Review: 2017 Cadillac CT6 Platinum 3.0TT

[smk4565]

14 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Gotcha... and I am looking forward to the "new product every six months from mid-2018 through the end of 2020 into 2021" scenario

That's about 6 new products even if it includes the XT3, CT5, and CT3.. I'm looking forward to the balance

They need a compact crossover below the XT3/4 whatever is coming next.  If they get that and a 3-row above XT5, then 4 crossovers starts to fill out the segments.  They probably won't have any performance products in that line, which I think they need, but at least they will have 4 crossovers then.  

I think Cadillac should offer an additional 3 crossovers that are EV's for a total of 7 crossovers plus the Escalade.  That could serve as their path to performance crossovers like what Tesla has. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

58 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Bolt has more sales than a Model S because it is 1/3 the price.  Tesla has home battery unit, the solar roof and other items to expand beyond cars.  Tesla has a whole home power system thing going on.  GM doesn't manufacture the battery or motor for the Bolt, LG does.   The current crop of Mercedes hybrids are pretty standard tech, the B-class is a compliance car thrown together.  The real Mercedes EV's are in development as they have a dedicated EV platform, and soon their own battery factory.  Once that all comes online around 2019 they can start to give Tesla a run.

As Drew said, it takes 5 years (sometimes 4) to get a car to market, Cadillac has no EV in the works now, and a Bolt clone probably isn't what they need.  Cadillac is still playing catch up on crossovers, which were getting hot 10 years ago, and they still only have 1.  I don't see Cadillac magically having 5 or 6 EV's on sale 5 years from now.

LG is the manufacture of the components but the patent and engineering is GM's. They designed the entire system including the electric traction motor and battery-control system, not to mention the integration of all components into the vehicle. They are similar in fact to what Magna is to various OEMs. 

Tesla right now is a money pit that makes no money doing what they do. GM is actually moving in the right direction.. at the right pace considering the market. The Bolt and Volt may be less expensive but the difference in sales says a lil more.We'll see when the Model 3 shows up. It will initially have a sales advantage.. but honestly.. why would GM be able to easily counter with an EV version of any of its cars at this point?

[balthazar]

9 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They need a compact crossover below the XT3/4 whatever is coming next.

Not Cadillac's mission. Not a full-line brand and not looking to plug into every segment.

[Drew Dowdell]

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

As Drew said, it takes 5 years (sometimes 4) to get a car to market, Cadillac has no EV in the works now, and a Bolt clone probably isn't what they need.  Cadillac is still playing catch up on crossovers, which were getting hot 10 years ago, and they still only have 1.  I don't see Cadillac magically having 5 or 6 EV's on sale 5 years from now.

Cadillac's EVs are going to be Voltec related plus at least one pure EV based on Bolt technology.  The beauty of the Bolt setup is that it is readily expandable. They can build an entirely new and larger shell around the Bolt skateboard power train. GM is a lot further along with their EVs than you think.

[Drew Dowdell]

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They need a compact crossover below the XT3/4 whatever is coming next.  If they get that and a 3-row above XT5, then 4 crossovers starts to fill out the segments.  They probably won't have any performance products in that line, which I think they need, but at least they will have 4 crossovers then.  

I think Cadillac should offer an additional 3 crossovers that are EV's for a total of 7 crossovers plus the Escalade.  That could serve as their path to performance crossovers like what Tesla has. 

Why do you keep trying to turn Cadillac into a full line brand like Mercedes? They are not and never will be unless Chevy and Buick go away. I don't want Cadillac pushing fake Gucci bags like Benz does.  Cadillac should not be selling the Pontiac Grand Am of the intro-lux world. It would dilute the brand as the CLA is doing.

[G. David Felt]

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The Bolt has more sales than a Model S because it is 1/3 the price.  Tesla has home battery unit, the solar roof and other items to expand beyond cars.  Tesla has a whole home power system thing going on.  GM doesn't manufacture the battery or motor for the Bolt, LG does.   The current crop of Mercedes hybrids are pretty standard tech, the B-class is a compliance car thrown together.  The real Mercedes EV's are in development as they have a dedicated EV platform, and soon their own battery factory.  Once that all comes online around 2019 they can start to give Tesla a run.

As Drew said, it takes 5 years (sometimes 4) to get a car to market, Cadillac has no EV in the works now, and a Bolt clone probably isn't what they need.  Cadillac is still playing catch up on crossovers, which were getting hot 10 years ago, and they still only have 1.  I don't see Cadillac magically having 5 or 6 EV's on sale 5 years from now.

The BOLT platform is able to be used in many different places. Since no one on this forum has true insight into what Cadillac / GM is doing with the BOLT platform, we really do not know just how many various auto's are coming based on the EV platform. Nor do we know how many other CUV/SUV/Trucks/Cars that will roll out besides the small actual info they have told us.

Like Drew has stated multiple times, we have not seen Johans work yet. 

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They need a compact crossover below the XT3/4 whatever is coming next.  If they get that and a 3-row above XT5, then 4 crossovers starts to fill out the segments.  They probably won't have any performance products in that line, which I think they need, but at least they will have 4 crossovers then.  

I think Cadillac should offer an additional 3 crossovers that are EV's for a total of 7 crossovers plus the Escalade.  That could serve as their path to performance crossovers like what Tesla has. 

So you want Cadillac to be like Benz the Toyota of German? Got it and how is this a luxury only auto company then? It is not, plus Cadillac does not need all of that as they have their sister company Chevy to fill in the low end.

[smk4565]

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Why do you keep trying to turn Cadillac into a full line brand like Mercedes? They are not and never will be unless Chevy and Buick go away. I don't want Cadillac pushing fake Gucci bags like Benz does.  Cadillac should not be selling the Pontiac Grand Am of the intro-lux world. It would dilute the brand as the CLA is doing.

It isn't just Mercedes, BMW has X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7 is coming.  Audi has Q1, Q3, Q5, Q7, Q4 and Q8 is on the way.  7 crossovers is pretty much the standard of the luxury market.  And these are cash cow products.   A Cadillac should make 5 times the profit margin of a Chevy, why would GM not want more Cadillac models?

And Cadillac doesn't even need 7 crossovers, but the need at least 4 plus the Escalade, and they need at minimum 1 sports car and 1 convertible.  And they need EV's, when and how many sort of depends on battery tech and what the market is buying.

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, dfelt said:

The BOLT platform is able to be used in many different places. Since no one on this forum has true insight into what Cadillac / GM is doing with the BOLT platform, we really do not know just how many various auto's are coming based on the EV platform. Nor do we know how many other CUV/SUV/Trucks/Cars that will roll out besides the small actual info they have told us.

Like Drew has stated multiple times, we have not seen Johans work yet. 

So you want Cadillac to be like Benz the Toyota of German? Got it and how is this a luxury only auto company then? It is not, plus Cadillac does not need all of that as they have their sister company Chevy to fill in the low end.

Cadillac doesn't need to fill the low end, with exception of a low $30,000s compact crossover, they need to fill the high end.  The XT4 should be priced where the XT5 is now, the XT5 needs a $10,000 price increase, they need a 3 row crossover.  I think Cadillac could sell an SUV in the $150,000 range above Escalade, they could sell a sports car in the $200,000 range and a sedan in the $100-125,000 range.

[balthazar]

11 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac doesn't even need 7 crossovers, but the need at least 4 plus the Escalade

4 plus the Escalade is 5, and you said "at least", which implies '6' is better, yet 'they don't need 7'.

What Cadillac will be sitting perfect with is an XT4, XT5, XT6 and the Escalade (which should expand it's packages/trims/options upward beyond the current $110K). Upstaging the Escalade is a terrible marketing plan, it should remain the top model.
That CUV/SUV lineup fits the catalog of Cadillac very well as a low-volume marque. 3 more CUVs is overkill, BMW is a perfect example of overlap/overkill in the CUV column.

[G. David Felt]

On 5/27/2017 at 10:43 AM, smk4565 said:

Cadillac doesn't need to fill the low end, with exception of a low $30,000s compact crossover, they need to fill the high end.  The XT4 should be priced where the XT5 is now, the XT5 needs a $10,000 price increase, they need a 3 row crossover.  I think Cadillac could sell an SUV in the $150,000 range above Escalade, they could sell a sports car in the $200,000 range and a sedan in the $100-125,000 range.

You're missing the point as you seem to always do since your so drunk on your MB kool aid. The BOLT Engineering tech can be used for a wide range of auto's from Luxury to base entry level. 

MB is going to do that so why not GM!

[smk4565]

18 hours ago, dfelt said:

You're missing the point as you seem to always do since your so drunk on your MB kool aid. The BOLT Engineering tech can be used for a wide range of auto's from Luxury to base entry level. 

MB is going to do that so why not GM!

Well right, Cadillac needs at least 4 EVs, figure 2 sedans and 2 crossovers.

[surreal1272]

Why does everyone keep arguing with SMK about this dead horse he keeps beating? He will always ignore the simple fact that Cadillac is not Mercedes and does not need to be for reasons already explained to him at least a million times. This is just getting sad. 

[smk4565]

Cadillac needs to be Cadillac.  Which used to mean style, technology, power, luxury ride and they need to leverage their history rather than run away from it.

Cadillac used to be the standard, but they have been chasing BMW and Lexus for so long they forgot who they are.  And they change CEO's at GM every few years, change Cadillac management and marketing slogans every few years and it is the same old, result.

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac needs to be Cadillac.  Which used to mean style, technology, power, luxury ride and they need to leverage their history rather than run away from it.

Cadillac used to be the standard, but they have been chasing BMW and Lexus for so long they forgot who they are.  And they change CEO's at GM every few years, change Cadillac management and marketing slogans every few years and it is the same old, result.

Kinda how MB has become the Toyota / Chevrolet of Europe and the world.

No thanks, Cadillac has embraced their history in many ways in their current auto's and SUVs/CUVs. I suspect we will have a true telling by 2020 of Cadillac as it become a true luxury only auto maker and not Uber Luxury to cheap ass econo box auto that MB has become today along with semi's way too many taxis and so much more.

[ykX]

4 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Kinda how MB has become the Toyota / Chevrolet of Europe and the world.

No thanks, Cadillac has embraced their history in many ways in their current auto's and SUVs/CUVs. I suspect we will have a true telling by 2020 of Cadillac as it become a true luxury only auto maker and not Uber Luxury to cheap ass econo box auto that MB has become today along with semi's way too many taxis and so much more.

When every prime minister or president of the world except US will start driving Cadillac instead of MB, then you can say that MB became Toyota/Chevy.

Here is the official state car of the world countries 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_state_car

Without going into details when you search Mercedes-Benz it is mentioned 213 times, BMW mentioned 144 times, Audi 86 times, Cadillac 41 times.  Benz deserving or not still carries the prestige among majority of people.

[G. David Felt]

2 minutes ago, ykX said:

When every prime minister or president of the world except US will start driving Cadillac instead of MB, then you can say that MB became Toyota/Chevy.

Here is the official state car of the world countries 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_state_car

Without going into details when you search Mercedes-Benz it is mentioned 213 times, BMW mentioned 144 times, Audi 86 times, Cadillac 41 times.  Benz deserving or not still carries the prestige among majority of people.

Sad state of affairs but true that so many are badge snobs but then I am sure we have that on Cadillac too.

Even with the official state auto being MB, they are still also a Chevrolet / Toyota equal auto company.

[smk4565]

So Cadillac can't beat a Chevy/Toyota level company?

Mercedes was the premier car brand in Europe in the 1900-1970 time frame, just as Cadillac was in the USA during that time.  But when globilazation happened, Cadillac never really got out of the USA until they went to China late, and they went from #1 to #5 or 6 in the USA. They lost their way and I am not convinced that Johan knows how to get them out of the woods.

[oldshurst442]

41 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

So Cadillac can't beat a Chevy/Toyota level company?

Mercedes was the premier car brand in Europe in the 1900-1970 time frame, just as Cadillac was in the USA during that time.  But when globilazation happened, Cadillac never really got out of the USA until they went to China late, and they went from #1 to #5 or 6 in the USA. They lost their way and I am not convinced that Johan knows how to get them out of the woods.

Ill agree.....

BUT!!!

From 1939-1945...this is where things get  murky for Mercedes-Benz..

After 1945, the only VICTOR that came out on top....from Duesenberg (which folded  before the war even started), to Auburn (which also folded before the war even started) to Rolls Royce and Mercedes-Benz.....

CADILLAC was the ONLY game in town!

Lincoln was a FIERCE competitor too!

In the 1940s and into the 1950s, 'twas Cadillac on top of the world.

Mercedes built something of value and desire  with the Gullwing, but that was about it!

It took M-B in the late 1960s to gain what Hitler and Nazi Germany destroyed what M-B had before 1939...

In the 1970s...Cadillac was still on top of Mercedes-Benz. Although  Cadillac's shine was losing its luster quite quickly!

So..it is false for you to advertise Mercedes-Benz as a leader and luxury car maker from 1945-1967 or 1968....

And....lest not you forget that the W211 Mercedes, although built like a tank....was NOT a luxury car.

It was a CHEVROLET at heart which helped propel Mercedes back into the luxury game because it was built like a tank! Where as  Cadillac cars and GM  in the late 1970s were not! This is where Mercedes got its claws on Cadillac and never let go!  Coincidentally, all other M-B cars other than the W211 were also just as crappy as  Cadillac cars were! This is where Lexus  comes in!

But, in hindsight, had the D3 NOT been so stupid in the 1970s, I dont think  M-B would have this resurrection that they had....but that is more on the D3 than M-B!

[balthazar]

7 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac needs to be Cadillac.  Which used to mean style, technology, power, luxury ride and they need to leverage their history rather than run away from it.

Cadillac used to be the standard, but they have been chasing BMW and Lexus for so long they forgot who they are.  And they change CEO's at GM every few years, change Cadillac management and marketing slogans every few years and it is the same old, result.

No one who proclaims this ever defines specifically what they mean. Doesn't Mercedes "need to be Mercedes" too? When will they start? I can talk the same nonsense, too.

Cadillac "is running away" from style (I thought the Escalade was too 'blingy' (another undefined term)!), technology (CT6- arguably class-leading technology platform & construction), power (CT6 3.0TT- one of the most powerful 3.0L V6s available, CTS-V : 640 HP and 1/4 mile in 11.2), luxury ride (licensing class-leading MR to ferrari/ others)... etc etc??? It's blatant, wishful blatherings. Good luck finding an apartment in Fantasy Land- the rent is cheap but occupancy is HIGH!

Cadillac has not "chased" BMW anymore than Mercedes "chased" Cadillac (by finally giving customers luxury interiors in the early 90s. Their interiors weren't remotely competitive before that). "Same result" from Cadillac - yes : style, technology, power, luxury, and ride, among other amenities. You don't have to like it (many people hate Mercedes, too), but the hardware is available. [Waits for canned response about sales volume proving 'something'...]

[Drew Dowdell]

7 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac needs to be Cadillac.  Which used to mean style, technology, power, luxury ride and they need to leverage their history rather than run away from it.

Cadillac used to be the standard, but they have been chasing BMW and Lexus for so long they forgot who they are.  And they change CEO's at GM every few years, change Cadillac management and marketing slogans every few years and it is the same old, result.

Then why the hell do you keep bringing up volume? That isn't Cadillac's goal. 

[smk4565]

13 minutes ago, balthazar said:

No one who proclaims this ever defines specifically what they mean. Doesn't Mercedes "need to be Mercedes" too? When will they start? I can talk the same nonsense, too.

Cadillac "is running away" from style (I thought the Escalade was too 'blingy' (another undefined term)!), technology (CT6- arguably class-leading technology platform & construction), power (CT6 3.0TT- one of the most powerful 3.0L V6s available, CTS-V : 640 HP and 1/4 mile in 11.2), luxury ride (licensing class-leading MR to ferrari/ others)... etc etc??? It's blatant, wishful blatherings. Good luck finding an apartment in Fantasy Land- the rent is cheap but occupancy is HIGH!

Cadillac has not "chased" BMW anymore than Mercedes "chased" Cadillac (by finally giving customers luxury interiors in the early 90s. Their interiors weren't remotely competitive before that). "Same result" from Cadillac - yes : style, technology, power, luxury, and ride, among other amenities. You don't have to like it (many people hate Mercedes, too), but the hardware is available. [Waits for canned response about sales volume proving 'something'...]

Mercedes since like 1895 has been about engineering and build quality.  "The Best or Nothing" is an 1890s slogan.  So Mercedes is Mercedes, they haven't changed the mission.

A 3 liter V6 with 400 hp is pretty much the luxury standard, BMW has a 3 liter with 420 hp, Alfa Romeo a 2.9 liter with 505 hp, Mercedes has a 3 liter with 394 hp, Infiniti has a 400 hp 3 liter V6, Lincoln has a 400 hp 3 liter V6.  Mercedes has a 400 hp 2 liter four even.  

Cadillac saw 3-series and 5-series sales in the early 2000s and tried to copy them, they saw the Lexus RX get hot and tried to carbon copy that, named their car SRX, they even copied the name!   Even the Escalade was just because the Navigator was a success and Cadillac had to throw something together fast.  They succeeded there, but they couldn't out BMW, BMW and they couldn't out-Lexus, Lexus.  

[smk4565]

18 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Then why the hell do you keep bringing up volume? That isn't Cadillac's goal. 

Cadillac's goal is to make money, part of that is sales volume.  Luxury brands can make $5,000 per car, $20,000 per car if you are Porsche.  The more you can sell at those big margins the better.  If Cadillac was run successfully it could generate 50% of GM's total profit.  Volkswagen's profit doesn't come from the 7 million VW's they sell, it mostly comes from the 2 million Audis, and 250k Porsche and Bentleys.

If Cadillac doesn't have any volume (which they don't) then GM won't pump money into them (which they don't).  And that makes no sense when Cadillac could easily make more net profit than Chevy, if not Chevy, Buick and GMC combined.

[oldshurst442]

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Ill agree.....

BUT!!!

From 1939-1945...this is where things get  murky for Mercedes-Benz..

After 1945, the only VICTOR that came out on top....from Duesenberg (which folded  before the war even started), to Auburn (which also folded before the war even started) to Rolls Royce and Mercedes-Benz.....

CADILLAC was the ONLY game in town!

Lincoln was a FIERCE competitor too!

In the 1940s and into the 1950s, 'twas Cadillac on top of the world.

Mercedes built something of value and desire  with the Gullwing, but that was about it!

It took M-B in the late 1960s to gain what Hitler and Nazi Germany destroyed what M-B had before 1939...

In the 1970s...Cadillac was still on top of Mercedes-Benz. Although  Cadillac's shine was losing its luster quite quickly!

So..it is false for you to advertise Mercedes-Benz as a leader and luxury car maker from 1945-1967 or 1968....

And....lest not you forget that the W211 W123 Mercedes, although built like a tank....was NOT a luxury car.

It was a CHEVROLET at heart which helped propel Mercedes back into the luxury game because it was built like a tank! Where as  Cadillac cars and GM  in the late 1970s were not! This is where Mercedes got its claws on Cadillac and never let go!  Coincidentally, all other M-B cars other than theW211 W123 were also just as crappy as  Cadillac cars were! This is where Lexus  comes in!

But, in hindsight, had the D3 NOT been so stupid in the 1970s, I dont think  M-B would have this resurrection that they had....but that is more on the D3 than M-B!

That should be written as W123 Mercedes....not the W211...

 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

'Making money' is via 2 metrics: volume and profit. They can work together in an untethered relationship just fine.

Quote

If Cadillac was run successfully it could generate 50% of GM's total profit.

That's your claim, but it's neither Cadillac's or GMs. 
And you have not even an approximate idea about Divisional profits at GM. But General Motors made 9.5 billion profit last year- how much did Cadillac contribute?? None of us know.

Cadillac sold 277K last year. 277K is solidly over Cadillac's traditional average volume, and the brand should aim to stay under 350K globally. Cadillac has volume; saying "they don't" is more foolish blathering. Maserati sold 36K last year... that's getting pretty sparse, but it's still 'volume'. Jaguar sold 148K last year, that's definitely 'volume'. So is 277K.

Edited June 1, 2017 by balthazar

[Cmicasa the Great]

20 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac needs to be Cadillac.  Which used to mean style, technology, power, luxury ride and they need to leverage their history rather than run away from it.

Cadillac used to be the standard, but they have been chasing BMW and Lexus for so long they forgot who they are.  And they change CEO's at GM every few years, change Cadillac management and marketing slogans every few years and it is the same old, result.

Cadillac is more Cadillac these days that it had been during the gestation of 2003-2009. Again.. the BK put a lot of stuff Cadillac was planning on hold.. the recovery after the BK has been quite good with the only real hiccup being the non realization by previous management that CUVs would overwhelm the luxury market as well.. not to mention that its competition from singular luxury companies would dip waaaaaay low into the mainstream.. eg. Mercedes selling a "Cimmaron" (CLA) and the so called "World's Ultimate Driving Machine, BMW selling shit like the FWD X1.. a rebodied Mini to the public. The double standard is insane.. if Cadillac did either of those things U, most likely would roast them. Ironically.. I think the Cadillac version of a CLA based on the Cruze would still be better than the CLA.. and a small CUV based on the the Regal would fuck up the X1. 

[G. David Felt]

@Cmicasa the Great I agree that Cadillac probably could make a better CLA or X1 fighter. In reality, I hope they never do as Cadillac just needs to focus on Luxury and ignor the badge wanna be snobs that are too cheap or cannot really afford to buy a Cadillac.

Let's face it, MB and BMW have used cheap leases to grow their market share and quality has suffered on top of the entering Toyota / Cheverolet territory with their badge and not being good at it. This will come back to haunt them I think.

[Cmicasa the Great]

19 hours ago, ykX said:

When every prime minister or president of the world except US will start driving Cadillac instead of MB, then you can say that MB became Toyota/Chevy.

Here is the official state car of the world countries 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_state_car

Without going into details when you search Mercedes-Benz it is mentioned 213 times, BMW mentioned 144 times, Audi 86 times, Cadillac 41 times.  Benz deserving or not still carries the prestige among majority of people.

It might also stand to reason that Cadillac.. up until 2016.. didn't have anything close to a Full-Size RWD vehicle to be considered. The CT6 is certainly up to snuff now.. and a CT8 will be over the top. 

Its like when arguing sales but ENTHUSIASTS.. who see the sales.. kno the make-up.. completely ignore the fact that Cadillac essentially had 6 vehicles (170,006)  for 2016.. and Audi had 12 (210,213) yet doesn't scold Audi, plush with CUVs, for only selling 40K more than a brand that has half its number of available names.. and only ONE real CUV.

[Cmicasa the Great]

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

No one who proclaims this ever defines specifically what they mean. Doesn't Mercedes "need to be Mercedes" too? When will they start? I can talk the same nonsense, too.

Cadillac "is running away" from style (I thought the Escalade was too 'blingy' (another undefined term)!), technology (CT6- arguably class-leading technology platform & construction), power (CT6 3.0TT- one of the most powerful 3.0L V6s available, CTS-V : 640 HP and 1/4 mile in 11.2), luxury ride (licensing class-leading MR to ferrari/ others)... etc etc??? It's blatant, wishful blatherings. Good luck finding an apartment in Fantasy Land- the rent is cheap but occupancy is HIGH!

Cadillac has not "chased" BMW anymore than Mercedes "chased" Cadillac (by finally giving customers luxury interiors in the early 90s. Their interiors weren't remotely competitive before that). "Same result" from Cadillac - yes : style, technology, power, luxury, and ride, among other amenities. You don't have to like it (many people hate Mercedes, too), but the hardware is available. [Waits for canned response about sales volume proving 'something'...]

This is huge.. and historic so Smk doesn't want to admit. Mercedes, IMO, really didn't come off as luxury in the sense that Caddy did (and BMW damn sure didn't) until the late 80s.. BMW did't become that way til the late 90s. Their sweet spot was the toppling of Cadillac and Lincoln when Lexus hit (along with Acura and Infiniti) in the early 90s thus making the Cadillac and Lincoln brands seem "for old people" and no longer "cool." That along with BMW's "World's Ultimate Driving..." and great handling to back it up solidified the need for an American luxo company to move to that direction as well. Lincoln failed with the LS, and threw in the towel.. Cadillac started with the Catera, and morphed it into the Catera Touring Sedan or "CTS" and here we are. Thing is that SIGMA was ever bit as dynamic as anything coming from Germany.. they just didn't have the "Cool" back.. or the recognition by the younger Gen X buyers that Cadillac was as much of a track/curve star as anything coming from BMW, Benz, and Audi. The luxury appointments got muddled down when the money got tight a GM.. That lasted from 2003 to 2010.

Shit has changed. Money is now abundant. The entire Cadillac line-up can do battle with Germany and in many situations come out on top. The CT6 TT3.0 could effectively go up against an A8, 740 or S550 and beat them inn many areas with no bias involved.. and the CT6 is not even billed as the Flagship.

[Cmicasa the Great]

38 minutes ago, dfelt said:

@Cmicasa the Great I agree that Cadillac probably could make a better CLA or X1 fighter. In reality, I hope they never do as Cadillac just needs to focus on Luxury and ignor the badge wanna be snobs that are too cheap or cannot really afford to buy a Cadillac.

Let's face it, MB and BMW have used cheap leases to grow their market share and quality has suffered on top of the entering Toyota / Cheverolet territory with their badge and not being good at it. This will come back to haunt them I think.

U kno I agree. I have on countless occasions said that my '14 Impala was a true rival, imo, to the E350 of the same time. Smk will blath about 0-60 times I'm sure.. but I will automatically counter wit.. They are literally identical in that metric despite again.. the GM car being larger by a foot

[smk4565]

9 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

U kno I agree. I have on countless occasions said that my '14 Impala was a true rival, imo, to the E350 of the same time. Smk will blath about 0-60 times I'm sure.. but I will automatically counter wit.. They are literally identical in that metric despite again.. the GM car being larger by a foot

Saying the Impala competes with the E-class is like saying a Subaru BRZ competes with a Corvette.  Not even close.  

As far as Mercedes not getting anything going until the 80s, in the 1950s Mercedes made the first Super Car also the first car with direct fuel injection, 1960s Mercedes had the most luxurious most advanced sedan in the world in the 600.  AMG was founded in 1967, the 450SEL 6.9 was the first luxury sport sedan, they were doing it before M cars before V-series, before Audi RS.

[oldshurst442]

55 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Saying the Impala competes with the E-class is like saying a Subaru BRZ competes with a Corvette.  Not even close.  

As far as Mercedes not getting anything going until the 80s, in the 1950s Mercedes made the first Super Car also the first car with direct fuel injection, 1960s Mercedes had the most luxurious most advanced sedan in the world in the 600.  AMG was founded in 1967, the 450SEL 6.9 was the first luxury sport sedan, they were doing it before M cars before V-series, before Audi RS.

HA!

One car in the 1950s...

I mentioned that!

I also gave you the  "most luxurious most advanced sedan in the world in the 600" by saying  1967 or 1968...But still only one car!

And as for your AMG...

AMG was an INDEPENDENT hot rodding company..NOTHING TO DO with  Mercedes-Benz...

The W123 is from the 1970s...1976 to be exact....

This was its predecessor

Introduced in 1968

You think that this car had a leg up on this one? (Its just the Caprice)

Impala 327 SS interior

Let alone other GM divisions that are higher on the scale from a lowly Chevy....

Built like a tank the W123 is....

But you really think that the 3rd world's taxi cab has a leg up on North America's taxi cab and police car for the same late 1970s-mid 1980s time frame?  Because this Caprice/Impala/Bel Air was also built like a tank!

Because this is the best the W123 could do interior wise

Because as a Chevy....in 1984...this is quite comparable WITHOUT the leather seats of the W123...

 

Mercedes Benz AFTER WW2 had to cater to the masses...

1947

And thanx to AMERICAN MONEY BUILDING UP THE COMPANY AGAIN!!!

We all know what  Cadillac done in 1949...

Like I said...Mercedes Benz took off as a luxury  car maker in the late 1970s and the people took to them in the 1980s when Cadillac really started to crumble...

Hell....this is when the Japanese got cocky and introduced Infinity, Acura and Lexus JUST BECAUSE Cadillac was falling down and Mercedes Benz was nowhere near the top!

Remember Amati?

That was to be Mazda's luxury marque...that is how cocky the Japanese were JUST BECAUSE MERCEDES BENZ WAS NOT A PURE LUXURY BRAND IN THE 1980s!!!

BAMBOOZLE somebody else....and if it aint that....SMARTEN UP!!!

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

PS:

@smk4565  You really dont want me posting pics of what Mercedes Benz was REALLY producing for the masses IMMEDIATELY AFTER the war WELL INTO in the 1950s and what engine offerings were available...

Even Chevrolet with their stove bolt Inline 6 offerings had better MODERN style, features, build quality, power AND desire!

Ill leave you with a ROCK-N-ROLL song to REMIND you HOW THINGS WERE ABOUT TO GET State's side in 1949/1950 and beyond...

(not the original but the video is what I wanna show)

Listen to the lyrics...And its just an Oldsmobile...not even Cadillac!

 

 

That one model in 1954-1957....THAT IS WHAT YOU WANNA CLING TO?

REALLY?

1954-1957

Really?

At the height of milk shakes, roller skates, hot rods and rock-n-roll America...

GTFO!!!

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

1957 Ford Fairlane!

You wanna talk about engineering @smk4565 ?

This is on a freakin' Ford bro!!!!

You wanna cling to that ONE model in 1954?

 

GTFO!!!

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

3 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

HA!

One car in the 1950s...

I mentioned that!

I also gave you the  "most luxurious most advanced sedan in the world in the 600" by saying  1967 or 1968...But still only one car!

And as for your AMG...

AMG was an INDEPENDENT hot rodding company..NOTHING TO DO with  Mercedes-Benz...

Like I said...Mercedes Benz took off as a luxury  car maker in the late 1970s and the people took to them in the 1980s when Cadillac really started to crumble...

That was to be Mazda's luxury marque...that is how cocky the Japanese were JUST BECAUSE MERCEDES BENZ WAS NOT A PURE LUXURY BRAND IN THE 1980s!!!

BAMBOOZLE somebody else....and if it aint that....SMARTEN UP!!!

 

AMG was independent until Mercedes bought them, but they still have all that AMG heritage and knowledge in what they build today.  The experience comes along with it.

Here is a luxury Mercedes from 1936, and it recently sold for $11,770,000 

They made this in the 60's and charged $22,000 for it, more than any Rolls-Royce, and at a time when a Cadillac Deville was $5,700. 

And in the late 70s and 80s when you watched Dallas or Falcon Crest or any of these shows with super rich people, they drove Mercedes.   They have been at it a long time.  And if Mercedes wasn't building luxury, why didn't Cadillac or Lincoln or the Japanese go into Europe and sell luxury cars to Europeans?  But in fact Mercedes had the market sewn up and Lexus and Infiniti and Acura knew America was an easier target.

[balthazar]

The 600 wasn't a consumer vehicle, it was a commercial vehicle, just like the Series 75.
And Cadillac was building cars like this 20 years earlier than the 600, so I guess mercedes "chased" Cadillac :

 

The regular production mercedes, the ones consumers bought, had hideous interiors, marginal build quality and were never class-leading in amenities. MB didn't even offer factory A/C until 1968 or thereabouts. After briefly offering it in the early 40s, Cadillac made it a permanent offering beginning in 1953. More "chasing" of Cadillac by mercedes. Rolls didn't get A/C until '56.

And the problem with 'heads of state' is that office & it's like have long been harbingers of Most Corrupt. IOW; People No One Looks Up To Anymore.

Edited June 2, 2017 by balthazar

[balthazar]

Cadillac made this in the 1950s and charged $13.8K for it, nearly the exact same price as a Rolls Silver Cloud @ $14.1K (needless to say; the Rolls was a technological and design dinosaur) ~

Another example of Mercedes "chasing" Cadillac.

Edited June 2, 2017 by balthazar

[oldshurst442]

1930 Boatail

1932

1936

And JUST before the war started...all with V16 engines...1939

All Mercedes ever had was that 500K Special...

Oh yeah....and this one

That 1939 Cadillac was MODERN compared to that Hitler car when the war started!!!

 

[smk4565]

And with all Cadillac's ingenuity an engineering and GM's huge scale, they never thought to sell cars outside the USA, especially when German and Japanese car companies were in shambles in the 1950s.  Not only did the German and Japanese makes get on their feet quickly, they took over the US market also.

[Cmicasa the Great]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

And with all Cadillac's ingenuity an engineering and GM's huge scale, they never thought to sell cars outside the USA, especially when German and Japanese car companies were in shambles in the 1950s.  Not only did the German and Japanese makes get on their feet quickly, they took over the US market also.

Maybe they just didn't see the need or profitability of large scale production of Cadillacs in a region that was so heavily entrenched in loyal supporting of home brands. Its still evident.. Europe is a closed market that has makers who are only really profitable because of their outside sales and Union+Gov't manipulation. Its a prime reason why even Toyota's sales paled in comparison to VW, PSA, Renault, Ford, and Opel sales last year in Europe. 

The problem with the U.S. market is that it is populated with blind fools such as yourself.. who insist on defending other nations products even at the peril of their own livelihood or national pride. U are pathetic.. make me sick.. and I would love it if U are not going to keep your foreign loving mouth shut.. U get the fuck outta this country and move to Germany. Every time I see a Mercedes I think of U.. consider looking for a bag full of dogshit and doing a smear campaign of realistic proportions.

[A Horse With No Name]

Europe is a very closed market as is Japan.

Cadillac has my respect for doing very well in the only open and free market on the planet.

[A Horse With No Name]

As far as Balthazar and his points go...The CTS is more dynamic and fresh than anything Benz sells IMHO

27 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

 

The problem with the U.S. market is that it is populated with blind fools such as yourself.. who insist on...

There is a decent portion of Americans who are as smart as a bar of soap...

[A Horse With No Name]

On 5/25/2017 at 7:56 PM, oldshurst442 said:

@FAPTurbo

Then there is the red neck BMW or Mercedes owner where these owners own and drive 10 year old, burnt headlighted because too expensives to replace, sometimes rusted out 3 and 5 Series Bimmers and C and E class cars pretending to be big time playas!

Oh yes....BMW and Mercedes has reached that zenith where Cadillac once was with the low class crowd pretending to be somebodys!

 

[smk4565]

16 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Maybe they just didn't see the need or profitability of large scale production of Cadillacs in a region that was so heavily entrenched in loyal supporting of home brands. Its still evident.. Europe is a closed market that has makers who are only really profitable because of their outside sales and Union+Gov't manipulation. Its a prime reason why even Toyota's sales paled in comparison to VW, PSA, Renault, Ford, and Opel sales last year in Europe. 

The problem with the U.S. market is that it is populated with blind fools such as yourself.. who insist on defending other nations products even at the peril of their own livelihood or national pride. U are pathetic.. make me sick.. and I would love it if U are not going to keep your foreign loving mouth shut.. U get the f@#k outta this country and move to Germany. Every time I see a Mercedes I think of U.. consider looking for a bag full of dog$h! and doing a smear campaign of realistic proportions.

Personal attacks aside, the point was brought up that Mercedes build terrible cars in the 50s, 60s and 70s.  While Cadillac was the gold standard.  So if that were true, why didn't Cadillac go into Europe or Japan to sell cars?  If Cadillac was go great they could have gone into either market.  But I think the German and Japanese cars of the 60s and 70s were better made than most realize, and it is why those 2 countries took over a big chunk of the American market in the 80s, 90s and all the way up until today.  

Even now, all these millionaires and billionaires in the USA that want to spend $200,000+ on a car, where are the American car companies to sell them a car?  Mercedes, Ferrari, Aston Martin, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche are all eager to do it, Cadillac and Lincoln, and even Tesla are no where to be found.  That isn't the consumer's fault for buying an import when it is their only option.  If you want a luxury car convertible, America doesn't even make one!  How is that possible?  

The US isn't full of blind fools, it is full of people that seek the best product, especially in the luxury market.   As far as national pride goes, Year-to-Date Mercedes has sold 70,311 American made cars in the USA, while Cadillac has sold 59,493.  And this even with the XT5 made in the USA, because the SRX was made in Mexico, which would really drag Cadillac's American car production down.   But I didn't hear Cadillac fans complaining about it, in fact many said it was good for America to make Cadillacs in Mexico so GM would get more profit. 

[smk4565]

16 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Europe is a very closed market as is Japan.

Cadillac has my respect for doing very well in the only open and free market on the planet.

Year to date Cadillac is in 7th place in Luxury sales in the American market.  They trail Acura by 340 cars and Acura is down 11.5% for the year.  Is 7th place "doing very well" ?   When Johan was at Infiniti, Cadillac easily outsold them.  Now that Johan is at Cadillac, Infiniti is beating them this year for the first time ever. 

[balthazar]

5 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Personal attacks aside, the point was brought up that Mercedes build terrible cars in the 50s, 60s and 70s.  While Cadillac was the gold standard.  So if that were true, why didn't Cadillac go into Europe or Japan to sell cars? 

If you were familiar with Cadillac's history, you wouldn't have to ask that question.

Cadillac came from -and was for a major swath of their history; a small volume marque. It took the brand just under 50 years to sell their millionth car (1950).  Sales grew yearly & steadily : '50: 103K, '55: 140K, '60: 142K, '65: 181K, '70: 238K, '75: 264K.

Cadillac had all they could do to keep up with demand.  Be aware that there was only a single factory in this era; it wasn't until '71 that a Cadillac was ever built outside the Detroit plant.  Also be aware that in this era Cadillac turned down what became the '63 Riviera (pitched intially/internally as the LaSalle II), because they didn't have the capacity for the model. By circa 1970, Cadillac had so many options and trims available, the Division stated it could build a full 3 years of production volume without ever duplicating one of their cars.

This all are the main reasons, but Cadillacs were always exported right from the beginning (just in small numbers).  As illustrated above, the marque had enjoyed a huge market (for their goals) in their home territory... you know; the same market EVERY OTHER manufacturer eventually tries to get into.

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

If you were familiar with Cadillac's history, you wouldn't have to ask that question.

Cadillac came from -and was for a major swath of their history; a small volume marque. It took the brand just under 50 years to sell their millionth car (1950).  Sales grew yearly & steadily : '50: 103K, '55: 140K, '60: 142K, '65: 181K, '70: 238K, '75: 264K.

Cadillac had all they could do to keep up with demand.  Be aware that there was only a single factory in this era; it wasn't until '71 that a Cadillac was ever built outside the Detroit plant.  Also be aware that in this era Cadillac turned down what became the '63 Riviera (pitched intially/internally as the LaSalle II), because they didn't have the capacity for the model. By circa 1970, Cadillac had so many options and trims available, the Division stated it could build a full 3 years of production volume without ever duplicating one of their cars.

This all are the main reasons, but Cadillacs were always exported right from the beginning (just in small numbers).  As illustrated above, the marque had enjoyed a huge market (for their goals) in their home territory... you know; the same market EVERY OTHER manufacturer eventually tries to get into.

Right, but they could have built more factories.  And let's look at those numbers, 181,000 in 1965, and 264,000 in 1975.  Today with a larger population and bigger car market this is what they are selling:

2016:   170,006

2015    175,267

2014:   170,750

2013:   182,543

2012:   149,782

2011:   152,389

They are running at mid-60s numbers, and well below what they sold in the 70s.   They are on pace for 150,000 this year, it seems as it 2013 they peaked and have since flat lined.

[Drew Dowdell]

Cadillac didn't go to Europe because there was always a strong sense of nationalism there. The Germans bought Benz. The French bought Citroen. The English bought Daimler, Jaguar, Bentley, and Rolls. The Italians bought Maserati and Lancia. Swedes bought Volvos and Saabs. 

Most of the continent was torn up by war and the economics of sending Cadillacs by boat over the Atlantic to people who were still rationing meat, petroleum, and sugar (Britain till 1955), rebuilding cities (France, Belgium, Denmark), or were occupied countries split in half (Germany), weren't good. By 1946 the Eastern Bloc countries were off limits.

@smk4565 you seem to think that all of Europe was rolling around in Adenauers, Grossers, and Silver Clouds. That might be what the movies tell you... But that wasn't anything close to reality.

[Drew Dowdell]

To drive home this point... Packard, Imperial, Auburn, Duesenberg, Lincoln, and Chrysler didn't bother sending cars over either.

[smk4565]

19 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Cadillac didn't go to Europe because there was always a strong sense of nationalism there. The Germans bought Benz. The French bought Citroen. The English bought Daimler, Jaguar, Bentley, and Rolls. The Italians bought Maserati and Lancia. Swedes bought Volvos and Saabs. 

Most of the continent was torn up by war and the economics of sending Cadillacs by boat over the Atlantic to people who were still rationing meat, petroleum, and sugar (Britain till 1955), rebuilding cities (France, Belgium, Denmark), or were occupied countries split in half (Germany), weren't good. By 1946 the Eastern Bloc countries were off limits.

@smk4565 you seem to think that all of Europe was rolling around in Adenauers, Grossers, and Silver Clouds. Thanks might be what the movies tell you... But that wasn't anything close to reality.

Mercedes sold 280,000 cars in 1970, granted that was their global volume, but most of that was Europe.  I know Japan and European counties are mostly closed off, but if Cadillac could have tried it before the Germans and Japanese really got going.  They could have done a lot of things, but the past is the past.

The problem now is Cadillac has half a line up, and they have had this problem since the 90s.  Too many over lapping sedans, no real high end car, not enough body styles, etc.  Not enough crossovers and the crossover fad started 15 years ago.  And GM and Johan don't seem to be in any hurry to fix the problems.

[smk4565]

17 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

To drive home this point... Packard, Imperial, Auburn, Duesenberg, Lincoln, and Chrysler didn't bother sending cars over either.

True, and maybe if some of them tried to go global, those brands wouldn't be out of business or close to it in the case of Chrysler.  Citroen, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Lancia, etc either didn't make an effort to come to the US, or made a really weak one.  They are all also ran brands now.  Mercedes and BMW made the push, Lexus made a big push, and they are on top today.