CTS Question(s)

**1998 T/A** · 11-28-2012, 04:59 PM

Thinking about picking up a CTS ranging from 2003-2005 with mileage ranging 110k to 140k. Is there anything to look out for on these cars? and can you throw an LS1/LS2/LS3 in them without a banging headache? Thanks in advance!

**pajeff02** · 11-28-2012, 05:55 PM

Just bought a 2010 CTS 4 with the 3.0 engine. Really like the car alot. I presume you are looking for a "V"?

**1998 T/A** · 11-28-2012, 08:15 PM

not really looking for a V, way to far out of my price range. I was looking at Grand Prixs (2003-whenever they discontinued) and it seems like the for the mileage and price they follow each other pretty closely, so why not get a caddy? I just wanted to know if there was anything on these cars that go quickly or something to look out for when buying them used with some higher mileage. Would love a V but just not in the budget but wouldn't mind putting an LSx in there later down the road!

**pajeff02** · 11-29-2012, 02:31 AM

The non-V models are by no means slouchs. My 3.0 is a direct injection engine rated for 270 h.p. and the 3.6 engine makes somewhere just north of 300 h.p. Combined with the 6 speed auto, that really helps to keep the engine in the torque band, and you get a car that really runs good. Granted, being AWD, I have more driveline loss, but so far I have been more than happy with my CTS.

**Cutlass** · 11-29-2012, 03:44 AM

the 2003 and a very few early 2004s had a version of the old Caddy Catera/Saturn L300 engine. Its kinda of an old ball engine, kinda difficult to work on until you get used to it, and has a timing belt that needs to be serviced in a timely manner (like most timing belt engines), because its an interference motor. The engine has a few other quirky things but nothing worth mentioning.
The 2004 and newer have the "High Feature V6" engine. Its a better, more power engine. Some of them burn oil because the air filter boxes warped, didn't seal well, and allow dirt in the engine and wore out the rings. And some had timing chain stretch issues but most of them have been fixed up with the update parts by the time they hit 80K miles.

The transmissions in all these years hold up nearly flawlessly. Very rare to have a problem. Flush the fluid every 50K is my recommendation on these.

The rear diffs hold up fine as well. very few problem besides some leaks every once in a while.

**Smittro** · 11-29-2012, 06:47 AM

Did I hear mention of a 660 DOHC??

**1998 T/A** · 11-29-2012, 02:34 PM

Smittro, the Base CTS is still RWD right?

from what I have gathered from here and other places a late model 2004 will be a good bet with plenty of power. The burning oil issue, was that a recall thing to have the air boxes replaced?

**Cutlass** · 11-29-2012, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by 1998 T/A

Smittro, the Base CTS is still RWD right?

from what I have gathered from here and other places a late model 2004 will be a good bet with plenty of power. The burning oil issue, was that a recall thing to have the air boxes replaced?

No recall on the air box. most likely you won't have a problem, but when you do find a car you want, you're gonna wanna check the air box at some point.
I don't know what Smittro is talking about. The CTS is a RWD car and if you wanna put an LS V8 in it you'd just use a LS compatible transmission.

**FishinCricket** · 11-29-2012, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by 1998 T/A

Smittro, the Base CTS is still RWD right?

from what I have gathered from here and other places a late model 2004 will be a good bet with plenty of power. The burning oil issue, was that a recall thing to have the air boxes replaced?

Yes, the CTS didn't have an AWD option until the latest body style, 2008 and up..

Definitely go for the 3.6, the 3.2 and the 2.8's were junk... The posters above have all been spot on.

One point though: the reason a Grand Prix will run about the same money as a CTS is because repairs on the CTS will likely be higher, if they occur. Owning a vehicle that cost $40k+ new comes with certain responsibilities.

**Smittro** · 11-29-2012, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by Cutlass

No recall on the air box. most likely you won't have a problem, but when you do find a car you want, you're gonna wanna check the air box at some point.
I don't know what Smittro is talking about. The CTS is a RWD car and if you wanna put an LS V8 in it you'd just use a LS compatible transmission.

Thinking of a different car.. My bad.

**Cutlass** · 11-30-2012, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by FishinCricket

Yes, the CTS didn't have an AWD option until the latest body style, 2008 and up..

Definitely go for the 3.6, the 3.2 and the 2.8's were junk... The posters above have all been spot on.

One point though: the reason a Grand Prix will run about the same money as a CTS is because repairs on the CTS will likely be higher, if they occur. Owning a vehicle that cost $40k+ new comes with certain responsibilities.

the 2.8 is basically the same thing as the 3.6, just a smaller displacement. And its tough to tell what engine you have when you drive around town. they both feel the same off the line.
OP, manual transmission were available (but rare). If thats your thing, keep your eye out for one.

**FishinCricket** · 11-30-2012, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by Cutlass

the 2.8 is basically the same thing as the 3.6, just a smaller displacement. And its tough to tell what engine you have when you drive around town. they both feel the same off the line.
OP, manual transmission were available (but rare). If thats your thing, keep your eye out for one.

lol, I've driven and sold several 2.8's and 3.6's (and 3.2's and Catera's, etc) and I could always tell a MARKED difference between them..

There's CERTAINLY a difference in resale value!

**Cutlass** · 11-30-2012, 05:10 PM

Sounds like we're in the same business. I work on Cadillacs. 3.2 "Catera" engine certainly feels different. But I've been surprised several times to find a 2.8 under the hood instead of the usual 3.6. We've even had a few comments in the shop like "Why would you even need to get the bigger engine, they feel the same." The way the 2.8 jumps off the line and drives around surprises me that it isn't the 3.6. Not sure why we have such opposite opinions on this. I'm gonna start paying closer attention when I get another 2.8 in the shop.

**1998 T/A** · 11-30-2012, 08:04 PM

When did they stop putting 2.8's in these cars?

**pajeff02** · 12-01-2012, 03:51 AM

Not a clue. Until buying our car last month, I really knew nothing about them.

**Cutlass** · 12-01-2012, 04:03 AM

2.8 didn't last long. Just 3 model years 2005, 2006, and 2007

**1998 T/A** · 12-01-2012, 06:50 AM

The reason I asked is because i see a CTS on this guys lot for 6750 with 130k on the clock and one for 6000 with 103k on the clock, maybe the cheaper one has the 2.8?

**Cutlass** · 12-01-2012, 07:46 AM

could be. or it could be the the difference between a base CTS w/ 3.6 and the Sport CTS w/ 3.6.

**FishinCricket** · 12-01-2012, 08:22 AM

Or it could just be overall condition, owner/accident history, etc... I'd pay more for a 130k mile vehicle that was a one owner and was always well cared for vs a 100k mile, 6 owner car with two accidents on the Autocheck and NO previous service records on hand..

Wouldn't you?