Drove a CTS Vsport (and bonus: GTI). Thoughts & Review....
11-26-2014, 05:40 PM
#1
Out Of Control!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,557
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
18 Posts
Porsche Macan S SportDesign / Ex M-B's: 11 & 10 & 06 E350's, 02 S500
Drove a CTS Vsport (and bonus: GTI). Thoughts & Review....
Posted this on a Bimmer forum, but figure it could be of use to those shopping around. Or if you're just bored of sifting through all the "wheels" ad threads in this forum. It's written in a way as a comparison to my current 5 Series (which I won't have anymore in about a month).
My thoughts on the new CTS Vsport (which seems to be getting pretty rave reviews in those wonderfully subjective "magazine" tests):
Exterior: I'll say that the design is pretty nice and clean. It does look more premium than other GM Sedans, but still maintains a bit of that fleet "GM-y" look. It also is too confusing to differentiate between it and the ATS, which does it no favors.
Interior wise; It's a decent place to sit in. Firstly I'll say that MAJOR props to Caddy for not forcing a sunroof on you, as this has much better vertical room for me than competitors. For that alone I'd give it a win. Otherwise, It's no German equivalent, but it's closer. The construction doesn't feel as "welded together", still trying to shake off that chintzy/light/non-dampened "GM" feel to it, but a big improvement. Areas where it just falls back and becomes something someone like me who's appreciative and in tune with details, are in said details. Little areas that look more unfinished in the lower door jamb areas, and most of all how when you look at the rubber weather stripping going along the interior door frames, they look cheap and unfinished. Where the 5er has a nice, precise-running cloth strip, the CTV has a rounded rubber thing that was uneven in places and worst of all, showed a visible seamline within the rubber (where two pieces appeared to "mate"). Again, it's in these details that GM needs to nail to perfection in order to be considered a true competitor to the Germans. It still shows remnants of "sloppy old American car manufacturing". When a car shows that every detail is to a code of exactness, you can expect they carried that over to the underlying and important elements of the car that you can't see or touch. So, it's important.
I don't like the typical GM architectural dash design, it looks a bit cheap to me and GM is a brand that has so many cars, and most in lower priced brackets under the CTS, that being able to see a correlation with a Malibu is a big turn off. It's not like BMW, Audi or Mercedes where having a certain family linkage is a clear and confident point. GM tries to give Cadillac the premium essence over other GM's by giving the dash more of a "tech" look. Personally, tech is last on my list of what makes a car special. It needs to show me specialness in the parts that actually cost a lot of money to fundamentally and tangibly develop: architecturally, materials, integrity of feel, etc. Caddy's use this capitative touch center stack, and I hate it. It looks cheap to me, when off especially, and capitative buttons are never as reliable and satisfying as the click of a well dampened, solid button that gives you a sensation of how a car is underlyingly built. I'll take buttons, or maybe at least a better mix of buttons and capitative. It doesn't help that it doesn't contribute that sensation of solidity and "welded together" effect that the interior already lacks, even if a little bit, from a good German variant.
To sum up my feelings on its center stack setup and how it tries to "trick" you into a sensation of premium-ness solely by way of a tech look: I prefer the Tahoe LTZ's over the Escalade's.
DRIVE: This is where it shines. I'll write this in the form as a comparison to my 535i M Sport on 704 suspension. Keep in mind that there were 4 people in the car, so with 3 people shed, my impressions would be considerably better.
I'll start by saying that after driving some fun, more compact cars, I come to the increasing (obvious) conclusion that you just can't expect a modern midsize+ sedan to feel as dynamic as you sometimes wish it would. Even the most dynamic sedans will feel like soft luxury barges to some degree, as the fundamental aspect of the segment is to be a soft and comfy commuter first. Even the most "E60" of modern midsize sedans won't feel like a true E60, you probably have to go a segment smaller at least to get that.
The most notable aspect of the drive is the steering. It's well weighted, yet still fluid and direct. A definite improvement over the F10 steering. Probably one of the better or best steering feels I've come across in the segments current offerings. The suspension and balance is also well done, it's still a soft and mature luxury sedan, but can feel pretty sprightly if you want it to. Body roll exists to some degrees, but it's a fine balance. The F10 has a bit more float to it, I think a little more pitch and roll, but the tradeoff is that it feels a lot more "tank like luxo barge tracking solidly through whatever gets in front of it". Whether that's a positive or a negative is up to you. The Caddy definitely feels a little less iron-solid, but that also may contribute to a lighter feeling. A perfect blend of both, would be ideal. As for how they handle bumps, both are well suited and much better than my E Classes.
HP, with 4 people in the car, felt pretty good, though even with all that extra weight I expected maybe a bit more from 420 HP. 3 extra people in the car contributes to let's say, 500 lbs, which is the equivalent to 50 HP, which would put the car at 370HP, so I can see that making a pretty significant difference.
However, what seemed to be also playing a role is the transmission. Upon initial jolt, the auto winds down pretty quickly and gives you a nice powerful boost. However, I found that when nailing it then letting off for a second, then nailing it again, the transmission would get confused (and I had it in "TRACK" mode, the highest setting) and not downshift, making for a very long-waited and drawn out power surge. The test driver was saying how close they got the thing to feel like a dual-clutch and how this GM sourced 8 speed slushbox doesn't feel too perceivably short of a PDK even. That I don't agree with, as a dual clutch just definitely has an immediate effect that even the commendable GM 8 speed in this CTS can't quite capture. As to how it compares to the ZF8 Speed, I'd say it's a tossup, and need more seat time to conclude. The F10's ZF8 (with my cars Sport Auto option) Sport Mode does seem to be a little more peppy and aggressive to me, at least on its "good days".
The CTS Vsport feels like it's more rev-happy than the N55, which isn't a totally rev happy engine, at least not above 5K RPM's. The N55, however, does feel like it's more low-end geared.
SOUND wise: I think the best way to put it is that the N55 I6 naturally sounds better, but BMW put no effort into "tuning" it to sound good on the F10, instead, they try and mute it as much as possible. Even then, it sounds glorious at high RPM's as the engine tries to shout over all the padding. The CTS Vsport engine, on the other hand, seems like GM had to put work into making it sound special. And they pretty well succeeded, as it has a nice little racy growly-howl at higher RPM's. Again, N55 I6T= Naturally brilliant sounding yet tuned to not show it in the F10. CTS Vsport V6TT= Naturally more average sounding, but focus-tuned to sound pretty impressive.
The one I tested was around $62K. For that price, it's a hard package to beat, yet lacking in some ways my tastes are catered to. If I was seeking HP as my highest barometer of desire, then I'd go for the Vsport and not look back. Since HP is much lower on my list than overall build quality, design, interior feel, construction, and balance/handling, I'd stick with a German variant. The A6 probably draws the closest middle between the CTS and F10. Also, although the design is absolutely in no way offensive as previous Cadillacs have been, it's no F10. And now that Cadillac got the driving dynamics right, it's time to focus on the other reason we get German cars: ATTENTION TO DETAIL. Get that right, the weight of every switch, every seam, the trim pieces, and we're really talking. Though at the price of a CTS, it's an amazing dynamic value, so to their credit, they price themselves to earn some detail-oriented shortcomings. The Cadillac stigma is still too strong for me to overcome if I was shopping it for my own car, but they're trying, and catering to dynamic enthusiasts is always worth showing some love for.
---------------------------
Bonus review:
I've read some reviews of the new VW Golf GTI being considered one of the "best cars in the world". I think Top Gear even said something to that effect, so I decided to drive one.
Keep in mind that just weeks ago, I drove Porsche's finests ***** out on a race track, and am still on a high from that.
Interior is classically VW. Germanic, bare, with its soft touch then obvious hard touch surfaces mixing around each other, yet somehow comforting in how solid and perfectly formatted to you it is. Every switch, dial, position is just about right. There's no fluff. Simple driving environment. Focusedly German to a "T", if you ask me.
It's too bad the exterior looks so funny to me, kind of like a nose. Though, this is what makes it special and so fanatically desired and iconic to people. Props to VW for keeping up with its trademark look and continuing to carefully, if not almost unnoticeably hone it to its own version of perfection (granted I don't know how it compares to previous GTI's in various ways, though my brothers old 2002 model was fun). It's like the 911 of commuter cars. Even though the Golf look isn't my thing, it'd be a boring shame if they made it look like any generic 4 door Sedan with "teardrop" greenhouse like everyone else does.
The DRIVE of this thing was really amongst the best of any car I've driven. It is a near flawless showing of why numbers don't matter when it comes to car engineering. Nothing on this chassis is too much for another to handle. It only has 210 HP, yet it was immensely more fun to drive than the CTS. Every HP is fine tuned to work to its highest ability, and most importantly, the DSG (dual clutch) transmission is just ace, putting every inch of power at your whim, no slush or delay. Like a baby PDK, and as close to the fun of having a true manual that you can get from automatic shifting.
It is an engineering feat in careful, anti-gluttony delivering a more well balanced experience than most any who are frills-full soulful yet somehow sucked out of soul. The GTI doesn't frivolously try to convey soul, but in dialing everything together with such immaculate balance, it's more soulful than most other cars.
The handling is crisp and immediate, the car is light and agile, the road absorption isn't the least bit harsh, you feel connected to the road in a way that makes even traffic fun, however doesn't tire you out or give you a crude experience. Basically, it is German engineering excellence showcased in the most classically and true to form German way. Even the un-sexy design ia there for functional purposes. No frivolous lines or gimmicks, just some slight and tasteful dressings up, etc. There's also an "R" version that's above the GTI, that I'd love to drive.
Of course, part of my enthusiasm for the Golf GTI is in the lower expectations. This is a car that I put in the $25-$30K price bracket, even though it can cost more (the "R" fully loaded even over $40K, but careful on the options, and it's closer to earth).
I'd say in that ($25-$30K) price bracket, there probably isn't a better driving, more enthusiast geared car out there. Certainly raised my respect of VW or at least the GTI lineage.
Long read, but hope it's of some information or enjoyment.
My thoughts on the new CTS Vsport (which seems to be getting pretty rave reviews in those wonderfully subjective "magazine" tests):
Exterior: I'll say that the design is pretty nice and clean. It does look more premium than other GM Sedans, but still maintains a bit of that fleet "GM-y" look. It also is too confusing to differentiate between it and the ATS, which does it no favors.
Interior wise; It's a decent place to sit in. Firstly I'll say that MAJOR props to Caddy for not forcing a sunroof on you, as this has much better vertical room for me than competitors. For that alone I'd give it a win. Otherwise, It's no German equivalent, but it's closer. The construction doesn't feel as "welded together", still trying to shake off that chintzy/light/non-dampened "GM" feel to it, but a big improvement. Areas where it just falls back and becomes something someone like me who's appreciative and in tune with details, are in said details. Little areas that look more unfinished in the lower door jamb areas, and most of all how when you look at the rubber weather stripping going along the interior door frames, they look cheap and unfinished. Where the 5er has a nice, precise-running cloth strip, the CTV has a rounded rubber thing that was uneven in places and worst of all, showed a visible seamline within the rubber (where two pieces appeared to "mate"). Again, it's in these details that GM needs to nail to perfection in order to be considered a true competitor to the Germans. It still shows remnants of "sloppy old American car manufacturing". When a car shows that every detail is to a code of exactness, you can expect they carried that over to the underlying and important elements of the car that you can't see or touch. So, it's important.
I don't like the typical GM architectural dash design, it looks a bit cheap to me and GM is a brand that has so many cars, and most in lower priced brackets under the CTS, that being able to see a correlation with a Malibu is a big turn off. It's not like BMW, Audi or Mercedes where having a certain family linkage is a clear and confident point. GM tries to give Cadillac the premium essence over other GM's by giving the dash more of a "tech" look. Personally, tech is last on my list of what makes a car special. It needs to show me specialness in the parts that actually cost a lot of money to fundamentally and tangibly develop: architecturally, materials, integrity of feel, etc. Caddy's use this capitative touch center stack, and I hate it. It looks cheap to me, when off especially, and capitative buttons are never as reliable and satisfying as the click of a well dampened, solid button that gives you a sensation of how a car is underlyingly built. I'll take buttons, or maybe at least a better mix of buttons and capitative. It doesn't help that it doesn't contribute that sensation of solidity and "welded together" effect that the interior already lacks, even if a little bit, from a good German variant.
To sum up my feelings on its center stack setup and how it tries to "trick" you into a sensation of premium-ness solely by way of a tech look: I prefer the Tahoe LTZ's over the Escalade's.
DRIVE: This is where it shines. I'll write this in the form as a comparison to my 535i M Sport on 704 suspension. Keep in mind that there were 4 people in the car, so with 3 people shed, my impressions would be considerably better.
I'll start by saying that after driving some fun, more compact cars, I come to the increasing (obvious) conclusion that you just can't expect a modern midsize+ sedan to feel as dynamic as you sometimes wish it would. Even the most dynamic sedans will feel like soft luxury barges to some degree, as the fundamental aspect of the segment is to be a soft and comfy commuter first. Even the most "E60" of modern midsize sedans won't feel like a true E60, you probably have to go a segment smaller at least to get that.
The most notable aspect of the drive is the steering. It's well weighted, yet still fluid and direct. A definite improvement over the F10 steering. Probably one of the better or best steering feels I've come across in the segments current offerings. The suspension and balance is also well done, it's still a soft and mature luxury sedan, but can feel pretty sprightly if you want it to. Body roll exists to some degrees, but it's a fine balance. The F10 has a bit more float to it, I think a little more pitch and roll, but the tradeoff is that it feels a lot more "tank like luxo barge tracking solidly through whatever gets in front of it". Whether that's a positive or a negative is up to you. The Caddy definitely feels a little less iron-solid, but that also may contribute to a lighter feeling. A perfect blend of both, would be ideal. As for how they handle bumps, both are well suited and much better than my E Classes.
HP, with 4 people in the car, felt pretty good, though even with all that extra weight I expected maybe a bit more from 420 HP. 3 extra people in the car contributes to let's say, 500 lbs, which is the equivalent to 50 HP, which would put the car at 370HP, so I can see that making a pretty significant difference.
However, what seemed to be also playing a role is the transmission. Upon initial jolt, the auto winds down pretty quickly and gives you a nice powerful boost. However, I found that when nailing it then letting off for a second, then nailing it again, the transmission would get confused (and I had it in "TRACK" mode, the highest setting) and not downshift, making for a very long-waited and drawn out power surge. The test driver was saying how close they got the thing to feel like a dual-clutch and how this GM sourced 8 speed slushbox doesn't feel too perceivably short of a PDK even. That I don't agree with, as a dual clutch just definitely has an immediate effect that even the commendable GM 8 speed in this CTS can't quite capture. As to how it compares to the ZF8 Speed, I'd say it's a tossup, and need more seat time to conclude. The F10's ZF8 (with my cars Sport Auto option) Sport Mode does seem to be a little more peppy and aggressive to me, at least on its "good days".
The CTS Vsport feels like it's more rev-happy than the N55, which isn't a totally rev happy engine, at least not above 5K RPM's. The N55, however, does feel like it's more low-end geared.
SOUND wise: I think the best way to put it is that the N55 I6 naturally sounds better, but BMW put no effort into "tuning" it to sound good on the F10, instead, they try and mute it as much as possible. Even then, it sounds glorious at high RPM's as the engine tries to shout over all the padding. The CTS Vsport engine, on the other hand, seems like GM had to put work into making it sound special. And they pretty well succeeded, as it has a nice little racy growly-howl at higher RPM's. Again, N55 I6T= Naturally brilliant sounding yet tuned to not show it in the F10. CTS Vsport V6TT= Naturally more average sounding, but focus-tuned to sound pretty impressive.
The one I tested was around $62K. For that price, it's a hard package to beat, yet lacking in some ways my tastes are catered to. If I was seeking HP as my highest barometer of desire, then I'd go for the Vsport and not look back. Since HP is much lower on my list than overall build quality, design, interior feel, construction, and balance/handling, I'd stick with a German variant. The A6 probably draws the closest middle between the CTS and F10. Also, although the design is absolutely in no way offensive as previous Cadillacs have been, it's no F10. And now that Cadillac got the driving dynamics right, it's time to focus on the other reason we get German cars: ATTENTION TO DETAIL. Get that right, the weight of every switch, every seam, the trim pieces, and we're really talking. Though at the price of a CTS, it's an amazing dynamic value, so to their credit, they price themselves to earn some detail-oriented shortcomings. The Cadillac stigma is still too strong for me to overcome if I was shopping it for my own car, but they're trying, and catering to dynamic enthusiasts is always worth showing some love for.
---------------------------
Bonus review:
I've read some reviews of the new VW Golf GTI being considered one of the "best cars in the world". I think Top Gear even said something to that effect, so I decided to drive one.
Keep in mind that just weeks ago, I drove Porsche's finests ***** out on a race track, and am still on a high from that.
Interior is classically VW. Germanic, bare, with its soft touch then obvious hard touch surfaces mixing around each other, yet somehow comforting in how solid and perfectly formatted to you it is. Every switch, dial, position is just about right. There's no fluff. Simple driving environment. Focusedly German to a "T", if you ask me.
It's too bad the exterior looks so funny to me, kind of like a nose. Though, this is what makes it special and so fanatically desired and iconic to people. Props to VW for keeping up with its trademark look and continuing to carefully, if not almost unnoticeably hone it to its own version of perfection (granted I don't know how it compares to previous GTI's in various ways, though my brothers old 2002 model was fun). It's like the 911 of commuter cars. Even though the Golf look isn't my thing, it'd be a boring shame if they made it look like any generic 4 door Sedan with "teardrop" greenhouse like everyone else does.
The DRIVE of this thing was really amongst the best of any car I've driven. It is a near flawless showing of why numbers don't matter when it comes to car engineering. Nothing on this chassis is too much for another to handle. It only has 210 HP, yet it was immensely more fun to drive than the CTS. Every HP is fine tuned to work to its highest ability, and most importantly, the DSG (dual clutch) transmission is just ace, putting every inch of power at your whim, no slush or delay. Like a baby PDK, and as close to the fun of having a true manual that you can get from automatic shifting.
It is an engineering feat in careful, anti-gluttony delivering a more well balanced experience than most any who are frills-full soulful yet somehow sucked out of soul. The GTI doesn't frivolously try to convey soul, but in dialing everything together with such immaculate balance, it's more soulful than most other cars.
The handling is crisp and immediate, the car is light and agile, the road absorption isn't the least bit harsh, you feel connected to the road in a way that makes even traffic fun, however doesn't tire you out or give you a crude experience. Basically, it is German engineering excellence showcased in the most classically and true to form German way. Even the un-sexy design ia there for functional purposes. No frivolous lines or gimmicks, just some slight and tasteful dressings up, etc. There's also an "R" version that's above the GTI, that I'd love to drive.
Of course, part of my enthusiasm for the Golf GTI is in the lower expectations. This is a car that I put in the $25-$30K price bracket, even though it can cost more (the "R" fully loaded even over $40K, but careful on the options, and it's closer to earth).
I'd say in that ($25-$30K) price bracket, there probably isn't a better driving, more enthusiast geared car out there. Certainly raised my respect of VW or at least the GTI lineage.
Long read, but hope it's of some information or enjoyment.
11-26-2014, 05:55 PM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: MA
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
'15 E350 4M Sport
I enjoyed reading your review. Having owned two GTI's and an R32 I can attest to the handling and fun-to-drive nature of these nicely crafted 'pocket rockets'.
11-26-2014, 06:35 PM
#3
Out Of Control!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,557
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
18 Posts
Porsche Macan S SportDesign / Ex M-B's: 11 & 10 & 06 E350's, 02 S500
Thanks. And indeed! What an excellent car. I never got why people who had them seemed to never want to let them go. I totally get it now.
11-26-2014, 06:53 PM
#5
Out Of Control!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,557
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
18 Posts
Porsche Macan S SportDesign / Ex M-B's: 11 & 10 & 06 E350's, 02 S500
Thanks Airmousam. Worth checking it out. I obviously didn't do it from an E Class drivers perspective, but would be interested to see what someone who currently has either an E or CTS Vsport would say in regards to each other. The E400 would be the truest competitor, though down in HP. 420 is a lot of ***** for the CTS, but GM always is good about HP, they just have to get that people want other things aside from HP as well. They're learning, but still not quite there. Apparently resale values of CTS' are already plummeting, which makes sense. Lots of baggage and skeletons in the closet of that company and the Cadillac image, still.
I'm getting a Porsche Macan next. Managed to be the only car that fitted my necessities, desires and requirements for now.
I'm getting a Porsche Macan next. Managed to be the only car that fitted my necessities, desires and requirements for now.
Trending Topics
11-26-2014, 10:36 PM
#8
Out Of Control!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,402
Received 1,884 Likes
on
1,321 Posts
2014 E63S; AMS 100 octane ecu tune; edok tcu tune; BB intakes; dyno tuned
Nice write up
That cts v sport is clocked at 4.2 and 12.5 ... That's e550 biturbo territory ... Would be interesting to see if the e400 has similar or better performance though I doubt it
That cts v sport is clocked at 4.2 and 12.5 ... That's e550 biturbo territory ... Would be interesting to see if the e400 has similar or better performance though I doubt it
11-26-2014, 10:46 PM
#9
Out Of Control!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,557
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
18 Posts
Porsche Macan S SportDesign / Ex M-B's: 11 & 10 & 06 E350's, 02 S500
Thanks, glad you guys enjoy it.
PeterUbers: DAMN, yes that is zippy. I don't know why it didn't feel as epic to me as I'd expect, but it has to do with a full car of grown dudes. I mean, that'll make any car feel lethargic. Though even then, the thing was very quick.
I imagine that should be better than E550 biturbo territory? Less weight & more HP? The 550i has more HP, but probably more weight, I wonder how those compare as well.
As for the E400, I'd think that should be perhaps impossible. I mean it's down about 80 HP(?) and seems to put up performance numbers very close with the 535i (high 13's, and low 5's 0-60, maybe high 4's for the E400?).
PeterUbers: DAMN, yes that is zippy. I don't know why it didn't feel as epic to me as I'd expect, but it has to do with a full car of grown dudes. I mean, that'll make any car feel lethargic. Though even then, the thing was very quick.
I imagine that should be better than E550 biturbo territory? Less weight & more HP? The 550i has more HP, but probably more weight, I wonder how those compare as well.
As for the E400, I'd think that should be perhaps impossible. I mean it's down about 80 HP(?) and seems to put up performance numbers very close with the 535i (high 13's, and low 5's 0-60, maybe high 4's for the E400?).
11-29-2014, 11:51 PM
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
6 Posts
2015 E250 BT 4M
12-23-2014, 02:07 AM
#14
Super Member
Figured this was the place to share my opinions of the prev-gen CTS-V and current CTS V-Sport. I drove the V a few months back and the V-Sport today.
2012 CTS-V: Overall, I was this close to becoming an owner. I was just about ready to live with its downsides when news of the CTS V-Sport broke, which sounded like it'd be a significantly a better daily driver. I waited ... and ended up in an E550, but I digress.
* Honking V8 had beautiful sounding and feeling power. Regardless of speed, it was ready to dole out impressive acceleration with its 556hp / 551tq.
* Magnificent MR trick suspension. Crazy firm, yet ate up minor/major imperfections with grace. It's my benchmark.
* Available as a wagon. Hell, yeah! I'm a wagon nerd.
* Interior design was almost there, but build materials were a let-down especially below the knee. Dot matrix readout screens. Keep in mind it debuted in '08ish.
* Somewhat concerned that I'd tire of the beautiful engine note non-stop coming into the cabin, super firm suspension and tight Recaros for a daily driver. Pondered if there could ever be a thing as too much of a good thing.
* The horrendous mpg (12/14 auto tranny) can be rationalized, but pairing it with a tiny 18gal tank was a poor choice. Essentially no range.
* No AWD, but I can see their likely argument that it's a (nearly) no-holds barred sport sedan and the competition at the time was also RWD.
2014 CTS V-Sport Premium: Big-time dollars per button quotient, but I was disappointed the entire package wasn't head and shoulders better than the prev-gen CTS-V.
* Definitely a nice interior, but I was expecting far more. Only a few WTF's (which nearly every car has).
* Hard to believe it does 60 in 4.4-4.5s, but nearly every instrumented test supports it. Touchy accelerator. Didn't pull away at hwy speeds like I expected.
* Lots of racy engine noise, but I didn't care for its rodded-out TT V6 sounds. Total turn off.
* 8spd tranny and paddle shifters were grand. Rapid, blipped downshifts. Unfortunately, it was eager to start upshifting on its own though within ~10s of my manual downshift.
* Steering required constant input as it tracked every which way but straight, like the front tires were tramlining.
* Next-gen MR susp lost the plot versus the CTS-V. It didn't soak up the little stuff nearly as well and wasn't as firm (I was in Sport, but not Track mode).
* Cool gadgets: Multi-function, moveable HUD. Lane departure tied to seat buzzers. Cue system was fine, but its haptic feedback didn't seem fully connected to the activity you were performing. Configurable flat panel driver display was cool, but dubious value.
* Imperfect gadgets: Motorized cup holder lid was loud, slow and silly. Too much info presented in the HUD, like lane departure status (maybe it can be optioned off?). Color on the configurable flat panel driver display was flat and dull.
* Still no AWD.
2012 CTS-V: Overall, I was this close to becoming an owner. I was just about ready to live with its downsides when news of the CTS V-Sport broke, which sounded like it'd be a significantly a better daily driver. I waited ... and ended up in an E550, but I digress.
* Honking V8 had beautiful sounding and feeling power. Regardless of speed, it was ready to dole out impressive acceleration with its 556hp / 551tq.
* Magnificent MR trick suspension. Crazy firm, yet ate up minor/major imperfections with grace. It's my benchmark.
* Available as a wagon. Hell, yeah! I'm a wagon nerd.
* Interior design was almost there, but build materials were a let-down especially below the knee. Dot matrix readout screens. Keep in mind it debuted in '08ish.
* Somewhat concerned that I'd tire of the beautiful engine note non-stop coming into the cabin, super firm suspension and tight Recaros for a daily driver. Pondered if there could ever be a thing as too much of a good thing.
* The horrendous mpg (12/14 auto tranny) can be rationalized, but pairing it with a tiny 18gal tank was a poor choice. Essentially no range.
* No AWD, but I can see their likely argument that it's a (nearly) no-holds barred sport sedan and the competition at the time was also RWD.
2014 CTS V-Sport Premium: Big-time dollars per button quotient, but I was disappointed the entire package wasn't head and shoulders better than the prev-gen CTS-V.
* Definitely a nice interior, but I was expecting far more. Only a few WTF's (which nearly every car has).
* Hard to believe it does 60 in 4.4-4.5s, but nearly every instrumented test supports it. Touchy accelerator. Didn't pull away at hwy speeds like I expected.
* Lots of racy engine noise, but I didn't care for its rodded-out TT V6 sounds. Total turn off.
* 8spd tranny and paddle shifters were grand. Rapid, blipped downshifts. Unfortunately, it was eager to start upshifting on its own though within ~10s of my manual downshift.
* Steering required constant input as it tracked every which way but straight, like the front tires were tramlining.
* Next-gen MR susp lost the plot versus the CTS-V. It didn't soak up the little stuff nearly as well and wasn't as firm (I was in Sport, but not Track mode).
* Cool gadgets: Multi-function, moveable HUD. Lane departure tied to seat buzzers. Cue system was fine, but its haptic feedback didn't seem fully connected to the activity you were performing. Configurable flat panel driver display was cool, but dubious value.
* Imperfect gadgets: Motorized cup holder lid was loud, slow and silly. Too much info presented in the HUD, like lane departure status (maybe it can be optioned off?). Color on the configurable flat panel driver display was flat and dull.
* Still no AWD.
Last edited by Johnny Rad; 12-23-2014 at 02:53 AM.
12-23-2014, 02:29 AM
#15
Super Member
After testing the '14 CTS V Sport today, I was happy to get back into my E550. I thought my E more than held its own, but some (a lot?!) of that could've been me trying to "protect" my recent purchase!
* If the CTS V-Sport is 4.4-4.5s to 60, then our TT V8 is sub-5 all day every day. I still can't support C&D's 4.3s instrumented testing result, but who can?!
* The E550 definitely pulls harder at hwy speed, but the V Sport digs significantly better from zero.
* The CTS V Sport definitely felt like the better handler, but that wasn't my purpose on the drive. I'd take a firmer susp in my E, but wouldn't accept the way the V Sport crashed over the smaller, sharper bumps.
* The V Sport is a nice place to sit. Front seats are more sporty than ours and the leather was softer. The interior design was appropriately swoopy and modern inside without going off the deep-end. I think the int of our E is just fine. Some call it boring, while others might say traditional. I'm hoping to see the new mini-S class int find its way into the E.
* I couldn't listen to the Caddy's TT V6 soundtrack day in and out. Zero audio awesomeness. I wish my E sounded half as good as the CTS-V's big V8, but in lieu of that I'm generally OK with mine being pretty silent.
* Boy do I wish I had a HUD (more than just mph though), a tranny that actually listened to its paddle shifters and a heated wheel. Cool stuff!
* Surprisingly, I can live without the V Sport's configurable driver dash display. Disregarding the dull presentation, it was a gimmick. Nice gimmick, but a gimmick nonetheless.
* If the CTS V-Sport is 4.4-4.5s to 60, then our TT V8 is sub-5 all day every day. I still can't support C&D's 4.3s instrumented testing result, but who can?!
* The E550 definitely pulls harder at hwy speed, but the V Sport digs significantly better from zero.
* The CTS V Sport definitely felt like the better handler, but that wasn't my purpose on the drive. I'd take a firmer susp in my E, but wouldn't accept the way the V Sport crashed over the smaller, sharper bumps.
* The V Sport is a nice place to sit. Front seats are more sporty than ours and the leather was softer. The interior design was appropriately swoopy and modern inside without going off the deep-end. I think the int of our E is just fine. Some call it boring, while others might say traditional. I'm hoping to see the new mini-S class int find its way into the E.
* I couldn't listen to the Caddy's TT V6 soundtrack day in and out. Zero audio awesomeness. I wish my E sounded half as good as the CTS-V's big V8, but in lieu of that I'm generally OK with mine being pretty silent.
* Boy do I wish I had a HUD (more than just mph though), a tranny that actually listened to its paddle shifters and a heated wheel. Cool stuff!
* Surprisingly, I can live without the V Sport's configurable driver dash display. Disregarding the dull presentation, it was a gimmick. Nice gimmick, but a gimmick nonetheless.
Last edited by Johnny Rad; 12-23-2014 at 02:35 AM.
12-23-2014, 02:30 AM
#16
Out Of Control!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,557
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
18 Posts
Porsche Macan S SportDesign / Ex M-B's: 11 & 10 & 06 E350's, 02 S500
Nice reviews!
WOW. Is that 12 city / 14 highway on the CTS-V? I mean, at least it's got the ridiculous HP to make an excuse, that that is absolutely horrendous. My new car is rated at 17 city and 23 highway and it's abysmal, compared to my 535i MPG especially.
I agree, while the CTS Vsport felt fast, I was shocked to see 4.2 0-60 figures if I remember correctly. That would make it amongst the quicker cars I've driven (at least in the upper bracket). It didn't quite feel that bonkers, but I did have 4 people in the car.
WOW. Is that 12 city / 14 highway on the CTS-V? I mean, at least it's got the ridiculous HP to make an excuse, that that is absolutely horrendous. My new car is rated at 17 city and 23 highway and it's abysmal, compared to my 535i MPG especially.
I agree, while the CTS Vsport felt fast, I was shocked to see 4.2 0-60 figures if I remember correctly. That would make it amongst the quicker cars I've driven (at least in the upper bracket). It didn't quite feel that bonkers, but I did have 4 people in the car.
