Razorecko: Good for you and I hope you are loving every minute of the car. Seriously.

A couple suggestions that may help it look a "little" better...

1. Remove those tacky GM squares on the sides and get rid of C T S letters in the rear. Go with V badging only. They will do it at the dealership free of charge.

2. Paint that chrome window trim black - I have never seen so much chrome badging on a sports car

3. Tint windows as dark as possible. Will help you with not being seen in the Ugly Old Man ride. Forget this step if you actually are an ugly old man.

Repost pictures once this has been completed and we'll re-evaluate.

Cheers.

 

You come into a c63 forum and expect people to adore your ride? If you can't take the heat stay out the kitchen, it's others people opinion. Like I said a thousand times before, who cares what others think if you like the darn car.

 

My old 330i Perf Pkg looks way better IMO...sorry.

 

 

About the service thing, I've had my Cadillac Escalade for twice as long as my SL63 and it has not been in service for any problems. My SL has been in 4 times for transmission and ESP problems.

 

Really?
You're excluding the 3 Black Series AMG cars, right?

The new E63 is also widened.

 

GM makes fairly reliable trucks and SUV's. Cars are a different story. The only GM I ever owned (Tahoe) the steering just broke, I could spin the wheel around and around and nothing. Good thing I was in a parking garage when it happened, traded it in three months later. Have not bought American since.

 

I don't know man,... my interior is quite spectacular compared to my 03 C32, and when I was shopping the C63 against the CtS-V, it fared quited well in comparison to the C63. Talk about a cheap cheesy impression,... that is exactly what I got when I first sat in the cockpit of the C63. A sea of plastic! I hear you on the CF but you'd be hard pressed to find true carbon fibre in many cars,... simulated CF is an industry wide phenom these days as simulated wood was last decade. As far as fit-n-finish,... well my CTS-V scores quite high in that category. I also think it is a bit unfair to judge the current V against 08's and earlier. The 09 is a total rebuild over the last generation, and in many areas over the 08.

I've had mine for a little over 3 months now, and it has been solid. Aside from having to have the UltraView replaced, I have not experience not one early problem. On the other hand, I had to take my C32 to the dealership three times within the first 6 months of delivery. IC pump failure, faulty radiator, a symphony of tranny problems stemming from the faulty radiator,... a lot of stuff that you would think a quality operation would catch before hitting the streets. So these things can be said for just about any brand,... and I mean any. I've heard stories of Farrari owners having access to their brand new never before titled cars only a day before having to give it up for months,... just to get stuff fixed.

Bottom line, Caddy has done a fine job with the 09 CTS-V. Some say the turn-around as been a couple years in the making,... I can't testify to that, I was too busy turning my nose up to anything with wheels made in America to notice. And if I had not stumbled onto the 09 V the way I did, I prolly would still be splashing about in my bias. I would also prollly be the proud owner of a C63.

 

^ I can agree to that. I was very suprised when our special ordered ml63 came in. ( arctic on tan ) I expectecd a little more for 90k but the 0-60 performance is pretty badass

 

How can we debate against your unbaise opinion on either cars because you have driven/owned both of these 2 fine cars. Good decision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Razorecko, you have one sweet looking Caddy.
I took notice of the CTS-V ever since they made there racing debut on Speed a few years back.





-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

Cuddos to you for not being brand bias. But I'd understand for those that do.

 

You "do also can understand"?

Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis?

 

No gym for home.

 

 

There it's been fixed. You guys are the best.
Sorry if this offend some of you Cuddos to you for not being brand bias. I guessed it did?

 

Have you seen the fake carbon fiber in the new M3? Nobody seems to rag on that POS drab interior...

 

[QUOTE=yaymitch;3526220]A friend of mine went from the M3 to a V two years ago and he has had nothing but problems with it and is still trying to get it declared a lemon. QUOTE]


The V of two years ago is NOT the same as the new one. I had an '05 V and went through 4 rear differentials...a known weak link in the drivetrain. Then again, I can't blame GM for it completely since I was pushing 480hp/445tq to the wheels and always drove it like I stole it. On the road courses and drags I never had Lotus, Porsche, BMW, MB, Aston, Subie, Mitsu (etc) guys coming up to me saying things like 'sure you just raped me on the track but your car is a piece of crap.' I did, however, have a few stuck-up guys that wouldn't talk to me much after I lapped them in a Caddy.

At the end of the day, MOST American cars are pretty solid as far as the 'get me to work and back' parts. It's the perceived lack of quality you get from the cheap interior plastics and bizarre exterior moldings that make people say they'll fall apart after a few years. Truth is, you look out on the street and see plenty of old American cars still humming along just fine. My 1995 F250 has 115k miles on it and I pretty much just need to change the oil now and then. My '05 CTT needs a quart of oil every 1000 miles (which is considered "normal").

 

I guess the less than flattering comments on the CTS-V are to be expected here, but it really comes across as if most of you are not actually performance car enthusiasts. The C63 is a good option for those wanting a fast, smaller sedan. The CTS-V is more comparable to the E-Class. It is a more substanital car. From several angles the C leaves you with that "hey, what happened to the rest of the car" feeling, kind of like the 1 Series BMW. A President at my company had a pretty accurate quote. He said " the C-Class is a very nice car for a young professional woman just starting out her career". As for the reliability comments, I had a 2007 CTS-V for 3 years, without one issue. Granted, the interior was very cheap looking (no rattles or any issues though). They fixed that with the new V. It might not be Audi quality, but I don't see it being any worse than the C63's. For those of you who can't appreciate either (1) any other brand than MB or (2) any American brand, you should enjoy your entry level C-Class and hopefully one day you will make your way up to the E-Class/S-Class boards. By the way (and sadly enough), I currently own a C300.

 

Don't lump the C63 in w/ the C300/350's. If you think they are in anyway similar then your posts have officially become irrelevant. The C63 is more agile than any E or S series AMG will ever be. I wanted a sports car not a luxury sedan with power and no agility. I have no issues with the CTS-V other than I was super scared to invest in an American Car (not truck). I thought it was way too risky for my money. As far as performance I am resigned to the fact the the CTS-V is faster and may handle better but I just didn't think the risk was worth it. Daimler dumped Chrysler because they brought 'em down in reliability and financial stability as any American car company would've. At least you Cadillac owners can rest easy knowing the US Gov't. will back your warranties when GM goes out of business.

 

Let's see if this thread can go 17 pages.....keep it up

 

...and yet it seems all too common to not only lump the '09 CTS-V in with not only the regular CTS (which is also very different than the V) but, even more unbelievable, every single other American car ever produced since 1920.

 

Except the 1983 Corvette. That was the greatest American car ever made. Way better than the CTS-V.

 

Quite a reach there...

 

I don’t want an S or E class... If I did I would have bought one, not everyone who has a C63 got it because they couldn’t afford a more expensive AMG, maybe the C63 was their preference over the other models... I personally would rather have the C63 over most other 63's, except for the SL63 and CLK63 BS...

Just because you are a car enthusiast does NOT mean that you have to like or appreciate every car with 500 horses... Just because the CTS-V has a lot of power doesn’t mean I will like it, even though I love performance sport cars... There are many other factors that come in to play when determining your opinion of a vehicle...

How can you not, well maybe not that far back in time. But a company is only as good as its track record, so until these American company's can prove otherwise and produce a sports car without all the flaws and “cheesiness” that they ALL have then I will continue to have the mentality that they are all inferior compared to German or Italian sport cars, which is a FACT. I don’t understand why this is so hard for some people to swallow, if you chose to purchase a CTS-V, Corvette or any other American car, it shouldn’t surprise you or upset you that other cars in its class will be superior, which is how it’s been since I can remember...

 

[QUOTE=1st amg;3527069]Not sure how so, the C63 is the only AMG ever built that they actually widened the track of the car, the front end is extended by about four inches, this car was the only car out of the AMG factory where they actually modified it susbstantially, all the other AMG vehicles have had everything bolted on, such as engine, tires, exhaust, suspension, wheels, interior bits etc.

The C55 was lengthend 3.1" to get the 5.4 motor in.