Cadillac News: 2020 Cadillac CT4-V and CT5-V Aren't As Powerful As Their Predecessors

[Drew Dowdell]

Most transmissions aren't rated for much higher than 6,500 input rpm anyway. 

[balthazar]

Just going to be wheezing up there in the thin air, not going faster.

[smk4565]

The LFX V6 Cadillac uses now makes peak horsepower at 6,800 rpm with a 7,200 redline.  Which I must say is rather high, because who drives at that kind of engine speed.  

[Drew Dowdell]

the tip of the peak doesn't really matter

[smk4565]

I would love to know what these 2 cars weigh.

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Just going to be wheezing up there in the thin air, not going faster.

The 6.2 Camaro peaks at 6000rpm and redline is at 6500rpm... I don't have the answer but it's a pretty common occurrence. 

[balthazar]

46 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The LFX V6 Cadillac uses now makes peak horsepower at 6,800 rpm with a 7,200 redline.  Which I must say is rather high, because who drives at that kind of engine speed.  

Interesting, and so telling. 6100 RPM is too low and 7200 is too high.

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

 

[smk4565]

9 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Interesting, and so telling. 6100 RPM is too low and 7200 is too high.

6100 is fine, just on a sports car I would have thought it a little higher.

[balthazar]

4 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

6100 is fine, just on a sports car I would have thought it a little higher.

Earlier in this very thread you called it “crazy low”.

[ccap41]

15 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Oh you are right, it is a DOHC.  I thought then it came out they said it was a pushrod, but that is my mistake.  That is a crazy low redline for a DOHC engine.

Right here. 

[balthazar]

smk likes a tight little redline window of 250 RPM, both so it can be 'proper' AND can be called out for 'benchmarking/copying' a certain singular brand.

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Earlier in this very thread you called it “crazy low”.

I said peak horsepower at 5600 rpm is low for a sports car. And yes 6100 rpm is low for a DOHC engine.

Regardless they replaced a 640 hp engine with a 355 hp engine and a 460 hp engine with a 320 hp engine. I remember 5 years ago when people ripped a 375 hp AMG in a car smaller than the CT4-V, yet no one says this dilutes the V brand.

Edited May 31, 2019 by smk4565

[surreal1272]

21 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

I said peak horsepower at 5600 rpm is low for a sports car. And yes 6100 rpm is low for a DOHC engine.

Regardless they replaced a 640 hp engine with a 355 hp engine and a 460 hp engine with a 320 hp engine. I remember 5 years ago when people ripped a 375 hp AMG in a car smaller than the CT4-V, yet no one says this dilutes the V brand.

It’s like you didn’t read the article at all. The diluting of the brand and the mention of more power are in the article  

And I quote:

 

“Badging them as V dilutes hardcore image that the past few models have brought forth.”

 

”But there are hardcore versions coming in the pipeline according to the rep.”

 

Which means, aside from changing what the V series means (which I don’t agree with for the record), there will be more powerful versions. Not sure how you can actually read the article and then make the statement that you just did other than just to troll Cadillac.

 

And if you’re going to reference something from five years ago, cite said reference  because I’m curious as to which Benz you are talking about. The 355HP 2015 CLA AMG is not smaller. In fact, it has already been mentioned that the CT4 is a direct competitor for the CLA (and I’m assuming the A Class) and the Audi A3. Please cite this five year reference of yours.

 

Edited May 31, 2019 by surreal1272

[ccap41]

Fun fact: Mercedes C43 fake-AMG makes 385hp at, you guessed it, 6100rpm.

Last I knew, it was also a DOHC engine. ?

[ykX]

50 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Fun fact: Mercedes C43 fake-AMG makes 385hp at, you guessed it, 6100rpm.

Last I knew, it was also a DOHC engine. ?

Isn't the CT4-V will be C43 competitor, and it will have 320hp vs 385hp and 369 lb-ft vs 384 lb-ft.

I am not sure if CT4-V will be lighter and by how much than C43, but powerwise it is quite down.

BTW just saw this on Motor Trend

"And there will also be a track version of the CT4-V with details to come soon. This will be a V-Series strategy going forward, an affordable V and a track V. "

So I guess V replaces V-sport and V track will be instead of V.

[surreal1272]

30 minutes ago, ykX said:

Isn't the CT4-V will be C43 competitor, and it will have 320hp vs 385hp and 369 lb-ft vs 384 lb-ft.

I am not sure if CT4-V will be lighter and by how much than C43, but powerwise it is quite down.

BTW just saw this on Motor Trend

"And there will also be a track version of the CT4-V with details to come soon. This will be a V-Series strategy going forward, an affordable V and a track V. "

So I guess V replaces V-sport and V track will be instead of V.

That will make at least a little more sense as long as that means more HP and not just suspension and handling tweaks to make it a “track car”. I guess we will see eventually. 

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, ykX said:

Isn't the CT4-V will be C43 competitor, and it will have 320hp vs 385hp and 369 lb-ft vs 384 lb-ft.

I am not sure if CT4-V will be lighter and by how much than C43, but powerwise it is quite down.

BTW just saw this on Motor Trend

"And there will also be a track version of the CT4-V with details to come soon. This will be a V-Series strategy going forward, an affordable V and a track V. "

So I guess V replaces V-sport and V track will be instead of V.

Yeah, this V seems to have replaced the V Sport and whatever they decide to name the more serious version will be the replacement for the previous V. 

It's a shuffling of the names that seems completely unnecessary. 

[regfootball]

6 hours ago, NINETY EIGHT REGENCY said:

 

YOU CAN'T UNSEE IT NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY

[G. David Felt]

I really hope Cadillac does not go in the following direction:

• CT4
• CT4 V
• CT4 V-Platinum
• ct4 V-Iridium

Etc. etc. etc.

To me this is a useless rebadging of the performance thread. Someone problely believes they need to have the SUV/CUV/Car all in the same naming flow which is not true.

[smk4565]

Who knows if there will be a more powerful version than these.  GM can say that now, doesn't mean they will build them.  If these cars don't sell they may not bother to put a bigger engine in.  

This CT4 seems to be a refreshed ATS, I would like to see the actual dimensions and weight of it.  I am also curious on the price, and how Cadillac came up with this strategy and direction for these 2 cars.

[Robert Hall]

3 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

This CT4 seems to be a refreshed ATS, I would like to see the actual dimensions and weight of it.  I am also curious on the price, and how Cadillac came up with this strategy and direction for these 2 cars.

Looks like the wheelbase is the same as the ATS, but the CT4 is about 5 inches longer and a couple hundred heavier.

ATS

Wheelbase	109.3 in (2,776 mm) 112.6 in (2,861 mm) (ATS-L)
Length	4,643 mm (182.8 in)
Width	1,806 mm (71.1 in)
Height	1,420 mm (55.9 in)
Curb weight	1,504–1,570 kg (3,315–3,461 lb)

CT4

Wheelbase	109.3 in (2,776 mm)
Length	187.2 in (4,755 mm)
Width	71.5 in (1,816 mm)
Height	56.0 in (1,422 mm)
Curb weight	3,616 lb (1,640 kg) (CT4-V, RWD)

[smk4565]

1 minute ago, Robert Hall said:

Looks like the wheelbase is the same as the ATS, but the CT4 is about 5 inches longer and a couple hundred heavier.

ATS

Wheelbase	109.3 in (2,776 mm) 112.6 in (2,861 mm) (ATS-L)
Length	4,643 mm (182.8 in)
Width	1,806 mm (71.1 in)
Height	1,420 mm (55.9 in)
Curb weight	1,504–1,570 kg (3,315–3,461 lb)

CT4

Wheelbase	109.3 in (2,776 mm)
Length	187.2 in (4,755 mm)
Width	71.5 in (1,816 mm)
Height	56.0 in (1,422 mm)
Curb weight	3,616 lb (1,640 kg) (CT4-V, RWD)

They probably recycled the ATS chassis and wheelbase and the body just has more overhang.  Which is fine, nothing wrong with the chassis.  CT4 is bigger than a C-class, but priced like an A-class, which also is probably a good idea to give more size per dollar than the others.   

[balthazar]

7 hours ago, smk4565 said:

...they replaced a 640 hp engine with a 355 hp engine and a 460 hp engine with a 320 hp engine.

Much like you believed the ATS & CTS were "being cancelled and not replaced", you are once again being purposely obtuse/ unwillingly confused. 
 

[regfootball]

2 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

Looks like the wheelbase is the same as the ATS, but the CT4 is about 5 inches longer and a couple hundred heavier.

ATS

Wheelbase	109.3 in (2,776 mm) 112.6 in (2,861 mm) (ATS-L)
Length	4,643 mm (182.8 in)
Width	1,806 mm (71.1 in)
Height	1,420 mm (55.9 in)
Curb weight	1,504–1,570 kg (3,315–3,461 lb)

CT4

Wheelbase	109.3 in (2,776 mm)
Length	187.2 in (4,755 mm)
Width	71.5 in (1,816 mm)
Height	56.0 in (1,422 mm)
Curb weight	3,616 lb (1,640 kg) (CT4-V, RWD)

Yes. Wheelbase is same for ATS and CT4. No additional rear seat room. Bad move by Cadillac. Didn’t bother to fix the big problem on the ATS

They could have used the wheelbase stretch of the Chinese ATS-L WHY NOT CADILLAC???

 

Edited June 1, 2019 by regfootball

[smk4565]

35 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Much like you believed the ATS & CTS were "being cancelled and not replaced", you are once again being purposely obtuse/ unwillingly confused. 
 

It has been know that CT4 and CT5 would replace them for a long time, probably a Johan idea.   These were the Johan cars the Johan supporters said would make Cadillac beat the Germans.  

I am not really sure why the Cadillac brand is still here outside of the Escalade.  The rest of the line is awful.

[balthazar]

^ Not by you; you repeatedly claimed the ATS/CTS were being cancelled and not being replaced. It was your way of proclaiming the 2 series 'failed'. I was here, I read the posts.  

 

[surreal1272]

3 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Who knows if there will be a more powerful version than these.  GM can say that now, doesn't mean they will build them.  If these cars don't sell they may not bother to put a bigger engine in.  

This CT4 seems to be a refreshed ATS, I would like to see the actual dimensions and weight of it.  I am also curious on the price, and how Cadillac came up with this strategy and direction for these 2 cars.

Much like how the A Class is just a refreshed CLA? The CT4 literally has not one thing in common with the ATS outside of the Cadillac badge itself. 

24 minutes ago, balthazar said:

^ Not by you; you repeatedly claimed the ATS/CTS were being cancelled and not being replaced. It was your way of proclaiming the 2 series 'failed'. I was here, I read the posts.  

 

He sure did because he didn’t see why it was worth it when everyone wanted CUVs. 

[smk4565]

39 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Much like how the A Class is just a refreshed CLA? The CT4 literally has not one thing in common with the ATS outside of the Cadillac badge itself. 

They have been making the A-class for 20 years.

CT4 has the same chassis and same wheelbase as the ATS, so it must share something.

[G. David Felt]

36 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

They have been making the A-class for 20 years.

CT4 has the same chassis and same wheelbase as the ATS, so it must share something.

20 years to Germans, a couple years in the US as a Toyota / Ford Competitor.

[surreal1272]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They have been making the A-class for 20 years.

CT4 has the same chassis and same wheelbase as the ATS, so it must share something.

Not in the US they haven’t and they are on the same platform as the CLA so it is just as guilty of being a refresh here as you are trying to paint the CT4. In fact, it’s even worse because the A Class being sold here is really no different from the CLA on top of just being FWD (yes I know there is an AWD option but that is still a Buick like FWD platform). The CT4 is not even close to a refresh and honestly it’s just pure trolling on your part to even state that kind of nonsense. The only thing it has in common with the ATS is the platform, making it much more than a refresh. Maybe they should sell the CT4 next to the ATS like Mercedes does with the CLA and the A Class. Take a page from the “best or nothing” FWD compact luxury car. 

Edited June 1, 2019 by surreal1272

[ocnblu]

Shoot I read somewhere that the CT4-V was supposed to be 200 lbs lighter than the ATS-V.

Of course, the new one doesn't have a twin-turbocharged V6.  But then it is apples and oranges, since there is a higher performance V ++ coming.

[ocnblu]

It takes a while to get these things out, you don't even know, bruh.  Early CT4 prototype, next to a senior model.  Too bad the convertible proposal was dropped @ the last minute: 

[smk4565]

7 hours ago, dfelt said:

20 years to Germans, a couple years in the US as a Toyota / Ford Competitor.

So if the CT4 is priced below the A-class, is Cadillac competing with Toyota and Ford too?

[regfootball]

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They have been making the A-class for 20 years.

CT4 has the same chassis and same wheelbase as the ATS, so it must share something.

it literally looks like the door openings are the same, i bet the frame is nearly all the same, windshield, lots of things.

6 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Shoot I read somewhere that the CT4-V was supposed to be 200 lbs lighter than the ATS-V.

Of course, the new one doesn't have a twin-turbocharged V6.  But then it is apples and oranges, since there is a higher performance V ++ coming.

200 less pounds, i believe it may be possible.  a lot of the weight savings would be due to the 4 cylinder being lighter than the v6.

Now you can least AWD on the CT4-V with all wheel drive.  In which case adding back AWD probably equals the weight out.

[regfootball]

this is one of the better CT5 pics I have found recently.  But why bother to make it look like a hatchback if you didn't give it a hatchback?

Edited June 1, 2019 by regfootball

[regfootball]

[smk4565]

58 minutes ago, regfootball said:

it literally looks like the door openings are the same, i bet the frame is nearly all the same, windshield, lots of things.

Well it is the same car, the CLA is the coupe, and A-class is sedan and hatchback.  I don't see how giving buyers 3 body styles instead of 1 is a bad thing.  

[Robert Hall]

8 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Well it is the same car, the CLA is the coupe, and A-class is sedan and hatchback.  I don't see how giving buyers 3 body styles instead of 1 is a bad thing.  

And they have the GLA for the psuedo-CUV hatchback. 

1 hour ago, regfootball said:

this is one of the better CT5 pics I have found recently.  But why bother to make it look like a hatchback if you didn't give it a hatchback? 

So they can give it a tiny trunklid with a small opening. 

[surreal1272]

5 hours ago, smk4565 said:

So if the CT4 is priced below the A-class, is Cadillac competing with Toyota and Ford too?

No because the CT4 is RWD while the A Class is FWD, making it more of a mainstream brand competitor. 

41 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Well it is the same car, the CLA is the coupe, and A-class is sedan and hatchback.  I don't see how giving buyers 3 body styles instead of 1 is a bad thing.  

Under the definition of the word “redundancy”, it says “see redundant”.  

 

A Class hatch=GLA but even less useful  

 

Oh and the A Class is just proof that the CLA is useless. 

Edited June 1, 2019 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

No because the CT4 is RWD while the A Class is FWD, making it more of a mainstream brand competitor. 

Under the definition of the word “redundancy”, it says “see redundant”.  

 

A Class hatch=GLA but even less useful  

 

Oh and the A Class is just proof that the CLA is useless. 

And what about XT4, XT5, and XT6, which is the volume of the Cadillac brand?  Those are front wheel drive.

Although I do think they can drop the CLA, it is too similar to the sedan.   The GLB will be where the volume is, since crossovers are what sell.

[balthazar]

3 hours ago, regfootball said:

why bother to make it look like a hatchback if you didn't give it a hatchback?

Looks like a fastback sedan to me. Hatches are 98% 2-box designs.

[Drew Dowdell]

17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They have been making the A-class for 20 years.

CT4 has the same chassis and same wheelbase as the ATS, so it must share something.

The A-Class was a SMART sized hatchback for the bulk of that time.... don't make it sound like they've been making the current A-class that long. 

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

I have looked at the video and studied these two cars. These are my thoughts only...

GM clearly has not fixed Cadillac. There is a huge problem. I thought about the changes in the lineup.  All they did was drop XTS and replace it with XT6 crossover because this is what sells. XT6 just like XTS appeals to the same segment of buyers. 

They replaced CTS and ATS. They said that was not happening. They did. They go by different names( CT4 and CT5). They have three sedans instead of four.  XTS was too close to CT6 and put the squeeze on CTS. At least XTS had a bigger trunk unlike the small trunk on CT6.  They still have not fixed the fundamental problems of the CTS and ATS. I checked out the dimensions on the CT4. It is as big as a downsized 1986 Buick Riviera.  They at least got the c pillar right on CT4.

They still clearly have not let this Euro aspiration thing go.  They need to stop being ashamed who they they are,  and use the heritage and history to rebuild Cadillac.  GM has the strong heritage and does not use it to rebuild the entire company.

It is like John Mc Elroy from Autoline said:  GM is shrinking its foot print globally for the next down turn. They want to act like a smaller company, but they do not realize they are still a large company.  They are smaller globally:  No presence in Europe, and have left countries they were not selling. That is a good move, but you have got to invest in your brands. GM is scared to take chances and it shows. They cannot depend on China. They need a: Ed Welburn, a Harley Earl, or a Bill Mitchell, a Wayne Cherry, or Chuck Jordan to lead design.

Looking Back on GM’s Six Past Design Chiefs

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/looking-back-gms-six-design-chiefs/

The Cadillac crest needs revision. I at first thought with the guy that was working for Cadillac whose first name starts with a U who left recently was changing it, that maybe it was a good idea. I do not think so now. It does not say luxury or stand out any longer. It is no different than a Chevrolet emblem.  You could put Chevrolet emblems on these two cars and they could pass for Chevrolets. That Cadillac emblem/ crest is missing something.  Even the one from the 1950's said "luxury" 

They need to bring the wreath back or the V or make them emblem more detailed.  Right now it does not say luxury. It says "cheap or mass market"

It is sad when a company favors Chevrolet for everything and it shows. Too many brands have suffered because of Chevrolet. People thought oh, kill brands and it will solve the problem. It has not and GM still is doing the same thing and making the same mistakes. This is getting old. They did not give Oldsmobile this much time to turn around. That was unfair. 

GM should engineer top down and not bottom up. What is good enough for Chevrolet is not good enough for the rest of GM. They should invest and change how they think. 

The people who post here know what Cadillac is. GM does not know.  Cadillac is majestic. It is stately. It is luxury. It stands apart. It has features you should not find on Chevrolet. It has styling to stay you have arrived. 

CT6 is a good start, but it is not complete. That c pillar on that car does not say Cadillac. It says Toyota, Audi or other six window design c- pillar cars.  You look at CT5, you do not immediately think Cadillac. You think Saturn or Chevrolet. It should not be that way. Cadillac needs to lay off all that black trim. Again.. it says cheap.  

They have taken the Escala concept styling and put it on the  CT4( small) the CT5( medium) and the CT6( large).  That philosophy does not work. That is what BMW does. BMW is in trouble right now too. 

If Pontiac was here and they said these two cars were Pontiac, no one would have an issue because that is what they would expect from Pontiac.  If they said they were Holden, no one would have an issue. 

When you look at Cadillac, you should want to own it or drive it.  It should be nice to look at. The only vehicle that has stayed true to Cadillac's mission is Escalade. They need to look at that vehicle and build on that. They need to learn who they are again.

They need to start using real names. The letter and number thing is not working.  Just stop. 

I am just expressing how I feel. I do not work at GM, but it is clear to the outside what needs to happen to fix Cadillac. 

I want GM and Cadillac to be great again. What will it take?  What must happen? 

 

 

 

 

 

[ocnblu]

7 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

So they can give it a tiny trunklid with a small opening. 

They should have it hinged like a glovebox since it is similar in capacity.

[surreal1272]

6 hours ago, smk4565 said:

And what about XT4, XT5, and XT6, which is the volume of the Cadillac brand?  Those are front wheel drive.

Although I do think they can drop the CLA, it is too similar to the sedan.   The GLB will be where the volume is, since crossovers are what sell.

Deflection and missing the point at the same time. Congrats. I am talking about sedans, not dime a dozen CUVs. 

Edited June 2, 2019 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

7 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Deflection and missing the point at the same time. Congrats. I am talking about sedans, not dime a dozen CUVs. 

Well SUV is the bulk of the market.  You have to do more to stand out in the SUV crowd when there are so many.  I think it will actually be easier to sell sedans in the 2020s from a competition stand point because most brands will only have maybe 2 sedans and 7 crossovers, so if you want a sedan, the choices will be much less, they'll get sales by default.  

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, NINETY EIGHT REGENCY said:

I have looked at the video and studied these two cars. These are my thoughts only...

GM clearly has not fixed Cadillac. There is a huge problem. I thought about the changes in the lineup.  All they did was drop XTS and replace it with XT6 crossover because this is what sells. XT6 just like XTS appeals to the same segment of buyers. 

They replaced CTS and ATS. They said that was not happening. They did. They go by different names( CT4 and CT5). They have three sedans instead of four.  XTS was too close to CT6 and put the squeeze on CTS. At least XTS had a bigger trunk unlike the small trunk on CT6.  They still have not fixed the fundamental problems of the CTS and ATS. I checked out the dimensions on the CT4. It is as big as a downsized 1986 Buick Riviera.  They at least got the c pillar right on CT4.

They still clearly have not let this Euro aspiration thing go.  They need to stop being ashamed who they they are,  and use the heritage and history to rebuild Cadillac.  GM has the strong heritage and does not use it to rebuild the entire company.

It is like John Mc Elroy from Autoline said:  GM is shrinking its foot print globally for the next down turn. They want to act like a smaller company, but they do not realize they are still a large company.  They are smaller globally:  No presence in Europe, and have left countries they were not selling. That is a good move, but you have got to invest in your brands. GM is scared to take chances and it shows. They cannot depend on China. They need a: Ed Welburn, a Harley Earl, or a Bill Mitchell, a Wayne Cherry, or Chuck Jordan to lead design.

Looking Back on GM’s Six Past Design Chiefs

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/looking-back-gms-six-design-chiefs/

The Cadillac crest needs revision. I at first thought with the guy that was working for Cadillac whose first name starts with a U who left recently was changing it, that maybe it was a good idea. I do not think so now. It does not say luxury or stand out any longer. It is no different than a Chevrolet emblem.  You could put Chevrolet emblems on these two cars and they could pass for Chevrolets. That Cadillac emblem/ crest is missing something.  Even the one from the 1950's said "luxury" 

They need to bring the wreath back or the V or make them emblem more detailed.  Right now it does not say luxury. It says "cheap or mass market"

It is sad when a company favors Chevrolet for everything and it shows. Too many brands have suffered because of Chevrolet. People thought oh, kill brands and it will solve the problem. It has not and GM still is doing the same thing and making the same mistakes. This is getting old. They did not give Oldsmobile this much time to turn around. That was unfair. 

GM should engineer top down and not bottom up. What is good enough for Chevrolet is not good enough for the rest of GM. They should invest and change how they think. 

The people who post here know what Cadillac is. GM does not know.  Cadillac is majestic. It is stately. It is luxury. It stands apart. It has features you should not find on Chevrolet. It has styling to stay you have arrived. 

CT6 is a good start, but it is not complete. That c pillar on that car does not say Cadillac. It says Toyota, Audi or other six window design c- pillar cars.  You look at CT5, you do not immediately think Cadillac. You think Saturn or Chevrolet. It should not be that way. Cadillac needs to lay off all that black trim. Again.. it says cheap.  

They have taken the Escala concept styling and put it on the  CT4( small) the CT5( medium) and the CT6( large).  That philosophy does not work. That is what BMW does. BMW is in trouble right now too. 

If Pontiac was here and they said these two cars were Pontiac, no one would have an issue because that is what they would expect from Pontiac.  If they said they were Holden, no one would have an issue. 

When you look at Cadillac, you should want to own it or drive it.  It should be nice to look at. The only vehicle that has stayed true to Cadillac's mission is Escalade. They need to look at that vehicle and build on that. They need to learn who they are again.

They need to start using real names. The letter and number thing is not working.  Just stop. 

I am just expressing how I feel. I do not work at GM, but it is clear to the outside what needs to happen to fix Cadillac. 

I want GM and Cadillac to be great again. What will it take?  What must happen? 

 

 

 

 

 

Good post.  And I think a lot of the current Cadillac line looks like it was designed by the same people that design Chevrolets.  And they shouldn't look anything alike.

[oldshurst442]

2 hours ago, NINETY EIGHT REGENCY said:

I have looked at the video and studied these two cars. These are my thoughts only...

GM clearly has not fixed Cadillac. There is a huge problem. I thought about the changes in the lineup.  All they did was drop XTS and replace it with XT6 crossover because this is what sells. XT6 just like XTS appeals to the same segment of buyers. 

They replaced CTS and ATS. They said that was not happening. They did. They go by different names( CT4 and CT5). They have three sedans instead of four.  XTS was too close to CT6 and put the squeeze on CTS. At least XTS had a bigger trunk unlike the small trunk on CT6.  They still have not fixed the fundamental problems of the CTS and ATS. I checked out the dimensions on the CT4. It is as big as a downsized 1986 Buick Riviera.  They at least got the c pillar right on CT4.

They still clearly have not let this Euro aspiration thing go.  They need to stop being ashamed who they they are,  and use the heritage and history to rebuild Cadillac.  GM has the strong heritage and does not use it to rebuild the entire company.

It is like John Mc Elroy from Autoline said:  GM is shrinking its foot print globally for the next down turn. They want to act like a smaller company, but they do not realize they are still a large company.  They are smaller globally:  No presence in Europe, and have left countries they were not selling. That is a good move, but you have got to invest in your brands. GM is scared to take chances and it shows. They cannot depend on China. They need a: Ed Welburn, a Harley Earl, or a Bill Mitchell, a Wayne Cherry, or Chuck Jordan to lead design.

Looking Back on GM’s Six Past Design Chiefs

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/looking-back-gms-six-design-chiefs/

The Cadillac crest needs revision. I at first thought with the guy that was working for Cadillac whose first name starts with a U who left recently was changing it, that maybe it was a good idea. I do not think so now. It does not say luxury or stand out any longer. It is no different than a Chevrolet emblem.  You could put Chevrolet emblems on these two cars and they could pass for Chevrolets. That Cadillac emblem/ crest is missing something.  Even the one from the 1950's said "luxury" 

They need to bring the wreath back or the V or make them emblem more detailed.  Right now it does not say luxury. It says "cheap or mass market"

It is sad when a company favors Chevrolet for everything and it shows. Too many brands have suffered because of Chevrolet. People thought oh, kill brands and it will solve the problem. It has not and GM still is doing the same thing and making the same mistakes. This is getting old. They did not give Oldsmobile this much time to turn around. That was unfair. 

GM should engineer top down and not bottom up. What is good enough for Chevrolet is not good enough for the rest of GM. They should invest and change how they think. 

The people who post here know what Cadillac is. GM does not know.  Cadillac is majestic. It is stately. It is luxury. It stands apart. It has features you should not find on Chevrolet. It has styling to stay you have arrived. 

CT6 is a good start, but it is not complete. That c pillar on that car does not say Cadillac. It says Toyota, Audi or other six window design c- pillar cars.  You look at CT5, you do not immediately think Cadillac. You think Saturn or Chevrolet. It should not be that way. Cadillac needs to lay off all that black trim. Again.. it says cheap.  

They have taken the Escala concept styling and put it on the  CT4( small) the CT5( medium) and the CT6( large).  That philosophy does not work. That is what BMW does. BMW is in trouble right now too. 

If Pontiac was here and they said these two cars were Pontiac, no one would have an issue because that is what they would expect from Pontiac.  If they said they were Holden, no one would have an issue. 

When you look at Cadillac, you should want to own it or drive it.  It should be nice to look at. The only vehicle that has stayed true to Cadillac's mission is Escalade. They need to look at that vehicle and build on that. They need to learn who they are again.

They need to start using real names. The letter and number thing is not working.  Just stop. 

I am just expressing how I feel. I do not work at GM, but it is clear to the outside what needs to happen to fix Cadillac. 

I want GM and Cadillac to be great again. What will it take?  What must happen? 

 

 

 

 

 

Ive been saying a version of this for a while now! 

Im glad that a few passionate people about Cadillac, and GM, are voicing their opinions.  

If we are NOT happy about our beloved Cadillac...lets start shouting that  out loud!!!

RAISE A LITTLE HELL!!!

(Canuck Rock Rules!!! )

 

[ocnblu]

Yes but many times over the years, GM purposely made Chevrolet look like a "junior Cadillac"... 1971: