STV V-6 praised by autoweek
 

http://www.autoweek.com/article.cms?articleId=101749
looks liek they disagree with whoever wrote the motor trend article

Re: STV V-6 praised by autoweek
 

I disagree with the M/T article too. It's nice to see Autoweek throw some much deserved praise onto the STS. I think M/T was much too harsh in their criticism of the STS interior. I actually think it looks quite elegant in it's simplicity. The materials are all top notch and everything is very intuitive. M/T simply bashed the heck out of this "subjective" area because they couldn't find any real faults to justify ranking it so low next to it's peers.

Re: STV V-6 praised by autoweek
 

Well, the materials in the STS aren't all top notch. Just sit in it. THe low rent plastic will astound you. BUt the MT article didn't give a lot of credit to the STS. And way too much to the RL.

Re: STV V-6 praised by autoweek
 

Yeah, I have to agree with you - I was not very impressed by the materials either. Its like GM decided to upgrade the highly visible areas, and then cut corners on things that wouldn't get noticed as much. Problem is, when you can buy 2 or three cobalts for the same price, there should not be any materials of the same grade in the vehicle - and there are.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

Well I just hope no one is stupid enough to pop $50k on to the worst lame duck, depreciating nightmare that is the RL. Heck even the new E350 is faster and so will the new 530i not to mention the 550. In fact I can't wait to blow an RL off the line in my wifes CTS!

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

Yeah, some of the materials in the STS should be upgraded from the current car. The materials aren't that bad, and the quality of them would be great for most cars. But when you talk about a world-class luxury sedan, you should aim for the very best in interior decor.

Re: STV V-6 praised by autoweek
 

It's not that the interior materials are bad - they're not. It's just that the design is UTTERLY UNINSPIRED. Boring. The curvaceous dashes of the new Infiniti and Acura competitors, by contrast, are quite engaging to the eye.

Also, Cadillac has fallen into the trap of laminating the wood trim so tightly that it winds up looking like plastic. Compare the texture of the new Infiniti's wood. It looks like wood. VERY nice.

The net result of the STS dash is a big zero. Not a big negative. But it contritbutes nothing, either.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

On a similar vein:

When I sat in a CTS-V in the Caddy showroom, I was struck by the abundance of monotone, cheap plastic on the console, kick panels and door panels, etc. Obviously the CTS-V and STS-V are great cars, but there still a lot of old GM permeating their interiors.

Most people ususally buy a car based on their first in-car experience. maybe a litlle more attention should be paid to material selection.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

I really dont understand the criticism of the STS's interior. My dad has a fully loaded V6 STS with ebony interior. The materials all feel great to the touch, and they look good to me. Its a very classy interior in my opinion. Its not overwrought. Besides, no one ever says anything negative about BMW's, and dont get me wrong, I love BMW, but the interior in the 5er is MUCH less appealing stylistically. Also, Ive spent alot of time in the interior of my dads car, and when I went to the LA autoshow I sat in the new A6. I think the STS's interior plows that away, especially in tactile feel.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

i agree, and layout. The A6 console is too busy! buttons all over - it's like some sorta nightmare around the shifter...

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

The problem with all the Cadillac interiors is the lack of details and "smart touches" that every other luxury brand has.

Yes... Cadillac has some nice leather, a couple nice feeling buttons, and a nice flowing style. But when you get right down to it, the wood, though real, looks fake. The plastic feels cheap. Take a look at the vanity mirror on the sun shades. It looks like a 50 cent piece you'd buy a a $1 Store. The roll top cover of the cupholders is as bad as those pencil box rolltop covers. The "click" when you close it too sounds very cheap. Lifting up the arm rest, you notice the cheap squeaks.
Take a look at the XLR. THe center console compartment is extremely flimsy. The vanity mirrors are badly done. The compartment next to shifter as a creaky squek qhen you open it. And there little silver line etched on the wood, whereas on an A6 or the M35 it's an actual chrome piece.

As much as I love the STS, I could never justify paying so much money for an interior that belongs in a $30K car. Now STS-V... with the leather wrapped dash... might prove to be something all together different. But the problem is this high quality dash should be available on the $45K STS not the $70-80K version!!

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

There will always be personal opinion, but the bottom line is almost every car has some low points:
5 Series door styling.
SLK's centre console
Audi TT's entire dash
300C's entire cabin
XLR's passenger dash
etc etc... the bottom line is that the interior needs to be inviting. Too many people over emphasize the interior... and in most mag reviews, its my honest opinion its overweighted. For example the cobalt's base engine blows away all of the competition, but all we hear about is the cobalts interior is not 100% there. Its about the entire package folks.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

When a VW Passat has a higher quality interior than the Cadillac STS... you have to wonder what is really going on!?!

It is about the entire package. But if the entire package is a $70,000 automobile with the interior of a $30,000 one, it will give you some pause before you make the decision. Expecially when Mercedes and Lexus and VW and Audi have some stunningly beautiful and extremmely high quality interiors.

Face it... the STS has some blemishes in its otherwise decent interior... and so does XLR.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

Unfortunately, I agree. But so does some BMW's, some MB's (see last post in case you have lost track). What my point is, if you have gains in other areas (ie magnetic ride control, more powerful engine) then perfection in the interior is not required IMHO. No car out there is perfect, its about the overall package - and just cause the interior isn't perfect, it doesn't mean the overall package isn't better.

So face it, you don't know what you're talking about.

Re: STS V-6 praised by autoweek
 

Oh I know that BMW and MB have interior issues as well. A lot of it has to do with ergonomics and placement of the buttons and switches and intuitiveness of the iDrive/TouchScreen, etc.

I think when you are looking at a car at a certain price range, you're going to expect perfection. My next car will be in the $60-80K range. And when I sit in the interior of a car in that price range, I expect it to look and feel like it belongs in that price range. This is synonymous with buy a $1M house and furnishing it with IKEA!!! Why have a marble entry way, berber carpets, and maple hardwood floors if your bookcase is made of cardboard?? I'm not saying that you should get custom made furniture... but something of decently high quality like Ethan Allen furniture woul dbe a nice compromise.

I've already drove the STS and STS4. I love the car. I have no problem with the performance aspects of the STS. I do have issues with how the interior is put together with the cheap plastics on the dash, surrounding the seats, the cupholder, and the vanity mirror. THe Lacrosse has a bette rput together dash, when it comes to details, than the STS. Maybe STS-V will have significant interior upgrades?? I dunno. I haven't sat in one yet.