[bballr4567]

Yeah this is really strange, you make it bigger, but it's not clearly bigger inside. A couple of years ago at an Auto show I was sitting in the back on a CTS... and thought it was cramped. I get out and there is a guy in his probably early 60's standing there. And he's like 'not much room back there, I like the car but that might be a deal breaker'

I know some have said they don't buy for the people in the back seat.... well I am one that does base a good portian of my decision on that. But then again, maybe I'm not the target buyer....

I hope the car does well though.

See, thats the perc of a 5 series. Its a rather decently roomy sedan IMHO. I can fit in the rear seat rather ok but it has almost an inch in rear legroom but almost two more inches in shoulder and almost an inch in headroom too. I just dont get it.

 

[BlackGTP]

Beat me to it. Another GM car overpriced by $2,000-$3,000. When will GM learn?
A really interesting comparison would be to compare dimensions of the new CTS with the last generation of STS. I'll bet they're really close..

So you want GM to go back to the good old days? A sub par car for a sub par price.

 

[jadis]

I have been waiting for a serious alternative to the E550 4MAtic and the 550 Xdrive and the A6/S6. I am excited Cadillac is finally providing an advanced AWD sedan with over 400hp. Way to go Cadillac!!

 

[CaddyLac10]

If it weren't for the additional 5" in length I would accept these fractional differences. But the CTS is longer so I have to wonder where it all went in this supposedly all new structure, which is the same question I wondered when I saw how small the ATS's trunk is. Maybe the 5" went to preserve the trunk capacity?

My other comment is to the engine/transmission combos, I'm disappointed there isn't an improved or new transmission offering, other than the twin-turbo 6, that will find its way to the ATS as well, and that there isn't an AWD on either the TT6 or anywhere else in the line.

The NA 3.6 CTS has the 8 speed too so one could easily end up in the 3.6 ATS. The 3 and IS have 8 speeds so I don't think Cadillac can afford not to put one in the ATS and price can't be an excuse because others a doing at the same price point. AWD probably won't happen until GM is ready with their in-house 8 speed.

 

[hunchman]

Well, for all those special people who claim that a luxury vehicle MUST be DOHC its a win I guess. Still, sad that itll likely get exactly the same MPG as a V8 that will make more power and be faster.

GM is estimating a 4.6 for 0-60. The Camaro SS does it in 4.8 with a 350 extra pounds on board. The 1LE with a little more traction does it in 4.3. Yea, a win all right.

If it makes you happy, you can slap a Cadillac emblem on the Camaro and have your cake too.

The CTSV weighs a few more ounces than the Camaro.

 

[epaulo]

very bold looking, i love it. n e interior shots?

 

[58482]

I have been waiting for a serious alternative to the E550 4MAtic and the 550 Xdrive and the A6/S6. I am excited Cadillac is finally providing an advanced AWD sedan with over 400hp. Way to go Cadillac!!

I think you've missed the part where the VSport is only RWD.

 

[dctex99]

I do fear how the press will spin it, they will compare the new CTS sales volume to the last gen CTS when it first went on sale and say what a failure it is. Which is of course comparing apples and oranges. My expectation is that there will be a lower volume sold (again vs when the 2nd gen CTS first went on sale) as the price is higher.

Always remember their are "Discounts" and "rebates" and "Brand Retention Bonus'" so what you pay has little to do with what
the MSRP is..The big question will be how they retain value; if they lose 15 Grand out the door like Town Cars did at the end, it
will be a bargain to buy after a couple of years......we will see...

 

[tbirderic]

Pricing is right where it should be. Good job GM.

 

[dslay04]

The CTS's interior dimensions are within less than an inch of the E-class'

 

[CADILLACSIXTEEN]

i so desperately want to see this car in person

 

[AMcA]

So I had to look up the stats on both cars. Although the 2014 is clearly larger, I have no clue where GM put all that space.

• 2013 CTS
• Front head room 39"
• Rear head room 37"
• Front shoulder room 57"
• Rear shoulder room 55"
• Front hip room 54"
• Rear hip room 53"
• Front leg room 42.4"
• Rear leg room 36.1"
• Luggage capacity 13.6 cu/ft

• 2014 CTS
• Front headroom: 39.2
• Rear headroom: 37.5
• Front shoulder room 56.9
• Rear shoulder room: 54.8
• Front hip room: 53.8
• Rear hip room: 53.3
• Front leg room: 42.6
• Rear leg room: 35.4
• Luggage capacity: 13.7 cu/ft

I think a lot of the room may have gone into the long hood and low stance.

One of the things about this car that's distinctive is the long, low hood which gives it proportions a little more like the sedans that ruled the market from the early '60s through the late '80s, maybe - cars that wanted to be long and low, unlike todays tall, bulky cars that leave the passengers sitting inside a tub.

This car represents a move backwards in time and form. It's subtle, but it's there. I suspect that new packaging ate into space in various ways. We'll see if the car's good looks overcome the space gap.

 

[CJH]

Is AWD going to be an option moving forward once they switch transmissions, or are they going to be stupid and lose NE sales by only offering RWD Vsports?

Mercedes only sells 550s in AWD for a REASON.

Leaves out the upper Midwest as well. Doesn't make sense to me, unless it will be added later when the "new" transmission comes on line. We were going to seriously consider a VSport, but w/out AWD its crossed off the list. That's a bummer.

 

[mgescuro]

Time for the Cadillac dealerships to convert a lot of CTS owners...into ATS owners.

Fat chance.
Current CTS aren't going to trade down to a smaller ATS. And IMHO, current CTS owners won't want to spend the cash to get a new CTS.

AND.... XTS exists in the same price point.

I called this YEARS ago.

 

[AMcA]

2014 ATS

FRONT HEAD ROOM 38.6 in. FRONT HIP ROOM 53.0 in.
FRONT LEG ROOM 42.5 in. FRONT SHOULDER ROOM 55.2 in.
REAR HIP ROOM 52.3 in. REAR HEAD ROOM 36.8 in.
REAR LEG ROOM 33.5 in. REAR SHOULDER ROOM 53.9 in.

Looks like meaningful improvements over the space in an ATS - 2" rear leg room. More head room. Slightly more hip room. All around an inch or two more space in all major dimensions.

 

[civilzues]

Fat chance.
Current CTS aren't going to trade down to a smaller ATS. And IMHO, current CTS owners won't want to spend the cash to get a new CTS.

AND.... XTS exists in the same price point.

I called this YEARS ago.

You have lowered yourself to Grumpy Cat. Now go get your Kraft Cheddar Cheese block for your "Xmas" party and call it a night. :

 

[mgescuro]

So I had to look up the stats on both cars. Although the 2014 is clearly larger, I have no clue where GM put all that space.

• 2013 CTS
• Front head room 39"
• Rear head room 37"
• Front shoulder room 57"
• Rear shoulder room 55"
• Front hip room 54"
• Rear hip room 53"
• Front leg room 42.4"
• Rear leg room 36.1"
• Luggage capacity 13.6 cu/ft

• 2014 CTS
• Front headroom: 39.2
• Rear headroom: 37.5
• Front shoulder room 56.9
• Rear shoulder room: 54.8
• Front hip room: 53.8
• Rear hip room: 53.3
• Front leg room: 42.6
• Rear leg room: 35.4
• Luggage capacity: 13.7 cu/ft

You act surprised. We all know that GM has an issue when it comes to interior packaging!! Last time, they blamed it on the tumble home.
You also have to remember that the current CTS has more leg room because GM used "Thin Seats" to "make" more room. That's where the rear leg difference is coming from.

 

[fastball]

Does want.

From that angle, this car is absolutely stunning. Beautiful.

 

[AMcA]

From Cadillacs website.

<a href="http://s1183.photobucket.com/user/SGTPosaune/media/CTSSpecs.png.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1183.photobucket.com/albums/x478/SGTPosaune/CTSSpecs.png" border="0" alt=" photo CTSSpecs.png"/></a>

WOW - an Audi S6, also with 420 hp, weighs 4255 lbs. Cadillac has a 300 pound weight advantage. That's big.

Versus Mercedes E550 at 4146 pounds, Cadillac has a 190 pound advantage. Also big.

And versus BMW 550i at 4365 (in RWD trim), over 400 pound advantage for Cadillac - HUGE!

 

[mgescuro]

exciting. for all those that are upset on price, where in the rulebook does it say Cadillac needs to be the affordable every man's car. If you are a price buyer, Buick offers a fine range of vehicles.

If you can't afford a Cadillac, go find a job that pays you more. Not everyone should be able to drive a Cadillac. People should work for it.... or buy an ATS.

A base price of $46,000 is about where it should have priced. If anything, I think it's too low.