CTS Coupe!

[2o6]

Why is the bumper so big? The rear really could have been done much better. The rest is pretty good. Front: A, Sides: B+, Rear: C-, average/overall grade: B-

I agree, somewhat. If the rear was lower (while preserving the fastback shape) it'd be great.

[Raza]

I think it looks okay.  They managed to take out some of the hugeness of the CTS. 

[Eye of the Tiger]

It's perfect

[FlatBlackCaddy]

ass cakes

[Payman]

ass cakes

Big fat ones.

[omicron]

It's a rough MS Paint job, but you get the idea. A longer front end to balance out the rear, and a lower, more pronounced boot:

[Submariner]

It's a rough MS Paint job, but you get the idea. A longer front end to balance out the rear, and a lower, more pronounced boot:




Much improved.

[SVT666]

It's a rough MS Paint job, but you get the idea. A longer front end to balance out the rear, and a lower, more pronounced boot:

I don't think you need to make the front longer, just lower the rear.

[Catman]

I like the original better.

[Raza]

It needs more glass.

[J86]

It needs more glass.

You could say that about most new cars.

[NomisR]

It needs more glass.

Belt line's too high.. make it look fat.

The car feels like they took the G37, and made it even fatter.. I guess it went through a "Zevolution"...

[Catman]

I think they should cover the side windows with carbon fiber.

[BimmerM3]

You could say that about most new cars.

YES. I fucking hate the high belt lines that are on all these new cars.

[omicron]

YES. I fucking hate the high belt lines that are on all these new cars.

Even more so, I hate not being able to look down onto the bonnet. I have to go well back into the mid-'90s to find cars that give panoramic front vision.

[ChrisV]

I love it. Cross between the CTS sedan, the A1 Scirocco, and the original AMX. the rear is not really any more bulky than the G37, but it has more character than the G37. The rear quarters, when sedan from side on, look flat, but the flares are actually fairly pronounced and in person will mask the height in any angle but directly from the side. On the CTS, the 3/4 view and the walkaround is going to show that rear quarter as the home of a nice round fender flare, and it won't look even SLIGHTLY slab-like in person And in V form, will be even more aggressive.

I think it's a great all around design and nicely, boldly different from the competition without being Aztek different.











Anotehr with a lot of height:



And I'll throw in my favorite Torino for good measure:




The styling of the coupe is not for everyone (THANK, JESUS!), but it is not done so by accident. It is purposely designed to push the styling well beyond what most people believe is "proportional". It is not intended to attract everyone nor please everyone. If it did, it would be teutonic and the idol of a few Eurocentric car forums..

[CALL_911]

As I scrolled down your post, I was stopped by this:


I would sell my left nut for one.

[Tave]

the rear is not really any more bulky than the G37, but it has more character than the G37.

That's a G35. The rear on the G37 is less bulky than either its predecessor or this CTS (and all the better for it IMO):






I like Omi's chop a lot. Much more reminiscent of the XLR.

[ChrisV]

That's a G35. The rear on the G37 is less bulky than either its predecessor or this CTS (and all the better for it IMO):

Not much different, The bumper is still huge and featureless.

I like Omi's chop a lot. Much more reminiscent of the XLR.

I don't. I like the fastback roof line better, more like the AMX, Scirocco, and URQuattro, rather than the turret-topped XLR. I'd be willing to bet that in person, scaled by the cars and trucks around it, the CTS is going to be very good looking and much more proportion than it sometimes looks in photos.

[Catman]

I agree with Chris, the car is aggressive and bold.  I bet it sells well.

[MX793]

I rather like it.  I just hope the outward visibility (specifically front and side) is better than the Camaro.

[the Teuton]

Judging from the sedan, side and forward visibility won't be too bad. Looking at that rear window and rear quarter windows, and visibility out those ways should be positively dismal.

[MX793]

Judging from the sedan, side and forward visibility won't be too bad. Looking at that rear window and rear quarter windows, and visibility out those ways should be positively dismal.

Poor rear and rear-quarter visibility is pretty much par for the course for any coupe.  Being that this is a premium car, I fully expect either a backup camera or other warning system, which would definately make the limited rear view much more tolerable when backing out of a parking space or parallel parking.  It's when you also can't see out of the front or sides that I consider visibility truly compromised.

[the Teuton]

The sedan isn't that bad to look out of. I would have mentioned it if it were.

[Vinsanity]

I do like the fastback concept, but I prefer a more toned-down execution:

[2o6]

No..........still liking the factory version better.

[Madman]

It looks like it's been shunted from behind.

No, this is the Cadillac that was shunted from behind.  The 1980-85 Seville.



Although it does bear some resemblance to the CTS Coupe.  I guess the '80s are coming back?




Cheers,
Madman of the People

[Vinsanity]

No..........still liking the factory version better.

I thought you liked more overhang...




It's starting to make sense that the hunchback Sevilles serve as inspiration for the coupe, but I'm not sure the world is quite ready for 80's retro at this moment...

[pendyman]

I love the Infinti coupes, which seem to be the ones most compared with the new Caddy, but I'll take the Caddy. I think this car is a real contender.

[SVT666]

I do like the fastback concept, but I prefer a more toned-down execution:

Maybe make whatever rear deck there is just a tad flatter, it would be perfect.  I'm really liking the chopped version a lot better then the CRX inspired factory version.