2018 Cadillac XTS Puts on A CT6 Face

39 minutes ago, balthazar said:

STS of the '90s when it came out & subsequently was absolutely not 'deemed a failure'- nice try. It got a lot of positive press and first PUT Cadillac into consideration with the German equivalents. Making that jump perceptionally was by itself a success. Now Cadillacs are automatically mentioned with other sports sedans. And yes- "people buy them", just not in numbers you arbitrarily set.

"5 EVs by 2020?" Why didn't Mercedes have 10 EVs in 2010?

 

 

That's YOUR mindset. Unfortunately for YOU (a non-Cadillac buyer, BTW) Cadillac is not following your tweets.
Higher sales to a degree is fine. 2 million?? No thanks- they're not interested.
Why doesn't any small brand suddenly snap their fingers and build 70 models and shoot for 2 million units? Go muddle on that one for a week, see if you can possibly develop any theoretical answers to your own question.

Cadillac, like Subaru, Mazda, Porsche, Lotus, and the like successfully build and sell cars because they are not everything to everyone. Subaru has zero interest in building a diesel dually and Porsche is not whoring itself out by building a cheap entry level sedan like the CLA of Benz.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

No, I want them to sell 2 more crossovers (rear drive ones on Alpha and Omega), and a sports car and a convertible.  And if the sports coupe and convertible are the same vehicle like Jaguar F-Type and Corvette have 2 body styles that works for me.

Sports car is out of character for Cadillac, see what I wrote above.

• If Cadillac sells 300K to Mercedes' 2,000,000, then Cadillac would -via math again- have 2 EVs.

• Products are judged at particular moments, but seldom by longevity. Far too extrapolated and ethereal a metric.

Think of -for example- a dishwasher. Once you own/operate one for 15 years with no reliability issues and are ready to proclaim it a "success", the company has completely changed their product lines & suppliers & tech & factories & management & even ownership a few times. Thusly the 15-yr old dishwasher evaluation has zero bearing on the brand new model (which may be a piece of cheap crap). Only thing you see is the name, an intangible.

20 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

If "Seville" was a success, it would still be here, if STS was a success it would still be here.

"We've forgotten how the Seville burst into our consciousness in 1992, when it redefined everything we expected from an American luxury car.  We take it's goodness for granted now."
"When you drive a Seville SLS, it's just what you'd expect, a quiet and thoroughly competent car, the kind of car that Audi and Mercedes Benz have worked so hard to become in recent years.  The Seville STS is not what you expect, however, because it delivers the same quietness and composure at a far greater speed."
"The new Cadillac Seville is an extremely fine piece.  Like a Jaguar, it strikes a balance between luxury and performance. Like an Audi, it rarely looses it's composure on the road. And like a Mercedes, it rides the leading edge of automotive technology. It's so refined, in fact, that it doesn't exactly grab your assumptions about big sedans [201"] and shake them, as the previous Seville did. The effect here is more subtle, because the new Seville is a legitimate wholehearted attempt to build the best luxury car in the world, and it arrives at a time when other luxury-car manufacturers are cutting back on content. There's courage in this car and that's what makes us believe in it."

~ Automobile magazine, October 1997.

I actually liked the Seville STS redesign of 1998.  It was my favorite car of the late 90s.   But it didn't win the battle, and then when they did the 2005 STS, I seem to remember they rounded it off and dumbed it down, they didn't use the original car Bob Lutz wanted, and it lost the battle.  Now the CTS is in it's slot, losing the battle again.  I wish we still had the Seville, I don't like the alpha numerics, and I think a Seville done right would be a bigger threat to the imports than the CTS is, CTS was always pushed as an entry level car, now they want it to be their middle car.  It would be like Honda deciding to make the Civic a Camry fighter, it doesn't make sense.

But it did win the battle. Re-read my post above yours. It was done right, it bettered the competition in a number of areas, and it created enormous good will toward Cadillac in the press and with consumers. Go ahead; call it a 'failure' again.

RE CTS : "now they want it to be the middle"... if by "now" you mean 'for nearly 5 years', then yes.

12 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Not just 2009, but 1999, and even 1989, that Cadillac has been fighting the same battle. Their image and public perception has trailed away past 2009.  The Allante was going to challenge the Germans and create prestige for the brand, that failed and that was 30 years ago.

In 1997 Cadillac was the #1 selling luxury brand in the USA on a 50 year streak of being #1 and today they are 7th place.  They are almost more clueless now than they were in 2009 or 2002.  They just have better engineers covering up the blatant weaknesses in product planning and marketing and R&D spending.

I think its safe to say that Cadillac made some mistakes back then with the wrong managers and didn't take to the market the way they should have. That has changed. Cadillac in every way is on par with what is offered by the sales leaders in terms of luxury and tech. The lack of additional products that solidify their ascension is their only issue.. and they are coming

Also.. since sales are your gauge today.. and not 0-60 times.. in 1997 Cadillac was the number one selling brand but I think its fair to say that the climate of vehicles has changed dramatically. In truth the number one selling brand in luxury is fielding a great deal of vehicles that are NOT.. luxury. Is that fair to say? Furthermore the number selling brand.. as I have pointed out on countless occasions is selling 13 vehicles to Cadillac's 6

Benz 26,893 (13 Vehicles for sale)

BMW   25,818 (14 Vehicles for sale)

Lexus 25,401 (11 Vehicles for sale)

Buick 20,077 (7 Vehicles for sale)

Audi 19,197 (12 Vehicles for sale)

Acura  13,939 (11 Vehicles for sale)

Cadillac 13,211 (6 Vehicles for sale)

Infiniti 12,514 (8 Vehicles for sale)

Lincoln 10,288 (7 Vehicles for sale)

Volvo 6,202  (9 Vehicles for sale)

LR 4,993 Jag 3,113 = 8,106 (8 Vehicles for sale)

Porsche 4,805 (5 Vehicles for sale)

Maserati 1,265 (3 Vehicles for sale)

The shit gets old.. and its this type of idiotic tune-out that made me go from posting 30X a day to only showing up occasionally. I mean seriously.. how can one logically call one a success and the other one a fail when they ignore this glaring reality: Cadillac only has 6 vehicles.. that's less than any other maker besides Porsche and Maserati..only ONE.. CUV and still manages to be coming up hard on the leaders.

Acura is fielding almost DOUBLE the amount of vehicles as Cadillac yet only leads it in sales by a whopping 728 sales.. and is bringing in about $10K less in ATP. 60% of Lincoln's line-up of 7 vehicles are the hottest selling segment.. yet still trails Caddy. Benz and BMW have 5.. count 'em 5 CUVs out of their line-up of 13/14 vehicles.. In other words Benz and BMW have one less CUV than Caddy's entire line... hmmm wonder if Cadillac added more vehicles carelessly just for the sake of sales would they take back that #1 spot?

I mean since we are being PETTY.. why not just look at GM Luxury as Cadillac (13,211), Buick (20,077), Denali (55,000 based on 25% of GMC sales are Denali)? That would give GM's PAG (LOL) about 88,000 sales for 2017.. almost FUCKING Up the sales of BitchMW, Mercedes Bitch, Assdi, and Lexshit combined

8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I actually liked the Seville STS redesign of 1998.  It was my favorite car of the late 90s.   But it didn't win the battle, and then when they did the 2005 STS, I seem to remember they rounded it off and dumbed it down, 4) they didn't use the original car Bob Lutz wanted, and it lost the battle.  1) Now the CTS is in it's slot, losing the battle again. 2)  I wish we still had the Seville, I don't like the alpha numerics, and I think a Seville done right would be a bigger threat to the imports than the CTS is, 3) CTS was always pushed as an entry level car, now they want it to be their middle car.  It would be like Honda deciding to make the Civic a Camry fighter, it doesn't make sense.

1) How is the CTS losing the battle?? Sales Again..U miss the point. Sales are not the gauge by which luxury of all things, should be measured. Pointing for the billionth time to CAMRY

a) Motor Trend Car of the Year 2014, Car and Driver's 10 Best 3-4 years running. Hell.. didn't the 4 year old CTS just come in 5 points below the BRAND NEW EClass  for the #2 spot at C&D 

2)  U are just playing to a crowd.. looking for something else to hate about Cadillac.. all while praising a company on a daily basis that has an alphanumeric naming convention that confuses even GOD... and that was before they made it more complicated a few years back by changing it again.. I still call the GLE the ML on occasion.

3) The only thing I agree with. The CTS name should have been the ATS, while the STS should have simply returned. The BK fucked up a lot.. as the XTS was originally the XLS and would have been what the CT6 is now. There was also a planned CT8 called the DT7.. or were they (it and the XLS) the same???

4) The car Lutz  wanted was essentially what we got. I personally loved my STS's looks.. especially when they were in VSeries form. The original car was killed because Lutz thought is was weird looking. He killed this :

and

we got this:

Let me just say this once again...as the import lover here...Cadillac is just an amazing company to me. Very impressed with the company and their direction.

39 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Let me just say this once again...as the import lover here...Cadillac is just an amazing company to me. Very impressed with the company and their direction.

well....

What direction is that?

The decision to keep the XTS just because it prints money...

How prostitutey is that?

The ΧTS just CONFUSES the customer base...

Keep in mind Im this critical JUST because I see the double standard accusations of Mercedes-Benz and the defending of Cadillac!

But lets face reality....

The XΤS, no matter how good the product is, it still represents Cadillac's not so distant dark ages that Cadillac ITSELF wants to DISTANCE themselves from....

And to make it look like the NEW Cadillac that Cadillac wants to be is just....ass backwards

Then again, the Escala is that new face that Cadillac wants to become and the CT6 will benefit from it as I think the CT6 with this refresh will skyrocket with sales next year....

Back to the direction of Cadillac...

With JDN WANTING to go SMALLER than the ATS when the ATS becomes the CT3 and we give shyte to Mercedes-Benz for offering a new car but same as CLA...

So I ask again....what direction are you liking?

ΟΚ...powertrains

the TTV8 is a-coming....

It needed this engine a DECADE ago!!!

The GM corporate V8 which happens to be THE CORVETTE engine was a GREAT choice to power all those V Series Cadillacs, but....the false perception snobs snubbed that decision but that is all in the past!

But...still does NOT change the fact that the new DOHC TTV8 is needed YESTERDAY!

When the TTV8 does come out....THE "IN" motorvation does not lay with turbo V8s, but with 100% electric motors and batteries...

Hopefully Cadillac has these and its just SUPER SUPER SECRETIVE!

So...what double standard excuse are we gonna look at to justify Cadillac's direction?

The inclusion of MORE CUVs and SUVs in the line-up to boost sales???!!!

The lack of crossovers goes to show the poor management that has plagued Cadillac for 20 years or more.  Even the first SRX was about 6-7 years after the ML and RX and about 4 after the X5.  Even the Escalade is here only because the Navigator hit big in 1998 and Cadillac lost the sales crown.  Cadillac's boss in 1998 said Cadillac will never build a truck because they are a car brand, 6 months later the Escalade arrived as a Yukon with a badge swap.

crossovers have been hit for years and Cadillac still only has one.  Why don't they have 5 of them?   GM fans praise Denali because it makes a profit, a Cadillac version would make twice as much.  GM has introduced new Chevy, Buick and GMC crossovers, so they have the ability to put new product out, they are just ignoring their most profitable brand.

7 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

well....

What direction is that?

The decision to keep the XTS just because it prints money...

How prostitutey is that?

The ΧTS just CONFUSES the customer base...

Keep in mind Im this critical JUST because I see the double standard accusations of Mercedes-Benz and the defending of Cadillac!

But lets face reality....

The XΤS, no matter how good the product is, it still represents Cadillac's not so distant dark ages that Cadillac ITSELF wants to DISTANCE themselves from....

And to make it look like the NEW Cadillac that Cadillac wants to be is just....ass backwards

Then again, the Escala is that new face that Cadillac wants to become and the CT6 will benefit from it as I think the CT6 with this refresh will skyrocket with sales next year....

Back to the direction of Cadillac...

With JDN WANTING to go SMALLER than the ATS when the ATS becomes the CT3 and we give shyte to Mercedes-Benz for offering a new car but same as CLA...

So I ask again....what direction are you liking?

 

ΟΚ...powertrains

the TTV8 is a-coming....

It needed this engine a DECADE ago!!!

The GM corporate V8 which happens to be THE CORVETTE engine was a GREAT choice to power all those V Series Cadillacs, but....the false perception snobs snubbed that decision but that is all in the past!

But...still does NOT change the fact that the new DOHC TTV8 is needed YESTERDAY!

When the TTV8 does come out....THE "IN" motorvation does not lay with turbo V8s, but with 100% electric motors and batteries...

Hopefully Cadillac has these and its just SUPER SUPER SECRETIVE!

So...what double standard excuse are we gonna look at to justify Cadillac's direction?

The inclusion of MORE CUVs and SUVs in the line-up to boost sales???!!!

Excellent post, I agree.

i actually have no problem with the XTS sticking around a while because it sells and they can fleet sale it without disturbing the core line.  I will point out people say the XTS prints money, the S500 has an options list that is $55,000 if you pick everything and that doesn't include an engine upgrade.   That is a whole XTS worth of options, that is how you print money.

49 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The lack of crossovers goes to show the poor management that has plagued Cadillac for 20 years or more.  Even the first SRX was about 6-7 years after the ML and RX and about 4 after the X5.  Even the Escalade is here only because the Navigator hit big in 1998 and Cadillac lost the sales crown.  Cadillac's boss in 1998 said Cadillac will never build a truck because they are a car brand, 6 months later the Escalade arrived as a Yukon with a badge swap.

crossovers have been hit for years and Cadillac still only has one.  Why don't they have 5 of them?   GM fans praise Denali because it makes a profit, a Cadillac version would make twice as much.  GM has introduced new Chevy, Buick and GMC crossovers, so they have the ability to put new product out, they are just ignoring their most profitable brand.

yup!

This is reality!

All detractors of what you posted here all defend with blind faith using double talk to justify their blindness and biases...

Talk of the STS being a hit!

HA!

By this time in 1999, the STS was an also-ran!

Great cars the 1st and 2nd generation STS was!

But the E39 M5 and E36 M3 heading into the E46 M3 was the gold standard and the D2 Audi A8/S8 was starting to be the Gold Standard and the W220 M-B S Class was leaving the pack behind while the W210 E Class was getting real hot!

We seem to ignore how powerfully percieved all those German sedans really were in the late 1990s to the early 2000s and how the STS was really laughed at!

I HATE Jeremy Clarkson....I think he is a buffoon.

I think his review of the STS is full of shyte! FULL OF SHYTE STEREOTYPES IGNORING THE CRAP EUROPE BUILD!!!!

Yet....THIS WAS REALITY OF HOW EVEN AMERICANS SAW THE STS of 2nd generation vintage!!!

Only the hardcore GM loyalists defended the STS....myself included!

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

yup!

This is reality!

All detractors of what you posted here all defend with blind faith using double talk to justify their blindness and biases...

 

Talk of the STS being a hit!

HA!

By this time in 1999, the STS was an also-ran!

Great cars the 1st and 2nd generation STS was!

But the E39 M5 and E36 M3 heading into the E46 M3 was the gold standard and the D2 Audi A8/S8 was starting to be the Gold Standard and the W220 M-B S Class was leaving the pack behind while the W210 E Class was getting real hot!

We seem to ignore how powerfully percieved all those German sedans really were in the late 1990s to the early 2000s and how the STS was really laughed at!

I HATE Jeremy Clarkson....I think he is a buffoon.

I think his review of the STS is full of shyte! FULL OF SHYTE STEREOTYPES IGNORING THE CRAP EUROPE BUILD!!!!

Yet....THIS WAS REALITY OF HOW EVEN AMERICANS SAW THE STS of 2nd generation vintage!!!

Only the hardcore GM loyalists defended the STS....myself included!

 That Review was full of Shit!  Excuse me as I need a clean shirt.

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Keep in mind Im this critical JUST because I see the double standard accusations of Mercedes-Benz and the defending of Cadillac!

But lets face reality....

The XΤS, no matter how good the product is, it still represents Cadillac's not so distant dark ages that Cadillac ITSELF wants to DISTANCE themselves from....

And to make it look like the NEW Cadillac that Cadillac wants to be is just....ass backwards

 

I hope your not saying I have a double standard. the only real criticism I ahve of Benz is personal, they really do not appeal to me.

I do not expect a John Cooper Works Mini Coupe to appeal to SMK either.  To each his own.

To expect every car maker to ahve a completely refreshed lineup all of the time is just madness. current Jetta is quite a few years old, local VW dealers are selling them hand over fist.

2 minutes ago, dfelt said:

 That Review was full of Shit!  Excuse me as I need a clean shirt.

Clarkson is an arrogant asshole who succeeds because he is an arrogant asshole.  Bill O Reilly is the same way....Megyn Kelly is only successful because she has blonde hair and firm breasts...

I don't really consider Clarkson competent to review automobiles nor do I consider O' Reily or Kelly journalists.

Poorly chosen source IMHO.

That being said....again...why am I as the import guy here the one not throwing Cadillac under the bus....1998 is almost two decades ago....how desperate are we to slut shame the domestics?

Funny!

Balthazar got a thumbs up for his chosen source because we agree with the FAVORABLE review of the STS but we want to leave the effin blinders on and  say poorly chosen source and slut shaming for the same car two decades ago!!!!

Yet...REALITY is that the STS has LONG PAST and went to RWD at that before dying an agonizing death and the CTS is now at the STS rank when the CTS was BELOW the STS rank and the CTS will be  called the CT5...

Reality whether we want to admit it or not, is that Balthazar's source is what wishful thinkers believed what the STS was all about and what Jeremy Clarkson's view was HOW THE STS WAS REALLY PERCEIVED IN THE REAL WORLD!

Yes, the STS was a GREAT car!

The STS however FAILED to stop the EUROPEAN ONSLAUGHT of WHAT LUXURY'S DEFINITION WAS FOR THE 1990s AND BEYOND! The Germans were in control of that whether we want to admit it or not! Still true today whether we want to admit it or not! Except Cadillac has a CLEARER and BETTER way of dealing with it! There are no Fleetwoods and Devilles and Cateras to phoque the progress!

What??!!!!

There is however the XTS that is EVERYTHING that the Fleetwoods and Devilles and Cateras hampered Cadillac with!

Irony is that the FWD STS was a better MARKETED product for Cadillac to sway the masses away from the Germans!

46 minutes ago, dfelt said:

I HATE Jeremy Clarkson....I think he is a buffoon.

I think his review of the STS is full of shyte! FULL OF SHYTE STEREOTYPES IGNORING THE CRAP EUROPE BUILD!!!!

Please...dont forget that I posted this before I posted the video...

Jeremy is an α$$h0l3...though sometimes he is an α$$h0l3 because he speaks what   most people think and what some people  might not agree with just to entertain!

Regarding the STS....it is what  MOST people thought, INCLUDING MOST AMERICANS, hence why the STS name plate is no longer (but the CTS name plate is still around...)

Irony part deux:

The STS dilemma might be 2 decades old....but those same assbackwards decisions at Cadillac are STILL being made!

Looking in the mirror is the HARDEST thing one could do!

THIS IS ABOUT PUBLIC PERCEPTION....NOT about the car's real potential versus its competition....

Why is PERCEPTION sometimes MORE IMPORTANT than REAL QUALITIES?

Its the buying public that buys and its THEIR PERCEPTION that DICTATES WHAT IS BOUGHT!!!

Cadillac's perception is improving, it takes time! This was said enough times in these forums...

The STS was part of the dark years at Cadillac and THAT is why a 2 decade old car is relevant and the XTS is part of that heritage whether we want to admit it or not!

19 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

I hope your not saying I have a double standard. the only real criticism I ahve of Benz is personal, they really do not appeal to me.

I do not expect a John Cooper Works Mini Coupe to appeal to SMK either.  To each his own.

To expect every car maker to ahve a completely refreshed lineup all of the time is just madness. current Jetta is quite a few years old, local VW dealers are selling them hand over fist.

Clarkson is an arrogant asshole who succeeds because he is an arrogant asshole.  Bill O Reilly is the same way....Megyn Kelly is only successful because she has blonde hair and firm breasts...

I don't really consider Clarkson competent to review automobiles nor do I consider O' Reily or Kelly journalists.

Poorly chosen source IMHO.

That being said....again...why am I as the import guy here the one not throwing Cadillac under the bus....1998 is almost two decades ago....how desperate are we to slut shame the domestics?

RIGHT!

Megyn has Breasts?  Could not get past the face.

Agreed, I also do not feel they are journalists. After all if you are and are supposed to be nuetral, then he shot himself in the leg by starting the video off on a negative note about the cadillac. Leaving the 90's to come back to the 21 Century of 2017.

I will agree with SMK, nothing wrong with Cadillac having an auto that can make them coin that people continue to buy. Cadillac needs to continue to offer all options for all types of custom rides. After all a true luxury auto maker does not need to compete in the Chevy / Toyota league of auto's and Luxury should be something special.

Course custom jobs always show the potential of Cadillac.

Custom STS

ATS Convertible

CTS Convertible

CT6 Convertible Concept

Course with CUV being the craze, these will probably not happen in the near term.

But the XT-3

XT-7

CT8 Fleetwood would be nice too!

Course came across this as where the Escalade needs to go, not sure I like it, but interesting:

Can see it more as an XT-7 or XT-9?

But this I do love even though it is a car, someone worked up a Escala Wagon Concept: 

So I wonder if the new Escala Nose that will be put on the XTS is backwards compatible for those that have or buy an older XTS and want to upgrade to have the newer Escala look? 

The Escala Wagon looks a lot like Mazda 6 wagon

3 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

well....

What direction is that?

The decision to keep the XTS just because it prints money...

How prostitutey is that?

The ΧTS just CONFUSES the customer base...

Keep in mind Im this critical JUST because I see the double standard accusations of Mercedes-Benz and the defending of Cadillac!

But lets face reality....

The XΤS, no matter how good the product is, it still represents Cadillac's not so distant dark ages that Cadillac ITSELF wants to DISTANCE themselves from....

And to make it look like the NEW Cadillac that Cadillac wants to be is just....ass backwards

Then again, the Escala is that new face that Cadillac wants to become and the CT6 will benefit from it as I think the CT6 with this refresh will skyrocket with sales next year....

Back to the direction of Cadillac...

With JDN WANTING to go SMALLER than the ATS when the ATS becomes the CT3 and we give shyte to Mercedes-Benz for offering a new car but same as CLA...

So I ask again....what direction are you liking?

 

ΟΚ...powertrains

the TTV8 is a-coming....

It needed this engine a DECADE ago!!!

The GM corporate V8 which happens to be THE CORVETTE engine was a GREAT choice to power all those V Series Cadillacs, but....the false perception snobs snubbed that decision but that is all in the past!

But...still does NOT change the fact that the new DOHC TTV8 is needed YESTERDAY!

When the TTV8 does come out....THE "IN" motorvation does not lay with turbo V8s, but with 100% electric motors and batteries...

Hopefully Cadillac has these and its just SUPER SUPER SECRETIVE!

So...what double standard excuse are we gonna look at to justify Cadillac's direction?

The inclusion of MORE CUVs and SUVs in the line-up to boost sales???!!!

I wouldn't call it prostitution so much as boosting profitability. The vehicles each maker has normally have to pay their own bills and sometimes other vehicles that can't. The XTS is a hit.. It retains traditional Cadillac car buyers who aren't looking for the new world order..  and if U can truly give me one solid reason why the XTS shouldn't be available then I'll hear it and I'll discuss. Point blank.. show me a reason why. The XTS is not techy? Bullshit. The XTS can't handle as well as some of the Large Germans and Japs??? Bullshit. It isn't luxuriously appointed??? Bullshit. 

In fact here is a test of both the XTS VSport and one of the LS460 and FSport. Interesting.. the FWD based Cadillac pretty much runs all over it or equal in every test. 

Confusion??? To who? I'm a Cadillac customer.. I kno Cadillac customers who have XTSs, Escalades, ELRs, XT5s, STSs, ATSs, CTSs, DTSs, SRXs, CT6s.. not one ever mentioned being confused about what Cadillac was doing pertaining to their car choices.. what they did do was express why the went with one over the other.. usually.. SIZE was the determining factor when price wasn't.

The XTS doesn't in anyway represent the "Dark Days" of Cadillac where contemporary tech was weak.. they handled like boats... and styling was fit for a nursing home.

As to SMALLER THAN ATS:

I haven't heard since JDN took the reigns about a smaller than ATS model.. quite frankly the focus has been on CUVs.. as that is the market. The knee jerk reaction to the success of Benz's CLA certainly pushed the idea originally, but I'm confident that for the U.S. at least.. we probably won't see anything smaller. From what I have heard.. the ATS will be slightly larger

Engines:

Personally I see zero reason why Cadillac needs a TTV8 unless GM needs a TTV8. The LT series OHV engines are magnificent, smooth, engineering tour de forces, and efficient. No one has snubbed the OHV but the idiots making $35K a year over at MT/C&D/AUTOMOBILE/R&T. Last I checked.. the OHCs in the Benzs nor the OHVs in the Cadillac very seldom make their way into their apartment complex parking lot space unless they're used with 20K min on the odo. Quite frankly GM should stick to OHV V8s because soon the E-Motors may be the next true frontier in Luxury.

Where is the double standard. I'm all for sales as long as they don't dilute the brand. 500K by 2020 is doable with the same formula or pricing Cadillac currently has.. as long as they include desirable product such as CUVs cause that's what sells these days. Look at the fuckin numbers. A $33K CUV that is competent and luxury has nothing to do with a shitty ass CLA. The CLA is shitty.. price be damned.. name be damned.. if Cadillac brought out a CLA we'd call it a CIMMARON.. which was actually a better car than the CLA. And I'm saying that if U brought a 1987 Cimmaron and compared it pound for pound.. luxury appointment per appointment.. vs the CLA.. the Caddy would win

Yo.. look what was up in Rose's space  He would beat me in a race.. but for $1.1 Million more he damn sure should. 

I liked the Seville STS, but it wasn't the car to beat the Germans, it was full size American car.  The XTS is about the same size as a 1998 STS, there is still a market for a big American smooth riding car.  And I think the people that are going to buy an XTS, are going to buy an XTS and won't care if it has a 6-speed or a dated chassis or whatever.  They aren't going to care, so there is no point is putting a lot of money into the XTS, Cadillac did the right thing here doing the minimum cost MCE, and just let the car soldier on

The money needs to be spent on crossovers and EVs.  

201" is mid-size. There are no full-size cars left (210" and up).
Unfortunately, the dumbing down marketing mindset has to now call mid-size 'full-size', as if.

4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

201" is mid-size. There are no full-size cars left (210" and up).
Unfortunately, the dumbing down marketing mindset has to now call mid-size 'full-size', as if.

??   Where do you get those arbitrary numbers from?  It's not 1977...  mid-size, full-size, etc designations are made based on interior volume, not arbitrary length...

4 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

 

I wouldn't call it prostitution so much as boosting profitability. The vehicles each maker has normally have to pay their own bills and sometimes other vehicles that can't. The XTS is a hit.. It retains traditional Cadillac car buyers who aren't looking for the new world order..  and if U can truly give me one solid reason why the XTS shouldn't be available then I'll hear it and I'll discuss. Point blank.. show me a reason why. The XTS is not techy? Bull$h!. The XTS can't handle as well as some of the Large Germans and Japs??? Bull$h!. It isn't luxuriously appointed??? Bull$h!. 

In fact here is a test of both the XTS VSport and one of the LS460 and FSport. Interesting.. the FWD based Cadillac pretty much runs all over it or equal in every test. 

Confusion??? To who? I'm a Cadillac customer.. I kno Cadillac customers who have XTSs, Escalades, ELRs, XT5s, STSs, ATSs, CTSs, DTSs, SRXs, CT6s.. not one ever mentioned being confused about what Cadillac was doing pertaining to their car choices.. what they did do was express why the went with one over the other.. usually.. SIZE was the determining factor when price wasn't.

The XTS doesn't in anyway represent the "Dark Days" of Cadillac where contemporary tech was weak.. they handled like boats... and styling was fit for a nursing home.

As to SMALLER THAN ATS:

I haven't heard since JDN took the reigns about a smaller than ATS model.. quite frankly the focus has been on CUVs.. as that is the market. The knee jerk reaction to the success of Benz's CLA certainly pushed the idea originally, but I'm confident that for the U.S. at least.. we probably won't see anything smaller. From what I have heard.. the ATS will be slightly larger

Engines:

Personally I see zero reason why Cadillac needs a TTV8 unless GM needs a TTV8. The LT series OHV engines are magnificent, smooth, engineering tour de forces, and efficient. No one has snubbed the OHV but the idiots making $35K a year over at MT/C&D/AUTOMOBILE/R&T. Last I checked.. the OHCs in the Benzs nor the OHVs in the Cadillac very seldom make their way into their apartment complex parking lot space unless they're used with 20K min on the odo. Quite frankly GM should stick to OHV V8s because soon the E-Motors may be the next true frontier in Luxury.

Where is the double standard. I'm all for sales as long as they don't dilute the brand. 500K by 2020 is doable with the same formula or pricing Cadillac currently has.. as long as they include desirable product such as CUVs cause that's what sells these days. Look at the f@#kin numbers. A $33K CUV that is competent and luxury has nothing to do with a $h!ty ass CLA. The CLA is $h!ty.. price be damned.. name be damned.. if Cadillac brought out a CLA we'd call it a CIMMARON.. which was actually a better car than the CLA. And I'm saying that if U brought a 1987 Cimmaron and compared it pound for pound.. luxury appointment per appointment.. vs the CLA.. the Caddy would win

Thanx for responding to me in a serious way. You actually took the time to discuss and counter without the bullshyte!

OK... my HONEST rebuttal and where I TRULY stand because some of that ranting was to OPEN some eyes...while I still stand by what I said, maybe I was a tad too harsh JUST BECAUSE I wanted to prove a point....

It worked!

OK...

I dont mind the ΧTS still being sold, but I called that out because I felt that Mercedes gets called out unfairly for doing the same thing...

Profits and sales go hand in hand....Mercedes needs to do something and Cadillac (forget GM and its other brands to help out with paying the bills for a moment as Cadillac needs to show GM it could swim on its own...it has to show some level of profitability...) needs to do something and both brands/companies gotta do it differently 'cause both brands/companies are different, have different backgrounds and had different roads taken over their 100 years plus of building  cars...

Each others solutions would not work for the other. Plus, both have R&D and marketing departments to evaluate what progresses and regresses have been made and what SHOULD be done is to correct the direction if it starts straying...

So all this talk about the XTS and the CLA and what it would do to the future perceptions of their respective brands is just HOT AIR!

We dont know what Mercedes or Cadillac will do to correct any bad directions...

What we DO KNOW is that  Cadillac has been taking 1 step forwards and 2 steps back since the late 1970s...

Do I have to give examples of this or can at least we be honest about that and move on?

What we also know is that Mercedes Benz has got their ego bruised by Lexus and Acura in the late 80s and early 90s and got their heads smashed in by BMW in the mid 1990s that as we speak, they are the ones that are blooding the competition....

Oh sure, they have their fair share of stinkers along the way

sold in a different  market than this one which also proves what directions Mercedes had to take in their 100 years...but this one was a stinker in those markets that it was sold at

B Class

all sold in the last 15 years

But....their R&D and marketing departments countered those missteps...

Its pretty phoquing sad though that the Cimarron STILL gets tossed around!

Why is that though?

I personally get PISSED OFF at ANYBODY that tries to insult Cadillac with the Cimarron as that was a  car that was sold 30 PHOQUING YEARS AGO!!!!

Problem is that Cadillac keeps on taking 1 step forward 2 steps back and their R&D and marketing departments havent done ANYTHING to let is forget.....

For every CT6 there is a Catera

For every Escalade there is the 1st gen SRX...let us not forget that the 1st gen 'Slade was a last second effort with  very blatant badge engineering because 1 step forward 2 steps back...

For every V Series Cadillac there is a ELR, XLR and XTS...fine products but waaaaay undernourished, underdeveloped and OVERESTIMATED and frankly the wrong phoquing product at the wrong phoquing time!!!

As far as the sub-ATS goes....these are links to what I found....take those as you will as I remember reading about it....maybe JDN stopped with that plan....

http://blog.caranddriver.com/what-comes-before-a-cadillac-planning-a-sub-ats-sedan/

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2016/01/cadillac-plotting-sub-ats-rear-drive-sport-sedan.html

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/06/11-new-future-cadillac-vehicles-by-year-2021-details/

We agree on the TTV8....BUT...I believe that this engine WAS a must but moving forward I believe EVs are where its at!

About the confusion part...

Well, lets be honest...this car  caters to the folk that want the stereotypical American luxury car, but the direction Cadillac is still chasing is that BMW thing of the 1990s...if you dont agree with that....then we will just be going around in circles...

However, I did say that Cadillac has no Fleetwoods and Devilles and Cateras to mess that up!

I did say the XΤS is a GREAT  car...so was the STS, however the STS was still marketed better than the XΤS

 Maybe Cadillac's  marketing department needs to do a better job?

PS: The XΤS DOES represent the dark days...

Its the DIRECT replacement of the Deville which became the DTS whose DIRECT SUCCESSOR is the XTS whose PRIMARY customer base is those Fleetwood and Deville customers of the late 1980s and all through the 1990s who also has the same customer base as those late 1980s Buick Park Ave and LeSabres...and coincidentally are also the Lincoln Town car's and FWD Continentals...

Yes....dark days when the FWD STS was to break free from that market demographic but that only solidified that aging demographic and those people bought the STS as well,  making Cadillac just switch the Deville name to DTS because  Cadillac realized the STS wasnt changing the demographic tide and that is why the  Catera was introduced....

Ironically, 'twas the pro athletes and gangsta rapper Escalade that made Cadillac young and hip....

The  CTS was not even born then....

So yeah...the ΧTS represents fully the dark days...

Its just that the XTS is a much much much better executed DTS and FWD STS ever was!!!

42 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

??   Where do you get those arbitrary numbers from?  It's not 1977...  mid-size, full-size, etc designations are made based on interior volume, not arbitrary length...

1.  In my book, manufacturers and auto-based entities define size classifications, not a Gov't policy body.  You are free to subscribe if you choose.
2.  You don't think EPA drew "arbitrary" lines for their system? And are you aware a car with a console & without a console is defined as having the same front hip room? You CANNOT have 56" of front seat hip room WITH a console and 55" of rear hip room where 3 are seated. Who overlooks these declarations? The EPA.
3. Why in the world would interior volume tell you what size a car is?? The EPA would call an El Camino a sub-compact and the same chassis'd, same wheelbase 4-dr a full-size.  I could not care less above overall interior cubic volume- it's a borderline intangible in the real world.

The 'system' needs reform.

^ 'your book' though is your opinion--your 'facts', not commonly accepted reality.  In the reality I'm aware of, a Taurus today is full size, a Fusion is midsize; an Impala is full size, a Malibu is midsize...(though rental car companies fudge the definitions and routinely push cars up one size class).

If we are going to talk dark days, there is a huge number of cars much darker during the 90s and early 2000s than anything Cadillac thought to build.

The local Mitsubishi club does not recognize the final generation of Eclipse as a legitimate Mitsubishi but they recognize the Mirage...let that sink in for a moment.

1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

If we are going to talk dark days, there is a huge number of cars much darker during the 90s and early 2000s than anything Cadillac thought to build.

The local Mitsubishi club does not recognize the final generation of Eclipse as a legitimate Mitsubishi but they recognize the Mirage...let that sink in for a moment.

 

I agree. But this is about Cadillac...

And we are a looooong way from these Standards of the World

Dewar winning 1910s Cadillac

1930s

1950s

1960s

1970s

when these Cadillacs are concerned

Not Dewar award winning 1980s

1990s

Deville

Deville

Even the damned mags were badge engineered!!!

DTS

XTS

Yup....dark days for Cadillac!!!

By the time you get to the end...please go back to the top of this post to remind yourself what the Glory Days were all about!!!

1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

^ 'your book' though is your opinion--your 'facts', not commonly accepted reality.  In the reality I'm aware of, a Taurus today is full size, a Fusion is midsize; an Impala is full size, a Malibu is midsize...(though rental car companies fudge the definitions and routinely push cars up one size class).

Don't you feel that auto manufacturers and those who's focus is on the industry have a more weighed say over time in what defines a vehicle than a johnny-come-laterly soulless policy-writing bureaucracy that also concerns itself with the methane emissions of sheep?

There were "full-size" cars for decades upon decades before there even was an EPA. Again I submit to you, not as a personal opinion but as an application of common sense; the EPA would call an El Camino a sub compact and the 4-dr version on the same 'platform' a "full-size' because they use an arbitrary 'formula' of interior cubic space. How many consumers deliver inflated balloons for a living?

Quote

Why is it so hard to compare cargo space? It's because different automakers follow different cargo space accounting methods. The methodology in question, called SAE J1100 Motor Vehicle Dimensions, is rooted in SAE drafting standards from 1963. A formal version was approved in 1973 with comprehensive revision in 1975. Eight subsequent versions came between 1984 and 2009, explained Neil Mitchell, a senior design engineer at GM. But there's little consistency as to which version automakers use. Toyota said it employs the 1975 version, which it says the EPA mandates for cargo volumes that classify a car as subcompact, compact and so on. Hyundai said it uses the 2002 version; Honda said it uses the 2005 version. Chrysler, GM and Ford said they use the 2009 version.

^ These are the people (the EPA) that, as per SOP Big Gov't practice, have so thoroughly fucked up definitions that they are unusable for the only reason they exist: comparison. Might as well go by 'subjective feel' of cargo space. I watched a CT6 / Continetal comparions video where the trunk cargo test was seeing how many bulk Costco packages of paper towels fit inside. Same 'science' the EPA uses.

It's junk. I'll stick with exterior dimensions.

I was shopping in a first ring/ second ring 6/10 burb the other night that happens to be near a prominent caddy dealer.  Lots of boomer / elder demographic.

In the span of a couple miles and a few minutes not less than 4 new XT5's.

And since that other day, the next two days, seen more new XT5's.  Caddy demand was pent up for crossovers.

In the meantime I see several XTS out and about.  It's rare to see new CTS.  Used to see more ATS.  CT6 is extremely rare.

It's evident to me there is no detriment and all the benefit to continue to sell the XTS for 3 more years.  It's the ES Lexus equivalent.  No pretense, just some cush and badge honor.  The new updates help but I do think they should have spruced the interior more.

ATS is questionable to me in USA unless they redo the whole thing (including rear seat leg room), and probably should have remained CTS.  CTS should have been STS.  CT6 should have brought back DTS.

Caddy may keep the XTS until they clear out the awkwardness of their sedan lineup.  When the XTS dies, they should stick with 3 sedans (and that includes not expecting much volume out of the ATS size car).  If they bring an even smaller FWD based car, that's suicide in the US i think.  They need to keep the XTS to just plug the hole for those who don't like the CTS or think the ATS and CTS are too small and too unsightly, and don't like the CT6 or can't come close to affording it.

Caddy's sin in the last 10 years or so.  Downsizing all their product.  CT6 is a nice size but a bit shy in width.  Caddy really can rejuvenate sedans with a king size car.  CT6 is a bit shy of king size.  

8 hours ago, balthazar said:

Don't you feel that auto manufacturers and those who's focus is on the industry have a more weighed say over time in what defines a vehicle than a johnny-come-laterly soulless policy-writing bureaucracy that also concerns itself with the methane emissions of sheep?

There were "full-size" cars for decades upon decades before there even was an EPA. Again I submit to you, not as a personal opinion but as an application of common sense; the EPA would call an El Camino a sub compact and the 4-dr version on the same 'platform' a "full-size' because they use an arbitrary 'formula' of interior cubic space. How many consumers deliver inflated balloons for a living?

 

They haven't made an El Camino in 30 years, so who cares?   Your external dimension approach doesn't account for downsizing..what is full size today isn't the same size it was 40 years ago and definitely not 50 years ago...length and width is one measure of size, but it's too simplistic. 

What is more important is how the automakers themselves define the cars and the standard, commonly accepted categories they fit in...

1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

They haven't made an El Camino in 30 years, so who cares?   Your external dimension approach doesn't account for downsizing..what is full size today isn't the same size it was 40 years ago and definitely not 50 years ago...length and width is one measure of size, but it's too simplistic. 

Plus, with the advent of FWD and computer aided car design that helped car manufacturers put an emphasis on interior volume and space (Chrysler's Cab Forward engineering in the 1990s for example...and yes I realize this engineering design element existed before CAD and before 1992)  forced the various levels of 'guvment'  to re-write the rules...

13 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Plus, with the advent of FWD and computer aided car design that helped car manufacturers put an emphasis on interior volume and space (Chrysler's Cab Forward engineering in the 1990s for example...and yes I realize this engineering design element existed before CAD and before 1992)  forced the various levels of 'guvment'  to re-write the rules...

 

This is a semantic discussion and I can see all sides. I have a love of the old land yachts...but was rather surprised when I ate at a restaurant with my parents in North Carolina with my parents.  We went after a local car show....

Was surprised at how the imperials, Impalas, and Invictas of the day were dwarfed by modern large SUV's.

I would say that dinosaurs still live...because Birds have a genetic and evolutionary link back to dinosaurs according to evolutionary biologists. the ahve just biologically descended to become something else...

In the same way the Sedan Deville of 1974 has become the Escalade, and the Impala of 1968 has become the Suburban.

1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

They haven't made an El Camino in 30 years, so who cares?   Your external dimension approach doesn't account for downsizing..what is full size today isn't the same size it was 40 years ago and definitely not 50 years ago...length and width is one measure of size, but it's too simplistic. 

What is more important is how the automakers themselves define the cars and the standard, commonly accepted categories they fit in...

...or the language itself has evolved...

in 1890 the word Gay meant happy and well dressed...not what it means today.

Everything changes and evolves, from hair styles to fashion to housing choices to language...

Full size car has historically had a lot of different meanings. Using the word one way does not preclude it being used another.

1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

They haven't made an El Camino in 30 years, so who cares?   Your external dimension approach doesn't account for downsizing..what is full size today isn't the same size it was 40 years ago...

Stick with me Moltie; the point RE the Elky is how the EPA's approach would categorize it, not if it's in production today. That their approach is flawed. Such as (again; the interior) of the Ford Transit Connect being shipped here with seats puts it in one category, then Ford throws the 2nd/3rd/whaatever seats into the dumpster before sale and suddenly -viola- it's a truck/whatever. From the outside, it hasn't changed.

Further my point RE downsizing- THAT"S EXACTLY IT- 'full-size' "downsized" to mid-size- there no longer are full-size cars! Hence "downsized". You can't radically change the size of something and have it 'be the same'. But boy howdy; does "full-size" sound betterer to American consumers. Can't drop that juicy term - "But wait- there's more!"

It is not a semantic discussion.

Find me the interior volume of a 1974 Chevrolet Caprice or even the downsized 1979 Caprice and then compare and contrast that with a FWD "fullsized" Honda Accord or Toyota Camry or Chevrolet  Malibu of 2016 and considering how long and large the 1970s  car was with those modern family haulers and then come and talk to me....

The trunk volume space need not apply.

(And I realize the 1974 Impala, 3 grown adults fit COMFORTABLY in front or 1 adult and 3 kids...because so wide....but like I said....in contrast....the 2016 cars are way way way way smaller)

4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Stick with me Moltie; the point RE the Elky is how the EPA's approach would categorize it, not if it's in production today. That their approach is flawed. Such as (again; the interior) of the Ford Transit Connect being shipped here with seats puts it in one category, then Ford throws the 2nd/3rd/whaatever seats into the dumpster before sale and suddenly -viola- it's a truck/whatever. From the outside, it hasn't changed.

Further my point RE downsizing- THAT"S EXACTLY IT- 'full-size' "downsized" to mid-size- there no longer are full-size cars! Hence "downsized". You can't radically change the size of something and have it 'be the same'. But boy howdy; does "full-size" sound betterer to American consumers. Can't drop that juicy term - "But wait- there's more!"

INTERIOR SPACE took PRECEDENT!!!

Ignore that fact if you want to!

And no...it aint always about tin foil conspiracy theories that the "guvment" is out to get us, fool us, steal from us!!!

I understand this hatred for guvment stems from the birth of the United Stated of America, but man, let us ease up on the hatred!

14 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Yo.. look what was up in Rose's space  He would beat me in a race.. but for $1.1 Million more he damn sure should. 

What is that ugly car next to that Lovely Cadillac? Looks like someone went to a ball game, had a spicy hotdog and had to quickly relieve themselves. 

12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

PS: The XΤS DOES represent the dark days...

Its the DIRECT replacement of the Deville which became the DTS whose DIRECT SUCCESSOR is the XTS whose PRIMARY customer base is those Fleetwood and Deville customers of the late 1980s and all through the 1990s who also has the same customer base as those late 1980s Buick Park Ave and LeSabres...and coincidentally are also the Lincoln Town car's and FWD Continentals...

Yes....dark days when the FWD STS was to break free from that market demographic but that only solidified that aging demographic and those people bought the STS as well,  making Cadillac just switch the Deville name to DTS because  Cadillac realized the STS wasnt changing the demographic tide and that is why the  Catera was introduced....

Ironically, 'twas the pro athletes and gangsta rapper Escalade that made Cadillac young and hip....

The  CTS was not even born then....

So yeah...the ΧTS represents fully the dark days...

Its just that the XTS is a much much much better executed DTS and FWD STS ever was!!!

Sorry.. just don't agree. I don't see those cars as DARK DAYS just because they weren't track stars and appealed to a different type of buyer. That buyer during those times saw a Fleetwood as MONEY. A Seville as MONEY. Times changed and an American car had to be able to turn.. just so happens that the first European cars that could really handle outside of Porsche were those BMWs.. who.. then decided to leave their sporting roots and turn to Luxury. This can be said to death.. but in the 80s and part of the 90s.. BMW and Audi were anything but LUXURY. They were sport cars that happen to be sedans.. or vice versa.

Quite frankly U pull up in this in 1997 and people knu U had money.. and panties were definitely gonna be wiggled off at the front door

Pull up in this.. and U were most likely a CEO

Bottom line is times change.. demographics and desires changed.. who would have thought 10 years ago that CUVs would storm the market after what we went thru with gas prices and the almost death of SUVs? Funny thing is people can say that GM was caught behind the 8 ball and idiotic for not having CUVs ready.. then U look at GM.. Chevy in particular.. and U see they have plenty of CUV/SUVs..  but for Cadillac.. the issue could have been averted simply by going the Lexus route and simply rebadging existing models.. but the press/media.. and idiotic fans are so hard on Cadillac.. that they have to develop "special" CUVs that will never be to a track. 

My plan would say FUCK IT.. the Enclave would be the XT7. AWD only. Turbo 3.0 and MRC. Cadillac design.. watch it sell. XT8 would would be a Tall wagon version of the Omega.. XT6 would be a Tall version of Omega. XT3 would be tall version of Alpha. Done.. shut the fuck up

15 minutes ago, dfelt said:

What is that ugly car next to that Lovely Cadillac? Looks like someone went to a ball game, had a spicy hotdog and had to quickly relieve themselves. 

I want to accept that compliment on behalf of Rose.. but the Mclaren owner was a cool older dude. He seriously said to me.. "I love what Cadillac has done with that and the big car they just brought out... U have to bring that to Hunt Valley's Cars and Coffee next weekend. " 

5 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Sorry.. just don't agree. I don't see those cars as DARK DAYS just because they weren't track stars and appealed to a different type of buyer. That buyer during those times saw a Fleetwood as MONEY. A Seville as MONEY. Times changed and an American car had to be able to turn.. just so happens that the first European cars that could really handle outside of Porsche were those BMWs.. who.. then decided to leave their sporting roots and turn to Luxury. This can be said to death.. but in the 80s and part of the 90s.. BMW and Audi were anything but LUXURY. They were sport cars that happen to be sedans.. or vice versa.

Quite frankly U pull up in this in 1997 and people knu U had money.. and panties were definitely gonna be wiggled off at the front door

Pull up in this.. and U were most likely a CEO

Bottom line is times change.. demographics and desires changed.. who would have thought 10 years ago that CUVs would storm the market after what we went thru with gas prices and the almost death of SUVs? Funny thing is people can say that GM was caught behind the 8 ball and idiotic for not having CUVs ready.. but for Cadillac.. the issue could have been averted simply by going the Lexus route and simply rebadging existing models.. but the press/media.. and idiotic fans are so hard on Cadillac.. that they have to develop "special" CUVs that will never be to a track. 

My plan would say f@#k IT.. the Enclave would be the XT7. AWD only. Turbo 3.0 and MRC. Cadillac design.. watch it sell. XT8 would would be a Tall wagon version of the Omega.. XT6 would be a Tall version of Omega. XT3 would be tall version of Alpha. Done.. shut the f@#k up

Deep down inside, I feel this way too!

It  may seem Im all over the place with Cadillac, but its because Im frustrated with the Euro-Centric snubs and the misdirections and miscalculations that Cadillac has taken because of the Euro-Centric snubs.

Its like when your own child gets Cs & Bs but you know he/she could get As but for whatever reason does not!

24 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Deep down inside, I feel this way too!

It  may seem Im all over the place with Cadillac, but its because Im frustrated with the Euro-Centric snubs and the misdirections and miscalculations that Cadillac has taken because of the Euro-Centric snubs.

Its like when your own child gets Cs & Bs but you know he/she could get As but for whatever reason does not!

The past is the past...the imperfect past is real, the perfect past is not...I will gladly accept the imperfect past of Cadillac...they ahve been building awesome cars for a very long time and I like their current lineup.

49 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Deep down inside, I feel this way too!

It  may seem Im all over the place with Cadillac, but its because Im frustrated with the Euro-Centric snubs and the misdirections and miscalculations that Cadillac has taken because of the Euro-Centric snubs.

Its like when your own child gets Cs & Bs but you know he/she could get As but for whatever reason does not!

Right.. I think it was @balthazar that once said over at GMI... when the 2016 CTS-V debuted..

 "Cadillac needs to be itself and not a carbon copy of the Germans…. EXCEPT still do everything they do." Balthazar GMI 7/31/15

I instantly became a fan.. and then saving my pennies in a jar so I could one day buy one... 

2 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Right.. I think it was @balthazar that once said over at GMI... when the 2016 CTS-V debuted..

 "Cadillac needs to be itself and not a carbon copy of the Germans…. EXCEPT still do everything they do." Balthazar GMI 7/31/15

I instantly became a fan.. and then saving my pennies in a jar so I could one day buy one... 

You are not the only fan...I am a huge fan myself.

7 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

 

Bottom line is times change.. demographics and desires changed.. who would have thought 10 years ago that CUVs would storm the market after what we went thru with gas prices and the almost death of SUVs? Funny thing is people can say that GM was caught behind the 8 ball and idiotic for not having CUVs ready.. then U look at GM.. Chevy in particular.. and U see they have plenty of CUV/SUVs..  but for Cadillac.. the issue could have been averted simply by going the Lexus route and simply rebadging existing models.. but the press/media.. and idiotic fans are so hard on Cadillac.. that they have to develop "special" CUVs that will never be to a track. 

My plan would say f@#k IT.. the Enclave would be the XT7. AWD only. Turbo 3.0 and MRC. Cadillac design.. watch it sell. XT8 would would be a Tall wagon version of the Omega.. XT6 would be a Tall version of Omega. XT3 would be tall version of Alpha. Done.. shut the f@#k up

To the first question, Mercedes did as the GLK came out in 2008, that was their 4th SUV at the time.  They were ready.

I actually think Chevy could get 2 more crossovers in their line up, one between Equinox and Traverse we know is coming, and I think they could get a crossover below Traxx or drop Traxx down in price and get one in between that and Equinox.

Cadillac has the XT4 already coming, I would also do an Alpha crossover, an Omega crossover and depending on the price point of the Omega, I could see a Cadillac version of the Enclave.  Cadillac could put out 5 crossovers, and all 5 would outsell their best selling sedan.  It happened at Buick, all those crossovers kill the sedans in sales, it is happening at Jaguar, and even Maserati's #1 seller is a crossover.  

47 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

To the first question, Mercedes did as the GLK came out in 2008, that was their 4th SUV at the time.  They were ready.

I actually think Chevy could get 2 more crossovers in their line up, one between Equinox and Traverse we know is coming, and I think they could get a crossover below Traxx or drop Traxx down in price and get one in between that and Equinox.

Cadillac has the XT4 already coming, I would also do an Alpha crossover, an Omega crossover and depending on the price point of the Omega, I could see a Cadillac version of the Enclave.  Cadillac could put out 5 crossovers, and all 5 would outsell their best selling sedan.  It happened at Buick, all those crossovers kill the sedans in sales, it is happening at Jaguar, and even Maserati's #1 seller is a crossover.  

What is the justification for the additional crossovers? We see no warrant for your claim.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

To the first question, Mercedes did as the GLK came out in 2008, that was their 4th SUV at the time.  They were ready.

I actually think Chevy could get 2 more crossovers in their line up, one between Equinox and Traverse we know is coming, and I think they could get a crossover below Traxx or drop Traxx down in price and get one in between that and Equinox.

Cadillac has the XT4 already coming, I would also do an Alpha crossover, an Omega crossover and depending on the price point of the Omega, I could see a Cadillac version of the Enclave.  Cadillac could put out 5 crossovers, and all 5 would outsell their best selling sedan.  It happened at Buick, all those crossovers kill the sedans in sales, it is happening at Jaguar, and even Maserati's #1 seller is a crossover.  

Dude...how the efff are you going to pay for R and D, development, inventory, advertising and the like? GM is already sitting on a crap ton of cars it cannot sell...

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.

33 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Dude...how the efff are you going to pay for R and D, development, inventory, advertising and the like? GM is already sitting on a crap ton of cars it cannot sell...

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.

11 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

INTERIOR SPACE took PRECEDENT!!

with who??

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.