What do you guys think of the CTS?
10-31-2002, 08:01 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 571
Re: What do you guys think of the CTS?
Originally posted by punjabithug
Was up i was just wondering about the cadillac CTS i havent seen that many on the road probably only 3 How would you compare that car to a 2003?
Was up i was just wondering about the cadillac CTS i havent seen that many on the road probably only 3 How would you compare that car to a 2003?
10-31-2002, 08:46 PM
#6
My $.02
Cadillac will never attract the younger crowd because they really want the BMW/MB crowd. Nobody will every seriously consider a GM product over a BMW/MB product. The CTS is probably a nice car. However, in comparison with the Maxima its a slug. GM just doesn't get it.
10-31-2002, 09:34 PM
#8
I think the exterior is beautiful...very aggressive, but still classy. However, just as important, the interior is crap. It looks just like any Grand Prix or Alero rental I've ever seen.
10-31-2002, 10:06 PM
#9
Interior is really ugly to me...exterior is OK, at least its distinctive. It's actually selling pretty well, behind the G35 but better than the Catera. But according to Cadillac most of the trade-ins are Honda Accords instead of the BMWs and Benzes they were hoping for.
11-01-2002, 12:26 AM
#11
Originally posted by Maxima Dan
Ugly. Would rather take the bus than drive that thing.
Ugly. Would rather take the bus than drive that thing.
11-01-2002, 04:26 AM
#13
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 161
Re: My $.02
Originally posted by ajahearn
... GM just doesn't get it.
... GM just doesn't get it.
GM actually has some good cars outside the US, especially Australia.
11-01-2002, 05:04 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 269
It's ugly, and it can't perform like its competitors (3.2 TL-S, 330i, G35, X-type, etc. . .) Maybe next year, when the more powerful engines come out, it will be something worth considering, but only if they keep the price where it is and if they don't get rid of the manual transmission like Lincoln did with the LS.
11-01-2002, 06:12 AM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
I like it when it has the 17's on it. I don't like the car when I see it with 16's, it just looks to big in the rear quarter panel. Next year it will get about 260hp from a new V6 and upward of 350 from a 5.7 liter V8. I have heard that the Art & Science design theme plays much better on the 2004 STS, but I haven't seen it yet. GM is a good company, with good people. Until recently though their vehicle operations were run by people with no automotive experience or drive. Their former North American President (Ron Zarilla) left and went back to Baush and Lomb (spelling) where he came from originally. His "Brand Management" ideas almost took the company down.
Myself, I am waiting on the GTO. I may give the Max up for a 2005 GTO. I just miss that good old V8 rumble.
Myself, I am waiting on the GTO. I may give the Max up for a 2005 GTO. I just miss that good old V8 rumble.
11-01-2002, 06:35 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 485
Re: Re: My $.02
Originally posted by Hotnicks
That comment pretty much explains it all. It is a great idea that they "tried" to introduce a car that could actually compete in the entry level lux/sport market. But GM just doesn't get it!
GM actually has some good cars outside the US, especially Australia.
That comment pretty much explains it all. It is a great idea that they "tried" to introduce a car that could actually compete in the entry level lux/sport market. But GM just doesn't get it!
GM actually has some good cars outside the US, especially Australia.
EU
11-01-2002, 07:17 AM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,687
I owned a Silver 1999 Catera Sport between my 98 GLE and my current 02 SE. I had the option when turning in the car (leased) to get the CTS. I thought it was impressive in features (and Cadillac's service), but I can't get over the body's interior and exterior lines. I just could not force myself to like it.
The reasons that the Catera was replaced are many... most of which were known only by Catera owners. But I'll fill ya in since I'm a nice guy:
1) Front Brakes were $300+ because they included a ceramic sensor that only the dealer could replace
2) Faulty parts - In 2 years, I got a new tranny, gas tank, battery, alternator, and about 10 fog lights.
3) Lack of expected sales. The Catera was targeted to younger drivers (like late 20s-30s). The problem was that people in their 20s and 30s who could afford the Catera chose the BMW 3/5 series instead.
There are more reasons, but I don't want to waste space listing them. Mine was not a lemon either, as my mother owned the same year/model/trim level as mine, and all went faulty on hers other than the tranny. She turned her lease back in before the tranny was replaced, but it was on its way out.
The reasons that the Catera was replaced are many... most of which were known only by Catera owners. But I'll fill ya in since I'm a nice guy:
1) Front Brakes were $300+ because they included a ceramic sensor that only the dealer could replace
2) Faulty parts - In 2 years, I got a new tranny, gas tank, battery, alternator, and about 10 fog lights.
3) Lack of expected sales. The Catera was targeted to younger drivers (like late 20s-30s). The problem was that people in their 20s and 30s who could afford the Catera chose the BMW 3/5 series instead.
There are more reasons, but I don't want to waste space listing them. Mine was not a lemon either, as my mother owned the same year/model/trim level as mine, and all went faulty on hers other than the tranny. She turned her lease back in before the tranny was replaced, but it was on its way out.
11-01-2002, 08:43 AM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: Re: My $.02
Originally posted by exunaja
I was in Australia for about 5 years and yes GM do produce better car there. Holden Comnmodore SS, similar to taurus SHO. They race this car with skyline and also sierra cosworth all the time, but of course.. nissan take them out almost every race.
EU
I was in Australia for about 5 years and yes GM do produce better car there. Holden Comnmodore SS, similar to taurus SHO. They race this car with skyline and also sierra cosworth all the time, but of course.. nissan take them out almost every race.
EU
11-01-2002, 08:44 AM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 221
Cars like this end up like that girl you take home at closing time: she looked good at 2am after a few drinks but she just doesn't do it for you after you get a longer look.
The novelty of the CTS will wear off very quickly after you own it for a while. And, like that girl, you wake up and ask yourself "What the hell was I thinking?"
The novelty of the CTS will wear off very quickly after you own it for a while. And, like that girl, you wake up and ask yourself "What the hell was I thinking?"
11-01-2002, 09:06 AM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Phydeaux
Cars like this end up like that girl you take home at closing time: she looked good at 2am after a few drinks but she just doesn't do it for you after you get a longer look.
The novelty of the CTS will wear off very quickly after you own it for a while. And, like that girl, you wake up and ask yourself "What the hell was I thinking?"
Cars like this end up like that girl you take home at closing time: she looked good at 2am after a few drinks but she just doesn't do it for you after you get a longer look.
The novelty of the CTS will wear off very quickly after you own it for a while. And, like that girl, you wake up and ask yourself "What the hell was I thinking?"
11-01-2002, 09:10 AM
#23
To me, it is still ugly, but hell, if the CTS-V makes it here as planned in about a year, then I may start to like it...
RWD, 6 speed, LS6! V8, 18 inch wheels....damn.
Still ugly as sin though.
RWD, 6 speed, LS6! V8, 18 inch wheels....damn.
Still ugly as sin though.
11-01-2002, 09:43 AM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 190
My Mom and her husband just purchased a CTS about 3 months ago. They love it, but I am still not all that impressed. It has some really funky angles. I think the car looks like a cross between Robocop and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome...not a compliment!
Besides, their car stickered for about $38K with about 1/2 of the options (auto, sports pkg, sunroof, winter pkg)...no premium sound and no Navi. That would put it about $41K! That is a lot of money for 220hp and a heavy car. Compared to my loaded SE (minus Navi), they really don't have much that the Max is missing.
When the V8 comes out next year, they will price those at $45-48K...that is a totally different target market. They are after the 5-series BMW's at that price. Tough sell for a Caddy.
Besides, their car stickered for about $38K with about 1/2 of the options (auto, sports pkg, sunroof, winter pkg)...no premium sound and no Navi. That would put it about $41K! That is a lot of money for 220hp and a heavy car. Compared to my loaded SE (minus Navi), they really don't have much that the Max is missing.
When the V8 comes out next year, they will price those at $45-48K...that is a totally different target market. They are after the 5-series BMW's at that price. Tough sell for a Caddy.
11-01-2002, 10:49 AM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 140
Originally posted by max988
The CTS were priced around $36,000 at the auto show earlier this year. I won't pay that much for a vehicle with only 220hp and 'unique and agressive' styling.
The CTS were priced around $36,000 at the auto show earlier this year. I won't pay that much for a vehicle with only 220hp and 'unique and agressive' styling.
11-01-2002, 12:50 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 221
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
No thanks.
11-01-2002, 12:52 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,968
Originally posted by Phydeaux
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
11-01-2002, 01:07 PM
#33
The look is growing on me and I will seriously consider a CTS after my Maxima, since I know I won't get another Maxima as my next car. The CTS does look much different that most anything out there.
11-01-2002, 02:41 PM
#34
Originally posted by Phydeaux
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
and with 345hp on tap making it almost as quick to 60 as an auto Maxima (not 2k2) its impressive, not to mention REAL wood interior trim unlike any Nissan or Infiniti and a kicking sound system from the factory and a bunch of dealer installed stereo options.
If I was in the market for an SUV I'd be happy with an Escalade...
11-01-2002, 02:53 PM
#35
Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 81
Originally posted by carnal_c30
hmmm I think the Escalade and all GM trucks have a hydroformed rail frame... thats some good technology there, the Escalade has an Independent Rear suspension... unlike the MAXIMA haha
and with 345hp on tap making it almost as quick to 60 as an auto Maxima (not 2k2) its impressive, not to mention REAL wood interior trim unlike any Nissan or Infiniti and a kicking sound system from the factory and a bunch of dealer installed stereo options.
If I was in the market for an SUV I'd be happy with an Escalade...
hmmm I think the Escalade and all GM trucks have a hydroformed rail frame... thats some good technology there, the Escalade has an Independent Rear suspension... unlike the MAXIMA haha
and with 345hp on tap making it almost as quick to 60 as an auto Maxima (not 2k2) its impressive, not to mention REAL wood interior trim unlike any Nissan or Infiniti and a kicking sound system from the factory and a bunch of dealer installed stereo options.
If I was in the market for an SUV I'd be happy with an Escalade...
11-01-2002, 02:56 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 140
I'd be more than happy with a brand new Escalade. GM or not. Throw that thing on some 23 inch chrome wheels and I'd be sitting pretty. But what were they thinking with the EXT. I think they have sold 5 of those nationwide. I mean come on a Cadillac pickup truck. Somethings were not meant to be made...and that is one of them.
11-01-2002, 03:00 PM
#37
Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 81
Originally posted by black2kmax
I'd be more than happy with a brand new Escalade. GM or not. Throw that thing on some 23 inch chrome wheels and I'd be sitting pretty. But what were they thinking with the EXT. I think they have sold 5 of those nationwide. I mean come on a Cadillac pickup truck. Somethings were not meant to be made...and that is one of them.
I'd be more than happy with a brand new Escalade. GM or not. Throw that thing on some 23 inch chrome wheels and I'd be sitting pretty. But what were they thinking with the EXT. I think they have sold 5 of those nationwide. I mean come on a Cadillac pickup truck. Somethings were not meant to be made...and that is one of them.
23's !!
bling bling
No good in MN though. Too gangsta 4 me anyhow.
11-01-2002, 03:08 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 269
Originally posted by Phydeaux
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
You are kidding. Who would want an Escalade? It's a $54,000 Suburban with lots of plastic body cladding. Body on frame construction, live axle rear, nothing more than a pick-up truck without the slightest hint of technology.
No thanks.
11-01-2002, 03:12 PM
#39
I agree. But the fact of the matter is 90% of all SUV owers have never even off asphalt much less off road. So that's why you have the emergence of the unibody suv. Rides much better and the step in is lower.
Originally posted by tbirdrob
Body-on-frame, truck-based construction is what an SUV should be! Anything else is just a lifted up car. You need a frame to carry and pull heavy loads. What unit-body SUV can pull a 7,000 lb boat behind it?
Body-on-frame, truck-based construction is what an SUV should be! Anything else is just a lifted up car. You need a frame to carry and pull heavy loads. What unit-body SUV can pull a 7,000 lb boat behind it?
11-01-2002, 03:17 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 140
Originally posted by Jeff92se
I agree. But the fact of the matter is 90% of all SUV owers have never even off asphalt much less off road. So that's why you have the emergence of the unibody suv. Rides much better and the step in is lower.
I agree. But the fact of the matter is 90% of all SUV owers have never even off asphalt much less off road. So that's why you have the emergence of the unibody suv. Rides much better and the step in is lower.