Spying: Cadillac CTS

Way too early to make any judgement based on these pictures. But I am happy they are working on the new version.

I'd assume that out of the need to reduce complexity it'd make sense to move to Alpha real quick, no? So why stick with Sigma? :-/

Other publications are reporting this is an all new model, that it's larger, and that it's Alpha based.

The CTS is moving to a very similar 5 series size. That will make it fall in line with the other cars in class as for better or worse the CTS was always the odd one out.

It should provide more interior room and a larger trunk.

The one thing to note is moving it to the Alpha may permit GM to provide a larger CTS but also keep it similar in weight and who knows it could to prove to be ligher than the present smaller car we have now. GM has learned how to make the Alpha very light with the ATS and I am sure many of the measures will be employeed on the CTS too. While It is not going to come in at the 3300 of the ATS there is a real chance it will beat the 5 series in weight.

I have heard talk of the Turbo V6 having 350 HP. Also expect a V8 to continue in a V series car.

The real unknown is will there be a Coupe again? Also with the ATS getting a Wagon will the CTS wagon return. Sales have been very weak here and the smaller wagone would do better in their attempts in Europe.

I really don't expect any major suprises here. The ATS and XTS have shown us where this car is going style wise and we know to expect more room. I would also expect to see more technology being in the mix here at the higher price point. With a V8, magnetic shocks and a powerful V8 in a l light car for the class I can see this car being much better than the present CTS.

It will be interesting to see where this all ends up.

Alpha is far from done with what we will see. Just wait for the Camaro.

It would make sense to move to Alpha and drop Sigma and reduce cost while increasing quality and profit margin.

CTS currently IS a very similar size to the 5-series, they're less than 2" apart in OL. It doesn't need to grow a single inch (tho the wheelbase could increase a bit if they wanted it to).

I think Cadillacs point is they will gain the 2 inches.

The ATS needs more space between and the CTS to be more. Also how many here cry becase there are no larger Cadillacs and they do not fit in a CTS? More than I want to hear.

The steps between the ATS, CTS and new flag ship RWD will be just right with the XTS doing the dirty work of fleet work, profesional car work and the remaining snow top traditional luxury buyers that are left in FL and other areas. Toss in some suprises like a small roadster, a coupe coupes and a wagon they should have a nice car line up. The trucks will sell as long as they are blinged out Chevys and will make a lot of money doing so.

I just wonder where the smaller SUV lines will go. The small SUV market is growing and growing. It makes one wonder what Cadillacs reaction will be. The SRX I feel will not be alone for long.

I could be wrong but I think there's some new sheetmetal underneath the camo.

ATS equals the 3-series in length.

CTS is 1.7" less than the 5-series, or other words; equal.

There is no point in growing the CTS 1.7"

My reaction here is that, somehow, still, people actually believe the CTS is "uncompetitive" with the 5-series based solely on size (of which there is no discernible difference).

In other words, if the CTS was within one-half inch, SOMEONE would still bring up size as an "issue".

Other publications are reporting this is an all new model, that it's larger, and that it's Alpha based.

other publications are reporting the assumptions of the original author.

ATS equals the 3-series in length.

CTS is 1.7" less than the 5-series, or other words; equal.

There is no point in growing the CTS 1.7"

My reaction here is that, somehow, still, people actually believe the CTS is "uncompetitive" with the 5-series based solely on size (of which there is no discernible difference).

In other words, if the CTS was within one-half inch, SOMEONE would still bring up size as an "issue".

Until the 5-series grew and gained lots of weight with the latest generation, the CTS was within less than an inch. So unless the old 5-series as "too small" to compete with the new 5-series....

ATS equals the 3-series in length.

CTS is 1.7" less than the 5-series, or other words; equal.

There is no point in growing the CTS 1.7"

My reaction here is that, somehow, still, people actually believe the CTS is "uncompetitive" with the 5-series based solely on size (of which there is no discernible difference).

In other words, if the CTS was within one-half inch, SOMEONE would still bring up size as an "issue".

When one finds that the Americans have built a very competitive luxury auto and has their own best beaten by it, then they start to look little things to complain about.

The CTS-V and CTS in all versions beats the Driving Machine of BMW and MB, so the reviewers who do not want to believe we can build quality products that are the best use little things like 1.7" to justify why it is faster or not equal to a 5 series.

Fact is we have to accept that we cannot win everyone over, so we need to stay focused on building the best product there is and accept that every other builder is out there is going to try and knock off our crown. Only by doing this will we truly stay the standard of the world and continue to win over skeptics.

Every little comment needs to be reviewed and if it has a bit of fact for example certain dash trims that are not truly Luxury level, then you fix these things to make sure the American Driving machines are just that, The Driving machine Standard of the World. CTS-V

Who knows they may make it 1.5 more than the 5 series for a total of 3"inches increase. in relation to the 5 it really matters less vs the ATS. The greater difference in size between the CTS and ATS is to Cadillacs advantage. Why have two cars nearly the same size?

The bottom line is that with the ATS now here the CTS can afford to add a little more to gain more trunk and interior room. With using the Alpha they can now do so with less risk of a weight penalty.

More room at the same or less weight and a car that is moved farther away fromt he ATS. Where is the down side?

I would toss out the 5 series argument all together as the key is to make place for the CTS between the ATS and new flag ship. Let it become a car not so close to the other two models.

They need to make their car their own and not just a CTS large, medium and small.

They need to make their car their own and not just a CTS large, medium and small.

The odd thing is the current CTS has a longer wheelbase than the 'new flagship' (XTS).

FYI, GM has never officially called the XTS "new flagship". It is media made up term.

CTS dimensionally may be similar to 5-series, but even compared to the previous generation, it was relatively cramped inside and was certainly not to the same caliber of engineering, equipment, prestige, pricing, etc.

With the ATS being the new entry-level Cadillac sports sedan and the true 3-series competitor, the new CTS can stop being a "tweener" and rival the 5-series, E-Class, and A6 directly.

FYI, GM has never officially called the XTS "new flagship". It is media made up term.

This is true and what is even worse are people who are GM fans that call it a flagship when GM has made it clear it is not the flagship.

GM has made it clear that this car is the volume Service fleet/ livery go to car frm the start. Also it is a FWD for those who demand FWD. The fact is the XTS was a car started long ago and just finished with the new money. It is a gap filler and a car that will lift the resale burden from the other main line Cadillacs. In other words no resale value plunge like the Town Car to the ATS and CTS while providing the easy money that the Town Car used to bring in to Ford before they killed it. In other words they had this car already and they may as well put it to some use vs wasting the money invested. Doing it this way will not harm the other Cadillac and will provide some needed cash flow.

The XTS mission is seperate from the rest of the Cadillac line. For what it's worth it is their Captiva.

The flagship is yet to come.

The XTS mission is seperate from the rest of the Cadillac line. For what it's worth it is their Captiva.

Weak excuse...

The flagship is yet to come.

I'll believe that when I see it..

The greater difference in size between the CTS and ATS is to Cadillacs advantage. Why have two cars nearly the same size?

Good question, let's e-mail BMW public relations and find out why they have 2 cars nearly the same size!

While we're at it, let's e-mail mercedees' public relations and find out why they have 2 cars nearly the same size!

Just 2?

The flagship is coming. There is a whole platform being developed for it.

What I find most amusing is the people bitching about it most are those driving 100k mile cars and will never buy a flagship from ANYONE.

Last I looked, and to Pauli's dismay, the Lacrosse is holding its value pretty well.

The XTS mission is seperate from the rest of the Cadillac line. For what it's worth it is their Captiva.

Weak excuse...

The flagship is yet to come.

I'll believe that when I see it..

Not a weak excuse just buisness.

You will see it and finally believe it. Cadillac needs at least one larger car model even in a lower volume. Once they have the CTS and ATS in place the time will be right for a top line car. Too many wanted the top line first but it would have failed as Cadillac had yet to prove they could build a world class car at $40K . How can you expect someone to plop down near $100K for a unproven car?

The greater difference in size between the CTS and ATS is to Cadillacs advantage. Why have two cars nearly the same size?

Good question, let's e-mail BMW public relations and find out why they have 2 cars nearly the same size!

While we're at it, let's e-mail mercedees' public relations and find out why they have 2 cars nearly the same size!

The box cars are being made is getting smaller so there is less room between them. But even then the 5 series is different enough to give buyers a different feel and more room in the car. These two cars attract different buyers. A third larger Cadillace also attract different buyers.

The way some of you act here GM just needs one car per division and I find it odd as I would expect that most complaining the most would want the greater difference between lines.

I expect in the next gen Lacrosse and Regal they also too will be spread out a little more. They nearly overlap each other in price and size. GM has done a good job of trying to make them appeal to different buyers but I suspect the next gen Lacrosse will grow in size at some point. It is a case GM simply had to work with what they had.

Seems like they are following the Lexus strategy... Lexus has 3 RWD sedan lines (IS, GS, LS) and a FWD appliance (ES) for volume. Though in Cadillac's case, why not leave the FWD filler to Buick? Unlike Toyota/Lexus, GM has a brand for FWD near-lux models--Buick. You don't see BMW or MB putting FWD volume models between the 5 and 7 or the E and S...

I just don't see the point of the XTS, since it's not a step up from the CTS but a step down/sideways. The XTS may sell well against the MKs and ES, but that's aiming pretty low.

What I find most amusing is the people bitching about it most are those driving 100k mile cars and will never buy a flagship from ANYONE.

That's kind of a low blow and not relevant to the topic at hand.

The point of the XT$ is money.

The Town Car was a cash cow for Ford. GM already had much of the basic work and money invested in the XTS. They can sell this as the Volume car and target the other three lines to specific buyers who don't want to see their car in fleet sales.

The XT$ may not advance Cadillac technology or Image wise but it will do no harm money wise.

Lexus offers the 250 also as a car for those who demand FWD. For just being a tarted up Camry it still brings in money and does little harm to the image.

Fact remains there are many who will not buy a RWD car. While it is smaller in this segment as most also have a suv at home for winter there are some who still want FWD. Their money is green too.

What I find most amusing is the people bitching about it most are those driving 100k mile cars and will never buy a flagship from ANYONE.

That's kind of a low blow and not relevant to the topic at hand.

Well you're not buying an S-Class, a 7-series, or an XTS anytime soon are you? There is a predilection on C&G to pre-judge cars and to declare anything that doesn't fit the person's definition of "a good car" as a crap car that will never ever sell.

SMK and you have both been proven wrong by the SRX and Lacrosse. GM clearly has a better read on the market than you two do.

As I've told SMK in the past I will tell you too. You cannot judge the future success of the XTS on the efforts of it's competition. The MKS wasn't built well and its sales figures reflect that. It has nothing to do with FWD/RWD and everything to do with the fact that the driver can see the foam insulation inside the HVAC vents while in a normal seating position. The Acura RL sells terrible, not because it is FWD based, but because it is a styling dud and offers very little over an Accord DeLuxe in terms of... anything.

The XTS, if they build it right, will do well.

Last I looked, and to Pauli's dismay, the Lacrosse is holding its value pretty well.

Alas, yes... was hoping to snatch one up dirt cheap, but unlike the last gen LaX, this one is retaining its value rather well.

Last I looked, and to Pauli's dismay, the Lacrosse is holding its value pretty well.

Alas, yes... was hoping to snatch one up dirt cheap, but unlike the last gen LaX, this one is retaining its value rather well.

Its not just the LaX... with higher gas prices, the extinction of large cars being manufactured and C4C removing a lot of serviceable large cars from the used car pool, decent cars LaX sized and above are hard to find.

What I find most amusing is the people bitching about it most are those driving 100k mile cars and will never buy a flagship from ANYONE.

That's kind of a low blow and not relevant to the topic at hand.

Well you're not buying an S-Class, a 7-series, or an XTS anytime soon are you? There is a predilection on C&G to pre-judge cars and to declare anything that doesn't fit the person's definition of "a good car" as a crap car that will never ever sell.

SMK and you have both been proven wrong by the SRX and Lacrosse. GM clearly has a better read on the market than you two do.

As I've told SMK in the past I will tell you too. You cannot judge the future success of the XTS on the efforts of it's competition.

It's laughable how many believe a great majority of consumers shop for cars by overall length or which wheels drive.

What I find most amusing is the people bitching about it most are those driving 100k mile cars and will never buy a flagship from ANYONE.

That's kind of a low blow and not relevant to the topic at hand.

Well you're not buying an S-Class, a 7-series, or an XTS anytime soon are you? There is a predilection on C&G to pre-judge cars and to declare anything that doesn't fit the person's definition of "a good car" as a crap car that will never ever sell.

SMK and you have both been proven wrong by the SRX and Lacrosse. GM clearly has a better read on the market than you two do.

As I've told SMK in the past I will tell you too. You cannot judge the future success of the XTS on the efforts of it's competition.

It's laughable how many believe a great majority of consumers shop for cars by overall length or which wheels drive.

I can guarantee ALL BUT TWO of my friends know which wheels drive their cars. They don't know, and they don't care. And one of the two who knows, but doesn't care.

It's laughable how many believe a great majority of consumers shop for cars by overall length or which wheels drive.

The great majority of consumers are sheep that only believe what is written in Consumer Reports. Cadillac is supposed to be above that... a luxury brand, not pushing common, mainstream FWD appliances..Cadillac should .leave the appliances to Chevy and Buick and focus on serious, RWD luxury cars.

Sheep have money too.

Many BMW's are sold to people who have no clue on the performance nature and just buy them for the image.

In fact they made a crap load of money off the old 318's to people who had no clue.

The XTS is short term as I do not expect it to be around forever. Even if it does last it may be sold as a fleet machine just as the Captiva and the Caprice. That is unless there is enough pubic demand GM could leave it avail to the public even longer. There are still a lot of people out there that love cars like this. Lexus has made a crap load of money off the 250.

Either way it will be nice for Cadillac to have a 3rd car in the show room as it will still take some time for a flagship. This a no harm car and will bring in easy money. That is the point of selling cars is it not?

At least with FWD/AWD/RWD there is no reason that anyone should leave the showroom looking for something that is not offered.

You have to look at this big picture not from an enthusiast point of veiw.

As long as the Alpha CTS keeps the double A-arm front setup I'll be happy...

Yeah XTS should only be a 1 Gen car, as Caddy intros the flagship and others roll out this kind of car can go to Buick as the pricing will be wrong for Caddy by then

It's laughable how many believe a great majority of consumers shop for cars by overall length or which wheels drive.

The great majority of consumers are sheep that only believe what is written in Consumer Reports. Cadillac is supposed to be above that... a luxury brand, not pushing common, mainstream FWD appliances..Cadillac should .leave the appliances to Chevy and Buick and focus on serious, RWD luxury cars.

You aren't addressing some nebulous, upper-tier market slice of spec-conscious enthusiasts, but a micro-NICHE. Cadillac is not tesla or fisker, and neither is BMW or mercedees- the vast majority of their vast volume of consumers are EXACTLY like Paulie's friends.

You aren't addressing some nebulous, upper-tier market slice of spec-conscious enthusiasts, but a micro-NICHE. Cadillac is not tesla or fisker, and neither is BMW or mercedees- the vast majority of their vast volume of consumers are EXACTLY like Paulie's friends.

WIth BMW and M-B, though, the vast majority of their cars are proper RWD luxury cars, not FWD appliances. That is the difference, and it makes all the difference in the world... I couldn't imagine paying $60k let alone $30k for a FWD appliance. FWD is fine for cheap appliances, but not for anything serious...maybe it's a generational thing and all the younger buyers have grown up w/ FWD and don't know any better...

Sheep have money too.

Many BMW's are sold to people who have no clue on the performance nature and just buy them for the image.

In fact they made a crap load of money off the old 318's to people who had no clue.

The XTS is short term as I do not expect it to be around forever. Even if it does last it may be sold as a fleet machine just as the Captiva and the Caprice. That is unless there is enough pubic demand GM could leave it avail to the public even longer. There are still a lot of people out there that love cars like this. Lexus has made a crap load of money off the 250.

I don't think the ES has been a 250 in over 10 years...it's the 350 currently..and GM has Buick to sell such models..and again, BMW and M-B don't have such things in their lineups...3,5,6,7....C-,E-,CLS-, S-class...all RWD goodness w/ no mainstream FWD in sight.

Anyway, enough of my tangent. Back to the thread topic, it's going to be interesting to see what they do w/ the next CTS...can't tell much from the spy pics but it looks evolutionary from the current model...maybe it will have some rounded edges like the ATS...

Sorry I ment ES350 as it is nothing more than a warmed over Toyota.

The whole thing boils down to the fact GM had the XTS done for the most part. They did not have a flag ship or any other RWD in the works till well after the chapter 11. Buick already has a Lacross. The simple fact is Cadillac has one car and only one more new one ready to go into production being the ATS.

So do they duplicate the car over at Buick or do they add somethings to it that could not be had on a Buick and make some money with a third model for a few years?

Cadillac has not been and still is not BMW or Benz. To become one of this class will take time and money.

I feel it Cadillac will be better served with a left over FWD/AWD transition car vs living off one car and a bunch of chomed Chevy [but profitable] SUV's.

Once Cadillac get the larger car ready we will see the XTS fade away. In time Cadillac will become what you want but till then they just don't have the finished product.

CTS is the right size on the outside, but too small on the inside. I was at the Pittsburgh Auto show today and yesterday, sat in the E-class both days, it feels much more roomy than a CTS and the cars are the same size. Even a Sonata or Optima feels roomier than a CTS does. With better space management, I think the exterior of the CTS can stay the same size and interior can grow. The cramped interior needs to be addressed. I even heard many people saying the CTS was too small for them and they want a bigger car. I think the interior fools them into thinking the CTS is smaller than it actually is.

I got a good look at the XTS, the lady said pricing was expected to be $45-60k. The XTS doesn't look as big as it is, which is good, because the MKS looks bigger than it is, and looks ridiculous. The interior looked nice (could not sit in it), but not as well made as an E-class or 5-series. It is better than a Lexus or Acura interior of that price range, but that isn't saying much. I can tell old guys that want a roomy car and don't want to drive over 55 mph will like the XTS. But that demographic isn't a big one, as witnessed by STS/DTS and MKS/Town Car sales.

On a side note, the new M5 looks spectacular and the difference between that and a CTS-V is dramatic. The M5's brakes are more impressive than the whole CTS-V. CTS-V looks so tacky, and the build quality isn't very good either.

Are Audis including the A8 just FWD appliances? Don't give me that crap about which way the engine is mounted, it doesn't matter a hill of beans now with Hi-Per strut. The weight balance of an A8 and Lacrosse AWD are nearly identical.

Are Audis including the A8 just FWD appliances? Don't give me that crap about which way the engine is mounted, it doesn't matter a hill of beans now with Hi-Per strut. The weight balance of an A8 and Lacrosse AWD are nearly identical.

Audis don't sell very well in the USA. They appeal to the luxury customer that wants sub-dued styling and AWD because they think it is safe, and perhaps like the fuel economy of a small displacement, boosted engine. There is a market for that type of car, but it isn't the biggest segment of buyers.

And the A7 has a disappointing interior for what it costs, and a 310 hp 3.0 liter V6 at $77,000, I think not. The Cadillac press person even mentioned how the XTS has more interior room than an Audi A6 (which I would hope since the XTS is far bigger) but if they are looking to steal A6 sales, how many are there to steal. No one buys an A6, or an Acura RL or Volvo S80. But the XTS will get sales of the 70+ crowd that only buys American because there are no other big American cars left, expect for the terrible MKS.

Are Audis including the A8 just FWD appliances? Don't give me that crap about which way the engine is mounted, it doesn't matter a hill of beans now with Hi-Per strut. The weight balance of an A8 and Lacrosse AWD are nearly identical.

Audis are AWD in the US. And except for the A3, they don't have transverse engines and thus don't suffer from the weak too-short front wheel-to-door distance that transverse FWD models suffer from..their proportions are closer to RWD..

What they are doesn't matter, what they're based on is what counts..... or so you've told me. So what you're saying is that if Cadillac sold the SRX as only AWD, yours and SMK's bitchfest about the second best selling mid-size luxury crossover would end? Somehow, I don't think it would.

When you're done chewing on that one, talk to me about the front-wheel to door distance at Audi

Thanks for posting. Appears to be the concept XTS, not sure if the production car's proportions match it. Notice the base of the windshield stretches over the wheel arch on the Cadillac, whereas the Audi's stops fully behind.

.... which is a function of greenhouse design... Not drive train layout... See new new VW Beetle.

The A4/5/6/7 have better proportions than the A8, but the A8 isn't bad...doesn't look like a typical weak FWD profile.

A8 is a much better car than XTS... regardless of powertrain layout. And besides the A8's engine is mounted longitudinally, which allows for a predictable full-time Torsen AWD system.

None of which actually matters, because the XTS is Cadillac's ES350. It will sell by virtue of being large, cushy, and inexpensive compared to its similarly sized European rivals. Engineering a $100K Cadillac supersedan at this time simply doesn't make sense.

.... which is a function of greenhouse design... Not drive train layout...

True- look at the 'Steering Wheel to A-Pillar Base' of each.

None of which actually matters, because the XTS is Cadillac's ES350.

I suppose GM just couldn't use the LaCrosse to compete w/ the MKS and ES, which is a more natural competitor for those models than something from Cadillac...

.... which is a function of greenhouse design... Not drive train layout...

True- look at the 'Steering Wheel to A-Pillar Base' of each.

The old cab-forward idea which hasn't gone away..unfortunately, with that stubby, sloping hood and lights coming half way up the fender, the XTS nose in profile looks like it was inspired by the Yaris..it needs at least an extra 6 inches of wheelbase, with at least 4 of it ahead of the firewall...111.7 is way too short for a fullsize.