ATS 2013 Cadillac ATS Tests Thread

[Guibo]

Top Gear

Posted by: Pat Devereux , 23 July 2012


What's this ATS all about? Looks like a shrunken Cadillac CTS.
And that's essentially what it is. Only it isn't as the ATS is an entirely new car built off a completely, all-new-from-the-ground-up platform. Car companies, least of all luxury ones, don't get to build new platforms - the basic fabric of a car other than the body - very often as they cost an immense amount of time and cash. So this ATS saloon is not the only car that is going to be built off it. Apart from all the ATS model derivatives, the ATS's skeleton and nervous system will be reworked for the next Camaro, the refreshed CTS and a new Chevrolet compact coupe, which we know only as the 130R concept car so far.

OK, so it's the smallest Cadillac?
Yes, think of the ATS as a BMW 3 Series competitor. As that's exactly what it was conceived and designed to beat. Cadillac has watched as the 3 Series has become the default luxury compact car in the US, and has had to wait until now to bring the fight to it. It's a massive task to try and topple the Bavarian uber saloon, but Cadillac reckons the rear-drive ATS is the car to do it.

Really? Why?
The company proved, as much to itself as the rest of the world, that it could build globally competitive luxury performance saloons when it debuted the mighty CTS-V model back in 2004. Now it's taken all of the key learning from that car and applied them to the junior ATS, plus a truckload of new tricks.

OK, but it's not just about performance models, what are the regular cars like to drive?
Good to great. We got to drive everything from the base 2.5-litre manual model all the way up to the 3.6-litre V6 variant and the general impression on the road is that the chassis guys have really done their homework. Super smooth ride, good steering feel and quiet, finely controlled suspension let you know immediately that this car means business. The base engine is a little coarse when extended and the smooth 3.6 bent six will please the more mature driver, but the sweet spot is the two-litre turbo unit, especially when it's mated to the tap-shift auto gearbox. In this configuration the ATS gels into a back road weapon that has you snipping up and down gears and slicing through corners just for fun. Word of caution: do not spec the manual.
Any other standout features?
Yes, the (optional) actively damped two-mode suspension. In a lot of cars with multi-mode suspensions you can only tell the difference if you are a student of pre-stressed and ordinary concrete. In the ATS, you effectively get two cars. The first one is a comfortable cruiser with enough body control to keep things interesting and tidy. The second one is an all-out scratcher that, still without being uncomfortably hard, tightens the car's movements allowing you to be extra precise with the steering and throttle, and being rewarded for doing so.
How do you know that?
We got to drive the ATS on a short race track in Atlanta that felt like it had been designed - by F1 guru Herman Tilke, no less - after a blast across some hilly British countryside. Just fewer sheep on the road. The 50/50 front/rear ATS was completely linear and rock solid throughout, to the point that you start to think you are a better driver than you are. That kind of flattery is always welcome - and rare.

So, better than a 3 Series then?
At the limit, it really does feel that way. On the road, the fight is more even. The ATS's cabin doesn't have the BMW's super modern feel, settling for a more traditional stitched leather approach, which will please some and deter others. But it does have some nice, unique touches. The CUE control centre is big, bold and easy to use with words - it understands ordinary language instead of expecting you to speak like a robot - or fingers. And there is BOSE active noise cancelling, which keeps the cabin free of unwanted noise, just like your headphones on an aeroplane.

Is it a good buy?
With prices starting at a bit over $33k, which is less than the 3 Series, yes, it is definitely worth a look. The model to aim for is the two-litre turbo with the tap shift auto box and the active chassis. The 3 Series now has a new and serious US competitor.

Specs (as tested)
2,457cc, 4cyl, RWD, 260bhp, 353lb-ft, 27mpg, CO2 n/a, 0-60mph 5.7secs, 155mph (est), 1530kg
Price
From $33,990 (£21,883)

http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/cadillac-ats-first-drive-2012-07-23


Edmunds/InsideLine, Published 07-23-2012

Cadillac isn't saying that its goal with the 2013 ATS sport sedan is the equivalent of kneeing BMW's 3 Series in the stomach, putting it in a headlock and wrestling it to the ground.
But there's not a shred of doubt that Caddy's new baby is aimed squarely at the most competent compact sport sedan in the history of the world. That the small Bimmer served as the ATS's benchmark is unquestionable. Not just in Cadillac's statement: that the ATS will "challenge the world's best compact luxury cars." But the spec sheet shows, dimensionally, that the 2013 Cadillac ATS is a near carbon copy of the 3 Series: It's within 0.3 inch in overall length and within 0.2 inch in width.
Corporate posturing and marketing hype aside, a Cadillac official later admitted to us, "Honestly, we'll just be happy to be considered in the same sentence as the 3 Series."
After a day driving around Georgia and lapping the brand-new Atlanta Motorsports Park, we can say, yup, the ATS is legit. Just to be sure, we hooked up our test equipment to a pre-production model while we were there.

No More Cimarron Jokes
Make no mistake, the 2013 Cadillac ATS is a completely brand-new, from-scratch rear-wheel-drive design (all-wheel drive is optional). True, the three available direct-injected engines have been seen before in various iterations, and the fantastic CUE infotainment system debuted in the XTS. But as a whole, this is a brand-new Caddy.
And it's light. There's lots of high-strength and ultrahigh-strength steel, and the chassis is scalloped out and utilizes lightening holes to shed pounds where possible. There's also an aluminum hood, magnesium engine mount brackets and aluminum front suspension arms. End result? The base model tips the scales at 3,315 pounds, while the 3.6 V6 test car comes in at 3,461. The last BMW 328i we tested, which utilizes a 2.0-liter turbo engine, hit the scales at 3,427 pounds.

One Out of Three
The base ATS, which starts at $33,990 including destination, comes with a 2.5-liter naturally aspirated four-cylinder putting out 202 horsepower and 191 pound-feet of torque (the 2012 BMW 328i starts at $35,795 with destination, but its turbo-4 puts out 240 hp). Earning 22 city/33 highway/26 mpg EPA combined, this engine is clearly little more than the ATS's mileage and price leader — a fact that is obvious the first time you apply real pressure with your right foot. It's quiet and smooth enough, and the six-speed automatic is a worthy companion with its silky operation but, no lie, we checked to see if the parking brake was on a couple of times.
Even though it's not billed as the top engine, the 2.0-liter twin-scroll turbocharged four-cylinder had us most amped up going in because it's the only power plant that's available with a manual gearbox. And we like forced induction. The numbers are there: 272 hp at 5,500 rpm, 260 lb-ft of torque from 1,700-5,500. There is minimal turbo lag but midrange is plentiful. Remarkably, when paired with the automatic, Cadillac estimates (although it's not yet official with the EPA) identical fuel economy for this engine as it does for the 2.5-liter four. Reality, we suspect, will prove otherwise.
Either way, it never stirred our soul — there's no real punch, and its completely nondescript whirring noise is uninspiring. Then there's the all-new Tremec six-speed manual, which has longish throws and is a bit clunky.
The 3.6-liter V6, on the other hand, is a fine piece. Unlike the turbo-4, it does its best work up high, churning out 321 hp at 6,800 rpm and 275 lb-ft at 4,800. Cadillac says it will earn 19 city and 28 highway mpg, however, proving that you'll pay for the additional power.
Even so, it makes genuinely sexy sounds at high revs, but it's Cadillac-quiet at low speed. The sole transmission is the six-speed auto with magnesium paddle shifters. This transmission is so "smart" that on the track we experimented with leaving it in Drive and it held revs perfectly when needed and automatically downshifted and blipped the throttle when we braked for corners. As such, we preferred the V6/auto combo over the turbo-4/manual on the track.

The Numbers Game
Acceleration testing on a pre-production ATS Premium 3.6 at an unfamiliar test venue resulted in 60 mph in 5.7 seconds (5.4 seconds with a 1-foot rollout as at a drag strip) and the quarter-mile in 13.9 seconds at 101.9 mph.
For reference, the last BMW 335i we tested, a 2010 sedan with a six-speed manual and a turbocharged inline-6, hit 60 in 5.2 seconds (4.9 with rollout). The 2012 Mercedes-Benz C350 posted a 0-60 time of 5.6 seconds (5.4 with rollout). Translation: As nice as Caddy's V6 is, it's no match — in pure numbers or in terms of refinement/usability — for BMW's turbo-6.

Magnetic Personality
Cadillac factory racer Johnny O'Connell didn't mince words when he told journalists at the launch of the 2013 Cadillac ATS: "This is the best car I've driven around the proving grounds in my 12 years at General Motors."
Say what? Perhaps he already forgot a certain famous sports car. You know, the Corvette? Or the CTS-V?
O'Connell elaborated further while he gave us hot laps in an ATS: "Oh sure, the Corvette has higher limits," he explained, "but the ATS is more forgiving when it reaches the limit." In other words, when the Corvette begins to oversteer, it happens very quickly and it isn't easy to save, whereas the ATS can be driven up to and beyond its limits all day. Even by us average folk.
The balance the ATS exhibits comes via a 50/50 weight distribution and well-tuned standard FE2 suspension, including Cadillac's first-ever five-link independent rear setup. The quick and precise electric steering offers adjustable weight and has high effort in Sport mode. As a result, the ATS proved a more-than-willing dance partner on Georgia's twisty back roads. It's very tied down, with minimal body roll and minimal understeer at the limit.
Premium models, like our test car, come with the FE3 sport suspension and magnetorheological dampers. Not only is the ride quality driver-controlled, but these high-tech dampers constantly adjust to the road...in milliseconds. Summer tires helped, too. The car's balance lets you teeter on the brink of understeer/oversteer, working the throttle to eliminate push. Power-on oversteer isn't easy to achieve, even with the V6, but when it happens it's extremely controllable.
Around the skid pad at Road Atlanta, the ATS matched the 0.92g lateral grip of the 3 Series, while it stopped 1 foot shorter from 60 mph — 108 feet. Brembo brakes come standard on all ATS models above the base car. Fade was nonexistent, although pedal feel out on the road was a bit soft.

CUE It Up
Cadillac's CUE infotainment system, which debuted on the 2013 XTS, has found its way into the ATS, too. CUE, which stands for Cadillac User Experience, integrates phone, audio and navigation into an 8-inch LCD touchscreen. It can pair data for up to 10 Bluetooth-enabled mobile devices. Perhaps most important is that CUE's interface operates like an iPhone or iPad — by tapping, flicking, swiping or spreading, which gives it a welcome familiarity for many users.
"Haptic" or pulsed feedback on the fully capacitive faceplate lets you know that your finger is, in fact, changing settings on the HVAC controls — unlike in the Chevy Volt and Ford Explorer. There's a learning curve with CUE, of course, but the capability of the system is quite amazing.
The front seats do a nice job of holding you in place and it's easy to find a comfortable position. Optional sport seats don't provide the needed lateral support, but the bolsters are electrically adjustable.
Rear-seat headroom is actually pretty decent, but knee room is tight. Despite a wide aperture, the ATS's 10.2-cubic-foot trunk is small for the class — especially between the wheelwells.

Better Than the 3 Series?
Taking on the established German and Japanese players in one of the most difficult-to-infiltrate segments in the country takes guts. And it shows even bigger cojones for Cadillac to come right out and say the 2013 ATS is capable of challenging the world's best compact sedans.
But the ATS has a lot going for it. Most specifically is its genuinely capable handling. And the CUE infotainment system shows real progress in an area that's hugely significant to many buyers.
But does it knock the BMW 3 Series off its comfy perch? Not yet. Not with these powertrains. Still, the 2013 Cadillac ATS, which will begin shipping to dealers August 1, is an exciting rear-drive alternative to the compact sport sedan establishment. That it's as good as it is, and that it's American-made, should be enough to bring new, young buyers into Cadillac dealers.
Even better, Cadillac officials did everything other than confirm that an ATS-V performance model is on the way. Give it a real engine, and maybe, just maybe, it can take on the M3.

http://www.edmunds.com/cadillac/ats/2013/road-test.html
http://www.edmunds.com/cadillac/ats/2013/road-test-specs.html


Car & Driver: Cadillac Charges Head-on at the Germans

Prying satisfied customers out of their Audi A4s, BMW 328s, and Mercedes-Benz C350s might seem tougher than establishing democracy in Afghanistan, but conquest sales will have to play a huge role in the success of the new Cadillac ATS. The brand desperately needs a successful entry-luxury car because that’s the bestselling segment in the premium-car world. And since Cadillac has been moving in a sporting direction, it’s taking on these European sedans rather than targeting real-estate-agent buggies like the Lexus ES or the Lincoln MKZ.

Off to a Good Start
We went into deep detail with the ATS earlier this year and were impressed with its design and engineering. Based on the brand-new Alpha platform, the ATS features a front-engine, rear-drive layout, as well as four-wheel independent suspension, the latest ZF electric power steering, and four-wheel disc brakes. Motivation comes from a choice of three engines, with an available manual transmission, and optional all-wheel drive. It’s all wrapped in modern and attractive sheetmetal styled with a softer take on the Cadillac Art and Science design language. The whole shebang is 8.5 inches shorter than the CTS. We got a chance to drive it last month, and now we can finally tell you about it.
From behind the wheel, the car makes an excellent first impression, with a good driving position combined with superb sightlines delivered in part by reasonably thin A-pillars. Models with sport seats have adjustable thigh support as well as adjustable side bolsters. You can choose from among seven interior color and finish schemes, including ones with aluminum trim and genuine carbon fiber. The overall ambience feels stylish and rich, and we were immediately able to find a comfortable driving position.
Good visibility extends to the information displayed to the driver, although the tachometer is tucked a bit far to the left on the instrument cluster and can fall out of your vision when driving hard. A head-up display is available, and there are three customizable windows below the central speedometer that can be configured using a large toggle switch on the right steering-wheel spoke; the control can be manipulated easily without looking down at it. Another toggle on the left spoke operates the cruise control.

The 8.0-inch LCD touch screen for the new CUE (Cadillac User Experience) system looks great and remains highly visible even when hit by direct sunlight. It has a number of clever features, such as a function that only brings up additional buttons only when a proximity sensor detects your hand nearby—this allows the screen to stay uncluttered most of the time. You can change the map scale by squeezing or spreading your fingers as you do on a smartphone, and the nav system can pull contact address information directly from a paired phone. We appreciate not having to manually enter an address that already exists in a connected device.

Overreaching Engine Lineup
We first drove an ATS with the base engine, a 202-hp, 2.5-liter four-cylinder with direct injection. It’s basically a slightly updated version of Chevy’s workhorse engine and is available only with a six-speed automatic and rear drive. This engine won’t generate envy among any Audi or BMW owners. It delivers no better than adequate performance (claimed 0 to 60 in 7.5 seconds, which we think is about right on the nose) and it feels slower than it is, as the transmission resists downshifting as you toe the throttle. The big four-cylinder also is fairly loud at high revs. Were we in charge at Cadillac, we would have introduced the ATS without this engine, then slipped it into the lineup several months down the road if a less expensive entry-level model was deemed necessary.

Next up was the 2.0-liter turbocharged four with 272 ponies and 260 lb-ft of torque. Smoother than the 2.5-liter, it’s still louder at full power than the Audi or BMW turbo fours, but it also can run with them (0 to 60 in the high fives). It comes in three driveline configurations—manual rear-drive and automatic with rear- or all-wheel drive—all of which feel energetic. The manual gearbox is precise, slick, and satisfying; the automatic is well matched to the engine’s torquey output.
The 3.6-liter V-6 is the most powerful engine choice with 321 hp. Sadly, it isn’t available with a manual gearbox, although the automatic transmission does offer a manual-shifting mode and optional steering-wheel paddles. When you move the shift lever into the manual gate without doing anything else, you’ve selected Sport mode, which puts the transmission in a friskier mood, while also increasing the steering effort.
The 3.6’s sport steering setting feels very good, but it would be nice to be able to separately select these modes. In one winding stretch, for example, while running at a brisk—but not breakneck—speed, the transmission suddenly shifted down two gears because the Performance Algorithm Liftfoot (PAL) mode that’s activated when in Sport mode suddenly thought we were between two corners on a racetrack and decided we needed to keep our revs up. It was startling and unwelcome; we’d like to be able to drive twisty roads with the suspension and steering in Sport mode without worrying about this happening.
On all of the versions, the steering is accurate and nicely weighted, although we’d like more on-center feel. Even so, the ATS feels terrific on a winding road and it’s easy to place it right where you want it on corner entry. The suspension tightly controls body motions and the structure has that carved-from-a-solid-block feeling. Unfortunately, the roads around Atlanta, where we drove the ATS, are much too smooth to gauge the suspension’s ride comfort.

Right On Track
We also were able to wring out the ATS at Atlanta Motorsports Park, a country-club facility with tight turns and roller coaster–like elevation changes. It dives into corners decisively; thanks to the good visibility, you can easily find the corner apexes. The car’s overall balance is excellent, with mild understeer that shifts into modest oversteer as you ease off the throttle.

Even with the traction and stability control switched off, the ATS never bites a driver. The strong brakes help the relationship—Brembos at the front are standard on the 2.0T and 3.6, optional on the 2.5—and never got soft or made pained noises. Our first ATS encounter definitely has us looking forward to the inevitable comparo.

Visually, the ATS fits in with the primo Germans. Although it’s slightly longer than a BMW 3-series or a Mercedes C-class, that’s mostly due to the pointy nose and tail that Cadillacs share. The interior package feels more like the (E46) 3-series from two generations ago—that means a tidy and compact feel, but also a tighter cabin. Although two adult males can fit behind each other, kneeroom is not abundant. Neither is shoulder room, as the ATS’s rear wheel wells push the outboard occupants towards the center. At 10.2 cubic feet, the ATS also has the smallest trunk in the segment.
On the other hand, we think the ATS looks terrific—both inside and out—and makes a decent visual statement, even in a segment full of attractive cars. It also delivers the solid structure and confidence-inspiring moves that are expected in this cohort. We think the powertrains could all be a tad quieter at full throttle, but at cruising speed, the ATS is as relaxed as any competitor.
Cadillac’s biggest challenge will be to get buyers of German cars to take serious notice of the ATS. Based on this experience, we think they should give it a shot.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-cadillac-ats-first-drive-review

 

[Merc1]

I really like the interior and the technology. Exterior is a little dull though. Can't wait to see the dozen comparison tests coming.

M

 

[Guibo]

Motor Trend
Bavaria Bound: Can Cadillac Put Its Car Where Its Mouth Is?

Ever since its "Art and Science" rebirth, Cadillac has made it clear it's gunning for BMW. The CTS, and particularly the big-stick CTS-V, is the opening salvo. For too long, though, the CTS has been the only product in Cadillac's portfolio worthy of taking on the Germans, and it wasn't the undisputed victor. Now, with its all-new 2013 Cadillac ATS, the new Standard of the World finally appears ready to take on the Ultimate Driving Machines.

The ATS was presented as a true BMW 3 Series competitor, and was benchmarked against what Cadillac says is the best 3 Series ever, the E46. Them's fightin' words, right there. Since then, Cadillac's been running its mouth with Super Bowl commercials, Nurburgring test videos, and more. In the meantime, BMW has returned fire in a very reserved, German way, by introducing the new F30 3 Series, which easily trounced the competition in a recent MT comparison ("The More Things Change...", May 2012).

The singular question, then, is whether Cadillac can back it up. Given Cadillac's boasting and GM's general long-standing but finally fading habit of overpromising and under-delivering, I was skeptical. That new 3 Series is damn good, and I should know -- I'm assigned to MT's long-term 328i. Has Cadillac really done it?

The answer is yes. The Cadillac ATS is shockingly good. In fact, here are the four things I don't like about the ATS: the instrument cluster is boring and uninspired; the shift paddles on the steering wheel are too far away from your fingertips; the back seat is too cramped; and the 2.5-liter base engine has no business being in a car aimed at dethroning the 3 Series. That's it. But does that make it better than the 3 Series?
The ATS certainly has its spec sheet right. Every external dimension, from wheelbase to track widths to length, width, and height, are within an inch or less of the 3 Series. The Cadillac offers both a 270-horsepower, 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder to match the 328's same-size 240-horsepower turbo-four, and a 321-horsepower, 3.6-liter V-6 to match the 335's 300-horsepower, 3.0-liter turbocharged inline-six. The ATS offers everything from optional magnetic shocks to its CUE infotainment system and more to match BMW's adjustable shocks and iDrive and the rest. But does that mean anything on the road?

It does. I drove all three engine variants on beautiful and treacherous back roads north of Atlanta, and I was more than surprised. The ATS is smooth and composed on rough pavement and through turns. The ride is appropriately stiff for a car with sporting intentions, but never harsh or brittle. I was most surprised by the standard, non-adjustable suspension, because frankly, I couldn't feel much of a difference between how it and the optional Magnetic Ride Control suspension rode or handled.

And it does handle, fancy shocks or not. Cadillac claims the ATS weighs as much as 160 pounds less than the last 3 Series we tested, but it retains a solid, weighty feel on the road. It comes off planted and confident, ready to glide through corners with ease rather than attack them with unbridled fury. I can't recall how many times we've declared that the CTS "ain't your father's Caddy," but the moniker applies equally to the ATS. It's good enough to make you overconfident. Should that become the case, the ATS defaults to progressive understeer, unwilling to put its tail out unless you really do something wrong, like put a tire off the road into some nice, soft dirt.

On the road or the track, the ATS imparted a sense of balance -- the engine never overdrove the suspension or tires. Steering feel is very good for an electric unit and the car turns in quickly with a nice bit of weight to it. The Brembo brakes, standard on turbocharged and V-6 models, provide excellent, linear stopping power and resist fade very well. GM's six-speed auto has been tuned up for performance duty and offers upshifts so quick, most people would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between this torque converter auto and a dual-clutch unit. Downshifts, though still quite good, are where the torque converter loses time and a little composure. The six-speed manual, available only with the turbo four-cylinder engine, is a very nice box with short, crisp throws with a pleasant mechanical feel to them and an easy-to-modulate clutch.

While I drove all three variants on the road, I was only able to test the top-shelf V-6. Without a proper dragstrip on hand, I used the front straight at Road Atlanta where our trusty VBox recorded a 0-to-60 mph time of 5.7 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 14.1 seconds at 101.6 mph. That's actually a bit slower than Cadillac predicted. It said the V-6 should do a 5.4 to 60 and 14 flat in the quarter. Aside from the test location, unusual atmospheric conditions on the test day may have contributed to the poor result. We'll retest the car when one becomes available in California to verify the result. The BMW 335, by contrast, lays down a blistering 4.7-second 60-mph time, though its 300-horsepower rating is suspect, considering that's 426-horsepower Camaro SS 0-to-60 mph territory. I had far better luck in the braking test, where the ATS stopped in just 111 feet from 60 mph, just two feet longer than the 335. The ATS really shone on the skidpad, where it pulled 0.94 g average to the BMW's 0.90.

The V-6 emits a decent rasp as you lay into it. It's one of the better 60-degree V-6 sounds out there, considering how hard it is to make that type of engine sound good. The turbo-four, meanwhile, makes something of a soft growl that, again, is pleasing for a four-cylinder. Both engines doled out power in a nice, smooth pull to redline, though the V-6 didn't feel all that much faster on the road than the turbo-four. Cadillac says the turbocharged engine should lay down a 5.7-second 60 mph time and a 14.1-second quarter-mile. It expects this will be the volume-selling engine.

Then there's the 2.5-liter, naturally aspirated four-cylinder. It's not a bad engine - in fact, it's very smooth. It just doesn't belong in a Cadillac. Power delivery levels off about halfway through the throttle pedal's travel, and while it's adequate for getting around town, it's not particularly impressive (7.5 seconds to 60 mph and mid-15s in the quarter-mile, Cadillac says). The ATS doesn't need this engine. Not for sales, not for marketing, and not for CAFE. The 2.0-liter turbo gets the exact same fuel economy and costs just $600 more than the 2.5-liter while still undercutting the 328's base price by $1600. All the 2.5-liter does is let Cadillac say the ATS starts under $34,000, by all of $10. What's more, it's only available on the lowest trim levels and without the performance options or all-wheel drive. BMW doesn't offer a stripper model with a weak engine, and neither should Cadillac. It's an old habit Cadillac picked up from Chevrolet and it needs to stop if Cadillac wants to play with today's big boys of luxury. No one brags about having the cheapest, least-equipped luxury car on the block.
They may brag, though, about CUE. I hadn't tried the Cadillac User Experience prior to the ATS, and based on Jonny Lieberman's experience with the XTS, I was prepared to be disappointed. The Cadillac people tell me that despite the cars being launched only a few months apart, the ATS features a newer version of the CUE software, which the XTS will be getting retroactively. This ability to make fast, running changes is part of Cadillac's strategy to let you update CUE by simply going online and downloading the latest software to a USB thumb drive, then plugging it into the car, rather than going to the dealer. We'll see how that works out when it actually goes online, and how Cadillac's even more ambitious plan to someday make the car itself a Wi-Fi hotspot and let it download software updates wirelessly works out when that day comes.

In the meantime, CUE is very good. It's like having an iPad in your dash, and anyone comfortable with an iPhone or Droid will find it familiar. The controls are touch-sensitive and generally quick to react, especially on the screen. Controls on the faceplate, like the temperature, require a more deliberate poke to avoid picking up every accidental brush, but delays and missed commands can be frustrating. To avoid glitches, push and hold, or train yourself to slow down and wait half a tick for the slight vibration of the haptic feedback, signaling that your touch has been recognized. Also, you need to touch the black above the little metal accents, not the accents themselves, as that's where the sensor actually is.

On the screen, menus are easy to navigate and some common controls fade out when not in use, then pop back up when your hand gets near the screen. The fonts are large and easy to read; the graphics crisp and sharp. Transitions between big apps, like navigation to climate control, sometimes have a short delay, but not worse than I've experienced on my iPhone. The pinch/spread feature for zooming the map, though, is achingly slow compared to an iPhone, and the swipe-the-turn-by-turn-to-the-instrument-cluster feature is more trouble than it's worth. Use the intuitive steering wheel controls to bring it up in one of the three customizable panes in the screen below the needles. These are handy not only because you can see a lot of information at once, but you can enlarge one of the three panes by selecting it, making it easier to read. Or, just select the page in the sharp, full-color head-up display with the information you want. Not only has Cadillac finally upgraded its HUD as I've been begging it too, but it's actually outdone BMW by making it more adjustable and offering more information.

The ATS' interior is, in comparison to its gizmos, fairly reserved. The styling takes no great chances and the gauge cluster is pretty boring to look at, but the materials throughout are high-quality and well-assembled. The front seats offer a good compromise of comfort and sportiness, though I could do with more side bolstering. The vibrating Safety Alert Seat feature is a neat trick and much less irritating than the shrieking beeps other brands employ to remind you to watch your surroundings. The rear seat, while also comfortable, is something of a tight squeeze. At 5'9", I fit comfortably, but just barely and without a lot of legroom. The roof is low and the door opening is lower, making it feel claustrophobic and requiring some serious head-ducking to get in and out. Outward visibility is good in all directions except back due to the high trunk.

In all, then, the new Cadillac ATS is a very, very good car. But is it better than the 3 Series? The honest answer is...I don't know yet. Despite driving them less than 24 hours apart, I just can't say without driving them directly back-to-back. Both cars ride, drive, and handle exceptionally well, offer a deluge of technology and sport top-notch materials and build quality. To say that the ATS is as good as 3 Series is a grand compliment by itself, but determining which car is better will have to wait for the inevitable comparison test. It's gonna be a nail-biter.


Shiny Side Down: My Unfortunate Roll in the ATS

Yeah, it was me. I'm the guy who put a Cadillac ATS on its roof during the press preview. Here's how it happened:

The turn was a downhill S-turn, a sweeping left into a sweeping right. The speed limit on Georgia's Route 136 is 55 mph, and while I wasn't looking at the speedometer at the time of the accident, I hadn't been driving recklessly and stability control was on.

My mistake was misjudging the corner. It was un-posted and tighter than I thought and I didn't brake quite as much as I should have. As a result, I tracked wide at the exit and was left with a choice: tighten the line right before making a sharp right turn and risk upsetting the car that way, or let it run a little wide onto the shoulder and then attempt to gently drive back onto the road. I chose the second option.

With the pavement ending at the white line, driving onto the shoulder meant into the dirt, which was far softer than I thought (the tracks were several inches deep). The car immediately turned sideways, and while I counter-steered, the car was sliding at a 90-degree angle across the road. Thankfully, there was no oncoming traffic. We slid sideways onto the opposite shoulder. If we'd stopped three feet shorter, you probably wouldn't be reading this. I remember hoping to myself that the car wouldn't get stuck in the dirt and need to be pulled out.

As it happened, our momentum carried us just far enough for the nose of the car to go off the hill. Once it did, gravity took over and the rest of the car slowly followed. It was the least-violent or exciting rollover you'd ever seen. It slowly tipped onto its side, then onto the roof and slid a few feet down the hill before coming to rest against a tree. Aside from my ego, there was no injury at all to me or my passenger. Two Georgia State Troopers and a Dawson's County Sheriff's Deputy found my report credible enough to let me off with just a good shaming.

Why am I qualified, then, to write this review? Because the car was not responsible. I firmly believe that the exact same accident could have happened regardless of what vehicle I was driving. Experience behind the wheel of the ATS on the track and on the road, before and after the accident, showed it to be a confident, neutral handler not prone to wild oversteer. Misjudging the corner was my mistake and it ended poorly to say the least. I can't blame the car for that.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1207_2013_cadillac_ats_first_test/


More reviews from various blog sites:
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/07/23/2013-cadillac-ats-first-drive-review-video/

http://jalopnik.com/5928279/cadillac-ats-the-jalopnik-review
The fit/finish of the leather on the console here leaves a lot to be desired. Hopefully that is limited to heavily used press vehicles, but might raise longterm concerns in production ones.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/07/review-2013-cadillac-ats/

Overall, the Cadillac isn’t priced low enough to sell based on price alone, but isn’t priced so high that even those who prefer it will opt for the much more established BMW…unless you happen to require the most athletic suspension, and little else. In this case, the BMW lists for over $5,000 less with a manual transmission, and over $6,500 less with an automatic. Yes, the Cadillac includes about $7,000 in mandatory additional features, but some enthusiasts won’t want them.
I pressed a number of ATS team members about this inflexible packaging. Their response was that they had to keep the build combinations very low, 915 to be precise. GM feels that matching the BMW’s 1.2 million build combinations would substantially drive up costs and harm quality. I believe that they believe this, but I’m nevertheless skeptical. How does it significantly help cost or quality to always install nav when you install the FE3 suspension? I don’t doubt that reducing manufacturing complexity helps, but I don’t think all additional build combinations are equally harmful (as assumed by GM math).
Another rationale makes more sense. One team member said that they’re undercharging for the adaptive shocks and other FE3 bits. Since these are deleted when AWD is added, some easy math yields a $900 price. This is cheap. To make this low price financially viable, they must force you into a heavily optioned (and so more profitable) car to get it.

Generally don't care for silver sedans, but this looks rather good, from the rear wheel forward anyay:

Rear looks a bit too much like the old CTS, and I don't like how that character line running from the top of the tail lights to the C-pillar seems to end in no-man's-land. Still, I'd seriously consider this car against a 3er/C-Class/A4 before pulling the trigger.

 

[Merc1]

WOW.........good roll.

M

 

[K-A]

That is a NICE car. Nicest Caddy I've seen since the their glory days back decades upon decades ago. Not as fuzzy and awkward as the CTS. Yes, it looks pretty generic GM, like a Malibu with a Caddy badge, but it goes a little deeper than that I think, and works.

I agree that that stupid upward line cutting into the C-Pillar is pointless and ugly though.

 

[Zafiro]

Nah, I dont like it. Let the car stay in US. I guess this is what next Saab 93 would look like if Saab still existed

 

[rollo]

How shocking Just_me that you don't care for a favorably reviewed new American car!

 

[Zafiro]

How shocking Just_me that you dan't care for a favorably reviewed new American car!

I like American muscle/sportscars but thats about it. Only Americans love their own cars you guys are like Swedes and their beloved Volvo/Saab.

 

[rollo]

I like American muscle/sportscars but thats about it. Only Americans love their own cars you guys are like Swedes and their beloved Volvo/Saab.

And just when I thought you couldn't be any more demeaning. LOL

 

[Wolfgang]

2013 North American Car of the Year: Cadillac ATS
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/2013-north-american-car-of-the-year-cadillac-ats-53892.html

 

[NarutoRamen]

I've seen a few of these running around. Not impressed.

 

[Levi68]

I'm impressed. Looks to be a good alternative to the unimpressive three.

I agree that that stupid upward line cutting into the C-Pillar is pointless and ugly though.

A bit like most of the lines on new Mercs.