Anyone driven in the Cadillac CTS?

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: chiwawa626
Cadillac = shitty design, especially interiors.

cien interior

sixteen interior

Shitty, eh?

Yes, I'm aware that these are just concept, but you shouldn't make general statement like you did... these concepts only show what they're capable of.

THEN WHY DON'T THEY DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????

I can't think of one GM interior with the exectption of the Seville that is worth writing home about. And even it can't compare to a $35,000 Lexus ES300.

I can understand you taking up for GM (as you always do), but you've got to admit that when it comes to interiors, they're near the bottom of the list. When it comes to interiors (quality/materials/finish), I see it this way:

Audi/VW
Lexus
Mercedes
BMW
Acura
Honda
Infiniti
Honda
Toyota
Nissan
Mitsubishi
Lincoln


Hyundai/KIA


Ford

GM

So you group GM as a whole but don't group Toyota/Lexus or Ford/Lincoln or Honda/Acura, etc... together.

I just edited my above post of the PRODUCTION XLR interior... you tell me that is ugly/shitty.

 

[NFS4]

So you group GM as a whole but don't group Toyota/Lexus or Ford/Lincoln or Honda/Acura, etc... together.

GMC, Chevy, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Hummer...all of them are pretty crappy as far as interiors go.

Lexus is a grade above Toyota interiors...real wood vs fake stuff, etc.
Same for Lincoln vs Ford
Acura interiors are typically a slight step up from Hondas

GM interiors (with the exception of some Caddy models) are pretty consistently sh!tty across the board

I just edited my above post of the PRODUCTION XLR interior... you tell me that is ugly/shitty.

Do you think that ONE interior is enough to redeem GM for years of crap? Still doesn't compare to the RX330, GX470, Touareg, or just about anything in this class. The Touareg absolutely kills it.

http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/roadtests/firstdrive/2004/volkswagen.touareg/04.volkswagen.touareg.int.500.jpg

 

[Cfour]

Just wanted to add that when it comes to GM's interiors,as a whole, they are below the average quality/fit/finish.. but this doesn't mean ALL GM cars are. I only took offense to his post because he generalized all Cadillac models. I think GM is headed in the right direction with the Solstice coming out, new Grand Am/Prix on the way... axing the Aztec, etc...

I mean I drive a '00 Grand Am GT, not a supercar by any means, and I hapen to like the interior, and I don't put up with rattles or anything of that sort. It is very straight-forward, and the car out-performed anything in it's class at the time I bought it. Accord/Altima/Maxima.. even the higher priced cars wouldn't outperform it at the time.

I'm just trying to say I am sick of people generalizing all GMs cars into one category.. there are several brands for a reason and I think they deserve to be distinguished from eachother.

 

[psteng19]

Originally posted by: Cfour
Just wanted to add that when it comes to GM's interiors,as a whole, they are below the average quality/fit/finish.. but this doesn't mean ALL GM cars are. I only took offense to his post because he generalized all Cadillac models. I think GM is headed in the right direction with the Solstice coming out, new Grand Am/Prix on the way... axing the Aztec, etc...

I mean I drive a '00 Grand Am GT, not a supercar by any means, and I hapen to like the interior, and I don't put up with rattles or anything of that sort. It is very straight-forward, and the car out-performed anything in it's class at the time I bought it. Accord/Altima/Maxima.. even the higher priced cars wouldn't outperform it at the time.

I'm just trying to say I am sick of people generalizing all GMs cars into one category.. there are several brands for a reason and I think they deserve to be distinguished from eachother.

Uh huh... your Grand Am GT out-performing a Maxima.... right....

You have some special edition with the supercharged 3800?

Yes I know they're not in the same price range or even class, but you're the one who mentioned it.
Accord and Altima maybe.
But you do know that the Maxima had 222 hp/200 tq, no?
And the interior of any of these 3 are leaps and bounds above any Pontiac.

 

[Spoooon]

I've posted this a couple times... I think the interior of my '03 Envoy compares favorably to my old '98 Avalon. Granted, the Avalon is an old car, but the interiors are about even in terms of fit and finish, IMHO. The quality of the plastic, I suppose, is better in the Toyota. But I don't think the plastics in the Envoy feel cheap. Not as good, sure, but cheap? No.

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: psteng19

Originally posted by: Cfour
Just wanted to add that when it comes to GM's interiors,as a whole, they are below the average quality/fit/finish.. but this doesn't mean ALL GM cars are. I only took offense to his post because he generalized all Cadillac models. I think GM is headed in the right direction with the Solstice coming out, new Grand Am/Prix on the way... axing the Aztec, etc...

I mean I drive a '00 Grand Am GT, not a supercar by any means, and I hapen to like the interior, and I don't put up with rattles or anything of that sort. It is very straight-forward, and the car out-performed anything in it's class at the time I bought it. Accord/Altima/Maxima.. even the higher priced cars wouldn't outperform it at the time.

I'm just trying to say I am sick of people generalizing all GMs cars into one category.. there are several brands for a reason and I think they deserve to be distinguished from eachother.

Uh huh... your Grand Am GT out-performing a Maxima.... right....

You have some special edition with the supercharged 3800?

Yes I know they're not in the same price range or even class, but you're the one who mentioned it.
Accord and Altima maybe.
But you do know that the Maxima had 222 hp/200 tq, no?
And the interior of any of these 3 are leaps and bounds above any Pontiac.

When I bought my car back then my friend got a '99 maxima w/ 190hp.. and lets just say I know its slower than my car. And when its curvy, he's left way behind. And didn't the Nissans have lots of complaints on interior quality when they made their new models?

But like you said, they're really not in teh same class anyways. I got my car for $14,500 w/ 6700 miles on it.

 

[Linux23]

As long as the interiors are functional, who cares what they should look like. Why should Ford and GM change their interior designs, if they can do the same job as your average jap car?

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: Linux23
As long as the interiors are functional, who cares what they should look like. Why should Ford and GM change their interior designs, if they can do the same job as your average jap car?

jap car? :disgust: Be careful.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Linux23
As long as the interiors are functional, who cares what they should look like. Why should Ford and GM change their interior designs, if they can do the same job as your average jap car?

The question is, why can't their interior quality be as good as Japanese or European marques? It easy to be complacent, but if they want to compete with the big boys, they need to show it.

Bob Lutz himself has said that he is taking GM in the direction of VW/Audi for interior design/quality. So obviously HE cares.

 

[Spoooon]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Linux23
As long as the interiors are functional, who cares what they should look like. Why should Ford and GM change their interior designs, if they can do the same job as your average jap car?

The question is, why can't their interior quality be as good as Japanese or European marques? It easy to be complacent, but if they want to compete with the big boys, they need to show it.

Bob Lutz himself has said that he is taking GM in the direction of VW/Audi for interior design/quality. So obviously HE cares.

Why can't their interior quality be as good? Because it's lazy americans doing the building. This is a good application for a Marxist idea: the alienation of the worker. The worker is separated from the product because each worker is only responsible for one small part. Because of this, they don't take pride in the end result because they don't see how their small part is a part of the greater whole. In Japan, and I imagine Germany, the workers take great pride in their work and their company. From some of the documentaries and what not, it appears that the companies go to great lengths to ensure that each employee knows that they are a valued asset. And it shows.

But, I still think the interior quality of my Envoy is decent, and not cheap.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Spoooon

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Linux23
As long as the interiors are functional, who cares what they should look like. Why should Ford and GM change their interior designs, if they can do the same job as your average jap car?

The question is, why can't their interior quality be as good as Japanese or European marques? It easy to be complacent, but if they want to compete with the big boys, they need to show it.

Bob Lutz himself has said that he is taking GM in the direction of VW/Audi for interior design/quality. So obviously HE cares.

Why can't their interior quality be as good? Because it's lazy americans doing the building. This is a good application for a Marxist idea: the alienation of the worker. The worker is separated from the product because each worker is only responsible for one small part. Because of this, they don't take pride in the end result because they don't see how their small part is a part of the greater whole. In Japan, and I imagine Germany, the workers take great pride in their work and their company. From some of the documentaries and what not, it appears that the companies go to great lengths to ensure that each employee knows that they are a valued asset. And it shows.

But, I still think the interior quality of my Envoy is decent, and not cheap.

When my dad was looking at SUVs, we looked at the Envoy, Trailblazer, Explorer, and Highlander.

We ranked them:

Highlander - Damn near perfect. Quality materials everywhere. Switchgear has nice weighty feel
Explorer - Nice build quality, some cheesy components here and there, but overall nice.
Envoy - Subpar materials. Panal gaps not that good. Switchgear rather "Lego" like
Trailblazer - Even worse than the Envoy. Just pure crap.

But the main winners for my dad with the Highlander Limited were the plethora of features, smooth & quiet engine, virtually NO wind noise at highway speeds, excellent gas mileage, superior ride and handling, Toyota quality, reliability and resale value. After my dad got r@ped with resale value on his Explorer, the Highlander is a nice step up.

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: NFS4

When my dad was looking at SUVs, we looked at the Envoy, Trailblazer, Explorer, and Highlander.

We ranked them:

Highlander - Damn near perfect. Quality materials everywhere. Switchgear has nice weighty feel
Explorer - Nice build quality, some cheesy components here and there, but overall nice.
Envoy - Subpar materials. Panal gaps not that good. Switchgear rather "Lego" like
Trailblazer - Even worse than the Envoy. Just pure crap.

But the main winners for my dad with the Highlander Limited were the plethora of features, smooth & quiet engine, virtually NO wind noise at highway speeds, excellent gas mileage, and Toyota quality reliability and resale value. After my dad got r@ped with resale value on his Explorer, the Highlander is a nice step up.

Are you just talking interiors? Because the 4.2L in the Trailblazer was on the 10 best list this year. I can't say I've sat in an Trailblazer, but the overall interior looks very functional, with the seats being able to fold all the way down for maximum cargo space, it lacks in the looks department on the dash though.

Highlander = Ownij
Envoy = Ownij, theres a reason this got SUV of the year.
Explorer is OK

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: NFS4

When my dad was looking at SUVs, we looked at the Envoy, Trailblazer, Explorer, and Highlander.

We ranked them:

Highlander - Damn near perfect. Quality materials everywhere. Switchgear has nice weighty feel
Explorer - Nice build quality, some cheesy components here and there, but overall nice.
Envoy - Subpar materials. Panal gaps not that good. Switchgear rather "Lego" like
Trailblazer - Even worse than the Envoy. Just pure crap.

But the main winners for my dad with the Highlander Limited were the plethora of features, smooth & quiet engine, virtually NO wind noise at highway speeds, excellent gas mileage, and Toyota quality reliability and resale value. After my dad got r@ped with resale value on his Explorer, the Highlander is a nice step up.

Are you just talking interiors? Because the 4.2L in the Trailblazer was on the 10 best list this year. I can't say I've sat in an Trailblazer, but the overall interior looks very functional, with the seats being able to fold all the way down for maximum cargo space, it lacks in the looks department on the dash though.

Highlander = Ownij
Envoy = Ownij, theres a reason this got SUV of the year.
Explorer is OK

I was just talking interiors until the last paragraph. The straight six in the Trailblazer/Envoy is awesome though

GM is all about some good truck powertrains

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: NFS4

When my dad was looking at SUVs, we looked at the Envoy, Trailblazer, Explorer, and Highlander.

We ranked them:

Highlander - Damn near perfect. Quality materials everywhere. Switchgear has nice weighty feel
Explorer - Nice build quality, some cheesy components here and there, but overall nice.
Envoy - Subpar materials. Panal gaps not that good. Switchgear rather "Lego" like
Trailblazer - Even worse than the Envoy. Just pure crap.

But the main winners for my dad with the Highlander Limited were the plethora of features, smooth & quiet engine, virtually NO wind noise at highway speeds, excellent gas mileage, and Toyota quality reliability and resale value. After my dad got r@ped with resale value on his Explorer, the Highlander is a nice step up.

Are you just talking interiors? Because the 4.2L in the Trailblazer was on the 10 best list this year. I can't say I've sat in an Trailblazer, but the overall interior looks very functional, with the seats being able to fold all the way down for maximum cargo space, it lacks in the looks department on the dash though.

Highlander = Ownij
Envoy = Ownij, theres a reason this got SUV of the year.
Explorer is OK

I was just talking interiors until the last paragraph. The straight six in the Trailblazer/Envoy is awesome though

GM is all about some good truck powertrains

Roger that, just looking to clarify :beer:

 

[Desslok]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
wait for the CTS-V...mmmm....400HP...6-spd...crazy handling...can you say M-series killer? CAN YOU?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH YEA RIGHT!

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: Desslok

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
wait for the CTS-V...mmmm....400HP...6-spd...crazy handling...can you say M-series killer? CAN YOU?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH YEA RIGHT!

Just for the sake of comparing performance:

BMW M5:
394 hp @ 6,600 rpm
369 lb. ft. of torque @ 3,800 rpm
4024 lbs.

CTS-V
400 hp @ 6,000 rpm
390 lb. ft. torque @ 4800 rpm
3,847 lbs.

CTS-V = 200 lbs. lighter, + 6hp, +20 tq.

It should be a good comparison, and the CTS-V should chime in at $20k or so less. I wouldn't be so quick to laugh next time...

 

[Spoooon]

When my dad was looking at SUVs, we looked at the Envoy, Trailblazer, Explorer, and Highlander.

We ranked them:

Highlander - Damn near perfect. Quality materials everywhere. Switchgear has nice weighty feel
Explorer - Nice build quality, some cheesy components here and there, but overall nice.
Envoy - Subpar materials. Panal gaps not that good. Switchgear rather "Lego" like
Trailblazer - Even worse than the Envoy. Just pure crap.

But the main winners for my dad with the Highlander Limited were the plethora of features, smooth & quiet engine, virtually NO wind noise at highway speeds, excellent gas mileage, superior ride and handling, Toyota quality, reliability and resale value. After my dad got r@ped with resale value on his Explorer, the Highlander is a nice step up.

I guess I'm just not as picky as some people. But I still maintain the favorable comparison between the Envoy and my old Avalon. I don't know what you mean by lego like switchgear. Everything seems to be just as solid as it was in my Toyota. Sure there are panel gaps, but worlds of improvement between the Envoy and my old Cutlass Supreme. At any rate, is the Highlander even in the same class as the Envoy? And yes, the I6 rules.

edit: Now I remember what the Highlander is. For some reason, I was thinking of the Landcruiser. My dad test drove it when I was SUV shopping and he thought it was pretty weak and too expensive. I don't care for the way it looks. The 4Runner though is a pretty sharp looking vehicle. If it weren't for the fact that the Toyota dealership wouldn't deal, I probably would have a 4Runner right now.

 

[jjessico]

Classic domestic cars with v8s are still better, as a group, than all other cars.

There is my general, inflamatory, flame-bait, opinion statement for this thread as I do not have time to read through all the arguments and quips that have already been posted.

Jason

 

[Desslok]

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: Desslok

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN wait for the CTS-V...mmmm....400HP...6-spd...crazy handling...can you say M-series killer? CAN YOU?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH YEA RIGHT!

Just for the sake of comparing performance: BMW M5: 394 hp @ 6,600 rpm 369 lb. ft. of torque @ 3,800 rpm 4024 lbs. CTS-V 400 hp @ 6,000 rpm 390 lb. ft. torque @ 4800 rpm 3,847 lbs. CTS-V = 200 lbs. lighter, + 6hp, +20 tq. It should be a good comparison, and the CTS-V should chime in at $20k or so less. I wouldn't be so quick to laugh next time...

GM will find some way to screw it up, they ALWAYS do. The Catera is a good example it was supposed to take on BMW and fell flat on it's face.

 

[Cfour]

Originally posted by: Desslok

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: Desslok

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN wait for the CTS-V...mmmm....400HP...6-spd...crazy handling...can you say M-series killer? CAN YOU?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH YEA RIGHT!

Just for the sake of comparing performance: BMW M5: 394 hp @ 6,600 rpm 369 lb. ft. of torque @ 3,800 rpm 4024 lbs. CTS-V 400 hp @ 6,000 rpm 390 lb. ft. torque @ 4800 rpm 3,847 lbs. CTS-V = 200 lbs. lighter, + 6hp, +20 tq. It should be a good comparison, and the CTS-V should chime in at $20k or so less. I wouldn't be so quick to laugh next time...

GM will find some way to screw it up, they ALWAYS do. The Catera is a good example it was supposed to take on BMW and fell flat on it's face.

Would you care to explain how can they find a way to "screw up" an engine and tranny that are already quite successful in the Z06, and often prove to put down more HP to the wheels than they are rated to do?

 

[Desslok]

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: Desslok

Originally posted by: Cfour

Originally posted by: Desslok

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN wait for the CTS-V...mmmm....400HP...6-spd...crazy handling...can you say M-series killer? CAN YOU?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH YEA RIGHT!

Just for the sake of comparing performance: BMW M5: 394 hp @ 6,600 rpm 369 lb. ft. of torque @ 3,800 rpm 4024 lbs. CTS-V 400 hp @ 6,000 rpm 390 lb. ft. torque @ 4800 rpm 3,847 lbs. CTS-V = 200 lbs. lighter, + 6hp, +20 tq. It should be a good comparison, and the CTS-V should chime in at $20k or so less. I wouldn't be so quick to laugh next time...

GM will find some way to screw it up, they ALWAYS do. The Catera is a good example it was supposed to take on BMW and fell flat on it's face.

Would you care to explain how can they find a way to "screw up" an engine and tranny that are already quite successful in the Z06, and often prove to put down more HP to the wheels than they are rated to do?

They don't have to screw up the engine or tranny. They could get the handling set up wrong, or have some design issues with mating that engine and tranny to the CTS's frame to name a few. I personally hope they can build a car that can rival BMW in all around performance, but their track record is not the greatest.