Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Cadillac XLR and XLR-V

135678

Comments

  • xkssxkss Posts: 722
    check the link

    cars
  • akanglakangl Posts: 3,591
    Owned 2005 XLR. Ever try to put the hard top up after rain storm?? DON'T! The accumulated water falls into the TRUNK!Great GM design for its luxuary vehicle!!!!
  • I think the key is in knowing when to come in out of the rain......... :confuse:
  • navigator89navigator89 Posts: 1,080
    Many have compared the BMW M6 to the XLR-V and stated that the BMW is a better performer with more power and better handling. Now BMW prices the M6 $3000 below the XLR-V. Could this mean that people will take the BMW over the Cadillac?

    IMO the XLR-V is overpriced. Many people harbor dislike for GM cars and to price one for $100K is a bit too much. This is the only GM product to his the $100K mark. Cadillac should bring it down to $85K and then they have a chance. Think, about it, a Z06 Corvette can smoke an XLR-V, and its under $70K. Why bother with it then?

    Anyway, at least it is cheaper than the SL55 AMG.

    BMW M6 pricing
  • Actually the Z06 can't touch the XLR-V from a dead stop. With the new supercharged Northstar V8, there isn't much on the market even comes close. Trust me, I have test driven this car and it's like being shot out of a cannon. It's super fast and a blast to drive. One thing to remember, a Cadillac will always be a CADILLAC. The price is irrelavant. If you want power and grace, then I would highly suggest you test drive one. I think you'll change your opinion of this car and also on BMW M6. Not much comparison in power, the Cadillac is beyond a doubt the fastest car from 0 to 60 for a production model. The price is the price. Remember, you pay for what you get!
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    The fastest car from 0-60 production model is the XLR-V? I seriously doubt that. I doubt the XLR-V will be as fast as the M6 and/or especially the Z06. The Z06 is a sub 4-sec 0-60 car in the right hands. I don't doubt the XLR-V is faster, but faster than those 2 I got to see to believe.

    The "supercharged Northstar" was easily beaten in every speed contest in a recent STS-V/CLS55/M5 comparo.

    M
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Posts: 2,496
    "One thing to remember, a Cadillac will always be a CADILLAC" You mean like the Cimarron? Or the GM "One size fits all brands" models of the 80s? :P

    I like the XLR a lot but still maintain it needs a better interior and lower price.

    '13 Jaguar XF, '11 BMW 535xi, '02 Lexus RX300

  • navigator89navigator89 Posts: 1,080
    "Actually the Z06 can't touch the XLR-V from a dead stop. With the new supercharged Northstar V8, there isn't much on the market even comes close."

    Im not sure why you would say that. First of all the Z06 has way more power, with the 7.0L LS7 engine putting out 505hp. It's acceleration times are below 4 seconds. The Cadillac's 4.4L V8 only puts put 443hp.

    "Not much comparison in power, the Cadillac is beyond a doubt the fastest car from 0 to 60 for a production model"

    That's totally false. I haven't read a test of the XLR-V yet, but I dont think it's 0-60 time will be better than 4.5 seconds.

    I still stand by what I said, The XLR-V is a fine vehicle, however I wouldn't pay $100K for one, and I doubt others would either, especially with other alternatives being out there, like the M6, Jaguar XK, Porsche 911, Corvette etc.
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Posts: 2,496
    From Forbes.com:

    Lowest seller in '05: XLR convertible (3,730)
    Base price: $77,295

    Article listing best/worst selling model for each nameplate. This does not necessarily mean it (any of the low selling vehicles) is a bad car. But I believe earlier in the thread there was a debate over XLR sales. This # does seem to reflect the cut in production (from 23 to 12 per day, I believe) that Caddy institued due to low demand.

    IMHO, overpriced & lower-rent GM interior helped doom the initial sales forcasts. Lexus sold more than 2x SC430s, the low seller for Lexus:

    Lowest seller in '05: SC convertible (8,360)
    Base price: $66,050

    The XLR did outsell the Jag XK and Audi TT convertibles!

    Having said that, I'd still like an XLR!

    Tryin' to keep the thread alive...

    Any owner comments on their XLRs: Build quality, reliability, ride, handling, mpg, fun???

    '13 Jaguar XF, '11 BMW 535xi, '02 Lexus RX300

  • mpyles1mpyles1 Posts: 90
    The roof dumping rainwater into the trunk?

    Sounds like my '98 Corvette with Targa top. During a rainstorm, I had to stuff paper towels along the top of the driver's side window to stay dry. And don't get me going on what happened going through a car wash or the other reasons it was in the shop 13 times in the 15 months I owned it.

    I now drive a 2004 SL55 . . . hard and fast. Tight as a drum, stellar handling and braking, quiet, comfortable, reliable, and blindingly fast.

    GM is smoking dope if they think they can build a sustainable market presence at anything near the $100K price point. Ultimately, engineering has to take the front seat to play there, and all the front seats at GM have long since been scooped up by the marketing guys.

    A supercharger bolted onto a Cadillac is just the 2006 version of opera windows and vinyl landau roofs.
  • 213cobra213cobra Posts: 12
    Anyone who thinks the XLR-v is just an XLR with a supercharger bolted on hasn't researched, driven or otherwise experienced the car. The 4.4L blown Northstar is a handbuilt performance engine with a large number of upgraded internals to go with the integrated supercharger. Additionally, brakes, tire/wheels and suspension tuning are substantially upgraded. Plus the V has the new 6 speed auto transmission which is robust, capable, and quite smart in its adaptive capability. The manual shifting mode is better too. The standard XLR is luxurious, straightforward, entertaining and comfortable. The XLR-v is a gloved fist by comparison, pouring on seamless locomotive power that is pushed against the planet through impressive traction.

    By comparison, the Mercedes SL55 feels powerful but porky and a generation behind. It's fat and isolating, not a participative experience. The Cadillac is much more flingable and experiential, while still retaining the solid, in-the-road feel expected in this class of car.

    The XLR-v is a seriously engineered car, well-assembled and thought-through. It does not attempt to copy anyone else's formula. It brings relatively lightweight construction, rigid frame-based "drivable chassis" architecture, world-class motive power, virtually 50/50 weight distribution and excellent packaging to the luxury sports car/GT convertible class.

    I haven't found any XLR owner nor even basher who thinks the standard issue XLR is overpriced in the $75K range. But somehow people question whether there is another $25K of value in the V version. I'm here to say that if you really examine the differences, understand them, and then personally experience the difference in the drive, there is no question. The car could not be offered for $85K in today's market. Period. Is it a worthy alternative to the SL 600/55s? To the Aston V8 Vantage? To the Maserati Grand Sport? To the Jag XKR? To the autostick Porsches? Bet your [non-permissible content removed]. Now, they're all distinctly different takes on what a luxury 2 seat GT should be (yeah, I'm ignoring the Jag/Porsche vestigal rear shelf, uh, "seats". The Mercs have that umistakable nuevo-bloat. The Brits are low on power. The Maser has that gorgeous Ferrari mill and inimitable interior saddled to the clunky Cambiocorsa tranny. The Porsche has 45 years of misallocated engineering overcoming its original design flaw and frankly it's good but tired. There are reasons to like them all. This V series Cadillac is a real, modern, capable alternative. Yeah, I bought one. It wasn't what I expected to do. It won on the merits.

    Phil
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Posts: 2,496
    "I haven't found any XLR owner nor even basher who thinks the standard issue XLR is overpriced in the $75K range."

    I think that the price is an issue to (past/present) potential XLR buyers. Sure, if the car appeals to you at that price point, you buy. But after (I think) '04 GM cut daily production nearly in half. I think many potential buyers were turned off by the lower rent interior and the higher rent price. More $ and you can buy the well established MB SL. A few $ less, the Lexus SC430 (XLR wins on the exterior there, imo! SC takes the interior honors...). Or, 'Vette, either Targa or convertible.

    I agree that both XLR iterations are valid competitiors in their respective classes. The pricing is just a bit presumptuous. That is why I'm watching ebay for '05s...!

    '13 Jaguar XF, '11 BMW 535xi, '02 Lexus RX300

  • mpyles1mpyles1 Posts: 90
    Sounds very much like a GM-written marketing release. In fact, the paragraph describing the lightweight construction and chassis architecture sounds very much like the press language I used to pore over as I built up a head of steam to buy my Corvette.

    It all comes to naught if the cars are not reliable . . . and GM has a long way to go to convince me they know how to build a reliable high performance car.

    The front left steering rod falling off my Corvette when I drove -- slowly -- over a railroad crossing is a hairy experience I never want to repeat in a high-performance car. Nor was getting caught in the far-left lane of I-95 in heavy traffic when the car went into limp mode for the fourth time due to a faulty engine control module. That's the day I parked the car on the roadside, called a tow company and, without ever getting in it again, sold it at a fire-sale price to unload it.

    And, by the way, have you ever driven the "porky" SL55 that's "a generation behind"? And just what comprises the list of outdated technology on that car?
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    What is this nonsense? A CADILLAC is a CADILLAC??? You mean like the "wonderful" Cadillac Catera? Cadillac Cimarron? or how about the "excellent" V-8-6-4 DeVille models. Puhleeez, get a reality check dude. I would never be embarrassingly stupid enough to spend this kind of money on a Cadillac when they have time and time again done nothing but embarrass the world with their abhorrent, shoddily crafted, unreliable, overpriced cars. And apparently fat and arrogant GM doesn't give a damn.
  • 213cobra213cobra Posts: 12
    I've seen everything in this class of car. I just don't agree the interior of the $75K XLR or the $100K XLR-v are "low rent." They're functional, undistracting, straightforward, AND made of materials appropriate to an open car -- i.e. the flat plastic buttons won't get hot in the sun. All the data displays are instantly readable. Everything seems tightly attached.

    The ONLY interior that stands out as outclassing everything else in the $100K - $140K range is the Maserati Grand Sport. Now there's an interior to embarrass everything else. Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Cadillac -- they all seem like Mattel products by comparison. But only the Italians do that. In the overall scheme of things, the XLR/XLR-v interiors are fine.

    Phil
  • 213cobra213cobra Posts: 12
    Yeah, mpyles1, I have driven the porky SL55. I said it LOOKS a generation behind, and feels it too. The technology in that car is current, but you can't escape it packs over 400 lbs. above the XLR-v, which is easily sensed. And the long overhangs look out of proportion to the rest of the car. The technology isn't outdated on the Merc, it's the design architecture. Plus, did I mention it's a pig?

    I haven't ever purchased a new GM vehicle before. I bought two on the same day, a CTS-v and an XLR-v. The aggregate owner data verified by 3rd parties verifies GM's rapid advancements in build quality and design durability. I had a '96 Corvette, which was alleged to be from the era of GM build incompetence. Yeah, on that car the interior suffered the GM bean counter intervention, BUT it is virtually bulletproof. I put 80,000 of its to-date 105,000 miles on it with far less maintenance cost that any other performance car I or anyone I know has owned. So, with my XLR-v, time will tell. I'm optimistic.

    Nothing in my prior post was from GM's press release. It was simply a description of what I can observe + what I know about the car. I am thoroughly familiar with the current Corvette platform's design and implementation attributes, so it is not difficult to understand the XLR-v.

    But you're right, the cars have to evidence GM's progress in making reliable cars. The market data says they are there, for the most part. Now, people have to give them a chance. I am.

    Phil
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    There have been many things said about the current SL, but I've never seen anyone say that there was something wrong with its looks. That is a first. The jet-fighter look of the XLR doesn't even come close to the elegant styling of the SL, IMO. Neither does its interior. The XLR doesn't feel like a 75-100K product in the least.

    M
  • mpyles1mpyles1 Posts: 90
    The only downside of the SL's design is that I almost get tired of looking at it, since there's one coming at me from almost every stoplight in the environs around my home. The only XLR I've seen in the neighborhood belongs to someone who lives in my building and parks in the same garage. The only reaction I've seen to its design was the garage attendants snickering at the "bat ears" sticking up above the windshield header when the top was down. They wondered if the car could go fast enough for the wind to tear them off.

    Based on my experience of GM build quality, I would say yes.

    Maybe I just like pigs more than bats.
Sign In or Register to comment.