Cadillac died!

[Hudson]

Am I the only one who noticed that Cadillac died in May? The DTS was the final REAL Cadillac...and its gone! Here's the full obituary:

http://automotivetraveler.com/jump/3161

Your thoughts?

[SAmadei]

You're not the only one to notice the death of the DTS... or to comment on the loss of the Northstar.

For me, Cadillac is dead because the only Cadillac car left is the diminutive CTS. Who would have ever thought Cadillac's largest car would be smaller than a Chevy Malibu... or a '79 Chevy Nova.

Yes, yes, I know a Buick-quality replacement is coming in the form of the XTS. It'll take another decade before a true flagship comes out... lovely.

Of course, its still all moot for me. GM died in the bankruptcy when they came back minus one particular marque.

[ocnblu]

Nope, you're not the only one that noticed, Mr. Hudson. We had a thread here lamenting it a few weeks back. Some Italian dude bought the last one off the line.

[hyperv6]

The one my inlaws DTS was a quality nightmare and they were very lucky to get the extended warranty. This car even though they like it has left them with a less than good feeling about a new Cadillac.

I was never a fan of this car as it is just not my kind of car but that is just my deal. I am willing to see what we really get with the XTS no one here really knows enough about it yet to really condem it yet. For the most the DTS shared with Buick too and few here complained about that.

Cadillac is far from done yet so lets just see what else they bring to market. Right now they are building from the ground up and the higher volume cars are getting the first work.I would not be suprised to see a larger RWD sedan in the future.

It is a shame the Northstar did not get the upgrades over time and could have become the engine it could have been for this segment. It was not a bad engine but GM just could not grow it as they had wished and killed the second gen due to the lack of funds.

[Hudson]

Nope, you're not the only one that noticed, Mr. Hudson. We had a thread here lamenting it a few weeks back. Some Italian dude bought the last one off the line.

I read that thread...and that's not the point. The loss of the DTS and/or the Northstar aren't as important as the lost of REAL Cadillac engines. "Some Italian dude" (really? This is how you describe Bulgari?) bought the last DTS, but that car was powered by the LAST CADILLAC ENGINE! All of the 2012 models have engines that can be purchased to power a Chevrolet or a Buick or an Opel with nothing exclusive to Cadillac.

[Robert Hall]

Meh.

[Justin Bimmer]

The 3.6 started out in Cadillacs. Engines are becoming accessories.

[frogger]

The DTS I drove a few months ago was not close to what a flagship should be IMO. It did not feel premium vs a typical 35K-40K car.. Just large.

[smk4565]

For me, Cadillac is dead because the only Cadillac car left is the diminutive CTS. Who would have ever thought Cadillac's largest car would be smaller than a Chevy Malibu... or a '79 Chevy Nova.

Cadillac's only car. 10-20 years of poor product planning, quick fixes, and stop gaps has left Cadillac with the CTS and a pair of SUVs, one that is a chromed up Chevy and another that seems awfully close.

What Cadillac was in the large car era of the late 50's to early 80's, slowly died during the 80s and 90s, but the big floaty sedan market in general died. The past image of Cadillac is dead, I think they realized this in 2002 when they did the renaissance with Sigma. However, the execution wasn't good enough and Cadillac needs to reinvent itself again if it plans to survive.

[Intrepidation]

The CTS, the only real Cadillac to me, is alive and well.

[FAPTurbo]

The CTS, the only real Cadillac to me, is alive and well.

Unlike the target audience of the DTS! HEY OOH!!!

[SAmadei]

Hope you like that CTS in White, Black, Silver or Red. That's all the luxury you get in color choice.

The CTS-V is probably quite the fun car, if you have roads nearby where you can wring the 556hp out of it. But once you get past that, the normal CTS is like a 300hp RWD G6/Regal... cramped with no trunk... and in my case, it takes 5 minutes of careful folding to get inside. Not very Cadillac-like, to me, unless I utter that Cadillac name put on a certain J-body platform. Honestly, I don't even think I care for the styling anymore on the sedan. The Coupe and Wagon are still interesting, but waning... GF thinks the coupe is the ugliest thing she's ever seen.

In the end, the only part of the CTS I'm interested in is the LSA drivetrain... maybe transferred into a clean 1980's G-body coupe, with Hotchkiss suspension upgrades. Or better yet, transferred into a clean Coupe De Ville... in place of the 8-6-4 disaster. '82 Coupe De Ville is 3784 pounds, vs. 4250 for the CTS-V... tenth a second for every 100 pounds lost... thats a '82 Coupe De Ville a half second faster in the quarter than the CTS-V.

[Hudson]

The 3.6 started out in Cadillacs. Engines are becoming accessories.

The 3.6L V6 is a "High Feature" engine and, as such, has always been a GM engine, designed for all brands. The Northstar engine was an ARCHITECTURE designed for Cadillac...as was the HT-series and the V8s before them. "Engines are becoming accessories" is the problem here. BMW has inline sixes that are exclusive to BMWs. Mercedes-Benz engines are not found in any other significant vehicles (niche exotics don't really count...or enhance the exclusive quality of the engines).

Cadillac engines were desired. Cadillac engines powered hotrods ("Studelac") and sports cars (Allard). Today, the same basic architecture found in the CTS powers the Chevrolet Malibu.

[Robert Hall]

Cadillac engines were desired. Cadillac engines powered hotrods ("Studelac") and sports cars (Allard).

Note the past tense...that world is long gone.

[Robert Hall]

The CTS-V is probably quite the fun car, if you have roads nearby where you can wring the 556hp out of it. But once you get past that, the normal CTS is like a 300hp RWD G6/Regal... cramped with no trunk... and in my case, it takes 5 minutes of careful folding to get inside.

Hmmm...I'm 6'0, 240lbs, found the CTS easy to get in and out of...what are you, 6'8" and 500lbs? (j/k)....

'82 Coupe De Ville is 3784 pounds, ....

Huh?? An '82 de Ville is more like 4500-4800 pounds, isn't it? That's a huge car...

Edited June 15, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[67impss]

The CTS-V is probably quite the fun car, if you have roads nearby where you can wring the 556hp out of it. But once you get past that, the normal CTS is like a 300hp RWD G6/Regal... cramped with no trunk... and in my case, it takes 5 minutes of careful folding to get inside.

Hmmm...I'm 6'0, 240lbs, found the CTS easy to get in and out of...what are you, 6'8" and 500lbs? (j/k)....

'82 Coupe De Ville is 3784 pounds, ....

Huh?? An '82 de Ville is more like 4500-4800 pounds, isn't it? That's a huge car...

All ya wanted to know and then some Spec's

[balthazar]

Comparing cross decades : size has little correspondence to weight. mercedees makes a 4500lb 2-seat roadster.

[Robert Hall]

Comparing cross decades : size has little correspondence to weight. Mercedes makes a 4500lb 2-seat roadster.

Maybe...it's still odd to think a modern midsize unibody would be heavier than an older BOF fullsize, even a downsized one..

I suppose it's just that today's cars are more 'densely packed' with heavy content and safety features...

(though I do like the idea of an LSA drivetrain in an '80s CDV...I like those old boats)

Edited June 15, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[SAmadei]

The CTS-V is probably quite the fun car, if you have roads nearby where you can wring the 556hp out of it. But once you get past that, the normal CTS is like a 300hp RWD G6/Regal... cramped with no trunk... and in my case, it takes 5 minutes of careful folding to get inside.

Hmmm...I'm 6'0, 240lbs, found the CTS easy to get in and out of...what are you, 6'8" and 500lbs? (j/k)....

We've been over this before. I'm 6'4" and 400lbs... however, I'm all torso. If my legs were in a normal ratio with my torso, I'd be about 6'8"~9".

When I sit in a larger car like the 2004 Grand Prix, I need to put the seat all the way back, all the way down and then tilted back, so when seated, I can usually look out the rear window. Climbing out of that hole while getting my head to clear the roofline is a real PITA. At NYAIS a few years back, the Cadillac folks asked me not to try out the CTS, instead urging me to only play with the STS and DTS. The STS was still kinda small.

'82 Coupe De Ville is 3784 pounds, ....

Huh?? An '82 de Ville is more like 4500-4800 pounds, isn't it? That's a huge car...

All ya wanted to know and then some Spec's

Your specs are listing the 4100 as a V-6.

I fat fingered the 3784, its actually 3783 in the Standard Catalog listed for '82 only. Other similar years ('80-'81/'83-'84) are about 3900. I suspect the '82s got some of the early '80s short lived aluminum parts.

An '82 is mostly full of open space... just like I like my big cars.

[Robert Hall]

'82 Coupe De Ville is 3784 pounds, ....

Huh?? An '82 de Ville is more like 4500-4800 pounds, isn't it? That's a huge car...

All ya wanted to know and then some Spec's

Your specs are listing the 4100 as a V-6.

There was a Buick 4.1 V6 offered in the De Ville from '80-82..extending out to '92 when the '80 body went out of production, they used a wide array of engines--the Buick V6, Cadillac 368 and 4100 (V8-6-4 and regular), the Olds diesel and 307, and Chevy 305 and 5.7..

Edited June 15, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[SAmadei]

There was a Buick 4.1 V6 offered the De Ville from '80-82..the 4.1 V8 was '82-84...

Ah, oddly that is an "optional" engine, hence I didn't see it. Optional, with a $165 credit. LOL.

Still, the V8 weight in '82 is 3783, the V6 column had all dashes, hence the reason I thought it had gone away in '82. Not seeing the 4.1 V-6 in '80.

[Robert Hall]

There was a Buick 4.1 V6 offered the De Ville from '80-82..the 4.1 V8 was '82-84...

Ah, oddly that is an "optional" engine, hence I didn't see it. Optional, with a $165 credit. LOL.

Still, the V8 weight in '82 is 3783, the V6 column had all dashes, hence the reason I thought it had gone away in '82. Not seeing the 4.1 V-6 in '80.

If one can believe Wikipedia, it was a late '80 option...I vaguely remember ads for the V6 version back in day..the early eighties were a strange time, Ford and GM putting tiny V8s and more V6s in their big cars, Chrysler going to all-FWD, all-ugly...

Anyhoo, back on topic..the DTS was a decent enough car, but was pretty dated and in need of replacement...unfortunately, the replacement is a smaller FWD model. Not really progress, IMO..

Edited June 15, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[jock82]

Nope, you're not the only one that noticed, Mr. Hudson. We had a thread here lamenting it a few weeks back. Some Italian dude bought the last one off the line.

I read that thread...and that's not the point. The loss of the DTS and/or the Northstar aren't as important as the lost of REAL Cadillac engines. "Some Italian dude" (really? This is how you describe Bulgari?) bought the last DTS, but that car was powered by the LAST CADILLAC ENGINE! All of the 2012 models have engines that can be purchased to power a Chevrolet or a Buick or an Opel with nothing exclusive to Cadillac.

That is my complaint, also, I don't want a Cadillac with a Chevrolet or Buick engine, I rented a CTS and drove it on a 1,000 mile trip, and believe that was the most uncomfortable auto trip I have ever been on. That POS is far from being a Cadillac.

[ZL-1]

I'm dying here over this supposed Cadillac death...

[Robert Hall]

MY 2012 is going to be wierd for Cadillac, though...only 1 car (albeit w/ 3 body styles)...but MY 2013 brings the ATS and XTS..

Edited June 16, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[riviera74]

The Cadillac that used to exist (pre 1985) is over. Time for all of us to deal with that. Cadillac-exclusive engines have either disappeared or have essentially tricked down the line to other GM vehicles. Most of the innovations in cars now lie elsewhere, so Caddy needs to adapt. Ideally Caddy can be a RWD car marque and leave the FWD stuff for Buick. The notion that Cadillac died because the Northstar is no more and the Ultra V8 got canceled is hilarious on its face. As for BMW or Mercedes, they have no downmarket equivalents so that idea is fallacious. VW/Audi, Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura, and especially Ford/Lincoln all share engines to lower costs and maximize efficiencies.

If the OP thinks that Caddy is bad off, try Lincoln. Lincoln has had nothing truly unique for itself in almost 30 years.

[CSpec]

The CTS, the only real Cadillac to me, is alive and well.

Unlike the target audience of the DTS! HEY OOH!!!

well played

[Croc]

There was a Buick 4.1 V6 offered the De Ville from '80-82..the 4.1 V8 was '82-84...

Ah, oddly that is an "optional" engine, hence I didn't see it. Optional, with a $165 credit. LOL.

Still, the V8 weight in '82 is 3783, the V6 column had all dashes, hence the reason I thought it had gone away in '82. Not seeing the 4.1 V-6 in '80.

It was offered late in the 1980 model year. My family owns one--wonderful car. If you have the Standard Catalog of Cadillac, make sure you have the 2nd edition or later as the late-1980MY addition of the 4.1 is omitted in the first edition.

[SAmadei]

It was offered late in the 1980 model year. My family owns one--wonderful car. If you have the Standard Catalog of Cadillac, make sure you have the 2nd edition or later as the late-1980MY addition of the 4.1 is omitted in the first edition.

3rd edition. Must need a fourth.

[Z-06]

The 3.6 started out in Cadillacs. Engines are becoming accessories.

The 3.6L V6 is a "High Feature" engine and, as such, has always been a GM engine, designed for all brands. The Northstar engine was an ARCHITECTURE designed for Cadillac...as was the HT-series and the V8s before them. "Engines are becoming accessories" is the problem here. BMW has inline sixes that are exclusive to BMWs. Mercedes-Benz engines are not found in any other significant vehicles (niche exotics don't really count...or enhance the exclusive quality of the engines).

Cadillac engines were desired. Cadillac engines powered hotrods ("Studelac") and sports cars (Allard). Today, the same basic architecture found in the CTS powers the Chevrolet Malibu.

Not anymore Hudson. Peugeot-Citroen and BMW have PRINCE engine architecture. MB and Nissan-Renault are jointly developing engines. I strongly maintain that both those luxury manufacturers are on life support for survival as independent luxury manufacturers or close to it unlike the perception they are giving out. Audi is already VW's dollar hooker on a penny night. Lexus and Acura - let us not go there.

I guess Cadillac is ahead of the game when it comes to cost sharing compared to BMW and MB.

[Croc]

It was offered late in the 1980 model year. My family owns one--wonderful car. If you have the Standard Catalog of Cadillac, make sure you have the 2nd edition or later as the late-1980MY addition of the 4.1 is omitted in the first edition.

3rd edition. Must need a fourth.

Really. I don't have mine with me and can't imagine they removed it when making the 3rd edition, but it's either in the opening paragraph on the model year or specifically mentioned in the DeVille section, I think the latter. Either way, it was available late in the model year.

[balthazar]

SC series books are fraught with errors. My copies are peppered with penned corrections (by me). Really poor proofreading. Just saying.

Edited June 16, 2011 by balthazar

[thedriver]

As far as I have been concerned, there have been no "traditional" Cadillacs since the Fleetwood ended in 1996. I know there have been big cars, small cars, front drive, rear drive, and everything in between, but to most people that car represented what Cadillac was. Large, powerful, comfortable, something to be noticed. There have been nothing like it since, closest was probably the Sixteen concept car. GM has been trying to turn Cadillac into variously BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus lately, but it just isn't the same.

[Croc]

Large, powerful, comfortable, something to be noticed. There have been nothing like it since.

Interesting...so which of those adjectives don't fit the CTS? It's certainly styled to be noticed, my experience in them has always been extremely comfortable, their engines are pretty powerful, and they are on the large side of their class (by price).

Honestly, GM would have kept producing luxobarges if the market existed...the company really didn't abandon a large and profitable customer base by any stretch...consumer preferences changed and buyers abandoned that market segment.

[Intrepidation]

Why the CTS is a real Cadillac:

It's RWD

It platform isn't shared with any other brand

It's offered in multiple body styles.

In V form it's the Standard of the World

All things the DTS never was. It was it is, which is whatever if it tickles your fancy. However, it was hardly the defining vehicle of the brand. Cadillac dies if the CTS goes Epsilon or something and the ATS ends up being based on Delta II. Until then it's alive to me.

[Croc]

Why the CTS is a real Cadillac:

It's RWD

It platform isn't shared with any other brand

It's offered in multiple body styles.

In V form it's the Standard of the World

All things the DTS never was. It was it is, which is whatever if it tickles your fancy. However, it was hardly the defining vehicle of the brand. Cadillac dies if the CTS goes Epsilon or something and the ATS ends up being based on Delta II. Until then it's alive to me.

Yup.

[riviera74]

Why the CTS is a real Cadillac:

It's RWD

It platform isn't shared with any other brand

It's offered in multiple body styles.

In V form it's the Standard of the World

All things the DTS never was. It was it is, which is whatever if it tickles your fancy. However, it was hardly the defining vehicle of the brand. Cadillac dies if the CTS goes Epsilon or something and the ATS ends up being based on Delta II. Until then it's alive to me.

And the next step would be to develop a real flagship for Cadillac, something that is meant to crush the 750i and S430 and the XJ.

[daves87rs]

I'm dying here over this supposed Cadillac death...

Me too. You guys simply cannot be serious. Tastes change, and you cannot build a car to keep everyone happy anymore.....that idea died a few decades ago.......

The Northstar? No thanks, as it was quite often a nightmare engine anyways.....don't miss the 80s or 90s (even 00s) there...

While I kinda liked the DTS, they simply haven't done the car right in nearly a decade.....and since 2006, nothing more than a rental queen......the car simply needed more.

I might feel bad if it actually went out with a bigger bang than it did.......

[daves87rs]

Why the CTS is a real Cadillac:

It's RWD

It platform isn't shared with any other brand

It's offered in multiple body styles.

In V form it's the Standard of the World

All things the DTS never was. It was it is, which is whatever if it tickles your fancy. However, it was hardly the defining vehicle of the brand. Cadillac dies if the CTS goes Epsilon or something and the ATS ends up being based on Delta II. Until then it's alive to me.

Bingo.

[SAmadei]

Large, powerful, comfortable, something to be noticed. There have been nothing like it since.

Interesting...so which of those adjectives don't fit the CTS? It's certainly styled to be noticed, my experience in them has always been extremely comfortable, their engines are pretty powerful, and they are on the large side of their class (by price).

The CTS is not large, and reviews from people I know feel it is not particularly comfortable. Surprisingly, NONE of the ex-Cadillac owners I know own a CTS. They all own Mercedes now.

The CTS is fine (IMHO) as a 3 series competitor, but it is not where Cadillac's breadwinner should be.

Honestly, GM would have kept producing luxobarges if the market existed...the company really didn't abandon a large and profitable customer base by any stretch...consumer preferences changed and buyers abandoned that market segment.

The luxobarge market dried up because the "big three" didn't change them with the times, giving people the wrong ideas about how a modern luxobarge could be. GM has spend the last 30 years, over a generation and a half, building first underpowered luxobarges, them converting all of them to FWD and the whole time, virtually none of them (by production numbers) where given decent handling to keep up with the sportier contemporary smaller sedans.

People still want large vehicles... they were willing to move to truck platforms so they could have powerful engines, RWD and less floaty suspension. Now, with fuel prices up, where do these buyers go, since the large sedan market has been destroyed.

[Hudson]

Not anymore Hudson. Peugeot-Citroen and BMW have PRINCE engine architecture. MB and Nissan-Renault are jointly developing engines. I strongly maintain that both those luxury manufacturers are on life support for survival as independent luxury manufacturers or close to it unlike the perception they are giving out. Audi is already VW's dollar hooker on a penny night. Lexus and Acura - let us not go there.

I guess Cadillac is ahead of the game when it comes to cost sharing compared to BMW and MB.

BMW and Mercedes-Benz have architectures that are not shared. Cadillac does not.

I'm not saying that the CTS (2nd gen) is a bad car, because it's not. As an automotive historian and enthusiast, I believe that Cadillac needs a dedicated engine architecture. From the business analyst side, I understand the need to share...but Cadillac needs some exclusivity to compete with the world's top tier of luxury brands (and Sigma is not enough).

[Croc]

Large, powerful, comfortable, something to be noticed. There have been nothing like it since.

Interesting...so which of those adjectives don't fit the CTS? It's certainly styled to be noticed, my experience in them has always been extremely comfortable, their engines are pretty powerful, and they are on the large side of their class (by price).

The CTS is not large, and reviews from people I know feel it is not particularly comfortable. Surprisingly, NONE of the ex-Cadillac owners I know own a CTS. They all own Mercedes now.

The CTS is fine (IMHO) as a 3 series competitor, but it is not where Cadillac's breadwinner should be.

Honestly, GM would have kept producing luxobarges if the market existed...the company really didn't abandon a large and profitable customer base by any stretch...consumer preferences changed and buyers abandoned that market segment.

The luxobarge market dried up because the "big three" didn't change them with the times, giving people the wrong ideas about how a modern luxobarge could be. GM has spend the last 30 years, over a generation and a half, building first underpowered luxobarges, them converting all of them to FWD and the whole time, virtually none of them (by production numbers) where given decent handling to keep up with the sportier contemporary smaller sedans.

People still want large vehicles... they were willing to move to truck platforms so they could have powerful engines, RWD and less floaty suspension. Now, with fuel prices up, where do these buyers go, since the large sedan market has been destroyed.

I'm really glad all of your friends have been so successful in life that they replaced their $40-45,000 Devilles and Fleetwoods/Broughams with $90,000+ S-Classes because they still need a large comfortable RWD car. Good for them.

[balthazar]

Cadillac engines were desired. Cadillac engines powered hotrods ("Studelac") and sports cars (Allard).

Note the past tense...that world is long gone.

Quite incorrect. There is active usage of the Northstar in hot rod applications today. There are aftermarket companies (CHRF is one), and there are engines running 600 HP reliably. The owner of CHRF has a 1000 HP build. Even the Tucker replica runs a rear-mounted Northstar. They're definitely out there, so 'that world' is still here.

[Camino LS6]

Clearly, Cadillac needs something above, and something below, the CTS.

And has for quite some time now.

Escalade has about run its course, XTS is a left-field entry, SRX is a fad.

They had better get crackin'.

Still, I wouldn't call the brand dead.

[SAmadei]

I'm really glad all of your friends have been so successful in life that they replaced their $40-45,000 Devilles and Fleetwoods/Broughams with $90,000+ S-Classes because they still need a large comfortable RWD car. Good for them.

It is good for them. I am building more character of being part of the 'black sheep' not-so-wealthy side of the family.

I didn't just say S-classes... but there are enough of them... some E-classes. Most also own some sort of giant SUV, as well. An H1 was owned, not sure if it still is.

$40-45,000 Devilles and Fleetwoods? Oh, as if they stuck with GM that late. After GM misfired the first couple times, they were long gone. Lets see... $13500 new '77 Seville... about 4x a '77 Nova. Today the Cruze is where the Nova was positioned in '77. $21000x4 gets you into high E-class, low S-class territory. So their taste in cars has only slightly leveled up over the years. I also recall a '82 Seville... rode in that to South Carolina and back twice. I can't believe that was $23K in '82 dollars.

Of course, you are mixing two parts of my post here... I stated they don't have CTS's... but larger Mercedes (Its not hard to find a Merc larger than a CTS). My point about large, RWD cars is not necessarily about them... I feel the old luxobarge drivers are sitting in big SUVs ($35K~$55K) right now fretting over gas and the fact that there is nothing to downsize into without seriously compromising the space they need, with the handling and features they have gotten used to in these highly optioned SUVs. They have the mistaken idea that a luxobarge needs to drive like 1976, because its the bulk of what GM, Ford and Mopar have built.

[Croc]

I'm really glad all of your friends have been so successful in life that they replaced their $40-45,000 Devilles and Fleetwoods/Broughams with $90,000+ S-Classes because they still need a large comfortable RWD car. Good for them.

I didn't just say S-classes... but there are enough of them... some E-classes.

Of course, you are mixing two parts of my post here... I stated they don't have CTS's... but larger Mercedes (Its not hard to find a Merc larger than a CTS).

Interesting, since the E-Class and the CTS have nearly identical exterior dimensions.

[ZL-1]

Since Hudson was trying to aim his initial post at Cadillac's exclusivity dying with the demise of the Northstar engine, let me quote my own reply to him at "that other GM forum":

I miss the Cadillac exclusive thing only in the sense that GM is dumber than dumb in the way they market things. Introducing new/improved V8s or other important innovations in Cadillacs first and some 3 or 6 months (I'm being 100% arbitrary here, it's just an example) later in the Corvette and then have them trickle down is what GM shpould be aiming to do. It would keep Cadillac's cutting-edgs status within the GM brands for some time (higher prices/margins) and Chevies/Buicks would be pervceived as getting Cadillac engines/components instead of the other way around. That's proactive perception change, and clever marketing as well, IMHO.

[riviera74]

One Word SAmadei: Zeta, if GM dares to build them for GMNA. The Camaro is not what is called for. A large RWD Cadillac (and Buick, I might add) sedan is what is called for.

GM: Build it NOW.

[SAmadei]

Interesting, since the E-Class and the CTS have nearly identical exterior dimensions.

Yeah, and they both have four tires. BFD. You have left Relevanttown well behind.

One Word SAmadei: Zeta, if GM dares to build them for GMNA. The Camaro is not what is called for. A large RWD Cadillac (and Buick, I might add) sedan is what is called for.

GM: Build it NOW.

Oh, well, you're preaching to the choir there, my friend. That's why my 35 years of heavy GM loyalty turns to bitterness everyday that passes. GM has decided to forsake us.

[Croc]

Interesting, since the E-Class and the CTS have nearly identical exterior dimensions.

Yeah, and they both have four tires. BFD. You have left Relevanttown well behind.

Bull$h!. You said the CTS isn't large enough for your Benz-loving friends. It's the same size as the E-Class, both exterior and interior dimensions.

I'm not arguing anything about content, simply size. Cadillac makes big enough cars, with room IMO for a larger flagship one day.