Cadillac CTS/CTS-V

macguy · October 2002

HI, i went back to the reviews and i noticed that motor trend made its tests on a CTS with 16" wheels. Motor Week had a 17 incher. Now, that can very well be the reason. I expect that the Cadillac claimed sub 7sec 0-60 only applies to the standard configuration. As you add optons you add weight, and by the time you add the sports package and all its whistles the car is couple of 100 pounds heavier. All that translates to a slower car. I hope my sport packaged CTS won't be above the 7.0 sec mark. The 17" wheels i think comes with the same 225 wide tyres, and hence the rolling resistance from the road is the same, so this should have no effect, except if the overall wheel and tyre diameter of the 17" wheel is larger than that of the stadard wheels, this will cause slower acceleration.

tgp1810 · October 2002

Arlgiht, it was starting to bother me...I knew that I read somewhere that the "C" stood for Cadillac but I couldn't remember where. Well these sites list the "C" as standing for Cadillac:

Atlanta Journal-Constitution http://www.ajcclassifieds.com/auto/2003carguide/cadillac.html

Hamilton Motor Products http://autonet.ca/HMP/NewSpecials.cfm

Consumer Guide http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/new/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/24625.htm (at the bottom under news)

eaton53 · October 2002

Cool Touring Sedan... because it is!!

richw5 · October 2002

Hit the wrong key so this will be a quick edit. I don't know if I like the alpha designations for Cadillac models, but it's common in the luxury class where Cadillac is competing. C-class Mercedes, BMW 325, etc. I've even started calling our Seville, "STS", instead of Seville. Whatever you call it, it's different, it's quick, it's safe and it's a fun car to drive. Most of all it's "Our CTS".

Rich

richw5 · October 2002

Congrat's on your new CTS!

When you said that the dealer wouldn't get any more Seville's until the '04 models, I thought the salesman was fibbing to you, then I remembered you were in Saudi.

My '99 STS is a fun car to drive also, just not as much fun as the CTS. Most people don't realize how quick a 300 horsepower FWD car can be. It has some torque steer, not a lot, but enough for you to know it's there. Since I drive "goofy foot" ( with my left foot on the brake), I can surprise a lot of drivers with RWD cars that should be a few tenths of a second quicker than me.

The STS is a superior road car!! I can only hope the next gen STS is as good on the road as this one. You would't have gone wrong with an STS, just not had as much fun in everyday driving.

Keep monitoring this board. I think you'll see some interesting postings. Since Cadillac needs to lower the age of it's buyers, the young guys who are racing their CTS's, are the best thing Cadillac has going for it. I look forward to their exploits on the track.

Rich

baron87 · October 2002

As stated previously, C is just the series designation! C-Series, S-Series, D-Series, X-Series, etc. The series designation is an indication of size and price...SRX and STS will be roughly the same overall length/width and price (high 30s for base), and will share powertrain combos. Again, the first letter is the series designation and the second two are the body-type.

CTS=C-Series Touring Sedan

STS=S-Series Touring Sedan
SRX=S-Series XWD (crossover)
STX=S-Series Touring XWD

DTS=D-Series Touring Sedan

EXT=E-Series XWD Truck
ESV=E-Series (something extended, lengthened vehicle)

XLR=X-Series Luxury Roadster
XTS=X-Series Touring Sedan (think Imaj, FTS)

Again, Escalade (base) will never have an alphanumeric...because it is woven into American pop-culture.

cadman88 · October 2002

What is the difference between SRX and STX?

Also is ESV E-Series Streched vehicle?

bingoman · October 2002

I hope you don't keep those brake lights lit all of the time.

richw5 · October 2002

Bingoman - I've had a light touch on the brakes so far. Always got 55K + miles on my drum brake cars (front wheels, more miles out of the rears). The only car that went through brake pads fast was my '94 STS. I got about 25 to 30k miles out of those pads. The pads on my '99 are at 45k miles now and they still have pad surface left. I have them checked when I rotate the tires.

I'm sure as I get older, the light touch will become the arthritic knee touch, but for right now, left foot brake is still good for me. Some of the performance driving schools teach their students to use their left foot, just don't lay it on the brake.

My wife and stepson ask, "how can you drive like that?". I've done it for over 42 years, so it's second nature.

Rich

richw5 · October 2002

Since my wife feels I spend entirely too much time on the internet, this will be my last post for the weekend. I have to keep her happy and go for a drive in the CTS (retirement party for one of her co-workers).

I found this board in late July or early August. There were some CTS owners, in early posts, who haven't said anything in a while. I'd like to hear the following from them and other owners:

1. How many miles do you have on your CTS?

2. How would you rate your car (scale of 1 to 10)?

3. Would you buy another?

4. Any other comments you'd like to make.

It should be interesting.

Rich

fjk57702 · October 2002

barron87 is correct about Cadillac's new naming convention. I think that it is poorly thought out, but that is only my opinion. STX probably is the next generation Seville (STS) all wheel drive model.

pmdriver · October 2002

Necros - Trust me on the tire inflation - The camber gain (negative camber gained as the car goes into jounce on the front outside corner) along with the tire construction will allow for the optimum grip with 30 psi. Or better yet, the fun of what you're doing is finding the right set up on your own, just don't ignore lower tire pressure settings (I promise you wont "scrub off your sidewall lettering")

Mcgreenx - I consider the "poise" of the vehicle the reaction of the vehicle to inputs in the linear range, or the sub-limit handling range. The way the car reacts to sharp steering inputs before tires lose adhesion and the way the roll motions are damped. In short, the confidence you have in the vehicle that it will remain composed after you give it an input.

Jemiller - The nominal front camber is -0.5 degrees per side. Max adjustment is variable with production variation but -1.0 deg/side should be easily achieve able. I suppose the camber can be adjusted for driving style for autocrossing. I personally don't feel there is enough gross understeer for my style to bother with the re adjustments for toe with the camber adjustment (The toe curve is also effected). Good call on the FE3 adjustments for high speed cornering. They also are positive for transient (quick steering) inputs. Interesting tidbit on the V-series rumors on the Nordshleife.

Richw5 - Thanks for the compliments for our team. I'm very happy to hear you are enjoying your car (that was certainly our intent!) I am working on the CTS-V. By the way, I know the young engineer you mention you DVD quite well!

scottc8 · October 2002

My experience bears out pmdrivers' advice. While our club was autocrossing our Lincoln LSs last Feb. in California, we had the pleasure of being joined by the Manager of Vehicle Engineering for the car, who designed the LS suspension and has a good bit of racing background. He informed us that there was no need to raise tire pressures, that the LS suspension would not allow the sidewalls to roll over. From what I've read, the CTS suspension is very similar and just as good. If you've got enough air to keep the sidewalls from rolling over, you've got enough air. More won't help, and in fact may lessen grip by reducing the contact patch. Many autocrossers use white liquid shoe polish to mark the sidewalls of the tires to see where they're scrubbing. FWIW, I've been autocrossing a 3700 lb. Lincoln on the OEM tires at 30 psi without scrubbing the sidewalls.

macguy · October 2002

Have fun with your new car. I was supposed to get mine yestrday but they did not have my plates ready and promissed me today.

Now what wheels are on this car. I have not seen these wheels before, at least not here in Saudi. Are these standard wheels, were these available since early '02. the one i am getting have 17" chrome wheels that are identical to those of the CTS. Cadillac.com states that the only other 17" wheels are machine finished aluminums, but the ones you show in the picture do not look like machine finished.

merc1 · October 2002

So in other words Cadillac doesn't know what they're doing with their "designations" either. Their system makes no sense, it's silly at best as is the the new styling direction, a pity. I ask you what is so wrong with the current STS' look to warrant all this severe love/hate it styling? What is wrong with names Seville, DeVille etc? SRX means what now? S series, R means what (?) and X means crossover right? STS is about the only ones that make sense, Seville Touring Sedan. CTS doesn't stand for Catera Touring Sedan, but some think it does. ETC was cruel joke to post on the back of the late Eldo. I think Cadillac should keep names for the sedans, and use new designations for truly "new" products like the XLR (which should have been CLR = Cadillac Luxury Roadster, but thats another story) and SRX.

Cadillac better hope the products overcome the naming system because if they don't they'll find themselves with a case of Acura Legend to RL syndrome.

M

baron87 · October 2002

It's sort of like a pyramid type effect

S-Series Family

Touring_____________________X-Wheel Drive
|_____________________________|
|_____________________________|
|_____________________________|
Sedan, XWD___________________Crossover

The STX is merely an AWD version of the next generation STS, as fjk stated. I agree, that this naming convention could have been thought out a little more logically, however, when you analyze the whole picture it does make sense and follows some sort of pattern. And it is somewhat unique, also.

My apologies for the crude diagram...but it was the best I could muster at 12 AM Chicago time!!

merc1 · October 2002

I disagree, that makes no sense and it way too drawn out for no good reason at all, other than to join the European/Japanese brands way of doing things. Everyone has a "S" something in their lineup, there is nothing "unique" about that mess of a naming system. Unique would be to stick with names in segments that are filled with letter/number combos.

M

1roastaa · October 2002

The wheels are after market if you look in the web page next to the hole in one picture you will see the stock wheels next to the after markets made by MNS. My CTS is a LUX SPORT with all options

sevenfeet0 · October 2002

baron87, I have to agree with merc1 on this one. It is confusing, even to those of us who a fans of the marque.

Part of it is that Cadillac hasn't unveiled the entire new product line yet, so we can't see the entire strategy. But based on what we know combined with previous uses of the "3-letter" designation, I'm not sure that Cadillac has this right.

Mercedes also has the same problem in my opinion. They have the C class sedans, the large CL coupes and the expensive smaller CLK coupes. They also have the SL and the SLK, which have no relation outside of being two seater coupes. Each car has a numeric designation following for engine size although Mercedes has given the wrong number in the past for certain vehicles.

Lexus handles this better. The ES, IS, and LS are all different sedans. The SC has its own designation as a coupe and the SUVs all end in "X" (LX, GX, RX). Each letter combo has a number combo for engine size, like Mercedes and BMW.

For BMW, you have standard size designations for 3 series, 5 series, and 7 series. That's followed by a two digit engine size, and then a "C" for coupes, or "L" for long wheelbase models. Like Mercedes, BMW has been known to fib on the engine size monikor for marketing reasons.

But what is Cadillac doing? Well historically the STS and SLS were the first to use a 3 letter monikor in 1993. It made some sense, with the names meaning "Seville Touring Sedan" and "Seville Luxury Sedan" specifically. The DTS and DHS came later, by Cadillac resurrecting the old "Deville Touring Sedan" name from the early 90's. But the DHS should have been called the DLS in order to match the mission of the SLS.

The Eldorado got ESC and ETC designations during this time. Again, Cadillac uses a different middle letter than "L" for the Luxury model, again confusing the buyers. The ETC name made more sense, outside of the unfortunate coincidence of what "ETC" means.

Now fast-forward to today. Cadillac seems to be hell bent on going forth and changing all names to letters. The last major name shift of Cadillac vehicles started in the 50's (Deville, Eldorado) but the old numeric designations didn't completely disappear until the 1970s (i.e. "Fleetwood 75").

But now we have a vehicle called the Escalade, which has variations called the EXT and upcoming ESV. So first, we have a new "E" series vehicle, despite the fact that Eldorado ETCs are still being sold. Part of this problem is the name "Escalade" itself. When the original Escalade was introduced, Cadillac hadn't committed to the new naming scheme. When the second generation was introduced, Cadillac missed an opportunity to rename the truck to a different name, or just go with a unique three letter designation. Since the original Escalade was forgettable, this was a missed marketing opportunity. Even worse, the new Escalade is a hit...such a hit that Cadillac doesn't dare rename the Escalade now to the new naming regime. So much for uniformity.

And then there's the Escalade variations, the EXT and upcoming ESV. OK, "T" stands for truck. "X" stands for reconfigurable, given the new midgate design. But what does "S" and "V" stand for in the ESV? Previous uses of "S" in the middle letter designation have been in the ESC, which didn't mean anything anyway. And as for the "V", this flies in the face of Cadillac's use of this letter for their high end performance line. Let's say that the upcoming V12 engine will be the engine for V-series Escalades. The name "ESVv" is downright dumb.

If anything should be the "E" class, it should be the new XLR. The old Eldorado was always the personal luxury vehicle, which is now the XLR's mission. The prototype was called the Evoq, another "E" name. But that was all for naught on the Escalade mistake. The rest of the name "XLR" makes sense, although it could have just as easily been called "XLC" to eliminate yet another way to call a vehicle at Cadillac.

The real problem is the upcoming SRX. Since the STS is still going to be around in current and upgraded forms, I have some questions. Is the SRX really an "S" class vehicle like the STS? Do they serve the same market price points, or is it closer to the CTS? If "R" means reconfigurable here, this flies in the face of the EXT's name, not to mention the use of "R" as a "roadster" in the XLR. And worse, you have the use of the "X" name in three different places on three different nameplates (SRX, EXT and XLR).

Does any of this make any sense? Even a first year MBA student wouldn't make these kinds of mistakes in marketing class. This isn't the first time Cadillac has had this problem. From 1936 to 1976, Cadillac used numeric names for some or all of their models. Despite the fact that some names stuck (Series 62, Series 60 Special, Series 75), others came and went and reappeared depending on the model year (Series 61, 63, 64, 67, 70, and the 90 series with the V16 engine). Even worse, the transition from all numbers to all names took over 25 years to complete. Also, there is no way to designate an engine type at Cadillac. There is no standard built into the name, or no trailing engine type like what Audi does. If I were Bob Lutz, I wouldn't forget that the marketing of these vehicles and their respective names can be just as important as the engineering.

baron87 · October 2002

The only place where it really seems to make sense is the S-Series. STS and SRX will be same size, same price point, and will share the same powertrains.

Remember, the next-generation STS will only be about two or three inches longer than the CTS, and it will base with the 3.6L V6. SRX will base around 37-38k with the 3.6, as will STS. But the real hitch comes in with the AWD STS variant, STX. Because 'X' is the last letter in the SRX, however, not all SRXs will be AWD. Another gaff...

Maybe we interperate this too heavily. Maybe the connotation is that SRX, STS, STX are similar because they all begin with S, and that's it. Maybe we are supposed to just treat that way; that there is no code or "tricks" to the rest of the name...that they are just "names", only not in the conventional sense.

But then why is Cadillac's official stance that the first letter is the series, and the second two the body-type? It's all very confusing, not at all streamlined or consistent enough. Perhaps in a few years it will make more sense.

Oh and as for the "ESVv"...Cadillac has never actually put the 'v' in that position. The official name of the CTS-variant is "V-Series CTS"; it has only been the media who has used the term "CTSv".

At any rate, it is confusing, and Escalade definitely messed the whole scheme up, but whatever, 'TS', 'LR', 'TC', etc., are easy enough to understand...it's only 'RX', 'SV', and 'XT', that seem a little absent-mindedly chosen.

oldsman01 · October 2002

Local dealer is now up to three CTSs on their lot. Two are sterling and one is cashmere. The sterling looks pretty good, but cashmere looks to dull on a car like this. Again, this tells you how conservative the car market here is. At least none of their cars(including Devilles) have any tacky aftermarket add ons.

cadman88 · October 2002

The most my dealer has ever had is 2, white and black, but the black one was sold before the white one came in, the person just had to pick it up. Anyways on the naming system, I agree with 7feet0 that some of it is messed up, but they are just names, I don't think that people care what their car's name is "I drive a Seville" "I drive a STS" "I drive a 5 Series" ect. They aren't going to say I drive a S-Series Touring Sedan or a BMW 530i, 540i, or 525i, ect.

Try to think of it as sort of a trim level, Accord DX,EX, ect.

calicadi · October 2002

In my LuxSport w/17's and stock Goodyears w/31 psi all around, doing 70 around a sweeping downhill right-hand curve with good camber, I detect what begins to feel like drift, mostly from the rear but a detectable difference in the steering wheel feel as well. Could I be:
a)experiencing tire roll?
b)experiencing the Stabilitrak kicking in and altering the attitude.
c)Actually losing adhesion to the road slightly?

A slight steering adjustment eradicates the sensation. Also, how do you mark the tire to check for roll? I don't want to look like a pinhead with painted-on ganster white walls. Are there any examples in the pictures posted to-date? And does anyone know what Stabilitrak will do if the car begins to drift? Is it only sensitive to rapid inputs?

Thanks to all in advance for any info.

automole · October 2002

1. How many miles do you have on your CTS?

5500

2. How would you rate your car (scale of 1 to 10)?

This is a difficult question to answer without it being more specific. It depends on what other cars you are comparing the CTS to and what aspect of the CTS you're rating. Overall, compared to other 4 door sedans in it's price range I'd give the CTS a very high rating. As for exterior and exterior styling I'd give it a 9.5; there's very little (if anything) I'd change. I'd rate handling, braking, and automatic transmission characteristics at a '9' and engine performance at a '7'. Fit and finish is also a '7' in my opinion; it's better than average but there's definitely room for improvement.

3. Would you buy another?

Assuming that Cadillac doesn't do too much to 'soften' the CTS's styling and that the price is kept reasonably low...yes. If the CTS's engine is improved and the U.S. economy improves (so that I'm in a better position to afford a new car upgrade) I'll likely trade my CTS in on a new one in a couple of years.

4. Any other comments you'd like to make.

So far my CTS has been a great car. I'd like to see new engine options (unrefined American V8 muscle) offered in the future. It would also be nice if Cadillac wasn't so cheap when it comes to standard features on the base model; IMO there's no excuse for a $30k car not to come standard with a compass, dual power seats, 17" wheels, fold-down rear seat, and homelink garage door opener.

dindak · October 2002

Looks like your web link over loaded.

Might want to check that.

richw5 · October 2002

Congratulations on your new CTS. Nice wheels!

Automole - Guess I should answer my own questions.
1. We have 5700 miles on our CTS.
2. I would probably rate the CTS an 8.5 overall. Not necessarily against another car, but what I expected from it. Also knowing the changes coming down the line for '04.

Still not sure about the styling (side view and rear), love the front. Give it an 8. just my perception.

It needs a few (30 to 40) more horses, my wife thinks it's OK as is. Give it an 8.5.

Handling, driveability, etc. Give it a 10. I love to drive it. It belongs on the road.

Interior, move the clock, redesign the info system (make it easier to use), make it a touch classier. Nav system sucks. Give it an 8.

3. I would definitely buy another. I would hope to upgrade to a 260 horse CTS "Sport Lux" in a few years or ... if the economy got better, a CTS-V with a auto/sport tranny, when they are available.

4. Buying the CTS was a impulse decision. We needed a car with a back seat to pick up our grandson. It was one of the best decisions I've ever made (other than marrying my wife). Our CTS has brought back the thrill of driving and made the drive to work (for my wife) fun. She still comments on other drivers giving the CTS a look. After all, isn't that what it's all about, a fun car that's different enough to make people watch it drive down the street. Americans love their cars.

As for naming convention, I'm not happy with it, but ... I refer to our Seville as the "STS" and the CTS as "CTS" or "little white car", when my wife asks, "What car are we taking". After a few years, we'll all be using internet slang terms anyway (LOL).

Rich

sevenfeet0 · October 2002

1. About 2000 miles.

2. Here's my breakdown of different parts of the car:

Engine: 6 (needs more HP compared to Infiniti or even Honda these days...it does give what it has well though).

Transmission (Automatic): 8 (nice and smooth without hunting, but the autotrans needs a manu-shifter).

Interior: 8 (deduct 3 points for no performance gauges and no lumbar support, folding rear seat should be standard as it was in our previous '94 Escort! Non-Nav system radios need a classier font. A special bonus point added back for legroom...it allowed me to buy the car!).

Exterior: 9 (pretty boss for looks...people notice this car! Blind spots are a little large, but large mirrors help).

Fit and Finish: 8 (*lots* better than previous Cadillacs I've owned, but still room for improvement)

Body structure: 9 (the Sigma class is for real)

Handling: 8 (*lots* of fun, LuxSport gets uncomposed on the worst paved roads)

Braking: 8 (haven't hit anything yet :-)

OVERALL: 8 (this car could be a 9 easy with powertrain and interior upgrades)

3. Would I buy another? Hell yes, especially since we know that many of the earlier gripes are being addressed.

4. Other comments? To Pmdriver2 and the others at GM lurking about here: keep up the good work and remember to keep this car's engineering, features and price either competitive or preferably class leading in every regard.

merc1 · October 2002

"Mercedes also has the same problem in my opinion." I'd have to disagree with that, because Mercedes' designations easily make more sense, first the series then the engine size, easy. C,E,S in succession small sedan to large, CLK and CL both stand for "Coupe-Light" as in 2-door and light weight, well supposedly considering the CL's curb weight. The SL and SLK stand for short-light, all of this is in German mind you. Mercedes has done this for years, Cadillac on the other hand is only switching for the sake of doing so. As Acura did (mistakenly).

M

sevenfeet0 · October 2002

Is it just me, or do any of you have issue with the noise of the windshield wipers? They are fine until any amount of dirt gets ahold of them. Then the left wiper specifically seems to stack a microlayer of dirt on the windshield toward the end of its travel, which causes subsequent sweeps to drag and blade and create noise.

Manually cleaning the windshield helps, but I don't want to do it for every rainstorm. has anyone else seen this? Has anyone tried a more high performance wiper blade?

richw5 · October 2002

I knew I could count on you for an interesting review of the CTS.

No, I haven't had the wiper problem. It's drizzled a lot lately here in Chicago and our wipers are working perfectly. Only wish they were "rain-sense" wipers (another item that should be standard).

Here's an interesting page I came across:

http://media.gm.com/events/sema/02sema/index.htm

At least they're trying to stimulate interest.
Click on Cadillac under divisions, on the left side of the page.

Rich

sevenfeet0 · October 2002

Wow.

Well, the SEMA show has in recent years been a different kind of auto show. Originally for tuners and customizers, the manufacturers are have been debuting concepts here now for some time. The fact that Cadillac is getting into the act is quite interesting.

Of course, Cadillac is trying to get some pre-launch buzz for its big product placement in the new Matrix movie due next summer. But, the real news are some of the upgrades that they feature. None of them seem all that crazy and I suspect that many are being seriously considered for production.

First, witness the Escalade upgrades. Cadillac dealers have been making a mint offering wheels and accessories upgrades for them, and somebody at GM is wisely deciding to get into the act. Half the Escalades I see in Atlanta have custom wheels that put the 17-inch factory wheels to shame. The wheel wells will accomodate up to 22" wheels, so why not? The interior upgrades are also interesting. The Escalade needs to banish the remaining faux wood trim and further seperate the trucks from their Chevy/GMC bretheren.

The supercharged Vortec is also pretty cool. I'm not sure where it's place will be when the V12 arrives, but the supercharger is probably a cheaper (and lighter) upgrade. You could also likely bolt on the supercharger as a parts upgrade for existing Escalade owners. The ESVm is more of the same, with different wheels. No engine upgrade for this one; I'll bet they are saving the V12 for this bad boy.

The DTS icon is an interesting car. Take the existing DTS and spruce up the exterior and interior with upgrades for the executive. The rear seats get massagers and the wood treatment is upgraded to eucalyptus...just like the XLR. There aren't any engine upgrades mentioned...oh well.

And then there's the CTSm. Let's see....

Ebony Diamond triple coated paint? Check!
19 inch wheels on 40 series Z rated rubber? Cool.
BiHID lights AND HID foglights? Burn my eyes, baby!
Alcantra headliner? Ok...
Ground effects? Check!
Black Chrome interior including guages, center stack, shift knob and door handles? Lord Vader, your car is ready.

Anyone want to place bets that some of these features will end up on the CTSv next year? Too bad the CTSv's engine didn't make an appearance at this show...it would have been a cool place to show it off.

oldsman01 · October 2002

Not that I'm falling out of love with the CTS, but I'm seriously considering a Saab 9-3(2003 model) as a stop-gap for the CTS. CTS is a bit out of my price range right now and with the power and interior upgrades coming, I really want to wait. If I like the way the 9-3 drives, can get a good lease deal for 36 months/15K annually, and get a trade allowance on my Intrigue which will cover the note, I may be driving a 9-3. Then in 3 years I should be in a position to buy(or lease) a CTS and get the upgrades. Who knows, maybe I can even swing a CTS V series then:)

mcgreenx · October 2002

You are right on, which means I agree with all but one of your assessments. Putting aside the numerical ratings, the only thing I take a little issue with is your comment about fit and finish. I honestly don't know what could be improved upon. Everything on my car fits, and I haven't heard a hint of a rattle. I hate to use the term because of ads for another make, but the CTS is Rock Solid. After 2500 miles, I can't recall having had a car that I enjoyed driving as much as my CTS, and I've had Caddies, including an STS, a Continental, Aurora, Chrysler LHS, and a few more, have had no trouble with any of them (except for the Continental when my sons burned up the engine driving in the Rockies after losing all the radiator coolant, but that's another story). But the CTS is a blast to drive. Quick, nimble, responsive, couldn't be happier with it. It's not perfect, by any means, some of the shortcomings that almost everyone has noted could be (and hopefully will be) improved upon, but if the foreign car lovers/magazine writers (including CR) don't kill it, the CTS will be refined and improved into a true classic.

automole · October 2002

I've got 5500 miles on my CTS and have experienced a few occasional rattles coming from the driver door and/or dash and center console. Most of them occur while driving on rough freeway pavement.

Fit, finish, and interior noise levels are worlds better than the 300m that I traded for the CTS but worse than I would have expected for a car with such low miles in it's price range.

Admittedly, I'm hyper-sensitive to ANY creaks, squeaks, and rattles so the fact that I haven't yet taken my CTS to the dealer to fix the rattles says that the problem isn't THAT serious.

Overall, the car is still very solid and fun to drive...I just feel that the "fit and finish" quality has room for improvement.

macguy · October 2002

I got my Lux sport CTS 2 days ago. Sorry guys I did not have time to follow this board or post to it. Too busy with the cool dark blue CTS of mine. Wowww... am I glad I passed the E240 and the A6. Sorry to all the Mag review editors, but I honstly believe I would not have been happier than with this CTS. This thing is turning heads all over. I have seen drivers adjusting their rear view mirrors to put me in sight as they pass by and have seen passengers in other vehicles turnig 180 degrees. There is just nothing like it on the road, and being in Saudi Arabia the car is even more exotic.

As for the car it self, well, I do not know why wasn't I as impressed when I did the test drive. Is it because that now I know it is mine, so it is phsycological?

Here is a run of the few things that caught my attention so far (the surprises)

- No lumbar support, bad
- Large side mirrore, good
- The front parking llights (those small trianglular lights), so cute
- The rear fog red lights (have not seen that on an american car before), good
- I can write my name and have it displayed as i put the key in for all to see. cool (when did Cadillac did that, or is this a new thing).

Again, did I mention how much attentin and commotion this car is generating (my BMW 528 owining brother was so impressed by the exterior)

sonjaab · October 2002

Congrats on that CTS.......Hey you being
in Saudi..By chance do you see any of those
re-badged Holdens as Chevy impala ss ?Man
they would be one HOT car if brought to the
USA. I guess we will have to wait on the
GTO badged Holden here ! I wanted a CTS
badly this year. NO dealer would do GM
employee deal here in Central NY. My 96
Deville was gettin long in the tooth so
I ended up with a new Deville. No regrets
tho ! Next time a V-8 CTS in my future !
Enjoy yours!................geo

BTW: It is my understanding that you can
have any newer Caddy to say your name on
the DIC...Dealer must do it...and of course
its NOT free !

sevenfeet0 · October 2002

I should explain my ratings system, which I came up with on a whim and should be treated as such. I tried to rate the various parts of the car based on what else I had seen from competitors in the class, or what I had driven. Generally, the ratings were quite favorable. I don't generally give out "10"'s, primarily since I reserve that for "best in class or extraordinary merit considering the current state of technology". If I think that something is equal to the rest of the best out there, it gets a 9, not a 10.

In the case of fit and finish, believe me, I like the CTS *a lot*. It's probably one of the most refined things I've seen come out of GM. However, before and after I took delivery of the car, I noticed a few minor things and one potentially major thing. First, I noticed a little glue overflow in certain sections of the headliner. That was quickly removed...if anything it should have been seen by the dealer's detailer. Second, I agree with others here that the visors either should be made of higher quality materials or cut differently so that the pattern mark around the edges wasn't there. It makes it look like it was cut out of a child's pattern book. And the Bose logo on my left side tweeter on the A-pillar is loose.

But my biggest concerns is the sound of the doors. That's right, the sound. For years, GM hasn't gotten right how to hang a door. The CTS doesn't have past problems of ill fitting door or hood seams that plagued past Cadillacs. But the doors don't quite have the "bank vault" sound common in Mercedes vehicles. The door slam sound should be something very reassuring to the structure and the competence of the vehicle for the owner. The CTS is the best Cadillac door I've heard...but it could be better.

Otherwise, for fit and finish, the seats are perfect, the carpet is correct, the plastics fit nicely, the door handles work well, and the switches feel substantive. I can't complain about anything else. I'm tough on this car because I know that GM has to make it perfect for it to be taken seriously. BMW and Mercedes can to afford to make a mistake or two (like BMW's steering effort change last year in the 3 series). Cadillac cannot. I'm glad GM is taking this car very seriously because the future of Cadillac with the future buying habits of GenX and GenY buyers are at stake. It's that simple.

eaton53 · October 2002

Cadillac should get involved in the wheel biz... it's a gold mine.

Those 19" wheels must have 225/40/19 tires on them to maintain the correct wheel diameter. I've been doing a few calculations and have found that 19" is the largest possible wheel for the CTS that will not screw up the speedo. 245/35/19 would also be an exact size match... and is an available size.

At SuperBuyTires.com, they're claiming the have 20" wheels that will fit the CTS. But if you look at the tire size they're specing (on the Driv Mach5 for example) it's 275/45/20.

There's no way that will fit... it would be 4" diameter bigger than stock!!

bigdaddycoats · October 2002

The Lund CTS that was featured in Motor Trend had 20" wheels with Toyo Proxes 245/35ZR20 tires. Looks very sweet.

eaton53 · October 2002

That's 1" bigger in diameter than stock, which is probably enough to throw things off.

That tire size in 19" is a perfect match.

sevenfeet0 · October 2002

Even Motor Trend said that 20" wheels in the Lund CTS was a bit much. They agreed that 18" or 19" would likely be better.

calicadi · October 2002

Thanks to richw5 for the SEMA post. Is the consensus that the 20" is more for show than go and the best fitment would be along the lines of the 255/40ZR-19 as shown at SEMA? Anybody with competition or engineering experience care to share relative advantages/disadvantages in upgrading from the stock 16" or 17" arrangement? My experience is limited to my old El Camino (1979 w/350 cid and 300THD). Went from 205 on 15's to 235 Dunlop A2's on 17's.

eaton53 · October 2002

The wheel tire diameters work out to this...

Stock 16" (225/55/16) 25.74"
Stock 17" (225/50/17) 25.85"
18" (225/45/18) 25.97"
18" (245/40/18) 25.71"
19" (225/40/19) 26.06"
19" (245/35/19) 25.75"

Any of these should work fine - availability might be an issue with some.

Pros - look very cool, can improve handling, depending on style and materials can decrease unsprung weight, gives option of switching from super high performance to snow tires.

Cons - Expensive!!!, can degrade ride quality, low profile tires make wheels easier to damage, can increase unsprung weight.

There's probably a few more reasons I haven't thought of... and there are issues with 20".

mcgreenx · October 2002

I've never experienced this before: a day or two ago ALL AM radio stations started to seem detuned, as if the frequency is slightly off. The FM stations are fine. Waddaya think it could be? An antenna connection or "condenser setting"? Seems to have happened suddenly and was working OK before the onset of the problem. FYI, I have the Bose radio (no navigation system). Very annoying.

eaton53 · October 2002

For the CTS application the standard tire is a Falken 245/35/19.

The wheel I inquired about was the 19" Niche 5F16...

http://www.superbuytires.com/wheels_by_brand.html?stage=2&brand=Niche&model=5F16&id=6627

mariner7 · October 2002

I read in recent months CTS is outsold by LS. Does anyone know if it's true. If it is, it's trouble for GM. Because a brand new Caddy can't even outsell a car Ford wants to have a new platform for but doesn't have the money to.

I don't see the point of putting the Corvette's engine in the ctsv. The engine is powerful, but it's old tech ohv. The point was to impress the crowd that's buying the Ms and the AMGs and steal sales. That crowd will laugh at the ohv. When was last time bmw and mercedes even had an ohv engine, ten, twenty years ago?

eaton53 · October 2002

There aren't hardly any M and AMG sales to steal... their production is very limited.

The point of the CTSv is to go very fast and it should do be able to prove that point very well. I don't think too many M and AMG people laugh at the Z06 when one shows up on a road course ready to race.

jemiller · October 2002

As long as you understand that you're making the car not only less comfortable but also slower by going for the big tacky 19" or 20" bling-bling...

sda · October 2002

I had the fun of test driving a CTS while my car was in for service. What a fun car. The engine and auto transmission are wonderfully responsive, and the car has a nice balanced feel. I was a bit surprised however by how intrusive the engine sounds when it accelerates. (Lively and energetic, but noisy) It is much noisier than the 98 Catera I owned. But then again, the Catera wasn't as much fun to drive. Didn't have the chance to really sample the non-Bose (standard) sound system. Any comments from those who currently own a CTS ? Any how...two thumbs up!

Oldsman01: Any thought to just buying a base CTS. It is nicely equipped with zero options, and would be within range of the Saab 9-3 you're considering. Onyx blue with neutral interior gets my vote!

jemiller · October 2002

Here we go again...what does it matter how many valves an engine has or how they're actuated? DOHC dates back to the 1920s, predates pushrod OHV in production by ~20 years, so it's hardly 'high tech'.

By the way, the last Mercedes-Benz-branded OHV engine used in a car was the Ilmor Indy V8 of the mid-80s, built for Penske to run through a rule loophole targeted at "stock block" engines. It kicked everyone's backside.

The LS6 in the Z06 weighs the same, occupies less space, and gets better gas mileage than BMW's or Mercedes' engines of comparable output. None of which would even FIT under the hood of a Corvette, GM was able to design the C5 into such a tight package because the engine is so small.

I can tell you that M5 owners respect the LS6 engine and Z06 capabilities. The Z06 is one of the two or three fastest production cars, in terms of lap time around a typical road course, built anywhere. What they don't respect is the floppy seats, acres of plastic, and sloppy finish but that's why Z06s are $50K and anything comparable in performance is $75K+.

An LS6-powered CTS would work just fine. The engine is no problem. It's the material quality and details GM has to get right - Chevy can get away with apologies for the 'Vette's material quality because it's cheap for what it is, but going down the "we're sloppy but we're cheap" road is not how you build Cadillac into a premium brand.

Cadillac CTS/CTS-V

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles