Ask the Car People.SM


2008 Cadillac CTS

2880 messages,  Last post on Mar 14, 2013 at 9:16 AM

You are in the Cadillac CTS/CTS-V Forum.

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

Messages Page 139 of 289

#1376 of 2880 Re: website [knotem] by readerreader

Sep 19, 2007 (1:11 pm)

Replying to: knotem (Sep 18, 2007 9:33 pm)
#1368 of 1375 Re: website [1487] by knotem Sep 18, 2007 (9:33 pm)
Replying to: 1487 (Sep 18, 2007 5:55 pm)
"It sounds like many of you are not going to get the car for a few reasons that I consider minor. Perhaps the CTS isnt for you."
  
That unforgivable sunroof design is not a minor problem if it can’t block out 70% of the heat and the sun light when I don’t need them. It’s a major SHOW STOPPER in my opinion and many others on this board.
       
Anybody cares to state his/her opinion has the right to speak up; if a person has to praise or criticize the car I’m thinking of buying, I would like to hear it loud and clear without getting offended, even if that criticism was exaggerated or wrong, because that critic is a real Cadillac fan, saying his/her honest opinion, not a paid Auto Writer.
========================================================
 
Please point to multiple car reviews from magazines, online publications and new owners or people who have test-driven this car that point to the sunroof being a "SHOW STOPPER" (sic).
 
Such a view is unique to a few posters on this forum and largely rhetorical. Can anyone refer me to any reviewers here who failed to overcome the "70%" heat problem with the AC? Did I miss the posts where people complained about the heat (on actual test drives)?
 
Other than that, this is the first time I have ever heard anybody try to suggest that auto writers could be biased in favor of Cadillac (or GM).

#1377 of 2880 Red ones? by texases

Sep 19, 2007 (1:50 pm)

Anyone finding the red ones in stock? The dealers near me have none (Dallas).

#1378 of 2880 Re: Keyless entry/ignition [rem506] by readerreader

Sep 19, 2007 (2:01 pm)

Replying to: rem506 (Sep 19, 2007 11:15 am)
#1372 of 1376 Keyless entry/ignition by rem506 Sep 19, 2007 (11:15 am)
The keyless entry/ignition feature on the 2008 CTS is one of the nicer options and I have a hard time believing anyone could have any serious fault with it. Is the complaint that Caddy used a "switch" that you turn rather than a button that you push? It's the same natural and traditional motion we have all been executing for years without having to take the key out of your pocket and physically place it in the ignition.
The key fob that accompanies the keyless entry/ignition is sleek looking and feels solid. I was very impressed. The remote start is an added bonus. This is a feature that should be put into the "positive" category.
============================================================
 
It is a positive.
 
It's way simpler than BMW's keyless ignition system--which Edmunds hated (as well as Car and Driver--and maybe even Motor Trend); and it's the same as the Acura RL's:
 

 

 
Interestingly enough, Car and Driver complained that Acura's design drained the battery since it was easy to not turn it all the way to "Off"--
 
"Complaints, yes, we got complaints. The ignition knob on the steering-wheel column seemed a dumb idea and left at least two editors stranded with a dead battery because they hadn’t turned the knob all the way off. In a car with a traditional ignition, they wouldn’t have been able to remove the key and kill the battery."
 
http://www.caranddriver.com/longroadtests/10770/long-term-test-review-2005-acura- -rl-2005-acura-rl-rants-and-raves-page2.html
 
So, three to four years later, we know Cadillac's system is better than that.
 
Here is how it looks:
 

 

 
Much of the criticism of the car on this board is unfair in the light of its competitors. This is quickly obvious when you look at the details.

#1379 of 2880 Re: More time in the CTS [sevenfeet0] by readerreader

Sep 19, 2007 (2:06 pm)

Replying to: sevenfeet0 (Sep 19, 2007 12:06 pm)
It's too late for that, as some here don't seem to even care to know that.
 
Here are some night shots:
 

 

 

 

 

#1380 of 2880 Well. . . by cdnpinhead

Sep 19, 2007 (2:42 pm)

I started wondering if Rockylee had been reincarnated with a new screen name, but apparently not. He's still posting elsewhere these days, but doesn't want to participate here or in the Entry-Level board, now that there actually is an '08 CTS. Strange, given his previous history.
 
I'd thought some of the recent cheerleading might have been him. Guess again.

#1381 of 2880 Re: Well. . . [cdnpinhead] by readerreader

Sep 19, 2007 (3:12 pm)

Replying to: cdnpinhead (Sep 19, 2007 2:42 pm)
#1380 of 1380 Well. . . by cdnpinhead Sep 19, 2007 (2:42 pm)
I started wondering if Rockylee had been reincarnated with a new screen name, but apparently not. He's still posting elsewhere these days, but doesn't want to participate here or in the Entry-Level board, now that there actually is an '08 CTS. Strange, given his previous history.
  
I'd thought some of the recent cheerleading might have been him. Guess again.
============================================================
 
When you're wrong you're wrong. It's a simple as that.
 
Other people may back down in the face of untruthfulness so as to avoid being painted as a "fanboy" or as a "rockylee" (whatever that is); but that is irrelevant to me.
All of that strikes me as rather immature; and I suppose the people who are discussing this car on Edmunds would be old enough to buy one.
 
All substantial criticisms of the car will stand up to the facts.
 
All others will wither away or hide behind pejorative titles and name-calling. I have no time for that.
 
You take care of yourself.

#1382 of 2880 Re: Well. . . [cdnpinhead] by knotem

Sep 19, 2007 (3:25 pm)

Replying to: cdnpinhead (Sep 19, 2007 2:42 pm)
"cheerleading" is the politically correct word; I thought they're GM's agents.

#1383 of 2880 Re: Well. . . [knotem] by readerreader

Sep 19, 2007 (3:42 pm)

Replying to: knotem (Sep 19, 2007 3:25 pm)
#1382 of 1382 Re: Well. . . [cdnpinhead] by knotem Sep 19, 2007 (3:25 pm)
Replying to: cdnpinhead (Sep 19, 2007 2:42 pm)
"cheerleading" is the politically correct word; I thought they're GM's agents.
====================================
 
Not any more than somebody spreading demonstrable falsehoods (compulsively or not) about it, would be a "BMW agent".
Occam's Razor precludes both, and rather suggests simpler motivations. There isn't even any evidence that "agents" exist.

#1384 of 2880 Ahem.... by Karen@Edmunds HOST

Sep 19, 2007 (4:09 pm)

...it's about the CAR, not each other. Disagreeing with someone else is fine, but let's leave the personal assumptions and accusations at the door.
 
Thanks for your cooperation.

#1385 of 2880 I Certainly Wasn't. . . by cdnpinhead

Sep 19, 2007 (5:50 pm)

flinging mud at anyone, but expressing disappointment that a strong (to put it mildly) advocate of the (at the time) "next" CTS isn't here to discuss it, now that it actually exists.
 
There was much discussion at the time about the futility of comparing the virtues of a non-existent vehicle to those actually available.
 
Now they're all up and running, but some appear to have run farther than others.

Messages Page 139 of 289

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