smk4565

I am just saying, if Cadillac wants to be tier 1, then they have to have a tier 1 product line. Cadillac likes to claim they are on par with the Germans, but the product line doesn't back it up. So either get the product line, or go after Acura and Lincoln and aim to be the best Tier 2 luxury brand.

I am in no way a fan of the 1-series, but it isn't that much of a down market car. The 135i has the same 0-60 time as a Camaro SS, and will probably out handle the Camaro, so the 1-series sticks to BMW performance car image. Even in Europe where they have the 2 liter diesel, at least the 1-series is still rear drive and can offer handling and driving dynamics. But if gas was $8 per gallon here, I am sure Cadillac would be selling 2 liter diesel cars too, everyone would. BMW can sell a car like the 1-series and not hurt their reputation because they have the 7-series creating prestige. And the 3-series and 5-series have a 20 year reputation as being top of their respective classes. That is what Cadillac is missing, every vehicle with a wreath and crest on it isn't great, and they have no halo car. The CTS-V has performance, but not the luxury or refinement of the European sport sedans. CTS-V sells for $20k less than any comparable European sedan, there is a reason for that, and it isn't GM trying to be charitable. The new M5 has technology off their Formula 1 car, the CTS-V won't even be close to it.

Bankruptcy came out of years of poor decisions on product planning, that seem to continue in the post bankruptcy era. And customers don't care about the company's struggles, GM/Cadillac have to find a way to build a better car than the Germans despite bankruptcy, and every year they delay is more time for the Germans to build their lead. If you measure success by profit, GM is pretty terrible. Cadillac isn't exclusive in a good way like Maserati or Bentley, they are becoming exclusive because fewer and fewer people want their cars. Much like Saab and Volvo are exclusive. The 1-series which you always say is a flop, outsells the STS. The SRX is selling well, but they cut $10,000 off the price from the previous SRX. Going down market to get volume isn't going to help their image any. If Cadillac goes down market, they don't really need Buick/GMC then. CTS Wagon and Coupe on the way isn't enough, BMW and Merc have had multiple body styles on multiple cars for years. Even Infiniti and Lexus have sedan/coupe/convertible on the IS and G37.

So what, the 3-series was in a current model for all that time, while the CTS released a new model in 08. The 1-series also came out, which probably took some 3-series sales. The 5-series and E-class dropped off in 07 to 09 also, but the 2010 E-class is selling at the same rate as it did in 2006 when the market was strong. The STS/DTS combined sold 72,342 in 2007, and will be lucky to top 23,000 this year. That would be a 68% decline, and the XLR was canceled. So if those customers are leaving, and the CTS is down 39%, what does Cadillac have left?

2009: C-class 47,578 E-class 37,635 2008: C-class 72,471 E-class 38,576 2007: C-class 63,701 E-class 48,950 2006: C-class 50,187 E-CLASS 50,195 2005: C-class 60,658 E-class 50,383 Note: CLK is counted separate, it averaged 15-18,000 per year until 08 when it dropped to 10,000. CLK is dead and will be E-class coupe and convertible from now on. 2007 was Mercedes record sales year in the USA.

I found recent BMW numbers: 2009: 3-series 81,997 5-series 36,195 2008: 3-series 112,464 5-series 45,945 2007 3-series 142,490 5-series 54,142 2006 3-series 120,180 5-series 56,756

Some of the Wikipedia numbers look a little off. Especially 2009, when the CTS, STS, and DTS combined have sold about 54,000. I do remember the CTS topping 60,000 in 2005, that was its best year and sales did drop a little after that as the car aged, so the 04-07 Wikipedia numbers look pretty good.

They should just kill that brand, they build hideous looking cars, the TC was the only half decent looking one. They should just keep one of those Scions, like the boxy one, and sell it as a Toyota. That gives them a competitor to the Cube and Element. Otherwise they have the Yaris and Corolla to sell boat loads of, and don't need Scion.

Looks very roomy which isn't true of all 5 seater SUVs, the Grand Cherokee, especially the older ones, for example has a smallish back seat. One area that looks cheap is the wheels, the LTZ model should have better, but more so, the gap between the wheel and the fenders is a bit big. The Ford Edge does a better job here, they have expensive looking wheels that hug the body more.

Rebadging gone bad. Why make a vehicle that competes with Chevy, dumb move.

What about a Dodge Royal Monaco as detailed in this exquisitely made piece... Although my personal favorite of that era was the Seville (the original, not the hideous slant back one) or Town Car Coupe, only because a 2-door Town car looks ridiculous.

If he doesn't like negative press, maybe he should work on not selling defective floor mats and cars that rust. Beyond the Tundra tailgate problems, it seems like whenever I see a late 90s or 2000-2001 Toyota or Lexus it has rust on it. A car shouldn't have rust when it is 8-10 years old. All Toyota makes is appliances, and they aren't even as good as Honda's appliances. Toyota is getting arrogant, they better not forget how they got on top in the first place. If Toyota gets complacent like GM did, they'll fall like GM did, because Hyundai is looking a lot like Toyota of 1990 but growing faster. And I'd love to see Hyundai eat into Toyota's market share and take them down.

At 105,000 miles the problems were too bad you had to get rid of it? My dad actually has a Honda Odyssey with 192,000 miles (mostly city/suburb miles) on it. He had 5 GM vehicles that didn't make it past 130,000 miles. This is what killed GM, most of their cars didn't last that long. A Honda shouldn't last double the mileage of a Chevy, Chevy needs to get better. I hope your Traverse runs 200,000 miles if not for you, for the next person that gets it.

A straight-8 I'd be in favor of. That would be Duesenberg-like!

The V12 I'd like to see, but I doubt it would ever happen. Using 2 of the 3.0's would be good, then they could twin turbo it. BMW already has a twin-turbo V12 with an 8-speed, GM would need that and perhaps a 2-mode hybrid system added on to it, plus an all aluminum chassis/body. If they did all that, Cadillac would have a chance.

They do make a lot of profit on every S-class, but they aren't selling at $80k. $92k for a base S550 and that is before you start with the options list that will easily put it over $100,000. If you want an S65 AMG be ready to spend $201,000. GM doesn't have $100,000 car stuff in their arsenal, look at how badly the XLR-V failed. And the LSx engines aren't the answer, that will get laughed out of the segment, a 6-speed isn't enough either. Cadillac as a new entrant has to earn credibility, so they'll have to come up with never before seen technology and equipment to get attention and respect. It doesn't matter if it is Cadillac or Lincoln, Acura, Volvo, Infiniti, etc, any of those brands selling a $95,000 sedan are fighting a lost cause.

I agree with Regfootball totally. The S-class is and always was the global standard for this class. In 1963, this is what world leaders were driven around in: And today it's this: For nearly 50 years this has been the car. It isn't as simple as converting a GMT900 platform or Zeta and taking some shortcuts on the interior and throwing together a car like the S-class. There can be no shortcuts or compromises and making an "80% the car at 80% the price" isn't going to work. The people that spend $90-100k on a car are looking for perfection and prestige.

Jaguar was just named #1 in JD Power sales satisfaction for 2009 (they were #1 in 2008 also). They were #1 or #2 in JD Power customer satisfaction for 2007, 2008 and 2009. Jaguar was also #1 in JD Power vehicle dependability for 2009, and 3rd place overall in Business Week's "customer service champs" list and 1st place for an automaker. Jaguar is doing everything right at the moment, and has turned profitable. Plus they can sell cars in Europe, which Cadillac hasn't figured out how to do.

They had 40 years of evolution, the 2008 car looked the same as the 1968 XJ. It was time for a radical change, but I happen to love the new XJ. There is rumor of an XJR in the works with 600 hp as well, things could get interesting in Coventry.

The XJ is light for a full size v8 sedan. I know we are talking about a Zeta ranger topper, but shouldn't the range topper's platform be a notch or 2 better than the CTS's platform? Audi's have longitudinally mounted engines so the weight balance on them is better than an awd Acura or Lincoln. My mom drives and Audi, they are nothing special. A BMW drives better. And the new A8 looks like an overweight A4, no match for the 7-series or XJ.

The XF platform was from the S-type but upgraded, and the suspension came from the XK. The next XF will be an all aluminum chassis. Zeta's problem is it is too heavy. And does anyone think the CTS-V would be a better car if it was on the Zeta platform? A Zeta Cadillac would have to go against the aluminum/magnesium XJ, an all new 7-series that has 8 gears and a twin turbo V12, and the S-class which also has a twin turbo V12 and 45 years of rock solid reputation. The hardware to build an S-class like sedan doesn't exist within GM. I wish it did, but it doesn't. Therefore the XTS will be a FWD/AWD Epsilon car with a 290 hp V6. We already have a FWD DTS with 290 hp, how is that working out? Acura had an AWD only, 300 hp V6 car in 04 or 05, and look at what a dud the RL has been, Cadillac doing the same thing six years later isn't going to work out any better. If you want to go after the 5-series, E-class or higher, you better send power to the rear wheels.

Zeta would be fine for Chevy but not Cadillac. Sigma (which will need upgraded/replaced soon) has midsize covered, so Zeta would be only be useful for a large car. Cadillac will need more than the Camaro platform to go up against the big German sedans and the XJ. I think of it like this, the G8 and Camaro are below the CTS, why pay $20-30,000 more than a CTS for a car on a lesser platform. Currently, Cadillac lacks the resources and knowledge to challenge the ultra sedans, that is why I am not at all excited about the XTS.

While I always look forward to NAIAS to see the new models and concepts, I am not going to get my hopes up for the XTS. I'm expecting a Lincoln MKS with vertical headlamps. Unless power is sent to the rear wheels, the XTS will be no more interesting than the Volvo S80 or Acura RL.

They may not be taken seriously as a luxury maker but look at what sales of the Elantra, Sonata, and Santa Fe have done since the Genesis went on sale. People don't see their entry-level or mid-level cars as jokes any more. The Equus and Genesis can be seen as engineering exercises and good publicity for the time being, and maybe one day they'll get their own brand. I agree that Hyundai is moving faster than Toyota did with Lexus, in 20 years, they might be what Toyota is today.

I'm just saying that the Equus has some nice materials like the Alcantara headliner. Details make the car, a Rolls-Royce is a great car because of the endless attention to detail. Cars like the Impala, Cobalt, Grand Prix, etc don't pay attention to little details, and consumers notice. That is why a Corolla or Civic can sell outsell the Cobatl 3 to 1. Build quality, panel gaps, trim pieces all matter.