M/T: No-down $399/mo entry luxury comparo

[bill25]

So it could be worse for Cadillac - and they are moving in the right direction imo.

I agree for the most part. I just think they need to focus a little more on luxury in general and maybe a little less on track. They have Chevy for their real track performance. I am not saying that Cadillac should get sloppy with their chassis development, Chevy still needs that. Look what it did for the Camaro.

[kevm14]

With few exceptions, Cadillac's track advantages do directly translate to driving satisfaction for the enthusiast on the street - it is important to give them credit for that. They may not be the best riding in the segment, but they have the best ride for the handling they provide (i.e. at least one competitor both rides worse and handles worse). Bested seemingly only by the Giulia, and only just now. A next gen ATS is probably due soon.

If anything has a reputation to shake with regard to being a numbers car, that would be Corvette, with the peak being the first few years of C6 Z06 (2006). However, I will absolutely grant them a pass for that time period. The C6 Z06 was not necessarily a driver's car, but it was a very fun car, with levels of performance you wouldn't see at a cheaper price until the 2013 Mustang GT500. And even then the GT500 merely matched acceleration performance and was still far less capable in handling. So let's not totally write off the early C6 Z06. It was providing value in an era of the final year of the GTO, no Camaro, and the CTS-V1. That shit trapped 125. That's nothing to sneeze at. In fact, the first Camaro to reach the levels of acceleration provided by a 2006 Z06 would be the 2017 Camaro ZL1 (powered by LT4).

[bill25]

Yes, I agree but...

With few exceptions, Cadillac's track advantages do directly translate to driving satisfaction for the enthusiast on the street

For actual sales numbers, this doesn't matter. Remember the segment, these people are buying a badge and financial bragging rights, not an enthusiast car.

Is it nice for enthusiasts to get a cheap used unloved ATS that has some enthusiast qualities, yes, but this is not helping Cadillac as a premium brand, which is where it is lacking, or at least perceived to be lacking.

[kevm14]

True, I just don't know if I'd claim that they have specifically sacrificed luxury for performance / lap times.

[kevm14]

I take that back. There is one area: Rear seat legroom.

[bill25]

I don't think they are doing it on purpose, I just think it is a genuine weak point.

[kevm14]

That I agree with. But I'll ask a question: can they maintain all of their great chassis work while adding "luxury?" I don't necessarily even mean in terms of technical limitations (i.e. classic ride vs handling tradeoffs) but in terms of how much it costs to build each car. If they up their luxury game, can the market tolerate a higher MSRP? Certainly there is room in the class for them to raise prices so this isn't totally out in left field.

They also need to be very careful how they add luxury in terms of marketing. For example, offering an FE1 suspension on the ATS is probably a mistake in the long run. But adding a CT8-type halo car is permissible as it won't be expected to drive exactly like a 3,400 lb ATS. Then again, the CT6 drives smaller than the CTS and is larger. Or, adding better luxury content for Premium trim levels is something they could focus on. If the base car needs to get better to support it, then that will drive MSRPs across the entire line.

And I don't think they should copy BMW's approach. Which is to sell luxury first and charge a lot extra for performance. It works for them but I don't see why Cadillac should copy that.

I'll also mention in the spirit of this performance vs luxury discussion that the Chinese Domestic Market is very heavily biased toward luxury over performance. They literally want (and have) extended wheelbase luxury vehicles with reclining and massaging rear seats with a 4 cylinder engine. This will continue to shift the characteristics of vehicles as it already has. As time goes on, laser focus on the US Domestic Market is only going to cost sales, globally.

[kevm14]

And I don't think they should copy BMW's approach. Which is to sell luxury first and charge a lot extra for performance. It works for them but I don't see why Cadillac should copy that.

On the other hand, if they are trying to make a luxury nameplate for themselves, luxury first is exactly what they should do. I just look down on BMW for selling out and I'd be sad if Cadillac went in the same direction.

I also think what Cadillac has achieved has been the harder engineering work than a vehicle like the Lincoln Continental. But luxury can mean different things...I think the Continental fails as a luxury car because it is not on a premium platform. It is the wrong formula if we are to believe the Germans invented this segment. Every Euro-luxury car in every decade was often nicer than the American one, while simultaneously out-performing it. Their formula works. You just have to pay big bucks. So here came Cadillac to one-up them on their chassis game, at a lower cost.

Anyway, I guess the point was, they did the hard part. Now do the easy part! This has essentially been said by the press.

[kevm14]

Here is a recap of the cars, right from the end of the article:

9th Place: Infiniti Q50 2.0T
Big on value and interior space, the Infiniti left our judges with nothing else nice to say.

8th Place: Volvo S60 T6
Stylish and safe, the Volvo can’t escape its long-past sell-by date. It’s an old car in a hyper-competitive class, and it just can’t keep up anymore.

7th Place: BMW 330i
How the mighty have fallen. The reigning winner and standard-bearer of the class suffers from old age, dulled dynamics, and a lack of personality.

6th Place: Jaguar XE 25t
A new standard in the sporty-handling versus refined-ride equation, the Jaguar was undone by its tiny back seat, boring interior styling, and buggy infotainment system.

5th Place: Cadillac ATS 2.0T
The best sport sedan chassis in the class is let down by a useless back seat and barely acceptable infotainment system.

4th Place: Lexus IS 200t F Sport
A good all-around performer, the weighty Lexus is underserved by its overstressed engine, unintuitive infotainment system, and polarizing styling.

3rd Place: Mercedes-Benz C300
The most luxurious of the field, the Mercedes needs to improve its ride quality and improve the value proposition of its pricing.

2nd Place: Audi A4 2.0T Quattro
Smart, practical, sophisticated, and something of a Q-ship, the Audi quietly crawled its way up the podium but lacked the personality to take the top spot.

1st Place: Alfa Romeo Giulia
Efficient, economical, quick, safe, and without question the most fun to drive, the Giulia is a car we’re willing to gamble on despite its reliability legacy and lack of cost-of -ownership data.

If we believe M/T, they are capable of achieving very high marks in this segment. Rear legroom and better infotainment is totally possible for the next generation of the ATS. They can probably pass down some Omega stuff to Alpha and keep that evolution going strong.

For what it's worth, Bob might be driving an FE3 ATS right now if it didn't have the legroom issue.

[kevm14]

At the risk of having a discussion with myself, I will also add that magazine ratings and sales aren't always directly related. There are, of course, a large number of factors that explain why, including:
- Lease deals (which is why I liked this article - it looked at this class from the eye of the segment buyer, or tried to)
- What your neighbor drives
- Nearby dealer support
- Other price incentives
- Brand experience
- Brand perception
- Sheer personal taste

Probably a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting. But I was trying to capture soft, qualitative characteristics that can't be driven directly from a given car's spec sheet.