mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

2025 Cadillac Celestiq EPA Energy Consumption Ratings Released

The Cadillac Celestiq serves as General Motors’ ultra-luxury electric flagship sedan, combining sumptuous backside coddling with a cutting-edge all-electric powertrain and head-turning style. That said, the question remains – how efficient is it? Now, the 2025 Cadillac Celestiq has received official energy consumption ratings from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The side profile view of the Cadillac Celestiq luxury sedan.

According to the EPA, the Celestiq consumes 42 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity every 100 miles driven. This translates to an EPA-estimated 84 MPGe in the city, 77 MPGe on the highway, and 81 MPGe combined. With the batteries fulyl charged, the Celestiq is expected to deliver a driving range of 303 miles. Recharging with a Level 2 charger will require approximately eight hours to reach full capacity.

Cadillac Celestiq EPA Energy Consumption Ratings
Combined Energy Consumption (kWh/100 miles) 42
City Fuel Consumption Equivalent (MPGe) 84
Highway Fuel Consumption Equivalent (MPGe) 77
Combined Fuel Consumption Equivalent (MPGe) 81
Driving Range (miles) 303
Level 2 Charge Time (hours) 8

These numbers are essentially identical to those reported by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), as GM Authority covered previously.

The Celestiq rides on the GM BEV3 platform and features a dual-motor, all-wheel-drive setup powered by a 111-kWh battery pack. This combination delivers a maximum output of 655 horsepower and 646 pound-feet of torque, allowing for a 0-to-60 mph acceleration time of 3.8 seconds. While impressive, these figures trail behind other ultra-premium electric sedans, such as the Lucid Air Sapphire, which reaches 60 mph in just 1.9 seconds thanks to its 1,234-horsepower tri-motor layout, and the Tesla Model S Plaid, which accomplishes the same benchmark in roughly two seconds thanks to its 1,000-horsepower tri-motor layout.

Production of the Celestiq takes place at the GM Global Technical Center in Warren, Michigan, where each unit is assembled by hand. Pricing starts at $340,000. Buyers are offered a wide array of personalization options, including unique materials, finishes, and even the opportunity to use wood from a customer’s personal property as trim inside the cabin.

According to Vehicle Chief Engineer Tony Roma, GM expects to produce the Celestiq in exceptionally low volume, with a maximum of only a few hundred units set to roll out per year.

Jonathan is an automotive journalist based out of Southern California. He loves anything and everything on four wheels.

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 EPA has yet to get it right on MPGe for EVs, which makes this rating way overoptimistic.

    Reply
    1. Exactly, with less than half of the power from a power plant making it too the tires, were looking at around 30-35 MPG equivalent. That’s what owners see with a C7 Corvette

      Reply
  2. While mentioning that it’s not as fast as the Lucid or the Plaid, you could have also mentioned that it’s right in line with the Rolls as far as performance with more range. Why leave that out?

    Reply
    1. This ugly Hearse Mobile should never be mentioned in the same sentence as the Rolls Royce Spectre, or any Rolls for that matter. In terms of sales, quality of material and styling, just to name a few, the Rolls Royce Spectre will always put this ugly Hearse Mobile to shame, I’ve already seen 3 Spectres so far, still waiting to see one these Hearse Mobiles. Is it possible that there is no demand for this Hearse Mobile regardless of what GM is saying?

      Reply
  3. I don’t consider the Air and Model S ultra luxury because they are in line for mid-size premium sedan segment with top spec’d models.

    GMA knows better but ignore the obvious.

    Reply
  4. Please correct the obvious typo from “head-turning style” to vomit-inducing style”.
    Thank you.

    Reply
  5. Think how much better the MPG’s would be if it were not a fat whale.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel