cp-the-nerd

Casa, your personal opinion of the CT6 and Continental doesn't negate the fact that the comparisons DID happen and more than a few people shared my sentiment of being underwhelmed. I'm not trying to convince you to change your opinion. The CT6 is a great car, BUT if the luke warm reception of the initial unveiling is any indication, it's not going to solve Cadillac's downward trend of sedan sales in a market dominated by demand for crossovers. A poor reception of this car could actually cancel a true flagship above it.

The problem is the Elmiraj and Ciel were done after this car was pretty much locked in. This car is not new at GM as they have been working on it for a good while. I agree this is not a flag ship wow but then again it really is not the flag ship either. I think they improved on the CTS styling and wished they had taken it farther but that is what I expect the present manager will do. The body was done long before they arrived. I think the new managers will bring out that lacking 10% in the entire car that GM just never would fully go all in on. Mark had to fight too many battles on this car than he should have. #1 this is Cadillac so no corners should be cut. #2 Mark should have been let do what he felt needed to be done. I know he is proud of this car but it is still not 100% of what he was shooting for. YEah. I wish people would get off that idea that the ElMiraj should be avail NOW. It shouldn't. Its a styling exercise that will most likely show up next gen.. like the Ciel is evident in the ATS, CTS, and CT6, not to mention the Escalade. The SRX is still apart of the OLD Cadillac language from the Evoque. The ELR and XTS, come from the Converj.. both of them. Bottom line if they introduced the ElMiraj right now.. in the current line-up.. they would have one mismatched looking car on the lot with several that look nothing like it. That styling exercise needs to come at the same time as new introductions are starting to roll out in mass. I would expect that the styling of the next CTS, ATS will be tweaks on the current design to align them even more with the CT6, Slade and XT5. The ATS, by the way.. may have been the spring-board of all of this, begot from the last gen CTS and STS. Look at that car and U can see that it was designed around the same time as the 2008 CTS. From the rear.. they can easily be confused. The ATS, as many may kno.. was set to debut around the same time as the Second Gen CTS as a replacement for the 9-3 based BLS.. of course BK spoiled that @hyperv6 - The Ciel concept was from 2011, the Elmiraj was 2013. I find it hard to believe the timeline excuse of the CT6 design. You guys seemed to lock onto the part about the Ciel and Elmiraj, but my point was "the exterior design is about 10% shy of enough visual drama." Humor me for a second, because I have the perfect example for this. When the production CT6 was first unveiled last year, I wasn't alone in giving it a shrug from an exterior perspective, meanwhile Lincoln unveiled their striking Continental concept based on FWD architecture and got just as much (if not more) attention from the media. It didn't necessarily need to look like the concept, but I don't think anyone expected it to just completely blend into their existing lineup. I am utterly convinced that if the CT6 had the same sort of unapologetic style direction Cadillac had been hinting at, even if just enough to set apart from the CTS, the Lincoln would have been little more than a footnote by comparison. Instead, we've been having direct comparisons of specs and style by the media and enthusiasts.

Design is, of course, subjective to some extent. The LED interior lighting, infotainment screen, and gauge cluster are all newer and more visually appealing than what was offered in my Malibu. Everything in the Malibu was low tech, albeit well done. All the displays were simple teal-on-black simple low-res LCD screens. I quite like my Malibu because I'd compare it to a movie with the best practical effects just before everything switched to CGI.

Why does the E Class use a similar shifter while the GLA uses a Chrsyler like dial? Shouldn't they use the same shifter?Seriously. Totally different powertrains. I believe the FWD 8-speed is an outsourced trans. That XT5 shifter is shared with the new Lacrosse using the same trans.

My ONLY gripe with this car is just that the exterior design is about 10% shy of enough visual drama. I'm obviously a GM guy, especially Chevy and Cadillac, and I guarantee I can't pick this car out from a CTS beyond 50 feet. I've grown to like it more than I did at first, because when it was unveiled, I was HUGELY disappointed not to see cues from the Ciel and Elmiraj. Just because this isn't a "true" flagship, IMO that's not an excuse to give the car a face that could pass for a mild refresh of the car slotted below it. But I digress. I give the exterior a B or B-, but the rest of the car seems to be a straight A student.

This is Buick trying to avoid the fact that this is an older model that we're just seeing for the first time. So it's nowhere near the execution of even the 2014+ Regal, Lacrosse, Enclave, etc. Needless to say it's not in the same ballpark of genuinely new Buicks for 2016 and 2017 that have been unveiled this year.

10 years old is a pretty vast exaggeration, come on man. That interior is quite a bit nicer than mine, and in 2009 when I bought my Malibu, most agreed it was class leading or close to it. It's a 4-5 year old design, and that's what you're noticing. The Cascada is NOT a new car. It's a terribly late US adoption of a European model. I don't like the Cascada at all. It's about 500 lbs overweight for what it is so it has terrible fuel economy, it has an underpowered engine given said weight, and it's already long in the tooth. What also bugs me is how lazy the US version is compared to the Euro model, we didn't even get the Buick trademark grille.

This is literally the Colorado's trail boss equipment in a GMC package.

This interior is so perfectly elegant. I'd love to see this execution in an ATS.

This! I tried to allude to this but your post made it clearer. Alphanumeric names are by definition MEANINGLESS. Their meaning is determined slowly over time by a model's success and therefore recognizability. To change from one alphanumeric scheme to another with the goal of consumer clarity?! That's complete insanity! You just reset recognizability to ZERO. What the difference between a "name" gaining respect over time and an alphanumeric? It isn't like a Ford "Fusion" actually has a damn thing to do with "fusion". Same thing can be said for any "named" car/truck. The only "names" that seem to have any meaning are the trucks, Tacoma, Sierra, Canyon, Colorado, Tundra, Ranger, Titan, Frontier. They're places as if saying they can go anywhere tough(not sure about the Tacoma one though). But when it comes to cars and SUVs the names are just a random word, for the most part. They all start with zero value and in a few years they ditch the name for something else anyway like the Cavalier, Cruze, whatever will be next.. Escort, Focus, then whatever will be next.. Honda and Toyota have kept their names around a long time to build some value to the names but for the most part a "name" has as much meaningless-ness as CT6 or S550. A name can evoke a feeling or mental association without any experience with the car, where numbers are cold and numb. "Eldorado," "Imperial," "Galaxy," they all illicit some sort of mental stimulation without even trying, that stimulation can latch onto model association very rapidly. When a brain processes extraneous information, it's thrown out of short term memory, that's basic neuroscience. It's why you wouldn't remember half the phone number shouted to you by the hottest girl you've ever seen but you'd remember her name when you told your friends the story a month later.

I think the most powerful remark was when one of the detractors declared "Lincoln has become Mercury," because it makes the most sense. Lincoln is almost exactly what a well sorted Mercury brand should be. FWD/AWD and a lot of shared powertrains and technology. The only models that extend further into luxury territory are their Black Label vehicles equipped with the top engine. Lincoln should strongly consider making those interiors standard instead of filling dealers with cars one notch above Ford Titanium.

This! I tried to allude to this but your post made it clearer. Alphanumeric names are by definition MEANINGLESS. Their meaning is determined slowly over time by a model's success and therefore recognizability. To change from one alphanumeric scheme to another with the goal of consumer clarity?! That's complete insanity! You just reset recognizability to ZERO.

Over at Autoblog, the reception of the Lincoln Continental was as controversial and hotly debated as it was here at C&G. Some editors felt there was room for the handsome--albeit sedate--flagship sedan in the market and Lincoln will only move forward from here, while others felt that Ford fell far short of creating the halo vehicle it needs and made a number of key mistakes that will seal its fate. Lots of interesting points from folks who know the industry. "The Lincoln Continental may have been our fifth-place pick for Best In Show at this year's Detroit Auto Show, but it's probably the one we argued about the most. In fact, we're still talking about it. And we'll no doubt be discussing it long after we finally get to drive the new sedan later this year. We do this with lots of cars, all the time. The Continental is an especially important, high-profile car right now. It has the task of being a torch-holder for the struggling-to-run Lincoln brand, and that's a tough job these days. But did Lincoln do right by its Continental name? Did its Detroit showcar stop us in our tracks, or were we left feeling cold?" http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/21/2017-lincoln-continental-debate-featured/

Great post. I would merely add that the folks at car & driver are dick heads that live on hyperbole.

Wow, that is big, big praise. Not to second guess you in any way, but you really wouldn't get that impression from the big dollar journalists. Motor Trend relegated the new Malibu to the bottom tier of Car of the Year entries (did not make finalist) and Car & Driver seemed to slip in as many unnecessary sideways comments as they could. Do you have any commentary on that? You've driven tons of cars so you're not exactly surprised by the typical "nice" car.

I like Cadillac's current names: ATS, CTS, XTS. They're not perfect, but the scheme rolls off the tongue, and the cars have some level of recognition now. What nobody has really mentioned is how is Cadillac going to do their V-series nomenclature in the future? CT6-V, CT5-V, CT4-V sounds clumsy as hell. Will it be VT6, VT5, etc? Will they drop "V" all together? I digress, I'm derailing sh*t. I'm not into alpha numerics in general, but changing from one to another just seems asinine to me.

Mark my words, this article will repeat itself in a few years with Cadillac in the headline instead for the CT_ scheme.

Here's a weird comparison you'd never see coming 5 or 10 years ago: 2016 Camaro V6 or Nissan 370Z? It's only Nissan's fault this is a relevant question. The 370Z is totally outdated. The Camaro gives up a few tenths in a straight line, but has a better chassis, ride, fuel economy, practicality, technology, interior (shocking, I know!), and a modern exterior design. Even the VQ V6 is showing its age in a bad way.

I tried to stray away from them...but even so old at this point, the combination of features, space, and value they offer is 2nd to none. Favorite by far in the class was the Durango, drove that and it's easily in a different class. But to lease, even for a Durango that was $4-5k less than the Traverse, it leased out terribly at $150+ more per month--they only have 2015's, and built them way too long, so the residuals are terrible. With GM, it was too easy. Combination of lease Pull Ahead, etc. and she was good to go. Went from a $36k Terrain to a $44k Traverse with a ton more stuff, and didn't go crazy up in a payment. She's liking it a day in, and oddly enough loves the Saddle interior. I wasn't sure, since she thought it was orange and she never actually drove one of these (aside from an Enclave back in 2008), but all is well. The Durango is a great SUV. It's a midsize though, right? Riding on the bones of the Grand Cherokee is a win-win with a cheaper overall package. They look damn sharp too since the refresh. Very underrated vehicle.

GM did an excellent job refreshing the Lambda crossovers. The sheetmetal is still among the best looking in its class (the refreshed Acadia and Enclave are lookers as well), and the updated interior is fantastic despite the carry over steering wheel. Other crossovers have exceeded the Lambdas in fuel economy by now, but none have really surpassed the overall package.

Toyota already makes such an engine, doesn't it? I find it hard to believe the Lexus 3.5L V6 with 300+ horsepower isn't based on the 2GR-FE.

Believe it or not, it drives absolutely nothing like a V6 Camry. Aside from the power delivery, it's wholly different. The steering is naturally weighted, precise, and has decent feel. Overall, it is much more enjoyable to drive, and much sportier and competent for what it is than a V6 Camry, even the SE model. It uses the exact same V6, so it's got 268hp, and it does well with it. It does use the older 5AT rather than the 6AT, though. My wife liked the practicality and seating position of a SUV/CUV, and I wanted to keep AWD. From there it was a pretty easy candidate because it's the only thing out there aside from new offerings that has good power but is still fuel efficient. And their AWD system is actually pretty good. Good to know! Thanks for your impressions. I've heard good things about the Rav4 V6, but after driving a '14 Camry SE V6 it was hard to believe Toyota has any idea how to tune a FWD car so it doesn't suck. I trust your opinion though.

Does it drive differently/better than the Camry V6? Because I don't like how those drive at all.

I thought the new Civic's "4-door coupe" design was done to simultaneously offer a sedan with near-hatchback functionality. I didn't know they had any intention of doing a separate 5-door.

A new model Chevy Malibu.