Hey all, new here just thought I would include this new comparison done by motortrend. I'm looking forward to the 2.0t with the manual. I wonder if changing to a short shifter would address MT's complaints.
I watched this review earlier and honestly hated it.
I don't get how the reviewer at the end stated that The ATS is a better car, but it lost due to the fact that it had a worse transmission?
Also, they say looks is subjective, but I honestly think that the new 3 Series looks extremely cheap. It just screams rental from the halogen ( non projective) headlights to the cheap untasteful designed interior. The ATS looks very premium from the exterior to the interior and I would go as far to say that the ATS has the best interior in its class.
"Everybody is afriad of something different" And thats what the ATS is, something a little different and i think many people are unwiling to praise what they are not used to. I wonder how many of MT employees drive a bmw and just have some bias in them. When they did the M5 vs CTS V comp, the CTS beat it out in almost every way, but just because the cts got 98 points and the bmw got 2, means that they cant affirmatively say that the cadillac is better? I dont know, it alwasy seems like theres bias somewhere. but in the logn run, its our opinion that matters and we can go drive them for ourselves and do our own comparisions.
I'd like to stick to your question, and personally wonder the same thing.
I've already ordered and am waiting on a 2.0T Premium with the manual to be delivered in the next couple of weeks.
I knew it was highly unlikely to get a test drive with one prior to buying it, so I decided to take the plunge and order without knowing.
I'll be trading in my BMW 07 Z4M roadster for this car, and the shifter on it is damn good (IMHO), and would hate to really miss that as I'm sure I'll notice if it really is THAT bad.
Anyone have any actual experience with one, and a comparison to something else that they've driven?
Other than the transmission, this seems like a win to me. There hasn't been a time before where the Cadillac was actually the better car in comparison tests (other than the CTS-V), and was said to be more fun to drive than the leader in the entry level sports sedan class. Cadillac should be very proud of the ATS and one day maybe this E46 BMW 3 Series owner will switch back to Cadillac.
Regarding the shifter: unfortunately, MT is not the first site I've heard comment on it. Hopefully a change in shifter would remedy it. I drove an ATS 2.5l and felt the transmission was pretty responsive on shifting via the shifter for the AT, it's no DSG but it's pretty quick and responsive. Honestly, if my wife didn't have the DSG in her Audi I wouldn't probably notice the slight pause in shift.
As for the 328, I think it's a great vehicle but I've had too many friends who have had problems with their BMWs to feel comfortable with long-term ownership of one. My friend just blew his engine on his brand new M3 and have a few friends who have had nothing but problems with their 3 series. Not to say BMW makes all bad vehicles I had one friend with an e46 m3 and had few to no problems with it. Honestly, I like tinkering on my own vehicles and American cars have always been my thing.
It sounds like Miata gearing to me (fun car and all), but boy I hope not!
The question is if so, why have such high gearing?
I wouldn't think that it's really needed and certainly not helping 0-60 #'s.
I've no idea, all I do know is as mentioned, this isn't the first time I've heard a car rag say this tranmission is total shit. I would (hope) that they ment to say 3rd, but that's sort of like saying ' sorry, I didn't mean to call you an idiot, I just meant you're not as smart as I am. '
1-2 shift should put you into 60 on any sports car. Period.
I've no idea, all I do know is as mentioned, this isn't the first time I've heard a car rag say this tranmission is total shit. I would (hope) that they ment to say 3rd, but that's sort of like saying ' sorry, I didn't mean to call you an idiot, I just meant you're not as smart as I am. '
1-2 shift should put you into 60 on any sports car. Period.
Now mind you, this is strictly theoretical, mathematical limits at the 7000 rpm redline. I suspect first-fourth will probably go a little higher, as the rev limiter is probably 100-200 rpm above redline. And certainly sixth, probably fifth top speeds will be limited by power, not engine speed. I'd be surprised to see the 2.0T even hit 150. I bet it tops out around 140ish.
but as you can see, it will easily hit 60 in 2nd gear. Whoever said 4th is required for 60 mph was smoking crack.
My 190 hp, 1997 Maxima hit 60 in 2nd gear.
The Motor Trend reviewer complained about the BMW's kick-down switch, as if it was the first time he encountered one?!? Has he only driven four cars in his lifetime?
I think this would be worth mentioning considering that we're doing a head-to-head with what's been highly-anticipated to be the one to finaly take down the 3 series. It requires a top to down level comparison.
similar to how he criticized that BMW's manual transmissions have always sucked.
CAGS is only needed to avoid gas guzzler tax. Not an issue with these engines.
My takes on the video,
first time I've heard complains on the BMW manual transmission.
Why is there a kickdown stop on the throttle with a manual transmission?
Why does every American car with a manual (in this market segment) shoot it self in the foot? Fords original SHO had a great engine with lousy shift linkage. Lack of sales was (still is) used to justify not offering a MT in a four door sedan. Why does the current CTS only offer the 3.0L with the MT and not the 3.6L, also no summer tires or performance suspension when ordering the MT? Sure they offered the 3.6 for first model year of the new style so the magazines would test it then they quietly took away all performance options with the MT. My current car (Lincoln LS with MT) only offered the MT with the smallest engine (it did only come with performance suspension package). I can live with the 2.0L engine (actually prefer the lighter weight) but get the shift feel right.
I think the MT report mis spoke. I think you need 3rd to get to 60. So what, other than magazine testing speed to 60 is only for comparison. Once you know one car did it in 2nd and the other required another shift to 3rd you adjust the readings to take that into account. In real world driving, getting to highway speed (70 mph) from 40 (start of ramp), or passing on a two laner (usually 50 to 90) is more important than 0-60.
I had an XR4Ti that would reach 60 in second, but 2nd was too high and 2nd and 3rd were too close. When making turns (slowing to 30) a downshift to 2nd caused bogging. When that transmission crapped out I put a T5 from a Ford Ranger in. Then it topped out at around 50 in 2nd but it was more useful in town.
My current car Lincoln LS works well when passing, an easy 5th to 3rd shift at 50mph increases engine speed from 2100 to around 3500rpm this allows me to get up to 100 before requiring a shift.
The ATS should work well at 50 a drop from 6th to 3rd will increase engine speed from 1750 to 4000 while 6th to 4th would give an engine speed of 2850 (a little too slow though the ecm control of the turbo wastegate could make it very useful). So as long as your not going to exceed 88mph while passing 3rd is a good gear without a shift. Now how smooth all of this shifting will be is another thing altogether.
There's no way. Maybe, MAYBE, you have to shift to 3rd for 60, But I really, really doubt it. The last car I had that wouldn't get to 60 in second was my 1992 Saturn SC with 120hp. I stand by my numbers, +/-5%. There is no way in hell the ATS tops out at 55 in 3rd.
I've got 5 bucks says he meant you need to grab 4th at the top of the 1/4 mile. He commented there was only a 2mph difference in trap speeds despite the ET difference, which sounds to me like a delay caused by one extra shift.
The voiceover is recorded long after the actual test- he probably just flubbed that and included the "shift to 4th" comment in the wrong place. Either that or he meant third gear and just said 4th by mistake.
I bet they caught the mistake, but they wanted the BMW to win so badly that they didn't bother to change it. Perhaps BMW made their wallets a little heavier too...
I've got 5 bucks says he meant you need to grab 4th at the top of the 1/4 mile. He commented there was only a 2mph difference in trap speeds despite the ET difference, which sounds to me like a delay caused by one extra shift.
The voiceover is recorded long after the actual test- he probably just flubbed that and included the "shift to 4th" comment in the wrong place. Either that or he meant third gear and just said 4th by mistake.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Cadillac Owners Forum
4.8M posts
369.7K members
Since 2002
Cadillac Forums is the perfect place to go to talk about your favorite Caddys including the ATS, CTS, SRX, Escalade, LYRIQ, Vistiq, concept and future Cadillac models.