Mercedes E320 vs Cadillac CTS 3.2

[GIR]

Instead of comparing a ferrari to a Viper lets for once compare cars whichcan be afforded by an average joe. In my opinion these 2 cars represent the ultimate in family cars in from both sides of the ocean.

I won't tell you what I think yet...

Opinions please

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo GIR,

 

kennst du schon Mercedes E320 vs Cadillac CTS 3.2 (Anzeige)? Dort ist vieles zu finden.

 

Sportwagen Kaufberatung Ersatzteile (Anzeige) | Sportwagen Kaufberatung Tuning (Anzeige) | Sportwagen Kaufberatung Uhren (Anzeige)

[thepolarfoxqx]

gol, i hope america can do better than a CTS.

Just the same, the 90 degree 3.2L SOHC V6 in the merc. is supple smooth, spools out an even flat torque curve, and feels generall muscular. The 3.2L 54 degree V6 in CTS carries some harshness to it, but has a bit more violent and sporty of a feel, as it has a strong mid level, and is less flat in terms of torque delivery. Handling probably goes to CTS, which has a tighter suspension. Interior goes to merc for sure, the CTS is not that practically or elegantly done, and the mercedes is typical mercedes, which is nearly flawless. While E class is timelessly elegent outside, CTS goes more for brash and trendy. The exhaust note on a CTS is rough and barky, the exhaust on a E320 is velvety purring. I think the CTS is the sportier of the two, while the merc is much better for quality, luxury, and execution. A merc is also greater than $10k more than a CTS.

A Lincoln LS would be a much better contender for north america, as I think it evenly does battle with an E320.

[izzyloveslizzy]

A Lincoln LS? I'm afraid I'll have to dispute that, vigorously. The LS V8's aim is apparently to out-do the non-motorsport 5-series (and not the new one either). The tired old 2003 BMW 5 beats the Lincoln in everything except cargo space, pricing, and handling. The CTS is new and may be entering it's twilight years in a few, and the addition of the ~400HP V8 should ensure the CTS has plenty of competition to offer the other mid-size opponents. Not that I'm saying it's drastically and dramatically better than the LS, but I'd pick the Caddy over a Lincoln, I'm afraid. I doubt an E320 is much to compete with (of course it does have the best performance in the category, with nearly endless torque coming out the wazoo). But the Merc-Benz has some flaws which distract.... The luxury and utility in the Merc are amazing, as expected, but other important factors (such as the level of handling that you would expect with that much performance), throw the charts off-balance a bit. America can certainly do better than a CTS, but since the E320 isn't exactly the absolute best mid-size to come out of Europe, then the CTS would be a good ( :roll: ) match for it. Since you mentioned non-tweaked non-factory-performance-level versions of both sedans, GIR, I'm assuming you want the cars compared in more than just the performance category. The looks on both cars are sweet, and the performance levels are at least acceptable (although the 220HP in the Caddy-CTS can be tricky, as Fox mentioned). The price on the Caddy is definitely less than a Merc E-calss, which means it attracts the lower end buyers. The E will most likely be avoided entirely just because it's a Merc (not that that's a bad thing - but it's somewhat intimidating to buy a Merc; I'm not making that up, I've heard it from any and every one who ever considered buying a Benz sedan). Mostly just because of the name Merc. The "average Joe" will look at the E and go: "well, that's probably out of MY price range"! Of course to be honest the half-edgy parallel-dimension-CTS exterior can also raise some eye-brows and scare some wallets, surely. I think since these are more "family sedans" than sports-sedans (not to diss the performance of either one), what most people will look at (including me, if I was in "most people"'s position) are safety, utility, and other more sane features. But in my personal onion (opinion) the E is a better contender, even when considering the higher asking-price. It's got more bang-for-the-buck/desirability. Of course I'd have to agree with the rest of what FOX said about the engines (you can never dispute the engine stats and ratings when Fox is talkin' about'em!).

Now it's your turn, GIR....