Not a bad price, actually. If they can keep a decent quality, it should sell pretty well.

Luxury at a good price; it should sell very well.

You can buy a much better car for that price, the Infinity G35 starts at $31,450. The Lexus IS350 is $35,705, The BMW 3 series starts at $33,175.

Travis, I wouldn't be so sure about the BMW.

The BMW 3 series doesn't have a 300HP model for less than $38,900. You're thinking of their weak 230HP model which has an even weaker 200 ft/lb of torque. It's not even a competitor.

The G35 isn't bad at all, its 3.5L engine puts out 306HP but only 268 ft/lb of torque. It's pretty affordable. The IS350 also produces 306HP, and a somwhat better 277ft/lb of torque. It is all-around better than the G35, but it also starts at $4K more.

The G35 and IS350 are both good buys. Depending on final engine specs and gearing, I have my doubts as to whether they can really beat the CTS in that price range (especially since you can tack on the Performance Collection package and still come in at around $35.5K).

Alexvrb

I know the BMW in this price range has a weak engine but even spending say 7~10K more for the 335i, the much lower rate of depreciation would yield a similar final cost of ownership to the CTS.

Also the $32,235 price is with a Manual and a 258 HP engine. I would bet you have to pony up more than just the cost of the performance package for the 300 hp engine which only makes 270 lb ft btw. And GM lists the Curb weight for the 2008 CTS as a portly 3861 for a RWD Manual and 4100+, for the AWD Auto model.

It's interior looks low-rent as usual, especially the ill placed window switches.

As Travis pointed out, there's much better (material, resale, brand name, etc) cars available for the same money.

Still, they'll sell some to die-hard domestic fans. I recall when they bought that huge spot in the Matrix Reloaded with the CTS and Escalade.

So you agree that the $33K BMW is weak on power, and you need to spend almost $7K more if you want a BMW 3-series with that kind of punch. With that said, I don't think anyone is going to say that the BMWs were meant to be real price competitive. They still sell.

You're right that the base model does not include the more powerful 300HP 3.6L. They killed the 2.8L, but include the existing 3.6L 258HP with about 252 ft/lb in the base model. We'll have to wait and see how much more they want for the upgraded 300/270 V6. I'm a little disappointed in that, but I suppose they didn't want to hurt sales of their faster models. They would have been better off with the 258HP 3.6L as the base engine, and for their faster engine either a SC 3900 or 5.3L LS4. Wishful thinking I know. I did discover that a short-throw shifter is included with the 6MT, and the AT option is a 6-speed as well.

Onto the weight, yes, it appears the 2008 CTS is indeed a bigger, heavier car. However, that kind of screws up the comparison to the 3-series or the G35 and IS350. It actually squares up more with the 5-series, and perhaps M35, or GS350. I like the M35 and GS350 quite a bit, but they're a little more expensive. Annoyingly, the 3.5L in the M35 isn't as aggressive as the 3.5 in the G35.

I'm not really sure what the dimensions of the CTS are, but it doesn't really line up well with the BMW 5 series price wise; and surprisingly, weighs in heavier than the 535i (which is less than 100lbs heavier than the 3 series). This puts the CTS about 160 lbs heavier than the 5 series.

The premium luxury package and sport package place the CTS squarely in the range of a fairly well optioned 335i sedan range. Performance wise, the hat tips to BMW in this case...value wise, you will probably be able to haggle the price of the CTS down more than BMW. However, the long term value might go to BMW due to fuel efficiency, and resale!

You guys kill me , this car isn't even out yet and already there something better give the car a chance first. I own a 05 G35x and since when did the material in my car become good thats 1 of the biggest knocks on all nissan made cars . Name who has a better name then cadillac, If it wasn't for the g & M series cars infinity might be dead ( Q45 is it still alive) they are making a comeback just like cadillac albit alot faster. Also low rent interior did u see the acura RL inside now that does not belong in a 50,000 car , this inside looks good to me and in til you touch it how do you know how good it is. anyway my G35 is gone at the end of the year so ill be shopping and this is at the top of my list followed by 5series, acura TL replacement, audi a6(talk about resale value), or 4matic e class.

You guys kill me , this car isn't even out yet and already there something better give the car a chance first. I own a 05 G35x and since when did the material in my car become good thats 1 of the biggest knocks on all nissan made cars . Name who has a better name then cadillac, If it wasn't for the g & M series cars infinity might be dead ( Q45 is it still alive) they are making a comeback just like cadillac albit alot faster. Also low rent interior did u see the acura RL inside now that does not belong in a 50,000 car , this inside looks good to me and in til you touch it how do you know how good it is. anyway my G35 is gone at the end of the year so ill be shopping and this is at the top of my list followed by 5series, acura TL replacement, audi a6(talk about resale value), or 4matic e class.

"I'm not really sure what the dimensions of the CTS are, but it doesn't really line up well with the BMW 5 series price wise; and surprisingly, weighs in heavier than the 535i (which is less than 100lbs heavier than the 3 series). This puts the CTS about 160 lbs heavier than the 5 series."

Then it would be better to compare it to a 5-series, which makes the CTS a winner on price.

The CTS looks like size wise it is not a competitor for the 5 series, 42.4 inches of front leg room, and 36.2 in the rear seats, 38.9 inches of headroom, with 36.9 in the rear.
The 3 series is 41.5 inches of legroom up front and 34.6 in the back. Though the BMW has 38.5 and 37.5 inches of headroom respectively.

The G35 clocks in at 43.9/34.7 F/R for leg room and 40.5/37.7 for head room. And it's not going away, it's simply being upgraded into the G37 with a more powerful 330 hp engine, and improved interior quality.

As far as the BMW comments, the 335i starts at $37795 is it's engine is underrated at 300 hp and 300 ft lbs, the Dyno runs I have seen show it putting down around 275 hp and 300 ft lbs at the rear wheels. Simple math will tell you that the car is making more like 340 hp and 360 ft lbs, which also helps to explain why the 335i is posting similar performance numbers to the previous M3 I see 13.6 seconds @ 104 mph for the 1/4 mile with the new car.

The other thing about the BMW is that you can spend $37,795 on one now, Compared to $34,540 for the CTS, but when you turn around and sell it after 3~5 years you get a lot more for the BMW, so it ends up costing the same or less to own the BMW.

I've looked at the interior and exterior dimensions for the 535i sedan. The new CTS is very close. It's certainly bigger than a 3 series. Cars aren't something I trade in every few years, so I don't look closely at resell value for such a short period. Not to mention that doesn't count repair costs for the BMW if you drive it and rack up miles.

It's probably a little underrated, but there's no way that a bone stock 335i is THAT underrated. That's just bogus. I understand that YMMV, and that there are variations, but not like that. It's a huge selling point, and would only make them more money. It was probably an improperly tuned dynojet, or it was a cherry-pick. One dyno test does not equal 335is running around with 340/360. Also, what gear was it in for that pull?

Here's a good read on MD vs Dynojet. This is for a Camaro.
http://g35driver.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26743

I've been told that Dynojets are worse for turbos. So read this too.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=286440

I'd much rather have an IS350 either way.

Even if you don't like the dyno numbers, you still have to explain the 0~60 and 1/4 mile times, both of which are within .1~.2 seconds of a 333 hp M3. And the M3 only weighs 3340 lbs compared to 3542 lbs for the 335i, Also I have seen Dyno tests at Automobilemag.com and Edmunds.com, The Edmunds test had 280 hp and 280 ft lbs. The G37 also put down 280 hp in that test, and the G37 is rated at 330 hp. Every test I have seen shows the 335i hitting 60 in under 5 seconds, and posting a 1/4 mile time right around 13.5 seconds. It's just faster than it should be with 300 hp and 300 ft lbs. And my personal interests lean towards the G37 but I doubt I could afford it.
I am working on a new car in the not so distant future, the upcoming WRX and the Lancer Ralliart are what currently has my attention.

The G37 looks good. Good boost to HP over the G35, but not a big increase in torque (~10 ft/lb). Still not a bad upgrade especially since they plan on upgrading the interior from what you said.

For the M3 vs 335i, remember that the M3 wasn't a torque monster. The 335i is rated at around 30 less HP, BUT also 30 more ft/lb of torque.

Regarding the Dyno against the G37. Is the G37 turbocharged? If your answer to this question is "no", then I wouldn't really trust anything but a highend Mustang Dyno matchup. Read the links I gave you. I said before that I agree it is probably underrated. But not nearly as much as you think. :(

Lancer Ralliart vs WRX? If you can buy the new WRX over the Ralliart, go for it. The Ralliart 2.4L motor is weak sauce. The new Lancer also share a platform with the Dodge Caliber, although they upgraded it for additional strength. Unfortunetely, this rigidity comes at a cost - the new Lancer weighs about 200 pounds more than its previous iteration. In contrast, the new WRX has a 2.5L producing 225/226 HP/torque, and the weight remains virtually unchanged. It also supposedly has a better interior design and quality than the previous WRX.

Unless of course you hate how the WRX looks and love how the Lancer looks.

The new Lancer Ralliart is rumored to be a 230ish hp AWD car aimed straight at the WRX and priced to compete with the WRX, if that is the case it basicly comes down to avalibility of DSG (the Evo will have it, so possibly the Ralliart will as wel) Looks, Fuel economy, actual performance numbers, price and on the WRX's side the fact that I like hatches for the pratical aspects.

Huh. Everything I read regarding the 08 Ralliart involved a sub-200HP 2.4L. Also I thought Mitsubishi called their "performance" auto/manual "Twin-Clutch SST" or some such nonsense. Even if the Ralliart has it (which all I've read to date indicate it won't), it won't save them if their engine sucks and weight is up.

Maybe what I've read is out of date, or you're referring to a future model past 08.

if you google you will come up with some stuff, Auto week had some information saying that the Lancer Ralliart will be AWD and turbo this time, I have seen several other rumblings stating the same. Right now the last Lancer Ralliart was the 2007, The current body style has yet to see a Ralliart version.

still ugly!!!!shoud be called ''azteclac cts''

Travis:

Why in the name of all that is holy would you buy an infiniti when you could have a cadillac?