I Like the 2nd generation CTS more, tell me why I'm wrong!

[vannhukien]

Is it just me???!!! I waited for months for the release of the new generation CTS because I was such a fan of the 2nd generation CTS. When Cadillac released photos of the third generation CTS design, I was in awe. It looked incredible....Then I saw one in person. I have to say, the design, to me, seems boring and a bit cheap. I particularly hate the black behind the grille, doesn't it look like cheap plastic back there. The rounded back end looks like a more boring version of the new cls. It also seems overly stretched and narrow to me. This is Motortrends care of the year??? WTH???

Then I read the reviews and decided I must be wrong. Every article had nothing but praise for this car, particularly when it came to its styling. Also, the performance is apparently amazing. Well this made me happy because the 2nd generation CTS was a bit slow when you compared it to something like a 535. Oh wait, so is the new CTS- 6-6.1 0-60, and that's only if you use the RWD; I have yet to see AWD numbers. So this "amazing" sports sedan is right on par with a Honda Accord V6, great. To be fair, all the praise was for the nice shifting and great handling. However, lets not forget, this is an American sports sedan. European cars have traditionally been better at handling because in America we like to punch it on the onramp and fly down open highways, not twisties in the French country-side. I do appreciate good handling but I would also appreciate decent acceleration numbers in Motortrends car of the year.

I was still convinced I was wrong and this new CTS actually looked nice. Then I saw a 2nd and 3rd generation CTS driving on the highway next to each other (both black). There was no comparison for me, the 2nd generation CTS looked bolder, younger and sized appropriately for someone under 60.

One last complaint- It annoys me that Cadillac switched their design philosophy to exactly that of the Germans. So instead of driving a Cadillac we are simply getting Cadillac's take on the 5series, EClass and A6. I very much appreciated how the CTS went in between the 3 and 5 series. The 3series always seemed too feminine and dainty while the 5series always had a 40 year old and up vibe to it. The CTS filled that void nicely, but no more.

Finally, before I am ridiculed for being so completely wrong, and I must be wrong because everyone who has reviewed this vehicle disagrees with me, I have to point this out. If this car is soooo great, why don't it's sales reflect it. The luxury marked this year is up 14 percent, yet Cadillac sales are down 5%. In the business world that is cause for major concern.

Please, tell me where I am wrong. Make me see why this car is beautiful and amazing. Otherwise I am going on the cheap and getting a 2nd generation CTS or joining the masses of D-bags and getting a 535, because I think these cars at least look good.

 

[eots44]

You are entitled to your opinion, but I don't share the same views. Personally I found the 2nd gen to be the most boring, not ugly, just not exciting. The 1st gen was designed to be bold and radical, a chance for Cadillac to show off it's new Art and Science design era, as the 1st gen CTS was the first full application of this design, and it executed all of those things perfectly, it was so different people loved it. It's performance was top notch. It was the first application and introduced the 3.6L, which was a huge hit and can still be seen in Cadillacs and across the whole General Motors line up to this day. I feel with the 2nd gen they had planned to tone down the styling a bit, the 1st gen had already established the CTS name plate, and focus on improving build quality and things of the such. While I do think the interior was a major improvement, the 2nd gen just didn't have the effect on me the 1st one did, probably why I never traded up from my 1st gen which I still to this day have and love! Now the 3rd gen in my opinion is when Cadillac decided they wanted the CTS to become a World Class Sedan, and truly compete with the offerings from BMW and Mercedes Benz. The CTS now has a similar price tag and has grown in size from the 1st two generations. I feel they got the styling spot on and it's a master piece! It's no longer just another CTS, as that was the vibe I felt the 2nd gave off, It's unique and eye catching. It looks so intimidating now and I love that. the front end looks so mean and menacing, like it's screaming I've got some major balls under my hood so move the hell out of the way. As for performance, the CTS that was doing 0-60 in just over 6 seconds was probably the base model 4cylinder turbo. The 2.0L T has almost identical horsepower numbers to the Accord's V6. The Accord is also a much lighter car, the lightest CTS is still almost 100lbs heavier then the heaviest Accord. At it's heaviest, the CTS tops out at almost 4,000lbs, nearly 500lbs heavier than the heaviest Accord. But in any aspect you can't compare the 2, it would be unfair to both cars, not only are they in different classes selling to two totally different people with two totally different budgets, they are just nothing alike, they differ in almost every dimension. Back to performance, the CTS V Sport with the marvelous Twin Turbo 3.6L V6 which is probably the heaviest, can produce a 0-60 time of 4.5 seconds, which is pretty impressive for a 4,000lbs car in my book. I think it's too early to tell by the sales, this new generation is still fairly new, and seeing as it's jumped in price, many just can't afford to trade up to the new one, this new one just needs to persuade a few 5 series buyers, and a few from the comparable Lexus (not sure of what it is). Speaking of Lexus, they compared a CTS V Sport to the comparable Lexus which was quite a considerable amount cheaper, and they still felt the CTS was a much better car and worth every penny.