: Holy BUSINESS! the modern DTS can PULL!



Lupin
12-05-10, 10:10 PM
I was driving towards the interstate today and a current (2008+) DTS blasted by me going like 70 onto the onramp, which was a pretty steep and sharp curve, and he did it with no difficulty at all, driving his DTS as if it were my car (CTS-V). So as we get on the interstate I pulled up next to him to give him a thumbs up, and he shoots me this look, and hauls off! I'm talking like 120+ and QUICK! So I start to follow from a distance, and he was maneuvering like a sports car.

Unfortunately... he didn't see the cop which he blasted by going 120 on his right hand side. Cop hauled after him and took him down. That's jail time here, lol.

The point is I didn't know the modern DTS had such large testicles. I think it would have been able to give my old V6 CTS a serious run for its money. I'd heard from 77CDV on here of some pretty badass business pulled by modern DTS owners, but the performance exhibited by this example was definitely exemplary.

Ranger
12-05-10, 10:13 PM
Unfortunately... he didn't see the cop which he blasted by going 120 on his right hand side. Cop hauled after him and took him down. That's jail time here, lol.
:histeric:
PRICELESS!

Lord Cadillac
12-05-10, 10:15 PM
The DTS has pretty good power up top but really nothing crazy compared to the rest of the competition in the full-size luxury sedan segment. I had a 2000 DeVille DTS and even IT had some pretty nice pickup once it got moving... The Northstar is a pretty strong engine.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-05-10, 10:16 PM
Well if you wanna play with fire, you're gonna get burned.

Playdrv4me
12-05-10, 10:28 PM
There's not a big aftermarket for those things so I suppose that was a stock motor also. My '01 STS is only 25 or so hp short of a current DTS though and it doesn't really feel as fast as I remember.

hueterm
12-05-10, 10:34 PM
Your STS is 300HP...a current DTS Performance tops out at 292.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-05-10, 10:38 PM
292 = 300. The way they rated it just changed. Besides, you're not gonna feel 8hp, especially in a four thousand pound DTS.

Playdrv4me
12-05-10, 10:40 PM
WTF?! 292? I would have thought for SURE the DTS had the 325hp powerplant from XLR by now, if not similar enhancements to the FWD version. What fail! Damn you Cadillac and your "wither on the vine" mentality.

Lord Cadillac
12-05-10, 10:56 PM
And people around here think I'm crazy for being frustrated...


WTF?! 292? I would have thought for SURE the DTS had the 325hp powerplant from XLR by now, if not similar enhancements to the FWD version. What fail! Damn you Cadillac and your "wither on the vine" mentality.

hueterm
12-05-10, 11:00 PM
No, the FWD never got the upgrade....only the RWD went up to 325...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-05-10, 11:01 PM
What did the upgrade consist of? Was it maybe not applicable to the FWD Northstar because of engine bay restrictions?

Playdrv4me
12-05-10, 11:02 PM
And people around here think I'm crazy for being frustrated...

Well it's certainly understandable. And while it is true that the DTS is being "wound down" for its eventual exit, I can't imagine the engineers couldn't have found a way to squeeze just a little more juice out for its last few years. Technically Chad is absolutely correct, 8hp doesn't do a damn thing, BUT on paper to shoppers that's a psychological difference of a car with "300+ hp" versus a car with hp "in the 2s".

Playdrv4me
12-05-10, 11:06 PM
What did the upgrade consist of? Was it maybe not applicable to the FWD Northstar because of engine bay restrictions?

Essentially my understanding is that the RWD N* is some 80 percent internally different from its FWD sibling. Still, I figured those changes had more to do with repackaging for the RWD application and improvements to the extremely fragile cooling system on the FWD version. I think with a little work a few more ponies could have been found in the FWD product without serious detriment to the suspension and drive components. I mean even 10, 20hp... SOMETHING.

gdwriter
12-06-10, 12:56 AM
Back to the original topic, I pulled onto an on ramp yesterday and let the Northstar do its thing. I know there are more powerful engines out there, many with fewer cylinders, but I don't care. I love how my 275-hp Seville responds so willingly to my right foot.

Jesda
12-06-10, 01:22 AM
When the Northstar came out it was way ahead of its competition. In 1993 Infiniti's VH45 was at 278hp, Lexus was at 250hp, and the BMW 540i was 282hp. You had to step up to the 305hp M5 to outdo the Northstar.

Of course, the Seville and Deville got heavier and slower as more features and options were added, but the 300HP transverse Northstar had a competitive amount of power for over a decade. Plus, it sounds great. The 2007 DTS I drove was a 275hp version. Hauled butt on the highway.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1McizZTla8


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKKp-k-l4HQ

The exhaust and intake in the DTS sound louder and more aggressive than the Seville, and that was a base model rental car.

Aron9000
12-06-10, 01:31 AM
Yeah, the Northstar really sings on the highway. I've driven a 1995 STS, power was decent down low below 60mph, but man that thing would flat out haul from 60-120, when I ran out of nerve. And it sounds great, I think that those mid 90's Sevilles had a louder exhaust than the later Caddys.

Playdrv4me
12-06-10, 01:40 AM
Realistically I'd say the N* had maybe a 4 year head start as the Mark VIII caught up to it by 1997 and the LS400 by 1998. Those cars split the difference between the 275 and 300hp versions of the N* at 290hp with basically the same performance on the pavement. The Ford's mod motor also had a lot left to give in the aftermarket, while the N* had seemingly hit a brick wall. By 2000 the M5 had moved on the 400hp range, and now there are numerous V6s eating the N*s lunch.

As we've discussed ad nauseam here before though, a powerful V6 is not a worthy replacement for a V8, and it would have been nice to see the DTS get a little bump before it went out and took the N* to the grave along with it.

Jesda
12-06-10, 01:44 AM
If the DTS was a Chrysler, they'd turbo charge it and offer a special performance version for its last year of production. GM's approach seems to be to suffocate a car and allow it to die slowly, miserably.

Stingroo
12-06-10, 07:29 AM
I don't think I've ever said this, but... Chrysler would have done it better.

:dies inside:

hueterm
12-06-10, 08:10 AM
Music....sweet music.... (to quote Mick and David...)

ejguillot
12-06-10, 09:02 AM
Essentially my understanding is that the RWD N* is some 80 percent internally different from its FWD sibling. Still, I figured those changes had more to do with repackaging for the RWD application and improvements to the extremely fragile cooling system on the FWD version. I think with a little work a few more ponies could have been found in the FWD product without serious detriment to the suspension and drive components. I mean even 10, 20hp... SOMETHING.

Um, the internal changes went way beyond repackaging for the RWD application. Variable valve timing was just the most prominent of many alterations.

Rolex
12-06-10, 11:11 AM
The DTS needs moar LS7. :haulbutt:

I think the DTS is a great looking car though.

Stingroo
12-06-10, 11:13 AM
EVERYTHING needs moar LS7.

mhamilton
12-06-10, 11:27 AM
What did the upgrade consist of? Was it maybe not applicable to the FWD Northstar because of engine bay restrictions?

The RWD N* got variable cam timing, which would not fit (so I've heard) in the FWD package. Also more compression, and they got a 6 speed automatic.

I believe that more of the reasoning behind leaving the FWD with less power was because of driveability concerns with that much power to the front wheels.

Lord Cadillac
12-06-10, 12:49 PM
The DTS is a great looking car and I really don't see why GM/Cadillac has to bleed it to death. Why kill the nameplate? Why XTS? Why not DTS? The XTS isn't going to replace both the STS and DTS - not feature-wise nor sales-wise. The XTS isn't going to sell as many cars as the DTS and STS combined. They should just call the XTS DTS and continue with Cadillac's traditional name. We all know the DTS is a DeVille.. What's an XTS? I certainly believe DTS still has a good name - even though it's behind the times...

drewsdeville
12-06-10, 12:51 PM
The DTS is a great looking car and I really don't see why GM/Cadillac has to bleed it to death. Why kill the nameplate? Why XTS? Why not DTS? The XTS isn't going to replace both the STS and DTS - not feature-wise nor sales-wise. The XTS isn't going to sell as many cars as the DTS and STS combined. They should just call the XTS DTS and continue with Cadillac's traditional name. We all know the DTS is a DeVille.. What's an XTS? I certainly believe DTS still has a good name - even though it's behind the times...

I may be wrong, but outside of fleet and commercial sales, I'm pretty sure the STS and DTS are flopping hardcore right now. The cars aren't getting the job done and they need to be replaced, period. I'm sure it won't take much for the XTS to exceed their sales.

If most drivers don't even know their car's drive configuration, do you think that the significance of the nameplate is going to influence anyone? XTS or DTS, it doesn't matter. IF anything, the DTS portrays an undesirable image in the market. It sounds just like it is, a slug of a gramps and grams boat that really doesn't excel at anything at all.

Lord Cadillac
12-06-10, 12:59 PM
They're not selling for a few reasons. They're both long in the tooth. They're both underpowered. The STS is boring looking.. All they need is updating - not new names. If names were insignificant, wouldn't all automakers change their vehicle's names as frequently as Cadillac does?


I may be wrong, but outside of fleet and commercial sales, I'm pretty sure the STS and DTS are flopping hardcore right now. The cars aren't getting the job done and they need to be replaced, period. I'm sure it won't take much for the XTS to exceed their sales.

If most drivers don't even know their car's drive configuration, do you think that the significance of the nameplate is going to influence anyone? XTS or DTS, it doesn't matter. IF anything, the DTS portrays an undesirable image in the market. It sounds just like it is, a slug of a gramps and grams boat that really doesn't excel at anything at all.

drewsdeville
12-06-10, 01:04 PM
It matters for other manufacturers that have a solid background to work from. Cadillac hasn't been in the consumers good graces for the past 30 years, and any reference to those names really doesn't mean anything to them. That's what I think anyway. Cadillac NEEDS this overall post-bankruptcy freshening of the lineup. Updating simply isn't enough.

orconn
12-06-10, 01:39 PM
The DTS is a great looking car and I really don't see why GM/Cadillac has to bleed it to death. Why kill the nameplate? Why XTS? Why not DTS? The XTS isn't going to replace both the STS and DTS - not feature-wise nor sales-wise. The XTS isn't going to sell as many cars as the DTS and STS combined. They should just call the XTS DTS and continue with Cadillac's traditional name. We all know the DTS is a DeVille.. What's an XTS? I certainly believe DTS still has a good name - even though it's behind the times...

Isn't the real challenge for Cadillac marketers to come up with model designations that the general public can identify with specific cars? Of course this necessitates that Cadillac come up with cars that are such standouts in the first place that the public has them in their range of consciousness. It is of only secondary importance that we, as Cadillac aficionados, can identify a specific models correct name or designation. They could call it a XY!@R and we'd know what it is. Not so the general public, who, in the end, create demand for the cars.

77CDV
12-06-10, 02:41 PM
I've never been unhappy with either my DHS or current DTS. They were both smooth, quiet, comfortable cars that had plenty of power to get the job done. My only wish is that they had gone with RWD for the 2000 (or at least the 2006) refresh.

At the risk of attracting Drew's ire, I will maintain that you can't sell a product you don't advertise. When was the last time you saw a commercial for a DTS? Or an STS? GM is pensioning off these models. Fine. We'll see what happens with the XTS. I suspect they'll flog the hell out of it for a year or two, then leave it to languish for 4-5 years, then wonder why it isn't selling. That seems to be the ususal GM MO.

Playdrv4me
12-06-10, 02:41 PM
Variable valve timing was just the most prominent of many alterations.

Sure, if you're in the marketing department. However in practical terms it was no where near as significant as the structural and longevity improvements designed into the block and head. I saw the white paper on these internal modifications once and they basically redesigned or strengthened ALL of the areas that were a major weakness on the FWD version. Essentially, the RWD N*, VVTi or not, is what the FWD version should have been 17 years ago. To that end, I think there's still a little something more they could have given the DTS in 2006, at least for the Platinum version.

Playdrv4me
12-06-10, 03:05 PM
I believe that more of the reasoning behind leaving the FWD with less power was because of driveability concerns with that much power to the front wheels.

A valid concern (and I actually mentioned suspension and driveline effects in my post last night). However technology evolves, and Cadillac really stayed the course with FWD claiming it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. So the way I see it, if 300hp to the front wheels was doable in 1993, I have a hard time believing the effects of an extra 20 or 30 a decade later could not be mitigated.

gdwriter
12-06-10, 04:15 PM
I remember taking Jesda's Q45 for a brief spin at the Des Moines meet in 2007, and that engine really didn't wake up until you were north of 3,500 RPM. What's nice about the Northstar is it has plenty of torque off the line. Driving it like gramps, and you'll hardly hear the engine, but goose it, and it makes a lovely sound past 3,500 RPM and keeps pulling and pulling to extra-legal speeds.

That said, it's still a shame GM has allowed the DTS and the Northstar to wither on the vine. Other than making the switch to RWD, I think the STS was a step backwards from the previous generations of the Seville. When I bought mine, there was an '08 STS on the lot (at a substantial discount), and both inside and out, the Seville was a more handsome and luxurious car.

ben.gators
12-06-10, 06:01 PM
Well, I do 65-70MPH on steep ramps, and my STS has no problem with that and handles it pretty nice. I do love the sound of N*, which show itself when RPM passes 4K. In my daily trip to university, that steep ramp is one the few places that I can push the gas hard without increasing speed too much.

mhamilton
12-06-10, 06:36 PM
A valid concern (and I actually mentioned suspension and driveline effects in my post last night). However technology evolves, and Cadillac really stayed the course with FWD claiming it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. So the way I see it, if 300hp to the front wheels was doable in 1993, I have a hard time believing the effects of an extra 20 or 30 a decade later could not be mitigated.

Sorry I didn't see page 2 of this thread until after I hit submit.... anyway, I agree they probably could have done it, but I do recall reading some GM article where it was mentioned they didn't want to add power in the FWD application. Though I'd certainly believe it was for the same reason they never updated Eldorado, they knew it was going to be axed soon enough.

I'd really like one of the RWD VVT N* setups in an '08+ STS, but I'm not sure the rest of the car will be a good upgrade from my Eldo (was actually just asking over in the STS section). I love the look of the "bigger CTS," but the quality seems questionable, unfortunately.

Playdrv4me
12-06-10, 07:04 PM
Sorry I didn't see page 2 of this thread until after I hit submit.... anyway, I agree they probably could have done it, but I do recall reading some GM article where it was mentioned they didn't want to add power in the FWD application. Though I'd certainly believe it was for the same reason they never updated Eldorado, they knew it was going to be axed soon enough.

I'd really like one of the RWD VVT N* setups in an '08+ STS, but I'm not sure the rest of the car will be a good upgrade from my Eldo (was actually just asking over in the STS section). I love the look of the "bigger CTS," but the quality seems questionable, unfortunately.

I would not sweat the details on the newer STS. My concern would be less with overall reliability, and more with the fact that the materials and design is not likely to be on par with what you expect from your Eldo. The Eldo, along with its Seville brother from that time-frame, was far better built than either the Seville/STS that came after it.

That said, the car is a technological tour de force and a real bargain in that category of vehicle. You really have to get one loaded up to make the transition worth-while though.

And speaking of hauling ass, the BEST deal of ALL STS cars is the 2006-2008 STS-V. Today I was browsing around craigslist and came across a 2007 with 54k and Certified for something like 24k. You can BARELY get a 2003 E55 AMG for that much and the Merc is SURE to make your life a living hell in repairs without a warranty. I've seen 2006 STS-Vs for as little as 20 grand.

The-Dullahan
12-06-10, 07:38 PM
I heard this story on the phone already. Hooray, Me.

Yeah, I drove a DTS once and did some fairly evil things with it. can definitely get out of it's own way.

hueterm
12-06-10, 08:59 PM
It matters for other manufacturers that have a solid background to work from. Cadillac hasn't been in the consumers good graces for the past 30 years, and any reference to those names really doesn't mean anything to them. That's what I think anyway. Cadillac NEEDS this overall post-bankruptcy freshening of the lineup. Updating simply isn't enough.


OK, you've mentioned it in 2 places, so I've got to respond. Where is this "30 years" bias fantasy coming from? I might could spot you the last 5-7 years only for the following, but 30??? No way...:

1.) The age of the DTS platform, which is essentially unchanged since 1994. I'm sure turns off the more innovative buyer, but is looked for in the traditional buyer. Kind of a wash, but I'm sure the former outnumber the latter (even more each day, as the latter die off).

2.) The '05 STS redesign was a flop. If they had went right out of the box w/the '08 freshening, and then built on that after a few years, things might have been very different. Even w/the '08 freshening, it's still pretty boring. Also, there never should have been a V6 option. It cheapened the car -- especially prior to the new 3.6 DI. The V negates this, but as it's approaching super car status, its numbers are irrelevant.

3.) The XLR was too expensive, and not worth the price. It should have been in Corvette's price range, not SL500...seriously. They weren't flying them over on a 747 and still they didn't learn anything from Allante...

4.) The lack of an acceptable crossover up to now. The original SRX has some good qualities, but the station wagon look was a mistake (and I like wagons, but most people don't). They should have put out a Lambda at that platform's launch. I have no problem with the current SRX, it's just too small for my taste. A Lambda, I might consider, if it had a V8...

30 years ago, the Deville still had the 425....pre V864 and pre 4100. Even with those engines that made the N* look like a Honda Civic in terms of reliability, people bought Devilles/Fleetwoods and Eldorados in droves. And GM kept the semis full of replacement engines coming... Granted, the mid/late '80s were a downsize dead zone, but the '89 Deville/Fleetwood/Sixty and the '92 Seville/Eldo more than made up for that. (The Brougham/FWB kept right on trucking through it all...) The '94 Deville's styling was more on the boaty side, but the '97 and the '00 were well received and well sold. The '98 Seville's redesign was also timed right, but was ready for a refresh by '05.

Then there's a little thing called the CTS and a big thing called the Escalade. Those have been around for 8-10 years, and have sold like crazy ever since (well, maybe since the '02 'Lade...).

They've had their spells...but to say that consumers haven't looked favorably on Cadillac for 30 years, is blindness...

Lord Cadillac
12-06-10, 09:56 PM
OK, you've mentioned it in 2 places, so I've got to respond. Where is this "30 years" bias fantasy coming from? I might could spot you the last 5-7 years only for the following, but 30??? No way...:

1.) The age of the DTS platform, which is essentially unchanged since 1994. I'm sure turns off the more innovative buyer, but is looked for in the traditional buyer. Kind of a wash, but I'm sure the former outnumber the latter (even more each day, as the latter die off).

Agreed.


2.) The '05 STS redesign was a flop. If they had went right out of the box w/the '08 freshening, and then built on that after a few years, things might have been very different. Even w/the '08 freshening, it's still pretty boring. Also, there never should have been a V6 option. It cheapened the car -- especially prior to the new 3.6 DI. The V negates this, but as it's approaching super car status, its numbers are irrelevant.

Agreed.. I like the current STS but it's very boring to see on the road. More so to me than a Lexus GS - which is the next most bring mid-size luxury sedan.


3.) The XLR was too expensive, and not worth the price. It should have been in Corvette's price range, not SL500...seriously. They weren't flying them over on a 747 and still they didn't learn anything from Allante...

Agreed.


4.) The lack of an acceptable crossover up to now. The original SRX has some good qualities, but the station wagon look was a mistake (and I like wagons, but most people don't). They should have put out a Lambda at that platform's launch. I have no problem with the current SRX, it's just too small for my taste. A Lambda, I might consider, if it had a V8...

Agreed.. All they needed was to have the SRX look the way it does now with the drivetrain of the first generation and they'd have had the best selling Crossover SUV on the planet. Who'd have bought a Lexus RX?!


30 years ago, the Deville still had the 425....pre V864 and pre 4100. Even with those engines that made the N* look like a Honda Civic in terms of reliability, people bought Devilles/Fleetwoods and Eldorados in droves. And GM kept the semis full of replacement engines coming... Granted, the mid/late '80s were a downsize dead zone, but the '89 Deville/Fleetwood/Sixty and the '92 Seville/Eldo more than made up for that. (The Brougham/FWB kept right on trucking through it all...) The '94 Deville's styling was more on the boaty side, but the '97 and the '00 were well received and well sold. The '98 Seville's redesign was also timed right, but was ready for a refresh by '05.

Then there's a little thing called the CTS and a big thing called the Escalade. Those have been around for 8-10 years, and have sold like crazy ever since (well, maybe since the '02 'Lade...).

They've had their spells...but to say that consumers haven't looked favorably on Cadillac for 30 years, is blindness...

I definitely think the mid 90s were a good time for Cadillac.. To me, a white diamond ETC or STS is still a head turner...

hueterm
12-06-10, 10:12 PM
Crimson's not too shabby, either.... ;-)

Playdrv4me
12-06-10, 10:17 PM
Crimson pearl is gorgeous.

Jesda
12-06-10, 11:10 PM
I want a platinum in the rare shade of bright blue with bronze flakes.

ryannel2003
12-07-10, 02:23 AM
I want a platinum in the rare shade of bright blue with bronze flakes.

Blue Diamond... gorgeous. I feel the DTS would have done better if the Platinum interior was standard. It's quite the upgrade over the standard DTS interior.

gdwriter
12-07-10, 02:45 AM
The suede headliner in the Platinum DTS is to die for. I think Jesda almost messed up his nice pants when he felt it at the Chicago Auto Show last year.

Lupin
12-07-10, 08:53 AM
Haha. I've never driven one, but I have sat in a 2008 DTS, and the interior is definitely in the higher echelons of Luxury. Funny, Craig, when I saw that DTS blast by, you and your 06 was the first thing I thought of. It's as the Dullahan and I discussed on the phone. My CTS-V feels like a luxury sports car, but the DTS feels like your living room. However, my living room doesn't get out of its own way like that. Even though the powerplant might be behind in terms of numbers compared to other vehicles in its class, but really, if your living room can go from 60-120 fast enough to catch a CTS-V's attention, how much more do you really need?

Lord Cadillac
12-07-10, 10:13 AM
That said, it's still a shame GM has allowed the DTS and the Northstar to wither on the vine. Other than making the switch to RWD, I think the STS was a step backwards from the previous generations of the Seville. When I bought mine, there was an '08 STS on the lot (at a substantial discount), and both inside and out, the Seville was a more handsome and luxurious car.

Cadillac decided to go BMW with the current generation of STS. That's the problem. I don't know why they abandoned their roots when Lexus came along and did it better. They should have improved along those lines instead of chasing BMW. Now even BMW is getting more luxurious.


Blue Diamond... gorgeous. I feel the DTS would have done better if the Platinum interior was standard. It's quite the upgrade over the standard DTS interior.

I agree. The platinum interior should have been standard.

gdwriter
12-07-10, 03:43 PM
Cadillac decided to go BMW with the current generation of STS. That's the problem. I don't know why they abandoned their roots when Lexus came along and did it better. They should have improved along those lines instead of chasing BMW. Now even BMW is getting more luxurious.I agree up to a point. As mentioned previously, the SRX would have been much more successful from the get-go had it improved on the Lexus RX approach. The sales success of the second-generation SRX confirms this theory.

At the same time, I much prefer that the CTS uses the BMW as a benchmark. I think most people who pay a premium want both luxury and performance. And while BMWs are getting more luxurious, they still lag in some ways. I was appalled at the coarse, stiff leather in both the 3-Series and the 5-Series that I saw at the Chicago Auto Show this year. To get leather as soft and luxurious feeling as in any Cadillac or Lexus, you had to spring for a 7-Series or pay extra on a 5.

I think Cadillac can find a strong niche with a distinctive design language (done), capable performance (achieved with the CTS and V Series, others still have a ways to go) and sumptuous, yet tastefully done interiors (again, I think the CTS and SRX do this well, but the DTS is clearly dated inside). If Cadillac can build on what it's accomplished with the CTS and SRX, I think they'll regain prestige in the luxury class.

What I don't want to see from Cadillac are snoozefests like the Lexus ES. Sure, it's popular, but it's for people who want the prestige of the Lexus brand, even if it's basically a gussied-up Camry.

Only Lexus has succeeded with a lineup of mostly dull, uninvolving luxury cars. Obviously, many people like that, and in terms of comfort and reliability, Lexus makes a fine car. But truly, they only meet the needs of people who are moving up from Toyotas or bailing from trouble-prone Mercedes-Benzes.

The success of BMW, as well as Audi and the rejuvination of Infiniti tells me a combination of performance and luxury is where the growth is in the premium class.

gary88
12-07-10, 04:40 PM
I'll just post this paragraph from the latest C&D because it's pretty relevant and true.

http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/3936/img6116iu.jpg

Jesda
12-07-10, 07:07 PM
When Cadillac built "Cadillacs" it did well, but its customers unfortunately kicked the bucket. The last time Cadillac was #1 in America was 1999, but the brand had been in decline since the 80s. When the wider, smoother, quieter, and more Cadillac- and Lexus-like 1998 Seville came out to replace the more European 92-97 generation, sales dropped.

Lord Cadillac
12-07-10, 08:52 PM
All Cadillac needed to do was put the second generation body on the first generation SRX and it would have had a Lexus RX killer. I have little doubt in my mind.

I'm not crazy about the standard leather in BMWs either. I prefer soft leather.

Cadillac should offer a good mixture of luxury and performance. I think BMW lacks in luxury (though they're improving very quickly) and Lexus lacks in performance (for the most part). Somewhere inbetween should work nicely.


I agree up to a point. As mentioned previously, the SRX would have been much more successful from the get-go had it improved on the Lexus RX approach. The sales success of the second-generation SRX confirms this theory.

At the same time, I much prefer that the CTS uses the BMW as a benchmark. I think most people who pay a premium want both luxury and performance. And while BMWs are getting more luxurious, they still lag in some ways. I was appalled at the coarse, stiff leather in both the 3-Series and the 5-Series that I saw at the Chicago Auto Show this year. To get leather as soft and luxurious feeling as in any Cadillac or Lexus, you had to spring for a 7-Series or pay extra on a 5.

I think Cadillac can find a strong niche with a distinctive design language (done), capable performance (achieved with the CTS and V Series, others still have a ways to go) and sumptuous, yet tastefully done interiors (again, I think the CTS and SRX do this well, but the DTS is clearly dated inside). If Cadillac can build on what it's accomplished with the CTS and SRX, I think they'll regain prestige in the luxury class.

What I don't want to see from Cadillac are snoozefests like the Lexus ES. Sure, it's popular, but it's for people who want the prestige of the Lexus brand, even if it's basically a gussied-up Camry.

Only Lexus has succeeded with a lineup of mostly dull, uninvolving luxury cars. Obviously, many people like that, and in terms of comfort and reliability, Lexus makes a fine car. But truly, they only meet the needs of people who are moving up from Toyotas or bailing from trouble-prone Mercedes-Benzes.

The success of BMW, as well as Audi and the rejuvination of Infiniti tells me a combination of performance and luxury is where the growth is in the premium class.


I'll just post this paragraph from the latest C&D because it's pretty relevant and true.

The Escalade did remind me a lot of my Fleetwood Brougham...

ben.gators
12-07-10, 09:17 PM
When Cadillac built "Cadillacs" it did well, but its customers unfortunately kicked the bucket. The last time Cadillac was #1 in America was 1999, but the brand had been in decline since the 80s. When the wider, smoother, quieter, and more Cadillac- and Lexus-like 1998 Seville came out to replace the more European 92-97 generation, sales dropped.

Hum, from my point of view 92-97 generation is more "Cadillac" than 98-2003 generation, and 98-2003 generation is more European. Cadillac by introduction of 98 generation was looking for extending its market to Europe, and it partially describes why they made it more European like! Anyway, 98-2003 generation still had plenty of original American flavor in comparison to new CTS/ STS.

The main problem of Cadillac is majority of its sales are the cars that are not "Cadillac" any more.... CTS, SRX, Escalade... As you know historically Cadillac is not famous for building an small mid-sized sedan like CTS, or SUV or crossover... That is pretty wonderful that Cadillac extended its scope to these types too, but what about the cars that Cadillac is famous for and is supposed to build? Where is the RWD full sized 8-cylinder luxury sedan that Cadillac? OK, let's neglect RWD....Do you know that from 2012 there will be no 8-cylinder car in Cadillac showrooms anymore?! What about that?
Where is Cadillacs personal luxury car (coupe)? Where is eldo or its replacement?

Where is a car like Seville?

Jesda
12-07-10, 10:40 PM
98-03 was nicer and much more refined, but gained 350lbs and a few inches of width so handling suffered significantly. I know they exported the later Seville, but the one before it was much more appropriate for driving in Europe.

The car that preceded it had a Z-rated autobahn package and did 0-60 runs in 6.5 seconds, way back in the mid 90s!

EChas3
12-07-10, 10:50 PM
The STS & DTS are both too small. It's a crying shame the only big Cadillac is a truck.

I want an Obama-wagon!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-07-10, 11:21 PM
Modern Cadillacs really don't do anything for me. The last Cadillac I really liked was the '02 Eldorado Touring Coupe. It had the classic name, the big personal luxury car body, the extremely handsome body, the big powerful Northstar. The 98-03 STS was nice as well, but it seems to be very problematic, a definite love/hate relationship, and the Eldorado never seemed to have those issues. It was also never redesigned in '98, so it didn't get as big and as heavy as the 98+ Seville, so I'm assuming it would handle better aside from the Magnaride STS's.

Playdrv4me
12-07-10, 11:49 PM
Outside of oddities like the HT4100 and V8-6-4 the 1998-2004 Seville is likely the most problematic car EVER to wear the Cadillac badge. Keeping one on the road requires equal parts luck, fairy dust and religious maintenance. A select few Sevilles are anointed and never give their owners a lick of trouble, but for most of us, it is a masochistic relationship.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-08-10, 12:04 AM
My buddy Ryan loved his when he bought it in August, but now after a few issues, he really doesn't like it so much. Last I talked to him, he was scared about the headgaskets.

ryannel2003
12-08-10, 12:33 AM
I look at my car like this: it's nearly 11 years old and things are going to break. When they break, I'm probably going to talk about how shitty the car is and that I'm gonna set it on fire because it sucks. Once the car is fixed and everything is great I brag about how fast it is, how comfortable the seats are, how the stereo absolutely rocks, and how it looks like a million bucks.

I love mine and it has been a pretty good car. It's had issues but none of them too major, and I plan on keeping it for quite some time. It's cheaper to fix what's wrong than to go out and buy something and make car payments.

Playdrv4me
12-08-10, 12:58 AM
I look at my car like this: it's nearly 11 years old and things are going to break. When they break, I'm probably going to talk about how shitty the car is and that I'm gonna set it on fire because it sucks. Once the car is fixed and everything is great I brag about how fast it is, how comfortable the seats are, how the stereo absolutely rocks, and how it looks like a million bucks.

I love mine and it has been a pretty good car. It's had issues but none of them too major, and I plan on keeping it for quite some time. It's cheaper to fix what's wrong than to go out and buy something and make car payments.

This is very true. You know me well enough to know I wasn't condemning the car as a whole, just the truth about the way it was put together.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-08-10, 12:59 AM
I dunno man, I said the same thing when I had the Mercedes (boy, it's a bitch to fix, but when it works I love it) but after selling that and buying that GS, which has only needed one repair in the last year and a half, a faulty window regulator, I'm really loving how simple, reliable and utterly drama free it is.