+1LeroyBrown wrote:not to sound like a a**. but cateras are the ugliest cars that cadilac has made.
No.LeroyBrown wrote:not to sound like a a**. but cateras are the ugliest cars that cadilac has made.
I still stand by my previous statementJesda wrote:
No.
I turned out to be real ugly.charlieo wrote:Why do you hate your mother?
Aha, now i know. I always thought they were like Malibus or something, but then I saw the totally not FF layout.Jesda wrote:They're rebadged Opel Omegas with expensive hard-to-find parts in the US market.
No V8's, no SUV's. Maxima..thats a possibility.ZOMG.SR20 wrote:ummm Maxima, QX4, Q45?
charlieo wrote:Why do you hate your mother?
II couldn't have said it better myself.Jesda wrote:They are awful cars to maintain and service. Fun to drive. When Catera owners joined the Cadillac forum I used to subtly suggest pushing their cars into a lake. I play nice now.
They're rebadged Opel Omegas with expensive hard-to-find parts in the US market.
I'm in love with a piece of Sh*tDasoupdude wrote:
Whats funny is that I joined that site in 2003 and didn't buy a Caddy until 2007.Dasoupdude wrote:Jesda, i never knew you were a moderator on the caddy forums. http://www.cadillacforums.com/....html
Wasn't that motor a source of common complaints from press and owners alike in the early CTS? It wasn't really a Cadillac-caliber motor...raspy and not particularly smooth. Unless it was a different early CTS motor that I'm thinking of.Jesda wrote:The 2000 and later models were mechanically quite reliable, and their engines were carried over to the 2003 CTS (but no later).
It was definitely weaksauce, but they'll run forever. What I don't understand is why GM offered the little 2.8 later on.MinisterofDOOM wrote:Wasn't that motor a source of common complaints from press and owners alike in the early CTS? It wasn't really a Cadillac-caliber motor...raspy and not particularly smooth. Unless it was a different early CTS motor that I'm thinking of.