Cadillac-Becoming the Standard Once More

[ChevroletRevived]

True...and take a look at the road test Motor Trend did on the STS and 5-Series. They placed the STS on equal footing with the 5-series.

[redfox]

the cadillacs look great give gm 5 years and they will turn it around. i think gm has finialy learned there lesson.

[msupete]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

Just a few comments:

* Bose suspension should be brought down to STS level.

I interned at Bose and they talked about this suspension a bit. Don't expect it to be on ANYTHING less than 100k. This suspension is EXTREMELY expensive, to put it lightly. It will be at the minimum, 10k added to the price

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by CobaltSScrazy

M, I usually agree with your assessments, but garbage? Are you f*cking kidding me? Its competitive and a quality car, have you ever driven one with the 3.6 and a 5 speed? I have and its quality. AND ITS A HELL OF A LOT NICER THAN A 9-3 ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!

The CTS interior is garbage. High quality parts that add up to a low rent interior. Undeserving of a car that sells for $30-55K.

The CTS performance is decent for its class, though a bit mid-range.

For the record, I've driven every iteration of CTS... including the CTS-V. In fact, I've driven all current Cadillacs except for the New Escalade, BLS, DTS, STS-V, and XLR-V.

Lest we start up this broken record again....
* Cadillac performance is up to par with the world's best.
* Cadillac's interiors... across the board... leave a lot to be desired. And I include the new Escalade in that assesment.
* Cadillac's use of technology and "luxury gadgets" is incongruous at best. (ie - Push button start in STS and XLR but not Escalade.)
* Cadillac's exterior designs are aggressive, but not across the board, leaving a disjointed feel in the lineup.

Drive the new 9-3 Aero and feel free to revise your assessment.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by ChevroletRevived

Mgescuro, I agree with you on a lot of points but when you say the CTS is garbage, my agreement ends. It is not garbage. Look at the comparo R&T did a while ago. Who won that contest...the CTS!

Maybe I shoudl have been more clear.
CTS interior (and SRX) is garbage.

CTS performance is good.

EDIT: I take that back. I said "CTS was garbage" in response to a comment about the interior stylings. So.. I stand by me "garbage" remark. In fact, with the 2006 "wood applique" on the center stack of the CTS, not only is the CTS interior garbage... it's TACKY.

[asim]

Nice job man, you never fail to impress me. =]

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by msupete

I interned at Bose and they talked about this suspension a bit. Don't expect it to be on ANYTHING less than 100k. This suspension is EXTREMELY expensive, to put it lightly. It will be at the minimum, 10k added to the price

REALLY?? For true active suspension??? That much???
Well... then.. not STS then... but definitely XLR.

[Mikkoo]

Originally Posted by DuSpinnst

A4 and CTS are completly different styling.

They are competitors in the same class, thus the CTS must be
upgraded in the interior, where it's woefully inferior to the A4.

[superstreet]

i will like a enclave based cadillac

[Gm786]

Pretty good write-up ChevroletRevived.

[CobaltSScrazy]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

The CTS interior is garbage. High quality parts that add up to a low rent interior. Undeserving of a car that sells for $30-55K.

The CTS performance is decent for its class, though a bit mid-range.

For the record, I've driven every iteration of CTS... including the CTS-V. In fact, I've driven all current Cadillacs except for the New Escalade, BLS, DTS, STS-V, and XLR-V.

Lest we start up this broken record again....
* Cadillac performance is up to par with the world's best.
* Cadillac's interiors... across the board... leave a lot to be desired. And I include the new Escalade in that assesment.
* Cadillac's use of technology and "luxury gadgets" is incongruous at best. (ie - Push button start in STS and XLR but not Escalade.)
* Cadillac's exterior designs are aggressive, but not across the board, leaving a disjointed feel in the lineup.

Drive the new 9-3 Aero and feel free to revise your assessment.

escalade interior man M you ARE full of it tonight. I sense a anti-caddy tone in your writing tisk tsik . Performance wise the CTS is very good, if not great. 255hp is the going rate, faster than a 3, and we're using the current model which will be replaced in like 17months and again it WILL be the class leader. Agreed with the tech stuff, pushbutton should be across the board and their interiors do leave stuff to be desired. As far as the exterior design, I don't see how they are not agressive across the board or non-identifiable. If you showed me a debadged cts,sts,dts,srx,escalade,xlr,ctsv,stsv,xlrv any person who knows some info about cars could EASILY identify the entire lineup together as its distinctive, unlike anything else, and cohesive.

I'll drive the aero which has that turbo v6 waste of gm r&d and $$$$ and ***** all over it w/ a 5speed 3.6 CTS. THat engine is SOLID and it produced 5 more hp than a aero 9-3 turbo. The ONLY reason saab has it is for marketing purposes, taht engine costs upwards of 5k b/c of the turbo whereas the 3.6 n/a only costs around 2500/engine. I have very tight connections with the powertrain team heading up this project, I know what I'm talking about. B/c it has a turbo people think its cool and audi-ish and subara sweet, if that makes ANY sense at all.

M- you disappoint, and btw 9-3 sales have been stable whereas EVERY year the cts has been on the market its sold more units progessively.

Lastly, the wood trim on teh cts stack isn't tacky, I really enjoyed it as I tested out one a week and a half ago. (No saab kool-aid plz. I really like the car, dont kid yourself, but the cts is clearly a more superior more solid car. Do I like the saab interior? Alot, its great and I wish it were in the cts, but the cts def. looks decent if not good. Not great, but not bad )

[ChevroletRevived]

Originally Posted by asim

Nice job man, you never fail to impress me. =]

Thank you asim. And you too Gm786. Your comments are appreciated.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by CobaltSScrazy

escalade interior man M you ARE full of it tonight. I sense a anti-caddy tone in your writing tisk tsik . Performance wise the CTS is very good, if not great. 255hp is the going rate, faster than a 3, and we're using the current model which will be replaced in like 17months and again it WILL be the class leader. Agreed with the tech stuff, pushbutton should be across the board and their interiors do leave stuff to be desired. As far as the exterior design, I don't see how they are not agressive across the board or non-identifiable. If you showed me a debadged cts,sts,dts,srx,escalade,xlr,ctsv,stsv,xlrv any person who knows some info about cars could EASILY identify the entire lineup together as its distinctive, unlike anything else, and cohesive.

Oh that's OK. I know everyone here thinks I'm the biggest caddy-hater. But that's farthest from the truth. I just hold Cadillac to a higher standard, and to this day, they haven't met it. Cadillac needs to be of a higher standard to really start making conquest sales... sustainable conquest sales. In order to sell these cars in Europe and Asia, they need to be FAR better than they are now. Simply dropping in Chevy switchgear and steering wheel with a Cadillac emblem is beancounting at its finest. It shows lack of detail. Show me a Mercedes steering wheel that is shared with Chrysler. Show me a Jaguar steering wheel that is shared with Lincoln. You're not going to find it there... why would you find it in Cadillac. At least Saab has teh common decency to differentiate the steering wheel.
As for the exterior... the current best looking A&S design is XLR. It's sleek and edgy, followed by BLS. CTS has some odd corners and looks fat. CTS-V looks properly proportioned. STS is too rounded and not edgy enough. DTS has an A&S front, but the rest of it doesn't. Escalade became too soft and in some angles looks like an Expedition. I think this is just due to the evolution of A&S. Right now, we're stuck in the middle of it.

Originally Posted by CobaltSScrazy

I'll drive the aero which has that turbo v6 waste of gm r&d and $$$$ and ***** all over it w/ a 5speed 3.6 CTS. THat engine is SOLID and it produced 5 more hp than a aero 9-3 turbo. The ONLY reason saab has it is for marketing purposes, taht engine costs upwards of 5k b/c of the turbo whereas the 3.6 n/a only costs around 2500/engine. I have very tight connections with the powertrain team heading up this project, I know what I'm talking about. B/c it has a turbo people think its cool and audi-ish and subara sweet, if that makes ANY sense at all.

Ironically enough, the 2.8L Twin-scroll turbo is related to the 3.6L. THey come from the same HF family and is essentially CTS's 2.8L with a turbo attached to it. The 2.8L Twinscroll won an award for being one of the best new engines, as well. Plus the Aero has a 6-spd (auto and stick) coupled to the 2.8L. If you have such tight connections to the powertrain team, you do know that the 2.8L is also offered in the BLS and an Opel.... at varying HP outputs to diffuse the cost.

Originally Posted by CobaltSScrazy

Lastly, the wood trim on teh cts stack isn't tacky, I really enjoyed it as I tested out one a week and a half ago. (No saab kool-aid plz. I really like the car, dont kid yourself, but the cts is clearly a more superior more solid car. Do I like the saab interior? Alot, its great and I wish it were in the cts, but the cts def. looks decent if not good. Not great, but not bad )

That's fine. You like the CTS. Congratulations to you. But the way Cadillac designers incorporated the wood in teh CTS (as well as XLR) center stack is REALLY tacky. For crying out loud, it's like a snap-on wood accent piece!!! It's terrible!!

[ChevroletRevived]

Well I agree..we should hold Cadillac to a higher standard. No, Lincoln does not share it's steering wheels, like the DTS/Escalade do, but look at the CTS...do you see that interior on any other GM vehicle. Or the new Corporate radio for that matter? You don't see that on a Caddy. I think you'll be impressed by the new CTS mgescuro. I hope it lives up to my expectations.

[CobaltSScrazy]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

Oh that's OK. I know everyone here thinks I'm the biggest caddy-hater. But that's farthest from the truth. I just hold Cadillac to a higher standard, and to this day, they haven't met it. Cadillac needs to be of a higher standard to really start making conquest sales... sustainable conquest sales. In order to sell these cars in Europe and Asia, they need to be FAR better than they are now. Simply dropping in Chevy switchgear and steering wheel with a Cadillac emblem is beancounting at its finest. It shows lack of detail. Show me a Mercedes steering wheel that is shared with Chrysler. Show me a Jaguar steering wheel that is shared with Lincoln. You're not going to find it there... why would you find it in Cadillac. At least Saab has teh common decency to differentiate the steering wheel.
As for the exterior... the current best looking A&S design is XLR. It's sleek and edgy, followed by BLS. CTS has some odd corners and looks fat. CTS-V looks properly proportioned. STS is too rounded and not edgy enough. DTS has an A&S front, but the rest of it doesn't. Escalade became too soft and in some angles looks like an Expedition. I think this is just due to the evolution of A&S. Right now, we're stuck in the middle of it.
Ironically enough, the 2.8L Twin-scroll turbo is related to the 3.6L. THey come from the same HF family and is essentially CTS's 2.8L with a turbo attached to it. The 2.8L Twinscroll won an award for being one of the best new engines, as well. Plus the Aero has a 6-spd (auto and stick) coupled to the 2.8L. If you have such tight connections to the powertrain team, you do know that the 2.8L is also offered in the BLS and an Opel.... at varying HP outputs to diffuse the cost.
That's fine. You like the CTS. Congratulations to you. But the way Cadillac designers incorporated the wood in teh CTS (as well as XLR) center stack is REALLY tacky. For crying out loud, it's like a snap-on wood accent piece!!! It's terrible!!

the 2.8 turbo which is of the same family was a waste of money. Just check the 3.6L box and you get the same power, erg, even more. If that r&d money went into the 3.6 right away, we'd have 280-320hp out of the 3.6L. Thats all I'm saying.

I agree with you though that caddy shouldn't share nearly any parts with any other brand, in terms of surfaces / parts/ things that the consumer sees/touches. As far as powertrain, mechanicals, and everything the consumer does not directly see, thats fine cross-use as much stuff as possible.

Look at the 300, a warmed over Eclass chassis. I love it, badge engineering at a good level. (I still HATE the interior of that car though, especially teh steering wheel/centerstack and air vents)