XTS Spy Shots

[regfootball]

The brands that aren't chasing volume are the ones that charge six figures for every car they sell. At those prices they can afford to sell in small volumes. Everyone else needs some sort of "volume car" to keep the lights on for the niche stuff. Caddy's answer to that question is apparently the XTS (and the SRX). I'll agree that a car configured like the XTS would be a better fit over at Buick, slotted above the LaCrosse, but I have softened on it for a couple of reasons:

1) It's not Caddy's flagship, no matter how you define flagship - be it "most expensive vehicle", "biggest vehicle", or "best performing vehicle. The XTS is none of those. At worst, it's a Fritz car that will pave the way for a true rear drive flagship. I wouldn't be surprised if the EpII XTS is a one-and-done car, but don't quote me on that.

2) It actually appears like it's going to be a nice looking car. It's not like they grafted A&S cues on a generic design, a la the DTS. It's a ground-up A&S car. It won't look completely out of place in the Cadillac showroom.

Give the car a chance. If I were GM I wouldn't try pitting it against a 5, 7, E, or S, but I think they could steal more than a few Audi/VW/Volvo buyers with it.

at the auto show this past weekend i was sitting in a new SRX and a couple of well off 40+ers were commenting how much nicer the new one is and then something about how crappy the old one was and how bad it drove.

interesting considering the SRX won a lot of handling comparos but clearly what you can take from this observation is that the XTS is to sedans like the SRX is to crossovers.

it makes no pretense about being a canyon carver. It also will not sell for huge dollars (except for the uber equipped) and especially its not mercedes money. lastly, it really is a vehicle more about creature comforts and interior niceness. So if caddy can sell this car to boneheads like were sitting in the front with their logoed dress shirts on......caddy will be fine.

[regfootball]

4 model Subaru is outselling 10 model VW in the US and you think they're borderline?

no i agree with you on that i was thinking more within Japan's boundaries that Toyota would possibly have a penchant to want it eat Subaru to save itself.

what subaru is doing in the US is impressive. But once everyone adopts AWD universally what will the unique selling proposition of Subaru be anymore? They will need to evolve.

VW is the only Euro automaker that will have the ability to be one of the world's top 5 or 7 auto brands based on market share and units. For the european carmakers to remain relevant on a world scale, VW almost has to sacrifice itself to do this. I know Fiat is in a position to do this as well and of course Renault, but they are already networked with Nissan in order to do that.

Edited March 17, 2011 by regfootball

[Croc]

Guys, the luxury market isn't the volume market. Sales numbers aren't at all what the game is about--profits are. If anything, Mercedes-Benz's push for volume in the mid-late 90s has been a large part of their fall as king of the US luxury market because they are too attainable. It's just like Cadillac in the late-70s and early 80s--what caused the brand's 30-year slide from greatness? The promotion of a Chevy guy to head Cadillac with the promise of volume. This led to cost-cutting and short-term gains, but in the long term the prestige was gone. Cadillacs weren't aspirational--they became common. It's a delicate balance, and it's similar to why I'm shaking my head at VW for their recent decision to go for volume by sacrificing on some measures of quality. No one seems to learn from history.

VW's problem was unique. projections were that only 5-10 carmakers would survive globally as superpowers. they knew that one or two of the US makers would stay on that list. They knew the Japanese with a long term quality history would likely be represented with Nissan and Toyota at a minimum. They knew Hyundai would be on there, and there will be Chinese to fear. In it's own country, VW can't compete on luxury or even quality within its own borders, while overbuilding in the sense that they cannot grab for higher prices on the world scale. If VW was to survive, it has to be as a volume automaker globally. Which means they by neccessity had to downgrade their product to keep their profits. If they kept building the higher price stuff, there is still no belief they could match the Japanese on reliability, so eventually they would lose to Japan on both price and quality.

So essentially VW by default has to dumb itself down some and become a commodity. VW has to be big to remain relevant globally, because they do not have the ability to survive as a smaller volume maker.

The Volkswagen Group includes several brands that are not sold in the US. If they truly felt they needed to have more of a presence in the US with more volume, they should have done it through a new entry-level brand and not by diluting the prestigious VW brand. Seat and Skoda are two that come to mind that would have been great for this purpose.

Anyway, didn't mean to derail the topic, but I wanted to clarify my response.

[Croc]

The brands that aren't chasing volume are the ones that charge six figures for every car they sell. At those prices they can afford to sell in small volumes. Everyone else needs some sort of "volume car" to keep the lights on for the niche stuff. Caddy's answer to that question is apparently the XTS (and the SRX). I'll agree that a car configured like the XTS would be a better fit over at Buick, slotted above the LaCrosse, but I have softened on it for a couple of reasons:

1) It's not Caddy's flagship, no matter how you define flagship - be it "most expensive vehicle", "biggest vehicle", or "best performing vehicle. The XTS is none of those. At worst, it's a Fritz car that will pave the way for a true rear drive flagship. I wouldn't be surprised if the EpII XTS is a one-and-done car, but don't quote me on that.

2) It actually appears like it's going to be a nice looking car. It's not like they grafted A&S cues on a generic design, a la the DTS. It's a ground-up A&S car. It won't look completely out of place in the Cadillac showroom.

Give the car a chance. If I were GM I wouldn't try pitting it against a 5, 7, E, or S, but I think they could steal more than a few Audi/VW/Volvo buyers with it.

Remember how excited we all were when we heard the DTS was dead? Except it really just got renamed. Unless we want GM shutting down Buick, they really need a laser-like focus on their (IMO excellent) two-prong strategy of attacking both ends of the premium/luxury market.

[SAmadei]

I just disagree that every car EVAR has to be rear wheel drive and that in order to be considered "premium" the car must be RWD based (how Audi gets away with it, I don't know)

I've never advocated that every car EVAR needs to be RWD. But lets have a few. GM has a cheap and expensive RWD sports cars. Lets have a cheap and expensive large RWD car... maybe even a coupe.

We don't know it's width yet and we know it's NOT going to be the flagship.

Its based on EpII, which is notorious for being narrow. If EpII can have infinite flexibility in width and length, why is there a Delta, Gamma, etc.

Engineering has limits. They put the subway trains on the edges of the Manhattan bridge... and, doh!, the bridge started to fail and had to be completely reengineered. Historically, making a big car out of a small platform is a disappointment.

Cadillac's flagship is the Escalade Hybrid... and that was the first time in a long time that it's largest vehicle is it's flagship. Prior to the Escalade H joining the lineup, the flagships have been the XLR(-V) STS(-V), or going back far enough, the Seville and Allante... both of which were dwarfed by the Deville and Fleetwood.

So, that just proves that Cadillac has been bass-ackwards for decades.

The Escalade is a joke as a flagship, IMHO, and makes Cadillac look like something tailored to country bumpkins. The big Merc has class and elegance that Cadillac used to have. Escalade is gaudy and crass, especially when rappers stick every piece of cheap chrome JC Whitney crap on it... but you know that money can't buy taste.

No car anywhere will satisfy everyone, but if you have gripes, at least make them legitimate.

So its not your idea of legit, so everyone else is wrong? We all look for different things in a new car.

Sorry, to me, its not legitimate to moan about 10% better sized seams or 10% better fabric when its got 25% less space than it should and is 100% Buick wannabe.

My money buys cars as well as yours... and it pains me that if I was buying right now, I'd have to take the big Merc "taxicab" over the XTS as it has so far been revealed to us.

The only position of leadership I care about is sales. Who cares who has the most HP and the most of anything if the car doesn't sell.

Then Cadillac should start selling Cruzes and Sonics.

Cadillacs historically sold in lesser numbers than Buick (2.5:1) and Chevy (10:1). They are supposed to be somewhat premium.

I agree that a done up Tahoe does not a flagship make. If anything is a flagship its the CTS-V. Not only is it bespoke, but, at least when it came out a couple years ago, it was the best in the segment. A true Standard of the World.

I agree... right now the CTS-V is the defacto flagship. Its my feeling that Cadillac should be putting effort to a larger version (as Big Ed has dictated), and give the XTS to Buick to replace the Lucerne... which saw its sales perk up last month.

Then This is the top Cadillac.

All your qualities mentioned above plus more and more expensive than 1.4 million dollars and can run at 90 mph even with all tires flat..

I'd love to see a civilian version of this.

2) It actually appears like it's going to be a nice looking car. It's not like they grafted A&S cues on a generic design, a la the DTS. It's a ground-up A&S car. It won't look completely out of place in the Cadillac showroom.

I'm starting to feel A&S is passe. I have a hard time telling new A&S Caddys from old A&S Caddys sometimes unless I really think about it.

[Potluck]

I don't think selling Seats or Skodas in the US would be that big a favor to the US or VW. It wouldn't help VW gain status and it would just dilute VW's marketing dollars.

[Drew Dowdell]

I just disagree that every car EVAR has to be rear wheel drive and that in order to be considered "premium" the car must be RWD based (how Audi gets away with it, I don't know)

I've never advocated that every car EVAR needs to be RWD. But lets have a few. GM has a cheap and expensive RWD sports cars. Lets have a cheap and expensive large RWD car... maybe even a coupe.

This was started way back in Fritz days. And it's timing is most important. The big RWD Caddy won't be ready for a few more years. In the meantime, Cadillac needs something to sell.

The STS is dead (though I think it could easily be refreshed) and the DTS has old hardware.

Cadillac CANNOT be just CTS, SRX, and Escalade.

Putting out the XTS does a few things:

1. It removes the STS and DTS from the lineup - this frees up room at LGR for more CTS production and at Hamtrammak for Volt production

2. The XTS can be built in Kansas City, Lake Orion, Oshawa, or Shanghai using excess capacity for the Lacrosse, Regal, or Malibu.

The RWD Caddy will get here. Just not yet.

[Croc]

The STS' problem was entirely due to a $h!ty interior and poor materials quality. Even the conservative, ho-hum design would have sold a lot more had the interior not been so subpar. Chinese SLS was what should have been sold in America--slightly longer, much better executive-style interior.

[Drew Dowdell]

Which is why I think it could have been refreshed rather than canned.

[z28luvr01]

The STS' problem was entirely due to a $h!ty interior and poor materials quality. Even the conservative, ho-hum design would have sold a lot more had the interior not been so subpar. Chinese SLS was what should have been sold in America--slightly longer, much better executive-style interior.

Yes

Now, there's hardly any size difference between the STS and CTS. Still I like the STS, warts and all, and would consider a CPO STS as they are excellent used car values.

[ZL-1]

Unless we want GM shutting down Buick, they really need a laser-like focus on their (IMO excellent) two-prong strategy of attacking both ends of the premium/luxury market.

Agreed on the two-prong strategy. But I have this odd idea that the brand that would get canned would be Cadillac and not Buick.

[hyperv6]

There is always going to be models we will think would be better off as one brand vs another. Even a case could be made for the new Chevy Sports Sedan as a Buick vs a Chevy. It is not going to be cheap and Chevy will already have a new Malibu sedan and soon after a Imapala sedan.

I really don't have an issue if one or the other has the sedan but a case could be made for either. I just don't want both to get one that is similar.

As the public goes in general I really don't see people worrying in the public sector if this car is a Cadillac or Buick. Even then lets just see what all we get in this car before we pass too much judgment. The final product may hold more than we know.

Also in the big picture how much do we really know on where GM is going. They speak little on future products and plans like they have just a few years ago. This car could just be filling space till their real future is ready. Odds are the roots of this car are still in and around the pre BK developments they rushed before they filed.

Either way GM has identified a market or they would not have built it.

Besides I would not see this car being shared with Opel and odds are it will do well in China as a Cadillac. Heck they may sell more XTS there than here.

The truth is there is more to this than we know or have expressed here.

At this point it is a Cadillac and that will not change. It would be wise to see what the finished product is and what Cadillac plans are then we can rip em for it if a proper reason is deemed.

Edited March 17, 2011 by hyperv6

[Drew Dowdell]

The Volt would have been better as a Buick also. First, the price. Second the content. Third the name Electra just screams out at you waving "I'M HERE! I'M HERE!"

But it wasn't.

From what I can see so far, this will make a very good Cadillac.

[Croc]

Unless we want GM shutting down Buick, they really need a laser-like focus on their (IMO excellent) two-prong strategy of attacking both ends of the premium/luxury market.

Agreed on the two-prong strategy. But I have this odd idea that the brand that would get canned would be Cadillac and not Buick.

That is an odd idea, and certainly one that has less than a trillionth of a percent chance of happening.

The Volt would have been better as a Buick also. First, the price. Second the content. Third the name Electra just screams out at you waving "I'M HERE! I'M HERE!"

But it wasn't.

From what I can see so far, this will make a very good Cadillac.

Agreed on Electra. Also, why "Volt"? I always thought "Lumina" would have been a much better wink-and-nod name.

[Lamar]

Agreed on Electra. Also, why "Volt"? I always thought "Lumina" would have been a much better wink-and-nod name.

At the risk of sounding like a science geek, I'm guessing because "lumina" is closer to the lumen, which has more to do with light and less to do with electricity.

[Croc]

Agreed on Electra. Also, why "Volt"? I always thought "Lumina" would have been a much better wink-and-nod name.

At the risk of sounding like a science geek, I'm guessing because "lumina" is closer to the lumen, which has more to do with light and less to do with electricity.

Honestly GM prolly just thought it had too much baggage. Whatever

[CSpec]

Agreed on Electra. Also, why "Volt"? I always thought "Lumina" would have been a much better wink-and-nod name.

At the risk of sounding like a science geek, I'm guessing because "lumina" is closer to the lumen, which has more to do with light and less to do with electricity.

Honestly GM prolly just thought it had too much baggage. Whatever

Yeah and Lutz was busily changing the names of cars he approved personally anyway. I don't see him calling GM's trailblazing new model the same as a meh 90s sedan.

[SAmadei]

This was started way back in Fritz days. And it's timing is most important. The big RWD Caddy won't be ready for a few more years. In the meantime, Cadillac needs something to sell.

The STS is dead (though I think it could easily be refreshed) and the DTS has old hardware.

Cadillac CANNOT be just CTS, SRX, and Escalade.

Well, this is all fine and well known. And I'm in agreement with the STS and the lineup left. As someone else mentioned, I would have liked to see a reskinned STS/SLS, without the quality problems.

Rebuilding a completely new car is time intensive and expensive. Building the XTS the sell, what? 80K over 5 years? GM didn't even want to put a Pontiac nose on the Commodore wagon or Ute and GM could have moved 40-60K a year. Sure, the XTS has better unit profit, but GM could have avoided dumping G8s on the market and kept its profit up, had they tried. GM is a company that STILL likes putting the big bets in the wrong places sometimes.

The RWD Caddy will get here. Just not yet.

The longer it takes, the longer the turn around. GM needs to get the foot back in this door before the window of opportunity slams shut.

[Justin Bimmer]

Unless we want GM shutting down Buick, they really need a laser-like focus on their (IMO excellent) two-prong strategy of attacking both ends of the premium/luxury market.

Agreed on the two-prong strategy. But I have this odd idea that the brand that would get canned would be Cadillac and not Buick.

It is funny you say this, because somebody I know who works in the industry would be in agreement with you. I don't know how right he is though.

[Drew Dowdell]

This was started way back in Fritz days. And it's timing is most important. The big RWD Caddy won't be ready for a few more years. In the meantime, Cadillac needs something to sell.

The STS is dead (though I think it could easily be refreshed) and the DTS has old hardware.

Cadillac CANNOT be just CTS, SRX, and Escalade.

Well, this is all fine and well known. And I'm in agreement with the STS and the lineup left. As someone else mentioned, I would have liked to see a reskinned STS/SLS, without the quality problems.

Rebuilding a completely new car is time intensive and expensive. Building the XTS the sell, what? 80K over 5 years? GM didn't even want to put a Pontiac nose on the Commodore wagon or Ute and GM could have moved 40-60K a year. Sure, the XTS has better unit profit, but GM could have avoided dumping G8s on the market and kept its profit up, had they tried. GM is a company that STILL likes putting the big bets in the wrong places sometimes.

The RWD Caddy will get here. Just not yet.

The longer it takes, the longer the turn around. GM needs to get the foot back in this door before the window of opportunity slams shut.

The RWD Caddy was championed by Whitaker less than 12 months ago..... come on now.

[ZL-1]

It is funny you say this, because somebody I know who works in the industry would be in agreement with you. I don't know how right he is though.

Me neither. My reasoning was how well Buick does in China (which is a growth market) versus Cadillac (which essentially remains a NA affair), and how Cadillac has to make up for less volume and a dedicated platform, and making up for those two things means higher transaction prices with higher margins.

That said, I think both brands will survive. A 3-brand strategy is not dumb, as long as in the future Cadillac remains distinctive enough.

Edited March 18, 2011 by ZL-1

[Paolino]

The STS' problem was entirely due to a $h!ty interior and poor materials quality. Even the conservative, ho-hum design would have sold a lot more had the interior not been so subpar. Chinese SLS was what should have been sold in America--slightly longer, much better executive-style interior.

This is true. I recall reading very favorable reviews about the handling/powertrain of the STS, but it just kept coming down to the interior that made people turn positives into negatives.

[SAmadei]

The RWD Caddy was championed by Whitaker less than 12 months ago..... come on now.

A decision 25 years too late.

Its apparent that GM was thinking of returning to large car RWD for some time, otherwise the Sixteen concept wouldn't have been developed... and the Seville-STS line would not have switched back to RWD.

However, its sad they can't pull the trigger. Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes and BMW, yet can't compete with Chrysler's 300C.

Blah blah blah... GM had no money, will be the same old retort. Right. No money to right the ship since 1985? Money to develop the XTS, a Cadillac rebadge of a LWB LaCrosse but not a Cadillac rebadge of the LWB Commodore.

[Drew Dowdell]

The RWD Caddy was championed by Whitaker less than 12 months ago..... come on now.

A decision 25 years too late.

Its apparent that GM was thinking of returning to large car RWD for some time, otherwise the Sixteen concept wouldn't have been developed... and the Seville-STS line would not have switched back to RWD.

However, its sad they can't pull the trigger. Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes and BMW, yet can't compete with Chrysler's 300C.

Blah blah blah... GM had no money, will be the same old retort. Right. No money to right the ship since 1985? Money to develop the XTS, a Cadillac rebadge of a LWB LaCrosse but not a Cadillac rebadge of the LWB Commodore.

15 years.

GM has still been struggling with it's bread and butter in that time. The Malibu only became class competitive in 2008, the Cruze in 2010, the Equinox in 2009, and the Impala still isn't. GM is just now selling cars that sell on their merits rather than on their rebates. The STS was a two-fer special using the hardware of the SRX and CTS to make a slightly larger than CTS sedan. It's not like GM dumped a bunch of money into the STS program relative to building one from scratch... and to be honest, it shows in the end result.

[smk4565]

The STS' problem was entirely due to a $h!ty interior and poor materials quality. Even the conservative, ho-hum design would have sold a lot more had the interior not been so subpar. Chinese SLS was what should have been sold in America--slightly longer, much better executive-style interior.

This is true. I recall reading very favorable reviews about the handling/powertrain of the STS, but it just kept coming down to the interior that made people turn positives into negatives.

I drove an STS V8, it was rather floaty and rolled about too much. The CTS or anything from the German trio handles better. The STS doesn't feel athletic when you drive it, there isn't a lot of fun factor to it. Plus the powertrain in it now lags what others have. The STS had potential, they just never put enough effort into the car, it was always an afterthought.

[smk4565]

A decision 25 years too late.

Its apparent that GM was thinking of returning to large car RWD for some time, otherwise the Sixteen concept wouldn't have been developed... and the Seville-STS line would not have switched back to RWD.

However, its sad they can't pull the trigger. Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes and BMW, yet can't compete with Chrysler's 300C.

Blah blah blah... GM had no money, will be the same old retort. Right. No money to right the ship since 1985? Money to develop the XTS, a Cadillac rebadge of a LWB LaCrosse but not a Cadillac rebadge of the LWB Commodore.

I would agree. In the 1980s the threat of the Germans was there, then with Lexus in 1990. Cadillac did the Cimmaron and Allante which were jokes. Then fumbled about for 10 years with big front drivers, before 2003 finally doing a rear drive CTS. They started to get serious about competing with the imports in 2003-2005, but they never committed enough to it, and then they just sort of let things stay stagnant, while the rest of the market improved. For 25 years Cadillac has lacked the guts to pull the trigger and really go for it, and they always resort back to trying to build a import clone of a Chevy or Buick platform and it fails.

And I agree, GM had plenty of money in the 1980s and management only cared about short term profit, and didn't care if they made crap and had no long term thinking. And then the 20 years of bad decisions that we all know about that led to bankruptcy. The XTS reminds me of "old GM" thinking and product planning. It's like the late 80s when the Deville and Fleetwood, Buick Electra/Park Ave and Olds 98 were on the same platform, but at least then the Cadillac had a V8 to make it a little different.

[Potluck]

Cadillac is doing ok in china also. It's not just Buickland.

[Drew Dowdell]

A decision 25 years too late.

Its apparent that GM was thinking of returning to large car RWD for some time, otherwise the Sixteen concept wouldn't have been developed... and the Seville-STS line would not have switched back to RWD.

However, its sad they can't pull the trigger. Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes and BMW, yet can't compete with Chrysler's 300C.

Blah blah blah... GM had no money, will be the same old retort. Right. No money to right the ship since 1985? Money to develop the XTS, a Cadillac rebadge of a LWB LaCrosse but not a Cadillac rebadge of the LWB Commodore.

I would agree. In the 1980s the threat of the Germans was there, then with Lexus in 1990. Cadillac did the Cimmaron and Allante which were jokes. Then fumbled about for 10 years with big front drivers, before 2003 finally doing a rear drive CTS. They started to get serious about competing with the imports in 2003-2005, but they never committed enough to it, and then they just sort of let things stay stagnant, while the rest of the market improved. For 25 years Cadillac has lacked the guts to pull the trigger and really go for it, and they always resort back to trying to build a import clone of a Chevy or Buick platform and it fails.

And I agree, GM had plenty of money in the 1980s and management only cared about short term profit, and didn't care if they made crap and had no long term thinking. And then the 20 years of bad decisions that we all know about that led to bankruptcy. The XTS reminds me of "old GM" thinking and product planning. It's like the late 80s when the Deville and Fleetwood, Buick Electra/Park Ave and Olds 98 were on the same platform, but at least then the Cadillac had a V8 to make it a little different.

There was never a year when Cadillac didn't have a RWD car. (The Catera picks up when the Fleetwood died, the 2003 CTS was early intro in 2002)

[Croc]

A decision 25 years too late.

Its apparent that GM was thinking of returning to large car RWD for some time, otherwise the Sixteen concept wouldn't have been developed... and the Seville-STS line would not have switched back to RWD.

However, its sad they can't pull the trigger. Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes and BMW, yet can't compete with Chrysler's 300C.

Blah blah blah... GM had no money, will be the same old retort. Right. No money to right the ship since 1985? Money to develop the XTS, a Cadillac rebadge of a LWB LaCrosse but not a Cadillac rebadge of the LWB Commodore.

I would agree. In the 1980s the threat of the Germans was there, then with Lexus in 1990. Cadillac did the Cimmaron and Allante which were jokes. Then fumbled about for 10 years with big front drivers, before 2003 finally doing a rear drive CTS. They started to get serious about competing with the imports in 2003-2005, but they never committed enough to it, and then they just sort of let things stay stagnant, while the rest of the market improved. For 25 years Cadillac has lacked the guts to pull the trigger and really go for it, and they always resort back to trying to build a import clone of a Chevy or Buick platform and it fails.

And I agree, GM had plenty of money in the 1980s and management only cared about short term profit, and didn't care if they made crap and had no long term thinking. And then the 20 years of bad decisions that we all know about that led to bankruptcy. The XTS reminds me of "old GM" thinking and product planning. It's like the late 80s when the Deville and Fleetwood, Buick Electra/Park Ave and Olds 98 were on the same platform, but at least then the Cadillac had a V8 to make it a little different.

The Allante wasn't a joke--I would seriously own one if the opportunity ever arose, except no one ever wants to part with theirs.

[Drew Dowdell]

resale is still ridiculous on them, especially the northstar powered ones

[Croc]

A decision 25 years too late.

Its apparent that GM was thinking of returning to large car RWD for some time, otherwise the Sixteen concept wouldn't have been developed... and the Seville-STS line would not have switched back to RWD.

However, its sad they can't pull the trigger. Cadillac wants to compete with Mercedes and BMW, yet can't compete with Chrysler's 300C.

Blah blah blah... GM had no money, will be the same old retort. Right. No money to right the ship since 1985? Money to develop the XTS, a Cadillac rebadge of a LWB LaCrosse but not a Cadillac rebadge of the LWB Commodore.

I would agree. In the 1980s the threat of the Germans was there, then with Lexus in 1990. Cadillac did the Cimmaron and Allante which were jokes. Then fumbled about for 10 years with big front drivers, before 2003 finally doing a rear drive CTS. They started to get serious about competing with the imports in 2003-2005, but they never committed enough to it, and then they just sort of let things stay stagnant, while the rest of the market improved. For 25 years Cadillac has lacked the guts to pull the trigger and really go for it, and they always resort back to trying to build a import clone of a Chevy or Buick platform and it fails.

And I agree, GM had plenty of money in the 1980s and management only cared about short term profit, and didn't care if they made crap and had no long term thinking. And then the 20 years of bad decisions that we all know about that led to bankruptcy. The XTS reminds me of "old GM" thinking and product planning. It's like the late 80s when the Deville and Fleetwood, Buick Electra/Park Ave and Olds 98 were on the same platform, but at least then the Cadillac had a V8 to make it a little different.

There was never a year when Cadillac didn't have a RWD car. (The Catera picks up when the Fleetwood died, the 2003 CTS was early intro in 2002)

Please. The Fleetwood was the Grand Marquis of GM--ancient platform that went on and on and on. At least it got some updates, but really--it actually came with less content than the Roadmaster in some cases, namely the climate controls.

Until the CTS, Cadillac never tried to build a serious car that could drive. It was stuck in the 70s with their vinyl tops, fender skirts and whitewall tires. The Catera wasn't even a real Cadillac, and it certainly did not have the build quality befitting the wreath and crest, either. I like the refreshed Cateras, but that doesn't make them Cadillacs.

[Croc]

resale is still ridiculous on them, especially the northstar powered ones

True story. I don't care if there may be a phantom horn, I want a 1993 Allante.

[vonVeezelsnider]

resale is still ridiculous on them, especially the northstar powered ones

True facts, probably the Ford Thunderbird roadster of the day in terms of residuals.

[SAmadei]

The Allante wasn't a joke--I would seriously own one if the opportunity ever arose, except no one ever wants to part with theirs.

If it wasn't a joke, it was an unmitigated disaster.

Allante slammed the door on the Cadillac-only buying habits of two families I knew of. In one case, my friend had a new Caddy nearly every year in the '80s... had 3 Allantes in quick succession, each was a huge lemon... spending more time in the shop than in his driveway. Finally, on some icy roads, he blamed the car for spinning around while going around a curve. It was nearly totaled, but unfortunately, the insurance rebuilt it. He promptly got rid of it as it REALLY drove wrong. Sold it and got a SL500, and a few Jags (that also fell apart)... but no more Cadillacs.

[Croc]

Well if they're just so awful, why are they so prized by their owners and why are they so hard to come by and why do they have most excellent resale values? Sorry your friend didn't like his, but honestly it's the car's fault for spinning on icy roads? As you mentioned, his Jags fell apart. The 80s weren't kind to cars because all those new electronics had a lot of bugs to work out, but the Allante's biggest issue was a squirrely electric system known for randomly sounding the horn on its own.

[hyperv6]

resale is still ridiculous on them, especially the northstar powered ones

They must have gone up as I looked at a few in this area and they really were not all that expensive a couple years ago. The only ones with any value were the low mileage Northstars and even they were resonable. Compared to a Cadillac sedan from the same era they have held value but...

I just looked in my area and I find them dor $4K-$12K. Not a whole lot better than a low mileage 88 Fiero GT. At those prices I think an Italian bodied Cadillac is a lot of car for the money. Kind of like how the Lincoln Mark II has been treated. A Rare and special car but little value vs original cost.

I even see Reatta's at a good price but the dash issues are a pain to deal with since parts are scarce. I still love the drop tops. I even saw one here that someone put a

3800 SC in it.

[smk4565]

Catera was never competitive. Another rebadge to take the easy way out and try to make a quick buck. The Allante was front drive and priced against rear drive Jag XJS, Mercedes SL, BMW 8-series, Porsche 911. The Allante never made much impact, the Pininfarina body looked good, but there were quality issues and a lot of people probably forgot that car even existed.

Cimmarron, Allante and Catera were all one and done cars. Much like the XLR, Sigma STS, and I think the XTS will be the same. It is poor product planning and brand management. If they got it right to begin with, they could make the car for 40 years, like the 5-series or E-class.

Edited March 21, 2011 by smk4565

[SAmadei]

Well if they're just so awful, why are they so prized by their owners and why are they so hard to come by and why do they have most excellent resale values? Sorry your friend didn't like his, but honestly it's the car's fault for spinning on icy roads? As you mentioned, his Jags fell apart. The 80s weren't kind to cars because all those new electronics had a lot of bugs to work out, but the Allante's biggest issue was a squirrely electric system known for randomly sounding the horn on its own.

People collect Yugos, too... it don't mean they were great cars.

I had TWO friends who had problems with them. I met the one who went through 3 of them shortly after he was rid of them. He never did anything to damage the Jags and his cars owned since have been pretty solid. I've driven with him enough to know he able to drive on some ice. He felt that the car reacted poorly... drove around a curve he'd driven a hundred times, he claimed under the speed limit... car in front jumped on the brake, he jumped off the gas and the rear came around, and the guardrail across the road tried to rip the rear suspension out of the car.

As far as electronics in '80s cars go, I'm fully versed in that... But none of my '80s cars have been all that awful. The Allantes suffered from other quality control problems and drivetrain issues in addition to electrical issues, according to my friend... but I hardly remember exactly what it was, as it was 15 years ago when we discussed it. He wanted to like the cars, but they were just too flawed.

But don't let the Allante being another black eye to Cadillac stop you from finding a survivor. Steer away from any red '93s from NJ with mismatched paint on the rear quarters.

[Z-06]

Back to XTS, like the car, GM's strategy has been ambiguous. The car is good, but why spend the efforts - when it would have been an ideal Buick flagship.

Caddy does need volume no doubt, and possibly this car is a temporary effort to give a temporary push in volume to get enough money for further R&D.

[z28luvr01]

Back to XTS, like the car, GM's strategy has been ambiguous. The car is good, but why spend the efforts - when it would have been an ideal Buick flagship.

I think we have to remember that this is a Fritz car. There were plans for a Zeta Caddy flagship (remember DT7??) that GM abruptly cancelled "due to CAFE", along with the Zeta Buick and the Zeta Impala.

Caddy does need volume no doubt, and possibly this car is a temporary effort to give a temporary push in volume to get enough money for further R&D.

That's probably the case. This could either be the vehicle that keeps the lights on at Cadillac and pays for the ATS, CTS, et al. Or it could be the car that keeps the seat warm until a legitimate large RWD Caddy is ready.

[balthazar]

All this Buick><Cadillac back-n-forth is based solely on FWD><RWD, when 70% of BMW 1-series owners bought thinking the car was FWD.

Its not that important, it really sails over the heads of the VAST majority of consumers out there.

The car is a Cadillac in every sense of the language, and as a continuance of the DTS segment, it should serve the Division well.

[Z-06]

Back to XTS, like the car, GM's strategy has been ambiguous. The car is good, but why spend the efforts - when it would have been an ideal Buick flagship.

I think we have to remember that this is a Fritz car. There were plans for a Zeta Caddy flagship (remember DT7??) that GM abruptly cancelled "due to CAFE", along with the Zeta Buick and the Zeta Impala.

Caddy does need volume no doubt, and possibly this car is a temporary effort to give a temporary push in volume to get enough money for further R&D.

That's probably the case. This could either be the vehicle that keeps the lights on at Cadillac and pays for the ATS, CTS, et al. Or it could be the car that keeps the seat warm until a legitimate large RWD Caddy is ready.

True it is a Fritz car, but GM saw a case to make money out of it, seeing a market there. In its hey days the DTS sold in large volumes to the blue haired customers with virtually no competition, these people do not want a Buick and hence the car. I think in someways GM is listening and giving its customers what they want. And not everyone wants a back crushing suspension or need for RWD. Like SRX the car can have a place so as long there is a true S-Classe, 7er crushing flagship.

[Intrepidation]

All this Buick><Cadillac back-n-forth is based solely on FWD><RWD, when 70% of BMW 1-series owners bought thinking the car was FWD.

Its not that important, it really sails over the heads of the VAST majority of consumers out there.

The car is a Cadillac in every sense of the language, and as a continuance of the DTS segment, it should serve the Division well.

Hush with your logic!

[Croc]

The CTS is the volume Cadillac. ATS will take that over when it arrives. If CTS weren't selling in sufficient volume, the business case for coupe and wagon variants couldn't have been made. The DTS is just a fleet queen and a staple of the nursing home circuit. Except guess what? Aging baby boomers are buying Toyota Avalons and Lexuses, not big boaty Cadillacs. Octogenarians don't buy new cars--they keep what they have until they die or their keys get taken away.

[Justin Bimmer]

The CTS is the volume Cadillac. ATS will take that over when it arrives. If CTS weren't selling in sufficient volume, the business case for coupe and wagon variants couldn't have been made. The DTS is just a fleet queen and a staple of the nursing home circuit. Except guess what? Aging baby boomers are buying Toyota Avalons and Lexuses, not big boaty Cadillacs. Octogenarians don't buy new cars--they keep what they have until they die or their keys get taken away.

So lets give the aging baby boomers a car that can compete with the Avalon and Lexus.

[Drew Dowdell]

The CTS is the volume Cadillac. ATS will take that over when it arrives. If CTS weren't selling in sufficient volume, the business case for coupe and wagon variants couldn't have been made. The DTS is just a fleet queen and a staple of the nursing home circuit. Except guess what? Aging baby boomers are buying Toyota Avalons and Lexuses, not big boaty Cadillacs. Octogenarians don't buy new cars--they keep what they have until they die or their keys get taken away.

So lets give the aging baby boomers a car that can blow away the Avalon and Lexus.

Fixed.... and I don't mean in acceleration specifically.

[balthazar]

Croc ~ >>"The CTS is the volume Cadillac. ATS will take that over when it arrives."<<

Probably, but I don't think the CTS will see a corresponding drop, necessarily.

>>"If CTS weren't selling in sufficient volume, the business case for coupe and wagon variants couldn't have been made."<<

It's still unknown what the exact wagon/coupe volumes are, and if they are breaking even or not. It's an assumption that the sedan is covering the other 2 models in ROI. Elsewhere on the 'net, there are those who are adamant that the current CTS won't break even until 2013 IIRC.

>>"The DTS is just a fleet queen and a staple of the nursing home circuit. Except guess what? Aging baby boomers are buying Toyota Avalons and Lexuses, not big boaty Cadillacs."<<

This can easily change, and has a good possibility of doing so based on what we've seen to date. Boaty avalons & boaty lexus's were the waning flavor of the prior year- both heavily tarnished by abysmal quality since. I don't see Brembos & TTs in those geezermobiles. Time will tell.

>>"Octogenarians don't buy new cars--they keep what they have until they die or their keys get taken away."<<

Nice gross generalization; what's some of your favorite ones about early 20-yr olds?

My grandfather bought a new CTS when he was 90, BTW. And every time I take notice of a upper-tier mercedees in traffic, the driver is easily 65.

Just noted a newer c- or e- convert an hour ago- the woman looked every bit of 80- bone-white perm, heavily-creased face, giant sunglasses, etc.

[Croc]

The CTS is the volume Cadillac. ATS will take that over when it arrives. If CTS weren't selling in sufficient volume, the business case for coupe and wagon variants couldn't have been made. The DTS is just a fleet queen and a staple of the nursing home circuit. Except guess what? Aging baby boomers are buying Toyota Avalons and Lexuses, not big boaty Cadillacs. Octogenarians don't buy new cars--they keep what they have until they die or their keys get taken away.

So lets give the aging baby boomers a car that can compete with the Avalon and Lexus.

Because that's Buick's job. GM has made it clear in their recent press releases that they want Cadillac to go after Mercedes and BMW, and Buick to go after the softer lux brands, like Lexus and Jaguar. Their product is muddled and way out of sync with their PR, but frankly I think the PR and intent is on point and in the right direction. Now it's about product.

Just because someone may want a big cruiser does NOT mean they are entitled to a Cadillac badge on the hood. If they want to throw a fit and take their ball over to Mercedes, go for it. Then MB will start to get a geezer reputation.

Anyway, it's a moot point. The Boomers swore off GM because of the 70s and 80s. GM could make a car that could cure cancer and they still will buy the Toyota instead. That's why you don't &#036;h&#33; on your customers--you alienate them for life.

Finally, younger buyers (by that I mean under 50) are far more brand agnostic than their parents. Hence, that's why GM should focus on pandering to that market--it's a growth demographic, not a dying one. I am still blown away by how many Regals and LaCrosses I see around LA. Even started seeing a few Cruzes. Good signs.

Never see a DTS, but CTS and SRX are common enough sights.

Edited March 22, 2011 by Croc

[smk4565]

The CTS is the volume Cadillac. ATS will take that over when it arrives. If CTS weren't selling in sufficient volume, the business case for coupe and wagon variants couldn't have been made. The DTS is just a fleet queen and a staple of the nursing home circuit. Except guess what? Aging baby boomers are buying Toyota Avalons and Lexuses, not big boaty Cadillacs. Octogenarians don't buy new cars--they keep what they have until they die or their keys get taken away.

So lets give the aging baby boomers a car that can compete with the Avalon and Lexus.

Buick Lacrosse is supposed to compete with them, GM has that car. But most baby boomers won't buy American or especially not a Buick, because Buick is what their parents drove. And Toyota/Lexus before the safety issues of last year had the reputation of driving 250,000 miles without ever needing maintenance and the baby boomers love that because the Chevy they had in 1980 fell apart in 4 years and they swore they'd never go back.

[balthazar]

250,000 miles without an oil change or a wiper blade??

How is ANY other car brand still in bidnit ?