Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2008 Cadillac CTS



  • socalbmmrsocalbmmr Posts: 12
    The lease calculator on is not accurate. Currently, BMW is offering leases for 3-series with the following deal: 3 yrs/36,000 mi, 60% residual value and about .00125 money factor. Plug those in and you should get a payment around 575- 650 depending on sticker price.
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    I thought that is what I said, but not in so many words.


    Unless the CTS is less expensive than a 5 series, I think it will face an uphill battle.

    That is, of course, if the CTS is as popular to lease as Bimmers seem to be.

    For, who would pay more per month for a $40K CTS than a $50K BMW?

    I don't know how and I almost don't care -- but when my company, those many moons ago, offered a car allowance (for a lease), I literally looked first at a Chrysler product.

    My then boss, himself owning an Audi Silver Fox, a BMW Bavaria and a Porsche 944, showed me an article about a new car, called an Audi 5000 (the 100LS was pretty much considered a losing proposition at the time).

    He showed me that I could lease a new 1978 Audi 5000 for less money than a Dodge Charger or a Cordoba or even an Olds Toronado, even though they had lower MSRP's.

    I went for the Audi 5000.

    Cadillac's new CTS is a very compelling package (on cyber paper) -- I hope they "lease them" to move them (taking a page from BMW.)
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    The normal CTS(V aside - it's more like a M5 if anything) will come in at about $35, or about 40K equipped comparably to the 5 series. BMW is like Mercedes in this way - overpriced and you pay for the badge.

    And a lot of people are spending their money elsewhere. Accura, Infinity, Lexus, Cadillac - they all make compelling 5 series choices for often less money or with better reliability(often both).
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    Although my wife has owned 2 BMW's, I have not ever owned one. My impression is that the least lease cost animal in the ELLPS and LPS kingdom is and has been the BMW.

    If the anecdotal evidence is true, the majority of these cars are leased. Likewise it appears that 75% of BMW's are leased and they have, typically, zero costs other than gas, insurance & plates for 50K miles.

    The subventing or the residuals alone makes a BMW's 3 year cash out of pocket often the lowest of most and sometimes all of its "league" (ellps or lps.)

    It seems that the BMW, if it is "overpriced and you pay for the badge" suggests that the cars it competes with are even more so.

    I am in the 75% (and growing) who long-term rent my cars. I am enthusiastically in favor of returning to an American car. The CTS fits my age, lifestyle, income etc, well (at least the written word and 2d pictures of it seem to.)

    Yet, if I configure a new CTS, a new A6 and a new 5 series, as I would like them (AWD, technology packages, upgraded suspension, wheels and tires, etc.), I will look at the monthly payment for 27 - 39 months, the out of pocket maintenance costs and the cost to feed and insure it.

    I will do the same for the other vehicles that at that time are in the market in in my sweet spot.

    Apparently that puts me in with about 75% of the car consumers in the classes noted.

    Historically, the BMW stands an excellent chance of being the lowest TCO under these conditions.

    The BMW badge seems to all but guarantee a high residual, hence paying for the badge takes on the meaning that it is a "discount coupon."

    Long timers here know I have been a screaming voice in the wilderness for Audi -- practically shilling for them (but not really.)

    I am not "pro BMW," I am in favor of the best (at a price point) value, performance, safety, content, etc I can get. I am rooting for GM and the CTS -- but "IF" a 5 series BMW and a CTS are leased at a similar TCO for the term noted above, I believe most consumers would opt for the BMW.

    Ditto if BMW and Audi are switched and ditto again if the same can be said about Mercedes. For others it would be the same thing for an Infiniti or a Lexus.

    Cadillac has apparently moved the CTS up, substantially. In the marketplace that is here now, however, it sometimes seems MSRP is only slightly relevant -- people (about 75% of them) want to know the amount of the monthly check they will have to write for the next 3 years, period.

    For this 75% of us, I suspect paying for the badge, if indeed that is what it is, is a good thing, because it has tended to slash the price of "ownership."

    Cadillac, without some similar programs, may find itself having a car that everyone wants but few are willing to pay for considering the scenario I have laid out.

    I am not shilling for BMW or Mercedes, at least I don't mean to be. I am looking at this from a marketing perspective given the current realities. If "we" think BMWs are overpriced, it can only be because we have stopped looking once we see the sticker price.

    These days, apparently, the sticker price is not what people are using to evaluate their acquisitions.

    For $600 and change per month, for a CTS or one of the overpriced cars, I would certainly suspect many if not most would opt not for the Cadillac.

    Often wrong and never uncertain, I remain. :confuse:
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    If you have to ask, you can't afford it.
  • allargonallargon Posts: 75
    Leasing in TX doesn't make much sense to me unless one is writing it off as a business expense. Other states are much more pose..leasee friendly.

    Apparently, BMW subsidizes more than GM or Ford. I even posted a link.

    For those of us that purchase to own, I don't see a Bimmer being cheaper than a Caddy or an Infiniti.

    Back to the Caddy... when's the Bluetooth one coming out again? :blush:
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    The car that has the least lease cost is often the car that is the least cost to own for the same reason: residual.

    It is true that a sub-vented lease may offer artificially high or low numbers to entice a customer into buying.

    Yet, no company is so big that it can lose money or every deal and "make it up in volume."

    If -- and this is unknown TODAY -- a $45K car is more expensive to lease for X time, than a $50K car, it is likely the $45K car will be more expensive to buy and own, unless the car is kept until it is fully depreciated. Of course what happens is that the car with the higher residual retains its value longer than the other one.

    The difference may prove immaterial to you but in terms of an asset on a balance sheet, it is possible (and sometimes probable) that the car with the high residual may actually cost less than the one with the lower residual.

    Most folks will NOT pay $650 per month for a $45K car if there is a $50K car offered for the same money, especially if the latter comes complete with full, free, maintenance for 4 years or 50K miles.

    A $45K Acura at ~$865/mo when a $48K Bimmer is ~$650 is not a compelling position for the Acura sales person to be in (when he reveals the Acura's residual is but 47% when the Bimmers is 61%.)

    Cadillac, I am certain, will rise to this issue with the new CTS -- once the initial buzz subsides. Remember when the 300 came out? Local Chrysler dealers were charging over sticker and even had the gall to put a line item on the new sticker called "ADP." Additional Dealer Profit.

    Now the lease programs on the 2007 300's are really attractive.

    My assumption, and that is all that it is, is that the CTS (since the majority of the customers who drive them rent them) will be subvented either by discounts, artificially low money factors (including 0%) and/or high residuals.

    In the past Cadillac supported low lease payments with high residuals, somewhat to their dismay, since it made the leases almost impossible to terminate early.

    One of my co workers had a 2004 Cadillac and GM sent her a get outta jail (up to 5 months) coupon -- which she promptly applied to a 2007 CTS (on a 39 month lease/ 18K miles for a low number beginning with a $4!)

    Sometimes, if there are any business deductions especially, a lease is not imprudent.

    Sometimes it is. :shades:
  • pearlpearl Posts: 336
    Mark, I think you are spot on re leasing/residuals. I am intrigued by the upcoming CTS - no doubt it will be a fine car - however, in looking at a variety of numbers on the cars I like (i.e. style, performance, cost of ownership, residual value, etc), it will take a lot to pry me away from BMW.
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    I'm also "rooting" for an American ellps or lps that makes a compelling counterpoint (in all areas) to Audi, BMW, Lexus, etc.

    To do this, the product has to be "great," and the "deal" also has to be darn near magnetic.

    GM can make this happen -- possibly with this car.

    Can't wait.
  • pearlpearl Posts: 336
    in a press release about the 08 STS. Link posted in the 08 STS thread.
  • piasonpiason Posts: 55
    This is a CTS forum :surprise:
  • pearlpearl Posts: 336
    Yes, I know that....and if you knew anything about the 08 CTS, you would know that it is supposed to get the new direct injection 3.6L V6. Well, it is apparently also going into the STS (which was not generally known earlier), so if any CTS fans want to read some things about this engine they can find the link on the STS board.
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    Only 298 hp? Let the whining begin!

    I suppose they'll force you to get the stiffer suspension and teeth-rattling lower profile tires to get the DI engine.

    The thing I hate most about my Intrigue is the harsh ride over even small bumps and road undulations.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Dang. An Intrigue is harsh? I just about fell asleep in the last one I drove. Compared to that, yeah - the CTS is going to feel like a cart with wooden wheels. :P
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    I believe they softened the ride on later Intrigues.
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    Here is what may happen, what may HAVE happened, etc, with respect to what is sometimes described as harsh or rough rides.

    In the "old days" cars were often offered with sport or "performance" suspensions. Remember the Impala, then the Impala SS was offered, then the Caprice, etc etc?

    The SS was, from at least the suspension point of view, only different from the base Impala by virtue of stiffer coil springs and "heavy duty" hydraulic shocks. Perhaps there were "anti-roll bars" perhaps they were larger than the ones on the standard Impala, perhaps there was a front or a rear anti-sway bar, perhaps even one at both ends.

    These Super Sport versions rode much more harshly than the standard versions, and, frankly, they didn't handle THAT much better.

    Ever stiffer springs, struts, shocks, whatever did not impart much of anything "super" to these cars because the cars were NOT very stiff.

    Over the years the cars have become stiffer and stiffer and stiffer and the ride has actually improved -- as has the handling.

    Couple today's super stiff chassis with some modern design springs, struts, bushings, shocks (or whatever) and active and passive roll bars, air suspension bits, semi-active dual diagonal hydraulic anti-roll bars, Magna ride, bigger wheels, bigger tires, term insurance for your wife, and so on and we have reached something of a point in time where we can buy cars that can have both compliant rides AND performance capabilities at the same time.

    I am not assuming anything about anyone's personal seat of their pants impressions. But, I have noticed some people who have driven "loose" NOT STIFF, that is, chassis based cars for years believe stiff chassis cars "ride rough." Only after driving both and back to back time and again do some folks actually start to seek ever stiffer chassis cars.

    The stiffer the better for RIDE and HANDLING. We can only hope Cadillac has made the new CTS Über stiff.

    The Intrigues, perhaps were softened, but I would assume the softening was NOT due to chassis stiffness -- but, if it was a result of stiffening the chassis, one could assume later Intrigues handled better.
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    Stiffening the chassis, by itself, wouldn't make the ride smoother, but it would allow them to use softer springs or bushings without the handling getting sloppier.

    My old 74 Fleetwood had flexibility designed in to help absorb bumps, which it did quite well. High speed handling was another matter, but it was fine for everyday driving and always felt stable (except on ice & snow).

    Rumor has it the STS will be discontinued after 2009, but I hope they won't wait that long to put Magna Ride on the CTS. I would consider paying $1500 extra to have good handling and a smooth, stable ride, but due to middle age, I would rather have a smooth ride and adequate handling, if I have to chose. That's why Buicks are softly sprung, and the young folks complain. Just wait a few years.

    I wouldn't have bought the Intrigue if I'd test-driven it on the bumpy roads I use everyday, a mistake I won't make again. I looked at the Regal, but there was no comfortable place for my left foot.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,935
    "The G8 GXP/GTX based off the Holden Commodore HSV will have Delphi's Magneride system and it's adjustable FYI.” – rocky

    MagneRide is not mentioned in anything I have seen from GM:

    Some production ( as well as show car ) details on the V6 and V8 versions here: x.html

    What is your source for this info?

    - Ray
    Supposing that if the V8 is called a GT ( seems likely ), and given the current model designations Pontiac seems to have ‘standardized on’, that would appear to offer 2 higher equipment levels – a GTP and GXP. This seems to present the opportunity for Pontiac to bring the equipment & interior refinement ( ? ) level up. And add more Luxury features. Twice. In the future. Perhaps to include MagneRide at some point in the future?
    2016 BMW 340i
  • Has anyone heard what the wait is likely to be for a wagon version?
  • biker4biker4 Posts: 746
    In the US it might be forever. :shades:
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,993
    Motor Trend.

    If the 502 hp HSV edition from Australia, is brought over here then Magneride is one of the features on that car. They said it would be on a limited edition model. The article is from about 4-5 months ago. ;)

    Now lets get this one back on the 08' CTS. Any more news on the CTS-V and when it might debut ?

  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    CTS Coupe and Wagon: MY 2009 at the earliest. Possible unveiling at Detroit Auto Show in Jan 08. But they may do one in 09, other in 2010. It's all rumor and speculation at this point.
  • First, this is really on topic, but I may be the only one who really cares about this. I am not a Caddy guy, and gave up on GM in the eighties when I discovered that my 86 Olds, in my mind, was glued together instead of screwed together as I expected. I also, at the time had a '83 Firebird which was a piece of junk, but, mind you, to my mind a good looking piece of junk as it careened down the road and did its level best to do it in a level line. I had a '48 Caddy as my first company sure helps if your new fathet-in-law owns the company, which I loved... the Caddy, not my fathet-in-law. As a weekend vehicle, I bought a new '86 Chevy pickup for $11,000, put 95,000 miles on it and sold it in 1995 for $3000.00. I put this in for all the math freaks who can tell me if that was a good deal or not. Then I bought a 1995 GMC Tahoe. I say GMC because for some strange reason, I don't consider GMC to be part of General Motors. They just seem better. I know they're the same damn thing as a Chevy, I'm just telling you I think they're better. Sanity or logic was never s strong suit in my family.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,993
    GMC, is better because they get a little better grade of parts. I know this because dad made parts for em all at GM/Delphi and Chevy would get GMC's parts that were a hair lower in tolerance. So while they are the same in a lot of ways GMC's are a hair better made.

    Cadillac, Buick, Saab, GMC, all get the best parts.

    The Chevy, Pontiac, Saturn, get as good parts but if the part is a hair off in spec but will pass Chevy spec it goes to Chevy. A hair off might mean a millionth of a millimeter so the performance of the part isn't jeapordized but the tolerances of Cadillac and like brands are indeed the highest. A fuel injector going into 3.6 Chevy might not pass 3.6 Cadillac specs is all. ;)



    Hummer, I don't recall where they sit on the tolerance board spectrum
  • The point of all this boring info is the I am NOT a GM or Caddy fan, until I saw the '08 CTS. KNOCKED MY SOCKS OFF!!!Hated the earlier CTS's or should say I just ignored them. I now drive a '02 MB C320 wagon which I really like..O.K., for all you cynics out there, the little tri-star at the end of the hood has something to do about it...but it's just a tad too snug, and forget about adults in the back seat. I end up with my chin on the steering wheel, and the back-seaters end up with their chins on their knee caps. Now, the interior. Loved the idea of the ambient lights and pinlights on different stuff, love the part wooden steering wheel..MB wants over $500 for one on a factory order..seats and just every thing looks plush and perfect in that light colored leather, EXCEPT for that crappy plastic gray colored piece between the top of the dash board and the bottom of the windshield. Where in the hell did that come from? You know what I piece I mean, don't you? I say piece but that sucker is big, and swoops right the whole front under the windshield. Have to see one in person, may be a deal breaker. Hope not.
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    Do you mean the defroster grill? I don't have very good photos of it, but I hadn't even noticed it til you posted.

    I think a mid-sized wagon would be just ideal for me. GM doesn't make one now in the US (Opel has a Vectra wagon that Saturn may one day import). Perhaps the CTS wagon could start a resurgence in US wagons. Right now the Germans and Swedes own the market, which is small but lucrative. Those MB wagons were very popular in toney suburbs in the 80's.
  • No, not the defroster grill, the whole top dashboard over the instrument manual that the defroster grill sits in. Only really noticeably unsightful when you have a light colored interior color. Does that last sentence make sense? I reread it and I don't understand what the hell I mean. Anyway, I must have weird tastes because I was looking at a picture of the new Maserati coupe and it had the same gray dealy...hey, maybe it's to reduce sunlight reflection from the windshield?
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,343
    What is an "instrument manual?"
  • ral1960ral1960 Posts: 74
    You're right, it's dark to reduce glare, and also so it's own reflection in the windshield won't be as noticable. Most people seem to like the CTS's (and SRX's) new dash because it looks like hand-stitched leather (which I suspect will only be used on the V series), instead of hard or moulded plastic, which is considered cheap-looking. It's certainly better than the all-black techno-dash on the current CTS.

    I do prefer the door latches on the current car, however. The placement of the window controls also worries me, but it's 5 hours to Atlanta to see it in person this weekend, when I should be doing my taxes.

    I'm glad to see more poly-chromatic interiors. I'm tired of the multiple shades of gray I've had the last 23 years (which is better than all one shade of gray).

    I wonder how dark the Mulberry leather interior will be. I'm guessing it replaces black as a choice, which means it will be pretty dark.
  • piasonpiason Posts: 55
    Has there been any test drives on the new 2008 CTS?
Sign In or Register to comment.