You are here: Forums Sedans Cadillac STS/STS-V Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?

Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?

1325 messages,  Last post on Apr 08, 2009 at 7:01 AM

You are in the Cadillac STS/STS-V Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Cadillac STS, Cadillac STS-V, Sedan

Messages Page 33 of 134 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ... 134 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#314 of 1325 by chavis10 Feb 17, 2004 (3:53 pm)
G chassis a failure? Wow, this topic just keep getting better.
#315 of 1325 chavis10 by rctennis3811 Feb 17, 2004 (3:58 pm)
"Tennis, I've driven DTSs and STSs around a road course and they torque steered only in extreme situations. You obviously haven't had much seat time so I won't even respond to your nonsense."   Nonsense??? How is saying that a car has torque steer obvious??? You just say things like "nonsense" to cover up the fact that you're wrong and can't admit that some cars in this world are not as good as you think they are.
#318 of 1325 by eaton53 Feb 18, 2004 (8:21 am)
"The SRX has already received many accolades -ranked #1 in Consumer Reports (can you believe that?!?!), best luxury SUV in C&D and best luxury SUV in Money magazine."   It's also the Automobile All-Star in the Midsize SUV category. The STS is the sedan version of the SRX and ought to address the main complaint - the use of the CTS dashboard (although I'm not complaining). It should be a bit lighter than the SRX. Those 2 things will make it an even greater vehicle.   I expect the SRX to get the STS dash before too long.
#319 of 1325 chavis10 by rctennis3811 Feb 18, 2004 (9:20 am)
You're telling me that I'm only listening to what C/D says!?! I've rented an 01 Seville STS when on vacation and I can PLAINLY tell you that there is some apparent torque steer when accelerating to gain speed for the highway. All I'm saying is that FWD is not as good as you think it is. But, I'll choose it over RWD if I lived in the snowbelt...
#320 of 1325 merc1-Why LS6 Is Most Advanced by mbukukanyau Feb 18, 2004 (11:09 am)
Why do I insist that the LS6 is probably the most advanced engine in the world?   1. Its Simple in Design 2. Developed - Designed and Built from the Ground up in 2001 3. Most efficiency engine in Bang for the Buck and Fuel economy 4. three-way catalyst air injection reaction 5. sequential fuel injection in LS6 Vs. Direct Injection in your BMW V12 6. hydraulic roller Valve lifters 7. All Aluminum Block Just like the Bemmier V12 8. The most sophisticated engine Control System in the industry designed to Reduce Vibration associated with Pushrod engines. 9. Thermoplastic intake manifold – Does the BMW V12 Have that? 10. drive-by-wire electronic throttle Just like The Bemier 11. BMW V12 HP- 438 LS6 HP-405 on the –BMW HP # Advantage for 4 Extra Cylinders (Read Toyota Corolla Engine as extra useless Weight) 33HP 12. EPA Mileage Estimates BMW V12- 15 mpg / 23 mpg Z06 19 mpg / 28 mpg 13. Torque: 400 ft-lbs BMW V12 444 ft-lbs Difference =44-For 4 Cylinders   My point Give GM engineers a V12 and they will squeeze 800 HP out of it.   Show me another engine with such #’s and I will show you a more advanced engine. Many moving parts and software algorithms are not a measure of advancement. I tell you a BMW V12 engine is technologically inferior to an LS6. No matter what BMW Marketing and European car Magazines tell you.   You have 13 factual Items to refute that assertion.
#321 of 1325 by 1487 Feb 18, 2004 (3:20 pm)
The first thing I must say is that after seeing the pics of the "new" A6 I am excited about the STS. The 5 series, and now A6, do not appear to have what it takes to be all around leaders in this class. The E-class is probably the best thing going right now but it's pricing is ridiculous. Of course, people like Merc1 would dispute that because MB's aura is worth every penny. I disagree and I think the STS will be a nice alternative to the overpriced E-class.   I am confused about a few things, one being the fact that people keep bringing up all of GM's technological deficiencies when this topic is supposed to be about the new STS. Another thing I don't get is the bragging about the 6 speeds used in Audi, Jag and BMW products. It's nice to have a six speed but those manufacturers all bought their trannies from a supplier, namely ZF. Ford, BMW and VW do not design or manufacture their own 6 speed autos so they really haven't accomplished much of anything other than writing some big checks. GM could have purchased 6 speeds and maybe they should have, but when they debut their new trannies they will represent GM's own money and engineering. The whole argument over the number of cogs is silly because the real world benefits of 6 speed vs 4 speeds are minimal. GM's new 6 speed FWD tranny is only going to yield a 5% increase in fuel economy over their current 4 speeds. Not something the average driver is going to notice. The next argument will be that engines cannot be fully exploited with old 4 or 5 speeds. Wrong again, the Vette is a good example of this. The C5 was about .2-.3 secs slower than the 6 speed manual with an auto, again the difference is negligable. The same truth applies to the GTO. While a good 6 speed will cut down on gear hunting and help milk the best performance out of an engine when compared to an average 4/5 speed auto, it has minimal advantages over a well designed, smooth shifting 4 speed. GM needs more cogs to keep up in terms of advertising, but owners won't be able to feel the difference in terms of performance or fuel savings. I doubt MBs 7 speed will offer any real world advantages over a good 5 speed or 6 speed, but it will give them bragging rights and something to take our minds off their average quality. When your Benz is in the shop at least you will know you have more cogs in your auto than everyone else.   merc,   You can't even get the facts about your favorite German cars right and yet you want us to take your word about Caddys. You are way off on so many fronts that one doesn't really have time to reason with you. It amazes me that the same guy who has lambasted cadillac for producing low quality, soft riding, underpowered cars has no problem with MB and BMW producing overpriced, low quality, overly complex cars. In the past you ranted about cadillac resorting to electronic crutches and useless gizmos and now your beloved German brands are knee deep in malfunctioning electronic doodads and user interfaces that add no value to the driver. You used to say that cadillac should stop worrying about gimmicks and learn how to make a proper RWD car, now I think its safe to say you should give BMW and MB that same advice. It baffles me that people like you will waste so much time blasting GM for being behind the times when the cars you love dont offer the reliability of a Corolla. Do you really think that 6 speed autos, ABC, Sensotronic, iDrive, etc. is more important than reliability and solid ergonomics? What good is all that space age crap if the car is constantly at the dealer? Maybe, just maybe, GM is concentrating on producing high quality cars and components instead of trying to beat everyone to the punch with unwanted, unproven gadgets. I have read a number of posts here and I have yet to see what your issue with the STS really is, you have talked about everything but the topic at hand. Again, what do GM's four speed autos have to do with the '05 STS?
#323 of 1325 1487 by rctennis3811 Feb 18, 2004 (3:43 pm)
What's so bad about BMWs, Jaguars, Audis, and MBs again?? Heck, people buying a large luxury car have enough money to pay the extra bucks for those German cars! Plus, most of them are in it for the "prestige factor". Cadillac still isn't one of the most prestigious around the globe yet. If a person is in a Cadillac people look, but when a person is in a German car (BMW, MB) people STARE. They're just that prestigious and it's going to take a couple of more years until Caddy has that exact reputation.

Messages Page 33 of 134 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ... 134 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Cadillac STS/STS-V Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?