Howdy, Stranger!

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

2008 Cadillac CTS



  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Mark, I would look for magneride to be available on the
    CTS-V or later be available. Next time I talk to Cadillac I will offer it as a product suggestion. Cadillac, has said they worked hard to get the suspension right. The G8 GXP/GTX based off the Holden Commodore HSV will have Delphi's Magneride system and it's adjustable FYI. ;) This should perhaps give us a clue that it might be available on the CTS someday. It might take a few years to make it. I love Magneride also as I had it on my 2002' Cadillac Seville STS. The Buick Lucerne CXS, Corvette, DTS, STS, SRX, Holden HSV's, and future G8 GXP/GTX models will have it also. ;) The 2010' Buick Velite Sedan will have it also. ;)

  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,733
    I can definately say that the magnetic ride technology is...

    It's like the car went through some sort of wierd time-warp and suddenly you get a suspension that's what you'd expect after over a century of making them. It makes standard suspensions look exactly like trying to do math with a slide-rule when there's this new electronic device calle a calculator. Hopelessly slow and outdated. Last century. Some guy hammering metal into a crude shape and calling it a suspension part.

    Versus something that looks like it belongs on some future tech show on Discovery Channel.

    Test drive the base model Lucerne with the V8 option. Now drive the CXS. The only difference between them other than 1 inch on the rims is the magnetic ride suspension. And it's exactly like the difference between a 3 and a M3. Something drastic just happened. Looks the same on the outside but two totally different animals.

    No torque steer. No lurching, no wobbling and floating through turns. No diving when you stop. It's all.. just... gone. That Lucerne suddenly drives like a late 90s S-Class.(yes it SO doesn't seem possible until you drive it)

    If they put Magnetic Ride on the new CTS, it'll without a doubt eat the IS350 for lunch, shred the G, and make the 5 series look like the overpriced yuppie bling-mobile that it is. (Mercedes... yeah they need to get away from Chrysler ASAP - they just dont compete anymore)
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,069
    You nailed it!

    And, despite some other "yea buts" that I might PERSONALLY want to debate, I have to agree:

    "If they put MagnaRide on the new CTS. . ." well, hell, there's a new sheriff in town. :shades:

    Probably would make profit too at an add on price of, perhaps $1,500 to $1,750 MSRP. Don't cha think!?!
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    I'm going to e-mail Cadillac, about this.......

  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    I e-mailed on the "2008'CTS forum" request that Magnetic Ride Control be available for the 2008' Cadillac CTS. I also asked when bluetooth would be available on the 08's as it's been delayed here so the europeans can get it first and I went off in a rant that we get neglected even though us americans are the most loyal buyers. I'll be looking forward to my response. :)

  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Just curious if anyone heard any more news on the 09' CTS-V ????? The CTS-V, I think will be moved up to my first choice of new cars I want to buy.

    #1 09' CTS-V

    #2 08' CTS-AWD

    #3 08' CTS-RWD

  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I believe the order info for the CTS will be available next month on GM's dealer site. Do you ever go to that site? There is no '08 Caddy vehicle info yet but there will be in three weeks.
  • carnaughtcarnaught Posts: 1,577
    When's the car due in showrooms?
  • 14871487 Posts: 2,407
    I believe in July or August.
  • socalbmmrsocalbmmr Posts: 12
    I've been scouring the net for any more shots other than the old spy shots and the NAIAS shots, as well as those on -- has anyone seen any others?

    I'm curious about exterior/interior color combos... one thing I think that has really set the 3-series apart from its competitors lately has been its choice of cool colors both exterior and interior. My hope is that Caddy offers something other than the typical black, tan and grey choices... chocolate brown or red would be cool leather colors...
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    From the saleman's guide excerpted on GMI:
    "Optional "Mulberry" leather seating."
    Don't know if mulberry is a color (dark purple) or a brand.
  • socalbmmrsocalbmmr Posts: 12
    Hmmmmm... interesting. Can you send me the link to GMI? And what exactly is GMI?! Forgive my ignorance... :)

    I'm really getting excited about the CTS... it might be my first domestic!
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,733
    GM doesn't want to say "Burgundy". Gotta love these new names. "Lunar sunrise pearl mist glowing...(and the color isn't even mentioned yet)"

    How about real colors? Heh.

    Take blue. When was the last time you ever saw a car with only "blue" as the color?
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,069
    If it comes to pass, as some here contend, that the new CTS comes to market priced "within reach" of the outgoing CTS (MSRP) if similarly equipped -- I think that is a good thing. And, a question, are those of you who are like me in wanting "my CTS -- should I get one -- to be AWD" thinking that the AWD "feature" should add at most $1,900 to the bottom line of the CTS?

    If that is so, doesn't that make a 258HP ALL optioned AWD CTS come to market at $45,000-ish? And, if that is so, what does that mean the cost of the 300HP version would be? $47,500-ish (plus shipping and handling?)

    Now, at that price, you are likely to be above the typical BMW 3 and Audi A4 MSRP -- but only by 2 or 3 thousand, and truth be told, if you configure your BMW with similar equipment to what the CTS will most certainly have, the BMW and/or the A4 will be between $38 and $50,000. I have recently priced both cars just for "fun."

    Now, I am cognizant of the CTS's advantage (to me at least) of a 5 series wheelbase and dimensions overall that would be much more to my liking than either the 3 series or the A4. So, even though I still contend the comparisons are a bit less apples to apples, the CTS may (in some instances) be cross shopped against an Audi A6 and a BMW 5 series.

    I can't remember the last time I had a car that had an MSRP of less than $50K and I am ready for one, and favorable to an American car as long as it is NOT a LOOOOOOSER (not that I think the CTS is, by any stretch.)

    So, as my wife's guest, on HER 1 year countdown to a new car, I am the not-at-all reluctant passenger on weekend after weekend of test drives of possible suspects to replace her "in today's $" $48,000 BMW X3.

    We tested the Cadillac SRX, Lincoln, MKX, the LandRover HSE, the Acura R and M - DX's, the X5 and of course the X3 (we even tested the Mercedes M class, but it just doesn't do a thing for me, or her.)

    Cut off my legs and call me shorty, we tested the MDX with magna ride (MDX Sport, so named.)

    The thing was $45,000 +. The X3 (just to cite one) was $48,000 +. The Acura had a superior technology package and thusly equipped with the magna ride was good to very good in the handling dept. It was $3,000 less than the X3.

    Just for fun, asked for a 36 month 45 K lease quote (I know some here are anti-lease, to each his/her own): MDX $865/mo. X3 $623/mo. (and the X3 currently is without a "program" so an even more expensive BMW AWD 3 series is actually $613/mo, same deal.)

    Despite the superior sound system and technology package and some otherwise "attractive" features of the MDX, my wife (both an MBA and JD), said, "why would I pay $240 more for a $3,000 less expensive car. The MDX must have a poorer residual and probably a crummy money factor (interest rate.)" Her point, was that the financing arms of companies, although, big and powerful, cannot lose money or gain unreasonable risk -- and, er, make it up in volume. The Fed is the Fed, BMW or Acura Credit is not the Fed.

    Sure residuals can be propped up, and even insured -- but doing so isn't free.

    Her conclusion was that the BMW had the ability to use a higher residual (which it did) because it was actually known to LIKELY be worth more in 36 months than the less expensive MDX would be proportionately speaking.

    My conclusion is that one should look at the MSRP of a car, the acquisition cost of the car as if it were being paid for IN CASH, and then it should have a lease calc run to determine the residual in dollars (even if subvented.)

    What in the wide wide world of sports does all this have to do with the NEW CTS?

    I know the argument (for and against) leasing, that has and is put forth here and else where (on edmunds, and other places.) But, GMAC is a separate company and so is BMW Financial. Not wanting to lose money is compelling. So, if the current on-line calculators are any [even slightly plausible] indication of "retained value" and even representatives of a willingness to sub-vent the cost of money (and I grant, the new CTS and the new Audi and the new BMW, etc etc etc will change the dynamic), it would seem that those who are prone to favor leasing will be able to lease a BMW 3 series for less than a CTS and a BMW 5 series for a reasonably small incremental amount more than the CTS.

    Hopefully, there will be some "programs" for the CTS perhaps after it has been out in the market for a while (6 months?) If not, it would seem that a casual scan of the automobile new car classifieds that seem to overwhelm the Sunday Morning papers would mitigate NOT in favor of acquiring a new CTS, even though it might appear to be the bargain of all bargains. For, if the financing arm of the respective companies reveal their residual, I am not unconvinced that their figures do, in some way, represent "the market."

    The X3 had a residual of, as I recall, 64% for the lease I mentioned. The Acura was much lower.

    For the leasing crowd, an otherwise attractive $45,000 CTS may be "priced beyond one's ability to justify and rationalize" even though the competition may be some 10% -12% higher in MSRP.

    Apples and apples, the $45K MDX were it the exact same cost as the X3 (at $48K) on a lease, would be very attractive. Apples and apples, based on term and MSRP, the MDX ought to be about 5% less per month, minimum. Instead it is over 30% more. One would have to have a lot of love for two cars that were priced at $45K and $48K to take the $45K model over the $48K model for a 30%+ premium, all other things being monitarily this close.

    Yes, it is too soon to tell, yes, given the paucity of product information about the new CTS, this post is just barely on topic, hanging by a thin thread -- but hopefully the spirit of my meaning, my rationalization for "concern" in other words, is not too far off the mark. For it matters little if you buy or lease, if one car has a (for instance) 20% higher residual and a 10% higher MSRP, it is the one that will most likely have the lowest total cost of "ownership" over a given period regardless of the form of that ownership: buy, finance or lease, for example.

    I keep thinking, "if my $53,000 Audi is $640 per month, a $45,000 Cadillac ought to be ABOUT $537 per month." Hope I'm right. :shades:
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,733
    45K will probably buy you the CTS-V. The base with the 3.6 will be starting at about $35K.
  • bruceomegabruceomega Posts: 250

    "..... the CTS's advantage (to me at least) of a 5 series wheelbase and dimensions overall that would be much more to my liking than either the 3 series or the A4 ....."

    In a prior post, I listed the sizing of the 08 CTS AWD compared to the 07 530Xi. They were so close you could almost say they were identical in size, but the 530Xi was 373 pounds lighter.

    Somewhere in CarSpace, a link to the brochure for the 2008 5 series was posted and I downloaded that. According to that information, the 535Xi and 08 AWD CTS will be very close in both size and weight- 535Xi is only 98 pounds less than the 08 AWD CTS.

  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,069
    Except I will not be shopping for a base car. I will be comparing pretty much maxed out versions to similarly equipped versions.

    There is no way a CTS-V will be, thusly equipped, priced at $45K.

    I still find it encouraging that some here feel a maxed out 300HP AWD CTS will be under $49K.

    Cadillac configuration of an STS, for example, starts out at such a friendly price. Then WHAM the dang thing shoots to over $60K if you want AWD and Magna Ride.

    The new CTS, unless it comes in minimalist option form (meaning packages are not required, unless one wants them to be) will, IMHO, follow the STS's model.

    If I want an AWD version with Navigation and Sat radio, IF I said, I'll bet somehow there will be thousands of dollars worth of other stuff that may come along.

    Probably, for me, that will be just fine. Probably.

    But, some of these cars, especially from Cadillac and Lexus, to name two, pile package after package on top of each other.

    Here's one -- all my cars have heated rear seats. To get them on an Infiniti M35 (for example) requires the Premium package, some $10,500, as I recall.

    I don't know who taught who, but more and more this is the way it seems.

    Complain all you want about the overpriced XYZ from Germany or Sweden or where ever. But when I price some of these cars, I literally wonder how the marketing folks who put these programs and packages together breathe in the vacuums they must inhabit.

    With only what we know at this point, the CTS looks like a really attractive and high feature, function, content and value for the buck car. I simply wonder since more and more of these cars are leased (for right or wrong) why someone wouldn't go for the 530xi over the CTS if the mo pay was "within spittin' distance" of each other.

    Just like I wouldn't pay $865 for a $45K Acrua when I could have a $48K BMW for $623, same terms.

    I'd almost always pay a little more for my favorite, but so many of these cars are more alike than they are different, styling and perhaps some content being the main differentiators. So, that "a little bit more" just doesn't make sense or at least as much sense as it used to.

    I'm looking for different, better and if possible a higher value. If there are almost no compelling reasons to go with one vs the other, I would imagine most people would go with the more expensive MSRP'd product that had the same 36 month cost of ownership.

    Folks writing a $45K check vs a $55K check lump sum may disagree, but even then, the basis for the lower short term cost is, in part, the anticipated rate of depreciation. Planning to keep the car until the wheels turn square? Well, yes that may affect the decision, but with leasing on the rise, it is perhaps not the majority thought process.

    over 75% of BMW's are leased. My local Cadillac dealer says it is over 50% for his products, and rising. I don't know if this is a localized phenom. The BMW number, so says my dealer owner, is not simply a local number.

    I would like the Cadillac as an alternative, a financially sound alternative for my mode of acquisition.

    All speculation at this point.

    And, that's the good news.
  • socalbmmrsocalbmmr Posts: 12
    BMWs are hard to say no to when the lease is so compelling. On a 3-series, you're looking at a quoted 60% residual value for 12k/year 3year lease and a money factor (as of right now) of about .0015. CHEAP!!

    If the new CTS can compete at that level, and still be a few $$K less out the door, then it'll be a slam-dunk.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,824
    You do realize that Edmunds doesn't make options available on vehicles, right? We just post what manufacturers give us :)

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

Sign In or Register to comment.