McCalf

Although I don't have many posts, I have been visiting this forum regularly for more than a year now, and I've noticed that nobody ever compares the TSX/Acura to Cadillac. Granted, when I was looking for my car I did not consider any Cadillacs because the TSX was already on the high end of my price range. However, if I had a few more $$, I would have definitely cross-shopped the TSX with the CTS. From a performance standpoint are Cadillacs that much inferior to BMW, Lexus, Acura, etc.? I have noticed many people on this forum really dislike American cars; but I always thought Cadillacs were reliable/quality vehicles. If I had an extra $30000 sitting around when I was shopping, I would have loved to put a V-series in the driveway. Thoughts...?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

A CTS-V, sure. I'd want one of those too. But Cadillac as a whole lacks the same quality feel that all of its competition provides. The standard CTS just does not provide enough to overcome this. The CTS-V, on the other hand, does provide an awful lot of performance both in a straight line and around corners.

GIBSON6594

A regular CTS interior just does not hold a candle to the TSX. It's not a bad car, but I think it lacks a soul

Dan Martin

The CTS-V weighs 700lbs more than a TSX. It's got a ton of power and well tuned suspension but it's still big and heavy. Totally different animal than the TSX.

Dan Martin

It's as good as american cars get, but it still looks like ass. There are mold lines everywhere in the car and its just a sea of hard plastic. The radio styling is a joke:


Take 20 seconds to sit in one and you'll see cost-cutting measures everywhere.

bradykp

i like the cadillacs, but they don't offer the same value. but i would buy one if i had money to burn!

eidji

I swear there is an evil leprechaun trying to escape from the console of that caddy!

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Nicely done...

LuvMyTSX

I also cross shopped a CTS, but when I looked at the resale value I didn't even bother to test drive it.

I also had a hard time with being in my 20's and owning a Caddy. Seemed a little too old for me.

And now that I see the interior from the pics in this thread, I know I wouldn't have liked it.

GIBSON6594

joerockt

I cross-shoped the CTS...Like most people said, the dash is horrendous. I also found the cabin to be a bit on the small side...

swirlie

That has to be one of the best posts I've seen in a looong time!!

BulldogHockey

I've got a friend who has a CTS with the 3.6L DOHC. I guess I'm one of the few who likes this car. I've had a number of spirited trips in this thing and it handles quite well. 260 HP, RWD, 50/50 weight distribution, etc. Way better off the line than the TSX. He drives it like a mad man, so I'd hate to be the one who buys his lease return.

I agree that the interior is not as good, though still nice compared to other domestics. So far it's held up well. The navi is not nearly as good. He had some early problems with the Stabilitrak, and one with the moon roof. Handling in the snow is not real great, even with Stabilitrak.

I think its got an appealing look and is a good performer. But nothing depreciates faster than an American luxury car!

Belzebutt

If someone pointed a gun to my head and said "you HAVE to buy an American car in the same price range as the TSX" I would pick the CTS.

Its exterior looks are original, and I can't comment on the interior since I never sat in one. From the pictures it looks average, but it's hard to say. C&D likes it so that's a good sign in my book.

afici0nad0

haha...

i'd have to sell it right after though...

Black_6spd

Although Cadilac has made a genuine attempt to attract a younger buyer, I still associate the brand as a grandpa car.

The only time they really got my attention was when one of the models was getting bullet holes in Matrix Reloaded from an Escalade. Caddy must have paid mucho royalties for that plug....

Beoshingus

I didn't consider the CTS for the simple reason of price. To get the same options on the CTS that come on the TSX by default, the CTS would be close to $40K. It's not because Cadillac is in anyway inferior. I'm not a big fan of the interior either, but it's a nice car, and it has LOTS of power. Fun to drive. The issue for me is that TSX was in the segment I was shopping, and Cadillac didn't offer any entries in that segment. To get a CTS, I would have had to sacrifice navigation, moonroof, and some other things to stay within my budget - and it would have still been more expensive than what I paid for the TSX.

If you search my earlier posts, you'll find that I mentioned the Cadillac BLS (unfortunately a Europe-only car) that would be an excellent comparison to the TSX. There are links to pictures as well. Too bad they don't sell those here - yet. The more competition the better, I say.

polytsx

I don’t really have anything against Cadillac’s. I think they have come along way. My only real complaint would be the rather horrendous resale down the road. Look at all those STS buyers and how much money they loose…it is just scary.

Beoshingus

Agreed. The depreciation comes from the fact that they cost too much to start with. I've always thought their retail prices were too high. Apparently somebody agreed, because they've lowered the prices. Also, it's not entirely fair to assume the depreciation of a new model based on its predecessor. Granted, without a magic mirror into the future there is no other way to guess, but it's still a guess. A newer better car may not depreciate as much as its inferior predecessor.

bradykp

I agree with Beoshingus. It's a great car, but the reason why many of us bought the TSX is because the TSX had a lot to offer in a price range that it probably doesn't really belong in. That makes the TSX accessible to many people who were looking to spend a little less as well as to people who just can't justify spend 5-10 grand more for the same features.

I realize a lot of people on AZ are not fans of American cars. I think it's a shame more people don't give them respect, beause they are a lot better than people give them credit for, especially GM, in my experiences. Ford needs a lot of work, Chrysler is pumping out cars that just have no character in my opinion. The 300M is nice, but do they really have to make every other car look almost exactly like it?

The Americans need to figure out how to improve their quality images with the public as well as cut costs (in the right area). Maybe if they finally realize that no hassle pricing is better than high prices - rebates and incentives, they'll start to retain their value a little bit better.

The fact is, the American cars aren't as bad as people say they are, but they all have a few things that are pretty easy to point out as flaws, and almost every american car lacks in interior design. I still have some hope for the future of American cars, maybe someday, they'll realize that focusing on 20 passenger SUVs is a mistake, and get back to designing good sports cars and good functional cars.

biker

I've said it a few times - give me a CTS with a slightly better interior for the price of the TSX+1K (for RWD) and I'll buy it. The 2.8L V6 6MT I tried had the one of the best tranny feel I've driven.

jimstsx

I drove a few CTS cars...some with the big engine and some with the small engine....when I was looking for a car. The TSX beats it HANDS DOWN!!! There is NOTHING that makes me want that car. Even the CTS-V, which is poorly optioned and is overpriced, isn't that impressive of a car.

Don't get a CTS...get a TSX. A few letters make a world of difference!

psteng19

That's because the CTS competes with the TL, G35, 325 as far as pricing goes, not the TSX.

The handling/performance of the CTS is much better than the TSX given it's RWD/V6 platform.
However, that's about the only thing it has going for it.

The interior (both styling and materials/finish) is sub-par, resale is horrid, exterior styling is grotesque (subjective).

In the $35k sedan class, I'd be in a G35 no question.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Have you actually driven the CTS? The handling on the base model is not that impressive and the steering feel sucks. Plus, the base motor is barely adequate for the weight of the car.

DC_TSX

my brother has a CTS with the 3.6L V6 and i must say i liked how the car drove and felt, he got it a couple of months ago and all i could do is rag on him about how much better the TSX is in all categories. the CTS is a nice car, but about 10K too much.

afici0nad0

Beoshingus

Dude, sorry, but you are full of crap. The CTS was made to compete with BMW 330, and I think it's not too far off the mark. The big 6 is a very powerful engine, and moves it very well. The CTS-V gives M5 a good run for the money. For half the price.

And anyone who can say that the 200hp TSX beats a 400hp CTS-V "hands down" has:

1.) Never driven a CTS-V
2.) Never even READ about a CTS-V
3.) Been eating crack cocaine with a spoon

Can your TSX go 0-60 in under 5 seconds? The CTS-V can. Don't make a fool of yourself and compare a TSX to a CTS-V. Comparing a TSX to a regular CTS is a bit of a stretch. A TL comparison would be much more fair.

Like I said, there is nothing Cadillac makes (aside from the Euro-only BLS) that compares with TSX. Next thing you know, you'll be comparing TSX to a Bentley Arnage.

I love my TSX, but it doesn't fill me with delusions of grandeur.

West6MT

Dan and LuvmyTSX hit it on the nose.

jimstsx

First of all, my TSX can't get to 60 in under 5 seconds...I never said it could.

And despite what you may think I have driven a CTS-V, a friend of mine has a silver one. I don't eat crack with a spoon and I have read about the car. I know more about that car than you can imagine. Tell me where I said that the TSX was faster than a CTS-V. Show me in my post where I said that.

I said that nothing makes me want ANY CTS. Anyone who knows about cars at all can agree that BMW and Acura BOTH make better vehicles than GM.

I said that the CTS-V is overpriced and it is. It should have come with a 6 and an automatic option also. And it isn't just my opinion on the lack of options or the lack of transmissions, look in any car magazine and you will see that they agree also. I also said that the TSX beat the CTS hands down....and it does in quality, resale and overall value per dollar. My friend who has the CTS-V had his rear-end of the car encounter some type of problem and after 2 weeks in the shop it wasn't fixed right. Maybe it is the car, maybe it is the company that makes the car, or maybe it is the dealer network but there is NOTHING THAT MAKES ME WANT A CTS!!!!!!!!!!!

I will sacrafice performance for build quality any day. Plus, that extra HP won't mean much in 7 years when the car is broken down and not worth a penny. At least with the TSX the interior isn't a piece of plastic and fake wood. Also, the leather doesn't look or wear like a trash bag....but it does in the CTS.

Maybe you can take a better look at the car and a better read of my first post before you go off on me.

I said that the car is poorly optioned and overpriced and that it isn't that impressive....and guess what...??? IT'S NOT IMPRESSIVE.

Good luck with the car, the re-sale value, the quality, the interior materials, the $1500 option for an automatic, the $900 sunroof option and the fact that everyone in the world can lease one for $199 a month.

Finally, good luck with your response to my post. Maybe next time you can read the post and understand what I said and compared before you tell me how I use crack and have never even been in a CTS.

Obviously all the GM ads this past fall worked on one person.....YOU!!!!!

peter_bigblock

The CTS is priced more competitively with the TL, mid-30's when optioned decently. I think GM have done themselves a disservice by letting Buick become the geeze-mobile brand. Where Pontiac is for the younger go-fast crowd and Caddy are the more monied "I've arrived" crowd, Buick isn't in between. I should be a Buick customer -- late 30's to early 40's, good income, looking for a real near-lux sport sedan that doesn't scream "bucks" just yet, but says I'm a little more class-conscious than the testosterone Oakley-thermonuclear image of Pontiac. Instead, they offer the softened-stool Lucerne and Lacrosse, and the world's-ugliest-car Rendezvous.

They can't get away from the idea that just adding a V8 makes a car sporty and leather seats make it luxurious. Their lack of imagination and their retiree/health costs are killing them. They'll go bankrupt as they're less and less able to float the entire company by selling pickup trucks.

joerockt

^^^ Great post...

ianS

When you ever almost lost your life due to the stupid design and serious issue from GM, you will never trust their products. I was in a accident because my bonneville shut down itself and cut off all the power after I rev it past the redline when I was driving over 140km/hr. At that moment the steering and brake were locked and I just all the way went into a ditch that beside the highway. When I complain it to GM after I recover from the hospital, they replied me that it is by design and that is my fault that I am driving that fast!

peter_bigblock

I was up in the middle of the night and decided to get off a good rant about GM before going back to bed.

The sad thing is that my family was a GM family, going back to my grandfather, until about the late-70's. Then we started discovering that Honda made a reliable, inexpensive, fuel-efficient, fun-to-drive car and began buying Civics and Accords instead of Monte Carlos and Impalas. Thirty-odd years later, I don't think anyone in my family has bot an American brand since, except a used '00 Tahoe I bot as a tow vehicle.

cusetsx

I hope you didn't tell the police and/or your insurance company that you were going that fast when the accident happend.
How do you expect a company to respond when you take a car past it's "limits".
I'm sorry that you were injured though.

Belzebutt

Maybe it's part of a secret program to "cull" speeders.

97AcuraCL

not only a no; but a FUCK NO

cttsxDAWG

eww!

eidji

While above the speed limit, I assume, it isn't unreasonably fast. For the US, 140 km/h is only 85 mph, which is 15-20 over the speed limit in most interstates in the US (I don't know Canadian freeway limits). It's not that fast and often traffic on the US interstates approach that speed in normal flow.

cusetsx

^^
It is easy to redline an A.T. Bonneville going 85?...excuse me over 85 which could mean way over 85. heh. He took it past the redline that's what made me throw up some flags. He obviously was pushing the engine.

GIBSON6594

1- Speed isn't everything
2- Some stating their opinion doesn't make them full of crap