Okay. Seriously, what the hell is CR’s beef with GM? This isn’t the first time I smelled bull crap reeking from their articles. But aside from the past, this statement is by far the most ridiculous. No other publication can really say anything negative about the CTS, but somehow Consumer Reports does. How can they come up with the claim that the 2010 CTS is “not reliable”? It has owned the KBB resale value award for luxury sedans for two straight years. Unreliable cars don’t hold resale value! So riddle me that, CR. Riddle me that.
I don’t understand how seven million people can read this garbage and believe it.
Check out CR’s full press release after the jump.
CADILLAC CTS TOPS CONSUMER REPORTS’ TESTS
OF LUXURY SEDANS BUT RELIABILITY REMAINS AN ISSUE
CTS outpoints Acura RL, Mercedes-Benz E-350, Audi A6, and Lincoln MKS
YONKERS, NY – The Cadillac CTS posted an “Excellent” overall score and outpointed competitors from Acura, Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Lincoln in Consumer Reports’ testing of five luxury sedans for the February 2010 issue.
The CTS earned an “Excellent” overall road test score of 84, outdistancing freshened versions of the Acura RL, which earned a “Very Good” score with 80 points, the redesigned Mercedes-Benz E350 and freshened Audi A6 and which both earned “Very Good” scores of 79 points, and the Lincoln MKS which earned a “Very Good” road test score of 75 points. The CTS trails only the Infiniti M35 among all luxury sedans in the category that CR has tested, but below-average reliability prevents CR from recommending it.
“With excellent driving dynamics, a smooth and punchy drivetrain and a well-furnished interior, the CTS outscores some of the best imported luxury sports sedans,” said David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports’ Auto Test Center in East Haddam, Connecticut. The CTS trails only the Infiniti M35 among the 13 luxury sedans that have been rated by CR.
The new E350 has a slightly roomier interior and retains the same high quality materials and fit and finish of the previous E-class, but it doesn’t quite live up to its predecessor’s great ride and handling. The Audi A6, now five years old, still holds its own against even the newest luxury sedans. The Acura RL has a smooth and refined powertrain, but it’s not the most exciting sedan to drive. The Lincoln MKS came with the uplevel EcoBoost turbocharged engine, which is bundled with AWD.
In an Auto Test Extra, Consumer Reports also tested the Lexus HS 250h, a new hybrid sedan that received an “Excellent” road test score of 83, slightly higher than the Prius.
Prices for the luxury sedans as tested ranged from $50,660 for the Acura to $55,245 for the Mercedes-Benz. Only the Acura is recommended. The Mercedes-Benz is too new to have reliability data. Because CR tested the Audi A6 3.0T and MKS Ecoboost with newly introduced engines, CR cannot predict their reliability. CR only Recommends vehicles that have performed well in its tests, have at least average predicted reliability based on CR’s Annual Auto Survey of its more than seven million print and Web subscribers, and performed at least adequately if crash-tested or included in a government rollover test.
Full tests and ratings of the luxury sedans test group and the Lexus HS 250h appear in the February issue of Consumer Reports, which goes on sale January 5. The reports are also available to subscribers of www.ConsumerReports.org. Updated daily, ConsumerReports.org is the go-to site for the latest auto reviews, product news, blogs on breaking news and car buying information.
The CTS gives up virtually nothing to the premium European cars tested in terms of refinement, powertrain, ride, or handling. The ride is supple and controlled and handling is agile and sporty. The Cadillac CTS Premium RWD ($50,995, Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price as tested), is powered by a 304-hp, 3.6-liter 6-cylinder engine that delivers lively performance and gets 19 mpg overall in CR’s own fuel economy tests. The six-speed automatic transmission shifts responsively. Braking is excellent. The interior is plush, with well-fitted padded panels and nice touches of wood and chrome. It has a moderately-sized trunk.
The Acura RL is a pleasant and refined car, but the driving experience isn’t special enough to justify its $50,000 price tag. The car is full of electronic conveniences, but the ride and backseat are not as comfortable as those found in competing vehicles. Handling is sound, but less sporty than most of its competitors. The Acura RL AWD ($50,660 MSRP as tested), is powered by a 300-hp, 3.7-liter V6 engine that is smooth and slick and delivers 19 mpg overall on premium gasoline. The five-speed automatic transmission is very smooth and responsive. Braking is very good. The RL’s high-quality interior has impeccable fit and finish. For a car in this class, the RL’s trunk is modest.
The redesigned E350 doesn’t ride as comfortably or handle as well as its predecessor. Handling is still capable, but not exceptional, and the ride isn’t as absorbent as before, but still the E350 is quick and quiet, solid, comfortable, and luxurious. The Mercedes-Benz E350 RWD, ($55,245 MSRP as tested), is powered by a 268-hp, 3.5-liter V6 engine that delivers smooth and strong performance and 19 mpg overall on premium fuel. The seven-speed automatic transmission usually shifts smoothly. Braking is very good. The interior is nicely finished with padded panels and high-quality materials. The trunk is good-sized.
Audi freshened the A6 with a new, supercharged engine that improves performance while retaining decent fuel economy. Handling remains responsive and secure, the seats are very comfortable, and the interior is nicely finished. The A6 Premium 3.0T Quattro AWD, $53,075 MSRP as tested), is powered by a 300-hp, 3.0-liter supercharged V6 engine that delivers strong acceleration and 20 mpg overall on premium fuel. The six-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly. Braking is very good. The rich interior is trimmed with high-quality materials and panels are tight- fitting. Trunk space is good.
The MKS, which is based on the Ford Taurus, doesn’t do much to set itself apart for its higher price. It has many amenities and well-finished interior but the driving experience is ordinary. The Lincoln MKS Ecoboost AWD, ($52,770 MSRP as tested,) is powered by a 355-hp, 3.5-liter turbocharged V6 engine that provides strong performance and gets 18 mpg overall. The six-speed automatic transmission shifts quickly and smoothly. Braking is very good. The inviting interior has thickly padded and stitched panels and nicely detailed front perforated-leather seats. The MKS has a good-sized trunk, but its opening is very short.
Though pleasant overall, the HS 250h doesn’t have the refinement, quietness, and ride comfort associated with the Lexus brand. The cabin is narrow and handling is unexciting. The Lexus HS 250h Premium Hybrid ($38,939 MSRP as tested), is powered by a 187-hp 2.4-liter 4 cylinder hybrid electric/gasoline engine that delivers adequate performance and excellent fuel economy at 31 mpg overall. It can drive up to 26 mph on electric power alone. The CVT transmission works very smoothly. Braking is very good. The interior trim uses high-grade materials. The trunk is modest.
With more than 7 million print and online subscribers, Consumer Reports is one of the most trusted sources for information and advice on consumer products and services. It conducts the most comprehensive auto-test program of any U.S. publication or Web site and owns and operates a 327-acre Auto Test Center in Connecticut. The organization’s auto experts have decades of experience in driving, testing, and reporting on cars. To subscribe, consumers can call 1-800-234-1645 or visit www.ConsumerReports.org.
That’s right- a Car and Driver’s 10 Best for three years running, as well as being the Kelly Blue Book Resale Value Award winner for two years running, still can’t seem to sway the opinions of the fellows over at Consumer Reports Magazine (CR). Despite the 2010 Cadillac CTS winning out against the competition in the publication’s road tests with a score of 84 (which is considered “excellent”) and despite all previous accolades for the Caddy, CR goes on to claim that it has “below-average” reliability and therefore is does not make it on to the recommended list.
Future Product Guide: GMC Vehicles For 2012, 2013, 2014 Model Years 
Rumormill: All-New Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra To Resemble Cheyenne Concept 
Spied: The All-New 2014 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 
The 2014 C7 Corvette: What We Know 
Officially Official: 2012 Corvette Sees Much-Needed Upgrades 
NAIAS 2012: Chevrolet TRU 140S Concept Is Really Just A Sexy Cruze Coupe 
Lex on Chicago 2012: GM Will Finally Breathe New Life Into GMCI have owned and currently own both brands (Chevrolet and GMC) I've talked to a lot owners and read ...
Lex on Chicago 2012: The 2013 GMC Acadia/Acadia Denali Refreshes Crossover SegmentAfter a 2nd look, this is actually a Saturn Outlook with new headlights, bumper, grille, hood, taill...
Alex Luft on Study: Cadillac's Green Hell ATS Ad Had Most-Viewed Spot In U.S. TV HistoryThanks Ray!...
by 
July 23, 2011 at 2:32 pm
Hey stupid! The bottom line is this: if the shit falls apart it ain’t worth it no matter how “great” everything else is. Stupid fucks like u r the reason GM can get away with selling broken “dreams”. CR reports it and smart consumers head their warning and avoid a money pit. Dumbasses like u keep attempts like the Catera, CTS, Deville, and their Northstar headaches alive.
July 24, 2011 at 2:08 pm
All that cussin’ and name-calling doesn’t answer the question of why CR still feels that the CTS is less reliable that its competitors. And while vehicles like the Catera aren’t the pinnacles of GM engineering, the author doesn’t advocate their existence. Read much?
July 25, 2011 at 6:15 pm
There’s no mystery here. Just talley up the black, red, and white dots in CR and u have ur answer. I’m just sick of people excusing GM and others for their piss poor reliability. And I’m sick of GM playing the public by passing their unreliable trash as worthy. If they can up their reliability then I’ll up my respect. I’d actually buy a Cadillac if their initial, and longterm reliability was and remained “much better than average”. And if more people would have avoided their products GM would have had no choice but to step up it’s game or fold.
Instead of u searching high and low for excuses to explain the CTS’s low reliability rating, start demanding loud and clear for more reliable products from GM altogether.
July 25, 2011 at 6:35 pm
Look at the latest CR USED CAR issue on stands now. Cadillac’s reliability is a freekin nightmare!! The Deville from 2001 onward has black dots everywhere. The Catera belongs in the guiness book for it’s historic mechanical failure. The CTS represents the only direction the Catera could go which is up, barely. The STS- trash as well. With stats like this who needs a hoopty? And then to too it all off u have Manoli throwing a hussy fit cause “Suprise” the new CTS followed the tradition of its stablemates. Manoli needs to aim his questions right back at GM encourage them to get their own laundry cleanness first before looking for blame somewhere else.
July 25, 2011 at 6:42 pm
Cadillac has shown its rear. Rule of thumb is this: when it comes to Cadillac, u can rent them, lease them, and ride em. The one thing u don’t do is buy them!!
July 25, 2011 at 11:31 pm
And one more thing (this goes for u too Manoli). Perhaps u remember CR’s glowing review of the Catera when it was tested. It received a “promising” which was a new rating pending reliability. Despite the high praise of it’s performance and driving characteristics the car’s reliabilty ( like other Cadillacs) killed it. So yes CR called it liked it was then and it’s doing the same now. The Catera was ultimately found to be a REJECT and this new CTS has merely followed suit. It’s a highly praised money pit and consumers will do well to AVOID IT!! If that gets ur feathers all ruffeled then so be it! It’s not CR’s fault, it’s GM’s and that’s where the focus of ur little hissy fit needs to b aimed!
P.S. Used SRX’s are a black dot hoarding hog too! It’s a shame cause Cadillac builds some attractive cars. The only problem is that they spend more time on the side of the road rather than on it.
July 25, 2011 at 11:48 pm
I’m also sorry for the cussin and the name calling it was uncalled for and disgraceful. Please forgive me. I just can not stand giving companies a pass for substandard product reliability. Consumers deserve better.
July 26, 2011 at 12:37 am
Do yourself a favor and put away your Consumer Reports gospel.
I can agree with everyone else that consumers deserve the best (even though most of them don’t know how to properly drive “the best”). I also will not defend cars like the Catera. You’re right, it was a dud. And that’s probably a big reason why it’s not around anymore. However, when nearly every other consumer publication out there gives the Cadillac CTS a dose of acclaim besides CR, I feel compelled to flag it. CR has not been known to give the nod to practically any domestic brand, yet publications like KBB, JD Power and Consumers Digest generally fail to find the same faults, especially recently.
July 26, 2011 at 12:55 am
PS, thank you for reading.
July 26, 2011 at 7:10 am
I’m sorry but the favor IS the magazine. And it’s not a gospel, it’s a guide. Once again, it’s not CR’s fault the stock of Cadillac vehicles rate as low as they do reliability wise it’s GM’s. CR accurately represented the Catera’s reliability which u call a ‘dud’ and it accurately represents the rest of their lineup as well-”poor”. CR is not the only mag to show this. There r many other forums where owners agree on the myriads of problems this brand is known for. Resale value means nothing in terms of reliability. Many consumers will allow a cars design appeal, road manners, to take the lead over reliability when purchasing a car as a trade off for reliability. Call it brand loyalty or just plain ole stupidity but there’s no running from the fact that Cadillac has a long ways to go in their reliability. In the mean time competitors such as Lexus, Acura, and Infiniti , have proven far more reliabile. Again if u take issue with these facts, aim ur criticism towards GM and not CR. U have a much better chance of fixing the problem when u actually face it instead of avoiding it, and the problem is GM.
July 26, 2011 at 7:26 am
Oh and if u check the reliability of the CTS-V CR actually gives it a better than average rating. I saw this a few weeks ago and was pleased to find this cause I actually like the CTS-V to the point of purchase. It remains to b seen if it maintains this. I hope it does and hope other Caddys follow suit. But I digress because I have been disappointed in the past. The new Suburban started out with a much better than average rating only to quickly deteriorate. It was a shame cause I actually like the Suburban. The realistic criticism CR reports about the Cadillac’s reliability should b used as an opportunity for improvement, not an avenue to hide from and deny.