Thread from 2016
Hello, Everyone. I have a customer who getting ready to walk again and needs his CTS fixed. Im going to see what I can do. The question is what to look for in the CTS, What are the problem areas, How are they in a Autocross, and how is the ownership experiences with the car. What say you?
The ones with the letter V added to them seem very nice! 
What generation? First ('03-'07), second ('08-'14) or third generation ('15+)? I have quite a bit of experience with the second generation through my work (GM tech). The problems I see with these are:
-The engine. Said it before and will say it again, the GM 3.0L/3.6L engine is a troublesome piece. The earlier models had issues with porosity in the heads that caused them to leak coolant into the engine and required replacement of the cylinder heads. The timing chains on these seem to stretch with particular frequency, just did a set with only 70K cost $500 in parts and 12.5 hours labor. Once they get a tiny bit of slack they throw a CEL, and before long they jump time and wreck the engine. It uses 3 chains and they are a pain to set up and you have to be dead-on. Best handled by a dealer, due to the weird timing procedure and requirement of special tools. They also, like all DI engines, have issues with carbon buildup on the valves that will cause them to stick and produce misfires, requires having the heads cleaned with a ton of top end cleaner.
-The hubs are a real stupid setup. The tone ring is a piece of metal-impregnated plastic that is glued to the back of the hubs. They get old and chunks fall off and then you get Service ABS/ESC lights. Also, when you do brakes and hammer the rotors off, the tone ring will fall off on occasion. Doing the rear hubs requires disassembling half of the rear of the car.
In reply to JohnRW1621:
My 2005 was the worst vehicle I've ever owned, and that is from someone who has had Land Rovers and owned 27 cars.
Timing chain tensioner went at 53k miles, caused massive damage that GM would not warranty. This was on the 3.6 liter. The car needed an entire bottom end along with all that timing chain related stuff because the reluctor wheel is a press fit in the middle of the crankshaft, mine broke loose in the timing failure. Most expensive, unreliable POS I've ever had. Dealership literally had to replace the entire crankshaft, connecting rods on a car with 53k miles on it!!
Also requires removing the intake manifold to change the spark plugs.
Run, don't walk away from these.
Storz wrote: In reply to JohnRW1621: My 2005 was the worst vehicle I've ever owned, and that is from someone who has had Land Rovers and owned 27 cars. Timing chain tensioner went at 53k miles, caused massive damage that GM would not warranty. This was on the 3.6 liter. The car needed an entire bottom end along with all that timing chain related stuff because the reluctor wheel is a press fit in the middle of the crankshaft, mine broke loose in the timing failure. Most expensive, unreliable POS I've ever had. Also requires removing the intake manifold to change the spark plugs.
Oh, yeah, I forgot that the crank reluctor wheels sometimes come loose of the crankshaft and then it requires replacement of the crankshaft. There is even a TSB about it. And yup, intake must be pulled to do anything other than an oil change. That's why I kinda wonder about the people who want to swap the GM 3.0L/3.6L into anything else. A genuinely awful motor.
Like I said. Worst car I've ever had. Was really a bummer as at the time it was the most expensive car I had ever bought and was meant to be a nice long term car for us, ended up being an utter nightmare.
I sold it and bought a 15 year old BMW 540i that had 275k miles on it and drove that for over a year with zero issues.
Storz wrote: Like I said. Worst car I've ever had. Was really a bummer as at the time it was the most expensive car I had ever bought and was meant to be a nice long term car for us, ended up being an utter nightmare. I sold it and bought a 15 year old BMW 540i that had 275k miles on it and drove that for over a year with zero issues.
Just because they renamed the Catera (CTS stands for Catera Touring Sedan, actually) doesn't necessarily mean it left behind the Catera's ways
The CTS is too small and the Vs are overpriced. On paper it should be great but it isnt, for the money. I still like the wagon though. It is a sweet looking car. I have been pretty happy with my G8 (nno manual for the GT had always annoyed me), buy for $27k brand new, it was a bargain. It has a great turning radius and handles fantastic. This in a car that has much more room than a CTS. Some parts are expensive due to the limited run. Unless the CTS is a V wagon I would look elsewhere. If badging is important, and you don't mind an auto, a Benz would be a nice alternative. If it is a project car, maybe an LS swap would be interesting.
If your friend just loves the car, it may be worth a lot to him. Whatever you do will be appreciated.
Remember the very earliest cars ('03 and '04 I think, maybe just '03) had only a 3.2L Opel/Vauxhall engine. My dad had one of the first off the line, drove it for ~60k miles without an issue. That being said, it wasn't exactly an inspiring engine and the combination of manual with very light clutch + very early first generation electronic throttle body made it very artificial feeling to drive. I imagine the automatic cars are less of an issue.
His coworker had a '04 Lincoln LS V8 and I can honestly say that the LS was a better car, and that's saying something.
Sorry for the threadjack, but is this the same 3.6L engine that's in the last few years of the old W-body Impala (including 9C1s)? We had a discussion on here a while ago about how it's plenty fast but also plenty thirsty, so I'm just wondering if it adds plenty fragile/annoying to the mix.
Stealthtercel wrote: Sorry for the threadjack, but is this the same 3.6L engine that's in the last few years of the old W-body Impala (including 9C1s)? We had a discussion on here a while ago about how it's plenty fast but also plenty thirsty, so I'm just wondering if it adds plenty fragile/annoying to the mix.
The DOHC 3.6 is in everything. SUVs, Camaros, the new V has a twin turbo version of it.
It is what it is. I've done chains in one (a transverse: step 1 is drop drivetrain out) but I also have a lot of customers with no problems. Use the correct oil and change it every 3000-5000mi, ignore the oil life monitor.
My boss has a CTS4. It's been pretty good to him. The fuel economy isn't stellar (I think he averages 22mpg) the DI tuning has some weird part throttle hiccups when it apparently goes from stratified combustion to normal combustion, which is also probably part of the fuel economy problem if it trains the driver to keep his foot in it all the time.
You do not need to remove the intake plenum to do plugs on the 3.6. Maybe you do on the old non-DI engine (longitudinal version of Opel engine used in Saturn L-series) because of its cassette type ignition coils. Even if you did, you do spark plugs so rarely that this is a non issue, and it's only like eight bolts and lift it off, anyway. I'd much rather do that than the gymnastics typically required of replacing plugs in any pushrod engine except Pontiac. (The nice thing I will say about Pontiac engines)
Now, putting fluid in the transfer case, THAT is a maintenance nightmare without body modifications.
In reply to Stealthtercel:
The 3.6L seems pretty good in the Impalas. But in other applications, ugh. I have yet to see a Traverse/Acadia/SRX/Outlook over 100K that hasn't needed timing chains. Or an entirely new engine.
In reply to NickD:
First, and its a 3.6.
I have seat time in the first gen cars. With an open diff they don't like to drift. That's not to say that they won't...
I know that the dash material seems like the worst example of how much gm sucks at interiors. Was in a second gen the other day and was stunned how little they've moved their game forward in the last 20 years.
last CTS I saw, I was following home from work yesterday. Person driving it was far too aggressive.. weaving back and forth and tailgating the car in front of them in an attempt to pass (that they never did) which probably explains why their CTS looks like it was backed into something at a high rate of speed
the 3.6 has been changed as time went on, the newer the better. I think most of it was sorted out by 08?
Gearheadotaku wrote: the 3.6 has been changed as time went on, the newer the better. I think most of it was sorted out by 08?
Nope. I work for GM. Seems like the '07-'13s are the worst.
Boss's is an 09, I think he has 140k on it, unopened engine? Ignore the oil life monitor, change every 5k max with good synthetic, problem engine becomes anvil engine.
One thing I have noted is every CTS of that generation I've seen, two and four wheel drive, has had a clutch type limited slip in the rear diff. I don't know if that was standard equipment or if the local dealers just up-optioned the heck out of their stock orders.
Experiencing his car on longish rides made me very tempted to buy a clean, enthusiast-maintained manual trans non-V that came up for sale late last year. But I just can't get over how BIG they are. Yes they were the "small" Caddy but they're still a 5-series class car.
Mod Edit: Zombie canoe deleted
JW
You'll need to log in to post.
