Well time is ticking down for me. My 2002clk55 must be returned on Sept 6 and so I have to have a new car by then.

However, I am really having such a problem deciding what car to get. Hell, I cannot even decide if I want a sport or luxury car.

Ideally, I want the cadillac cts-v. But I'm not sure if I want to spend 50k.

With that said, I looked at the acura tl and g35. I hated the g35 so that got dropped out real quick (interior was just horrible).

On a visit to a caddi dealer I saw my surprise car, the pontiac gto (I know... I couldn't believe I was looking at a pontiac either). Anyway, the car is a monster (350hp) and the 05 which are due out in a few weeks will have 400hp (which matches the performace of the cts-v). The real kicker is that the gto is LESS THAN the acura. I can get if for 30k.

So now it comes to this.

GTO-

Pros
Best seats I ever sat in (front and back).
Unbelieveable performace for the price

Cons
Small trunk
Interior is not bad but doesn't come close to acura
Not many cool things (navi, satellite radio, etc.)
so so looks
pontiac quality???

TL
Pros
Best looking interior/exterior
Great toys (satellite radio, navi)
good trunk space

Cons
Performance kinda sucks
Touque steer

CTS-V
Pros
Best of both worlds

Cons
Probally not worth the 15 -20k extra

So what do you guys think? I know they are two completely different cars but that is how confused I am . Any help, or comments would be appreciated.

 

If you want luxury, sporty and performance with cool features like XM, DVD-A, BT, Nav, voice commands, your best bet is TL. If you just want performance and can compromise on luxury and space, also look at Subaru WRX Sti along with GTO.

 

I know someone who bought CTS-V. His differential blew and he found that it's common problem with this particular car. Then he found that there is a collective letter (or something else) from CTS-V owners to GM with complains. Apparently, rear portion of the car is not designed to handle massive torque and power from 400 hp engine. I can also assume that Pontiac will have the same problem as CTS-V.
Just be careful and do some research.

 

I think you summed it up... "The real kicker is that the gto is LESS THAN the acura"

Enough said.

 

Mark, does that mean that you would go for the gto?

 

IMHO, it is a choice of refined performance versus raw performance

I would recommend test driving both on the same day if possible and also reading reviews of both cars. Edmunds is a good place to start.

 

although the TL is going to be lower in performance than the gto it makes up for it in that it is a well rounded car. it has good performance for a 4 door sedan and comes with alot of nice features. the gto while packing alot of punch does not deliver a total package. if performance is what you are after then the gto is the best pick for the money. the acura would be a compromise between performance and luxury. the caddi would be the best of both worlds but the extra cost might not seem worth it. but if you are coming from a clk55 the TL will seem slow, while the other 2 cars will be faster just because there are more ponies under the hood.

 

It is my understanding that there is a substantial backlog of unsold GTO's in the pipeline. Autoweek reports a 255-day supply. Do the math.

 

Those were all considerations for me as well, but I needed an automatic (since most of my time is spent in stop-and-go traffic) so the CTS-V was out. Also, didn't especially care for the interior. I liked the Pontiac GTO interior, especially the way it "fits" the driver, but the exterior did nothing for me... plus I understand they will be introducing a newly styled GTO within a couple of years. That means the current one will be dated real quickly.

The TL is a decent enough performer to put a smile on your face... plus it's beautiful inside and out! That makes it the best all-around choice for my needs.

 

Well, Since I own a TL. NO, I would not buy a GTO. I was trying to be SMART with a play on words. The GTO is LESS THAN an acura.

Sorry for the confusion.

You have to drive them both and see what makes you happy. Only you will know for sure.

Good luck in whatever car you choose.

Mark

 

I'm surprised to hear that about the CTS-V rear end, and somewhat skeptical. The CTS-V driveline is lifted directly from the Corvette ZO6, so unless the Vette's experiecing the same problem, which I doubt, I dunno.....The CTS-V performance could match or exceed the CLK55, if you need that, though the interior won't match the TL, nor will the goodies, so it's time to prioritze what you need in a ride. I'm considering the GTO as well, against the G35, 300C(!), and the TL of course. I can't afford the CTS-V, but the GTO is boring outside, not enough gadgets inside to win out against the TL. I came from a '97 Z28, so I'm familiar with the power, but not many places to wind it out, you know?
The 300C is very powerful, nice inside but doesn't quite match the TL's interior or gadget count. This one's high on the list after my test drive. Essentially a last-generation Benz E-class at a discount when you opt for the C trim level. I'd like to go back to RWD from my current 2000 TL, but all things considered, the TL is the BEST value in its class, hands down. It comes down to intangibles like Honda quslity. Will DaimlerChrysler back up the 300C? Will you bore of the GTO? Is the CTS-V really worth the premium for extra horses you can't really exploit very often?
Time fora pros & cons llist, as well as many test drives. Compare the 300C against the CTS-V if the CTS is high on your list. You may be pleasantly surprised at how things stack up. OTherwise, I'd skip straight to the TL. The 2005 G35 will be more powerful than the current TL, plus the interior is niced up a teeny bit.

 

Since you lease the 02 CLK55, might as well lease the M3 afterwards....I heard the 06 M3 will be a V-8 w/400HP

 

nah, never been a big fan of the bmw

Plus I don't think I really want to spend 50k on a car this time around.

 

mlionel wrote:
"I know someone who bought CTS-V. His differential blew and he found that it's common problem with this particular car. Then he found that there is a collective letter (or something else) from CTS-V owners to GM with complains. Apparently, rear portion of the car is not designed to handle massive torque and power from 400 hp engine. I can also assume that Pontiac will have the same problem as CTS-V.
Just be careful and do some research."


I'm sorry, but that's both kind of funny and kind of a shame. You have to wonder about GM with this. I mean the engine in both of these cars IS A SMALL BLOCK. We're not talking about Godzilla the Torque Monster here. In the 60's, GM did a super job of building supercars (the first of this genre) with rear ends, clutches, and transmissions that could easily handle twice the torque of the small block in these two cars. I know, I had one. Heck, their Muncie M22 "rock crusher" was capable of handling over 1300 lb/ft of torque! And some of the big block Chevy's were good for torque in the neighborhood of 600 lb/ft and horsepower ratings a tad over that. So what happened?

Did they forget how to build this equipment? Did something get lost along the way? You think someone was not doing their homework?

Oh well, this was interesting.. thanks for the info. I, too really like the CTS-V. Maybe it was a good thing I didn't go for it after all.

 

There are many cars to buy today. But there is only one with all the things a person ants in one car.
If you like speed, power, comfort and service then select the TL automatic.
If you just the power select the 6mt period.

 

I don’t know if reliability is important to you. If so, take a look at Consumer Reports. The predicted reliability of Cadillac CTS is much worse than average while the Acura TL is rated as better than average. CU says the first-year reliability of the CTS has been “poor”.

 

I had interest in the GTO until the recent GM Test Drive in Motion thingy where I actually got to see the GTO and drive it. I had really high expectations, but came away thinking it was a complete POS. I drove both the manual and automatic. As much as I love driving manual trans, I can honestly say, I liked the AT much more (and I didn't like that at all). If you like stiff clutches, long throws, and rubbery/imprecise shifting, you might like it.

Take it from someone who has owned and driven more GMs than should be admitted - move away from the GTO (and GM in general - other than the Corvette and a few other exceptions).

As for the Cadillac, I drove that (i.e. CTS) and thought it was OK. The CTS-V is sure to be a great performer, but for $50k, there's a lot more out there to look at. Quality is better than the lowlier GMs (i.e. Pontiac, Chevy), but I wouldn't bet on it being in the same league as Honda.

Lastly, the GTO is a completely different beast than the TL. It's aimed at grown-up Firebird/TransAm owners who can't quite afford a Corvette and it's sole purpose is speed. Forget about looks, refinement, luxury, etc. Oh, did I mention it's a POS? (By the way, I don't usually say that about many cars, especially those in this price range). The TL is superb in most measures of a good entry-level-luxury-sport-tourer.

 

For my 2 cents worth, I wouldn't consider a GTO until Pontiac decided to restyle the car and go away from the Holden Monaro look. The styling is far too tame for that beast of a car!

Take the TL and run.... you'll never regret it.

 

http://www.acura-tl.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91095

 

As you mention, the 2005 GTOs are supposed to have the 400hp LS2 engine in them, btw. They're also adding hood scoops in an effort to make them look a little less plain. Personally, I like the GTO, and think with a body kit they can be made to look awesome. I wonder what the insurance and real-world gas mileage is, though?