Rumorpile: The Three-Row Cadillac Crossover Has Been Shelved

Smart Move, Leave the 3 row cross over to the mid tear and focus on a truly luxury CUV with Escalade being their top of the line SUV.

Interesting.... I wonder if the SRX will go down in exterior size while staying the same in interior size. (It's X3 sized inside while almost X5 sized outside) Then this new crossover could be an X5/M-Class direct competitor.

My concern would be about body-mass. Unless the new platform sheds a lot of mass, building a 2-row crossover on a 3-row platform could lead to an overly heavy SUV.

Alpha and Omega, I say!

But I don't think it will happen...

This is part of the same reason why Dodge is phasing out the minivan - the market for parents with a lot of kids is dwindling significantly.

This is part of the same reason why Dodge is phasing out the minivan - the market for parents with a lot of kids is dwindling significantly.

Well... they're not. The Dodge brand is converting to a sporting brand. The T&C will carry on. One less badge engineered vehicle at the Chrysler company now.

I think it has more to do with the fact that the direct competition in that price class is predominantly 2-row crossovers. Except for the stupid niche vehicles, Cadillac wants to have an option, model for model, for everything you might buy at the BMW dealership up the street.

The development of any Cadillac is now tied to any other GM platform development. If you can't make the business case for a 3-row luxury crossover for Cadillac as part of a long-term platform marketing strategy, then it will not be built.

As the press release states, "the proposed Cadillac crossover would compete too closely with the Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia." Unless GM wants to re-badge the old Saturn Outlook as a Cadillac, but I doubt that will happen.

Fiat-Chrysler is doing the same thing with integrating its platforms for cars to be sold on both sides of the Atlantic.

The margins are too high to take the "Escalade" name off the current SUV platform. GM makes a lot of money from the Tahoe/Denali/Escalade sales and simply "transferring" the name to a different platform is too risky.

That would also go against the current marketing campaign with David Bowie's "Fame" in the commercial showing that you are driving the ultimate symbol of luxury and not simply an up-level family hauler.

The ideal scenario for Cadillac is to create synergy within its own products while sharing remotely with other brands. Which means, diversifying the RWD platforms, if it is possible.

The only possibility of Cadillac being "exclusive" in its product offering that I can see now is if they put that 4.5L V8 into production in addition to the 3.6L V6 TT.

Everything else is being shared by the other brands. The CTS-V will get the Z-O6 powertrain and all of the other engines can be found in other GM cars.

I still miss the Northstar engine.

They don't need 4 Lambdas and Cadillac doesn't need more front wheel drive vehicles so this is a smart move. I also think that big families may be a bit on the decline, people wait longer and longer to have kids and they have less of them. And if gas keeps climbing, how much demand will there be for SUVs, when there are cars that might get 10 mpg better. Even in the luxury market, once the diesels catch on and people can take a 38 mpg sedan vs a 24 mpg SUV, that is a pretty dramatic difference. We have crumbling infrastructure also, gas taxes aren't going down, they will only go up. Maybe gas stays at $4 a gallon, but what if it is $6 per gallon in 2018, how will those big SUV sales look then?

What Cadillac should do is make an SUV off the Alpha platform, and if they wanted to be economical they could make a short version and a long version like Hyundai does with the Santa Fe, then you can battle with X3 and X5 with one vehicle that has 2 versions. They won't do that though because the SRX sells. The other option is to make the SRX a bit smaller and keep the price in the $35-50k range and keep it front drive like the Lexus RX, and build an Alpha SUV the size of the CTS and not make it look like a station wagon on stilts like the last time around.

Even if gas prices go up, there will still be a market for the Body on Frame Full Size SUV's. From hauling trailers to Companies that have needs, there is a value market for the Full Size SUV and GM is the King right now and must keep them fresh to keep that title.

The Mercedes GL is unibody and outsold the Escalade the past couple years. I do agree that on some level there will always be a market for a big SUV like the Escalade, just like there will always be that select market for a Bentley or Ferrari regardless of how much gas costs. I think the market for mid size or slightly large SUVs could decline, that is why Cadillac is making the right move not throwing a 4th Lambda and another SUV into the mix. Look at sales of the Audi Q7, Lincoln MKT, Lexus GX, etc, they don't sell (although they are lousy vehicles too).

Small crossovers are the hot thing now, that is the market to move into. Cadillac doesn't need a middle size, bigger and biggest SUV approach; they need to have small, medium and large. I wouldn't say Cadillac needs to go Encore small, but if they used Alpha they could make something ATS sized and keep the price based at $35k.

The previous Escalade was also $6k more than the GL in just base form. The 2015 model increases the price differential to $9k. Do try to compare apples to apples.

The Escalade's closest competitors as far as size and body on frame SUV go are the Navigator at $56,000 and the Infiniti QX80 at $63,000. The Escalade is now $71,000 and outsells the other two with ease. The GL is $63,000 base and unibody but it is as long as an Escalade and has 3 rows of seats, it really serves as the Escalade's greatest competitor since the Range Rover costs more and is a smaller 5 passenger, and the Lincoln is hopeless.

The Escalade is a successful produce for Cadillac, but they don't need another 3 row SUV, they need a small SUV.

They have an SUV in the small class.... the SRX is the same size interior as the X3 and GLK. Sure it is larger on the outside, but that doesn't appear to be SRX hurting sales as it is still easily outselling its German rivals at that price point. Cadillac needs an X5 sized SUV (interior room) and that is what the new 2-row crossover in this article should accomplish.

Sales of the ATS and CTS are disappointing. How much longer will Cadillac invest billions trying to compete with Mercedes and BMW? I think Cadillac should consider having 3 crossovers (one smaller than the SRX plus a 3 row larger than the SRX) plus the Escalade because that's what luxury buyers (not me personally) appear to want.

ATS did fall off a cliff this month... not sure what happened there.

The ATS looks a little bland I think, and it is a bit cramped inside. On the outside it may be the same size as the Germans, but on the inside I feel like there is a bit more room in a 3-series or C-class, although the C-class is sort of a narrow car too. The Lexus IS is way up, perhaps it is stealing off the ATS or perhaps people don't like CUE or all the glossy bling on Cadillac interiors.

The SRX could almost get a little smaller to create more space between it and the Escalade for the new SUV to slot in the middle. I hope it is an Alpha SUV though and not just a stretched wheelbase SRX with a new name like SLX.

To ehaase's point, I don't think Cadillac is spending billions, where is the money going? Yes they did the Alpha platform but that spawed 2 cars and the transmission was carry over, and the 2.0t and 3.6 V6 were already in house so no new engine to develop. The Escalade doesn't cost too much in engineering since most of the work is shared with other trucks.

Mercedes passenger car division R&D budget is huge and Mercedes now has the 400 engineers that built their F1 car (that is undefeated) working on AMG road cars because they don't have anything else to do for the next few years. Cadillac doesn't spend what it takes to truly compete with BMW and Mercedes, GM doesn't have that kind of money to make that happen, but if they don't spend what they have, Cadillac will be Acura and end up a dead brand. Because if GM ever has to ax another brand it will be Cadillac since GMC is just a Chevy and Buick shares all its platforms and engines and some interior components with Chevy also. Honda doesn't kill Acura because they have no Buick or GMC, Acura serves that purpose of badge job vehicle.

The ATS looks a little bland I think, and it is a bit cramped inside. On the outside it may be the same size as the Germans, but on the inside I feel like there is a bit more room in a 3-series or C-class, although the C-class is sort of a narrow car too. The Lexus IS is way up, perhaps it is stealing off the ATS or perhaps people don't like CUE or all the glossy bling on Cadillac interiors.

The SRX could almost get a little smaller to create more space between it and the Escalade for the new SUV to slot in the middle. I hope it is an Alpha SUV though and not just a stretched wheelbase SRX with a new name like SLX.

To ehaase's point, I don't think Cadillac is spending billions, where is the money going? Yes they did the Alpha platform but that spawed 2 cars and the transmission was carry over, and the 2.0t and 3.6 V6 were already in house so no new engine to develop. The Escalade doesn't cost too much in engineering since most of the work is shared with other trucks.

Mercedes passenger car division R&D budget is huge and Mercedes now has the 400 engineers that built their F1 car (that is undefeated) working on AMG road cars because they don't have anything else to do for the next few years. Cadillac doesn't spend what it takes to truly compete with BMW and Mercedes, GM doesn't have that kind of money to make that happen, but if they don't spend what they have, Cadillac will be Acura and end up a dead brand. Because if GM ever has to ax another brand it will be Cadillac since GMC is just a Chevy and Buick shares all its platforms and engines and some interior components with Chevy also. Honda doesn't kill Acura because they have no Buick or GMC, Acura serves that purpose of badge job vehicle.

You want to talk about bland look at your beloved BMW and MB, other than their performance lines, those auto's are all bland and where I can at least sit in the ATS without my knees hitting the dash. The 3 series from BMW and MB C class I hit the dash. Yes at 6'6" tall I am cramped in all 3 versions but Cadillac has marketing issues more than being bland and cramped inside.

Before you say GM will kill of Cadillac, you need to think about the stupid moves BMW and MB have made over the years and the diluted garbage they are selling around the world. Quality is some of the worst on both BMW and MB products. Mini's are a joke except to those that love the cuteness of the car as they do not fit most people, lousy product lines and based on their own numbers ship with 1 defect per car and in some cases 2. The Smart Car is another joke of an auto. Right now they might have the money in the bank, but the unions are starting to drag both companies down. They have over capacity, less than reliable products and there are far better choices out there if you are not a badge snob.

I don't like BMW or Audi, I like Jaguar and Mercedes. The German trio are seeing record sales over the past few years and record profit levels, I think I read Audi makes nearly $10,000 per car, and Porsche makes nearly $20,000 profit per car, people are obviously paying money for them even if some of them are dressed up VW's. Personally I'd never buy an Audi. Mercedes was #2 in quality according to JD power last year, only Lexus was better. Mercedes doesn't have over capacity either, the S-class is being built at 100% capacity, the C-class sold in the USA will be built in the USA because the German factory is maxed out and they are building a new factory in China. I would imagine with BMW sales climbing, they don't have all kinds of excess capacity either.

Maybe the ATS's problem is marketing, but to ehaase's point, Cadillac has to spend to keep up with the Germans. BMW spent 4.8 billion Euro on R&D last year, Mercedes is usually around $5-6 billion, a couple years ago Mercedes spent more on R&D than any other car maker except Ford. Cadillac's problem is they don't have a $4 billion annual budget, but if they don't at least try to keep up then Cadillac will turn into what Acura and Lincoln have become. You either spend big or go home.

Cadillac also doesn't have to have the lineup that those manufacturers do. Cadillac is not producing taxi cabs and they will don't seem to be entering the knock-off luxury market (CLA, A3, 1-Series) any time soon. I'm glad that Cadillac isn't pursuing all the weird niche models that BMW and Benz are... do we really need a Cadillac competitor to the X4 and X6 just to move an additional 300 units a month? Imagine what BMW and Benz's profitability would be if they DIDN'T chase every niche.

Cadillac shouldn't be in every niche, BMW goes overboard trying to create body styles for the sake of creating body styles. I don't think the other auto makers do that so much. Cadillac does need 3 SUVs though, and they need a convertible and/or sports car. Can't survive just on sedans, especially when 2 of their 3 sedans have the same price.

SRX needs to become MKX sized and on a more sophisticated platform, and then add another smaller crossover. escalade is a premier product , it's what people aspire to, so no need for lambdas.

ATS for all it's goodness does suffer from almost non existent back seat. I think that is what is killing it in our market. Also the interior already has a dated feel. Cadillac has not developed a lease strategy to in stealth fashion hook first timers into the fold with cheap leases. Plus they do not seem to be marketing the car. What they ought to do is concentrate less on fully loaded versions and just build the ATS to a not too steep price class and just try to get intros into to the brand. One item besides the v that caddy needs is a trim for all wheel drive turbo manual. Quattro is what sells Audi. I would also even say we need Cadillac diesels. An ATS. And maybe even a CTS. On the ATS too even though I think the 2.5 is ok for the starter trim really they should consider dropping it and maybe just putting a detuned 2.0 turbo in the base model..

Not a lot of CTS or ATS around here of the new versions. Funny, the Buick regal seems to do quite well.....lots of XTS too....

I think the opposite. The SRX should stay the same size interior, but move to Alpha platform to improve packaging and lose weight. Then this new crossover can be the MKX-X5-Mclass contender.

I think the opposite. The SRX should stay the same size interior, but move to Alpha platform to improve packaging and lose weight. Then this new crossover can be the MKX-X5-Mclass contender.

I would agree with that, except for who really cares about competing with anything Lincoln makes. They can make 2 crossovers off the Alpha platform, make the better packaged, smaller on the outside SRX (you could probably cut 4 inches in front bumper overhang), then make an M-class and X5 competitor. The CTS wheelbase has to be longer than an M-class or X5 so we know size wise it would work, and no one is driving any of the above mentioned vehicles off road.

Plus you already have the CTS powertrains in place, the mid-size crossover can start with the V6 perhaps and offer the twin turbo V6 in a V-sport model. Jeep has the SRT Cherokee, the Germans have V8 and AMG/M models of their SUVs, even the Toureg has a 380 hp hybrid option. Cadillac needs some kind of high power SUV.

>>...except for who really cares about competing with anything Lincoln makes.<<

Mercedes feels it's justifiable to build vehicles that sell only 2-300 units/mth (g-class SUV); that's less than HALF on any Lincoln SUV. NOT at all saying they're direct competitors but a lux SUV sales is a sale and some consumers don't bother to adhere to the tight segments we go by. Sometimes functionality trumps other criteria, and these pretty much all do the same thing- sit the occupants up higher than a sedan. Mercedes & BMW dismissed the CTS when it came out, and it's a major segment player now. There's not much expense in studying your opposition, even if enthusiasts believe it's well below your level.

Cadillac shouldn't be in every niche, BMW goes overboard trying to create body styles for the sake of creating body styles. I don't think the other auto makers do that so much. Cadillac does need 3 SUVs though, and they need a convertible and/or sports car. Can't survive just on sedans, especially when 2 of their 3 sedans have the same price.

I agree with SMK here. Cadillac needs another SUV between Escalade and SRX - a direct X5, Cayenne, A7 competitor. That vehicle should be possibly on Alpha/Omega with engines mirroring CTS. Given SRX is a bread and butter SUV and given the disastrous sales numbers of Gen 1, I do not think GM will move it on RWD platform. It seems with T/E getting smaller, SRX will become slightly smaller. This move in someways clears the room for the middle child SUV.

ATS coupe and convertible are a given. However, Cadillac really needs a GT halo car done right on Corvette platform. It should be sold exclusively using turbo and hybrid powertrains. So what if the two compete?

The dowsized theta SRX could stay fwd based since the people that buy entry lux crossovers don't care and probably have driven fwd all their life anyway and are used to it. The mid-size Cadillac SUV needs to be on Alpha because they need to put over 400 hp in it.

I would like to see Cadillac with a halo sports car, but I don't know if the Corvette platform is the answer. That didn't work the last time, but the XLR also just wasn't that good. It is a tough call on how to proceed there, because they can't make a mid-engine V12 sports car, they have none of that in house to pull from. A GT car would be more fitting, but would they do it better than an F-type, or Mercedes SL, or the coming AMG GT, or an Aston Martin or Maserati, etc.

XTS has over 400hp and it handles fantastic

XTS has over 400hp and it handles fantastic

Does it handle better than a CTS V-sport or 535i?

And how would a 420 hp SRX handle or ride compared to a SRT Cherokee or X5 or M-class. And what if they need 500 hp since that is what BMW and Mercedes offer? You can't go against those vehicles with a front wheel drive Chevy chassis.

XTS has over 400hp and it handles fantastic

Does it handle better than a CTS V-sport or 535i?

And how would a 420 hp SRX handle or ride compared to a SRT Cherokee or X5 or M-class. And what if they need 500 hp since that is what BMW and Mercedes offer? You can't go against those vehicles with a front wheel drive Chevy chassis.

Given your extensive knowledge in cars, you know that one SUV called Porsche Macan is based on VW MLP platform, which is FWD biased and handles 400 hp right?

And speaking of FWD Chevy chassis, a lowly Delta Cobalt SS turbocharged was fastest on the Ring, before it was killed. It was faster than 135i, IS-F, R-Spec Genesis, even faster than an EVO in Car and Driver's Lightning Lap. That is such a minnow company to beat.

And speaking of FWD Chevy chassis, Cruze has won 3 WTCC championships, which features RWD cars also.

Maybe the Corvette and Camaro should move to FWD too. I mean if FWD is good enough for Cadillac (GM's most exclusive and highest end brand) then obviously it is good enough for the Camaro.

Maybe the Corvette and Camaro should move to FWD too. I mean if FWD is good enough for Cadillac (GM's most exclusive and highest end brand) then obviously it is good enough for the Camaro.

There is a reason SRX exists, even if it is a FWD and per your standards - SALES - it has to prove it.

And GM makes FWD better than RWD saviors of the world a.k.a. GMW, Chevroletdes Benz who in turn are going FWD. In your lifetime you will see a FWD S-Class.

^ I think that last part is absolutely true. s-class's just float thru traffic; they're never pushed. FWD could allow a nearly flat rear floor for Corporate CEOs to jello-wrestle in the back.

There will never, ever be a front wheel drive S-class. The S-class chassis isn't shared with any other car, even under the platform consolidation plans Mercedes has for 2017-2020 the S-class will continue to have it's own chassis into the next generation. They know what their customers want, and that is what they build.

As I mentioned earlier a fwd SRX works because most entry-lux crossover buyers are probably moving up from a Rav4/CR-v/Equinox or CamCord. The type of people that buy a Lexus RX350 or an Acura SUV or an SRX probably prefer fwd because it is all they know and all they have ever driven. This is why the Lexus ES350 has always sold well, it is mass market entry lux, and it feels like the Camry the sheeple used to drive.

Front wheel drive products over $50,000 are destined to fail, that is why the middle Cadilac SUV should be built on Alpha. The XTS sales have dropped below the CTS, because people want RWD at that price, any Volvo, Lincoln or Acura near $50k is a sales dud, the A8 is a sales dud, etc. People spending big money on a car don't want the chassis and engine from some generic family sedan.

Maybe the Corvette and Camaro should move to FWD too. I mean if FWD is good enough for Cadillac (GM's most exclusive and highest end brand) then obviously it is good enough for the Camaro.

There is a reason SRX exists, even if it is a FWD and per your standards - SALES - it has to prove it.

And GM makes FWD better than RWD saviors of the world a.k.a. GMW, Chevroletdes Benz who in turn are going FWD. In your lifetime you will see a FWD S-Class.

ATS should move to Delta, CTS should move to the Malibu's epsilon platform. XTS stays on stretched Epsilon. Then Cadillac would have the same mechanical bit as the Cruze-Malibu-Impala, think of the economies of scale! ATS could get the 140 hp turbo 4 as the base engine, the Verano's turbo as the optional. CTS would get the Malibu 2.5 liter base, 2.0T for the v-sport and the CTS-V would lose the 556 hp V8 in favor of a 410 hp turbo V6. XTS continues as is. FWD equals sales and the Camry proves it, so that is what Cadillac should do.

For the people who buy these above-mentioned cars, they have neither knowledge or a care which wheels are driving. It's NOT a selling point for 98% of sales of any of them- volvo, acura, mercedes or BMW.

We are YET AGAIN brought back to Daimler's newest & highest-hope product- the FWD CLA.

Maybe the Corvette and Camaro should move to FWD too. I mean if FWD is good enough for Cadillac (GM's most exclusive and highest end brand) then obviously it is good enough for the Camaro.

There is a reason SRX exists, even if it is a FWD and per your standards - SALES - it has to prove it.

And GM makes FWD better than RWD saviors of the world a.k.a. GMW, Chevroletdes Benz who in turn are going FWD. In your lifetime you will see a FWD S-Class.

ATS should move to Delta, CTS should move to the Malibu's epsilon platform. XTS stays on stretched Epsilon. Then Cadillac would have the same mechanical bit as the Cruze-Malibu-Impala, think of the economies of scale! ATS could get the 140 hp turbo 4 as the base engine, the Verano's turbo as the optional. CTS would get the Malibu 2.5 liter base, 2.0T for the v-sport and the CTS-V would lose the 556 hp V8 in favor of a 410 hp turbo V6. XTS continues as is. FWD equals sales and the Camry proves it, so that is what Cadillac should do.

Hey if Benz, BMW and Porsche can make FWD pigs dance with lipstick, so can GM. GM fans are used to getting FWD cars. But will the fan-boys of the halo German brands be used to getting a FWD V-12 S-Class, or a 911 turbo?

Since you and all Germans look for sales to be successful, your formula and wish of FWD Germans are not too far off.

The comments on here about FWD appliance cars does make me think back to my first car I bought out of college. 1991 Ford Escort GT built by Mazda for Ford. That pocket rocket had the insurance industry pushing ford to de-tune it and soften it up the following year. That first year of the new body style and performance showed that a FWD appliance can be fun to drive. It had a 2.0 4 engine with a 5 speed manual tranny that was a blast and got awesome gas mileage.

I do believe that GM, Ford and Dodge can build fun to drive FWD appliances that do not put you to sleep like the Asian auto's. Big question is will the German Fan boy's be big enough to admit that BMW, MB, etc are behind what what bleeding edge leading by America and Asia.

As the Germans push for sales, their FWD appliances will end up here in America and then you have the Toyota affect I think for those brands. I suspect the name badge snobs will have a problem with their 100K s class or 7 series sitting along side a 19-20K car.

XTS has over 400hp and it handles fantastic

Does it handle better than a CTS V-sport or 535i?

And how would a 420 hp SRX handle or ride compared to a SRT Cherokee or X5 or M-class. And what if they need 500 hp since that is what BMW and Mercedes offer? You can't go against those vehicles with a front wheel drive Chevy chassis.

Let's get realistic about the target market for this vehicle please. The SRT Cherokee is dead-man walking... they are canceling it. Not exactly a market that Cadillac should be chasing. Also, the XTS V-Sport and CTS V-Sport are so close in handling ability on the track (and I've driven them both on an actual race track, back to back) that the performance difference is less than any driver errors that can happen. The XTS actually feels more confident because it has AWD, but you can "hoon" the CTS if you really want. The XTS has a weight disadvantage and the CTS a power advantage.... but all in all the differences are so minor that your objection to the powertrain layout is purely academic . BTW, the XTS V-Sport can send the majority of torque to the rear wheels when and if needed. In sport mode, it runs with most of the torque to the rear constantly. It also has Hi-Per strut to take away any torque steer.

As approximately ZERO X5 or M-Class drivers take their vehicle to Track Day to compete, the difference in handling is going to be pretty low on the list of buyer's needs... right around "aggressive tire tread pattern" in terms of importance.

But I'm sure the middle aged real estate agents of Palm Beach County Florida will be right there with you complaining about handling when the time comes.

You crack me up Drew. Great comments!