Whoa! Careful there, zeroed out!:xlol:TripleOught said:thanksfully chevy did a way better job in their copy...although i wouldn't be caught DEAD driving either one. and yes, i think the fusion looks more like an sts. atleast w/ the lights and grill...
Same here, they are glorified station wagons and nothing more.TripleOught said:thanksfully chevy did a way better job in their copy...although i wouldn't be caught DEAD driving either one.
:thumbsup:Smokin' 04 CTS said:There is no refinement at all in the Fusion. Its a styling cliche, with the front end of a cadi and import altezza lights in the rear. It would have had potential if it came out back in 2000, but its just too little too late.
I think its the replacement for the ford taurus. If so I think its a great move.
Lots of cars copy the CTS:
Chrysler 300: Side and rear profile
Infiniti G35: Front end
Acura TL: Side and rear profile (rear licence plate bezel and overall edgyness)
now add the Fusion to the list.
I like the CTS, because it did it first and it did it right. It still looks very unique and turns a lot more heads than any acura or infiniti.
which one came out first g35 or cts? I thought g35 came out before the ctsSmokin' 04 CTS said:There is no refinement at all in the Fusion. Its a styling cliche, with the front end of a cadi and import altezza lights in the rear. It would have had potential if it came out back in 2000, but its just too little too late.
I think its the replacement for the ford taurus. If so I think its a great move.
Lots of cars copy the CTS:
Chrysler 300: Side and rear profile
Infiniti G35: Front end
Acura TL: Side and rear profile (rear licence plate bezel and overall edgyness)
now add the Fusion to the list.
I like the CTS, because it did it first and it did it right. It still looks very unique and turns a lot more heads than any acura or infiniti.
Easily said, but most owners would disagree. The Cruiser, as Robert says, is a cute little wagon, incredibly versatile, and, in my experience, totally reliable - something I can't say about my CTS with its whimpy differential. I've been trying for several months to dump this thing at a fair price, but have pretty much given up &, as I've related previously, we've relegated it to to/from golf course (Anyone ever try to stuff a couple full size golf bags in the trunk? If only they'd have made it about two inches wider..., but I digress) - only about a 15 mile round trip - I seriously don't trust it much further. Third differential is about to belly up...Z71 said:Same here, they are glorified station wagons and nothing more.
A friends wife wanted the PT crusier bad and they got one. After a year they realized is was a POS and dumped it.
Wish it were true, my friend... Our CTS has never been driven hard - no fast starts, etc. My wife puts on 95% of the miles & is a 63 yr old grandma who drives like a 63 yr old grandma. I'm a bit older, have owned a number of performance cars that I drove as such over the years, but do not abuse my vehicles. I love to play with my Cruiser, but have never tested the CTS's performance envelop. The differential on our car (all three of them) have never been stressed... I kinda think you got lucky with yours...Cadiman1983 said:About the differentials, either a couple of you got lemons or are driving it too hard because mine is going on 50,000 miles, and it has had no problems. I'm not a grandma driving, but I'm practicing for NASCAR everytime I go out either.
Dream on with aftermarket support - first let's take care of the differential issue - power's only good when delivered...Cadiman1983 said:Not to mention, if the CTS got more aftermaket support, like a programmer and mass produced headers, the CTS would crush the PT Cruiser due to aerodynamics. Not to mention, I would never be caught dead in a PT Cruiser, as they are simply ugly, and I'll get a heck of a lot more tail driving my CTS then a PT Cruiser.