regfootball

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point. The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models. Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible? They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis. Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks. Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers. Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles. That is a joke. Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars. And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette. They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control. Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe? We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage. Cadillac is lost, makes me wonder how close they were to the chopping block back in 2009-2011...... A4 may not sell much but Audi sells a lot of A3's now too...and Q1's, Q3's, Q5's..... XT5 should help Cadillac get back to something but they need 3 more crossovers pronto and then i think also get the sedans figured out. Looks like Jaguar and Volvo have come back from the dead and maybe the only hope for Cadillac to come back is to send the entire operation to an overseas country to fix it.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base. You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to. Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space. I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows. We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead. The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas. Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match. The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again. You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there. I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space. GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more. If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time. They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

This has been available for about a month now. IN THE FLESH! is what i am waiting to see...... seen the pics many times already, although these high res ones are super.

Right. I think Buick is afraid they can't mark up a Verano 15 grand

ATS was designed to be the lightest car in the class, the whole "every gram matters" philosophy they talked about. But some other guys got lighter, or got roomier and bigger while not adding any weight, and most of the ATS weight advantage in 2013 was in comparing an NA 4 cylinder ATS to a turbo 4 BMW and a V6 Mercedes. Low weight is nice, it isn't the way to win buyers. If it drives like a tin can, or has no interior space, or a cheap interior, no one will care what it weighs. Right. ATs Doesn't qualify as a tin can but it just lacks in interior and utility. If they were to put a new engine in it, program the throttle and engine computer for linear feel and much faster response instead of this crap CAFE placating crap, and had all he parts of the driveline feeling tight and working together, then We are onto something that they don't have make v models for.

That's the same weight weas a 328xDrive..... what's your point? Smk and Balthazasr already repeated a lot of what I was thinking. I can just add again with emphasis.....useless back seat ....joke of a trunk....and still weighs 3700 pounds. That's hardly packaging efficiency. Coupled with an interior that is lacking, and a power train that needs help to feel all of one piece, no wonder they don't sell. CLa at least has style and a nice interior. The c class which was the actual mission of Cadillac to compete with, is in a whole nother league. If the car /power train felt more refined and had a better interior, the shortcomings would be greatly masked.

3671 pounds, what a joke....... http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-cadillac-ats-sedan-20t-awd-test-review

Killer styling costs zero to very little extra. Parked next to the outgoing Cruze, it's extremely evident how much swag is lost. It's not UGLY though.........pleasant, at least.

don't want a Mercedes truck

Encore's interior updates for 2017 are what i am waiting to see. Still feel Verano next version is justified. How GM can say its not worth a low volume for Verano but then to sell a tiny few Cascadas, makes no sense.

TESTED:2016 Cadillac ATS sedan 2.0t 8AT AWD Luxury, MSRP 45,000 and change Note: offered this test drive as an alternate / move up to the used Volt i went in to test drive. Offered as a sample due to a service loaner demo with a 'great lease deal'!! Disclaimer: i don't drive many luxury cars so my proper frame of reference is not great. I typically review vehicles as daily drivers. Prior similar test drive: http://www.cheersandgears.com/topic/81073-2013-cadillac-ats-25l-rwd/?hl=%2Bcadillac+%2Bats Since i am not really in the luxury car market, than this test drive may seem a little odd. But I am a GM fan and since i hadn't driven the AWD turbo ATS, I said 'sure'. My comments may not necessarily match what a prospective luxury buyer may think. So i may not dwell on the right things and by all means I would enjoy others comments. HIGHS ATS is an attractive car on the outside. 2.0t engine has --some-- grunt, but (see below) I may be one of the few people who like the gauges and displays. I do like the view to the outside (rear maybe has a bit of a blind spot) Radio sounded good. Love XM! LOWS 3 years later, the ATS seems dated, particularly the interior, which has its moments of cheapness This time, the front seats felt cheap and unsupportive GM / Cadillac has plenty of work to do on gaps and seams on the interior, and plastics. Cadillac needs a gut and redo of the dash and center stack controls....at least the CUE has some updating. Looks very 2009 or something. Less space in the car than my last review. So I got bigger or the car got smaller. Or, I didn't really judge the tight interior very well last time. ---and i don't like the huge tranny and drive tunnel and intrusive consoles very much these days either. Rear seat and trunk space in particular a joke. Actual usability of this car as a functional device is likely a huge part of why the sales of this car suck. 2.0t power doesn't come on until you really juice the throttle and there is a delay. It is NOT turbo lag. It's a purposeful programming of the throttle working and it hinders sportiness and the feeling of torque taking off from the stop light. Takes a long time for the shifting to come too. Turbo four also while well muted in cruising, gets coarse and noisy quickly in mid to upper rpm's and is more comparable to the turbo motors in economy cars as far as refinement. Overall, the powertrain is not purpose built for a more expensive brand. The engine and tranny feel like they were 'just bolted together' ...... AWD added to this chassis, which is already heavy for the space you actually get inside, makes the car feel all around heavy for its minuscule size. ---yes I understand this chassis is really purpose built to be a uterus for the V-series performance cars. Steering neither felt sporting or 'easy and light' and had a lot of dead spot. ---I imagine driving this car at 4/10th does not genuinely expose the real feel or capabilities of this car and chassis. But it didn't feel like even a potential track monster either. Car is neither a cushmobile nor does it give the notion of being a BMW competitor. Overall construction of the car felt old GM sloppy..... A base Camaro 4 has more benefit, is nicer inside, and costs MUCH LESS. Jaguar's new XE comes out very soon. A well optioned Mazda6 has a nicer interior. I think it would even be quite a gratifying alternative. SUMMARY Am I a little hard on this car? I don't believe i can totally say yes. Have i changed my tune vs the last review...? Yes, perhaps. I should probably go drive a CLA Mercedes or a Volvo V40 or something to compare. This time, with the heft of the all wheel drive and relative half assedness of the powertrain tuning, this just did not do it for me. I'm getting old perhaps. I just recall leaving the dealership and gazing at the XTS and thinking, "I bet many more people would rather like to take this thing for a spin" than the ATS. XTS telegraphs soft ride and quiet interior. Cadillac's performance engineering the last few years has given it well deserved accolades. But now i have to ask, has it translated to sales? I think the CTS would also, or could also be more of my car. At least there is more room and more function. With the same powertrain though, i can't envision a much different result when the car is used for general daily driving. Maybe the new v6 is more my style. So i should without judgement on the ATS as a whole until then. I just remember how nice the base 2.5 ATS with RWD drove, it felt lighter and there was no lag in the throttle control and powertrain. And it rode better. Is this why they are saying the CT6 4 cyl RWD might be the most fun? It only took a few short years but i think time has passed the ATS and GM by (at least in the US). If Cadillac is truly developing a 'compact' or 'subcompact' "below the ATS", with a FWD chassis, then maybe that makes sense. I don't think too many A3 or CLA drivers are as obsessed with performance as much as style. Cadillac needs a style upgrade and needs to be more efficient in the package. A good FWD chassis may be the way to do it. And perhaps they need to put electrification / voltec in every new model. Tesla has changed the game and Cadillac may need to rethink exactly how they are building cars because chasing BMW hasn't worked out real well for them, has it. (side note, everyone in the showroom was looking at the SRX's). I can't really give this car a bad grade because many would love to have a car like this. But i think we are on the dawn of something new and Cadillac is now stuck in an old paradigm. If they intend to have high performing 9/10 RWD chassis, they need to at least package and tune the vehicle so they can be sold as luxury cars too. ATS might have been cool in 2013 but the world moves quickly. Since the V- cars are obviously more purpose built, the evaluation of those would be much much different. Thanks for the test ride, and the lease payment is a great deal, but i think I'll pass. An Impala, Malibu, Cruze or new LaCrosse, perhaps.....can't wait for the Jaguar XE's arrive maybe i need to do a second take on this one, maybe i just couldn't stretch its legs enough

a jacked up sonic made in korea selling for 35 grand could stand to not charge extra for the newer motor. (I do love the Encore BTW but some might look at the Trax and Sonic that way)

sexy affordable cars, the number of them available keeps getting less and less.

seen a few in the wild now (one is a drivers ed car) and have seen old cruze red with RS right next to the new one in red with RS package. The outgoing Cruze looked Muhrican and had swagger. New one just isn't as "GM" or as crisp, or as sporty. It is very much more Asian and softened. Anonymous, almost. Cruze's macho styling had set it apart. New one probably appeals even more to the vanilla appliance crowd. In that aspect, if it conquests some prior Asian car owners, then its probably successful.

The starting price here is pretty reasonable......its like Buick wants to keep the sedans as a whole below crossovers. Envision for example will be a fair amount more than this. Seemingly.

motor trend and car and driver have been really pathetic lately. Autoblog has been terrible since Detroit auto show or perhaps beyond that. Places i used to go for auto news like Edmunds and USA today have gotten useless and stale too. I actually am postulating here that car web sites and car journalism have really taken a hit in the last 5 years or so. It's been all about mpg. So now everything is a downsized cracker box....or a CUV. Hardly any performance cars and car styling has gone snooze too. Cars really are just appliances, devices. Lots of technology has been developing at a rapid pace...but we are so spoiled by the tech we are used to and expect that its like nothing for the automakers to spit out new features and innovations that are trouble free, all the time. Like it was said above, its a slow time of the year for car news, but me thinks it may be a permanent slow down unless the EV onslaught comes up faster and even then, gear heads are not going to wax rhetoric about electric motors. Been visiting other GM sites, during the lull....stuff like gm-volt.com, cruzetalk etc. Gets you nice tidbits of info on how the cars are doing real world.

"real" "real fricking dull"

I've read some realistic analyses that suggest model 3 actual prices will need to be about 50 grand for tesla come close to even making $$$$. Meanwhile. Volt has highest customer satisfaction of any GM car, conquests other brands and turns them into happy Gm fans. The Volt is dead nuts reliable and has a huge quality rep which is amazing for such a pioneering car while teslas are not recommended. Volts sticker at 40k and less and presumably GM can make a go of it. They could easily scale up the size of their EV platforms at any point for larger vehicles to sell mid size cars and crossovers with the same powertrains. There will be a tipping point where they will respond and do that. 2 key people leaving tesla right before model 3 launch smells to me like things are not rosy at tesla and the sticker shock of the true model 3 price will mean again you won't see them revolutionize things in the next 5 years.....so judgment day will come sooner on them than you think.

you're at 3200 pounds. the new Malibu 2.0 is heavier than the 1.5......i forget what C/D weighed it at, but it think it was like 3450 or something. So right there i would say if you just use weight as a factor, the inverse of how much the Malibu weighs vs. the 3200 is about .927.....927x25.5 = about 24 mpg..... the first few reads on Malibu 2.0 mpg in fully is near that...like 23 and change. I was just reading Malibu forum and some folks in colder time of year were about 24-27 mpg with the 1.5 and city driving. Now some are seeing 27, 30, 32 in more combined overall driving in warmer weather...with what lets face it is a larger car. One person reported 40+ on a highway trip. Maybe when the 9 speed teams with the 1.5, the Malibu will deliver some eye popping mpg. Like I said the new Cruze has real mpg improvements........but it weighs about 10 percent less (rough calc) right there you get 10% mpg improvement. The torque on the new Cruze 1.4 is highlighting what you said.....I really like the torque on some of these new turbo cars. Surprisingly the Civic turbo did not have that same torque lunge. Honda is still learning turbo. I don't know of anyone who likes auto stop. Friend has it on his Malibu fleet car and says he doesn't mind it but it makes me mad we don't get a defeat switch. The fact we don't has to have something to do with meeting the federal reg and that incenses me. I do believe govt is forcing us into hybrids and that is maybe fine......but until price and packaging are not compromised because of it, and it gets more reliable and less quirky, it's not going to take hold asap. I believe the carmakers are stalling a bit at least for powertrains here in the US to see if new influence arrives in washington and they maybe undo or modify this federal overreach and some of these useless POS CAFE regs into something more flexible and beneficial for everyone.

promises that are really just vaporware, but be sure to get the customers money and tell them 'it's on the way'

What/where is that word from?? it was bounced out there on 'another site' Avista may become an EV. Avista styling plus EV

good deal, GM will be at the forefront of that, and will buy all the Tesla scraps. Word is GM has a tesla S beater in the works for many thousands less......and possibly the Avista styling.

fuelly had a couple reports on the new Malibu 2.0 premier. low 20's. The previous malibu 2.0 and current fusion 2.0 are in that range as is the Regal 2.0. I think this is why you're seeing the displacements for those turbos ever shrinking. The EPA and fuelly etc. numbers show the mpg's improve when say you go to a 1.5t instead of the 2.0. BUT then you lose the power.......... everything goes in cycles. govt got ballsy forcing insane mpg standards. so most of the lineups need smaller motors. Those who opt for the bigger motors pay much more $$$ and don't get the mpg benefits. in the end your real mpg still comes down to weight, aerodynamics, gearing. Look at the new Cruze vs the old one. If you see them on the lot side by side, you see how much narrower and sleek the front of the car is. Its quite a bit lighter and has improved engine and tranny. It gets an amazing combined mpg increase from 30 to 35 for what is essentially the same transport pod. Look at the Regal's fuelly numbers, any engine. All pretty bad. I think the Verano was brought in to pump up CAFE. Now they may dump verano. I think the new Regal next year will probably have the 1.5t as a base motor as well. Regal's mpg should go way up and be a much larger car (malibu clone). The 2.0 won't improve much tho. Malibu 2.0 gets the new 9 speed auto for 2017 now I guess, BTW

Musk and his tap dancing. Rudderless boat

this likely means Mitsubishi can be the brand for the 'lesser markets' and emerging markets, and to be honest is probably a lifeline for them. And, they can have a better chance of remaining relevant and keeping up on tech. I think a cpl years back everyone predicted that there would be some consolidation in the Japanese companies and this is a step to that. Toyota may ultimately end up with all of Subaru and Mazda. Honda may be left pissing in the wind. Nissan will absorb Mits. Suzuki will probably get sucked up by Tata or something.