Topic: 2016 ATS-V reviews

[Agiledood]

"At the test track, the ATS-V launches like a cat out of a bathtub, clocking 4.2 seconds to 60 mph and 12.6 seconds through the quarter-mile. "

Can wait to see some comparos in the near future... cue the nitpickers in 3...2......

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-cadillac-ats-v-coupe-test-review-launches-like-a-cat-out-of-a-bathtub-page-2

[mmret]

"At the test track, the ATS-V launches like a cat out of a bathtub, clocking 4.2 seconds to 60 mph and 12.6 seconds through the quarter-mile. "

Can wait to see some comparos in the near future... cue the nitpickers in 3...2......

1

In fact I'll let C&D do it for me.

The ATS-V’s few blatant flaws are squirreled away inside the cabin. The V-specific instrument cluster is more legible than the regular ATS’s, though it hardly looks upscale. The V treatment doesn’t address the ATS’s tight rear seat or the maddening CUE infotainment system that becomes even more difficult to use when combined with a firmer ride and higher speeds.

I wouldn't care too much about the rear seats personally but some might. The other criticisms are spot on.

The bottom line is that this is not a Corvette. Its a Cadillac, its a small / sporty GT. The interior falls flat on its face in two critical areas (instrument cluster and the center stack), both of which look like 90s Detroit renditions of the future. Its just bad. I know they're trying to make a Cadillac shield looking thing out of the buttons on the center stack but it just looks awful and incredibly cheap.

We know Cadillac can do good instrument clusters. But this just reeks of amateur. The center stack on both the CTS and ATS are both terrible though and Cue is Cue. Acceptable for Chevrolet but thats about it.

For the money charged, yes you have to get these things right. Otherwise I'm going to go buy an M3/M4 or the upcoming C63 or if I just want speed I'll just buy a Corvette (which actually has a much nicer interior to my eye... it actually looks coherent and not ripped out of a Chevy and dressed up)

[Agiledood]

True enough. I know that's my primary concern when I'm driving on twisty roads. Man, if only this instrument cluster was nicer looking.   

C&D nitpicks the M4 for harsh shifting on it's most aggressive setting, and for being "too slow" on it's least aggressive setting. It seems to follow the trend of recent BMW reviews...that is, the latest generation models are less engaging to drive than their predecessors. Motortrend ranked the 3 series below the ATS and the C350 citing it's 'rubbery feel' and feeling 'meh' compared to the other 2.

Of course all review I've seen rate the ATS' manual shifter as the worst of the bunch.

It might take a couple of years, but the CUE knocks will die off the same way BMW's iDrive knocks did once they improved it. As for the backseat, this ain't the car to buy if you have 4 6'+ people to haul around and I'd argue that isn't the demographic of the 7 people who've bought the ATS.

Who knows when, or if, Cadillac will please the brand snobs but you can't argue with the driving experience one of the best in its class.

[mmret]

True enough. I know that's my primary concern when I'm driving on twisty roads. Man, if only this instrument cluster was nicer looking.   

Look, you obviously have an axe to grind here, so this is the last I'm going to say about it.

If you like the ATSV then fine. Great. Fantastic driving machine. But in the market, we have to deal with realities. And the reality is that this car is not positioned nor is it going to be perceived as a pure performance machine. And Cadillac simply does not have the brand recognition of BMW or Mercedes, and the -V does not have the nameplate recognition of M or AMG. Or even Corvette. These are realities.

Bottom line is that this is a high performance version of a supposed luxury car. And luxury car means design matters, usability matters. The ATS falls short here and does so in a way that makes you scratch your head. "Who approved that?. As a result, it falls short in the marketplace.

Yes from a technical perspective the ATSV is great. I'm still going to drive away in a Mustang V8 or Z06 or one of the Germans or even a Lexus RC depending on what I want, because those cars fill out the luxury side better or focus more on the sport side at a cheaper price.

This car does not exist in a vacuum where there is no competition. Will some buyers like the ATSV over all the others for what it is? Sure. But Cadillac crippled themselves with a major misstep that could have easily been avoided. This is just reality.

[Agiledood]

True enough. I know that's my primary concern when I'm driving on twisty roads. Man, if only this instrument cluster was nicer looking.   

Look, you obviously have an axe to grind here, so this is the last I'm going to say about it.

And the reality is that this car is not positioned nor is it going to be perceived as a pure performance machine.

right back at ya...if a 464 HP, 445 lb0-ft coupe isn't positioned as a performance machine, I don't know what is... time to switch to decaf fella...

[Snowman]

Meh. I can do the same with 100 HP less 

[Agiledood]

To be honest, I thought it would be quicker.  The C63 and M4 are definitely quicker.  But I am an anomaly in my needs.

Regardless, the resale on Cadillacs is quite poor so the C63 or M4 for me.  If I am going to spend that much on a car, I would want to get as much back as possible in the end.

Autoguide claimed a 0-60 time of 3.8s in their test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VGYv4Gg1L8

Same nitpicks as everyone else though...CUE and crappy instrument panel but it makes up for that with being quieter and more livable than the M4 for everyday use, 2K cheaper and more satisfying to drive on the track.

Well, I think MMRET is being a little difficult on the car.

I don't think so...you like what you like, you don't like what you don't like...

Seems like they've nailed the balance between street and track with the 3rd generation magnetic ride control.

Can't wait to see how it stacks up in good comparo.

[revalations]

This thing pushes all my right buttons. Amazingly enough the TTV6 even sounds good. Love the looks, performance is spot on, braking...basically the whole package works for me. The IP is a bit blah, but as stated I doubt I'd give it much thought while driving it.

First CAR in a very long time having me think long and hard about buying.......I'm also 36, saying I want a new Caddy says something about where the brand is heading.

[OliverD]

3) smaller car (don't get the hate for the small back seat, if you want larger car buy the CTS)

If the rear seat is significantly tighter than the ATS' main competitors – 3-series, A4, C-class, IS, etc. – then it's a valid complaint. Whether or not that's true, I'm not sure.

[OliverD]

True enough. I know that's my primary concern when I'm driving on twisty roads. Man, if only this instrument cluster was nicer looking.   

Look, you obviously have an axe to grind here, so this is the last I'm going to say about it.

And the reality is that this car is not positioned nor is it going to be perceived as a pure performance machine.

right back at ya...if a 464 HP, 445 lb0-ft coupe isn't positioned as a performance machine, I don't know what is... time to switch to decaf fella...

He didn't say it wasn't positioned as a performance machine - he said it wasn't positioned as a pure performance machine which is absolutely a true statement.

Arguably, ATS-V buyers will be able to look past its interior issues but the reality is that this car is based on a supposed luxury car. If other cars in this segment don't get these complaints then it's because the models they are based on don't have these issues in the first place.

There's always going to be purists like yourself that think these things don't matter but the bottom line is that this isn't a hardcore sports car. Presumably ATS-V buyers want some modicum of practicality and to expect an interior that is on par with the rest of the class is hardly unreasonable.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I could put up with the interior of this long before the insipid interior of the C63.

Performance-wise, it's pretty well where it needs to be.

[whaddaiknow]

True enough. I know that's my primary concern when I'm driving on twisty roads. Man, if only this instrument cluster was nicer looking.   

Look, you obviously have an axe to grind here, so this is the last I'm going to say about it.

Bottom line is that this is a high performance version of a supposed luxury car. And luxury car means design matters, usability matters. The ATS falls short here and does so in a way that makes you scratch your head. "Who approved that?. As a result, it falls short in the marketplace.

Yes from a technical perspective the ATSV is great. I'm still going to drive away in a Mustang V8 or Z06 or one of the Germans or even a Lexus RC depending on what I want, because those cars fill out the luxury side better or focus more on the sport side at a cheaper price.

This car does not exist in a vacuum where there is no competition. Will some buyers like the ATSV over all the others for what it is? Sure. But Cadillac crippled themselves with a major misstep that could have easily been avoided. This is just reality.

I'm with you 100%.
When looking at a luxury car (regardless of its performance pretentions), interior design matters. ATS falls flat there. Doesn't mean Caddy can't do it.
This is what I have come to expect from Cadillac. And it seems GM is about done with the sh1tty CUE.

[revalations]

Wonder when the CTS-V reviews are coming? Mind you. that's going to be a good 20K more than the ATS-V so I'll quit dreaming now....