: Cadillac continues to disappoint me...



CaptainFishpond
02-18-09, 12:52 PM
For decades and decades Cadillac was the true leader of American luxury and innovation. When you saw a Cadillac there was no mistaking it for anything else, it was unique. Now a days Cadillac is following the trends instead of setting them. They are producing cookie cutter cars that are less and less unique. Take for example the STS and CTS, when the hell did a Catera ever look like a Seville? Even worse is that Cadillac is spending the most time and money advertising a 6 cylinder car, cookie cutter car. I know I know, you have to go with the times and the times call for better fuel economy. But you donít have to sacrifice principal along the way. Another example of straying from tradition is the lack of individuality each car in the current line up has, with the exception of maybe the DTS. All the CTS's and STS's I see are white, black, or tan. There doesnít seem to be as much color in production of these cars. The way Cadillac is going about advertising is a whole other story, in my opinion they have it all wrong. I donít think they have the right to be pretentious anymore. The future of Cadillac to come scares me; Iím just glad that all the ones that I want to drive have already been produced and are out there. I know everyone has there own opinion, and this is mine.

Good day.

gothicaleigh
02-18-09, 10:51 PM
For decades and decades Cadillac was the true leader of American luxury and innovation. When you saw a Cadillac there was no mistaking it for anything else, it was unique. Now a days Cadillac is following the trends instead of setting them. They are producing cookie cutter cars that are less and less unique.

What looks like the new CTS? You may not like it's styling, but it's certainly unique.


Take for example the STS and CTS, when the hell did a Catera ever look like a Seville?

You're basing this upon... one generation (that was more a tarted up Opel than a real Cadillac)? Two out of the three generations share Cadillac styling cues. All automotive companies use a company design theme, it builds brand recognition.

Egg-crate grill, high corners, long hood, center crease. Your Deville shares as much with the Seville and Eldorado of it's time as the STS does with the CTS and XLR.


Even worse is that Cadillac is spending the most time and money advertising a 6 cylinder car, cookie cutter car. I know I know, you have to go with the times and the times call for better fuel economy. But you don’t have to sacrifice principal along the way.

That 6 cylinder produces more horsepower than your car, and across a wider powerband. In a lighter engine. What exactly was the sacrifice?


Another example of straying from tradition is the lack of individuality each car in the current line up has, with the exception of maybe the DTS. All the CTS's and STS's I see are white, black, or tan. There doesn’t seem to be as much color in production of these cars.

There are 9 color choices. Still, most owners seem to prefer to order them in black, silver and white. There are also numerous packages and options (far outnumbering those available on the aging DTS). There is no less 'individuality' than before.


The way Cadillac is going about advertising is a whole other story, in my opinion they have it all wrong. I don’t think they have the right to be pretentious anymore.

For the first time in decades they are building a car from quality materials and earning respect. The interior in the CTS is the best in it's class. The performance available in the V-series is the best in the world.

It's the first time since the late 50's that Cadillac has had any right to brag about their cars.

CaptainFishpond
02-19-09, 08:50 AM
The new CTS looks like any old CTS with a body kit. Im not impressed.

Yeah the Deville and Seville share styling cues, but there good looking cars. The CTS in my opinion is not, its euro styling is awkward.

The sacrifice was that Cadillac is marketing a mid size car as their bread winner. They are a full size luxury car company. Honestly you could take the Cadillac badges off the thing and it would look like a Toyota, especially the older ones. Its about time they made a little more power, and they make just a little bit more than the DeVille.

In my opinion they don't come close to sharing the individuality of the older models. As for interior, Ive rode in the CTS many a time and I will say that my old 88 Eldorado and 92 Seville were more comfortable hands down, as is the DeVille.

Id take any old Cadillac any day over the CTS.

Lord Cadillac
02-19-09, 12:47 PM
I like the CTS very much - but I agree with you that Cadillac should have a proper full-size luxury car - and it should be their flagship. Even Hyundai has this.

thebigjimsho
02-20-09, 07:49 AM
Cadillac of the 80s and 90s is why GM is in horrible financial shape right now. I'll take my '04V and what Cadillac has to offer right now instead...

CaptainFishpond
02-21-09, 12:21 AM
I think the LS6 is an awesome motor..... in a Vette.

Dont give the 80's and 90's to much credit for the bad shape GM is in now, its more complicated than that.... much more.

thebigjimsho
02-23-09, 01:09 AM
Dude, you're 22. You didn't truly experience cars of the 80s and 90s when they were new.

And an awesome motor is an awesome motor no matter what it powers. Talk of what you have a clue on, ummkay?

CaptainFishpond
02-23-09, 04:21 PM
Ill be honest, I do like the V series Lac's a lot. Id just like the motor more in a Vette. I know the 80's were bad for GM.... and bad for every other American car company. I think the increase in quality and sales of Japanese and other foreign cars in the last ten years has almost everything to do with the shape that GM is in. Oh, and I have a clue about LS motors, I work with everything from LS1's to LS7's everyday.. including many a CTS-V.

timothyr
02-24-09, 05:08 PM
I think Capt. does have a few very valid points...cadillac truly does not have a full size competetor to the 7-series or s-class...the 80's were hard on everyone, but in all fairness, the 90's were the intro of the northstar (despiite its problems it was still on par with some of the best), and the eldo and seville rework breaking the mold of generic caddys (and taking MT's COTY award)
I think there advertising and marketing methods down right suck....half the world has no clue that the XLR's exist, and that the v-series will go head to head with an AMG or M and not bring shame to america.
as far as deisgns, at least they are uniquly Caddilac, and they have gotten away from looking like a chromed chevy (as was the case with the 85-88 cars).
And if given the option, I would love to have the 84 Coupe deville d'elegance I got to drive in high school....yeah, the 4.1 was gutless, but it was cadillac plush & styled all the way through.
Yeah, the newer designes are nice, but i think alot of the details that set a cadillac apart have gotten lost in the mix...I truly enjoyed the loaded 07 STS we rented a few weeks ago (complete with a V8), howevery it still felt more GM parts bin then my 78 FWB.

The Tony Show
03-03-09, 06:09 PM
Flagship cars are not money makers- they're image cars. The S-Class, 7 series and LS460 make up a very small part of their respective companies' portfolios, whereas they make the majority of their sales on the C-Class, 3 series and ES350 (respectively).

Cadillac has been rebuilding their company image from the ground up since 2000. After the failed Cimmaron and Catera experiments, they finally hit on a world class volume car in the CTS. Once they get 3 or 4 years worth of CTSs on the roads and in the magazines, Cadillac will have the credibility to ask $60k+ for a flagship car. Trying to launch a quality flagship before they've earned back the public perception would guarantee failure, no matter how good it is. Buyers will take one look and think "$65k for a Cadillac? Yeah right..." Observe what happened to the XLR. Great car that outperformed an SL500, but it was too soon- people balked at $80k for a Cadillac.

If people have spent the last 4 years reading about how awesome the CTS is however, they're going to think "Hmmm....people are always talking about how awesome their small car is, so maybe I should check it out."

timothyr
03-06-09, 12:14 PM
Point well taken, and totally correct, I think at times I am just a complete loyalist....I currently own an older 7 and s class that dont get driven, and would gladly drop top dollar for something from caddy that could compete, but as proved with the first generation of "bangle butt" 7-series, people buy on reputation regardless; and cadillac still has a way to come; but at least they are finally on the right track as far as product....it would be nice if they could get a decent marketing team.

Koooop
03-13-09, 09:54 PM
I think the LS6 is an awesome motor..... in a Vette.

Dont give the 80's and 90's to much credit for the bad shape GM is in now, its more complicated than that.... much more.

Cadillac threw junk at us in the '80s and '90s. Except for the RWD last of the Fleetwoods with the "not quite an LT1", it was pretty much all crap.

I like the LS6 in my Caddy, if it weren't for the LS6 in the V I wouldn't have bought a CTS Now if they'll just put a LS3 in the CTS I'll get another.

You ought to go wring one out, then you're realize what toads the caddy's of old were.

I've owned about 10 Cadillacs, most were pigs.

V-Eight
03-16-09, 04:12 PM
Its funny you say the DTS is the most innovative, when it is the ugliest of them all, looks like so many other cars out there, and lacks RWD.

CaptainFishpond
03-18-09, 02:20 PM
If you are referring to any of my posts, I never said that the DTS was the most "innovative". I said it had the most individuality. What are all these cars that look like a DTS? And I know a lot of guys want the RWD but I live in a very snowy climate and like FWD. Its all irrelevant I guess, cause all of this is a matter of opinion.

thebigjimsho
03-22-09, 12:30 AM
Most people in snowy climates that actually know how to drive will prefer RWD since it gives you the most control in most situations. AWD obviously is best, but RWD is better than FWD.

gothicaleigh
03-23-09, 08:27 AM
Most people in snowy climates that actually know how to drive will prefer RWD since it gives you the most control in most situations. AWD obviously is best, but RWD is better than FWD.

+1

I live in a rural part of Michigan (which means I get to deal with snow and ice daily throughout the winter on roads with, to say the least, sub-par upkeep). I much prefer a balanced RWD vehicle like my CTS or BMW e30 over my numb handling Seville STS in the snow. Even traction from a stop (usually RWD's weakest attribute in slippery conditions) isn't really a problem if you have the foresight to shoe your car with a good set of Blizzaks when the weather turns cold and learn how to modulate your throttle.

King Steve
03-23-09, 10:14 AM
I've had issues getting traction from a standstill with RWD in the past, but maybe I just don't "actually know how to drive" or "have the foresight" to do those things. Haha, but seriously, I'd say each has its pros and cons for the snow. Traction control certainly helps.

thebigjimsho
03-24-09, 12:12 AM
I've had issues getting traction from a standstill with RWD in the past, but maybe I just don't "actually know how to drive" or "have the foresight" to do those things. Haha, but seriously, I'd say each has its pros and cons for the snow. Traction control certainly helps.
Here's the problem. With RWD, the biggest hurdle is accelerating from a stop. Other than that, the RWD has it all over the FWD. If you start to skid with FWD, you're usually cooked. Aim the wheels, hope the ABS can slow you down some and pray you have enough room to stop. With RWD, if you start to skid, you always have some sort of hope in countersteering and giving it throttle.

Add in traction control and many stability control systems and RWD is a slam dunk over FWD these days...

thebigjimsho
03-24-09, 12:15 AM
+1

I live in a rural part of Michigan (which means I get to deal with snow and ice daily throughout the winter on roads with, to say the least, sub-par upkeep). I much prefer a balanced RWD vehicle like my CTS or BMW e30 over my numb handling Seville STS in the snow. Even traction from a stop (usually RWD's weakest attribute in slippery conditions) isn't really a problem if you have the foresight to shoe your car with a good set of Blizzaks when the weather turns cold and learn how to modulate your throttle.
I got my Town Car with traction control and all season tires that often sees snowy roads. It does have a tough time starting, but it tracks very well and the traction control is very intrusive. I couldn't spin it if I tried. And when I turn it off, I still have my fun...

Koooop
03-24-09, 01:35 AM
RWD is more fun on ice, but the FWD has the point it an floor it option.

With FWD the snow tires hook up and drag you where ever you aim it.

My SDV's were excellent in the snow as was my Mom's '95 STS. I've never taken the V in the snow, I think the air dam would be a bit of a snow plow.

thebigjimsho
03-24-09, 01:25 PM
RWD is more fun on ice, but the FWD has the point it an floor it option.

With FWD the snow tires hook up and drag you where ever you aim it.

My SDV's were excellent in the snow as was my Mom's '95 STS. I've never taken the V in the snow, I think the air dam would be a bit of a snow plow.In a straight line, sure. But other than that, it serves no purpose...

Koooop
03-24-09, 02:20 PM
My SDV were old school big block RWD. They were great in the snow. The worst snow car I ever drove was a 300SD Turbo Diesel MBZ, that car SUcKED in the snow! Every time the turbo kicked in it did a 180 if you weren't paying attention. The good old days, Centra's, Fat tires and a stinky ass Turbo.

V-Eight
03-26-09, 06:50 PM
Most people in snowy climates that actually know how to drive will prefer RWD since it gives you the most control in most situations. AWD obviously is best, but RWD is better than FWD.

The only downside is that is gives slightly less traction, but its nice to be able to control your back end.

CaptainFishpond
03-27-09, 04:50 PM
[QUOTE=thebigjimsho;1818739]Here's the problem. With RWD, the biggest hurdle is accelerating from a stop.

Um.. unless one does all of there winter driving on the highway, Id say that's a pretty big hurdle. I have had both RWD and FWD drive cars and I certainly know how to drive. I personally just don't like sitting on a 15 degree angle hill spinning my tires on the ice. To me, that's reason enough to drive a FWD.

Also, I don't want to have to "modulate my throttle" when driving in the snow. Or try not to come to a complete stop so that I don't loose traction. Id rather just drive and not have to worry about it, which is what I do now as I have never gotten stuck in snow in a FWD drive car... and I live in Cleveland.

Koooop
03-30-09, 04:31 PM
For decades and decades Cadillac was the true leader of American luxury and innovation. When you saw a Cadillac there was no mistaking it for anything else, it was unique. Now a days Cadillac is following the trends instead of setting them. They are producing cookie cutter cars that are less and less unique. Take for example the STS and CTS, when the hell did a Catera ever look like a Seville? Even worse is that Cadillac is spending the most time and money advertising a 6 cylinder car, cookie cutter car. I know I know, you have to go with the times and the times call for better fuel economy. But you donít have to sacrifice principal along the way. Another example of straying from tradition is the lack of individuality each car in the current line up has, with the exception of maybe the DTS. All the CTS's and STS's I see are white, black, or tan. There doesnít seem to be as much color in production of these cars. The way Cadillac is going about advertising is a whole other story, in my opinion they have it all wrong. I donít think they have the right to be pretentious anymore. The future of Cadillac to come scares me; Iím just glad that all the ones that I want to drive have already been produced and are out there. I know everyone has there own opinion, and this is mine.

Good day.

Rick Wagoner is stepping down at the order of Prez. Obama.

I wonder what Mrs. Pelosi is going to try to force us to drive! Somehow I think your dissappointment with Cadillac is going to grow as will mine when she shuts down the CTS-V. :banghead:

thebigjimsho
03-30-09, 11:34 PM
Um.. unless one does all of there winter driving on the highway, Id say that's a pretty big hurdle. I have had both RWD and FWD drive cars and I certainly know how to drive. I personally just don't like sitting on a 15 degree angle hill spinning my tires on the ice. To me, that's reason enough to drive a FWD.

Also, I don't want to have to "modulate my throttle" when driving in the snow. Or try not to come to a complete stop so that I don't loose traction. Id rather just drive and not have to worry about it, which is what I do now as I have never gotten stuck in snow in a FWD drive car... and I live in Cleveland.
well fine, drive mindless then. I've also never been stuck in my Town Car with all season tires and I drive no matter what, over 60k miles a year. In Boston...

thebigjimsho
03-30-09, 11:38 PM
Bottom line is you get through more situations safely and have more control with RWD. Period. Anyone who KNOWS how to drive will know that...although I learned that before I was 22...

waffleman
04-17-09, 11:59 AM
"For the first time in decades they are building a car from quality materials and earning respect."


ehm, excuse me...but I would not call the inside of the CTS "quality material" when there are creaks and rattles everywhere. Just look at the 2008 CTS forum and you'll see tons of people complaining about that. That should NEVER happen in a 40K car - simply inexcusable.

concorso
04-21-09, 03:52 PM
Ill be honest, I do like the V series Lac's a lot. Id just like the motor more in a Vette. I know the 80's were bad for GM.... and bad for every other American car company. I think the increase in quality and sales of Japanese and other foreign cars in the last ten years has almost everything to do with the shape that GM is in. Oh, and I have a clue about LS motors, I work with everything from LS1's to LS7's everyday.. including many a CTS-V.GM was in hard shape LONG before 1999. It's only been the last 10,15 years or so that the quality problems have really shown results. You forget too quickly that its been about 5 years now that GM has been talking about extremely hard financial times.

concorso
04-21-09, 03:58 PM
The sacrifice was that Cadillac is marketing a mid size car as their bread winner. They are a full size luxury car company. Honestly you could take the Cadillac badges off the thing and it would look like a Toyota, especially the older ones. So they should market a DTS thats not going to sell? Caddy could put all their ad money into the DTS and it still wouldnt sell any better. It's just not competetive to anyone who is not a Cadillac afficianado.

Cadillac is a brand, not a full size luxury car company. They need to sell to survive. Advertising the car that sells the best and is most attractive is smart business.

Point to 1 Toyota...1 (any brand here) that looks like the CTS, of either gen. The CTS is about as distinct as you can get nowadays with regulations on everything, from MPG to pedestrian safety.

concorso
04-21-09, 04:05 PM
Flagship cars are not money makers- they're image cars. The S-Class, 7 series and LS460 make up a very small part of their respective companies' portfolios, whereas they make the majority of their sales on the C-Class, 3 series and ES350 (respectively).

Cadillac has been rebuilding their company image from the ground up since 2000. After the failed Cimmaron and Catera experiments, they finally hit on a world class volume car in the CTS. Once they get 3 or 4 years worth of CTSs on the roads and in the magazines, Cadillac will have the credibility to ask $60k+ for a flagship car. Trying to launch a quality flagship before they've earned back the public perception would guarantee failure, no matter how good it is. Buyers will take one look and think "$65k for a Cadillac? Yeah right..." Observe what happened to the XLR. Great car that outperformed an SL500, but it was too soon- people balked at $80k for a Cadillac.

If people have spent the last 4 years reading about how awesome the CTS is however, they're going to think "Hmmm....people are always talking about how awesome their small car is, so maybe I should check it out."Great post! Cadillac is getting close to where we want it, but it'll take another few years of good sales and great new products to get fully back there. Look at the leap forward the 2nd gen CTS is! I love the first gen, but an owner still had to make excuses for the purchase sometimes. The new gen is competitive in all areas! Now, its simply a great choice!

DBeaSST
04-29-09, 02:53 PM
I was browsing around Ford's web site today and started looking at the new 2010 Taurus SHO. It really hit me when looking at this car. Cadillac has really screwed up on their top of the line cars.

Leaving out the FWD versus RWD versus AWD argument, take a look at what comes STANDARD on a Taurus SHO. The SHO is very close to a feature for feature match for a well optioned STS!

Now, I'm a fan of GM products and tend to lean towards their vehicles. So I will give that a $60,000 (well equipped V6 RWD STS) Cadillac is better than a $40,000 Ford.

However, the STS has been allowed to sit, without "real" updates since it's debut in 2005 while other cars (including other GM models) catch up to it in feature content.

Cadillac is the top of the line division within GM. And the STS or DTS (depending on how you look at it) are the top of the line car models within Cadillac. These should be the absolute best that GM can do. As such (and this is not meant as a put down to Ford) there is NO WAY a Ford car should be this close to matching a Cadillac in feature content!

I know GM is hurting for money right now. But the STS got a face lift in 08 and it should have been a LOT more than just some sheet metal and an upgraded V6.

Okay, done ranting for the moment.....

K STS
05-17-09, 09:49 PM
However, the STS has been allowed to sit, without "real" updates since it's debut in 2005 while other cars (including other GM models) catch up to it in feature content.

Hi. First i'd like to say this thread was a very interesting read. I agree with some points, and disagree with a few others. Props to the OP for bringing this up. I also agree that Cadillac shouldn't be marketing their entire brand line on the 6 cylinder CTS. I've had a 2000 Deville, a 1994 Eldorado, a CTS (fully loaded minux nav,) and now a STS. I can tell you the CTS was nice, but the 2000 Deville was very nice. The engine sound, power, and some of the interior features were nicer than the CTS. You can say the new Direct injection 300hp V6 eliminates the need for a V8... and I can say you're dead wrong. The torque and feel of the engine is way different than a northstar. I test drove the DI, and compared to the V8 N*, there was no question in my mind on which is superior. Also, even the 2008 CTS is missing features that I now require in my STS - which blows my mind since the STS/DTS are being cut after 2010. Hopefully the replacement will be up to quality, surpassing the $30,000 CTS which is a very cookie cutter car. Everyone thinks the styling is so revolutionary, but everyone thinks that about new styles the first year or two they are out.

Anyhow, in response to the quote above, I also saw the 2010 Taurus and the features it had yesterday at the dealership. While you can say the 2010 Taurus has alot of features the STS has, the sts was also out 5 years earlier, and in order to get "mykey" or voice activation, you have to get the super optioned out top level taurus, which im sure will make up 10% of all the ones sold. This is common in the industry. Remember when CD players came out and only the most expensive BMW's had them? Less than 2-3 years later, hondas had them. So if it takes ford 5+ years to start hitting their cars with features Cadillacs have had, I'd say thats pretty impressive.

inurok
06-20-09, 11:53 AM
Cadillac of the 80s and 90s is why GM is in horrible financial shape right now. I'll take my '04V and what Cadillac has to offer right now instead...

I disagree that Cadillacs of the 80/90s were what brought down GM. GM was brought down by sitting back end enjoying the ride while other makes were passing them with better quality exciting fun & advanced cars.

Personally I think GM has been in the slow lane too long to catch up. Even "The New GM" is going to be playing catchup for many years to come.