Owners have filed 12 complaints
about the 2026 Cadillac CT5 with NHTSA between 2025 and 2026.
The largest single group is the driver assist & collision avoidance.
Across this model's run it ranks 5 of 6 worst.
The letter says how bad. This says what kind — whether this year drew
an unusual number of complaints, unusually dangerous
ones, or failures that arrived unusually early.
The dashed ring is 50 — the national norm. Further out is worse.
Complaint volume — 25
Against the median year of the Cadillac CT5. 50 means typical for this
model; 100 means roughly double.
Severity — 86
16.7% of these complaints
involved a crash, fire, injury or death, against a national rate of
9.7%.
Early failure — not reported
Too few complaints recorded a mileage to measure this.
Complaints filed with NHTSA, by model year. Bar colour is the FaultScore grade:
A
B
C
D
F
ungraded
What breaks on a 2026 Cadillac CT5
Every complaint is filed against a part. Follow any row for the complaints about that part alone.
Driver Assist & Collision Avoidance
541.7%
1 crashes, 0 fires · median 1,200 mi
Acceleration & Cruise Control
216.7%
Median failure at 1,200 miles
Other & Unspecified
18.3%
Brakes
18.3%
1 crashes, 0 fires
Electrical System
18.3%
Transmission & Drivetrain
18.3%
Engine & Cooling
18.3%
When owners complained
A spike years after the car went on sale usually means a part wearing
out on schedule across the whole fleet — the kind of pattern no single
owner can see from inside their own car.
Sep 2025peak 3Sep 2026
Complaints that involved harm
Reports where the owner recorded a crash, a fire, an injury or a death.
Port Saint Lucie, FLCrash
SERVICE BRAKES
CRITICAL SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURE & CONCEALED SOFTWARE REPAIR: Within 14 days of vehicle delivery, a 2026 Cadillac CT5 experienced a complete failure of its heavily advertised Reverse Automatic Braking (RAB) driver-assistance technology. While reversing at a safe, low speed toward a full-sized stationary vehicle, the system failed to detect the obstacle, issued zero visual/audible warnings, and failed to apply automatic braking, resulting in an unmitigated collision ($2,800 physical damage). SUBSEQUENT OEM CONCEALMENT & SOFTWARE FLASH: The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealership (Wallace Cadillac). While in dealer custody, onboard vehicle logs confirm that GM Update 661.10 was flashed to the vehicle's modules on June 8th. GM Corporate and the dealership subsequently claimed no repairs or updates were performed, stating the system tested "fully functional" on June 13th (after the undisclosed software patch was applied). GM Executive Management (Case #103080717 / PAC Case #101155599) has repeatedly refused to provide written diagnostic findings or supply the owner with the Event Data Recorder (EDR) telemetry logs as requested under the Driver Privacy Act of 2015, communicating denials strictly via telephone to avoid a paper trail. This issue directly correlates with ongoing federal investigations into GM electronic brake control module failures. The failure of active safety collision-avoidance systems poses an immediate, severe safety risk to vehicle occupants and pedestrians.
NHTSA complaint #11764078 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
CRITICAL SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURE & CONCEALED SOFTWARE REPAIR: Within 14 days of vehicle delivery, a 2026 Cadillac CT5 experienced a complete failure of its heavily advertised Reverse Automatic Braking (RAB) driver-assistance technology. While reversing at a safe, low speed toward a full-sized stationary vehicle, the system failed to detect the obstacle, issued zero visual/audible warnings, and failed to apply automatic braking, resulting in an unmitigated collision ($2,800 physical damage). SUBSEQUENT OEM CONCEALMENT & SOFTWARE FLASH: The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealership (Wallace Cadillac). While in dealer custody, onboard vehicle logs confirm that GM Update 661.10 was flashed to the vehicle's modules on June 8th. GM Corporate and the dealership subsequently claimed no repairs or updates were performed, stating the system tested "fully functional" on June 13th (after the undisclosed software patch was applied). GM Executive Management (Case #103080717 / PAC Case #101155599) has repeatedly refused to provide written diagnostic findings or supply the owner with the Event Data Recorder (EDR) telemetry logs as requested under the Driver Privacy Act of 2015, communicating denials strictly via telephone to avoid a paper trail. This issue directly correlates with ongoing federal investigations into GM electronic brake control module failures. The failure of active safety collision-avoidance systems poses an immediate, severe safety risk to vehicle occupants and pedestrians.
NHTSA complaint #11764078 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
The most recent complaints
In the owners' own words, exactly as filed with NHTSA.
Port Saint Lucie, FLCrash
SERVICE BRAKES
CRITICAL SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURE & CONCEALED SOFTWARE REPAIR: Within 14 days of vehicle delivery, a 2026 Cadillac CT5 experienced a complete failure of its heavily advertised Reverse Automatic Braking (RAB) driver-assistance technology. While reversing at a safe, low speed toward a full-sized stationary vehicle, the system failed to detect the obstacle, issued zero visual/audible warnings, and failed to apply automatic braking, resulting in an unmitigated collision ($2,800 physical damage). SUBSEQUENT OEM CONCEALMENT & SOFTWARE FLASH: The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealership (Wallace Cadillac). While in dealer custody, onboard vehicle logs confirm that GM Update 661.10 was flashed to the vehicle's modules on June 8th. GM Corporate and the dealership subsequently claimed no repairs or updates were performed, stating the system tested "fully functional" on June 13th (after the undisclosed software patch was applied). GM Executive Management (Case #103080717 / PAC Case #101155599) has repeatedly refused to provide written diagnostic findings or supply the owner with the Event Data Recorder (EDR) telemetry logs as requested under the Driver Privacy Act of 2015, communicating denials strictly via telephone to avoid a paper trail. This issue directly correlates with ongoing federal investigations into GM electronic brake control module failures. The failure of active safety collision-avoidance systems poses an immediate, severe safety risk to vehicle occupants and pedestrians.
NHTSA complaint #11764078 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
CRITICAL SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURE & CONCEALED SOFTWARE REPAIR: Within 14 days of vehicle delivery, a 2026 Cadillac CT5 experienced a complete failure of its heavily advertised Reverse Automatic Braking (RAB) driver-assistance technology. While reversing at a safe, low speed toward a full-sized stationary vehicle, the system failed to detect the obstacle, issued zero visual/audible warnings, and failed to apply automatic braking, resulting in an unmitigated collision ($2,800 physical damage). SUBSEQUENT OEM CONCEALMENT & SOFTWARE FLASH: The vehicle was taken to an authorized dealership (Wallace Cadillac). While in dealer custody, onboard vehicle logs confirm that GM Update 661.10 was flashed to the vehicle's modules on June 8th. GM Corporate and the dealership subsequently claimed no repairs or updates were performed, stating the system tested "fully functional" on June 13th (after the undisclosed software patch was applied). GM Executive Management (Case #103080717 / PAC Case #101155599) has repeatedly refused to provide written diagnostic findings or supply the owner with the Event Data Recorder (EDR) telemetry logs as requested under the Driver Privacy Act of 2015, communicating denials strictly via telephone to avoid a paper trail. This issue directly correlates with ongoing federal investigations into GM electronic brake control module failures. The failure of active safety collision-avoidance systems poses an immediate, severe safety risk to vehicle occupants and pedestrians.
NHTSA complaint #11764078 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Roswell, GA
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Adaptive Cruise control acts like it’s going to maintain a gap (user selectable gap distance is able to be manipulated and displayed on drivers information center) but will rush right onto a preceding cars bumper. I’m told that even though manual transmission cars have the components and illusion that adaptive cruise control works, it doesn’t which is bad if you think it will work. Please make adaptive cruise control work in manual transmission CT5s like it does in auto. Similarly, the Surround Video Recorder equipment is installed but doesn’t record and isn’t viewable. Please make that function as well. Again, all of the hardware is there - implement it!
NHTSA complaint #11747734 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Roswell, GA
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
Adaptive Cruise control acts like it’s going to maintain a gap (user selectable gap distance is able to be manipulated and displayed on drivers information center) but will rush right onto a preceding cars bumper. I’m told that even though manual transmission cars have the components and illusion that adaptive cruise control works, it doesn’t which is bad if you think it will work. Please make adaptive cruise control work in manual transmission CT5s like it does in auto. Similarly, the Surround Video Recorder equipment is installed but doesn’t record and isn’t viewable. Please make that function as well. Again, all of the hardware is there - implement it!
NHTSA complaint #11747734 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Mchenry, IL
UNKNOWN OR OTHER
While driving vehicle at approximately 50 mph in normal driving conditions, the vehicle’s automatic emergency braking/forward collision system activated an alert when a vehicle ahead of me slowed and turned out of my lane. After the lane was fully clear and there was no obstacle in front of the vehicle, the system aggressively braked and brought the car completely to a stop on the highway. During the event, the vehicle temporarily would not respond to accelerator input even while pressing the gas pedal. This created an extremely dangerous situation and nearly resulted in a high-speed rear-end collision. No crash occurred, but if a larger vehicle such as a semi-truck had been behind me, serious injury or death could have resulted. I am reporting this as a potential false automatic emergency braking / phantom braking event. Vehicle is a rental, history unknown…
NHTSA complaint #11738910 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Mchenry, IL
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: WARNINGS
While driving vehicle at approximately 50 mph in normal driving conditions, the vehicle’s automatic emergency braking/forward collision system activated an alert when a vehicle ahead of me slowed and turned out of my lane. After the lane was fully clear and there was no obstacle in front of the vehicle, the system aggressively braked and brought the car completely to a stop on the highway. During the event, the vehicle temporarily would not respond to accelerator input even while pressing the gas pedal. This created an extremely dangerous situation and nearly resulted in a high-speed rear-end collision. No crash occurred, but if a larger vehicle such as a semi-truck had been behind me, serious injury or death could have resulted. I am reporting this as a potential false automatic emergency braking / phantom braking event. Vehicle is a rental, history unknown…
NHTSA complaint #11738910 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
While driving vehicle at approximately 50 mph in normal driving conditions, the vehicle’s automatic emergency braking/forward collision system activated an alert when a vehicle ahead of me slowed and turned out of my lane. After the lane was fully clear and there was no obstacle in front of the vehicle, the system aggressively braked and brought the car completely to a stop on the highway. During the event, the vehicle temporarily would not respond to accelerator input even while pressing the gas pedal. This created an extremely dangerous situation and nearly resulted in a high-speed rear-end collision. No crash occurred, but if a larger vehicle such as a semi-truck had been behind me, serious injury or death could have resulted. I am reporting this as a potential false automatic emergency braking / phantom braking event. Vehicle is a rental, history unknown…
NHTSA complaint #11738910 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Muskogee, OK
POWER TRAIN
Catastrophic engine failure within 700 miles Requires full engine replacement Problems began around 150 miles on odometer Message: Reduced accelerated speed Check engine light Service transmission system Service variable valve timing system
NHTSA complaint #11718643 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Muskogee, OK
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL
Catastrophic engine failure within 700 miles Requires full engine replacement Problems began around 150 miles on odometer Message: Reduced accelerated speed Check engine light Service transmission system Service variable valve timing system
NHTSA complaint #11718643 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
Muskogee, OK
ENGINE
Catastrophic engine failure within 700 miles Requires full engine replacement Problems began around 150 miles on odometer Message: Reduced accelerated speed Check engine light Service transmission system Service variable valve timing system
NHTSA complaint #11718643 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 1,200 milesOwensboro, KY
VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL
The contact owns a 2026 Cadillac CT5. The contact stated that while driving the vehicle with the Super Cruise feature activated, the message indicated a road construction zone, and the brakes independently activated. The contact stated that there was no road construction nearby. The contact reset the super cruise control feature. The contact stated that while the super cruise control was set at 75 MPH, the vehicle unintendedly accelerated to 100 MPH within seconds. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The dealer was made aware of the failure; however, the contact was awaiting scheduling information. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure, and a case was filed. The contact was advised to cease using the cruise control feature until the vehicle was inspected by the dealer. The failure mileage was approximately 1,200.
NHTSA complaint #11687842 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.
at 1,200 milesOwensboro, KY
FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE: ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
The contact owns a 2026 Cadillac CT5. The contact stated that while driving the vehicle with the Super Cruise feature activated, the message indicated a road construction zone, and the brakes independently activated. The contact stated that there was no road construction nearby. The contact reset the super cruise control feature. The contact stated that while the super cruise control was set at 75 MPH, the vehicle unintendedly accelerated to 100 MPH within seconds. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The dealer was made aware of the failure; however, the contact was awaiting scheduling information. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure, and a case was filed. The contact was advised to cease using the cruise control feature until the vehicle was inspected by the dealer. The failure mileage was approximately 1,200.
NHTSA complaint #11687842 — an unverified report by a vehicle owner.