Cadillac XLR vs. BMW 650i

youmils03 · #1 (**permalink**) 01-30-2009, 10:41 PM

I feel that both the American Cadillac XLR and German BMW 650i are exceptional sports cars. Reaching 60mph from a dead stop in under 6 seconds, the handling of both cars is significantly better than average. They both have a standard navigation system and leather upholstery. Here's where you pick your side.

Cadillac - The Cadillac XLR is a hardtop convertible, while the 650i is a soft-top. Ouch!

BMW - The 650i has 40 more horsepower than the XLR. Ouch!

Cadillac - The XLR gets slightly better fuel economy.

BMW - The BMW 650i's assistance system is free forever, while the XLR's assistance system (Onstar) is only free for a year.

Cadillac - The XLR has a heated steering wheel.

BMW - The BMW has heated door locks.

Cadillac - The XLR has a 6-disc CD changer.

BMW - The 650i has a wireless cell phone link.

Cadillac - The XLR is less expensive.

BMW - The 650i has automatic day/night power mirrors.

Cadillac - The Cadillac is adaptive cruise control.

Again, they're both outstanding cars. I'd say the XLR might slightly outshine the 650i for more amenities, a smaller price tag, and better fuel economy. What are your thoughts?

apolloGT · #2 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 12:00 AM

The 650i, optioned the same way, is $100,000 whereas the Caddy is $78,000. I'd go for an XLR-V with the 469hp SC V8. Costs the same, and looks just as neat as a 650i. I'm generally a fan of Cadillacs, but the XLR was slightly disappointing, given that they couldn't take down the Mercedes SL (they sure took down MB and BMW with the new CTS-V). Even so, I'd go with the XLR-V

mesarius · #3 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 12:16 AM

The XLR is an ok car I suppose, though it is somewhat heavy and they only come with Automatic transmissions where BMW is notorious for offering Manual transmission as at least an option. With that said I would take the BMW hands down. I'm not really all that impressed with the XLR, to me it feels like a heavy, plush Corvette with an automatic transmission. Plus as with all other Cadillacs it looks like it was designed using only a ruler, I'd rather see a few curves.

SuperchargedXJ · #4 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 12:51 AM

In my opinion, the XLR is no match for the 650i... they are in two different leagues. That's not to say the XLR isn't a nice car, because it is... I just don't think it's a match for BMW engineering.

youmils03 · #5 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 10:42 AM

Thanks to everyone that has commented so far!

I've read all three comments carefully, and it really gave me some more information. The 650i looks a little bit nicer, and it has manual transmission for an option.

I feel that people who were more on the "luxury, amenities, upscale interior" side of things would go for the Cadillac, while people who want more of the "sporty, manual transmission, ride" would take the 650i. They're competitors, but somewhat different cars. I'd rather have the XLR myself. That is NOT at all to say that the 650i is a bad car. I understand the arguments that the 650i fans give, and those arguments are something to consider. They're both great cars, but my opinion is that the XLR might just satisfy me a little bit more than the 650i.

apolloGT · #6 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youmils03

Thanks to everyone that has commented so far!

I've read all three comments carefully, and it really gave me some more information. The 650i looks a little bit nicer, and it has manual transmission for an option.

I feel that people who were more on the "luxury, amenities, upscale interior" side of things would go for the Cadillac, while people who want more of the "sporty, manual transmission, ride" would take the 650i. They're competitors, but somewhat different cars. I'd rather have the XLR myself. That is NOT at all to say that the 650i is a bad car. I understand the arguments that the 650i fans give, and those arguments are something to consider. They're both great cars, but my opinion is that the XLR might just satisfy me a little bit more than the 650i.

I would say it's the other way around (except for the manual transmission option). Honestly, both cars are a bit overpriced. The convertible hardtop is better than a soft top, and 469hp isn't a bad figure. Having said all that, you could definitely get a V or a regular XLR MUCH cheaper than list price at this time, whereas the Bimmer you're gonna pay for it all. Unless it's an M or 35i model, I think BMWs tend to be overpriced and really not worth it.

sccavette · #7 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 03:51 PM

One thing to keep in mind you are going to take a bath in resale with the Cadi and not the BMW. You can buy the XLR used at the auto auctions for less than 1/2 what they were new a year ago. The BMW,s are holding value very well and seem to always have.

Both cars have good and bad. Some look at the hard top as a good thing for the cadi where some that have owned and worked on them will disagree. The BMW is more money and can you really see anything that warrents it becides it is a BMW?

If you do prefer the Cadi over the BMW you better get one now because it is no longer going to be built like the modern day Allante of the 90's.

My personal opinion is I the same as ApolloGT, give me a CTS-V over the XLR anyday!

youmils03 · #8 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apolloGT

I would say it's the other way around (except for the manual transmission option). Honestly, both cars are a bit overpriced. The convertible hardtop is better than a soft top, and 469hp isn't a bad figure. Having said all that, you could definitely get a V or a regular XLR MUCH cheaper than list price at this time, whereas the Bimmer you're gonna pay for it all. Unless it's an M or 35i model, I think BMWs tend to be overpriced and really not worth it.

I don't know where you get the 469 horsepower figure. The XLR-V has 443 horsepower (I think) and the XLR has 320. We are strictly comparing the regular $80,000 XLR and the $80,000 650i. Is your opinion still the same?

apolloGT · #9 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youmils03

I don't know where you get the 469 horsepower figure. The XLR-V has 443 horsepower (I think) and the XLR has 320. We are strictly comparing the regular $80,000 XLR and the $80,000 650i. Is your opinion still the same?

My fault.. the STS-V and the XLR-V have the same engine, but for some reason the STS-V has 469 to the XLR-V's 443. Haha, some people on this site won't like what I'm about to say, but I'd still take the XLR. I wouldn't look like a dentist and I'd be driving a car of my country.

Johnnyboy · #10 (**permalink**) 01-31-2009, 06:06 PM

I'd take the 650i hands down... but like others said... if you changed the Caddy to the CTS-V... I'd go with the Caddy.

youmils03 · #11 (**permalink**) 02-01-2009, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apolloGT

My fault.. the STS-V and the XLR-V have the same engine, but for some reason the STS-V has 469 to the XLR-V's 443. Haha, some people on this site won't like what I'm about to say, but I'd still take the XLR. I wouldn't look like a dentist and I'd be driving a car of my country.

I know what you mean by "I wouldn't look like a dentist". The 650i has that kinda "working" appearance to it, if you know what I mean. I think the XLR looks sportier, and its interior is a little more upscale. I'd rather have a Cadillac XLR, but the BMW 650i. And for $20,000 less than both of those cars, the Cadillac CTS-V gets a 110% with a 556 horsepower V8, 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. The CTS-V is probably the world's most underpriced car, considering its upscale interior, sporty nature, and reasonable price. You'd be stupid to think that a BMW M5 or Mercedes E63 AMG would be better buys than the CTS-V.

apolloGT · #12 (**permalink**) 02-01-2009, 02:16 PM

yeah the automatic can do 3.9 0-60s.. which is pretty damn sweet. I'd definitely grab one of those (in manual despite the slightly slower time) and eventually buy smaller pulleys for the blower... hehe

youmils03 · #13 (**permalink**) 02-01-2009, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apolloGT

yeah the automatic can do 3.9 0-60s.. which is pretty damn sweet. I'd definitely grab one of those (in manual despite the slightly slower time) and eventually buy smaller pulleys for the blower... hehe

Yep, the CTS-V's is an exceptional car. It'd say it's underpriced by about $25,000.

Would you rather have a Cadillac XLR-V hardtop convertible with more luxury amenities or Cadillac CTS-V with more power and faster? That's a hard one.

apolloGT · #14 (**permalink**) 02-02-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youmils03

Yep, the CTS-V's is an exceptional car. It'd say it's underpriced by about $25,000.

Would you rather have a Cadillac XLR-V hardtop convertible with more luxury amenities or Cadillac CTS-V with more power and faster? That's a hard one.

CTS-V

I think I would really enjoy making a few BMW and Benz owners cry.