smk4565

C-class outsold the 3-series this month, that is big. Although the 3-series is in transition since the new model comes out in January I think. But still, C-class was #1 and E-class was #3 selling luxury car. Strong showing my the M-class too. The SL needs an update, that thing is dying.

LoL...just a 6spd. I do wonder if Chrysler is working on an 8 speed for their FWD models..they already have one for the good stuff.. No, Marchionne said the 2013 model will have an optional ZF 9-speed. It's going to be the S-class and the Dart leading the way, haha.

Could be an Epsilon 2 Impala concept. GM loves economies of scale and the W-body doesn't give them that any more. More likely will be some lame city car concept with an electric motor and 52 horsepower. Those are popular on the auto show circuit recently. ATS is what I am looking forward to the most. The Encore is a vehicle they need, GM needs a small girly crossover because they lose sales to competitors in that segment.

It will have an optional 9-speed transmission. It is going to be like the S-class!!!!

If Hyundai can design and build a DOHC V8 from scratch, then I am sure Cadillac can also. They did it for about 90 years, I'm sure they can do it again. Hyundai is also not coming out of chapter 11 in need to revamp several divisions and with no current V8 design to put into production. At some point the bankruptcy excuse isn't going to be valid anymore.... Agreed! People keep blaming bankruptcy, that was a self inflicted wound and GM still uses some of the same thinking that got them into that mess in the first place. It's time to move on and compete, if they can't afford to fund Cadillac then maybe they still have too many models, too many brands.

What is annoying is how well the Prius and Lexus ES350 sell. I guess I can see the Prius, it has little direct competition and is the best know hybrid. But the Es350 is probably the 4th best selling luxury car and there are so many better options at that price point. Wait, they still make the FJ Cruiser?

This is about as interesting as the new Kenmore refrigerator getting the energy star sticker.

If Hyundai can design and build a DOHC V8 from scratch, then I am sure Cadillac can also. They did it for about 90 years, I'm sure they can do it again.

Both are premium brands though, and they share engines between the R8 and Gallardo. BS. A $114,000 R8 sharing engine with $182,000 Lamborghini is same as a $30,000 Buick sharing engine with $50,000 Cadillac. Audi may be premium but Lamborghini is supercar. The R8 V10 is $150,000 base and $199,000 for the GT model. The $114,000 R8 gives you a V8, not a Lambo engine. Cadillac though goes beyond the engine sharing, they share a lot of platforms and other bits. Escalade/Tahoe, ELR/Volt, XTS/LaCrosse, SRX/Equinox. There is a lot of similarity there, the CTS is the only Cadillac that sets itself apart. 5-6 years ago Cadillac had more unique models, it seems lately they are becoming more and more like the rest of GM. That trend is what bothers me.

The important questions are:- Will having a unique engine architecture for Cadillac lead to substantially better performance and/or refinement Whether a majority of Cadillac buyers will want to pay an additional $5000~8000 for a unique engine architecture built in small volumes The answer to the first question is especially critical since it heavily influences the answer to the second. The extra cost becomes an especially hard sell when it is not backed by substantial superiority. The current breed of I4 and V6 engines shared between Cadillac and Chevy matches the performance levels of competing luxury marques so I do not see room for substantial improvements to be hard by going to an independent engine architecture. A 270hp 2.0 liter turbo or a 315~323hp 3.6 liter V6 is up there with the very best from Audi, BMW, M-B, Acura, Infiniti and Lexus. Although I find the DI system on GM engines to be insufficiently "silenced" -- this however is more of a sound deadening issue and not really an engine architecture issue. On the V8 front, the LS3/L99 pushrod engines currently offer lower weight, smaller size and better fuel economy than competing DOHC V8s of similar output. This is an advantage to be capitalized on not something to frown at. The upcoming Generation V smallblock engines will bring VVT, cylinder deactivation and direct injection to bear, so I fully expect them to be competitive. Given the current landscape, I personally do not support the idea of doing a unique engine architecture for Cadillac and/or Buick. However, I do find that there is room of more substantial tuning differences between engines destined for Chevies and those slated for Caddies. One area, for example, is in fuel requirements. While the typical Chevy buyer will probably pay a notable amount of attention as to whether the car he buys will drink regular unleaded, somebody sinking 40, 50, 60 or 70K on a luxury car is much less likely to care. The difference between 87 octane and and 91 octane is a good 0.5~1.0 points in compression ratio. Higher compression equals more power as well as slightly better fuel economy. Hence, I'll like to see Cadillac V6s and V8s feature a compression bump along with the expected 5~7% power increase at the expense of requiring a 91 octane recommendation. I'll also like to see additional silencing on the Cadillac and Buck engines -- especially for the medium frequency DI groans. I agree on the differentiation of the V6. Making a 280-300 hp V6 for Chevy and a Cadillac V6 with a few different parts and higher compression ratio with 320-325 hp is a good way to start, and they are basically on that path. Nissan/Ford/Honda all do it with the 3.5 liter V6, then the 3.7 liter versions for Infiniti/Lincoln/Acura. GM could go down that road too with 2 displacements or maybe a supercharger on Cadillac V6s. Either way there should be something to set the Cadillac V6 apart from the Chevy/Buick versions, even if it is just 25 hp and maybe quieter operation. I disagree though about the V-series engine, and a Cadillac V8 in general. Cadillac should have a DOHC V8 that is theirs only. $5,000 extra isn't that much on a V-series product. V-series isn't supposed to be "cheap value" it is supposed to be "standard of the world." And the Audi A8 gets 28 mpg highway, and the Mercedes E550 coupe gets 27 mpg so good fuel economy can be had from a DOHC V8. The Mercedes V8 has the same highway mileage as a CTS V6 and the Merc has an extra 243 lb-ft of torque. That is a considerable difference.

AMG does. The CTS-V engine is not hand built, it is built on an assembly line in Silao, Mexico (where they make the Avalanche, Suburban Yukon XL and Escalade ESV/EXT). The Corvette ZR1 has a hand built engine, and I have read the Gran Sport engine is hand built because of the dry sump oil system. Those are built in Michigan. Aside from that, I see the problem as the Corvette engine is not made to be "standard of the world" in noise, vibration and refinement. A V-series Cadillac should be fast, but also refined, it is still a luxury car.

I think the Hyundai Genesis Coupe will be there. I wouldn't be surprised to see a smaller Buick SUV concept. Or else a small Chevy crossover, because that is an area GM is lacking. With the new Escape and Mazda CX-5 coming that segment is getting competitive. The Equinox is really a midsize vehicle, GM doesn't have an SUV of less than 180 inches in length. (Gamma or Delta based)

I like the sound of industry leading 68% high strength steel body, and offering 3 engines. Too many new cars are overweight and have limited engine choices, or at lease limited engines at launch. I hope they launch with all 3 engines and not just the weak engine, and make you wait a year to get the better engine.

I mean on previous cars. Fiat and Alfa over the years were never known for reliability, they were known for the opposite. And Chrysler cars pre-bankruptcy were rubbish, case in point the Sebring. And to go from the Caliber, the worst car in the class, to no car in the class, to then jump to the head of the class is a tall order. So that is why I am skeptical. I do really like the rear tail light design and I usually don't like Dodge/Chrysler design. So I think this car may win over some new fans which is what Chrysler/Dodge need. I'd say the Focus and Elantra are the best looking compacts now, this car looks promising from the teasers, I'd look forward to the final version to see if it supplants those 2.

Both are premium brands though, and they share engines between the R8 and Gallardo.

Don't forget the W engines that are shared with VW, Audi. Bugatti, and Bently. Today a company needs to share with divisions or it will need to share with other companies. BMW has worked with GM and now is talking to Toyota to share cost on new technologies and parts. Development cost are so high any more the cost need to be spread out as much as they can. This is why even cross town rivals GM and Ford shared funding in the transaxle they co developed. you mean like the V6 that the E, C, SLK, R, ML, GLK, and CLS use that comes from the Sprinter? The Sprinter originally had an inline five cylinder, replaced by the 72 degree V6 that is used in the E-class and S-class (and Jeep for a while). But the engine makes more power in the sedans than it does in a Sprinter. The 3.5 liter gas V6 in all those cars is a 60 degree V. And I never complained about sharing a V6 with Cadillac and Buick/Chevy, because you can tweak the engine for each car. As they do with a CTS and a Traverse, or as Honda or Nissan do. Although they both have 3.5 and 3.7 liter V6s for some differentiation. My complaint was V-series cars sharing an engine with a Chevy. An AMG engine for example is only in an AMG product.

The teaser photos look good; I like the full width tail lamps and I am glad to see someone put some bold styling into a compact car. So many small cars are boring looking. Not sure about the name, but since alliteration is hot right now with domestic cars, Dodge Dart fits the mold. Chrysler/Fiat build quality I am not sold on however.

Japanese cars may be for the most part economical and reliable, but they are mostly boring to look at and boring to drive too. Japanese brands haven't had that good of a sales year, especially Honda and Toyota. Hyundai is doing well, but Toyota might have it's best days behind them. And what Toyota/Honda product is really fun to drive, they are all appliances. Europe has many more luxury and performance cars that are interesting.

But the CTS-V isn't built on the same platform, suspension, transmission and engine as a Malibu or Cruze. And actually, I'd prefer Cadillac make their own engine that is not used in Corvette for their V-series cars. But that is another topic altogether. I am not convinced the ELR won't just be a Cadillac Volt with a different body, maybe with a battery upgrade.

The argument of "they need this car to spread out the development cost of the Volt" I think is a bad one. The Volt should be able to support its own development cost, and even if it couldn't spread it onto another Chevy. It shouldn't be Cadillac's role to spread development costs of a slow selling Chevy. Cadillac should be building cars that luxury buyers want, and cars that will improve their brand image. By saying we need the ELR to help cover Volt costs smells of "old GM" thinking and supporting legacy costs and sunk costs should not be the goal. The goal is to build profitable vehicles that people want.

What is odd to me is the EPA made the rating, it isn't really Hyundai's fault. But maybe the EPA rating will change next year.

I am all for saving gas and think Cadillac needs hybrids and diesels. But I would rather see a hybrid CTS or plug-in CTS than another car built of a Chevy platform. It seems that GM's plan is to have every Cadillac platform share with a Chevy, that is a dangerous path to go down. Plus, Cadillac keeps stating they are a performance luxury brand but slow FWD cars isn't performance. If the ELR does 0-60 in 6 seconds flat then great, but if it is just slow like the Volt then it doesn't belong in Cadillac's line up.

Great design couldn't save the XLR. I think the XLR is the best looking Cadillac ever made, but it didn't have the build quality, performance, interior, etc to justify the price. The BMW 6-series had 550 units last month in the USA, but they sell over 1,000 a month globally. Which is low volume, but it is basically a 5-series coupe, it isn't different model. The Z4 has pretty low sales, only 3,200 this year in the USA. If they built a plug-in CTS that sold 400 units a month I'd see that as a better investment than an ELR that sells 500 units a month.

I don't think fuel economy or being able to drive 30 miles on electricity is enough to sell a car costing maybe $60,000. People spending that much money on a car aren't looking to save $2,000 a year in fuel costs. At that price point, Cadillac is going to have to offer a lot more. A Volt with a nicer interior sounds to me like Lincoln thinking, and we all know that doesn't work.

I think it's more that GM needs to spread the investment in the Volt hardware across multiple models... Spending more money to make a car that will sell maybe 500 cars a month and possibly steals sales from the Volt is going to be more profitable? Maybe it will be, but I have doubts. At one time they tried to spread costs of the W-body across 5 brands, or the GMT360 across 5 brands, 4 minivans, etc. All those badge jobs just led to lost money, and I realize this isn't a straight badge job. But still, hybrid luxury cars aren't selling the sales charts on fire, Cadillac should have one, but perhaps a CTS hybrid would be the cheapest and easiest to make, and sell the most. Look at current luxury cars sales, Mercedes is dominating right now, and fuel efficiency isn't their strength. So while I think a "green" car is important I wouldn't make it a priority; performance, technology and engineering seem to matter more to luxury buyers. If Cadillac can do all the other stuff well, then throw on fuel economy as a bonus that is great. But for fuel economy to be the #1 attribute isn't the way to go.