IS-F vs anything Cadillac
05-05-11, 02:34 PM
#16
Driver School Candidate
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I going to loose any sleep tonight because a CTS-V can run from 0-60 faster than my IS-F, no. When I bought the IS-F, it came down to the quality issue, and just an overall better looking interior(the last item is just my humble opinion). I know the IS-F and the car I came out of, G8/GT are really apples and oranges, but the quality issue lingered with me as I looked over a $72000 CTS-V at my local dealership. And after the problems that plagued the G8, I just could not help think, is the CTS-V quality really any better? After having driven the IS-F now for about three weeks, it is a great car, much better than the G8, faster, and a whole lot more fun.
05-05-11, 02:49 PM
#17
Driver
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CTS-V isn't even close to the same class as a ZR1. More comparable to a Standard Corvette, possibly a grand sport.
I haven't driven a CTS-V yet but I wouldn't be so sure it doesn't ride a lot nicer than the F does. My ZR1 in sport mode rides better than MY IS-F does and in touring mode it's night and day better.
I can't say that the CTS-V is better overall than the F because I've never been in one but I still think the IS-F is an awesome car and you couldn't go wrong with either one.
I haven't driven a CTS-V yet but I wouldn't be so sure it doesn't ride a lot nicer than the F does. My ZR1 in sport mode rides better than MY IS-F does and in touring mode it's night and day better.
I can't say that the CTS-V is better overall than the F because I've never been in one but I still think the IS-F is an awesome car and you couldn't go wrong with either one.
05-05-11, 09:45 PM
#18
Lexus Champion
CTS-V isn't even close to the same class as a ZR1. More comparable to a Standard Corvette, possibly a grand sport.
I haven't driven a CTS-V yet but I wouldn't be so sure it doesn't ride a lot nicer than the F does. My ZR1 in sport mode rides better than MY IS-F does and in touring mode it's night and day better.
I can't say that the CTS-V is better overall than the F because I've never been in one but I still think the IS-F is an awesome car and you couldn't go wrong with either one.
I haven't driven a CTS-V yet but I wouldn't be so sure it doesn't ride a lot nicer than the F does. My ZR1 in sport mode rides better than MY IS-F does and in touring mode it's night and day better.
I can't say that the CTS-V is better overall than the F because I've never been in one but I still think the IS-F is an awesome car and you couldn't go wrong with either one.
The looks are subjective, but the Recaros in the V embarass our seats. It offers a 6 speed, has waaaaay more room and the performance isn't something we should be discussing on a Lexus forum, it is that ugly. Tuned vs. tuned.....lol.
You can speculate about reliability and criticize the "bling" of the design (too much chrome for myself), but there is zero chance that the F does anything tangible better than the V. Add in the two door option and there's an even better argument.
Pick your poison but to disparage the V is laughable.
05-05-11, 10:46 PM
#19
Lexus Test Driver
Meh, I doubt I'll ever consider an American car again after my experiences with them.
Also, I did ride in a friend's CTS and the interior is really overdone and gaudy. I actually prefer the old gen CTS interior - which while still probably overstyled, was at least different in a good way. The new one is just too busy, way too much going on.
As far as CTS-V shortcomings - the sluggish transmission has not been reviewed well, and I do recall the steering feel was panned in a few reviews.
Did you quote the wrong post? I see a criticism of the F and nothing positive about it in the one you quoted.
Also, I did ride in a friend's CTS and the interior is really overdone and gaudy. I actually prefer the old gen CTS interior - which while still probably overstyled, was at least different in a good way. The new one is just too busy, way too much going on.
As far as CTS-V shortcomings - the sluggish transmission has not been reviewed well, and I do recall the steering feel was panned in a few reviews.
Did you quote the wrong post? I see a criticism of the F and nothing positive about it in the one you quoted.
05-05-11, 10:57 PM
#20
Lexus Champion
I agree that the interior is somewhat "gaudy" but the Recaros are awesome. The tranny can't be that slow if it got around the 'Ring faster than any four door on the planet prior to the Pan TT.
And for someone that now owns an exotic, there are many that would say that a ZR1 is a far better "bang for the buck" than many of the supercars. While your experience with American cars may have been negative...you have none in your sig...there is no denying that a current gen Z06/ZR1/CTSV outperform most cars in their class.
05-05-11, 11:37 PM
#21
Lead Lap
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: AZ
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too much chrome for my tastes. That SC may seem great but its heat soak city when you push it hard, especially here in AZ. I've run my F back to back 6 times with no breaks between and it was very consistent.
05-06-11, 12:42 AM
#22
Lexus Test Driver
Fortunately, seats are one of the easiest thing to swap in a car if you ever so desire.
And for someone that now owns an exotic, there are many that would say that a ZR1 is a far better "bang for the buck" than many of the supercars. While your experience with American cars may have been negative...you have none in your sig...there is no denying that a current gen Z06/ZR1/CTSV outperform most cars in their class.
Just like food, cars have to be about more than lap times or spec figures on a piece of paper. Someone who likes dynamic, lightweight cars isn't going to find a tank like the CTS-V (or even the IS F, for that matter) good value because he's not going to like it to begin with, no matter what the cost.
As for American cars? I grew up in a Cadillac family. It hasn't been a Cadillac family for probably at least 20 years. I will say I do have fond memories of one American car, an Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser, 2nd gen - but even that had its reliability issues, just not nearly as much as the Cadillacs.
05-06-11, 06:35 AM
#23
I owned an '06 CTS-V. I can say hands-down that the fit and finish, handling and quality of the IS-F wins. Easily. The original V's seemed to be half finished- the steering was vague, it had a foot brake with a manual transmission (that always bugged me). The shifter was terrible- the throw was huge and there was probably 2" of lateral play in the shifter while it was in gear. It never felt as planted as the IS-F does. The ride was definitely smoother, but the car tended to float more when pushing it. Also, the car had tons of rattles, squeaks and other oddities you would not expect from a $60k. It definitely didn't have anywhere near the amenities the F has (bluetooth, audio, backup cameras, etc).
I haven't driven a newer V, but they definitely look nicer. I hope the reliability has improved- in 2 years of owning the V, I think it was in the shop 3-4 times. Again, not a deal breaker, but you would think that GM could do a little better in one of their flagship marques.
I haven't driven a newer V, but they definitely look nicer. I hope the reliability has improved- in 2 years of owning the V, I think it was in the shop 3-4 times. Again, not a deal breaker, but you would think that GM could do a little better in one of their flagship marques.
05-06-11, 09:52 AM
#24
I owned an '06 CTS-V. I can say hands-down that the fit and finish, handling and quality of the IS-F wins. Easily. The original V's seemed to be half finished- the steering was vague, it had a foot brake with a manual transmission (that always bugged me). The shifter was terrible- the throw was huge and there was probably 2" of lateral play in the shifter while it was in gear. It never felt as planted as the IS-F does. The ride was definitely smoother, but the car tended to float more when pushing it. Also, the car had tons of rattles, squeaks and other oddities you would not expect from a $60k. It definitely didn't have anywhere near the amenities the F has (bluetooth, audio, backup cameras, etc).
I haven't driven a newer V, but they definitely look nicer. I hope the reliability has improved- in 2 years of owning the V, I think it was in the shop 3-4 times. Again, not a deal breaker, but you would think that GM could do a little better in one of their flagship marques.
I haven't driven a newer V, but they definitely look nicer. I hope the reliability has improved- in 2 years of owning the V, I think it was in the shop 3-4 times. Again, not a deal breaker, but you would think that GM could do a little better in one of their flagship marques.
I think you and me would be buddies..
I actually was deciding between the V and F before I pulled the trigger on the F. It's actually an easy comparison.
The CTS-V started in 04-07. First two years it was a 5.7 liter, the last two of the first gen was a 6.0. Both were rated 400ish hp, the 6.0 had a better tq curve.
It drove nice and smooth with great tq, but it was still floaty, crap shifter, whiny rear end, bad squeaky suspension bushings and the interior was bland-boring trash. The buttons were pealing or rubbing off, the touch screen had bad visual wear and the fit and finish was fading fast in/out(06'). Bluetooth? Forget about it. Under 100ms paddle shift auto? Forget about that too.
The first gen was definitely a car for the owner who doesn't mind getting their hands dirty. Stock it was only at best a low 13 sec car. Even with a Maggie SC it was at best a mid 12 sec car. My F ran a mid 12 stock with a 5 liter engine.
To sum it all up, the first gen CTS-V was crap with truck interior compared to the likes of the IS-F. To be fair the 07' goes for around 30k, so about 10k less than a decent F.
They skipped 08 and started the 2nd gen with the 09' and that's where they finally updated the rest of the car. The interior is real nice, on par with the IS-F, the power train is even better than the original with an SC. It handles awesome too. Seems like they finally figured it out. you could also get an auto or manual trans. The kicker is the cheapest I saw was 45k for a crappy color and higher miles. The good colors were starting at 50k. Depreciation on the CTS-V is pretty bad, and 04 can be had in the mid to high teens but it seems like the IS-F is bad too. If you want to spend 55 on a nice loaded 09 CTS-V, what's to say you can't afford a used 09 GTR(55-65k), unless you really need 4 doors...
When I saw the F in the high 30's low 40's, then test drove one I knew it was it. Legendary Lexus reliability, cutting edge tech; why pay more in the hopes The GM CTS-V would hold up over time. Not a chance I was willing to take. I got my F for 38+tax 46k miles.
New vs New, that depends on the styling preferences and budget. The V is a bit more but not by alot. Get a extended warranty on the Cadi, it is after all blown.
~Dv8
The CTS-V started in 04-07. First two years it was a 5.7 liter, the last two of the first gen was a 6.0. Both were rated 400ish hp, the 6.0 had a better tq curve.
It drove nice and smooth with great tq, but it was still floaty, crap shifter, whiny rear end, bad squeaky suspension bushings and the interior was bland-boring trash. The buttons were pealing or rubbing off, the touch screen had bad visual wear and the fit and finish was fading fast in/out(06'). Bluetooth? Forget about it. Under 100ms paddle shift auto? Forget about that too.
The first gen was definitely a car for the owner who doesn't mind getting their hands dirty. Stock it was only at best a low 13 sec car. Even with a Maggie SC it was at best a mid 12 sec car. My F ran a mid 12 stock with a 5 liter engine.
To sum it all up, the first gen CTS-V was crap with truck interior compared to the likes of the IS-F. To be fair the 07' goes for around 30k, so about 10k less than a decent F.
They skipped 08 and started the 2nd gen with the 09' and that's where they finally updated the rest of the car. The interior is real nice, on par with the IS-F, the power train is even better than the original with an SC. It handles awesome too. Seems like they finally figured it out. you could also get an auto or manual trans. The kicker is the cheapest I saw was 45k for a crappy color and higher miles. The good colors were starting at 50k. Depreciation on the CTS-V is pretty bad, and 04 can be had in the mid to high teens but it seems like the IS-F is bad too. If you want to spend 55 on a nice loaded 09 CTS-V, what's to say you can't afford a used 09 GTR(55-65k), unless you really need 4 doors...
When I saw the F in the high 30's low 40's, then test drove one I knew it was it. Legendary Lexus reliability, cutting edge tech; why pay more in the hopes The GM CTS-V would hold up over time. Not a chance I was willing to take. I got my F for 38+tax 46k miles.
New vs New, that depends on the styling preferences and budget. The V is a bit more but not by alot. Get a extended warranty on the Cadi, it is after all blown.
~Dv8
05-08-11, 07:54 AM
#26
Rookie
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the V relates to the m5 and the e63, the F relates to the m3 and c63 - end of story. its a bigger, faster, and more expensive car (hence...a different class).
All in All, i love the F engine. But i think if we could take the best of the V (the S/C 6.2) and find a way to put it in the F..well, i think that would be game over
All in All, i love the F engine. But i think if we could take the best of the V (the S/C 6.2) and find a way to put it in the F..well, i think that would be game over
05-08-11, 09:09 PM
#27
Rookie
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: ontario
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ctsv vs isf
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I owned an '06 CTS-V. I can say hands-down that the fit and finish, handling and quality of the IS-F wins. Easily. The original V's seemed to be half finished- the steering was vague, it had a foot brake with a manual transmission (that always bugged me). The shifter was terrible- the throw was huge and there was probably 2" of lateral play in the shifter while it was in gear. It never felt as planted as the IS-F does. The ride was definitely smoother, but the car tended to float more when pushing it. Also, the car had tons of rattles, squeaks and other oddities you would not expect from a $60k. It definitely didn't have anywhere near the amenities the F has (bluetooth, audio, backup cameras, etc).
Why would you bother writting about the 1st generation cadillac vs you isf ?
The second generation ctsv is an entirely different car from the ground up !
The platform is entirely different never mind the interior and powertrain .
The 09 and up ctsv is substantially better quality car compared to the first generation and the isf is simply no match against it . In Canada the price of the isf is dangerously close to a new cts v (when discounted by GM) . However , if your happy with your isf why bother worrying about it .
I owned an '06 CTS-V. I can say hands-down that the fit and finish, handling and quality of the IS-F wins. Easily. The original V's seemed to be half finished- the steering was vague, it had a foot brake with a manual transmission (that always bugged me). The shifter was terrible- the throw was huge and there was probably 2" of lateral play in the shifter while it was in gear. It never felt as planted as the IS-F does. The ride was definitely smoother, but the car tended to float more when pushing it. Also, the car had tons of rattles, squeaks and other oddities you would not expect from a $60k. It definitely didn't have anywhere near the amenities the F has (bluetooth, audio, backup cameras, etc).
Why would you bother writting about the 1st generation cadillac vs you isf ?
The second generation ctsv is an entirely different car from the ground up !
The platform is entirely different never mind the interior and powertrain .
The 09 and up ctsv is substantially better quality car compared to the first generation and the isf is simply no match against it . In Canada the price of the isf is dangerously close to a new cts v (when discounted by GM) . However , if your happy with your isf why bother worrying about it .
05-09-11, 06:43 AM
#28
Because this thread was comparing the CTS-V and the IS-F.
And if quality of the first generation is indicative of the quality of the second generation, then I'm not impressed. And since both cars cost around the same amount of money when they were new, I think it's a very fair comparison.
And if quality of the first generation is indicative of the quality of the second generation, then I'm not impressed. And since both cars cost around the same amount of money when they were new, I think it's a very fair comparison.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I owned an '06 CTS-V. I can say hands-down that the fit and finish, handling and quality of the IS-F wins. Easily. The original V's seemed to be half finished- the steering was vague, it had a foot brake with a manual transmission (that always bugged me). The shifter was terrible- the throw was huge and there was probably 2" of lateral play in the shifter while it was in gear. It never felt as planted as the IS-F does. The ride was definitely smoother, but the car tended to float more when pushing it. Also, the car had tons of rattles, squeaks and other oddities you would not expect from a $60k. It definitely didn't have anywhere near the amenities the F has (bluetooth, audio, backup cameras, etc).
Why would you bother writting about the 1st generation cadillac vs you isf ?
The second generation ctsv is an entirely different car from the ground up !
The platform is entirely different never mind the interior and powertrain .
The 09 and up ctsv is substantially better quality car compared to the first generation and the isf is simply no match against it . In Canada the price of the isf is dangerously close to a new cts v (when discounted by GM) . However , if your happy with your isf why bother worrying about it .
I owned an '06 CTS-V. I can say hands-down that the fit and finish, handling and quality of the IS-F wins. Easily. The original V's seemed to be half finished- the steering was vague, it had a foot brake with a manual transmission (that always bugged me). The shifter was terrible- the throw was huge and there was probably 2" of lateral play in the shifter while it was in gear. It never felt as planted as the IS-F does. The ride was definitely smoother, but the car tended to float more when pushing it. Also, the car had tons of rattles, squeaks and other oddities you would not expect from a $60k. It definitely didn't have anywhere near the amenities the F has (bluetooth, audio, backup cameras, etc).
Why would you bother writting about the 1st generation cadillac vs you isf ?
The second generation ctsv is an entirely different car from the ground up !
The platform is entirely different never mind the interior and powertrain .
The 09 and up ctsv is substantially better quality car compared to the first generation and the isf is simply no match against it . In Canada the price of the isf is dangerously close to a new cts v (when discounted by GM) . However , if your happy with your isf why bother worrying about it .
05-09-11, 11:14 AM
#29
Lexus Champion
Why would you bother writting about the 1st generation cadillac vs you isf ?
The second generation ctsv is an entirely different car from the ground up !
The platform is entirely different never mind the interior and powertrain .
The 09 and up ctsv is substantially better quality car compared to the first generation and the isf is simply no match against it . In Canada the price of the isf is dangerously close to a new cts v (when discounted by GM) . However , if your happy with your isf why bother worrying about it .
The second generation ctsv is an entirely different car from the ground up !
The platform is entirely different never mind the interior and powertrain .
The 09 and up ctsv is substantially better quality car compared to the first generation and the isf is simply no match against it . In Canada the price of the isf is dangerously close to a new cts v (when discounted by GM) . However , if your happy with your isf why bother worrying about it .
The second gen V is a completely different ball game. When I looked at the V last fall it was actually $2K cheaper than what my F was.
05-11-11, 09:04 AM
#30
Lexus Champion
Considered the '11 V when replacing the GS. Obviously, one can debate styling forever but, overall the Cad looks pretty good (possibly excepting the rump on the coupe - I'm still ambivalent).
Size-wise, as previous posters have pointed out, the comparison is not valid. If you really need the room, then you do and the F is probably out. I don't.
For me, the biggest plus was the availability of a manual but...............I never could put the reliability issue to rest. I tend to hold on to cars for a while and have certainly been spoiled in that regard for the last 20 years by Lexus.
Decision: F car!
Size-wise, as previous posters have pointed out, the comparison is not valid. If you really need the room, then you do and the F is probably out. I don't.
For me, the biggest plus was the availability of a manual but...............I never could put the reliability issue to rest. I tend to hold on to cars for a while and have certainly been spoiled in that regard for the last 20 years by Lexus.
Decision: F car!