C&D COMPARO: 2007 BMW 328i v 2008 Cadillac CTS DI v 2008 Infiniti G35 Sport v 2008 Mercedes-Benz C300 Sport

Here We Go!

With performance numbers this close, and prices similar as well...

I'll go for the one that most appeals to me aesthetically (Inside and Out):

The CADILLAC CTS

A road presence, and driver environment currently in a class by itself.

I know there are alot of BMW, MB and Lexus fans on this site to corner each market. However is there anyone who wants to join with me in actually supporting Caddy.

Cause I gotta be honest, this new direction they are moving in and this new CTS, is just 'frik'n sweet'. I can't get enough of this car.

Cadillac has done something rather remarkable with the design of this new CTS - Actually produced a vehicle that I see people turning their heads (admiringly) to look at while walking along the Las Vegas Strip!

In a city where luxury vehicles are nothing uncommon, and BMW 3-Series/Mercedes C-Classes are as plentiful as Honda Accords, that's quite an achievement.

Well Done Cadillac!

I like the the new CTS very much. Cadillac has accomplished what many manufacturers only can dream of. Distinctive, high quality cars. You do not cofuse Cadillacs with anything else. Only BMW and Mercedes are in the same league. Jaguar, Audi, Lexus could take notes. Audis and Lexus's car models all look alike. Jaguars are blah even the new XF. Now if the CTS just weighed 300 lbs less.

I guess that's the price of having additional 'stretch out' room... and for a car with this level of refinement, performance, luxury and LOOKS, it's a price I'm willing to pay!

Amazing how a 328i still tops competitors meant to go against the 335i...

And who would that be? They compared these cars due to price and class. And honestly, taking from the review itself, it seemed the G was the better.

that would be the G35 and CTS... I guess you didnt read the article? From the last paragraph of the article, it said the G35 was a big improvement from the old gen G35, but the competition has also improved.

Don't forget that the 328i is also giving up 78 HP and options.

The 328 sucks! I would take a G35 any day over it. If I cant have the power of the 335, why would I buy a 3 series? I would even buy the caddy over it. The MB...I would rather have the 3 series

"If I cant have the power of the 335, why would I buy a 3 series?"

Because it still drives perfectly, with telepathic steering, perfect damping and grin-inducing handling?

Anyway, if you remember, the lowly LAST-generation 3 Series flagship (330i) had less power than the 328i!!!

haha, WHERE IS THE IS250??? so good it cant be compared?

they said in the comparo that it was too slow...

so slow and sad that they saved it the embarrassment of being compared to these impressive sedans. good call on the editors part.

well, since i am G35 owner, I will go with G35 is my choice ... lol..

Apparently the IS250 was too slow to compete...which it is. 8 seconds or something? I could forgive it if it was a 2 litre and got great mpg, but it's a V6!

And I don't believe it! A MANUAL Merc C300?? We have the C280 in the UK (same engine, different name) and there is no manual offered...that's so bizarre, considering the US's love of autos.

Congrats BMW, I see the C Class continues its record of losing badly.

How has it lost?

All cars here are winners. It all depends on personal preference. The C-Class has never done well in Car and Driver comparisons. Big deal.

The last generation C-Class did well enough in comparison tests. It was always a sort of middle car. Good enough in the luxury department, good enough in the sports department, great in the safety department and so on.

It simply wasn't very competitive in terms of driving dynamics though. I doubt buyers cared since most people who buy a Mercedes C-Class by default care more about travelling in comfort, not drag racing or taking extreme curves with precision steering.

I know the C class isnt the best choice, but the last Generation (havent driven the new one yet) always put a smile on my face.

The C-Class isn't the best choice? Says who?

Tell that to the people who like the way the cars drives, feels, looks, performs etc. A statement like that is a "personal opinion". Every single car in this class is the "best choice" to someone.

whoa there bill, I said that so that I WOULDNT get deboosted, I was making a positive comment about the C that I figured most would disagree with. And by "best choice", I mean "best SPORT sedan", isnt that what we're comparing here? I love all these cars, but yes, in MY MIND, the C isnt the 'best choice', but I would be compelled to choose it - if that makes any sense.

Good choice of cars. Out of those, I would have to pick the G35.

Car and Driver showing their BMW and Infiniti bias as usual. Not that it matters since those two are the sportiest cars in this class.

I think they should have compared the CTS and C-Class in terms of luxury, not sport, since it is obvious that they focus more on that aspect than sheer sportiness.

Why should Mercedes or Cadillac focus on building "involving driver's cars"? You obviously have no clue. The C-Class or CTS were never meant to dethrone the BMW 3er. Both these cars focus on comfort and luxury first, sport second. From what I've read, the C-Class and CTS are very capable sports sedans in their own right: the BMW 3er and Infiniti G simply are sportier. Infiniti wants to take on BMW in this segment, Cadillac and Mercedes don't, no matter what their marketing hypes up.

So, who cares? You want the best sports sedan for your money, go to BMW or Infiniti. You want comfort with a nice blend of sport, stop by your local Cadillac, Mercedes, Audi, Lexus (etc.) dealer.

Fact is, the BMW 3-Series formula sells. The Mercedes C-Class formula sells. Why change it? BMW do what they do best, Mercedes' do what they do best. It's so simple.

And I maintain my position on Car and Driver. They're sports biased and they're BMW and Infiniti (throw in Honda there too) biased as well. I'm not complaining, I am just mentioning this. Read some of Car and Driver's older reviews and you can see a bias towards BMW simply because they're sportier than whatever car they were compared against.

I would hazard a guess that the new Twin Turbo 2.0L diesel engine from BMW will sort out the performance issues.

Should have 323d in the stores by March 08.

This is what i do not understand

They are comparing the CTS to the 3-Series, C-Class & G35 and you guys have no problem with it.

On an earlier topic people were comparing the soon to be launched CTS-V with the 5-Series, E-Class & S6 and when i asked what gives ? i was told it was in the 5-Series Class "Size Wise" but priced to compete with the Smaller Class of vehicles such as the Models above.

So the question now is this, In which bloody class of vehicles should this vehicle be judged ?

I've stated more times than I can recall that the Cadillac CTS does, IN FACT, compete directly with the E-Class/5-Series/A6 when physical size is taken into consideration, but the A.W.E.E.M. (AutoSpies WannaBe Euro Enthusiast Majority) continue to argue that it competes with the BMW 3-Series/Mercedes C-Class though the, "C300, and the 328i, for that matter, is barely larger than a Honda Civic sedan—a Civic, in fact, has more interior space than the Benz"...

There's No Logic What-So-Ever in comparing the Cadillac CTS to these (physically) Lesser Vehicles IMO.

...and as you stated, when the CTS-V is released, every comparison test will have it pitted against the Hyper-Performance Mid-Sized offerings from the Euro/Japanese Marques i.e. M5, S6, E63 AMG and the like.

It'll be interesting to read the 'justifications' to follow...

What the H#!* does "bloody" mean??? Is that a bad word over there?

A Merriam-Webster etymologist proposes that the word originates from 19th-century England and was used much in the same manner as the 'F-word' is currently used as an intensifier in Western society.

So Now You Know...

Note: The use of the word "bloody" as an intensifier is/was considered to be rather offensive in England.

DaHarder, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THE STS??? The STS is the one that's been compared to the 5 Series! There is NO WAY in hell that it could compete with the full-size sedans, because it would lose every time... even with the price advantage. With the mid-size sedans, it's more at home.

Cadillac even showed an STS driving through a crowd of E's and 5's in one advertisement a couple years ago.

Why does everything have to be so 'compartmentalized'?

Just as the CTS is somewhat of a 'tweener' bridging the gap between luxury compacts and mid-sizers, the STS might well be regarded as the same, except bridging the the crevice that lies between mid-sized and full-sized luxury sedans.

What A Concept!

Your point is well contrived I95.

And as DaHarder said the car indeed does not compare to the BMW 3 series nor the MB C class. I do believe there is a valid comparison with the G35 sedan however in almost all categories.

The neat thing about Caddy, is they developed the CTS specifically so it wouldn't be compared to a european model counterpart. Pure Genius!... in my mind. Lexus went the other route and now finds itself in a model/class horsepower war with the big 3 germans. Thats a much tougher route to take with a bigger chance of failure. (note: to all the lexus fans, I'm just stating a point, not saying any brand is better than any other brand).

What GM did was they went ahead and built a phenominal sedan based on german ideals (like power, refinement, a well crafted cabin and great handling)...however they made it for the US market. We have wider roads, larger citzens and buy and carry alot of crap in our vehicles. So instead of building a 3 series clone, they built a car with its key 'good' characteristics and aimed it squarly at the market it was intended to sell in, in the first place. Oh it helped that they gave it domestic pricing as well.

If you want to compare cars to the 3 series, you can use the MB C class, Audi 4/5, and Lexus IS model. The Caddy shouldn't even be in that comparison...thats where you run into the "apples to oranges" situation.

If you absolutly need to compare the CTS to somthing (which I don't think you do...I think it could quite possibly fall into its own category) Then the G35 sedan would be its antagonist. They at least have similar lengths, wheelbases, height, vehicle volumes and engines (though the G is slighly smaller).

You don't know how to use bloody??
Bloody is a, well, bloody fantastic word!!!
Bloody amazing, bloody huge...etc
bloody hell is also a popular swear.

This my rile a few people and warrant a few deboostings, but I would like to have seen the Acura TL-type S thrown in this segment. MSRP 38,795 with 286hp and 0-60 times ranging from 5.5-5.9 depending on who is doing the testing. Is Acura being left behind by the automotive community all the while producing stellar products with some of the best manual trannys on the market. The TL-S comes one way, with one option, manual or automatic. It's a lot of car for the same if not less money than the cars on this list when compared spec for spec, and it will hold it's own against any of these cars.

V-10 NSX

The Acura TL 'curse' is that it's based on the (rather pedestrian/mundane) FWD Accord platform.

A vehicle without RWD/AWD in this segment is simply relegated to 'also-ran' status.

The Acura TL is nothing but a glorified, front-wheel drive Honda Accord. Don't get me wrong. I like the TL, and it does perform well, for a fwd car. If you noticed the cars on this comparison, they are all based on RWD platforms. The TL would have been murdered in this comparo.

How many more deboosts before this one is closed?

As I said before Zenophobia runs rampant here.

DaHarder, regardless of what car another one is based on, if its specs and price speak for themself...put that car in the comparison. The TL is one underrated car.

The Acura TL certainly represents solid value for the money, but too many of its (last generation) Honda Accord roots are apparent for the true enthusiast to truly embrace it.

It's not a bad vehicle, it's just not one of the greats.

The TL will probably outsell all of the cars in this comparo except for the BMW for 2007

I doubt it. When the new A4 comes out, that will make it the oldest car in the segment. The new TL will be the one getting the buzz.

The M3 will win. This is Car & Driver.

I hope there's a performance G coming! It would do so much for Infiniti's already great image!

technically you're right, a base C350 automatic would have met the price requirement, but considering this comparison was clearly labelled for "manual transmission sport sedans" that would have been pretty stupid. In that case though, a base 335i could have also qualified for the test AND had a stick. I'm fairly certain the BMW would have come out on top then too.

If this test was based on luxury and not so mush sport the C300 probably would have placed higher. But hey all the cars in this comparo are good. My personal favorite is the G35 but I'd perfer the coupe instead.

Terms of Luxury this is how they would finish:
1st - Infiniti G35S
2nd - Mercedes C300 Sport
3rd - BMW 328i
4th - Cadillac CTS

the G35 is tops for luxury? Can I get a little of whatever you're smoking? Cause it must be some good stuff.

Actually, it would look more like...

1. Cadillac CTS
2. Mercedes C-Class
3. BMW 3 Series / Infiniti G35 (tie)

By the way, the official press releases for the new SLK are out. Apparently the SLK350, with the 268-hp 3.5-l V6 now makes 305-horsepower.

About time!

Cool! a 268 hp car that makes 305 hp!!

How did they do that?

wink!

I like the Cadillac because they really got it right this time, America can be proud of that car.

I love the feel of a Benz.

I love the roudy sporty nature of the G, that goes all out to get its cred.

The Bimmer's got the posh most look for, but at this price point, I'd pick the more powerful G, as the 335, (while an amazing performer) reaches slightly to high in price.

um....*rowdy

say it again...we know...we can all read...in fact I get this mag in the mail so that's about the 5th time now.

But the C Class also has softer springs as well. C and D mentioned its body roll compared to the others.So it was never going to win the handling constest.Frankly it has never been M/B's philosophy to make the ultimate driving machine. However where M/B feel down was in the C class interior. The previous version in my opinion has a better quality more luxurious interior. This new one is very cheap and plastiky. I think the Infinity and the CTS beat it soundly on interior appointments. The BMW has never made the best interiors. Simply because they are more concerned with driving ergonomics. That has always been their philosophy. The CTS was mostly critisized for its mannual tranny. Yet in the same issue it was voted one of the top 10 cars. The difference was that car had an automatic which they say better suits the CTS. Overall for value if I did not neet ultimate handling I would probably go for the Caddy if I needed a near luxury car among these 4.

The main problem with the MB C series is the "feel". MB has gone too far and sucked the driving experience out of its cars. Too power everything! I tried a SL550 and no feedback at all, Porsche 997S is way more fun. Of course this is only bad if you are a "car" person which most of the people in the mags are. Besides that the C series is great and comfortable.

BMW keeps it tradition and maintains the sporty feedback that most "car" people enjoy, thus recieves higher marks. Glad to see the CTS following the BMW mold than MB with good feed back. I am sure the CTS would have beat the G35 if it was quicker; would have been very close in the least. I seen both and the CTS has a much better interior.

The S550 IS amazing. In that class, feedback is hard to come by. The best anyone can do is make it feel smaller in the twisties--which is what Mercedes-Benz was able to do. I've test driven the S550 twice, and it was very impressive. It also has a beautiful interior, which you all know.

I remember back in 2004, I believe, that Road and Track had an 11 car test of vehicles that were slotted in this class. They should do something like that now, with the new generation.

1. 335i
2. C350
3. A4 3.2 Quattro
4. IS350
5. G35
6. CTS
7. TL Type-S

I think in that comparo, they also added cars like Lincoln, Jaguar, Volvo, and something else.

Now that would be really interesting.

Of course, price should not be an issue, because in that test, R&T said that the BMW out performed, out handled and out-classed the G35, but was about $8K more, so it lost out to the G35. I think price should not be an issue when it comes to class of cars. Cars are not classified based on price.

Hmmm?

So, in 'Thierry-Land', what exactly are vehicles categorized/classified by...

Inquiring Minds Would Like To Know?

um... size... I mean, I think size is a better comparo no?

when car companies put out cars, its usually compared by size. I don't think Hyundai Azera competes with a BMW 3er or Lexus IS? I think it targeted the Lexus LS. BMW 5er. I mean, its a 30k car.

"Hmmm?

So, in 'Thierry-Land', what exactly are vehicles categorized/classified by...

Inquiring Minds Would Like To Know?"

DaHarder, care to read your OWN comments? You continue to spout off about how the CTS should compete with the mid-sized sedans even though it's priced like the smaller sedans!!! You are completely contradicting yourself!

thierryhenry14 says these cars should not be classified by price? Well, back in March I went shopping for a sports sedan. I tried all these except the new CTS because it was not available back then. But I test drove the older CTS. I liked them all but guess what is sitting in my garage right now... You guessed right. A G35. It all came down to one fact: the most bang for the buck. See, this category does not aim for the 6-figure salary guys. So price does play a very important role here.

"fastonekiller" I would agree with you had all that chrome on the Caddy been plastic & not real chrome.

As for everyone hating on the 328's win, I'll I have to say is go & drive it! Seriously until you drive it, (Or basically any other of BMW's models) you will not understand it.

That said I'd still take the G35 because it is faster, cheaper, better equipped, & IMO looks better than the 328i, which lacks the chrome grill & dual tailpipes of the 335i…But I’d take a 335i over anything in this class.

"99% of these cars will be sold with automatics, so their test basically means nothing except to people who think they know something about cars."

Like you?

I don't know if you know what temporary workers mean but I think its different than, per say, permanent workers...no?

How about a British magazine perspective?

'EVO' out of the UK (A performance-car based magazine) said that the C-Class in Sport trim is actually a better drivers car than a comparable 3-series. And they know what they are talking about.

They also said the CTS wasn't as sharp dynamically as the 3 or C, and that while the interior looked good, the quality fell short of the C and 3.

It may be a European magazine, but that doesn't make it the definitive answer.

No, but it's a damn sight more accurate.

C&D is the most biased magazine on the auto magazine front, they are just too pro BMW. So this comparo test is not really convicting for me. I'll take the G35.

You know, that's true, but they are pro BMW for a REASON. If they liked cars that sucked and continued to rate them highly, that would be one thing. But loving BMW is quite another. Those cars, especially the 3er, are hugely impressive and deserve every accolade they get. It doesn't matter if it's short on power, because the 328i still delivers all of the fun of its more expensive brethren.

s4 u are so right. the 3 series is so smooth on the road, it is A1.the handling is brilliant. if you havent driven one you dont know what you missing out on, especially the coupe