[b4z]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

STS does have some downmarket design issues.
The top of the console lid is hard and should be padded.
The lid needs to be thicker which will make it look more substantial.
MY SRX has this thin lid also and I do not like it.

The horizontal wood strip above the glove box looks like the it was lifted out of my mom's 1977 Impala wagon.
it seems like an afterthought. Almost as if the designers said we have too much palstic here and need to put something in there to break up the mass.

The center stack is too wide. Almost Jaguar like in the space it takes up.
It takes away from legroom. At 6'8" I feel like the CTS has more legroom than the STS.

At 41K for the base STS there is a lot of value there. But once you start adding options it is not a 60K vehicle just like the SRX was not a 60K vehicle when fully loaded.

 

[goblue]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

The design elements of the STS interior are fine, its just that the materials aren't there at all, nor is the assembly. IMO neither are good enough for the CTS. Now, the CTS/SRX are terrible on both counts. So, I guess you could call the STS an improvement.

GM could simply increase the quality of the materials in the STS right now and solve 70% of the problem. Another 20% would be fixed by strengthening some fit quality between parts. The other 10% will have to wait for a full redesign. My point is however, with the STS it is possible for GM to bring it up to slightly above average for the class by specing out different materials.

CTS on the other hand needs a full redesign. Nothing else can fix that star trek derived mess.

 

[mgescuro]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

Horrid Design? I think its the most distinctive design in its class

Sorry....should have been more specific.... "Interior Design"
Hardly distinctive.
Hardly luxurious.
ANd you need to upgrade to the V to get some semblance of quality parts. But as a V, there are different issues.... the exterior suffers because it's not aggressive enough... and the seats are "sport" seats.

STS performacne? Wonderful.
Everything else that makes STS a "premium luxury" car? Nope. Needs to go back to the drawing board.

 

[CarShark]

Inside Line Follow-Up Test: 2006 Cadillac STS-V

Cadzilla

By Scott Oldham Email
Date posted: 01-17-2006

It takes a serious set of stones to go after the BMW M5 and the Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG. The two have been the undisputed kings of four-door performance for nearly two decades. Challenging them is like picking a fight with Clubber Lang and Drago at the same time, and even Rocky wasn't punchy enough to do that.

Well, it turns out Cadillac has grown a pair worthy of Easter Island. The 2006 Cadillac STS-V is a high-performance version of the rear-wheel-drive STS, created with the sole intention of taking on the legendary German super sedans. And it just might have what it takes.

More at Edmunds

 

[mbukukanyau]

Re: Inside Line Follow-Up Test: 2006 Cadillac STS-V

They called it Cadzilla.. very nice picture
Edmunds is too slow

 

[CobaltSScrazy]

Re: Inside Line Follow-Up Test: 2006 Cadillac STS-V

edmunds was entirely wayyyyy tooo slllooooowwwwww! What they said was dead on, best caddy ever but still not m5 e55amg material. I hope they upgrade everything and up the power and luxury in it

 

[TheCaddyKid]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

You tell me this. Do you have friends or relatives or family who drive cars that are in the $65-150K range? if so... you go and spend SIGNIFICANT time in them. Not a quick 2 minutes.
To me, it is obvious you have not spent time in any premium automobile. And I'm not talking C-Class or 3-series. E500 or better. 550i or better. XJ8 or better.
I've driven a Quattroporte, DB9, Maybach 62, S600, 750iL, XJ8, A8, Phaeton. These cars epitomize premium luxury/performance. You expect Cadillac to enter their domain with STS-V or XLR-V?? Cadillac comes no where near. It's an embarrassment!! take it a notch down... and you're looking at 550i, E500, GS430, etc. And STILL... STS is just middle of the pack... at best!!

I work at a car auction.One of the largest car auctions in New York State.You name it,I have driven it.I can tell you that you are crazy about the STS-V's interior.I have driven them,and AMG's,and M's.I spend quite a bit of time in these cars taking them to and from dealerships.The STS's interior is right on par,if not better than the 545.I found more parts in the 5-series that moved around in their places then some Buicks that I have driven.This is the new 545i by the way.BMW interiors are not impressive.The leather sucks.Its not smooth like the STS's leather but rather rough instead.The MB's that I drive have nice interiors.Quality is great,but Cadillac is right on par with these also.I picked up a STS from a local dealership Friday afternoon.It had one of the quietest cabins I have ever been in.Not to mention,since the beginning of time Cadillac has always given the better ride then both BMW and MB.My Eldorado is so smooth that it pretty much steers itself.Like I said,I make money off of driving these cars.I am just as big a MB guy as I am a Cadillac guy.There on par with each other.And BMW is behind.The STS's cabin is also very well crafted.I don't know what you got into but yours nuts about the STS's interior being cheaply put together.I have found every 5 series I have driven to have a crappier interior than and Caddy I have driven,except maybe a CTS,which is way out of class.Not to mention the awsome Bose sound system Cadillac offers is the best of any stock system you can get.Cadillac interiors are fine considering what the competition offers.

And also,you just compared the STS-V to interiors of cars well over a $100K.
The Quattroporte,Maybach 62,740iL?Ofcourse Cadillac's interiors are inferior,there half the price!

Remember,the STS-V is a sport-luxury car.Brushed aluminum and that other crap you would find in a Ferarri doesn't belong.And the seats,very comfortable compared to Beemer seats which feel like cinder blocks.

And lets see your Euros make something that doesn't look like Grand Am's and egg mobiles.The styling of a Cadillac blows them away.Every body line goes somewhere.The Eros just create roundness and jelly bean look-alikes with everything they make.Which is why they look alike.But do Cadillacs look like anything else on the rode?Nope.But a Mercedes can be mistaken for a Jaguar to the untrained eye.But everybody knows a Cadillac is a Cadillac when it rolls down the road.

You got to admit,Cadillac has brought far more to the table in their first couple of years of being in the high performance market then MB or BMW did their first years.Which only means that Cadillac will bring more than the competitors in the years to come.Notice back in 2000 when Cadillac started filling in the hole they dug themselfs year back,they have come farther faster then any car maker I know of.Sales are better than ever.I found a sales chart.The only manufactuer beating Cadillac right now in sales is Lexus in the luxury segment.Whose behind?You guessed it,MB and BMW.

 

[mgescuro]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

I can tell you that you are crazy about the STS-V's interior.I have driven them,and AMG's,and M's.I spend quite a bit of time in these cars taking them to and from dealerships.The STS's interior is right on par,if not better than the 545.I found more parts in the 5-series that moved around in their places then some Buicks that I have driven.This is the new 545i by the way.BMW interiors are not impressive.The leather sucks.Its not smooth like the STS's leather but rather rough instead.

You're trying to tell me that the "composite material" dash of the STS is actually richer in texture and quality than a 550i, E500, or A6?? Not a chance!!
Also, if you read all my posts, I've never faulted STS's leather seats, though I have faulted STS-V's lack of sport-style seats.

The STS's cabin is also very well crafted.I don't know what you got into but yours nuts about the STS's interior being cheaply put together.I have found every 5 series I have driven to have a crappier interior than and Caddy I have driven,except maybe a CTS,which is way out of class.Not to mention the awsome Bose sound system Cadillac offers is the best of any stock system you can get.Cadillac interiors are fine considering what the competition offers.

I don't know why you don't see the cheapie Chevy-like interior bits in the STS!! Cupholders, center stack dark grey plastic, carpet, sunvisors, switchgear, just to name a few.
Cadillac interiors are subpar for a $60K car.

And also,you just compared the STS-V to interiors of cars well over a $100K.
The Quattroporte,Maybach 62,740iL?Ofcourse Cadillac's interiors are inferior,there half the price!

I'm just pointing out luxury cars that do in fact have better designed interiors.
Furthermore, STS-V is $76,000and XLR-V is $100,000. THat puts it in range of every single car I mentioned except DB9 and Maybach 62. This is a fair comparison.

Remember,the STS-V is a sport-luxury car.Brushed aluminum and that other crap you would find in a Ferarri doesn't belong.And the seats,very comfortable compared to Beemer seats which feel like cinder blocks.

Brushed aluminum and/or carbon fiber can be found in the S6. I"m saying premium details are sorely lacking in all Cadillacs... especially the flagship STS.

The Eros just create roundness and jelly bean look-alikes with everything they make.Which is why they look alike.But do Cadillacs look like anything else on the rode?Nope.But a Mercedes can be mistaken for a Jaguar to the untrained eye.But everybody knows a Cadillac is a Cadillac when it rolls down the road.

That's why seemingly everyone is copying the Bangle's design philosophy for BMW. Controversial styling... yes. But ultimately, it set teh stage. Art & Science has done well distinguishing cadillac from teh competitors. but ultimately, it is still unrefined, with varying styles across the board.
A mercedes can be mistaken for a Jaguar??? :blink:

You got to admit,Cadillac has brought far more to the table in their first couple of years of being in the high performance market then MB or BMW did their first years.Which only means that Cadillac will bring more than the competitors in the years to come.Notice back in 2000 when Cadillac started filling in the hole they dug themselfs year back,they have come farther faster then any car maker I know of.Sales are better than ever.I found a sales chart.The only manufactuer beating Cadillac right now in sales is Lexus in the luxury segment.Whose behind?You guessed it,MB and BMW.

I've never discounted the fact that Cadillac has turned itself around. It's just that the competition has turned up the heat, and Cadillac has fallen back again.

 

[TheCaddyKid]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

You're trying to tell me that the "composite material" dash of the STS is actually richer in texture and quality than a 550i, E500, or A6?? Not a chance!!
Also, if you read all my posts, I've never faulted STS's leather seats, though I have faulted STS-V's lack of sport-style seats.

There is nearly no difference my friend,to tell you the truth.Nicer than the 550i and A6?Without a chance.E500?Just as nice.Also if you re-read my post I never said that you faulted the STS's seats,I was throwing in my thoughts.

I don't know why you don't see the cheapie Chevy-like interior bits in the STS!! Cupholders, center stack dark grey plastic, carpet, sunvisors, switchgear, just to name a few.
Cadillac interiors are subpar for a $60K car.

I don't know why you fail to see that all cars have their fair share of plastics.Yes,even your Mercedes Benz's and BMW's have plastics everywhere.Around the radio,vents,door buttons,etc.,just like the STS.The carpets are also the same whether you want to hear that or not.Whats wrong with the sunvisors?Now atleast the STS,as well as any other Cadillac interior is extremly distinctive from all the rest.Where as you would notice,that a MB interior is just all round and curvy,just like any other car.And BMW interiors,well,are just ugly.Design lines that go absolutly nowhere.With a mix of curves and edges,it just looks like crap.And I have noticed,since I drive these cars daily,that BMW and Cadillac use just about the same materials,and MB is much different at all.

I'm just pointing out luxury cars that do in fact have better designed interiors.
Furthermore, STS-V is $76,000and XLR-V is $100,000. THat puts it in range of every single car I mentioned except DB9 and Maybach 62. This is a fair comparison.

Ofcourse.Cadillac isn't going to have the best interiors in the world.It's not a hand built Rolls Royce.Get it out of your head that Cadillac and everyone who owns them think that they are the best cars ever produced.Cadillac was Standard of The World 50 years ago.They are not now nor do they claim to be.With that said,they are not going to have the best of everything.Neither does BMW or Mercedes Benz which you seem to love so much.They do have their faults you know.If you want the best of the best go buy a RR.With that said,your prices are slightly off.A S600 runs at about $130K.A 7 Series,about $120K.XJ8,about $115K.Phaeton,$100K,and a A8 runs roughly at $120K.And a Quattroporte,$100K.The STS,$63K loaded,STS-V,$76K.Those prices blow away the STS's.If the STS was priced at $100K+ I could understand your point.But at 40 grand under those cars you mentioned,its not even a comparison.There not in the same class.

That's why seemingly everyone is copying the Bangle's design philosophy for BMW. Controversial styling... yes. But ultimately, it set teh stage. Art & Science has done well distinguishing cadillac from teh competitors. but ultimately, it is still unrefined, with varying styles across the board.

BMW set the stage?For what?They seem to be making ugly interiors these days that no other car seems to copy.you must be the only person that thinks Cadillac is unrefined.In the past 5 years they have managed to bump themselves to number 2 in luxury car sales right behind Lexus.Something good must be going on over at Cadillac.Maybe you can't accept the fact that Cadillac is now back in the running?

I've never discounted the fact that Cadillac has turned itself around. It's just that the competition has turned up the heat, and Cadillac has fallen back again.

Please.Wrong again.Like I said,number 2 in luxury car sales in 2005.Behind Lexus and ahead of BMW and MB.You tell me whose fallen back.

A mercedes can be mistaken for a Jaguar??? :blink:

Yes indeed.

 

[TheCaddyKid]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

Jaguar and now the MB.I see very similar styling cues.The same round,jelly bean-like shape that both companies out out.To the untrianed eye,thye could be the same cars.

 

[TheCaddyKid]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

Anther view.

 

[TheCaddyKid]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

And the Jag's,I mean Mercedes rear.

 

[ChevroletRevived]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

I like the STS...I think it was a good effort for GM. It's interior is very nice looking..and high quality. I have actually sat in it...have you?? And, it's a success. Yes, the next one will be better. That's how it goes.....it seems the second gen or updates of Caddy's are much better then the first ones. The new CTS can't come fast enough though..it's interior really behind the class now.

 

[mgescuro]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

There is nearly no difference my friend,to tell you the truth.Nicer than the 550i and A6?Without a chance.E500?Just as nice.Also if you re-read my post I never said that you faulted the STS's seats,I was throwing in my thoughts.

Oh yes there is clearly a difference between the two. It's about the look and the touch and feel of the material.
You want to take a look at the wood? How it is thick and robust in the Germans and especially the British, while it looks glued on in the Cadillacs? How about the attention to detail that Jaguar places on each wood panel to make sure each wood panel on the door is a virtual mirror of each other, without resorting to fake wood?

I don't know why you fail to see that all cars have their fair share of plastics.Yes,even your Mercedes Benz's and BMW's have plastics everywhere.Around the radio,vents,door buttons,etc.,just like the STS.The carpets are also the same whether you want to hear that or not.Whats wrong with the sunvisors?Now atleast the STS,as well as any other Cadillac interior is extremly distinctive from all the rest.Where as you would notice,that a MB interior is just all round and curvy,just like any other car.And BMW interiors,well,are just ugly.Design lines that go absolutly nowhere.With a mix of curves and edges,it just looks like crap.And I have noticed,since I drive these cars daily,that BMW and Cadillac use just about the same materials,and MB is much different at all.

Of course cars are going to have their fair share of plastic. Cadillac just has vast swaths of it. The entire center console is dark grey plastic!
The carpets are thinner on STS. Heck... even DTS has thicker carpets than STS. The sun visors are way too thick for what they do. THere's nothing all that special about them.
You talk about "design lines?" Where exactly are they on the STS? NOWHERE.

Why is there no wood on the doors? Why don't the interior panels fit? In fact, find me an STS with good fit and finish on the exterior?? The chrome line isn't contiguous. The wood is incongruous in the STS. There is just no design aesthetic in the STS.

Ofcourse.Cadillac isn't going to have the best interiors in the world.It's not a hand built Rolls Royce.Get it out of your head that Cadillac and everyone who owns them think that they are the best cars ever produced.Cadillac was Standard of The World 50 years ago.They are not now nor do they claim to be.With that said,they are not going to have the best of everything.Neither does BMW or Mercedes Benz which you seem to love so much.They do have their faults you know.If you want the best of the best go buy a RR.With that said,your prices are slightly off.A S600 runs at about $130K.A 7 Series,about $120K.XJ8,about $115K.Phaeton,$100K,and a A8 runs roughly at $120K.And a Quattroporte,$100K.The STS,$63K loaded,STS-V,$76K.Those prices blow away the STS's.If the STS was priced at $100K+ I could understand your point.But at 40 grand under those cars you mentioned,its not even a comparison.There not in the same class.

If Cadillac is to compete with the rest of the world, it's going to have step it up. I don't think Cadillac is all that. I think Cadillac should be able to compete with them. But it really is just a dressed up Chevy. And that's it.
And your prices are WAY off. Phaeton is at $65,000. The XJ's start at $62,000. The Super 8 is $90,000. A8 starts at $68,000. THe A8 L W12 runs $118,000.
ANd frankly, the top end STS has an interior worth of a $40,000. And the V should be in the Premium STS at $60,000.
XLR... also doesn't hang in this class. I mean.. what was with the pseudo half-wood half metallic center stack?

Maybe you can't accept the fact that Cadillac is now back in the running?

Cadillac is back in the running? Sure. But for how long? Competiton is tough. Cadillac is still unproven. Cadillacs models are already long in the tooth and still not considered a high-end marque. The V's are a welcome addition. BUt that's about it.

Please.Wrong again.Like I said,number 2 in luxury car sales in 2005.Behind Lexus and ahead of BMW and MB.You tell me whose fallen back.

Sales in the US are great for Cadillac. But don't be mistaken. Cadillac is still a very small fish in the global market.
Cadillac NEEDS better cars. And they need to quit cutting corners.

So no. The Cadillac lineup to date is boring.
Enclave has proven GM can create very desirable interiors, yet Cadillac comes up with a snoozer of an Escalade.
Cadillac comes up with STS. It runs well, but when compared to the competition, it's not up to par, as the competition has raised the bar.

Sorry. Cadillac is still just not good enough.

 

[mgescuro]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

I like the STS...I think it was a good effort for GM. It's interior is very nice looking..and high quality. I have actually sat in it...have you?? And, it's a success. Yes, the next one will be better. That's how it goes.....it seems the second gen or updates of Caddy's are much better then the first ones. The new CTS can't come fast enough though..it's interior really behind the class now.

I've sat in it. I've driven it. It's nice. It's just not a $60,000 car.
And you're right... the CTS can't come fast enough.

I look forward to seeing it.

 

[BigAls87Z28]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

The STS deffinatly needs a refresh on the interior front. It should come along with the new CTS. It deffinatly is not the level of design it needs to be. It needs to flow better, be more asteticly pleasing then anything else. Buick Enclave blew away anything and everything in any GM car to date. Everything looks great, everything flows, everything looks high end.

 

[ctaylorzl1]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

I like the STS interior. its kinda plain but, I think it looks good with the woodgrain and the flat surfaces. I don't like the guages though, even the Aveo "Special Valve" version has cooler guages!

 

[Butz]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

I like the interior design of the STS, plain simple and elegant. I don't like bold in your face interior design (eg: new S-Class). I like the exterior to be bold and the interior to be simple and elegant.

the STS is fine

 

[SuchANiceGirl06]

Re: Great Review of STS in Autoweek

I like the STS...I think it was a good effort for GM. It's interior is very nice looking..and high quality. I have actually sat in it...have you?? And, it's a success. Yes, the next one will be better. That's how it goes.....it seems the second gen or updates of Caddy's are much better then the first ones. The new CTS can't come fast enough though..it's interior really behind the class now.

The CTS was down right terrible from the very beginning. The old Cadillac Catera gave a better "sense" of quality and actually looked more upscale than the replacement CTS IMO. On to the STS, I've also sat in it and driven the Northstar STS4 (AWD). Definitely not worth the $66,000+ MSRP fully loaded. Deduct 10-15 grand immediately and we may have a good deal going. As far as styling, I think it's very nice compared to recent art and science themed Cadillacs such as the CTS and SRX, which haven't aged well to me at all. A bit anonymous looking though, and kind of strays more toward Cadillac designs of the recent past than the in-your-face art and science look, which might not be the worst thing. The interior looks "okay", but the design & materials themselves wont strike you as "world class" or even close, especially if you hop out of it and right into a 5-series, or dare I say an Audi (any model). But generally are better executed than I think some of you give it credit for, especially when you consider Cadillac interiors of the very recent past (and even the present, take the SRX, CTS and current Escalade for instance.) Unfortunately given GM's track record for "updating" new models, the current STS will probably run until 2009 or 2010 before even a significant "refresh" takes place.

 

[Bggriffi]

Re: Automobilemag.com belittles 2006 Cadillac STS-V

Look how far Cadillac has come since the introduction of the current Escalade (not the rebadged Denali of the late 90's). Who would have ever thought that a Cadillac would beat a BMW or Mercedes 5 years ago? Interiors could still use some work, but GM is making its presence known in the luxury market. People are buying more Cadillacs and as the money continues to roll in the products (including their interiors) will get better.