smk4565

ATS-V is relatively unknown to the masses, and imagine Mercedes if the C63 and E63 were there only AMG products, and there was no S-class, no SL, no G-wagen, no CLS, no AMG GT, no SLS Gullwing, etc. Putting a big V8 in a poor selling mid-size sedan like CTS doesn't really make it a halo for the brand. Same as the Charger Hellcat is not going to save Dodge and let them sell more Darts. They are in fact cancelling more products than they are introducing. I still think Cadillac needs an alpha crossover and an Omega crossover with V-series variants. The Alpha can be ATS size to compete with Porsche Macan, the Omega a 3 row to compete with Q7, X7, GLS, and in a way it would make the Escalade obsolete, with a 400 hp V6 base, 500 hp and 640 hp V8s optional in a chassis that is 1,000 lbs lighter than an Escalade.

Acura interiors are all garbage compared to a luxury car. They are similar to what you get in a Mazda 6. Lincoln interiors are a sea of plastic and Fusion parts as well. I would put the ATS and Q50 both behind Lexus or the Germans for interiors.

Olds has it right in that Cadillac has no halo product, other than Escalade. They need a smaller than XT5 crossover and a 3 row crossover because that is what the masses buy. However they also need halo product that defines the brand. GM has toyed with a mid-engine Corvette for 10-20 years, why not just make a mid-engine Cadillac super car, leave the Corvette front engine, rear drive. I actually think they should cap the Corvette at 500 hp and not run the price up to the $100k mark as they have done in the past. If you watch reviews on the Z06, most say it is worse than the Stingray because it has too much power, it can't even put it down. The Corvette should be what the Stingray is, and I'd argue a 400 hp twin turbo V6 version at $50k would open up a few more sales. If GM wants to build a 600 hp car, or a mid-engine car, give that to Cadillac. Cadillac first needs to be luxury, they should build a full size coupe and CT8, that are above Escalade Platinum in luxury, and build a mid-engine super car to compete with the Ferrari 488. Even if they lose money on all 3, at least they will start to change the image of the brand.

100% agree on the Camry, it has reputation and is a safe buy, but it isn't the best car. I think the Q50 has a better interior, and is roomier than an ATS. The Q50 has a 300 hp V6 for the price of the ATS 2.0T and they have a 400 hp V6 for not much more than the 335 hp V6 in the ATS. Better performance with the Q50 on paper. I have never driven a Q50, I have driven the G37, which is a bit too boy racer and noises for me, I think they missed the luxury side of the equation on the G37, but it was pretty good handling. Question still remains as to why the ATS is the 6th or 7th best seller in the segment, and I don't think it is the back seat leg room.

No one is buying their sedans, and they only have 1 crossover. I would say that the ATS and CTS are competitive, but the BMW and Mercedes counterparts are better the Audi A6 is always gets strong reviews, the Infiniti Q50 is better than an ATS at qual money. I hate Lexus styling, and the dated engines, Cadillac is probably making a better vehicle than the IS or GS or ES trio of sedans, but Lexus does a better job of branding and marketing. Cadillac builds a better product than Lincoln and Acura for sure, better than the Infiniti Q70. Overall that puts Cadillac middle of the pack I'd say.

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point. The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models. Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible? They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis. Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks. Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers. Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles. That is a joke. Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars. And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette. They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control. Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe? We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage. I agree about variants.. we all kno this. The Cadillac situation may be a bit different as the vehicles have to be executed even more stringently than the bread and butter ones. The ATS vs Camaro convertible thing I have no answer or logic for tho.. It is my opinion.. and some fact that Cadillac is waiting for the 2018-19 model year to fully build on the excellence it presented with the CTS, Escalade, XT5 and CT6. Baby steps.. blowing your entire load while teh world is not looking would be even worse than doing nothing at all. So Cadillac has the ability to make great cars now, but is going to wait until the 2019 model year to release them? I would imagine the GM shareholders wouldn't be happy that Cadillac could be bringing in better profits right now, but instead they have to wait another 2-3 years.

The current 3-series is smaller than a 2003 CTS. Pretty much every segment of car has size creep, look at a 90s Accord and a 2016 Accord for example. I think what is interesting is Cadillac got rid of the STS, because it wasn't selling, people said it was too big, too soft, or didn't have the performance to match the Germans. And now the CTS is the exact same length as the 2005-2010 STS, the turbo 4 makes comparable power to the STS V6, and the 3.6 V6 comparable power to the old Northstar V8. They turned the CTS into a carbon copy of a car GM itself deemed a failure.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4?Is it marketing / image problems there also? It was in the final year of it's model cycle last year. They sold 34,000 of them in 2014 and 37,000 of them in 2013. When it was fresher it sold better, but that car was under powered the past few years, the base car now has a 252 hp turbo. Better interior and more power always help. I think Audi reliability issues hurt that car also, and Audi styling looks a bit too like a VW and hasn't changed much recently, I think it is a bit boring. I didn't include the A5, but they sell about 15,000 of those per year, which is about what the Lexus RC sells. If you tack 15,000 units to the A5 and IS for their coupe counterparts, their numbers look pretty good. I think A4 loses sales to A3 also, because they are more similar than a CLA and C-class are for example. So the A4 is going through a similar pattern as the ATS, seeing as how the ATS is going on four years old? Interesting. The 2015 model year A4 went on sale in 2008. It was in its 8th model year! (mid-cycle refresh in 2012 on the A4) And why they let it go 8 years, I have no idea.

What I put in bold is U being FULL OF $h!. Cadillac didn't tout the weight savings as a selling point.. they touted the handling capabilities due to lighter weight and chassis engineering as a selling point. The Escalade is an established vehicle in a segment that quite frankly it pretty much established. Even tho it was no the first (Nav) it was the one that became the icon way early on. ATS is brand new.. 1st generation. CTS literally segment jumped. Neither have all the variants that the competitors have either. From a sales point of view.. that could.. and I kno it seems crazy.. effect sales. I mean walking into a Cadillac dealership to buy a convertible ATS and not finding one could push that buyer to go over to BMW. People like U need to stop being stupid. My patience is thin And I have said for years Cadillac needs more models. Why is there no ATS and CTS convertible? They got a Camaro convertible out pretty fast, same chassis. Cadillac is like GM's step child that never gets what it needs, because they are too worried about building more Buicks. Buick got a convertible, Buick has 3 crossovers. Cadillac 1 crossover, 0 convertibles. That is a joke. Cadillac doesn't have a sports car above Corvette, yet BMW, Mercedes and Audi all have $100k+ sports cars. And why, some GM unwritten rule that nothing can be faster than a Corvette. They'll put a supercharged V8 in a Camaro, why not make a 600 hp ATS-V with all wheel drive, 10-speed automatic, awd and launch control. Where is the V8 full size sedan at Cadillac that was teased back in the Ed Whitacre era, the full size V8 coupe? We got the 4-banger CT6 instead, and the El Mirage, was in fact, a mirage.

So what's your opinion on the problem factors plaguing the Audi A4? Is it marketing / image problems there also? It was in the final year of it's model cycle last year. They sold 34,000 of them in 2014 and 37,000 of them in 2013. When it was fresher it sold better, but that car was under powered the past few years, the base car now has a 252 hp turbo. Better interior and more power always help. I think Audi reliability issues hurt that car also, and Audi styling looks a bit too like a VW and hasn't changed much recently, I think it is a bit boring. I didn't include the A5, but they sell about 15,000 of those per year, which is about what the Lexus RC sells. If you tack 15,000 units to the A5 and IS for their coupe counterparts, their numbers look pretty good. I think A4 loses sales to A3 also, because they are more similar than a CLA and C-class are for example.

2015 sales volume: BMW 3/4-series: 140,609 M-B C-class: 86,080 Acura TLX: 47,080 Lexus IS: 46,430 Infiniti Q50: 43,874 Audi A4: 29,013 Cadillac ATS: 26,873 I doubt back seat space or trunk volume led to the numbers on that list. Other factors are at play there.

I have also said probably 100 times, I don't think the ATS back seat hurts sales. Even the smallest trunk in the class probably isn't hurting sales. The car has other problems that hurt it, and the badge and marketing are bigger issues than the back seat. Case in point, the CLA has an even more useless back seat than the ATS, and the CLA outsold it last year.

Then why did you compare the ATS with the c-class, when the c-class starts $6000 higher and the CLA is 2000 lower? Because they are both rear drive and Cadillac stated the mission of the ATS was to compete with the German trio of 3-series, A4, and C-class.

Interior looks better, although it looks like a Hyundai/Kia interior, I think Hyundai/Kia do pretty good interiors as of late. I think the2017 interior is a good improvement, but the exterior looks too angular, and the headlights too squared off and small. Looks too Asian for me.

Moving from an ATS to a CTS is only about a $10k jump, so that could be an easier move. But 3-series to 5-series could be $15-20,000. I think just saying if people can't fit in a small luxury car, go buy a bigger one doesn't make a lot of sense, most can't afford the price jump. I am 6'2" and I can fit just fine in a C300, there is no reason you can't make a small segment luxury car that is roomy enough for people over 6 feet tall.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Maybe they had to kill the Verano to make room for other Cadillac Cruze, that they say isn't coming, but probably is coming.

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.