2008 Cadillac CTS: Noisy

I noticed that creaking in a posted test-track video on the CTS website. I asked what it was, and got no reply, but it must be the leather. A neat "problem" to have. Still, for the track, Alcantra must be the best.

Perhaps the creaking noise is a testament to your driving ability, Donna. After all, you're Italian like an Andretti! Don't forget Kimi Räikkönen drives a red car, too. :o)

Whoa. Suby, extra points for the umlauts (spelling?). How the heck did you pull that off? :)
 
Hmmph, I know the CTS will be a huge success for Caddy. But man that thing is just so ugly. There is a new one parked in my parking garage. I see it everyday and am freshly surprised by how ugly it is each time I see it. "Art and Science", love it or hate it I guess. Call it "Slabs and Corners."

johnmarco, Microsoft Windows' Character Map application is our friend.
 
ä - 1) Press and hold the Alt key down. 2) Press 0-2-2-8 on the numeric keypad. 3) Release the Alt key.
 
ö - Same as above except 0-2-4-6 is used in Step 2.
 
If you use a Mac, I can't help ya, bud.

I think the CTS looks great. I wish this type of quality and attention to detail ran through their entire product range- speaking to GM products in general, not just Caddy.

Who cares if the leather creaks in this car? I would sell my neighbor to get my hands on one of these.

It probably creaks because things are so tightly fitted together. Since there's a little give (especially in seats) where two surfaces meet, rubbing's gonna happen, and like the balloon example above, noise might be the result. Maybe GM has gone *too* far with the fit and finish! ;D

"I think the CTS looks great. I wish this type of quality and attention to detail ran through their entire product range- speaking to GM products in general, not just Caddy."
 
check out Vue, Malibu, Enclave, Astra, Acadia, Yukon/TAhoe, Lucerne, Silverado/Sierra, etc. It's not just Cadillac anymore. There arent many GM models left that don't have nice interiors and even the older GM models have decent build quality.

Lol 1487 sometimes I seriously wonder if you work for GM....do you? It wouldn't surprise me to see company representatives on here at all. I think there is someone from a Mercedes dealer, for example.

1487 forgive me for interjecting- but why is it that someone has to work for a car company just to point out obvious details? If cruiserhead1 has been in any current newly redesigned non-Cadillac GM models, he wouldn't have made that statement. The materials are bit nicer in the CTS but as 1487 mentioned, the same level of fit and finish can be found in Buick, Chevy, GMC and Saturn models.

Thanks SubyTrojan. I'm going to put that on a sticky note.

chavis, was your comment directed to me? I was the one that joked about a car company, not 1487.
 
And I'm not really being serious, I'm just pointing out that 1487s posts often make me feel like I'm watching a commercial for GM.

Chavis - I disagree from my personal experience. I've been in several recent saturns and chevys and the level of build quality/fit and finish has been quite off what I expected. The first saturn aura I sat in had a huge hump where two pieces of dash covering met. It was an eye-searing center of the dash build quality faux pas. It was one of the first, lets say, 10000 Auras, but it should never have been on a showroom floor. How it made it past the dealership prep, I'll never know.
 
Other things like moving trim, instead of tightly affixed, I've seen in the new Saturn CRV....I mean Vue.
 
I've been in two Chevy Malibus and haven't seen any problems, and the CTS was a gorgeous example of awesome design and build quality (that creaking would both me, personally). A chevy equinox and silverado/1500 I've been in have both shown really low build quality with rocking seats and, again, trim that is just not firmly affixed.
 
Perhaps those are just one-off experiences. It's definitely possible I happened to be in some models that had seen some bad days from the factory.
 
So, again, why is it a bad thing to question the build quality?
 
Just an FYI: my 06 Honda Civic SI (which was also in the first batch produced) has, to me, low build quality. It had 1-2 creaks and rattles develop at 1500 miles, some door-arm-pull trim hasn't fit tightly ever, my trunk-carpeting hangs away from the side of the trunk by the side of the opening, my driver's side visor comes dangerously close to falling apart each time it's opened. So it's not like I'm being one-sided hear. Call a spade a spade.
 
On another note: my 2008 Subaru Legacy GT 5-speed (4th model year) has some of the best build quality I've ever had the pleasure of witnessing. I haven't found a single thing wrong with it yet. Even the paint barely has any orange peel, and Subaru is not known for good paint. I've waxed the car and detailed the inside, so I've had a chance to get to know her :)
 
Joe

@joefrompa:
 
Well done, I couldn't have put it better myself. I hold cars to a high standard- our 2004 Sienna (one of the first) JUST developed its first rattle (and only on rough roads)...at 64k miles. On the other hand, our 2003 Accord came from the factory with a rattle and subsequently spent the first 2 weeks of its life in the dealership until they got it right.
 
Now to fix the C-pillar rattle in the '06 Tucson...

GM Build quality is very "hit or miss". My '06 Impala has it's fair sure of creaks, squeaks, and rattles even at the "early" age of 2yrs/26K miles. The dash, the doors, even the rear parcel shelf have developed noises. I have gone so far as to shove felt under certain pieces in various parts of the car to quiet things down. My parents '03 Impala, on the other hand, had some noises develop but not as many as my Impala has.
  
The "anti-itch" tape that GM uses under the door pulls on the interior door panels is even starting to slide out from under the door pull and become visible. Every now and then I have to go at it with a razor blade and trim it to make it less visible.
  
My father owned a 2003 Saturn VUE, and it was full of squeaks, creaks, and rattles by the time he traded it at 45,000 mils or so.
  
On the other hand, I have read of other '06+ Impala owners who have no noises what-so-ever in their cars.
  
Overall, I agree that GM has pretty good fit and finish. Now, if GM could start using a better quality brake rotor, that would be a step...no, make that a GIANT LEAP...in the right direction.

The Caddy is not the only creaky vehicle out there. The '09 Forester likes to creak its dash and upper roof. The Ion with Sunroof liked to rattle, creak, and buzz its dash. The Malibu Maxx rear hatch trim chirped whenever hatch was closed or big bump was passed on to rear. Credit a big part of this to dissimilar plastics which expand/contract at different rates and poor quality fasteners that either slip or flex, allowing parts to move around.

Suby I just got that working. I had to use the number keypad on the right, not across the top of the keys. Thänks!

"And I'm not really being serious, I'm just pointing out that 1487s posts often make me feel like I'm watching a commercial for GM."
 
you aren't. Its amazing to me that folks believe there are two categories of car fan out there: those that think everythign GM makes is 2nd rate or GM employees who are too blind to see the light. The information I am presenting has been presented in reviews over the last few years. Automobile Mag was the one comparing the G8s interior to something from Audi, not me. I can give you a long list of improvements I would like to see from GM but I will spare you for now. For starters they need to dump the trailblazer/Envoy, give the G6 convertible the 3.6l/6 speed combo, upgrade the G6's interior and replace the northstar or give it more power. Pretty much everything else I would criticize is in the process of being changed.

joe,
 
The Vue's interior is one of the best at GM and in the segment. I have sat in at least 3 so far and they all were solidly constructed. This opinion is shared by all the major magazines. I understand that you feel you are being an equal opportunity critic but just because you civic has less than perfect build quality doesnt mean GM vehicles have to be in the same category. I have seen some minor interior quality issues in the Aura that could be improved but when I sat in a 2008 Camry I saw similar issues so I can hardly say the Aura's interior is unacceptable. I have not seen similar issues on the lambdas, Astra, Vue, CTS, STS, SRX, Malibu, etc. Taken as a whole GM's current lineup has good fit and finish. The only major exceptions I can think of are the interiors of the Sky/Soltice- they are pretty cheap.
 
I see no one has mentioned GM's exterior fit and finish because they know its top notch. The panel gaps on current GM models are smaller (in my estimation) than most Toyota products. Check out the hood/fender or trunk/fender gaps on a Toyota and compare than to a GM product. You will see the difference.
 
ryster,
 
I dont know that squeaks and rattles are a sign of poor build quality. Based on the long term tests I read you can have those issues in any brand and its hard to figure out where the noises originate. I havent experienced a lot of squeaks and rattles in GM products. My old car had one minor phantom noise that occurred when crashing over harsh bumps. Most people wouldnt have noticed it but I am really sensitive to car noises.

Here's some food for thought. I'm not going to say anything else because I don't want 1487 personally attacking me (again).
 
http://66.160.188.111/roadtests/.ee978df
http://66.160.188.111/.ee98b23

Overly sensitive people tend not to see the whole picture. This is an awesome car. I would get one even if the seats were made from vinyl.
 
And people who are overly sensitive tend to be @ssholes.

"Here's some food for thought. I'm not going to say anything else because I don't want 1487 personally attacking me (again). "
 
we all know you are anti anything that isn't Suburu, especially if its a GM product. I dont have much regard for anyone who tries to pretend the CTS-v isnt a great performance car- that is a true sign of ignorance and bias. While everyone is entitles to hate whatever automakers they want I would hope that you could ad least acknowledge a quality product when you see one regardless of brand.
 
You are great at providing examples when it comes to bashing GM products (or me) but that picture doesnt prove that GM fit and finish is poor across the board. I saw an SRX with that same rocker panel gap so that seems to be consistent or at least not an issue unique to that particular SRX. It doesnt look good but its no worse that what you'll find on rear of the FJ Cruiser or any number of Toyota vehicles. Check the gaps between the bumper and fender on the Armada or Titan and then get back to us. Also, since you work for Edmunds why dont you get some pics of the panel gaps on the CTS, Enclave, Silverado and G8 and show us how poor they are. Bet those pics wont show up in any of your posts.
 
Finding one example of a fit and finish issue on one vehicle doesnt prove any more about an automakers entire line than finding one example of excellent fit and finish proves anything. This is why I was talking about GM vehicles as a whole.

PS- the SRX still has excellent interior materials and build quality in spite of the minor issues Suby was so quick to show us.

1487 -
 
"The Vue's interior is one of the best at GM and in the segment. I have sat in at least 3 so far and they all were solidly constructed. This opinion is shared by all the major magazines. I understand that you feel you are being an equal opportunity critic but just because you civic has less than perfect build quality doesnt mean GM vehicles have to be in the same category. "
 
Please excuse me but that last sentence was not coherent. Let me restate: You understand that I FEEL (not that I am) an equal critic of poor build quality whether it be GM, Honda, or elsewhere, but because my civic has less than perfect build quality doesn't mean GM vehicles are in the same category? That's not even a non-sequiter. It's just incoherent.
 
You have sat in 3 vues and all the major auto magazines agree, so GM has great build quality? No. I'm sorry. I disagree with that logic. "All the major auto magazines" have become disgraces. Ok, almost all. So I don't exactly take anything they say without big ol' grains of dried sea salt.
 
GM's made huge strides, but I'd recommend you view every car with a gimlet eye and revise your appraisals. Or at least, stop defending Gm in a 20 to 1 ratio of 20 all-out defenses to every one minor criticism.
 
Joe

"we all know you are anti anything that isn't Suburu, especially if its a GM product. I dont have much regard for anyone who tries to pretend the CTS-v isnt a great performance car- that is a true sign of ignorance and bias. "
 
While he does love the Subarus, I have never found Suby to be overly hateful/critical of other car brands. And, as an added bonus, he tends to back up his statements rather then just stating an opinion as fact, and then demanding proof while showing none himself. Blanket statements about the opinion of the entire automotive journalism world cannot be proven, and aren't worth the type the take up.

suby- give it rest. My uncle has the same generation SRX V6 with no build quality issues to speak of (that I have noticed) so what do your little posts prove? Absolutely nothing. Some cars have flaws and some do not. One might leave the line as a lemon while the vehicle right behind it may be perfect.
 
I made three visits to various auto shows this year and one thing that seemed consistent across the board was built quality. Toyota used just as many hard surfaces as Ford and panel gaps in some Hondas seemed on par with some GM models. I saw flashing in Toyota models just as I did in Hyundais. This supposed rift in craftmanship is greatly exaggerated. One area people tend to overlook are interior ergonmics. Honda has seemed to go off the deep end (Accord and Pilot) with the button laden launch control dashboards but this is rarely viewed as a negative.

so wait, is this a good noise or a bad noise?
 
I would think noisy is bad?

"Also, since you work for Edmunds why dont you get some pics of the panel gaps on the CTS, Enclave, Silverado and G8 and show us how poor they are. Bet those pics wont show up in any of your posts."
 
I'm not a member of the editorial department. I don't have access to their vehicles like you imagine I do.
 
And please stop with the "anti-anything that isn't a Subaru." Do you want me to dig out the drawings of 4th generation Camaros I drew while I was in junior high and high school, scan them, and post them here for you?
 
Here's a photo of me and Scott Sharp (HTML used due to link length) whom I became a fan of because of his work driving the #33 Duracell (3rd gen Camaro) and Rain-X (4th gen) Chevolet Camaro in the SCCA Trans Am series in the early 1990s. I also loved watching Jack Baldwin in the Hot Wheels Camaro, too.
 
While I'm a huge Subaru fan, that doesn't mean I hate everything else. And thanks for always trying to make things personal. :o)
 
Although I may sometimes disagree with others here such as chavis10, I believe I don't belittle or slander him in any way. Please correct me if I'm wrong, bud.

yes i do want to see them just because that would be funny.

"You have sat in 3 vues and all the major auto magazines agree, so GM has great build quality? No. I'm sorry. I disagree with that logic. "All the major auto magazines" have become disgraces. Ok, almost all. So I don't exactly take anything they say without big ol' grains of dried sea salt. "
 
I am all for not taking the word of magazines but your argument is bunk. If almost every publication says the EXACT same thing and people who have been in the vehicle agree I fail to see why we should believe something to be untrue. I mean if you are going to argue the Vue has poor build quaity you might as well argue it has 400hp as well since you don't care about the facts. I'm all for realstic criticism but the Vue interior is high quality and that really isnt debatable. I have been in the Astra a few times as well and it has similar build quality which makes sense because both vehicles are sold in Europe with the same interiors.
 
"GM's made huge strides, but I'd recommend you view every car with a gimlet eye and revise your appraisals. Or at least, stop defending Gm in a 20 to 1 ratio of 20 all-out defenses to every one minor criticism. "
 
I counter silly arguments or statements. I have never said that I am a fan of every GM product, nor have I ever said Gm has no room for improvement. If you have proof otherwise please quote me- or get Suby to research it for you since that's his specialty. If you want to argue the Lucerne should have more than a 4 speed auto I would agree. If you want to say the Aura and Malibu V6 should get better mileage I would agree. If you say that GM has spotty fit and finish across the board I'm not going to agree. It's pretty simple actually.

if suby would have access to edmunds cars, they would need 2 sti's

"Blanket statements about the opinion of the entire automotive journalism world cannot be proven, and aren't worth the type the take up."
 
tell that to Joefrom PA since he's the one who said he disregards everything he reads in car magazines.
 
How can I prove build quality? You have to sit in the vehicles yourself and examine the interiors. I provide proof when possible, but this is a tough one. If someone doesnt want to admit something I cannot make them. If joe or Suby or anyone else wants to sit in a Vue or Cadillac and claim that pieces of trim are falling off I cannot "disprove" that unless we can sit inthe vehicle together. The press has generally agreed that GM fit and finish and interior design is much better than it was and is fully competitive. I don't know why Joe or anyone else would argue otherwise.

"While I'm a huge Subaru fan, that doesn't mean I hate everything else. And thanks for always trying to make things personal. :o)
  
Although I may sometimes disagree with others here such as chavis10, I believe I don't belittle or slander him in any way. Please correct me if I'm wrong, bud."
 
dont flatter yourself by thinking I have something against you personally. I do not, I dont even know you. What I do know is that you have a knack for investing a lot of time trying to counter anyone who says anything positive about the GM products in the fleet or any others. Perhaps you have nothing against them, but I don't see you getting upset when people defend the imports in the LT fleet. Why is it you get so bent out of shape when people say positive things about GM products? Why are so hell bent on discrediting the CTS-V's lap time by saying a Suburu did the same thing? I just dont see you jumping on anyone except those who you feel are too bullish on GM products.

"What I do know is that you have a knack for investing a lot of time trying to counter anyone who says anything positive about the GM products in the fleet or any others."
 
Wow. Okay. Replace "GM products" with "imports" and you'd be looking at the man in the mirror. Why is it that you started trolling around here roughly around the time the Aura was added to the fleet (I may be totally wrong!) when you were kicking posterior and taking names on Karl's blog well before that? You were totally free to comment on this LT blog at the same time.
 
"Why are so hell bent on discrediting the CTS-V's lap time by saying a Suburu did the same thing?"
 
I'm not he__ bent on discrediting it. I just don't see what the big deal about it is. People are making much ado about nothing. Do you want me to give the Cadillac team a cookie? I've got a few thin mints at my desk I can spare. Is it wrong for me to expect a 550 hp "beast" to be turning sub-7:50 laps around the Nordschleife, especially if a "weak sauce" 276 hp (or even 320 hp as some suggest) STi can do a lap in 7:59 with a standing start?

1487 -
 
You are going off the deep end again :)
 
Let's examine two statements in here...
 
I said, " "All the major auto magazines" have become disgraces. Ok, almost all. So I don't exactly take anything they say without big ol' grains of dried sea salt."
 
and then you said,
 
"tell that to Joefrom PA since he's the one who said he disregards everything he reads in car magazines. "
 
So lets get this straight. I feel that almost all Auto mags have become extremely commercialized and afraid to say much bad about anything. So I say that I take what they say with a big grain of salt. You then pass that on to someone else as "Joefrompa said he disregards everything he reads in car magazines."
 
Can you grasp why people constantly fling at you accusations of hyperbole, grandiose statements, and opinions presented as fact? Do you not realize how poorly you present yourself about 90-95% of the time and why that makes even your good posts hard to digest and read?
 
And don't defend your slander of Subytrojan as "I don't have something against you personally."
 
That's the same mentality of someone who walks around angry at everyone, cursing at everyone, and then when someone gets upset they say "Jeez, don't take it so personally. I don't even know you."
 
By the way, how is it discrediting the CTS-V lap time to say a Subaru did the same thing?
 
Joe

"By the way, how is it discrediting the CTS-V lap time to say a Subaru did the same thing?"
 
Yeah, I don't get that either...
 
1487, care to elaborate?

Nurburgring times are often disputed, and as many have noted, there is no complete source of data on this topic. If there is a car that did it faster then the CTS-V, I think Cadillac would want to know.

"Wow. Okay. Replace "GM products" with "imports" and you'd be looking at the man in the mirror. Why is it that you started trolling around here roughly around the time the Aura was added to the fleet (I may be totally wrong!) when you were kicking posterior and taking names on Karl's blog well before that? You were totally free to comment on this LT blog at the same time. "
 
I've been reading and posting on edmunds/IL/townhall since 1998. You are totally wrong. I dont know how long this format has been around but I do know that IL used to post updates on LT fleet cars every few months. If I'm not mistaken this blog format hasnt been around for more than year or two. I'm not "trolling around", I read the blogs that seem interesting and skip the ones that do not. Now I see what your problem is- you are on a mission to discredit me based on comments I've made in Karl's blog. I try to side with those who are making sense. I dont pick sides based on one's job title or supposed status. Sorry that I do not defer to Karl or anyone else simply because they are paid to write about cars. Just because you are paid to write about cars doesn't mean that everything you say is gospel. I know you havent noticed, but Karl's commentary has been known to stir up contrary opinions. And not just from me.
 
"Yeah, I don't get that either...
  
1487, care to elaborate?"
 
Check out straightline under the CTS-V entry. He was suggesting the time isnt all that impressive and the CTS-V should be faster since some special edition Sti with no AC recorded a similar time at the Ring. Anyone who dismissed the CTS-V has to be biased in my book. Give credit where it's due, that's all that I ask.

"I'm not he__ bent on discrediting it. I just don't see what the big deal about it is. People are making much ado about nothing. Do you want me to give the Cadillac team a cookie? I've got a few thin mints at my desk I can spare. Is it wrong for me to expect a 550 hp "beast" to be turning sub-7:50 laps around the Nordschleife, especially if a "weak sauce" 276 hp (or even 320 hp as some suggest) STi can do a lap in 7:59 with a standing start?"
 
ah, you can barely hide your disdain for Cadillac and GM. I love it. Only a handful of cars have documented faster times than the CTS-V and you say its too slow. Makes PLENTY of sense. Was the Sti sold in America? Was it street legal? Did it have AC, sound deadening and safety features? If not then I dont care about it's lap time. If we stripped the CTS-V of all its luxury features and turned it into a race car it would be faster too.

"So lets get this straight. I feel that almost all Auto mags have become extremely commercialized and afraid to say much bad about anything. So I say that I take what they say with a big grain of salt. You then pass that on to someone else as "Joefrompa said he disregards everything he reads in car magazines." "
 
You nor I have any clue as to what point you are trying to make. I agree that you cannot believe EVERYTHING an auto writer says but common sense says that when you have consensus amongst 3 or 4 reviews then something has to be taken seriously. Journalists have said the Vue has a high quality interior and sitting in the vehicle confirms that. I dont see why you disagree. If you honestly think that auto writers refuse to criticize cars because they are afraid to offend automakers you must not be reading C&D or IL or Automobile Mag. MT and R&T tend to be more realistic (some say "soft") but other publications have NO problem finding fault with domestic products. Do I need to find some reviews of the Sebring, Caliber, Aztek, Ion, etc? Give me a break. If the same magazines who have been critical of GM interiors for DECADES say the Vue has quality materials why would I doubt them? C&D could hardly be called a haven for Gm loving journalists and they had nothing but praise for the interior.
 
"By the way, how is it discrediting the CTS-V lap time to say a Subaru did the same thing? "
 
Read his comments on Straightline and here for yourself. He said GM was making much ado about nothing and the CTSV should be significantly faster- even though the M5 and M3 are slower. Go figure.
 
"Do you not realize how poorly you present yourself about 90-95% of the time and why that makes even your good posts hard to digest and read? "
 
Joe, this seems to a problem you alone are having. Most others seem to be able to comprehend what I'm saying. I did not know merely disagreeing with you proves that I am presenting myself poorly 95% of the time. I'm so glad that 5% of what I post is cogent and discernable.
 
Slander? I think you need to review the definition of that word. I did not slander Suby or anyone else.
 
You and Suby can gang up on me all day (I'm sure you will) but you wont be able to prove that I am a blind GM devotee no matter how many keystrokes you waste. I suspect I know more about GM products than you two combined which means I am very familiar with their product flaws. Again, I could easily list all of them if that will make you feel better. My position is simply that GM makes more competent vehicles than incompetent ones and that GM's design and powertain offerings are underrated by the press and so called auto enthusiasts who have been raised to worship foreign engineering while deriding anything connected with Detroit.

I'm on a mission to discredit you? I just don't want you misinforming other blog readers here with your propaganda. You say things like current GM products have excellent panel fit. So I dug up a case where the LT MY2007 SRX (which I believe is current according to most people), had fitment issues. And like flies on excrement, you jump on me like I guessed you would.
 
"ah, you can barely hide your disdain for Cadillac and GM. I love it. Only a handful of cars have documented faster times than the CTS-V and you say its too slow. Makes PLENTY of sense. Was the Sti sold in America? Was it street legal? Did it have AC, sound deadening and safety features? If not then I dont care about it's lap time. If we stripped the CTS-V of all its luxury features and turned it into a race car it would be faster too."
 
Somebody call a doctor because I'm dying from laughter. =Þ
 
Yes, the STi was sold in America, with a more powerful 293 hp 2.5L engine than the 276 hp 2.0L engine of the Japanese WRX STi spec C. Yes, the spec C is street legal. As you can see in the video I linked in the Straightline blog entry, it has A/C and all the standard safety equipment.
 
Cadillac CTS-V @ 4,300 lbs w/ 550 hp (Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 tires) - roughly 7.81 lb/hp
 
JDM STi @ 3,100 lbs w/ 276 hp, 320 hp (Bridgestone Potenza RE070 tires I think) - 11.23, 9.69 lb/hp
USDM STi @ 3,300 lbs w/ 293 hp (Bridgestone Potenza RE070 tires) - 11.26 lb/hp
 
USDM Nissan GT-R @ 3,900 lbs w/ 480 hp (Bridgestone Potenza RE070R tires) - 8.125 lb/hp
 
Am I crazy for thinking the CTS-V's lap time of 7:59 is disappointing? I guess so. :shrug:

"Am I crazy for thinking the CTS-V's lap of 7:59 is disappointing? I guess so. :shrug:"
 
Yes, you are. First of all, you seem to forget your beloved STi is AWD and can therefore more effectively apply its power around the track. Secondly, most people know that pound/HP figures are more telling for straight line acceleration (overcoming inertia from rest) rather than how fast in can lap a track (once the vehicle has gained momentum). For example, the Z06 kills the GT-R above 80 mph because it has more power to overcome it's lower natural force (the force it exerts on the ground aka weight). The GT-R can simply apply the power that it has more effectively than can a Z06 which is why it's faster around the 'Ring.
 
Weight is the enemy on a track and adding huge amounts of HP is not really going to help if the chassis is out of whack. The beauty of the CTS-V is it's tuning. It's a heavy luxury car that outperforms every other sedan on the market at the 'Ring, period. This STi weighs an unrealistic 3100lbs (according to your stats) that nullifies whatever HP advantage the CTS-V may have. The value of the 'Ring is that it measures how a car functions as a whole. Obviously, nose heavy front engine/RWD cars have to work harder than other more favorable set-ups so the 7:59 time tells us just how well sorted the CTS-V really is. Out in the real world, the CTS-V will destroy any STi and this wouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

"Joe, this seems to a problem you alone are having. Most others seem to be able to comprehend what I'm saying."
 
lol.

"Do you not realize how poorly you present yourself about 90-95% of the time and why that makes even your good posts hard to digest and read"
 
You'll have to speak for yourself on that one. I find all of 1487's posts easy to comprehend.

Okay. I'm crazy like a fox. :o)
 
Regarding AWD being more effective getting power to the ground, that's true to a certain extent. If it was, why aren't the fastest race cars in the world (e.g., Formula 1, Le Mans prototypes, etc.) AWD? Perhaps regulations have banned AWD, though. But the weight penalty would probably hurt performance, not to mention F/R weight distribution.
 
The 'Ring has monster straights where the CTS-V's power definitely helps, though.
 
Thanks for keeping your cool, chavis10. :thumbsup: You do a fine job of disagreeing, correcting, and challenging me without making things personal. I greatly respect you/that.

PS- the CTS-V was likely even heavier than 4300 lbs because of the added safety gear and camera rigs. Not to mention is was using a torque converter automatic... When will the excuses subside? To some folks, GM can simply do nothing right.

I guessed it was 4,300 lbs instead of 4,200 lbs because of the automatic and extra paraphernalia.

"I'm on a mission to discredit you? I just don't want you misinforming other blog readers here with your propaganda. You say things like current GM products have excellent panel fit. So I dug up a case where the LT MY2007 SRX (which I believe is current according to most people), had fitment issues. And like flies on excrement, you jump on me like I guessed you would. "
 
Get pictures of other GM vehicles. If I show you one pic of a Toyota with one fit/finish issue that doesnt mean that Toyotas are poorly built. What part of that dont you get? examine GM vehicles for yourself and see what conclusions you can come to. Unlike you, I dont draw ALL my conclusions about vehicles from this blog.

"Yes, the STi was sold in America, with a more powerful 293 hp 2.5L engine than the 276 hp 2.0L engine of the Japanese WRX STi spec C. Yes, the spec C is street legal. As you can see in the video I linked in the Straightline blog entry, it has A/C and all the standard safety equipment. "
 
Others disputed your claims about the AC and power ratings. You have any proof? since you are known to be pro-Suburu I take your claims with a grain of salt. Others seemed to be knowledgable about that car and disagree with some of your statements.
 
MT tested the GT-R on the dyno and it really has about 507hp and 500 lb-ft of torque. Dont believe the hype. GM's engines are usually SAE rated while the GT-R is NOT. Name another car with a 4000+ curb weight that laps the Ring faster than the CTS-V. Unless you can do that your assertion that is should be faster is baseless. I'm just dealing with the FACTS, its nothing personal. You are so desperate to prevent me from "misinforming" others here (as if they need your help sorting out the truth) that you will argue with anything I post regardless of the merit.

"The 'Ring has monster straights where the CTS-V's power definitely helps, though. "
 
Did you watch the video? There are very few sustained straight stretches on the track. The last straight away is by far the longest and its the only time when the CTS-V really gets to do its thing from a speed perspective. Prior to that the track is full of sharp turns and braking is almost constant.

"Get pictures of other GM vehicles. If I show you one pic of a Toyota with one fit/finish issue that doesnt mean that Toyotas are poorly built. What part of that dont you get? examine GM vehicles for yourself and see what conclusions you can come to. Unlike you, I dont draw ALL my conclusions about vehicles from this blog."
 
I'm not the one making blanket statements that exterior fit is good on manufacturer ABC's vehicles. It must be warm over there with all those blankets.
 
"Others disputed your claims about the AC and power ratings. You have any proof? since you are known to be pro-Suburu I take your claims with a grain of salt. Others seemed to be knowledgable about that car and disagree with some of your statements."
 
Did you even watch the in-car video of the STi's lap? It's crystal clear the car has A/C, airbags, etc. What others? opfreak and I figured out he was referring to the version 7 STi instead of the version 8 one I was referring to in the Straightline blog entry. Perhaps you conveniently overlooked that. Who are the others? For what it's worth, the editors sometimes ask me for information on the WRX and WRX STI. I'm not the greatest expert in the world on the car, but I know a good amount about it.
 
"MT tested the GT-R on the dyno and it really has about 507hp and 500 lb-ft of torque. Dont believe the hype. GM's engines are usually SAE rated while the GT-R is NOT. Name another car with a 4000+ curb weight that laps the Ring faster than the CTS-V. Unless you can do that your assertion that is should be faster is baseless. I'm just dealing with the FACTS, its nothing personal. You are so desperate to prevent me from "misinforming" others here (as if they need your help sorting out the truth) that you will argue with anything I post regardless of the merit. "
 
You are amazing. Half the time you argue that mag writers and my friends here at Edmunds don't know their heads from their rears and therefore, can't be trusted. The other half of the time, you're quoting them as gospel truth. If we're not supposed to believe anything they say/write, why do you quote them?
 
Name another car with a 4,000+ lb. curb weight that laps the 'Ring faster than the CTS-V? I can't name a *car*, but I know Hans Stück lapped the 'Ring in 7:49 in an E53 BMW X5 with a V-12 engine from the 1999 BMW V12 LMR Le Mans prototype in the year 2001. :o) I'm sure you don't believe me. So you probably won't believe any of the facts a Google search would dig up for you. Or this video clip of him testing the imaginary X5 he did the lap in.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVl-dT68glo
 
http://www.carpages.co.uk/bmw/bmw_x5_le_mans_record_28_06_01.asp
 
"Did you watch the video? There are very few sustained straight stretches on the track. The last straight away is by far the longest and its the only time when the CTS-V really gets to do its thing from a speed perspective. Prior to that the track is full of sharp turns and braking is almost constant."
 
Yes. I watched the video complete with its flying start and switching to different camera angles throughout. There are very few sustained straight sections on the 'Ring? There are at least three *long* stretches where the CTS-V can stretch its legs. I've "driven" over a hundred laps of the 'Ring in Gran Turismo 4. I probably know the track better than you, but could be mistaken as always.
 
After all, everything I say is wrong. Anything and everything 1487 says is correct. I give up. You win.

1487- good point about the GT-R's power figures. I'm guessing Nissan is purposely underrating the HP figures so they spec V's power will seem more impressive. The Z06 is likely underrated as well.
 
GM has been the only manufacturer to rate every single new engine under the SAE certified standards.

Let's keep all these 'Ring comparisons to STOCK production cars. Specialty cars may be faster but can you live with them everyday? Will it break down as soon as the lap is complete? Does it have a 5year powertrain warranty?
 
PS- re: STi. even a car w/o an A/C compresser will still have a vent and heater functions therefore may still have HVAC controls in place.

"Let's keep all these 'Ring comparisons to STOCK production cars. Specialty cars may be faster but can you live with them everyday? Will it break down as soon as the lap is complete? Does it have a 5year powertrain warranty?"
 
Why? The X5 is heavier than the CTS-V. Therefore, having a ton of power won't help its cause just like the CTS-V having a good power-to-weight ratio doesn't help its. If we apply all the same excuses as to why the CTS-V didn't go much faster than a flying start 7:59 around the 'Ring to this X5, they're invalid. But I don't know what I'm talking about; so everyone out there, don't listen to me.
 
Regarding the STi having an A/C compressor or not. You may be right, chavis10. I guess we have to find one and drive it. :o)

"Why? The X5 is heavier than the CTS-V. Therefore, having a ton of power won't help its cause just like the CTS-V having a good power-to-weight ratio doesn't help its. If we apply all the same excuses as to why the CTS-V didn't go much faster than a flying start 7:59 around the 'Ring to this X5, they're invalid. But I don't know what I'm talking about; so everyone out there, don't listen to me."
   
The GT-R is 700-800 lbs more than the Z06 and is faster around the 'Ring so power to weight ratios mean nothing when comparing times at this track. The Z06 murders the GT-R in a straight line but it can't put down it's power as effectively coming out of the various turns of the course. The example you provided further proves my theory: the lighter RWD CTS-V and heavier AWD X5 simply represent the Z06 and GT-R respectively.
  
I think you need to take your concerns to John H and the rest of the people at GMPD. You seem to be only person who isn't impressed with this performance. You can leave questions and feedback over at gmblogs.com. They often reply to questions and concerns so perhaps they can shed some light into the tepid lap time they posted. I was under the impression that they have handily beat their competition but apparently that's not good enough. Go figure...

I disagree that the X5's AWD helps it go around the 'Ring in the same manner (most efficiently getting the power to the ground) as the GT-R and STi. As far as I know, that's not how xDrive was intended to work. I may be totally wrong again.
 
I posted a comment in the Cadillac Drivers' Log "More from Nürburgring" blog entry a couple days ago--a little before the video went up.
 
I'm not saying the CTS-V's lap wasn't a good lap. It's just not a great "omfg" lap in my meager opinion.

Suby,
 
It's funny, I agree and disagree with you. When I heard the lap time I was like "ok", nothing special.
 
But I'll say that it's pretty darn good. I think I've gotten used to seeing much faster times from some cars.
 
According to Wikipedia, that 4300 (or whatever) pound sedan was only 3 seconds slower than a Porsche 996 turbo, C5 Z06, and was as fast as a 997 Porsche 911 Carrera S.
 
Now to me, that's pretty damn impressive. Impressive to the point where I say to myself "something is wrong here". What am I missing? How did a very heavy big ol' sedan, even with tons of power, lap the 'ring at the same time as a much, much lighter (~1100 pounds) 355 HP Carrera S?
 
If everything is on the up and up, then I'd say it's a damn impressive lap time.
 
Joe
 
P.s. Regarding SAE ratings...I don't understand this. SAE is a standard measure, so how could GM be underrating their powerplants if they are all SAE certified? By default, the SAE rating would be standardized and not under-rated.

So anyway, I thought it was odd you mentioned onomatopoeia. I was just explaining its meaning to my deputy and how it is different from aliteration.

"I'm not the one making blanket statements that exterior fit is good on manufacturer ABC's vehicles. It must be warm over there with all those blankets. "
 
You keep ignoring the fact that my position has been supported by reviewers from all sort of automotive publications. Your "proof" that GM has poor fit and finish consists of two photos from the same SRX. Not enough for me.
 
"You are amazing. Half the time you argue that mag writers and my friends here at Edmunds don't know their heads from their rears and therefore, can't be trusted. The other half of the time, you're quoting them as gospel truth. If we're not supposed to believe anything they say/write, why do you quote them? "
 
your arguments are getting weaker as we go along. First of all I have sent corrections in to IL via email on numerous occasions after reading misinformation in road tests. Secondly, I often dispute subjective opinions that are based on double standards. Do you know what a dyno does? If you do then you should understand why I do not have a problem quoting an OBJECTIVE dyno reading from MT. It is apparent to anyone with common sense that the non SAE rated GT-R is underrated. Please learn the difference betweeen statements based on objective measurements or empirical data and blowhard subjective opinions that are inconsistent with previously rendered opinions.
 
"Name another car with a 4,000+ lb. curb weight that laps the 'Ring faster than the CTS-V? I can't name a *car*, but I know Hans Stück lapped the 'Ring in 7:49 in an E53 BMW X5 with a V-12 engine from the 1999 BMW V12 LMR Le Mans prototype in the year 2001. :o) I'm sure you don't believe me. So you probably won't believe any of the facts a Google search would dig up for you. Or this video clip of him testing the imaginary X5 he did the lap in. "
 
I thought it was obvious we were talking about stock cars available from manufacturers and not one off vehicles created by tuners. You have to do better than that. You are getting very defensive and hostile for no reason. I never said "everything" you say is incorrect but I am pointing out that your arguments here are not convincing in the least.

"Regarding SAE ratings...I don't understand this. SAE is a standard measure, so how could GM be underrating their powerplants if they are all SAE certified? By default, the SAE rating would be standardized and not under-rated"
 
SAE J1349 allows you to print a power figure within 1% (+/-) observed output of the engine. For example, the Z06's LS7 engine is certified at 505hp but that could be the mean, minimum or maximum output figure- we don't know. That could give a range of ~ 505-516hp.

"Yes. I watched the video complete with its flying start and switching to different camera angles throughout. There are very few sustained straight sections on the 'Ring? There are at least three *long* stretches where the CTS-V can stretch its legs. I probably know the track better than you, but could be mistaken as always. "
 
The ring is known as a track that tests suspension, brakes and engine capability. If you watch the video or play your video game you will see its not all about long straights, period. Even if it was you have to be the first person in history to try and dismiss a vehicle for having too much hp. I'm not even sure what why you feel the CTS-V should be criticized for being able to exploit the straights with its powerful engine. The fact that you are making so many excuses is testament to your bias. Just give credit where it's due.
 
And please give the "camera angle switching" conspiracy theories a rest. Why would GM have to lie about the Ring time? BTW, dont you believe that the best Ring times for ALL vehicles are acheived by using the best launch techniques, warm up procedures and weather conditions?
 
"I'm not saying the CTS-V's lap wasn't a good lap. It's just not a great "omfg" lap in my meager opinion."
 
And this is based on what? You keep saying that and you keep ignoring the fact that the E63 and M5 and M3 are slower. Those are the CTS-V's peers, not a special edition STi with no A/C or sound insulation. If the CTS-V's time is unacceptable please explain how you feel about the slower M5 and E63. Your stance on the CTS-V makes no sense when you consider that it beat its prime competitors on their home territory. How can faster than the class leader be considired too slow by any sane person? Hey, next thing we know you'll be saying the GT-R is too slow. Oh, wait thats a Nissan so you're Ok with it's performance. Cant wait to read your excuses about the ZR-1.

"Now to me, that's pretty damn impressive. Impressive to the point where I say to myself "something is wrong here". What am I missing? How did a very heavy big ol' sedan, even with tons of power, lap the 'ring at the same time as a much, much lighter (~1100 pounds) 355 HP Carrera S? "
 
check the power to weight ratio. Why would you doubt the CTS-Vs track time when the E63 and M5 weigh over 4000lbs? The M5 is only about 13 seconds slower and is less 300lbs lighter. You act like every car with an impressive Ring time is a lightweight. The GT-R proves you dont need to be a lightweight to obliterate the Ring. That car comes in at 3900lbs which isnt that far off the CTS-V.

Do I know what a dyno does? Obviously not.
 
http://www.carspace.com/videos/play!id=.5bc16827
 
"The ring is known as a track that tests suspension, brakes and engine capability. If you watch the video or play your video game you will see its not all about long straights, period. Even if it was you have to be the first person in history to try and dismiss a vehicle for having too much hp. I'm not even sure what why you feel the CTS-V should be criticized for being able to exploit the straights with its powerful engine. The fact that you are making so many excuses is testament to your bias. Just give credit where it's due."
 
Have you ever driven a car in anger on a road course? I'm not talking about some lame wannabe autocross course at a ride and drive. Power makes a huge difference the longer a track is, even if you want to try to discredit the insanely long straightaways the 'Ring has.
 
Just give credit where it's due? You don't know the STi I was referring to doesn't have A/C or sound deadening (it sure looks like it has A/C in the video). After all, it is a *production sedan*, which is required for FIA homologation. Perhaps you should be giving a 276-320 hp sedan credit for breaking the eight minute barrier at the 'Ring using a standing start.
 
"I thought it was obvious we were talking about stock cars available from manufacturers and not one off vehicles created by tuners."
 
You never stated that. You just said to name a 4,000+ lb. car that can lap the 'Ring faster than the CTS-V. I didn't. I named a honking sport activity vehicle instead.
 
"You are getting very defensive and hostile for no reason. I never said "everything" you say is incorrect but I am pointing out that your arguments here are not convincing in the least."
 
Okay. Can't wait to read my excuses about the ZR1 (a true GM expert wouldn't have used a hyphen because they all know the "ZR-1" was for the C4)? GM also has said the ZR1 isn't meant to be an all-out track car like the Z06. Why would I make excuses about a car I love (I probably should get rid of my 1:24 ACTION Racing collectible of the C5-R that Dale Earnhardt and his son co-drove at the Rolex 24 Hours of Daytona, too. And my 1:24 1999 #24 Jeff Gordon DuPont Chevrolet Monte Carlo while I'm at it. Oh! And my two Chevrolet Racing caps, too! And the free t-shirt my uncle, Roland Leong, gave me when he was Ron Capps' crew chief when Ron was driving Don Prudhome's Camaro Funny Car and finished 2nd to John Force.)? Oh right. Because I'm an import fanboy.

"You never stated that. You just said to name a 4,000+ lb. car that can lap the 'Ring faster than the CTS-V. I didn't. I named a honking sport activity vehicle instead. "
 
I am saying the CTSV is fast (as is everyone else but you) because its faster than key competitors. If I put the SL65s engine in a solstice it would likely be faster than the GT-R but who cares since thats not a production vehicle sold to buyers. Your excuses are lame. Manufacturers are responsible for the vehicles they produce and sell and thus BMW isnt going to be touting Ring times from a race car derived V12 X5 they didnt manufacture. If the CTS-Vs time compares favorably to a mega hp X5 with a race car motor I would say that is more proof that the Cadillac is awesome.
 
I dont really have a problem with this Sti's time but its a far lighter car with AWD and without creature comforts. I dont consider that an apples to apples comparion but apparently you do.
 
You still havent explained why we should criticize the CTS-V for taking advantage of the straights just like all high hp cars do on the Ring. The power to weight ratios of the M5 and CTS-V arent that different so I dont see your point. While the STi may have far less power it also likely has over 1000lbs less curb weight to lug around since its not a luxury sedan.
 
"Okay. Can't wait to read my excuses about the ZR1 (a true GM expert wouldn't have used a hyphen because they all know the "ZR-1" was for the C4)? GM also has said the ZR1 isn't meant to be an all-out track car like the Z06."
 
I read about the proper nomenclature for the ZR1 but I was rushing and didnt think that was all that relevant to what I was talking about. You know which car I was referring to. So now you are out to prove your GM fanboy credentials. I am impressed and I have to say you have me beat since I own no GM licensed items. So if you are such a GM fan why are you hating on the CTS-V when others are not? I dont get that at all. I guess the true moral of this story is that you are here to strictly "protect" other posters from my misinformation as argue with everything I say. You are arguing that GM has poor fit and finish and that the CTS-V is an underachiever and yet you claim to be a longtime fan of the General. Dont get it at all. If I say the sky is blue you will post a link to prove its really green.

"Do I know what a dyno does? Obviously not. "
 
It was a rhetorical question. I was quite sure you were familiar with a dyno. I just wanted to point out how silly it was to ask me why would I quote a dyno figure from a major magazine.

It's not about being a "fanboy." The bottom line is this: the CTS-V is the King of its class at the 'Ring, period. It is faster than ALL of its competition sold in N. America, period. No manner of excuses can change that fact. Regardless of who finds the results impressive or not, those are facts so let's deal with them.
 
I'd love to pull up next to an Impreza STi Spec C (or whatever it's called) in a CTS-V. We could settle that score on the street...

"If I say the sky is blue you will post a link to prove its really green."
 
The sky itself is blue?
 
http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html
 
chavis10, street racing should not be endorsed in any way. Keep it on the track, man. If we can get the cars, I accept your challenge. :o)

I guess that means you finally ran out of gas in terms of rebuttals. Thats not a bad thing.
 
I think Chavis summed it up. Some things arent open to debate, even if you dont like the people presenting the information. The CTS-V is extremely fast and capable and can smoke the M5 and E63 around the Ring. If anyone has a problem with that or wants to prove that cadillac has done a poor job they should take it up with GM.

"The CTS-V is extremely fast and capable and can smoke the M5 and E63 around the Ring. If anyone has a problem with that or wants to prove that cadillac has done a poor job they should take it up with GM."
 
I never disputed that. I just thought its lap was "meh." It's just my opinion. Apparently, some people don't like it.

if the CTSV is too slow for you there always your Sti Spec C special edition with no sound deadening. Hopefully it will give you enough performance to impress someone with such lofty standards. If the CTSV isnt impressive I would hate to know what you think about the M5.