smk4565

If Cadillac can do an Alpha coupe for $40k, I am pretty sure Buick can. The ATS starts at $33,000, even a near loaded ATS is around $50k. And if you do a Riviera for $45-50k, I still don't see people buying that over an Infiniti, Lexus, Cadillac, Mercedes, Audi or BMW. Because all those luxury brands can make a coupe for $40,000. This is the same reason the Equus and K900 don't sell, they aren't from a luxury brand. Very few will buy a Hyundai when you can get a Lexus or Mercedes at the same price. Cadillac hasn't made this pricing move up market yet either, the CTS is priced below the 3 Germans, the Jaguar XF, Lexus GS and Infiniti Q70. The ATS is priced below the A4, C-class, IS, and probably Jaguar XE. So Cadillac is playing to the lower end of the price spectrum of the luxury market already. Moving to equal the others doesn't really create all that much more room for Buick, a few thousand dollars maybe. Cadillac isn't going to some super high end pricing like where Porsche is. As far as profitability goes, GM just released their 2nd quarter numbers. 2.4 million vehicles sold, $1.1 billion in net profit. That is $458 per unit. We know GM makes money on pickups, they are probably losing money on their sedan lineup with those numbers. Daimler by comparison, 714,800 units sold, $2.4 billion in profit, or $3,637 per unit. (those include their commercial trucks also)

They sold a CL, they never went without a big coupe.

V6. I figured that was a typo. And we'll see Cadillac coupes, convertibles, diesels, hybrids, etc, etc in the future. The other guys have it now though, and Cadillac used the same arguments in 2003 how rear wheel drive was coming, then a longitude mount Northstar was coming, 6-speed autos were coming, etc. They have been in catch up mode for years. So the question is will they ever really catch up.

Suppose Buick makes an Avenir with a twin turbo V6, what would that cost $55-60,000? Let's say they price it like an Equus or K900, which have 430 hp V8s and a lot of equipment, and yet we see those sell less than 3,000 units per year. Not a lot of volume there. Then what happens to the CT6 if there is a Buick with the same chassis, same size, and a 400 hp engine for less than the 265 hp engine CT6, talk about stepping on toes. The LaCrosse is supposed to grow in size too, it could be similar size to an Avenir. You can use RWD and more luxury and power as the differentiater, but I'd see that car would have to be priced more like a Genesis or top end Chrysler 300. Maybe they can have room for the current LaCrosse to go up $2,000 in price and still get the Park Avenir in around $40-50k segment. That could be a solid product, probably not a lot of volume in the USA, but they'd have China sales. I think a mid-size Riviera could easily be priced around $40k (regardless of platform they choose) and this would be priced in line with the A5, RC350, 4-series, and Infiniti Q60 or whatever the G37 is now. Granted those are all a bit smaller and sporty, the Regal could offer interior space and a quiet, more comfortable ride. Even at $40-45k you are asking buyers to pass on a Lexus, Infiniti, Audi and BMW and pick a Buick that is a tough sell as it is, maybe doable if it looks great and is mid-size compared to the competition's small size. To price a Riviera in the $50-60k range is suicide. One coupe has a base price in that range and it is the E-class, the rest all gave up. Even being the only mid-size luxury 2-door on market, the E Coupe isn't a huge seller. So you think the Buick Riviera can challenge the E-class and buyers are going to spend $60k on a Buick coupe? Never going to happen, it would sell worse than the Cadillac ELR. Let's remember the Cadillac sedan sales are weak, and their sedans have base prices at $33k, $44k, and $44k. Hard to say Cadillac will rapidly move up market when they can't get sales where they are, and if Cadillac can't get big volume at those prices, how does Buick do it?

Twin Turbo V8, for sure you'll get 500 hp, there are lots of those on market. No way GM makes a 500 hp V6.

GM is going to make a 500+ hp V6?

The S-class has 60 onboard computers/microprocessors 4 wide angle cameras 1 far infrared camera 1 near infrared camera 12 ultrasonic sensors 1 long range radar 4 short range radars 1 multi-mode radar 1 stereo camera

I am sure the system would help a lot in those potholes. On Top Gear they drove an S65 on equally bad roads and it rode pretty smooth they said, and that is was the old car before Magic Ride Control was invented. Also important to note that the S-class did win the competition and was named the best car for a leading light in the Albania Mafia.

The S-class can go over speed bumps without you feeling it, I am sure it can handle pot holes. The system can read road imperfections as small as half an inch. Here is a demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZLKxoFAsh8

A base CT6 is said to be around 3700 lbs, but Cadillac hasn't put one out yet for the magazines to test either. But that is also a 4-cylinder, rear drive car. Add a twin turbo V6, bigger wheels, bigger brakes, all wheel drive, and I bet you are crossing over 4,000 lbs. Still a 10 lbs per hp which is what I would call ideal. Which is why I wish the TT V6 was base, and they had a TT V8 ready to go. Remember the S550 has 516 lb-ft of torque at 1,800 rpm. Torque affects acceleration, not horsepower. And that is the bottom S-class, they sell it with more power. The CLS has a 9-speed automatic, I am surprised that hasn't hit the S-class yet. The 750i is .5 seconds faster 0-60 than an S550, if the 7-series is the CT6's target, it will have to be fast. S-class beats all these cars in ride quality though, they all have reactive suspensions, only the S-class has the camera that scans ahead and prepares the suspension for what is coming.

I am not sure an Omega car for Buick is a good idea. I think the top Buick sedan should have a price starting in the high $30s. And how many cars does Buick need, if you have Verano-Regal-LaCrosse as a 3 sedan line up, plus a Cascada convertible. Unless they could do a Riviera coupe on Omega and keep that priced at $40k. But then you have a Lincoln Mark VIII type large coupe, and that didn't sell 20 years ago back when cars sold, now people want crossovers. I don't think Buick needs a 4 sedan line up, I see Buick versions of the Cruze-Malibu-Impala as more reasonable, a sedan smaller than the Cruze I don't think has a place at Buick, plus they have the Encore which is sub-compact.

I retract the "not big enough" statement about the CT6, since it is with in inches in every dimension of the 7-series, XJ, A8, and S-class. Lacks the muscle of those cars though, and the CT6 is a nice car, but I don't think as nice inside as the 4 cars I just mentioned. The lack of horsepower and interior makes me think they need to price it less than those cars. If Cadillac does price it in the $55-75k range they could have success. If they price it $75-95k I think they are dead in the water. We shall see.

So if it beats all the other cars at the drag strip, doesn't that make it the Champion and not the Challenger?

BMW does make a 740iL that is 205 inches long with 45 inches of rear seat leg room. So if someone doesn't think the 740i has enough room in back, they can just look across the showroom for the alternative. Every generation of the S-class has outsold every generation of the 7-series, most by 2-1 margin. S-class has often been in front on safety, luxury and performance. BMW for a brief period in the late 80s had a 300 hp V12, but Mercedes 3 years later had a 389 hp V12, so that was that. And the 7-series never had a V8 until 1992, while the S-class always offered one. The new 7-series is pretty nice, 0-60 in 4.3 seconds on the V8 model, they did a good job on it. But the S-class is still the king of the big sedans, they have the Maybach luxury, the AMG power, and more tech is coming for the 2017 model year since the 2017 E-class is getting things like the eardrum protection pre-crash audio alert system.

Styling is of course subjective, I am just saying there is a type of buyer that wants a grand touring coupe or sports car, but maybe thinks they need a back seat, so a CLS or A7 becomes a good option. Probably why the XLR, SC430, Jaguar XK have all died, and you don't really see luxury coupes anymore. Even the BMW 6-series became 4-door and costs more than a 7-series, both of which makes zero sense to me. I don't think the CT6 attracts the buyer that wants a sporty, flashy looking car, when it has a traditional 3-box design. Personally I like traditional 3-box design and think an A7 is the ugliest Audi on the road. I see the CT6 appealing more to the Equus and K900 type buyers that want a big sedan, but don't want to pay $80,000+ to get it. That is why I think pricing is key, because those cars have V8s too, CT6 doesn't have a V8. Maybe the loaded CT6 3.0TT competes with the base 7-series at the $70-75k price point.

I'd agree with the 6,000 a year number, that is about Audi A8 volume in the USA. And assuming they keep prices in the $60k range, not $80k range. I think the next 7-series was going to be long wheel base only here, or at least the V8 models will be. Either way, the S-class will continue to whoop on thing as it has since 1977. Here is the thing with the CT6, it has basically the same engine lineup as a CTS (which isn't a hot seller) and the CTS V-sport has a more powerful engine than the 3.0TT V6 in the CT6. So even a top end CT6 is less performance than a CTS V-sport. A CTS V-sport is $60k base, with some options let's call it a $65k car. So to me a CT6 3.0TT should be $70,000, maybe $75k loaded to the max. I don't think Cadillac will price it that way though, I think they'll pull an another ELR and overshoot the market and charge $20-25k more than a CTS with the same engine.

Where have I seen that before? Oh right, here:

What I don't like about the CT6 is it isn't big enough or luxurious enough to really match the big Germans. And it is too big to go against a 5-series, plus the CTS does that, and it is still too big and not sporty looking to go against a CLS or A7. Plus you can get a CLS or A7 with a twin turbo V6 for under $70k, so that makes me think the CT6 twin turbo V6 needs to be under $70k, which puts the 2.0T model at like $52-55k for it to have a chance to sell, and I don't think Cadillac will price it that low. This is a car giving you the same powertrain as a $44k CTS, and at the top end, the 3.0TT is worse than the CTS V-sport. So the customer is only getting space and a slightly different dashboard and some amenities like the 34 speaker Bose stereo. What is that worth? I'd think $10,000 premium over a CTS at most so it has to base price around $53k and max at $70k. That is a lot of overlap to the current CTS and XTS in price, unless they make 2016 the last year of the XTS, but I don't think it is dying until like 2019.

It is about time they got new engines, it has had the same engine lineup since 2007. What makes no sense is you can't get AWD with the 2.0T which is the volume engine, or should be the volume engine for people anyway. Secondly, where did they find a 3.5 liter V5 making 255 hp? 2004? Is that the old Chysler 300M engine? Thirdly, won't the gas mileage be the same on a 3.5 liter V6 making 255 hp, as it is on the 3.5 liter V6 making 306 hp? So what is the point, who would buy the weaker V6 if you get the same gas mileage on both. Why even offer both? Just offer one V6 to simplify manufacturing and ordering.

I think that CT6 is going to get eaten alive, I am curious as to how they'll price it. I think they'll aim too high, which is why I see it getting eaten alive.

I heard Dave Leone himself say the CT6 would have a 265 hp 2.0 liter turbo 4. Now maybe they will only sell it in China, but they are building it for sure. This is Cadillac's big gun, it should bring something better than that. Consumer choice is good, so offer turbo V6 and V8, a diesel and a hybrid. I was against the 2.5 liter ATS since launch, if Cadillac wanted to topple the 3-series, they should have come out guns blazing, and not used the 2.5 liter engine found in the base Malibu (and now the base Colorado). It's a Cadillac, step it up. I'll agree on the eAssist, at the time gas was expensive, so they were trying to push fuel economy and I think that car got like 36 mpg highway when it first came out, so at the time that was good. And I imagine they will move to a 2.0T and 8 or 9 speed, as that is where the market is going. I'd still be an advocate for the V6 continuing in mid-size to large Buicks like LaCrosse and Enclave, or a Riveria or Avenir if they happen. I'd like to see a V6 option on the Buick version on the Malibu to make it different. Sort of how Fusion is turbo 4 only, but MKZ has a V6 option.

I agree that a 4-cyldiner is enough for most people. The Camry V6 has like a 6% take rate, and the hybrid is about 10%, so over 80% of those are base 4 banger. 175-200 hp is enough for a small to mid crossover or family sedan, most people don't drive in any sporting nature. A Cadillac CT6 is not for "most people" it is for a higher end buyer. The Corvette weighs less than a 335i, I don't see them putting a 2.0T in the Corvette because it would be enough for the typical Camry/Accord buyer. V6 should be a minimum on a CT6. The ATS has less standard hp and torque than a CLA, and they want the ATS to compete with the C-class which is 241 hp base. The A4 is going to have 252 hp base, Lexus IS will have the 245 hp 2.0T. I still think the ATS should have the 2.0T standard, and they could beat them all on base hp, rather than being 40 below them all. And if even Cadillac buyers are content with a 260 hp, I am sure a 306 hp GMC Canyon is plenty of power, thus no need for a Cyclone.

Then why do we have to have a 2.0T in a Cadillac CT6? Why not make a 3.0tt V6 the base model, and a 4.0tt V8 optional? Why a 2.5 liter 4-cylinder in the ATS? That 2.4 liter eAssist engine in the Lacrosse, when the Avalon, Cadenza Maxima and Azera have a standard V6? Every GM sedan is basically designed with one eye on CAFE so they can sell more Silverados and Tahoes because that is where the profit is made. Which is why CAFE is stupid to begin with, and you can make cars larger and get around CAFE, which makes no sense. If you want better gas mileage, put a $1,000 gas guzzler tax on any vehicle under 30 mpg combined, $2,000 gas guzzler tax on any vehicle under 25 mpg combined, $3,000 on anything under 20 mpg combined, $4,000 on anything under 15 mpg combined. Then you place a $1,000 tax credit on any car above 40 mpg combined, and $2,000 on any car above 50 mpg combined. And watch fuel economy soar, and sale of fuel efficient vehicles soar.

Buick can't go really high up market with sedans or coupes with $50k+ Aviners or Rivieras, etc. Cadillac struggles to sell 2,000 CTS a month at that price, a Buick would sell worse, and a large car would sell worse than a mid-size. $25-45,000 is the Buick sweetspot. What I'd do, as I put in another thread is call the next Verano the Regal, which would be 185 inches long, 1.5 liter and 2.0 liter turbo 4 engines. Optional all wheel drive. Priced at $24k base so it is well above the Cruze, but still cheaper than the current Regal that doesn't sell well. The Envision would share chassis, engines, etc with this Regal. The next Malibu is to be 193 inches long, perfect size for the LaCrosse and you could price it around $30k, undercutting the Azera, Maxima and Cadenza which are also about 193 inches long, and still priced well enough above the Malibu. 2.0T standard here, I'd V6 as well, all wheel drive option. Sedan #3 is the Park Avenue, which would be 201 inches long like an Impala or XTS is now. This you could price around $38k, a $10k premium over a base Impala. V6 and all wheel drive, maybe a turbo 4/hybrid option also. This would compete with ES350 and MKZ, although be larger than those cars, and help fill the void left by the XTS. Then you have the Cascada convertible on the Delta platform, and I would do a Riviera priced about $34k with very limited options because above $40k there are too many luxury coupes to pick from, including ATS, so you want to stay away from that. Riviera should be mid-size, a little larger than Camaro, luxury focused, maybe the 3.6 V6 is the stand alone engine, because this is a low volume car I'd think, and probably older buyers who would want a V6 over a turbo 4.

I think Malibu, Impala, LaCrosse, and Regal will all be on the same platform. Hopefully the XTS is dead at the end of this cycle. I don't think they'll do a Grand National, because GM doesn't have 40% market share like back in the 80s. So I suspect they won't want in house competition for the Camaro or ATS. Plus I think a GNX would be low volume, and the cost to get it crash tested and emissions certified, etc probably makes it not worth it. It would be nice for them to do a Riviera coupe, they could even be off the next generation Epsilon platform, and share powertrain with the Regal or LaCrosse.