Cts-v.....cts-v!

[Jetfire]

My god...they actually BUILT it. It's actually going to be FOR SALE. Just read the First Drive in the newest Road & Track. Some specs:

3833 lbs (264 lb more than regular CTS)

LS6 engine (accounts for 60 lbs of that extra weight)
Tremec T56 6-speed (C5 variant)
4-pot Brembos with 14" rotors in front
245/45ZR-18 Eagle F1 Supercars
Thicker gauge subframes
Revalved shocks
Bigger swaybars
Stiffer springs
Shock tower brace
50/50 weight distribution
Claimed 0-60 of 4.7 seconds
Subtle cosmetic changes

Any wanna give me a mid-to-high-forties check? They should be in showrooms around November/December.

[jw]

My god...they actually BUILT it. It's actually going to be FOR SALE. Just read the First Drive in the newest Road & Track. Some specs:

3833 lbs (264 lb more than regular CTS)

LS6 engine (accounts for 60 lbs of that extra weight)
Tremec T56 6-speed (C5 variant)
4-pot Brembos with 14" rotors in front
245/45ZR-18 Eagle F1 Supercars
Thicker gauge subframes
Revalved shocks
Bigger swaybars
Stiffer springs
Shock tower brace
50/50 weight distribution
Claimed 0-60 of 4.7 seconds
Subtle cosmetic changes

Any wanna give me a mid-to-high-forties check? They should be in showrooms around November/December.I thought it was going to start inthe 50s. Should be priced to sell with the GM family discount!

[Nick325xiT 5spd]

Hmm... I will HAVE to drive one. :D

[·clyde·]

Hmm... I will HAVE to drive one. :D
I may have to own one.

But I won't.

[TD]

My god...they actually BUILT it. It's actually going to be FOR SALE. Just read the First Drive in the newest Road & Track. Some specs:

3833 lbs (264 lb more than regular CTS)

LS6 engine (accounts for 60 lbs of that extra weight)
Tremec T56 6-speed (C5 variant)
4-pot Brembos with 14" rotors in front
245/45ZR-18 Eagle F1 Supercars
Thicker gauge subframes
Revalved shocks
Bigger swaybars
Stiffer springs
Shock tower brace
50/50 weight distribution
Claimed 0-60 of 4.7 seconds
Subtle cosmetic changes

Any wanna give me a mid-to-high-forties check? They should be in showrooms around November/December.

IMO, it sounds like exactly what the E46 M3 should have been:

- 4 door
- V8 power
- Real brakes

[Mr. The Edge]

3833 lbs :dunno:

[TD]

Isn't that just the E46 M3 with a large passenger?

[johnlew]

Read all about it. (http://www.imakenews.com/autospies/e_article000144018.cfm)

As an aside, in my parking garage, someone has a CTS in all black, the color I think it looks best in. It has a very stealth, like the plane, look. In the row of cars lined up against the wall, BMWs, MBs, Lexus, etc., it stands out in a spooky, subtle way. Just kind of sitting back there lurking, dark and ready to pounce.

[Mr. The Edge]

Isn't that just the E46 M3 with a large passenger?

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34692

[cosmo911]

Isn't that just the E46 M3 with a large passenger?

You're an idiot. 500 lbs. is a large passenger? :confused: :rolleyes:

[TD]

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34692
Oops. I had the M3 convertible's weight on the brain for some reason.

[The Roadstergal]

Oops. I had the M3 convertible's weight on the brain for some reason.
The convertible's a whole mess heavier than the coupe. :eeps:

[e46shift]

kinda like a poormans m5 :thumbup:

[e46supra]

6 lugs!

Lets see if they sorted out the suspension.
It would be amazing if they can create a suspension that emulate the Z06 suspension in a sedan.

[Jetfire]

Yeah, it's heavy...but hey guys, this is GM's first REAL attempt at a modern supersedan. GTPs and the supercharged Imapalas/Monte Carlos don't count, and nor does the GTO. This thing is gonna rock.

I think the CTS looks best in black as well. It's got some great lines, although I can see why some people would hate them.

[pdz]

the weight of the upcoming GTO and the CTS-V is disturbing.

great that they're making the cars, and i hope that they have sufficient braking power and suspensions to handle the power.

(i doubt it).

but they'll be fast in a straight line.

i'm also guessing that their engines won't blow up :angel: .

[Nick325xiT 5spd]

the weight of the upcoming GTO and the CTS-V is disturbing.

great that they're making the cars, and i hope that they have sufficient braking power and suspensions to handle the power.

(i doubt it).

but they'll be fast in a straight line.

i'm also guessing that their engines won't blow up :angel: .
Don't you think 14" Brembos would have a pretty good shot at handling the power and weight? :dunno:

Now the suspension is DEFINITELY the big question. According to the reviews, the GTO is very close to the M5 in performance, so it can't have an awful suspension. Hopefully, the CTS-V will do at least as well.

[nate]

Don't you think 14" Brembos would have a pretty good shot at handling the power and weight? :dunno:


Probably, if you put halfway decent pad on it.

btw, E46 M3s actually have pretty good brakes. You put a decent track pad on there, and won't have fade issues at all.

I think this should be a good car. Too heavy though, but good M5 imitator. (probably better than the E39 M5, but not E60)

[GregD]

The real question is what will the reliability be like. I haven't been too impressed with GM products for a long time.

Also, IMO, it's just plain ugly. : puke:

[Jetfire]

The real question is what will the reliability be like. I haven't been too impressed with GM products for a long time.

Also, IMO, it's just plain ugly. : puke:
Styling is definitely up for debate. For the record, I really like the new Cadillacs a lot. The Escalade/EXT/ESV, CTS, XLR (boioioing), and upcoming SRV all look good to me, and most of them look great. People who hate them are certainly justified, though.

As for reliability, I've actually had no problems with any GM product. My last GM car (bought new) took all of the abuse I gave it and then some. In fact, the vast majority of Grand Prix owners really ran them HARD. Aside from tansmission issues (try pumping well over 300 ft-lbs through a FWD tranny meant for 280 max) the cars stood up admirably. The interior was rather Duplo-like, but that's just a styling problem.

[pdz]

it will be interesting, won't it? the first time they run a CTS-V against theh competition. i'm guessing in that comparo, it will be the m3 and S4 (size class).

seeing as how the XLR did quite well compared to other high-end roadsters, i'll bet the CTS does just fine.

but it then becomes a question of:

is this a car we'd all love to drive OR is it a car we'd want to own?

[pdz]

Probably, if you put halfway decent pad on it.

btw, E46 M3s actually have pretty good brakes. You put a decent track pad on there, and won't have fade issues at all.

I think this should be a good car. Too heavy though, but good M5 imitator. (probably better than the E39 M5, but not E60)

as far as the brakes go:

4 pots up front is "okay". remember, audis have what? 6pots in front? 4 in the rear?

who knows what this car has in the rear. and who knows how GM's implementation of the brakes will be, even though they use brembo parts.

for example, the brembos on the 993 are 4 piston f/r and they work quite well, but i would think they're helped out by the hydraulics porsche uses, the drilled rotors, and the OEM pad; the STi has brembos, too, but not quite the same, is it?

[Nick325xiT 5spd]

as far as the brakes go:

4 pots up front is "okay". remember, audis have what? 6pots in front? 4 in the rear?

who knows what this car has in the rear. and who knows how GM's implementation of the brakes will be, even though they use brembo parts.

for example, the brembos on the 993 are 4 piston f/r and they work quite well, but i would think they're helped out by the hydraulics porsche uses, the drilled rotors, and the OEM pad; the STi has brembos, too, but not quite the same, is it?
Sure beats the single pots my 3600lbs. monster truck has...

[andy_thomas]

IMO, it sounds like exactly what the E46 M3 should have been:

- 4 door
- V8 power
- Real brakes

4 doors? I think you'll find the number of people disagreeing with you will be, er, everyone :). What makes you think the E46 M3 should have been a four door?

- V8 power: well, that was left to the M5. If you want lazy, nothing-special V8 power, get an S4. They have 4 doors, too. I agree, though, that a small-capacity, high-revving V8 with an aluminium engine would have done no damage to the weight distribution. Whether BMW could have got a steering rack in there (vs the box used for the V8 5s) is debatable, though.

Real brakes? Everyone bar the North American markets got those. Don't blame BMW; blame BMW NA (or the reasons they de-contented the NA-market M3 brakes).

Otherwise, the CTS-V sounds like everything the M3 isn't and shouldn't ever be. A 3,900 lb pig that will only be sold in a handful of markets. Doesn't really cut it.

[pdz]

4 doors? I think you'll find the number of people disagreeing with you will be, er, everyone :). What makes you think the E46 M3 should have been a four door?

- V8 power: well, that was left to the M5. If you want lazy, nothing-special V8 power, get an S4. They have 4 doors, too. I agree, though, that a small-capacity, high-revving V8 with an aluminium engine would have done no damage to the weight distribution. Whether BMW could have got a steering rack in there (vs the box used for the V8 5s) is debatable, though.

Real brakes? Everyone bar the North American markets got those. Don't blame BMW; blame BMW NA (or the reasons they de-contented the NA-market M3 brakes).

Otherwise, the CTS-V sounds like everything the M3 isn't and shouldn't ever be. A 3,900 lb pig that will only be sold in a handful of markets. Doesn't really cut it.

i am neutral on 4 doors. having them or not does not detract from the sportiness of the S4 or the M5. if the M3 had 4 doors, do you think they would lose sales and sales of the 330Ci would suddenly go up? or that the 330i ZHP is "less sporty" than the 330Ci? i think it's strictly preference. and in this "sporty luxury" realm, anything goes.

i know people are making a big point about "squeezing" in an aluminum v8 into the e46m3. but remember, the inline six is a very long engine. i really think having a 3.5 litre v8 in there is not an issue. maybe having a v8 in there would actually make use of the m3's "PowerDome" hood.

i agree that in most cases where brake fade occurs at DE's, this is driver error and usage of teh brakes needs to be readjusted. however, when One Lap M3s crack all four rotors and Instructors driving M3s complain about brake fade, then the 3450 pound curb weight is an issue. and maybe not so much that it is that figure, but that BMW might have thought about upping the capacity and cooling of the brakes to deal with that weight.

i do not think the CTS-V is the answer to the M3 at all, but that is a fundamentally good chassis, so it will be very, very interesting to see how it does.

[JetBlack330i]

I don't suppose there is any chance for a manual tranny... oh, well...

[TD]

I don't suppose there is any chance for a manual tranny... oh, well...
A 6-spd manual is the only tranny choice. No auto, no manumatic. Just a stick.

[pdz]

I don't suppose there is any chance for a manual tranny... oh, well...

yeah, you wouldn't see all of us crusty old school types in this thread if there wasn't a 6speed available.

otherwise, it'd just be another heavy v8 barge. oh wait! it already is. :D . i dunno about the others, but i hope it kicks serious germanic arse when they go head to head.

[Jetfire]

Uh, guys, the ONLY transmission option is a 6-speed manual.

I think this car WILL be a competitor to the E46 M3. Yes, it's bigger. It's also heavier. It costs a few thousand less. It also has 50/50 weight balance, a nice, simple, big-ass engine that has TONS of tuning potential with just bolt-ons while also offering very reasonable gas mileage (C5s have NO gas guzzler tax. They get almost 30 mpg on the highway), nice aggressive styling, and the list goes on. It's not as "nice" as the M3, perhaps. And don't wait for it to catch an M3 on the track, because it probably won't. But it's still going to be a damn cool car. And I bet it'll be fun to drive to boot.

Sure it's a GM product, but who the hell cares? Just don't buy one new. ;)

[JST]

yeah, you wouldn't see all of us crusty old school types in this thread if there wasn't a 6speed available.

otherwise, it'd just be another heavy v8 barge. oh wait! it already is. :D . i dunno about the others, but i hope it kicks serious germanic arse when they go head to head.

Let's keep the weight issue in perspective. The CTS is a big car, bigger in nearly every dimension than an E39. In price, the CTS-V is an E46 competitor, but in size and performance, it's an M5 competitor. And it certainly weighs less than an E39 M5 (38XX lbs v. 40XX lbs.)

If it is as good as I think it will be, I will buy one.



CTS:

Wheelbase (in.) 113.4


Track FR (in.) 60.3


Track RR (in.) 60.0


Length (in.) 190.1


Width (in.) 70.6


Height (in.) 56.7




E39:

Wheelbase (in.) 111.4 111.4 111.4 111.4


Track FR (in.) 59.5 59.5 59.5 59.5


Track RR (in.) 60.1 60.1 60.1 59.6


Length (in.) 188.0 188.0 188.0 188.0


Width (in.) 70.9 70.9 70.9 70.9


Height (in.) 56.5 56.5 56.5 55.7

[Jetfire]

Hey, you're back! Either that, or you're crazy from the sun and you're posting from Cabo.

Finally, someone else who understands what makes this car so cool. I can't wait to get behind the wheel of one. It would make a fantastic family car. ;)

[JST]

Hey, you're back! Either that, or you're crazy from the sun and you're posting from Cabo.

Finally, someone else who understands what makes this car so cool. I can't wait to get behind the wheel of one. It would make a fantastic family car. ;)


Am back; you guys are great, but posting from Cabo would be :ouch:

Here's why (the view from our deck):

[Alex Baumann]

There was a page on the Caddy site about this car, but I can't seem to find it.

Does anyone have the link ? :)

[johnlew]

There was a page on the Caddy site about this car, but I can't seem to find it.

Does anyone have the link ? :)
CTS-V (http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/futuremodels/vseries/overview.html)

[Jspeed]

4 doors? I think you'll find the number of people disagreeing with you will be, er, everyone :). What makes you think the E46 M3 should have been a four door?

... not as long as I'm alive. ;)

The E36 M3 sedan was very successful in NA and according to the sales training manual, E46 sedans are stiffer than the coupes.

[Alex Baumann]

CTS-V (http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/futuremodels/vseries/overview.html)

Thank you ! :thumbup:

[JST]

Automobile this month has a review of the CTS-V. Here are some quotes:

"[T]he Fuchsroehre [at the Nuerburgring] is a gentle left-hander that exits steeply uphill. A car goes from full jounce to full rebound in short order here, so the suspension damping has to be outstanding...M cars cope with the Fuchsroehre magnificiently. Audis and Volkswagens fall down in this corner, their damping unable to cope...The new Cadillac CTS V is brilliant here, however, the first American car that can stand up to the world's best sports sedans. It's that good."

After some technical details and a dis of the cheap-seeming interior, the mag continues: "The engine is stunning, with monstrous amounts of torque and a willingness to rev. When you put your foot in, the growl is utterly intoxicating, a noise that could only come from a large capacity American V-8."

"Around the Nuerburgring, the V is heroic. Without trying too hard, we were able to lap in less than nine minutes, just four seconds shy of our best time in the ultimate pre-993 Porsche 911, the RS 3.8. John Heinricy, director of high-performance vehicles for GM's Performance Division, has gone around the circuit in eight minutes nineteen seconds, which is better than the current M3 has managed to do."

In fairness, they conclude "[i]t isn't as ultimately involving as BMW's M3 or M5." However, "it is easier to live with and has stellar straight-line performance and handling."

Automobile reports a price of 45-47K, 400 hp, 390 lbs ft of torque, 0-60 in 4.7 seconds, a 6 speed manual transmission, a mechanical limited slip differential, and a traction-control system with four modes (including a "competition" mode, similar to that used in the Corvette). Weight is given as 3833 lbs (the smaller M5 is 4024, FWIW).

An American car as good as those built in Europe? One for which no excuses ("it's good, but no stick," or "it's good, for a Lincoln," or "it's good for those who must buy American") are required? An honest to god American aspirational performance sedan?

This thing could be the real deal. Welcome back, Standard of the World.

I think I'll name mine "Corvillac."





EDIT: Here is a list of other Nordschleife lap times. As you can see, 8:19 is very, very impressive. http://www.nordschleife.no/

[Nick325xiT 5spd]

Holy ****!

[johnlew]

I was going to quote some of the stuff you mentioned JST, this weekend, but I couldn't remember where I'd read it. Glad you found the article.

[Emission]

Random Thoughts:

I still think it is physically ugly.

About this Caddy, it is one thing to make the perfect car, it is another to have to fly off the showroom floor. I wouldn't buy a Caddy just like I wouldn't buy a Vette. At 35, I am too young!

BTW, BMW brakes will suck as long as they are single piston - case pretty much closed.

[Mr. The Edge]

Random Thoughts:

I still think it is physically ugly.

About this Caddy, it is one thing to make the perfect car, it is another to have to fly off the showroom floor. I wouldn't buy a Caddy just like I wouldn't buy a Vette. At 35, I am too young!

BTW, BMW brakes will suck as long as they are single piston - case pretty much closed.

my brakes stop pretty well :dunno:

[Emission]

OK, "SUCK" is a bit harsh. Maybe, "BMW brakes have room for improvement."

Until you've driven better (multi-piston) brakes on the track, you don't realize what you are missing.

My 328i would warp rotors, while my 330i glazed the pads and gunked up the rotors from the heat. The more laps, the hotter they got until they started to fade... I was always watching how I applied them, and very conscience of their use.

My 930 brakes (OEM Brembo, aluminum caliper, 4-piston, cross-drilled & vented on all corners) stop just as hard the first run as the last, and they never even seemed to get hot. They were the last thing I though about while running laps!

Brakes are an easy upgrade, and I am frustrated that BMW seems to ignore them.

(OK, off my soapbox.)

[pdz]

i know the laptimes at the ring are based on one lap....would be interesting to see two or three laps so you could see the interplay between heat soak & its effect on the engines, brakes and brake fade as well as an indicator of how good these test drivers are (they're good).

the CTS is strange looking, but the aerokit on the V series is less so. am still in shock about this car.

[andy_thomas]

... not as long as I'm alive. ;)

The E36 M3 sedan was very successful in NA and according to the sales training manual, E46 sedans are stiffer than the coupes.

Ah, you make a good point about the E46 sedans being stiffer than the coupes. I always thought that BMW used seam welds on the M instead of spot welds and adhesive to make a monocoque stiffer than the cooking coupe, but that's purely conjecture.

As with the E30 M3, I think any future M3 needs to be more different to the rest of the line-up to really make an impact. By all means make a four-door, but IMHO a stiffened, lightweight 2-door should be the lead car.

[JetBlack330i]

Automobile this month has a review of the CTS-V. Here are some quotes:

"[T]he Fuchsroehre [at the Nuerburgring] is a gentle left-hander that exits steeply uphill. A car goes from full jounce to full rebound in short order here, so the suspension damping has to be outstanding...M cars cope with the Fuchsroehre magnificiently. Audis and Volkswagens fall down in this corner, their damping unable to cope...The new Cadillac CTS V is brilliant here, however, the first American car that can stand up to the world's best sports sedans. It's that good."

After some technical details and a dis of the cheap-seeming interior, the mag continues: "The engine is stunning, with monstrous amounts of torque and a willingness to rev. When you put your foot in, the growl is utterly intoxicating, a noise that could only come from a large capacity American V-8."

"Around the Nuerburgring, the V is heroic. Without trying too hard, we were able to lap in less than nine minutes, just four seconds shy of our best time in the ultimate pre-993 Porsche 911, the RS 3.8. John Heinricy, director of high-performance vehicles for GM's Performance Division, has gone around the circuit in eight minutes nineteen seconds, which is better than the current M3 has managed to do."

In fairness, they conclude "[i]t isn't as ultimately involving as BMW's M3 or M5." However, "it is easier to live with and has stellar straight-line performance and handling."

Automobile reports a price of 45-47K, 400 hp, 390 lbs ft of torque, 0-60 in 4.7 seconds, a 6 speed manual transmission, a mechanical limited slip differential, and a traction-control system with four modes (including a "competition" mode, similar to that used in the Corvette). Weight is given as 3833 lbs (the smaller M5 is 4024, FWIW).

An American car as good as those built in Europe? One for which no excuses ("it's good, but no stick," or "it's good, for a Lincoln," or "it's good for those who must buy American") are required? An honest to god American aspirational performance sedan?

This thing could be the real deal. Welcome back, Standard of the World.

I think I'll name mine "Corvillac."





EDIT: Here is a list of other Nordschleife lap times. As you can see, 8:19 is very, very impressive. http://www.nordschleife.no/
Didn't they say similar things about the Catera, which was supposed to be the Euro beater?
I'll reserve judgement after they are publicly available and I get my hands on one.

[JST]

Didn't they say similar things about the Catera, which was supposed to be the Euro beater?
I'll reserve judgement after they are publicly available and I get my hands on one.


The Catera was never available with a stick, never had 400 hp, and was always based on a middle-of-the-road European chassis. People were cautiously optimistic about that car, but not based on its 'ring times.

I'll buy a Cadillac the day they make a car that is more desireable than its competitors. The badge stigma associated with Cadillac means no more to me than the badge cache associated with BMW (and, based on the success of the CTS and the prospects for the SRX and XLR, that stigma might not be long for this world).

The Z06 shows that GM can build a good, fast car when they set their mind to it. The Z06 pounds its competitors into the wall, but is afflicted with the curse of two seats. Can GM apply the engineering principles of the Z06 to a four door luxury sedan? It sounds like the answer finally might be yes.

[JetBlack330i]

Stick and 400hp was not an issue and none of it's competitors at the time had it.
The Catera was plagued by, and ultimately died of, reliability issues. Did GM improve that much in last few years?

[Jetfire]

The Catera was never available with a stick, never had 400 hp, and was always based on a middle-of-the-road European chassis. People were cautiously optimistic about that car, but not based on its 'ring times.

I'll buy a Cadillac the day they make a car that is more desireable than its competitors. The badge stigma associated with Cadillac means no more to me than the badge cache associated with BMW (and, based on the success of the CTS and the prospects for the SRX and XLR, that stigma might not be long for this world).

The Z06 shows that GM can build a good, fast car when they set their mind to it. The Z06 pounds its competitors into the wall, but is afflicted with the curse of two seats. Can GM apply the engineering principles of the Z06 to a four door luxury sedan? It sounds like the answer finally might be yes.
I believe that the CTS-V will definitely have an interior that does not fare well against its competitors. But I also think that this will be its only serious drawback. Even after filtering through the media hype, everything I read about this car makes me want it more. I understand that Caddys have had a sort of geezer image over the past couple of decades, but it's hard to argue that any of the marque's recent designs is catered towards the pastel linen pants gang. They are trying hard to gain market share in a younger market and I believe they are doing all the right things. The ultimate question will be whether the market accepts Cadillac; for what it's worth, I do, and I hope everyone else does as well. The Escalade has already made its mark, and the CTS and XLR will serve as indicators of things to come. Hell, even the SRX crossover ute/wagon/thing looks good to me. Any of these cars would work very well parked next to my M3.

[Jetfire]

Stick and 400hp was not an issue and none of it's competitors at the time had it.
The Catera was plagued by, and ultimately died of, reliability issues. Did GM improve that much in last few years?
I don't remember what the press had to say about the Catera, but I do remember it. It was a pretty bland car. "The Caddy That Zigs" and the cute duck in the commercial notwithstanding, it looked and drove much like any other middle-of-the-road sedan. That isn't enough for a manufacturer trying to reinvent itself.

I think GM and Cadillac are serious about it this time around. It's rather silly to make any claims without driving one myself, but I think this offering is far from the bottom of the heap in the segment and not so far from the top. Ultimately, it will probably succeed due to its overall value, that sweet V8, and the styling that will turn off some but quickly attract others.

[JST]

Stick and 400hp was not an issue and none of it's competitors at the time had it.
The Catera was plagued by, and ultimately died of, reliability issues. Did GM improve that much in last few years?


I don't know. Do you think the CTS V will spin its engine bearings with alarming frequency? Or have a radiator fan that catches fire and burns the car (and anything surrounding the car) into a crisp? Or have electronic throttle motors that leave drivers stranded by the side of the road? Or have water pumps that fail constantly? Or thermostats that crap out so frequently that lines form at dealerships to have them fixed? Or have indecently delicate crank and camshaft position sensors?

GM's quality is no worse than BMW's, is the point that I am making. I would have far fewer reliability concerns buying a CTS with a bullet proof small block Chevy in the nose than I did when I (hesitantly, and only after verifying the warranty was still intact) bought my M3.

[in_d_haus]

It's just another crappy GM product that's ugly as sin...:thumbdwn:

[JST]

It's just another crappy GM product that's ugly as sin...:thumbdwn:

I'll give you the ugly part, though IMHO it's substantially better than Bangle's recent work. But the "just another crappy GM product" is based on what, exactly?

[Thorack]

You are all right to wait and see what the results are but, what I really want to know is what price the dealers are expecting people to pay? The Northstars in Lincoln Nebraska where discounted between $5000-$7000 just to get the off the lot. They want $50,000+ for a CTS-V, get real its an american car! You just dont pay that much for Ameriacn steel no matter who makes it.

[dlloyd1975]

I'll give you the ugly part, though IMHO it's substantially better than Bangle's recent work. But the "just another crappy GM product" is based on what, exactly?

I'd base it on my experience with rental cars. The GMs seem to break after a couple thousand of abuse, or at least there's quite a bit of wear on them. For personal experience, my brother's Grand Am is a complete POS. Dead transmission and a host of other problems with it, after only 100k. My Mazda was nearly perfect after close to 120 and I didn't even maintain it that well.

The exception to this seems to be basic work trucks (take a lickin' keep on tickin). I've also noticed that the Buick Regal rentals, even with more miles, seem to be a bit nicer than most other GM rentals of the same mileage.

[JST]

You are all right to wait and see what the results are but, what I really want to know is what price the dealers are expecting people to pay? The Northstars in Lincoln Nebraska where discounted between $5000-$7000 just to get the off the lot. They want $50,000+ for a CTS-V, get real its an american car! You just dont pay that much for Ameriacn steel no matter who makes it.


People pay more than that for Hummers, Escalades and Navigators. And Corvettes, for that matter.

[in_d_haus]

I'll give you the ugly part, though IMHO it's substantially better than Bangle's recent work. But the "just another crappy GM product" is based on what, exactly?

Ya ever driven a CTS? It's too soft, the brakes are crap, the steering lacks feel (ya want me to continue?) and it will be rusting away in a junkyard long before many other cars

[Mr. The Edge]

Ya ever driven a CTS? It's too soft, the brakes are crap, the steering lacks feel (ya want me to continue?)

sounds like you're describing the E46

[in_d_haus]

sounds like you're describing the E46

Cubed

[JST]

Ya ever driven a CTS? It's too soft, the brakes are crap, the steering lacks feel (ya want me to continue?) and it will be rusting away in a junkyard long before many other cars

Of course, the suspension on the hyper-performance edition is stiffer. And the brakes are better. Judging a CTS V based on these criticisms of the CTS is like saying in 2000 that "the M3 is going to be crap, because the base model 323i is too soft and doesn't have good brakes."


Won't know until it's for sale, of course. But I see every reason for optimism.

[johnlew]

Won't know until it's for sale, of course. But I see every reason for optimism.

JST, this is an exercise in open or close mindedness. We're all familiar with the domestic/GM history and we can all read the stats on the CTS-V. Whether one is willing to reserve final judgement on the car until it's seen/driven in the metal, is a reflection of state of mind. Some folks respond with curiosity, others respond with chronic bias.

[Jetfire]

Of course, the suspension on the hyper-performance edition is stiffer. And the brakes are better. Judging a CTS V based on these criticisms of the CTS is like saying in 2000 that "the M3 is going to be crap, because the base model 323i is too soft and doesn't have good brakes."


Won't know until it's for sale, of course. But I see every reason for optimism.
:imwithstupid:

[dlloyd1975]

I don't remember what the press had to say about the Catera, but I do remember it. It was a pretty bland car. "The Caddy That Zigs" and the cute duck in the commercial notwithstanding, it looked and drove much like any other middle-of-the-road sedan. That isn't enough for a manufacturer trying to reinvent itself.


I think that mascot was the Aflac ducks second cousin by marriage or something.

The CTS-V looks pretty darn impressive. Too bad it won't be available with Euro delivery. Any word on if they're going to sell it in Europe?

[Jetfire]

JST, this is an exercise in open or close mindedness. We're all familiar with the domestic/GM history and we can all read the stats on the CTS-V. Whether one is willing to reserve final judgement on the car until it's seen/driven in the metal, is a reflection of state of mind. Some folks respond with curiosity, others respond with chronic bias.
I agree. Having grown up in a family that only ever owned GM or Ford cars, then having bought a Pontiac as my first new car, I seem to be much more open minded about American vehicles then most Bimmerphiles. And that's a good thing.

Sure, GM makes a few crap cars. They also sell to a HUGE market, ranging from ultra bargain hunters to rock stars. The company that sells a Cavalier to an 18-year-old burger flipper will also throw the keys of an Escalade to the next Hollywood starlet's chauffeur on the same day.

You can't drive one or two GM vehicles and claim that they're all awful, much like you can't drive a 2001 E46 and say that all BMWs have terrible steering. Or, for that matter, look at an E65 and claim that all BMWs are ugly and overpriced.

[Jetfire]

The CTS-V looks pretty darn impressive. Too bad it won't be available with Euro delivery.

I'm sure you can arrange for Detroit Delivery, if you desire. Nothing like stop-and-go driving through Pothole City to appreciate something like that. :rofl:

[dlloyd1975]

I'm sure you can arrange for Detroit Delivery, if you desire. Nothing like stop-and-go driving through Pothole City to appreciate something like that. :rofl:

Uh, no. Detroit is a cursed place.

http://www.simplyvintage.com/images/products/unisex/detroit_preview.jpg

[marsfire]

Man, whats wrong with you guys? This car may be a great performer, but it is SO FRIGGIN UGLY!!!!! I do like the direction cadillac is going in especially with the XLR, but the CTS looks like a mutated retarded little brother.

No matter how great of a deal or performance car it is, I just could never own something sooooooo fugly.

IF the price is correct at about 50k, I would MUCH MUCH MUCH rather shell out a bit more and get the Corvette or the Z06 at 52k. I dont think there is any way this ugly car could compare with the Z06.

[Jetfire]

Man, whats wrong with you guys? This car may be a great performer, but it is SO FRIGGIN UGLY!!!!! I do like the direction cadillac is going in especially with the XLR, but the CTS looks like a mutated retarded little brother.

No matter how great of a deal or performance car it is, I just could never own something sooooooo fugly.

IF the price is correct at about 50k, I would MUCH MUCH MUCH rather shell out a bit more and get the Corvette or the Z06 at 52k. I dont think there is any way this ugly car could compare with the Z06.
LOL. Like I said, some people will find this car very ugly. Can't really blame them, although I think it looks great.

The CTS is not even CLOSE to the C5, though. One is a two-seat sports car and the other is a sedan. Would you compare the M5 to an M Coupe?

[Fuzzypuppy]

is this a car we'd all love to drive OR is it a car we'd want to own?

For me:
Drive - sure, why not?
Own - no f@^!ing way

[MR325iT]

Just read the Car and Driver review last night. I'm not a fan of the styling (though Bangle's done far worse), and I think the Escalade is responsible for the downfall of western civilization, trans fats, alien abductions, and other bad things, but it's hard to argue with 400HP in a RWD sedan with a 6-speed manual for like $50K, regardless of who makes it. Someone at Cadillac was clearly paying attention.

Don't worry though, GM has a history of killing off its most interesting models just as they're getting interesting.

[AK]

I have to say I think the CTS-V looks b**chin'. To me, it's much more attractive than anything that's come out of Banglified Motor Works lately. And kudos to GM for giving it an honest-to-Gawd mechanical limited slip rear end. We'll be able to switch off traction control and lay down twin black stripes all day long with this baby. The drivetrain will essentially be bulletproof (T56 trannies are used in Dodge Vipers).

I bought my 6-speed 540i because it was the only ticket in town that gave me a V8, a manual tranny, and 4 doors. Amazing how Cadillac, of all makers, is about to give me an alternative, value priced at less than 50 kilobux. Two years from now when my 540i has 100k miles on it and I'm ready for something new, I may stop by for a test drive. Hopefully then my Chuck Schwab portfolio will be in good shape. :)

[TD]

I just got my Car and Driver and immediately read their "First Drive". It sounds like they were very impressed. They had virtually no complaints. And noted that the CTS-V turned a faster Ring time than either the M3 (non-CLS) or the M5. 0-60 is estimated at 4.7 sec.

[in_d_haus]

It's still a fugly, unreliable piece of Detroit farm machinery

http://www.supercars.net/cars/2004@$Cadillac@$CTS-Vg.html

[TD]

It's still a fugly, unreliable piece of Detroit farm machinery

http://www.supercars.net/cars/2004@$Cadillac@$CTS-Vg.html
Hold on, haus. You and I both drive E36s. We certainly can't be that concerned with reliability.

[in_d_haus]

Hold on, haus. You and I both drive E36s. We certainly can't be that concerned with reliability.

TD, with all due respect, my 525 has 220,000 miles and aside from standard maint has had no problems. My E36 has 45,000 miles and no problems to date.

The CTS will never make 220K miles without falling apart first.

[Mr. The Edge]

I just got my Car and Driver and immediately read their "First Drive". It sounds like they were very impressed. They had virtually no complaints. And noted that the CTS-V turned a faster Ring time than either the M3 (non-CLS) or the M5. 0-60 is estimated at 4.7 sec.




I really could not care less about comparable 'Ring times.


:stickpoke

[johnlew]

TD, with all due respect, my 525 has 220,000 miles and aside from standard maint has had no problems. My E36 has 45,000 miles and no problems to date.

The CTS will never make 220K miles without falling apart first.

I had a '92 Buick Park Avenue with 160k on the clock with none other than maintenance work. Bought it with 108k. Buddy of mine bought a GMC van with 200k on it, now has 300k on it. Did some tranny work on it when he bought it. :dunno:

[TD]

:stickpoke
Has anyone ever told you that you're a huge pain in the ass?

BTW, I referred to their Ring time comments more to establish overall credibility than to get in a BMW vs Caddy pissing contest.

My older Ring times quote was referring to a past pissing contest.

[JST]

TD, with all due respect, my 525 has 220,000 miles and aside from standard maint has had no problems. My E36 has 45,000 miles and no problems to date.

The CTS will never make 220K miles without falling apart first.

Yeah, I never see Cadillacs or Lincolns in livery fleets with 220,000 miles on them.

Oh, wait. Yes I do. Daily.

[Mr. The Edge]

Has anyone ever told you that you're a huge pain in the ass?


yes; I've also been called an Archivist :p

[Alex Baumann]

Why are you guys so hard on the CTS ? OK, it may not be the most freaking beautiful car in the world, but it is no way worse than the E60 or E65 (maybe better).

The package they are going to offer sounds stunning. I don't know whether we'll see that car here in Vaterland, but if they bring it here, I'd definitely test drive it.

Same applies for Holden Monaro. There's a slight chance that Opel may build one of its next Omega models on Monaro basis. V8, RWD, 6 speed manual, 320 hp. :thumbup:

[johnlew]

I just got my Car and Driver and immediately read their "First Drive". It sounds like they were very impressed. They had virtually no complaints. And noted that the CTS-V turned a faster Ring time than either the M3 (non-CLS) or the M5. 0-60 is estimated at 4.7 sec.

And, it may be more practical for you.

[TD]

And, it may be more practical for you.
As I like to say, I plan to keep my M3/4 for a long time. But it's always good to see additional 4-door performance choices become available.

On paper, the CTS-V sounds great. More money than I want to spend, but...

[Nick325xiT 5spd]

Whether or not I buy one, I hope this car does REALLY well. It's exactly the sort of vehicle I want introduced to the market. Next car, I want a scary fast sedan, and the CTS-V could well fit the bill.

[in_d_haus]

Whether or not I buy one, I hope this car does REALLY well. It's exactly the sort of vehicle I want introduced to the market. Next car, I want a scary fast sedan, and the CTS-V could well fit the bill.

If it inspires the M5 to be even more capable than it would have served a purpose.

[Jetfire]

TD, with all due respect, my 525 has 220,000 miles and aside from standard maint has had no problems. My E36 has 45,000 miles and no problems to date.

The CTS will never make 220K miles without falling apart first.

:tsk:

The engine will last that long easily with regular oil changes. No doubt about it. The chassis is not brand new, and I am sure that tens of thousands of Sigmas exist with at least that many hard European miles on them. Perhaps you see more broken American cars out there because a) the plurality of cars in this country are still American and b) the average car owner doesn't give a rat's ass about maintenance.

Very few American cars are capable of taking on the Europeans. From what I've read, this car will be one of them. Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure I'm right.

[JST]

:tsk:

The engine will last that long easily with regular oil changes. No doubt about it. The chassis is not brand new, and I am sure that tens of thousands of Sigmas exist with at least that many hard European miles on them. Perhaps you see more broken American cars out there because a) the plurality of cars in this country are still American and b) the average car owner doesn't give a rat's ass about maintenance.

Very few American cars are capable of taking on the Europeans. From what I've read, this car will be one of them. Time will tell, but I'm pretty sure I'm right.

I'm just waiting for haus to make a further BMW reliability claim to the guy with one sitting in his garage sans engine.

The long and the short of it is that BMWs use higher quality materials in their interiors than do the majority of American cars. These materials look and wear better then the cheapy stuff used in most American makes. As a result, when you get into a BMW with 220K miles, it tends to look a lot better than the equivalent American sled. Of course, a BMW with zero miles tends to look better than the equivalent American, too.

But BMWs break down just as often (if not more often) as GMs do. They cost a whole lot more to fix. And they are, in that sense, no "better built" than your average GM.

[·clyde·]

More money than I want to spend, but...

If the resale is as crappy as most American cars, it could make for a great value used in a couple years.

[bmw325]

I'm joining this thread a few days late-- but I just finished reading all the press on the CTS-V. I am very impressed. To anyone who has qualms about reliability, ugly interiors or ugly exteriors-- look no further than an e60 or e65 for the definitive word on these subjects. The small-block Chevy motor is pretty much bullet-proof as is the Tremec transmission. I'd still rather have the CTS-V mechanicals in an e46 body shell-- but that's never going to happen. FWIW, I think the CTS-V actually does a good job of "making a statement" -- and while its not attractive, it is striking. These are things that Bangle aspires to, but misses by a long shot. There's something very "honest" about this car-- you can tell it was built by a group very dedicated engineers who saw themselves as the "underdogs" determined to bring down the German competition.

[car_for_mom]

I test drove the first iteration of the CTS (and yes, they found me a manual, because I wasn't going to test drive the car if they hadn't; I am the Manual Transmission Princess! :rolleyes: ).

My mother wouldn't drive anything unless it was a Cadillac; I grew up with various Caddys (and vowed I'd never, ever get one!). So, it was a stretch for me to even test drive one.

I was surprised at the car - it seemed pretty decent. The manual ("I've driven a BMW, and it's no BMW") wasn't bad at all; I'd say it was better than the Audi 1.8T, Volvo S60 T5 and the olde Saab 9-3 - it needs some refining, but it's not a bad manual, especially for a Cadillac.

The exterior styling grows on you after a while, and looks best in black.

The interior, actually, was a real turnoff - I'm telling you, the first-generation CTS's interior, its console looks just like the front of a Hewlett-Packard Vectra PC! Arrrrgh! And, there is a bit too much of the typical GM Early Soviet Union Decor, too.

The Sixteen, the Cadillac wundercar, has an absolutely stunning interior, approaching Audi-like design. I saw it at the 2003 LA Auto Show, so I know Cadillac can do better!

As for the CTS-V; it looks good, but I think I might be too 'po' for it; if it's priced more like the M3 as opposed to the 760Li, then, we'll see, Lord willing!

[Jetfire]

It's priced competitively against the M3.

[woohoo]

I don't know if the CTS-V has the same steering wheel as the regular CTS but MY GOD, the steering wheel in the regular CTS looks as if it came from a bus. And what is up with those funky interior shapes? What a turn-off. :thumbdwn:

[pdz]

I don't know if the CTS-V has the same steering wheel as the regular CTS but MY GOD, the steering wheel in the regular CTS looks as if it came from a bus. And what is up with those funky interior shapes? What a turn-off. :thumbdwn:


that must be some kind of bus-like steering.

for a chief engineer to easily run 8:19 on the 'ring speaks for itself. that is faster than BMW test drivers with the E46M3, about as fast as the 996 911........i think for those who don't get it yet, think about that.

pretty impressive.

yeah, it's not a beauty to look at, but is the E65? is the E60? subjective is subjective, so we can disagree about the styling but the performance, and not just in a stupid straight line, either, but on a real track speaks volumes.

[Mr. The Edge]

:eeps:

http://www.racingfanatics.com/Caddy_5a%20copy.jpg

[Stuka]

But BMWs break down just as often (if not more often) as GMs do. They cost a whole lot more to fix. And they are, in that sense, no "better built" than your average GM.

Yep, thank goodness for warranty! :yikes:

My E36 M3's:

Broken rear subframe bushing
Broken shock mount
$#@! sunroof rattling
OBC going crazy with the brake light failure
multiple dead fuel sending unit
multiple door seals repalcement
various interior trim pieces falling off
And much more that I don't remember

My E46 M3:

Blown engine
Broken drive shaft
Bad potentiometer
Bad DBW pedal assembly
Multiple door seals replcement
SMG reprogrammed for going nucking futs and popping to neutral
Leaky head gasket bolt (prior to the first engine blowing up)
Some other stuff that I don't remember

My E30 325is

Bought for $2700
Spent $4600 fixing the damn thing to get it reliable and track worthy
Oh yeah, sunroof is inoperable, along with passenger window, cigarrette ligher, and radio that asks for the code once every few days

So why do I keep coming back for more? Because it drives like a B-M-V, dammit. :thumbup: :bigpimp:

If this Caddy is as good as it looks on paper, BMW will have to take notice. How much were they planning on charging for the M5? :dunno: :p

Andy
02 M3 CB/Cloth SMG

[andy_thomas]

Isn't that just the E46 M3 with a large passenger?

Yes. And the CTS-V is 4,200 lb with a large passenger. Mmm.

[andy_thomas]

I think that mascot was the Aflac ducks second cousin by marriage or something.

The CTS-V looks pretty darn impressive. Too bad it won't be available with Euro delivery. Any word on if they're going to sell it in Europe?

Yes, Cadillac is going to sell it on the Continent. They can't be bothered making a RHD version, though, so chances are no-one in the UK (the biggest sports-car market in Europe by far, by the way) will give Cadillac credit for building it. Instead, they'll continue to lambast Cadillac as a manufacturer of soft-riding pimpmobiles for older gents and rappers.

I think it would make a great alternative choice to an M5, rather than an M3. An M3 is heavy enough as it is; this is 500lb worse.

[·clyde·]

Because it drives like a B-M-V, dammit. :thumbup: :bigpimp:


Do they drive anything like BMWs? :dunno:

[Jetfire]

Do they drive anything like BMWs? :dunno:
In German, it would be pronounced "bay-em-vay." :dunno:

[JST]

Yes, Cadillac is going to sell it on the Continent. They can't be bothered making a RHD version, though, so chances are no-one in the UK (the biggest sports-car market in Europe by far, by the way) will give Cadillac credit for building it. Instead, they'll continue to lambast Cadillac as a manufacturer of soft-riding pimpmobiles for older gents and rappers.

I think it would make a great alternative choice to an M5, rather than an M3. An M3 is heavy enough as it is; this is 500lb worse.


If you all would just learn to drive on the right side of the road, this wouldn't be an issue. And then we could drive TVRs.

[·clyde·]

In German, it would be pronounced "bay-em-vay." :dunno:
Well, he wrote out "bee-em-vee."

Of course, he lives in LA, so who knows what he really meant. :dunno:

:angel:

[Motown328]

Well I am glad to find at least a few people who are interested in this auto, because I am sure not.

They're all over the place now and look like mini-Batmobiles. I just can't see, unless you have an employee or executive discount, how you could explain to yourself to dish out that much $$$ for something that will be bought with huge insider discounts or, in a few months, $5,000, etc. off. Look at the resale values for an Escalade. I can get a 2001 Escalade, fully loaded here for $22,000. What a joke!!! :tsk:

Another reason to buy German/Japanese is that your investment (resale value) is well-kept.

[JST]

Well I am glad to find at least a few people who are interested in this auto, because I am sure not.

They're all over the place now and look like mini-Batmobiles. I just can't see, unless you have an employee or executive discount, how you could explain to yourself to dish out that much $$$ for something that will be bought with huge insider discounts or, in a few months, $5,000, etc. off. Look at the resale values for an Escalade. I can get a 2001 Escalade, fully loaded here for $22,000. What a joke!!! :tsk:

Another reason to buy German/Japanese is that your investment (resale value) is well-kept.


The CTS-V is an entirely different animal than the CTS, from a desirability standpoint.

Cadillac resale values do suck compared to the Germans. But that is something that is likely to change.

[Motown328]

The CTS-V is an entirely different animal than the CTS, from a desirability standpoint.

Cadillac resale values do suck compared to the Germans. But that is something that is likely to change.

JST, you're from around here right? So you know how it is with buying Big Three (it sure ain't American anymore, can't say Buy American, lest people think I'm talking Hondas and Toyotas)........0% for 72 months, $5000 off, plus family/employee discounts. Unless you are driving that heap to the bone, it's a financial mistake to buy. Right now I can walk down the street and get me a 2003 Cavalier, new of course, for $8700. That's right, you heard me, fresh off the line, for $8700 plus tax, title, and license.

Hahahaha....of course, the car retails for well over $15,000. (sorry rest of the U.S., esp. Californians....) See my point. At least buying BMW, Acura, etc., I know I won't buy my nice 330i and then two weeks later see on TV every break in between football and hockey, NOW WITH $4500 OFF AND INTEREST-FREE FINANCING!!! Ulcers................ :eek:

[JEM]

At $8700 that Cavalier is still about $2000 overpriced.

At $50K the CTS-V represents decent value, at least relative to its capabilities and competition.

[JBsZ06]

I saw the CTS V series at the NY auto show last year and have been thinking about this car for quite a while.

If GM would step up to the plate with the dual clutch SMG type tranny it would be more competitive with the upcoming M5..IMHO..

I believe that option will allow many more sales of BMW's M series...

Cadillac should follow suit but I doubt it will for quite a few years..

BTw..475 - 500hp is on the table for the 2nd or 3rd year using the ls7 motor from the C6 Z06...

[Motown328]

I saw the CTS V series at the NY auto show last year and have been thinking about this car for quite a while.

If GM would step up to the plate with the dual clutch SMG type tranny it would be more competitive with the upcoming M5..IMHO..

I believe that option will allow many more sales of BMW's M series...

Cadillac should follow suit but I doubt it will for quite a few years..

BTw..475 - 500hp is on the table for the 2nd or 3rd year using the ls7 motor from the C6 Z06...


That's been the problem with the Big Three for decades. They think just because they drop a big engine in the damn hunk of scrap, it makes it a good auto. That thing gotta Hemi? Yeah, but it drives like a refrigerator......... :tsk:

[Jetfire]

That's been the problem with the Big Three for decades. They think just because they drop a big engine in the damn hunk of scrap, it makes it a good auto. That thing gotta Hemi? Yeah, but it drives like a refrigerator......... :tsk:
The CTS is pretty far from a hunk of scrap, and as far as American sedans go, it's probably the furthest the Big Three have gone from a hunk of scrap. This car is going to be a big deal, and not just because of the LS6. The articles and reviews on developmental versions of this car have already spelled it out.

And not to pick nits, but the only vehicle with a Hemi in it right now is MEANT to drive like a fridge. :p

[JST]

JST, you're from around here right? So you know how it is with buying Big Three (it sure ain't American anymore, can't say Buy American, lest people think I'm talking Hondas and Toyotas)........0% for 72 months, $5000 off, plus family/employee discounts. Unless you are driving that heap to the bone, it's a financial mistake to buy. Right now I can walk down the street and get me a 2003 Cavalier, new of course, for $8700. That's right, you heard me, fresh off the line, for $8700 plus tax, title, and license.

Hahahaha....of course, the car retails for well over $15,000. (sorry rest of the U.S., esp. Californians....) See my point. At least buying BMW, Acura, etc., I know I won't buy my nice 330i and then two weeks later see on TV every break in between football and hockey, NOW WITH $4500 OFF AND INTEREST-FREE FINANCING!!! Ulcers................ :eek:


Though I did see on a break in football that they are offering $5K rebates on Z4s.

I understand your point. Generally, there isn't a whole lot built by the big 2.5 that really excites me, which explains why I have a BMW and a VW despite also having access to big family discounts. But the CTS-V actually looks like something I'd want to buy, independent of the badge.

We'll see. Could be wrong, but it would be nice to be right.

[JEM]

The CTS is pretty far from a hunk of scrap, and as far as American sedans go, it's probably the furthest the Big Three have gone from a hunk of scrap. This car is going to be a big deal, and not just because of the LS6. The articles and reviews on developmental versions of this car have already spelled it out.

The point here is that the Sigma platform on which the CTS is built is, in core engineering, at least as advanced as anything BMW has - Dynamic Drive and Active Steering aside.

[missing23]

[QUOTE=johnlew]Read all about it. (http://www.imakenews.com/autospies/e_article000144018.cfm)
[QUOTE]


UGH, that front grill is :bling:

[elbert]

UGH, that front grill is :bling:

I assume you're referring to the mesh grille. Bentley does the same thing :dunno: I think it looks nice, especially on a black car.

[Jetfire]

I assume you're referring to the mesh grille. Bentley does the same thing :dunno: I think it looks nice, especially on a black car.
Bentley and Jaguar Rs.

[Mr. The Edge]

:eek:

http://members.roadfly.org/quickburn7/SFauto%20show%20034.jpg

[Jetfire]

Woohoo. :thumbup: I hope this car will be available for walk-throughs in Detroit, although I'm guessing that it won't be. :(

[Plaz]

:eek:

http://members.roadfly.org/quickburn7/SFauto%20show%20034.jpg

Amen.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

[Jetfire]

Amen.

:eek: :eek: :eek:
Shrug...I like it. :dunno:

[AK]

Shrug...I like it. :dunno:

same here. i saw it in person at the auto show in Anaheim a few weeks ago and thought it looked great.

i do kinda wish GM could figure out a way to import some of the other aussies besides just the Holden Monaro (GTO)...

http://www.holden.com.au/www-holden/action/modeloverview?modelid=4009

[elbert]

Amen.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Maybe a little too shiny. I would get it powdercoated a darker silver.

[Thertorch]

4 doors? I think you'll find the number of people disagreeing with you will be, er, everyone :). What makes you think the E46 M3 should have been a four door?

- V8 power: well, that was left to the M5. If you want lazy, nothing-special V8 power, get an S4. They have 4 doors, too. I agree, though, that a small-capacity, high-revving V8 with an aluminium engine would have done no damage to the weight distribution. Whether BMW could have got a steering rack in there (vs the box used for the V8 5s) is debatable, though.

Real brakes? Everyone bar the North American markets got those. Don't blame BMW; blame BMW NA (or the reasons they de-contented the NA-market M3 brakes).

Otherwise, the CTS-V sounds like everything the M3 isn't and shouldn't ever be. A 3,900 lb pig that will only be sold in a handful of markets. Doesn't really cut it.

Now that the CTS V is actually out, it's interesting to see what everyone pre-supposed it would be.

3900 lb pig, huh? Guess you'll have to get used to looking at a pig's butt then.... :rofl:

[JEM]

Now that the CTS V is actually out, it's interesting to see what everyone pre-supposed it would be.

3900 lb pig, huh? Guess you'll have to get used to looking at a pig's butt then.... :rofl:

Hey, it's pretty much exactly what I expected it to be. Better, really, since the big wheels, cleaned-up end caps, and tweaked ride height do a lot to fix the (IMO pretty awful) CTS shape.

The only negatives are GM build issues (some real but mostly minor, some only potential at this point) and the widely-reported wheel-hop-on-launch situation.

[Cowboy Bebop]

still looks like a$$... if they would just build the CIEN, now were talking a car!

the Ctsv looks like it was "designed with NACSAR" in mind.
slap a few decals on the thing and put it in the pack!

I'll pass thank you.

[Thertorch]

still looks like a$$... if they would just build the CIEN, now were talking a car!

the Ctsv looks like it was "designed with NACSAR" in mind.
slap a few decals on the thing and put it in the pack!

I'll pass thank you.

Uh huh, and the decal on the trunk says "The line for BMW's starts here"..........

[EZ]

Recently, I drove a CTS on a slalom course at El Toro, and I was really turned off by its handling. The car is tall, big and heavy. And I mean it feels really HEAVY. When it turned, I was getting an impression that I was riding a pig. Even a Mercedes C-class felt much better. Only Lexus felt behind the Caddy.

Granted, it wasn't a cts-v. However, the v-version has the same dimensions and it is even heavier. I really doubt that firmer springs could fix that awful drive feeling. So, IMHO, GM has a long way to go before match the 3er (especially M3 and even ZHP). They should've benchmarked it against the heavier 5er.

[JEM]

...everyone I know of who's driven the CTS-V has come away raving, and those that have driven it in closed-course settings (racetrack/autocross/etc) even more so. And some of these people are intimately familiar with M3s, M5s, etc.

The feedback I've gotten is (depending on your basis for comparison) that it's got 90% of the tossability of an M3 (impressive enough, given that it's as big as an E60) but a hell of a lot more engine, or the grunt of an M5 but a more responsive chassis.

It can't match BMW for material quality, but it doesn't seem to be too awful. I've looked at one, but haven't driven it yet. Maybe next week. There's a few floating around now, a couple in local dealers. Not planning on trading the M5 for one, but I'd like to see for myself how good it really is.

[Thertorch]

Recently, I drove a CTS on a slalom course at El Toro, and I was really turned off by its handling. The car is tall, big and heavy. And I mean it feels really HEAVY. When it turned, I was getting an impression that I was riding a pig. Even a Mercedes C-class felt much better. Only Lexus felt behind the Caddy.

Granted, it wasn't a cts-v. However, the v-version has the same dimensions and it is even heavier. I really doubt that firmer springs could fix that awful drive feeling. So, IMHO, GM has a long way to go before match the 3er (especially M3 and even ZHP). They should've benchmarked it against the heavier 5er.


Sport suspension, or regular?

[JEM]

guess u missed the recent news concerning american car build quality vs. europeans :rolleyes:

It's not possible to generalize to that level, you have to look at the specific model and plant where that model is built.

BMW, for instance, has problems with the E65. Most of the rest of the line, however, is solid, though the US-build models have never quite matched the German-build models.

You also have to look at who's buying them. A 7-series buyer is going to be a pretty critical customer. Anyone buying, say, a Cavalier is focused purely on the pricetag and won't be paying much attention to the oozing trim glue or the rattles.

Note that the Ford Focus is actually getting pretty good reliability ratings now, but it was a pretty fair disaster for the first four years or so, and the Wayne, Michigan-build sedans were considered worse than the Mexico-built hatchbacks. Ford's got so much on their hands with new product rollout, in fact, and they're so relieved to have finally gotten the kinks out of the Focus that while the Focus is being replaced in Europe, they're going to keep the old one going in the US.

[EZ]

Sport suspension, or regular?

I believe it had a sport suspension, but I'm not sure.

[BahnBaum]

In January, when I decided I was going to buy the M3, I got a little nervous and decided I had to look at a couple other cars just to make sure I would be happy. I looked at the S4 and stopped at the Cadillac dealership to find out when they were expecting their first CTS-V. I gave my card to the sales manager and asked for a call the day it arrived. I made it clear I was a serious buyer.

After their anticipated delivery date passed with no call from the dealership, I called and left a message for the sales manager reminding him that I was very interested in the CTS-V, and asked for a return call. I never heard anything from him. I had my heart set on the M3, so in fairness this experience with the dealership was nothing more than an excuse for me to go with what I knew I always wanted.

I believe some of you are selling this car short from a performance (not just straight line) standpoint. But I found it completely cadillacky that they were already apologizing for the fit and finish of the interior even before it was released, promising an interior upgrade in year 2; and of course the wheel hop issue would be completely unacceptable to me.

Alex

[Jetfire]

I want to drive one. Now.

[Thertorch]

I believe it had a sport suspension, but I'm not sure.

I drove a 325i vs. the CTS lux/sport package, test drive only. The 325i felt more responsive, while the CTS felt a bit numb. But other then steering input they both handled pretty well. To be fair to the German, I'll have to give it another try before I pick up the Caddy.

And this year Caddy is bringing out the 6 speed manual for the base model, which will help alot. Typical GM tho, they can't pull the trigger and release the right vehicle in year one, they have to bring it out a piece at a time.

And fit and finish isnt' the issue with the interior, it's the look. It's too polarizing, so Caddy (spelled Bob Lutz ) is gonna redo it. Maybe add some of them fake leather sufaces...

As to the CTS V, GM nailed that one. Nice to see Caddy take the lead for a change.

[tgravo2]

I just saw a CTS-V at a car show and all I could do was drool

I don't even like the cts but this one just hit me

[Thertorch]

Well I am glad to find at least a few people who are interested in this auto, because I am sure not.

They're all over the place now and look like mini-Batmobiles. I just can't see, unless you have an employee or executive discount, how you could explain to yourself to dish out that much $$$ for something that will be bought with huge insider discounts or, in a few months, $5,000, etc. off. Look at the resale values for an Escalade. I can get a 2001 Escalade, fully loaded here for $22,000. What a joke!!! :tsk:

Another reason to buy German/Japanese is that your investment (resale value) is well-kept.

Hehe, Cadillac, because of the CTS SRX, has cracked the 50% resale barrier for the first time in a long time..

[Thertorch]

Recently, I drove a CTS on a slalom course at El Toro, and I was really turned off by its handling. The car is tall, big and heavy. And I mean it feels really HEAVY. When it turned, I was getting an impression that I was riding a pig. Even a Mercedes C-class felt much better. Only Lexus felt behind the Caddy.

Granted, it wasn't a cts-v. However, the v-version has the same dimensions and it is even heavier. I really doubt that firmer springs could fix that awful drive feeling. So, IMHO, GM has a long way to go before match the 3er (especially M3 and even ZHP). They should've benchmarked it against the heavier 5er.

There's that reference to pigs again...does driving BMW's make you more appreciative of farm animals, by any chance?

[rruiter]

Styling is definitely up for debate. For the record, I really like the new Cadillacs a lot. The Escalade/EXT/ESV, CTS, XLR (boioioing), and upcoming SRV all look good to me, and most of them look great. People who hate them are certainly justified, though.

As for reliability, I've actually had no problems with any GM product. My last GM car (bought new) took all of the abuse I gave it and then some. In fact, the vast majority of Grand Prix owners really ran them HARD. Aside from tansmission issues (try pumping well over 300 ft-lbs through a FWD tranny meant for 280 max) the cars stood up admirably. The interior was rather Duplo-like, but that's just a styling problem.

yeah, the styling isn't that great. I don't think it will hold up over time as good as say an e46. It's soso now, and in 3 years it will be nothing to turn your head for.

As for GM quality.. Had a GM product once, NEVER again. what a pos.
problems that a modern car should never get at 30K miles; brakes, window-motors(all 4!), alternators, ac.... no thanks.

[TD]

yeah, the styling isn't that great. I don't think it will hold up over time as good as say an e46. It's soso now, and in 3 years it will be nothing to turn your head for.

As for GM quality.. Had a GM product once, NEVER again. what a pos.
problems that a modern car should never get at 30K miles; brakes, window-motors(all 4!), alternators, ac.... no thanks.
Have you paid any attention to the reliability issues people are having with E46s?

I am quite sure that Cadillacs are rated higher for quality than BMWs.

[rruiter]

Have you paid any attention to the reliability issues people are having with E46s?

I am quite sure that Cadillacs are rated higher for quality than BMWs.

too bad their resale values don't reflect that. I don't trust the damn surveys. I clearly remember the hummer coming out as the worst vehicle overall. When they looked into what the complaints were, a lot of them were "it's using too much gas" well, duh, there goes the credibility of the survey. I think higher end drivers are more critical also, messing up the survey even more.
Plus they are initial quality surveys. doesn't mean anything for long term reliability.

[EZ]

I drove a 325i vs. the CTS lux/sport package, test drive only. The 325i felt more responsive, while the CTS felt a bit numb. But other then steering input they both handled pretty well. To be fair to the German, I'll have to give it another try before I pick up the Caddy.

And this year Caddy is bringing out the 6 speed manual for the base model, which will help alot. Typical GM tho, they can't pull the trigger and release the right vehicle in year one, they have to bring it out a piece at a time.

And fit and finish isnt' the issue with the interior, it's the look. It's too polarizing, so Caddy (spelled Bob Lutz ) is gonna redo it. Maybe add some of them fake leather sufaces...

As to the CTS V, GM nailed that one. Nice to see Caddy take the lead for a change.

Hey, I'd be very happy to see an American company producing top-notch vehicles. That's why I went to the show. Did I miss something there? May be. I'll give them a second try.

As for now, I am just expressing an opinion.

[Plaz]

Have you paid any attention to the reliability issues people are having with E46s?

I am quite sure that Cadillacs are rated higher for quality than BMWs.

To what E46 problems are you referring that drop them below GM standards?

[Thertorch]

yeah, the styling isn't that great. I don't think it will hold up over time as good as say an e46. It's soso now, and in 3 years it will be nothing to turn your head for.

As for GM quality.. Had a GM product once, NEVER again. what a pos.
problems that a modern car should never get at 30K miles; brakes, window-motors(all 4!), alternators, ac.... no thanks.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I had a Subaru once, and had an accident. I'll never buy another one, cause they get into accidents alot....

Personal stories are very affecting for us as individuals, but really do little to enlighten anyone about overall quality or reliability. That's why outfits like JD Power do their thing, so we can sort out the horror stories from the truth.

Check out Edmunds reviews section for 3 series, and for the CTS. 3 series. after 150+ reviews is a 9.4, CTS after 90+ is 9.3. JD Power has the CTS at #1 or 2 now for initial quality. Cadillac resale is up past 50% after 3 years. The debate on Quality is over, Cadillac has hit the mark on their new vehicles.

Driving feel, however, is a different and very subjective matter. My personal opionion is that Cadillac missed the mark by going for the core Cadillac market with the CTS, and will spend another year or so correcting the mistake. Once that is done, the base CTS will be on par with any car now made.

[Wallenrod]

The problem with rating and all these consumer surveys and jd power and whatever else they have there is that when someone driving a buick has a suspension falling off, squeeks all over the place and weird engine noises, they probably don't think about it at all. They wouldn't buy a buick in the first place if they cared. So as long as it moves them from point A to B, they would probably rate it excellent. Do you think they care what engine oil they put in or whether they should change it more often than suggested manufacturer intervals? Or whether their model has the same control arms as a model with some different package? Are you kidding me...
Now take people who buy BMWs. Many (not all) probably are interested in these cars, research them a lot and constantly complain about every little bit of imaginary (or real) problem. Enough to check this and other forums.

So clearly there's a bias and all these surveys are about as useful as a call to a BMW 1-800 number.

[Thertorch]

The problem with rating and all these consumer surveys and jd power and whatever else they have there is that when someone driving a buick has a suspension falling off, squeeks all over the place and weird engine noises, they probably don't think about it at all. They wouldn't buy a buick in the first place if they cared. So as long as it moves them from point A to B, they would probably rate it excellent. Do you think they care what engine oil they put in or whether they should change it more often than suggested manufacturer intervals? Or whether their model has the same control arms as a model with some different package? Are you kidding me...
Now take people who buy BMWs. Many (not all) probably are interested in these cars, research them a lot and constantly complain about every little bit of imaginary (or real) problem. Enough to check this and other forums.

So clearly there's a bias and all these surveys are about as useful as a call to a BMW 1-800 number.

Ah, I see. So no one who owns any other car than BMW cares about it? That explains why Ford and Chrysler rank No. 1 and 2 on all the surveys, cause all them people just don't care......

Um, it should be obvious, and I mean OBVIOUS that people understand and report the problems with their vehicles. That's why certain brands rank higher or lower then others in these surveys... ( I can't believe this needs an explanation, the rest of you forgive me please ) .

The big difference, and I mean BIG difference is that certain brands, like BMW, have such great and I mean GREAT advantages, that their owners will complain about the problems but still report that they love their cars.

BTW, Buicks are actually pretty well built, if you believe the surveys, but I digress.

Triumph and MGB made some of the most god awful mechanical contraptions ever to afflict the planet. If you owned one, you drove it during the week and fixed it on the weekend, unless you had to fix it on the side of the road. ( My Spitfire ran home from work one night in the rain with the points closed, true story ) And yet, people loved to own them. Because, a little open two seat roadster has a great deal of appeal to alot of people, even if it's built to Yugoslavian specifications.

Moral of the story, don't confuse brand loyalty/driving satisfaction with build quality.

[JST]

To what E46 problems are you referring that drop them below GM standards?

In roughly their order of appearance throughout the model run:

-Electronic throttle failures
-Issues with front lower control arms and vibration during braking
-Cam and crank position failures
-Thermostat failures
-Auxiliary fan failures
-Fires resulting from above
-Window regulator issues
-Spun bearing problems (S54)

Those are just off the top of my head. I'm not arguing that the E46 is a bad car, but it has certainly not been problem free.

[Thertorch]

And one last thing about styling, while I'm ranting.

If you don't like the way a car looks, your not gonna buy it, and no one can make you. That's pretty well understood. Bad looking does not equal poorly made.

BMW 3 series are certainly easy to look at, in a Minivan luxury sedan sort of way. Safe, not to distinguishable. The look of the Japanese Lux sedans are even more conservative. And if Audis get any more slab sided, they'll retail in the meat isle of Cosco.
The CTS is the purple haired girl with the body art you meet in a bar. Definately not for everyone.


First time I saw the new 7 series, I thought it was the new Altima....

Z4 is everything a Shelby Cobra would have been if Carroll Shelby had been drunk and working in the dark.

But those are just opinions :rofl:

[EZ]

And one last thing about styling, while I'm ranting.

If you don't like the way a car looks, your not gonna buy it, and no one can make you. That's pretty well understood. Bad looking does not equal poorly made.

BMW 3 series are certainly easy to look at, in a Minivan luxury sedan sort of way. Safe, not to distinguishable. The look of the Japanese Lux sedans are even more conservative. And if Audis get any more slab sided, they'll retail in the meat isle of Cosco.
The CTS is the purple haired girl with the body art you meet in a bar. Definately not for everyone.


First time I saw the new 7 series, I thought it was the new Altima....

Z4 is everything a Shelby Cobra would have been if Carroll Shelby had been drunk and working in the dark.

But those are just opinions :rofl:

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

[Wallenrod]

That explains why Ford and Chrysler rank No. 1 and 2 on all the surveys, cause all them people just don't care......


That's probably because all the people who died from the exploding fuel tanks didn't get a chance to complete the survey :rofl:

[TeamM3]

sounds like a hyped up Caddy version of the GTO to me :dunno: GM must be going back to their old tricks

[Thertorch]

sounds like a hyped up Caddy version of the GTO to me :dunno: GM must be going back to their old tricks

Not really. It's brand new body architecture, the Sigma platform. This body was tuned for performance from the get go, the handling was not an afterthought. The modifications to the base CTS are stiffer shocks, springs and bigger stabilizer bars ( tho I'm not 100% sure of that last one), with a brace across the engine bay. Bigger wheels and tires and the car can lap the ring faster then the M3.

The engine is the LS6, ZO6 version making 400hp. Caddy claims it's because it was a better fit then the Northstar, but with the Northstar capped at about 320-330 hp, I believe it was because the LS 6 put them in competition with the M3-M5 type cars.

Overall, a very impressive debut for Cadillac. If they could just get the steering feel of a Beemer, ( and ok, redo the interior ) the car will be classic.

[JST]

Not really. It's brand new body architecture, the Sigma platform. This body was tuned for performance from the get go, the handling was not an afterthought. The modifications to the base CTS are stiffer shocks, springs and bigger stabilizer bars ( tho I'm not 100% sure of that last one), with a brace across the engine bay. Bigger wheels and tires and the car can lap the ring faster then the M3.

The engine is the LS6, ZO6 version making 400hp. Caddy claims it's because it was a better fit then the Northstar, but with the Northstar capped at about 320-330 hp, I believe it was because the LS 6 put them in competition with the M3-M5 type cars.

Overall, a very impressive debut for Cadillac. If they could just get the steering feel of a Beemer, ( and ok, redo the interior ) the car will be classic.


The GTO is a Holden Monaro, which is a stretched and widened version of the (old) Opel Omega, which formed the basis for the Caddy that Zigs (aka the Catera). But the Opel Omega and the Sigma are not related, other than in general concept.

It's the fact that the CTS-V can lap the 'ring faster than either the M3 or M5 that means it must be taken very seriously.

[LmtdSlip]

4 doors? I think you'll find the number of people disagreeing with you will be, er, everyone :). What makes you think the E46 M3 should have been a four door?

- V8 power: well, that was left to the M5. If you want lazy, nothing-special V8 power, get an S4. They have 4 doors, too. I agree, though, that a small-capacity, high-revving V8 with an aluminium engine would have done no damage to the weight distribution. Whether BMW could have got a steering rack in there (vs the box used for the V8 5s) is debatable, though.

Real brakes? Everyone bar the North American markets got those. Don't blame BMW; blame BMW NA (or the reasons they de-contented the NA-market M3 brakes).

Otherwise, the CTS-V sounds like everything the M3 isn't and shouldn't ever be. A 3,900 lb pig that will only be sold in a handful of markets. Doesn't really cut it.

:thumbup:

[Thertorch]

4 doors? I think you'll find the number of people disagreeing with you will be, er, everyone :). What makes you think the E46 M3 should have been a four door?

- V8 power: well, that was left to the M5. If you want lazy, nothing-special V8 power, get an S4. They have 4 doors, too. I agree, though, that a small-capacity, high-revving V8 with an aluminium engine would have done no damage to the weight distribution. Whether BMW could have got a steering rack in there (vs the box used for the V8 5s) is debatable, though.

Real brakes? Everyone bar the North American markets got those. Don't blame BMW; blame BMW NA (or the reasons they de-contented the NA-market M3 brakes).

Otherwise, the CTS-V sounds like everything the M3 isn't and shouldn't ever be. A 3,900 lb pig that will only be sold in a handful of markets. Doesn't really cut it.


3900 lb pig sets lap record at Sebring........... beats old record by a full 3 seconds. Rumor is that M3's are still on the track..... :rofl:

[Thertorch]

Soooooo......
At Sebring, the CTS V race mod has set a new lap record. This certainly doesnt mean it's gonna win, but it does prove the point that the basic vehicle dynamics were NAILED!

I realize that because the M3's are just so much better they made them drive around the track in reverse with the parking brake engaged, but I'm still encouraged by Cadillac's showing. :rofl:

Competition is good. Competition for premium brands is better. Competition when it's being waged and won by your freinds and neighbors, brother's, sister's, aunt's and uncles is best.

Cadillac.. The standard of the world...... ( Today ;))

[jw]

Super V! Spy shooters uncover dazzling, 600-hp CTS prototype (http://autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_code=carnews&loc_code=index&content_code=09818491)
We’re told this beast is the forerunner for the maximum General Motors Performance Division Caddy, the CTS Super V. Available direct from GM for about $65,000, Super V features a 600-hp engine, carbon fiber hood and fenders, and that scoop for getting more cooling air in and around the engine bay.

Once GM engineers get done running the Nürburgring, they’ll get down to the business of building just 500 limited-edition Super Vs.
http://www.autoweek.com/weekart/2004/0531/0531caddyex_main.jpg

[Jetfire]

Uh, $65,000? That seems almost laughably inexpensive, if true.

[Plaz]

Good god is that thing ugly. :eek:

[jw]

Uh, $65,000? That seems almost laughably inexpensive, if true.
Talked w/ dealer this week as I was working out delivery of my CTS tomorrow. The rumor is confirmed as a rumor. :thumbup:

[jw]

Good god is that thing ugly. :eek:
Most beasts are! That thing is beastly! What the hell are people going to do w/ 600hp car who normally couldn't afford one? Baby it or crash it!

[jw]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=43903&item=2482767966&rd=1

Vehicle Description

625 horsepower \ 550 foot pounds of torque!!, built by More Performance who specializes in LS1 Chevrolet engines. This particular engine is a Procharged 383LS6. This includes Lunati crank shaft, rods, JE Pistons, Coated Bearings, LS6 Intake, LS6 Cylinder Heads, Custom Computer Tuning and a upgraded fuel system. This is the first Supercharged CTS-V in the US and is a daily driver. We made 524 rear wheel horsepower(RWHP) on 10PSI of boost. This car maintains factory like driveability, while getting 25 MPG on the highway. With the addition of Headers and Exhaust this car is capable of making 700 horsepower.

[JPinTO]

I guess Cadi wants to make a statement. Driving the CTS-V, I didn't feel like it suffered from lack of power, it suffers from too much weight and lack of SMG.

[jw]

I guess Cadi wants to make a statement. Driving the CTS-V, I didn't feel like it suffered from lack of power, it suffers from too much weight and lack of SMG.
Didn't stop them from kicking a$$ at Sebring. :dunno:

[JPinTO]

Didn't stop them from kicking a$$ at Sebring. :dunno:

I didn't have a chance to drive it at Sebring, unfortunately. Are they stripped?

[Zaphod]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=43903&item=2482767966&rd=1

Vehicle Description

Those type of numbers are worthless, IMO, if they have not solved the wheel hop issues that the V has. I've read where there have been instances where axles have been broken on a stock V. What good is the torque if you can't get it to the pavement?

[jw]

Those type of numbers are worthless, IMO, if they have not solved the wheel hop issues that the V has. I've read where there have been instances where axles have been broken on a stock V. What good is the torque if you can't get it to the pavement?Don't think the CTS-V was designed to be a dragster, but from what I've read they are addressing the issue if you're willing to fork over the $$.
"...Also, we just received a CTS-V with the Performance Suspension
package recently introduced by Cadillac. It was a
2004 model, so it looks like
this package will work for all years. Anyway, the thing plants
SO MUCH better, its amazing. It still hops a little, but not enough to really degrade your lauch. This should be
standard not optional. It's a little harsher on the rough roads, but rides surprisingly well on straight, smooth surfaces. I'll get you
numbers soon." (original emphasis)

http://cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13423&highlight=wheel+hop

[Zaphod]

Don't think the CTS-V was designed to be a dragster, but from what I've read they are addressing the issue if you're willing to fork over the $$.

http://cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13423&highlight=wheel+hop


I tend to agree about the car's intent, but, after reading some of the other posts in the thread it seems the wheel hop can rear (no pun intended) its ugly head in some cornering situations.

Fortunately, it's seems to be fixable albeit somewhat pricey.

[mrmpl]

Bentley and Jaguar Rs.


Like the Bentley, Jaguar, Caddie - we have RaceMesh! :thumbup:

RaceMesh - BMW, MINI, LEXUS (http://community.webshots.com/user/customgrilles)