I was reading about the new 2009 Cadillac CTS-V in the March issue of Automobile Magazine and it sure does sound impressive. Actually the 2008 CTS is Motor Trend's Car Of The Year!! The CTS-V has a 550HP motor that puts out an astonishing 550 lb-Ft!! At $59,000 it almost seems like a bargain, too. The only problem is that it's well, a Cadillac and I have some experience with them. Since I was a child, my father has always owned Cadillacs, right up until his brand spanking new 2008 DTS and, without exception they have all been pieces of crap. Poor finish, cheap materials and unreliability continue to plague them. Of course in recent years it's gotten better but it's still a crap box. The trim on the right side of my father's passenger seat has a hole in it and is cracked. There are a bunch of wires falling down under the driver's size seat. The cup holders are cracked. The cruise control doesn't work. The car rattles and squeaks. It has been in the shop 5 times in 3 months for repairs that would horrify and amaze the average BMW owner. Maybe it's me but I fail to see the benefit of owning a brutally fast car that cannot seem to be able to keep itself from falling apart and having to pay $60,00 for the privilege.

Yup !! At least if it's a Mercedes................. it's ... well a German car !! :D

:rolleyes:

Might want to put those rehashed stereotypes to bed. For what it's worth, my 550 was the least reliable car I have ever owned, by some margin, and was bought back. GM on the other hand is now scoring better than some of the Japanese brands on reliability and satisfaction surveys. Based on your definition, was my $70,000 BMW a "crap box" too?

The CTS-V actually sounds like it will be an excellent car and early reports in the motoring press are favorable. M5 performance for less than 550 money.

Im in love with the new CTS-V. It has unbelievable power and it looks pretty sick as well. Althought the only downside to the CTS is that its a really tight car. My cousin just got the regular V6 and Im 6'1", it was a very tight car for me to drive. Even the backseat was very tight. The CTS is not a car they compare to the 5er, they compare it to the 3. The car is def a beast and well worth the money. Your comments about the Caddys being a crap box I dissagree with you there. When the 745 first came out my father had it and that car was a crap box but dosent mean that BMW's are crap boxes. There are always a few bad apples in the batch and Im sure with every car company. My father has a 83 Fleetwood Brougham and that car is perfect. Caddys have always been known to have a lot more to offer in their cars then others. Not now but about 20yrs ago ya. When the german cars werent as popular in the US as they are now.

When my wife got a 2004 SRX I really couldn't believe we owned a Cadillac. It turned out pretty good.... so she got another one in 2006. Now she's getting ready to get a 2008 -- her third one. She has been very pleased with the them and with her dealer.

I was ready to get a 2006 CTS-V when I saw this 530i for a good price and decided to go the more practical route (but looking back I wish I had bought either a CTS-V, 545, or 335 -- the 530i is a little slow for my taste).

The GM RWD based Sigma platform vehicles are modern and solid (CTS, STS, and SRX). The DTS, while it has been updated, is on a really old platform that is certainly showing its age -- although that is no excuse for the problems with your father's car.

Well, my father has gotten a new one every 24 months for the past 40 years and without exception, every single one of them has been crap. I agree that it has gotten better but still dismal.

I rented the standard issue 08 CTS from Budget last November for several days in FL as it was only $10/day more than a full size and came away impressed but not smitten. Car had about 1K on the clock and I put 400 miles on it. It had the auto which I left in Sport mode all the time. It's handling was 90% BMW with a touch of body roll. The steering on center feel was loose. Biggest disappointment was no integrated Bluetooth. The key fob was huge and unwieldy. If I was in the market for an automatic, I'd consider it on price alone. It's a near BMW but the lack of integrated Bluetooth, no BMW silky manual trans, GM's financial woes, depreciation, and reliability keeps me away.

It seems like everyone, except Consumer Reports wants the CTS - V to become a legit BMW fighter. Yea, it might be less money, and it might have more power than my 550, and it could be a better buy, but no matter how much lipstick you put on it, it is still a Caddy. It will have crappy resale value, and a depreciation factor of roughly twice what BMW will experience. Factor in the free maintinance, and I still think the 550 is a better buy, knockout dead goodlooking, and no AARP sticker in the rear window.

I'm not a big Caddy fan, but I have owned several GM vehicles and they were all solid cars.

As for overall ownership experience, Cadillac still has a way to go to compete with BMW (or Audi and MB), but the price definitely makes it worth a look.

I've never driven the CTS but I did test drive the STS-V when I was deciding on my most recent car. While it didn't handle like the 550i, it was certainly not bad. It came fully loaded and I was able to negotiate a price that was pretty much what the 550i cost me. In terms of the fit/finish it was pretty good - certainly not "crap". I think that Cadillac has come a long way in upgrading the quality of their cars and the handling has improved as well. They are not a BMW but for the price the CTS and STS are alternatives. The STS-V certainly didn't handle worse than the MB E550 I looked at and the lease package was better. I wound up getting the BMW primarily for the handling and the technology and I love it but I don't think I would have been unhappy with the STS-V.