Earlier this month, Cadillac revealed the new CT5 in a surprise announcement. The 2020 Cadillac CT5 will ride on an evolution of the company’s RWD/AWD Alpha architecture – the Alpha 2 platform. It indirectly replaces both the ATS and CTS sedans to compete against the BMW 3 Series and Mercedes-Benz C-Class. While there’s little doubt the car looks striking, one particular area of the Cadillac CT5 design is dividing Cadillac fans.
That area is the execution of the C-pillar, which features an Escala-like curvature and a black blanking piece aft of the rear door cutline. It would appear that the blanking piece has some people in arms.
“The opaque black plastic triangle under the C-pillar is very unfortunate. That’s just not acceptable in a 50K+ vehicle, or even a 30K+ vehicle.” — GM Authority reader, ds, wrote.
“Black plastic triangle on C-pillar is copy paste from former GM model Opel Insignia/Buick Regal and looks so cheap. No luxury car but cheap Chevy. Car is looks more like chinese crap – less is better. I hope that interior will be better than on spy shots.” — gm_guy
“I’m just not feeling that Accord/Altima-ish C pillar design. The rest of the car I like so far other than that. However, I can say that I’ve noticed the Sport (with black trim) makes it stand out (worse) more than the Luxury chrome does. Not sure why, but the chrome must break up the ugly a little more.” — Dan Berning
“Looks very much like an Infinity. The black plug at the C-pillar is especially cheap. Toyota doesn’t even do that. This design is not even in the same league as Lexus.” — Brian W.
Other comments about the Cadillac CT5 design were a tad harsher.
“There is NO WAY IN HELL I will by a car that has that TACKY design in the far back pillar (C), it makes the entire car look like some cheap piece of shyte.” — MastaFunk
However, not everyone hated it:
“I love how people are complaining about the c pillar styling and this so called plastic piece, it is comical, you gotta see it in person, there is nothing like this car. It does not look cheap in person and the sport model is down right sinister looking, just wait till the V model hits with over 675hp . Every guy is going to want it.” — Av
While opinions aren’t evenly divided on the Cadillac CT5 design, the C-pillar treatment is seemingly controversial.
Comments
There seems to be a spit decision on the look. I voted ugly. I really don’t think its ugly and I don’t think it pretty. With the limited choices I had I went with ugly. I think if they got rid of the tail on the chrome and replaced the plastic with glass it would be much better .
I voted pretty to offset your ugly – because I feel the same way you do…it’s neither.
I kinda feel the same as you guys.
Neither.
The only thing I would say is I simply think it would look better without the tail. Just make it look like a window, with trim, but no window.
Because I think it looks better than if it were just C-Pillar the same color as the car.
I think it should be a window but I’m sure the “you know who” squashed that.
And if they raised the height of the rear door over the current ATS/CTS it would be a plus.
There are ALOT of vehicles with the blank in that spot.
No big deal to me.
I totally agree with you.
Also, the person who said you’ve gotta see it in person…. uhhh, has he?? Lol.
I may go to NYC Autoshow next month to check out in person.
Got to see it first in person. Most GM photos are just horrible computer photos. In real life things tend to appear better than they are seen on the web.
I am not a fan of the short deck lid but will see how it turns out.
I don’t care for it. However, I like the rest of the car. It’s exactly how I envision a modern day 4 door Chevy Monza would look like. It would look fantastic as a 2 door coupe. This just looks more like a sporty Chevrolet to me than a Cadillac. I feel the same way about the XT6. It looks like a sporty Chevrolet. I love it as a Chevrolet, I’m not sure that’s the traditional Cadillac buyer though.
I think the C-pillar looks like an old Saturn sedan.
I think the whole side from the A-pillar back looks like an updated 4-door Saturn Ion. I sure hope this car looks much better in person
Datsun B210. Check it out on an image search.
LOL. First, seeing a quote of what I said seems funny to read it now. Anyhow, I also voted ugly, but only based on the overall look of the “C-pillar” and not the entire car. Like I said before: with the black trim I don’t like it at all. With the chrome trim (and the maroon color), it looks much better. Like several have said on here already, I will need to see it in person to make a final call.
We do see the fastback treatment on the 2020 camouflaged CT4. It seems to have more of a straighter angle from the roofline, rear window down to the rear deck. This gives the new CT4 a sharper look.
I do like the look of a luxury sport vehicle with a flat rear deck.
The blacked out trim on this new CT5 still looks sharp.
I still like the updated CT6. All the lines work well together. I hope they never cancel this vehicle.
The CT4 will have the same side windows and roofline as the ATS. Its back end may be weird because the center will be as high as the ATS while the sides will be low to imitate the horizontal Escala character lines. It may have the shape of the previous generation Malibu.
We had a similar issue on the Chrysler Pacifica (to the left and right of the liftgate) and bugs me to this day. That said — best wishes to Cadillac — PLEASE don’t be a Catera
the short dek lid and hump roof looks like the ugly honda four door does not look like a cadillac at all i see sales falling even more!!
I think the C-pillar is not the worst part of the car. Instead it is the rounded roof line that then concludes with the C-pillar. Why they didn’t decide to make this sleeker (headroom?) is the ultimate reason the side profile doesn’t appeal to me. The sharp angles in the front and rear just don’t move well with the rest. It’s a shame cause this thing is a looker from the front and rear.
anyone i know says a cadillac is nothing special anymore! the last real caddy was 2000 yr.
The C pillar is similar to the 2019 ES350. I don’t understand the blacked out piece.
The front end is very good. The rear is great. An Escala5 would have been better.
Personally I like a car that is different and not looking the same as the last 20 years, like BMW + Mercedes.
I sure hope the newer 2.0T with lower specs isn’t slower than the current 2.0T.
With only 2 trims, I sure hope that we can add individual options and not have to add a $5000 package
just to get one option we really want.
Yeah wouldn’t that be great !!!
Putting options on a vehicle we are buying the way we want.
Its just unheard of !!
Someone should try it !!!
I want this with no sun roof, no special suspension, forward and rearward park assist, forward breaking, AWD, chrome like premium and a 3.0TT. Ill bet everyone of those are in a “cluster” and will be thousands for one and I don’t want the rest.
“O” Well 3 to five years if its still available we will take one.
Same here; not saying its ugly, nor is it pretty to me–I just dont like it
I don’t think it’s completely unfortunate….. That being said, it does seem like a cost cutting fix instead of using glass. Which is completely unacceptable in the league that Cadillac desperately wants to compete in. C’mon guys, get it together already! Watching this once storied brand go down the tubes is hard. A BMW shopper would not tolerate this
The ct5 2020 design looks tacked on aft wise. Just design a station wagon like the discontinued cts. I’m a satisfied 2014 cts Cadillac station wagon owner. This ct5 2020 design is uninspiring. To much german, not enough american. A Cadillac owner.
The 2019 CTS looks way better.
Unoriginal, forgettable and bland. Therefore it gets an ugly from me!
I think 2020 is Cadillac’s last chance to evolve, compete with the Germans not to mention Alfa, Volvo and media darling Genisus.
The current CTS may look a little less than exciting but that never hurt Audi, and overall it is a well-designed car.
The new C-pillar looks cheap, underwhelming and as if Impala met Altama and then extracted genetic material from Cruze. GM has been playing with this sort of C-pillar treatment for years but added additional unneeded curvature.
Cadillac tried a reformed, subtle Art and Science and now sends to have resorted to copy and paste me too design. This is especially problematic as cars are becoming less curvy, more square once again making Cadillac behind the curve once again.
GM needed a future icon like the new CLA. This is why Mark Adams should have been left at Cadillac or even the tean behind Avista put in charge.
I never cared for the xt4 sport either, until I saw one in person and thought – holy crap that looks good. I like the most recent Cadillac vehicles I’ve seen. I have not seen this in person though.
Smart move by Cadillac to release these images ahead of its official debut at the New York auto show. That way, most of the harsh comments will have been already made and won’t dominate the coverage of the car.
IT LOOKS LIKE A CHEVY CRUISE !!! Cheap and ugly. I will NOT replace my beautiful 2017 CTS with one of these. After 39 years of Cadillac ownership and 17 new Cadillacs I will probably switch brands. Not what I’d want to do, but I can’t drive a car that looks like that, not after having 5 CTSs.
I would have much preferred that they use the clean and elegant triangular window of the Escala, which would have truly set this car apart. It is certainly an important enough vehicle to merit that kind of attention to detail. What they have done, at least in these renderings, is surely the weakest part of an otherwise nice design.
Look at the 2020 Hyundai Sonata… that is fantastic… this… typical cheap, (zero daring) GM… so sad!
One of many problems I have with it, on top of the C-pillar treatment, is that there’s too much plastic below the headlights. It comes across as an afterthought and cheapens the car (was not impressed with the similar XT4 that I have seen in person).
Another problem I have with it is that the headlights lost their “edge” in production. They’re too tall and they lack that aggressiveness the Escala had (Mazda and Jaguar both do better with their similar headlight designs, and the three-dimensional chrome trim Mazda uses looks really premium, IMO).
The CT5’s door handles are very unexceptional as well.
And the wheels are very dated looking.
Maybe I’ll feel differently when I see it in person, but right now I’m not impressed. I’m seeing new products from Cadillac, but nothing indicates the brand is being revitalized.
Its beautiful.
Looks cheap. Doesn’t look like a luxury car.
GM is pathetic! They’ve had all this time to create a “winner”, they show us the Escala and deliver a total bore with lights that resemble the Escala.
Cadillac waited over 11 years for a three row and the near universal response to the XT6 has not been enthusiastic but.. huh?
Either GM Mgt is incompetent, or they simply don’t care. Everyone here wants Cadillac to be significant and a strong luxury brand, current mgt is not moving the brand upward but consistently disappoints… when the mkt doesn’t respond they give up, look at the CT6. Everyone wanted it to be competitive against MB/BMW and it’s a “great” product but it’s about 80%. It should have been launched w/a Vette V8 if Blackwing wasn’t ready… it hasn’t sold to expectations so they kill it, almost. These moves do not inspire confidence.
Look at the New Genesis G70, right out the gate it’s Car of the Year, because it delivers value for the money… GM just doesn’t care and I say delivering 80% is disrespectful to the customers.
Hey lose money but put out winners, this ain’t a winner… so sad
The Xt6 was designed to meet Chinese tastes not Americans. That’s where the focus is right now for the brand.
I’ve purchased 3 Cadillacs in 5 years. Cts, Elr, and then a 2018 Escalade. While I’m not a fan of the current Ats and Cts, or the original Ct6, this CT5 is stunning. I could care less about the C pillar. I wouldn’t have even noticed it if not for all of the backlash. True Cadillac fans will flock to this car. And it will attract new buyers, because its only competition based on looks is the C class.
The Sport version is bound to look better in real life–they’ve removed the gloss in the photos.
My suggestion is to extend the chrome appendix down to the fender curve. That would distract from the black panel and be different from all the other sloped-back sedans.
Yea, it’s unfortunate. It should be glass. I’m not sure what they were thinking. That said, I won’t let it ruin the car for me, and I still think it is a very good looking sedan which should have very good performance. I voted pretty. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
Exactly this.
I don’t care… I like it
The design idea itself is neither ugly or pretty, its different, imo a Hofmeister kink or an A5 sportback style design would’ve been less polarizing. That said, I’ll withhold final judgement until I see it in the metal.
The plastic piece reeks of cost cutting though. When Steve said they’ll expedite JDN’s plan, this is the type of the BS I was worried about … It should’ve been clear glass with a 6-window DLO.
I’m not a fan of the c-pillar design. I went on the cadillac website and under the picture of the CT5 it clearly states “pre-production model, actual production model may vary”. So hopefully Cadillac makes some tweeks before the car hits the showroom floor. Still a good looking car.
All images that are digitally altered and not of the real thing have that footnote. It is no indication that design changes will be made.
Might as well by a Honda accord sport coupe. Its half the price, looks the same and probably has the same features as well. I recently bought my 4th Cadillac in 12 years,I love these cars but the new design is horrible. I would not purchase this car.Come on Cadillac you can do better than this.There’s to many model changes in such a short period of time, your running out of ideas.
The Honda doesn’t look “the same”… and it will drive substantially worse and has an inferior warranty. See the model in person first, then judge…
I wouldn’t call it “ugly”, I just hate that it’s not an actual window. It gives the impression Cadillac cheaped out either on production or engineering costs. Design-wise, it looks remarkably similar to what my 2018 Honda Accord has. Only on my Accord, it’s an actual window.
I own a used $8,000 2014 Chevy Cruze that was meant from day one to be a no frills cheap beater car. It has a very similar plastic C pillar insert. Definitely would not want to spend $50k+ on a car and have it share cheap plastic inserts with something a 17 year old buys with a summers worth of lawn mowing money… Just saying.
Welp Cadillac can’t win with their cars. Just cut the whole lineup but leave the CTS-V and trucks. What’s wrong with that
Looks like a Infiniti.. Nothing special.
People keep overreacting over a small ass c pillar. Last time I checked, the c pillar doesnt determine a vehicles success.
As an owner of a gen 3 CTS, nothing about this design entices me to replace my current car. While most people seem to rightfully complain about the C pillar, the real problem is the proportions. Look at the side profile. Unlike the Gen 3, with its longish hood and raked trunk section, this looks like every cheap front drive midsize sedan on the market (aside from the wheel to firewall ratio). I don’t even like the rear on my gen 3, but the rear on this one does nothing to improve it. The CT6 has the interesting outline/cushion shape around the trunk from the Escalator. This one has no character. It’s like they shrunk some of the interesting features of the CT6 and watered it down until it is uninteresting. It laks 5he striking presence that attracted me to the general. Hopefully it’s better in person.
As an owner of a gen 3 CTS, nothing about this design entices me to replace my current car. While most people seem to rightfully complain about the C pillar, the real problem is the proportions. Look at the side profile. Unlike the Gen 3, with its longish hood and raked trunk section, this looks like every cheap front drive midsize sedan on the market (aside from the wheel to firewall ratio). I don’t even like the rear on my gen 3, but the rear on this one does nothing to improve it. The CT6 has the interesting outline/cushion shape around the trunk from the Escala. This one has none if that character. It’s like they shrunk some of the interesting features of the CT6 and watered it down until it is uninteresting. If you have no new idea for this model, at least take the current tact from the Germans and make all models look exactly the same, just in different sizes. It seems to work for Audi, MB, and BMW. It’s better than this.
It lacks the striking presence that attracted me to the gen 3. Hopefully it’s better in person or they still have time to update the design after receiving the almost unanimous feedback.
If Cadillac is to remain true to its intent on incorporating styling cues from its 2016 Escala concept car, the C-pillar is quite a departure from the Escala, resulting in a stylistically distasteful design, in my opinion (understanding that design and beauty are in the eyes of the beholder), The chrome trim looks like it was a mistake, where the designer overshot the upper line where it joins with the lower line, then decided the ‘mistake’ looked good anyway and could justify it as being a differentiator to the typical variations of the original Hofmeister Kink (BMW, 1961) brazenly in use by other manufacturers.
From the direct side shot it reminds me of the old Sebring turned 200 before its final generation. If its a black tinted piece of glass and not plastic, it may fare better in real life shots. I’m hoping its not plastic but either way, when you think about it, if it was an actual window, what would we be looking at? The seats/ headrest are clearly in front of it so would we be staring at the rear shelf? #QTNA (questions that need answers)
“Every guy is going to want it.” So comical, you could buy a 700+ Hellcat or an even quicker Tesla right now…
It’s not just the c pillar. There are other egregiously unattractive facets to this lopsided jewel. None of them work well together but they sum up to a big no thanks from this 4 time caddy buyer. Grille is much too vertical and blunt. The hood is too high. The cowl is too high. The beltline is too high, repeating the flaw of the Camaro. The roofline is awkward, probably in an attempt to provide rear headroom after the rear seats were raised.
The rocker height is far too high. It all suggests they tried to make a sedan that they could market as an almost-Cuv. Yes, the market loves cuv’s right now but the ct5 needed to appeal to those counter culture types who still love a good sedan. Offering something that resembles a lowered cuv was a mistake. The glass work in the rear door is tragic. Between the door and c pillar we get 3 panels where 2 would be more acceptable and 1 ideal. The clunky b pillars interrupts the greenhouse badly and ruins any attempt to mimic the gorgeous escala. The front fascia is too busy and needed to lose all the fake mesh below the grille. The painted parts appear to hang off spindly little struts at the corners of the mouth. Its jarring. The tail lamps are too generic and lack the Cadillac signature vertical orientation. The exhaust outlets are about the most premium looking feature but they are way out of scale big. Nothing else on the exterior is executed to that level of perceived material quality, so seeing the nice exhaust bezel just reminds you how cheap the rest looks. Overall this is just hugely disappointing to an enthusiast accustomed to Cadillacs improving with each generation. Thankfully they haven’t wrecked the ct6 yet so maybe I can get 1 more caddy under my belt before I have to graduate to a German.
“The rocker height is far too high. It all suggests they tried to make a sedan that they could market as an almost-Cuv.”
Are we looking at the same car? Th CT5 is practically scraping the ground. I’m sure it will be less 59″ high.
Yes, the same car. Check them out and you will see the ct5 rocker to ground has been raised well above current cts. Look carefully at the side shots. A shadow has been cleverly added to help disguise the fact that the real rocker barely extends below wheel centerline. Without the trick photography there is a substantial gap to ground. This ct5 appears to be following the impala pattern of high floorpan and high h-point more so than the current cts with its low floor and deep seating.
Go to the CT5 tag and look at some of the camouflaged spy photos. If anything, it looks sportier and squater than the CTS.
Squat yes. Sporty not so much. By sort of over inflating the body shell it does appear kind of bulbous but I dont equate it to sporty. Reminds me more of BMW’s gt. I dont know anyone who was considering a CTS but instead was drawn to that look. I know it has killed my interest and I bought 4 cars off the sigma and alpha platforms. CT5 wont be #5.
“The rocker height is far too high. It all suggests they tried to make a sedan that they could market as an almost-Cuv.”
Are we looking at the same car? The CT5 is practically scraping the ground. I’m sure it will be less 59″ high.
If I were a betting man, I would say the piece in question is actually glass (not a window) and not “opaque plastic” as some seem to suggest. I will wait till we have more detailed photos/videos of the vehicle before I get a better idea, and see it in person for final verdict.
In the end, design is subjective… not all will like it and not all will hate it.
The reason the C-pillar is so upsetting to people is because it looks cheap. It probably can’t be glass or they would have made it glass, because of crumple zones or simply because it’s cladding over metal. Either way, I worry it will have a similar effect as the gauge cluster in the ATS, one glaring, compromised detail that’s so out of place on a car in its class that the prospective buyer will stay with a German brand. The Alpha chassis of ATS was by all accounts equal to anything put out by BMW. It’s a true shame when the styling team (obviously under pressure from the accounting department) undercuts the triumphs of the engineers.
“It’s a true shame when the styling team (obviously under pressure from the accounting department) undercuts the triumphs of the engineers.”
I think it was the stylists’ sloped roofline and enlarged door opening that made re-engineering the required strength impossible without a window so small as to be useless–and even uglier than this blank.
It would look fine without the dividing post in the rear door windows. Two vertical lines is one tpo many.
That is an example of informed, concise analysis. Thank you, and I agree.
The inside interior of that C pillar looks curved like that of a BMW 5 Series. Therefore they should have made that plastic crap, steel curved to match the inside. What’s with the rear seats showing 3 inches of “hump” in the floor beneath that? Tacky!
ya know, cadillac has come a long way since the cts ats and xts. i thing the c pillar is nice. that piece of the c pillar could be of use by placing the cadillac emblem there insted of it being blank. it would be nice and fancy . all of yall need to stop hating on cadillac and be positive
that spot could be of use by putting the cadillac emblem there. i love cadilac and gm as a whole