[crowan]

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

 

[crowan]

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:

 

[crowan]

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.