DRIVEN: 2019 Chevrolet Blazer LT AWD 3.6

[Cmicasa the Great]

2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

What do you want it to start at; $19K??

I really think this is the concensus of this thread.. That Chevy should be a discount brand offering everything the other makes do but cheaper because it's GM. I showed even that the Edge is pretty expensive. It's the same bull people pushed for Caddy..  That the CTS, for instance, was only great if it were a tweener, offering more for less than the Germans, but it still better compete or beat them. 

[Robert Hall]

3 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Yeah!  

GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave.  It seems like the Cadillac XT5 and soon to be XT6 is the Pontiac Lemans, 4 door Bonneville and Grand Prix while the GMC Acadia would be the Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme or something like that... 

 

I suppose so, but I can't really compare cars from long ago with these plastic generic FWD lease appliances.  Different GM, different time and place.      

2 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I really think this is the concensus of this thread.. That Chevy should be a discount brand offering everything the other makes do but cheaper because it's GM. I showed even that the Edge is pretty expensive. It's the same bull people pushed for Caddy..  That the CTS, for instance, was only great if it were a tweener, offering more for less than the Germans, but it still better compete or beat them. 

Ford doesn't have any filler brands anymore, though since they got rid of Mercury..so I'm not surprised they run the price up to Lincoln price points. 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Robert Hall

[oldshurst442]

4 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The thing is that GM may be, and I said they should a while ago, finally allowing the divisions to have some autonomy from the rest. Like the old days. Chevy should be concerned with what Ford, Toyota, Honda etc do.. They shouldn't give a rats ass what Cadillac is doing. Each brand should in essence earn. And in truth.. If people buy it.  Let them

True. 

It seems though, that Chevy is focused on Acura as well, on the Blazer.  Not a negative mind you.  A very good thing. 

Where it becomes bothersome is that Buick is not focused on anybody in particular and is getting lost in the shuffle by its other corporate siblings which leaves Buick to be in no man's land.  Cadillac's focus is ever changing with all those changes on top. Johan is gone, the new guy is in and yet again, the ship is sailing in a slightly different course....again.

3 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I suppose so, but I can't really compare cars from long ago with these plastic generic FWD lease appliances.  Different GM, different time and place.      

The more things change, the more they stay the same...

[Robert Hall]

The Blazer seems like a Murano competitor more than anything...they even copied the older Murano styling w/ the kicked up quarter window. 

[oldshurst442]

Just now, Robert Hall said:

The Blazer seems like a Murano competitor more than anything...they even copied the older Murano styling w/ the kicked up quarter window. 

Yeah...

But The Acura RDX is a competitor too.

The RDX starts at 38 000. It is slightly smaller than the Blazer, but..still has a 2.0T...

Which one is the Blazer and which one is the RDX?

The Murano seems to have  been a pioneer for this segment 15 or so years ago. 

 

[Robert Hall]

I don't know why Chevy would target Acura, though..that's what GMC or Buick is for.  Chevy should be targeting Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Ford, Hyundai, etc...the entry level brands. 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Robert Hall

[riviera74]

If it wasn't for the Encore and the Enclave, Buick would be a China-only brand.  Come to think of it. that may well be Buick's long-term future.

[ccap41]

12 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

 The Blazer starts at $29K. The Cadillac XT5 that starts at $43K. So what I'm seeing is that the BLAZER can be optioned out to the same price as a base XT5 . Which makes all the sense in the world. Betcha y'all didn't know but a 3Series can be optioned out to the same price as a 5Series?

The difference there is that a 3 Series isn't the same exact vehicle as a 5 Series and a Blazer is an XT5 in different clothes. 

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

THE PRICE OF THE BLAZER IS INFLATED FOR THE SAKE OF DISCOUNTING! I

Khols sales model. That's the kind of reputation I would want to bring to my company. 

[oldshurst442]

13 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I don't know why Chevy would target Acura, though..that's what GMC or Buick is for.  Chevy should be targeting Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Ford, Hyundai, etc...the entry level brands. 

I do not know what to tell you on that.

Pontiac is no longer around, the excitement brand. Mind you, Chevy was always full of excitement after 1955. The Tri-box Chevys, the Corvettes, Corvairs, the SS vehicles from Impala to Malibus (Chevelles) to Camaros. 

Chevy also had a touch of lux as well. The 1957 Bel Air.  The Impalas of the 1960s. The Caprice name plate after that. The Monte Carlo. The Kingswood station wagons. A touch of lux on the Chevrolet side of things, but you have to admit, those cars had class. 

Therefore, Chevrolet could EASILY today  and has done so countless of times throughout is history,  be  Pontiac, Oldsmobile AND Chevrolet all at the same time.  People gravitate towards Chevrolet. Chevrolet would be missing a big opportunity to NOT try to get as many sales as Chevy can at whatever price level. If it could go slightly up market to where Oldsmobile was and still sell affordable stuff, why not?  

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Why is Chevy wrong and Ford OK wth the Edge St? 

Because for the price you're getting 335hp/380tq vs 305hp/269tq plus the upgraded suspension and brakes. 

+30hp

+111tq

[oldshurst442]

18 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Because for the price

THAT would be the answer to everything, right?

Different people value different things...

Now, if you noticed, I did not quote you on the horsepower/torque numbers. Nor do I wanna us to go on a defending rant of why X model is worth more and is valued more than Y model because of whatever reasons...

I could cry fowl and shout 'til the cows come home why BMW is NOT worth their price of admission at ANY level they sell CUVs and cars at, but there are takers.  I could call those BMW leasers/owners fools and laugh at them just as we have done here with the Blazer. 

But in reality, if ANY car manufacturer sets a price for a certain car, and it sells in the market place in high enough numbers for a profit, then its a sales success no matter what we say about it. 

Like I said, I could turn blue in the face with anger about BMWs, but BMWs sell in quite the high numbers....at a profit...

We'll see what the market place has in store for the Blazer. Especially vis-a-vis its competitors. 

Personally, I do prefer the Edge ST, any Edge, over any CUV, but I really dont care how many it has got over the Blazer. 

Personally, If I valued speed over anything else, I wouldnt even be looking at a CUV, and I know, you even showed me how the Edge ST is a GREAT performer, but in MY eyes, I dont value CUVs in that light...I STILL would prefer a car, coupe, for speed over a CUV...even though the Edge ST may wipe the floor over some cars that I deem to be performance cars...

In other words...different people value different things.

I dont find a problem with the Blazer being that high in price. I havent sat in one either to see if the fit and finish is on par with its competitors, but assuming that fit and finish, options are on par, hey, if Chevy can peddle a Blazer at 50 000 dollars, more power to them.

Ive seen quite a few Edge's in my neighborhood. None of the ST kind. Gasoline prices are high where Im at.  Bolts and Model 3s are everywhere though... (at approximate same price points...) 

Different people value different things...

 

 

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by oldshurst442

[Drew Dowdell]

13 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The Blazer being used a top of the line RS fully loaded versus a base XT5 with a few add ons..

 The Blazer starts at $29K. The Cadillac XT5 that starts at $43K. So what I'm seeing is that the BLAZER can be optioned out to the same price as a base XT5 . Which makes all the sense in the world. Betcha y'all didn't know but a 3Series can be optioned out to the same price as a 5Series?

The lease payment be damned.. because that is a true variable in the payment process with Chevy apparently offering a 6.1% and Cadillac offering a .02%.

But the larger question is why lease this vehicle at that rate when financing it would be the cheaper route? Do people in 2019 LEASE Chevys that are not over $60K? 

Yeah, but the Blazer is a base 4-cylinder. The point was that when you put the same equipment in the vehicles, they cost the same money.  That shouldn't be... Cadillac still has a nicer interior (even if I don't personally care for the design) and more prestige.  It should cost more and the Chevy should cost less. 

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Love the silver, but I'd do it with Black wheels.. No car should have gray interior tho.. None.. But the vents actually do a sensational job in the Camaro of heating and cooling. Seating positions are similar. Heat rises. And they also serve as controls. Either way..  Why is Chevy wrong and Ford OK wth the Edge St? 

My only issue, in fact, with the Blazer's exterior really lies in the chrome in the front.. Which I'd black out as soon as I got it home 

Because the Ford doesn't come with a lame 2.5 liter base engine.  The ST has real performance chops, and the Lincoln Nautilus still costs more when you equip them the same way. 

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

...it seems like Buick is lost in space somewhere. Chevy is encroaching its territory from below while Cadillac is encroaching its territory from above.

That's been ongoing since the late 1950s tho. Blame the Impala, if you like. You could go farther back when the '41 Buick Limited exceeded the entry level Cadillac in price (and didn't return after WW II).
Pricing overlap was so non-existent prior to WWII that GM brought out the 'companion makes' to fill those gaps: Pontiac, Marquette, Viking & LaSalle. Now (globally speaking), brands overlap brands & models overlap models. It's the way the industry has been for decades.

[oldshurst442]

23 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

 That shouldn't be... Cadillac still has a nicer interior (even if I don't personally care for the design) and more prestige.  It should cost more and the Chevy should cost less. 

 From my perspective:

Cadillac shouldn't  be playing at this level. Cadillac shouldnt be selling cars at this price point. Cadillac shouldnt be trying stoop to Lexus or Acura levels of entry level lux.

That WAS Oldsmobile territory and Pontiac. Cadillac should be higher level than that.  

Now that Olds and Pontiac are gone, leave that to Chevy and Buick and let Cadillac BE Cadillac.

THE standard of the world. You aint gonna get there by selling "entry level" BS marketing...

THE standard of the world MEANS building and selling  dreams. Not crappy XT5s. By building and selling sky is the limit Ciels and golden dreams Eldorados...

ATS...nope

CTS...nope. 

CTS-V: YES!

CT6 and CT6-Vs: YES!

Escalade: YES!

XT5:NOPE

XT6: MAYBE

XT4: ARE YOU MAD???!!!  NO WAY!!!

The Blazer is fine where it is. Its Cadillac that is out of its league here!  It SHOULD aim higher! 

We are bitching about a Chevy having a base 2.0 liter 4 banger, but over at Cadillac, Cadillac uses the same base 4 cylinder in certain models yet we dont cry fowl for Cadillac doing that.

Am I missing something? 

Edited February 26, 2019 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

12 minutes ago, balthazar said:

That's been ongoing since the late 1950s tho. Blame the Impala, if you like. You could go farther back when the '41 Buick Limited exceeded the entry level Cadillac in price (and didn't return after WW II).
Pricing overlap was so non-existent prior to WWII that GM brought out the 'companion makes' to fill those gaps: Pontiac, Marquette, Viking & LaSalle. Now (globally speaking), brands overlap brands & models overlap models. It's the way the industry has been for decades.

Yes. I could agree to that. I cant disagree because it really is the truth. That "brands overlap brands & models overlap models. It's the way the industry has been for decades." 

Was it a smart move on Chevy's part to introduce the Impala and the way Chevy sold the Impala with all that class and "luxury" features it had? 

Over 13 million sold making it the highest selling Chevy model. The answer is clearly yes! 

My beef, if its not already clear, is not that Chevy is aiming that high. Im good with it!

My beef is with Buick not focused properly and their product line is suffering for it.

My other beef is that Cadillac is aiming TOO low. I dont mind if they do go low somewhat, since GM does not have the Pontiac and Oldsmobile filler brands anymore, but to encroach Chevy levels of price, not a good thing.

Again, Ill bring up ATS and XT4.  Cadillac does NOT need this.  Chevy could handle that part. 

BLAZER anybody???!!!  Camaro anybody?  If Cadillac wants a small performing RWD car, maybe the ATS-V Sport with a TTV6 400 horsepower that the V currently has SHOULD be the LOWEST ATS it offers and the full out V should be the V8 that the Camaro ZL1 offers... 

Lease queen ATS with the 2.0T should NOT even be a thought for Cadillac dealerships. 

BUICK could handle the lease queen 2.0T ATS level vehicles... 

XT4?

Same thing...

Cadillac does not need this...

The problem with this is that BMW and Audi and Mercedes has this world wide. That world wide, BMW, Audi and Mercedes Benz sell lower market vehicles, but these lower market vehicles are NOT sold as entry level luxury or luxury.  Those models are really sold as econobox cars.

Cadillac's strategy to emulate that is doing it wrong...

Therefore, if Cadillac wants to sell a bazillion 2 Series and 3 Series econobox competitor cars in Europe and in China, that Cadillac has to sell itself as an entry level brand...there, and here...

But Cadillac was NEVER that. Therefore Cadillac should just cut that crap out! No need for Cadillac to overlap Chevrolet...

THAT is how I sees it. ATS, XT4, XT5 is just Cadiallc overlapping Chevrolet. I dont sees it as the Blazer overlapping Cadillac. I sees the XT5 overlapping the Blazer...not a good thing for Cadillac! 

[Cmicasa the Great]

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

I suppose so, but I can't really compare cars from long ago with these plastic generic FWD lease appliances.  Different GM, different time and place.      

Ford doesn't have any filler brands anymore, though since they got rid of Mercury..so I'm not surprised they run the price up to Lincoln price points. 

How is that relevant in a Go Go world??? Most of the real car buyers.. THE REAL CAR BUYERS... the mainstream.. doesn't even know that Cadillac is a part of GM. It was so bad a decade ago that GM decided to put "GM" Chicklets on every vehicle just to inform the buyers. That stopped. So much so I have a friend who recently bought a Traverse for himself, his wife has an XT5, and they are looking out for a decent blip of inventory of the Blazer for their daughter who is about to graduate Grad school in the Spring. In conversations with him and his wife, they not once seem to realize that they are driving platform mates. His wife didn't even know that the XT5 and Traverse were apart of the same corporation until they got their statements the same day from GM Finance. 

[Robert Hall]

17 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

How is that relevant in a Go Go world??? Most of the real car buyers.. THE REAL CAR BUYERS... the mainstream.. doesn't even know that Cadillac is a part of GM. In conversations with him and his wife, they not once seem to realize that they are driving platform mates. His wife didn't even know that the XT5 and Traverse were apart of the same corporation until they got their statements the same day from GM Finance. 

Alas, the world is full of such uniformed, clueless people...and this is an enthusiast page, so we are aware of common platforms...I have no interest in what the general public think about anything...

Edited February 26, 2019 by Robert Hall

[Cmicasa the Great]

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

True. 

It seems though, that Chevy is focused on Acura as well, on the Blazer.  Not a negative mind you.  A very good thing. 

Where it becomes bothersome is that Buick is not focused on anybody in particular and is getting lost in the shuffle by its other corporate siblings which leaves Buick to be in no man's land.  Cadillac's focus is ever changing with all those changes on top. Johan is gone, the new guy is in and yet again, the ship is sailing in a slightly different course....again.

The more things change, the more they stay the same...

Buick is the odd man out in this country.. as it focusing on CUVs here but has a full line-up in China selling over 1.2 Mill last year I believe there alone. The issue with Buick doesn't have to be an issue to be honest.. because out of all the brands that I could see as direct competitors.. Buick and GMC could be that since they are on the same showroom.. BUT!!! No one looking at Buick in that same showroom is really looking at GMC and vice versa.. It is most likely why U are seeing the Acadia and future offerings "Toughing Up." The Acadia, if U notice, now has a square jaw.. Buick a round face. 

As to Caddy. Where are they changing focus in reality? Not once do I recall them saying that they are getting out of the Lux-Sport game.. just going about it differently in terms of powertrain in 5 or so years. RIGHT NOW.. The CT4 and CT5 are testing and could debut soon.. the CT6 has new legs.. the CUVs are no different than they were in SRX days.. and the Escalade is still King, with a new one on the horizon. It must also be noted that there is definite talk of the "Escala" still coming in 2021. JDN's plan has not in anyway been abandoned just because he jumped.. got pushed off.. ship.

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

I don't know why Chevy would target Acura, though..that's what GMC or Buick is for.  Chevy should be targeting Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Ford, Hyundai, etc...the entry level brands. 

That makes zero sense in terms of your aforementioned commentary on styling as the catalysts. Styling is styling.. there is only one car I know of that has always attempted to stay looking "a to b" for the sake of it and that's the Corolla.. and even that now is trying to look sporty

[Cmicasa the Great]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

The difference there is that a 3 Series isn't the same exact vehicle as a 5 Series and a Blazer is an XT5 in different clothes. 

Khols sales model. That's the kind of reputation I would want to bring to my company. 

I used other examples of the exact same size (VW/AUDI/POR- and Lex/Toy) but actually the 3 Series and 5 Series argument was more brilliant.. because they are on the same fukking lot criss-crossing in each others pricing. Its a fact of car sales. 

Also.. are U downing the Kohls sales model? Spoken like a true individual who has no business trying to dictate how sales works. Kohls' business model is actually quite successful, with very nice profits. The Stock is a very happy camper in my portfolio

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

Because for the price you're getting 335hp/380tq vs 305hp/269tq plus the upgraded suspension and brakes. 

+30hp

+111tq

Yet very little in terms of acceleration superiority. Have U seen the numbers? Where the hell is that extra toque going when it is only yielding about 3/10ths in acceleration? GTFOH! 

[Cmicasa the Great]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Because the Ford doesn't come with a lame 2.5 liter base engine.  The ST has real performance chops, and the Lincoln Nautilus still costs more when you equip them the same way. 

I don;t even see the 2.5L when I look at these vehicles. V6 only.. and that's the only metric I've used in pricing. I'm not going to sit here and dictate limitations on a mainstream brand. On Caddy.. yeah.. I say sure limit it to forced induction only. On a Chevy... no.. choices are better.

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

That's been ongoing since the late 1950s tho. Blame the Impala, if you like. You could go farther back when the '41 Buick Limited exceeded the entry level Cadillac in price (and didn't return after WW II).
Pricing overlap was so non-existent prior to WWII that GM brought out the 'companion makes' to fill those gaps: Pontiac, Marquette, Viking & LaSalle. Now (globally speaking), brands overlap brands & models overlap models. It's the way the industry has been for decades.

YES!!!? Love it that someone else remembers the companion brands. Marquette/ Buick, Lasalle/Caddy.. Viking/Olds, Pontiac/Oakland

[Cmicasa the Great]

29 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Alas, the world is full of such uniformed, clueless people...and this is an enthusiast page, so we are aware of common platforms...I have no interest what the general public think about anything...

Yeah.. We also have to come to grips with the idea of.. if we are playing CEO.. what would U actually do as a CEO? Seriously. This is a car forum and news group.. but we are convinced as real live car enthusiasts that the only way U can purchase this vehicle is in top of the line Premiere or RS form above $45,000, and that none of the other competitors offer their vehicles in a similar price point, even when they were NEW for 2019. Oh wait! Am I the only one who will be holding his chest in laughter if the new Murano, Edge, Passport etc come out with a similar price to this brand new vehicle due to rising costs of materials and a real life trade war going on between the magnificent United States of America and its fake necessary labor and finished material donor China?

The Blazer is no more overpriced than a Honda Pilot or upcoming Passport. GM needs to price their vehicles where they feel they can amend the publics' perception of price point and worth, coupled in with their mastery of price manipulation in consumers mind's via discounting. I'd rather GM sell me a Blazer that MSRP at $51k and give me $3k worth of discounts, than Honda sell me a Passport at $51k, no discount and then tell me I should be happy to pay it. In that situation I'm going to need some Kool-aid to go with the KY they neglected to use on my Bum.

Amazing when consumers are happy to be screwed by the foreign makes and made to pay top dollar for par products, yet expect to pay less for the domestic product, while demanding superior quality, WOT factories, and higher pay and no lay offs to the workers, while still bad mouthing domestic product and attempting to divert sales to aforementioned par competition. Someone brought up Acura.. An RDX is not, in reality, a vehicle worth $37k. Its a Honda CRV with leather and bigger engine. People seem to give it a pass because Honda tells them that Acura is something special. It's not. This is not the brand that once helped usher in Japanese luxury with the Legend. A brand that might be more damaged and insignificant than Lincoln. Actually might isn't even necessary. The Chevy Brand has been pulling in very nice conquest sales and transaction prices. To think of it as an "every man's brand" these days is really cutting it close. A Chevy can be bought starting at $13K, yes, but a Chevy can also come in at $120K as well, or even $80K for a pick-up. The Blazer should do fine, despite the detractors who haven't touched the steering wheel as of yet saying that its a bad value. NEWSFLASH! All cars these days are bad values unless you buy used. Quibbling over a $2K difference between a Blazer and an Edge or Murano, is silly as it is ridiculous. Especially when it is a known fact that GM will have boukkoo incentives available at launch most likely and still make mad profit off the vehicle due to various reasons, no the least is that its platform has been on the market now for almost 3 years.

[Drew Dowdell]

17 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The Blazer is no more overpriced than a Honda Pilot or upcoming Passport.

The Pilot and Passport come standard with V6 engines and for little extra money, adaptive cruise and other safety features not found on the Chevy until you plunk down 50g.  Up against a Passport, the Blazer is uncompetitive even at the lower price range. 

[ccap41]

29 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The Blazer is no more overpriced than a Honda Pilot or upcoming Passport.

The cheapest Pilot that gets a V6(standard equipment) and AWD is $33,350.

At Chevy to the cheapest V6 with AWD costs you $37,195.  

[Cmicasa the Great]

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

The Pilot and Passport come standard with V6 engines and for little extra money, adaptive cruise and other safety features not found on the Chevy until you plunk down 50g.  Up against a Passport, the Blazer is uncompetitive even at the lower price range. 

Then don't buy it.. stop bitching. Who are U advocating for? Perhaps I'm too far gone.. I only would buy a top of the line, or near, Blazer or otherwise. 

FWD PASSPORT is $31,990 V6  280HP/262ft-lbs

FWD Blazer is $34, 495 (+$2505) 3.6L V6 engine 305 hp/269 lb-ft

And while Adaptive Cruise Control is standard on the Passport.. why is Navigation now.. but it is on the Blazer. and WHY THE HELL CAN I GET ANDROID/AppleCar on the Chevy, but not the Honda 

and even more to the point.. WHY THE HELL over a $2K difference between a Blazer and Passport knowing that the MSRP is currently minimum carrying $3K in incentives, while the Honda is carrying none. Again.. CHEVY better not fukk me.. Honda.. fukk away

 

 

[balthazar]

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

 From my perspective:

Cadillac shouldn't  be playing at this level.
ATS...nope
CTS...nope.
CTS-V: YES!
CT6 and CT6-Vs: YES!
Escalade: YES!
XT5:NOPE
XT6: MAYBE
XT4: ARE YOU MAD???!!!  NO WAY!!!

I'm almost 100% onboard with you here. I think the ATS was a very nicely done product/design, but I agree that Cadillac should NOT be in this segment- same for the XT4. If nothing else- they're too small for 'Cadillac's. This is why I've been vehemently hopeful that the downturn in the sedan segment would end up with the cancellation of the CT4. Cadillac doesn't have the volume to spread down to the ATS level and still justify the investment, I would have to guess. And while I'm sure the XT4 is generating profit (ATS also), I still believe that Cadillac's market position should 'prevent' them from going there. While the XT5 I'll allow, I would have cast my vote to roll the XT4 money into the XT5 & the 3-row XT5 (XT6). And that's also where I think Cadillac should have gone- made the XT6 an 'XT5 ESV'. WTH is it a completely new design??

The proliferation of so many models per brand cannot continue long-term, ESPECIALLY when you have a reputed upcoming period of EV transition, where the IC & EV version of the same brand/segment share so little. Pare down the lineups.

Edited February 26, 2019 by balthazar

[oldshurst442]

5 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I'm almost 100% onboard with you here. I think the ATS was a very nicely done product/design, but I agree that Cadillac should NOT be in this segment- same for the XT4. If nothing else- they're too small for 'Cadillac's. This is why I've been vehemently hopeful that the downturn in the sedan segment would end up with the cancellation of the CT4. Cadillac doesn't have the volume to spread down to the ATS level and still justify the investment, I would have to guess. And while I'm sure the XT4 is generating profit (ATS also), I still believe that Cadillac's market position should 'prevent' them from going there. While the XT5 I'll allow, I would have cast my vote to roll the XT4 money into the XT5 & the 3-row XT5 (XT6). And that's also where I think Cadillac should have gone- made the XT6 an 'XT5 ESV'.

The proliferation of so many models per brand cannot continue long-term, ESPECIALLY when you have a reputed upcoming period of EV transition, where the IC & EV version of the same brand/segment share so little. Pare down the lineups.

I made a quick, dramatic post about what vehicles and markets Id want Cadillac to be in without really thinking about it too deeply, but yeah, what you said here is what I believe in as well. 

[Drew Dowdell]

22 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

WHY THE HELL CAN I GET ANDROID/AppleCar on the Chevy, but not the Honda 

uh... you can. It comes on all trims except the base model. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

5 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I'm almost 100% onboard with you here. I think the ATS was a very nicely done product/design, but I agree that Cadillac should NOT be in this segment- same for the XT4. If nothing else- they're too small for 'Cadillac's. This is why I've been vehemently hopeful that the downturn in the sedan segment would end up with the cancellation of the CT4. Cadillac doesn't have the volume to spread down to the ATS level and still justify the investment, I would have to guess. And while I'm sure the XT4 is generating profit (ATS also), I still believe that Cadillac's market position should 'prevent' them from going there. While the XT5 I'll allow, I would have cast my vote to roll the XT4 money into the XT5 & the 3-row XT5 (XT6). And that's also where I think Cadillac should have gone- made the XT6 an 'XT5 ESV'. WTH is it a completely new design??

The proliferation of so many models per brand cannot continue long-term, ESPECIALLY when you have a reputed upcoming period of EV transition, where the IC & EV version of the same brand/segment share so little. Pare down the lineups.

I cannot get with this idea that Cadillac should pretty much start at CTS-V. Come on. No other luxury brand starts at CTS-V levels. The CTS-V is discounted due to acceptance. It would be like Superman crossing over.. showing up on the door steps of Avenger's Mansions... and not after beating the SHAT outta Thor, Iron Man, and the Hulk.. deciding to just be in the same position as sad and BS position that they are putting Spidey in within the new MCU because he's the new guy in Marvel.

YES!!! Cadillac is DC and BMW/Benz are Marvel. LOL. 

The Cadillac line-up has needed an ATS since 2003. The CTS should have never been a tweener. It set the stage for the issues the brand has now. Cadillac should have abruptly made the transition into Sport/Lux on day one of 2002 or that day in 2001 when the debuted the CTS at Pebble Beach. It simply didn't have to reinvent itself in terms of luxury.. just update the line-up with better handling vehicles, no different than what Benz did around 20002. And before 1999.. no one I know put Benz above Cadillac. And BMW and Audi damn sure weren't. Stale product didn't mean also ran. It mean fix your fukking line-up to accommodate the new buyers

 

The DTS in the exact config as the CT6.. yes a BIG CADDY.. remember that most did not need for the FWD DTS to be continues since the preceding flagship, the Fleetwood had just died like 4 years ago. All the bells and whistles. No compromises, and at that time.. literally on the same level as the vaulted S-Class of the day. One by one they should have introduced the CTS in the same size the ATS has been.. The STS 2 years later in the same size the CTS is now. .. we would have been 4-5 years later, or 2004 the next gen DTS would be on ZETA, a brand new platform, as originally planned.. New DOHC engine called "Ultra.." in between all of that XLR, SRX, Escalades, BRX, XLRm. 

What I just typed is the original plan with a some time-line variations within the decade that was 1999-2009. 

CTS/CTC(oupe)/V

XLRm/V

STS/STC/V

DTS/DTC/V

XLR/V

BRX/V

SRX/V

Escalade/ESV/ETC/V

all avail in convertibles except CUV/SUVs

[Cmicasa the Great]

2 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

uh... you can. It comes on all trims except the base model. 

uh.. exactly. I didn't see it when I tried to build a base model vs a V6 almost same priced Blazer. Again.. the BASE Blazer is $2500 less than the Passport.. the Chevy still comes with Android/Apple. GREAT SAFETY FEATURE for me. Like keeping my eyes on the road..

But No one is holding a gun someone's head and saying they have to buy it. Chevy's base is cheaper.. because Honda is offering a bigger engine. Chevy will end up being equal priced with equal powertrain, albeit more powerful powertrain, because CHEVY OFFERS INCENTIVES and HONDA DOESN'T.. most of the time.

Hey!!! Why are U not bitching at Honda for not offering.. OFFERING.. OFFERING.. a smaller more efficient and cheaper engine combo? WHY!? I like choices. Why are U OK with Honda not giving me a choice?

[Drew Dowdell]

1 minute ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

uh.. exactly. I didn't see it when I tried to build a base model vs a V6 almost same priced Blazer. Again.. the BASE Blazer is $2500 less than the Passport.. the Chevy still comes with Android/Apple. GREAT SAFETY FEATURE for me. Like keeping my eyes on the road..

But No one is holding a gun someone's head and saying they have to buy it. Chevy's base is cheaper.. because Honda is offering a bigger engine. Chevy will end up being equal priced with equal powertrain, albeit more powerful powertrain, because CHEVY OFFERS INCENTIVES and HONDA DOESN'T.. most of the time.

Hey!!! Why are U not bitching at Honda for not offering.. OFFERING.. OFFERING.. a smaller more efficient and cheaper engine combo? WHY!? I like choices. Why are U OK with Honda not giving me a choice?

$29.9 Seems to be the base price for this class of vehicle regardless of the powertrain offered.  At Ford, it is a 2.3T.  If Chevy put the 2.0T in there as a base engine, I wouldn't have such an issue with it. The 2.5 is a lame engine and has been for years. 

[Frisky Dingo]

This thing is a joke. And it's yet another mediocre GM offering in what is becoming a quite extensive list of mediocre new GM offerings. I feel like they are really losing touch and are on the brink of a repeat of the bailout days. These borderline luxury segment prices for mainstream offerings are comical. Especially for a brand that actually has luxury nameplates within the corporate umbrella.

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Frisky Dingo

[Drew Dowdell]

9 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

This thing is a joke. And it's yet another mediocre GM offering in what is becoming a quite extensive list of new GM offerings. I feel like they are really losing touch and are on the brink of a repeat of the bailout days. These borderline luxury segment prices for mainstream offerings are comical. Especially for a brand that actually has luxury nameplates within the corporate umbrella.

 

About the only saving grace on these is that at least they are making them look different.   But otherwise I'm seeing a repeat of the GMT360 days. 

2 Wheelbases, 3 different engines, every brand gets one.

[Robert Hall]

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

About the only saving grace on these is that at least they are making them look different.   But otherwise I'm seeing a repeat of the GMT360 days. 

2 Wheelbases, 3 different engines, every brand gets one.

The more things change with GM, the more they stay the same...every brand gets it's own versions.  They went so crazy w/ GMT360, surprised Pontiac and Cadillac didn't get variations of that...

[Drew Dowdell]

4 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

The more things change with GM, the more they stay the same...every brand gets it's own versions.  They went so crazy w/ GMT360, surprised Pontiac and Cadillac didn't get variations of that...

Isuzu and Saab did instead. 

[oldshurst442]

16 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I cannot get with this idea that Cadillac should pretty much start at CTS-V. Come on. No other luxury brand starts at CTS-V levels.

Cadillac is not..well was not, your average luxury brand. It was much more than that. The Lasalle brand was created to sell at a price point lower than Cadillac that  Cadillac actually manufactured, right?

The brand stopped being produced because of WW2, right? But when WW2 ended, Buick just just took over that spot, right? And Cadillac just continued on being THE Standard of the World and in North America at least, was even more prestigious that Rolls Royce right?  Even producing a model that cost more to buy than Rolls Royce, right?  I mean, V16 Cadillacs of the 1930s were always in that Rolls Royce territory, along with Deusenbergs but after WW2, Cadillac was very much alone in that regard, right?  I mean, America was just about the only country that was not exactly decimated  by WW2 and thrived 10 fold after, right? Leaving Cadillac and with Lincoln, to be the choice for the world's most rich and powerful. And those folks were in America for the most part, right? 

JUST because the 1960s happened and that was the start for GM going haywire with all the brand overlapping and it went out of control in the 1970s and by the 1980s is was too late for Cadillac to right the ship that in 2019 going forward that Cadillac HAS to have a Cimarron sedan and Cimarron CUV in their line-up just to be like every other luxury brand does it today, right?

I want Cadillac to BE the Standard of the World.  Doing what other luxury brands like Acura, Lexus, BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Jaguar does it, does NOT mean that Cadillac NEEDS to.  

Rolls and Bentley are in the boutique level of luxury. Top top top tier.

Ferrari and Lamborghini are boutique sports car makers that will be producing boutique SUVs...

Porsche WAS a boutique sports car maker and now has become a full fledged SUV maker. Not even a boutique SUV maker as their Macan is based off of VW bones and sold in mainstream levels of sales in that slightly higher than Chevy Blazer prices...

Im sure there is a spot where Cadillac could and SHOULD thrive in. Somewhere where a Porsche Panamera resides in no lower and for now, as high as a Mercedes S Class Maybach. Until Cadillac gets enough steam to go higher than that. 

Of course awesome cars and cuvs with 50 000 dollar price tags from Cadillac could be sold, but those gotta be the best of the best vis-a-vis the competition. That means no lease queens with 2.0T engines. That means ATS V as THE base ATS and as the lowest Cadillac cars and CUVs go with luxury interior and performance. 

That means the CT5 should be at the very least a V sport in conception. As a base vehicle. 

THAT is what I envision Cadillac to be.  I dont want Cadillac to be the American version of the European version of BMW or Mercedes Benz.  I want Cadillac to be...CADILLAC. 

 

 

[balthazar]

• The Lasalle brand was created to sell at a price point lower than Cadillac that  Cadillac actually manufactured, right? •
"actually manufactured" - what? LaSalles were not built by Cadillac. Or are you saying 'LaSalles sold cheaper than Cadillac did'?

• The brand stopped being produced because of WW2, right? But when WW2 ended, Buick just just took over that spot, right? •
Not quite, no. There was no '41 LaSalle, and it wasn't WWII that did it in. LaSalle was outselling both Cadillac & Lincoln in '40. If you look at the years '36-40 (discounting the recession year of '38), Cadillac's volume was pretty consistent at around 12K units/year. LaSalle's varied a lot more, but seemed to be on the upswing- over 20K in '37, 39 & 40.

Buick did overlap LaSalle in price range at the end of it's run, so it did have a dampening effect from below in that regard (LaSalle still sold very well- best year in '37). But Cadillac also edged downmarket a bit here by pricing the '41 Series 61 notably less than it's entry '40 car, and into the prior LaSalle price range (the lower 50%, too). Unlike the Packard 120 (that arguably saved Packard, tho at a terminal cost in the long run), the Series 61 was of no degradation to the brand's image, and was not heavily promoted. Volume was very low within the Cadillac brand.

By the last few years, LaSalle was using Cadillac engines IIRC, and the decision was to 'enfold' LaSalle into Cadillac. I'd have to bone up on the back story, but I believe there was some concern LaSalle was grabbing a bit of the Cadillac spotlight, as it were. In this era, Cadillac was still firmly holding the 'SOTW' banner high.

It's not viable to compare immediate pre- and post-war sales volume, too many strong variables involved, but Cadillac shot up to 61K in 1947.

Edited February 26, 2019 by balthazar

[oldshurst442]

5 minutes ago, balthazar said:

The Lasalle brand was created to sell at a price point lower than Cadillac that  Cadillac actually manufactured, right? •
"actually manufactured" - what? LaSalles were not built by Cadillac. Or are you saying 'LaSalles sold cheaper than Cadillac did'?

LOL. Both actually.

I was under the impression that Lasalles were manufactured by the same factories that Cadillacs were produced in and yes, at lower prices that Cadillacs were sold at and because I thought that Cadillacs were manufactured in the same factories as Cadillacs were, I thought that Lasalles were just cheaper priced Cadillacs with a Lasalle badge on them instead of a Cadillac badge on them. 

[Robert Hall]

11 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

LOL. Both actually.

I was under the impression that Lasalles were manufactured by the same factories that Cadillacs were produced in and yes, at lower prices that Cadillacs were sold at and because I thought that Cadillacs were manufactured in the same factories as Cadillacs were, I thought that Lasalles were just cheaper priced Cadillacs with a Lasalle badge on them instead of a Cadillac badge on them. 

Who knows...even in the ancient black & white world GM did have some body and platform sharing between divisions. 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Robert Hall

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

About the only saving grace on these is that at least they are making them look different.   But otherwise I'm seeing a repeat of the GMT360 days. 

2 Wheelbases, 3 different engines, every brand gets one.

 

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

The more things change with GM, the more they stay the same...every brand gets it's own versions.  They went so crazy w/ GMT360, surprised Pontiac and Cadillac didn't get variations of that...

 

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Isuzu and Saab did instead. 

I'll have an article up in a bit, but the long story short is that another 3-row crossover was just spied for Buick.... so now Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac will each have two versions of the platform.   I'm still thinking there will be a GMC larger than the Acadia eventually and Cadillac will likely get a third version in an XT7.

Ugh....

[balthazar]

Who knows...even in the ancient black & white world GM did have some body and platform sharing between divisions.

Somebody knows- my god; Thanos hasn't stricken all history past last week, has he?
• Not 'platforms'; chassis' & bodies. Unless your want to talk about Nash or Hudson after certain years.
There was no chassis sharing until I believe the new '68 A-Bodies. Breezy sources will tell you GM used 'A', 'B', etc bodies across the Divisions --and they did to some degree beginning about 1933-- and while non-enthusiasts might think that means they were interchangeable; they were NOT.
• Up until the 1970s (when Cadillac's volume became unwieldy), there was only 1 Cadillac plant at one time.

every brand gets it's own versions

Don't think of it as 4 brands with the same (guts) vehicle.

Instead, think of it as ONE vehicle with 4, unprecedentedly different trims (bodies & interiors). Who else offers this level of individuality on one model??

[Robert Hall]

54 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

 

 

I'll have an article up in a bit, but the long story short is that another 3-row crossover was just spied for Buick.... so now Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac will each have two versions of the platform.   I'm still thinking there will be a GMC larger than the Acadia eventually and Cadillac will likely get a third version in an XT7.

Ugh....

GM just can't help themselves... new GM is like old GM still in that if we have a platform available, every dealer gets a variation... esp. something that is currently hot like midsize crossovers.  C1XX is the J-body or W-body etc of today..  same meat, different toppings. 

 

48 minutes ago, balthazar said:

 

There was no chassis sharing until I believe the new '68 A-Bodies.  

Don't think of it as 4 brands with the same (guts) vehicle.

Instead, think of it as ONE vehicle with 4, unprecedentedly different trims (bodies & interiors). Who else offers this level of individuality on one model??

I'd assume the '64 A-bodies had the same chassis...same wheelbase.  What point would it have been to have different chassis for each brand?  I know GM had a lot of duplication back then like different V8s at each brand, but I would have thought they would strive for some commonality for economies of scale in manufacturing, esp. with the dirty bits.

 I would think the '65 B-body chassis would have been similar across the brands also other than wheelbase variations...likewise for the C-bodies.

Anyway, back to present day..the one vehicle w/ different trims view is intriguing...what is a GM brand/division these days, beyond styling and trim?  Just a marketing organization mostly.. 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Robert Hall

[Cmicasa the Great]

48 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

 

 

I'll have an article up in a bit, but the long story short is that another 3-row crossover was just spied for Buick.... so now Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac will each have two versions of the platform.   I'm still thinking there will be a GMC larger than the Acadia eventually and Cadillac will likely get a third version in an XT7.

Ugh....

Still lost as to why this is an issue or concern. Corner the CUV market. Why does that cause so much of an issue? And Cadillac should have everything that Chevy has.. but at the same time get its own unique vehicles. Makes zero sense to  create multiple platforms that don't get shared. OMEGA SHOULD BE AT CHEVY!!! Hope that causes some of U to burst into flames?

47 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Don't think of it as 4 brands with the same (guts) vehicle.

Instead, think of it as ONE vehicle with 4, unprecedentedly different trims (bodies & interiors). Who else offers this level of individuality on one model??

YES.. That's exactly what it is. Not to mention its madly profitable. I don't think many of 'em know.. and quiet as its kept.. GM has somehow hit upon a formula that has yielded about $90 Billion in profits since BK.. they forget that GM without any efficiency lost $90 Billion before. 

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Who else offers this level of individuality on one model??

VW has MQB... that underpins everything from a Golf to the Atlas.  The difference there being that there is a huge difference between Golf and Atlas and nearly every car in between.  A Traverse is not drastically difference from an Enclave except in interior appointments. The Acadia and XT6 are on the same wheelbase, just that the XT6 has a few extra inches of length behind the rear wheel. 

VW also has MLB.... that one is used in VW, Audi, Porsche, and Bentley. But those cars are drastically different from each other also.

29 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Still lost as to why this is an issue or concern. Corner the CUV market. Why does that cause so much of an issue? And Cadillac should have everything that Chevy has.. but at the same time get its own unique vehicles. Makes zero sense to  create multiple platforms that don't get shared. OMEGA SHOULD BE AT CHEVY!!! Hope that causes some of U to burst into flames?

I don't mind platform sharing. I agree that Omega should have been used at Chevy and Buick as well... VSS (which is a combo of Alpha and Omega) will be.  What I mind is 6+ vehicles all of nearly the same dimensions overlapping each other in price, performance, and appointments. It's part of what got GM into trouble a decade ago.

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Instead, think of it as ONE vehicle with 4, unprecedentedly different trims (bodies & interiors). Who else offers this level of individuality on one model??

But it is just one vehicle with different clothes on it.. What does one offer that the other two don't? Premium leather on the Caddy? They didn't give the Caddy's Super Cruise, like they should have. 

[frogger]

Not as dumb as the 70's/80's/90's where they were so alike you could swap doors on them..

 

 

 

 

[Robert Hall]

4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

But it is just one vehicle with different clothes on it.. What does one offer that the other two don't? 

Different badging, different dealers (usually).  I'd assume the interior plastics are better than the Chevy, GMC or Buick and they have more interior color choices? 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Robert Hall

[ccap41]

6 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Different badging, different dealers (usually).  I'd assume the interior plastics are better than the Chevy, GMC or Buick and they have more interior color choices? 

Clothes.. They just look different. 

[Robert Hall]

9 minutes ago, frogger said:

Not as dumb as the 70's/80's/90's where they were so alike you could swap doors on them..

True..they've improved since the infinite mediocrity of the 80s-90s X-bodies, A-bodies, J-bodies.....truly generic appliances.  Disposable, forgettable cars with no character, just cheap plastics and trivial brand differences.    These CUVs have distinct styling, but they are just as forgettable as past GM generics..just fodder for recycling in 10-15 years, nothing memorable.   Sad that GM doesn't aspire to do better.

[frogger]

6 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

True..they've improved since the infinite mediocrity of the 80s-90s X-bodies, A-bodies, J-bodies.....truly generic appliances.  Disposable, forgettable cars with no character, just cheap plastics and trivial brand differences.    These CUVs have distinct styling, but they are just as forgettable as past GM generics..just fodder for recycling in 10-15 years, nothing memorable.   Sad that GM doesn't aspire to do better.

Right up to bankruptcy on some turds like their minivans and CUV's (Torrent) of the time.