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: 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. |
|
| Folks, if you'd like to compare and contrast the features of the XLR vs. German or other autos, you're welcome to start another topic for that purpose. This topic's for discussing the features of the XLR/XLR-V. Continued off-topic posts will be removed, as will disrespectful ones. | |
|
Replying to: katcar (May 08, 2006 9:05 am) Is the XLR or V worth the extra money over an SLK or Corvette? The SLK is cramped and feels like a toy to me -- not remotely comparable as an automobile. The XLR shares the Corvette's underlying platform and the Vette is much lighter because it is a sports car, not a luxury GT. Which you want more is up to you. If you want pure performance, the Vette is your ride. If you want a luxury sporting GT, the XLR is the better variant, but with less ultimate grip and power-per-dollar. Phil |
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (Apr 20, 2006 8:03 pm) Such a convienent story don't you think. This about the car feeling so nible and he wasn't driving is nonsense. I can make a Bentley feel nimble to a passenger if I throw the car around hard enough! The entire world has seen Cadillac's interiors for what they aren't - up to the standards of the competition. 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. True and if the SL was a sports car you'd have a point. As a luxury GT this weight problem you keep talking about is all in your head and isn't shared by any of the professional reviewers that have put the SL at the head of this class time and time again. If you can't understand that weight isn't the main concern of a GT car then there are no words to convey this. 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. Ahh..the art of doing proper research. That poster quoted figures from the old M5, not the new one. That model beat the CTS-V and the new one destroys it. 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 The comparision is absurd. An Audi A8 has way more features than a Linc TC and the A8's interior furnishings alone would give it more weight over the cheap interior of the TC, plus the A8 has AWD. The overall cheapness of the XLR's interior is just as noticeable. M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (May 14, 2006 10:16 pm) No, you can't make a Bentley feel nimble to a discerning passenger. It's quite easy for a passenger to sense car dynamics without being behind the wheel. The Bentley can be surprising for its size and bulk, but neither will be disguised to even a mildly experienced driver -- or even a licenseless passenger who simply retained his or her high school physics. My story was only convenient in that it happened coincident with our participation in this thread. I suppose I should have hit the record button on the car's voice recorder to upload the unvarnished commentary. I've met a lot of people recently who are unhappy with their Merc. The old recent prior M5 was in virtually a dead-heat with the CTS-v. That the new one half-a-model-cycle later is a little quicker is no surprise, especially given the price. When the next Cadillac is introduce half-a-model-cycle beyond the new M5, things will be even or exceeded again. Still, I've driven the new M5. The V10 is a pointless change, the car feels heavy once again, the power advantage is inaccessible in normal driving, and the current V is more involving. It's really not an interesting car other than as an abstraction, like an engineering concept with no known utility. Better to buy a sports car, or step up to something emotionally engaging like a Quattroporte Sport. I live in Los Angeles. Every luxury, exotic or sports vehicle offered in the US is a routine sight for me on any day's drive to the office. I work in an industry where those cars are the norm. A Maserati, Mercedes, Audi, Bentley, Ferrari, Lamborghini, BMW, Aston or Roller interior gets no special recognition. We've been in and out of all of them. Yawn. People who have moved from SLs to XLRs/XLR-Vs have not felt compromised by the Cadillac interior. They appreciate -- as I do -- its straightforward ergonomics, handsome design and honest materials. Metal, leather, cloth and plastic as appropriate to purpose. Carpet is the singular interior oversight, IMO. Everything else stands up to the Germans, and everyone else stands behind the Italians and perhaps Aston-Martin. More to the point, being in the car now for 3 months and 4000 miles, I like the interior better still with time and familiarity, and the SL interior -- which I am subjected to far too often -- seems in poor taste by comparison. And BTW, M, it's clear the absurdity of Audi's aluminum unibody sedan coming in at about 4400 lbs. is completely lost on you. But what else can I expect from someone who thinks a surplus quarter ton of useless bulk in a 2-seat Mercedes is something to turn a blind eye to? Oh...forgot to mention I saw three more new gold-badged Mercs in the last 24 hours. Love to see the superior taste of that brand-seeking Mercedes crowd. Phil |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (May 16, 2006 2:03 pm) I'll guess that, as your an Angelino, you are in the same biz as my brother (As I could have been had I tried. Or had talent...  ). Your taste in cars, well that you don't have in common with him. His pilot was just picked up, he celebrated by buying a 1987 Chrysler Lebaron Convertible. Quite an upgrade from his '72 Buick Convertible! And, as I often lament, he can afford to buy all the cars I want but he buys the cars I can afford! You and Merc both have good thoughts, points and opinions. What I find to be in your favor is that after comparing/contrasting, you put your $ where your pen is and bought the best car for you. Can't dispute or argue with that decision. So, no issues to report with the XLR, nice. I think the revamped center stack in the '06 (base) has done a bit to improve the interior. But, dime a dozen and overweight or not, to me the SL takes the style prize. Both interior/exterior. But the relative exclusivity of the XLR is quite an allure to me. If only my tech stocks would return to their 2001 levels I could fulfill my mid-life crisis desire. Or maybe I should hit my brother up.... Nah, given his auto knowledge, I'd ask for a Caddy GT convertible and he'd send me an Allante...?! Keep posting XLR updates.
|
|
|
Replying to: laurasdada (May 16, 2006 3:50 pm) During that time, of course, Cadillac style devolved from exuberant to bland to downmarket until a return to taste was established by the Allante and the '90s STS and Eldo. The Allante was mechanically wrong, being FWD, but it was a looker in the day, the Pininfarina body lean, well-proportioned and much more expressive than the corpulently brick-like SL. In its last year it actually became pretty good, given the dynamics imposed by the platform and it still makes a stylish cruiser. I see some of them in virtually new cosmetic condition here in SoCal. Mercedes' stylists woke up to show some life in the late '90s and Cadillac got courage on the same front with the '99 Evoq show car. When the current SL form factor showed up, it wasn't ugly, nor bland, but it nevertheless has a certain deformed element to its shape that was overlooked at the time, due to the absence of anything more interesting, and the contrast with the simply strange latest Lexus SC. It's having the context of the XLR/XLR-v that reveals what's wrong with the current SL's design. Its wheelbase is 100.8" against overall length of 178.5". For the XLR/XLR-v, the same figures are 105.7" against 177.7". The extra 5 inches of wheelbase within a slightly shorter overall length looks much more modern, leaving the Mercedes looking '90s Camaro-like by comparison. The old-school (pre-1970) Mercedes expressiveness in the SL design has drama that the prior cars lacked completely, but the look is melted and droopy next to the chiseled XLR, and leaves the Merc with a very unflattering fat tail. Alone, the Mercedes keeps its dignity. Juxtaposed with an equally-well-maintained XLR-v its datedness stands out like 4 inch collars and mutton-chop sideburns. It's prettier than the Mercedes most people today grew up with, but no longer forward-looking or beautiful. The Merc interior borders on tasteless. It just tries too hard to impress without having the design sensibility of the Italians. I don't like it at all. The XLR-v gives me plenty of leather and the most straightforward, masculine presentation of the car's functionality of anything in its class. Really, I don't see the problem. I think most of the carping about the interior is reflexive defensive criticism by people who don't like to admit the crediblity of Cadillac's technical achievements with this car, which threaten their view of the market order. No matter, the drivetrain, platform, suspension and the notable lack of mass compared to the class reinforce all the reasons for buying the car in the first place. The car gets more enjoyable with use and time, and it gets just the right amount and kind of attention. Kids on crotch rockets to Moms in Range Rovers to performers in Bentleys seem to uniformly respond enthusiastically to the XLR-v. And by the way, while your brother's LeBaron is as pedestrian as it gets here, at least the top drops. And that '72 Buick drop-top can carry some serious street cred if it's shined up and not spewing blue smoke or black puffs from the tailpipes! Phil
|
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (May 16, 2006 2:03 pm) Until you know why that extra weight is there or have experienced the car fully then you're just shooting in the dark here. Isn't that what you've been telling me about the XLR? There is no way that the SL is compromised by a few extra pounds to the point of which you hype it up because if it was ALL the sources that have reviewed the car and compared it to the XLR wouldn't have put the SL over the XLR. Clearly someone would see the XLR as being superior if it truly were. Now you can't have it both ways. If the automags say that the XLR is a good handling car that is a worthy competitor you can't turn around and say they don't know what they're talking about regarding the SL. No, you can't make a Bentley feel nimble to a discerning passenger. It's quite easy for a passenger to sense car dynamics without being behind the wheel. The Bentley can be surprising for its size and bulk, but neither will be disguised to even a mildly experienced driver -- or even a licenseless passenger who simply retained his or her high school physics. Something tells me you can with the person you claimed felt a huge difference between the SL and the XLR just by riding in the XLR. I suppose I should have hit the record button on the car's voice recorder to upload the unvarnished commentary. I've met a lot of people recently who are unhappy with their Merc. Probably so. There are lots of people unhappy with any car on the market, this is nothing new. Not even all Lexus owners are completely happy! The old recent prior M5 was in virtually a dead-heat with the CTS-v. That the new one half-a-model-cycle later is a little quicker is no surprise, especially given the price. When the next Cadillac is introduce half-a-model-cycle beyond the new M5, things will be even or exceeded again. Until it happens it doesn't mean much. The V10 is a pointless change, the car feels heavy once again, the power advantage is inaccessible in normal driving, and the current V is more involving. It's really not an interesting car other than as an abstraction, like an engineering concept with no known utility. Better to buy a sports car, or step up to something emotionally engaging like a Quattroporte Sport. Well I haven't driven the M5, I was just pointing out to that poster about the differences in performance and that that were indeed looking at the previous M5's numbers. Interesting you should bring up the Quattroporte, now that is nothing but 4-door Ferrari in all but name. Something we can agree on. Love that car! People who have moved from SLs to XLRs/XLR-Vs have not felt compromised by the Cadillac interior. They appreciate -- as I do -- its straightforward ergonomics, handsome design and honest materials. Metal, leather, cloth and plastic as appropriate to purpose. Carpet is the singular interior oversight, IMO. Everything else stands up to the Germans, and everyone else stands behind the Italians and perhaps Aston-Martin. Sorry, but this will never have any merit with me so no need to keep repeating it. The XLR has a cheapo interior compared to the Germans and calling the materials "honest" doesn't change it. You're spinning here. And BTW, M, it's clear the absurdity of Audi's aluminum unibody sedan coming in at about 4400 lbs. is completely lost on you. But what else can I expect from someone who thinks a surplus quarter ton of useless bulk in a 2-seat Mercedes is something to turn a blind eye to? Oh...forgot to mention I saw three more new gold-badged Mercs in the last 24 hours. Love to see the superior taste of that brand-seeking Mercedes crowd. It is equally clear to me that the reasons why the A8 would weigh that much is completely lost on you, especially if you're going to compare it to a relic like the Lincoln Towncar. None of this surprises me either when it comes from a person that can see the obvious cheap-out GM did on the XLR's interior compared to its rivals. Taste, design all of that is up for debate for sure, but the materials are cheap and that you can't hide or dismiss by saying that the materials are "honest". Since you're such a stickler for low-weight and obviously don't care about interior furnishings you should buy a Lotus Elise. Did I mention that the local Cadillac dealer has several DTS models with cloth tops sitting on their lawn? Good to see the blue-hair brand is still being true to its roots. I see you've mentioned the Allante in another post. That car was a piece of pretty junk! A fwd roadster with a 140hp V8 upon introduction and GM couldn't figure out why it failed miserably in the marketplace. The Allante was one of Cadillac's worst moments in history. When the R129 SL came upon the scene in 1990 it sealed the coffin of the Allante. Really, I don't see the problem. I think most of the carping about the interior is reflexive defensive criticism by people who don't like to admit the crediblity of Cadillac's technical achievements with this car, which threaten their view of the market order. No, I have given credit where it is due for Cadillac and their V series cars, its the nonsense about weight is where we disagree. The implication that someone buys or seeks out the XLR because of lower weight how that somehow makes these Cadillacs all-superior. How these Cadillacs are so much better in every respect because they're lighter when you're really ignoring the fact that luxury cars (which is what these cars are) are supposed to do more than just be agile or peform, they're supposed to pamper also. That is where the XLR falls down hard, it doesn't feel the part interior wise and that I maintain more important to the average buyer in this segment, not whether or not the car is tossable. That is what you simply don't get. How many people you think push these cars to know the difference to the point of seeking out a Cadillac over a Mercedes. Now in your case, seriously if that is what brought you to the XLR then that is ok, but this ongoing nonsense about weight is just that because these cars are more about luxury than they are running slaloms though both cars can do it fairly easily. M
|
|
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
