Part II: '07 Escalade Exposed

[Trimnell1]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Featu...icleId=107890#4


I know that the official pics and info will be available at 12:01 AM Thursday, Nov. 10 but these are by far the best spy photos of the new Escalade till then. I think that it looks really hot and I'm glad that GM put some more money and effort into differentiating the Escalade from the Tahoe/Yukon. That small pic in the other Escalade thread doesn't do it any justice at all.

[Cory Wolfe]

Well... I still can't say that I'm impressed... hope it looks good in GM photography...

[Bimmer325]

I'm not sure what to think. The front fascia looks awesome, especially the LED headlamp treatment and more angular Cadillac grille. LOVE the lower front-fascia too. The rest just doesn't look Cadillac. The sides and rear are nearly identical to the Tahoe/Yukon. Doesn't look nearly as differentiated as the current model. Where's the A&S? Also, I wasn't aware the taillamps would be clear-lense. They actually look good from what we can see.

[jlbunting]

Looks sweet. Cant wait to see the rest. Side does look a little like the Yukon though....

[Bimmer325]

Hopefully the C-pillar is edgier than that of the Tahoe/Yukon. Notice it's one of the few areas GM bothered to conceal. :AH-HA_wink:

[KaliRover]

Well the interior certainly look's refreshing...

[jbartley]

is the Escalde getting blinker/turn indicators in the side view mirrors (FRONT SIDE)? in the other spy pics we've seen it looks like the lower black lip has a narrow light-strip or something and in these pics - that black lip has been taped over...

[Cadillacfan]

I think it looks good from what we can see. Much more upscale then the current one.

[Guest Josh]

I'll reserve judgement until the official information release.

[boblutzfan]

Just a few more days until the real thing is introduced. Does anyone know if official pictures will be available at 12:01 AM on Friday or will we have to wait until the actual show?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I'm not too impressed... It's not as substantial as the old Escalade and definately not as radical looking (Which is a bad thing) The slim headlights just don't work well with Art & Science as they look awkward from certain angles with the huge Cadillac grille. The SRX was okay and has never sold well, the DTS okay too and is selling well, but how much on looks? And now it seems as if the Escalade will just be "okay" as well. Cadillac is losing it's momentum.... and apparently the Escalade is going to look like an upper trim level to the already controversial Yukon... with a contrived appearance that loses all of the divisions unique-ness. Come to think of it, I don't think ANY GM division is unique anymore.. They're all a mismatch of RANDOM watered down styling "templates" I think it is LESS distinctive than the last generation BY FAR... Same EXACT greenhouse, same headlight setup as the Yukon, same sides as the Yukon AND Tahoe... With the only distinctions being the chrome mirrors, the Cadillac grille and the side vent. Maybe I'm jumping the gun, but that's a pretty clear picture.

[boblutzfan]

LOL!!!  Wait until Thursday.  I've been hearing this bull for years, "I don't like", "I'm not impressed", then you see the real thing and love it. :rolleyes:

[post="40231"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

AH-HA - what happens on Thursday? Is it the reveal in Beverly Hills that is referred to the the GM Blog? Here is a quote from the GM Blog: "FastLane radio host Deb Ochs interviews Jim Taylor, Cadillac general manager, about the unveiling of the 2007 Cadillac Escalade, being revealed this week in Beverly Hills, Calif. "

Do tell - do you have more info?

[Robert Hall]

Same photos on Autoweek...it looks like except for the front clip, the body is the same as the Tahoe and Yukon..

[TheWatcher]

From what I see, I think it looks very professional. Futuristic without losing its mature side. I think more business-aligned groups, who wouldn't normally go for something as flashy as an Escalade, will take a closer second look at this beast.

[Shantanu]

I think it looks good, actually. It doesn't make sense for GM to keep selling the same vehicle. This looks like a more premium SUV from the outside.

[boblutzfan]

From an inside sorce who has begun posting pictures and other vital data the word is this: "As I mentioned in previous threads, during the recent Satellite broadcast to dealers Cadillac announced the reveal would take place in Beverly Hills on November 9th at a "star studded" event." It sounds like the big day is tomorrow!!! The Fastlane Blog confirms that the intro is in Beverly Hills and NOT the South Florida Auto Show on Friday. This means that we should see pictures tomorrow!!!!!!!!!!

[Ultra Magnus]

Well its a lot cleaner looking. It seems to lack the big beefy panache of the current Escalade. I think they should have kept the clean side styling for the Yukons and kept some of the body cladding that made the Escalade unique. Without it, it looks way too much like a Yukon with a grille treatment.

[boblutzfan]

Update on the reveal. It sounds like the introduction on Rodeo Drive is tomorrow night and is invitation only. The release of pictures will be Thursday morning.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

Differewnt sheetmetal? What? A black B-pillar is not going to distinguish this Escalade enough from Tahoe and Yukon. Absolutely pitiful. This better have an actually unique interior. I'm really disappointed, and trying to be a modern-day GM fan is getting to be very difficult.

[Cadillacfan]

You can't make that judgement from only seeing part of the car. The rest is covered so you can't completely see what the side looks like. Also, I don't know where you've been but for months now, we knew that 'slade was getting different doors and different sheetmetal in front of the A-pillar and behind the C-pillar. The interior is also is completely different from the Tahoe and Yukon and we've seen a bit of what it looks like and I completely agree with that statement.

[Cory Wolfe]

Come to think of it, I don't think ANY GM division is unique anymore.. They're all a mismatch of RANDOM watered down styling "templates"

:withstupid:

Even the damn 90s, which everyone seems to hate, was more distinctive than GM now..

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

LOL!!!  Wait until Thursday.  I've been hearing this bull for years, "I don't like", "I'm not impressed", then you see the real thing and love it. :rolleyes:

[post="40231"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I know... And I'll be one of the first to admit guilt.

But that's a good thing... That GM can win over a skeptic.

[blkcadillac]

It's going to sel whether you or me are impressed

[KaliRover]

I have a feeling that the Navigator will be knocked out of the competition by this, I mean after seeing the new Expedition Interior, and seeing the Navigator exterior, it's a yawn.

The Escalade look's great from the rear view...


as if the Infiniti QX56 and the Range Rover had a kid... lol. Just my take.

[ZL-1]

That front end looks good, but there's still too much tape on the car... 2 days more until the official pics are released, right? Edited November 8, 2005 by ZL-1

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

It's going to sel whether you or me are impressed

[post="40332"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I'm not so sure...

There are a lot of negatives already with fuel instability and anti-SUV :bs:

Add to that a subtraction of the distinctive looks that MADE the Escalade in the first place and an almost equally impressive and identical looking Denali except without the frivolous add ons and we instantly have "the bad old days" of the K1500 based Escalade.

STYLE makes Cadillac because that has been it's MAJOR selling point since the re-vamp and even in the golden days and that's what it's target audience gravitates to. Why is it so hard for Lutz and co. to realize that?

No style=No success, at least in that niche.

[Trimnell1]

Hey, let's get rid of Lutz and all his staff and bring back Zarella and his brand management minions because we all know that these hot, distinctively-styled, and high-tech Zarella vehicles were going to take GM's market share above 30%!!! Oh wait, I guess that these Zarella cars were so great that somehow the buying public didn't notice and GM's share is in the low 20s because the employee pricing has ended, and for some strange reason they don't want to buy most Zarella cars without a huge discount. Like AH-HA said, let's continue to bash all these Lutz vehicles without even seeing them in official pictures. Lame.

[maynard]

I'm not so sure...

There are a lot of negatives already with fuel instability and anti-SUV :bs:

Add to that a subtraction of the distinctive looks that MADE the Escalade in the first place and an almost equally impressive and identical looking Denali except without the frivolous add ons and we instantly have "the bad old days" of the K1500 based Escalade.

STYLE makes Cadillac because that has been it's MAJOR selling point since the re-vamp and even in the golden days and that's what it's target audience gravitates to. Why is it so hard for Lutz and co. to realize that?

No style=No success, at least in that niche.

[post="40348"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

And this speculation is based on spy shots? At least give it a chance to fail lol. Stop counting your chickens before they've hatched sheesh =p
Something else I'm curious about is, whether or not people purchasing a vehicle of this price range are really all that concerned with gas prices. *shrug*

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Hey, let's get rid of Lutz and all his staff and bring back Zarella and his brand management minions because we all know that these hot, distinctively-styled, and high-tech Zarella vehicles were going to take GM's market share above 30%!!!

GMT800 was a HUGE success.

Oh wait, I guess that these Zarella cars were so great that somehow the buying public didn't notice and GM's share is in the low 20s because the employee pricing has ended, and for some strange reason they don't want to buy most Zarella cars without a huge discount.  Like AH-HA said, let's continue to bash all these Lutz vehicles without even seeing them in official pictures.  Lame.

[post="40358"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Okay, I will if it suits me.
:cheers:

Hey, I even admitted that I would probably be wrong, but to not discuss our opinions just because they're not "popular" would be pretty "Lame" too.

I never claimed to be right, or that this was my final judgement, it's just my opinion at the moment and what *COULD* happen.

And yes, Lutz hasn't really shown me a thing yet. Eventhough the Solstice is nice, there is more to running GM than a 'pet project' low volume WELL cliniced roadster.

And this speculation is based on spy shots? At least give it a chance to fail lol. Stop counting your chickens before they've hatched sheesh =p

Oh, I know... And it's PURE speculation and opinion and was meant to be taken as nothing more. I dunno why I'm skeptical; something about it has just triggered negativity. (Maybe all of the "It's better than sex" hoopla)

Something else I'm curious about is, whether or not people purchasing a vehicle of this price range are really all that concerned with gas prices. *shrug*

Yeah, I'm not sure.

[scharmer05]

I know a couple farmers up here that have escalades up here....yes farmers....and i know they aren't concerned about gas prices...they are using an escalade as their farm vehicle for gosh sakes. So does it really matter if this escalade gets 20 or 18. Wouldn't to me if i was buying an escalade.

[boblutzfan]

If any of these new GMT-900s have a chance to succeed it is the Escalade trio (Escalade, ESV and EXT). It has already been said, but if you are spending north of $60,000 on a vehicle, then the gas price isn't realy a concern. Yeah, you may hate paying $3.00/gallon for gas, but you CAN and that is the issue. Now the Tahoe which will have a transaction price of nearly half the Escalade may be hurt by rising gas prices just because it will be marketed more toward the middleclass / lower upper class. If the new Cadillac trucks have all the quality, features and styling that has been promised, then it will control the lux-truck market. I predict a huge success for these new rides.

[El Scorcho]

The only things I don't like are the slab sides. I keep hoping these are only on preproduction models, otherwise Cadillac just isn't A&S anymore. Say it ain't so!!

[ToniCipriani]

I like it how they try to camo it to look like a Tahoe using tape... Oh wait... never mind... :lol:

[jmore1276]

Why is it that GM can change the sheet metal betwwen the GMT 360's, but not on the latest GMT 900's. They're doing the same thing they've always done....putting a different sticker (and grill and taillights) on the same body. I can understand (to some extent) GMC and Chevy, but I really had high hopes of Caddy standing out from the pack this time. I'm not impressed with the syling at all. In the old days, when they had less technollgy (50's 60's) They would change sheet metal every year and have differen't sheet metal for every brand. It was alot harder to tell which cars shared which platforms. Cookie Cutter Cookie Cutter Cookie Cutter Cookie Cutter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

[Trimnell1]

Obviously, everyone is entitled to their opinion as this is a discussion forum about primarily GM vehicles. But I find it kind of strange that AH-HA said that he never owned a domestic car before and when he went to the GM future car preview he was extremely impressed by what he saw; he would even strongly consider buying several of them if he was in their respective markets. I thought that most of the members here are (supposedly) GM fans, and to hear all this negativity towards camoed vehicles made to look ugly and to confuse people as to their true designs makes me laugh. :lol: That an import buyer like AH-HA would consider buying a future GM vehicle says to me that the future Lutz lineup must be very impressive. No, I haven't been drinking any GM kool-aid but I have been a GM fan longer than some of you have been alive; and I've seen too much dull, boring, lame-ass GM crap over the years that when someone like Lutz who has a proven track record of shepherding hot designs to market was put in charge of GM vehicle development, then I felt a lot better about GM's future. Though the GMT-800s and several other vehicles have indeed been huge succeses, there is no denying the fact that GM's market share slump is the result of all these Zarella brand-managed vehicles not selling on their merits but on huge discounts. I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, this is just MY opinion. Edited November 9, 2005 by Trimnell1

[Guest Josh]

Obviously, everyone is entitled to their opinion as this is a discussion forum about primarily GM vehicles.  But I find it kind of strange that AH-HA said that he never owned a domestic car before and when he went to the GM future car preview he was extremely impressed by what he saw; he would even strongly consider buying several of them if he was in their respective markets.  I thought that most of the members here are (supposedly) GM fans, and to hear all this negativity towards camoed vehicles made to look ugly and to confuse people as to their true designs makes me laugh.  :lol:

That an import buyer like AH-HA would consider buying a future GM vehicle says to me that the future Lutz lineup must be very impressive.  No, I haven't been drinking any GM kool-aid but I have been a GM fan longer than some of you have been alive; and I've seen too much dull, boring, lame-ass GM crap over the years that when someone like Lutz who has a proven track record of shepherding hot designs to market was put in charge of GM vehicle development, then I felt a lot better about GM's future.  Though the GMT-800s and several other vehicles have indeed been huge succeses, there is no denying the fact that GM's market share slump is the result of all these Zarella brand-managed vehicles not selling on their merits but on huge discounts.  I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, this is just MY opinion.

[post="40523"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Which is something you are entitled too. Which is something I agree with.

I'm in a GM family. Two generations (hopefully I'll be the third, however it looks like I'll be writing, instead of producing) and I know GM's previous design heritige all too well.

The 80's and early 90's were atrocious (sp?) for GM and for GM fans.

However, when people bash the Solstice because it's "low-volume"......people honestly have no idea how much of an image vehicle this is for General Motors. Since when has there been 15,000 pre-orders on a GM vehicle made on a car that plans to produce about that many per year? Never.

Lutz knows what he's doing. I've seen it...I'll vouch for it and I'll say it again, the end of this decade is going to be memorable.

[caddycruiser]

Which is something you are entitled too. Which is something I agree with.

I'm in a GM family. Two generations (hopefully I'll be the third, however it looks like I'll be writing, instead of producing) and I know GM's previous design heritige all too well.

The 80's and early 90's were atrocious (sp?) for GM and for GM fans.

However, when people bash the Solstice because it's "low-volume"......people honestly have no idea how much of an image vehicle this is for General Motors. Since when has there been 15,000 pre-orders on a GM vehicle made on a car that plans to produce about that many per year? Never.

Lutz knows what he's doing. I've seen it...I'll vouch for it and I'll say it again, the end of this decade is going to be memorable.

[post="40562"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, I think the general consensus is STILL that a lot of us are getting sick and tired of hearing "but you just wait" and seeing things like the nice, but still lacking Lucerne, these trucks that already seem like models that were out 5 years ago, etc. Solstice is great, but if it's the ONLY thing you can do that stands out and takes the market by storm, you're going to have some MAJOR problems....oh wait, GM's already in that boat...

These trucks are going to sell, no doubt, but now that we've seen most (or at least have a strong idea), I'm not as enthused as I was hoping for. GM could have done more, and I don't think I'm the only one who thinks so.

Hmm...now let's see--wonder how lacking the supposedly "amazing" Enclave and Acadia will be? ^_^

Sorry, but this little "promise" game has more than worn out its welcome.... :(

And before ANYONE says it, the completed production models won't give off any more of an aura than this tape covered one...that's just bunk. Consider it "seen". Edited November 9, 2005 by caddycruiser

[Guest Josh]

I'll tell you what. The new CTS? It'll blow your socks off. The new Trailblazer? I'll blow your underwear off. The new Envoy? It'll blow your boxers off. Every mid-size vehicle in between....it'll blow you off period. (Sorry, that's my MPH-Mag reading showing through). You get the idea. These vehicles right now are gap vehicles. GM will not admit that, but they are. That's what were here for.

[Cory Wolfe]

I thought that most of the members here are (supposedly) GM fans, and to hear all this negativity towards camoed vehicles made to look ugly and to confuse people as to their true designs makes me laugh.  :lol:

Not a GM fan, but a Pontiac fan and like FOG... I'm skeptical.

Hey, let's get rid of Lutz and all his staff and bring back Zarella and his brand management minions because we all know that these hot, distinctively-styled, and high-tech Zarella vehicles were going to take GM's market share above 30%!!!  Oh wait, I guess that these Zarella cars were so great that somehow the buying public didn't notice and GM's share is in the low 20s because the employee pricing has ended, and for some strange reason they don't want to buy most Zarella cars without a huge discount.  Like AH-HA said, let's continue to bash all these Lutz vehicles without even seeing them in official pictures.  Lame.

[post="40358"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That an import buyer like AH-HA would consider buying a future GM vehicle says to me that the future Lutz lineup must be very impressive.  No, I haven't been drinking any GM kool-aid but I have been a GM fan longer than some of you have been alive; and I've seen too much dull, boring, lame-ass GM crap over the years that when someone like Lutz who has a proven track record of shepherding hot designs to market was put in charge of GM vehicle development, then I felt a lot better about GM's future.  Though the GMT-800s and several other vehicles have indeed been huge succeses, there is no denying the fact that GM's market share slump is the result of all these Zarella brand-managed vehicles not selling on their merits but on huge discounts.  I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, this is just MY opinion.

[post="40523"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The 80's and early 90's were atrocious (sp?) for GM and for GM fans.

However, when people bash the Solstice because it's "low-volume"......people honestly have no idea how much of an image vehicle this is for General Motors. Since when has there been 15,000 pre-orders on a GM vehicle made on a car that plans to produce about that many per year? Never.

Lutz knows what he's doing. I've seen it...I'll vouch for it and I'll say it again, the end of this decade is going to be memorable.

[post="40562"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

And yes, Lutz hasn't really shown me a thing yet. Eventhough the Solstice is nice, there is more to running GM than a 'pet project' low volume WELL cliniced roadster.
Oh, I know... And it's PURE speculation and opinion and was meant to be taken as nothing more. I dunno why I'm skeptical; something about it has just triggered negativity. (Maybe all of the "It's better than sex" hoopla)

[post="40364"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree with FOG. Lutz really hasn't done much of anything. Yet, that is. So leaving the future out of this and speaking strictly about design...

What has he done? Well, let's see... now each new vehicle has a cheezy and horribly placed GM badge. Now vehicles are less distinct. Now most interiors he's touched look the same. Now more parts are shared between vehicles than before. Wow... how nice of him.

As for the whole Zarrella thing and 80s/90s vehicles... First off, Zarrella was in marketing. Second, yes he sucked. Third, yes many vehicles were crap. Fourth, you're missing the point. Whether they were unreliable, were of low quality materials, and had terrible fit/finish is totally irrelevant. Most of that is what ruined GM, not the designs. They were more distinctive whether you liked them or not. Atleast the 90's ones were. Now most GM vehicles all look bland, watered down, and the same - inside and out. Kind of like the 70's and some of the 80's all over again...

And as for AH-HA... well there are more reasons than just styling that would make him consider buying one. That and looking good and looking distinctive are two totally different things. Now as for the Escalade... I have two eyes. I use them for seeing. I'm not blind. I can see. What do I see? I see a Tahoe/Yukon with different wheels, a different front, and different taillights. Nevermind the interior as I can't see it. Minor things like trim and colored pillars are just that... minor. As for the actual design of it... From the crappy lieked pics to all the spy pics and even to Chis's chop which looks like an exact match to those... I can say that I am unimpressed. Will my opinion change once official pics are released? Possibly, but why bother post stuff like this to not comment on it?

[Cory Wolfe]

I'll tell you what. The new CTS? It'll blow your socks off. The new Trailblazer? I'll blow your underwear off.

The new Envoy? It'll blow your boxers off.

Every mid-size vehicle in between....it'll blow you off period. (Sorry, that's my MPH-Mag reading showing through).

You get the idea. These vehicles right now are gap vehicles. GM will not admit that, but they are. That's what were here for.

[post="40607"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, I'll believe it when I see as that is only your opinion. I've been told sh!t like that about GM vehicles before and I ended up coming off unimpressed. From what I've heard... there is a chance the CTS will by not being true Art & Science. Lutz has pretty much ruined A&S. The only true ones were the CTS, XLR, and SRX... all done without Lutz. Also the last Cadillacs too be perfectly styled... Edited November 9, 2005 by blackviper8891

[Nick]

I'll blow your underwear off.

[post="40607"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

:ph34r:

[Trimnell1]

Not a GM fan, but a Pontiac fan and like FOG... I'm skeptical.
I agree with FOG. Lutz really hasn't done much of anything. Yet, that is. So leaving the future out of this and speaking strictly about design...

What has he done? Well, let's see... now each new vehicle has a cheezy and horribly placed GM badge. Now vehicles are less distinct. Now most interiors he's touched look the same. Now more parts are shared between vehicles than before. Wow... how nice of him.

As for the whole Zarrella thing and 80s/90s vehicles... First off, Zarrella was in marketing. Second, yes he sucked. Third, yes many vehicles were crap. Fourth, you're missing the point. Whether they were unreliable, were of low quality materials, and had terrible fit/finish is totally irrelevant. Most of that is what ruined GM, not the designs. They were more distinctive whether you liked them or not. Atleast the 90's ones were. Now most GM vehicles all look bland, watered down, and the same - inside and out. Kind of like the 70's and some of the 80's all over again...

And as for AH-HA... well there are more reasons than just styling that would make him consider buying one. That and looking good and looking distinctive are two totally different things. Now as for the Escalade... I have two eyes. I use them for seeing. I'm not blind. I can see. What do I see? I see a Tahoe/Yukon with different wheels, a different front, and different taillights. Nevermind the interior as I can't see it. Minor things like trim and colored pillars are just that... minor. As for the actual design of it... From the crappy lieked pics to all the spy pics and even to Chis's chop which looks like an exact match to those... I can say that I am unimpressed. Will my opinion change once official pics are released? Possibly, but why bother post stuff like this to not comment on it?

[post="40613"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Again, everyone is entitled to their opinions about what is good design and what is not. My opinion is that most all Zarella vehicles sucked ass and I don't give a damn whether anyone else agrees with me or not. We've all heard the line "Wait till you see what's coming down the road" about new GM vehicles before, but this was from GM people. To hear about the new Lutz cars that were shown to the media and analysts and to see such positive press about them speaks volumes about how good they must be. And these are the same people who are always so down and critical of GM. So whether you or I like or dislike these new vehicles matters little because they're coming soon presumably as shown, and I'll be in the market for them whether anyone here likes them or not. I say the sooner these Zarella cars are gone off the market the better.

BTW, Zarella started off as head of marketing but was later named as president of North America where he and V.P. Tom Davis of product development worked closely together to create vehicles for N.A. So almost the entire current lineup was as a matter of fact created under his direction. <_<

[Cory Wolfe]

We've all heard the line "Wait till you see what's coming down the road" about new GM vehicles before, but this was from GM people. To hear about the new Lutz cars that were shown to the media and analysts and to see such positive press about them speaks volumes about how good they must be. And these are the same people who are always so down and critical of GM. So whether you or I like or dislike these new vehicles matters little because they're coming soon presumably as shown, and I'll be in the market for them whether anyone here likes them or not.

That still doesn't garantee anything...

Frankly, relying on the words of another is retarded. They tell you something, you'll believe it no matter what. Where's the sense in that? Neither you nor I have seen any of it. Yet because analysts say wonderful things about it, we should believe it even though we haven't even seen it?

BTW, the CTS was a Zarella-era vehicle... It is still regarded as one of GM's best even as vehicles with Lutz's touch roll-out. It basically turned around Cadillac's image. Lutz admitted that he would not have approved such a vehicle. Would it be fear of taking chances like GM needs to? As I look across GM's latest lineup... I'd say that's why.

[Trimnell1]

That still doesn't garantee anything...

Frankly, relying on the words of another is retarded. They tell you something, you'll believe it no matter what. Where's the sense in that? Neither you nor I have seen any of it. Yet because analysts say wonderful things about it, we should believe it even though we haven't even seen it?

BTW, the CTS was a Zarella-era vehicle... It is still regarded as one of GM's best even as vehicles with Lutz's touch roll-out. It basically turned around Cadillac's image. Lutz admitted that he would not have approved such a vehicle. Would it be fear of taking chances like GM needs to? As I look across GM's latest lineup... I'd say that's why.

[post="40656"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yeah, we shouldn't take what other people say as gospel, but the fact that these analysts and media people who often look down on GM said that they were mightily impressed by GM's future lineup did give me a lot of optimism. You and I will have to wait to see the vehicles before we make our final opinions, but it's also retarded to keep bashing Lutz because we haven't seen a lot of his 100% developed vehicles yet.

OK, maybe I'm a little harsh on the Zarella cars because I do really like the Cadillac lineup, the Corvette, the GMT-360s, the SSR, and some others. The problem is that the rest of GM's lineup is sadly lacking against the competition, and I'm looking forward to seeing what Lutz can bring to GM as Josh and AH-HA have already seen.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

[quote]Obviously, everyone is entitled to their opinion as this is a discussion forum about primarily GM vehicles. But I find it kind of strange that AH-HA said that he never owned a domestic car before and when he went to the GM future car preview he was extremely impressed by what he saw; he would even strongly consider buying several of them if he was in their respective markets. I thought that most of the members here are (supposedly) GM fans, and to hear all this negativity towards camoed vehicles made to look ugly and to confuse people as to their true designs makes me laugh. [/quote]

***This is not directed at anyone specifically, I just used trimnell1's post as a tie in to prove a point.***

[random post]

You know this accusation crap; it really never ends...

If you root FOR GM, then "You're a GM cheerleader" and "The bias is ridiculous" and "You would be respected more if you weren't so close-minded" eventhough this is a GM website, not a Toyota humper's den.

Then, when you show disdain for GM and voice your opinion against GM it's; "I thought you guys were GM fans" or "You're dumb, this car has success written all over it" or "Wow, you're so close-minded."

It gets VERY old and it's simply a difference of opinions. Just pointing that out.

[/random post]

[quote]I'll tell you what. The new CTS? It'll blow your socks off.[/quote]

I agree.

[quote]The new Trailblazer? I'll blow your underwear off.

The new Envoy? It'll blow your boxers off.[/quote]

Which apparently now, we'll never see because of gas prices... Thank goodness, I can't afford new underwear.


[quote]You get the idea. These vehicles right now are gap vehicles.[/quote]

And therein lies the problem my friend......

GMT900 NEVER, EVER SHOULD'VE BEEN A "GAP" VEHICLE. That's suicide. GMT800 had style, distinction (How little it migh've been in some areas) and class leading attributes. The new trucks, while very nice, just don't seem to share that razor sharp edge. And I'm sure the media will let us know it too, every chance they get.

I'm fed up with the promises and half-assing. Cadillac will soon have an AWESOME CTS and what looks to be a handicapped Escalade. That's half hearted to me and the lack of consistency is annoying at the very least.

For example: I've ALWAYS bled GM platlettes, you all know that. But, we're I in the market for a mid size car, I'd buy a Fusion.. We're I in the market for a full-size car, I'd be hard pressed to not buy a Charger. That's just 2 examples of HUGE markets where GM needs to get with the game and it's bad when a GM-nazi like myself is tempted elsewhere.

[quote]As for the whole Zarrella thing and 80s/90s vehicles... First off, Zarrella was in marketing. Second, yes he sucked. Third, yes many vehicles were crap. Fourth, you're missing the point. Whether they were unreliable, were of low quality materials, and had terrible fit/finish is totally irrelevant. Most of that is what ruined GM, not the designs. They were more distinctive whether you liked them or not. Atleast the 90's ones were. Now most GM vehicles all look bland, watered down, and the same - inside and out. Kind of like the 70's and some of the 80's all over again...[/quote]

Thank you very much BV... That's exactly what I was trying to say.

[quote]BTW, the CTS was a Zarella-era vehicle... It is still regarded as one of GM's best even as vehicles with Lutz's touch roll-out. It basically turned around Cadillac's image. Lutz admitted that he would not have approved such a vehicle. Would it be fear of taking chances like GM needs to? As I look across GM's latest lineup... I'd say that's why.[/quote]

He also said he wouldn't have greenlighted the 300C. That's because Lutz doesn't know anything other than ORGANIC style... To him EVERYTHING must consist of organic, whittled or honed down shapes with abstract accents. This works for things such as roadsters because of their purity and purpose, but NOT for SUV's and luxury cars. As a result of that, we have Art & Science relegated from "youth, intensity and technology" to "mature, soft and traditional" and that's not a good thing since the STYLING (Not as much technology and dynamics) the sense of style, is what transformed Cadillac's image. Then you add the rest of the divisions to the mix; Buick has went from GORGEOUS retro-esque show stoppers to half VW, half watered down A&S hybrids with a Ford-oval-esque accent. Pontiac is hanging on with it's bland-ized 90's update look. GMC is stealing Chevrolet's trademark oval tailights and has tamed "Terra" down to looking somewhat like a new Buick and somewhat like an old Cadillac. and Chevrolet is the catch-all with two cars that show about a 10% resemblance to the SS, except without the theived tailights, and a mix N match of various other ethnic styling cues. Then Saturn, with a straight from Europe appearance, for a straight from the South division.

Maybe I'm being too harsh (Probably am, since a lot of the new cars aren't bad cars) but at least in the Zarella era EVERY division had direction instead of doing completely random things. And I hope Lutz and comapny make me eat crow. If they do then I'll salt that bad boy up and chow down, because I hope they do for GM's sake. But as of now, I'm still not sure the corporation is living up to it's potential.

[ichbinjohnk]

You know...I REALLY want to know how the 90's Zarella vehicles were "more distinctive," because honestly, I don't see how.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

You know...I REALLY want to know how the 90's Zarella vehicles were "more distinctive," because honestly, I don't see how.

[post="40726"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Aztek: Although ugly, was distinctive.
Torrent: Although attractive, is the same thing as a Chevrolet SUV I can buy.

Park Avenue: Distinctly Buick, with the oval styling theme carried by the division and it's concepts for years.
Lucerne: Where the hell did these headlights and tailights come from? Doesn't bear ANY resemblence to the Lacrosse or classic Buicks and is that lower bumper from a Cobalt?

2005 Yukon Denali: Distinctive "sleeper" look with lots of bling-bling, very different wheels, cladding.
2007 Yukon Denali: A regular Yukon with slightly different wheels and a chrome grille and NOTHING to differentiate the profile.

Cadillac CTS: Racy, heritage inspired styling.
Cadillac DTS: Same interior as a 'plebian' Buick.

The list goes on...

The Zarella cars weren't all great or even good, but each division had a logical styling theme (and excellent ones at that) that didn't intertwine with OTHER divisions. Just look at the Zarella concepts for proof, compared to the "Same general look" Lutz concepts. For example; the difference between the concept Lacrosse and Imaj or Terradyne compared to the concept Solstice, SS or the GMC Graphyte which all share the same "fat, broad, with organic headlight/tailight shapes" characteristics.

[sciguy_0504]

I can't believe I'm agreeing with FOG! :o I'm really hoping the Escalade looks better in the actual PR photos. It's not really getting my attention in the spy pictures, especially the ones in this thread. FOG is 100% correct when he said the GMT900's should NOT be gap vehicles. Tons of money went into their development and they were rushed to production and they should have been done correctly the first time, not half-assed and then improved 2-4 years later.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

Yeah I agree in the fact that Ron Zarrella overall had vastly superior concept vehicles compared to the ones we've seen recently. I was absolutely blown away by the 1998-2001 range of concept cars (and a couple 2002's, plus the 2003 Chevy SS and Journey concept cars), but otherwise I haven't been too impressed. I hate to doubt the insiders, and I should reserve final judgment, but just what I've seen in some cases lately worries me, stopgap or not. GM has so much potential and I see it go to waste.

[ichbinjohnk]

Aztek: Although ugly, was distinctive.
Torrent: Although attractive, is the same thing as a Chevrolet SUV I can buy.

Park Avenue: Distinctly Buick, with the oval styling theme carried by the division and it's concepts for years.
Lucerne: Where the hell did these headlights and tailights come from? Doesn't bear ANY resemblence to the Lacrosse or classic Buicks and is that lower bumper from a Cobalt?

2005 Yukon Denali: Distinctive "sleeper" look with lots of bling-bling, very different wheels, cladding.
2007 Yukon Denali: A regular Yukon with slightly different wheels and a chrome grille and NOTHING to differentiate the profile.

Cadillac CTS: Racy, heritage inspired styling.
Cadillac DTS: Same interior as a 'plebian' Buick.

The list goes on...

The Zarella cars weren't all great or even good, but each division had a logical styling theme (and excellent ones at that) that didn't intertwine with OTHER divisions. Just look at the Zarella concepts for proof, compared to the "Same general look" Lutz concepts. For example; the difference between the concept Lacrosse and Imaj or Terradyne compared to the concept Solstice, SS or the GMC Graphyte which all share the same "fat, broad, with organic headlight/tailight shapes" characteristics.

[post="40730"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

On those, I can generally see your point...but I'm talking 90's cars, which is what people have been saying.