The Motor Authority reveals that Cadillac has spiked the STS-V model for 2010. The high-performance variant of the brand’s slow-selling flagship (who knew?) joins the Impala SS, Cobalt SS and Pontiac G6 GXP in model heaven (purgatory?). The SS moniker will live in in the hearts and minds of students of Jewish persecution and fans of the new Chevrolet Camaro. As widely reported elsewhere, GM CEO Fritz Wagoner Clone Henderson specifically highlighted the fact that GM was NOT going to drop the Corvette from its shrinking roster of performance-oriented brands—I mean, products. This despite slow sales, a ruling Presidential Task Force on Autos that keeps mentioning the words “small” and “fuel efficient” (yes, I know), and the fact that the in-house fanzine “Corvette Quarterly” has published its last paean to pistonhead perfection, or a reasonable facsimile thereof.
This car doesn’t make any sense. If you are into that type of car, CTS-V could be better. If not, choose a Lexus ES.
Kill it with fire. Leave the coals hot for the regular STS while you’re at it.
The STS is an absolutely awful and embarassing car. IMO the entire concept has less merit than reskinning the 95 as a BLS did.
It’s not that it was a bad car…
…well, wait, no, it was a bad car. It wasn’t terrible, but it was compromised even in it’s base form. It was cramped, the materials quality suffered versus Cadillac’s own CTS and it was always a hard sell versus the M5 and AMG E-Class it was supposed to compete with. That Lexus doesn’t position the GS in this space is telling; that the CTS is more commonly compared with the M5/AMG E is even more telling.
Were the base STS a better car, this would have probably been more seriously considered. But GM really didn’t give the STS what it needed, and the CTS really crowded this car out.
I actually like the way the STS looks. I think it’s the best cut at Art & Science Cadillac did, and I’d have no real issues owning one (without that grille, thanks).
It was a terrible car when new. Take the 2-3 year depreciation hit and it becomes an acceptable (STS) or pretty nice (V-series) way to putz around town for cheap.
Makes sense. CTS-V is where enthusiast’s dollars are best invested.
“The SS moniker will live in in the hearts and minds of students of Jewish persecution and fans of the new Chevrolet Camaro.”
Cheap shot?
The Cobalt SS is not dead, just the sedan version. it’s actually quite an entertaining car, just devoid of any attempt at NVH management. and in coupe form, too compromised for my taste, but I’m sure it has an audience.
psarhjinian
yeah, I’m a little bit dickish today and it’s coming through. It certainly isn’t the waste of carbon that it’s FWD predecessor was.
I’d certainly take one over the ES in a hypothetical choose or die situation (sorry wsn).
Cadillac needs to stop chasing the Germans and go for making luxury cars with an authentically American point of view. All those stupid tuned on the Nürburgring and Stuttgart, we have a problem ads made me groan. The naming switch from the great names of Cadillacs past to the oh so Germanic three letter alphabet soups were another mistake. Seville, Deville, Fleetwood, Eldorado … those are great names which profitably sold hundreds of thousands of cars over the years. Why ditch them?
You don’t compete with the other guys by pretending you have overtaken them on their turf, you compete on your own turf and make them come to you.
Do all those MBA types in Detroit know nothing? I think part of the problem is that the gear heads and buff books have far too much influence on what Detroit does. Everyone wants to get a great review from Car & Driver … but that isn’t what sells cars, especially not to Cadillac buyers!
I’d certainly take one over the ES in a hypothetical choose or die situation.
That you’re comparing it to the ES just shows how much trouble this car is in. It really, truly, is a GS competitor, but it isn’t cross-shopped against the GS at all. And second-rate (and cramped, and funny-looking) as the GS is, it’s more reliable, much nicer inside and won’t drop in value.
Again, I really like the way this car looks, to the point where I might forgive it’s other faults, but it needs to drive better, especially in non-V trim, and it needs a much better interior (or at least an interior not worse than the CTS’). I don’t understand spending the money to style it and put it on the (relatively expensive) Sigma platform only to hamstring it in details. Of course, I don’t understand a lot of what GM does, so it’s really par for the course.
another performence car dead. damn. if gm keeps on down the road of becoming government motors they gonna find them selves with empty showrooms
A quick scan of eBay shows a bunch of 1-2 year old STS’s that are selling for nearly 60% off the original sticker.
I agree with the comments that it is a very good-looking car, probably better proportioned than the CTS. But the interior looks so downmarket from where they want this car to be. I can’t imagine dropping $65K on a new one of these. But $32K for an ’08 with a V8 and 12000 miles? That’s a much more appealing option.
Cadillac needs to stop chasing the Germans and go for making luxury cars with an authentically American point of view
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with trying to out-German the Germans, at least in a way. They (the German luxury marques) make really, really nice cars. If Lexus is a Japanese Mercedes (90% of the ability, 200% of the mechanical soundness), Cadillac could do something similar.
I’d also be hard-pressed to say what consitutes “American” luxury without resorting to negative stereotypes and characteristics that people aren’t looking for and wouldn’t buy. There’s nothing wrong with a car with a decently button-down suspension that can cruise at autobahn speeds and corner capably: it’s not a German virtue as much as it’s a sign someone spent money on the suspension. The only Americanization I could see would be adding a little width, more brash styling and the LS engine across the board.
Art & Science was a good start, and the CTS is a great car, but GM never followed through with the rest of the lineup. The XLR, STS and SRX were kind of half-baked, and the DTS is a sick sort of joke. The Escalade, I don’t think, counts.
“has less merit than reskinning the 95 as a BLS did.”
Yeah, too bad the BLS was a reskinned 9-3.
With the new CTS, the STS is absolutely pointless. The CTS is nicer in every way, and not that different in size. If the STS isn’t redone soon, then it should be dropped. The same goes for the DTS. The Escalade, CTS, and SRX are the only Cadillac models that can be considered competitive right now.
The SS moniker will live in in the hearts and minds of students of Jewish persecution and fans of the new Chevrolet Camaro.
When I first came to the US, I was horrified to see this monicker. Had never heard about it before (in its car form), but in France, the “SS” is one of the handful of letter combos that were removed from license plates. Then I reasoned that letters themselves can mean a great many things and I should stop bothering. But it was jarring at first…
if gm keeps on down the road of becoming government motors they gonna find them selves with empty showrooms
And this would be different from their current state of affairs how?
“Yeah, too bad the BLS was a reskinned 9-3.”
really? woops. I’ve been driving a 9-5 all week so excuse me if I’ve picked up a little Saab tunnel vision.
The more I read my first post the more I’m disagreeing with it anyway. I actually appreciate that they tried to do a flagship RWD’er, and think that it’s necessary, but they shouldn’t have gone half-cocked into the venture. It’s the DTS that really gets me going anyway (FF, 4speed auto…in short, crap). The STS is, I think, more properly characterized as a major let-down. It should’ve been done right, at a larger size (you will never ever see me advocate that again) and used to replace the DTS.
@ psarhjinian
That’s Gubbament Mow-tars. Gotta git it write. Smile.
That said I’d love to have a Cadi that God hands out demerit points to bumps for failing to unsettle the chassis that has a stupid button that has two settings: “Boat” and “Sport” that when flipped to sport firms junk up enough so that the tires don’t howl going around corners at a reasonable clip. I want a Cadi with two yards of crumple zone with an option to mount a smart 4 two as a hood ornament. I want a Cadi that is stone quiet while sailing down the highway at 80 mph that has enough chrome to dazzle the eye but remains understated enough so that it doesn’t draw undue attention to the two bodies I may or may not have in the trunk. Build it and I will come.
According to Autoblog, STS-V is “underpowered and yet overpriced compared to the CTS-V”.
Ouch!
Cadillac needs to stop chasing the Germans and go for making luxury cars with an authentically American point of view.
Actually, all three Detroit manufacturers have been building cars with “an authentically American point of view” all along. That’s why I never bought any of them. It’s only recently, since they have begun “chasing the Germans”, that I have begun to think there might be something in their showrooms worth a look.
After putting the wife into three STS’s in a row and my experience with all three was so problematic that she now is driveing a Lexus GS I gotta tell you a Cadillac anything would be the last car on earth I would purchase. They were nice comfortable cars but quality problems were numerous and frequent. About every six to eight weeks something was wrong with those cars. It was funny I had more warranty appointments at the dealer than oil changes. The opposite is the Lexus GS Troublefree and a pleasure to own. Lexus will get my next purchase when I am ready. The really irritating thing with the Cadillacs was the ordeal I had to go thru to get warranty work done. The factory rep had to approve some of the repairs and she acted like she was doing me a favor . When you spend 50 to 60 grand on a car you sure don’t need that crap from a car company. A former loyal GM customer.
When we talk about the STS we have to talk about where GM started, and where they are now.
In the 1980s GM beclowned themselves by throwing the whole company over the front-wheel-drive lemming-plunge.
It took them ten years longer than it should have to reverse this bit of stupidity, and in that intervening window Toyota (Lexus) and the Germans completely ate their market.
If you consider that the first-gen CTS was their first effort at correcting the nightmare, and the STS the second, and the current CTS the third, they’re not doing all that badly.
The original CTS was a good mechanical platform with horrid detailing. The STS was an incremental improvement on both but still not up to the competition. The current CTS is world-class in platform and design.
At the same time you had the religious war over pushrods. You had the “we need the blown Northstar because no CHEVY motor will ever support The Cadillac Image” crowd, and then you had the “Stop counting cam sprockets and look at results!” bunch.
The end result is that “modern engine technology” has a lot more to do with materials and computer-modeling of airflow than it does with counting cams (DOHC four-valve engines date to 1914 anyway) and the LSA makes both the blown Northstar and the BMW S85 and most everything else out there look truly stupid.
The STS-V just isn’t good enough and the CTS-V stole its thunder.
I worked on the Sigma Platform for a while. The STS wasn’t big enough to create enough differentation with the CTS (another example of GM’s complete stupidity in Product Development), but the Supercharged Northstar was bomb.
The car itself should have been about 10 inches longer in Wheelbase and another 5 inches longer in the trunk. Then it would have made sense.
HiPo versions of plebeian cars rarely make money. The 60’s were the exception, but GM had 50% market share back in the day, and could afford to trick out every other model just for shitz and grinz. Hell, even the bulk of first gen Mustang production consisted of wheezy 1 barrel sixes, and 2 barrel small blocks, the 4 barrel small blocks and big blocks made up less than 15% of total production.
BTW, I drove a six cylinder version of the current STS — it powerful sucks. I actually preferred the the wrong wheel drive version of the STS. The old version sucked as well, but unlike the current version, the FWD version was comfortable.
Although I’m sure there was no harm intended, the conjoining of the concepts of Jewish persecution and the demise of the high-performance “SS” GM models was in poor taste. I’m not Jewish, but I thought it was a poor attempt to be pithy and clever. TTAC is such an outstanding site, with such timely and thought-provoking analysis, there’s really no need to stretch creativity in an attempt to be cute. Other than that, keep up the good work!
Wow. Cheap shot on the completely out of line comment about Jewish Persecution. The piece was strong enough and in keeping with your usually effective editorial voice without this reference.
I certainly agree that the new CTS-V makes the STS-V redundant.
But I simply don’t understand all the negativity regarding the STS. Is it the best car in its class? No. But it certainly doesn’t suck the way so many seem to think. But then I guess I shouldn’t complain. All the hatred and nay-saying have created an absolutely killer used-car bargain. I got a hell of a lot of car for the price of low-content Camry when I bought my Northstar STS.
Some people need to step away from the keyboard for a while.
Lighten up. Failed humor is always better than successful sanctimony.
Paris-Dakar: For a website that’s at the top of the heap, there’s nothing wrong with a little constructive criticism and insight which, shared professionally and with the best of intentions, can make it a little better yet. I think you’re mistaking sanctimony for sensitivity. I’ll bet that our gracious host likely won’t make the same association again, simply because there are better options to use….
bunkie – exactly right. The STS doesn’t suck but it also doesn’t shine.
By any sensible metric the first-gen CTS sucked. The platform was pretty good, but the engine was weak, the aesthetics dubious, the material quality awful. But the price was right, and it had enough character to overcome its weaknesses and attract buyers.
The first-gen CTS-V was a great car in large part because it was something GM so rarely ever did – a very flawed car with a personality strong enough to overwhelm the flaws. You could recite chapter and verse on what was wrong with it but once you’d driven it none of that mattered. It was the less-than-pretty girl who could wrestle you until you passed out exhausted, then wake you up and hump you raw.
The STS fixed many of the original CTS’ failings – the shape isn’t awkward, the interior isn’t trash – but whether by design or by accident they managed to create a car with no real personality. Size-wise it’s stuck in no man’s land between the 5-series/E-class and the big battleships, the styling is bland, the driving experience is competent but not special, the pricetag is moderate but so’s the feature set.
Has it been a sales success? Probably not, certainly it doesn’t pull the kind of per-unit margins that a 750i or an LS460 does (which is really what a car in that segment has to do) but it’s been a necessary evolutionary step toward a fully-formed Cadillac product.
The new CTS is a jewel, the shape’s a home run, the interior is gorgeous, as long as they can keep the build quality up it’s the first Cadillac product since the ’60s (maybe the ’50s) that can be said to be world-class with no asterisks and no excuses.
As for the STS-V, everything I needed to know about that car I learned the first time I sat down in one.
It had the same cheap, flat seats as the original CTS-V (I’m still quite certain that one Saab 9-5 seat cost more than an entire first-gen CTS interior) but, rather than the crucial grippy Alcantara insert that made the seats work tolerably well in the CTS, the STS-V had perforated leather.
“Aha, a cruiser, a seven-tenths car, because you could never stay behind the wheel going around corners anyway.”
Its most obvious competitor, then, would have been the Jag XJR, but while the Jag may not be all that fast by modern rocket-sedan standards, it does feel special.
Even if GM wasn’t dying, the STS-V no longer has a place in the lineup with the existence of the CTS-V.
@JEM “It was the less-than-pretty girl who could wrestle you until you passed out exhausted, then wake you up and hump you raw.”
I am going to have nightmares for the next week thinking about that scenario.
There are a lot of comparisons to the new CTS. Sorry, but I’m not that impressed with it. Four star crash rating up front is pretty sad for an all-new effort. The second, make that first, thing that would make it a no-sale for me is that damn center console intruding on my right knee. It took me all of a few seconds sitting in one to realize that it would be hell down the road. That and some of the poor build quality reported from Edmunds long-term tests also make me realize that it is still GM taking shortcuts. No thanks. I’ll take a BMW or Audi.
The STS is, of course, too small. It’s also too damn cheap feeling – plain and simple. There are far too many sharp interior edges and plastic crap that Audi wouldn’t even allow in their trunk finishing, let alone in the cabin space. The lack of attention to detail with Cadillac is staggering. There are plenty of world-class cars out there from BMW, Audi and Lexus to simply try and at least copy to some extent that there is no excuse for Cadillac. They are lost. That CTS ain’t gonna save ’em either.