I just drove a traded-in Cadillac Vistiq, and I found myself a bit conflicted. This is a brand new EV that doesn’t really feel as modern as it should, and yet, it’s so cushy to drive that I still like it. Here’s what I mean.
Last week’s Trade-in-Tuesday brought us something rather interesting. Apparently someone traded in a brand new Cadillac Vistiq for a Polestar 4, giving me a great opportunity to test drive the all-new three-row Caddy.
Here’s what I thought:
I will admit that, when researching this car, a few of my wires must have gotten crossed, as I thought the whole time that this vehicle had come out in 2023. This was the car’s sibling, the Lyriq, and though I regrettably got that wrong in the video above, in my defense, the Lyriq doesn’t exactly feel like a particularly advanced, modern EV.
I recently drove the Rivian R2 and Lucid Gravity, plus I’ve driven the R1S. These are vehicles that feel fresh; their overall vehicle packaging is impressive, with lots of interior volume, big frunks, and clever features, plus their infotainment systems look big and modern. The Lyric feels a bit last-gen in those regards.
I mean, just look at the underhood area: 
It’s a bunch of power electronics all stacked up in such a way that it reminds me of EVs of yore — ones that adapted old ways of doing things, specifically stacking a bunch of stuff on a subframe and then decking that subframe onto the body. It’s not clean or elegant, and it doesn’t leave any room for a frunk.
The interior is nice, but if you covered the badges and told me this was a Hyundai Ioniq 9, I wouldn’t be surprised. The Ioniq 9 at least has Apple Carplay and some physical switches to control things like volume and HVAC, whereas the Cadillac has a Google built-in infotainment system and relies on an upper screen and a lower, angled one that tends to smudge and glare in the sun.
With all that said, I have to give Cadillac credit for resisting the urge to have touchscreen-adjustable vent aim, and instead going with these amazing joysticks:
Interior space in the first two rows is amazing — the car is wide, tall, and downright roomy.
For adults, the third row may be a bit tight and best suited for short trips, though I’m 5’8″, and if I’m in the two rows ahead, it’s not bad. The floor is a bit tall, meaning my knees sat higher than I’d like, but otherwise it’s OK; there are cupholders, speakers, USB ports, and vents back there.
Speaking of the tall floor in the rear, this leads to a squished cargo area.
The roof dips a bit in the back, presumably for aero reasons. It, along with the tall floor, combine to create a rather short rear aperture, so you can forget about loading big couches into this thing.
As for how the Vistiq drives, the answer is: Great. 615 horsepower means the 6,300-pound beast gets to 60 mph in under 4 seconds; the ride quality — while not exactly a magic carpet — is good, the seats are cushy, and just in general, the cabin is a great place to relax.
“It’s extremely comfortable and powerful, and it’s got a lot of presence to it. I could drive this thing all day, cross-country,” I say in the Trade-In-Tuesday YouTube video above. “It’s hard for me to hate a car that’s this comfortable and this baller.”
Is the visibility amazing out the back? No.
Is the Vistiq particularly efficient? No; it’s about as efficient as the boxy Rivian R1S.
Still. I know it’s not particularly space-efficient, which is unfortunate since packaging is a key way electric cars — which all have similar torque curves, similarly low centers of gravity, similarly quiet powertrains, and generally similar powertrain performance — can distinguish themselves. I know the Vistiq is not particularly energy efficient. I know its interior doesn’t look amazing. I know rear visibility isn’t amazing. I know there’s no CarPlay.
And yet, I walk away liking the 305-mile-range, $~80,000 Vistiq. And it all comes down to one fact: The thing is baller. The looks, the interior comfort, the way the SUV makes you feel when you’re behind the wheel. It’s just cool.
The Vistiq is clearly somewhat ‘old GM’ in that it’s an inexpensive new hat on an existing chassis — the under-hood space and the dash layout give away that it relies heavily on the engineering of the Lyriq which is 3-4 years older than the Vistiq, and because that car was delayed by a year-and-a-half (due to the pandemic) it’s riding on bones that are almost a full product cycle old — more, when compared to the 3-4 year cycles that the Mainland China OEMs are doing as they get up to speed.
There’s a very obvious constraint where GM doesn’t want to launch all their EV SUVs at once for some reason, but that’s led to this slow trickle of what are effectively the same car in 2 wheelbases and 2 trim levels (Chevrolet and Cadillac)
I appreciate the insight, Sam!
I probably need to know your credentials for declaring things “cool” or “baller.”
It’s an overpriced piece of crap. $80K for a machine that takes one boringly from Point A to Point B, and expensively, I might add? 39kWh per 100 Miles (per EPA, Edmunds tested it worse than that)? Maybe for $40K, and if I were in the market and part of the target demographic, I’d be interested.
Sure, it’s on the lot that you are forced to “advertise” here. Don’t think we don’t understand the gun pointed at your head. Guessing every car for sale on all of their lots are “cool” or “baller.”
Naw, if it were shit I’d say it’s shit. Which is why the review you see above is more critical than any Vistiq review on the web. I keep it 1000.
Feels like the front end of those cars is growing and growing, until one day it will envelop the cabin, and they will reinvent the bus. It will also probably be bigger than one as well.
Sounds like it’s a baby Escalade. That’s a good thing.
I hate frunks and after being in the business for 16+ years, I’ve never met a customer who cared about them. Ever. And I do deal with EVs. Frunks are one of those things that automotive journalists love, but regular people don’t care about.
What I have experienced, is the proliferation of unnecessary soft touch plastics everywhere in cars and unsightly USB-C ports being placed only in places where you can’t hide them…All thanks to automotive journalists!
Are these an improvement? No.
Automotive journalists love to say that everything needs to be soft touch–but soft touch scratches and mars and you can’t repair it, only replace, and it’s too expensive to replace. Harder plastics can sometimes be repaired. Making the underside of a glovebox softer plastic where it can get scuffed isn’t doing the consumer any favors.
Similarly, automotive journalists, since they’re in different cars all the time, have made the entire industry move to having exposed ports for devices so they can find where to plug in. If I buy a car, I know where the plugs are and I want them hidden away so there aren’t unsightly cords everywhere… But this isn’t a choice anymore because automotive journalists decided that their inconvenience is more important than good, minimalist design.
Say no to frunks. I just want all the car nonsense I’m not going to deal with under there! Washer fluid for the win!!
No one ever calls out how Tesla and Rivian both don’t offer Apple CarPlay and have worse reliability than Land Rover or Alfa Romeo by far. They have frunks, though!
Wow, tell us how you really feel!
I’m pro-frunk because of the anti-theft element, but I’m also OK if an automaker foregoes it for a tighter, more efficient interior package. What I don’t like is wasted space or a bunch of hardware just stacked up; I like things integrated tightly.
As for hard plastics vs soft touch? To me, it depends on the application and the location of the plastics. A hard touch plastic that won’t warp in the sun >>a soft touch surface that looks like a swollen marshmallow after a few years.
Love me a frunk at least big enough to store the charger cables, some gloves, an older jacket and a few wet wipes in a ziplock.
Normalizing the idea that the frunk on an electric is where charger cables, adapters, and other bits of important but infrequently used easy to lose miscellany lives would be a good thing – an at hand first place to look that’s easy to remember. Trunk compartments and other dedicated storage can be anywhere, and having the storage under the hood makes it easier to remember to put stuff back where it belongs – you’re less likely to toss the cable in the back seat and drive off because hey, there’s a hood still up!
It’s also easier to retrieve the cables from the frunk when the stern of the ship is loaded with dogs, luggage, food, strollers, etc.
The fact is that the Vistiq has a TON of under-hood space that’s entirely unused for styling (and probably crash protection) reasons. They could have packaged systems that sit under the rear floor or behind the dashboard there, or they could have provisioned a frunk. They did neither!
I doubt journalist have this much influence anymore. Probably tests well with focus groups, and/or looks good on a presentation for shareholders. And is probably easier to marketing.
Hard agree on soft plastics. I wish we still had exposed metal like cars had in the past.
Dude.
Breathe.
And what we consumers want aren’t USB plugs – but wireless charging/bluetooth connectivity. At no extra cost.
And Frunks.
All the Frunking Frunks.
But we do not want hard, brittle plastics like the map pockets and interior door handles on Mom’s old Volvo 240 either.
Soft is good.
No CarPlay = no GM
So it’s not the most energy efficient, it’s not at all space efficient, but it’s relatively comfortable and makes you look like you’re driving something more expensive.
It’s a 21st Century Cadillac Series 62/Calais.
You should write my headlines