Cadillac ATS to Get up to $1000 Price cut and ATS 2.5L is Dead for '17

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

Prices will be reduced between $650 and $1,100, depending on the trim level. And each model will get more content than it did before. For example, Cadillac is eliminating the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine, leaving the 2.0-liter turbocharged four-banger as the standard engine, and the 3.6-liter V-6 as the top engine. Starting with the '17 model year, buyers of a 2.0-liter turbo with some popular add-ons, such as a Bose surround-sound audio system, will pay about the same price as the 2.5-liter sedan with those same features cost in the '16 model year.

The goal is to give customers more value without resorting to the sort of fire-sale incentives that have hurt the ATS in the past, says Cadillac's global product planning director, Hampden Tener. It also spotlights the ATS' 2.0-liter engine, which is rated at 272 hp, more powerful than the 2.0-liter turbos offered in the BMW 328i and Mercedes C class.

"We want to emphasize the 2.0-liter turbo and the car's features while attacking the market on the product side, rather than using increased incentives," he told Automotive News.

Making the 2.0-liter turbo the standard engine boosts the ATS' base price by about $1,500, to $35,590 including shipping. That's above the base price of the 3 series. The 2.5-liter accounted for more than 20 percent of sales.

But Tener believes that dangling greater value at each trim level will spur demand. And reducing the number of model and engine configurations to seven, from 16, will make it easier for dealers to stock the most popular combinations.

The ATS' sales woes in part reflect a four-year hangover from a poor launch strategy. Analysts and dealers say Cadillac priced the cars too high and overproduced them in the first two years. Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen and his team have been struggling to right the ATS ever since, including dramatically reducing inventories and cutting back on incentives.

 

[G. David Felt]

This will be interesting to see how it goes over.

[Cmicasa the Great]

This will be interesting to see how it goes over.

 

 

I KINDA called the engine change back in the "ATS 8Speed" thread earlier, altho I figured that the 2.0L would be come the base in 2018 as the CT3

 

 

 

ATS (CT3) will have be, most likely, the same size in exterior dimensions but magically have lighter weight, and a bigger interior. Styling will take on the more fluid design of El Miraj and Ciel mixed. BET!!! The engines.. considering Cadillac is seemingly going forced induction.. I wouldn't be surprised if the 2.0L and 3.0L are the main engines, but the 3.6L may still be a middle man. I would expect the 3.0L may actually get a detune to take its place tho.. say about 360HP and the continued use of the LF4 for the VSeries but obviously more power.  CMICASATHEGREATXvX

[Cmicasa the Great]

It really will make things a bit less confusing.. on top of that.. ATS WITH NO SINGLE PIPE.. YES!!! The 2.0L is now going to be at high end ofthe spectrum in terms of power in the segment. Also remember that the fuel econ of the 2.5L is almost identical to that of the 2.0L Turbo despite the 2.0L having 70 more HP and 100lbs more of torque

[Suaviloquent]

Why would power matter for the new base engine/removal of the 2.5? We all know what's what. The competition from Germany chronically underrate their engines.

 

And I figure enthusiast buyers of the competition, also know that.

 

Aside from that, this choice makes a lot of sense. I figure the SUB-ATS model will have a 1.5L turbo engine standard, and the 2.0T as the uplevel option. 

 

Now I think they should for the CTS refresh have the LF4 as the VSport engine.

[G. David Felt]

Why would power matter for the new base engine/removal of the 2.5? We all know what's what. The competition from Germany chronically underrate their engines.

 

And I figure enthusiast buyers of the competition, also know that.

 

I agree that Enthusiast buyers will know the power of the engines, but most BMW / MB badge snobs will not.

[smk4565]

This makes a lot of sense, and I was saying 3 years ago they should drop the 2.5 liter and make the 2.0T the base engine.  Putting more equipment and better powertrain in the car was what they should have done all along.  

 

I actually think Cadillac should drop the 3.6 V6 over the next 2 years and make the 3.0 TT as their mid-level engine, even if they have to dial back the power a little bit to 370 hp to improve refinement.  The 3.6 V6 is just useless when it comes to torque compared to the German sixes and the Jaguar V6.  Cadillac should be striving toward an all turbo lineup by 2018.

[regfootball]

2.5 was 20% of sales?  i would have thought it would be more like 10%.  

 

They had better get a new 2.0t in the pipeline, one that is more refined.

 

smk's bit about making the tt3.0 the midlevel has some merit.  The Jaguar XE goes right to the 340hp v6 as the step up engine option.

 

A lot of Cadillac's traditional customers might still not want a turbo though.  They could put the new 3.6 in there to satisfy those.

 

ATS'st flaw right now is probably the cheap interior.  And lack of space is probably what has killed sales the most of anything, however they can't fix that until they totally redo the car.  If they at least totally updated the interior that could spur a sales uptick.

 

I would recommend Cadillac not burn the time on a smaller vehicle unless they think it would sell in other markets.  make the ATS you have now more space efficient.

[ccap41]

Good... I don't think the 2.5 should have ever been in this car. 

[G. David Felt]

This makes a lot of sense, and I was saying 3 years ago they should drop the 2.5 liter and make the 2.0T the base engine.  Putting more equipment and better powertrain in the car was what they should have done all along.  

 

I actually think Cadillac should drop the 3.6 V6 over the next 2 years and make the 3.0 TT as their mid-level engine, even if they have to dial back the power a little bit to 370 hp to improve refinement.  The 3.6 V6 is just useless when it comes to torque compared to the German sixes and the Jaguar V6.  Cadillac should be striving toward an all turbo lineup by 2018.

Marketing might think they need to follow everyone with turbo this, turbo that, but GM is more than capable of building a high quality long life NA DI V6 or V8 that would fit the bill running on regular gas or going the Hybrid or EV route.

[smk4565]

The Cadillac 3.6 V6 is about 60 lb-ft of torque and 3,500 rpm away from where it needs to be.  A Cadillac V6 should make 340 lb-ft at 2,000 rpm.

 

Jaguar has 340 and 380 hp V6s that are in the 330-340 lb-ft range, BMW's engine is under rated at 320 or 330 lb-ft, whatever they claim, the Mercedes V6 is 350ish hp and torque, Audi is in that range too now.  You want a V6 with mid to high 300s in horsepower and torque now.

 

I'd like to see Cadillac pair that turbo V6 with a hybrid system.   

[balthazar]

A Cadillac V6 should make 340 lb-ft at 2,000 rpm.

Cadillac's OTHER V6 makes 404 HP & 400 TRQ.

[smk4565]

 

A Cadillac V6 should make 340 lb-ft at 2,000 rpm.

Cadillac's OTHER V6 makes 404 HP & 400 TRQ.

 

Right, that is why I said the 3.0 twin turbo should be the step up engine from the 2.0T.    The Turbo V6 has already been criticized for refinement though, so they might have to work on that part of it.  The Infiniti Q50 has a 400 hp V6 for under $50k, the ATS should have the 3.0TT for $47,900, throw it in the CTS for $55,000.

[balthazar]

No; you said

A Cadillac V6 should make 340 lb-ft

and a Cadillac V6 makes 400 lb-ft.

If you are going to make blanket proclamations, expect to get called out.

 

Here's a proclamation of my own :: "If mercedes wants to convince people it's 'the best', their V6 should make at least 425 lb-ft of torque."

[daves87rs]

Interior still needs some work..(and space) A little extra value will help, but there still will be some discounts in there to help....

[Suaviloquent]

I think the LGX V6 is looking more and more like an oddball. It's a totally nice engine...but it is lacking the oomph that the boosted sixes provide in the first upgrade powertrain choice of competing brands, and Cadillac has the engine to replace in the cards.

 

I think the LGX should be relegated to use by Buick, GMC and Chevy... 

 

But it's hard to imagine them keeping the 3.0TT a Cadillac exclusive for too long, or even an exclusive for the CT6 at that.

[smk4565]

I was thinking all Cadillac V6s should have at least 340 lb-ft, but I didn't really state that well.  My main point was the ATS and CTS mid-level engine should be the twin turbo V6.  If they want to let the CT6 have some seperation they could detune the ATS and CTS 3.0TT's down to 375 hp or so.  The 400 hp TT V6 isn't doing Cadillac any good only being offered in one car though.

[ccap41]

I was thinking all Cadillac V6s should have at least 340 lb-ft, but I didn't really state that well.  My main point was the ATS and CTS mid-level engine should be the twin turbo V6.  If they want to let the CT6 have some seperation they could detune the ATS and CTS 3.0TT's down to 375 hp or so.  The 400 hp TT V6 isn't doing Cadillac any good only being offered in one car though.

When you say mid level are you talking about 4 engines in the ATS? 2.0T, 3.0TT, X?, 3.6TT? We know the n/a 3.6 cannot be above the 3.0TT but everybody keeps saying "mid-level" engine.. well that's kind of tricky when there are 4 engines offered. 

 

Or are you saying it should be 2.0T, n/a 3.6, 3.0TT, 3.6TT? 

[G. David Felt]

With various Turbo options, you could have Twin Turbo V6 across the whole GM family!

 

Just make sure the newest and best in the Cadillac Family always first!

[balthazar]

The 400 hp TT V6 isn't doing Cadillac any good only being offered in one car though.

Except the part where it exceeds so many of it's competitors.

 

And give the engine a chance to see expanded usage - it only debuted a few months ago. 

Edited June 29, 2016 by balthazar

[smk4565]

I'd like to see...

 

ATS:  2.0T, 3.0 TT V6, 3.6TT V6

CTS:  2.0T, 3.0TT, 3.6 TT (ATS-V 460 hp version), 6.2 sc V8

CT6:  2.0T, 3.0TT V6

 

That is what I'd do for gas engines, until they have a turbo DOHC V8 then that would go to CT6 and replace the CTS-V 6.2 liter.

 

Of course there would be plug-in hybrids options on all 3 cars with the 2.0T, that would work in the XT5 also.  I'd like to see a 3.0TT V6 plug-in on the CT6 and Escalade.

[balthazar]

You forgot the CT6 4.2TT V8

[smk4565]

 

That is what I'd do for gas engines, until they have a turbo DOHC V8 then that would go to CT6 and replace the CTS-V 6.2 liter.

 

I didn't forget the 4.2 V8, but it isn't available right now. My lineup they could do right now. When the 4.2 V8 arrives for sure that goes to CT6, I'd put it in the Escalade and ATS-V also.

[balthazar]

"I'd like to see" implies a future scenario. 4.2TT is in the works; it's on the way.

 

Personally, I'd like to see the 2.0T dropped from the CT6; there should be some sort of engine hierarchy as you move up. As opposed to audi, which offers a VW 2.0L in the A3, A4, A5, A6.

In addition to the 4.2TT V8 in the CT6, I would like to see the pros & cons of ALSO offering the 6.2SC V8 there also.

[smk4565]

I wish the CT6 had the V8 at launch, I'd be all for them dropping the gas only 2.0T in the CT6, and making the 2.0T plug-in hybrid the base engine, and go to the turbo v6 and v8 from there.

[balthazar]

Hybrids don't sell, the take rate in a CT6 would be in the single digits and it doesn't add any cache' to the series. It's not a priority.

[Cmicasa the Great]

I stand by what I said the other day in the ATS/Japan thread. It was as if the boys at CAdillac saw my suggestion (LOL as if) and said "yeah.. he knows what he's talking about "

 

From June 14th:

 

 

It really is at that point that Cadillac stop messin around and do right by this model. I've driven M3s, M4s, last gen CAMGs, and IS-Fs... the ATS even in 2.0L form damn near triumphs them all.. let alone the VSeries. This car deserves a better send off before the CT3/4 arrives.

 

First.. kill the 2.5L. There simply isn't any plausible reason why its offered outside of offering a cheaper and justified reason to have a cheaper Caddy on the lot. That the fuel economy/cost is exactly the same.. sans the fact that one takes Premium and the other takes regular. Cost to fill a 2.5 is $37.. the 2.0L??? $8 more. Come on.. if U can't afford that.. buy a Cruze.

 

Engine options:

 

2.0L as base. 272HP

3.6L as mid    340HP  (kill this when the CT3/4 arrives in favor of a 3.0L TT with 350HP even if U have to publish BS numbers and say its only 340 for insurance sake)

3.6L TT LF3  as .. yup.. VSport   390HP. Just do it.. stop playing around. Ain't that many ATS-Vs being sold as a reason why U wouldn't want this to be on the streets to takes from its sales.

3.6L TT 464HP or.. optional (meaning people who want it.. pay for it)$3500 LT1 V8 with 480HP

 

Let's be clear.. this extra 15 HP can be achieved cheaply by Cadillac via a Tune, and a ported throttle body. I would also start selling from the dealership.. installed (WHATTA DEAL!!!!) a cat-back Corsa exhaust systemor GM built system that boasted the HP another 15. Price?$1900 Installed

[smk4565]

Hybrids don't sell because they are the most expensive engine option on most cars. If the CT6 hybrid was $59,900 and the turbo V6 was $64,900, and turbo V8 $74,900 the hybrid would sell.

[surreal1272]

Hybrids don't sell because they are the most expensive engine option on most cars. If the CT6 hybrid was $59,900 and the turbo V6 was $64,900, and turbo V8 $74,900 the hybrid would sell.

So you would have them do it exactly the opposite of the competition?

[Frisky Dingo]

Good riddance. The 2.5 car sucked.

[smk4565]

 

Hybrids don't sell because they are the most expensive engine option on most cars. If the CT6 hybrid was $59,900 and the turbo V6 was $64,900, and turbo V8 $74,900 the hybrid would sell.

So you would have them do it exactly the opposite of the competition?

 

Not really, the plug-in hybrid C-class is cheaper than a V6 C-class.   The MKZ Hybrid is cheaper than the turbo V6 MKZ.  They could make the plug-in hybrid CT6 the base model easily.

[ccap41]

Kind of random...but...

 

I tried to build a 2016 ATS online yesterday and it won't allow me to have the "black chrome" package and then add CUE to it.. It makes me get rid of the black chrome package in order to get CUE. Why???

[Suaviloquent]

 

I stand by what I said the other day in the ATS/Japan thread. It was as if the boys at CAdillac saw my suggestion (LOL as if) and said "yeah.. he knows what he's talking about "

 

From June 14th:

 

 

It really is at that point that Cadillac stop messin around and do right by this model. I've driven M3s, M4s, last gen CAMGs, and IS-Fs... the ATS even in 2.0L form damn near triumphs them all.. let alone the VSeries. This car deserves a better send off before the CT3/4 arrives.

 

First.. kill the 2.5L. There simply isn't any plausible reason why its offered outside of offering a cheaper and justified reason to have a cheaper Caddy on the lot. That the fuel economy/cost is exactly the same.. sans the fact that one takes Premium and the other takes regular. Cost to fill a 2.5 is $37.. the 2.0L??? $8 more. Come on.. if U can't afford that.. buy a Cruze.

 

Engine options:

 

2.0L as base. 272HP

3.6L as mid    340HP  (kill this when the CT3/4 arrives in favor of a 3.0L TT with 350HP even if U have to publish BS numbers and say its only 340 for insurance sake)

3.6L TT LF3  as .. yup.. VSport   390HP. Just do it.. stop playing around. Ain't that many ATS-Vs being sold as a reason why U wouldn't want this to be on the streets to takes from its sales.

3.6L TT 464HP or.. optional (meaning people who want it.. pay for it)$3500 LT1 V8 with 480HP

 

Let's be clear.. this extra 15 HP can be achieved cheaply by Cadillac via a Tune, and a ported throttle body. I would also start selling from the dealership.. installed (WHATTA DEAL!!!!) a cat-back Corsa exhaust systemor GM built system that boasted the HP another 15. Price?$1900 Installed

 

 

Uh....you didn't call this. Absolutely everybody here found it quite stupid to offer the 2.5L in the Cadillac ATS as the base engine.

[surreal1272]

Hybrids don't sell because they are the most expensive engine option on most cars. If the CT6 hybrid was $59,900 and the turbo V6 was $64,900, and turbo V8 $74,900 the hybrid would sell.

So you would have them do it exactly the opposite of the competition?

While some poor soul down voted this, they should have considered where I got my statement from.

The S Class hybrid is the exact same price as the base model, hence my "why would Cadillac do the exact opposite of the competition". They could price it identical to the base CT6 and do just fine with that.

Inform yourself next time.

[Suaviloquent]

Hmmm...Hmmm,,,,HMMMM...Noooo....MAYBE.. NAHHH

 

I don't get it. I think Surreal and SMK have the exact same point/seem to be in agreement. SMK says make the hybrid the affordable choice. Surreal says it can be priced like the base model. They both achieve similar ends. Perhaps if the plug hybrid offers performance upgrades, it can still be priced above base, but below TTV6.

 

Where is the disagreement?

 

[smk4565]

I dunno, I think it seems logical for a 335 HP plug-in hybrid turbo 4 to be base model, a 400 HP turbo v6 middle option and turbo v8 high end. In a CT6 you don't need a base 2.0t any more than the ATS needed that 2.5 liter.

[surreal1272]

Hmmm...Hmmm,,,,HMMMM...Noooo....MAYBE.. NAHHH

I don't get it. I think Surreal and SMK have the exact same point/seem to be in agreement. SMK says make the hybrid the affordable choice. Surreal says it can be priced like the base model. They both achieve similar ends. Perhaps if the plug hybrid offers performance upgrades, it can still be priced above base, but below TTV6.

Where is the disagreement?

He thinks the CT6 hybrid should be $5k cheaper than the entry model while Benz matches the price of the two.

Still don't see the issue?

Reading comprehension is your friend Suave.

I dunno, I think it seems logical for a 335 HP plug-in hybrid turbo 4 to be base model, a 400 HP turbo v6 middle option and turbo v8 high end. In a CT6 you don't need a base 2.0t any more than the ATS needed that 2.5 liter.

There is no logic there. The hybrid is supposed to be a step up from base, not as an entry point to base, much less being $5K cheaper than base.

Simply no logic when you break it down.

Edited July 1, 2016 by surreal1272

[ccap41]

Why does a hybrid HAVE to be a step up? Or "supposed" to be a step up? And if it is "supposed" to be the step up but it is offered at base price, that should be a bonus, right? I don't see anything wrong with that. Lincoln does it with their MKZ, 

 

The S Class's base S550 and S550e Plug-in start at the same exact price($96,650). I think that is all smk is trying to say is it shouldn't be a step up in his opinion. They should offer the hybrid and 3.6 at the same entry price. 

[G. David Felt]

I think if you have a Tubo 4 banger, it is a step up to Hybrid. I would have no problem with a Turbo 4 Hybrid at the same starting price as a V6. They both have the same performance, but of course the Hybrid gets better MPG. Let the market then decide which they want to buy and have a step up to turbo V8 and top line is SC V8 for the CT6.

[Suaviloquent]

With the way that the CT6 is priced I think a 5k price spread a step up from "base" is totally fine. I would not consider the 2.0T a "BASE ENGINE" anymore. It has its advantages of weight and handling over the V6, and darn near the same performance. It's a Phantom. It exists because it exists yet again in a different context and different place.

 

The 2.0T engine option has China to thank for it's existence, and GM decided there's no harm in having it available here - the supply of that engine is ready, and their platform is flexible. 

 

The Voltec system will prolly be AWD (unless it's not - please tell) and add some gusto to the car. I can imagine Cadillac finding a way to package the battery so that truck volume isn't lost...And remember, Cadillac is predicting a 35+ mile EV range. That's twice or three times anything PHEV or EREV of that general size.

 

But really...it's a stretch to compare the top dog Mercedes (before the Maybach variants)...to a this adapted to be the temporary flag holder (Not flagship). Mercedes can do whatever it wants with it's pricing of that car...and by no means are they peddling the plug in as a value...because it gets piss poor EV range and piss poor mileage when the pack is drained. And the trunk gets truncated as much as if you had the wine cooler option.

 

If the E-Class LWB was going to be sold stateside, I'd think the CT6 and that E-class variant they'd be at each other's throats - because the comparison makes a lot of sense.

 

Otherwise...neat tangent into the CT6. But the 2.0T is not really a mistake for the CT6, because it came ahead of its time and wasn't what we all expected. But it's still a hell of a car. And I'd bang, OK? Not the hybrid though - that can stay in China.

[surreal1272]

With the way that the CT6 is priced I think a 5k price spread a step up from "base" is totally fine. I would not consider the 2.0T a "BASE ENGINE" anymore. It has its advantages of weight and handling over the V6, and darn near the same performance. It's a Phantom. It exists because it exists yet again in a different context and different place.

The 2.0T engine option has China to thank for it's existence, and GM decided there's no harm in having it available here - the supply of that engine is ready, and their platform is flexible.

The Voltec system will prolly be AWD (unless it's not - please tell) and add some gusto to the car. I can imagine Cadillac finding a way to package the battery so that truck volume isn't lost...And remember, Cadillac is predicting a 35+ mile EV range. That's twice or three times anything PHEV or EREV of that general size.

But really...it's a stretch to compare the top dog Mercedes (before the Maybach variants)...to a this adapted to be the temporary flag holder (Not flagship). Mercedes can do whatever it wants with it's pricing of that car...and by no means are they peddling the plug in as a value...because it gets piss poor EV range and piss poor mileage when the pack is drained. And the trunk gets truncated as much as if you had the wine cooler option.

If the E-Class LWB was going to be sold stateside, I'd think the CT6 and that E-class variant they'd be at each other's throats - because the comparison makes a lot of sense.

Otherwise...neat tangent into the CT6. But the 2.0T is not really a mistake for the CT6, because it came ahead of its time and wasn't what we all expected. But it's still a hell of a car. And I'd bang, OK? Not the hybrid though - that can stay in China.

A step up FROM base is fine and that is what should happen. What should not happen is pricing a hybrid AS the base model with the next trim being $5K higher. That has been my whole point from the get go.

And it is not a stretch to bring up the S Class In comparison. It illustrated perfectly the pricing tier I was talking about which contradicts SMKs assumption that the hybrid should be the cheapest for Cadillac. It literally makes no sense no matter how you slice it.

Edited July 1, 2016 by surreal1272

[Suaviloquent]

I think SMK doesn't consider the 2.0T a credible car....  So could the hybrid/erev be the car with a base price similar in tune to the what we think...

 

I truly believe, Cadillac ...if they wanted to, could raise MSRP's across the board by a fair bit - because the value is inherent to the badge now for Cadillac cars too.

 

But there's a big difference. The S-Class 550e has a turbo six and a battery pack, with not that good range. And there is only the V8 otherwise or then the AMG versions available here.

 

The CT6 will have the four-cylinder with a much bigger pack for more EV range. It's hard acceleration performance should actually be above the LGX V6 IMO.  

 

Invariably...the S-Class 550e, while being priced like the V8...there's a lot of margin built into that car, plus tacked on options. 

 

 

So now, thank you Surreal, my logitech finally kicked in yo.

 

The S-Class goes from a V8 to a turbo six with battery pack.

 

That's a loss of TWO cylinders. COUNT'EM HOSS.

 

Therefore, where can this same phenomenon be replicated in the CT6?

 

Remember, CT6 PHEV makes 449 hp and an unspecified amount of torque as of now. And it is RWD, as is the S550e.

 

Where's the matching performance? Well, only the TTV6 right now makes 400 hp.

 

So the CT6 goes from a turbo 6 to a turbo four with battery pack.

 

That's ALSO a loss of two cylinders.

 

So...the plug-in should be priced like the TTV6. That makes sense.

 

SMK you lost this one...

[surreal1272]

No price raise. I repeat. No price raise.

I think SMK doesn't consider the 2.0T a credible car....  So could the hybrid/erev be the car with a base price similar in tune to the what we think...

 

I truly believe, Cadillac ...if they wanted to, could raise MSRP's across the board by a fair bit - because the value is inherent to the badge now for Cadillac cars too.

 

But there's a big difference. The S-Class 550e has a turbo six and a battery pack, with not that good range. And there is only the V8 otherwise or then the AMG versions available here.

 

The CT6 will have the four-cylinder with a much bigger pack for more EV range. It's hard acceleration performance should actually be above the LGX V6 IMO.  

 

Invariably...the S-Class 550e, while being priced like the V8...there's a lot of margin built into that car, plus tacked on options. 

 

 

So now, thank you Surreal, my logitech finally kicked in yo.

 

The S-Class goes from a V8 to a turbo six with battery pack.

 

That's a loss of TWO cylinders. COUNT'EM HOSS.

 

Therefore, where can this same phenomenon be replicated in the CT6?

 

Remember, CT6 PHEV makes 449 hp and an unspecified amount of torque as of now. And it is RWD, as is the S550e.

 

Where's the matching performance? Well, only the TTV6 right now makes 400 hp.

 

So the CT6 goes from a turbo 6 to a turbo four with battery pack.

 

That's ALSO a loss of two cylinders.

 

So...the plug-in should be priced like the TTV6. That makes sense.

 

SMK you lost this one...

Lol. No worries suave. I suffer frequently from rampant brain farts. It's like mental constipation.

[Guest smk4565]

My original point was Cadillac should lose the 3.6 V6 in every vehicle, and go with turbo 4 and turbo v6 engines only and turbo V8 of course when the new V8 arrives. 

 

A 3.0TT CT6 is $66,000, they could easily sell a turbo 4 hybrid CT6 at $60,000 and call that the base model, thus dropping the 2.0T and 3.6 V6 from the range.  This lets the CT6 move up market to where it should have been in the first place, not at $53,900 or whatever it starts at now, that is below Genesis and Kia K900 pricing.  Plus it makes it a "Green" vehicle and gets points from that and it looks like a tech leader.

 

If the manufacturing cost of the plug-in hybrid, and performance of it rivals the 3.0TT car, then I can see charging $66,000 for both of them, but I don't really know if they need a CT6 in the $55-65k price point, If they feel like they need a $55k CT6, then I think the demographic they are hitting (traditional DTS buyers over 70) would rather have the 3.6 V6 rather than a turbo 4.

[smk4565]

I made a post that I don't think went through, so I'll retype it.

 

Originally I said they should drop the 3.6 V6 from all Cadillacs, and go with an all turbo line up, and plug-in hybrids.

 

The 3.0TT V6 CT6 is $66,000, they could easily offer the plug-in hybrid for the same price, I think they could even offer a hybrid turbo 4 for $60,000 and make that the base CT6.  I don't think they really need a $54k CT6, just move the price up to $60k+ where it should have been all along.  Right now the CT6 is priced at or below a Genesis G90 or Kia K900.

 

If they are going after traditional DTS buyers over age 70, that crowd would prefer a V6 over a turbo 4, they come from an era where a Cadillac always had a V8, they won't want a 4.  But I think making a hybrid CT6 for $60k the base car gets the price up closer to where it should be, it also makes the CT6 a bit of a "green" car and they get some points for that.

[smk4565]

How Mercedes prices the S-class shouldn't really matter as even the A8 and 7-series are priced about $20k under it, unless you take a fully loaded 750i to an S550, but then as soon as you get to an Maybach or S65 Audi and BMW have nothing.  If you look at the C-class the plug-in hybrid is cheaper than the V6, and I bet the same thing happens with the E-class.  The car companies need to hit a 54 mpg CAFE in 2025, they need people buying the plug-ins to get there. 

 

For what it is worth, the S-class plug-in is going to a 13.4 kWh battery pack next year, up from 8.7 kWh, so range will improve to an estimated 30 miles.  Mercedes has 10 plug-ins coming, they are spending $8 billion in 2 years on green powertrains.    I also hope they sell the inline six S-class with the 48 volt electric system here next year, instead of holding it for Europe only, they could price it around $86,000 and crush whatever sales the A8 and XJ still have.

[Suaviloquent]

Cadillac does not need the big push of CAFE on its own, as it's all of GM that is counted for it. And I think Mercedes better damn have more plug-ins, it has a lot of thirsty vehicles outside of the sedans and the two small crossovers.

[surreal1272]

My original point was Cadillac should lose the 3.6 V6 in every vehicle, and go with turbo 4 and turbo v6 engines only and turbo V8 of course when the new V8 arrives. 

 

A 3.0TT CT6 is $66,000, they could easily sell a turbo 4 hybrid CT6 at $60,000 and call that the base model, thus dropping the 2.0T and 3.6 V6 from the range.  This lets the CT6 move up market to where it should have been in the first place, not at $53,900 or whatever it starts at now, that is below Genesis and Kia K900 pricing.  Plus it makes it a "Green" vehicle and gets points from that and it looks like a tech leader.

 

If the manufacturing cost of the plug-in hybrid, and performance of it rivals the 3.0TT car, then I can see charging $66,000 for both of them, but I don't really know if they need a CT6 in the $55-65k price point, If they feel like they need a $55k CT6, then I think the demographic they are hitting (traditional DTS buyers over 70) would rather have the 3.6 V6 rather than a turbo 4.

And again, no.

[Frisky Dingo]

Now that the 2.5 is out of the ATS, they need to keep going and drop the 2.0T from the CT6, and replace the 3.6 with a TT V6 in everything else. That 3.6 just does NOT cut it.

Edited July 2, 2016 by Frisky Dingo