mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

2016 Cadillac ATS-V Faces The BMW M4 And Lexus RC-F: Video

The comparison tests keep rolling in featuring Cadillac’s latest attempt at cracking the sport coupe formula. And if we had anything to say about it, we think the 2016 Cadillac ATS-V is an extremely formidable player here. Especially as a first go.

But, this time it was Cars.com rounding up three sport coupes and putting them through their paces on the track.

The good news? The 2016 ATS-V didn’t place in last. The bad news? It placed behind it’s most heated rival: the BMW M4.

Cars.com says the M4 is simply still the benchmark in this class. And we’d agree, to a degree. The M4 does a lot of things right still. The power is always ready upon exiting a corner, and the chassis is sublime. But the automatic transmission is a major downfall in the car, as noted by the publication.

The 2016 ATS-V does nearly everything the M4 does, except, it feel less special. That’s us talking, by the way. Cars.com says the dampening and steering was too soft compared to M4, something it wasn’t a fan of. Though, the 2016 ATS-V won fans for its six-speed manual gearbox. The V series still lacks some of the charm an M car brings with it. Even if the marketing department has gone overboard with ensuring M decals reside at each corner of their cars.

The story was not so good for the Lexus, however. The RC-F was deemed too heavy, and lacked the low-end grunt of the turbocharged V6 engines found in the ATS-V and M4, leaving the car in third place.

What’s your say? Was this a fair positioning? Or should the ATS-V have taken top honors. Sound off below if you feel so compelled.

Former GM Authority staff writer.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. The test was not accurate at all, they did not use the automatic ATS-V which is much faster. Cars.com got lazy and were probably paid off by BMW, they said the auto was not available, what a cop out. Don’t do the test then, you are comparing apples to oranges, such a pointless test.

    Reply
  2. We may not like them, but BMW M3/M4 is still the benchmark. The ATS-V is not a heavy car, but the fact that the older BMW, with the automatic, is still quite a bit lighter than the stick shift ATS-V, and a couple hundred pounds lighter that the automatic ATS-V, is a testament to the engineering and exotic materials used by the M engineers. I would like to see both cars dynoed on the same dynamometer, as it appears the BMW is pushing more power and torque than they say. We still have to lift our hat to Cadillac, however, the difference in the cars is not enough to make fans of Cadillac bolt to BMW, but unfortunately, it also won’t make BMW fans, or those on the fence choose the ATS-V. The Lexus is totally outclassed here, with the V8 exhaust sound the only positive

    Reply
    1. Guess you did not read my comment…. And no you are incorrect, the ATS-V auto weighs only 100 more lbs than the M4 auto. Also the ATS-V auto is identical to the M4 on 0-60 and 1/4 yet brakes faster for $8,000 less carbon option. This is why the test by cars.com was poorly thought out and rushed and not accurate by any means. Anyone knows the current autos in cars are much faster than any manual and not a real test comparison once so ever.

      Reply
      1. My comment are my own thoughts, and was not a rebuttal of yours. Why do you guys get so defensive if someone suggest the ATS-V, a fantastic car, is not better than the competition? There are many test drive out there, and the results are basically the same. You should know that the main reason to get ceramic brakes is not for 60 to 0 stopping, it’s more for repeated track use and abuse, with absolutely no fade, ceramics also last much longer, and reduce unsprung weight. And yes, the ATS-V is heavier, and it’s more than 100 lbs. I would buy the C63 over either of these, because I don’t track my car, and the AMG’s interior and V8 exhaust sound put them to shame, but that’s just me. If you think the ATS-V is better than the M3/M4, thats fine, just don’t get mad if others don’t share that opinion

        Reply
        1. Yet again you did not read anything I said you just saw I disagreed with you and got butt hurt. Please read before you reply. I said the biggest problem is that it was not the auto tested which is a significant difference in performance. Where are you getting your weight numbers? I see nowhere online where it’s more than 100lbs. Now on the the ceramic brake option, if you are dumb enough to spend 8,000 on brakes go ahead. But again I know you hate to do this, but read about the brakes on the ATS-V and how they are standard brembo and no test driver could get them to fade and yet worked the same as the 8,000 option from BMW. When you fully price out these two cars the BMW is 10-15k more. Also Apple CarPlay was just added to the ATS-V which makes it a no brainer, unless you just want grunt without control and want the Mercedes C63 and still pay 10-15k more. Please read and don’t pull stuff out of your butt.

          Reply
          1. Just another fanboy who think it is okay to promote their brand by attacking everybody else. The moment you start to discuss price, you lose me, people should want to buy Cadillac because it is as good or better than the vehicles it competes with, and not because it is cheaper. That is one of the biggest problem Cadillac face as a brand, the main draw to it is that it is a cheaper alternative to the Germans, instead of it being flat out better. Go sit inside a C63, and then a ATS-V, and tell me if the ATS-V interior is in the same league. There are multiple sites online you can check and compare the base curb weight of the M3 and ATS-V, go check, and publish one that show the curb weight less than 160lbs heavier.

            Reply
            1. Ok mr know it all, how about you actually read a real review by a company that has a track record unlike worthless cars.com. Here is a review from motortrend manual vs auto to prove my point you moron. These numbers put the ATS-V better than BMW in almost any category with the”auto version” like I said from the beginning. I am a realist and follow facts I know that must be hard for you to fathom. You seriously want to trust cars.com, a website that has no history on reporting at all? Please admit you know nothing about these cars since you keep avoiding my main point that cars.com should not have posted manual numbers vs an auto BMW.
              http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1507_2016_cadillac_ats_v_first_test_review/

              Reply
    2. Pretty much what autopal said! The ATS-V is most definitely a valiant effort by Cadillac, and serves as a testament to what their engineers are capable of! It’s still amazing to see a Cadillac match the likes of the formidable Germans! But at the end of the day, the mighty M4 still has the total package: superior engineering, lightweight, and a comfortable interior with a special touch.

      And kudos to Lexus for offering a V8! Yes it may be somewhat coarse compared to these turbo sixes, but it’s good to have the option!

      Reply
  3. The BMW is still the benchmark.
    Nothing new.
    But don’t forget that in the BMW you also get to drive in style.
    The ATS still has a horrible cheap and tacky interior.

    Reply
    1. Says the guy who apparently has never say in an ATS. Its interior might not be as good as that of the Germans, but it certainly isn’t anywhere near as bad as you describe.

      Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel