the CTS is an entry level Cadillac but it is still a luxury car. a 2.8 CTS mt with almost no options at 30k dollars is entry level. that really isnt that cheap either. the V is not entry level, entry level cannot start out at 50k dollars unless it was a Bentley... sorry.davesdeville said:If the CTS isn't the entry level Cadillac, what is? (And don't say BLS, because that's not out yet, and isn't even going to be available in the US.)
just because it doesnt have leather on the doors doesnt mean its entry level. and yes, your car beats them all because it is a Cadillac. :yup:Slywun said:My latest 'entry level' purchase beats them all hands down in every category.
Since you were so condescending, okay:CVP33 said:You're paying for speed and luxury. Now here's your homework. List all the luxury options available on the STS that are not available on the CTS-V. I hear crickets. Not very many huh?
Oh nevermind. I just noticed you're 18. I thought I knew everything when I was 18 too. Take care. :thumbsup:
You're on the right track but you're still missing it. The STS-V is the one that they added the super charger to not the CTS-V. The STS is the entry level sedan for future CTS-V owners. When a STS owner thinks they can step up to the power and handling they can move up to a CTS-V.Nocturn said:Price has nothing do with entry level.
The entry level aston martin cost 110K..(new V8 vantage I think...but I may be thinking of the DB9). The entry level Porshe cost 50K (boxter). The entry level Lambo cost 110K.
Entry level simply means its the cheapest, usually most common, most manufactored vehicle in a lineup.
Take Chevy for example. A base line cobalt is the cheapest car you can get from chevy (ignoring crap ass aveo), the SS SC cobalt cost up to 24K, and will blow a base cobalt away, but the point remains its still a cobalt and still the entry level car from chevy.
Look at the first three letters in CTSV...its still a CTS, which is still the entry level car for Cadillac, it's not a seperate model, but a trim level. Exactly like the M3, M5 and AMG cars.
I did not purchase my 04 CTS-V because it was a Caddy. I purchased it because of its features/performance. There is no way in hell I would have purchased any other Caddy otherwise (maybe an Escalade at the time).davesdeville said: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.
I couldn't agree more! I have never owned a Cadillac before and had to think long and hard about owning one being an M and AMG kind of guy. What I bought was a 4-door Corvette, nothing more, nothing less. I personally would not buy an STS-V or XLR-V no matter how good, in their price rangew I would and will go for the M5 or SLK55 as they give you more bang for not so much more $.CVP33 said:I doubt highly that anyone who owns a CTS-V bought it because it was a Cadillac. If anything the name plate was nearly a deterent. As for me, I bought a 4 door Corvette. And for the record it's far more than entry level. :lildevil:
Except the M5 is definitely a better performer than the M3.Leloz said:This is like comparing the M3 to an M5.. which would you rather have?
I would take the M5 :thumbsup: ... or in this case the STS-V.
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:davesdeville said: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...