Smaller and less expensive?

[Bruce Nunnally]

I keep reading opinions that the CTS is TOO big, simply because it is larger than the BMW 3-series. I would like to suggest that the only people that think this are the 3-series snobs that were not going to buy a CTS anyway. The CTS to me is just large enough to comfortably seat adults in the rear; I would not want to have any less rear leg room. I am glad to hear that the 2008 CTS will have some additional rear leg room; if I didn't need rear seats I would drive a 2-seater.

Here is some info from cadillac.com's comparison charts:

The CTS has a wheelbase of 113.4"; the BMW 3-series is 108.7"; the Mercedes C-class (as in CTS) is 106.9".

The CTS has the most rear leg room:

Leg Room (rear) (in.) CTS 36.2 BMW 34.6 Mercedes 33.0

The CTS weighs less than the BMW:

Curb Weight (Auto Trans) (lbs.) CTS 3568 BMW 3605 Mercedes 3495

(Here's the problem) the CTS has the lowest HP:

Horsepower @ RPM CTS 255@6200 BMW 335i 300@5800 Mercedes c350 268@6000

but costs the least of the 3:

Base MSRP CTS $32,685* Base MSRP BMW 335i $38,900* Base MSRP Mercedes C350 $38,600*

*(when optioned 'up' to match CTS 3.6L standard features).

The BMW 328i has 230hp and costs $34,300, so the CTS is more competitive there.

The Mercedes C280 has 228hp and costs $33,400. To compete you can only buy the upmarket CTS engine and stay away from the upmarket options.

Where should the CTS be? It should have MORE hp and better handling than either of the entry level Germans. BMW uses sprint (tightly spaced) gearing that GM does not, so to be as quick GM cars need more hp. So say at least a 10% advantage in HP, or 330hp in the base CTS, (and 550hp in the CTS-V). We don't need to catch up this year and get a 300hp DI VVT V6; we need a jump to at least 330hp.

To compete in this brand-loyal segment, one needs to be able to show advantages in quality, reliability, performance, and price. Reliability is up, cornering in the sport model is very good, great in the CTS-V. Pricing is good. Our current CTS offerring falls short on GO for this class. I love the VVT LY7 engine, but send more horses.

We don't need a smaller CTS. We need more content in the CTS, and we need more power.

[95SevilleSLS]

I look at it this way: I'll never buy a German car! I'd really love to drive a CTS someday though. Never seem to find them though around here.

[JohnnyG]

When I posted my reply to the DTS poll, I didn't really think about the CTS. Why? Well, since I've heard so much about the poor interior quality, I didn't consider it fair competition for the BMW/Mercedes class of cars.

I agree with your post completely. THIS should be the car to compete with the BMW crowd, if GM can add more power, as you say. I also think the additional rear legroom and planned interior upgrades will go a long way to make this a viable option to a BMW.

Gasoline prices are going to continue to increase, no matter what has been posted in the news to the contrary. World demand will be the biggest driving factor in that. So GM should also try to market the fact that these cars get comparative fuel economy to the other choices as well.

[jackc]

The styling of this car is too "edgy" for my taste - especially the dash. I prefer the smoother interior lines of the STS.

[95SevilleSLS]

The styling of this car is too "edgy" for my taste - especially the dash. I prefer the smoother interior lines of the STS.

Same here. I'm more particular to the smoothness. That's why my next "new" car will be a 2006 or so DTS.

[JasonA]

I think the rather unconventional dashboard design is slated for a major re-do on the next CTS, which would be a good thing in my book. I think the concept can be seen on the 2007 SRX:

http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/...x&year=2007

Actually, Cadillac does have some interior shots of the new 2008 CTS:

http://www.cadillac.com/allnewcts/

[95SevilleSLS]

Does anyone else hate those steering wheels with that look like the one in this CTS? I don't know about anybody else, but I drive with my hand on the bottom of the steering wheel. My Monte Carlo was like that too and I couldn't stand it. Luckily my seville has a spot to put it

[JasonA]

I don't really care for 3-spoke wheels either. A good 4-spoke wheel is the best for me in terms of comfort and ergonomics.

[Cadillac Jim]

GM has an patented integrated supercharger/intake that they use on the STS-V. They could add that to the 3.6 V6 family and limit boost (as the do with the STS-V) and produce 320 hp with a very small maximum boost and be ready for anything the competition has to offer.

Of course, that just might set off another horsepower war.

[Bruce Nunnally]

The High Feature V6 engine family was designed to go up to 4L, handle supercharging/turbocharging well, and direct injection when it became ready. GM has a 2.8L DOHC turbo variant now. It would be simplicity itself to put out a 3.6L DOHC VVT DI turbo variant with 370hp or so. Especially since the 6speed tranny is in production; not sure the 5speed auto could handle any more hp/torque.

[OynxSTS]

This is a funny thread...

CTS too big??? The CTS is too small!!!

The 3 series BMW IMO is a bit of a chick car.

Ya they are "OK", but real BMWs start with at least a "5"

[Jack357]

I'm with you Onyx.

[kdaddy]

Ditto to Onyx and Jack.

I think the DTS is just the right size if you ask me. 207 inches in length and over 4000 lbs.

Kdaddy

[bc6t]

The CTS isn't too big at all and like Onyx said - I compare it to the 5-series while the 3-series compares to the Honda Civic for size in my book.

After driving my '98 STS for 4 years now - exclusively city driving - I feel it is a little too big (for city driving) - handles a bit like a boat - I feel I am ready for a more nimble Caddy - like the CTS-V. Don't get me wrong - the STS drive to work & back is the hightlight of my work day, but I want more power and responsiveness...