Cadillac News: Ladies & Gents, I Give You The Cadillac XTS

[hyperv6]

I'm not seeing the crazy modifications to the production design over the concept. The windows on the side are now functional and the fog lamps are a bit different.

There are some small detail things that if you put both photos side by side you can find them. Overal they kept the car pretty close to the show car and what changes were made were based on practical needs and cost. The people who will buy this car will never know the differeve.

[hyperv6]

God knows it is an improvement over the DTS.

I don't think it's an improvement over the DTS. It's too narrow, and I don't care for the third window in the C pillar.

I think it could succeed modestly if priced at the level of the Lexus ES350, but I fear Cadillac will price it much higher.

That I feel is where the target is. I have seen people place much higher price on this than it will really be. SInce it is based on a standard platform this will help keep the price in a affordable range. ALso if GM plans to use it for fleet and livery sales it will have to keep it affordable.

This is not a flag ship and it will not be a performance car. It will be a comfortable sedan with good MPG that will be affordable to the older buyers and commercial buyer.

None of us should put any big expectations on this car for leading edge performance to ultra Luxury. This will be a more modern traditional luxury car and a affordable luxury car. It is taking the slot that the town car left and Lincoln is trying to get a new model to replace. It is a slot where there is good profit but not a lot of flash.

As for the DTS it was showing its age and needed help. As for size many of these cars will be getting shorter and more narrow to remove weight. They need MPG's andI fear what we may see just to meet the new stadards unless the goverment wakes up.

Edited November 13, 2011 by hyperv6

[smk4565]

My guess is they set the base price around $47,895.

[Blake Noble]

I'm not seeing the crazy modifications to the production design over the concept. The windows on the side are now functional and the fog lamps are a bit different.

Here's something I whipped up illustrating the differences. I couldn't help to pepper in a little opinion in the commentary, so simply ignore where I ramble a bit if you have to.

Ignore how crude it is. My graphic design skills have gotten very rusty since I quit taking classes.

And, once again, the only things that I see that had to be changed on the concept car (which, once again, was touted to be a "thinly veiled" version of the eventual product) to make it production friendly are:

• The size of the side-view mirrors.
  
• The headlamp detailing.
  
• Some interior parts and switchgear.
  

Once again, I think the glasshouse was changed so that the hardpoints of this larger version of EPII could more easily be shared with the upcoming Chevrolet Impala.

Edited November 13, 2011 by black-knight

[hyperv6]

I'm not seeing the crazy modifications to the production design over the concept. The windows on the side are now functional and the fog lamps are a bit different.

Here's something I whipped up illustrating the differences. I couldn't help to pepper in a little opinion in the commentary, so simply ignore where I ramble a bit if you have to.

Ignore how crude it is. My graphic design skills have gotten very rusty since I quit taking classes.

And, once again, the only things that I see that had to be changed on the concept car (which, once again, was touted to be a "thinly veiled" version of the eventual product) to make it production friendly are:

• The size of the side-view mirrors.
  
• The headlamp detailing.
  
• Some interior parts and switchgear.
  

Once again, I think the glasshouse was changed so that the hardpoints of this larger version of EPII could more easily be shared with the upcoming Chevrolet Impala.

The question is how many people who are the target of this car will really notice?

[Justin Bimmer]

I get there are all these changes, but the untrained eye says "looks just like the concept"

[Camino LS6]

Yep, still hate it.

[yougojay]

Depressing...all the Cadillac cars look the same. They come out with all these neat looking concept cars, you know GM can build them, then the company gives us this. The older I get the more I miss the old days. At least the cars had some character.

[Robert Hall]

I'm not seeing the crazy modifications to the production design over the concept. The windows on the side are now functional and the fog lamps are a bit different.

Here's something I whipped up illustrating the differences. I couldn't help to pepper in a little opinion in the commentary, so simply ignore where I ramble a bit if you have to.

Ignore how crude it is. My graphic design skills have gotten very rusty since I quit taking classes.

And, once again, the only things that I see that had to be changed on the concept car (which, once again, was touted to be a "thinly veiled" version of the eventual product) to make it production friendly are:

• The size of the side-view mirrors.
  
• The headlamp detailing.
  
• Some interior parts and switchgear.
  

Once again, I think the glasshouse was changed so that the hardpoints of this larger version of EPII could more easily be shared with the upcoming Chevrolet Impala.

The question is how many people who are the target of this car will really notice?

Doubt it... it's a DTS replacement and a competitor for the MKS, RL and ES..nothing more..will provide a steady volume and fleet sales for a while.

I hope we eventually see a real, serious Cadillac range topping full size sedan that will be competitive in the big leagues..

[ocnblu]

I'm thinking "cowcatcher", as in old locomotive, when I look at that front end.

[dwightlooi]

I just want to have an informed opinion. I am not a fan of this class of car but I am willing to give it a shot and to be fair I need to see it in person first. Too many have made harsh comments about a car only to have to take back or change their opinion later once the car is seen in person and does well on the market.

I can understand having an informed opinion about the car, sure. As I've said, though, the one photo we've got is enough to form an opinion on this car from a design standpoint and regarding how the changes made from the concept car affect the design overall.

Once again, I've only condemned the car from a design standpoint.

It's kind of like me forming an opinion on you. I would rather meet you first vs Just hating you based on seeing you in one drunken photo on facebook! LOL!

Well, no ... not really. While you can't form a rounded opinion about my behavior and personality from one photograph, you can certainly form an opinion about my appearance (e.g. "He's got a nice smile" or "He looks like he might be a bit of a slob").

No one here, myself included, is making any firm assumptions about the car aside from how it has been designed. Again, notice no one has said in this thread that the car "is going to drive like shit" or "will be weak and underpowered." We don't have any hard data to go on here, hence why no one has said anything regarding those two aspects of the car, myself included.

As for the concept vs production car. I think most are smart enough to understand the need for many changes. There is no need to explain on further.

Really? Again, I'm going to have to disagree with you here unless you can explain why so much had to be changed from the production-ready concept car.

I've given my explanation here and -- I'm sorry -- that's the only thing that makes logical sense. It's certainly not because that the original concept car would be expensive to produce on the outside.

I look at cars like this as how the public will react and if there is a market segement to support it. I see there will be enough of each for this car if they keep the price down untill they can get to the kind of car they really want here. It was either this car for 4-5 yerars in the show room or an empty space in the showroom for the next 4-5 years. It will make money and do well till the right car is ready.

Livery sales alone will make back any investment here. The Ma and Pa buyers need cars too. As for China it will do well. It will return better than average MPG and the back seat I suspect will be the best seat in the house in their version. Most owners in this class do not drive they are driven there.

I don't know if the general public will get behind this one if it's going to max out beyond $50k price wise.

Then again, it's really too early to assume anything about this car sales wise. That doesn't mean I won't speculate, though.

However, I will guarantee this: if this car does not deliver on all expectations regarding fuel economy, an involving driving experience, interior fit and finish, the level of standard content, and overall quality then the press will crucify this car, Cadillac, and GM as a result. They had better hope that they've built a good enough stop-gap until they decide to produce the Ciel for general consumption (but I'm not holding my breath regarding the Ciel), otherwise this car will haunt them until they pull the plug on it.

Regarding China, I really think this car will consistently lose out to the Park Avenue. Just saying and speculating.

I don't look at it quite so sternly. The XTS, regardless of what anyone said or did not say, is not and will not be Cadillac's flagship. That will be the Ciel or whatever it ends up being called. The XTS is Cadillac's competitor to the Lexus ES350. It is not the Caddy with which to take on the S-class, the 7-series or the LS460. In this regard, I believe it will price in the 40s and it must exceed the expectations of Lexus ES and Acura RL buyers, as well as appeal to DTS/Deville customers looking for a follow-on caddy to buy. That standard is high, but it is not astronomical. And, from the superficial look I am getting so far, I don't see any obvious failings.

The car must be extremely comfortable and whisper quiet. It must look and feel well made and classy. It should also have decent fuel economy and performance, but these aren't top priorities to this class. It doesn't have to be the ambassador as to everything that Caddy can accomplish -- it does not have to be a halo car.

[Blake Noble]

The question is how many people who are the target of this car will really notice?

That's not the sole point I'm trying to make. I'm just wondering why GM chose to make Lee's Famous Recipe when they could've just as easily made KFC -- the real thing -- with not much more effort or cost.

Want to know something, though? I don't know why all of those styling changes bother me, to be honest. Maybe it's because I feel that GM was capable of greater, effortless, and production feasible design prowess here and that makes me worry what that might mean for some future car that I'll be far more inclined to care about and actually purchase.

I get there are all these changes, but the untrained eye says "looks just like the concept"

I don't think you'd need a trained eye to pick up on the differences. I know I found a lot of them on my first glance. Then again, I'm not about to go out and find people to hold those two pictures up to.

Edited November 15, 2011 by black-knight

[daves87rs]

Well, at least I like it...

[Lamar]

I don't look at it quite so sternly. The XTS, regardless of what anyone said or did not say, is not and will not be Cadillac's flagship. That will be the Ciel or whatever it ends up being called. The XTS is Cadillac's competitor to the Lexus ES350.

Here's my thing though... it was said before that Buick was positioned to take on Lexus.

Why, again, is Cadillac redoubling Buick's mission?

[vonVeezelsnider]

I will say after looking at it again that it certainly appear to have much better proportions than the LaCrosse which sometimes looks super awkward esp from rear 3/4 view. I would agree with Ocn though that overall the 9-5 has the best execution of the Epsilon II cars so far although this is second in my mind.

[hyperv6]

The question is how many people who are the target of this car will really notice?

That's not the sole point I'm trying to make. I'm just wondering why GM chose to make Lee's Famous Recipe when they could've just as easily made KFC -- the real thing -- with not much more effort or cost.

Want to know something, though? I don't know why all of those styling changes bother me, to be honest. Maybe it's because I feel that GM was capable of greater, effortless, and production feasible design prowess here and that makes me worry what that might mean for some future car that I'll be far more inclined to care about and actually purchase.

I get there are all these changes, but the untrained eye says "looks just like the concept"

I don't think you'd need a trained eye to pick up on the differences. I know I found a lot of them on my first glance. Then again, I'm not about to go out and find people to hold those two pictures up to.

Based on what I have learned from GM people many things are changed to meet many requirements. What seems like a little thing to you and me can add many many problems and dollars if it goes into production.

Things as small as the smell of the leather scent cost money. This was one thing they were asking the diciples on the Camaro. Areas where sheet metal is crimped can be inportant to keeping it more rigid as they reduce the gage of the metal on the new cars to cut weight. LED fogs add to cost and on a car like this. GM wants to keep this cars price in check as it is more a volume car vs a high dollar limited car.

Whlile we all like to have Kobe steak a New York Strip at the Texas Road House fits the need more.

Now if this were the Cadillac flag ship no comprimise is needed. That is the car that will sell in lower volume and a higher price so no corners need be cut.

Also for anyone who thinks this will be nothing but just another Larcrosse clone it would be wise to hold that thought. This car will offer things you will not ever find in a Lacrosse. By the time you do find them in a Buick Cadillac will have moved on.,

This is just going to be the volume car for Cadillac and it is just filling empty space in the show room. Much of the work on this car was done prior to the Chapter 11 just as the Malibu and ZL1. GM rushed a lot of project to put on the shelve so they would have new cars in less time when they came out of the bail out. It is a good thing they did or they would be like Chrysler and hurting for relivent new product for the show room. So far the redesigns are helping but the Fiat is a flop. Chrysler still needs small cars and it will still be some time till more rebadged Fiats arrive.

[regfootball]

people soiled their panties all aghast when the last SRX became the Cadillac Vue, but look at the sales charts.

take last months STS+DTS numbers and then go 4x on it and I am gonna guess that is where XTS goes once up and running.

CTS and LaCrosse may take a little bump in the shorts but hey that is how GM balances out production and new car programs. it should even out the resources and sales over time.

ATS will also steal a few CTS sales, but really the XTS being the ES Cadillac and the ATS becoming the 3 series cadillac just means to me that the next CTS will become a bit of a de facto flagship in the next gen. These days, a flagship doesn't NEED to be the largest. And even then, if Cadillac does carry through with a true S class competitor, it will have to be that much better than the next gen CTS.

[ocnblu]

So it's 202 inches long with 40 inches of rear seat leg room, 18 cubic feet of trunk space and an unfettered 3.6L V6. Standard 19" wheels, with 20" rims on Platinum trims. The GM photos still make it look a bit high and narrow in the front 3/4 shot. And the rear still has the proportions of the concept, with a short decklid but long "underhang".

It's something to get used to. And I don't think it is Cadillac's ES350. It's higher than that... I don't know, Audi A6? Volvo S80?

[Camino LS6]

You know, I've been a huge detractor of this car from the moment I saw the concept. But I think that the level of dislike rose to a scream when whatever website it was that broke the story used the unfortunate term "flagship". If the headline had been " Cadillac debuts the XTS concept as its me too product for the FWD luxury crowd" , the objections might have been quieter.

Because, in truth, that's all the XTS is: a 'me too" product that competes with other "not really luxury" cars like the ES350 and the entire Acura lineup.

And that would be ok, except that this is GM we are talking about and that job belongs to Buick.

This car is the wrong car, at the wrong time, wearing the wrong badge. And the absence of a true flagship is made more obvious by putting the XTS into Caddy's lineup.

It hurts the brand.

[hyperv6]

Camino the fact is this is a car that is not targeted for you. In fact if you did like it there would be something wrong as they are now aiming this car as the enthusisast buyers. There is a mass segment of people out there that like cars that you and I do not like and their money is just as green. GM could try to force them into a car they don't like or offer them a car they will buy. It is about making money.

Also just because some report made this out to be some kind of flaf ship in error does not make it a flag ship.

While this may not be a luxury car in you terms it is in the view of many others. I too believe this will be like the SRX and it will sell in good numbers as there are few really good cars in this class. The money made on cars like this will help provide the income to build the flagship of your dreams.

So it is fine to not like this car. I too am not a fan but I also understand I no longer reresent the wants and the needs of the average buyer anylonger. As long as they make money with this car more power to em.

I think in the end you will be proven wrong that this will hurt Cadillac. While it is not the home run car it will be a solid performer in profit and not harm Cadillacs image. With the town car gone there is a lot of sales up for grabs and a lot of money on the table left to be picked up. Also I see this car being replaced in 4-5 years anyway. It is just buying time.

Edited November 16, 2011 by hyperv6

[Camino LS6]

I don't dream of Cadillacs, flagship or otherwise, but it is still easy to see that this car is misplaced at Cadillac.

As a Buick, it might nose into Caddy's territory a bit, but that would be a good thing for both brands.

Maybe it will sell ok, like the SRX does - we shall see.

But both of these vehicles muddy the brand waters at GM, and that is a familiar GM pitfall.

[Drew Dowdell]

What would hurt Cadillac more is having a showroom with just CTS, SRX and Escalade for the next 24 months.

[G. David Felt]

So this XTS is not a car for me or many others here it would seem. Yet it will sell well as it does have an audience that is wanting it. My dad, 70 years old was very upset when Caddy anounced the death of the DTS. He was waiting till he retired to get his final retirement car. Since I showed him the pictures of the xts, he is very excited and this Friday when we go to our Cadillac party at Dougs NW Cadillac he is planning on talking with Brad the saleman who has sold all our cadillacs and hummers into our family about the ability to order up an XTS.

I truly see a market for this and Cadillac does also. We cannot overlook those in their late 50's and older who like a auto like the XTS. It will offer expanded growth to the caddy family.

[hyperv6]

What would hurt Cadillac more is having a showroom with just CTS, SRX and Escalade for the next 24 months.

Cadillac needs product now and this one will do well.

I am ok with some here not liking this car as if every car was embraced by many here it would tell me GM has missed a segment of the market somewhere. There is no car do it all model and GM needs to address different buyers.

While there will be some appeal to the snow tops here the car will also take a step more to where they need to be vs the old DTS and STS.

[hyperv6]

I don't dream of Cadillacs, flagship or otherwise, but it is still easy to see that this car is misplaced at Cadillac.

As a Buick, it might nose into Caddy's territory a bit, but that would be a good thing for both brands.

Maybe it will sell ok, like the SRX does - we shall see.

But both of these vehicles muddy the brand waters at GM, and that is a familiar GM pitfall.

One look at the options listed today Buick could never price a car out with the same features here in their range.

Haldex AWD and the Magnetic ride are years from ever being found in a Buick under $40K.

The other technology will trickle down to Buick but Cadillac will be on to others by then,

I really see this car as being much more than just a Lacrosse 2.0. I am waiting for the reviews to point this out. GM has suprised many with the new cars they have come out with in the last 2 years and proved many wrong about their preconcieved ideas.

I hope you are wrong not to make me right but to prove GM is still on the right track. I have said in the past GM will come back one model at a time ove the next 5 years, This is just one more model and step I hope in reaching their goal.

[ocnblu]

Whoa, reading the actual dimensions of the car, it really IS high and narrow. And fairly long, but mostly high and narrow. It is, I guess, Cadillac's MKS, although it seems a bit nicer. High and narrow though...

[Robert Hall]

Whoa, reading the actual dimensions of the car, it really IS high and narrow. And fairly long, but mostly high and narrow. It is, I guess, Cadillac's MKS, although it seems a bit nicer. High and narrow though...

Short wheelbase also..111 inches...

[ocnblu]

2012 Chrysler 300:

wheelbase - 120.2"

length - 198.6"

width - 75"

height - 58.4"

Ahhh... yes...

[Robert Hall]

2012 Chrysler 300:

wheelbase - 120.2"

length - 198.6"

width - 75"

height - 58.4"

Ahhh... yes...

I like the Chrysler's proportions and shape a lot better, though I suspect the XTS has more rear seat room.

[hyperv6]

The car is just a little larger than the Lacrosse in most dims. It has around 40 inches of leg room in the back and a larger trunk.

[Camino LS6]

What would hurt Cadillac more is having a showroom with just CTS, SRX and Escalade for the next 24 months.

May be.

But it would have been better if something else had been greenlighted instead of this.