Full Review: 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe

[Drew Dowdell]

Full Review:

2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe

<big><big><span  style="font-weight: bold;="" font-family:="" monospace;="">

Baby Got Back! </span  style="font-weight:></big></big>

Gallery 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe

Let's get something out of the way. Yes you can see out the back of the Cadillac CTS Coupe. It is great visibility? No, but that's why they put a backup camera and rear parking sensors back there. That takes care of reverse. If the gear selector is in "D", then the only piece of technology you need to worry about with regard to rearward visibility is a black 2" x 6" piece of plastic on the right of the driver's side foot well. Press that, and anything mucking up your view out the back will instantly grow smaller. This car is all about going and looking good while doing it. It draws attention everywhere.

The CTS coupe joins the sedan and wagon for the first time in the 2011 model year. It's base price of $39,040 is about $3,000 more than the base sedan, but the coupe gets a higher level of standard equipment. For starters, the coupe doesn't even bother with the sedan's base 270hp 3.0 litre V6, instead going straight for the 305 horsepower direct injected V6. A 6-speed automatic comes standard as opposed to being a $1,224 option as on the sedan. Other features standard on the coupe that are optional or not available on the sedan include: Limited slip differential, 18" inch alloy wheels, sport suspension, and 8-way power passenger seat.

Getting in and out of the CTS coupe is a fairly easy task as far as coupes go. The doors aren't so huge that you can't open them in a tight space. They can be on the heavy side and if you're on a steep hill, the indents aren't quite deep enough to hold the door open. The electronic door release lends that air of jet fighter feel. The dash and center console are all straight out of the CTS Sedan. Controls, if a bit numerous, are logically laid out. Cadillac equipped this CTS with key-less access. You simply keep the fob in your pocket and turn the dial where a traditional key would be. I prefer this method over push button key less start for the simple reason that you have a physical indication of what the car should be doing; unlike say Lexus where you just have a button and if you need to shut the car off suddenly due to a run away vehicle situation, you aren't randomly stabbing a button trying to shut the car down. With Cadillac's system, the tragedy that occurred with the run away Lexus in California last year would not have happened.

Rear seat room is surprisingly good even if getting back there is a bit awkward. There are power seat slider controls at back outside corner of the seats. Rear seat passengers can reach up and do a Vulcan neck pinch on the seat and it will motor forward. One strange bit in the back was the lack of a center arm rest, yet the outboard arm gets one leaving you leaning towards the centerline of the car. Trunk space isn't for someone who can't pack light. Two large suit cases, two small roll aboards, and you're done. Trunk supports are large goosenecks that you need to be mindful of. Looking at the rear, I don't see any other way Cadillac could have mounted the trunk lid. Form over function as they say.

The Navi-tainment system is easy to use, though it took me a little bit to realize that you pair your bluetooth phone through the voice response system rather than navigating through the menus on the screen. The navigation function works well, but the maps could use an update in both look and function. They are starting to look half a version behind the times and at least in the case of one highway here in Pittsburgh, the exit numbers haven't been updated in the NAV though they changed here about a year ago. I had that same issue on the 2011 GMC Sierra Denali previously.

Overall, the interior, with it's ambient lighting and great styling, feels like a very upscale place to spend your time.

Now, for the part you all car about most; How does it drive? In this particular tester, the tires already had 5,000 miles of hard hard driving on them. Still lateral grip seemed very good. The CTS coupe is heavy, weighing in at over 3,900 lbs. To put that in perspective, that is more than the larger BMW 650i coupe. You feel this weight going around the curves, but it doesn't feel like a hindrance to performance. The ride is quite on the firm side and highway expansion joints can get tiresome and repetitive. Weight does hurt in acceleration. If Cadillac could shave even a couple hundred pounds off this car, it would even more firmly live up to the new cred that Cadillac is building. You never feel underpowered, but that "3, 2, 1, Launch" feeling just isn't there in this car.

The CTS coupe helped to give Cadillac record growth in 2010, helping to earn Cadillac the title of "Fastest Growing Luxury Marque in 2010". Putting even the vaunted BMW 3-series coupe on notice that GM is after blood. Cadillac has an army of new releases coming over the next 4 years. If they meet or beat the CTS coupe in capability and style in their respective segments, I see no reason Cadillac can't earn that same title for 2012 and beyond.

Related:

Cadillac ATS Power Train Predictions

Interactive Review: 2011 Cadillac SRX Turbo

[Camino LS6]

I'm not a Cadillac guy, but I sure would enjoy wringing-out a V-spec coupe.

[William Maley]

I'm not a Cadillac guy, but I sure would enjoy wringing-out a V-spec coupe.

I would gladly wring a regular CTS Coupe myself

[balthazar]

Such a nice classy car. Good write-up.

Those truck goosenecks are something; hard to believe there's not a better solution. If decks weren't so high, resulting is such tall RR fascias, the lids wouldn't have to open so incredibly far.

I wonder if a 'flying strut' design would work: where the trunklid is connected to 2 arms alongside the RR window, and it actually hinged at or near the top of the RR glass. Like a hatchback but the RR glass stays put. That would eliminate the in-trunk hinges/ goosenecks/ scissors entirely.

[Robert Hall]

I wonder why they don't use struts like hoods or hatchbacks use instead of the gooseneck hinges?

[balthazar]

I believe the strut/scissor hinge set-up doesn't raise the decklid as far as gooseneck hinges. They also narrow the opening considerably, as all that has to mount somewhere.

-- -- -- -- --

This again seems to be a instance where an automotive execution has gotten much WORSE than it was already excellently engineered as:

[regfootball]

love the car. nice perspective on the writeup.

[jwbouch]

I have been driving on 76 through Philly a lot lately for work, and every morning I see this guy who drives a CTS Coupe. It definitely catches my eye every time, but once it passes me, it looks odd from the rear. The rear track is so much wider then the sedan or wagon, it just looks strange to my eyes. Overall though, it is absolutely an eye catching car!

[Robert Hall]

I've seen a couple in person, still haven't warmed up to the design..I like greenhouse shape, but the tail is so thick vertically, and stubby lengthwise..

[BuddyP]

I believe the strut/scissor hinge set-up doesn't raise the decklid as far as gooseneck hinges. They also narrow the opening considerably, as all that has to mount somewhere.

Our Aura's trunklid opens almost straight up and down without the goosenecks

[SoCalCTS]

I hate the way the CTS Coupe looks. I hope the ATS doesnt take any of the styling from this! The rear is so ugly.

[Satty]

Am I the only one who would rock a CTS coupe over a Camaro any day?

[Drew Dowdell]

Am I the only one who would rock a CTS coupe over a Camaro any day?

You'd probably fit into the back seat better too.

I would totally do a CTS Coupe over a Camaro.

[William Maley]

Am I the only one who would rock a CTS coupe over a Camaro any day?

No, I would rock a CTS Coupe as well

[SoCalCTS]

You guys might drive one but I doubt you could rock it.

[Satty]

In a Camaro you'll looked like a frat boy. In a Cadillac, at least this Cadillac, you'll look like someone.

[Intrepidation]

I believe the strut/scissor hinge set-up doesn't raise the decklid as far as gooseneck hinges. They also narrow the opening considerably, as all that has to mount somewhere.

-- -- -- -- --

This again seems to be a instance where an automotive execution has gotten much WORSE than it was already excellently engineered as:

I dunno, I've never found the opening of my trunk to be narrow, I've fit plenty of large objects in it.

And then there's the Concorde's trunk...

[frogger]

Am I the only one who would rock a CTS coupe over a Camaro any day?

Although I haven't driven a CTS coupe (sedan only), my experience with the Camaro was enough to conclude that I would run with a CTS coupe over a Camaro.

Edited January 18, 2011 by frogger

[SeanLoh]

Ignore the price difference and compare coupe verse coupe. I'd be rocking the CTS coupe over even the Camaro SS coupe.

[Satty]

The prices aren't too terribly different, a Camaro will hit $40k, the power is the difference and the CTS is so much better that its worth the 100hp penalty.

[SoCalCTS]

In a Camaro you'll looked like a frat boy. In a Cadillac, at least this Cadillac, you'll look like someone.

Frat boys are hot. lol hmmmm... that Camaro is sounding better and better. I can't wait to see the ATS based Camaro.

[Cory Wolfe]

Frat boys are hot. lol hmmmm... that Camaro is sounding better and better. I can't wait to see the ATS based Camaro.

That is a valiant point.

[William Maley]

You guys might drive one but I doubt you could rock it.

I couldn't rock a Camaro either

[Robert Hall]

I'd have to get a mullet wig to drive the Camaro. I love the exterior, but the interior not so much, and esp. the poor outward visibility...I think the Mustang or Challenger would be easier to live with...esp. the Mustang..love the interior.

Loaded Mustang GT vs CTS coupe...hmmm...

Edited January 19, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Croc]

Exterior's great, but the interior needs help. Lack of a rear center console/armrest in a bucket rear seat configuration is unacceptable in this class.

[Drew Dowdell]

You guys might drive one but I doubt you could rock it.

The CTS Coupe has a usable back seat, verse the Camaro, I'm sure I could rock it.

[regfootball]

Exterior's great, but the interior needs help. Lack of a rear center console/armrest in a bucket rear seat configuration is unacceptable in this class.

i think the coupe should have gotten its own unique dash too, myself.

[balthazar]

^ Why in the world would door count dictate a different dash ???

Pointless, change-for-change's sake, esp when the CTS interior is as dynamic & nice as it is.

And the center armrest thing is way overblown. There's one in the wife's GP in back, and it never gets used when both my sons are there. I've been in the back of cars with armrests- sometimes I use it, sometimes I flip it up. But it gets harped on like we're talking power vs. crank windows.

[Croc]

^ Why in the world would door count dictate a different dash ???

Pointless, change-for-change's sake, esp when the CTS interior is as dynamic & nice as it is.

And the center armrest thing is way overblown. There's one in the wife's GP in back, and it never gets used when both my sons are there. I've been in the back of cars with armrests- sometimes I use it, sometimes I flip it up. But it gets harped on like we're talking power vs. crank windows.

Actually, the CTS coupe interior uses cheaper, Rubbermaid plastics in places the sedan and wagon do not. And while I personally think a full console should be a given in any 2-seat rear, a fold-down armrest is expected and mandatory for this class. YOU may not use it, but the vast majority of people like something to rest their arms on. This omission is especially egregious since it is the only Cadillac without one, the other two CTS variants have one, and even the Chevrolet Cruze has one. But a $50,000 halo Cadillac doesn't have one?

[Satty]

And aren't the seats more bucket-like than bench-like? An armrest back there makes sense.

[Drew Dowdell]

Actually, the CTS coupe interior uses cheaper, Rubbermaid plastics in places the sedan and wagon do not. And while I personally think a full console should be a given in any 2-seat rear, a fold-down armrest is expected and mandatory for this class. YOU may not use it, but the vast majority of people like something to rest their arms on. This omission is especially egregious since it is the only Cadillac without one, the other two CTS variants have one, and even the Chevrolet Cruze has one. But a $50,000 halo Cadillac doesn't have one?

Balth, the omission forces you to pay attention to it. Due to the tight quarters in the rear, your outboard arm is forced to use the arm rest... as there is no other place for it to go. The lack of a center arm rest gives you the sensation of being forced to tilt inward. I normally wouldn't think it to be a make or break issue, but in this car its absence is noticed more than most.

[balthazar]

^ Thanks for the clarification.

I still don't imagine any adults will be riding back there, ever, so I question the 'make or break' idea, but OK.

[Drew Dowdell]

^ Thanks for the clarification.

I still don't imagine any adults will be riding back there, ever, so I question the 'make or break' idea, but OK.

The back seat of the CTS coupe is usable by adults, unlike the Camaro. Not someplace I'd want to spend 300 miles, but it's much more comfortable than the Camaro.

[Croc]

^ Thanks for the clarification.

I still don't imagine any adults will be riding back there, ever, so I question the 'make or break' idea, but OK.

This is a luxury car. Practicality and pragmatism aren't relevant. If Cadillac did not want to put in a proper back seat, they could have made it a 2-seater with extended trunk storage and interior rear storage space. But you can't put a half-assed rear seat that has a 20k difference in perception from front to rear and expect no one to notice or care.

[Camino LS6]

I'd rather have the Camaro for a whole host of reasons.

[regfootball]

^ Why in the world would door count dictate a different dash ???

Pointless, change-for-change's sake, esp when the CTS interior is as dynamic & nice as it is.

And the center armrest thing is way overblown. There's one in the wife's GP in back, and it never gets used when both my sons are there. I've been in the back of cars with armrests- sometimes I use it, sometimes I flip it up. But it gets harped on like we're talking power vs. crank windows.

the character of the coupe is so much more badass, and the normal CTS dash while classy, looks a bit tame. something a bit more adventurous and racy and not so horizontal and plain while not 'needed' could really enhance the badass nature of the coupe.

JMO.

whatever the case, the lack of the rear center armrest is plain and simply unconscionable, on any car over 15k in MSRP.......