Leasing is a great way to put yourself behind the wheel of some pretty extravagant cars with not a lot out of pocket. A few thousand dollars later and an affordable payment a month grants you access to premium badges and sporting intentions.
Motor Trend recently rounded up nine contenders in the highly-contested, compact luxury sedan segment to see which serves your $399 per month payment the best. Each one of the vehicles in play is offering an identical $399 per month lease deal, meaning value was a big factor here, especially since most lessees buy their vehicles out at the end of the term.
The 2017 Cadillac ATS was one of nine to compete for the crown, but alas, it finished mid pack. Fifth place was all the ATS could muster after being dinged for a cramped rear seat, ho-hum interior design and lesser value compared to other vehicles. However, the ATS continued to be lauded for its incredible chassis and sporting character. Finding the balance between “sport” and “luxury” continued to escape Cadillac, though.
If there’s some good news for Cadillac, it did outdo four vehicles: the Jaguar XE, BMW 3 Series, Volvo S60 and Infiniti Q50. But, you’ll notice names like Audi, Mercedes-Benz and Alfa Romeo are not under Cadillac. Head to the link here to see the entire pecking order.
Comments
Read it yesterday.. it did beat the Jaguar XE, BMW 3 Series, Volvo S60 and Infiniti Q50. Of those only the 3series is as old.. and let’s face it the ATS instantly gets demerits just for being American. I’d say for a car that’s been on the market since 2012 and was designed essentially in 2008.. it did damn well. The next Gen (CT3?) engineers/designers, I’m sure are learning a great deal before it is put on the market.
I think the ATS got robbed by the Lexus IS 200t in that comparo. Compared to the IS, the ATS has better handling, a better infotainment system (many car reviews on this point), and per the MT testing the 2.0 ATS is much, much faster. Look at the weight on the IS vs. the ATS – the IS is a fat pig. I can handle losing to the M-B, Audi, and the new Alfa. But the ATS should have at least been in 4th place.
love how they start by saying its not a really practical segment,due to price & size. then knock it down for rear seat room.
like… okay…. that’s cool.
We are talking about Motor Trend here.. so hypocrisy and double speak was almost expected. What kicked me in the head was that the untried.. untrue.. glutton for future frustration sitting at the Alfa service bay Giulia came anywhere near to 1st.
In performance.. yes it pulled off a better 0-100, but..
“The Alfa’s figure-eight performance was severely handicapped by its overly aggressive stability control, which couldn’t be defeated.”
They even rip it for fit and finish
” it took knocks for its wonky ergonomics. We liked its decently large rear seat and comfortable front seats, but we took issue with the fit and finish and some cheaper materials”
I see you also got tired of “everythingGMsucksInsidenews.com” too?
Would love to see some of the Camaro iLE suspension components make their way to the ATS as they’re necessary for the ATS to be competitive.
Well, reading the comparos it seems like the ATS’ chassis and handling, if it is behind the Gulia, is only behind the Gulia by a little bit. High praise for a car that’s going into its sixth year of production – I think GM can mostly evolve the chassis. I think what would better help the CT3/whatever they’re going to call it next would be access to the LGW V6 for V-Sport version. Better gearing/further improvements to the LTG Turbo 4 version too – looking a the numbers I’m curious as to how the Audi hit 60 in 5.1s and it took the ATS 5.7s.
You and I are more interested in the performance aspects than the normal customer. With that being said, we represent a very small portion of the car purchasing public. Cadillac has to find all the ways to appeal to those folks first to make their vehicles successful.
AWD equals zero spin not to mention the jump off the line is real. U should find 0-60 in all AWD vehicles tuned for performance to be slightly better than their competitors with only RWD. The Alfa puts out 306lb of torque early on so it is able to eeek out a win over the Audi despite being RWD. The Cadillac 2.0L doesn’t get to peak torque for 1000rpm after the Alfa.
As I have said on numerous occasions.. Cadillac really needs to boost the 2.0L Turbo to bring on the BOOM earlier and more of it at this point. The Cobalt SS Turbo with a similar engine was easily tunable to 340 ft-lb 9 years ago.. under warranty. No reason why the 2.0L isn’t more powerful at this point.