2008 Cadillac STS V6 Review

2008 cadillac sts v6 review

History records an era when a Cadillac was a no-compromise choice for well-heeled individuals seeking perfection. I remember the original import-fighting Seville’s refreshing blend of global proportions with acres of unabashed Cadillac style. What followed—neglect and shameless down market downplays– left Cadillac oblivious to its former “Standard of the World” designation. So it’s no surprise that the latest STS, nee Seville, doesn’t deserve to wear the crested wreath.

The STS’s new grill evokes images of a polyester-clad used car salesman’s teeth-laden, insincere smile. The afterthought fender venti-ports are his suit. Other than that, there’s nothing memorable about the top-drawer Caddy’s sheetmetal. Sure, the watered-down cues from the last-gen CTS make for a handsome shape. But where the old CTS was a shot of Jägermeister to Johnny Walker entry-level luxo sedans, the STS’ conservative contours are a lukewarm bottle of piss.

In fact, the STS’ down market styling influences bring to mind of another silent reminder of GM’s ham-fisted product planning: the Oldsmobile Aurora. Both top-flight sedans paved the way for a new generation of American luxury. But the uber-Olds got a po-faced Alero makeover. Which nobody bought. Ditto the STS, without the plastic surgeon’s scalpel.

For all of GM’s talk of world-class interiors, the new-for-‘08 STS still has the shittiest cabin in its class. The vent registers’ flimsy actions are worthy of Aveo real estate. The console, while positively Malibuian, fails to coddle like the padded, stitched panels on the Lexus GS. The only touch-point more pedestrian than the door panel’s northern hemisphere: the hard plastic that envelops the gauge cluster, forcing the driver to make skin contact with Lumina-grade goodness with each activation of the keyless ignition system. This is a forty-five thousand dollar luxury car?

The STS’ leather looks, feels and smells worthy of the under-20k compact crowd. Even worse, front passengers get a flashback to the compromised floor pan of yesteryear’s Camaro: the bloated transmission tunnel pinches foot space and adds claustrophobia to an otherwise inhospitable atmos. If the sensory disappointments haven’t set a nail in the STS’ coffin, the flat and flaccid BOSE audio numbs your ears with eight over-hyped, underperforming drivers. Let’s be clear: if this Caddy’s interior could talk, it’d win TTAC’s Bob Lutz award.

Thankfully the STS’ respectable underpinnings hail from the GM sigma platform, which made the CTS an American hero. Too bad the dynamic dyslexia turns this platform’s inherent “FTW” attitude into a “WTF” blend of compromises. In true Detroit fashion that means the ride isn’t half bad for a sports sedan wannabe. The cruise is plush and confident, without the mack-daddy purpose of its DTS cousin. Pavement joints, potholes and parking lot speed bumps never stand a chance.

Which leads to the inevitable trade-off. Feed the STS a corner and you’re done; inescapable understeer and prodigious body roll are your partners in stupidity. The saving grace is a fairly neutral rear wheel-drive orientation– that feels like a milquetoast E-Class Merc at anything less than 8/10ths. Our tester’s all-wheel-drive added tenacious grip; white loafer-wearing snow birds will be thrilled.

The compromised Caddy gets worse under the hood. The STS’ standard-issue 3.6-liter V6 is hot for its direct-injected torque peak (at a sky-high 5200rpm). In other words, the engine creates a brand and model-dishonest torque curve; wafters needs not apply. Thankfully, the six-pot delivers the power in a strictly linear fashion. Miserably, the six-speed autobox’s oddly spaced one-two gear interrupts the smooth and righteous application of power.

Add this bewildered forward propulsion to the mixed bag suspension and you get an anticlimactic blend of an attention-seeking engine and buzz-killing corner-scrub. Much like the CTS, the STS needs the real American spirit generated by the small-block V8s found in far cheaper GM sedans.

In fairness, the STS has an impressive options list to compensate. The model offers everything from Magnaride dampeners, to a locking rear differential, to flashy Brembo stoppers. Some require the (sorely needed) Northstar V8 and a serious chunk of change. Or perhaps the supercharged STS V-series for a cool eighty grand? Didn’t think so.

On paper, the STS matches the imports at many hotly-contested price points. There’s the GS350-alternative discussed here, and an AMG E-class fighter up top. But the cheap bones of the STS V6 prove that this Caddy is out of its league, minor or major.

Rumor has it that RenCen is resolute: Caddy’s future lies downmarket. The STS is on deathwatch– making way for a hungry rookie with a soulful V8. The Hyundai Genesis could well be the STS re-incarnate, ready to punch the luxo-sedan market in the solar plexus. In theory, the STS coulda been a contender. But reality sucks, and the Cadillac STS’s irrelevance hits home at first glance. So if it’s on the chopping block, good riddance to bad rubbish.

[ CarMax provided the vehicle reviewed, insurance and a tank of gas]

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 99 comments
  • Sajeev Mehta Sajeev Mehta on Oct 01, 2008

    We have another "agree to disagree" standoff. Sure, the STS has wood trim, leather trim and shiny metallic accents, but their design/placement/frequency of use/presentation is sub-par. E-class, 5-series, M-series, GS-series, whatever...they all excel over the GM product. But Phil, grab one of the STS' vent registers: cheap and flimsy! My Focus SE tester had higher quality vents, and that's inexcusable.

  • Fps_dean Fps_dean on Aug 02, 2009

    Fom the reviewer: "My Focus SE tester had higher quality vents, and that’s inexcusable." I've driven both cars, somewhat frequently and the vents don't even turn in uniform on the Focus because they are just that cheap. The vent registers in the STS aren't very much different than what's found in Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc. Now I drive a 2005 1SF (v8 RWD) model, and the handling of the car is most excellent. The new v6 engine offers similar performance, which is competitive with any car in the class -- the older v6, not so much. I only test drove 1SF and 1SG models however, so perhaps the lower trims do not ride as nicely -- but keep in mind the base models sell for quite a bit cheaper than the competition as well. Other cars that I test drove and were the Mercedes Benz E350, BMW 5 series, Audi A6, and Volvo S80, but the STS definitely drove at least as nicely, had more power available, arguably the best audio (very close either way) and all of the options and in many cases then some. Again, I only drove 1SF and 1SG models. I feel this review doesn't do this car justice. The STS is not a bad car at all -- most legitimate reviews at least recognize that the folks at Cadillac have made a huge jump in the right direction, and the STS is still a good offering even if there's other cars that they like better.

  • Inside Looking Out Why EBFlex dominates this EV discussion? Just because he is a Ford expert?
  • Marky S. Very nice article and photos. I am a HUGE Edsel fan. I have always been fascinated with the "Charlie Brown of Cars." Allow me to make a minor correction to add here: the Pacer line was the second-from-bottom rung Edsel, not the entry-level trim. That would be the Edsel Ranger for 1958. It had the widest array of body styles. The Ranger 2-door sedan (with a "B-pillar", not a pillarless hardtop), was priced at $2,484. So, the Ranger and Pacer both used the smaller Ford body. The next two upscale Edsel's were based on the Mercury body, are were: Corsair, and, top-line Citation. Although the 1959 style is my fav. I would love a '58 Edsel Pacer 4-door hardtop sedan!
  • Lou_BC Stupid to kill the 6ft box in the crewcab. That's the most common Canyon/Colorado trim I see. That kills the utility of a small truck. The extended cab was a poor seller so that makes sense. GM should have kept the diesel. It's a decent engine that mates well with the 6 speed. Fuel economy is impressive.
  • Lou_BC High end EV's are selling well. Car companies are taking advantage of that fact. I see quite a few $100k pickups in my travels so why is that ok but $100k EV's are bad? The cynical side of me sees car companies tack on 8k premiums to EV's around the time we see governments up EV credits. Coincidence? No fooking way.
  • EBFlex "I'd add to that right now, demand is higher than supply, so basic business rules say to raise the price."Demand is very low. Supply is even lower. Saying that demand is outstripping supply without providing context is dishonest at best.
Next