STS-V Pricing is $77K!!!

21965 Views 198 Replies 50 Participants Last post by rayainsw, Jan 10, 2006

b4z

Discussion Starter · Oct 5, 2005

pricing just announced.
XLR-V is $100K

So much for value pricing.
Caddy really dropped the ball on pricing the new V's.

161 - 180 of 199 Posts

Dave's V

· #161 · Oct 16, 2005

I bought my CTS V because I have owned various European cars and was tired of waiting 5 days for essential parts and months for non essential parts. I also bought the CTS V because it doesn't look like anything else out there on the road. Cadillac needs some work but they are saving GM's butt right now. BMWs are fine cars, I would just never own one again. I would never buy from a company that dumps its cars (sell cheaper overseas then in the home market) when their own citizens can't afford the same car at the same price.

I wouldn't buy the STS V either (I would by a Z06 for that price) but I would buy it over any import at that price.

MCaesar

· #162 · Oct 16, 2005

MacOSR said:
There is much more to this discussion then has been said (unless I missed it).

I currently have a 2004 CTS-V that I purchased the day it hit the dealers floor. I even foolishly paid a premium over MSRP which I will never do again for ANY car. This was my first Cadillac (at 31) and my 6th new GM vehicle. I have always been a die-hard US-made vehicle purchaser..."buy American!" I did compare the CTS-V to the BMW M3 and still chose the Cadillac CTS-V over the BMW M3.

My top reasons for choosing the CTS-V over the BMW M3 in order:
1. Performance

2. American made
3. Perceived better value

Recently I have decided to purchase a 2006 BMW M5. I had many factors in my decision making process. I considered keeping my 2004 CTS-V, getting a Mercedes (various models), getting an STS-V.

Here were my top reasons for deciding to not keep the CTS-V:
1. GM releasing a car with terrible wheel hop.

2. GM's poor response to the wheel hop.
3. GM's decision to spec a rear-end not designed to handle the power the motor puts out.
4. GM's response to rear-end problems.

Here were my top reasons for deciding to not get an STS-V:
1. It is made by GM and I have lost faith in GM due to the response to CTS-V issues.

2. I think it is an old man's car (forgive me...this is my perception).
3. Not enough performance.
4. No auto shifting manual option (BMW SMG).
5. I don't see the price justification.

Here were my top reasons for going with the 2006 BMW M5:
1. Performance.

2. Status.
3. SMG III
4. Interior quality
5. Friend's experiences with multiple M3's (good).
6. I like it better then anything out there in its class.
7. Unbelievable treatment by the BMW dealer

I think the comparison between the CTS-V and the STS-V is a silly one to make. I don't believe many true performance enthusiasts would choose the STS-V. Yes you will have the executives that will choose the STS-V because of its power but when you are in that price range if you were truly considering performance and luxury you would most likely choose a Mercedes or a BMW. The target market is the executive that wants an American luxury 4 door large sedan with power.

What should be most concerning to GM is why did I decide this year to move away from American made vehicles when I wouldn't have even have considered it three years ago?
1. I feel that GM pisses on the customer. Look at the wheel hop and rear-end problems on the CTS-V.

2. We are now a global economy. GM's vehicles are using parts made in China so what is the real difference.
3. Dealer attitudes. I was trying to purchase two 2005 Cadillac Escalades and a 2006 Corvette Z06 and the dealer wouldn't deal with me on price (the Escalades were selling too well I guess). I was willing to pay MSRP on the vette but wanted dealer invoice on the Escalades. I ended up getting a couple Toyota Sequoia Limiteds and now the M5.
4. When doing side-by-side comparisons I felt there was a much better value for my $ in the Toyota's.

There is much more to a luxury sedan then the HP ratings!

You make some excellent points. GM will not truly be a world class organization until they stop bringing cars to market before they are ready. You can run off an almost endless list of cars they brought to market before they were ready (either in design like the CTS-V or engine like the GTO and SSR). Then they spend the next few years getting it right but by then they have killed the image of the car.

As for Toyotas, they are very refined cars but most of them have no soul. They feel like very good appliances. That is fine for Corollas and Camrys but not for luxury or performance cars.

MacOSR

· #163 · Oct 16, 2005

MCaesar said:
As for Toyotas, they are very refined cars but most of them have no soul. They feel like very good appliances. That is fine for Corollas and Camrys but not for luxury or performance cars.

Agreed. GM should be very concerned about China IMHO. Give China a few years and they will be formidable to contend against. Every organization has it's problems. However, you have a problem organization when it doesn't operate with the mentality of "do what is right for the customer."

GM should also watch for Toyota vehicles being compared to their luxury cars/suvs. Go compare a Toyota Sequoia Limited with second row captains seating and wood trim. You will walk away realizing about the only things missing are dual climate zone and not as much HP in the Toyota. However, you get 120v outlet in the Sequoia, save $15,000, and it feels more solid.

MacOSR

· #164 · Oct 16, 2005

Dave's V said:
I bought my CTS V because I have owned various European cars and was tired of waiting 5 days for essential parts and months for non essential parts. I also bought the CTS V because it doesn't look like anything else out there on the road. Cadillac needs some work but they are saving GM's butt right now. BMWs are fine cars, I would just never own one again. I would never buy from a company that dumps its cars (sell cheaper overseas then in the home market) when their own citizens can't afford the same car at the same price.

I wouldn't buy the STS V either (I would by a Z06 for that price) but I would buy it over any import at that price.

Be careful there :hide: Various people have waited weeks for basic parts for the CTS-V including myself. Every car company has these issues.

I am suprised you would get a Z06 over the STS-V solely on similar price. They target two completely different market segments. Corvette Z06 - tire rippin, corner slicing power and speed for two. If you are looking at the Z06 you would also be in the market for a Porsche or Viper.

CVP33

· #165 · Dec 1, 2005

CVP33 said:
Well it's simple math. At $77,000 it's overpriced in my opinion. (my opinion)

As for performance we're in trouble:

BMW 4,050 lbs. 507HP/384TQ 0-100mph 10.0 secs 1/4 mile [email protected]
E55 4,237 lbs. 469HP/516TQ 0-100mph 9.9 secs 1/4 mile [email protected]
STS-V 4,295 469HP/430TQ ? ?

Here's the source btw http://www.fast-autos.net/list.html (great resource for bench racing :histeric: )

With the weight disadvantage, automatic transmission and missing TQ (vs. Mercedes) and HP (vs. BMW) I will estimate the STS-V will do 0-100mph in 11.0 seconds and the 1/4 mile in [email protected]. (and BTW these are both faster than our CTS-V's)

I will leave this post here and soon enough we'll find out if I was wrong. And I'm man enough to admit. :yup:

STS-V
0-60 4.8
0-100 11.9
1/4 Mile [email protected]
60-120 13.3
100-140 15.7
130-0 553 ft
100-0 317
Skidpad 0.90
mpg 17

January Motor Trend Magazine results

Damnit I was wrong. The STS-V really does suck.

See less See more

MCaesar

· #166 · Dec 1, 2005

CVP33 said:
STS-V
0-60 4.8
0-100 11.9
1/4 Mile [email protected]
60-120 13.3
100-140 15.7
130-0 553 ft
100-0 317
Skidpad 0.90
mpg 17

January Motor Trend Magazine results

Damnit I was wrong. The STS-V really does suck.

It seems hard to justify spending $30,000 for a slower car just to get an automatic and slightly more back seat room. The STS-V should have been a big leap forward and it is not.

MacOSR

· #167 · Dec 16, 2005

MCaesar said:
It seems hard to justify spending $30,000 for a slower car just to get an automatic and slightly more back seat room. The STS-V should have been a big leap forward and it is not.

Can't argue with that.

Swine

· #168 · Dec 17, 2005

I Like it anyway

MCaesar

· #169 · Dec 17, 2005

MacOSR said:
Be careful there :hide: Various people have waited weeks for basic parts for the CTS-V including myself. Every car company has these issues.

I am suprised you would get a Z06 over the STS-V solely on similar price. They target two completely different market segments. Corvette Z06 - tire rippin, corner slicing power and speed for two. If you are looking at the Z06 you would also be in the market for a Porsche or Viper.

GM has a lot more issues than any other big company. Why has their market share fallen every year? The stupid leaders of GM thinks it comes down to cost containment and marketing.

No, stupid (GM, not you) it the PRODUCT!!!

Until they understand that you

1. Can't bring cars to market before all the refinement is complete

2. You can't offer warmed over Chevys as Pontiacs

3. You must be the LEADERS in car design, not the follower

4. Quality is life and death

until then, they will suck wind.

See less See more

MacOSR

· #170 · Dec 18, 2005

MCaesar said:
GM has a lot more issues than any other big company. Why has their market share fallen every year? The stupid leaders of GM thinks it comes down to cost containment and marketing.

No, stupid (GM, not you) it the PRODUCT!!!

Until they understand that you
1. Can't bring cars to market before all the refinement is complete
2. You can't offer warmed over Chevys as Pontiacs
3. You must be the LEADERS in car design, not the follower
4. Quality is life and death

until then, they will suck wind.

I refuse to purchase another GM vehicle right now. Why?

1) The problems I have had and others have had with their CTS-V's. (GM can't be shocked we are having problems with the rear-ends when they aren't even rated to handle the power being put out.) The wheel hop is TERRIBLE in the snow on my CTS-V. My grinding tranny is normal according to GM. (Started grinding going from 4-5 at around 8k miles during winter.)

2) The way warranty work is handled (or not handled). It seems that GM argues almost everything. Look at the responses people are getting from GM with obvious warranty issues.

3) The employee pricing has destroyed already poor resale value for those of us that purchased prior to the crazy discounts.

Vrocks

· #171 · Dec 18, 2005

MCaesar said:
You make some excellent points. GM will not truly be a world class organization until they stop bringing cars to market before they are ready. You can run off an almost endless list of cars they brought to market before they were ready (either in design like the CTS-V or engine like the GTO and SSR). Then they spend the next few years getting it right but by then they have killed the image of the car.

As for Toyotas, they are very refined cars but most of them have no soul. They feel like very good appliances. That is fine for Corollas and Camrys but not for luxury or performance cars.

So you're saying Toyota, MB and BMW don't release their cars to soon? Prove it. Eyeryone has recalls and runing changes, yes, even Toyota.

MacOSR said:
Agreed. GM should be very concerned about China IMHO. Give China a few years and they will be formidable to contend against. Every organization has it's problems. However, you have a problem organization when it doesn't operate with the mentality of "do what is right for the customer."
GM should also watch for Toyota vehicles being compared to their luxury cars/suvs. Go compare a Toyota Sequoia Limited with second row captains seating and wood trim. You will walk away realizing about the only things missing are dual climate zone and not as much HP in the Toyota. However, you get 120v outlet in the Sequoia, save $15,000, and it feels more solid.

Actually, as China develops GM is building up their presence, and we know the Chineses dislike the Japanese so I doubt Toyota or Lexus will be very popular.... China won't block american manufacturing, just like we don't block their stuff. If they did... WWIII (The Taiwan issue could get ugly as well).

MCaesar said:
GM has a lot more issues than any other big company. Why has their market share fallen every year? The stupid leaders of GM thinks it comes down to cost containment and marketing.

No, stupid (GM, not you) it the PRODUCT!!!

Until they understand that you

1. Can't bring cars to market before all the refinement is complete

2. You can't offer warmed over Chevys as Pontiacs

3. You must be the LEADERS in car design, not the follower

4. Quality is life and death

until then, they will suck wind.

The union deals aren't helping.... Their products are getting better, don't you see that?

Vrocks

· #172 · Dec 18, 2005

MacOSR said:
I refuse to purchase another GM vehicle right now. Why?
1) The problems I have had and others have had with their CTS-V's. (GM can't be shocked we are having problems with the rear-ends when they aren't even rated to handle the power being put out.) The wheel hop is TERRIBLE in the snow on my CTS-V. My grinding tranny is normal according to GM. (Started grinding going from 4-5 at around 8k miles during winter.)
2) The way warranty work is handled (or not handled). It seems that GM argues almost everything. Look at the responses people are getting from GM with obvious warranty issues.
3) The employee pricing has destroyed already poor resale value for those of us that purchased prior to the crazy discounts.

1) Actually I've seen the abuse that some of the V's were put through in order for a diff to fail. Some people can't drive and other's drive like jackasses.
2) Sorry, you just have a shitty dealer that won't work with you. They don't feel like dealing with GM so you end up doing their work.

I will admit that GM could use a new corporate philosphy that might come about if they do restructure and cut back. Which could (hopefully) force a number of the under performing and poorly rated dealerships to close. Brand consolidation would be nice along with selling off Hummer and SAAB.

MacOSR

· #173 · Dec 18, 2005

Vrocks said:
I will admit that GM could use a new corporate philosphy that might come about if they do restructure and cut back. Which could (hopefully) force a number of the under performing and poorly rated dealerships to close. Brand consolidation would be nice along with selling off Hummer and SAAB.

The dealerships are not the core of the problem. GM itself is and its desire to do anything to save money instead of doing what is right when it comes to warranty work.

MCaesar

· #174 · Dec 18, 2005

Vrocks said:
So you're saying Toyota, MB and BMW don't release their cars to soon? Prove it. Eyeryone has recalls and runing changes, yes, even Toyota.

Actually, as China develops GM is building up their presence, and we know the Chineses dislike the Japanese so I doubt Toyota or Lexus will be very popular.... China won't block american manufacturing, just like we don't block their stuff. If they did... WWIII (The Taiwan issue could get ugly as well).

The union deals aren't helping.... Their products are getting better, don't you see that?

It is not a matter of recalls. I am talking about releasing cars before the DESIGN is finished - not malfunctions.

Examples

Fiero - released with a crappy 4 speed and anemic 4 cylinder; took years to produce V6 GT

Caprice - released in 89 with crappy engine and suspension that wasn't fixed until 94 Imp SS

The 78 mid-sized cars (Regal, Cutlass) - by the time they got it right they killed it off

GTO - poor styling and average performance; they fixed the motor and now have to spend millions fixing the styling

FWD Impala - instead of re-skinning the Lumina they should have waited until they had it right

Product getting better?

Only the fringe stuff. The Cadillacs are getting better though the STS-V is not the home run we all hoped for. THe Corvettes remain the best performance value on the market.

No, the problem is the mainstream sedans. FWD for the Impala, Grand Prix, Lucerne, etc just doesn't cut it any more. The styling is mediocre to poor. The Chrysler 300C turns heads whereas the Lucerne puts people to sleep.

Where is a sedan from GM that can compete with the S Class and teh 7 series?

GM has a LONG way to go in improving their product.

And their market share reflects that. You can't fool the customer with warmed over cars.

See less See more

Vrocks

· #175 · Dec 19, 2005 (Edited)

MCaesar said:
It is not a matter of recalls. I am talking about releasing cars before the DESIGN is finished - not malfunctions.

Examples

Fiero - released with a crappy 4 speed and anemic 4 cylinder; took years to produce V6 GT

Caprice - released in 89 with crappy engine and suspension that wasn't fixed until 94 Imp SS

The 78 mid-sized cars (Regal, Cutlass) - by the time they got it right they killed it off

GTO - poor styling and average performance; they fixed the motor and now have to spend millions fixing the styling

FWD Impala - instead of re-skinning the Lumina they should have waited until they had it right

Product getting better?

Only the fringe stuff. The Cadillacs are getting better though the STS-V is not the home run we all hoped for. THe Corvettes remain the best performance value on the market.

No, the problem is the mainstream sedans. FWD for the Impala, Grand Prix, Lucerne, etc just doesn't cut it any more. The styling is mediocre to poor. The Chrysler 300C turns heads whereas the Lucerne puts people to sleep.

Where is a sedan from GM that can compete with the S Class and teh 7 series?

GM has a LONG way to go in improving their product.

And their market share reflects that. You can't fool the customer with warmed over cars.

An 89 Caprice, Fierro, and cars from the 70's??????... it's 2005. :histeric: The GTO... they knew all along that it wouldn't be a huge success for a few reasons and they've been developing an all new GTO for a couple of years. It was a stretch just to bring the car to the US because of union labor contracts.

Old people buy Buicks, young to middle aged people buy a car like the 300.

The ULS will be Cadillacs anwser to the S class and 7 series.

Vrocks

· #176 · Dec 19, 2005

MacOSR said:
The dealerships are not the core of the problem. GM itself is and its desire to do anything to save money instead of doing what is right when it comes to warranty work.

Obviously GM is the "core" but the dealership makes a big difference.

It all comes down to money and american union labor is killing GM. Toyota has plants in the US but they won't allow the unions in, I can't blame them.

Because of the labor costs in America GM, Ford, etc will produce more cars in CHINA and Mexico.

MCaesar

· #177 · Dec 19, 2005

Vrocks said:
An 89 Caprice, Fierro, and cars from the 70's??????... it's 2005. :histeric: The GTO... they knew all along that it wouldn't be a huge success for a few reasons and they've been developing an all new GTO for a couple of years. It was a stretch just to bring the car to the US because of union labor contracts.

Old people buy Buicks, young to middle aged people buy a car like the 300.

The ULS will be Cadillacs anwser to the S class and 7 series.

You want more recent ones"

FWD Impala - they finally got the powertrain right but the styling can't compare to the 300 or Five Hundred

Lucerne - wrong wheels driving the car

GTO - bland styling

Grand Prix GTP/GXP - after many years they finally got the handling right with the offset tire sizes

Aztek/Rendevous - how is GM's share of the minivan market versus Chrysler?

Silverado - the last generation lost the momentum the previous generation was building up. It had almost passed the F150 but the Ram came and stole its thunder

H3 - a 5 cylinder? are you serious

And yes the examples from the 80s count as well because that is when the big slide started

See less See more

Vrocks

· #178 · Dec 20, 2005

You want more recent ones
FWD Impala - they finally got the powertrain right but the styling can't compare to the 300 or Five Hundred
That's YOUR OPINION, I personally think the Five hundred looks like crap and you know how I feel about the 300... just my .02

Lucerne - wrong wheels driving the car
Works great in bad weather. FWD is fine in lower powered vehicles and again.. just your opinion.

GTO - bland styling
It's a Holden Monaro, which sold just fine in Australia. It's a matter of taste / opinion..... They couldn't change alot on the car and a new one is being designed.

Grand Prix GTP/GXP - after many years they finally got the handling right with the offset tire sizes, no comment, I never drove the car or its competitors.

Aztek/Rendevous - how is GM's share of the minivan market versus Chrysler?
Aztek, looks similiar to the Prius or butt ugly. Rendevous.. never liked it myself but I personally dislike every minivan, minivan / suv hybrid. So... more opinion rather than true product defects.....

Silverado - the last generation lost the momentum the previous generation was building up. It had almost passed the F150 but the Ram came and stole its thunder
Did the Ram out sell the Silverado??? I don't think so, and when it comes to trucks you can combine the Chevy and GMC sales. Which damn near equals the F150 sales.

H3 - a 5 cylinder? are you serious
Hummer is crap. They should sell it along with Saab and put more money into their top brands. The H3 has the I5 because it's based on the small pickup platform and they were aiming for a very low price point. I wouldn't be caught dead in it or the H2.

And yes the examples from the 80s count as well because that is when the big slide started
Whatever you say boss. I (my opinion) personally don't care about what they made 20 years ago.

See less See more

MCaesar

· #179 · Dec 20, 2005

V

You are way off on your assessment.

Look at the GM sales figures and market share over the last 20 years. Prima Facie

You would have to blind, dumb, and have your head buried in the sand to not see GM's has put out inferior product, with some notable exceptions, for decades. The customers sure can see it.

CASE CLOSED

MCaesar

· #180 · Dec 20, 2005

Healy said he sees GM's ending the year with a market share of about 25.8 percent, down from 27.2 percent in 2004

Denial is very costly in business.

GM's refusal to put real money into R&D and produce cars equivalent to Toyota, Honda, and now Chrysler has cost it market share. Now Nissan is going after the truck market with a real contender.

GM will have to make better product or perish.

Impressive double-digit sales gains by Japan's top automakers drove car and truck sales in the U.S. 8 percent higher in December, boosting industry sales to a three-year high of 16.9 million vehicles for 2004.

But while industry sales rebounded sharply in December, the year ended on a mixed note for Detroit's automakers. DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group posted a 9 percent sales rise in December and a 4 percent gain for the year, but General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. lost more ground to Asian rivals.

Although U.S. automakers increased incentives for the fifth straight year, their combined market share ended at an all-time low.

"The Big Three Japanese are taking share from the Big Three U.S. automakers. It's been going on a long time, and it's a steady march," said auto analyst Robert Hinchliffe at UBS Securities in New York.

GM, despite some of the industry's most generous discounts, suffered a 3 percent decline in December -- and a 1 percent drop in 2004, reflecting a dearth of new cars and trucks.

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0501/06/A01-50668.htm

See less See more

161 - 180 of 199 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.