smk4565

Unless the new MKZ is rear drive with the 5.0 liter V8 from the Mustang GT, this is a snooze car, and we can all move along, there is nothing to see here.

Agreed with SAmadei, the car does share styling cues from Chevy sedans, the grille is plain, I don't like the sweep back headlight fad, I too think it is awful. It is just a so-so looking car, it doesn't really wow me into thinking I want one. It isn't really classy or sophisticated looking like some Audis and it isn't aggressive like a CTS. And it has that high trunk thing going on. The Hyundai Veloster has similar air vents/navigation set up also.

Agreed with Cubical, the front end does remind me of the 2013 Malibu how the hood raises. The first gen CTS, even the current really share no styling cues with other GM product, the ATS seems to have Chevy cues all through it. As if the same team designed it, the Cruze and Malibu and ran out of ideas so they just shared.

The chrome wheels are a bit Chrysler 300C, in photos it looks a bit tacky, but I'd have to see it in person. I still don't like the headlights and I think the front end is a bit too rounded off. That "softened" Art and Science look is boring, not a fan of the black plastic around the fog lights either. It isn't a bad looking car in any way, but it just doesn't look like an expensive luxury car, and reminds me of a Chevy in some ways.

The way it drives is what really matters. The ATS interior is pretty similar to the SRX interior, so I suppose Cadillac is being consistent, but a gripe of mine about the SRX aside from drivetrain is that it reminds me of a Chevy/GMC. It seems like GM has the same designers working on every car and they all start to look the same, there isn't enough difference between the brands.

I too think it looks a little soft, it doesn't stand out that much. But they went for broad appeal, so that is okay, and red is a dumb color, so it may look better in other colors. What I like is the low weight, with the FE3 suspension it should be pretty nimble. I also like the variety of color, wood, and material choices for the interior, that should help appeal to a broad customer base of young and old. Too many cars offer black leather and silver trim, or tan leather and wood, and that's it. Nice to see multiple woods, aluminum and carbon fiber. The interior layout looks good too, it isn't anything fancy looking but looks functional. What I do not like is the headlights that sweep back toward the windshield, the front end reminds me of a Cruze sort of. I also don't like how the spoiler integrates to the trunk, that carve out almost Bangle-like tail looks bad, and I don't like inset or center placed exhaust either. #1 complaint is the center stack and HVAC vents is out of the Equinox. This is Cadillac, you can't go to the Equinox parts bin. The trunk is tiny, interior sounds smaller than what the 3-series or A4 might give, but I'd have to sit in them to compare. Overall I'd say a solid double, they got themselves in scoring position, but still have work to do.

Price is a little steep, but it could gain value over time if preserved. But to spend that much money you'd almost have to drive it all the time, the car is too bad ass to sit in a garage. If only they had 2 for sale, one to preserve and one to drive.

I don't like how the hood seems to slope downward so much or the blacked out front bumper in the grille, I think they could have made that cross bar thing more prominent like it is on the Charger. But I like the rest of the exterior. On the inside, overall I like it, I like the creativity on the storage areas under the front seat or in the glove compartment. My one gripe is so many cars now have an integrated console, with HVAC and radio/sat-nav controls all in one, this has that cheap rubber separator that reminds me of a 90s GM car. I prefer a Focus or Elantra to this, but the Dart in pictures looks far better than any of the Japanese compacts or the Jetta.

What about this chassis with a twin-turbo V8?

Agreed, that is awesome. Cheers for sure, at $35k it is still worth it. This is my favorite Chevy of the 90s, probably my favorite Chevy of the past 25 years.

I read earlier that they could get the E-class under 2800 lbs, but putting a wimpy hybrid powertrain in it is dumb. Use the 302 hp V6 instead.

Well Cadillac is offering 0%, so they are even more aggressive on that front. Mercedes will win, they have been on a roll lately.

$25k isn't too much, CR-V's and Escapes sell for that (maybe not base trim but reasonably equipped). Small does not have to equal cheap. There are people that don't need a lot of room but want a nice vehicle.

My guess is a Lotus Exige whoops this thing in handling and will cost $30-40k less. I just don't see Acura making a good sports car, somehow it will end up on an Accord platform turned backward so it is rear engine/rear drive, rather than front engine/front drive. And the concept will no doubt have some mythical engine and the real car will get the Accord V6 with turbo and the CRZ's hybrid system.

I actually sort of like these, and this one is in good shape. Although I like the Allante more, and you could probably find one for a price similar to what Reatta's go for. I like the 1980s Mercdes SL as well.

Cheers. Looks to be in good condition and it isn't that pricey for a classic car. And it has an intimidating front end that you don't see anymore in the world of aerodynamics and pedestrian safety.

Jeers, they ruined it. They have gotten rid of the essence of the Econoline van. The Econoline needs to be cargo trim or 15 passenger church van, that is what it is all about.

Sounds awesome, I want to spend $90,000 on a car with performance equal to a Mustang or 3-series.

Hooray for pointless vehicles! I myself am surprised they still make this thing, but 3rd world dictators seem to keep buying them. It is almost funny just to see how long they can keep it on sale at this point. The Jeep Wrangler has been pretty much the same for a long time, the G-Wagen isn't too different aside from costing 5 times as much.

lolwut? I've never heard of this newfangled Nissan Rondo before. I realized I messed up after I posted that, I was thinking Nissan Rouge. But all these mini-utes are pretty pointless anyway.

It has a bit of a VW Tiguan or Nissan Rondo vibe to it. Perhaps a little of a Pontiac Vibe, vibe as well. I don't like it, but GM needs a small SUV and females will probably like it.

I hope they make it look like similar to the Optima/Sorento/Forte style, because Kia has some decent looking cars now. And most importantly, RWD with a V8!

I do wonder how GM markets Cadillac in Europe or China..never seen ads from those markets...do they emphasize the American nature of it? They should... Buicks dominate in China. But Buick isn't a luxury car, it is mid-range car. They sold 550,000 Buicks in China, but a lot of that is the Excell and the Astra hatch and Verano. LaCrosse and Regal combined for 183,000 cars. Which are strong sales numbers, but they aren't priced in the luxury range. The Buick version of the Commodore/Statesmen is 369,000 RMB, about what a Mercedes C200 costs in China. Cadillac sold 17,000 vehicles in China in 2010, so a pretty big drop off when you move to the higher price range.

Building the car is one thing, then they have to convince the international market to buy it. That is the hardware part. Even in China, Cadillac is far behind the Germans in sales. I think the sales/marketing end of it will be harder than the engineering side.

I don't know if Cadillac has the money, people and hours to produce a lineup that can sell in Europe. That is my worry. It will take years because the SRX and CTS will have to be next generation so that puts them back a few years. Maybe 2016you or so they can make a run at it. But while Cadillac gets cash if the SRX and CTS in the USA, Mercedes is getting cash off multiple models in multiple countries. The S-class for example is the most profitable car and globally it outsells the CTS. Mercedes can keep building their lead, they have the most money.