Caddy's own Blue Devil

  • Thread starter Joey D
  • 53 comments
  • 2,216 views
I see your point, and I would agree. Given that its GM, just like Toyota, there will always be people there to pick their cars apart for whatever reason.
Ofcourse, badge snobery is a cow to get around if you happen to fall victim to the negative side of it. And that alone I reckon makes this car already a lose to it's German rivals even if it ends up being a better car. Not that I think it will, but the if is there.

the Europeans are likely to hate it more because of the extra power and the added "brutishness" of the car.
Hell no, if the power is put to good use and is part of a car that we actually consider to be good, we will like it. But in a big sallon that's no easy feat that even AMG don't always succeed with. If it's your typical American car comes to Europe case of it's quick but no that great, then we will hate it. As for not liking brutishness, for want of a better term. How can the continet that gives you TVR, Marcos, Porsche, Lamborghini, Pagani, Weismann and more be considered people who would not like the "brutishness of the car". We adored the Monaro and we adored the VXR500 version even more, with it's extra power.

Simply put, we love brutal cars, but they have to be good cars. For an American car to be considered good here, it has to really be at least on a par with the higher level rivals it will compete against. See the C6 Corvette for proof that this can happen. It's just a very rare thing for an American car to be sold over here that actually manages that. Then you have the American car market as we generally see it now.

The American Focus, not as good as the European one. Take the next range of Satuns, all based on the decidedly average range of Vauxhalls we've had for the last 4 or so years. Take the last line up of Cadillacs, they lacked the handling, build quality and refinement of their prestige rivals. But there's something else and it's not to be confused with that badge snobbery, and that is passion. Before you think I'm talking about European cars being built with passion and American cars not, just keep your cool, because I'm not. What I'm talking about is having a passion for the cars around you.

Here in the UK we have a hell of a lot of small sportscar companies, many offering several models. A large number of thoes by all rights, are below average cars. but a passion for thoes lightweight, small, nimble, soul stirring sportscars takes them to a level where thier faults are far outweighed by your connection to them. This passion can extend to general cars built in your country, or eevn your continent. Naturally, there's very few people in Europe who have any kind of passion what-so-ever for Caddilacs, in the US I'm sure there's a lot of European cars that many Americans don't have a passion for, but take the classic muscle cars for example, by all rights they wern't very good cars, but the emotional response you can get from seeing, hearing, sitting in or even driving one is immense.

I would love for this car to be really good, because it will only create a more competetive market and better cars again the next time around. However, I've never once seen a Cadillac come close to it's rivals over here, there is simply nothing for me to base any idea that this car will be great on. Looks wise, it's interesting but pretty ugly imo, performance wise, we don't really car if it's quicker than the M5 or not. It should be, so if it is, so what. The big ? is whether it's a great car or not, a good American car won't cut it, a great one has a chance.
 
YSSMAN mentioned an automatic transmission and it made me think...
I doubt that will happen.
I don't see any reason for them to suddenly start offering an auto with this car when they wouldn't do that with the previous car.
Chances are that an auto is the last issue on the minds of the people involved with development.

the problem with that logic is that automatic transmissions sell here in the land of the lazy drivers, America. and, with most of the competition offering automatics (Benz) and Manumatics (BMW,) Having a stick-only car tends to backfire.

*Typical customer* "Oh, this CTS-V is nice! Can I get it with an Automatic?"
*Dealer* Uhhhhhh.....
*Typical Customer* "Oh.....well, I'll consider it..."
 
speaking of blue devil.

first of all it's a poor name

and secondly HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN WAITING FOR IT? :mad:
 
It's not going to be called the Blue Devil, it's a code name for it because Rick Wagoner graduated from Duke before going on to Harvard.
 
I would love for this car to be really good, because it will only create a more competetive market and better cars again the next time around. However, I've never once seen a Cadillac come close to it's rivals over here, there is simply nothing for me to base any idea that this car will be great on. Looks wise, it's interesting but pretty ugly imo, performance wise, we don't really car if it's quicker than the M5 or not. It should be, so if it is, so what. The big ? is whether it's a great car or not, a good American car won't cut it, a great one has a chance.

Its good to hear that the idea is still somewhat appealing, and furthermore, that the VXR500 has gone over well. I did see some reviews of the new VXR8, and those seem to be rather positive as well...

...Given the standards set in-house by the Commodore, the Cadillac (in theory) should be able to not only out-run it in a straight-line, but should (in theory) be able to out-handle it as well...
 
the problem with that logic is that automatic transmissions sell here in the land of the lazy drivers, America. and, with most of the competition offering automatics (Benz) and Manumatics (BMW,) Having a stick-only car tends to backfire.

*Typical customer* "Oh, this CTS-V is nice! Can I get it with an Automatic?"
*Dealer* Uhhhhhh.....
*Typical Customer* "Oh.....well, I'll consider it..."

While you say my logic is flawed, I point to the facts (and the current CTS-V) and say your logic is flawed. :sly:
It's not personal to you either, it's to everyone and anyone who thinks GM wouldn't do a Manual only car with this 600hp beast.

Simply put, actions speak louder than words and right now GM's actions have proven that they are indeed willing to produce a Manual-only car. 👍
 
What I've always found surprising about the CTS-V is the amount of women I see driving them here in Grand Rapids. I've never been able to wrap my head around a middle-aged woman (no older than my Mom, 47) driving a CTS-V without a problem. Men like Clarkson and Tiff complain about the shift-action of a T56, and yet these women drive it like it isn't a problem.

Who is the sissy here? (I kid...)

Adding an automatic really only extends the ways in which the car can appeal to other potential buyers. Its really not like it will slow down sales, as Mercedes will still sell plenty of C63s with the 7GTRONIC, so I really doubt a 6L80E would hurt the CTS-V all that much...

...And I just realized that they'll probably use the 6L90E as seen in the trucks (based on power issues). Currently the most-powerful engine strapped to the transmission is the 469 BHP 4.4L Supercharged V8 from the STS-V, but there isn't any telling how well it would hold-up to 550-600 BHP....
 
What I've always found surprising about the CTS-V is the amount of women I see driving them here in Grand Rapids. I've never been able to wrap my head around a middle-aged woman (no older than my Mom, 47) driving a CTS-V without a problem. Men like Clarkson and Tiff complain about the shift-action of a T56, and yet these women drive it like it isn't a problem.

Who is the sissy here? (I kid...)

Would be better if you weren't kidding... I mean, that really does say something doesn't it?
Maybe their complaints are just a tad overly critical? (I kid... :lol: )

None the less, the testimony here regarding women driving this car is enough to tell me that GM isn't worried about putting an automatic into a car like this.

Beyond that, I've got to add that the first time I saw a CTS-V on the road it was being driven by a man who easily had 10 years of senior citizenship under his belt. :lol:

If seniors and middle age women have no problems with this then I just don't see why they would want to add an automatic to the options list.

Furthermore, I'm suprised to see so many people who usually knock autos make such vigorous arguments for their implimentation. :confused:

I for one (and as an automatic driver) believe the CTS-V has no place using an automatic and strongly believe the big wigs at GM feel the same way. 👍
 
Don't get me wrong, I'd only buy the CTS-V with a manual transmission, but I think its part of the reason why people had (more or less) stayed away from the car with the first generation model.

...You get people who complain that Cadillac is a luxury car company and should offer an automatic, and then you've got people who say that if they want sport, they need to offer a manual...

Me personally?

I just like having a choice...
 
On the good/poor gearbox note, just because a gear box is considered poor, it doesn't mean it's too difficult to use for middle aged women. A poor box doesn't = a Lamborghini Countach box where you need Arnie arms to shift. A poor box could be very light weight and allo you to shift with your index finger. Actually that would be an insanely poor gearbox, but my point is, the weighting of the shift doesn't = the final verdict on a gear box, there's a lot more that that.

I think regarding the auto, I think it makes sense for GM to at least offer an auto in the American market, but that doesn't mean they will. Surely people looking for the CTS-V will be looking for the sporting intentions the car offers, and autos are rarely associated with sport. So there's a lot of marketing gubbins going on here, but in terms of outright sales, I can see an auto making sense in the US. But like Kent said, that doesn't mean there will be one because Caddillac have already built a no auto availalbe model before.
 
Don't get me wrong, I'd only buy the CTS-V with a manual transmission, but I think its part of the reason why people had (more or less) stayed away from the car with the first generation model.

If it was lack of an automatic that kept people away from the CTS-V, why did BMW sell far more M5s than CTS-Vs, even though the M5 was only equipped with a 6-speed manual?
 
Which M5?

The previous M5?

The CTS-V was a purpose-built, low-production model that was really only meant for GM to poke around at the idea of an AMG-like tuning company, which turned out far-better than most people had suspected.

The CTS-V sold outstandingly well for being an upstart model without any history whatsoever, but I'm still in the camp that says that with an automatic option (keep the T56 standard fare), they would have sold more. Its not that it is the best high-performance option, but it is an option that is more appealing to most Cadillac-type buyers.

The old LS is a good case for discussion, I think. Being that it was about the size of the CTS and available with a V8 matched to an automatic or a manual, most people opted for the automatic and eventually lead to the cancellation of the manual transmission model.

...This all being said, it wouldn't have made sense for Cadillac to offer an automatic up until last year anyway. Having a four-speed in the CTS-V would have been suicide, and now that the 6L80E has already been matched to the LS2 (and LS3), it would be the better choice for automatic in the current car.

But, even then, the CTS-V dies here in the next few weeks. The '08 Sigma II CTS models should begin rolling out of Lansing by the end of July, and should be showing up in dealerships starting in August. Then it will be at least eight months to a year before the Sigma II (probably an '09) CTS-V shows up...
 
Um, you may want to check the figures on the older M5...

Car and Driver had a pre-production CTS-V with the old LS6 matching or beating the M5 by every measurement. The later models were much improved, particularly those equipped with the LS2 from the C6 Corvette, due to better chassis tuning and an altogether better engine (IMO).

...Plus, you really can't (technically) compare the E39 M5 to the Simga I CTS-V, given that they were never sold at the same time, and beyond that, comparing sales overall isn't exactly fair either, given that the E39 M5 will have been on sale two years longer than the CTS-V...

And beyond that, do you even have sales numbers to back up the claims that BMW sold more? Not that I would completely doubt it, but I'd be interested to hear how wide of a margin it would be...
 
If it was lack of an automatic that kept people away from the CTS-V, why did BMW sell far more M5s than CTS-Vs, even though the M5 was only equipped with a 6-speed manual?

You must be referring to the E39 M5, which isn't a fair comparison. The CTS-V was just entering as the E39 M5 was leaving.

As for seeing them, well, you're in Europe, a not so friendly buyer of Cadillacs, so I wouldn't doubt you'd see more M5s than CTS-Vs, not to mention the CTS-V there probably isn't cheap.
 
Actually, "the Cadillac trailed the M5 in every acceleration category, and its 13.7-second elapsed time through the quarter was the slowest of the trio." This was likely due to the awful axle hop they were getting from the Caddy.

Also, looking at the numbers, they're all very close, and any victory by the CTS-V could hardly be called a victory. Of course, the same goes for the M5, but considering it first came out 6 years earlier, I can see exigeracer's point.

Still...
...Plus, you really can't (technically) compare the E39 M5 to the Simga I CTS-V, given that they were never sold at the same time, and beyond that, comparing sales overall isn't exactly fair either, given that the E39 M5 will have been on sale two years longer than the CTS-V...
I agree. Sales numbers can't be compared here.
 
You must be referring to the E39 M5, which isn't a fair comparison. The CTS-V was just entering as the E39 M5 was leaving.

As for seeing them, well, you're in Europe, a not so friendly buyer of Cadillacs, so I wouldn't doubt you'd see more M5s than CTS-Vs, not to mention the CTS-V there probably isn't cheap.
Here's a quote from Autocar...
he problem for the CTS-V is not how it goes, corners or stops, but more mundane matters. Some of the detailing on the outside – crude chicken wire mesh in the intakes and undernourished-looking exhausts – is only a taste of an interior of simple angular forms and very cheap plastic. And as if left-hand-drive only wasn’t enough of a problem in the UK, the Caddy compounds the problem with a wheel that doesn’t adjust for reach and is far too big to feel sporting. Surely those laps around the ‘Ring required something a bit more grippy and manageable? You can’t fault the generous amount of standard kit inside, but for £45,000 this isn’t good enough.
Yes, we did say £45,000. That’s the Caddy’s biggest problem: it’s just too expensive. When you factor in that it’s a left-hooker – a problem when overtaking in a car as wide as this – the downmarket interior and the fact that we averaged a fuel consumption figure in the low teens, it’s hard to make a case for it. Just about anyone with petrol in their veins will love a thrash in a CTS-V, but the appeal may wane if you consider buying one.




Here's another quote...


The interior is comfortable - the leather-covered sports seats offered more support than on any other American car I have driven, but there's still a tacky feel about the dash. Instrumentation is OK but the rest is a mish-mash of cheap looking dials and switches with poorly-fitting plastics spoiling an otherwise impressive performance package.
Cadillac still can't make a super saloon to the European standards set by BMW's M5, Audi's S4 or the Mercedes-AMG offerings, but it's catching up.


And that's the generaly consensus here, it's just not good enough. Not garbage, but not good enough.
 
...Plus, you really can't (technically) compare the E39 M5 to the Simga I CTS-V, given that they were never sold at the same time, and beyond that, comparing sales overall isn't exactly fair either, given that the E39 M5 will have been on sale two years longer than the CTS-V...

So how many times in this very thread have you compared the Sigma II CTS-V with cars that have been on sale already for a year or two? That doesn't make sense either then.

(I would further elaborate this point, but the search function isn't working)

As for seeing them, well, you're in Europe, a not so friendly buyer of Cadillacs, so I wouldn't doubt you'd see more M5s than CTS-Vs, not to mention the CTS-V there probably isn't cheap.

I live, and always have for my entire existance, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
 
So how many times in this very thread have you compared the Sigma II CTS-V with cars that have been on sale already for a year or two? That doesn't make sense either then.

Technically, no, it wouldn't. But that would take all the fun away from talking about a car that will be out in the not-too-distant future, wouldn't it?
 
Exactly my point with the e39 and CTS-V, where one of them was a superior product.

This is their second chance, and I believe that throwing more power at it will not make it a superior product over the current M5, which is undoubtedly an amazing machine all around.
 
By no means would I ever consider the Sigma I CTS-V a better car than the E39 M5, as I'd consider that to be one of the top cars ever made in my lifetime... Without question my favorite BMW ever built.

...In regards to the E60 M5, IMO the standard is lower than what it was with the E39. Sure, people like the M5, but it just isn't as "likable" as the car that had preceded it.

Its a horsepower war these days, and Cadillac wants to play ball with the Germans. If we are already anticipating their power increases, why not beat them to the punch? The E63 has pretty much set the power standard now, the RS6 will likely blow that apart, and the CTS-V will bump it up even further.

...What it will come down to here is who has the better chassis, and the advantages there are with Cadillac and Audi, as both had been campaigning the CTS-V and RS6 for a while. I've been told by GM guys that a lot of the CTS-V parts we will see in the Sigma II car were developed during the campaigning of the Sigma I car, and furthermore the design of the Sigma II racer. As a matter of fact, many of the Sigma I CTS-V parts will be standard fare in the "base" Sigma II CTS, which should pump the game up quite a bit for GM this time around...

I still can't wait to see the 300 BHP model with the six-speed, preferably in black. Sex on wheels, the only other car I want to see more right now is the G8...
 
Back