: Considering a CTS-V - some questions/concerns



Looney100
07-19-09, 10:56 AM
I've been looking for a V8 sedan for a while now, up until last week, I had narrowed things down to either an M3 or Lexus IS-F. Then I saw the CTS-V on Top Gear.
Went to have a look at one at a dealership yesterday and was pretty impressed with both the car and the value. I've got a few concerns that I was hoping some of you here could comment on:

-Reliability - in general for GM is below average, Consumer Reports doesn't rate the CTS very highly. The 3 series and Lexus both have top of class reliability ratings

-Depreciation - Again not very good for GM. But this might be an opportunity for me to pick up a used vehicle in a year or two at a steep discount.

-Fuel Economy - This baby guzzles gas. Consumption rates are considerably higher than the M3/IS-F

Any comments? What are each of your top likes & dislikes about your V?

Hawkeye2
07-19-09, 11:09 AM
First, where do you come with GM reliability is below average? Check
again with J.D Power.

Are you basing it on Consumer Reports?

Depreciation - try buying a Jag! The V is new this year, how can there
be a depreciation rate for them already. Try to find a used one.

I don't buy a car based on what I think it will be worth when I go to sell
it. I buy what I want now.

It is fast, safe, comfortable, seats 4, looks good, comes with a stick shift,
and IT IS MADE IN THE U.S.

Drive one, and you'll see what I mean.

Rolex
07-19-09, 11:22 AM
All vehicles depreciate. If you're buying a vehicle as in investment, you've got more money then good sense. Unless you intend to put the car up on blocks and store it for 30 years then re-sell it, you won't make (real) money on any vehicle. All cars will depreciate when you drive them off the lot, and with each year you own it. Cars are made to be enjoyed and driven. If you're looking for a sedan with a BIG fun factor then you'll find that in the V.

62Jeff
07-19-09, 11:30 AM
-Reliability - in general for GM is below average, Consumer Reports doesn't rate the CTS very highly. The 3 series and Lexus both have top of class reliability ratings

I don't know about that, what is your source? Old memories of GM quality are no longer accurate.


-Depreciation - Again not very good for GM. But this might be an opportunity for me to pick up a used vehicle in a year or two at a steep discount.
Used ones with under 10,000 miles are available on e-bay for $10k under original MSRP. Some new ones can be had for deep discounts right now through supporting vendors on the forum, which should put the price of a new one at thousands below MSRP. It's too early to tell how much depreciation will hit the CTS-Vs, since there's many variables about limited (or not) production. But yes if price is a consideration, used is cheaper. Only you can determine whether or not the purchase price is significant to you. I bought new, because I didn't want a car that may have been abused by a former owner. How many times did he/she bounce it off the rev limiter? How many times did they power brake it and floor the gas? I just didn't want to deal with that.


-Fuel Economy - This baby guzzles gas. Consumption rates are considerably higher than the M3/IS-F
I drive 3.3 miles to work each day, and don't go many other places. I'm averaging 10-11 MPG. The one time I took a 400 mile round trip on the highway, I averaged 20.


Any comments? What are each of your top likes & dislikes about your V?
Love

the smooth, quiet performance
the performance value
the potential GM left in the drive train, with simple and inexpensive computer tunes resulting in 600+ crank hp. Try that on a BMW without breaking the bank.
the stock seats
the USB integration
the brakes
most of the ergonomics. The center arm rest and the door panel arm rest are at the same level, so it feels better


Hate

the Recaro seats, hurt my sketchy lower back (I'm on my second V since January). Note: Most people love the Recaro's, they just weren't for me and how I plan to use the car.
the lack of ventilation in the stock seats
the rattles in the headliner, I believe associated with sunroof hardware
the thin sunroof shade, the sunroof needs a limo tint to keep the heat out of the car
the ridiculous brake dust, turning my polished front wheels to black in 2 weeks time


Things I'd Change
In addition to things I hate, these things I'd change:

Replace carbon fiber plastic bits with dark wood. This is now available and I may make that swap.
Move the steering wheel stereo controls to the left side of the wheel

Prof
07-19-09, 12:08 PM
In my opinion the CTS V is a daily driver with a performance vehicle character. If fuel economy is an issue this is not the vehicle for you...but neither are the other two you mentioned. If you are worried about an extra $30 a month from a fuel bill, you are in the wrong arena.

I think the new attitude at GM is going to stick. Quality has greatly improved and there seems to be a dedication to customer satisfaction.

I love my V2, but I also love my SRT 10 and it gets 8 mpg...and I love my Volvo 850R Wagon...they are totally different vehicles, but each fills a need in my psyche...try the CTS V for a year...you will love every minute of it!

Looney100
07-19-09, 12:15 PM
First, where do you come with GM reliability is below average? Check
again with J.D Power.

Are you basing it on Consumer Reports?



It is fast, safe, comfortable, seats 4, looks good, comes with a stick shift,
and IT IS MADE IN THE U.S.

Drive one, and you'll see what I mean.

According to the latest survey released by JD Power (problems per 100 vehicles):

Buick 122
Lexus 126
Cadillac 148
BMW 166
Industry Average 170
GMC 174
Chevy 185
Saturn 211
Pontiac 220
Hummer 221
Saab 226

I think its safe to say that GM is below average.

I haven't yet driven a CTS-V yet, but will do so soon. From what I've read, I'm not concerned about ride quality or experience.

Other problem, my wife can't shift gears, so I'm stuck with an auto :(

V-Eight
07-19-09, 12:16 PM
-Reliability - in general for GM is below average, Consumer Reports doesn't rate the CTS very highly. The 3 series and Lexus both have top of class reliability ratings

The V is superior in every category.


-Depreciation - Again not very good for GM. But this might be an opportunity for me to pick up a used vehicle in a year or two at a steep discount.

From what I've heard V's actually keep their value better than Ms and Mercedes

On another note, the IS-F sucks compared to the V and M3

CVP33
07-19-09, 01:24 PM
Depreciation? Pick your poison. Each of the cars - CTSV, M3, ISF - can be purchased for around $60,000 when the options are figured in. The CTS-V just comes with more standard equipment. My guess is that all 3 can be had a year later with low miles and a great dealer sponsored pre-owned warranty for around $45,000.

The real difference comes when you compare it to the M5, E63 and Jaguar - cars more in it's size class and most likely to be cross-shopped. Then you're looking at $90,000 to $100,000 to match the V's equipment and most likely looking at depreciation in the neighborhood of $25,000 to $30,000 vs. the $15,000. Just my guess, but we'll know in a year or two.

Caroutisine
07-19-09, 01:39 PM
Had mine for over 3,000 miles now and the ony problem I've had was a minor fix on the radio. Loose wire was causing the passenger side speakers to not work. The only vehicle I've driven in recent memory with a better ride was a 2010 E550. The V rides better than my 2005 STS did.

The only thing I don't like is the fuel economy, and specifically the range. Wish it had a little larger tank, but that would add weight I guess.

Resale is taking a hit right now due to better discounts and rebates on new CTS-V's. But as stated, no car is an investment. Even if you put it on blocks for 30 years, you would come out better investing the money over the 30 years...

neuronbob
07-19-09, 02:44 PM
According to the latest survey released by JD Power (problems per 100 vehicles):

Buick 122
Lexus 126
Cadillac 148
BMW 166
Industry Average 170
GMC 174
Chevy 185
Saturn 211
Pontiac 220
Hummer 221
Saab 226

I think its safe to say that GM is below average.

I haven't yet driven a CTS-V yet, but will do so soon. From what I've read, I'm not concerned about ride quality or experience.

Other problem, my wife can't shift gears, so I'm stuck with an auto :(

You mean, Cadillac is more reliable than the industry average, and certainly more than the average GM automobile. I was concerned about reliability as well as I'm a 20-year and ongoing Honda/Acura owner. I've had my car only four months and 4000 miles, so it's hard to say anything about reliability. I can tell you that the car hasn't had any unexpected dealership visits yet, in fact, I haven't had it in for an oil change yet.

It is a total blast to drive. I mean, there is simply nothing like that good old American V8 rumbing sound.

Gas mileage sucks, but as noted above, the M3 and IS-F suckalmost as badly. I share the concern about the range, we need another gallon in the tank, STAT. I'm getting 240 miles to the tank, a bit over 200 if I fool around a lot (e.g. 0-90 mph blasts on the on-ramps, wheeeeeeee! then slow to freeway speed) If you're that worried about mileage, you can a) buy a regular CTS, it's really not a bad car or b) do the WFM tranny/engine tune, which increases mileage by a few.

Anyway, this was my actual pros and cons list from when I was considering the car:

PROS:
FAST
This is a HOT-looking car :drool:
Great interior with large, simple-to-use buttons that are relatively few
Regular seats do me just fine as I use the car as a "grand tourer"
American (bonus--keep other Americans employed)
Great exhaust note
Excellent handling
Best bang for buck in the segment (M5, XF-R, Maserati Quattroporte, E55 are its natural competition, not the M3 and IS-F)
Most importantly: Got a good deal in purchasing it
BIG trunk for travel
Have you ever seen a negative review for this car? Let me know when somebody finds one. Everybody but the greenies loves this car.

CONS:
Gas mileage, but I can afford the gas so this is a non-argument
Don't like the navi voice controls (but I'm getting used to them)
GM going bankrupt (I ended up buying despite that, BK happened three months later, now they are not bankrupt so this is a non-argument)

What finally put me over the edge was that one of the sponsoring dealers was close to me distance-wise and offered a great deal.

HTH some.

PS--don't feel like you're stuck with the automatic. This is the fastest automatic transmission I've ever experienced. I love it! I also had no choice as my beloved wife doesn't drive stick, either.

vperl
07-19-09, 02:49 PM
Who are these folks that come on the forum and bash the V@ without actually having any facts?

Look at every review ever written on the V2, look at Top Gear, not exactly a friend of American steel, many car magazines love the V2, Car & Driver as I remember have rated the CTS & the V as car of the year....

I have yet to find any real negative articles on the V2......

I suspect in france, or Germany or some place that is still using outside toilets would not like the V...

Who cares, I like my V2, others can go fish.....

Hawkeye2
07-19-09, 03:36 PM
According to the latest survey released by JD Power (problems per 100 vehicles):

Buick 122
Lexus 126
Cadillac 148
BMW 166
Industry Average 170
GMC 174
Chevy 185
Saturn 211
Pontiac 220
Hummer 221
Saab 226

I think its safe to say that GM is below average.

I haven't yet driven a CTS-V yet, but will do so soon. From what I've read, I'm not concerned about ride quality or experience.

Other problem, my wife can't shift gears, so I'm stuck with an auto :(

Industry average 170 - Cadillac 148. You are asking about a Cadillac,
not all GM.

As for stick, that is a personal choice, there are numerous posts on stick
vs. auto. But, I repeat YOU HAVE TO DRIVE ONE! And, you can feel
good buying American.

Good luck with whatever you buy.

Cheers.

RWFJR
07-19-09, 05:17 PM
Other problem, my wife can't shift gears, so I'm stuck with an auto :([/QUOTE]

I preffer the auto. It has a very smooth shift and 1/4 mile times are quicker with the stock auto than the shift. You also have the auto shift option with the stick or paddles on the wheel.:yup:

mbshoe
07-19-09, 09:52 PM
To elaborate on some of the pros/cons

Pro
"American made." I bought the car with some amount of pride and quite a bit of trepidation.
The handling and driving experience is superb. I know that's a repeat of what everyone says, but it's so true. The suspension is sublime.
I like the Recaro's, but fully understand different bodies have different opinions.
I like the manual transmission + clutch operation. Your mileage (spouse) may vary.
I love the rumble it makes at idle. It's so wrong for a Cadillac. :-)
I live in a rural area, and the steerable headlights are much more than the gimmick I expected them to be. They're less useful in an urban setting.
The Nav/Audio system plays audiobooks downloaded from Audible.com ! What a pleasant surprise.
The car is pretty unique. I outside of Sacramento, and base CTS's are rare. I've never seen another V (V1 or V2) on the road around here.
When visiting San Jose for business, I've got the most HP of any vehicle in the parking lot.


Con
Needs larger fuel tank - the range is not long enough. Especially when driving aggressively.
Rear windows don't have 'express up' feature. (only down). On the other hand, the rear windows go all the way down. This the first car I've ever owned where the rear windows go all the way down.
Interior squeaks and rattles are an embarrassment. I'm ashamed to take friends for a ride. It just reinforces the poorly made American car stereotype.
The voice recognition is nearly useless. It's frustrating that voice control is the only way to do things like bluetooth pairing. You have to read the manual to remember the magic words. A simple menu on the touchscreen would be much easier to use. (Yes, I know not every V comes with Nav - not my problem. My complaint stands).
The thin plastic strap attached to the gas cap can't last for much longer.

I have 11K miles, and nothing has broken, yet. I solved the wheel clicking problem myself. The carpeting in the front driver's foot well has pulled loose on both sides. I bought some aftermarket floor mats because the stock mats are so thin and made from the cheapest nylon, that it's clear they are leftovers from a Geo Metro stockpile somewhere.

I love the way the car drives. I am disappointed at the short-cuts taken in other areas. I hear it's much better than the V1, and there is no doubt Cadillac has come a long way from the DTS my parents own. But, Cadillac has a ways to go. The "little" things matter. GM doesn't understand that. For a 'normal' car, I plan to continue to happily pay a bit of a premium for an Accord/Camry sort of vehicle as compared to anything from GM. For a 'go-fast' car, the CTS-V is definitely a bargain. But, not without compromise.

Despite my tone, I don't regret buying the car. I'm just not sure I'd buy another one. It will be years before I have an idea of its overall reliability. One factor in its favor was the 100,000 mile drivetrain warranty.

marktanner
07-19-09, 11:59 PM
I have a friend who is facing the same issues. He wants an automatic for various reasons as well. There are pros and cons to every automobile, of course.

As far as reliability goes, i do believe the first year for the CTS was below average. My '08 was a lemon, and one reason why I started reading this forum. I have been monitoring both the CTS and the V2 forums for over a year, and I do believe things are much better this year. Very few posts about problems anymore, and the CTS forum is pretty quiet these days, compared to this one, which has lots of posts about performance and upgrades. My V has been great so far, with only a minor issue with seat movement in the driver's Recaro, which I otherwise love. Others I know are having very few problems, either. Cadillac has been working hard on this, from what we hear.

Mileage isn't great, but as good as most of the competition. I have the stick. My worst so far is 13, my best 16.5, and the car is still breaking in. It's been running 22-23 on the highway. The car is rated at 14/19, so I'm pretty happy overall, as it may get a bit better with further break-in. It's running about 20% less than my CTS DI, but I never floored the CTS for the fun of it like I sometimes do with the V. The M3s barely do any better, which is not very impressive for a smaller, much lighter car with a lot less power. Not sure about real world mpg with the Lexus as I don't know anyone with one. My friends with M5s report only 11 mpg, which is worse than even the automatic V. All of these cars can use bigger tanks, though highway range is pretty good in my car.

As far as depreciation, the regular CTS has been rated best in it's class. NO car has great resale right now, but the V seems to be holding up pretty well in comparison. Sales of all M cars are down a lot, and they are offering great deals on them, so even M3s are not holding well. M5s seem to plummet $30K+ in the first year alone ( I know someone who got $45K as a trade in for a year old M6 that was originally $110K, a loss of $65K/60% in one year!). MB AMG E63s are going for $30-40K off for a year old car. Don't have any info on the Lexus, but it's sales are so poor it can't be very good (never have seen one in the two years it's been out, and it's never won any comparo test, either).

A few other things to consider. A lot of the major controls are more "normal" and easier to use than things like the turn signals and transmission selector for the automated manual you'll have to buy on the BMW. BMW ergonomics are pretty weird these days. At least the i-drive in the M3 is improved, as the one in the current M5 is still a disaster. You can probably get used to these things, but how about your wife? Also, do you ever need a back seat? The CTS is the best, the M3 tighter, and the Lexus is a joke.

GM-4-LIFE
07-20-09, 05:39 PM
I haven't had any reliability issues with ANY GM vehicle I have ever owned and I have owned at least 30+ of them in the last 10 years. Don't go by consumer reports. Go by J.D. Power. They are more neutral in their surveys.

I won't buy a vehicle from any other manufacturer only because I have had good luck with GM vehicles and I have known quite a few people with BMWs including relatives and close friends that have had nothing but problems. A few had to lemon them to get their cars taken back so they can have a reliable vehicle to drive. They bought a BMW thinking it was a reliable vehicle and they are surprised when they are the ones with a piece of junk and me with an American car that always starts.

The Cadillac CTS has one of the highest resale values according to Kelly Blue Book. I am sure the CTS-V will hold it's value. It has so far and the first year is the biggest depreciation hit you will typically take.

You can't compare fuel economy on a BMW 3 series or Lexus IS-F compared to the CTS-V. I mean which one has 556 hp and 551 ft lbs? None, so how can you compare? You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't have tire shredding performance and hybrid MPG. It just won't happen.

I will take my CTS-V and enjoy it. No BMW or Lexus is going to give you this type of driving experience.

For the price, you can't beat the CTS-V. Call Scott at Superior. He is offering GM employee pricing on all CTS-Vs in stock which is thousands less than sticker which makes the CTS-V an even more of a bargain!

SG

Z06ified
07-22-09, 12:10 PM
No offense man, but if you're reading Consumer Reports for your car purchase decision, and you're so concerned about fuel economy, then I don't think a CTS-V is the car for you. I think a 4-cylinder Toyota Camry LE is more your speed.

Cadillac Tony
07-22-09, 12:15 PM
The V is an incredibly well sorted car. The daily ride is nice and smooth, and it drives like a normal car when you aren't giving it the boot. Cadillac's JD Power rating for quality is now above MB and BMW, and GM has the experience building high performance cars that Lexus doesn't. Things like engine/transmission life and the durability of the brakes, bushings, etc are all question marks with the IS-F. Service also doesn't cost a fortune on American cars.

I'm horribly biased though, so take all this with the requisite grain of salt. If you decide on the V and there's anything I can do to help you out with the purchase, feel free to drop me a line. I have two loaded automatics in stock right now (one with the Recaro seats and one without), and I offer special pricing for Internet buyers.

Go with the V- you'll love it!

Looney100
07-22-09, 10:58 PM
No offense man, but if you're reading Consumer Reports for your car purchase decision, and you're so concerned about fuel economy, then I don't think a CTS-V is the car for you. I think a 4-cylinder Toyota Camry LE is more your speed.

Just because you've preceeded a post with 'No offense' doesn't mean it isn't offensive. The sarcasm in your post is quite apparent, and it doesn't provide any information. Should I just buy the car without considering how it stacks up against its competition?

Reliability and fuel economy are only a couple of the criteria I'm looking at. In fact, the lack of range of the CTS-V seems to be a common criticism of owners in the forum. That lack of range is a direct result of the car's fuel economy.

Ultimately, I'm looking for value for my money when I'm spending the kind of cash I am looking at on a vehicle, and operating costs including fuel and repairs are a significant cost of any vehicle. When the V consumes 50% more fuel than the other vehicles I'm considering, that's something worth factoring into my decision.

vperl
07-22-09, 11:14 PM
Just because you've preceded a post with 'No offense' doesn't mean it isn't offensive. The sarcasm in your post is quite apparent, and it doesn't provide any information. Should I just buy the car without considering how it stacks up against its competition?

Reliability and fuel economy are only a couple of the criteria I'm looking at. In fact, the lack of range of the CTS-V seems to be a common criticism of owners in the forum. That lack of range is a direct result of the car's fuel economy.

Ultimately, I'm looking for value for my money when I'm spending the kind of cash I am looking at on a vehicle, and operating costs including fuel and repairs are a significant cost of any vehicle. When the V consumes 50% more fuel than the other vehicles I'm considering, that's something worth factoring into my decision.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
offense maybe taken, you have my permission.....
my V has one of the worse greenie scores available and the government gave us owners a greeie sticker to prove it..

the gas guzzler tax ought to , scare you to a prius

see you my rear view

the second you mentioned a "worry" about gas consumption any one with a V knew you were just yanking our chain, the V is not for anyone that has any concern about the gas situation....

backup
07-22-09, 11:26 PM
[QUOTE=Looney100;1948225]Just because you've preceeded a post with 'No offense' doesn't mean it isn't offensive. The sarcasm in your post is quite apparent, and it doesn't provide any information. Should I just buy the car without considering how it stacks up against its competition?

Reliability and fuel economy are only a couple of the criteria I'm looking at. In fact, the lack of range of the CTS-V seems to be a common criticism of owners in the forum. That lack of range is a direct result of the car's fuel economy.QUOTE]

The range is poor, but the economy is not that bad. Recently completed a 400 mile highway round trip. Cruise set to 70-75 mph the whole way. Fuel computer said 19.xx mpg average. Call it 20 and it isn't that bad, considering you can drop the hammer anyt time you want. The range is bad becaus the tank is small, not because of the overall fuel consumption.

Somebody said it, you can't have your cake and eat it too. It takes energy to make 550hp, and that requires fuel. If you are shopping performance cars though, don't focus on fuel economy, that is way down the list of expenses. And remember, the V is a supercar with 4-doors, a Z06 sedan if you will, so it really is in a different class. Compare it with other forced induction V8 sedans and you will see it compares favorably on fuel economy.

marktanner
07-23-09, 12:21 AM
Mileage is all relative, especially compared to SUVs. I gave a ride today to someone who drives a Jetta. He asked about the mileage. I told him (somewhat embarrassed) that it was rated at 14 and 19, and that I was pissed that the traffic jam we were stuck in was dropping my average from 16 to 15. He said wow, he wishes his wife's 6 cylinder Olds Bravada got mileage that good! Not the response I expected from a Jetta driver. Compared to some SUVs, our cars can actually appear pretty green.

zr1vet
07-23-09, 11:35 AM
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
offense maybe taken, you have my permission.....
my V has one of the worse greenie scores available and the government gave us owners a greeie sticker to prove it..

the gas guzzler tax ought to , scare you to a prius

see you my rear view

the second you mentioned a "worry" about gas consumption any one with a V knew you were just yanking our chain, the V is not for anyone that has any concern about the gas situation....
I got the Prius first and next week I get the V.
50 mpg + 10 mpg / 2 vehicles is 30 mpg??? I think I'll be ok on my mileage:)

Krug Ford
07-23-09, 01:06 PM
They are a blast to drive and you get a lot of bang for the buck.

vperl
07-23-09, 02:55 PM
Just in case some have never seen this here we go, be afraid...... I am proud to be a "A Global warmer"

1BlinkGone
07-23-09, 04:57 PM
I was a subscriber to CR for many years. That said: I have pretty much lost trust in them, as I have found that they are anything but unbiased... esp with autos. Like somebody else implied, CR is all about Toyota as their fair-haired company in automobiles.
That said, they have other proclivities of bias: JVC for electronics... and other like bias issues.
The ONLY thing I might, MIGHT rely on for CR is the overall service ratings for appliances. Other than that, I pretty much ignore what they say.
JD Power is much more credible, as also already mentioned, IMHO.

1BlinkGone
07-23-09, 05:02 PM
Mileage is all relative, especially compared to SUVs. I gave a ride today to someone who drives a Jetta. He asked about the mileage. I told him (somewhat embarrassed) that it was rated at 14 and 19, and that I was pissed that the traffic jam we were stuck in was dropping my average from 16 to 15. He said wow, he wishes his wife's 6 cylinder Olds Bravada got mileage that good! Not the response I expected from a Jetta driver. Compared to some SUVs, our cars can actually appear pretty green.

Shoot, my wife's former 2001 Mazda MilleniaS (supercharged 2.3 V-6) was only getting 13-15 mpg in the city, and it took 'Premium Fuel Only' for that little 220 hp sucker... and got all of 24-25 MPG hwy @ 65 mph. Its 28 MPG claims were only obtainable at 55mph.

I'll take 15 mpg city, for 556hp anyday.

1BlinkGone
07-23-09, 05:05 PM
Just in case some have never seen this here we go, be afraid...... I am proud to be a "A Global warmer"

Amen. Sad that so many ignore the 100's of credible scientists that are screaming "scam" over the artificial GlobalWarming doctrine.

now back to our regularly scheduled program... :D

Z06ified
07-23-09, 05:38 PM
Just because you've preceeded a post with 'No offense' doesn't mean it isn't offensive.

OK, you got me there - I really don't care if you're offended.


Ultimately, I'm looking for value for my money when I'm spending the kind of cash I am looking at on a vehicle, and operating costs including fuel and repairs are a significant cost of any vehicle. When the V consumes 50% more fuel than the other vehicles I'm considering, that's something worth factoring into my decision.

What are you comparing the V to then. You mentioned the IS-F and M3. The V does NOT consume 50% more fuel than those cars. In real world driving, I would bet the V gets the same or better fuel economy. Check out Edmund's long term test of their M3 - I think they're averaging high 13 MPGs with their M3.

My point is, if someone is seriously concerned about fuel economy in a car, then a car like the CTS-V, or an IS-F, or an M3, or any performance sedan for that matter, is not the car for them. If you're that tight on money, you should be more concerned about the cost of tires on these cars, as THAT will be the largest single maintenance expense - you're looking at $1,500 every 15k - 20k miles to replace those Michelin PS2s. I know, I have them on my Z06.

You gotta pay to play. You don't want to pay? Then I recommend the Camry LE.

vperl
07-23-09, 05:46 PM
You gotta pay to play. You don't want to pay? Then I recommend the Camry LE.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7

Well, my choice for him would be the AMC Rambler

Looney100
07-23-09, 09:42 PM
OK, you got me there - I really don't care if you're offended.

What are you comparing the V to then. You mentioned the IS-F and M3. The V does NOT consume 50% more fuel than those cars. In real world driving, I would bet the V gets the same or better fuel economy. Check out Edmund's long term test of their M3 - I think they're averaging high 13 MPGs with their M3.

My point is, if someone is seriously concerned about fuel economy in a car, then a car like the CTS-V, or an IS-F, or an M3, or any performance sedan for that matter, is not the car for them. If you're that tight on money, you should be more concerned about the cost of tires on these cars, as THAT will be the largest single maintenance expense - you're looking at $1,500 every 15k - 20k miles to replace those Michelin PS2s. I know, I have them on my Z06.

You gotta pay to play. You don't want to pay? Then I recommend the Camry LE.

I'm comparing the V to an IS-F (admittedly coming up much shorter on the power). Please forgive the Canadian fuel economy ratings, but the IS-F is rated at 8.5L/100km hwy, 11L/100km city, the V is rated at 11/17.5 respectively. A 29% and 59% increase in consumption.

For the record, the V would be replacing my current toy, a heavily modified '94 25th Anniversary Trans Am with 383ci LT1, lumpy cam & nitrous. Approx. 475HP NA, and 650 on the bottle. So even with the 556HP the V has, it will be slower than my existing vehicle.
The V would certainly get better city mileage than the TA given the cam and stall converter, but the opposite is true for highway driving. I'm just amazed that given the modifications on the TA, its able to post much better economy than the V. Likely due in no small part to the extra 1000lbs the V carries around with it. Fuel economy is a consideration for me, but not nearly my #1 criteria.

Trust me, I can afford to play - again just seeking to get value for my cash.

Basically I'm looking for a four-door toy as I can't fit the family in the TA, which has resulted in me having put about 1000km total on it in the last 3 years

vperl
07-23-09, 10:02 PM
I'm comparing the V to an IS-F (admittedly coming up much shorter on the power). Please forgive the Canadian fuel economy ratings, but the IS-F is rated at 8.5L/100km hwy, 11L/100km city, the V is rated at 11/17.5 respectively. A 29% and 59% increase in consumption.

For the record, the V would be replacing my current toy, a heavily modified '94 25th Anniversary Trans Am with 383ci LT1, lumpy cam & nitrous. Approx. 475HP NA, and 650 on the bottle. So even with the 556HP the V has, it will be slower than my existing vehicle.
The V would certainly get better city mileage than the TA given the cam and stall converter, but the opposite is true for highway driving. I'm just amazed that given the modifications on the TA, its able to post much better economy than the V. Likely due in no small part to the extra 1000lbs the V carries around with it. Fuel economy is a consideration for me, but not nearly my #1 criteria.
***********************************

it is a possibility that the franky AM is faster, do not know....

Question is can it turn, or do you have to stay in straight line?

Bet the V2 can out do you on most any road course....

And if youdrive the V2 5- or 8 hundred miles it is a joy and very comfy.

All the top notch interior and such you cruise in style, not hopping down the road and hoping you can make the next tight corner on a road

handles like a dream, the V2 is the best anyway you cut it...

Maybe you ought to get a sts...

************************************************** ****8

Trust me, I can afford to play - again just seeking to get value for my cash.

Basically I'm looking for a four-door toy as I can't fit the family in the TA, which has resulted in me having put about 1000km total on it in the last 3 years
\fghj

Looney100
07-23-09, 10:30 PM
The TA would certainly win in a straight line vs. the V2. A road course would be much closer, but I wouldn't count out the TA as it's 1000lbs lighter and I've improved the body rigidity and suspension a fair bit over the years.

The V2 would certainly be a much more comfortable and likely more enjoyable ride. I've had the TA for 14 years, and as much as I still love it, it's dated and no longer matches my lifestyle, which I why I'm considering the V.


I must say I'm quite surprised in the responses received to my original post. I got a couple great responses addressing owners' likes & dislikes of their cars, but I didn't realize that I'd have to put on my flame suit if I even questioned that the V may not be the most perfect vehicle ever produced.

V-Eight
07-23-09, 10:44 PM
I doubt that the V is 17.5L/100km. My inefficient 4.9 is 11.....

62Jeff
07-23-09, 10:46 PM
Hate

the rattles in the headliner, I believe associated with sunroof hardware



Update - this rattle turned out to be a sub woofer cover in the rear package tray. The sunroof and associated hardware are now proving to be noise free on my car.

vperl
07-23-09, 10:53 PM
I must say I'm quite surprised in the responses received to my original post. I got a couple great responses addressing owners' likes & dislikes of their cars, but I didn't realize that I'd have to put on my flame suit if I even questioned that the V may not be the most perfect vehicle ever produced.

***********************************************

Well, we love to have some fun.
Those meanies ought to be ashamed

Looney100
07-23-09, 11:38 PM
I doubt that the V is 17.5L/100km. My inefficient 4.9 is 11.....

http://www.gm.ca/gm/english/vehicles/cadillac/cts/options#

17.5 for the auto 15.0 for the manual

Looney100
07-23-09, 11:41 PM
Update - this rattle turned out to be a sub woofer cover in the rear package tray. The sunroof and associated hardware are now proving to be noise free on my car.

Glad to hear it as I would certainly go with the sunroof. So what's the reason for all the sunroof/no sunroof debate I've seen? The sunroof seems to be quite contentious among owners.

Looney100
07-23-09, 11:49 PM
Just in case some have never seen this here we go, be afraid...... I am proud to be a "A Global warmer"


Whos produces the sticker? The state gov't?

Someone needs to invent some method to store the waste heat from automobile engines so we can use it for our homes. :)

V-Eight
07-23-09, 11:52 PM
http://www.gm.ca/gm/english/vehicles/cadillac/cts/options#

17.5 for the auto 15.0 for the manual

I'm still not buying it, new autos are equal or better than manuals when it comes to efficiency.

vperl
07-23-09, 11:58 PM
Whos produces the sticker? The state gov't?

:)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Always amuses me when people ask a question that was answered one or two posts above....... or they can use Goggle or Bing to find the answer in seconds...they are lazy and
they must be loonies

If you buy, purchase a 2009 CTS-V you also may be issued your very own greenie sticker, by the Feds, who else woulde waste the paper and ink

62Jeff
07-24-09, 12:20 AM
Glad to hear it as I would certainly go with the sunroof. So what's the reason for all the sunroof/no sunroof debate I've seen? The sunroof seems to be quite contentious among owners.

Well in spite of mine now proving to be quiet, I don't like the sunroof. It lets too much heat in, the flimsy sun shade is almost worthless. The car that was available locally when I purchased had the sunroof, so that's what I ended up with.

I traded in a convertible for the CTS-V, and had hoped the sunroof provide some benefit for me, but the sunroof doesn't provide anything near a convertible driving experience. About the only thing it has been good for so far, is letting in additional light on an overcast day.

V-Eight
07-24-09, 12:24 AM
Glad to hear it as I would certainly go with the sunroof. So what's the reason for all the sunroof/no sunroof debate I've seen? The sunroof seems to be quite contentious among owners.

It reduces the strength of the car. So for people who are heavily modding it for more power, they usually opt out of the sunroof.

Looney100
07-24-09, 07:13 AM
It reduces the strength of the car. So for people who are heavily modding it for more power, they usually opt out of the sunroof.

The loss of rigidity from a sunroof has to be minimal. It's would be nothing like a convertible or T-top for allowing twisting. You'd just be removing part of the sheet metal and replacing it with glass with much of the roof still intact.
From a performance basis, the extra weight may be a bit of a concern its got to add at least 50lbs to the car.

V-Eight
07-24-09, 09:42 AM
^I'd think so too, but other people seem to say different

Gary Wells
07-24-09, 10:27 AM
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/170456-anybody-regret-having-sunroof-09-cts.html

I think that if you guys read or re-read this thread you might get a little clearer perspective of the pros & cons.