Author Topic: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium  (Read 5951 times)

Offline Autos_Editor

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 5760
  • Carma: +78/-320
  • member
    • View Profile
Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« on: February 26, 2013, 06:29:28 am »


After a week behind the wheel of the 2.0-litre turbo ATS, Tom Sedens is mighty impressed.

Read More...

Offline ChaosphereIX

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa
  • Posts: 1127
  • Carma: +31/-82
  • Gender: Male
  • Wont run with the pack
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 97 Alfa Romeo 155 V6, 07 Saab 9-3 2.0T, 99 Mazda Protege (RIP), 04 Pontiac Grand Prix GT (RIP)
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2013, 07:42:57 am »
glowing review. I agree, fantastic car and fantastic powertrain. Who cares if CUE is stupid - it can be updated. Who cares if the back seats are tight - putting three abreast in the back, I have only ever encountered this situation a half dozen times over the years, nobody expects acres of room nor should they. Love that they kept the proportions tidy and didn't swell the car just to have class leading room here and there where it doesn't matter. Love this car.
Objects in mirror are losing

"I don't see why someone should lose their life just so you can have a snack." ~Russel Brand'

"If driving an Alfa does not restore vitality to your soul, then just pass the hospital and park at the morgue to save everyone time." ~John

Offline redman

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Mississauga, Ontario
  • Posts: 1462
  • Carma: +54/-175
  • Gender: Male
  • "Have no critics, you'll likely have no success."
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2010 Subaru Legacy Limited, 98 Subaru Forester S
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2013, 08:17:12 am »
Sounds like G.M. has done their homework and passed.

The only think I don't get lately (and not just from G.M.) is in regards to the engine choice; the purpose of a small engine like a 2.0L Turbo is to optimize fuel economy buy clearly it fails here as with Ford (Ecoboost).

Why not just place a straight 6 under the hood. For me their is nothing (save a V12) sweeter than the feel of a well engineered straight six. Prime example E46 M3.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2013, 08:56:52 am by redman »
Past New Car Dealer for : BMW, Lexus, Nissan and Toyota<br />Past Used Vehicle Dealer: All Makes and Models. Seen a lot of it. Drove a lot of it. <br />Four-stroke Otto Engine 1876. Modern timer, pop-up toaster 1919. Keep convincing yourself that you have the "latest appliance".

Offline nlm

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1085
  • Carma: +51/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2013, 08:39:34 am »
Nice review but two questions:

"It all makes its way through a six-speed automatic on my tester (though a manual is available with this engine), and out to all four corners via an all-wheel-drive system."

- I'm assuming that a manual is not available with this engine and AWD?

"Does the ATS beat the competition? Right now, Iíd put it on par. Putting anything on par with a benchmark is saying something. Itís saying itís good. And the ATS isnít just good. Itís awesome."

- ATS = on par; on par = good; good < awesome; ATS = Awesome. You lost me on this one! Do you think the ATS is as good or better than the benchmark?


Offline vantage007

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Location: Downtown Toronto
  • Posts: 581
  • Carma: +32/-32
  • The Stig
    • View Profile
    • Double Clutch Canada
  • Cars: 1990 MX-5 - 36K Miles
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2013, 09:17:41 am »
Yeah I don't care in the slightest if the rear seats are tight. I had the ATS 3.6 Premium over the holidays and at one point I fit five 6-footers into it. It was nearly unbearable but it can be done. This isn't possible in my parents' E90 3-series sedan.

The car is absolutely brilliant.

Offline carcrazed

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: North York
  • Posts: 1048
  • Carma: +17/-50
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2008 MDX Elite
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2013, 09:21:04 am »
Nice review but two questions:

"It all makes its way through a six-speed automatic on my tester (though a manual is available with this engine), and out to all four corners via an all-wheel-drive system."

- I'm assuming that a manual is not available with this engine and AWD?

"Does the ATS beat the competition? Right now, Iíd put it on par. Putting anything on par with a benchmark is saying something. Itís saying itís good. And the ATS isnít just good. Itís awesome."

- ATS = on par; on par = good; good < awesome; ATS = Awesome. You lost me on this one! Do you think the ATS is as good or better than the benchmark?

Here's how I read it:
THE competition = BMW 3 series = awesome = ATS being on par ==> ATS is also awesome.

Offline mixmanmash

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Edmonton, AB
  • Posts: 2095
  • Carma: +39/-143
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2002 Mazda Protege ES-GT, 1993 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo, 2009 Nissan Rogue S AWD (wife's)
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2013, 09:42:21 am »
Nice review but two questions:

"It all makes its way through a six-speed automatic on my tester (though a manual is available with this engine), and out to all four corners via an all-wheel-drive system."

- I'm assuming that a manual is not available with this engine and AWD?

Correct.  Only manual and RWD.

I do find issue with not having enough rear seat room.  In many of these smaller RWD sports sedans, I can't fit a rear facing child seat without moving the drivers seat up, which doesn't leave me comfortable.  As well, I regularly have adult passengers and it would be nice to have enough room for them.  It's pretty sad that my 2002 Protege has better rear seat room than an A4, C-Class, 3-Series, ATS, G37, and IS.

Offline wing

  • Big Wig
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Location: Ottawa, On, Canada
  • Posts: 21915
  • Carma: +194/-158
  • Gender: Male
  • If you ain't first ... you're last!
    • View Profile
    • Drivesideways
  • Cars: 2009 Lexus LX570,2005 Radical SR3
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2013, 10:14:55 am »
And watch your head getting in, geez it's a tight squeeze.

Offline Wildsau

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Posts: 82
  • Carma: +9/-11
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Own: 2007 Honda Odyssey, 2003 Kawasaki ZRX 1200R Owned: 2006 Audi S4 Avant, 1998 Jeep Cherokee, 1991 Audi 20V quattro coupe
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2013, 10:36:12 am »
Nice review but two questions:

"It all makes its way through a six-speed automatic on my tester (though a manual is available with this engine), and out to all four corners via an all-wheel-drive system."

- I'm assuming that a manual is not available with this engine and AWD?

"Does the ATS beat the competition? Right now, Iíd put it on par. Putting anything on par with a benchmark is saying something. Itís saying itís good. And the ATS isnít just good. Itís awesome."

- ATS = on par; on par = good; good < awesome; ATS = Awesome. You lost me on this one! Do you think the ATS is as good or better than the benchmark?

Here's how I read it:
THE competition = BMW 3 series = awesome = ATS being on par ==> ATS is also awesome.

That's a good question, nlm. I could have been more clear. Carcrazed read it correctly - I found both cars to be awesome! In this case, they're awesome in some of the same areas, as well as in significantly different ways from each other.

Offline Wildsau

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Posts: 82
  • Carma: +9/-11
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Own: 2007 Honda Odyssey, 2003 Kawasaki ZRX 1200R Owned: 2006 Audi S4 Avant, 1998 Jeep Cherokee, 1991 Audi 20V quattro coupe
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2013, 10:39:49 am »

I do find issue with not having enough rear seat room.  In many of these smaller RWD sports sedans, I can't fit a rear facing child seat without moving the drivers seat up, which doesn't leave me comfortable.  As well, I regularly have adult passengers and it would be nice to have enough room for them.  It's pretty sad that my 2002 Protege has better rear seat room than an A4, C-Class, 3-Series, ATS, G37, and IS.

I agree. I know it slightly dampens the spirit of the sport sedan, but for my everyday requirements, I regularly need to transport my three kids (in various stages of child seating) and at other times, 1 or 2 adults. I also require significant trunk space on a regular basis, and I found the ATS' to be too small for me - although it would be fine for many folks.

These things sound trivial when looking at the sport factor in a sedan, but in the end, I'd have to put my money on something I can also live with when it comes to utility. I wish I didn't need those things and I could buy a 2-seat trunkless wonder. But that's not the case right now.

Offline whaddaiknow

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa, ON
  • Posts: 1570
  • Carma: +90/-258
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2013, 10:57:08 am »

I do find issue with not having enough rear seat room.  In many of these smaller RWD sports sedans, I can't fit a rear facing child seat without moving the drivers seat up, which doesn't leave me comfortable.  As well, I regularly have adult passengers and it would be nice to have enough room for them.  It's pretty sad that my 2002 Protege has better rear seat room than an A4, C-Class, 3-Series, ATS, G37, and IS.

I agree. I know it slightly dampens the spirit of the sport sedan, but for my everyday requirements, I regularly need to transport my three kids (in various stages of child seating) and at other times, 1 or 2 adults. I also require significant trunk space on a regular basis, and I found the ATS' to be too small for me - although it would be fine for many folks.

These things sound trivial when looking at the sport factor in a sedan, but in the end, I'd have to put my money on something I can also live with when it comes to utility. I wish I didn't need those things and I could buy a 2-seat trunkless wonder. But that's not the case right now.

I agree with you 100%.
Anyone with a family (2 or more kids) middle-aged or older will not buy this car.
This car, as good as it may be, is targeted at a younger buyer who isn't bothered by shuttling kids in the back and won't complain about a stiff ride for the sake of corner carving. This car is NOT a family member, it's a fun toy for a younger driver.

(I do take my 3 kids to daycare everyday in my 3-series. It's NOT fun)

Question is - will a younger buyer find $55k for a toy like this? And if they do, won't they look at the Audi S4 with a proper (supercharged) V6 which will mop the floor with this 2.0T ATS and starts at $53k?

I personally find this review positive to the extreme. In my research, I usually discard both extremes (positive and negative) as not thorough and/or objective. Is the ATS flawless even for its intended purpose? Doubt it.

The car is good on its own but the review is a  :thumbdown:

Offline Sir Osis of Liver

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Regina, Sask
  • Posts: 12985
  • Carma: +313/-313
  • Gender: Male
  • You call this an angry mob?
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2013 Subaru CrossTrek Touring
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2013, 11:01:33 am »

I agree with you 100%.
Anyone with a family (2 or more kids) middle-aged or older will not buy this car.
This car, as good as it may be, is targeted at a younger buyer who isn't bothered by shuttling kids in the back and won't complain about a stiff ride for the sake of corner carving. This car is NOT a family member, it's a fun toy for a younger driver.

(I do take my 3 kids to daycare everyday in my 3-series. It's NOT fun)

Question is - will a younger buyer find $55k for a toy like this? And if they do, won't they look at the Audi S4 with a proper (supercharged) V6 which will mop the floor with this 2.0T ATS and starts at $53k?

I personally find this review positive to the extreme. In my research, I usually discard both extremes (positive and negative) as not thorough and/or objective. Is the ATS flawless even for its intended purpose? Doubt it.

The car is good on its own but the review is a  :thumbdown:

So you have a family and bought a similarily sized 3-series, yet families won't buy the ATS. Interesting theory.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Ė
Carl Sagan

The truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it, ignorance may deride it, malice may distort it, but there it is. -Winston Churchill

Offline whaddaiknow

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa, ON
  • Posts: 1570
  • Carma: +90/-258
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2013, 11:06:25 am »
So you have a family and bought a similarily sized 3-series, yet families won't but the ATS. Interesting theory.

When I got the 3-series, we only had 2 kids. Wife wasn't sure if she was going back to work. We also had a van. The 3-series was my toy.
Now that we have 3 kids, wife is back to work and leaves early, I have to take care of the kids in the morning. In hindsight, I should have gotten something with a more spacious back seat.

Does that explain the "theory"?

If I were to buy today under $40k, it would be a '13 RAV4, '13 B250, '13 Accord or '13 Avalon

Offline Sir Osis of Liver

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Regina, Sask
  • Posts: 12985
  • Carma: +313/-313
  • Gender: Male
  • You call this an angry mob?
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2013 Subaru CrossTrek Touring
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2013, 11:09:18 am »
So you have a family and bought a similarily sized 3-series, yet families won't but the ATS. Interesting theory.

When I got the 3-series, we only had 2 kids. Wife wasn't sure if she was going back to work. We also had a van. The 3-series was my toy.
Now that we have 3 kids, wife is back to work and leaves early, I have to take care of the kids in the morning. In hindsight, I should have gotten something with a more spacious back seat.

Does that explain the "theory"?

If I were to buy today under $40k, it would be a '13 RAV4, '13 B250, '13 Accord or '13 Avalon

It explains it, but not very well.

Around my neighbourhood, there are a number of A4, IS, 3 series. Much like yourself, most have another larger vehicle. How would the same thing not apply to the ATS?

Offline whaddaiknow

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa, ON
  • Posts: 1570
  • Carma: +90/-258
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2013, 11:19:35 am »

It explains it, but not very well.

Around my neighbourhood, there are a number of A4, IS, 3 series. Much like yourself, most have another larger vehicle. How would the same thing not apply to the ATS?

All strictly my opinion. It is way too expensive for what it has to offer. Handling seems to be its forte but it's quickly going downhill from there. Anyone who has to "live" with a car for a number of years, will have to consider:

space (cramped), reliability (unknown but it being a GM is not playing in its favour), cost of ownership, usability (that CUE sh1t alone would be enough to drive me nuts), resale value too.

Unless you can afford to part with $60k (OTD) on impulse after driving it alone for a few minutes, you should give it a long hard look before talking numbers with the sales guy.

Offline Mike

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Oakville, ON
  • Posts: 4868
  • Carma: +151/-85
  • Gender: Male
  • Content Machine
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 1990 Mazda MX-5 Miata, 2008 Suzuki SX4 Sedan
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2013, 11:32:07 am »

I do find issue with not having enough rear seat room.  In many of these smaller RWD sports sedans, I can't fit a rear facing child seat without moving the drivers seat up, which doesn't leave me comfortable.  As well, I regularly have adult passengers and it would be nice to have enough room for them.  It's pretty sad that my 2002 Protege has better rear seat room than an A4, C-Class, 3-Series, ATS, G37, and IS.

I agree. I know it slightly dampens the spirit of the sport sedan, but for my everyday requirements, I regularly need to transport my three kids (in various stages of child seating) and at other times, 1 or 2 adults. I also require significant trunk space on a regular basis, and I found the ATS' to be too small for me - although it would be fine for many folks.

These things sound trivial when looking at the sport factor in a sedan, but in the end, I'd have to put my money on something I can also live with when it comes to utility. I wish I didn't need those things and I could buy a 2-seat trunkless wonder. But that's not the case right now.

I agree with you 100%.
Anyone with a family (2 or more kids) middle-aged or older will not buy this car.
This car, as good as it may be, is targeted at a younger buyer who isn't bothered by shuttling kids in the back and won't complain about a stiff ride for the sake of corner carving. This car is NOT a family member, it's a fun toy for a younger driver.

(I do take my 3 kids to daycare everyday in my 3-series. It's NOT fun)

Question is - will a younger buyer find $55k for a toy like this? And if they do, won't they look at the Audi S4 with a proper (supercharged) V6 which will mop the floor with this 2.0T ATS and starts at $53k?

I personally find this review positive to the extreme. In my research, I usually discard both extremes (positive and negative) as not thorough and/or objective. Is the ATS flawless even for its intended purpose? Doubt it.

The car is good on its own but the review is a  :thumbdown:

 Wildsau wrote the review.

Offline Northernridge

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Manitoba
  • Posts: 5313
  • Carma: +265/-266
  • Gender: Male
  • Because I say so.
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2012 MB E350, 2011 GMC Sierra 1500
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2013, 11:48:13 am »
About the only things that the ATS has going against it are no reliability history and the big one...lack of brand cache. It's reasonable to doubt that buyers will step up at $55k given the alternatives available.
There are things that are so serious that you can only joke about them.
― Heisenberg

Offline Sir Osis of Liver

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Regina, Sask
  • Posts: 12985
  • Carma: +313/-313
  • Gender: Male
  • You call this an angry mob?
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2013 Subaru CrossTrek Touring
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2013, 11:49:52 am »

It explains it, but not very well.

Around my neighbourhood, there are a number of A4, IS, 3 series. Much like yourself, most have another larger vehicle. How would the same thing not apply to the ATS?

All strictly my opinion. It is way too expensive for what it has to offer. Handling seems to be its forte but it's quickly going downhill from there. Anyone who has to "live" with a car for a number of years, will have to consider:

space (cramped), reliability (unknown but it being a GM is not playing in its favour), cost of ownership, usability (that CUE sh1t alone would be enough to drive me nuts), resale value too.

Unless you can afford to part with $60k (OTD) on impulse after driving it alone for a few minutes, you should give it a long hard look before talking numbers with the sales guy.

I'd bank on GM reliability long before anything German frankly.

Your other points apply equally to the German competition. None are cheap, none are spacious, all are poor choices for cost of ownership, and depreciation in the class isn't stellar. CUE over iDrive is a wash based on my limited experience.

Offline ChaosphereIX

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa
  • Posts: 1127
  • Carma: +31/-82
  • Gender: Male
  • Wont run with the pack
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 97 Alfa Romeo 155 V6, 07 Saab 9-3 2.0T, 99 Mazda Protege (RIP), 04 Pontiac Grand Prix GT (RIP)
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #18 on: February 26, 2013, 11:50:58 am »

It explains it, but not very well.

Around my neighbourhood, there are a number of A4, IS, 3 series. Much like yourself, most have another larger vehicle. How would the same thing not apply to the ATS?

All strictly my opinion. It is way too expensive for what it has to offer. Handling seems to be its forte but it's quickly going downhill from there. Anyone who has to "live" with a car for a number of years, will have to consider:

space (cramped), reliability (unknown but it being a GM is not playing in its favour), cost of ownership, usability (that CUE sh1t alone would be enough to drive me nuts), resale value too.

Unless you can afford to part with $60k (OTD) on impulse after driving it alone for a few minutes, you should give it a long hard look before talking numbers with the sales guy.
if you have 3 kids, you should not be using a sport sedan to shuttle them around. Sport sedans, or any sedans, should not be designed with shuttling three car seats in the back when then are being designed. you are buying the wrong car if that is the case. Dont try and make a square fit into a circle hole, get a vehicle that is designed to shuttle around 3 kids. I can get 2 kids in the back of my Saab [not great back seat room to start with] no problem, but 3 is rediculous. The back seats are not meant to be Dodge Caravan big, nor should they be. You want a people mover, buy one.

Offline whaddaiknow

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa, ON
  • Posts: 1570
  • Carma: +90/-258
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2013 Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Premium
« Reply #19 on: February 26, 2013, 11:57:26 am »

 Wildsau wrote the review.

Ironic, eh?  ;) One has to go to the forum to see what the reviewer actually has to say about the car? GM reads the main articles but don't bother reading the forums?  :)