STS People,
Here are two pictures. The STS with options tops out in the mid 60K range (WAY OVER PRICED IMO). And also attached is the 2005 E500 Mercedes. Anyone else think that the STS looks a lot cheaper than the Mercedes? I was hoping for a broader more classic styling theme for the 2005 STS. Remember the bigon days when having a Seville meant you were doing better then the average guy on the block? Remeber the feel of sitting in the back of a car and actually fitting into it.
Here is where Benz is kicking Caddy's ass right now (regarding the 2005 STS)
1) The E 500 stayed with a classic/prestige grill theme (caddy did not)
2) The E 500 appears to be a bigger car and looks good when parked (The STS is sigma'd out and looks like a CTS XL which is what it is)
3) I'd bet an E500 Engine would have a lot more off the line kick than a 320 horse Northstar.
Again, I have owned Caddy's forever and most likely will not switch to MB but you have to see the points I am raising...
Here are two pictures. The STS with options tops out in the mid 60K range (WAY OVER PRICED IMO). And also attached is the 2005 E500 Mercedes. Anyone else think that the STS looks a lot cheaper than the Mercedes? I was hoping for a broader more classic styling theme for the 2005 STS. Remember the bigon days when having a Seville meant you were doing better then the average guy on the block? Remeber the feel of sitting in the back of a car and actually fitting into it.
Here is where Benz is kicking Caddy's ass right now (regarding the 2005 STS)
1) The E 500 stayed with a classic/prestige grill theme (caddy did not)
2) The E 500 appears to be a bigger car and looks good when parked (The STS is sigma'd out and looks like a CTS XL which is what it is)
3) I'd bet an E500 Engine would have a lot more off the line kick than a 320 horse Northstar.
Again, I have owned Caddy's forever and most likely will not switch to MB but you have to see the points I am raising...