smk4565

Cadillac's image has improved over 10 years, but they still lag. BMW and Mercedes are already on top. I would argue that BMW getting Gen Y people to buy their cars is a good thing, if a 30 year old buys a BMW, they may buy them for the next 40 years. The DTS is bought by 70 year olds, they might not be alive long enough to buy another one. Cadillac needs younger buyers, they are still around a 60 years old average. I'd like to see Cadillac's goal to be to return to "standard of the world" but unfortunately I don't think GM is committed to them enough to make it happen.

A Camry XLE V6, with the Option B package (the most expensive one) that as nav system and Bluetooth, and XM radio added for $490 comes to $31,969 including destination charge. $32,400 for a base 328i, and that car comes pretty stripped down, $32,900 for a BTS makes sense. It shouldn't overlap with Maximas, G8s, TSX, etc. 1-series has been a success in Europe because it is small and very fuel efficient with the diesels (near 50 mpg), and BMW is a broader range brand there. The 1-series we are getting is still near 30k to start, I know the 135i is $34,900 base. They also expect to only sell 20,000 or so a year here. BMW also makes a car with a $120,000 price tag, there is enough at the top end to keep brand image high. Cadillac's image is still defined somewhat by the DTS, which isn't a good thing. More importantly though, BMW knows what they are, and where they want to go. Cadillac still seems lost, unsure whether to be performance, or cushy, or big, or small, $35k or $80k.

The whole Acura brand has 149,000 sales for 2007 through October (down 9.7%), the TL has 48,400 of those. The 3-series so far this year has sold 118,000 units, more than double the TL. BMW has sold 240,000 total, up 8.6% this year. Acura and their dressed Accord are not hurting anyone, the C-class sold twice as many in October. 5-series sold 4943 in October, 43,000 so far this year.

So price the BTS with a loaded Camry V6 or a Pontiac G8? Is that what a Cadillac should cost? $32,900 is as low as the BTS should go. CTS will need a massive overhaul to take on cars like the Jaguar XF, unless Cadillac's goal is to be a $30-50k player, and not challenge the higher end luxury marks. But they never really explain what the goal is.

A sedan can get better than the 335i, the M3 sedan comes out soon. I don't know exactly what 5-series sales are this year, but BMW as a whole has been up every month, while most other brands are in down years. If GM has a $2500 labor cost penalty over most imports, and prices their car $2000 less than the 3-series, they are either making $4500 less in profit, or putting $4500 less into it, or some combination in between. I just don't think cheaper than a BMW beats BMW, Cadillac has built cheaper cars than them for years. The BTS should be designed to beat the 3-series and priced after, not priced beforehand, like with the Solstice, so they had to strip it down and cut corners to match the 20k price.

Well obviously a BMW isn't for everyone, my mom for example won't buy a BMW, Cadillac or Mercedes because they are too recognizable, and she has to drives to clients houses and prefers something more bland, or less common. She's had 3 Volvos, a Saab and now and Audi over the last 22 years. Some people like floaty ride, so Lexus comes in here, and some people just want something not too expensive and similar to the Accord or Fusion they just got rid of, thus the TL and MKZ. But the 3-series sells over 120,000 units a year in the US, far more than any other competitor (I know they have coupe, convertible and a wagon they sell 1000 of). Cadillac keeps claiming they are going for BMW type handling, or dramatic performance/luxury/style, when Bob Lutz says a CTS-V will suck the doors of the M5, it better. If they set the bar that high, they better reach it. The CTS has to go way up in price when the BTS arrives, look at Cadillac's pricing, $32k base and a pair of $43k base sedans. Then look at a Mercedes, 32k base, next cheapest is $51k base, CLS is in the $70s, S-class is $88k base.

Well even for people that never bought a luxury car, and are looking at their first, and narrow it down to 3-series and BTS. Chances are the BTS having a lower base price won't win any buyers, BMW's image is so strong, that alone is enough to get buyers that are on the fence. People will drive the 3-series and the BTS, (or C350, Is350, whatever) and they'll probably buy the one that drives best and looks best and conveys the image they want to convey. BMW says "performance" and "I've made it" or whatever tagline of success you want to use. Cadillac still means "old person's car" to a lot of people. Cadillac has the duel challenge of making a car equal to the imports, but also changing their image, price of the car won't really matter. The 5-series is way more expensive than a CTS, yet BMW sales keep going up, charging high prices hasn't hurt them one bit.

BMW's economic situation allows them to cut weight with aluminum and carbon fiber, Jaguar does it in the XJ, Audi does it. If GM can't because of their union contract or other economic factors, that will make it harder for them to compete with the super luxury cars. The BTS's interior has to be at a minimum to the level that the CTS is now. The current CTS is much better than the old, although the seats I think got worse, and the new CTS doesn't even have 4 way lumbar. I am sure they saved $18 by using 2 way instead of 4, but the competition doesn't think like that. I'd like to see Cadillac make the best cars, I'd rather buy a Cadillac than an import, but Cadillac doesn't have a lot of variety now, or several good products that build a strong brand image.

The 5-series is keeping a 3.0 liter I6 with 250 hp I think for base, the twin turbo I6 returns, that engine makes over 280 rear wheel horsepower in he 335i, so it isn't a 300 hp, they'll probably just rate it higher or to what it actually is next time. The 4.8 liter 360 hp V8 dies, a 4.4 liter direct injection, twin turbo V8 takes it's place. Rumored 410 hp and lb-ft of torque, and perhaps burn less gas than their current V8. If they get over 100 hp per liter like they do from the I6, I'd think more like 440 hp in the new V8. M5 is rumored to get a 5.5 liter twin turbo V10. The 535 diesel is coming here as well, it gets 35 mpg average, beats a Camry hybrid or Yaris. They are likely doing a hybrid 5-series on top of that. The M3 CSL was modified with a supercharger, spoiler, and they cut the weight down, so it isn't a stock car, but someone could buy and M3 and make it. It did the Nurburgring in 7 minutes 22 seconds, 5 seconds faster than the Pagani Zonda, 20 seconds faster than the 505 hp Z06. Here is the link... http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/20/new-rin...7-22-8-seconds/ Cadillac doesn't need anything like that, my only point with it is the 3-series has a good chassis, the BTS has to be really good to compete. I think they should price the base BTS above the 3-series, maybe make the loaded one less though. Low price usually means not as good, BMW/M-B faithful won't buy a BTS because it is $500-1000 less, the BTS is going to have to be a better looking, better interior car. And if GM's goal is low base price, they'll cheap out the interior or something to keep cost down. They made the Malibu $1000 less than the Accord, and all the reviews are the Accord has the best interior, if GM spend that extra $1000 and priced the car the same, the Malibu would have the best interior.

New 3-series I think is 2012 or 2013 model year. New 5-series is 2010 model year, and they have way more power coming. If the CTS is meant to go against it, it will need some big time engine upgrades.

I know Cadillacs are reliable, but look at the competition also. BMWs run for a long time, 200,000+ miles is easy on a BMW, and they are usually top 10 in JD Power reliability. Although that study is 3-4 years, that isn't that great an indicator. Lexus is #1 reliability, and most of those mid 90s Lexuses are still running with a ton of miles on them, although I think a BMW or Cadillac would last longer. American cars have a general reputation of not lasting long, so I don't think the BTS is going to win 3-series buyers over because they think it is more reliable. BTS better have a better interior than the 3-series, more features, more motor and more gas mileage and equal handling, or at least very close. A supercharged M3 just set the Nurburgring track record the other day, Cadillac has their work cut out for them.

I am aware, quick list of cars I'd never buy... Any Buick, Mercury, Hyundia, Kia, Toyota, Lexus ES and IS, current DTS, Town Car, any SUV or station wagon or pick up or van. Unless I got into the hauling business or something that needed a truck, but never as a personal vehicle.

Not enough of them. I doubt they bring out an $85k base price sedan, and they are killing the SRX which drives great, for a downgrade. But I am very interested to see the lineup when they get it done. I hope they top the Jaguar XF, I think that car is pretty cool. They need to get 35 mpg out of the CTS somehow by 2009 also, the 535d gets 35 mpg average, beats a Yaris, Fit, Aveo and Camry hybrid, and it's coming here within a year.

Oldsmoboi said he'd like a V6 Lucerne as a daily driver. That is why I picked on the 3800. I wouldn't take a V6 Lucerne or a Northstar Lucerne. The added 25 hp (compared to the Aurora) from the northstar is just canceled out by the porkier curb weight. That Northstar was in the 1993 Seville, maybe it is time to upgrade. The Avalon is nicer than a LaCrosse and the center console area has higher grade materials than the Lucerne, it is basically a better Buick than a Buick is. I'd never buy an Avalon or any other Toyota, but at least it and the ES350 are semi modern, not riding the same platform, engine, tranny from 1987, Lexus didn't even make cars then.

Yea, capacity will never be an issue. The old CTS sold about 60,000 around 05 or 06 when it had it's best year, the STS in 05 I think sold around 30,000 cars, maybe a little more. The STS is only on pace for around 15,000 this year I think, so even if the CTS sells 75,000, they are still about the same volume as before. They can always put the STS or DTS out of their misery early if need be.

No way, the Lucerne has a very average interior, fake wood all over, cheap cloth in the base model. It's huge and the 3800 is weak. I have an Aurora 4.0, the interior has a far superior layout, better materials like real walnut wood trim, and the V8 is 100 times better than a 3800 in everything but gas mileage. The Aurora handles better than the Lucerne too. I think they took a big step backward from the Aurora to the Lucerne, although I suppose the Lucerne is marginally better than the LeSabre. I wouldn't trade my 86k mile Aurora for a brand new Lucerne CXS straight up. That being said, after 4+ years of front drive V8, I'd like rear drive and a bit smaller car next time, the Aurora is too front heavy and body rolls on tight windy roads like all front drive cars. Buick might be able to catch up to the Avalon and ES350, if GM ever invests the money, not like they have Toyota's money sitting around and only 30 vehicles to spend it on. Cadillac needs to continue the chase of M-B, BMW, Jaguar, etc. Jaguar I think will become relevant again.

I don't expect a CTS sized car to handle like or be as fast as a 3-series, but the problem is Cadillac doesn't have a small car, or a legit $50-70,000 car. So the CTS is left to do battle against 3 segments of cars. The CTS is the best middle sized, entry level luxury car, the ES350, TL, MKZ are really all that are in that group though, maybe a Volvo or the 9-5. My frustration with Cadillac I tend to take out on the CTS, which isn't really fair to the CTS. I am just unhappy with Cadillac's car lineup. Cadillac needs a small car, and an S-class fighter, then they have what every other brand has. And with the 528i comparisons, people could say a Chrysler 300C has 345 hp for less than money than a CTS, or an SRT-8 has 425 hp for what a CTS costs, so does that make the CTS no good? The level of materials are different, just like with the CTS and 5-series. There is a reason there is a cost difference between the 2. Not that makes one better than the other, they are just different segments.

I don't know why people always bring that up, the 528i exists because gas in Europe is $7 a gallon, and the thing gets better mileage than a Malibu or Accord or Camry (V6). Other brands do that too in ads, "more horsepower than a 528i" but who cares. Toyota could run Camry V6 has more power than a CTS ads, but what is the point. And there is a 500 hp 5-series that goes 205 mph without a speed limiter, they just offer about 7 engine choices if you factor in the diesels, which isn't a bad philosophy. Ford made a comparison like that with the Edge, it was .2 seconds faster 0-60 than the slowest X5, and they did an ad just for that. Who cares, no one thinks a Ford Edge is as good as an X5 or cross shopping.

It is good to see GM with a car of the year, again, the Vette has been their only best car list contender for a while. I thought for sure the stupid Accord would get it, car magazines love the Accord. The handling numbers they got for the CTS were very impressive, the 6.3 second 0-60 time is weak, the Camry/Accord V6 can do that. My other complaints on the CTS are 2-way lumbar, the STS's seats are far superior, and I was actually not that impressed with the stereo in the CTS. The one in my Aurora sounds better. Those are minor fixes though that they'll probably fix during the MCE. I'd like to see the Standard of the World slogan come back as well, but they need more than 1 car. They need 4 stars, so 1 down, 3 to go.

I did see that, it goes to $44k loaded which is a lot, might as well get a 335i. The 135i will be wicked fast though, probably be 0-60 in the 4.8 second range. It is hard to get a car that fast for under $40 grand. Though I think the 335i makes more sense, just like an Acadia (and $10,000 for gas) or GL320 makes more sense than a Tahoe hybrid. Although people don't always buy what makes sense, some will buy an Escalade Hybrid just to say they have it, even if it is only 18 mpg. Mercedes quality isn't what it used to be, but they do seem to last forever, although maintenance could be costly along the way. Diesels can rack up crazy miles.

I agree, the Tahoe and Yukon are pricey, and the GL320 is $54,000 as well, and 18/24 mpg, which would beat out 20/20 mpg, and it tows more, and the 3-point star has a better image than the bowtie. The Acadia and other Lambdas (or even the CX-9, etc) offer similar interior room, better driving and comparable fuel economy, and much lower price. They just don't have the towing or off road, but I doubt many people are taking a Tahoe hybird off road. They need to put hybrid technology on smaller vehicles so they can get in the 30-40 mpg range.

It is good that they made a Tahoe that gets 20 mpg, not 16, but it's a lot of money, and will people pay the extra for a vehicle that still sucks gas. Most minivans are 17/24 mpg, and can average 20 mpg. Not everyone tows frequently. For those that do need towing, the Mercedes GL320 has 3 rows of seats, tows 7,500 pounds, (1000 more than the Tahoe Hybrid), and gets 18/24 mpg, for $54,000. So there is a more capable off road SUV that tows more, and gets better mileage for nearly the same price. Should the Mercedes be "green" car of the year as well?

20 mpg average shouldn't be the "green" car of the year. Any minivan can average near that and haul 7 people.

I like the exterior look of it. The interior looks too similar in shape and style to the Taurus and Volvo S80. Being a front driver, it won't win any handling awards, I am not sure what the turbo will make, but what will the point be, even with awd, it will still be front heavy and probably torque steer. They do offer some good technology for the price like adaptive cruise control, adaptive headlights, push button start, capless gas tank. But I think this will only appeal to current Lincoln/Mercury buyers or the Bonneville/Aurora/Seville/300M etc crowd that likes roomy and front drive. This car is way better than the Lucerne, but that isn't saying much. The big front drive car segment is shrinking fast, this may appeal to some of the old die hard fans of it, but that is about it. Built on the Taurus DE3 platform is a huge downside.

They need to overcome that hurdle. Consumers don't care about GM's and Ford's labor cost problems, they want a good car. When GM/Ford cheap out $2000 on materials and features but Honda doesn't, people go buy Hondas, because the car is better. People are not going to buy a domestic that is inferior because they feel sorry for GM/Ford that their labor cost is high, so GM/Ford can't use it as an excuse as to why their cars are not as good. They can use it as an excuse as to why their profit margin is lower, but that's it.