smk4565

Agreed with Riviera74, there is no vision or unique selling point. Mercedes could make an ad with a 3.0 liter CTS vs a G55 AMG and laugh about how the Cadillac sport sedan is slower than a military truck/suv but they don't. They have better things to do.

The Camry is still doing pretty well considering it is at the end of the model cycle, and the new one is coming for 2012. It is still the top seller in the segment. I am surprised the Corolla hasn't dropped more, because it is so inferior to the newer offerings in that segment. They were lucky to sell 16,000 Corollas, unless they fleeted a ton of them. On the Lexus side, nice to see them dropping. They used to be good for over 20,000 a month, lately only about 14,000 a month. Maybe customers don't want to spend big money on a dressed up Toyota anymore. The German brands have stepped it up the past couple years, the Lexus line-up seems so stale, the only new stuff are dopey hybrids like the CT200.

Lincoln sales are pretty miserable, the decline keeps on going. F150 on the other hand is kicking butt.

The mid-size crossovers are doing well. The Malibu is the spot for concern, even if near the end of a model run, that is a pretty low sales volume. Cadillac's line-up is pretty thin.

That's weak, I want a million speeds! Although I wonder what this would do to the acceleration and fuel economy numbers of an Accent or Elantra that have a little engine without a broad power band.

Audi has to make claims on how they do something better than Mercedes or BMW, because in the USA they get crushed in sales despite selling cars at a lower price. These comparison ads are usually ways for a lesser brand to try to get noticed, because overall their car isn't as good. When you are on top, you don't have resort to stuff like that.

Agreed with Bimmer and Moltar. A V6 Camry can smoke an Escalade in a drag race, so what? It is a pointless and irrelevant comparison. Cadillac needs to get their own house in order and set the standard, not just make meaningless claims to appear like they matter.

I agree 0-60 in 7.5 seconds isn't really slow, it is adequate for regular driving. A V6 Camry or Accord can crush a C300 in a straight line, but so what. The C300 isn't meant for straight line speed. The C300 is there for people that want a Mercedes and don't care about speed. So many brands want to try to knock Mercedes down to their level, but it won't work. If Cadillac wants to beat Mercedes, they have to raise themselves up, not try to bring Mercedes down.

That is a lot of shifting, but I suppose the 6th and 7th gear wouldn't be used much unless on steady highway cruise. 7 or 8 speeds works when the computer does the shifting for you, but I don't know if manuals will be able to follow that trend when the driver has to do the work.

Everyone picks on the C300, the Suzuki Kizashi claims to be faster or handle better than it to. The C300 is slow, but that doesn't make it a bad car. And they do offer better engines for people who want to go faster. In general, I am not much of a fan of non-direct comparisons because you can always find one thing a car does better than another. But look how many automakers want to make comparisons in ads to Mercedes. Compared to Mercedes who rarely mentions other auto brands in their commercials, they know they are the top brand, no need for them to compare to others.

They are 0.4 inches different in length. But they aren't that comparable since the Sonata is more powerful, lighter, more fuel efficient, lower in cost, and has better warranty.

I don't think the 4.0 turbo V8 is really meant to compete with high performance cars, even though in A8 trim it has 500 hp. The S6 and S7 are really to go against base model Jaguars, E550, and 550i. The S8 does give decent fuel economy for a 500 hp car, but if they want to make the A8 exciting, they should put the engine form the Murcielago in there, since they are done with that car.

It does have a little 370Z or next gen Genesis coupe in it, but it still looks like a Jag. I hope dynamically it is better than a Cayman/Boxster, it looks better already. And the image is better because it isn't a Porsche Cockster or poor man's 911.

Yep. They found a way to make performance boring. The only thing I like is the approach they take with the 2.0 turbo, 3.0 supercharged V6, and 4.0 turbo V8. I like the lower displacement boosted engine theme because they get good torque and fuel economy numbers. Although BMW does that on the 5-series now with turbo 4, 6, and 8 cylinders.

On the first statement I would agree. It goes beyond the price to image also, a German car has the image of more sophistication (the wine, cheese, and opera crowd), a Cadillac is for old people in Florida or gangsters. Point 2 I am not sure of yet. If GM was so serious, why the front drive vehicles with Chevy underpinnings. GM said they were serious on Cadillac in 2003 when the first CTS came out, and it would be followed by a more rear drivers to fight the Germans, and 8 years later the STS, SRX (rwd) and XLR are in the graveyard. So I remain skeptical that Cadillac is for real serious this time. On the 3rd point, I hope you are correct and Cadillac gets back to the Standard of the World. But as I said, I am not convinced yet. The ATS is step one and it is going after a legend so it better be good.

I've had both rear window regulators replaced. The front window broke for a different reason that I forget. And my car has 3 engine mounts, I have replaced all 3, and the mechanics say that the V8 lifts because of the torque and it bends the mounts until they break. Why didn't GM make a stronger mount then? I had to replace the AC compressor last year also, my second GM car in a row that had that break. I hope they have learned from these quality problems, because I like my car, but with the maintenance record I have had with it, I am hesitant to consider another GM car.

I like it, the XF is still my favorite Jag, but it is good to see them bringing out a lower priced coupe than the XK. I'd like to see them do the supercharged V6 plus the turbo diesel V6 (available already in Europe) on the XF to expand the range. The best thing is Jag is getting back to their sports car roots, I hope they put this on sale, if they can do it for under $50k base, that would be sweet.

The real one actually looks worse than the bad photo shop of a couple days ago. Perhaps this cross sharing can lead to Jeep getting a rear drive 2+2 sports coupe. There have been rumors of a Jaguar or Bentley SUV also, this is just so lame. If you are a sports car brand, build sports cars, don't build trucks.

ATS coupe on this platform, but I guess that doesn't really count as building something else on it. Camaro is likely, which should mean, smaller and lighter, which is a good thing. Rumor is the next CTS will be built on the Alpha platform also and get 4-cylinder and 6-cylinder power.

I think it depends on what you call quality. JD Power sees quality/reliability as fewest repairs, and in this case a Camry does great and a BMW maybe not so well. But if looking at how long a car will last, I think German cars do very well. Not only do the engines last, but the leather and interior trim pieces hold up well over time because they are using high grade materials to begin with. This is where Cadillac has to get better, Cadillac is probably doing just fine in keeping repair costs down. Cadillac may already beat BMW and Mercedes in repair costs, but BMW and Mercedes still whoop them in sales. I'll put my personal story into this. I got my Aurora with 26k miles on it 8 years ago. Now it has 135k miles, I've been good with all the maintenance on it, the engine still runs very well, although it does burn about 2 quarts of oil in between oil changes. But on that car I've had to have 3 power windows repaired, 3 engine mounts replaced, 2 wheels because they leak (and the 2 originals are leaking now) torque converter and obviously shocks/struts and tie rods which I expect after 100k miles on Pittsburgh's pothole filled roads. It hasn't been a cheap car to maintain. But what annoys me most is the headliner on the sliding sun roof cover is peeling back and falling off, and I don't even open or close it often. I just get the feeling when they built that car, they didn't built it to last more than 10 years. I still get that feeling from GM cars, they they aren't really built for the long haul. Even the calendar in my car stops around 2020, I mean didn't they think the car might last more than 20 years?

My only fear is it looks like there could be some Bangle-butt in the trunk. Other car makers have copied that recently, and I don't know why.

Or transaxles... FWD transaxles. They have Mini which has FWD transaxels.

It looks a lot like a C-class. If the headline said next-gen C-class caught testing, I'd probably believe it. But I like the proportions of the C-class, so I like the shape of this car too.

BMW has the ZF 8-speed in most models, and the 3-series is supposed to get it on the next generation, so they are set for transmission. I also don't see BMW selling their engines to a mainstream luxury car maker. They can do it to Fisker, or a company like Fisker, Spyker, even Lotus because those companies don't compete directly with BMW. I could see a share on range extender electric drivetrains, but BMW has the gas engine part down. And I don't know if a lithium-ion battery and electric motor is all that hard to engineer. I think BMW can handle it alone, but a team up with GM to work on powertrain for next Volt and i3 and i8 cars I can see happening also.

They didn't mention price or weight. Interesting how this car might be faster (in a straight line) than a more expensive CTS-V.