Details Emerge on Cadillac "XT3" CUV

This will be interesting to see unfold and how people respond to the new names as well as dedicated Cadillac only features.

I still don't get why they aren't using their rear drive chassis to build crossovers, rather than build them off front wheel drive Chevy platforms.  Well actually, I know why they do it, because it is cheaper and most crossover buyers are dopes and don't know the difference.  However, if you want to be the standard of the world, and topple the Germans, you don't do that with the Epsion chassis.  The Epsilon chassis can't even topple the Fusion.

I still don't get why they aren't using their rear drive chassis to build crossovers, rather than build them off front wheel drive Chevy platforms.  Well actually, I know why they do it, because it is cheaper and most crossover buyers are dopes and don't know the difference.  However, if you want to be the standard of the world, and topple the Germans, you don't do that with the Epsion chassis.  The Epsilon chassis can't even topple the Fusion.

I see the new blinders from Amazon Prime arrived today!  

The Theta Premium platform SRX vastly outsold its same priced german rivals.... sometimes it even outsold them combined.  The Epsilon chassis sells far far more copies than the Fusion. Globally, Regal/Insignia alone sells about 40% of the volume of Fusion/Mondeo globally.  Then add in the Malibu, Impala, XTS, and Lacrosse and the Fusion gets left behind. 

I have my doubts about this new crossover being Epsilon... if it is, it is Epsilon in name only or a completely new generation of it. 

Actually I see not problem with the car being FWD based. Put in the GKN system AWD and the vehicle is ready to smoke tires. The difference with the GKN system is that it can be tuned to run the rear axles at all times, while the clutch packs decided whether to transfer any power to the rear. 

That means on power turn-in response should be spectacular.

I wan the XT3 to look athletic though. The XT5 can look thick and blockish.

However, if you want to be the standard of the world, and topple the Germans, you don't do that with the Epsion chassis. 

Mercedes rules sales charts with the front-wheel drive CLA and GLA. 

The standard for today's world is who rakes in the most cash. Cadillac sells boatloads of SRX's and that's all that matters in the end. 

Perhaps ATS and CTS should move to front wheel drive Cruze and Malibu platforms as well. Drop the prices to $27k and $34k and watch the sales rise.

They priced the XT5 at $39k, XT3 would have to be $34k and an XT1 around $29k. That is more of a push into Buick territory rather than German territory. People here want to criticize Mercedes for selling 1 fwd crossover, Cadillac is about to have 3 FWD crossovers in the $30-40k space. And no V-series crossovers.

Let the high volume crossovers be premium FWD/AWD if that justifies building lower volume RWD cars that are absolute beasts like the ATS, CTS, and CT6.

Though I will say any sort of flagship crossover NEEDS to be omega based.

However, if you want to be the standard of the world, and topple the Germans, you don't do that with the Epsion chassis.

 

Mercedes rules sales charts with the front-wheel drive CLA and GLA. 

 

The standard for today's world is who rakes in the most cash. Cadillac sells boatloads of SRX's and that's all that matters in the end.

Cadillac does not rake in much cash. They could sell 1 million SRX and still get outsold by Audi and BMW.

The GLA is outsold by the GLC, GLE and GL. The GLA doesn't really light up any sales charts. Those 2,000 GLA's a month are basically used as a gateway drug to get otherwise non-mercedes drivers into the brand.

But if crossovers and utilities are the hot segment and highest margin item and if Rolls, Bentley, BMW, and Mercedes will build a 600 HP SUV (maybe Audi will too) and Range Rover has a 550 HP model, then where is Cadillac without an ultra performance crossover?

Cadillac had to build the CTS-V and ATS-V because the Europeans had high performance sedans. Well now the Europeans are cranking out high performance utility vehicles. So cadillac crossover will be behind again just like the fwd cadillac sedans were 20 years ago.

But if crossovers and utilities are the hot segment and highest margin item and if Rolls, Bentley, BMW, and Mercedes will build a 600 HP SUV (maybe Audi will too) and Range Rover has a 550 HP model, then where is Cadillac without an ultra performance crossover?

Cadillac had to build the CTS-V and ATS-V because the Europeans had high performance sedans. Well now the Europeans are cranking out high performance utility vehicles. So cadillac crossover will be behind again just like the fwd cadillac sedans were 20 years ago.

I assume this is directed at me..? I'm saying a crossover larger than the XT5 should be omega based, and therefore able to match the europeans blow for blow in performance and top-tier luxury. The XT5 itself should be capable of running the 3.0T with AWD which would really be sufficient performance for what it is.

But if crossovers and utilities are the hot segment and highest margin item and if Rolls, Bentley, BMW, and Mercedes will build a 600 HP SUV (maybe Audi will too) and Range Rover has a 550 HP model, then where is Cadillac without an ultra performance crossover?

Cadillac had to build the CTS-V and ATS-V because the Europeans had high performance sedans. Well now the Europeans are cranking out high performance utility vehicles. So cadillac crossover will be behind again just like the fwd cadillac sedans were 20 years ago.

As a badge loving snob you will never accept that Cadillac already does build a superior SUV/CUV. Escalade beats anything MB or BMW builds! Your G-Wagon is Overpriced Garbage and has been proven again and again that those buying them are only worried about the badge. End of story! SRX and now XT5 out do the germans, Cadillac just needs to get variety out and they are working on it. 

Took multiple decades for MB to pass Cadillac same with BMW Cadillac has changed and is moving in the direction to be back at the top of the world neck n neck with the germans and this scares you as then you will have nothing to use to constantly move your goal posts.

I agree with cp that the larger than XT5 crossover should be built on Omega, I thought XT5 should have been built on Alpha, using the CT6 engine line up.  

As far as beating the Germans, does the XT5 do 0-60 in less than 4.2 seconds?    Because the GLE63 does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds.  The GLE can actually go off road too (assuming you have tires to do so).  

The Escalade is a sales success in the USA because it appeals to truck buyers, but I think the Mercedes GLS is overall a better vehicle.  The GLS is lighter (in fact about 500 lbs lighter, which Cadillac fans think makes a CT6 better than an S-class or 7-series) the GLS is more fuel efficient in diesel or V6 guise, and faster with a V8.  GLS can out-handle the Escalade too.  But the Escalade does have high appeal and that is what matters.

The cheapest G-wagen is $15k more than the most expensive Escalade, and the G-wagen is smaller than an XT5.   I don't know that they really are that close of competitors.  Other than they are both expensive SUVs.  I'd say the G-wagen competes more with Range Rover in that they were both off roaders turned to luxury vehicles, but even the Range Rover has gotten larger and more car like over the years.

By the way, if the G-wagen was total garbage and it only sold because of the badge, that must be one hell of a badge to get people to pay $120k for the base model and 2/3 of G-wagens sold are AMG which are $140,000 and $220k for the V12.

Nobody in the U.S> buys the g-wagon, it's a niche within a niche, sales-wise. A non-player.

Mostly because; not the pricing... but the fact that you can't just stick fat tires on a 1960's SUV and expect it to sell.

Nobody in the U.S> buys the g-wagon, it's a niche within a niche, sales-wise. A non-player.

Mostly because; not the pricing... but the fact that you can't just stick fat tires on a 1960's SUV and expect it to sell.

Actually, the G-wagen dates from the late 70s...yes, they are a low volume niche vehicle, but I see them often enough...seem about as common as Range Rovers (not the Sport, but the big one) around here.. they sell well enough worldwide to have them had continued far beyond their original variation...

60/70s, whatever. G-wagon, with it's VW Thing-esque era of construction, is certainly rooted in the '60s mindset of 4WD vehicles; external hinges, the lights screwed to the fenders, exposed fasteners, it's 35 years overdue for a complete clean-sheet re-engineering. It's the German Jeep Wrangler.

60/70s, whatever. G-wagon, with it's VW Thing-esque era of construction, is certainly rooted in the '60s mindset of 4WD vehicles; external hinges, the lights screwed to the fenders, exposed fasteners, it's 35 years overdue for a complete clean-sheet re-engineering. It's the German Jeep Wrangler.

I guess it's honest simplicity of construction is part of the appeal, like the Land Rover Defender. Retro without trying to be retro.