How hard are Cadillacs (04+ CTS') on the pocketbooks
12-06-2013, 09:23 AM
#11
Registered User
12-06-2013, 09:48 AM
#12
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by whiteflash' timestamp='1386353401' post='22910695
I really do NOT like Infiniti's. Would not buy.
12-06-2013, 10:49 AM
#14
Registered User
Originally Posted by Marioshi' timestamp='1386354238' post='22910714
[quote name='whiteflash' timestamp='1386353401' post='22910695']
I really do NOT like Infiniti's. Would not buy.
I really do NOT like Infiniti's. Would not buy.
[/quote]
Hmm I always thought the G35 sedan has a pretty non-offensive body style, certainly not anything that makes it better/worse looking than a CTS.
The VQ engines are powerhouse engines its true, but I think you are mislead about FE. Against the CTS: 2004 vs 2004 both rated at 17/24mpg but the Caddy gives up 40hp and 40lb ft of torque while being heavier. Certainly EPA estimates don't mean everything but its something to think about.
I agree with you about the sound although I wonder if the Sedans are quieter stock for stock. Whenever I hear a VQ coming it is always a G coupe or Z.
BTW not offended that you did not like my suggestion, I am just always surprised when someone dislikes a brand so completely.
12-06-2013, 11:19 AM
#15
Thread Starter
Well the idea here would be to stay under 10K'ish (if I want to keep the S as a side car; I would want to make this purchase in cash).
Needs good stock seating, and softer suspension, and preferably over 25mpg on the freeway. I would also prefer it to be from this millenia. It doesn't have to be RWD, though, I think that's generally always the preferred option. Also manual is preferred, but this will be primarily a comfy people mover so, auto-tragic could be acceptable (rowing gears in traffic can be a special kind of hell with a bum left knee).
Needs good stock seating, and softer suspension, and preferably over 25mpg on the freeway. I would also prefer it to be from this millenia. It doesn't have to be RWD, though, I think that's generally always the preferred option. Also manual is preferred, but this will be primarily a comfy people mover so, auto-tragic could be acceptable (rowing gears in traffic can be a special kind of hell with a bum left knee).
Originally Posted by whiteflash' timestamp='1386355687' post='22910761
[quote name='Marioshi' timestamp='1386354238' post='22910714'][quote name='whiteflash' timestamp='1386353401' post='22910695']I really do NOT like Infiniti's. Would not buy.
[/quote]Hmm I always thought the G35 sedan has a pretty non-offensive body style, certainly not anything that makes it better/worse looking than a CTS. The VQ engines are powerhouse engines its true, but I think you are mislead about FE. Against the CTS: 2004 vs 2004 both rated at 17/24mpg but the Caddy gives up 40hp and 40lb ft of torque while being heavier. Certainly EPA estimates don't mean everything but its something to think about.I agree with you about the sound although I wonder if the Sedans are quieter stock for stock. Whenever I hear a VQ coming it is always a G coupe or Z.BTW not offended that you did not like my suggestion, I am just always surprised when someone dislikes a brand so completely. [/quote]
As far as style offense goes; the CTS understands it's brutish and it's lines are such. The G reminds me of a Richmond skank in a dress.
Also, intangible: As a Californian millenial, back in say, '05, a lot of my spoiled/entitled peers were getting G's from their parents and trying to act cool about it. And trust me, I understand that there's no real correlation between Infiniti and youth douchebaggery, and that it's a construct built in my head.
I just personally can't find any particular redeeming quality that says "This is worth the hours you worked."
12-06-2013, 11:36 AM
#16
Registered User
Also, intangible: As a Californian millenial, back in say, '05, a lot of my spoiled/entitled peers were getting G's from their parents and trying to act cool about it. And trust me, I understand that there's no real correlation between Infiniti and youth douchebaggery, and that it's a construct built in my head.
I just personally can't find any particular redeeming quality that says "This is worth the hours you worked."
I just personally can't find any particular redeeming quality that says "This is worth the hours you worked."
I can appreciate knowing what is worth your hard earned and what is not. I will think a little harder and get back to you with a non douchey recommendation.
12-06-2013, 11:42 AM
#17
Thread Starter
Might be a Bay Area thing. I also graduated '04. There were a LOT of kids my age driving them around that time, and acting cooler than school. Like I said, I know it's an entirely false correlation I've constructed in my own head. Just no particular redeeming qualities + my own delusional outlook = Meh, probably won't buy.
But hey, I appreciate the consideration!
But hey, I appreciate the consideration!
12-06-2013, 12:31 PM
#18
I think the $10k price point leads you down a few paths:
1. Older and more luxurious - possibly more problems due to age but nearly always poor MPG (prior gen TL/RLs or Lexus for example)
2. Newer and economy design - middle of the road driving with reasonable MPG (mini-suv?)
3. Old & sportier - spend money on the repairs in exchange for so-so MPG but more fun behind the wheel (Celica/RSX for example)
You could probably get a reasonable Subi Legacy, though I'd tell you the GT with turbo could be problems. Fits all the bills - even has a manual option. I would hate you to buy one and drop coin into it like I have.
I won't buy a car under $25k again. I want new and lower mileage to avoid the pit falls of expensive repairs.
1. Older and more luxurious - possibly more problems due to age but nearly always poor MPG (prior gen TL/RLs or Lexus for example)
2. Newer and economy design - middle of the road driving with reasonable MPG (mini-suv?)
3. Old & sportier - spend money on the repairs in exchange for so-so MPG but more fun behind the wheel (Celica/RSX for example)
You could probably get a reasonable Subi Legacy, though I'd tell you the GT with turbo could be problems. Fits all the bills - even has a manual option. I would hate you to buy one and drop coin into it like I have.
I won't buy a car under $25k again. I want new and lower mileage to avoid the pit falls of expensive repairs.
12-07-2013, 08:45 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cadillacs in general are pretty solid vehicles. GM has long had good financing and loyalty programs, so depreciation appears higher than it really is - repeat GM owners don't pay sticker, and get low financing. IOW, the family buying their third Cadillac pays less for the car than the guy buying a new Lexus at a similar MSRP. Depreciation for the Cadillac looks higher, but they paid ~$5K+ less than sticker and spent less on financing over the same period of time as the Lexus owner.
Cadillacs are luxury cars, so simple maintenance and repairs can cost more than on cheaper cars. Shocks and struts will cost more than for a Camry, for example. On the other hand, owners tend to take care of them - garaged their entire life, dealer serviced, etc. As with any used car, the owner has more impact on long-term reliability than brand.
Cadillacs are luxury cars, so simple maintenance and repairs can cost more than on cheaper cars. Shocks and struts will cost more than for a Camry, for example. On the other hand, owners tend to take care of them - garaged their entire life, dealer serviced, etc. As with any used car, the owner has more impact on long-term reliability than brand.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post