| Re: I hope exec's read this forum. I sat in a CTS and a new STS at my local caddy dealer while my car was in for service. I have to say that as much as I love the cars, they could use a tad bit more refining. When I sat in the STS, the first thing that went through my mind were the bench seats in my 1963 Mercury Monterey. That how hard they felt compared to my 1998 STS. The trunk is also alot smaller than the older style caddies, as well as the opening for it. The interior also also struck me a a little cheap (all the plastic stuff I guess) although the wood trim did look very nice. There is much less leg room in the back seats, although I hardly ever have anyone in the car other than me so that didn't really bother me. I'd have to say that the saets would be the deciding factor on whether or not I bought a new caddy. My friends parents have a 2002 DTS. When I get out of his 1995 Deville Concours and get into their DTS, it like going from sitting on a cloud to sitting on a slab of concrete. Even my 1998 STS has much more comfortable seat then the new STS. I know it's supposed to be "sporty", but that no reason to be sitting on a park bench when you drive the car. Overall, it fit and finsh of all the parts as a whole that determine the integrity reliability of a car. Although the 300C is a very well designed car, Chrysler just doesn't have the reputation for descent reliability that GM has now. I think thats the main reason that people who drive Cadillacs such as myself are turned away by the Chrysler. I will wait a year or two till its been in the market place for a while until I make my final decision. For all we know, it could be just as reliable as a caddy. After all, it is a Mercedes hidden beneath a Chrysler skin. |