2004 Cadillac Cts-v Low Miles Navigation Warranty on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Cadillac CTS-V First Drive [w/video]

A million insects lost their lives today. Boxelder bugs and mayflies making the ultimate sacrifice in Elkhart Lake, their carapaces no buffer against a rocketing rectangle of safety glass. Their bodies gorily streaking into spangles along the diamond-faceted face of the Cadillac CTS-V. Road America is a four-mile ribbon of pavement snaking its way through the emerald center of the country's northern heartland. Since the 1950s it's seen uncountable fields of diverse racing machinery rocket over its hills and around its 14 corners. I would imagine that on those occasions the tramping of onlookers and hubbub of vehicles, both competitive and commonplace, would dissuade a great number of our six-legged friends from making their way onto the track. But today it's just me turning laps. Inconceivably just one journalist, driving the baddest roadgoing Cadillac ever made, on one of the loveliest circuits America has ever carved out. So big-winged bugs made it out to me in a vast array and a tragic sum, and I drilled through them oblivious to anything but one of the greatest days of driving I've ever had. Cadillac has turned its CTS-V from a performance sedan to a monster. For 2016 Cadillac has turned its CTS-V from a performance sedan to a monster worthy of the carnage described above. The words "epic" and "awesome" are hilariously overused on the Internet, but in the case of the CTS-V's 6.2-liter supercharged V8, their literal meanings are fitting. The capacity to produce 640 horsepower and 630 pound-feet of torque is astounding. Feeling those outputs come to growling life under my foot arch, uncorks different reactions in my brain as the day wears on: first trepidation, next cautious optimism, finally red-eyed bloodlust. A glance at the power and torque curves will show you that the charged V8 behaves more like a naturally aspirated thing than a turbo'd on/off switch. Peak torque arrives at 3,600 rpm, horsepower at 6,400, giving the engine lovely, linear power delivery. Even with top torque happening near the middle of the tach, there's no small amount of the stuff when the engine first spins up, so launching all 4,145 pounds of Detroit iron still feels exotic. Launching all 4,145 pounds of Detroit iron still feels exotic. On the roads around Wisconsin, using all of the available power is hardly advisable, but I have no trouble driving this fast car slowly (sort of).

Cadillac could base its entry-level sedan on the Chevy Cruze [UPDATE]

UPDATE: Cadillac spokesperson Donny Nordlicht tells Autoblog , "The post speculating on a future Cadillac model derived from the Chevrolet Cruze is completely false." Premium automakers Mercedes-Benz and Audi have seen plenty of success with new small front-drive-based sedans. The CLA-Class had its best January ever this year, while Audi moved more of its new A3 in 2015 than its predecessor sold in 2005 through 2010 combined. The fact that Cadillac wants a piece of that pie is no surprise, then. There's a new rumor that GM's luxury brand could launch its own compact – possibly called CT2 – to battle the Germans. Cadillac, a brand that's pushed hard to rebuild its rear-drive reputation, could develop a new entry-level model based on the front-wheel-drive 2016 Chevrolet Cruze's D2XX platform. Go ahead and make your Cimarron jokes. Sources are telling GM Inside News that a Cadillac built on the Delta platform would ditch the Cruze's turbocharged 1.4-liter four-cylinder for a 1.5-liter turbo in base models. General Motors' well received 2.0-liter turbo four would serve in higher-end models. According to GMIN, the Delta-based Cadillac would likely command a $6,000 to $9,000 premium over the Cruze, so figure $23,000 to $26,000 on the low end to $30,000 to $33,000 for something at the top of the range. As much as we dislike the kind of badge engineering that brought us the Cavalier-based Cadillac Cimarron in the '80s, the company has done an admirable job of distinguishing vehicles on shared platforms lately. A Delta-platform Cadillac would at least have a good basis – the new Cruze is surprisingly comfy. That said, we question GM's rationale if this rumor is indeed true. Put simply, Cadillac needs another sedan like I need another student loan payment. The company has four sedans, three of which overlap two segments, and none of which are selling very well. That's not because they're bad, but because customers want crossovers, of which Caddy has but one – the new XT5. Spending the time and money to add a fifth sedan to the mix when the company desperately needs to flesh out its CUV range would be a tremendous mistake. As much as we hate to say it, if Cadillac really wants to add a small, entry-level car to its range, it'd better be a crossover. Related Video:

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.