Dreaming little dreamy dreams

http://jalopnik.com/the-15-best-reviewed-cars-of-2013-1488666755


I love the fact that no less than 3 different Aston Martins made the list, and two Bentleys as well. The Continental GT Speed is the one that I was raving about to Seamaster in our Bond thread. Some of the commenters complain that the list is a bit bogus since Jalopnik has always been the "people's" car site, and most of these cars are ones that none of us will ever be able to afford. But the list is "best reviewed," so it is inevitable that it is populated with supercars. On the other hand, lowly #15 is none other than the Cadillac CTS, which is more reasonable. I have driven one for a week out here in Vegas, and I agree with the reviewer that it is one of the better cars that GM has built, if not the best. (At least among those that I have driven.)

We tried to talk EZ into giving us a complimentary upgrade to the CTS, which they would not go for, of course, but the clerk offered an upgrade at $150 more for the eight days. We still said no, so he went down to $105. After a bit of wifely grumbling, we took it. Glad that we did. The rental car does not have the twin turbo V6, of course, but it DOES have the "ordinary" V6 instead of the base four cylinder. The turbo is supposed to do zero to sixty in 4.4 seconds, which is hardly supercar category any more, but we are talking about an American luxury sedan that goes for between $50,000 and about $75,000, depending on configuration. The regular V6 still puts out 320hp, which is nothing to sneeze at. Sadly, I am driving that rental car in a town where no one ever speeds, so neither am I, but I have been flooring it on the entry ramps onto the 65mph freeways, and the regular V6 kicks it aplenty. Plus, the ride is excellent -- smooth, but with enough road feel to be satisfying. We went through Red Rock Canyon a few days ago, and I managed to drive it pretty hard on the back-and-forth hairpin turns for a few miles, until I caught up with the traffic ahead of me. Limited body roll, even in hard cornering. I am not in the market for a new car right now, but if I was, and I wanted to spend the money on a car (as opposed to more home theatre equipment) the CTS would be on my list of cars that I would consider.

As nice as the CTS is for being a GM product, I am an BMW\Fiat\Mercedes-Benz\VW guy myself. If I could see well enough to drive, of course.

One of my clients who is a former Pontiac / Caddy dealer is telling me how ass backwards caddy engineering is and you couldn't pay him to drive one. Loves chevorlet though go figure. Take it for what its worth.

If he indeed loves Chevrolet, then I will definitely weigh that against his opinions of Cadillac!

I have never been a Cadillac person, so I was as surprised as anyone to enjoy the car. I love Bimmers as well, but on the other hand I have owned one, and really have little interest in paying for the repairs again. Or the insurance, for that matter, since our rates doubled. The insurance company explained that it was due to the repair costs of the vehicle, which they considered higher than even a Corvette. Cadillac repairs are much, much more reasonable. Interestingly, if you follow the link from the article to the review of the CTS, a BMW fanboy goes on an anti CTS rant, and gets slapped around a bit for it.

Iago wrote:I have never been a Cadillac person, so I was as surprised as anyone to enjoy the car.  I love Bimmers as well, but on the other hand I have owned one, and really have little interest in paying for the repairs again.  Or the insurance, for that matter, since our rates doubled. The insurance company explained that it was due to the repair costs of the vehicle, which they considered higher than even a Corvette.  Cadillac repairs are much, much more reasonable.

What model did you own?

The fact that your insurance company doubled your rates simply for higher repair costs is criminal. Although, almost all European cars will be higher in repair costs than American cars due to higher parts prices and a much smaller dealer network, especially here in Canada. They also have a reputation (on the Internet, anyways) for below-average reliability compared to American\Asian cars. My uncle's Mercedes feels like its built out of a solid lump of rock, plus he has not had any issues with the car aside from normal warranty work. YMMV

European car salesmen can also be more snotty at times, even from Volkswagen: My mother and I went to look at a Rabbit 2.5 a few years ago, and the salesman did not seem interested in selling us a car, let alone answering our questions properly. Having said that, the used prices of some of these European driving machines are awfully tempting.

Historically insurance companies have always charged differently based on make model and features. The logic is usually that somebody is more out to do something stupid in a sports car but I guess they are extending it to the cost of replacement parts now.

On European cars you cant even use a standard gates hose and some worm gear clamps, It is a specially made part that interlocks with the radiator that can only be aquired through the dealer that costs an insane amount of money. I can support the insurance companies on this decision. My daily driver is a very humble practical car, (Trans AM spends most of its time sleeping in the driveway, while I tinker with it. Especially in the winter) why should the insurance on my daily driver (chevy cruze) be surcharged so that the insurance company does not loose money when they have to pay the repair bill on my neighbors bmw after he cracks it up? He wants to drive a bmw he should be responsible for paying the appropriate amount to the insurance companies to cover repair costs if he breaks it.

That being said double the cost does seem excessive. They should not be making extra money, They should only be covering the additional cost of parts.

I will warn you guys now, though, that since I am of Italian descent I am more biased towards European cars. Just sayin'.

I wish that they would handle insurance premiums for cars over here in Canada and the USA like they do over in Europe, where the cost of a cars insurance premiums are mainly affected by the engine displacement, and not the make of vehicle, repair-rate, or other such things. Basically, if the engine is over two litres then your premiums increase as the engine displacement increases. So my mothers Nissan Sentra would be almost nothing compared to an F-150, for instance. Or a Ferrari.

One of my cousins works for Mercedes as a mechanic, which is where I got this information.

Ferrari 208 is proof you don't need a big motor or the ability to go fast to have an expensive repair bill.

"The 308 was slow enough and the 208 was just down right embarrassing. The car was only made so owners could get around the over 2.0 Litre tax on cars in Europe. Interestingly, the 2 litre V8 is the smallest V8 ever put into production."

http://www.exoticspotter.com/blog/2012/09/26/best-worst-ferraris-ever-made/

East wrote:Ferrari 208 is proof you don't need a big motor or the ability to go fast to have an expensive repair bill.

"The 308 was slow enough and the 208 was just down right embarrassing.  The car was only made so owners could get around the over 2.0 Litre tax on cars in Europe.  Interestingly, the 2 litre V8 is the smallest V8 ever put into production."

http://www.exoticspotter.com/blog/2012/09/26/best-worst-ferraris-ever-made/

I know of that particular Ferrari. The later 208 Turbo models were somewhat better, with 220HP, instead of 155HP. Embarrassing, to say the least. LOL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_308_GTB#208_GTB.2FGTS

The CTS-V that is quoted in the article Iago linked to is a bit of a different beast, and not really your typical Cadillac. I'd gladly have one.

Incidentally, that article is full-on porn.

Seamaster wrote:Incidentally, that article is full-on porn.

You say that like it is a bad thing!


The CTS that I drove in Vegas was not the "V" version, of course, but I will vouch for the fact that I would be happy to own any version of it, though I would lean toward at least the regular 6 cylinder. Interestingly, if you look at the review linked in the article, the reviewer actually recommends the base turbocharged four cylinder. With that, you are talking about a $45,000 car, and it is still a great car for the money. Pushing it to the V Sport twin turbo V6 version jumps up to $60,000, and adding the premium trim jumps to $70,000. Seems a bit steep for a trim package -- 2/3 the cost of the engine (and related mechanics) upgrade. The only differences with the premium package appear to be full leather seats, driver assist, a sunroof and the "luxury package" (whatever that is.) But as long as you are dreaming, you are talking about a $72,000-$75,000 car. Still not too bad compared to what is out there, and Cadillac's warranties look pretty good: 4 year/50,000 mile bumper-to-bumper, 6 year/70,000 powertrain, and 6 year/70,000 roadside assistance & courtesy transportation.

Take this with a grain of salt, but here are the latest rumors -- a seven-speed manual, and maybe even a V8?

http://jalopnik.com/cadillac-ats-v-could-get-a-425-hp-twin-turbo-v6-seven-1502977033

(Ignore the part about "could get" the twin turbo V6 -- that is already available!)



iACM: We had a 325i. Nice car, but it had higher miles when we got it (90,000 or so) and as a result it started to get into a lot of expected repairs at that mileage, as well as some unexpected ones, such as $2,000 for new computer -- NOT including installation! The insurance company that we had at that time (we have Progressive now, but I cannot remember if we had them back then) explained that they had 25 points scale for ranking car repairs, and BMW scored a 25.

It's not a bad thing. Ever.

Although it is pure cosmetics, the thing that I like about the CTS-V is that you can get it in black with satin graphite wheels. Combined with the bulge in the hood for the supercharger, it just looks menacing. That's cool.

I don't know much about the ATS, but if those rumours are true, that's very interesting.

The non-V version that I drove in Vegas was the Caddy off-white with grey interior, and while that package hardly stands out, the overall lines of the car are still good. I would choose a different colour, but I could happily live with the standard version (though again I would want at least the base V6.) On the other hand, check this out:

http://jalopnik.com/yes-you-can-hoon-a-70-000-420-hp-cadillac-on-ice-and-1507658746

A 420hp twin-turbo V6 RWD in Track Mode on ice and snow? One salivates at the thought of the fun to be had. The comments on this article get into the same BMWs-are-better debate, but there are some pretty good responses, one of which notes correctly that unlike many manufacturers -- including the Germans -- who offer "sports packages" for their cars, the Vsport Cadillac is a genuinely mechanically different car, with a different suspension as well as engine, which makes the upgrade far, far from cosmetic.

Speaking of cosmetics and colours, I just played with their configurator and as long as the dreams are of the dreamy dream sort, I would probably go with the black diamond tricoat and the premium trim brown seats with black trim. I prefer all black, but it just seems to need some contrast in the interior, and the black/brown seems the most tasteful and still fits the exterior.

Interesting read.

Personally I like what Cadillac have done with their cars. In fact, it's the only GM-built car that I'd buy today; none of the others interest me. But Cadillac is now building cars that truly perform (with proper transmissions to boot) and still have that luxury feel. And while they're pricey, they're not so pricey that they're entirely out of reach.

Black diamond tricoat with satin graphite wheels would be my pick. I'm not sure about the interior. That is something I'd have to play with, but I agree the brown could be nice. I'm particularly fond of darker browns with a reddish tint. In fact, a red interior might also work (if it's available), but it'd have to be the right shade of red. I think I will have to head off and play.

They do have a black interior with "morello" red trim, which did not do that much for me on a first look as it seems a bit more purple, but on the other hand I like purple, so there you go.  I think that I could live with that.

The interesting thing with all of this is that while the thought of that twin-turbo V6 going into the smaller ATS is pretty breathtaking -- to say nothing of a V8 -- but if I was going to pull the trigger I would probably lean more toward the CTS anyway.  I think that we had this conversation before, but while age has hardly eliminated my lust for performance, it has increased my love of comfort.  Having driven the CTS for a week, I can vouch for the fact that it is extremely comfortable; I was able to get the seat as far back as I wanted, the wheel fit into my hand in a comfortable arm position, and even the side panels fell just right along the length of my arm when resting my left arm on the door while driving one-handed.  None of those things are inconsiderable.  Considering that its "lowly" twin-turbo V6 can post 0-60 times within a couple of tenths of many of the high-end cars on that Jalopnik list, take all of it together and you have a competitively priced, great performing, comfortable car.

Even looking at the supercars on that list makes me have to realistically assess what I would do.  (If I can use the word "realistic" with a straight face here.)  Sure, the manual V12 Vantage is amazing, but if I had to live in the car, I would probably lean toward the larger Vanquish instead -- and dare I say it, I might even consider the four-door Rapide S.  (The more that I look at the pictures in their review, the more that I realize that it is a breathtakingly good-looking car.)  Same thing with the Bentleys; the GTC Speed would be more fun, but I think that I would prefer living in the Flying Spur.

Gotta love randomly clicking through links on Jalopnik:

http://jalopnik.com/2013-cadillac-cts-v-wagon-the-jalopnik-review-523089179

O.K., that gets it down to a 3.9 second 0-60mph -- in a WAGON. As they point out, that is as fast as the Lamborghini Gallardo. Mind you, this one has a supercharged V8 not the twin-turbo V6, but still. On the other hand, check out this aftermarket version that Canepa Design got their hands on:

http://jalopnik.com/for-71-999-is-this-v-a-victory-1505075094

That is one mighty, mighty good looking wagon!

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2011/11/review-2012-cadillac-cts-v-coupe/

My former boss had a cts-v, I think it was a 2008. What I have been told about their engineering aside that car was a blast to ride in, Let alone be driving. Lines seem to get better with every passing model year.

Interesting -- that appears to be a 2 door. Is it the ATS?


Cadillac already appears to have updated their website. You can now build a CTS-V with the supercharged 8 cylinder and a manual transmission, or automatic transmission with optional paddle shifters. That puts the 556hp, 3.9 second 0-60 into the regular sedan. But the Vsport version of the regular CTS is the one that is getting all the good marks, and appears to handle better -- though i will keep my eyes out for reviews of that 8 cylinder CTS-V!

Pretty sure that photograph is the CTS-V, in coupe trim.

If I was in the market for any of the cars we've discussed, there is one thing for sure: I'd have a hell of a fun time test driving them to find the right car. Sigh . . .

Well, I am not in the market either, which is why the dreams are of the dreamy dream sort. But it is nice to see that vehicles like that are within reach -- I do not have to hold out for an Aston! Speaking of which:

http://jalopnik.com/chinese-counterfeit-plastic-forces-aston-martin-to-reca-1516627635

Just what on the Planet of Hell is "counterfeit plastic"?!?!!? I assume that it refers to subpar, below spec product, but "counterfeit" is a bizarre term to apply to it.

The irony, of course, is that a Cadillac is something that's within reach! How times change.

Counterfeit plastic sounds terrible. Like it'd leave you glowing if you handled it for too long.

Regardless, the solution is obvious: Aston Martin needs to go back to handcrafting wooden arms for their accelerator pedals.

"It's hard to imagine there's a lucrative business in making fake plastic for faulty accelerator pedal arms in Aston Martins, but it appears we've been proven wrong. "

It sounds like parts were INTENTIONALLY engineered from sub quality plastic? WTF?

Something tells me that there is a very interesting story about that whole affair that will never be written because it is too obscure.  Cheap Chinese plastic parts in Aston Martins is not exactly 60 Minutes material.  Of course, 60 Minutes has had a pretty atrocious track record lately, so maybe it is after all.

But, regardless, I am still driving our 2012 Focus quite happily.  We have had some transmission problems, all covered under warranty, which appears to be a problem with the model.  (If you Google "Ford Focus transmission" it will autocomplete "2012," which is never a good sign!)  But Ford agreed to give us a complementary extended warranty to 5 years/75,000 miles, so they have done well for us.

My company also finally retired my old Taurus at work (180,000 miles, all but the first 200 put on by me!) and replaced it with a 2014 Fusion.  Nice looking little bird, that one.  Base SE, of course, since we are talking about a company car, but I would be quite happy with one for my own use, as long as it was a higher trim level.

I have yet to drive a Fusion, but I have been impressed by Ford's restyling of the vehicle. How do you find the interior, realizing that you are in the base trim?

Well, it is base, and so it is cloth, but it is certainly not unattractive.  It is not too dissimilar the the interior of our Focus.  A fair amount of plastic, of course, but nothing that seems too chintzy.  The center console is good for base trim -- minus the full Ford MySync system that our Focus has, of course, but still pretty good-looking.  Time will tell how durable everything is in the long term.  I have not noticed anything that seems like it will fall apart any time soon on our Focus, and the Fusion seems similar.  Given how beautiful the exteriors of the Fusions are, and how affordable they are, I would be more than willing to consider one for our next car.  The engines are going to keep getting smaller, but such is life.  It does not really matter, as Eve does most of the driving in whatever our newest vehicle is at the time, and with the miles that she puts on the MPG is much more of a factor. She thinks that she wants power, but the reality is that she cannot handle it!


Apropos of not too much, here is a video from Jalopnik that proves why you should just walk home the next time you get a flat tire during bad weather:

http://jalopnik.com/out-of-control-car-misses-man-changing-tire-by-slimmest-1522260601