Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

driver100

stickguy said:

just watched a couple of Jetta preview drive videos. sounds impressive. If I was shopping large compact sedans soon, this is probably at the top of the list.

I watched it too and that new Jetta sounds like a great value....like the guy said...it is up against the Civic and he thinks this one is a great alternative. Also the one commentator said something that I have tried to say about European cars;
"This car is engineered by engineers, not by marketers".
I think there is a difference, when a car is engineered by people who love and enjoy the experience of driving, compared to building a car to capture a certain percentage of the population.

qbrozen

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Caddy didn't miss the mark. By commonly found accounts (both professional and nonprofessional), the CTS and ATS are tremendous drivers' cars, especially in V sport and V trims. But it still has the wrong badge to be popular enough.

The people who buy Cadillacs don't want a "driver's car" and the people who want "a driver's car" don't want a Cadillac. "Know your audience" is my advice.

The market niche for Cadillac was always the middle aged to older aged buyer in search of a cruiser for the highway as well as elegance.  That has changed since the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The brand continues to attract the older clientele, however their advertising is aimed at the 20-40 year old population segment.  Their quality control has improved and their use of up-to-date technology is impressive.  The ATS and CTS are in need of some major design improvements as these models retain the same basic design as those of the latter part of the first decade of this century.

Their SUV’s are sharp looking and even the ATS and CTS models continue to be attractive.  I agree with Shifty that people do not necessarily go to Cadillac dealerships to buy a “true” driver’s car.  They go there for luxury and elegance at an affordable price.  Their performance “V” models are impressive power cars - but for that same price ($92,000+) there is stiff competition from German manufacturers.

But I still have to compliment the Cadillac Division for turning around the entire line - manufacturing and technology.  In fact, GM is building excellent vehicles in all its Divisions.

Just to clarify: M5 starts $20k higher than a CTSV

Appreciate the clarification, Q, however one cannot compare a CTSV to an M5 in terms of handling and stability.  The $20,000 price differential is pocket change when considering the purchase of a muscle car, IMO.  20% more for an M5 over a CTSV is worth higher out of pocket costs.  Even the E63 is a preferred pick over the CTSV at 20% more, IMO.

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.

abacomike

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Caddy didn't miss the mark. By commonly found accounts (both professional and nonprofessional), the CTS and ATS are tremendous drivers' cars, especially in V sport and V trims. But it still has the wrong badge to be popular enough.

The people who buy Cadillacs don't want a "driver's car" and the people who want "a driver's car" don't want a Cadillac. "Know your audience" is my advice.

The market niche for Cadillac was always the middle aged to older aged buyer in search of a cruiser for the highway as well as elegance.  That has changed since the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The brand continues to attract the older clientele, however their advertising is aimed at the 20-40 year old population segment.  Their quality control has improved and their use of up-to-date technology is impressive.  The ATS and CTS are in need of some major design improvements as these models retain the same basic design as those of the latter part of the first decade of this century.

Their SUV’s are sharp looking and even the ATS and CTS models continue to be attractive.  I agree with Shifty that people do not necessarily go to Cadillac dealerships to buy a “true” driver’s car.  They go there for luxury and elegance at an affordable price.  Their performance “V” models are impressive power cars - but for that same price ($92,000+) there is stiff competition from German manufacturers.

But I still have to compliment the Cadillac Division for turning around the entire line - manufacturing and technology.  In fact, GM is building excellent vehicles in all its Divisions.

Just to clarify: M5 starts $20k higher than a CTSV

Appreciate the clarification, Q, however one cannot compare a CTSV to an M5 in terms of handling and stability.  The $20,000 price differential is pocket change when considering the purchase of a muscle car, IMO.  20% more for an M5 over a CTSV is worth higher out of pocket costs.  Even the E63 is a preferred pick over the CTSV at 20% more, IMO.

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.

Thanks Q.  Appreciate the info.  I still prefer the E63 AMG over the CTSV for many reasons, one of which IS NOT snobbery!  It has to do with trust in MB’s engineering and emphasis on quality.  Not as big a fan of the BMW - but if I had to choose between a CTSV and an M5, it would be the BMW.

ab348

qbrozen said:

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.

Exactly. Unfortunately some of the comments are indicative of the image problem Cadillac still faces. Their cars perform as well or better than the two German brands and have the numbers to back it up. But the old image still persists in many people's minds.

stickguy

The Mazda tribute was a badge job of a Ford Escape. The mountaineer was the mercury version of the explorer.

stickguy

The early Mazda version of the explorer was the Navaho. 2 door only. Ford engines

bwia

As I struggle to wrap my mind around the $45,000+ price tag of an entry level luxury automobile an article in the Boston Globe caught my eye. Could you believe the cost of a 4-year college education is now in excess of $50,000 per year?

Comparing the two, a nicely equipped SUV look cheap by comparison. If salaries have remained stagnant for the last 10+ years, then where are people finding the money to buy cars or finance their children's' education? The answer is simple---piles of student loans, now over $1 trillion, and Lord knows trillions of dollars in car loans.

How long can this continue, I don't know but we are beginning to see some financial pressures at smaller private colleges as many have failed or merged with private or public universities. God help those parents who need new wheels and a freshman entering college this fall.

fintail

Interesting E63S/M5/CTS-V/Panamera comparo in the prior edition of R&T

Print edition has more data, they ranked the CTS-V in 3rd place, besting the expensive and bargey Panamera. M5 took the crown. Price difference between the Caddy and BMW/MB, subtracting ceramic brakes (not possible on Caddy), wasn't tremendous, around 10%. I think lack of AWD and the transmission didn't help Caddy performance, and they griped about interior quality.

roadburner

As I mentioned over in CCBA, my wife suggested I buy a beater to drive to work if I win the election. So, assuming I pull that off, come October or so I'll start looking. Nothing boring(of course) and nothing over $10k, maximum. I'll probably go with either a Miata or a Z3.

qbrozen

abacomike said:

Thanks Q.  Appreciate the info.  I still prefer the E63 AMG over the CTSV for many reasons, one of which IS NOT snobbery!  It has to do with trust in MB’s engineering and emphasis on quality.  Not as big a fan of the BMW - but if I had to choose between a CTSV and an M5, it would be the BMW.

Totally get it. Make no mistake, the E63 stirs strong desire in me. Just not sure, if it came down to it and I could actually afford either, I could cough up the price of a whole other midsized sedan to choose it.

@fintail
l am convinced interior is something I must not be able to judge. All the rags typically praise Audi, for example, as the best in the biz, and I am completely unimpressed by their interiors. BMW is rather boring and sterile. I do like Benz, though. But, as I've said, my Caddy was damned impressive from my POV (although the seats weren't the most comfortable). All of my passengers thought the same.

BTW, not for nuthin, but the 3 other vehicles in that comparo are all new, while the Caddy is a development cycle behind. So, come next year, it may get back on top for 2-3 years before the Germans play catch up again.

snakeweasel

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Caddy didn't miss the mark. By commonly found accounts (both professional and nonprofessional), the CTS and ATS are tremendous drivers' cars, especially in V sport and V trims. But it still has the wrong badge to be popular enough.

The people who buy Cadillacs don't want a "driver's car" and the people who want "a driver's car" don't want a Cadillac. "Know your audience" is my advice.

The market niche for Cadillac was always the middle aged to older aged buyer in search of a cruiser for the highway as well as elegance.  That has changed since the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The brand continues to attract the older clientele, however their advertising is aimed at the 20-40 year old population segment.  Their quality control has improved and their use of up-to-date technology is impressive.  The ATS and CTS are in need of some major design improvements as these models retain the same basic design as those of the latter part of the first decade of this century.

Their SUV’s are sharp looking and even the ATS and CTS models continue to be attractive.  I agree with Shifty that people do not necessarily go to Cadillac dealerships to buy a “true” driver’s car.  They go there for luxury and elegance at an affordable price.  Their performance “V” models are impressive power cars - but for that same price ($92,000+) there is stiff competition from German manufacturers.

But I still have to compliment the Cadillac Division for turning around the entire line - manufacturing and technology.  In fact, GM is building excellent vehicles in all its Divisions.

Just to clarify: M5 starts $20k higher than a CTSV

Appreciate the clarification, Q, however one cannot compare a CTSV to an M5 in terms of handling and stability.  The $20,000 price differential is pocket change when considering the purchase of a muscle car, IMO.  20% more for an M5 over a CTSV is worth higher out of pocket costs.  Even the E63 is a preferred pick over the CTSV at 20% more, IMO.

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.

Thanks Q.  Appreciate the info.  I still prefer the E63 AMG over the CTSV for many reasons, one of which IS NOT snobbery!  It has to do with trust in MB’s engineering and emphasis on quality.  Not as big a fan of the BMW - but if I had to choose between a CTSV and an M5, it would be the BMW.

Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

abacomike

snakeweasel said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Caddy didn't miss the mark. By commonly found accounts (both professional and nonprofessional), the CTS and ATS are tremendous drivers' cars, especially in V sport and V trims. But it still has the wrong badge to be popular enough.

The people who buy Cadillacs don't want a "driver's car" and the people who want "a driver's car" don't want a Cadillac. "Know your audience" is my advice.

The market niche for Cadillac was always the middle aged to older aged buyer in search of a cruiser for the highway as well as elegance.  That has changed since the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The brand continues to attract the older clientele, however their advertising is aimed at the 20-40 year old population segment.  Their quality control has improved and their use of up-to-date technology is impressive.  The ATS and CTS are in need of some major design improvements as these models retain the same basic design as those of the latter part of the first decade of this century.

Their SUV’s are sharp looking and even the ATS and CTS models continue to be attractive.  I agree with Shifty that people do not necessarily go to Cadillac dealerships to buy a “true” driver’s car.  They go there for luxury and elegance at an affordable price.  Their performance “V” models are impressive power cars - but for that same price ($92,000+) there is stiff competition from German manufacturers.

But I still have to compliment the Cadillac Division for turning around the entire line - manufacturing and technology.  In fact, GM is building excellent vehicles in all its Divisions.

Just to clarify: M5 starts $20k higher than a CTSV

Appreciate the clarification, Q, however one cannot compare a CTSV to an M5 in terms of handling and stability.  The $20,000 price differential is pocket change when considering the purchase of a muscle car, IMO.  20% more for an M5 over a CTSV is worth higher out of pocket costs.  Even the E63 is a preferred pick over the CTSV at 20% more, IMO.

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.

Thanks Q.  Appreciate the info.  I still prefer the E63 AMG over the CTSV for many reasons, one of which IS NOT snobbery!  It has to do with trust in MB’s engineering and emphasis on quality.  Not as big a fan of the BMW - but if I had to choose between a CTSV and an M5, it would be the BMW.

Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

Absolutely not.  But I would never own ANY car out of warranty!

qbrozen

My '67 Dodge is out of warranty.

fintail

If the Caddy is out of cycle, then it needs further price competitiveness, not just ~15% less than the established players. Caddy is almost in the position of an upstart. If it plays at nearly the same price as the segment leaders, few will risk taking the plunge and giving it a try. I have to say again that the dealer experience is likely involved in this, too.

The interior stuff is indeed subjective, but I also believe there is often a relationship between smoke and fire, and a lot of people complain about design and materials. Comparing a single track time metric also won't do it, no more than a single 0-60 or 60-0 metric.

qbrozen said:

@fintail
l am convinced interior is something I must not be able to judge. All the rags typically praise Audi, for example, as the best in the biz, and I am completely unimpressed by their interiors. BMW is rather boring and sterile. I do like Benz, though. But, as I've said, my Caddy was damned impressive from my POV (although the seats weren't the most comfortable). All of my passengers thought the same.

BTW, not for nuthin, but the 3 other vehicles in that comparo are all new, while the Caddy is a development cycle behind. So, come next year, it may get back on top for 2-3 years before the Germans play catch up again.

dino001

Cadillac's styling doesn't work for me, but I can see appeal to others, if you like that type of thing. Can't speak about content or driving, as I've never driven one, or even sat inside. Their marketing is just awful, though. I already said once that their commercial to David Bowie's "Fame" tune (one with a Pharaoh, Maharajah, Louis XIV types in "vehicles" of their time followed by Cadillac), was probably the most repulsive with extraordinarily obnoxious message: buy our car - you'll join long line of the worst oppressors in the world!

dino001

bwia said:

As I struggle to wrap my mind around the $45,000+ price tag of an entry level luxury automobile an article in the Boston Globe caught my eye. Could you believe the cost of a 4-year college education is now in excess of $50,000 per year?

I think there are plenty of decent schools that would cost you less. Not everybody has to go to Harvard. Also, not everybody has to rent a one-bedroom apartment, or eat organic steak while in college. But yes, there seems to be excessive pricing on the product, essentially another pricing bubble enabled by government's mandate of cheap credit and idiotic notion that best education means five brand new gyms and dorms, twenty fully equipped new lab buildings, ten story parking garage and 100-thousand-fan stadium, and every lecture hall being like a multimedia 3D theater. Cause nothing less will do.

dino001

fintail said:

If the Caddy is out of cycle, then it needs further price competitiveness, not just ~15% less than the established players. Caddy is almost in the position of an upstart. If it plays at nearly the same price as the segment leaders, few will risk taking the plunge and giving it a try. I have to say again that the dealer experience is likely involved in this, too.

The interior stuff is indeed subjective, but I also believe there is often a relationship between smoke and fire, and a lot of people complain about design and materials. Comparing a single track time metric also won't do it, no more than a single 0-60 or 60-0 metric.

I have said that before. Cadillac is currently boxed-in by infrastructure reflecting its past high volumes, but product line and management quest to be like upscale leaders. It has more dealerships than MB, BMW, or Audi (by factor of two, or more), yet it sells half of units (vs. MB, BMW, not Audi) per year. They sell roughly same number of units as Acura. I count two Acura dealers in Tampa Bay and two more adding greater area (Sarasota, Lakeland). There are four Cadillac Stores in the same smaller area and three more in the expanded area (some dealers own more than one store). Essentially Cadillac has TWO-TO-FOUR TIMES (probably depends on the area) as many stores as it should. That metric alone is a killer to any hope of improvement, regardless of the product.

I think a real path for Cadillac is to be like Jaguar - forget the volumes, forget "full line" of product. Sell what sells, drop the rest. Buy out dealers first (or terminate them on technicalities, if they can), of course (they need GM corporate help for that). THEN start introducing new product. Chances of success? Less than 5 percent. They had a chance during the bankruptcy, but blew it on political crap and caved under dealer's pressure.

driver100

stickguy said:

The Mazda tribute was a badge job of a Ford Escape. The mountaineer was the mercury version of the explorer.

Thanks for coming through stick........I got the Ford/Mazda connection a bit mixed up....

nyccarguy

bwia said:

As I struggle to wrap my mind around the $45,000+ price tag of an entry level luxury automobile an article in the Boston Globe caught my eye. Could you believe the cost of a 4-year college education is now in excess of $50,000 per year?

Comparing the two, a nicely equipped SUV look cheap by comparison. If salaries have remained stagnant for the last 10+ years, then where are people finding the money to buy cars or finance their children's' education? The answer is simple---piles of student loans, now over $1 trillion, and Lord knows trillions of dollars in car loans.

How long can this continue, I don't know but we are beginning to see some financial pressures at smaller private colleges as many have failed or merged with private or public universities. God help those parents who need new wheels and a freshman entering college this fall.

I have 3 young children (11, 9, & 6). The thought of paying for any sort of college scares me to death (even cheap college).

driver100

"snakeweasel"
Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

I prefer my cars to have a warranty. But, if I bought or owned a car that was out of warranty (we do, the C250 in Florida has an expired warranty) I wouldn't be that much more concerned about it whether it was an MB or not. I would expect I will pay more for upkeep and repairs, but, I will be driving something I will enjoy much more. In other words....I would chance it. And, I probably see more 20 year old MBs around in proportion, as I see any other make that lasts that long.

dino001

My approach is if you have money for the car, you should have money for repairs. Warranty is great (big plus), but if it shouldn't be necessary, or I should rethink the purchase. Risk of having no warranty risk could be priced. Extended warranty companies do that every day. For them it's worth about half (or less) of what they think it's worth to you (rest is profit and sales commissions).

qbrozen

fintail said:

If the Caddy is out of cycle, then it needs further price competitiveness, not just ~15% less than the established players. Caddy is almost in the position of an upstart. If it plays at nearly the same price as the segment leaders, few will risk taking the plunge and giving it a try. I have to say again that the dealer experience is likely involved in this, too.

The interior stuff is indeed subjective, but I also believe there is often a relationship between smoke and fire, and a lot of people complain about design and materials. Comparing a single track time metric also won't do it, no more than a single 0-60 or 60-0 metric.

Well, you don't lower your MSRP as you go along in a cycle. You can increase incentives, which they do. Street price of a CTS-V vs an E63s is quite a bit more than 15%, that's for sure.

stickguy

I just finished the last tuition payment back in December. 8 years total for the 2 kids. It is a wonderful feeling. I think of them each as the new Porsche that I will never have. They owe me. Someday I will be really old, and plan to collect.

But, those prices you see, are largely meaningless for most people. Like the room rates on the hotel door. or MSRP on appliances or electronics. Largely made up to give discounts off of.

how much you pay also heavily depends on your family income. Really rich folks probably write the full check. poor people, in many cases, pay nothing (or next to it) at many schools. If your income is below a certain amount (not that low, maybe $80k?) for some ivies, you pay zippo. Nadda. and all financial aid is grants, not loans. And at other schools, they supply need based aid.

state schools though are different. much lower cost but few grants given out. So basically you pay about what many private schools end up being in the end. Still, for a normal middle class family (especially in the NE, where incomes are higher but costs offset it), a $20-25K annual nut can be hard to swallow. The federal aid calculators don't do a good job looking at net, instead of gross, income. If you live in a state with good public colleges, that still has low low prices, take advantage!

another good idea is try to get done in 3 years. 1 year less partying for the kiddos, but major savings for parents. Take advantage of AP classes, and many high schools now offer classes at (or through) the community college, so kids can graduate with a ton of credits already for very little money. If nothing else, they can take more real/major courses instead of basic core courses.

of course staying at home is cheaper, but that isn't much fun for the kids. Or the parents! Many kids IMO actually need to go away to learn how to live on their own and be independent. but YMMV.

fintail

From the R&T test, non ceramic brake cars don't have a huge price gap. 100K vs 125K? 20% then? In my experience, those who can afford the former can afford the latter, and will often choose what they perceive as the best, no matter the price.

If MSRP is wildly inflated and vehicles are trading at 25%+ less due to relatively secret incentives, something is wrong with the pricing model.

qbrozen said:

Well, you don't lower your MSRP as you go along in a cycle. You can increase incentives, which they do. Street price of a CTS-V vs an E63s is quite a bit more than 15%, that's for sure.

fintail

For me, it depends on the specific model and year.

I bought a warranty for my old E55, and came out in the black - it had some quirks. I wouldn't bother with one on that C250, it is a relatively simple and solid car. The more complex and expensive, the better chance a warranty will be useful.

driver100 said:

"snakeweasel"
Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

I prefer my cars to have a warranty. But, if I bought or owned a car that was out of warranty (we do, the C250 in Florida has an expired warranty) I wouldn't be that much more concerned about it whether it was an MB or not. I would expect I will pay more for upkeep and repairs, but, I will be driving something I will enjoy much more. In other words....I would chance it. And, I probably see more 20 year old MBs around in proportion, as I see any other make that lasts that long.

Mr_Shiftright

Creating a bunch of "halo cars" isn't going to save Cadillac. Automotive history is littered with excellent examples of companies that produced some magnificent, trending-setting, beautiful, highly competent cars....just before they went out of business.

Mr_Shiftright

Speaking of which---how's the depreciation curve on Cadillacs vs. the competition?

driver100

Mr_Shiftright said:

Speaking of which---how's the depreciation curve on Cadillacs vs. the competition?

I checked 2015s and they were all very close. I find that hard to believe....just a guess but I don't think my Mercedes dealer would give me much for a trade-in Cadillac....that would be a hard sell for them.

abacomike

Mr_Shiftright said:

Creating a bunch of "halo cars" isn't going to save Cadillac. Automotive history is littered with excellent examples of companies that produced some magnificent, trending-setting, beautiful, highly competent cars....just before they went out of business.

As an example(s):

Pierce-Arrow, Packard, Hudson, Studebakker, Auburn, etc.  All of these brands, at one time or another, produced heavily sought-after automobiles that were trend-setters.  Some of these fully restored cars are truly magnificent.

Even British Leland roadsters (Triumph and MG) were beauties + Austin-Healey.

driver100

fintail said:

For me, it depends on the specific model and year.

I bought a warranty for my old E55, and came out in the black - it had some quirks. I wouldn't bother with one on that C250, it is a relatively simple and solid car. The more complex and expensive, the better chance a warranty will be useful.

driver100 said:

"snakeweasel"
Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

I prefer my cars to have a warranty. But, if I bought or owned a car that was out of warranty (we do, the C250 in Florida has an expired warranty) I wouldn't be that much more concerned about it whether it was an MB or not. I would expect I will pay more for upkeep and repairs, but, I will be driving something I will enjoy much more. In other words....I would chance it. And, I probably see more 20 year old MBs around in proportion, as I see any other make that lasts that long.

Excellent opinion....much appreciated. It confirms my feelings. Nothing too fancy on the car and it only goes about 6000 miles a year....currently at 24000. With such low mileage a warranty would be a waste. In Florida I see 15 and 20 year old MBs all the time.

I have no problem keeping this car....without a warranty on it.

laurasdada

explorerx4 said:

@laurasdada
I asked one of my kids who lives in the Cleveland area about local income taxes.
Depending where you live, you might have to file returns for the location you work in and another for the location where you live.

I believe that's correct (ah, bureaucracy!). Luckily daughter lived/worked in Cleveland. CWRU.

laurasdada

Stick, we're 5/8 through the 8 year college tuition plan. Was fun college shopping for the boy, St. Lawrence U: "We know we're a bit expensive (~list $65k/yr IIRC), but we own some apartments near Wall St. that students can stay in while interning!" Not sold.

My XF is out of warranty, I'm hoping what little work I had done in warranty, along with the TSBs will afford me expense free motoring for at least a bit longer. Really, it's British, so my worries are unfounded.

jmonroe

abacomike said:

snakeweasel said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Caddy didn't miss the mark. By commonly found accounts (both professional and nonprofessional), the CTS and ATS are tremendous drivers' cars, especially in V sport and V trims. But it still has the wrong badge to be popular enough.

The people who buy Cadillacs don't want a "driver's car" and the people who want "a driver's car" don't want a Cadillac.

"Know your audience" is my advice.

The market niche for Cadillac was always the middle aged to older aged buyer in search of a cruiser for the highway as well as elegance.  That has changed since the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The brand continues to attract the older clientele, however their advertising is aimed at the 20-40 year old population segment.  Their quality control has improved and their use of up-to-date technology is impressive.  The ATS and CTS are in need of some major design improvements as these models retain the same basic design as those of the latter part of the first decade of this century.

Their SUV’s are sharp looking and even the ATS and CTS models continue to be attractive.  I agree with Shifty that people do not necessarily go to Cadillac dealerships to buy a “true” driver’s car.  They go there for luxury and elegance at an affordable price.  Their performance “V” models are impressive power cars - but for that same price ($92,000+) there is stiff competition from German manufacturers.

But I still have to compliment the Cadillac Division for turning around the entire line - manufacturing and technology.  In fact, GM is building excellent vehicles in all its Divisions.

Just to clarify: M5 starts $20k higher than a CTSV

Appreciate the clarification, Q, however one cannot compare a CTSV to an M5 in terms of handling and stability.  The $20,000 price differential is pocket change when considering the purchase of a muscle car, IMO.  20% more for an M5 over a CTSV is worth higher out of pocket costs.  Even the E63 is a preferred pick over the CTSV at 20% more, IMO.

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.
Thanks Q.  Appreciate the info.  I still prefer the E63 AMG over the CTSV for many reasons, one of which IS NOT snobbery!  It has to do with trust in MB’s engineering and emphasis on quality.  Not as big a fan of the BMW - but if I had to choose between a CTSV and an M5, it would be the BMW.

Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

Absolutely not.  But I would never own ANY car out of warranty!

You ain't lived until you have owned a car out of warranty.

Back when I was raising a family, I always bought used cars. Now things are different. I wasn't afraid of used cars back then. I always bought GM as I felt they were the best of the choices offered by Detroit back in the 70's and 80's. Imports were out of the question. They were never even considered nor were Chrysler products, all models. I might have been adventurous and daring but not as much as @qbrozen owning '67 Dodge out of warranty. That takes a lot of guts. But back in '67 if you knew how to hammer a wrench and were willing to spend a little bit of money at the auto parts, even a Chrysler product could be maintained by a daring owner. Like I said, I was somewhat daring "back in the day" but nothing could make me crawl down the Chrysler hole.

I wouldn't even own a Chrysler product today...IN WARRANTY. I told the story about what Son #1 went through with his 2008 T&C. Long story short (just for you @driver100 ), about 3 months after he had it, a new engine had to be installed and a new tranny at around 170K miles. The main reason he bought it was because Chrysler offered a lifetime unlimited miles power train warranty to the original owner back then so he made good on that warranty and didn't have to pay a dime for those repairs.

More talk about daring, just ask him about all the other nuisance repairs he had to live with, also under warranty with that van, and he'll bite your head off and he got rid of that beast more than two years ago.

jmonroe

snakeweasel

abacomike said:

snakeweasel said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

qbrozen said:

abacomike said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Caddy didn't miss the mark. By commonly found accounts (both professional and nonprofessional), the CTS and ATS are tremendous drivers' cars, especially in V sport and V trims. But it still has the wrong badge to be popular enough.

The people who buy Cadillacs don't want a "driver's car" and the people who want "a driver's car" don't want a Cadillac. "Know your audience" is my advice.

The market niche for Cadillac was always the middle aged to older aged buyer in search of a cruiser for the highway as well as elegance.  That has changed since the 1980’s and 1990’s.

The brand continues to attract the older clientele, however their advertising is aimed at the 20-40 year old population segment.  Their quality control has improved and their use of up-to-date technology is impressive.  The ATS and CTS are in need of some major design improvements as these models retain the same basic design as those of the latter part of the first decade of this century.

Their SUV’s are sharp looking and even the ATS and CTS models continue to be attractive.  I agree with Shifty that people do not necessarily go to Cadillac dealerships to buy a “true” driver’s car.  They go there for luxury and elegance at an affordable price.  Their performance “V” models are impressive power cars - but for that same price ($92,000+) there is stiff competition from German manufacturers.

But I still have to compliment the Cadillac Division for turning around the entire line - manufacturing and technology.  In fact, GM is building excellent vehicles in all its Divisions.

Just to clarify: M5 starts $20k higher than a CTSV

Appreciate the clarification, Q, however one cannot compare a CTSV to an M5 in terms of handling and stability.  The $20,000 price differential is pocket change when considering the purchase of a muscle car, IMO.  20% more for an M5 over a CTSV is worth higher out of pocket costs.  Even the E63 is a preferred pick over the CTSV at 20% more, IMO.

A track is a helluva good indication of handling and stability. Just this year, the E63S finally unseated Caddy's deathgrip on fastest 4-door, beating the previous record around VIR by 1.4 seconds. Worth $20k for that difference? I can't answer that for you.

The M5? Waaayyy behind, finishing nearly 9 seconds later.

Thanks Q.  Appreciate the info.  I still prefer the E63 AMG over the CTSV for many reasons, one of which IS NOT snobbery!  It has to do with trust in MB’s engineering and emphasis on quality.  Not as big a fan of the BMW - but if I had to choose between a CTSV and an M5, it would be the BMW.

Then i have a question, would you own a MB that was out of warranty?

Absolutely not.  But I would never own ANY car out of warranty!

Most of my car ownership time has been owning cars out of warranty. There is nothing wrong with it if the engineering and quality is good. Outside of routine maintenance and wear and tear items I rarely have out of pocket expenses. 

The thing that gets me is how I am told how great the engineering and quality of these cars are by people who don't trust that quality and engineering enough to win the car outside a warranty period. 

Tell me how much warranty work have you had done on your recent car?

Mr_Shiftright

The problem isn't about unreliability so much as how much labor is involved to fix things---there's so much stuffed under the hood and/or dash that a $25 part can cost you $600 to replace.

I think the sweet spot for used cars is the 2 years old to 5 years old bracket. Before 2 years, you suffer a lot of depreciation, and after 5 years you suffer a lot of repairs or just plain "expendables" that wear out.

If cost to own were a BIG RED LINE, then at Day One the red line would start to plunge, then flatten out years 2-5, and then start rising rapidly again.

jmonroe

nyccarguy said:

bwia said:

As I struggle to wrap my mind around the $45,000+ price tag of an entry level luxury automobile an article in the Boston Globe caught my eye. Could you believe the cost of a 4-year college education is now in excess of $50,000 per year?

Comparing the two, a nicely equipped SUV look cheap by comparison. If salaries have remained stagnant for the last 10+ years, then where are people finding the money to buy cars or finance their children's' education? The answer is simple---piles of student loans, now over $1 trillion, and Lord knows trillions of dollars in car loans.

How long can this continue, I don't know but we are beginning to see some financial pressures at smaller private colleges as many have failed or merged with private or public universities. God help those parents who need new wheels and a freshman entering college this fall.

I have 3 young children (11, 9, & 6). The thought of paying for any sort of college scares me to death (even cheap college).

You're in the same boat as Son #1, his sons are 16,14,12 (in August).

There is a wee bit of outside hope for the 14 year old because he is pretty good at hockey. Since he is the first line center on the first team, his coach and his additional hockey training instructor thinks he could get a partial hockey scholarship at a smaller school. Probably something like what Mikes grandson got for baseball. Although Son #1 thinks he has hit the wall because he doesn't see any improvement of late with his additional instructing. But his instructor says that is not so uncommon. Well, if I was selling additional instruction that's what I would say too. No sense losing a pay check from a student, right?

No one has a lot of hope for that, even Grandson #2. At least he is realistic and is just having fun while it lasts. I think he has decent shot at a partial scholarship because of his grades. His lowest grades have been 2 B's since first grade (he didn't get that from me). When you ask him what he wants to do in life he says, "be a GM in the NHL". That's a dream too and everyone is letting him run with that one for now.

I sure wouldn't want to be faced with tuition for 3 kids today. I thought it was bad with 2 sons and the cost back then was nowhere near what it is today even allowing for inflation.

jmonroe

Mr_Shiftright

You have to be careful with "partial scholarships"--colleges are acting like car dealers these days--they jack up the price, then give you the discount.

qbrozen

jmonroe said:

I wouldn't even own a Chrysler product today...IN WARRANTY. I told the story about what Son #1 went through with his 2008 T&C. Long story short (just for you @driver100 ), about 3 months after he had it, a new engine had to be installed and a new tranny at around 170K miles. The main reason he bought it was because Chrysler offered a lifetime unlimited miles power train warranty to the original owner back then so he made good on that warranty and didn't have to pay a dime for those repairs.

More talk about daring, just ask him about all the other nuisance repairs he had to live with, also under warranty with that van, and he'll bite your head off and he got rid of that beast more than two years ago.

We had several nuisance repairs with our '08 T&C as well, but nothing that put it out of service. Getting a new engine at 3-mos old that then was driven to 170k, at which point the tranny gave out, is certainly nothing to get in a huff about. Sounds like he got A LOT of use out of the van. Obviously the repairs did not deter them driving it all those miles.

qbrozen

driver100 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Speaking of which---how's the depreciation curve on Cadillacs vs. the competition?

I checked 2015s and they were all very close. I find that hard to believe....just a guess but I don't think my Mercedes dealer would give me much for a trade-in Cadillac....that would be a hard sell for them.

Yup. Like I said before, the mid-sized luxos are very similar. That said, I'd be willing to bet a 3-series does better than an ATS. Maybe when I have the time, I'll look into that for my own edification.

cdnpinhead

snakeweasel said:

The thing that gets me is how I am told how great the engineering and quality of these cars are by people who don't trust that quality and engineering enough to win the car outside a warranty period.

Damn straight! I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm driving a car with 144K miles on it that's been out of warranty for 7 years -- oh my! I've bored everyone over the years with how many other cars I've driven for 10+ years and 125K+ miles that served our family very well.

But that's just me.

jmonroe

Mr_Shiftright said:

You have to be careful with "partial scholarships"--colleges are acting like car dealers these days--they jack up the price, then give you the discount.

Like I said he is 14 so there is still some time to think about it but it is worth looking into the "salesmanship" that schools are delving into these days.

jmonroe

stickguy

Shifty, that was my MO for quite a while (for my car, the wife got the family car which was bought new and kept longer). Usually right at 3 YO with reasonable miles (say 30K). Then I would drive it 3 years, usually with no drama, and get the itch to wash, rinse, repeat. so I never had a car outside of that 5/6 YO 60-70K bracket.

always made sense. Very rare to have repairs (just some normal wear items like tires or brakes), and at the end, was still nice enough to have decent equity. Plus usually paid cash up front, so never a payment.

the family car, and sometimes mine, would be on the buy new and hold longer plan. But, still usually to the 6/7 YO 70-80K range max. So same back end, but got to enjoy the brand new years. No way the wife is taking on a used car purchase for her. She does not care what I do (automotively only of course).

switched to leasing 4 years ago, but that was a cash flow reason. May go back to that. Basically the same keep for 3 year plan, I just get the first 3 instead of the 2nd 3!

one issue more recently has been the advent of desirable features and new models. sometimes, the 3 YO car just doesn't have stuff I really want!

stickguy

I forgot one other point about college. I always assumed it was better to have kids at least 4 years apart to space out the payments. Turns out that is wrong. You actually want to have them all in at the same time. assuming you are qualifying for financial aid. The FAFSA calculates what the family can pay, but that is total. so schools usually give more aid. Kinda like pay for the first one, and the 2nd is free!

jmonroe

qbrozen said:

jmonroe said:

I wouldn't even own a Chrysler product today...IN WARRANTY. I told the story about what Son #1 went through with his 2008 T&C. Long story short (just for you @driver100 ), about 3 months after he had it, a new engine had to be installed and a new tranny at around 170K miles. The main reason he bought it was because Chrysler offered a lifetime unlimited miles power train warranty to the original owner back then so he made good on that warranty and didn't have to pay a dime for those repairs.

More talk about daring, just ask him about all the other nuisance repairs he had to live with, also under warranty with that van, and he'll bite your head off and he got rid of that beast more than two years ago.

We had several nuisance repairs with our '08 T&C as well, but nothing that put it out of service. Getting a new engine at 3-mos old that then was driven to 170k, at which point the tranny gave out, is certainly nothing to get in a huff about. Sounds like he got A LOT of use out of the van. Obviously the repairs did not deter them driving it all those miles.

Yes, he got a LOT of use out of it but it came with a LOT of aggravation. Finally in 2016 he had enough and bought a 2016 Kia van. He looked at Honda, Toyota, and just for the fun of it he looked at a Chrysler again. The Chrysler was the least expensive so if he was buying on price alone he would have bought that but just looked at it for kicks. Just couldn't bring himself to own another one.

He still thinks the Chrysler has the best layout for hauling. He especially likes the stow and go second row seats of the Chrysler when hauling stuff from Home Depot and it has more storage room behind the third row seats too but even that was not enough to make him put up with the expected Chrysler aggravation of another one. He said he'd rather make two trips or even rent the Home Depot truck than get another Chrysler van.

He's the one paying so it's his choice. Now to see if he can get to 170K miles with less aggravation. Early results say he will but he's not come to the finish line yet.

jmonroe

jmonroe

cdnpinhead said:

snakeweasel said:

The thing that gets me is how I am told how great the engineering and quality of these cars are by people who don't trust that quality and engineering enough to win the car outside a warranty period.

Damn straight! I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm driving a car with 144K miles on it that's been out of warranty for 7 years -- oh my! I've bored everyone over the years with how many other cars I've driven for 10+ years and 125K+ miles that served our family very well.

But that's just me.

No, that's me too.

How do you know you have a reliable car until it's 6,7, 8 years old or more with lots of miles? A 3 year old car hasn't even had a chance to get the paint scratched yet.

I'm convinced that some people just talk and others have guts.

jmonroe

fordfool

nyccarguy said:

I have 3 young children (11, 9, & 6). The thought of paying for any sort of college scares me to death (even cheap college).

Room, board, and tuition were reasonable at SUNY (Buffalo) when I graduated in 1966, and still reasonable when the Darling Daughter graduated in 2006. And City University had free tuition. Is CUNY still a bargain?

Although, I see the CT does put you out of New York. What about U. Conn?

stickguy

Does not matter much for the spare car (based on our current usage), but for the main car that we take out together, and use for travelling, I don't actually want an old, outdated one. I like having newer tech and features. They add lots of value to me.

so I don't really care that a 2000 XYZ mobile with 120K on it might still be as reliable as an anvil. I still don't want to be driving one all the time.

even our RDX, which at 43K miles is barely broken in, and can probably go indefinitely without any problems, is antiquated features wise compared to new ones. and that is only 6 MY old now.

stickguy

I think that SUNY has gone up quite a bit in recent years. might be mid-20s now in state? total with room and board.

edit: just looked at SUNY Albany (my nephew is a freshman there now) which might be one of the pricier ones, and total charges look to be about $23K.

qbrozen

jmonroe said:

I wouldn't even own a Chrysler product today...IN WARRANTY. I told the story about what Son #1 went through with his 2008 T&C. Long story short (just for you @driver100 ), about 3 months after he had it, a new engine had to be installed and a new tranny at around 170K miles. The main reason he bought it was because Chrysler offered a lifetime unlimited miles power train warranty to the original owner back then so he made good on that warranty and didn't have to pay a dime for those repairs. More talk about daring, just ask him about all the other nuisance repairs he had to live with, also under warranty with that van, and he'll bite your head off and he got rid of that beast more than two years ago.

We had several nuisance repairs with our '08 T&C as well, but nothing that put it out of service. Getting a new engine at 3-mos old that then was driven to 170k, at which point the tranny gave out, is certainly nothing to get in a huff about. Sounds like he got A LOT of use out of the van. Obviously the repairs did not deter them driving it all those miles.

Yes, he got a LOT of use out of it but it came with a LOT of aggravation. Finally in 2016 he had enough and bought a 2016 Kia van. He looked at Honda, Toyota, and just for the fun of it he looked at a Chrysler again. The Chrysler was the least expensive so if he was buying on price alone he would have bought that but just looked at it for kicks. Just couldn't bring himself to own another one. He still thinks the Chrysler has the best layout for hauling. He especially likes the stow and go second row seats of the Chrysler when hauling stuff from Home Depot and it has more storage room behind the third row seats too but even that was not enough to make him put up with the expected Chrysler aggravation of another one. He said he'd rather make two trips or even rent the Home Depot truck than get another Chrysler van. He's the one paying so it's his choice. Now to see if he can get to 170K miles with less aggravation. Early results say he will but he's not come to the finish line yet. jmonroe

We traded our '08 for a '14 before we hit 100k. Wife looked at alternatives but could not give up the added functionality like you pointed out. This time, however, I got a lifetime warranty bumper to bumper. I will make her run this into the ground!

tbirdmarco

 G Monroe sounds like your son had a bad one but I got a lot of use out of it like you said it’s his money is choice like anyone in here ha ha Ha you do get a bed one from time to time just hope it’s not you but that’s life for you nothings perfect