Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Well it's All Wheel Go, not All Wheel Stop
Last weekend on my way home from Lake George to NYC in the snow/ice/slush we saw no less than 12 Jeeps off on the sides of the roads, 3 chevy Impalas, 2 Thunderbirds, and 1 Ford Crown Victoria State Trooper!
Even with AWD, you need to drive with care, however, having driven both, and raced both, I'll take AWD anyday depending on the system.
-mike
As for living in NYC...I'll take the snow.
The hallowed ( in the USofA ) and reasonably standard 0-60 time measurement is occasionally subject to an issue of shift points. BMW, in particular, often seems to ignore any relevance to 0-60 acceleration times in picking gear ratios.
The last BMW 530 test I happen to have handy ( $50K sedan comparison test from C+D ) shows MPH / 1,000 RPM for the 530’s second gear at 9.2, with a final drive ratio of 3.46:1. RPM limit is 6,500. This means that the second to third gear shift occurs JUST before the 0-60 MPH ( or 0-100KM \ 62 MPH ) time is recorded – slowing that time to some degree.
The 535i and 535xi numbers I have show the heavier AWD xi quicker ( by 1 tenth ) than the 535i.
Now, the rev limit of the new 335 & 535 motor appears to be increased to 7,000 RPM.
The 535xi has the same 3.45:1 final drive – but with the increased RPM limit, my ** GUESS ** is that now the 535xi will hold second gear just PAST 60. Avoiding the time lost to that additional shift.
And the 535i has a final drive ratio of 3.64:1. Approx a 5% difference – and will likely ( along with the fact that it will weigh less ) result in quicker acceleration within any particular gear range. But will show as ‘less quick’ than the 535xi, if that second to third gear shift in the 535i occurs just before 60 MPH – causing that additional shift time to be included.
Clear?
- Ray
NOT a drivetrain engineer . . .
1. Does it have bluetooth? (I read somewhere it does, but its GM, so I doubt it).
2. Is there a rearview camera? (seems like just rearview ultrasonic sensor maybe).
3. Are the voice activated features voice-sensing like in acura and other cars or do you have to record preset voice tags? (because the press release made it seem like their were voice tags, so i'm not sure how GM does their voice activated systems, if they are available in their cars currently).
I know that, you know that most people know that. What most likely got them in the ditch was an over reliance on AWD.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1. Bluetooth - yes, no, but.
Yes it will have bluetooth, no, not in the United States, only in Europe, but, "later" in the US (said to be 6 months into the production) -- translates into "late, late availability in the US."
2. Rearview camera? Can't find it anywhere, but parktronic, assuming it is available from the get go has served me well since 2000. The RVC plus parktronic is supposed to be the best of all worlds, assuming there is also front parktronic.
My best guess is "no RVC."
Also no pushbutton start.
Editorial: I have pushbutton start. It was a $750 option in 2005 on my Audi A6. I use it about 1/3 of the time to start the car. The damn key plus the fob is so big, I hate having it in my pocket, so it ain't no THANG to stick the key in and turn it. BUT, the cool thing about the smart key is that when you approach the car and your hands are mostly full, the car knows its you and unlocks the doors you have programmed. This is a really nice feature.
I could give a cuss about pushing a button to start the car -- but since it is now even on the far far less expensive Nissans, it would seem a "me too" feature that you ought to put on the car just to shut some of us up.
My personal taste in pushing a button is not relevant to you, of course, but for pity's sake, I do like it when the car recognizes it is you and doesn't force you to fool around finding a button on a fob to push, especially in the winter when the key is buried deep in your inside coat pocket.
Ah, the height of laziness.
ummmm, #3
Acura and Infiniti seem to have some pretty slick voice tech -- my Audi is OK. At least I can recite phone numbers without training it and the nav system's voice works well, too as it does for the sound system.
I know not what Cadillac will or can do -- it would seem AT MINIMUM to need to be up to the OK Audi standards. The Acura TL's system is impressive -- I cannot imagine the Cadillac, if it has one, will be anywhere close.
Back again to Nissan Altima -- this voice tech must now be super cheap. And, now that I have had "OK" voice tech for almost 3 years, I believe it is a safety feature. It was cool for about 15 minutes.
My 2005 Audi, like many of the new breed of cars has (from the driver's seat) 82 knobs, dials, switches, buttons, dials and other stuff to push, twist, poke, slide, click and rotate. Without voice how could you drive the thing PLUS ever make a phone call (my phone is 100% hand and eyes free thanks to voice.) The point is, if the CTS has anywhere close to the number of buttons and do dads that a three year old Audi has (and it has MMI to boot!) and lacks voice command, well, more's the pity.
Drive it like you live. :shades:
Often tech seems to be added just for that "cool" factor. When I looked at an Acura TL a couple of years back, that was my first thought re the Bluetooth. "Cool" However, I agree that that is a worthwhile bit of tech and will definitely be something high on my list for my next car. If a Nissan Altima has it, there's no excuse for a Cadillac (or Lincoln, since that's what I now drive) to have it, and have it now.
"He says it will be in the 2009 Cadillac CTS, which is almost certain for Australia as Holden looks to boost its prestige business with Cadillac and Hummer.
The diesel is a 2.9-litre four-valve V6 turbo-diesel with 184kW and 550Nm. "
Perhaps in the USofA also?
Rocky
The only thing ugly about previous generation CTS's were the scream cheap interiors and the stupid seat mounted belts.
Why does Cadillac do things like that? Cadillac is supposed to be the flagship luxury brand.
_________________________
reference text::::
The ugly headlights, busy black dash, and seat-mounted belts are gone.
I think the biggest mistake Cadillac makes with the CTS is to limit the available options. When you spend over $40k you want a car equipped the way you want it. It will be a mistake to leave off such things as a rear view camera when the navigation system is ordered, and the cruise control should have the adaptive option available. These things are available on lesser cars and ought to be at least optional on the CTS. The camera could even be a dealer installed option if it is a problem for the factory.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/2008-cadillac-cts.htm
Or http://www.cadillac.com has video, gallery's, etc, at the bottom left of the website.
I hope I was of help pal.......
Rocky
What's going to be even more impressive is when you see the 2009' CTS-V out run C5 Corvette's Z0-6's and just maybe a C6 Vette It will be worth watching what the 0-60 and quarter mile times will be on the 09 "V". Some say 515 hp. Some say 550 hp. and a lot say 600 hp. I am hoping it will be 600 hp. as that would be such a awesome number in a sedan, let alone a Cadillac. :shades:
Rocky
I think this puts pressure on Lexus to add either AWD or a manual to the IS350, or more power to the 250.
Looks like a contenda, doh.
DrFill
Oh well......
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
P.S. Glad to be of help !
I could not agree more. I am a certified track instructor with SCCA and NASA and it's hilariously funny when people come to the track for the first time, usually 2 groups, punky kids with their rice-rocket fast and furious cars or middle aged guys with their BMW 5 series, Caddy CTS, or Dodge Charger SRT8s. I have on more than one occasion gotten out there in the "novice" group with my 150,000 miles Subaru Legacy putting out 165 hp when new in 1994 and ran laps around these guys.
It's amazing how humbling it can be during the course of the day to see these very confident cocky people (both the younguns and the middle age folks) turn around and really realize that they need to concentrate on their skills more than what modifications they can do to their car or which new expensive sporty ride they want to buy, depening which demographic they are in.
As we say at the track school "fix the nut behind the wheel" The best part of actually learning to performance drive especially a car like the CTS or CTS V is that you can actually take advantage of all these new and technologically advanced cars have to offer, along with the fact that you can actually transfer your skill set from car to car.
-mike
Motorsports and Tuning Host
Your post reminded me of the one thing that could possibly result in the AWD version being quicker in the ‘real world’ despite the additional weight & rotating mass:
The 335i has no LSD. And with that much torque, that low down in the RPM range, it appears possible that the addition of AWD might increase the launch traction sufficiently to reduce the 0-60 time with all 4 tires applying TQ. Traction control typically will not allow ( too much ) wheel spin – but will often reduce power & cost time in the process. And most published numbers are obtained with Traction Control turned ‘off’.
I doubt we’ll see a published test with a RWD & AWD version of the 3, or a CTS running back-to-back on the same day\track.
- Ray
Happy to keep traction control ‘on’ in the real world . . .
I want to know what is the 45 to 75 time. That is what lets me pass one semi without becoming a splat on the grill of the on coming semi. I think 300hp, 270 torque, and six speeds should get me by that semi rather quickly, but I would still like to see and compare those numbers.
-mike
Here is where skill comes into play. Skill and judgement, even with the Supra or in this case 2008 CTS, poor judgement could leave you kissing the front end of the oncoming Semi, despite the extra power.
-mike
- 0-60 times are meaningless because with most modern cars, it's like pushing the auto-launch button on a F1 racecar. Whomp on the accelerator and make the engine scream. Presto - really fast in a straight line.
Take that same Camry into city traffic and try to get it to do 20-40 and so on and it might as well be a Buick. It's big, heavy, and cumbersome. Slow to shift as well unless you hammer it and it goes into "0-60 mode". (problem is a transmission that tries to out-think you and silly tall gearing with an overly agressive torque converter/overdrive)
- And of course, you can't get past the skill point, either. The last time I drove 0-60 in under *ten* seconds was when... ah yes... Pasadena Freeway. 20 ft onramp(yes, no joke - 20 ft). But that's a singularly bad example, to be sure(only the freeways in San Fransisco are uglier, IMO, than this one freeway)
Not, that's not to say that I won't go down twisty roads at silly speeds from time to time, but I'm not surprized in the least that those tools with their overpowered rockets can't keep up with a smaller and lighter sedan. My ancient Volvo 164E I had in college even drove circles around most people due to skill and a decent design.(Volvo's copy of the BMW Bavaria/3.0) I mention it because it was a big heavy 3000lb tank compared to something like a 2400lb BMW 2002Tii. A good driver could probably beat a rich guy with his CTS at the track in a Sentra. :P
Me? I don't NEED 300HP. In fact, that's far too much power to actually have a decent driving experience. See, it's a big engine, has too tall gearing, weighs almost two tons, and has a very muscle-car era behavior. Stomp on it too hard and the car lurches and the tires chirp if you have traction control off.
By the way, traction control isn't required on a properly made car. But stuff a huge HP engine in a FWD car and.. yeah - it becomes necesarry.
Me? I'd take a 1995 or so M3 over any of the newer modern toys. Well, except for maybe a S2000 Lovely car.
But in fact, a situation like this occurs very seldom in normal driving. Put Phil Hill in his Tercel and the writer in the Supra and have them both try to merge from an onramp into a hole in traffic travelling at 65-70 mph, and the outcome is likely to be different.
Actually, here is where the 0-60 time is useful information. It is not that you often go from 0 to 60 as fast as you can, but the 0-60 time gives you a reasonable idea of how fast it will go from 20-60 or 20-70 (merging) or 30-80 (passing). Actually, 5-60 or 10-60 (i.e. rolling start) would be even better because it eliminates the "floor it and drop the clutch" or the "brake-torque it and slip your foot off the brake" element.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
I believe the new CTS will be, [non-permissible content removed] for tat, several thousand dollars more (at MSRP) than the outgoing CTS.
I want to be wrong.
The content of the new CTS as outlined and detailed, in some cases, on the Cadillac web site (the micro site) is a step up. This will cost, yes?
The real proof will be to configure a 2007 CTS with "all the toys" and a similarly equipped 2008 CTS -- in my case I would add the 300HP engine and AWD which I am confident will add cost, but that is not the cost I am speaking of -- I think the new CTS is more car in every way, it just HAS to cost more.
Again, I hope to be wrong.
Perhaps ignorance is bliss, after all.
On day one of the most recent BMW school in South Carolina, the first exercise is "simple." The object is to fully engage the ABS to a full and complete stop.
If I'm lying, I'm dyin' -- even with four runs and up to four repeat tries -- about 1/2 the class either could not or would not engage ABS fully and maintain full engagement to a full and complete stop.
That was the first exercise the first morning. Inducing and controlling understeer? Fughetaboudit!
High speed lane changes -- OMG, the flying cones!
Yes, we ALL improved -- I was hardly the class champeen, don't think that. What was most disturbing was the apparent inability or lack of willingness to even attempt to learn how ABS (or whatever the exercise was) feels, or how to undo understeering, etc.
My wife and I left wondering how the rest of the population really reacts when full on breaking or understeer recovery would come in "handy."
It would seem to me, our conclusions or observations (many of us here, that is) in terms of driving skills are dead on.
We need to make getting a driving permit much more of a skills based endeavor. Not likely to happen -- yet we continue to produce more "capable" cars for drivers who don't keep up.
The CTS will just add to the number of capable cars driven by, apparently, people with decades old driving skills.
The truth is... how they react is.. they don't and end up crashing.
With the proper technique, you could manage to ride a *motorcycle* in the snow or on ice. With the wrong technique, you can fly off the road on a nice sunny day.
As a little plug, those who are interested in discussion track days, HPDEs, racing, and just about any other motorsports or performance oriented driving, we have a Motorsports section now open! I'd really like to focus on HPDEs, Drag Racing, Auto-x etc. So c'mon over!
-Mike
Motorsports and Tuning Host
Rocky
-mike
The 2009' CTS-V could have as much as 600 hp. Now that will be one impressive car and as I've said before if the car can some how maintain it's current MSRP price I might be a owner of one.
Rocky
If they do sell a CTS-V with 600hp you can bet with options it'll tip the price to >$50k maybe even as high as $60k or more. Look at the SLR-V that is priced >$100k, last time I checked anyway.
Can anyone guess my favorite part on the CTS-V?
-Mike
Motorsports and Tuning Host
600 hp. is useable for more than just Drag Racing. :P
I agree in a road course the Legacy would eat the CTS-V's lunch. However on a large road with moderate turns the "V" would out power your legacy with rain shoes.
If they do sell a CTS-V with 600hp you can bet with options it'll tip the price to >$50k maybe even as high as $60k or more.
Well they cost $52K now. My best guess would me in the mid to high $50K range. Ya know maybe $56-58K seems about right.
Look at the SLR-V that is priced >$100k, last time I checked anyway.
You mean the XLR-V convertible or the STS-V ? The XLR-V starts at $79K and the STS-V strts at $77K
Can anyone guess my favorite part on the CTS-V?
I would guess the manual shifter ?
Rocky
Yup like I said "Drag" racing.
You mean the XLR-V convertible or the STS-V ? The XLR-V starts at $79K and the STS-V strts at $77K
XLR-V convertible. According to Cadillac.com it starts at $98,300 Just "built" one with Silver color and Black leather, $100,000 on the nose.
I would guess the manual shifter ?
Engine and trans are nice, but they are useless without the Brembos!
-mike
Rocky
Car & Driver 2008 CTS
According to C&D article (link above) the rear legroom is up by an inch or so. I read somewhere that this is due the new "slimline" design of front seatbacks. Rear shoulder room is also about an inch wider as overall width grows by 2" or so. Legroom difference may not mean much, though, unless there's some lateral foot room under the front seats. With all the electric motors and stuff under there, it's pretty crowded under there in my 2003. My concern is more about rear headroom, which I can't imagine will be any better due to the sleeker design of the C-pillar.
But then again, what do I care, since I'm usually in the driver's seat? :shades:
Can't wait for the GM Dealerworld site to be updated to check out the option bundling, etc. 2008 STS, SRX and XLR have been up since April 2. The suspense is killing me! Watch this link!
Online Ordering Guide
Your Local Dealer ought to now be able to answer many questions...
- Ray
Waiting for the CTS-v variant....
And that's the way it should be. Give me some choice in how I configure my car. Unlike Acura which is "all or nothing."