Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?

sls002

2001 and 2002 were not great either. They may hit 25,000 with little difficulty, matching 2001. The V8 will cost you near 60,000 with navi.

jerrymcshane1

$60K for a loaded AWD STS. And in 2+ years be worth about $35K IF YOUR LUCKY. Cadillacs are very well made vehicles but their depreciation history is horrendous, to say the least.

sls002

acenj wants the nav system. Nav is only available with the luxury performance package. The base price is $58,800 or so. An option or two will run the final price over $60,000. Incentives may result in a lower price tag and a dealer that wants to make a deal can result in a lower price tag.

Domestic cars have always depreciated to about half of their original price in 3 years. With all the incentives now, original prices are meanless, and actual depreciation is difficult to figure. However, a 2002 Seville is worth around $20-23,000 retail from Edmunds blue book. A 2002 BMW 530 is worth about $27,000. You would probably have paid more for the bimmer than the caddy new.

Anyway, one should buy a new car to keep until it is no-longer worth anything to you, the original owner. I plan to drive my SLS till 2010-2012 or so.

rayainsw

“one should buy a new car to keep until it is no-longer worth anything to you, the original owner.”

Based on exactly what set of assumptions?

I can certainly see where YOU may wish to do this. But do you view this strategy as the only possible way, for everyone, in any circumstance?

I happen to believe that I’d potentially see SOME value in almost any car, even a 10 year old one, if cheap enough and in good repair. Even if only as some sort of backup / emergency transportation device.

Yet I both appreciate (and see value in) new technologies such as Vehicle Dynamics / Stability Control Systems, for one instance. Other examples: The current “horsepower race” has resulted in quicker cars. I derive enjoyment from acceleration. Many others see usefulness (and value) in the latest navigation systems. But my point here is only that how much value any such newly available feature is worth is a highly subjective judgment call, and an individual one.

There are plenty of folks who will advise everyone: “Never buy a new car”.

There are certainly arguments to be made, from a financial viewpoint, to “let some other shmuck take the first couple years depreciation hit”. Etc. Etc.

Buy neither Caddy-s nor clothes nor houses are purely financial purchase decisions for most people. And I don’t see the purchase of any Caddy (or BMW or Infiniti, etc.) – new OR used, as one of “need”. Transportation may be a need. These premium models and brands also succeed because they satisfy “wants” as well.

I do enjoy my house, though it is larger than I truly need. It would be impossible to justify a “need” for the 2 car garage and the private backyard, for instance. From a re-sale standpoint, it may actually be a better investment than a smaller one. But I clearly do not need several aspects of my house.

Neither do I need a new car every 2 or 3 years.

But I cannot see myself accepting the risk of running such a complex car as a Caddy beyond the warranty period. As many other have said. The potential cost of diagnosis and parts / labor to repair problems is rather extreme. The cost of parts and labor for a 6 year old car, worth 20% of MSRP when new, is not 20% of labor / parts for a brand new car, or that car when new. It is simply absorbed by someone else during the warranty period.

And some new technologies, improvements in the ride /handling compromise, better acceleration, etc. all have value for me. My strategy works for me. And that’s the only one it has to work for. Enjoy (?) yours . . .

YMMV. By a lot!

- Ray
Not a financial advisor – and will never even play one in real life . . .

sls002

My comments were meant for jerrymcshane1 who has complained about Cadillac's depreciation rate more than once. If I understand your rather lengthy rant, a Cadillac becomes worthless to you at the end of the warranty period. I am not overly concerned about driving mine past the warranty period. About the worst that can happen is for the engine to need replaced, and the cost of engines is now about $5000.

Anyway, if my Seville is still worth around $5000 when it is 8 years old (2010), then the depreciation rate for me will have dropped to about $5000 per year. At present the car is dropping about $10000 annually.

I think someone who plans to trade in three years or so, should consider lease instead. You don't own the car, but you do know the actual cost of driving it for three years.

acenj

Well,

Acenj wanted a v8 & Nav, but not anywhere near 60K!!! I saw the V6 w/ Nav at 49 and thought the v8 would run only a few thou more, so much for that.

Now i have to think hard about this (i'm not looking into to seriously just yet anyway). Caddy has some serious competition in this price point - especially with Infinity and Lexus cranking out some seriously equipped models with the new M and the GS at 50K, loaded, ...

lets see how long it takes to get some rebates going!

Aceman

skuuter

As everyone with a smidgen of sense knows, a new car is never a good investment. So why do people buy new cars? In my case, it's because I know exactly how my car's been treated and maintained from day one. It also is good for my ego, adds to my sense of well being and is good for the economy.

I could never justify a lease, even though I regularly buy a new car every three to four years.
I put too many miles on my cars to have a lease make sense. As for keeping the car beyond the warranty period; I'm out of warranty by the beginning of my third year of ownership.

Do I expect to get a fair amount of value from trading the car in or selling it with 100K on the ODO? You bet, because I take a lot of pride in keeping my cars maintained properly and washed and waxed more often than most people. So, even though the car, if I'm lucky, may only be worth 30% of it's original value, it's going to be the cream of the crop when compared to similar cars.
Over those years I will have had a car that is modern, comfortable and easy on everyone's eyes. I just budget the expense of owning a new car like I do having to pay my electric and cable bills.

Cars are necessary for most of us these days. I admit I've bought more car than I need, but isn't that the point? Who wants to limit their choices to what's practical all the time? You only live once, so enjoy it and stop worrying about depreciation and whether your purchase is a smart one. If it makes you happy and you don't live beyond your means, then you've made the right choice.

rayainsw

"Cars are necessary for most of us these days. I admit I've bought more car than I need, but isn't that the point? Who wants to limit their choices to what's practical all the time? You only live once, so enjoy it and stop worrying about depreciation and whether your purchase is a smart one. If it makes you happy and you don't live beyond your means, then you've made the right choice. "

Well said. And concise.
- Ray
Occasionally verbose . . .

sls002

I think the options packages will change in another model year or so. At least the CTS packages are different than they started out as. The nav is only available on the 1SC, 1SF and 1SG packages, where it is standard.

jerrymcshane1

GM Announces New Incentive Program Intended to Help Clear Vehicles Off Dealers' Lots
DETROIT March 9, 2005; Dee-Ann Durbin writing for the AP reported that General Motors Corp. announced a new round of consumer incentives Thursday intended to help clear slow-selling vehicles off dealers' lots this month.

GM will give cash bonuses of between $500 and $1,500 for vehicles that have been in dealer inventories for at least 125 days, GM spokeswoman Deborah Silverman said. Most of those vehicles will be eligible for $1,000 bonuses, but Cadillacs will be eligible for $1,500. Cadillac sales were strong at the end of 2004 but fell 3.3 percent last month, according to Autodata Corp.

The "March Madness" promotion is similar to a red tag sale GM held in December. GM's sales fell 7 percent overall that month, but the bonuses helped sales of individual brands like Chevrolet and Cadillac. Cadillac sales rose 19 percent in December, helping the luxury brand achieve its best sales year since 1990.

pat

Can you post a link to that please?

sls002

http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/gm11e_20050311.htm

I found the above link. What cars might qualify or where they are is a bit fuzzy from the buyer end, but the dealers/GM know.

pat

Thanks for that link -- what we need here is a link to the article that jerrymcshane1 is quoting in order to avoid copyright issues. I found the article and here is the link:

http://www.theautochannel.com/F/news/2005/03/10/009440.html

For future reference, copying and pasting all or part of an article (beyond a couple of sentences or so) requires an accompanying link that is publicly accessible (i.e., doesn't require a paid subscription to read, or anything like that).

Okay, so now we're squared away on this one, carry on!

jerrymcshane1

Sorry about not providing the "link." I thought the article might help some potential Cadillac buyers. And YES, the info given out by GM is "fuzzy." Sounds like this promotion is more guided towards the dealers NOT we consumers to alleviate the bloated inventories. My local Cadillac, Buick, and Chevy dealer for example, has no less than 3 04' SRX's on his lot. And about 3 05's.

rayainsw

"General Motors Corp., the world’s largest carmaker, on Wednesday said it now expects a first-quarter loss and sliced its calendar-year earnings forecast, reflecting lower North American sales and production volumes and a tougher pricing environment."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7205394/

I am surprised that the STS has still received no incentives. Pricing (IMHO) is the biggest issue for the STS - it certainly is for me . . .

- Ray
Confused by the GM / Caddy Marketing / Pricing strategy . . .

rcf8000

I'm also surprised that there are no incentives on the STS. Lexus has them on LS430s; MB has them on S class.

jerrymcshane1

I really don't see how a $750 cash rebate to a student (what student can afford a $65,000 Lexus) can be construed as an incentive.

Rebates $750 Cash to Customer start: 03/01/2005 end: 06/30/2005 Get Dealer Pricing
Restrictions College graduate bonus cash is only available to those who have graduated in the past 120 days. Proof of graduation is required. Rebate can only be applied toward the down payment.
Comments Incentives may vary; see your local dealer for details.

rcf8000

I got a "$500 Purchase Certificate" in the mail, good toward an ES330 or LS430 through 3/31. That feels like an incentive to me. It may only be available in the "Western Area", though. I have never received anything like this before, and I've been a Lexus customer for 7 years. From what I can tell, the market is very soft for high end luxury cars right now. It's surprising, considering that the economy is doing well, or so we are told.

rayainsw

Well, when they add another 0 to the end of the amounts ($500 / $750) it will likely generate some additional sales.

Could be they will wait until 2006-s start to arrive in significant numbers on dealer lots - but I would expect they'll be offering incentives in this range, if there are many unsold STS-s at that time - and into the November / December timeframe.

We'll see.

- Ray
Thinking (still) that at invoice less a $5,000 incentive, a 1SF becomes a reasonable value . . .

hummerspec

Dont worry Gm is at about 27% of last years sales. They are going to have to kick it into gear very soon.

jerrymcshane1

I would bet the ranch (don't have one though) that the STS will see a significant cash rebate EARLIER than Nov.. Maybe even this spring. If one read any of the head honchos remarks yesterday after they posted terrible numbers (and the whole year is supposed to be just as bad) the words MARKET SHARE were still in vogue. In other words, HIGHER incentives are on the way. GM still adheres to selling MORE vehicles regardless of their margins to GAIN MARKET SHARE.

hammen2

From http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0503/17/A01-120183.htm

"Long a leader in the incentive war, GM plans to change its strategy. Wagoner wants to move away from huge cash rebates and price vehicles closer to their real market value. The company's advertising also needs to emphasize the value and attributes of GM brands rather than peddle price alone."

acenj

I'm beginning to think that any incentives seen may not be substantial, guess time will tell. I saw a report showing sales numbers of each of the makes for GM. WHile chevy, buick, pontiac where in the 10-25% off of last year, caddy was only 3.8% off or something like that. will be waiting though.

aceman

carnaught

"....Caddy was only 3.8% off or...."

If true, that's significant considering Cadillac introduced an entirely new car, the STS.

jerrymcshane1

Isn't this one and the same? Pricing vehicles closer to their mkt value vs added cash incentives. The two render the SAME result. LOWER prices, for the buyer. It's basically a "mind game" thing. GM has already LOWERED the sticker on the GMC Envoy, Chevy Trailblazer, etc., etc..

rayainsw

The marketing and financial people at GM apparently believe(d) that they could charge a very ‘premium’ price for the STS immediately upon introduction. BMW (one STS competitor, certainly) tried something quite similar back in 1969. (I remember it well!)

“All the 6-cylinder cars first appeared in this country as 1969 models. The 2500 listed for $5,367, while the 2800 went for $6,369. Five or six grand isn't much today, but back then it was not an inconsiderable sum - a 1969 2002 was only $3,053. [Considering the competition such as Mercedes] it's not surprising that sales of the 2500 and 2800 were less than robust.”

“But Max Hoffman came up with a clever marketing plan. He suggested that the two models be combined into one called the Bavaria. The car appeared in 1971 and was actually the 2800 minus the leather upholstery and Nivomat rear suspension. A few items that had been standard on the 2800, such as the heated rear window and the handsome tool kit attached to the underside of the trunk lid, were made optional.”

However, the Bavaria's most important feature was a lower price tag. At less than $5000 - $4,987 east coast point of entry (POE) - the car suddenly became a bargain. The name, too, was a clever strategy because it reinforced the Bavaria's Teutonic origin. It worked splendidly and sales firmed up.” – Source = R&T

STS relevance?

Well, given the raw numbers are (almost exactly) 10 X difference in the pricing from 35 years ago, this may seem odd – but I think we can look at percentages here.

The same reduction in (percentage of) MSRP as the BMW 2800 to the Bavaria ($6,369 to $4,987), if applied today to a ‘typical’ STS V8 would result in a reduction for the STS V8 from $58,785

(typical here is my likely choice, should I buy one as they can currently be configured = the 1SF Equipment Group / version. Just as one example.)

to $46,029 (a reduction to 78.3% = almost 22% off. Interesting that a “base” STS V8 MSRP = $47,720).

Now, in 2005 I doubt such a reduction in the STS V8 MSRP is likely. Today.

However, without hordes of happy STS (RWD) customers and proven high residuals / trade-ins, I just do not see how Caddy can expect to ask these prices – today. And given the current sales, I just do not see how Caddy or the dealers can expect to hold to these prices.

If, in a couple years, they have proven that the STS is reliable, maintains performance over time, and is very desirable as a used car / trade-in, perhaps . . .

The core similarity is that BMW did not have such ‘hordes’ of happy premium sedan customers in 1970 – and in this country had previously been selling mostly 1600-s and 2002-s. It took a while for the BMW premium sedans (as these 6 cylinder sedans were, back then) to establish a premium value and “priceworthyness”. So – they lowered their prices. A lot. And built a reputation over time that (one could argue) now allows them to charge a premium price for their cars in this country.

Now it took BMW nearly 2 years to “see the light” and develop the Bavaria and essentially reduce the MSRP. I doubt Caddy has the luxury of that kind of time frame.

I have driven 2 examples of the STS V8. I do believe that it is a good car, and sufficiently capable in the areas of performance to interest me. Yet I do not see it as the clear class leader is any area. (M45 Sport leaps to mind in several areas, particularly with MSRP in the low $50K area.)

- Ray
Who WOULD pay $47.7K for a 1SF, today . . .

sls002

I think that they are trying to limit sales of the "performance" STS, due to the fuel consumption. If in fact, they expected to sell a high percentage of performance versions relative to the base/luxury STS with the axle ratio that results in decent fuel economy, then the EPA might want to charge a guzzler tax.

The V6 STS is priced at a level that makes it a real alternative to the CTS. A nicely equipped CTS runs close to $40,000. In fact the nicely equipped 2.8 liter CTS runs too close to $40,000.

The new Buick LaCrosse with 3.6 liter V6 runs upwards of $35,000 well equipped.

I want a six speed automatic before I get interested in anything.

rayainsw

“I want a six speed automatic before I get interested in anything.”

Well, I would certainly like to see a 6 speed automatic in the STS. The STS with 5 speed automatic (assuming the 2 early build examples that I drove were representative) already interests me.

My guess is that we will see a 6 speed automatic available on other STS-s besides the STS-v, due out late this year.

I will be interested to see when it appears and how GM / Caddy decides to offer it. I can see several possible scenarios, most of which I do not like.

Given that the 5 speed is a relatively new trans., and used in relatively few GM vehicles (SRX, XLR, and?) I would be very surprised if the powers that be would decide to simply replace this trans. completely across the board on all STS V6 and V8 models. The 6 speed is being built at a newly equipped facility, not on the same equipment as the 5L50-E. So unless they have another RWD high torque application / vehicle in mind, I think the excess capacity for building the 5 speed that would result from such a move would preclude such a broad replacement. Though that’s certainly what I’d like to see. At little to no additional increase in MSRP. (Riiiiiight.)

So – my guess is that either the 6 speed will be made available something like AWD is being made available – on the STS V8 1SG only, initially. Then on the 1SF (currently), then on the V6 (sometime later) – and perhaps across the board, eventually. Or it will become part of the 1SG equipment. Or. Or.

My reading of the ratio spread on the 6 speed automatic suggests that with an appropriate final drive ratio, it will offer (at least) equivalent acceleration plus a significant lowering in RPM at speed in 6th, and likely a commensurate improvement in highway EPA rating.

We shall see.

We do appear to be cursed with living in “interesting times”.

- Ray
Hoping to be proven wrong (again) . . .

sls002

Your assumption that the 5 speed is new is false. GM has been making this transmission for BMW for several years. GM is also planning to replace the FWD transmissions with 6 speeds too. One thing for sure is that the 6 speeds will not appear all at once. It will take some time to get production up to speed, so that everything can have one. I expected to see some FWD 6-speeds for the 2006 model year, but none have been announced that I am aware of. Probably the 6 speeds will go into production in 2006 for the 2007 model year...

merc1

"I think that they are trying to limit sales of the "performance" STS, due to the fuel consumption. If in fact, they expected to sell a high percentage of performance versions relative to the base/luxury STS with the axle ratio that results in decent fuel economy, then the EPA might want to charge a guzzler tax.
"

I'm not sure what you're saying here? It seems to me that GM would like to sell as many high-end STS V8 models they could because that is where the most profit is. The EPA doesn't charge gas guzzler taxes based on sales, they do it based on fuel economy of the model in question. If the STS V8 doesn't have a GGT now it won't all of sudden get one because they sell a lot of them. As far as limiting sales of performance STS models, they STS-V wouldn't be built if this were at all true. It seems to me that the STS, especially the V8 version, nice as it is, is simply overpriced. To say they don't want to sell that many because of fuel economy concerns seems like a grand excuse to me.

M

sls002

The AWD STS does have a guzzler tax. The premium luxury performance model (1SG) has a 3.42:1 axle ratio that probably does not get much better mileage than the AWD. The base STS has a 2.73:1 axle ratio, and the EPA numbers are based on that gearing. I would think that if most STS's sold will have high performance gearing, then the EPA's fuel economy numbers should be based on the high performance gearing. I don't know how the EPA decides what gearing to use. There is no reason not to put a number that is based on the actual gearing that the car is equipped with. GM tests the cars with all the various gearing and they know what the difference is. It would be a simple matter for the computer printing out the window sticker with all the options to look up the gas mileage for the axle ratio and print it out.

I also think that Cadillac thinks that the STS is good enough to price at the $60,000 level for the performance models. It is clear to me that if they were cheaper, that would be the version of choice.

The STS_v is getting a 6 speed automatic so that the fuel consumption problem is reduced. However, this supercharged engine is only 4.2 liters in size to bring the fuel consumption into line. A larger engine would burn too much fuel. This was reported in one of the recent car magazines I think.

merc1

"The base STS has a 2.73:1 axle ratio, and the EPA numbers are based on that gearing. I would think that if most STS's sold will have high performance gearing, then the EPA's fuel economy numbers should be based on the high performance gearing. I don't know how the EPA decides what gearing to use. There is no reason not to put a number that is based on the actual gearing that the car is equipped with. GM tests the cars with all the various gearing and they know what the difference is. It would be a simple matter for the computer printing out the window sticker with all the options to look up the gas mileage for the axle ratio and print it out."

Ok thanks for the clarification. Does GM have any say in this matter? I think they should, but then again most cars in this segment don't have the option of different gearing for the same engine so the STS is sorta unique in that regard.

M

sls002

What I understand is this: the automanufacturers do the testing and the EPA does spot checking to make sure that they are not cheating. The Corvette does offer an optional performance axle ratio too. Some of the other cars with performance models like the G6 have different axle ratios, and in this case, the G6 GT has a lower EPA MPG rating. So, I do not understand how the STS slips by, except that the STS V8 is one model with some packages.

fjohnson

I (an attorney) was recently contacted by an individual who purchased a 2005 CTS-V. With 7000 miles on his vehicle he took it in for an unrelated issue. The dealer told him the tires needed to be replaced at a cost of $2500 and that his warranty did not cover tire wear. The dealer confessed that Cadillac put improper tires on this high performance vehicle, that this is a national problem, and that Cadillac has not agreed to cover the dealer's cost of replacing the tires. In short, they refused to cover the cost and Cadillac has refused to initiate a recall. I am investigating the claim and am trying to determine whether my client's issue is as broad-based as the dealer suggested or if it is unique to my client.

sls002

The original equipment tires for the CTS_v were Goodyear Eagle F1 w rated 245/45R18's. If the car in question has/had these tires they should be OK, unless the owner has worn them out. The tire rack has tires for the CTS_v that cost around $200-250 each. What tires/wheels did the car come with exactly??? If they goofed at the factory and put the base tires for the CTS on this car, then there is a problem, but I would think that the problem is Cadillac's.

There is a scam here somewhere.................

merckx

I have noted that for the last few years the manufacturers have been warning that very high performance tires can have an extremely short life span. Typically they have to put quite a bit of hp down to the pavement,and are very sticky as a braking/handling aid. So 7000 miles could be expected if one drives with a heavy foot.

pat

We should be having this conversation in either the Cadillac CTS discussion, or if there is interest I can reopen the archived Cadillac CTS-V discussion.

But I don't think we should be having it here.

shfawaz

Can anyone confirm what the current incentives besides the 5.9% finance rate on a purchase? On a lease, I was told at one dealer it was $750 lease incentive, another told me it was $1750. I thought March Madness brought $1500 rebates on Cadillacs for cars over 125 days on the lot. I'm interested in leasing a V6 STS Luxury performance, and any help would be appreciated

sls002

The incentive on a car sitting around over 125 days is $1,000 in addition to other incentives. There are no incentives for the STS anywhere unless a local dealer has an under the table deal with Cadillac.

rayainsw

"The STS_v is getting a 6 speed automatic so that the fuel consumption problem is reduced. However, this supercharged engine is only 4.2 liters in size to bring the fuel consumption into line. A larger engine would burn too much fuel. This was reported in one of the recent car magazines I think. "

STS-v has a 4.4L displacement version:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article_id=9019
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=7&article_id=1825&page_number=6

I wonder if the long term motor reliability with the supercharger's additional load on internals also might have been driving such a change. Additional block material would likely allow the thermal and pressure loads to be dealt with better . . .

- Ray
Wondering what the EPA rating of the STS-v will turn out to be . . .

sls002

I did goof on the size. The EPA numbers (GM's estimate) are 16 city 25 highway. They did reduce the bore size to make the block stronger. I think the EPA guess was in Automobile.

rayainsw

Caddy did not place well.
Too bad.
Link:

http://secure.grubbs.com/cardriver.pdf

Looks to me like the current pricing policy at Caddy / GM is largely to blame:

It looks to me like they were faced with a dilemma somewhat similar to mine, when I look at equipping a V8 STS as I’d like to buy and drive one. My quandary is that in order to specify certain things that are of great interest to me, I need to buy (lots of) other, often expensive items as well, that do not interest me. Or at least are not worth the asking price, to me.

It appears that they chose / were provided with the best equipped STS V8 that they could under the parameters in effect. MSRP = $50,890 = 1SE ($50,565 + $325 for the Digital Audio System XM option, I presume).

This selection of the 1SE means there was no ability to add MagnaRide, no way to have the more aggressive final drive ratio (C+D specs show the 1SE’s 2.73 final drive, not the 1SF’s 3.23 – a big difference in acceleration feel, based on my test drives last Fall), no way to have any larger wheels or more aggressive tires (Michelin Energy LX4, P235/50R-17 = not very performance oriented) and no ability to order / specify any additional performance enhancing items like the Performance Handling Package (QAF).

– but this choice DID allow an STS V8 to have an MSRP below the $55K limit that C+D established for this test.

I’d personally like to be able to configure a 1SE with:
(JE5) Brakes, 17", Performance,
(G80) Limited Slip Differential,
(V03) Performance Cooling Package,
(NV7) Premium Steering Gear, ZF,
(FE3) Suspension, 4-wheel Independent With Magnetic Ride Control
and the much more aggressive wheel / tire package in the QAF . . .

And a Moonroof. And the heated / COOLED front seats.

I’d prefer NOT to have / pay for the NAV system (2K-ish?), the Xenon / HIDs, and a few other items included in 1SF and 1SG.

But apparently Caddy did not have me in mind when they established the current Options and Packages available for the V8 STS. (Sigh)

Just my 2 gallons worth . . .
- Ray
Waiting to see of there is further option availability “adjustment” . . .

sls002

I did browse thru the article. I don't have my C&D for May yet. I will point out that the 1SG perfomance on 0-60 and quarter mile are not much better. Replacing the standard tires with the same size performance tires would probably help handling some.

I needed to take my Seville to the dealer today and they had an STS, XLR and CTS_v on the showroom floor. I looked at the finish on the plastics and think all three are not better than my Seville for finish. I don't know what other vehicles in this class look like, but I am not impressed.

justgreat47

high gas prices, high sticker prices and high option package prices and TIME will conspire against the sts...there's no success like failure and for someone who likes to buy and hold the sts is shaping up to be a great deal. it will take a few years, but with any new model it pays to bide one's time. jackg 90seville 96k

the 4.2 in the v series is smaller for better cooling and longevity...it will also help in the fuel economy numbers...but it was done mainly for durability issues....

cove148

I believe I read that GM & Ford are jointly developing a 6 speed auto. Lexus LS430 introduced the 6 speed in the 2004 model. Really nice.

acenj

Well,

Its easter sunday - what better way to kill time than by hitting the caddy, infinity, and chrysler dealership.

I must say, up until today, i was hell bent on getting the STS. something about the exterior lines that just draws me to it. I checked out a few on the lot, and as per my reading, can't touch the V8 for less than 50K. Thought the V6 w/ Nav is nice at 50K if there were incentives - but it is a V6.

Then I went to check out the new M. I didn't think i'd get to see many, but there were at least 6/7 for me to see. First one I saw was the M45 sport. WOW. w/ nav, MSRP was 54K. Interior lookes 50 times nicer than the caddy IMO. I then saw a M35X (AWD w/ Nav), which ran 50K. I think i've been converted. i'm hoping i haven't been, but a test drive will determine that. Where the caddy seems to be a little car for a lot of buck, the M's seem to be a TON of car for a little buck (keeping things in perspective here:)). Anyway, I guess my biggest thing is the M got me excited (no comments please), whereas the caddy was just, well just a caddy, didn't really get any juices going. I am just blow away at the pricing caddy set for the STS given its competition. The M45 sport had quite a few bells & whistles, and the interior & exterior just floored me. can you tell i like it! UGH!!!! I really don't want to buy a foriegn car, someone talk some sense into me.

Aceman

carnaught

Ace,

Recently I looked at the STS (wanted to buy American), Audi A6, M, and the new GS Lexus. Wife and I drove all and the best deal for a trade was offered on a loaded STS V6. I ended up selling my wife's previous car and therefore the trade, per se, was not a consideration. After considering the STS for $50,500 (mrsp), I just didn't like certain issues. It was first a new model/redo of an American car, not likely to be without multiple defects. Then I didn't like the bundling of options on the STS. To get what I wanted I would also be getting a spoiler which I didn't want on a Caddy, and wouldn't get Cadillac's famous magnetic ride control nor would I get H.I.D. headlights which I had become used to and expected in a $50k car. Then there was resale or lack of it. I considered a lease but no great deals were offered. The car's looks and driveability were quite good. Then with new "06's (Lexus and Infiniti) available, I became more interested in going up one model year, i.e., one year newer model. The M fit the bill combining luxury and sporty handling plus Infinti's reliability and great service experience I had on my G35.

We're had our M35 Sport with all the "toys" for two weks now and do not in the least regret our decision. All of our other choices would have been great as well, but the Cadillac seemed to really fall short, unfortunately. The msrp on the Infiniti was under $48k with more options, more power and better fuel economy and one year newer than the STS. Obviously any car's looks are completely subjective.

vmathis

Hello All-
Am a Caddy lover. Traded in 2004 CTS for STS last weekend. Got the 1SG package, want to remove the block for the DVD player. Have teenager and husband who wishes to watch DVD's while we travel. Any ideas?

rayainsw

"The M45 sport had quite a few bells & whistles, and the interior & exterior just floored me. can you tell i like it! UGH!!!! I really don't want to buy a foriegn car, someone talk some sense into me. "

Sorry - I have driven 3 M45 Sports - and I can't help you here.
- Ray
Equally impressed with the M45 Sport . .

xkss

The new STS-V won't be faster than an E55 AMG or an M5, but at least the STS is no longer fwd. The new STS-V will have Brembo brakes, a new 6 speed automatic transmssion, and a lot of other cool stuff.

from motorsportscenter.com

The supercharged Northstar V8: 4.4 liters, 440 hp, 430 lb-ft of torque - 90% of which is available from 2200 to 6000rpm, and VVT. This supercharger is worthy of special note - engineers were happy to tell us that this blower operates with some 30% less drag than the Ford GT's supercharger, and the intercooler has 50 cooling fins per inch length of the pipeline.



The most powerful Cadillac ever made (along with the new XLR-V)