2005 Cadillac CTS
The 2005 Cadillac CTS could be called the great American sports sedan. It certainly fits that description with its sporty handling, exhilarating acceleration and powerful braking. If you haven't been in a Cadillac in a couple of years, you'll likely be surprised and impressed by this newest generation. Their names are like alphabet soup: CTS, STS, XLR, SRX. But driving one of them confirms Cadillac now builds world-class automobiles.
It was the CTS that kicked off this renaissance. Introduced as a 2003 model, its edgy styling immediately grabbed the spotlight. Praise of its dynamic qualities quickly followed from the automotive press, which focused on its superb rear-wheel-drive chassis. Two years later the CTS is improved and more refined. It's now powered by a new generation of V6 engines designed to be smooth and quiet but more powerful, with state-of-the art features such as variable-valve timing, dual overhead cams, and four valves per cylinder. The 2005 CTS comes with a choice of these new VVT V6 engines, a new 2.8-liter V6 and a 3.6-liter V6 introduced as an optional engine last year. We've tested the latter and found it to be powerful and silky smooth, especially around town.
And for those who want a four-door Corvette, there's the CTS-V, a hot rod that looks like a CTS but sounds and accelerates like a Corvette. With its Corvette engine, sports suspension and Brembo brakes, the CTS-V offers racecar performance. And should we remind you that it's rear-wheel drive, the layout of choice for high-performance cars? You could look up “sports sedan” in the dictionary and a picture of the CTS-V would not be out of place. Nor would it feel out of place on a race track. CTS-V is only available with a manual shifter.
For 2005, a new six-speed manual gearbox is also available for the regular CTS models. Most buyers opt for the automatic, but the new manual is remarkable for its smooth shifting and smooth, easygoing clutch. Both the 2.8-liter and 3.6-liter V6 engines are available with the six-speed manual or the more popular five-speed automatic. We'd march immediately to the responsive automatic if the manual wasn't so good. The 2005 CTS also gets a new instrument cluster and a choice of new 16-inch wheels. The interior is still austere, a complaint when the CTS was first introduced, but the quality of some of the soft-touch materials now seems better.
Equipped with the smooth 3.6-liter V6 and its smooth suspension, which was refined for 2004, the CTS is a smooth, sophisticated car that belies its sporting potential until you mash down the gas and attack the corners. The CTS builds on Cadillac's century-long tradition of technology and design innovation, and is a modern interpretation of the strikingly beautiful cars that made Cadillac famous. Built on GM's acclaimed Sigma rear-wheel-drive architecture, the CTS was rigorously tested at the famed Nurburgring racetrack in Germany.
The 2005 CTS line starts with a new entry-level model that features a new 2.8-liter V6. It's a sophisticated engine with variable valve timing rated at 210 horsepower and 195 pound-feet of torque. Production of the 2.8-liter model begins in October 2004 and pricing wasn't available at press time.
A more powerful model comes with a 3.6-liter V6 VVT ($31,700), which develops 255 horsepower at 6200 rpm and 252 pound-feet of torque at 3200 rpm. This engine debuted as an option for the 2004 CTS. (Gone is the old 3.2-liter V6 used in the 2003-04 CTS.)
Both come with an optional five-speed automatic transmission ($1,200), but both can be ordered with the new Aisin six-speed manual transmission (which replaces the old five-speed manual).
Standard equipment includes leather-trimmed upholstery, dual-zone climate control, power driver's seat, driver information center, a seven-speaker sound system, 16-inch alloy wheels with all-season tires, and one year of the OnStar road assistance service. Also standard are traction control and anti-lock brakes (ABS) with brake proportioning, which balances the braking front and rear. Side-impact airbags and side air curtains come standard for front and rear passengers in addition to the standard dual frontal airbags.
The Sport Package ($1,875) takes the suspension tuning a step further with monotube shocks, brake pads with more anti-fade heat resistance, 17-inch alloy wheels with 255/50R17 tires, load-leveling rear suspension, speed-sensitive power steering, and StabiliTrak electronic stability control. The Luxury Package ($3,165) includes heater power front seats, memory presets for two drivers, auto-dimming rearview mirror with compass, HomeLink universal garage door transmitter, alarm system, and a wood-trimmed steering wheel and shift knob.
The new CTS-V ($49,300) comes stuffed with the 5.7-liter V8 LS6 engine from the high-performance Corvette Z06 rated at 400 horsepower and 395 pound-feet of torque. It comes mated to a Tremec six-speed manual gearbox (an automatic is not available). To put this power to the ground, CTS-V gets 18-inch wheels, grippy tires, big Brembo brakes, and other high-performance tweaks.
The CTS was the first production car using Cadillac's new Art & Science design vocabulary first shown on the Evoq concept car. The design is a festival of wedges, sharp junctions and chiseled angles that can be seen throughout the latest generation of Cadillacs. The edgy design is distinctive. There's no confusing a Cadillac with anything else.
The CTS refines the Cadillac tradition of vertical headlamps and taillamps that dates back to 1965. Viewed from the front, the CTS is imposing, with its large louvered grille framed by sharp, vertical headlamps. The front air dam is all business, with simple rectangular foglights and a long narrow intake near the skirt. The CTS has a short, high deck with tall, vertical taillamps. The view from the rear is broken up by the indentation cut widely around the license plate in a contrasting color. The CTS-V looks a bit better here by using body colored plastic.
The angular theme continues inside, although it was softened for 2004. The CTS is sold in Europe and the interior reflects that. It projects an idea that driving is serious business. Visually, it's an austere cabin, lacking the warmness of the new Cadillac STS. You'll find no wood in the CTS. The interior is a mix of high-tech textures, some of it dimpled like a golf ball. Many of the materials are soft and interesting to the touch. The instrument cluster has been improved for 2005, and the gauges remain clear, straightforward and easy to read.
The leather seats are excellent, comfortable for all-day driving with good bolstering to hold your torso in place in sharp corners. There's good support for the driver's right leg, and where the right shin touches it feels soft. There's a good support for the left leg as well, with a good dead pedal for the left foot.
The three-spoke steering wheel contains buttons for the sound system and cruise control, and is deliciously padded in leather for all but the part of the rim between about 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock, which is trimmed in wood.
Changing the temperature, adjusting the stereo, and operating the navigation system are easy and convenient in the CTS. The center stack juts out from the rest of the dash, with the elaborate GPS navigation system at the top center location. Climate controls are at the bottom, controlled by amber-lighted pictograms.
The stereo works well, allowing quick and easy switching from a news channel on XM Satellite Radio to music on FM to traffic on AM to a CD. The small triangular speakers for the optional Bose system are mounted on the A pillar, and look cool. OnStar is provided, allowing drivers to make hands-free, voice-activated calls. OnStar operators will call out the emergency crews if the airbags go off and you don't respond, they can unlock the doors for you, or direct you to the nearest gas station, ATM or Italian restaurant.
The CTS offers more interior room than some of its European competition. A tall driver or passenger will be comfortable in front and only slightly cramped in the rear. The rear seats are comfortable for two or three passengers, offering good leg room, though lacking in thigh support. There is a convenient pass-thru tunnel between the rear seats, to the trunk, if the split folding rear seats are ordered.
The CTS drives wonderfully around town. It cruises comfortably on the freeway and feels at home on winding roads.
The new 3.6-liter V6 is silky smooth when cruising, less so at full throttle. And it responds quickly whenever you step on the gas, a benefit of its broad torque curve. It's a thoroughly modern engine with a 60-degree aluminum block, double overhead cams, variable-valve timing, electronic throttle control, six coils and a structural oil pan. The 2.8-liter V6 VVT is a modified version of the 3.6-liter V6 with VVT. The 2.8 and 3.6-liter V6 earn the same EPA-estimated mileage of 18/27 mpg City/Highway and run on regular 87 octane. Choosing between them is a matter of power versus cost. Speed costs money.
We can highly recommend both the automatic and manual transmissions, so choosing between them is a matter of preference and whether stop-and-go driving is part of your daily commute. The five-speed automatic transmission is superb. In normal mode, it seems to shift a lot, especially at a casual pace. Selecting the Sport mode changes the transmission's attitude, giving it sharp and decisive response. The automatic is an excellent choice for the CTS. It even gets better gas mileage around town than the manual.
The manual gearbox is surprisingly smooth and pleasant, however, and if you like sports sedans you may prefer it. You can shift it so smoothly that your passengers wouldn't know it was a manual if they couldn't see you shifting. For some reason we expected it to be balky, but the opposite is the case. It's a model of smoothness. It's easy to match clutch take-up and throttle for smooth driving, especially at low speeds. The shifter is very smooth with short, precise throws. You can shift smoothly up through fourth gear at low speeds without lugging the engine. The smoothness of shifting and the low-speed tractability of the engine makes driving around town very pleasant.
Ride and handling are impeccable, smooth, steady, predictable. The CTS feels solid, but not heavy. Steering is precise, with just the right amount of resistance from the speed-sensitive power steering. Cadillac tuned the suspension at Germany's legendary Nurburgring circuit, because that's where German sports sedans are developed, and Cadillac was eager to challenge them on their terms. It shows. The suspension is nicely damped so the ride is very comfortable, erasing the bumps. Still, the suspension is there when you need it in the rippling twisty curves. In short, the CTS is fun to drive. Braking and suspension capabilities of the 2.8-liter model are the same as those of the 3.6-liter model.
Its rear-wheel drive, crisp handling and prodigious horsepower work together when charging out of corners. Go into a corner too quick and StabiliTrak is there to reduce the chance of a skid, applying just the right amount of brake and throttle correction to keep the CTS on the road. The anti-lock brakes with brake proportioning work very well with powerful, predictable braking. Slam on the brakes at 70 miles an hour and there's no drama: no squealing, no swerving.
The CTS-V has some of the characteristics of the CTS, but is a bit of a different animal, sacrificing pleasantries to achieve increased performance. For starters, CTS-V comes exclusively with the high-performance Tremec T56 six-speed, and it's a relatively stiff shifter. It also takes more pressure to push in the clutch pedal, and clutch take-up is fairly abrupt, making smooth launches a challenge. And the modified suspension causes the car to bob on undulating pavement. Not to mention the engine is always raring to go. Like the Corvette, the CTS-V forces the shifter from first to fourth gear when driven leisurely, which helps lower its EPA fuel economy rating. All of this makes it harder to motor around town with the smoothness of a first-class chauffeur. The CTS is more pleasant as a daily commuter. Standing on the gas, however, reveals th
The rear-wheel-drive Cadillac CTS offers performance, comfort and overall engineering in the same sports sedan league as BMW, Audi, Mercedes and Infiniti. Its styling is distinctive and its image fresh and reborn.
A new generation of engines improves on the CTS for 2005. A new six-speed manual transmission is available that makes it a true sports sedan. If that isn't enough, the CTS-V sounds and runs like a Corvette.
|Model Line Overview|
|Model lineup:||Cadillac CTS 2.8 (TBA); CTS 3.6 ($31,700); CTS-V ($49,300)|
|Engines:||210-hp 2.8-liter dohc V6 VVT; 255-hp 3.6-liter dohc V6 VVT; 400-hp ohv 5.7-liter V8|
|Transmissions:||5-speed automatic; 6-speed manual; Tremec 6-speed manual|
|Safety equipment (standard):||dual airbags, side air bags, and roof air bags standard; ABS, traction control, yaw control|
|Safety equipment (optional):||Stabilitrak electronic stability control|
|Basic warranty:||4 years/50,000 miles|
|Assembled in:||Lansing, Michigan|
|Specifications As Tested|
|Model tested (MSPR):||Cadillac CTS ($31,700)|
|Standard equipment:||air conditioning; sport front bucket seats with leather seating surfaces; power mirrors; power windows; power locks; tinted glass; passive anti-theft system; tilt wheel; cruise control; remote keyless entry; ABS; traction control; electric rear window defroster; fog lamps; one year OnStar|
|Options as tested (MSPR):||DVD Navigation System ($1,850) includes XM Satellite Radio, AM/FM with in-dash 6-disc CD changer, DVD based navigation, RDS, digital signal processing, 8 Bose speakers; Sport Package ($1,875) includes Sport suspension, StabiliTrak electronic stability control, load-leveling, speed-sensitive power steering, P225/50R17 tires, 17-inch aluminum wheels, performance brake linings; HID headlamps ($645); split folding rear seats ($450)|
|Gas guzzler tax:||N/A|
|Price as tested (MSPR):||$37215|
|Engine:||3.6-liter dohc 24v V6|
|Horsepower (lb.-ft @ rpm):||255 @ 6200|
|Torque (lb.-ft @ rpm):||252 @ 3200|
|EPA fuel economy, city/hwy:||17/27 mpg|
|Track, f/r:||60.0/60.0 in.|
|Turning circle:||35.5 ft.|
|Head/hip/leg room, f:||38.5/53.3/42.4 in.|
|Head/hip/leg room, m:||N/A|
|Head/hip/leg room, r:||36.9/53.5/37.0 in.|
|Cargo volume:||12.8 cu. ft.|
|Towing capacity:||1000 Lbs.|
|Curb weigth:||3694 lbs.|
|Brakes, f/r:||disc/disc with ABS, EBD|
|Fuel capacity:||17.5 gal.|
|Unless otherwise indicated, specifications refer to test vehicle. All prices are manufacturer's suggested retail prices (MSPR) effective as of August 8, 2004.Prices do not include manufacturer's destination and delivery charges. N/A: Information not available or not applicable. Manufacturer Info Sources: 1-800-333-4CAD - www.cadillac.com|
2005 Cadillac CTS - Specs
Dimensions and capacities are in inches unless otherwise specified.
At a glance, this probably looks like an odd grouping for a comparison test. There's a good reason for this. By our standard comparison-test parameters, it is an odd grouping—if we were actually doing a standard comparison test, that is.
One car is short a couple of doors. Another is no longer in production and cost some $23,000 more than either of the others. Ordinarily, we try to round up rides that are similar in concept, performance potential, and price. But with this trio, the only inescapable commonality is that they all aspire to be "ultimate driving machines."
Two of these cars were built by the company that coined the slogan. The other is one of several that purport to meet ultimate driving standards. BMW is in the enviable position of setting the pace in the world of sports sedans, which means any manufacturer seeking prominence in this demanding realm measures its products against those wearing the blue-and-white propeller badge. We could do no better than to use the same yardsticks.
Tuned on Germany's treacherous Nürburgring racetrack—the unforgiving development crucible employed by BMW, Porsche, and AMG, to name just a few—the Cadillac CTS- V is clearly the most ambitious effort General Motors has made to produce a sports sedan credible by BMW standards.
Did the Cadillac kids hit the 10 ring? Last year's Nürburgring preview of this Cadillac (September 2003) certainly seemed to suggest a serious contender had been created. But we were shown pre-production development cars, and the program didn't allow our formal testing procedures. This time around we put our hands on a sure-'nuff production sample, albeit an early one. So we rounded up the brace of Bimmers—an M3 from our friends at BMW of North America and, since BMW NA was fresh out, an M5 from our friend Dave Wexall.
In addition to several Wendy's franchises, Wexall owns a BMW 330i cabriolet and a Ferrari 512BB, but he loves his "M car," as he calls it, best. We promised we'd be gentle, but Wexall wasn't really mollified until we also promised to replace the M's tires at the conclusion of the test. He's seen our act before.
With the preliminaries settled, including instrumented braking, skidpad, and straight-line acceleration, we saddled up and headed south—three jet-black bullets rumbling through the mists of a dank November morning. Not ideal for evaluating performance cars, but we had high hopes for the next day's visit to Putnam Park, a beautiful 1.77-mile road course about 20 miles west of Indianapolis. And from a performance point of view, we were counting on Putnam Park to provide the definitive story.
Before we get into the play-by-play, we must report some idiosyncrasies in our Cadillac test car, all of which affected the testing. For example, we discovered a slow leak in the left front tire, which probably took a point or two off the Caddy's skidpad performance. Once we became aware of this problem, the digital readouts of Cadillac's excellent tire-pressure monitoring system made it easy to keep track of the condition of the suspect donut, but like most slow leaks, it picked up speed and, as a result, limited our driving time.
Another problem turned out to be virtual. After a few laps on the Putnam Park road circuit, long before the track had dried enough for us to turn meaningful lap times, the Caddy began reporting high oil temps. When the pavement dried, allowing go-for-it driving, we were unable to make more than two consecutive circuits before the display numbers soared north of 300 degrees Fahrenheit, accompanied by an insistent chime.
We were baffled. On the one hand, even with Mobil 1 synthetic in the sump, oil-related instrument readings are hard to ignore. Imagine Lindbergh, after noting low oil pressure as he sat on that Long Island runway, deciding to take off for Paris anyway. Also, when we popped the hood, the oil level was down almost a quart, and there was a hint of that used-up-lubricant smell we associate with engines whose hearts have ceased to beat. On the other hand, our man Csere experienced nothing of this sort during his Nürburgring preview driving, and we saw no corresponding increase in coolant temps.
Nevertheless, since we wanted the Caddy to survive the Putnam runs, we were cautious, limiting our lapping and short-shifting to keep the revs down. We feel certain a little more driving with a little less constraint would have produced better lap times.
Later, Cadillac engineer Ken Morris explained that the oil-temp monitor in this car is new to GM and has presented some software-calibration challenges. The first 50 cars off the line have exhibited the same problem. It would have been helpful to have known this going into the test.
The third problem we encountered was axle tramp, also known as wheel hop, during hard acceleration from a standing start, and it's one that can't be explained away so easily. Morris notes that with a judicious combination of clutch slip and wheelspin, GM development engineers have finessed 0-to-60 runs in the 4.5- and 4.6-second realm, which is pretty much what we anticipated with this car's Corvette powertrain. Unfortunately, we hadn't been to the GM school of CTS- V launch technique, so our efforts were rewarded by rear-wheel hop, with severity in direct proportion to the level of aggression employed to get the car out of the blocks. It soon became clear that further runs were likely to bring the test to a premature end, whereupon we left off.
The result was a disappointing 0-to-60 time—5.2 seconds versus the 4.7 seconds we estimated in September. And although we believe Cadillac engineers when they say they've found ways to drive around this phenomenon, we also believe that CTS- V owners attempting to extract the best 0-to-60 times from their cars are likely to become intimately acquainted with differential replacement costs.
By the Numbers
As noted, the Caddy's sprints were not up to our expectations, and this applies to more than the 0-to-60 numbers. Despite the launch limitations, with the most potent power-to-weight ratio in the group and the shortest final drive, the CTS- V should have begun to assert itself once it got out of the starting gate. That was not the case. Although it was quicker than the M3 to 100 and 140, the Cadillac trailed the M5 in every acceleration category, and its 13.7-second elapsed time through the quarter was the slowest of the trio (the Caddy's trap speed was 107 mph compared with 106 for both the M3 and M5). In our September preview, we cited Cadillac's forecast of quarter-miles in the low-13-second range, with a trap speed of about 110 mph.
We were also a little mystified by the skipad test results. The Caddy's 245/ 45ZR-18 Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar EMT tires provided a bit less rear footprint than that of either of the BMWs, although it put up the best skidpad number, 0.90 g. But could that leaky left front have diluted the result? When we took a closer look at the skidpad times, we noticed a bigger-than-usual disparity between the counterclockwise and clockwise times, so it's a possibility. The tire-pressure monitor doesn't preempt other dashboard readouts until at least one tire is below 24 psi (or above 42), and since we set pressures before heading out to the test track, we weren't aware of the problem until the following day.
We don't think the leak had much effect on the braking numbers. The Cadillac was third among three, requiring 165 feet to stop from 70 mph, a foot longer than the M5, four feet longer than the M3, which weighs in 555 pounds lighter. Nevertheless, 165 feet is a sports-car number, and the CTS- V had distinctly better pedal feel than the M5.
Still, the objective test results suggest that Cadillac didn't hit its development targets quite as squarely as hoped.
Racetrack development notwithstanding, sports sedans have to provide driving pleasure across a broad range of categories—from something as simple as the feel and function of controls and switches to how well the seats accommodate their occupants in all kinds of driving to driver sightlines to ride quality to exhaust note. In this purely subjective realm, the CTS- V fared reasonably well against the Bavarians, a little soft in some areas, but superior in others.
For example, in a ride-and-handling round-robin tour of our 10Best test loop, the Cadillac's rather aggressive suspension tuning trailed the more supple M5 in ride quality but wasn't as hard-edged as the M3. On the other hand, we rated its steering feel and response on a par with the BMWs', and we were impressed with the high threshold of Cadillac's stability-control system—much more willing to allow a little sliding than that of either BMW, and much less intrusive when it did intervene. We were even more impressed that GM allows the option of shutting down the system.
Certainly, there's more to public-road driving than max cornering speeds and late braking. And in the realm of livability, the Cadillac gives a very good account of itself. The front buckets don't offer quite as much lateral support as the M5's, but their range of adjustability is good, and if they give anything away in terms of all-around comfort, the distinction is academic. The M3's seats, in contrast, reflect the sportier nature of the car—almost raceworthy, but difficult to adjust and even harder to achieve long-distance comfort. We could wish that the Cadillac's steering column had a telescope feature as well as tilt, but no one reported any difficulties with achieving an optimal driving position.
Our one dynamic gripe: the shifting of the six-speed manual transmission. We called it "rubbery" in our September report. GM responded by tightening the action but went a bit too far, rendering the shifting a tad too stiff. We would also be much happier if the engineering team had eliminated the low-rpm one-to-four upshift, a sop to fuel economy that's been an irritating Corvette feature for so long.
In terms of general comfort and self-indulgence, the CTS- V is a clear winner. It's roomier than the M5, particularly in the rear, the electroluminescent instruments look good and scan better, the interior styling looks more contemporary than the aging BMW layouts, and the Caddy's audio system makes the BMW units sound very ordinary indeed.
Would racetrack development yield superior racetrack performance? Our expectations were for exactly that, but as noted, we encountered limitations that diluted the Caddy's act on the undulating Putnam layout, a beautifully conceived collection of varying curves, several of them linked, with a long front straight to give horsepower a workout.
To limit oil-temp-readout hysterics, we tried short-shifting the Caddy at 5500 rpm, well below the 6000-rpm horsepower peak, figuring the 5.7's edge in torque would cover for not using all the revs. And we limited consecutive hot laps to two, allowing the Caddy to cool off for about 15 minutes between runs. The net of this is that we posted just four go-for-it laps.
For all that, Putnam provided the information we wanted.
To no one's surprise, the M3 emerged as the athlete of the trio. The combination of its tidier dimensions, stiffer suspension tuning, and quarter- ton less mass easily offset the disparities in horsepower and torque versus the bigger cars.
As the track dried, the M3's logbook became sprinkled with rapturous reports from the test crew. "Such a sweetheart around the track," wrote one. "So composed, so balanced, so eager," rhapsodized another.
The smaller Bimmer's responses were quicker in abrupt transitions, its balance allowed easily controlled drifts off fast apexes, and its lighter weight made for quicker corner exits. Beyond that, the M3's seat bolsters were by far the best for keeping the driver centered during hard thrashing. We were a little surprised to encounter lengthy stopping distances a couple times during the track work—"Brake fade can be achieved," reported one tester—but the bottom line was no surprise at all: The M3 is much better suited to racetrack exercise than its bigger cousin, and it posted the best lap time of the day at 1:24.471 (75.4 mph).
The M5's racetrack behavior, in contrast, could be characterized as dignified. Bigger and heavier than its feisty cousin—and also 46 pounds heavier than the Cadillac—it was a little slower on turn-in, a little more inclined to body roll, a little more reluctant in transitions, a little more deliberate on corner exits. On the other hand, the logbook was full of praise for its predictability and versatility.
One tester summarized the M5 as a "perfect all-arounder." Another extolled its "fluid" behavior: "So smooth, so progressive, just melts into understeer or oversteer, depending on your right foot. No drama, no white knuckles."
And that list of "littles"—turn-in, body roll, etc.—didn't hold the M5 back all that much. Despite a rather long brake pedal, something we've noted in other M5s, the senior M car recorded a best lap just a second slower than the M3: 1:25.493 (74.5 mph).
Compared with the Bavarians, the track performance of the CTS- V came across as edgier and less refined, although just as eager. Transitions felt more abrupt, particularly compared with the M5, and the action of the brakes felt a bit grabby, particularly with the first hard application when the rotors and pads had cooled off.
"It's harder to achieve oneness with this car," observed one tester.
Nevertheless, the Cadillac's steering was gratifyingly precise. It turned in like Marshall Faulk cutting for the goal line, and if its weight transfer wasn't quite as smoothly managed as the M5's, there wasn't a hint of reluctance in its transient responses. The CTS- V was also perfectly happy to provide the driver with as much oversteer as he wanted. The breakaway might be a little more abrupt, but once rotation set in, it was easy enough to control with a judicious throttle foot.
Throttle, of course, is one of the elements that helps to make the CTS- V a player in the supersedan derby. The small-block V-8's superb low-end thrust provides delicious visceral urgency to corner exits, as well as a brassy baritone aural accompaniment. So even though we weren't able to employ nearly as much throttle as we would have liked, and not nearly as often, the Cadillac's best lap—1:25.355 (74.7 mph)—edged the M5's by 0.138. And there's no doubt in the mind of the DL (designated lapper) that there was another second or so that we were unable to exploit. Perhaps even more.
The Bottom Line . . .
. . . is a key element in this evaluation. As tested, the M3 and the CTS- V are about the same in price, although substantially different in character. The smaller Bimmer is essentially a sports car with a cramped back seat, whereas the Cadillac offers sedan versatility and comfort to go with its muscle. It's hard to imagine that someone interested in one of them would seriously consider the other. Yet the CTS- V and the M5 are directly comparable in everything but price. Given even money, our test crew favored the M5. Then we asked ourselves the key question: Is the M5 almost $23,000 better than the Cadillac? We got a resounding no to that one.
The CTS- V isn't perfect. Nevertheless, after a long succession of so-called Euro sedans that were exactly as European in character as Omaha, Cadillac has finally created one that can run with the autobahn crowd. It may not be the baddest bull in that herd, but it's got the right moves and the right stuff—plus that freshly creased look that's uniquely Cadillac—at the right price.
Surely the example we drove was not yet fully baked, as it were. There was the little problem with the oil-temp sensor and a resistant shifter that could use a bit of last-minute tuning. But I cannot tell you how delighted I am to drive this car, how delighted I am that this car even exists. The basics of the car are so right. The engine is so brutally wonderful. The handling character is that of a clever delinquent—lively, wily, and never boring. And the wheels, the grilles, the body add-ons, and the contrasting stitching inside—all specific to the V—look the business. Raise your glass to never having to pretend the Catera is a legitimate sports sedan ever again!
It's hard not to be pumped by this new CTS- V. I first drove it last June on Germany's Nürburgring, where it displayed confidence-inspiring stability, precise steering, powerful brakes, and enough playful oversteer at the limit to keep you plenty amused. I fretted that the taut suspension would prove unyielding on the pockmarked pavement back home, but the CTS- V turns out to be surprisingly supple and livable in Michigan. It could stand a slicker shifter, a richer interior, and less off-the-line wheel hop, but if you've been waiting for a solid American entry that can challenge the Germans in the patrician sports-sedan class, your wait is over.
Watch out, children, fusty old GM is raising hell. The power is loud, violent, and addictive. The steering is sharp, the suspension is in control, and the brakes are a strain on tendons. You touch bliss in a drift out of an apex, the grille pointing where your right foot aims it. Holy Saint Herman of Alaska—the traction-control-disable button is right there on the steering wheel! You can boot GM's lawyers out of the car with one thumb flick. No need to, though, since the computer allows lots of sideways horseplay before it intervenes. Straight-line acceleration is crimped by spasmodic axle hop, and the chintzy interior (pre-Lutz) should be shoveled. But GM's being bad is really quite good.
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io
2005 Cadillac CTS
$30,190 - $32,440MSRP / Window Sticker Price
|MPG||17 City / 27 Hwy|
|Transmission||6-spd man w/OD|
|Power||255 @ 6200 rpm|
Hi! We notice you're using an ad blocker. Please consider allowing Autoblog.
We get it. Ads can be annoying. But ads are also how we keep the garage doors open and the lights on here at Autoblog - and keep our stories free for you and for everyone. And free is good, right? If you'd be so kind as to allow our site, we promise to keep bringing you great content. Thanks for that. And thanks for reading Autoblog.
Here's how to disable adblocking on our site.
- Click on the icon for your Adblocker in your browser. A drop down menu will appear.
- Select the option to run ads for autoblog.com, by clicking either "turn off for this site", "don't run on pages on this domain", "allow this site" or similar. The exact text will differ depending on the actual application you have running.
- Refresh the Autoblog page you were viewing. Done!
You still haven't turned off your adblocker or allowed our site. It only takes a few seconds.
You must be logged in to perform that action.
Cadillac cts 2005
Do not forget to wash this linen right away, then iron it, it should always be ready. He left. Lenka took off her peignoir, wet with sweat, and threw it into the washing machine. I trudged to the bathroom, turned on a strong shower.2006 Cadillac CTS Review!
I covered my head with a duvet cover and sank. Jennifer Torres was a famous 30-year-old Spanish television model. Well, a model - this is very figuratively speaking, since she did not participate in any fashion shows, only in television. Talk shows, starred in clips of rappers and various commercial projects.
You will also be interested:
- Privacy tarps for fences
- Free pumpkin stencils owl
- British council lesson plans
- Vector icon 2 lighter
- Abilene furniture craigslist
- Columbia county ga arrests
- Open records el paso
- Emory hospital nurse residency
- Alter bridge love song
Were decorated with many rivets, buckles, straps. Spectacular boots fit perfectly. Only it was unusual to stand on high heels. And then I saw a reflection in the mirror of the closet. In the twilight of the mirror, it was as if Katya had soy.