Topic: First Drive: 2015 Cadillac ATS Coupe

[Autos_Editor]

A new type of Cadillac.
Read More...

[Benhaze]

I wish that Caddy would revise the gauge cluster and make it more cohesive than it is today: http://www.autos.ca/galleries/2015/index.php?level=picture&id=3718

Look at that reflection on the upper part of the cluster. Hopefully they will use the CTS all digital option for the ATS-V.

[Mike]

This car surprised me. It's quite good. The torque from the revised 2.0T is impressive. Even with the mediocre six-speed manual, I'll take it.

[Weels]

This car surprised me. It's quite good. The torque from the revised 2.0T is impressive. Even with the mediocre six-speed manual, I'll take it.

That sucks to hear that it still ... sucks. 
OK, how does it compare to say a '15 WRX?  Not exactly comparable cars, but that was last manual i drove.

[Mike]

This car surprised me. It's quite good. The torque from the revised 2.0T is impressive. Even with the mediocre six-speed manual, I'll take it.

That sucks to hear that it still ... sucks. 
OK, how does it compare to say a '15 WRX?  Not exactly comparable cars, but that was last manual i drove.

The WRX doesn't have the worlds best transmission either, so they are actually pretty close. Acceptable in a budget performance AWD sedan, I fond the engagement and refinement lackluster in a luxury coupe.

[Northernridge]

Cadillac got the front end design right...the grill looks pretty tight. In profile though I still don't care for their raked-rear-window-with-no-trunk-lid look.

Not sure if the author was looking for nits to pick or if there was a little slop in QC but Cadillac can't afford anything that looks like quality lapses...even some of the 'better than before' comments remind us of the not so good old days for Cadillac.

It's a long way to the top...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDCs7ijNUVM

[Weels]

Oh Cadillac. I want to love you. I really like this ATS.  It's a damn sexy machine.
But it's the little things that are killer:


Having to look at this awful display every day:



and this:

"how quickly the shiny touch-sensitive plastic of the dashboard’s central element attracts dust particles and smudges. Even when freshly cleaned, it took just minutes to start looking a bit dirty."

would drive me nuts & keep me away.  I'm pretty anal about keeping my interior clean (but not Snowman level anal..) 
 

Oh, and since I have the mike,  a special seat in hell is needed for whoever thought adding that chrome around the windows & C pillar was a good idea. 

[Oldsguy]

Not sure if the author was looking for nits to pick or if there was a little slop in QC but Cadillac can't afford anything that looks like quality lapses...even some of the 'better than before' comments remind us of the not so good old days for Cadillac.

You know the drill. Same thing with Buick reviews that harken back to their 1990 cars. Auto writers cannot help themselves when it comes to GM cars. Funny how they forgive and forget the sins of other manufacturers so much more easily - Ford in bad old days, Hyundai, Kia, you name it. But GM? Never.

[carcrazed]

The performance of the turbo 4 makes me question the need for the V6 at all.  V6 needs to offer more power to justify the price premium, IMO.

[tpl]

I don't find that display particularly offensive but I agree that the chrome aropund the C pillar copuld well go.

[Weels]

I don't find that display particularly offensive but I agree that the chrome aropund the C pillar copuld well go.

Reminds me of the '97 Grand AM I had back in the day.  Not good.

[aquadorhj]

I don't find that display particularly offensive but I agree that the chrome aropund the C pillar copuld well go.

really?   hmm..  i don't mind the chrome, but that display is lackluster to say the LEAST...  (i hate it, to plainly state my feeling..  )

Not sure if the author was looking for nits to pick or if there was a little slop in QC but Cadillac can't afford anything that looks like quality lapses...even some of the 'better than before' comments remind us of the not so good old days for Cadillac.

You know the drill. Same thing with Buick reviews that harken back to their 1990 cars. Auto writers cannot help themselves when it comes to GM cars. Funny how they forgive and forget the sins of other manufacturers so much more easily - Ford in bad old days, Hyundai, Kia, you name it. But GM? Never.

Oldguy, i actually agree with you that a lot of people are very HARSH towards GM.    myself included..

but, me personally, seeing the last 20 years of GM cars, they are improving, but not quite there.    and given the Cadillac's glory days, and GM's long history a lot of us have huge expectations when it comes to GM, and during the last 20 years, GM has never EXCEEDED it.     (exceptions being Corvette (C7) and trucks.)

[Brendan McAleer]

Not sure if the author was looking for nits to pick or if there was a little slop in QC but Cadillac can't afford anything that looks like quality lapses...even some of the 'better than before' comments remind us of the not so good old days for Cadillac.

You know the drill. Same thing with Buick reviews that harken back to their 1990 cars. Auto writers cannot help themselves when it comes to GM cars. Funny how they forgive and forget the sins of other manufacturers so much more easily - Ford in bad old days, Hyundai, Kia, you name it. But GM? Never.

It's a $55K car, and the metal bit on the dash wasn't properly aligned. I nit-picked how crappy the vents on the CLA were, and Jag's plastic paddle-shifters, so why not this?

Overall though, the only jarring thing about the interior was how quickly the centre-stack gets smudgy (Caddy includes a little micro-fibre cloth to wipe it clean); the rest of it is really good, with the use of real materials one of the more solid points. I'd like to put the highest-trim 2.0L against an IS350 and see how they line up.

[Noto]

Cadillac’s new crest now debuts with its wreath removed, bearing only the stylized coat-of-arms of Antoine Laumet de La Mothe, eighteenth-century founder of Detroit. The new shield is simpler, wider, ready to go into battle against the blue-and-white roundel of BMW,

To me, it looks like the emblem was cut and pasted into paint, then re-sized.  Almost looks pixilated to me and stretched too wide without being tall enough.

I don't really care.  It's an emblem.

It is priced very attractively, I think.  $2,200 for AWD is a decent 'upgrade' and the 'base' engine seems to be more than up to the task.  Impressive numbers from a 2.0T, though I'd like to see a dyno chart before I give my final thought.  I know GM put a lot of R&D into their 2.0T and I think it shows.

The interior LOOKS and feels premium to me, but I still feel cramped inside.  That's really the only complaint I could have.  I mean, I'd go for the sedan any way, but why bother - the back seat room probably doesn't differ all that much.

Good showing, Caddy. 

Oh, and Brendan, as always, incredible writing.

[Mike]

The performance of the turbo 4 makes me question the need for the V6 at all.  V6 needs to offer more power to justify the price premium, IMO.

My thoughts exactly after driving them. Sound is the only reason now.

[Fobroader]

Hmmm....270hp turbo 4, RWD, 6 spd manual, killer looks....yeah, the interior is a little chintzy, but really, nice work Caddy. I'd definitely take this over the A5 or Q60. Great review by the way, I like the fact you guys don't pull punches.

[lebowski]

Great review. Based on the specs of that RWD 2.0 model, it might be the sport/lux coupe to get; Audi is now too long in the tooth, MB C-coupe is less handsome, Comparable 4-series is more expensive, Infiniti Q60 is -- well i don't know much about the Infiniti except I've always detested the sound of the VQ engines so it would be out for me.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Chrome around the windows is fairly universal, depending on the model. I don't see it as a big deal one way or the other.

The rest of the car looks pretty well done, if not as adventurous as the previous CTS coupe.

[Noto]

Great review. Based on the specs of that RWD 2.0 model, it might be the sport/lux coupe to get; Audi is now too long in the tooth, MB C-coupe is less handsome, Comparable 4-series is more expensive, Infiniti Q60 is -- well i don't know much about the Infiniti except I've always detested the sound of the VQ engines so it would be out for me.

The steering is the problem with the Q50...

[lebowski]

Chrome around the windows is fairly universal, depending on the model. I don't see it as a big deal one way or the other.

The rest of the car looks pretty well done - not as heinous as the previous CTS coupe.

Fixed for you 

I know, I know, opinions are like a*&holes