How time flies. Five years ago the second-generation Cadillac CTS had
just debuted at NAIAS. While prettier than the original, it was also
fresh, exciting, and proof that Bob Lutz’s General Motors could turn out
a damn fine car when it really wanted to. People who hadn’t owned a GM
product for decades bought one, my father among them. Five auto shows on
and we’ve glimpsed Cadillac’s future with the 2013 ATS. Does the 2012
CTS seem well beyond its sell-by date? Or does the old car, with a new
3.6-liter V6 engine and a new Touring Package, retain some compelling
advantages?
The CTS casts a considerably larger shadow than the ATS: nine inches
longer (on a four-inch-longer wheelbase), an inch wider and two inches
taller. The additional inches enable sheet metal that is both more
dramatic and more graceful than the new car’s, with more athletically
flared fenders and a less severely truncated tail. The leaner ATS isn’t
an unattractive car, but it won’t induce double-takes the way the CTS
did five years ago. It doesn’t make a strong enough statement to
establish an instantly recognizable design language for the brand. But
since two generations of the CTS have already accomplished this
difficult task, the ATS will get by with toned down Cadillac cues
attached to a body that could otherwise be mistaken for a Mercedes-Benz
C-Class.
Aside from its headlights, nothing marks the ATS as the (much) newer
design. Then again, if we had first seen the CTS this year, it would
have still looked fresh. But of course we’ve seen it plenty. The “new”
ain’t coming back without much more significant exterior changes than GM
has made over the past half-decade. Even the Y-spoked chrome-plated
wheels included in the new Touring Package have been available on the
car since the 2010. The Touring Package’s spoiler-shaped CHMSL? Borrowed
from the V.
Inside, the CTS’s age is much more evident. The silver-painted plastic
flowing down the center stack appeared downscale and dated even in the
car’s first year. The cleaner center stack in the ATS doesn’t make the
same mistakes, with piano black trim and touch-sensitive controls (much
like those first seen in the 2011 Lincoln MKX) instead of mechanical
buttons.
And the retractable display used in the CTS? It’s from a bygone era
where nearly every interaction with the car didn’t involve a screen.
(Some new Audis still employ this gimmick, but what’s the point when the
thing will have to almost always be deployed?) Bluetooth is now
standard in the CTS, but perhaps because the controls were designed when
GM was still putting all of its eggs in the OnStar basket, I never
figured out how to access it. (Yes, I know, RTFM, but this hasn’t been
necessary with other cars.) The Touring Package mildly dresses up the
cabin with metal pedals and black-stained wood trim. Want an interior
that’s not gray, black, or tan (the latter not available with the
Touring Package)? Then wait for the ATS.
Like the ATS, the CTS was designed to compete with the BMW 3-Series.
So while the older car is roomier than the new one inside, it’s not a
full size class roomier. The largest difference: an additional two
inches of rear seat legroom. But these additional inches aren’t enough
to make the CTS’s rear seat suitable for long-distance adult occupancy,
as the seat is small and mounted low.
Trunk space? The CTS’s 13.6 cubic feet only seem commodious compared to
the ATS “is that a typo?” and its 10.2 cubic feet. Opponents of
conventional hinges have a new poster child
The official specs don’t tell you everything. From the driver’s seat the
two sedans seem quite different. You sit about an inch lower in the ATS
behind a more compact instrument panel and a smaller-diameter steering
wheel. An inch difference in the “H-point” has a much larger impact than
you might think. Partly because of this, the new car seems much smaller
and more agile even when not in motion. (How it feels in motion will
have to await some on-road seat time.) On the other hand, the CTS’s
higher driving position and larger interior components fit the car’s
brash, muscular personality.
The CTS’s standard front bucket seats, apparently patterned after
those in the Corvette, have never seemed substantial enough for the car.
The Touring Package replaces these with the allegedly optional Recaros
you’ll find in just about every V. The power-adjustable thigh and
seatback bolsters of these “high performance seats” provide as much
lateral support as you can stand. Despite four-way power lumbar
adjustments, they’re not comfortable. Even towards the end of my week
with the car I kept tweaking the lumbar adjustment in search of a
setting where I didn’t feel a rod pressing uncomfortably into my lower
back. My brief time with the seats in the ATS suggests that they’ll
provide decent lateral support and more comfort than either of the CTS’s
seats.
In the past, if you’ve wanted both the sueded steering wheel and the
Recaros in the non-V CTS you were, to employ another acronym, SOL.
Unlike in the V, where the suede requires the Recaros, you had to choose
between one or the other. This year both are only available together,
as parts of the Touring Package. The clear lens taillights that
previously acoompanied the sueded tiller did not survive the rehash.
For 2012, the CTS’s 3.6-liter V6 has been thoroughly revised,
gaining 14 horsepower (for a total of 318) in the process. The new V6
sounds a little pedestrian at part throttle in the midrange, but
transitions to a tone worthy of a premium sport sedan if you open up the
throttle and wind it out. Acceleration is strong enough that few people
will feel the need for the 556-horsepower V. (Just don’t sample the V,
or you’ll become addicted to its excess. That car made me do bad
things.) But the ATS should feel considerably more energetic. Cadillac
acquired some serious weight-saving religion during the more compact
sedan’s gestation, and packed it full of aluminum and magnesium.
Consequently the same 3.6-liter V6 will have over a quarter-ton less to
motivate. Unimproved with the new V6 are the EPA fuel economy ratings,
which remain at 18/27 mpg city/ highway.
Unfortunately, a six-speed manual won’t be available with the new V6
in either car. In the ATS devotees of the third pedal will have one
choice, a 270-horsepower turbocharged four. In the CTS the manual is now
available only with the underwhelming 3.0-liter V6. The CTS’s six-speed
automatic is slow to react to manual shifting. Smallish buttons hidden
on the backside of the steering wheel spokes require hands at nine and
three. Prefer ten and two? Well, it might be best to let the
transmission call the shifts anyway. In the ATS, large magnesium paddles
will be available—much better.
Since its launch, the regular CTS has been available with three
different suspensions, FE1, FE2, and FE3. With the FE1 suspension the
car feels vague and even sloppy. Discouraged by reviews of the FE3, and
without the ability to sample it in advance, my father ordered his car
with the FE2, billed as offering the best ride-handling balance. That
was a mistake. He ended up getting rid of the car because the FE2
suspension doesn’t sufficiently control body motions. On the wavy
highway that leads to his house, the car provoked severe “head toss”
over every undulation. On such roads, the firmer FE3 suspension actually
rides much steadier, while remaining well short of harsh over patchy
pavement. The FE3 car also feels tighter and more precise. If only we’d
known back in the fall of 2007 that this was the suspension to get. One
downside: The FE3 is only available with the 19-inch high-performance
summer tires (specifically 245/45ZR19 ContiSportContacts). If you live
where it snows, you’ll be investing in winter treads.
Even with the FE3 suspension and a limited-slip differential (bundled
with the summer tires), the CTS lacks the character of a precision
instrument. Instead, even in non-V form, it’s a two-ton linebacker of a
sport sedan with a more overt character than you’ll find in competitors:
big, bold, and ballsy. Vigorous control inputs aren’t the smartest,
fastest way to drive, but the CTS invites them. While I’ve yet to drive
the new ATS, my discussions with the engineering team (plus the much
lower curb weight and lower seating position) suggest that it will feel
tighter, lighter, and more precise – especially with its FE3 sport
suspension, which will include magnetic ride control shocks like those
standard in the CTS-V but not available in the regular CTS. You’ll also
find a more refined chassis (perhaps to a fault) in the
front-wheel-drive Buick Regal GS.
The hydraulic-assist system in the CTS feels much like that in the V,
providing a level of tactility rarely found in today’s cars. At first
touch, the system has the same insulated, numb feel found in the typical
luxury sedan, but layered below is a more direct connection and even
nuanced feedback. I cannot recall another car (aside from the V) with
similarly multi-layered steering. Unlike in the CTS-V, engaging
“Competitive Mode” does not reduce the level of steering assist. Assist
will vary by mode in the ATS, but the system will be electric rather
than hydraulic.
Not that you have to use the steering wheel to rotate the CTS. The
rear end’s lateral slip can be progressively modulated with the
throttle. At a steady speed through turns the CTS’s nose feels a little
reluctant to hold a tight line. A little throttle balances the chassis
nicely. Overcook it, and the stability control system cuts in almost
seamlessly. Don’t need the nanny? It can be completely turned off, but
even “Competitive Mode” bumps the threshhold enough that the car can get
seriously sideways. Use with care. The stability control might have led
you to think you’re a better driver than you actually are.
At first glance, the $2,810 Touring Package is a bargain. The seats
and suede alone list for $3,700 in the V. The package deletes a heated
steering wheel and folding rear seat that aren’t available in the
supercharged sedan. GM may have feared a sale-proof window sticker, but
then perhaps they shouldn’t have restricted the package to the top spec
CTS. Add $995 “black diamond tricoat” and the bottom line nudges over
$55,000.
Seem steep? A similarly-equipped BMW 335i will set you back about the
same. But then BMW isn’t known for reasonable pricing, especially not
on heavily equipped cars. The Infiniti G37 has long been the value play
in this segment, with a sticker price over $10,000 below the others.
Even after a $2,200 adjustment for the Cadillac’s additional features
(as calculated by TrueDelta’s car price comparison tool)
the CTS checks in nearly $8,000 higher. If you can do without the
Touring Package’s sueded steering wheel and Recaro seats, then the
pricing shifts about $2,500 in the Cadillac’s favor (the tool accounts
for power adjustments, but not the Recaro label).
The advent of the ATS highlights the CTS’s shortcomings, most notably
dated controls, passé silver plastic trim, and an extra quarter-ton of
curb weight. If you want the latest tech or the most agile handling,
wait for the truly compact Cadillac. And yet, even in its fifth model
year the CTS retains a striking exterior and engaging personality. The
ATS doesn’t have the same visual impact, and might lack the same driving
dynamics as well, in a bid to beat the polished Europeans at their own
game. To this the Touring Package brings all of the CTS’s sportiest
available features together for the first time in the same non-V car. If
you no taste for the latest tech, and prefer the character of a
linebacker to that of a point guard, then no need to wait for the ATS.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment