Cadillac Says A Refreshed XTS Coming This Year, New Products Beginning In Second Half of 2018

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

They are able to hide behind the excellent 8-speed and 9-speed automatics for the moment, but that moment isn't going to last very long and may already be over. 

The XT5 I drove felt way faster than its numbers suggested it should, but I really feel it is because of the way the transmission is geared. 

But everyone has 8 and 9 speed transmissions and Audis are much quicker than Cadillacs with comparable power.   Compare an XT5's performance to a Jaguar F-Pace or Mercedes GLC43 and it isn't even close.  The GLC43 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is CTS V-sport performance out of a V6 crossover.   The 3.6 V6 just can't match any of the Euro sixes.

On 1/26/2017 at 6:02 PM, dfelt said:

Guess living in a rainy state with money, I rarely see a convertible, but plenty of coupes. I honestly cannot say when I last saw a convertible from Benz, BMW or really any other car brand except Mustang and Camaro.

I will say that Silver Escalade is sexy. Imagine if the C pillar was black rather than silver and you would have a long floating roof on it till you got to the sexy tail lights. 

Come down to Scottsdale....luxury convertibles are a daily sight...esp. now in winter when it's cool enough to drive top down.   Luxury convertibles sell well in So Cal, AZ, Florida...it's inexplicable for Cadillac to be in the luxury market without one...even in the Cleveland area, I've seen 3 BMW 4 series convertibles and a 6 series convertible driving around this week in the sleet and snow..

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Let me make something abundantly clear here. The Escalade does not ever need a V6 of any kind. It has earned part of its reputation on the 6.2L and that should not change. They have plenty of smaller models in their lineup that could use a turbo six but that brute is not one of them. 

CAFE says it will need a V6, and they could easily get over 400 hp and lb-ft from a V6 that would drink less gas than a 6.2 liter.  I would still offer the V8 as an option, and I'd probably make it a turbo or supercharged V8.  The original Escalade had a 255 hp V8 while the age of the same year had a 300 hp V8.  The CTS has replaced the STs with a 4-cylinder, if they cut cylinders in half there, they can cut 2 off the Escalade.

I am in favor of a six cylinder S-class too which i think is happening this year, you don't need to offer a standard V8 just because.  And there isn't a reason a base S-class needs 476 hp which the 4.0 V8 will make in it when they replace the 4.7.  Just like you don't need 450 hp ina truck with poor handling.  The average buyer doesn't care.  Just the the Corvette could offer a base V6.  But in all cases I support the optional V8.

15 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

But everyone has 8 and 9 speed transmissions and Audis are much quicker than Cadillacs with comparable power.   Compare an XT5's performance to a Jaguar F-Pace or Mercedes GLC43 and it isn't even close.  The GLC43 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is CTS V-sport performance out of a V6 crossover.   The 3.6 V6 just can't match any of the Euro sixes.

Doesn't seem to stop the XT5 from being the second best selling crossover in its segment after the RX.   I agree that a Turbo V6 would be a nice option to have, but a the moment it certainly isn't slowing down sales. Cadillac just had to add another shift to Spring Hill to keep up with demand. 

0-60 in these beasts largely doesn't matter in terms of sales. Once you get beyond "sufficient", every 0.1 second subtracted from the 0-60 time has drastically diminishing returns.

18 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

But everyone has 8 and 9 speed transmissions and Audis are much quicker than Cadillacs with comparable power.   Compare an XT5's performance to a Jaguar F-Pace or Mercedes GLC43 and it isn't even close.  The GLC43 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is CTS V-sport performance out of a V6 crossover.   The 3.6 V6 just can't match any of the Euro sixes.

Audis are faster due to the fact that they employ performance AWD in all of there vehicles. Same for the GLC43... plus it gets a boost from the gearing in the 9speed. BTW.. to anyone paying attention.. this GLC43 is an AMG model with a 3.0LTT. A similarily geared VSport XT5 with AWD would most like fuck it up.. with only the LGW's HP let alone the LF3 

12 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

CAFE says it will need a V6, and they could easily get over 400 hp and lb-ft from a V6 that would drink less gas than a 6.2 liter.  I would still offer the V8 as an option, and I'd probably make it a turbo or supercharged V8.  The original Escalade had a 255 hp V8 while the age of the same year had a 300 hp V8.  The CTS has replaced the STs with a 4-cylinder, if they cut cylinders in half there, they can cut 2 off the Escalade.

The 6.2L V8 Escalade gets better fuel economy than the 3.5TT V6 Navigator.... so there goes that idea.

The GLS450 with the 3.0TT only gets 1mpg better highway and 1mpg better city... but it's also 60hp and 100 lb-ft behind the Cadillac. 

The GLS550 gets a 1999 like 14/18. 

4 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

We agree on most things but the coupe and convertible. Just how many do you think they will sell? Give me a real number. 

The reason I use real saturation numbers is it puts it in real perspective when you deal with a low volume brands. 

30% is not all that much when you only sell 25K units over all. It put things a little more honestly. Business often use percentages publicly as can be much easier to hide the face your 35% gain was only 150 cars over last month. 

The Cadillac name has been on a slow decline since 1960. When GM moved them to a volume brand they slowly declined from what they once were to what they became. The fact is it was like boiling frogs. They turned the heat up on you slowly over several decades and you never realized how bad things were or got. That is understandable but now looking back it is clear when you look at what Cadillac did in the 1930's they were far from it in the 80's. 

When GM decreed everything had to be smaller and FWD Cadillac tanked. Some like to say the Cimarron but the first FWD Deville was the failure point. They even rushed a make over due to the failure in the market of the car. They strapped on longer quarters but it did not help much. 

Now if you can say with a straight face that the Cadillacs of the 80s were good or great cars you have lost all credibility. 

The bottom line is the bottom fell out someplace and today you are looking at a damaged brand that has struggled to regain where it once was. At one time the Cadillac was the best car in the world with out dispute. The craftsmanship was beyond compare and it really was a better car than a Rolls. To own one at this time meant you really were someone and few others could afford the car.

Then the change to mass volumes came chasing the dollar in the 60's and later. Then the bottom came out when they made the car just another GM car with a badge.

The bottom line is a Cadillac should not be a car that just anyone can buy or afford. They lost that right and have to earn it back.

Now in a market with coupe selling in less and less numbers daily they matter little. The convertible would be a solid idea if you are doing a 4 door touring car that will show you are different and why. Even a Alpha based sports car done properly but affordably with a decent trunk and GT like qualities would be reasonable at $50K. People would be willing to use that amount to gamble if it is a good car or not if the styling is compelling.  

But there is absolutely no way a coupe is a band aide that will fix Cadillac all on its own. Like it or not the CUV is going to have to be their salvation as this is where the market is going. Pay the bills with the CUV and then make the fun niche cars once you accomplished that. 

Also a coupe is DOA till Cadillac returns to a global market. That ain't happening for a while so that ain't going to help. 

I find many of the people who are Cadillac people really are not the kind of people Cadillac needs anymore. It should not be the car of truck drivers or hair dressers but it should be the car of leaders. [note no reflection on you just the many I see in Cadillac's] 

I can remember in the early 80's working at a gas station in a bad part of town. I took a customer home to his $6K house while riding in his near $18K Eldo. We had to stop so he could give a man a brief case for some money. Not a trip I enjoyed much. 

Same in the 80's we had a bar tender next to the station. He owned a new Eldo. Classy guy. He was charged with a felony for shooting a guy in the back because his drunk girl friend talked to him. He used to have us wash his new Eldo with the fire hose when we washed the parking lot. Ya Cadillac really appealed to a group of leaders in the community at the time. 

I bet if it were today they would not be driving a Benz or Bentley. 

Now I would agree to a Bentley GT coupe like car when Cadillac is ready for such a car but that is still beyond their ability to sell. I know they could build one but selling one is another story. That is beyond their price grade the customers would trust yet. 

Quick.. the only car makers on Cadillac's level of 1930s (check the V16) remaining are Rolls and Bentley. Benz, outside of the Pullman. Both Rolls and Bentley are a part of another company after the almost death of each in the 80s. And let's be clear.. during the 80s and 90s.. both were only a slight step, if any, above Cadillac or Benz. 

With due respect.. we could all tell stories from our younger days.. hell I can tell U some from now.. where a person we knu or encountered was driving a car that sat outside of a rented shack or slum. I'm from Baltimore 4Godsake.. I see $100K+ Range Rovers, 760is and S-Classes outside of the projects anytime I roll thru. Cash money rulz.. always.. and it really doesn't care where its spent.. and nor do the sellers of commodities. 

I can say that Cadillacs of the 80s.. some.. were great cars.. versus the competition. The 90s??? Not so much. The 2000s saw a resurgance and the 2010s are them being there but still getting people to accept it, thus a slight pull back. In other words the CT6. That car is near perfect. And I can see Cadillac (JDN) saying.... "Whoooah Whoooah.. save that extra stuff for the next car (CT8) because we have to ease them into this again.. otherwise all the extra stuff we put into it will not only go unnoticed, but be billed as trying too hard."

You said " I can say that Cadillacs of the 80s.. some.. were great cars.. versus the competition"  

Well that is not saying much. 

Cadillac as it once was died and you just never notices as you just kept lowering your standards as they lowered there. Yes the others also failed at times but not as much. 

As for the cars of today. They are good cars no question but there is still better execution that needs to be done. Mark Ruess fought for higher quality parts in the CT6 but was rejected by the board. He really wanted it to be a flagship but was never permitted to do so. 

Because of this JDN killed the Flagship idea as the car is not perfect and that is why the slot was changed. You may think the CT6 is perfect but you also loved the 80's Caddies too. A Cheap steak is good if you know nothing better. 

To be honest JDN came in and was not happy with anything at Cadillac. He had a good start but everything and I mean everything needed some more work to make it what it should be. Hence the pause in product while it is being fixed. 

Things are being fixed like no more people Engineering Chevys on Monday and Cadillac on Friday. Cadillac now have their own group of engineers and designers share with no one in GM. Yes some basic structure work will be shared on the platforms but the rest will be nothing but Cadillac. Good move. 

Quality of materials will be upgraded. They will address the short comings in materials and options missing on these cars. No self dimming mirror on the ATS and CTS Passenger side? This has been a large complaint on something my old SSEI has standard. 

We will see more on the improved marketing once they really have something to market. 

The Cue is now being fixed to be user friendly right from the start. It was a good system once you learned how to use it. It should have been easy to use as soon as you saw it not two days later. 

Moving to their own engines and doing them so no more issues like the N stars had. Yes the N stars had oil and head gasket issues. Most of this was because they tried to save money doing them. 

GM has always had people who get it there but they were always controlled by those saving a buck that did not get it. That damaged culture is still being removed but the people who are not the problem are now in charge per Lutz. 

The move to NYC was not something they could be honest about. The move was to bring in people who normally would not work for them because they did not want to live in Detroit. Also they moved to NYC to put space between them and the rest of GM. No more GM leadership just popping in for a visit daily to question every move. 

Note we will get more enhanced performance cars at Cadillac and I expect a mid engine car around 2025. With them in the prototype class now they should be able to leverage that. For now they are using Chevy engines to get started but watch they will use the DOHC engine in the car in the future. 

Hell their racing program is so much better this year than their last attempt. The last prototypes were unsorted cars they had no clue about and temperamental engines. This car is a proven engine from the Daytona Prototype run by the teams that ran the prototype. They are using a proven chassis and and proven maker. Sounds like a program run by someone who gets it. No more fast lap times and then DNF. I expect they will win the class this year. The 24 you can never tell till the checker falls as that many hours anything can happen. 

This will all work out. It will take 10 years to gain more ground and even then they may still be 4th in sales but they will be selling more cars and getting higher prices and growing vs. just getting by. 

Re Read the penalty of leadership again. This is the mind set I believe they are striving to gain again. No excuses and no compromise. God knows we have had way too much of that. 

3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Doesn't seem to stop the XT5 from being the second best selling crossover in its segment after the RX.   I agree that a Turbo V6 would be a nice option to have, but a the moment it certainly isn't slowing down sales. Cadillac just had to add another shift to Spring Hill to keep up with demand. 

0-60 in these beasts largely doesn't matter in terms of sales. Once you get beyond "sufficient", every 0.1 second subtracted from the 0-60 time has drastically diminishing returns.

Fuel economy would matter more, which would be the argument for a turbo 4 or hybrid going into the XT5.  In general though, across ATS, CTS, XTS, XT5, etc, the 3.6 isn't the best option anymore.  Same goes for Lexus with their 306 hp 3.5 liter V6 that they have been selling since 2006.  It is tired and dated.

XT5 is a new product and the only crossover at the Cadillac lot, that helps it sell, plus GM has a big SUV following.  But all the more reason that Cadillac should have about 4 crossovers on sale to capitalize on American's willingness to buy American trucks and crossovers.  Americans don't seem to want to buy American made luxury sedans.

3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The 6.2L V8 Escalade gets better fuel economy than the 3.5TT V6 Navigator.... so there goes that idea.

The GLS450 with the 3.0TT only gets 1mpg better highway and 1mpg better city... but it's also 60hp and 100 lb-ft behind the Cadillac. 

The GLS550 gets a 1999 like 14/18. 

The Escalade 4wd is rated at 15/20 mpg, not like it is much better, and the GLS550 is more powerful and faster.  The current GLS is too thirsty though, the GLE's hybrid engine would help.   I imagine on the next generation GLS due in 2018 they will fix fuel economy.  Weight should drop a few hundred pounds, the inline six and 4.0 V8 with the 48 volt electric system will be a big improvement over the 4.7 liter V8 that is a gas hog. 

Motor Trend has a comparison this month of the E300, CT6 and Volvo S90 and the CT6 was last place.  I don't think it is near perfect if it can't even beat the mid-size luxury cars, it is a far cry from the real flagships.

They're "not buying" German luxury sedans either.

BTW- the Escalade is exempt from CAFE. 

27 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Motor Trend has a comparison this month of the E300, CT6 and Volvo S90 and the CT6 was last place.  I don't think it is near perfect if it can't even beat the mid-size luxury cars, it is a far cry from the real flagships.

Mercedes Trend puts the Cadillac in last place...

pinch me...

52 minutes ago, balthazar said:

They're "not buying" German luxury sedans either.

BTW- the Escalade is exempt from CAFE. 

German luxury sedans are the only ones that sell.  

The Escalade should impact CAFE, the F150 will.  Large trucks have to be 23 mpg EPA sticker by 2025.  But if they want to continue to offer 15/20 mpg with 420 hp while Mercedes I-6 offers 408 hp with way better mileage, they can go ahead.  BMW X7 and Audi Q8 are on the way too, the Euros are going to attack that segment with lighter, better handling, better braking, faster, better equipped SUVs the the Escalade is.  They can't live on name forever.

The Q8 is a 5-seater "4-door full size crossover coupe"   I'm sure Audi will sell about 10 of them.

China (which happens to be the world's #1 auto market) taxes displacement every 0.5 liters, anything over 2 liters is taxed heavily, over 4 liters it is taxed a lot.  

An S400 V6 in China costs $181,366, but an S500 with a 3.996 liter V8 is $290,360.   On the E-class going from the 2 liter four to the V6 adds $19,000.  A GLS V6 Luxury trim to a V8 is $31,000 increase with all other equipment being the same.  Crazy taxes!

7 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The Q8 is a 5-seater "4-door full size crossover coupe"   I'm sure Audi will sell about 10 of them.

Eventually they'll make a Q9 3 row SUV and sell 37 of those.

The X7 and Maybach GLS are going to bring the competition.

^ Shirley you don't think those price differences are solely due to displacement tax!

Large trucks have to be 23 mpg EPA sticker by 2025.

Incorrect, it is still corporate average fuel economy.
The Escalade is exempt, numerically. GM sold 10 million vehicles in 2015.

6 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ Shirley you don't think those price differences are solely due to displacement tax!

 

 

 

Incorrect, it is still corporate average fuel economy.
The Escalade is exempt, numerically. GM sold 10 million vehicles in 2015.

 

You just called him Shirley LOL! 

On the engines here is the problem. 

To keep sales stable when oil goes up need better MPG to not hurt sales. You need good power when oil prices are down. 

While the V8 gets good MPG the problem is going to be emission very soon as one GM insider said a little while ago the 2 valve will be killed at some point do to emissions. As things get tighter it makes the window smaller. 

Also if you sell globally a product the smaller engines will be easier to sell where they tax by liter.

Adding more powerful engines to a FWD/AWD  based SUV is a neat idea but sales I think will be limited. If you can do it to cover the development cost and make money that is fine but too often the cost go up so much that it hurts the price and limits sales.  It is much easier and cheaper to do it in a RWD based model. 

Also these things are top heavy. If a company makes a faster top heavy product and people get out there and start flipping them over the Companies will pay no matter how stupid the accident or driver. Some models are ok and there are some models out there that can flip by hitting a curb. 

A buddy used to work for LKQ auto recycler's they are across the country. He would send me photos of flipped Terrains and HHR's since I owned both. We notied how well they held up but we also noticed how many had flipped with light contact or no contact at all. 

Now I am not saying these are unsafe but you must consider if a number of them flip and the additional power causes more some one will notice. GM is not the only one to have this issue. It really was surprising how many HHR models flipped. 

I am not saying not to do it but it is a consideration that needs to be made. 

As for the car like CUV models at least in America it is an answer to a questions not asked. I see them but they are limited and most people opt for the more SUV like models. 

1 hour ago, hyperv6 said:

You just called him Shirley LOL! 

- - - - -

Just poked around the net- the last displacement tier for the Chinese market (as of 2010) was a 20% displacement tax on engines over 4L. It's 15% on engines between 3 & 4 liters, so --unless some chucklehead is proposing an Escalade with a 2.9L engine (12% tax)-- the difference between, say; a 3.9L Escalade and a 6.2L Escalade is 5%.  

Boo frickety hoo. It's a luxury product, people; can't afford it, import a Trablant.
As usual, the scary, dark displacement tax is nothing to agonize over. Many countries have moved away from displacement taxes to other metrics.

17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

But everyone has 8 and 9 speed transmissions and Audis are much quicker than Cadillacs with comparable power.   Compare an XT5's performance to a Jaguar F-Pace or Mercedes GLC43 and it isn't even close.  The GLC43 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is CTS V-sport performance out of a V6 crossover.   The 3.6 V6 just can't match any of the Euro sixes.

Yes because everyone is just drag racing from stop light to stop light in their CUVs. Like Drew said, 0-60 times are not top priority for CUVs or most of their buyers. 

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

They're "not buying" German luxury sedans either.

BTW- the Escalade is exempt from CAFE. 

Which is exactly why it doesn't need a V6 of any kind. 

The Escalade isn't sold in China, the Mercedes GLS and Audi Q7 are.  So in world's largest auto market the Escalade doesn't even compete.  All the more reason Cadillac needs an XT7 and more crossovers.  And an 8% tax difference to go from 3 liter to 4 liter is a lot on a $150,000 car which is about what the GLS sells for in China, that is $12,000 tax.  

To be clear, I think the Escalade should always have a V8 option, but they could easily make the base engine a 3.0TT V6.  If we aren't concerned about 0-60 SUV times, a V6 Escalade that does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds will sell just as well as a V8 model doing 0-60 in 5.9 seconds.  

This is part of Cadillac's problem for the past 30 years though, they are stuck in the past, and don't adapt to the market changes fast enough.  Always a step behind, always playing catch up.

16 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Motor Trend has a comparison this month of the E300, CT6 and Volvo S90 and the CT6 was last place.  I don't think it is near perfect if it can't even beat the mid-size luxury cars, it is a far cry from the real flagships.

I'm surprised no one called U out on this idiotic comparo.

Let's be clear.. with $70K U could have gotten a CT6 3.0L TT with AWD that would have put the weaksauce Chinaman car on the trailer with the Kraut.

 In fact.. why was the CT6 in this run at all? Why not simply bring in a CTS 2.0L AWD loaded to the hilt? To MT it made sense to take a 204 inch car and put it up against 2 vehicles that were smaller than even the smaller than CT6s lil sis the CTS. 

Can U say BULLCRAP???

56 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Escalade isn't sold in China, the Mercedes GLS and Audi Q7 are.  So in world's largest auto market the Escalade doesn't even compete.  All the more reason Cadillac needs an XT7 and more crossovers.  And an 8% tax difference to go from 3 liter to 4 liter is a lot on a $150,000 car which is about what the GLS sells for in China, that is $12,000 tax.  

To be clear, I think the Escalade should always have a V8 option, but they could easily make the base engine a 3.0TT V6.  If we aren't concerned about 0-60 SUV times, a V6 Escalade that does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds will sell just as well as a V8 model doing 0-60 in 5.9 seconds.  

This is part of Cadillac's problem for the past 30 years though, they are stuck in the past, and don't adapt to the market changes fast enough.  Always a step behind, always playing catch up.

I agree on the of being stuck in the past.. pre 2014 or JDN and Uwe getting to their posts.. but saying goodbye to some of the traditional buyers seems to be their major goal in returning the brand to its rightful spot... above Benz. In China.. an onslaught of new vehicles would only continue their offensive.. with last year the brand selling 117K units and up almost 50%. New products will push them even higher. 

And before U recite other brand's numbers.. keep in mind that Cadillac is somewhat new to the market.. not to mention as I said before.. should be coupled with its sister brand Buick. But U would hate that. Cause that would put Cadillac/Buick sales above your precious Germans

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

The Escalade isn't sold in China, the Mercedes GLS and Audi Q7 are.  So in world's largest auto market the Escalade doesn't even compete.  All the more reason Cadillac needs an XT7 and more crossovers.  And an 8% tax difference to go from 3 liter to 4 liter is a lot on a $150,000 car which is about what the GLS sells for in China, that is $12,000 tax.  

To be clear, I think the Escalade should always have a V8 option, but they could easily make the base engine a 3.0TT V6.  If we aren't concerned about 0-60 SUV times, a V6 Escalade that does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds will sell just as well as a V8 model doing 0-60 in 5.9 seconds.  

This is part of Cadillac's problem for the past 30 years though, they are stuck in the past, and don't adapt to the market changes fast enough.  Always a step behind, always playing catch up.

So a 6000 lb. SUV with a V6 could do 0-60 in 6.5 seconds? Want to explain the physics behind that?

33 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I'm surprised no one called U out on this idiotic comparo.

Let's be clear.. with $70K U could have gotten a CT6 3.0L TT with AWD that would have put the weaksauce Chinaman car on the trailer with the Kraut.

 In fact.. why was the CT6 in this run at all? Why not simply bring in a CTS 2.0L AWD loaded to the hilt? To MT it made sense to take a 204 inch car and put it up against 2 vehicles that were smaller than even the smaller than CT6s lil sis the CTS. 

Can U say BULLCRAP???

When I first saw the comparo in the magazine, I thought it was a CTS, but I guess they went with the CT6 since it is newer.  Given the CT6 has more room and equipment than the CTS, that should have helped it.   And the CT6 was the middle priced car of the 3 and they made it a 4 cylinder comparison.  They could put an E43 in a comparo with a CT6 3.0 and same result would happen as it did with the 4 cylinder engines.  The CTS would have done worse than the CT6, the interior and fit and finish and build quality were the biggest reasons the CT6 was in last place, and the CTS is worse than the CT6 in all of those categories.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

And an 8% tax difference to go from 3 liter to 4 liter is a lot on a $150,000 car..., that is $12,000 tax.  

3 - 4 liters is the same tax rate. You'd have to go from a 2.xL to a 3.xL, and the increase there is only 3%, not 8% (as of 2010). Everything OVER 4.0L is the same rate; a 4.1L is the same as a 8.2L.
That's $4500 on $150K, not $12K. Big deal, those paying these prices are grooving on overpaying, anyway, if it even matters.

34 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

So a 6000 lb. SUV with a V6 could do 0-60 in 6.5 seconds? Want to explain the physics behind that?

A V8 Escalade is 5,520 lbs, a V6 should be a little less.

The GLS450 has a V6 and is 5,335 lbs and does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds, so the physics must be possible.  And that is with a 362 hp engine, when 400 hp is possible from a V6.   And they have a new GLS about 1-2 years away with more power and less weight.

10 minutes ago, balthazar said:

3 - 4 liters is the same tax rate. You'd have to go from a 2.xL to a 3.xL, and the increase there is only 3%, not 8% (as of 2010). Everything OVER 4.0L is the same rate; a 4.1L is the same as a 8.2L.
That's $4500 on $150K, not $12K. Big deal, those paying these prices are grooving on overpaying, anyway, if it even matters.

But the Audi, BMW and Mercedes six cylinder engines are all like 2.99 liters, so they are under 3, the Audi and Mercedes V8s are 3.99 liter so they are under 4.   A GLS450 is taxed at the 2-3 liter rate.  So that is like 8% vs 20% on an Escalade.  Plus they have an annual displacement tax.

I found a tax table for annual taxes.

2400 RMB is $349 per year the 5,400 RMB for over 4 liter is $785 per year tax.  And this is why they don't sell any Cadillacs with an engine larger than 3 liters in China.

Who cares where the other brands are at?? We're talking about the Escalade and where IT'S at.

6.2L engine is NOT a detriment to Chinese sales because realistically the only displacement decrease would theoretically take it to is between 3.0 & 4.0L, which like I said; the difference is only 5% of the vehicle price, or in other words, negligable. This tier of buyer is not pinching pennies, everything it this price tier is about conspicuous consumption. It would be interesting to see a 4.2TT V8 in the Escalade, but it would NOT be interesting to see a 2.4L engine there, regardless of stated power specs.

11 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Who cares where the other brands are at?? We're talking about the Escalade and where IT'S at.

6.2L engine is NOT a detriment to Chinese sales because realistically the only displacement decrease would theoretically take it to is between 3.0 & 4.0L, which like I said; the difference is only 5% of the vehicle price, or in other words, negligable. This tier of buyer is not pinching pennies, everything it this price tier is about conspicuous consumption. It would be interesting to see a 4.2TT V8 in the Escalade, but it would NOT be interesting to see a 2.4L engine there, regardless of stated power specs.

But they don't even sell the Escalade in China, so they have no sales at all.   I do hope in 2022 Cadillac is still pushing the Escalade with a 6.2 liter V8 pumping out 420 hp at 5,800 lbs getting 15/20 mpg.  Makes it easier for the GLS to win since they keep advancing with new powertrains.

At some point I'd expect Cadillac to make an Omega based SUV, or some sort of performance SUV.  They can't just sit around and let Porsche, BMW, Audi, Jaguar and Mercedes rack up profits on performance crossovers, even Alfa Romeo and Maserati are getting in that space, and they'll get some sales.  The Stelvio has 505 hp from a 2.9 liter V6, sort of makes the Escalade's 6.2 V8 look weak and out dated.

[ragged sigh]

I realize they don't sell the Big E in China, that was clearly stated above, also. 

Since we are responding to each other, please take note of my point; that the Escalade's displacement is NOT a reason not to sell it in China, that 'reason' doesn't hold water.

On 1/29/2017 at 2:33 PM, smk4565 said:

When I first saw the comparo in the magazine, I thought it was a CTS, but I guess they went with the CT6 since it is newer.  Given the CT6 has more room and equipment than the CTS, that should have helped it.   And the CT6 was the middle priced car of the 3 and they made it a 4 cylinder comparison.  They could put an E43 in a comparo with a CT6 3.0 and same result would happen as it did with the 4 cylinder engines.  The CTS would have done worse than the CT6, the interior and fit and finish and build quality were the biggest reasons the CT6 was in last place, and the CTS is worse than the CT6 in all of those categories.

Actually. U are wrong. The CT6 on the bottom spectra was laxed in the interior to justify the price. The CTS actually has a better interior than the CT6, IMO, until U get to the Premium L and Platinum CT6. The CT6 in this comparo is a BASE car for all intents. The only CT6 that should be sold, if it is gonna be held to the same level of expectation as the S-Class etc.. would be the Platinum.. which I have yet to read an true negative word about its interior even in comparos against the aforementioned leader of the segment.

Otherwise.. realize that if U take a car that should only be sold to people with the "XYZ means.." and downgrade it cater to those who only have the "XY" sans the Z.. corners will have to be cut.. and they damn sure are better cut from the insides than the bones. Point is.. if U have a car like the CT6.. on Omega.. and U have to snatch out things to bring cost down.. where do U snatch? Do U add in heavier steel instead of the lighter stuff? Do U put in less sound-deadening?? How about less forgiving sound-proof glass??? No what Caddy did was put less high quality leather in, deleted the MRC, and added no performance tires. U want a real CT6?? Buy a Platinum or even Premium Luxury. 

22 hours ago, smk4565 said:

But they don't even sell the Escalade in China, so they have no sales at all.   I do hope in 2022 Cadillac is still pushing the Escalade with a 6.2 liter V8 pumping out 420 hp at 5,800 lbs getting 15/20 mpg.  Makes it easier for the GLS to win since they keep advancing with new powertrains.

At some point I'd expect Cadillac to make an Omega based SUV, or some sort of performance SUV.  They can't just sit around and let Porsche, BMW, Audi, Jaguar and Mercedes rack up profits on performance crossovers, even Alfa Romeo and Maserati are getting in that space, and they'll get some sales.  The Stelvio has 505 hp from a 2.9 liter V6, sort of makes the Escalade's 6.2 V8 look weak and out dated.

With every comment made the closer U come to really being that childhood game.. we used to Pin the Tail on. 

Where is the true advancement in powertrains when all they did was get beat by the MIGHTY Escalade enough times that they put a more aggressive 9speed in the BITCHO Benz so it could literally eeeeeek out a win in the acceleration test by a mere 10th of a second in the 1/4 and 0-60 both. 

Also.. if GM wanted to drop more than 420HP/460lbs of torque in the 'Slade they certainly have the engines, both NA and Forced Induced to do it

51 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

With every comment made the closer U come to really being that childhood game.. we used to Pin the Tail on. 

Where is the true advancement in powertrains when all they did was get beat by the MIGHTY Escalade enough times that they put a more aggressive 9speed in the BITCHO Benz so it could literally eeeeeek out a win in the acceleration test by a mere 10th of a second in the 1/4 and 0-60 both. 

Also.. if GM wanted to drop more than 420HP/460lbs of torque in the 'Slade they certainly have the engines, both NA and Forced Induced to do it

Baffling how he thinks that Benz is the only make capable of advancing tech. All I know is that more folks prefer the overdressed Chevy over the Benz. 

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Actually. U are wrong. The CT6 on the bottom spectra was laxed in the interior to justify the price. The CTS actually has a better interior than the CT6, IMO, until U get to the Premium L and Platinum CT6. The CT6 in this comparo is a BASE car for all intents. The only CT6 that should be sold, if it is gonna be held to the same level of expectation as the S-Class etc.. would be the Platinum.. which I have yet to read an true negative word about its interior even in comparos against the aforementioned leader of the segment.

Otherwise.. realize that if U take a car that should only be sold to people with the "XYZ means.." and downgrade it cater to those who only have the "XY" sans the Z.. corners will have to be cut.. and they damn sure are better cut from the insides than the bones. Point is.. if U have a car like the CT6.. on Omega.. and U have to snatch out things to bring cost down.. where do U snatch? Do U add in heavier steel instead of the lighter stuff? Do U put in less sound-deadening?? How about less forgiving sound-proof glass??? No what Caddy did was put less high quality leather in, deleted the MRC, and added no performance tires. U want a real CT6?? Buy a Platinum or even Premium Luxury. 

The CT6 in the comparison was $70k so it is hardly a base car.  And I suspect even a Platinum CT6 is going to lose an interior battle with a lot of cars in the $70-90k range.

But why is the CT6 so compromised in the first place?  Why did they have to cut corners at all?  This is just Cadillac mentality on display.  They cut corners on the bones of the XT5, it is just the Cadillac way to take shortcuts.

29 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Baffling how he thinks that Benz is the only make capable of advancing tech. All I know is that more folks prefer the overdressed Chevy over the Benz. 

Not only Benz, as I said Alfa Romeo's SUV has 505 hp from a 2.9 liter engine.  Tesla's SUV has like 650 lb-ft or torque and can do 0-60 in less than 3 seconds, BMW has a plug in hybrid X5.  

If you go back to 2010 the Mercedes GL had 4.7 and 5.5 liter natural aspirated V8s while the Escalade had a 403 hp 6.2 V8.  The GL went to 3.0 and 4.7 liter biturbo engines and in 2019 will have a new inline 6 and 4.0 V8.  That is 2 generations of new engines, the Slade will still have the same engine.

It was a base car with a few upgrades.  It wasn't a Platinum or a Premium..  which is in my opinion the only way to go.  I explained why the CT6 isn't 100%. If it were the S550 would be consistently put on the truck.  Screw Benz.  And Screw it's fans.  

And what is your idiotic obsession with 0-60 times as a measure of luxury? It's stupid.  U act as if we are talking about Camaros and Mustangs.  

4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Not only Benz, as I said Alfa Romeo's SUV has 505 hp from a 2.9 liter engine.  Tesla's SUV has like 650 lb-ft or torque and can do 0-60 in less than 3 seconds, BMW has a plug in hybrid X5.  

If you go back to 2010 the Mercedes GL had 4.7 and 5.5 liter natural aspirated V8s while the Escalade had a 403 hp 6.2 V8.  The GL went to 3.0 and 4.7 liter biturbo engines and in 2019 will have a new inline 6 and 4.0 V8.  That is 2 generations of new engines, the Slade will still have the same engine.

Way to 100% miss the point. I am talking about your omission of Cadillac in the tech advancement game. You are making silly assumptions about the engines as well, like GM doesn't have DOHC 6.2L that they can easily put in the Slade by 2019. Let me just say this. While you harp on about cheapness, 0-60 times, old engines, and whatever else you can use to attach to that moving bar of yours, remember this. That overdressed Chevy, a tenth of a second slower and all, beat that Benz in the last MT luxury SUV comparo. It outsells it too. 

BTW, the GL went with those motors because of the Asia/China market. This has already been discussed to death. Let me add this one last bit. Ever heard the expression 'Don't fix what isn't broken"? That's the Escalade. It's the same principle you have used for the four decade old G-Wagen. 

I still don't get why Cadillac doesn't have a full size SUV on Omega that is like 4900 lbs with the 3.0TT V6 base and a 4.2TT V8 optional.  But then it would be better than the Escalade, so they won't make it.

36 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

I still don't get why Cadillac doesn't have a full size SUV on Omega that is like 4900 lbs with the 3.0TT V6 base and a 4.2TT V8 optional.  But then it would be better than the Escalade, so they won't make it.

Why would Cadillac yank down or vie sales away from the almost brand new, extremely profitable K2x Escalade for a same size vehicle.. on a platform with singular service, not even in production for a whole year? Even more importantly, the Escalade is BOF and BOF buyers in US and Canada, as the Navigator proves, has buyers who love V8s.. particularly Big ones

18 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I still don't get why Cadillac doesn't have a full size SUV on Omega that is like 4900 lbs with the 3.0TT V6 base and a 4.2TT V8 optional.  But then it would be better than the Escalade, so they won't make it.

Conjecture as you have zero proof that a make believe vehicle is better than the current one. All we know for certain is that the current vehicle is better than anything Merecedes offers.

2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Conjecture as you have zero proof that a make believe vehicle is better than the current one. All we know for certain is that the current vehicle is better than anything Merecedes offers.

The CT6 is admittedly compromised by Casa, if they took out the compromises and add the optional V8 we know is coming and make a crossover out of it, I don't know why it wouldn't be better than an Escalade.  Omega is a heck of a lot better platform than what the Silverado rides on, and GM does crossovers better than they do sedans.  No reason to believe that a CT6 based crossover without the penny pinching wouldn't be the best SUV/Crossover in GM history.

13 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The CT6 is admittedly compromised by Casa, if they took out the compromises and add the optional V8 we know is coming and make a crossover out of it, I don't know why it wouldn't be better than an Escalade.  Omega is a heck of a lot better platform than what the Silverado rides on, and GM does crossovers better than they do sedans.  No reason to believe that a CT6 based crossover without the penny pinching wouldn't be the best SUV/Crossover in GM history.

Again, pure conjecture since the current Slade is already good enough to beat the supposedly more advanced GL, Silverado bones and all. For the record, an Omega could happen but not at the expense of the current Slade. It doesn't need to and that is what you don't get here while you constantly try to knock Cadillac down a peg. 

The XTS in Black Amethyst is lovely in the 

This is a hard car to beat.

 Couldn't Cadillac build the Escalade, XT5, and an Alpha platform crossover and an Omega platform crossover?  And an XT3 or XT2 compact crossover.  They could easily support 5 SUVs.

57 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

 Couldn't Cadillac build the Escalade, XT5, and an Alpha platform crossover and an Omega platform crossover?  And an XT3 or XT2 compact crossover.  They could easily support 5 SUVs.

I am sure they could but then I would say we should discuss that in an Escalade thread.

So about the XTS, I see this car actually living on for a lot longer than most people expect.

Best uses are private auto transport such as Lyft or Uber, Limousine service, Funeral parlor service, Fleets in addition to private retail sales to those that want a more float older full size auto.

I would like to see some of the thin seat technology go into it as the room for feet under the front seats is tight. That would help those of us with big feet.

XTS could have a Town Car like life span.  The markets it caters to don't care if it is old or front drive, as long as they are roomy and relatively cheap.  The Town Car went 13 years with basically no improvements and the livery market still bought it.  The current XTS could last until 2022 easily caring to fleet and livery buyers.

6 hours ago, smk4565 said:

 Couldn't Cadillac build the Escalade, XT5, and an Alpha platform crossover and an Omega platform crossover?  And an XT3 or XT2 compact crossover.  They could easily support 5 SUVs.

Escalade : check.
XT5 : check.
'XT7' : check.
XT4 : OK.

XT3 or XT2 ?? No way. Leave the tiny cheap CUVs to mainstream brands. Like mercedes/ BMW/ Toyota/ Chevy/ Ford/ Nissan/ Ford.
Cadillac doesn't need to spread their catalog into every vehicle segment out there, their volume doesn't support it and their goals don't need it.

Well  Cadillac is for sure getting versions of the Equinox and Traverse, that is already confirmed.  I'd like to see Alpha and/or Omega SUVs.  They could always do an XT9 or something above Escalade in the $125-175,000 space.  Tesla Range Rover, GLS, G, Cayenne are already there, you have Bentley and soon to be Rolls and Lamborghini above that.  BMW may have an X7 M with a V12 at $150k, that upper end market is filling up, but they wouldn't all go there if there wasn't profit to be had.