Quote:
Originally Posted by kbui
There is a CTS-V Sedan as well as a Coupe! The Sedan was what the poster was referring to? For that price, the CTS-V Sedan is a better car.
|
I think you're missing the point. From the standpoint of transporting passenger the CTS-V sedan is just about as limited as the coupe is. Outside the CTS-V is larger than it's actualy rivals, the 3-Series, C-Class, etc. Inside, it's really not any better at transporting people in the rear seat than the worst of those and some of them, like the Audi A4, are noticeably more comfortable in the back despite being much smaller.
The CTS-V in either coupe or sedan is only a better car than the M56 if you don't actually
need a sedan that can comfortable seat adults in the back.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DGthe3
Put simply, the Cadillac is a genuine luxury sport sedan with room in the back for nearly anyone to sit in and be comfortable, yet with performance that surpasses practically every sedan in the world. The M56 is not. And realistically speaking that limits the M56 to:
|
Sit comfortably in? I think you need to revisit your number. Take, for example, rear leg room.
The Infiniti has 36.2 inches while the Cadillac has 35.9 inches. Sounds close, right? Ah, but wait....there's more. The Caddy only has 42.2 inches of front leg room compared to the Infiniti which has 44.4 inches. That might not mean much but for the fact that manipulating the seat track to allow the front seat to move ridiculously far forward is an age old trick car companies use to inflate their rear leg room numbers of cars with rear leg room issues.
Put the seats in those two cars in the same position for the same driver (oddly makes sense, doesn't it), and the Infiniti will have about 2.5 inches more rear leg room. To put that into perspective, 6 inches of rear leg room turns a mid sized sedan into a virtual limo....2.5 inches is still a lot. Or put more simply, a rear seat passenger can get comfortable in the back of a CTS...so long as nobody is actually sitting in the front.
The Infiniti also has four inches more shoulder room in back, and of course that smidge extra head room too. Even more, having worked in the auto industry.....specifically with interiors and for a time in prototyping....my time tells me the Caddy is playing the numbers game in the rear seat area because, to be blunt, it feels even more cramped than the difference in numbers indicate. And virtually every review I can find supports this notion with a search for cramped or tight rear seat on the CTS sedan bringing up hits from Car and Driver, Automobile, Auto.msn, and a few dozen others. On the new M I could not find a single complaint about rear seat room, but I did find comments like this....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Motor Trend
Refreshingly, Infiniti eschewed a coupe-like roofline for the M, styling that's popular right now but impedes rear-seat room. This M has no trouble carrying four adults in comfort; five if needed.
|
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...m37/specs.html
Worst of all, I don't even understand why GM or their enthusiasts are fighting this fight in the first place. The CTS is a G-Series competitor, not a M Series competitor. And in that segment the CTS shines as an ode to the fact that GM really can get it right.
Oddly, neither GM nor their fans are content to leave well enough alone and, when somebody makes a post about a car that the CTS cannot hope to compete with in terms of rear seat comfort, some yahoo is going to chime in an say how they would rather have a CTS-V as though nobody actually buys a sedan to carry people in the back and, as such, segment doesn't matter. What you're really doing is setting up a good car to fail in a fight it shouldn't have been in to begin with.
Honestly, I think I could throw a review of a Rolls Royce Ghost up on here and somebody would say "I would rather have a CTS-V", and most of the folks on here would just nod their heads.