dwest1023

As you may know, every week me an the lady go out and test drive cars to see if the RL can be replaced with something else. So far nothing has touched to RL for us. Today, just for the heck of it, we stopped by the Cadillac dealer to try out the new all wheel drive CTS. I have to say, I was shocked. I have never liked American cars, but this 2008 CTS is a good car. The car was very quiet with not a hint of a rattle. The ride and handling was better than the RL. The transmission was so smooth I could not dectect a shift in normal driving. The audio system seemed to come right from the RL but played DVDs and had a hard drive. The Navi was superior. There is no disk to load but the maps are downloaded and always up to date. To switch from nav, to radio controls you just touch the radio tap on the screen. The interior was very nice, although I would give the edge to the RL. The CTS had 305HP, and it moved that car! AT WOT, the RL is more refined. The seats were awesome and kept you planted. The cooled seats were great. GM did a suburb job of dialing in a sport ride, with luxury comfort. The speedo showed both compass, digital speed as well as analog speed read out.(cool) Best part, the CTS uses regular gas!

My dislike were the accelerator being too close to the brake pedal. Everytime I took my foot off the accelerator it would hit the brake. The interior space is less than the RL. I hated the shape of the outside mirrors.

We are not quite ready to jump ship, but Honda has its hands full and needs to step up to the plate with the next RL. The only issue I may have with the Caddy it the reliability issue. The warranty is 5 years 100K miles, but I hate warranty work as its always atleast a two trip affair. I hope some of you take a test drive in the CTS, I would like to know what you think.

briny319

I haven't driven the new CTS but wil check it out. But it isn't even in the same ballpark as the RL.

OMG a loaded CTS is $43,835.00, that's almost the same as the avg selling price of the RL. I think GM is nuts. I don't car how nice this car is, it can't be better than a G35 or 335i which are also same price range.

TampaRLX-SH

It's nice to hear that GM is getting some nice products out there. I was in a new Suburban today, and I was impressed with th refined interior. GMs of the past always turned me off with the gray putty interiors.

That said, the CTS is NEW. The RL is in it 3rd year with virtually no changes. OF COURSE the ante is upped with each model launched. That is just how the car game goes.

With no significant content or style changes it is silly to compare a newly launched competitive model to one in it waning model run. The RL should be compared to what was on the market when IT was launched. It is very likely the next RL will make today's CTS seem long in the tooth...that is just how the game goes.

More important to me is not who has the latest greatest....I'd be buying a new car every 6 months! But instead, more important to me how long a car I own I can remain enamored with. Like a wife, I want her to last. I may look at the newest top model, but I want to remain happy with the one I come home to.

briny319

Well put.

And nice pic too. I love that color.

neuronbob

Now you guys are getting what I'm saying about the General generally and the new CTS in particular. They are definitely doing something right that's making me consider buying American in the future. OMG did I say I would consider buying American?

I'm going to be test driving that puppy in the near future myself with a thorough comparison to the RL, just for fun. I would NEVER buy an American car in its first year, but the CTS looks good and sounds fabulous on paper. Please note: the CTS is "entry luxury" and the RL is "mid-luxury", so the two are not in the same class. The RL's direct competition would be the STS AWD.

Acura had better wake up soon! Next MY is gonna be BIG for them.

Mike_TX

Really inerested in a couple of things, since my wife is a died in the wool Cadillac lover.

First, I'm guessing the Nav still "greys out" when the car starts moving, like the older versions. If that's the case, does it take voice commands? How well? That is, can you actually route to a location by voice?

Secondly, I wonder how well the car runs on regular gas ... you know, it doesn't make that 304 hp on regular - only on premium. I haven't gotten a straight answer on the amount of hp lost on regular, but some say as much as 25 or 30. The ECU really has to ratchet back when on regular, due to the direct injection. And that puppy weighs in at close to 4,000 lbs!

It sure looks good on paper and in pictures ... I'm sure she'll be wanting to go look at them in person soon. She still likes her old CTS, even after I talked her into upgrading to an STS a year ago.

.
.

dug-mac

I agree with what many are saying with regard to the CTS. GM is doing a better job. I have sat in the Caddy and hope to drive one on Monday. It is an attractive package and Cadillac already had figured out the handling/suspension package on the previous edition. The question, of course, is reliability. I would also be hesitant to jump on the first year model. Also, I'm not sure that the CTS offers good value as the large engine with AWD and NAV will be close to $47-48K. I suspect the 4th Gen TL will have AWD (or SH-AWD) and 300 HP and be closer to $41-42K...

dwest1023

With all wheel drive it list for $52000

dwest1023

I looked at the STS, and I am not old enough for the car The interior looks outdated compared to the RL. I did not test drive it, and I just don't like the way it looks

dwest1023

[QUOTE=Mike_TX]Really inerested in a couple of things, since my wife is a died in the wool Cadillac lover.

First, I'm guessing the Nav still "greys out" when the car starts moving, like the older versions. If that's the case, does it take voice commands? How well? That is, can you actually route to a location by voice?

Secondly, I wonder how well the car runs on regular gas ... you know, it doesn't make that 304 hp on regular - only on premium. I haven't gotten a straight answer on the amount of hp lost on regular, but some say as much as 25 or 30. The ECU really has to ratchet back when on regular, due to the direct injection. And that puppy weighs in at close to 4,000 lbs!

It sure looks good on paper and in pictures ... I'm sure she'll be wanting to go look at them in person soon. She still likes her old CTS, even after I talked her into upgrading to an STS a year ago.




The Navi DOES NOT gray out. Its the best Navi I have used so far. This navi is all new. The new CTS does not required premium and is not recommend.

PortlandRL

I think GM is onto something (finally). My car was recently in the body shop and I got a Saturn Ion as a loaner car. Not a bad little car to putt around town in. Good get-up-and-go, great gas mileage, and minimal engine and road noise. My only complaints are no dead pedal and no cruise control. Definitely not a road-trip machine.

Mike_TX

Wow! I'm amazed the GM attorneys allow drivers to actually USE the nav while moving! LOL.

As for the premium fuel, I quote from the September, 2007 issue of Motor Trend:

"GM global rear-drive chief engineer David Leone claims a 15-percent power increase (though you'll only get the full 304 horses if you run it on premium unleaded)." (The emphasis is mine.)

Various other sources point the horsepower loss still leaves you ahead of the old engine in terms of power, but don't expect to get all the hp from regular gas.

.
.

kirbyflorida

I strongly suggest you get info on the reliability from the net, you will be shocked on the Caddy.
Even Road and Track or Car and Driver had rear ends going out way before 30,000 miles.

I think Honda has the best ergonomics on the planet.

dwest1023

Trust me I will. The first car I bought was a 1974 Toyota Corolla, and I have never even looked at an American car since. Trust me I have already read the horror stories
about Caddy reliability and that is probably what will keep us from leaving the Honda fold. This CTS has been out a while and I would hope that by this generation, GM would have fixed the problems this model had. The CTS is a recommend buy by CU. All I am saying is GM, at least, has really stepped up to the plate enough to make ME take notice, and I don;t notice very easy. I have driven them all, and THIS Caddy make me pay attention. Not BMW, MB, Infinity,Jag, etc have done that to me. I will say the twin turbo 535, was impressive, but cost way to much and I have big issues with BMW reliability. Me and the lady took a brand new CLK350 out of the showroom floor, and during the test drive, the transmission failed(no joke). As I have said many times, when you get up in the RL class all you can do is nit pick for the most part, because most of these cars are very good. The RL(IMO) is should be a classic in my book. I have never driven a car that just does all things well and at the price you pay for it, I don't know how you could buy something else. I will wait on the new RL( I hope) before I make any decision. Next year will be an expensive one for me, as there is a rumored tsx turbo, and a mazdaspeed maita. (own both as 06's)

I really would like to hear other opinions about the new CTS, so I will be looking forward to hear from anyone else that takes a drive in one.


PS
Anyone looking to buy the New Infinity G35, that car did not impress me either. Love the exhaust note though! One of the best factory exhaust notes out there.
WOT power comes on very late. Oh well, just thought I would throw that one in there.

Godwhacker

Agree that Generous Motors may finally be getting its head out its butt. As for the CTS, my dad has a 2002, and has had zero problems with it and loves it. Also, I went to lunch at a local mall a few weeks back, and GM had this travelling exhibit featuring the new Buick SUV, the Enclave. I took a gander, and while certainly not quite up to the standard of many high end SUV's (e.g., X5. RX, MDX, etc), its a lot less money and is quite nice, and would definately cross shop with the more mid range RDX, X3, etc.

Shotgun

You deliver consistently intelligent and mature posts! However, having been a loyal Acura customer since I purchased my 89 Acura Legend coupe, I fully expect Acure to deliver something extraordinary in their next iteration...Something that not only looks appealing but is up there on the "performace" level as well. If not...I just may look elsewhere...

TampaRLX-SH

I do agree that Acura has to step up with the next RL, significantly. Not only for the RL model, but the lineup for the brand. That said, the current gen RL was pretty damn impressive to me in 2005 when it was launched. Obviously not to the masses, but to me at least. Of course Acura will not survive the heated competition if it only caters to a minority of buyers.

My only fear is that in attempt to make a big leap in the next gen is that they go somewhere fugly with the styling.

neuronbob

I also worry about the marketing. Given the lack of marketing with the current model (it petered out about six months after release), that is my other fear. If people don't know what you're offering, there's no way they'll buy it.

I have no doubt that the next RL will be better given the strong statement Honda gave with the Accord. With one fell swoop, the Accord has encroached upon "entry-level luxury" status.

SpicyMikey

I want to agree with that statement and say lack of marketing is a huge problem for the RL. But, I have to point out I don't seen any big marketing campaigns for the MDX, and it sells well. Of course, the MDX is in a different product segment, but, it's up against stiff competition from MB, BMW, and Lexus just like the RL. Good cars sell themselves.

I'm sincerely stumped by the unbelievably low sales. I can't see the problem, but that might be because there is just no problem for me personally. Obviously, we all like the combination of features the RL offers (most of us here own one). Maybe we're just unable to see the flaws in the packaging of the car that makes it undesirable to the vast majority of mid size $40-50k sedan buyers. Maybe it doesn't need some HUGE obvious flaw to kill sales (butt ugly design, a 2.4l 4cyl engine, etc.). Maybe a combination of all these small little problems just doom it. Maybe Acura sees that, accepts that, and is just not going to waste any more money on it until they can fix it. My local dealer doesn't even put one on the showroom floor. Instead, he has two TL's, an RDX, MDX, and TSX. Doesn't even have one outside on the pads near the front door (another TL and a TSX)

Jackzilla

Spicy, basically the problem is the Honda/Acura selling proposition. Honda/Acura is a company that adheres to an "Engineering of the Product" selling proposition - this is a selling concept in which the customer is perceived as intelligent and perceptive enough the discover the inherent superior design, engineering and resulting reliability inherent in the product and the superior value that they deliver to the consumer. Products sold on this proposition never achieve the high market shares that similar products, offering less value, but more consumer flash/emotional appeal do.
Mercedes Benz and BMW are both, also, makes that offer sophistocated designs (maybe even over engineered for US road conditions), but look at how they're promotted -- they appeal strictly to the prospect's vanity and concept of self-importance, as if to say, "if you buy our car people will notice you and think what a smart and very successful individual you are". Thus, the appeal is strictly to the emotions of the prospect -- product engineering and value are strictly secondary in this market segment.
Honda/Acura puts far more engineering content into their products than most customers will ever appreciate -- elegent, beautifully thought out solutions that other makers would look at as design overkill. But that was Sochira(Sp.?) Honda's (the company founder) guiding philosophy. There are NO cars selling today for less than twice the price of an RL (at least that I'm aware of) that use the kind of materials and types of design that Acura puts into the RL. It was the same way when the Acura NSX was on the market. It never sold as well as might have been expected for what it offered, but nothing from Ferrari or the other exotics even approached it for the sophistication of its design, engineering and construction. Yet the other exotics with all their "character" reliability problems and just plain lack of practicality, as transportation, and MUCH MUCH higher prices outsold the NSX by wide margins. Flash and ego gratification, unfortunately, will outsell solid, practical value anyday. Go figure, but it's just human nature.
In the meantime, we should all just count ourselves as part of a small elite group with the good perception and superior judgement to recognize a really excellently engineered automobile and superior value that the vast majortiy are overlooking for the flash and fluff of lesser marques.

black label

I think it's best to buy your cars and lease your wives, there's much less commitment that way and the car typically comes with a better warranty.

SpicyMikey

I can agree with all you said. I guess it's an elegent way of saying Acura's marketing sucks, not only for the RL but in general. That's what many people say. But, I'm still hesitant to agree that's the key to the sales# problems. Can THAT many people in this country be THAT shallow to effect the numbers so dramatically? I suppose it's possible but I'm skeptical. Unless, maybe the collective marketing for Acura has resulted in brand "cachet" that simply exceeds the RL price (albiet it slightly). Could it be that the problem isn't as much the RL as it is the brand? Is $48-$53k just more then the Acura brand can support? And because of that, the RL is simply dismissed without serious consideration regardless of it's true value? If Acura sold the MB E350 (exactly as it is now) with an Acura badge on it, would they also sell 552 next month?

This could be a good subject for a Marketing Thesis

neuronbob

So what Jack is saying is that RL owners are smarter than the average American? Probably true. RL owners on this board have come to this car choice not through advertising (for we are too smart for that.... ), but through careful research of what a car in this price range should offer, and rejection of the "brand image" concept. I know I don't need a Benz or BMW to feel important!

Hey, wait, there's an ad campaign there!

Clouds of dust as people stampede toward a BMW dealership,
"Ignore the herds stampeding toward brand image. You feel you don't need that to show your success."

Dust clears, desert mist RL with 19" RonJon wheels appears.
"It's clear which car is the best-engineered and safest of the bunch.
Acura RL. What the intelligent car owner buys."

OK, that was lame. I had to try, though!

jftjr

And thus, Bob proves that marketing is, indeed, not brain surgery.

Jackzilla

Spicy, you should never underestimate the shallowness of the consumer and the key factors that motivate them. Volvo, for example, continues to sell cars on the proposition that they are safer than any other, when in fact all cars have to meet the same basic safety standards in order to be sold in the US. Several other makes in fact score better than Volvo on safety tests, yet your Volvo consumer would NEVER believe that any other car was safer than the Volvo. Little known fact, in Sweden where Volvos are built, Volvos are regerded as little more than a Swedish Ford. Swedes who aspire to having a top flite prestige auto aim for a Benz.
And, if Acura sold the MB E350 the customer would get A LOT more for their money. If you take a few minutes to build an E350 on the MB site, you'll find that it will cost you over $60,000 just to match basically all that Acura offers on the Tech optioned RL. And some of what Acura offers (CMBS, iVTEC, SH-awd) are not even offered on the E350, at any price.
And, believe me, you won't get a Benz dealer to knock anything significant off the MSRP -- I know because I tried long and hard and the best I could get was a grand off. You might do better, but I doubt it.
What sells the E350 is the Benz cachet, because if you really look at the "fit and finish" of an E class, it's not even in the same league as a Honda Accord, much less an RL. The door and hood gaps are big enough to drive through and the orange peel in the finish is a joke for the price they're asking -- not to mention that every metallic color they offer costs $900. extra.
Believe it or not, the only Benz E Class that comes close to offering all that the RL offers as standard is the E-550, and its base 4-matic version "STARTS" at over$60,000.
Believe me, I once considered buying an E-Class, but having thoroughly gone over one at the dealers, the E350 doesn't offer even a fraction of the value (not to mention the build quality) of the Acura RL.
The way I look at it, owning an Acura RL makes one a member of a rather exclusive club of very knowledgeable auto enthusiasts. So, call me smug, but I'm not the least bit unhappy about not running into myself everytime I turn the corner -- and people do recognize the car as being rather unique, going by some of the favorable comments that have been offered while getting gas.
Just out of curiosity, it might be interesting to know just how many E350's Mercedes sell in a month. Anyone have any idea?

SpicyMikey

Year to Date as of July

1. 5 - Series - 23,807
2. E - Class - 22,246
3. M - 11,701
4. GS - 11,168
5. STS - 9,509
6. S80 - 6,164
7. A6 - 6,014
8. RL - 3,482
9. 9-5 -2,266

Would Acura have sold 22,246 E class sedans if they had an Acura badge on them? It's a question (if it could be answered) that would get us the answer we are looking for;

If we could magically take the E350 and make it an Acura with a wave of our magic wand, how many would they sell in the next 30 days?

If they sold 522 (or even less) then the problem is ALL caused by Acura image (or lack thereof) and is not due to the V6 or the SHAWD, or whatever else.

If they sold 3500, then it's not the brand, it truly IS the car.

If they sold something in between (like 1500), then it's a bit of both

Wish I had a magic wand

Jackzilla

Spicy, if Benz really sold over 3000 E350s a month, through July 31, I guess it just proves old PT Barnum was right -- there's a sucker born every minute.
Kidding aside, though, the figures pretty much prove my point. The cachet (prestige factor) of a Benz or Beemer is what makes the sales -- although from what I've been reading many of these "sales" are actually leases, something like 70% in the case of BMW. Moreover, the leasing has a lot to do with the length of these marques warranties. One does not really want to have these cars after the warranty runs out, unless they have cubic money for the enormous prices for repairs.
Does anyone here think that a BMW or MB is really twice as good as an "M" or "GS", which the sales figures would suggest. Either of these two cars will be running trouble free long after the BMW and MB owners have dumped their cars because of their far less than steller reliability.
I would personally take any of the poorer selling cars over the BMW or MB, based on the experiences of people I know who have "OWNED" one of them.
Prestige and a big fat check book will keep your MB or Beemer running great -- better just have two of them for when one's in the shop.
Every Honda product I've owned, and I've had five, has run for more than 100,000 miles and never needed anything but oil changes, tires and general maintenance. Nuff said!

Jackzilla

Spicy, related to this thread, there was another recent car brand that comes to mind that was such a dismal flop that it's now off the market in the US. That was the Volkswagen Phaeton, a true super luxury car designed to compete and crush such makes as the Lexus LS, Benz S Class, and BMW 7 Series and Audi A8 (of which it was basically a clone). In terms of quality, fit and finish, engineering and features it had them all - big V8, even bigger W12, all wheel drive, exceptional interior and amenities and super quality materials. BUT, and its a big BUT, it had a VW nameplate (a "Peoples" car), with all that implied. Very few people thought a Volkwagen with a $70,000 starting price carried the prestige that such a high price would suggest -- the W12 model started at nearly $100K. So prestege is apparantly what people are looking for for when they start laying out over 5 large for any auto. And that in my opinion is what Acura's problem is. It just hasn't established itself as a brand that buyers perceive as conveying that the owner is a person of substantial means, who can afford, what people generally view as an expensive, exclusive automobile.
Lexus, is the only one of the Japanese makes that has remotely succeeded in cracking the prestiege barrier shared by the likes of MB and BMW. And interestingly, just like Acura, the Lexus brand is just for the US -- everywhere else in the world the LS is marketed as a Toyota!
Anyone looking for an absoutely fabulous bargain should take a look at used VW Phaeton prices -- low milage examples that cost over $100K can be had for $50K or even less. The W12 actually was just about an equal of the Maybach, which goes for about $350K, that's how advanced and luxurious the Phaeton is.

Chas2

The Phaeton is a close cousin to the Bentley, the four door, not the Continental GT, due to the predominantly steel body structure vs the aluminium of the A8. It was a great car, but it did look like an overgrown Passat. Pity, maybe you are on to something there.

The only person that had one that I knew of was the wife of a VW dealer. Her copy had so many transmission problems, she gave it up within a year, and is driving an Audi.

dwboston

The factory in Dresden where the Phaetons were built was state of the art and very clean and cool-looking. There is a photo gallery of it here: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1837641

The cars were hand-built, which may have led to some of the consistency/quality problems.

briny319

I don't think acura will ever be considered a luxury brand. It took lexus +15yrs and they have only made a dent. Which is fine by me. And I don't think RWD and a V8 is going to help all that much. I think it mainly comes down to marketing. Acura needs to fire their ad agency and hire whoever bmw uses. "The ultimate driving machine", how can you compete with that. The only time I EVER EVER see an acura commercial is on Speed channel, normally during Le Mans or some other acura race sponsored race. The RL is a great car, almost a perfect car. I don't care if they only sell 522 per month, or if no one knows what it is. I just wish they would make it look different from the accord. So many people think the RL is the next gen accord.

briny319

Also, to get back on topic. I don't think caddy will ever be considered a luxury brand to anyone under 55. 90% of caddy drivers are old men with big hats (no offence to any old men who wear big hats), that drive 10mph below the speed limit (I got stuck behind two of them today). I can't understand why anyone would buy one. While their lineup has improved and is improving, they put out so much crap in the last 25yrs it ruined the status of the brand. What was the cavalier version... the catera? Now that's high end luxury.

dwboston

The Catera ("the Caddy that Zigs") was a rebadged Opel, not a Cavalier.

I've seen plenty of Acura ads during sporting events (PGA golf, Red Sox games) and primetime TV. Maybe you need to watch different channels. The Acura Advance ads are pretty good but it's going to take more than ads to turn things around. The next-gen TL and RL could go a long way to turning the tide. Everyone is focusing on the new Accord versus the current cars. The next TL and RL will obviously be that much more impressive than the Accord. They have to be. Acura is far from dead. Have a little faith.

Slightly off-topic but I read the head-to-head comparison of the new Accord V6 with the similar Camry model in MT while at the Honda dealership picking up my registration and inspection sticker on Saturday. They loved the new Accord and picked it over the Camry. The styling is growing on me. Looks very BMW-like while retaining "Honda-ness".

GoHawks

The Cimmirran (sp?) was Cadillac's rebadged Cavalier.

ssim3

you would be a fool to turn down a sts-v or cts v, those cars are wicked fast.

kirbyflorida

Yes until the rear diff goes out , starts making noise at 15000 miles per long term test by car mags and forums.

SpicyMikey

But most people buying a cts or sts are not looking to go fast. In fact, most people buying any 4 door sedan are not thinking about that. It better do more then go wicked fast.

godfather2

dwest, the particular cts you drove (direct injection engine, awd, dvd nav, bose, etc.) is going to cost about the same as an RL, but it's a bit smaller. i must say, however, that the CTS is the best product Cadillac has put out in decades (and not just because i sell them)

dwest1023

I don't car how fast a car is, if it is not reliable. Lots of car out there are wicked fast (wrx) , but in the 50K league it better do other things well too. That is the beauty of the Rl. It does nothing great, but does everything well. For this reason, I have not found ANYTHING better. Even though the CTS seemed to be as nice or nicer than the RL, I still would not jump to buy it, knowing the History of American reliability. So far all my Jap cars have served me well and never needed any major repair. I just got rid of my 24 year old Toyota pickup and it has never seen a shop. I am sure the next gen, RL will be awesome, as the bar has been raised.

dwest1023

Yes it is smaller, and the issue with the brake and accelerator pedal is going to be a big issue for some( too close). I don't know a lot about American cars as I have not owed one in 30 years, but the test drove of the 2008 CTS was impressive. I have also driven the Buick Lucerne and while not my cup of tea, its comfort seemed to be better than the RL. For a floater, it floated very well.