smk4565
Members-
Posts
13,686 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Forums
Articles
Gallery
Events
Store
Collections
Everything posted by smk4565
-
I would guess that Cadillac gets 25% of GM's R&D dollars if they are lucky. And 50% probably goes to trucks and the rest of the car brands and lines have to squeak by on the remaining 25% Acording to Daimler's annual report, Mercedes passenger cars got $9.1 billion in R&D spending in 2009-2010. Mercedes trucks another $3.7 billion over 2 years, and Vans/Buses another $1.6 billion. Total of $14.4 billion over two years for Daimler, but Mercedes cars does enjoy 63% of Daimler's big budget. Anyone think GM will give Cadillac $9 billion in 2 years?
-
I know that was staggered, but they roll them out fairly often. Mercedes does spend around $6 billion a year in R&D, although it does go to more than just the car platforms. Mercedes spends nearly what all of GM does on R&D. I would guess that Cadillac gets 25% of GM's R&D dollars if they are lucky. In 2007 Mercedes actually spent more in R&D than GM, and GM had 8 brands to spread that across. All I'm saying is Mercedes has deep pockets and Cadillac does not. So Cadillac is forced to platform share, and the Alpha platform may be compromised. Maybe it will be great, but if it falls short of expectations and doesn't match up to the Germans, I won't be surprised either. I think I'd be more surprised if it is really good, rather than watered down.
-
ATS and Camaro could share, but that means the Camaro isn't the muscle car it is today. The Camaro then becomes more like the 3-series in size and driving dynamics (which is not a bad thing), and more like a Hyundai Genesis Coupe or Nissan 370Z kind of small sports car. But also note how much the Mustang and Camaro outsell the Genesis Coupe and 370Z. And do customers want a Camaro the size of a Cruze with 4 and 6 cylinder power only. But I think when you want to put a bigger car like the CTS on that platform, then a soft riding Buick, somewhere along the line you are trying to put square pegs in round holes. The challenge Cadillac has is overcoming Mercedes deep pockets. Because Mercedes can spend $2 billion on the C-class, $2B on the E-class/CLS, $2B on the S-class, and all of a sudden it is $6 billion for 3 platforms, although they do make 2 and 4 door of each line. But can Cadillac spend $6 billion for an ATS, CTS, and a real full size car? Probably not, that is why we get the XTS and a Tahoe with bling.
-
True that they can make multiple vehicles out of it. But they can't specialize it for one (or two) kinds of cars though. And the previous generation C-class cost $1.9 billion to develop and that was 10 years ago. Even since the 80s, each S-class cost over $1 billion by itself. I couldn't find the W221's cost, but the W220 S-class was over $1.6 billion to develop and that was late 90s money. I don't know if Cadillac has the funds to spend over $1 billion on the ATS alone, another $1 billion on the CTS, another $1 billion on a large car, etc. The problem GM runs into, is they want to make a 3-series killer, but they also want to build 4 other products off that platform. I think to kill the 3-series, it the platform has to be designed with one thing in mind.
-
A C-class is 3,527-3,615 lbs for the V6 models. If the 4-cylinder model goes on sale here (which I think it is) I assume that will be more in the 3,480 lbs range. A 328i is 3,428 lbs. I think the ATS needs to be in that 3500-3600 lb range, and should have a turbo 4-cylinder and DOHC V6. The Camaro should be in that weight range too, a Mustang is around 3,500 lbs and the Genesis coupe is even less. CTS can be 4,000 lbs, all those mid-sizer are now, but then again, with CAFE going higher and higher, automakers will be forced to cut weight.
-
GM does tend to cut costs or take short cuts when they can. So if they go that route with Alpha and compromise the platform to make it all things to all people it will be sad. What worries me, is they have to make it cheap enough for Chevy, build a small Cadillac, a mid-size Cadillac, possibly another car. The 3-series platform is purpose built, they don't have to compromise it. It would be unfortunate if the Alpha platform is not capble and the ATS and next-gen CTS are just mediocre. But only time will tell.
-
GMC is competition for Chevy as it stands now. Not being able to differentiate brands and having them compete with each other was part of what led GM to bankruptcy. GMC has volume now, but gas is rising. And GMC is a useless brand outside of North America. But as I said, I wouldn't kill it off, I would make it only for fleet/commercial use. That makes GMC the specialists on that and can maybe go after the Ford "work solutions" trucks.
-
Even though I think they could kill GMC and not miss a beat, I believe General Motors will keep GMC around for the foreseeable future. So the question is what to do with GMC because right now they are Chevy overlap. I see two paths: 1. Work grade trucks (fleet, contractor special, delivery vans, utility company vehicles, etc). This would range from a small pickup and Transit type van up to the full size pick up and vans, and the medium duty tucks for dump trucks and moving vans. This gives GMC a unique focus and takes that away from Chevy and Chevy can focus on the regular customer, not the business customer. 2. Denali trim crossovers, SUVs, Sierra, and van. The Canyon would have to die, the Savana could stay if it was more a conversion, luxury van. At least this way GMC has a luxury focus, and if a Silverado is $22k base, make the Sierra $35k base. Part of the higher price points could allow more diesel and hybrid technology as well. This would separate GMC and Chevy, but at the same time, Buick and Cadillac are in the luxury crossover business so overlap could occur there. I prefer plan 1.
-
Cadillac Taking Some Lessons From BMW For The ATS
smk4565 replied to William Maley's topic in Cadillac
The 528i weighs 3814 lbs, which is heavy, but not LaCrosse weight. The 528i also gets 32 mpg from a six cylinder. GM has 4-bangers that can't get 32 mpg. 535i will top 4,000 lbs, I think they made the 5-series too big, why make it bigger than it was, although now it is closer to the XF and A6 in size. I'm looking forward to when the XF gets on an aluminum chassis and gets the weight way down. Safety regs are killing new cars with weight gain. I'd like to see Cadillac build sedans off an aluminum chassis, but if they have to platform share with Chevy, Chevy can't get priced needed to offset aluminum. -
Nissan and Infiniti Ford and Lincoln Honda and Acura Toyota/Scion and Lexus (the exception with a pair) Hyundai, Kia, BMW and Mercedes are alone. GM and Chrysler are the ones with multiple brands, that have overlap, and share dealerships. They were the two that went bankrupt. Personally, I think GMC is here to stay, at least for the next 10-15 years, but I think if you had 3 strong brands, all could support their own dealer network.
-
Cadillac Taking Some Lessons From BMW For The ATS
smk4565 replied to William Maley's topic in Cadillac
Should have copied the 3-series 20 years ago. Copying the 3-series is a good idea, but at the same time, the copy is never as good as the original. So Cadillac has to come up with something unique and better than what BMW has. While keeping in mind that the ATS won't be against the current 3-series, but the next generation, although even after 5 or 6 years on the market, the E90 3-series is still the best car in the class. -
If a brand can't stand on it's own (own dealer network) then it is too weak to survive. I mean Lincoln and Acura dealers survive on their own. Buick and Cadillac could become one dealership, but really, if they can't make it alone, then they are too weak. Either get stronger or die.
-
Ford and Mercury co-existed for decades, and Chrysler and Plymouth co-existed for decades as well. Olds and Pontiac co-existed with Chevy and Buick for decades. Yet none of those worked out. I never thought GMC needed to stay past bankruptcy, but if they stick around (which I think they will) at least make every GMC a Denali, so they are more exclusive or different from Chevy.
-
This is true. Chevy becomes stronger if/when GMC dies. Chevy didn't pick up all the former Saturn/Olds/Pontaic owners because Chevy's lineup is different than what those brands had. But Chevy's lineup is not different than GMC's, they are basically the same.
-
I know ride and handling are different, but both increase with RWD. Put any suspension you want on any front driver, it ain't gonna ride like an S-class or a Rolls-Royce Phantom. Plus most front drivers carry 60% of their weight (or more) over the front axle. Lambda is perfectly suitable for Chevy or Buick, but not Cadillac. Cadillac should have RWD. And I would be in favor of a crossover Escalade because they could get weight down which puts V6 engines (gas and diesel) in play and gets gas mileage up.
-
How many units did GMC sell outside of the USA? There is more to the car market than the USA. GMC builds Chevrolet clones, the same as Mercury made Ford clones with a fancy grille and chrome strip on the trunk. GMC is overlap. GMC should be all Denali models only, or all work trucks only, or just go away. General Motors would be more profitable without GMC because all those sales could go to Chevy and the GMC marketing and operations goes away, and people putting the Chevy and GMC dealers against each other to get the lowest price goes away. Chevy's biggest competitor, is GMC, why make a competitor for you most important brand. The Silverado and Sierra for example both have a base MSRP of $21,235. Priced to the exact dollar.
-
RWD car rides and handles better. Regardless of engine power, a RWD car will have smoother ride and handling. That is why Acura and Lincoln are what they are, and Mercedes and BMW are what they are. If you do a Lambda Escalade, why is someone paying $65,000 for that, when mechanically it is the same as a $30,000 Traverse? Is there really going to be $35,000 put into the interior? The interior better be Jaguar XJ level in that vehicle if that is what they do. And don't forget CAFE. GM has a ways to go to get their average up. Hyundai already is ahead of the 2015 requirement, but they don't build a full size truck. Where as the GMT900 is GM's top selling platform.
-
Sounds good to me. And the vinyl interior work trucks that GMC sells can be Chevy also. If Buick and Cadillac are building luxury crossovers, GMC in redundant. I support keeping GMC if they become a commercial truck brand for business and fleet sale. Building work truck pick ups, commercial cab chassis, a Transit-like Van, full size van or Sprinter-type vehicle, etc. But right now GMC is Mercury.
-
Well they tried that for one generation of the SRX, and then gave up and built a cheap FWD SUV to get volume. Had the SRX been redone the right way, on Sigma with the new 3.6 DI V6, cancelled Ultra V8, non-existent 8-speed transmission, and non-existent diesel V6, Cadillac could have played in that crowd. This tends to be a problem a lot with Cadillac, they want to gun for that high end crowd, then do a half hearted attempt (which a Lambda Escalade would be) then when it flops they pull back and retreat way down the price scale. Allante, XLR, STS-V and original SRX being recent examples. Personally, I'd make the Escalade a rear drive crossover that is large, but not quite as large as the current model. But Cadillac also has much bigger priorities, so if they can con people into paying $65k for a Tahoe a few more years, they might as well milk it while it lasts. But I wouldn't bet my brand on it, because Hummer looked really strong at one point and was a cash cow, now it is gone. In 2020 the Escalade could be dead too.
-
Nah... Escalades do not have to have great fuel economy or smaller size. For that Caddy already has the Theta based SRX. Escalades should remain a big SUV with a BIG engine, there is still a demand for that kind of thing. Let's see how long that demand lasts at $4.25 a gallon. Especially if other automakers make 3 row big crossovers with diesels or hybrids. And what if gas hits $5 a gallon in a couple years. Better to be ahead of the curve, rather than stuck with a big truck with a thirsty engine when the market goes somewhere else.
-
Maybe Encore will be small sized. The Equinox and SRX are basically mid-sized vehicles, nearly 1 foot longer than a Ford Escape. Perhaps they want an SUV in the 180-182 inch long range, and that isn't a bad idea. I think small and less expensive is good given the economy we are in. Plus, more and more people get married later (or not at all) and have less kids than they used to, so not everyone needs a big SUV, or even a midsize SUV.
-
Lambda is wrong wheel drive for Cadillac. Although I would be in favor of taking the Escalade off GMT900 because it is overly huge and gets about 14 mpg. Making the Escalade a more gas friendly crossover is a good idea, but not on Lambda, we already have 3 of those.
-
An Eldorado Brougham they built for two years, and how many did they actually sell. That was the XLR or Alante of its day. They built an overpriced extravagant car, redesigned it in 59 and it was gone by 1961. So as I said, they never built anything that belonged in that segment. Every generation, Cadillac takes a stab at the Jaguar, high end Mercedes, Maserati strata, and they come up short and give up for 15 years. Let's see Cadillac build a top end car that sells and actually sticks around.
-
The largest car cruise in the area I think. They get over 2,000 cars most nights. http://www.starlitecarcruise.com/ There was a guy with a McLaren Mercedes SLR last year, pretty sick car to see in person.
-
Found this beauty for sale at a local Hyundai lot
smk4565 replied to FUTURE_OF_GM's topic in The Lounge
Yes. Looks pretty good, wasn't the Batmobile from the Adam West TV show a Bonneville conversion?