smk4565

I think Fleetwood and Eldorado still have some weight and can be made cool. Deville and Seville I'd leave in the closet, but LaSalle they could use. I think Chrysler should be using Imperial and Atlantic, those are strong names, unlike Sebring and 300. Maybach is building the Zeppelin as their last hurrah. Acura traded the Legend for the RL, Legend sounds like it means something, RL means nothing, except for "really lame." On engines, Mercedes just showed off their new multi-spark V6 and V8s today, and rumor of a 476 hp twin turbo V6 from AMG is out there. If I were Cadillac, I wouldn't want a turbo 4 when Mercedes, BMW and Infiniti have 300+ hp V6s, or a 400 hp pushrod when the other guy as 476 hp and AMG badges. GM tried to sell a 400 hp, basic no frills car for $35,000 in the GTO, and it wasn't that good of a seller. Dodge has the Challenger, and Chrysler the 300 SRT, both with a 420 hp pushrod for $45k, and those are junk cars. The ATS needs to aim higher than that.

Maybe when Cadillac goes into their 2nd or 3rd renaissance (which ever they want to call the ATS-generation) they should go back to names for cars. The alphanumeric names are getting to be overkill, no where is worse than Lincoln and Acura, MKZDX, etc. Eventually real names will come back, Cadillac should start a trend, rather than follow. Rolls-Royce has it right, they build the Ghost and Phantom, that is far cooler than MKS or XTS.

My issues with the CTS interior are the gray plastic that adorns the center console and map pockets in the doors. The backs of the front seat at plastic, the gauges are split into 3 parts with plastic rings, and the gauge cluster rises above the dash (same as the malibu and altima) which creates more cut lines than if it was just integrated into the dash. Also the gear shifter is only half wood as an option, the base gear shifter seems to be vinyl or plastic, when it should be wrapped with the same leather used for the seats. Furthermore, when you sit in a CTS, it just doesn't feel expensive or special, sure there is leather and wood and some stitching and that is nice and all, but it still feels like they cut corners or the beancounters got in there before it hit the showroom. Even if we assume content the same, or not important to the buyer, the M5 still has the ability to rev to 8400 rpm which creates a Ferrari-like, race car sound. The CTS could make 1,000 horsepower, it won't sound like a Formula 1 car, that emotional payoff the M5 provides is what makes it the king of the class. It is similar to how Aston Martin can charge $250,000 for a DBS when it isn't any faster than a GT-R or Z06, in fact the DBS is probably slower than both, and I don't think anyone would trade a DBS for a Nissan or Chevy.

Cadillac builds one car, that out performs an older M5, and is on par with the RS6. On a race track the CTS-V can post good lap times, but the build quality still isn't there, the level of materials used isn't there. The Lancer Evo 10 can out perform a lot of cars also, and crush them around a race track, but it doesn't make it a class leading car at anything Cadillac's problem isn't the CTS-V or the CTS, it is the inconsistency of their products and advertising. The CTS-V's problem isn't horsepower or 0-60 time, it is the interior trim, features list, and build quality. Cadillac made a car that beats the M5 0-60 and has to sell it for $30,000 less. Is Cadillac's image that much in the gutter that they have to put a 33% discount on their best product?

That sounds like a recipe for a Camaro. Simple doesn't sell in the luxury segment. The Audi RS5 is likely to cost $69,000-75,000 when it comes to the US. The ATS-V should be aiming closer to that, or the $60-65k for an M3. Why is Cadillac's goal to be the K-Mart of the luxury car brands? Bargain basement pricing isn't good for a luxury car brand, that is why Cadillac has a weak image.

But in the 1980s, GM was making billions in profit, and couldn't come up with a car to rival the Germans. In the 90s, they still were making billions a year, and no rival or even attempt to go after the 3-series (or 5-series for that matter) was made. Even post bankruptcy, GM is still a pretty poor company, they are struggling to break even still even with the bankruptcy cleansing their balance sheet. It is certainly possible to make a car to rival the 3-series, but Lexus even with their deep pockets and resources still came up short. I am waiting to see if GM really commits to the ATS, or if they just do a "good enough" job on it because they need to focus on re-doing the GMT900s or hold back so the ATS doesn't compete with the CTS.

Well they currently build nothing on par with the Germans. The closest thing they have is the CTS, which is like a watered down 5-series/E-class that sells for $13,000 less. So there is nothing to point to. The ATS is going into territory GM hasn't gone in 25 years, and the one time they tried, they built the worst car in Cadillac history.

It will be, American cars often find places to cut corners. As I said before, no American car ever made an impact in the small luxury class, in fact the only attempt really was the Cimarron (uh oh, I said it), and we know how that turned out. The Catera was a midsize car, as are the CTS and MKZ. Faux wood, leather out of the Malibu, and engine out of a defunct Solstice, and the corporate radio unit aren't going to cut it. Remember GM is launching an unproven, unknown car and going after the #1 selling luxury car in the world that has 30 years worth of awards and accolades on the shelf. They can't compromise this car.

Exactly right on the first point. And the car in that class with the I6, is the #1 seller and considered by every automotive publication to be the gold standard of the class. I can't see GM keeping weight to 3300 pounds. Almost nothing GM makes is among the lightest in the class, they are usually among the heaviest in the class. A Corvette is near 3300 pounds, and the ATS has to have dual power heated and ventilated seats, Sat-Nav, 10-12 speakers, moonroof, leather, wood, sound deadening, etc. All that stuff adds weight. My guess is weight closer to 3600-3700 pounds, in which case they will need 300+ hp to keep it running with the 335i and G37. The ATS-V should be closer to $60k. If the regular ATS is in the $28-38k price range, it won't have the build quality the Germans have, and it will fall flat on its face. The ATS is going into a segment no American car has ever had success in.

4-cylinder engines lack refinement, even the best in the world can't compare to a good 6 cylinder. Plus with all that turbo boost, the power delivery isn't going to be as smooth. Those power numbers aren't enough either. This engine makes 320-330 hp (depending on model) and 332 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm, with an overboost that can produce 370 lb-ft for 7 seconds.

Lexus has an identity and reputation of high quality and reliability. That allows them to sell to luxury buyers that don't care about performance, but want comfort and a car that will never need repaired. Whether the car goes 200,000 miles without needing a major repair or not is besides the point, the people that buy a Lexus believe it will. BMW and Infiniti sell to buyers that want performance. Cadillac doesn't have that clear cut identity. Most of the people in the 45-60 age group that buy luxury cars still perceive Cadillac as a big American boat for old people, or a gangster Escalade. By trying to be all things, Cadillac doesn't hit any one thing really well. Alfa builds crummy cars, but they sell because of that Italiano passion/style/soul. Aston Martin has it too.

What Cadillac needs is to get an identity and to get some soul and passion pumped into their brand. The one thing that prevents me from buying a Genesis is that the car has no soul or passion. It looks great on the stat sheet, it drives great, but it doesn't stir emotion or have personality. The Genesis is the polar opposite of an Alfa Romeo.

The 3-series is a compact car, unless you want to call Minis compacts, and the 3-series class "small car". Either way, a 3-series is about the size of a Civic and they can sell them for $40-45,000. My question was/is, can Cadillac build a sedan the same size as a Cruze and get $40-45,000 for it? The CTS isn't a hot seller, can they make the ATS smaller, and yet equally expensive as a CTS, and sell at double the volume of the CTS?

I think they need the 3.6 at minimum, and probably a turbo or supercharged 3.6. Unless they twin-turbo the 3.0 and really boost the power on it. Infiniti has 328 hp now and thanks to their 7-speed tranny, it gets 19/27 mpg. The 2.8T just doesn't have enough power or fuel economy to go against BMW's straight-six or Infiniti's V6. The G37 sedan is 187 inches long, the coupe is 183, so the coupe is near the 3-series coupe and A5 in size. The G-sedan is a bit of a tweener in terms of size. The M37 is 194 inches long, the A6 I think is 193 inches long, an XF is 195. Infiniti's offerings do run a bit bigger than the Lexus or German rivals.

A base ATS (turbo 4) should be 0-60 in about 6.2 seconds, since a BMW 328i can do that, and with the V6 it should be closer to 4.9 seconds because a 335iS can do that now. BMW will have the next generation 3-series out by the time the ATS comes out. The G37 does 0-60 in the low 5s, but that car is closer to the CTS's size than the 3-series. They have to make the ATS faster than the CTS to keep up with the rest of the class. The ATS-V would have to have CTS-V type performance to match the M3.

An NA 4-cylinder in a Cadillac should not happen. Cadillac should have the best engines of General Motors. That is still a problem at GM, they hold back on Cadillac so they can pump money into other brands, or figure Chevy needs V8 trucks and muscle cars, but Cadillac can get by with only V6s because the old geezers won't care. The ATS needs to be running 0-60 in 4.8 or 4.9 seconds in standard trim, the ATS-V better be closer to 4.3 seconds. So I hope they don't hold back any punches as they say.

I hope "high out put, small displacement" doesn't mean 4-cylinder and turbo 4-cylinder. A turbo-4 cud suffice for the base model, but this car needs the 3.6 V6 tuned to at least 330 hp, turbo charge it if needed. Cadillac has been claiming they were going after BMW and Benz since the late 1980s, that I will believe when I see it. Can Cadillac really charge $45,000 for a compact car and sell it in volume?

I like the Sonata, to me it is one of the most appealing cars under $30k. 113,000 miles doesn't seem like much, but Pontaics did always seem to have the worst build quality of any GM brand. I like the HHR, its the best looking of the small boxy cars.

I actually like that. It looks better than the HHR (which I think looks good if you like retro), and looks better than the Orlando and Granite. The headlights have a bit of an Acura/Lincoln vibe, but in a good way. The styling is really good, but I don't have any interest in a 150 hp electric car. But for people that do want a 150 hp electric car, this would be the way to go.

S-classes last forever though. Most GM cars need a lot of repairs around the 100k-150k mile mark, and then are dead around 150,000 miles. I saw a 2009 Town Car Signature Limited for just $23,900 the other day. I think those cost about $50,000 new, so that is fantastic depreciation.

For around $30k they could get an 05-06 S-class 4Matic, that is much better equipped than any new GM car and will probably last longer too. But I suppose if I had to chose a car from that group, I'd say the Regal. It seems like they are traditional sedan buyers, and the Camaro is pretty aggressive and a fairly big departure from full size family sedans.

Porsche is #1 in long term reliability, and they only make DOHC engines. It isn't really the number of parts, it is how well it is made. Really it doesn't matter if the ATS-V has a million horsepower, Cadillac has an image and reputation problem. They are struggling to be the 4th best selling luxury maker in the USA, and they are nothing overseas. Cadillac needs to focus on build quality and turning around their image. Cadillac is still a brand that you have to justify why you bought one rather than a BMW, Mercedes, or Lexus.

Exclusive from the rest of GM. The BMW straight six (gas or diesel) is the world standard for that class, and straight sixes are smoother than V6s. Now my 4.4 or 4.8 liter V12 idea would be really exclusive.

Twin-turbo DOHC V6 would be my choice. It works for the GT-R. The next M3 is going to be an inline six, so that seems like a good way to do. The 5.5 liter pushrod sounds like something in the Silverado, thus not something that should be in a Cadillac. Notice Mercedes never put the Hemi V8 from the Ram into an E-class. In an ideal world, I think the ATS would have a straight six and they would copy BMW's engine as closely as possible. GM's 3.6 V6 and Infiniti's 3.7 V6 still lag behind the BMW and Benz in refinement and smoothness. A Cadillac straight six would be more refined than the 3.6 and then Cadillac would also have an exclusive engine to offer. Although I'd still like to see a twin turbo DOHC V8 the most, and a V12 Cadillac would be nice. Even if they did something like a 4-5 liter twin turbo V12. The Ferrari F40 only had a 3 liter V8, a 4 liter V12 is possible. The F50 had a 4.7 liter V12 that weighed 435 lbs, which is right in line with what the LS-series engines weigh and less than the Northstar.

No doubt it will have a lower price than the Civic and Corolla.