Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

Cadillac CTS/CTS-V

15681011129

Comments

  • automoleautomole Member Posts: 154
    cadillac1: As for my (unpopular) opinion on "the reason for Cadillac's silence in regards to the CTSi(CTSv" I don't think there is going to be a 'Corvette' engine V8. I could believe a supercharged V6 (I've heard a rumour that Vortec is working on a supercharger kit for the CTS). I also would find it hard to believe that they would release a new engine only to replace it with another in the second year of production. My theory is that they will 'tweak' the existing V6 for a few more horsepower in the base car and offer a high performance V6 (supercharged?) or perhaps a small V8 (not a 400hp monster V8 like I keep hearing about)in the CTSv. It just doesn't make sense to me that Cadillac would put a 400hp V8 in their bottom of the line 4 door sedan when they are coming out with the XLR next year.

    As for the most important thing that needs changing in regards to the CTS exterior...I would say the wheels. I like the current styling of the wheels, they just need to be bigger in both the base model and luxury performance CTS's. It would also be nice if the car had a stainless exhaust tip or if the exhaust was completely hidden from view. IMO it doesn't make much sense to have a cutout in the rear valence and then have and ugly plain looking pipe; either hide it or give us something to look at. Other than that, I wouldn't change ANYTHING with the exterior other than possibly offer a 2 door model.
  • bigdaddycoatsbigdaddycoats Member Posts: 1,058
    I believe that the current 3.2 is produced in Europe? As well as the 3.0 in the Saturn Vue and L-series. The Vue is going to start using a 3.5 from Honda sometime next year. If I am correct the contract between GM and Honda is for 50,000 engines per year, which is more than the Vue will need. So, it is my guess that Saturn will use the Honda V-6 in the Vue and the L-series and the CTS will have an all new V-6 for the 04 model year and this will end the importation of any variation of the current Opel V-6.
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Member Posts: 539
    My theory on the engine is this. At the beginning of the CTS developement, Olds was doing fine and the 3.5 V6 Northstar was expected to become the premium V6 for GM (replacing the 3800). However, with the demise of Olds and the the failure of the 3.5 to meet the 2004 emissions standard (while the 3800 has), the "shortstar" V6 was doomed and the CTS was left hanging for an engine at the last minute. The solution was either the 3800 (low tech) or a cast iron Opel V6 (not really high tech either). The Opel at least was overhead cam... Cadillac has put some spin on the 54 degree design...
  • jgranatajgranata Member Posts: 70
    the 3.2 v6 will definitely be replaced next year, i think around may. the only reason the cts was brought out this year with the 3.2 was, of course, the lack of product in the under 30,000(that's a joke) near luxury category for cadillac.
    the new motor is all new: 60 degree v6 3.6 liters
    4 cam and i think 260 hp...but even though autoweek reports they're testing a v8 cts in europe, i don't think it will happen or the reports aren't accurate. i don't think the v8 (small block or the northstar) won't fit w/o major
    surgery. you might see a halo version made by gm's
    version of ford's svt. it would be mostly for bragging rights with a limited production run and
    the cost would be outrageous. jackg
  • sevenfeet0sevenfeet0 Member Posts: 486
    The 3.2L V6 in the current CTS might be a lame duck, but it is used in other applications at GM (Saturn, Opel, Saab, Holden), so its not like it won't have a life after the CTS.

    One of the benefits of the LS1 V8 is its compact design. Overhead cam shafts may be high tech, but they take up more space (height). This is one of the reasons why the current C5 Corvette uses an OHV engine since it has a very low hood line. The 4.6L Northstar could probably never fit in the CTS engine bay, but the LS1 apparently seems to fit.

    Also, there is precedent for engine changes after the first year for a model. The 1992 Eldorado and Seville had the older 4.9L V8 but changed to the Northstar V8 for 1993. In that regard, the usage of the massaged over 3.2L V6 in the current CTS isn't much different than Caddy strategy a decade ago. Sometimes engine timelines and car product timelines don't quite match.
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Member Posts: 539
    The new V6 design for the CTS (3.6 liter) is also going to be built (Motor Trend Sept 2001?) in 2.8 and 3.2 liter sizes and will replace the current Opel V6 in Opels as well as the CTS. This new engine is designed to be a "family" of engines to be used throughout GM's domain (Europe as well as USA).
  • trichard2trichard2 Member Posts: 20
    My CTS w/Bose will play CDR but not CDRW.

    Horsepower comment: my car has a little over 6000 miles and I have yet to be embarrested either intown or on the expressway. I recently drove from Phoenix,AZ to Detriot,MI and the car responded very well under all conditions. While I don't drive at the red line neither am I a poke-a-long kinda guy. 250 or 260 hp might be nice but I don't believe it matters all that much. I do have experience driving cars with much more than 220 hp.

    The car has been serviced to correct refueling problem (twisted fuel tank filler hose)and wet carpet problem (leaking body seams per bulletin 02-08-57-005, replace carpet). Out of service one week, parts delay. Everything A-okay for now. Don't expect much more in the way of problems. We enjoy the car very much.
  • dindakdindak Member Posts: 6,632
    Current engine may be a lame duck, but it's no slouch either. I think it's a really good motor and current owners have nothing to worry about.
  • trichard2trichard2 Member Posts: 20
    I'm embarrassed. See I can spell it. Sorry 'bout that
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    Good show. Takes a good person to admit a gaffe with a smile. Good review as well. That Phoenix to Detroit drive must have been a real joy.
  • fueledupfueledup Member Posts: 64
    if you really look at the rear end below the brake light i'm sorry to say the dam thing reminds me of a typical gm suv. i'm ready for the modification provided by cadillac 1 in the real world. just tell me where and how much.
  • fueledupfueledup Member Posts: 64
    as trichard2 stated , i also had twisted fuel filler hose {thus the name fueledup }, wet carpet beneath driver seat from a/c condensation. reworked a/c but only dried carpet out did not replace. left headlight seal bad they have to order part. williamson cadillac in miami had car for 10 days returned with grease stains throughout cabin, and now there's a vibration from around center pod. when will service centers ever take pride in there work. overall i really enjoy the car but dealing with uninspired service centers truly sucks.
  • oldsman01oldsman01 Member Posts: 1,203
    It's been a while since I was here last as I was out of town all last week and I don't have time to read all 101 new posts so have wqe picked up any new CTS owners? Last week's issue of Autoweek had a CTSi spied in Germany on the test track and the LS1 V8 was again mentioned. The 04 model also appears to have some modifications to the front end or at least CTSi models will. The article also said that regular CTSs will get a new V6 and an updated interior next year as well. While I was away on business last week I did rent a Caddy and believe it or not, got a Seville(SLS). Seems Avis rents those as well as Devilles. All I can say is that I was mighty impressed with the SLS. It didn't handle as sharp as the CTS does, but boy did it ride well. And the interior was fabulous. I love how the instruments come to life when the ignition is switched on and the power adjustable steering wheel remembers your setting just as the seats and mirrors do. Then there is the Northstar V8. Sure the Seville is a more expensive car than the CTS, but I'm starting to wonder if I still want a CTS or a 3 year old "lease turn in" STS. Not to bash the CTS as I think it is a great car for it's price, it's just the Seville is far more opulant and that is a weakness of mine. Oh well, decisions decisions. Anybody see the XLR review in Car & Driver? Doesn't the Northstar engine look right at home in a proper RWD installation?
  • oldsman01oldsman01 Member Posts: 1,203
    The dealer here in my area totally renovated their showroom about 5 years ago and it still looks very modern and upscale. When I was in Milwaukee last week(Waukesha area) I noticed they had a Cadillac/Pontiac/Izuzu(if I remember correctly) dealership and it looked like it was straight out of the 1970s judging from the exterior. There were several CTSs sitting right in front, I guess to bring it into the modern era. I do agree that some Cadillac dealers do need to upgrade their showrooms to make them look like a luxury car dealer.
  • cadman88cadman88 Member Posts: 75
    I think you should make the door longer on the CTS convertible. Also on the hatch/coupe, just keep the same body as the sedan, delete the rear door and make the front door longer.
  • wwhite2wwhite2 Member Posts: 535
    It's really bad when consumers are scared to have their new cars repaired under warranty when We are almost always gauranteed to get the car back dirty and not repaired correctly
  • cadman88cadman88 Member Posts: 75
    Friday at Pebble Beach, says that if it has about double the hp it has now (220) BMW better watch out.
  • automoleautomole Member Posts: 154
    sevenfeet0: The CTS's current engine could use a little more torque (I'm fine w/the HP where it's at) but it's no lame duck. Also, I'm familiar with the LS1 and the size of my CTS's engine compartment and I just don't see how it would be possible to fit that engine in there...I hope I'm wrong though. Still, even if it did fit I don't see them putting a 400HP engine in the CTS when the XLR gets a measly 320HP.


    fueledup: Cadillac already made the rear end you desire...just trade the CTS for a Catera! ;)http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/edweb/brauer/catera/media/00.cadillac.catera.r3-4.jpg

    -I feel for you...I would be PO'd if I got my CTS back with grease stains! Hearing your story doesn't make me look forward to taking mine in for service.


    cadman88: 'IF' the CTS had double the HP it has now the BMW, XLR, Corvette, etc, etc, etc would be in trouble...

  • bingomanbingoman Member Posts: 373
    I had my CTS in to the dealer this week to take care of the radio cutout problem. They replaced the amplifier. There is an Enterprise car rental office next door that they use to provide loaners under the warrantee. They gave me a Deville with 325 miles on it. It's a lovely car but it rides like a boat. Wallows on turns and bumps, and takes a quarter second to respond to the wheel, which has no feel of the road. Now I am sure I made the right decision with the CTS lux sport.

    This dealer (Rydell in the San Fernando Valley) does a great job of servicing. And if the service department people give me any grief my sales lady is all over them. As for clean, they wash the car every time I bring it in.

    I've been in Cadillac dealerships all over the country with my Catera and now my CTS (just got back to Los Angeles from Phoenix, Houston and Chicago) and have gotten good service at all of them.
  • automoleautomole Member Posts: 154
    trichard2,

    The CTS DOES play CDRW's. You have to burn them as a standard audio disc and close the session however (multisession discs won't work).
  • tcolbergtcolberg Member Posts: 3
    Burning the CD-RW as a standard audio disc and closing the session defeats the purpose of even using the RW disc in the first place. I think the objective in asking for the player to be able to read CD-RWs is to be able to just load MP3s on the disc, but that would require a MP3 cd player. Oh why didn't Cadillac just put either XM or a MP3 CD player as an option, or even both?
  • sevenfeet0sevenfeet0 Member Posts: 486
    I'm sure that Bob Lutz will get out the shoehorn and get something larger into that engine bay!

    And as for a 400 HP V8 when the XLR only gets 320 HP or so, the CTSi will be Caddy's first "V-series" car, like Mercedes' AMG of BMW's M cars. M3's and CLK AMGs all have lots more horsepower than stock versions of most of their upscale cousins. Of course, the XLR is likely to have a "V" version of itself someday.
  • necrosnecros Member Posts: 127
    I think there are a few CTS manual transmission owners here, so I'll ask: Has anyone removed the shift knob yet? My Momo Combat shift knob comes in today or tomorrow, and I thought I'd gather some intelligence before I started messing with my beautiful car. :)
  • trichard2trichard2 Member Posts: 20
    automole-tcolberg, thanks for the cd disc info
  • jgranatajgranata Member Posts: 70
    personally, the switch by gm (one of the last hold outs for ohv motors) is a shame. the power characteristics of an ohv coupled with it's reduced cost of maufacture AND the advantage of being able to design hood lines much lower than a
    car with an ohc motor, just seems to make more sense than the added cost. forget about that great front end of the c5 if it had an ohc small block. when gm replaced the 3.8 in the intrigue with the shortstar there were a fair number of people that preferred the power curve of the ohv over the new motor. this isn't a knock on the s/star; sounds like it's a good motor. but; if you do alot of local, around town driving, ohv's
    imo, are better motors. also, maintenance on ohc
    motors (not gm's though) can be ridiculous: the v6
    3.0 in the audi a6 and a4 neeeds to have the timing belt (rubber) replaced around 70,000 miles;
    cost is approx 900-1000 $. jackg actually the
    3.2 does have the rubber timing belt (probably because it's a euro designed motor) and will require changing around 60k i think...
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Member Posts: 539
    Now that GM has developed the dual cam in the crankcase with pushrods, ohc's are totally behind the times. The rubber timing belts are affected by leaky water pumps too.
  • b4zb4z Member Posts: 3,372
    Which engines are talking about?
  • wwhite2wwhite2 Member Posts: 535
    You have to remove the transaxle to get at a C- Clip that holds the shifter knob on . Good luck and get the factory service manual !
  • wwhite2wwhite2 Member Posts: 535
  • baron87baron87 Member Posts: 93
    big breakthrough in engine technology. Whether it be the fuel cell cars which will be on the road by 2010 or the new OHV twin-cams with VVT...it's all coming our way. One of the engines is the 4.3L V8, it is OHV with twin-cams and VVT, along with orbital direct fuel injection...I believe it was featured in an OPEL concept car. This is truly the stuff of the future...very high-tech...blows the doors of Honda's VTEC DOHC engines...
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Member Posts: 539
    The dual cam in crankcase was as barron87 pointed out, a concept engine. Not in a production engine, but it can be done. Most belt driven cams also use the same belt for the water pump (so beware). My aurora (a northstar V8) uses a little belt to drive the water pump off one of the overhead cams (which are chain driven). This limits the stress of the belt on the pump.
  • jgranatajgranata Member Posts: 70
    in no particular order, gm is definitely on the edge of breakout technology for engine design and management. drive by wire will be standard across all makes in a few years. there was a sport ute tested with a variable displacement v8 that the editor from car and driver who test drove the vehicle, swore he couldn't tell the change over from v8 to v4 application (no v6...something about
    too much vibration)...come to think of it, maybe they used one bank of the v8 for the 4 cylinder application instead of a v config...the water pump issue with the ohc design is a definite problem area, that's one reason why the audi is so
    expensive to have the timing belt replaced, they recommend doing the pump when you do the belt!
    direct injection has been tried for years and is used in commerical diesels...that would make a huge difference in fuel economy and performance.
    there were problems with driveability when mitsubishi tried to market it, but i'm sure the software they use now can make it doable. jackg
  • hydra2hydra2 Member Posts: 114
    I have mixed feelings about GM producing an ultra high tech engine. It would be great for bragging rights, but if they produce an exotic engine just for the sake of having an exotic engine and it winds up breaking too easily, I think it will do much more harm than if they stick to the basic principles of engine building and produce an efficient, reliable engine that is elegant in its simplicity. They don't need to reinvent the wheel, just take it to a higher level of efficiency (power, mpg, smoothness, size,torque, weight and reliability).

    High tech is great, but it loses its allure if its so cutting edge that it leaves you stranded on the side of the road too often.

    Don't get me wrong, I would love to see GM (I'm a stockholder) and Cadillac produce a high tech marvel, but only if it is reliable and more functional (practicality anyone?)than its present engines and those from its competition. It should not be complex just for the sake of complexity.

    What I want is a "better" engine whether its high tech or low tech. I don't want them to spend so much money trying to build an engine that no one else has and then have no research money left to work on awd cars or classier interiors or in other words, the rest of the car to keep it competitive.

    Also, in case you haven't noticed, they share their excellent technology with the rest of the auto world, so their high tech stuff wouldn't be exclusive for long e.g. Onstar,XM Radio, Night Vision(?),the transmissions the sell to BMW
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    In case you haven't noticed, Honda has built 'high tech' motors that are totally reliable, for about the last zillion years.

    No company can say its up there with the best the world has to offer and not have some 'high tech' going on, and buyers expect it to be reliable as well.

    Some folks think complexity = unreliable. Well duh, if you don't engineer and build it properly.

    There are plenty of companies that build reliable 'high tech engines'. Its about time GM jumped into this arena more.
  • jbernie1jbernie1 Member Posts: 6
    Has anyone seen what the new pricing will be on the CTS coming out in Sept/Oct, in conjuction with the 2003 model year?
  • oldsman01oldsman01 Member Posts: 1,203
    Last time I checked, the Northstar engine was pretty "high tech." Maybe not exotic level high tech, but certainly a very modern engine. Despite the basic design being nearly 10 years old now, the Northstar is still a very impressive engine. And it looks like more updates are coming when RWD applications appear. Oh and Northstars are very reliable engines as well thus the argument that high tech = problems just doesn't hold water these days.
  • oldsman01oldsman01 Member Posts: 1,203
    Cadillac and GM "share" features like Night Vision and XM radio with other automakers because Night Vision and XM are not GM designed exclusives. Night Vision is designed and built by Raytheon and XM radio is it's own company(although GM's Hughes is part of it). My guess is the 5 speed automatic was sold to BMW because BMW was willing to pay a price for it and at the time, GM had no RWD application they could use it in.
  • cadman88cadman88 Member Posts: 75
    Yes, the reason GM sold the 5 speed auto to BMW was because the CTS and other cars that the transmission was made for weren't out yet. Is OnStar a GM designed exclusive, because I think Acura's have them.

    I agree that GM should not sell those types of technology's to other car company's, in a few years every car company will have Quadrasteer!!, why doesn't GM just keep it for themesevles only?
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    OnStar is a wholly owned subsidiary of GM. Other non-GM companies, including Lexus, have begun licensing OnStar to offer their customers.

    Not bad. GM earns money on cars it does not even make or sell.
  • bingomanbingoman Member Posts: 373
    In case you haven't noticed. General Motors is in business to make money. They will sell almost anything the make to anyone who is willing to pay a price which will make a profit for GM. As a stockholder I wouldn't have it any other way. If GM were to withhold any product from the market you can be sure that some other company would create something to serve the same purpose and sell it. GM has competition for even those products which they sell. XM radio has Sirius for competition. Mercedes has an OnStar clone. And GM buys products which it can obtain cheaper than it can produce from other manufacturers. That's the business world.

    Bingoman
  • cadman88cadman88 Member Posts: 75
    My big point was that Quardrosteer will be available to all other companies in a few years, if GM is the only one that has it than why would someone who wants a truck to tow their boat get a non-GM product? I just think that if GM makes a major technology advance than they should not sell it to other companies, I agree that if its not anything major than they should sell it, (the five speed auto wasn't really major). But Quadrasteer?, they should keep that to themeselves, if they are the only ones that have it than how else is the consumer going to get it if they don't buy GM's product.
  • jagboyxtypejagboyxtype Member Posts: 241
    Systems like Quadrasteer have already been on non-GM cars that were developed by their own companies. I think I remember the first Infiniti J30's had rear wheels which turned slightly with the fronts, and some Mitsubishi sports cars had them too.

    Whatever new technology arrives on the market, you can be sure that if the initial creator does not license it out, then the others will simply design (or copy) their own versions of it to stay competative. Audis have OnStar too!
  • johnnylincjohnnylinc Member Posts: 308
    NightVision was designed, developed, and originally produced for Cadillac installations by Texas Instruments. The reason that Raytheon's name is on it now is because Raytheon bought TI's defense business, which includes the NightVision product line. Raytheon sells it, but they didn't invent it.

    Just giving credit where credit is really due.
  • babyloubabylou Member Posts: 31
    jagboxytype is correct; Four wheel steering (4WS)(Quadrasteer) was on Mitsubishi and Nissan vehicles decade ago. Their reasons for using the gadget was to improve handling and to a lesser extent reduced turning circle. 4WS is simple and can be done by any car company, there is no technological barrier to hurdle.

    Auto companies share components all of the time. Remember when Jags had GM tranny's? The Honda S2000 has a differential made by Mazda. GM and Toyota share engine control sensors. GM will now use Honda V6 engines. BMW and Chrysler share I4 engines. The list goes on and on.
  • regfootballregfootball Member Posts: 2,166
    Honda, the same company that makes pushmowers, had 4 wheel steering in the Prelude. Nissan had 4WS in many vehicles.

    I hear the Quadra steer is quite impressive actually.
  • bigdaddycoatsbigdaddycoats Member Posts: 1,058
    I believe Quadrasteer is a develepment of Delphi. In an agreement with Delphi, GM has exclusive rights to this product for a number of years - I want to say 3 to four years? I know but can not remember.
  • mcgreenxmcgreenx Member Posts: 179
    I'm considering a CTS and drove models with and without the Luxury Sport Package. The one with the Sport Package drove rough as a cob over bumpy roads. For 99% of city driving, I think I would have to forego it, although I would prefer to have the Sport features. Anyone experienced with the Sports pack care to comment?

    I've looked at a couple of hundred posts and can't find the reference to high oil change costs. Can someone give me a post number?
  • mcgreenxmcgreenx Member Posts: 179
    One post suggested the GM Protection Plan to hedge against routine maintenance costs, so I looked at http://www.gmprotectionplan.com/findaplan.cgi


    They don't list the CTS. Under 2003 models you'll still find the Catera!! And no prices, just "Contact your dealer." Haven't looked lately, but Chrysler posted list prices for every combination of policy type and years and mileage of coverage. Very frustrating.

  • hydra2hydra2 Member Posts: 114
    New technology is very expensive and almost always a roll of the dice in terms of whether it will be reliable or not. I'm not against exotic solutions if they are both functional and reliable. But, as a previous poster noted, evolutionary change can also be revolutionary. Please read my entire previous post.

    Many previous Japanese and some European innovations were not new in the sense that they had been field tested in their home markets before being shipped to America. Unfortunately GM field tests most of its products on us (Any one remember the exotic Cadillac variable V8 that was supposed to run on a different number of cylinders as needed?). With more imports building ever more complex new products outside of their home markets in places such as South Africa, Mexico, Canada and America these products are being field tested in America and some misses are bound to show up (even though some brands will down play them or blame them on the customers).

    Cadillac is still rebuliding its customer service and can't afford too many misses. After its customer service is more fully repaired it will be better able to deal with "miscalculations" like the Toyota engine sludge or the Lexus ES300 tranny problems in stride.

    I'm not suggesting that GM should stop innovating engine design. What I'm saying is that the engine is just part of the package. I prefer a package that is greater than the sum of its parts. If Cadillac upgrades the engine without upgrading the rest of the car, other car makers will field a competitive engine that may not be as good but they will perhaps outclass Cadillac with the rest of the car and limit Cadillac's potential sales. Some of the prior and present day BMW engines lack(ed) overwhelming power and/or sophistication, but they made up for it by putting these small engines in small cars with good MT and a good balance of other features.

    The current CTS engine is no slouch. If Cadillac put the CTS on a diet and made several hundred pounds disappear, it would seem like a much greater engine. It could, as many others have speculated, simply add a blower and create more hp from the same engine. As I said before hp and high tech bragging rights are not always the only or best solutions. The new engine slated for the CTS will add hp and that certainly won't hurt, but most people will compare the CTS to its rivals in many more areas than the power or sophistication of the engine.

    Personally, I don't know what Cadillac's future engines plan(s) might be. I just hope it works on a high level. I suspect that outside of the enthusiasts on this and similar boards, that is all most people care about.
  • sonjaabsonjaab Member Posts: 1,057
    YAHOO...Just got a 02 new Deville !
    Its got all the goods, bose,roof,chromies,
    bun warmers etc....You know I have wanted
    a CTS badly but the dealers near me that
    have any (5 in central NY) won't do GMO/
    GMS deal on them. Oh well I will enjoy
    this pearl white beauty and in 5 yrs I
    will take a shot at a V-8 CTS !...geo
Sign In or Register to comment.