Cadillac Renaissance: Miracle or Mirage?

[The O.C.]

What- my wittle finger might get tired pulling up for 4 seconds on the non-power express-up button? I think I can handle it.

You've TOTALLY missed the point of that whole argument.....

[bowtie_dude]

Yeah...um, OK; that was indeed sarcasm. I really didn't think a smilie was necc on that one, but apparently so.

In all seriousness, if the vehicle's power, drivability, comfort, room, styling and reliability are in order, no half-handful of 'missing' features are going to ever turn me away from it.

What- my wittle finger might get tired pulling up for 4 seconds on the non-power express-up button? I think I can handle it.

You're not the majority of the market. X car has 4 window buttons all with express down AND up, and for the same price Y car does not. Hmm?

People like you are why GM is having issues. You can't see past your own nose when it comes to what GM needs to be in the industry, so hopefully people like you will never work for GM again.

[sciguy_0504]

I believe the current Caddy lineup is far from perfect. IMO, it still needs a cheaper/smaller convertible/roadster, a "BRX" and a full-tilt luxury car along the lines of S, 7, A8, LS, etc.

I would also like to see a less powerful engine standard than what has been thrown about (300HP V6). There is a reason why Benz, BMW and Lexus are putting them out: cheap sales for people who need that badge and don't want or need all that power.

[balthazar]

You're not the majority of the market.  X car has 4 window buttons all with express down AND up, and for the same price Y car does not.  Hmm?

You've TOTALLY missed the point of that whole argument.....

>>"People like you are why GM is having issues. You can't see past your own nose when it comes to what GM needs to be in the industry, so hopefully people like you will never work for GM again."<<

Wow; you assume I'm an ex-GM employee. Fascinating.

Edited May 16, 2006 by balthazar

[bowtie_dude]

>>"People like you are why GM is having issues.  You can't see past your own nose when it comes to what GM needs to be in the industry, so hopefully people like you will never work for GM again."<<

Wow; you assume I'm an ex-GM employee. Fascinating.

I didn't assume that. I said people LIKE you working for GM have, among other things, caused GMs current woes. Which I followed up with the hope that people LIKE YOU never work for GM again.

[balthazar]

OK; I see.

However, you might be interested to know that my core opinions on GM run very similar to what brought them to a circa 58% marketshare, so maybe people like me should work for GM. Again.

And no; that doesn't mean I would shoot down express-up windows.

[The O.C.]

And no; that doesn't mean I would shoot down express-up windows.

I think the big point here in "arguing" about the express windows is not really ABOUT the express windows....

The point really is that GM still, in many ways, seems to have their heads up their collective asses when it comes to the automotive market in general that exists far outside of downtown Detroit....

They've shown they can do an awesome GMT-900, but in other ways (the lack of certain minor, but consequential features, etc.) they show that they really don't know what is expected in the marketplace relative to the vehicles they develop for the general public.

Either that...or they blatantly make the decision (bean-counter-wise or not) not to follow the accepted trends in the marketplace.....

[Robert Hall]

I think the big point here in "arguing" about the express windows is not really ABOUT the express windows....

The point really is that GM still, in many ways, seems to have their heads up their collective asses when it comes to the automotive market in general that exists far outside of downtown Detroit....

They've shown they can do an awesome GMT-900, but in other ways (the lack of certain minor, but consequential features, etc.) they show that they really don't know what is expected in the marketplace relative to the vehicles they develop for the general public.

Either that...or they blatantly make the decision (bean-counter-wise or not) not to follow the accepted trends in the marketplace.....

What I've observed is that on many feature details, GM is about 5 years or one generation behind its competitors. The Malibu and G6 as they are now would be pretty competitive in 2000-2001, for example..

[eaton53]

One thing about the SRX, boy is it a screamin' deal used.

Low miles, V8, Magneride, Ultraview, everything for under $30K.

Astounding car for that price... if I were in the market for a utility vehicle there's no doubt that would be the one.

[jbartley]

this article while i think they were trying to raise a point is very poorly but together. when trying to read it it's very ADD. couldn't they have written in a more coherent format and addressed some of the issues specifically? esp. when they were trying to compare across many car brands.

[Sixty8panther]

S I X T E E N

Build it... quickly and true to concept!!!

[Satty]

I honestly dont see the point in going that high up when the STS and SRX are struggling and the CTS is due for a sales decline. Make the volume sellers competative then go for the super high end stuff.

[ellives]

I agree. Going after something so lofty when you're core business is under siege is foolhardy.

I honestly dont see the point in going that high up when the STS and SRX are struggling and the CTS is due for a sales decline.  Make the volume sellers competative then go for the super high end stuff.

Edited May 18, 2006 by ellives

[enzl]

I'd love to see the CTS lineup expand to a coupe and convertible before they even think about moving upmarket...

...additionally, the time and effort would be better served to refine what they have and give all more competitive interiors...

[balthazar]

Oh; good to know the CTS "isn't competitive"! I wonder how 55K or so consumers were so easily hornswaggled into buying one? Let's ge tthe word out.

And that's right above: Cadillac is without a doubt 'under seige'. Of course this begs the question- what, then, is mercedes? I suppose I'm in error for weighing sales data as any indication of success...

[evok]

Well the CTS(61k) was out sold by everyone in its class/price point except for the MB C-Class (60k). And that was just by 1000 vehicles.

That includes the following:

Acura TL (78K)

BMW 3 (105k)

Infiniti G35 (69k)

Lexus ES (67k)

And this year the Lexus IS should outsell the CTS as well.

Success compared to what? the Catera!

I assume some of what holds the CTS down has been its "uncompetitive interior".

[The O.C.]

Well the CTS(61k) was out sold by everyone in its class/price point except for the MB C-Class (60k). And that was just by 1000 vehicles.

That includes the following:

Acura TL (78K)

BMW 3 (105k)

Infiniti G35 (69k)

Lexus ES (67k)

And this year the Lexus IS should outsell the CTS as well.

Success compared to what? the Catera! 

I assume some of what holds the CTS down has been its "uncompetitive interior".

Exactly.

CTS really IS a great product and one of GM's best. However, this market segment in general shows that if you don't do a bang-up job in just about every respect (CTS' somewhat cheaper interior trimmings for example) then you face a difficult struggle.

The CTS itself IS a success in the fact that it shows GM can build a great-driving, solid-handling RWD car with a responsive and competitive drivetrain.....and it lead a styling renaissance at Cadillac that, unfortunately, REALLY never went much past that very CTS model.

It's overall market performance, however, is not as strong as it probably SHOULD be....

[Robert Hall]

Exactly.

CTS really IS a great product and one of GM's best.  However, this market segment in general shows that if you don't do a bang-up job in just about every respect (CTS' somewhat cheaper interior trimmings for example) then you face a difficult struggle.

The CTS itself IS a success in the fact that it shows GM can build a great-driving, solid-handling RWD car with a responsive and competitive drivetrain.....and it lead a styling renaissance at Cadillac that, unfortunately, REALLY never went much past that very CTS model.

It's overall market performance, however, is not as strong as it probably SHOULD be....

In the last year, I've test driven the G35, CTS, IS, 325 (E46), A4, and TL and really enjoyed the feel and handling of the CTS, but the interior was a let-down..it would be acceptable in a $20k car, but just wasn't as nice I would want for a $35k car ---my favorites for interior were the TL followed by the A4 and 325.. (my critieria being primarily a entry-luxury sports sedan with a manual).

[ellives]

Sales data means very little when you're hemorrhaging cash.

Oh; good to know the CTS "isn't competitive"! I wonder how 55K or so consumers were so easily hornswaggled into buying one? Let's ge tthe word out.

And that's right above: Cadillac is without a doubt 'under seige'. Of course this begs the question- what, then, is mercedes? I suppose I'm in error for weighing sales data as any indication of success...

[ellives]

The CTS itself IS a success in the fact that it shows GM can build a great-driving, solid-handling RWD car with a responsive and competitive drivetrain.....and it lead a styling renaissance at Cadillac that, unfortunately, REALLY never went much past that very CTS model.

I'd consider the commercial success of the Escalade MUCH past the CTS. Prior to the first A&S 'slade the Escalade was a joke slapped together in record time yes, but it was still a warmed over Denali. 99% of consumers couldn't tell the difference without seeing the badging.

In many ways this vehicle was the re-birth of Cadillac and not the CTS.

[Robert Hall]

I'd consider the commercial success of the Escalade MUCH past the CTS. Prior to the first A&S 'slade the Escalade was a joke slapped together in record time yes, but it was still a warmed over Denali. 99% of consumers couldn't tell the difference without seeing the badging.

In many ways this vehicle was the re-birth of Cadillac and not the CTS.

Good point..by the way, anyone have yearly sales figures for the 'Slade?

[turbo200]

I don't know if I'll have time to read through this entire topic tonight, but all I can say now is compared to where Infiniti, Acura, Audi, MB, BMW, and now Lexus have gone to in the short time since Cadillac's rebound....well it doesn't compare. Those marques are ever-improving. The NG CTS, as has been mentioned here I'm sure, will be a success, though its interior again just looks to build on the competition's lead and not really revolutionize anything in styling, but the STS and SRX are unmitigated disasters. They were not fine three years ago, and it's not fine that the CLS, 5, A6, M45 all look so fresh and modern, and the STS and SRX will remain largely looking the same for some time as has been confirmed by evok in this thread.

Style, class, presence, design......are so important, well they are tri-fold important in this class of cars. GM is missing an important opportunity to make Cadillac relevant with coastal [young, affluent] import shoppers....yet again. There time is running out, on all fronts. The luxury sector is being innundated with incredible cars.......CLS is the most beautiful sedan on the road....and MB's rep keeps going up up up to the stratosphere; the same is true with other brands. Meanwhile, Caddy is stuck with an outdated STS that looks more stale than a Cobalt SS SC. What a shame.

Come on Cadillac. the money has to be there to design some incredible, breathtaking cars never before seen, inside and out. NG CTS is a good try for the exterior from what we've seen, but the interior isn't really breathtaking, just a significant improvement from what was there before. That'll be enough to win some conquests. But STS and SRX are a wholly different story, inside and out. And lest we forget the rest of the world class lineup that has never really fleshed out [aside from a class-leading Escalade trio].

[balthazar]

Sales data means very little when you're hemorrhaging cash.

Cadillac is "hemorrhaging cash"?

Oh wait, you were talking about the corporation as a whole, weren't you? I thought this thread was addressing "Cadillac's Renaissance"...

CTS(61k)... MB C-Class (60k)... Infiniti G35 (69k)... Lexus ES (67k)

These are negligable volume differences. But if we are going to make points using the numbers above, clearly the CTS is competitive.

[Drew Dowdell]

I agree. Going after something so lofty when you're core business is under siege is foolhardy.

See Also: Volkswagen Phaeton

[evok]

CTS(61k)... MB C-Class (60k)... Infiniti G35 (69k)... Lexus ES (67k)

These are negligable volume differences. But if we are going to make points using the numbers above, clearly the CTS is competitive.

I see how you left out BMW 3 (105k) and the Lexus IS statements.

[Croc]

Well, I just found out that GM (read: Lutz) decontented battery rundown protection on the 2006 DTS as my father left his radar detector plugged into the lighter and the battery was dead upon arrival in Indianapolis (we rented a Trailblazer for the LA-Indy trek). Yea he never had to worry about that with his 2000 DHS...and while I'm not sure, I don't think it was an issue in his 95 Concours.

Oh, and when the battery dies...you are unable to remove your key from the ignition, you cannot shift the transmission into neutral to move it out of the garage to jump it...and of course if you keep your jumper cables in the trunk you cannot access them since the trunk no longer has a keyhole. Congrats GM...idiots.

My vote goes to "Mirage" though I am hopeful this changes with the next wave of product.

[balthazar]

I see how you left out BMW 3 (105k) and the Lexus IS statements.

Yes I did, because those sold so many more. Therefore, by inference; the CTS and the is and the c-class and the es are ALL 'uncompetitive'. Fair is fair.

[evok]

Yes I did, because those sold so many more. Therefore, by inference; the CTS and the is and the c-class and the es are ALL 'uncompetitive'. Fair is fair.

Thats just stupid.

[balthazar]

LOL!!

[kiljoy]

He's right you know, that is stupid. I mean, except for all the people in front of me, I'm first in line. Except for all the people who have more money than me, I'm the richest guy in the world.

That kind of thinking leads to mediocrity.

[CARBIZ]

The CTS is a laudable vehicle, but one that I doubt core Cadillac buyers would consider. I, myself, prefer larger vehicles and if I am going to pay $60k+ (and in Canada, all our vehicles are over-priced: SOMEBODY IS MAKING A KILLING ON THE NOW NEARLY PAR DOLLAR!!), I want a vehicle that rides, looks and feels like a Cadillac - or at least like I spent 60 grand.

Again, coining the phrase "Tyranny of Enthusiasts," GM had better not forget its loyal core of 60+ drivers (my parents) who don't need to do .93 on a skidpad. I know I am going to earn the wrath of people on this board, but the BIGGEST mistake Cadillac ever made was in the late '80s when it downsized and made small Cadillacs.

It is good to go after the BMW market with the CTS, but the DTS or Deville or whatever the hell you want to call it, should still be a large, luxurious Cadillac.

[Mr.Krinkle]

the cts wasnt the car for your typical cadillac shopper but that why it was so effective. it lured new sales or at least interest and recognition in the brand.

2 things that were sorely missing for years.

whats stupid is thinking tht you are number one when you see people in front of you. cadillac knows that there are people in front of them. bmw is a stand alone right now. no one can touch them. how long has lexus been chasing that dream.

now the is sales are up to almost 1000%. is that a success even though it still doesnt compete with bmw? not many people walk away from bmw. the rest of the market is a dog fight among the other players.

theres always going to be room for improvement but to say the cts is only successful compared to the catera or uncompetetive is really baseless.

number one and competitive arent quite the same.

the slightest amount of change is what propels a competitve car to numero uno.

and really, how far away is cadillac from doing just that?

edit: those sales numbers are negligible and as much as i would like for cadillac to outpace bmw its one step at a time. i think this may be an instance where a second place win is a victory. thats not something i normally believe but realistically it will take some time to unseat the legend of bmw. In this particular market i believe cadillac has the ability to accomplish that before lexus.

Edited May 18, 2006 by Mr.Krinkle

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Looks like it's time to attack Cadillac now since the media has destroyed every other aspect of GM's divisions...

The Escalade must've scared the F*** out of Edmunds (It was too competitive) because since that write up they've waged and ALL OUT WAR against the division. First the bad write up, then the HORRIBLE electronics piece (One of the main reasons the tuner/bling crowd buys the Escalade--how ironic that Edmunds attacks it) and now THIS.

They're either 1) Trying to kill Cadillac's momentum in the trendsetting Cali atmosphere by sacking them while they're weakest or 2) Trying to completely SHUT Cadillac out BEFORE they even get a chance. Remember, this is pretty much the ONLY american brand that gets HUGE respect in California... How opportune for Edmunds to front the war (And coming defeat)

Admit it: You've asked yourself this question

With the launch of the new 2007 Escalade, Cadillac has announced the beginning of Phase Two of its renaissance. But the question that can rightly be posed regarding Phase One is whether it was truly the miracle Cadillac claims, or just a mirage that is apt to dissipate in the face of increasingly fierce foreign competition.

Umm.... BETTER sales. BETTER image. LOWER buyers age.... What about ANY of that says "mirage"?!?!?!

See, this is how it goes... The media has been ATTACKING Cadillac's image boost now for around 2 years (Saying that it's superficial and blingy---eventhough CELEBRITIES and THE YOUNG are exactly who they have been and ARE continuing to appeal to... 2 markets that the asian makers would saw off their nuts for YET, that's not GOOD enough when it's a domestic division... Then the MEDIA has to make it out to be CHEESY and ill constructed. BUT, what exactly is CHEESY and ILL CONSTRUCTED about being a STATUS symbol for those which MASS-AMERICA adores, looks up to and immulates?!?!?!? NOTHING, that's what! (Unless you let the media spin it)

Cadillac HAS been successful, yet because of their bias--just like with everything domestic, they have to shun it, pick it apart and cast negativity on it... Eventually, they'll make Cadillac out to be the "overpriced poseur car" and they'll succeed in killing YET another domestic turnaround. MY QUESTION IS THIS: WHAT IS SO BAD ABOUT WHO CADILLAC APPEALS TO?!?!? THEY ARE THE MOST SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE IN THE WORLD

The power windows have no one-touch express-up function, like those you'd find, for example, on every Volkswagen Jetta, for all four windows. The steering wheel tilt is not only manual rather than power adjustable, it adjusts in the huge, clunky increments one might associate with some commercial truck.

So.... We're questioning Cadillac's renaissance based on "One touch power windows and a tilt wheel that ONLY tilts?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

WOW.... WE'VE REACHED NEW LOWS.... AND NO SURPRISE THAT EDMUNDS TOOK US THERE. You know, it was bad enough that EVERY OTHER media outlet in this joke of a country wants Cadillac and it's token model to fail so badly that they're willing to pick the truck apart based on it's CARGO AREA PLASTICS and BUTTONS, but now that Edmunds has posed a "Sensational question" and an entire article on essentially fabricating BULL&#036;h&#33; and a BULL&#036;h&#33; perception problem to perpetuate the import-is-better bias is amazing to me.........

Wow... Just wow! HOw much longer are these guys going to HOLD ON TO trying to KILL Detroit and just how much more FEABLE and see-through will their articles become.... (Insiders: feel free to answer) The PUBLIC is beginning to see the truth and one can only hope that they'll CONTINUE to see the transparency in the HALLUCINATION TRIP that is the american media.

But the company might not find luxury sedan buyers as forgiving as SUV buyers. Certainly, at the prices of the high-performance "V" models, Cadillac buyers have the right to be extremely discerning, and some expectations have yet to be fulfilled.

Take the new STS-V, for example. It has the same horsepower rating as the mighty Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG, but it doesn't deliver the same visceral thrill that taunts the driver into misbehaving. The Mercedes-Benz E55, BMW M5 and M3, and Caddy's own CTS-V snarl and snap, reminding the driver of the potential under his right foot.

I actually agree here.... And by-in-large I believe the STS to be Cadillacs WEAK SPOT right now and that's NOT a good thing since it's supposed to be the flagship sedan right now. Why, o why GM did you not BEST the competition instead of EQUALING them with the V-Series... We need REVOLUTION, not EVOLUTION. Hopefully the 2008 refresh will address some things.

REPEAT AFTER ME GM: REVOLUTION NOT EVOLUTION!!!!!!!

[balthazar]

He's right you know, that is stupid.  I mean, except for all the people in front of me, I'm first in line.  Except for all the people who have more money than me, I'm the richest guy in the world. That kind of thinking leads to mediocrity.

No-ooo; the analogy related to your example would be: you are not in line because you are not first.... ie: the CTS is not competitive because it is outsold negligably by most of it's competition.

Notice no where is anyone saying the c-class is not competitive.

So.... We're questioning Cadillac's renaissance based on "One touch power windows and a tilt wheel that ONLY tilts?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

No; that's not it at all. You missed the point. It's not that 2 or 3 minor features are the "missing", it's that 3 or 4 minor features are "missing". See, it's not just one single thing, so the entire vehicle shows just what continues to be so very wrong with GM. See now? Edited May 18, 2006 by balthazar

[ellives]

My pat response: Those who can, do; those who can't, write about it.

While all of you naysayers out there would criticize Cadillac for the CTS and comment as below that it is "outsold ... by ... competition" the key to remember is the product is oh so VERY much better than what it replaced. Keep in mind that brand loyalty is huge in the car business and getting people to even consider something that was been considered undesirable for ANY reason, is going to take time and patience.

Oh and yes I know the argument is there where Cadillac must be better than their competition, not just "almost as good as." At this stage, every generation of what they're bringing out is leaps and bounds better than the prior one. The key to it all is the rate of improvement and as long as they're improving their product faster than the competition, they'll catch and overtake. They get it. Believe me they get it.

No-ooo; the analogy related to your example would be: you are not in line because you are not first.... ie: the CTS is not competitive because it is outsold negligably by most of it's competition.

Notice no where is anyone saying the c-class is not competitive.

So.... We're questioning Cadillac's renaissance based on "One touch power windows and a tilt wheel that ONLY tilts?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

No; that's not it at all. You missed the point. It's not that 2 or 3 minor features are the "missing", it's that 3 or 4 minor features are "missing". See, it's not just one single thing, so the entire vehicle shows just what continues to be so very wrong with GM. See now?

[enzl]

I'll weigh in..carefully...and I'll try to bridge some of the gaps in this thread...

Everyone, to a certain degree, is right, because I believe that Cadillac, along with everyone else, has been caught somewhat by surprise by a number of A&S developments--

1. Escalade-its beyond successful and a cash cow. If the sales of the ESV/EXT are proportionately as good as the reg. 'slade, Cadillac will sell more $50K lux trucks than anyone in the states...that's unbelieveable, and quite frankly, just what Caddy used to stand for...big, brash, heavy, cromed V8 beheamoths...so, in a way, their cars have gone more modern, and trucks reflect their past fairly clearly...which leads me to...

2. CTS staying power....fooling $35k luxo buyers might work once, but the media, fans and new blood showed up in GM showrooms, in many cases, for the first time. Love or hate the styling, you know exactly what it is rolling down the street.

3. Quasi-failure of STS/SRX-Thinner air up in this price range....TBC....dinner's ready!

[CaddyXLR-V]

What I don't understand, is how anyone can say the STS doesn't look that good. I fell in love with that car when I saw one driving around, even more than I like the CTS. I think some here may be justifying it sales numbers(not on purpose) by saying the car is watered down. I think if it were selling like crazy, many here would have praised it's beautiful styling. The STS makes the CTS look chunky and oddly proportioned in comparison.

[Northstar]

The STS looks pretty good, but it's too boring to make a real splash in the market like the CTS. Cadillac basically entered uncharted territory with the new STS, and it didn't do a whole lot to make it stand out from the pack. The CTS on the other hand definetly stood out from the pack when it came out (and it still does, actually).

The STS looks good, but so does the GTO. It just so happens that neither of them are that eye-catching, and both are in segments in which many people want eye-catching styling.

[Mr.Krinkle]

time. Love or hate the styling, you know exactly what it is rolling down the street.

3. Quasi-failure of STS/SRX-Thinner air up in this price range...

i like that phrasing, and yup, it sure is.

[97regalGS]

interesting thread.

here's my hypothesis. CTS is being sold, in large part, to GM customers, and to traditional Cadillac customers who are looking to a) save a few bucks, and b) get a smaller car (based on personal observations of number of over-50 drivers of CTS - not scientific nor statistically accurate, i know).

sure, there are some import cross-shoppers, but Cadillac cars, DO NOT hit the radar screen of most entry lux or lux shoppers out there. end of story!

I'm in Toronto working for a large corporate company in sales where a good chunk of the demographic is where Cadillac wants to be. No one, and I mean no one, that has been looking at new cars in the past several years has Cadillac or CTS on their radar screen. no one. they are just not there. there is one CTS in the parking lot and a guy i know bought it used. and a CTS-V just showed up this week for a few days so not sure if an employee or someone in town for the week.

if the CTS was a solid triple for Cadillac (compared to the Catera) then the STS and SRX were walks leaving the bases loaded and no runs scored. (the Escalade is not playing in this game but is on another field scoring lots of runs.)

Cadillac still has a lot or work to do to make themselves relevant, and I mean really relevant in their market. I remain very confident about NG CTS, but NG STS and NG SRX scare the hell out of me.

[evok]

interesting thread.

here's my hypothesis.  CTS is being sold, in large part, to GM customers, and to traditional Cadillac customers who are looking to a) save a few bucks, and b) get a smaller car (based on personal observations of number of over-50 drivers of CTS - not scientific nor statistically accurate, i know).

Bingo - the key words being to GM customers.

[evok]

Cadillac even still has a long way to go with the V-Series cars. Really I do not care about the performance, that’s a moot point as far as I am concerned. It is the V-series styling treatment that is typical GM tacky, cheesy and ill conceived for the price.

I was at my Caddy dealer a couple weeks ago and aesthetically the cars look like pieced together aftermarket jobs out of line with Cadillac historic tradition.

This goes back to Cadillac not knowing what the heck it wants to be.

The wire mess grill looked like an aftermarket, bling bling job, and no different that the old aftermarked Rolls Royce E&G Classic grills that the dealers installed in the 80s and 90s.

Really, the vehicles looked like after thoughts and GM tried too hard to make the products different from the rest of the line up.

Suggestion Lutz:

Put a traditional egg crate on the vehicles and recycle the old Cadillac V underneath the crest to signify the V cars, instead of copying another OEM with the dumb mess(h) insert.

The race “inspired” V and flag looks like it was designed by a committee. Hence tacky and ill conceived.

What you currently have is akin to putting black walls on 1985 Eldorados, removing the stand up hood ornament and calling that package the EURO perfomance Touring Coupe!

It does not work. It screams, we do not know what we are doing!

Edited May 19, 2006 by evok

[CARBIZ]

You know, bitching about power express up windows (perhaps GM's overzealous lawyers won't let them do it - some idiot might pinch their fingers and sue), and opinions about tacky plastics aside, does anybody here actually look at what the competition also lacks? I followed a brand new Infiniti yesterday in my underground and the damned thing's headlights weren't on! My '91 Caprice had automatic headlights! The new Cobalt has automatic headlights.

I see so many damned imported cars with no headlights on underground, so this has made me think yet again - DOES GM BUILD AN INFERIOR CAR, OR IS BMW AND AUDI, ETC. BUILDING CARS THAT THE CRITICS WANT TO DRIVE?

So while some of us prefer "ratcheted" adjustable steering, rather than the crappy Japanese style push-down-the-stupid-lever-find-the-right-spot-and-then-pull-up-the-stupid-lever-to-relock-it type adjusable column, that doesn't make Cadillac automatically inferior because it doesn't offer it.

[Robert Hall]

You know, bitching about power express up windows (perhaps GM's overzealous lawyers won't let them do it - some idiot might pinch their fingers and sue), and opinions about tacky plastics aside, does anybody here actually look at what the competition also lacks?  I followed a brand new Infiniti yesterday in my underground and the damned thing's headlights weren't on!  My '91 Caprice had automatic headlights!  The new Cobalt has automatic headlights.

  I see so many damned imported cars with no headlights on underground, so this has made me think yet again - DOES GM BUILD AN INFERIOR CAR, OR IS BMW AND AUDI, ETC. BUILDING CARS THAT THE CRITICS WANT TO DRIVE?

  So while some of us prefer "ratcheted" adjustable steering, rather than the crappy Japanese style push-down-the-stupid-lever-find-the-right-spot-and-then-pull-up-the-stupid-lever-to-relock-it type adjusable column, that doesn't make Cadillac automatically inferior because it doesn't offer it.

The automatic lights can be turned off...

[evok]

You know, bitching about power express up windows (perhaps GM's overzealous lawyers won't let them do it - some idiot might pinch their fingers and sue...

I have seen that argument used on other boards so I am stating, there is FMVSS 118 on the books that covers express close windows safety requirements for anti pinch.

That should put that issue to rest.

[The O.C.]

interesting thread.

here's my hypothesis.  CTS is being sold, in large part, to GM customers, and to traditional Cadillac customers who are looking to a) save a few bucks, and b) get a smaller car (based on personal observations of number of over-50 drivers of CTS - not scientific nor statistically accurate, i know).

sure, there are some import cross-shoppers, but Cadillac cars, DO NOT hit the radar screen of most entry lux or lux shoppers out there.  end of story!

I'm in Toronto working for a large corporate company in sales where a good chunk of the demographic is where Cadillac wants to be.  No one, and I mean no one, that has been looking at new cars in the past several years has Cadillac or CTS on their radar screen.  no one.  they are just not there.  there is one CTS in the parking lot and a guy i know bought it used.  and a CTS-V just showed up this week for a few days so not sure if an employee or someone in town for the week.

if the CTS was a solid triple for Cadillac (compared to the Catera) then the STS and SRX were walks leaving the bases loaded and no runs scored.  (the Escalade is not playing in this game but is on another field scoring lots of runs.)

Cadillac still has a lot or work to do to make themselves relevant, and I mean really relevant in their market. I remain very confident about NG CTS, but NG STS and NG SRX scare the hell out of me.

I have a friend that is in his low 30's.....and drives a previous-generation Eclipse GT. He is NOT an auto enthusiast....but he does like driving a nice car.

He was asking my opinions on cars as he is ready to trade in the Mitsubishi. He's looking at the.....

G35

TL

3-Series

Audi A4

I asked him what about the CTS?

He said...the "what?"

I said the Cadillac CTS....

He said "there's no way I'm driving a Cadillac....it's an old man's car."

I tried to reason with him that Cadillac's made huge strides of recent and is actually appealing to younger people but he didn't want to hear it. He has his perception and not much is going to change it.

(For what it's worth, he thinks the Infiniti is somewhat geriatric as well.)

Sounds like he's narrowed it down to TL or A4.

Now I do see plenty of younger people around SoCal in CTSs....(unlike STSs) and GM is making some inroads with this car in this market.....but my friend's perception show how far they really have to go.

I have another friend that traded in an Audi A6 2.7T on a new CTS....so that WAS a win. However, this guy was in his late 40's....a bit older....and not an auto enthusiast either. He was (by his own admission) more of a payment buyer when it came to the CTS....although he DOES like the car.

[balthazar]

evok= Really I do not care about the performance, that’s a moot point as far as I am concerned.

That's.... the.... entire point.... of the CTS-V; performance! If you don't care about that aspect, perhaps you have to consider the fact that the vehicle will n e v e r appeal to you no matter how it's equipped.

...instead of copying another OEM with the dumb mess(h) insert.

Uhhh... who copied which OEM??

What you currently have is akin to putting black walls on 1985 Eldorados, removing the stand up hood ornament and calling that package the EURO perfomance Touring Coupe! It does not work.

So: the CTS-V looks too different than the rest of the Cadillac line (>>"GM tried too hard to make the products different from the rest of the line up"<<), and the Eldorado Touring Coupe was not different enough (>>tires, hood ornament, badges<<).

Those 2 vehicles aren't even remotely comparable. I knew the ETC and CTS-V...., you're no ETC.

Seems to me it's not Cadillac that 'doesn't know what the heck it wants'!

Edited May 20, 2006 by balthazar

[bowtie_dude]

I think what he's trying to say is that when you look at how BMW and Mercedes differentiate their M- and AMG-cars and then look at how Cadillac has chosen to differentiate their V-cars, Cadillac can, to some, come off as a little juvenile and boy-racer-ish. I agree, to a point, but I also think the CTS-V is a damn good looking car, one of the best looking GM makes.

Of course, I also think the E46 M3 is one of the best looking cars on the road as well. So go figure.

[bowtie_dude]

What this thread has been trying to point out is that with GM, its no longer large glaring blemishes on their cars that make them bad. Its the half-dozen little things that GM just can't seem to get right. Like fake wood in the Escalade or no express-up windows or mouse-fur headliners or good interior design (GMT-900s and select Saturns excluded) or INTEGRATED center consoles, and the list goes on.

The half-dozen little things that in a Toyota, Honda, or Audi are so well thought out, you KNOW that they spent their time making sure everything was perfect (anecdotal Toyota stories aside). Yet in a GM, you know that they're after-thought considerations, at least until just very recently.

Edited May 20, 2006 by bowtie_dude

[balthazar]

Interesting: 'it's no longer large glaring blemishes that make them bad'... but it's a half-dozen tiny things, and the vehicles are still "bad"? I can't see it from here. Real vs. fake wood is immaterial if people have to be told the wood is real- all of it feels like plastic anyway.

Lots of vehicles have 'mouse fur' headliners yet that fact is seldom if ever mention unless we're reading about GMs.

I have also yet to see a "perfect" toyota- none have ever wowed me upon inspection or even matched the general level of hype accompanying the loopy T logo.

And if any vehicle in the CTS-V class defines the term 'boy-racer', it's the M3. That front bumper is straight out of a ricer catalog, and the rest of the gingerbread looks so tacked on and... yes; smacks of being an after-thought. So there you go- different people, different opinions.