riviera74

Ideally, nobody would use coal for anything. I would rather keep nuclear power and reprocess the waste rather than foolishly shut the plants down. Reducing fossil fuel usage is a good thing not because of the environment, but because of the geopolitics. Better to minimize sources that come from unstable parts of our world than depend on same unstable parts of the world. Electrifying everything in our society will reduce the need for foreign sources of power, which should make the USA more secure than ever.

All that may be true, but that still does nothing to improve Cadillac's market share whatsoever. Cadillac needs to have MB/BMW/Audi drivers trade in those German vehicles for Cadillac ones. How do you get that done on a consistent basis?

Mercedes, yes. BMW was wise to make MINI the cheap FWD appliance. There is no such thing as a cheap BMW FWD appliance. . . . presuming that all X vehicles are as RWD as their sedans.

Small problem: if not for organized labor, few would be paid more than $12/hour these days. Do some unions mess up? YES. Will abolishing unions help the rest of America? I doubt it.

I tend to think that a lot of this is because, Escalade aside, Cadillac does not lean into its American-ness enough. We all know what MB, BMW and Audi are and stand for. What is Cadillac's USP? Names matter too.

Given that Daimler had some serious losses last year, I do not think they would redesign the GLS anytime soon. Dieselgate still needs to be paid for first.

1959? 1958? It sure does need some TLC.

The Blackwing 4.2V8 should still be available for Cadillac until the EVs come out in force. As for the new Escalade, how do you improve that engine without a supercharger? The 3.0 Diesel option is a nice touch.

Thank heavens it was never renamed. Cadillac needs more names, not fewer.

OK, how are sales going? If they are really bad, Chevy will probably do a 2000 Ford Taurus and style it more conservatively. They might need to fire somebody in order to send the right message too.

Maybe Jeep should cut prices by $6K across the board. Better still, also bring in a higher-branded Jeep, much like Honda did with Acura.

Sometimes the vision cannot be achieved given current technology. Sometimes the market simply is not ready for the product itself. The EV1 is a perfect example of both problems. GM had too many issues back then AND crude oil was about $10 a barrel 25 years ago. Hence no real demand for a fully BEV back then. Everybody who bashes GM for ending the EV1 when they did made a lot of assumptions that simply were not true at all back then. Elon Musk was lucky he did not invest in BEVs until after 2010, when the technology was actually attainable and he had the funds to create some of it. So GM is NOT the leader in BEVs right now. So what? It is 2020, not 2040 or 2060. I should not expect an affordable BEV for about another decade. As for the infrastructure, it is coming along slow and steady. When oil is above $150 a barrel, expect a lot of consumers to race to BEVs. My real complaint is that a new BEV still costs over $25K to buy and usually the really good ones start at over $40K. Until a new BEV is $10K, then the market will not actually change.

Chrysler needs a Rogue-sized CUV, not a Murano-sized CUV, first in order to be more competitive.

By that standard, why even sell the Touareg when VW can simply sell the Cayenne and keep all the profits? BTW, isn't an Audi A5 similar to the Cayenne?

Software EULAs effectively state that you only own a license to USE the software, not actually own it. Microsoft pioneered that about 40 years ago. EULAs = no ownership rights.

Easily the best minivan just got better. Honda/KIA/Toyota are all overrated.

So when will everybody (GM especially) ditch DI?

Needs more torque.

Since when is an IRS worse than a solid rear axle? If you want space in your SUV, then IRS is the best way to get there.

Star Wars needed to end the whole Skywalker saga for good. Disney needs new and fresh stories instead of the trilogy that just ended. The new Escalade is fine and is better than the last one. Remember the original 1999 Escalade? Now THAT ONE looked exactly like a same-year Tahoe/Yukon!

It is unsurprising that my home state would do something this silly. Florida is notorious for nickel and dime taxes on everything they can . . . . especially since there is no state income tax. You would think that my state would LOVE EVs given how much its citizens love the environment but state legislators always have their hands out for more money, especially from legacy industries that can pay to play.

WOW. Nobody wants 3cyl engines in their cars. Ideally, everyone in China would go straight for a V6 instead of settling for 4cyl engines. And yes, GM/Ford should dump the 3cyl engines immediately.

Great Idea. Now how does GM deal with the 4cyl issue? A majority of GM vehicles use 4cyl engines now.

The EV1 did not make it because the batteries were terrible. Back then there were lead-acid batteries (for the car) and nickel-metal hydride batteries (for laptops and cellphones). Lithium batteries came later. If we had solid state batteries 30 years ago, the EV1 would have gone a long way into displacing ICE engines. The other problem was that in 1998 oil was $10 a barrel. TEN DOLLARS A BARREL! Gas was very cheap back then and nobody would have cared for a fully BEV at all. IF oil was $150 a barrel or higher and stayed there for at least five years, a lot of customers would be dying for a BEV and pay any price. While I like the BEV as a concept and would like to see us forgo oil forever, BEVs must be cheap enough to displace USED CARS and be better than what we as a public can buy right now. What we need is a $10K BEV version of a Model T (or a Model A).

Governments may well be forcing the issue. What should automakers do, hope for 1998 to return?