Car & Driver tested a Cadillac CTS-V vs a Jaguar XFR vs a Mercedes E63; they pick the Mercedes 1st, the Cadillac 2nd, and the Jaguar 3rd:<\/p>\n
All other things being equal, if the CTS-V<\/em> had been equipped with an [available] automatic transmission like the two other cars here it might have tied the Benz in overall points. How, you ask? A six-speed automatic V<\/em> we tested in April for CARand DRIVER.com managed the quarter-mile in 12.2 seconds, 0.4 second quicker than both the manual in this comparo and the one from our November 2008 road test. The difference would have tipped the quarter-mile-acceleration score in the Caddy\u2019s favor.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Read more: 2009 Cadillac CTS-V Comparison Tests – Car and Driver<\/a>.<\/p>\n
This probably is the best summary:<\/p>\n
Even with the muted soundtrack, our usually home-team-loyal German correspondent quickly deemed the Cadillac to be the sportiest-feeling car of our trio and one that, at $67,345, undercuts the test\u2019s second-priciest Jaguar by more than $12,500. It will cost you about $8000 more than the Jag to start looking at the Mercedes…<\/p>\n
Despite the disparate window stickers, everything else\u2014horsepower, weight, terrible fuel economy, even tire width\u2014is nearly identical in this group. Even the acceleration to 100 mph ended up in a three-way tie.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The three cars are very close in mission, performance, and luxury.\u00a0 The Cadillac manages to achieve it all for $12K – 20K less cash.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Car & Driver tested a Cadillac CTS-V vs a Jaguar XFR vs a Mercedes E63; they pick the Mercedes 1st, the Cadillac 2nd, and the Jaguar 3rd: All other things being equal, if the CTS-V had been equipped with an … Continue reading