Get YA RED HOT CTS-V!!! Right Ova Here!!! Cadillac CTS-V Configurator is Up!!!

[surreal1272]

The E63 does 0-60 in 3.5 seconds according to Mercedes, 3.4 seconds by some magazines, the AWD system gives it the acceleration, so it might beat the CTS-V in 0-60 despite the power to weight ratio disadvantage, but it will be close either way.   I think the E63 is a little over priced because an S550 is $95k, to me an E63 shouldn't be about $94k, especially since the driver assist package and Bang an Olufsen stereo are options.   When you load up the E63 you are up to about $115k, and now you are at SL550 money and $15k away from AMG GT money.   New E63 is on the way next year though, so we'll see what they do.

 

If you want real value though, you can get two Lincoln MKS for the price of one CTS-V.  And that gives you over 700 hp.

Except that you can't drive two of them at the same time!

[oldshurst442]

 

 

 

ummm, all these supposed devious accusations and implications is lame.

Can't a person just be genuinely shocked at the $100K price of a CTS.  Regardless of engine.

 

An ignorant person could say that, sure, but YOU said it because you're Wings and you can't say anything about GM without a passive aggressive comment or thinly veiled criticism. It's why you don't get banned, yet still have -40 reputation points accrued in a month.

 

really?

 

REALLY????

 

All I did was make a simple shocked statement on price.

All the rest is dust and nonsense for which you have contributed twice now.

 

As for my negative points, a mod confirmed that nearly all of them are from one person who adores me so much that he makes sure you subtracts in every one of my posts, regardless.

I will try to move on with my life though.

 

 

 

 

This^^^ This is the reason why U get on my *** nerves.. U thin for some reason I got these guys over here away from MT to help in your ever continuing need for free online psychotherapy. No one really gives a $h! about your opinion in these threads.. because for

 

1)  U are biased as a muthf**ka. I'm talking even more than me in that U ignore the reality of things and live in some crazy world where white is black and black is rainbow.

 

2) have no interest in these types of cars.. RWD, non-turbo V6 or 4cylinder, or luxury because.. well..  U're a Ford fan. 

 

3) are just a GM hater.. despite them putting food on your ***king table and sending U to school 

 

3) 

 

First of all...Hi there Wings.

I decided to quote Casa...because...well...CP had an answer for you..and so does Casa...and because this:

 

"This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by Wings4Life. View it anyway?"

 

Its hard to just ignore and zoom past your stupidity when so many quote you...I saw this in your post and decided to answer you back...

 

"As for my negative points, a mod confirmed that nearly all of them are from one person who adores me so much that he makes sure you subtracts in every one of my posts, regardless.

I will try to move on with my life though."

 

You dummy....

1. you have about 40 negative posts...I did about 15...that would still leave you with 25 negatives....but wait...you said that the mods actually up voted my negatives...that negates my 15 negative votes...you idiot...you still have -40...

 

 

Oh....this is the PM you gave me at Motor Trend...this was posted on June 23 @9:06 AM

 

 

 

WingsFan4Life

User | Posts: 238 | Joined: 05/15

Posted: 06/23/15

09:06 AM

 

In case you did not know, all your negative votes at C&G forum do nothing other than add up.

They are designed to deal with spammers, and when a significant amount adds up, merely hides the post that got all the votes.  The mods are alerted to your actions and can see every single one of them, and then vote them back up to counter.  How childish btw.

So either knock it off, or I will continue to draw attention to your BS.

Oh, and welcome to my ignore list.

 

 

 

 

You still accumulated more negative votes....FYI....those were not from me...like I said...I just gave you about 15-18 of them....well now...you have 5 more...because not only your posts are stupid regarding your "yikes" comment and then trying to act innocent by playing your famous victim card......but because you have involved me when you said you were gonna ignore me...

 

 

It shows you are a Greek born in Greece...Greeks in Greece love to play soccer....and soccer players are all FAKERS!!!

Us Canadian boys and American boys...even if we have a Greek backround...like I for instance...we man up...we play with broken bones...hockey players and Football players do...

 

You say you like the Detroit Red Wings? Well....they suck!!! Just like YOU!!!

[smk4565]

 

The E63 does 0-60 in 3.5 seconds according to Mercedes, 3.4 seconds by some magazines, the AWD system gives it the acceleration, so it might beat the CTS-V in 0-60 despite the power to weight ratio disadvantage, but it will be close either way.   I think the E63 is a little over priced because an S550 is $95k, to me an E63 shouldn't be about $94k, especially since the driver assist package and Bang an Olufsen stereo are options.   When you load up the E63 you are up to about $115k, and now you are at SL550 money and $15k away from AMG GT money.   New E63 is on the way next year though, so we'll see what they do.

 

If you want real value though, you can get two Lincoln MKS for the price of one CTS-V.  And that gives you over 700 hp.

Except that you can't drive two of them at the same time!

 

Well back in the 90s someone made a Cadillac Eldorado with a Northstar engine in the back, they lengthened the trunk a little bit to make it fit.  But the end result was 600 hp and 4 wheel drive and terrible handling.  So If you bought two MKS, and like welded them together some how you could have 8 wheel drive and 700 hp.

[surreal1272]

 

 

The E63 does 0-60 in 3.5 seconds according to Mercedes, 3.4 seconds by some magazines, the AWD system gives it the acceleration, so it might beat the CTS-V in 0-60 despite the power to weight ratio disadvantage, but it will be close either way.   I think the E63 is a little over priced because an S550 is $95k, to me an E63 shouldn't be about $94k, especially since the driver assist package and Bang an Olufsen stereo are options.   When you load up the E63 you are up to about $115k, and now you are at SL550 money and $15k away from AMG GT money.   New E63 is on the way next year though, so we'll see what they do.

 

If you want real value though, you can get two Lincoln MKS for the price of one CTS-V.  And that gives you over 700 hp.

Except that you can't drive two of them at the same time!

 

Well back in the 90s someone made a Cadillac Eldorado with a Northstar engine in the back, they lengthened the trunk a little bit to make it fit.  But the end result was 600 hp and 4 wheel drive and terrible handling.  So If you bought two MKS, and like welded them together some how you could have 8 wheel drive and 700 hp.

 

Well there you go!! Sign me up! Oh wait, there is the problem with parking that thing. Screw it! Sign me up anyway!

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

The E63 does 0-60 in 3.5 seconds according to Mercedes, 3.4 seconds by some magazines, the AWD system gives it the acceleration, so it might beat the CTS-V in 0-60 despite the power to weight ratio disadvantage, but it will be close either way.   I think the E63 is a little over priced because an S550 is $95k, to me an E63 shouldn't be about $94k, especially since the driver assist package and Bang an Olufsen stereo are options.   When you load up the E63 you are up to about $115k, and now you are at SL550 money and $15k away from AMG GT money.   New E63 is on the way next year though, so we'll see what they do.

 

If you want real value though, you can get two Lincoln MKS for the price of one CTS-V.  And that gives you over 700 hp.

Except that you can't drive two of them at the same time!

 

 

 

Until I'm pushing 89 years old.. I don't think I would  want to drive even ONE.

[smk4565]

The CTS-V will be doing battle with this mostly, should be here next summer.  They seem pretty far along in development.

[smk4565]

Why have just one V8 though, when you can have two V8s!

 

[oldshurst442]

Did someone mention the Mosler El Dorado?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT:  I SEE THAT YOU BEAT ME TO IT BY 1 MINUTE!!!

Edited July 2, 2015 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

The CTS-V will be doing battle with this mostly, should be here next summer.  

I don't understand why it's camo'd up- it clearly will be 90% of the last car / the CLA.

MB needs to advance their design, not sit on their hands. 

[smk4565]

I actually think the next E-class looks to have a body more similar of the W211 model.  Looks like they are going with rounded off ends, no sharp creases on the sides.  I wish they'd split the headlights again so it doesn't look like a C-class.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

[balthazar]

Percentages are all well & good, but the MB in that example still costs it's owner MORE MONEY.

 

IIRC, I saw an example recently where an SLS cost the owner $83,000 after just 3 years. I'm not so sure he's touting his depreciation percentage number with that crushing cost penalty.

[smk4565]

Right, Mercedes cost more than Cadillacs, so the depreciation as a percentage is not as bad.   And just the nature of the car, S-classes and AMG Mercedes are going to lose value because people are going to worry about running costs.  Where as something like a 3-series will hold value because it is a more popular car on the resale market.

[Cmicasa the Great]

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

 

 

 

 an 8.5% difference is nothing, especially when the Benz buyer initially paid 40% more for their car...  What makes it worse is that U had SUCH A HUGE ISSUE with the price of the Cadillac, but are sitting there defending the more expensive Benz. What U seem to miss also is that in YEAR 2.. the Benz depreciation starts to accelerate even more so. 

[smk4565]

Maybe Benz buyers have lots of money and don't care.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

 

 

 

 an 8.5% difference is nothing, especially when the Benz buyer initially paid 40% more for their car...  What makes it worse is that U had SUCH A HUGE ISSUE with the price of the Cadillac, but are sitting there defending the more expensive Benz. What U seem to miss also is that in YEAR 2.. the Benz depreciation starts to accelerate even more so. 

 

Well, considering it was hypothetical anyway, just wanted to point out you were wrong.

 

And really, I don't think expressing surprise with the word 'yikes' is having "SUCH A HUGE ISSUE" , but I will try and remember all this and just how sensitive some GM fans can be, in the future.

[surreal1272]

Percentages are all well & good, but the MB in that example still costs it's owner MORE MONEY.

 

IIRC, I saw an example recently where an SLS cost the owner $83,000 after just 3 years. I'm not so sure he's touting his depreciation percentage number with that crushing cost penalty.

Well said. The maintenance costs on just about any MB far outpaces any Cadillac, something Wings seems to conveniently ignore or forgets entirely.

 

 

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

 

 

 

 an 8.5% difference is nothing, especially when the Benz buyer initially paid 40% more for their car...  What makes it worse is that U had SUCH A HUGE ISSUE with the price of the Cadillac, but are sitting there defending the more expensive Benz. What U seem to miss also is that in YEAR 2.. the Benz depreciation starts to accelerate even more so. 

 

Well, considering it was hypothetical anyway, just wanted to point out you were wrong.

 

And really, I don't think expressing surprise with the word 'yikes' is having "SUCH A HUGE ISSUE" , but I will try and remember all this and just how sensitive some GM fans can be, in the future.

 

Of course you wanted to point out that he was wrong instead of realizing the error of only going by one factor such as depreciation while ignoring the MUCH higher cost of ownership involved with owning the Benz.

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

 

 

 

 an 8.5% difference is nothing, especially when the Benz buyer initially paid 40% more for their car...  What makes it worse is that U had SUCH A HUGE ISSUE with the price of the Cadillac, but are sitting there defending the more expensive Benz. What U seem to miss also is that in YEAR 2.. the Benz depreciation starts to accelerate even more so. 

 

Well, considering it was hypothetical anyway, just wanted to point out you were wrong.

 

And really, I don't think expressing surprise with the word 'yikes' is having "SUCH A HUGE ISSUE" , but I will try and remember all this and just how sensitive some GM fans can be, in the future.

 

 

 

I'm still not actually wrong when viewing from YOUR need for value pricing in luxury. U go YIKES on an $84,000 CTS-V, but have no issue with a $102,000 E63AMG S. On top of that, if the vehicles are already more expensive then out of pocket costs is only exacerbated when the Benz depreciation numbers comes into focus. And it gets worse. The Benz depreciation will actually speed up more so than the Cadillac by year 2.. then 3. At a point.. it might be possible to find that more expensive E63 on the used car lot for the same price as the CTSVSeries, or damn close.

Maybe Benz buyers have lots of money and don't care.

 

 

Pleeeeease. Having lots of money doesn't mean that U just have fun throwing it in the fireplace. 

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

Percentages are all well & good, but the MB in that example still costs it's owner MORE MONEY.

 

IIRC, I saw an example recently where an SLS cost the owner $83,000 after just 3 years. I'm not so sure he's touting his depreciation percentage number with that crushing cost penalty.

Well said. The maintenance costs on just about any MB far outpaces any Cadillac, something Wings seems to conveniently ignore or forgets entirely.

 

 

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

 

 

 

 an 8.5% difference is nothing, especially when the Benz buyer initially paid 40% more for their car...  What makes it worse is that U had SUCH A HUGE ISSUE with the price of the Cadillac, but are sitting there defending the more expensive Benz. What U seem to miss also is that in YEAR 2.. the Benz depreciation starts to accelerate even more so. 

 

Well, considering it was hypothetical anyway, just wanted to point out you were wrong.

 

And really, I don't think expressing surprise with the word 'yikes' is having "SUCH A HUGE ISSUE" , but I will try and remember all this and just how sensitive some GM fans can be, in the future.

 

Of course you wanted to point out that he was wrong instead of realizing the error of only going by one factor such as depreciation while ignoring the MUCH higher cost of ownership involved with owning the Benz.

 

huh wha??

So you are introducing fuel costs and insurance and oil changes and everything now?

 

Look, I made a simple point, that one depreciates faster than the other, casa tried to call me out (along with his usual insults) and I proved him wrong but showing the percent depreciation, of what was effectively a hypothetical situation anyway.  

 

Wow, this can go on for days, and I have lost interest.

And for the record, I think all of the above are over priced and a complete waste of money, and ALL of them depreciate significantly anyway.

 

My case is closed on this, and again, I simply want to say....yikes to all

[smk4565]

Mercedes sold 1.65 million cars last year, so I guess not too many people are worried about depreciation or running costs.  On fuel costs though, the CTS-V has a gas guzzler tax, the E63 does not.

[balthazar]

On fuel costs though, the CTS-V has a gas guzzler tax, the E63 does not.

Maybe Cadillac owners have lots of money and don't care.

[oldshurst442]

 

On fuel costs though, the CTS-V has a gas guzzler tax, the E63 does not.

Maybe Cadillac owners have lots of money and don't care.

 

LOL!!!

[surreal1272]

@Wings--And your simple point is 100% unfounded when you compare it against the competition. I have already shown you the big difference in package price. Of course now you say that they are all overpriced yet never any mention about a certain overpriced $400K Ford whenever those conversations come up. That is a "yikes" for another day though. 

 

And you actually didn't prove Casa wrong either, unless you are taking his word that his numbers were right in the first place. Of the top ten depreciating cars of the last tens years, the TOP two are MB AMG models with the only Cadillac being the now gone STS-V. No mention of ANY generation CTS-V.

 

http://jalopnik.com/5982789/the-most-depreciated-cars-of-the-past-ten-years

 

And like Casa, those depreciation values for the AMG really start to tumble after the first two years, coincidentally when that maintenance free warranty runs out on the Benz.

 

Now the case is closed.

[smk4565]

Of course $200,000 V12 Mercedes are going to depreciate.  They are priced at double the V8 model to begin with and who wants a 10 year old V12 car?  The operating and repair costs are staggering and an S65 or SL65 isn't really a collectable like a Ferrari.   If you want resale on a Mercedes get one with a diesel engine.

[Cmicasa the Great]

Yup.. another IDIOTIC conversation started by the one and only.. Barrel Chested Wings. Who the hell is buying these cars as investments anyway??? If U are then don't deserve it anyway. The car or the money 

 

We are talking about a 640HP Sexy Beast Luxo Sedan that will make 911 Turbo and Z06 owners shift nervously trying not to miss a gear

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

@Wings--And your simple point is 100% unfounded when you compare it against the competition. I have already shown you the big difference in package price. Of course now you say that they are all overpriced yet never any mention about a certain overpriced $400K Ford whenever those conversations come up. That is a "yikes" for another day though. 

 

And you actually didn't prove Casa wrong either, unless you are taking his word that his numbers were right in the first place. Of the top ten depreciating cars of the last tens years, the TOP two are MB AMG models with the only Cadillac being the now gone STS-V. No mention of ANY generation CTS-V.

 

http://jalopnik.com/5982789/the-most-depreciated-cars-of-the-past-ten-years

 

And like Casa, those depreciation values for the AMG really start to tumble after the first two years, coincidentally when that maintenance free warranty runs out on the Benz.

 

Now the case is closed.

 

hmmm, so my 'yikes' sticker shock surprise was a complete mistake on my part and completely unfounded and you have now proven that, through many attempts I might add, and as far as you are concerned, you have now "closed the case."

 

Thank you surreal, it's not the same without you policing my thoughts and expressions......but, my 'yikes' remains.  

It remains for the V and any other sedan that doubles or triples in price over a very competent base luxury sedan.

 

Deal with that.

[surreal1272]

 

@Wings--And your simple point is 100% unfounded when you compare it against the competition. I have already shown you the big difference in package price. Of course now you say that they are all overpriced yet never any mention about a certain overpriced $400K Ford whenever those conversations come up. That is a "yikes" for another day though. 

 

And you actually didn't prove Casa wrong either, unless you are taking his word that his numbers were right in the first place. Of the top ten depreciating cars of the last tens years, the TOP two are MB AMG models with the only Cadillac being the now gone STS-V. No mention of ANY generation CTS-V.

 

http://jalopnik.com/5982789/the-most-depreciated-cars-of-the-past-ten-years

 

And like Casa, those depreciation values for the AMG really start to tumble after the first two years, coincidentally when that maintenance free warranty runs out on the Benz.

 

Now the case is closed.

 

hmmm, so my 'yikes' sticker shock surprise was a complete mistake on my part and completely unfounded and you have now proven that, through many attempts I might add, and as far as you are concerned, you have now "closed the case."

 

Thank you surreal, it's not the same without you policing my thoughts and expressions......but, my 'yikes' remains.  

It remains for the V and any other sedan that doubles or triples in price over a very competent base luxury sedan.

 

Deal with that.

 

Don't flatter yourself as I was not the only one who pointed out your flawed argument, unless you think everyone else is policing your thoughts as well. Can't wait until the GT comes out in 2017 so that we try your "yikes" argument on a $400K Ford.

[ccap41]

Casa, from your quoted numbers above: 

I calculate that the V depreciated 35% and the AMG only 26.5%

 

Just saying.

 

A $73K 2014 CTS-V Coupe with almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $54K.. a drop of $19K.  

 

A $102K Benz E63AMG Swith almost all the trimmings is now worth, with 12K on the odo, $80,500.. a drop of $21,500

 

 

 

 an 8.5% difference is nothing, especially when the Benz buyer initially paid 40% more for their car...  What makes it worse is that U had SUCH A HUGE ISSUE with the price of the Cadillac, but are sitting there defending the more expensive Benz. What U seem to miss also is that in YEAR 2.. the Benz depreciation starts to accelerate even more so.

Well, considering it was hypothetical anyway, just wanted to point out you were wrong.

 

And really, I don't think expressing surprise with the word 'yikes' is having "SUCH A HUGE ISSUE" , but I will try and remember all this and just how sensitive some GM fans can be, in the future.

 

 

I'm still not actually wrong when viewing from YOUR need for value pricing in luxury. U go YIKES on an $84,000 CTS-V, but have no issue with a $102,000 E63AMG S. On top of that, if the vehicles are already more expensive then out of pocket costs is only exacerbated when the Benz depreciation numbers comes into focus. And it gets worse. The Benz depreciation will actually speed up more so than the Cadillac by year 2.. then 3. At a point.. it might be possible to find that more expensive E63 on the used car lot for the same price as the CTSVSeries, or damn close.

Maybe Benz buyers have lots of money and don't care.

 

 

Pleeeeease. Having lots of money doesn't mean that U just have fun throwing it in the fireplace.

First, I didn't realize till just now when I read E63AMG S that the "S" is the only one offered this year. They used to have a regular AMG and an "S" model. That could be some of the price gap. Obviously not almost 20k difference.

Second. I completely agree with you Casa. Just because you have money doesn't mean you want to waste it..on maintenance of all things.

[Suaviloquent]

Man...   

 

 

I can't even post in some of these threads because they're just getting ruined (sidetracked; meandering; bs; whatevs) time and again. All the time; every time; all day; every day.

 

Ignore function means TOTAL IGNORATION of an ignoramus's posts.

[surreal1272]

The S is the only one available now and it is almost $20K more than the V at base price.

[ccap41]

The S is the only one available now and it is almost $20K more than the V at base price.

Interesting.. Any idea what the previous gen was when they offered "just" the AMG and then the AMG S? (price difference)

 

I'll have to google it because I thought the "S" was a pricey package.

 

EDIT: Found the difference.

 

"Ensuring a lifetime of punishment for the all-wheel-drive system is AMG’s twin-turbo 5.5-liter V-8. Engine-management tweaks bump the base car’s output from last year’s 518 horsepower and 516 lb-ft to 550 and 531. Mercedes previously offered a $7300 AMG Performance package on the E63 for power brokers. That’s now called the AMG S model, which cranks up the boost from 13.0 psi to 14.5 to yield the previously mentioned 577 horsepower and 590 lb-ft. A limited-slip differential is standard on the S (it’s optional on the E63 AMG), where it was deemed necessary to handle the additional twist. In a masterstroke of customer understanding, Mercedes will offer E63 wagon buyers—i.e., enlightened lunatics—only the higher-output tune."

Edited July 6, 2015 by ccap41

[El Kabong]

Man...   

 

 

I can't even post in some of these threads because they're just getting ruined (sidetracked; meandering; bs; whatevs) time and again. All the time; every time; all day; every day.

 

Ignore function means TOTAL IGNORATION of an ignoramus's posts.

Indeed.

[Frisky Dingo]

I'm a little late to the party on this one, but I just went to the configurator, and then did the same for it's 2 primary rivals, the M5 and E63. I will say that I don't think it's overpriced. But considering Cadillac's sales numbers of their other vehicles that enjoy a healthy price advantage, I'm not sure how much buyers in this market will actually care.

 

I built a CTS-V out for $99,210. Surprisingly, the AMG was only 9K more at $108,985. The M5 came in the most expensive at $113,795. The BMW's price was mostly on account of having to get the Executive Pkg to get ventilated front seats, which is stupid. It does add other things like adaptive LED lights and whatnot, though. Still, for the money that these cars cost, I could easily overlook a 14% higher price tag to get what I feel is a better looking, and better built car. I'm also a little reluctant to believe the LT4 will perform flawlessly in this car after the stories of Z06 owners. I like that the M5 offers more options in terms of colors and interior leather. The fact that the M5 offers a true DCT is a big plus for me, as well. Also, the M5's aftermarket is killer. That said, I obviously couldn't fault someone for going with the Cadillac. To each their own. 

 

What I would REALLY do with this kind of money, however, is buy a 650 Gran Coupe. I built one that came in @ 108K, with everything I could possibly want, including Individual ext paint, leather, and interior trim. The sexiest looking sedan on the market imo, and it's power deficit can be almost entirely overcome with just tuning. Add to that the exclusivity and that's the route I'd go.

[Cmicasa the Great]

I'm a little late to the party on this one, but I just went to the configurator, and then did the same for it's 2 primary rivals, the M5 and E63. I will say that I don't think it's overpriced. But considering Cadillac's sales numbers of their other vehicles that enjoy a healthy price advantage, I'm not sure how much buyers in this market will actually care..

 

 

Your opinion on the price is valid.. but only if the price was the real reason why the CTS wasn't selling in the numbers it was selling previous generation. (see below)

 

 Sales off by 30%.. Coupe sales accounted for 30%.. No Coupe= loss of 30%.. if the coupe buyers of previous generation ONLY WANTED A COUPE.

 

The above ^^^^^^^^^^ reason is an answer to a question that no one who wants to say "I told U so" wants to hear

ntw.. the only one in this thread saying that the Cadillac price is high.. is the guy who believes we should all forgo the Cadillac and buy an MKZ in its place. Because as an ENTHUSIAST.. he believes we should all drive Fusion derived FWD.. or AWD cars with 340HP less

[cp-the-nerd]

I'm curious to see where sales go with the 2016 Cadillac lineup. With more state of the art drivetrains and a more fleshed out showroom--new crossover and still-newish Escalade to compliment the the three car models and new V-series range toppers--I expect to see overall sales swell 10% or more. The regular CTS and ATS will have welcome bumps to performance and fuel efficiency that will broaden the appeal of the models even further.

 

Hopefully we'll see some decent advertising to go along with it all.

[El Kabong]

I'm a little late to the party on this one, but I just went to the configurator, and then did the same for it's 2 primary rivals, the M5 and E63. I will say that I don't think it's overpriced. But considering Cadillac's sales numbers of their other vehicles that enjoy a healthy price advantage, I'm not sure how much buyers in this market will actually care..

 

 

Your opinion on the price is valid.. but only if the price was the real reason why the CTS wasn't selling in the numbers it was selling previous generation. (see below)

 

 Sales off by 30%.. Coupe sales accounted for 30%.. No Coupe= loss of 30%.. if the coupe buyers of previous generation ONLY WANTED A COUPE.

 

The above ^^^^^^^^^^ reason is an answer to a question that no one who wants to say "I told U so" wants to hearntw.. the only one in this thread saying that the Cadillac price is high.. is the guy who believes we should all forgo the Cadillac and buy an MKZ in its place. Because as an ENTHUSIAST.. he believes we should all drive Fusion derived FWD.. or AWD cars with 340HP less

We all know what's what on that score, man

But on a serious note, your pointing out the lack of a coupe and my comments about Cadillac trying to hold the line on prices make the sales numbers of Cadillac sedans even more remarkable. With due props to the outgoing CTS, this is a class-leading platform.

[smk4565]

The CTS is replacing the STS of 5-10 years ago, they never had a coupe there before. Audi A6 and Lexus GS don't have a coupe, the 5-series has the GT, but I imagine 95% of 5-series are sedans. I don't think a coupe magically boosts sales 30% in that segment.

[Cmicasa the Great]

The CTS is replacing the STS of 5-10 years ago, they never had a coupe there before. Audi A6 and Lexus GS don't have a coupe, the 5-series has the GT, but I imagine 95% of 5-series are sedans. I don't think a coupe magically boosts sales 30% in that segment.

 

 

Your logic is flawed. I'm not saying that having a coupe magically boost the numbers. The LOSS.. the LOSS.. the LOSS of 30% of what U sold last year, of Gen 2 Coupes, would certainly make the CURRENT CTS.. the one that is being reported in the negative news articles, sales reports, and negative domestic hater's commentaries.. like yours.. is the reason I said what I said. 

 

If Cadillac plans on not offering a coupe for the CTS.. then they need to offer a "6Series or CLS" type product lickity-split to counter the loss of that dynamically styled vehicle. It has actually affected their sales numbers overall in the cars dept. Their competition at BMW and Benz offer these products in their 6series, 6Series GC, EClass Coupe, and CLS. 

 

Point blank the Cadillac line-up is missing a great deal of what would allow them to be sales champ in the market. a 6 car line-up is simply not ever gonna compete in sales against a 16 car line-up over at BMW. Even worse is that within that 16 car line-up they are offering Chevy and Buick competitors for all intents. The only way Cadillac can truly compete in this atmosphere of luxury cars being all things to all buyers is for GM to kill Chevy.. kill Buick.. kill GMC.. kill Opel/Vaux/Holden and only have Cadillac selling their products. Everything from Cadillac Sparks to Cadillac Corvettes to Cadillac Silverado 3500HDs.

 

OK OK.. I digress because technically Cadillac could meet BMW in sales by simply combining sales channels of Cadillac and Buick/GMC. BMW sold 2.1 million last year. Cadillac/Buick/GMC sold 2.1 Million. 

 

^^^^ That is what BMW did last year by employing a technique of selling the same levels of quality as those 3 GM brands last year globally. If U have been to Germany in the last few years.. U would have had to notice that the BMW 316i is perhaps less luxurious than a Chevy Cruze 1.8L LS let alone the 1.4L LTZ.

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

I'm a little late to the party on this one, but I just went to the configurator, and then did the same for it's 2 primary rivals, the M5 and E63. I will say that I don't think it's overpriced. But considering Cadillac's sales numbers of their other vehicles that enjoy a healthy price advantage, I'm not sure how much buyers in this market will actually care..

 

 

Your opinion on the price is valid.. but only if the price was the real reason why the CTS wasn't selling in the numbers it was selling previous generation. (see below)

 

 Sales off by 30%.. Coupe sales accounted for 30%.. No Coupe= loss of 30%.. if the coupe buyers of previous generation ONLY WANTED A COUPE.

 

The above ^^^^^^^^^^ reason is an answer to a question that no one who wants to say "I told U so" wants to hearntw.. the only one in this thread saying that the Cadillac price is high.. is the guy who believes we should all forgo the Cadillac and buy an MKZ in its place. Because as an ENTHUSIAST.. he believes we should all drive Fusion derived FWD.. or AWD cars with 340HP less

We all know what's what on that score, man

But on a serious note, your pointing out the lack of a coupe and my comments about Cadillac trying to hold the line on prices make the sales numbers of Cadillac sedans even more remarkable. With due props to the outgoing CTS, this is a class-leading platform.

 

 

 

Truth is that most stand alone luxury brands are utilizing their name to sell lackluster products in an effort to remain relevant in a down economy. They are also trying to stave off CAFE and equivalent mandates by offering lower end products with weaker, more efficient engines. Benz for instance would be DEAD if they only offered vehicles with the "xx350" and above name. Cadillac could survive selling only Escalades and perhaps only vehicles with 3.6L and above because it has Chevy, Buick, and Opel/Vaux to widdle down its footprint. 

 

From an onlooker's perspective, one with a realistic point ... the CTS is selling fine CONSIDERING its hobbled by a line-up that is minus what it offered a year prior (No coupe, no Vseries, no coupe Vseries, no old inventory of discounted Gens 2s) It is now selling a sedan only version with a higher price tag. WOW.. sales went down.. go figure. 

 

I could say a similar logical stand point thing about the ATS but I would add that it is selling against a competitive background that is offering about 80% more in their line-up than Cadillac is giving the ATS. I posted it before, but here goes again:

 

 

328diesel Sedan

328diesel xDrive Sedan

3series Sedan

3series xDrive Sedan

ActiveHybrid 3

3series xDrive Sports Wagon

3series xDrive Sports Wagon

3series diesel xDrive Gran Turismo

3series xDrive Gran Turismo

M3

4Series Coupe

4Series xDrive Coupe

4Series Gran Coupe

4Series xDrive Gran Coupe

4Series Convertible

4Series xDrive Convertible

M4

 

vs 

ATS Sedan

ATS-V (Not even here yet)

ATS Coupe

ATS-V Coupe (Not even here yet)

 

Edited July 8, 2015 by Cmicasa the Great

[ccap41]

 

 

 

 

Your opinion on the price is valid.. but only if the price was the real reason why the CTS wasn't selling in the numbers it was selling previous generation. (see below)

 

 Sales off by 30%.. Coupe sales accounted for 30%.. No Coupe= loss of 30%.. if the coupe buyers of previous generation ONLY WANTED A COUPE.

 

The above ^^^^^^^^^^ reason is an answer to a question that no one who wants to say "I told U so" wants to hearntw.. the only one in this thread saying that the Cadillac price is high.. is the guy who believes we should all forgo the Cadillac and buy an MKZ in its place. Because as an ENTHUSIAST.. he believes we should all drive Fusion derived FWD.. or AWD cars with 340HP less

We all know what's what on that score, man

But on a serious note, your pointing out the lack of a coupe and my comments about Cadillac trying to hold the line on prices make the sales numbers of Cadillac sedans even more remarkable. With due props to the outgoing CTS, this is a class-leading platform.

 

 

 

Truth is that most stand alone luxury brands are utilizing their name to sell lackluster products in an effort to remain relevant in a down economy. They are also trying to stave off CAFE and equivalent mandates by offering lower end products with weaker, more efficient engines. Benz for instance would be DEAD if they only offered vehicles with the "xx350" and above name. Cadillac could survive selling only Escalades and perhaps only vehicles with 3.6L and above because it has Chevy, Buick, and Opel/Vaux to widdle down its footprint. 

 

From an onlooker's perspective, one with a realistic point ... the CTS is selling fine CONSIDERING its hobbled by a line-up that is minus what it offered a year prior (No coupe, no Vseries, no coupe Vseries, no old inventory of discounted Gens 2s) It is now selling a sedan only version with a higher price tag. WOW.. sales went down.. go figure. 

 

I could say a similar logical stand point thing about the ATS but I would add that it is selling against a competitive background that is offering about 80% more in their line-up than Cadillac is giving the ATS. I posted it before, but here goes again:

 

 

328diesel Sedan

328diesel xDrive Sedan

3series Sedan

3series xDrive Sedan

ActiveHybrid 3

3series xDrive Sports Wagon

3series xDrive Sports Wagon

3series diesel xDrive Gran Turismo

3series xDrive Gran Turismo

M3

4Series Coupe

4Series xDrive Coupe

4Series Gran Coupe

4Series xDrive Gran Coupe

4Series Convertible

4Series xDrive Convertible

M4

 

vs 

ATS Sedan

ATS-V (Not even here yet)

ATS Coupe

ATS-V Coupe (Not even here yet)

 

 

..ATS offers AWD.. In both coupe and sedan. which will cover the xDrive versions of the coupe and sedan. Also.. Those "Gran Turismo" are absolutely hideious. Nobody wants to see a sexy ATS botched with a competing body style.. But yes, BMW has a massive lineup all the way across the board. I have to believe all those Gran Turismos and Gran Coupes and Wagons only account for a very very small margain and probably don't even cover their own development costs which makes sense the Cadillac hasn't jumped into making all sorts of variants(at least in the US). I do think a convertible coupe would sell because that would be quite pretty and sporty. And a hybrid and diesel. But I have to belive a hybrid is in the works even if it is just because CAFE is forcing it, same with the diesel. But GM does have a small diesel in the Cruze they would update or heck..it'd be awesome if they would use the 2.8 Duramax. Make it a quick diesel, which would be the only one in its class.

Edited July 8, 2015 by ccap41

[smk4565]

Which makes you wonder where are the Cadillac hybrids and diesels?  I just don't think Cadillac will ever be able to throw product out there as fast as the other companies do.  Lexus has 6 hybrids for example.  The body styles that BMW and Mercedes put out is almost mind boggling they can do so many.  They can really hit specific tastes of luxury buyers that want something unique or different.