Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    2018 Cadillac XTS Puts on A CT6 Face

      The XTS is sticking around for a while.


    The Cadillac XTS represents the last of an era of front-wheel drive based luxury sedans for the brand. You may think that it will not be too long before the XTS goes into the great parking lot in the sky. But that's where you be wrong as the brand is giving the XTS some big updates for 2018.

    The most noticeable change is the new face that makes the XTS look more like the CT6 - something we first learned about last month. There is a new front grille and headlights that have been moved up slightly. The rear comes with a new trunk and reshaped LED taillights. Inside, Cadillac has introduced the latest version of CUE which brings forth an all new user interface.

    There is much to report in the XTS' mechanicals aside from an updated chassis that is said to improve ride comfort. The 3.6 V6 with 304 horsepower comes standard, while the V Sport makes do with a turbocharged 3.6 V6 with 410 horsepower. Both engines come paired with a six-speed automatic. The 3.6 is available with front or all-wheel drive, and the V-Sport only comes with AWD.

    The updated 2018 XTS arrives at dealers this fall.

    Source: Cadillac
    Press Release is on Page 2


    2018 XTS JOINS NEW GENERATION OF CADILLAC DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY

    NEW FOR 2018

    • Enhanced technology features with next-generation Cadillac user experience
    • Improved chassis for even greater ride comfort
    • Freshened front and rear appearance

    The Cadillac XTS is a spacious and comfortable sedan with confident handling and performance. For 2018, the XTS receives technical, chassis and appearance changes to heighten the appeal of this elegant sedan.

    Beginning with the enhanced next-generation Cadillac user experience, which debuted on the 2017 CTS sport sedan, the XTS now offers a dynamic platform that can be adjusted over time to meet a customer’s evolving connectivity needs, leveraging the cloud to enable personalization, available connected navigation and applications via the Collection app store.

    The updated chassis has revised tire designs for both 19” and 20” tires—improving ride comfort while reducing outside noise for a quieter more comfortable cabin. Drivers will find front-seat luxury much more comfortable thanks to changes to seat foam geometry, wire frame structure and heat pad redesign. An increased use of engineered sound insulators (to reduce exterior noise) reduces cabin sound to create an even more serene environment.

    New exterior styling features freshened front and rear fascias. Updated interior color and trim choices – including a Platinum-exclusive Maple Sugar with Jet Black environment – and new alloy wheel options highlight the updates to the XTS. The appearance change includes new fenders, front and rear fascias, grille, and the addition of LED headlights and taillamp in keeping with today’s portfolio. It also brings the overall length of the car to 200.9 inches (1.1” inches shorter than 2017).

    Also available is the XTS Platinum V-Sport, which takes performance to a higher level, driven by an exclusive twin-turbo engine and all-wheel drive.

    Standard and available features across the lineup include:

    • Updated chassis with improved ride comfort
    • Brembo front brakes standard
    • Available advanced all-wheel-drive system with electronically controlled limited-slip differential
    • Standard 19-inch wheels and available 20-inch wheels, with a new wheel design for Luxury and Platinum models
    • Updated next-generation Cadillac user experience infotainment system with the fastest response time ever, updated graphics, personalized profiles, smartphone-like navigation, Wi-Fi and active connection
    • Adaptive remote start
    • Four USB ports
    • Standard eight-speaker Bose audio system

    When it comes to trunk space, the XTS is in a league of its own, with 18 cubic feet (509 L), exceeding some midsize and full-size competitors — that’s more than the Audi A6, BMW 5 Series and Mercedes-Benz E-Class. The cargo advantage means room for five or more suitcases.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    1 hour ago, Suaviloquent said:

    I think this XTS refresh will keep it going for a many years still. I like the look a lot, just not the profile though.

    The voice of rational thinking and reason rises from the dead.

    Welcome back, I missed having you around.

    4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Exactly, "cars" that don't sell.  Crossovers and trucks make up 67% of the auto industry now.  If you have crossovers, you make money, you can pay for R&D and advertising, etc.

    So Cadillac should follow Subaru and define itself by crossovers...so much for standard of the world and leading.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Exactly, "cars" that don't sell.  Crossovers and trucks make up 67% of the auto industry now.  If you have crossovers, you make money, you can pay for R&D and advertising, etc.

    The thing is that U don't need a billion different sizes of every car when one can can cover two spaces. The Chevy line-Up as it is require just one more CUV because of the complete down size of the Equinox.. which BTW.. can be optioned to over $40K. After that inclusion of a "Trailblazer," which should be simply cribbed from Oz.. Chevy will have a perfect CUV/SUV line-up. There is no need to have a bunch of vehicles completely in another's space. I have complained about the XTS for that reason.. being the same size as the CT6 (kinda) while being the same price as the CTS.. (kinda).. Cadillac addressed that complaint by essentially using the XTS for it fleet duties while retaining resale for the others. Smart move... as I don't want to see the CT6 out in mass as a Black car. Furthermore this issue I bring up is exactly the reason why U.. and many others spoke against the A-Class showing up. The Benz small car line will now have the A-Class, CLA, and essentially the C-Class occupying the same space in CONSUMER'S MINDS.. they will all now be the "Baby Benzes." Talk about confusion. Frankly.. the Benz line should have started at the C-Class.. and left it there. I hope, in the wake of car sales drop off, JDN has killed it in his mind for a Cadillac smaller than the ATS.. unless it is a niche Sports coupe or Hatch.

    Lastly.. I think the big thing with GM.. as I have stated many times before in relation to REBADGING.. their base or donor cars are quite frankly on the same level as most premium vehicles. Example is the new Malibu.. which.. if U yanked the name and put on blinders.. could easily be mistaken for an Audi or Lexus in the fit and finish.. driving.. again.. blinders and a cover-up of the badge to kill bias. A new Equinox Premiere is every bit as competition and luxuriously appointed as a GLK. This is fact... Using such a donor car for Cadillac would not be the same as using the Cavalier for the Cimmaron. It really wouldn't be.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

    The thing is that U don't need a billion different sizes of every car when one can can cover two spaces. The Chevy line-Up as it is require just one more CUV because of the complete down size of the Equinox.. which BTW.. can be optioned to over $40K. After that inclusion of a "Trailblazer," which should be simply cribbed from Oz.. Chevy will have a perfect CUV/SUV line-up. 

    It would have to be restyled for the US, though...the Asian Colorado-based Trailblazer is hideous in side profile, IMO...would need new rear doors and side quarter windows..

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 6/24/2017 at 8:57 AM, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    It would have to be restyled for the US, though...the Asian Colorado-based Trailblazer is hideous in side profile, IMO...would need new rear doors and side quarter windows..

    I think it would be perfect.. and the only thing for America tastes needed would be a front DETACHABLE bottom spoiler/valence for the fascia.. just to fill it out. And it could be optional

    2016_05_09_holden_trailblazer20.jpg

    2017-Chevrolet-Trailblazer-Rear-Right-Si

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, balthazar said:

    "don't sell" = 33% of the industry. LOL.
    Yet SMK wants a handful of convertibles in every brand (6%).

    I would be surprised if six percent of the cars were convertibles.

    Around here in Ohio you can see a parking lot with 350 cars in it and Zero convertibles.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Instead of shaming Cadillac, we should be grateful GM builds the Cascadia and Camaro.

    1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

     

    Lastly.. I think the big thing with GM.. as I have stated many times before in relation to REBADGING.. their base or donor cars are quite frankly on the same level as most premium vehicles. Example is the new Malibu.. which.. if U yanked the name and put on blinders.. could easily be mistaken for an Audi or Lexus in the fit and finish.. driving.. again.. blinders and a cover-up of the badge to kill bias. A new Equinox Premiere is every bit as competition and luxuriously appointed as a GLK. This is fact... Using such a donor car for Cadillac would not be the same as using the Cavalier for the Cimmaron. It really wouldn't be.

    Quoted for truth...

    ...and GM sells the Maibu in top trim for fifteen grand less than a comparable Audi or Lexus.

    Parts and repair will be much cheaper.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     Chevy is getting a version of the Acadia as their middle crossover.  Chevy has room for another crossover but really GMC could use an off road or off road looking SUV or crossover.

    Cadillac needs a minimum 3 crossovers.  Whether you are selling t-shirts, French fry orders or crossovers you have to have small, medium and large.  The Escalade serves at the XL, but there could be room for an xtra small too.

    The 2018 Camry blows away the Malibu and everyone else in that segment.  And I always thought the Camry was a miserable car, but the new one is best inclass power, best in class fuel economy, it has like 6 trim levels, the interior looks good, and we know it is reliable because it is a Camry.  Supposedly it even drives well now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    45 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

     Chevy is getting a version of the Acadia as their middle crossover.  Chevy has room for another crossover but really GMC could use an off road or off road looking SUV or crossover.

    Cadillac needs a minimum 3 crossovers.  Whether you are selling t-shirts, French fry orders or crossovers you have to have small, medium and large.  The Escalade serves at the XL, but there could be room for an xtra small too.

    The 2018 Camry blows away the Malibu and everyone else in that segment.  And I always thought the Camry was a miserable car, but the new one is best inclass power, best in class fuel economy, it has like 6 trim levels, the interior looks good, and we know it is reliable because it is a Camry.  Supposedly it even drives well now.

    Camry is competitive with but does not blow away...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 6/23/2017 at 6:56 PM, balthazar said:

    OFTEN (but not always) the same parties who say 'Cadillac needs to be Cadillac' are the same parties who also call recent past decades 'the dark days'.
    NOT poking at you, 442, other have said these things well before you did and with a lot more vigor.
    My take is, they often have no idea what they mean.

    Its all good.

    In the future, if you want to poke at me, you could.

    You Balthy, you always back up your views with almost pin point accuracy most of the time.

    You feel like setting me straight...go right ahead I say. I learn new lessons this way!

    On 6/23/2017 at 7:22 PM, balthazar said:

    with who??

     

    The best I could do with that is BECAUSE of downsizing and BECAUSE of computer aided designs such as Chryco's Cab Forward design (I know this cab forward design PREDATED CAD and Chrysler inc) alonf with FWD revolution that new criteria was needed.

    Like your El Camino example and the 1974 Deville example....

    Cars like the 1974 Deville do not exist anymore.

    The longest Escalade is nowhere near as wide as any pre-1977 downsized American car. And I dont think the Escalade is as long also...

    A 1976 El Camino...its a long car....but what good does that do if its classified as a fullsized car (or intermiadiate as per 1970s rules) when it probably has the same amount of interior space as a 2017 Chevy Cruze?

    Dont forget the Cruze is not only THE NORM of today's 2017 reality, but the Cruze is also a compact car.

    (Per 1970s rules...is a  Cruze a subcompact?)

    OK....how many cars in 2017 are as large and wide as a 1974 Impala?

    That definition of large class does not exist anymore!!!

    Hell...how many cars are as large and wide as the downsized 1977 Impala?

    Not even the mighty S-Class from Mercedes Benz Im willing to bet!!!

    So yeah...I think that going to this new way of classing cars may have its own flaws, I believe it has compensated well enough for the change of the engineering realities and the size of cars and their interior space in 2017 better than had we stayed with the status quo that started to change in the mid-1970s...

    Coincidentally, computers started to help engineers design their cars shortly after the down-sizing...

    PS: downsizing was a political and social must in the mid-1970s...

    Much like what we are facing today with almost the same reasons and those reasons are OIL and the MIDDLE EAST!!!

    What does that have to do with car classification?

    Everything is intertwined...but we shouldnt be afraid to get away from the status quo....evolution is a good thing...

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Quote

    The longest Escalade is nowhere near as wide as any pre-1977 downsized American car. And I dont think the Escalade is as long also...

    I assume you meant 'nowhere near as long'. Escalade ESV is 224" overall (Escalade is 204").  I had a '65 Bonneville 4-dr hardtop for a while, it was 221".  However, the width thing is correct : Escalade is 74" wide, my '59 Buick is a commanding 81".  Nothing like 66" of front seat hip room and no console! A La Crosse gives you a paltry 54.8" (minus the 12-16" of console, of course; make that more like 40"!)  So now I have a Buick with 66" of hip room but the new "full-size" Buick has 40". A chin-scratcher. ;)

    Quote

    A 1976 El Camino...its a long car....but what good does that do if its classified as a fullsized car (or intermiadiate as per 1970s rules) when it probably has the same amount of interior space as a 2017 Chevy Cruze?

    That's my point- who cares how much interior cubic volume it has? One still has to pilot/ park/ parking deck/ garage it- who's parallel parking based on interior volume?  According to Mobility Lab, about 85% of the cars on American roads are used to transport only one person. IE: is interior volume really tangible for MOST drivers?

    Some visual aids to illustrate the EPA's 'formula' :

     

    Screen Shot 2017-06-24 at 8.47.59 PM.png

    Screen Shot 2017-06-24 at 8.47.46 PM.png

    http://jalopnik.com/everything-thats-ridiculous-about-the-epas-vehicle-clas-1660382740

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't know if it is down sizing, but shift in preference.  Look a 90s Corolla or Civic compared to a 2005 compared to now.  The current Civic looks huge compared to an old one.  Look at a Cavalier parked next to a Cruze, huge difference.  So some segments they are making cars bigger, but fun size cars are just disappearing.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I don't know if it is down sizing, but shift in preference.  Look a 90s Corolla or Civic compared to a 2005 compared to now.  The current Civic looks huge compared to an old one.  Look at a Cavalier parked next to a Cruze, huge difference.  So some segments they are making cars bigger, but fun size cars are just disappearing.  

    Depends on what you mean by fun size...but the bug eye Sprite is not going back into mass production.

    ...and actually I think in a few years I will buy another Miata...4th generation which is the current car.

    So long as that stays in production I am a happy guy.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    26 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    I assume you meant 'nowhere near as long'. Escalade ESV is 224" overall (Escalade is 204").  I had a '65 Bonneville 4-dr hardtop for a while, it was 221".

    I meant it as "I think the Escalade ESV may be an inch or so shorter than the 1974 Deville, but I aint sure and if the Escalade ESV happens to be a tad longer then I am not that surprised either"

    Your point of view is logical!

    Give me 24 hours so I could think of a logical counter argument.

    Edited by oldshurst442
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    OK, Buick media says the 2016 LaCrosse EPA interior volume is 99 cubic feet but the "passenger volume" is 101.7 CF.
    If you do the math, it calculates out to 97.7 CF. According to the wikipedia page COMBINED interior & cargo volume for sedans of 85-99 CF is a "subcompact", yet other online sites say the '16 LaC was "full-size". Something's off....

    For context's sake, my '59 coupe interior volume is 111 CF, but it has notoriously low headroom due to not having dropped footwells up front. Exterior height is only 54".

    - - - - -

    1975 Impala interior cubic footage : 98.7. It has better headroom than my '59, but is down on hip room by almost 7 inches up front (59.3"), tho it only lost 1.3" in overall width vs. the '59. Last DTS was 107.6.

     

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    OK, Buick media says the 2016 LaCrosse EPA interior volume is 99 cubic feet but the "passenger volume" is 101.7 CF.
    If you do the math, it calculates out to 97.7 CF. According to the wikipedia page COMBINED interior & cargo volume for sedans of 85-99 CF is a "subcompact", yet other online sites say the '16 LaC was "full-size". Something's off....

    For context's sake, my '59 coupe interior volume is 111 CF, but it has notoriously low headroom due to not having dropped footwells up front. Exterior height is only 54".

     

    Something is indeed off...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well a Maybach S-class has 120 cubic feet of interior space, but now a days when people want interior space they buy an SUV.   I bet a lot of people that walk into a Buick showroom find the Encore roomier than a LaCrosse just because of the body shape, it plays tricks on people's minds.

    • Confused 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Well a Maybach S-class has 120 cubic feet of interior space, but now a days when people want interior space they buy an SUV.   I bet a lot of people that walk into a Buick showroom find the Encore roomier than a LaCrosse just because of the body shape, it plays tricks on people's minds.

    Maybach S class is an extremely small portion of overall vehicle sales.  Not really sure what people think when they buy cars...in the United States we have 330 million people and 220 million private vehicles.  Probably impossible to generalize much about the public at large in this case.

    11 hours ago, balthazar said:

    - - - - -

    1975 Impala interior cubic footage : 98.7. It has better headroom than my '59, but is down on hip room by almost 7 inches up front (59.3"), tho it only lost 1.3" in overall width vs. the '59. Last DTS was 107.6.

     

    I wonder if that is from side impact collision standard changes regarding Impala hip room.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Only 6 more CF than a s-550?? (114 CF). That's a crap-ton of extra money for a few duffel bags of space.

    My '59 has 1.5-in more total legroom than the S-550 -as a coupe- on a 1.5-in shorter wheelbase. :D

    - - - - -

    Horse- I thought of that also, I'll measure my B-59 door thickness but they are plenty thick- I don't think that's it. There's plenty of room for side impact guards. GM started putting them in ahead of the federal reg IIRC: 1970- and I have access to a P-70 I can measure. Or was there a standard that mandated more space between the seat & door?

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 hours ago, smk4565 said:

     

    The 2018 Camry blows away the Malibu and everyone else in that segment.  And I always thought the Camry was a miserable car, but the new one is best inclass power, best in class fuel economy, it has like 6 trim levels, the interior looks good, and we know it is reliable because it is a Camry.  Supposedly it even drives well now.

    Reliable because its a Camry.. GTFO of here.. I won't even start on my issues when I had one.. and why I truly hate Toyota. I won't even remind U of the reason why my neighbor just garaged his and bought a new Acadia. 

    HP.. HP is irrelevant in this day and age if it doesn't move the car any faster. FOR ONCE.. for ONCE... I will use your bitch-ass 0-60 metric.. and say that as far as I have read from MT and C&D.. the new Camry, despite its 306HP.. is no faster than the Malibu 2.0L Turbo with 50 less HP and almost equal torque.. Why?? Because like most Toyotas they did very little with the platform in switching models. The Camry is still 3300-3600 lbs.. the top Malibu is 3,280 lb

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    21 hours ago, smk4565 said:

     Chevy is getting a version of the Acadia as their middle crossover.  Chevy has room for another crossover but really GMC could use an off road or off road looking SUV or crossover.

    Cadillac needs a minimum 3 crossovers.  Whether you are selling t-shirts, French fry orders or crossovers you have to have small, medium and large.  The Escalade serves at the XL, but there could be room for an xtra small too.

    The 2018 Camry blows away the Malibu and everyone else in that segment.  And I always thought the Camry was a miserable car, but the new one is best inclass power, best in class fuel economy, it has like 6 trim levels, the interior looks good, and we know it is reliable because it is a Camry.  Supposedly it even drives well now.

    There is nothing exciting about any of the mid-size segment. They're all competent cars now that the Avenger and old Malibu are gone. There isn't a bad mid-size out there, they're all "above average".   Most Camries will be sold with the 4-cylinder.  As far as your best in class list is concerned - Honda is releasing the 2018 Accord on July 14th, so I expect Camry's best in class crown to lose a few gems. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Only 6 more CF than a s-550?? (114 CF). That's a crap-ton of extra money for a few duffel bags of space.

    My '59 has 1.5-in more total legroom than the S-550 -as a coupe- on a 1.5-in shorter wheelbase. :D

    - - - - -

    Horse- I thought of that also, I'll measure my B-59 door thickness but they are plenty thick- I don't think that's it. There's plenty of room for side impact guards. GM started putting them in ahead of the federal reg IIRC: 1970- and I have access to a P-70 I can measure. Or was there a standard that mandated more space between the seat & door?

    Not sure of any additional requirements...

    1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    There is nothing exciting about any of the mid-size segment. They're all competent cars now that the Avenger and old Malibu are gone. There isn't a bad mid-size out there, they're all "above average".   Most Camries will be sold with the 4-cylinder.  As far as your best in class list is concerned - Honda is releasing the 2018 Accord on July 14th, so I expect Camry's best in class crown to lose a few gems. 

    Actually it pains me greatly to say it and even more greatly to admit it, but Fusion Sport for what it is...is actually kind of impressive.

    2 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

    Reliable because its a Camry.. GTFO of here.. I won't even start on my issues when I had one.. and why I truly hate Toyota. I won't even remind U of the reason why my neighbor just garaged his and bought a new Acadia. 

    HP.. HP is irrelevant in this day and age if it doesn't move the car any faster. FOR ONCE.. for ONCE... I will use your bitch-ass 0-60 metric.. and say that as far as I have read from MT and C&D.. the new Camry, despite its 306HP.. is no faster than the Malibu 2.0L Turbo with 50 less HP and almost equal torque.. Why?? Because like most Toyotas they did very little with the platform in switching models. The Camry is still 3300-3600 lbs.. the top Malibu is 3,280 lb

    Malibu is also better looking IMHO, although I lack your hatred of the Camry.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Only 6 more CF than a s-550?? (114 CF). That's a crap-ton of extra money for a few duffel bags of space.

    My '59 has 1.5-in more total legroom than the S-550 -as a coupe- on a 1.5-in shorter wheelbase. :D

    - - - - -

     

    It is also multiple orders of magnitude better looking than the rather bland S class.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I ment Envision before when I said Encore about people thinking an Envision is roomier than a LaCrosse.  Buyers see crossovers, even small ones as more room than a full size sedan.  

    Every mid-size sedan is pretty good now, but the Camry hybrid beats the Volt by 10 mpg when the Volt isn't charged ahead of time.   That is pretty crazy, and exciting because 50 mpg is the new standard for the mid-size segment, you'll see everyone there within a couple years.   

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    51 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I ment Envision before when I said Encore about people thinking an Envision is roomier than a LaCrosse.  Buyers see crossovers, even small ones as more room than a full size sedan.  

    Every mid-size sedan is pretty good now, but the Camry hybrid beats the Volt by 10 mpg when the Volt isn't charged ahead of time.   That is pretty crazy, and exciting because 50 mpg is the new standard for the mid-size segment, you'll see everyone there within a couple years.   

    Toyota does have impressive Hybrid battery technology, one of  things I like about it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    57 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I ment Envision before when I said Encore about people thinking an Envision is roomier than a LaCrosse.  Buyers see crossovers, even small ones as more room than a full size sedan.  

    Every mid-size sedan is pretty good now, but the Camry hybrid beats the Volt by 10 mpg when the Volt isn't charged ahead of time.   That is pretty crazy, and exciting because 50 mpg is the new standard for the mid-size segment, you'll see everyone there within a couple years.   

    When the Volt isn't charged? Fuckin charge it..  Lol.. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

    I ment Envision before when I said Encore about people thinking an Envision is roomier than a LaCrosse.  Buyers see crossovers, even small ones as more room than a full size sedan.  

    Every mid-size sedan is pretty good now, but the Camry hybrid beats the Volt by 10 mpg when the Volt isn't charged ahead of time.   That is pretty crazy, and exciting because 50 mpg is the new standard for the mid-size segment, you'll see everyone there within a couple years.   

    The EPA test isn't even close to accurate for PHEVs. I do so much better than the EPA in the Volt and Fusion Energi. My experience on both is well beyond EPA. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    The EPA test isn't even close to accurate for PHEVs. I do so much better than the EPA in the Volt and Fusion Energi. My experience on both is well beyond EPA. 

    Volt is very impressive.

    17 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

    When the Volt isn't charged? Fuckin charge it..  Lol.. 

    That is assuming one is smart enough to figure out "male" and "female" in regards to an electrical cord connection.

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Only 6 more CF than a s-550?? (114 CF). That's a crap-ton of extra money for a few duffel bags of space.

    My '59 has 1.5-in more total legroom than the S-550 -as a coupe- on a 1.5-in shorter wheelbase. :D

    - - - - -

    Horse- I thought of that also, I'll measure my B-59 door thickness but they are plenty thick- I don't think that's it. There's plenty of room for side impact guards. GM started putting them in ahead of the federal reg IIRC: 1970- and I have access to a P-70 I can measure. Or was there a standard that mandated more space between the seat & door?

     

    I got nothin' for our discussion regarding vehicle classification.

    My best swing at the ball was already discussed which I think is good enough to explain why the switch.

    Your thought process is logical enough....

    I just simply dont care enough to make a distinction. I remember very well how large and wide cars were back in the day and because we are simply not offered those types of cars anymore coupled with the fact that where I live in the Province of Quebec and Quebec is the compact car capital of North America and has been since the late 1980s...it really does not make any difference to me how cars are  classified.

    I do laugh though when I do hear some "enthusiast" car magazines  call the Honda Accord as a fullsized car....for those very same reasons you mention...

    I also laugh to see how cars have grown in size and especially weight (thanx in part to all the safety stuff going on, but also due to the unnecessary gadgets that we have such as TV screens...) and I just as ask myself.....why oh why did we have to downsize our cars? To have back-up cameras and beep beep noises when another car approaches our blind spot? Id gladly take the gluttonous amounts of steel and chrome over the gluttonous amounts of unnecessary electronic doo-dads!

    So yeah! A part of me thinks the way you do, but in reality, I just reminisce how huge cars were back in the day and...that is it.

    Edited by oldshurst442
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    43 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

     

    I got nothin' for our discussion regarding vehicle classification.

    My best swing at the ball was already discussed which I think is good enough to explain why the switch.

    Your thought process is logical enough....

    I just simply dont care enough to make a distinction. I remember very well how large and wide cars were back in the day and because we are simply not offered those types of cars anymore coupled with the fact that where I live in the Province of Quebec and Quebec is the compact car capital of North America and has been since the late 1980s...it really does not make any difference to me how cars are  classified.

    I do laugh though when I do hear some "enthusiast" car magazines  call the Honda Accord as a fullsized car....for those very same reasons you mention...

    I also laugh to see how cars have grown in size and especially weight (thanx in part to all the safety stuff going on, but also due to the unnecessary gadgets that we have such as TV screens...) and I just as ask myself.....why oh why did we have to downsize our cars? To have back-up cameras and beep beep noises when another car approaches our blind spot? Id gladly take the gluttonous amounts of steel and chrome over the gluttonous amounts of unnecessary electronic doo-dads!

    So yeah! A part of me thinks the way you do, but in reality, I just reminisce how huge cars were back in the day and...that is it.

    Would love to go back to the early seventies and enjoy full size cars once again.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    15 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    The EPA test isn't even close to accurate for PHEVs. I do so much better than the EPA in the Volt and Fusion Energi. My experience on both is well beyond EPA. 

    So very true, Neighbor bought a new Volt 4 months back and was told he would need to gas up once a month at most by the dealer. He just filled up his first tank after 4 months. Says he loves it. Asked him why not the Bolt? Says his wife did not like the style compared to the VOLT. Says if the BOLT powertrain was in the VOLT, they would have bought it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, dfelt said:

    So very true, Neighbor bought a new Volt 4 months back and was told he would need to gas up once a month at most by the dealer. He just filled up his first tank after 4 months. Says he loves it. Asked him why not the Bolt? Says his wife did not like the style compared to the VOLT. Says if the BOLT powertrain was in the VOLT, they would have bought it.

    I am just waiting for Gm to build a sporty little electric roadster like the Miata....would love that!

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    I am just waiting for Gm to build a sporty little electric roadster like the Miata....would love that!

    Totally agree, I think GM could bank many sales if they build a EV Roadster. Tesla says their Roadster 2.0 is on the drawing boards for 2019 or 2020 release. I think GM could easily take the BOLT Powertrain and build a Roadster that would just as is give 300 Mile range due to being lighter and grab a bunch of business.

    Back on Topic, I like the CT6 face on the New XTS. What I would love to see is Cadillac surprise everyone by putting the BOLT powertrain into the ATS and the XT-3.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    27 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Totally agree, I think GM could bank many sales if they build a EV Roadster. Tesla says their Roadster 2.0 is on the drawing boards for 2019 or 2020 release. I think GM could easily take the BOLT Powertrain and build a Roadster that would just as is give 300 Mile range due to being lighter and grab a bunch of business.

    Back on Topic, I like the CT6 face on the New XTS. What I would love to see is Cadillac surprise everyone by putting the BOLT powertrain into the ATS and the XT-3.

    Was always dazed and confused as to why the ELR was not a roadster. It would have been perfect.

    Cadilac-ELR-convertible.jpg

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    41 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

    Was always dazed and confused as to why the ELR was not a roadster. It would have been perfect.

    Cadilac-ELR-convertible.jpg

    Ohh exactly...

    And with a battery pack dropping the center of Gravity...a smaller Chevrolet version....would be just killer.

    I think GM has some good things in store for we who wait....!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • ^^^  I think the last pic is an AI generated picture.    YUCK!!! I mean, if it is one, its a GREAT image, the technology is both awesome and scary. Very real. But fake...and that is the yuck part of it all.  The fakeness.  I like REALITY.  
    • I became a hater when I realized Toyota is just another same ole same ole corporate greed company like any other and when I realized that they had sheeple followers that they had brainwashed thinking that Toyota can never do any harm.  It wasnt a right away hatred either.  It took time. I first noticed something was off about Toyota with the aforementioned engine sludge thing.  And it took years after that when I started questioning folk that drove Toyotas and then incident after incident happened and yet nobody ever was pissed about Toyota's failures.  It all came to a boiling point with me with the unintended acceleration debacle and had it NOT for Toyota settling out of court of billions of dollars, I myself would have chucked it to stupid drivers, but Toyota plead guilty quietly and paid that tremendous fine.  And it peeved me more to see that AMERICAN media kept that quiet also, but also downplyed the WHOLE thing by them ALSO blaming the American driver coming up with excuse after excuse defending Toyota.  And then I read (call it a consipracy theory if you want to) a report (not on the internet) that Japanese automakers convinced the American buyer to perform their regular maintenance at the dealerships and when their was a problem akin to catastrophic failure with the vehicle, the dealership would repair the problem without the owner knowing about the problem and all that was also subsidized by the Japanese government and the WORST offenders of this were Nissan, Toyota, Mitsubishi and Subaru in the 1980s.  Another reason why I dont like this company is that they stopped producing cars for the enthusiast for a little while.  Boring appliance after boring appliance made especially for dumb people that would be better off using public transportation. And in more recent times, better calling an Uber.   I like some cars of theirs. I have pointed this out plenty of times.  No need for me to justify what cars and trucks I like from them.  But you did mention the Lexus LC500 and yeah!  THAT would be one awesome creation.  Id take mine in coupe form though. But if I was doing this car MY way, Id LS/LT swap it.  Nothing crazy done to the engine, just with enough HP and torque to best Lexus' original efforts.  500HP and 500ft/lbs.  In HP, its not much more than what Lexus done, but its the torque figures that make the difference in my make belief dream LC 500. 
    • I actually like the look but at near 9,000 lbs., holy smokes! Instant pot hole maker lol..
    • The LC500 is just a damn fine looking car, regardless of who makes it. Lexus mucks up a lot of exteriors (and not just with the "predator" grill) but the LC500 is not one of them.   I feel you on that. A year ago, it was my right hip (post surgery) and I was doing the same thing as you for a few weeks lol. Rest and recover.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search