Anyone 100% buying the day they arrive?

[CIWS]

Originally Posted by Florian

Kat,

They are indeed built on the same Sigma platform, BUT, the STSv isnt nearly as solid in the corners as the CTSv. Ive had both, I can compare objectively. The STSv just doesnt have the same 'feel' as the CTSv did....but I kind of like my Luxo-barge.


F

Originally Posted by Florian

no new STS-v, that style is over.

F

Originally Posted by Kadonny

I can also tell you from owning both, the STS-V feels much bigger when sitting in it. 6 inches or not, I have more legroom in the STS-V and way more shoulder room.

F-16 vs an F-14 The CTS-V is more nimble, but the STS-V is more plush and a little bit fatter in the ass, but it will also haul ass while playing MP3s in Dolby 5.1.

[Brett]

Originally Posted by Kadonny

I can also tell you from owning both, the STS-V feels much bigger when sitting in it. 6 inches or not, I have more legroom in the STS-V and way more shoulder room.

Isnt the Gen2 CTS bigger than Gen1? Im just trying to figure out how someone standing on a showroom floor looking at the CTS-V and STS-V picks the STS-V. Especially when it appears that it will be more expensive. I hoped to pick up a used STS-V in afew years now I gotta figure a Gen2 CTS-V would be a better deal

[CIWS]

Originally Posted by Brett

Isnt the Gen2 CTS bigger than Gen1? Im just trying to figure out how someone standing on a showroom floor looking at the CTS-V and STS-V picks the STS-V. Especially when it appears that it will be more expensive. I hoped to pick up a used STS-V in afew years now I gotta figure a Gen2 CTS-V would be a better deal

Gen2 CTS-V is slightly larger than Gen1. Weight of the Gen2 CTS-V will be very close to that of the current STS-V if not the same. The STS-V has features and luxuries the Gen1 CTS-V does not, plus it doesn't carry a rear end that tends to blow apart(s) with excessive wheel hop because it's pretty much nannied, so off the line it goes. Gen2 CTS-V is supposed to remedy this. Although we don't yet know for sure, a Gen2 CTS-V may not be too far off in price from a current STS-V, although you can pick up a slightly used and Cadillac Certified STS-V now for about the same as a new Gen1 CTS-V.

[Brett]

the way this is playing out, the STS-V is going to be a rare breed, which is pretty cool in some ways. annoying in a few others.

[Cadillac Tony]

Originally Posted by thebigjimsho

Isn't the S/C Poon* 4.4 litres?

Yeah, it is. That's what I get for typing too fast.

Originally Posted by Katshot

Now see, I came up with about 450lb. for the LS2.

http://www.gmperformanceparts.com/_r...ineQRC2008.pdf

[thebigjimsho]

Originally Posted by Katshot

Obviously a subjective call, and I'm assuming you're referring to the '09 CTS-V. Hardly a fair comparison. How about we wait and compare the next Gen. STS-V.

Nope, I was talking about the current CTS-V.

[HITMONEY]

Next Gen STS-V???




I wouldn't hold your breath too long for that to show up in the showroom anytime too soon..... more like never.

[Katshot]

IMO (please notice I said that), I really liked the "looks" of the Gen. 1 STS better than the CTS. Unfortunately, the STS-V ended up with a super-charged, revised version of the Northstar (not good IMO). Honestly, that put me in a VERY hard place when trying to pick one over the other. Deciding factor was driven home when I saw the MSRP of the STS-V
Nice car but the price invoked instant MEGA-sticker-shock. Damn shame.
Now comes the new CTS. Hmmm...really liked it as soon as I saw it. Then comes the '09 CTS-V. My reaction? WOW!!!!! SUPER WOW!!!!!!!
But....then I start thinking about the price, the power, the insurance.....Hmmm.
Then, I see the review of the CTS w/DI V6 engine. My brain starts wondering wehther the "V" is really worth my time. Yeah it's more powerful but.....with RWD the power is mostly kept away from me due to lack of traction (damn computer). But realistically, even if I defeat the T/C the power is unusable. So do I really want/need it? Is the standard CTS w/DI engine a better idea? Hmmm
Just not sure.

[CadV]

I have owned both the CTS-V and the STS-V. The CTS-V has a smaller interrior because people used to complain about getting in and out of it. CTS-V interior is cheap looking. Like many have specified I switched because of all the problems I had with the CTS-V. It handles great though but that is about it.

I drive in heavy traffic and I need an auto. Only time I race is on the freeway. STS-V is a far superior car in my opinion because I like all the technology bells and whistles. The interior is far superior to the CTS-V as well.

They have fixed my complaints in the new CTS-V so I will eventualy get one when they allow GMS.

[b4z]

STS was not designed at the last minute by Lutz.
He was not a fan of Art and Science and when he saw the design of the STS he rounded off some of the sharp edges and LOWERED the roof 1".
My feeling is he messed the car up.
I didn't feel that the STS offered any more usable room than the CTS, but I heard that for the second year the front seat travel was increased.
I am comfortable in newer STSs, but also feel that the new CTS offers more legroom than the previous gen.

And for those that argue that the STS is not that much bigger in each dimension, a few inches here and there, especially in wheelbase can totally change the feel of the car. Add in a couple 100lbs of extra weight + softer supension and the change can be huge.
Barge might be an overstatement but I got his point.

[Rich H]

Originally Posted by b4z

STS was not designed at the last minute by Lutz.
He was not a fan of Art and Science and when he saw the design of the STS he rounded off some of the sharp edges and LOWERED the roof 1".
My feeling is he messed the car up.
I didn't feel that the STS offered any more usable room than the CTS, but I heard that for the second year the front seat travel was increased.
I am comfortable in newer STSs, but also feel that the new CTS offers more legroom than the previous gen.

And for those that argue that the STS is not that much bigger in each dimension, a few inches here and there, especially in wheelbase can totally change the feel of the car. Add in a couple 100lbs of extra weight + softer supension and the change can be huge.
Barge might be an overstatement but I got his point.

I have not driven a STS V but I have driven an 08 STS as a warranty rental. Maybe it is not a fair comparison to a CTS V but the term luxurious "barge" is not an overstatement based upon the feeling I got after a few days. And I'm not talking just they way it responds in handling. It just feels too big inside and outside. It accelerates reasonably well (better than a standard barge no doubt) but the proportions are not conducive to a responsive vehicle in the corners. It kind of ... well ... floats. The bigger the proportions the more the mass unless a tremendous amount of up-front thinking (and cost) goes into the materials of construction. I'm hoping that the 2" width gain combined with the 300+ lb weight gain in the 09 CTS V doesn't affect its current nimbleness - which only a test drive will tell.

[HiTechRV]

Comparing an STS to an STS-V is like comparing a CTS (Gen I) to a CTS-V. Might as well compare the V's to a Park Avenue, it's about as valid.

[The Tony Show]

Originally Posted by Rich H

I'm hoping that the 2" width gain combined with the 300+ lb weight gain in the 09 CTS V doesn't affect its current nimbleness - which only a test drive will tell.

Because we all know that wider track width is bad for handling, right? Look what a wide track did to the handling of the Corvette and Viper....just terrible, I say.

[Rich H]

Originally Posted by The Tony Show

Because we all know that wider track width is bad for handling, right? Look what a wide track did to the handling of the Corvette and Viper....just terrible, I say.

I would say that the 2" gain in overall width contributed a significant amount to the weight gain. If the associated increase in track width helps the handling and skidpad cornering, as it apparently has on the base 2008 CTS, I'm all for it. If not, I can do without the increased width AND weight. The wider, lower profile tires on the new V should help as much as the track width at a much lower weight penalty.

[thebigjimsho]

Originally Posted by b4z

STS was not designed at the last minute by Lutz.
He was not a fan of Art and Science and when he saw the design of the STS he rounded off some of the sharp edges and LOWERED the roof 1".
My feeling is he messed the car up.
I didn't feel that the STS offered any more usable room than the CTS, but I heard that for the second year the front seat travel was increased.
I am comfortable in newer STSs, but also feel that the new CTS offers more legroom than the previous gen.

And for those that argue that the STS is not that much bigger in each dimension, a few inches here and there, especially in wheelbase can totally change the feel of the car. Add in a couple 100lbs of extra weight + softer supension and the change can be huge.
Barge might be an overstatement but I got his point.

I said it was REdesigned per Lutz at the last minute. And then you go on to prove my point. Whether you like it or hate it is no matter. But it was done...