The ATS does look better but i'd still take the bmw.
The ATS was ultimately tripped up by two things that left it especially vulnerable against the BMW: its engine and gearbox.
Cadillac claims the ATS achieves peak torque at 1700 rpm (the BMW can call up full grunt as low as 1250 rpm), but you’d never know it. Launching the Caddy proved difficult, with the car either bogging or frittering power away through excessive wheelspin. And though there’s power lurking in its little 4-banger, the ATS suffers from turbo lag, a congested-sounding exhaust note and a power curve that feels too compressed. All the urge seems concentrated between 2500 and 6000 rpm, where the more flexible BMW zings and sings anywhere from 1500 to 7000 rpm.
Worse, the manual gearbox recalls the Ghost of Saabs Past, clanking its awkward chains. Throws are a bit long and loose-jointed; the Camaro ZL1’s manual is a paragon in comparison. Chasing the BMW on wooded back roads, I occasionally jammed the 3rd-to-2nd shift, killing forward progress.
With a tight powerband and short gearing, the Cadillac requires two shifts, three gears and 6 seconds to reach 60 mph. That puts the ATS over a halfsecond behind the BMW, which needs only one shift to pass 60 mph. Yet, when the ATS carries its ample momentum through curves, this is still a fun and confident sedan. Though we did find ourselves wondering whether another ATS, with the stronger V-6 and an automatic transmission, will end up being the enthusiast’s choice, clutch pedal or not.
"Of course that's just my opinion; I could be wrong."
Originally Posted by The Igneous FactionOriginally Posted by WhistlerYOW
I got my C&D... here are interesting figures;
2013 ATS L4 2.0T 272HP / 2013 328i L4 2.0T 240HP / 2006 330i I6 3.0 255HP All manual.
Weight 3477lbs / 3390lbs / 3458lbs
On 1200miles+ 19mpg / 23mpg / 25mpg
0-60mph 6.3s / 5.6s / 5.9s
5-60mph 7.4s / 6.6s / 6.5s
Those ridiculous 2.0T don't perform any better the larger NA engines of yore, not even direct injected neither are they significantly lighter. What a joke.
The 3 series is a great car, and I was at one point considering a 135i instead of my CTS-V, so I won't knock it. The ATS is a legitimate competitor that is better than it in some ways, worse in others. The best car is the compromise which fits a personality.
I have driven both the 335i and the 328i and the 328i felt nimbler and more toss-able. And I find it hard to believe that they get 23 MPG. Something sounds like BS here.
I have a similarly rated 2.0T to the N20 and even when I drive the piss out of it I get better than 23 MPG.
Looks like GM is listening to the initial impressions from the press regarding the feel of the manual transmission: http://www.leftlanenews.com/cadillac...ort-issue.html
Good for them Glad to see GM it taking things seriously and putting things in steps to address them regarding the ATS