Would You Pay $48K For THIS? Rank 5 Other Cars That Would BLOW This Away

If this was a German car you would be saying how 48 g's is a bargain. Your bias is showing.

We're asking a question, not posting an opinion. HOW is that biased?

I suggest reading the comments as they come in...

001

A fairly reasonable point, although what it really starts to do is to reveal that different customers will highlight different metrics of interest for what constitutes a good/bad value.

For example, I don't really care about horsepower, per se. Sure, I do want enough oomph so that a vehicle isn't a slug, but I also think that a 0-60 in ~6sec is frivolously unnecessary: I'd rather have a bump to the vehicle's MPG instead.

Similarly, I've generally found that such vehicles (which are usually American in origin) are usually mismatched in terms of their chassis being able to keep up with what the motor can do ... the motor is what gets one into trouble, whereas the chassis is what gets you **out** of trouble. As such, I'd rather have a motor-limited design than a chassis-limited one, which is why the CTS doesn't rank very highly on my personal list (caveat: this is based on GM's general reputation, not confirmed by research).

Next, the use case and duty cyle intents of the product also play a role in rankings. For example, if one does have a great suspension (chassis) setup for track performance, is it figuratively "too much" to live with day-to-day? The classic example of this is the VW GTI ... a 200 mile highway blast with its thrumming of expansion joints isn't fun.

Then there's also factors like durability...how many squeaks & rattles (and mechanical failures) are there going to be by the time that this vehicle is 5, or 7 or 10 years old (or more)? What's illustrated here is differences in customer buying preferences & habits ... there's a lot of proiucts sold today which are designed to just get through a 3-4 year lease with enough left over to have a high resale to the second owner...and then over the next few years, it goes to hell. If you're the three year leaser, you probably don't care...but if you're the buy-and-hold (for 7-10 years), then this is a consideration.

So what's my list? Broadly, I've found the German brands to not be quite as reliable as the Japanese products, but they also have a different 'mix' of hardware attributes which I personally find more enjoyable. GM comes in third with neither. If I were to pin this down a bit further, I'd say for Germany, its Mercedes/Audi, then BMW/VW .. for Japan, its Toyota (Lexus)/Acura (Honda), then Infinity (Nissan) .. for Detroit, probably Ford before GM.

Overall, I'm content to give the ATS five years and see how well it endures. There's penty of other products to choose from that have reasonble track records such that I'm not particularly interested in being the 'Beta Tester' on a $50K product. As my father used to say, "Never buy the first year of production from GM".

-hh

While normally I would agree that for most American cars, the chassis/suspension is the weak link, but in the case of the ATS, the chassis is the star - - - better handling than the BMW 335i Sport. I'm not sure I'm ready to go there just yet, but I give kudos where kudos are deserved. At this price, the problem for Cadillac with be perception and past prejudice.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1302_2012_bmw_335i_2013_cadillac_ats_mercedes_benz_c350_comparison/viewall.html

@Terry989 ... thanks for the link to Motor Trend's review. An interesting take all the way around, although I'm afraid that it does reinforce a couple of my points, namely the difference between a 'track test' and actually living with a vehicle in real life on real roads, such as what was noted with this comment:

"...Back to the Cadillac: While the seats are fabulous for canyon carving, they do beat you up over a long distance. Once again, we have an area where the Mercedes is best of the bunch..."

FWIW, it also doesn't help that here in the Eastern USA, our highways aren't as in as good of condition as California's, which unfortunately gets ignored by the manufacturers and model after model arrive with rediculously low profile tires which routinely cause blow-outs from our potholes, especially the run-flats. So while such tires post nice track numbers, the problem is that out in real life, most tire setups with sidewall profiles less than a 50 series becomes a liability...


-hh

No way I would settle with BMW or Audi for that price range.

Neither the ATS nor the Q50 would be on my shopping list for $50k.

In a virtual tie, my top picks would be the S4 and 335i. The potency of their engines is undeniable while they handle extremely well. They may not have the handling of the ATS, but those differences to the non-professional driver would likely be neglible.
In a distant third would be the IS350, mainly due to carryover engine and I still haven't warmed up to that interior.
I may even consider the TL SH-AWD or the S60 R-Design AWD a lesser price point. So I guess that's my five, ranked.

You keep ranting about "carryover engine" yet the current 3er 335i is the same engine HP-wise (your entire argument when you talk about the "weak" IS250), regardless of whether it was single or dual turbo, the only change was ONE mpg improvement. Actually no, the current 335i is listed as 300hp now, whereas the former was 306!

@clams, what don't you get? The carryover engine of the Lexus can't match the carryover engine of the BMW's performance. If the Lexus engine performed as well as the 335i (and S4), it would not be an issue, yet it would still rank 3rd on my list.

And let me add that it's a widespread belief that the 335i engine is understated at 300hp. More accurate estimates put it at anywhere from 320-340hp.

Buddy, his point is you constantly talk about the IS having an outdated engine yet the 335i STILL uses the same basic spec'd engine since 2007. Forget about what it is 'actually capable of'...it was rated at 306hp almost 7 years ago and the JUST LAUNCHED 335i is now at 300hp. What's even funnier is how you neglect to mention BMW's new 4-banger 320i that has only 180hp.

C 350 Coupe for me, or the CLA 45 AMG

The CLA makes its first appearance!

Yes, I agree. I forgot about the CLA45 AMG. I would rank that as 3rd on my list.

S4/335i -tie
CLA45 AMG
IS350
TL SH-AWD
S60

I would take BMW , Mercedes and then Audi. The ATS just try to be a 3 series copy..

1. CLA45AMG
2. Audi S4
3. Caddy ATS (yeah I think it's a good car... but I'm only 30 so I probably would pass on it just because it's not trendy enough for my age group)
4. Once I put the M-Sport package on the BMW 335i it broke $51k which means Corvette time...
5. I don't know. I hate all the Japanese premium brand exteriors too much. Used to not be the case.

Personally speaking, I'd rank the following:

1) Audi S4
2) Mercedes CLA45 AMG
3) BMW 335i
4) Infiniti Q50
5) Lexus IS350

If I were asked by a friend or family what to buy, I'd suggest this:

1) BMW 335i
2) Lexus IS350
3) Infiniti Q50
4) Audi S4
5) Mercedes CLA

00R, just curious why your personal picks aren't aligned with your recommended picks. Just trying to understand the rationale. Usually, for me, anyway, the cars I want for myself are the cars I would recommend to others.

well, for $48,000 or less it's not easy. i'd probably do a base 335i. better car all around even without the luxury items.

why everyone is suggesting an S4 is beyond me as that car STARTS over $48,000 and flys up from there.

Dude...it is ONLY $100 over $48k, stop being a drama queen.

yes, dude, and with a few options it's $60,000. go try and find one under $55,000.

Prestige version is $54k and comes with more std. features than a BMW. Pretending BMW doesn't nickel and dime on options? Disillusioned.

retry.

To make matters worse you state you'd get a base 335i with no luxuries as if ALL dealers even carry one then complain about doing the same for an Audi! We're talking a $3k diff. at best.

Agent00R - try buying a similarly equipped 335i for this money, i tried. The C Class and 3-Series for this money you get apples & oranges and leather interiors are extra on both at this price point. My ATS 3.6 was about the same money as this one with the better wheels. For this money you get C300 or 328i and the 3.6 engine alone blows them away. The technology in both is substandard to CUE, I've used both and CUE is terrific ONCE you learn it. Does it need improvement, when does technology stand still? Its fine and much better than the other interfaces. The C Class is in its last year and arguably the best one, but its still not as athletic or fun to drive as the ATS. The ATS is clearly more of a 3 Series car. Neither the A4 or the C are as capable as the ATS and I'll say this again, if the A4 or C were Cadillac's they'd be panned as outdated.

Where I live all 3 are like (enter your favorite cheap econo-box here), they're absolutely everywhere and there is nothing special about them. The A4 is about to be replaced and though a wonderful car is dated. The ATS is unique, powerful, wonderfully appointed (red interior w/real carbon fiber is slick). My wife is a long time 3 Series lover and she absolutely LOVES the ATS 3.6.

There was a comment here about "copy cat" but who doesn't benchmark the competition. You don't think BMW has a couple ATS's in their warehouses? I hated the GM Bailout and feel it was illegal, but I bought the best car out there for the money. No one has been in the back seat in the 6 months we've had it, which I'd enlarge and the trunk is fine with the folding rear seat.

The ATS is exemplary for anyone who who is a normal driver. Can you take it to the track, I'd like too and see what its made of. But 99.99% of 3/C/A4 buyers never do so those comparisons are irrelevant.

I just got back Italy where I saw the CLA (I saw zero new Golfs) and the CLA may sell to a new type of buyer which is the target. But that car is ugly, the interior is cheap and they're playing on their name. If it was a Cadillac I think it would be universally panned!

My personal confusion with the ATS is that you would think they would come into the game and undercut the market significantly like the G35 did for a while to get traction but they are not.

I think the key flaws on the car are suspect resale value compared to the incumbents and I personally thought the interior looked cheap and material choices/colors meant for a different demographic than the 3-Series/Audi/Mercedes crowd.

Another thing that confuses me is why would anyone want a CTS after driving this? Interior space seemed very similar to me.

My guess is although I have not seen numbers broken out is that all they have done is moved their existing customers to an ATS from a CTS vs. conquesting other brands in any significant volume.

I've always loved Cadillac's but the only two things I've seen from them in the last 20 years that interest me have been the Escalade and the Elmiraj concept.

Everything else has been a designed by committee effort in my opinion.

001

1. C350
2. ATS 3.6
4. IS 350
5. 335i
6. A4
7. Q50

ATS hands down. It's that good.

i don't need to list five cars. I would take a loaded 328i M Sport.