BigPontiac

One of the items I wished was optional on the GTO was a power sunroof...now it appears there is an aftermarket solution! Details I think Webasto is the supplier BMW uses...

Now THAT is cool!

I just scrolled back to see the badge...it's not on the car in the PR shots! Just the autoshow pics. That's an easy fix, use some dental floss and they'll come right off without leaving a mark. Wax. Done. Viola! You're badge-less...

You said: In 2005, the 4/5 year old CTS was competing against a 7 year old BMW. 6th out of 8 to me is not really competitive. That's not even mid-pack. I'm saying most of the models that beat the CTS were newer designs that debuted after the CTS. However, to be fair, the CTS they tested had the Sport package and 3.6 (instead of the 3.2)...so at least they tested the "best" model Cadillac had to offer (instead of pitting a 2.8 against a 330i for example, then calling the CTS slow...). My dad has both a 2006 TL M6 and a 2006 G35x. Personally, I find the TL to be highly overrated. Nice interior materials and nav, but the driving experience is very "eh". The G's not bad...the new 2007 however may shape up to be a very formidable opponent in this class (I only got to sit in one, not drive it...so my opinion may change after a test drive).

$2.37 here for 87.

2006 was the first year for the revised 3-Series body style. 2005 was the last year for the previous generation body style that originated in 1999. It outsells it with or without including the AWD model. Most of them are newer. I posted the link in response to the statement "how it performed was actually its greatest asset and showed in comparison tests against its direct competitors. So it wasn't entirely about dimensions." If you got an article that proves that statement, feel free to post it. Otherwise, it's yet another opinion that can't be substantiated. I'm very tired of reading all the generalities presented as gospel. I'm sure the 2008 CTS will stack up much better against it's competitors....and all the major magazines will do more comparison tests. My two concerns center around the lack of availability of the DI V6 on the manual transmission model and that e-brake placement.

I believe I've mentioned buyer choice being the deciding factor several times now. As for sales volume, since using numbers worked so well to clarify the dimensional differences between the cars, lets try the same approach with sales volumes. Using the numbers posted on C&G for Nov sales we get the following:CTS Jan-Nov 2006: 50,024 Jan-Nov 2005: 53,959 source 3-Series (RWD sedan only) Jan-Nov 2006: 58,387 Jan-Nov 2005: 63,210 3-Series (AWD sedan) Jan-Nov 2006: 21,551 Jan-Nov 2005: 9,934 source The sales numbers do not appear to support your assertion that the BMW sells in higher volumes due to more available body styles. Eliminating the additional body styles as well as the AWD sedan model still shows the 3-Series selling in higher volumes than the CTS. As for the CTS's performance against its direct competitors being an asset, the most recent comparison test I remember seeing showed it placing in 6th place out of 8 cars. 8th: 2005 Saab 9-3 Aero 7th: 2005 Volvo S60R AWD 6th: 2005 Cadillac CTS 3.6 Sport 5th: 2005 Audi A4 3.2 Quattro 4th: 2005 Acura TL 3rd: 2005 Infiniti G35 2nd: 2006 Lexus IS350 1st: 2006 BMW 330i C&D 35K Sport Sedan Comparison Every CTS we drive is better than the previous one, which makes us already impatient for this car's replacement.

It's the same debate that always seems to occur on this board, bigger is assumed to be better when it comes to the CTS...the supersize it American mentality. Whenever someone tries to defend the CTS on merit against other competitors in it's class, all anyone ever comes up with is "it's bigger" for comparable money. The numbers prove that the CTS has more rear seat legroom, yet has less rear headroom. So, as long as your adults are short in stature, then they should enjoy the back of the CTS. Of course, then they wouldn't need the leg room anyway so there would be no advantage in needing such a large car and heavy car. So, taking us back to buyer choice...some may prefer the bigger CTS, but the North American market appears to prefer the smaller 3 Series based upon sales volume.

My thoughts exactly!

So moving from the generics to the specifics: 2007 BMW 328i vs. 2007 Cadillac CTS 2.8 Exterior: 3 Series vs. CTS Length: 178.2 in. vs. 190.1 in. Width: 71.5 in. vs. 70.6 in. Height: 55.9 in. vs. 56.7 in. Weight: 3340 lbs. vs. 3509 lbs. Wheel Base: 108.7 in. vs. 113.4 in. Interior: 3 Series vs. CTS Front Headroom: 38.5 in. vs. 38.9 in. [bMW has sunroof std, CTS does not] Rear Headroom: 37.5 in. vs. 36.9 in. [bMW has sunroof std, CTS does not] Front Shoulder Room: 55.4 in. vs. 56.6 in. Rear Shoulder Room: 55.1 in. vs. 56.2 in. Front Leg Room: 41.5 in. vs. 42.4 in. Rear Leg Room: 34.6 in. vs. 36.2 in. Maximum Luggage Capacity: 12 cu.ft. vs. 12.5 cu.ft. * Source Edmunds.com So I'll take it when you say adult sized, you mean the CTS has 1.6in. of additional rear legroom and 1.1in. of additional rear shoulder room? But I'm sure that leg room comes in handy to slump down and compensate for the CTS's .6in less rear headroom (more like 1.6 if the CTS has a sunroof). Those advantages are quite sad considering the CTS is 11.9in longer in length than the 3 Series and 4.7in longer in wheelbase. Not exactly a commanding advantage or marvel of packaging efficiency...

Which may be true for some buyers, but may not be for others. The current gen CTS is certainly "more car" for the money from a size perspective vs. the 3-Series...it's the size of a 5-Series. So if the buyer's priority is having a bigger car, then CTS may be the better value for that buyer. However, for those buyers who don't place a premium on that added size, it may not appear to be a better value. I have a friend with a 2004 CTS 2.8 w/manual who fits that bill...he likes the extra size the car affords over his old 2001 Audi A4 Quattro. But, when he drove my BMW against his CTS he said my car was more fun to drive...but it's too small to meet his needs. He made his choice by voting with his wallet for the Cadillac. (drives it in the winter on Blizzaks) The flip side of the value equation is the resale value and warranty. My friend's CTS is on SmartLease, so he's not concerned about the resale. I bought my BMW, so the resale matters more to me...and the KBB research I did on both cars before buying showed the CTS resale dropping like a rock (hopefully this has been improving). Also, the BMW 4/50 warranty covers all maintenance...including wear & tear items like clutches and brake rotors. That to me added value to the BMW since I didn't need the size. Hence, I voted with my wallet. It all comes down to buying what meets your needs and wants. Some may feel the need to "supersize it"...I did not.

So, I wonder if Cadillac could surprise us? I just noticed that the 2007 G35 has the foot pedal emergency brake with the automatic, but has console mounted emergency brake lever for the manual transmission model. While that seems pretty rare, could Cadillac be adopting a similar strategy? In theory the pictures I saw of the new CTS interior with the manual trans at Automobilemag.com could just be a photoshopped image (GM did it with the G6 last year...) Guess we'll have to wait to see a real car to know for sure...

This is the same debate that always happens when the CTS and 3-Series come up. Lots of opinions being presented as facts...and little grounding in WHICH generation of 3-Series is being compared to which generation of CTS. The 1999-2005 3-Series sedan was a smaller car than the 2006+ 3-Series sedan. So, which "3-Series" has been spotted without people in the rear seat? Were the drivers directly questioned as to why they weren't carrying passengers? What was the sample size of the survey? Survey method? Margin of error? Are we talking about the North American Market? European Market? Worldwide? My opinion, as someone who cross shopped the 2005 CTS against the 2005 3-Series, was that the 3-Series was a better car...and I voted by spending my hard earned US dollars and purchasing one. The CTS being bigger was actually a negative to me as a buyer as I don't have a huge use for the back seat and I preferred the package size of the 3-Series. The crummy resale value, pump to set emergency brake and fuel economy didn't help the CTS with me either. Will my preferences be the same as everyone else's? Probably not, but at least I've driven both cars and spent real money on purchasing one of them. I'd rather have Cadillac offer 3/4 scale RWD CTS as the BLS in the North American market...that to me would be a true 3-Series competitor. I also see lots of "must have AWD option" thrown around with no mention of the tires. I've driven a RWD BMW through New England winters with traction control, a manual transmission and a set of 4 Blizzak winter tires with no problems.

And that would be why? Oh that's right, because dimensionally the CTS is the SIZE of a 5-Series!

Have you tried Autotrader.com? I had good luck with them when I sold my old BMW...they also had a "ad runs until it sells" piece too for the more expensive ads... Took about 24hrs to show up online, if that.

Hopefully they give it a real name instead of the stupid "G8" moniker. Start the shift back to real names with the shift back to rear wheel drive. Interesting how the Cadillac Escalade didn't get "alphabetized" during it's redesign... Pick a way, names or numbers...not both. Consistency is a marvelous thing...it would almost imply a plan.

Wow, this thing is terrible looking...particularly the front. Seems more like the "Pep Boys Edition" than GXP. All the plastic cladding on Pontiacs from the 90s suddenly looks tasteful. They need to add the bug bunny badge from the old Chevy Venture Warner Bros Edition...THEN it would be complete!

I like the styling MUCH better than the current version...I've always found the side profile to look odd on the current gen. The part I can't believe is all the driver's car, 'ring-tuned...blah blah blah...then I see the interior pictures with the manual transmission...and "the pump to set" emergency brake continues. WTF!! I guess I better hope nothing happens to my 330i!

Shown: Photo of Chevrolet Volt Advance Copy: The New York Times; Sunday 01/07/07: Page 12-1; Additional photos are on page 12-2. Top Speed: 120MPH 0-60 Acceleration: 8.5 Seconds Range: 640 Miles (with batteries and on-board generator). Battery only range: 40 Miles Weight: 3200 pounds Recharge Time: 6.5 Hours Article content: "General Motors will unveil an electric concept car, the Chevrolet Volt, which has created the most buzz in advance of the (NAIAS) show. GM says the Volt, a plug-in hybrid, could deliver the equivalent of 150 miles a gallon. The Volt thus promises - at least in theory, given that it would not be produced without a leap in battery technology - three times the mileage of a Toyota Prius." When General Motors unwraps the Chevrolet Volt for the press today (Sunday 01/07/07), it will be revealing much more than the latest fantasy from its styling studios. Beyond its striking coupe-like lines, the Volt is also a declaration of GM's intent to mass-produce a new type of hybrid-electric vehicle, one that can drive up to 40 miles on batteries alone and recharge itself with an onboard generator - or by plugging into a standard 110-volt household outlet. The Volt is also less than it appears. The batteries to make it roadworthy do not yet exist, a shortcoming GM acknowledges. The squat four-seat hybrid sedan previews a new family of plug-in electric drive systems that GM calls E-Flex. The system, which the company plans to begin installing globally when the batter technology is mature, will be capable of delivering the equivalent of 100 miles a gallon or more in urban driving, GM officials said. The Volt's total range is 640 miles using the combined capacity of fully charged batteries and a built-in gasoline-powered generator. While hybrids like the Toyota Prius can drive short distances on batter power and make longer trips using a thrifty gasoline engine, the Volt's gas engine is not connected to the wheels. It turns only a generator to charge the battery pack, a design typically called a series hybrid, and operates in a narrow RPM range for maximum efficiency. In the Volt, the E-Flex drive system consists of a small three-cylinder gas engine, a 53-kilowatt generator and a long lithium-ion battery pack that forms a spine down the center of the car's floor. To maximize batter life, the engine that drives the generator automatically kicks in when the battery's charge falls below 30% of capacity and shuts off when the battery charge reaches 80% of maximum; at that point E-flex reverts to pure electric mode. "We've dubbed this feature a 'range extender'" said Robert A. Lutz, GM's vice chairman for product development. "It also provides a steady flow of electricity to get the vehicle home or to the nearest charging plug." GM is planning to offer E-flex power systems in all major world markets. The company's next generation compact car platform due in 2009, has been designed to accept an E-Flex battery pack, generator and related hardware. While development of the new electric drive system has already begun, the company can not set a production schedule until the proper batteries are ready, said Nick Zielinski, the Volt's chief engineer.

Oops, sorry...didn't mean to double post. I scanned the Olds section and didn't see anything that referenced C&D or the race, so started a new thread. I couldn't believe all the punishment that car took and kept going...particularly the rollover and beating!

The Feb 2007 issue of Car and Driver magazine has an article about their entering a race called the "24 Hours of LeMons." The race consists of $500 cars racing against one another. The C&D team picked up a 1995 Olds Aurora as their entry: Copper Mist with 175,315mi and crash damage for $500 on eBay. Graphic on the car's hood: C&D magazine cover shot from when the Aurora was introduced Graphic on the back bumper reads: "Probably your father's Oldsmobile" 24 Hours of LeMons website A few interesting excerpts from the article: There's also a small section on the 3 other Oldsmobiles entered in the same race: 1994 Achieva, 1984 Cutlass Supreme Brougham V-6 and a 1977 Cutlass Supreme.

It may have changed, but OnStar used to subcontract AAA for towing, roadside assistance, etc.

Appears to be in limp-home mode...but I'd be pretty pissed too if I bought a new CTS-V that only had 12k miles on it with those types of problems. Watch the video

While they get constantly bashed on...I'd look at a Ford FreeStyle AWD...they're HUGE inside. As an overall value for a "family truckster" they're hard to beat. A quick ebay example: link My dad's had a 2006 FreeStyle SEL AWD for a year now with no issues.

Could be. I'm not sure if the 2500 Chevy and GMCs would compete for 2008 as well. Being a car magazine, I'm skeptical they'd pick anyone's HD models over Toyota's 1500 model. Also, there WAS a big paid advertising booklet on the Silverado not too long ago in MT. I think it was the AutoExtremist who was talking about how MT could be bought...I think it was a Dodge Lancer or some such car he mentioned as the example. Hopefully the award helps GM sell pickups, which can in turn give them cash to fund improved product for all the brands (particularly Pontiac!).