mmarshall

Per multiple-requests, a review of the all-new 2017 Cadillac CT6.

For those of you who are not aware of it, I have been recovering from a slip/fall and a serious knee injury that required surgery.....re-attachment of all four quad-tendons at the kneecap. That is why you have not seen any MM reviews for over two months. This was a serious injury and required lots of recuperation and physical therapy. It is much better now...I'm functioning almost normally, and (usually) walking either without a knee-brace at all, or with the brace unlocked, free to bend with the leg. The only time it needs to be locked is going down large steps, which is still tricky.....going up is no problem. But the knee is still a little wobbly...so I still have to be careful ANYWHERE I walk.

I owe a debt of gratitude and thanks to a number of factors that helped me through this difficult time. As always, first to God....and to ALL who prayed for me. Then, to my neighbors who helped me back to my house after my fall (the fall wasn't very far away from my condo unit, but was severe....I couldn't walk or get up). Then, to my brother, who lives fairly close by, taking several days off of work to get me to and from the hospital and various clinics, and helping out with some things at home (I had no problem riding in the back seat of his Kia Sportage, sitting sideways). Then, to my brother's supervisors who generously allowed him to take the necessary time off. Then, to a good orthopedic surgeon, who (competently) put my knee back together (he had to drill a hole in my kneecap and reattach the ruptured tendons).....though his communication/people-skills left some to be desired. Then, to the excellent Federal system of health insurance for retired employees (you get a choice of a number of different companies.....I have Blue Cross), which covered most, though not all, of the expenses. And, of course, to an excellent Physical Therapist, who has been working closely with me a couple of times a week.

So, I'm back in the groove now, at least to an extent, if not totally normal.....and it's time to get caught up on those waiting reviews. With the CT6 (which I had a number of CL requests for), I had finished the static-review back in early June, just before the injury, but did not get to the test-drive......so, of course, a test drive was the first thing I did today, while also re-examing the interior, underhood, and trunk on the one I test-drove.

So....now that we're done with all of that, let's talk cars again.

http://www.cadillac.com/sedans/ct6-sedan.html

IN A NUTSHELL: An improvement over its XTS predecessor, but IMO still not really a Cadillac flagship.

CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Kia K900, Hyundai Equus, and the upcoming Lincoln Continental. The CT6 also probably slots in somewhere between the Chrysler 300 and Lexus LX460, and somewhat under the BMW 7 series, Mercedes S classes, and Audi A8.


OVERVIEW:

Though not quite as old as Mercedes (Daimler-Benz), which is arguably the world's oldest formal automaker, Cadillac is still one of the oldest luxury-car makers in the business, dating back to 1902....well over a century. The company has produced many innovations over the years, perhaps the most important being that of the electric starter-motor for auto engines, which eliminated the difficult, awkward, and sometimes dangerous business of hand-cranking the engine for a start. An engine misfire or backfire could suddenly jerk the crank and seriously injure someone, sometimes with broken bones or dislocations. Cadillac also gave us a number of other good innovations, and worked with BMW and Mercedes to develop others, like anti-lock brakes and traction/stability systems. The company, since the late 1940s, has been known for its vertical and fin-styling themes, primarily because GM's lead stylist in the 1940s and 50s, Harley Earl, was enamored with Lockheed's World War II-era P-38 fighter plane and its twin-boom, twin-tail fuselage. He used that plane's twin-rudder theme to use the first small tail- fins on Cadillac models in the late 1940s, and the rest, of course, is history.

Cadillac went on to become the "Standard of the World", as its ad-themes suggested. In the 50s and early 60s, if you didn't have a classic '57 Chevy or two-seat '55-57 Ford Thunderbird, a Cadillac was THE American car to own. The nameplate was legion with musicians, entertainers, and stars in Hollywood. Country music great Hank Williams owned a '53 Cadillac (he needed a plush, soft-riding car with his notorious back-problems)...and he passed away in the back seat that car on the way to Cincinnati to give a concert. Rock-music great Elvis Presley loved the huge, massively-finned Cadillacs of the late 50s, owned some pink ones, and, even gave them as gifts to his friends and family (one of the pink ones is still on display at his Memphis Graceland Estate). Bruce Springsteen, another big rock star, also liked pink Caddies.....even wrote a song about one. My late father briefly owned a '62 Sedan De Ville he got as a hand-me-down from my mother's cousin when he got a new '67....my first taste of power-steering and power brakes was on was on that '62, and how overly-sensitive the hydraulic-assist was were back then. My first actual driving lessons, before that were in a compact Plymouth Valiant with automatic.

The fuel crises of the 1970s, though, greatly affected the Cadillac nameplate, especially after the mid-size Seville was introduced in 1975 and the big Caddys were all downsized in 1977. Quality also suffered, going from bad to worse to even worse. Some of the 1980s-vintage Cadillacs ranked among the most poorly-built and unreliable cars with that nameplate ever produced, with disasters like the V-8-6-4 variable-displacement engine, the terrible 5.7L diesel V8 diesel originally developed by Oldsmobile, the awkward-looking chop-tail 1980 Seville, and, of course, the notorious Cimarron. (I actually liked the Cimarron's overall looks and interior, but its carbonated 80 HP engine and harsh-shifting 3-speed was a joke for a luxury-grade vehicle). The nameplate, for a number of reasons (not the least among them GM's poor management) never regained the Standard of the World status it had enjoyed decades earlier, and, for a time, most Cadillac owners and drivers ended up being silver-haired World War II veterans and their spouses who had started with the nameplate after the war, and simply stuck with it through its troubles. Indeed, one elderly lady in my church, a retired Army general, who has since passed away, traded in for new DeVille/DTS every fall for over 45 years, at the same local dealership, usually getting the latest new color (the dealership, of course, made light of that in its advertising). For several reasons, I generally don't buy into the idea of automotive stereotyping (small convertibles being for females and gay men, minivans for soccer-moms, Volvos for schoolteachers/professors, Buicks for old people, BMWs for Yuppies, etc...), but the DeVille/DTS was a rare exception. Its reputation of being a geezer-mobile indeed WAS, in fact, true. It was rare, in my experience at least, to see someone under about 60 or so driving one....with many in their 80s.

Eventually, of course, the soft-riding DTS was dropped, and replaced by the somewhat smaller XTS, which had a much more nicely-detailed interior, better materials inside, better handling, and an AWD option for bad weather that the DTS lacked. But the XTS, in my experience when I reviewed one, clearly lacked the DTS's ride comfort, showed some engineering problems in the chassis (which the factory later admitted), and was saddled with the hard-to-use CUE video-system that few people liked. To be honest, and even being as objective as I could, I simply didn't like it. Most of the same comments could also be made when Lincoln's MKS replaced the long running Town Car...I also was not impressed with the MKS, for almost exactly the same reasons).

Now, it's the XTS's turn to get dropped......(good riddance).......and to be replaced by the all-new CT6. The MKS will also soon be on its way out, replaced by an all-new Lincoln Continental debuting later this year. Yes, Lincoln is bringing back the classic Continental nameplate....but that will be the subject for a future review, not this one.

So, welcome to the CT6. In its first year, it is offered in four different trim-lines....CT6 ($53,495, Luxury ($59,340), Premium Luxury ($68,565), and Platinum ($88,460). One transmission is offered (an 8-speed Sport-shift automatic). Three different engines.....a 2.0L turbo in-line four of 265 HP and 295 ft-lbs. of torque (this doesn't seem like an engine fit for a Cadillac flagship), a normally-aspirated 3.6L V6 of 335 HP and 284 ft-lbs. of torque (now that's more like it, and probably the engine I'd choose), and the top-line 3.0L twin-turbo V6 of 400 HP and 404 ft-lbs. of torque, the engine for showing off. Availability of the three engines varies among the four trim lines, but not all of the engines are offered in each trim line.....see the web-site for details, as it is a little complex to list it all here. From the web site, AWD appears to be standard on all the 3.6L and 3.0L twin-turbo versions, and RWD on the turbo 2.0L, with AWD not available. The standard AWD on so many versions, of course, might make it a significant competitor to upper-level Audi Quattro sedans, but future sales will determine that.

I looked at several different CT6 interiors, both before and after my injury, but, for the test-drive, chose the version I'd probably choose if I were in the market for this car...the 3.6L Luxury Trim, with its standard AWD. I drove a black-on-black model, though.....most definitely NOT the color combination I would chose. And my particular test car was pretty loaded, with over $12,000 worth of options.....again, more than I would choose for my own car. As with most test-drives, though, I was more concerned with the drivetrain and chassis than the paint or interior color. Overall, I liked it a little more than the XTS, but it still does not quite stack up to what I feel a Cadillac flagship should be. For the details, read on.

MODEL REVIEWED: 2016 Cadillac CT6 3.6L Luxury AWD.

BASE PRICE: $60,395


OPTIONS:

Bose sound system with 34 speakers (yes, that's right...34 speakers): $3700

Active Chassis Package (includes Magna-Ride shocks): $3300

Rear Seat Package: $2450

Enhanced Vision/Comfort Package: $2025

Lighted Trunk Sill Plate (dealer-installed): $325

Highway Safety Kit: $130

Wheel Locks: $75

DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $995 (not too bad for a vehicle this size)

LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $73,395


DRIVETRAIN: AWD, Longitudinally-mounted 3.6L V6, 335 HP, Torque 284 Ft-lbs. (Cadillac doesn't list the RPM figures for max-torque/HP on the web site), 8-speed Sport-Shift automatic transmission.

EPA MILEAGE RATING: 18 City, 27 Highway, 22 Combined

EXTERIOR COLOR: Black Raven

INTERIOR: Jet Black Leather



PLUSSES:

Good wind noise isolation.

3.6L V6 good overall power plant for this car.

Seamless drivetrain and engine stop/start system.

Active rear-wheel steering standard or optional on some versions.

Sharp, quick steering response and lack of body roll.

Attractive, easy to read, analog-style, electro-luminescent gauges.

Complete set of secondary gauges.

Rear seat entry/exit somewhat easier than in many of today's sedans.

Relatively simple spare-tire access.

(Mostly) good interior hardware.

Generally roomy, well-finished cargo area.

Relatively good front/rear headroom and legroom.

Transmission shift-lever action better than expected.

Variety of interior wood/carbon-fiber trim-patterns (but only on some versions).

Excellent stereo sound quality.



MINUSES:

Road noise from the rather aggressive tires.

Tires prone to flat-spotting and vibration when cold.

Ride slightly too stiff for Cadillac traditionalists.

Balky hood-release?

Still-complex CUE system, though not as much as before.

Somewhat loose-feeling door handles.

Hard-to-reach battery under trunk floor.

A few cheap-feeling interior hardware components.

Styling not much different from less-expensive CTS.

Improvements needed for both inside and outside mirrors.

Too many of the exterior paint colors extra-cost.

Front seats not as comfortable as expected.

Recent Cadillac reliability, per Consumer Reports, has not been good.



EXTERIOR:

On the outside, the new CT6 is easily recognizable as a member of the Cadillac family......it carries on the aforementioned Cadillac tradition of chunk, vertical-fender/headlight/tailight styling that has been a hallmark, in one form or another, for well over half a century. In fact, the general overall styling and overall body-shape is quite similar to its brother CTS.......IMO, for the first several glances (never mind the first glance), it can be difficult to tell the two of them apart, unless you look closely. There are some minor differences in things like the shape of the exhaust-outlets, number and location of exterior chrome-strips, the shape/pattern of the vertical taillights, the style/pattern of the alloy wheels, and a couple of other small things. "Weeping" strips of chrome, dropping down from the headlights, outline the edges of the two front fenders. But, in general, the similarity to the present-generation CTS is remarkable. This is a major departure from what we're going to see at Lincoln, where the styling of all-new Continental, the CT6's most likely competitor, differs much more from its own smaller-brother MKZ....more on the new Continental, of course, later, in another review. The CT6's general front and rear styling theme is also carried on very closely in Cadillac's new XT5 SUV, but, of course, that is also the subject of another review.

Overall, the new CT6 is quite low-slung on the outside, and sits fairly close to the ground. Despite the fairly low-slung stance, however, entry/exit for large persons such as me is definitely made easier by the fact that the rear-roofline (and that of its brother CTS) blessedly avoids the current obsession with the droop-down, humpback-whale look from so many of today's sedans (Thank you, Cadillac). The slightly higher rear-roofline allows noticeably easier entry/exit to the back seat without banging one's head or having to contort one's body into a pretzel. Perhaps (?) this is deliberate on the part of the stylists/designers.......those who have the most tradition of buying or leasing Cadillac flagship sedans (or even riding in the back seats of them), while not necessarily having one foot in the grave, still clearly have enough birthdays behind them that they do not have the flexibility or athleticism of someone in their twenties or thirties.

While I thought the exterior of the new CT6 was handsome (as is also the case with the CTS), I was somewhat less-impressed with the actual sheet metal itself, which did not feel that substantial, or the somewhat loose-feeling attachment of some of the trim and door-handles. The doors opened and closed with a precise but not very solid-feeling sound. The paint jobs on the ones I looked at were generally quite well done, though the pricing-structure is a ripoff. Nine exterior colors are offered, but seven of them cost extra ($495 to $995)......with only the black and silver avoiding the extra charge. And, IMO, only the Red Tint Obsession and Crystal Pearl White (which would be my choice) seem to avoid the funeral-home look. (Oh, yeah....and the patented, trademark light-pink, special-production color for Mary Kay Cosmetics LOL). As is usually the case nowadays, there are no standard body side moldings to protect all of those extra-cost paint jobs from parking-lot dings and scratches. There is a chrome strip down each side, but, like with some other vehicles, they are mounted too low for door-protecion.


UNDERHOOD:

Snap the hood-release lever.......the inside hood-release on several of my test cars seemed to have a hang-up that took more than one attempt to get the primary latch to release enough to get my large fingers under the hood to release the secondary lever. The rather light hood rises to display the usual insulation pad on the underside. A pair of nice gas struts hold up the hood for you....no fussy manual prop-rod. Three different engines (all longitudinally-mounted for RWD/AWD) fit under the hood, so, of course, the are are some differences in how tight each engine fits in, how much the engine covers block things underneath them, and how accessible engine components are around the sides of each block. The 3.0L Twin-Turbo V6, as one would guess from the added hardware and ductwork on a V6, fits in the tightest, with the least amount of room to reach things. The 3.6L fits in rather tight along the sides, but with some open area in front to reach things. To address the complaints of some enthusiasts, I can see why the engineers did not try and stuff a V8 in there......there just isn't enough lateral room, plus the new CAFE gas-mileage laws are working against traditional V8s anyways. Not only that, but the 3.0L TT puts out a boatload of power...as much as any Cadillac V8 of a non-V-spec nature would probably put out anyway. The battery is not underhood...it is back in the trunk, for weight-distribution and to save space in the tight confines next to the engine. The dipsticks, filler-caps, and fluid-reservoirs, asks usually the case, are fairly easily reachable. The hood, when it closes back down again, does not shut with the usual audible thud or slam, but with a very muted, quiet, precise click......something I don't think I've ever heard or felt before on a vehicle with a metal hood.



INTERIOR:

The CT6's interior is generally an impressive-looking cabin, and there are a variety of trim patterns available in both wood and carbon-fiber (I'm a fan of both if done well) and leather-upholstery colors, though not all colors and patterns an trims are available on all models....see the web-site's Build-Your-Own feature for details. Some of the wood-trim options actually look like wood, others have a swirl-pattern that, to my eyes, looks somewhat like 1960's-era Paisley. I didn't particularly care for the looks of the four-spoke steering wheel (I usually prefer the look of three), but the addition of the fourth spoke did help with placement of the many steering-wheel buttons/controls. Some of the trim-patterns have wood-tone on the steering wheel, while others don't. The analog-style electro-luminescent gauges were quite attractive, colorful, and easy to read....and, in something rare for sedans nowadays, there was a complete set of gauges for oil pressure, voltmeter, and coolant temperature. The new CUE system in the center dash video screen was also colorful, and marginally easier than older CUE systems, but still quite complex. (a salesperson had to show me many of the functions). The stereo system was what one would expect in a car of this class.....excellent sound quality (and an even better premium stereo is available as an option...the car I test-drove had 34 speakers). The leather in the seats felt quite nice, and of a good grade.The front seats themselves, which have a number of different power-adjustments depending on trim-model, were generally comfortable, but didn't seem to be as well-padded as some Buick seats I've experienced, or as superbly form-fitting and contoured to my frame as the ones I sampled recently in the Lexus GX. The fabric headliner on the ceiling, inside of the A-pillars, and sun-visors was generally nice, but not as silky-feeling as on some competitors. The low, T-shaped "electronic" transmission-shifter on the console actually had more of a traditional mechanical feel/action in its movement......I was pleasantly surprised, as I've never liked the electronic shifters typically used in, say, BMWs and Mercedes products. Most of the interior trim and hardware seemed well-done, solid, and well-attached, though, in some trim versions, too many surfaces were highly-polished a little too much for my tastes.There were a few light or flimsy-feeling parts and compartment-covers here and there, but most of the interior seemed well-crafted. One pushes a video-icon, not a mechanical button, to unlatch the thin glove box door. There was relatively good headroom both front and rear, even on this low-slung sedan, again due to the somewhat conservative roofline....and the fact that the engineers designed the sunroof housing over the front seats in a manner that minimizes the amount of headroom lost. With the front seat set at where I usually want it, rear legroom is also pretty good for someone my size. Depending on trim-version, there are, of course, also a plethora of comfort/safety/convenience features all throughout the cabin....too many to list here in detail (see the web-site for details), though the rear seats don't recline or fold......more on that below.

Though some things could be improved (and Cadillac CUE systems, even this one, always have room for improvement LOL), there wasn't much about this interior I really disliked, except for one thing......the awkward finger-slide/sensor control for the stereo volume, under the dash-screen. In general, I'm a firm believer in rotary-***** for stereo functions. especially for volume and tuning. I've also criticized similar finger-slide controls in the Lincoln MKZ sedan and some other older Lincoln models, though Lincoln, thankfully, is getting away from those and going back to ***** for more features (but not everything) in its latest MKC and MKX models.


CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:

Open the trunk lid, and the CT6 has a nice roomy trunk/cargo compartment that is generally well-finished, although the dark gray carpet on the walls doesn't quite equal the plushness of the carpet-grade used on the floor. A First-Aid kit for the trunk is optional, even on top-line versions, where you would think it would be standard. The aforementioned rear seats don't fold down for added cargo space, though a cut-through passage in the middle of the seat is provided in the middle for long narrow items in the trunk like skis, fishing poles, golf clubs, etc.....(many of those who own cars like this are retired or near-retired, of course, and often carry those things). Under the floor is the usual temporary spare tire, and, under the temporary spare, the car's battery, hidden under a battery-cover. One nice thing about the temporary spare in this car, though, is the ease of getting it out. Just un-twirl a small single hold-down circular piece of hardware a couple of inches in diameter, grab the tire, and pull it right up. Then, set the flat tire on the same mounting, twirl the same screw-on mount right back into place finger-tight, and, Bingo, that's it...you're ready to go. A monkey could do it.

(Just an aside note on the lack of a fold-down or reclining feature for the rear seats. That's something that I'm not going to necessarily blame on cost-cutting. Like with some other higher-priced sedans, a lot of time and effort went into the engineering of the CT6's unibody frame, and, in some cases, structural engineers prefer not to use folding or reclining rear seats when getting maximum frame-strength and bracing across the rear. That's because rigidly-mounted seats seats form an added brace across the width of the vehicle, just forward of the trunk, providing better rigidity and allowing the rear suspension, and in some cases rear-wheel steering, to work more effectively).


ON THE ROAD:

Start up the 3.6L V6 with the (usual for this class) engine START/STOP button. The V6 comes to life generally smoothly and quietly, but with some small audible noise at idle. Though not quite as refined as some similar-sized Lexus powerplants I've sampled, the 3.6L, overall, IMO, is a good choice for this car....reasonably refined and powerful, having enough spunk for the added weight/drag of the standard AWD. I did not actually sample the smaller 2.0T turbo four, but, overall, I do not think that a relatively small turbo four is a suitable power plant for a flagship of this class, though some of them can produce decent power. The extra power of the 3.0L twin-turbo V6 is probably not needed for most driving conditions.....unless one wants to show off, CTS-V style, in a manner somewhat less sedate than typical for a Caddy flagship. The 8-speed Sport-Shift automatic shifted and operated smoothly and seamlessly, as did the automatic stop/start system for the engine at idle....a feature that used to be mostly in hybrids, but, because of fuel-economy rules, is making its way into more and more conventional vehicles. The stop/start system, nevertheless, can be turned off if desired.

I had mixed feelings about the chassis, handling, and noise-isolation. Overall handling and steering response was excellent for a sedan this size, aided by the AWD, fast-ratio electric power steering, and electronic rear-wheel steering that has the rear wheels pivot a couple of degrees to compliment the front as the steering wheel is turned. Steering response is very quick, with minimal body roll.....Cadillac engineers seem to be putting sharp handling into virtually everything they design nowadays. The Magna-Ride system shocks, which use a magnetic field and small iron particles to vary the fluid-damping, do a generally good job of adapting to different road surfaces, though, like the XTS that preceded it, I though the ride was, overall, a little too firm for the type of driver who would normally be looking at a Caddy flagship. Part of that was the large, aggressive, low-profile tires, which firm up the ride no matter what kind of suspension you have.....magnetic or not. And the specific tires on my test car (I forgot to check which brand they are) seemed prone to flat-spotting from sitting around awhile....there was a small but continuous shimmy/vibration in the chassis on any type of road surface until the tires fully warmed up and started flexing. At lower speeds, the tires also produced more audible road noise than I felt suitable for a Cadillac flagship, though the effective sound insulation and wind-noise control helped mute the tire noise at higher speeds. The brakes were quite effective, and the pedal location was not too bad for my big Mens' size-15 shoes going from gas pedal to brake....the shoe did not tend to get hung up on the side or bottom of the brake pedal. On the road, I noticed that the camera-equipped inside rear-view mirror did not go with my prescription glasses very well....it produced ghost-images and reflections on the face of the mirror , and interfered with my rear-vision. Pressing a button on the bottom of the mirror turns off the camera, and reverts to the straight-mirror, which I found much better and less instructing. The twin outside mirrors were much too small for my tastes, which may (?) have been done to try and cut down on air-resistance and bump up gas mileage slightly.


THE VERDICT:

Well, IMO, Cadillac has done a somewhat better job on this car than they did on the XTS which preceded it....but IMO it is still not what I would call a true flagship, especially compared to the very impressive Mercedes S-550 that it is aimed at. In fairness, though, the S-Class costs a good chunk more than the average CT6, though top-line Platinum versions of the CT6 can run into low-line S-Class price territory. Cadillac had planned a larger, true flagship with a V12, but that project got cancelled, so the CT6 makes do as the top-line Cadillac sedan for the time being. It will, of course, directly compete with the upcoming Lincoln Continental sedan flagship (which you can bet the monthly rent I'll review LOL).

The CT6, despite its generally good overall performance, IMO needs several improvements....better mirrors, a more realistic paint-pricing system, less-aggressive (and quieter) tires on the Luxury trim-line version, a more respectable base engine, and a CUE video-system that you don't have to be Steve Jobs or Bill Gates to figure out. Though the voice-commands help, one still needs to set the system up for each one, which can be complex. It also, IMO, needs to be differentiated more from its CTS brother, both in size and styling. Right now, there just doesn't seem to be a whole lot of incentive for paying more for a CT6 when you check out the CTS.

But that still doesn't mean that the CT6 is a waste of money...I'd still take it over its predecessor XTS, hands-down. And, although it clearly cannot equal the road manners of the superb Mercedes S-Class or the superbly-crafted ornateness and interior of the Audi A8, you can, in most cases, for what an S-Class or A8 costs, have a CT6 with some money left over in the bank. And, in today's market, value sometimes plays just as much a role as ultimate design-excellenece.

And, as always......Happy car-shopping.

MM

mmarshall

(And here are the images/pictures....I had trouble posting them with the actual review)

Aron9000

Cadillac really needs to fire their interior designer and the guys who came up with CUE. Looking at those pictures of that light tan interior, I feel like the light tan interior on my old SC300 is better designed in terms of the colors, the matte finish on the wood(Why so shiny Cadillac??, its real wood, not 1970's fake crap, quit making real wood look like fake crap), and the overall layout, the dash is way less busy with way fewer cut lines and competing materials in my SC. I also feel that Lexus was doing better looking gauges back in the 90's than what Cadillac is putting in their cars now. That blue and red color scheme on the gauges just doesn't work IMO, and the font is way too busy.

And a lot has been written about how much CUE sucks. I don't like it either, especially that slider instead of a volume **** marshall mentioned. The really infuriating part about CUE is that the standard GM touch screen systems they use in all their other cars are much easier to use and have decently snazzy graphics. Also CUE uses "piano black" buttons on CUE, another dumb design choice because they show fingerprints, something you don't have a problem with in the standard GM infotainment systems.

Sorry if I seem to rant and rave a bit, but I am a big fan of Cadillac, love their classic models and the Escalade. Even liked some of their newer sedans until they started putting CUE in them along with that goofy interior design language that came with CUE.

mmarshall

A number of different color seats and wood trims/carbon-fiber patterns are available, depending on trim-model. My test car, for example, had black leather with a unique bronze-colored carbon-fiber trim on the dash and door panels.......a combination I had never seen before.


I don't particularly care for the red/blue combo either, but at least Caddy gives you the option of a full-secondary set of gauges to keep an eye on what is happening under the hood. Most vehicles don't, outside of large pickups and sports/sport-oriented cars. And, if you don't like the gauges, the dash can be electronically programmed a number of configurations.

The latest CUE system in the CT6 is still overly complex, but the graphics are actually pretty nice-looking....much nicer than before. Too bad you have to be Steve Jobs to actually USE them LOL.

Yes, I know you like big old American iron (so do I) . I saw the post you did about the 90s-vintage Cadillac Fleetwood in the "Favorite Luxury Car" thread.

Fizzboy7

Welcome back to car reviewing, Marshall! This one was yet another good read, with lots of solid and trusted info. (One tick: you mentioned "styling not different enough from the CTS" twice.)

So I'm thinking at this point, the "traditional Cadillac buyer" is long gone by now. Nearly all of today's Cadillac's buyers are the same ones buying Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, BMW, and Mercedes. They are cross-shipping those makes and want all the same virtues those brands offer with their models. Cadillac has gone out of their way to alienate/eliminate the older buyers of the 70's and 80's. Enough time has gone by now where those older buyers have either died off or left the brand.

mmarshall

Thanks. I've got the new XT5, Continental, LaCrosse, and Envision coming up....not necessarily in that order.
And again, Thanks ......I edited out that double-reference. Might be a little rusty after more than two months.

The CT6 and latest CTS, though, DO have a lot of visual similarities.....there's a reason why I included that statement. In fact, to me, they are almost identical, except for the area right below the headlights. Here....see what you think:






Well, due to good health care, more sensible lifestyles, and a number of other factors, a lot of the older, more traditional Cadillac owners (the ones most lamenting the loss of the DeVille/DTS/Fleetwood) are living quite long lives nowadays...and, of course, driving longer. This is especially true of the county (Fairfax) in Virginia that I live in, just outside of Washington, D.C., which boasts the highest average life expectancy in the U.S. for both males (82) and females (83). So, not only here, but even in other parts of the country, the idea that the traditional Cadillac owners all have either one or both feet in the grave is not accurate. But you're right in that more and more of them are probably hanging up the keys each day. But, even right here on Car Chat, posters like Aron9000 show that not all of the fans of these big old soft-riding American luxury cars are aging geezers, either. Ride/seating comfort and interior plushness is something that can be appreciated at any age.....as I myself discovered, as a teen-ager, a half-century ago.

tex2670

Those buyers are not entirely gone. How many Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, BMW or MB vehicles have you seen with fake convertible tops on them? I've seen a handful of Lexus, maybe one Acura, and none of the other brands. Cadillacs, on the other hand.....now, in fairness, I see more (many!) XTS's with that feature, but once that car is phased out, the CT6 will be the remaining large Cadillac for those buyers to gravitate to.

mmarshall

Agreed. There are more of them still driving around than a lot of people think.


You'll notice, though, that you don't see the XTS (vinyl roofs or not LOL) on the roads in anywhere near the numbers you did the DTS. In fairness, that is partly because the XTS was only in production for a relatively few number of years compared to dozens for the DTS. But, an equal, if not larger, factor, is that many of the DTS fans simply don't like the XTS. It handles better then the softly-sprung DTS (and offeres an AWD option for bad weather), but clearly does not provide the traditional Cadillac comfort those buyers wanted. Lincoln suffered the same problem........the former Town Car buyers shunned the MKS in droves, for mostly the same reasons as at Cadillac. Whether those former DTS owners gravitate to the CT6 or not remains to be seen.......but I wouldn't bet on it.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

while i agree with the demographic, i don't agree the DTS was in any way 'soft riding' like cadillacs of real old. i drove all of my ex-father-in-law's Deville's and DTS' (probably half dozen, dutifully traded in every 2-3 years) and when they went to the northstar engines, they also went to bigger wheels, lower profile tires, and a decidedly stiffer suspension setup. my old acura legend was a more comfortable ride. the big dts though did have a long wheelbase and decent noise suppression, and when my ex-f-i-l played the soft elevator music as he drove, i often felt like i was in a mall.

is that because you think it will be hotter in the summer? if so, i've concluded that's a myth. my jeep grand cherokee has black leather and it's no warmer than the cream colored interior i had on my explorer.

what are the qualifiers in comparison to? how is the spare-tire access relatively better or worse than any other car? i've noticed your caution against using any absolutes but it's not clear how to interpret the qualifiers without clarification.

like the absolute here.

i believe most of the traditionalists you speak of (the wwii 'greatest generation' tom brokaw has talked of) are now sadly dead. being in florida, i see tons of retirees and FAR fewer cadillacs than in the past. many have moved onto cuv/suvs, finding them MUCH easier to get in and out of, not to mention room for all the (yes stereotypical) golf clubs! some getting smaller hatches like kia souls, honda hr-vs, priuses, and so on. wealthier retirees are getting lexus (es/ls/rx/gx/lx) or mercedes/bmw/audi, etc. this is cadillac's challenge - and they're rightly doing it by 'product first'... of course being a HOT HOT competitive market they continue to have their work cutout for them but they're definitely trying hard.

the ct6 is no s-class but i don't think it was intended to be - it's bigger than an e/5/gs/6 though, with tons of tech and drive train options. the s-class is so strong that cadillac likely felt going directly after it would fail.

i think the likelihood of a ct6 owner opening the hood are slim and none. in 18 months of ownership of my jeep grand cherokee i've opened the hood once just out of curiosity.

almost every vehicle now comes or can be optioned with push button start.

mmarshall

No, the later DTS models were not necessarily like the Cadillacs of the late 50s through mid-70s, which rode like magic carpets and handled like battleships. And the Concours version of the DeVille/DTS (I'm sure you'll remember that version), which was dropped before the rest of the model line was, used trim and a Touring suspension/tires/underpinnings that, while not stiff per se, were slightly more sport-oriented then the regular DeVille line. The general point I was trying to make, however, was that, IMO, the DTS was clearly more comfort-oriented than any Cadillac sedan since, which, in comparison, ride and handle like stiff German sport-sedans.....indeed, some of them have German engineering and are proven on the Nurburgring course. The ATS-V, for example, is extremely stiff in its underpinnings, which translates into some of the best handling in its class (the auto magazines love it), though, of course, it is aimed at a completely different group of buyers than a DTS, XTS, or CT6 flagship.



In my own personal case, I just don't like black paint on vehicles for a number of reasons. Part of it is the continual dust/wash/wax/detail problems. Part of it is the rebel/aggressive driver image it often reduces.....though I generally don't believe in auto stereotypes, many others do. And, part of it is the sunlight/heat factor (though that can help, of course, in the winter when you want quick melting of snow and ice on your car).

But the main reason I made that statement also goes beyond personal or preference reasons....into the realm of fact, science, and physics. Your JCE's black interior may stay as cool as the light-colored interior your Explorer had, but are (or were) either of those two vehicles regularly parked outside in sunlight during a Florida summer? If they are regularly parked under trees, of course, that will help somewhat.....as will heavy tint on the windows (as much as state law allows). The regular afternoon thunderstorms in Florida (which, in some FL locations, occur like clockwork), also help by cutting off the afternoon sun for awhile. But, black paint on a vehicle's exterior, more so than any other color, is guaranteed to heat up when sitting in direct sun, especially at a high sun angle (which Florida also has most of the year). That is not just MM's opinion.....that is a fact. The root cause of it that what is termed, in physics, as Albedo...the term for a surface to reflect sunlight based on its surface color. Albedo is measured between 0 and 1. White surfaces have the most albedo (1)....which means that they reflect virtually all of the sunlight that hits it, and stay cool. (a good example of this is a fresh white deep snow cover, in winter, making it difficult for the sun to warm up the land and air above it). Conversely, black surfaces have the least albedo (0)....which means that most of the sunlight that strikes them is absorbed, and heats the surface up.

So, while I respect the specific conditions that you have encountered with your JGC and Explorer, to say that it is a myth that black surfaces heat up more in summer is simply inaccurate.....it is accepted science. Also, you are are talking about a vehicle with a black interior, not necessarily black exterior paint. If the exterior paint (from a lighter color) does not heat up as much as a darker color would, it won't radiate as much heat inside.

As you note, both here in Car Chat (and to a lesser extent, in the Debate thread with politics), I try not to use absolute terms when describing things that are (or tend to be) subjective and/or based on personal opinion and observation. Like discussing the black paint above, there are both personal and factual/scientific reasons why I don't care for paint that color. For instance, all else equal, opening and shutting a light aluminum hood with a manual prop-rod is usually easier than trying it with a heavier steel hood (unless a strong gust of wind jerks that light aluminum hood right out of your hands LOL). As far as the question you bring up on the spare tire, removing it in the CT6 is much easier than in many other vehicles....it is held on by only one spin-off attachment, which is quickly spun counter-clockwise and removed. And there are no other tools, like jack-handles/cranks, held on by the attachment wing...just unscrew and remove the spare, that's it. While not necessarily "absolute", I find that "relatively" easy to remove compared to most other vehicles.

(That's one reason why F1 and Indy cars converted to quick, spin-off tire attachment decades ago....to drastically shorten the length of the average pit-stop)


Yeah, those 34 speakers do a job. But whether the CT6's optional 34-speaker system (which my test-car had) is better than the superb Mark Levinson system on the LS460 (which is arguably the most impressive automotive stereo I've ever heard) is open to opinion.



This is where I differ from some other opinions. I don't believe that plush, soft riding/seating comfort is something that depends on age, or is necessarily limited to older folks.....though it is (and was) admittedly rare to see a teen-ager in a traditional Cadillac. However, I, and some of my friends, liked big, plush luxury cars when we were in high school (I had a big Buick and then a big Chrysler in college)....though, like normal teenagers, we also liked the muscle cars of the era. I myself had some fun with muscle-cars, but it was sensible fun.....not doing stuff that could get us hurt or killed. We saw too many young people get hurt and/or killed trying to drag-race on public roads.

(One of my uncles had a 1967 Cadillac Sedan De Ville that must have been a city block long (even bigger than my big Buick), and, since he was aging and didn't care much for driving any more, I drove it once for him on a fairly long trip as a newly-licensed teen-ager (my driving was good and safe enough that he trusted me). I also drove it up, with a girl from my high school class, to the photo-studio to get our high-school pictures for the yearbook taken. Wow. What a road car. I was probably the only kid in my county behind the wheel of a car like that).


Caddy did have an S-Class-fighting V12 flagship planned, but the project got cancelled.....probably because of the rush to develop the XT5 and upcoming XT3 for this (currently) SUV-crazy world. My guess is the XT projects (and the Ct6 itself) ate up all the development funds.



While not going into all the details why, though, I think it is a defect in the way the CT6's interior hood-latch is designed, since I saw the same problem on several sample-vehcles. I'd expect to see a TSB out on it shortly.

I don't know why ignition buttons started out on expensive cars, and worked their way down. Seems to me that buttons are actually cheaper to produce and install on an assembly-line than a conventional switch, which not only requires the separate machining of 2-3 separate key-sets per vehicle, but also, by law, requires built-in assemblies attaching to the ignition switch for locking the steering column and shift-lever when the key is untwisted and removed.

tex2670

I don't think I'm prepared to agree with that statement. You probably know the relative sales numbers--I don't. But I see the XTS everywhere. I'll bet I see at least one a day.

BrownPride

Well done review and congrats on the strides you've been making with your recovery.

I have some gripes with the CT6 (notably some of the finer details of the interior, pricing on higher-end models, and the bland styling of the rear) but overall I'd say it's one of the better Cadillacs GM has released in a long long time. By fitting the large, RWD sedan profile it's certainly the most "real" Cadillac on sale today. The styling is far more refined than the CTS, which I find to be awkward and ungainly. The CTS IMO didn't look great to begin with and has aged horribly. Put one next to the aging 5-series, A6, or GS and it's no question for me that the latter three are far more attractive and still look fresh.

Now the question arises, will people to ditch their overall nicer and more refined German and Lexus midsize sedans for the CT6 just because it's a little larger? The new E-class, for example, starts around the same price of the CT6 and is in my opinion a superior vehicle in every facet minus it's length disadvantage. I don't think the CT6 will lure clients of competitors as much as it will bring traditional Cadillac customers flocking back to the brand.

BrownPride

I think the point you're trying to make is that Cadillac is trying to be cross-shopped with those brands. I've read a few articles over the past couple years confirming that the ATS and CTS are in fact, not luring customers away from other brands at all. The overwhelming majority of sales are to people upgrading from other GM products or Fords. As poor as the Escalade is I at least appreciate that it's unapologetically Cadillac. I feel similar about the CT6, which isn't trying to be a German knockoff and is instead trying to be a traditional Caddy and offering a value proposition to go with it.

Sulu

A push button is cheaper but a push-button ignition is much more than that. There are expensive and complex electronics (both hardware and software), including a radio system to communicate with the keyfob, behind that seemingly simple button.

mmarshall

I see maybe one XTS a day, too.....in an area with the second-densest traffic in the country.