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
Sedans Cadillac CTS/CTS-V 2008 Cadillac CTS
2757 messages, Last post on Oct 09, 2009 at 8:13 PM
You are in the Cadillac CTS/CTS-V Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: ewl88 (Apr 23, 2008 2:51 am) Add-on Bluetooth kits are available but I'm not a fan of customizing a brand new vehicle. Alternatively, buy a $100 Bluetooth earpiece and live with the inconvenience. (That being said, I love my CTS and will live without Bluetooth for now.) |
|
|
A Cadillac dealer, about 35 miles away from home, is trying to locate a CTS with all options, without a roof, emailed me saying that he might have one for me in few days. According to Edmunds.com the average loaded CTS is sold about $1,000 above invoice, and according to Costco their negotiated prices should be better than the average price at Edmunds. My question is how much did you pay "ladies and gentlemen" above invoice? Excluding incentive, GM card pay back, Employee/Supplier discount…etc. Your input is really appreciated
|
|
|
My mother wants to buy a new car to replace our 10 year old Buick Century. Currently, I do all the driving for her. She would like another Buick. I asked our local Buick dealer to get a LaCrosse Super for me to test drive. I was told NO way, wait for the 2010 model. Whatever. Their loss, my gain. I really like the 2008 CTS, especially the RED color. I have sat in one but did not drive it due to the tiny rear window. I am only 5'6" tall and my mother is much shorter than I am. When I drive, I never use the outside mirrors. I turn and check to my left or right. Will the design of the rear of the CTS give me any visibility to the left or right when I turn to look or will the headrests and rear pillars block my view?? If there's no visibility to the rear, I'll forget the CTS and move on. All comments appreciated. We really need new wheels and I want a sporty type vehicle. The CTS is about the only American car that I would consider at this time. Thanks to all.
|
|
Why would you have to wait for the 2010 LaCross Super model, which is TWO model years away???...
|
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Apr 28, 2008 5:50 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: bryan (Apr 29, 2008 4:51 am) I still plan to check out the 2008 CTS further. I really like the car and it has received positive reviews. One knock on the CTS is "rear visibility." I guess I'll see for myself if I drive the vehicle. |
|
|
Replying to: horns1976 (Apr 27, 2008 9:45 am) Buick makes no such cars. If she doesn't mind going a bit larger, though, there is a good alternative, though. Get her a 2007 or 2008 Certified Lacrosse CXS. This car has several things going for it: 1:The 3.6VVT engine is from the CTS. It's geared, though, for low-end torque instead of high-end HP. As a result, it's *faster* than a base CTS around town, since the torque jumps to nearly maximum(looks like a flat line almost) at about 1600rpm. Far below that of the CTS. It has zero lag as a result. So it feels very eager and fast, like the CTS. It also can, as a result, pass quickly in overdrive without having to drop down a gear. It feels like the world's smallest V8 instead of a V6 the way they've set it up. Their change to the 3.9 is because they need the 3.6 engines for the CTS, which brings me to point #2. 2: It's a front wheel drive CTS with a Buick badge on it, and it costs a LOT less. GM makes less profit off of it than the CTS, which is why their limited 3.6VVT production is going there from no on. The 3.9 is a revamped 3.8 and drives like it. laggy, hunting for gears, throttle lag... it's a joke compared to the 3.6. The Super is really an overblown version of the same nonsense. Why pay premium money for the latest bling when you can get a CTS mechanically, or close to it, for less money? 3:It has the same suspension as well as the first generation CTS. It's a massive improvement over the typical slush and wobble that Buicks normally have. I drove a normal LaCrosse and this back to back and it was like someone turned the "suck" switch off and it transformed from a toad to a little tiger. It really is a drastic change. Note - the Lucerne CXS is also a similar eye-opener. It reminded me of a late 90s S420. Like no Buick I've ever driven. Big, solid, powerful, and tight. 4:It's family and older person friendly. Good interior, nice seating, and exactly what most people in their 50s and 60s want. It's also easy to see out of the rear. The optional bench seat up front opens up the front to where it feels much roomier inside as well - almost like a slightly smaller Lucerne. My mom was impressed. It also can be had in a nice light leather interior, unlike the G6(black leather only). 5:It's inexpensive. As I mentioned, a one year old certified version can be had for well under $20K now. With the remainder of the recent 5 year/100K mile warranty. 6:The transmission is the venerable 4 speed GM. This is actually a GOOD thing. First off, these are a whopping $1600-$1800 to fix compared to $3500+ for a Camry. No joke. Price a CTS transmission rebuild versus a Camry or most anything else with 5-6 gears in it. $3500-$4500. Ouch. The 4 speed is exactly right for a car with loads of low rpm torque like the Lacrosse CXS and the Lucerne CXS, because they need to shift less often. You get a smooth ride and the thing has the torque to muscle its way to the next gear. GM's mistake was mating it in the original designs with the 3.8 and 3.9, which is a typical pushrod design made to get good EPA ratings and as a result deliver maximum power at 4800rpm or so. So it developed closer to 120lb-ft of torque and maybe 130hp driving around town. Got great gas mileage, but drove like a turd. It needed more gears, since it was programmed to shift at about 2500rpm unless you floored it. The gearing was also so high, that to do this, you needed to keep it manually in 2nd until about 50mph to reach maximum HP. 3rd maxxed at almost 90mph, and overdrive was impossible - well over the design limits for the car(130 or so). This wasn't red line, either - just where you managed to get the listed HP!. First gear maxxed out at 25mph, leaving a suspicious hole between first and second, which is why it was such a turd around town. The thing sounded like it would explode at 25mph and then boom - 230HP to 130HP at 30mph and then a long climb up to maximum again. And the torque converter locking up if you let off for an instant at any speed over 35mph didn't help, either. I know the 3.8 well - I lived with four of them through the 80s and 90s. But the 4 speed IS a very reliable and bulletproof transmission. Just they stuck it on everything when it was made designed to work with V8s. The CXS, though, is like an old 60s V8. Less gears is fine(and less money to maintain/fix) because it has no lag down low. You blip the throttle 1/5th the way down and you're at maximum torque instantly. Mile high gearing works well in this case. And it's why old V8s did fine with 3 speed automatics - with 400hp+ on tap, there wasn't any situation where it lacked for power. Plus, the 3.6 is a very smooth and refined engine. ***whew***  The only other car that I would recommend would be an IS300. The IS350 is overkill and the 250 is underkill - it's worse than a typical Camry V6. The IS300 had a better engine, handles a bit better since it's 200lbs lighter, and a certified version is quite inexpensive. And you can see out of the back, unlike the new IS. It is the only Toyota I ever drove that reminded me of a Volvo or BMW from the 90s. Completely European sport sedan feel - but with some luxury as well. The paddle shifters plus the I-6 and RWD made for a very good car. P.S. http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=240623087 A typical example of a LaCrosse CXS. |
|
|
|
On 2/29/08 I put a deposit on a CTS with the PDR & PDW packages. Two months later, I don't even have a prospective build date. Funny path to profitability.
|
|
|
Replying to: genuisity (Apr 27, 2008 7:11 am) I ended up ordering my CTS and was quoted a price of $300 over invoice. My car had an MSRP of $37,640 at the time I ordered it. It has gone up $500 now. I just picked it up Saturday and paid $35,321. This was almost $1,000 below both Supplier Price and Edmunds TMV. I think I got a very good deal. Please, don't anyone burst my bubble! |
|
|
Replying to: 150mphclub (Apr 30, 2008 5:08 am) if the car has not been picked up yet from dealer allocation...it may not be built in 08MY..my understanding was the last day to order was last Fri....thus the dealer will have to resubmit your order for an 09 ...since they dont care over from one MY to the next
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Cadillac CTS/CTS-V 2008 Cadillac CTS
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Cadillac CTS-V
2010 Cadillac CTS
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
