Repair-It

I actually can't find any first gen CTS's with manuals. Well, I can, but they're all CTS-Vs.

One of them is fairly close in year and mileage to my car. Let's look for another fun resale investigation:

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale ... 6912&Log=0

Oh dear. Mine is in nicer shape for sure, with a couple K fewer miles. This one is $17k. So I think my car is still worth more than I paid for it, 3-1/2 years later. Sweet.

There are no interior shots but this one looks nice.

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale ... 3117&Log=0

To be fair, it's a 2006 with only 60k for $16k.

Also I screwed up my search. These 4 are within 75 miles. There are 46 CTS-Vs nation wide. On the cheap side:

2004 w/ 157k for $12k
2006 w/ 133k for $13.5k
2005 w/ 154k for $10.5k !!!!

Ok so they're still getting cheaper, but maybe as a function of becoming more common with higher miles. The lower mile ones (~40k) are still in the mid-$20k range (down maybe from low $30k).

How are the V2s doing? Are they in the realm of affordability yet?

There are 59 CTS V6 manuals on Autotrader. As far as making the non-V CTS interesting, there is the 3.6L which came out for 2004 w/ 255hp. In 2005, the new base engine was the 2.8L V6 with 210hp @ 6500rpm. With FE2 or FE3 it's probably not a bad car to drive. In 2005, the manual trans was an Aisin 6-speed. I don't know all the details such as if the manual is available with all engines.

Here are the cheapest manuals:

2003 (3.2 V6) w/ 123k for $5,500
2003 (3.2 V6) w/ 171k for $6k
2003 (3.2 V6) w/ 143k for $6k

Cheapest 2.8: $6k
Cheapest 3.6: $8k

Bob wrote:How are the V2s doing? Are they in the realm of affordability yet?

I'm supposed to be doing homework. So this is perfect. Initial results are that there are 20 CTS-Vs w/ manual trans on Autotrader which are $45k or less. There are 9 that are $40k or less. Side note, autotrader seems better at filtering (at least the UI).

Examples:
2010, black, 66k, $38,399
2010, blue, 44k, $38,991
2011, white (I actually love this white, white diamond tricoat), 80k, $34,995

Those are sedans. Of those initial 9, there was one coupe:
2011, black, 60k, $39,700

No wagons in this mix. In fact there are only 11 wagons w/ manual in all of autotrader. By the way, the wagon was 2011-2013, like the coupe. The V was 2009-2013. The 2nd gen CTS came out for MY2008.

To step up to a wagon w/ manual, here are some options:
2012, looks like thunder gray, 22k, $56k
2011, black, 11k, $56k

So here's that white one for $35k. You have to see the color in person. It's beautiful. It has a satin quality to it and is very rich. I saw a V1 once in this color (not factory) and it was awesome.

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale ... 4260&Log=0

I'm not loving the white wheels but it has the Recaros and seems to be loaded.

And now I'm pissed. It's clearly an auto but the ad says manual.

Ok so here's the next cheapest, the black one with 66k: http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale ... 7642&Log=0

Does NOT have Recaros. I think I'd want the Recaros.

They seem to be holding on to their value fairly well. From what I remember a while back the cheapest were around $40k. For reference, I checked out C63 AMGs. They actually seem to be cheaper with a some in the low $30k range.

And now, first world problems. Which CTS-V2 version? The wagon is currently priced out of contention but forget about that for a second.

Motor Trend has a couple things to say about this.

This one explains that the coupe got all the attention.

http://wot.motortrend.com/would-you-rat ... 57749.html

This one explains the typical auto-journalism fawning over the CTS-V wagon, even though sales numbers don't support that there are enough regular car enthusiasts who feel the same way.

http://blogs.motortrend.com/let-the-oth ... 19691.html

Choice quotes:

But here’s what Christian had to say a month or so later after he got to spend 1500 miles with the V-Wagon, “I. Love. This. Car. Putting it simply, if this car were a woman, I’d marry it. The CTS-V Wagon did everything I asked it to and more. It was docile and comfortable enough to put me to sleep when I wanted it to, yet adrenaline-infusing and wickedly fast when I needed some excitement. I was honestly expecting a car this powerful to be compromised in some way and I was hard pressed all weekend to find it.” Now, I’ve spoken about this before, but the ride/handling compromise in the CTS-V might just be the best in all of automotivedom.

See, Mike not only owns a 911, but he’s the former technical of European Car. To say that he prefers his automobiles German is akin to saying fish enjoy water.

With that said, read this, “Although I honestly can’t see myself buying one of these -- I don’t think I could keep myself out of jail -- if it did come down to a choice between the CTS-V Wagon or a BMW E60 M5, I would take the V. It might be a little smaller in the backseat than the M5, but it’s livable. The V is just so much more entertaining to drive. If I’m buying a car like this, I want emotion, I want noise and I want something that scares me when I want it to. The V has all those things, but it will also do 16 hours of driving in a weekend comfortably.”

“The suspension is amazingly well developed. Even in comfort mode the body movement is minimal and weight transfer never feels extreme. I pushed on a couple of corners that transitioned from down to up–hill right at the apex. You normally feel the inside front get really light as it loads up at first and them rebounds and it didn’t happen in the V. Even getting on the gas hard with rear completely hooked up, you never feel like you’re carrying the inside front.”

These quotes really apply to any CTS-V2 though. But the wagon is quite rare. Some numbers:

** Article Cadillac CTS-V Wagons Made Up 0.5 Percent Of CTS Sales from The Truth About Cars
Update Nov 2013 from CTS-V net (GM Site)
2011-2013 CTS-V Wagons - 1,386 total or 7% of total production
2010-2013 CTS-V Coupes - 7,030 total or 38% of total production
2009-2013 CTS-V Sedans - 10,010 total or 54% of total production
2011-2013 CTS-V Wagon Total production 1386

2011 CTS-V Wagon Production 395 (fewest made for the 3 year run)
Figuring a 20/80% split between MT/AT that means that only 79 2011 CTS-V Wagons with the MT6 were built (estimated)
Interesting Fact - 2013 CTS-V production was 3068. Ferrari production for 2013 was 7318.

For me, the coupe is out. There is no performance advantage and you sacrifice backseat usability for styling. So it's sedan or wagon. The sedan is a bit lighter. Given the actual price difference, the sedan is the obvious choice. But if they were priced the same, I really don't know what I'd get. Wagons are fine, but expensive, luxuriously trimmed wagons make little sense to me, unless all you do is put totally clean/neat stuff in them (a large TV would be one example). Cargo capacity wise, it's not that big, though like I mentioned with the TV, the dimensions lend themselves to fitting some bulky stuff better than a sedan.

So that's functionality. What about sheer desirability? The wagon checks the car guy box, but that box is actually checked because people are so amazed that you can have performance in something shaped like a wagon. Me? I'm less amazed. B-body people have been doing hotrod stuff to their wagons ever since I've been following B-bodies (and before). It's nowhere near the novelty it is for folks who seem totally disconnected from the idea of a hotrod wagon.

It seems like at the end of the day, the emotional rationale is "wow, a high performing wagon! And you can put stuff in it! You won't, but you totally could and that's awesome." Is it?

As someone on GM Inside News put it:

In most parts of the world the wagon (or Estate car) is viewed as being driven by the Lord of the Manor, with a Tweed sport coat, who smokes a pipe and has two very well trained hunting dogs in the back...

While in the US, these are what people think of: But I don't think of wagons in that way. I already know they can be cool. Except my use of a CTS-V as a real utilitarian wagon is stymied by the fact that its styling (and overall size) compromises functionality and how about the elephant in the room that if you pay $56k (cheapest) for a V2 wagon, you aren't going to make a mess out of it.

I had another dream that I drove a CTS-V2 of some kind. I remember noticing three things:

- The shifter was better than mine
- The steering was better than mine
- Lots of torque all over the place

Turns out all of this is probably true.

Motor Trend Head 2 Head with the CTS-V wagon and MB E63 AMG wagon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWtjjg40mVo

The E63 is a bit faster.

kevm14 wrote: Also I screwed up my search. These 4 are within 75 miles. There are 46 CTS-Vs nation wide. On the cheap side:

2004 w/ 157k for $12k
2006 w/ 133k for $13.5k
2005 w/ 154k for $10.5k !!!!

Ok so they're still getting cheaper, but maybe as a function of becoming more common with higher miles. The lower mile ones (~40k) are still in the mid-$20k range (down maybe from low $30k).

Price check. 5 within 75 miles (up from 4 back in March). 80 CTS-V1s nation wide. Which is up by quite a bit.

The cheapest ones currently:
- Black 2004 w/ 117k for $11,700, private
- Silver 2005 w/ 136k for $11,995, dealer
- Silver 2005 w/ 151k for $10,900, dealer
- Black 2004 w/ 171k for $10,891, dealer
- Silver 2004 w/ 141k for $11,995, dealer

So $11k-$12k is still the floor. Under that and you get wrecks.

The 5 within 75 miles are:
- Black 2004 w/ 64,600 miles for $19,999. Same dealer I test drove an 07. Has somewhat frosted headlights and somewhat peeling nav buttons/knobs.
- Black 2005 w/ 62,000 miles for $16,900, private sale. Modded. Magnuson supercharger!!! 20,000 miles on new engine/trans. 481 rwhp on this one. Jesus, this one's a must test drive for anyone in the market right now! Not that anyone reads my forum. Shit maybe I should trade to this, haha.
- Red 2005 w/ 55,000 miles for $18,700, private sale. Seems pretty clean.
- Black 2005 w/ 55,400 miles for $19,788, dealer. Seems pretty clean.
- Black 2006 w/ 66,700 miles for $18,900, dealer. No pics. Writeup pitches the nav as simple to use. I guess it's fairly simple...

Conclusion: nothing with lots of miles. In fact these are all VERY tightly packed around the 60k range, which is maybe a coincidence.

For only $38,900 you could have this: http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale ... 7770&Log=0

LS7 with TVS-2300 (LS9 blower) and 1000hp. CTS-V2 rear end. NOS. Wow.

Prices of cars with around the same mileage as mine (110-120k, from nation wide search):
- Black 2005 w/ 112,700 miles for $14,499, dealer (Los Angeles)
- Black 2005 w/ 114,368 miles for $16,988, dealer (MO)
- Red 2005 w/ 118,433 miles for $15,375, Cadillac dealer (PA)
- Red 2005 w/ 119,116 miles for $15,992 [reduced], Honda dealer (TN)
- Black 2004 w/ 117,000 miles for $11,700, private (just married in AL). This one's all blacked out, which is something.

Conclusion now? My car may still be worth around what I paid. Maybe a tad under since those are dealer prices.

Here's one to chew on for the mileage worrywarts: buy car X with 30,000 miles. Buy car Y with 100,000 miles. Each year you add 12k of driving. Depreciation is much less per year on the car with 100k, particularly as a percentage of its value. Still, I think it probably was the right decision not to put a million miles on my car. This isn't really a drive it into the ground kind of car. I've never had a car with resale (particularly after driving for 4 years) so I don't know how to work this.