Rumorpile: Good and Bad News For Cadillac

Eliminating multiple bodystyles is exactly the wrong way to go.

Those behind such thinking are what should be cut.

Use the Converj name for the ELR and that's it: easy fix! GM/Cadillac should be worrying about more important stuff other stuff like the door handles thing (which sounds ridiculous - don't see how a USD3.2 added cost per unit would ruin the Omega project financially...), the locking in of model variants (especially for the ATS and CTS), the possibility of locking the next-gen SRX (and possibly a smaller CUV) on Alpha...

Eliminating multiple bodystyles is exactly the wrong way to go.

Those behind such thinking are what should be cut.

Exactly

GM needs to controll the Bean Counters. We all need Companies to be run profitably with minimal waste, but Bean Counters is what destroyed this counteries Auto Industry due to going over board on cheapness.

A luxury $100K should have high quality components, not the cheapest around. This does not mean you go with every Tom, Dick and Henry who over charges but I have to believe that $5 door handles are far better than $1.80 Door handle.

GM America WANTS TO SUPPORT AMERICA!!! $5 USA Door Handle over $1.80 China made door handle should be the way to go!

In fact, the top of the line American S class competitor should be 100% USA sourced, USA Built. Having Hand built engines in a customer top of the line USA BUilt Luxury drive.

THAT IS WHAT AMERICA WANTS!

The bean counters are what will always hold Cadillac back. Mercedes will spend $1 billion on an S-class without thinking about it, and use windshield wipers with lasar drilled fluid holes just because they can. Cadillac looks to drop cost by $12 per vehicle with cheaper door handles. And if they cut corners on something you touch every time you get in or out of the car, you know they will cut in the places you don't touch. Sad.

Cars need multiple body styles also, if the wagon doesn't sell I can see dropping that, but ATS and CTS should both have coupe and sedan versions. Or if ATS has coupe and sedan, maybe CTS gets wagon and sedan, but you can just have all sedans like Acura or Lincoln.

I am not a fan of 3 letter names because most are meaningless. Audi's A4-A6-A8 names make sense and are simple, but what Acura does putting random letters together is stupid. I wouldn't mind Cadillac bringing back some word names like Eldorado or making up some new ones.

Cadillac has some great names that could come back, IMO... deVille, Fleetwood, Seville, Eldorado, Biarittz...better than non-TLA TLAs...

While some body styles should not be abandon they still need to earn their keep. The coupe was not great in numbers but it was great enough to live. As for the wagon like it or not it just did not sell.

For a wagon to live Cadillac needs to return to Europe or export them to a market that will buy them.

Different body styles are great but they really have to produce. Anything you keep around has to earn its keep and make a profit. Sentimental concepts do not pay the bills.

The two things that kill the wagon is Americans hate conventional wagons and the price. I am sad to say if they had made it a tall wagon like BMW people would have flocked to it even with silly car/truck looks.

GM needs to controll the Bean Counters. We all need Companies to be run profitably with minimal waste, but Bean Counters is what destroyed this counteries Auto Industry due to going over board on cheapness.

A luxury $100K should have high quality components, not the cheapest around. This does not mean you go with every Tom, Dick and Henry who over charges but I have to believe that $5 door handles are far better than $1.80 Door handle.

GM America WANTS TO SUPPORT AMERICA!!! $5 USA Door Handle over $1.80 China made door handle should be the way to go!

In fact, the top of the line American S class competitor should be 100% USA sourced, USA Built. Having Hand built engines in a customer top of the line USA BUilt Luxury drive.

THAT IS WHAT AMERICA WANTS!

One thing too many auto companies don't understand is that the USA is a high cost country. You cannot cost cut your way to begin a "value" leader doing your engineering and manufacturing in a high cost country -- not unless you can convince the UWA to accept $8.25 an hour. Maybe not even then. You can't match Hyundai's prices without building something significantly inferior to Hyundai's, so you shouldn't even try.

Companies have to accept the fact that their products will cost more and sell for more than the competition from Korea, China and elsewhere. Accept that and try to figure out how to command a higher price and successfully operate without being the value leader.

Also in the pipeline is the ATS-V. Motor Trend reports that a twin-turbo

V6 will be the engine of choice. Those who were hoping for V8 might

want to stay tuned as there is a chance of V8 ATS-V coming towards the

end of the ATS' lifecycle.

I am sorry but that makes ZERO sense. Personally, I very much hope that they realize that the Pushrod V8 represents an ace up their sleeve, not a liability. That they'll go for the lighter, more compact, power powerful, cheaper to build and no less fuel economical V8. And, honestly, I believe they will and that Motortrend doesn't know what they are talking about.

But whatever it is that they do, making a Bi-turbo V6 ATS-V then switching to a V8 late in the model cycle makes ZERO sense. The ATS will be a TT V6 or a Pushrod V8, and that will be that from beginning to end. There won't be both.

ATS has had instant name equity in the market. CTS has a good rep. DTS was taking hold, XTS might have a good rep. SRX is doing well.

ELR though, dud. Converj would be better, it would be ok if the Converj were not alphabet soup.

Cadillac should really determine the alphabet soup thing on a model by model basis. No need to be so adamant that all or none has to be letters.

FWIW I think the new MKZ is helping Lincoln as far as getting more name familiarity with the 3 letter thing.

The bean counters are what will always hold Cadillac back. Mercedes will spend $1 billion on an S-class without thinking about it, and use windshield wipers with lasar drilled fluid holes just because they can. Cadillac looks to drop cost by $12 per vehicle with cheaper door handles. And if they cut corners on something you touch every time you get in or out of the car, you know they will cut in the places you don't touch. Sad.

Cars need multiple body styles also, if the wagon doesn't sell I can see dropping that, but ATS and CTS should both have coupe and sedan versions. Or if ATS has coupe and sedan, maybe CTS gets wagon and sedan, but you can just have all sedans like Acura or Lincoln.

I am not a fan of 3 letter names because most are meaningless. Audi's A4-A6-A8 names make sense and are simple, but what Acura does putting random letters together is stupid. I wouldn't mind Cadillac bringing back some word names like Eldorado or making up some new ones.

two words (ok 4)

union labor and contracts

flip side is even if GM had cheap labor this is America, the beancounters would still try to strip the cost.

Also in the pipeline is the ATS-V. Motor Trend reports that a twin-turbo

V6 will be the engine of choice. Those who were hoping for V8 might

want to stay tuned as there is a chance of V8 ATS-V coming towards the

end of the ATS' lifecycle.

I am sorry but that makes ZERO sense. Personally, I very much hope that they realize that the Pushrod V8 represents an ace up their sleeve, not a liability. That they'll go for the lighter, more compact, power powerful, cheaper to build and no less fuel economical V8. And, honestly, I believe they will and that Motortrend doesn't know what they are talking about.

But whatever it is that they do, making a Bi-turbo V6 ATS-V then switching to a V8 late in the model cycle makes ZERO sense. The ATS will be a TT V6 or a Pushrod V8, and that will be that from beginning to end. There won't be both.

I don't think the twin turbo going into the ATS will be labelled ATS-V. I could be wrong, but it's just a hunch.

Germany is a high cost country, wages are higher there than in the USA, and the S-class is 81.1% German parts content, yet it has been the #1 selling car in that class for 30 years. High costs in the USA isn't an excuse, and we are talking a high end Cadillac, not a $8,000 compact sold in 3rd world countries.

Fleetwood and Eldorado are strong names, Deville is a bad one, they trashed it, and Seville ran it's course. Eldorado would be good for a grand touring coupe if they ever did a Jag XK or Maserati Gran Turismo competitor. Fleetwood is a nice name for a flagship sedan. But you either have to do names or alphabet soup, mixing doesn't make sense, which is why Escalade doesn't fit with the current naming scheme.

I think ATS-V will have a turbo V6, it is a rather small car and BMW is doing a turbo six M3, and the M3 is the gold standard.

How do we know this story is even accurate, must be a slow news day to focus on a door handle of all things. Just put it out there and eveyrbody runs with it.

How do we know this story is even accurate, must be a slow news day to focus on a door handle of all things. Just put it out there and eveyrbody runs with it.

Which is why I give stories like these the designation of Rumorpile.

We really don't know the entire story concerning the LTS's door handles, really.

Consider this: when Bill Mitchell and his team were designing the second-generation F-bodies, the long doors they wound up using were also something of a cost-cutting measure. The fact they elminated the small quarter windows behind the doors (early clay mock ups did, in fact, have small rear quarter windows) eliminated a decent chunk of money there and the design team were able to put the money they had saved to use on making other areas of the car more styled and feel (at the time) more premium. Of course, the beancounters approved the longer doors because they made the car cheaper to build. Overall, it was a win, win situation for everyone.

Who knows? Maybe the design team revised the door handles to look more distinct and, as a by-product, the revised design turned out to be far less expensive to make.

The wagon was never a seller and the Coupe version of the CTS in my opinion should be more a GT car like the 6-Series is, rather than a derivative of the sedan. Cheaping out on the flagship on the other hand, is not something I think bodes well.

Current s-class door handles look like they cost 50 cents. We have no price comparison here to judge whether or not $1.80 is an upgrade or not.

S-class door handle :

XTS door handle :

Don't know what this cost, but it looks far more upscale & unique than the lump above it.

Whatever.

Door handles have been a cost savings area for years. Many GM cars used the same handles from 1955 through the mid to late 70's.

I can remember buying the new handles for my 68 SS for $7 apiece from the dealer with out the buttons. My originals has scars but the stainless buttons were fine. I could not have had the originals re chromed for what I paid for the new ones.

I would not get too excited over this story with out more information. If they are cheap and flimsy then you can complain but low cost does not always mean cheap or flimsy in simple parts like this.

Hell even the cost of the scent of the leather is a factor too. That was one cost area that came up on the Camaro with focus groups. They were asked if they needed the smell or not. It is something that is added and adds to the cost of the car.

Germany is a high cost country, wages are higher there than in the USA, and the S-class is 81.1% German parts content, yet it has been the #1 selling car in that class for 30 years. High costs in the USA isn't an excuse, and we are talking a high end Cadillac, not a $8,000 compact sold in 3rd world countries...

...I think ATS-V will have a turbo V6, it is a rather small car and BMW is doing a turbo six M3, and the M3 is the gold standard.

Right, but the Germans don't try to operate on a business model of trying to undercut the Japanese and match the Koreans on price like GM tried to do in the 90s and 2000s. Not even Volkswagen did that. The average Golf and Jettas were $2K more than the Civics & Sentras, while being about 4~5K more than the Hyundai's of the day. And those were Puebla, Mexico, made Golfs and Jettas. If they tried, they would have failed.

I believe the ATS-V will get LT1 power; there is no reason to move to a less powerful, heavier, yet more expensive engine which is arguably less desirable to at least half the buyers of this type of vehicle. The ATS getting a 2.0T - 3.6 - 6.2 engine options spread allows the CTS to logically move to a 3.6 - 3.6TT - 6.2SC engine spread. Alternatively, the ATS can go to 2.0T - 3.6TT - 6.2, which allows the non-V cars to meet BMW head on, whereas the 6.2 out do the M3's I6T in every respect (weight, mass, power, cost and fuel economy)

Well, it looks like little has changed at GM: release a non-4-door-sedan variant, but half-ass it due to failing to understand the basics of that market and/or obvious cost-cutting, then throw their hands up in the air and claim there is no market for said variant, despite the fact that many other marques churn them out generation after generation.

CTS Wagon: GM lost out on this one by failing to understand the fundamentals of wagons: cargo capacity. The slope of the roof and the notched liftgate led to a small opening, which made it a pain in the ass for hauling stuff. Any wagon buyer will notice this in two seconds and then either go to a different showroom, or start looking at the SRX.

CTS Coupe: Way overpriced. $h! interior, especially compared to sedan and wagon. Beautiful, striking car, but that interior wouldn't pass my muster in a 30k car, let alone 60k. Again, GM, you might want to occasionally go to a competitor's showroom and see what they offer at a particular price point. Bankruptcy is an excuse; where's the interior refresh post-BK? Oh wait, let's instead throw our hands in the air and declare "NO MARKET!" despite what's going on over at the Infiniti (!!), Mercedes-Benz and BMW showrooms, generation after generation.

Current s-class door handles look like they cost 50 cents. We have no price comparison here to judge whether or not $1.80 is an upgrade or not.

S-class door handle :

XTS door handle :

Don't know what this cost, but it looks far more upscale & unique than the lump above it.

Whatever.

And the XTS handle lights up.

Well, it looks like little has changed at GM: release a non-4-door-sedan variant, but half-ass it due to failing to understand the basics of that market and/or obvious cost-cutting, then throw their hands up in the air and claim there is no market for said variant, despite the fact that many other marques churn them out generation after generation.

CTS Wagon: GM lost out on this one by failing to understand the fundamentals of wagons: cargo capacity. The slope of the roof and the notched liftgate led to a small opening, which made it a pain in the ass for hauling stuff. Any wagon buyer will notice this in two seconds and then either go to a different showroom, or start looking at the SRX.

CTS Coupe: Way overpriced. $h! interior, especially compared to sedan and wagon. Beautiful, striking car, but that interior wouldn't pass my muster in a 30k car, let alone 60k. Again, GM, you might want to occasionally go to a competitor's showroom and see what they offer at a particular price point. Bankruptcy is an excuse; where's the interior refresh post-BK? Oh wait, let's instead throw our hands in the air and declare "NO MARKET!" despite what's going on over at the Infiniti (!!), Mercedes-Benz and BMW showrooms, generation after generation.

You and I are not famous for getting along or agreeing on much, and I may even differ with you on some specifics of this post, but concur entirely with the essence of it.

Generation after generation indeed.

Maybe GM's disease is an insistent demand for an instant return, maybe it is a lack of perspective on variants in general, but I think it may mostly be a failure of strategic thinking. Perhaps even the total lack of one beyond a mid-cycle refresh.

It's "silver bullet" thinking, and that is a uniquely American failing.

I really doubt that they see the long-term benefits (and savings) to be found by increasing the use of variants rather than the number of stand-alone models.

The sad thing is, they once understood this.

You know, back when they ruled the automotive world.

Must be a lesson in there somewhere.

Germany is a high cost country, wages are higher there than in the USA, and the S-class is 81.1% German parts content, yet it has been the #1 selling car in that class for 30 years. High costs in the USA isn't an excuse, and we are talking a high end Cadillac, not a $8,000 compact sold in 3rd world countries...

...I think ATS-V will have a turbo V6, it is a rather small car and BMW is doing a turbo six M3, and the M3 is the gold standard.

Right, but the Germans don't try to operate on a business model of trying to undercut the Japanese and match the Koreans on price like GM tried to do in the 90s and 2000s. Not even Volkswagen did that. The average Golf and Jettas were $2K more than the Civics & Sentras, while being about 4~5K more than the Hyundai's of the day. And those were Puebla, Mexico, made Golfs and Jettas. If they tried, they would have failed.

I believe the ATS-V will get LT1 power; there is no reason to move to a less powerful, heavier, yet more expensive engine which is arguably less desirable to at least half the buyers of this type of vehicle. The ATS getting a 2.0T - 3.6 - 6.2 engine options spread allows the CTS to logically move to a 3.6 - 3.6TT - 6.2SC engine spread. Alternatively, the ATS can go to 2.0T - 3.6TT - 6.2, which allows the non-V cars to meet BMW head on, whereas the 6.2 out do the M3's I6T in every respect (weight, mass, power, cost and fuel economy)

Yet again you leave out other factors. Again it is not just numbers but what it would take to steal buyers from Audi, Benz, BMW and Lexus.

You are not stealing buyers from Chevy or Ford here. It come to what they expect and want in a car. Many are automotive snobs and reject simple yet good engine. Logical no but if you need to fancy up the engines to sell them then that is what you do.

As for the CTS wagon failing the cargo capacity has nothing to do with it as if that is a factor they will buy a SUV every time. The simple fact is even if the CTS was a large Volvo like box it would have failed just the same. The only thing that would have saved it was the Euro market that failed to materialize with the distributor issues at the time of intro.

As for the coupe the interior was not any worse than the rest of the line. Yes it still could improve some but it was not much worse than most others in class.

Leave the ELR name alone. They have the ats, cts, srx, xlr, keep with the name theme, giving the car a new name after its already out is stupid. One of cadillacs problems is familiarity. Every couple years they change what they offer and people never know exactly what they have, like the cts coupe and wagon, most people dont even know about them so let them stick around and just put them in some ads, let people get use to things!!!!!!!!!!