Ask the Car People.SM


Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

16087 messages,  Last post on May 09, 2013 at 9:32 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum.

What is this discussion about? BMW 3 Series, Infiniti G37, Acura TL, Lexus IS 350, Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Cadillac CTS, Volvo S60, Audi A4, Acura TSX, Car Comparisons, Sedan

Messages Page 851 of 1609

#8501 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [shipo] by 1487

Mar 06, 2007 (7:05 am)

Replying to: shipo (Mar 05, 2007 3:56 pm)
"First off, let’s lose the bilge water about what auto rags have written. They far too often stack the deck one way or another for their opinions to really mean much as a general statement."
 
Most auto mags like BMWs so I dont get your point. Are you saying we should disregard their opinions when they praise BMW products, or just Cadillacs? Just want to get clarity.
 
" I have no idea who or what opined that the CTS was a legit contender, but I have to question its motives. Those two cars were as different as night and day and there is no way the CTS of that era was even qualified to sniff the fumes of the 530i. "
 
One one hand we have my personal experience and the word of numerous magazines. On the other hand we have your biased opinion of the CTS which is a car you test drove in order to criticize since you are obviosuly a BMW owner and die hard fan. Which side should I believe? I also drove the 530 back to back with the STS V6 and the BMW had no clear advantage. Your bias is eroding the little credibility you have left at this point. Almost everyone knows the CTS is a real sports sedan, perhaps its time for you to acknowledge this instead of comparing it to an Accord. BTW, does the CTS-V fit into your description of the CTS as a soft, half baked sports sedan? Just wondering.
 
"The engine had also been dramatically improved over the early models, so much so that I’d even go so far as to say that it was competent. Not as smooth as an I6, but then no V6 is so no loss there. That said, the car’s suspension was still sloppy, the seats were still uncomfortable, and the ergonomics still weren’t ergonomic. "
 
Wow, competent? Thanks! I'm sure Cadillac execs can sleep well at night knowing that you thought the 3.6V6 was competent. Sloppy suspension? Thats way off base and everything you are saying totally contradicts what we know to be true about the CTS. I'm wondering how the CTS made it around the Ring with that Buick soft suspension you are describing. As for the interior, I havent said anything positive about it so I fail to see why you continue to insult the interior design.
 
"Ummm, do you rely on the car magazine for all of your opinions? I mean really, who gives a crap what a car magazine says? "
 
Thats exactly what I say when people try to use magazines as proof that BMWs are clearly superior to the competition. I like the CTs interior based on the pics, but the magazines (and Edmunds) share my opinion. People who have been in the car at the show also said it feels as good as it looks. Dont know what else to tell you. I cant take anyone seriously who thinks the '08 CTS interior is crap. That just shows you refuse to give credit where it's due. Any complaints about the 300hp engine or 6 speed transmission? Let me guess, you dont believe the magazines when they say those features will be available.
 
"No, I think that you’re parroting the scribes who regurgitate the marketing bilge fed to them by the auto companies. "
 
If these scribes were praising BMWS (which they do) would you stil be insulting them? Of course not. They are merely pointing out the positive features of a car they like. If you honestly think that publications like MT and C&D which are known for slamming GM products are just making this stuff up or repeating what GM told them to say you are truly out of touch. The car is nice and they wanted to convey that in their reports from the NAIAS. simple as that.
 
"Oh, and FWIW, the same day I drove the CTS 6-Speed last year, I drove an A3 2.0T 6-Speed. Yikes, what a difference."
 
Yikes! The CTS is only about 4 years older than the A3 and thus it makes sense that the A3 seems fresher in terms of design and execution. The CTS is in its final few months of production and you are wasting keystrokes criticizing a 5 year old design that is about to be retired. I wouldnt buy the 2007 CTS at this point with the new car coming out. Cadillac addressed your criticisms of the car and you are stills saying the '08 is mediocre at best. Go figure.

#8502 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [habitat1] by 1487

Mar 06, 2007 (7:16 am)

Replying to: habitat1 (Mar 05, 2007 3:03 pm)
"First, don't even think about putting Cadillac and Lexus in the same sentence as if they have something in common vs. German cars. "
 
Are you seriously stating that cars like the GS, IS, STS, CTS, etc. have ntohign in common with the C, E, 3 and 5? LOL! YOu have got to be kidding me dude. I know that Lexus doesnt offer manuals but aside from that it is completely absurd to sit here and say Lexus and Caddy sports sedans arent even in the same ballpark. First of all MB and Audi models cant even get with BMWs in handling and thus they are no better than CAddy or Lexus models. If BMW has an edge, its a very slight edge that cant even bee noticed in street driving.
 
"Second, there is no "substantive" reason in the world that anyone should pay any more than $25,000 for a CTS. My 2004 Acura TL 6-speed cost $32,400 new and is now worth (30,000 miles), according to Edmunds, $24,600 on trade-in value. That's a total of $7,700 in depreciation. "
 
Never said the CTS is a leader in resale value but I have to admit your numbers seem a little off. I rarely see used CTS models around here for under $24k or so. Are those numbers based on one particular car you saw for sale or did you get that from kbb? sorry but $40K to $18k in three years seems a little off to me. We all know that Acuras have good resale value and if that is your only concern than the TL is great. Of course to people who want RWD the TL isnt an option.
 
Since we are talking about resale value I think is important to note that the amount saved when buying and financing a new car is significant. If you save $100 a month by getting a CTS over a German car and invest that over the course of your finacning period (60 months) I think that $6000 could earn enough to offset the difference in depreciation. But I'm sure you've already thought of that.

#8503 of 16087 Re: True cost to own: Acura vs. Cadillac... [habitat1] by 1487

Mar 06, 2007 (7:19 am)

Replying to: habitat1 (Mar 06, 2007 4:46 am)
"But if you buy any GM, short of a Corvette, practice bending over and grabbing your ankles. "
 
Actually their trucks and SUVs have pretty good resale value. Wrong again.

#8504 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [1487] by circlew

Mar 06, 2007 (7:25 am)

Replying to: 1487 (Mar 06, 2007 6:50 am)
If you drive both cars for over 500 miles in mixed driving and on the track, you will feel the difference. If not, see may last statement.
 
BTW, it's great to use the rags for a guide but they are far from Gospel. Who's buying these cars anyway? YOU.
 
Regards,
OW

#8505 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [1487] by blueguydotcom

Mar 06, 2007 (7:38 am)

Replying to: 1487 (Mar 06, 2007 6:47 am)
The CTS is no larger or heavier than the 5 series, A6, E350, etc. so your statement makes no sense. In fact, the CTS is lighter than the A6 last time I checked even though the cars are essentially the same size.
 
Who brought up that big egg the a6? I didn't. I brought up the A3/A4 - cars I know drive better than a CTS.
 
Every review of the CTS I have seen has had praise for the steering feel and the CTS does not understeer any more than other sedans in this class.
 
I've driven the CTS. The hack journalists never really tear into cars for being underperformers. The art of automobile critique - much like film critique - has been reduced to either high praise or middling support with enough superlatives to keep the ad dollars flowing. Anyone recall the flap when the LA times' car guy tore into GM? What happened? Yeah, GM pulled advertising. So tell me, can I trust a magazine with ad dollars at stake over my OWN experience? No. My money is more important to me than what some pandering auto journalist writes to protect his job.
 
It surely has less propensity to understeer than an Audi.
 
not in my experience. The front end dive on the CTS was laughably awful. It was more akin to driving a plow, than a sport sedan. When I mentioned the dive to the car salesman, he just said, "This is a caddy. It's tuned for comfort."

#8506 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [circlew] by 1487

Mar 06, 2007 (7:56 am)

Replying to: circlew (Mar 06, 2007 7:25 am)
Dont have access to a track and I doubt many BMW owners drive their 530s on the track. Its pointless to brag about capabilities that cant be tapped on public roads. Most of the cars we are discussing offer more than owners can use.
 
"BTW, it's great to use the rags for a guide but they are far from Gospel. Who's buying these cars anyway? YOU. "
 
I am not a person who makes buying decisions based on car mags. If I did I would be a rabid BMW fan since the auto press loves BMWs even though they offer worst in class value. One has to agree (actually you dont of course) that you tend to believe something when various press sources concur. Most of the press says the 3 series is the benchmark sports sedan but according to you I should disregard that since mags are biased and often off base. I hardly quote buff mags as gospel but certain things have to be accepted based on how often they are agreed upon by the automotive writers from numerous sources. I accept that Audi makes high quality interiors, Honda makes great manual trannies, that BMW usually have accurate steering, etc. Along with that I accept that Cadillac does in fact know how to design a RWD sports sedan.

#8507 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [blueguydotcom] by 1487

Mar 06, 2007 (8:04 am)

Replying to: blueguydotcom (Mar 06, 2007 7:38 am)
1. The 3/A4/IS are compact cars and weigh less than the CTS. They should be more nimble since they are shorter and lighter.
 
2. The CTS is the same size as the 5, E and A6 and that's why I mentioned the A6. The CTS is priced like a compact German car but handles and hold people like a midsize German car. Its pretty simple.
 
3. You should read more if you honestly think auto writers never criticize vehicles. HAve you ever read any revies of the Aztek? The last gen Escalade? The GM minivans? The Catera? Please spare me. The CTS hasnt been dogged because its not a bad car. Very simple.
 
"Yeah, GM pulled advertising. So tell me, can I trust a magazine with ad dollars at stake over my OWN experience? No. My money is more important to me than what some pandering auto journalist writes to protect his job."
 
GM rarely pulls advertising. OBviously you havent read the review in question if you honestly think this was a case of GM pulling ads over a factual, but unfavorable reviwe. The idiot journalists barely talked about the car, he used the article to attack GMs management and called for their resignations. The editorial content of any magazine or paper is separate from the ad department. If that wasnt the case GM products would always get good reviews in C&D and MT since GM spends tons of money for ads in those publications. Anyone who reads them knows that GM products rarely get praise. It is beyond silly to suggest that the CTS (or any other car) only got good reviews because of ad dollars and that is one of the lamest excuses I have ever heard to trash a car someone doesnt like.
 
"not in my experience. The front end dive on the CTS was laughably awful."
 
The laws of physics and reviews of the CTS say your wrong. Also the CTS has a base suspension and a sports suspension. Which were you driving? Audis have 60% front weight bias and thus understeer and Audi go hand in hand. There is a reason the CTS has 50/50 distribution like BMW models my friend. They didnt just do it for kicks.

#8508 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [1487] by blueguydotcom

Mar 06, 2007 (9:09 am)

Replying to: 1487 (Mar 06, 2007 8:04 am)
1. The 3/A4/IS are compact cars and weigh less than the CTS. They should be more nimble since they are shorter and lighter.
 
I'm not looking for excuses - I'm looking to drive a car that's fun and nimble and offers entry-level lux. Caddy fails on all three of those criteria.
  
2. The CTS is the same size as the 5, E and A6 and that's why I mentioned the A6. The CTS is priced like a compact German car but handles and hold people like a midsize German car. Its pretty simple.
 
So it's a large sedan trying to compete in the ELLPS field. Well they missed the mark showing up to the dance with the biggest, least nimble date.
  
3. You should read more if you honestly think auto writers never criticize vehicles. HAve you ever read any revies of the Aztek? The last gen Escalade? The GM minivans? The Catera? Please spare me. The CTS hasnt been dogged because its not a bad car. Very simple.
 
Reviewers softball all vehicles. They don't tear into the cars enough and really overlook glaring mistakes in execution and drive. Far too often they give a car a seal of approval based on the price or the genre it's competing amongst. For my money all cars compete against all cars. This isn't 1st graders against 12th graders...it's my money determining which vehicle i will find fun for the next few years. They're all given a level playing field. some deliver, some don't.
  
GM rarely pulls advertising. OBviously you havent read the review in question if you honestly think this was a case of GM pulling ads over a factual, but unfavorable reviwe. The idiot journalists barely talked about the car, he used the article to attack GMs management and called for their resignations.
 
How dare he think! How dare that writer and human being express an opinion that runs contrary to the great GM. This is exactlty what I'm talking about. The review was amusing and he had a strong point of view. i applaud all critics who stand up and really express themsevles. I may not agree but at least I know the critic is doing his job: being critical.
 
Anyone who reads them knows that GM products rarely get praise. It is beyond silly to suggest that the CTS (or any other car) only got good reviews because of ad dollars and that is one of the lamest excuses I have ever heard to trash a car someone doesnt like.
 
I trash the CTS because it's ugly, poorly put together, has a rough engine, sloppy suspension, cruddy transmission, zero road-feel, bad interior and is way overpriced. The reviewers...they're just pandering. So I feel bringing up reviews of any car is worthless...like movie critics/food critics, car reviews are meaningless entertainment.
  
There is a reason the CTS has 50/50 distribution like BMW models my friend. They didnt just do it for kicks.
 
Who knows why GM does anything? Why did they put a Knight Rider dash in the CTS? Why do all the plastic feel like a child's toy? Why does the front end dive in corners? Why does the engine make thrashing sounds? Why does the car exhibit so much body roll in corners? Why is it a dip causes massive undulations that continue as if the car had bad struts/springs? Why is GM still in business? So many impossible to answer questions and in the end I'm left with a simple fact: the CTS is not the kind of car that will ever grace my garage. I value fit, finish, design, ergonomics, ride, handling, power, balance...the CTS is subpar in all those areas.

#8509 of 16087 Re: Coming to a dealer near you this spring... [1487] by kdshapiro

Mar 06, 2007 (9:14 am)

Replying to: 1487 (Mar 06, 2007 7:16 am)
"Since we are talking about resale value I think is important to note that the amount saved when buying and financing a new car is significant. If you save $100 a month by getting a CTS over a German car and invest that over the course of your finacning period (60 months) I think that $6000 could earn enough to offset the difference in depreciation. But I'm sure you've already thought of that."
 
With that logic, you might as well buy a Hyundai Accent, put $1000/month more in the bank and become a multi-millionare. :confuse But I'm sure you already knew that.

Messages Page 851 of 1609

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement