- #21 of 6098
-
Re: As far as I'm concerned... [lemko]
by rockylee
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:09 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Nov 27, 2006 9:54 am)
Well lemko, that's a pretty good break-down and I could even agree with it.
Rocky
|
- #22 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [fintail]
by rockylee
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:15 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Nov 27, 2006 9:45 am)
Well the early-mid 90's STS was better than the E-class, IMHO.
Rocky
|
- #23 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [rockylee]
by fintail
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:19 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Nov 27, 2006 10:15 am)
In some ways, I am sure it is. Especially if one doesn't like a 6cyl engine.
|
- #24 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [fintail]
by rockylee
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:33 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Nov 27, 2006 10:19 am)
Well the E-class today is better than the current STS. that is hard for me to say *gulp* because I like the STS.
Rocky
|
- #25 of 6098
-
I would say:
by sls002
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:39 am)
-
|
For status, the Rolls Royce is it. Possibly, since BMW took over, it may even have decent engineering.
Syling depends on what one likes, however, most luxury cars are not Azteks.
J. D. Power has Lexus at the top of the heap. They are mostly concerned with quality and dependability.
If the point of this discussion is:
"what is the worlds best luxury car?"
Then I think that the Rolls Royce, Bentley and Maybach are very good. Cadillac does not have anything in this catagory. Cadillac does not have any sedans that compare with an S-class Mercedes either, except perhaps for size. For the "best" luxury car, the standard of the world would have to be very refined, something GM does not quite grasp.
|
- #26 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [rockylee]
by fintail
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:41 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Nov 27, 2006 10:33 am)
I don't think the STS is a bad car either...and I have seen them fairly cheap at a year or two old here. It might even be a better value than the competition...but the segment isn't really about value.
It comes down to an old GM problem - you have to keep on moving. These new models come out that are competitive, but don't seem to receive upgrades like the competition. Too often they live on for many more model years than they should.
|
- #27 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [rockylee]
by sls002
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:44 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Nov 27, 2006 10:33 am)
I think that Cadillac's sigma platform is quite good. Where Cadillac falls short is on interior quality and general refinement. The CTS interior has a bit too much firm plastic in it I think. Not sure how it compares with a 3-series BMW though.
|
- #28 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [fintail]
by rockylee
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:51 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Nov 27, 2006 10:41 am)
Yeah I agree with ya fintail. It's so difficult because smaller car company's are changing designs every 4 years. I here some are going to try to get it down to every 3-years to cater to leasing customers that want the latest and greatest.
Rocky
|
- #29 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [sls002]
by rockylee
-
Nov 27, 2006 (10:56 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: sls002 (Nov 27, 2006 10:44 am)
Yep, the current STS missed out on GM putting the few extra bucks more on interior quality. The CTS interior spy photo's I've seen give me hope.
Rocky
|
- #30 of 6098
-
Re: What does "Standard of the World" mean? [rockylee]
by sls002
-
Nov 27, 2006 (11:01 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Nov 27, 2006 10:51 am)
Do not confuse styling changes with design changes. For example, the 2008 CTS will have new styling, but will still be a sigma platform design. The best that we can hope for is an improvement to the sigma design, but the basic platform design is probably not going to change a lot. But the 2008 CTS should have a lot of improvement in refinement, which can be done with some refinement in the basic sigma design.
|