For anyone interested, on Fox's 24 tonight, our good buddy George Mason, head of CTU, is driving a silver CTS with the Lux Sport package. Bad things have happened thusfar to Mr. Mason in this episode, so I'm not sure if we'll see the car again, but it's nice to see the CTS getting exposure on Fox's most popular show.
I didn't expect to see a CTS on "24" but there it was. Good exposure. I'm going to watch to see if the car re-appears.
Did anyone see the commercial that shows the CTS driving so fast that it glows? It then stops at a intersection and you hear the car cooling off and it returns to the white color. Gets your attention!
I think I've noticed some comparative references to bmw's on this forum. I just got out of a '00 328Ci, sport, step, Dinan CAI, Dinan eng & trans sftwr. Into a '03 sable/neutral CTS, every option but nav. Keeping in mind that I had a coupe, here's some first impressions... The bmw has sports car 'taut' suspension. It's tighter, but not at all jarring. You can just feel that it's excellent. The CTS also has a comfortable firm sport feel, but delivers a smoother ride. Of course, it's a heavier car. It's a nice change actually. Feels very in control, but I haven't played with the car at all yet either. Both cars are well balanced. The bmw offers more of a true sports car response and feedback steering feel to it by a margin, but the CTS feels tight and smooth. If you haven't logged much time in one of bmw's award winning chassis, the CTS will feel excellent. To me, the CTS is 'very good', with the bmw rating as 'excellent'. The weight difference shows here. I was running Yokohama AVS's on 17's on the coupe in the summer, and Blizzak lm22's in snow, so it was a sticky ride. So far, I like the stock CTS rubber for being all season. They'll be just fine until it's time to replace. In terms of Stabilitrak, the bmw's DSC- dynamic stability control worked well. I haven't felt the CTS' cut in or out, so I can't say. I think most high end models are up to speed in what they offer in this regard. Along with the suspension, steering, and rubber, when it comes to ride, one pleasant surprise is that the CTS sport seats are everything the bmw sport seats are. One minor item they don't have is an additional thigh bolster that can be pulled out if desired, but the side bolsters, positioning, and firmness is very nice and compares as an equal. I think interior ergonomics is good in both cars. They both feel good to me. Once adjusted, you fit real well into the bmw. I happen to fit real well in the CTS also. There is more room, but I still prefer the enveloping cockpit feel, and the CTS delivers a comfortable 'drive me' cabin. One detail the CTS excels in is front shoulder belt placement. The bmw coupe's were a long awkward reach. You got used to it, but it was never easy. Steering wheel controls are welcome again, with the CTS reflecting its newness by offering more functions. The CTS's climate control package is far superior to the bmw's in all aspects and additionally offers dual controls. A glaring omission in the CTS is the lack of a temp gauge. Overall, in addition to being newer and more programmable, I like the total CTS controls and instrumentation package better than what's in the 3 series. The CTS audio is also clearly better than the bmw's cd system. We'll see how everything holds up. Power plants are a different matter. The bmw is a clear winner, with the CTS an admirable second place. It wins out stock, and even stronger with the couple of Dinan mods. There's three main reasons why the others target bmw 3's and 5's in their segments- handling, brakes, and engines. The CTS feels like it could track real well, and I'm comfortable saying that it exceeds my personal capabilities at speed, S-track off of course, so for me that's a wash. But the engine...well, the bimmer is the benchmark. The inline six is ultra smooth, powerful, and just begs to be run all the way to redline. The CTS engine feels great (@300 miles), but you can just 'tell' that it's not as strong or refined. But hey, everyone loses to the bmw six so that's not too bad. The CTS auto trans seems smooth. I haven't pushed beyond 4k rpm yet or been aggressive, so right now I can't judge how it compares against the bmw steptronic in either regular or sport mode. The CTS sport brakes with their hi-perf pads feel solid, very safe, and like they could stop the car in a true sports car like manner. They are not quite up to the bmw's, but keep in mind that the bmw is a lighter coupe with bigger rotors, calipers, and soft rubber. It flat stops. Period. I received many compliments on my coupe--bright red, fact spoiler, sport pkg. I have already received a few on my CTS. Have to say though, the CTS seems to be a love it or hate it style, whereby the bmw was more universally accepted. That's all I have for now. More as I think of it.
I will agree with the previous posters that on paper, the Lincoln LS V8 Sport Premium is priced comparably to other luxury imports (BMW, Mercedes, Audi). But what they fail to recognize is what Car and Driver commented on about the competition. People rarely question paying top dollar for those cars since they have proven themselves time and time again over decades. But Lincoln and Cadillac begin at a handicap on this issue. They aren't considered tops in their game any more, and therefore have to market themselves accordingly.
The classic example of using pricing to gain attention and market share in this segment happened in 1990 with the introduction of the Lexus LS400. In time of recession in the US and Mercedes raising the cost of a S class to 50 grand, Toyota launches a luxury brand with a hokey name that has no reputation whatsoever. But they price their car at $36,000, far below the competition. Mercedes owners started taking a chance on the deal and found out that it was a nice car, better in many ways than their old S classes. Lexus isn't as price competitive any more since they don't need to be, but they are still cheaper than an S class or a BMW 7 series.
That strategy has been mimicked by Infiniti. Up until now, they have not been able to break out of Lexus' shadow with a disastrous product launch in 1990 and good, but not great products ever since. So when they introduced the G35, they made sure that not only was the product capable, but that the price was irresistable. It's easy to leave an Infiniti dealership with a well-optioned G35 and only spend $35K. A well optioned CTS costs $38k and higher. A well optioned BMW 330i is even higher.
When you're behind in the market and the perception is that you must prove yourself, proper pricing becomes a valuable tool in attracting buyers to further increase credibility. You may have the best product going, but if no one buys it since they see little incentive on changing from the market leaders, then you will likely fail. CTS pricing is less than the leader (BMW), but not equal to that Infiniti or Acura (the TL is the best bargain in the class). Lincoln has a similar problem.
Truth be told, Lincoln has a bigger problem. Only the LS can reasonably go up against the luxury imports these days. The old Continental was a joke (and was mercifully killed) and the Town Car is just a livery vehicle...no DTS version. Lincoln has to try to tell their story with one mid-sized vehicle...not a good position to be in. Your only other options is to cross over to Ford's other products (Jaguar, Volvo). At least Cadillac has a product line strategy to compete.
I enjoyed reading your comments. They would be as I would expect from a BMW 3 Series owner that has moved over to the CTS.
The CTS will feel heavier because it is! Larger, more 5 series dimensions means the CTS is about 300 lbs heavier than your old car (but almost identical in weight to a 530i). Come to think of it, whenever a car magazine does a handling comparison test, everyone always invites the M3, but no one invites the M5. Despite the gobs of horsepower, the M5 is 600 heavier than an M3, which makes a big difference when you are cutting cones and circling the track.
As far as the engine goes, well, no one would disagree with your assessment. Inline sixes are the smoothest way to package 6 cylinders by far. I'm still surprised that Mercedes abandoned their straight-sixes for V6s some years ago. My best compliment for the CTS' engine is that the torque curve is pretty broad, and available at low revs. It does a pretty good job of giving what it has to offer.
Have fun with your new ride and continue to let the community here know what you think.
I think the point was the both the CTS and the LS are priced way BELOW the competition if you do an equal comparison of similarly equipped cars of the same size. Just compare them to a 530i. Unfortunately they too often are compared to a C class, 3 series or A4 which is just plain WRONG. It's like they get penalized for having a lower price. I also don't think the Acura TL or G35 are necessarily the same class. The G35 isn't nearly as refined or luxurious as the CTS or LS and the Acura is a great car but it's still FWD and doesn't handle as well.
And I'm not sure most import luxury buyers would consider the DTS or STS to be true competition. They're closer than a Town Car for sure, but not close enough. Caddy and Lincoln both need NEW products (RWD) to successfully compete with the imports. Caddy's only advantage right now is $$$. Ford just doesn't have the cash to invest in new platforms.
Front wheel drive makes the Seville/Deville non sports sedans. My SLS is even less of a turing sedan, but does handle OK. The CTS/LS are in between cars - not 3 or 5 series (C or E class) cars - but something in between. Basically you get a bigger car at a higher price or a smaller car at a lower price. The LS is aimed at a 5 series buyer more than the CTS, which is aimed more at the 3 series. I say that because the CTS is V6 and less luxury, which the LS has V8 and nicer interior.
The CTS IS a 3-series competitor, plain and simple. Also, G35, IS300, A4, 9-3, TL. It may be larger than some but was created to be an entry level luxury sport sedan, just like it's main competitors. From what I have seen the automotive press as well as GM executives agree with this as well. The new STS should be more competitive with the 5-series. Automotive News also lists all above models in the same class - near luxury.
The CTS may be in between the 3/5 and C/E but the LS is bigger than a 5 series (actually closer to a 7 series) and bigger than the E class. And it comes with a V8. Here are the groupings as I see them:
I agree the CTS is somewhere in between the first and second groups.
And by the way - car magazines are some of the most biased sources of data you can find. They're good for entertainment and to get specs but I wouldn't take them as anything more.
Well, yes they are biased. But you have to read them. If you subscribe to one or more and read the articles you should have a feel for what they think. In general the writers ususally like sports cars -> so sports sedans are in. Cars like the Cadillac DeVille are out. But usually in comparisions, the Cadillac is last, but considered an excellent car for the highway, which is what it was designed for anyway.
You also need to have a clear understanding of what kind of car you are looking for too. I bought the SLS because it was a good deal and is not far off the mark as to what I wanted. FWD is good on ice and snow and we have that here. Also have a good sized trunk, the LS had a shallow trunk - but fold down read seat was good.
Yes, the M5 understeers. At which point it's going fast enough that not much is going to catch it, and in most cases neutral steer is just a little more throttle away.
Three words: K-Mac camber plates.
Yes, the CTS has a better chassis design, but I doubt a CTSv would get me to sign the check. The CTS shape didn't appeal to me much to begin with and the more I see it the less I like it.
I don't see how you can put the CTS between anything. It's longer than a 5-series Bimmer and fractionally longer than the new E-class Benz.
We're not talking huge numbers here - a couple inches longer than the E39 5-series, a couple inches shorter than the LS - but then the G35 and Passat (the real 'tweeners') are only 3 inches shorter than the 5-series.
Well, I opened up a hornet's nest again. However, we're not that far apart on our opinion.
First, I would say that the G35 is a direct competitor to the CTS and the LS. The interior might be a little downmarket compared to a BMW (and the wood package is downright laughable), but they spent their money in the right places (chassis, engine).
Second, if you compare the CTS and LS against the 530i or E320, then yes, they are resonably priced. But for some reason, the CTS ends up always getting compared to smaller competitors. Of course, Cadillac and Lincoln may not care just what they are being compared to as long as they are invited to comparison tests.
But I have to take one issue with the LS. The LS is admittedly a large car for the class. It's three inches longer in wheelbase than the 530i. It's longer in length, width, you name it. And it still manages to be the same weight. And if you directly compare the interior dimensions, the LS seems like a large car.
But the LS doesn't seem like a large car to me at all. Maybe it's because the legroom of the LS (and the Jag S-type) sucks. I don't care what the EPA specs say, the cockpit is cramped...so cramped that it's impossible for me to even drive the car. Now granted, my height is a statistical anomaly. But I can get into a BMW 530i and drive away. I can get into a CTS (and bought one). I can't drive a LS. I've learned never to trust EPA dimensions until I sit my butt in the seat.
EPA rates the emmissions. I think the dimensions are based on SAE guidelines/rules/whatever. But that being said, exactly how you fit into the car will depend on things that are not measured. A lot of people complaining about legroom measurements are really complaining about the knee room which is not an offical measurement. For tall people comfort is probably determined by a combination of head room and legroom. A poor dash design can reduce knee room.
If you read the magazines, the Cadillac CTS (and virtually EVERY American car) is dinged because it doesn't go around corners at 60MPH as well as a BMW or Mercedes, usually costing twice as much.
BUT, if you DRIVE the way they test cars in the magazine, you will probably be targeted, ticketed and prosecuted as an "agressive driver." It makes no difference if you are on a deserted country road, or an empty freeway at 5 A.M.; you drive in a politically incorrect way, and you are going to get zapped. Here in Texas, they evey write "AD" on the top of a ticket so your case will get special attention from the prosecutor. Of course, once your insurance company finds out you are now the politically incorrect "agressive driver," you will either get a rate increase or loose your coverage.
SOOOOOO, you can buy a Cadillac/Buick/Pontiac and enjoy it on the highway or soaking up undermaintained potholes the way it was designed to do, or buy a car that the magazines praise for its' handling, but rides like a delivery truck with 80PSI of air in the tires. However, if you do buy that overpriced wundercar, don't drive it like you were on a German Autobahn or writing for a magazine!!!
My suggestion: buy the car you like, such as the bargain-priced CTS, and enjoy it.
Actually, the CTS was praised for its handling. I agree with jemiller - if you don't want crisp handling just get a Taurus, Accord or Camry. You don't have to drive like a maniac to enjoy a balanced, RWD chassis.
I now have 1200 miles on my dark blue lux-sport CTS. I did a 0-60 test and was not quire happy. the car scored a best of 7.9 sec. I was not really surprised since the car, while responsive and fast, never felt like a low 7 sec car. Even the test drive car (another lux-sport CTS) felt like an 8 second car. The one I got is automatic, and i got the best time launching from 1500 rpm with TCS inactive (but even launching at 1500 rpm did not spin the wheels -does the stabilitrack got something to do with that-) This is really disappointing for me. I do not feel the same about the CTS and can no longer look forward to prove the car in an traffic light grand prix.
Motor Trend tested an auto CTS and reported 6.8 sec 0-60. But they were in a Lux model. Do you think that the extra weight of the moon roof (which I got) and the rest of the sport package items added up to cause the slow down. Or is the stabilitrack holding back hard launches. The passing acceleration (like flooring it from 60 mph) is outstanding though. I will be pitting the CTS against my 1986 modified 442 (my college car). The olds got a 350 cid engine -it is mildy modified and puts out tons of torque and won lots of challenges. It will be interesting to see what the CTS will do.
On another note, I tested the top speed capability and got about 217 kmph (135 MPH) into the wind. The car race to 120 mph in 4th gear before shifting into 5th. In 5th the acceleration died considerably and it was a while before the 135 mph was attained. I felt like it could have gone to 220 km ph (136-137 mph). From experience on the same road, driving with the wind is worth 15-20 kmph. If I was driving the other way into the wind (I am sure I would have got a minimum of 230 kmph (143 MPH). Throughout the exercise, the car was very stable and under control, wind noise was very acceptable, actually remarkable for a GM car.
This is a remarkable car, who cares about all of those put down reviewers.
So the auto trans will shift to 5th at WOT? Just curious, because the LS won't shift out of 4th if you keep your foot down. A friend went for max speed with his LS trans in 5th using the SST manual shifter and reported it wouldn't go any faster than in 4th, and took forever to get there. Mostly I'm just always curious about the decisions made by powertrain engineers.
yes, the CTS did shift into 5th in WOT. Remember, this tranny is used in the BMW 5 series which also shift 5th at WOT. I think I could have held onto 4th past 120 mph, but I thought the rev limiter would have kicked in. I also wanted to see at which speed the speed limiter would have kicked in too, but I guess I did not exceed the tire speed rating, so the car kept going
My AM started to sound as if it were "off tuned," then eventually was totally lost. Diagnosed as a "bad antenna module," said to be under the headliner immediately in front of the rear window. That may be what you are describing, in the early stages of failure.
on the kelley blue sie is a new option for the CTS- california special equipment group for $5005. Does anyone know what this is? It says details not yet available. I wonder if it is something close to the CTSm from the SEMA show?
I did mention before some of the differences that I see in my CTS (Saudi version) from the USA version. I now learned of some more, here is the full account: - I have a full size head rest for the back seat middle passenger (all the pictures I saw for the US CTS did not have them). - There is a child seat latch over the middle back seat too. The car.com reviewer complained about the lack of that. - The Saudi CTS have rear fog lamps (2 strong red lamps beneath the 2 reverse lights that are operated at the driver discretion). - The speedo have a maximum dial of 260 kmph, which reads 260 mph if the setup is switched to English from Metric (I find this to be very cool) - While the US warranty is covers 4 years, the Saudi warranty is for 3 years, but we are covered for 62K miles not 50k (for me the extra 12k miles are more significant as I always exhaust the miles ahead of the allowed years) - We are also covered by 3 year free maintenance (or 50k mile) which includes oil changes and every thing except for tire service (Motor Trend gave credit to BMW for that over the CTS in their Aug 2002 review.)
But do not feel bad guys, we do not have the star one service, hence no center LCD screen for us. We also do not have the compass in the mirror even though gmarabia.com mentions it as standard. Finally we also do not have the garage opener/sound recorder.
How come they did not put parking sensors on this car, I miss these a lot.
I don't think any CTSs offer the rear parking assist. None of the US versions do. I noticed the CTS pictured at the "ring" in the DVD had the third head rest in the rear.
Your disapointment in performance may be due to your low mileage. In my LS, the motor didn't start to loosen up until almost 10K miles. I would imagine that the new GM engines are just as tight. Just keep having fun and your times should go down as your motor gets fully broken-in. Besides, driving fun is about way more than 0-60 times. Like taking your favorite off-ramp at twice the posted speed, in a 4-wheel drift......
First, I think the US CTS's have three child seat mount pounts for all three rear seats. I least I remember my car having them. You are right about the rear seat headrests...two headrests for the US, three headrests for other parts of the world.
I'm not surprised that the export CTS's have rear fog lamps. That feature doesn't seem to be offered on any US legal car. In fact, there is a little controversy with Mini Cooper owners about this. The rear fog lamps are on the US car, but the switch to turn them on is missing, much like the CTS. There is confusion about whether or not that rear fog lamps are legal in the United States.
I waited to take the CTS to the dragstrip just after the first oil change at 3000 miles. I figured by then the engine would be ready. Since I did run the engine at the track I feel like the performance has even increased. It doesn't feel as restricted when pulling out in first gear or going through the other gears to max speed. I swear that the car is asking to go and run some more.
I will only do this at the track to keep it LEGAL and do abhor those who believe any street is a dragstrip.I guess that I'm not proving anything to myself that I don't already know.
I must add that pulling out at a traffic light alongside a car that has challenged me is a problem. I have noticed that cars with auto trans seem to just push the pedal full throttle when they pull out like their going somewhere important. Ocassionaly this does happen alongside of me and when it does I usually enjoy showing the person at the next traffic light what a CTS manual trans can pull out like . Then I get off the gas and return to 'normal driving'. I don't consider this to be racing because then all of the auto trans drivers would be in violation of the law most of the time.
Something else that you had mentioned about your CTS in pulling out that I found interesting, tire squeal or laying rubber as it's called. Since I have gone to the dragstrip many times , I have gone through hell and high water not to get the tires to burn out at the take off. Generally a little is acceptable but while you're sitting there making tire noise the other guy is starting down the track and you have lost time.
I can get the CTS to burn out if I want it to but I usually only want an 'eek'if that.
It is just an illusion of sound that impresses the listener into thinking that a car must really be fast because the tires make noise. On a street car it must make the tire companies just smile with another tire sale soon to be.
There are definitely two window cavities in the rear panel on either side of the license plate area, under the backup lights. I wonder if it would be possible to obtain the fog taillight kit from cadillac.
Considering the hourrendous multi-car pileups in fog on freeways in various parts of the country, I for one would like to see the super bright taillights made available for use in connection with fog lights. Although, I wonder if it would become a problem in clear air considering the number of cars I see in L.A. driving with fog lights on in perfectly clear air.
Another thought would be to use red or yellow strobe lights in place of the superbright tail lights. These would get even more attention in foggy conditions.
But my insurance company might like me if I use them in a fog and keep someone from running into me.
But realistically, it would be nice if the laws were changed to allow better rear lighting for difficult situations such as dense fog. Of course it would also take a large education program to convince drivers to use their lighting properly. Here in L.A. is see high beams on city streets. People driving at night with no lights at all (I don't understand how they can drive without noticing that there are no lights on the dashboard). People driving with foglights (or driving lights which are brighter than their headlights) on clear nights. Well that's my [non-permissible content removed] for the evening. Drive safely everyone.
The current Aurora and the last generation Jaguar XJ are the only cars I've seen with rear fog lights. It seems like a good idea, but I don't see the advantage in the rear as with fog lights in the fronts. The ones I've seen on Jags and Auroras just look like another set of taillights on the car. And I agree, too many people drive around with their fog lights on when they are not needed. I noticed that the CTS's fog light switch doesn't click into position, but it seems that you have to move it to the "on" position each time. Much like a heated seat switch. Owners, tell me if this is correct or not. On my Intrigue, the fog light switch has can be left in the on position and anytime the headlights come on, the fog lights come on. I would image most other cars are set up like this as well.
I like to check lease residual values on any car I am considering buying, as that establishes the true value and cost of owning a car. I will be making a purchase in about 3 months, and am considering Infinity G35, CTS and others. I was amazed when I checked TMV on this site (Edmunds) to find the residual of the CTS ia around $13,000 for three year lease, well under 50% residual. This is much worse than the G35 or most other cars, and raises the monthly lease payment vs. the others. Maybe this is a throwback to the DTS and other hogs that drop like a stone in value immediately (TMV of a new $47K DTS is around $38K to BUY). To me, the G35 vs CTS is a no brainer even before this revalation: G35 is cheaper, faster, better looking and superior in many ways. However, I would love the CTSv, which I would have to wait for, but if the residual/resale value is that poor, either leasing or purchasing is out of the question: too uneconomical vs. the alternatives. Question: is the residual/resale value really this bad? Why? Will it improve as the car is out longer? If not, how can you people justify owning this automobile? I guess that I am more used to Japanese and even German cars, which have retain much more value. It seems to me that Cadillac will have a lot of problems if they do not get this issue straighened out.
Rear fog lights are extra bright tail lights, like brake lights which are on constantly. They are designed to give the person behind you additional warning in fog that you are just ahead of him/her. Especially those idiots who choose to overdrive their ability to see ahead in fog. If you don't mind being hit in the rear don't bother about them.
The residual value for lease purposes is a best guess by the leasing companies. With a completely new car such as the CTS it is a SWAG. If you have a crystal ball you might be able to do better.
The other factor in the equation is the lease rate which can certainly offset a lower residual. There is also more to life than a $20/ mo difference in lease cost. If you are worried about that then maybe you should look at a less expensive car. In this category of car, one should buy what they like.
maybe one person? Seems like a pretty good endorsement of the car. I frequent the intrigue and impala boards and there have been quite a few that have done lemon law or buybacks. especially the intrigue. Looks like caddy has done a pretty good job so far.
Part of residual value is the reputation of the manufacturer's cars over years covering such factors as reliability, and appeal. Clearly Cadillac has been behind the curve on these issues and is only now really coming into its own since the nadir of the 1980s.
The CTS' projected resale probably has a lot to do with Cadillac's earlier reputation in the last 10 years or so. But by the time that other future products join it (STS, SRX and XLR) within 24 months, I expect those residual lease values to climb over time. One thing that will not help the 2003 CTS' resale value is the changeover to a new base engine in 2004. It will leave us 2003 owners with a slightly less desirable trade, but them's the breaks.
The G35 is a wonderful car. My best friend owns one after taking my advice to test drive it. It is stylish, has great quality, is resonably priced and has a killer engine. The resale values of Infiniti are pretty good but probably not as good as Lexus or other cars since Infiniti hasn't made class leading vehicles in the last 12 years either until now. Certainly the old G20 was not on most people's short list for a car.
Even then, now is a lousy time to lease a car. With interest rates in the gutter and everyone wanting to make you a deal on a new car, ownership makes a lot more sense. Either that or ownership in a used car just back from lease, when the big three flooded the market with leases in the last few years.
I've seen a few on eBay and one car on the used lot at Nashville's Crest Cadillac. But in this economy, that could just mean that someone couldn't afford the car for one reason or another.
My wife has told me that someone from GM called the house to guage customer satisfaction with the car. It's nice to see GM following through on this stuff. It does make a difference.
My dealer also got brownie points yesterday. They have a new service in which an owner can come in for a quick service item (like an oil change or tire rotation) and be out within an hour. They were very busy but in an hour I got my car back, they charged me nothing for the first oil change and even gave me coupons for the next visit. Nice!
Comments
Did anyone see the commercial that shows the CTS driving so fast that it glows? It then stops at a intersection and you hear the car cooling off and it returns to the white color. Gets your attention!
They didn't show enough of the CTS, but it was cool to see. I hear it will be front and center in the new Matrix movie coming soon.
The bmw has sports car 'taut' suspension. It's tighter, but not at all jarring. You can just feel that it's excellent. The CTS also has a comfortable firm sport feel, but delivers a smoother ride. Of course, it's a heavier car. It's a nice change actually. Feels very in control, but I haven't played with the car at all yet either. Both cars are well balanced. The bmw offers more of a true sports car response and feedback steering feel to it by a margin, but the CTS feels tight and smooth. If you haven't logged much time in one of bmw's award winning chassis, the CTS will feel excellent. To me, the CTS is 'very good', with the bmw rating as 'excellent'. The weight difference shows here. I was running Yokohama AVS's on 17's on the coupe in the summer, and Blizzak lm22's in snow, so it was a sticky ride. So far, I like the stock CTS rubber for being all season. They'll be just fine until it's time to replace. In terms of Stabilitrak, the bmw's DSC- dynamic stability control worked well. I haven't felt the CTS' cut in or out, so I can't say. I think most high end models are up to speed in what they offer in this regard.
Along with the suspension, steering, and rubber, when it comes to ride, one pleasant surprise is that the CTS sport seats are everything the bmw sport seats are. One minor item they don't have is an additional thigh bolster that can be pulled out if desired, but the side bolsters, positioning, and firmness is very nice and compares as an equal. I think interior ergonomics is good in both cars. They both feel good to me. Once adjusted, you fit real well into the bmw. I happen to fit real well in the CTS also. There is more room, but I still prefer the enveloping cockpit feel, and the CTS delivers a comfortable 'drive me' cabin. One detail the CTS excels in is front shoulder belt placement. The bmw coupe's were a long awkward reach. You got used to it, but it was never easy. Steering wheel controls are welcome again, with the CTS reflecting its newness by offering more functions. The CTS's climate control package is far superior to the bmw's in all aspects and additionally offers dual controls. A glaring omission in the CTS is the lack of a temp gauge. Overall, in addition to being newer and more programmable, I like the total CTS controls and instrumentation package better than what's in the 3 series. The CTS audio is also clearly better than the bmw's cd system. We'll see how everything holds up.
Power plants are a different matter. The bmw is a clear winner, with the CTS an admirable second place. It wins out stock, and even stronger with the couple of Dinan mods. There's three main reasons why the others target bmw 3's and 5's in their segments- handling, brakes, and engines. The CTS feels like it could track real well, and I'm comfortable saying that it exceeds my personal capabilities at speed, S-track off of course, so for me that's a wash. But the engine...well, the bimmer is the benchmark. The inline six is ultra smooth, powerful, and just begs to be run all the way to redline. The CTS engine feels great (@300 miles), but you can just 'tell' that it's not as strong or refined. But hey, everyone loses to the bmw six so that's not too bad. The CTS auto trans seems smooth. I haven't pushed beyond 4k rpm yet or been aggressive, so right now I can't judge how it compares against the bmw steptronic in either regular or sport mode. The CTS sport brakes with their hi-perf pads feel solid, very safe, and like they could stop the car in a true sports car like manner. They are not quite up to the bmw's, but keep in mind that the bmw is a lighter coupe with bigger rotors, calipers, and soft rubber. It flat stops. Period.
I received many compliments on my coupe--bright red, fact spoiler, sport pkg. I have already received a few on my CTS. Have to say though, the CTS seems to be a love it or hate it style, whereby the bmw was more universally accepted.
That's all I have for now. More as I think of it.
The classic example of using pricing to gain attention and market share in this segment happened in 1990 with the introduction of the Lexus LS400. In time of recession in the US and Mercedes raising the cost of a S class to 50 grand, Toyota launches a luxury brand with a hokey name that has no reputation whatsoever. But they price their car at $36,000, far below the competition. Mercedes owners started taking a chance on the deal and found out that it was a nice car, better in many ways than their old S classes. Lexus isn't as price competitive any more since they don't need to be, but they are still cheaper than an S class or a BMW 7 series.
That strategy has been mimicked by Infiniti. Up until now, they have not been able to break out of Lexus' shadow with a disastrous product launch in 1990 and good, but not great products ever since. So when they introduced the G35, they made sure that not only was the product capable, but that the price was irresistable. It's easy to leave an Infiniti dealership with a well-optioned G35 and only spend $35K. A well optioned CTS costs $38k and higher. A well optioned BMW 330i is even higher.
When you're behind in the market and the perception is that you must prove yourself, proper pricing becomes a valuable tool in attracting buyers to further increase credibility. You may have the best product going, but if no one buys it since they see little incentive on changing from the market leaders, then you will likely fail. CTS pricing is less than the leader (BMW), but not equal to that Infiniti or Acura (the TL is the best bargain in the class). Lincoln has a similar problem.
Truth be told, Lincoln has a bigger problem. Only the LS can reasonably go up against the luxury imports these days. The old Continental was a joke (and was mercifully killed) and the Town Car is just a livery vehicle...no DTS version. Lincoln has to try to tell their story with one mid-sized vehicle...not a good position to be in. Your only other options is to cross over to Ford's other products (Jaguar, Volvo). At least Cadillac has a product line strategy to compete.
The CTS will feel heavier because it is! Larger, more 5 series dimensions means the CTS is about 300 lbs heavier than your old car (but almost identical in weight to a 530i). Come to think of it, whenever a car magazine does a handling comparison test, everyone always invites the M3, but no one invites the M5. Despite the gobs of horsepower, the M5 is 600 heavier than an M3, which makes a big difference when you are cutting cones and circling the track.
As far as the engine goes, well, no one would disagree with your assessment. Inline sixes are the smoothest way to package 6 cylinders by far. I'm still surprised that Mercedes abandoned their straight-sixes for V6s some years ago. My best compliment for the CTS' engine is that the torque curve is pretty broad, and available at low revs. It does a pretty good job of giving what it has to offer.
Have fun with your new ride and continue to let the community here know what you think.
And I'm not sure most import luxury buyers would consider the DTS or STS to be true competition. They're closer than a Town Car for sure, but not close enough. Caddy and Lincoln both need NEW products (RWD) to successfully compete with the imports. Caddy's only advantage right now is $$$. Ford just doesn't have the cash to invest in new platforms.
E320 530iA LS V6 A6 3.0
E500 540iA LS V8 A6 4.2
On the smaller side you have
C230 325i A4 2.5 Xtype 2.5
C320 330i A4 3.0 Xtype 3.0
I agree the CTS is somewhere in between the first and second groups.
And by the way - car magazines are some of the most biased sources of data you can find. They're good for entertainment and to get specs but I wouldn't take them as anything more.
You also need to have a clear understanding of what kind of car you are looking for too. I bought the SLS because it was a good deal and is not far off the mark as to what I wanted. FWD is good on ice and snow and we have that here. Also have a good sized trunk, the LS had a shallow trunk - but fold down read seat was good.
Three words: K-Mac camber plates.
Yes, the CTS has a better chassis design, but I doubt a CTSv would get me to sign the check. The CTS shape didn't appeal to me much to begin with and the more I see it the less I like it.
We're not talking huge numbers here - a couple inches longer than the E39 5-series, a couple inches shorter than the LS - but then the G35 and Passat (the real 'tweeners') are only 3 inches shorter than the 5-series.
The CTS brochure is much improved this year, but it would be nice to see more of a color variation.
First, I would say that the G35 is a direct competitor to the CTS and the LS. The interior might be a little downmarket compared to a BMW (and the wood package is downright laughable), but they spent their money in the right places (chassis, engine).
Second, if you compare the CTS and LS against the 530i or E320, then yes, they are resonably priced. But for some reason, the CTS ends up always getting compared to smaller competitors. Of course, Cadillac and Lincoln may not care just what they are being compared to as long as they are invited to comparison tests.
But I have to take one issue with the LS. The LS is admittedly a large car for the class. It's three inches longer in wheelbase than the 530i. It's longer in length, width, you name it. And it still manages to be the same weight. And if you directly compare the interior dimensions, the LS seems like a large car.
But the LS doesn't seem like a large car to me at all. Maybe it's because the legroom of the LS (and the Jag S-type) sucks. I don't care what the EPA specs say, the cockpit is cramped...so cramped that it's impossible for me to even drive the car. Now granted, my height is a statistical anomaly. But I can get into a BMW 530i and drive away. I can get into a CTS (and bought one). I can't drive a LS. I've learned never to trust EPA dimensions until I sit my butt in the seat.
BUT, if you DRIVE the way they test cars in the magazine, you will probably be targeted, ticketed and prosecuted as an "agressive driver." It makes no difference if you are on a deserted country road, or an empty freeway at 5 A.M.; you drive in a politically incorrect way, and you are going to get zapped. Here in Texas, they evey write "AD" on the top of a ticket so your case will get special attention from the prosecutor. Of course, once your insurance company finds out you are now the politically incorrect "agressive driver," you will either get a rate increase or loose your coverage.
SOOOOOO, you can buy a Cadillac/Buick/Pontiac and enjoy it on the highway or soaking up undermaintained potholes the way it was designed to do, or buy a car that the magazines praise for its' handling, but rides like a delivery truck with 80PSI of air in the tires. However, if you do buy that overpriced wundercar, don't drive it like you were on a German Autobahn or writing for a magazine!!!
My suggestion: buy the car you like, such as the bargain-priced CTS, and enjoy it.
If one is not interested in energetic driving, the CTS is no better a choice than a 530i, or E320, or 6-cylinder CTS. Or a Taurus, or a Camry...
If one is interested in actually using the tires a little bit, then the CTS is well suited for it (if one tolerates the shape...)
And there are some of us who haven't yet been beaten into submission by the absurdities of law enforcement.
I now have 1200 miles on my dark blue lux-sport CTS. I did a 0-60 test and was not quire happy. the car scored a best of 7.9 sec. I was not really surprised since the car, while responsive and fast, never felt like a low 7 sec car. Even the test drive car (another lux-sport CTS) felt like an 8 second car. The one I got is automatic, and i got the best time launching from 1500 rpm with TCS inactive (but even launching at 1500 rpm did not spin the wheels -does the stabilitrack got something to do with that-) This is really disappointing for me. I do not feel the same about the CTS and can no longer look forward to prove the car in an traffic light grand prix.
Motor Trend tested an auto CTS and reported 6.8 sec 0-60. But they were in a Lux model. Do you think that the extra weight of the moon roof (which I got) and the rest of the sport package items added up to cause the slow down. Or is the stabilitrack holding back hard launches. The passing acceleration (like flooring it from 60 mph) is outstanding though. I will be pitting the CTS against my 1986 modified 442 (my college car). The olds got a 350 cid engine -it is mildy modified and puts out tons of torque and won lots of challenges. It will be interesting to see what the CTS will do.
On another note, I tested the top speed capability and got about 217 kmph (135 MPH) into the wind. The car race to 120 mph in 4th gear before shifting into 5th. In 5th the acceleration died considerably and it was a while before the 135 mph was attained. I felt like it could have gone to 220 km ph (136-137 mph). From experience on the same road, driving with the wind is worth 15-20 kmph. If I was driving the other way into the wind (I am sure I would have got a minimum of 230 kmph (143 MPH). Throughout the exercise, the car was very stable and under control, wind noise was very acceptable, actually remarkable for a GM car.
This is a remarkable car, who cares about all of those put down reviewers.
Does anyone know what this is? It says details not yet available. I wonder if it is something close to the CTSm from the SEMA show?
I did mention before some of the differences that I see in my CTS (Saudi version) from the USA version. I now learned of some more, here is the full account:
- I have a full size head rest for the back seat middle passenger (all the pictures I saw for the US CTS did not have them).
- There is a child seat latch over the middle back seat too. The car.com reviewer complained about the lack of that.
- The Saudi CTS have rear fog lamps (2 strong red lamps beneath the 2 reverse lights that are operated at the driver discretion).
- The speedo have a maximum dial of 260 kmph, which reads 260 mph if the setup is switched to English from Metric (I find this to be very cool)
- While the US warranty is covers 4 years, the Saudi warranty is for 3 years, but we are covered for 62K miles not 50k (for me the extra 12k miles are more significant as I always exhaust the miles ahead of the allowed years)
- We are also covered by 3 year free maintenance (or 50k mile) which includes oil changes and every thing except for tire service (Motor Trend gave credit to BMW for that over the CTS in their Aug 2002 review.)
But do not feel bad guys, we do not have the star one service, hence no center LCD screen for us. We also do not have the compass in the mirror even though gmarabia.com mentions it as standard. Finally we also do not have the garage opener/sound recorder.
How come they did not put parking sensors on this car, I miss these a lot.
That's off the pace of the 1400+ vehicles they have been producing per week.
I'm not surprised that the export CTS's have rear fog lamps. That feature doesn't seem to be offered on any US legal car. In fact, there is a little controversy with Mini Cooper owners about this. The rear fog lamps are on the US car, but the switch to turn them on is missing, much like the CTS. There is confusion about whether or not that rear fog lamps are legal in the United States.
I will only do this at the track to keep it LEGAL and do abhor those who believe any street is a dragstrip.I guess that I'm not proving anything to myself that I don't already know.
I must add that pulling out at a traffic light alongside a car that has challenged me is a problem. I have noticed that cars with auto trans seem to just push the pedal full throttle when they pull out like their going somewhere important. Ocassionaly this does happen alongside of me and when it does I usually enjoy showing the person at the next traffic light what a CTS manual trans can pull out like . Then I get off the gas and return to 'normal driving'. I don't consider this to be racing because then all of the auto trans drivers would be in violation of the law most of the time.
Something else that you had mentioned about your CTS in pulling out that I found interesting, tire squeal or laying rubber as it's called. Since I have gone to the dragstrip many times , I have gone through hell and high water not to get the tires to burn out at the take off. Generally a little is acceptable but while you're sitting there making tire noise the other guy is starting down the track and you have lost time.
I can get the CTS to burn out if I want it to but I usually only want an 'eek'if that.
It is just an illusion of sound that impresses the listener into thinking that a car must really be fast because the tires make noise. On a street car it must make the tire companies just smile with another tire sale soon to be.
Considering the hourrendous multi-car pileups in fog on freeways in various parts of the country, I for one would like to see the super bright taillights made available for use in connection with fog lights. Although, I wonder if it would become a problem in clear air considering the number of cars I see in L.A. driving with fog lights on in perfectly clear air.
Another thought would be to use red or yellow strobe lights in place of the superbright tail lights. These would get even more attention in foggy conditions.
Anybody else have any thoughts on the subject?
But realistically, it would be nice if the laws were changed to allow better rear lighting for difficult situations such as dense fog. Of course it would also take a large education program to convince drivers to use their lighting properly. Here in L.A. is see high beams on city streets. People driving at night with no lights at all (I don't understand how they can drive without noticing that there are no lights on the dashboard). People driving with foglights (or driving lights which are brighter than their headlights) on clear nights. Well that's my [non-permissible content removed] for the evening. Drive safely everyone.
The residual value for lease purposes is a best guess by the leasing companies. With a completely new car such as the CTS it is a SWAG. If you have a crystal ball you might be able to do better.
Seems like a pretty good endorsement of the car.
I frequent the intrigue and impala boards and there have been quite a few that have done lemon law or buybacks.
especially the intrigue.
Looks like caddy has done a pretty good job so far.
The CTS' projected resale probably has a lot to do with Cadillac's earlier reputation in the last 10 years or so. But by the time that other future products join it (STS, SRX and XLR) within 24 months, I expect those residual lease values to climb over time. One thing that will not help the 2003 CTS' resale value is the changeover to a new base engine in 2004. It will leave us 2003 owners with a slightly less desirable trade, but them's the breaks.
The G35 is a wonderful car. My best friend owns one after taking my advice to test drive it. It is stylish, has great quality, is resonably priced and has a killer engine. The resale values of Infiniti are pretty good but probably not as good as Lexus or other cars since Infiniti hasn't made class leading vehicles in the last 12 years either until now. Certainly the old G20 was not on most people's short list for a car.
Even then, now is a lousy time to lease a car. With interest rates in the gutter and everyone wanting to make you a deal on a new car, ownership makes a lot more sense. Either that or ownership in a used car just back from lease, when the big three flooded the market with leases in the last few years.
The auto market has really changed since 9/11 and the GM 0% shock.
My wife has told me that someone from GM called the house to guage customer satisfaction with the car. It's nice to see GM following through on this stuff. It does make a difference.
My dealer also got brownie points yesterday. They have a new service in which an owner can come in for a quick service item (like an oil change or tire rotation) and be out within an hour. They were very busy but in an hour I got my car back, they charged me nothing for the first oil change and even gave me coupons for the next visit. Nice!