Last Place Again

[mystik]

Seems like they always have these doesnt it? I open the pages of my new Motor Trend, and see immediately: V-8 SPORT SEDAN SHOOTOUT M45 meets 545i meets E500 meets CADDY STS. I knew the result without opening the damn magazine. STS in last place. So what comments did they have on it? If I'm allowed to scan the entire article in here, I'll do so glady so you guys can see it. The idea in a nutshell is "GM's premium division continues to improve, but so do the rest." Complaints were that the Cadillac had too much interior noise and that switching from touring to performance was a nuisance. The running order were as follows; 1st Place: BMW 545i 2nd Place: Mercedes E500 3rd Place: Inifinty M45 4th Place: Caddy *sigh* Dont really know what else to say other than ugh.

[Croc]

Gotta agree with them, though. STS is NOT a breakthrough product.

[BIGPhil]

I also glanced over this article. What happened to the days in which they did comparison tests and rated the different features using a points system? If I remember right, and please someone correct me if I am wrong, weren't the BMW and Mercedez the MOST expensive ones of the group? Not to say that the faults that they discussed weren't legit, but I would think that HIGHEST price would definately be a fault in my book. Not to pick over the placing of the vehicles, but wouldn't it be better, from a consumer's standpoint to know how they came across with their decision as opposed to making it seem completely opinionated?

[Northstar]

I'm guessing if the STS had the ZF steering gear it would have beaten the E-Class. However, I think a lot of this comparo was based on driving dynamics, and the 545i and M45 are definetly tuned to be sportier than the STS, which is probably why they beat it.

[Cory Wolfe]

Well, I gotta agree with the placement of them. I don't think the STS is worthy of first in any comparison (unless against a Jaguar or something... :P ). It's just not the stand-out product that it should be, imo.

[pow]

Wonder why they didn't test the 2006 550i. It's the same price, has the same fuel economy, but 360 horsepower instead of 325.

[VenSeattle]

Why wasn't the Lexus GS430 included?

[HarleyEarl]

I was loitering at the dealership again. A Chevy Impala and Cadillac STS were near each other, the sun was shining bright into the interiors and dash. Both the two toned tan affair. I was amazed....the Impala interior was superior to the Cadillac. I know much has been discussed about the Caddy interiors, but it is inexcusable for cars in the luxury category to be this ordinary.

[VenSeattle]

If a Toyota and Lexus sit beside one another, the fit, finish & quality will be similar. Only the materials used will be different. Such can and should be the same for GM. I don't think it's as much that Cadillac is ordinary as Chevrolet's quality and appearance has increased dramatically with its most recent remodels. Yes... the STS can improve. It will continue to get better. The DTS’s interior is superior to the STS imo, and I'm sure the next CTS will show a dramatic step forward above the current STS as well. I don't know if the STS will receive a mid-life interior upgrade but the next generation will also continue the trend. There's only about $20k difference between the FWD V8 powered Impala SS and the STS V8 RWD performance sedan. I still believe you get your $20k worth with the STS. For that matter… the difference is far less between the Impala and the DTS and you definitely get your money's worth with the DTS.

[pontiac1]

the sts is the new kid on the block. i think that it will take some time for the sts to get at the top spot. afterall, those other cars have already been around the block a few times. imo, the sts is still working out it's 'kinks' but it will eventually be a class leader. so i am not surprised with the way it finished. Edited October 9, 2005 by pontiac1

[CaddyXLR-V]

Does the STS have a sport suspension package? I dont remember ever reading/hearing anything about it. If it doesn't it should. I think they made the the STS too soft for handling, but I love how it looks. I think whats hurting its sales the most is the CTS, being so similar in size, but costing much less. Anybody know when a new Northstar will be out? I think its a good time for the Northstar to be updated to about 350+hp. Even the 5.3 will be making more hp/torque than the Northstar.

[VenSeattle]

I think whats hurting its sales the most is the CTS, being so similar in size, but costing much less. Anybody know when a new Northstar will be out? I think its a good time for the Northstar to be updated to about 350+hp.

[post="25768"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The STS is selling perfectly fine. It will easily make its sales goal this year.

The STS's Northstar IS the new Northstar. It's practically an all new engine for RWD/AWD applications. 320hp under normal aspiration and 469 hp supercharged is completely competitive in this market.

The 320 hp may increase in a year or two once the STS gets the 6-sp across the line-up, but a new Northstar will not be required for that.

[Variance]

the sts is the new kid on the block. i think that it will take some time for the sts to get at the top spot. afterall, those other cars have already been around the block a few times.

[post="25747"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Not the M45.

BTW, the ranking above is incorrect. The M45 finished ahead of the E500. Edited October 9, 2005 by VarianceJ30

[CaddyXLR-V]

The STS is selling perfectly fine. It will easily make its sales goal this year.

The STS's Northstar IS the new Northstar. It's practically an all new engine for RWD/AWD applications. 320hp under normal aspiration and 469 hp supercharged is completely competitive in this market.

The 320 hp may increase in a year or two once the STS gets the 6-sp across the line-up, but a new Northstar will not be required for that.

[post="25794"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That is only a 20hp increase in 12 years. Why should Cadillac just be competitive? Cadillac should be GMs best. I think they either need to give the Northstar more hp, or make a V10 or V12 Northstar.

[VenSeattle]

That is only a 20hp increase in 12 years. Why should Cadillac just be competitive? Cadillac should be GMs best. I think they either need to give the Northstar more hp, or make a V10 or V12 Northstar.

[post="25813"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

They are making a V12 Northstar.

[CaddyXLR-V]

They are making a V12 Northstar.

[post="25816"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Thats good news. I havent heard much about it recently, I just remember GM had the XV12 in the Cien, and I'm guessing it will be the top engine in the ULS(or whatever it will be called). It just seems like its taking forever to debut.

[VenSeattle]

Thats good news. I havent heard much about it recently, I just remember GM had the XV12 in the Cien, and I'm guessing it will be the top engine in the ULS(or whatever it will be called). It just seems like its taking forever to debut.

[post="25827"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, I don't know if it's a Northstar V12 or the XV12 or what ever they're going to call it. But, the future Cadillac flagship is suppose to have a V8 & V12. Last rumor was 2008 or 2009... Not sure, but it's suppose to still be coming.

[mystik]

Man...it'd be nice if the XLR had the supercharged Northstar standard, and the XLR-V had the V-12 northstar in it...

[Sixty8panther]

Gotta agree with them, though.  STS is NOT a breakthrough product.

[post="25517"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Have you driven one? I drove the v6 and Northstar at a R&T/C&D ride and drive event and the E500 felt like a overweight pig compared to the Northstar Caddy while the 530i had about a 1.25 second delay in throttle response. I wish I had the chance to drive the new BMW 545i but I have not. Edited October 9, 2005 by Sixty8panther

[pow]

Have you driven one? I drove the v6 and Northstar at a R&T/C&D ride and drive event and the E500 felt like a overweight pig compared to the Northstar Caddy while the 530i had about a 1.25 second delay in throttle response. I wish I had the chance to drive the new BMW 545i but I have not.

[post="25942"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Without reading your post, lemme guess... you went to a Cadillac-sponsored driving event and the BMW lagged so it sucks.

Yeah, I was right.

[balthazar]

Without asking your opinion, you obviously think Cadillac doctors all the cars to be in their favor. Yeah, I was right.

[Dsuupr]

If nothing else I'd put money on the Cadillac having less issues and costing less to maintain over 60k miles.

[pow]

Without asking your opinion, you obviously think Cadillac doctors all the cars to be in their favor.

Yeah, I was right.

[post="25998"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Nope, you're wrong....

[balthazar]

Really. Then of what relevence is the fact that where he drove both was at a

Cadillac-sponsored driving event

?

[Croc]

The STS is in no way a breakthrough product. It has a bland exterior, and a low-quality interior. Those plastics are hard, and their corners are SHARP! The center console is very hard and doesn't close with the solund of a solid product. The interior design is bland. The only thing going for the STS is the performance, and even then it is overpriced. If the interior actually had good materials in it and a less insipid design, I could forgive the exterior. But no. The product is watered down.

[SoCalCTS]

This is very interesting.

The E-Class was rated as the MOST UNRELIABLE CAR SOLD IN NORTH AMERICA by Consumer Reports. I guess quality did not figure into these rankings.

This was from an article that appeared in the Globe and Mail in September

For now, Mercedes must face facts: The brand went from No. 1 in J.D. Power and Associates' 1990 Vehicle Dependability Survey to No. 27 in the latest survey; and a poll published this year by Consumer Reports rated the 2004 E-Class the most unreliable car sold in North America

[daves87rs]

I don't understand how the STS even got into that test. It's not even in the same league as the first two...

[Sixty8panther]

I guess all the other times I drove high milage BMWs and they seemed just about on par wiht ym high milage Caddy GM must have doctored those cars too right? :rolleyes: For the record I love the styling of both the 545 & STS, and the E-class is just bland on the exterior. More 1995 than 2005. As far as the quality it's on par wiht the cars' prices. The Germans have an edge over the Japanese but not much, as far as Cadillac goes Dollar for dollar GM makes a great luxury car.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I also glanced over this article. What happened to the days in which they did comparison tests and rated the different features using a points system?

If I remember right, and please someone correct me if I am wrong, weren't the BMW and Mercedez the MOST expensive ones of the group? Not to say that the faults that they discussed weren't legit, but I would think that HIGHEST price would definately be a fault in my book.

Not to pick over the placing of the vehicles, but wouldn't it be better, from a consumer's standpoint to know how they came across with their decision as opposed to making it seem completely opinionated?

[post="25523"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Nah..

Then they wouldn't get the DESIRED results.

The E-Class was rated as the MOST UNRELIABLE CAR SOLD IN NORTH AMERICA by Consumer Reports. I guess quality did not figure into these rankings.

That only counts when it's an American car, unless the quality of said American car is positive, then it doesn't count at all

I don't understand how the STS even got into that test.

It's not even in the same league as the first two...

To give GM bad publicity.... Like I said, now the magazines are STACKING the tests... It's the same reason the "knife in a gunfight" Cobalt LS was included in their small car test. To destroy the credibility of GM's new product.

"Coincidence" that this article was published almost exactly when GM is drumming up publicity for the V-series ehh???

Why wasn't the Lexus GS430 included?

Because then IT would be last judging by the lackluster publicity it has received so far.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Without reading your post, lemme guess... you went to a Cadillac-sponsored driving event and the BMW lagged so it sucks.

Yeah, I was right.

[post="25979"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

LOL... :rolleyes:

Everyone remember though, the CTS didn't do well in the publications either at fist AND the STS is hitting it's sales targets just fine.

[bobo]

Why wasn't the Lexus GS430 included?

[post="25690"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The article mentioned that the M45 beat the GS in a shootout in the May issue. The current GS hasn't really gotten good press for being a drivers car.

I've driven all these cars except the M45, and I'd take any of them over the STS. Not that the STS isn't a good car, but the others really shine whereas the STS seems just ok. However, Cadillac deserves credit for introducing a credible competitor, albeit one that needs a little bit more polish.

[mystik]

That does bring up an interesting point. There are people who are actually on waiting lists for STS's. So GM really doesn't have a problem with what these magazines say about the car. Thing is though, they have reviewed the STS a lot. In a lot of comparison tests. Last time it came in 6th. When it went up against the BMW it beat it in almost every category, but "approached the sedan differently". Motor Trend has a nice "Why Detroit Should Be Worried Pt 1 and 2" at the beginning of their new issue. The Tundra? GM should be worried about the Tundra? I'd worry that the Mitsubishi Raider take more sales away from the Silverado than the Tundra. Also notice the graph sales of the Titan...fizzed out. The one market Japan will never conquer is the truck market. Period.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

That does bring up an interesting point. There are people who are actually on waiting lists for STS's. So GM really doesn't have a problem with what these magazines say about the car. Thing is though, they have reviewed the STS a lot. In a lot of comparison tests. Last time it came in 6th. When it went up against the BMW it beat it in almost every category, but "approached the sedan differently". Motor Trend has a nice "Why Detroit Should Be Worried Pt 1 and 2" at the beginning of their new issue. The Tundra? GM should be worried about the Tundra? I'd worry that the Mitsubishi Raider take more sales away from the Silverado than the Tundra. Also notice the graph sales of the Titan...fizzed out. The one market Japan will never conquer is the truck market. Period.

[post="26759"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The STS is compared so much because they are trying to kill demand for it.

Asia WILL crack the truck market because the media will help them all they can, mark my words.

Why should Detroit be worried? Because they're being slain and are about ready for the killshot. One that the media and public certainly are eager to give them; all they (the media and public) need is for the asians to give them the right weapons ( the right alternatives to buy and herald as "ground breaking")

[HarleyEarl]

Cadillac has been making cars for about a hundred years, there are no excuses for this interior that is no better than mainstream cars. This is supposed to be a luxury sports sedan. It fails. I derserves last place based on cheapness alone.

[The O.C.]

That does bring up an interesting point. There are people who are actually on waiting lists for STS's. So GM really doesn't have a problem with what these magazines say about the car. Thing is though, they have reviewed the STS a lot. In a lot of comparison tests. Last time it came in 6th. When it went up against the BMW it beat it in almost every category, but "approached the sedan differently". Motor Trend has a nice "Why Detroit Should Be Worried Pt 1 and 2" at the beginning of their new issue. The Tundra? GM should be worried about the Tundra? I'd worry that the Mitsubishi Raider take more sales away from the Silverado than the Tundra. Also notice the graph sales of the Titan...fizzed out. The one market Japan will never conquer is the truck market. Period.

[post="26759"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Thing is.....I've also driven all cars except the M45 and, styling opinions aside, the STS is nowhere NEAR the car that the BMW 545i is.....in ride, handling, powertrain refinement AND performance, and interior quality and fit-and-finish.

I also drove the STS at the ride-and-drive event and the one we had was equipped with the premium sport package with the 18-inch wheels and tires. Even so, it was most definitely NOT a crisp-handling package like the BMW and the E500 (with AMG sport package.) This is in stark comparison with the CTS with that car's sport package....which stands up very well with the competition.

In my opinion, it's probably struggling in comparison tests because it is NOT driver-oriented like the others....and the interior quality is definitely lacking. Not to mention a price point that is not ALL that better than the arguably-superior competition. Finally, and this is subjective, but I don't think people like the fact that the STS lacks the styling bravery found on the less-expensive CTS.

[mystik]

Asia will not crack the fullsize truck market and here's 3 reasons. 1. Toyota Tundra 2. Nissan Titan 3. Honda Ridgeline All hailed as superior trucks that changed the way trucks are percieved, blah blah blah. Has any of them made a dent? Nissan now has bragging rights with magazine publications, but no sales to back that up. The Ridgeline is an Avalanche without balls, and the Tundra is the wimpiest truck on the market. The new Tundra wont be anything more than the current Tundra is. A guy driving to and from a construction site doesnt give two sh*ts about what his trucks interior looks like.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Asia will not crack the fullsize truck market and here's 3 reasons.

1. Toyota Tundra
2. Nissan Titan
3. Honda Ridgeline

All hailed as superior trucks that changed the way trucks are percieved, blah blah blah. Has any of them made a dent? Nissan now has bragging rights with magazine publications, but no sales to back that up. The Ridgeline is an Avalanche without balls, and the Tundra is the wimpiest truck on the market. The new Tundra wont be anything more than the current Tundra is. A guy driving to and from a construction site doesnt give two sh*ts about what his trucks interior looks like.

[post="27334"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Just wait

If people are told what to do long enough (i.e. not to buy domestic) they will obey. (Cognitive conditioning) ESPECIALLY since the media is ALREADY debasing the "Patriotic" stance (Why a large majority of buyers are loyal anyway) and ESPECIALLY since the asians are viewed far superior in everything they do.

[HarleyEarl]

What is so interesting is that Germanic brands are increasingly moving away from Germanic style and becoming more American in appearance. The STS is way too much in the 'form follows function' design. Too timid.

[Flybrian]

A guy driving to and from a construction site doesnt give two sh*ts about what his trucks interior looks like.

[post="27334"][/post]

People who buy a Tundra clearly don't either...

...guess they had extra Corolla plood.

[The O.C.]

People who buy a Tundra clearly don't either...

...guess they had extra Corolla plood.

[post="27873"][/post]

No....but they DO care about supportive bucket seats, superior fit-and-finish, hard plastic trim with a low-gloss finish and that DOESN'T feel hollow and brittle, radio and HVAC controls that feel substantial, and so forth....

I'll be the first to admit the Tundra/Sequoia interior is about the ugliest I've seen in regards to sheer style....I'll also be the first to admit that the level of fit-and-finish and material quality beats anything out there in the full-size truck market (F150 included.......although the Ford LOOKS better....)

[Flybrian]

While I agree its nice (and kind of cute) that Toyota managed to put a car interior into a pickup, it would be even nicer (and really adorable) if they could manage to make their pickup a decent truck, you know, where it counts.

[bobo]

I don't care for the Tundra (or Sequoia) interior at all. It's unsightly, and the material quality isn't particularly good. However, the one area where the Tundra excels is the ride quality and handling, which used to be a Chevy strength. The Tundra may not be the choice of contractors, but for weekend warriors, it is a compelling truck.

[mystik]

People who buy a Tundra clearly don't either...

...guess they had extra Corolla plood.

[post="27873"][/post]

Wow. Thats hideous. Those AC Controls remind me of the old Silverado's AC controls. Im sorry, but supportive bucket seats? Have you sat in a Tundra? Silverado/Sierra seats own Tundra seats.

[Carguy]

It seems to me Caddy could do better if they used the 400HP LS2 with DOD instead of the 320HP Northstar in the STS. Its just as smooth. More fuel efficent. ALOT more POWERFULL at lower RPM's and would KILL the COMPITITION!! I think they should do a 90 degree 4.5L V6 based on the 6.0L LS2 V8 with the same Bore/Stroke not only to use in the pickups as a base Engine. But in the CTS as a base (useing a ballence shaft like the 3800) engine with 300HP in LS2 tune Then have the 400HP LS2 as the NON V opt in the CTS. Then SUPERCHARGE it to 500HP for the CTS V. If you REALLY THINK ABOUT IT these are refined smooth efficent Engines that would improve these cars while rejoining them with Caddies past. STOP TRYING TO BE EUROPIEN CADILLAC and BE AMERICAN! This would save STRUGGELING GM some $$$$$ while at the same time BOOSTING the power and efficency of these cars! Caddy use to be the STANDARD of the WORLD with L HEADES then OHV's and BIG CUBES NOT OHC's! And with TECH like DOD and 6SP Auto Transmisions these SMOOTH REFINED POWERFULL OHV Engines could/would be GREAT for CADILLAC!! Edited November 25, 2005 by Carguy

[skepticman]

It seems to me Caddy could do better if they used the 400HP LS2 with DOD instead of the  320HP Northstar in the STS. Its just as smooth. More fuel efficent. ALOT more POWERFULL at lower RPM's and would KILL the COMPITITION!! I think they should do a 90 degree 4.5L V6 based on the 6.0L LS2 V8 with the same Bore/Stroke not only to use in the pickups as a base Engine. But in the CTS as a base (useing a ballence shaft like the 3800) engine with 300HP in LS2 tune Then have the 400HP LS2 as the NON V opt in the CTS. Then SUPERCHARGE it to 500HP for the CTS V. If you REALLY THINK ABOUT IT these are refined smooth efficent Engines that would improve these cars while rejoining them with Caddies past. STOP TRYING TO EUROPIEN CADILLAC and BE AMERICAN! This would save STRUGGELING GM some $$$$$ while at the same time BOOSTING the power and efficency of these cars! Caddy use to be the STANDARD of the WORLD with L HEADES then OHV's and BIG CUBES NOT OHC's! And with TECH like DOD and 6SP Auto Transmisions these SMOOTH REFINED POWERFULL OHV Engines could/would be GREAT for CADILLAC!!

Sorry, Carguy, but I'm going to have to tear you a new one. I've seen lots of armchair car enthusiasts post on various forums and you're like a lot of others who don't think things through enough.

First, I'm sure GM doesn't consider the pushrod engines refined or smooth enough to use in a luxury car like the STS or any non-V Cadillac. I've heard of a TSB on the CTS-V or Corvette engine saying that GM considered a less than smooth idle to be normal behavior, so they don't build all of their engines to the same level of refinement.

I've read that GM wanted to use the Northstar in the CTS-V, but it wouldn't fit and so they were forced to go with the Z06 engine. GM seemingly wants to move in the opposite direction as you.

I'm certain Cadillac would get criticism from the reviewers for using "old technology" and lots of customers wouldn't even look at a car with a drivetrain that many consider "old technology."

As far as putting a 400 HP engine in the regular CTS, think about all the things that must go along with that much power. Bigger rotors and brakes, a heavier suspension, transmission and differential, wider tires and rims, and who knows what else. There would also be a higher maintenance cost for the customer because replacing high performance brakes and wider high performance tires costs more. You'd end up building a slightly stripped down version of the current CTS-V and it would probably cost nearly as much. And there is more overhead for GM with having more models and options available. You would now have at least three different CTS models at 300, 400 and 500 HP (and maybe a fourth base model under 300 HP), each with increasingly larger braking, suspension, etc. requirements.

If they instead put a 300 HP 3.6L V-6 with direct injection in the CTS, it will have some of these requirements, but not nearly to the extreme that 400 HP requires.

And a V-8 with equivalent power will likely get worse gas mileage in the city than the V-6. And the V-8 with DOD will probably get the same or worse mileage than the V-6 on the highway.

Remember that the vast majority of CTS models sold don't have the performance suspension or the manual transmission, so the typical CTS customer is not all that performance-oriented and all this overhead would almost certainly reduce GM profits because of the large overhead for a small volume of sales. GM should instead be simplifying the options, even though it takes away customer choices.

If you think through what you're asking for, you'll see that GM wouldn't even consider most of these things you want. Sorry, try again.

[Guest carpetbagger]

how did a picture of a Toyota Tundra dashboard get into a discussion of the STS and its competition?

[Carguy]

Sorry, Carguy, but I'm going to have to tear you a new one. I've seen lots of armchair car enthusiasts post on various forums and you're like a lot of others who don't think things through enough.

First, I'm sure GM doesn't consider the pushrod engines refined or smooth enough to use in a luxury car like the STS or any non-V Cadillac. I've heard of a TSB on the CTS-V or Corvette engine saying that GM considered a less than smooth idle to be normal behavior, so they don't build all of their engines to the same level of refinement.

I've read that GM wanted to use the Northstar in the CTS-V, but it wouldn't fit and so they were forced to go with the Z06 engine. GM seemingly wants to move in the opposite direction as you.

I'm certain Cadillac would get criticism from the reviewers for using "old technology" and lots of customers wouldn't even look at a car with a drivetrain that many consider "old technology."

As far as putting a 400 HP engine in the regular CTS, think about all the things that must go along with that much power. Bigger rotors and brakes, a heavier suspension, transmission and differential, wider tires and rims, and who knows what else. There would also be a higher maintenance cost for the customer because replacing high performance brakes and wider high performance tires costs more.  You'd end up building a slightly stripped down version of the current CTS-V and it would probably cost nearly as much. And there is more overhead for GM with having more models and options available. You would now have at least three different CTS models at 300, 400 and 500 HP (and maybe a fourth base model under 300 HP), each with increasingly larger braking, suspension, etc. requirements.

If they instead put a 300 HP 3.6L V-6 with direct injection in the CTS, it will have some of these requirements, but not nearly to the extreme that 400 HP requires.

And a V-8 with equivalent power will likely get worse gas mileage in the city than the V-6. And the V-8 with DOD will probably get the same or worse mileage than the V-6 on the highway.

Remember that the vast majority of CTS models sold don't have the performance suspension or the manual transmission, so the typical CTS customer is not all that performance-oriented and all this overhead would almost certainly reduce GM profits because of the large overhead for a small volume of sales. GM should instead be simplifying the options, even though it takes away customer choices.

If you think through what you're asking for, you'll see that GM wouldn't even consider most of these things you want. Sorry, try again.

[post="48453"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You make some good points! With SO MUTCH compatition out there in the around three and a half liter V6 near luxury class now BEATING Caddies #'s something HAS TO BE DONE!! If a RADICAL LS6 transplant is TO MUTCH and the new type Fuel Injection boosting the 3.6L HP to 300 is NOT READY then WHAT SHOULD THEY DO?? Would a 4.0L Version of the 3.6L HFV6 with 280HP be enough?--NO! Not with 300HP Lexus Is's running around. GM and Caddy need to make a BOLD series of MOVES HERE and the LS6 is a GREAT ENGINE! And I remember a TURBO version of the previous 3.2L NON HFV6 was going to be used in the CTS V and Lutz said NO!!--THANK GOD!! Your points are good but I am tired of the BASHING of OHV TECH being OLD FASHION! Just look at the difference in fuel economy of a STS V8 at 4.6L's and the same on a LS6 6.0L V8 GTO!! To your way of thinking the MUTCH SMALLER 4.6L Engine should be more fuel efficent. But it IS NOT and with DOD the LS6 would be EVEN BETTER STILL!! The LS6 is a better/more powerful/more fuel efficent powertrain even though its MUTCH LARGER!!------Does that not sound more ADVANCED TO YOU?----It does to me! They have the better Engine with the PLUS FACTER of being a V8 to KILL the COMPETITORS so DO IT GM!!

[Sixty8panther]

While I agree its nice (and kind of cute) that Toyota managed to put a car interior into a pickup, it would be even nicer (and really adorable) if they could manage to make their pickup a decent truck, you know, where it counts.

[post="27955"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

ZZZZING! B)

[Sal Collaziano]

I'm not surprised that the STS finished last.. It's not the best product.. And yes, as Cadillac keeps getting better, so does the competition.. BUT.. If you were to have a comparison category for "Most Improved Vehicle", the STS would have won Hands Down. I think that says a lot... So while the other guys are getting a little better every year, Cadillac is catching up faster than anyone wants to think about.. It's only a matter of time before it'll be very difficult for anyone to place Cadillac any further than first or second in every category... Edited January 19, 2006 by Sal Collaziano

[jry]

a buddy traded in his 750 li for an sts. which he'll give back once the sts V that he has money on gets in. bad news is that the the audio/nav unit died (just like on my cts, before gm bought it back). now he is wondering what he got himself into.