Cadillac Vehicles & Engine Lineup (Circa 2015)

[smk4565]

I have a question: how can GM improve the ATS and the CTS to be best in class to a point where otherwise non-Cadillac owners switch to Cadillac?

• Styling -- I think they are on track
  
• Interior Quality -- A little demerit here and there, but they are 90% of the way there
  
• Differentiated Features -- Electrochromic windows, magnetorological shocks, something special.
  
• Performance -- between a 2.0T & 3.6 DOHC V6, plus a small block powered V they are set as along as they keep weight in check
  
• Value -- Don't price yourself out of the market; even Lexus started out selling the LS400 at a $20K discount over the Germans
  

Thing is though, magnetorological shocks are still an adaptive suspension that reacts to what it hits. And Audi and Acura use it also. Mercedes is working on a suspension that reads the road before the car hits it, so the suspension can adjust before the car hits the bump. Everyone has suspensions that react, but only Benz will have one that prepares, that is special.

On performance, I do think Cadillac needs a DOHC V8, but horsepower isn't really a Cadillac problem. The E-class is the #1 selling mid-size luxury car and it is far from the most powerful. I think the problem is in the ride/handling department.

[67impss]

I have a question: how can GM improve the ATS and the CTS to be best in class to a point where otherwise non-Cadillac owners switch to Cadillac?

This is their biggest challenge and something Cadillac (nor Lincoln) has been able to do for the past 15-20 years. That is why their sales volume kept dropping. The CTS brought in a new buyer compared to the old Seville and Deville/DTS, but I wonder how much of that was import luxury conquest compared to mainstream buyers moving up to a luxury car.

I think Cadillac's areas for improvement need to be build quality, fuel economy, and driving dynamics. Especially for overseas markets. The CTS is their only car that is decent at driving dynamics and even it didn't wow me in anyway when I drove it. A BMW is a much better driving car. Cadillac loses the performance buyer to the Germans and the old folks that want worry free and good mileage buy Lexus. So they have to find a way to appeal to those buyers.

Smk I thought that Buick was supposed to be in line with Lexus? Your always harping on that point that XTS should not be a Caddy but a Buick so what's the target market the Germans or the Japanese? Just wondering trying to see your view of Caddys position not riding ya

[smk4565]

Smk I thought that Buick was supposed to be in line with Lexus? Your always harping on that point that XTS should not be a Caddy but a Buick so what's the target market the Germans or the Japanese? Just wondering trying to see your view of Caddys position not riding ya

I was never really a big promoter of the XTS should be a Buick campaign, I more think that the XTS shouldn't even exist because a $50,000 front wheel drive car is stupid. I also don't think Buick competes with Lexus, unless by compete you mean they both attract buyers over 60. Buick is a $25-40,000 manufacturer, and today most mainstream brands like Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, and Hyundai live in that space also.

Cadillac should be more like an Infiniti or European car. Even Lexus tries to make a couple sporty cars to balance out their old geezer ES, Lexus just isn't any good at sport sedans. The 40-60 year old luxury car buyers aren't too interested in land barges and float mobiles that their parents drove. Gen X and Gen Y (for the most part) are buying smaller, nimble handling, fuel efficient cars and they like technology and style. Cadillac right now still builds to a midwestern America baby boomer and older demographic. Cadillac needs to broaden its appeal.

Where is Cadillac's 30 mpg car or better yet 40 mpg car?

Where is the DOHC V8 that Infinit, Hyundai, Benz, BMW, Audi, Jaguar, Lexus all have

Wehre is the 7 or 8 speed transmission?

Where is a real flagship?

Where is the sports car or convertible? Can you imagine BMW, Mercedes, Audi or Jaguar with no convertible? Even Infiniti and Lexus have them.

Where is Cadillac's image? They are part BMW wannabe, part rap video truck, and part retirement home geezer cruiser. There is no focus.

[balthazar]

^ Yet one looks at mercedees, for example, and you see an even worse lack of focus. Tiny, 4-banger, FWD puddlejumpers are coming, there's a 40-yr old SUV, a minivan and a stripper cargo van alongside the mass-produced mainstreamers. You also have multiple design languages (the sleek CLS vs. the blocky, angular, knock-off A&S look of the GLK and E-class).

Most of the lineup are monstrous gas guzzlers (26 models at 17 or less city, 11 under 15). They have exactly 1 car that gets over 30 highway right now- many are in the low 20s. Awful.

Design-wise they're recycling 1980s grilles on most of the models. They've lost a ton of their class-leading margin and are mired in useless tech for tech's sake. mercedees is in an all-out volume grab, and the lack of direction shows.

Edited July 6, 2011 by balthazar

[smk4565]

^ Yet one looks at mercedees, for example, and you see an even worse lack of focus. Tiny, 4-banger, FWD puddlejumpers are coming, there's a 40-yr old SUV, a minivan and a stripper cargo van alongside the mass-produced mainstreamers. You also have multiple design languages (the sleek CLS vs. the blocky, angular, knock-off A&S look of the GLK and E-class).

Most of the lineup are monstrous gas guzzlers (26 models at 17 or less city, 11 under 15). They have exactly 1 car that gets over 30 highway right now- many are in the low 20s. Awful.

Design-wise they're recycling 1980s grilles on most of the models. They've lost a ton of their class-leading margin and are mired in useless tech for tech's sake. mercedees is in an all-out volume grab, and the lack of direction shows.

Yet for all their faults they are the #1 selling luxury car in the world, selling over 1 million cars a year and they make billions in profit every year. The C-class turbo 4 arrives this fall, the C-class and S-class also get diesels soon, that will solve some of their fuel economy woes. The next S-class is said to get over 70 mpg while doing 0-60 in under 5.5 seconds. No automaker is even remotely close to that, that is game changing.

You can keep thinking what Cadillac is doing and has done for the past 10-20 years is the path to success, but look at their brand. Sales have been on steady decline over the past 20 or even 30 years, they have almost no sales volume outside of North America and their product line is now 1 mid size car and 2 SUVs. Cadillac is a dying brand, there was a blip from 2003-2005 when they showed a little sign of life, but they are flat lining again. They aren't as bad off as Lincoln, but in 5 years they could be.

[balthazar]

>>"Yet for all their faults they are the #1 selling luxury car in the world, selling over 1 million cars a year and they make billions in profit every year."<<

Sure they do- by catering to every vehicle segment going with whatever they can stuff into that segment, doing staggering fleet sales and including commercial vehicles. I've said it before, but the sprinter badged as a MB is a mind boggler and perfectly indicative of the problem. Now mercedes is daring to seriously dilute it's image here with the FWD compacts- the same road Cadillac took in 1982. Build the image, then tear it down.

>>" The next S-class is said to get over 70 mpg"<<

Sure it will, esp when the current hybrid 6-banger gets 17/25. It's 4500 lbs now, the next one will likely gain another 250 lbs.

If this were remotely likely, they wouldn't need FWD cars to bolster CAFE, the E would get 85 and the C would get 110 MPG. Dream on.

mercedees build gas guzzlers across the board- it's their 'thing'.

>>"You can keep thinking what Cadillac is doing and has done for the past 10-20 years is the path to success"<<

Where did I state that, ever? Stick to addressing the actual posts. Cadillac has had some hits without doubt, but many more misses.

The point was how the 2 are following the same path and their focus is wandering.

mercedees real approach problem is that they have this unique shiny bubble image in the U.S. and make a mountain of profit from it, yet by introducing all these misdirected products, they risk that fat cash cow.... but they will risk that chasing a dollar.

[Drew Dowdell]

and S-class over 70mpg?..... uh..... right...

[Lamar]

and S-class over 70mpg?..... uh..... right...

Unless they're shortening the mile once that car comes out, I call also.

[hyperv6]

I have a question: how can GM improve the ATS and the CTS to be best in class to a point where otherwise non-Cadillac owners switch to Cadillac?

Much more of what Chevy has provided with the Cruze. Give the people more than they expect and want as a fair price. People in this class want dramatic but elegant styling, nothing too crazy or odd. Cadillac has that going now and they don't try to copy BMW or Benz as many other try to do. They look like a Cadillac.

Along with styling performance is key. They need to get performance suspensions and engines that are special to Cadillac. Even if they share an engine with the Camaro they need to tune it and make it special in some way. Technology sells Audis and other German makes. Brag power has been key in this class for years. In the future it will have to be done in many cases with smaller engines and this is where TT V6 engines play well. It will be interesting to see what other technologies they will apply.

They keep building cars like the CTS coupe and sedan and build on what they started they will do well. The ATS I expect will be a leap forward as will the next CTS. They will address things that they could not afford to address in the past.

The future ATS and CTS need to be no excuse cars. If Chevy can make the Cruze work they can do well here too. Money and proper funding can make a difference in the final product. We are now just seeing this.

Also after reading the Lutz book I can see the product will be more and better focused on the real customers and not the imagined customer by GM think groups. THis is where their misses have come into play. Lutz pointed out great styling sells cars. It may add more of a blind spot like the rear window in the CTS coupe. But if the styling is done right people will let the blind spots fade away and not effect them. It is much harder to sell a car with good sight lines that look crappy. Ever really hear owners of a Ferrari complain about blind spots?

Edited July 6, 2011 by hyperv6

[Drew Dowdell]

You can keep thinking what Cadillac is doing and has done for the past 10-20 years is the path to success, but look at their brand. Sales have been on steady decline over the past 20 or even 30 years, they have almost no sales volume outside of North America and their product line is now 1 mid size car and 2 SUVs. Cadillac is a dying brand, there was a blip from 2003-2005 when they showed a little sign of life, but they are flat lining again. They aren't as bad off as Lincoln, but in 5 years they could be.

Uh..you may not like the SRX, but the public at large disagrees with you and it's second in sales only to another FWD based crossover continuing to beat your beloved X3 (brand new BTW) by 75% in sales while maintaining similar transaction prices.

The ATS with it's 3 body styles is about 10 months from showrooms.

The CTS continues to do well.

The XTS has a very low bar to hit in sales, they can keep a 5,000 car a month pace on that (roughly 1,000 less than the DTS + Lucerne + STS sustained sales rate) and still beat out (deep breath) Chrysler 300 twice over, Hyundai Genesis sedan + Equus twice over, Lexus IS + GS + HS + LS + CT, or Lexus ES about twice over, 5-series, Audi A4 + A5 + A6 + A7 + A8, The entire Acura car lineup, The entire Lincoln car lineup, The entire Infiniti car lineup.....in sales.

Even the Escalade that you like to rage on is selling double the Q7, double the Lexus GX+LX, double the BMW X6, about the same as the entire Infiniti SUV/CUV lineup.

So while you may think they are flat lining, their sales certainly haven't.

[Drew Dowdell]

I have a question: how can GM improve the ATS and the CTS to be best in class to a point where otherwise non-Cadillac owners switch to Cadillac?

Much more of what Chevy has provided with the Cruze. Give the people more than they expect and want as a fair price. People in this class want dramatic but elegant styling, nothing too crazy or odd. Cadillac has that going now and they don't try to copy BMW or Benz as many other try to do. They look like a Cadillac.

Along with styling performance is key. They need to get performance suspensions and engines that are special to Cadillac. Even if they share an engine with the Camaro they need to tune it and make it special in some way. Technology sells Audis and other German makes. Brag power has been key in this class for years. In the future it will have to be done in many cases with smaller engines and this is where TT V6 engines play well. It will be interesting to see what other technologies they will apply.

They keep building cars like the CTS coupe and sedan and build on what they started they will do well. The ATS I expect will be a leap forward as will the next CTS. They will address things that they could not afford to address in the past.

The future ATS and CTS need to be no excuse cars. If Chevy can make the Cruze work they can do well here too. Money and proper funding can make a difference in the final product. We are now just seeing this.

Also after reading the Lutz book I can see the product will be more and better focused on the real customers and not the imagined customer by GM think groups. THis is where their misses have come into play. Lutz pointed out great styling sells cars. It may add more of a blind spot like the rear window in the CTS coupe. But if the styling is done right people will let the blind spots fade away and not effect them. It is much harder to sell a car with good sight lines that look crappy. Ever really hear owners of a Ferrari complain about blind spots?

+1111

When you are driving a CTS-V coupe, stuff behind you doesn't matter.

[smk4565]

and S-class over 70mpg?..... uh..... right...

According to Dr. Weber they will do it; this is the company spending $2.5 this year on alternative fuel and hybrid technology. I read this article a little while ago:

In an interview with Car and Driver, Mercedes development director Dr. Thomas Weber said "Three years ago, everyone thought that there would only be small cars and that there would be no more large cars. But our plug-in concept demonstrated that an S-class could make 78 mpg (3.0 L/100km), so those questions stopped. With the next generation of S-class we are talking 81 mpg (2.9 L/100km), using a new-generation 3.0-liter V-6 gasoline engine-direct injection and piezo injectors-integrated with a 60-hp (44 kW) electric motor. In pure-electric mode, the car would have a range of just over 20 miles (32.2 km) at speeds of up to 68 mph (109 km/h). It is clear that we will have a plug-in hybrid in the next-generation S-class."

81 mpg Euro is about 70 mpg here. If they do this, (and I think they will because the S-class is always 10 years ahead of its time) no other car maker is close. The new S350 bluetec has over 450 lb-ft of torque and gets 30 mpg highway, that is still well above big car standards. The next S-class is supposed to drop weight from the W221 model, but cars seldom drop weight. Although when they went from the W140 S-class to the W220, there were considerable weight savings, so I know Benz knows how to do it.

[Drew Dowdell]

and S-class over 70mpg?..... uh..... right...

(and I think they will because the S-class is always 10 years ahead of its time)

So they're going to introduce eAssist on a big sedan and be 10 years ahead of everyone else? Perish the thought!

Was the S-class also 10 years ahead of its time in 1981 when it got airbags 7 years after Oldsmobile? Was the S-class 10 years ahead of its time when it got ABS in 1979, 8 years after Chrysler first offered it?

[smk4565]

Uh..you may not like the SRX, but the public at large disagrees with you and it's second in sales only to another FWD based crossover continuing to beat your beloved X3 (brand new BTW) by 75% in sales while maintaining similar transaction prices.

The ATS with it's 3 body styles is about 10 months from showrooms.

The CTS continues to do well.

The XTS has a very low bar to hit in sales, they can keep a 5,000 car a month pace on that (roughly 1,000 less than the DTS + Lucerne + STS sustained sales rate) and still beat out (deep breath) Chrysler 300 twice over, Hyundai Genesis sedan + Equus twice over, Lexus IS + GS + HS + LS + CT, or Lexus ES about twice over, 5-series, Audi A4 + A5 + A6 + A7 + A8, The entire Acura car lineup, The entire Lincoln car lineup, The entire Infiniti car lineup.....in sales.

Even the Escalade that you like to rage on is selling double the Q7, double the Lexus GX+LX, double the BMW X6, about the same as the entire Infiniti SUV/CUV lineup.

So while you may think they are flat lining, their sales certainly haven't.

Crossover buyers are mostly sheep. They'll buy what they perceive to be good, that is why the Lexus RX wins the sales crown every year. I'd rather Cadillac make the SRX rear drive, but I would never consider buying any crossover, and I know the market doesn't care. so I have less problem with the SRX being FWD than I do the XTS. I mainly don't like the SRX being front wheel, because it will no doubt lead to more front wheel drive Cadillacs.

XTS won't sell 5,000 cars a month, the DTS sells about 1,000 the Lincoln MKS about 1,200. Town Car and STS are dead, S80 and Acura RL don't sell. This is the type of car it is. How is the XTS going to sell at E-class levels, where will the buyers come from? Aside from funeral homes.

The ATS might be good, I am glad we know not much about it. I am eagerly awaiting it, because it is probably the only Cadillac in the next 4-5 years that I'd consider.

[Drew Dowdell]

Uh..you may not like the SRX, but the public at large disagrees with you and it's second in sales only to another FWD based crossover continuing to beat your beloved X3 (brand new BTW) by 75% in sales while maintaining similar transaction prices.

The ATS with it's 3 body styles is about 10 months from showrooms.

The CTS continues to do well.

The XTS has a very low bar to hit in sales, they can keep a 5,000 car a month pace on that (roughly 1,000 less than the DTS + Lucerne + STS sustained sales rate) and still beat out (deep breath) Chrysler 300 twice over, Hyundai Genesis sedan + Equus twice over, Lexus IS + GS + HS + LS + CT, or Lexus ES about twice over, 5-series, Audi A4 + A5 + A6 + A7 + A8, The entire Acura car lineup, The entire Lincoln car lineup, The entire Infiniti car lineup.....in sales.

Even the Escalade that you like to rage on is selling double the Q7, double the Lexus GX+LX, double the BMW X6, about the same as the entire Infiniti SUV/CUV lineup.

So while you may think they are flat lining, their sales certainly haven't.

Crossover buyers are mostly sheep. They'll buy what they perceive to be good, that is why the Lexus RX wins the sales crown every year. I'd rather Cadillac make the SRX rear drive, but I would never consider buying any crossover, and I know the market doesn't care. so I have less problem with the SRX being FWD than I do the XTS. I mainly don't like the SRX being front wheel, because it will no doubt lead to more front wheel drive Cadillacs.

XTS won't sell 5,000 cars a month, the DTS sells about 1,000 the Lincoln MKS about 1,200. Town Car and STS are dead, S80 and Acura RL don't sell. This is the type of car it is. How is the XTS going to sell at E-class levels, where will the buyers come from? Aside from funeral homes.

The ATS might be good, I am glad we know not much about it. I am eagerly awaiting it, because it is probably the only Cadillac in the next 4-5 years that I'd consider.

DTS sells 1,000 a month lately, but at their peak, the numbers for the DTS, Lucerne, and STS were all much higher, well over 5,000 in fact. I know the STS is RWD, but have you seen the average STS driver lately? If the XTS looks good to them and has a really nice interior, that will be all it takes to get them in the door RWD or not. The MKS sells poorly because it really is a gussied up Ford. It shares switchgear with the F-150. It's a solid platform, but the interior is a mixed bag at best (recycled parts from lesser models and poor parts fitment/assembly) In my view, you cannot judge what a FWD (most likely AWD) Cadillac would sell like based on the MKS, RL (Accord De Lux LS Brougham), or S80 (just too..... Swedish and not different enough from an S60 visually)

[balthazar]

80% of BMW 1-series owners believe their car is FWD, and that after experiencing how it drives.

Has to be at least 30% of 3-series believe their car is FWD, too- they are that similar in appearance/size unless right next to each other.

FWD BMWs are coming to market as soon as their ready.

FWD / RWD as a criteria for purchase is completely overrated, overall.

XTS offering a FWD model vs. the AWD model is irrelevant beyond message board quarterbacks.

Nope- I don't want to see a FWD only XTS, but I'm just another message board hack.

[dwightlooi]

Where is Cadillac's 30 mpg car or better yet 40 mpg car?

Where is the DOHC V8 that Infinit, Hyundai, Benz, BMW, Audi, Jaguar, Lexus all have

Wehre is the 7 or 8 speed transmission?

Where is a real flagship?

Where is the sports car or convertible? Can you imagine BMW, Mercedes, Audi or Jaguar with no convertible? Even Infiniti and Lexus have them.

Where is Cadillac's image? They are part BMW wannabe, part rap video truck, and part retirement home geezer cruiser. There is no focus.

30~40 mpg Hybrid

I really don't think that ought to be a priority. Car buys as a whole, especially luxury car buyers, is not as green as some politicians and Global Warming coolaid drinkers will like us to believe. GM wanted a halo car and they have the Volt. That is enough for now. The meat of the luxury market is not hybrids, its the 6-cylinder sedans. Money is better spent getting these a couple of MPG better mileage than on a Halo Hybrid. In this regard, I do not disagree with the cancellation of the Cadillac Converj. The market and the volume simply isn't there.

DOHC V8

Put simply, the DOHC arrangement is best suited to 4 and 6 cylinder engines trying to meet displacement tax thresholds or engines trying to meet displacement limits in racing due to class rules. A DOHC V8 is inferior to the pushrod alternatives for the purpose of delivering performance and fuel economy. This is because -- for a given power & torque output target -- a pushrod engine is externally smaller, lighter and has lower internal friction, despite requiring a larger displacement. As a side benefit, the Pushrod engine is also cheaper to manufacture. This is not to say that technology should be shunned. The Gen V pushrod engine deserves and will receive state of the art features like direct injection, variable valve timing and cylinder deactivation.

8-speeds

Its on the way... it was delayed by 2~3 years as the program was put on ice during the Bankruptcy.

Flagship

The XTS (ETS) is not the flagship. It is the Lexus ES fighter. Some flagship should be built, but it probably will take a back seat to the ATS and CTS refresh -- and that is probably the right priority. My advocacy is for a RWD flagship based on a stretched Zeta II or Sigma with an optional V12 engine developed cheaply by essentially mating two 3.6 V6 into a 7.2 V12 mill.

Sports Car or Convertible

The ATS will have a Convertible and a Coupe. The CTS already has what is perhaps the sharpest looking 2-door on the planet. Should Cadillac get a XLR redux? I think so. Basing it on the C7 platform, but powering it with a V12 instead of the Pushrod V8 is a good differentiator.

[Robert Hall]

and S-class over 70mpg?..... uh..... right...

(and I think they will because the S-class is always 10 years ahead of its time)

So they're going to introduce eAssist on a big sedan and be 10 years ahead of everyone else? Perish the thought!

Was the S-class also 10 years ahead of its time in 1981 when it got airbags 7 years after Oldsmobile? Was the S-class 10 years ahead of its time when it got ABS in 1979, 8 years after Chrysler first offered it?

Invalid point. GM briefly experimented w/ airbags around '74, but didn't commit. GM was still putting stupid seatbelts attached to the doors in some cars instead of airbags into the '90s. Same w/ Chrysler and ABS.

Edited July 6, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[balthazar]

^ smk's point was one of innovation, not 'commitment' ("10 years ahead of everyone else").

[smk4565]

DTS sells 1,000 a month lately, but at their peak, the numbers for the DTS, Lucerne, and STS were all much higher, well over 5,000 in fact. I know the STS is RWD, but have you seen the average STS driver lately? If the XTS looks good to them and has a really nice interior, that will be all it takes to get them in the door RWD or not. The MKS sells poorly because it really is a gussied up Ford. It shares switchgear with the F-150. It's a solid platform, but the interior is a mixed bag at best (recycled parts from lesser models and poor parts fitment/assembly) In my view, you cannot judge what a FWD (most likely AWD) Cadillac would sell like based on the MKS, RL (Accord De Lux LS Brougham), or S80 (just too..... Swedish and not different enough from an S60 visually)

At their peak sure, but the Deville/DTS peak was 10 years ago, most of those buyers are shall we say, not looking for a new car. Big luxury sedans in general do not sell much volume, the front drive ones do worse than the rear drivers. The XTS is catering to a dying market. And the XTS is a gussied up Buick (and future Impala). It is exactly what Ford does with the MKS and Acura does with the RL. Cadillac might just execute it better.

The XTS is made to appeal to the Cadillac buyer of the 90s, I think they are wasting their time. Cadillac needs to move on and build the future, not the past.

[smk4565]

Flagship

The XTS (ETS) is not the flagship. It is the Lexus ES fighter. Some flagship should be built, but it probably will take a back seat to the ATS and CTS refresh -- and that is probably the right priority. My advocacy is for a RWD flagship based on a stretched Zeta II or Sigma with an optional V12 engine developed cheaply by essentially mating two 3.6 V6 into a 7.2 V12 mill.

Sports Car or Convertible

The ATS will have a Convertible and a Coupe. The CTS already has what is perhaps the sharpest looking 2-door on the planet. Should Cadillac get a XLR redux? I think so. Basing it on the C7 platform, but powering it with a V12 instead of the Pushrod V8 is a good differentiator.

I do think Cadillac needs 30-40 mpg cars, if they don't do it with hybrid they can do it with diesel. They need diesel anyway to sell outside of the USA. While I agree that hybrids don't make much volume, it does give a technologically advanced image to a brand.

Flagship is a big problem for Cadillac, they are going to have to make it the size of the XTS, yet charge twice as much. So that could be a hard sell. Then we are looking at Sigma or Zeta rehashed; by 2015, those are 10 year old platforms. And will Cadillac spend the money for it? I think a Cadillac flagship is essential to legitimize American cars and build image, but I am skeptical in them doing it right.

ATS convertible is needed, but not enough. BMW makes 3, Mercedes makes 4, Audi makes 3. Cadillac needs a purpose built sports car, whether that is in the Z4/SLK class or at something higher end I don't care which. I find the CTS 2-door to be a horrible looking car, it looks tacky, overweight, and big butted. But even the fans can't say it is a better looking 2-door than a Jaguar XK or Maserati Gran Turismo.

[smk4565]

In general the S-class is 10 years ahead of the field, but I know not always on everything. If you look at a 2000 S-class and the features and technology on it, it would rival or beat $50,000 cars of today, and for sure outmatch the entry level luxury class. But they are obviously committed to the car also. Since the 1970s the S-class has been the car everyone has been chasing. If Cadillac plans to go into that field, they better go all in. Because the S-class is about to go into its 6th model year and it is still outselling brand new models from Jaguar, BMW and Audi.

[Drew Dowdell]

and S-class over 70mpg?..... uh..... right...

(and I think they will because the S-class is always 10 years ahead of its time)

So they're going to introduce eAssist on a big sedan and be 10 years ahead of everyone else? Perish the thought!

Was the S-class also 10 years ahead of its time in 1981 when it got airbags 7 years after Oldsmobile? Was the S-class 10 years ahead of its time when it got ABS in 1979, 8 years after Chrysler first offered it?

Invalid point. GM briefly experimented w/ airbags around '74, but didn't commit. GM was still putting stupid seatbelts attached to the doors in some cars instead of airbags into the '90s. Same w/ Chrysler and ABS.

Don't care if you think it is an invalid point. Lincoln had rear ABS in '69, Chrysler had 4 wheel ABS in '71 and both experimented with it and offered it on and off as they perfected it. Bosch gets all the credit for making it mainstream, but Detroit did it first and in the case of Lincoln, a full 10 years ahead of the Germans. Cadillac had the autotronic eye in '55.

You can't say that GM didn't commit to it when it was offered in 4 brands from '73 to '76 (basically till the B-bodies got downsized for '77 and there was no point building it for just the Toronado, the only car with ACRS that hadn't been redesigned for '77 and '78)

GM had the first commercially available mutli-displacement engine 25 years ahead of it's time. Sure it flopped, but Cadillac was still innovating ahead of Benz. You simply cannot say "Mercedes did it first" when there are still operational examples of the Cadillac 8-6-4 that are 25 years older than the Mercedes version.

Cadillac had night vision first.

Cadillac had magnetic ride control first.

Cadillac had heads up display at least 15 years before Benz and BMW decided to jump in on the idea.

Oldsmobile and Buick had touch screen HVAC/Radio/VIC a full 20 years before BMW could come up with the iDrive idea.

Oldsmobile had the first navigation system available in a production car but Mercedes was relatively quick to catch up with Oldsmobile this time and introduced a NAV system on the S-class a mere 4 years later.

Cadillac had the idea of slapping luxury car badges on underwhelming economy 4-cylinder FWD cars and selling them to gullible aspirational Americans a full 30 years before Benz caught on.

You can't say that Cadillac and GM don't innovate and lead from time to time.

[dwightlooi]

ATS convertible is needed, but not enough. BMW makes 3, Mercedes makes 4, Audi makes 3. Cadillac needs a purpose built sports car, whether that is in the Z4/SLK class or at something higher end I don't care which. I find the CTS 2-door to be a horrible looking car, it looks tacky, overweight, and big butted. But even the fans can't say it is a better looking 2-door than a Jaguar XK or Maserati Gran Turismo.

I actually like the CTS Coupe... and I actually think it looks better than a jaguar XK or Maserati GT. Heck I think it looks better than a Lamborgini Aventador -- which is REALLY tacky -- or A Ferrari 458 Italia. The CTS Coupe has a more unique look than any of these in its proudly inorganic form and its very clean cut styling.

I never by new cars -- I cannot stomach or justifythe depreciation in the first 3~4 years -- but I'll probably get the CTS-V Coupe when a 3~5 year old copy becomes available, in the right condition, at the right price. The only question is whether I stick it out in the 2005 C55 until then, or I get a 2008 C63 somewhere in between. The problem is that the C63 isn't particularly pretty and if I get one next year, I probably will be stuck with it until at least 2016.

But back on topic... GM does not have the spare cash, time or resources to do a low volume Sports Car on a unique platform just for Cadillac. If Caddy wants a sports car, it'll have to be either an Alpha derivative or a C7 derivative.

[hyperv6]

As Bob Lutz pointed out and this I feel applies to Cadillac more than any other GM car. GM needs to build cars people want with the things they want or expect. Any 2 year old used car can meet the needs of any driver with no problem. A new car needs to give them what they want to the point they will pay the extra money. The wants need to drive buyers to the point they would be willing to wait to ge the car they want if they have to order it. This is where the image, styling, special featues and technology applies.

While cars like the CTS Coupe have this now the key is to make each year they continue to build it make the present owener wished he waited a year for the new features. You have to keep that carrot out there infront of the mule.

Note when I say technology and features I don't mean gimicks that wear off like self parking etc.

[balthazar]

Really?? Bob come up with that all by himself ?

That describes selling products since the beginning of retail- it applies to all cars ("want, expect, need').

[hyperv6]

Really?? Bob come up with that all by himself ?

That describes selling products since the beginning of retail- it applies to all cars ("want, expect, need').

The point is he knew this but he had to convince the people at GM to do this. They were focused on filling needs and not wants. He had to show them this is why they were not selling faceless Saturns.

Yes GM though Saturn people wanted non discript with little badging and no grills as they just wanted a good friendly dealer to work with. Not it was not till he got involved that Saturn started to look good. But he points out like I have there was no money to market the cars and it was too late to save them.

Now you can be snide at Bob but the fact is there was a whole cast of highly intelligent people at GM that had no clue. This is not an isolated thing in buisness. I see it in my own marketing department. Too often the people making and selling the product only think they know their customer.

Just look around at the many messed up marketing things going on.

[Robert Hall]

Now you can be snide at Bob but the fact is there was a whole cast of highly intelligent people at GM that had no clue. This is not an isolated thing in business. I see it in my own marketing department. Too often the people making and selling the product only think they know their customer.

Just look around at the many messed up marketing things going on.

True enough...lots of cluelessness and incompetence in business, I esp. see it in customer/client management and project planning and management...so many headaches in my work world come about from poor communication between business analysts and management and clients/end users and how that communication is communicated to product development and engineering...

[dwightlooi]

More important that trying to figure out what people want -- or at least what you think people want -- more important than focus groups, studies and all that is the need to realize one thing...

The USA is a high cost country, we cannot sell faceless products and compete on price or value. The Koreans and the Chinese will win every time. A US company has to be the purveyor of unique and differentiated products, within or without the established mainstream. Companies that realize this do not always succeed, but companies that do not will always fail, if not today, tomorrow.

[smk4565]

More important that trying to figure out what people want -- or at least what you think people want -- more important than focus groups, studies and all that is the need to realize one thing...

The USA is a high cost country, we cannot sell faceless products and compete on price or value. The Koreans and the Chinese will win every time. A US company has to be the purveyor of unique and differentiated products, within or without the established mainstream. Companies that realize this do not always succeed, but companies that do not will always fail, if not today, tomorrow.

So undercut the Germans by $10-20,000 to compete on price. Then make versions of the Chevy Tahoe and Equinox to be unique? I agree with your statement, but Cadillac is not doing that. Mercedes and BMW are the 2 that make unique products and they are the top sellers in the luxury game.

[hyperv6]

I don't think undercutting is the key. The key is to offer a better car with no excuses. Better styling, better interior, better all around performance better options.

Leave off the goofy tech things like self parking and give them the kind of tech buyers in this class really want and can really use. On board systems that are easy to use vs I drive etc.

Also work on Image. This is not about selling high volume here with the price charged sell less but make more per unit. High Volume hurts an image faster than anything. The Town Car for intents with volume became a taxi.

Like DOHC or not buyers in this class expect it. Turbo and Twin turbos are now expected on V6 applications. BMW I see today is looking to offer 3 turbochargers on a 6. Is it needed no could they do it with no turbo and push rods... yes but people expect more when paying this price. The only more we will not see in this class is pistons. The large engines are as wide spread as we will see. The V8 will survive but I see it shrinking in size.

Going cut rate will leave you as a competitor of Lexus and Hyundai. That is Buicks job. Cadillac has to pay all the chips as they can't go back. It is all or nothing here and they have to get it right.

Edited July 8, 2011 by hyperv6

[balthazar]

A far greater percentage of general consumers understand piston count better than IBC vs OHC.

Really, these swirling generalities help nothing. 'Better styling' is always subjective, so is 'better interiors'. These, stated thusly, are meaningless.

Unfortunately, when puddle-jumpers offer NAV & the same roster of tech options/features the lux cars do, it's the gimmicky crap that's left to quickly differentiate the lux segment from the rest. This has been the problem over time with the contraction of differentiation between what was the much larger, much better equipped lux sedans, to a MUCH smaller dimension & equipment differentiation we struggle to sort thru today. When you factor in that all the basics and then some have been around for years, stoic design hampered by so many outside rules, and very very little truly new appearing, it's the unnecessary that's left to spur any conversation. I wish it were otherwise.

[hyperv6]

A far greater percentage of general consumers understand piston count better than IBC vs OHC.

Really, these swirling generalities help nothing. 'Better styling' is always subjective, so is 'better interiors'. These, stated thusly, are meaningless.

Unfortunately, when puddle-jumpers offer NAV & the same roster of tech options/features the lux cars do, it's the gimmicky crap that's left to quickly differentiate the lux segment from the rest. This has been the problem over time with the contraction of differentiation between what was the much larger, much better equipped lux sedans, to a MUCH smaller dimension & equipment differentiation we struggle to sort thru today. When you factor in that all the basics and then some have been around for years, stoic design hampered by so many outside rules, and very very little truly new appearing, it's the unnecessary that's left to spur any conversation. I wish it were otherwise.

Point is odds of a V12 are slim to none. You have 4-6 and 8's to work with and that is it. That is off the table due to economics and the goverment. But that is not to say many other options are open.

Now what you do to them is what makes people take notice. People in the segment are not Camry buyers and often know ICB and DOHC along with many other advanced features like Direct Injections and Turbo Charging. Image and ego play big here. When I go by the Firestone Country $$$$ Club the parking lot is all about one upmanship. The guy did not buy the Benty coupe because it was a good buy and the Benz Black series is not there because he saved money. these cars are to show power and image. What does the car say for the owner. Most Ferraris are not sold to people for track day but to people who want to be noticed.

There is no generalities here better is better. Sales determind if you have it right. Like the CTS coupe you are not going to make all happy but most will love it. You can't tell me when you look at this car that the styling moves you inside and makes you say wow. You can't say the Dame Edna Styling on the BMW moved you in a similar positive way.

The segment has really not been challanged in a great way and GM can step the game up and challange. To this point they have played around in conservitive ways. But as much as I like the CTS they have not gone far enough to challange and make people notice. They are at best like Lexus and just hoping to be involved and not the leader of the group.

The things GM needs for Cadillac is to make cars that project an image that people with money want. They have done this with the Escalade but have not gotten there yet with the cars. You have to feed the ego of the owners.

[Lamar]

Now what you do to them is what makes people take notice. People in the segment are not Camry buyers and often know ICB and DOHC along with many other advanced features like Direct Injections and Turbo Charging. Image and ego play big here. When I go by the Firestone Country $$$$ Club the parking lot is all about one upmanship. The guy did not buy the Benty coupe because it was a good buy and the Benz Black series is not there because he saved money. these cars are to show power and image. What does the car say for the owner. Most Ferraris are not sold to people for track day but to people who want to be noticed.

You give buyers too much credit. My mother just bought a new 535i, and I had to tell her all the mechanical specs on the car AFTER she bought it.

Sure, there are buyers who know the specs and stuff. But what keeps being skirted here, and I know that this is a thread about engine offerings and such, is that people still buy mainly because of the BADGE. And with more exclusive equipment often comes more badges...

[Drew Dowdell]

Really?? Bob come up with that all by himself ?

That describes selling products since the beginning of retail- it applies to all cars ("want, expect, need').

The point is he knew this but he had to convince the people at GM to do this. They were focused on filling needs and not wants. He had to show them this is why they were not selling faceless Saturns.

Yes GM though Saturn people wanted non discript with little badging and no grills as they just wanted a good friendly dealer to work with. Not it was not till he got involved that Saturn started to look good. But he points out like I have there was no money to market the cars and it was too late to save them.

Now you can be snide at Bob but the fact is there was a whole cast of highly intelligent people at GM that had no clue. This is not an isolated thing in buisness. I see it in my own marketing department. Too often the people making and selling the product only think they know their customer.

Just look around at the many messed up marketing things going on.

You mean like this?

Maybe this:

Maybe it was this:

Maybe this?

or this

the point is.... in the '90s, could you blame GM for thinking that people wanted faceless little cars?

[Drew Dowdell]

Now what you do to them is what makes people take notice. People in the segment are not Camry buyers and often know ICB and DOHC along with many other advanced features like Direct Injections and Turbo Charging. Image and ego play big here. When I go by the Firestone Country $ Club the parking lot is all about one upmanship. The guy did not buy the Benty coupe because it was a good buy and the Benz Black series is not there because he saved money. these cars are to show power and image. What does the car say for the owner. Most Ferraris are not sold to people for track day but to people who want to be noticed.

You give buyers too much credit. My mother just bought a new 535i, and I had to tell her all the mechanical specs on the car AFTER she bought it.

Sure, there are buyers who know the specs and stuff. But what keeps being skirted here, and I know that this is a thread about engine offerings and such, is that people still buy mainly because of the BADGE. And with more exclusive equipment often comes more badges...

After 3 Park Aves and a Custom Cruiser, my grandmother leased her first 750i not long after my Grandfather died (wealthy but very frugal man who was quite content in his 1983 Ford Fiesta which had replaced his mid-70's Opel Kadet Combi, up until early 2001 when he was forced to stop driving). Her only reason for getting it was "I've always wanted a BMW". First 750i was a lemon and BMW let her step into a lease of a new one for no money out of pocket to get out of her existing lease early. The second one wasn't lemoned, but was constantly at the dealer for warranty work.

Burned twice by BMW, she now has a loaded Lacrosse.

[Lamar]

After 3 Park Aves and a Custom Cruiser, my grandmother leased her first 750i not long after my Grandfather died (wealthy but very frugal man who was quite content in his 1983 Ford Fiesta which had replaced his mid-70's Opel Kadet Combi, up until early 2001 when he was forced to stop driving). Her only reason for getting it was "I've always wanted a BMW". First 750i was a lemon and BMW let her step into a lease of a new one for no money out of pocket to get out of her existing lease early. The second one wasn't lemoned, but was constantly at the dealer for warranty work.

Burned twice by BMW, she now has a loaded Lacrosse.

EXACTLY my point there. Aside from people who actually follow the industry, I've not met anyone who knows anything about BMW and how the cars are built... just that it's a "status car." Same with Mercedes-Benz, for that matter. That's why they get into the barebones models which are slower and whose interiors are worse-equipped than my wife's '99 Maxima. I can assure you that DOHC, 8-speed auto transmission, skidpad numbers, and weight distribution didn't mean crap to those buyers.

What we need to remember is that there are two kinds of buyers... people who know cars and people who don't. The ones who do know cars will pay attention to all the mechanical specs and capabilities and buy based on what they prefer. The ones who don't buy primarily on image, secondarily on interior features. The car market is saturated these days with the latter group.

So all this about valvetrain, transmission, suspension, handling characteristics, and the like won't matter if, first, Cadillac doesn't make a concerted effort to improve its image and reestablish itself as a top-tier brand.

[dwightlooi]

Well, I think the "assumption" that Pushrods are a tough sell is overblown. The fact is that it is superior technology and all you have to do is say it. And it's not really contrived to say it. The marketing slogan for a 6.2 liter DI-VVT AFM Pushrod-16v V8 making 470 hp and delivering 25 mpg in an ATS can simply be this...

"Cadillac 6.2 V8"

...

"470 hp"

...

"17/25 mpg"

...

"The world's most smallest, lightest, most advanced and most fuel economical 470 hp production engine"

And, all of a sudden, you have pseudo gear heads all over the world rethinking their understanding of engines.

Edited July 8, 2011 by dwightlooi

[hyperv6]

Well, I think the "assumption" that Pushrods are a tough sell is overblown. The fact is that it is superior technology and all you have to do is say it. And it's not really contrived to say it. The marketing slogan for a 6.2 liter DI-VVT AFM Pushrod-16v V8 making 470 hp and delivering 25 mpg in an ATS can simply be this...

"Cadillac 6.2 V8"

...

"470 hp"

...

"17/25 mpg"

...

"The world's most smallest, lightest, most advanced and most fuel economical 470 hp production engine"

And, all of a sudden, you have pseudo gear heads all over the world rethinking their understanding of engines.

Where in the world outside GM fans are they crying and demanding pushrod engines?

It may be all you post and I don't disagree but people are buying otherwise. Do they need DOHC no but do most people world wide want and expect it yes.

It is like the traction tale for FWD. People today want FWD for the most part because they get better traction. Not true but it is easier to use for the unskilled driver. Point and shoot.

It all comes back to preception, ego and wants of the customer. There are many automotive snobs that will refuse a Chevy powered Cadillac no matter what you show them. Smart no but their money is green and you will not get it otherwise. If GM is to keep the LS based engine in their cars they really need a specific Cadillac tuned version that offers what Chevy does not offer. Mine is begger better and fancier, in this class Imsge is king not logic.

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, I think the "assumption" that Pushrods are a tough sell is overblown. The fact is that it is superior technology and all you have to do is say it. And it's not really contrived to say it. The marketing slogan for a 6.2 liter DI-VVT AFM Pushrod-16v V8 making 470 hp and delivering 25 mpg in an ATS can simply be this...

"Cadillac 6.2 V8"

...

"470 hp"

...

"17/25 mpg"

...

"The world's most smallest, lightest, most advanced and most fuel economical 470 hp production engine"

And, all of a sudden, you have pseudo gear heads all over the world rethinking their understanding of engines.

Pushrods in the CTS-V aren't a tough sell. All you have to do is say "Five Hundred and fifty six horsepower"

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, I think the "assumption" that Pushrods are a tough sell is overblown. The fact is that it is superior technology and all you have to do is say it. And it's not really contrived to say it. The marketing slogan for a 6.2 liter DI-VVT AFM Pushrod-16v V8 making 470 hp and delivering 25 mpg in an ATS can simply be this...

"Cadillac 6.2 V8"

...

"470 hp"

...

"17/25 mpg"

...

"The world's most smallest, lightest, most advanced and most fuel economical 470 hp production engine"

And, all of a sudden, you have pseudo gear heads all over the world rethinking their understanding of engines.

Where in the world outside GM fans are they crying and demanding pushrod engines?

It may be all you post and I don't disagree but people are buying otherwise. Do they need DOHC no but do most people world wide want and expect it yes.

It is like the traction tale for FWD. People today want FWD for the most part because they get better traction. Not true but it is easier to use for the unskilled driver. Point and shoot.

It all comes back to preception, ego and wants of the customer. There are many automotive snobs that will refuse a Chevy powered Cadillac no matter what you show them. Smart no but their money is green and you will not get it otherwise. If GM is to keep the LS based engine in their cars they really need a specific Cadillac tuned version that offers what Chevy does not offer. Mine is begger better and fancier, in this class Imsge is king not logic.

Where in the world outside of a select few on C&G and a few editors at C&D are people crying out for DOHC? In this class, power is king and the only thing a BMW owner has left to point to is the badge.

[Drew Dowdell]

No one would dare insult the V10 Viper engine and in fact the Hemi probably increases Chryler's image.

[Robert Hall]

No one would dare insult the V10 Viper engine and in fact the Hemi probably increases Chrysler's image.

True enough. I'd still like to see Chrysler build a V10 w/ Hemi heads. I wonder what will power the NG Viper...

The Hemi engine is part of Mopar's distinctly American flavor.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[hyperv6]

Well, I think the "assumption" that Pushrods are a tough sell is overblown. The fact is that it is superior technology and all you have to do is say it. And it's not really contrived to say it. The marketing slogan for a 6.2 liter DI-VVT AFM Pushrod-16v V8 making 470 hp and delivering 25 mpg in an ATS can simply be this...

"Cadillac 6.2 V8"

...

"470 hp"

...

"17/25 mpg"

...

"The world's most smallest, lightest, most advanced and most fuel economical 470 hp production engine"

And, all of a sudden, you have pseudo gear heads all over the world rethinking their understanding of engines.

Pushrods in the CTS-V aren't a tough sell. All you have to do is say "Five Hundred and fifty six horsepower"

It is the HP not the pushrods selling the V. But then again what percentage of the CTS sales are V's. There is a large group of people out there that believe correct or not that German engineering is superior to American no matter how often their BMW has a $1800 issue. Benz and BMW market themselves on techology from safety to performance. People buy into this.

Years ago people tought the orange peel on a Germans car paint was because they used more paint than Detroit. I had a Ford engineer tell me that was what people would tell them in clinic in the early 80's. People though bad paint was a good thing when it came to the Germans. He told me Ford used to put a little orange peel in to try to give the same impression for a while. He is also the one that told me they don't fool proof cars they idiot proof them as the public can never be underestimated.

The public as a whole are fools but you need to cater to them. Give them what they want or they will go else where. While luxury car buyers are not your normal grease under the fingernails kind of gear head many are still the want a be gear head that has the money to buy his performance. He like the brag factor or more of everything. He may not install bigger turbo's or a larger intercooler but he can tell his golf partner he has a bi turbo and 500 HP, that is what he cares about. He is not a Camaro Gear Head kind of guy and needs to be treated as such.

Now on a Camaro I see a DOHC as a negitive as most of these guys want tradition. But then again the Gen y drivers like the new way of things as they have grown up with the new technologies. I see it in our customers at work. The old guy wants a SBC and the young guy wants the larger Turbonetic's turbo for his 4 cylinder. Most of our sales staff hate inports 4 cylinders but their money is a green as the old guys. This is where I see offering both is not a issue but a requirement.

The trouble here is a preception of what Cadillac owners are and what they need to do to increase sales. Some of the old way will work but GM and Cadillac needs to adapt to the modern buyers that are going else where. You have the present buyers they need the people that are else where and have an opinon of a good car that does not include Cadillac....yet. You can argue to him and show him the push rod engine all you want but in his mind the he see's the other engines as more advanced and better. I see the ATS as a step to go after the new target market for Cadillac. I think there will be some suprises with this car for all groups.

The buyers of import luxury and performance are not the same kind of old people that have been tooling around in Buicks and DTS. The market has shifted and Cadillac is going to shift with it if it is going to survive. If not they could easily end up just like Olds and Pontiac. Before you say no who ever thought Olds and Pontiac would die.

No one would dare insult the V10 Viper engine and in fact the Hemi probably increases Chrysler's image.

True enough. I'd still like to see Chrysler build a V10 w/ Hemi heads. I wonder what will power the NG Viper...

The Hemi engine is part of Mopar's distinctly American flavor.

I suspect with Fiat in charge it will be 8 cylinders and may even be more than on cam. There has been a lot of hinting of Alfa being used.

[balthazar]

If anyone took note of Dwight's blue text, the proposed ATS advertising did NOT mention valvetrain configuration anywhere.

The whole idea here is to pitch the whole package, and not rest on the laurels of a half-handful of specs.

That would start the re-education of the consumer..... that tiny percentage who are interested in internal engine specs.

In fact, DOHC is hardly a selling point; as mentioned- just about everything has it, rendering it mass-production mainstream generica.

>>"The public as a whole are fools but you need to cater to them. Give them what they want or they will go else where"<<

So where are the 80% of 1-series buyers going to go once they find out BMW sold them a RWD car instead of the FWD car they paid for ???

Where are the 30-40% of 3-series buyers going to go ??

Lamar nailed it- lux cars are sold on reputation/badge 90% of the time. Specs are irrelevant.

-- -- --

>>"There is no generalities here better is better"<<

Define "better". Your 'better' is not everyone else's 'better' and it never will be.

Edited July 8, 2011 by balthazar

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, I think the "assumption" that Pushrods are a tough sell is overblown. The fact is that it is superior technology and all you have to do is say it. And it's not really contrived to say it. The marketing slogan for a 6.2 liter DI-VVT AFM Pushrod-16v V8 making 470 hp and delivering 25 mpg in an ATS can simply be this...

"Cadillac 6.2 V8"

...

"470 hp"

...

"17/25 mpg"

...

"The world's most smallest, lightest, most advanced and most fuel economical 470 hp production engine"

And, all of a sudden, you have pseudo gear heads all over the world rethinking their understanding of engines.

Pushrods in the CTS-V aren't a tough sell. All you have to do is say "Five Hundred and fifty six horsepower"

It is the HP not the pushrods selling the V. But then again what percentage of the CTS sales are V's. There is a large group of people out there that believe correct or not that German engineering is superior to American no matter how often their BMW has a $1800 issue. Benz and BMW market themselves on techology from safety to performance. People buy into this.

and what percentage of 3-series are Ms? The lower end CTS has DOHCs for someone who must have that over power. The M3 isn't sold on being DOHC, it's sold on being high horsepower with relatively low weight. The M5 isn't sold on being DOHC, it's sold on being a V10 with 500hp and great handling despite it's porky weight. DOHC is the least important part of the equation. It's right up there with the great Pushbutton start verse Key twist start debate of 2010.

In the end, does it really matter how you start the car or how many cams the engine has if all you're going to end up seeing is a pair of vertical tail lights getting smaller in the distance in front of you? When enough BMW guys experience this phenomenon, they'll get the picture and tell their friends.

[smk4565]

I agree with what Hyper has been saying. Cadillac does need to adapt to get the current luxury buyers plus those that haven't entered the luxury market yet.

Image does play a huge role in luxury cars. Of course people say "I've always wanted a BMW" or "I've always wanted a Mercedes" because they build the best and most expensive cars. They built their reputation over the past 30-40 years while Cadillac let theirs weaken. Driving a Cadillac (or Lexus or Lincoln) means you are an old person or that you couldn't afford a BMW or a Benz. The image just isn't there for those brands. Image building is what Cadillac needs, that is why they need to get focused and build some top end cars. Cadillac is clueless from a brand management standpoint.

The CTS-V may have 556 hp, but the 268 hp E350 that is easily optioned up over $60,000 probably outsells the CTS-V by large margin. Even with all that horsepower, Cadillac can't overcome the 3-point star.

[Lamar]

The CTS-V may have 556 hp, but the 268 hp E350 that is easily optioned up over $60,000 probably outsells the CTS-V by large margin. Even with all that horsepower, Cadillac can't overcome the 3-point star.

Let's think about this for a second... are you daring to compare the sales of the mass-market, driveable-by-anybody E350 to the top-of-the-line, probably-too-much-car-for-most-people CTS-V?

[balthazar]

^ Sales numbers = superiority.

Which is exactly why smk thinks the 1st 5 generations of S-class were inferior to the Fleetwood / Brougham / 60Special.

[Lamar]

Fair enough, Balthy. Then also by his logic, LaCrosse > E-Class.