Skip to main content

2013 Cadillac XTS AWD Platinum - A Closer Look

In a 2-page, 10-paragraph, car review of a luxury sedan, Car & Driver failed to review much of the car besides the CUE (Cadillac User Experience) infotainment system. They go on and on to complain about the CUE system but they mention very little about the engine and ride of the car. There are basically only two paragraphs that talk about the engine and the suspension.

I can't say whether the CUE system is as bad as they say because I haven't tried it yet. However, in their review of the engine, they only mention two aspects; the hp output of the engine (304 hp) and the 0-60 mph time, which is 7.2 seconds. They then criticize the performance for being only adequate and move on. In the next paragraph, they criticize the suspension for not being as sporty as the ATS and a numb, light steering feel but say it has a nice balance between body control and comfort.

I do agree that the straight line performance is only adequate but I'm not sure why that's a problem. For a long time, Rolls Royce had a tradition of rating the output of their engines simply as "adequate", because that's all you need in a big luxury car. If it's not sports luxury, adequate power is enough. Very few people would argue about the Mercedes S-Class being a true luxury car. It is one of the most recognized large luxury cars (if not the most recognized) and one of the most prestigious as well. I remember reading Motor Trend's review of the Mercedes S350 BlueTEC 4MATIC (Mercedes lingo for AWD) diesel. They raved about it and said that it may be the one to have in the S-Class lineup, despite having much more powerful engine choices. 

Additional power over what the Cadillac XTS AWD and Mercedes S350 BlueTEC 4MATIC offer is very rarely, if at all, needed on the road. The Cadillac is just a little slower to 60 mph than the Mercedes (7.2 vs 7.0 seconds) but it is quicker midrange - 5 mph to 60 mph is dealt with in 7.6 seconds in the Cadillac vs 8.6 seconds in the Mercedes. Some people will disagree about that being enough. What I'm sure everyone will agree about, though, is that how quickly the engine propels a car from 0-60 mph isn't the only important piece of information. How smooth are the transmission shifts? Does it hunt for gears? How quiet is the engine? Does it feel refined? Does the engine seem happy across the rpm range or strong and smooth only in a certain range? These and many other aspects of the drivetrain are more important than a 0-60 mph time, especially in a luxury sedan, but there was no mention of them. It doesn't get much better for the suspension review.

They say the suspension "nicely mixes body control and comfort" which sounds great to me but they think it is lacking. Why must a large luxury sedan that's designed to carry people in luxury and comfort, not canyon carving, handle like a compact sporty luxury car like the Cadillac ATS? Shoppers of the Cadillac XTS and other large luxury sedans are more interested in a comfortable and composed chassis, not going to autocross them or hunting for the perfect stretch of back roads to push the car around. How well does it soak up bumps? How does it transmit bump noises into the cabin? How does it drive at high speeds? Like the engine review, they focused on one aspect they don't like (the suspension not being very sporty), and did not give a detailed review of other more important aspects.

If you look close enough though and try to find the more important details about the car, you can. Judging by how critical they were of every aspect they didn't like, it is safe to assume that the engine and transmission are refined and well matched to the car. It is very quiet and comfortable, without being floaty. It out brakes and out handles the S350 BlueTEC without punishing its occupants and although it's nearly 700 lb lighter, it does not sacrifice space in the cabin or in the trunk. It has almost every safety and convenience feature you can find in a car today. The cabin is well designed and covered in fine materials - finer than those found in a Mercedes CL63 AMG, according to Motor Trend's first drive review. Car & Driver thinks it's adequate luxury. I think it's plenty of luxury with sufficient power. What do you think?


Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.

Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.

🔥 Most Visited This Week

Falken Azenis RT615k+ Street and Track Review

Last year, I picked up a 2009 Lancer Ralliart to do a long term test with it as a dual duty track/daily. One of the first things I knew I was going to do was put a decent set of tires on it. The car came without OEM wheels which was actually good because I didn't have to hesitate about getting a good set of aftermarket wheels to support going wider. Thankfully, my friends at YST Auto Halifax  set me up with a great set of Superspeed RF03RR wheels. The Wheels I had never even heard of Superspeed but I trusted the good folk at YST Auto who mentioned some customer cars running on track with them. These wheels are rotary forged which is basically a prerequisite to be taken seriously in this market populated by companies like TSW and Fast Wheels. The wheels looked like a high quality, well finished wheel and each had a "QC" check sticker on. Just for appearances? Maybe, but I found no defects. The wheels seemed easy to balance (didn't need many weights) and at 18.1 lb. f

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track load

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky