The XTS has better brakes than the Jag, and in 2.0/ 3.6 trim better
fuel economy. It also probably has slightly better handling. The
manual 6spd option also exists. It is RWD, anyone saying otherwise
clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.

The 3-series is quicker, and yet less powerful and easier on gas still.

The ATS 3.6 does 0-60 in 5.4s and 0-100 in 12.8, qtr mile in 13.8 @ 104.

Why not look at a 3.0 V6 S XF, it is better on fuel than the 4.2 and
is quite fast. The current XJ 3.0 2wd is exactly as fast as my supercharged
V8. 5.2s to 60 and 13.7 in the quarter mile.

the Jag is a better powertrain and more unique. And I'm sure most will
agree that the facelift styling is more refined, losing that "surprised" look
of the first couple years, and the chrome vents which were a bit too much
IMO.

The Cadillac is a worthy rival to the 3-Series according to some, but it has
yet to beat the 3 in a comparison, so I am not sure. If you are looking to
move from mid-size to entry-level luxury, the ATS would be an original
choice. Its styling stands out and it has one of the nicer interiors in its
class.

My pick of the current cars might be a CTS-V, a lot of car for 60
grand. the new M5 is too much of a limo to be taken seriously, and the
S6 Audi has been at the top of its class since 2007. It is also only 70
grand, and has a Bentley-shared 4.0 V8 and does 0-60 in 3.7s.

Edit: Confused me Cadillacs

 

Have you even been in a MY2012+ XF?

There isn't a thing that wasn't revised in the interior.

All new TFT cluster (better than LCD)
All new operating software
All new seats
All new buttons and few more were added for quick and easy access
New refined gear selector
New trim options

and i can keep going.....

 

How do you know XTS has better brakes?

Give me some numbers 60 to 0 and i will tell you if it does or not.

LMAO.....M5 is too much of a limo to be taken seriously, that's why every car company measures their best products against the M5, including grandpa mobile Cadillac. Both Timex and Rolex give out accurate time. You go ahead and take the Timex over Rolex.

 

FWIW i just bought a 2012 portfolio and am picking it up sunday. i'll post pics then. my current car is an '04 CTS and i've driven the new cadillacs as part of my shopping.

my take was that the XTS is kind of a boat and not a comparable driving experience to the XF. the ATS and CTS are closer. i wouldn't buy the first year of a model so no ATS under any circumstances (the '09 XF people probably would admit the same...). the new CTS isn't much different than my '04 so there was no point in that. the CTS-V however, is a monster. at 556 hp it is rocket ship and pretty livable i though, except those optional recaro seats are uncomfortable. personally i like the CTSV coupe's styling but it seemed to me it might not age well, and it was too much money to take a chance.

frankly my second choice was the Volvo S60T6R, which is very pretty and comfortable car that's kinda sporty at 325 hp i think. that seemed pretty close to the XF, but was a little cheaper than the base, if less luxurious.

after all is said and done its all about personal taste. my only concern is that my new Jag won't be as reliable as those others, and 60k is a pretty big bet....

 

Life's too short to not get what you like. I have read up on the XTS and have heard mostly positives. In my opinion, tradeing in a car for a car you like more is never a step down. Some have said that my XF is a step down from the car I traded it in for, but it's my money and my car. At the end of the day, I am very with the XF so far. TC

 

He also thinks its rear wheel drive

 

ianclements,

Are you talking about the XTS or the ATS, because you keep talking about entry levels, 3 series and V6's? I thought that the ATS was a competitor with the 3 series, not the XTS.

 

Oh dear, Cadillac lingo has eluded me. ATS and XTS are so
easily confused. (ETS or something is on its way too).

Forgive me, the things I said in terms of XTS are invalid, I
meant ATS. It does have good brakes, best in class accoring
to C/D. Stopping distances of around 159ft from 70.

The XTS has been largely ignored by the auto-media people,
and thus I have hardly been exposed to a shred of info
about it that Cadillac didn't feed out.

@Executive... the M5 became a benchmark in the E34/E39
years, and during the introduction of the E60. The current
car has placed last in every comparison I have seen it in.

The competitors the E60 spawned, MB E63 and Audi S6 (not even
RS6 was needed to beat it) were too formidable. In MT, C/D,
the M5 placed stone last. Then, in the most recent C/D stuff,
the new 5-series lost to an Infiniti and a 6-MY old C6 Audi A6.

The current S6 does what the current M5 does (neglecting to
mention the RS6, which is more comparably priced) with 160
less horsepower.

the F10 is a 7-series chassis modified to be a bit smaller. IMO,
it is still 7-series territory in terms of size and weight (think E38
on a McDonald's diet) and it, again, placed last against the Audi
and Merc in a major newspaper comparison.

In the words of Shaun Bailey, Engineering Editor for Road and
Track: "The M5 is the best-handling 7 Series BMW has ever made...
passenger comfort and isolation take precedence over driver
enjoyment."

 

Yes, I've seen the 12's at the dealer when I took my car in. I didn't feel inspired to trade-in my car that's for sure. All the little differences are sort of cosmetic improvements. Nothing innovative or new. Instead of silver knob, they changed it with black. I'm not buying something I already have for those types of cosmetic differences. The TFT cluster is nice. Better looking software. But is that something worth trading-in? It's pretty much the same IMO. The LED in the front lacks so much creativity and originality that it looks aftermarket-ish. I just think Jaguar could've came-up with something a little bit more unique for the XF and not be so Audi-ish with the styling. And I don't like what they did with the plain chrome bar on the rear. I liked the J A G U A R inscribed on the bar. So even though there is something things I like, like better seats, there are somethings I don't like.

 

As I say, if you wanted a SAAB 9 5 then the Cadillac/Buick/Chevy fwd car is for you. It is a v nice car but just not in the Jaguar league. I guarantee it will disappoint a former Jaguar owner.

If you buy an Audi count on selling it before the warranty is up. I have a mint condition 2001 Audi S4 and it is a money pit at only 50,000 miles. Anything fom the VWAG is going to be similar. The popularity of that group's products is a complete mystery to me. Very nice to drive but poorly engineered for after warranty servicing and parts quality is very poor. No doubt VWAG current levels of profitability may result from high margins made on poorly made cars. They have that history.

 

Now that we have some numbers, you are wrong about breaking performance on the XF.
Jaguar XF 60-0 breaking is 106ft. Cadillac ATS is 129ft, which is E550 or 550i territory.

There is not much out there that has better stopping power. XF is comparable to a 911 Porsche. And, i am not even talking about Supercharged or R models, just the plain NA XF. That's how good the breaks are.


I agree with the older M5s being the benchmark, that's why they are called "grandfather" of super sedans.
And, what do you mean by being placed in last? The F10 M5 is significantly faster than the E60 (i can attach videos) and i am pretty sure it doesn't handle worse.

 

In the performance categories, the M5 is identical or marginally
faster than its rivals, but in subjective/handling/price categories
in the comparisons is where it comes "last".

The ATS comes with a Brembo option and those brakes were what
I referred to with such great performance. 129ft from 60
isn't good, a 1998 XJ8 L stops from 60 in 126ft.

2013 Cadillac ATS First Test - Motor Trend

The Brembo-equipped car does 60-0 in 111ft, before the
journalist crashed it. Shows how fit these journalists are
to be wasting free gas and tires in the newest models

Also, the 1998 XJR achieves a 117ft stopping distance from
60... same as an E39 M5, and just 3ft shorter than a 456M or 550.

Ian

 

Here is my 2 cents worth.
I think it all comes down to personal preference in the end, but each car described does have different features and specs. To me the CTSV is just another me to fast 4 door that shares all the typical GM quirks. Nice car but not limited or different INMHO.

I love everything about the new XF but the LED lights, they are just to long or something.If I didnt already have my XFR I would certainly take a new XF fully loaded.

If I were to trade up now for a car close to price of my current XFR I would choose a optioned out Buick Lacrosse as I love the interior and features that much and not the exterior. Or a 2012 MB E550 Twin Turbo 4Matic with P2 package.
Now if I were to stretch the dollar further I would go for first a 08 997 turbo with full bolt ons, or the new E or CLS63 AMG Twin Turbo with mild bolt ons second. And ultimately just get the new AWD Twin Turbo E63 AMG and be divorced and broke.

I am a HUGE feature guy, I love the bells and whistles and conviences of high end cars. This is why I love my XFR so much and it is different.
P.S. I forgot t oadd I would def do a new Caddy XTS fully equipt in RED.

 

Ian,

The results of the XJ you describe are outstanding, even in today's standards. Jaguars always came with good brakes.

I think Brembos don't carry as much weight as they used to, in terms of reputation. A lot of car companies Subaru, Toyota and now Cadillac, just play up the name to get consumers into their dealerships. When in reality, they don't provide the performance XF would with standard brakes. The mind games only work on those, who aren't in the know.

If you really think about it, the 60-0 breaking performance of the ATS is disappointing. Considering it weights over 600 lb less than the XF and it takes extra 5 feet to stop.

My XF stops substantially better than the STR i drove a few years ago with Brembo brakes.

 

The STR has always had some kind of invisible hand
making it worse than it should be... slower than the
XJR, worse performance in every category despite the
most powerful configuration of the 4.2 at the time.

I don't know if I'd call the ATS's performance disappointing,
but I see your point. One thing these raw numbers don't
always show is the track performance, fade, etc... and Jaguar
has always engineered their brakes to cool exceptionally well.

The ATS was commended for its brakes improving with every high
speed stop though, so they covered their bases there too.

The name does attract the buyers. I even find myself wanting a
Brembo option on my car (one was availble) despite the fact
that my car's brake leaving me wanting for naught. Brembos are
bigger in the rear than mine are in the front, it says "Jaguar" on
it, and I can say "I have Brembo brakes". So, in all, they look
nicer and have cachet.

 

The bottom line for me is any Caddy is at least in part a Chevy or a Buick. A Jaguar is just a Jaguar (no mention of the DEW platform in its molested form).

You could always go classic and get a Cadillac Cimarron




Caddillac XTS or a Buick Lacrosse





Cadillac ATS vs Buick Regal





If your looking for a rearwheel drive Car that is fantastic in eveyway and has about 320 hp get a Infiniti G37 Sedan. If you drive an ATS I suggest taking it to an Infiniti dealer on the test drive.

 

To Legend:
If you are into innovation I can understand the unrest, particularly if you are in your mid-thirties. BMW and others have better innovation, but sometimes to a fault. Being in the design profession, I am ultimately drawn to the XF because it has what I believe are some timeless lines and looks. The interior is understated and not over the top, beautifully executed lines inside and out. I actually like the 2012 headlights better, but the originals have grown on me.

I need to see the XTS interior and also drive the car. As I have said before the combination of sport, luxury and design sold me on the XF. I seriously considered and Audi S5 because of the exterior design, but interior didn't cut it and I really needed four doors.

Until I see the XTS, I am not even sure they are comparable cars? The XTS is supposed to compete with a 3 series BMW, a drivers car. The XF is more of a GT sedan designed to look like a coupe. The Caddy is definitely edgier. I can understand the appeal, just not what I would drive at this point. What else out there grabs your attention?


P.S. I think I have ATS and XTS confused as well.

I would like to have a two seater, more sports oriented car and the daily driver like the XF at some point. I like the looks of the new Boxster. Still say, if you like the Caddy that much over the Jag, buy it.

 

I think that the type of people who are drawn to the XF would generally not want to trade for another XF that really hasn't changed in any significant way, but would line up for the next generation for that all-new excitment they felt the first time. I surely wouldn't change my 2010 XKR for a 2013 with the biggest difference being a headlight...but I CAN'T WAIT for the new XK and F-Type!

I don't see the small XF changes, or lack of big ones, as a negative, but can certainly relate to the wanting of the thrill of something completely new. Good luck with finding that, and if it happens to be a Caddy then maybe just don't get too attached because you just might want the next gen XF when it arrives!

Bruce

 

Not sure if anyone has suggested this already, but I would recommend going to the nearest rental car office and renting an XTS for a week or two. This will give you a very good feel for the car without having to commit to a purchase/lease. Unless your state laws allow for an "unconditional unwind", a rash or an completely emotional based decision can and will cost you a lot more than renting the car for 7 to 10 days.

IMO, although I like what the Caddy is doing, I would never ever trade a Jag for it, especially a fairly current model. The interior fit and finish is still far from Jaguar standars, its ride and handling has been calibrated for its primary market, the US where car performance is still evaluated at the stop light...

But, as many have said, its ultimately your decision and your $$. Do what will make you happy.

 

Remember braking distances can only be compared in identical conditions. Different road surface, different temperature and even wind makes a significant difference.

Also, unless you can also compare the tires fitted to each car you wish to compare the braking distance itself doesn't tell you much.

Tires stop the car and the biggest improvement you can make to the brakes on your car is to fit better tires.

Brembo has made a big name for itself by association with racing and high end sports cars.

The really big brake manufacturers like ATE know all that Brembo knows.

For really interesting and useful information about brake upgrading check out the technical papers tab on the Stop Tech website. They don't offer a brake upgrade for Jaguar. Almost nobody offers an aftermarket brake upgrade for any Jaguar. That tells you something important about the Jaguar factory brakes.