smk4565

$31,600 is the blue book value of a 2004 E500 4-matic. A new E550 is $60,500 base price without all wheel drive. The last generation E-class had window controls in the middle by the shifter, but the current car has just the shifter and no switches in the middle. Mercedes puts seat controls on high on the door.

But Lexus has 3 hybrids: RX, GS and LS. Mercedes has E class and GL class diesel. BMW has 2 diesels going on sale during 2008 and X6 hybrid and 5-series diesel are coming soon.

The 420 hp in the XF is the middle engine. The XF-R will have over 500 hp from a new DOHC V8. I am not convinced that the CTS-V interior is any better than the STS-V interior, and the STS-V failed to compete with the M5 and E63. The Audi RS6 has 580 hp and no one considers that to be a benchmark car. But notice even Cadillac said BMW was their benchmark and what they aimed for. They admit they are chasing BMW rather than being a leader at performance/luxury. Comparing the CTS to the 5-series is like comparing the G8 to the CTS. The G8 is rear drive, has leather seats and the same V6 and offers a V8 that is faster than a CTS DI for a lot less money, but there is a big difference in materials in a G8 and in a CTS. The same holds true for CTS and 5-series, they may have similar size and power/drivetrain, but there is a difference. I wish they would improve the CTS interior, load it with technology, put a $47,000 base price on the CTS and blow the 5-series away but Cadillac is afraid it seems of the higher end luxury market. Cadillac could sell 750,000 cars a year if they were what they used to be, (1902-1959 era), but what they are now is a tier 2 luxury brand. I'd rather see them tier 1 and leading the way, not competing with Lincoln and Acura as to who can crank more power from a V6 because they are too gutless to make a V8 or V12 or a legit S-class competitor.

The M5 interior is nothing great either (the above pic is the 05 interior, they made it a little better for 08). The 5-series also came out in fall 2003, it is near the end, where as the CTS is brand new, the 5-series will be all new in a year or so. The Mercedes C-class has a garbage interior. The E-class though has better materials than the CTS does, despite the hard seats. The CLS is pretty nice and they make that in AMG tune as well. The Ford Focus also has a hard drive to store songs in, the CTS can't live off having a hard drive as cutting edge. Using top quality leather, aluminum, wood, carpet, etc make a good interior. Jaguar XF is an example. The CTS interior is good for entry level luxury cars, but lacks heads-up display, lane departure warning, Bluetooth, adaptive cruise control, heated steering wheel, 7.1 surround sound, etc. The mid-level cars like the 5-series, E-class, CLS, Jag XF have that stuff. I don't really care for BMW styling inside or out, but I recognize that they use quality materials and their cars have the best handling/driving/steering. BMW sales were up 6.7% in 2007, Mercedes and Lexus were up 1.8% and Cadillac was down 5.7%. BMW is doing something right. If the CTS-V is priced around $63,000 like the M3, people will compare it to an M3, just like the CTS DI is compared to the 335i. The M3 is 3500 pounds, 4200-4300 for a CTS-V, that is a bad mismatch on a curvy road. The Corvette performs near the low end Ferraris because of it's low weight. I don't understand why GM understands that with the Vette, but not with Cadillac. Giving up on a DOHC V8 and not having diesel and hybrid CTS on sale this year also show they don't understand the luxury market.

The question is will it cost $82,900 to compete with the M5 (GM says in the press release M5 and E63 are the competitors)? Or will it be priced around $62-65,000 and get compared with the M3 which is much lighter and more agile. It doesn't have an $82,000 car interior, and it can't handle with an M3 that is 750 pounds lighter. The same CTS vs 335i or 535i argument exists. From a styling standpoint, I like the base car's grille more this looks too much like the old one. I like the wood better than the black stuff that replaced it, and I am not a big fan of the G8 concept wheels.

Looks way too much like a Vue, I am sure the BRX will look like a Vue with a Cadillac grille. The tail lights don't quite fit right with the Vue's curved rear end either. The BRX will be so much like a Vue. The BRX and canceling V8s is just dragging Cadillac's image down. GM fans (including myself) always make fun of Lexus for rebadging the Camry, yet that is what Cadillac is moving toward, rather than making unique vehicles that stand out. Cadillac used to be the best in the world, now they are becoming a V6 only brand (with a couple v-series cars) and dressed up Saturns. They are just like Acura and Lincoln, all V6 and dressed up from the lower brand. Compare Acura and Lincoln to BMW and Mercedes, who has more status? Fuel cell is nice and all, but there is no where to buy hydrogen, and unless it is cheaper to buy than gas and as readily available people aren't going to buy it. Unless GM makes up something like Honda did with a home refueling station that they did with the FXS Clarity or whatever it's called. If they want to do a fuel cell Cadillac though, it better perform like a Cadillac should, they'll need more power and speed.

I know, it is supposed to be out as a 2009 model. So if the Impala is Ep. 2 then won't it just be a cheaped out version of the LaCrosse? And once the LaCrosse moves up market it is going to steal Lucerne sales, much like the CTS is stealing STS sales. The 300C/Charger have been more successful than the front drivers they replaced, but they don't sell in huge volumes because of their size. A rear drive midsize car would outsell a full size rear drive car. Why Ford didn't take the Mustang's success and make a 4 door car off that platform and choose the 500/Taurus huge front driver is beyond me.

A front drive Impala that is prices a little more than the Malibu just creates more competition for Buick. The Malibu is already far superior to the LaCrosse, why give Buick more competition when they are fading as it is. The Impala should be rear drive, and not 205 inches long and 4200 pounds if they are worried about gas mileage. Rear drive leads to better ride and handling and most of the market doesn't do it, this is a chance for GM to capture new buyers. The CAFE and mpg solution lies with diesel. The BMW 335d and 535d have 425 lb-ft of torque and get 2 mpg more than a 4 cylinder Camry. I think GM uses CAFE as an excuse for why they won't make a Zeta Impala, or a new V8 for Cadillac, when really they just want to shed costs and platform share, and hope marketing can create perceived differences between their 7 front drive sedans. That didn't work in the 80s, didn't work in the 90s, isn't working in the 2000s and won't work in the 2010s. smallchevy is right, it is about creating a new market. GM can build a car 20% better than the Accord and still not win back Camry or Accord buyers. A lot of Camry/Accord type buyers won't even consider a domestic car. GM has to seek out new buyers, get people coming from SUVs, or Mustang/sports car buyers that need a sedan but liked rear drive, Grand Marquis/Crown Vic drivers that like rear drive but want smaller and better fuel economy, etc.

Buick sales were down 23% in 2007 to 185,791 units. The Enclave isn't saving them, they are still in the same free fall they have been in for the last 20 years. Oldsmobile sold 265,878 cars the year GM decided to kill them due to slow and declining sales. Hummer and Saab sales are even more in the tank. How come CAFE regulations kill rear drive Impalas and a new V8 for Cadillac but they keep making Hummers?

The Impala should be rear drive because GM has 1 rear drive sedan that isn't a Cadillac and for front drive lovers the G6, Aura, Malibu, LaCrosse, Lucerne, 9-3, 9-5, Delta platform (though much smaller) and the Lambdas and theta SUVs are front drive and car based. They have a ton of front drive stuff for people to choose from, and hardly anything rear wheel drive. As far as Buick goes, they are not a luxury brand. Their top end sedan has a base price of $25,500, and almost always has a $2500 rebate (wow a Buick flagship for less than a Camry 4-cylinder). That puts Buick closer to Ford than Lincoln, let alone Lexus. When the cheapest car on a Buick lot is $33,000 and the brand has fewer than 9% fleet sales, they can think about being a luxury brand.

Good point about the GP, that was 78% fleet sale, so the Impala will pick those up. The Impala is 58% fleet sale now, it could easily hit 65% fleet which will make it really undesirable to retail customers regardless of engine, drivetrain, styling, chrome, or anything else. I thought the LaCrosse was supposed to be longer than the Malibu (but shorter than the current LaCrap) but looking at the spy photos the body shape looks nearly identical to the Malibu. Similar to how the LaCrosse and Grand Prix shared side panels and window shape.

Isn't that what the 2009 LaCrosse is? The Impala will be a direct competitor to the LaCrosse in that scenario. Lower price often means not as good. Especially when Toyota's production costs are $2000 less per car than Chevy's. If the Impala is $2000 less than the Avalon, GM is either making $4000 less per vehicle or using lesser materials and features. The Lexus ES has a higher base price than the CTS, if the LaCrosse becomes a direct competitor to the Lexus ES, will GM price a Buick sedan higher than a Cadillac that they claim rivals the 5-series?

I too would like to see direct injection on all GM's engines. There is great potential with the 2.8 liter V6, maybe upping that to 3.0 liters, and using direct injection to get 240 or so hp and 30 mpg highway. The 3.6 in the Malibu is making 252 hp and 26 mpg, I think anyone in the family sedan market would trade 10-15 hp for 4 more mpg. A smaller DI V6 could serve as the base engine in the Impala as well and Buicks. If the new LaCrosse is supposed to be like what the TL and ES350 are to the Accord/Camry, then the Lacrosse would be nicer than the Lucerne, making the Lucerne irrelevant. If the LaCrosse stays cheaper than the $25,000 Lucerne and is just a streched Malibu, what is the point of making an Impala that is a stretched Malibu. Either way seems like there will be big time over lap with the 2 Buicks and the Impala, leading to one of them dying off.

I don't like BMW styling inside or out very much. iDrive is dumb, but their cars steer/drive/handle better than any other sedan. BMW has diesel and hybrid coming summer/fall of 2008. The CS concept will inspire the 5, 6, and 7 series all of which are 2009 or 2010 models. I like the CTS exterior, but the old one had a better interior layout with the angled console, it just had junky materials. My knee hits the center console in the new CTS, and there are a few interior gripes I have about it. I have only owned GM cars, but my favorite car right now is the Jaguar XF. For me it could come down to the XF or a future Cadillac if they have something comparable.

Basically, the BTS needs an interior better than the 08 CTS and similar outside look, but smaller. CTS ($47,000 base) needs an interior like the Jaguar XF, more expensive grille, removal of gray plastic on the outside, and better proportions in the rear, the STS should come back as a $65-80,000 CLS type car, and a ULS/XTS (with V12 option) that can go head on with the S-class. Cadillac also needs diesel power, maybe with a hybrid, so they have some 35+ mpg cars.

The problem is what is Cadillac? Are they a luxury performance brand that is a world leader in technology, and styling, or are they a brand that sells big sedans like the DTS and a rebadged Tahoe. I want them to be the luxury performance brand, that has great styling and technology. But the STS, DTS, XLR, and BLS in Europe all fail at that mission. I want them to be American and I like the styling theme, but I'd like to see them closer to BMW in performance. Lexus sold 56,000 units in Europe in 2007, which is way more than Cadillac and Lexus just started there. Lexus plans to grow to 150,000 per year there. Cadillac is nearly non-existent in Europe because the cars are too big and suck gas, and the interior materials aren't good enough.

Lexus can gamble on a $170,000 Ferrari fighter because Toyota has money to burn. They might only sell 500 LF-A a year but I bet they put it in their ads and brag about its performance and build their image more. It is similar to what the Prius did for Toyota. A money loser that didn't sell in big numbers at first, but it gave Toyota an image stronger than any amount of advertising could produce. That is the difference between GM and Toyota, GM has to play it safe, limit spending, and Toyota can outspend any one and build a $120,000 hybrid sedan or $170,000 sports car on a gamble.

Lexus has bland styling and some vehicles lack performance, especially handing, but they have been the #1 selling luxury brand in the USA for 7 years in a row, and are the fastest growing in Europe. They don't build my style of car, but they are doing something right with their image to get so many people to buy them. Cadillac became a land barge competing with the Town Car by their own doing. They could have changed to be like BMW and Mercedes long ago, but they didn't build what the market was shifting too, they built what the market was. At least they are finally changing. The CTS has a good interior for an entry level car, (though the layout and seats could be better) but the CTS is being pushed as Cadillac's flagship car right now. The real problem is the upper end, there is nothing there. The XLR's interior is worse than the CTS's and the XLR doesn't have the performance and $80,000 car should have. Cadillac isn't a legit threat to BMW or Mercedes (especially globally) yet. I hope they will be, but they have a really long way to go.

Lexus is playing catch up in the performance luxury segment, but they are leading in the hybrid arena and the LS460 has a lot of technology like parking itself and Mark Levinson stereo. Plus Lexus hasn't been around that long, they have grown a ton in 15 years. The Lexus LS-A test mule just ran the Nurburgring in 7 minutes 24 seconds, that is an insane time, 16 seconds faster than the Z06, and faster than the 911 GT3. If the production version is that fast, that will give Lexus some performance credibility they currently lack. I never forgot the STS-V's engine, I was only comparing the Northstar against the BMW 4.8 liter, M-B 5.5 liter and Lexus 4.6 liter since those are their main V8s. The V-series engines should be compared to M and AMG engines. And the 230 hp engine in the 5-series is $44,000, for $60,000 you get a V8. BMW is clearly doing something right, that 5-series outsells the STS by a ton and the 5-series is at the end of its life cycle. Unfortunately, the STS is an irrelevant car in the luxury segment, I don't even think the Germans see it as competition. Which is a shame, because Cadillac has better styling than the imports and a huge corporation behind them, but they can't make a car that performs like a 5-series and has an interior like a Jaguar XF.

That is the problem, "Cadillac has it coming" while the others have been doing it for a couple years. Cadillac is always playing catch up.

What is worse than Cadillac losing the horsepower war is losing the fuel efficiency war. Mercedes offers a 50 state diesel car, and is working on more plus hybrids, BMW is bringing their diesels here soon and hybrids and Lexus has the hybrids. Those brands have "green" image and/or technology image which Cadillac lacks right now. Cadillac also lacks in the upper echelon of cars, and has too many base price of $44,000 or less sedans. BMW and Mercedes cost $8000 more than an STS because they use better wood, better leather, better plastic and have more current technology. The STS is more in a class with the Acura RL. I agree that the 230 hp 5-series is wimpy, but it gets good gas mileage, and in most parts of the world, like Europe, that is important. BMW designs cars to sell everywhere in the world, not just the USA and Canada like Cadillac does. BMWs are usually low in weight and have always had decent acceleration without being the class leader in power. The new 5-series comes out in about a year, the base engine may change. The 407 hp V8 takes over as their main V8, the M5 could be 738 hp with twin turbos if they wanted too, they already work with a tuner to make custom ones like that. Cadillac has the world's biggest (maybe 2nd biggest) auto maker and 105 years of history behind them, there is no reason they shouldn't be on an even field with M-B or BMW. But GM seems too cheap or too afraid to compete.

I think that is what Pontiac should do. They could cover the police, taxi and rental fleet markets with a couple of sedans, and not have to fleet out Chevys, Buicks or Cadillacs. Then resale value of one brand suffers rather than 4. I agree totally with the hybrid and diesel options. Fleet customers like taxi, government, police are going to require higher mileage. That is why the Ford Panther platform is dying and NYC is buying Escape Hybrid taxis.

W-Body and G-Body both have to die, along with the 4-speed automatic and 1990s engines. The Impala drives like it is form 1999, not 2007, which is why they discount them like crazy, while the Accord in 4-cylinder and cloth sells for $23k and after 4 years still sells for $15k. Reputation/image/perception go a long way. Camry and Accord have it, the domestics don't right now.

My mistake, I was thinking of the old Mercedes engine, the 4.3 and 5.0 liter V8s were 3 valve per cylinder, and their V12 is a 36 valve, 3 valve per cylinder.

Isn't that what the upcoming LaCrosse and current Lucerne are? The Lacrosse is longer than a Maxima or Avalon already. It seems that GM is thinking of making the Impala more like the Avalon, so that they can retire Buick if (when) the new products fail. This also justifies Pontiac's existence because the G8 would be more unique, and when they make a Cadillac off Zeta, people won't say it is a dressed up Impala. Chevy will have the Camaro as their Zeta car anyway. Although it wouldn't surprise me if the Impala stays a big front drive barge and costs $23,000 and gets fleet sold to death.