2010 Cadillac Cts 3.6l Awd Premium Navigation Panorama Roof Bose Xenon Warranty on 2040-cars
Cleveland, Ohio, United States
Body Type:Sedan
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:3.6L 217Cu. In. V6 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
Fuel Type:GAS
For Sale By:Dealer
Make: Cadillac
Model: CTS
Warranty: Vehicle has an existing warranty
Trim: Premium Sedan 4-Door
Options: Leather
Drive Type: AWD
Mileage: 34,900
Number of Doors: 4
Sub Model: 4dr Sdn 3.6L Premium AWD
Exterior Color: Black
Doors: 4 doors
Interior Color: Black
Engine Description: 3.6L V6 DIR DOHC 24V
Number of Cylinders: 6
Cadillac CTS for Sale
- 2007 cadillac ctsv, metallic grey, black leather interior, good condition, fast(US $21,000.00)
- 2009 cadillac cts 3.6l direct injection - no reserve
- 2003 cadillac cts base sedan 4-door 3.2l
- 2012 cadillac cts luxury sedan 4-door 3.0l raven black - 600 miles!!(US $36,600.00)
- 2009 cadillac cts4/awd/sunroof/salvage/no reserve/
- We finance 2006 cadillac cts-v 6spd navi wrrnty mroof hids 6cd spoiler sdeairbag(US $17,000.00)
Auto Services in Ohio
Yocham Auto Repair ★★★★★
Williams Auto Parts Inc ★★★★★
West Chester Autobody ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Valvoline Instant Oil Change ★★★★★
Sweeting Auto & Tire ★★★★★
Auto blog
De Nysschen says Cadillac will be ready for a $250,000 model in 15 years
Fri, Nov 21 2014Cadillac president Johan de Nysschen has some very, very lofty goals for the American luxury car manufacturer. That's according to a new report from Reuters, where the former Audi and Infiniti exec says that Cadillac is only 15 years away from selling a $250,000 car. "It is too early today for a $250,000 Cadillac," de Nysschen told Reuters at the LA Auto Show. "Fifteen years from now, it won't be." Now, provided de Nysschen doesn't envision a future of hyper-inflation, where an ATS rings up at $200K and a CTS at $225,000, the idea that Cadillac could sell a car worth a quarter-of-a-million dollars in just 15 short years is the very definition of ambitious. That's doubly true when you realize that, at present, Cadillac's most expensive vehicle is the Escalade ESV Platinum, which costs no more than $97,940, while de Nysschen said the upcoming CT6 sedan will be priced "in the 70s." What do you think? Could a Cadillac that costs well over twice as much as the brand's most expensive current vehicle be a reality in the distant future? Or is de Nysschen aiming too high too soon? Let us know what you think in Comments. News Source: ReutersImage Credit: Jae C. Hong / AP Cadillac Luxury cadillac ct6
How the demise of Lincoln's Town Car has kick-started a limo revolution
Sun, 30 Dec 2012The deaths of the Ford Crown Victoria and the Lincoln Town Car have meant overhauls of three high-profile American fleets: police, taxi and livery car. Just as police fleets are more open to considering other options and a Nissan van is the new face of the NYC taxi, livery car companies are looking at replacements for the Town Car beyond The Blue Oval. Ford, via Lincoln, has made an MKT Town Car (pictured), but an article in the Detroit News claims "it has failed to win over most of the big limousine companies." The upstarts trying to move in include livery and limo editions of the Cadillac XTS, and livery specifications of the Toyota Avalon and Chrysler 300.
Each of those challengers, however, faces challenges. The Town Car was a workhorse, American, rear-wheel-drive sedan with plenty of rear legroom. Cadillac has been in the livery space before but with decontented models that were about selling the brand, not its luxury. It is taking the opposite approach with the XTS, pointing out that its livery edition is "contented in the upper half of the XTS range." Still, the CEO of Michigan's largest livery company says "it's quite a bit smaller than what we're used to," and he also prefers rear-wheel drive.
The Chrysler 300 is rear-wheel drive, and American, which matters to some companies, but Chrysler hasn't yet revealed the livery package for it. The livery Avalon marks Toyota's first time getting into that business in the US, a natural step after having done so well with taxi clients and with the Town Car out of the way. Still, the livery client is a different to taxi buyers, so the Avalon could face other soft-touch hurdles.
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over 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.