: I'm so CONFLICTED!



Katshot
03-14-05, 10:20 AM
As of last week, I was firmly confident that it was time to move on from my FTS. I've had it for a while now, actually longer than any other car I've ever owned I think. I built it to prove to myself and some friends at Cadillac that it could be done, and more importantly SHOULD'VE been done. I've enjoyed driving it, and racing it but, have recently been bitten by the need to have something new again. Last week, for the first time in many years, I actually took my baby, my FTS, to the dealership for some work. I have known for some time that it needed to have an oil leak tended to but have just put it off for some reason. Finally, last month, my wife told me it NEEDED to get fixed. She hated smelling burning oil everytime we drove it. I wrestled with what to do with it, in the end deciding to take it to the one place that I knew would treat her right. Since the dealership here is loaded with old freinds, I knew they would take good care of me and my car.
Today, I picked it up and while driving back to the office, felt the need to "play" with my car a little.
Here's where the conflict comes in.
It took just ONE smokey burn-out and I'm hooked on the car all over! I'm so weak! :crying:

HotRodSaint
03-14-05, 10:31 AM
I'm so weak! :crying:

And on that, I will agree. :p

Katshot
03-14-05, 11:01 AM
And on that, I will agree. :p

Why am I NOT surprised by that post? :rolleyes2

HotRodSaint
03-14-05, 11:11 AM
Why am I NOT surprised by that post? :rolleyes2

Besides that fact that I told you I wasn't going to be polite the next time, deep down inside you also know it's true. :helpless:

gothicaleigh
03-14-05, 01:25 PM
Personal attacks? :helpless: You used to be better at hiding them HRS... :p

Yeah, those big cars are hard to let go of (while not quite a FleetWood, I did use to own an Impala SS). Something magical about forcing all of that steel into motion and gliding down the road. :)

HotRodSaint
03-14-05, 01:27 PM
Personal attacks?

Do you have time for them today?

Because I see that a few of your posts have some good answers. :rolleyes:

HotRodSaint
03-14-05, 01:32 PM
(while not quite a FleetWood, I did use to own an Impala SS)

Get out of town!

Did you really? :)

gothicaleigh
03-14-05, 02:02 PM
Get out of town!
Did you really? :)

Yep. A black '96. Was my daily driver for a couple years. I bought it with high mileage and drove it until the engine started knocking. Then had it rebuilt and beat on it some more. It's life with me ended when someone backed into the driver's side with their Tahoe. One of my employees at the time offered to buy it from me, so off it went. My Eldorado replaced it as my daily.

caddydaddy
03-14-05, 02:13 PM
Today, I picked it up and while driving back to the office, felt the need to "play" with my car a little.
Here's where the conflict comes in.
It took just ONE smokey burn-out and I'm hooked on the car all over! I'm so weak! :crying:

Keep it! It's a soon to be classic, and a very unique car! You'll probably regret selling it in the future, like I am for my old Fleetwood!

Katshot
03-14-05, 02:39 PM
Never ceases to amaze me, how popular those cars were (are). It's exactly the car I used as evidence that a sporty Fleetwood would sell. Unfortunately, they never listened to me. Even though I knew they intended to dump the B & D body cars so they could build SUVs, I still thought that the Fleetwood could go out on a high note rather than with a wimper. I always felt that Cadillac missed the boat on that one and in doing so also let the traditional buyer hang. I guess it was a preveiw of things to come huh? Cadillac HAS pretty much abandoned the traditional buyer unfortunately.

Ralph
03-14-05, 03:33 PM
It's sort of like your trademark Kat, I say keep it. ;)

STS 310
03-14-05, 05:53 PM
Keep it. You know DAMN well your not going to get what you want for it anyway.

Katshot
03-14-05, 05:55 PM
Keep it. You know DAMN well your not going to get what you want for it anyway.

That's the truth!

airbalancer
03-14-05, 06:33 PM
what about the mustang?

DeVillish
03-14-05, 09:30 PM
Are you still making payments on it? If not i say why get trapped in a new car making payments every month on top of insurance and stuff. Yeah new stuff is cool but so is your FTS! I say keep it, atleast till i come back to the states so i can buy it, lol!

illumina
03-15-05, 12:12 AM
Keep her dude!!!

Besides, my secret is out of the bag and once my car is finished, we're going to have to hook up and race the two...I am expecting similar performance numbers to the FTS when she (Seville) is complete for stage one...

Ralph
03-15-05, 12:15 AM
what about the mustang?

I can see Kat in a CTS-V, even a used one, in black of course. :shhh:

BeelzeBob
03-15-05, 12:34 AM
Yes, Cadillac HAS abandoned the traditional buyer.. I hope that changes in the future..

TomDeville
03-15-05, 12:37 AM
You're not weak Katshot.
You just love your awesome
and totally styling ride. Listen to the Esteemed
Caddycommunity on this one.
It's an FTS, it's rare and you would regret
selling it. It's worth more to YOU, than you
would get for it!$! Worst case scenario
is that you keep it as a luxurious, safe
and powerful 'Winter Beater'.
Did you note the maximum RPM tachometer
hit on that reaffirming smoky burnout?
Also, what octane level do you use?

Best Regards,

TomDeville :coolgleam :coolgleam

majax
03-15-05, 02:23 AM
Maybe the traditional buy abandoned Cadillac:disappoin

I would say keep your car unless you can find a nicer Fleetwood:halo: :p

davesdeville
03-15-05, 04:08 AM
If you don't know right now how much you really want a new car, then save the 30 grand and keep the FTS.

HotRodSaint
03-15-05, 12:36 PM
One of my employees at the time offered to buy it from me, so off it went.

You have your own business?

Get out of town!!! :thumbsup:

So was your SS modified, or stock? Any tips on what to look for on high mileage LT1's?

TomDeville
03-16-05, 12:22 AM
HRS, Leigh, Katshot, astute Salvatore C.,
'obsessed' Ralph and other Esteemed
members:

MAJAX exhibits a perspicacity and
perceptiveness beyond his purported
years. There is a larger, deeper and more
salient question raised herein. The evocative
issue at hand is as follows:

HAS CADILLAC ABANDONED THE TRADITIONAL
BUYER? OR, HAS THE TRADITIONAL BUYER
ABANDONED CADILLAC?

Please advise, if able.

TomDeville
:coolgleam :coolgleam :coolgleam

P.S. Ralph is certainly at liberty to throw
in a depraved Natasha white bikini full shot as a
thumbnail and addendum to his
commentary, which shall truly assist us in our
deliberations in connection with all of the foregoing
;and, the incidental problematical distinction and
resultant conundrum raised by my inquiry.

davesdeville
03-16-05, 12:48 AM
Anyone have sales figures for the last of the RWD Fleetwoods?

Kev
03-16-05, 01:03 AM
You love the car, you know the car, if it ain't broke keep it! You'll hate yourself if you get rid of it!
There is nothing wrong with keeping a car till there is no life left in it. Or in this case, until you have no desire for it.

Ralph
03-16-05, 03:32 AM
P.S. Ralph is certainly at liberty to throw
in a depraved Natasha white bikini full shot as a
thumbnail and addendum to his
commentary, which shall truly assist us in our
deliberations in connection with all of the foregoing
;and, the incidental problematical distinction and
resultant conundrum raised by my inquiry.

LOL. :histeric:

Anything for the good of the conversation... :sneaky: Variety is the spice of life, how about RED.

Did you EARN it Tom?? ;) (another pic in post #42)

Kev
03-16-05, 10:13 AM
HRS, Leigh, Katshot, astute Salvatore C.,
'obsessed' Ralph and other Esteemed
members:

MAJAX exhibits a perspicacity and
perceptiveness beyond his purported
years. There is a larger, deeper and more
salient question raised herein. The evocative
issue at hand is as follows:

HAS CADILLAC ABANDONED THE TRADITIONAL
BUYER? OR, HAS THE TRADITIONAL BUYER
ABANDONED CADILLAC?

Please advise, if able.

TomDeville
:coolgleam :coolgleam :coolgleam

P.S. Ralph is certainly at liberty to throw
in a depraved Natasha white bikini full shot as a
thumbnail and addendum to his
commentary, which shall truly assist us in our
deliberations in connection with all of the foregoing
;and, the incidental problematical distinction and
resultant conundrum raised by my inquiry.Word Ho! (jk)
My my, looks like someone just got a Thesuarus for his birthday!
Congratulations Tom, my hat's off to you, your post is a veritable cornucopia of multi-syllabic semantene and spoonerisms.

By the way, in the future I'm sure we'd all appreciate if you keep the raising of your condums to yourself!

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 11:44 AM
HAS CADILLAC ABANDONED THE TRADITIONAL
BUYER? OR, HAS THE TRADITIONAL BUYER
ABANDONED CADILLAC?

GM feels that the DTS is aimed at traditional buyers. I do too, which is why I'd never consider one.

I bought a once in a lifetime Cadillac product intended for it's traditional buyers, but well suited for those who prefer individualism.

It's was a good modern interpretation of a good classic design, coupled with a chassis and engine that has huge amounts of aftermarket support because of it's Chevy origins.

Other than the CTS-V to a smaller degree, Cadillac will never again make a car with this kind of aftermarket support. I mean, does anyone make tubular A-arms for any other Cadillac product yet?



http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/1/web/289000-289999/289674_71_full.jpg
More Pic's Here. (http://www.cardomain.com/id/hotrodsaint)

Katshot
03-16-05, 12:23 PM
GM feels that the DTS is aimed at traditional buyers. I do too, which is why I'd never consider one.

I bought a once in a lifetime Cadillac product intended for it's traditional buyers, but well suited for those who prefer individualism.

It's was a good modern interpretation of a good classic design, coupled with a chassis and engine that has huge amounts of aftermarket support because of it's Chevy origins.

Other than the CTS-V to a smaller degree, Cadillac will never again make a car with this kind of aftermarket support. I mean, does anyone make tubular A-arms for any other Cadillac product yet?

Obviously, I understand the attraction of the last Gen. Fleetwood but I don't understand your first sentence at all. You're admittedly a "traditional buyer", you agree with Cadillac that the Deville is aimed at the "traditional buyer", yet you say you'd "never consider" one? That doesn't seem to make any sense.

slk230mb
03-16-05, 01:18 PM
Keep the FTS.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 01:19 PM
Obviously, I understand the attraction of the last Gen. Fleetwood but I don't understand your first sentence at all. You're admittedly a "traditional buyer", you agree with Cadillac that the Deville is aimed at the "traditional buyer", yet you say you'd "never consider" one? That doesn't seem to make any sense.

Where did I 'admit' anywhere at anytime to being a 'traditional buyer'? :confused:

Is it common with 'traditional buyers' to make their suspension much less than pillow soft? Is it common with 'traditional buyers' to increase the exhaust noise so much that it permeates the cabin at any speed? Is it common with 'traditional buyers' to put performance tires and rims on their land yachts?

Read my post again, and this time use your reading comprehension skills.

Katshot
03-16-05, 02:31 PM
Where did I 'admit' anywhere at anytime to being a 'traditional buyer'? :confused:

Is it common with 'traditional buyers' to make their suspension much less than pillow soft? Is it common with 'traditional buyers' to increase the exhaust noise so much that it permeates the cabin at any speed? Is it common with 'traditional buyers' to put performance tires and rims on their land yachts?

Read my post again, and this time use your reading comprehension skills.

Dude, don't get your panties in a bunch.
I guess I just figured that since you owned a Fleetwood, that pretty much meant you were at least "basically" a traditional buyer. I would characterize a "traditional buyer" as someone interested in large, smooth-riding, powerful, RWD luxury. Even though you may have done a couple minor mods to your Fleetwood, it's mostly still a Fleetwood. If you weren't interested in a "traditional" luxury car, I would think you would've bought a Chevy Caprice, or something similar.

Jesda
03-16-05, 02:36 PM
The Silent Generation (that survived the depression) is dying off, and the boomers are now showing tremendous economic prominence. Boomers tend to be more expressive and enjoy more active lives. Smart move by Cadillac. Buick can still retain the Silent Generation.

Ralph
03-16-05, 03:26 PM
Obviously, I understand the attraction of the last Gen. Fleetwood but I don't understand your first sentence at all. You're admittedly a "traditional buyer", you agree with Cadillac that the Deville is aimed at the "traditional buyer", yet you say you'd "never consider" one? That doesn't seem to make any sense.

I agree, Jeff needs to drive one and see how they handle, etc. before judging. The beauty of my Dad's DTS is that it is traditional and luxurious enough for him and it would be sporty and advanced technology wise, etc, for me.

Katshot
03-16-05, 03:45 PM
I agree, Jeff needs to drive one and see how they handle, etc. before judging. The beauty of my Dad's DTS is that it is traditional and luxurious enough for him and it would be sporty and advanced technology wise, etc, for me.

I've said many times, that I like the DTS (I'll take mine in black w/chrome wheels) in spite of it's being a FWD Northstar-powered car. I know it doesn't have as many bells and whistles as some other cars but I think a loaded DTS is more than enough "toys" for me, and it's sure comfortable enough. Between that, and the fact that it's not such a hard-edged design as the other cars in the current Cadillac line-up, I think it's still a great car for the "traditional" buyer. Unfortunately, it appears that Cadillac is about to change all that, starting with the styling.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:08 PM
I guess I just figured that since you owned a Fleetwood, that pretty much meant you were at least "basically" a traditional buyer.

Yep, that's me! I was looking for a vehicle with ample trunk space to carry my 2.5 golf bags, along with uncle Ralph and Aunt Bettie to my winter villa in Palm Springs! :histeric:


I would characterize a "traditional buyer" as someone interested in large, smooth-riding, powerful, RWD luxury.

I was sold on it's styling and it's aftermarket support. Period.

I was sold almost as soon as it was introduced. I even took a test drive in 1996 and might have purchased one. But being that used Cadillacs hold their value about as good as used condoms, I couldn't justify the $37 grand for what was essentially a Chevy with a leather interior.

And for under 15 g's today, there are far better used car choices, if luxury is the goal.


Even though you may have done a couple minor mods to your Fleetwood, it's mostly still a Fleetwood.

Darn, And I was hoping people would think that it was a rocket ship! Or maybe even a rare FTS!


If you weren't interested in a "traditional" luxury car, I would think you would've bought a Chevy Caprice, or something similar.

The seats are leather, it has a factory landeau top and it has rear vanity mirrors. So what else makes this a 'luxury' car?

The wood is fake plastic, all of the pillars are covered with cheap headliner material, the trunk is unfinished in cheap trunkliner, the climate control is much to simplistic and the glove box is all but useless to name just a few complaints I have about this 'luxury' car.

So if I think this car is cheaply made, do you think I would have been happy with the obviously cheaper Chevy product?

I was drawn by it's LT1, it's modern interpretation of traditional Cadillac styling and it's aftermarket support. In that order.

If the Impala SS did not exist to offer aftermarket support, and/or the engine was a Northstar, I never would have purchased this car.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:15 PM
I agree, Jeff needs to drive one and see how they handle, etc. before judging. The beauty of my Dad's DTS is that it is traditional and luxurious enough for him and it would be sporty and advanced technology wise, etc, for me.

I hate, absolutley HATE, the large Hyundai style headlights on the current generation Deville (I think they are current).

But, more than that, I will not purchase any FWD car, unless it is an economy car. End of discussion.

When spending anything more than 20 g's, it will be RWD or AWD. If that makes me traditional, then Detroit left, not me.

But I don't think most traditional buyers care. They want just want a big comfy sofa on wheels.

Most Cadillacs of the Fleetwood era, had more gadetry. It was already an ancient dinosour when it was built. They just put some pretty clothes on it.

Kev
03-16-05, 04:17 PM
Yep, that's me! I was looking for a vehicle with ample trunk space to carry my 2.5 golf bags, along with uncle Ralph and Aunt Bettie to my winter villa in Palm Springs! :histeric:Ooh! Can I come too? Can I? Can I? Please please please!!

Ralph
03-16-05, 04:22 PM
I hate, absolutley HATE, the large Hyundai style headlights on the current generation Deville (I think they are current).

But, more than that, I will not purchase any FWD car, unless it is an economy car. End of discussion.

When spending anything more than 20 g's, it will be RWD or AWD. If that makes me traditional, then Detroit left, not me.

But I don't think most traditional buyers don't care. They want just want a big comfy sofa on wheels.

Most Cadillacs of the Fleetwood era, had more gadetry. It was already an ancient dinosour when it was built. They just put some pretty clothes on it.

You have to drive one because it's really difficult to tell you are in a FWD vehicle. You would be amazed at the handling, power and gadgets in these cars if you wan the technology. Since FWD is going away, it's too late to worry about it now anyway. Technology has made FWD very advanced imo but it's all what YOU prefer as to what determines what people buy. So that's cool. People will drive a new Cadillac and have no appreciation for the work and technology that went into them making them a lot more than a Chevy rebadged imo. Cadillac has exclusive features and if people want more they will buy a Cadillac. It's been their corporate policy to not have models from different divisions competing with each other like Buick, so therefore, Cadillac will always offer more because it is at the top of the GM food chain.

You SHOULD have real wood. I have American walnut in mine and I wouldn't have thought Cadillac would use plastic because all the new ones have real wood as well?

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:22 PM
I was drawn by it's LT1, it's modern interpretation of traditional Cadillac styling and it's aftermarket support. In that order.

I would also add, that this is only my second GM product.

I bought it, knowing that it was a 'modern' GM product. Thus I was prepared to 'fix' that which the engineers decided was good enough.

That also meant settling for nothing less than a black interior. There is nothing worse on any GM car, than opening the door and finding 10 different shades of Shale in the same car between all the plastics, the carpet, the leather and the vinyl.

For 37 g's, this was one peice of crap car. For 13 g's, it's a good Hot Rod amongst all of the cookie cutters.

Katshot
03-16-05, 04:25 PM
But I don't think most traditional buyers don't care. They want just want a big comfy sofa on wheels.

Most Cadillacs of the Fleetwood era, had more gadetry. It was already an ancient dinosour when it was built. They just put some pretty clothes on it.

HUH? :confused:
I was with you for the first half of the post but these sentences totally lost me.

Ralph
03-16-05, 04:29 PM
I would also say that Cadillacs have waaaay more gadgets today then 10 years ago in the era of the fleetwood. night vision, Magnesteer, etc. are just a couple as well as all the more numerous sensors and advanced computers the cars use today.

Way more advanced today imo.

Tom Deville, that was kind of a crappy pic, here is one taken of her in the past week.

p.s. TOM, there is a Nat thread revived in the Lounge for you called "Natasha Movie." You should also set up your private messaging option on the forum to allow PM'S from other members so I can alert you to these crucial issues, and pics. :p

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:31 PM
I was with you for the first half of the post but these sentences totally lost me.

What makes the Fleetwood modern? Absolutley nothing but it's body style!

It was 100% low-tech all the way, unless you consider the Chevy LT1 to be a Cadillac technical acheivement.

Read the preceding sentence in the original post for the context of the sofa on wheels comment.

Katshot
03-16-05, 04:34 PM
Yep, that's me! I was looking for a vehicle with ample trunk space to carry my 2.5 golf bags, along with uncle Ralph and Aunt Bettie to my winter villa in Palm Springs! :histeric:



I was sold on it's styling and it's aftermarket support. Period.

I was sold almost as soon as it was introduced. I even took a test drive in 1996 and might have purchased one. But being that used Cadillacs hold their value about as good as used condoms, I couldn't justify the $37 grand for what was essentially a Chevy with a leather interior.

And for under 15 g's today, there are far better used car choices, if luxury is the goal.



Darn, And I was hoping people would think that it was a rocket ship! Or maybe even a rare FTS!



The seats are leather, it has a factory landeau top and it has rear vanity mirrors. So what else makes this a 'luxury' car?

The wood is fake plastic, all of the pillars are covered with cheap headliner material, the trunk is unfinished in cheap trunkliner, the climate control is much to simplistic and the glove box is all but useless to name just a few complaints I have about this 'luxury' car.

So if I think this car is cheaply made, do you think I would have been happy with the obviously cheaper Chevy product?

I was drawn by it's LT1, it's modern interpretation of traditional Cadillac styling and it's aftermarket support. In that order.

If the Impala SS did not exist to offer aftermarket support, and/or the engine was a Northstar, I never would have purchased this car.

Now I REALLY have no clue why you hang out at a Cadillac forum. You obviously have a very low opinion of GM cars, and certainly have no clue about what a Cadillac is, or why anyone would want one. As has been applied to many other similar situations;
If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand.

Ralph
03-16-05, 04:35 PM
What makes the Fleetwood modern? Absolutley nothing but it's body style!

It was 100% low-tech all the way, unless you consider the Chevy LT1 to be a Cadillac technical acheivement.

Why didn't you just buy a Camaro then? It's hard to believe you bought that car simply for the engine?

It's the features on Cadillacs that are technical achievements.

Katshot
03-16-05, 04:37 PM
What makes the Fleetwood modern? Absolutley nothing but it's body style!

It was 100% low-tech all the way, unless you consider the Chevy LT1 to be a Cadillac technical acheivement.

Read the preceding sentence in the original post for the context of the sofa on wheels comment.

I understand that about the Fleetwood but you were "supposed" to be responding to Ralph's post about the DTS, that's where you lost me.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:37 PM
it's all what YOU prefer as to what determines what people buy.


Exactly. I preferred the Cadillac styling vs the Caprice styling, even though it's a just a Chevy Caprice with a Cadillac body.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:40 PM
I understand that about the Fleetwood but you were "supposed" to be responding to Ralph's post about the DTS, that's where you lost me.

I said it was ugly and it was FWD.

Kev
03-16-05, 04:41 PM
I don't know about y'all but I like my "Sofa on wheels" ;)

Katshot
03-16-05, 04:42 PM
Exactly. I preferred the Cadillac styling vs the Caprice styling, even though it's a just a Chevy Caprice with a Cadillac body.

If you want to break cars down to the basics, then certainly you can say that about many OEMs cars but the term "Cadillac body" is a much greater difference than your statement would imply.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:43 PM
Why didn't you just buy a Camaro then? It's hard to believe you bought that car simply for the engine?

It's the features on Cadillacs that are technical achievements.

How many clients can you fit comfortably in the back of a Camaro?

And just what technical acheivement was accomplished by stretching a Chevy chassis and placing a Cadillac body on it?

Ralph
03-16-05, 04:48 PM
And just what technical acheivement was accomplished by stretching a Chevy chassis and placing a Cadillac body on it?

XLR? :shhh: :sneaky:

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:51 PM
If you want to break cars down to the basics, then certainly you can say that about many OEMs cars but the term "Cadillac body" is a much greater difference than your statement would imply.

And much less difference than your statement would imply.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 04:52 PM
XLR? :shhh: :sneaky:

So tell me why it isn't selling well again?

Oh yea, the Corvette...

Ralph
03-16-05, 04:57 PM
So tell me why it isn't selling well again?

Oh yea, the Corvette...

If I had the choice I would buy the XLR just for the exclusivity of the thing! I only hope that by the time I can pay the $117,000 CDN. for one they still make them. I saw a silver one and was very impressed. I still have to see a new-style Corvette in person, but the XLR will have features/options that are unique to Cadillac that the Corvette won't have for discerning buyers who want true sport and luxury with ALL the bells and whistles.

I guess they should lower the price a bit so more people would buy them, but then there goes "exclusivity" out the window.

Kev
03-16-05, 05:01 PM
Hey, don't worry Ralphie, if they follow suit with most Cadis they'll be affordable in a year or two. You'll be able to pick out a nice low mileage model for a fraction of the orignal cost. And they will be worth every depreciated penny! :thumbsup:

Adam
03-16-05, 05:04 PM
Anyone have sales figures for the last of the RWD Fleetwoods?

http://100megsfree4.com/cadillac/cad1990/cad96f.htm

also on the cad96f part you can replace with 93, 94, or 95. hope that helps. the sales figures are in there somewhere.

Ralph
03-16-05, 05:04 PM
Hey, don't worry Ralphie, if they follow suit with most Cadis they'll be affordable in a year or two. You'll be able to pick out a nice low mileage model for a fraction of the orignal cost. And they will be worth every depreciated penny! :thumbsup:

I haven't even seen a used CTS-V yet!! See that's the difference between Canucks and Yanks, we keep our cars for 10 years so the market doesn't make them depreciate so much. :devil: :D

Blackout
03-16-05, 05:21 PM
ok HotRod lemme get this straight......you spent 16k on a Fleetwood because of its engine and its low-tech all the way approach? Sounds like a wise investment if I ever heard one. You could of saved yourself a lot of money if putting clients in your car is the main priority. You should have just gotten a Chevy Caprice Wagon and saved yourself a lot of money or even a Buick Estate Wagon. But I think its funny that you have this car and supposedly love it and all but yet all you have managed to do so far in this thread is crap on it and say that you got it because of the engine. :suspect:

Blackout
03-16-05, 05:21 PM
I haven't even seen a used CTS-V yet!! See that's the difference between Canucks and Yanks, we keep our cars for 10 years so the market doesn't make them depreciate so much. :devil: :DWell if you see a CTS-V on the road doesn't that make it a used CTS-V cause its in use? :thumbsup: I know that sucked but I am bored

Ralph
03-16-05, 05:28 PM
Well if you see a CTS-V on the road doesn't that make it a used CTS-V cause its in use? :thumbsup: I know that sucked but I am bored

That's true!! But I guess I couldn't take possession of it for my own unless I jack it San Andreas style. :lildevil:

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 05:45 PM
Now I REALLY have no clue why you hang out at a Cadillac forum.

Let's see...Because I own a Cadillac! :D


You obviously have a very low opinion of GM cars,

GM still makes cars!?! :D

Yes, I do have a very low opinion of a company that uses a '70's designed frame and '50's designed engine, to compete with the best from Germany and Japan in the 35 k plus luxury car market. But then, I guess so did most consumers as evidenced by it's poor sales performance and short production life.

GM is more notorius than Microsoft for rushing products to the market before they are ready for prime time. The SSR and the GTO show that they have not learned this lesson yet! :suspect:


and certainly have no clue about what a Cadillac is, or why anyone would want one.

I know why I wanted one, and that's all I really needed to know, now isn't it?

I also know that whatever opinion I give for my purchase, your opinion will always be superior to mine in your own mind.


As has been applied to many other similar situations;
If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand.

Please explain it to me, your highness!

It is obvious to you, that you are the smartest person on this forum.

So I'd really, really like to hear the high and mighty Katshot explain what a 'real' Cadillac owner understands, that I don't?

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:01 PM
But I think its funny that you have this car and supposedly love it and all but yet all you have managed to do so far in this thread is crap on it and say that you got it because of the engine. :suspect:

I actually bought it so that I could argue with a father and son on an automotive board over the reasons I bought it.

So I better go sell it now, because you guys have really put me in my place.

Yep, I feel really stupid for buying a car using it's high aftermarket support as one of my reasons. Yep, shame on me for wanting a nice loooking body style that was so easy to modify. I'm not sure that I can handle knowing that the reasons for my purchase don't meet your families high standards.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:14 PM
ok HotRod lemme get this straight......you spent 16k on a Fleetwood because of its engine and its low-tech all the way approach? Yes, all because of the engine. I was soley focusing on the engine in all of my posts, I never once mentioned it's style. :helpless:


Sounds like a wise investment if I ever heard one.

Car's are almost never a wise investment.


You could of saved yourself a lot of money if putting clients in your car is the main priority.

Did I say it was my main priority?


You should have just gotten a Chevy Caprice Wagon and saved yourself a lot of money or even a Buick Estate Wagon.

Because no one has ever modified one of those before. :suspect:


But I think its funny that you have this car and supposedly love it and all but yet all you have managed to do so far in this thread is crap on it and say that you got it because of the engine. :suspect:

And you bought your MK VIII for it's wondeful saggy a$$ed looks, right?

davesdeville
03-16-05, 06:25 PM
I think I'll give HRS's idea a try.

Eldorados are pieces of crap.



No. It still doesn't make much sense to buy a car and call it a piece on some internet message board.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:27 PM
I'm getting tired of people like you bitching and moaning everytime someone has anything even slightly negative to say about Cadillac or American OEMs in general.

Really? So the HELL am I!!! :yup:


First of all, I'm NOT a Cadillac enthusiast. I've only owned one Cadillac in my life and probably will never own one again (notice I said "probably").

This is my second Cadillac! And I will definitley own another one. :thumbsup:


The problem comes when people have an issue with my opinions not being tainted by Cadillac loyalties and enthusiasm.

I seem to be having that issue too! :hmm:

BeelzeBob
03-16-05, 06:29 PM
Why don't we each post our ideal "end of the road" for this discussion? Then, we can vote on which outcome is best and leave it at that...

Blackout
03-16-05, 06:31 PM
And you bought your MK VIII for it's wondeful saggy a$$ed looks, right?I bought a Mark VIII for the exact opposite of why you bought your Fleetwood. I did not pay $16k for my car I got mine for $4500. 4.6 > LT1 in terms of aftermarket support, hell the Mark VIII's aftermarket >>>> the the Fleetwoods. My interior IMO is much more upscale then the Fleetwood's and has more bells and whistles then a Fleetwood and is very high tech for its day unlike your "low"-tech Fleetwood as you like to call it. And why did you buy your Fleetwood for? For going out in the lake to go fishing?

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:33 PM
It still doesn't make much sense to buy a car and call it a piece on some internet message board.

Honestly, which is the better car?

A 1996 Mercedes S-Class, a 1996 BMW 7-Series, a 1996 Lexus LS or a 1996 Cadillac Fleetwood?

I think the Fleetwood has more style. But technologically, it lagged far behind it's competition.

Blackout
03-16-05, 06:39 PM
Honestly, which is the better car?

A 1996 Mercedes S-Class, a 1996 BMW 7-Series, a 1996 Lexus LS or a 1996 Cadillac Fleetwood?

I think the Fleetwood has more style. But technologically, it lagged far behind it's competition.Then why didn't you get one of those other cars then? All you seem to be doing is making yourself look dumb by making fun of the Fleetwood in terms of its competition. If your going to whine and moan about how inferior the Fleetwood is then get rid of the damn thing and get something better!

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:39 PM
I did not pay $16k

Neither did I.


4.6 > LT1 in terms of aftermarket support, hell the Mark VIII's aftermarket >>>> the the Fleetwoods.

I have no idea what >>>> means.


My interior IMO is much more upscale then the Fleetwood's and has more bells and whistles then a Fleetwood and is very high tech for its day unlike your "low"-tech Fleetwood as you like to call it.

So then you even agree, that the Fleetwood was not even high-tech for it's day!


And why did you buy your Fleetwood for? For going out in the lake to go fishing?

Yes, the 7000lb towing capacity was also a selling point for me.

Adam
03-16-05, 06:47 PM
Hey DavesDeville, did you see my post in answering your earlier question? its on page 3.:thumbsup:

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:51 PM
Then why didn't you get one of those other cars then?

Because I didn't want any of those car's.


All you seem to be doing is making yourself look dumb by making fun of the Fleetwood in terms of its competition.

A '57 Chevy convertable is low-tech.

It is also low-tech when compared to some of it's 1957 competition, such as Jaguar. But does that make people dumb for buying '57 Chevies today?

What I think makes one look dumb, is starting an argument over someone elses personal car buying criteria.


If your going to whine and moan about how inferior the Fleetwood is then get rid of the damn thing and get something better!

One post, does not a whine make.

Your father asked me a series of questions and I answered them honestly.

As a Fleetwood owner, he could have agreed or disagreed with my answers. He chose the low road instead.

That you showed up, makes me wonder if that was his motive all along.

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 06:58 PM
Why don't we each post our ideal "end of the road" for this discussion?

We can only buy car's based on other peoples personal criteria for us, and not our own personal criteria.

Thus the solution is to never buy a car without asking the most arrogant person you can find on the internet for their much more valuable opinion on your personal car choice! :thumbsup:

Blackout
03-16-05, 07:05 PM
What I think makes one look dumb, is starting an argument over someone elses personal car buying criteria.I believe it was you who said this about my Mark VIII...
And you bought your MK VIII for it's wondeful saggy a$$ed looks, right?So now your telling us that your dumb. This just keeps on getting better and better with you!




That you showed up, makes me wonder if that was his motive all along.So your saying his motive was for me to show up on here and listen to you talk crap about your car and about yourself?

Katshot
03-16-05, 07:22 PM
Your father asked me a series of questions and I answered them honestly.

As a Fleetwood owner, he could have agreed or disagreed with my answers. He chose the low road instead.

That you showed up, makes me wonder if that was his motive all along.

Somehow, I think you are mistaking this thread for some OTHER one in your mind. As I recall, you started your posts here on this thread with personal attacks and have done little more throughout besides try to be a wise-ass.
Say what you will but after you actually started posting semi on-topic here, I actually agreed with your assessment of the Fleetwood and was merely asking you to clarify one part of your post that didn't seem to make sense. From there, YOU, not me were more intent on making this a personal attack.
I said what I said based solely on YOUR statements and was not trying to provoke the wise-ass posts that followed from you.
I truely do not understand the sense of your buying a car that you obviously have very little love or respect for, but that's your business of course. Your posts seemed full of conflicting statements and I was trying to grasp your meaning in them. Again, I was met with wise-ass replies from you.
I don't go out of my way to belittle you here on this forum, as you have been trying to do to me. It's obvious to me and many others here that you have little to offer here beyond snappy, wise-ass comments, and self-serving political commentary. I wish you would find a new game because your current one is very tiresome.

illumina
03-16-05, 07:54 PM
Ok folks, stop this pissing match!!! :tisk:

Kevin (right?) I say keep the FTS... She is a nice car and unique...

HRS, the Fleetwood of yours is nice too...What can she do in the quarter? I bet she runs better than some out there...Oh Hell, probably a lot better...

Besides, when my project is done, I have something for both the FTS and the Hot Rod Kaddy... :burn: :yup: :D

I'm expecting some real performance from her when done...

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 09:35 PM
Somehow, I think you are mistaking this thread for some OTHER one in your mind. As I recall, you started your posts here on this thread with personal attacks and have done little more throughout besides try to be a wise-ass.

I love the holier than thou sanctimonious attitude people adopt so quickly around here. It almost makes me beleive you!!

Yesterdays mild comments directed towards you were an admited retaliation for your continued personal attacks in another thread.

But I started today with a clean slate and an attempt to give an honest answer to TomDeville's question.


Say what you will but after you actually started posting semi on-topic here, I actually agreed with your assessment of the Fleetwood and was merely asking you to clarify one part of your post that didn't seem to make sense.

Then I apologize for being a smart a$$.


From there, YOU, not me were more intent on making this a personal attack. I said what I said based solely on YOUR statements and was not trying to provoke the wise-ass posts that followed from you.

Being a smart a$$ and getting personal, are two different things. You started the personal attacks by telling me I didn't have a clue. Until then, it was all about Cadillacs, albiet with smart a$$ retorts instead of serious ones.


I truely do not understand the sense of your buying a car that you obviously have very little love or respect for, but that's your business of course.

When have I ever said that I do not love or respect my car? :confused:


Your posts seemed full of conflicting statements and I was trying to grasp your meaning in them. Again, I was met with wise-ass replies from you.

Conflicting statements? What am I, on trial? Because that's what it felt like even before your the cross-examiner showed up on the scene.

So if I was a smart a$$, and your questions were real, then I'd like to apologize.

But what makes that apology very hard to offer, is that fact that I asked you politely several times the other day to stay on topic and yet you continued to your personal attacks on me.

I admit in light of that fact, it was hard for me to stay on topic and not be a smart a$$ towards you.


I don't go out of my way to belittle you here on this forum, as you have been trying to do to me.

I did it only twice in this section yesterday. I told you I wasn't going to be polite if you continued. So I either had to keep my word, or let you win the pettiness competition. And I couldn't do that, could I?


It's obvious to me and many others here that you have little to offer here beyond snappy, wise-ass comments, and self-serving political commentary.

I'm sorry that you do not find my contributions to your standards.

I'd now make a smart a$$ comment in return, but that might be used against me in the court of...what court are we in again?


I wish you would find a new game because your current one is very tiresome.

Thank you for your advice. I will consider it deeply and develop a new game to play.

Yes, that was a smart a$$ comment. But what else did you expect from me after calling me a game playing smart a$$ with little offer the forum? A big hug and a thank you?

HotRodSaint
03-16-05, 09:38 PM
So now your telling us that your dumb.

Yes, I am dumb for buying a Fleetwood that looks great, performs good, tows good and hauls whatever fat butt I allow to sit in my rear seat.

So now will you go away? :)

BeelzeBob
03-17-05, 10:55 AM
I guess we're going to have a "personal attack" patrol on the forums.. It seems that these situations are because of one person or another initiating a personal attack. Now we'll have to keep an eye out as to who starts.. It's even worse when they carry on into new, entirely separate discussions...

davesdeville
03-17-05, 08:10 PM
Yes, I am dumb for buying a Fleetwood that looks great, performs good, tows good and hauls whatever fat butt I allow to sit in my rear seat.

So now will you go away? :)

Apparently you didn't read the 2 things you said that he quoted...



Hey DavesDeville, did you see my post in answering your earlier question? its on page 3.:thumbsup:

Yes I did, thank you.

HotRodSaint
03-18-05, 10:54 AM
Apparently you didn't read the 2 things you said that he quoted...

Why does it not surprise me that you would re-open this matter? :rolleyes:

And why does it not also surprise me that just like me, you have a reply left unanswered in this thread?

Now will you too, please go away and leave it alone.

:cop: It's done folks, nothing left to see. Please move on. :cop:

Katshot
03-18-05, 12:01 PM
Unless I missed something, Dave's question was answered in post # 57.

HotRodSaint
03-18-05, 12:27 PM
Unless I missed something, Dave's question was answered in post # 57.

Why does it not surprise me that you didn't arrive with an olive branch?

Instead you want me to lead you to post #69? Are you happy now?

These issues do tend to go away when people don't keep poking at them. :Poke:

Will you please join me in trying to stop this, instead of fueling it.

:cop: Now it's done boys, there is nothing more to see. Move it!! :cop:

Katshot
03-18-05, 12:43 PM
I wasn't the one that revived this thread today. I saw your post and based on your comment thought I'd look to see what had gone unanswered. Your question in post # 69 was kind of an open-ended one that I felt was better left alone. I found the post where Dave asked about the production numbers and found that it HAD been answered, by a HELLUVA link :thumbsup: as a matter of fact. If my posting was viewed as "fueling" something, it was unintended. :hide:

HotRodSaint
03-18-05, 01:26 PM
I wasn't the one that revived this thread today.

You also didn't ask for it to end or make any effort to do so either.


I saw your post and based on your comment thought I'd look to see what had gone unanswered.

Based on my comments, you should have left it alone. That was the message. Once again, you aren't reading in context.


Your question in post # 69 was kind of an open-ended one that I felt was better left alone.

You can have your own personal reasons why you can leave questions unanswered, but I can't??? And that's why you felt it necessary to jump to Daves defense, using an unthorough search of the facts as evidence? :hmm:


If my posting was viewed as "fueling" something, it was unintended. :hide:

It only fueled the perception that some already have as you being the game player.

Katshot
03-18-05, 01:50 PM
You also didn't ask for it to end or make any effort to do so either.



Based on my comments, you should have left it alone. That was the message. Once again, you aren't reading in context.



You can have your own personal reasons why you can leave questions unanswered, but I can't??? And that's why you felt it necessary to jump to Daves defense, using an unthorough search of the facts as evidence? :hmm:



It only fueled the perception that some already have as you being the game player.

Why do you always seem to look for an arguement in everything?
You revived the thread today and in doing so mentioned....
You know what, screw it I'm not wasting my time here. I'm sure you'll come back here and post something so you'll have the final word.
Have at it. :banghead:

illumina
03-18-05, 04:09 PM
Kevin, are you keeping the FTS or what dude?

Adam
03-18-05, 04:22 PM
I found the post where Dave asked about the production numbers and found that it HAD been answered, by a HELLUVA link :thumbsup: as a matter of fact.

why thank you. *takes bow*

Katshot
03-18-05, 05:02 PM
Kevin, are you keeping the FTS or what dude?

Yeah, for now I think I'll be holding on to it. If for no other reason, because a convertible Mustang GT will command a premium price for some time and I hate to pay list for anything.

Adam
03-18-05, 05:07 PM
now i dont know your financial situation but here's a suggestion, why dont you just keep it and buy a new Mustang GT convertible and have the FTS as like a weekend cruiser or a show car or something along those lines?

Katshot
03-18-05, 05:20 PM
I've thought of that but until I clear some space and build an outside entrance at our factory, I have no place to let it sit. I want to build a garage on my property but there's at least 2 projects ahead of that one. You know how that goes. :rolleyes2

Adam
03-18-05, 06:43 PM
yeah i know how it goes. i got my 95 Continental fixed and the guy who fixed it said i needed to get rid of it quick cause the computer was going bad (btw he was not offering to fix it and is a close friend of my dads and has never tried to sell us anything). so now i have set a date to get rid of it, hopefully in August but i have to finish my Fleetwood first and that is gonna take some money. i had a whole bunch of money saved up for it but lost a lot of it becuase of a family crisis. hopefully i can get it done by june or july and then ill be able to get the car i want (hopefully a CTS or a Escalade).

btw, i used to work for a company that would build and install storage buildings (big enough for a car or two) for like 1k bucks (that is with labor and all). i am not sure if they are still open though cause i got layed off because of cut backs. they were nice metal buildings too.

HotRodSaint
03-19-05, 09:28 AM
You revived the thread today and in doing so mentioned....

Dave addressed me and I responded to him.

You then decided to respond to me on Daves behalf.

There is now nothing more to discuss.

Dave got the message that it's over.

Brett
03-19-05, 09:54 AM
Being a smart a$$ and getting personal, are two different things. You started the personal attacks by telling me I didn't have a clue. Until then, it was all about Cadillacs, albiet with smart a$$ retorts instead of serious ones.

Actually, try reading post 2 of this thread again. you got personal on post 2. you werent talking about cadillacs starting with post 2. let me remind everyone that post 2 follows post 1. post 1 is the first post in a thread, so post 2 is of course the second. it took you all of 1 post to make this personal and not about cadillacs.


Sorry Kev, im gonna lock this. if you want it unlocked tell me or you want to restart it, feel free. but this thread has run its course