Cadillac News: Cadillac To Replace Three Sedans With One

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Not sure they need an A3 fighter...trying to be everything to everybody is what got 

GM in trouble in the first place.

They probably don't need one, the A3 and CLA are like 1,500 unit a month sellers, maybe not even that, it isn't a big segment.  An XT3 crossover would sell better than a small sedan.  Lexus has a crossover below the NX coming, Cadillac could put the XT4 against the NX and then do a XT3 against the new Lexus sub-compact, and I imagine Acura will do an HR-V clone, and Infiniti has their GLA clone, Audi has Q3, and a Q2 coming.  So if I were Cadillac I would do CT3 long before another sedan, 2 sedans is enough.

[balthazar]

23 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Mercedes will have more EV's than Tesla by 2022.

Mercedes has more EV models NOW (4), but no one buys them.
BMW is solidly ahead of MB with 6 EV models, and is outselling MB in this category by a factor of SIX, ( just the gnomish i3 outsells all MB EVs combined) but still; no one is buying BMW EVs. Cadillac ATS sales are neck & neck with BMW EVs so far in 2017, and we all "know" the "ATS isn't selling".

MB S550e sold 81 units in June, vs. 2350 Tesla Model S's.
Daimler had better fix their EV image before they bring 10 (or whatever the claim) models to market.

[daves87rs]

1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Not sure they need an A3 fighter...trying to be everything to everybody is what got 

GM in trouble in the first place.

 

And make sure they get it right as well......then they are free to go on to the next one...

 

GM is famous for just shoving stuff out sometimes.....

[balthazar]

I'll repeat myself, I don't mind.

Many critics think Cadillac somehow needs to echo every German segment but they don't.
A3 / CLA are nasty little penalty boxes for a luxury brand. MB needs the CLA for CAFE (because the smart is a failure), but Audi shouldn't due to VW/others.

Cadillac has ZERO need to be in the bottom feeder 'entry level' segment. it's not worth the time & money; either for a sedan of a CUV- too cheap, too small, too low-priced, too counter to the mission statement.

[smk4565]

52 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Mercedes has more EV models NOW (4), but no one buys them.
BMW is solidly ahead of MB with 6 EV models, and is outselling MB in this category by a factor of SIX, ( just the gnomish i3 outsells all MB EVs combined) but still; no one is buying BMW EVs. Cadillac ATS sales are neck & neck with BMW EVs so far in 2017, and we all "know" the "ATS isn't selling".

MB S550e sold 81 units in June, vs. 2350 Tesla Model S's.
Daimler had better fix their EV image before they bring 10 (or whatever the claim) models to market.

Mercedes has 1 EV and if the retro fitted B-class compliance car for California.  I am not counting their hybrids if it has a gas tank it is not an EV.   I believe their pure EV's will get the job done.  They are looking at 300 mile range and 400 hp, that seems pretty desirable.  

Mercedes is also joining Formula E, so they can learn more from EV's there.

[surreal1272]

4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

First I said the CT5 will probably be priced lower than the XT5 because it is common for a sedan to cost less than the same size crossover. 

Then you said, CT5 will cost $40,000, same as an XT5.  

To which I said, I could see them doing that, and I agreed with you that CT5 and XT5 could cost the same because Mercedes uses this strategy.  I don't really care how they price the CT5, I was just predicting that they would go after those $35k sedans for sake of volume, and that is sort of where the CTS had success back in Gen 1.

Mercedes will have more EV's than Tesla by 2022.  Tesla is going to be strong player I think, but Mercedes has the manufacturing capability Tesla does not, and Mercedes can design and engineer cars.  They will be able to take the fight to Tesla too, the ones that need to worry are the Lincoln, Cadillac, Acuras of the world that don't have an EV coming soon, and the low volume guys like Jaguar and Alfa that can't afford another player coming into the segment to slice down the pie even more.

I don't care about the order in which things were spoken. You think Cadillac should prove their sedans cheaper than their CUVs and I'm saying that they do not have to do that and it can work given the Mercedes example I gave, end of story. The gen 1 CTS you reference at $35K would sell for $40K if you adjust for inflation.  You clearly did not consider that while you were so busy moving that bar.  

 

Mercedes "will have". The key words there are "will" and "have" while they really have zero here right now. GM already has one, the Bolt which I would take over the Tesla just for having a hatch and far more cargo flexibility. Oh and it isn't priced anywhere near $59K under any configuration. Sorry. I like Tesla overall but the 3 is a big miss for me. Just ugly. 

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Mercedes has 1 EV and if the retro fitted B-class compliance car for California.  I am not counting their hybrids if it has a gas tank it is not an EV.   I believe their pure EV's will get the job done.  They are looking at 300 mile range and 400 hp, that seems pretty desirable.  

Mercedes is also joining Formula E, so they can learn more from EV's there.

"Can learn"? Sorry but what exactly have they been doing with that massive R&D budget you crow so much about? The learning should have already been there from the "best or nothing" luxury car company. 

[smk4565]

The Bolt doesn't have a 310 mile battery or autonomous driving.  And Model 3 is larger and faster than the Bolt.  If you take off the $9,000 battery pack and $8,000 autonomous drive which Bolt does not offer the Model 3 is $42k even with paint and wheel upgrade.  And a Bolt Premier is $42k.  

[balthazar]

If Nissan's leaf can sell with 107 mile range and BMW can clean MB's EV clock with a 180 mile EV, I think the Bolt with it's 240 miles range is completely competitive. People do not buy a singular 'best' feature of a car more than any other- vehicles have always presented a plethora of attributes to gain a sale.

It's exactly why the mid-size luxury segment doesn't consist of ONLY the MB e-class, ya get me, smk?

[surreal1272]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The Bolt doesn't have a 310 mile battery or autonomous driving.  And Model 3 is larger and faster than the Bolt.  If you take off the $9,000 battery pack and $8,000 autonomous drive which Bolt does not offer the Model 3 is $42k even with paint and wheel upgrade.  And a Bolt Premier is $42k.  

And the Bolt has far more cargo and hauling room for families than the 3 but hey let's just ignore why CUVs are putting sedans in the dirt because it is not convenient to your argument. 

[smk4565]

39 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

And the Bolt has far more cargo and hauling room for families than the 3 but hey let's just ignore why CUVs are putting sedans in the dirt because it is not convenient to your argument. 

The Bolt isn't really a CUV though, it is a hatchback.  It is also 20 inches shorter than the Model 3.  The Model 3 has 15 cu ft of cargo space, the Bolt has 16.9 cu ft.  That isn't a huge difference, and the Bolt has 95 cu ft of passenger space, I imagine the Model 3 can meet that, they haven't put out the specs yet.

The Bolt stopped production because they have a 110 day supply on dealer lots, there isn't demand for it.

[Robert Hall]

The next Tesla will be the Model Y compact CUV, so they will have that base covered. 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/07/tesla-teases-new-model-y-car-cheaper-model-3-production-elon-musk

[balthazar]

32 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Bolt isn't really a CUV though, it is a hatchback.  It is also 20 inches shorter than the Model 3.  The Model 3 has 15 cu ft of cargo space, the Bolt has 16.9 cu ft.  That isn't a huge difference, and the Bolt has 95 cu ft of passenger space, I imagine the Model 3 can meet that, they haven't put out the specs yet.

The Bolt stopped production because they have a 110 day supply on dealer lots, there isn't demand for it.

• Issue with the Model 3 is that the cargo space is SPLIT at either end of the vehicle, so large items can't fit in circa 7 cu ft of space.

• Bolt is currently the #5 EV/PHEV in sales and it's not nation-wide yet. It's in relatively high demand; my local dealer only has 2. The over-production works out to only a few cars per dealer.

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

• Issue with the Model 3 is that the cargo space is SPLIT at either end of the vehicle, so large items can't fit in circa 7 cu ft of space.

• Bolt is currently the #5 EV/PHEV in sales and it's not nation-wide yet. It's in relatively high demand; my local dealer only has 2. The over-production works out to only a few cars per dealer.

The Model 3's cargo room and interior space should match up well with any other small sedan, the Model 3 has exactly the same rear legroom as a C-class, and has about an inch more head room, an inch less front head room.   And there is a Model Y crossover coming for those that want an SUV.  Tesla I think can cause a rather big disruption to the market, and the pie is only so big so Tesla's gain is someone else's loss.

[A Horse With No Name]

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

• Issue with the Model 3 is that the cargo space is SPLIT at either end of the vehicle, so large items can't fit in circa 7 cu ft of space.

• Bolt is currently the #5 EV/PHEV in sales and it's not nation-wide yet. It's in relatively high demand; my local dealer only has 2. The over-production works out to only a few cars per dealer.

Exactly.

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

And the Bolt has far more cargo and hauling room for families than the 3 but hey let's just ignore why CUVs are putting sedans in the dirt because it is not convenient to your argument. 

Selective bias is often difficult for people to realize when they are utilizing.

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

The Model 3's cargo room and interior space should match up well with any other small sedan...

You're still ignoring that the total cargo volume is the front AND rear trunks added together. A minor inconvenience for smaller items, but larger items are going to be a hardship. Coupled with the absurdly small opening and an implied half the total volume makes it sound like the rear trunk is 7-9 cu ft. That's ridiculously small. ATS has a small trunk and it's 10.5 cf on the exact same overall length.

Consider the practicality if Tesla -not requiring an engine block out front- had shifted the cab far forward and allowed for a long rear trunk of 14 or even 18 cf! Repackaging could have shifted the pendulum back toward making small sedans an alternative for the cargo advantages of a small CUV. Electric power could have revolutionized the packaging of the mainstream sedan and buoyed it's falling market share. Opportunity missed, IMO.

[Robert Hall]

If they had shortened the nose and pushed the cab forward it would have looked like a FWD econobox, though... 

[smk4565]

10 minutes ago, balthazar said:

You're still ignoring that the total cargo volume is the front AND rear trunks added together. A minor inconvenience for smaller items, but larger items are going to be a hardship. Coupled with the absurdly small opening and an implied half the total volume makes it sound like the rear trunk is 7-9 cu ft. That's ridiculously small. ATS has a small trunk and it's 10.5 cf on the exact same overall length.

Consider the practicality if Tesla -not requiring an engine block out front- had shifted the cab far forward and allowed for a long rear trunk of 14 or even 18 cf! Repackaging could have shifted the pendulum back toward making small sedans an alternative for the cargo advantages of a small CUV. Electric power could have revolutionized the packaging of the mainstream sedan and buoyed it's falling market share. Opportunity missed, IMO.

The Model 3 has a rear engine, err motor, so obviously they can't have a huge trunk.  What they have is adequate enough for a couple suitcases or groceries, it isn't going to stop people from buying the car.  And they will have a small CUV for those that want a box on wheels.  It isn't like the 3-series, ATS, A4, C-class have turns that hold 6 suitcases.  The Volt as a 10.6 cubic foot trunk, and seating for 4 not 5.   Where is the outrage over the Volt's cargo capacity and passenger room?   Because most of the buyers don't care, they drive alone or with 1 passenger, put some groceries in it, and that is about it.

 

[surreal1272]

25 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Model 3 has a rear engine, err motor, so obviously they can't have a huge trunk.  What they have is adequate enough for a couple suitcases or groceries, it isn't going to stop people from buying the car.  And they will have a small CUV for those that want a box on wheels.  It isn't like the 3-series, ATS, A4, C-class have turns that hold 6 suitcases.  The Volt as a 10.6 cubic foot trunk, and seating for 4 not 5.   Where is the outrage over the Volt's cargo capacity and passenger room?   Because most of the buyers don't care, they drive alone or with 1 passenger, put some groceries in it, and that is about it.

 

Apples to oranges. We are not talking about the Volt since it is not a EV only car like the 3. We are talking about the Bolt which does seat five and has far more cargo room. That is the whole reason why CUVs are being picked over sedans. Remember? This is a perfect example of why Tesla should have released a CUV is this price range as opposed to the struggling sedan market. If this were a $35-40K Cadillac EV sedan, you would say the exact thing as what we are saying about the 3. Stop moving the bar to fit your argument just because of the brand in question. 

[regfootball]

If the model 3 has the rear motor, that's going to kill snow climate sales.  Everyone is used to FWD now.

New Model 3 interior is questionable.  Even the infamous Tata Nano has more stuff on the dash than the model 3.

 

[balthazar]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The Model 3 has a rear engine, err motor, so obviously they can't have a huge trunk.  What they have is adequate enough for a couple suitcases or groceries, it isn't going to stop people from buying the car. 

It's not 'rear motored'- on the Model S the entire motor assembly fits between the rear tires. Trunk is aft of that- the problem is Tesla should have put a hatch on the 3 like they did the S or given the car another 6-in of length. 7-8 cf is the smallest trunk in the small sedan segment by far. If you can't fit common boxed items in the car other than the back seat, that's definitely going to stop some buyers. Might as well have been a 2-door.

Perhaps Tesla will incorporate a hatch in the next generation.

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Apples to oranges. We are not talking about the Volt since it is not a EV only car like the 3. We are talking about the Bolt which does seat five and has far more cargo room. That is the whole reason why CUVs are being picked over sedans. Remember? This is a perfect example of why Tesla should have released a CUV is this price range as opposed to the struggling sedan market. If this were a $35-40K Cadillac EV sedan, you would say the exact thing as what we are saying about the 3. Stop moving the bar to fit your argument just because of the brand in question. 

The Bolt isn't a performance car though and the Model 3 is a sports sedan.  The Model 3 seats 5 like other small sedans and has similar cargo space to other small sports sedans.   It has plenty of attributes to attract buyers.   The Model 3 is faster than a Bolt, I would take performance over truck space every day of the week.  The Mercedes B-class has more cargo room than a Bolt, does that make the B-class the better than the Bolt?

CUVs are being picked over sedans for a lot of reasons.  I personally hate CUVs, but the market wants them and I get that is why car companies are offering 5 CUVs and 2-3 cars.  It also makes me thankful that the brand I like still makes cars and doesn't have to merge 3 of their sedans into 1.

[smk4565]

4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

It's not 'rear motored'- on the Model S the entire motor assembly fits between the rear tires. Trunk is aft of that- the problem is Tesla should have put a hatch on the 3 like they did the S or given the car another 6-in of length. 7-8 cf is the smallest trunk in the small sedan segment by far. If you can't fit common boxed items in the car other than the back seat, that's definitely going to stop some buyers. Might as well have been a 2-door.

Perhaps Tesla will incorporate a hatch in the next generation.

Hatch would be nice, but also costs more.  And it isn't like the ATS, 3-series, A4, Prius, Volt, C-class or whatever else people might cross shop with has a hatch back either.   They all have a trunk too.  And they can't make it longer, it is a small car.  That is like saying the Cruze has a small back seat, so it should be 6 inches longer, because then it is a Malibu.

The Model 3 has 180,000 orders, it only will outsell the entire Cadillac brand in 2018, and all wheel drive and a performance variant are coming next year.  I don't think the trunk size is of any concern when they are probably going to sell 200,000 of these next year.

[balthazar]

• So Tesla didn't put a hatch on the car because they didn't want it to cost $65K.
Meanwhile the car has potentially half the trunk everything else in its segment does. 6-in doesn't put it in a different class- there's 6-in of variance in the segment as it is.

• Why no AWD & battery upgrade & self-drive and other options at launch? Because Musk 'said so'? A LOT of people wanted those options.... hope they come online before their number comes up. Everything else in the segment already has AWD...

• Tesla stated it will produced 500K vehicles in 2018 but only built 46K in 2016. Good luck!

[A Horse With No Name]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

• So Tesla didn't put a hatch on the car because they didn't want it to cost $65K.
Meanwhile the car has potentially half the trunk everything else in its segment does. 6-in doesn't put it in a different class- there's 6-in of variance in the segment as it is.

• Why no AWD & battery upgrade & self-drive and other options at launch? Because Musk 'said so'? A LOT of people wanted those options.... hope they come online before their number comes up. Everything else in the segment already has AWD...

• Tesla stated it will produced 500K vehicles in 2018 but only built 46K in 2016. Good luck!

Tesla sill has enormous cash flow issues.  I will be impressed if they build a hundred thousand cars in 2022.

[riviera74]

A question: does anyone know when there will be a Cadillac version of the Bolt/Volt?  Or better still, an Enclave-sized EV?  Seems to me that while Cadillac rationalizes their sedan output and (hopefully) adds an XT3 and an XT7 STAT, the EV market needs to be addressed soon.  Tesla cannot produce enough of them because of their lack of experience.  Cadillac should be leading the way in EVs, not Chevrolet.  Unless it is a crossover or an SUV, most people will not buy a Chevy north of $30K.  All Cadillacs are already north of that price point.

[A Horse With No Name]

4 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

If they had shortened the nose and pushed the cab forward it would have looked like a FWD econobox, though... 

Like the Pontiac Aztec, this thing will sell on style alone!

3 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

A question: does anyone know when there will be a Cadillac version of the Bolt/Volt?  Or better still, an Enclave-sized EV?  Seems to me that while Cadillac rationalizes their sedan output and (hopefully) adds an XT3 and an XT7 STAT, the EV market needs to be addressed soon.  Tesla cannot produce enough of them because of their lack of experience.  Cadillac should be leading the way in EVs, not Chevrolet.  Unless it is a crossover or an SUV, most people will not buy a Chevy north of $30K.  All Cadillacs are already north of that price point.

Given how the ELR sold, maybe a decade any ways.

[FAPTurbo]

it's hilarious that cadillac - a billion year old brand - is so bad that it gets compared to a singular car that's not even on the road yet. 

[Intrepidation]

So basically they are just killing the XTS, which we knew was happening, and when the ATS and CTS are up for redesigns they'll get renamed, which we also knew was happening. So literally nothing we didn't already know.

[oldshurst442]

7 minutes ago, Intrepidation said:

So basically they are just killing the XTS, which we knew was happening, and when the ATS and CTS are up for redesigns they'll get renamed, which we also knew was happening. So literally nothing we didn't already know.

Well...not quite like that.

The ATS and CTS will be just one car...the CT5.  A tweener probably like how the 1st and 2nd gen CTS was.

An Audi A3 fighter (smaller in segment size to the ATS and Audi A4) will be the other sedan lower in price and smaller than the CT5 (and smaller than the ATS if you did not quite catch the hints)

A bigger and costlier sedan than the CT5 called the CT6 remains the same and the 3rd sedan that is talked about...

And no word on a CT8 so nobody knows what to expect for that...but a CT8 plan was mothballed by Johan and with him not saying a word about it now and ONLY saying that there will be 3 sedans in Cadillac's portfolio and all 3 sedans were explained what they were, one could safely ascertain  that a  CT8 is not in the cards for the immediate future...maybe in another 10-15 years...again...

[Intrepidation]

Ah, well that whole tweener thing worked so well the first time around. It'll run into the same problems the first two generations of CTS did: too big to be compared favorably to the 3 Series/A4/C-Class, too small to go against the 5 Series/A6/E-Class/.

[daves87rs]

17 minutes ago, Intrepidation said:

Ah, well that whole tweener thing worked so well the first time around. It'll run into the same problems the first two generations of CTS did: too big to be compared favorably to the 3 Series/A4/C-Class, too small to go against the 5 Series/A6/E-Class/.

A lesson never learned it seems.....

[A Horse With No Name]

7 hours ago, FAPTurbo said:

it's hilarious that cadillac - a billion year old brand - is so bad that it gets compared to a singular car that's not even on the road yet. 

The whole thread is a parody actually...

4 hours ago, daves87rs said:

A lesson never learned it seems.....

Indeed...

5 hours ago, Intrepidation said:

Ah, well that whole tweener thing worked so well the first time around. It'll run into the same problems the first two generations of CTS did: too big to be compared favorably to the 3 Series/A4/C-Class, too small to go against the 5 Series/A6/E-Class/.

Unsure really myself of what is going on at Cadillac.  My daughter and I had some time to kill so we stopped in at a local Cadillac dealer that is attached to a Benz dealer.  Cadillac dealer was dead, one poorly dressed and seemingly Asperger's aflicted couple looking at a car...Benz dealer was packed with customers, many of them young and attractive.

[A Horse With No Name]

7 hours ago, Intrepidation said:

So basically they are just killing the XTS, which we knew was happening, and when the ATS and CTS are up for redesigns they'll get renamed, which we also knew was happening. So literally nothing we didn't already know.

Pretty much...

[Robert Hall]

Maybe for an A3/CLA competitor they can do a rebadge of the Cruze and use the retro name 'Cimarron'.  

[oldshurst442]

7 hours ago, Intrepidation said:

Ah, well that whole tweener thing worked so well the first time around. It'll run into the same problems the first two generations of CTS did: too big to be compared favorably to the 3 Series/A4/C-Class, too small to go against the 5 Series/A6/E-Class/.

If we are honest about it...and auto journalists rarely are...

• both generations of the tweener CTS did quite well in the market place regarding sales and acceptance of Cadillac joining the ranks of the sport sedan luxury crowd despite a lacking of a up to par interior vis-à-vis its peers. And that was probably its only weakness.
• Auto journalists and magazines usually review cars based on who pays their salary, if you know what I mean...Both tweener CTS' were great performance cars, especially in V trim. Much like today. Auto journalists, when not favorably comparing them to the Germans was really bullshyting us...
• It would be a tad different now as the 3 Series AND the M-B C Class grew in size to be somewhat where the tweener CTS' were...albeit the BMW 3 Series just a tad smaller than the tweener CTS'. But the C Class is just about the tweener CTS' size.

2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Pretty much...

Well...not quite like that.

The ATS and CTS will be just one car...the CT5.  A tweener probably like how the 1st and 2nd gen CTS was.

An Audi A3 fighter (smaller in segment size to the ATS and Audi A4) will be the other sedan lower in price and smaller than the CT5 (and smaller than the ATS if you did not quite catch the hints)

A bigger and costlier sedan than the CT5 called the CT6 remains the same and the 3rd sedan that is talked about...

And no word on a CT8 so nobody knows what to expect for that...but a CT8 plan was mothballed by Johan and with him not saying a word about it now and ONLY saying that there will be 3 sedans in Cadillac's portfolio and all 3 sedans were explained what they were, one could safely ascertain  that a  CT8 is not in the cards for the immediate future...maybe in another 10-15 years...again...

Edited July 31, 2017 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

The whole 1st & 2nd gen "issue" with the CTS being "too big to compete" was utter BS.
There is a LOT of unmitigated BS used in auto reviewing to validate a disfavorable opinion of a given product, and the same going the other way.

[surreal1272]

14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The Bolt isn't a performance car though and the Model 3 is a sports sedan.  The Model 3 seats 5 like other small sedans and has similar cargo space to other small sports sedans.   It has plenty of attributes to attract buyers.   The Model 3 is faster than a Bolt, I would take performance over truck space every day of the week.  The Mercedes B-class has more cargo room than a Bolt, does that make the B-class the better than the Bolt?

CUVs are being picked over sedans for a lot of reasons.  I personally hate CUVs, but the market wants them and I get that is why car companies are offering 5 CUVs and 2-3 cars.  It also makes me thankful that the brand I like still makes cars and doesn't have to merge 3 of their sedans into 1.

Again, you said in an earlier post that these cars are for the grocery getter types, which makes performance a far less desirable trait than versatility. 

 

And your weak B Class argument holds no water as it has no real electric range and is six shades of fugly. How well is it doing btw compared to the Bolt?

 

And you are modifying your CUV argument because of who is involved here. Fact is that if this were Cadillac here, you would be typing away about their need for more CUVs not more sedans that don't sell. Sorry but if the rule applies to Cadillac then it most certainly applies to everyone else given the current sales climate. 

14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Hatch would be nice, but also costs more.  And it isn't like the ATS, 3-series, A4, Prius, Volt, C-class or whatever else people might cross shop with has a hatch back either.   They all have a trunk too.  And they can't make it longer, it is a small car.  That is like saying the Cruze has a small back seat, so it should be 6 inches longer, because then it is a Malibu.

The Model 3 has 180,000 orders, it only will outsell the entire Cadillac brand in 2018, and all wheel drive and a performance variant are coming next year.  I don't think the trunk size is of any concern when they are probably going to sell 200,000 of these next year.

The Prius has a hatch as does the Volt. Try again. 

 

And 180,000 "orders" is not 180,000 produced which has been Teslas Achilles heel from the get go. They haven't provided close to that number yet. Hell they haven't sold that many total cars yet but you think they can do it with one half baked car, just because it's Tesla? Again, I like Tesla overall but I also live in the real world where they have not proven that they can handle that type of production yet. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by surreal1272

[A Horse With No Name]

3 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Maybe for an A3/CLA competitor they can do a rebadge of the Cruze and use the retro name 'Cimarron'.  

Funny...but not going to happen.

Personally I like premium small cars, but premium small cars are not in GM's corporate DNA.

[Stew]

On 7/28/2017 at 7:43 PM, cp-the-nerd said:

Who are you referring to? If this is somehow a reference to me, I stated that a new sedan and crossover would be debuting next year with the new design language. I assumed the model would be the ATS replacement and it happens to be an ATS/CTS replacement.

No, not you   You know who I am talking about though  

 

I am sad to see the ATS goes.  The ATS for all it's warts is a beautiful and fun to drive car. 

I still hold my hopes and heart out for a version of the El Mirag, though I will not hole my breath.  With Mercedes sticking with the S Class coupe and BMW coming out with the 8 series, there may be something there. 

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

And your weak B Class argument holds no water as it has no real electric range and is six shades of fugly. How well is it doing btw compared to the Bolt?

Chevrolet Bolt June '17 sales : 1642  / YtD : 7592
MB B250e June '17 sales : 46  / YtD : 317

[surreal1272]

2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Chevrolet Bolt June '17 sales : 1642  / YtD : 7592
MB B250e June '17 sales : 46  / YtD : 317

And this is why the B Class is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. 

[smk4565]

35 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

And this is why the B Class is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. 

 

37 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Chevrolet Bolt June '17 sales : 1642  / YtD : 7592
MB B250e June '17 sales : 46  / YtD : 317

Because the B-class is a bad car, and despite having more cargo capacity than an i3 or Bolt or Model 3, no one shops on cargo capacity.  And the B-class prouduction is ending by September and will no longer be offered.   The B-class and i3 are the wrong shape, I don't get why GM copied it for the Bolt.

And since Surreal says Tesla doing a sedan was a mistake he will be happy to know that Mercedes next EV will be a crossover.

Back to Cadillac, question is, what do people want the CT5 to be?  How should it be sized and priced?  What platform, what engines?   Is the Alpha platform staying for the CT5 and Camaro?

[balthazar]

• B-class CANNOT be a "bad" car; it's a Mercedes!! Don't you think Daimler learned anything from decades of crap-tastic SLs and s-classes with Rubbermaid interiors & no amenities?? B-class is 'engineered like nothing else' (or whatever the tagline was), dontcha know!

• Bolt doesn't come close to "copying" the Playskool-esque i3, which is why the Bolt -still in limited release- is slaughtering the i3 in sales. I mean; isn't that your go-to metric; the better car sells more?

• If cargo capacity 'doesn't sell', why the plethora of fold-down rear seating, the move to CUVs / SUVs, the steady upgrading of towing capacities, the return of mid-size pick-ups & the proliferation of mini cargo vans?? People. Got. Stuff.

[surreal1272]

40 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

 

Because the B-class is a bad car, and despite having more cargo capacity than an i3 or Bolt or Model 3, no one shops on cargo capacity.  And the B-class prouduction is ending by September and will no longer be offered.   The B-class and i3 are the wrong shape, I don't get why GM copied it for the Bolt.

And since Surreal says Tesla doing a sedan was a mistake he will be happy to know that Mercedes next EV will be a crossover.

Back to Cadillac, question is, what do people want the CT5 to be?  How should it be sized and priced?  What platform, what engines?   Is the Alpha platform staying for the CT5 and Camaro?

See that's where you got things twisted up. It makes sense for Benz to do an EV CUV for reasons already stated. You're the one giving Tesla a free pass on not doing when if this were a GM product, you would bemoan the fact that they released a sedan when sedans are struggling in the market place. 

 

Oh oh and the B Class is $h! because it has no real range and is fugly from every angle. I've already told you this so don't try to put words in my mouth when you clearly haven't paid attention to the words being said here. 

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

• B-class CANNOT be a "bad" car; it's a Mercedes!! Don't you think Daimler learned anything from decades of crap-tastic SLs and s-classes with Rubbermaid interiors & no amenities?? B-class is 'engineered like nothing else' (or whatever the tagline was), dontcha know!

• Bolt doesn't come close to "copying" the Playskool-esque i3, which is why the Bolt -still in limited release- is slaughtering the i3 in sales. I mean; isn't that your go-to metric; the better car sells more?

• If cargo capacity 'doesn't sell', why the plethora of fold-down rear seating, the move to CUVs / SUVs, the steady upgrading of towing capacities, the return of mid-size pick-ups & the proliferation of mini cargo vans?? People. Got. Stuff.

To all three points, yes and then some. It's just more of that bar moving by SMK to fit his narrative that everything GM is $h!. 

[daves87rs]

3 minutes ago, balthazar said:

• B-class CANNOT be a "bad" car; it's a Mercedes!! Don't you think Daimler learned anything from decades of crap-tastic SLs and s-classes with Rubbermaid interiors & no amenities?? B-class is 'engineered like nothing else' (or whatever the tagline was), dontcha know!

• Bolt doesn't come close to "copying" the Playskool-esque i3, which is why the Bolt -still in limited release- is slaughtering the i3 in sales. I mean; isn't that your go-to metric; the better car sells more?

• If cargo capacity 'doesn't sell', why the plethora of fold-down rear seating, the move to CUVs / SUVs, the steady upgrading of towing capacities, the return of mid-size pick-ups & the proliferation of mini cargo vans?? People. Got. Stuff.

LMAO on the kid's i3.......

Flat right in the EV "bolts" of the world coming. If we really want EV to be used, use it what people like to own......

[A Horse With No Name]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

• If cargo capacity 'doesn't sell', why the plethora of fold-down rear seating, the move to CUVs / SUVs, the steady upgrading of towing capacities, the return of mid-size pick-ups & the proliferation of mini cargo vans?? People. Got. Stuff.

Not to mention Americans are no longer small people.  Was reading a book on the Manhattan project in WW 2 that had several photographs of people from the 1940's...

Americans have grown exponentially since then...

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

To all three points, yes and then some. It's just more of that bar moving by SMK to fit his narrative that everything GM is $h!. 

Again, zero sum game....Mercedes cannot be great if someone else is also great, so shame everyone else...entirely irrational.

[Robert Hall]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

 

Because the B-class is a bad car, and despite having more cargo capacity than an i3 or Bolt or Model 3, no one shops on cargo capacity.  And the B-class prouduction is ending by September and will no longer be offered.   The B-class and i3 are the wrong shape, I don't get why GM copied it for the Bolt.

And since Surreal says Tesla doing a sedan was a mistake he will be happy to know that Mercedes next EV will be a crossover.

Back to Cadillac, question is, what do people want the CT5 to be?  How should it be sized and priced?  What platform, what engines?   Is the Alpha platform staying for the CT5 and Camaro?

That's heresy for an M-B fan boy like you to call the B-class a 'bad car' isn't it?   The B-class predates the EV version, it was available as a normal engined car before the EV version came along.  

As far as the unorthodox shape/styling of the Bolt and i3, my theory is it's part of the philosophy that alternative powertrain models by normal car companies have to be distinctive looking to sell--i.e. look at the Prius, Mirai, Leaf, i-Mev....all have unconventional styling. The i3 and Bolt follow that thinking, the Volt to a lesser extent.

18 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Not to mention Americans are no longer small people.  Was reading a book on the Manhattan project in WW 2 that had several photographs of people from the 1940's...

Americans have grown exponentially since then... 

Very true...bigger people and people with more stuff...need space to haul stuff.  Though nowadays most of my stuff arrives at the front door via UPS, USPS, FedEx, Amazon... I still do buy some stuff from physical locations. like to have room in my SUV to haul said stuff.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[balthazar]

^ Stuff is how the lowly pickup went from a bare-bones single cab work machine in the '70s to $80K techie luxo boats.
I looked over a '17 F-150 Platinum on the dealer lot and it was hella gorgeous... but a million miles above my '94 F-150 XL RC with it's rubber floor mat & bench seat.

[A Horse With No Name]

29 minutes ago, balthazar said:

^ Stuff is how the lowly pickup went from a bare-bones single cab work machine in the '70s to $80K techie luxo boats.
I looked over a '17 F-150 Platinum on the dealer lot and it was hella gorgeous... but a million miles above my '94 F-150 XL RC with it's rubber floor mat & bench seat.

I actually really like old pickup trucks...were that old F150 still alive, I might just drive to new Jersey and buy it off of you,.

[Robert Hall]

1 minute ago, A Horse With No Name said:

I actually really like old pickup trucks...were that old F150 still alive, I might just drive to new Jersey and buy it off of you,.

Speaking of old pickup trucks, my only experience with full-size trucks were the ones my Dad and brother had, all 70s models..the 70s pickups had a lot of charm, clean simple styling.   My Dad had a '79 Dodge Power Wagon 4x4, short bed. Very bouncy ride and numb steering, learned to drive in it and drove it a fair bit over a few years.   In the late 80s my brother had a '74 Ford F100  longbed, 300 six and manual, and a '75 Chevy C10 short bed step side, 350...both 2wd...fun vehicles.. all very stripped by 2017 standards.