Last post on Mar 14, 2013 at 9:16 AM
You are in the Cadillac CTS/CTS-V
What is this discussion about?
Cadillac CTS-V, Cadillac CTS, Sedan
#2396 of 2880 Re: 2008 CTS 4 / GM’s mentality – Garage door opener [sls002]
Jul 01, 2008 (7:11 pm)
Wow sls, we agree on something. You got my point exactly. While I didn't buy the premiumn luxury package, I did buy the seating package, luxury1 package, competition package, and others. I just think that somewhere along the way Cadillac should have made the opener available without having to spend an extra 6 grand or so on options that I didn't need. The main reason I didn't get the premiumn package, is that flimsy cover or not I don't like sunroofs. With the directions and connections from OnStar, I didn't need the Nav system either. Ohwell, I bought a very small opener at Lowe's and it fits very nicely in the compartment in front of the shifter. I think making the sunroof a seperate option is a smart thing. I have seen a lot of posts on this board and others that people didn't buy the car because of the sunroof and cover.
Jul 01, 2008 (7:15 pm)
Just got my Hemmings Muscle Machines today and in it they say that a stock 09 V with stock tires ran the Nuremburg course in 7:59minutes. This is the first production car to run the course in less than 8 minutes. Up till now only race and heavily modified cars have been able to do it in under 8 minute. They were speculating that the Caddy is putting out somewhere around 550 horsepower. While that is to much car for me on a daily basis , it would be nice to be able to rent one like the old Hertz Shelbys and get the feel of it just once.
Jul 01, 2008 (8:50 pm)
Sunroofs - love 'em or hate 'em, it is of course a personal decision. Just to throw my 2 cents in, I am usually indifferent about sunroofs. When my cars have them, I use them only occasionally. I admit I was really intrigued by the very large glass area on the '08 CTS even if the whole roof does not open. What was a deal breaker for me was the mesh, flimsy feeling (IMO) cover. I just don't like lots of light in the car sometimes as I am personally distracted by it (again, my own reality). I do not understand why there cannot be an opaque cover of some sort.
I figured by ordering my '09 CTS without the sunroof I was saving some $ and gaining some rear seat headroom. Eases the pain somewhat!
#2399 of 2880 Re: 09 CTS-V [rcantwell]
Jul 02, 2008 (5:06 am)
Correction to my post. I re-read the article, and the 09 CTS-V is the first production SEDAN to do the Nuremberg course in under 8 minutes.
#2400 of 2880 Re: 2008 CTS 4 / GM’s mentality – Garage door opener [rcantwell]
Jul 02, 2008 (9:14 am)
For 2009 the seating package comes with the opener. The seating package comes with other packages, but does not require the higher end package but does require the luxury package. In 2008 the seating package was available without other packages I think. While I am not fond of sunroofs either, when the car is hot from sitting in the sun, opening the windows and sunroof will speedup getting the hot air out of the car. The sunroof in my SRX has a light cover too, but I don't notice any heat coming through, but it is heavily tinted. I have never talked to onstar for directions with my last vehicle. I plan to keep the basic onstar safe&sound (or whatever it is) plan.
#2401 of 2880 Re: 2008 CTS 4 / GM’s mentality – Garage door opener [sls002]
Jul 02, 2008 (12:36 pm)
That makes sense, too bad it didn't happen in 08. Guess they couldn't get everything right the first year. The directions and connections plan from OnStar is great. Just call them give them the address and they download turn by turn directions to the car. On my CTS a asic map appears on the radio screen when approching a turn and they give audible directions well before each turn. I liked it so much that I upgraded the OnStar in my 07 Avalanche to the direction and connections plan also.Every time I have used it it has taken me right to my destination.
I have friend who also has an 08 CTS with navigation. He couldn't figure out the nav system and just called OnStar for directions.
#2402 of 2880 Re: 2008 CTS 4 / GM’s mentality – Garage door opener [rcantwell]
Jul 03, 2008 (8:13 am)
I think that no matter how they package the options, someone will not be happy with the way it is done. Back in the 70's options were not packaged so one could get exactly what they wanted, but dealers would usually order what they thought would sell for the price. On the SRX the third seat comes with the utility package. This seems odd, as the utility package includes towing with heavy duty cooling (what I wanted). I would have perferred to do without the third row seating.
I have found the nav to work well, but did have to read the manual first, and then experiment with entering addresses. Generally the street name is entered without a direction (East, west...) and if the direction is needed a choice will be presented with a range of numbers. I really like having a map displayed on long trips so that I can see where I am. Much safer than trying to look at a paper map while driving. Also is very helpful going through big cities like Chicago.
#2403 of 2880 Re: 2008 CTS 4 / GM’s mentality – Garage door opener [sls002]
Jul 03, 2008 (9:13 am)
I would agree with your comments about the navigation system. I also find it very useful, especially were I am forced to detour because of construction here in Los Angeles. It helps me avoid turning into dead end streets and no exit areas.
One thing I find a bit disconcerting is the voice directions. The verbs (action instructions) such as turn left at the end of the road are given in a very smooth voice but the nouns (street names) are the given in a rushed voice after a slight pause. They were obviously recorded separately, and possibly by a different announcer. Setting up a route is much easier than it was with my '03, and the screen is easier to read. I also like the fact that you can vary the intensity of the screen independent of the dash lighting.
#2404 of 2880 packaging \ maps Re: 2008 CTS 4 / GM’s mentality – Garage door [sls002]
Jul 03, 2008 (10:27 am)
I agree on the packaging issue – and on the NAV vs. paper maps issue as well.
Caddy ( in particular ) seems to have changed what is included in their packages – and what other options are available ( only ) when purchased with certain packages more often than most. And I do not see any logic ( from the customer’s standpoint ) in many of the choices.
While I do understand some issues \ implications regarding options such as final drive ratio, the Corvette has long been available with an optional ‘performance’ final drive ratio – and for 2008 one is available again.
I see no rational explanation for requiring ( for example – on an STS, when I was looking seriously at buying ) that one select the highest & most expensive option package ( 1SG, on the STS – for something over $8,000, last I remember ) before one could also select the QAF \ Performance Handling package. There is simply no connection here – except a completely artificial one.
And – seriously - If I had been able to “cherry pick” exactly & only the options I wanted, and was willing to pay for, on an STS, I’d have almost certainly bought one. In order to configure one with what I wanted, there was $5,000 or more of stuff that I did ** NOT ** want.
I do see the advantage, from the standpoint of Dealerships ordering cars for stock, in bundling options together. ( The “Pattern Orders” further address this. )
My recollection of the initial intent when packages began to appear was basically: Order these 4 items & we’ll discount the “Package” – compared to the MSRP of the 4 items individually.
Now, I believe it is largely a marketing strategy designed to sell more expensive versions of the product, at larger margins. Since, in order for customers to buy what they really want, they typically must also purchase options they don’t really want, need or even care about. . .
The ‘un-bundling’ of the sunroof a while back for the STS gave me hope. That hope is now faded completely.
And if I drove regularly to unfamiliar areas ( like our Outside Sales People do ) and \ or at night, I would definitely have a NAV system in my vehicle. In my view - Paper maps are fine, if you have a co-pilot. And I find them useful in deciding what order to use when planning multi-destination routing. Otherwise, I think that a built-in or portable NAV system would pay for itself in time saved very quickly when under those conditions.
Now convinced that GM \ Caddy will never change their paradigm regarding option packages . . .
Jul 03, 2008 (12:14 pm)
I believe you are right, option packages were supposed to be cheaper than individual options. Now they just lump them into packages and make us buy options we don't want and need to get the ones we want.
In the good old days, I remember( 70's) that if the manufacturer had it on the shelf you could order it. I am a Mustang fanatic, own a clasic Mustang, and there are numerous documented cases where options that were meant for the T-Bird or other Ford cars found their way onto the Mustang. One case in particular is a Mustang that was ordered with the Landau bars on the rear quarters.