smk4565

I never cared for this slogan much, it just didn't seem to make sense for a car company. But GM does have a problem with changing slogans every year, and not developing clear brand identities that you can have a slogan fit. "Chevy runs deep" doesn't really inspire me at all to look at a Chevy. The best slogan out there is "ultimate driving machine" (and BMW needs to lose the Joy crap), because it is what the car is, and it makes you want to drive one.

I actually think he should stay retired. He had some good ideas and pushed GM to improve interiors and quality and get a more global approach. But with the winners also came the Astra, Aura, Sky, Solstice, G8, and a lot of money wasted on brands that ending up dying anyway. Most outsiders knew in 2005 that GM had a brand management problem, he himself said GM had damaged brands. If Lutz were great, he would have scrapped those brands then and worked on Chevy and Cadillac. I'd like to see GM get some new blood in there, like Ford did with Mullally. At least Bill Ford recognized the problem was bigger than they knew how to fix, and Mulally saved Ford form bankruptcy and government bail out. Bob Lutz is the past, GM needs the future.

They should have green-lighted it years ago, I don't get what is taking them so long, but at least it looks like they are doing a flagship car. Hopefully the economy is better then also, because big sedan sales aren't doing so well, and that segment is getting more and more crowded.

CTS, LaCrosse and the crossovers are doing well, I think the 3 body styles on the CTS is helping big time. The surprise to me is the Yukon, must have been big incentives on those. I think the Regal had a nice month considering it doesn't really fit in a normal segment, it slots between family sedan and entry-lux. DTS and Lucerne are dead, I wonder if many of those that would have bought a DTS or Lucerne are opting for the cheaper (and better) LaCrosse. Makes me wonder what the XTS is going to do.

The Genesis is picking up some. I figured it would once the Equus went on sale. No doubt people go in looking at an Equus, and then settle for the Genesis.

A turbo 3.5 liter would make more than 300 hp. The 3.7 makes 330ish hp, a few years back when the VQ V6 was a 3.5 liter they were near 300 hp with it. Perhaps they will turbo the 2.5 liter V6 and combine with the 7-speed, which could get near 300 hp and high mileage. I'd think a turbo 3.5 liter would be 360-370 hp. The Mercedes diesel is a nice addition.

Well, it's like with Corvettes...it's the older guys that can afford to buy expensive toys. Better to see them driving one than some subliterate rapper felon or Justin Beiber. Beiber has a Ferrari. It was just in the news that he had a minor accident in it. But the trend of old guys buying a CTS-V doesn't surprise me. The guys that grew up with 60s era muscle cars and have money for toys like Corvettes and Cadillacs. The under 45 crowd with money for toys would most likely prefer an import. Which is hopefully something Cadillac can change.

You are pinning Cadillac's future on the XTS? I don't see an oversized Lexus ES350 as the answer to their problems. Well, the XTS will give them a model to compete w/ the MKS, RL, ES, S80, and 9-5. And the ES is smaller and cheaper than all the others. Look at the rest of the list, all sales duds. Why even bother competing with that.

You are pinning Cadillac's future on the XTS? I don't see an oversized Lexus ES350 as the answer to their problems.

It looks a little better than the current car, but the grille is a bit Audi and the look up front is of a Nissan/Infiniti. The current car as a weird look from front view, but looks good form the side and back. Hopefully the finished product looks good, I'd like to see them put the V8 in this car.

FWD from a performance brand = Boooooooo. FWD on a hot hatch type of car is acceptable, but all RWD is still better. I don't get why all these brands want mediocrity over superiority.

Read people over 70.

I would agree that being #1 in sales doesn't make a car the best one in the segment, especially in segments with fleet sales. But the E-class and 5-series are about tied for tops in that segment. I like the Jaguar XF, but it is V8 only, so that limits it on buyers. My main point was to refute the claim that Audi turned around, why can't Lincoln do the same. The A6, A8 and Q7 are all in the back of the class in sales, even the A4 sales at about the same rate as the Lincoln MKZ. Audi does a few things well, but they aren't exactly the model of luxury success for the USA. Globally, with A3's and 4-cylinder A6's and diesels they do well because they have fuel efficiency and lower price point than a Mercedes. I don't see Lincoln being successful by improving the sheet metal and interiors of the MKS and MKZ. A $40,000 Fusion is still a hard sell.

VAG was able to do it with Audi, so why can't Ford do it with Lincoln? Or, rephrasing the question, why is Ford management so incompetent in your opinion? Audi has a global market, and most of their global sales are at the lower end of the luxury market, on smaller cars. In the USA, Audi isn't having a ton of success, but they do alright. Lincoln doesn't have a chance internationally, so they have to make it in the USA. An E-class outsells an Audi A6 nearly 10 to 1, so Audi's plan isn't working in that regard. Audi does have good interiors across the board, this is something they do well, and their cars get fairly good mileage compared to other luxury brands, and they did a good job marketing Quattro. Audi also has had a ton of racing success at Le Mans, and VW owns Lamborghini and Bentley, so they can do an Audi R8 based off a Gallardo, or a put a Lambo V10 in an A8 sedan. Ford doesn't understand global luxury (see Volvo, Jaguar, Land Rover, Aston Martin) first off. Secondly, they don't have other brands or racing pedigree for Lincoln. At best Lincoln can work on interiors and fuel economy, but I don't see that as being enough. When you have 270 hp, 34 mpg family sedans for $25,000, why spend $40k on a slower, thirstier Lincoln. Plus the technology and features on family compact sedans is catching up with the entry lux sedans.

Can't save Lincoln by doing their current strategy executed better. Taking the MKS and making it more gorgeous or changing the interior doesn't solve the obesity problem it has, or the nose heavy problem. Regardless of what they do to the MKZ and MKS on those platforms, the car won't be as good as a European car. The absolute best Lincoln can hope for is to build a better Acura. And Acura is in the dump also. Unless, they leverage the Ford Falcon and Mustang platforms and basically re-invent themselves. To fix Lincoln you need to blow it up and start over, at a cost of billions of dollars. That is a big gamble, which I don't see Ford making.

Revamped LNF could work. But the engine as it is now isn't fuel efficient enough. I don't know how the NVH is since I haven't driven one, but obviously that engine was designed with Pontiac, Saturn and Chevy Cobalt/HHR in mind. So I'd imagine that it wasn't designed to Cadillac specification. The fuel economy race will go all the way to the top. Audi just revealed an A8 hybrid that gets 37 mpg. And there are plug-ins and electric cars at high dollar amounts coming. I think for a luxury brand to make it they have to cover both ends. Some will want performance, some will want economy, and many will want both. So if Cadillac can do a CTS-V, but also a 40 mpg CTS, they are hitting both ends of the market.

The Solstice GXP engine is a bit 2007, I think GM should come up with a new turbo 4 for Cadillac. Adding eAssist to that and an 8-speed transmission gets the ATS and CTS above the 35 mpg mark. Then Cadillac can match up to the hybrids and diesels. Speaking of which, the CTS should get a diesel also. Just how the fuel economy race happened with compacts, and everyone wanting 40 mpg, that is going to start happening with luxury cars. Already 3 luxury brands have 40+ mpg, I'd imagine come 2015, that 7 brands have a 40 mpg car, Cadillac should be trying to be a leader in this, not a follower.

Cadillac does not have a 30 mpg vehicle. Their 7 closest competitors do. That is a problem for Cadillac. Mercedes has a lot of guzzlers, but they also operate at a higher end of the market, where the consumer doesn't care as much. Plus they have a lot of high power engines. But Mercedes has high mileage cars in Europe, they can import those here to have high milage offerings, and it looks like they will over the next couple years. Mercedes also doesn't have a sales problem, they are having a huge year in the US and globally. Mercedes sales have grown in recent decades, where as Cadillac's best year was 1976. It's been 35 years of decline. The $35-50k luxury market has a lot of hybrids and diesels, and turbo 4's. BMW has a 36 mpg 3-series, a 32-34 mpg (depending on EPA rating) 5-series. Cadillac is missing an opportunity for sales by not making anything that gets better than 27 mpg. If they want to survive here and go global, they need a 35 mpg ATS and CTS, maybe even a 40 mpg CTS.

By making one sedan with average fuel economy and 2 thirsty SUV's, Cadillac's mileage looks good?

I must say I like the Hyundai Veloster a lot. With that the Accent and Elantra, Hyundai has a mighty strong presence in the compact market. The Fiesta and Focus are really good and appealing also. I think the Civic and Corolla are in trouble because they are so boring. It used to be that every compact car was boring, and the Civic and Corolla dominated because they were better built, longer lasting. But now a lot of these cars are well built, and small cars aren't boring anymore.

Luxury car makes top mpg: Acura 22/31 mpg Audi 30/42 mpg BMW 24/34 mpg (528i estimated, EPA figure not available) Infiniti 27/32 mpg Lexus 43/40 mpg (also have 35/34 and 32/28) Lincoln 41/36 mpg Mercedes 22/33 mpg Cadillac 18/27 mpg. Their 7 closest competitors have a 30 mpg car, three of them have a 40 mpg car.

Looks kind of like the Lexus HS250h, which is also an ugly car. But give credit to them for adding that rear arm rest. I think Chevy followed the right Asian brand. Hyundai is the future, Toyota is the past. A front drive family can't really handle more than 260-270 hp, and the buyer of this car doesn't even want more than that. They care more about fuel economy, and Hyundai has it right, with a 4, turbo 4, and hybrid 4.

I think for a long time, GM (and even the entire auto market) has needed a luxury compact rather than all the sport compacts that are out there. There is definitely a market for a smaller, cheaper version of an ES350/Avalon/MKZ sort of car with some luxury and smooth ride. Although, I get a big Pontiac G6 vibe from the Verano because of the headlights and slab sides, which cheapens the car for me.

So why doesn't Cadillac replace the transmission? I don't think they are unable to produce an 8-speed, but I do think the cost cutter culture still reigns supreme, and I'm sure they believe that a 6-speed is "good enough." And here in lies what holds Cadillac back. That "it's good enough" mentality of GM that works for Chevy doesn't work for Cadillac.

That engine drinks fuel. If the CTS turbo 4 was 0-60 in 6.2 seconds and 24/34 mpg, it would be appealing as a base engine, because the average buyer doesn't care that much about robust acceleration. Even a 3.6 liter CTS is barely quicker than a 528i, and at a loss of 6-7 mpg, poor trade off.