hyperv6

Cadillac needs product now and this one will do well. I am ok with some here not liking this car as if every car was embraced by many here it would tell me GM has missed a segment of the market somewhere. There is no car do it all model and GM needs to address different buyers. While there will be some appeal to the snow tops here the car will also take a step more to where they need to be vs the old DTS and STS.

I can see many many options here that are not and will not be available on a Buick for a long time if ever. More suspension, more quiet, more drive line, more technology and just more of many things that Buick can not use based on their price point. This car looks to be some where to being $45K-55K based on the hardware it is using and will be interesting to see what it brings in the reviews. It the media gives it an endorsement it should do well. I do have an interest in what they have planned for a V model. I did not expect it but I already see the Haldex AWD and matched with the Magna Ride just a Turbo V6 it could make for an suprise for many people. If they can under cut the price on some of the other cars alittle this could do very well.

Considering that it has 3-rows of seats, I doubt a longer-wheel base 5-door model will ever show up. Now going the other way - shortening it to a 3-door - would be much appreciated. Land Rover is planning to offer a 3-door Defender (as per the concepts shown already), and GM was known for years to offer a 3-door Blazer, so it would be logical that a sportier, back to its roots 3-door would be at least in the planning stage at this point. I really did not think they would offer the LWB as it was a mess the last time. I just wish they would make the third row an option as I know few people who ever use them. I would rather see the price drop and the cargo space improve. The third row may be great for those who don't use birth control or travel to Mecca but for most people it is just in the way. As an option it is there for those who really want it if needed. Hyperv6 I have to totally disagree with you over the 3rd row seat. The reason my daughter, son and wife love the 99 Durango we have is that when you need space for cargo, you have it, but then when you need a few extra seats for carring people, you can pull them up and have them also. This trailblazer allows you to squeeze in a few more kids or a couple of adults for short trips and that give a ton of value in my opinion. While some folks may need seating with the 3rd row most never use it and if they do they use it just to put space between the kids. Most cars on the road carry 1 person most of the time and 2-3 some of the time few carry more than 5 ever even if they have the room unless they are the short bus. I just feel it would be better suited to make the seat available to the minority that need it vs the majority that would either keep it folded up or in storage in the garage. In short let the people who need it able to get it but stop sticking the majority of us paying for a seat we do not want. Agree or not that is just my opinion. I already have a pair of 911 seats on legs in the garage lounge area and don't need a Trailblazer love seat there too. LOL!

GM did well before on the IMSA GTP Vette. There was no mistaking it for a 962. With Pratt and Miller they should do well with this car.

Camino the fact is this is a car that is not targeted for you. In fact if you did like it there would be something wrong as they are now aiming this car as the enthusisast buyers. There is a mass segment of people out there that like cars that you and I do not like and their money is just as green. GM could try to force them into a car they don't like or offer them a car they will buy. It is about making money. Also just because some report made this out to be some kind of flaf ship in error does not make it a flag ship. While this may not be a luxury car in you terms it is in the view of many others. I too believe this will be like the SRX and it will sell in good numbers as there are few really good cars in this class. The money made on cars like this will help provide the income to build the flagship of your dreams. So it is fine to not like this car. I too am not a fan but I also understand I no longer reresent the wants and the needs of the average buyer anylonger. As long as they make money with this car more power to em. I think in the end you will be proven wrong that this will hurt Cadillac. While it is not the home run car it will be a solid performer in profit and not harm Cadillacs image. With the town car gone there is a lot of sales up for grabs and a lot of money on the table left to be picked up. Also I see this car being replaced in 4-5 years anyway. It is just buying time.

I would love to see this one in the old GM Goodwrench GTP black and silver.

That's not the sole point I'm trying to make. I'm just wondering why GM chose to make Lee's Famous Recipe when they could've just as easily made KFC -- the real thing -- with not much more effort or cost. Want to know something, though? I don't know why all of those styling changes bother me, to be honest. Maybe it's because I feel that GM was capable of greater, effortless, and production feasible design prowess here and that makes me worry what that might mean for some future car that I'll be far more inclined to care about and actually purchase. I don't think you'd need a trained eye to pick up on the differences. I know I found a lot of them on my first glance. Then again, I'm not about to go out and find people to hold those two pictures up to. Based on what I have learned from GM people many things are changed to meet many requirements. What seems like a little thing to you and me can add many many problems and dollars if it goes into production. Things as small as the smell of the leather scent cost money. This was one thing they were asking the diciples on the Camaro. Areas where sheet metal is crimped can be inportant to keeping it more rigid as they reduce the gage of the metal on the new cars to cut weight. LED fogs add to cost and on a car like this. GM wants to keep this cars price in check as it is more a volume car vs a high dollar limited car. Whlile we all like to have Kobe steak a New York Strip at the Texas Road House fits the need more. Now if this were the Cadillac flag ship no comprimise is needed. That is the car that will sell in lower volume and a higher price so no corners need be cut. Also for anyone who thinks this will be nothing but just another Larcrosse clone it would be wise to hold that thought. This car will offer things you will not ever find in a Lacrosse. By the time you do find them in a Buick Cadillac will have moved on., This is just going to be the volume car for Cadillac and it is just filling empty space in the show room. Much of the work on this car was done prior to the Chapter 11 just as the Malibu and ZL1. GM rushed a lot of project to put on the shelve so they would have new cars in less time when they came out of the bail out. It is a good thing they did or they would be like Chrysler and hurting for relivent new product for the show room. So far the redesigns are helping but the Fiat is a flop. Chrysler still needs small cars and it will still be some time till more rebadged Fiats arrive.

Here's something I whipped up illustrating the differences. I couldn't help to pepper in a little opinion in the commentary, so simply ignore where I ramble a bit if you have to. Ignore how crude it is. My graphic design skills have gotten very rusty since I quit taking classes. And, once again, the only things that I see that had to be changed on the concept car (which, once again, was touted to be a "thinly veiled" version of the eventual product) to make it production friendly are: The size of the side-view mirrors. The headlamp detailing. Some interior parts and switchgear. Once again, I think the glasshouse was changed so that the hardpoints of this larger version of EPII could more easily be shared with the upcoming Chevrolet Impala. The question is how many people who are the target of this car will really notice?

Considering that it has 3-rows of seats, I doubt a longer-wheel base 5-door model will ever show up. Now going the other way - shortening it to a 3-door - would be much appreciated. Land Rover is planning to offer a 3-door Defender (as per the concepts shown already), and GM was known for years to offer a 3-door Blazer, so it would be logical that a sportier, back to its roots 3-door would be at least in the planning stage at this point. I really did not think they would offer the LWB as it was a mess the last time. I just wish they would make the third row an option as I know few people who ever use them. I would rather see the price drop and the cargo space improve. The third row may be great for those who don't use birth control or travel to Mecca but for most people it is just in the way. As an option it is there for those who really want it if needed.

The issue with the Camaro was it stayed too close to the orignal show car. Many on the Camaro team whated to change the interior but GM wanted to stay with the original theme. The Camaro team got feed back on the dash, steering wheel and shifter that was not good but GM made them use them anyways. Now you can see the new wheel and updates to the dash to buy time till the new car arrives. GM is now staying as close to the show cars as they can but there too often are things that can not or should not be used.

I don't think it's an improvement over the DTS. It's too narrow, and I don't care for the third window in the C pillar. I think it could succeed modestly if priced at the level of the Lexus ES350, but I fear Cadillac will price it much higher. That I feel is where the target is. I have seen people place much higher price on this than it will really be. SInce it is based on a standard platform this will help keep the price in a affordable range. ALso if GM plans to use it for fleet and livery sales it will have to keep it affordable. This is not a flag ship and it will not be a performance car. It will be a comfortable sedan with good MPG that will be affordable to the older buyers and commercial buyer. None of us should put any big expectations on this car for leading edge performance to ultra Luxury. This will be a more modern traditional luxury car and a affordable luxury car. It is taking the slot that the town car left and Lincoln is trying to get a new model to replace. It is a slot where there is good profit but not a lot of flash. As for the DTS it was showing its age and needed help. As for size many of these cars will be getting shorter and more narrow to remove weight. They need MPG's andI fear what we may see just to meet the new stadards unless the goverment wakes up.

There are some small detail things that if you put both photos side by side you can find them. Overal they kept the car pretty close to the show car and what changes were made were based on practical needs and cost. The people who will buy this car will never know the differeve.

That's all well and good, hyper. Just for the record, though, my posts weren't written to try and convince you to join my side in this, they were constructed to simply: Explain to you that, from logical observation, I see no reason why the exterior design of the original XTS concept couldn't have been carried over intact as very few details were unfriendly for production. Explain why I condemned the design of the car. Explain to you that by simply studying the original concept and the production car, I did not need any further photos to know that the production XTS is far removed from the original concept and the design ultimately suffers from it. Remind you that I did not make any other definite comments regarding the car. Perhaps I didn't communicate that clearly in my past two posts. I will also add in this bit of food for thought: Robert Cumberford bases his design analysis articles for Automobile on what he sees in photographs. He's been in the field of automotive design for quite some time too, sooooo ... I realize GM Photography sometimes is terrible, but that is only so much truth and so much excuse in the current circumstances. Anyway, that's my stance on the exterior design of this car. Deride it all you want, but I'm standing firm with my opinion: it's an utter disappointment externally versus the production-ready concept car from last year. Again, I'm not trying to convince you to think any differently about how you see this car. I'm also terminating any future argument about it with you from this post forward, but discussion is certainly welcome. Now I know why I seldom like or agree with Cumberford. To do a review like this is kind of like a food critic basing his review on a dish based on a photo...or one of us reviewing Italy based on a Video. Lets just wait and see what we get before we roll all the dice on one photo. That is all I am stating. That is why I want to see the car in person as some assume the car is Lacrosse in size when the platform can be made longer and wider based on need. I think we will find this to be a little larger than the Buick.

The Lacrosse needs some outside trim updates. I agree the head lamps and other items like the wheels would make the car look fresh again. The interior is not bad but color changes and a few small trim changes would be ok. I do love these wheels. They are even similar to the Opel Astra OTC. I hope Buick makes them available. Good wheels are hard to come by anymore so many are not what I call good looking. Good wheels and tires can make the looks of the best and worst styled cars. My GTP has the twisted 5 spoke chome option wheel. I have had so many people comment on the car and it is mostly due to the wheels. The 10 spokes just never played out well for that car and the better wheels make it look so much better.

I see little point in the Transverse with this vehicle. I too find it too minivanish and the MPG is nothing to write home about. I would hope this Trailblazer will have a more stable frame than the last. The old one had a lot of flex to it. I also hope no one get the idea to make another long wheel base either, talk about ugly. I am sure both the frame will be stiffer and the wheel base will not be changes.

That is why I will wait. The photography has not improved and many of GM's designs even in a good photo don't really show how good they look in person. The CTS coupe looks ok in photo's but in person the way the wide shoulder quarter panels flair out when it is coming at you on the road really is impressive. Few people can photograph cars well and some just do not show the detail you can get in person. The Cruze also was not a car that photo'd well but on the road and in better trim and colors it really is a good looking car that will not be mistaken for a Honda, Hyundai or Toyota want a be. It says Chevy in its own style and for a small car in LTZ trim look more expensive than it really is. Same for the interiors. The photos just don't comunicate the full story as you need to sit in it and feel it ti get the full on idea. Of late so many base all or nothing on cars not ever seeing more than a photo. At times the photo is even of the camo version. They also do not have any idea of what options the car will offer let alone the engine packages and they start the sky is falling deal. I too used to fall for this but with GM's latest cars I am learning to wait and see as I am finding the cars once they hit the market are better than I first expected. I had my doubts on the Cruze and now having drive one and spent time with it I can say GM did this one right. Also sales show the public also has connected to it. I found the same on the Nox and other new GM cars. Few have disapointed me and are showing GM is finally getting it together. There are still things they need to work out but what car company doesn't?

I can understand having an informed opinion about the car, sure. As I've said, though, the one photo we've got is enough to form an opinion on this car from a design standpoint and regarding how the changes made from the concept car affect the design overall. Once again, I've only condemned the car from a design standpoint. Well, no ... not really. While you can't form a rounded opinion about my behavior and personality from one photograph, you can certainly form an opinion about my appearance (e.g. "He's got a nice smile" or "He looks like he might be a bit of a slob"). No one here, myself included, is making any firm assumptions about the car aside from how it has been designed. Again, notice no one has said in this thread that the car "is going to drive like shit" or "will be weak and underpowered." We don't have any hard data to go on here, hence why no one has said anything regarding those two aspects of the car, myself included. Really? Again, I'm going to have to disagree with you here unless you can explain why so much had to be changed from the production-ready concept car. I've given my explanation here and -- I'm sorry -- that's the only thing that makes logical sense. It's certainly not because that the original concept car would be expensive to produce on the outside. I don't know if the general public will get behind this one if it's going to max out beyond $50k price wise. Then again, it's really too early to assume anything about this car sales wise. That doesn't mean I won't speculate, though. However, I will guarantee this: if this car does not deliver on all expectations regarding fuel economy, an involving driving experience, interior fit and finish, the level of standard content, and overall quality then the press will crucify this car, Cadillac, and GM as a result. They had better hope that they've built a good enough stop-gap until they decide to produce the Ciel for general consumption (but I'm not holding my breath regarding the Ciel), otherwise this car will haunt them until they pull the plug on it. Regarding China, I really think this car will consistently lose out to the Park Avenue. Just saying and speculating. Just let it go I will form my final opinion after I see the car and you can quote me on that! LOL! The bottom line is I am not going to argue a car that you nor I have seen. You comments speak volumes....

I'm not inclined to agree here. The concept car was, reportedly, based around the EPII architecture itself, meaning that cowl height, hard points, and things of that nature regarding the design were supposed to be production friendly. The only details that I see that would have to be changed for production from the original concept would be the internal lighting elements of the headlamps (not their shape) and the size of the sideview mirrors. (Additionally, certain aspects of the interior would undoubtedly have to be changed as well, but that's another story for right now.) No, instead I think all of those unnecessary changes were made so that the hard points of the car could more easily translate to and be shared with the upcoming EPII Impala, forsaking what little exclusivity the concept had to offer. Mark my words on this; it's little more than a '77 Seville for the twenty-first century. If something didn't make production, there is a reason and that reason is bureaucracy. Like I said, that one photo tells quite a lot. Put it up next to the concept car and the bigger picture is right there for you to see, plain as daylight. Again, you don't need a full press-kit to analyze this thing from a design standpoint. It's a mess and it's been needlessly tampered with from the original concept car. As for what powertains this car will have and how it will drive, no one has made any criticisms regarding those two areas in this thread. Regarding it competing with the 7-Series and S-Class, well, we knew when Fritz the Ditz introduced the original concept car last year this would be anything but a competitor to those cars. That's why there was so many people here up in arms about it, people were worried that GM would position this car above the CTS and call it quits, especially considering the ongoing uncertainty of a future large, rear-drive Cadillac and also when it was revealed it was not only going to replace the DTS but the STS as well. I think we all realize that this car is competing with the Lincoln MKS, Acura RL, and Lexus ES. That's also troublesome because those are cars that are in the Buick LaCrosse's territory and that car has done a wonderful job of going after those buyers. Honestly, the LaCrosse is a much nicer car than the XTS. I just hope that the XTS doesn't somehow sabotage the footing the LaCrosse has managed to make here. I'm not so sure GM's going to see a big return on this one in America, if they're building it solely to get old Ma and Pa Kettle to trade in their Devilles and DTS's. As for China, that's really anyone's guess. Yes, it's not a flagship. But that doesn't mean the original concept should have been thrown away like it has. The XTS is a Cadillac and some people, regardless if they intend to buy one or not, hold the marquee to standards higher than what this production XTS has been designed and (perhaps) built to. I just want to have an informed opionion. I am not a fan of this class of car but I am willing to give it a shot and to be fair I need to see it in person first. Too many have made harsh comments about a car only to have to take back or change their opinion later once the car is seen in person and does well on the market. . It's kind of like me forming an opinion on you. I would rather meet you first vs Just hating you based on seeing you in one drunken photo on facebook! LOL! As for the concept vs production car. I think most are smart enough to understand the need for many changes. There is no need to explain on further. I look at cars like this as how the public will react and if there is a market segement to support it. I see there will be enough of each for this car if they keep the price down untill they can get to the kind of car they really want here. It was either this car for 4-5 yerars in the show room or an empty space in the showroom for the next 4-5 years. It will make money and do well till the right car is ready. Livery sales alone will make back any investment here. The Ma and Pa buyers need cars too. As for China it will do well. It will return better than average MPG and the back seat I suspect will be the best seat in the house in their version. Most owners in this class do not drive they are driven there. The bottom line is this is not a Cheers and Gear kind of car. I only see a few here that would be interested in this kind of car. But there are more people out there than just us and they buy a lot more cars too.

Oh they will sell it here. JUSt as the Cruze and Colorado they will play the can't have it here game and then anounce it will be built in a plant here. Jeep sales are up because it has 4 doors and t cheaper than most other SUV's Different styling helps too. what would you buy a boring exscape of a Jeep. If they bring this is there a real need for the Traverse anymore. You have the Tahoe and you will have this. The Traverse really does not help in the MPG department and is not price much less than the Tahoe. I do approve of the styling so far and I think it should answer the Explorer well. I just will be happy for this and the Colorado to have a proper quality interior.

Other then the green house there is little here to go on. I suspect as flat as the camo is it is hiding a much more sculpted body. Judging the styling on the Colorado and Trailblazer I expect this truck to has a much more shaped hood and side. This is has become a trade mark of the Ed Wellborn design at Chevy.

First thing we all need to do here is let go of the concept as it is just that a concept. It has things and features that do not easily translate into production due to MFG, cost effective, quality etc. If something did not make production there is a reason. As for passing final judgment here I will wait till I see the real production car. Once I have seen it, sat in it, seen the option list and driven one I can make better judgment on this vs just looking a one photo. As of now I am not hating the car but I still know too little to pass similar judgements some already have. I also plan to keep in mind what this cars mission is and not expect a 7 series or AMG beater. Like stated before I too think China will eat this one up and it will make money here in several roles. This is not a flagship and should not be expected to fill that role.

I think I will wait till I see it in person first. like many cars GM has done of late they present so much better in person. The CTS coupe looks ok in photo's but presents so much stronger in person. But like I have said this car was not going to be a home run but will make money and not harm Cadillac till they get the car they really want. God knows it is an improvement over the DTS.

You have to see this car in person as the photo's don't show what it really is. Many of GM's cars of late look understated in photos but really pop in person. You will not mistake this for a Sonota on the street!

Very nice. The interior look very inviting and the wheel look very good on this car. If they could offer this at a price under $40K they will have a winner. I just don't want them to creep too much higher till Cadillac moves up in price. This is as nice a looking sedan as any on todays market.

I really think the car woluld sell better if there were more of them around the country. The truth is most markets outside those near an ocean hace not seent hese or have seen very few. You are looking at a car that will just be a small part of the auto market and it is in so few markets. I have seen more Ferrari 458's because there are more of them built than the Volt. The electric car thing is not a cheap start up for anymone. Those who condem the Volt for price need to condem any electric car. As more are sold and a segment is established the segment will get a little more cheaper as time goes on. MFG will invest their own money and not GM's to make parts that will be cheaper and more competitive. It will take time as this segment will see slow growth in witht he high prices and public acceptance. I have only seen 2 volts here and that was just a week or so ago and I have yet to see a Leaf. The only other electric car I see around here is a Tesla or two and they are more novelty toys for the rich than a real daily driver. As for the Leaf and any other full electric car. I really don't expect to see many here in the cold midwest as they are presented today. They just lack the cold weather range and our drives to work are not short. For the most part here with the lack of any Volts being sent here many people really have little clue of them. They have heard of them but could not really tell you much about them other than they are electric. Not everyone keep up on automotive news. One thing that may has made this car more a challange is the Cruze Eco. This car alone is selling in great numbers at a not so cheap price and is doing better MPG than the EPA numbers. I have several buddies with them and they love this car as it takes nothing specail to buy run or deal with. They only care about MPG and that is what they get. The Volt will remain and the price will shrink as well as the range will grow. It will always be a little more expensive but will still be acceptable. GM has long ago understood this car was a slow growth car and if you build it you need to build the market. If they did not build it there would never be a market.