2006 Audi RS 4 vs 2006 Cadillac CTS-v - Conclusion - Head to Head

The Audi's breeding, all-wheel drive, and premium rolling stock showed up in our slalom test results, the RS 4 clearing the orange cone field at 67.5 mph, compared with the CTS-v's 64.3. That's a big delta factor. The Cadillac doesn't generate as much grip-front or back-as does the Audi, and its all-season Goodyear Eagle RS-As aren't nearly as sticky as the RS 4's Pirelli PZero Rossos. The last CTS-v we tested wore Eagle F1 Supercar summer rubber and - surprise, surprise - ran a zestier 66.8. This also contributed to the CTS-v's less-than-stellar 60-to-0-mph braking distance of 123 feet. That previous CTS-v stopped in 114. The good news is that cadillac still offers the Eagle F1 tires as a customer-request, no-cost option. The change to the longer lived Eagles for 2006 is in response to owner complaints about the grippy but soft Eagles' short tread life. The RS 4? A much-more-like-it 112 feet.

Either is up for a good hard drive. The RS 4 makes you smile silly. it's so quick and just begs you to cane it up to redline again and again. The engine has a reedy intake noise and that throaty exhaust burble, so you'll find your right foot up its butt all the time. The caddy isn't as revvy, but its midrange torque is a gas to play with, and it starts to growl from 3000 revs on up.

Numb steering plagues several Audis, but the RS 4's leather-wrapped sport wheel talks to you. Turn-in is quick and linear; the front end goes where you point it and stays there. The S4 understeers too much, so the RS 4's more connected behavior is welcome. It takes a lot of throttle to unsettle, but it'll drift a smidge if you push it. The stability and traction systems don't cut in too quickly, and when they do, it's a mild intervention. They can be switched off completely. This Audi's handling persona can best be described as high limits with no bad habits: neutral cornering, good grip, well-controlled body motions, minimal squat and dive, and strong, fade-free braking.

The CTS-v has confident, communicative steering too, and with all that torque, it'll burn rubber from here to China. The slalom data tell us the Caddy will wash out sooner, and it does, front and rear. There's minimal body roll, and the damping feels about right. The huge Brembo brakes offer good feel and modulation. The CTS-v's Sigma chassis is a good piece, and while its limits aren't as high as the RS 4's, acquits itself well with few foibles. Unfortunately, the all-season tires don't let it perform at its true potential. The Cadillac is more forgiving than the Audi over the rough stuff, in part because of the extra sidewall cushion afforded by its 45-series rubber, as compared with the O-ring-like 35s on the Audi. but they both ride well considering their road-eating personas and manly suspension tuning. They're quiet, too: no squeaking or creaking, and minimal road rumble and wind noise.

Putting aside the toys and tricks the Caddy's window sticker can't afford, there are a few frustrators. Why doesn't this manual transmission car have a handbrake? Why are the tilt steering-column's notches so far apart, never allowing a just-right adjustment? Why the wonky shifter and the midlevel tires? Serious drivers spending $50k-plus would pay a few grand more to make the most of the CTS-v's good qualities and not to have to deal with these compromises.

Head to head, the RS 4 wins. Given its $22k premium, you'd expect that. It performs better in every parameter, has more creature features to enhance the driving experience, and its fit, finish, and materials quality stands heads above the CTS-v's. The Cadillac delivers 80-85 percent of the experience for around 70 percent of the price, so there's a value gain in that equation for some buyers. Verify your bank balance and then choose your weapon.