smk4565

I suppose GM just couldn't use the LaCrosse to compete w/ the MKS and ES, which is a more natural competitor for those models than something from Cadillac... I don't think Buick competes with Lincoln or Lexus. There in lies part of the problem. The LaCrosse competes with the Avalon, Taurus and Maxima. A Maxima can even hit $41,000, so can a SHO. I'd say the Chrysler 300 and Genesis are competitors also on size and price point, different drive wheels, but they would still get cross shopped I think. Since Buick is not a luxury car, Cadillac has to wear many hats, thus they need an XTS to cater to those in Florida that like pastel pearl paint jobs and seats you sink in to. I question if they really need to cater to this market though. Or if the CTS were as well executed as the E-class that it couldn't attract both those that want smooth ride and those that want performance.

SRX sells because it is cheap. It also sells because Americans are suckers for domestic SUVs in the same way they are suckers for Camry and Accords. On the plus side, it looks better than an RX350 or MKX and it has more power than either one also. Lexus may have it in build quality and technology , but the Lincoln and Acrua offerings don't have an interior as good as the SRX. The German midsize luxury SUVs are considerably more expensive than an SRX. To bring this back to the CTS, here is where the challenge will lie. When the CTS goes up in price to make way for the ATS, what happens to CTS sales? And then also, what happens with the XTS and CTS fully overlapped in price point?

Audis don't sell very well in the USA. They appeal to the luxury customer that wants sub-dued styling and AWD because they think it is safe, and perhaps like the fuel economy of a small displacement, boosted engine. There is a market for that type of car, but it isn't the biggest segment of buyers. And the A7 has a disappointing interior for what it costs, and a 310 hp 3.0 liter V6 at $77,000, I think not. The Cadillac press person even mentioned how the XTS has more interior room than an Audi A6 (which I would hope since the XTS is far bigger) but if they are looking to steal A6 sales, how many are there to steal. No one buys an A6, or an Acura RL or Volvo S80. But the XTS will get sales of the 70+ crowd that only buys American because there are no other big American cars left, expect for the terrible MKS.

CTS is the right size on the outside, but too small on the inside. I was at the Pittsburgh Auto show today and yesterday, sat in the E-class both days, it feels much more roomy than a CTS and the cars are the same size. Even a Sonata or Optima feels roomier than a CTS does. With better space management, I think the exterior of the CTS can stay the same size and interior can grow. The cramped interior needs to be addressed. I even heard many people saying the CTS was too small for them and they want a bigger car. I think the interior fools them into thinking the CTS is smaller than it actually is. I got a good look at the XTS, the lady said pricing was expected to be $45-60k. The XTS doesn't look as big as it is, which is good, because the MKS looks bigger than it is, and looks ridiculous. The interior looked nice (could not sit in it), but not as well made as an E-class or 5-series. It is better than a Lexus or Acura interior of that price range, but that isn't saying much. I can tell old guys that want a roomy car and don't want to drive over 55 mph will like the XTS. But that demographic isn't a big one, as witnessed by STS/DTS and MKS/Town Car sales. On a side note, the new M5 looks spectacular and the difference between that and a CTS-V is dramatic. The M5's brakes are more impressive than the whole CTS-V. CTS-V looks so tacky, and the build quality isn't very good either.

Not Sure but Ford sells about 50k Taurus a year and Buick a bit over 50k LaCrosse per year. And Nissan sells some number of Maximas, plus Volvo and Acuras, for some reason people want to buy FWD almost luxury cars, so enter the Azera.

Probably eXtreme Luxury Roadster or eXtra Luxury Roadster. I don't remeber DHS even existing.. I believe DHS was supposed to mean Deville High-level Sedan or maybe high luxury. It was sold 2000-2005 as the luxury trim of the Deville and it had the bench seat. The DTS had sporting credentials, aka floor mounted shifter.

There is also the POS, I mean BTS, the short lived sedan on the 9-3 Epsion platform. And BTS stood for Below The Standard.

Agreed, that new GS is horrible looking. This is sort of like how Acura hijacked all their cars with horrbile front end styling a few years ago. Lexus seems to be hitting everything with the ugly stick, because they want dramatic, but don't understand design.

This is pretty interesting, I like it. My only complaint is why isn't the sleep cabin add on thing taller? Or else why didn't they take an extended cab, then add that box on to make it extra luxurious.

Well it sure is red. I can't get excited much from cars of this era. Most are too big and too underpowered.

Seems pricey, although you do get a lot of equipment and a pretty powerful engine for this segment. It is close to the Genesis in pricing, that is surprising, because if you are going to spend that much, why not jsut buy the Genesis.

I am really curious to see how this car turns out. The Optima looks really good, a sporty rear dive version of that could be sweet. But if it is sort of generic like an Equus that would be a let down. Amazing that Hyundai/Kia will have 3 rear drive V8 sedans, and GM and Ford together make 2. (ATS, CTS, not counting the police only Caprice)

Awesome for sure. What's better than a V8 or V12, a jet turbine! Even the guy with the Veyron bragging about his quad turbo V16, can be trumped by the Jaguar owner that is like oh yeah, check it out, jet engine turbines.

Hopefully smaller is a sports car or roadster. And not a FWD city car.

A Fleetwood Brougham is not made with the chassis, suspension or steering or transmision to match the powerful engine. The S-class is tested on the Nurburgring and made for high performance driving. The original top speed of a 1879 Fleetwood was probably around 85-90 mph. This car is just a home made disaster. And boaty Fleetwoods should be driven by an older version of James May that likes simple highway cruising and thinks "powerrrrrrrrr" and speed are evil.

Very bland and boring. And it has mega granny car image. Better to find an Aurora of that era.

Ugly color and it does look like a backyard hot rodder. A ton of power, but it is probably a disaster to drive. And that style Cadillac shouldn't be about a massive engine, it should be about dignified and refined driving.

The best looking GM car of the 1990s. Although I like how my Aurora is a little smaller and lighter and I like my interior more than that one. Plus my radio antenna is built in, not a power up and down one. And this car isn't black, the 90s Aurora needs to be black for the true stealth bomber feel.

Not worth $6,000 let alone $16,000. it is a 14 year old Grand Am. Regardless of mileage it is still a 14 year old Grand Am. Move along, nothing to see here.

The 210 hp A4 costs as much or more than cars with 260-280 hp though. And it isn't like the A4' interior or feature content is amazing to compensate. For example, a 280 hp V6 Passat is about $29k. The A4 is just sort of a yawn car, and a wow price. Fixed. No, the A4 has a good interior. The A4 interior is better than the CTS, certainly far better than any Buick.

The interior on the RDX belongs on a CR-V, it is horrible for a luxury vehicle. The Acura ILX interior on the other hand is jsut awful for any type of vehicle. It is like a 90s Accord. I don't get how Acura sells cars, the interiors are terrible, the exteriors are ugly and the powertrain is from a Honda. If you like that, just buy a Honda and save the money.

Would be nice to see the Veloster turbo engine in the Elantra. But nice to see they added some body styles.

That thing is ugly, the Transit looks better. Why do these things always have tiny 2 liter engines, if GM did a van like this with the 2.5 liter 4-cylinder they could have the powerhouse of the group!

I like the old one more, but I also don't like Granite or Terrain styling.

The 220 hp Regal costs as much or more than cars with 260-280 hp though. And it isn't like the Regal interior or feature content is amazing to compensate. For example, a 280 hp V6 Passat is about $29k. The Regal is just sort of a yawn car, and a wow price.