Cadillac XTS Struts Its Stuff At LA

[William Maley]

Cadillac XTS Struts It Stuff At LA

William Maley - Editor/Reporter - CheersandGears.com

October 20, 2011

The Cadillac XTS will appear in the flesh at next month's LA Auto Show. The car will have Cadillac's new CUE infotainment system which will also appear the new ATS sedan and SRX crossover. We don't know what engine will be under the hood, though a version of the 3.6L DI V6 is a safe assumption.

Source: Inside Line

[Blake Noble]

I so badly want to place this car in the same light as the '67 Eldo, but I can't. If you want to correlate history to the present, you definitely can spin it that way. The Eldo was a big, cushy personal luxury car. The XTS is a big, cushy personal luxury car. The Eldo was a front-driver and was the original, sole front-driver in Cadillac's line-up when it was redesigned for '67. The XTS is a front-driver and will be the only front-driver (car-wise) in Cadillac's lineup when it's trotted out. The '67 Eldo was supposed to be the pinnacle for technology in Cadillac's line up back then and the XTS, in a way, fills that role now.

However, this car just doesn't stir the soul the same way that '67 Eldo does. Just take in the styling, for starters. The Eldo looked cutting edge back then. The XTS doesn't with it's sterile, neutered aura. God knows the XTS won't possess any personality like the '67 Eldo did either. It almost smacks with a peculiar undertone of Roger Smith-era malice.

Just wake me up when they build the ZT-whateverthehelllettertheymightuse.

Edited October 21, 2011 by black-knight

[PurdueGuy]

The side view is very important, the picture above doesn't show the length. Looks pretty good, very classy.

[Robert Hall]

The stubby Yaris-inspired nose is what ruins it for me...if it had an extra 6 inches or so between the tire and door it would look much better, IMO.

[regfootball]

this replaces the DTS and brings it forward about 15 years.

it's caddy's lexus ES350 or whatever.

it will sell. which, is what the bizness is about. sell.

[regfootball]

The stubby Yaris-inspired nose is what ruins it for me...if it had an extra 6 inches or so between the tire and door it would look much better, IMO.

this is one of those rare cars to me that pulls off having extreme length and a short nose.

originally i thought when i saw the first pics that they mailed it in, then i saw those walkaround videos and i realized when seeing it in 3d how good of a job GM design did moving a car this size ahead futuristically with the short nose and getting it look balanced. I would love to drive this car with such a dramatic proportion shift.

[balthazar]

Nice to see some proportional length getting back where it belongs- the deck.

We've been in a long nose/short deck cycle for decades- it's getting boring (even as it gets increasingly extreme).

[Robert Hall]

Nice to see some proportional length getting back where it belongs- the deck.

We've been in a long nose/short deck cycle for decades- it's getting boring (even as it gets increasingly extreme).

IIRC from the pics a while back, the rear is very short, like the CTS..so this is a short nose, shorter deck design..

[balthazar]

I'm looking at the overall rear overhang, not just the top side of the decklid.

And it may not be much or any longer than the DTS, but it gives me the stylistic impression it is.

[Robert Hall]

I'm looking at the overall rear overhang, not just the top side of the decklid.

And it may not be much or any longer than the DTS, but it gives me the stylistic impression it is.

Hard to say..looks shorter than the DTS in profile. Looking forward to seeing how it actually looks in person.

[balthazar]

I was 'meh' at the still pics, but agree with reg WRT the 360 video; some really sophisticated surface transitions worked in there...

[regfootball]

what is huge.... ushering in the era of the really long greenhouse......

the 98 intrepid in retrospect was a very extreme car, i am amazed at how successful it was and how stunningly futuristic it was blending the three boxes. the greenhouse morphed into the trunk and hood.

i think the XTS returns a trend in that direction, but at the same time as balthy suggested, it has a prominent trunk, the hood is short still though.

the 04 maxima to me was a bellmark, maybe even if it was an evolution of the 03 altima. irregardless.....the maxima to me ushed in the short rear deck look big time. the XTS to me has a glide to it a lot of the 2000's cars don't have.. still it has some length to it one would associate with a cadillac.

Edited October 21, 2011 by regfootball

[ocnblu]

I'll wait to see how oddly proportioned the production car is before I give it two snaps up... or down.

[hyperv6]

While I know this car has created a lot of debate I have a little different veiw in light of GM's latest statments.

They have come clean and stated this car is to catch the DTS and Town Car buyers. We all knew that but they also stated this car was also aimed at the livery crowd that is wide open with the loss of the town car. THey also look to aim this car at the limo and profesional car market.

To make a long story short here they did not call this a flag ship and it gives me the impression that his car will be as much for commercial sales as private. Think of it as Cadillacs Captiva. GM can build and sell this cars in numbers to who ever wants one but also on fleet or commercial sales and not hurt or kill the other and Future Cadillac resale values. This car will fite the bullet and really is a Cadillac while not really being the kind of Car Cadillac is becoming.

Better to sell this car like that than a ATS< CTS or even an Omega based flag ship in numbers at fleet sales prices to Enterprise or a large livery company who will dump them on the market later and kill resale values.

This car will improve on the DTS by a lot and will still be a nice car to anyone in the public that would want one but it is not the kind of car the rest of the line up will become. This one will take one for the team to help bring in money and still not hurt the resale of the rest of the company.

[Justin Bimmer]

That image is still the concept. That is not the production model.

[Robert Hall]

That image is still the concept. That is not the production model.

It will be interesting to see how much the production car differs..certainly some of the concept details were concepty (lighting, instrumentation), but I wonder if the body lines will be essentially unchanged..

[SAmadei]

Better to sell this car like that than a ATS< CTS or even an Omega based flag ship in numbers at fleet sales prices to Enterprise or a large livery company who will dump them on the market later and kill resale values.

Enterprise is going to buy what GM has no choice but to sell cheap... and thats going to include its fair share of ATS/CTSes. Only way to stop that is to refuse fleet sales.

As far as the new photos go, the XTS still doesn't move me. I actually prefer the DTS.

[Robert Hall]

As far as the new photos go, the XTS still doesn't move me. I actually prefer the DTS.

The DTS is a pretty clean and crisp design. The XTS' short nose just emphasizes the poor FWD proportions.

[jock82]

As a current DTS owner and Cadillac owner for 41 years this thing doesn't do it for me. I hate the way the thing looks, and they still don't get it. I personally don't want a 6 cylinder engine in my Caddie, I don't care how powerful it is supposed to be. This thing is not a Cadillac.

[hyperv6]

Better to sell this car like that than a ATS< CTS or even an Omega based flag ship in numbers at fleet sales prices to Enterprise or a large livery company who will dump them on the market later and kill resale values.

Enterprise is going to buy what GM has no choice but to sell cheap... and thats going to include its fair share of ATS/CTSes. Only way to stop that is to refuse fleet sales.

As far as the new photos go, the XTS still doesn't move me. I actually prefer the DTS.

Fleet sales prices are set by GM and they can make what ever deal they want to Livery Companies or Enterprise. They have already shown restraint on some of their other models to help resale values. They also are selling Vehicles like the Captiva to support fleets but not at the expense of customers values.

Here is some of what GM has said. They want to target Town Car buyers and for the last so many years that was mostly fleet sales and some private buyers.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/10/17/cadillac-to-market-new-xts-to-the-town-car-set/

If this is what they are doing it will enhance the value of owning a CTS and ATS as you know then they will not be dumping a bunch of used ones on the market.

GM has shown they need to show value in owning one of their cars and Cadillac is the one that needs to show the most value as they have the most to lose. While it may appeal to the secondary market buyer there is little appeal in buying a CTS as the resale while better is still not what it should be.

I see the XTS as the car to take one for the division and keep fleet sales up while they fix an hone the rest of the division. If they give Enterprise the best price on it thats the one they will buy unless they get stuck with a lot of unsold ATS but I don't expect that.

GM has shown signs of selling smart and not whoring out like they used to have to.

[SAmadei]

Fleet sales prices are set by GM and they can make what ever deal they want to Livery Companies or Enterprise. They have already shown restraint on some of their other models to help resale values. They also are selling Vehicles like the Captiva to support fleets but not at the expense of customers values.

I've always seen rentals as good advertising for car manufacturers... so I feel fleeting a last-generation product, like the Captiva, continues propagating the myth that GM cars are out of date and inferior to the Equinox.

Its a double edged sword, the dumping of fleet vehicles onto the secondary market, but then again, if you are building cars people will go crazy for, even a glut of used will get snapped up at a reasonably premium price. Note that when GM had 45% of the market, the Big Three were virtually the ONLY cars fleeted to rental companies and GM did not have the resale problems from the secondary market they have now. Because back then, GMs were so compelling, the people's demand bid them up.

I also question how much of GM's recent resale value resurgence is due to GM restraining themselves or due to the secondary market holding its value due to the economy being in the toilet.

I see the XTS as the car to take one for the division and keep fleet sales up while they fix an hone the rest of the division. If they give Enterprise the best price on it thats the one they will buy unless they get stuck with a lot of unsold ATS but I don't expect that.

I foresee GM being stuck with unsold ATSes because it will not have the cachet of the 3 series for a long time, and the CTS is cheap enough to be a better alternative for many. For the XTS to "TOFTT" will just confuse the consumers who will see a bigger car being given away at relatively cheap prices and people getting the XTSes at the rental will still see Cadillac offering its Buick-mobile to old folks.

GM has shown signs of selling smart and not whoring out like they used to have to.

Signs, yes, but I'm not convinced they are done their colossal mistakes.

[hyperv6]

Fleet sales prices are set by GM and they can make what ever deal they want to Livery Companies or Enterprise. They have already shown restraint on some of their other models to help resale values. They also are selling Vehicles like the Captiva to support fleets but not at the expense of customers values.

I've always seen rentals as good advertising for car manufacturers... so I feel fleeting a last-generation product, like the Captiva, continues propagating the myth that GM cars are out of date and inferior to the Equinox.

Its a double edged sword, the dumping of fleet vehicles onto the secondary market, but then again, if you are building cars people will go crazy for, even a glut of used will get snapped up at a reasonably premium price. Note that when GM had 45% of the market, the Big Three were virtually the ONLY cars fleeted to rental companies and GM did not have the resale problems from the secondary market they have now. Because back then, GMs were so compelling, the people's demand bid them up.

I also question how much of GM's recent resale value resurgence is due to GM restraining themselves or due to the secondary market holding its value due to the economy being in the toilet.

I see the XTS as the car to take one for the division and keep fleet sales up while they fix an hone the rest of the division. If they give Enterprise the best price on it thats the one they will buy unless they get stuck with a lot of unsold ATS but I don't expect that.

I foresee GM being stuck with unsold ATSes because it will not have the cachet of the 3 series for a long time, and the CTS is cheap enough to be a better alternative for many. For the XTS to "TOFTT" will just confuse the consumers who will see a bigger car being given away at relatively cheap prices and people getting the XTSes at the rental will still see Cadillac offering its Buick-mobile to old folks.

GM has shown signs of selling smart and not whoring out like they used to have to.

Signs, yes, but I'm not convinced they are done their colossal mistakes.

If rentals are to be an influance they better sell them better ones as the ones I have no matter the make are seldom the best example of make let alone the model.

Also Fleet sales are a negitive most the way around.

First off they seldom are money makers at least to the rentals. Often they are dumping grounds for slow sellers. Finally they are a problem for resale values for owner who bought them new. Case in point the HHR has been dumped on Enterprise and other service fleets to the tune of 40-50 percent the last few year of production. This in turn has made it possible to make a HHR LT1 that stickered at $22K be worth only $10-12K in a year or two. Now on the other hand the SS is not much more and never was leased and it still is sold used most dealers for $18-19K. Lease turn ins are nearly as bad for resale value on unless there is a greater demand for the car and a more limited supply like the G8 has shown.

It's simple supply and demand. Dump a supply of any car on the market yearly used and unless there is a high demand the resale value drops through the floor. Ever notice how a simple Honda keeps their resale so high. Few rental dumps from fleets and good demand for used cars. To me this is how you treat customers and get them to continue to buy in the future.

To claim victory or loss on the ATS is a little naive to call as we have yet to the full car let alone how the market will react to it yet. How many did we see claim the Cruze was a total flop on paper before it came out only to took like idiots now that the car is doing so well. Lets just wait and see the car and how the people take to it before we write anything off here.

I think too you should wait to see the XTS first before you hang a Buick handle on it. While it may not be a full blown Cadillac flagship I feel it might supply a little more than a Buick can or will offer. Lets see it and then judge. GM is doing more right today than just a few years ago and I think the people there are a little smarter and being permitted to do what they can vs what they are told. It shows in recent product and I think will show more in the new clean sheet of paper post BK cars.

Will them make any mistakes in the future? Yes as there is not a company out there that walks on water. Will GM make fewer mistakes and get more right than in the past? They are already showing that and I expect it will only improve. To be honest if GM did not fail somewhere that would tell me they are not taking enough risk to move ahead. As long as they calculate and get most of them right and few of them wrong it makes for a company that will lead the industry vs playing it safe and following. The Ford Ecoboost F 150 is a good example of where Ford took a major risk and it has paid off. In fact it has laid the ground work for smaller efficent engines in their trucks and more people being open to them. This will help sales once they start making the needed changed for CAFE.

Where Cadillac will make a impact will be the livery maket and the Professional car market. There are few options out there for these cars now and GM can make it pay off on volume. These cars also get used up and seldom make a large impact on the used market.

[smk4565]

this replaces the DTS and brings it forward about 15 years.

it's caddy's lexus ES350 or whatever.

it will sell. which, is what the bizness is about. sell.

The DTS was very 1995, so I guess the XTS will get up to 2010 standards.

The ES350 is slightly smaller than a CTS though, the XTS is huge the Lincoln MKS is the only similar car on the market.

It will sell, the same way the Town Car sold, Limo and Hearse market here we come!

[frogger]

I'm keeping an open mind, this car may pleasantly surprise me after the DTS was such a disappointment behind the wheel.

[ocnblu]

Powertrain rumors are abounding. I even sawr a report of a 2.5L turbo four being plinked under the hood of this "Cadillac". I hope that's wrong-o.

[hyperv6]

A Turbo 2.5 cold eaily power a car like this and with a hybrid system could give good MPG but Gm would have to market the crap out of it to get people to try it before they judge it to the point they dismiss it before they even try it.

I would say there may be a 2.5 here but fully expect a V6 engine to be the main player here. Will justy have to see what they offer. I think they will do a Lacross like drivetrain offering but with a little more power by the time this hits the market.

People buying this car are not performance people. They are the ones often still looking for whitewalls. My inlaws have a DTS and are shocked at how few whitewall tires are still on the market. They are the also kind of drivers I often tend to see in these cars. Yes they used to only buy Town Cars too so GM is looking for the correct group of buyers. They may not be the most exciting but they have money.

[ocnblu]

Yeah, wow. A turbo 4 cylinder in a "large" Epsilon Cadillac sedan. Have I missed a news article? The one where Lee Iaccoca became GM's CEO? Because the idear of it reminds me of a K-car "Imperial". Lock. Stock. And barrel.

[smk4565]

Yeah, wow. A turbo 4 cylinder in a "large" Epsilon Cadillac sedan. Have I missed a news article? The one where Lee Iaccoca became GM's CEO? Because the idear of it reminds me of a K-car "Imperial". Lock. Stock. And barrel.

Nice.

[Robert Hall]

Yeah, wow. A turbo 4 cylinder in a "large" Epsilon Cadillac sedan. Have I missed a news article? The one where Lee Iaccoca became GM's CEO? Because the idear of it reminds me of a K-car "Imperial". Lock. Stock. And barrel.

Agreed...it's as lame an idea as the junky 'large' FWD boxy sedans Chrysler built in the late '80s on stretched K-car platforms..GM is just pepetuating the FWD mediocrity image.

[balthazar]

^ If only any appreciable amount of consumers actually shopped by which wheels drive!

Do not underestimate the significance that 75% of BMW 1-series owners believe their car is FWD.

There is no more pertinent stat in the FWD/RWD discussion.

By association and sheer human nature, I believe at least 30% believe their 3-series is also.

While I've never owned anything FWD and have no plans to, it just. doesn't. matter. to most consumers, sorry.

And the XTS, from all press materials so far, is certainly no '80s New Yorker.

[pow]

^ If only any appreciable amount of consumers actually shopped by which wheels drive!

Do not underestimate the significance that 75% of BMW 1-series owners believe their car is FWD.

There is no more pertinent stat in the FWD/RWD discussion.

By association and sheer human nature, I believe at least 30% believe their 3-series is also.

While I've never owned anything FWD and have no plans to, it just. doesn't. matter. to most consumers, sorry.

And the XTS, from all press materials so far, is certainly no '80s New Yorker.

It certainly makes a difference in the way a car drives, and consumers notice that just after a few blocks. You don't have to be a self-proclaimed "enthusiast" to appreciate the natural steering feel and ergonomics commonly associated with RWD cars.

[balthazar]

You & I notice it, the vast majority DO NOT.

Just rolling down the street or slogging thru rush-hour; there's really no difference.

Push the car a bit, go thru some corners, then yes; of course.

[ocnblu]

A difference can be felt as soon as one turns the steering wheel. A heft, a deadness, an I'm not sure what to call it but it's different and not as good.

[smk4565]

FWD Vs RWD matters on luxury cars, especially the bigger ones. Just look at sales of the Volvo S80, Acura, TL, Lincoln MKS, and Cadillac DTS. All duds. Even the A6 with a longitudinal engine for better weight balance and Quattro is a sales dud compared to the other 2 German sedans. The Lexus ES350 and Acura TL have moderate success since they are at the bottom of the luxury pyramid, but they still get outsold by several rear drivers of equal price.

Luxury car companies make FWD to save money by using mechanics of a mainstream car and/or because they lack the ability to do it the right way (Acura, Lincoln, Volvo). Either way it is a shortcut and a compromise, and buyers notice. Real buyers, the Funeral Home won't care what the drive wheels are, so the XTS is okay.

[SAmadei]

If rentals are to be an influance they better sell them better ones as the ones I have no matter the make are seldom the best example of make let alone the model.

Also Fleet sales are a negitive most the way around.

First off they seldom are money makers at least to the rentals. Often they are dumping grounds for slow sellers. Finally they are a problem for resale values for owner who bought them new. Case in point the HHR has been dumped on Enterprise and other service fleets to the tune of 40-50 percent the last few year of production. This in turn has made it possible to make a HHR LT1 that stickered at $22K be worth only $10-12K in a year or two. Now on the other hand the SS is not much more and never was leased and it still is sold used most dealers for $18-19K. Lease turn ins are nearly as bad for resale value on unless there is a greater demand for the car and a more limited supply like the G8 has shown.

It's simple supply and demand. Dump a supply of any car on the market yearly used and unless there is a high demand the resale value drops through the floor. Ever notice how a simple Honda keeps their resale so high. Few rental dumps from fleets and good demand for used cars. To me this is how you treat customers and get them to continue to buy in the future.

No need to repeat supply and demand to me... but apparently there is need to repeat it to GM. The HHR shouldn't have been dumped on Enterprise because if demand for the HHR dried up suddenly, they shouldn't have built them in the first place. Without these raging bargains, let Enterprise and friends bid up for the cars that people actually want to drive, want to rent, want to see on the road and want to purchase.

Honda and its keiretsu have the sense to forecast properly the Honda they plan to sell. Sure, they aren't going to get it perfectly right (Accord Crosstour), but then again, they don't have 100K Crosstours being dumped on Enterprise lots right now, do they?

To claim victory or loss on the ATS is a little naive to call as we have yet to the full car let alone how the market will react to it yet. How many did we see claim the Cruze was a total flop on paper before it came out only to took like idiots now that the car is doing so well. Lets just wait and see the car and how the people take to it before we write anything off here.

I never said the Cruze would flop. I said it was an ugly, Sebring rip off... and I stand by that. But its also the lower half of the meat of Chevy's sales. Even if it came out completely retarded, a huge number of loyal Chevy folk would still buy it... as they have been buying questionable Cavaliers and Cobalts for decades.

There is no victory or loss to the ATS... I am forecasting... just like when I play poker, stockmarket or football bets. If its a huge success, I eat some crow and we all lose by GM never building a car longer than 180 inches again.

I think too you should wait to see the XTS first before you hang a Buick handle on it. While it may not be a full blown Cadillac flagship I feel it might supply a little more than a Buick can or will offer. Lets see it and then judge. GM is doing more right today than just a few years ago and I think the people there are a little smarter and being permitted to do what they can vs what they are told. It shows in recent product and I think will show more in the new clean sheet of paper post BK cars.

There is nothing GM can do to the XTS to not make it into a "big FWD Buick"... that die was thrown when the platform was chosen. After GM demonstrated what Cadillac could be with the STS, CTS, XLR... the DTS became the odd man out. To lose Sammy Hagar for Gary Cherone does not help when the world wants a return to Roth.

Not necessarily the best analogy, but...

Buick doesn't supply what Buick used to offer, either. When I call new Buicks Lexuses... that's meant as an insult.

The Ford Ecoboost F 150 is a good example of where Ford took a major risk and it has paid off. In fact it has laid the ground work for smaller efficent engines in their trucks and more people being open to them. This will help sales once they start making the needed changed for CAFE.

I don't see the Ecoboost being that big of a deal, risk-wise. Ford had full size pickups for decades with 6 cylinders and sold tons of them. And that Ecoboost is not going to get the job done when you start piling in the weight.

Where Cadillac will make a impact will be the livery maket and the Professional car market. There are few options out there for these cars now and GM can make it pay off on volume. These cars also get used up and seldom make a large impact on the used market.

I think the livery market is just going to switch to trucks. Getting around in a car limo is a PITA (The Hummer super stretch was worse). The old DTS was a rare limo due to it being easier to convert Lincolns. I imagine the 300 is the next easiest to convert and it produces a nice looking limo. I feel the angles on the XTS will look awful once stretched... like a zig-zag.

I doubt the XTS will have any takers for armored cars... I doubt the EpII platform is prepared for an additional 4 tons of weight, as it is already being stressed to bring us the XTS.

I imagine the XTS will make a great hearse. But only 2000 or so of those are built a year, as funeral homes are holding on to them for longer and longer. I have asked my family to not permit me to take my last drive in a frigging SUV.

[hyperv6]

Friend Honda did not have to keep production up at plants to keep them open. It was too expensive to close them and pay union workers to stay home vs dumping the cars. Just not building the cars was not as easy as you want to make it as you have to factor in many issues involved here. God knows GM and most auto makers wished it was as easy as it is you your world. This should really no longer be as much an issue.

Where did I say you said the Cruze was a flop? I said many people I never accused you. Based on what you just said you just joined the club LOL! The buyers of the Cruze have not been the traditional Cobalt buyers. Just look at who are driving them most are older and not what I would call limited or entry level income people as many Cobalt buyer were. Few are fleet and rentals.

If you bet like you think you must lose a lot of money on Football. Hint don't bet on the Browns to win! LOL!

Roth??? Very poor analogy Van Hagar sold many more albums and made a lot more money than Roth. Roth fans are just more loud and obnoxious not larger in numbers. The last STS and XLR were not finacial wins, since they both have been dropped I would say they were not what Cadillac really needed. For the most only the CTS and SRX along with the SUV are all that have kept Cadillac alive.

As for Buick, your insult cars are of more interest to more people. I have seen more people other than my Parents and the friends get excited about a Buick. That has not happened for a long time. They for once are selling cars that interest people under 65 and that has not happend since the GN.

Ford did sell the V6 engined but not in that great of numbers in the last 15 years. Most were V8 and on top of that they did not charge $1000 more for the v6. As for not being able to tow a load, That is a myth spread by uniformed people on the web. Near 50% of production is a real accomplishment and they should be commended for taking the risk of selling a premium engine at a premium price that was way out of the norm. Again many predicted it would never work but so far it is a win.

You really have know idea where the meat of the Livery market is. Most Livery cars are not your streach limo. If you have been to LA, SF, Chicago NYC and other large cities there are a great number of black Town Cars in each city. These cars are used by companies and many paying customer to deliver them around town daily. Some are out of town visitors, some local company officals, Celebreties, VIP's etc. Most companies in the past used to own their own fleets of cars to take people from place to place and home and back. Today companies dropped these cars and now pay independent companies to do this for them. They are normally just stock town cars with tinted glass, no armor plate and no additions. These cars sold in great numbers and this in part is why Ford continued to build them as they were easy money. Livery cars are even used in good numbers in even smaller cities. I see many here even in Akron Ohio. These cars deliver tens of thousands daily in many cities. The Town car was the work force for this market. The 300 could take some of this but why should GM not try to take some of this market.

The long cars and trucks are just novelties and are a small part of this market. Same for armor plated vehicles. Most of these today are SUV's. We sell a lot of parts to several firms building these vehicles and they amazing for what some of them are and can do. It would be too expensive to do much of this to a car.

THe Hearse market is there too. There are very few cars out there serving this market. The DTS has dominated this one and I see the new car doing the same. 2,000 sales are not large but why give them away?

While the XTS might not be a world class car in the eyes of some it will generate a lot of income by serving several rolls. I really don't expect this car to be around for long. It is a gap filler that was already started before the turn around at GM. I expect we will see a much better car to replace it in time. Cadillac like GM is not going to transform over 2-3 years. They will tranform over time and the ATS is really the first step of the major changes. I think this will will suprise many. It is not going to be just a small CTS.

Edited October 22, 2011 by hyperv6

[SAmadei]

Friend Honda did not have to keep production up at plants to keep them open. It was too expensive to close them and pay union workers to stay home vs dumping the cars. Just not building the cars was not as easy as you want to make it as you have to factor in many issues involved here. God knows GM and most auto makers wished it was as easy as it is you your world. This should really no longer be as much an issue.

In my world? Honda and Toyota seem to be in my world... i.e., have run a business without these constraints GM has saddled themselves with. Its not like Honda and Toyota exist in a vacuum. GM has sent people to learn from them.

I'm well aware of the issues GM faced closing plants... but this was all brought on by themselves, and it has far reaching consequences.

Where did I say you said the Cruze was a flop? I said many people I never accused you. Based on what you just said you just joined the club LOL!

WTF does that mean? I only clarified my position. If you think I joined that club, you have a serious problem with reading comprehension.

The buyers of the Cruze have not been the traditional Cobalt buyers. Just look at who are driving them most are older and not what I would call limited or entry level income people as many Cobalt buyer were. Few are fleet and rentals.

I don't even look at the drivers because you can't necessarily tell squat from that to determine income level. Everyone pretends to be living better than they are.

Oh, and the J-bodies started life off with a premium price, too. Flash forward to 2016 and lets talk about the rich and famous fighting each other to get a Cruze.

If you bet like you think you must lose a lot of money on Football. Hint don't bet on the Browns to win! LOL!

I won plenty... including using the Browns. Peyton Hillis 2010 was a monster.

Your insulting manner tells me you're arrogant and your inability to discuss oversteer versus understeer in the other thread indicates to me your thinking is about as deep as a goldfishes'.

Roth??? Very poor analogy Van Hagar sold many more albums and made a lot more money than Roth. Roth fans are just more loud and obnoxious not larger in numbers.

Again, your thought processes are misfiring wildly.

Roth - 34 million albums with VH (VH1 - 10m, VH2 - 5m, W&CF - 3m, FW - 2m, DD - 4m, 1984 - 10m)

Hagar - 16 million albums with VH. (5150 - 6m, OU812 - 4m, F.U.C.K. - 3m, Balance - 3m)

Granted, in US sales... not counting worldwide since it is not going to change much... because, for example, CAN platinum is a lot less albums than US platinum. As for tours, well, a lot of that requires adjusting for inflation. Just watch to see how big the reunited tour brings in next year... I'm sure it'll be in the top 10.

Honestly, after this part of your post, I'm just bored with your droning on about the same points from other threads without bring new information into play.

[hyperv6]

What had happend to GM and the issues where they could not close the plants were there and they had to make lemonaide of lemons till they could get out. Henc Fleet sales.

"I never said the Cruze would flop. I said it was an ugly, Sebring rip off".. I read this as defensive. Sorry. You may think it is ugly but they are making money. Someone loves it in good numbers I might add.

Rich and famous of a Cruze?? These are people who used to buy Impala's Camary's Civics and Accord at a higher price. Middle class familes people who used to not buy Cobalts till they sent Jr to collage. Start looking around you might learn somthing.

My mannor is based only on what I recieve from someone else. Think of it as reflective. I may have not used the proper word in our conversation but I assuemed and expected you could figure out my point. Sorry if I over estimated. Note Hillis has been sick and is hurt there are also contract issues distracting. I love him on the team and hope they can get it worked out.

The new VH will never complete the full tour. Either Eddie will burn out Drunk or on Drugs [i am sad to say] will not make it thr whole way or they will they will Fire Dave again. Sad to see such talent go to waste. At least we have Chickenfoot. How over due is the VH album now alrady? Sorry you are correct on the sales but they still did very well with 4 #1 albums and 17 top 12 singles with 2 Grammy nominations is very repectable.

See ya Mr Quote!

[smk4565]

Cadillac made the decision to transform itself in 2003, and they made the move away from the Seville, Eldorado, Catera to the CTS, XLR, SRX, STS. A move from FWD and an Opel rebagde to purpose built RWD performance/luxury cars. Now they are moving back to FWD with the SRX and XTS. It is as if they went after the Germans for 5 years, then got scared and said we better focus back on Lincoln, as we did from 1935 to 2002.

[67impss]

Hyper when did Honda unionize? I've worked at Marysville .East Liberty. Troy & Russel's Point none were unionized. Also at the financial meltdown period in 2009 Honda did close the doors at these plants at least they were down to 3 days a week. The point being it was too expensive to keep them open!

"Friend Honda did not have to keep production up at plants to keep them open. It was too expensive to close them and pay union workers to stay home vs dumping the cars. Just not building the cars was not as easy as you want to make it as you have to factor in many issues involved here. God knows GM and most auto makers wished it was as easy as it is you your world. This should really no longer be as much an issue."

[hyperv6]

Hyper when did Honda unionize? I've worked at Marysville .East Liberty. Troy & Russel's Point none were unionized. Also at the financial meltdown period in 2009 Honda did close the doors at these plants at least they were down to 3 days a week. The point being it was too expensive to keep them open!

"Friend Honda did not have to keep production up at plants to keep them open. It was too expensive to close them and pay union workers to stay home vs dumping the cars. Just not building the cars was not as easy as you want to make it as you have to factor in many issues involved here. God knows GM and most auto makers wished it was as easy as it is you your world. This should really no longer be as much an issue."

My point was Honda did not have to keep the doors open and production running because they are not union. GM was at a point where it was cheaper to build the cars and keep the plants runing vs closing the lines down due to UAW contracts that were in place. Things post Chapter 11 should be better and I expect it will no longer be as much an issue.

I know Honda is still not Union and never had this problem hence they could drastically cut production if needed. Now at the other end of the state Lordstown had to keep pumping cars out as to send the UAW people home got to be very expensive. The Union has changed their deal to get the Cruze and other future models and these will help GM be better off. It may not be as ideal as a non union plant but at least it opens more options to them they did not have to control production. With with the economy and future sales in question it may be a big help if sales stall.

Sorry for not being clear. My whole point was GM had union issues Honda and other non union plants did not have to deal with that made it cheaper to keep going than closing down. Sorry I don't have the details right now but it was reported a lot at the time in the media and Wall Street Journel.

Edited October 23, 2011 by hyperv6

[SAmadei]

My point was Honda did not have to keep the doors open and production running because they are not union. GM was at a point where it was cheaper to build the cars and keep the plants runing vs closing the lines down due to UAW contracts that were in place. Things post Chapter 11 should be better and I expect it will no longer be as much an issue.

I know Honda is still not Union and never had this problem hence they could drastically cut production if needed. Now at the other end of the state Lordstown had to keep pumping cars out as to send the UAW people home got to be very expensive. The Union has changed their deal to get the Cruze and other future models and these will help GM be better off. It may not be as ideal as a non union plant but at least it opens more options to them they did not have to control production. With with the economy and future sales in question it may be a big help if sales stall.

Sorry for not being clear. My whole point was GM had union issues Honda and other non union plants did not have to deal with that made it cheaper to keep going than closing down. Sorry I don't have the details right now but it was reported a lot at the time in the media and Wall Street Journel.

Its still a problem brought on by GM.

Disclaimer: I am not completely anti-Union, only anti-overbearing/greedy/destructive-union.

GM should never had let the UAW get so powerful that they can dictate such constraints on GM's business processes. In many industries that took a massive hit from overseas competition, unions backed off or became less interfering... but that's not the case with GM... as overseas competition continued, GM let the UAW run them over. We say things will be different now, but now the UAW is a major owner and is still the union in charge... so GM's success will help to fill the union's bank accounts to help them keep pressure on GM.

That said, I question... is GM unionized as a corporation, or on a plant-by-plant basis? If the latter, I have to question: perhaps it would have been easier to bulldoze plants and build new ones without unions than to build MY after MY of fleet vehicles at a loss... and at a loss of GM's resale value.

A massive UAW fight and strike would have been a huge blow to GM, sure... but at some point GM would have face the music... and they did, in the form of a BK. But in the same way, at some point, the strikers would have to realize that OK pay is better than no pay... and that the crazy pay days of GM's heyday were long gone.

[CanadianBacon94]

Cadillac made the decision to transform itself in 2003, and they made the move away from the Seville, Eldorado, Catera to the CTS, XLR, SRX, STS. A move from FWD and an Opel rebagde to purpose built RWD performance/luxury cars. Now they are moving back to FWD with the SRX and XTS. It is as if they went after the Germans for 5 years, then got scared and said we better focus back on Lincoln, as we did from 1935 to 2002.

IMHO cadillac is not moving to FWD, with the SRX it was a matter of picking a class and selling cars there, the best sellers in that class are FWD, and these aren't car enthusiast cars, the RX SRX and whatever else is made there are for people who think Minivans are too soccer-momish, and they think there cool parents...

The XTS is here to make the Cadillac line seem less weak while the STS and DTS are out untill their "S killer" comes out in five(or however many) years i guess, not a smart plan but...

looks better than a four car line, at least to me, and probably most others(non car people)

they don't see it as

Meh, SUV

Meh, FWD, etc etc

Edited October 23, 2011 by CanadianBacon94

[smk4565]

Escalade - Navigator

SRX - MKX

XTS - MKS

CTS - MKZ (same size and price, just rwd vs fwd)

Possible Lambda Cadillac coming to compete with the MKT. Both automakers even us alphanumeric names on everything except their full size SUV. The ATS is the only difference in the lines. Cadillac isn't moving to all FWD, but they are moving really close to what Lincoln offers, and Lincoln is dead, why copy anything they do.

[balthazar]

yet mercedes & BMW are bringing multiple FWD models to the most lucrative market on Earth- the U.S.; Cadillac is dead, why copy anything they do?

[hyperv6]

My point was Honda did not have to keep the doors open and production running because they are not union. GM was at a point where it was cheaper to build the cars and keep the plants runing vs closing the lines down due to UAW contracts that were in place. Things post Chapter 11 should be better and I expect it will no longer be as much an issue.

I know Honda is still not Union and never had this problem hence they could drastically cut production if needed. Now at the other end of the state Lordstown had to keep pumping cars out as to send the UAW people home got to be very expensive. The Union has changed their deal to get the Cruze and other future models and these will help GM be better off. It may not be as ideal as a non union plant but at least it opens more options to them they did not have to control production. With with the economy and future sales in question it may be a big help if sales stall.

Sorry for not being clear. My whole point was GM had union issues Honda and other non union plants did not have to deal with that made it cheaper to keep going than closing down. Sorry I don't have the details right now but it was reported a lot at the time in the media and Wall Street Journel.

Its still a problem brought on by GM.

Disclaimer: I am not completely anti-Union, only anti-overbearing/greedy/destructive-union.

GM should never had let the UAW get so powerful that they can dictate such constraints on GM's business processes. In many industries that took a massive hit from overseas competition, unions backed off or became less interfering... but that's not the case with GM... as overseas competition continued, GM let the UAW run them over. We say things will be different now, but now the UAW is a major owner and is still the union in charge... so GM's success will help to fill the union's bank accounts to help them keep pressure on GM.

That said, I question... is GM unionized as a corporation, or on a plant-by-plant basis? If the latter, I have to question: perhaps it would have been easier to bulldoze plants and build new ones without unions than to build MY after MY of fleet vehicles at a loss... and at a loss of GM's resale value.

A massive UAW fight and strike would have been a huge blow to GM, sure... but at some point GM would have face the music... and they did, in the form of a BK. But in the same way, at some point, the strikers would have to realize that OK pay is better than no pay... and that the crazy pay days of GM's heyday were long gone.

I fully agree and it was a mistake made long ago when times were fat and GM never invisioned problems. The folks back then should have thought of this but it is what it is.

From what I know the UAW works as a unit for most issues but contracts are worked out plant to plant. Case in point the UAW folks at Lordstown knew they are at risk in the largest plant GM owns. It is not a cheap plant to run and GM could leave it very easy. But GM also uses this to work out deals more in favore with GM. The Cruze was offered to them if they took reasonable cut and they would keep their jobs building the Cruze. If they failed to make a deal GM was just going to shop it around to other plants and see who would take the deal they offer.

I think the baiscs are worked out nationally but they work out many details plant to plant.

The rubber indutry did kill the URW when they offered to build new union plants if they would deal to reasonable cuts in the 70's. Goodyear and others did move south and build non union plants. This gave them leverage with the union plants. The URW died and now the rubber workers are now USW union members.

Building new plants is a good idea for some companies but it all depends on their finacial health and also their product. Building auto plants right now for GM would be a big risk and for Ford who already has loans leveraged on theirs impossible.

Also right now with the economy building a new plant would be difficult as many of the sweet tax free deals to relocate are not there. Local goverments are looking for money and it is hard to give these sweet deals away right now but you never know who might offer what. Goodyears replacing their 100 plus year old headquarters with a new headquarters built by Akron and Ohio. This will keep them here for a long time. But now the City is 80 million in the red.

I am not so much anti union as I am anti union managment. Talk about some real fat cats. The URW guys here in Akron drained the union and employees, They were left with the money and the tire builder were left with no jobs.

That is just my understanding. I know there is much more too it and it will vary from union to union. Maybe someone that belongs to the UAW can fill in more or correct this.

Edited October 23, 2011 by hyperv6

[hyperv6]

As for FWD in the future luxury class it is a matter of being smart.

Like pointed out above picking kinds or classes where they do well like the SRX. Benz and BMW are not looking to FWD because they want to but because they have to with future regs not only CAFE here but also the emissions and miles regs in Europe. Right now they are moving into untested markets and they are using car in growing thses cars. They will make mistakes and I am sure they will create class leaders.

Cadillac already has shown show cars that were small FWD in the last few years. In Europe they are being accepted well with the odd Aston Martin based on the Toyota IQ. I would have never expected such a response. The key is will it keep going or just be a novelty like the Smart car is here.

No matter what the greatest changes in the next 10 years will be in the luxury market and the truck market. The company that gets it right will earn the lead and advantage.

[SAmadei]

Building new plants is a good idea for some companies but it all depends on their finacial health and also their product. Building auto plants right now for GM would be a big risk and for Ford who already has loans leveraged on theirs impossible.

Well, doing it now is too late, considering the UAW is a one of the biggest shareholders.

As for FWD in the future luxury class it is a matter of being smart.

In a small car, ATS-sized or smaller, yes, I agree. NOT in a large car like the XTS.

Like pointed out above picking kinds or classes where they do well like the SRX. Benz and BMW are not looking to FWD because they want to but because they have to with future regs not only CAFE here but also the emissions and miles regs in Europe. Right now they are moving into untested markets and they are using car in growing thses cars. They will make mistakes and I am sure they will create class leaders.

The weight difference between FWD and RWD is generally a rounding error, and RWD cars have already been demonstrated to get better mileage than similar FWD cars. Please stop continuing to use this myth to justify GM's half-baked ideas of FWD across the board.

[Robert Hall]

yet mercedes & BMW are bringing multiple FWD models to the most lucrative market on Earth- the U.S.; Cadillac is dead, why copy anything they do?

Those are just low-level appliances. Their good stuff remains RWD (for now)..

Edited October 24, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/T38ESmCxrIM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>