Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

2014 Cadillac CTS 3.6 vs. 2014 Audi A6 3.0T, 2014 BMW 535i xDrive, 2014 Mercedes-Benz E350

Behind the rural gas station that serves as Car and Driver’s pork-cracklin’s-and-beer depot during southern Ohio comparison tests squats a small, unadorned cinder-block structure slathered in white paint. Somehow, we’d never noticed this building on previous trips. It has a central glass door flanked by two small windows. All of the glass is blacked out. A handwritten sign taped to the door indicated that the establishment was open and warned that alcoholic beverages and smoking are not allowed.

Because we are pure of heart, we naturally assumed this was some sort of sex shop for locals who hadn’t yet discovered the internet. Or maybe it was the clubhouse of a Satan-worshipping sewing bee. Or could it be an NSA outpost posing as the clubhouse of a Satan-worshipping sewing bee? So, with sunflower seeds and Twizzlers in hand, we pushed open the door. Now, I want you to imagine the scene in Animal House where the guys enter the Dexter Lake Club with their dates and there’s a moment of stunned silence from everyone. It was like that, only there was no Otis Day and the Knights or dancing couples. There were instead about 12 eyes staring at us in a way not unlike those of a raccoon you’ve discovered digging through your trash can behind the garage.  And the only light in this one-room structure, other than the Tuesday-afternoon sun now streaming in through the door, came from video-gaming machines that lined the walls to our left and right. Eventually, the dude standing on a small platform at the back of the room called out, “Well, hey, guys! Come on in.” The gamblers turned back to their machines.

“Oh, well...uh...we’ve got to go do the...thing...with, uh...thanks.”


What does this reveal about the state of the mid-size-luxury-sedan market? Or the probability that the Cadillac CTS, now in its third generation, can compete in a straight-up fight with the German sedans that inspired it? Not much, except that if you want to afford one of these four vehicles (with an average as-tested price of $65,228), you’re probably going to want to stay out of cinder-block buildings behind gas stations.

We hopped in our Radiant Silver 2014 CTS (with sassy polished 18-inch wheels) and blasted back into the Hocking Hills, where we would reconvene with the rest of our group. They were busy trying to figure out how far an average adult-male human would have to walk to be equivalent to a one-inch caterpillar (named Aaron) moving 11 feet.

Here were parked our contenders. Our rear-wheel-drive CTS received motivation from the mid-level engine choice, a 321-hp 3.6-liter naturally aspirated V-6. It’s the slightly up-powered version of the 3.6 familiar from the previous CTS. Our test car wore Premium-level trim, which brings a huge load of both useful and frivolous features, such that it stickered for $67,075. A less-opulent CTS with the same engine can be had for about $55,000.

The three other cars were the established triumvirate that Cadillac has been stalking for the past decade or so. First up: the reigning comparison-test champ, 10Best-award winner, and all-around agreeable car, the Audi A6. We opted for an A6 with its mid-level engine option, the 310-hp, supercharged 3.0-liter V-6. The Audi is the only  vehicle in this test not significantly changed from last year. It carries the comparo’s lowest as-tested price of $62,745, even while equipped with optional adaptive cruise control and a sport package among other less costly stuff.

Next is the model that was once the ultimate bogey for Cadillac: the BMW 5-series. Specifically, we asked for the face-lifted-for-2014, rear-drive 535i. That not being available, we accepted a four-wheel-drive 535i, powered by the 302-hp, turbocharged inline-six. Thanks to its M Sport package ($3150) and a couple of expensive convenience bundles, the 535i rang in as our priciest entrant at $67,600.

To finish out the German trifecta, we grabbed a Mercedes-Benz E350, which, like the BMW, has been face-lifted for 2014. Ours wore the “sport” version’s curvy new nose, not the staid face of the “luxury” model. This means it carried no Alterman-satisfying hood ornament, but, according to the window sticker, it came with a “lowered sport suspension.” Try as we might, we could not find any evidence of sport in the suspension. But with leather seating and a whole bunch of infotainment features, our E350 arrived with a comparatively reasonable $63,490 price tag. It is powered by a 302-hp 3.5-liter V-6.

The Lexus GS350 would be eligible for this competition had it not already lost a comparison test to the Audi. So it was just Cadillac versus Germany. And, sadly, we could find no competitor with a real name—just a mess of numbers and mostly capitalized letters.

We noticed as we drove away from the gas station in the brick-shaped CTS that its fancy, dual instrument-panel screens with their fancy multicolored animations bore some resemblance to video-gaming machines. Coincidence?


The only car in this comparison that confounds us as much as the gaming den, the 535i xDrive seems to have lost touch with what once made us go gaga for the model. Alterman wrote down what we were all thinking: “There’s very little of the E39 [1997–2003] left in the 5-series. Now it feels like a big cruiser.”

Indeed, the notebook was overflowing with various ways to describe the 5-series as large and ponderous. It’s clear that shortly after inspiring Cadillac to build lively sedans, BMW left that territory for the taking. While the heaviest entrant at 4187 pounds complete with four-wheel-drive hardware, the BMW is bigger than the other three cars only in its wheelbase, trunk, and front-seat space. It’s the car’s deportment that leaves the lumbering impression. Its fat, large-diameter steering wheel commands a steering system that feels distant and a little slow-witted. The 535i doesn’t turn in readily. Instead it takes a two-stage approach to cornering. Turn-in is accompanied by enough load transfer and body roll to sow doubt about the car’s ability. Then it settles in and delivers the test’s second-best level of grip (0.86 g). But the experience is never exactly fun or confidence-inspiring. And the slowest-in-test slalom performance (40.1 mph) reveals its ultimately messy transitional behavior.

So the BMW has become something of a cruiser. That’s okay if you like that sort of thing, right? Well, it would be if it delivered the ride quality to match the test’s other cruiser, the Mercedes. But it doesn’t. It feels heavy-footed and clomps loudly over broken pavement. And over one particularly abrupt undulation on our handling loop, the 5’s suspension wanted to bottom out, where the other three cars took the hillock with considerably less drama. We suspect driving a 7-series on the same roads wouldn’t feel much different.

The BMW’s saving grace is its near-perfect powertrain. Deep within this car beats the heart of a BMW. The engine snarls demurely. It smoothly pulls the heaviest curb weight to a quickest-in-test 5.3-second zero-to-60 sprint. And the BMW is the only car here able to break 14 seconds in the quarter-mile. Though ostensibly an identical transmission to the one in the A6, BMW’s tuning and calibration make it feel smoother and more certain of its gear choices, as if it can anticipate a driver’s desires by telepathy. Good thing, too, because our car didn’t come with any shift paddles—an odd, but somehow telling, omission for a car with the M Sport package.

2014 Mercedes-Benz E350
Third place: Parlor Games.

.


Senior editor Tony Quiroga reckoned that if we swapped out the “fun to drive” category from our scoring chart with “gratifying to drive,” the Mercedes E350 would have aced that cell.  And he’s right.

Mercedes has been building large, satisfying luxury sedans for longer than just about any carmaker, and it shows in the E350’s air of cool imperturbability. It pours down the road fluidly. It shelters its occupants from the nastier bits of the world without completely isolating them from the experience of driving.

The basics are so very right. The dash is low and the windows are tall, providing excellent visibility. Its straightforward rectilinear instrument panel implies quality, solidity, and durability. And the apparent quality of the materials and finish is impeccable, with just the right amount of gleam. Its infotainment controls are even sensibly designed—no small accomplishment these days.  And the E350 has the second-roomiest and most comfortable back seat of the bunch.

The E350 encourages you to drive it as you would a Mercedes. This is to say, at a reasonable pace with none of that high-school nonsense. Should you choose to push it further—and we did—the seemingly imperturbable car becomes perturbed. Its seven-speed transmission gets confused in hard running (even in its sport setting), delivering shifts at odd, inopportune times. The big-displacement V-6 gets loud and gritty-sounding. And the suspension stops bothering to control body motions. The Mercedes was the only car without a selectable sport setting for its suspension.

Cool down a bit and the E350 eases back into its happy place and, frankly, so does the driver.

The E-class is a car that nails one side of the luxury-sport equation and disregards the other. If that’s the kind of car you’re looking for, stop looking.

2014 Cadillac CTS 3.6
Second place: Parlor Games.

A wise sage once posited that people advertise the trait they are most defensive about. Judging by the new CTS, that maxim applies to carmakers, too.

So often ridiculed in its recent past as the maker of floaty, uncoordinated tanks, Cadillac is focusing on providing dynamically competent sports sedans. With this CTS, it overshoots the mark in the best possible way.

Senior editor Jared Gall noted that if we brought out typical potential customers for these sorts of cars and let them loose on our handling loop, the Cadillac is the only one that would feel any different to them.

Indeed, cycling into the Cadillac from any of the three other cars was a revelation every time. Its handling prowess, innate friskiness, and hair-trigger steering put the CTS in a class of one. It is the only car in this group that didn’t just put up with hard driving, it indeed goaded its driver to go faster. Fortunately, the CTS stops as well as it goes, halting from 70 mph in 158 feet, meaning it comes closer to the perform*ance of a Porsche Cayman S than to these luxury competitors.

The CTS is a brick house. Its structure feels ingot-stiff, which is all the more remarkable since it’s also the lightest car in the group—almost 350 pounds slimmer than the BMW. For this, GM engineers are owed much respect.

And the chassis tuners have clearly made good use of the stiff structure. Our car came with the optional magnetic dampers that, combined with shockingly quick steering, turn the CTS into an eager puppy forever tugging at the leash.

Its demeanor may shock some old-school Caddy drivers as surely as it pleases us. Based on the stiff body control, you wince at the sight of upcoming bumps and potholes, expecting nastiness. But the CTS quietly, serenely dispatches them. Mid-corner bumps are absorbed without nudging the car offline. The Cadillac delivers the fastest ride motions and is the busiest on highway slogs, but only compared with the other, more luxury-oriented rides.

At the track, with stability control off, the CTS proved to be especially eager, *wagging its tail enough to slow its slalom time to only the second fastest of the group (41.3 mph). Our advice: Leave the stability control on.

Sounds like the winner, right? Well, yes it is, if you love the CTS’s stern looks (we do) and want a sports-car chassis.

But there are demerits here. First, the 3.6-liter V-6 is a little coarse in the upper ranges, and its thrust is ultimately not that impressive. The CTS’s zero-to-60 and quarter-mile acceleration times tied those of the Mercedes for last, despite its enviable weight-to-power ratio. Its observed fuel economy (18 mpg in mixed driving) was the test’s lowest. Its back seat is relatively cramped. The interior greets your eye with a crazed *carnival of textures, colors, finishes, and materials all piled on top of each other and surrounding the CUE touch-screen entertainment system, about which the less we say, the better.

But goodness, is it a fun car.

2014 Audi A6 3.0T
First place: Parlor Games.

If the Mercedes is the supreme luxury car of the group and the Cadillac is the dominant sports sedan, the Audi A6 3.0T is the great compromise.

Compromise has been turned into a bad word by obstinate lawmakers and a nation of detestable political pundits. But in the world of luxury-sports sedans, a compromise between the opposite ends of the spectrum is just where most buyers want to be. Okay, if  you still can’t stomach the word compromise, try substituting it with happy medium, or balance—or, hell, call it a win-win, if you must.

Our scoring system rewards a balance of attributes. Look at the Final Results chart. Notice how the A6 wasn’t the clear winner in any of the broad categories (“vehicle,” “powertrain,” “chassis,” or “experience”). Whereas the Mercedes and Cadillac soared and slumped in the rankings and the BMW scored well only in the powertrain category, the Audi racked up good numbers everywhere and finished with a five-point lead over the Caddy.

This makes the A6 our rational, reasonable choice instead of the emotional one. But that doesn’t mean the Audi is cold or uninvolving. While it isn’t as tantalizingly frisky as the Cadillac, the Audi brings its own deep satisfaction to back-road driving. Carrying the lowest center of gravity in the group, and endowed with faultless body control, the A6 (with the $1500 Sport package) is predictable, precise, and perfectly stable. This, too, is a variety of fun. The steering, which is a bit flavor*less, is at least nicely matched to the chassis. The A6 ran through our slalom faster (42.6 mph) and gripped the skidpad more tenaciously (0.88 g) than the others. All four cars wore M+S-rated tires. A soggy brake pedal was the A6’s only real dynamic demerit. Even then, the car delivered second-in-test emergency-braking distance from 70 mph (171 feet).

Along with the BMW’s turbocharged inline-six, the Audi’s supercharged 3.0-liter proves that a force-fed, smaller-displacement six (this one a “V”) is the best means of motivating two tons of luxury. Not only are the BMW and Audi quicker than their naturally aspirated competitors, their engines are also smoother and produce greater torque. The A6 was our passing champ both on the test track and the road. The blown V-6 delivered a big wad of its highest-in-test torque at the twitch of a big toe. The eight-speed automatic transmission served up the correct gears almost as presciently as the essentially identical transmission in the BMW. All this makes the Audi feel lighter over the road than it has any right to feel.

And then there is the area where Audi has, for more than a decade, excelled: providing a beautifully designed vehicle with high apparent quality inside and out, without excess flash or fussiness. There is no fireworks display inside the Audi. The feel is more modern-art gallery than casino. It’s simply an artfully executed and roomy interior, with nicely weighted knurled ***** and a phenomenally good navigation system.

In this case, the safe bet also happens to be your best bet.

VEHICLE, POWERTRAIN, CHASSIS, C&D/TEST RESULTS, FINAL RESULTS:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-6

corradoMR2

Where's the GS?

My gut says it would have finished third, behind the CTS.

CTS, very impressive...

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

In Motortrends "Six-Cylinder Midsize Luxury Sedan" comparison

4th: M37S
3rd: A6 3.0T
2nd: 535i
1st: GS350 F-Sport

It would be curious to see latest GS, CTS, 5-Series, E-Class, A6, Q70 and XF in a shootout.

TangoRed

When this article came out like 4 months ago it caused a massive *****storm on the 5-series boards. It was hilarious.

lamar411

They said the GS wasn't included because it has already lost a comparo to the A6.

geko29

Which I totally understood at the start of the article. When I was done reading, the omission just made me wonder where the GS would have fallen among the other three. If the A6 had finished mid-pack, I wouldn't care.

SteVTEC

Going on 4 years later I continue to be terribly disappointed in the 5-series this generation. There'd have been a 2011 5er parked in my garage, if it hadn't felt so disconnected and boring to drive. I've had them for loaners. Feels like a Camry. No thanks. So glad I got the convertible instead. But they did the same thing to the 3/4-series now as they did to the 5-series. No thanks to any of those too.

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

and the 5 series continues to sell well because of the badge.

doge

I had a 528i as a rental a few years ago and thought it was very nice that zf trans is a gem. My buddy has a e60 545 and it is no where near as nice as the current car is. Im not sure where these criticisms are coming. I haven't been a bmw person in the past but these new ones are real nice the interiors are huge improvement over what they have used to be. Im thinking about a x5 as a replacement for my ML500

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

You kind of answered your own question. The E60 had a terrible plastic interior for the price, but at near 400lbs less than the F10, it drove performed like a dream. Now with the F10 they based it off the heavier 7-Series chassis, added more luxury, so the car itself is much nicer inside (and out IMO), but it's also more numb which to BMW enthusiasts and enthusiasts in general is a big no no. Granted the shift from Sport to Luxury and Lexus from Luxury to Sport is interesting to see how people react, but if they are losing customers, they're also gaining them now when they otherwise would never had if their cars were too harsh.

mmarshall

All four of these sedans, IMO, would have probably outscored the new Lincoln MKZ. But it would have been interesting to see where the Volvo S80 and Infiniti Q50 would have ranked in comparison.

I noticed, though, that the article didn't make any comments about the notoriously complex CUE, MMI, or I-Drive systems....all of which have often been panned in other comparisons/reviews.

pbm317

MMarshall, the MKZ and Q50 are not meant to compete against the Midsize Lux cars. Q50 will be shopped against the A4, C-Class, 3 Series and IS350. MKZ really competes against the ES350, maybe the outgoing TL and incoming TLX.

S80 could eventually compete against these models, but will likely be relegated to the side/sub class with the Acura RLX.

mmarshall

Perhaps so, but I mentioned the MKZ and Q50 because those sedans are what Lincoln and Infiniti are offering in this price range AS competition, at least on paper. However, I agree that the MKZ cannot be considered a sport sedan....but neither is the non-AMG E-class Mercedes, which WAS included in the test.

I suspect the true reason the S80 was not included was simply poor sales. It's just not that popular in the American market.

pbm317

Are you kidding me? Lincoln and Infiniti are not in the price range of this test. These models are upwards of $65,000, definitely not MKZ and Q50 competitors, even "on paper" as you suggest.

Lincoln MKS is the larger more premium sedan, that even then, wouldn't be in this segment, and is on its way out. Volvo S80 has been uncompetitive for some time now, and is also due for a major change, no need to include it in this test.

Infiniti has their Q70 (former M37M56) that could have been included, but has also been pretty uncompetitive in the segment.

I understand you write some reviews MMarshall, but a lot of times your understanding of segments and models seems to be a bit off.

stlgrym3

iTrader: (4)

i don't know what Audi did with those supercharged 3.0 and 4.0 motors, they're insanely quick. 3.0T 0 - 60 under 5 seconds, and 4.0T under 3.5 seconds. amazing powertrains.