Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
Now you may not like the styling of the CTS/SRX but I like them a heck of a lot better than the DTS. I like the way the center flows into the console which the DTS does not do. The new CTS does even a better job of this.
http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/gallery.jsp?model=srx&year=2007
http://www.cadillac.com/allnewcts/
-Cj
Can somebody compare the hardness to the CTS or STS? I would imagine that they have modified the Slade seats to be more"euro sporty" like they have the CTS/STS.
Since this is not a Pontiac forum, I will limit my comments – but I’ll point out here that GM has officially announced the RWD ( apparent ) replacement for the PONTIAC top of the line sedans ( Bonneville & Grand Prix ) – and it will be the G8.
Some production ( as well as show car ) details here:
http://media.gm.com/us/gm/en/news/events/autoshows/07chicago/brands/pontiac/inde- x.html
Aside from a somewhat higher weight than I’d prefer to see, the specifications suggest to me that the G8 may become a viable Sport Sedan.
With respect to Caddy’s marketing strategy: I wonder if Caddy is going to concede the Sport Sedan segment to Pontiac?
The V8 version of the G8, with RWD and a version of the 6.0L in my Corvette and a nearly identical automatic trans. ( 6L80 ) - and a 6 speed manual trans. to be available, does this mean Caddy will again re-focus more on Luxury? With some ‘Sport’ available – if you insist. And are willing to pay STS-v or XLR-v prices.
I doubt the interiors of the production G8 will quite match the best Caddy interiors, yet my ** GUESS ** is that the G8 V8 will provide acceleration slightly better than the current, 2008 STS V8. Probably high 13s, with the automatic – and perhaps mid-13s with the manual. Published tests of the Holden sedan ( that is virtually identical to the G8 that we’ll see here early next year ) also seem to indicate that this will be a serious competitor in the Sport Sedan category.
If the G8 V8 is designated GT ( seems most likely, as this point in time ) 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.
Will this mean that if you want a RWD Sport Sedan, with some level of luxury, you’ll be expected to shop at the Pontiac store? And if you want Luxury – you’ll shop at the Caddy store? Will the CTS-v be offered with an automatic trans. this time around?
So many questions.
We shall see . . .
- Ray
Somewhat confused by GM & Caddy’s current & projected Marketing Strategy.
The heavier SRX will do 0-60 in just over 6 seconds with a smaller engine.
Actually, I think you raise a valid point. We've all heard how Lutz fancies Pontiac a poor-man's BMW. Well, maybe That would free Cadillac to go in the Mercedes direction. Personally, I like that idea better (just MHO)
The 2008 CTS isn't any smaller than the G8.
CTS: length 191.6", width 72.5", height 58"
G8: length 192.8", width 74.8", height 58.1"
Curb weight is about the same for both in the 3800+ pound range. Spending the extra 10 grand on the Cadillac gets you a badge, some aluminum suspension bits, and a shorter final drive ratio.
http://www.media.gm.com/us/gm/en/news/events/autoshows/07chicago/brands/pontiac/- - index.html
Weight, with the V8 is 4000 lbs, but the CTS V6 is heavy.
The CTS's wheelbase is a bit shorter by nearly 1.5 inches.
The G8 will be a lot of car for the money. My guess is that a well equipped G8 will run well over $30,000. A basic V6 G8 may be a good deal compared to the basic V6 CTS.
They don't keep German luxury sedans out, so why should they keep American cars out? After all, we're much more important trading and political partners to them. That complaint is strictly American, the Europeans don't have trouble selling in Japan. Cars never seen here, like Fiat & Peugeot, are sold there.
The Japanese auto mag I sometimes look at has lots of pics of premium German sedans, Italian exotics, regular European cars like VW and Peugeot. The only American car in that mag is the 300C. My guess is if Detroit can deal in more style, they will have more success exporting to Japan.
The article: http://wardsautoworld.com/ar/auto_japan_isnt_closed/
Those are the numbers MT quoted - from the Holden version.
The G8 will have a slightly different nose & tail – likely longer due to Pontiac styling and US crash requirements.
- Ray
Ready for my G8 Test Drive. . .
My priorities actually lie more in the 5 – 60, 35 – 70, 50 - 80 realm, as I have little interest in generating tire smoke. And I do admit to being a Torque Addict, but:
The 3.6L V6 being offered in the G8 suggests that GM \ Pontiac aggress with you. My guess is that they will sell a lot more V6s than V8s.
I also have a somewhat irrational ( but very strongly held ) preference for the ability to cruise at high speeds at low engine RPM. My Corvette, with 6.0L V8 and the 6L80 trans. – geared the same as the 6L50, as used in the STS V8s – cruises at 1550 RPM at 70 MPH. With a somewhat more aggressive final drive ratio ( 2.92 vs 2.56 in the Corvette ) that would still mean less than 1800 RPM at 70 MPH in the V8 G8. Assuming a similar rear tire rolling radius. ( They look to be very close - within approx. 0.5%. )
I have absolutely no interest in any ‘wagon’ version.
Anyway – by “smaller engine” here I presume that you refer to the NorthStar 4.4L V8?
I do like & respect the NorthStar – but it does not produce either the low RPM grunt or the peak TQ that I lust after in typical daily street driving. Extrapolating ( a really fancy word for guessing here ) from the 2007 LS2 HP & TQ plots, I expect that the L76 at peaks of 362\391 HP\TQ will produce 300 lb-ft of TQ as low as 1500 RPM. ( The LS2 produces 300 at around 1200 RPM. ) Rising to around 330 at 2000 RPM, 355 at 3000 ROM, 375 at 4000 RPM and reaching a TQ peak ( according to GM ) of 391 at 4400.
The 4.4L NorthStar needs over 4000 RPM to exceed 300 lb-ft. At 1500-2000 it generates around 265 and at 2500-3000 it generates around 275.
Point is that to push around close to 4,000#s, I want what the 6.0L supplies.
“The G8 will be a lot of car for the money. My guess is that a well equipped G8 will run well over $30,000.” Agreed * 2. Though a G8 V8 with no options seems destined to be a very low $30s Sedan. And a “lot of car” from a performance standpoint at that price.
I hasten to add that I don’t really see the G8 as a Caddy CTS or STS competitor – at least in every respect.
Yet if Pontiac provides what I perceive as a reasonable quality interior, an aggressive price ( Lutz strongly suggests that this is likely – in context of previous pricing mistakes, re: the GTO ), excellent ride and handling, and reasonable fuel economy in the Real World. . . Well, I will have to take it seriously.
I question how well the G8 will deal with the near 4000# curb weight, but I am forced to keep an open mind here.
And I am looking at the G8 largely because Caddy has not indicated that they’ll be sending anything I’ll find Very Interesting my way, anytime soon. ( sigh )
- Ray
Unreasonably disappointed in Caddy – SOW or not . . .
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2007/HPT%20Library/Premium- - %20V/2007_44L_LC3_STSV.pdf
In any case, the critical issue is how much torque at the wheels, which depends on gearing and engine output. What one needs is an ideal mix of gearing and engine torque. Engines that are too big will burn too much fuel.
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2007/HPT%20Library/Premium- - - - %20V/2007_44L_LC3_STSV.pdf”
My mis-type: I was referring to the 4.6L n/a version – the one without the supercharger. The one in the STS V8. Not the one in the XLR-v & STS-v.
Comparison with the 4.4L version, given the cost & complexity & apparent fuel (in-)efficiency of that motor would not be appropriate.
Mea culpa.
- Ray
Sorry . . .
Small Escalade??? :P
I really doubt Cadillac would mess with the Escalade and move it to the Lamda platfrom. Way too much risk and downside to do that.
But the SRX sells about as many vehicles as the STS and is in a hot market. The Lamda is too close in size to the Escalade to use it as the platform for the SRX.
To be competitive, GM needs a smaller CUV to compete with the X5's/RX's/etc. The only platform that I see that Cadillac could use is the Sigma. Perhaps they will make it more SUV like and less car looking.
The only other possiblity is to use the Theta premium architecture but this may be a bit smaller than desired. But it would be closer to the X5.
I have seen the 2008 STS Order Guide.
I was ( for just a moment ) encouraged by the wording of:
RPO = PDV = “NEW! V8 Performance Collection includes
(CF5) power sunroof, (YQ4) audio system
with navigation, (Y53) Driver Awareness
Package and (K59) Adaptive Cruise Control”
This is Caddy Marketing’s idea of a ‘Performance’ Collection? Ha-rumph.
[[ That’d be a rhetorical question. ]]
LSD and ZF Premium Steering still only available as part of the top option groups. ( And neither is available with AWD, if that matters to anyone. )
And RPO = PCZ = “Performance Handling Package, includes
(QAF) P255/45R18 front, P255/45R18 rear,
Michelin Pilot Sport summer only tires, (P73)
18" x 8.5" (45.6 cm x 21.6 cm) chrome wheels
and (J56) Brembo brakes”
. . . is still available ( as additional cost option ) only on the top option groups. And not with AWD on the V6. ( sigh )
To me, this confirms that Caddy is really only focused on Luxury. That appears to be the highest priority. It looks to me like Performance is being treated as something of an afterthought, at best. At least on the STS – where I once thought Caddy had the best chance of capitalizing on the fact that no American company was marketing a serious V8 RWD Sport Sedan.
Not a bad thing, in any absolute terms – but just really doesn’t ‘do it’ for me.
- Ray
Who had hoped Caddy could build & sell STSs as reasonably priced RWD V8 Sport Sedans . . .
I'm excited about a Acadia Denali, Redline [on the] Outlook , or Enclave Super.
I hope chevy doesn't get a lambda. I hope GM polishes up the Equinox 1st. A 270hp 3.6lv6 and AWD sounds great for cadillac and chevy. Give it cadillacs new style, a 6speed automanual, AWD, and a price around $30k-$35k and gm has something for the RDX, X3, MKX, ect.
I'll call it the Cadillac JRX.
The Extend version with 7 passengers [used as Suzuki XL-7] could be the Equinox 7 or JRX 7
-Cj
-Cj
Gagrice-
I'd have to agree with you here. The first generation Lexus IS was nothing more than a cosmetically engineered Toyota Corolla. It wasn't bad, but it certainly was not worthy of the regal Lexus badge. Not surprsingly, I don't think they sold well. This is what happens when a company tries to appeal to every market, just like McDonalds has tried to do.
---mediapusher
After driving that piece of junk they call the Chevrolet Impala, I can see that very little if anything has changed when it comes to GM's sloppy craftsmanship and engineering, if that's what you want to call it. Below is a critique of things I noticed about the car:
1. Loose fitting body panels on the exterior and interior of the automobile
2. Serious problems with weight distribution and car body lean. This makes the car difficult to maneuver and handle. I'm 6'1 185lbs ok, so I know the weight shifting wasn't because of me.
3. "Retarded" lumbar support that focused on middle of back instead of small of back
4. Seats otherwise had no support and their ergonomics were terrible.
5. An annoying and noisy exhaust system that sounded similar to a crocodile mating call.
6. Flimsy and cheap hollow plastic finish on the interior. This was especially noticeable on the door locks.
The form and fit seemed ok this time. That was a shock.
7. The trunk axles had plastic sheaths on them...:\ Why?
Uhh people, I don't know what you call this, but this is not world class. It's mediocre at best. GM probably doesn't know how to build a precision crafted automobile like it's competition can. This car is supposed to compete with a Honda Accord sedan. There are some people that like the Chevrolet Impala and the other stuff that GM makes, fine. The Impala is one of GM's better selling automobiles; but don't try and convince me that the stuff GM makes is world class, because it just isn't true.
What really puzzles me is that GM makes fine stuff in other countries like China and Australia. I was visiting my kin in Australia last year, so I know what I'm talking about. Holden is the "Toyota" of Australia. Their cars are great. This leads me to believe that Holden is GM only because of an acquisition, however I could be wrong.
I've noticed the cheap interior of the current Cadillac CTS. I haven't had the opportunity to test drive this car. I've heard it drives nicely. But's what's with the embarrassingly cheap interior?-- almost to the point where it becomes offensive. That is not world class. World class means performing on a fine level in all categories and being made of fine or decent materials..It should at least be a "man-made diamond" and not "cubic zirconia"
It doesn't matter that the soon to be released 2008 CTS's interior is better, because the interior details are something that should not have been missed with the earlier models. These are the points that GM constantly misses.
Someone like me (and there are millions) isn't likely to buy a GM car even if their quality gets up to par, because of the massive ways they've exploited consumers of the U.S.A. in the past. After test driving the Chevrolet Impala on April 1st, 2007, now, it's really personal, however it's been personal for a long time.
The first generation Lexus IS was actually a cosmetically engineered Toyota Corolla, and this was grotesquely noticeable. While the emotions you note seem to have a certain snobbish appeal, I'd have to agree with your marketing point. Toyota wants to be in all markets cause it means more cash in their pocket, hence the gross first generation Lexus IS
________________
I know when we parked next to one of those Yugo looking little IS hatchbacks my wife could not believe how far Lexus had gone down hill. In her eyes that was what Lexus was now selling and she wanted nothing to do with them. She has all the money.
_____________________________________
The new 6 and 7 series BMWs are so UGLY. I can't believe it. What were their designers smoking??? They remind me of that song, It sings like this---> (They call you MR. personality because you're so UGLY.....) except with the BMWs 6 and 7 series I would substitute the words like this....They say that it has personality because it's so ugly, it's so ugly!.....
OK
Toyota Altezza. The IS300 was a good car (except for being 500 pounds too heavy), but a sport-oriented 3-series fighter didn't fit with what Lexus was in the late '90s.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
__________________________
reference text:
Lexus is Toyota's answer for MB and BMW
That may be true. Though I don't remember BMW being very popular in the 1980s. I was taken back the first time I saw a cheapo Mercedes. Maybe MB needed to start a cheap car company to compete with Toyota. Or Maybe that is why they bought Chrysler. I don't see Cadillac in that mix. The only reason I even gave Cadillac a second thought was my search for the nicest SUV. I found their cars to be a lot nicer than my last Cadillac, a 1948 4 door with a big flathead V8 engine.
Then how does the Impala sell so well, if even you would be surprised if I liked it? That car is supposed to compete with a Honda Accord? The surprising thing is, that according to GM it does compete and very well with it's competition. I believe them.
-- mediapusher?
__________________________
Replying to: mediapusher (Apr 04, 2007 8:02 pm)
We would have been surprised if you had liked the base Impala.
--imidazol97
_____________________________
reference text::::::
Now you may not like the styling of the CTS/SRX but I like them a heck of a lot better than the DTS. I like the way the center flows into the console which the DTS does not do. The new CTS does even a better job of this.
_________________________
reference text::::::
If labor cost is their complaint, it doesn't hold water, cause Cadillac could make their cars anywhere and the U.S.A. public would buy them. Why not make them in China (low labor cost) and send them here(U.S.A.) if that's what it takes?
_______________________
I think Cadillac considers the STS their top of the line model, and they are trying to price the performance version as high as possible. The problem is that the STS is not quite worth the price with the interior as it is. Even if they repackaged stuff the way you would like, the price tag would probably be higher for the base car, and the performance stuff would be higher too, so you would probably still pay around $58,000.
So of course it blew. GM is very much like Chrysler in this way. They make some cars that are world-class and some that are as if Skoda built them. Like they have several personalities all at once. So, they make worse vehicles and better vehicles than the imports. With an enormous wad of chaff inbetween to sift through.
_________________________
reference text::::
I realize nothing could be more boring for a younger person than to hear about the "old days" but Cadillac was really highly regarded in our culture---owning one was the object of outright jealousy and the average man on the street was genuinely impressed to see one. Why? Because they were conspicuously opulent compared to the shabby everyday cars most people drove
____________________________________
Replying to: louiswei (Mar 31, 2007 2:06 pm)
Cadillac's have always been affordable. Lexus is supposed to be top of line Mercedes beaters.
-mike
I think one problem is that a lot of things at GM are done by committees, and as a result noone really takes responsibility for the final result. My 2002 Seville is put together fairly well I think, but I have not owned a Lexus, so I don't know how it compares. The nearest Lexus dealer is over 300 miles from here.
This is what makes Ferrari, for example, a standard of the world and probably nobody else (not a luxury standard, but a different kind of standard)---and not many people can afford to own one, or run one, and they are conspicuously different from any other car.
Probably impossible to do in a regular passenger car anymore.
I have test-driven a Lexus LS430 before I bought the Seville. The Lexus is slightly nicer than the Seville, but not $5K nicer. It also had a less-powerful engine than the Seville and felt like driving my old Buick Park Avenue.
MB being the standard of the world for prestige in the "easily possessed" auto market.
Lexus being the standard of the world for quality/reliability in the "easily possessed" auto market.
Acura being the standard of the world for value (best bang for the bucks) in the "easily possessed" auto market.
Where is Caddy?
I find myself more able to judge and support Cadillac's decisions if I forget what it once was, and remember instead how low it sunk in the 1980s.
That Cadillac even exists is remarkable, given how bad it had become at one point. In that sense, relatively speaking, I am genuinely impressed by today's products. But the battle is far from won.
My statement on the quality of the current Cadillac line was not a negative. I really like the Escalade. I really do not want any sedans on the market. Just me. If I was to buy a luxury sedan today it would be an E320 CDI. Cadillac has nothing in that class. If GM had not botched up their feeble attempt to build a diesel in the 1980s, there would not be such a stigma attached today.
But if your goal is to purchase a vehicle that runs and drives, that you can actually use, then Lexus and Toyota are clearly superior choices to Cadillac.
Well, for one, the car builders in Japan are master vehicle builders and craftsmen, and have been doing a great job for their whole career, with many veterans of "producing the highest quality product" available in the market today, yesterday, and 15 years ago as well.
The Chinese have no record of producing high quality product, only a record of having produced lesser electronics than the Japanese.