Drew Dowdell

and no B pillar

it's a Camry that they ran into a brick wall a few dozen times.

It's a K-car on a Toyota lot, I'm guessing you could talk him down another $400.

this would give room to the SLS

then for $200, what are you worried about?

the kinda did this with the CTS also. Since my 2004 CTS, they've changed the gauges, changed the shifter on the automatics, added a medium setting to the heated seats <previously the only settings were "tepid" and "1st degree">, upgraded the rear differential, and some external visual changes on the Sport model.

haha! sorry, that line reminded me of I'm not dead yet! I think I'll go for a walk!

doesn't the NG CTS go into production this time next year?

There was a guy at the office named Haillong Wang, pronounced Hey-Long. but that got too many snickers so he picked himself a nickname. What does he pick? Harry of course.

no lie, kid one year behind me in Highschool: Richard Craver

Interestingly, that is still better mileage than a 4-cylinder RDX.

why not, he's already sold out the country to chinese investment bankers.....

how are Maximas doing sales wise? I rarely them around here.

Maxima is heading north into Avalon territory.

cause that would have been a fair fight.

You don't want that 3.2. That was the original engine in the CTS and while it was modestly powerful, it had a weird idle. The best I can describe it would be a "limp".

Fly

If GM or Ford had been in this and come in anywhere but the last two places, I'd have screamed bias!

In Cadillac's the biggest offender was the boat anchor 4100 engine the first year got a 368 <I think>. Olds got a 307 or the 350 diesel <or a gas 350 early years>. Buick got a 307, the 350 diesel, the 3.8 or the turbocharged 3.8. My Toronado was fairly reliable for me. Only towards the end did I start having issues that start cropping up on 160k mile carberated cars. Automatic climate control, digital dash, power everything, even the rear air suspension still worked. A radiator, an alternator <taken out by the radiator>, and a carborator were my only major issues. Brakes were a bastard. edit: Oh yeah, and the FWD? I could plow snow with it if I wanted. Just don't ask me to stop. You even look at the brakes and the rears lock up and around you go.

yeah, sorry, still not convincing. I owned both a 1985 Toronado and a 1985 Continental. Both were more luxurious than this.... 1983 SEC

All other parts of the argument get down to personal preferences. But this part: is the part of all your arguments that I take issue with. The Luxury/prestige buyer don't want the same thing as they did 20-30 years ago. Back then it was: Rich Corinthian Leather Dyna-ride air cushion suspension relaxing, sumptuous comfort roomy bench seats go in any weather traction <fwd> Today it is: firm suede seats how many "G" can it pull strong seat bolsters <for when you're taking your '83 Seville through a hairpin> RWD required bucket seats In short, the people who grew up with GTOs and Mustangs as kids now want modern GTOs and Mustangs with premium appointments and badging NOT modernized '66 Cadillac Devilles. THIS is how the market has changed. It's not evolution anymore than one species dying out and another taking it's place is evolution. The luxury car didn't evolve, it went extinct. The performance car evolved to fill the luxury car's place.

Tell that to GM with a straight face. Better made? sure. Drove <as in handled> better? sure. Road better? eh, you can't really beat an air cushion suspension for ride softness. with a bit of help from the car rags. I own a CTS remember? On long trips I actually prefer using my Avalanche because of the softer ride. The CTS beats me up too much on the PA TPK. I usually end up using the CTS for fuel concerns and the fact that Chas doesn't like to drive the 'Lanche. Not sure how poor Lincoln got dragged into this. Show them some mercy. again, not sure where you're going with this.

I think it has something to do with "you can sell an old man a young man's car, but you can't sell a young man an old man's car".

That was a Seville <cause I couldn't find a decent Eldo pic> v. a 633i. Dunno how much more apples to apples you want it.

not sure who's point you're trying to prove here, mine or yours. that 3-series doesn't look any better or more luxurious than the Cimarron. The Cimarron, I think we'd both agree, is an abortion of style, taste and quality. So it being comparible to the 3-series does what for your argument? the Cimarron was also not typical of Cadillacs of the time. as far as the modern day CTS, I've stated repeatedly that tastes have changed. The reason I use the 1980-1985 range is because there weren't a lot of body changes at Cadillac during those years and Google image search is a bit more forgiving than focusing on one year. Edit: and why are we comparing the lowest common denominators of each company? I compared a Seville with a 633i, though an Eldorado would have worked as well. My only point here is that Cadillac in the 80's was much more luxurious in terms of traditional luxury than BMW, Benz, or Audi. Any by that regard, the '85 Seville deserves to be in the commercial. By the end of the 80's, that was still true, but America's tastes changed to favor the firmer, trimmer appointments of the Euros.