pricing just announced.
XLR-V is $100K

So much for value pricing.
Caddy really dropped the ball on pricing the new V's.

pricing just announced.
XLR-V is $100K

So much for value pricing.
Caddy really dropped the ball on pricing the new V's.

Hi b4z,
where do you have this info from????

Harry

Wow. A little higher than I expected. 10% higher.

I think that all but shoots my hopes of the STS-V ever getting into my garage.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107463

Cadillac Slaps $100,000 Tag on XLR-V
Date Posted 10-04-2005

DETROIT — Cadillac's new XLR-V, the performance variant of the hardtop roadster, will carry a manufacturer's suggested retail price of $100,000 when it arrives in showrooms later this year. The companion STS-V sedan will be priced at about $77,000.

The XLR-V is fitted with a supercharged, 4.4-liter version of General Motors' Northstar V8. The engine makes 440 horsepower and drives the rear wheels through a new six-speed automatic with manual-shift capability. Cadillac claims 0-to-60-mph acceleration in fewer than 5 seconds.

Also due this fall is the STS-V, which shares the supercharged, 4.4-liter unit and six-speed gearbox. Like the XLR-V, the high-performance sedan gets larger wheels and tires, along with the appropriate suspension modifications.

In a related move, GM announced that 49-year-old Bob Kruse will replace Mark Reuss, 42, as head of the company's performance division, which is responsible for development of the V-Series Cadillacs, among other goodies. Kruse retains his title as executive director of North America vehicle integration, while Reuss shifts to executive director of vehicle systems.

What this means to you: For about $25,000 less than the price of a Mercedes SL55 AMG, you can drive a 440-hp Cadillac roadster.

Cadillac
STS-V
$77,000.00 MSRP
4.4L V8 469hp

XLR-V
$100,00.00 MSRP
4.4L V8 443hp


Mercedes Benz
E55 AMG it starts at $82,575*
AMG-built 5.5L 24-valve V-8 engine - 469 hp @ 6,100 rpm

SL55 AMG
$125,775*
AMG-built supercharged 5.5L 24-valve V-8 engine - 493 hp @ 6,100 rpm


BMW
M5
MSRP $81,200
10 engine, with a five-liter capacity, 10 cylinders, 500-hp (SAE net) output, 383 lb-ft maximum torque, and engine speeds in excess of 8,000 rpm.

I'm sure the STS-V can be had for $10k under MSRP after a few months...just like my CTS-V (MSRP @ $55k, bought for $45,600). The M5, on the other hand, will likely go for over MSRP for quite some time. That widens the gap a bit.

yeah but a fully loaded STS is around what 67-68k? so in all reality your paying 9-10k dollars more just for more horsepower. still that is quite expensive.

Large money!!!

It's not "better enough" than a CTS-V to warrant the price. That's my opinion. Can't see paying $30,000 more for 1 inch more leg and shoulder room and an automatic.

Cadillac stepped into Audi S4, BMW M3, and Mercedes C55 territory with the CTS-V... and they seem to be doing ok. I just hope this new STS-V venture does not go like the Phaeton did for VW. I am sure the BMW can't be had for less than MSRP. They barely budged when I was trying to buy a 545i.

Cadillac's new 4.4 liter (267 cubic inch) supercharged Northstar V-8 is hand-built at this new facility in Wixom, Michigan - The Performance Build Center. It is the most powerful engine ever put in a Cadillac and is designated LC3.

I would imagine the LC3 would get a plaque just like the 505 hp LS7. The new aluminum Corvette Z06's 505 hp LS7 is also hand-built at the Performance Build Center.
http://popularhotrodding.com/enginemasters/articles/cadillac/0504em_cady/



http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0504phr_ls7_21_z.jpg

http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0507phr_gm_19_z.jpg

Please follow This link (http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42223&page=1&pp=20) and scroll down to my post. There is more here than just 1 inch of room and an automatic. Driving a CTS and STS is night and day, and the Vs will be no exception.

cvp33,

I doubt that there is any more legroom in the front.
I feelmore comfortable in a CTS than a STS.
Rear legroom is more however.
STS is designed toa different sandard than CTS.
Quieter and more refined.

It's not "better enough" than a CTS-V to warrant the price. That's my opinion. Can't see paying $30,000 more for 1 inch more leg and shoulder room and an automatic.

you forgot 69 more horsepower than your V brother.

and how much more weight?

HAHA

Reed

This is like comparing the M3 to an M5.. which would you rather have?

I would take the M5 :thumbsup: ... or in this case the STS-V.

Like it or not, you CTS-V guys are driving a quick entry level Caddy. People with serious bank tend not to go for entry level.

Watch me get lynched by the CTS-V people...

I'm sure the STS-V can be had for $10k under MSRP after a few months...just like my CTS-V (MSRP @ $55k, bought for $45,600). The M5, on the other hand, will likely go for over MSRP for quite some time. That widens the gap a bit.

With only a 1600 unit production for 06 I doubt highly these cars will go for under MSRP.

Like it or not, you CTS-V guys are driving a quick entry level Caddy. People with serious bank tend not to go for entry level.

Watch me get lynched by the CTS-V people...

Interesting. Uninformed but interesting.

Funny

I doubt highly that anyone who owns a CTS-V bought it because it was a Cadillac. If anything the name plate was nearly a deterent. As for me, I bought a 4 door Corvette. And for the record it's far more than entry level. :lildevil:

I would have to agree with cvp33 on all of his points.

*sigh* I know I'll regret this, but there is no denying that the CTS-V is an entry level car with upgraded supsension and powertrain. That's not to say it isn't a damn nice car with excellent performance, but a fact is a fact. There's nothing wrong with that, you CTS guys shouldn't take it as an insult. It is the entry level car, just like an M3.

STS and CTS are apples and oranges. The cars have different priorities and intended owners. To say otherwise would be like saying that the SL600 isn't worth the money because it only has a little more shoulder room than an SLK350.

Interesting. Uninformed but interesting.

Look at the options and features available on the STS compared to the CTS and tell me who's uninformed.

CTS-V is not the entry level Cadillac. In fact it's sticker of $51,395 is higher than every base Cadillac car with the exception of the XLR. Now if you mean the base CTS for $31,235 with it's V6, no NAV, no 6 speed etc. I'd have to agree.

Here's the facts:

'06 CTS-V $51,395
'06 STS $41,470
'06 DTS $41,190
'05 Deville $46,840
'06 SRX $39,995

Righting the wrongs of the uninformed once again. :sneaky:

CTS-V is not the entry level Cadillac. In fact it's sticker of $51,395 is higher than every base Cadillac car with the exception of the XLR. Now if you mean the base CTS for $31,235 with it's V6, no NAV, no 6 speed etc. I'd have to agree.

Here's the facts:

'06 CTS-V $51,395
'06 STS $41,470
'06 DTS $41,190
'05 Deville $46,840
'06 SRX $39,995

Righting the wrongs of the uninformed once again. :sneaky:

Actually, the base CTS has a 6 speed manual. You have to pay extra to get the automatic :D

Actually, the base CTS has a 6 speed manual. You have to pay extra to get the automatic :D

I stand corrected. :histeric:

You're not paying that $51k for a lot of luxury options, you're paying it for speed.

Dave,

C'mon man you really can't be that dense. Please tell me which one of these options listed below actually help the V go faster.

Navigation
Two zone climate control
Bose Stereo
XM Radio
8 way power seats
Heated Seats
Memory Package
Full Leather interior
Leather Steering Wheel
Leather Shifter
Moon Roof
Homelink
Front, Side and Side Curtain Airbags
Fog Lamps and Driving Lights
Tire Pressure Monitor System
Full instrumentation - oil temp, water temp, oil pressure, rear diff temp
OnStar
Auto dimming rear view mirror
Tilt Wheel
Power Steering and Brakes
Alarm Theft Deterrent System
All Power Options
Cruise Control
Headlight Washers
Stability and Traction control
HID headlights


You're paying for speed and luxury. Now here's your homework. List all the luxury options available on the STS that are not available on the CTS-V. I hear crickets. Not very many huh?

Oh nevermind. I just noticed you're 18. I thought I knew everything when I was 18 too. Take care. :thumbsup:

Navigation
Two zone climate control
Bose Stereo
XM Radio
8 way power seats
Heated Seats
Memory Package
Full Leather interior
Leather Steering Wheel
Leather Shifter
Moon Roof
Homelink
Front, Side and Side Curtain Airbags
Fog Lamps and Driving Lights
Tire Pressure Monitor System
Full instrumentation - oil temp, water temp, oil pressure, rear diff temp
OnStar
Auto dimming rear view mirror
Tilt Wheel
Power Steering and Brakes
Alarm Theft Deterrent System
All Power Options
Cruise Control
Headlight Washers
Stability and Traction control
HID headlights

i got all those except for the tire pressure monitor and the navigation. entry level Cadillac... oh Luxury Sport nevermind. i got something you dont got though... WOODGRAIN!!!!!!! i didnt pay for speed.

This is like comparing the M3 to an M5.. which would you rather have?

I would take the M5 :thumbsup: ... or in this case the STS-V.

Umm an M3 is a 2 door with a small back seat. An M5 is a 4 door that seats 5 comfortably. A CTS-V and an STS-V are both 4 doors that seat 5 comfortably, the STS-V seats it a whole inch more comfortably. Of course the CTS-V driver could use that extra inch for their back pocket. Fitting that $25k you save in your back pocket is a tight squeeze.

As for the entry level, I think CVP33 has proven you wrong.

i got all those except for the tire pressure monitor and the navigation. entry level Cadillac... oh Luxury Sport nevermind. i got something you dont got though... WOODGRAIN!!!!!!! i didnt pay for speed.

Corrected again! Damnit~ :histeric:

i got all those except for the tire pressure monitor and the navigation. entry level Cadillac... oh Luxury Sport nevermind. i got something you dont got though... WOODGRAIN!!!!!!! i didnt pay for speed.


Wood grain? Doesn't that also come in a regular CTS?

Oh, we paid for speed, handling, and braking, along with our luxury items.

Umm an M3 is a 2 door with a small back seat. An M5 is a 4 door that seats 5 comfortably. A CTS-V and an STS-V are both 4 doors that seat 5 comfortably, the STS-V seats it a whole inch more comfortably. Of course the CTS-V driver could use that extra inch for their back pocket. Fitting that $25k you save in your back pocket is a tight squeeze.

If you want to get technical, we can compare the e36 M3 4 door to the e34 M5.... or a C55 vs. a E55...

I did notice something else today, my few friends who own an M5 or E55 are not true enthusiasts and have never seen any track time with their cars . However, the few I know with an M3 or CTS-V do take their cars to various track events. I wonder if this will be a similar trend with STS-V buyers.

If you want to get technical, we can compare the e36 M3 4 door to the e34 M5.... or a C55 vs. a E55...

I did notice something else today, my few friends who own an M5 or E55 are not true enthusiasts and have never seen any track time with their cars . However, the few I know with an M3 or CTS-V do take their cars to various track events. I wonder if this will be a similar trend with STS-V buyers.

You're right on with this. I doubt highly that any STS-V's will see track time. The E55's are not track animals either so that makes sense. As for the M5, those owners are missing out not doing a track event from time to time.

I also noticed you have a Z06 coming. What dealer did you use? I'm waiting for GMS. $58,770 is much easier to swallow than $69K + $10K dealer market adjustments. :cookoo:

I went with Duke down in Suffolk, I buy all my new GM vehicles from them :thumbsup:

I did notice something else today, my few friends who own an M5 or E55 are not true enthusiasts and have never seen any track time with their cars . However, the few I know with an M3 or CTS-V do take their cars to various track events. I wonder if this will be a similar trend with STS-V buyers.

It probably will be, even more so with the V series compared to the M or AMGs. Because enthusiasts, the type who are more likely to modify their car, are more apt to buy the CTS-V than the STS-V simply because there is and will be much more aftermarket support for the CTS-V.

Dave,

C'mon man you really can't be that dense. Please tell me which one of these options listed below actually help the V go faster.

Navigation
Two zone climate control
Bose Stereo
XM Radio
8 way power seats
Heated Seats
Memory Package
Full Leather interior
Leather Steering Wheel
Leather Shifter
Moon Roof
Homelink
Front, Side and Side Curtain Airbags
Fog Lamps and Driving Lights
Tire Pressure Monitor System
Full instrumentation - oil temp, water temp, oil pressure, rear diff temp
OnStar
Auto dimming rear view mirror
Tilt Wheel
Power Steering and Brakes
Alarm Theft Deterrent System
All Power Options
Cruise Control
Headlight Washers
Stability and Traction control
HID headlights


You're paying for speed and luxury. Now here's your homework. List all the luxury options available on the STS that are not available on the CTS-V. I hear crickets. Not very many huh?

Oh nevermind. I just noticed you're 18. I thought I knew everything when I was 18 too. Take care. :thumbsup:

All I'm saying is that the STS has more features and options than the CTS. Take my word for it or research it yourself, it's a fact. Hence, the STS commands a higher price than the CTS. Like it or not, CTS is still the entry level sedan. You CTS-V guys seem like you think your car is God and there's absolutely no reason for anyone to buy an STS-V, that's far from being the case.

BTW, all those features you listed except for 5 (nav, xm, homelink, onstar, & headlight washers) are on my 10 year old ETC or my friends 14 year old Park Ave... you have more airbags too. The non speed related features/options that are only available on the V are few and far between. Seriously though, you're bothering to list "power steering and brakes" as a feature of any car these days?

If the CTS isn't the entry level Cadillac, what is? (And don't say BLS, because that's not out yet, and isn't even going to be available in the US.)

cvp33,

Don't forget power lumbar.

If you want to get technical, we can compare the e36 M3 4 door to the e34 M5.... or a C55 vs. a E55...

I did notice something else today, my few friends who own an M5 or E55 are not true enthusiasts and have never seen any track time with their cars . However, the few I know with an M3 or CTS-V do take their cars to various track events. I wonder if this will be a similar trend with STS-V buyers.

Isn't the 4 door M3 still a 4 seater? I do not know why people think the STS is that much bigger than the CTS. It isn't. An M5 is ALOT bigger than an M3. Put the CTSV and STSV together next to each other, and most will not be to tell that one is bigger than the other. i own a CTSV and I had trouble telling the difference when they were on the lot. Also, what is the weight difference between the CTSV, STSV, and the difference between the M3 and M5?

Now if you really want to know if you are paying too much start comparing the STS-V to the 300 SRT-8.

Wood grain? Doesn't that also come in a regular CTS?

Oh, we paid for speed, handling, and braking, along with our luxury items.

yeah i have a 2003 CTS luxury sport. my friends dad just bought a V and it doesnt have woodgrain. the steering wheel is full leather wrapped and where i have wood on my door handles his are chrome. i paid for the same things you did excpet i dont have as much horsepower. handling and braking are pretty good but not what you got.

Corrected again! Damnit~ :histeric:

its ok, you have a true luxury car because you have tire pressure monitors :D ;).

If the CTS isn't the entry level Cadillac, what is? (And don't say BLS, because that's not out yet, and isn't even going to be available in the US.)

the CTS is an entry level Cadillac but it is still a luxury car. a 2.8 CTS mt with almost no options at 30k dollars is entry level. that really isnt that cheap either. the V is not entry level, entry level cannot start out at 50k dollars unless it was a Bentley... sorry.

I can't recall the last time 14 in Brembo's on an entry level car and don't forget
CAGS.....LOL (not that it's a desirable option).

If it makes you feel better to think of the CTS-V as fast entry level vehicle, then have at it.

I've had Lexus, Acura, Saab, Honda, and even a couple of Corvettes. My latest 'entry level' purchase beats them all hands down in every category.

My latest 'entry level' purchase beats them all hands down in every category.

just because it doesnt have leather on the doors doesnt mean its entry level. and yes, your car beats them all because it is a Cadillac. :yup:

Price has nothing do with entry level.

The entry level aston martin cost 110K..(new V8 vantage I think...but I may be thinking of the DB9). The entry level Porshe cost 50K (boxter). The entry level Lambo cost 110K.

Entry level simply means its the cheapest, usually most common, most manufactored vehicle in a lineup.

Take Chevy for example. A base line cobalt is the cheapest car you can get from chevy (ignoring crap ass aveo), the SS SC cobalt cost up to 24K, and will blow a base cobalt away, but the point remains its still a cobalt and still the entry level car from chevy.

Look at the first three letters in CTSV...its still a CTS, which is still the entry level car for Cadillac, it's not a seperate model, but a trim level. Exactly like the M3, M5 and AMG cars.

I like it, Caddy battling Caddy, that's good news!

You're paying for speed and luxury. Now here's your homework. List all the luxury options available on the STS that are not available on the CTS-V. I hear crickets. Not very many huh?

Oh nevermind. I just noticed you're 18. I thought I knew everything when I was 18 too. Take care. :thumbsup:

Since you were so condescending, okay:


-Double laminated glass around the whole car

-rainsense wipers

-5.1 channel DVD audio

-touchscreen nav

-bluetooth

-twice the sound deadening via mats in the firewall, doors, floor, etc..

-intellibeam headlight control

-leather wrapped door inserts,

-leather wrapped dash

-Leather wrapped center console

-Olive ash wood trim

-A/V interface for iPods

-15 speaker DTS audio system

-power tilt/telescope steering wheel

-ultrasonic park assist

-Adaptive remote start

-Push button start

-2 selectable reverse curb view mirrors

-6 Speed automatic with driver shift control

-Air conditioned seats

...and that's just to name a few luxury items the CTS-V doesn't have as you requested. I won't even get into things like LED tail lights, dual projector beam headlights, projector foglights, decklid spoiler, etc....

No one here insulted your car. If you want to get snippy however, know your facts before you jump up on a pedestal. The CTS is Cadillac's least expensive 4 door car, and one with the optional powertrain enhancements (the V) is a badass sports car with luxury included.

The STS is Cadillac's most expensive 4 door car, and one with the optional powertrain enhancements (the V) is a premium luxury car with badass performance included.

I would never own a base CTS nor would I plunk down $77,000 for a s/c 4.4 liter STS. Just not enough car there to justify the price. I will bet that the market will bear this out.

While the CTS is an entry level Cadillac, the CTS-V is in a class by itself. It out performs and out handles all comers in it's class. The base CTS cannot make that claim. Nor can the the STS or STS-V.

I'm sorry fellas you're wrong again on all counts. Is the STS-V a better car than the CTS-V. It damn well better be for $26,000. Hell I can buy a 2006 LS2 equipped CTS-V and a GTO for that cash.

You can have your olive wood and parking assist, frankly I have no use for either. I know the old foggies love that shit though and that's why they're in there.

I bought the ANTI-Cadillac and I'm damned proud of it. I'll say it again, the Cadillac name plate is more of a deterrent to buying the V than a selling point. Case in point. The STS-V is exactly what I would expect from GM, under powered and over priced. The STS-V will get handled by the E55 and new M5. The CTS-V killed the C32, M3 and S4 and did it for thousands less. While the STS-V is thousands less than the E and M it lacks their performance.

I picked a winner, the STS-V unfortunately is a loser. That is of course if GM still claims it's a performance luxury sedan. If not. Than it's a pretty high priced option package.

And I apologize if this sounds condescending. It's not meant to but I know that some will take it that way. :highfive:

Price has nothing do with entry level.

The entry level aston martin cost 110K..(new V8 vantage I think...but I may be thinking of the DB9). The entry level Porshe cost 50K (boxter). The entry level Lambo cost 110K.

Entry level simply means its the cheapest, usually most common, most manufactored vehicle in a lineup.

Take Chevy for example. A base line cobalt is the cheapest car you can get from chevy (ignoring crap ass aveo), the SS SC cobalt cost up to 24K, and will blow a base cobalt away, but the point remains its still a cobalt and still the entry level car from chevy.

Look at the first three letters in CTSV...its still a CTS, which is still the entry level car for Cadillac, it's not a seperate model, but a trim level. Exactly like the M3, M5 and AMG cars.

You're on the right track but you're still missing it. The STS-V is the one that they added the super charger to not the CTS-V. The STS is the entry level sedan for future CTS-V owners. When a STS owner thinks they can step up to the power and handling they can move up to a CTS-V.

The CTS-V isn't just a rebadge and a super charger like a Cobalt SS or STS-V. The entire drive train, suspension, body, wheels, brakes, options are changed. Comparing the STS-V to the Cobalt SS would be a better analogy if they actually gave the Cobalt a smaller motor before they supercharged it.

I know this is hard to take but anyway you judge the STS-V it just sucks. Compare it to cars in it's class and it get's owned on performance. Compare it to "lesser" M3's, S4's and CTS-V's and it becomes painfully overpriced. Sorry guys the STS-V is nobody's car. It's not a peformer and frankly it's not a value.

All I'm saying is that the STS has more features and options than the CTS. Take my word for it or research it yourself, it's a fact. Hence, the STS commands a higher price than the CTS. Like it or not, CTS is still the entry level sedan. You CTS-V guys seem like you think your car is God and there's absolutely no reason for anyone to buy an STS-V, that's far from being the case.

If the CTS isn't the entry level Cadillac, what is? (And don't say BLS, because that's not out yet, and isn't even going to be available in the US.)[/QUOTE]

Get your cars right! You seem to think the V is the same as the CTS (any regular model CTS). This is as accurate as saying the BMW 3 series is the same as an M3 or a 500 series is an M5. Totally different cars for totally different markets. Go DRIVE a V and then tell me you don't want one (if you can drive a stick and like to drive). If you like to float and be surronded by woodgrain the V is not your car but if you want to DRIVE a car and feel the joy of power, handeling and yes superior stopping then a V is your car. I agree that the Cadillac name almost kept me from buying the V and I really wish the badge on it was just that, a V without the CTS attachment. Notice how BMW keeps the M series distinct? That is what Cadillac should do with all of it's V-s.

You CTS-V guys crack me up. You think your car is top dog, and now you're getting pissy because a bigger meaner dog just moved in. The CTS-V is great, only problem for you guys is that the STS-V is better in just about every way except aftermarket.

I'd take touch screen Nav, Blue-tooth and remote start from the STS-V and put it in the CTS-V. For the price of an STS-V you can take the savings and mod the hell out of CTS-V and stomp on the STS-V. I think the STS-V is going to be nice but I hope like hell it can hold up the V name when it goes up against its competitors. The CTS-V holds its own, still. Again, I think the STS-V is nice but not for that price but if you can afford, why not?

I think GNSCOTT has it right about the SRT8--I'm worried that this 77K will drive more people away from GM and into a 300C Hemi or SRT8 (or the CTSV), and maybe pick up a nice winter car or track car for the difference.

Not sure how you can say any car is better than any other car if you haven't driven both. I'm looking forward to driving an STSV to compare with my CTSV. But with all of the extra features listed and the pictures I have seen, I'm worried that it will feel to me like the Chrysler cars of the 80's and 90's felt to me compared to the GM cars of the same period--kind of a car-maker role reversal, GM morphing into Chrysler and vice-versa.:hmm:

Like it or not, you CTS-V guys are driving a quick entry level Caddy. People with serious bank tend not to go for entry level.



Now THAT is funny, especially given the age and vehicles of the author.

Like it or not, you CTS-V guys are driving a quick entry level Caddy. People with serious bank tend not to go for entry level.

I did not purchase my 04 CTS-V because it was a Caddy. I purchased it because of its features/performance. There is no way in hell I would have purchased any other Caddy otherwise (maybe an Escalade at the time).

What do you consider "serious bank"? I have a 2006 BMW M5 on its way...is that serious bank enough?
:rolleyes:

I doubt highly that anyone who owns a CTS-V bought it because it was a Cadillac. If anything the name plate was nearly a deterent. As for me, I bought a 4 door Corvette. And for the record it's far more than entry level. :lildevil:

I couldn't agree more! I have never owned a Cadillac before and had to think long and hard about owning one being an M and AMG kind of guy. What I bought was a 4-door Corvette, nothing more, nothing less. I personally would not buy an STS-V or XLR-V no matter how good, in their price rangew I would and will go for the M5 or SLK55 as they give you more bang for not so much more $.

The CTS-V does things that that only the RS4 and M5 can better and is MUCH less expensive making it the bargain of the group and a viable product.

Now if only the CTS-V was 15% smaller and 300lbs lighter...oh well, can't have everything! :rolleyes:

This is like comparing the M3 to an M5.. which would you rather have?

I would take the M5 :thumbsup: ... or in this case the STS-V.

Except the M5 is definitely a better performer than the M3.

On the other hand the STS V is bigger, heavier, more comfortable suspension and a smaller displacement (yes I know it is SC) engine. Those aren't exactly the best things for performance. I forgot about the automatic.

It is very hard to justify paying $25k more for a few extra standard features that most people never would use otherwise.

Now $77k for a 7.0L Z06, that is worth it. But I guess it might not be modern enough for the STS V driver. (JK)

The STS-V is nice...real nice. IMO, it will be slower than the CTS-V. I think the price is too high. I would much rather have a new CTS-V for $40K (which is what I bought mine for brand new) and have $37K to spend on upgrades.

I'll chime in:

CTS-V = 4 Door Z06, not just a Corvette. I was split between a Z06, Dodge Magnum R/T and the V. If I knew the rear end woahs, I would've probably got the Z06 instead!

But, Godamn, I love my V, even if she's in the shop right now.

Like it or not, you CTS-V guys are driving a quick entry level Caddy. People with serious bank tend not to go for entry level.

Watch me get lynched by the CTS-V people...

Lynched? Not likely. Nobody takes any opinion from an 18 year old very seriously, especially if it has to do with the spending habits of "people who have bank." :thepan:

I sold an S55 AMG to get my CTS-V because the former didn't give me the driving experience that I was looking for, at almost twice the price. I think you will find that most of the V owners acquired the car after carefully considering choices in a number of price brackets. Speaking for myself, the V is a specialty car that is the most fun I've had on 4 wheels at any price. It is no more an entry-level Cadillac than the original GTO was an entry level Pontiac and a "pretty quick" LeMans. (I know: waaay before your time.)

As you get more mature, you'll learn to differentiate between price and value. Whether it is a Ferrari F430, a V, or a Mini Cooper, people with "serious bank" buy what pleases them, not what might impress the peanut gallery.

CR

Like it or not, you CTS-V guys are driving a quick entry level Caddy. People with serious bank tend not to go for entry level.

Watch me get lynched by the CTS-V people...

davesdeville,
apparently you don't know the difference between performance and entry level so when your nuts have dropped (18 yrs old) get back to us with some actual knowledge on the issue... lol sorry couldn't resist anymore

I bought a CTS-V because it has a Corvette engine.

I won't buy an STS or STS-V because I'm not a Northstar fan.

I didn't buy an E55 Kompressor because (are you ready) it's a big fat soft Cadillac with a big engine crammed in it! (What a role reversal) And the price is stupid and it was scheduled to be discontinued.

I didn't buy a C55 or M3 because the back seats are actually cleverly disguised luggage compartments and are totally useless for baby seats or adults.

I didn't buy the M5 because the price was stupid (and the CTS-V was better in every catagory at that time), and it was set for replacement.

The new M5...Drool, drool. The price is even more stupid, but if I grow some balls, maybe!

As you get more mature, you'll learn to differentiate between price and value. Whether it is a Ferrari F430, a V, or a Mini Cooper, people with "serious bank" buy what pleases them, not what might impress the peanut gallery.

CR

When I told my friends I had actually bought a Cadillac I was met with very surprised looks. They all own BMW, Lexus, MB, and Audis. They all thought I would purchase a more expensive 'nameplate' car just b/c I could afford it. I could tell that my friend who just bought a 545 was relieved that I had bought an 'inferior' car to his. He's one of those guys that wants to one-up you all the time. One of the greatest things for me about the v-series cars is the fact that it is sooo underrated by everyone. It puts a smile on my face each and every time I out-accelerate and out-handle a car that many other uninformed people deem to be superior.

I think it's great Cadillac is trying to bring about the V-series in each car in their lineup. Is the STS-V worth the extra money? I'm sure it will be to some and, ultimately, that's all that really matters.

I know which is the supercharged one. The Cobalt SS is just an analagy not becuase they added a supercharger but because its the top trim of the Cobalt line, just like the CTSV is of the CTS line. The CTS is the entry level car from Cadillac, thus the CTSV is the top trim of the entry level car from Cadillac.

Someone want to tell me what they changed from the CTS to the CTSV, and what they appearntly didn't also do to the STS to the STSV that makes the CTSV more valid? They both got the same treatment and upgrades.

And the Supercharged cobalt did get a smaller engine (2.0 vs 2.2)

I have owned and driven both a CTS and my CTS-V. I challenge anyone who passes off the V as a "Trim Level" to actually drive one and then give an opinion. My V is an absolute beast, especially when compared to the CTS I used to have. Some of the differences could be construed as upgrades (alcantara seat inserts, for example), but the power and performance put it on a whole different level from the v6 CTS, enough to make it totally different car.

For this reason, I will not pass judgement on the STS-V until I have actully driven one. I will say though, as a product designer, that I find it very attractive, even with the overdone script on the doors.

If you drive a CTS-V, you will see why we all think our car is "God".:cool2:

I like this thread, but just straight (stock for stock) numbers show that the STS-V is a tenth quicker in the quarter mile even with that extra weight. Am I mising something here?

I like this thread, but just straight (stock for stock) numbers show that the STS-V is a tenth quicker in the quarter mile even with that extra weight. Am I mising something here?


The right driver could possibly change that, but I'm just here to :stirpot:


CVP33 is right - the STS-V isn't really worth the price differential, at least to those of us who own and love our CTSV's...add a Maggie and you're still less than an STS-V and it isn't LUXURIOUS enough, IMHO, to justify the additional heft of the car.

But, alas, they are our younger brothers so we'll have to allow them their :cookoo:

STS-V Driver: "Pardon me, sir, do you have any Grey Poupon?"

CTS-V Driver: "Hey...do you know of any good restaurants on the way to Summit Point from here? Kind of in a rush; racer registration is at 9 am."

I encounter people with serious bank everyday, my company targets the top 3% of the world population. They have multiple homes all over the world, their own jets and SERVANTS to drive THEM around daily. They do have multiple cars, drivers, and cars that they can enjoy, and not everybody is the same. There are guys who have the Ferrari collection, Lambos, Astons, all that crap. The CTS is the entry level car for Cadillac. The CTS-V is a muscle car. The definition of a muscle car is the smallest body available (to Cadillac) and stuff the biggest motor available into it (the LS6). If you look at the way car trends are going there are more 4 door type cars, and now companies are boosting them with hp. For me the choice was simple. I wanted an American car, 4 door, with balls. When walking around the NYC auto show I saw an LS6 stuffed into CTS. Perfect. When they came out with my color I bought it. I need a car that seats more then the Vette, and is just as fast. Bingo, Winner, Yatzee, Whammy, tell me what I won: a badass Cadillac thats fast luxurious, and very rare. M3s and M5s, E55s and all that are a dime a dozen. I can count on both hands the amount of times I've seen a V. Besides I'm 5'8" 130. A STS-V would be silly big. And I would of never bought a Cadillac if it wasn't for the V. People ask me ALL THE TIME why did I buy a Cadillac, I explain, and they still don't get it. I take them for a ride, its a different story. Go Chris!

STS-V Driver: "Pardon me, sir, do you have any Grey Poupon?"

CTS-V Driver: "Hey...do you know of any good restaurants on the way to Summit Point from here? Kind of in a rush; racer registration is at 9 am."

CTS Driver: "When I get serious bank and start speaking like an adult, I'm getting rid of this entry level Caddie.":hide:

I encounter people with serious bank everyday, my company targets the top 3% of the world population. They have multiple homes all over the world, their own jets and SERVANTS to drive THEM around daily. They do have multiple cars, drivers, and cars that they can enjoy, and not everybody is the same. There are guys who have the Ferrari collection, Lambos, Astons, all that crap. The CTS is the entry level car for Cadillac. The CTS-V is a muscle car. The definition of a muscle car is the smallest body available (to Cadillac) and stuff the biggest motor available into it (the LS6). If you look at the way car trends are going there are more 4 door type cars, and now companies are boosting them with hp. For me the choice was simple. I wanted an American car, 4 door, with balls. When walking around the NYC auto show I saw an LS6 stuffed into CTS. Perfect. When they came out with my color I bought it. I need a car that seats more then the Vette, and is just as fast. Bingo, Winner, Yatzee, Whammy, tell me what I won: a badass Cadillac thats fast luxurious, and very rare. M3s and M5s, E55s and all that are a dime a dozen. I can count on both hands the amount of times I've seen a V. Besides I'm 5'8" 130. A STS-V would be silly big. And I would of never bought a Cadillac if it wasn't for the V. People ask me ALL THE TIME why did I buy a Cadillac, I explain, and they still don't get it. I take them for a ride, its a different story. Go Chris!

amen brother couldn't have said it any better myself.

OK OK my turn!!!!!!

1. I wouldn't be caught dead in a non-V CTS. Sorry CTS guys....nice car, but not for me.

2. I wouldn't be caught dead in a non-V STS. Sorry STS guys....nice car, but not for me.

3. If the STS-V was the same price as the CTS-V, I'd still choose the CTS-V.

Somehow, I would bet an 18 year old's "serious" bank is his parent's so actually he isn't worth sh!t. Once you can go out and earn enough money for any Caddy, let us know. Even if you "received" the money from someone else, that is not EARNING it.

$27k for useless options since that is basically the big difference between the two V's. At least the XLR V drivers can say their car is unique.

The CTS V set the standard and even though the STS V costs almost a GTO more, they haven't reached the CTS V's performance standards.

Oh I'm not rich don't get me wrong. I paid for my ETC with my own money from a job. If my parents were rich and paid for everything, I'd be driving a CTS-V now and an STS-V asap. BTW, the STS-V will indeed outrun a CTS-V in a straight line (and although autox and road racing is fun, 1/4 mile is what I do.) It's like I said, STS-V > CTS-V in every way except aftermarket support (and price.)

reminder to GM don't piss these V guys or stocks may tumble.

Oh I'm not rich don't get me wrong. I paid for my ETC with my own money from a job. If my parents were rich and paid for everything, I'd be driving a CTS-V now and an STS-V asap. BTW, the STS-V will indeed outrun a CTS-V in a straight line (and although autox and road racing is fun, 1/4 mile is what I do.) It's like I said, STS-V > CTS-V in every way except aftermarket support (and price.)

A couple of quick questions David.

1) Which vehicle do you currently terrorize the quarter mile with? The eldorado or the seville? BTW, when you tire of going in a straight line you will then know the joy of truly driving a performance vehicle vs. aiming.

2) If by ">" you mean larger than you are correct. If ">" means better than you must define better. Is the STS-V a better car for it's targeted market? I don't think so. Is it a better value? I don't think so.

The STS-V is a slightly larger rebadged CTS (yes CTS) with a S/C 4.4 liter. Where else do you think they got those lines? See one on the road and you have to look damned hard to confirm it's an STS coming vs. a CTS. AND it damn well better be faster because from where I'm sittin' that's all its got going for it. It's slower than ALL it's competitors and will sadly get be killed within 2 years after GM realizes it's mistake.

Marketing, pricing and positioning of the STS-V is so far off base as to be laughable. I haven't seen a blunder like this since the Aztek.

Oh I'm not rich don't get me wrong. I paid for my ETC with my own money from a job. If my parents were rich and paid for everything, I'd be driving a CTS-V now and an STS-V asap. BTW, the STS-V will indeed outrun a CTS-V in a straight line (and although autox and road racing is fun, 1/4 mile is what I do.) It's like I said, STS-V > CTS-V in every way except aftermarket support (and price.)
sts-v will not beat the cts-v in the road course. Sts-v running 8:30+ and cts-v under 8:20 at the ring (mind you nurburgring nordschief is a high speed track and sts-v should win according to the horsepower but it didn't). This is probably the same reason why e55 will not beat a c55 on a road course but not as extreme in this case.

Please follow This link (http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42223&page=1&pp=20) and scroll down to my post. There is more here than just 1 inch of room and an automatic. Driving a CTS and STS is night and day, and the Vs will be no exception.
Here's what I think after driving a few CTS's and STS's:

The CTS is the drivers car. It handles and feels better than the STS.
The STS is the luxury car. All of the new technologies with a quiet and smooth ride.

You CTS-V guys crack me up. You think your car is top dog, and now you're getting pissy because a bigger meaner dog just moved in. The CTS-V is great, only problem for you guys is that the STS-V is better in just about every way except aftermarket.

Speaking of the aftermarket, check out the mods in the header as well as the hp/tq numbers. All of that was done for l/t $10K. I'll show that "bigger meaner dog" my taillights any day of the week and will do so in a car that has style and originality.

So, by all means, go pay an extra $27K for an additional 69 hp at the crank and a soulless boat with woodgrain. I'll see (and own) you on the road...

:farting:

Nick

You can post every little gadget the STS-V has that the CTS-V does not and it still does not add up to the difference. You buy a performance car for performance, not for double sound insulation. The V still rips the STS-V even though The STS-V has almost 70 more HP.

People will not pass up a comparable Mercedes or BMW to save $3k and get the Caddy. I'll take a CTS-V, a Solstice, and change left over for tires for the price of the STS-V.

I think that the difference between a CTS-V and STS-V buyer may very well be exemplified by the conduct in this thread.

Not one negative comment has been made by STS fans about the CTS-V, yet all the CTS owners feel the need to make comments like the one above. Why? No one from the STS forum goes over to your section and puts down your car. CVP claimed that the CTS-V had the same luxury content as the STS-V, and there would be "crickets" if you tried to list the advantages of the STS-V in that category. I listed twenty-five (off the top of my head!), and instead of owning up to being wrong, the argument just changed to "that luxury stuff's for old fogies". The only crickets I hear are from your camp.

Perhaps the STS-V buyers are concerned about things other than "owning you on the road". Perhaps they aren't interested in doing a Vin Deisel impression and living life "a quarter mile at a time", and perhaps they are considering more than the powertrain and lateral G's when selecting a vehicle, but rather the whole package.

You guys need to find something constructive to do with your time, because if you want to start name calling and cutting down other people's cars, I could spend all day on yours. Perhaps we can agree to disagreeabout what makes a good car, return to the discussion of STS-Vs, and leave the rudeness out of it?

Doubtful...

You're not paying that $51k for a lot of luxury options, you're paying it for speed.

Tony,

You're mistaken again. My post was in response to David's above. We not only get the performance to best the cars in our class we also get the luxury options.

As for the negativity. I would label the term "entry level" as the first salvo among many. After that you and David both got what you deserved. A cold serving of truth and facts. Hard to swallow for some.

As for the 1/4 mile. That again was David's comment not ours. We claim that the CTS-V will kill the STS-V on the track because it already has. Nurburgring a bell? 11 seconds on a road course is a lifetime.

And as for my actions, I've not been rude. I've been honest.

Take care and save the lectures. :thehand: :D

Except the M5 is definitely a better performer than the M3.



I believe that you are wrong with this statement. I'm pretty sure that when comparing M3's and M5's from the same generation, the M3 wins consistantly in most performance numbers.

It's not a lecture, I just think it's silly that everyone here who owns a CTS-V wants to compare track numbers. The STS-V isn't a track car, and no one said it was. Your "cricket" comment was silly, because the STS-V has twice the amount of luxury as the CTS-V.

As far as the rest of your comments, it's pretty sad that while you lecture another poster for being young and immature, most of your comments are directly out of the "internet tough guy" handbook. I particularly like the little smileys.

Cadillac owners in general should show a little unity, because if other Cadillac models don't succeed, there won't even be such a thing as a V-Series car in a few years. To claim you aren't rude is ridiculous Just take a look at your own signature.

Finally, don't claim your opinions as being truth. You said that the CTS-V "stomped" the S4, then why did Car and Driver magazine (Vol 50, #5) say that, "Although the CTS-V's value rated high, it fared worse in areas realted to refinement: driver comfort, ergonomics and engine noise, vibration and harshness. It was by far the noisiest inside at wide open throttle, prompting one tester to write that it came across as "the muscle car of the group", which in this case is a tepid accolade." The feelings of superiority you have for your V are the same as others will have for their STS-V, but for different reasons, and not everyone will agree.

...add a Maggie and you're still less than an STS-V and it isn't LUXURIOUS enough, IMHO, to justify the additional heft of the car.


Man, these are dangerous comparisons to start on.... Do you know what I can do with a 93 camaro and $10k? For $13,000 total I can blow the doors off of your $50k Caddy....

I know that's not what you're saying, but comparing cheaper moded cars to more expensive stock ones can turn really silly fast!

CVP33,

Is this honestly your sig now????

"My neighbor wanted a car that looked fast, was overpriced and was a bottom feeder in it's class. He paid $77,000 for a STS-V. I wanted a 4 door sedan that would beat all other cars in it's class and do it for thousands less. I bought a CTS-V. My neighbor makes me giggle."

Are you really that emotionally bothered by the STS-V to post that in your Sig on a Caddy message board? :hmm:

Man, these are dangerous comparisons to start on.... Do you know what I can do with a 93 camaro and $10k? For $13,000 total I can blow the doors off of your $50k Caddy....

I know that's not what you're saying, but comparing cheaper moded cars to more expensive stock ones can turn really silly fast!

You make a very valid point. I think what it comes down to is that there are two distinct demographics at work here with respect to the potential buyers of these vehicles. I, like may other CTS-V owners, bought the car for its performance in a 4 door platform. When this type of buyer looks at the STS-V, they will invariably look at the respective performance numbers of each vehicle since that is what brought them to the dealership in the first place. Looking at it from that perspective alone, I find it hard to justify the additional cost of the STS-V. The economics involved was the reason for my comparison of a modded CTS-V v. a stock STS-V.

Nick

Tony,
The CTS-V owners are making a lot of valid points. I'd guess the vast majority of CTS-V owners would place several cars ahead of the STS-V for their car of choice. We're more M3 than M5 (previous generations, the new M5 is a beast) / Ferrari over a Masserati / Porsche GT2 or GT3 instead of the Turbo. Basically, we want the:
- 6spd manual
- Firm suspension
- Great brakes
- Great chassis feel
- Aggresive 6, 8, 10, or 12 cylinder engines

I could have leased an XLR or an STS but I chose to lease another CTS-V. I really don't care about Blue tooth, auto wipers (I don't even use the auto headlights feature in my V), or cooled seats, all I wanted was a car that I look forward to driving.

Crozier and Tony,

Once again, I don't own a Caddy. Never wanted to and don't now. I own a 4 door Corvette. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

As for emotionally bothered. Nah, that will be the poor bastard who plunks down $77K for an STS-V.

As for Car and Driver I could care less what the say about NVH. I put an X-pipe on my V to make it louder and faster. Headers and CAI for the same. I know it's impossible for non-V owners to understand but we don't embrace the Cadillac nameplate, we don't aspire to own a quiet and subtle car. Many of us are sacrificing ride quality to make the car handle better and giving up quiet for more power.

A $77,000 dollar loser doesn't resonate with CTS-V owners and quite frankly isn't on ANY enthusiasts radar that I've talked to. We find it impossible to understand why someone would spend $27,000 to be worst in class and slower. It just doesn't make sense to a CTS-V owner.

Think of it this way. How many giant foam fingers do you see at football games with 3 fingers raised. Who in the hell would brag about being 3rd?

I agree with you 100% VRocks, and I love the hell out of the CTS-V. I just wish some people could see beyond their own desires and understand that there are people on the flip side of the coin who will accept a little body roll and sacrifice .05g lateral grip in favor of a 469hp, automatic transmission car that hauls ass, as well as cools theirs.

Damnit! I forgot the condescending and internet tough guy smilies that I always add.

:bouncy: :D

Name calling. Got to love it.

Oh I'm not rich don't get me wrong. I paid for my ETC with my own money from a job. If my parents were rich and paid for everything, I'd be driving a CTS-V now and an STS-V asap. BTW, the STS-V will indeed outrun a CTS-V in a straight line (and although autox and road racing is fun, 1/4 mile is what I do.) It's like I said, STS-V > CTS-V in every way except aftermarket support (and price.)Yep, New Mexico ranked 50th in the ranking of the smartest states. Guess who was 1st. Is there any non pre-production STS-Vs that have turned any 1/4 mile times? It is what you do. Hey, since it is the dumbed-down 2 pedal type, you should have a much easier time launching. But that's what you do. Why don't we see what happens with 2 production Vs first? I mean, that's what I'd do.

I understand your opinion, but where is this #1 thing coming from? What great national car ranking system did I miss that proclaimed the CTS-V #1 in its class? You think it's #1? Awesome. Enjoy it. But it's one man's opinion. There's plenty of websites and magazines that would beg to differ. Not saying they're right or you're wrong............

And what's with #3? No one has proclaimed the STS-V #3 yet except you. And when it is tested, even if it is a few ticks behind the competition in speed, there will be other areas where it will be better. Let's let the first one get to a dealer or at least get tested by a magazine before condemning it.

-Oh, and before I finish:

It's not a 4-door Vette, it's a Cadillac with a Z06 motor. You won't find anyone on the Lotus Elise forums claiming that their car is a "lightweight Celica". Be proud of owning a Cadillac. I am.

A couple of quick questions David.

1) Which vehicle do you currently terrorize the quarter mile with? The eldorado or the seville? BTW, when you tire of going in a straight line you will then know the joy of truly driving a performance vehicle vs. aiming.

2) If by ">" you mean larger than you are correct. If ">" means better than you must define better. Is the STS-V a better car for it's targeted market? I don't think so. Is it a better value? I don't think so.

The STS-V is a slightly larger rebadged CTS (yes CTS) with a S/C 4.4 liter. Where else do you think they got those lines? See one on the road and you have to look damned hard to confirm it's an STS coming vs. a CTS. AND it damn well better be faster because from where I'm sittin' that's all its got going for it. It's slower than ALL it's competitors and will sadly get be killed within 2 years after GM realizes it's mistake.

Marketing, pricing and positioning of the STS-V is so far off base as to be laughable. I haven't seen a blunder like this since the Aztek.

Big Jim,

I wouldn't look for any replies to direct questions. I'm still waiting for answers to this post.

I'd like the STS-V cheerleaders to help me with the following:

1) Do you agree that the STS-V is 1/4 mile stormer as stated by David? Or is it a road course warrior, allbeit 11 seconds slower than the CTS-V?

2) Do you feel that the $26,000 premium is warranted? Although it is cheaper than the M5 and E55.

3) Are you disappointed that the STS-V is slower than both the new M5 and E55? Or do you see this as a selling point?

4) Does it bother you that the STS and CTS look nearly identical to the untrained eye? And even for car enthusiasts it's a minimum of a double take?

5) If the goal of the STS-V is not to race and win 1/4 mile or road courses and it's OK to be bested by M5's and E55's why not just stay with the V8 STS and save the $12,000 bucks for something more practical?

I'd really like to hear from a true STS-V buyer. No more "if I had the money" or defenders of the faith or those with hurt feelings because some CTS-V owners won't tow the company line with regard to all Cadillac models. I'd like to know what the value equation of the STS-V buyer is. What are you looking for in a car, what do you hope to get out of the STS-V? You can PM me if you wish and take the conversation off-line.

I know somebody out there is as enthusiastic about the STS-V the way us early buyers of CTS-V's like Reed, Rick, Urby, Chris, Doug and others were. I'd like to hear from you.

Finally, don't claim your opinions as being truth. You said that the CTS-V "stomped" the S4, then why did Car and Driver magazine (Vol 50, #5) say that, "Although the CTS-V's value rated high, it fared worse in areas realted to refinement: driver comfort, ergonomics and engine noise, vibration and harshness. It was by far the noisiest inside at wide open throttle, prompting one tester to write that it came across as "the muscle car of the group", which in this case is a tepid accolade." The feelings of superiority you have for your V are the same as others will have for their STS-V, but for different reasons, and not everyone will agree.

Good Lord, you guys just don't get it. First of all, the V is a driving enthusiasts car. I wasn't drawn to the V for "refinement" and Lexus-like quiet in the cabin. I could care less if the ergonnomics could be improved with a telescoping steering wheel. I WANTED a 4 door muscle car, and Cadillac happened to have made one. If Buick had made the V, I would have been in a Buick deealership with a check in my hand. Car and Driver could not have paid the V a greater compliment as far as I was concerned. A snarling V-8, a six speed manual tranny, great handling, and the ability to put the smackdown on anything in its class, for less money. That is where the fun factor meets value!

The point being made about the STS-V is that, unlike the V, it falls far short of an attempt to lead from the front of its market competition. Instead, it doesn't measure up to the performance numbers of the other cars in its class. In fact, it brings up the rear which is a bad place to be for a new offering in a very competitive market niche. I am not a cheerleader for Cadillac and I am not going to pop a woody over the STS-V just because it rolls out of a Cadillac plant. Its a nice car, but for the money, it is no value. I cheer for enthusiasts' cars that try to vault to the head of the field not settle for 4th place.

Unfortunately, the opinions being offered by those singing the praises of the STS-V are coming from people who have no seat time in either car and have no appreciation for what the V's capabilities are beyond what they read in a car magazine. Drive one and you will no longer consider it to be a trim package for the CTS. It really is a 4 door Corvette.

This is a fun thread. Steering dangerously near to ad hominim at times, but still funny.

Whomever said that we're talking about two different types of buyers got it right:

CTS-V buyer: wants a serious engine and chassis with lots of go-fast and road feel. If there's a nice luxury car wrapped around the engine, so much the better, but digital ashtrays and automatic floor mats aren't really differentiators for him. This buyer would probably be in a Z06 if he didn't have to haul more than one other person around on a fairly regular basis.


STS-V buyer: wants a quiet luxury car with a cushier ride. If it happens to have an engine, so much the better. This buyer would probably be in a Rolls if he truly had 'serious bank.'
There's no shame in buying an STS-V if that's your cup of tea (for sure, you won't be as likely to SPILL your cup of tea as you float your STS down the road). I can afford the STS-V (I have semi-serious bank) but like Chris, I'm more the four-door Corvette CTS-V kinda guy. I love doing my own shifting most of the time, except when I'm bogged down in traffic on the freeways, at which times I'd love to have the STS-V slushbox. (No, I take that back. It's not worth it. As I've said before, paddles are for recalcitrant children.)

Only time will tell, but it's possible that the STS-V does have one feature that we CTS-V owners would kill for: a bullet-proof differential.

Only time will tell, but it's possible that the STS-V does have one feature that we CTS-V owners would kill for: a bullet-proof differential.

Ain't that the truth!

And for the record I'm truly trying to understand who the STS-V buyer is. What attracted them to the model? What are they looking for? What other models did they consider? Etc. Maybe it's about buying an American car. The only issue with that is if that is the only reason, than your first trip (or trips) to the dealer will have you second guessing your decision.

The only reason I can withstand the trips to my dealer is because the payoff comes everytime I drive the V. There is no other car I'd rather be driving.

And T.O., just an observation. As a member from December of 2004 with 107 posts, I noticed that 7.5% of your posts or 8 so far are in this thread alone. This has obviously struck a nerve with you. Are you an STS-V buyer? Just curious. Again trying to understand. :hmm:

Whomever said that we're talking about two different types of buyers got it right:





Thank you! Someone finally heard me....

Good Lord, you guys just don't get it. First of all, the V is a driving enthusiasts car. I wasn't drawn to the V for "refinement" and Lexus-like quiet in the cabin. I could care less if the ergonnomics could be improved with a telescoping steering wheel.


That comment was in regards to an earlier post in which someone said that the CTS-V was almost as much of a luxury car as the STS-V. You and I are actually agreeing, but the conversation has become a little muddled.....

The reason for my low post count is simple: I normally lurk in threads but refrain from commenting because the original discussion gets lost to bickering. (*ahem*) It doesn't matter if it's Miata.net, rx8club, whatever. Everyone knows for a fact that their car is better than everyone else's. I got involved in this discussion because I don't think a lot of people here are giving the STS-V a fair shake, and it irked me.

Yes, I'm an STS-V buyer. I've owned mostly sport coupes until the last few years when I built a Miata for SCCA competition. That allows me to get my track days in, while being able to move into a different consideration set of vehicles for my daily driver, since it no longer needs to see double duty on the street and track.

I don't care if the STS-V is a few 10ths slower than an M5 or E55. I'm not taking it drag racing. I think Mercedes and BMW are the most overrated pieces of crap on the road, as evidenced by their abysmal customer satisfaction ratings. Any company that has to pledge to remove several hundred electronic features from a car because of glitches is NOT making a good product.

I also don't care if the CTS-V is faster around a track (which it is). I'm not racing any CTS-Vs, and if I did from a stoplight, I'd probably win unless I was up against one of the 2 people who can launch that car without wheel hop. I've driven a CTS-V about 40 times, including on a track, and it's a great enthusiast muscle car with some luxury.

Just as you CTS-V guys say, you really can't understand until you have one. The little things like never fishing my key out of my pocket to get in and having the car lock behind me automatically are great. I've repurchased all my favorite CD's in 5.1, because the STS's sound system is the best I've ever heard. And dammit, when I spend Cadillac money for a car, I want to look around the interior and feel like I'm in a Cadillac. Being able to mash the gas and do 60 in less than 5 seconds with no wheel hop, shifting or effort is the icing on the cake.

Let me put it another way: The STS-V is a luxury car 24/7, but when you floor it, it's suddenly, almost magically bad ass. You can even shift if you want to.

The CTS-V on the other hand, is a muscle car 24/7, but when you drive it gently, it doesn't magically turn into a luxury car. It's still loud, it still rides firm, and you still have to shift it. Not that that's bad, but that's just the way it is.

Hopefully, this sheds some light on why I'm buying this "loser" car.

Thank you! Someone finally heard me....




That comment was in regards to an earlier post in which someone said that the CTS-V was almost as much of a luxury car as the STS-V. You and I are actually agreeing, but the conversation has become a little muddled.....

The reason for my low post count is simple: I normally lurk in threads but refrain from commenting because the original discussion gets lost to bickering. (*ahem*) It doesn't matter if it's Miata.net, rx8club, whatever. Everyone knows for a fact that their car is better than everyone else's. I got involved in this discussion because I don't think a lot of people here are giving the STS-V a fair shake, and it irked me.

Yes, I'm an STS-V buyer. I've owned mostly sport coupes until the last few years when I built a Miata for SCCA competition. That allows me to get my track days in, while being able to move into a different consideration set of vehicles for my daily driver, since it no longer needs to see double duty on the street and track.

I don't care if the STS-V is a few 10ths slower than an M5 or E55. I'm not taking it drag racing. I think Mercedes and BMW are the most overrated pieces of crap on the road, as evidenced by their abysmal customer satisfaction ratings. Any company that has to pledge to remove several hundred electronic features from a car because of glitches is NOT making a good product.

I also don't care if the CTS-V is faster around a track (which it is). I'm not racing any CTS-Vs, and if I did from a stoplight, I'd probably win unless I was up against one of the 2 people who can launch that car without wheel hop. I've driven a CTS-V about 40 times, including on a track, and it's a great enthusiast muscle car with some luxury.

Just as you CTS-V guys say, you really can't understand until you have one. The little things like never fishing my key out of my pocket to get in and having the car lock behind me automatically are great. I've repurchased all my favorite CD's in 5.1, because the STS's sound system is the best I've ever heard. And dammit, when I spend Cadillac money for a car, I want to look around the interior and feel like I'm in a Cadillac. Being able to mash the gas and do 60 in less than 5 seconds with no wheel hop, shifting or effort is the icing on the cake.

Let me put it another way: The STS-V is a luxury car 24/7, but when you floor it, it's suddenly, almost magically bad ass. You can even shift if you want to.

The CTS-V on the other hand, is a muscle car 24/7, but when you drive it gently, it doesn't magically turn into a luxury car. It's still loud, it still rides firm, and you still have to shift it. Not that that's bad, but that's just the way it is.

Hopefully, this sheds some light on why I'm buying this car.

Great post. We've found more common ground here than you may have guessed. And I left out the one thing I didn't agree with.

A couple of quick questions David.

1) Which vehicle do you currently terrorize the quarter mile with? The eldorado or the seville? BTW, when you tire of going in a straight line you will then know the joy of truly driving a performance vehicle vs. aiming.

2) If by ">" you mean larger than you are correct. If ">" means better than you must define better. Is the STS-V a better car for it's targeted market? I don't think so. Is it a better value? I don't think so.

The STS-V is a slightly larger rebadged CTS (yes CTS) with a S/C 4.4 liter. Where else do you think they got those lines? See one on the road and you have to look damned hard to confirm it's an STS coming vs. a CTS. AND it damn well better be faster because from where I'm sittin' that's all its got going for it. It's slower than ALL it's competitors and will sadly get be killed within 2 years after GM realizes it's mistake.

Marketing, pricing and positioning of the STS-V is so far off base as to be laughable. I haven't seen a blunder like this since the Aztek.

1. I don't have a Seville, read my name. I run my ETC at the track once in awhille. Like I said, going fast in a curvy line, "driving" as you call it, is fun. I autocrossed my ETC last Friday. I'll post the video of it tomorrow in the Kills/Racing video section. You can harass me there if you wish to talk about what I drive, rather than in the STS-V forum which neither of us drive.

2. The STS-V, stock for stock, is a better car than the CTS-V in my eyes. And I'm sure a few thousand people who have the cash will agree with me.

The CTS was the first car with the new art&science styling. The SRX, DTS, Escalade, STS, hell even BLS have similar styling. So you're saying they're all CTS clones?

Yep, New Mexico ranked 50th in the ranking of the smartest states. Guess who was 1st. Is there any non pre-production STS-Vs that have turned any 1/4 mile times? It is what you do. Hey, since it is the dumbed-down 2 pedal type, you should have a much easier time launching. But that's what you do. Why don't we see what happens with 2 production Vs first? I mean, that's what I'd do.

Yeah, I live in NM so I must be stupid. Right :rolleyes: I haven't seen a production STS-V run the 1/4 but I would bet money it will beat a CTS-V. Especially when you blow your rear all over the track. Maybe try some tact next time you post in here.

Big Jim,

I wouldn't look for any replies to direct questions. I'm still waiting for answers to this post.

I'd like the STS-V cheerleaders to help me with the following:

1) Do you agree that the STS-V is 1/4 mile stormer as stated by David? Or is it a road course warrior, allbeit 11 seconds slower than the CTS-V?

2) Do you feel that the $26,000 premium is warranted? Although it is cheaper than the M5 and E55.

3) Are you disappointed that the STS-V is slower than both the new M5 and E55? Or do you see this as a selling point?

4) Does it bother you that the STS and CTS look nearly identical to the untrained eye? And even for car enthusiasts it's a minimum of a double take?

5) If the goal of the STS-V is not to race and win 1/4 mile or road courses and it's OK to be bested by M5's and E55's why not just stay with the V8 STS and save the $12,000 bucks for something more practical?

I'd really like to hear from a true STS-V buyer. No more "if I had the money" or defenders of the faith or those with hurt feelings because some CTS-V owners won't tow the company line with regard to all Cadillac models. I'd like to know what the value equation of the STS-V buyer is. What are you looking for in a car, what do you hope to get out of the STS-V? You can PM me if you wish and take the conversation off-line.

I know somebody out there is as enthusiastic about the STS-V the way us early buyers of CTS-V's like Reed, Rick, Urby, Chris, Doug and others were. I'd like to hear from you.

Let me try this one.

1. For a big luxury car it is indeed a road course warrior. And like I said, the STS-V will finish the 1/4 quicker than the CTS-V stock for stock.

2. Is the CTS-V really worth the price when you could pick up a GTO and save yourself damn near $20k? Yeah? Well for similar reasons plenty of people should think the STS-V is worth the extra.

3. But I thought you CTS guys were arguing that we hadn't seen any real performance numbers from the STS-V? Jim was. Oh, I get it, it only matters if the STS-V is slower than an E55 and M5 but not if it's faster than your precious CTS.

4. The driver sure as hell can tell the difference. That's what counts because that's who pays. I learned to tell them apart the first week the STS was out. Not my fault you can't see.

5. See #1.

You're not just "not towing the line," you're talking shit about the car because you can't see past your CTS-V.

You don't understand the fact that the STS-V isn't designed to be an enthusiast car like the CTS-V is. If it were, it would have a Chevy motor and a manual. You're an enthusiast so you think it's a piece of crap. I'm an enthusiast but I think it's more practical to have a stock daily and a fast weekend car so I can appreciate the refinement of the STS-V.

Well thank you. I guess this means a disagreement actually *ended* in an internet forum???

Alert the media!

T.O.,

I'm done. :thumbsup:

Thanks for sharing your opinions and helping me understand.

1. I don't have a Seville, read my name. I run my ETC at the track once in awhille. Like I said, going fast in a curvy line, "driving" as you call it, is fun. I autocrossed my ETC last Friday. I'll post the video of it tomorrow in the Kills/Racing video section. You can harass me there if you wish to talk about what I drive, rather than in the STS-V forum which neither of us drive.

I mostly stick to the V forums don't have much in common with the other makes/models.

2. The STS-V, stock for stock, is a better car than the CTS-V in my eyes. And I'm sure a few thousand people who have the cash will agree with me.

Stock for stock yes. Dollar for dollar not in my opinion.

The CTS was the first car with the new art&science styling. The SRX, DTS, Escalade, STS, hell even BLS have similar styling. So you're saying they're all CTS clones?

Your words not mine.

Yeah, I live in NM so I must be stupid. Right :rolleyes: I haven't seen a production STS-V run the 1/4 but I would bet money it will beat a CTS-V. Especially when you blow your rear all over the track. Maybe try some tact next time you post in here.

Big Jim is our resident bully. If you can get past the delivery most times he's got pretty good information.

Let me try this one.
1. For a big luxury car it is indeed a road course warrior. And like I said, the STS-V will finish the 1/4 quicker than the CTS-V stock for stock.

Most likely you're correct. CTS-V wins the road, STS-V wins the track it will never see.



2. Is the CTS-V really worth the price when you could pick up a GTO and save yourself damn near $20k? Yeah? Well for similar reasons plenty of people should think the STS-V is worth the extra.

Great comparison. Much better than the Cobalt SS analogy. Except it's a two door coupe. But you're getting closer.

3. But I thought you CTS guys were arguing that we hadn't seen any real performance numbers from the STS-V? Jim was. Oh, I get it, it only matters if the STS-V is slower than an E55 and M5 but not if it's faster than your precious CTS.

Nothing to reply to here. Maybe one of the CTS guys can chime in.

4. The driver sure as hell can tell the difference. That's what counts because that's who pays. I learned to tell them apart the first week the STS was out. Not my fault you can't see.

I believe Car and Driver called the STS a less edgy CTS. And said "that's not a bad thing". They do look alike. That's a fact.

5. See #1.

So your answer to this would be yes. The goal of the STS-V is to be slower than it's competitors. Now you do understand that the CTS-V is not a competitor of the STS-V, right?


You're not just "not towing the line," you're talking shit about the car because you can't see past your CTS-V.

Interesting comment. Please post the non-factual comments that I made. I will be glad to explain them. I will gladly post the inaccuracies of your posts.

You don't understand the fact that the STS-V isn't designed to be an enthusiast car like the CTS-V is. If it were, it would have a Chevy motor and a manual. You're an enthusiast so you think it's a piece of crap. I'm an enthusiast but I think it's more practical to have a stock daily and a fast weekend car so I can appreciate the refinement of the STS-V.

Again your words here not mine. Never called the STS-V crap. Never said it needed a chevy motor or a manual. Just trying to understand why someone would want the car finishing third in it's class. Who know's maybe once the magazines can do a test of performance (unsubjective) and styling/luxury (subjective) the STS-V will beat out the quicker E55 and M5's. If it does it will be a performance bargain. If it doesn't, well than we still have unanswered questions.

Well, we'll just wait and see what numbers it puts up when it's released. You can't go around saying it's not up to par without it even being released yet, and that's what you've been doing.

Well it's simple math. At $77,000 it's overpriced in my opinion. (my opinion)

As for performance we're in trouble:

BMW 4,050 lbs. 507HP/384TQ 0-100mph 10.0 secs 1/4 mile 12.6@115mph
E55 4,237 lbs. 469HP/516TQ 0-100mph 9.9 secs 1/4 mile 12.5@116mph
STS-V 4,295 469HP/430TQ ? ?

Here's the source btw http://www.fast-autos.net/list.html (great resource for bench racing :histeric: )

With the weight disadvantage, automatic transmission and missing TQ (vs. Mercedes) and HP (vs. BMW) I will estimate the STS-V will do 0-100mph in 11.0 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 12.8@111. (and BTW these are both faster than our CTS-V's)

I will leave this post here and soon enough we'll find out if I was wrong. And I'm man enough to admit. :yup:

I can't believe I just read 6 pages of V vs. V. Maybe because it was entertaining. Maybe because I wanted to see the outcome. However there was no outcome.

At the end the way I see it, the STS-V owners have what they wanted, the "V" style to make it look fast, improved performance numbers over the stock STS, news that the STS might be a contender in its class, and yet the proposed buyers for these cars are buying it for the luxury because their main use for the car is not for performance. :tisk:

On the other hand, what was attempted many times to be explained by CTS-V owners, in my opinion, was why CTS-V owners could justify the purchase of the V over a stock CTS. Yes it makes a lot of sense. The CTS-V is a performance car. Buying a V is what that means.

It doesn't mean that you can slap a V emblem on another vehicle and not follow what the initial goal accomplished with the CTS-V. So that is why, I think most of us CTS-V owners are upset. It's not because we think you guys are above us. How could we, we're faster and still have luxury implemented in our cars. It's because there's some ignorance coming from the STS-V fans on identifying the cars real purpose.

Seeing a V emblem go on a vehicle with all the tools it should have except the automatic tranny and seeing it still suffer performing top in its class. It's shameful for the STS-V owners and for Cadillac. Cadillac is only now to my eyes, trying to make a profit on it and what I'm seeing now is, they're losing that passion they had when they developed the CTS-V.

So we should all be upset with Cadillac and not really with the proposed buyers for this car. All we can do is give them a wave by and feel sorry they didn't get what we current "V" owners know they deserved when we blow by them. :burn:

Quick let's all go argue about the XLR-V. That's over priced too. And at 440 hp will simply NOT perform.

Ouch!

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20547

Here's one area where we have a LONG way to go. And for the record I think BMW interiors suck as well.

Here's my ranking:

1) Mercedes
2) Audi
3) Infiniti
4) Lexus
5) Volkswagen (Phaeton only)

I left out the obvious Bentley, Aston Martin, etc. because obviously they're in a league by themselves.

Quick let's all go argue about the XLR-V. That's over priced too. And at 440 hp will simply NOT perform.

paste from the XLR-V forum...

"People will complain, but they are not considering the long-term goal of the "V" cars. Cadillac is NOT and should NOT be about "Value Pricing." If Cadillac were about value pricing, then what is to distinguish it from a Buick? (compared to a Deville, for example) What would give it more status and recognition? That's right, price is a big factor in determining "exclusivity." If you want the name and technology, you have to pay for it and you get the "status" in the process. In the first post there he makes a good point about what you get for the money, and the fact it is 25K less than the AMG. Good bargain? Yes. If one is lucky enough to be able to buy one, others will know they have something special. That's the main goal for an ultra-status vehicle like the XLR-V, and being seen behind the wheel.

Thanks to the "V" series from Cadillac, it has already propelled Cadillac far above Lincoln and many others, and now Cadillac has a good shot at aiming for the top, and that means "Standard of the World" once again. THAT'S the reward.

Much like the Veyron, the goal will not be to sell these on a mass scale. They will sell a limited number of them to allow Cadillac to get the recognition they need to get back on top."

and I disagree, because they ARE designed to perform, and 440 hp is nothing to sneeze at!

Pasted from my reply in the XLR-V thread.

It's not enough to move the price up. GM must move the content up. I have no issue right now with the features GM is offering. Magnetic Selective Ride suspension, Night Vision, Adaptive Cruise, GM has some very robust technology in our cars. But right now our packaging just sucks. Paint work, body seams, plastic quality and overall fit and finish needs to move up with the price.

Look at my post on the STS-V thread regarding the interior. My god the STS-V's interior looks positively austere when compared to Audi, Mercedes, Infiniti and Lexus. The radio portion of the center stack would be at home in the Cobalt or Malibu. Hardly the stuff of $77,000 and $100,000 dollar luxury automobiles. The GM faithful deserve better.

How could we, we're faster and still have luxury implemented in our cars. It's because there's some ignorance coming from the STS-V fans on identifying the cars real purpose.

Even some of your fellow CTS-V owners recognize the STS-V is gonna be quicker on acceleration. Which, btw, is why I see the need to pick up an STS-V over a STS V8 - the CTS-V crowd are the enthusiasts who will take their car to the road course and dragstrip, the STS-V owners are less likely to do that but everybody pulls up at a stoplight now and then.

Pasted from my reply in the XLR-V thread.

It's not enough to move the price up. GM must move the content up. I have no issue right now with the features GM is offering. Magnetic Selective Ride suspension, Night Vision, Adaptive Cruise, GM has some very robust technology in our cars. But right now our packaging just sucks. Paint work, body seams, plastic quality and overall fit and finish needs to move up with the price.

Look at my post on the STS-V thread regarding the interior. My god the STS-V's interior looks positively austere when compared to Audi, Mercedes, Infiniti and Lexus. The radio portion of the center stack would be at home in the Cobalt or Malibu. Hardly the stuff of $77,000 and $100,000 dollar luxury automobiles. The GM faithful deserve better.

Yup, I answered there about interiors, etc.

Even some of your fellow CTS-V owners recognize the STS-V is gonna be quicker on acceleration. Which, btw, is why I see the need to pick up an STS-V over a STS V8 - the CTS-V crowd are the enthusiasts who will take their car to the road course and dragstrip, the STS-V owners are less likely to do that but everybody pulls up at a stoplight now and then.

The STS-V had better be faster than the CTS-V or more than a few buyers will cry foul. And I predict the STS-V will be by a few tics.

I want to start off by saying this thread has been a good read.

Its been said before and I'll say it again: CTS-V has the NA LS6, 6-speed manual, its louder, thus it was built for a completely different target customer (especially the tranny). The STS-V with its relatively small SC Northstar was a mistake IMO by GM. It needs some serious balls with its price tag and target customer.

I think we should leave the discussion of "Who's faster?" until we get some third party empirical test results under our belts. We're all whistling in the dark right now. But some guys just like to argue for no good reason, I guess. Fallaciously, sometimes. (No, I'm not saying anyone's gay...)

I wouldn't be at all surprised if an STS-V tuner pops out of the woodwork down the road, offering small tweaks to up the power. (Smaller pulley? K&N? CAI? Exhaust? And beyond?) I can see it now: "You've spent a bazillion bucks and still can't catch that M5, not to mention LawFive's 585 horsies and 547... torquies? Well, just give us $___ and one week. When we're done, you'll at least be able to catch the M5!"

Another comment buried in what's now this six page thread resonates with me: I don't recall when the STS guys have ever come into our forum and peed on us, or our car, e.g. "Your CTS-V interior is cheaper and sucks more than ours!" "No, it doesn't!" "Yes, it does!" "No, it doesn't!" (actually: yes, it does). So CTS-V guys play nice, stay objective, and remember this:
Every dollar the STS-V guys spend over cost is a dollar that GM can plow into the upcoming redesign of the CTS-V. Assuming GM survives that long.

People are assuming a lot about the STS V. It may wheel hop, shift lazily (it is aimed at the luxury driver) and it may have the rear end that was supposed to be made for the 69 less HP CTS V.

I wouldn't criticize CTS V drivers for being rude. A non CTS V driver did say that if we had "serious bank", we wouldn't have bought a CTS V. Unforntunately since he is 18, most of us probably have 3-4 times more "serious bank" then he does now.

Notice that most CTS V owners didn't criticize the STS V. We just don't see paying $25k more for a car that has a few more useless options.

I wouldn't also comment about the reviews the CTS V got if I was a STS owner. Even the STS finished 6 out of 8 cars a few months back (the Malibu like interior was one reason).

And the CTS V has plenty of luxury. Please stay away from Corvettes and simiiar cars if you think the V is not luxurious. The rumble from the LS7 might give you guys a migrane headache while it'll give most CTS V owners a bunch of smiles.

The performance quotes are almost a joke. First the STS V is a better performer car than the CTS V, until I mentioned the track. All of the sudden the STS V driver wouldn't go to the track so it doesn't matter. Then it all depends how the CTS V driver controls wheel hop. Which is it guys?

And yes the CTS V did kill the S4, even on British TV where they seem to be pro European.

The CTS V wasn't built to be like the Cadillac's before it. The CTS series has changed Cadillac around financially. I know I wouldn't have considered a Cadillac if it wasn't for the CTS.

C&D doesn't know crap about cars unless it says Toyota, Honda or Nissan on it. At least with the CTS V I don't have to worry about looking at another car from a different company that looks like my car.

Oh man..

remember a year ago I strated a thread " V versus V"
Here it is!!

Even some of your fellow CTS-V owners recognize the STS-V is gonna be quicker on acceleration. Which, btw, is why I see the need to pick up an STS-V over a STS V8 - the CTS-V crowd are the enthusiasts who will take their car to the road course and dragstrip, the STS-V owners are less likely to do that but everybody pulls up at a stoplight now and then.

Keep thinking that the STS-V is going to be faster than a stock CTS-V at the light. When a stock CTS-V smokes you tell us all about how you got killed. However, if the CTS-V gets smoked, we'll make the playing field even. Meaning, a supercharged CTS-V against your supercharged STS-V. Obviously STS-V will be no contest. So in the long run, CTS-V has more potential if you want to get into a stoplight contest.

Update:

Actual MSRP is $77,090.
Availablity is late 2005.

I for one wish that the CTS had better NVH.
A few decibels knocked off in engine and road noise would be appreciated.
I bought the SRX because I felt like it had 1 more generation in improvements over the CTS.

Update:

Actual MSRP is $77,090.
Availablity is late 2005.

I for one wish that the CTS had better NVH.
A few decibels knocked off in engine and road noise would be appreciated.
I bought the SRX because I felt like it had 1 more generation in improvements over the CTS.

SRX, now there's a Caddy I do like. You can have your "sclades" and EXT's I like the SRX even in a V6. My wife, which was my target market, hated it. "Too small" she proclaimed. She's freekin' 4'11" tall, how big do you want the damn thing I retorted? I'll keep my Tahoe she said and then got up and left the dealership. Damnit, I even have to fight about vehicles at home! :lildevil:

Speaking of the aftermarket, check out the mods in the header as well as the hp/tq numbers. All of that was done for l/t $10K. I'll show that "bigger meaner dog" my taillights any day of the week and will do so in a car that has style and originality.

LOL---I was going to post a similar message, but this one hit the spot.

The STS-V might be a terrific car, but the value just isn't there. How can one truly ignore that aspect? :banghead:

The STS-V might be a terrific car, but the value just isn't there. How can one truly ignore that aspect? :banghead:

You guys just don't seem to get it, with all due respect. Again, this car is NOT about "Value." It's about "Status." Rarely is there value in a 100K car, or for that matter a 1.25 million dollar Veyron. Pricing is just one aspect of specialty cars that can provide Cadillac with a high-class and much needed reputation again, just like back in the glory days, ie. the 1930's and the 16 cylender cars, etc. STATUS! NOT VALUE!

Finally, don't claim your opinions as being truth. You said that the CTS-V "stomped" the S4, then why did Car and Driver magazine (Vol 50, #5) say that, "Although the CTS-V's value rated high, it fared worse in areas realted to refinement: driver comfort, ergonomics and engine noise, vibration and harshness. It was by far the noisiest inside at wide open throttle, prompting one tester to write that it came across as "the muscle car of the group", which in this case is a tepid accolade." The feelings of superiority you have for your V are the same as others will have for their STS-V, but for different reasons, and not everyone will agree.

Yeah, I read that article too.

The S4, V, and the C55 were all rated very high and it was VERY clear they were splitting hairs on which was the best car. (i.e. "As a consequence, the C55 finished one point behind the CTS-V by one point. We can only hope this doesn't provoke any arrests in Stuttgart." For the record, the final "scores" were: S4=204, V=201, C55 AMG= 200).

In terms of performance, the V did stomp the S4. The S4, however, made that up and then some (in Car & Driver's mind(s)) via other attributes, such as driver comfort, features/amenities, fit and finish, etc.

LOL--and the comment that the V was loudest at wide-open throttle cracked me up when I first read it and it does to this day. Aftermarket exhaust systems seem to be one of the first modifications that V-owners (and many high-performance car drivers) do. Why? Because of potential performance enhancements, as well as more/better SOUND. Hell, the stock V exhaust is so quiet, I could hear a mouse fart over it at 200 meters...

The CTS-V on the other hand, is a muscle car 24/7, but when you drive it gently, it doesn't magically turn into a luxury car. It's still loud, it still rides firm, and you still have to shift it. Not that that's bad, but that's just the way it is.

Umm, no. See comment above. My V is, by far, the quietest car I have ever owned (and some were not performance cars). At WOT, the whine of the maggie literally dwarfs everything else (& stock is much quieter than that)...

If Cadillac wants to play with the BIG boys, they are going to need a car like the Maybach and it will have to have all the extra goodies to go with the price tag. The STS-V may even be the wrong platform for something like this.....

You guys just don't seem to get it, with all due respect. Again, this car is NOT about "Value." It's about "Status." Rarely is there value in a 100K car, or for that matter a 1.25 million dollar Veyron. Pricing is just one aspect of specialty cars that can provide Cadillac with a high-class and much needed reputation again, just like back in the glory days, ie. the 1930's and the 16 cylender cars, etc. STATUS! NOT VALUE!

Apologies, but I guess I don't get it. In my mind, we are all value buyers to a certain degree (don't make me come up with 1,000,000 examples--a little thought and it's clear what I mean). Clearly, where each individual draws the line definitely varies from person to person, but it definitely exists in each of us.

I very much fail to recognize how one has more "status" in a STS-V vs., say, a BMW M5 or a Mercedes Benz E55 AMG. As a matter of fact, I would think "status" higher with the foreign listed cars than the STS-V with, not to mention, superior performance. And, let's not forget, that is at least SOME (if not a very significant portion) of WHY we are purchasing a V in the first place!! We want some performance!!!

Make no mistake about it--I very much love all 3 of the V-series Caddys. HOWEVER, the pricing of the STS and the XLR is disappointing in my mind. Either the performance needs to go up or the price go down in my mind. :D

Apologies, but I guess I don't get it. In my mind, we are all value buyers to a certain degree (don't make me come up with 1,000,000 examples--a little thought and it's clear what I mean). Clearly, where each individual draws the line definitely varies from person to person, but it definitely exists in each of us.

I very much fail to recognize how one has more "status" in a STS-V vs., say, a BMW M5 or a Mercedes Benz E55 AMG. As a matter of fact, I would think "status" higher with the foreign listed cars than the STS-V with, not to mention, superior performance. And, let's not forget, that is at least SOME (if not a very significant portion) of WHY we are purchasing a V in the first place!! We want some performance!!!

Make no mistake about it--I very much love all 3 of the V-series Caddys. HOWEVER, the pricing of the STS and the XLR is disappointing in my mind. Either the performance needs to go up or the price go down in my mind. :D

There will be "Status" in the STS-V because it will be produced in limited numbers and have a higher sticker price than many other status cars. (and the little "V" on the fender doesn't hurt either ;) ) Of course people have their own personal preference as to what brand is "higher status," as you said, person to person it varies. It might even be argued that it is a "bargain" as compared to some other AMG models, etc. I don't believe there will be disappointment among the vast majority of buyers with 469 HP. Hopefully, it will offer comparable performance for the pricetag, but time will tell. It is designed to perform. The STS-V will be seen and respected as compared to a E55 AMG or M5 because loyal GM or Cadillac fans will purchase one over those other choices, if they choose.

Like I said, Cadillac should go all out and produce the Sixteen or a Maybach-type vehicle to get the ultimate recognition. HERE is an example WHY Cadillac NEEDS to produce an even higher-status vehicle, something like the Maybach..........(I think Cadillac was "snubbed"....)

An article in the Robb Report (for the luxury lifestyle) Magazine caught my eye. I won't type the entire article, just the main points. From April 2002, p.98. here it goes:

Autos as Acquired Tastes,

"One of the more poignant moments in American cinema occurs in the 1987 classic TIN MEN, when aluminum siding salesman Danny Devito tells his wife, Barbara Hershey, about the importance of driving a Cadillac. A less substantial vehicle, Devito's character explains, would not instill confidence in his clients, but a Cadillac means you're dealing with someone of importance. Audiences laughed; the movie was set in 1963, and American tastes had changed dramatically since then. Upward mobility baby boomers no longer aspire to Cadillacs. Success meant a Mercedes, a BMW, or a Jaguar. The desire to turn heads was fueling a bull market in Ferraris and Lambourghinis, the ultimate in high powered sex appeal."

"Even then, the more things changed, the more they remaned the same, says Syracuse University Professor Robert Thompson, president of the Popular Culture Association. The way most of us identify our station in life is by the trappings of refinement; gracious homes, art collections, cellars stocked with fine wines. Yet none of these-however rare and costly-signal success and taste as effectively as an automobile. Everyone sees what we drive, while they may not see your art collection in your house."

"How else, for instance, does one explain the BMW M coupe? The average motorist might find its quirky, ugly duckling silhouette amusing, but vintage racer and car collecter Sandy Sadtler, proprietor of restoration specialists Madden & Ryan of Radnor Pa.., was enthralled. "The moment I saw it, I thought anything that looks this homely has to have great performance," says Sadtler, who bought one."

The article goes on to mention how wonderful Mercedes, Jaguar, and Bently are seemingly implying domestic cars are junk!?

Rich people may NOT be value buyers. They won't care about the million dollar price tag for the Sixteen, they will purchase one regardless, and those are the people Cadillac would target with cars like the Sixteen. Compared to that, the STS-V is a bargain. ;)

The STS-V will be seen and respected as compared to a E55 AMG or M5 because loyal GM or Cadillac fans will purchase one over those other choices, if they choose.

LOL--not me!

If I was in a E55 AMG, I'm looking for STS-Vs to torture!! :D

"One of the more poignant moments in American cinema occurs in the 1987 classic TIN MEN, when aluminum siding salesman Danny Devito tells his wife, Barbara Hershey, about the importance of driving a Cadillac. A less substantial vehicle, Devito's character explains, would not instill confidence in his clients, but a Cadillac means you're dealing with someone of importance.

In all honesty, I disagree with that sentiment. I have a very hard time believing that someone would instill confidence by driving a cadillac, but would NOT instill confidence driving a BMW or Benz, but, perhaps, that is just me. ;)

LOL--not me!

If I was in a E55 AMG, I'm looking for STS-Vs to torture!! :D

LOL, that's true, it all comes down to personal choice in the end. Those AMG interiors are beautiful. :worship:

That is, as long as the electronics don't fry on you in the AMG...... :D

HERE is a pretty interesting MB site.....

http://www.mercedes-benz-usa.com/mlclass.php

Funny read....

I must, though, stand behind CVP's statement that the CTSV is the Anti-Cadillac and if GMPD had a special set of badges, I'd tear all those Caddy crests off my car. There is really nothing I find attractive about a Caddy, except that my father and older brother drove them. Oh, I'm wrong...one good thing about having Caddy badges is the facial expressions of the various sports-car drivers after I beat them at the BMW autox. The guy in the Porsche C4S looked like he got kicked in the crotch, the Z8 driver had an uncontrollable facial tick, and the guy in the Z06 appeared to be shell-shocked..."That's a CADILAC????" They never saw me coming...

I love my 4 door Z06, and if it had the STS-V motor in it...I would've gotten an STi.

Ve good,

ace996

Think of it this way, the CTSV is a GM car, the STSV is a Cadillac.

The STSV competes with its competition for much less, which is the point. The STS may not blow away the competiton like the CTSV but its still priced alot less, and offers something different to those who are surrounded by mercs and beamers.

The SLK and SL run almost the same times yet you don't see SLK guys thinking they are somehow better than SL owners.

I have a very hard time believing that someone would instill confidence by driving a cadillac, but would NOT instill confidence driving a BMW or Benz, but, perhaps, that is just me. ;)

There ya go, that's why Cadillac needs to build a $100,000 dollar Cadillac, so people beside you at the red light will "look up" to you knowing you paid that much for a limited prestige car, and they will also be considered a serious brand again. :thumbsup: ;)

Keep thinking that the STS-V is going to be faster than a stock CTS-V at the light. When a stock CTS-V smokes you tell us all about how you got killed. However, if the CTS-V gets smoked, we'll make the playing field even. Meaning, a supercharged CTS-V against your supercharged STS-V. Obviously STS-V will be no contest. So in the long run, CTS-V has more potential if you want to get into a stoplight contest.

This is exactly what a few of you CTS-V guys aren't getting. The CTS-V is the enthusiasts car, it's the one you run headers and an aftermarket supercharger on because it's got a Chevy engine in it. The STS-V isn't nearly as much of an enthusiasts car. It's faster stock for stock, and that's probably going to be good enough for whoever bought it.

Of course this is what we would all like to see happen with the STS-V........

"6.0-liter LS2 V8 borrowed from the Corvette, supercharged to produce 505 hp and 520-lb-ft of torque. With engineers already familiar with squeezing the supercharged 4.4-liter Northstar engine under the STS hood, the LS2 provided just another challenge for the team."


http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=102212

^^That would make it more of an enthusiast type car, however it would repel buyers who want an exclusive DOHC motor. I WILL NOT get into the "pushrod is just as good as DOHC" argument, because it's irrelevant, some buyers just want DOHC.

A very interesting thread.

I'm sure I'm not going to change anyone's minds, but heres my take.

1) Let's not go saying that "I could buy car x and car y for the price of an STS-V" That's just dopey. The STS-V either provides value at it's price point or it does not. No one considering p