# LOL what a joke cadillac Vs M power



## frhsfootball80 (Jun 28, 2006)

*"General Motors is laying down the gauntlet. The next-gen Cadillac CTS-V won't be here until the fall of 2008, but, with an anticipated 500 horsepower, it has the BMW M5 squarely in its sights."
*

http://www.caranddriver.com/dailyautoinsider/12833/spied-2009-cadillac-cts-v.html

what a joke :tsk:


----------



## B_RASHED (Oct 11, 2006)

isnt the cts v a v6 just supercharged. i love the cadis though. my dad has the 2006 xlr. its the sickest thing weve ever had in all the family. its got power and its a v8 but the xlr-v is a v6 (supercharged) and i dont think that can even touch an m5. but im really wanting to see the new and improved cts-v


----------



## LS2 MN6 (Feb 8, 2007)

I wouldn't say a joke. The CTS-V is certainly no 5-Series, but it does put down some serious power numbers.

The next one will be more of the same.


----------



## FJ540 (Jan 1, 2007)

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/8682/executive-adrenalators-page3.html

Sounds like the tester doesn't care too much for the vehicle anyway.

The styling between the e60 and that fugly Detroit trash is about on par.


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

Put an E60 M5 next to a new CTS and most people with eyesight won't be calling the Caddy the ugly one of the two.

The new CTS-V is not going to be a slouch. And for the money, it's far preferable to the guppy-mouthed E60 M5.


----------



## #5880 (Feb 11, 2006)

I looked at the CTS before we got the e90.

It got cheesier everytime I drove it :thumbdwn:


----------



## Brian McKinney (Sep 22, 2006)

yeah they dont mention that the car starts to rattle and squeek after 10K miles and has steering as numb as a Hummer


----------



## AzNMpower32 (Oct 23, 2005)

The Caddy will have a cheap interior no matter how much wood dressing they try and put on. The interior will never have the simple elegance as a BMW.

As with all competitors' attempts, the new CTS will likely put down good power and striaght line accel numbers, but it'll lack the finesse, poise, and balance of the BMW.


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

AzNMpower32 said:


> The Caddy will have a cheap interior no matter how much wood dressing they try and put on. The interior will never have the simple elegance as a BMW.
> 
> As with all competitors' attempts, the new CTS will likely put down good power and striaght line accel numbers, but it'll lack the finesse, poise, and balance of the BMW.


Have you sat inside a BMW lately?

:loco:


----------



## tscales (Oct 22, 2006)

I love all these responses. You all must define your lives by the fact that you own a B...M...W.

The CTS-V is a heck of a car. I particularly had to laugh at the 'supercharged 6' comment. Do you live under a rock 

The V currently has the Chevy LS2, one of the finest engines in the world. Lighter than the I-6 in an E46 M3. 400hp. 400ftlb torque.

Stock.

Easily modified to make massive horsepower. Reliably. Well price Twin Turbo kits.

I love my 540 and my M3, but when I want a refined, powerful engine, I drive my 07 Corvette.


----------



## Jalli (Jan 10, 2005)

Just because the Corvette and the CTS-V share an engine does not make them comparable at all. I have to agree that the Corvette is a beautiful car that drives brilliantly, but the Cadillac cannot and will not compare.

Cadillac interiors look great for the first few seconds, and then you just stare at them wondering what happened.. As for the driving dynamics, don't even get me started..

Jeremy Clarkson owns an M5, and has repeatedly says that he considers it better than Ferrari 430. I think he said that the current generation CTS-V was "interesting" or something..

TD- Why do you even post here if you hate BMW's so much? Your constant criticism has turned you into a troll..


----------



## tscales (Oct 22, 2006)

My point wasn't that the CST-V was superior, but that I found it entertaining that it was being slammed without any knowledge, but just because it was a Cadillac.


----------



## BmW745On19's (Aug 12, 2005)

The CTS-V is a fantastic car in terms of outside styling and performance, let me tell you, performance, it makes BMW look like a Benz in the corners. It's a fantastic car. Build quality/interior styling is the only thing holding it back from making it an _amazing_ car. The next CTS-V will be a real competitor to BMW. However, I'd probably still want an M5, just because it's a BMW, not a Caddy (brand image over brand image).


----------



## Buyse13 (May 31, 2006)

tscales said:


> I love all these responses. You all must define your lives by the fact that you own a B...M...W.
> 
> The CTS-V is a heck of a car. I particularly had to laugh at the 'supercharged 6' comment. Do you live under a rock
> 
> ...


:liar:


----------



## kishg (Apr 4, 2005)

TD said:


> Put an E60 M5 next to a new CTS and most people with eyesight won't be calling the Caddy the ugly one of the two.
> 
> The new CTS-V is not going to be a slouch. And for the money, it's far preferable to the guppy-mouthed E60 M5.


please. crappylac vs m5?


----------



## #5880 (Feb 11, 2006)

GM just flat out refuses to put a decent interior into ANY of their cars.

A friend of mine bought a Z06 and paid a ridiculous sum to have a trim shop put a real interior into it. It felt like a Ferrari after that in many ways. Just make it an option or contract X number of cars to a serious interior shop as an option. :dunno: 

Also, the rear end was weird on high speed turns with a little bump in the road. It gave me an uneasy feeling.


----------



## Brian McKinney (Sep 22, 2006)

I rented a CTS once, its a supped up rear drive Pontiac Grand Prix, cheap, shifts are untimely, and cheap look and feel


----------



## BmW745On19's (Aug 12, 2005)

Go drive the damn car (CTS-V) and put it through the twisties as you would a BMW M, you'll understand what my opinion is real quick. The car was developed on the Nordschliefe for christ's sake!


----------



## FJ540 (Jan 1, 2007)

I almost snapped a pic at the dealer today - 5 C6 vettes in the used car section.

I don't base my identity on my bmw, I base my past car ownerships against them. Even with all the nickel and diming the car is giving me, it's still better than ANY other brand I've owned.

If your vette was out of warranty, would you still love it?


----------



## BmW745On19's (Aug 12, 2005)

lao270 said:


> Also, the rear end was weird on high speed turns with a little bump in the road. It gave me an uneasy feeling.


I noticed that too, I think its because they use leaf springs and not any type of post-1950's suspension instead.


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

I drove the GTO with the LS1 engine (I think that is the 350 HP one) and the engine is amazing. Say what you wish about GM and I've bashed on their old interiors quite a bit.; the newer stuff they are producing is much better then the older. The new Tahoe is on par or better, interior wise, to Toyota etc.

The E39 interior is quite nice, it's functional and does what it should. Do I think it's the best thing ever....no. 

BMW advertised their new M3 V8 as one of the lightest V8's out there producing 400+ HP. The reason it's "one of" is due to the LS engines. Overhead cams add a ton of weight to the top of an engine and LS has done a miracle with pushrods. You can put the LS engine in just about anything and turn it into a drag racer. I just sold a Miata and the real power junkies would dump an LS in the 2300 pound car and turn it into a monster.

My first BMW was back in the late 90's and there really wasn't much competition out there in comparison. These days, Infinity, Cadi and Lexus have set BMW in their sites and there are competent options out there. I used to say nothing drives like a BMW......these days I say nothing drives exactly like a BMW.


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

FJ540 said:


> If your vette was out of warranty, would you still love it?


Let's get real  if we are comparing reliability......we better take the above post to the Toyota board or something. I just got a 5 with 70k and am putting away cash for my suspension refresh. 

BTW, I'm not trying to stir anything up.....but lets keep everything in perspective.


----------



## Jalli (Jan 10, 2005)

The current LS2 weighs in at somewhere around 440 lbs. The new M3 V8 supposedly comes in at around 444 lbs. The old I6 (S54) came in at around 430 I believe. Understand that these numbers come from some quick googling and mental conversions..

While the LS2 is a good engine, it has never been one of Ward's 10 best engines, as I predict the BMW V8 will be..


----------



## Jalli (Jan 10, 2005)

BmW745On19's said:


> Go drive the damn car (CTS-V) and put it through the twisties as you would a BMW M, you'll understand what my opinion is real quick. The car was developed on the Nordschliefe for christ's sake!


I think the Corvette was driven at the Nordschliefe before release too. Since GM never touted this, I guess it didn't do so well....


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

[



Jalli said:


> The current LS2 weighs in at somewhere around 440 lbs. The new M3 V8 supposedly comes in at around 444 lbs. The old I6 (S54) came in at around 430 I believe. Understand that these numbers come from some quick googling and mental conversions..
> 
> While the LS2 is a good engine, it has never been one of Ward's 10 best engines, as I predict the BMW V8 will be..


The LS7 weighs in at 458 and produces 500+ HP. If you were to blow an engine (money shift....which I think would a BMW only issue) the LS7 is probably cheaper to replace even with it being hand built. The LS2 at 400hp would be very cheap to replace.

The new M3 engine has a ton of tech gizmos and will produce 420hp. The BMW V8 will be a marvelous engine......but I'd take an LS2 or LS7 and its relative simplicity IMO.

Just did a little checking, an LS2 crate engine new is around 5,800 without looking for a discount. The LS7 can be had off Fleebay for 12,500. I look forward to seeing what the new V8 from BMW will cost to replace new (I used to have a E36 M3 and was very careful not to blow an engine).


----------



## 325ic a beer (Oct 21, 2005)

*Speaking from experience....*

The Cadillac (a 2006 Silver 6 litre ls2 V-8 Cadillac CTS V series)
I have been driving occasionally for the last year at my lake house in upper Wisconsin is actually a monster powerwise and damn if it doesn't handle too badly either.
I have to watch my teenager tendencies in the car at all times. You HAVE to have the manual six speed to enjoy the car DEFINITELY.


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

lao270 said:


> I looked at the CTS before we got the e90.
> 
> It got cheesier everytime I drove it :thumbdwn:


Great move. I used to handle our GM accounts at my last job and what a piece of sh$t company they are. Especially when I also had managed Honda, Toyota, and a few others accounts at one time or another. After that last job, I'll never walk on a GM lot again.


----------



## FJ540 (Jan 1, 2007)

$1k in suspension is a whole bunch cheaper than replacing busted plastic interior pieces.

Look at any 5 year old caddy and tell me that was a good investment. Old people don't even want them anymore.


----------



## jcatral14 (Aug 4, 2003)

FJ540 said:


> http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/8682/executive-adrenalators-page3.html
> 
> Sounds like the tester doesn't care too much for the vehicle anyway.
> 
> The styling between the e60 and that fugly Detroit trash is about on par.


I love my E60 :bigpimp:


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

FJ540 said:


> $1k in suspension is a whole bunch cheaper than replacing busted plastic interior pieces.
> 
> Look at any 5 year old caddy and tell me that was a good investment. Old people don't even want them anymore.


Cars are depreciating asset.....so as an investment....they all suck. Luxury cars are the worst investment since they generally depreciate faster and then level out. BMW has good resale value depending on model.

I have the touring, the rear sub frame bushings would cost me 1500-2000 if done at a dealer...and that's just for those bushings which are poorly designed. 60K-70K and requiring major suspension work is not something I consider great....but I got a great deal on the car so I can live with it. If I had all work done at the dealer, I'd have a 3+k in suspension work needed in the next 10K.

The Cooling system etc have been issues since my last BMW and it seems nothing has really changed. Junk is all relative, I find most new BMW owners buy and then dump once the bills start increasing. In the area of reliability and cost of ownership, BMW is just not worth talking about. I believe BMW makes a mint off maintenance and repairs more so then most car manufacturers especially Japanese.


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

The current CTS-V has been kicking the **** out of the E46 M3 in SCCA T2. The CTS-V is the real ****ing deal.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

As a former loyal GM owner/buyer.... All I can say is... GM will never touch BMW. They may make a car with more power but you get what you pay for.

GM builds crap and their service is even worse.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> The current CTS-V has been kicking the **** out of the E46 M3 in SCCA T2. The CTS-V is the real ****ing deal.


V8 vs I6.... Are you surprised by this?

These are not production cars either.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

tscales said:


> but when I want a refined, powerful engine, I drive my 07 Corvette.


Refined....:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

GM comes nowhere close to the refinement of other manufacturers.

Power, yes. refinement no.


----------



## swajames (Jan 16, 2005)

Jalli said:


> I think the Corvette was driven at the Nordschliefe before release too. Since GM never touted this, I guess it didn't do so well....


 The C6 Z06 recorded a 7:43 lap time. You're looking at 8:09 and 8:13 for the M6 and M5.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

MMMM_ERT said:


> V8 vs I6.... Are you surprised by this?
> 
> These are not production cars either.


A good engine is a good engine. How many cylinders it has should be irrelevant as long as it does the job.

The cost of the two cars is similar, though once you throw some options on the M3 the cost skyrockets quickly. If the V Caddy can beat an M3.....that's a scary thought at the track. This isn't your granny's Caddy anymore and I'm sure the new version will be an improvement over the older one....just like with the new M3.

Competition has heated up all around in areas BMW used to easily dominate. They aren't the only game in town and this is from a former M3 driver and a current 5 driver. The V Caddy has a $5800 crate motor and puts out 400HP and close to as much torque. The car is also fully optioned at 50K and will beat the current M3. I'm sure the new M3 will pass it......but the competition is pretty fierce which is a good thing all around since BMW has to keep on its toes.


----------



## AusBmw (Jun 3, 2006)

This has made for a very interesting read guys!

Over here it's the same,GM (holden) suck at build quality and there interior,but there cars have massive amounts of power,take the HSV GTS Gen 4,it packs mighty ,LS2 which make 307kw of power,has more pull in it that a teenage boy,comes it in 550nm toque. Put ya foot down and it will melt ya face in to the drivers seat,That's were the fun ends,it's all down hill for them as far as Im concerned. 



Still I don't really know what caddi is like,but having driven many GM product that are made here they HAVE a Fark of long way to come before i consider them in the same boat as bmw,I'd be waiting to see what the new m3 is like,the old generation is starting to show it's age a bit.

I dont think those barmy Bavarians will be resting on there morals. The pride of Germany is on the line,lol!


----------



## Vroom (Feb 21, 2006)

I love BMW, have had mainly 5 series the last decade or so including 5 out of my last 6 cars. My next car will likely be a new 650 or M5. However, I have a very good friend who owns a CTS-V and it's been a pretty good car. It's fast and handles closer to what I expect from a BMW than any other non-BMW I've driven in the last couple of years (Lexus, Infiniti, Audi, etc.). Reliability has been great for him on the CTS-V, 3 years / 40k miles no squeaks, etc. I've also seen pics of the new CTS interior coming out in a couple of months, and I have to say GM finally got things right. If the great car makers at BMW take the attitude that some of you do "Oh it's just a Caddy, GM is junk", they will be in for a rude surprise because the new CTS-V coming out next year is shaping up to be the real deal.


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

I guess I'm missing the 'joke'. 500+ hp is nothing to laugh at, no matter what company builds it.

Regardless how 'funny' some of the _sad_ GM haters on here may think it is to even mention a Caddy and the M in the same sentence, the V will without a doubt give it a run for its money. Much like the current gen V can easily run with the E39 M, the same will happen when the new one comes out.

Oh, and it'll be 'funny' how you'll be able to actually switch off stability control, for a little more action, in the new V. Try that in the M5 manual and see who the 'joke' is on.


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

MMMM_ERT said:


> Refined....:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
> 
> GM comes nowhere close to the refinement of other manufacturers.
> 
> Power, yes. refinement no.


Im wondering how much exposure you've had to the Vette/CTS-V V8. Im guessing not much, because this engine is PLENTY refined. Whisper-quiet at idle, but smooth as republican's lies at redline. Add in the power output and the fact that they return 20+ mpg, and youve got yourself a winner.

Again, this GM hating is just sad. :tsk:


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

Agreed. but this is apples to oranges....that is a completely NON-stock race car.

Race cars certainly are not refined. 



Dawg90 said:


> CTS-V deserves some respect.
> 
> 2005 SPEED GT CHAMPIONSHIP STANDINGS
> Driver/Car/Points (victories in parentheses)
> ...


----------



## mwagner1 (Aug 13, 2004)

TD said:


> Have you sat inside a BMW lately?
> 
> :loco:


Yes I have....it ROCKED...I also sat in some trashy Detroit Caddy garbage...comfortable for the short run then uncomfortable after 45 miles, cheap, plastic, cheap, yucky, cheap...

The Caddy I drove/rode in performed okay on a straight road but when we hit the curves it was DAMN SCARY..SOFT SOFT SOFT..my friend's Lexus LS 460 rides, handles, looks a million times better than that POS I drove/ride in

Get thee to a Caddy if you hate BMW so much!!! 

Cheers,


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

pilotman said:


> Keep bashing GM, when America loses its entire manufacturing base you won't have a job and won't be able to afford a BMW. (Yes, it negatively affects ALL OF US directly or indirectly).


Yeah...because GM makes the entire car here in the US right? No parts (and jobs) outside the US go into making of GM cars?

I love the "buy American" argument...


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

MMMM_ERT said:


> I love when some yokel on a message board calls someone they don't even know a liar.
> 
> Credibility = zero.


Youre right, I dont, and would never want to, know you. I never called you a liar, I was saying as far up your @ss as your head is about the car, it could have had no engine in it and you would probably have said it was rougher. :tsk:


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

mwagner1 said:


> Yes I have....it ROCKED...I also sat in some trashy Detroit Caddy garbage...comfortable for the short run then uncomfortable after 45 miles, cheap, plastic, cheap, yucky, cheap...


Rocked, huh. Must be that 'rocky' driver's seat known to the 5'er, cause the dash/interiors are awfully plain these days. Not bad, but plain. The next gen CTS and STS interiors are MUCH more aesthetic than what's coming out of germany (except Audi) these days.



> The Caddy I drove/rode in performed okay on a straight road but when we hit the curves it was DAMN SCARY..SOFT SOFT SOFT..my friend's Lexus LS 460 rides, handles, looks a million times better than that POS I drove/ride in


Must have been a 1970 Caddy vs. a heavily modded 460, cause the big toyota is the one with suspension that makes it feel like a leaning ship when it's on a curving road. :tsk:


----------



## #5880 (Feb 11, 2006)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> The current CTS-V has been kicking the **** out of the E46 M3 in SCCA T2. The CTS-V is the real ****ing deal.


I don't doubt it.

But I'm guessing they've ripped out the dash! :rofl:


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

Has anyone tried the new G35. I tried the previous version and found it competent....but a little unnerving at the limit. The newer version is supposed to be quite an upgrade and I'm curious what others have found.

The tit-for-tat crap belongs on the HS school forums. :tsk:


----------



## #5880 (Feb 11, 2006)

LoveTAH said:


> I guess I'm missing the 'joke'. 500+ hp is nothing to laugh at, no matter what company builds it.
> 
> Regardless how 'funny' some of the _sad_ GM haters on here may think it is to even mention a Caddy and the M in the same sentence, the V will without a doubt give it a run for its money. Much like the current gen V can easily run with the E39 M, the same will happen when the new one comes out.
> 
> Oh, and it'll be 'funny' how you'll be able to actually switch off stability control, for a little more action, in the new V. Try that in the M5 manual and see who the 'joke' is on.


I'm not a "GM Hater",

I do vote with my dollars though


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

Mike_Check said:


> Philo...I just can't get past the fact that you are bashing the hell out Caddy's, and yet, your own sig tells the story of how good old fashioned BMW reliability has been in the last 10 years. :rofl:
> 
> And I quote.... *"2006 325i with terrible engine ticking sound. See earlier threads for reference. Anyone else have this problem? "*
> Two year old car ticking? Just pointing out facts here.
> ...


Ummmmmmmm, where did I say BMW has great reliability? I have never said that and my previous posts on this board confirm that. In fact, I bash BMW about the metallic ticking noise my engine has. I bought a BMW because I had my first one when i worked in Thailand and it was the funnest car I ever had. Thats why I went back when I moved back to the US.

If you were to read my previous post on this board, I used to work for Toyota, and a Japanese Tier 1 auto supplier. The TPS system is the best in the world, even GM exec and Ford exec admit that. Compared to all other car companies, Toyota and Lexus are the best at managing quality. If I bought a car for reliability, it would be a Lexus.

At the Tier 1, I handled our GM accounts. We had the CTS and DTS business. Check where that HVAC is coming from. It aint Delphi, but Denso. Delphi had to still make the radiator because of Union contracts, but we assembled the radiator and condenser into the CRFM. The radiator was heavy, and was not using the latest technology. Where's that control panel coming from? Yep, Denso, but its made in Mexico. GM wasted my time for months telling me we had to increase our service part capacity because our system was inadequate. Of course it wasnt up to par to what GM was used to. But then, we hardly ever had any service parts. Our service part production process was an afterthought since our PPMs were always so low. Im not even going to start getting into the crazy cost cutting ideas they had. I had to get our upper mgmt involved since their ideas were putting the consumer at a serious safety risk. At least GM is trying to improve their quality by switching suppliers, but with great quality comes higher prices, too bad GM doesnt believe this.

So why am I bashing Caddies? Because I know way too much that is not out in the general public. I could continue with the GM bashing but there is just too much to bash about.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

dbruce said:


> Has anyone tried the new G35. I tried the previous version and found it competent....but a little unnerving at the limit. The newer version is supposed to be quite an upgrade and I'm curious what others have found.
> 
> The tit-for-tat crap belongs on the HS school forums. :tsk:


The G35 is a very impressive car...:thumbup:

We did a back to back comparo (courtesy of BMW) with a 330, G35 and Audi A4 a couple years ago and the G35 really held it's own. It had the edge on power over the Bimmer...but the Bimmer outhandled it in spades. The A4 was way nose heavy.

BTW - I agree on the HS BS...people lose their credibility (and the arguement) with personal attacks. They get put on ignore...


----------



## tscales (Oct 22, 2006)

GREAT reading:

http://www.vorshlag.com/ls1bmw0.php


----------



## akhbhaat (Apr 29, 2003)

Brian McKinney said:


> yeah they dont mention that the car starts to rattle and squeek after 10K miles and has steering as numb as a Hummer


You're talking about the M5, right?

I'm not kidding. Road feel and weighting in the E60 version are atrocious.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

MMMM_ERT said:


> Agreed. but this is apples to oranges....that is a completely NON-stock race car.
> 
> Race cars certainly are not refined.


And racing heritage used to matter to BMW enthusiasts. :dunno:


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

No one has mentioned that the next gen CTS will have a completely redesigned interior that at least from the pics is very impressive. But as others have mentioned since it does not have a roundel it will not be worthy to many here.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

Dawg90 said:


> And racing heritage used to matter to BMW enthusiasts. :dunno:


STill does in my eyes. But the initial discussion topic was on production vehicles...


----------



## SoCalJD (Oct 24, 2006)

mtbscott said:


> When I first started lurking on Bimmerfest a few years back, it was pretty level-headed around here. BMW enthusiasts yes, performance car lovers yes, fanbois no. Looks like the demographic is changing.


>>>

:thumbup: I'm kinda new here...been looking for a decent BMW site to hang at. Sounds like, from the tone here, this ain't it. The CTS-V is a decent car, and is plenty fast...but so is a WRX. Does that make them "better" than a BMW? GM interiours are pure crap...not sure how anyone can deny that. Would anyone here, if offered either car for free, take the Caddy over the M5? (Having said that, I'm no fan of the E-60, and I haven't driven the *new* CTS-V. But I'll take my E-39 over the last CTS-V *anyday*).


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

SoCalJD said:


> >>>
> 
> :thumbup: I'm kinda new here...been looking for a decent BMW site to hang at. Sounds like, from the tone here, this ain't it. The CTS-V is a decent car, and is plenty fast...but so is a WRX. Does that make them "better" than a BMW? GM interiours are pure crap...not sure how anyone can deny that. Would anyone here, if offered either car for free, take the Caddy over the M5? (Having said that, I'm no fan of the E-60, and I haven't driven the *new* CTS-V. But I'll take my E-39 over the last CTS-V *anyday*).


Bye.

Ironically, I believe the post you quote was targeted at the posters who refuse to acknowledge that a GM car could be a worthy competitor to a BMW.

So if we were all fanbois, you'd want to stay? But because we are objective, you find the "tone" here problematic?

See ya.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

SoCalJD said:


> >>>
> Would anyone here, if offered either car for free, take the Caddy over the M5? (Having said that, I'm no fan of the E-60, and I haven't driven the *new* CTS-V. But I'll take my E-39 over the last CTS-V *anyday*).


The M5 costs $35,000 more, so who wouldn't take the M5?


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

Dawg90 said:


> The M5 costs $35,000 more, so who wouldn't take the M5?


And sell it.


----------



## SteveinBelAir (Dec 28, 2005)

Yes the Vette has leafsprings. But it sounds like most of you don't know how they are used.

The use of leaf springs in the Corvette is not to be confused with leaf spring suspensions used in trucks and older cars; they are two completely different things. The Corvettes transverse leaf springs serve the same purpose as coil springs in other vehicles, but they are lighter, allow for the vehicles mass to be closer to the ground, and allow for lighter anti-roll bars since they can assume some of that duty. Their main disadvantage is that they are more expensive than coil springs.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=transverse+leaf+spring


----------



## Mike_Check (Feb 7, 2007)

SteveinBelAir said:


> Yes the Vette has leafsprings. But it sounds like most of you don't know how they are used.
> 
> The use of leaf springs in the Corvette is not to be confused with leaf spring suspensions used in trucks and older cars; they are two completely different things. The Corvettes transverse leaf springs serve the same purpose as coil springs in other vehicles, but they are lighter, allow for the vehicles mass to be closer to the ground, and allow for lighter anti-roll bars since they can assume some of that duty. Their main disadvantage is that they are more expensive than coil springs.
> 
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=transverse+leaf+spring


Finally....I was too lazy to explain the transverse leaf setup. 

The C6-R uses the same setup. I think that car runs okay...the interior is not up to some of you guys' standard I know...but a sub 6 minute 'Ring run...:dunno:


----------



## Flee67 (Dec 21, 2001)

At the kind of prices that 5ers and M cars go for nowadays, I can definitely see the CTS and CTS-V being a reasonable alternative for many. Like someone else mentioned earlier, the soon to be released next generation CTS looks quite promising in terms of exterior and interior design.


----------



## Mike_Check (Feb 7, 2007)

philo98 said:


> Ummmmmmmm, where did I say BMW has great reliability? I have never said that and my previous posts on this board confirm that. In fact, I bash BMW about the metallic ticking noise my engine has. I bought a BMW because I had my first one when i worked in Thailand and it was the funnest car I ever had. Thats why I went back when I moved back to the US.
> 
> If you were to read my previous post on this board, I used to work for Toyota, and a Japanese Tier 1 auto supplier. The TPS system is the best in the world, even GM exec and Ford exec admit that. Compared to all other car companies, Toyota and Lexus are the best at managing quality. If I bought a car for reliability, it would be a Lexus.
> 
> ...


I was just poking fun :stickpoke: 

GM interiors in general are horrid. I concur. But so are the 5er's IMO.

Anybody seen the interior of the new Chevy Silverado? :wow: They took the advice from the Saturn Executives, and went upscale on the 07-08 lineup.


----------



## SoCalJD (Oct 24, 2006)

TD said:


> Bye.
> 
> Ironically, I believe the post you quote was targeted at the posters who refuse to acknowledge that a GM car could be a worthy competitor to a BMW.
> 
> ...


>>>

No, the tone I find problematic is the exact one you've displayed. Like a buncha kids arguing over penis size.


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

SoCalJD said:


> >>>
> 
> No, the tone I find problematic is the exact one you've displayed. Like a buncha kids arguing over penis size.


WTF are you talking about? The juvenile posts are the ones that say "GM sucks, BMWs rule. Anyone who doesn't know that is an idiot."


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

Mike_Check said:


> I was just poking fun :stickpoke:
> 
> GM interiors in general are horrid. I concur. But so are the 5er's IMO.
> 
> Anybody seen the interior of the new Chevy Silverado? :wow: They took the advice from the Saturn Executives, and went upscale on the 07-08 lineup.


No problem! I was just re-living some of the nonsense I had to deal with with GM and the amount of precious time I lost!!


----------



## Mike_Check (Feb 7, 2007)

philo98 said:


> No problem! I was just re-living some of the nonsense I had to deal with with GM and the amount of precious time I lost!!


GM=cheapasses

BMW=hired cheapasses

Ford=junk


----------



## SoCalJD (Oct 24, 2006)

TD said:


> WTF are you talking about? The juvenile posts are the ones that say "GM sucks, BMWs rule. Anyone who doesn't know that is an idiot."


>>>

I agree. So are yours though, with your "wtf, bye, c-ya/etc" crap. But I'm not just talking about you. This is my 2nd foray into this site, and both times I encountered a bunch of arrogant ...kids. I'll assume they don't represent the whole board, but there certainly is a lot of them here.


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

Mike_Check said:


> GM=cheapasses
> 
> BMW=hired cheapasses
> 
> Ford=junk


Yep, exactly. We did have some BMW business too and the problem with them was the ackward designs and the number of parts they wanted to use. Our engineers always told them they could redesigned the product, use less parts, and increase performance, but BMW was pretty set in their ways. The problem, though, is the more parts used to do something, the higher the probability of quality problems developing.


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

-


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

philo98 said:


> Yep, exactly. We did have some BMW business too and the problem with them was the ackward designs and the number of parts they wanted to use. Our engineers always told them they could redesigned the product, use less parts, and increase performance, but BMW was pretty set in their ways. The problem, though, is the more parts used to do something, the higher the probability of quality problems developing.


I'm not an engineer, and I can see that BMW likes to make things needlessly complex for simple stuff. My friend, who has done a ton of work on cars for me, told me he would do all the relatively simple stuff on the BMW. His quote for the BMW was "over engineered" and he left it at that.

My, new to me, 5 has more bells and whistles then I need. I'm finding simplicity in design more and more attractive after owning and driving so many cars.


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

Mike_Check said:


> I was just poking fun :stickpoke:
> 
> GM interiors in general are horrid. I concur. But so are the 5er's IMO.
> 
> Anybody seen the interior of the new Chevy Silverado? :wow: They took the advice from the Saturn Executives, and went upscale on the 07-08 lineup.


GM's interior design improves by leaps and bounds with each iteration. I sure as **** can't say that about BMW these days. Have you been inside the new Escalade? Whatever you may think about the vehicle, that interior is NICE.


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

dbruce said:


> I'm not an engineer, and I can see that BMW likes to make things needlessly complex for simple stuff. My friend, who has done a ton of work on cars for me, told me he would do all the relatively simple stuff on the BMW. His quote for the BMW was "over engineered" and he left it at that.
> 
> My, new to me, 5 has more bells and whistles then I need. I'm finding simplicity in design more and more attractive after owning and driving so many cars.


Yes. It is over-engineered. The only HVAC I was involved with for BMW was the Z4. It has a really crazy design and way too many servomotors. We could have cut out about 4 servos, make the unit cheaper, and increased heating and cooling comfort, but they didnt like this idea. However, the Engineers and Purchasing people I met were a hell of a lot of fun at the bar. And they couldnt stand that we would set meetings past 430.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

I read the new CTS - the regular one, will have optional LSD. BMW take notice.


----------



## SoCalJD (Oct 24, 2006)

dbruce said:


> I'm not an engineer, and I can see that BMW likes to make things needlessly complex for simple stuff. My friend, who has done a ton of work on cars for me, told me he would do all the relatively simple stuff on the BMW. His quote for the BMW was "over engineered" and he left it at that.
> 
> My, new to me, 5 has more bells and whistles then I need. I'm finding simplicity in design more and more attractive after owning and driving so many cars.


>>>

I drove the "new" 7-Series when it first came out. My initial (and current) impression is that someone (Bangle? ) told the engineers: "Take everything you've ever known about driving a vehicle and make it more...complicated". Took me 1/2hr to get the seats adjusted, and I had to have the salesman (twice!) turn the car off for me. All that stuff made it into the E-60. So I passed on the E-60 when my 03' 540i-6 lease was up and bought an E-39 M5. Fairly simple, although I've never fully understood the HVAC...and I've owned 3 E-39s. I did get my wife a new 325i, and while it *drives* great, I'll *never* be able to figure out 1/10th of what the I-Drive/voice activation/HVAC/etc stuff can/will do. (And WHY is a push-button starter something that anyone needs?:dunno: ) The lit door handles (when you unlock the car at night) and the adaptive headlights are serously cool however.:thumbup:


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

SoCalJD said:


> >>>
> 
> I drove the "new" 7-Series when it first came out. My initial (and current) impression is that someone (Bangle? ) told the engineers: "Take everything you've ever known about driving a vehicle and make it more...complicated". Took me 1/2hr to get the seats adjusted, and I had to have the salesman (twice!) turn the car off for me. All that stuff made it into the E-60. So I passed on the E-60 when my 03' 540i-6 lease was up and bought an E-39 M5. Fairly simple, although I've never fully understood the HVAC...and I've owned 3 E-39s. I did get my wife a new 325i, and while it *drives* great, I'll *never* be able to figure out 1/10th of what the I-Drive/voice activation/HVAC/etc stuff can/will do. (And WHY is a push-button starter something that anyone needs?:dunno: ) The lit door handles (when you unlock the car at night) and the adaptive headlights are serously cool however.:thumbup:


Within BMW, there is a serious disconnect between Engineering and Purchasing. My feeling was that the Purchasing people were interested in making changes that would lower the cost of the supplied parts that they were buying and possibly making the systems in the car more user-friendly. This would increase profit margins without any sacrifice to performance and make consumers happy. However, the Engineers were very proud of their designs and very stubborn to have someone else come in and critique them and offer improvement. It just shows who wears the pants at BMW and how Upper Mgmt there needs to do a better job of pulling the two depts together.

GM on the other hand, the Engineers had very little power and Purchasing drove everything. Thats why there are so many "cheap" parts in alot of GM vehicles since cost was the most important driver of any decision. The first question GM Purchasing would ask at every meeting was "Whats it going to cost?" If your an Engineer its pretty clear which company you would want to work for.


----------



## Frank Rizzo (Aug 2, 2003)

LoveTAH said:


> :banghead: I swear as f'n thick-headed as some of you are, you have NO need for a car with an airbag.
> 
> * Look, fool*, I dont care if it has pushrods, or two little rats on steriods inside doing all the work, the end result and bottom line is all that matters: this engine could push 3800 lbs up to speed just as fast as and just as smoothly as anything in its class (S4, C55). And currently the asians (for all their technology) don't have anything that can touch its output, either.
> 
> As for leaf springs, well, when it was put up against the almighty M5 on the track, it got around it quicker, so I suppose they aren't that bad either.


Neat-o. The TOU here calls for no personal attacks, rethink your prerogative next time before posting.

I have no problem with you living in a land that time forgot, but I'm not paying north of $50k for a CTS-V with pushrods, a poor interior and questionable build quality.

Clicky:>>> http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178298&highlight=CTS-V


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

> and questionable build quality.


If you're going to use that argument, you really need to move over to the Honda or Toyota boards.....cause this isn't the place to use it.


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

Frank Rizzo said:


> Neat-o. The TOU here calls for no personal attacks, rethink your prerogative next time before posting.
> 
> I have no problem with you living in a land that time forgot, but I'm not paying north of $50k for a CTS-V with pushrods, a poor interior and questionable build quality.
> 
> Clicky:>>> http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178298&highlight=CTS-V


What is your problem with pushrods?


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

dbruce said:


> If you're going to use that argument, you really need to move over to the Honda or Toyota boards.....cause this isn't the place to use it.


Not that Toyota has high build quality either.


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

TD said:


> Not that Toyota has high build quality either.


I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I consider Lexus to be second-to-none in both reliability and build quality.


----------



## TD (Dec 19, 2001)

dbruce said:


> I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I consider Lexus to be second-to-none in both reliability and build quality.


Well, IMO, the initial quality surveys and number and seriousness of recalls is a more accurate indicator of quality than one person's assessment of the quality of their high-end division.

Go sit in (and/or drive) a Camry back to back with a Buick and get back to us. Make sure to compare fitment gaps and quality of materials.


----------



## Vroom (Feb 21, 2006)

Frank Rizzo said:


> I have no problem with you living in a land that time forgot, but I'm not paying north of $50k for a CTS-V with pushrods, a poor interior and questionable build quality.


Living in a land that time forgot is where anyone is that thinks that the next gen CTS-V will not be a great car. This isn't 1978 and the age of crappy boat Caddys, take down your CHiPs and Saturday Night Fever posters and join us in 2007 :rofl:


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

I can only speak from my own experience ... my 06 Vette and my father's 06 Vette have both been flawless and his previous 03 Vette only went to the dealer for an oil change.

We are not hardcore GM fans, we are Auto enthusiasts who love driving cars ... My father also has an Audi S4 Cab and a 650ci, I have an Audi A6 (8 cyl) with a 335i on the way ... ask each of us which car we drive the most and the answer is the Vette ...

Something about the way that car feels and drives makes it incredibly fun ... 

Gm has come a long way IMO :thumbup:


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

TD said:


> Well, IMO, the initial quality surveys and number and seriousness of recalls is a more accurate indicator of quality than one person's assessment of the quality of their high-end division.
> 
> Go sit in (and/or drive) a Camry back to back with a Buick and get back to us. Make sure to compare fitment gaps and quality of materials.


If you want to compare equivalent cars, then it's BMW to Lexus.....not Toyota. In the case of the Camry, which I used to own one, they are still built like tanks and are excellent utilitarian vehicles. The new V6 version will do the 1/4 in mid 14's and build quality is top in their class. I've found that overall build quality has gone down across most manufacturers, with Ford, GM Hyundai and Chrysler being notable exceptions due to their previous poor overall quality.

I'm driving an E39 and haven't found the overall quality outstanding. It's a nice car and the interior is better then adequate. I've see a few weird electrical gremlins which I'm told I should get used to (Once in a blue moon the steering wheel decides not to move to previous setting and the climate control went blank for no reason once).

Cars are improving and I, personally, don't think BMW stands out as much as it needs to with the premium they charge. I will not even look at a BMW new and for many, the biggest selling point on the BMW is the full warranty and maintenance for the first X thousand miles. Another poster has mentioned how insanely complex the new 5 and 7 series are. My GF had to move her managers new M5 and had trouble figuring out how to do anything with it....it took a team to decipher the controls. My other friend owns an E39 5 series and is getting insane repair bills on it since around 90k.

I don't care what brand I buy as long as it fits my needs. In the case of the 5 I now own, it was cheap and fit my needs. It could have been a Caddy or a Lexus. I would have no problem owning a CTS. Back in the late 90's, no one had anything that could really challenge the 3 series and definitely not the M3 or M5.....that is changing. When looking for cars, my previous E36 M3 was on the top of my wish list....not the new gizmo laden M5 or other BMW's.


----------



## Mike_Check (Feb 7, 2007)

dbruce said:


> If you want to compare equivalent cars, then it's BMW to Lexus.....not Toyota. In the case of the Camry, which I used to own one, they are still built like tanks and are excellent utilitarian vehicles. The new V6 version will do the 1/4 in mid 14's and build quality is top in their class. I've found that overall build quality has gone down across most manufacturers, with Ford, GM Hyundai and Chrysler being notable exceptions due to their previous poor overall quality.
> 
> I'm driving an E39 and haven't found the overall quality outstanding. It's a nice car and the interior is better then adequate. I've see a few weird electrical gremlins which I'm told I should get used to (Once in a blue moon the steering wheel decides not to move to previous setting and the climate control went blank for no reason once).
> 
> ...


Yeah but...nothing drives like a Bimmer! 

And nothing squeaks like a pre-2007 GM! 

Nothing gets towed so gracefully as a Ford 

:rofl:


----------



## philo98 (Nov 25, 2006)

TD said:


> Well, IMO, the initial quality surveys and number and seriousness of recalls is a more accurate indicator of quality than one person's assessment of the quality of their high-end division.
> 
> This is not necessarily a good indicator of overall quality since the data can be skewed. A common practice of all auto manufacturers is the "hidden" recall. The auto company knows there is a problem but does not officially announce a recall on the part. If a consumer comes in and complains the dealerships have been instructed to replace the part, no questions asked. The average consumer leaves happy since there was no resistance to have the part replaced and "may" tend to give a better overall score based on this experience. I can think of a number of instances where Toyota/Lexus and GM have done this and if I google the problem, nothing ever comes up. Some of these were pretty serious design errors. However, if the problem has any kind of safety implications, a recall is issued immediately. If you look at most Toyota recalls, most had some potential safey issue, although there have been a few others.
> 
> ...


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

dbruce said:


> If you're going to use that argument, you really need to move over to the Honda or Toyota boards.....cause this isn't the place to use it.


Please...BMW may be far from perfect...but the build quality is light years ahead of anything GM builds.


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

MMMM_ERT said:


> Please...BMW may be far from perfect...but the build quality is light years ahead of anything GM builds.


That's the problem, they aren't light years ahead of the GM new stuff. The current CTS may be behind....but the new version won't be.


----------



## sc 540i (Apr 25, 2006)

LS series especially the LS7 is a better motor than any motor bmw has produced. I don't particularly like Gm, but you have to give credit where credit is due.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

dbruce said:


> The current CTS may be behind....but the new version won't be.


Sorry, I have too much history with GM to believe that will ever happen.


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

MMMM_ERT said:


> Sorry, I have too much history with GM to believe that will ever happen.


Step into the new Tahoe....or Escalade for luxury.


----------



## AK (Jan 19, 2002)

LoveTAH said:


> Im wondering how much exposure you've had to the Vette/CTS-V V8. Im guessing not much, because this engine is PLENTY refined. Whisper-quiet at idle, but smooth as republican's lies at redline. Add in the power output and the fact that they return 20+ mpg, and youve got yourself a winner.
> 
> Again, this GM hating is just sad. :tsk:


This is absolutely not true. I had an '05 CTS-V before getting my 335i so I know what they're like.

Yes, GM's LS2/LS6 engines make a lot of horsepower, but to do that with pushrods and no variable valve timing, you have to put a big camshaft in it. These motors have a lopey idle, just like any other hot rod. I've never owned a car before that consistently got people to comment on how rough the idle was whenever we sat at a red light. Granted, when you stand on the throttle, the noise it makes is (Jeremy Clarkson impersonation) astonishing and will make the hair on your back stand up.

Also, the gas mileage sucked. On a 400 mile drive it returned 22mpg. Around town you'll be lucky to get better than 15 mpg. Plus you have to deal with the CAFE-induced 1-4 skip shift.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

dbruce said:


> Step into the new Tahoe....or Escalade for luxury.


I'm not speaking of build quality in the sense of tangible feel....I'm talking about how well the car is put together and how long it will stay well put together.

GM is a joke in this regard.

They can dress up a turd...but the turd will still stink.

Lets not even go into how bad their service dealer network is...


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

> These motors have a lopey idle


I've driven both the LS1 (GTO) and LS2 (Vette) and never experienced this, can't explain that. Edit: The only explanation would be it is intentional and felt like it should be there. Since i've driven plenty of silky smooth engines.....I should have picked up that as a design defect in seconds.



> CAFE-induced 1-4 skip shift.


A 3 year old with a screwdriver can disable this.....much like our wonderful shift valve in the BMW.


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

> I'm talking about how well the car is put together and how long it will stay well put together.


The we are definitely discussion something that belongs on another board. BMW is not know for reliability and cost of ownership isn't something I'd like to compare to anything other then a Mercedes owner.


----------



## AK (Jan 19, 2002)

dbruce said:


> I've driven both the LS1 (GTO) and LS2 (Vette) and never experienced this, can't explain that.
> 
> A 3 year old with a screwdriver can disable this.....much like our wonderful shift valve in the BMW.


Re: lopey idle... You won't notice it unless you spend some time in the car. If you drive it for 10 or 15 minutes you won't care and all you'll say is "HOLY SH*T this thing is fast!"

The LS6 in particular may have had a more lopey idle than the others. It's the same size as the LS1 (5.7L) but makes 50 more hp. It's all in the cam.

Re: the skip shift.. yes, I know I could have eliminated it easily. But I was in the midst of a lemon law buyback and I didn't want to give GM or my dealer ANY additional reason to reject my claim. I wanted that car as stock as possible.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

dbruce said:


> BMW is not know for reliability...snip.


So we have gone full circle I guess...as I stated in one of my previous posts...



MMMM_ERT said:


> Please...BMW may be far from perfect....


I stand by my many years of experience with them.... GM is a joke.


----------



## AK (Jan 19, 2002)

I can see my CTS-V Lemon Law post was already linked to in this thread... I'll try to keep it short:

- It's disappointing to me the number of "fanbois" on this site now who are blind to the fact that GM can in fact make something better than junk...when it wants to.

- The CTS-V is a car that was 90***37; finished. Management signed off on using inadequate driveline components in order to save cost and the result has been a LOT of problems related to the rear differential, halfshafts breaking, vibration, driveline clunks, etc. The CTS-V's shifter was as horribly bad as the one in a Honda S2000 is good.

- The CTS-V's chassis and suspension were SPOT ON. The car's handling was simply outstanding as were the Brembo brakes.

- The interior quality and materials were nowhere near the same level of the stuff you'll find in an E60 or E90. I think we can all agree on this.

- The CTS-V has got to have just about the worse resale value of any car I can think of. Two years old and the asking prices are something like $20K below the original window sticker.

- GM's customer service is about as bad as any giant bureaucracy. This does not mean that BMWNA's is any better.

- My new 335i doesn't have the oil cooler, as it should. IMHO, BMW is guilty of the same cost-cutting shortcuts, against engineering's advice, that GM is. We aren't immune to this stuff.

- Aside from the mechanical issues, the CTS-V was basically flawless. They don't suffer from electrical gremlins like a typical BMW does. In fact, if it weren't for the diff issues I'd probably say that over 10 years, a CTS-V will have fewer overall problems than say, a 550i.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

Most of your post (excepts below) backs up what I've been saying...I hope you are not referring to me as a "fanbois".... I have no loyalty to any manufacturer anymore and I have the experiences to back up my stance.



AK said:


> - The CTS-V is a car that was 90% finished. Management signed off on using inadequate driveline components in order to save cost and the result has been a LOT of problems related to the rear differential, halfshafts breaking, vibration, driveline clunks, etc. The CTS-V's shifter was as horribly bad as the one in a Honda S2000 is good.
> 
> - The interior quality and materials were nowhere near the same level of the stuff you'll find in an E60 or E90. I think we can all agree on this.
> 
> ...


As for dealer service/customer service...I had 18 years of horrible experiences with many GM dealers and customer service from San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego. I've always had very positive service experiences with BMW...and Honda when I owned one.


----------



## akhbhaat (Apr 29, 2003)

dbruce said:


> I don't care what brand I buy as long as it fits my needs. In the case of the 5 I now own, it was cheap and fit my needs. It could have been a Caddy or a Lexus. I would have no problem owning a CTS.


+1



> Back in the late 90's, no one had anything that could really challenge the 3 series and definitely not the M3 or M5.....that is changing. When looking for cars, my previous E36 M3 was on the top of my wish list....not the new gizmo laden M5 or other BMW's.


+2

In 2000, the second best thing out there was the A4, and that was (and mostly still is) a lame front wheel with the engine block hanging out ahead of the axle.

I wouldn't spend my own money on the E60 M5. But I'd be lying if I said I didn't drool over the E39 version for years.


----------



## v33_n0d3 (Mar 21, 2007)

In the end, simplicity is the better choice. Sure, toys are fun, but everything breaks. Take a look at the E30. Simple, refined and most of all it works like a charm. Who cares if it doesn't have the gizmo's of the latter E60 and on? That only means less of a hassle when time catches up and bites you in the crotch. Can someone say..... *LEASE?*

As for GM, what's the big deal? So they spend minimal money on sh*tboxes. That doesn't mean they can't make something good. Take a look at the Corvette. When did it have a bad year? None that I know of. If they want to make something that will hand the M5's ass back to BMW on a silver platter, all they gotta do is say the word and sign the damn check. That's all it takes.


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

v33_n0d3 said:


> Take a look at the Corvette. When did it have a bad year? None that I know of. .


Flagship Zed 06 had the annoying habit of the roof panel flying off...at 65 70 MPH.

Thats quality baby... :thumbup:


----------



## v33_n0d3 (Mar 21, 2007)

lol that's something I never heard of. Well what I meant was it kept everyone's eyes popping, model after model and year after year.


----------



## akhbhaat (Apr 29, 2003)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> What is your problem with pushrods?


Because when you're at the local automotive circle jerk, with a bunch of other guys grabbing their crotches at the sight of each other's cars, it's cool to say things like "MacPherson, multilink, Valvetronic, double VANOS."

"Pushrod" just doesn't have the same effect - and it could be construed as gay, and you sure as hell don't want to be stigmatized like that in the presence of grunting men who jerk each other off to the sound of exhaust notes.

Wait, isn't Bimmerfest coming up?


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

> "Pushrod" just doesn't have the same effect - and it could be construed as gay, and you sure as hell don't want to be stigmatized like that in the presence of grunting men who jerk each other off to the sound of exhaust notes.


Kinda ironic, the last guy that was talking overhead cams wouldn't even give me the reach around. :rofl:


----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

v33_n0d3 said:


> lol that's something I never heard of. Well what I meant was it kept everyone's eyes popping, model after model and year after year.







_phantasms (3 months ago) 
No z06's are supposed to have a removalable roof. There was an issue with 06 Z06's. The glue that holds down the roof had a different rate of expansion from the panel itself when exposed to heat. There is a company out there that will mod a Z to have a removable roof. Of course in a different manner than myself._


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)




----------



## MMMM_ERT (Mar 13, 2004)

dbruce said:


>


Uhh...again...noone ever said BMW didn't have their own problems.

....but a roof flying off a 70K+ car at freeway speeds is pretty sad. :tsk:


----------



## dbruce (Feb 21, 2007)

MMMM_ERT said:


> Uhh...again...noone ever said BMW didn't have their own problems.
> 
> ....but a roof flying off a 70K+ car at freeway speeds is pretty sad. :tsk:


They are both sad. Unfortunately for the Australian buyers, no lemon law.....so they were at the mercy of BMW for a seriously flawed car. In the 5 series, standard cooling and vanos issues plague the vehicle.....but no update or change is made and BMW doesn't admit there is a problem. If you own a 540, you will need to replace the cooling system every 50k and in the I6, double Vanos issues will arrive by 70k or so (PO replaced the Vanos in my car).

GM isn't a saint by any means, but I wouldn't put BMW on any pedestals.


----------



## akhbhaat (Apr 29, 2003)

dbruce said:


>


I had to hit myself in the head to confirm that those were, in fact, E65s, and not reskinned clones of my old E32.

Gotta love the 7er. Some things never change.


----------



## 115sonic (Apr 20, 2007)

B_RASHED said:


> isnt the cts v a v6 just supercharged. i love the cadis though. my dad has the 2006 xlr. its the sickest thing weve ever had in all the family. its got power and its a v8 but the xlr-v is a v6 (supercharged) and i dont think that can even touch an m5. but im really wanting to see the new and improved cts-v


The only engine in the CTS V is the corvette V8.
Check Cadillac website.


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

MMMM_ERT said:


> Uhh...again...noone ever said BMW didn't have their own problems.
> 
> ....but a roof flying off a 70K+ car at freeway speeds is pretty sad. :tsk:


Compared with the October and November 2002 production M3s, where 10-20***37; of the engines failed?


----------



## LoveTAH (Dec 25, 2005)

AK said:


> This is absolutely not true, *in my case*. I had an '05 CTS-V before getting my 335i so I know what *mine* was like.


There. My corrections are in bold, since you're clearly speaking for yourself and all.



> These motors have a lopey idle, just like any other hot rod. I've never owned a car before that consistently got people to comment on how rough the idle was whenever we sat at a red light.


Again, your experience. Over here, the two V's Ive had extensive seat time in idled smoothly, with no lump and only the unmistakable V8 rumble.



> Also, *my* gas mileage sucked. On a 400 mile drive it returned 22mpg. Around town *people who drive with some sense can* get better than 15 mpg.


Fixed once again, since everyone with at least two brain cells knows that mileage varies. :tsk:


----------



## AK (Jan 19, 2002)

LoveTAH said:


> Again, your experience. Over here, the two V's Ive had extensive seat time in idled smoothly, with no lump and only the unmistakable V8 rumble.


Apparently it's the experience of many other people as well since GM/Cadillac has to address it in their "customer concerns" list for the CTS-V:



> The 400?horsepower LS6 V8 engine derives its awesome power through a combination of displacement, stroke and tuning. A key element of this combination is giving the engine better "breathing" ability through unique camshaft to valve lift and duration. The efficient process of getting the air/fuel mixture in and exhaust gases out of the combustion chamber is achieved through this higher valve lift and longer valve open times. The result of camshaft design results in what is commonly referred to as an unstable idle or the random roughness of the engine. This is normal and does not indicate a concern.


http://www.cadillacfaq.com/faq/answers/caddyresp.html

My friend's '04 Z06 with the exact same engine also idled the same way. They're hot rods with a big cam and they have a lopey idle. End of story.



> Fixed once again, since everyone with at least two brain cells knows that mileage varies. :tsk:


So you're saying I'm an idiot because I couldn't get more than 15mpg in the city with my CTS-V? That's the EPA city mpg estimate for the car, btw. I suppose if I shifted it at 1500rpm and got lucky and never hit any red lights I could have beat that number.


----------



## lickem66 (Apr 16, 2007)

BmW745On19's said:


> Go drive the damn car (CTS-V) and put it through the twisties as you would a BMW M, you'll understand what my opinion is real quick. The car was developed on the Nordschliefe for christ's sake!


It may have been driven on the Nordschliefe but it was designed by GM.. Big difference..


----------



## swajames (Jan 16, 2005)

lickem66 said:


> It may have been driven on the Nordschliefe but it was designed by GM.. Big difference..




Very few stock BMW times come close to the time recorded by the stock C6 Z06. The best times I've seen for the E60 M5 and E63 M6 were significantly slower than the 7:43 time the Z06 turned in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times


----------



## v33_n0d3 (Mar 21, 2007)

I think you're missing out on the fact that any BMW that comes anywhere near the price range of a Z06 was designed with luxury and refinement in mind, sans the collectibles like the CSL and GTR M3's. Does the S85 have a lopey idle, a ridiculously loud rumble or bone-crunching stiffness? Didn't think so. But I think it's pretty darn good for it to be as close to a 100***37; pure-bred sports machine (not to mention one that leeched a lot of the theories and technologies off other companies) as it is. Nevermind the 2.0L more displacement.


----------



## sc 540i (Apr 25, 2006)

lickem66 said:


> It may have been driven on the Nordschliefe but it was designed by GM.. Big difference..


This is the reason people think BMW drivers are all a.s.sholes.:tsk: Stop being so ignorant. Seeing as they take the time to hand build every motor they must be doing something right. What do you think about the great design on the radiators on the 540's :dunno:


----------



## plien69 (Apr 11, 2005)

GM has some very fine engineers. The latest Ferrari (599 GB) rides on a GM-designed and built magnetic shock ride control system.


----------

