2016 Cadillac ATS sedan 2.0t 8AT AWD Luxury

[surreal1272]

The argument was made, if someone is 6'3" or too big to fit in an ATS/3-series/IS/C-class, just have them go up to the next size car.  But in most cases that is a $15,000 jump in price, going from $40,000 to $55,000 is going to be too big a jump for the majority of buyers.  

 

Buying a used 5-series or E-class for $40k was the other solution presented, which makes sense to the consumer, but to the car company, they lose out on that new car sale.

And then you skewed and moved the bar on it. You point out the $20K jump for BMW while ignoring the fact that the gap is not near as big from the ATS to the CTS. You see the problem yet?

[smk4565]

Moving from an ATS to a CTS is only about a $10k jump, so that could be an easier move.  But 3-series to 5-series could be $15-20,000.   I think just saying if people can't fit in a small luxury car, go buy a bigger one doesn't make a lot of sense, most can't afford the price jump.  I am 6'2" and I can fit just fine in a C300, there is no reason you can't make a small segment luxury car that is roomy enough for people over 6 feet tall.  

[balthazar]

CTS is $46,555 with destination charge, $7,500 less than an E350, the E350 and CT6 are $465 apart.  That is why I compared the price jump as going to a CT6.

Then why did you compare the ATS with the c-class, when the c-class starts $6000 higher and the CLA is 2000 lower?

 

[surreal1272]

As far as trading up from ATS/C-class/3-series to the middle size, that could be a big price jump. A 5-series has a starting price $20,000 above a 3-series for example. That is a big jump, it would be like telling an ATS prospective buyer to get a CT6, they are going to walk out of the showroom. The used e-class or 5-series argument makes sense, I'd rather have a lighty used car that was $60k new and $40k used than a new car that is $40k with less power, features, room, and will depreciate anyway.

Except you skipped the logic completely with you made the ATS to CT6 comparo when it would be more accurate to jump from the ATS to the CTS, which is the 5 series competitor (not the CT6).

The rest of your "logic" can be applied to any car this exposing the fallacy of your argument.

The  CT6 is priced closely to the 5-series and E-class.

 

The base prices with destination charge are:

 

CT6 2.0:  $54,490

CT6 3.6:  $56,490

 

528i:   $51,195

535i:   $56,845

 

E350:  $54,025

 

CTS is $46,555 with destination charge, $7,500 less than an E350, the E350 and CT6 are $465 apart.  That is why I compared the price jump as going to a CT6.

That doesn't make it any less of asinine comparison.

[surreal1272]

Moving from an ATS to a CTS is only about a $10k jump, so that could be an easier move.  But 3-series to 5-series could be $15-20,000.   I think just saying if people can't fit in a small luxury car, go buy a bigger one doesn't make a lot of sense, most can't afford the price jump.  I am 6'2" and I can fit just fine in a C300, there is no reason you can't make a small segment luxury car that is roomy enough for people over 6 feet tall.

Bet you are not talking about those back seats (which what everyone is talking about here) because I'm 5'10" and the back seats of all those luxury compacts, including the C Class, are too snug for anything more than a run up the street.

Again, your bar moving is on full display here.

[smk4565]

 

CTS is $46,555 with destination charge, $7,500 less than an E350, the E350 and CT6 are $465 apart.  That is why I compared the price jump as going to a CT6.

Then why did you compare the ATS with the c-class, when the c-class starts $6000 higher and the CLA is 2000 lower?

 

 

Because they are both rear drive and Cadillac stated the mission of the ATS was to compete with the German trio of 3-series, A4, and C-class.

[smk4565]

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

[smk4565]

2015 sales volume:

 

BMW 3/4-series: 140,609

M-B C-class:         86,080

Acura TLX:            47,080

Lexus IS:              46,430

Infiniti Q50:           43,874

Audi A4:               29,013

Cadillac ATS:       26,873

 

I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list.  Other factors are at play there.

[surreal1272]

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales. Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales. The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

The CLA DOES NOT COMPETE WITH THE ATS.

And now you're moving the bar on volume. What a damn joke.

Pick an argument and stick with it for once.

Edited May 24, 2016 by surreal1272

[balthazar]

2015 sales volume:

Audi A4:               29,013

Cadillac ATS:       26,873

 

I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list.  Other factors are at play there.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4?

Is it marketing / image problems there also?

[smk4565]

 

2015 sales volume:

Audi A4:               29,013

Cadillac ATS:       26,873

 

I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list.  Other factors are at play there.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4?

Is it marketing / image problems there also?

 

It was in the final year of it's model cycle last year.  They sold 34,000 of them in 2014 and 37,000 of them in 2013.  When it was fresher it sold better, but that car was under powered the past few years, the base car now has a 252 hp turbo.  Better interior and more power always help.  I think Audi reliability issues hurt that car also, and Audi styling looks a bit too like a VW and hasn't changed much recently, I think it is a bit boring.

 

I didn't include the A5, but they sell about 15,000 of those per year, which is about what the Lexus RC sells.  If you tack 15,000 units to the A5 and IS for their coupe counterparts, their numbers look pretty good.  I think A4 loses sales to A3 also, because they are more similar than a CLA and C-class are for example.

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6.  But none of those 3 cars sell well.  It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car.  Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS.  They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars.

 

 

 

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point.

 

The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin

 

[surreal1272]

2015 sales volume:

Audi A4:               29,013

Cadillac ATS:       26,873

 

I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list.  Other factors are at play there.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4?

Is it marketing / image problems there also?

It was in the final year of it's model cycle last year.  They sold 34,000 of them in 2014 and 37,000 of them in 2013.  When it was fresher it sold better, but that car was under powered the past few years, the base car now has a 252 hp turbo.  Better interior and more power always help.  I think Audi reliability issues hurt that car also, and Audi styling looks a bit too like a VW and hasn't changed much recently, I think it is a bit boring.

 

I didn't include the A5, but they sell about 15,000 of those per year, which is about what the Lexus RC sells.  If you tack 15,000 units to the A5 and IS for their coupe counterparts, their numbers look pretty good.  I think A4 loses sales to A3 also, because they are more similar than a CLA and C-class are for example.

So the A4 is going through a similar pattern as the ATS, seeing as how the ATS is going on four years old?

Interesting.

[Cmicasa the Great]

As far as trading up from ATS/C-class/3-series to the middle size, that could be a big price jump.  A 5-series has a starting price $20,000 above a 3-series for example.   That is a big jump, it would be like telling an ATS prospective buyer to get a CT6, they are going to walk out of the showroom.   The used e-class or 5-series argument makes sense, I'd rather have a lighty used car that was $60k new and $40k used than a new car that is $40k with less power, features, room, and will depreciate anyway.

 

You're a f@#kin idiot. Its no other way of putting it. An ATS buyer might as well buy a CT6 because BMW prices its cars $3500 more than Cadillac prices its??? How about an ATS buyer go straight over to the on the showroom floor next step CTS which is not only larger than the ATS, but has more equipment.

 

BTW The ATS 2.0L ($36,240) to CTS 2.0L ($45,560) price jump is $9,320. The 328i ($38,350) to 528i ($50,200) price difference is $11,850. 

 

[smk4565]

 

 

 

More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6.  But none of those 3 cars sell well.  It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car.  Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS.  They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars.

 

 

 

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point.

 

The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin

 

And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models.  Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible?  They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis.   Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks.  Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers.  Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles.  That is a joke.  Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars.   And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette.   They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control.  Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe?  We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage.

[smk4565]

 

 

 

2015 sales volume:

Audi A4:               29,013

Cadillac ATS:       26,873

 

I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list.  Other factors are at play there.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4?

Is it marketing / image problems there also?

It was in the final year of it's model cycle last year.  They sold 34,000 of them in 2014 and 37,000 of them in 2013.  When it was fresher it sold better, but that car was under powered the past few years, the base car now has a 252 hp turbo.  Better interior and more power always help.  I think Audi reliability issues hurt that car also, and Audi styling looks a bit too like a VW and hasn't changed much recently, I think it is a bit boring.

 

I didn't include the A5, but they sell about 15,000 of those per year, which is about what the Lexus RC sells.  If you tack 15,000 units to the A5 and IS for their coupe counterparts, their numbers look pretty good.  I think A4 loses sales to A3 also, because they are more similar than a CLA and C-class are for example.

So the A4 is going through a similar pattern as the ATS, seeing as how the ATS is going on four years old?

Interesting.

 

The 2015 model year A4 went on sale in 2008.  It was in its 8th model year!  (mid-cycle refresh in 2012 on the A4)  And why they let it go 8 years, I have no idea.

[regfootball]

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base.  You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to.  Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space.  I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there.  I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space.

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

Edited May 24, 2016 by regfootball

[regfootball]

 

 

 

 

More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6.  But none of those 3 cars sell well.  It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car.  Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS.  They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars.

 

 

 

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point.

 

The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin

 

And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models.  Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible?  They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis.   Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks.  Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers.  Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles.  That is a joke.  Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars.   And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette.   They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control.  Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe?  We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage.

 

Cadillac is lost, makes me wonder how close they were to the chopping block back in 2009-2011......

 

A4 may not sell much but Audi sells a lot of A3's now too...and Q1's, Q3's, Q5's.....

 

XT5 should help Cadillac get back to something but they need 3 more crossovers pronto and then i think also get the sedans figured out.

 

Looks like Jaguar and Volvo have come back from the dead and maybe the only hope for Cadillac to come back is to send the entire operation to an overseas country to fix it.

Edited May 24, 2016 by regfootball

[oldshurst442]

 

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base.  You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to.  Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space.  I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there.  I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space.

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

 

I AGREE TO THIS REG 100%

 

These quotes here is what MANY GM die hards will ignore and/or cover up and make excuses for:

 

I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there...

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive....

 

 

For the last quote, Casa has a solution....he gives no phoques for what others think of the back seat area and they could all walk home for all he cares....

To me...that is just trying to save face as he knows Cadillac flubbed the ATS in that area.

The ATS is still a 4 door sedan, meant to carry....passengers.

 

I was ALWAYS hard on the Bimmer 3 Series and the Audi A4 for them being claustrophobic  compacts selling at such high prices because sheep bought them....I aint about to go soft just because Cadillac copy and pasted that formula for the ATS...

For the Malibu it was worse, because the Malibu is a  FAMILY hauler with not much family space hauling aspects....

[oldshurst442]

 

 

 

 

 

More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6.  But none of those 3 cars sell well.  It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car.  Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS.  They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars.

 

 

 

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point.

 

The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin

 

And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models.  Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible?  They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis.   Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks.  Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers.  Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles.  That is a joke.  Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars.   And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette.   They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control.  Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe?  We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage.

 

Cadillac is lost, makes me wonder how close they were to the chopping block back in 2009-2011......

 

A4 may not sell much but Audi sells a lot of A3's now too...and Q1's, Q3's, Q5's.....

 

XT5 should help Cadillac get back to something but they need 3 more crossovers pronto and then i think also get the sedans figured out.

 

Looks like Jaguar and Volvo have come back from the dead and maybe the only hope for Cadillac to come back is to send the entire operation to an overseas country to fix it.

 

 

 

I read earlier in this thread that Cadillac listened to the traditional buyer for too long.

While I agree to that, Cadillac has also IGNORED one type of traditional buyer too..

And if they actually produce it one mother freakin' day, Cadillac will INSTANTLY re-acquire what they one had....

And the car in question is along the lines of a Ciel, El Miraj....Sixteen.

 

 

 

That is TWICE that even Jeremy Clarkson on his show praised and WANTED Cadillac to produce these cars....

The Sixteen first then the Ciel.

 

Listen to the episode...all what James may says with Jeremy is ALL THE QUALITIES that people ASSOCIATE CADILLAC WITH...which ironically, the Escalade oozes, which is also the one vehicle that people lust over at Cadillac...

Better than a Bentley is what Jeremy said about the Sixteen...

 

While SUVs and CUVs are the CHEAP way to sell VOLUME....cars like a Sixteen, Ciel, El Miraj are the REAL way to people's hearts...

 

Stinkin' Rich MoFos  ALL OVER THE WORLD are WAITING on Cadillac DESPERATELY to build such a vehicle....

THESE are the REAL traditional Cadillac buyers..the stinkin' rich asshats that give no phoques about anything and anyone....THESE folk are what Cadillac needs to focus on....

 

Proof?

Well, the Hummer brand is long gone...

The Hummer H2 sold just as equally well as the Escalade, maybe even better...

And we all know who bought those Hummer H2s, self indulgent pricks with too much money too spend.

And lets be honest, the H2 was as luxurious as a seedy motel on the outskirts of Las Vegas where one goes to bang a 2 dollar whore...

The Escalade after the H2 was gone just took off like a bat outta hell...and let us not forget...same Chevy platform for both....to this day....

Imagine what a REAL Cadillac engineered and luxury laden Sixteen AND Ciel AND El Miraj would do for Cadillac's  image....

Sure XT1 and XT2 and XT3 and XT4 is needed for volume....

But Sixteen and Ciel....and DONT call them CT8/9....is needed for....PERCEPTION...

CT3 and CT5 and CT6....that is little league baseball...

Keep the CT3, CT5 and CT6 for volume, but the REAL cars JDN needs to focus on are the REAL Cadillacs people are waiting upon...

 

One step at a time I guess...

 

Just my opinion.

Edited May 24, 2016 by oldshurst442

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

 

 

More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6.  But none of those 3 cars sell well.  It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car.  Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS.  They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars.

 

 

 

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point.

 

The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin

 

And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models.  Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible?  They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis.   Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks.  Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers.  Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles.  That is a joke.  Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars.   And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette.   They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control.  Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe?  We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage.

 

 

 

I agree about variants.. we all kno this. The Cadillac situation may be a bit different as the vehicles have to be executed even more stringently than the bread and butter ones. The ATS vs Camaro convertible thing I have no answer or logic for tho..

 

It is my opinion.. and some fact that Cadillac is waiting for the 2018-19 model year to fully build on the excellence it presented with the CTS, Escalade, XT5 and CT6. Baby steps.. blowing your entire load while teh world is not looking would be even worse than doing nothing at all. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base.  You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to.  Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space.  I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there.  I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space.

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

 

 

 

Hold up.. Show off to co-workers?? There is nothing aspiring about owning one.

 

Furthermore the idea that piss poor engineering is present due to an INCH less legroom in the rear sounds ridiculous. In fact.. the legroom of the ATS is only an issue NOW.. because the segment leader decided to go bigger. The 3Series is suddenly a family car.. which means that anything not sized exactly like in interior dimensions is lacking in engineering kno-how? Preposterous!!! Even worse is that people are supposedly buying these cars so they can "indulge Co-workers in a chauffeur drive"   Its a non-issue because again.. the boys at Cadillac , like the boys at Chevy heard your whining and are making the change to mimic the size difference of the 3series. I fully believe that they will be capable of doing it while retaining the weight and handling superiority. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

For the last quote, Casa has a solution....he gives no phoques for what others think of the back seat area and they could all walk home for all he cares....

To me...that is just trying to save face as he knows Cadillac flubbed the ATS in that area.

The ATS is still a 4 door sedan, meant to carry....passengers.

 

I was ALWAYS hard on the Bimmer 3 Series and the Audi A4 for them being claustrophobic  compacts selling at such high prices because sheep bought them....I aint about to go soft just because Cadillac copy and pasted that formula for the ATS...

For the Malibu it was worse, because the Malibu is a  FAMILY hauler with not much family space hauling aspects....

 

 

 

Listen Bud.. U don't kno me.. so stop thinking that U kno my mind. The truth of the matter is that I really could give a rat's ass about passengers comfort level in the rear of my car as long as I'm comfy in the front. Same thing for what choice of music I choose when they get in.. I'm listening to what I want.. if they don't like it.. put their earbuds in and turn it up to 10.. cause I'm blasting my $h!. 

 

The ATS's supposed size issues in the rear will be taken car of after all the bitching from people who probably can't buy anyway so what's your issue? The CT3 is a relaunch of sorts and will rise on the back of a car that won quite a few awards with exception.. to the all important.. back seat one. Cause suddenly.. U lonely mofos have so many friends to tout around that U are trying to stuff them all in the backseat.. of a compact car   

[oldshurst442]

 

 

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base.  You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to.  Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space.  I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there.  I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space.

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

 

 

 

Hold up.. Show off to co-workers?? There is nothing aspiring about owning one.

 

Furthermore the idea that piss poor engineering is present due to an INCH less legroom in the rear sounds ridiculous. In fact.. the legroom of the ATS is only an issue NOW.. because the segment leader decided to go bigger. The 3Series is suddenly a family car.. which means that anything not sized exactly like in interior dimensions is lacking in engineering kno-how? Preposterous!!! Even worse is that people are supposedly buying these cars so they can "indulge Co-workers in a chauffeur drive"   Its a non-issue because again.. the boys at Cadillac , like the boys at Chevy heard your whining and are making the change to mimic the size difference of the 3series. I fully believe that they will be capable of doing it while retaining the weight and handling superiority. 

 

 

 

 

For the last quote, Casa has a solution....he gives no phoques for what others think of the back seat area and they could all walk home for all he cares....

To me...that is just trying to save face as he knows Cadillac flubbed the ATS in that area.

The ATS is still a 4 door sedan, meant to carry....passengers.

 

I was ALWAYS hard on the Bimmer 3 Series and the Audi A4 for them being claustrophobic  compacts selling at such high prices because sheep bought them....I aint about to go soft just because Cadillac copy and pasted that formula for the ATS...

For the Malibu it was worse, because the Malibu is a  FAMILY hauler with not much family space hauling aspects....

 

 

 

Listen Bud.. U don't kno me.. so stop thinking that U kno my mind. The truth of the matter is that I really could give a rat's ass about passengers comfort level in the rear of my car as long as I'm comfy in the front. Same thing for what choice of music I choose when they get in.. I'm listening to what I want.. if they don't like it.. put their earbuds in and turn it up to 10.. cause I'm blasting my $h!. 

 

The ATS's supposed size issues in the rear will be taken car of after all the bitching from people who probably can't buy anyway so what's your issue? The CT3 is a relaunch of sorts and will rise on the back of a car that won quite a few awards with exception.. to the all important.. back seat one. Cause suddenly.. U lonely mofos have so many friends to tout around that U are trying to stuff them all in the backseat.. of a compact car   

 

 

That is all cool and all..YOU are THE quintessential  Cadillac customer that Cadillac NEEDS to cater too...

Remember this commercial?

 

OK then....U know what is phoqued up?

Cadillac trying to sell COMPACT CARS!!!!

What are U smoking to tell ME that U dont give a shyte about anything and anyone yet U want to own a toy car like an ATS???!!!

Cadillacs are big, brash....

 

And THAT is how people want them!!!!

 

Hell, even the XTS outsold the ATS and the CTS...

I KNOW the CT6 will do fine, just because its a BIG Cadillac...but it could have used more brashness...

 

As far as the competition goes...

 

Dont U think that when the 2nd generation CTS hit the streets, and was quite successful, did BMW decide to enlarge the 3 Series?

Cadillac, I believe, started a trend with a BIGGER back seat....

Yet you too Casa, are too BLIND to see that a small back seat was NEVER ideal...

'Twas Cadillac that started THAT trend, only for Cadillac to take 2 steps back, because Cadillac marketers FOLLOW instead of LEAD...

Cadillac was too STUPID to realize that THEY are the ones to START a BIGGER back seat in COMPACT LUXURY cars....

 

Also....SPACE is a LUXURY that EVERYONE COVETS and EVERYONE has the SAME definition for...

Many may not like wood, or chrome....

However, SPACE is a LUXURY that EVERYONE WANTS EQUALLY....

 

And...ironically...CADILLAC is the ONLY top tier LUXURY MAKER that has built a REPUTATION on...SPACE...

 

Starting with Cadillac V16s of the 1930s to El Dorados in the 1950s and 1960s to the 60 Specials that started the bigger is better trend of American Luxury to the Escalade ESV of today....

 

So...please, dont try to justify a toy car ATS...

Yes....Cadillacs are cars to be chauffered in...

 

En Espagnole....but pictures say a 1000 words...

[oldshurst442]

You know?

 

Cadillac needs volume cars too.

Yet, who the hell wants a Cadillac when Cadillac has NO quality PERCEPTION cars?

 

Who is gonna fork over money  for a reasonably priced Cadillac when many dont view Cadillac as a "gotta have it" brand...

 

BMW and Audi and Mercedes could get away with craptastic compacts because all 3 Germans have this brand cachet thing going on...so a CLA and a BMW 2 Series and a Audi A3 sell....Maybe Audi a tad less then the other compacts...

 

But Cadillac....has NO car to be coveted by ANYBODY....

The Ciel, The Sixteeen and the El Miraj were DREAM cars that were only for show....yet THESE are the cars that woooooooed the people...

Showing  non-existent show cars and then trying to sell ATS models is NOT the way to build lust....

 

Cadillac NEEDS to build that LUST car in order to sell the volume cars....

Porsche....succeeded in selling the volume cars, because they already have the lust cars...

 

Cadillac phoqued up with the lust car in the XLR....going back to the Allante as well...

Cadillac needs to build up to that again, I understand that, but...an ATS/CTS, V or otherwise and a CT6 are NOT what the people lust over at Cadillac....

 

What to do?

Hopefully JDN has a clue....

 

But a Starbucks Cafe lounge thing in New York City is NOT that answer either!!!

Edited May 24, 2016 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

 

 

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base.  You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to.  Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space.  I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there.  I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space.

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

 

 

 

Hold up.. Show off to co-workers?? There is nothing aspiring about owning one.

 

Furthermore the idea that piss poor engineering is present due to an INCH less legroom in the rear sounds ridiculous. In fact.. the legroom of the ATS is only an issue NOW.. because the segment leader decided to go bigger. The 3Series is suddenly a family car.. which means that anything not sized exactly like in interior dimensions is lacking in engineering kno-how? Preposterous!!! Even worse is that people are supposedly buying these cars so they can "indulge Co-workers in a chauffeur drive"   Its a non-issue because again.. the boys at Cadillac , like the boys at Chevy heard your whining and are making the change to mimic the size difference of the 3series. I fully believe that they will be capable of doing it while retaining the weight and handling superiority. 

 

Shouldn't it be though?

It's a 35-70k Cadillac. I know if I bought a Cadillac, regardless of model, it should be show-off worthy to the majority of people who buy the mainstream chevy, ford, toyota, honda, etc. So it should be aspiring to own. You don't spend that kind of coin on something that you don't aspire to own. 

Edited May 24, 2016 by ccap41

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

2015 sales volume:

Audi A4:               29,013

Cadillac ATS:       26,873

 

I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list.  Other factors are at play there.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4?

Is it marketing / image problems there also?

 

It was in the final year of it's model cycle last year.  They sold 34,000 of them in 2014 and 37,000 of them in 2013.  When it was fresher it sold better, but that car was under powered the past few years, the base car now has a 252 hp turbo.  Better interior and more power always help.  I think Audi reliability issues hurt that car also, and Audi styling looks a bit too like a VW and hasn't changed much recently, I think it is a bit boring.

 

I didn't include the A5, but they sell about 15,000 of those per year, which is about what the Lexus RC sells.  If you tack 15,000 units to the A5 and IS for their coupe counterparts, their numbers look pretty good.  I think A4 loses sales to A3 also, because they are more similar than a CLA and C-class are for example.

 

 

The new A4 looks like a Passat with an Audi grille.

[surreal1272]

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales.  Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales.  The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat.  

 

Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

i think the rear seat hurts the sales with traditional Cadillac base.  You still have a lot of those people you need to sell to.  Those who grew up believing luxury meant a basic minimum amount of comfort / space.  I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there.  I can't believe the high level execs at GM let that pass and go to production.....grounds for firing IMO when they should have demanded all of that be reengineered for more space.

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive.

I AGREE TO THIS REG 100%

 

These quotes here is what MANY GM die hards will ignore and/or cover up and make excuses for:

 

I hear people take pot shots at how small the ATS is when i go to the auto shows.  We all tried to hide how much the rear seat problem hurt the outgoing Malibu and now look at the awesome press its getting for correcting a primary flaw.. interior SAE measurements always mislead.  The ATS is plagued by many of the same typical GM rear seat packaging problems where the front seat is too low, the hardware is intrusive, and the floorpan (probably due to where the bracing is) has pitifully small actual footwell areas.  Couple that with narrower greenhouses, fighter plane diving rooflines, ridiculously small and narrow door openings, and tank humps that stick out forward of the actual seat itself, even for the smaller, wedging yourself into an ATS backseat requires gymnastics training and inspires claustrophobia that an MRI tube could match.

 

The ATS is the classe of car that one buys and has to show off to coworkers.....where you bring coworkers to lunch here and again.  You're going to have the occasional 6 footer back there...

 

GM can't punt on these packaging issues very much more.  If anything it shows piss poor engineering, can't meet structural demands and preserve ample space at the same time.  They make a sturdy frame for the car to ring the 'Ring......but then its so overbuilt and bulky that there's no back seat space to indulge co workers in a chauffeur drive....

 

For the last quote, Casa has a solution....he gives no phoques for what others think of the back seat area and they could all walk home for all he cares....

To me...that is just trying to save face as he knows Cadillac flubbed the ATS in that area.

The ATS is still a 4 door sedan, meant to carry....passengers.

 

I was ALWAYS hard on the Bimmer 3 Series and the Audi A4 for them being claustrophobic  compacts selling at such high prices because sheep bought them....I aint about to go soft just because Cadillac copy and pasted that formula for the ATS...

For the Malibu it was worse, because the Malibu is a  FAMILY hauler with not much family space hauling aspects....

Sorry but I said the same thing to folks if they wanted to be that way and my car never had any complaints (from any publication) about the back seat (and that was my '06 Magnum). It's rather presumptuous for you to assume why Casa said that and is, quite frankly, quite ignorant as well. Not everyone follows along the line of thinking you are suggesting here so maybe you should actually ASK Casa why he really feels that way instead of assuming just because of your own personal bias towards the situation.

[ccap41]

^ while I agree that it is pretty ignorant to assume at the same time it is pretty obvious that he will make anything GM look great even with their shortcomings on vehicles, because nothing is perfect... but anything GM is the best.. I think that is what Olds was getting at, but again, that'd be me assuming..lol 

 

I've been in the back of an ATS and the head room is tight but if somebody was giving me a ride somewhere I would never complain(and nobody's ever complained about mine. Even when people have had to get in the back of my Mustangs) about somebody else's car so I'd suck it up regardless so I don't know if the "friends and family" not complaining about something is always the best. Most people are just nice enough to not criticize other people's vehicles. That is one reason we rely on the professionals to review and dissect cars for us.

Edited May 24, 2016 by ccap41

[surreal1272]

^ while I agree that it is pretty ignorant to assume at the same time it is pretty obvious that he will make anything GM look great even with their shortcomings on vehicles, because nothing is perfect... but anything GM is the best.. I think that is what Olds was getting at, but again, that'd be me assuming..lol 

 

I've been in the back of an ATS and the head room is tight but if somebody was giving me a ride somewhere I would never complain(and nobody's ever complained about mine. Even when people have had to get in the back of my Mustangs) about somebody else's car so I'd suck it up regardless so I don't know if the "friends and family" not complaining about something is always the best. Most people are just nice enough to not criticize other people's vehicles. That is one reason we rely on the professionals to review and dissect cars for us.

Yes he is a GM fan. However, he has also been very upfront about their shortcomings so I maintain my stance on this.

I do agree with you about the passenger perspective. Most don't care or just won't say anything but I've met a few over the years that were silly enough to say things like that. My response has always been "so, how long will it take you walk there?"

[ccap41]

 

^ while I agree that it is pretty ignorant to assume at the same time it is pretty obvious that he will make anything GM look great even with their shortcomings on vehicles, because nothing is perfect... but anything GM is the best.. I think that is what Olds was getting at, but again, that'd be me assuming..lol 

 

I've been in the back of an ATS and the head room is tight but if somebody was giving me a ride somewhere I would never complain(and nobody's ever complained about mine. Even when people have had to get in the back of my Mustangs) about somebody else's car so I'd suck it up regardless so I don't know if the "friends and family" not complaining about something is always the best. Most people are just nice enough to not criticize other people's vehicles. That is one reason we rely on the professionals to review and dissect cars for us.

Yes he is a GM fan. However, he has also been very upfront about their shortcomings so I maintain my stance on this.

I do agree with you about the passenger perspective. Most don't care or just won't say anything but I've met a few over the years that were silly enough to say things like that. My response has always been "so, how long will it take you walk there?"

 

Fair enough, I don't disagree, just don't 100% agree either.. Kind of neutral on that part of it.

 

lol yeah I guess I have heard that before and responded very similarly, come to think of it. But none were in cars that had doors for the rear passengers. That would have had to have been in either mustang. Nobody complained once in though. It was just about getting in and out from a damn coupe which just plain sucks. 

[Drew Dowdell]

You don't buy an ATS or 3-series or A4 to be your friends' free Uber driver.  If you plan on taking bunches of friends out regularly on long trips, either pony up for a mid-size luxury or step down to a "family" car/SUV.

 

These are personal luxury cars. 

[oldshurst442]

I aint gonna acks Casa nuthin'.

I don't give a shyte what BMW does with their models....

 

I do care what Cadillac does wit ders...

Cadillac hit a sweet spot in size with 1st and 2nd gen CTS all to piss it away....

BMW grew their 3 Series to COMPETE with the CTS of old....

 

Cadillac BEAT the 3 Series and Casa and Cadillac don't even know it!!!

 

 

The ATS is what the 3 Series was...and what is that?

Well, acks Casa what HE thinks of the old 3 Series...and THAT is what the ATS is...

 

There shouldn't be ANY excuse for the ATS....

Who gives a phoque what the BMW 3 Series did or does???!!!

 

What Cadillac does concerns me!!!

 

Oh and Drew...

A personal coupe or sedan is a bigger car than a former 3 Series or ATS...

A former 3 Series car is a compact sports sedan.

THAT is what the Germans do...or did.

 

Personal Luxury is what Cadillac did...

And should enter that market again...

 

Casa mentions that a CLS also has crappy back seat space...well...the CLS is a PROPER PERSONAL LUXURY SEDAN/COUPE...

 

A 4 Series Grand Coupe is also a GREAT and PROPER PERSONAL LUXURY CAR...

An ATS is what an old news 3 Series car was....

The CURRENT 3 Series car is what an OLD CTS WAS....

Its too bad that Cadillac abandoned that market in favor for an old news market...

[smk4565]

The current 3-series is smaller than a 2003 CTS.  Pretty much every segment of car has size creep, look at a 90s Accord and a 2016 Accord for example.

 

I think what is interesting is Cadillac got rid of the STS, because it wasn't selling, people said it was too big, too soft, or didn't have the performance to match the Germans.  And now the CTS is the exact same length as the 2005-2010 STS, the turbo 4 makes comparable power to the STS V6, and the 3.6 V6 comparable power to the old Northstar V8.  They turned the CTS into a carbon copy of a car GM itself deemed a failure.

[smk4565]

 

 

 

 

 

More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6.  But none of those 3 cars sell well.  It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car.  Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS.  They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars.

 

 

 

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point.

 

The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin

 

And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models.  Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible?  They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis.   Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks.  Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers.  Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles.  That is a joke.  Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars.   And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette.   They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control.  Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe?  We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage.

 

 

 

I agree about variants.. we all kno this. The Cadillac situation may be a bit different as the vehicles have to be executed even more stringently than the bread and butter ones. The ATS vs Camaro convertible thing I have no answer or logic for tho..

 

It is my opinion.. and some fact that Cadillac is waiting for the 2018-19 model year to fully build on the excellence it presented with the CTS, Escalade, XT5 and CT6. Baby steps.. blowing your entire load while teh world is not looking would be even worse than doing nothing at all. 

 

So Cadillac has the ability to make great cars now, but is going to wait until the 2019 model year to release them?   I would imagine the GM shareholders wouldn't be happy that Cadillac could be bringing in better profits right now, but instead they have to wait another 2-3 years.

[Drew Dowdell]

Cadillac makes great cars now, but you can't see with the 3-pointed stars in your eyes. 

[surreal1272]

Cadillac makes great cars now, but you can't see with the 3-pointed stars in your eyes.

^^THIS!!^^

[smk4565]

Cadillac makes great cars now, but you can't see with the 3-pointed stars in your eyes. 

No one is buying their sedans, and they only have 1 crossover.   I would say that the ATS and CTS are competitive, but the BMW and Mercedes counterparts are better the Audi A6 is always gets strong reviews, the Infiniti Q50 is better than an ATS at qual money.  I hate Lexus styling, and the dated engines, Cadillac is probably making a better vehicle than the IS or GS or ES trio of sedans, but Lexus does a better job of branding and marketing.  Cadillac builds a better product than Lincoln and Acura for sure, better than the Infiniti Q70.  Overall that puts Cadillac middle of the pack I'd say.

[Drew Dowdell]

The Camry is the best selling mid size... That doesn't make it the best mid size... It just means that people have habits that are hard to break.

And it's biased, agenda driven people like you who bash Cadillac constantly over non-issues that perpetuate the stigma against the brand.

No, the Q is not better than the ATS... Not by a long shot

[surreal1272]

The Camry is the best selling mid size... That doesn't make it the best mid size... It just means that people have habits that are hard to break.

And it's biased, agenda driven people like you who bash Cadillac constantly over non-issues that perpetuate the stigma against the brand.

Again, this ^^.

Could not have said it better myself. Sales have jack squat to do with how good a car is. Perceptions kill sales faster than how good or bad a car actually is.

[oldshurst442]

Cadillac DOES make GREAT products now....

 

It aint ONLY SMK that is blinded by German "engineering"...

 

The problem is...how does Cadillac reverse that trend?

 

Personal luxury coupes like these?

 

 

 

PS: on the track stuff, people dont care!!!

 

Or like a REAL personal luxury coupe...

 

Because the little bullshyte cars have NOT moved the needle....

The 'Tweener CTS Sedan did, not the coupe....and the current CTS is a confusing proposition...

All this time....it was a 3 Series fighter, now its a 5 Series fighter...

Its Confusing for Cadillac guys, let alone normal douche bag Audi and BMW guys...

And....dont give me times have changed BS...

While times have changed from what was THE car to own...

...all of a sudden...the times have returned where Cadillac took a right turn at Alburque...

 

This being the right turn...

 

And while Cadillac FINALLY got it RIGHT!!!

The people dont want sports sedans anymore...

 

Even BMW ACKNOWLEDGED it...

 

 

But BMW's "M" has weight behind it....and BMW plays to its strengths from time to time...

Cadillac too...plays to its strengths from time to time....but not nearly enough...

 

 

Cadillac needs these PRONTO!!!

 

And there is NOTHING ELSE to say about it!!!

 

You guys could bitch, whine and find excuses for the ATS...its a failure because THAT is NOT what the people want from Cadillac....

Call it CT3 and make it bigger....people WANT a CADILLAC...not a CT3...

 

If that means real names with real sheet metal....so be it...

I hope JDN know what he is doing...

Volume sub ATS cars better NOT fail....because I have a feeling, this is the end of the road for Cadillac if JDN's current plan fails....

CT8 is moth balled....

THAT is NOT good news from where Im standing...

 

People want to see a CT8 so they could drive off in there CT3 DREAMING about a CT8....but if a CT8 does not exist?

What do people dream of owning Chez Cadillac then in being inspired to own a CT3?

 

The latte shop in NYC is NOT that answer...

 

TESLA accomplished in a relative short 5 years what Cadillac has being trying to do with Allante since 1990...

Edited May 24, 2016 by oldshurst442

[surreal1272]

Cadillac makes great cars now, but you can't see with the 3-pointed stars in your eyes.

No one is buying their sedans, and they only have 1 crossover.   I would say that the ATS and CTS are competitive, but the BMW and Mercedes counterparts are better the Audi A6 is always gets strong reviews, the Infiniti Q50 is better than an ATS at qual money.  I hate Lexus styling, and the dated engines, Cadillac is probably making a better vehicle than the IS or GS or ES trio of sedans, but Lexus does a better job of branding and marketing.  Cadillac builds a better product than Lincoln and Acura for sure, better than the Infiniti Q70.  Overall that puts Cadillac middle of the pack I'd say.

Riiiight. The Q50 is better. Riiiiiiight. That recycled G is not equal, much less better than, a comparably equipped ATS. In fact, in just about every review involving the two, the ATS comes out ahead.

[oldshurst442]

PSS:

Ive said this before...

 

It aint this car that led the Cadillac resurgence in the late 1990s...

It really is this car

 

And its NOT looking back!!!

[Drew Dowdell]

Olds, you're both right and wrong.  The CTS, while not at the level of the germans on interior design, put Cadillac back on the performance map. It gave Cadillac the platform to hone its skills on leading into the second gen CTS on the same platform that became a German killer on the track. 

[smk4565]

The Camry is the best selling mid size... That doesn't make it the best mid size... It just means that people have habits that are hard to break.

And it's biased, agenda driven people like you who bash Cadillac constantly over non-issues that perpetuate the stigma against the brand.

No, the Q is not better than the ATS... Not by a long shot

100% agree on the Camry, it has reputation and is a safe buy, but it isn't the best car.  

 

I think the Q50 has a better interior, and is roomier than an ATS.  The Q50 has a 300 hp V6 for the price of the ATS 2.0T and they have a 400 hp V6 for not much more than the 335 hp V6 in the ATS.   Better performance with the Q50 on paper.  I have never driven a Q50, I have driven the G37, which is a bit too boy racer and noises for me, I think they missed the luxury side of the equation on the G37, but it was pretty good handling.

 

Question still remains as to why the ATS is the 6th or 7th best seller in the segment, and I don't think it is the back seat leg room.

[Drew Dowdell]

Heartily disagree on the Q50 interior. I'd put it second to last place in the segment being beaten for worst only by Acura (TLX, Rlx, or ILX , take your pick, doesn't matter)

[Drew Dowdell]

The answer is simple. People like you who are badge snobs. For the price, people would rather buy a Mercedes-Pretendz CLA than a equal price ATS with more equipment and better performance. The ATS is clearly the superior car, but people like you have convinced the sheep that they have to get the Pretendz in order to show that they've "made it".

[smk4565]

Olds has it right in that Cadillac has no halo product, other than Escalade.   They need a smaller than XT5 crossover and a 3 row crossover because that is what the masses buy.  However they also need halo product that defines the brand.  GM has toyed with a mid-engine Corvette for 10-20 years, why not just make a mid-engine Cadillac super car, leave the Corvette front engine, rear drive.  

 

I actually think they should cap the Corvette at 500 hp and not run the price up to the $100k mark as they have done in the past.  If you watch reviews on the Z06, most say it is worse than the Stingray because it has too much power, it can't even put it down.  The Corvette should be what the Stingray is, and I'd argue a 400 hp twin turbo V6 version at $50k would open up a few more sales.  If GM wants to build a 600 hp car, or a mid-engine car, give that to Cadillac.

 

Cadillac first needs to be luxury, they should build a full size coupe and CT8, that are above Escalade Platinum in luxury, and build a mid-engine super car to compete with the Ferrari 488.  Even if they lose money on all 3, at least they will start to change the image of the brand.  

[Drew Dowdell]

Cadillac has 3 halo products. Escalade, CTS-V, and ATS-V.

[smk4565]

Heartily disagree on the Q50 interior. I'd put it second to last place in the segment being beaten for worst only by Acura (TLX, Rlx, or ILX , take your pick, doesn't matter)

Acura interiors are all garbage compared to a luxury car.  They are similar to what you get in a Mazda 6.   Lincoln interiors are a sea of plastic and Fusion parts as well.  I would put the ATS and Q50 both behind Lexus or the Germans for interiors.