Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

smk4565

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,686

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

 Content Type 

Everything posted by smk4565

  1. smk4565
    The argument was made, if someone is 6'3" or too big to fit in an ATS/3-series/IS/C-class, just have them go up to the next size car. But in most cases that is a $15,000 jump in price, going from $40,000 to $55,000 is going to be too big a jump for the majority of buyers. Buying a used 5-series or E-class for $40k was the other solution presented, which makes sense to the consumer, but to the car company, they lose out on that new car sale.
  2. smk4565
    That isn't good news for them. One thing about FCA, is they never really bothered to build fuel efficient cars, they have for years just wanted to build pickups, Jeeps and Hemi powered full size sedans. At some point you have to round out the portfolio or introduce new technology.
  3. smk4565
    Except you skipped the logic completely with you made the ATS to CT6 comparo when it would be more accurate to jump from the ATS to the CTS, which is the 5 series competitor (not the CT6).The rest of your "logic" can be applied to any car this exposing the fallacy of your argument. The CT6 is priced closely to the 5-series and E-class. The base prices with destination charge are: CT6 2.0: $54,490 CT6 3.6: $56,490 528i: $51,195 535i: $56,845 E350: $54,025 CTS is $46,555 with destination charge, $7,500 less than an E350, the E350 and CT6 are $465 apart. That is why I compared the price jump as going to a CT6.
  4. smk4565
    As far as trading up from ATS/C-class/3-series to the middle size, that could be a big price jump. A 5-series has a starting price $20,000 above a 3-series for example. That is a big jump, it would be like telling an ATS prospective buyer to get a CT6, they are going to walk out of the showroom. The used e-class or 5-series argument makes sense, I'd rather have a lighty used car that was $60k new and $40k used than a new car that is $40k with less power, features, room, and will depreciate anyway.
  5. smk4565
    Mercedes lists the CLA and CLS as coupes on their website. So they aren't trying to make them sedan competitors, they sell other sedans. CLA vs ATS is a pointless comparison, C-class vs ATS is the better comparison. No one is comparing a CLA to a 3-series or A4. As far as the drives like a tin can, I meant in general. Every car maker is now saying how they shed weight, and half the time that is due to engine down sizing or getting rid of the spare tire and jack. Weight savings are good, but not really a selling point to consumers. More specific to the ATS, is Cadillac touted the weight savings as the big selling feature of the car, just like they did with CTS, just like they are now doing with the CT6. But none of those 3 cars sell well. It is like Cadillac thought if they build the lightest, best handling car then it will be a sales winner, and forget to finish the rest of the car. Meanwhile, the Escalade which has zero weight saving measures or handling abilities outsells the ATS and CTS. They need to re-examine their forumla for building cars. Also interesting that everyone says marketing is Cadillac's problem, which I think is one of their biggest. The marketing has been bad for a coupel years. Probably not a coincidence that Uwe Ellinghaus has been in charge of marketing for the past 2 years. The marketing when to crap when he got there.
  6. smk4565
    That is GM's fault for making the ATS too small. But they were trying to copy an 06 3-series. The C-class and A4 are 184-185 inches long. It makes no sense that the CTS is 196 inches long, the biggest mid-size luxury sedan, and the ATS is the smallest in it's class. Then the CT6 is 7-series size at 5-series pricing. XTS priced exactly the same as CTS. The whole sedan line up doesn't make sense. They have no plan, they just keep throwing things against the wall to see what sticks.
  7. smk4565
    I give them credit for putting a 400 hp V6 into the Q50 for $49k, that is good performance per dollar. But their V8 is dated, that 420 hp was good back in 2010, but all the V8s have turbos on them now, make huge torque, and get better milage than that 5.6 liter engine Infiniti has. They never made a performance M56 or Q70 car, never made a true sports car, never made a 500 hp car, etc, etc. Infiniti tried to build themselves as a performance brand with 328 hp sedans. There just isn't a lot of wow factor in that. And the other guys have so many performance models now, Infiniti is just so far behind.
  8. smk4565
    The CLA is smaller than an ATS or 3-series, also catering to a different buyer. They are going after singles, coupe buyers, urban buyers, etc, it isn't like it is a family sedan. It is like saying the Mustang has a small back seat, but Mustang buyers won't use the back seat anyway. The C-class has 35.2 inches of rear leg room, the Q50 35.1, the Audi A4 has 35.7. This is the ATS competition. I also don't think the back seat is why the ATS doesn't sell. The interior is worse than the Q50, IS and the Germans, the imports for the most part beat the ATS on powertrains too. I don't think the Lexus IS is a better car, but it says Lexus on it, and as I said, Toyota has a fan base, and the Lexus reliability ratings.
  9. smk4565
    Maybe they had to kill the Verano to make room for other Cadillac Cruze, that they say isn't coming, but probably is coming.
  10. smk4565
    Way to fix the ATS is take the CT6 dash board and center stack, put it in the next ATS or CT 3 or 4 or whatever it will be called. Make the 2.0T base, the 3.0TT the mid-level engine. That will get them more on par with the C-class. Cadillac's problem is the C-class is as luxurious and better performing than the CT6. The ATS is hopeless against such competition. Lexus has enough Toyota kool-aide drinkers that will keep buying the IS, no matter how ugly they make it or how old that 3.5 V6 gets. And the new Audi A4 seems pretty nice. The Infiniti Q50 is priced better than the ATS and is a little bigger, with I think a better interior. You can get a 300 hp V6 Q50 for $40k or a 400 hp turbo V6 awd for $49k. Cadillac is still trying to sell the torqueless wonder that is the 3.6 V6 against the import turbos and it is a lost cause.
  11. smk4565
    ATS was designed to be the lightest car in the class, the whole "every gram matters" philosophy they talked about. But some other guys got lighter, or got roomier and bigger while not adding any weight, and most of the ATS weight advantage in 2013 was in comparing an NA 4 cylinder ATS to a turbo 4 BMW and a V6 Mercedes. Low weight is nice, it isn't the way to win buyers. If it drives like a tin can, or has no interior space, or a cheap interior, no one will care what it weighs. So how does the CLA get away with it since, in lower to mid level trims, it suffers from a lot of the same issues? The CLA 2.0T is $3,000 cheaper starting price than an ATS 2.0. At $40k the CLA is pretty well optioned and it gets 38 mpg highway in fwd models. It also has a sporty look to it, so I think styling and the fuel efficiency help it sell, and no doubt the 3-spoint star on the front is a big factor. I never drove a CLA, so I can't speak to how it drives, from sitting in them, they don't feel luxurious, but they feel well put together, sort of how I see a VW Passat. It isn't luxury, but you get a sense that is made solid.
  12. smk4565
    ATS was designed to be the lightest car in the class, the whole "every gram matters" philosophy they talked about. But some other guys got lighter, or got roomier and bigger while not adding any weight, and most of the ATS weight advantage in 2013 was in comparing an NA 4 cylinder ATS to a turbo 4 BMW and a V6 Mercedes. Low weight is nice, it isn't the way to win buyers. If it drives like a tin can, or has no interior space, or a cheap interior, no one will care what it weighs.
  13. smk4565
    If you think it is heavy now, what do you think it would weigh with a Voltec system? It would be over 4200 lbs. I do think the center stack is really cheap in this car, I am not a fan of the slider bars or swath of black plastic that is supposed to be touch sensitive for buttons. It reminds me of a last generation Ford Edge. Cadillac should put real buttons and knobs in cars, things that have a tactile touch and make a click when you turn or push it.
  14. smk4565
    I love when Sergio goes to Formula 1 races and sits in pit garage in his sweater (even though it is hot out) and has to watch his precious Ferrari lose to Mercedes over and over again.
  15. smk4565
    An obvious result, as one of these companies builds the Best or Nothing, the other two dress up Camrys and Fusions. Similar price, but the GLC is a small vehicle, it is sized more like the NX250 and MKC. I guess that would have been feeding the lambs to the the wolves, so they went with the MKX and RX350. What is amazing is the MKX Ecoboost with 380 lb-ft of torque could only manage 6.2 0-60 seconds while a 4-cylinder GLC could do it in 6.3 seconds. I can't wait to see what the GLC43 does, with an extra 100 hp, it has to be in the low 5's. Plus they have a V8 on the way, I'd like to see Lexus put a V8 in the RX, but they won't ever do that because they are S-A-W-F-T..... Saaaaaaaaaawft.
  16. smk4565
    100,000+ vehicles at $1,000 average, that is a $100 million mistake. Whether they faked the label or just did it by accident costly either way.
  17. smk4565
    That sounds like my kind of highway.
  18. smk4565
    Seems like all these car makers cheat. Autobahn does have high speed. The crap cars are probably doing 90 while at high rpm, the BMWs and Mercedes probably doing 120.
  19. smk4565
    If they can charge an upgrade fee to get a 153 HP 1.4 liter enging, I bet they could charge $5,000 for a 197 HP 2.5 liter.
  20. smk4565
    But if you stand still you get passed up.
  21. smk4565
    You'd think that Buick being a premium over Chevy would make the 153 hp engine standard, since the Traxx has the 138. A Mazda CX-3 has 146 hp, a Jeep Renegade 160 hp. On an unrelated note, they should offer an extended length Traxx, with a fixed rear glass panel roof and sliding/reclining rear seats. They can call it the Traxx Maxx.
  22. smk4565
    Needs an RS model with a 1.6 or 1.8 liter turbo with 200 hp. The Buick Cascada engine could work. I agree with Hyper, if you put 300 hp, awd, etc in a Cruze it becomes a $35,000 Cruze and no one wants a $35,000 Cruze. A 1.6 liter turbo doesn't really cost any more than a 1.4 liter turbo, an RS package could cost $2,000 with the bigger engine, 18" wheels, bigger brakes, some sport styling, etc. Then you have a $26,000 Cruze RS and a $24,000 Cruze LTZ. Or whatever they cost, I didn't look at pricing, but they can make a 200 hp Cruze affordable, and under $25k probably.
  23. smk4565
    I am sure the body of the ELR could work on D2XX with little change to the design. The Buick Cascada 1.6 liter turbo could serve as the engine. The size of the ELR is very close to the 2017 Cruze, they might have to tweak a few things here to there, but it shouldn't need too much redesign. The interior might have to change more to fit with other D2xx cars, but most of the Cadillac center stack is the same in every car, so you just fit that in there. Then you have your sub-ATS car, your sleek looking car to appeal to young people, your CLA/A3 fighter all rolled into one. Yes it would be a 2+2 coupe, but I doubt CLA buyers are using that back seat much anyway.
  24. smk4565
    They should recycle the ELR body/chassis and put a turbo 4 cylinder with about 200 hp, maybe a 1.6T base fwd a 2.0t optional with awd. Call it CT2, base price of $32,990 and there is your CLA competitor. Take out the batteries and back seat room and trunk space increase. ATS later becomes CT3, base price of $34,990.
  25. smk4565
    You can get a 305 HP Lacrosse for less money than a 197 HP Envision. As far as spare tires go, very few cars now have one. Take out the tire and jack and engineers just saved 50 lbs of weight. And the marketing people get to write about a car being lighter and more fuel efficient.
×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search