Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
plekto, that is true for most.....The "V" I guess for me is a private part extension for me. I've always wanted a car that was so fast it scared me and the only car that ever did that was a new 2000' Camaro SS that was modified and it had 385 hp.
Rocky
Rocky
P.S. It also adds to resale since most customers like the navi option anyways.
I as a elgible GMS participant can't combine my GMS and earned credit card dollars to a new GM product. It sucks because I would do just that.
Rocky
Rocky
You like ? :surprise: Wow, miracles do happen. :P
Rocky
Dude you are killing me........I however do think it's a good idea just in case you want a new CTS-V and you can turn your 08' CTS into your winter beater. :P
Rocky
The car was trashed by the press. Car and Driver said that it matched the dynamics of a early 90's 7-Series not the 3-Series of the time. The complaints about the interior were from everyone, not to mention the 4 main U.S. mags. The complaints focused on cheap materials, poor fit and finish. I already gave the proof of this in the other thread a while back and yet you continued to deny it. That is classic denial.
Bottom feeders? LOL, I like that one. The Z06 is a bottom feeder? The Aura is a bottom feeder? The STS? wow.
Apparently you don't know what an "American Sedan" is. The Z06 is not a sedan. I said that in the past American sedans were bottom feeders and you bring up the brand new Aura. The STS isn't a class leader is it? It isn't even close so my comment still stands.
The CTS is the best non V cadillac ever. How about that statement? Oh wait, can't say that until the magazines drive it because it may only look good "on paper" as GM pulls the wool over our eyes once again.
Makes no sense, whatever it is you're trying to say here.
M
In part the auto writers and the market. Now when they praise a GM car they're right on the money, but when they trash one they're clueless right?
I would drive the old FWD Seville, new STS or current DTS any day of the week over any non AMG/M E class or 5 series (old or new). Are those Cadillacs considered benchmarks by anyone?
Exactly, what you'd drive doesn't mean it is a benchmark, especially those old FWD heaps. Cadillac wasted so much time trying to make FWD work in RWD market its hilarious.
Probably not but they are EXCELLENT vehicles and in 80% of driving situations that we might encounter, you'll never miss the razor sharp handling of a sport package equipped BMW.
True, because the average consumer doesn't care, heck some don't know which set of wheels propel their car. Problem is that Cadillac wasn't competitive with those FWD cars. They were lame and sticking out in a RWD class.
I was once told by Mr. Merc that the old Caddy's couldn't compete (because FWD) and need electronic "crutches" just to drive down the road. I guess that's why everyone uses an alphabet soup of electronic damping nowadays, right?
Yep they did and ultimately they caved in an went RWD like everyone else. All the CVRSS nonsense was the most ridiculous spectacle possible. Everyone does it now to keep up with the Joneses.
This new CTS will hopefully have all the good that the Europeans offer yet still be American and not some "Me too" car like some of the competition.
That would be nice, too bad the cars that it is trying to compete with are of the Euro-thinking slant, not that 1-5 "Benchmark" nonsense. I especially love the one about the identity crisis. I guess the V series Cadillacs suffer from this too right? Cadillac is steadily chasing the Euros because that is whats in, not a DTS or ES350 type car. Deal with it. I'll give you that they're doing it with their own style and not being a styling copycat like some Japanese brand. BTW, I like the new CTS a lot, just having got back from Detroit. Its a gorgeous car inside and out.
M
He'll never, ever admit that. The outgoing CTS had a wonderful interior of quality materials, so did the pre-07 SRX.
M
I'm going to try to make a point here Chavis. Those interiors which did suck (no argument from me there), but they were not the norm from those brands, especially Mercedes and Lexus. That is the difference and it why people rag on GM interiors, cheap interiors are what they've done for years and years, 10 out of 10 times so yes people do forget that certain MB, Lexus and other imports have turned up stinky interiors from time to time. Don't you see that when Cadillac does cars like the new CTS on a consistent basis the criticism will go away? If GM could quit introducing half-baked cars like the Kappa twins no would could say anything.
M
I thought you had disappeared. We have kind of moved on from the Cadillac bashing stage of this discussion. Yes we know, MB has been making great cars for 100 year and Cadillac has just made its first competent car (well we dont really know yet, must wait for C&D to tell us) and they cant compete with the Europeans or Lexus. We all got the point.
"The complaints focused on cheap materials, poor fit and finish. I already gave the proof of this in the other thread a while back and yet you continued to deny it. That is classic denial. "
Never read anything about the CTS being poorly assembled. I dont know what you presented earlier, but I'm pretty sure the actual quotes are different from what you are presenting above. Repost it, I know you like to do anti-Gm research. While you are digging of evidence that everyone hated the CTS why dont you reread (assuming you ever read it) the R&T test between 7 RWD sedans in which the CTS finished first. Kind of hard to believe that happened since the car was universally bashed by the press according to you. The CTS-V was also named an all star by Automobile two years in a row. Maybe Cadillac paid for that award though, there's got to be an excuse. Classic denial indeed.
"I said that in the past American sedans were bottom feeders and you bring up the brand new Aura. The STS isn't a class leader is it? It isn't even close so my comment still stands. "
Z06 isnt a sedan, finally a valid point. Bravo! The '98 STS, '05 STS/STS-V, Aurora, DTS, Intrigue, Lucerne, G6, CTS, 300C, Fusion, SVT contour, 300M, etc. are/were all bottom feeders? never said the STS was a benchmark, but I fail to see how its a bottom feeder, especially the v series. To me the bottom feeder in the class would be the S type. The V8 luxury sedan class is so competitive that its hard to really say any car in that class is a bad car. Well, you would say the STS is junk, most an objective person would say they are all great cars.
I pointed this out to my Cadillac dealership in Atlanta in August 2003 when I was looking at the car for the first time. Given what I'd seen in other cars, I knew this was going to be a problem. It was a problem by the critics but fortunately for Cadillac, the car sold anyway. But the interior clearly was the weak spot of the car. Unforgivable in my book was repeating that interior in the SRX (which I now own). For an SUV that ranges from $38K to $62K, large swaths of black plastic is completely unacceptable (and thankfully, was upgraded for 2007). Not doing the SRX interior right the first time I believe lost them sales to Lexus and others despite the largely positive magazine reviews.
"True, because the average consumer doesn't care, heck some don't know which set of wheels propel their car. Problem is that Cadillac wasn't competitive with those FWD cars. They were lame and sticking out in a RWD class. "
You just contradicted yourself. You agree with my point and say some people don't know which wheels propel the car but then say Caddy was lame for sticking with FWD. If an average driver couldn't tell the difference, how was that lame? The old STS handled as well as your run of the mill E320 or GS300.
Yep they did and ultimately they caved in an went RWD like everyone else. All the CVRSS nonsense was the most ridiculous spectacle possible. Everyone does it now to keep up with the Joneses.
More conflicting logic. You say everyone uses electronic damping now to keep up with the Joneses and then say CVRSS was nonsense and a ridiculous spectacle when they pioneered the systems used today on virtually all luxury cars. Get your facts straight, CVRSS 2.0 had technologies that are just now being introduced in your beloved perfectly balanced Europeans sedans who as you used to say didn't need such frivolous technology to achieve good handling. You make absolutely no sense at all and continue to prove that if GM does something first it's crap but if Lexus, BMW or MB introduces a system it's a god sent. Ridiculous.
Cadillac is steadily chasing the Euros because that is whats in, not a DTS or ES350 type car.
Um, they are, are they? Is the Escalade chasing a european type truck? Would you care to let me know the sales figures of the DTS (and previous DeVille) since it's not as you say, "in?" You speak as if you know what the industry wants when you continuously prove you are out of touch. Again, your opinion is being delivered as fact when it is not. The ES350 (and RX) is a good seller as well it's it predecessor. Just because you (or myself for that matter) wouldn't buy it doesn't mean we're in the majority.
Also, if you like the new CTS, good for you. I don't think any of us will be jumping for joy because you can finally acknowledge a GM vehicle.
I see the problem now, that's we have different definitions for "nice interiors". No wonder the conversation didn't go anywhere.
Here we go... It seems to me, we are making excuses yet again. The Seville interior introduced in the '98 model year was a nice interior and very pleasing aesthetically in my opinion. I liked that car very much especially on the inside with navigation. So, for you this new CTS is the first GM car you would ever set foot in which is not true for other people. I have a '98 olds intrigue that has 98k miles and there is nothing wrong with it's interior design or durability (other than the cheap carpet). No sun damage, cracking or peeling on the plastics. Sorry, I cannot subscribe to your point of view implying every GM interior before MY '07 has been trash.
How did the Kappa's come up? Again, here you go proving that you hate everything GM builds (except the new CTS). We already know that so that goes without saying. I don't like the Solstice at all (inside or out) but the Sky looks ok although I would never buy a small roadster.
Lexus has always had nice looking cockpits and Infiniti has been all over the place.
If you look at the '98 STS, ETC and Deville interiors and then look at Lexus interiors in the ES300, GS300 and LS400 at that time you will see some similarities. Matter of fact, the gauges for the Cadillacs were made by the supplier of Lexus' electroluminescent gauges. To me, the CTS and SRX interiors were a step down from what Caddy had been doing in earlier cars. It's obvious they have learned their lesson because the Slade, '08 CTS and SRX interiors have more in common with the 90s Caddies than the current CTS.
I would like some examples of late 90s interiors that were head and shoulders above what Caddy was doing. Please don't say Acura or Infiniti either. My neighbor has an '03 I35 and the interior is about on par with the current Impala if it's even that good. The woodgrain is so obviously fake that they would've been better off omitting it from the interior. The last gen TL's interior was no better than the Accord's is today. They made a quantum leap with the '04 TL and TSX. All you are left with is Lexus really.
I personally like Acura and BMW's interior best in the late 90's. I like BMW's driver-oriented design (which they took it away and replaced with the current disaster) and as always, they use good materials. Acura always has the most elegant interior in my opinion, it's not too "in your face" but unique enough to stand out. The most important part is that both manufactures have good fit-and-finish even on their not-so-desirable years (like the current BMW).
To me Lexus and Cadillac's interiors are just IMO too bland in the late 90's (throw MB into that bunch if you wish). However, Lexus and MB at least utilized higher grade materials than Caddy and had better fit-and-finish (touch them and compare the difference, knock on it and listen, poke it and see how does the surface respond, press the center stacks cover to see if it squeezes, also the most important, check the gaps between panels) . Those are the ways how I identify good interiors from the rest. For me, Cadillac at that time was above average (Honda, Toyota level) but definitely not on par with MB, Lexus, Acura and BMW.
I do agree that Infiniti's interior is always not so pleasant all the way until recently.
If you liked the old BMW interiors than I can see why you weren't impressed by what Cadillac was doing. Driver oriented is one thing, but IMHO an interior needs to look like its befitting of a luxury car and that wasnt the case of older BMWs. Once you look at models before the '97 5 series and '95 7 series things got REALLY ugly, literally. All black interiors with small, simple gauges don't do it for me. The plastics and leathers in German cars has always been nice as far as I can remember but design is just as important as the hardness of plastics. Lexus interiors were rather plain (still are) but overall I though their late 90s interiors were the most luxurios looking on the market.
There you go, another reason why we are having this conversion. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind woodtrims and light color interior but I prefer black + aluminum (metallic acceptable) for 3 and 5-series class of cars. I would definitely opt for wood if I am getting a 7-series, S-class or LS because of the prestige factor.
Oh, By the way, I don't like simple gauges either. That's another reason why I hate current BMW interiors so much.
Gotta agree with you on Lexus interior being plain. However I did see a great deal of improvement for their current L-finess inspired sedans. IMO, Lexus interior's fit-and-finish and material quality are still top notch in the industry along with MB.
Rocky, your insurance probably offers the same thing, you just have to ask. Mine has a deductible of $250, but I think you can buy it down. Either way it's cheaper that the 2+K one's the dealer sells.
Most of the major insurance providers offer this protection. I have the caveman. I think if you don't ask, they won't tell you. I have about 11 discounts because I simply asked, "What else can I get a discount on?". And they opened the flood gate.
You may be surprised to find out all the coverages that you already have and haven't even used. It's some really good stuff if you inquire.
thebug...
Of course it's not a 3 series. The RX-8 isn't a 350Z either, but they always put it up against it. That the CTS and RX-8 both do about 80% as well as the car they are wrongly matched against speaks to how decent they are - especially for the price.
The 2008 CTS is going to knock the 5 series and the E class for a loop. Less expensive to buy, less expensive to maintain. Better performance. I can't wait to sit in one.
The construction in this city is maddening. I believe it's some much that city officials don't even know where it is sometimes. There is no way a nav system could know about this. I mean it's everywhere. You would just have to visit Las Vegas to see what I mean. It's absolutely crazy.
Cone zones have a tendency to just pop up unannounced. You can drive down a street at 9AM, and when you drive back the other way at 11AM it's now under construction, then at 5PM it's gone.
That's how it is all day, and sometimes at night. On other days, or at other times, without prior notice, the cone zone guys will just close a road for some unknown reason. So you just have to know alternate routes up front, and sometimes that doesn't even help.
thebug...
A winter beater for a CTS. No way, I don't even drive the current in the rain. I think that in the four years that I've had it, its only been out in the rain twice, (and it doesn't really rain here, it just spatters dust spots) and that's because it started raining while I too far away from home.
And yes, if I get the slightest hint of rain, I put it away, (or don't even consider it for the day) and use the designated rain car. If it's cloudy out, most people know which car I'm driving.
thebug...
I agree with you on this one, and I really think that the 5 Series, and like cars took a hit when the CTS hit the market.
thebug...
thebug...
Some are more sporty, some are more luxurious, but none are priced as low as the CTS, and price does matter now that some of these models are pushing 40K for a base model.
Just in my small social circle 5 people traded BMW's and Audi"s for the CTS. I'm sure that works both ways as well. Those first time CTS buyer's who were not satisfied went to other models. I bet if someone did research on this, it would be found as true. It's the nature of the beast.
I myself like the BMW 5 Series a lot, but won't buy one because I know it's over priced. There's just not enough there (big bucks, little bang) to warrant the asking price in my experience.
thebug...
Traded BMW's and Audi's what for the CTS?
Actually the current CTS. I believe that former BMW owners traded because of maintenance/service problems (which are no longer an issue), two Audi owners (1 A6 sedan, 1 wagon) traded because they simply liked the CTS. One of the CTS owners has since traded her CTS for the STS when it came out.
It may come as a surprise to you, but some people (me included) like the CTS and the Cadillac line very much. A few of us out here think that the BMW line is very, very nice, but at the same time very, very over priced.
I think a lot people moved over to the Cadillac line with the advent of the art and science concept, it is pretty decent. My first clue was the used foreign cars on the Cadillac used car lot. One would guess, that whoever dropped these cars off, probably purchased a Cadillac of some type. Just a guess.
And again, I'll bet it works the other way as well. Me, I'm sold on Cadillac. My current CTS (03 black on black, lux package) hasn't had one single maintenance problem, the service at the dealer is excellent, it continues to perform well, and still turns heads. Most of all, I really like it.
I owned a Volvo once, and when it came of age, I truly wanted to trade for another one, but just couldn't (and won't) deal with the lack of quality of service. Only one dealer here at that time (turn of the century), and the service department sucked to high heaven.
Car ownership for me is full circle. Pricing (bang for the buck), adequate bells and whistles (new technologies at a reasonable price), performance, and style (problem free, Ergonomically sound), and quality of service (service without the holier then thou attitude). Remove any one of these elements, and I am out of there.
To date, the Cadillac brand has provided these important features. I will, I say again, will purchase the 08 CTS this year. Can't wait.
thebug...
I guess what the later posters are saying is true. Very different definitions of what a good interior is are at play here. The joke is that you think any Cadillac interior before the 08' CTS and possibly the 07 SRX were up to par with the class. The biggest gripes with latter day Cadillacs has been their interiors or did you miss all that?
I thought you had disappeared. We have kind of moved on from the Cadillac bashing stage of this discussion. Yes we know, MB has been making great cars for 100 year and Cadillac has just made its first competent car (well we dont really know yet, must wait for C&D to tell us) and they cant compete with the Europeans or Lexus. We all got the point.
You said it not me.
M
You're so far in denial its funny. A brand new car that gets comments about its handling being on par with a car made 10+ years earlier is sad. When the press is in agreement on a single issue about a car, that is a problem. You'll continue to say that the old CTS has a nice interior when in fact it looked and felt like something from Playskool. Wow the car won 1 comparo in its entire production run against a bunch of larger not as sporty cars! Such a pridigous acheivement!
Never read anything about the CTS being poorly assembled. I dont know what you presented earlier, but I'm pretty sure the actual quotes are different from what you are presenting above.
Then you haven't been reading. Remember the XLR-V thread? I gave you at least 4 quotes from various sources commenting on how pitifully finished and put together the CTS, CTS-V and SRX were. You then turned right around and said that they didn't really mean anything. You ask for proof and then deny it when it is present. Classic GM defender stance I guess when the negative press is everywhere.
While you are digging of evidence that everyone hated the CTS why dont you reread (assuming you ever read it) the R&T test between 7 RWD sedans in which the CTS finished first.
Impressive until you find out that it didn't face its direct rivals. I guess you're going to stand on this one leg of a comparo forever huh?
The '98 STS, '05 STS/STS-V, Aurora, DTS, Intrigue, Lucerne, G6, CTS, 300C, Fusion, SVT contour, 300M, etc. are/were all bottom feeders?
The 98 STS was close to junk, I should know I had 2 uncles that owned them. The Aurora and Intrique are self explanatory failues from a failed brand. None of the cars you named except the 300C and SVT Contour have been anything but bottom feeders. You've got to be pretty desperate to bring up such a losing list of cars to make a point. The G6? Been called a dismal effort since day one.
The V-Series cars are impressive, no argument from me there. 2 rare expections to the norm.
The V8 luxury sedan class is so competitive that its hard to really say any car in that class is a bad car.
True there is no "bad" car in the class, but there are some at the bottom of the class and there is where the STS resides by everything I've seen. No the previous STSs were so out of touch with their class to be called that, but not the current one. It is at least competitive. No most people wouldn't say they were "great" cars, they'd say they're nice cars, the great ones don't sit in the bottom half of comparos. Don't ruin "great" status by trying to attach a Cadillac to it.
M
Really? You just don't get it. Cadillac was going around saying that their FWD cars could outhandle the RWD competition and that simply was BS. If you're going to beat the competition you have to at least offer what they offer. Lame is to be the only FWD car in the segment and challenge BMW for handling. There are regular car buyers and then there are enthusiasts and I know you know this Chavis. Cadillac can build all DTS, but see how far that gets them. The fact that they switched proved that it was lame and that the class demanded it, cluless buyers and all.
More conflicting logic. You say everyone uses electronic damping now to keep up with the Joneses and then say CVRSS was nonsense and a ridiculous spectacle when they pioneered the systems used today on virtually all luxury cars. Get your facts straight, CVRSS 2.0 had technologies that are just now being introduced in your beloved perfectly balanced Europeans sedans who as you used to say didn't need such frivolous technology to achieve good handling.
Complete BS chavis. Yet for all that effort Cadillac had to throw it out with the bathwater and go to RWD. If you look at the average BMW Chavis they still don't have anything near what Cadillac had or any electronic suspension aids at all. Or have you not noticed this.
Um, they are, are they? Is the Escalade chasing a european type truck? Would you care to let me know the sales figures of the DTS (and previous DeVille) since it's not as you say, "in?" You speak as if you know what the industry wants when you continuously prove you are out of touch. Again, your opinion is being delivered as fact when it is not. The ES350 (and RX) is a good seller as well it's it predecessor. Just because you (or myself for that matter) wouldn't buy it doesn't mean we're in the majority.
One look at the majority of the cars on the market answers you question Chavis. 10 years ago the Cadillac lineup consisted of one floaty, ill-handling, fwd barge after another, yet today they only make one such car the DTS, which to its credits handles better than those slop-plop DeVilles ever did. If you think the switch to rwd and actually caring about handling, not to mention coming up with the V-Series cars were done in the traditional American car idiom you're seriously mistake and out of touch yourself. Cadillac just like Lexus is chasing the Euros and if can't see that you're in denial big time. I don't see anyone rushing to build a DTS, but I do see Cadillac (and others) rushing to build a 3-Series. Keep thinking Cadillac marches to their own beat exclusively. They don't.
M
Well there were 2 of them in my family during the time and yeah they were nice, but what you don't get is that being "nice" doesn't cut in a class of car that expensive when rivals do things better. Why is that so hard for the GM faithful to acknowledge? Acura makes "nice" cars, but they're still seen a tweener brand, but Cadillac has the heritage and name to do better, but they haven't for the last 20+ years. Didn't say that everything up until now was junk, that may have been a little harsh, but their effors weren't up to the class either Chavis. The new CTS is or at least looks the part since they wouldn't allow anyone in the car at Detroit.
I had a 1997 Mitsu with over 175K with none of that type of damage either, so whats your point? You set the bar too low and then pat GM on the back when they clear it instead of measuring their offerings by the competition...and thus the circle continues. GM makes "nice" cars, yet they are at best, at best competitive...when are they going to build something that sits in the top 3 of the class?
M
"You'll continue to say that the old CTS has a nice interior when in fact it looked and felt like something from Playskool."
Never said the interior was nice.
"Wow the car won 1 comparo in its entire production run against a bunch of larger not as sporty cars! Such a pridigous acheivement! "
The 530 isnt sporty? wow, that is news to me. Please explain. The CTS was only involved in three large comparisons in its model run, two in C&D and one in R&T. C&D obviously didn't like the car and it finished in 3rd or 4th place in both comparisons. You act like the car lost 10 comparison tests when in fact it won one, and lost two.
"I gave you at least 4 quotes from various sources commenting on how pitifully finished and put together the CTS, CTS-V and SRX were."
Wrong again. None of the quotes you provided addressed poor build quality. From what I remember they commented on the cheap look of the CTS/SRX interior and said the XLR's interior wasn't as nice at is should be for the price. Not the same as criticizing build quality. Why dont you provide the quotes you hold so dear to your heart?
"Impressive until you find out that it didn't face its direct rivals. I guess you're going to stand on this one leg of a comparo forever huh? "
Your right, it was up against the 530, 300, S80, S-type, A6, etc. None of its direct rivals. How did I miss that? Excellent point, its direct rivals are cars that beat it in a comparison I assume.
" None of the cars you named except the 300C and SVT Contour have been anything but bottom feeders. You've got to be pretty desperate to bring up such a losing list of cars to make a point. "
The Lucerne, CTS, G6, 300 (not just C), Deville/DTS, '98 STS and 300M were (are) all successful. In fact the FWD STS sold better than the current model ever has. The Intigue and Aurora were both well received by the press and when GM killed Olds most felt that brand was making the best non Cadillacs in the company. C&D said the Aurora was the closest thing to Lexus GM had ever produced when it came out. Wrong again. The Countour, however, was indeed a failure in terms of sales. Of course, your opinion does mean more than the actual success of the models in question. It's pretty apparant you dont like any american cars (Oh wait!!! except the DC produced 300C) so I fail to see why you are trolling this topic to convince the masses that Cadillac has never made a competitive car prior to the '08 CTS. This is all part of your notion that GM never had any decent models on sale right now, they are always saying "wait until next year". In order to keep this lame argument going you have to discredit whatever is on the market. In five years you'll be saying the '08 CTS is crap because newer models will be on the market. BTW, the G6 was panned initially because its top powertrain was a 200hp V6 and 4 speed, but it now offers a 252hp engine with 6 speed that will run 0-60 in 6.2secs which is faster than the 330i automatic.
"2 rare expections to the norm. "
There are three V series cars.
"No the previous STSs were so out of touch with their class to be called that, but not the current one. It is at least competitive. "
Yes it was out of touch. It had 300hp, did 0-60 in 6.5secs, had DVD nav, HIDS, heated seats, stability, 425 watt Bose 4.0 Sound System with 12" sub in the back, Magneride, CVRSS and all the luxury features expected of a car in this class. The car went out of production in 2003 so it cant be compared to what is on sale now, but to what was available in 2003. It held it's own even if you hate the car.
"No most people wouldn't say they were "great" cars, they'd say they're nice cars, the great ones don't sit in the bottom half of comparos. Don't ruin "great" status by trying to attach a Cadillac to it. "
Only problem is I never said the STS was a great car. Dont let that stop you from arguing however, facts are typically irrelevant in any discussion with you. The STS is a solid entry and the only place it lags is in hp and interior styling. Thats really it. In terms of features and performance its right in the mix and it's far cheaper than the E and 5 series. I'll take the STS interior for $10k less than the Euro competition. I like the current E class interior (exterior is tired as ever) but I'm not paying 10 grand for a slightly superior design. I'm sure you know the model C&D tested in that big comparo didnt even have the sport package and then the complained the car wasnt sporty enough. Do they ever test BMWs without a sport package? Of course not.
Cadillac has been making nice interiors for the better part of a decade. Again, I suggest you look at the 90s STS/DTS/ETC interiors and compare them to what was being sold at that time. The Caddy interiors were very competitive and had the best gauges in the business except for Lexus. The CTS (as I already stated) was actually a downgrade from the FWD Cadillacs but Caddy was trying to go in a completely new direction to change perceptions about the brand. In YOUR opinion the last gen Caddy interiors didnt measure up, but everyone doesn't share that belief and you cant PROVE that their interiors were lacking. To me, and others, Caddy interiors in the late 90s were BETTER (not just on par with) than what Acura, Infiniti, BMW and Jaguar had on the market back then. The Germans did well in terms of materials, but in terms of design, ergonomics and aesthetic appeal the Cadillacs were better.
"but what you don't get is that being "nice" doesn't cut in a class of car that expensive when rivals do things better. Why is that so hard for the GM faithful to acknowledge"
what you dont get is that the luxury interiors of the German cars weren't more than "nice" 10 years ago. You have got them on a pedastal they do not deserve. Why is that so hard for the MB faithful to acknowledge? I rode in a last gen E class a few years back and I was just shocked at how plain and angular everything was. It was hard to believe that car probably cost well over $50k when it was new.
Rocky
There you go, you just said it yourself, others have utilized BETTER MATERIALS. We can argue about design and appeal all day long but that won't lead us anywhere because those are subjective opinions. Also, IMO, I don't think Cadillac had better ergonomics than its competitors as well.
I rode in a last gen E class a few years back and I was just shocked at how plain and angular everything was.
Some like plain and angular, others like smooth and subtle, it is totally based on people's preferences. However, one couldn't deny that everyone would love to have high grade materials for the interior.
ONE car went from FWD to RWD- the STS. The CTS was not around before Sigma. You prove that you have no technical knowledge whatsoever. In fact, I don't think you even understand anything about the dynamics of a vehicle. Your only source of knowledge are the driving impressions of journalists turned auto experts.
First off, let's define a chassis "aid" as you would like to call it. Whether it be Active Roll Stabilization, Airmatic DC, ABC, Magnetic Ride Control the goals are the same. All of them vary the reaction of chassis components to an outside force (road surface) over a larger range than possible with static settings. If you think of them as VVT systems on camshafts or an engine having a more useable powerband (long flat torque curve), u'll understand the point. It's not an "aid," it's effectively increasing it's range of reaction to varying degrees of wheel deflection. Some vary the dampers, others the springs and even anti-roll bars. These systems are optional on just about every mid-size and larger luxury car. According to your logic, simply because a car is RWD means it doesn't need such a system. Why then do even the Corvette, 911, Ferraris offer the exact same concept of CVRSS in their vehicles? Even when STS switched to Sigma, it still offers the same system offer in the FWD STS. At the time, Cadillac system was just as advanced in terms of the collection of data as the current offerings are now. The main difference is the amount of adjustments that can be made per second in which MRC leads them all at 1000 per second. Here are four RWD sedans that have chassis enhancement systems.
Lexus GS- AVR
BMW 5- ARS
E Class- AirmaticDC
STS- MRC
Also, your "average" BMW is a 3 series. If you had some knowledge, you'd understand that these systems are employed on heavier vehicles with higher horsepower. It's much easier to tune a car under 4000 lbs, that's simple logic.
Cadillac just like Lexus is chasing the Euros and if can't see that you're in denial big time. I don't see anyone rushing to build a DTS, but I do see Cadillac (and others) rushing to build a 3-Series. Keep thinking Cadillac marches to their own beat exclusively. They don't.
Again, which car is responsible for the success of Lexus? The RX, not a sports car, not chasing europeans. Which car is the second most popular? the ES, not a sports car chasing europeans. You can't get out of your bubble to understand that everyone does not want or need a BMW. In your mind, you can't fathom why anyone would want a nice riding car that doesn't beat you up over the road. Cadillac has a core group of buyers for the DTS. I'm glad you don't run a car company because they'd be out of business in about 6 months easy chasing some other company. FYI, Cadillac is not trying to build a 3 series, the CTS is a lot larger in case you haven't noticed to difference in size. Also, who established the PROFITABLE crossover utility market? Lexus and every else has followed.
There are regular car buyers and then there are enthusiasts and I know you know this Chavis. Cadillac can build all DTS, but see how far that gets them.
So are you saying the car manufacturers are supposed to build cars for eunthusiasts with no regard for regular buyers? No sense of business whatsover and it's sad because regular buyers are the ones buying cars. I'd say the DeVille/DTS is what has enabled Cadillac to survive and produce newer more focused cars so it seems it has taken them very far.
Well, well, well. Isn't that an interesting line? When the 3 series faces larger cars, the others are immediately ripped for not being as small, nimble and sporty. This appears to be a double standard straight from the horse's mouth. Other than the IS, most of the competition have longer wheelbases and lengths however they are not dealt this courtesy if you will, and are labled inferior to BMW's focus on the driver.
The things that make me go Hmmmm....
As far as I recall everything in Cadillac interiors was easy to operate and understand.
I dont doubt that some people prefer the austere looks of German interiors, but honeslty even the magazines that praise Euro products often comment that their interiors are lacking compared to Lexus and Acura offerings. I am not crazy about current BMW interiors, but I dont think the last gen was much better. Lots of right angles, black plastic, small buttons and plain gauges.
Forward your concerns to the GM management. I don't run the company or profit from their success. They've made cars that I liked in the past as well as products I'm interested in today. You keep talking about this legacy of GM that I really don't care about. Sorry, I wasn't around during the golden years of Cadillac's glory so I can only go on cars made in the last 20 years or so. As I said, I liked the last generation STS which was as technologically advanced as any other car in the class, period. That car came out in '98 almost 10 years ago, so this whole "Cadillac hasn't done squat in x amount of years" doesn't apply in my book.
The point is you've been saying GM's car aren't this and that. Now you're trying to clean it up and say that "competitive" isn't good enough? Wow... If it was good enough for me and a bunch of other folks, then your point holds absolutely no water. Again, your opinions live in the press and are congruent with the non sense spoon fed on this site and other publications. This is what happens when you have a bunch of English/Journalism majors pretending to be auto experts. A friend of my mother had a last gen 328Ci drop top that had so many problems she had to trade it in for something else. Now she has a CLK320 carbio that has had it's share of issues as well (non related to the power tops). My aunt has an S430 that's spent its share of days on a flat bed since it likes to lock her out or refuse to start. The list could go on but it isn't relevant. The point is when we're talking about "junk" let's establish what really qualifies a car as such.
Agree, until they bring us the BLS
Rocky
What is the BLS?
thebug...
Rocky