Here come the haters to tell us that for $295 less we can get 1 more horsepower in a Subaru. Ridiculous!

If I had a million dollars, this would be one of my first vehicle purchases. freakin sweet. way to go GM. freakin sweet. did I mention freakin sweet! now we just gotta wait for the '09 CTS-V. awesome ride

I think only people with kneejerk reactions to American cars would be very pissed about this. Personally, I think the car looks great. It might not be some people's top choice, but it's definitely up there.

Hats off to GM.

300+ Horses from a 3.6 V6 on REGULAR gas isn't tοο bad at all. Sucks that the Direct Injection version doesn't come in a 6 speed manual. Looks like the 5 series "might" have some competition.

The Caddy costs almost 40K, No way a Subaru only costs $295 less :) How about I buy a Subaru, You buy the Caddy, and I'll pay you $300 and we trade? :)

even though the car is great; the styling just throws me off.

Nice execution by GM. A very real competitor to the German luxury makes.

Nice work Cadi.

This new CTS is definitely better than the previous generations... though I didn't mind the first iteration very much it was pretty decent back then.

Nice edgy styling... Cadillac set out to reinvent itself for the new age, and has done a fantastic job with marketing.
Lincoln could stand to take a few lessons from its biggest made in America competition.

While the auto mags and auto sites will still probably rate the likes of the 3 series above that of the Cadi during their comparisons... The team working on Cadillac can certainly step forward to take a bow on a job well done, and hopefully maintain the effort in churning out some fantastic product.

Ok... I'm definitely not an American car fan boy, nor a fan boy of any particular region of vehicles.

But people really should give credit where credit is due.

/end pointless rant.

I think the CTS is one of the best-looking vehicles out there. I can't comment on anything else, but it looks great and I'm glad that GM has taken the initiative in turning around the American car industry. If only Ford and Chrysler would take some cues and fix up their ailing marques.

Must be GM who decided who gets the prize. Handling and quality... Handling... Quality?!... in this car?

That's Motor Trend Pakistan?

It must have been the *ugliest* car of the year 2008 competition which this car won. It makes my eyes bleed...

This thing is fugly as sin! Not sure what MT was thinking...

Looks like the days of uncompetitive GM vehicles may be over.

Sure. How much did this cost GM? Motor Trend is about as honest as a politician. Reminds me of the Tundra vs new Chevy review. The Tundra kicked its ass in everything (not even taking resale into account) and they give it to the Chevy because it was $900 less...

Did you not see the recent article of this POS vs the G35 sedan. Not only does the Cad have 100cc larger displacement, it also has Direct Injection...yet it still got absolutely stomped on by the G35's acceleration. Imagine if their engines had equal displacement / injection...still not "World Class".

While I don't disagree that these brand new 2007 GM models are a vast improvement over the crap they tried to shovel prior, their overall quality and resale are not up to their Japanese and German rivals.

They don't deserve a "Car of the Year" award. They're like that stupid kid in your grade school class that got some big award for improving their crap performance to mid-pack, but was still not even near the straight A, advanced classes or T.A.G. kids.

I will be interesting to see independent tests of this car. I know the old one got thrashed here in Europe partly because of its bad quality and handling. Hopefully GM finally have caught up in those departments...

It would be a nice change to get quality and handling from the US autos.

@Noya

In that Chevy 1500 vs. Tundra article, the Tundra was far more than $900 more. It was a few thousand more. And that was with the Chevy fully loaded. And the Tundra only "kicked its ass" in performance based tests due to the bigger motor and higher horsepower.

As far as G35 vs. a CTS, duh? Of course the G35 is gonna be faster. The CTS weighs a good bit more than a G35(About 300 pounds). And the horsepower is the same practically. Also you have to factor in what is the gear ratios of the two cars.

Ugliest car imaginable, unless you are a thinking of anything Dodge/Chrysler makes.

Bravo GM! Now, I wish you would develop a small hatchback/wagon with the same quality and a great diesel engine.

Last month I decided to make a new car purchase. I live in the U.S. midwest and I wanted a mid level 4 door luxury car around the mid 30s. Performance as far as power and suspension were important factors. With comfort, equipment, and ergonomics following.

My first stop the BMW 335i which was priced out of my reach and quite frankly I felt the look of the cockpit and interior was boring. I felt like I'd be paying 40K+ to drive a german banner around town.

I then looked at the Inifinti G35/37. I felt this car was too small for a 4 door. I regularly have adults sitting in the back seat.

I then looked at the new CTS. With all the positive hype about it's re-design etc I was excited to see it. I sat in one and the first thing that grabbed me were the tiny circular gauges. I had to squint to see the speedometer much less anything else. And honestly I really wasn't all that impressed with the interior layout of this car. Its a big car and it looks heavy. And it doesn't look "smooth" to me but rather boxy.

I then went to Lexus and checked out the IS350. Nice car, powerful engine, but it looks like all the other Lexus's to me with 4 doors and a big "L" on the front. And to equip it with the options I wanted: navigation, decent stereo, etc it would be $40 something out the door.

My last stop was the Acura dealer. I knew the TL was in my range and I knew it came equipped well at that price. But my only down on it on paper was its relatively weaker engine. I'd driven a TL in 2004 and I wasn't impressed with its power. Until I saw something at the dealer's parking lot: a "Type S" logo. When I saw the aggressive sport seats, the new 3.5 liter engine, quad exhaust pipes, sporty interior styling and of course its impressive equipment and Acura's one price gets all options I was sold. I know the torque steer chorus will chime in but front wheel drive is more of a priority where rain and snow can occur in our winters.

to wrap it up My 2008 mid level luxury car of the year priced in the mid 30s: The Acura TL Type S. I couldn't be happier. And quite frankly I can't believe Motortrend made the CTS their car of the year. It's a nice car but in my opinion not the best car in the world for the price.

Cheers!

@Chaser
Im really suprised you didnt look at the new Subaru Legacy SpecB or the 3.0R for your new car. Put it into the same category as a 335xi, Audi A4, and Acura TL for the most part. They come very well equiped, all-wheel-drive, and very sporty, the SpecB even comes with a 6spd and the 3.0R comes with a 5spd triptronic (auto/man) with paddle shifters...
As far as the CTS goes, I dont think it looks horrible, but its not the first car I'd go buy. Its got a lot of luxury, but thats about it... Handling is probably mediocre at best, but hey, what do you expect from companies that still use leaf spring suspension on their sports cars.

Yeah I hear you. I like subbies. And I also could have considered the Nissan Maxima in that category but I wanted the "luxury" related services that typically come with the upscale dealerships. Infiniti, BMW, lexus, Acura, etc. You know like loaner cars when its getting serviced, etc.

Chase

You really have to read what "Car of the Year" means. It's not "best car in the world for the price", and of course styling is somewhat subjective, but I suspect at least enough of their editors liked it to give it a thumbs up in that respect. But there's also significance, value. And it has to be a new model for 2008. Anyway, how many of you saw this car in person? Drove it? Tested the reliability over time? How quick to judge without facts... only bias.

I'm interested to see why it got picked over the Malibu, though, in "value" and "significance" anyway. I suppose it's significant as the icon of GM's attempt to make worthwhile cars.

Oh and... wow what is with the foggy red photos on MT's site? That makes it ugly all right. From the right angles and in the right colors... I think it's a nice enough looking car, but very Cadillac... so you kind of have to like that sort of thing.

Thats true Jason. But those were MY Criteria for Chaser's 35K car of the Year. j/k. Anyway, I think its safe to say comparative innovation probably is a larger factor to MT. But whatever MT uses to decide COTY 2008 isn't a very impressive year to me if the CTS is their icon for this year.

Yes its re-design is another positive turn around for GM and I like where GM is going. I also think the new Malibu is awesome. Maybe it wasn't counted because it didn't get out iearly enough.

GM will never compete with BMW, Audi or Benz.. cause they build boring bland junk with cheap interiors.

This whole angular design look for Cadillac is dated, all their cars look a like.
Another reason why GM will never compete with the germans, cause the Cadillacs have no resale value... they will always be on a lot for half price a year later, cause the quality put into these cars is crap.
Ive worked at the Hamtramck plant (doing IT work, not monkey union work) and saw how they built these cars, half of them dont run right off the assembly line or they are missing parts, they just charge $15 to 20K more for than the buick that is being built with the same chassis and engine, just different badging.

GM needs to get their head out of their arse and design a good car.
The only reason why they got car of the year, is cause they spent the most money in advertising with that magazine. They always do that every year.. its just a pay off for dumb people to think that the car is good.. hell, they made the PT Cruiser car of the year, and that car is the biggest steaming turd pyle ever built.

I question the credibility of this award when MT gave the Truck of the Year award to the Ridgeline! Ridgeline! Truck!

CTS is a admirable car in this class in all aspects, including QUALITY. First gen, was a good one too.

I also question the validity of this award. I saw this car at the LA Auto show this year and NO ONE was particularly impressed with its styling or its interior. I'm sure GM's desperation had a big hand in making this car of the year.

Remember when the Ford Thunderbird got the car of the year five years back? And for what? That car was damn near useless. The CTS isn't as bad, but I'd take a 3-series over the CTS in a heartbeat, or even better a G35.

David:

@Noya

In that Chevy 1500 vs. Tundra article, the Tundra was far more than $900 more. It was a few thousand more. And that was with the Chevy fully loaded. And the Tundra only "kicked its ass" in performance based tests due to the bigger motor and higher horsepower.

As far as G35 vs. a CTS, duh? Of course the G35 is gonna be faster. The CTS weighs a good bit more than a G35(About 300 pounds). And the horsepower is the same practically. Also you have to factor in what is the gear ratios of the two cars.

Okay, I toss MotorTrends after I read them and I don't feel like searching their website, but I'm almost positive it was less $2,000 more. And that was when the Tundra first came out (before the dropped their price to be more competitive with hillbilly Bob). That's another thing about magazine comparisons, they NEVER take resale into account, which is ridiculous since most people keep their cars for at least 3 years.

As for the CTS vs G35, exactly my point! The Cadi has several hardware advantages, but still sucks b*llz;
3.6L = more displacement (vs 3.5L)
Direct Injection = higher C/R (vs sequential injection)
6spd auto = tighter ratios (vs 5 spd auto)

Cadillac Alante
Cadillace CTS
Cadillac XLR
Lincoln LS
Lincoln Zeyphor?
Lincoln MKS?

You can defend domestics all you want, but at the end of the day they're still second class competitors (if you can even call them competitors).

David:

@Noya

In that Chevy 1500 vs. Tundra article, the Tundra was far more than $900 more. It was a few thousand more. And that was with the Chevy fully loaded. And the Tundra only "kicked its ass" in performance based tests due to the bigger motor and higher horsepower.

As far as G35 vs. a CTS, duh? Of course the G35 is gonna be faster. The CTS weighs a good bit more than a G35(About 300 pounds). And the horsepower is the same practically. Also you have to factor in what is the gear ratios of the two cars.

Okay, I toss MotorTrends after I read them and I don't feel like searching their website, but I'm almost positive it was less $2,000 more. And that was when the Tundra first came out (before the dropped their price to be more competitive with hillbilly Bob). That's another thing about magazine comparisons, they NEVER take resale into account, which is ridiculous since most people keep their cars for at least 3 years.

As for the CTS vs G35, exactly my point! The Cadi has several hardware advantages, but still sucks b*llz;
3.6L = more displacement (vs 3.5L)
Direct Injection = higher C/R (vs sequential injection)
6spd auto = tighter ratios (vs 5 spd auto)

Cadillac Alante
Cadillace CTS
Cadillac XLR
Lincoln LS
Lincoln Zeyphor?
Lincoln MKS?

You can defend domestics all you want, but at the end of the day they're still second class competitors (if you can even call them competitors).

@ Noya

"Reminds me of the Tundra vs new Chevy review. The Tundra kicked its ass in everything (not even taking resale into account) and they give it to the Chevy because it was $900 less..."

Didn't the Tundra have a full engine recall on all their 5.7L models due to the crankshaft snapping? You probably don't know what a crankshaft is so I'll enlighten you. The crankshaft is this silly piece of metal that transfers the pistons energy to the rest of the powertrain. I also don't believe GM has ever had a full engine recall.

The Tundra also tows less than the 1500 yet has a larger engine. I also wouldn't say that the Tundra has better resale. You can quote all the KBB you want, but if you have a 1500 you won't have a problem selling it for a decent price.

To Noya:

As I understood it, American trucks have always had a good resale value. Then again, I'm no truck person.

To everyone else:

For the people that say this car looks like the same ole' cadillac, what crack have you been smoking? The first time I saw this car in person, I was shocked at how different it looked. Yes, same cadillac styling (what do you expect.. it is a Cadillac right, maybe they should make it look like a BMW??, jackazzes).

Further, I haven't seen it first hand, but the interior is all new and improved and has had good reviews. It is also said to be vastly superior to the CTS of old, so unless you've seen it first hand, don't comment. You know what they say about assumptions.

I've been in the G35, and if you're comfortable in the front seat, then the person behind you isn't so comfortable ;) (I was in the back seat) I'm 5'4" with small feet, yet with my feet all the way back, they were still right up to the front seat. If you want something a little bigger, then maybe the caddy is now a good alternative. The TL is much nicer in terms of backseat room.

Not to sound like a fanboy and a defender of everything that is American, but yeesh, some of you people sound downright ignorant.

I think Motor trend had a contest for Ugliest car of the year, where the CTS narrowly edged out other GM products with it's hideous Aztec inspired styling, However there was a mix up with the envelopes for that contest and the car of the year. I wonder what they did with the envelope with the pictures of Audi S5 in it.

First, to Ant: The 5 series is a class above the CTS. The old STS was in the 5 series league, but a CTS competes against the 3 series. Alright? Check your price and size segments sometime. Or just learn to be an actual car lover.

To the Silverado vs Tundra crowd:

The Silverado is now NOT called a 1500, its a Silverado dammit. How many rednecks do I have to punch in the face or hit in the head with my torque wrench before they get that things change? Damnit its annoying.

Now, to the actual article, which so many are ignoring.

First, this is the "Car of the Year" Award. For a car to be considered for it, it has to be NEW FOR THAT YEAR. So all the cars people are saying are better than it? They could not be compared because they did not receive a significant redesign this year. To all the people saying the CTS is the best thing since Vannessa Hudgens photo leaked? The competitors included the Malibu and such: not other cars in the CTS class, which once again includes the 3 series, G35, IS350, A4 and C-Class. Which ones of those got a redesign for 2008? Just the C-Class, which is seriously lacking in the power department. Maybe a better daily driver in my opinion (I've test driven every car in the sports sedan category, and much to the chagrin of dealers, never purchased one).

Now to the CTS itself: its actually not that bad of car once you drive it. Is the interior world class? No, but you know what? Not many interiors are for this price segment.The G35's base interior kind of looks like a really nice Hyundai interior (and Hyundai has yet to release the Genesis so there). I'd say its a tie between the G35 and CTS here: the 3 series is still better than both once decked out right (but forget about getting that for the same price). A quick note to rear-seat room: upl8n8, what the hell are you talking about? I've never had a problem with rear seat room in the G35, and I'm 6'2. Maybe the person in front of you was a little bit of an asshole, putting the seat that far back?

Performance? It does not quite match the G35 as someone else said. Despite 1hp more, the G35 still accelerates faster and provides better handling. The CTS feels a little heavy now and then but not so much that'd the normal buyer would recognize, even I barely noticed it compared to the G35. Compared to the 3 series? Not even close: despite the remarkable handling of the CTS it's not posting the times of the 3 Series on any track. The G35 however does make an exceptional 3 Series fighter, and if given the right driver, may beat it. But does it BEAT the 3 series? if price is weighted, then yes: just like the G35, for the money the 3 series almost seems dumb. Why the hell would anyone pay that much more for a vehicle so slightly better? If you can afford to, then you should, but otherwise don't waste your time trying to decide.

To styling, I have to say at least the CTS looks unique. It will stand out, if not always for the right reasons. But then again, most cars here do look unique, some try and copy BMW's fine ass but thats about it. I do not like that it looks bulky, but eh, we'll just call it a "Fergilicious" look (see the video on Youtube concerning the CTS about that one, oh boy...... some people have way to much time, plant a tree with that time damn you).

The grill is a little too bold and takes away any sporty look the car has. The front end styling definitely is better on the 3 series or G35. Hell the IS350 might even look better, but only so much for that one (and I certainly do not think so).

Overrall, I'd rather have a G35 than this, but you know what? If I had to actually work to get a G35, as in go out of state to take delivery or such, I wouldn't. For that hassle, the CTS works just fine. Hell, if the salesman was just that much nicer than the Infiniti Salesman, I'd take the Cadillac in that case.

OVerrall, I think GM has a lot to learn if they want to take on the 3 series. But good attempt.

yea it took haters to spring out but they did... still a CTS winning for quality and handling seems almost too good to be true (speaking of handling, after all GM is responsible tor the vettes which handle remarkably, not even mentioning ZO6)

Styling is of a personal taste, besides you spend 90% of time looking at the interior of a car, how it looks from outside should not be a question of style but aerodynamics.

I have not yet seen this car in person, nor i have had the opportunity to judge the quality to myself so i hope i can trust Motor Trend to be less susceptible to corruption than Michael Bay....

Nice comments.

What I think you guys are missing is that GM prices caddies too high. With just a few options, they get right up their in the mid 40's, much closer to the BMW's than the G35.

I almost subscribed to Motor Trend this year, but I think I will stick with R&T and C&D. They seem a little more critical. I can't figure out why this car won either. Shoot, even with the slight remodel, I would have thought the G35 was more of a contender...

Yes, its Pakistan's 'Truck of the year'

@Jack

"Didn't the Tundra have a full engine recall on all their 5.7L models due to the crankshaft snapping? You probably don't know what a crankshaft is so I'll enlighten you. The crankshaft is this silly piece of metal that transfers the pistons energy to the rest of the powertrain. I also don't believe GM has ever had a full engine recall."

Not a 'full engine recall', but....

Nov 20th 2007 7:01PM
GM is recalling 90,000 vehicles to fix issues such as safety foam, timing chains, and engine components.

Speaking of crankshafts....
"Silverados and Sierras will receive new crankshaft position sensors. "
http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/20/gm-recalling-90-000-for-various-issues/

...anyhow...I drove a CTS a few years ago and thought it was a great car then. I'd love to test one with the improvements, but it's out of my price range, as are all cars over about 15k.

After hearing all the horror stories and subsequent resale drop in the previous gen CTS-V, plus the fact this is the "all new" CTS, I'd be too scared to purchase one. I'd prefer to wait and see how the long term quality ratings shake out.

Should sell well in the east...looks like an origami car.

It's not my top choice, but like this car. The drivetrain is sweet. The exterior is different and unique. The interior is well-appointed. It drives well. Even the magazine road testers were impressed with it at Nurburgring. And for people who buy cars to keep (so ppl can get a nice house and send kids to college, etc.) it starts at 32K and comes with a 100,000 mile warranty. Once the short BMW warranty expires, their maintenance costs can be nuts. Brakes alone are $600+. Add up a few of those and I could buy a turbo kit instead.

All the BMW fanboi's hate it. What a surprise. I like some of the BMW's too, but come on ppl, you have to pay stupid money for a great one. Otherwise you're getting a 230hp straight six with vinyl seats and a plain interior. Call it "pleather", "leatherette", whatever. Also I don't like the rear ends on the new 1, 3 and 5 series..those are just ugly. The front ends are nice though. Personally I like the previous-gen BMW styling overall.

I see this car as fitting somewhere between the 3-series and the 5 -series in size. You may or may not like the styling, but if you can't admit this is a nice car, your judgement is questionable. Notice I didn't say favorite. Even BMW's are not everyone's favorite.

To me, speed is luxury. I've never owned a sports sedan (although I have driven many of my friend's cars). I prefer to own two cars, one for commuting and shopping, and the other is an uncompromising fast coupe. For people who can only afford or want one car, this is a solid choice.

The grill is ugly, but other then that anytime an American car company wins the car of the year award is a good day for American car companies.

The new design has made the CTS shed its aggressiveness, for which, i loved it. Retaining the old design elements to an extent like- the front fog lamps, the wing mirrors would have made the new CTS stand along a 5 series with heads up.GM, please pump up your design engineers. Dont make the CTS too formal, to compete with the German executives.