Back On Top? Jaguar XF VS. Cadillac CTS

Jeb April 1st, 2008 3:08 PM Link

Great article. I’m probably in the minority of loving the looks of the XF…the first one I saw in the wild, I wasn’t sure if it was a coupe or a sedan until I spotted the rear door handles (it was out in front of the Jag dealership), and I’m a sucker for Jaguar, anyway. But the article pretty much cemented my appreciation for the CTS. The price is right, the power is there, and the looks have grown on me. In red, especially…

The real challenge in my eyes is going to be the G8 GT versus the CTS for top honors in the GM family. That’s a comparison I want to see.

Sean April 1st, 2008 5:17 PM Link

This could be make or break for Jaguar. The XF can completely turnaround the company and signal a new direction in design and engineering.

I wrote about Jaguar’s future last year:

http://www.beyondthekm.com/2007/03/01/thoughts-pag-jaguar-aston-martin/

Ducati Minor April 1st, 2008 5:42 PM Link

I don’t like it, and apparently neither do Jaguar’s US employees. Ford’s regional HQ is here in Irvine. My buddy’s girlfriend has worked for the Jaguar division for years. Prior to the Ford sale, I spoke to him about the XF. I told him the sedan would be a flop–some initial strong sales, but no long-term momentum worldwide (like the XK). He replied to me by expressing his girlfriend’s concern over her job (she still works for Jaguar now), and the employees’ lack of faith in the product. They were already searching for work elsewhere.

Good looks may not save lives, improve fuel economy, or make a car cozy, but they do count. How Jaguar ruined the C-XF, a stunning concept, and turned it into this…I just don’t know. The XK was based off a lightweight concept; yet the GT in showrooms weighs two tons. The C-XF offered fierce looks and the promise of immense power that customers associate with the marque from its glory years past. Jaguar’s designers turned it into a deformed Volvo. It upsets me how a company can ruin such promising ideas.

Ducati Minor April 1st, 2008 5:58 PM Link

On a good note about the article, Matt Davis is dead-on about the Brits. Their blind praise for this new Jag is annoying. But the Brits are holding onto anything they can. There is no British motorcar industry any longer. The firms are either owned by foreign enterprises or dependent on foreign engines, chassis, and transmissions. Roberto Carrer’s photography is in step with the Winding Road’s excellent work in this field. When it comes to these comparison tests, please pick a winner. The indecisiveness is a drag.

Kipp April 1st, 2008 6:00 PM Link

I stopped reading the article after I noticed both cars are over 6 seconds in 0-60 times, with the Cadillac at 6.5 seconds.

Why are these expensive cars so slow? The reviewer admits that these cars are also not great handlers, especially when compared to the Germans…

So what kind of person would buy one of these cars? Not someone interested in performance, obviously.. not anyone young, far too expensive, and older people wouldn’t buy the cadillac because it looks like a platonic solid. People who want a good, comfortable, reliable car are certainly not getting a jag or caddy, those are the kind of people who buy lexus and acura sedans. These cars fail at everything.

Ducati Minor April 1st, 2008 6:13 PM Link

Maybe you should actually read the article–this one and all the others that are related to it. You’ll learn something.

The Stig April 1st, 2008 6:16 PM Link

I gotta be honest, I drove the new CTS after reading all these rave reviews. I don’t know if my expectations were out of line, but I expected to be in a world class sport sedan. The one I drove was a fully loaded awd example. Gotta say, I was disappointed. For a sedan that has sporty pretensions, I found the lack of bolstering in the front seats to be distressing. Parts of the interior (specifically in the door panels and door handles) looked hastily assembled. The dash while soft to the touch, it seemed you could tell there was hardness immediately below it. Some of the plastics in the out-of-the-way areas screamed cheap. And I agree with the article about rear seat access and sitting position. While that’s not where I would be, I do get called on from time to time to drive adults around, and it was not comfortable. Plus the car had an annoying whine that would rise and fall with speed that sounded like an electrical issue through the speakers. Probably an easy fix, but did little to reinforce my image of GM built cars.

At the end of the day I kept saying “Nice enough - for an American car.” There was nothing offensive about the way it drove, but nothing extremely memorable either. But not at $46,000. All that said however, I’m still very curious about the V version.

Jeb April 2nd, 2008 9:06 AM Link

“The dash while soft to the touch, it seemed you could tell there was hardness immediately below it.”

This kind of statement is starting to drive me crazy. Of course there’s going to be hardness, it’s not a pillow. Why have we suddenly gotten so obsessed about squeezing dashboards? It’s as bad as counting cupholders. I don’t know how you guys drive cars, but I do it with hands on the wheel and shifter, not the dash housing and center console.

The Stig April 2nd, 2008 4:14 PM Link

Because how much attention they paid to details will tell you how much care they took in building the car. And for a car to sticker in the mid to upper 40’s, IMO it better deliver on all fronts. Unfortunately it reinforced too many of my stereotypes about American built cars.