[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by Hardeight27

In all honesty, I love a GM powertrain. They make crazy power for the money and are almost bulletproof.

However, every GM vehicle chassis I have ever owned basically started to disintegrate halfway to 100K miles. Door handles would fail, AC compressors would implode, gauge clusters went blank, interior pieces would just fall off, suspension parts would need frequent replacements.

It's like GM says, "Hey we have a great running gear here, let's just surround it with the cheapest junk we can find..."
Even Cadillac isn't completely immune to this phenomenon.

I sense some serious exaggeration going on here. Every single vehicle I owned before buying my current 5 Series has been a GM product and I’ve had none of the issues you speak of. Not only that, but all of them I owned for a long time and put over 200k kms (120k miles) on them.

Maybe you’re just lucky?

My wife got a new E90 in 2011 and it’s still proving to be a good car, which is why I felt somewhat comfortable getting my 5 a few years ago. HOWEVER, at 110k kms the AC in my 5 has just stopped working which is a new record low for me! I’ve never had an AC issue in a car so soon, so chock one up against BMW for that. Google suggests the condenser is a popular failure point on these cars, so I’ll look there first.

AC compressor went on the E90 at ~170k kms, which I’m ok with. The compressor in my Corvette went at 160k kms which isn’t bad since the compressor is on 100% in that car as it’s never winter driven.

The E90 suspension needs work just like any GM car does, only there’s twice as many parts to fail and the parts generally cost more. Oil pan gasket was leaking, that was an all-day job to fix. Random electrical gremlins from the driver’s footwell module. That was fun to figure out. I still think it’s a good car.

I love our BMWs and so far would not hesitate to buy another, but I also wouldn’t hesitate to buy a Cadillac either. My buddy has an ATS with the NA 3.6 and it’s a fantastic car; ~330hp on 87 octane, and it actually sounds good - WAY better than any post E90 M3 I’ve heard. Yep, I just said that.

I just re-read your post and realize I’m going on a bit of a rant, but I guess that’s directed at all the senseless anti-Caddy comments, not just your post.

Why not choose to be positive, people? Look at where Cadillac was 20 years ago and now they’re being compared to BMW. Sure they’re not quite there, that’s for sure, but holy crap they’ve come a long way and they’re still cheaper than BMW by a good margin.

Ok, rant off.

[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by 02M3ForMe

Regarding “feel”, the trick they use with the Alfa Romeo Quadrifoglio to make it feel the way it does is a super fast steering rack. Ratio on the QV is 11.9:1, uncharacteristically fast, like turning up mouse sensitivity speed sliders to the max. Not sure if they’re doing a similar thing with the Blackwing, can’t find the steering ratio quoted anywhere.

If the steering ratio was the silver bullet in making a good driver’s car, I think BMW would have figured that out a long time ago.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by Hardeight27

In all honesty, I love a GM powertrain. They make crazy power for the money and are almost bulletproof.

You say this as if it were true.

Meanwhile. Car and Driver has had these cars in their LT fleet:
BMW E46 M3, bought used, finished the long term test without any issues
BMW M3 E90: finished the long term test without any issues
BMW M3 G80: finished the long term test without any issues

Vette C7 at Lightning Lap 1: blew an engine
Vette C7 #2: blew an engine
Blackwing CT5: blew an engine

[wesleyan92]

Originally Posted by Panscan340

Most of these are base models. I don’t understand how the success of the base model pertains anything to how good of a car the racy versions are. Weird thing to focus on.

No one says “my m3 is so sick bc they sell so many 330i. “

Honda sells way more accords, does that mean it’s better than a 530?

None of the luxury OEMs breakout the model variants so the best extension of sales intelligence will be through these macro numbers. These numbers provide you enough data point to gauge sales popularity of the 3 series vs. the CT4 platforms.

[Panscan340]

Originally Posted by wesleyan92

None of the luxury OEMs breakout the model variants so the best extension of sales intelligence will be through these macro numbers. These numbers provide you enough data point to gauge sales popularity of the 3 series vs. the CT4 platforms.

Which in no way relates to the quality of the m3 vs the ct4v BW.

Again these cars are 1% of that volume, a rounding error.

No one buys the m3 bc they think a 330 is a good car or etc. it means nothing.

[strohw]

Geez, tough crowd.

The 4BW is 410whp and the M3 in this trim is around what 480whp? The manual's 0-60 with launch control is around 4.4 to 4.5 seconds. Which seams about right for 400ish HP.

What I'm really confused about is the comparisons that are being made. You have a car that costs $500 less than a RWD M340i with as close of a configuration that I can get. That comes stock with 6/4 piston brembo brakes, spec'd PS4 similar to the M3, magneride suspension with fully adjustable camber out to -2.5deg, a digital dash that provides more adjustable info than the ID8, whole set of drive mode options and traction management options similar to M3, a fantastic manual transmission, better brake/tire cooling management and better steering feel. Plus you get a free 2 day class with rooms at their Spring Mountain facility driving the same car you bought.

So, you get all of this for $500 less than a RWD M340i and because it doesn't beat the M3 in a straight line, it sucks. Which costs $14,500 more, optioned the same way. I like the current M3 and will probably have an LCI after I'm done with this car, but this thread is woah.

[strohw]

Originally Posted by wesleyan92

None of the luxury OEMs breakout the model variants so the best extension of sales intelligence will be through these macro numbers. These numbers provide you enough data point to gauge sales popularity of the 3 series vs. the CT4 platforms.

The OEMs themselves may not but you generally have individuals within the brand that post those numbers on their respective forums. You can get monthly break down for 4 and 5 Blackwings on their forum thanks to diligent people. Which has happened for other brands/models/trims that I've seen on other forums as well.

[vj123]

Originally Posted by strohw

Geez, tough crowd.

Being a fanboy for a particular brand is one thing but people take it to another level in threads like these and most of them have not even looked at one. I have been a part of several forums and sadly see this often here.

[AudiA4]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

The CT4 is so ugly. The bustleback ass takes inspiration from the horrendous 2nd gen Seville

That’s some rich irony…a G80 forum post calling another car ugly.

[NavM]

Once you drive any alpha chassis GM such as a Blackwing 4 or 5, Camaro SS or ZL1 and experience the manual transmission with the superb suspension and handing capabilities, you will realize why these cars get universal praise. They are just better at delivering the "ultimate" driving experience than any of their German competitors, regardless of the fit and finish, looks or losing a drag race. Of course one has to be happy with the quality of the car and its looks, etc before purchasing one, but to trash a car because it's a Cadillac and not a German car is just ridiculous. To those who keep dismissing the Blackwing, go and drive one.

[02M3ForMe]

Originally Posted by Blue Angel

If the steering ratio was the silver bullet in making a good driver’s car, I think BMW would have figured that out a long time ago.

I wouldn’t be so sure. Like the manual transmission feel that has persisted through the generations, there’s a good chance this is the desired steering feel targeted by BMW M.

The Alfa is no grippier or more nimble than a G80. They just pumped up the steering speed a lot to give you the feeling of more agility. Guarantee that a slightly smaller diameter steering wheel + shorter ratio on the G80 would probably transform the steering of the M3.

[Redgoat]

Ct4v BW < g80m3 < ct5v BW

[mirob]

I believe that GM should absolutely be commended for creating capable vehicles. Competition drives innovation and vice versa. We need Caddy's V division to be good in order for the M division to get better.

[TruthOne]

Originally Posted by strohw

Geez, tough crowd.

The 4BW is 410whp and the M3 in this trim is around what 480whp? The manual's 0-60 with launch control is around 4.4 to 4.5 seconds. Which seams about right for 400ish HP.

What I'm really confused about is the comparisons that are being made. You have a car that costs $500 less than a RWD M340i with as close of a configuration that I can get. That comes stock with 6/4 piston brembo brakes, spec'd PS4 similar to the M3, magneride suspension with fully adjustable camber out to -2.5deg, a digital dash that provides more adjustable info than the ID8, whole set of drive mode options and traction management options similar to M3, a fantastic manual transmission, better brake/tire cooling management and better steering feel. Plus you get a free 2 day class with rooms at their Spring Mountain facility driving the same car you bought.

So, you get all of this for $500 less than a RWD M340i and because it doesn't beat the M3 in a straight line, it sucks. Which costs $14,500 more, optioned the same way. I like the current M3 and will probably have an LCI after I'm done with this car, but this thread is woah.

You're not getting a CT4V Blackwing for less than an M340. Most are going for 75K up to 90K

https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-...B&gclsrc=aw.ds

[vj123]

Originally Posted by TruthOne

You're not getting a CT4V Blackwing for less than an M340. Most are going for 75K up to 90K

The one you quoted is a limited edition which is loaded with all possible options included frozen paint.

By getting an allocation, people have got bare bones 4BW 6MT for low 60s (excluding tax) which is a great value for the money.

[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

You say this as if it were true.

Meanwhile. Car and Driver has had these cars in their LT fleet:
BMW E46 M3, bought used, finished the long term test without any issues
BMW M3 E90: finished the long term test without any issues
BMW M3 G80: finished the long term test without any issues

Vette C7 at Lightning Lap 1: blew an engine
Vette C7 #2: blew an engine
Blackwing CT5: blew an engine

Some famous M engines have rod bearings that are considered maintenance items. Your point? I think it’s obvious this argument could go back and forth many times.

[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by 02M3ForMe

I wouldn’t be so sure. Like the manual transmission feel that has persisted through the generations, there’s a good chance this is the desired steering feel targeted by BMW M.

The Alfa is no grippier or more nimble than a G80. They just pumped up the steering speed a lot to give you the feeling of more agility. Guarantee that a slightly smaller diameter steering wheel + shorter ratio on the G80 would probably transform the steering of the M3.

You may have a point, and a slower steering rack does work better at high speeds. Our E90 has good steering, but it is heavy and doesn’t really pay dividends until you load it up in a corner.

Still, once set in a corner the balance of the chassis speaks louder than the steering ratio, in my opinion.

[Blue Angel]

Originally Posted by mirob

I believe that GM should absolutely be commended for creating capable vehicles. Competition drives innovation and vice versa. We need Caddy's V division to be good in order for the M division to get better.

Agreed!

I think it should also be noted that GM rates their engines to the SAE standard, the first one being the LS7 in the 2006 C6 ZO6 at 505 hp. As neat as it is to see the German brands underrating their engines, I prefer an honest and consistent approach.

[TruthOne]

Originally Posted by vj123

The one you quoted is a limited edition which is loaded with all possible options included frozen paint.

By getting an allocation, people have got bare bones 4BW 6MT for low 60s (excluding tax) which is a great value for the money.

Doing a quick search I don’t see anything lower than 70k . Even one with 50k miles is selling for 60k.

[vj123]

Originally Posted by TruthOne

Doing a quick search I don’t see anything lower than 70k . Even one with 50k miles is selling for 60k.

Dealers are known to load up options so that they can make more money and one can easily build a low spec vehicle by getting an allocation. A quick search shows these brand new vehicles which has MSRP in low 60s.

https://www.contecadillac.com/new-Fr...DL5RP2P0460618

https://www.cavendercadillac.com/Veh...-TX/5638698200

https://www.suburbancadillacofplymou...e2c11304db.htm

[Maverik259]

Most useless video I’ve ever seen. Learned nothing.

[Sy546]

Originally Posted by SYT_Shadow

You say this as if it were true.

Meanwhile. Car and Driver has had these cars in their LT fleet:
BMW E46 M3, bought used, finished the long term test without any issues
BMW M3 E90: finished the long term test without any issues
BMW M3 G80: finished the long term test without any issues

Vette C7 at Lightning Lap 1: blew an engine
Vette C7 #2: blew an engine
Blackwing CT5: blew an engine

Please don’t bring up an e46 m3 or e9x m3 when it comes to a reliability argument. Only one brand considers rod bearings maintenance