Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Drove the STS-V this weekend at the Cadillac Drive Summit. Aesthetically, very nice front end with the front grill flowing very nicely into that scooped hood. Rear end kinda ugly with that spoiler sticking up looking like an upturned shovel. Drive-wise - lots of power on tap and very smooth power band. Steering/handling was a big disappointment though - no road feel like the V; no taut feedback through the steering wheel and suspension seemed soft. (And I miss the shifts and watching the tach.) Turning effort was light with no feedback. Feels like a big sedan with lots of power but no road feel. I think I'll stick with my old '04 V and all its shortcomings. Don't need a refined V that has no temperamental, bad boy manners. :stirpot:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
Too bad they didn't make it feel more like the CTS-V. I don't care for power on a platform that won't let you handle it confidently. Mushy suspensions, numb steering and tremendous power don't belong together.

Did it have wheel hop?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
BadCad said:
Drove the STS-V this weekend at the Cadillac Drive Summit. Aesthetically, very nice front end with the front grill flowing very nicely into that scooped hood. Rear end kinda ugly with that spoiler sticking up looking like an upturned shovel. Drive-wise - lots of power on tap and very smooth power band. Steering/handling was a big disappointment though - no road feel like the V; no taut feedback through the steering wheel and suspension seemed soft. (And I miss the shifts and watching the tach.) Turning effort was light with no feedback. Feels like a big sedan with lots of power but no road feel. I think I'll stick with my old '04 V and all its shortcomings. Don't need a refined V that has no temperamental, bad boy manners. :stirpot:
Have you driven an E55 or M5 for comparison?
 

·
Registered
1992 STS / 2005 MB G500 / 2003 STS / 2006 XLR-V
Joined
·
11,694 Posts
Its too bad to see that the STS-V doesnt have a direction quite as chiseled as the M5 and E55, but I think that Cadillac is content to let the CTS-V take the raw balls to the wall driving experience, while the STS-V was designed for those who just want the fastest sedan possible without giving up any of the comforts they are used to in the normally aspirated version. I guess refined is in fact a good word for it, hopefully this wont deter the buyers coming over from the MB and BMW showrooms.
 

·
Registered
'04V, '05V, '06SRT8, '10V, '13ZL1, '12 V, '16 Z06 SC757
Joined
·
6,440 Posts
It's been stated to death.

Make it handle competently - check
Load it with features - check
Sell it for thousands less than your competitor - check
Make it faster than the competition - Uh oh.

It should've had the LS7. Now you can't tell me that a debored, supercharged, one off version of the Northstar was easier or cheaper to produce than just dropping the LS7 in. And it should've been at least as fast as the E55. If you want to break in to the ultra competitive, ultra exclusive world of premium sports sedan you don't do it with a triple. YOU HIT A HOMERUN. You make it a "no-brainer" for every perspective customer to at least look at it. Now GM made it easy to discount the Caddy offering and in the process tarnished the V legacy. You blew it fellas, you just plain blew it!
 

·
Banned
1995 ETC, 75 Deville, Cad500 powered 73 Apollo, 94 Mark VIII
Joined
·
7,971 Posts
BadCad said:
Steering/handling was a big disappointment though - no road feel like the V; no taut feedback through the steering wheel and suspension seemed soft. (And I miss the shifts and watching the tach.) Turning effort was light with no feedback. Feels like a big sedan with lots of power but no road feel.
Which is exactly how it is supposed to be. This isn't a hot rod Caddy, folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
davesdeville said:
Which is exactly how it is supposed to be. This isn't a hot rod Caddy, folks.
Why can't you have both? The E55 is refined and super powerful. Since we are late coming to the market you would think we could have at least hit those points.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
The STS V would not seem like such a let down except for that 300SRT! Simply outstanding results when the Benz engineers have to sign off on everything. Maybe VW needs to takeover GM. After all they added 50 to 55 mph top end to the Bentleys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Jesda said:
Complaints about refinement combined with demands for the LS7. This thread is all over the place!
SOme folks are just dissapointed that the new V can't run with the big dogs while others are trying to justify that.
 

·
Registered
CTS-V
Joined
·
1,192 Posts
rerone said:
The STS V would not seem like such a let down except for that 300SRT! Simply outstanding. Maybe VW needs to takeover GM. After all they added 50 to 55 mph top end to the Bentleys! The Germans sure turned Chrysler around.
I bet Cadillac isn't worried about the SRT8 when it comes to STS-V sales.

VW sucks in quality and design.

If the Germans couldn't make Chrysler better than it already was...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
851 Posts
Vrocks said:
I bet Cadillac isn't worried about the SRT8 when it comes to STS-V sales.

VW sucks in quality and design.

If the Germans couldn't make Chrysler better than it already was...
yeah, you got that right Vrocks,
VW sales the Golf`s and others now for 23% under sticker! I just wonder for how much the dealers get them!!!!

Harry
 

·
Registered
none :-(
Joined
·
282 Posts
rerone said:
The Germans sure turned Chrysler around.
Don't think VW has some very good reputation here in Europe. After all, last week it was me and my 98 Seville going for my friend's parents to the airport because his 00 VW Golf broke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Vrocks said:
I bet Cadillac isn't worried about the SRT8 when it comes to STS-V sales.

VW sucks in quality and design.

If the Germans couldn't make Chrysler better than it already was...
Perhaps they are not. But the Charger SRT8 smoking the STS-V around a road course is nothing to be proud of either. Although the interior of the STS is so much nicer you are right that they probably won't lose many sales to it.

It also worth noting in that article Car & Driver ranked the STS-V above the CLS55 despite the huge power deficit - especially at high speeds.

Apparently GM put together a very nice car that is just slightly down on high speed acceleration from the 55 and M5

I will say that I was too harsh in my initial assessment and in person I do love the styling.
 

·
Registered
1992 STS / 2005 MB G500 / 2003 STS / 2006 XLR-V
Joined
·
11,694 Posts
Wow, I cant believe this thread went this far with no one realizing VW DOESNT OWN CHRYSLER. ITS DAIMLER-CHRYSLER. i.e. MERCEDES??

Secondly, the 300C SRT is a nice car, but its full of cheap interior bits and is simply not at the level of the STS-V in terms of fit and finish... Sorry SRT guys.

Thirdly, if the STS-V does not fall into the category of a "hot-rod Caddy"... What the hell does?
 

·
Registered
94 FWB, 93 SDV, 94 FWB (sold), 90 Brougham (sold)
Joined
·
3,730 Posts
MCaesar said:
Perhaps they are not. But the Charger SRT8 smoking the STS-V around a road course is nothing to be proud of either. Although the interior of the STS is so much nicer you are right that they probably won't lose many sales to it.

It also worth noting in that article Car & Driver ranked the STS-V above the CLS55 despite the huge power deficit - especially at high speeds.

Apparently GM put together a very nice car that is just slightly down on high speed acceleration from the 55 and M5

I will say that I was too harsh in my initial assessment and in person I do love the styling.

Perhaps i was as well, but I'm still disappointed because of it. I was really hoping for something extraordinary, but I'm still thrilled at the quality of the interior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Playdrv4me said:
Wow, I cant believe this thread went this far with no one realizing VW DOESNT OWN CHRYSLER. ITS DAIMLER-CHRYSLER. i.e. MERCEDES??

Secondly, the 300C SRT is a nice car, but its full of cheap interior bits and is simply not at the level of the STS-V in terms of fit and finish... Sorry SRT guys.

Thirdly, if the STS-V does not fall into the category of a "hot-rod Caddy"... What the hell does?
from what i have gathered up, the cts-v falls into the "hot-rod Caddy" role a lot moreso than the sts-v.

and the cts-v has the engine to do so. the ls6/ls2 are hot rod engines compared to the refined supercharged N*.


i personally am happy with the new sts-v overall but what gets me is not that the car is a little slower than the competition, but its A LOT slower than the competition. At high speeds there is no race and in the quarter mile a 13.3 (moter trend) will not do when the MB is already around 12.5 with a 114.5 mph. that MB couild easily be rolling through the traps at low 12's.

On the plus side, the sts-v is cheaper and comes fully loaded. i think the price will take some buyers away from MB and BMW considering a MB cls55 amg could cost you more than $15,000 more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
MrEr1c said:
the quarter mile a 13.3 (moter trend) will not do
C+D just received last night:
They also report STS-v Quarter Mile as: 13.3
(Comparison test with MB and BMW M5.)
- Ray
Unable to recall any other numbers . . .
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
Top