As for price, I spec'd mine out pretty much fully loaded for $47G. Since I want a RWD w/ manual trans, I have to forego the driver assist package. Maybe that will change later, but I like that price for the car...
Actually I do a lot of rural interstate driving so I DON'T want the driver assist package. I don't need my car beeping or shaking the seat every time I change lanes without signaling. The basic parking assist is plenty.
I believe both packages include the "Safety Alert Seat".
For parking it's fine, but me personally I don't need a lane departure system. That thing would be beeping (if it beeps) and shaking all the time. I'm definately looking for one without that feature.
Maybe. But I think ALL cars in this class are overpriced.Originally Posted by CaddyFanFL
Hey, a loaded Honda Accord is over $30k !! That kinda puts pricing into perceptive.
I would say go drive an ATS and XTS back to back, but maybe you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. Some people are just made to go from point A to B and treat their vehicles as appliances. I'm guessing that may be you...
Actually, lane departure only activates if the wheel isn't turned- your signal has nothing to do with it.Originally Posted by AtlantaGuy00
If your wheel is straight and the car drifts out of lane, it alerts you. If the lane change is intentional, nothing happens.
But that is probably a matter of personal taste. However, my previous claim that no other manufacturer is pricing their smaller sedan at the same level as an equally equipped bigger model is still out there and so far, has not been challenged.
I pointed out before that my criticism is not aimed at the ATS itself and that I'm actually convinced that it will probably be the best car Cadillac has built over the last decade. I just wanted to point out that the pricing philosophy is - let me put it this way - certainly not without a risk.
If the ATS turns out to be as good as expected, we might see higher residual values and if that's the case, we might get some kind of compensation for the higher price. We have to keep in mind that many buyers are only willing to swallow BMW's hefty price-tags because they also tend to obtain their value quite well. If Cadillac can achieve the same, I'll stand corrected. "Competing with the 3-series" has far more aspects than MSRP and performance. The entire package has to be competitive.
I would feel a little guilty to pay more than $50K on the ATS - TODAY. However, a high residual, a nice incentive and as a result, an attractive lease-payment could certainly win some buyers over - including me.
It was a bold move from Cadillac to aim directly at BMW and adjust their pricing accordingly. Favorable reviews of a new car is a good beginning - but being able to compete with BMW in the market is everything but easy - and that's why I am a bit concerned. A higher price puts the ATS under high pressure.
Last but not least, I'm really surprised that even highly experienced members on this board seem to have a huge difficulty in telling the difference between the criticism of a product and the criticism of a market strategy and to make things worse, feel the need to personally judge other members if they share a different opinion. That really makes you wonder..
I think the biggest misconception is that Cadillac just arbitrarily "decided" to price the ATS comparably to the 3 series. This is false.
In the past, even when benchmarking a competitor, GM has built vehicles while looking for ways during design to undercut the cost of their rival. Usually this means heavier or lower cost materials, which allowed them to offer a similar size and featured product but for less money. With the ATS, the cost factor was mostly ignored during the engineering phase, instead focusing on weight. In fact, the design team were given the mantra "Every day, every engineer, every gram" during development. Instead of building the car to meet a price point, they did what they needed to in order to make a car that genuinely compared to or exceeded the competition.
As far as lease cost, residuals and incentives, all three are not compatible. High incentives hurt resale value, which is why in the past, BMWs have held higher residuals than Cadillac. Over the last few years this has started changing however- Edmunds.com gave the award for "Best Resale Value, Sedan over $40k" to the CTS, and "Best Resale Value, Luxury Brand" to Acura, Lexus and Cadillac.
See full list here
People seem to want it both ways. They want tons of incentives on the new cars to make them affordable, but then want a high resale value- the two are incompatible. Cars with high resale values have good reviews, high demand and low incentives. If you want affordable leases on the ATS, then you should hope sales are brisk and incentives are not needed. THAT will lead to high residuals and low leasing.
That is exactly why the ATS is a sensation amoungst the automotive press. The listened to the engineers NOT the accountants and other bean counters. Good stuff indeed and the market will pay fir something they really want. Ie: Harley -Davidson. People willing to spend more because they want one.Originally Posted by Cadillac Tony
If you can't afford the car, get off of this forum.