Howdy, Stranger!

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





2008 Cadillac CTS

11718202223141

Comments

  • traded BMW's and Audi"s for the CTS

    Traded BMW's and Audi's what for the CTS?
  • thebugthebug Posts: 294
    Traded BMW's and Audi's what for the CTS?

    Actually the current CTS. I believe that former BMW owners traded because of maintenance/service problems (which are no longer an issue), two Audi owners (1 A6 sedan, 1 wagon) traded because they simply liked the CTS. One of the CTS owners has since traded her CTS for the STS when it came out.

    It may come as a surprise to you, but some people (me included) like the CTS and the Cadillac line very much. A few of us out here think that the BMW line is very, very nice, but at the same time very, very over priced.

    I think a lot people moved over to the Cadillac line with the advent of the art and science concept, it is pretty decent. My first clue was the used foreign cars on the Cadillac used car lot. One would guess, that whoever dropped these cars off, probably purchased a Cadillac of some type. Just a guess.

    And again, I'll bet it works the other way as well. Me, I'm sold on Cadillac. My current CTS (03 black on black, lux package) hasn't had one single maintenance problem, the service at the dealer is excellent, it continues to perform well, and still turns heads. Most of all, I really like it.

    I owned a Volvo once, and when it came of age, I truly wanted to trade for another one, but just couldn't (and won't) deal with the lack of quality of service. Only one dealer here at that time (turn of the century), and the service department sucked to high heaven.

    Car ownership for me is full circle. Pricing (bang for the buck), adequate bells and whistles (new technologies at a reasonable price), performance, and style (problem free, Ergonomically sound), and quality of service (service without the holier then thou attitude). Remove any one of these elements, and I am out of there.

    To date, the Cadillac brand has provided these important features. I will, I say again, will purchase the 08 CTS this year. Can't wait.

    thebug...
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Cadillac has been doing nice interiors since the mid 90s. Check out the '96 STS interior and the '98 STS interior. Same for the Eldorado and Deville of that era. The CTS interior was actually worse than that of the FWD Caddy cars in terms of design. Your contention that the '08 CTS interior is the first nice interior is a complete joke. They have been at this for a decade although the CTS and original SRX interiors were kind of out of place.

    I guess what the later posters are saying is true. Very different definitions of what a good interior is are at play here. The joke is that you think any Cadillac interior before the 08' CTS and possibly the 07 SRX were up to par with the class. The biggest gripes with latter day Cadillacs has been their interiors or did you miss all that?

    I thought you had disappeared. We have kind of moved on from the Cadillac bashing stage of this discussion. Yes we know, MB has been making great cars for 100 year and Cadillac has just made its first competent car (well we dont really know yet, must wait for C&D to tell us) and they cant compete with the Europeans or Lexus. We all got the point.

    You said it not me.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    The car wasnt trashed by the press at all. That is a lie. NO one said the car was superior to teh 3 series, but that isnt the same as the car being "trashed". Please give the hyperbole a rest if you can. Just because you hate the car doesn't mean it was a failure. The CTS sold well, won a comparison test in R&T (can't wait to hear your excuse) and was generally given favorable reviews as a new kind of Cadillac that could actually handle like a European car. Apparently you missed all of that press though.

    You're so far in denial its funny. A brand new car that gets comments about its handling being on par with a car made 10+ years earlier is sad. When the press is in agreement on a single issue about a car, that is a problem. You'll continue to say that the old CTS has a nice interior when in fact it looked and felt like something from Playskool. Wow the car won 1 comparo in its entire production run against a bunch of larger not as sporty cars! Such a pridigous acheivement!

    Never read anything about the CTS being poorly assembled. I dont know what you presented earlier, but I'm pretty sure the actual quotes are different from what you are presenting above.

    Then you haven't been reading. Remember the XLR-V thread? I gave you at least 4 quotes from various sources commenting on how pitifully finished and put together the CTS, CTS-V and SRX were. You then turned right around and said that they didn't really mean anything. You ask for proof and then deny it when it is present. Classic GM defender stance I guess when the negative press is everywhere.

    While you are digging of evidence that everyone hated the CTS why dont you reread (assuming you ever read it) the R&T test between 7 RWD sedans in which the CTS finished first.

    Impressive until you find out that it didn't face its direct rivals. I guess you're going to stand on this one leg of a comparo forever huh?

    The '98 STS, '05 STS/STS-V, Aurora, DTS, Intrigue, Lucerne, G6, CTS, 300C, Fusion, SVT contour, 300M, etc. are/were all bottom feeders?

    The 98 STS was close to junk, I should know I had 2 uncles that owned them. The Aurora and Intrique are self explanatory failues from a failed brand. None of the cars you named except the 300C and SVT Contour have been anything but bottom feeders. You've got to be pretty desperate to bring up such a losing list of cars to make a point. The G6? Been called a dismal effort since day one.

    The V-Series cars are impressive, no argument from me there. 2 rare expections to the norm.

    The V8 luxury sedan class is so competitive that its hard to really say any car in that class is a bad car.

    True there is no "bad" car in the class, but there are some at the bottom of the class and there is where the STS resides by everything I've seen. No the previous STSs were so out of touch with their class to be called that, but not the current one. It is at least competitive. No most people wouldn't say they were "great" cars, they'd say they're nice cars, the great ones don't sit in the bottom half of comparos. Don't ruin "great" status by trying to attach a Cadillac to it.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    You just contradicted yourself. You agree with my point and say some people don't know which wheels propel the car but then say Caddy was lame for sticking with FWD. If an average driver couldn't tell the difference, how was that lame? The old STS handled as well as your run of the mill E320 or GS300.

    Really? You just don't get it. Cadillac was going around saying that their FWD cars could outhandle the RWD competition and that simply was BS. If you're going to beat the competition you have to at least offer what they offer. Lame is to be the only FWD car in the segment and challenge BMW for handling. There are regular car buyers and then there are enthusiasts and I know you know this Chavis. Cadillac can build all DTS, but see how far that gets them. The fact that they switched proved that it was lame and that the class demanded it, cluless buyers and all.

    More conflicting logic. You say everyone uses electronic damping now to keep up with the Joneses and then say CVRSS was nonsense and a ridiculous spectacle when they pioneered the systems used today on virtually all luxury cars. Get your facts straight, CVRSS 2.0 had technologies that are just now being introduced in your beloved perfectly balanced Europeans sedans who as you used to say didn't need such frivolous technology to achieve good handling.

    Complete BS chavis. Yet for all that effort Cadillac had to throw it out with the bathwater and go to RWD. If you look at the average BMW Chavis they still don't have anything near what Cadillac had or any electronic suspension aids at all. Or have you not noticed this.

    Um, they are, are they? Is the Escalade chasing a european type truck? Would you care to let me know the sales figures of the DTS (and previous DeVille) since it's not as you say, "in?" You speak as if you know what the industry wants when you continuously prove you are out of touch. Again, your opinion is being delivered as fact when it is not. The ES350 (and RX) is a good seller as well it's it predecessor. Just because you (or myself for that matter) wouldn't buy it doesn't mean we're in the majority.

    One look at the majority of the cars on the market answers you question Chavis. 10 years ago the Cadillac lineup consisted of one floaty, ill-handling, fwd barge after another, yet today they only make one such car the DTS, which to its credits handles better than those slop-plop DeVilles ever did. If you think the switch to rwd and actually caring about handling, not to mention coming up with the V-Series cars were done in the traditional American car idiom you're seriously mistake and out of touch yourself. Cadillac just like Lexus is chasing the Euros and if can't see that you're in denial big time. I don't see anyone rushing to build a DTS, but I do see Cadillac (and others) rushing to build a 3-Series. Keep thinking Cadillac marches to their own beat exclusively. They don't.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Here we go... It seems to me, we are making excuses yet again. The Seville interior introduced in the '98 model year was a nice interior and very pleasing aesthetically in my opinion. I liked that car very much especially on the inside with navigation. So, for you this new CTS is the first GM car you would ever set foot in which is not true for other people. I have a '98 olds intrigue that has 98k miles and there is nothing wrong with it's interior design or durability (other than the cheap carpet). No sun damage, cracking or peeling on the plastics. Sorry, I cannot subscribe to your point of view implying every GM interior before MY '07 has been trash.

    Well there were 2 of them in my family during the time and yeah they were nice, but what you don't get is that being "nice" doesn't cut in a class of car that expensive when rivals do things better. Why is that so hard for the GM faithful to acknowledge? Acura makes "nice" cars, but they're still seen a tweener brand, but Cadillac has the heritage and name to do better, but they haven't for the last 20+ years. Didn't say that everything up until now was junk, that may have been a little harsh, but their effors weren't up to the class either Chavis. The new CTS is or at least looks the part since they wouldn't allow anyone in the car at Detroit.

    I had a 1997 Mitsu with over 175K with none of that type of damage either, so whats your point? You set the bar too low and then pat GM on the back when they clear it instead of measuring their offerings by the competition...and thus the circle continues. GM makes "nice" cars, yet they are at best, at best competitive...when are they going to build something that sits in the top 3 of the class?

    M
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    When the CTS came out no one said it handled like a 10 year old BMW except you. Again, why dont you provide a reference for this assertion. This is your opinion, it's not grounded in reality. The CTS was definitely on par with the 5 series of that era and I'm sure that reviews reflect that. You are losing touch with reality.

    "You'll continue to say that the old CTS has a nice interior when in fact it looked and felt like something from Playskool."

    Never said the interior was nice.

    "Wow the car won 1 comparo in its entire production run against a bunch of larger not as sporty cars! Such a pridigous acheivement! "

    The 530 isnt sporty? wow, that is news to me. Please explain. The CTS was only involved in three large comparisons in its model run, two in C&D and one in R&T. C&D obviously didn't like the car and it finished in 3rd or 4th place in both comparisons. You act like the car lost 10 comparison tests when in fact it won one, and lost two.

    "I gave you at least 4 quotes from various sources commenting on how pitifully finished and put together the CTS, CTS-V and SRX were."

    Wrong again. None of the quotes you provided addressed poor build quality. From what I remember they commented on the cheap look of the CTS/SRX interior and said the XLR's interior wasn't as nice at is should be for the price. Not the same as criticizing build quality. Why dont you provide the quotes you hold so dear to your heart?

    "Impressive until you find out that it didn't face its direct rivals. I guess you're going to stand on this one leg of a comparo forever huh? "

    Your right, it was up against the 530, 300, S80, S-type, A6, etc. None of its direct rivals. How did I miss that? Excellent point, its direct rivals are cars that beat it in a comparison I assume.

    " None of the cars you named except the 300C and SVT Contour have been anything but bottom feeders. You've got to be pretty desperate to bring up such a losing list of cars to make a point. "

    The Lucerne, CTS, G6, 300 (not just C), Deville/DTS, '98 STS and 300M were (are) all successful. In fact the FWD STS sold better than the current model ever has. The Intigue and Aurora were both well received by the press and when GM killed Olds most felt that brand was making the best non Cadillacs in the company. C&D said the Aurora was the closest thing to Lexus GM had ever produced when it came out. Wrong again. The Countour, however, was indeed a failure in terms of sales. Of course, your opinion does mean more than the actual success of the models in question. It's pretty apparant you dont like any american cars (Oh wait!!! except the DC produced 300C) so I fail to see why you are trolling this topic to convince the masses that Cadillac has never made a competitive car prior to the '08 CTS. This is all part of your notion that GM never had any decent models on sale right now, they are always saying "wait until next year". In order to keep this lame argument going you have to discredit whatever is on the market. In five years you'll be saying the '08 CTS is crap because newer models will be on the market. BTW, the G6 was panned initially because its top powertrain was a 200hp V6 and 4 speed, but it now offers a 252hp engine with 6 speed that will run 0-60 in 6.2secs which is faster than the 330i automatic.

    "2 rare expections to the norm. "

    There are three V series cars.

    "No the previous STSs were so out of touch with their class to be called that, but not the current one. It is at least competitive. "

    Yes it was out of touch. It had 300hp, did 0-60 in 6.5secs, had DVD nav, HIDS, heated seats, stability, 425 watt Bose 4.0 Sound System with 12" sub in the back, Magneride, CVRSS and all the luxury features expected of a car in this class. The car went out of production in 2003 so it cant be compared to what is on sale now, but to what was available in 2003. It held it's own even if you hate the car.

    "No most people wouldn't say they were "great" cars, they'd say they're nice cars, the great ones don't sit in the bottom half of comparos. Don't ruin "great" status by trying to attach a Cadillac to it. "

    Only problem is I never said the STS was a great car. Dont let that stop you from arguing however, facts are typically irrelevant in any discussion with you. The STS is a solid entry and the only place it lags is in hp and interior styling. Thats really it. In terms of features and performance its right in the mix and it's far cheaper than the E and 5 series. I'll take the STS interior for $10k less than the Euro competition. I like the current E class interior (exterior is tired as ever) but I'm not paying 10 grand for a slightly superior design. I'm sure you know the model C&D tested in that big comparo didnt even have the sport package and then the complained the car wasnt sporty enough. Do they ever test BMWs without a sport package? Of course not.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    Now you are backing off your "harsh" GM criticims? please.

    Cadillac has been making nice interiors for the better part of a decade. Again, I suggest you look at the 90s STS/DTS/ETC interiors and compare them to what was being sold at that time. The Caddy interiors were very competitive and had the best gauges in the business except for Lexus. The CTS (as I already stated) was actually a downgrade from the FWD Cadillacs but Caddy was trying to go in a completely new direction to change perceptions about the brand. In YOUR opinion the last gen Caddy interiors didnt measure up, but everyone doesn't share that belief and you cant PROVE that their interiors were lacking. To me, and others, Caddy interiors in the late 90s were BETTER (not just on par with) than what Acura, Infiniti, BMW and Jaguar had on the market back then. The Germans did well in terms of materials, but in terms of design, ergonomics and aesthetic appeal the Cadillacs were better.

    "but what you don't get is that being "nice" doesn't cut in a class of car that expensive when rivals do things better. Why is that so hard for the GM faithful to acknowledge"

    what you dont get is that the luxury interiors of the German cars weren't more than "nice" 10 years ago. You have got them on a pedastal they do not deserve. Why is that so hard for the MB faithful to acknowledge? I rode in a last gen E class a few years back and I was just shocked at how plain and angular everything was. It was hard to believe that car probably cost well over $50k when it was new.
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Well have to eplore those options ;)

    Rocky
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    The Germans did well in terms of materials, but in terms of design, ergonomics and aesthetic appeal the Cadillacs were better.

    There you go, you just said it yourself, others have utilized BETTER MATERIALS. We can argue about design and appeal all day long but that won't lead us anywhere because those are subjective opinions. Also, IMO, I don't think Cadillac had better ergonomics than its competitors as well.

    I rode in a last gen E class a few years back and I was just shocked at how plain and angular everything was.

    Some like plain and angular, others like smooth and subtle, it is totally based on people's preferences. However, one couldn't deny that everyone would love to have high grade materials for the interior.
  • chavis10chavis10 Posts: 166
    Complete BS chavis. Yet for all that effort Cadillac had to throw it out with the bathwater and go to RWD. If you look at the average BMW Chavis they still don't have anything near what Cadillac had or any electronic suspension aids at all. Or have you not noticed this.

    ONE car went from FWD to RWD- the STS. The CTS was not around before Sigma. You prove that you have no technical knowledge whatsoever. In fact, I don't think you even understand anything about the dynamics of a vehicle. Your only source of knowledge are the driving impressions of journalists turned auto experts.

    First off, let's define a chassis "aid" as you would like to call it. Whether it be Active Roll Stabilization, Airmatic DC, ABC, Magnetic Ride Control the goals are the same. All of them vary the reaction of chassis components to an outside force (road surface) over a larger range than possible with static settings. If you think of them as VVT systems on camshafts or an engine having a more useable powerband (long flat torque curve), u'll understand the point. It's not an "aid," it's effectively increasing it's range of reaction to varying degrees of wheel deflection. Some vary the dampers, others the springs and even anti-roll bars. These systems are optional on just about every mid-size and larger luxury car. According to your logic, simply because a car is RWD means it doesn't need such a system. Why then do even the Corvette, 911, Ferraris offer the exact same concept of CVRSS in their vehicles? Even when STS switched to Sigma, it still offers the same system offer in the FWD STS. At the time, Cadillac system was just as advanced in terms of the collection of data as the current offerings are now. The main difference is the amount of adjustments that can be made per second in which MRC leads them all at 1000 per second. Here are four RWD sedans that have chassis enhancement systems.

    Lexus GS- AVR
    BMW 5- ARS
    E Class- AirmaticDC
    STS- MRC

    Also, your "average" BMW is a 3 series. If you had some knowledge, you'd understand that these systems are employed on heavier vehicles with higher horsepower. It's much easier to tune a car under 4000 lbs, that's simple logic.

    Cadillac just like Lexus is chasing the Euros and if can't see that you're in denial big time. I don't see anyone rushing to build a DTS, but I do see Cadillac (and others) rushing to build a 3-Series. Keep thinking Cadillac marches to their own beat exclusively. They don't.

    Again, which car is responsible for the success of Lexus? The RX, not a sports car, not chasing europeans. Which car is the second most popular? the ES, not a sports car chasing europeans. You can't get out of your bubble to understand that everyone does not want or need a BMW. In your mind, you can't fathom why anyone would want a nice riding car that doesn't beat you up over the road. Cadillac has a core group of buyers for the DTS. I'm glad you don't run a car company because they'd be out of business in about 6 months easy chasing some other company. FYI, Cadillac is not trying to build a 3 series, the CTS is a lot larger in case you haven't noticed to difference in size. Also, who established the PROFITABLE crossover utility market? Lexus and every else has followed.

    There are regular car buyers and then there are enthusiasts and I know you know this Chavis. Cadillac can build all DTS, but see how far that gets them.

    So are you saying the car manufacturers are supposed to build cars for eunthusiasts with no regard for regular buyers? No sense of business whatsover and it's sad because regular buyers are the ones buying cars. I'd say the DeVille/DTS is what has enabled Cadillac to survive and produce newer more focused cars so it seems it has taken them very far.
  • chavis10chavis10 Posts: 166
    Wow the car won 1 comparo in its entire production run against a bunch of larger not as sporty cars! Such a pridigous achievement!

    Well, well, well. Isn't that an interesting line? When the 3 series faces larger cars, the others are immediately ripped for not being as small, nimble and sporty. This appears to be a double standard straight from the horse's mouth. Other than the IS, most of the competition have longer wheelbases and lengths however they are not dealt this courtesy if you will, and are labled inferior to BMW's focus on the driver.

    The things that make me go Hmmmm....
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    OK, when I talk ergonomics I am talking about ease of use of controls in the car. German cars have been, and continue to be, criticized for their enigmatic controls and poor labelling of buttons and switches. Most BMWs and MBs used icons instead of words/letters to identify buttons on the dash in order to save money by not providing labels in various languages. MBs seem to be better at ergonomics but BMW seems to be determined to make driver interface as complicated as possible.

    As far as I recall everything in Cadillac interiors was easy to operate and understand.

    I dont doubt that some people prefer the austere looks of German interiors, but honeslty even the magazines that praise Euro products often comment that their interiors are lacking compared to Lexus and Acura offerings. I am not crazy about current BMW interiors, but I dont think the last gen was much better. Lots of right angles, black plastic, small buttons and plain gauges.
  • piasonpiason Posts: 55
    I don't think so! My father always had Cadillac’s and got well over 100K before he got a new one. Yes he had some problems but no more than any other car.
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    Well someone's favorite car company unveiled the new C class today. Looks good, but I think the CTS can definitely hold it's own against the '08 C class. The CTS has more power than the two V6s that will be offered in the US and I like the CTS interior better. The C class interior is better than the current car but still too dominated by plastic on the center stack. More wood would help as well, especially on the steering wheel. The C class has pop up nav just like the CTS. It doesnt look better inside or out to me.
  • chavis10chavis10 Posts: 166
    I had a 1997 Mitsu with over 175K with none of that type of damage either, so whats your point? You set the bar too low and then pat GM on the back when they clear it instead of measuring their offerings by the competition...and thus the circle continues. GM makes "nice" cars, yet they are at best, at best competitive...when are they going to build something that sits in the top 3 of the class?

    Forward your concerns to the GM management. I don't run the company or profit from their success. They've made cars that I liked in the past as well as products I'm interested in today. You keep talking about this legacy of GM that I really don't care about. Sorry, I wasn't around during the golden years of Cadillac's glory so I can only go on cars made in the last 20 years or so. As I said, I liked the last generation STS which was as technologically advanced as any other car in the class, period. That car came out in '98 almost 10 years ago, so this whole "Cadillac hasn't done squat in x amount of years" doesn't apply in my book.

    The point is you've been saying GM's car aren't this and that. Now you're trying to clean it up and say that "competitive" isn't good enough? Wow... If it was good enough for me and a bunch of other folks, then your point holds absolutely no water. Again, your opinions live in the press and are congruent with the non sense spoon fed on this site and other publications. This is what happens when you have a bunch of English/Journalism majors pretending to be auto experts. A friend of my mother had a last gen 328Ci drop top that had so many problems she had to trade it in for something else. Now she has a CLK320 carbio that has had it's share of issues as well (non related to the power tops). My aunt has an S430 that's spent its share of days on a flat bed since it likes to lock her out or refuse to start. The list could go on but it isn't relevant. The point is when we're talking about "junk" let's establish what really qualifies a car as such.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Gotta agree with you there, the new C's interior does look cheap.
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Cadillac is not trying to build a 3 series, the CTS is a lot larger in case you haven't noticed to difference in size.

    Agree, until they bring us the BLS :blush:

    Rocky
  • thebugthebug Posts: 294
    Agree, until they bring us the BLS

    What is the BLS?

    thebug...
Sign In or Register to comment.