2006 Cadillac DTS

[HarleyEarl]

January 6, 2006
2006 Cadillac DTS Road Test
by The Car Family

*** Specifications and prices contained in
this article are based on US products ***

Performance Sedan

Cadillac has fired a shot across the collective bows of the European and Asian luxury sedan builders with a revamped and much improved DTS Performance Sedan. Priced at US$50,500 with the high output Northstar V8
2006 Cadillac DTS (Photo: General Motors)
and packed with oodles of standard equipment befitting a luxury automobile, the Cadillac straddles the oomph of the BMW, the ride of the Mercedes, the interior of the Lexus, and the handling of the Jaguar.

Add to this mix the best interior lighting ever, great headlights, good visibility, a capable 292 horsepower engine and throw in a sharper image exterior and you have the best domestic made luxury car available. Still, there are a few shortcomings such as an automatic transmission that isn't always sure which gear to select when passing, a dismal fuel mileage rating, and brakes that feel wooden and made us wonder if it just wasn't our particular test vehicle. If you want room for five, or perhaps six, a huge trunk, an isolated ride, good acceleration, a handsome interior and quality sound system the DTS needs to be driven.

Mom's view: This is a big car and it takes a big space to park and the front wheel drive means your turning radius is large. Cadillac knows this and provides a sonar type parking warning system with dash top readouts to warn you of your proximity to objects. The bigness is also responsible for a softer ride and a relaxed fit type of atmosphere in the passenger cabin. There is ample room for four golf club sets in the trunk, a
2006 Cadillac DTS (Photo: General Motors)
variety of useful cabin storage bins, and terrific interior lighting. The light leather adorned interior is very nice and the seats are comfortable, but not all that supportive. On the other hand they are heated, cooled, and even offer a massage.

Safety wise you get pretty much everything. There are six standard air bars, ABS, and a variety of other electronic aids as well as one year of OnStar, a tire pressure monitor, and even remote starting for those cold mornings. The heater worked very well, but the heated seats weren't as quick. Cadillac also offers what they call dual-depth front-passenger airbag that varies its inflated volume based on the severity of the crash and the passenger's seating position.

Driving the DTS is simple enough given its potent engine and good visibility, but the brake feel wasn't to my liking, as it required too much leg pressure. I also prefer cars with a bit more bit to them and so the lush ride didn't light my fire. I would definitely go with an optional suspension-tuning package. However, those who are used to American luxury vehicles are going to be at home in the DTS. If you want more handling and performance look to the STS and smaller Cadillacs. This is a car for those who like to cruise and enjoy life. Even the rain sensing windshield wipers can take the drudgery out of having to worry about wet weather and the sound system was terrific. With General Motors offering great deals you can probably buy a DTS for tens of thousands less than a comparable European or Asian competitor and you with the optional 4.6 liter V8 and its 292 horsepower they aren't going to be pushing you into the slow lane.

Dad's view: The pricing of this Cadillac is considerably less than the competition and yet, on paper, offers the same or more in every department. The problem is that the DTS is still front wheel drive whereas all the competition is rear wheel driven and thus more responsive. To offset this Cadillac has stuffed the DTS with a wonderful array of
2006 Cadillac DTS (Photo: General Motors)
equipment. The optional DVD works well, but you have to spend time learning the system before hitting the road. The satellite radio works on XM, not our favorite, and the engine is plenty potent as it gets you to 60 mph in less than eight seconds. Of course, you pay for this as we only got 15 mpg in mixed driving. We believe they just might be the newness of our test car as the government reports 17/24 mpg.

I felt that this Cadillac was comparable in all ways to the Lexus LS except for its handling and in some areas the Cadillac had the advantage such as initial cost, acceleration, and available six passenger seating. Even the notable Lexus interior dash lighting failed to better the DTS's clean white-on-black dials and red indicators.

College going male's view: An excellent sound system with AM/FM/XM/and a 6 CD changer that would be the prefect place to listen to my CD at www.simple-thoughts.com. The radio reception was superb and the XM radio worked well, but the selection information was very difficult to read when you were using the GPS. When you use satellite radio and the nearly 200 stations you need to be able to quickly check what is on. With the GPS map on the monitor all you get is a small readout that is difficult to decipher.

I usually like big luxury cars and the DTS was no exception. It was actually peppy and the noise from the engine had a type of gruffness that clearly indicated it was not just capable of polite cruising. Handling was smooth and not the floppy type that old Lincolns and Cadillacs used to be famous for. The back seat has ample foot and headroom, the trunk opens wide when you use the remote, and the back-up lights can illuminate a football stadium.

Young working woman's view: Too large for me, but it had some strong attraction due its many features. You can get a heated steering wheel, dual zone temperature control, heated and cooled seats, remote start, a trunk that has nearly 19 feet of storage, side-mirror turn-signal repeaters,
2006 Cadillac DTS (Photo: General Motors)
a PCS phone-integration kit that can access digital, analog, or PCS service, self-leveling rear suspension, xenon headlights, and some fun options such as GPS with voice recognition and adaptive cruise control designed to maintain a set following distance on the highway.

Considering the competition the Cadillac is doing well. It is clearly not as well fitted out as the foreign made products, but it is better priced and provides a soothing ride. There are two engines available, one with 275 horsepower and one with about 20 more. I would test drive them both and see if you need the more potent and expensive option. I also would go with the performance suspension option and its 18-inch wheels. I would strongly have liked a large side mirror on the right door and some of the buttons were not clearly marked such as the driver's computer readouts.

As I looked at this DTS with its European exterior styling that camouflaged its ample size, I was amazed at how well Cadillac has done to make its products so easily recognizable from any angle. It also does not have that old boy look to it. Driving at night I was taken by the excellence of its headlights. They are second only to the Infiniti's and I would much prefer this DTS to the Q45 in all other areas except acceleration.

Family conference: The best large American luxury sedan, the DTS is a much better car than its predecessors. With a better transmission, a bit better refinement in its handling, and putting the drive wheels in back could make this a world class sedan. For a list of all vehicle websites go to www.reacheverychild.com and click on business.

[Drew Dowdell]

They go on and on about the interior lighting, but ya know what? It really is that good. I did my test drive of a top line DTS at night time and the interior lighting is the first thing I noticed.... I quite literally said "Wow!". This is the type of car where the drive wheels are substantially less relevant. I didn't notice any of the loathsum traits of FWD during my time with the car.

[Paolino]

They go on and on about the interior lighting, but ya know what? It really is that good.  I did my test drive of a top line DTS at night time and the interior lighting is the first thing I noticed.... I quite literally said "Wow!".

This is the type of car where the drive wheels are substantially less relevant. I didn't notice any of the loathsum traits of FWD during my time with the car.

[post="69024"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

What interior lighting are you referring to?

[Drew Dowdell]

Otherwise known as the "dome light". In most cars it's kinda dim and pathetic. The gauges are nice too though. Much less "wow" factor there.

[Paolino]

Otherwise known as the "dome light". In most cars it's kinda dim and pathetic.

The gauges are nice too though. Much less "wow" factor there.

[post="69037"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The domes were that impressive? I mean, yes, I kinda wish mine was brighter, and I always loved that my mom's LeSabre limited had 4 lights inside that lit up the compartment well, but I never really thought anyone would pay attention to that enough to do something about it!

[Drew Dowdell]

They are enough to make you stop and take notice. It made things a lot easier to see inside the car.

[91z4me]

I have been seeing some black DTSs around work, almost daily, and I have to say it is DEFINATELY a looker. Certainly the Deville was a wonderful, conservative car but the new DTS is a whole other level.

[jrockb4]

I laugh at how people talk about how big the DTS is, it's wheel base is almost 7 inches shorter than a 7 or S series, Audi A8L or even the Jag XJ8L. It is less than an inch longer than the LS430. But it does have some long overhangs (10 inches longer than the LS). Is it a perception problem with the DTS (a mental this is the biggest Caddy, so it must be long), or is it the extended trunk and hood that make is seem long?

[turbo200]

that's exactly it jrock. designers have visual tricks that make a car appear shorter in length and height. lengthening a wheelbase is one trick that will help trick the eye into believing it's seeing a shorter car overall.

[chrominium steel]

Do you think the DTS will be available as a rental car during the summer, or will it still be the old DeVille?

[Flybrian]

Do you think the DTS will be available as a rental car during the summer, or will it still be the old DeVille?

Depends on the lot. I know many around here are still running late-delivery Grand Ams, Classics, and Centuries even though those are now out of production. I've seen a handful of rental DTSs around here by now, so I'm sure by midyear there will be a healthy mix of DeVilles and DTSs.

[Robert Hall]

Do you think the DTS will be available as a rental car during the summer, or will it still be the old DeVille?

Avis has them in some locations..I rented one last month.

[Imaj]

That's an excellent review.. I'm 20 now, I started loving the Deville since I was 17 and I still would live to have a DTS in front of my home.. I just don't get this old-people-car thing..

[HarleyEarl]

Me either. I like the big Caddies.

[RJB]

I saw Motorweek over the weekend and they reviewed the DTS and they seemed to love it. This car seems to be getting more press than the STS, to me anyway.

[HarleyEarl]

I like the new DTS way better than the STS. The rear and profile of the STS have always left me cold....only like the front...hate the interior.

Edited January 17, 2006 by HarleyEarl

[HarleyEarl]

[97regalGS]

I saw Motorweek over the weekend and they reviewed the DTS and they seemed to love it. This car seems to be getting more press than the STS, to me anyway.

that's cause the DTS is new and the STS is yesterday's news.

[Drew Dowdell]

that's cause the DTS is new and the STS is yesterday's news.

The DTS does a better job at what it's supposed to do.

[AM6_Cutlass]

Finally somebody that realizes the six-passenger seating is an advantage over the competition. You may not want it, but it's there if you do. Can't say that about Lexus, MB, Infiniti or anybody else.

[The O.C.]

Finally somebody that realizes the six-passenger seating is an advantage over the competition.  You may not want it, but it's there if you do.  Can't say that about Lexus, MB, Infiniti or anybody else.

6-passenger seating is not going to get anyone from a German or Asian import into a Cadillac. At best, you'll pull old Caddy buyers or buyers from Ford and Mercury (Crown Vic, Grand Marq.)

The fact of the matter is.....NO ONE is doing 6-passenger seating anymore. ALL GM is doing is wasting money designing, engineering, and producing separate six-passenger seating configurations and column shifters in these cars. Believe me....the few people that actually would look for such a configuration certainly do not bring in enough revenue to GM to make the cost expenditure worthwhile.

I sat in a 6-passenger Impala at the LAIAS and it was an absolute JOKE. You cannot sit ANYONE in the middle position....because the driver and passenger seat-belt connectors totally jam into your butt....not allowing you to sit "down" on the seat. You end up sitting ON the seat belt connectors.....and you cannot move them down or out of the way.

Based upon sitting in bucket-seat versions of the DTS and Lucerne, I can't see their 6-passenger configurations being that much better than what I experienced in the Impala.

It just makes NO more sense to me.

[Flybrian]

Again, O.C., there's more to bench seating than six-seater capacity. I could say the same about the Corolla or Echo holding '5' people and say its a bunch of malarky, but we all know that's not always the point.

GM is down to leaving it as an option on four (4) car lines. Is it really that bad and that much of a waste in totality?

[The O.C.]

Again, O.C., there's more to bench seating than six-seater capacity. I could say the same about the Corolla or Echo holding '5' people and say its a bunch of malarky, but we all know that's not always the point.

GM is down to leaving it as an option on four (4) car lines. Is it really that bad and that much of a waste in totality?

Well I was basically responding to the comment that it's a "competitive advantage" which I don't think is true one bit.

And when (basically) those 4 (GM) car lines are the ONLY products in the industry (aside from the archaic Crown Vic/Grand Marquis) that seem to feel the need for the option, YES....I do think it's a waste.

AND I think it brings a much bigger negative impact to consumers' perception of the trendiness, up-tp-dateness, old-manish-ness, or whatever you want to call it, of the car and model line and GM in particular.

[HarleyEarl]

I personally like split bench seats with column shifter in larger luxury cars.....love the expanse of floor space....convenient spot for my laptop right next to me...just has more of a living room sofa thing...I hope GM always has them.

[Chicagoland]

As long as there is some market for benches, offer it as option.

Seeing a few DTS's in Chicago area, also.

[VenSeattle]

And when (basically) those 4 (GM) car lines are the ONLY products in the industry (aside from the archaic Crown Vic/Grand Marquis) that seem to feel the need for the option, YES....I do think it's a waste. 

AND I think it brings a much bigger negative impact to consumers' perception of the trendiness, up-tp-dateness, old-manish-ness, or whatever you want to call it, of the car and model line and GM in particular.

Yes, GM paid the development costs to have column shifters and bench-seats for 4 vehicles. The costs couldn't have been that great when compared to a single rebadge like the SAAB 9-7x. Remember that the previous Century, LeSabre, & Deville were predominately bench/column only, and accounted for approx 300,000 annual sales. I don't see it as a waste when it's a minor engineering cost for retaining 6-figure sales.

However, when GM is building an entire "4-vehicle/ 7-bodystyle" line-up catering to 32,000 sales... I find it a waste.

[The O.C.]

Yes, GM paid the development costs to have column shifters and bench-seats for 4 vehicles. The costs couldn't have been that great when compared to a single rebadge like the SAAB 9-7x. Remember that the previous Century, LeSabre, & Deville were predominately bench/column only, and accounted for approx 300,000 annual sales. I don't see it as a waste when it's a minor engineering cost for retaining 6-figure sales.

However, when GM is building an entire "4-vehicle/ 7-bodystyle" line-up catering to 32,000 sales... I find it a waste.

But that's where everyone on here is wrong. It is not a "minor" engineering cost. I was actively involved in this debate when I was at Buick. It is VERY expensive to engineer two separate shifter configurations on a car.

When I was in product planning for Park Avenue/Ultra, (this last/current generation) we fought SO hard for an option in the Ultra of a true bucket seat option with a floor-mounted shifter mated to a nice console that swept up and blended in with the straight-across dashboard. We really thought with that option, we could maybe pull SOME Lexus-types back to Buick, etc.

The best that they would do, was give us the cheesy "afterthought" console with five passenger configuration that was simply a storage console with a writing pad and they left the shifter on the column.

The bean-counters' response was simply a matter of cost. It was too expensive to engineer the floor shifter for that car (still too expensive EVEN THOUGH the Aurora and Rivera on the same platform offered floor shifters.)

[VenSeattle]

I compared the engineering cost to a complete clone of a another vehicle (9-7x) but that's beside the point. I better understand what you’re trying to say.

I'm shocked that it actually cost so much to engineer a floor shifter for a platform that already offers it on other vehicles (the Deville/DTS even offered both). You do not know how much I wish you would have been successful against the bean counters. The lousy POS console that the 97-01 PA had was horribly flimsy and didn't match the interior quality found in the rest of the vehicle (luckily, pressure-relief points kept most of the pieces from breaking off… I could re-attach them. The writing pad was a complete joke. I’m left-handed.) I'm much happier with the 02-05 console I have but would have preferred the shifter to be on the floor. I just like the exterior/interior styling of the Park Avenue better than any of the other G-Platform siblings.

I agree that if Buick would have provided a floor shifter in the 97 PA (optional for base; standard on Ultra) it would have appealed more to import buyers. At the time the LS400 only had 250-260hp. A 240hp Park Avenue Ultra with a floor-shifter would have been an appealing & less expensive alternative.

It's a shame that the Lucerne can be $5,000+ less expensive than the Park Avenue and offer both almost a decade later (decade too late).

[91z4me]

But that's where everyone on here is wrong.  It is not a "minor" engineering cost.  I was actively involved in this debate when I was at Buick.  It is VERY expensive to engineer two separate shifter configurations on a car.

Would this have been true on the W-body as well? My MC Z34 has the floor shifter but when I press the button to move it I hear a click in the column area, same thing on my mother's Grand Prix. I figured it was just a cable running into the same area as if it had had the column shifter.

[The O.C.]

Would this have been true on the W-body as well?  My MC Z34 has the floor shifter but when I press the button to move it I hear a click in the column area, same thing on my mother's Grand Prix.  I figured it was just a cable running into the same area as if it had had the column shifter.

I don't know.....I can only tell you from my personal experience working with the Park Avenue Ultra......

[The O.C.]

I agree that if Buick would have provided a floor shifter in the 97 PA (optional for base; standard on Ultra) it would have appealed more to import buyers. At the time the LS400 only had 250-260hp. A 240hp Park Avenue Ultra with a floor-shifter would have been an appealing & less expensive alternative.

It's a shame that the Lucerne can be $5,000+ less expensive than the Park Avenue and offer both almost a decade later (decade too late).

OH lord.....I agree with you SO much. I actually liked that car.....but always felt that one item was something really lacking.

Wanna hear something even worse? We tried to keep the bench seat/column shifter out of the '95 Riviera.....but lost that fight as well. However, ends up that dealers didn't order too many of the bench seat Riveras thankfully.....

One battle we DID win? And I SWEAR I'm not making this up............they wanted to offer WHITEWALLS on the '95 Riviera. We fought HARD and WON! You didn't see a whitewall option on that car (to go along with the bench seats) did you?

<whew>

[OCcarnut]

Yes, GM paid the development costs to have column shifters and bench-seats for 4 vehicles. The costs couldn't have been that great when compared to a single rebadge like the SAAB 9-7x. Remember that the previous Century, LeSabre, & Deville were predominately bench/column only, and accounted for approx 300,000 annual sales. I don't see it as a waste when it's a minor engineering cost for retaining 6-figure sales.

However, when GM is building an entire "4-vehicle/ 7-bodystyle" line-up catering to 32,000 sales... I find it a waste.

How much of the 300,000 sales was to rental car companies offering "six seating capacity" and how much was to actual retail buyers?