Howdy, Stranger!

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

Cadillac CTS/CTS-V



  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    Would you guys like to see a brand new
    spy pic of the STS?
    I thought so!
  • rstephrsteph Posts: 109
    Interesting...looks like a CTS to me. Like to see the final product next to a CTS.

    (Off topic..but didja look at the Chrysler 300c. Kinda cool looking. Anyone else think that front end looks a lot like a Studebaker of old??? My dad was a stud fan. I grew up in them and learned to drive in one.)
  • While rather blocky looking, there is somehing about the looks of the 300C that I like. I'm way too young to remember studs, but there is something about the 300C that appeals to me. It has a very stately appearance to it. Kind of like the Cadillac Deville does. And while the suspension is more MB related, there is nothing more American than a big, V8 powered, RWD sedan. Powered by a Hemi V8 no less.
  • rstephrsteph Posts: 109
    "I'm way too young to remember studs...."

    I knew someone was gonna say something like On top of that, I read the info on the 300c and they say...

    "The program is very key to Chrysler's turnaround,' he said. "They must do a really good job of educating the customer about rear-drive cars. That's the biggest test for them."

    Educating......about rear wheel drive..???? Jeez, I remember when the only domestic car with FWD was the Eldorado and everyone was going, "Oh, I just don't know about that!!"
  • There is an interesting story in today's WSJ, about the new Audi RS6. What more interesting is the sidebar comparing the Cadillac CTS-V, with the Audi RS6, MB E55 AMG, Jaguar S-Type R, and the BMW M5. Cadillac has certainly come up the last two years. Also the CTS-V is the least expensive in the comparison with the other souped-up sport sedans.
  • The first modern front wheel drive was the 1966 Oldsmobile Toronado, followed by the 1967 Cadillac Eldorado.
  • The picture of the 300C (in the link provided by b4z) is not the 300C. The picture shown is a wagon of some sort (maybe the Dodge Magnum?). The front end (particularly the grille) looks familiar, but the 300C is definitely a sedan!

    Looks like someone provided the wrong picture.
  • rstephrsteph Posts: 109
    Don't specifically remember the Toronado being FWD but I'm no expert so I'll stand corrected.

    I saw some reference to the "300N" somwhere. Maybe that's what that thing is. Whatever, I still think it looks like an old Studebaker...and I'll qualify that by adding...IMO!!
  • the 300N. The 300C and the 300N are one and the same car. Originally, they were going to call it the 300N, as a natural alphetic progression from the 300M, which has now been phased out.

    However, when they built the prototype, it became obvious that the 300N was completely unlike the 300M -- i.e. it is stately, heavy, un-sporty (and very German looking, IMHO) so they decided to backtrack to the 300C nameplate. The original 300C was powerful, but boat-like, and the new 300C is the same....
  • I'd hope that the 300C would be completely unlike the 300M. I'm still amazed that the 300M won (or bought) the car of the year title for Motor Trend. The 300M is a nice looking car with many features for the $$'s quality is FAR worse than the CTS however.
  • That picture of the 300C wagon is the 300C Touring which will be offered in Europe. Here in the states, the wagon version of the 300 will not be offered, but the Dodge Magnum likely will.

    rsteph, the Oldsmobile Toronado was FWD ever since it's inception in 1966. I think the Eldo followed a couple of years later. As for educating customers about RWD, JUST LET THEM DRIVE THE CAR!!! After test driving several CTSs and now owning a Lincoln LS, I love RWD. Not that all FWD cars are bad, but it is nice to be able to nail the gas while turning and not worry about the steering wheel wanting to go in it's own direction. And if the customer REALLY doesn't care about FWD or RWD, well I'm sure there is a nice Camry waiting for them down at their local Toyota store:)

    automole, sometimes MT hits the nail on the head with their COTY(i.e. 98 Corvette, 2000 Lincoln LS) and sometimes they miss the boat(i.e. 97 Malibu, 95 Chrysler Cirrus, etc). To their defense on the 99 300M, it was an impressive car at the time and offered alot of features and style for the price. I even considered one several times and they occasionally ran very attractive lease deals on them, but I just couldn't get past the fact that with a 250 hp V6 and only about 3500 lbs of curb weight, the car was no quicker than my Intrigue(with far fewer horses and about the same weight).
  • cjs2002cjs2002 Posts: 341
    just drove the 04 CTS I actually like it more than the 03 where power is conserned yet the door panels seem to have alot of plastic on it
  • rstephrsteph Posts: 109
    I think you're looks like either a version of the Magnum or the alluded to Chrysler cousin to the Magnum.
  • As I said in an earlier post I'd write a review on my observations of the 2004 vs. 2003 CTS after testdriving an '04 last weekend.

    I went to the local Cadillac dealer's "Premiere Event" in which the XLR, SRX, CTS, and Escalade were showcased. I found it interesting that it didn't say anything about the STS or DTS in my 3 page fold-out color seems that Cadillac is quickly sweeping both of those cars under the rug until the redesigned versions arrive. The event was to have a catered brunch, live music, wine tasting, and prize drawings.

    Upon entering the dealership with my Dad and Brother I was surprised to see the service department floor lined with round tables covered by white tablecloths and flower arrangements. My Brother and I were even more amused to see grey hair as far as the eye could see as we listened to a 'stunning' live rendition of a Frank Sinatra tune. All the 'old-timers' were dressed up in their Sunday best (suits and dresses) in order to attend the event. It was quite a 'display' and showcased the fact that although great progress has been made Cadillac still has a LONG way to go in order to improve their image and attract younger buyers. My Dad is in his 60's and my Brother and I both in our 30's...we were the youngest people there (including my Dad!).

    I got to look at the XLR and my first impression was that the new red is a poor color for Cadillac. I prefer last year's red...the new color isn't bright enough to be sporty or flashy and isn't dark (maroon) enough to be classy or expensive looking. I was also underwhelmed at the cars overall appearance; the basic lines and design looked impressive but there were little details that detracted from the "wow" impression that I would expect to get from an $80K car. The wheels looked somewhat cheap and ordinary for a car in its price range, the headlamp washers protruding from the front bumper were extremely cheesey looking (why they didn't include them in the headlamp assembly like the CTS w/HID is beyond for why anyone would actually need this feature) and the seats had the Cadillac signature of a stretched out butt print that I've become so accustomed to looking at during my last year of CTS ownership. I also think that the round sensors in the rear bumper look really terrible even though they are standard on many of today's cars and found it strange that the yellow daytime running lights weren't included on the lower front bumper with the driving lights like on the CTS (I think that 'feature' makes the CTS look really cool while daytime driving). The folding hardtop was impressive, as was the cars overall 'stance'.

    In the next room they had the new CTS and SRX along with a Cadillac commercial on infinite loop displayed on a Pioneer plasma screen. It was quite a contrast to go from Frank Sinatra to Led Zeppelin in the next room. The SRX looked great (it was the main reason we attended since my Dad is considering getting one) but we were unable to testdrive the demo model since it was in constant use by others.

    I did get to finally drive a 2004 CTS with the larger V6. I'd been considering trading mine for the improved engine but after my testdrive I've decided that it just isn't worth it to take the 'hit' on depreciation. My impression of the new V6 vs. last year's is that the new engine has much more torque at lower RPM's, pulled harder, and was much smoother. What I was surprised to see was that my (2003) engine actually seemed to rev faster and had much better freeway onramp acceleration than the 2004 (and a subjectively better engine 'note'). If I didn't know better I'd think that in addition to the new engine Cadillac 'tweaked' the rear-end ratio for 2004...but I haven't confirmed this theory. I also wonder how much the dual exhaust contributes to the HP increase for 2004 (15?). All things considered I'd probably still prefer the new engine since it seems more robust and isn't a big enough improvement to warrant trading mine in at this time however.
    I was hoping for a new V6 that felt like a small V8 which it didn't. To me it just seemed like a different 'shade' of V6 which was still underpowered for the CTS. I guess I will have to wait and save up for the V-series!

    Other things I didn't like on the 2004 was the stitching seam in the base model steering wheel (where the wood insert would go on the lux model) which I'm sure was done to standardize parts and save money, the chrome strip on the ashtray door (that looked out of place), and the white lettering on the dials (I actually prefer the yellow display). One thing I liked is that the cassette player is now gone from the base model's stereo...unfortunately I have the cassette feature on mine and it exists as an ugly wart on my dash reminding me of a bygone time.
    v8lincolnguy: I'm probably biased against the 300M since I owned one for 2 years. It isn't a bad car but doesn't even compare with the's also the only car I've ever owned in which I didn't feel a little sad about getting rid of. I drove off the lot in my CTS with a big smile on my face.

    cjs2002: What cars don't have door panels with lots of plastic>?
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    Did you drive a '04 with the Sport Package?
    I found the base 'o4 to have slower, lighter steering
    and was softer riding, with slower suspension reflexes than the '03..
    The '04 I drive was noticeably quicker than the '03. It came off the line really strongly.
    One thing I don't like about the CTS is the engine braking. Every time I took my foot off the gas it slowed down.
    Seems like that would affect fuel economy.
  • I drove a base 2004 w/out the sport package. The steering seemed lighter than my 2003 but I didn't notice a big difference in ride quality. The 2004 WAS noticeably quicker off the line but still didn't have the power I was hoping for. The engine braking is much more agressive in "sport" mode. I almost always drive in normal mode and rarely notice any engine braking during regular driving.
  • wwhite2wwhite2 Posts: 535
    I think if you take a closer look the door panels they are covered with a padded material ( a la everybody else).Maybe the execution of the covering is so clean it is fooling those with a "discerning eye "? They are not solid plastic. Now my 88 Corvette those are solid plastic
  • wwhite2wwhite2 Posts: 535
    I haven't driven an 04 yet but it seems like your comments about minimal acceleration difference have been proved by various posts . Especially if compared to the manual.
  • The wife and I just bought an '04 CTS yesterday. (Sept 27) The only option was the auto tranny/3.6L. Final price: $30K even, $80 below invoice, according to Edmunds. Brought a printout of the options shown on this site, and it helped a lot in negotiations.

    Thanks to everybody on this forum, I got a lot of good info here.
  • Cadillac has been doing these "premiere events" for well over a year now. My wife and I went to one in Atlanta about this time last year at a local art gallery. This new marketing effort is one of the ways that Cadillac is spending its money from their now-cancelled LMP racing program.

    I'm also not surprised that the DTS and STS aren't featured stars in the promotion...they weren't in the event I went to. In that event, the CTS and Escalade were the primary focus with the XLR as a future Cadillac product being discussed. The STS's current form is on life support and hopefully its replacement will come early in the 2005 model year. The older non-Arts & Science cars only serve to detract from Cadillac's new message these days. The Deville gets marketing dollars since it's still Cadillac's best seller, but it's clear that Cadillac wants big things out of SRX sales for this year to make up for an expected slide in Deville sales until a replacement bows.
  • bob550kbob550k Posts: 148
    Not that this is worth the effort, but wasn't Citroen mass producing FWD's about the GM came to exist and all the way into the modern age and now?
  • raybearraybear Posts: 1,795
    The STS isn't on life support, it's over with in its current form. I ordered my last one Friday. Hopefully there'll be an early introduction for the '05.
  • I know that :-)'s an expression. I think I said that the STS is due for a refresh in 2005.
  • Oldsmobile's Toronado was America's first modern front-wheel drive car. I don't think there had been one since the old Cords of the 1930s. Of course, Citroen and others had been building them in Europe already, but this was a big deal for America. Cadillac introduced its sister vehicle, a reintroduction of the Eldorado in 1967 with the same FWD platform.

    One of the other times in history where Oldsmobile would precede Cadillac with a significant innovation (in the GM days) was the fully automatic transmission (1940 for Oldsmobile, 1941 for Cadillac).
  • I was thinking of test driving a '04 CTS but decided against it because I wouldn't want to spoil automole's hoped for image of Cadillac drivers.

    I do believe, however, that Cadillac is willing/anxious to sell cars to ALL age groups and to this end is careful not to insult potential buyers.
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    I think the first FWD car was the Cord L29.
    The one that everyone is familiar with, the coffin bodied 810 & 812, came later.

    Does anybody remember the way ahead of it's time GMC motorhome of the '70s, with the Toronado 455 engine and FWD transaxle?
  • My intent wasn't to insult those that are over 60...I just meant to point out that if Cadillac is trying to attract younger buyers they still have a long way to go. I think Ioccoca (spelling?) said that "you can sell a young man's car to an old man but you can't sell an old man's car to a young man" and I believe that Cadillac is proving this to be true. FWIW I don't see myself as EVER driving a car like the current STS/DTS regardless of my age. There's also such a thing as a 'young' 60+ Grandpa is 90 years old and is not nearly as 'elderly' as the crowd I saw at the local Cadillac dealership. I think you should give the CTS a test drive...if my post swayed you away from it however, it probably wasn't the car for you anyway.
  • I currently drive a '03 CTS purchased May,'02 with 25k miles. It is the car for me in spite of my age.
  • I'm 28 and would seriously consider a CTS. In fact, I would have no problem driving ANY current Cadillac. When I'm ready to retire the LS in a few years, the CTS will likely still be at the top of my shopping list as it is a great car. The typical CTS and Escalade driver I see is much younger than the average Deville and Seville driver so they must be doing something right, despite mostly over 60 folks attending their "party." My guess is many of their younger customers may have been too busy to attend. As much as I would like to see something like that, there are times where I have other engagements to attend to. And I'm not even married or raising a family so I can only imagine how busy someone in that group would be.
  • sdasda Indian Land, SCPosts: 2,023
    And leaky air bladder suspension system??

    2010 Pilot EXL-RES, 2013 Accord EX

Sign In or Register to comment.