Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Cadillac XLR and XLR-V Cadillac XLR and XLR-V
199 messages, Last post on Jun 06, 2009 at 9:02 PM
You are in the Cadillac XLR and XLR-V Forum. Your Host is claires
|
Replying to: merc1 (Apr 16, 2006 9:49 pm)  108.5, top speed is 155 MPH, 60-0 is 116 feet, 100-0 is 203 feet, the slalom was 66.4 MPH, and the observed gas mileage was 18.2 MPG. The CTS-V has the following stats to compare:5.0, 11.4, 13.4109, 163, 115, 202, 66.0, and 17.1. I simply do not see the huge performance disparity that you quote. The cars seem very well matched to me, performance wise. The comment about the "truck engine" is one of the most false statements I have ever heard. These forums are good for that though. Just make a statement - that makes it true.
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Apr 16, 2006 9:49 pm) A business acquaintence needed a ride from the airport yesterday. He drives an SL55, which has caused him no end of glitch torture. Anyway, he got in my XLR-v, not being familiar with the car. After a couple of miles, his first comment about the car was "What the hell is this? It feels way more nimble than my SL55." His second comment, looking around the interior was, "This is a Cadillac? They did a beautiful job on this car!" He agreed with me that the carpet should be upgraded. Premium gasoline hit $3.32 last night in SoCal. I had a late business dinner and then had to drive from Orange County back to L.A. I filled up before I left. 71 miles of night freeway driving, average speed of 82 mph, my gas mileage was 25.2 mpg. Not bad for a 443hp car with a juice drive. I've had the car 2 months as of today, 3000 miles. Like high-end audio gear and new guitars, the car benefits from break-in, so new owners should be patient about little extraneous noises. They all emanate from the top. Little chatters on rough pavement caused by glass-to-weatherseal interfaces and new seal-to-seal interfaces. I've heard the same thing from new SLs and Lexi too. But at about 6 weeks suddenly the seams settle in and the car quiets down. During this time if you need any assurance that the car is rock solid, put the top down and you'll hear that nothing moves that isn't supposed to. Another thing is that people just love this car. It gets nothing but favorable attention and response. The German luxury brand mindset has attracted so much social arrogance to it that many people resent a Porsche, BMW or Merc. Not this car. Like a Mustang, a Mini, a Ford GT, everyone has a soft spot for it. It is unifying rather than polarizing. Drivers of Bentleys, slammed Acuras, Mustang GTs, BMWs, Mercs, F150s, Mini Coopers and Ferraris give the car smiles and thumbs-up. The real arbiters of street cred, the Latino valet crowd, love this machine. I get more favorable lot position for the XLR-v than anything short of a Maranello or Gallardo. Weight is a problem in any car with sporting intentions. 500 lbs extra in the Merc! Ridiculous. Even the guy yesterday had to observe, "Makes my SL feel positively fat." Yeah. Looks it too. Side by side, the SL just looks old and in the way. Anyway, if you can't understand how deleterious a surplus quarter ton is to the character of a 2 seat GT with performance aspirations, I suppose no words will move the ball upfield. Not one of those larded up German cars "easily" outperforms its V series match. As another poster already illustrated, the vast differences you claim are fiction. In either car, the superior driver wins. My point about Audi vs Town Car mass was not to compare the cars but to point out that to make an aluminum car as heavy as a body-on-frame all steel behemoth is truly a reflection of overengineering run amok. It's just a shame so many clueless brand seekers don't have the sense to reject this approach. I recognize the missing 500 lbs. in my XLR-v in the arc of every turn. Phil
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (Apr 20, 2006 8:03 pm) Accepting the fact that interior beauty/quality is in the eye of the beholder, I thought I'd just paraphrase what I found to be a humorous quote from Bob Lutz. I believe it was printed in Autoweek some time back and Lutz was responding to the "cheap" interior materials used in the CTS. To paraphrase, "The materials we used are actually of high quality and expensive. We just made them look cheap..." Not sure if it was tongue-in-cheek or an admission of guilt! Good to see this thread active. I appreciate the XLR updates. And enjoy the Phil/Merc banter...
|
|
|
Replying to: laurasdada (Apr 21, 2006 9:38 am) As one who has traveled extensively for business, I've always been amused by the premium perception of Mercedes and BMW brand status here in the US. Here, there are no cloth-seats in a Mercedes. But land in an airport in Germany or Belgium, for instance, and slip into a clattering Mercedes E or BMW 5 scummy rattlebox with cloth seats and a stick, and you see how little they differ from "ordinary" cars. You never look at a Mercedes as a status brand again, when you come back home. I've seen these cars much worse for wear than a 250,000 mile Crown Vic in New York. The interior plastics to me have appeared to wear poorly, not matching the durability of many high-mileage American interiors of late. Then of course, here in L.A. there are a gazillion used German cars with years and miles piled up on them, up and down Lincoln Boulevard. Take a look in some of those cars and you'll be disabused of any notion that BMW, Mercedes, Audi interiors are something special beyond the first 2 years of their life. As Ford and GM pull back from fleet sales to rental car companies, Toyota is now diluting their brand with godawful strippers at the airports. But when you do get a Chevy or a Cadillac, its interior is invariably less worn than a Toyota's. It's shocking sometimes how quickly a Toyota interior loses its luster from rental abuse, when the odo reads 3,000 miles. Are German car interiors "better"? Well, they have developed a specific tactile character for touch satisfaction and many people have embraced that soft-touch, sanded finish as a reference for luxury. However, it has become light-soaking and boring, and not particularly durable based on what I see when time and miles accumulate. But in a market where many US buyers of luxury cars like the XLR-v and SL lease for short terms or buy them outright for brief inclusion in the family fleet, the initial owner only has perhaps a 2 year perspective on the interior or the rest of the car. The Cadillac techie interior aesthetic is a departure from the superficial coddled norm established by the Euro makers. That introduces friction for market acceptance at the same time it lubricates acceptance by people looking for a fresh alternative. Based on the materials I see in the CTS-v, I think that interior will show very little wear in 4 years, with the possible exception of the suede inserts on the seat upholstery, and even that might surprise me. For a real step up, you'd bypass the poseur Germans and go straight to Maserati, if interiors are foremost of your car criteria. Phil |
|
|
Replying to: skeezix (Apr 19, 2006 11:16 am) M |
|
|
Replying to: riceowls (Jun 27, 2005 8:21 am) I'm concerned about the lack of trunk room in the XLR. I look forward to long weekend drives but need room for at least small luggage. When I examined the XLR with the top down there seemed to be no trunk space at all. Am I wrong? From the Edmund's consumer feedback it seems the SLK has some trunk space with the top down. I still need a looksee on this car. I'm also concerned with the price difference. Is the XLR worth the additional funds compared to the SLK? Would love to hear some feedback. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: katcar (May 08, 2006 9:05 am) "I'm also concerned with the price difference. Is the XLR worth the additional funds compared to the SLK? " I hate to be master of the obvious, but only you can answer that question. What do you need/want/desire/value and how much are you willing to pay to fulfill those variables? Is the XLR worth many more $ than a Corvette convertible, it's kissin' cousin? While I've casually shopped both, I never noted top-down trunk space, but I don't think you'll get much more than 6 cu ft. in any HT convertible with the top down. I think you are correct, though. With top down, the trunk is quite limited in the XLR. But not as miniscule as the Lexus SC430. Have you investigated the new Volvo C70, VW Eos and rumored BMW 3 series and Lexus IS HT convertibles? Lovely choice you get to make, though. Be sure to post as you compare/contrast and buy.
|
|
|
Replying to: laurasdada (May 08, 2006 4:12 pm) I have a lovely choice & a lovely husband! I've been observing various models on the road to see what visually appeals to me. I've also looked at the XLR the dealership but not the SLK- yet. I recently researched Edmunds on hardtop convertibles which was extremely helpful. The hardtop is my number one factor follwed by reliability, comfort and power (I like my horses!). I previously owned a '86 Fiero GT - great style, excellent engine quality, great horsepower - it was an exception to the Fiero rule. I'd like to experience the sporty feel & performance of this car but with more comfort since I'm no longer in my 20s! I have looked at the Volvo but it's not sporty enough. Actually Motorweek on PBS had a segment on it last week. I'm not a VW person and for the money I'm spending I want something a little more unique than the BMW 3 series. Also, half our execs have the BMW roadster- too common. My hsb thinks the XLR is worth the difference but I'm more practical-minded. I'm not convinced yet but hoping.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: katcar (May 09, 2006 5:06 am) Having written that, I think Cadillac has been building better cars for the last couple of years. Maybe XLR owners here could chip in on the build quality/relibility of their cars. I just re-read a lux convertible comparo (on-line, forget which of the Big Three car mags it was and it was a couple of years old) and the XLR was the only one that had top operation glitches (they had to manually fold in one of the small rear windows, if I recall, when lowering the top). The XLR did fare well overall, but the MB SL came out #1. My only Fiero story (well, mentally I'm still in my 20s...!) was catching a ride with my friend Lori who had a black Fiero. Driving along and suddenly the driver's side window just fell into the door! "Not again!" she said. I think, unfortunately, she had a typical Fiero...  I, too, went the practical-minded route in my most recent purchase. I was shopping Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans (darn family!), the usual suspects. And the MB E Class. I really wanted the E, but my practical New England tendency got the best of the "just go for it" voice in my head. Voila, very happy owner of an '05 Acura TL. Nice car, the E. But I just didn't see the extra $20k. I'll take the savings and apply it to my mid-life crisis toy. I actually think I'm a bit late for the crisis?!  Anyway, looking forward to your shopping reviews and decision process. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Cadillac XLR and XLR-V Cadillac XLR and XLR-V
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Cadillac XLR-V
2009 Cadillac XLR
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
