2008 Cadillac CTS: Caddy Does Carmel

Glad to hear there are at least *some* ways the CTS is better than the competition. But somehow, that post about "American Cars Are Never the Best" comes to mind when I compare this car to a 3series..

*prepares to be flamed*

@dragonflight-

I think it's impressive that in 2 generations the CTS has been developed and refined as much as it has to compete well with the 3-Series. Remember that the 3 has been refined into what it is today since the 1970's with the 2002. In the 80's it's kind of funny to think that BMW was lapping the 'ring with the then-E30 3-Series (and developing the first generation M3) while GM was busy gluing Cadillac badges on a Cavalier. How far we've come.

For me the main detractors of the CTS are the hugeness of size and the garish styling. I've grown to really dislike the front end. The weight is there too - this 300 hp CTS nets a 0-60 time over a second longer than the 300 hp 335i. However, there's a place in the entry-level lux segment for that buyer who wants more space and luxury feel along with much of the sportiness - I think the CTS (and G35) fits it well.

"But somehow, that post about "American Cars Are Never the Best" comes to mind when I compare this car to a 3series..

*prepares to be flamed*"

Don't worry, 1487 will be around soon enough to tell us all that this car is better than a Bimmer, Merc or Audi as soon as the shift ends at Burger King.....

Though the MKS is a clear cut below the CTS, it's unfair to say it has nothing going for it in comparison. It's much roomier.

I love this car. Its a shame about the "Squeaky seats. Wonky driving position. Crude power window switches", but I could care less about the nav.

As for the styling, I think its great. I'm looking forward to the coupe, though I hope it changes in look a little from the concept.

The CTS is a clear homerun for Cadillac and the domestic luxury industry as a whole as it does prove the domestics (well Cadillac so far) can compete on a world level when it comes to the complete package and/or a sport luxury sedan.

The one thing I REALLY.. REALLY... R E A L L Y admire about the CTS is its a blatant change of direction for Cadillac as a brand yet it still remains a Cadillac. If Cadillac can offer the same level of product execution (or more) with the rest of its product portfolio and remain consistent.............watch out!

Thats weird to hear a complaint about the nav system. I thought I recalled most reviews of this car praising the nav as one of the best. Maybe I'm confusing it with another car since I don't pay much attention at all to factory nav systems.

I didn't even know this car was supposed to have automatic-triple blink signals.

I'm really happy to hear that the FE2 suspension doesn't feel like a blatant loss compared to the FE3 suspension. This bodes well for the Camaro LS and LT, as it will have the FE2 suspension rather than the FE3 as on the SS. I'm tempted to save some cash and get an LT instead of an SS.

Cadillac needs to put this quote on a warning label SOMEWHERE :D

Warning: gleeful doughnuts may cause scenic vistas to become temporarily obscured.

stovt001,

No, you're right -- this is generally an excellent nav system. It just took an unusually long time to calculate my route on a few occasions, and one time I missed a turn because of it (I'd initiated the calculating process at a Carmel gas station, pulled out onto the road, approached an intersection...and the thing was still "calculating your route").

-Sadlier

I tested the CTS for fun after buying an '08 Enclave. The Wonky Driving Position description is spot-on. I called it the Pretzel-Illogic (anyone old enough to remember Steely Dan?) driving position.

GM must have some genetically-challanged ergonomic testers. The drivers seat-bottom on my Enclave tilts far enough forward to physically dump you on to the floor if you're not hanging on to the steering wheel. I can't imagine any of Buick's traditional blue-haired drivers actually using this setting, much less any of the highly-coveted younger crowd. The front passanger seat bottom, with no up/down tilt feature at all (hey GM, ever heard of passengers?), is permanently canted toward the front floor, so I had both seat cushions articulated and re-stuffed with better foam, and now they are a perfect fit.

My wife's 07 Avalanche with the adjustable pedals is really, really hard to get just right. The seat sits too high on its platform, you have to hunt-and-tilt the seat while sliding the pedals a half-inch at a time to find that optimum position.

Anyway, since I am 6'1" and she's 5'4", I thank GM for the memory seating every time I climb in after the wife's commandeered my ride!

Quite honestly, the BMWs have no appeal in Socal. They are more ubiquitous than Honda Civics. It doesn't stand out at all.

The Caddy certainly looks great. I think it's a tad overdone and will look dated in the future. It doesn't have the balanced proportions and a bit extreme but I also think you can get a better deal on the Caddy than a BMW so factor that in.

Waiting for the CTS SportWagon - now that adds something exciting and different enough for the CTS to stand on it's own as something people desire- irregardless of what competition is out there.

The MKS is stupid.

There a couple more things that should make BMW nervous.

1: The CTS is much better looking.

I know style is just ones opinion but IMHO it's been a number of since BMW made a good looking car.

2: Cadillacs are now cool.

Most (but not all) people who buy a BMW buy it for the status and the name (not cool). Thanks to years of poor products, no one buys Cadillacs for the name anymore. They do buy it however because it's a great car. Both the young and the old seem to love this car.

I just hope they use the talent or drive or whatever it is they have now to expand the lineup. Right now they a have model range on one car (that anyone cares about).

I would like to at least see a big sedan to compete with the high end Mercedes and Audis.

The CTS looks weird in person, I really dislike the 3 Sedan, love the 5 series, love the 3 coupe, BMW has nothing to worry about. Anyone who thinks BMW's are bought based on the name is blinded by the GM lights.

"Anyone who thinks BMW's are bought based on the name is blinded by the GM lights."

LOL I love the way BMW's drive and I know there are people out there who buy them for that reason.

They are very hard to find though.

Everyone I meet with a BMW, you try to talk cars with them and they don't know crap. They bought the car for the image..... "I drive a Bimmer".

I've come up with a good test. If the BMW has a manual transmission then it's a car guy (or girl). If it's an automatic then it's a poser.

I know it's just my opinion but I'm always right so there you go. :)

"But somehow, that post about "American Cars Are Never the Best" comes to mind when I compare this car to a 3series"

The car is larger and much heavier than the 3 series so perhaps you shouldnt compare it to that car. Since it costs the same as the 3, has more space and a better interior I'm not sure why you feel the 3 series is clearly superior. Sure it's faster, but the 335 is faster than every car in its price range because of the turbo engine.

"Everyone I meet with a BMW, you try to talk cars with them and they don't know crap. They bought the car for the image..... "I drive a Bimmer"

Exactly. Why do BMW fans have a hard time accepting this? Luxury cars sales are driven by image conscious people who want to be seen driving something expensive. If BMS were only driven by enthusiasts all BMWs would come with sport packages and manuals.

"The CTS looks weird in person,"

Yes, that's why its won all kinds of awards and sales are up 30%+ this year. You will find that people known to offer nothing but negative commentary on GM vehicles tend to be taken with a grain of salt. No one is surprised you dont like the CTS. Let me guess, you think the 6 is a better buy.

"I would like to at least see a big sedan to compete with the high end Mercedes and Audis."

It appears that is unlikely to happen. Instead Cadillac is going to focus on more CTS variants and a new SRX. Eventually a small 3 series type car should be offered on a new RWD platform. The S, 7 and A8 are relatively small volume cars and Cadillac isnt really passing up on huge sales by not competing there.

"Everything. The CTS positively pwns the MKS in every significant way, except maybe Sync. Best American luxury sedan under $50k? It's not remotely close."

The MKS have nothing in common. would you compare the ES350 with the G35 simply because they are both Japanese and have similar price tags? WHy do journalists insist on trying to group cars based on the national origins of their manufacturers? Do you really think the MKS is targeting the CTS? The MKS is much larger, has a few features not found on CTS and is designed to be a traditional luxury sedan, not a sports sedan. Lexus has been following the same formula and last time I checked it's worked out pretty well for them.

How many more times will MKS bashing be worked into these posts?

Yes, that's why its won all kinds of awards and sales are up 30%+ this year. You will find that people known to offer nothing but negative commentary on GM vehicles tend to be taken with a grain of salt. No one is surprised you dont like the CTS. Let me guess, you think the 6 is a better buy.

No, you moron. Looks have nothing to do with the cars performance. There is something wrong with your reading comprehension. I said it looks weird and suddenly, I don't like, hate it, and wonder why it's selling so well for being such a piece of trash, amazing what you can get from one sentence.

Since reading cx7lovers comments rarely offer anything of value to any discussion, I'm glad I missed his recent rant calling someone here a moron. How does a childish emotional outburst positively contribute to a discussion or debate?

@1487

You've fallen into the Reason Trap. As you once told me, trying reason with cx7lover is a complete waste of time. In the spirit of sportmanship, I applaud your effort.

Reason with me? What is there to reason WITH, I only commented on it's looks because when I saw one it looked ODD, and that's ALL I said. I never said anything about how it drove or sold. 1487 in ususal fashion comes with his extra B/S that he gets all from his head.

Your comments offer what, nothing? They're not even relevant to this blog. Go crawl in a corner.

"Exactly. Why do BMW fans have a hard time accepting this? Luxury cars sales are driven by image conscious people who want to be seen driving something expensive. If BMWs were only driven by enthusiasts all BMWs would come with sport packages and manuals."

1487, I understand where youre coming from but at the same time youre somewhat contradicting yourself. Yes I know there are some "BMW posers" out there but you cant automatically label all non enthusiasts or people who chose to buy the non sport editions posers.

For example, there is an older couple (late 40's) behind us that have 2 BMWs, a 07 328i coupe (non sport), a 07 335i sedan (non sport) and a Pontiac G6 coupe as a runabout. Im fairly sure they are clueless when it comes to performance vehicles but I just cant assume they purchased the cars just because they were BMW's. I dont know, maybe I should question them about their purchases?

There are people who buy BMW's, Hondas, and GM products that arent performance enthusiasts per se yet they just like that brand of car. You cant just look at it from a 1 demensional perspective.

You said "luxury car sales are driven by image conscious who want to be seen driving something expensive". I do agree to an extent but Cadillacs are luxury cars and can be expensive so where does that leave Cadillac? What reasoning do you give for the Escalades popularity? What luxury car maker wouldnt want the kind of badge/brand power/recognition?

@1487,

The point of this particular dig at the MKS was that the CTS is a better car for everyone -- not just those who appreciate tight steering and above-average handling. Like, if a couple septuagenarians asked me which sub-$50k American luxury sedan they should buy, I'd tell 'em to get the CTS without a second thought. In other words, Lincoln has come out with a brand-new flagship sedan that trails the CTS by a significant margin for every demographic.

-Sadlier

"Do you really think the MKS is targeting the CTS?"

How can you not compare the CTS to the MKS? Cadillac and Lincoln have been competeing to American's premium brand since... well.. always.

You have to compare their products.

Cadillac has come back from the dead, Lincoln had better follow soon or RIP.

The Lincoln MKS is a large car, and would go up against the STS and DTS, Buick Lucerne, and Pontiac G8.

The Lincoln MKS beats the CTS on roominess one size class up.

Review says the MKS's interior materials is comparable in the luxury car segment, which means it's more luxurious than the G8.

If you want an American made Toyota Avalon, the MKS is a good choice.

PS I'm assuming we don't care about the rocketship Avalon's 0-60 in 6.0 seconds (7.5 MKS), and 19/28 mpg (17/24 MKS).

"septuagenarians" There you go using big words again.

There's a large demographic that doesn't care about handling. They want a big, roomy, cushy, smooth auto. The MKS is targeted to them. No auto enthusiast is going to like it. Your grandpa is another story.

"If you want an American made Toyota Avalon, the MKS is a good choice."

I'd say that the Mercury Sable is a much closer competitor to the Avalon.

"1487, I understand where youre coming from but at the same time youre somewhat contradicting yourself. Yes I know there are some "BMW posers" out there but you cant automatically label all non enthusiasts or people who chose to buy the non sport editions posers. "

No contradiction at all. I never said the majority of BMW owners are posers. I just said that many BMW owner care about the badge and styling more than handling. I really dont care much about this notion of "posers". That is a ridiculous label used by people who feel they are somehow superior to other owners of their particular car just because they can quote specs or drive a stick.

"PS I'm assuming we don't care about the rocketship Avalon's 0-60 in 6.0 seconds (7.5 MKS), and 19/28 mpg (17/24 MKS).

Hopefully you have figured out the mileage and 0-60 time you mentioned are for the AWD MKS. The Avalon is FWD. The Avalon is far smaller and about 400lbs lighter. The Avalon also has a 14 cu ft trunk which is smaller than the Malibu's trunk. It also has a cheap interior that Toyota tries to dress up with metallic spray paint.

"You have to compare their products."

No you dont. Lincoln has made no effort to be seen a competitor to German brands. The only think Cadillac and LIncoln have in common is that both are American brands and both have been around for a long time. Lincoln doesn't target the same customers as Cadillac for the most part. The CTS and MKS have nothing in common. The DTS has more in commmon with the MKS.

"Lincoln has come out with a brand-new flagship sedan that trails the CTS by a significant margin for every demographic. "

Not really. There you go again making definitive statements that have no basis. The MKS is just as high tech as the CTS and just as distinctive looking. In addition, it's cheaper than a loaded CTS and considerably larger. That doesn't sound like a car that is "trailing" in every way. Most older people like to have a decent backseat and trunk and the CTS comes up a little short on both. Americans do not attack apexes in normal driving. The CTS' capabilities are impressive but they are overkill for normal driving. The MKS is simply a car designed for practical American driving on American roads. Just because it can't tackle the Ring doesn't mean its an inadequate car. I have already posted links to reviews that totally contradict your statements about the car and it appears that IL is the only major source that feels this car is a total dud. In terms of space, price, styling and features the car is competitive.

If the DTS gets canceled, the MKS will fill that role quite nicely. Much to the chargin of enthusiasts, the Deville/DTS has always been a strong seller negating the sentiment that the majority of the population want/need firm "sporty" rides with sublime steering. This is simply not true and I'd wager less than 20% of the American buying public evens notices these nuances when stuck in perputual gridlock. As a luxury car, I'm quite certain the MKS does just fine. Interestingly enough, reviews from other publications seemed to be much more impressed with the MKS than Insideline- who seems determined to let us know the MKS is a terrible vehicle in every single aspect. If every manufacture tries to copy BMW, where would that leave the traditional buyer? For those with convenient amnesia, let me remind you that Lincoln made a rear drive performance near luxury vehicle called the LS. Despite it's dynamic skills set, it was not really a sucess. Lincoln has been there and done that so you people need to get over it. Lincoln is NOT going to create another BMW wannabee and that's fine for me. BMW fans will never acknowledge that any price competitive product is superior to the 3/5 series in any way, shape or form and when a company like Lincoln who has tried and failed at that task takes a different direction, they are still criticized? Give me a break. If you deem BMWs superior, than buy them. For those of us who do not see all the hype, there are plenty of other great choices out there for LESS money.

For the record, the people I know with BMWs (or hope to acquire) could not define steering feel or handling characteristics if their life depended on it. All they know is that they own (or soon want to own) and BMW. I remember a friend of my mother's got a 328i cabriolet a few years back because she wanted "that Bimmer convertible." It turned out to be a nightmare and she got rid of it for a CLK cabriolet.

As far as the CTS is concerned, it only competes with the 3 series in one catergory, price. Other than that, the wider, longer, taller and heavier CTS will never run rings around the 335i. If that's the only thing you are interested in, then the Caddy won't fit the bill. However, if you plan to use your vehicle as a practical car and do practicle things like drive to work (imagine that!!) and take road trips, I don't think the CTS will disappoint. While some of you may drive through circuitus mountain switchbacks with no guardrails on a daily basis, you are a fractional minority. If you are in to cars, that does not limit you to only appreciating to the sporty ones. I like all types of vehicles from MKS soft to GT3 firm and everything in between. You people who can't appreciate that are missing out on a lot of good vehicles.

"There's a large demographic that doesn't care about handling. They want a big, roomy, cushy, smooth auto. The MKS is targeted to them. No auto enthusiast is going to like it. Your grandpa is another story."

Thank you. I love how people like Sadlier totally ignore the fact that the ES350 is the best selling midsize luxury car. The ES is one of the worst handling cars in the entry lux segment and sells like gangbusters. The sporty G35 gets whipped by the ES in sales every month. Why do people insist that any car that isnt a sports sedan isn't a nice car?

"I do agree to an extent but Cadillacs are luxury cars and can be expensive so where does that leave Cadillac? "

I dont have a problem with people buying cars simply for image reasons. I doubt cadillac does either. I only bought up that issue because BMW lovers pretend that the average BMW owner is more worthy of respect and admiration than the average luxury car owner because BMW owners are supposedly really concerned about driving dynamics.

"As you once told me, trying reason with cx7lover is a complete waste of time. In the spirit of sportmanship, I applaud your effort."

True indeed. This guy has never met a GM product he doesn't dislike.

It's fine to nit-pick, but with most of Edmund's writers, it is definitely biased against American cars. You know, selective absence of information, similar to the way the media tries to skew the audience to democrats by conveniently leaving out negative information about Obama, but hyping up any negative information about McCain.

I get the sense Edmund's does the same with their car reviews: problems and design flaws with foreign cars are conveniently not mentioned, while problems and design flaws with American cars are scrutinized and highlighted to no end.

I mean the shape of the end of the power window switches? Honestly.

How about pointing out elements of the CTS's interior design and materials quality that are better than the BMW 3-series and C-class (of which there are many, and you guys know it)?

I know most of you guys and gals live in the People's Republik of Kaleefornia, which is the most import-car-loving state in the country by far, but as journalists, you should really be more objective and fair in your reviews of all cars.

Going back to my initial clarification of the MKS dig, the point is, even Grandpa would be better off in a CTS. Why? Because our FE2-suspended CTS rides at least as softly/compliantly as the MKS -- and remember, there's an even cushier version (FE1) should Gramps want it.

People here who haven't driven an MKS are naturally assuming that it's got a classic American luxury ride. It doesn't. Despite its sailboat-grade handling, the MKS rides firmly. What was Lincoln thinking? I have no idea. But the CTS' FE2 suspension feels if anything more supple than the Lincoln's setup, which is remarkable given the Caddy's impressive handling.

The CTS also has more comfortable seats -- and if Gramps wants a bigger backseat than the Caddy's, I don't want to know what he and Grandma plan on doing back there.

Oh, and the CTS' DI-V6 is a very good engine; the MKS' truck-like 3.7-liter lump is not.

Conclusion: The CTS not only beats the pants off the Lincoln performance-wise -- it's also better at being a classic American luxury sedan.

-Sadlier

So now that the Aura test is nearly complete (or perhaps already complete?), this is the thread that will be overrun by insults and ridiculous statements?

Regarding the topic at hand:

Looks wise, I'd rather have this CTS then a 3 series. I'm concerned about the cars looks becoming dated in a few years, but for now I think its excellent (the three series is going down hill looks-wise, imo). I like that the CTS stands out in a crowd.

"Conclusion: The CTS not only beats the pants off the Lincoln performance-wise -- it's also better at being a classic American luxury sedan. "

I've been in the backseat of the CTS and the Taurus. The Taurus is considerably larger. The CTS has adequate backseat room but it's hardly commodious. In addtion, IL's road test mentioned the MKS was overpriced by $10k and yet the MKS is cheaper than the CTS with all the option boxes checked. YOu obviously have a problem with the MKS and that is your choice but other reviewers think it's a nice luxury car, period. Don't be surprised that people here disagree when other experts who have test driven the car do not agree. As for the 3.7L engine it's virtually the same as the "lump" in the CX-9 and I don't hear anyone complaining about it there. Then again, the CX-9 is seen as an import so that likely explains the discrepancy. next you will be telling me that Mazda "re-engineered" the 3.7L and it's not the same engine.

"So now that the Aura test is nearly complete (or perhaps already complete?), this is the thread that will be overrun by insults and ridiculous statements? "

So anyone who doesnt agree with the author of the post 100% of the time is now engaging in insults and making ridiculous statements? Maybe you should specify who and what you are referring to because the statements here seem largely reasonable to me.

I would love to hear the technical diffferences between the "truck like" engine in the MKS and the engine used in the 6 and CX-9. When you call the same engine unrefined in one vehicle and then act like it's perfectly competitive in another vehicle people could infer you are biased. I'm sure that's not the case though.

Similar/identical engines can sound quite different from car to car. Example: GM's 3.6-liter V6 in the Saturn Aura and Pontiac G8. In the Aura, it sounds pretty good; in the G8, it sounds like a bucket of bolts. Why? Got me. But there it is.

I don't think the Mazda 6's 3.7-liter sounds great, but it does sound more refined than the MKS engine. More firewall insulation? I dunno. The CX-9 engine may be comparable sound-wise to the MKS (haven't been in the CX-9 in awhile), but that's no compliment to the MKS -- we're talking a family hauler versus Lincoln's flagship luxury sedan.

Re: overpriced-ness, yes, that's correct. The MKS is massively overpriced. The CTS? Debatable. I think $46k is a bit steep for our long-termer, but it's a really good car. In any case, it's leaps and bounds ahead of the MKS, which is why Lincoln's out of its mind to be charging $46k for our MKS AWD test car.

"So anyone who doesnt agree with the author of the post 100% of the time is now engaging in insults and making ridiculous statements? Maybe you should specify who and what you are referring to because the statements here seem largely reasonable to me."

I did not say that. I said nothing about disagreeing OR agreeing with the author.

Its a general observation that the discussions in the Aura thread typically break down rather quickly. I am not referencing any single person. I think both sides are guilty of this.

"The CTS? Debatable. I think $46k is a bit steep for our long-termer, but it's a really good car."

Is it steep? Think about it. Your long-termer is basically a fully loaded model, with about $12k in options. You may question the value of all those options, but that shouldn't reflect in the value of the car. Would you view the car differently if it were a $34k base model, which would still have most of the fundamental goodness of the CTS you have? Or is it all of the options that make it "a really good car"?

To put the value equation in perspective, name another car in this segment that has all of the features and performance of this fully loaded CTS for less than $46k. Infiniti G35 is the closest I can think of, but it lacks a lot of the features and options the CTS, so you would have to compare a CTS optioned out with only the equipment available on a fully loaded G35, and compare that price (e.g. no ultra view moonroof available on the G). I'll bet they are close.

stringray: well put.

Stingray,

The DI-V6 is a must, so we're starting at almost $36k. I'd want the Bose (not stellar, but enjoyable) and nav system, and let's stick with the FE2, since it's on our test car and I like it. So what are we looking at...$40k or low 40s out the door?

That seems quite reasonable to me, actually. Not overpriced at all. Fair point.

-Sadlier

The 3.7L is tuned differently in Mazda's. To add, they more than likely have different exhaust systems. This engine is built in Japan too so they're probably more differences.

BTW, I laugh at the fact you rebutted me on something I never said, and ignored it when I called you out on it, and decided to agree with another moron based off of fabricated hate.

" In the Aura, it sounds pretty good; in the G8, it sounds like a bucket of bolts. Why? Got me. But there it is."

They are not the same engine. The G8 has a holden designed and built version. They are the same architecture but Holden has done some of it's own thing. There is a reason why the G8 is the only car with the 3.6L that sounds different. I have read nothing indicating Mazda and Ford have made major changes to their respective versions of the MKS. Furthermore its absolutely ridiculous to think that Lincoln would actually make a less refined version of an engine sold in a $25k Mazda. If you have some sort of basis for believing they are totally different engines let us know.

"I don't think the Mazda 6's 3.7-liter sounds great, but it does sound more refined than the MKS engine. More firewall insulation? I dunno. The CX-9 engine may be comparable sound-wise to the MKS (haven't been in the CX-9 in awhile), but that's no compliment to the MKS -- we're talking a family hauler versus Lincoln's flagship luxury sedan.

Re: overpriced-ness, yes, that's correct. The MKS is massively overpriced. "

first of all C&D tested the MKS along with the Genesis in their current issue and both cars produced the same sound levels. No other source has indicated the MKS' engine is too loud or undrefined. I read somewhere that it sounds like its straining at redline but luxury customers dont redline their cars. The Genesis has been widely praised as being quiet so if the MKS matches that performance it must be quiet as well.

Secondly, you have provided no real proof that the MKS is overpriced. Overpriced compared to what? the 5 series? The S80? The Es350? I dont think so. The fact that you dont like Lincolns doesnt mean the MKS is overpriced. The much smaller TL is going to cost over $42k with all the options and it doesnt even have a 6 speed auto. What basis is there for saying the MKS is overpriced when you consider its size and features? one of your editors said the car should cost no more than an Altima and I thought that was one of the stupidest and most biased comments I have read on IL. You might as well say the ES350 shouldn't cost more than $32k since it's based on a $20k Camry.

The "family hauler" CX-9 is over $40k fully loaded. Why would it be acceptable for a $40k semi luxury crossover to be less refined than the MKS? Let's be honest here.

"The 3.7L is tuned differently in Mazda's. To add, they more than likely have different exhaust systems. This engine is built in Japan too so they're probably more differences. "

any proof? You can build an engine in different countries using the same specs. Just because its built in Japan doesnt mean its a different engine.