Croc

But Suze Orman's gay.

Noticed that as well.

Wow...there are just no words.

They're making some really nice Buicks now.

I've always had a soft spot for this no-go show-boat.

Frankly, I think Cadillac is on the right track. I am a firm believer in quality over quantity, so if Cadillac will soldier on with only a few high quality vehicles, I'm OK with that. The CTS offers a complete, full-range model line in the biggest segment of the luxury market, the SRX is a very heart-of-the-market type of vehicle even though I don't personally care for it and think it is a downgrade from the previous-gen model in every area save styling (but it is selling far better), and the Escalade is still the Escalade. ATS is almost here, and then we have the brainlessly-approved XTS. Save for lacking a true flagship, these product lines will offer a fairly complete lineup in a variety of bodystyles. And remember...Buick had 3 vehicles about 2 years ago and look at them now.

And nowhere in there did I directly say that the CTS was too small for my particular group of ex-Cadillac owners... only that it is not large and that people I know in RL have not found it particularly comfortable. Those ex-Cadillac owners? Surprise, I'm not riddling them with questions about their tastes, or what they are test driving. Its inappropriate to bring up during the rare times I see them, usually when there is a casket in the room. Should I make a Venn diagram for you? People I know who have test driven the CTS and found it uncomfortable would be in one circle. Ex-Cadillac owners is in another circle that does not intersect the first circle. Apparently you do. You have a real hard on for misreading between the lines, and it just continues. I NEVER said the CTS is too small for Cadillac. Its too small to be Cadillac's only sedan. Even Lincoln's awful product portfolio still has a relatively large car in the MKS... too bad the boat has already sailed for Lincoln. Mercedes hasn't been making cars that are any bigger than Cadillacs? ...I'm not going to make you an exhaustive list or exterior and interior dimensions... when in June of 2011 the largest Cadillac car in production is 191.6 inches. The shortest E-class is 191.7... and the S-class is bigger. Christ, Hyundai is making THREE carlines that are bigger than the CTS. Shall we wait for 2022 for a true flagship? How about 2065? Last time I checked, time was money... and Cadillac is wasting time. Wow take a chill pill--you're getting really worked up over this. Thanks for clarifying your views on the size of the CTS...when you responded that the CTS wasn't large and all your friends drive M-Bs, that's why I responded with the S-Class comment--because that's the Mercedes materially larger than a CTS. If you weren't meaning to link those two thoughts together, then I'll take your word for it. Please note my verb tense--"hasn't been making"--refers to continual, repeated production over a long period of time. As you note, yes, June 2011 is the first time in a very, very long time (if not ever) that MB has produced something larger than a Cadillac, and only because the DTS is mercifully out of production. OK, you're starting to get on my nerves with your petty little jabs. Go to the XTS thread for an exhaustive recount of my views regarding that car as well as my views on what a proper large Cadillac should be. This is the internet. Let's keep things in perspective here. There's no need to take a simple misinterpretation to such a snide, personal level. If you cannot control yourself and be civil, that is not my problem.

Surely you jest.

Huh? Where's the gap? Pricepoint-wise, there is no gap. Look at Malibu vs. Regal or Malibu vs. Lacrosse. Verano vs. Cruze. Enclave vs. Traverse. There's simply no room in there, and why in the hell would GM spend all the time/money killing brand after brand only to introduce another one? When Saturn as Opel didn't pan out? Take any Opel, keep it in the high-level, well-appointed trims, and a Buick badge most certainly is not dissonant.

And this is where you need GPS. Better go back and reread the thread so you know what you are talking about. To clarify, they left Cadillac because of size and other Cadillac misfires... they are not coming back because the are happy where they are at. Also its mostly Benz loving family, not friends, unless bosses are automagically friends. I prefer to think of them as associates. Anyway, they moved to the big Mercedes' years ago... when Cadillac was busy pushing a bunch of tiny Eldos, Sevilles and Cimmarrons... the big Mercs influenced some of their children and grandchildren drive... hence 1 or 2 E classes. They ain't moving back because Merc still makes a flagship and the biggest Cadillac is the size of a medium Buick. Having a flagship that exudes some class, instead of looking like it belongs in a rap video, helps elevate the lesser car lines. Your arguing. I was sharing anecdotal evidence. The current planned bigger flagship is a Buick wannabe. Your new assertion that "Cadillac makes big enough cars" is completely absurd now that the STS and DTS are gone. A Cadillac should be at least large enough to take 3 people to the airport with all of their luggage. Or 4 tall execs to a lunch meeting that doesn't require them getting out of a clown car in their suits. I can't imagine forcing my hypothetical family of four in a CTS, once the children were past 10. 1: 2: I don't really give a rat's ass whether or not your friends/family/associates/whomever ever decide to look at Cadillac again. I honestly don't. Those are most likely lost sales for a variety of reasons. All I was responding to was your claim that the CTS is too small for Cadillac and that Cadillac needs a big barge the size of a DTS or Fleetwood. FACT: Mercedes hasn't been making cars that are any bigger than Cadillacs. That's all. 3: Please don't bring up that awful XTS. I'm already on record on this site regarding my thoughts on that abomination of a product decision. Please note I did say "for a bigger flagship one day." One day. Next calendar year is clearly not that day.

Me too. Moltar, it's easy: just visualize a Tri-Shield over every Opel logo.

Yeah, and they both have four tires. BFD. You have left Relevanttown well behind. Bull$h!. You said the CTS isn't large enough for your Benz-loving friends. It's the same size as the E-Class, both exterior and interior dimensions. I'm not arguing anything about content, simply size. Cadillac makes big enough cars, with room IMO for a larger flagship one day.

So? Much bigger car than Sonic. Sonic BASES (i.e. least amount of equipment) barely beneath Jetta.

There's absolutely no f@#king need for another brand in North America. Bring the Opel over as a Buick. The pricepoints will match up.

Cool, but none of that explains why the Cruze is then priced so low. Or how VW is able to price their Jetta so low. Especially since the Aveo/Sonic isn't even a totally re-engineered car on a new platform like the Cruze and Jetta. I'm still going to stick with "overpriced."

I didn't just say S-classes... but there are enough of them... some E-classes. Interesting, since the E-Class and the CTS have nearly identical exterior dimensions.

Interesting...so which of those adjectives don't fit the CTS? It's certainly styled to be noticed, my experience in them has always been extremely comfortable, their engines are pretty powerful, and they are on the large side of their class (by price). The CTS is not large, and reviews from people I know feel it is not particularly comfortable. Surprisingly, NONE of the ex-Cadillac owners I know own a CTS. They all own Mercedes now. The CTS is fine (IMHO) as a 3 series competitor, but it is not where Cadillac's breadwinner should be. The luxobarge market dried up because the "big three" didn't change them with the times, giving people the wrong ideas about how a modern luxobarge could be. GM has spend the last 30 years, over a generation and a half, building first underpowered luxobarges, them converting all of them to FWD and the whole time, virtually none of them (by production numbers) where given decent handling to keep up with the sportier contemporary smaller sedans. People still want large vehicles... they were willing to move to truck platforms so they could have powerful engines, RWD and less floaty suspension. Now, with fuel prices up, where do these buyers go, since the large sedan market has been destroyed. I'm really glad all of your friends have been so successful in life that they replaced their $40-45,000 Devilles and Fleetwoods/Broughams with $90,000+ S-Classes because they still need a large comfortable RWD car. Good for them.

Uhhhh...WAY TOO CLOSE IN PRICE TO THE CRUZE!! I'd definitely spend/finance $1-1.5k for a much larger car. Sonic should have started no higher than 13.7

Yup.

Interesting...so which of those adjectives don't fit the CTS? It's certainly styled to be noticed, my experience in them has always been extremely comfortable, their engines are pretty powerful, and they are on the large side of their class (by price). Honestly, GM would have kept producing luxobarges if the market existed...the company really didn't abandon a large and profitable customer base by any stretch...consumer preferences changed and buyers abandoned that market segment.

3rd edition. Must need a fourth. Really. I don't have mine with me and can't imagine they removed it when making the 3rd edition, but it's either in the opening paragraph on the model year or specifically mentioned in the DeVille section, I think the latter. Either way, it was available late in the model year.

Ah, oddly that is an "optional" engine, hence I didn't see it. Optional, with a $165 credit. LOL. Still, the V8 weight in '82 is 3783, the V6 column had all dashes, hence the reason I thought it had gone away in '82. Not seeing the 4.1 V-6 in '80. It was offered late in the 1980 model year. My family owns one--wonderful car. If you have the Standard Catalog of Cadillac, make sure you have the 2nd edition or later as the late-1980MY addition of the 4.1 is omitted in the first edition.

Oh, then that certainly is actionable. If animals are crawling inside, she's harboring vermin. Also, if you document the roof material on your deck, you might be able to work it as a hazard to you--things are routinely falling off on her property and pose a danger to someone on yours. Having a large hole in a roof is a lot different-sounding than just saying you have to spend two minutes a couple times a year after a storm and are more worried about the perceived impacts on your property value. Two minutes a couple times a year sounds like minor debris after an unusually strong seasonal storm...when I lived in the Midwest, we'd regularly spend 30-60 minutes cleaning up branches, leaves and/or chipped roofing materials (slate roof) nearly a dozen times in some years, so to me, a few minutes 2-3 times a year seems pretty minor. Has this been going on for a while? It would take a long time or a couple of very brutal storms to rip that kind of hole in a roof like that, and like you, I'm surprised your neighbor isn't apparently having severe water intrusion issues. Speaking of water...with moisture comes mold. Depending on the situation, you could also have cause for action if you think your neighbor's lack of repairs is causing air quality problems for you due to toxic mold spores. Basically...at least in the US, you can't do much/anything if your neighbor is offending your aesthetics or simply not being as meticulous as you would be (unless, of course, the aesthetics are in violation of neighborhood covenants, codes and/or restrictions). But you would have actionable cause if whatever your neighbor is doing is leading to health/safety/welfare issues for you/the neighborhood. Harboring wild animals (including birds--if they produce excessive droppings on your property, that's a health issue), mold, or maintaining an unsafe condition (debris regularly falling on your property) are all legitimate claims you should be able to make to the appropriate local authority. Hope this helps.

Hire someone to clean up the mess and invoice her. It's not the mess itself that bothers me - that takes a minute or two to clean up, a couple times a year - it's the fact that her house is falling apart and she doesn't care. Pride in your house does a lot for a neighbourhood. Oh. Well, in that case I don't have any sympathy for you. Your neighbors' house maintenance is their business, not yours. Maybe they're poor or something, who knows. But your complaint is akin to insisting they need to paint their house a different color because you think their shade of red will lower your property value. It won't, really--not until the point where you can call your equivalent of the Dept. of Public Health & Safety. Au contraire..it sounds like they are creating a blight in the neighborhood (which reduces property values) and should be cited by the neighborhood community association (if it is a covenant controlled community). There are people like that in my neighborhood.. No...if it qualified as "blight" then it would be at a point of deterioration where a claim would be actionable under code enforcement. I mean it isn't even in that bad of shape if the only mess occurs "a couple times a year" and is so little that it "takes a minute or two to clean." You know what I'd bet? Assuming the neighbor isn't a little old lady on a fixed income, I'd guess that they're well aware the roof is on its way out and are waiting for a big enough storm to come so instead of paying to fix the roof, they can file an insurance claim and have it taken care of for them. That's my guess, and frankly I don't necessarily have a problem with that.

Hire someone to clean up the mess and invoice her. It's not the mess itself that bothers me - that takes a minute or two to clean up, a couple times a year - it's the fact that her house is falling apart and she doesn't care. Pride in your house does a lot for a neighbourhood. Oh. Well, in that case I don't have any sympathy for you. Your neighbors' house maintenance is their business, not yours. Maybe they're poor or something, who knows. But your complaint is akin to insisting they need to paint their house a different color because you think their shade of red will lower your property value. It won't, really--not until the point where you can call your equivalent of the Dept. of Public Health & Safety.