The double standard lives on. Interesting that when BMWs are tested, sportiness counts for more than anything else. If the Genesis were compared against the 535i, the Bimmer would've won, hands down.

You can't have it both ways. Edmunds has complained for years about the soft and cushy nature of Cadillacs. GM finally produces a sporty version, and it loses to a knockoff of what Cadillac used to be.

Based on this comparison, I expect the Genesis to trounce BMW, Audi, and Mercedes, all of whom produce cars with ride quality even worse than that of the CTS.

When I saw who was conducting the comparison the winner was easy to predictt.

"When the half-baked first generation of Cadillac's CTS luxury sedan gave way to the crisp, mature, refined second-generation model in 2008, we breathed a patriotic sigh of relief. Here, finally, was a no-apologies high-end American car that could go toe to toe with the world's best. The styling was on point inside and out, the cabin materials were up to snuff, and lo and behold, the performance was there, too, thanks to countless chassis-tuning laps on the famed Nuburgring and a sophisticated available 3.6-liter direct-injected V6. "

1. The first car was tested on the Ring
2. The first car had nice materials, just an odd design. How hard is it to differentiate between design and materials quality?
3. The First CTS' engine was competitive with contemporary luxury sedans from BMW and others

Would the outcome of this article be different if you were looking for a sport-luxury sedan instead of a straight luxury sedan? I.e. if you were the type of person who would prefer a BMW 5-Series over a Mercedes E-Class, or an Infiniti M35 over a Lexus GS350, would you still choose the Genesis over the CTS?

Not surprising. We'll see if the Genesis holds up better though.

You people are talking like the Caddy lost this comparison. I don't think it didn't.

Yes, they are both luxury cars. However they cater to different ends of the luxury car spectrum. Genesis is soft and cushy with lots of toys. CTS is sporty, distinctive and full of toys.

I think the likelihood of someone cross-shopping these cars would be rare. So this comparison is only showing how similar performance-wise they are.

Nothing to make excuses about, in my opinion.

i may be biased because i own a E90 bmw... but i think the argument is not that bmws are sporty but HOW they are sporty. it's not that the genesis is soft and cushy (like caddy's of old) but HOW it is soft and cushy.

that is to say bmws are sporty without being harsh. they absolutely walk that very fine line in-between handling and comfort.

the cadillacs of old were soft and cushy to a fault. the genesis appears to be softer while still being composed. more mercedes benz or lexus soft maybe?

hence, it appears that we have here a caddy that is trying to ride like a bmw but fails and we have a hyundai that is trying to ride like a benz/lexus and succeeds.

maybe?

I dont think this should have been a comparison with victory as the end result. Yes, these cars may compete in the same segment but their overall missions and messages appeal to different buyers. The Caddy delivers on both sport and luxury while the Genesis focuses mainly on luxury.

Both cars are great however they are both winners as they both execute their missions as promised.

"The double standard lives on. Interesting that when BMWs are tested, sportiness counts for more than anything else. If the Genesis were compared against the 535i, the Bimmer would've won, hands down."

I have to agree with you on that one Chavis. Reminds me of the recent Insight Prius "comparison".

response to s197gt
Previous luxury comparisons by edmunds and elsewhere have found that the fe3 cts suspension (the stiffest setup, stiffer than the fe2 long term tester) was softer than the bmw 3 series, but was claimed to have been almost as good handling. This fe2 cadillac would be as sporty as the article says up top without being nearly as "harsh" as the bmw. Still, the bmws always win the supposedly luxury comparisons due to their steering and suspension tuning. Got to agree with chavis10: huge double standard to NOW under value the importance of handling.

I agree with hondacura4 also, the prius was faster, better appointed, quieter, and with better fuel economy than the insight, but the insight supposedly won due to handling and steering feel, contrary to this comparison (which is funny since other sites reported real poor steering feel in the insight).

These aren't objective comparisons, it seems to me the editors at edmunds get too caught up in brand image and fads following whatever the next big thing is. Look at the prius insight comparison, the insight won because the prius is so last year, the 370z lost to the genesis because the 350 was so last generation, and even the new mustang's review spent more text talking about the hyundai coupe that supposedly everyone was talking about. How about some consistency and objectivism?

altimadude, they're acting like the Hyundai won because of statements like this in the article:
"Perhaps the most striking fact about our landslide winner is that even if it cost the same as the CTS, it still would have won in a landslide"

Based on ever moving criteria, they decided to declare the Hyundai a "landslide winner".

I agree with the the common response that it seems like they're adjusting to the criteria to favor the Hyundai. It's funny because they typically favor performance over comfort. Now that Caddy has flipped, they flipped their criteria. It's quite frustrating.

I scrolled down to see the winner and immediately though "1487's gonna pop a blood vessel - a Korean car better than a Caddy? Noooooo!"

Congrats to Hyundai - they have put together a compelling "no excuses" package with this vehicle.

Why is this even called a "luxury car showdown". The Genesis is not and will never be a "luxury sedan".....Hyundai is not a luxury brand. To call the Genesis a luxury sedan is like calling the VW Passat a luxury car.

I also think there is a bit of a double standard here........the Cadillac would have won if it were a BMW! I'd like to see a comparo between the 5-series and the Genesis!

What are you talking about, blackadder? Does VW market the Passat as a luxury vehicle? No. Does Hyundai the Genesis? Yes. That's the whole reason for the Gensis:it is designed to be a luxury vehicle. What else do you think it is?

@ everyone,

Interesting discussion thus far. s197gt is pretty close to the mark regarding chassis tuning: the CTS lacks the uniquely adroit ride/handling balance of the 3 Series and 5 Series -- specifically, it doesn't handle well enough to justify its firmness relative to the Genesis, as much as we enjoy the FE2 setup -- while the Genesis does have the quietness and refined cushiness of a Lexus (actually, it rides better than the Lexus GS350, though it doesn't handle quite as well).

On the subject of brn's "ever-moving criteria" accusation...seriously? For the record, we have an exhaustive scoring sheet for vehicle evaluations. The vehicles change; our scoring sheet doesn't. In this case, the CTS won in vehicle dynamics, and lost in every other category (styling, being a particularly subjective metric, is not a category unto itself). That's pretty much the definition of a landslide victory.

Keep in mind that the four of us who participated in this test are driving enthusiasts to the core. Trust me, we appreciate the CTS's handling (and styling). But the Genesis is just so good at everything else (and costs six grand less?!) that it couldn't help but be the car all four of us would rather have in our driveways.

-JS

Orangutan, well, my point is that there's more to the term "luxury vehicle" than a car's levels of refinement and luxury. I would go as far as saying the primary reason for buying a luxury vehicle is prestige.
How many non-car people would pay the same amount of money for the Genesis as opposed to a Cadillac or a BMW?
How many rich people would want to be seen in a Hyundai, as opposed to a Cadillac or a Mercedes?

The fact is that the Genesis is a luxurious vehicle meant for people who want a luxury car experience at a reasonable price. Sure, it's fast, luxurious and refined - just like the Passat and most of VW's higher-end models - but that doesn't make it a "luxury vehicle"!

Josh, are you telling me that BMW is the only manufacturer that is makes sporty cars that are also refined?

I'm willing to bet that the Genesis is more refined, more spacious and also more "stylish" than the 5-series. Would that mean that the Genesis would also beat the 5-series in a landslide?
Just consider this a customer request: I'd like to see a Showdown between the 535i and the Genesis. Seriously. Better still, a three-way showdown between a 5- or 3-series, a CTS and a Genesis!

I agree with blackadder5639, and would like to illustrate his non-luxury without a luxury nameplate with volkswagen's sales flop of a Phaeton sedan.

I agree that the Genesis has the better back seat and by far the better top level audio system (though the Lexicon audio system is only available if you add every single option package) -- GM should join MB in dumping Bose. However, in terms of looks, ride, dynamics, ergonomics, soundtrack, build quality, and materials, I'd take the Caddy hands down. The Genesis is probably the better value, but the Caddy is easily the better car. Just a tug on the cheap, flimsy exterior door handles on the Genesis confirms that it's not quite the standard of the world yet.

I'm sure there are plenty of aspects of your testing that use a reoccurring checklist. The concern is what defines a "winner" seems to be dynamic. I'll refrain from examples, as others are providing them.

I suspect a lot of his has to do with each author having different priorities. That provides a very inconsistent reflection of Edmunds testing. What seems to be important in one comparison, appears to be insignificant in another. What you do behind the scenes is less important than how you appear to the public. Right now, it comes off as a moving target.

Reading the section about the Hyundai, it just sounds like it won because it was more of an ES350 than the CTS. It has more interior room, rides cushier, and is a lot quieter. And then, for an added bonus, the ES is a lot cheaper. I'm guessing that's probably not how it went down, but from the writing it just comes across that way. And, just curious, since when has a Maxima ever been considered a small vehicle? An S-Class, no, but I've never felt "crammed" in any Maxima since the 4DSC.

@blackadder,

"Josh, are you telling me that BMW is the only manufacturer that is makes sporty cars that are also refined?"

I'm telling you no such thing. The 3 Series in particular has a magical suspension -- zero impact harshness, yet handles like a sports car. I called it "unique," and I stand by that. But that doesn't mean BMWs are the only sporty and refined cars. I would hope that's obvious from this comparison test alone (the CTS being a sporty and refined car).

"[The Genesis is] fast, luxurious and refined - just like the Passat and most of VW's higher-end models - but that doesn't make it a 'luxury vehicle'"

No, what makes it a luxury vehicle is the features it offers (equal to the CTS, with an iDrive-style control knob to boot) and the way it drives and rides and feels and is put together. You're right that brand image is a significant factor for many luxury car shoppers, but what's significant to us is the way a car performs vis-a-vis the competition. Judged on its merits as a luxury sedan, the Genesis is superior. Period.

Also, Cadillac doesn't exactly have a sterling brand image these days. They're not unlike Hyundai actually -- on the upswing after a string of mediocre products (Catera, Sedan de Ville, first-gen CTS...um, Cimarron...).

"I'd like to see a Showdown between the 535i and the Genesis."

528i? Absolutely. That would be interesting. 535i, no. Way more expensive and way faster. The 528i, on the other hand, is probably a few tenths slower to 60 mph and it's much more expensive. (Ditto the M-B E350.)

Josh,

I usually agree with you, but, "the Genesis is superior. Period," is just not fact. I've driven both the Genesis and the CTS as well, and I absolutely stand by my above comments regarding their relative merits, and all else being equal I'd take the CTS any day of the week (though the Genesis is substantially less expensive so obviously all else literally isn't equal). And, really, using an "iDrive-style control knob" as a point in the Genesis' favor? After every reviewer on the planet just spent 7 years bashing iDrive? I'll agree that the Genesis has easily one of the better knob implementations, but the CTS' combination touchscreen/scroll knob (where often either can be used, with the option left up to the driver as to which one is more efficient for any particular task), is better still. The CTS also has a better ride/handling balance, a dramatically better interior design, better engine, telepathic transmission (in Sport mode), less intrusive stability control, and more clever toys (not the least of which is OnStar), along with my above nods to the Caddy for looks, dynamics, ergonomics, soundtrack, build quality, and materials.

As virtually everyone else here is (correctly, IMO) pointing out, this is an apples to oranges comparison, and you're essentially saying the Genesis is superior because it's more comfortable and has a better audio system. And if those are your highest priorities, then of course it's superior, but as many others have also pointed out, those haven't historically been your highest priorities in other comparisons.

@brn,

"I suspect a lot of his has to do with each author having different priorities. That provides a very inconsistent reflection of Edmunds testing."

As authors, we are bound by the scores and comments on the ratings sheets. As such, each comparison test review is actually a perfectly consistent reflection of Edmunds testing. The author's job is to tally up the scores, read through all the comments, and sum up our impressions. That's every author's sole priority.

@esoterica,

"cheap, flimsy exterior door handles on the Genesis"

Disagree. They're lightweight and made of plastic, yes. So are the ones on the new BMW 750i. Flimsy? No.

@sandcountry,

"it just sounds like it won because it was more of an ES350 than the CTS"

No, it won because it was more of an S-Class than the CTS. The ES350 is a really nice Camry. The Genesis has its own RWD platform and an interior that is clearly modeled after the S-Class's, not to mention an executive-style backseat.

I urge those of you who haven't been in a Genesis to check it out in person. I think you're making the mistake of assuming that it's like Azera version 2.0 or something. It's not. It's a whole new ballgame.

@SadButTrue, re: door handles, sorry, please try them again, they're cheap. The exterior door handles on every Genesis I've tried have felt both made of cheap plastic and not attached particularly well, rocking up and down in their tracks when pulled out. Granted it's one of the few substantial egregious quality lapses in the Genesis, but it's one that's noticeable literally every time one gets in the car.

@esoterica,

"'the Genesis is superior. Period.' is just not fact"

Hey, to each his own. But the four of us would disagree with you there. Note that the first part of that quote was "Judged on its merits as a luxury car,...." Judged solely on its merits as a sport sedan, the Genesis loses, as noted in the article.

"I'll agree that the Genesis has easily one of the better knob implementations, but the CTS' combination touchscreen/scroll knob...is better still"

Fair enough. I think they're both pretty good, but you're right, merely having an iDrive-style knob doesn't necessarily merit praise. In fact, as far as interior functionality goes, the two cars were virtually tied as I recall (don't have the numbers here now).

"The CTS also has a better ride/handling balance, a dramatically better interior design, better engine, telepathic transmission (in Sport mode), and more clever toys (not the least of which is OnStar), along with my above nods to the Caddy for ergonomics, build quality, and materials."

Engine: agreed, though only for the enthusiast. Transmission: telepathic? That's a stretch, and it's not as smooth as the Hyundai's. It does match revs for you though, which is cool. More clever toys? Other than OnStar, name one. These cars are pretty evenly matched on the toys list. Ergonomics? Tell me where the Genesis falls short. Build quality, um, check our long-term CTS logbook and search for "squeaks" or "rattles." Materials, Hyundai has the edge -- leather dash plus soft-touch everywhere, including the back of the center console where the vents are, which is virtually unheard of. Said vents are trimmed with wood, by the way.

"you're essentially saying the Genesis is superior because it's more comfortable and has a better audio system"

Quieter, rides better, better materials (another example: Genesis uses brushed aluminum on the CC/dash, while CTS uses only cheesy silver-painted plastic), vastly superior backseat. All mentioned in the article.

Again, to each his own. We happen to disagree on this one.

@SBT,

transmission: need I remind you this is for all intents and purposes the same transmission that set the record on the Nurburgring in full auto mode? In fact I'd actually say "telepathic" isn't giving this transmission nearly enough credit -- it's easily the most brilliant torque converter automatic I've ever driven (yes, that includes the BMW/Jag ZF 6-speed). If your long-term CTS doesn't have a liquid smooth transmission, you should have your dealer look at it (along with the interior squeaks) because there's a TSB for shift quality on some of the very early production vehicles.

Toys: Besides OnStar (which is really about a dozen toys including crash reporting, vehicle diagnostics, Mapquest Send-to-Onstar, turn-by-turn navigation, remote unlocking, stolen vehicle tracking, etc)): Ultraview sunroof, AWD, hard disk with TiVo-style pausing/rewinding of live radio and to which you can rip CDs or copy music off of USB disks, cooled passenger seat, keyless that locks the car as soon as you walk away, performance mode for the stability control, ambient interior lighting (speaking of S-Class), much better nav interface/display (including 3D representations of major buildings), graphical weather forecasts, voice command... shall I continue?

Ergonomics: Bad ergonomics includes having to do everything through the knob, no matter how "easy to use" the particular knob-based interface is. While it stuffs as many features as possible into as compact an interface as possible, there's no way to make a knob as efficient as an array of buttons/knobs for minimum time spent with eyes off the road. Case in point: trip computer functions. CTS: one easy-to-find button. Genesis... who knows how much time delving into menus with the knob.

Engine: I disagree, I think the engine in the CTS is superior for virtually everyone due to its better low-end torque. Obviously, YMMV.

Materials: I'd hardly count the leather stripe on the Genesis dash as a big win, and BTW, check again, the Genesis uses silver-painted plastic too, though unlike the Genesis the plastic in the CTS is at least clear-coated so it won't scratch. The CTS (again unlike the Genesis) also has pervasive french stitching, along with substantially better materials on top of the dash and the aforementioned LED light pipe ambient interior lighting.

Again, I'll agree that the Genesis has the better backseat, that's a no-brainer. Don't agree that it rides better, though we do have relatively glassy roads in Phoenix. The top-end Lexicon audio system is nothing short of phenomenal compared to the CTS' (and every other) middling Bose system. But even including "quieter" and "rides better" in that very short list of Genesis wins, I defy you to find one other comparison that Edmunds has ever done in which such a small list of said qualities have won over any and every quality having to do with "fun to drive."

Like you said, to each his own, but this "comparison" seems more affected by certain editors being dazzled by, "Hey, this is really a Hyundai!"

The Genesis is a great car, and for most people it's probably better value for the money than the CTS. But so is the G35, just at the opposite end of the sport/luxury spectrum. But just like with the G35, that doesn't mean the Genesis is the better car than the CTS.

Looks like Hyundai is getting what it wants, people to notice it, good or bad.

Congrats to Hyundai.

I just wish Caddy made a car that I really wanted. A CTS-V that doesn't look too different from the current CTS would be very nice. But I'm sure we'll get an overgrown fender flaring CTS-V.

Would I consider a Genesis, probably not, but I'll at least give it a test drive to see what all the commotion is about.

You're really nit picking out advantages. Like clear coated paint, so? The clearcoat will scratch first. I know because the stuff in my CX-7 is clear coated. Doesn't mean jack, it will scratch.

Yeah, people will be racing off the line and really noticing that low-end torque. Give me a break! If I'm passing someone the transmission will kick down to the lowest gear possible and that won't be in the "low-end".

OnStar is garbage. Especially the stolen vehicle tracking. What a waste of money. Get an iPhone and throw OnStar (Like all the smart car thief's do) out the window.

Let's not even get STARTED on flimsy and/or poorly built bits, the CTS has it's share.

esoterica,

Your comments are coming across as a little bit fanboy-ish.

The CTS tries to be a sports sedan but falls in no mans land. It's not nearly as sporty as a BMW, like it wants to be, and not nearly as buttery smooth as a Lexus. To top it all off, it's not much of a value. It's like settling for a lower performing BMW rival or settling more harsh Lexus rival. If your looking for a BMW rival, I'd say the Infiniti G37 is a better bet, and if your looking for a Lexus rival, the Genesis is a better bet. This leaves the CTS is being nothing more than a compromise that doesn't quite live up to either standard.

Drive the cars yourself and then decide. I have noticed Edmunds to be pretty subjective.
Also I see 1487 is here. The same guy that was defending an Oldsmobile 10 years ago.

Josh, if I was fully aware of exactly how things function internally at Edmunds, we could have a process argument. I don't, so you'll win every time.

The point that I tried to make is that's certainly not how it's perceived. You've got a lot of people here that feel like the criteria are inconsistent. Take that perception seriously.

While we're at it, the street price of the CTS is $2000 lower than the Genesis. You can play option games with either to make them look more expensive than the other.

What I get from the article is that the CTS is a good (but not great) sports sedan and a good (but not great) luxury sedan. The Genesis is fair at best at being a sports sedan but great at being a luxury sedan. Since the title of the comparison is "Luxury Sedan Showdown," I can understand why the Genesis won. If it had said "Sports Sedan Showdown," I'm sure the outcome would have been totally different.

brn,

Base DI CTS ~ $39k
Base Genesis ~$33k

Given that you will probably get discounts for the Genesis (dependent on dealership), you're estimating getting atleast $8k off MSRP? Everybody in the country is going to want to know where your Cadillac dealer is.

what a ridiculous group of whiners.

I'm a big fan of the CTS, it's a fantastic looking car and very nice but it's not on the same level as the luxury quality the Genesis.

My only complaint (and a big one) is the "design by committee" styling lets down all the engineering. From the rear it looks like a BMW, it's got shades of Lexus and Mercedes mixed in but the total result is bland.
Certainly not bad, it's a handsome mix of contemporary competitors (maybe that's the idea) but not distinctive. Unlike the Genesis coupe, it doesn't have a unique character to make it's own.

Otherwise, it really does impress. Being more of a german car fan and cheering the CTS return to excellence, I still admit the Genesis easily beats the CTS except the valet parking circle. I don't see how anyone could come to a different opinion after driving both especially considering the price.

The Genesis is more of the low key luxury car that could easily be mistaken for a Lexus, Mercedes, or BMW from a casual observer.

cx7lover, I'm nitpicking no more than SBT was with the leather swath on the Genesis dash, and he's simply wrong that the Genesis doesn't use silver-painted plastic. Regarding the silver areas in the CTS, try to scratch it -- you have to try exceedingly hard. Keys don't scratch it, coffee mugs don't scratch it, pens don't scratch it... I understand why people complain about silver paint being used instead of aluminum, but try living in Phoenix in the summer and you'll also understand why automakers can't use real metal anywhere that anyone would actually come in contact with with skin. The G35 (automatic, not sure about manual) has an aluminum stripe on top of the shifter, and it makes it painful to use the shifter after the car has been parked in the summer sun. Given the practical constraints, the choice of materials GM used in the CTS is top-notch.

And "OnStar is garbage"? Really? Thanks for the well-reasoned point of view. I'd be interested to know which iPhone is going to provide you with turn-by-turn voice guidance directions (without even having to tap through entering an address), can unlock your car for you, can remotely diagnose car trouble, can automatically call when you're in a collision and provide paramedics with true GPS coordinates for your location along with statistics about the direction and severity of the impact, can let you plan a route on MapQuest on your PC which you can then send to your car, etc. And I personally know of 3 people who have had their stolen cars retrieved with OnStar's help, so I'm not sure how that qualifies as a "waste of money" (not to mention several insurance companies offer significant discounts for having OnStar).

Your claim of flimsy bits on the CTS rings similarly hollow -- care to elaborate? Because AFAIK the only flimsy bits that Edmunds has pointed out the entire time they've had the car are the chrome rings around the gauges, which are hardly something the typical owner would ever touch, to say nothing of on a daily basis, unlike the flimsy Genesis exterior door handles.

Get back to us when you have an argument supported by anything except bluster.

arumage, because this is a Luxury sedan showdown and not a performance sedan showdown, I wasn't looking at the DI version. Street price for the non-DI version is about $33K. The Genesis is going for pretty much list, so it's base price is about $35K. Again, either one can be pushed ahead of the other.

I pulled those prices from CarsDirect. If I pull them from Edmunds, they're nearly identically priced. Interesting.

HAhahahahahahhhahhahhahahahahah!

Failing window switches, exposed underseat wiring, Velcro falling of (now that's just PATHETIC, how hard is it to mess up Velcro?), it's a friggin rattle trap, the drive seat squeaks and that stupid Navi system has software issues.

You're failing to understand that OnStar doesn't always work wherever you are. Which is a damn shame, get an iPhone (which does have turn by turn GPS coming up very soon) buy some roadside assistance and pair it up with LoJack. OnStar is a garbage system with little benefit. Not to mention it's obsolete technology. Not only will you actually save money, you don't have to deal with OnStar! Which is overpriced anyway.

Top-Notch, please, I can't even fathom how someone can be so biased. Go get your CTS and hope it doesn't have that highway vibration a bunch of owners are complaining about. I hope you like listening to GM quality in the form of rattles and squeaks.

brn,

List price for the Genesis is $33k, not $35k.

The Genesis design just puts me to sleep.
That, plus the softer suspension and the quieter interior guarantees 40 winks.

you drive. I'll just sack out in the passenger seat.

Perhaps they should have compared it to a Deville?

@esoterica,

Genesis does not use *exclusively* brushed aluminum. However, it does use aluminum on both the center console and dash, and it starts at $32k+. For $38k+, the CTS DI gives you Malibu/Cobalt-grade silver-painted plastic.

Look around at other cars in this price range. Infiniti G37 -- aluminum "Washi" trim. BMW 3 Series -- extensive aluminum on dash/CC. Audi A4? Okay, that car uses cheap silver plastic around the IP, and I don't like it there either. Anyway, you take my point.

@brn,

It makes sense to compare the Genesis to the CTS DI regardless of whether it's a "luxury" or "performance" test, because they are evenly matched engine-wise. The base CTS would be outgunned, thus losing one of its few advantages over the Genesis in this comparison test (ever-so-slightly better overall engine performance) and presumably losing by a wider margin.

Josh, keep dodging my point. I'll eventually go away.

dodging your point? What is your point?
he clearly responded-
You want them to compare the base CTS to the Genesis because they cost the same... so the Caddy can loose by a bigger margin??

I would get the CTS over the Genesis. The styling is much more distictive and original. The CTS costs more but it's money well spent; suspension tuning at the Nurburgring doens't come cheap.

The CTS was designed to compete with BMW's, Audi's, MB'S, Infiniti's, etc. at the performance level not some softly sprung cruiser.

However, if you wanted a softer sprung CTS, get a car with the FE1 suspension. GM is giving you options, don't complain when you choose the wrong one!

brn,

Since when have I ever taken your bait? ;)

Not clear on which point I'm guilty of dodging though...

Presumably this one?

"You've got a lot of people here that feel like the criteria are inconsistent. Take that perception seriously."

My response is that I have been taking it seriously. Just look at my responses in this thread. I've told you about the standard methodology we employ to arrive at our conclusions, and I've explained why those conclusions are what they are in this case. If you think we're randomly shifting our criteria because we <3 Hyundai, I don't know what more I could say to convince you otherwise.

Is that the "dodge" you were referring to?

I think brn means that you haven't started agreeing with him yet because everyone must come to an agreement on something as subjective as cars.

I like the Genesis. I really do. I just do not know if I can get passed the oblong "H" even if it is only on the trunk! I'll be curious to see if you all are still fully enamored with it at it's long term wrap up.

I like the Genesis quite a bit actually. Haven't even seen one on the road (though I'm not sure how well it would stand out with that styling). What I have issue with is the fact that the accord consistently one-ups the camrys and malibus due to a more sporting character, but now the hyundai one-ups the cts due to a better ride and quiter interior!? How soft and quiet is the accord as opposed to the camry?

Don't act like the score sheets make the test non-subjective, numbers still need to be interpreted. I know you guys have mentioned that you apply weights to the categories, which I think is where the issue is with the objections in this blog. Since when is quiet more important than sport at edmunds, even in your luxury comparos?

Josh, thanks for considering my proposal to present a 5-series vs. Genesis showdown.

And, Josh, I have no problem whatsoever with your professional opinion of the Genesis and the CTS. What I have a problem with is the inconsistency: Edmunds' (and just about every car reviewer except Consumer Reports and maybe MSN autos) have consistently rated sporty and refined cars higher than Lexus-like cars. That has been why BMWs have always been perennial award winners. It therefore seems unusual that the BMW-like car would lose this test, especially when the Genesis' handling is worse than even the equivalent Lexus.......this is partly why I've proposed a 5-series-Genesis showdown. If the 5-series wins, it would be very interesting.....
I think uncanny_man is right about the subjectiveness of the wieghts applied to the categories.

uncanny_man, I've seen a number of Genesis sedans around (Lubbock, Texas)! The Genesis looks good: it looks like a mature, "grown-up" luxury car, although it is rather undistinctive.
I'm gonna go test-drive one soon! I want to experience it for myself.

Don't see Hyundia as a luxury name, never will. Resale on the Hyundia will be atrocious. `People who buy this car must like flying under the radar because no one will notice you.

For all the Hyundau haters..,
I will gladly take on a used Genesis soon. I will be revving my V8 with SO much money to spend on gas because of the poor resale value!!

Poor resale is why I like Audi as well!

You guys have to really test drive this Genesis before you comment because I'm really surprised that this is a Hyundai, a Hyundai Come on! I drive my Lexus IS and I laughed at Genesis when it came out. But after test driving it last saturday, I can't believe I spent $40K on Lexus! Then again, i guess my car is for enthusiast, for daily commute, I can imagine riding that car instead of my car.

... i can't believe i just spent the time to read every one of the comments ...

in the market for a CTS myself (vs G37), so i'm very interested in this article.

1. i'm impressed that Josh put up so many replies (with an impressive level of diplomacy).

2. I, like many of you, was very surprised the Genesis won when the CTS clearly had the "sporting" personality of the two. however, perhaps "winning" isn't everything. the "Best For" conclusions did justice to each car and, to me, summarizes what personality/demographic each car appeals to.

i want the "European ride/handling balance in a bold American luxury sedan." Screw the car with "5 Series or even 7 Series luxury at a 3 Series price, and don't mind that it's not trying to handle like a BMW"!!! that's my conclusion from this comparison.

Finally, i remember that Toyota and Honda had humble beginnings and had made a good brand image over the years, therefore i am sure that in time "Hyundai" will lose much of its old, cheap-car image. However, i myself cannot see myself every spending more than $20k on a Hyundai any time soon. unfortunately, brand/ image is big and spending more than $30+k on a car for me means i better get noticed. the Genesis disappears in a parking lot like Camrys and Accords. ever mistaken a CTS for something else?

The point remains that the Genesis is a GREAT car that undercuts every other similarly sized luxury car on the market, PERIOD. Again, when Edmunds compares it against the 5 series, then I (and likely many other people) will shut up. Heck, I'd even like to see it compared to the A6 3.2, E350 and Lexus GS350. A loaded CTS DI is ~ $48k and much more expensive than the Genesis 3.8 with equal equipment so please don't let price stop you from comparing a 535i. I submit that IL isn't prepared to deem the Genesis superior than the 5 series even though the same benefits over the CTS would exist of the 5 series. The interior of the 5 series is dramatically worse than either the CTS or Genesis and its rear seat room is about the same as the Caddy. Basically, the 5 would give you the same compromises as the CTS (listed in the comparison review) for substantially more money so I would pay money to see how you guys would justify the Bimmer's superiority. The main difference between the 535i and CTS is that the BMW is much faster so unless raw speed can sway the vote, I don't see how the BMW could possibly win but I'm sure that it would.

PS- to be clear, I have no beef with the Genesis and like it a lot. If I carried adults around on a regular basis, the extra rear seat room would sway me. However, I still favor the CTS for reasons that aren't exactly practical. It just better suites my personality. That said, I'd get the Genesis over any 5, E, A6 or GS if the CTS did not exist.

i defintly do not agree with .....the cadillac is vastly superior compared to the hyundai genesis ..better looking better handling more fun to drive ans way more luxurious looking then that hyundai

While the CTS is "cutting edge" appearance now, Cadillacs just seem to look old after a few years, at least to me. Sat in three different CTS' and not impressed. For one thing, no matter how I adjusted the seat, knees hit the windshield edge getting in and out and I'm short. It also felt cramped and interior looked too "GM.".
If Genesis can respond to the criticisms of the suspension, they have a true winner - price not a factor.
The Genesis and the Azera are luxury cars! They are not prestige cars and there is a difference. Prestige is what someone else's perception of the car is and the major part of that is price and selectivity of owners. Hyundai will never be prestige.
In the 50's and 60's, Chevrolet, Ford, Studebaker and even AMC and others had cars that were classified as luxury because of what they offered. This is from several reference books on automobiles, not my opinion only,

I own a 2009 Genesis v8 with tech package. I didn't really shop the CTS. I did shop the STS when I found the STS wasn't right for me I looked at the CTS since I was at the dealer. BEAUTIFUL CAR! However. I was shopping for a FULL sized sedan, which the CTS is not. A better comparison would be the Genesis v. STS, both are full sized luxury (not sport) sedans.
I also shopped the 535i (too small again) and the E350 (v8 was well out of my price range).

Notes from my shopping.

1. STS was the BEST on concrete broken highways and had the largest back seat

2. CTS was the most fun on twisty roads (yes better than the BMW).

3. 528i had the worst transmission. (auto), best suspension (highway touring AND twisty road fun)

4. E350 felt like the cheapest car I tested.
This was the only "entry model" I shopped. It was a little small (s-class is not in my price range)

5. Genesis was not #1 on my list in every category it was #2 a LOT,
#2 highway suspension (90 mile commute)
#2 rear seat room (kids must fit)
#2 Engine, the only V8 tested, the BWM nicer although down 120Hp it felt powerful. This is where the STS lost, the v6 didn't have the power for the car, V8 was out of my price range
#1 Stereo, not even close.

Priced a hair under 40k (after discounts) the Genesis was 8K less than the best price on the STS. (STS was my second choice)

My point, it doesn't matter what others think about a car you want. If the car meets your needs better than any other .. buy it.

I am very tired of edmunds reviews on GM products.........too many double standards...I would choose the cadillac over the genesis anyday because hyundai has never had enough prestige to call the genesis a ''luxury sedan'' I do believe that the CTS could be improved some more (i.e.the backseat......um theres really no more things I would improve about it.)I do not belive that the genesis has better quality interior materials than the CTS....overall this was a bad review.

I test drove both -- a CTS with the DI V6 and a new Genesis V6. No contest; the Genesis with quieter, smoother, rode more in a much more composed fashion, and was about $6k less expensive. I bought my Genesis in mid-July last year and still consider it the best car I've ever owned.