smk4565

Cadillac's only car. 10-20 years of poor product planning, quick fixes, and stop gaps has left Cadillac with the CTS and a pair of SUVs, one that is a chromed up Chevy and another that seems awfully close. What Cadillac was in the large car era of the late 50's to early 80's, slowly died during the 80s and 90s, but the big floaty sedan market in general died. The past image of Cadillac is dead, I think they realized this in 2002 when they did the renaissance with Sigma. However, the execution wasn't good enough and Cadillac needs to reinvent itself again if it plans to survive.

A Maybach-Aston Martin combo car could be really sweet. But Maybach isn't needed, they don't sell, and it doesn't create brand image like a Bugatti Veyron. Mercedes has the S-class, which has spent most of the past 30-40 years being considered the best car in the world. They should drop Maybach and just offer an S-class Pulman limo with an extra fancy interior.

I don't get how you raise the price of a $50,000+ car that has the interior of a $23,000 car and has declining sales.

Seems that way, but those investments can be done with a 10-15 year loan and probably depreciated over 7 years for tax savings. So it isn't like the dealers have to put all that up front, but it does seem like Ford wants to weed out more dealers. The problem with this plan is that Lincoln's product line is so lame, it isn't going to attract people to the dealership in the first place.

Lower the price and the average buyer age will drop. The interior still needs improved, but a V6 Corvette at $42k could draw in more sales. The problem is the Corvette mainly appeals to current Corvette owners and guys that had muscle cars in the 60's and 70's. And that demographic is aging and shrinking. If the Corvette wants younger buyers, the car has to change some. Adding a smaller engine and lower price, along with new styling should help.

The problem list is really long. Brand identity is one, inconsistency of styling themes every 10 years is another. Platforms, marketing, bodies, size, pricing, you can pretty much name it and Lincoln does it wrong. I can't think of anything that Lincoln does better than the luxury car field, aside from the MKZ hybrid's gas mileage. There is nothing they excel in that brings in new buyers, or retains their old ones. To me the main problem is Lincoln is basically a Ford trim level, why pay $10-15k more for the Lincoln when the equal Ford basically has all the same stuff. The engineering behind the product is the main problem, restyling the current product is putting lipstick on a pig. The only way to save Lincoln is with amazing new product. They really need their own RWD chassis, maybe a second shared with the Mustang, and Ecoboost hybrids that are 300+ hp and 40 mpg good, and body panels that aren't off a Ford. They need smaller products too, small cars are the hot segment now, and Lincoln has nothing.

Lincoln's problem isn't in styling or marketing, it is engineering. Fords for thousands less have the same mechanicals, and now most of the same luxury features, and some of the Fords look as good or better than the Lincolns. There really isn't much point to buy a Lincoln, unless you own a Lincoln and don't want to drive anything else. Why buy an overpriced Ford with old geezer brand image when there are 6-8 other luxury brands with better offerings. The MKS and MKT are too large also. Most people don't need a 205 inch long sedan or SUV/Wagon/Hearse vehicle. I can pretty much guarantee that the redesigns won't sell either.

I don't get how DOHC is slower and less powerful. There are DOHC cars that are more powerful and faster than a ZR-1 or Viper. A Pagani Huayra is DOHC yet has 100 hp more than a ZR-1 and weighs less. And vibration and harshness should not be acceptable in a Cadillac. Cadillac should be excellent at everything, not just average or acceptable. But you bring up a good point about volume, the Corvette is not a high end car like an Aston Martin or Ferrari. So it should have sales volume, I think they should keep it in the $45-65k range, so they can't put a high end engine in the car. Interior is the biggest problem, regardless of what engine is under the hood, the Corvette interior is a joke. If they want to push the Corvette up against the high dollar super cars, I think they do need a high tech engine, but I wouldn't position the car there. A Cadillac supercar would be a better choice for that.

GT-R has a back seat and you can drive it in snow because it has AWD.

I'd agree, the front seems a little off. I like the back end, it looks good form the side too. A revised front end could make that car really good looking. I think they designed that car while they were still mostly in copy cat mode. The Sonata/Elantra/Accent are forming more of an design theme for Hyundai and perhaps taking cues from those cars will help.

It simply comes down to not having the V8. I think had they wedged it in there, people would have had not choice but to take the Genesis more seriously. I also think the Genesis coupe should have had a different name from the sedan. The new Camaro would not have ever been taken as seriously if it was called the Impala coupe. With all the DOHC vs IBC discussion in another thread, I wonder if had Hyundai built a IBC V8, it would have fit in the Genesis coupe. I imagine a LSx powered Genesis would have been taken very seriously by many. True about the V8. If Hyundai put their 5.0 liter V8 in the coupe, it would be more powerful than a Mustang GT or Camaro SS, be lower in weight and likely better gas mileage as well. Hyundai also has 8 gears while Ford and Chevy only 6. The Genesis coupe is smaller than the Mustang and Camaro, it is only about as big as a Cruze, so I would think a turbo V6 would be the best option. The new Hyundai V6 has 333 hp, a turbo could get it to 380-390 easily, that is plenty for a car that size and weight. Hyundai wants no part of a pushrod, Chevy and Chrysler only still build them because they don't have the money to make something new from scratch.

That is an amazing time. My first thought was about the tires, and if they are racing tires, but from what I read, even though they are designed for a track, they are street legal road tires. So that is quite the achievement.

The Elantra is averaging 3 days on dealer lots before sales. I also have been seeing a lot of them lately. If the Genesis gets the 8-speed and 333 hp V6, that makes it a pretty appealing package. Add in the Volester (which may or may not sell, but I think it will), and Hyundai really does have the cheap coupe segment covered. I bet the Civic coupe is suffering because of it.

Same amount of people as now, I was only thinking of widening roads. Like making a highway with 2 lanes (in one direction) into 3 lanes. I was only thinking of improvements to the current road system, like using concrete rather than asphalt so it last longer and less construction means less travel delays. Now if they put a Mag-Lev system in that connects major cities, I think road and air travel will both be reduced, but that is another topic entirely. Unless revenue from a gas tax can help fund mag-lev.

I think Ackerson is right on this one. A gas tax increased to 50 cents, or even $1 a gallon is better than CAFE of 45-60 mpg. It would have to be implemented over time though, and most politicians would be afraid to vote for it. But a 50 cent tax (vs 18 cents) would push gas from the $3.80 it is now to $4.12. That isn't terrible, especially if consumers know it is coming and the increase is gradual. All pushing CAFE higher does is make cars more expensive to buy. If gas is cheap people will buy gas guzzlers, and there will be no demand for a replacement. If gas were $5 a gallon, people would buy high mileage cars, and there would be demand for electric or alternatives. I just read the other day how a Saudi Prince wants to keep oil relatively cheap because it keeps us hooked on oil long term. And perhaps in theory (though probably not in reality) with more gas taxes, we could develop a better road network (more lanes) and car pooling would increase, meaning better traffic flow and less sitting in traffic idling engines. So people's average gas mileage should improve, but that is probably wishful thinking.

Hyundai/Kia outsold Honda, trailed Toyota/Lexus/Scion by only 1,000 units. Hyundai is rising fast. I am curious to see where they are in 10 years time, they could be huge.

The main problems I see with the XTS is it doesn't fit what Cadillac claims it wants to be, doesn't improve brand image, and isn't a sustainable vehicle. The Deville sold well at one time too, and now it is dead. XTS is short term thinking and another GM stop-gap. They aren't making a car for the next 30-50 years, like Mercedes did with the E or S-class in the 1970s.

Ooooooh what a feeling. So nice to see Toyota do poorly. They are the most over rated brand, most of their products are mediocre at best and many have become very stale. Toyota of 2011 reminds me of GM in the 1990s, a big giant waiting to fall.

The A6 is a real sales dog in the midsize segment, the e-class outsells it over 10 to 1, but then again the A6 is pretty bland and underpowered. I am surprised the A7 is doing so well, if you call 800 sales well, it did outsell the A6 and A8 which is interesting.

What I read was cars up 13%, crossovers down 1% and pickups down 14%. Cars are coming back, and this is still a truck heavy company, although not as bad as Chrysler is.

The base V6 S-class is $91,000. I don't see the XTS competing with that. There will also be the next generation S-class on sale at the time the XTS debuts, and Mercedes does have some powertrain enhancements in store.

The XTS is just a DTS but fatter, with a cheaper platform and a cheaper engine. Yes that new engine may make 25 more hp than a 17 year old V8, but pretty much anyone's V6 makes more power than a V8 did in 1993. The XTS is not worthy of the wreath and crest, regardless of what they do with the engine or the interior. It isn't as good as a German full size car, or even a full size Hyundai. Cadillac is supposed to be world class, not 4 years behind Lincoln.

The 7-series has a 535 hp V12, and the XTS has the front wheel drive and a 300 hp V6. What is Cadillac offering the luxury segment, that the Lincoln MKS and Acura RL (neither of which sell) already offer. The XTS is offering $30k sedan powertrain at a $50k price. All the XTS is, is an over sized (and over weight) Lexus ES350. Everyone here is quick to rip the ES350 because it is a Camary and will claim the CTS is better than the ES350 because the CTS is rear drive, sporty, unique platform, etc. Yet when Cadillac does exactly what Toyota does, it is okay and all is forgiven. I already can't wait for the day the last XTS rolls off the line and it sees its death.

A V6 with 50 to 75 more horsepower than your Northstar. I'm a big fan of the DTS, but if they get the XTS's interior anywhere close to that of the concept, it will be a knockout. It looks 100 times better in person. None of the pictures do any justice to it's size and imposing look in the when viewed in the steel. I don't think that V6 is going to have 350 hp. More like the 304 hp from the 2012 Impala. And even if it does have 350 hp, it will have to also have AWD or face ridiculous torque steer. AWD adds weight, and Lincoln already put a big 350 hp V6 awd sedan on sale in 2009, and hardly anyone cares about it or buys it. The 2013 XTS is a 2009 Lincoln MKS, with maybe a better interior. Even better is how the next Impala will share the platform, engine and transmission with the XTS. So that Impala-XTS is just like Taurus-MKS, that is not standard of the world.

They can't offer both types of engines if they do a mid-engine car that is more like an Audi R8 or Lotus Evora. Then they probably have to go with the high revving, turbo engine. If they keep it front engine, rear drive they have more options. They can stick with the big pushrod and use the formula they have used for 50 years, but sales of that car are down. The Corvette isn't brining in new customers as it sits now, so why make the C7 just like the C6. The GT-R may be a computer, but only the Veyron beats it 0-60 and around the Nurburgring it beats the ZR1 and a lot of other high priced exotics. The 911 Turbo is faster than the ZR1 also, so really if the Corvette is supposed to keep up with those cars, and attract a younger customer base, they probably do have to change the formula. On a side note, I think an AMG engine is around $18,000, but maybe it depends on which engine. Regardless of cost, Mercedes doesn't care, nor do their customers. That is the difference between Mercedes and GM though. Mercedes spares no expense to get the best available regardless of cost, and GM does "good enough" on a nickel and dime budget.