Last post on Nov 09, 2013 at 9:40 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views
What is this discussion about?
Cadillac Escalade, Cadillac XLR, Cadillac STS, Automotive News
#4635 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [jimbres]
Feb 28, 2008 (6:20 am)
Funny thing is, I still own one of those 1980s Cadillac "rolling bathtubs." I wouldn't call it a timeless classic, but it has a lot of sentimental value for me as it was my first new Cadillac. I had a 1975 Cadillac Sedan DeVille before that one. I've also owned a 1994 Cadillac DeVille and a 2002 Cadillac Seville STS. I currently own a 2007 Cadillac DTS Performance I bought back on November 23rd.
I couldn't even get a CTS at the time as my dealership was sold out. Funny thing is, as I was closing the deal on my DTS, a woman comes in almost frantic asking if they had a CTS. Looks like Caddy's got a hit! Sometimes I wonder if I should've got a CTS as well? It's a bit too small for my tastes, but I really love what they've done with it. Trouble is, by the time I got a CTS outfitted to my tastes, I'd have probably spent as much or more for it than my loaded top-of-the-line DTS.
#4636 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [pmc4]
Feb 28, 2008 (1:57 am)
Have you ever ridden in a MB from that period? The cars were never meant to be Caddy-like luxury. No button tufted seats and inches of sound deadening and numb steering and acres of plood. This was not the point, it is not a European ideal. The cars sold in relatively identical form on the world market - the American idea of luxury does not exist much away from this continent. People gave up some of the cush for durability, workmanship, and roadworthiness. I'd take a period MB to a track vs a period Caddy any day.
Nothing significant from Germany? Only little gadgets like fuel injection, ABS, large scale production of airbags, crumple zones, workable ergonomics, dual circuit brakes, the list goes on. Crude and primitive? The S-class cars since the W111 and especially the W126 were the most advanced sedans in the world when they were introduced. The 107 and 129 SL cars were also very advanced, hence how they have aged gracefully while most of their counterparts looked ancient after a few years.
Don't ask for pics when the pics you provide are innacurate and irrelevant.
#4637 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [circlew]
Feb 28, 2008 (2:02 am)
And that car was introduced in 1972 - 1980 was the final year. Those SLs and to some extent the SLC as pictured really helped MBs image during the 70s - that was an extremely glamorous car to own in the 70s if I am not mistaken. The SLC is not my first choice, but I'd probably take it over a 1976 Eldo, if I actually wanted to drive it.
#4638 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [lemko]
Feb 28, 2008 (7:20 am)
Sometimes I wonder if I should've got a CTS as well?
What about the STS? Pretty much the same car as your old Seville except for being RWD, and you could probably have worked a good deal on a leftover '07.
#4639 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [lemko]
Feb 28, 2008 (2:43 am)
You had an '02 Seville? I've gotta say that I've always liked the '92 - '04 Sevilles. They're sharp cars, with a clean, broad-shouldered all-American look. IMO, Cadillac's comeback began with the rollout of the '92 Seville.
About 6 years ago, I spotted a mint '96 STS in a local dealer's lot. Dark green, with tan leather interior, as I recall, & with only 30K miles on the clock. Asking price was in the mid to upper teens. I was smitten, so I tried to sell the Seville to my wife as a railroad station car. (At the time, an old Taurus was pulling this duty; I've never liked leaving the BMW at the station.) Sad to say, the STS was gone by the time my wife signed off on the deal. What a disappointment.
#4640 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [bumpy]
Feb 28, 2008 (7:46 am)
The new STS is a much smaller car than my old Seville STS. If they'd have kept it the same size as the old car, I probably would've gone for it. The new STS is also a much more expensive car than my Seville STS which I thought was pretty expensive as it is. I'd want a V-8 Seville and we'd be talking big bucks by then - even on a leftover.
#4641 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [lemko]
Feb 28, 2008 (7:50 am)
I don't think the new STS is really all that much smaller than the older FWD STS - I think maybe the older one seemed roomier due to FWD.... I'd have to look up the specs and check back ....my first impression is the new STS is roughly the same size as the old one though....
#4643 of 6195 Re: OK - [xhe518]
Feb 28, 2008 (8:33 am)
That does not tell you about the interior space. I had a 2002 SLS and traded it for an SRX (a stationwagon/SUV version of the RWD STS) and my feeling is that there is no difference in interior room. However, the legroom and headroom are the same, while the shoulder room is 1.5 inches less and the hip room is 2 inches less for the STS. So, Lemko is right about the DTS being bigger on the inside.
What I like about the SRX vs the SLS is the handling. The SRX is much better handling and will make a shorter U turn than the SLS could. The SRX feels more like a sports car by comparison, although not really like my 86 Corvette.
#4644 of 6195 Re: The Only Luxury Car... [fintail]
Feb 28, 2008 (8:42 am)
Mercedes was way ahead of GM in engineering in the 60's, and while I think perhaps GM has finally reached the point of being comparable now, they were probably behind through most of the 90's. To be fair to GM though, a nice Cadillac was always much bigger than a nice Mercedes and cost half as much. From my point of view, a Buick (far cheaper than the Cadillac) was a far more sensible choice. The Buick was affordable. But the E-class (used to be a 280 or 300 I think back when - mid-60's) Mercedes was a very well engineered car.