2008 Cadillac CTS: Will I still love you tomorrow?

I thought GM got out of the leasing business??

I think GM got out of the truck and SUV leasing business.

Yes. Yes. and Yes.

... unless car companies go retro with the 80's.

I've seen dealers advertising new CTS for as little as ~$26k with all the various GM discounts. From around a $40k MSRP.

What about rear seat head room? I sat in a new CTS-V and the rear seat had no head room for a 6 foot 200 pound guy. I could not sit up straight. The latest M3 sedan has more room in the back seat than a CTS-V. The worst is the C63 benz. Can't even get your legs inside the back seat. Oh well.

I hope it ages better than an '80s C4 Corvette.

imo, the '92-'95 Civic is the best-aging car of all time. Some Accords from the '90s age well too. I wouldn't say the same about their competition.

Remember how much everyone hated Audi's big-mouth grille and BMW's modern styling when they first came out? They're pretty normal now, even well regarded.

I have wondered this same thing. I didn't like Cadillac's angular styling when it first came out on the 2002 CTS, but it grew on me, to where the later XLR and STS looked even better. And now, the CTS is the best looking yet. I think this is what stylists sometimes aim for, where a car that initially looks like they went too far eventually wears in quite well. It's working for Cadillac, but not BMW, in my view.

Overall though, I think trendy styling usually doesn't age well, so 10 to 15 years later, it may be a "what was I thinking" kind of thing. Hard to say, so may as well just love it now while it lasts.

Looks like the 50's fins to me. Might be good while it lasts.

"imo, the '92-'95 Civic is the best-aging car of all time."

Carlismo, I have a Integra GS-R/Type R powered 1995 Civic EX sedan ( AKA Cintegra), and even though its "old" its aged very well. The design is simple, clean and conservative and I like it.

German cars overall tend to age well also as their lines are clean, uncluttered and their overall designs are modern and fresh but not trendy like the Infiniti portfolio.

One car that has aged extremely bad is the 03-04 Infiniti G35 sedan. These look 10 years old already and the interior.....well..

3 luxury sedans that have aged very well are the BMW 5 Series (E39), the 94-95 Acura Legend GS sedan and the 98-00 Lexus LS400.

The CTS....Im unsure of how it will age as the design is bold and a bit blingy yet its not overdone. Unfortunately, the last generation CTS suffered the same fate as the G35 I mentioned.

The old CTS aged before it was even released. It was always bold, but never beautiful because the proportions were odd and the details rough. I see similar issues with the C6's headlamps and front wheel arches, and the new Mustang's Charger-like beltline above the rear wheels.

The new CTS has a perfect side profile. The boxlike rear will date somewhat, as will the two character lines that extend downward from the front grille. Certainly less than that of BMW's 7-series, though. Otherwise, the front end is spot-on. Darker colors will soften the angles and lend longevity. Red shades like those are your test car are particularly flattering.

Interestingly, the base car with large wheels looks better than the CTS-V. The additional body cladding and inverted front intake of the V add unnecessary angles to a car that already has plenty. For all the subtle avant-garde design touches of the base CTS, the performance people still feel the need to make their work obvious in the sort of way you'd expect from Pontiac, but not from Cadillac. If the V remains desirable in the future, it'll be, as with the first version, because it's a damn fine car, not because it's a looker.

I can't believe you called the Ferrari California ugly. I think it's the most beautiful car they've made in a long time. But then again, you may have seen it in person....

It will look fine in 10 years. Its distintive now and will be in the future. I dont see how anyone could be worried about this issue when the CTS' Japanese competition is forgetable from day one. The last gen CTS is almost 7 years old and hardly looks outdated.

I just typed out a long response and it deleted it upon my post. I guess the webmaster doesn't agree with my opinions. To summarize in a shorter fashion:

- CTS will look just as good in 10 years if Cadillac continues with the design language and with the CTS as its flagship/volume vehicle.

- CTS-V is the one exception, as it already looks garish with that stock grille. Owners who swap it out right away will be happy they did so. The CTS is an inherently flashy vehicle, so its important to not add any unnecessarily garish mods -a la CTS-V grille.

I'm offended by your anti-California sentiments.
The California is the 2nd best looking Ferrari ever made, behind the 599 GTB.

I think the current CTS will hold its looks.
The first gen was different, but had poor (narrow) proportions, like the SRX. I also agree about the California. It is lumpy, with headlights that bring Phyllis Diller to mind...

Please, please, please replace this car with a Pontiac G8 GXP with the manual transmission.

"Please, please, please replace this car with a Pontiac G8 GXP with the manual transmission."

sorry you can only have two of the same type of car if its an EVO. They wont allow two G8s at the same time.

They should get a TL SHAWD or Lacrosse to replace this car. A Genesis would be nice too.

"The California is the 2nd best looking Ferrari ever made, behind the 599 GTB."

Niether car is that good looking to me. Aston's cars look better than any current Ferrari.

"sorry you can only have two of the same type of car if its an EVO. They wont allow two G8s at the same time."

And Jettas!

Also, I agree that the California is awful. Its the worst looking Ferrari in a long time.

The CTS will age well. This version will certainly age better than the first gen CTS, which had an ugly face but looked better in every other view.

I agree. I think this CTS will age well. The last gen CTS, not so much. The new CTS has nice proportions and a lot of nice styling touches that will still look good 10 years from now.

At least I hope it will. I plan to buy a CTS-V in the fall, and keep it for 10 years. :)

Should keep it longer to shut all the Toyota-lovers up.

I think this generation of CTS will age-well for 5-7 years because it has many styling trends that are still emerging in new vehicles in this segment....so the design won't get tired until the next generation of lux-vehicle cues comes out. But I don't think it has anything near a classic look (that's not a knock really, few cars actually look classic).

The last generation CTS though....that has prematurely aged. This may just be a symptom of Pennsylvania, the car itself, and the condition the buyers of CTS' keep the car.....but there are mostly Silver, Black, or Beige last gen CTS' around.....the silver looks dull, the black looks like it's losing it's "blackness", and the cluttered and overly angular design looks like the first draft of the more refined current generation.

Just my take. I consider it similar to the e36 BMW 3-series of ~1992-1998....those in 323/325/328 format did not age well, while the M3 variants aged a bit better.

Joe

mozzz, billt -

Saw and sat in the new California Spyder at the LA Auto Show. It looks better in person, especially with a superfox draped over it.
But still ugly.

Regards,
Snake Doc

Sometimes I feel like the only person who liked the original CTS better. It was such a pure statement of the design theme. It was revolutionary and gorgeous.

Sure it had its odd angles. The wheels it came with were too small, and it was jacked up too high, making it too tall and slab sided. That could be fixed though.

The problem with this one is that it looks like it got over inflated. I want the crispness of the first gen back.

I have never really thought that Cadillac's age well. Of all luxury brands I think they are the most trendy and tend to look dated well before the competition (here's looking at you XLR and STS). Having said that I think the current-gen CTS is a little different and will probably age as well as the competition. It seems like all entry-level luxury cars are favoring a more trendy styling theme these days.

This car looks dated right now and will not age well.

This whole angular design trend for cadillac isn't
making very many fans.

I don't know anyone who wants a cadillac or even talks about them at all.

"I don't know anyone who wants a cadillac or even talks about them at all."

Anecdotal evidence. Clearly though, the car has been a success for Cadillac, so a lot of people have been (or were until recently) buying them.

joefrompa, I think you summed up the 1st generation CTS well by likening it to a first draft. And on the BMW E36s, do you mean their styling hasn't aged well, or the cars themselves? Do you think the E46 will fare better?

CWC - Thanks.

I think the e36 interior looks and feels like a step down from the e30 and e46 BMW 3-series, and I think the slab-sided exterior with front headlight lens that fog over and look "aged" exacerbate the look. The rear taillights also were never very well integrated.

The cars themselves age quite nicely and are mostly low maintenance (aside from door panels peeling off). But the e36 has not, and most likely will never, age as gracefully as the e30 with it's classic lines, boxiness, signature headlights and grille, and beautifully functional and solid interior.

The e46 3-series OTOH, I think, will be considered a great looking BMW for a very long time. The overall exterior design theme is cohesive, and the interior is beautiful and functional and is the last generation 3-series with a driver-canted center stack and center mounted window switches. It's a pretty technologically advanced car, so it might not be as well appreciated as a "purists" vehicle....but bear in mind that both the M3 and e46 330i/ci with performance package were built more for the enthusiast than the masses....a fact which tends to endear itself among future generations of car lovers.

Me? I think I need to own an e30, and an e39, and an e46. They are economically sound investments, when bought 7+ years out from their production :)

Joe

I agree that Cadillac has not produced any stunning designs in many, many years. The current crop of angular creases has a uppity "in-your-face: we don't need to design for aerodynamics" snob appeal.

Looking back over the past two decades at American cars, which ones do you think would be worthy of a museum in 100 years? The only two that come to mind are the '91 Lincoln Mark VII LSC and, in a very distant second place, well I'll have to get back to you on that.

"The last generation CTS though....that has prematurely aged. This may just be a symptom of Pennsylvania, the car itself, and the condition the buyers of CTS' keep the car.....but there are mostly Silver, Black, or Beige last gen CTS' around.....the silver looks dull, the black looks like it's losing it's "blackness", and the cluttered and overly angular design looks like the first draft of the more refined current generation. "

I disagree. The first CTS was too narrow and had ugly base wheels as well as the gray around the license plate (that was changed) but it was a distinctive car and still stands out. The models with the original 17" wheels or the later models with the optional multispoke 18s and exposed exhaust tips still look good. The first CTS-V looked good in 2004 and does to this day. The V corrected many of the styling flaws of the base car.

"This whole angular design trend for cadillac isn't
making very many fans.

I don't know anyone who wants a cadillac or even talks about them at all."

Before the credit crunch the CTS was selling like hotcakes. Maybe your friends dont talk about cadillacs but many other folks do and the auto media likes their recent product.

1487 - I agree that the CTS-V of the last gen still looks good. But then, it's essentially a dressed up CTS. Which usually makes things look sharper, for longer.

For example, I think the e36 M3 is alot better looking than the e36 325. It's dressed up.

However, I stand by my statement that most CTS's I see in PA are, to your point, a little ungainly (or too narrow as you put it) and have poor base wheels, and the overall look doesn't exude understated elegance like so many other cars of this segment (or, at least, as other cars in this segment aim to do). The colors haven't aged well with that car's lines, the wheels on most are not attractive, and it, again, overall looks like a first draft attempt.

That's really not a knock, I don't consider it an un-attractive vehicle. I just don't think it's a classic or will be considered timeless.

But that's ok, most cars aren't. The last generation S-class isn't exactly timeless either.

Joe

"By mercedesfan on February 5, 2009 1:05 PM
I have never really thought that Cadillac's age well. Of all luxury brands I think they are the most trendy and tend to look dated well before the competition (here's looking at you XLR and STS"

I don't agree with that at all. I think the XLR and STS still look great. I recently saw an old STS and an old ETC (Eldorado) circa 1993-1995, and I thought they both looked great. They've aged very well, and look far more attractive and modern today than a Lexus ES/GS/LS or Infiniti i30 or Q45 of the same era.

A Mercedes E-class or C-class from 1993-1995 looks like a Mercedes of course, but they look much older than they really are compared to the STS and ETC.

Having said all that, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.

1487-

Your whole "distinctive and will stand out argument" does not hold water. Those qualities are more likely to make it look dated over time. If "distictive and stands out" make a good design, why aren't AMCs, Aztecs and 1990s Izusus brought up as examples?

That being said, the first generation CTS' with their bucket-full-of-knives styling completely turned me off to the Cadillac brand. The '08 helps me warm up a bit - but not much...

You people are crazy, art and science or whatever this design language is called totally revitalized Cadillac. No one under 60 was buying them from 1980 till 2002.

It's all anecdotal here btw.

It's ugly. I don't think this car appeals to younger people (under 35).

most people under 35 cant afford the car anyway. I'm under 35 and I like it.

I like my vehicles sleek and/or muscular. The CTS is neither. I'd take the California out of category 2 and put the CTS in. That is all.

Thanks Joe, for elaborating.

Styling is a wonderfully subjective thing, isn't it? It's funny how my perception has changed over time on the various 3-series BMWs. Back in the '80s, I didn't like the look of the E30 so much. Today, I do, though I'm amazed at how boxy it appears now.

I loved the look of the E36 during the '90s, but today, I think it looks a bit too small, because I've gotten used to the E46, which looked too big when it first came out. Now it looks just right, and much sleeker and streamlined than the E36.

I've warmed up to the E92 as well, although I don't think it has the classic BMW look that the E46 will.

How about the E21? I think that car looks cool in the front, as it also has that classic BMW tough look about it.

Getting back on subject - so how about them CTSs?! If I were in the market, I'd strongly consider one. I like their interior look and features too, such as the retractable nav screen.

I think the previous CTS has aged poorly - in large part because IMO the styling was dramatic and never that cohesive to begin with. Weird creases and angles. The new Cadillacs have refined the styling theme and especially the new CTS should age better as it's also been toned down.

"It's ugly. I don't think this car appeals to younger people (under 35)."

I'm under 35 and can afford it. I'd agree that in general this car would typically appeal to an older crowd. My generation isn't exactly hot to the Cadillac brand yet despite the revitalization. I personally have toyed with the idea of a V (even the DI is a slow barge for me) but the interior is just way too over the top and I don't care for the maw up front.

Joe = Under 35, can afford a CTS, and likes the exterior as much as a 2006+ BMW 3-series sedan and the interior much more so.

Doesn't offer me everything I want though, so none for me.