We all make our own fashion choices. Neckties, tiger-print parachute pants, 4-inch heels, body piercings or tattoo art (hopefully not as an ensemble). Sometimes it's painful to be a conforming nonconformist. Sometimes it's better to buy a sport sedan.
What does this have to do with the arrival of the two-door 2011 Cadillac CTS Performance Coupe?
It's about fashion. The kind of fashion that comes at the expense of comfort, utility or functionality — or simply being able to pass through an airport metal detector without setting off the alarm.
If Style Is Everything and Function Is Nothing...
Then our rear-wheel-drive 2011 Cadillac CTS Performance Coupe (base MSRP $43,430) might be for you. Or maybe you'd prefer one of the five other permutations of the CTS coupe, from the Base RWD model at $39,990 all the way up to a Premium AWD model that starts at $49,735 before adding options.
The detailing and craftsmanship apparent here are outstanding. The more we look at the 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe, touch it, close its reassuringly heavy doors and field unsolicited questions about it, the car's presence and gesture remind us of how cars were once rolling pieces of automotive art to be simply admired rather than justified with babble from overly compensated designers.
The mystique and sense of occasion of seeing an early Cadillac Eldorado float down the road is lovingly rekindled with the CTS coupe, albeit in a thoroughly modern fashion. There isn't a radius larger than a half-inch on anything but the steering wheel in the CTS coupe. And there's nothing retro about this car (unless you know what "shaved" and "Frenched" mean).
The Compromise of Style
We'll start with the driver seat that must, by its articulated purpose, accommodate access to the rear seats. If it rocked on its hinges only half as much as the infamously flaccid seat in the Corvette, we might be able to excuse it. We assume it's because of the active head restraint that the lump between our shoulder blades forced us to hunch forward like a lifetime bookkeeper. And all of this did nothing to improve the too-short seat cushion that met our thighs in only about half the distance we'd prefer.
Then there's the lack of front headroom, 2 inches less than the CTS sedan; we suggest that 6-footers forego the optional $700 moonroof. Admittance to the rear seats has its share of compromises, too. Front seatbacks fold forward almost enough and rest there, but they spring back on their side bolsters so they're never quite trustworthy. Once you get back there, you'll find 2.6 inches less headroom than you get in the CTS sedan.
When the road begins to turn, steering effort loads up so heavy that it feels like you're parallel parking a Lotus.
We all understand that most coupes have limitations in rear visibility, yet the 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe's C-pillar sail panels are particularly enormous. Luckily, the outside mirrors are large and rear parking sonar is standard equipment. This car also had the optional back-up camera as part of the $2,440 PDW Performance Luxury package. The view through the rearview mirror, however, convinced us we were at the front of a parade of ill-proportioned Chinese copies of vehicles we only vaguely recognize.
Compromised Ride, Cargo
Around town, our CTS coupe (equipped with the $2,090 Y43 summer-tire + FE3 suspension package) behaves too much like a car meant to turn a lap time at the Nürburgring instead of drive into town on a Saturday night. The undulations of the freeway make it feel as if we are boating through a 6-foot swell, with the stern of the car settling in a way that makes us almost queasy.
We've tested many examples of the CTS sedan including cars equipped with this same Y43 option (though with 18-inch Michelin PS2 tires rather than the coupe's 19-inch Continental ContiSport Contact 3 tires), and none have felt as out of sorts as this coupe. Experience tells us the rear springs are too soft and the rebound settings of the dampers are too aggressive.
Speaking of maritime metaphors, there's no room for a steamer trunk in the back of the 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe. The trunk offers a reasonable 10.5 cubic feet compared to the CTS sedan's 13.6 cubic feet, but the opening is like the book return slot at the library, and the trunk lid's gooseneck hinges force you to pack things in the shape of a pyramid to clear them. The high liftover into the trunk would be manageable except for the threat of burning your shin on the center-mounted exhaust beneath the bumper.
Track Tested
A lot of this might seem like complaints from someone who is paying too much attention to packaging instead of performance, but even at the test track this car had its challenges.
To begin with, the 245/45ZR19 tires ride as if they have too much air pressure, while harsh impacts through the heavy wheels shake both the steering and the cabin itself. There's amazingly little wind noise, but road noise rises and falls noticeably depending on the character of the pavement surface. And when the road begins to turn, steering effort loads up to such a degree by 35 mph and remains so heavy that it feels like you're parallel parking a Lotus — you know, the only car available without power-assisted steering.
Because the CTS coupe and sedan share the same direct-injection 3.6-liter V6 that makes 304 horsepower at 6,400 rpm and 273 pound-feet of torque at 5,200 rpm, we figured the coupe would perform much the same as the sedan, especially since their weights differ only by 24 pounds.
And we were right. Even though the coupe carries a shorter, 3.73:1 final-drive ratio that should make it quicker than the sedan (which has a 3.42:1 ratio), the two-door finishes the quarter-mile in essentially a dead heat with the four-door. Sixty mph arrives in 6.7 seconds from a standstill (6.4 seconds with a 1-foot rollout) and the quarter-mile comes up in 14.9 seconds at 95 mph. We've tested a comparable CTS sedan that reached 60 mph in 6.5 seconds and ran the quarter-mile in 14.9 seconds at 94.6 mph.
We thought the coupe's wider rear track (by 1.2 inches) would make the two-door a superior cone-dodger. But yet again, the car's results in handling tests were comparable to those of the CTS sedan, but not better. With an average speed of 67 mph between the slalom cones and a lateral 0.83g on the skid pad, the coupe proves a fraction slower than the 67.2 mph and 0.89g of a CTS sedan. The 2010 CTS Sport Wagon also nearly matches the coupe's measured agility.
What's more is that we had to wrestle with the coupe's reluctant steering to achieve these results. Why Cadillac tuned the coupe's steering so differently from the friction-free and precise action of the sedan, we do not know.
Filling in the CTS Spectrum
The appearance of the 2008 Cadillac CTS Sedan was widely heralded as the rebirth of not just Cadillac, but of GM. The car proved that General Motors still gets it, so we couldn't help but gush a little as we reported, "Cadillac has stopped trying to be German, something it is not. Instead it has rediscovered itself and produced a uniquely American sport sedan without peer."
But what is this CTS coupe supposed to be? Sporty or comfortable? Sadly, it is neither.
We think it goes like this: utility on one end in the CTS wagon, fashion statement on the other end in the CTS coupe and the sweet spot right in the middle with the CTS sedan. And, of course, don't forget the track-ready CTS-V to bully the rest of the world around.
We've tried to like the 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe because we love the styling and what it says about Cadillac so much that we don't want to discourage this sort of bold thinking. Yes, the CTS coupe is burdened by myriad compromises, but then again, so are most coupes. It's difficult to decide if the CTS coupe should be like the CTS sedan, only with fewer doors or instead something different. Maybe the problem here is that Cadillac didn't value the perfection of the balance between comfort and performance that the CTS sedan represented before it went in a new direction with the CTS coupe.
The rest of our criticisms just remind us why coupes are simply not as practical as sedans — especially one as world-class as the CTS sedan. So go donate those parachute pants to charity, Mr. Hammer. You're embarrassing yourself.
The manufacturer provided Edmunds this vehicle for the purposes of evaluation.
Add A Comment »
bearsdkillz says:
09:35 PM, 07/08/2010
This thing is ugly. BUTT-UGLY
4maticbenz says:
06:24 PM, 07/07/2010
Why is it that every automotive site from Motortrend to Car and Driver to Autoblog to here claiming this car has tons of style?! This thing is a misproportioned design nightmare! Look at that chunky rear end, and why does the car look like a wedge of cheese from the side profile shot? The car has too much roof and not enough trunk. The front end looks way too bulky and its fascia isnt aggressive nor elegantly styled. The exterior is just a TOTAL MESS and im gonna stop myself here. Atleast the interior and rims look great.
Now about the objective traits of this car; i have to say with those features listed it isnt terribly overpriced (atleast compared to the Euro coupes). Observed 18 mpg really isnt bad for a two ton car with over 300hp. 67 mph through the slalom is pretty impressive (especially considering the weight of the car). .82g on the skidpad is a bit below average for the class, and 6.7 sec to get to 60 mph is defintely below average for the class (by a whopping 1.5 sec). So overall id say the car cant be as bad as Edmunds claims it is, but i defintely wouldnt put it ahead of most of its competitors if i were in the sporty luxo coupe market.
bodyblue says:
08:11 AM, 07/07/2010
Jay,
When you posted on here a few days ago about 1487's lack of a sense of self and his statements above it helped me understand how impossible it is to truly talk to him rationally. He is incapable of admitting his mistakes and will never do so. Your arguement about the seats is completely lost on him and I think that is what you were trying to prove.....that when confronted with an line of reasoning in which he cant point to a fact in a press release or car brochure he de-constructs. He has convinced himself that he alone understands that IL and others on here form a vast conspiracy against GM. He gets increasingly manic when confronted. He reminds me of Captain Queeg from "The Caine Mutiny" ....all he needs is a set of steel balls to nervously roll in his hands to complete the portrait. At first I was stunned by how he reacts...now it is interesting in a perverse sort of way. Kind of like watching a rat in a laboratory. All it takes is a thread about the Camaro and he jumps like a rat with an electrode on his tail.
bodyblue says:
07:54 AM, 07/07/2010
"try to align myself with people who are a)intelligent b)open minded c) well versed in the subject matter at hand and d) mature. "
ROFLMFAO are you kidding? You remind me of the Nazis that said a big lie was easier to sell to the public than a small one.
"Its pretty clear there isnt one aspect of the auto industry that I don't know better than you do. You keep bragging about all this experience and knowledge that you possess but have yet to show me anything other than you can find 100 different ways to praise Ford. If you know squat I haven't seen it proven yet."
How is that "pretty clear"? Please provide your source material and then link it so you can prove your statements. Again, actually know very little about cars and the industry because you dont have real experience with them. You claim you dont work in the industry, ok then what makes you an expert? I dont claim to be an expert, I am a car lover and industry watcher. You are a sycophant who trolls board for folks to argue with over GM. You are just a punk with a chip on your shoulder over a company that could care less what you do or say. I am not looking for validation like you are....I just re-read what you said above and now I understand you better.
"When folks fall short in all those categories I don't lose sleep over the fact that they don't listen to me."
NOW I GET IT! You do indeed lose sleep over it! You just cant stand it when other folks cant see your logic and wisdom....as you have shown in this thread you are frantic to prove that you cannot be wrong in anyfact about GM. Thank God you cant go postal here and shoot those of us that think you are a complete nut. This is like watching a Criminal Minds episode! I now have a profile of you! I can just see you sitting in your room right now sticking pins in a Honda and BMW poster!
"The only instances in which IL liked the Camaro were the initial drive of the mule and the first tests vs the 2010 Mustang/Challenger"
Now you are delusional! You are the Unsub that the FBI has been looking for....you are falling apart fast!
"having worse steering and seats although niether has been changed from the sedan."
You cant PROVE that and it is making you crazy.
1487 you have made yourself look even more silly and fanatical If IL is so evil why do you hang around? Just answer that. Many posters on here dont agree with your views and style of posting. And it is indeed clear that, in your narrow mind, IL does not agree with you. So why not go where you superior views are recognized for what they are? Why continue to cast pearls before the swine?....Ahh I know now...according to your profile you are incapable of letting go and admitting defeat....becase in your twisted mind you KNOW that by repeating the same lies over and over somebody somewhere will change his or her mind and begin to recognize you for the automotive genius that you are. Good luck on that.
bimmerjay says:
02:26 PM, 07/06/2010
"BTW- did you read the second opinion? How do you reconcile that with your claim that the initial review is 100% accurate and the CTS coupe is crap? Whom do you believe here? The second opinion concurs with the other reviews of the car and IL's view of the sedan."
An informed, dissenting opinion is not patently invalid. This review is obviously not just one editor's opinion. The second opinion is one alternative viewpoint. Nobody said the review is "100% accurate and the CTS coupe is crap". There are obviously some flaws with this car but those may not be important to some people.
"Let me ask you a simple question. Why in the world would the seats have a different shape or design?"
It's extremely common to have a mid-cycle changes. For all we know, GM figured out how to save $2 per seat in the CTS coupe and the sedan will get the same improvements for 2011. That doesn't mean the seat will have any visible or hard structural changes. There are numerous changes like this made throughout a model's lifecycle without a press release or anyone noticing. Sometimes people do notice a material and potentially unintended difference.
"Here's another: Name another luxury coupe that has different seat design from its sedan counterpart."
The BMW 3-Series. The sedan was equipped with anti-whiplash active head-restraints for its 2009 MY refresh that the coupe did not receive until its March refresh this year. The seatback looks identical but it's not - it's a modified design underneath to accomodate the new whiplash protection, and the headrests themselves are completely different. Also, the coupe and sedan use different seat rail designs which gives a uniquely lower hip-point on the coupe. This could theoretically create discomfort in one car that is not present in the other. So, if you bought a 2010 335i coupe you would get a different seat than the 335i sedan.
"Here's one more: Have you seen another review in which the seat comfort was criticized as being worse than the sedan's?"
I've only read one other review of the CTS coupe in C&D. However, it's extremely common for some reviews to complain about uncomfortable seats that are praised in others, so there's no fallacy in logic or factual inaccuracy, it's simply a difference of opinion. It doesn't prove the seats are completely unchanged.
In this whole overblown argument, all I'm actually stating is that you cannot be factually certain without positive confirmation from the manufacturer that the seats in the CTS coupe are completely unchanged from the sedan's. You are simply assuming they are - and merely through pictures. Citing a lack of complaints in other reviews is not hard evidence at all, it's purely conjecture.
1487 says:
01:29 PM, 07/06/2010
"To my knowledge " You dont have any regarding anthing else but GM press releases. Please provide proof that you have experience with automobiles."
Read some of my posts. Its pretty clear there isnt one aspect of the auto industry that I don't know better than you do. You keep bragging about all this experience and knowledge that you possess but have yet to show me anything other than you can find 100 different ways to praise Ford. If you know squat I haven't seen it proven yet.
"Neither did I.....I said that sometimes they do and you popped in and made the bold statement that they are NEVER different. You got caught in a stupid statement and could not wiggle out of it."
didnt say never. I said unless you are talking about a sports seat a leather seat is generally the exact same seat as a cloth seat except for the covering that's what I said. The lambda's seats are exactly the same shape with leather or cloth which suggests to thinking people (if the shoe doesn't fit.....) that they are the SAME seats from the SAME supplier. There is NOTHING in the product information on the Traverse or any other comparable product that suggests you are getting a different seat design. You chose leather or cloth- its that simple. The seat is the same.
"That is factually incorrect as evidenced by my statements in this thread...so by you making such claim you are a liar. I often beat on GM for the bailout but more often I beat on them for their poor quality products. So stop whining."
That post proved my point. Thanks.
"You never answered my question.....why dont you take the oppertunity now to tell us why you should be respected and listened too on here? Dont be shy now.....and dont chicken out."
In case I wasn't clear I really don't care if you or anyone who agrees with you or respects you or likes you validates ANYTHING I say. It's not critical to me at all. I would be scared if you ever validated anything I said. I try to align myself with people who are a)intelligent b)open minded c) well versed in the subject matter at hand and d) mature. When folks fall short in all those categories I don't lose sleep over the fact that they don't listen to me. But since you are interested in validation please tell me again why you should be crowned the resident expert on these blogs.
"IL has said the Camaro has some faults, like any other car, but it has never said that....as usual you are lying to try and prove your really bad points. Just because you kiss the ass of every GM exec you come accros on the internet does not mean that everybody else does....IL has been very fair to the cars its tests and you cant PROVE any bias because there is none."
The only instances in which IL liked the Camaro were the initial drive of the mule and the first tests vs the 2010 Mustang/Challenger. After that they have trashed virtually every aspect of the car, even the styling is now being called into question. They don't like the interior, the weight, the visibility, the steering wheel, the shifter, etc. I dont have time to dig up every complaint about the car but you can use your considerable free time to go back and read all their entries in the LT blog. IL is many things, but I wouldn't use "fair" or "consistent" to describe them as evidenced by this CTS coupe review. They rake the CTS coupe over the coals for being less practical than the sedan (shocker!) and for supposedly having worse steering and seats although niether has been changed from the sedan. Suddenly, every positive attribute from the sedan has magically disappeared because Cadillac decided to re-engineer the coupe so it would feel worse than the vaunted sedan. Makes perfect sense but all the others who tested the car somehow missed these changes.
1487 says:
01:16 PM, 07/06/2010
"Will it languish on dealer lots? Hard to say, I'm not sure how many the General intends to build. It's a niche vehicle with a limited market to begin with. Is there really a market for a 50K vehicle with little practicality if you could get A. the CTS sedan or B. a Corvette or non-GM competetor?"
every coupe is a compromised product by nature. Do you think there is any market for low slung, small, pricey coupes when minivans offer much more space and versatility?
A luxury coupe is a niche vehicle by definition. We arent talking Camrys and Accord here dude.
I asked which comparable coupes can swallow several golf bags with ease. The Mustant is not comparable. The 3 series is a compact car with 1.5 cu ft more trunk space and the G37s has a far smaller trunk than the CTS coupe. NONE of these cars are ideal for hauling golf clubs or a week's worth of luggage.
bodyblue says:
06:57 AM, 07/05/2010
"To my knowledge " You dont have any regarding anthing else but GM press releases. Please provide proof that you have experience with automobiles.
How do you reconcile that with your claim that the initial review is 100% accurate and the CTS coupe is crap?""
What are you talking about? You tell so many lies now you are confused...please show anything I have written that the coupe is crap? You are a nut. I have not said a negative word about the coupe other than I dont think it looks as nice as the sedan.
"He didn't say leather seats are always different from cloth seats"
Neither did I.....I said that sometimes they do and you popped in and made the bold statement that they are NEVER different. You got caught in a stupid statement and could not wiggle out of it.
"The basic premise of every statement you make is that Americans should boycott GM products "
That is factually incorrect as evidenced by my statements in this thread...so by you making such claim you are a liar. I often beat on GM for the bailout but more often I beat on them for their poor quality products. So stop whining.
""Why should anybody listen to your opinions about cars when you have so little hands-on experience with them? "
You never answered my question.....why dont you take the oppertunity now to tell us why you should be respected and listened too on here? Dont be shy now.....and dont chicken out.
"The reasons are largely the same as the reasons IL claims the Camaro is a poorly engineered excuse for a car"
Please prove that statement...back it up with links. IL has said the Camaro has some faults, like any other car, but it has never said that....as usual you are lying to try and prove your really bad points. Just because you kiss the ass of every GM exec you come accros on the internet does not mean that everybody else does....IL has been very fair to the cars its tests and you cant PROVE any bias because there is none. You yourself pointed out the secone opinion section of this article, so which is it? Just give it up, what is the point you are trying to make?
g33t33b33 says:
10:51 PM, 07/04/2010
OK 1487, I'll bite. I'm not hating on the fact that it is a GM product or a Caddy. I dig the sedan. I'm saying certain elements of the CTS coupe's design are half-assed in comparison to others in the segment - unnecessary compromises when you look at other brands.
"Name concrete examples of the superior vehicles you speak of. I know I'm asking a lot."
Oh I know. It's so hard to google specs.
The Current 3 Series offers 12 cubes versus 10.5 for the CTS and does so without the intrusive hinges. Hell, even the Mustang - another vehicle not sold on merits of practicality - has over 12.
Will it languish on dealer lots? Hard to say, I'm not sure how many the General intends to build. It's a niche vehicle with a limited market to begin with. Is there really a market for a 50K vehicle with little practicality if you could get A. the CTS sedan or B. a Corvette or non-GM competetor?
"So I presume that the V coupe would be satisfactory in your eyes because it certainly will have more than enough performance to compensate for its lack of golf club toting capability. "
Yeah, if it stacked up favorably to others in its segment the same way the sedan compares to the AMGs and M5s at a lower cost.
1487 says:
10:16 AM, 07/04/2010
"Wrong again! Going to admit it?"
The text review doesn't mention cargo being crushed. The video does indeed mention it though.
BTW- did you read the second opinion? How do you reconcile that with your claim that the initial review is 100% accurate and the CTS coupe is crap? Whom do you believe here? The second opinion concurs with the other reviews of the car and IL's view of the sedan.