: One V8 left in Cadillac's "near luxury" car lineup...



Lord Cadillac
10-25-10, 04:07 PM
Forget about the CTS-V. It's not a luxury car nor a near luxury car. Like an M5 or a E55 AMG, it's an all-out performance car.

Anyway...

So the 2011 STS can't be purchased with a Northstar V8. That just leaves the DTS. And in 2012, it may also be without the Northstar. It's sad. Then again, nobody ever updated the Northstar and we have a V6 with more power anyway. The Northstar in the DTS has 292 horsepower at 6300 RPM. And that's in the performance version. Most have 275 horsepower at 6000 RPM. The 3.6 DI has 302 horsepower at 6300 RPM.

So does it matter? Consider NVH in your decision. I have not personally compared NVH in both vehicles...

Stingroo
10-25-10, 04:11 PM
Question - what is NVH? I keep seeing it pop up in threads. Someone explain.

Lord Cadillac
10-25-10, 04:27 PM
Noise, vibration, harshness...

Stingroo
10-25-10, 05:10 PM
Oh.

Well, the last DTS I was in was the one Craig rented for the meet. And I'd have to say I loved how smooth it was. It was smooth enough to put Matt, Dullahan, and me all to sleep in under 30 minutes after the night's festivities. I think it's lame that Cadillac doesn't have a V8 anymore. And I mean THEIR OWN V8. I love the LSx as much as the next guy (possibly more), but it isn't the same.

drewsdeville
10-25-10, 05:31 PM
Isn't this the same as last weeks thread, in different words?

The Tony Show
10-25-10, 05:31 PM
I don't like the startup valve clatter in the Northstar, and the power delivery is no more impressive than the 3.6L DI. Other than exhaust note, I see no advantage to the Northstar over a competent V6.

The Tony Show
10-25-10, 05:32 PM
Isn't this the same as last weeks thread, in different words?

Sal's on a mission. What exactly it is I don't know, but there's a definite theme to his last bunch of threads.

Stingroo
10-25-10, 05:34 PM
Indeed.

Though, seeing the 3.6 in the DTS wouldn't be a bad thing either. It wouldn't sound as nice by any means (IMO, of course), but still.

ryannel2003
10-25-10, 05:38 PM
I too do not like the Northstar's start up clatter... it's louder in the newest DTS's than it is in my Seville. However, I find it to be smoother and more refined feeling than the current 3.0 and 3.6 in the CTS models. It's unfortunate that GM has let the motor go this long without any kind of update, but it's still a great motor. I've been pondering my next car purchase, and I think a Crystal Red DTS is in my future. It's the best Cadillac for me, and the closest thing to a Seville I can buy. It's beautiful, elegant, well built solution for me and is dirt cheap to buy CPO.

drewsdeville
10-25-10, 05:49 PM
Well, I'm just going to reply with the same thing I said in last weeks thread. I think engine NVH levels are becoming moot with the chassis advancements that are being made. Chassis design is really where NVH levels come into play. Sure, maybe when a V6 and V8 are mounted on a 1965 Dodge truck frame with a couple pieces of angle iron, running open headers, differences in NVH levels may be very apparent. However, manufacturers have gotten isolation figured out so well that I really don't think it matters anymore. I don't care what any of the old timers say...many of these newer V6 powered cars have EXCELLENT NVH levels, comparable with the few V8 powered cars that are left.

ryannel2003
10-25-10, 05:54 PM
I agree Drew, but I still think Cadillac has some work to do with the NVH levels in their cars vs. the competition. Honda has a super smooth 3.5 V6 engine, and I don't think anybody can argue with a Lexus V6 engine. Of course, I think the I-6 BMW makes is just about the smoothest engine I've personally ever driven. Better than most V6's and V8's on the market today.

gdwriter
10-25-10, 06:00 PM
I don't like the startup valve clatter in the Northstar, and the power delivery is no more impressive than the 3.6L DI. Other than exhaust note, I see no advantage to the Northstar over a competent V6.I haven't noticed any startup valve clatter; I'll have to listen more closely when I leave for home this afternoon.

Although I know the Northstar usually needs a quart of oil between changes, like most owners, I'm not as attentive as I should be in checking the oil (I've had the check oil level message come up twice and felt like a dumbass both times). I have noticed the engine is quieter on startup when the oil is at the proper level.

ga_etc
10-25-10, 06:48 PM
I have driven a 3.6DI CTS and I really, really like that car. Acceleration and power is comparable to the N*, but the torque and sound of the N* in the upper RPMs never gets old. The 3.6DI is a little lacking there, but otherwise is a very impressive engine.

Jesda
10-25-10, 07:11 PM
The 3.6 is whisper quiet in the CTS, so quiet its kind of boring.

I miss the roar of my 4.9.

orconn
10-25-10, 08:08 PM
I don't like the startup valve clatter in the Northstar, and the power delivery is no more impressive than the 3.6L DI. Other than exhaust note, I see no advantage to the Northstar over a competent V6.

I do, I don't get to say I've got a V-8! I haven't driven the Cadillac V-6, but I'll bet the V-6 isn't as smooth as the V-8. To be honest I've never liked the V-6 configuration much prefering a V-12, straight six or V-8 in that order.

ryannel2003
10-25-10, 08:53 PM
I haven't noticed any startup valve clatter; I'll have to listen more closely when I leave for home this afternoon.

Although I know the Northstar usually needs a quart of oil between changes, like most owners, I'm not as attentive as I should be in checking the oil (I've had the check oil level message come up twice and felt like a dumbass both times). I have noticed the engine is quieter on startup when the oil is at the proper level.

I too noticed when my "Check Oil Level" shows up on the dash, there is more of a tap tap tap tap tap coming from the engine. Add 2 quarts and the noise goes right away. I really should check my oil level alot more often, but I just let the car tell me when it does. Stupid I know, but I tend to forget. Mine uses exactly 1qt every 1,000 miles. Used to be better, but I do alot more city driving than I used to.

hueterm
10-25-10, 08:57 PM
If it's not a V8, it's not a real Cadillac...

Tell them that, Sal...

Lord Cadillac
10-25-10, 11:18 PM
I don't like the startup valve clatter in the Northstar, and the power delivery is no more impressive than the 3.6L DI. Other than exhaust note, I see no advantage to the Northstar over a competent V6.

I never noticed the start-up clatter but if that was the only real issue, I don't see a problem. Have you ever heard a BMW 7-Series start-up? It doesn't sound good. There's a good reason for what you hear but that doesn't make it sound any better..


Sal's on a mission. What exactly it is I don't know, but there's a definite theme to his last bunch of threads.

Discussion. I want LOTS of discussion about Cadillac. I want to hear what people like and what people don't like. However, I prefer to hear what people don't like because that's what going to call for change at Cadillac. And that's what's going to get people talking.


I too do not like the Northstar's start up clatter... it's louder in the newest DTS's than it is in my Seville. However, I find it to be smoother and more refined feeling than the current 3.0 and 3.6 in the CTS models. It's unfortunate that GM has let the motor go this long without any kind of update, but it's still a great motor. I've been pondering my next car purchase, and I think a Crystal Red DTS is in my future. It's the best Cadillac for me, and the closest thing to a Seville I can buy. It's beautiful, elegant, well built solution for me and is dirt cheap to buy CPO.

I really don't understand why Cadillac abandoned the Ultra V8. It was basically finished. And considering most Cadillacs are sold with a V6, CAFE would not have been a problem. Surely the highest paid executive knows more than I do and realized this - so there had to be another reason for the demise of the Ultra V8. It was most likely squabbling inside between executives and teams. In fact, I'm pretty sure that is indeed what it was. And now we all suffer for it. (Those who want a Cadillac car with a V8, anyway.)


Well, I'm just going to reply with the same thing I said in last weeks thread. I think engine NVH levels are becoming moot with the chassis advancements that are being made. Chassis design is really where NVH levels come into play. Sure, maybe when a V6 and V8 are mounted on a 1965 Dodge truck frame with a couple pieces of angle iron, running open headers, differences in NVH levels may be very apparent. However, manufacturers have gotten isolation figured out so well that I really don't think it matters anymore. I don't care what any of the old timers say...many of these newer V6 powered cars have EXCELLENT NVH levels, comparable with the few V8 powered cars that are left.

I think a V6 Cadillac with "good" to "very good" NVH is fine for now. If all we're getting are stopgaps for the time being, than I'm satisfied with a Cadillac that's less than perfect. All we need is a stronger V6 for the heavier cars - and we should be okay. The twin turbo 3.0 would probably be fine for the XTS - but I'm not quite sure it's getting it. It really should because the XTS will be heavier than the DTS.


If it's not a V8, it's not a real Cadillac...

Tell them that, Sal...

I hear ya - but times have changed and we have to roll with the punches.. We have no other choice...

Playdrv4me
10-25-10, 11:26 PM
Have you ever heard a BMW 7-Series start-up? It doesn't sound good. There's a good reason for what you hear but that doesn't make it sound any better..


I was going to mention this... I still am not actually sure WHY the 4.4L engine sounds that way at startup but it makes you almost certain the thing is going to fly apart. Sounded identical in my 2003 Range Rover, 2002 X5 4.6iS and 2000 740iL. Not a fun sound.

hueterm
10-25-10, 11:38 PM
I hear ya - but times have changed and we have to roll with the punches.. We have no other choice...

Sure we do...

Equus
Genesis
XJ
XF
A8
A6(?)
LS
GS
M
7
5
S
E
2009 and older STS
2011 and older DTS

Why compromise?

Jesda
10-25-10, 11:40 PM
My primary interest is in seeing what cars I'll be buying in 2020 with the change in my couch.

EChas3
10-26-10, 02:36 PM
Sure we do...

.
.
.

Why compromise?

I agree. If they don't listen, vote with your next purchase. 4's are fine & fun for Roadsters, 6's have their place, but for a big car feel & refinement I expect a V8. I won't 'take less and like it'. Life's too short.

gdwriter
10-26-10, 02:55 PM
I too noticed when my "Check Oil Level" shows up on the dash, there is more of a tap tap tap tap tap coming from the engine. Add 2 quarts and the noise goes right away. I really should check my oil level alot more often, but I just let the car tell me when it does. Stupid I know, but I tend to forget. Mine uses exactly 1qt every 1,000 miles. Used to be better, but I do alot more city driving than I used to.I usually add a quart midway between oil changes, which I do every 3,000-4,000 miles under the requirements of my 225,000-mile engine guarantee from Valvoline. I'm close to an oil change, and I added a quart shortly before my business trip to Bend at the end of September. So my oil level is probably fine.

Listened closely when I started the car this morning and didn't hear any clatter. It may sound different outside the car. Maybe I'll roll the windows down next time.

The Tony Show
10-26-10, 02:59 PM
It's definitely only noticeable outside the car. I never really noticed it a lot until they started adding remote start to the N* cars, and it's REALLY pronounced when you're walking toward the car and start it- sounds like a sewing machine with sand in the bearings. I've heard it's just the hydraulic lifters pumping up because it stops after 10 or 15 seconds (once they reach operating pressure), but it still gets weird looks.

gdwriter
10-26-10, 03:04 PM
The 3.6 is whisper quiet in the CTS, so quiet its kind of boring.

I miss the roar of my 4.9.The Northstar is also whisper quite and butter smooth in normal driving, but nail it, and it makes the lusty roar of an engine happily doing what it was designed for. Still smooth as glass, too.

When I rode in Jesda's '92 STS back in February, I noticed his 4.9 was much louder than the one in my DeVille. It was also a high-mileage engine, and I think Cadillac deliberately allowed more engine noise in the cabin to enhance the image of performance.

If you haven't seen it before, here's a comparison of Sabrina vs. Cruella at WOT:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdBVQ3waezI

Vinsanity
10-26-10, 03:14 PM
Discussion. I want LOTS of discussion about Cadillac. I want to hear what people like and what people don't like. However, I prefer to hear what people don't like because that's what going to call for change at Cadillac. And that's what's going to get people talking.

While we're bringing it up, I don't like the direction they're planning for the XTS. Every successful Cadillac in recent memory has been the riskiest design and product planning move, while their safer efforts have been the weakest. Unfortunately, I see the XTS as an example of the latter. Cadillac proved with th CTS that they can capture a younger, higher-profile audience, but the XTS seems to me like a car designed for more traditional buyers who would go straight to the Cadillac dealership for their next purchase regardless of what they or anyone else makes.

The CTS found a suitable niche as a 'tweener between the 3/C and the 5/E, and it should stay there. The STS replacement should do the same, between the 5/E and the 7/S. Mercedes already has the CLS positioned there, and I think Cadillac can do a damn sexy 4-door coupe with sleek 2nd-gen A&S styling, a solid RWD architecture, and a 4.8L DI V8 underneath a long hood.

Stingroo
10-26-10, 04:26 PM
Four-door coupes can GTFO.

Just sayin'.

Lord Cadillac
10-26-10, 04:51 PM
I don't mind a traditional large car for people more interested in luxury than performance - but some argue that that should be a Buick. In regards to the XTS, I'm not sure what they're doing with it. Current GM management doesn't like it - and it's not even a full-size car. It's "near" full size (according to GM executives). Hopefully it's something that'll satisfy current DTS buyers until a proper flagship comes our way. Some say that DTS owners aren't going to like a V6-only replacement - but the V6 is stronger than the Northstar.....


While we're bringing it up, I don't like the direction they're planning for the XTS. Every successful Cadillac in recent memory has been the riskiest design and product planning move, while their safer efforts have been the weakest. Unfortunately, I see the XTS as an example of the latter. Cadillac proved with th CTS that they can capture a younger, higher-profile audience, but the XTS seems to me like a car designed for more traditional buyers who would go straight to the Cadillac dealership for their next purchase regardless of what they or anyone else makes.

The CTS found a suitable niche as a 'tweener between the 3/C and the 5/E, and it should stay there. The STS replacement should do the same, between the 5/E and the 7/S. Mercedes already has the CLS positioned there, and I think Cadillac can do a damn sexy 4-door coupe with sleek 2nd-gen A&S styling, a solid RWD architecture, and a 4.8L DI V8 underneath a long hood.

Vinsanity
10-26-10, 07:27 PM
At this point, Cadillac's lineup should remain simple, but contain a few knockouts instead of a dozen jabs. The few cars they put out should be game-changers like the CTS, and as they become more accepted in the market, they can then expand their lineup to more traditional offerings. But first, Cadillac has to catch the attention of the $50k-$70k crowd with something stunning, and the XTS just doesn't impress me.

drewsdeville
10-26-10, 07:36 PM
When I rode in Jesda's '92 STS back in February, I noticed his 4.9 was much louder than the one in my DeVille. It was also a high-mileage engine, and I think Cadillac deliberately allowed more engine noise in the cabin to enhance the image of performance.

Keep in mind that exhaust packaging was completely different between the K and C body 4.X's. Each body used different exhaust manifolds. Also, the C-body routed a cross-over up over the transmission bellhousing while the K-body got routed under the oil pan. Also, correct me if I'm wrong Jesda, but the '92-'93 4.9 Seville had dual mufflers as well. That's probably where the most difference came from.

BTW, did you "cheat" on the WOT and make it shift early or are those the actual shift points on an '01?

ben.gators
10-26-10, 07:37 PM
The Northstar is also whisper quite and butter smooth in normal driving, but nail it, and it makes the lusty roar of an engine happily doing what it was designed for. Still smooth as glass, too.

When I rode in Jesda's '92 STS back in February, I noticed his 4.9 was much louder than the one in my DeVille. It was also a high-mileage engine, and I think Cadillac deliberately allowed more engine noise in the cabin to enhance the image of performance.

If you haven't seen it before, here's a comparison of Sabrina vs. Cruella at WOT:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdBVQ3waezI

0 MPG INST during WOT! :D Anyway, N* sound is so lovely! :thumbsup:

77CDV
10-27-10, 08:08 PM
Some say that DTS owners aren't going to like a V6-only replacement...

And "Some" would be correct, at least about this DTS owner.

Lord Cadillac
10-27-10, 08:54 PM
What will bother you most? I'm sure the performance will be very similar - if not better until higher speeds...


And "Some" would be correct, at least about this DTS owner.

hueterm
10-27-10, 10:15 PM
What will bother you most? I'm sure the performance will be very similar - if not better until higher speeds...


The sound.

The politically correct nanny state BS compromise.

77CDV
10-27-10, 10:27 PM
What will bother you most? I'm sure the performance will be very similar - if not better until higher speeds...

I have a certain minimum standard for what I'll accept from a luxury car. That standard includes a V8 or better under the hood. I have nothing against sixes. They're perfectly fine in your average, workaday family sedan. In a luxury car, it has all the appeal to me of sardine-flavored ice cream.

drewsdeville
10-27-10, 10:40 PM
I have a certain minimum standard for what I'll accept from a luxury car. That standard includes a V8 or better under the hood.

Can you elaborate on "better"?

EChas3
10-27-10, 10:56 PM
The sound.

I gotta agree. The wife's old '98 STS had a sweet sound WOT. You could hear the power build from the intake side. It had great lines, too. She also misses the cruise cancel and the waste basket.

I don't miss the handling (I hope to never buy another transverse engine front wheel drive), but that was my only significant criticism.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-27-10, 10:57 PM
Can you elaborate on "better"?

Well, V-10, V-12. Or god forbid, the W12.

Stingroo
10-27-10, 11:55 PM
Or, in TRUE Cadillac style, something with sixteen cylinders.

77CDV
10-28-10, 12:54 AM
Well, V-10, V-12. Or god forbid, the W12.

Oh god please, NOT the W12. The N* is as involved an engine as I ever hope to own. Nor a V10. They just don't seem to be a well balanced design compared to a V8, V12, or V16. Mmmm.....V16 :drool:

orconn
10-28-10, 01:14 AM
I owned a V-12 for over ten years and drove plenty of them, great engines but not something I'd want in a DD. No a V-8 or even a straight six would be great, but a V-6 for a top of the line car just doesn't get ... doesn't sound good and requires to much fenagling to get the vibration out of it. If you are going to stay in the "luxury" market you'd better have an intrinsically smooth engine .... and it better sound good too!

Aron9000
10-28-10, 04:41 AM
I'd love to have a BMW with their straight six, so much better sounding, smoother, and a great powerband compared to a v6. I feel like a v6 is something for your Buick, upscale Ford, Toyota Avalon type of car, not a true luxury car.

I understand that not everybody wants a v8, but please Cadillac give us something different than the same v6 found under the hood of a Buick or Malibu. I'd love to own a big 4.0 liter I-6 with 300+hp.

Jailtime
10-28-10, 05:03 AM
I really wish the N* could have stayed around, maybe an update with DI would have been nice. I don't want a luxury car with a V6. Small turbocharged engines are for ricers, not for Cadillacs. I wasn't that impressed with the 3.6DI in the CTS. Didn't sound good, and didn't pull like a N* on the highway. Look at Lincoln, they produce a glorified Taurus SHO and Edge. Cadillac will be going that same direction if they go all V6.

Destroyer
10-28-10, 11:50 PM
The Northstar is dead.............Finally! GM needs to put Chevy drivetrains in ALL their cars. History tells that the only good Caddy's were Chevy powered (aside from the 472/500 powered cars). Let's look back, the 4-6-8 Caddy (POS), the 4.1 (POS), the Northstar (mega-POS). Then let's look back at the (flagship) Fleetwood's that used Oldsmobile and Chevy motors. The Olds motors were not exciting but they were reliable. The Chevy motors were not all that exciting either (but more so than the Olds motors). Both were much, much more reliable than any Cadillac motor. :bouncy:

hueterm
10-29-10, 12:09 AM
There will be plenty of them around for a long enough time to hold out for its successor (and I'm not talking an LSx)....once GM grows a pair...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-29-10, 12:14 AM
The reason (aside from the Northstar, 4.5 and 4.9) that all of the above-listed Cadillac designed engines sucked is because they were rushed to production. Before the 8-6-4 and HT4100, Cadillac had a sterling reputation as building some fine, heavy duty hard working engines that were easy to own and low maintenance.

Aron9000
10-29-10, 12:18 AM
I disagree about the Northstar, those in the FWD Deville/Seville/Eldo still suck. I could live with the various "quirks" like bad coil packs, oil consumption, leaking oil, etc if they didn't blow the headgaskets.

EChas3
10-29-10, 12:21 AM
Or, in TRUE Cadillac style, something with sixteen cylinders.

Mmmmmm! Sixteeen!

orconn
10-29-10, 12:40 AM
The reason (aside from the Northstar, 4.5 and 4.9) that all of the above-listed Cadillac designed engines sucked is because they were rushed to production. Before the 8-6-4 and HT4100, Cadillac had a sterling reputation as building some fine, heavy duty hard working engines that were easy to own and low maintenance.

Actually you have to go back before 1968 to get to the point where Cadillac engines had a reputation for trouble free operation and ownership. And before that time almost all American engines had a sterling reputation for reliability and low maintenance .... even though they burned a lot of gas! With the advent of smog controls drivability suffered. During the 1970's "dieseling" (you shut off the ignition and the engine continue to spontaneously fire till it finally shook to a stop) was an major annoyance, and definitely didn't do Cadillac's, or Jaguar's for that matter, image a bit of good. The fuel injected engines helped some, but gas from antiquated service stations that had contaminated gas cost fuel injected engine Cadillac owners dearly as the cars weren't covered by lengthy warranties for this and other manufacturer's defects. The eighties were a period of car American companies trying to increase gas mileage using outdated and poorly engineered remedies, while the Europeans and Asians used their years of small displacement more frugal engines (that actually performed pretty well, but required a higher degree of maintenance) to their advantage.

hueterm
10-29-10, 03:46 PM
Sal, did you get a new Escalade?

Lord Cadillac
10-29-10, 03:50 PM
No, but I'm definitely considering it...


Sal, did you get a new Escalade?

Jesda
10-29-10, 10:38 PM
No, but I'm definitely considering it...

My stepdad is considering one too. He's sniffing around for replacements for his 2004 LX470 with 300,000 miles. The new LX570 is brutally ugly and not as well made as previous generations (he also had an LX450), so he's considering Cadillac for the first time despite his disdain for the president and the GM bailout.

Post a full review if you buy one.

Destroyer
10-30-10, 12:42 AM
The reason (aside from the Northstar, 4.5 and 4.9) that all of the above-listed Cadillac designed engines sucked is because they were rushed to production. Before the 8-6-4 and HT4100, Cadillac had a sterling reputation as building some fine, heavy duty hard working engines that were easy to own and low maintenance.The "reason" means nothing to the guy that shelled out the money to buy the car and got stuck with a lemon. This is something that should NEVER happen to the owner of a new luxury car. Over the last several years I've grown to like Lincoln's but still place Cadillac higher in the food chain. Realistically I'm wrong though, Lincolns are far more reliable cars and equally shoddy as far as build quality. :thehand:

ryannel2003
10-30-10, 01:14 AM
As much as I love my STS, it's piss poor build quality is disappointing for a car that cost nearly $52,000 brand new. Luckily I paid a 1/5th of that 2 1/2 years ago so I can be a little easier on it. Having the headgaskets replaced at 54k was equally disappointing. I'd love to buy another Seville STS to replace this one, but I will probably go in another direction. Not sure exactly what I would want though. Maybe a Merc or BMW...

Lord Cadillac
10-30-10, 10:25 AM
It'll probably be over a year before I get into a new vehicle. So your father will probably have a review before me. I'm surprised he doesn't like the new LX570. Not even on the inside? Quality isn't so great either? I wonder if it was Toyota's plan all the while to be so impressive with Lexus only to cheapen-up down the line. That's a horrible idea but it seems like a good possibility. I just can't see any other reason for ALL their vehicles to have such a drop in quality.


My stepdad is considering one too. He's sniffing around for replacements for his 2004 LX470 with 300,000 miles. The new LX570 is brutally ugly and not as well made as previous generations (he also had an LX450), so he's considering Cadillac for the first time despite his disdain for the president and the GM bailout.

Post a full review if you buy one.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-30-10, 10:45 AM
As much as I love my STS, it's piss poor build quality is disappointing for a car that cost nearly $52,000 brand new. Luckily I paid a 1/5th of that 2 1/2 years ago so I can be a little easier on it. Having the headgaskets replaced at 54k was equally disappointing. I'd love to buy another Seville STS to replace this one, but I will probably go in another direction. Not sure exactly what I would want though. Maybe a Merc or BMW...

My S320 had amazing build quality, still IMO one of the finest built cars I've ever been in, but after about '99, all M-B's dropped significantly in quality of materials used and overall build quality. They just simply lost that "built like tank/bank vault" feeling and weren't as nearly as nice. BMW didn't have that problem though, but they weren't ever as impeccably built as the older M-B's. But like I've said before, if you're buying one of these, get ready to shell out big bucks for anything. Before 2000 though, I'd buy almost any Mercedes over a comparable BMW (except the 5 Series), but between 2000 and the Bangle redesigns, which started in '02, I'd take almost any BMW over a comparable M-B.


The "reason" means nothing to the guy that shelled out the money to buy the car and got stuck with a lemon. This is something that should NEVER happen to the owner of a new luxury car. Over the last several years I've grown to like Lincoln's but still place Cadillac higher in the food chain. Realistically I'm wrong though, Lincolns are far more reliable cars and equally shoddy as far as build quality. :thehand:

You're right. When dealing with the incredibly fickle, picky and perfection-seeking luxury car buyer, any manufacturer should do their best to thoroughly test and perfect all new products over a long period of time before they're brought to the table.


My stepdad is considering one too. He's sniffing around for replacements for his 2004 LX470 with 300,000 miles. The new LX570 is brutally ugly and not as well made as previous generations (he also had an LX450), so he's considering Cadillac for the first time despite his disdain for the president and the GM bailout.

Post a full review if you buy one.

How bad could it be? Certainly no worse than the new Infiniti QX56?
http://www.lexus.com/lexus-share/images/gallery/models/LX/photos/exterior/g_ext1_LX855.jpg
V.
http://www.carshowp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/2011-Infiniti-QX-Front-Angle-View.jpg

Yeah, the Lexus is far better looking.

Lord Cadillac
10-30-10, 10:46 AM
I agree that the Lexus is better looking than the Infiniti. In any event, they are both EXTREMELY luxurious SUVs.

ryannel2003
10-30-10, 11:36 AM
I would still take the Escalade over those two abominations. I believe the only SUV I would take over an Escalade is a Range Rover, and even then I would have a tough decision.

Stingroo
10-30-10, 12:02 PM
Those two SUV's look damn near like carbon copies of each other - except the Infiniti stopped off at Autozone for some fender vents, yo.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
10-30-10, 12:19 PM
The Infiniti looks a lot more rounded and organic. The Lexus looks a lot more rigid and square cut.

RippyPartsDept
10-30-10, 12:49 PM
i think they're both trying to look like a range rover - with more curves

and oh my eyes! what was infinity thinking with those fender louvers!?!?

Aron9000
10-30-10, 09:07 PM
Personally the new Land Cruiser is a lot better looking(if more bland) than the Lexus. $67,000 base price is really damn steep, the lexus is $77,000 base. If I were spending that kind of $$$, it would be an Escalade, no sense in cashing out that much $$$$ for vanilla.

http://www.motortrendautoshows.com/MTAS/TopLevel/Manufacturer/1262/New_Model_Gallery/preview_Toyota_Land_Cruiser.jpg

Jesda
10-30-10, 09:16 PM
http://www.carshowp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/2011-Infiniti-QX-Front-Angle-View.jpg

They look like broly dudes in Sunday dresses.

hueterm
10-30-10, 09:36 PM
Are the Land Cruisers as good off road as they used to be?

Playdrv4me
10-31-10, 05:16 AM
Are the Land Cruisers as good off road as they used to be?

They're still pretty incredible.

Lord Cadillac
11-01-10, 02:45 PM
http://photo.netcarshow.com/Lexus-LX_570_2008_photo_1b.jpg
http://photo.netcarshow.com/Infiniti-QX_2011_photo_0f.jpg

Stingroo
11-01-10, 03:34 PM
I just don't "get" the "Luxury SUV" concept, honestly. Meh.

Jesda
11-01-10, 03:35 PM
The interior of the LX570 isn't as nice in person as the LX470. Everything feels less substantive. I imagine the new QX is quite nice if it takes after the Infiniti M.

orconn
11-01-10, 04:57 PM
I just don't "get" the "Luxury SUV" concept, honestly. Meh.

I don't get it either, a truck is for doing the type of work where you get your hands dirty and you may end up smelling nasty! As far as I can see a "Luxury SUV" is for those who think a car isn't big enough for their ego image and those who feel an irrespressible need to take up multi spaces at the Mall. I have to laugh at those young females hauling their kid's stroller around in their Escalade, I quess to show they married a good income, but really to show the world that they are so lacking in confidence that they have negotiate the world in gussied up tank. But hey if they want to shell out a lot of bucks for a very high profit margin GMC, that's there business!

Stingroo
11-01-10, 05:22 PM
I don't get it either, a truck is for doing the type of work where you get your hands dirty and you may end up smelling nasty! As far as I can see a "Luxury SUV" is for those who think a car isn't big enough for their ego image and those who feel an irrespressible need to take up multi spaces at the Mall. I have to laugh at those young females hauling their kid's stroller around in their Escalade, I quess to show they married a good income, but really to show the world that they are so lacking in confidence that they have negotiate the world in gussied up tank. But hey if they want to shell out a lot of bucks for a very high profit margin GMC, that's there business!

Sounds about right to me. *shrug*

Jesda
11-01-10, 05:29 PM
I just don't "get" the "Luxury SUV" concept, honestly. Meh.

Luxury = More than you need

4WD = More than most people need

Stingroo
11-01-10, 05:32 PM
And to most:

SUV = Severely Useless Vehicle

drewsdeville
11-01-10, 05:39 PM
I don't get it either, a truck is for doing the type of work where you get your hands dirty and you may end up smelling nasty! As far as I can see a "Luxury SUV" is for those who think a car isn't big enough for their ego image and those who feel an irrespressible need to take up multi spaces at the Mall. I have to laugh at those young females hauling their kid's stroller around in their Escalade, I quess to show they married a good income, but really to show the world that they are so lacking in confidence that they have negotiate the world in gussied up tank. But hey if they want to shell out a lot of bucks for a very high profit margin GMC, that's there business!

I agree to this completely.

What I don't get is how a utility vehicle became an ego booster. Utility and work vehicles like pickups and SUV's really don't portray a luxury image. Up until the 70's, pickups were stripped down machines with a frame, body, and drivetrain. Maybe you had a radio, if you really wanted it nice. Luxury options weren't considered in trucks as they were worthless in the days when only farmers or contractors bought pickups to complete their intended tasks.

These people want to be seen in utility vehicles like pickups because they think it makes them look good, do they decorate their homes with chainsaws and shovels?

But oh well, like you guys say, let them buy it up I guess. Good for the economy (assuming they can actually afford them, which isn't always the case). I put hitches on my Caddy's so I can happily put them to work. The words "work", "utility" and "truck" portray a man who gets his hands dirty and gets shit done.

Sad thing is, my Caddy's get more work done than most with their pickups.

Stingroo
11-01-10, 05:41 PM
That's probably true, :lol: I want a hitch for the wagon, eventually. A nice little 5x8 open trailer would be nice for those things that just don't fit under the rear hatch, and be much safer than the roof rack to boot.

drewsdeville
11-01-10, 05:51 PM
Yeah, my hitches get used a lot.

On the downside, I go through a lot of brakes and have replaced air shocks and compressors a number of times.

I do actually have a truck, figuring I could actually USE one. My 1966 Powerwagon would be one hell of a workhorse if I ever got around to making it road worthy. It has the wrong carb on it, igntion needs a tune up, tail lights don't work, and most of the brakes don't work, save for one wheel on the front.

Oh well. One day I'll strip it down and do it right.

Stingroo
11-01-10, 06:01 PM
Air shocks... god damn I can't wait until the spring to get rid of mine.

drewsdeville
11-01-10, 06:04 PM
I actually like them. A loaded car with air suspension handles and rides really well in comparison to springs. I find them to be quite reliable as long as they aren't overloaded, which was the case with my failures.

But, I guess everyone has different experiences.

orconn
11-01-10, 06:05 PM
For many years I attended "A" horse shows. These are the shows where the best riders and horse in a region or the nation attend. The horses being shown at these "Hunter-Jumper" shows range in price from $25,000 on up to over a million dollars. Not all the participants are "super" rich but many are listed among Forbe's richest Americans. Now, at these shows one sees a lot of GMCs and Chevy trucks of various configurations. One rarely if ever sees an Escalade or Navigator and if one does see one in the parking lot, you can bet that it is owned (or leased) by a spectator. The folks driving the GMC's and Chevies have expensive cars but they are used for different occasions. It would be considered rather gouche to leave your Bentley Azure, top down, in such a dusty dirty environment (although I have seen it done!). So I would have to say an Escalade may be prestigious in certain circles but they are not prestigious where real wealth congregates!

Stingroo
11-01-10, 06:08 PM
I actually like them. A loaded car with air suspension handles and rides really well in comparison to springs. I find them to be quite reliable as long as they aren't overloaded, which was the case with my failures.

But, I guess everyone has different experiences.

That's true actually... it's been so long since I've been in a car that had good air shocks though I forget what that's like. :lol:

hueterm
11-01-10, 07:45 PM
Why might one want a luxury SUV over a standard model? I had two decked Avalanches before I bought my EXT:

-- I like the interior of the EXT better than the AV, which visually is primarily the perforated seat leather and the wood grain.

-- The seats themselves are significantly more comfortable, plus the 4-way adjustable headrests make them even more so.

-- It has 60 more horsepower, with almost no penalty in MPG (as if that's a priority) -- which makes it drive completely differently.

-- The highway ride is much better.

-- The rear parking sensors.

I have no use for a truck to haul around greasy tools or things covered in horse (or dog) shit on even an occasional basis. I have used it to haul dirty things very infrequently, but I like it because it keeps things CLEAN since the bed in enclosed. I can carry large items back and forth to St. Louis -- or pack up an almost unlimited volume of luggage, gun cases, golf clubs securely and out of sight. And unless I need to collapse the midgate, none of it intrudes into the passenger compartment. It's basically a luxury sedan w/the biggest trunk in the universe.

Now, the flipside is that Beretta can only go in the back seat, but that's why I have the wagons...

The '07 Avalanche closed the gap somewhat w/my '04 EXT, but I've still got more HP, a wood steering wheel, and more comfortable seats. Considering I only have 40000 miles on mine, and another 21 months of warranty, I don't think I'll be getting rid of it anytime soon.....

Jesda
11-01-10, 08:10 PM
I agree to this completely.

What I don't get is how a utility vehicle became an ego booster. Utility and work vehicles like pickups and SUV's really don't portray a luxury image. Up until the 70's, pickups were stripped down machines with a frame, body, and drivetrain. Maybe you had a radio, if you really wanted it nice. Luxury options weren't considered in trucks as they were worthless in the days when only farmers or contractors bought pickups to complete their intended tasks.


Yeah, it was quite a dramatic transition from work truck to passenger trucks. You could say it started with the Wagoneer and the Range Rover decades ago.

Americans always loved trucks and began using them for everyday passenger duties and commutes. Making them nicer and plusher was a natural progression, but the rapid acceleration of this transition was unusual.

CAFE played a major role. It was and is deeply flawed legislation, causing the full size American car to quietly disappear while larger and heavier SUVs took their place.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-01-10, 08:45 PM
I agree to this completely.

What I don't get is how a utility vehicle became an ego booster.

Probably because chicks dig a man who drives a truck.


That's probably true, :lol: I want a hitch for the wagon, eventually. A nice little 5x8 open trailer would be nice for those things that just don't fit under the rear hatch, and be much safer than the roof rack to boot.

That's the great thing about the B/D bodies. All that luxury and space, plus you can pull a trailer or a lot of payload with them when the need arises. Can't do that with an STS, S Class or 3 Series.


Air shocks... god damn I can't wait until the spring to get rid of mine.

Air shocks can be a PITA, but atleast on the GM cars, you get the shocks to support the car if the air suspension fails. Not so with the Fords.


Yeah, it was quite a dramatic transition from work truck to passenger trucks. You could say it started with the Wagoneer and the Range Rover decades ago.

Americans always loved trucks and began using them for everyday passenger duties and commutes. Making them nicer and plusher was a natural progression, but the rapid acceleration of this transition was unusual.

CAFE played a major role. It was and is deeply flawed legislation, causing the full size American car to quietly disappear while larger and heavier SUVs took their place.

I think that's the biggest thing. You'll notice that a lot of the full size trucks & SUV's started getting leather and auto a/c and stuff like that in the mid-late '90s, just when all the big luxury cars started to wane off in popularity and eventually die.

Playdrv4me
11-01-10, 08:48 PM
These people want to be seen in utility vehicles like pickups because they think it makes them look good, do they decorate their homes with chainsaws and shovels?

lol, I actually like luxury SUVs but even I have to admit that's one of the funniest things I've heard in a while.

Playdrv4me
11-01-10, 08:54 PM
For many years I attended "A" horse shows. These are the shows where the best riders and horse in a region or the nation attend. The horses being shown at these "Hunter-Jumper" shows range in price from $25,000 on up to over a million dollars. Not all the participants are "super" rich but many are listed among Forbe's richest Americans. Now, at these shows one sees a lot of GMCs and Chevy trucks of various configurations. One rarely if ever sees an Escalade or Navigator and if one does see one in the parking lot, you can bet that it is owned (or leased) by a spectator. The folks driving the GMC's and Chevies have expensive cars but they are used for different occasions. It would be considered rather gouche to leave your Bentley Azure, top down, in such a dusty dirty environment (although I have seen it done!). So I would have to say an Escalade may be prestigious in certain circles but they are not prestigious where real wealth congregates!

My ex used to have family that worked county fairs and such where these trucks were the norm... but what you fail to realize at first glance is that those "GMCs and Ferds" can now be decked out with MSRPs nearly as high, and in some cases HIGHER than your typical Escalade or Navigator. It is not uncommon to stack an F Series King Ranch diesel or GMC Sierra Duramax *well* into the 50k range. Whether or not these people choose to pretend they don't have a "luxury" truck, they most certainly do. Why else would GMC have introduced something as ludicrous as a "Sierra HD Denali"?

gdwriter
11-01-10, 08:55 PM
I've never had a thing for big trucks or SUVs, although they have their place. My sister has a four-door '05 Silverado with a fiberglass bed cover, and the statement about it being a big trunk is an accurate one, especially when you have young kids. It drives nicely for what it is, but it feels so damn big. Betty is about the same overall length, but feels so much more nimble (yes, a big Sixties Yank tank can be nimble). About the only time I feel Betty's size behind the wheel is when parking in a smaller space.

I used to think the Escalade was ridiculous (I called it the Escapade) until I rode in one. The leather is very, very nice (I'm sure it's a higher grade than a Tahoe, but not sure if it's better than a Denali) and the seats very comfortable. Still not something I'd want, but I can see why others enjoy them.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-01-10, 09:07 PM
I personally don't like driving trucks that much. It's nice to have that elevated view, but I don't like having to deal with the lousy fuel economy, sloppy, top heavy handling and having to climb up into my vehicle. I like cars that are low, long and luxurious.

orconn
11-01-10, 09:10 PM
Jesda's point about CAFE providing the loopholes which made the "gussied" pickup and Travelall/Suburban so desirable to fill a niche, but because they were so damn profitable the trend turned into a flood kept American carmakers more afloat than they would have been without the CAFE exempt trucks/SUVs to bolster their profits. Ofcourse the American public suffered by being supplied with gas guzzling, antequated transportation that proved less safe as the car companies took advantage of the truck exemptions to bypass safety laws that applied to cars.
In the end Detroit was waisting valuable development time, that really put them behind foreign makers, in bringing better passenger cars to the marketplace. Ford with the success of its Explorer and its' derivatives let their car products molder away, with their Panther platform cars sitting there for over twenty years as that company's entry in the mainstream sedan market. No wonder the Europeans and Japanese gain larger and larger marketshare during this time.

hueterm
11-01-10, 09:27 PM
While I love my EXT, if I still lived in STL, I probably wouldn't own one. Definitely not as my DD. A Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade would probably be my length limit. Plus, it would probably get stolen.

Down here, an EXT is mid-size.... And if I were going to get a 3/4T truck, I would SO rock that Sierra Denali HD -- are you kidding me??

drewsdeville
11-01-10, 10:24 PM
Air shocks can be a PITA, but atleast on the GM cars, you get the shocks to support the car if the air suspension fails. Not so with the Fords.



Yeah.

The real difference is that GM's setup uses the air shocks as support to the leaf or coil spring, type depending on the car, that's alongside it. When the air shock fails, there's still a standard spring offering some support.

In Fords setup, the SPRINGS are air, with regular shocks next to them. Therefore, when the air springs fail...that's it, no support. Then you get them bumper-dragging Town Cars and Crown Vic's out there that bounce all over the place.

Stingroo
11-01-10, 10:27 PM
lol There's a bumper-dragging Mark VIII in the parking lot on campus. It makes me wonder what he's going to do if he ever wants to have friends in the car. It's really nice looking, but looks like a neglected POS beater with the air suspension.

drewsdeville
11-01-10, 10:29 PM
You know, I've heard the bumper dragging referred to as "pimp".

What is the world coming to when having your vehicle in a state of disrepair is an image booster.

EChas3
11-01-10, 10:41 PM
America's love of Luxury SUV's is actually very simple. We love big luxurious cars, we always have. When manufacturers cave in to CAFE standards and pressure from special interests and stop making big cars, buyers seek the next best alternative: Luxury Trucks.

The federal government has no business telling anyone what legal product citizens can or can't buy. Politicians that don't learn they are public servants are soon to be unemployed. Civil servants are next. Take back your country. Vote!

Jesda
11-01-10, 10:51 PM
In 1958 John Keats wrote a book called "The Insolent Chariots". He criticized Detroit (tongue in cheek) for making cars longer, lower, wider, and excessive. After taking a camping trip with his family in his wagon, he concluded that it "was an illuminated rolling cave" inside with ground clearance too low to go over anything.

He said America needed a more upright car, with a commanding view of the road, high road clearance, a larger gas tank, stiffer springs, a truck transmission, and 4-wheel drive. He went on to say "it would be a machine able to go anywhere in any weather and it would resemble an Army weapons carrier, complete with water cans, shovels, and picks strapped to its sides."

lol, 1958. And now the SUV is the new "insolent chariot"

Trends are trends I guess.

Playdrv4me
11-01-10, 11:20 PM
While I love my EXT, if I still lived in STL, I probably wouldn't own one. Definitely not as my DD. A Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade would probably be my length limit. Plus, it would probably get stolen.

Down here, an EXT is mid-size.... And if I were going to get a 3/4T truck, I would SO rock that Sierra Denali HD -- are you kidding me??

As far as anything with a bed goes, I think I'd prefer the Sierra HD Denali over the CURRENT EXT. However, I've always wanted a large diesel truck (one of the few things I haven't owned) so that would be perfect for me. For someone to use something like that as a "work" truck however is just amusing to think about.

77CDV
11-02-10, 12:20 AM
America's love of Luxury SUV's is actually very simple. We love big luxurious cars, we always have. When manufacturers cave in to CAFE standards and pressure from special interests and stop making big cars, buyers seek the next best alternative: Luxury Trucks.

The federal government has no business telling anyone what legal product citizens can or can't buy. Politicians that don't learn they are public servants are soon to be unemployed. Civil servants are next. Take back your country. Vote!

Bad news. CAFE will soon apply to trucks as well. Better kiss the Escalade, et al., goodbye.

Aron9000
11-02-10, 12:21 AM
^ A lot of people with King Ranch Fords, etc just use them to tow their toys, they never get them dirty.

bill57
11-05-10, 11:43 PM
"Discussion. I want LOTS of discussion about Cadillac. I want to hear what people like and what people don't like. However, I prefer to hear what people don't like because that's what going to call for change at Cadillac. And that's what's going to get people talking".

Every time I see a post that is critical of Cadillac, two or three loyalists, including members who are employees of Cadillac in some capacity, pounce on the original poster. It's "love it or leave it" on this forum. A great place to find information, and a wealth of knowledge about Cadillac automobiles, but pity the poster who simply complains about something he finds unacceptable about his Cadillac. Notice my few number of posts compared to when I joined this forum. I came to read and learn, and found that if you express something negative about your Cadillac experience, you are an outcast.

I

EChas3
11-06-10, 12:42 AM
Bad news. CAFE will soon apply to trucks as well. Better kiss the Escalade, et al., goodbye.

There is no law supporting this executive order. There is no constitutional basis for the Federal Government to tell citizens what they can and can't buy. When it becomes impossible to buy new big cars, people will fix their old big cars instead. The liberals are determined to turn America into Cuba.

It's our own fault if we let them.

Jesda
11-06-10, 08:57 AM
Liberals... conservatives... they're all interested in telling us what to do. *sigh*

drewsdeville
11-06-10, 10:17 AM
Why cry about the government telling you what to do when you are funding it? If you don't like it, get out. I hear there are no CAFE standards in Ethiopia.

Rarely does anyone have a justifiable reason for complaining about CAFE. The complaints are always self centered, something "I" can't have, yet they refuse to look at the big picture.

I'm not interested handicapping national security so you can drive the car you want.

That said, I don't think CAFE is the best route to take, but I won't whine about it. I understand that my government isn't out to "get me" or make me miserable by limiting my choice in automobiles.

hueterm
11-06-10, 10:33 AM
So then instead of you piling on w/the other Eco-despots and criticizing people who don't fall for their BS, why aren't you driving your ne plus ultra Corolla, instead of some old Cadillac that could in no way meet CAFE? And don't say it's the cost, because I'm sure you could find an old one that would get much better mileage than a 4.9L V8, at a similar price...

drewsdeville
11-06-10, 10:36 AM
Wow...did you even read the post before responding?

I'm not defending CAFE, nor am I opposing it. I'm criticizing people who complain that their government makes the miserable for whatever reasons, CAFE or some other issue, then continue to fund and support it by living here and paying taxes. Hence the words "If you don't like it, get out". No one is holding you at gunpoint, stopping you from leaving and moving on to places that don't have CAFE or make you miserable.

As for my own car, if you'd like to donate to the cause I'd LOVE to dump my old Caddy for something that gets better mileage. I just can't afford to do it myself right now though, I have too much on my plate as it is.

PM me with my new ride!

I had a '92 Escort that I got cheap (traded for some spare computer parts I had laying around), got pretty good mileage, but due to a large insurance inscrease, I had to sell a car as I couldn't afford to insure multiples. I didn't trust the Escort to transport me till graduation as I had the Caddy in superb condition (I re-gasketed the engine, new exhaust, brake lines, tires, etc.). It was a matter of trust when I decided on the Caddy. And it still is. My Caddy isn't worth anything. If I sell it, the money I get from that will likely only buy me some mid-90's high mileaged econ car that won't be in as good mechanical condition as a Caddy, so it really doesn't make sense at this point.

But do I miss the fuel mileage and wish that Escort would have been trustworthy? Hell yes.

Otherwise, I plan on upgrading to a diesel powered car when I graduate next spring.

Jesda
11-06-10, 10:37 AM
"Do as I say, not as I do."

A truism of governing entities that transcends ideology.

Jesda
11-06-10, 11:05 AM
Wow...did you even read the post before responding?

I'm not defending CAFE, nor am I opposing it. I'm criticizing people who complain that their government makes the miserable for whatever reasons, CAFE or some other issue, then continue to fund and support it by living here and paying taxes. Hence the words "If you don't like it, get out".


That sounds like something Toby Keith would say at a concert.

Wind it back a few centuries: "If you don't like British colonial New England, go to Spanish Florida!" The solution, in that case, was to fix the problem rather than running away from it.

If you don't like something, you work to improve it. There is no binary "you either love all of it or you must leave". Its a vast land with all kinds of people, beliefs, and ways of thinking, so you do your part as a citizen to be informed, share what you know, open your mind, and participate in the process.

At the risk of sounding like a bonehead cable news commentator: Fatalism is inherently un-American.

drewsdeville
11-06-10, 11:15 AM
Come to think of it, usually the people who bitch about CAFE are the LAST people interested in and willing to "work to improve" our situation. Too much self centered thought processes. Most of those people really could care less about whats going on outside of their own world and rarely realize that in order to make improvements and advance, sacrifices have to be made. This is true for everyone, in all aspects of life. You can't expect something for nothing.

Those that aren't interested in this country's improvement or advancement don't belong here, period. It's not good for the citizens that care and it's not good for the "victim" either.

I agree, to a point, running away isn't always the answer. If you are miserable, you can't just complain about the government until they help you out. In the end, you are responsible for own well being, NOT your government. No matter how much you hate it, how much you bitch and whine, the government isn't going to come knocking on your door with an excuse pass for CAFE and any other legislation you might not care for that's stopping you from living a happy life.



People who realize this successfully immigrate/emigrate.

The government isn't directly responsible for taking control of your life and keeping you happy. Only you can do that. You gotta do what you gotta do.

Certain complaints about the government really confuse me sometimes. On one hand, with the complaints and requests, it seems like some really want the government to babysit them and hold their hand. But when it actually happens, they get all pissed off.

I guess, you just can't please some people.

Jesda
11-06-10, 11:41 AM
Lets rewind:


I'm criticizing people who complain that their government makes the miserable for whatever reasons, CAFE or some other issue, then continue to fund and support it by living here and paying taxes.

Your primary complaint is with people who disagree with federal policy. However, if you pay for a government's existence, you are entitled to criticize and correct it. As human beings with transportation, we're all free to leave, but that level of pessimism and fatalism results in failure.

drewsdeville
11-06-10, 11:53 AM
Lets rewind:


However, if you pay for a government's existence, you are entitled to criticize and correct it..

AND correct it! Yes, well done.

Rarely is that the case. Everyone can complain, that's easy. At what point are you actually being a contributing citizen and actually working to improve? Many, like some of the CAFE whiners, feel that complaining is enough, their sole civic duty.

Disgusting.

Without working to improve, the country's situation is not in your best interests, and you don't belong here.

Either way, I don't have any sympathy for those who consider themselves victims to our government and CAFE. We are all in this together, no one is a victim. Do what you can to help the cause and deal with it.

Stingroo
11-06-10, 11:59 AM
That's what we're doing though. Offering up our criticisms, and (I would hope, anyway) voting in a way that would lead to them being heard and acknowledged. So really the whole argument is a moot point

As for me: I'm not leaving the U.S. anytime soon, but I have no plans on being forced into some econobox because I'm "told" to by some new law. I'd rather buy used for the rest of my life and get what I want. It isn't selfish, it's consumerism. You buy what you want because you want it, not because you're told to. And what doesn't get bought ceases to exist.

bill57
11-06-10, 12:10 PM
"The CAFE system would have changed with the introduction of "Footprint" regulations for light trucks binding in 2011, but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals returned that rule for reconsideration for, among other things, being "arbitrary and capricious".[2] The most recent revision of CAFE that passed in 2007 no longer exempts light trucks classified as SUVs or passenger vans, unless they exceed 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) GVWR; it applies to pickup trucks and cargo vans up to 8,500 lb (3,900 kg) as was the case for SUVs. In 1999, over half a million vehicles exceeded the GVWR and so the CAFE standard did not apply.[3] In 2011, the standard will change to include many larger vehicles.[4] The US and Canada have the weakest standards in terms of fleet-average fuel economy rating among first world nations, e.g. 25 mpg in the US, versus 45 mpg in the European Union and higher in Japan (2008).[5] However, the US and Canada have the toughest emissions requirements (in terms of parts per million of pollutants). Some higher-mileage vehicles in Europe would not meet US (and California) emissions standards".

bill57
11-06-10, 12:16 PM
"We are all in this together".
Socialist mindset.

hueterm
11-06-10, 12:49 PM
Yeah, just like "It takes a village..." I don't have time to respond to Drew's "tool"box right now, but look forward to it...

gdwriter
11-06-10, 06:32 PM
:food-snacking:

hueterm
11-06-10, 06:34 PM
:food-snacking:
You can do better than that...

gdwriter
11-06-10, 06:42 PM
I don't have a dog in this hunt. But it's fun to watch.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-06-10, 06:42 PM
This CAFE thing doesn't affect me because I'll never buy new. I don't like the way most new cars look and I don't wanna pay those ridiculous prices, so used/old for me.

RippyPartsDept
11-06-10, 06:43 PM
You can do better than that...
:postpics:

how about that?

hueterm
11-06-10, 09:01 PM
There are so many starting points here...

Neither Drew, nor the Ecocult movement in general, is going to sway my decision on what kind of vehicle I want to buy. We have plenty of oil to drill and/or buy, if the enviros would just go F themselves instead of taking up valuable court time with frivolous lawsuits. While I'm for cutting down on air, water, and ground pollution (which we've made huge strides in -- visit China lately?), global warming is the biggest shakedown hoax to have ever been propagated on the planet.

I like big, powerful vehicles with the satisfying exhaust note of a V8. I have six such vehicles, and will continue to buy them. At the same time, if someone wants a smaller, more economical car, then go knock yourself out. I'm not interested in telling someone what to buy -- but I'm not going to back down from some pompous nannytool who is rabid on doing that very thing to me. If you think that's selfish, go right ahead, I call it freedom of choice.

CAFE, just like state run health care, and most of the excessive regulation we have now is nannystate run amok. "Leaving" because I don't like it is the most idiotic thing I've ever seen posted on this forum. I'm not going anywhere. On the contrary, you push back everywhere possible -- with your speech, your wallet, your political contributions, and your vote.

Oh, and I'll be sure to send you a fine cheese assortment with your whine...there are plenty of POS economy cars out there you can drive instead of your 4.9L V8 powered Cadillac. Since you've done so much to yours, you should be able to unload yours for enough to buy an 80s Civic, or Corolla, or something. Don't want to use too much gas now...

What fail...

RippyPartsDept
11-07-10, 12:39 AM
to me it seems the question behind Sal's original thread title is something like this:
so ultimately why was the Ultra V8 project cancelled?

which then leads me to two possibilities (as i see it, maybe you've got other theories)
was it regulatory concerns? (CAFE etc)
or was it a market calculation based on economics?

and now i'm left thinking
are the two possibilities intertwined?
wouldn't economic (profit driven) decisions and calculations be dependent upon the regulatory environment?

DAMNIT, I want the truth about the Ultra!

hueterm
11-07-10, 12:47 AM
Well, its called Government Motors for a reason...

Stingroo
11-07-10, 12:49 AM
I'll be so glad when the IPO is made, the US Gov't sells all of their stock off, and makes profit, and I never have to hear that term again.

hueterm
11-07-10, 01:06 AM
It's a stigma that will last a long time....

Jesda
11-07-10, 08:53 AM
I was hoping Cadillac would offer the 3.6-based V12 as a specialty performance motor in the new DTS replacement.

bill57
11-07-10, 01:44 PM
to me it seems the question behind Sal's original thread title is something like this:
so ultimately why was the Ultra V8 project cancelled?

which then leads me to two possibilities (as i see it, maybe you've got other theories)
was it regulatory concerns? (CAFE etc)
or was it a market calculation based on economics?

and now i'm left thinking
are the two possibilities intertwined?
wouldn't economic (profit driven) decisions and calculations be dependent upon the regulatory environment?

DAMNIT, I want the truth about the Ultra!

If "regulatory concerns" are in the discussion, then political policy arguments (circular or not) will, inevitably, be included.

RippyPartsDept
11-07-10, 02:18 PM
well lets see if we can make them linear or at least tangental... and not circular... that stuff gets to me and i end up feeling like Ouroboros
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/7679/ouroboros.jpg
it gets boring

Lord Cadillac
11-07-10, 02:20 PM
I do realize that this happens and it happens to me as well from time to time. I do my best to try and squash it as I see it. What does happen from time to time is we get one member who constantly rags on Cadillac and/or a specific model and gets on everybody's nerves. That leaves a bad taste in people's mouths and then the next person who comes along, doesn't see that old discussion and starts a new one - gets "it" from the membership.

In any event, if you get hammered for criticizing Cadillac, let me know. I'll look into it and see what's going on. At the same time, if somebody comes here just to troll and badmouth Cadillac at every whim, I'll take care of that as well..


"Discussion. I want LOTS of discussion about Cadillac. I want to hear what people like and what people don't like. However, I prefer to hear what people don't like because that's what going to call for change at Cadillac. And that's what's going to get people talking".

Every time I see a post that is critical of Cadillac, two or three loyalists, including members who are employees of Cadillac in some capacity, pounce on the original poster. It's "love it or leave it" on this forum. A great place to find information, and a wealth of knowledge about Cadillac automobiles, but pity the poster who simply complains about something he finds unacceptable about his Cadillac. Notice my few number of posts compared to when I joined this forum. I came to read and learn, and found that if you express something negative about your Cadillac experience, you are an outcast.

I

Jesda
11-07-10, 02:23 PM
well lets see if we can make them linear or at least tangental... and not circular... that stuff gets to me and i end up feeling like Ouroboros
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/7679/ouroboros.jpg
it gets boring

Its good, but I prefer Opera or Chrome.


WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/04/the-ohc-v12-that-cadillac-almost-built/

RippyPartsDept
11-07-10, 05:47 PM
Its good, but I prefer Opera or Chrome.


WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/04/the-ohc-v12-that-cadillac-almost-built/

Thx for the link. I also prefer chrome.

Lord Cadillac
11-13-10, 05:42 PM
In another year or so, the only V8 car left at Cadillac will be the CTS-V. And how many of those sell every year?

How difficult is it to offer a V8 as an option for Cadillac vehicles? I feel this would help retain the current customers who prefer V8s in their luxury cars. If GM needs to offset CAFE fines to sell these vehicles, than so be it. People who want a V8 will pay the price. Either that or they'll go somewhere else and pay it. A world class V8 would be great, but I think a properly tuned LSx would work fine for the time being - especially considering GM is working on something new that could probably go into the next generation of Cadillac vehicles.

The XLR is gone. The STS no longer has a V8 and is technically being replaced by the 3.6 DI CTS. The DTS loses its V8 after this year and is being replaced by the 3.6 DI XTS. In this case, the V6 has a little more horsepower than the outgoing Northstar in the current DTS - but not as much torque. Even if all things were equal, the DTS power-wise was, by far, the weakest in it's segment. If anything, it should have had a significant increase in power.

I don't know about anyone else but this worries me.. Buick has been doing a good job of moving up market lately. What significant difference is there going to be between Buick and Cadillac?

Jesda
11-13-10, 05:52 PM
I'm not "worried" as I, other than being a taxpayer, own no shares of GM. You guys take this too seriously.

I am "annoyed" that I can't get the car I really want from my favorite brand.

drewsdeville
11-13-10, 05:52 PM
In this case, the V6 has a little more horsepower than the outgoing Northstar in the current DTS - but not as much torque.

Less torque, yes. However, I think the new 6 speed transmissions GM is using will easily offset the torque difference and performance from the V6 will be equal, if not better than the Northstar. Since it's debut, the Northstar has been mated to the same 4T80 slushbox (in comparison to the newer 6TXX series).

Lord Cadillac
11-13-10, 05:57 PM
I'm not "worried" as I, other than being a taxpayer, own no shares of GM. You guys take this too seriously.

I am "annoyed" that I can't get the car I really want from my favorite brand.

I don't lose sleep over it or anything. I'm simply "annoyed" as well. And I have nothing else to talk about right now...


Less torque, yes. However, I think the new 6 speed transmissions GM is using will easily offset the torque difference and performance from the V6 will be equal, if not better than the Northstar. Since it's debut, the Northstar has been mated to the same 4T80 slushbox (in comparison to the newer 6TXX series).

The performance of the V6 vs V8 will probably be very, very similar. Still, while everyone else in the segment has a V8 that's getting stronger and stronger while using less and less gas, I don't see how it's acceptable for the new GM to simply maintain.. I know that GM is low on cash but at the same time, they're not doing themselves any favors by standing still in a fast-moving market.

Playdrv4me
11-14-10, 12:05 AM
I'm not "worried" as I, other than being a taxpayer, own no shares of GM. You guys take this too seriously.

I am "annoyed" that I can't get the car I really want from my favorite brand.

Well... This IS a CADILLAC forum, and as far as it relates TO Cadillac, I'd say that the loss of a bread and butter V8 probably is something that needs to be near the top of any Cadillac enthusiast's concerns. It's a pretty serious problem.

Jesda
11-14-10, 12:17 AM
It's a pretty serious problem.

List of problems:
1. Oh snap, just went bankrupt
2. Just lost a half dozen brands
3. Just lost hundreds of dealers
4. The public hates the parent company
5. The public is in a trendy "Green" phase, sudden need to build the Volt for PR reasons
-------
20. RWD V8 car for Cadillac is still missing, as it has been since the Clinton era.



I care, but I don't hold it against GM for not making it a priority.

Playdrv4me
11-14-10, 12:27 AM
Well see, if they had built a proper RWD V8 Caddy the other problems wouldn't have happened. Yep, I'm right.

Jesda
11-14-10, 12:29 AM
http://alanwoo.ca/files/gimgs/8_rebild-okay.png

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-14-10, 09:40 AM
The Brougham saves all. (Probably because you can fit all of the world's problems in the trunk)

77CDV
11-15-10, 12:04 AM
^In Brougham we trust?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-15-10, 12:06 AM
^In Brougham we trust?

Says my friend with the '99 STS and '96 Fleetwood Brougham.

77CDV
11-15-10, 12:08 AM
Which friend is that?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-15-10, 12:11 AM
Ryan (Brougham96). White diamond '99 STS, 100020 miles. He bought it a few months ago from a Cadillac dealer for like $5500 or something, he got a good deal on it, and it was a one owner that was always serviced there. He's been having a lot of issues with it recently, with the alternator, battery and now it won't start. His Brougham however has been a trouble free car that's currently parked in storage, awaiting spring.

drewsdeville
11-15-10, 12:15 AM
An 11 year old car with 100k+ on it for $5500?

I really don't want to sound like a total dick here, but I really wouldn't consider that a "good deal"...no matter how many previous owners.

It's unfortunate that he's having so many issues so soon though.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-15-10, 12:22 AM
KBB on that sucker, with 92k miles on it, in "excellent condition" is $7695. So yeah, he got a good deal.

drewsdeville
11-15-10, 12:24 AM
Blue book can be a useful gauge in certain instances, but it's not really something to rely on. Rarely does blue book actually reflect street value that you can actually pick a car up for.

Jesda
11-15-10, 12:27 AM
1999 was a particularly bad year for the fifth-gen Seville. I think it was also that generation's best selling year, so theres a whole bunch of them on used lots.

drewsdeville
11-15-10, 12:32 AM
I don't know, I'm pretty confident that with a little bit of effort, I could find a pretty nice sub-100k mile '99 Seville for less than $5500. The actual street value on those cars really isn't all that high right now, for whatever reasons. Perhaps for the reasons Jesda gave.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-15-10, 12:32 AM
I like the car overall, but I much prefer his Fleetwood Brougham. He's had a lot of issues with it recently and he's paranoid about his headgaskets. He has no idea if they're original and he's thinking about dumping the car before it becomes an issue. It's his winter "beater" so his FWB stays high and dry.

Playdrv4me
11-15-10, 03:40 AM
I like the car overall, but I much prefer his Fleetwood Brougham. He's had a lot of issues with it recently and he's paranoid about his headgaskets. He has no idea if they're original and he's thinking about dumping the car before it becomes an issue. It's his winter "beater" so his FWB stays high and dry.

I'd have to agree, $5500.00 is a lot of money for a 1999. I am one of those people though, that for whatever reason actually likes to purchase my cars from dealers of the brand, and ESPECIALLY when there is provenance regarding an original owner it was sold to at that same dealership etc. etc. So that adds a little value for me. Still, 5500.00 would easily buy you a 2001, 2002 or even a 2003 (with some luck) southern car with as little as 70-90k on it. It seems like the best deals on those cars always involve the willingness to travel and go get them though.

The reason I bring that up is that he's kind of between a rock and a hard place from my perspective. If he is truly paranoid about H/Gs, then 1999 was NOT the year he should have purchased as '98 and '99 tend to be above average on that. In fact, I think Sub has actually posted some factual reasons why that is, but I can't remember. The problem is if he tries to sell it now I have high doubts he will be able to recover all of that value, plus whatever else he has put into it. In that sense, it is probably best for him to stick with it and just plan a budget accordingly to take it up to Jake or a participating repair shop that uses Jake's method. You guys are so far north that towing a car to him wouldn't even be all that expensive. There are certainly far worse things in life than "suffering" with what is arguably one of the best Cadillacs ever produced.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-15-10, 09:21 AM
$5500 for an '02 STS?? Wow did those things drop in value as of recent!

gdwriter
11-15-10, 04:25 PM
When I bought my Seville in February '09, Edmunds TMV was $7,208 and NADA was $7,750. Thanks to Tony, I had the car's warranty history, which wasn't perfect, but wasn't horrible either (and most were problems common to these cars). Tony also sent me the AutoCheck report, and based on registration info, I'm likely the third owner. It was originally sold in Portland and registered in Washington and on a three-year lease. Based on where it was registered in Oregon in 2004, it was likely sold to its second owner at the same dealership that sold it to me.

That it was being sold at a Cadillac dealer and had been given a thorough mechanical and cosmetic prep was worth something to me. Mileage was 72,000, below average for an '01, it was spotless inside and out, and there were no issues mechanically nor with any accessories. The salesman was generous enough to let me take it on a 20-mile test drive, and the temperature gauge never budged past top dead center, which has been the case throughout my ownership. And I specifically looked for an '00 or newer because of revisions Cadillac had made to reduce the likelihood of head gasket failure (though not eliminating the problem entirely) and allowing it to run on regular gas. They were asking $7,900 and I ended buying it for $7,750 (which was the same as the NADA value). So while I didn't get much off the price, I also don't believe I overpaid given the condition of the car. And in 30,000 miles, the only thing I've had done beyond routine maintenance was replacing the crank sensors, which is a common problem with Northstars.

Playdrv4me
11-15-10, 05:44 PM
When I bought my Seville in February '09, Edmunds TMV was $7,208 and NADA was $7,750. Thanks to Tony, I had the car's warranty history, which wasn't perfect, but wasn't horrible either (and most were problems common to these cars). Tony also sent me the AutoCheck report, and based on registration info, I'm likely the third owner. It was originally sold in Portland and registered in Washington and on a three-year lease. Based on where it was registered in Oregon in 2004, it was likely sold to its second owner at the same dealership that sold it to me.

That it was being sold at a Cadillac dealer and had been given a thorough mechanical and cosmetic prep was worth something to me. Mileage was 72,000, below average for an '01, it was spotless inside and out, and there were no issues mechanically nor with any accessories. The salesman was generous enough to let me take it on a 20-mile test drive, and the temperature gauge never budged past top dead center, which has been the case throughout my ownership. And I specifically looked for an '00 or newer because of revisions Cadillac had made to reduce the likelihood of head gasket failure (though not eliminating the problem entirely) and allowing it to run on regular gas. They were asking $7,900 and I ended buying it for $7,750 (which was the same as the NADA value). So while I didn't get much off the price, I also don't believe I overpaid given the condition of the car. And in 30,000 miles, the only thing I've had done beyond routine maintenance was replacing the crank sensors, which is a common problem with Northstars.

Yea, 7750 for a 2001 in early 2009, purchased meticulous from a Caddy dealer was certainly not a deal I'd complain about.

Chad, about 2 or 3 months ago I came VERY VERY close to purchasing a BEAUTIFUL cobalt blue 2002 STS with 113k from a GM (though not Cadillac) dealer for 5100.00 out the door.

Jesda
11-15-10, 05:49 PM
The older a car gets, the more variation there is in resale value. You have the one-owner creampuffs at the top end and neglected heaps at the other. A decade is long enough for wide variations to appear. And if you limit your search to your town or region, you usually get what you can get.

I'm willing to go across the country, but I've encountered both excellent deals and terribly abused piles of junk, and on top of that you have travel and dog sitting costs. So, paying what seems like a lot for a local car might not actually be as bad as it seems. If its in line with the rest of the local market, you can resell it for not too much of a loss.

gdwriter
11-15-10, 06:27 PM
The older a car gets, the more variation there is in resale value. You have the one-owner creampuffs at the top end and neglected heaps at the other. A decade is long enough for wide variations to appear. And if you limit your search to your town or region, you usually get what you can get.

I'm willing to go across the country, but I've encountered both excellent deals and terribly abused piles of junk, and on top of that you have travel and dog sitting costs. So, paying what seems like a lot for a local car might not actually be as bad as it seems. If its in line with the rest of the local market, you can resell it for not too much of a loss.Exactly. With my work schedule, I can't travel all over the country to buy a car (and I'd rather use my vacation time for other trips). I'd be willing to go to Seattle, and maybe even as far as San Francisco if the car were exceptional.

What started me on buying my Seville was a periodic review of Craigslist looking for late model Cadillacs. I found a Blue Onyx '02 Seville in Portland for ~$6,000, but when Tony ran the warranty history, that car had 34 warranty claims, which made me wary. So I went to Auto Trader looking for '00-'04 Sevilles and found two '01s, one at a Toyota dealer in Vancouver, WA (just across the Columbia River from Portland) and the one in McMinnville, OR that I ended up buying. Tony ran the warranty history on both, which were much better than that '02.

The one in Vancouver had 80,000 miles, was priced $1,000 higher and didn't look as clean in the pictures. So I went to McMinnville first, and the car was in such fine condition that I didn't even bother with the one in Vancouver. This all happened in less than a week, with a trip to the Chicago Auto Show in the middle.

Stingroo
11-15-10, 06:33 PM
lol I bought my car basically sight unseen. There was one photo on the Craigslist ad, and all I could discern from it was that it was red and silver, and it had the wire hubcaps. I found it on autotrader, and found out it had a red interior and had the Alpine radio in it. Dad went and looked at it, took pics of the two small rust spots and gave me an over-the-phone review, and photos of the interior. It sounded good, I said yes. I could never go cross-country for a car, I think that's craziness. (But I love Jesda's threads :p )

Aron9000
11-16-10, 12:30 AM
I don't mind traveling halfway across the country for something unique.

How often do you find a NICE 1991 Brougham D'Elegance with EVERY SINGLE factory option in a killer color combo? Flew into Chicago to buy that one.

The Camaro rag top was another one of those deals. Hardly any v8/manual trans/convertibles were made, and this was two adult owners who really pampered the car. I also loved the white paint/black top/dark interior color combo. It wasn't ragged out like all of the other manual v8 fbodies out there. Flew into Connecticut and drove it home.

That being said, I do have my limits. I won't go out west for a car, too much driving. I did both of those excursions in two days, hell that Chicago trip I walked around downtown for 7 hours just to see the city.

Playdrv4me
11-16-10, 01:39 AM
I don't mind traveling halfway across the country for something unique.

How often do you find a NICE 1991 Brougham D'Elegance with EVERY SINGLE factory option in a killer color combo? Flew into Chicago to buy that one.

The Camaro rag top was another one of those deals. Hardly any v8/manual trans/convertibles were made, and this was two adult owners who really pampered the car. I also loved the white paint/black top/dark interior color combo. It wasn't ragged out like all of the other manual v8 fbodies out there. Flew into Connecticut and drove it home.

That being said, I do have my limits. I won't go out west for a car, too much driving. I did both of those excursions in two days, hell that Chicago trip I walked around downtown for 7 hours just to see the city.

It's worth going west (if you can fit it into your budget) just to see what is easily the most beautiful part of this country. Not to mention it's a lot easier to avoid the tinworm in Arizona than Connecticut!

ryannel2003
11-16-10, 02:32 AM
Ryan (Brougham96). White diamond '99 STS, 100020 miles. He bought it a few months ago from a Cadillac dealer for like $5500 or something, he got a good deal on it, and it was a one owner that was always serviced there. He's been having a lot of issues with it recently, with the alternator, battery and now it won't start. His Brougham however has been a trouble free car that's currently parked in storage, awaiting spring.

Sounds like a typical day with a Seville to me. Hope the car doesn't give him any more trouble. To be honest, it's worth it in the end. You won't find a better deal on any car... at least not for the money.

By the way... I tried selling my STS a few months ago for $5550 and nobody wanted it. It did need brakes but other than that it was a great car. These cars really aren't worth anything and I decided to keep mine rather than dump it for that reason. Plus, my motor had the headgaskets done before I bought it so I don't worry about that happening.

bill57
11-16-10, 06:51 PM
Used car prices are different in different markets, in spite of the computer making the world smaller. This was recently posted. The seller will probably come down no more than a few hundred dollars, and the car WILL sell in this market.
http://cleveland.craigslist.org/ctd/2056275264.html

Playdrv4me
11-17-10, 11:26 AM
Used car prices are different in different markets, in spite of the computer making the world smaller. This was recently posted. The seller will probably come down no more than a few hundred dollars, and the car WILL sell in this market.
http://cleveland.craigslist.org/ctd/2056275264.html

Yikes.

ryannel2003
11-17-10, 03:21 PM
Well now I know where I won't be buying a Seville in the near future.

RippyPartsDept
11-17-10, 05:08 PM
2000 Cadillac Seville SLS (CLEAN) Make an Offer - $2995 (http://wilmington.craigslist.org/ctd/2065571204.html)
1997 Cadillac Seville STS (LOADED) Make an Offer - $2500 (http://wilmington.craigslist.org/ctd/2065575286.html)

then...

1991 Mustang GT 5.0 - $5000 (http://wilmington.craigslist.org/cto/2065634082.html)

I'm no mustang expert, but that seems a bit high for such a crappy car (sure the interior is nice, but it's still 20 yrs old!)

drewsdeville
11-17-10, 05:15 PM
Apparently people in Ohio live in a vacuum, separate from the rest of the country :bonkers: I'm gonna guess that there's no way in hell most of us in different locations would be willing to shell out $6500 for an 11-12 year old Seville!

Stingroo
11-17-10, 05:19 PM
Apparently people in Ohio live in a vacuum, separate from the rest of the country :bonkers: I'm gonna guess that there's no way in hell most of us in different locations would be willing to shell out $6500 for an 11-12 year old Seville!

Yeah that's a crazy price by Floridian standards too.

gdwriter
11-17-10, 06:05 PM
OK, I'll play, too. Here are a few in my area (looks like prices are a good deal higher here, but you don't have to worry about rust):

2000 Seville STS: $5,995 (http://corvallis.craigslist.org/ctd/2042051316.html) Yo, Jesda! Isn't this the color you wanted?
2004 Seville SLS: $7,900 (http://salem.craigslist.org/ctd/2061164949.html)
1999 Seville STS: $6,999 (http://salem.craigslist.org/ctd/2049074140.html)
2000 Seville STS: $5,995 (http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/ctd/2065639561.html) Only 80,000 miles
1999 Seville STS: $5,000 (http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/ctd/2063847176.html)
2001 Seville STS: $4,995 (http://portland.craigslist.org/clc/ctd/2056773637.html)
2003 Seville STS: $5,995 (http://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/ctd/2058641877.html) Wouldn't this have MagneRide?

Jesda, if Ian still wants to buy your Seville and you're interested in any of these, I'd be happy to inspect it for you, plus provide pickup service at PDX (and I have a sleeper sofa).

hueterm
11-17-10, 06:11 PM
Why do these fools never put mileage on their ads....and yes, Gary -- the '03 does have Mag...

gdwriter
11-17-10, 06:18 PM
Most of them were in the 100,000 mile range if it was put in the ad or you could see the odometer in one of the pictures.

Jesda
11-18-10, 12:08 AM
OK, I'll play, too. Here are a few in my area (looks like prices are a good deal higher here, but you don't have to worry about rust):

2000 Seville STS: $5,995 (http://corvallis.craigslist.org/ctd/2042051316.html) Yo, Jesda! Isn't this the color you wanted?


*drool*

I'm holding on to this one though. The deal with Ian means I'd have to wait 6 months for my money, and going without a Cadillac for that long is a bit torturous.

gdwriter
11-18-10, 12:20 AM
I agree. But if there comes a time when/if you find something you like in the Pacific Northwest — Cadillac or not — my offer stands.

Playdrv4me
11-18-10, 03:00 AM
I may as well just add "2001 STS" to my vehicle line. I mean, it's going to happen.

Jesda
11-18-10, 03:04 AM
I may as well just add "2001 STS" to my vehicle line. I mean, it's going to happen.

If you want to buy a Cadillac, check in when your moneys become available.

Playdrv4me
11-18-10, 03:06 AM
Shhh shh shh

Jesda
11-18-10, 03:13 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5d5jxJ5vbM

bill57
11-18-10, 07:48 PM
A few more bargains from the Cleveland, Ohio market:

http://cleveland.craigslist.org/cto/2066364510.html

http://cleveland.craigslist.org/ctd/2000177594.html

BTW, We are in an economic recession here.

hueterm
11-18-10, 09:23 PM
I kind of like the '76.

That 2000 is highway robbery.....

drewsdeville
11-18-10, 10:23 PM
Good lord...

Apparently, it would have been worth the time and effort to drive my '95 to Ohio and sell it there rather than here in Milwaukee.

Jesda
11-18-10, 10:45 PM
Good lord...

Apparently, it would have been worth the time and effort to drive my '95 to Ohio and sell it there rather than here in Milwaukee.

I've considered doing that too. Find a friend in a market with higher resale, leave it with them, offer $100 if they sell it for a minimum price.