Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Is Cadillac's Image Dying and Does Anyone Care?

16566687071121

Comments

  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    I never see these trucks period. Like I said the last time I remember seeing a EXT was over a year ago.

    I can't remember the last time I saw an Avalanche that wasn't a dealers car.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I just don't like all the foo foo plastic add-ons. I was looking forward to the Avalanche when it first came out. When I saw it at the fair I almost threw up I thought it was so ugly. I see more of them in So CA than I would like to. Including the Caddy and Lincoln PU trucks.

    TO each his own I guess. No dumber looking that the big 22inch wheels and tires on half the Vehicles down here.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    My nephew down in the Nashville area is a home contractor. He drives an Avalanche - loves all the lockable cubbies for hauling tools and stuff. He doesn't haul much in the way of building supplies in it - the supply companies deliver most of that stuff to the job site.

    He carries a lot of paperwork in his too. He'd probably like an Escalade just fine though. :shades:
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,191
    In the Caddy STS forum here, I “requested” way back in 2005 and \ or 2006 that Caddy revamp their option and equipment availability policy – to allow configuration of what I’d call an STS GT. Less ( mandatory ) luxury and convenience options required before one could order the PCZ “Performance Handling Package” with the NorthStar V8.

    It appears that, with the introduction of the substantially upgraded V6 version of the 2008 STS, Caddy has in fact decided to allow something quite similar to what I had in mind back then.

    Essentially, I was looking for the highest \ best performance & handling equipment, without pushing MSRP well over $60K – for ‘stuff’ I really did not care that much about. ( Such as the Navigation system, Bose sound system, HIDs, rear heated seats, and a few other items. )

    This V6, with 300+ HP and a flat TQ curve, implying good general drivability in addition to that rather high specific output, mated to GM’s 6L50 6 speed automatic ( a version of the trans. in my Corvette ) intrigues me. Particularly with the imminent release of the CTS. ( Still waiting to see pricing. )

    ** IF ** the dynamics of the 2008 V6 STS are actually much as described in the previews I have read, and the quality ( mechanically & cosmetically ) is improved – in addition to the revamped interior & exterior. ( The 4 previews I have read so far, including 1 here on Edmunds, have been quite positive. )

    And ** IF ** the acceleration feel and handling feel of the V6 is truly as good as initial reviews, based on pre-production examples, is as good as reported. And the NVH control is refined.

    And ** IF ** the [ real world ] fuel mileage is reasonable.

    Etc.

    THEN, I see this as an advance toward Caddy making the STS a sales success. And building a base of [ very ] satisfied Caddy customers. I see potential to sell more V6 STSs than V8s, as has always been true – and these advancements sound like they’ll make the STS V6 something that will impress.

    And I also see this as a move toward making Caddy far more competitive – if not exactly “The Standard Of The World”. And certainly, if the V6 STS sells in larger numbers, and the upcoming CTS ( same motor available ) also becomes a sales success, these revenue stream enhancements ** MAY ** allow Caddy to invest in the other aspects that would push the Brand higher. If GM so chooses.

    I have asked the Internet Manager at my closest dealer to notify me when 2008 V6 STSs start arriving. I plan to test drive one, equipped as close as possible to how I’d buy one: 1SC, PDQ & PCZ. MSRP just under $55K. ( Where previously a V8 with PCZ had to be a 1SG, and had an MSRP well over $60K. A 2007 1SG – V8 w/Sunroof and premium paint currently on my Dealer’s lot lists at $62,940. That is without a HUD. And with no PCZ. )

    In addition to the larger ( Summer only ) tires & wider wheels & Brembo brakes, a 2008 STS V6 so equipped would even include a HUD – something previously only available bundled with (K59) Adaptive Cruise Control, and priced at something over $2,000. And again only available on the V8 with 1SG. I have had a HUD on past vehicles and have one on my Corvette – and appreciate the usefulness.

    It would include the Navigation system, heated AND VENTILATED front seats – and even a heated steering wheel. For a much more reasonable actual transaction cost. IMHO. And at a ‘penalty’ ( vs the V8 version ) of only 0.2 seconds in 0 – 60 acceleration. A difference I suspect very, very few could discern. IMHO.

    I see all this as Caddy making progress – movement in what I consider “The Right Direction”.
    Cheers,
    - Ray
    Willing to be convinced that this is a satisfying sedan to drive . . .
    2022 X3 M40i
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    The cladding on the old model was optional.
  • mediapushermediapusher Member Posts: 305
    See? now you guys are acknowledging the incredibly dumb things that GM does, just like I did from the start, yet I don't see anyone bashing you.
  • mediapushermediapusher Member Posts: 305
    It looks like an overinflated RAV4 because that's what it is
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Member Posts: 2,770
    That's because his statement wasn't totally overboard like most of yours are regarding Cadillac. BTW Caddy doesn't have to be the Standard of the World anymore. It will ALWAYS be the CADILLAC OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY.
  • mediapushermediapusher Member Posts: 305
    Yeah, "CADILLAC OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY" = "STYLE, BUT NO SUBSTANCE".
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You want substance with no style you can buy a ToyLex vehicle. This is not about the perfect vehicle. Though I must say, the Escalade comes close :)
  • aldwaldw Member Posts: 82
    Cadillac=Substance with style, that's what it is... ;)
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    In the early 1900's European cars were hand built with custom parts. The parts were not interchangeable. So, if you had a worn out part, you had to take your car to the factory or someone who could then build a custom part to replace the worn part.

    There were no European cars that could have been taken apart, with two other cars like it, and then, after mixing up the parts, put together three new cars from the parts of the three old cars. However, Ford model A's or T's (not sure which might have been in production) could have done just as well as Cadillac's.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,092
    Finally, GM is realizing that the interior DOES matter, even though many loyalists were very slow to admit that the insides were indeed a problem.

    Looks like a nice ride, I can't see why anyone would buy a current one now.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    I can't see why anyone would buy a current one now.

    -Agree Fintail......I guess the attractive lease deals and incentives have helped some take the plunge.

    -Rocky
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I think that the CTS was a good car for the money. The interior was not quite what I expected when I looked at a 2003. I did look at a Lincoln LS at a later time, and the interior was better, but not a lot better. I think that the SRX interior was too much like the CTS for the price tags that they put on the 2004-2005 models. I finally gave up on the idea of getting a 2006 program SRX in part because the 2007 interior was really quite nice. So, yes the interior does matter, and sales of the CTS should improve from current levels. The DI V6 won't hurt sales either.

    torque/hp curve:
    http://eogld.ecomm.gm.com/NASApp/domestic/graytabcontroller.jsp?graytabtype=1&rp- oid=36105&vehicleid=4824&regionID=1&section=oi_def
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    No, but I still have a first generation model with manual and the 3.6 engine in that nice metallic green on my top five list this winter.

    It's a very VERY good used car. 15-16K for a few year old example and well, it's SO much better than, what, a Fit or a new Corolla?

    EDIT: The new DI - look at that - diesel flat torque. Now compare that to a typical Toyota or Honda engine. (evil grin). That means you get full power at any speed or gear, as long as the pedal is down more than 1/4 the way.(probably 1/8th for most around town driving)

    Most people are going to be shocked. That's the flattest torque curve GM has ever made.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    WOW, that new engine is indeed quite impressive. :)

    -Rocky
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,092
    To be fair, that can be said about a lot of used highline cars, but yeah, it has to be a nicer driven than a Corolla or some other appliance, even with the iffy interior.

    I am going to Vegas in a couple weeks, I see you can rent CTS there. I'd almost think about it.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    EDIT: The new DI - look at that - diesel flat torque.

    That's an artifact of the inflated torque scale on the chart. 700 foot-pounds? Come on, it's not a diesel. It's running 220 ft-lb at 1200 rpm (80% of peak), which isn't anything to get excited about these days. And what's with the VTEC-looking dip in the low 3000s?

    This is what a flat torque curve looks like.

    11.3 is pretty low compression for direct injection. 12 is about as low as any self-respecting engine builder should go.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    I am going to Vegas in a couple weeks, I see you can rent CTS there.

    Rent a CTS-V and see how it compares to the E55.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,092
    I haven't seen those offered by any major firm, just plain CTS. I forget what the rate was, but under $100. I will probably get a S80/M35/A6 from Hertz, as I can get a discount.

    I can get a S550 for $325/day from Dollar...but that's not gonna happen.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    There are two peaks in the torque curve, which may mean a variable length intake manifold.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Compared to the imports, that IS a flat torque graph.

    What's really important, though, is the under 3000rpm range where 90% of daily driving happens. An engine that's only putting out ~100-120HP at 3000rpm(and mile-tall gearing of course) is essentially no different than a little 4 cylinder turbo of old.

    As for the compression ratio, yes, it's low. That's to be able to use standard gasoline. Or would you rather premium only?
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,191
    “Compared to the imports, that IS a flat torque graph.”

    There are exceptions to that sweeping generalization.
    The current BMW 335i(xi) and 535i(xi) are prime examples.
    At the flywheel, the torque curve of the 3.0L Twin Turbo motor is dead flat from approx. 1,500 to 5,000 RPM.

    One ‘real world’ chassis dyno test:

    http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/0609_c_bmw_335i_dyno.jpg

    http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/0609_2007_bmw_335i_dyno_revised/
    2022 X3 M40i
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Compared to the imports, that IS a flat torque graph.

    Not really. There's a dyno chart floating around for the G37, showing its torque curve to be almost literally flat from 2200 rpm to 7200 rpm.

    What's really important, though, is the under 3000rpm range where 90% of daily driving happens.

    Anyone who buys a "sport" sedan with the optional high-output engine, then loafs it along at 2000 rpm all day long has wasted their money. They should have bought a Buick or an Avalon.

    As for the compression ratio, yes, it's low. That's to be able to use standard gasoline. Or would you rather premium only?

    Yes. A premium car with a premium engine should be designed to run on something better than dishwater. Computer controls can retard the timing and fuel maps to allow cars to run on crap gas, so there's no good reason to hobble the engine with low compression. Anyone making the payments on a $40,000 car should be able to afford an extra 20-30 cents a gallon.
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,191
    " There's a dyno chart floating around for the G37, showing its torque curve to be almost literally flat from 2200 rpm to 7200 rpm. "

    This one???

    http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/0705_c+2008_infiniti_g37+dyno_chart.j- pg
    2022 X3 M40i
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    That looks like it.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    There's a huge difference, though, between 2200-2400rpm and 1200-1600rpm in actual use.

    Remember, despite it having all the power in the world, unless you can get a 6 speed manual gearbox with tight gearing in that "sports sedan" and then keep it in second gear around town(to get it into the 2500-4000rpm range - expect 16-18mpg!), you're stuck with loafing around town.
    (of course *I* ignore gas mileage and do this - get about 250 miles per tank. 90% of people don't)

    Mash the pedal - 3-4 seconds - 35-40 mph... torque converter locks up and you... "loaf". It shifts up a gear... you loaf. You want to unlock that torque converter and pass someone? Well, it's "loafing" at a whopping 900-1200rpm and you suffer a 2-3 second lag before it gets into its power band. The GM? Nope - none of that WOT-lag beahvior with this.

    The BMW is an exception obviously because they use I-6 engines, which develop better torque and power for their displacement.(technically, the I-6 is the closest thing to a perfect engine that's possible from a power, weight, and efficiency standpoint - which is why BMW refuses to change)

    P.S.
    Though, you'll note that only TWO of the GM 3.6 applications are geared for low-end torque. The rest are no different from the standard stuff out there.

    Go drive a CTS with the 3.6. Now, go across the street to the Buick dealer and drive the LaCrosse CXS. Same engine, same suspension, but which one drives better? Surprizing, isn't it? The CTS feels average. The CXS feels like a small block V8 from the 60s. Blip the throttle even a tiny but over idle and presto - maximum torque.

    The new DI CTS seems to be simmilar - just without sacrificing HP to do it.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    There's a huge difference, though, between 2200-2400rpm and 1200-1600rpm in actual use.

    Who would want to drive at 1200-1600 rpm?

    As for the rest of it, it sounds like a torque converter is a death sentence for a good engine and a good reason to avoid the slushbox. Now, where's that manual Lacrosse?
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Oh dear lord I wish GM made a LaCrosse with a manual...
  • rayainswrayainsw Member Posts: 3,191
    “Who would want to drive at 1200-1600 rpm?”

    Me, for 1.

    My Corvette, in sixth gear shows 1600 RPM at approx. 73 MPH. A cruising speed I often find comfortable. Returning 30+ MPG. 80 MPH is approx. 1750 RPM.

    But who’s counting . . .

    - Ray
    Happy at low RPM, cruising & happy at high RPM accelerating ( um ) briskly . . .
    2022 X3 M40i
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Oh, a pushrod sure. They should have a little graphic of Mister Scott pop up on the HUD saying "She'll fly apart, cap'n!" every time the tach goes above 3500 rpm.

    But who would want to run a DOHC V6 that slowly? That's like asking a thoroughbred to do a mule's job.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    That might be true of most pushrod engines but the new vette motors are not one of them.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    My SRX V8 with six speed slush box cruises 70 MPH with the engine running at about 1800 RPMs. It does kick down on up hills to 5th with the engine bumping up to 2200 or so. I averaged about 21 MPG on a long trip (it is still new though).
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Consider the following: take a pushrod engine - lets say this one:
    http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/HPT%20Library/HVV6/20- - - 08_39L_LZG_Impala.pdf
    Would re-engineering the valve train to have a DOHC instead of the single cam in block change anything? What I mean is to keep the two valve per cylinder design, with the same intake manifold and the same valve timing. I think below 6000 RPM's there would be no change in performance, torque or horsepower. Above 6000 RPM's the DOHC might possibly have bit more power, but with the peak horsepower at 5600 RPMs, it is more a question of falling off more slowly, not resulting in more horsepower.

    The point of course is that with a DOHC design, one would have 4 valve per cylinder and separate VVT on the intake and exhaust valves. Then one gets something like this:
    http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/HPT%20Library/HFV6/20- - 08_36L_LY7_CTS.pdf

    The big difference between these two engines is the extra valves with the intake and exhaust timing variation independant of each other. The pushrods are irrelavant, except that they probably make putting more than two valves per cylinder difficult or of little real value.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I just noticed one of the license plate lamps was out on my 2002 Seville STS last night as I was putting it away. To replace this tiny 194 bulb one has to remove the fabric lining from the decklid, unfasten at least eight wing nuts and remove the entire taillamp cluster spanning the width of the decklid. Whatever happened to the days of simply removing a lens with a phillips screwdriver to access the bulbs? An unexperienced person would've given up and taken the car to the dealer at unnecessary expense to replace a bulb or ended up breaking the cluster which must be very expensive to replace.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    Cadillac owners aren't supposed to change their own bulbs. They're supposed to drive to the dealer, walk up to the service desk, pull out their money clip and throw a handful of Benjamins on the counter, and declare, "That should cover it, and Armor All the tires."
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    My experience is that light bulbs don't burn out that often. The cost for a half hours work at my dealership is about $35, which may seem a bit much, but for a bulb that lasted 5 years...

    Of course if all the bulbs are starting to go one by one...

    I doubt that Chevy light bulbs are easily changed either...
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    exposed screw heads on the outside of the car pretty much have been gone longer than exposed screws on the inside of the car. Kinda poor to have exposed screws today. Be glad they were large wingnuts and did not require deepwell sockets.
  • mrbill50mrbill50 Member Posts: 2
    OK, so I've never driven a Mercedes or a BMW. Other than a 1970 Datsun 510 and a 1990 Mitsubishi Galant, I've always owned "American" cars. I put "American" in quotes because some of my Chrysler products were produced in Canada and Mexico. I've averaged a new car every 3 to 4 years since 1970, so I've owned a number of automobiles in my life. My most recent purchase is a 2006 Cadillac STS V6 with nav, BOSE sound system and all the other bells and whistles, list price just over $48K that I picked up in June, '07 for around $36K plus tax and tags.
    With 2 months and around 3K miles, I am nothing but impressed with the car and the dealer. The car runs perfectly. The ride is smooth, the cabin is quiet and the nav system is a dream. My trip from upstate NY to Brooklyn and back ran without a hitch. My mileage on this still new engine and transmission averages around 24 MPG mixed local and highway driving.
    Is Cadillac setting the standard for American cars? My experience is that they are, and from reading about the new CTS and STS for '08, they are again raising the bar.
    Personally, I will always drive a GM car - I refuse to be on the road without OnStar. My wife has severe medical issues, and having OnStar available has assisted us on several occasions. Enjoying the experience of driving a Cadillac just makes that even sweeter!
  • dvpriemdvpriem Member Posts: 11
    I have a 2004 SRX and the silver paint on the sides of the car has vertical stripes in it from the bad paint job. I think the robot arms were not adjusted property when it got sprayed.

    Anyone else with this problem.

    Oh, and also the rear end was replaced at 20k miles, you can't replace front exterior light bulbs without dismantling the bumper, and the car will not start at all at times.

    But mostly, I am interested in why a honda accord has a beter paint job than my Cadillac SRX
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The vinyl was pasted onto a metal roof, so you were lucky.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    It was red and she was very sexy. :shades:

    -Rocky
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    silver paint on the sides of the car has vertical stripes in it from the bad paint job.

    That does sound poor. Anybody know how a vehicle can have vertical stripes? If there is a problem it is horizontal stripes due to the fact that the paint gun runs along the car horizontally, not vertically. I guess if the paint is put on too heavily it could run.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    Perhaps it has been run through an automatic car wash with brushes that run vertically and have not been maintained?
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    they could start by writing truthful ad copy. The CTS banner ad on the main Edmunds page claims the direct injection V6 is "the most powerful engine ever to bear the Cadillac wreath and crest," which overlooks the entire V-series, the regular V8 STS and XLR, the Escalade, and more than a few luxobarges from the late '60s and early '70s.
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    The most powerful "V6".
  • sls002sls002 Member Posts: 2,788
    I noticed last night that Burn Notice on the USA channel is using a 2008 CTS as one of the cars on the set. Has been on for the last few episodes but I had thought it was an STS.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    Thats not what it says though and I quote, " Now available with a 304 hp Direct Injection V6, The most powerful engine ever to bear the Cadillac Wreath and Crest."

    Doesn't say most powerful V6 it says most powerful engine.
Sign In or Register to comment.