There’s no debating that the 2014 CTS will take the Cadillac brand to new heights: not only is the car the lightest in its segment, but it also looks like a million bucks, and represents a huge step forward for Cadillac any way you look at it… unless you’re looking at rear seat legroom.
The issue is that the new third-generation CTS has less rear-seat legroom than its most direct competitors from BMW, Audi, and Mercedes-Benz… and it also has less rear-seat legroom than the outgoing second-generation CTS, which strikes us as puzzling, to say the least.
2014 Cadillac CTS Rear Seat Legroom2014 CTS vs. the competition
|VEHICLE||REAR-SEAT LEGROOM (inches)||+ / - NEW CTS (inches)||REAR-SEAT LEGROOM (mm)||+ / - NEW CTS (mm)|
|2014 CADILLAC CTS||35.4||N/A||899||N/A|
|2014 MERCEDES-BENZ E-CLASS||35.8||-0.4||909||-10|
|2014 BMW 5 SERIES||36.1||-0.7||917||-18|
|2014 AUDI A6||37.4||-2||949||-50|
|2013 CADILLAC CTS||36.06||-0.66||915||-16|
Having studied the numbers above, it is worth mentioning that the 2014 CTS’ rear-seat legroom dimensions aren’t that much smaller than those of the Mercedes-Benz E-Class, and we don’t see it being much of a sales deterred in the real world. However, the topic possibly begs a bigger question: does the minuscule amount of second-row legroom in the CTS (at least when compared to the competition) endemic of GM? After all, no one needs a repeat of the 2013 Malibu and the rear-seat legroom fiasco (founded or not) happening with one of Chevy’s bread-and-butter models. Even so, perhaps what we should be asking is why the new CTS’ legroom shrunk, while the exterior dimensions grew. How’s that for space efficiency?