VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner

My First Drive of 2013 Cadillac ATS

19K views 107 replies 40 participants last post by  whitejeep1989 
#1 · (Edited)
My local Cadillac dealership just got about 5 new ATSes this week, so I stopped in today to check them out. Here is my disclaimer. I have been driving a relatively unrefined, noisy, and kind of slow and heavy SUV for the last 4 years. The last sedan that I owned as a daily driver was a 2001 Jetta VR6. So, I might be out of touch with what is considered state of the art or world class in sedan performance and styling.

The dealership only had the non-turbo 2.0 auto, and the 3.6 V6 versions on-hand. I will return at a later date, when they get the turbo fours in. The lone V6 they had was out on a test drive, so I drove the base 2.0. I have to say that the 2.0 was NOT slow at all. I was expecting it to feel lethargic, but it kept pulling like a freight train. I think your average ATS customer will be more than happy with this motor. In a mix of city and open road driving, the 2.0 never failed to accelerate willingly. In the cabin, the 2.0 was normally quiet. It only made itself known when I mashed the throttle, but once the trans upshifted the engine quieted right down. It never sounded unrefined, in fact it sounded aggressively furious!

The styling speaks for itself in photos, so I won't go into too much detail here. It is definitely a small car and plays baby brother to the CTS and XTS quite nicely. It was quite a sight to see a full Cadillac line-up in front of the dealership. I remember in the spring all they had were CTSes, SRXes, and Escalades. It is good to see the pond is getting restocked!

The interior is very well assembled out of top notch materials. The CUE system works pretty darn good, but the screen was full of finger smudges by the end of my drive. The CUE has cool physical "buttons" that you interact with for the more frequently used functions (volume, etc...). These fixed buttons are touch sensitive just like the screen, but it allows you to find functions without taking your eyes off the road. The vibrating feedback from the CUE is very aggressive. It almost feels like something is tapping on your fingers from the inside of the dash.

The much discussed "cheap looking" gauge cluster actually looks great in person. Admittedly, when the car is off, it does look pretty lackluster. When the car starts, the cluster illuminates in a pretty colorful display, and there is also a redundant screen in the cluster that echoes what is going on with the larger CUE screen. It was far from being cheap or boring, in actual operation.

I look forward to going back to try out the turbocharged version. Those additional 70 HP will be amazing in this car, because the standard 202 HP was certainly a very fun drive.

 
See less See more
1
#2 ·
It's a 2.5l 4cylinder, not a 2.0. 2.0 is for the turbo. The 2.5 makes 202 hp and 190 ft lb so it's still a pretty powerful engine.

On contrary, I have personally driven the new Acura ILX with the base 2.0 engine and was appalled at how slow the thing was, it was frighteningly slow.
 
#3 ·
I guess it is all about perspective. My Jeep has a 205 HP V6. I have been reasonably happy with it's acceleration. Driving a smaller and lighter vehicle, with about the same horsepower felt like a night and day difference! I guess people who are used to something more powerful or equal to the base ATS might not find it as thrilling as I did.
 
#4 ·
Checked on out today as well. Same exact setup you described, though we didn't drive it.
The interior is tight in the back for sure. However, very impressive materials, switchgear and electronics. They might have nailed this one.
Good to hear the 2.5 liter felt decent. How was the Noise/Vibration ?
 
#6 ·
I was at Cadillac dealer and had a demo of the V6 ATS. It was not the top model yet the sticker was $49k. Very sharp looking car, but the options list is as long as BMW. Everything is extra cost....even the black paint was an extra $995. And at $49k it lacked ventilated seats....I am 5'11" and felt the interior and trunk were cramped. There is NO spare tire nor is there a jack (ala BMW).

Just for kicks I stopped at the Honda dealer and looked at the new Accord V6 Touring. On paper the Honda puts the Cadi (and many other cars) to shame. Everything from LED Headlamps, 4 exterior cameras, crash mitigation, and a 278 hp V6 that runs on regular and is rated at 34mpg all standard (no cooled seats either on the Accord....one oversight). It may not out handle the Cad, but damn the Accord is an engineering tour de force for $34k.

I am afraid GM may need another bailout!
 
#16 ·
FV-QR

the 2.0T is a phenomenal little motor. it was fast in the Cobalt SS/TC, it was fast in the Sky Redline and Solstice GXP, and it will be faster still in the ATS. adding E85 capabilities to it just opens the door for huge power gains with engine tuning...god knows those things can take impressive boost numbers.

i see quite a few on the road (they build them pretty close to where I work). they always create an impression while rolling down the highway, so much so that i find myself staring at one passing in the other direction. it's about time they got a smaller car right...
 
#21 ·
Still doesn't make up for the crap they still put out like the Buick Encore.
we shouldn't instantly judge a car based upon the subjective opinion of its appearance. plenty of cars i consider unattractive are actually very capable and rewarding to drive...plus do well in their market segment. consider a car like the GT-R, Honda Fit, and Mini Cooper...all of which were never particularly loved on for some of their styling. i do find the encore a bit "tall," but otherwise has fine lines for a tiny SUV/city utility car...very few cars in that segment are particularly pretty to look at.

 
#23 ·
MINI sells 2000+ Countrymans every month at the same or higher price point as the Encore, and most of TCL thought they were ugly as well. I think with what we know at the moment, the Encore is being unfairly ragged on.

That said, let's shift back to the ATS. I'm glad to hear even an automatic, 2.5l model has a great driving experience!
 
#25 ·
I can judge all I want, because this is the stupidest looking thing Detroit has the balls to even try to sell to the American public, it might do okay or even well in China, but this is just stupid looking.

the definition of small SUV is changing dramatically. with the increasing size of cars like the Escape and Rav4, the small SUV segment is changing from what used to be b-sized pickup framed mini-trucks to FWD unibody vehicles that resemble a taller station wagon. NONE of these cars are particularly good looking. NONE, the only one to me that could look good is the Kia Soul.

lets look at what else is in that class/type of vehicle.







OP, sorry for derailing your thread...to make up for it, here is a nice ATS video.
 
#27 ·
Those cars look better than the Clown car version of the Murano.
again, very little to zero cars in that segment look good. however, if that encore has a slightly hopped up version of the 1.4T in the cruze, it'll probably be very successful in its segment (and get pretty good mileage). everyone bad mouths that motor as being underpowered, but we have one in our cruze and i'll say the torks are near instant and it makes more torks then hp.

as a related ATS note, the 2.0T is easily capable of making more torque than horsepower...as most of the tuned LNF's already do. :thumbup:
 
#28 ·
I can judge all I want, because this is the stupidest looking thing Detroit has the balls to even try to sell to the American public, it might do okay or even well in China, but this is just stupid looking.

the definition of small SUV is changing dramatically. with the increasing size of cars like the Escape and Rav4, the small SUV segment is changing from what used to be b-sized pickup framed mini-trucks to FWD unibody vehicles that resemble a taller station wagon. NONE of these cars are particularly good looking. NONE, the only one to me that could look good is the Kia Soul.

lets look at what else is in that class/type of vehicle.





Those all look dorky and are for dorks.

The only crossovers I would buy are the BMW X5 & X6. Otherwise give me a wagon or real SUV :thumbup:
 
#68 ·
Any of these cars would be great to own at the end of the day its just down to personal choice.

Normally when I ask an Audi owner why they chose their car they point to the so called tacky Fairy Lights at the front of the car.

When I ask an Mercedes owner they say the finance deal was so much cheaper.

BMW owners have usually tested all 3 and say they wanted a car that was involving and a real drivers car.

As an owner of many cars I feel I have the best brand of car you can get and when I see an Audi or Merc know I have the best car.

Audi Merc and Cadillac drivers in my opinion cannot really say this and must wish they too owned a BMW every time they see one.
 
#69 ·
Any of these cars would be great to own at the end of the day its just down to personal choice.

Normally when I ask an Audi owner why they chose their car they point to the so called tacky Fairy Lights at the front of the car.

When I ask an Mercedes owner they say the finance deal was so much cheaper.

BMW owners have usually tested all 3 and say they wanted a car that was involving and a real drivers car.
Really?

Usually what I hear is this:

I bought an Audi because its an Audi.

I bought a Mercedes because its a Mercedes.

I bought a BMW because its a BMW. ........
 
#73 ·
Any of these cars would be great to own at the end of the day its just down to personal choice.

Normally when I ask an Audi owner why they chose their car they point to the so called tacky Fairy Lights at the front of the car.

When I ask an Mercedes owner they say the finance deal was so much cheaper.

BMW owners have usually tested all 3 and say they wanted a car that was involving and a real drivers car.

As an owner of many cars I feel I have the best brand of car you can get and when I see an Audi or Merc know I have the best car.

Audi Merc and Cadillac drivers in my opinion cannot really say this and must wish they too owned a BMW every time they see one.
Cadillac has a very strong brand in the US, but the product is what has held it back. Cadillac needs a proper flagship.
 
#74 ·
I agree. Their selection pales in comparison to the German brands. Right now they have four model-lines that are class-competitive.. BMW has ten. Last year there was a nice concept that reminded me of a 60's Continental, but I guess they decided not to go through with it.
 
#88 ·
NoXenons = 2006330cickid?
 
#92 · (Edited)
I was able to drive an ATS 2.5 yesterday -- wow! I really liked the 2.5. It did not seem like a hold-over model. The motor spins up quickly, and seems unstressed. It actually suits the ATS well because the car feels so light and agile. It's not fast, but its plenty for highway and traffic. It reminded me a lot of an E46 330i. The automatic was very good, and the manual mode was quick and precise. I'm not picky about interiors, so I had nothing to complain about. The seats were good and the touch interface didn't bother me. The car was very well put together.

After driving the 2.5, it might just be the car I'd pick out of the ATS lineup. It seemed like a great package for a commute -- good MPG, quick, agile, and very high quality. The 2.0T would be considerably quicker, but I didn't feel like I was missing any power in the 2.5. -- This coming after just having stepped out of my CTS-V.

Overall very impressed. This is a GREAT sport sedan.

edit: Just to toss out some comparisons, the ATS seemed lighter and more agile than the 135i as I remember it, which was then more agile feeling than the E90 335i. Compared to an A4 2.0T as I remember it, the 2.5 is not as fast in a straight line (duh), but everything feels more precise and responsive, including the throttle.

The ATS' cabin reminded me a lot of my Cruze's in dimensions. It's narrow and tall. The back seats are just big enough for adults, also similar to the Cruze's in dimensions.
 
#93 ·
This might be an odd question, but has anyone cross-shopped this car with the IS250? (ATS 2.5)
They both appear to have similar power, though the ATS losses 2 cylinder but gains some MPGs.
$5K seems to be very steep just to get the CUE, rft + 17" alloys and powered seats for the premium package.
 
#94 ·
The closest I've gotten to an IS250 is riding shotgun in Byron's IS-F presser, so take this with a grain of salt, but I'd bet you the IS is softer and spongier all around. The interior of the ATS is a big notch up from the IS, which is to be expected since its brand new.

The ATS feels really light on its feet. Lighter than my Cruze. Lighter than the 911s I've driven. The closest car I've driven to it in recent memory in terms of "lightness" and front-end response is a Cayman S. Not to say the overall dynamics are on par because I didn't drive it hard, but it's worth saying the controls are precise and effortless.
 
#95 ·
OT:

It amazes me how fast dependability/reliability of new cars is improving, especially given their ever-increasing complexity/feature content. Chrysler's rating in 2012 is slightly better than Toyota's rating from 2005, yet most people only see them at the bottom and think "what a piece of crap". Just something to chew on. ;)




2005 JD Power Dependability Ranking of 2002 automobiles

Problems per 100 Vehicles
Lexus 139
Porsche 149
Lincoln 151
Buick 163
Cadillac 175
Infiniti 178
Toyota 194
Mercury 195
Honda 201
Acura 203
BMW 225
Ford 231
Chevrolet 232
Chrysler 235
Industry Average 237
Saturn 240
Oldsmobile 242
GMC 245
Pontiac 245
Mazda 252
Hyundai 260
Subaru 260
Volvo 266
Jaguar 268
Dodge 273
Nissan 275
Mitsubishi 278
Mercedes-Benz 283
Saab 286
Jeep 289
Suzuki 292
Audi 312
Daewoo 318
Isuzu 331
Volkswagen 335
MINI 383
Land Rover 395
Kia 397
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top