For years, automakers (especially US automakers) have been overlooking a plain and simple fact: FWD cars are not much fun to drive. Their over/under steer characteristics are (typically) the polar opposite of a RWD car, especially a mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive car. There are always exceptions, for for a "luxury" car, RWD is king. ALL of the high-dollar luxury/sport luxury sedans/coupes are rear wheel drive, and they're that way for a reason. Simply put, it allows the manufacturer to engineer the car with more available power (and a better route to lay it down to the pavement), as well as more complex geometry in the front suspension to meet the markets needs.

Every auto manufacturer needs to take note: Produce 2 RWD vehicles. One entry-level sports car ($12,000 - $20,000), and one midrange luxury car ($25k - $40k). They'll sell like crazy, especially if they look, drive, and feel good.

They're going to have to do better than the CTS coupe if they want to compete with BMW. That thing is way too blocky and angular to appeal to the same customers. They can match straight line performance, and maybe braking distances. They probably could only match handling on paper if they tried, as in pure g's and slalom speeds. BMW's appeal has been largely based on their suspensions and feel, Cadillac does not have either of those. Who knows though, maybe if Cadillac steals enough from European and Australian divisions they can put something together.

I hope they do actually. Cadillacs have that wonderful drop like a rock depreciation, so that I might be able to afford a used one.

"They can match straight line performance, and maybe braking distances. They probably could only match handling on paper if they tried, as in pure g's and slalom speeds. BMW's appeal has been largely based on their suspensions and feel, Cadillac does not have either of those."

Sounds like someone hasn't driven a Caddy in a long while. Their current crop of cars is NOT your grand daddy's caddy. Take a close look at the CTS that is on the horizon, eg next fall. It's very competitive with the likes of BMW and Benz. Also, the sooner you realize that non quantifiable statements like "feel" do nothing more than show your bias towards a particular brand, the better off you will be.

Bring it.

I have always prefferred Cadillac to BMW. I think Cadillac has nicer designs and have alway been an icon for luxury. This is good and great products have been described as 'the Cadillac of ..." (the Cadillac of motorcycles, the Cadillac of vacuumees, etc). One never hears that of BMW.

I just really can't picture most people who would buy a BMW or Audi even considering a Cadillac.

It is about time, GM, it is about time.

Front wheel drive with huge V-8's...how much dumber can you get. Oh yeah, try and sell it for the same price as the benchmark $50k BMW 5-series.

If they expect their new replacements to be competitive with BMW and Mercedes models, they better pull a World War II move and steal some of their German interior designer/ materials people.

As a current 3-series owners, Cadillac would never cross my mind as a prospective purchase. If they ever get their quality/style/resale on par or better, I just MIGHT consider LOOKING at one lol.

There's a prevalence in the automotive writing (press and apparently here) to compare the smallest car of one line, to the smallest car of another.

With BMW and Cadillac, it's not a good comparison. The BMW 3 series has barely more interior room than a Cobalt (and is actually smaller in overall length and height). The CTS is almost inch for inch (interior proportions) comparable to a BMW 5 series. The DTS is larger in every measured dimension than a 7 series. Comparing the DTS to the 5 series makes absolutely no sense, oh except that the DTS is significantly larger for less (you must compare V8 to V8, right?).

BMW is not a "luxury" car maker, they are an exceptional performance car maker. Luxuries you find in Cadillacs, or Lincolns, or Lexus or Jags do not exist in the same price BMW. The Others don't perform as well as the BMW. That's what they mean by "Ultimate Driving Machine". They only add the luxuries that they do to "justify" the price range in which they operate.

Of course, why does a machine that is designed to be "ultimate" at "driving" need 4 doors? Or 4 seats? Or god forbid a HARD top convertible? Maybe they're not so "ultimate" afterall. Oh, wait, there is the Z series... Okay, I'll give you 2-door, non-hardtop convertible 3 series as well...

Oh, and yeah, I'm happy that Caddy has decided to go RWD, even though practically nobody among the buying public understands the benefits. And even fewer use them ever. And fewer still use them regularly. It will end the discussion and now we can discuss really important things...

like express - down windows for all 4 doors, or just for the front 2...

I think it's the right thing to do, just as long they combine it with an anti-spinn system.

As 'Matt' wrote its the driving experience with RWD thats the key.

I think it's the right thing to do, just as long they combine it with an anti-spinn system.

As 'Matt' wrote its the driving experience with RWD thats the key.

To DaMinority:

I don't understand how you can classify an entire brand as 'luxory' or 'performance'.. nor why you would want to. Consumers don't look for one or the other. They look for a combination of both. A great driving experience includes everything related to the car. This includes interior, exterior, performance, suspension and quality.

If you're referring to luxory as meaning a boat on wheels with leather seats, then yes, old Caddies meet those standards. However, in today's world, that isn't enough to keep people coming back.

People don't use simple logic when deciding which car to buy, such as 'I want a luxury car' or 'I want a performance car'. Why should comparison reviews be any different?

While a CTS is larger than the 3-series, do you believe that a person shopping for a CTS can afford to buy a 5-series? The reviewers need to consider what is the closest comparison between trim / quality / performance / size... Basically, they want to compare groups of cars that a given consumer market may wish to compare.

In regards to why a performance car needs 4 doors. The same reason it needs 2 doors instead of 1. A car is first and foremost used as a form of transportation. It's great to have a powerful car with great handling, but it's even better if you have a great car that can fit 4-5 passengers... And even better if it has a luxorious interior, with more features than you can shake a stick at... all of which work well.

Also, one more sidenote, I thought I read that the new CTS would have an optional AWD. Personally, I live in Michigan and would never buy a RWD car, regardless of whether people insist that you just need snow tires to make it comparable to a FWD car. I've been known to drive through white-outs on the free-way in a foot of snow. Somehow, I just don't believe I'd be as stable driving a RWD car as I would be in a FWD or AWD car.

I'm merely waiting for the day in which the Triumph roadster makes its return....
I LOVE manual everything in my cars, and rear wheel drives. Nothing gets a better feel for the road as manual brakes (no vacuum booster on the master cylinder), manual rack and pinion steering, and a manual transmission...

When I couldn't find a Triumph of my own, I settled for the joys of an entry level subcompact with all manual controls...