smk4565

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive. When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad. For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume. They did just put a new for 2016 4.0 liter V8 in the G-wagen. Rumor is next year they are going to do an overhaul on the G-class, use aluminum to cut 400 lbs, and add a 360 hp inline six engine and 9-speed automatic. There will be updates, but they don't want to mess with a winning formula. No reason to fix a vehicle that gets more and more popular over time.

No one would buy a V6 G-wagen here, there is a diesel version in Europe. The G550 only has a 40% take rate, 60% of G wagens are AMG. The people buying it want the bigger engine. Mercedes sells a GLE with 4 and 6 cylinder and hybrid versions for people that want a mid size SUV that isn't crazy thirsty. The fans don't want them to change the G-wagen, it sells because they haven't changed the look since 1979. The Jeep Wrangler has looked the same since 1943, and it is FCA's most iconic vehicle.

Only product can save Lincoln. Black Label concierge services, and pick up and drop off service aren't going to do it. Gotta have the product. Look at Cadillac, they actually have 2 rear drive light weight chassis that are world class, and they are still struggling. Imagine where Cadillac would be if the ATS was based on the Cruze, the CTS was based on the Malibu, and XTS was their flagship. And there was no V-series, no Cadillac with over 400 hp, no coupes, etc.

Well the S-class is the #1 selling car over $95,000, and by a wide margin. But a G-wagen starts at $115,000 and 2/3 of them sold are AMG models that are $140,000. When you compare a G-wagen to BMW i8, Audi R8, or Bentley sales, the G-wagen sales look pretty good. And G-wagen sales are up this year, and they were up in 2015 over 2014. The sales keep rising, and this for a vehicle that Mercedes was going to end production on in 2006. But the fans wanted them to keep making, and they listened to their fan base. G-wagen sales were up 17% in 2015, and are up 23.8% this year.

Do they service Corvette Z06's at the same place they service $14,000 Sparks and City Express commercial vans? I don't really care what else is serviced where my car is serviced. My original post here was about how Ford probably wants to keep the Lincoln owners separate make it seem like Lincoln is different than Ford. Because in reality those Lincolns have a lot of Ford parts and Ford trim pieces and drive like Fords. If Ford wants to help Lincoln they need to get Lincoln it's own chassis and own bodies.

Good post. I'd go beyond Cadillac and throw in Lexus, Infiniti, Lincoln, and Acura. None of them have really jumped into that $100k territory to challenge Mercedes, or the Italian supercars, or Porsche or the Bentley and Rolls Royces of the world. And every car company wants to maximize profits, that is why they exist.

I think the G-wagon is the #1 selling vehicle in the USA with a base price over $100,000.

Nope it is properly priced, $8300+ cheaper than the GLC300 4matic with more features and function and better materials than the MB. This is a way better auto all the way around then MB is currently building and selling with more HP and Torque to boot. If you feel that about the Envision and XT5, then you have to reevaluate the MB CUV lineup that has the same problem and lower quality materials at this point as the Envision has surpassed the build quality of the MB. Let me know when Buick puts a 500 hp V8 in the Envision to compete with what M-B is doing.

The XT5 is only six inches longer and starts at $4K more. That is not "basically the same price". It's no different than the "less than different from each other" C Class and CLA ( and no I am not talking about price). For 2016 the Envision starts over $42,000, I know for 2017 the Envision starts at $34,990, but that is also for a 197 hp 4 cylinder. Eventually there will be a Cadillac XT3, if they price it $5k under the XT5 it will cost less than an Envision. I still think pricing is a little ambitious on the Envision. The Acadia for example is larger and cheaper, and GMC is supposed to be on par with Buick.

I wish the E-class went back to a split headlight set up to look different from the S and C classes, at least they put the vertical LED bars in. Most luxury brands are doing the similar look styling now, because they want brand continuity. Sauv is correct, that Mercedes wants a uniform look in every car. On a similar note, they did refresh the SL roadster to make it looks better, but the 2013-2016 version looked awful. But now the SL looks too similar to the AMG GT. They should make the SL have round headlights and look more like the 1950s car. The G-waggen is retro Mercedes and people love it. The SL could use a little retro Mercedes too.

The Envision will sell because it is a crossover. I think they priced it a bit high, because it is basically priced like an XT5, and the XT5 is a mid-size vehicle. Buick could actually add a 4th crossover between Envision and Enclave, but the Envision is priced almost at Enclave levels now, so they'd have to reevaluate the price tiers of their crossovers.

I never said the F150 was made in Mexico. I said Ford is building a plant in Mexico to build small cars there, and ship them back to the USA. The margins are good on trucks and crossovers, they will be the last to leave. But it would't surprise me if over time, the Detroit 3 move more and more factories to Mexico to get the cheap labor. And yes I know GM invests money into the USA, obviously they pay a lot of workers here, buy a lot of products and employe a lot of people. But other auto companies do the same. Toyota supports American suppliers and pays American workers also. As far as taxes paid goes, in 2015 GM got a tax credit of $1,897,000. Not only did they not pay any taxes, they took yet another government hand out. The difference here is I don't believe where the company head quarters is really matters. All these companies operate globally and distribute money globally. Where the head quarters is doesn't mean that is where the profits all end up. And I don't pick cars based on where the profits end up. I wouldn't care if my Mercedes was made in Alabama or Stuttgart, and I don't care what country the profits go to. All I care is that they keep building good cars.

I know GM doesn't owe anything to my town or any other. But that is also why people shouldn't buy a GM product thinking that the profits will be reinvested into the USA or their local town. Here is the Daimler annual report that states 1/3rd of S-class were sold in China. 107,336 S-class sold worldwide in 2015. https://www.daimler.com/documents/investors/nachrichten/kapitalmarktmeldungen/daimler-ir-release-en-20160108.pdf

This is probably a way to keep the Lincoln owners out of sitting in the Ford dealer service area, and/or to make it seem like Lincoln is more exclusive and separate from Ford. When at 90% of these dealerships the Ford and Lincoln are sold and serviced in the same building. My question is if they pick up your Lincoln for service, will they return a good car you would actually want to drive?

I live in Pittsburgh, southeast of the city (where I don't live) there are towns that relied heavily on steel mills until the 80s, that of course are closed and gone now. But there is lots of land out there, that has access to rivers and railroads, and isn't far from the PA turnpike either. This would be an ideal place to build cars with easy ways to transport them. It would have been nice if GM built a $3 billion factory and hired 5,000 workers in Pittsburgh, especially with all the engineers that Carnegie Mellon pumps out, but yet they built that factory in Mexico. Zero dollars for my home town, $3.6 billion for Mexico.

Then there's your problem right there. You should care where the profits are going because profits kept here means profits that are spent here. It's a real simple concept actually and how you fail to see that is beyond me.Oh and thanks for proving your hypocrisy on the countries of origin remark. That literally makes no damn sense. Who says they have to spend the profits here? Companies outsource and move things overseas all the time to save money, and thus make higher profits. Ford has made good profits lately, what did they do? They spent $1.6 Billion to build a factory in Mexico and create 2,800 jobs in Mexico. So those F150 profits are going straight to Mexico. They could have invested those dollars in a new factory in Michigan or Indiana, but they didn't.FCA has turned profit the last couple years, did they invest it in the USA? No, they discontinued the 200 and Dart, laid off workers in those factories, and the Compass/Patriot are to be replaced by a single model, built in a new factory in Mexico. I also found a story form December 2014 stating that GM would invest $3.6 billion to double their production capacity in Mexico and create 5,600 new jobs in Mexico. This idea that you buy an American brand car and the money gets invested back into America is a joke. Buying a Buick Envision is supporting job growth in China and Mexico, they are stealing our jobs, they are stealing our money, and I am not voting for Trump either. I do support free trade between all these countries, because the consumer always has the choice to buy what they want to buy. And I wouldn't buy a car from China, and I won't buy one from Mexico. Dude you have to stop. Money kept here, not overseas, is more likely to be spent here. Those profits go to folks here eventually, not overseas. It's that damn simple. That is all because you have no argument here.One last thing. You made my point by bringing up FCA and why it was always a bad deal. It's an Italian owner company so course, DUH, the money goes to Italy. Oh and F150s have and always will be made in Michigan. Class dismissed. F150 is made in the USA because they have high margins on them. High margin products are the last to leave. Low margin products like sedans are being shipped to Mexico, factories in the USA closing down. GM and Ford aren't building new factories here, or hiring more workers here, that stuff is getting sent away where land and labor rates are cheaper. If you buy Nabisco cookies and Oreos that are also now made in Mexico (which should be shipped to the USA in the trunks of Ford Fusions to save on transportation costs) you are supporting Mexican jobs. Nabisco didn't spend their profits on the 600 people in Chicago that lost their jobs. That is the issue here, the money isn't KEPT in the USA, these companies, whether it be cars, cookies, shoes or clothing sell products made outside of the USA buy people making $5 an hour so that the executives in the USA can pad their bonus, and the stock holders can get paid a dividend. And the more jobs they ship over seas, the more profit they make. If someone drives a Buick Envision and it is their favorite car in the world, then they should buy it because they like the car. They shouldn't buy any GM or Ford car thinking that it will help the American economy any more than buying a Toyota will help the American economy.

1/3rd of S-class sales are from China, and there is a factory in India already that supplies S-class to China and Southeast Asia. European, Middle Eastern, and North American market S-class come from Germany. They are made here, home to 22,000 employees, and this plant is receiving a $2 billion upgrade, so perhaps some companies re-invest in their home market.

Then there's your problem right there. You should care where the profits are going because profits kept here means profits that are spent here. It's a real simple concept actually and how you fail to see that is beyond me.Oh and thanks for proving your hypocrisy on the countries of origin remark. That literally makes no damn sense. Who says they have to spend the profits here? Companies outsource and move things overseas all the time to save money, and thus make higher profits. Ford has made good profits lately, what did they do? They spent $1.6 Billion to build a factory in Mexico and create 2,800 jobs in Mexico. So those F150 profits are going straight to Mexico. They could have invested those dollars in a new factory in Michigan or Indiana, but they didn't. FCA has turned profit the last couple years, did they invest it in the USA? No, they discontinued the 200 and Dart, laid off workers in those factories, and the Compass/Patriot are to be replaced by a single model, built in a new factory in Mexico. I also found a story form December 2014 stating that GM would invest $3.6 billion to double their production capacity in Mexico and create 5,600 new jobs in Mexico. This idea that you buy an American brand car and the money gets invested back into America is a joke. Buying a Buick Envision is supporting job growth in China and Mexico, they are stealing our jobs, they are stealing our money, and I am not voting for Trump either. I do support free trade between all these countries, because the consumer always has the choice to buy what they want to buy. And I wouldn't buy a car from China, and I won't buy one from Mexico.

There is a rumor that the 918 hybrid powertrain will go into the Panamera to make 700+ hp and 800+ lb-ft of torque. That could be pretty sweet if they do that, still will look ugly though.

Car sales every where are dropping, and the E-class was up. This was their best June sales ever, compared to June 2015 which was a record setting month for them. No one mentioned that all 4 SUVs were up 27% or better. People want crossovers/SUVs, and Mercedes has lots of them to offer. Lexus is asleep at the switch with hopelessly dated GX and LX, Cadillac and Acura only have 2 each, Audi has 2 tiny ones and a Q7 that isn't mid-size or full size.

Impressive side stepping but 100% unrelated to what I was saying. Good grief man. Pay attention.Now that you bring it up though, shall we talk about the German auto makers and how they treat their US employees? The average wage of a German auto worker is $67/hr. It's not even a third of that here and no, it does not have squat do with Germany being a more costly place in which to live. That is what I am talking about here. They pay a shot wage here and all the rest of the money goes to Germany. Now I realize that GM, Ford, and FCA do the same in other countries but you cannot sit on that high horse of yours and complain about their practices while ignoring German makes. Simply baffling how you can't get that concept. And please explain this bit of hypocrisy. You said it doesn't matter about the country of origin but not even two months ago you said you'd never buy a Chinese made S Class. Because I don't care where the profits go to. All these corporations have a lot of stock bought by the investment companies, whether it be Ford, GM, Toyota, or Daimler. And they all build cars in multiple countries around the world. And I would not buy a made in China Mercedes, luckily for me they build many of them in Germarny (despite the high labor costs) and they build them in the USA too. But buying a car made in China, is not supporting America. That is like saying buying Donald Trump's made in China ties is good for the American worker. It is ridiculous. If you want to say buying a made in Kentucky Corvette is good for America, I am all in on that one. Interestingly enough, 34.8% of Daimler stock is owned by Germans, 31.2% by other European countries, and 23.7% is owned by Americans. So it isn't like 100% of the money goes back to Germany, only 1/3 does.

How Mercedes prices the S-class shouldn't really matter as even the A8 and 7-series are priced about $20k under it, unless you take a fully loaded 750i to an S550, but then as soon as you get to an Maybach or S65 Audi and BMW have nothing. If you look at the C-class the plug-in hybrid is cheaper than the V6, and I bet the same thing happens with the E-class. The car companies need to hit a 54 mpg CAFE in 2025, they need people buying the plug-ins to get there. For what it is worth, the S-class plug-in is going to a 13.4 kWh battery pack next year, up from 8.7 kWh, so range will improve to an estimated 30 miles. Mercedes has 10 plug-ins coming, they are spending $8 billion in 2 years on green powertrains. I also hope they sell the inline six S-class with the 48 volt electric system here next year, instead of holding it for Europe only, they could price it around $86,000 and crush whatever sales the A8 and XJ still have.

I made a post that I don't think went through, so I'll retype it. Originally I said they should drop the 3.6 V6 from all Cadillacs, and go with an all turbo line up, and plug-in hybrids. The 3.0TT V6 CT6 is $66,000, they could easily offer the plug-in hybrid for the same price, I think they could even offer a hybrid turbo 4 for $60,000 and make that the base CT6. I don't think they really need a $54k CT6, just move the price up to $60k+ where it should have been all along. Right now the CT6 is priced at or below a Genesis G90 or Kia K900. If they are going after traditional DTS buyers over age 70, that crowd would prefer a V6 over a turbo 4, they come from an era where a Cadillac always had a V8, they won't want a 4. But I think making a hybrid CT6 for $60k the base car gets the price up closer to where it should be, it also makes the CT6 a bit of a "green" car and they get some points for that.

I dunno, I think it seems logical for a 335 HP plug-in hybrid turbo 4 to be base model, a 400 HP turbo v6 middle option and turbo v8 high end. In a CT6 you don't need a base 2.0t any more than the ATS needed that 2.5 liter.

Makes sense if rear drive has a 10% take rate. Plus with this kind of power you need to send it to all 4 wheels to get traction. The good news is the 9-speed transmission and downsized engine should improve fuel economy.