Checked out the new CTS-V and...
05-18-2009, 11:12 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG & 2009 CTS-V
05-18-2009, 11:39 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG & 2009 CTS-V
Not really,... almost every anti-CTS-V comment in here to date is based on that very premise. The 09 CTS-V is crap because the 05 CTS-V had problems,... the 09 CTS-V is crap because of the Caddy Camera,... the CTS-V is crap because my 1971 Pinto died the very day I mailed my last payment,... and on and on and on.
Truth of the matter is the 09 CTS-V has more out of common with the regular CTS than the C63 has with the regular C-Class sedan. And that's especially true when it comes to the drive train. For example, both the manual AND automatic trans are different between the two cars. With the C-Class Benz, you get the same 7speed auto no matter what you buy. In addition to having a wider front track like the C63, the V also sports a different suspension both front and back. Aside from the wider track, the Benz stops at stiffer springs and larger sway bars,... that's it. There is substantial added chassis and body bracing added to the V that the normal CTS lacks,... this is the reason the fold down rear seat option is missing from the V. The added body bracing leaves no room for the hole to the trunk, so why design the seats to fold? The cross members up front to support components for the 'all wheel drive' option is 86'd on the V to lose weight. All other CTS's have these cross members whether or not the AWD option was added. The Chassis setup on the C 4Matic is identical to the Chassis on the C63. Oh yeah,... don't let me forget the diff,... that's completely different too! There's more, but I think there's a character limit here.
Truth of the matter is the 09 CTS-V has more out of common with the regular CTS than the C63 has with the regular C-Class sedan. And that's especially true when it comes to the drive train. For example, both the manual AND automatic trans are different between the two cars. With the C-Class Benz, you get the same 7speed auto no matter what you buy. In addition to having a wider front track like the C63, the V also sports a different suspension both front and back. Aside from the wider track, the Benz stops at stiffer springs and larger sway bars,... that's it. There is substantial added chassis and body bracing added to the V that the normal CTS lacks,... this is the reason the fold down rear seat option is missing from the V. The added body bracing leaves no room for the hole to the trunk, so why design the seats to fold? The cross members up front to support components for the 'all wheel drive' option is 86'd on the V to lose weight. All other CTS's have these cross members whether or not the AWD option was added. The Chassis setup on the C 4Matic is identical to the Chassis on the C63. Oh yeah,... don't let me forget the diff,... that's completely different too! There's more, but I think there's a character limit here.
05-19-2009, 12:04 AM
#54
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
What is there to argue about, people? The C63 outsells the CTS-V by so wide a margin it's almost pointless to speak of them in the same breath.
Cadillac has done a commendable job in building a high performance sedan, but it'll never be serious competition for AMGs, M3s and M5s, RS4s and RS6s because serious performance car buyers simply do not gravitate toward the Cadillac brand. No offense intended to those of you who've bought one, but it'll take decades for Cadillac to establish a meaningful racing pedigree to go with the performance capabilities that the car promises.
It's a similar challenge faced by Lexus with its IS F.
Cadillac has done a commendable job in building a high performance sedan, but it'll never be serious competition for AMGs, M3s and M5s, RS4s and RS6s because serious performance car buyers simply do not gravitate toward the Cadillac brand. No offense intended to those of you who've bought one, but it'll take decades for Cadillac to establish a meaningful racing pedigree to go with the performance capabilities that the car promises.
It's a similar challenge faced by Lexus with its IS F.
05-19-2009, 12:52 AM
#55
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09' C63 AMG
What is there to argue about, people? The C63 outsells the CTS-V by so wide a margin it's almost pointless to speak of them in the same breath.
Cadillac has done a commendable job in building a high performance sedan, but it'll never be serious competition for AMGs, M3s and M5s, RS4s and RS6s because serious performance car buyers simply do not gravitate toward the Cadillac brand. No offense intended to those of you who've bought one, but it'll take decades for Cadillac to establish a meaningful racing pedigree to go with the performance capabilities that the car promises.
It's a similar challenge faced by Lexus with its IS F.
Cadillac has done a commendable job in building a high performance sedan, but it'll never be serious competition for AMGs, M3s and M5s, RS4s and RS6s because serious performance car buyers simply do not gravitate toward the Cadillac brand. No offense intended to those of you who've bought one, but it'll take decades for Cadillac to establish a meaningful racing pedigree to go with the performance capabilities that the car promises.
It's a similar challenge faced by Lexus with its IS F.
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
The C63 is a car with an amazing engine yet for a great price, so of course it will not have all the luxuries of its bigger siblings. So comparing the CTS-V to the C63 is not an equal comparison because the C63 lacks features the other true competitors in the V-series class would have. However even though it’s not an even comparison the C63 is still superior over the V-series IMO even with its disadvantage in its lack of features. Just because they are similar in price does not mean they are equal to compare or in the same class just because they are both sedans. An MB AMG and a Caddy in the same class will NEVER be similar in price. That alone is proof of the uneven comparison.
Even with decades to come I highly doubt Cadillac will establish that racing pedigree which you speak of, such as the one AMG's and BMW M's posses. Although they have raised the bar of their performance capabilities, there is still something missing, let’s not argue about petty details I am just stating a general point...
05-19-2009, 02:32 AM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG & 2009 CTS-V
What is there to argue about, people? The C63 outsells the CTS-V by so wide a margin it's almost pointless to speak of them in the same breath.
Cadillac has done a commendable job in building a high performance sedan, but it'll never be serious competition for AMGs, M3s and M5s, RS4s and RS6s because serious performance car buyers simply do not gravitate toward the Cadillac brand. No offense intended to those of you who've bought one, but it'll take decades for Cadillac to establish a meaningful racing pedigree to go with the performance capabilities that the car promises.
It's a similar challenge faced by Lexus with its IS F.
Cadillac has done a commendable job in building a high performance sedan, but it'll never be serious competition for AMGs, M3s and M5s, RS4s and RS6s because serious performance car buyers simply do not gravitate toward the Cadillac brand. No offense intended to those of you who've bought one, but it'll take decades for Cadillac to establish a meaningful racing pedigree to go with the performance capabilities that the car promises.
It's a similar challenge faced by Lexus with its IS F.
But then again,... not entirely. Cadillac does have a long and some would argue sorted history of circuit racing,... both here in North America and in Europe. But their on again, off again commitment to the sport probably has had a greater impact on their lack of pedigree than any other single factor. Resurrection I think, is a more accurate way to put it. Nonetheless,... you are correct! Nice post.
Last edited by ericpd; 05-19-2009 at 09:18 AM.
05-19-2009, 10:48 AM
#57
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
The C63 is a car with an amazing engine yet for a great price, so of course it will not have all the luxuries of its bigger siblings. So comparing the CTS-V to the C63 is not an equal comparison because the C63 lacks features the other true competitors in the V-series class would have. However even though it’s not an even comparison the C63 is still superior over the V-series IMO even with its disadvantage in its lack of features. Just because they are similar in price does not mean they are equal to compare or in the same class just because they are both sedans. An MB AMG and a Caddy in the same class will NEVER be similar in price. That alone is proof of the uneven comparison.
Even with decades to come I highly doubt Cadillac will establish that racing pedigree which you speak of, such as the one AMG's and BMW M's posses. Although they have raised the bar of their performance capabilities, there is still something missing, let’s not argue about petty details I am just stating a general point...
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
The C63 is a car with an amazing engine yet for a great price, so of course it will not have all the luxuries of its bigger siblings. So comparing the CTS-V to the C63 is not an equal comparison because the C63 lacks features the other true competitors in the V-series class would have. However even though it’s not an even comparison the C63 is still superior over the V-series IMO even with its disadvantage in its lack of features. Just because they are similar in price does not mean they are equal to compare or in the same class just because they are both sedans. An MB AMG and a Caddy in the same class will NEVER be similar in price. That alone is proof of the uneven comparison.
Even with decades to come I highly doubt Cadillac will establish that racing pedigree which you speak of, such as the one AMG's and BMW M's posses. Although they have raised the bar of their performance capabilities, there is still something missing, let’s not argue about petty details I am just stating a general point...
05-19-2009, 11:00 AM
#58
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Clifton, NJ
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 37 Likes
on
32 Posts
96 and 08 911 turbos
+1
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
The C63 is a car with an amazing engine yet for a great price, so of course it will not have all the luxuries of its bigger siblings. So comparing the CTS-V to the C63 is not an equal comparison because the C63 lacks features the other true competitors in the V-series class would have. However even though it’s not an even comparison the C63 is still superior over the V-series IMO even with its disadvantage in its lack of features. Just because they are similar in price does not mean they are equal to compare or in the same class just because they are both sedans. An MB AMG and a Caddy in the same class will NEVER be similar in price. That alone is proof of the uneven comparison.
Even with decades to come I highly doubt Cadillac will establish that racing pedigree which you speak of, such as the one AMG's and BMW M's posses. Although they have raised the bar of their performance capabilities, there is still something missing, let’s not argue about petty details I am just stating a general point...
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
The C63 is a car with an amazing engine yet for a great price, so of course it will not have all the luxuries of its bigger siblings. So comparing the CTS-V to the C63 is not an equal comparison because the C63 lacks features the other true competitors in the V-series class would have. However even though it’s not an even comparison the C63 is still superior over the V-series IMO even with its disadvantage in its lack of features. Just because they are similar in price does not mean they are equal to compare or in the same class just because they are both sedans. An MB AMG and a Caddy in the same class will NEVER be similar in price. That alone is proof of the uneven comparison.
Even with decades to come I highly doubt Cadillac will establish that racing pedigree which you speak of, such as the one AMG's and BMW M's posses. Although they have raised the bar of their performance capabilities, there is still something missing, let’s not argue about petty details I am just stating a general point...
If you forget all the branding aspects, there is no question what the superior vehicle is.
05-19-2009, 11:20 AM
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 K1
When GM goes bankrupt, let's see how much they put into continued development of the V-series Cadillacs. Wonder how that will affect resale value. The US government will back all the warranties though. It will be of similar value to the awesome 1-yr home warranties you get when you purchase a house.
05-19-2009, 11:28 AM
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG & 2009 CTS-V
+1
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
That is simply the bottom line, regardless of the fact that the CTS-V might beat the C63 by an inch it still does have that superior persona over the AMG's even the M5 which it's also supposedly faster than. I do not know a single person who would really prefer the V series over an M5 if they were the same price or had the choice of picking one for free... People simply purchase the V because they cannot afford the M5 or the AMG's they wish they could have... Technically the CTS-V isn’t even in the same class as the C63, yet caddy owners love to compare their car to it because it makes them feel better inside rather than comparing it to its true competitors (M5 & new E63) which may not be superior in speed but all the features they claim they bought the V series for over the C63 are all present in the M5 and E63 plus many more.
The C63 is a car with an amazing engine yet for a great price, so of course it will not have all the luxuries of its bigger siblings. So comparing the CTS-V to the C63 is not an equal comparison because the C63 lacks features the other true competitors in the V-series class would have. However even though it’s not an even comparison the C63 is still superior over the V-series IMO even with its disadvantage in its lack of features. Just because they are similar in price does not mean they are equal to compare or in the same class just because they are both sedans. An MB AMG and a Caddy in the same class will NEVER be similar in price. That alone is proof of the uneven comparison.
Know this,... in Europe, the CTS-V is more expensive than the E-Class AMG Take a moment and go figure!
Even with decades to come I highly doubt Cadillac will establish that racing pedigree which you speak of, such as the one AMG's and BMW M's posses. Although they have raised the bar of their performance capabilities, there is still something missing, let’s not argue about petty details I am just stating a general point...
Last edited by ericpd; 05-19-2009 at 02:23 PM.
05-19-2009, 11:53 AM
#64
Super Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Shanghai, Long Island(NY)
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63
lol, what did i say?
the argument goes on forever... in the end, they are just cars and they will be worthless after a few years. you picked cts-v over other alternatives b/c of your reasons, and there are reasons why i chose c63 over cts-v. financial issue, family, work, life style etc... its not always about which car performances better than the other.
if you are not a professional race car driver, there is no point to compare which car is a 1/10 sec faster on a drag strip, ring time IMO. once you take your car to a road course, you will notice that YOUR driving skill>anything.
the argument goes on forever... in the end, they are just cars and they will be worthless after a few years. you picked cts-v over other alternatives b/c of your reasons, and there are reasons why i chose c63 over cts-v. financial issue, family, work, life style etc... its not always about which car performances better than the other.
if you are not a professional race car driver, there is no point to compare which car is a 1/10 sec faster on a drag strip, ring time IMO. once you take your car to a road course, you will notice that YOUR driving skill>anything.
05-19-2009, 01:34 PM
#65
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Clifton, NJ
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 37 Likes
on
32 Posts
96 and 08 911 turbos
When GM goes bankrupt, let's see how much they put into continued development of the V-series Cadillacs. Wonder how that will affect resale value. The US government will back all the warranties though. It will be of similar value to the awesome 1-yr home warranties you get when you purchase a house.
and the warranty? seems chrysler warranties are still in effect and longer than 1 year.
reaching at straws here.
05-19-2009, 02:40 PM
#66
MBWorld Fanatic!
I was about to post this. It all boils down to your personal preference and how you are going to use the car.
05-19-2009, 04:02 PM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 K1
When the government starts backing warranties, here is what is likely to happen - 1) There will be no good techs because there will be no good compensation. 2) Try proving the issue is covered under warranty (the amount of red-tape you'll have to go through will be ridiculous). 3) Service centers will likely be less convenient and less cooperative (not to mention less productive) because there will be no margin or profit.
Do you own a house? Did you get a one-year warranty when you bought it? Did the company backing it up suck? (of course it did because there is no profit in those repairs) All they want is for no claims to be made and for you to renew with them after a year is up. Hopefully you never had to use your home warranty company. Anyway that was just my analogy. It had nothing to do with the length of the government backed car warranties.
Last edited by yaymitch; 05-19-2009 at 04:11 PM.
05-19-2009, 04:14 PM
#68
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Clifton, NJ
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 37 Likes
on
32 Posts
96 and 08 911 turbos
Your response makes me laugh. You deserve a Chrysler. Maybe I should explain what I meant, so you'll understand it better. And, yes I did bring up resale value, even knowing the history of AMG resale values.
When the government starts backing warranties, here is what is likely to happen - 1) There will be no good techs because there will be no good compensation. 2) Try proving the issue is covered under warranty (the amount of red-tape you'll have to go through will be ridiculous). 3) Service centers will likely be less convenient and less cooperative (not to mention less productive) because there will be no margin or profit.
Do you own a house? Did you get a one-year warranty when you bought it? Did the company backing it up suck? (of course it did because there is no profit in those repairs) All they want is for you renew with them after a year is up. Hopefully you never had to use your home warranty company. Anyway that was just my analogy. It had nothing to do with the length of the government backed car warranties.
When the government starts backing warranties, here is what is likely to happen - 1) There will be no good techs because there will be no good compensation. 2) Try proving the issue is covered under warranty (the amount of red-tape you'll have to go through will be ridiculous). 3) Service centers will likely be less convenient and less cooperative (not to mention less productive) because there will be no margin or profit.
Do you own a house? Did you get a one-year warranty when you bought it? Did the company backing it up suck? (of course it did because there is no profit in those repairs) All they want is for you renew with them after a year is up. Hopefully you never had to use your home warranty company. Anyway that was just my analogy. It had nothing to do with the length of the government backed car warranties.
1. All the good techs work for mercedes benz anyway right? I'm sure cadillac will still find some decent techs and not all will go running out the door immediately anyway.
2. I doubt there will be a significant increase in redtape for warranty work as this would clearly extend the length of time under protection.
3. Not sure
Government ownership of car companies is a new phenomenon and as such, the waters are untested.
That said, I would have no worries about buying a new GM vehicle if I so desired.
05-19-2009, 05:50 PM
#69
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WA
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 Porsche Cayenne Turbo
Really? Look back at most of the negative comments and you'll notice that people typically say stuff like 'it's another American piece of crap.' That's like talking about VW and saying 'another German piece of crap.' VW is not typical of all German cars (as MB, BMW and Audi are far nicer) just like Cadillac is not typical of all American cars.
I honestly don't know why I bring up these counterpoints. I'm here b/c I prefer the C63 over the competition. Having owned a CTSV previously though, I just feel like I need to counter the ignorant comments about it.
I honestly don't know why I bring up these counterpoints. I'm here b/c I prefer the C63 over the competition. Having owned a CTSV previously though, I just feel like I need to counter the ignorant comments about it.
05-19-2009, 08:37 PM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG & 2009 CTS-V
Your response makes me laugh. You deserve a Chrysler. Maybe I should explain what I meant, so you'll understand it better. And, yes I did bring up resale value, even knowing the history of AMG resale values.
When the government starts backing warranties, here is what is likely to happen - 1) There will be no good techs because there will be no good compensation. 2) Try proving the issue is covered under warranty (the amount of red-tape you'll have to go through will be ridiculous). 3) Service centers will likely be less convenient and less cooperative (not to mention less productive) because there will be no margin or profit.
Do you own a house? Did you get a one-year warranty when you bought it? Did the company backing it up suck? (of course it did because there is no profit in those repairs) All they want is for no claims to be made and for you to renew with them after a year is up. Hopefully you never had to use your home warranty company. Anyway that was just my analogy. It had nothing to do with the length of the government backed car warranties.
When the government starts backing warranties, here is what is likely to happen - 1) There will be no good techs because there will be no good compensation. 2) Try proving the issue is covered under warranty (the amount of red-tape you'll have to go through will be ridiculous). 3) Service centers will likely be less convenient and less cooperative (not to mention less productive) because there will be no margin or profit.
Do you own a house? Did you get a one-year warranty when you bought it? Did the company backing it up suck? (of course it did because there is no profit in those repairs) All they want is for no claims to be made and for you to renew with them after a year is up. Hopefully you never had to use your home warranty company. Anyway that was just my analogy. It had nothing to do with the length of the government backed car warranties.
Last edited by ericpd; 05-19-2009 at 09:13 PM.
05-19-2009, 10:03 PM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 C63 K1
Well I don't know where you guys bought your homes, but I got a 10 year warranty with mine for the bulk of the workmanship and a select list of materials used and a 15 year warranty on the foundation. Maybe the standard varies depending on what part of the country we all live in.
05-19-2009, 11:21 PM
#72
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09' C63 AMG
lol ok there buddy. I would have went with the c63 if it actually had a proper transmission. Call me old & stupid but I actually like driving a stickshift...strangely enough women seem to like it too. So in that sense which is more the old man car...the amg or the caddy
05-19-2009, 11:21 PM
#73
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09' C63 AMG
I don't own a home and therefore was unaware of your analogy in that area.
1. All the good techs work for mercedes benz anyway right? I'm sure cadillac will still find some decent techs and not all will go running out the door immediately anyway.
2. I doubt there will be a significant increase in redtape for warranty work as this would clearly extend the length of time under protection.
3. Not sure
Government ownership of car companies is a new phenomenon and as such, the waters are untested.
That said, I would have no worries about buying a new GM vehicle if I so desired.
1. All the good techs work for mercedes benz anyway right? I'm sure cadillac will still find some decent techs and not all will go running out the door immediately anyway.
2. I doubt there will be a significant increase in redtape for warranty work as this would clearly extend the length of time under protection.
3. Not sure
Government ownership of car companies is a new phenomenon and as such, the waters are untested.
That said, I would have no worries about buying a new GM vehicle if I so desired.
05-20-2009, 01:48 AM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG & 2009 CTS-V
LOL ok so you chose the caddy because its a manual tranny?? I could name about 10 other cars you could have gotten... If you buy your cars solely on the fact that it is a manual tranny than you really have to get your priorities straight.. O and btw real sport cars, such as Italian super cars (Ferrari, Lambo, etc.) ALL have paddle shifting, and some don’t even give you the option for a manual. So if you wanted to buy one of those cars I guess you would sh*t outa luck cause you couldn’t get a stick...
I didn't hear Razor say he bought the V simply and ONLY because it offered a manual transmission. I heard him say something entirely different. As for me, the manual option offered on the CTS-V was only ONE FACTOR I considered in making my decision,... although an important factor, but still only one.
Do a little more reading before you set off making comments about what cars like the Ferrari and Lambo does, and does not have. And above all, make an effort to understand and fully grasp what you read. Comparing the paddle shifters on the C63 to the paddle shifters on those cars, even the paddle shifters on the less exotic M3, is nothing more than you screaming loudly to all of us here that you know not what you're talking about.
Last edited by ericpd; 05-20-2009 at 09:19 AM.
