smk4565

Well the Quattroporte's engine sounds excellent, but it should since it is form the Ferrari 430. But despite the awesome sound it makes, it isn't worth $100k when there are other better cars. And they are insane if they want the M157 to go near $200,000.

That can't be worth that much. $125k for a Chevelle/El Camino seems like a lot. That is a ZR1 or the price of a lot of good 50s and 60s era sports cars.

The Maserati Lebaron was a joke. I am sure this will be better executed but it won't work. The Chrysler 300 platform isn't really on par with a CTS even, yet they want it to go against $80-180,000 sedans? This seems kind of like the Jaguar X-type mistake but at a higher price point. Quality and reliability isn't a strong point of Chrysler or Fiat either. I'm not sold on this idea either, if you were shopping for a $100,000 car why would you want a stretched Chrysler 300 with a Marerati V8.

54 mpg seems like a high target. But my guess is electric cars will somehow raise manufacturers averages. There will be some way to use creative math with electric cars to fudge the numbers of gas powered cars to get to the 54 mpg.

Please no X6, ZDX, or 4-door cross-coupe-fastback-hatch vehicle. They are pointless, they don't have the cargo space of a normal SUV, and they don't handle as well as a car. Cadillac needs to focus on their car lines.

I actually meant that the Escalade is a Chevy Tahoe underneath the same way that Lincolns and Acuras are Fords and Hondas. I think the Escalade will stay Tahoe based, but if it did move to Lambda, the same problem of having your top vehicle be a Chevy with chrome, wood and leather exists.

New SRX sells better than the old one because the old one was $10,000 more expensive and looked too long and too wagon like. Plus the new SRX is a better size. And yes, mostly women shop in this segment and they care more about soft, easy, predictable FWD, rather than the handling and performance advantage of RWD. Also consider the GLK and X3 are compacts, compared to more mid-size Lincoln/Lexus/Cadillac entrants to this segment. That "more room for the kids" argument helps the RX350 over an X3 also. But the segment may not always be like that, especially as mainstream crossovers get better and near the limit of FWD performance. Plus, Cadillac has no competitor to the M-class or X5, and there is probably more profit to be had at that price point than at the entry level one. SRX sells for now, but I wonder if the same formula will be working come 2018-2020. Acura and Lincoln have tumbled in recent years with that strategy, I don't like Cadillac going down that road and they are doing it with 3 of 5 current/future vehicles (Escalade, XTS, SRX).

X3 28i is 19/26 X3 35i is 16/23 Why? Gear Ratios, gear ratios, gear ratios. The BMW's ZF 8-speed tranny simply has a taller top gear. According to Fueleconomy.gov which lists official EPA rating,s the X3 35i gets 19/26 mpg. And yes the BMW/ZF 8-speed gives it an advantage, but that is what makes them BMW. They constantly work to offer the best engines and transmissions. Cadillac digs up the 6-speed out of a Malibu/Equinox, and puts in a gutless 3 liter V6 (again from the Equinox) and calls it a day. Until now when they realized the error and put the correct engine into the SRX. Cadillac can put an 8-speed in their cars, not one is stopping them. Then they can have advantageous gear ratios also.

8 more HP than the BMW but the SRX gives up 35 lb-ft and the BMW hits it's peak torque at 1300 rpm. But more importantly the X3 gets 3 mpg higher in city and highway. If the SRX were on the correct platform, not only would handling be improved, but it would open it up to better engines and transmissions. The SRX, MKZ and RX350 all offer basically the same drivetrain, but they get by with it because drivetrain and handling aren't important to most consumers in this segment. Fuel economy may be however. But all 3 of those SUVs can easily hit $45,000 and they offer about the same horsepower and fuel economy of a $29k Kia Sorrento. Over long term, I just don't see those 3 offering enough to differentiate themselves from mass volume SUVs. It is the same reason the Acura TL and Lincoln MKZ don't sell as well as a CTS, C-class or 3-series. At the end of the day, the MKZ is still a Fusion, just like the MKZ/SRX/RX350 have a lot of mass produced generic FWD underneath the sheet metal.

That is the engine that should have been in the SRX from day one. Better late than never though. On a related note, the X3 xDrive35i gets 19/26 mpg in AWD trim, 3 better than the SRX. Luckily for Cadillac most buyers in this segment don't care about power and fuel economy, but I still think the SRX is on the wrong platform which limits them on powertrain.

So more power, more refined chassis and more space in the back. Hmmm... The the final Jeopardy answer is...

I sat in a Kizashi at the auto show, it was pretty nice for the class. It was a more loaded up model, but the interior seemed well made with a few nice materials. And it has the size, price, fuel economy and enough performance. Probably that or a Subaru are the best fit. I like luxury so the MKZ for equal money would tempt me. Hard to pass up that VW Phaeton though.

I break this down into 2 segments. To get AWD with decent mileage you need a car or a 4-cylinder, small SUV. To buy a small SUV new and get heated seats and some features can easily run over $25k regardless whether it be Equinox, CR-V, even the Kia Sorrento can rise near $30k pretty quickly. So that leaves 2008-09 used SUVs, Ford Escape Hybrid, Saturn Vue, Santa Fe, Pontiac Torrent, etc. Segment 2 is sedans, which to get new with AWD for sub $25k you are looking at Suzuki and Subaru. But again going to a 2008-2009 car opens up the Passat, Fusion, MKZ, well equipped Legacy, even Cadillacs and Audis. The used sedan market is pretty good at $20-25k.

Probably has low miles due to the V8-6-4 not working, haha. It is in excellent condition, but $25,000 seems steep for a car like that. The 81-85 Seville just doesn't seem like a classic or collectible car now, or in the future. Where as ClassyEldo's 1971 Eldorado is a classic car with character. I'd stop to look at that if I were down at the Vintage Grand Prix, if I saw an 80s Seville I'd keep walking.

I think the Corvette looks best in black or red, then silver. Personally I prefer black cars in general, so I would say go with black again. White is too plain, but the Corvette looks good in blue too. The Corvette is sort of like Ferrari in that you almost have to get black or red, it was made for those colors. Just like the Toyota Camry was made for that champagne beige color.

I thought of a few dark horses in the Acura RL (being a Honda driver), and the Chrysler Pacifica which is a bit bigger than a CR-V, but an 08 Limited costs about $20k. I still like the MKZ because performance isn't a high priority and the MKZ is considerably nicer than a Subaru. And the MKZ is considerably cheaper on the used market than other AWD entry luxury sedans. Passat 4Motions are $20k, but I never really cared for those. Chrysler 300C and Dodge Magnum with AWD are on the used market for cheap also.

Solution:

V12 is just special. Regardless of how many turbos or whatever you do to a V8, it still isn't a V12. And any turbo or supercharging, or hybrid systems that you put on a V8 can be put on a V12. I would like to see Cadillac offer a V12 engine, even though they don't need one, it would be cool to have.

Not only better fuel economy, but it should solve the lack of torque in the current Cruze. Unless this is a horrible diesel engine, the Cruze diesel won't only be the most economical but the fastest also. I hope the power numbers are similar to the Jetta TDI, if so, great move by Chevy.

A trip back to 2005 finds us 3 excellent and affordable options, none of which are high mileage or beat up. Merecedes S430 4Matic Audi A8 Quattro 4.2 Porsche Cayenne S with the highly desirable 340 hp V8. A 2008 Audi A6 can be had for as little as $25,000.

Isn't an LS3 (and LS2) V8 about 450 lbs? The new 5.5 liter AMG engine (non turbo for SLK) weighs 412 lbs and makes 415 hp, pretty close to the 400-424 the LS3 makes. So it isn't any lighter or more powerful. And the AMG M157 bi-turbo V8 is 450 lbs. Same weight as the LS3, far more power. The LSA is 467 lbs, so heavier, less torque, less fuel economy than the AMG M157. The McLaren 3.8 V8 makes 592 hp and weighs 439 lbs. Again lighter than the LS-series engines and more powerful than all but the LS9, which is a near 500 lb engine. The more power from less engine weight is a flawed argument. I still don't understand how a pushrod V8 is better than a DOHC V8, but a pushrod 4, 6, or 12 cylinder is not better than a DOHC. And if pushrods were so superior, why don't any of the wealthy car companies that can have any engine they want invest in one? Only the 2 bankrupt car companies still make them, plus Bentley who is using an engine from the 1960s out of some traditionalist appeal to their old school buyers.

C&D test of the '11 BMW 528 returned 71 db at "true 70", 68 at '70 cruise' w/ DOHC. "60" is a lofty goal- automakers are only going to achieve that with more & more sound deadening (= more weight). The 3-series I've seen at 66-68 dBA, but the big Cadillac needs to benchmark the most quiet cars. The Hyundai Genesis and Lexus LS460 are at 63 dBA, and the Rolls Royce Phantom is 59 at cruise. But if the Genesis can get 63 dBA, a $100,000 Cadillac should be 60-62.

I still believe pushrod engines are too loud, the Cadillac flagship is going to need an interior sound level of about 60 dBA at 70 mph. GM's most quiet car now is around 67 dBA, and their pushrod V8 cars are over 70 dBA. The 2012 Impala is another example, they switch to DOHC and they gain 91 horsepower and fuel economy goes up 1 mpg. The only reason GM still has a pushrod V8 instead of a DOHC V8 is because they don't have the money to make an all new engine. CO2 emitted is another consideration for overseas markets. For example a CTS-V gives off 13.3 tons of CO2 per year vs 11.0 tons for an S63 AMG. Even a V12 BMW 7-series has a smaller carbon footprint than the CTS-V. Which makes me think a V12 Cadillac sedan should be possible, because the the Escalade's fuel economy and carbon dioxide emissions are on par with the V12 sedans, as is the CTS-V.

The Legacy is bigger than it looks, it has a bulky design, but it is smaller than most mid-size sedans. Even the SRX V6 is 14/22 mpg, that isn't fuel efficient. The STS is 17/26 which isn't too bad, but I agree with Drew saying it is too big. Plus it is like a 65 year old's car. The MKZ gets 28 mpg hwy with FWD, but it drops to 24 mpg on the AWD model (same with the Fusion). So that is a big mark against the MKZ. A 2010 or newer Legacy with the 4-cylinder gets 23/31 mpg. It is hard to get better gas mileage than that with AWD, so if high mileage is more important than luxury, the Legacy is a better option than the MKZ. Personally I like the MKZ. The Pontiac Vibe had AWD too, plus it has EXCITEMENT!!!

Back to cars, In searching near $20k AWD cars, the results were Legacy, Impreza, Fusion/Milan, Taurus/Sable, MKZ, and higher mileage A4, 328, and C280. For equal money, the MKZ is the best Ford product, so it becomes MKZ vs Legacy, which isn't much of a contest. But $23,990 gets one a 2007 Cadillac STS V6 awd, with luxury package and navigation, moonroof, rear parking aid, chrome wheels, heated and cooled seats, and heated steering wheel.