Test drove a CTS-V
08-29-2010, 02:24 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Test drove a CTS-V
I was on my way to the grocery store today and saw a CTS coupe drive out of the GM dealership. I decided to stop by and check them out. I was more interested in the CTS-V of course, and luckily, they had one in stock.
I was greeted with the typical swarm of salesman as I parked (next to the CTS coupes). All of them backed off, except a new guy who didn't know anything about the car and had only been working there for a day. I LOL'd when the first thing he asked was, "what can we do to get you in to this car today?". Uhhh.
EXTERIOR: The exterior was as expected from the photos in magazines/online. The car was a hulking behemoth. Huge. I think this car would have been much more attractive at 80% scale. The profile of the car was the best view IMO. The front and rear are more boxy than I'd like. The ass is humungous and the trunk is a huge compromise for its design (much like the G37 coupe). As you can see, compared to my S5 (which isn't very small), the CTS towers.
GRADE: C
INTERIOR: Thumbs up to GM for the initial quality of the interior in this car. The build quality is comparable to Infiniti. All the trim was soft to the touch and didn't creak when pressed. All the controls were nicely placed and the tactile feel of buttons and levers were firm and secure. The car had the Recaro seats ($3400 option!!
) which were definitely an upgrade over the stock crap. I'm not a fan of Alcantara, so the steering wheel and inserts in the doors didn't do anything for me.
There was entirely way too much chrome and shiny objects on the inside. Everywhere I looked I was being blinded by something (sunny day today). I don't like pop up nav's and this car's was no exception. It wasn't as bad as most implementations, but the dash being so high, probably made it seem like it wasn't so high up in the air, when in fact it was at normal level. Speaking of seating position and outward view, it reminded me eerily of the Camaro. The blind spots aren't as bad though. It had a crappy one color LCD screen for an info display in the cluster which shouldn't be in a 72k car.
The Bose stereo sucked. I think my desk speakers sound better.
GRADE: B+
DRIVING: Let me preface this section by stating that I am not interested in tracking a car like this (big, heavy, GT), and am strictly making comments based on it being a DD, which is what most people will do with the car anyway.
The motor is very quiet, even at WOT from inside. It was louder than y S5 of course, but they did a great job insulating the noise and making the car's rumble apparent, but not obnoxious. I couldn't hear the supercharger, not a negative point, but it would have been cool to hear. The car was an automatic (they didn't have any 6 speeds in stock, but they had one on the way in). The car shifted smoothly and wasn't fussy with gear selection. It was slow to shift (everything is after driving a DSG/PDK) but picked up speed nicely. It wasn't slap your momma fast like I expected, but that's probably on purpose as a luxury car. My old C6 felt faster (butt dyno). I loved the implementation of the paddle shifters, which were mounted on the inside of the steering wheel like buttons instead of "flappy paddles."
The car turned nicely. It felt kind of skittish on higher speed turns and the steering was very light. It definitely didn't feel like it weighed 4200 lbs. The steering was also more accurate than I expected. The dynamic was similar to the C63 I test drove a few weeks ago, with the acceleration going to the V and the handling going to the C63. The ride was very soft and soaked up bumps nicely. I noticed very little body roll.
GRADE: A-
CONCLUSION: I think I'd be interested in this car if I wanted a RWD monster DD, like the C63. The engine note isn't as nice as the C63's though. This car would be extremely comfortable to DD, unless the weather was compromising. I'm not sold on the styling (especially the rear), and the wheels (at 19") sink into the monster wheel wells. They ought to make a double-clutch transmission, but I'm glad they make it in manual. The inside trim is of good quality, but looks like a rap video. I was surprised there wasn't a gold chain hanging from the rearview mirror.
Overall, I think the car at it's current price won't sell well. I think the avg price will be around $50k for the V6, and at that price, they're competing with the more established players in this group (335i, E coupe). I think they should have undercut them in pricing initially and increased the price later on.
Great driving car. Questionable exterior. Lil Wayne interior, albeit well-built.
I was greeted with the typical swarm of salesman as I parked (next to the CTS coupes). All of them backed off, except a new guy who didn't know anything about the car and had only been working there for a day. I LOL'd when the first thing he asked was, "what can we do to get you in to this car today?". Uhhh.
EXTERIOR: The exterior was as expected from the photos in magazines/online. The car was a hulking behemoth. Huge. I think this car would have been much more attractive at 80% scale. The profile of the car was the best view IMO. The front and rear are more boxy than I'd like. The ass is humungous and the trunk is a huge compromise for its design (much like the G37 coupe). As you can see, compared to my S5 (which isn't very small), the CTS towers.
GRADE: C
INTERIOR: Thumbs up to GM for the initial quality of the interior in this car. The build quality is comparable to Infiniti. All the trim was soft to the touch and didn't creak when pressed. All the controls were nicely placed and the tactile feel of buttons and levers were firm and secure. The car had the Recaro seats ($3400 option!!
) which were definitely an upgrade over the stock crap. I'm not a fan of Alcantara, so the steering wheel and inserts in the doors didn't do anything for me. There was entirely way too much chrome and shiny objects on the inside. Everywhere I looked I was being blinded by something (sunny day today). I don't like pop up nav's and this car's was no exception. It wasn't as bad as most implementations, but the dash being so high, probably made it seem like it wasn't so high up in the air, when in fact it was at normal level. Speaking of seating position and outward view, it reminded me eerily of the Camaro. The blind spots aren't as bad though. It had a crappy one color LCD screen for an info display in the cluster which shouldn't be in a 72k car.
The Bose stereo sucked. I think my desk speakers sound better.
GRADE: B+
DRIVING: Let me preface this section by stating that I am not interested in tracking a car like this (big, heavy, GT), and am strictly making comments based on it being a DD, which is what most people will do with the car anyway.
The motor is very quiet, even at WOT from inside. It was louder than y S5 of course, but they did a great job insulating the noise and making the car's rumble apparent, but not obnoxious. I couldn't hear the supercharger, not a negative point, but it would have been cool to hear. The car was an automatic (they didn't have any 6 speeds in stock, but they had one on the way in). The car shifted smoothly and wasn't fussy with gear selection. It was slow to shift (everything is after driving a DSG/PDK) but picked up speed nicely. It wasn't slap your momma fast like I expected, but that's probably on purpose as a luxury car. My old C6 felt faster (butt dyno). I loved the implementation of the paddle shifters, which were mounted on the inside of the steering wheel like buttons instead of "flappy paddles."
The car turned nicely. It felt kind of skittish on higher speed turns and the steering was very light. It definitely didn't feel like it weighed 4200 lbs. The steering was also more accurate than I expected. The dynamic was similar to the C63 I test drove a few weeks ago, with the acceleration going to the V and the handling going to the C63. The ride was very soft and soaked up bumps nicely. I noticed very little body roll.
GRADE: A-
CONCLUSION: I think I'd be interested in this car if I wanted a RWD monster DD, like the C63. The engine note isn't as nice as the C63's though. This car would be extremely comfortable to DD, unless the weather was compromising. I'm not sold on the styling (especially the rear), and the wheels (at 19") sink into the monster wheel wells. They ought to make a double-clutch transmission, but I'm glad they make it in manual. The inside trim is of good quality, but looks like a rap video. I was surprised there wasn't a gold chain hanging from the rearview mirror.
Overall, I think the car at it's current price won't sell well. I think the avg price will be around $50k for the V6, and at that price, they're competing with the more established players in this group (335i, E coupe). I think they should have undercut them in pricing initially and increased the price later on.
Great driving car. Questionable exterior. Lil Wayne interior, albeit well-built.
08-29-2010, 02:30 PM
#2
Good write-up! I like the looks of the CTS-V Coupe, but woud probably get the sedan as a DD.
08-29-2010, 02:40 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: VA
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice review. I think the rear looks horrible. The vertical taillights and headlights are so bad looking imo, but they seem to be Cadillac's trademark to make their cars different for the pack.
I'd like to hear more about the dealer experience. Do you pretend to actually be interested in buying the thing?
I'd like to hear more about the dealer experience. Do you pretend to actually be interested in buying the thing?
08-29-2010, 02:40 PM
#4
![[DT]'s Avatar](https://www.s2ki.com/forums/customavatars/avatar91853_2.gif){kind=avatar}
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vilano Beach, FL
Posts: 2,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice review. In other press type pics, the styling doesn't seem an angular/hard as your pics, and I've got to say I'm not as much of a fan of that design direction.
The motor is obviously a beast. I had a friend with the NA version and the handling was surprising (it was the sedan) and I thought the interior was pretty well done.
This may sound bad, but I don't think I could drive a Cadillac. I know it's silly and doesn't really reflect anything about the technical merits of the car, but it's just a thing with me (and I'm even sort of an old guy
)
The motor is obviously a beast. I had a friend with the NA version and the handling was surprising (it was the sedan) and I thought the interior was pretty well done.
This may sound bad, but I don't think I could drive a Cadillac. I know it's silly and doesn't really reflect anything about the technical merits of the car, but it's just a thing with me (and I'm even sort of an old guy
)
08-29-2010, 02:55 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good read. I'm waiting on the specs of the new M5. The CTS-V is my second choice. I am aware there will be a 25k+ premium.
[QUOTE=[DT],Aug 29 2010, 02:40 PM]This may sound bad, but I don't think I could drive a Cadillac.
[QUOTE=[DT],Aug 29 2010, 02:40 PM]This may sound bad, but I don't think I could drive a Cadillac.
