It looks like GM is finally starting to get its act together with its lineup. This things going to be expensive I am sure, but the way I look at it is not how much does it cost brand new, as not but a few % of people buy them from the showrooms. This car in 2-3 years will be available for a reasonable price, be kick ass, and will help establish a solid rep for cadillac and GM once again. Good work if you are reading these comments GM!

G37 anyone? Good job GM, you have to imitate other vehicles and slap a "limited amount" slogan on it and overprice it. If the base is guestimated at around 40k, it will probably cost the consumer more like 48 - 50k and thats just the base. This is why american consumers keep switching over to foreign companies. Better cars, better service, better deals.

it looks like a CTS and a bmw 318i made sweet love and this was the child. but i still like it alot.

You have to love how fans of Japanese brands call any somewhat good idea a copy of some Japanese product...when everyone knows that the Japanese get all their ideas from worldwide products.

It doesn't look any more like a G37 than the G37 looks like a Chevy Cavalier, but don't let that little fact get in the way of your opinions :)

I'm not a big fan of the look but it's sexier than a G37 inside and out. If they dropped in an LS6 in it they might have something. It would be much faster and get better mpg then the G37. I'm pretty sure they'll stick with a 6 though.

It will be an LS3 (HOPEFULLY supercharged)...the 04/05 CTS-Vs were the only ones with the LS6 and yes, they get decent gas mileage for the performance.

That car is sure going to have some blind spots in the rear corners not to mention you won't be able to see the hood of the car behind you. Parallel parking is going to be a b___ unless they have some sort of camera. Trendy stylins is all good and well, but when it gives a car poor visibility, it can make it at best frustrating for drivers.

or they may put one of those northstar v8s in it..

Looks Awesome, but it's still a piece of shit american car.
enough said.

Whilst I still give this more credit than Alex has, I have to say, I'm still underwhelmed.

The reason the last CTS-V failed is because it looked like, well, what the current CTS-V is going to look like. And it was more a hot-rod than a sports car, sure it was technically tuned on the Nuremburgring, but it still did not cut the Apex of a corner like a 5 series does. And its track times, even though it had more power, were still lower than the M5.

With the coupe, GM gives us a pretty sedate looking car for hair stylists. It has a few buldges that try and look masculine but honestly, the next car Lauren Conrad drives on "The Hills" will be the CTS coupe (if the show stays around that long). I can already see either old men or young girls driving this car, very slowly, making me late for work again. (And if any early-20s women ever read this, take note: I live barely 4 miles from where I work, and I leave an hour before I have to be there. I've started leaving an hour and a half, but I'm still late. I'm lucky I'm the only guy willing to travel so much, otherwise I'm certain I'd be fired and it'd be because I'm stuck behind you from seven to eight, or worse, every weekday morning)

If the concept differs from the actual car, it'd be a good thing this time around. I just cannot see this selling better than say, a VW Tourag Cabriolet.

Allen:
May not sell better than the VW but certainly would spend as much time in the shop. Oh I forgot no matter how much data supports that statement American cars will always be POS's

Allen if it takes you an hour to drive 4 miles move or walk. Based on your post. You should be fired just on principle. Let's think about this "if" it really take about an hour to go four miles would replacing all of the slow driver change much? No!

Also CTS-V didn't have more HP than the M5 ever at least not in stock trim.

Introduced in 2004 it came with a 400HP LS6, BMW didn't produce a M5 that year. M5 sold that year would have been carry overs (2003's) with 394 V8 perhaps that's what you're referring to. The next M5, 2006 came with 500HP V10 while the CTS-V had an LS2 400 HP V8. Besides while the cars are similar in class I wouldn't think that they really compete that way with consumers because of the $20k+ price difference. That not to say that the Caddy owners wouldn't rather have an M5, I know I would.

Also keep in mind the CTS-V cost around $50k I don't know when the last new M5 sold for around that price but I don't think it was this century.

Any way could luck with the commute.

I have to say some praise and then again some dissention about this car. While I like the design and Cadillac's effort's to tune in a younger audience, I cannot vouch for the price point. I am of the opinion that GM might say the CTS coupe starts at 40K, it will likely be 50K with all the goodies, and with only 20,000 being built the first year, dealers will no doubt charge a "premium" to get you on the order list so your final price on your 40K CTS couple could easily be 55K, which would have bought you a CTS-V that few people wanted because the price point was too high.

The car is still bang for the buck going against higher-end BMW's or Mercedes, but, trying to attract a younger audience ultimately should also imply you need to make the cars cheaper, not more expensive. The younger you are, the more in insurance you pay, usually more gasoline is consumed - American car makers have notoriously seemed to design cars and market cars on the impression that $50K is an amount that everyone is willing to spend on their vehicles, when I would venture to guess the amount of people NOT willing to spend $50K on a car far outnumbers the number of people who are willing to spend that money.

And all comes down to greed - they want to push the profit margin so hard on these cars, the prices at least on the American side of things rarely come down. If this wasn't so much the concern, they'd be able to sell cars cheaper. You can either sell something at a high price with a high margin and sell very few of them, or you can sell at a cheaper price with a lower margin and sell a vast number of them. I personally prefer the Wal-Mart formula of lower prices and lower margins but higher volumes of sales. Japanese automakers seem to like this formula too.

The Chevy Camaro is a great example. GM said when they killed the car in 2002, they did so because sales were dismal - barely moving 100,000 units, whereas the Mustang was happily moving 250-300,000 units. It wasn't because of the design, the interest, or the speed/power...it was the f-ing price. You can buy a Mustang with most of the options in the high 20K range or the low 30K range. In 2002 a fully loaded Camaro was in the mid-to-high 30K range. Now they've reintroduced that car stating that they will build it as long as they sell 100,000 units a year. Gee, that's odd, because 7 years ago that's why you said you couldn't build the car anymore. Oh, and the all new Camaro has only gotten more expensive - most outlets are reporting a fully loaded Camaro will easily break 40K.

It is all numbers - always. The price you set determines your possible numbers on sales - the higher your price, the lesser number of people that can afford your product. GM needs to quit trying to win over the narrow-segment, high salary market and sell cars to the masses.

I need some coffee now.

To Steven... The big difference between the last Camaro and the new one is that the new one (on the Zeta platform) will share more parts with a greater range of models.... which will make the new Camaro profitable at 100,000 units.

In contrast, the last Camaro/Firebird, being on the F-body, basically shared very little with other cars in GM's lineup, being built in a plant that only built F-bodies. This meant that 100,000 on the old F-body meant that is wasn't profitable. The plant that these cars were built wasn't anywhere near capacity. And in the auto business, if you're not running at capacity, it'll kill your profitability in no time.

Now you can say the same thing about the Corvette... but the Corvette sells for a much higher price... and on a manufacturning basis, I'm quite sure it is set up to be profitable at lower volumes.

It was sad when they killed the F-body. As a performance car, it was better than the Mustang in every way. Nicer looking too than the pre-2005

But as a day to day car, the Mustang was way cheaper, was still good enough in terms of performance for the money, didn't have the irritating 1-4 forced upshift on the manual transmission and I think it had more interior space (especially the trunk - the F-body suspension took up a lot of space) - something I Firebird owner I knew complained about. Also, since it was basically a 1979 Ford Fairmont up to 1994, parts were cheaper and more widely available.

@ crashman
Yes, i won't let that little comment get in my way of making my opinion well known. Just as you didn't let it get in the way of making your opinion, which you obviously think very highly of, known. I enjoy japan's cars just as much as i enjoy Europe's line of cars. The fact that you make the accusation of myself saying american companies copy others cars, and then accuse the same company of copying everyone else's cars is not only remarkably bold, but somewhat of a lame attempt to defend something that isn't defendable. America has very few 'ideas' if you will that don't go unchanged and made better by other countries in the automotive industry. Look at the tuner scene and how the usa tried to jump into it with their srt-4 and the cobalt SS which were both complete failures. But, as you so elegantly stated, don't let my opinion get in the way of you making your's loud and clear.

Caddillac is really on a roll. Not too crazy about the coupe, but love the sport-luxury swade interior!

To James:

Look at the tuner scene?!!? Where do you think that came from, kid? How old are you?

Please put the Fast and the Furious movies down, and also please try and stay off of Paul Walker's nuts. He doesn't wanna go out with you. No, you can't drive his Skyline. Or the Evo.

Anyways, this coupe looks pretty good, but it's priced too high. A regular sedan CTS starts at $32k. I don't see why this one needs to start at almost $10k more. I don't see how this is copying the Japanese at all, the original CTS that this is based off of came out YEARS before the G35/7 were a thought. Who copied who? No one, the cars aren't even all that similar looking, so everyone needs to stop bitching.

American car quality sucked major amounts of ass throughout the 80's and 90's, so it's understandable that they have that stigma attached to them. But lets all take a look at Toyota, who has recently fallen TREMENDOUSLY ever since their production ramped up. Don't get me started on the Joke that is Nissan, who is basically carried by Honda and Toyota when it comes to the perception of asian quality. The europeans are consistently behind both American and Asian brands in quality tests at both the joke that is Consumer Reports, and the more reputable JD Power survey's in recent years. GM in particular, has made so much improvement in their cars, especially interiors, in the last 5 years its astonishing. Anyone making comments about GM quality without sitting in a new Malibu or a new CTS needs to drink a tall pint of STFU.

Also, gonna clear up some misconceptions about the F-body's demise:

1) The car had no alternative platform to jump to when the 2004-5 crash standards were coming into place. As was mentioned, the F-body shared nothing with any other car, meaning it was time for a total redesign, which should have happend, but was killed internally as early as 1998 because...

2) The coupe market was shrinking. Even Mustangs were being sold less than the years that preceeded it. To the GM bean counters (who by the way, were pretty much silenced as soon as Wagoner and Lutz and the Ed's took over) this meant it could no longer be a profitable car unless it was manufactured on another chassis alongside another car (sedan) at another plant. But this couldn't happen because...

3) The CAW union had a 30 year deal that ended in 2002 with GM to build ANY CAR NAMED CAMARO OR FIREBIRD at the St. Therese plant in Canada. GM, unable to move the car to another platform with another car, and unwilling to develop another F-body only platform for the camaro/firebird was forced to kill it. The car was dead as early as 1997, but only GM insiders know the true date.

Hopefully that will clear some things up.

Ryan

To James:

Look at the tuner scene?!!? Where do you think that came from, kid? How old are you?

Please put the Fast and the Furious movies down, and also please try and stay off of Paul Walker's nuts. He doesn't wanna go out with you. No, you can't drive his Skyline. Or the Evo.

Anyways, this coupe looks pretty good, but it's priced too high. A regular sedan CTS starts at $32k. I don't see why this one needs to start at almost $10k more. I don't see how this is copying the Japanese at all, the original CTS that this is based off of came out YEARS before the G35/7 were a thought. Who copied who? No one, the cars aren't even all that similar looking, so everyone needs to stop bitching.

American car quality sucked major amounts of ass throughout the 80's and 90's, so it's understandable that they have that stigma attached to them. But lets all take a look at Toyota, who has recently fallen TREMENDOUSLY ever since their production ramped up. Don't get me started on the Joke that is Nissan, who is basically carried by Honda and Toyota when it comes to the perception of asian quality. The europeans are consistently behind both American and Asian brands in quality tests at both the joke that is Consumer Reports, and the more reputable JD Power survey's in recent years. GM in particular, has made so much improvement in their cars, especially interiors, in the last 5 years its astonishing. Anyone making comments about GM quality without sitting in a new Malibu or a new CTS needs to drink a tall pint of STFU.

Also, gonna clear up some misconceptions about the F-body's demise:

1) The car had no alternative platform to jump to when the 2004-5 crash standards were coming into place. As was mentioned, the F-body shared nothing with any other car, meaning it was time for a total redesign, which should have happend, but was killed internally as early as 1998 because...

2) The coupe market was shrinking. Even Mustangs were being sold less than the years that preceeded it. To the GM bean counters (who by the way, were pretty much silenced as soon as Wagoner and Lutz and the Ed's took over) this meant it could no longer be a profitable car unless it was manufactured on another chassis alongside another car (sedan) at another plant. But this couldn't happen because...

3) The CAW union had a 30 year deal that ended in 2002 with GM to build ANY CAR NAMED CAMARO OR FIREBIRD at the St. Therese plant in Canada. GM, unable to move the car to another platform with another car, and unwilling to develop another F-body only platform for the camaro/firebird was forced to kill it. The car was dead as early as 1997, but only GM insiders know the true date.

Hopefully that will clear some things up.

Ryan

@ R. Force:

The Cobalt SS and SRT-8 were indeed copies of the Japanese imports which were modified to create street-cars, this has been called the cars of the "Tuner Scene." The Fast and the Furious just tried to expose said sub-culture of racing, and many stupid kids copied it. But do not come down on James just because he uses the words "Tuner Scene." Should I tell you to stop sucking off Carol Shelby for being a muscle car guy? In fact you may not be a muscle car fanatic, just like James may not be a tuner fanatic, so no, I won't say aforemented negative comment.

And about the Camaro demise: you hit that one right on the spot. GM was unwilling to take on engineering challenges and its worker base (and I fully supported GM just letting that strike drag out until the workers caved, but dammit they did not), and hence the old Camaro died. As far as profits for the car are concerned, the car was indeed profitable at 100,000 units, just look for GM's financial statements from the late 90s and early 2000s, and it did actually share a lot of parts with other Gm vehicles. I've tore several down before, and the LS1 engine in later years and LT1 are in many other cars, as you can also find the transmission, rear-end, and other parts in different forms around the whole GM line-up from back then. It's final assembly was indeed at one factory, but not for a minute should anyone think that the car did not share a broad arrangement of parts across the lineup of GM.

But as far as quality, its true GM has made great quality strides but even JD Power says they are not to the level of Toyota and Honda and Nissan. Also, based upon what information do you say Nissan is not a reliable car? And the fact you call Consumer Reports a joke when in order silence people like yourself they even changed the methods by which they measure quality recently (dropping a companies past in consideration from their standards) just proves you yourself are biased in favor of GM. Other than the transmission problems that plagued early 07 Camrys, Toyota has not had any significant recalls or quality concerns in the past year. And as far as European manufacturers are concerned, the 3 series has a long history of being reliable (I do agree that just about everything else is a going to bring weekly trips to a service desk though).

Its long been known that the "Buy America" crowd hates that fact that a independent source like Consumer Reports has stated that American quality just hasn't been there. And consumer reports is indeed unbiased: they have 1) got rid of the aforemented "past reliability" scores and 2) keep documentation of every car they test, which is purchased right off the lot of a car dealer from the company which sells the car. They can do this because of their endowment, which is in the billions.

@RX-7 Guy:
To the Commute: I get stuck behind these whiny ass women who drive slower than hell almost all the time. I'm not late every day but its more often 3 of 5 times a week. Not that it matters, I work for Goldman Sachs, they kind of do not care if you are late or not so long as the work is done, its clear and concise, and you make them money. I can leave early every day to if I like, so long as my work is done and there is nothing left for me that day at the office. I was just joking about the whole fired thing.

As far as power is concerned of the CTS-V: when I say more power I am not just talking about more horsepower, I'm also talking about torque. Both the LS6 and LS2 had more of that last one then the V8 in the M5 did. As far as the $20,000 difference, the 07' CTS-V now sells for $51,250, while the 07' M5 sells for $82,500. So, its more like a $30,000 difference. :)

Still, if the CTS-V was a decent competitor, I bet BMW would not be able to charge so much for that car. Given its ever-rising financials, I think more of that car is profit than not, and dealers, I hear, are still charging over MSRP for the M5. CTS-Vs sell at a discount usually.

Added to last post: I meant to say "Given its ever rising financial status, and the fact the Euro is now a $1.50 on top of that," where the similar statement was at the end.

And this isn't bagging on the CTS Coupe (I've said similar things about some stuff Mercedes does), but does that steering wheel look like it came out of a Pontiac Sunfire? It just, looks so familiar to me....

Its amazing the obsession American cars cause on people no? They say their crapp but they cant stop looking at them and talking about them...mission acomplished for the american car industry because when they stop looking and talking thats when your in trouble.

What´s true for american cars is true for america: "Americans are stupid at geography but everyone can point America on the map!"

It is way cool and macho looking. I will have to start saving up for it. It would be even cooler if it had a flex fuel system.

this thing just looks nice but i would bet my left nut that its rubbish... i bet it will win the motor trend car of the year like the ml 320 did the year i baught it and it was rubbish aswell, i hate american manufactured products, we are not a nation of mechanical innovation but rather inspiration and designe we just cant put design together with manufacturing and create a worthwhile product to compeat with the germans and japs.

As I've said before, I like this car. I look forward to test driving it. It looks nothing like the Infiniti G-series, which I also like a lot. The exterior is controversial and sporty, and the interior is businesslike and functional, yet upscale. The drivetrain choices are good, but what I would really like to see is a 500hp+ CTS-V coupe.

I think quality is much improved for GM (and Hyundai for that matter) in the past 5 years or so. The fit and finish should be very good. I would also ditch the chrome rapper wheels for proper machined-aluminum 5-spokes, but I'm old school.

Price does concern me a lot. One of America's advantages is bang for the buck. The base price should be around the same as the sedan. The CTS-V coupe should be at $40-45K. "Nuff said.

@ R. Force
Great! You insult me by mocking terminology i use but fail to realize you have stooped far below any age level you thought me of. First of all, the fast and the furious didn't invent anything as far as "tuning" goes. A common mis-understanding on the part of people who like to assume that EVERYONE GETS ALL THEIR INFORMATION FROM MOVIES AND NO WHERE ELSE! That movie just exploited what was already a big thing. Those were lame movies and had horrible actors, but the racing was all most people cared about i assume. Its hard to say that some weren't inspired by the movie, as i'm sure they were, but to think that everyone was is ridiculous. The "Tuner scene", yes i used it and i'll use it again. It consists of mostly import cars (like it or not) and now America has even copied (yes, copied) import car styles just to hop into the race. Do your research before you insult someone. Type the word tuner into google, see what happens. Assuming you spelled it right, the first two entries ( and if you know how google's search engines work) are, in fact, import car tuning.

this thred is so mickymouse, caddys are ambitious but rubbish

this thred is so mickymouse, caddys are ambitious but rubbish

this thred is so mickymouse, caddys are ambitious but rubbish

"..but rubbish..."

***!Jeremy Fakeson wannabe alert!***

There is a certain host of a certain TV show that uses that term all the time. But isnt that TV Show involved in the BBC scandals of faking, deceiving and lying and turns out it has been making an ass out of their spectators for years??

Im such a loser that i have to pretend im american and come here and bash american cars like a maniac. Like all losers i suffer from "Celebrity Obsession" so i love script-reading phony fake lying trained Monkey Jeremy Clarkson.