Cadillac V-Net


Supporting Vendors / Dealers - Advertising Information
Page 21 of 21 FirstFirst ... 111718192021
Results 301 to 306 of 306
  1. #301
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTspeedFReaK View Post
    I have read this entire post and am wondering if you would suggest a ATS-V to a prospective buyer or advise them to steer clear? I am a prospective buyer. I am looking for a used sedan so as to let someone else eat the depreciation.

    My background is this: I am a 50 yr old car guy who gravitates toward "sleepers". I had a 2011 Subaru WRX STI hatchback which was pro tuned and I upgraded most of the suspension components. I loved that car but it was a little rough around the edges and wasn't a lot of fun in heavy traffic. When it showed signs of potential engine trouble on the horizon, I decided to trade it in and get something more comfortable and yet still practical. I opted for a 2016 Ford Edge Sport. I immediately realized I had gone too soft and started looking for a track car or weekend car. I purchased a 2011 Corvette Grand Sport with 14k miles and upgraded the brake fluid and pads. Amazing track car! but I just didn't drive it enough. I just sold that car and am now searching for a really fun daily driver (I will trade or sell the Edge Sport) that is sufficiently comfortable.

    I am not particularly tied to any particular brand but I do want four doors and a hatch or decent trunk with folding rear seats. I will probably buy a very low mileage used car, preferably a one owner personal lease vehicle. I would like to spend in the $35-45k range.I am not looking for 0-60 times but a car with great suspension that feels like a drivers car in the twisty roads I am considering a ATS V, Genesis G70 3.3T Sport, Alfa Romeo Guilia Ti Sport, VW Golf R (which I would modify immediately to reach my performance goals) or a Chevy SS. While there are many other from the German stable which interest me, I don't want to drive the same brand as many of the more snobby/obnoxious people around me tend to drive. I am undecided. I was just about to pull the trigger on 10k mile 2016 ATS V which was loaded with every option. I went so far as to have a 3rd party mechanic inspect the car for me. After reading your experiences, I hit the brakes.

    Honest opinion? Would you suggest a 2018 or should I scratch it off my list? This will be my only vehicle. I want some degree of reliability. I don't mind replacing a touch screen panel and would probably add a downpipe and spark plugs when tuning the car. Transmission problems or turbo seal leakage and cylinder or head damage is a different story. While I am a adult capable of making his own decisions, I would greatly appreciate any advice you might have. Thank you in advance for your consideration
    I too have read all the pages on this forum and was about to buy a 16 ATS-V until I Read about the oil issue on both the blue coupe and white sedan. The problem still seems to be a mystery until they look at his old engine. But with that being said Iíve noticed that itís not all 16 & early 17 model ATS-Vís that have this problem. So what it comes down to when buying a used one, like I intend on doing is seeing what kind of warranty I can get. Say if I get this oil problem will I get a new engine too??? If warranty wonít cover it then I might go with the M4... definitely 100% rather have the V!

  2. #302
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Mystic, CT
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The more I think about it, the less comfortable I am trusting that GM/Cadillac will give the customer a honest and fair response if problems occur. There were problems with Corvettes too but it was higher volume car so there was a aftermarket which filled the void left by GM and their parts suppliers. I don't expect a car not to have failures. I just want to know that some sort of a fix is possible. Receiving a replacement part that is just as likely to fail is a deal breaker for me. It is very frustrating to find a car with such potential for greatness let down by some poorly designed parts and a inability to remedy the problem.

  3. #303
    Technical Writer for Internet & Print Media
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    CenCoast CA
    Posts
    217
    Post Thanks / Like

    V-Series Cadillac(s)

    2016 ATS-V Sedan, 2016 ATS-V Coupe

    Default

    So far, I've been unable to ascertain what the problem is with LF4 engines built in 2016 which causes only the front two cylinders to have a loss of proper ring seal which causes the oil smoke on cold start problem.

    There was some communication with my pal at Bunnin Cadillac, Technician Luis Rios, with a "Brand Quality Manager" at GM which indicated there was some kind of "materials problem" with the liners in those blocks, but that raises this question: if there was a "materials problem" how can it affect only liners used in #1 and #2? I'd think a materials problem could affect all the liners.

    Beyond that communication between Rios and a BQM, I can only speculate. I don't know if the LF4 block is manufactured with wet or dry liners. If they're dry liners and their installation leaves voids or other problems between the block's bores and the liner, that could cause problems with ring seal. Once the liners are installed and machined, if the front of the block distorts when the front cover fasteners are tightened, that could cause a ring seal problem, too. The only conclusion I can make at this point is that once, we misdiagnosed the cause as faulty valve stem seals and twice we misdiagnosed the problem as failed turbocharger shaft seals. Also, the early concern with engine oil was a dead end. Engine oil choice never played a part in the oil smoke on cold start problem.

    At one time I had a good contact with the GM Communications Manager for the now defunct GM Global Propulsion Systems, however, GPS was disbanded and its Communications Manager's job was eliminated. I'm attempting to make contact with whomever at GM Communciations deals with Cadillac engineering in hopes of getting more information about this engine problem.
    Last edited by Hib Halverson; 07-27-2019 at 01:45 PM.
    Hib Halverson
    I'net Tech Writer
    2Vs 'n' 4Zs

  4. #304
    Technical Writer for Internet & Print Media
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    CenCoast CA
    Posts
    217
    Post Thanks / Like

    V-Series Cadillac(s)

    2016 ATS-V Sedan, 2016 ATS-V Coupe

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTspeedFReaK View Post
    I have read this entire post and am wondering if you would suggest a ATS-V to a prospective buyer or advise them to steer clear? I am a prospective buyer. I am looking for a used sedan so as to let someone else eat the depreciation.

    My background is this: I am a 50 yr old car guy who gravitates toward "sleepers". I had a 2011 Subaru WRX STI hatchback which was pro tuned and I upgraded most of the suspension components. I loved that car but it was a little rough around the edges and wasn't a lot of fun in heavy traffic. When it showed signs of potential engine trouble on the horizon, I decided to trade it in and get something more comfortable and yet still practical. I opted for a 2016 Ford Edge Sport. I immediately realized I had gone too soft and started looking for a track car or weekend car. I purchased a 2011 Corvette Grand Sport with 14k miles and upgraded the brake fluid and pads. Amazing track car! but I just didn't drive it enough. I just sold that car and am now searching for a really fun daily driver (I will trade or sell the Edge Sport) that is sufficiently comfortable.

    I am not particularly tied to any particular brand but I do want four doors and a hatch or decent trunk with folding rear seats. I will probably buy a very low mileage used car, preferably a one owner personal lease vehicle. I would like to spend in the $35-45k range.I am not looking for 0-60 times but a car with great suspension that feels like a drivers car in the twisty roads I am considering a ATS V, Genesis G70 3.3T Sport, Alfa Romeo Guilia Ti Sport, VW Golf R (which I would modify immediately to reach my performance goals) or a Chevy SS. While there are many other from the German stable which interest me, I don't want to drive the same brand as many of the more snobby/obnoxious people around me tend to drive. I am undecided. I was just about to pull the trigger on 10k mile 2016 ATS V which was loaded with every option. I went so far as to have a 3rd party mechanic inspect the car for me. After reading your experiences, I hit the brakes.

    Honest opinion? Would you suggest a 2018 or should I scratch it off my list? This will be my only vehicle. I want some degree of reliability. I don't mind replacing a touch screen panel and would probably add a downpipe and spark plugs when tuning the car. Transmission problems or turbo seal leakage and cylinder or head damage is a different story. While I am a adult capable of making his own decisions, I would greatly appreciate any advice you might have. Thank you in advance for your consideration
    The cars you list are a pretty wide range, however, if you are really focused on the compact sedan segment, of the cars you list, the ATS-V and Guilia are characteristic of cars that size. If you are concerned about performance, keep in mind that the ATS-V is a much better choice than the Giulia Ti Sport. The only Alfa that compares to the ATS-V is the Giulia Quadrifoglio. Both can be had as four-door sedans. I'd say their quality and durability are comparable, ie: both can have problems. Both have great chassis. Both have lots of power with the edge going to the Quadrifoglio by about 40. With braking, the advantage goes to the Alfa but only if you buy the optional CCM brakes at $8000. If you decide on the ordinary iron brake rotors, both have equal braking abilities. There is no manual available in the Alfa.

    If you're partial to the Cadillac, look for a low mileage '17 or '18. There were not ATS-V four-doors in 2019.
    Hib Halverson
    I'net Tech Writer
    2Vs 'n' 4Zs

  5. #305
    Technical Writer for Internet & Print Media
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    CenCoast CA
    Posts
    217
    Post Thanks / Like

    V-Series Cadillac(s)

    2016 ATS-V Sedan, 2016 ATS-V Coupe

    Default

    At this point, I have 1290 miles on the replacement engine in my 2016 Coupe. So far, there have been no problems with the installation. In addition to the new engine, at about the same time, my dealer, Bunnin Cadillac, as part of Cadillac's Premium Maintenance program, both the engine air filters and the cabin air filter were replaced.

    At the 609 mile mark, I changed the oil for the first time. I always do the first oil change at 500-1000 miles on the engine to purge the oiling system of any silicone RTV residue which can cause oil foaming and to remove any debris from engine assembly which wasn't trapped by an oil filter and is lying on the bottom of the oil pan. Additionally, I don't think GM's Dexos 1 Generation 2 5W30 engine oil is the best choice for an engine like the LF4 which gets driven they way I run it.

    My choice in engine oil is Driven Racing Oil's "DI30 Synthetic Direct Injection Performance Motor Oil" which is an mPAO-based 5W30 full synthetic formulated specifically for high-performance street direct injected gasoline engines. DI30 builds on Driven's successful LS30 high-performance engine oil with an improved DGI-specific additive package intended to address the tendency of turbocharged DGI engines to have problems with low-speed preignition (LSPI) and soot creation. To better explain LSPI, I've excerpted a "White Paper" Driven's head of research and development, Lake Speed wrote for Engine Professional magazine.

    A Little-V Blog: The ATS-V purchase and ownership experience-dro_di30_1100-jpg

    LSPI occurs in turbocharged direct injected engines because of the higher cylinder pressures present and because of the shorter amount of time the fuel has to vaporize. A typical GDI engine has less than 160 degrees of crankshaft rotation to atomize the fuel compared to over 320 degrees of crankshaft rotation to atomize the fuel in a traditional port injection or carbureted engine. The combination of higher compression and shorter atomization time make direct injection engines more prone to abnormal combustion events such as LSPI.

    Internal combustion engines don’t burn liquid fuel. They “vaporize” the liquid gasoline by spraying the fuel as a fine mist into the hot and turbulent air moving through the engine. This process is typically called atomization, and it is simply the conversion of the fuel from a liquid state into a vapor. If the fuel doesn’t turn into a vapor, then the engine can’t burn it. Some of that unburnt fuel finds its way into the crevice between the top of the piston and the upper ring land where it mixes with the motor oil that lubricates the cylinder walls. This mixing is where things begin to go bad chemically.

    How does oil chemistry effect things?

    Gasoline direct injection engines create soot, just like a Diesel. The soot created in a DI engine can lead to increased abrasive wear greater than in a port injected or carbonated engine. Because DI engines offer both fuel economy and emissions advantages, the US Department of Energy made a research grant to Oak Ridge National Laboratory to investigate ways to overcome the limitations of DI engines with mainstream motor oil chemistry. These challenges pushed Oak Ridge to seek a lubricant development partner that could be nimble and had a keen understanding of engine hardware. This led Oak Ridge Driven Racing Oil to provide custom formulated motor oils.

    The efforts of this partnership found that reducing the amount of Calcium detergent and eliminating the Sodium detergent in the motor oil formula reduced the frequency and severity of LSPI events. Once the main culprits, Calcium and Sodium based detergent additives, where identified, research began to understand why these additives contributed to LSPI. It is believed that Calcium and Sodium detergents chemically react with the fuel to create a third chemical which is neither gasoline nor engine oil. This third chemical has a lower octane value than either the fuel or the motor oil, so its detonation resistance, or antiknock rating is significantly lower. Because of the lower detonation resistance of this “blended” molecule, abnormal combustion results, which we call Low Speed Pre-Ignition. This was proven out by blending oil formulas that eliminated Sodium detergents and greatly reduced Calcium detergents. These research formulas also eliminated LSPI events.

    This was a key finding, but it also presents a problem for the vast majority of off-the-shelf motor oils. Because calcium based detergents are the most cost effective detergents, calcium based detergents are widely used detergents in off-the-shelf motor oils, typically in high concentrations.

    You may be wondering why the focus is on low engine speed. That is a fair question. At low engine speeds the turbulence of the intake charge is less than at higher engine speed. The lower turbulence leads to less atomization “assistance” by the intake charge. Imagine an engine running at idle at a stop light. The engine speed is low and there is no load on the engine. In this scenario, the fuel charge has less turbulence to assist atomization/vaporization as well as lower piston temperatures due to lower engine loads. Both reduced turbulence and lower piston temperatures work against atomization/vaporization of the fuel. Now add in back pressure from a turbocharger, and you have a recipe for reduced cylinder scavenging of a poorly atomized fuel charge. It is now wonder that DI experience higher levels of fuel dilution in used motor oil samples than port injection engines!

    A long, low speed idle followed by a hard acceleration at full throttle is the perfect condition for an LSPI event – increased fuel dilution of the motor oil followed by high cylinder pressures.

    Further proof of the atomization theory came recently from a test at EFI University. Working with Driven Racing Oil, EFI University has a GM LT1 Direct Injection engine at their testing facility. Utilizing the factory “knock” sensors to watch for early signs of possible LSPI events, Ben Strader and his team at EFI University tested two similar octane fuels – VP C10 and VP C20. While these fuels are very similar in octane, 100 octane for C10 and 98 octane for C20, the distillation curves of both fuels are drastically different.

    Essentially, distillation is a measure of the ease of a liquid fuel to turn into a vapor. The higher the distillation temperatures, the more resistant the fuel is to vaporization. Conversely, the lower the distillation temperatures, the easier the fuel will vaporize.

    Interestingly, the higher distillation temperatures of the C10 fuel caused the engine to “knock” more than the lower octane and lower distillation temperature C20 fuel. This increased knock due to lessened atomization/vaporization of the C10 fuel proved the theory of non-vaporized/liquid fuel contributing to abnormal combustion events like LSPI.

    To address the soot and LSPI problems, Driven offers its line of DI specific oils – DI20, DI30, DI40 and DI60. All of these oils were built from the ground up to be compatible with turbocharged, direct injection engines. Lessons learned from Driven's partnership with Oak Ridge National Laboratory made its way into the Driven line of DI specific engine oils.

    Thanks to Lake Speed and Driven Racing oil for permission to use their material in this blog post.

    I'm using DI30 in my LF4 not only because its ability to reduce soot and LSPI, but also because DI30 uses a more robust mPAO base stock rather than the ordinary PAO base of Dexos 1 and Mobil 1. I prefer fully-synthetic engine oils, made from either Group-IV or Group-V base stocks because they are more stable under high-temperature (HTHS) conditions. My first oil change is a good time to replace a factory fill DI30, a Group-IV, mPAO-based, full-synthetic, 5W30 engine oil which I prefer run in the LF4 engine. Known as "SpectraSyn Elite" by its maker, ExxonMobil, "metallocene polyalphaolefin" or "mPAO" is described as: a high-performance polyalphaolefin (PAO) designed to provide better blending efficiency and performance capabilities than conventional synthetic PAO. These capabilities include: improved viscosity index, for high performance at a wide temperature range; enhanced shear stability, for long drain intervals and better low-temperature properties, for cold-start capability and fluidity. Ironically, ExxonMobil does not use its mPAO base stock in the Mobil 1 products it markets in North America. The mass-marketed Mobil 1 as well as Dexos 1 uses a Group III base stock.

    Driven DI30's mPAO base stock performs better under HTHS conditions which may exist in high-performance, turbocharged engines when they are driven aggressively in hot weather.

    As for oil filters, I use the ACDelco PF63E and I change them at 50% and zero engine oil life
    Last edited by Hib Halverson; 07-29-2019 at 05:11 PM.
    Hib Halverson
    I'net Tech Writer
    2Vs 'n' 4Zs

  6. #306
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    atascadero, ca
    Posts
    22
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hib Halverson View Post
    At this point, I have 1290 miles on the replacement engine in my 2016 Coupe. So far, there have been no problems with the installation. In addition to the new engine, at about the same time, my dealer, Bunnin Cadillac, as part of Cadillac's Premium Maintenance program, both the engine air filters and the cabin air filter were replaced.

    At the 609 mile mark, I changed the oil for the first time. I always do the first oil change at 500-1000 miles on the engine to purge the oiling system of any silicone RTV residue which can cause oil foaming and to remove any debris from engine assembly which wasn't trapped by an oil filter and is lying on the bottom of the oil pan. Additionally, I don't think GM's Dexos 1 Generation 2 5W30 engine oil is the best choice for an engine like the LF4 which gets driven they way I run it.

    My choice in engine oil is Driven Racing Oil's "DI30 Synthetic Direct Injection Performance Motor Oil" which is an mPAO-based 5W30 full synthetic formulated specifically for high-performance street direct injected gasoline engines. DI30 builds on Driven's successful LS30 high-performance engine oil with an improved DGI-specific additive package intended to address the tendency of turbocharged DGI engines to have problems with low-speed preignition (LSPI) and soot creation. To better explain LSPI, I've excerpted a "White Paper" Driven's head of research and development, Lake Speed wrote for Engine Professional magazine.

    A Little-V Blog: The ATS-V purchase and ownership experience-dro_di30_1100-jpg

    LSPI occurs in turbocharged direct injected engines because of the higher cylinder pressures present and because of the shorter amount of time the fuel has to vaporize. A typical GDI engine has less than 160 degrees of crankshaft rotation to atomize the fuel compared to over 320 degrees of crankshaft rotation to atomize the fuel in a traditional port injection or carbureted engine. The combination of higher compression and shorter atomization time make direct injection engines more prone to abnormal combustion events such as LSPI.

    Internal combustion engines don’t burn liquid fuel. They “vaporize” the liquid gasoline by spraying the fuel as a fine mist into the hot and turbulent air moving through the engine. This process is typically called atomization, and it is simply the conversion of the fuel from a liquid state into a vapor. If the fuel doesn’t turn into a vapor, then the engine can’t burn it. Some of that unburnt fuel finds its way into the crevice between the top of the piston and the upper ring land where it mixes with the motor oil that lubricates the cylinder walls. This mixing is where things begin to go bad chemically.

    How does oil chemistry effect things?

    Gasoline direct injection engines create soot, just like a Diesel. The soot created in a DI engine can lead to increased abrasive wear greater than in a port injected or carbonated engine. Because DI engines offer both fuel economy and emissions advantages, the US Department of Energy made a research grant to Oak Ridge National Laboratory to investigate ways to overcome the limitations of DI engines with mainstream motor oil chemistry. These challenges pushed Oak Ridge to seek a lubricant development partner that could be nimble and had a keen understanding of engine hardware. This led Oak Ridge Driven Racing Oil to provide custom formulated motor oils.

    The efforts of this partnership found that reducing the amount of Calcium detergent and eliminating the Sodium detergent in the motor oil formula reduced the frequency and severity of LSPI events. Once the main culprits, Calcium and Sodium based detergent additives, where identified, research began to understand why these additives contributed to LSPI. It is believed that Calcium and Sodium detergents chemically react with the fuel to create a third chemical which is neither gasoline nor engine oil. This third chemical has a lower octane value than either the fuel or the motor oil, so its detonation resistance, or antiknock rating is significantly lower. Because of the lower detonation resistance of this “blended” molecule, abnormal combustion results, which we call Low Speed Pre-Ignition. This was proven out by blending oil formulas that eliminated Sodium detergents and greatly reduced Calcium detergents. These research formulas also eliminated LSPI events.

    This was a key finding, but it also presents a problem for the vast majority of off-the-shelf motor oils. Because calcium based detergents are the most cost effective detergents, calcium based detergents are widely used detergents in off-the-shelf motor oils, typically in high concentrations.

    You may be wondering why the focus is on low engine speed. That is a fair question. At low engine speeds the turbulence of the intake charge is less than at higher engine speed. The lower turbulence leads to less atomization “assistance” by the intake charge. Imagine an engine running at idle at a stop light. The engine speed is low and there is no load on the engine. In this scenario, the fuel charge has less turbulence to assist atomization/vaporization as well as lower piston temperatures due to lower engine loads. Both reduced turbulence and lower piston temperatures work against atomization/vaporization of the fuel. Now add in back pressure from a turbocharger, and you have a recipe for reduced cylinder scavenging of a poorly atomized fuel charge. It is now wonder that DI experience higher levels of fuel dilution in used motor oil samples than port injection engines!

    A long, low speed idle followed by a hard acceleration at full throttle is the perfect condition for an LSPI event – increased fuel dilution of the motor oil followed by high cylinder pressures.

    Further proof of the atomization theory came recently from a test at EFI University. Working with Driven Racing Oil, EFI University has a GM LT1 Direct Injection engine at their testing facility. Utilizing the factory “knock” sensors to watch for early signs of possible LSPI events, Ben Strader and his team at EFI University tested two similar octane fuels – VP C10 and VP C20. While these fuels are very similar in octane, 100 octane for C10 and 98 octane for C20, the distillation curves of both fuels are drastically different.

    Essentially, distillation is a measure of the ease of a liquid fuel to turn into a vapor. The higher the distillation temperatures, the more resistant the fuel is to vaporization. Conversely, the lower the distillation temperatures, the easier the fuel will vaporize.

    Interestingly, the higher distillation temperatures of the C10 fuel caused the engine to “knock” more than the lower octane and lower distillation temperature C20 fuel. This increased knock due to lessened atomization/vaporization of the C10 fuel proved the theory of non-vaporized/liquid fuel contributing to abnormal combustion events like LSPI.

    To address the soot and LSPI problems, Driven offers its line of DI specific oils – DI20, DI30, DI40 and DI60. All of these oils were built from the ground up to be compatible with turbocharged, direct injection engines. Lessons learned from Driven's partnership with Oak Ridge National Laboratory made its way into the Driven line of DI specific engine oils.

    Thanks to Lake Speed and Driven Racing oil for permission to use their material in this blog post.

    I'm using DI30 in my LF4 not only because its ability to reduce soot and LSPI, but also because DI30 uses a more robust mPAO base stock rather than the ordinary PAO base of Dexos 1 and Mobil 1. I prefer fully-synthetic engine oils, made from either Group-IV or Group-V base stocks because they are more stable under high-temperature (HTHS) conditions. My first oil change is a good time to replace a factory fill DI30, a Group-IV, mPAO-based, full-synthetic, 5W30 engine oil which I prefer run in the LF4 engine. Known as "SpectraSyn Elite" by its maker, ExxonMobil, "metallocene polyalphaolefin" or "mPAO" is described as: a high-performance polyalphaolefin (PAO) designed to provide better blending efficiency and performance capabilities than conventional synthetic PAO. These capabilities include: improved viscosity index, for high performance at a wide temperature range; enhanced shear stability, for long drain intervals and better low-temperature properties, for cold-start capability and fluidity. Ironically, ExxonMobil does not use its mPAO base stock in the Mobil 1 products it markets in North America. The mass-marketed Mobil 1 as well as Dexos 1 uses a Group III base stock.

    Driven DI30's mPAO base stock performs better under HTHS conditions which may exist in high-performance, turbocharged engines when they are driven aggressively in hot weather.

    As for oil filters, I use the ACDelco PF63E and I change them at 50% and zero engine oil life
    I agree with your choice of motor oil. Never thought you would ditch Mobil 1. Wonder why Mobil 1 is so highly rated when it is not 100% synthetic and does not use group IV or V base oils. Wonder if DRIVEN is 100% synthetic. Likely not that important as long as they use the best base oils. Also liked their comments that using a high flow gauze air filter (K&N) requires more frequent changes of the oil filter due to the grit the air filter introduces into the engine. That is why I have always recommended and used factory paper filters. Their suggestion to change the oil filter frequently but keep the oil makes sense.
    Last edited by Unclevito; 10-27-2019 at 03:46 PM. Reason: Read Driven site

Similar Threads

  1. Video: Cadillac User Experience Technology | CUE
    By Rob in forum Other Cadillacs
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-09-2013, 09:38 PM
  2. GM Press Release: Cadillac to wow customers with total customer experience
    By Rob in forum Cadillac and GM Industry News
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-03-2012, 07:21 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Cadillac, ATS-V, CTS-V, STS-V and XLR-V are registered trademarks of the General Motors Corporation & Cadillac Motor Division.  Neither Cadillac Motor Division nor any subsidiaries of GM© shall bear any responsibility for CadillacVNet.com content, comments, or advertising. CadillacVNet.com is independent from GM© and is not affiliated with, sponsored or supported by GM©.  Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended, or implied.  All Rights Reserved