z71stampede

You really can't judge the STS until you've driven it--and I suspect many of these folks posting on here have not. While I initially much preferred the CTS over the STS from both an appearance and interior perspective--I recently spent several days (and a couple thousand miles) with a Thunder Grey 08 STS V-8. This was a turning point for me--what a fantastic car. It drove like no other Cadillac I've ever driven, and in most cases was easier to just get in and go than it's German rivals, and even its Japanese contenders. The interstate was effortless, the mountain twisties were surprising when the transmission was in "Sport", around town steering was a little light but easily adapted to and visibility was excellent. The powertrain was always where I wanted it to be--and surprised both a 330 and a 528 by showing tail lights to both of them through a particularly lonely stretch of highway 12. No muss, no fuss, almost effortless. That Northstar is a fantastic engine--and I will be very sad to see it go. Over the course of a week, with highway/city combined traffic and the joust with the Germans, I averaged 26.8 MPG. The interior was nice to be in and look at--everything was where I needed it to be. Buttons? You don't use them but once--then you're done--dual zone climate control for front--sound system controls on the steering wheel. Speaking of sound system--the 5.1 surround with Centerpoint is one of the best I've ever heard. Levinson included. My home 7.1 doesn't sound as great. I could sit in that car for hours just to listen to it. Overall--please don't make a judgement on the STS until you've driven it--and better yet lived with its competitors. I still lust over the CTS--but the STS in it's current form with the new nose--is a worthy competitor for any car in it's class. I can't wait to see the car that replaces it. Cadillac ROCKS.

I'll just add my support and agreement to the continued improvement of the core vehicles. GM, Cadillac especially, cannot afford not to deviate from this path. If GM can't be superior to every one of it's comptetitors it will not ever reach it's goals(and our expectations).

One thing about the Sixteen (or any ultra premium price point car for Cadillac) that no one has really touched on yet: GM does not have a dealer network that could support the expectations of that customer. The customer experience in that price stratosphere is unlike any experience you would receive in any Cadillac dealer in the country today. They would have to carefully choose where this halo car would be sold, and then build new showrooms/service departments to support it. And I'm not talking about a new showroom on an existing dealership, either. I hate to say it but you don't sell 200+k vehicles in the same showroom that you sell the 40k rigs. All of that would add a considerable amount of capital--and risk of not getting it right. Toyota recognized this and had to go through it with Lexus--a new brand back in the 80's. It worked.

As far as a sub-CTS model.....I don't think Cadillac is ready for that yet. If they choose to do one for the U.S--it had better be every inch a Cadillac, as nice inside and out as the CTS--with no excuses for price or performance. Otherwise, you might just as well buy a new Aura or Malibu. Does Cadillac really need to be all things to all people? I am not really sure. They should really do what they do better than anyone else, and leave the little ones to Europe for now.

Two or Three times depending on who you ask. Past entries into the hall of shame:

1993-1998 Toyota T100.

Toyota fanboys will call it full sized, but it's only roughly the same size as a similar vintage Dakota. Failed because of a lack of a V8 (a wheezy I4 and two wheezy V6s were offered), small size and lack of useful options.

2000-2006 Tundra

7/8 the size of a regular truck, the Tundra tried to go after the heavy duty truck crowd only to find out their poser fan base didn't want a tougher truck and real truck drivers wanted brakes that work, transmissions that held up for longer than 40,000 miles and steering and suspension parts that weren't made of recycled Paseos.

LOL. Toyota needs to stick with crappy economy cars.

That T-100 was amazingly ugly, too. They should at least have stretched the wheelbase to line up with the body they threw over it. My Dad had one for a couple of years but got tired of how little it would tow, and how crappy the mileage was when he did tow. The new Tundra is at best awkward to look at, and the interior is crazy. Toyota likes to claim that they spent hours and hours with contractors and fleet users to find out how working folks used their rigs. So how did they miss something as obvious and yet easy to fix as a weak tailgate? I am very happy to see Toyota running into the same problems their competitors have run into before--shows you that everyone makes mistakes. Will they get the media all riled up? I doubt it. They have pretty strong financial roots here in the states now, and they do employ a lot of Americans for which we should be thankful. But the press will just not stand up and say anything to them for some odd reason. Toyota's probably wishing the billions they invested in full-size truck programs were invested elsewhere about now since they are chest-deep in Tundra (with lots of cash on the hood LOL), Sequoia and even the not-compact anymore Tacoma with gas prices hovering around 3 bucks a gallon consistently throughout the year.

I think he is suggesting that if GM has to build the diesels for Europe anyway, why not sell them here also.

The reason they aren't diving in head-first with diesels is two-fold:

1) None of the European diesels could hit 50-state emissions requirements.

2) Many Americans still have a bad taste in their mouths after the last round of pathetic passenger car diesels a couple decades ago.

I agree--they should have stepped up R&D and production a little sooner--and now with 35 mpg CAFE I'm sure they wish they had made diesels a priority. For the GMT 900's you can bet there will be a waiting list a mile long, plus some hefty upcharges for this evidently awesome engine. I may have to step up to a gas engine now, and hope the diesel-mania has died down a bit when it comes time to replace it. The good news is that you get alot of the price premium back when you trade or sell, the bad news is that (at least here in the Northwest) diesel has been and continues to be .30-.40 per gallon more expensive than gas. Ouch!

Yes traditional Glow plug diesels do not like start and stop of the engine, but a Direct Injection diesel is able to handle that. I wonder if it has to do with the glow plug that has to heat up before starting for a traditional diesel?

This hybrid system started it's life in metro buses--Seattle was among the first to take delivery of them. Somehow those diesels don't seem to mind the starting and stopping--and have pretty good track records for reliabilty in fleet use.

Looks sweet. I will be very interested to see what real world gas mileage will be with one of these.

Speaking of real world mileage--for right now where the heck is the 6 speed automatic that's available almost everywhere but in the new Silverado/Sierra??? Truck Trend noted that even the 381 horse Tundra got better mileage (with 6 speed auto) than the Silverado 5.3 (with 4-speed). I thought 6-speed auto was to be available in 08 but don't see it on the order form.....

And wouldn't a light-duty diesel with this hybrid system be sweet?