Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh
The initial rollout of the ATS was applauded by the automotive press for ride and handling.
It won most ride and handling contests against the German competitors even at the M3/ATS-V level. But he press always complained about trunk size, rear seat size and access, along with engine sound. The "materials" used in the interior were not "well matched". The CUE was designed by the Devil himself. The last articles I read delved into how "smallish the windows are" and the gauges we're not even fit for a Chevy Cruise.
I've spent a lot of time in the ATS, all that shit is nit picking at worst and annoying at best. I liked the interior layout, seating position, and the CUE was no more distracting than any other purposeless interface. OMG it gets FINGERPRINTS on it, yeah, so does my cell phone, BFD. I think Cadillac's only real mistake was not offering a manual transmission with the V6.
I say initial assembly quality as it pertains to how well the car holds up over time. I have a lot of experience with BMW, and only one example with a GM product. I found the Cadillac as nicely assembled as a BMW. In fact, the layout of the underhood topography is a level better than an F30. The Cadillac under the hood was logical and organized as compared to a BMW F30. How well the ATS holds up over time is yet to be answered.
|
X2.
One reason you have to read reviews and just not read the final rankings.
Then see what the cars actually cost compared to the MSRP (I only care what they really cost). If they are knocking things you don't care about then your results can be different. The car with the biggest trunk and rear seat will win this area of the ratings, if you prefer a smaller car this might be opposite to how you feel.
If comparing the brands the ATS trunk is smaller, the rear seat is smaller, gauges aren't as good, I disagree that CUE is a big deal, dealership isn't as nice as Audi. All depends on what is most important to you. None of these were in my top 5 of things I wanted.