smk4565
-
Posts
13,727 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Forums
Articles
Garage
Gallery
Events
Store
Collections
Everything posted by smk4565
-
It is a joke. If you listen to any Toyota owner they think their car will never break and the Prius gets 150 mpg.
-
First off, a 2008 Lexus could not break down, that is a Camry engine, so it can go 500,000 without an oil change or any service of any kind, they are that good. Seriously though, I think people are more willing to buy an American SUV than an American sedan. Not sure why people give one a stigma and not the other. I bet the Lexus driving neighbors wouldn't consider a LaCrosse or a CTS, partly because they would think a Lexus sedan is more reliable, yet they will buy an Acadia. This is a challenge Cadillac has to overcome to get sedan buyers back. And the fact that a lot of people continued to buy American SUVs long after they swore off sedans for the CamCords even going back to the 90s, is all the more reason Cadillac needs more crossovers.
-
Industry News: The Growing Trend Of Longer New Car Loans
smk4565 replied to William Maley's topic in Industry News
I get that cars cost more and incomes aren't going up for a lot of people, and that people can keep a car for 10 years or more. But if you have to go out to 75 or 84 months to get the payment where you want it, you are buying too much car. Especially when a lot of people buy the car and finance in the sales tax and dealer fees. Then they are underwater most of the loan. Interest rates are still low, so it isn't so much that some one is paying loads of interest on a 7 year loan (obviously its more than a 5 year) but someone would be much more financially healthy if they financed a car for 5 years and kept it for 10, rather than financing for 7 and keeping it for 10. Having those extra years of no payment frees up a lot of income to pay down other debt or save for retirement.- 27 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- loan terms
- months
- (and 2 more)
-
The CLA isn't shoddy, it has a very proven and durable 2.0T and 7-speed transmission, and they still have build quality. They just don't have everything wrapped in leather or with a Bang and Olufsun stereo. The Sprinter has a spartan interior, but it has build quality that will let it last 300,000+ miles also. The sweep tail Rolls-Royce is awesome, it is the sort of thing that Cadillac could try to get into, building super luxury sedans. Mercedes can go against the Bentley Continental and Flying Spur with the Maybach S600 and the S65. They can match up with anything Porsche has, and they are about to go above the LaFerrari with Project One, so I do think Mercedes is capable of going against anyone at the high end. This is the game changer, no one will come close.
-
Buick News: Buick LaCrosse Adds eAssist, Lowers Price for 2018
smk4565 replied to William Maley's topic in Buick
I like the eAssist idea, and really it should be more widespread use, but I hope it is better executed than the last time they did it with the LaCrosse. -
Yes, but you don't get 50/50 weight balance with a fwd based car. I'm sure a GLA/CLA can throw toque at the rear wheels too, but it isn't going to drive like an E-class.
-
GLA looks not tall enough to be a crossover. It looks like it got stepped on and squashed. I will never buy a crossover for one, and two, I only want rear drive or AWD with a rear bias out of a longitudinal mount engine.
-
How are they going to over saturate the market when the CLA most months sells less than the S-class? The GLA is their worst selling crossover. C, E and GLE are the volume leaders of Mercedes, and those 3 lines are rock solid in their segments, and the S-class is like 40% market share in it's segment. G-wagen is up this year, hyper car on the way. The top end is strong as ever.
-
They already make a 2.0T front drive, they could put that in a top end Malibu/Terrain/Equinox, an Impala, LaCrosse, in whatever crossover slots between Equinox and Traverse, can put it in Traverse. I think for things like Acadia, Enclave, Cadillacs, you want maybe a 2.5 liter turbo 4, or a 2.0T hybrid of some sort, you need a little extra performance and refinement for the added price over a Chevy. The quicker GM gets out of the 3.6 V6 the better. Because the future is electrifying and engine downsizing.
-
Agreed and I agree on your earlier post about Cadillac using all turbos, except I would go turbo on the V-series also. CTS-V is the only supercharger they have, they could make a twin turbo V8 for that, twin turbo V6 and V8 for Escalade and get the whole line turbocharged. And to take it a step further, start to put in eAssist or a 48 volt battery system, to make all Cadillacs a mild hybrid around 2020. If they took a 2.0T and added on a 25 hp electric motor, then you are nearing 300 hp and lb-ft with it all working together, that is going to be a much better drive than the 3.6 and probably 15% better gas mileage.
-
Pretty much every luxury brand starts in the low $30s, the difference is most max out at $100k or less, while Mercedes can still go over $200k. The CLA is a relatively low volume Mercedes also, I don't think it is hurting them. C-class sales are up since the CLA went on sale. Yet it sill outsells the ATS. Because no one wants a Cadillac. Because Cadillac has no image. Because Cadillac doesn't have a flagship, super car, hyper car, convertible, GT car, or anything cool to lift the brand image, other than the Escalade, but those that think the Escalade is cool probably aren't shopping for small sedans.
-
Correct for an engine like the CLA45, but I could see more use for a 2.5 liter turbo for larger vehicles, maybe with an eAssist also. CAFE is going up every year
-
There is a lot Cadillac should have done. In the future they need to do more. I don't know why they don't have the CTS-V engine in an SUV. Lack of convertible is a problem. And I can't believe GMC doesn't have a hardcore off roader to compete with the Wrangler that they can use the chassis to make a Cadillac off roader to compete with the G-wagon. For years people said the CLA would be Mercedes downfall, it never happened, they are still #1 having record setting years. And this is exactly where Lexus, Cadillac, Acura and the others are going. Lexus has a GLA competitor on the way, Cadillac plans a crossover below XT4 and the XT5 starts under $40k. So they are all in that same space.
-
BMW has lost their way, their cars for too big and heavy and they lost that E39 magic. I think they could find that again, they still have a good image and loyal fan base, they might just be in a slump that could turn around with the 8-series and X7. The CLA is like $15,000 more than a Cruze and in top trim the CLA does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds those two cars aren't even close.
-
I am not trash talking American cars I am being realistic and pointing out the current problems Cadillac has. I thought in the mid 2000s that the CTS needed to shink to 3-series size and the STS needed to be smaller and more nimble to match the Germans. I have said since the Sixteen concept in 2003 that they need a flagship sedan. I have wanted a Cadillac sports car above Corvette for a decade, I want an Eldorado grand torturing coupe/convertible that would be a perfect competitor to the Lexus LC500. My complaint is Cadillac won't challenge the world's best. They are complacent now just as they were in the 80s, they are limited by the GM parts bin and the GM bean counters. Sigma was supposed to be the start of the renaissance and they are further behind the leaders now than they were in 2005.
-
Honda News: Two Reasons As To Why the Civic Si Only Produces 205 HP
smk4565 replied to William Maley's topic in Honda
For a front drive small car, that is enough for the Si. Especially since they make a Civic R with 300 hp. And i makes sense to keep the Is cheap enough for people to buy it without pricing out their customer base. -
Cadillac could have made a smaller car that would have worked in Europe. After the Cimarron disaster, they went until 2013 or so with the ATS before they made a small car. How many million 3-series sold in that time. No small crossover, missed opportunity, no 3 row crossover, missed opportunity. It just goes to the theme of always being behind the curve.
-
Because GM would never break it out, so that they protect the divisions. Even back in the day, they didn't want to admit that certain brands, like Saturn, were total money losers. GM doesn't want Cadillac's numbers or GMC's numbers out there because then shareholders could raise questions about the strategy with certain brands.
-
Audi did 50 billion euro in revenue in 2016. That is about $55 billion. And they are the #3 luxury car maker. Porsche made $4.1 billion in profit just by itself last year.
-
Everyone keeps saying "after the war" I am talking about going into Europe in the 70's, 30 years after the war. Ford went into Europe and grew and made money, Nissan has a decent European business. If Cadillac had a global appealing car in the 70s or 80s, they might have also fended off the attack better at home. But that is all history. Mercedes sold 70,311 vehicles MADE in the USA, that is only C-class, GLE and GLS. 3 models outselling Cadillac's whole line up, and the GLS is only Mercedes 5th or 6th best selling model. Acura outsells Cadillac with fewer models. And some of this goes back to my same point. Why does Cadillac have such a thin model line up? Why didn't they push higher up market sooner and why aren't they doing it now? They are 7th place in the American market right now. Luxury brands drive profit, without that profit it takes money away from GM being able to develop autonomous cars, and new products. Makes them less competitive over time. FCA is classic example, no luxury high margin, high volume profits, no money. Uncompetitive product. Ford is struggling with this now too, probably one reason Fields got fired, their stock price has been tanking since Mulally left.
-
True, and maybe if some of them tried to go global, those brands wouldn't be out of business or close to it in the case of Chrysler. Citroen, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Lancia, etc either didn't make an effort to come to the US, or made a really weak one. They are all also ran brands now. Mercedes and BMW made the push, Lexus made a big push, and they are on top today.
-
Mercedes sold 280,000 cars in 1970, granted that was their global volume, but most of that was Europe. I know Japan and European counties are mostly closed off, but if Cadillac could have tried it before the Germans and Japanese really got going. They could have done a lot of things, but the past is the past. The problem now is Cadillac has half a line up, and they have had this problem since the 90s. Too many over lapping sedans, no real high end car, not enough body styles, etc. Not enough crossovers and the crossover fad started 15 years ago. And GM and Johan don't seem to be in any hurry to fix the problems.
-
Right, but they could have built more factories. And let's look at those numbers, 181,000 in 1965, and 264,000 in 1975. Today with a larger population and bigger car market this is what they are selling: 2016: 170,006 2015 175,267 2014: 170,750 2013: 182,543 2012: 149,782 2011: 152,389 They are running at mid-60s numbers, and well below what they sold in the 70s. They are on pace for 150,000 this year, it seems as it 2013 they peaked and have since flat lined.
-
Year to date Cadillac is in 7th place in Luxury sales in the American market. They trail Acura by 340 cars and Acura is down 11.5% for the year. Is 7th place "doing very well" ? When Johan was at Infiniti, Cadillac easily outsold them. Now that Johan is at Cadillac, Infiniti is beating them this year for the first time ever.
-
Personal attacks aside, the point was brought up that Mercedes build terrible cars in the 50s, 60s and 70s. While Cadillac was the gold standard. So if that were true, why didn't Cadillac go into Europe or Japan to sell cars? If Cadillac was go great they could have gone into either market. But I think the German and Japanese cars of the 60s and 70s were better made than most realize, and it is why those 2 countries took over a big chunk of the American market in the 80s, 90s and all the way up until today. Even now, all these millionaires and billionaires in the USA that want to spend $200,000+ on a car, where are the American car companies to sell them a car? Mercedes, Ferrari, Aston Martin, Bentley, Rolls-Royce, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Porsche are all eager to do it, Cadillac and Lincoln, and even Tesla are no where to be found. That isn't the consumer's fault for buying an import when it is their only option. If you want a luxury car convertible, America doesn't even make one! How is that possible? The US isn't full of blind fools, it is full of people that seek the best product, especially in the luxury market. As far as national pride goes, Year-to-Date Mercedes has sold 70,311 American made cars in the USA, while Cadillac has sold 59,493. And this even with the XT5 made in the USA, because the SRX was made in Mexico, which would really drag Cadillac's American car production down. But I didn't hear Cadillac fans complaining about it, in fact many said it was good for America to make Cadillacs in Mexico so GM would get more profit.
