smk4565

Agreed with Reg, that Caddy interiors are getting a bit gaudy, but it is bit too early to tell still on this one. There are things I like more than the current CTS interior (which I don't care for too much) like the upper dash and center console, I like no pop up screen, and that they moved the center vents. But I don't like the center stack buttons or how those AC vents look sort of Camaro-like. It shows promise though, would like to see how it turns out and how build quality compares to the Germans. Am curious as to the displacement of the Twin Turbo engine. Assuming the 3.6 carries over with 318ish hp, I would think they have to be going high 300s, plus with better torque delivery. Unless the 3.6 dies and they go 2.0T 270 hp and V6 twin turbo with 350 hp or so. I hope there are 8 gears behind that engine though.

I thought about the Regal also, sales are down on it. But not surprising, the Veranao has the same engines, basically as good interior, just smaller. And many people may like smaller and more economical. Makes the 220 hp Regal turbo look weak now. Although I agree with putting a turbo in, Jetta has a turbo. I don't think they can move the Regal up any, the LaCrosse starts at $30k, Regal already overlaps it a lot in price.

Cheers. Great looking car.

This could be a sweet car if done right. To me, the Genesis is a great car in a bland package. The Charger and 300 have bold packages but sort of old chassis at this point, and despite the improvements on interior, Chrysler isn't setting any standards. Chevy has a chance here to have a modern, updated large RWD sedan that is a good car and has good styling. I fear though we get another car like the GTO and G8 that don't quite hit the mark.

Passat is larger than an A4, and you can get an A4 with a 310 hp/325 lb-ft supercharged V6. The Toureg Hybrid is also priced like an Escalade, it costs more than a Q7, they share a diesel and the Q7 V6 makes more power than a Toureg V6. And they do make a V12 Q7, they just don't sell it in the USA. Porsche shares a couple of those powertrains but they also have a 500 hp option. Obviously Cadillac is going to share turbo 4s and V6 with Buick or Chevy, but Cadillac still needs something to make Cadillac special. GM is putting in a plan to make three V8 Chevy cars, while Cadillac has 1? What happened? It used to be every Cadillac had a V8, they were the first automaker to mass produce a V8. Now they are just sending Cadillac down the CAFE highway to hell so they can make V8 Chevy sports cars and V8 Chevy trucks?

So put the baby duramax on sale already. I don't think developing a new engine is a waste of money. (and a diesel V6 can be used in cars and suvs) Ford did the Ecoboost, Ram is about to do Pentastar V6 and a diesel V6 in the pickup. I think gas and diesel V6, then a gas V8 obviously and duramax diesel. They could do 2 gas V8s if they feel need to have one for more regular trucks and one for HD. For the second pickup, I like the idea of doing one closer to S10 size. They need separation from the Silverado's size and price.

Is the Hemi getting the 8-speed in 2013? If so that could be an option worth waiting for. But if you don't want/need a V8 why bother, it will just drink gas and cost more on oil changes, tune ups, etc. I like V8s so to me it is worth it, but if you don't care about V8 sound and exhaust note, then it isn't worth spending the extra money on it. Especially when the V6 is putting out 290 hp, that is as much as a lot of V8s made 10 years ago.

The 2012 update helps the exterior a lil bit. I agree, it is bland though, I wish they did more with it. I like the interior a lot though, the layout is similar to the S-class, and that is a good thing. The R-spec 429 hp V8 is pretty awesome though, I drove one, only around town at low speed unfortunately, but it is very quiet and you can tell very powerful.

I am not saying power can't overlap, obviously a Camaro and Corvette are going to have 400 hp engines because people buy them for speed. But GM can't keep doing high performance Chevys while Cadillac gets a bunch of 4-cylinders and the V6 from an Impala. I don't care if they drop a Corvette engine in a big Chevy sedan, they aren't going to sell that many anyway, they would need a V6 model to go against the V6 Charger. I am just saying GM can't forget about Cadillac, that is the crown jewel, Cadillac should do everything better than Chevy, that is why it is a Cadillac.

Yes, and the Duramax isn't that economical. Excellent idea on Tahoe and Silverado. A diesel V6 could get those to 24 mpg highway I bet, that is as good as a Traverse. I guess while we are at it, it could go into the Traverse also, but that much torque would probably rip the transmission apart. GM would have to make a new one, I don't think and FWD transmission they have can handle over 300-350 lb-ft. Do you know that engine hauls a 7,200 to 8,400 lbs truck and still returns 22 mpg on highway? To me that is more efficient than the MB engine you are humping. EPA doesn't rate that engine, but Car and Driver got 14 mpg average from it (on a 2500, not a heavier 3500). You could get a Silverado diesel that weighs 5900 lbs, if it is 4 door, dually, long bed, then yes it probably is near 8,000 lbs. So weight reduction is an area for Chevy to look at. But the Duramax is an $8400 option, and I am not suggesting getting rid of it, it is a good engine for the 3500 trucks. I am saying add a 3 liter V6 diesel for the 1500 trucks and dump the 4.3 V6 and 4.8 V8s. That 4.3 V6 is from the 80s, time to say goodbye already.

Yes, and the Duramax isn't that economical. Excellent idea on Tahoe and Silverado. A diesel V6 could get those to 24 mpg highway I bet, that is as good as a Traverse. I guess while we are at it, it could go into the Traverse also, but that much torque would probably rip the transmission apart. GM would have to make a new one, I don't think and FWD transmission they have can handle over 300-350 lb-ft.

Ok, well still, you can't have a 450 hp Chevy, let alone a 600 hp Chevy when the ATS has a 195 hp or 200 hp 4-banger, the next gen CTS is getting a 4-banger and the XTS has 300 hp. And mega horsepower cars cost a lot, and Chevy is a value brand, and they need some volume. But I fear the "old GM" will rear its ugly head here and we will basically get a direct from Australia import that has the same flaws the GTO and G8 did. At least the G8 had a V6 model that wasn't crazy expensive, imaging if the G8 was only the GXP model, they would have sold 20 a month.

Diesel V6, more torque than any of these V8s and it would crush the ecoboost in fuel economy. 455 lb-ft and 27 mpg are the stats on Mercedes V6, GM could copy that, but I think Ram will beat them to it.

They still have to sell this car. If a 450 hp V8 is the base engine, they will charge $45-50,000 for it. They are about to charge $34k for an ATS 2.5 liter, a V6 Impala will probably be $30k, seeing as a 4-cylinder LaCrosse is over $30k. Figure they charge $50k for a base Corvette, so a Corvette engine in a full size sedan is going to cost that much. I don't see people spending $50k for a Chevrolet sedan, Cadillac struggles to get people to spend $50k for a sedan. And as Balthazar has mentioned, the hierarchy would be messed up. If Cadillac has the ATS, CTS, XTS in the $34-45,000 range for base prices, how do you put a Chevy up there and with a V8 when none of those 3 Cadillacs offer a V8 except for CTS-V. This is part of the problem with GM, Cadillac should be the grand daddy of them all, not behind Chevy.

Rumor is the Ram is getting a 3.0 liter diesel V6 with over 400 lb-ft of torque. The General should be looking at that. Pickups are about torque; the Mercedes diesel V6 puts out more torque than the 6.2 Vortec, the Hemi or Ford's Ecoboost, the 5.0 V8, even the 6.2 V8 in the Raptor. Why make a 6 liter engine to get 400 lb-ft when a 3 liter engine can make 450 and get 5-7 mpg more and be more durable.

F150 is the #1 selling pick up, and they sell more V6 than V8. Dodge is also putting a V6 Ram on sale (I just realized it isn't Dodge anymore, but to me it is). So GM has to look at what the top 2 competitors are going, and think we need a V6 also. I would look seriously at diesel power to get fuel economy up. A Mercedes ML350 diesel gets 20/27 mpg, and that is a 5,000 lb truck, I think it possible to get similar numbers out of a Silverado, especially with 8 gears to work with. And if they can remove weight out of the Silverado, that obviously helps. I do think they need a smaller pick up, the Colorado seemed too big, and also too expensive. It was like half as good as a Silverado at 90% the price. A smaller pick up for people that don't want a huge or thirsty vehicle makes sense. I still believe they can do that off an Equinox platform because that type of buyer is looking for easy to drive, with some versatility. They aren't looking to tow 10,000 pounds or haul payload.

The STS and DTS were fundamentally different too. If they make the CTS bigger (and softer), it is getting really close to what the STS was, which hopefully doesn't happen. I just don't see the point of a $45-60,000 front driver, a Buick, Avalon or ES350 can deliver the same driving experience of an XTS at a much lower price. And if you stretch out the CTS wheelbase and are smart you can make a big interior and put magnetic ride control standard. The CTS could easily beat the XTS is ride comfort and interior space, while also having the Nurburgring corning ability built in.

BS, because of price overlap??? There's plenty of overlap, for ex, between the c- & e-class, and they are much closer in purpose than the CTS & XTS.... Or are you admitting that FWD vs. RWD just doesn't matter that much after all??? There is $9,985 between a C350 and E350. There is $2,905 between the ATS 3.6 and the XTS 3.6, and they have to squeeze the CTS in between those two. Actually, a 3.6 CTS is cheaper than a 3.6 ATS that is supposed to be below it. Has pricing been announced for the 2013 CTS? The current CTS is only on the market another year. No they have not, but if GM keeps stating the CTS is supposed to compete with a 5-series or E-class, the price has to go there. An E-class bases over $50k, but I know Cadillac won't go that high. A V6 CTS has to be more than a V6 ATS, so a V6 CTS must slot in the $43-49k area. Possibly the CTS will grow in size, and base at $44,995 so that it and the XTS share a starting price, just like the STS and DTS shared a price point, since that worked out so well.

One can also view the structure such that the XTS is parallel to the ATS and CTS, not the top of a hierarchy. Think Lexus--they have the IS, GS, LS hierarchy and the CT and ES in parallel tracks... That is a good point, however Lexus is also the brand most people here make fun of the most. I think it easier to have a parallel priced car on a hybrid hatchback or a different body style than just your main sedans. At least then it has something unique. The ES and IS overlap they get away with because it is entry level and 2 different cars. GM though has Buick to run a parallel track to the ATS, for those that don't want Nurburgring firm suspension.

Well according to you, MB is a leader in technology and spends billions of dollars in R&D. Sure being an industry standard, as you mention it umpteen times, it would have come up with a simple solution of adding 995 more gears to the existing 5 to overcome the 800 lb-ft torque problem in its "Halo" car. There again you drowned your argument there. The Maybach came out 10 years ago, at the time it was leading edge, and even still, the rest of that car is ridiculously well appointed. But a few years ago they knew they would be dumping the car, no point on spending money on it. Let's see how the S-class Pullman turns out, and we'll see where the billions are going.

BS, because of price overlap??? There's plenty of overlap, for ex, between the c- & e-class, and they are much closer in purpose than the CTS & XTS.... Or are you admitting that FWD vs. RWD just doesn't matter that much after all??? There is $9,985 between a C350 and E350. There is $2,905 between the ATS 3.6 and the XTS 3.6, and they have to squeeze the CTS in between those two. Actually, a 3.6 CTS is cheaper than a 3.6 ATS that is supposed to be below it.

You guys realize that the Maybach/AMG V12 makes over 800 lb-ft of torque, but is down tuned to 738 lb-ft of torque. That 5-speed was the only transmission that wouldn't be shredded apart by it. But Mercedes has now upgraded the 7-speed to handle the torque, so for 2013 model year the 5-speed is gone.

I like this vehicle and don't like SUVs. The interior is fantastic for the price point. I don't think it should have Range Rover in the name though, just Land Rover Evoque would make more sense. Range Rover is the big $90k SUV. But the interior is worthy of the Range Rover name.

The Maybach was also developed in 2002 and is discontinued after 2012 model year. They may not choose over number of gears, but miles per gallon matters to many and new transmissions help that, as well as with acceleration. But it is more than the transmission, it is that Cadillacs are still built out of the parts bin, rather than developing what they really need to compete. Once the CTS goes up in price to $45-60,000, the XTS becomes very pointless. The CTS will probably even be roomier because it will have a longer wheel base. I think if they take the XTS platinum interior and feature content and put it in the ATS and CTS they are onto something, but I fear Cadillac will hold back the CTS and ATS because they need to leave something on the XTS to justify its existence. We saw this before with the 08 CTS, they had the STS sitting there as dead weight, but they kept equipment such as lane departure warning off the CTS to justify the STS price premium. The XTS is detrimental to the brand.

The XTS though doesn't help build image. It lacks a lot of features other big sedans have, nor the powertrain/mechanicals that the rest of the market has. Pretty much every BMW and Audi has an 8-speed now, Mercedes will soon have 9. Yet Cadillac has 6, like a Cruze or Elantra. One could buy an Audi S6 that does 0-60 in 3.7 seconds and is rated at 26 mpg highway, quicker than a CTS-V with fuel economy like a V6 CTS. The German cars are so good right now, Cadillac can't simply badge engineer out of the parts bin to catch up. And it probably isn't even Cadillac engineers fault, it is probably the bean counters not giving them what they need.