Interesting counterpoint on the ATS

[TurboDan]

What does the A4 offer the 3-series can't do? What does the ATS offer the C-class can't do? What does the IS offer the 3-series can't do?

Exactly. There are varying segments of cars. Within those segments are a bunch of models from a bunch of different brands that compete against each other. Cadillac is introducing a model that will compete with the 3er, C-Class and A4, among others. Why is this such a crazy idea? Was it stupid for Audi to make the A4 because BMW already had the 3er?

Should Honda stop making the Accord because Toyota also makes a mainstream, midsize sedan? Should Chevy stop making the Silverado because Ford makes the F-150?

[2o6]

Exactly. There are varying segments of cars. Within those segments are a bunch of models from a bunch of different brands that compete against each other. Cadillac is introducing a model that will compete with the 3er, C-Class and A4, among others. Why is this such a crazy idea? Was it stupid for Audi to make the A4 because BMW already had the 3er?

Should Honda stop making the Accord because Toyota also makes a mainstream, midsize sedan? Should Chevy stop making the Silverado because Ford makes the F-150?

Sporty usually says that most automotive segments are overcrowded, but we don't get anywhere near the choice places like Europe does.

[sportyaccordy]

Exactly. There are varying segments of cars. Within those segments are a bunch of models from a bunch of different brands that compete against each other. Cadillac is introducing a model that will compete with the 3er, C-Class and A4, among others. Why is this such a crazy idea? Was it stupid for Audi to make the A4 because BMW already had the 3er?

Should Honda stop making the Accord because Toyota also makes a mainstream, midsize sedan? Should Chevy stop making the Silverado because Ford makes the F-150?

Oh come on. When Audi made the A4, the only other cars in the segment were the 3 series, the C-class, and if you want to count them the 9-3 and the S70. The A4 did offer distinct things that the competitors didn't have- the main one being quattro- but other features being its very distinctive style in and out and general "Teutonicness".

Again, when Honda made the Accord I am not even sure the Camry existed, and even still after all these years it is a top 10 seller. Same with the Silverado. And when both cars came out, they brought completely new things to the table- hence their success. So what the hell are you talking about?

Again, A4 came into a segment where there were only 4 other cars (of which only 1 was competitive). ATS is coming into a segment with many more cars that are much more diverse + competitive (3, C, G, IS, S60, TSX, Regal, A3, A4, 9-3 still selling, etc.) and it literally brings nothing new to the table. Hell the CTS base model comes w/much more power and space stock for not much more money, and I bet there are a lot of rebates available for this.

I like the ATS in that "good idea on an internet message board" way, but again, you picked a lot of piss poor examples to show why the ATS would be a success. Literally every car you cited was successful for having the crucial things the ATS lacks- segment creating features and easy reasons to buy it over anything else out there. The Accord literally created the midsize sedan segment and opened the door for Japanese manufacturers. The Chevy C/K trucks helped make pickups more mainstream. A4 was the first car to offer a legitimate alternative to the 3 series. The ATS is literally a Cadillac 3 series w/no discount. Its not a car anyone has been waiting for and its not a car that will take people out of their other entry level sports sedans, no matter how good it is.

[cawimmer430]

Wimmer, it's a hypothetical commercial in an editorial...stop taking it so seriously.

I know. I read the whole thing.

But he's implying that these cars are "underpowered" and cannot go up a hill. It's a silly analogy.

[sportyaccordy]

Sporty usually says that most automotive segments are overcrowded, but we don't get anywhere near the choice places like Europe does.

What competitors to the ATS does Europe get that we don't? Uncompetitive French cars?

And don't talk about engines... the only reason Europeans still buy 316s is because of those criminal fuel taxes and a culture that shames consumption. If they could they would be buying the same big engines we do.

[cawimmer430]

What competitors to the ATS does Europe get that we don't? Uncompetitive French cars?

Hey! The Citroen C5 and Renault Laguna and Peugeot 508 are excellent cars! So is the Skoda Superb! 

[AltinD]

Hey! The Citroen C5 and Renault Laguna and Peugeot 508 are excellent cars! So is the Skoda Superb!

Why you no mention Passat? 

[cawimmer430]

Why you no mention Passat? 

Because that car is really uncompetitive. 

j/k  



I forgot to mention the Passat! 

[sportyaccordy]

Passat is on a lower tier, like a Maxima. Good car but not in that "realm"

I am sure those French cars are good cars, but they're not exactly "sport sedans", though I do think they are more realistic in their missions (like a Lexus ES).

[Hachee]

I usually can't stand to read much of what Baruth writes, and a lot of his argument is stupid, but he's not wrong in saying that they really needed to bring something else to the table.

There's nothing wrong with bringing a competitive (meaning substantially similar) model into a segment.  Plenty of you have sited all the current examples, and they're all pretty similar.  I suppose Cadillac did a ton of market research on this segment (NOT that this is always the smartest way to create your product!), and found (and it's pretty obvious) that buyers all want a good-looking but fairly conservative design, and they loaded the car up with the features that the buyers have come to expect (whether standard or optional).  

The big problem here is that Cadillac (still, whether you believe it or not) has a shitload of baggage.  It was hurt by many years of crappy cars, and yes, they've made progress, but it is still not the equal of BMW, MB, etc in terms of image or perceived quality.  I can tell you that in my town, there are loads of all of BMWs, Mercedes, Audis, etc, but I don't think I can recall one Cadillac that isn't an Escalade, and there aren't many of those.  It still doesn't seem to be an option for the typical sedan buyer.  But I still think that In order to continue their progress in overcoming this, they need to stand out.  And I don't think there's much in the way of features that they can do (that won't be quickly copied by someone else), so it has to be either styling or price (value).  While I think the ATS looks good, it doesn't look as distinctive as the CTS.  The first CTS was awkward, but distinctive and interesting in an odd way.  The current one (IMO) is fantastic looking, but a lot of people don't agree.  It's polarizing, and I think this has helped it.  I assume Cadillac has concluded that the ATS segment doesn't want this, but I think this is their big mistake.

As far as the engine choices go, I think Baruth is delusional in thinking that many people want a V8.  Yes, there should be an ATS-V (and maybe just a regular V8 as another choice), but most buyers don't want it today, even in a Cadillac.  I think they should have skipped the base 4 at introduction, and perhaps introduced it at a later date.  And whether we like it or not, BMW is the leader here, and if they're telling everyone a turbo 4 is the new way to go, people are going to think it's okay.  If Cadillac only offered a V6 which isn't as fuel efficient as BMW's four, they'll be seen (again) as dinosaurs.  IMO, the only two real issues with the ATS are the styling (which I like, but think it should have been sharper), and the price, which should undercut the competitors (when comparably equipped).  

But I suppose we'll soon see how well the ATS sells, and whether is sells without heavy discounts, and whether is sells to people who would have otherwise considered a BMW or Mercedes.  

[Madman]

The thing which everyone (including Cadillac) need to understand is that Cadillac needs to play the long game.  The ATS isn't going to clobber the 3 Series in the sales charts overnight.  It took a very long time to drive Cadillac's reputation into the shitter.  Ergo, it stands to reason it will also take them a very long time to rehabilitate Cadillac's image in the minds of the car buying public.

As long as Cadillac keeps striving to build true world-class cars that can be legitimate rivals to the BMW/Merc/Audi hegemony, the negative stigma associated with the Cadillac brand will GRADUALLY evaporate.  The worst thing Cadillac can do is to lose their nerve, get cold feet and fall back on their old bad habits.

It CAN be done.  Audi went from being a nonentity to a serious contender in just a couple of decades.  BMW went from building weird bubble cars which couldn't even reverse to being the world's best selling premium brand.  As tarnished as Cadillac reputation is, the name still carries a certain amount of weight.  The CTS has done much to redeem the Cadillac brand in the eyes of the buying public.  The ATS has the chance to build on that momentum and help drag Cadillac out of the wilderness.

BTW, Baruth is a fecking idiot.  Who the hell gave this talentless hack a job writing about the car business anyway?  And, more importantly, why hasn't he been fired yet?

[sportyaccordy]

Car companies don't do well by progressing "gradually" when they are falling behind. It takes a bold move.

Audi was pretty much DOA until the B5 A4, which they quickly followed up on with the C5 A6. These cars were revolutions, not evolutions.

BMW turned itself around w/the 2002. Again, there was nothing like it on the market before it came out. Revolution, not evolution.

Lexus LS was another revolution, as was, to a large degree, the 2nd gen ES. They saw where their competitors were weak and attacked.

No company has turned itself around by completely piggybacking onto competitors w/o offering something else, or addressing their competitors' weaknesses. The ATS does neither. If I was a car manufacturer this and the mainstream sedan markets would be the last places I'd want to enter.

[Raza]

Yeah, but the writer still said it. And it was an absolutely ridiculous thing to say that deserves being called out.

Yeah, but Wimmer's shitting himself saying that the 118i is more than enough for anyone, but it's just some dumbass talking.

[Vinsanity]

The ATS looks promising, but I agree that it had the potential for something greater and bolder. Maybe a sleek 5-door liftback design that doesn't look stubby like most hatchbacks (I guess Audi already did this with the A5 Sportback, but we don't get those in the U.S.). Instead, Caddy played it safe by giving us the spiritual successor to the first CTS, in thinking that fans of the original will come back for the sharp handling of the ATS. But perhaps they're forgetting that the biggest reason the first CTS was a hit was because it was something fresh and new at the time. This is something the ATS lacks, and the biggest reason that the XTS threatens to set the brand back 10 years. Like others have mentioned already, the XTS should've been a Cadillac 300C, not a Cadillac Impala.

[Raza]

That's true.  The first CTS was kind of crappy compared to its competition and it came out pretty successfully. 

[Vinsanity]

That's true.  The first CTS was kind of crappy compared to its competition and it came out pretty successfully. 

Crappy? In what way? Quality-wise, it wasn't any worse than a 1st-gen G35 or Merc W203. It was also much more refined and luxurious than the 1st Lexus IS.

Anecdotally, my car's holding up slightly better than my younger brother's E46, and much better than my middle brother's G35.

[sportyaccordy]

That's true.  The first CTS was kind of crappy compared to its competition and it came out pretty successfully. 

True... but it was a very bold design. I'm not sure I'd call it very American, but it was distinctive. It was kind of the precursor to the Chrysler 300

Sometimes it pays to completely uproot a brand's design language every now and then. I like the A&S cars, but I think the theme has run its course, even though it's only been maybe 10 years. It went from something fresh to something aged + lazy. The ATS would have been a good opportunity to try something new.

To be totally honest automotive design is in a bit of a rut right now. Everyone is on that "same bean different stretch" bullshit. Companies are afraid to experiment on mainstream designs.

[cawimmer430]

I am sure those French cars are good cars, but they're not exactly "sport sedans", though I do think they are more realistic in their missions (like a Lexus ES).

That's pretty much spot on. They're all comfort biased like a Lexus ES and there's no real optional sports model available. Not that buyers in this class (in Europe) care much. Volkswagen has the Passat R36 - and it sells like crap.

The Laguna comes in coupe form though and is mildly sporty (but still very comfort biased).

[SVT666]

What does the ATS have that the 3 series, A4, and C-Class don't?  Style.  The others have style, but it's very conservative. 

[CJ]

They're conservative, but will still look good 10 years later. The first CTS hasn't aged well.

[SVT666]

They're conservative, but will still look good 10 years later. The first CTS hasn't aged well.

No, but it had ugly grey plastic slathered all over the front of it.  The 2nd gen still looks great.

[CJ]

It's only been out 4 years, but it won't age as well as the Germans. It just won't.

[Raza]

Crappy? In what way? Quality-wise, it wasn't any worse than a 1st-gen G35 or Merc W203. It was also much more refined and luxurious than the 1st Lexus IS.

Anecdotally, my car's holding up slightly better than my younger brother's E46, and much better than my middle brother's G35.

Damn, I forgot you own one.  Didn't mean to offend, but now that I have....

The engine is harsh and the transmission is clunky.  The interior was cheap.  It was just bigger than the competition. 

[CJ]

I'll argue that interior quality was absolutely not as good as an E46 or W203.

[68_427]

The interior materials were actually very expensive.  The design was just awful.

[CJ]

I thought they felt a bit...Rubbermaid plasticy.

[SVT666]

It's only been out 4 years, but it won't age as well as the Germans. It just won't.

It's aging very well so far though.  Conservative designs will ALWAYS age better than polarizing designs.

[sportyaccordy]

What does the ATS have that the 3 series, A4, and C-Class don't?  Style.  The others have style, but it's very conservative. 

It's aging very well so far though.  Conservative designs will ALWAYS age better than polarizing designs.

True, but I want to say polarizing designs net more short term sales.

Style wise though, I am not even sure the ATS hits the mark. Again, it's a shrunk down, more conservative take on the current CTS. Hardly groundbreaking. This would have been a good idea when the current CTS came out in... 08? BMW was midway through its 3 cycle, hype over the new G was dying down, IMO nothing else really mattered. Now w/the new 3 and the new IS and G right around the corner, this thing is in the position it should have put its competitors in.

[2o6]

Passat is on a lower tier, like a Maxima. Good car but not in that "realm"

I am sure those French cars are good cars, but they're not exactly "sport sedans", though I do think they are more realistic in their missions (like a Lexus ES).

Regal, TSX and to a lesser extent the ES are of a different class.

[2o6]

Hey! The Citroen C5 and Renault Laguna and Peugeot 508 are excellent cars! So is the Skoda Superb! 

Those aren't luxury cars. They are directly comparable to mainstream midsizers like Accord and Camry.

Oh come on. When Audi made the A4, the only other cars in the segment were the 3 series, the C-class, and if you want to count them the 9-3 and the S70. The A4 did offer distinct things that the competitors didn't have- the main one being quattro- but other features being its very distinctive style in and out and general "Teutonicness".

Likewise, the ATS is bound to be more American in it's approach. Let's take it downmarket; what does the Elantra do that the Civic doesn't? What does the Corolla do that the Cruze can't? What does the Focus do that the Forte can't? What does the Mazda 3 do that the Dart won't?


Again, when Honda made the Accord I am not even sure the Camry existed, and even still after all these years it is a top 10 seller. Same with the Silverado. And when both cars came out, they brought completely new things to the table- hence their success. So what the hell are you talking about?

The Camry and Accord were both Japanese little sedans. Honestly, they were pretty much the same in their approach; Honda's driving prowess was only thinly established at that time, and Toyota's emphesis on comfort hadn't come about yet. Those cars succeded because of not only the oil crises, but the good reputation for reliability and quality.


Again, A4 came into a segment where there were only 4 other cars (of which only 1 was competitive). ATS is coming into a segment with many more cars that are much more diverse + competitive (3, C, G, IS, S60, TSX, Regal, A3, A4, 9-3 still selling, etc.) and it literally brings nothing new to the table. Hell the CTS base model comes w/much more power and space stock for not much more money, and I bet there are a lot of rebates available for this.

TSX, A3, 9-3, Regal are more downmarket. The ATS is also going for the "fun to drive" segment, but they are going to attempt to do it better than the rest. The CTS is also nearing the end of it's model cycle.

I like the ATS in that "good idea on an internet message board" way, but again, you picked a lot of piss poor examples to show why the ATS would be a success. Literally every car you cited was successful for having the crucial things the ATS lacks- segment creating features and easy reasons to buy it over anything else out there. The Accord literally created the midsize sedan segment and opened the door for Japanese manufacturers. The Chevy C/K trucks helped make pickups more mainstream. A4 was the first car to offer a legitimate alternative to the 3 series. The ATS is literally a Cadillac 3 series w/no discount. Its not a car anyone has been waiting for and its not a car that will take people out of their other entry level sports sedans, no matter how good it is.

People said the same thing about the G35 and the original CTS, and they were huge successes.

True, but I want to say polarizing designs net more short term sales.

Style wise though, I am not even sure the ATS hits the mark. Again, it's a shrunk down, more conservative take on the current CTS. Hardly groundbreaking. This would have been a good idea when the current CTS came out in... 08? BMW was midway through its 3 cycle, hype over the new G was dying down, IMO nothing else really mattered. Now w/the new 3 and the new IS and G right around the corner, this thing is in the position it should have put its competitors in.

The 3-series is pretty much the same model as last year but with a weird front fascia. All Audi models look the same, and the S60 looks like a Honda Civic.