hyperv6

What he said was they will use China for the Volume as it is the fastest growing market. Also it is isolated enough it will hold little effect on the other markets where lower volumes are desired. They will also spread out their volumes over many models to not over saturate any market so much that the models get real common to see like a Malibu. Profit per unit will be the key as volume is less important at that point too. If they sell in China fine if not the profit per unit will keep them buoyant.

It is tired but the last time they tired to fix it we got the Bangle look with the big butt and Dame Edna front. It made it where they were better off with tired styling. I think BMW is to a point time has moved on and they can not find that formula to move forward. They are afraid to do too much different but yet the conservative moves are leaving them behind. That is why cars like a Camaro are as much fun to drive now. If they can find the image thing BMW is in real trouble.

Much of the engine play is because of the emissions laws in various markets. Some also due to engine size taxes too. As for Chassis tuning it was just a choice as so many BMW owners are getting older maybe they expect a smoother ride? That one you can choose. As for interior the Germans really have never set the world on fires unless you like all dark leather. They are to blame for many of the dull interiors the other MFG have copied. Audi has made good interiors for years, Mercedes currently does also. And Mercedes put a V8 in the C-class, they have to follow the same rules as BMW. BMW gave up on what made the 90s and early 2000s M3 and M5 so good. They better find their secret sauce again. Luckily for them, they have a loyal following. The Germans on a whole make dark, drab looking uninspired interiors as a whole. Even in the top quality models they are dull. In the more base models they are down right cheap. I have two examples of 944 Seats in my garage now that show how cheesy they can be. As for Benz did they put a BMW V8 in their car and is that same car the same one BMW sends to other markets where Benz may offer different engines. Dude you really need to look at all the details not just the superficial ones. It is not so much a loyal following but the fact their image still sells. People like to say I own a Beemer and their friends are too stupid to know that really does not hold as much meaning anymore. Note too When I say crap interiors I do not question the Benz quality but I do question the look and styling. Hence the dull, drab and dark. The lighter colors are rare. Note I hate most Chevy interiors for the same thing.

If anyone has not watched this interview with JDN you should take the time to watch. http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/04/watch-the-entire-interview-of-cadillac-president-johan-de-nysschen-video/#comments You will be much better informed on the mind set and what the thinking is inside GM and Cadillac.

I was never much of a fan of Georges cars that he claimed out side the Munster cars and the Dean built Monkeemobile. But I did get to work with George several times trough work at events and he was a very nice and accommodating guy. I could see how he charmed many in Hollywood. I often wondered if Sam had lived and with Georges marketing abd Sans metal working talent how much more we would have seen from them. The car from this era I treasured was the Herb Adams Fire AM. They even took one and drove it from Michigan to Daytona raced it to 27th place once the crank broke. They were in tenth in GT. It was street legal. There were a hand full made for sale and I would love to have one.

Ed was not only a great designer but a great spokesman and great guy! He will be missed. Yes the Cadillac Cyclone above had some rudimentary radar collision system for the time. I suspect it may have worked as well as the rain sensing wipers did then due to the lack of electronic advancements of the time. The name may or may not have been on a short list for GM. I know while Pontiac claimed to find the Fiero name in a dictionary at a late night meeting claiming it meant proud in Italian. They also had a Firebird Fiero Show car in the late 60's. Then the name was a take off of the two words Firebird Aero concept that the car was the year before. GM seldom throws away names and will resurrect them from time to time even with a spelling change. They also do the same with some designs. The Fiero also was based on a GM Tech center design for a V6 Mid Engine Covette Chevy rejected in the mid 70's. Riviera was a Cadillac concept moved to Buick etc.

Much of the engine play is because of the emissions laws in various markets. Some also due to engine size taxes too. As for Chassis tuning it was just a choice as so many BMW owners are getting older maybe they expect a smoother ride? That one you can choose. As for interior the Germans really have never set the world on fires unless you like all dark leather. They are to blame for many of the dull interiors the other MFG have copied.

BMW is between a rock and a hard place. With new regulations it has limited their ability to do many things anymore and have had to go conservative. Now GM also has shown how they can really do a car right and refined with the proper funding for once. The days of just slapping stiffer springs, larger bars and bigger tires are over. This has put the BMW like performance in cars much cheaper than their own. Now few will cross shop these cars but it will spur interest in some and a really cool David and Goliath story. GM and the Camaro will carve out their own place in the market. The first thing they need to do is try to stop the Pony car label from being applied as they are truly a world class GT car that is still affordable.

What we do know for sure is that we really don't know much of what is coming and what they are planning. At this point we really need to just let JDN do his work and let the 11 models speak for what he and Cadillac is doing. For sure not ever model is going to be a home run but as long as there is progress that is key. Also not every one is going to be happy as in any case where a company needs to move on someone gets left behind. That is just a part of life and you will never satisfy everyone. I think we need to stop thinking of what we think they should do and just let them get these models out and let the public decide. Also these 11 models are not going to make Cadillac number one in 5 years. We still need to see them build the companies image as you can not buy or design that. It has to be earned over time and continued with quality and desirable products. This is why they are targeting younger people. While they may not buy now they will be in 5-10 years and you need to build for the future. Like in Football GM has treated Cadillac like a old team that tried to build through Free Agency and with old players. It was costly and not as productive as they had liked. Today they are like the Browns building through the draft and while it will be painful at first they can establish a young viable team that can last for a while and then continue to replenish in the draft much like New England and Seattle has done.

For anyone interested Melody Lee Director of brand and reputation strategy at Cadillac has responded on a web site. http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/04/cadillac-launches-fashion-retail-lab-for-aspiring-designers/ Nice to see Cadillac people speaking out more and showing what their mind set and mission is. I hope to see more of this.

What sorting? RWD is very capable for winter driving. We used it for 100 years with little issue.

I saw that yesterday via Twitter, here is the link. I'm not sure if I fully believe at the moment because there isn't that much information or corroborating evidence to support this. Also, there was a rumor flying around last week about Cadillac doing an ultra-lux sedan and SUV sometime in the next decade which has slightly more information, but again I'm not sure if this is true either. I'm waiting for some more evidence or hints before I'm ready to call the CT8 dead. Nothing is dead till they call it. This could also be a case they may have moved one model up and the other back too. A SUV would generally prove to be more popular right now at least at Cadillac.

I have to say that the 300 even with a V6 is a great cruiser and still very fun to drive. Snow is NOT a problem with the 300. It is heavy enough to stay very stable if you only go RWD. The V6 with 8 speed tranny in base AWD form, added the convenience group and the sky roof is a nice clean package. You could not go wrong. 2016-AWD-Limited300.jpg In laws have one and it is not an issue in the snow and right now with the big discounts it is a bargain if you can handle a few recalls. The electronics on it and decent tires it runs along fine. They do a lot of winter driving between their home here and in the mountains on a 5 hour drive, It is never dramatic.

Where is this different than what I have been saying? For god's sake you act like this is some original Idea and it is really what I have been trying to get across to you for days! You only left out the ability to sell it globally as a Holden or Opel. Did you just come to?

The truth is FWD is not better in the snow. The lie is that FWD is better and it was marketed like this back around 1980 to sell everyone on the smaller FWD cars. The rub many people believe it. The AWD is not as in demand as you may think. Just look at the sales of the Fusion as it is still below 20%. Added cost is a major factor and the fact only people on the fringe of the snow really demand it. Here in the snow belt not a common sight here as we know how to drive or have trucks. What keeps the Camaro alive is performance, Tradition and the lack of anything else with performance. Plus they are damn good cars to drive. The truth is...FWD IS BETTER IN SNOW... This coming from a guy the drives FWD...PREFERS FWD in snow...and drove RWD cars n the winter.... True...they were 1980s RWD cars...but still... RWD cars...get very SQUIRRELY when taking turns...when pressing the gas hard when engaging a turn... RWD cars dont have GRIP... One has to feather the peddle...or wheel spin happens...and guess what? To get out of an icy patch...wheel spin IS necessary... And...to get out of a small snow filled groove and some ice is under neath...wheel spin is necessary.... But with a catch...you need weight at the back of the wheels that drive... Yeah...I know the tricks of the trade...sand bags... There is no need for sands bags in a FWD car... you could argue this all day long... I dont know where you live... I live in Montreal, Quebec Canada. Buffalo, New York gets more snow than we do. Minneapolis Minn. gets more snow than we do... OK...we still get a lot of snow... We Montrealers are getting snow tomorrow actually... There are hardly ANY RWD cars being sold in Montreal... You think its because of marketing? Think what you will, but I believe Montrealers prefer FWD cars because they are a tad more predictable and easier to get out of snow banks than RWD cars... You know...it aint even about predictability... It really is the ease of not getting stuck in snow... I dont need snow tires with a FWD car...I do just fine with all seasons... Yet with a RWD car, peoplesay that winter tires are a necessity... I repeat...I PERSONALLY do just fine with ALL SEASONS with a FWD car...I NEVER get stuck! Ive gotten stuck countless of times with my 1988 Pontiac Firebird, with my 1985 Olds Delta 88, and with my uncles 1988 fullsize Chevy Van... I learned to drive in winter conditions with that 1988 Chevy Van. Anymore with a limited slip, stability control and anti locks RWD is just fine. FWD is good for those who have absolute no skid control skills that generally the Stability control deals with just fine. A RWD with some basic skills can be steered with the steering or throttle while if you lose traction with FWD you lose your traction and steering. Once the car understeers all you can do is get off the gas and hope you can recover. RWD you can get on the gas and steer out of it. I live on the side of the lakes that get all the snow vs. your side that only gets some. Much of this just comes down to basic skill levels. There is less traction with FWD as for every action their is a equal and opposite reaction. The weight transfers from the front to the back under take off. This is why cars do wheelies and in drag racing need wheelie bars to hold the nose down. This is also why FWD drag cars put the wheelie bars on the ground to keep the front wheels on the ground to get traction. We have now had several Generation now growing up in FWD and they just do not have the skills of past drivers to understand how to steer with RWD. I don't blame them as if you can not get your hands on a RWD you will never learn. We had to learn how to deal with it back when there was few FWD cars too. We used an old FIat and would blitz around a frozen parking lot learning how to deal with the FWD under-steer. No electronic aids then to say you. If you can find a FWD car with no electronics and just find out how bad FWD is with out them. There's a pretty big difference between being "just fine" and being the better vehicle. The weight over the drive wheels on a FWD will always be superior to a rear driven vehicle. There also isn't a ton of "steering out of it" in snow. Once a car slides sideways in the snow there isn't a ton of margin for error like on dry pavement. Dry pavement you can definitely use throttle and steering to get out o being sideways but in the snow once you lose traction and are sideways the level of grip is just so much lower that counter steering and MORE throttle just isn't there, except for the few degrees of yaw. There is a weight transfer from front to rear upon acceleration but if there is snow on the ground you can't accelerate hard enough to get enough weight transfer to actually get more traction upon the rear wheels. If both a FWD and a RWD car could only use 1/4 throttle to get going the FWD will have more traction as there will be very little transfer of weight, the front won't lift and the rear won't squat. My Beretta didn't have traction control but did have ABS and it was hands down better than my Mustang with traction control on or off. I also think tires are being severely underrated here. I will absolutely stand by a RWD car with winter tires is superior to a FWD or AWD vehicle with summer tires or all seasons. A good set of winter tires will transform a car in the winter. I think this is the biggest issue but people are cheap or in my case we usually only get a handful of snows a year and I cannot justify $1200 for 5 snows..or this past winter 1 1/2. Sorry but the weight still transfers with any acceleration. You move the weight moves. The bottom line is that people are brain washed into thinking FWD is better and the fact is so many people today just can not drive in the snow because they have been told how hard it is. My God you people would have been stranded 40 years ago! On Dirt racing and I mean wet slippery clay what do they run? RWD And I do not mean simple entry level FWD classes. Road racing Nissan just took a major hit when they tried to bring out a FWD Prototype car for Lemans. They have already scrapped the program. In all the years we had RWD cars a AWD was unheard of. Today now with the advent of FWD they have had to resort to AWD cars because FWD is not all a great as you want to make it. Hell you get into any deep snow the car will hang up where most others push through. I have spent years at my last house where the city seldom plowed the street and if they did they would plow the entrance in. The only car w have had to not make it in was FWD, All the RWD made it fine. Even my 2WD s-10 with no limited slip would bust through the piled up snow at the street entrance and still climb the hill to the house. I have had one RWD that was evil and that was an old Cougar. The brakes were the main issue as it would like to lock of the front brakes taking away the steering. The fact is so many people have not learned the simple skill of steering out of a skid and that is where the issue is. The RWD is not to blame just the operator lacking skills. If it were not for Anti Locks and traction control many FWD cars would be plowing head on into a curb with so many unskilled drivers. They would spin the tires and lose all steering and just plow or push right into a curb. We used to sell a lot of wheels tires because of that. As for tires All Season will handle most conditions as long as they have good tread depth. As for winter tires they are better on ice but are not something that is a must unless they are really bad tires. I have worked with many tire engineers from BFG, Goodrich and Firestone and seldom do any of them use a winter tire. To them they are just add on sales as most people really are not in conditions that the better AS can't handle. I am not going to say that winter tires are not better as they are but most people really don't need them. Most cars on the road have piss poor OE tires or just flat worn out tires as the problem. Oh I did have one other car that was a little bit of a handful and that was a GMC Spint SP 1972. With the El Camino based model with a big block under the hood and no weight in back with an open diff it was a little more challenging but nothing that did not get through 10" of un plowed powder.

The truth is FWD is not better in the snow. The lie is that FWD is better and it was marketed like this back around 1980 to sell everyone on the smaller FWD cars. The rub many people believe it. The AWD is not as in demand as you may think. Just look at the sales of the Fusion as it is still below 20%. Added cost is a major factor and the fact only people on the fringe of the snow really demand it. Here in the snow belt not a common sight here as we know how to drive or have trucks. What keeps the Camaro alive is performance, Tradition and the lack of anything else with performance. Plus they are damn good cars to drive. The truth is...FWD IS BETTER IN SNOW... This coming from a guy the drives FWD...PREFERS FWD in snow...and drove RWD cars n the winter.... True...they were 1980s RWD cars...but still... RWD cars...get very SQUIRRELY when taking turns...when pressing the gas hard when engaging a turn... RWD cars dont have GRIP... One has to feather the peddle...or wheel spin happens...and guess what? To get out of an icy patch...wheel spin IS necessary... And...to get out of a small snow filled groove and some ice is under neath...wheel spin is necessary.... But with a catch...you need weight at the back of the wheels that drive... Yeah...I know the tricks of the trade...sand bags... There is no need for sands bags in a FWD car... you could argue this all day long... I dont know where you live... I live in Montreal, Quebec Canada. Buffalo, New York gets more snow than we do. Minneapolis Minn. gets more snow than we do... OK...we still get a lot of snow... We Montrealers are getting snow tomorrow actually... There are hardly ANY RWD cars being sold in Montreal... You think its because of marketing? Think what you will, but I believe Montrealers prefer FWD cars because they are a tad more predictable and easier to get out of snow banks than RWD cars... You know...it aint even about predictability... It really is the ease of not getting stuck in snow... I dont need snow tires with a FWD car...I do just fine with all seasons... Yet with a RWD car, peoplesay that winter tires are a necessity... I repeat...I PERSONALLY do just fine with ALL SEASONS with a FWD car...I NEVER get stuck! Ive gotten stuck countless of times with my 1988 Pontiac Firebird, with my 1985 Olds Delta 88, and with my uncles 1988 fullsize Chevy Van... I learned to drive in winter conditions with that 1988 Chevy Van. Anymore with a limited slip, stability control and anti locks RWD is just fine. FWD is good for those who have absolute no skid control skills that generally the Stability control deals with just fine. A RWD with some basic skills can be steered with the steering or throttle while if you lose traction with FWD you lose your traction and steering. Once the car understeers all you can do is get off the gas and hope you can recover. RWD you can get on the gas and steer out of it. I live on the side of the lakes that get all the snow vs. your side that only gets some. Much of this just comes down to basic skill levels. There is less traction with FWD as for every action their is a equal and opposite reaction. The weight transfers from the front to the back under take off. This is why cars do wheelies and in drag racing need wheelie bars to hold the nose down. This is also why FWD drag cars put the wheelie bars on the ground to keep the front wheels on the ground to get traction. We have now had several Generation now growing up in FWD and they just do not have the skills of past drivers to understand how to steer with RWD. I don't blame them as if you can not get your hands on a RWD you will never learn. We had to learn how to deal with it back when there was few FWD cars too. We used an old FIat and would blitz around a frozen parking lot learning how to deal with the FWD under-steer. No electronic aids then to say you. If you can find a FWD car with no electronics and just find out how bad FWD is with out them.

Not bad when on of 50 offered are FWD. You can not compare numbers on what is sold anymore unless you counter it with what is offered. The choices are limited due to high prices, low volume and no verity. Just look if I want one for under $50K new what choices do I really have at GM? I don't want Chrysler because of age and quality and Ford only offers one. Imports much the same. The big lie is that few people demand AWD in the snow areas and the second lie is we all go out and buy winter tires. Even here with the city mostly employed by 4-5 tires companies here we all roll on All Season majority of the time. The percentages of cars where AWD is an option [Non Subaru} They generally sell a 5th of production or less. Most people in for AWD bought a CUV and to be honest only think they need it, Even then the CUV sales where it is an option is 50% or less in vehicles like the Nox or Terrain. Most are FWD. Now to the reality of the moment. The idea of a Alpha RWD is not going for market domination. The idea is to go where few others are to fill a global need that is out there. The market for RWD is small and I would be the first to admit that. But the reality is there still is a demand globally for a car the size and weight of a Alpha that is different than anything else on the market. It will not be expensive like a Cadillac. It will much more advanced than the Chrysler that for all their warts still sell well only in North America. It is not like they have to reinvest much to do it. On the other hand you can do another Impala that would only sell in North America and would sell for less money and in ever more shrinking numbers getting split by the Lacrosse and Malibu. I suppose you would like to sell 5 models of the Malibu under different divisions again? What did we learn there? The AWD Alpha option could easily be added with little added investment since it already is there to solve that argument point too. Look big picture here what would sell globally in better numbers? An Alpha sedan or a FWD impala? What would make more money Globally? What would be more different Globally? As for FWD and AWD for North America you already have how many choices now and do you need anymore in similar size and configuration? Diversification of global models is key. We saw what happens if you fail to do that at Pontiac. Canadian sales are not going to save your ass even in 8 wheel drive.

Well we need to consider that one this may be a false flag. Second this deal could mean a whole different deal too. What does Benz and BMW lack? A Cayenne like model. Part sports sedan part SUV. Sure they have these tall cars that are not doing all that well here but that is about it. Think outside the box. Just assume you take a Omega and make a Cayenne like model of it. Add a TT DOHC V8 with lots of power. Then you figure weight and instead of the 6,000 pounds the Porsche is you make it say 4800 pounds. This would have a better chance at over $100K in the three global markets they are in now China, North America and the Middle East. While I still would like to see a larger sedan at some point this plan to hit them where they are not would be a good move. Even the Audi is more SUV like than Cayenne like. Also the SUV segment is the fastest growing and most profitable there is. A successful model like this would easily pay for a large sedan program but the large sedan would never pay for the SUV. Imagine this with a TTV8 and maybe a electric hybrid system with crazy HP numbers too. I never understood the Porsche but it has been a gold mine and they are making more of them than I ever expected. Lets face it Cadillac could make a large sedan and even be a little better than the others but still struggle. But they make something the others really have not done other than Porsche and the coming ugly Bentley they could really stand out and it would reflect on the entire line. This all could as I have said be a false flag but if it isn't it could be a real opportunity if they play it right.

Well here comes a possible curve ball. The word is making the rounds that the CT8 is dead. No word on what could be the change in plan but they could be looking to do a SUV on the Omega now? With the moves of Porsche and Bentley the segments large cars are moving this way and they are wanting to target millennials. This is unconfirmed but that is what is coming out as of today. I really thing in the next 5-7 years Cadillac will be very different than what we see today. But so goes the market too.

The truth is FWD is not better in the snow. The lie is that FWD is better and it was marketed like this back around 1980 to sell everyone on the smaller FWD cars. The rub many people believe it. The AWD is not as in demand as you may think. Just look at the sales of the Fusion as it is still below 20%. Added cost is a major factor and the fact only people on the fringe of the snow really demand it. Here in the snow belt not a common sight here as we know how to drive or have trucks. What keeps the Camaro alive is performance, Tradition and the lack of anything else with performance. Plus they are damn good cars to drive.

Oh good it is bad enough to work with a Dealer franchise but even worse to work with a independent contractor that is not connected to the MFG. I can see where at times it may help but also many times where it will be much worse. UPS for all their good and bad their drivers as a whole are pretty decent getting things there due to their inner organizational complexity. But many other package services who use drivers who are private contractors their service can be a total nightmare most of the time. On Trac on the west coast is a real burn on shippers. While cheaper so much is late or delivered wrong. Roadway Package failed miserably on the independent contractor. It is hard enough to control a franchise but even more difficult to deal with contractors.

This is all spot on. Cadillac PR says they aren't interested in volume because they have no volume. Let's suppose GM makes $5,000 profit on a Cadillac, $2,500 on a Buick or GMC, and $1,000 on a Chevy. Wouldn't they want to sell more Cadillacs since that is where the profit margins are? Let's supposed Escalade sales doubled next year. Would the Escalade be a less profitable vehicle? Would less people want it? The answer is no, GM would just rake in even more profit, the Escalade wouldn't suffer in any way. I am not saying Cadillac should make a version of the Cruze and sell it for $28,995 to compete with the Acura ILX. That is a bad way to chase volume. I am saying that Cadillac needs more CTS/ATS sales and rear drive performance crossovers that have big margins. Porsche is the classic example, even 10 or so years ago they had 911 and Boxter, making nice margins. Then they put out the Cayenne, Panamera and Macan, the total brand sales volume triples, yet they are making $20,000 per car profit. Per unit profit is up, and sales volume tripled. That is kind of thinking Cadillac needs. The cars have been held down to several models and modest volumes at higher prices. No more 924 and 944 models. As for the rest the the SUV segment does not hold to the volume clause as the cars do. They are like trucks and have proven to be profitale in large volumes and not affect the status of the company as much since they are not cars. Cadillac will bring SUV models in and they will see higher volumes but the cars will not. The image of the cars and trucks are seen differently. This is where I would speculate it is going. Cadillac will offer a number of SUV models in various sized and volume will be what ever demand is. The cars will be offered in various configurations and in modest yearly volumes that can be adjusted. At the higher price the profits remain but the volumes can be adjusted to market demands to keep them where they are in enough supply to were we have enough to sell but not a ton of them being discounted. I speculate that the CT6 may evolve into a CTS replacement. The ATS would grow a little in size to still be smaller than the CT6 but a little larger than the ATS is now. This would remove the too similar CTS and CT6. The ATS moving up a little in size would make room for a smaller sedan that does not have to be too small. The CT8 would become the flag ship for the line. Two cars on the Alpha and two cars on the Omega. Then add a small sports roadster touring car that is not based on a Corvette or like the Corvette. More like a BMW roadster where it is affordable but not cheap. Grow this and then move on to other things. By growing I am saying making the cars the most refined and the most advanced in technology in class. Make the interiors the best with no debate or excuse. If you want to be the standard you must first set the standard with out question.

Well I think we can all agree that the 320i and the ATS 2.5 are both bad cars. Neither hold a candle to the Tesla Model 3 that with the $7,500 tax credit on the first 200,000 cars sold will undercut both of them in price. Not if you get any options as the 3 will be mostly 50K-65K by the time you get the better battery and the better anything else. Then you factor in the that Tesla has about 25,000 Tax credits coming that are being eaten up buy the S and X model now. By the time the 3 arrives they may not have any to offer unless the government offers more over the 200K they have used. Even Musk tweeted that the 3 will be closer to $42K by the time they start to deliver them.

For to drive the car is great. As for looks people expect more in the styling department for the price. As for winter driving that is BS to any one who knows how to drive. We got buy for nearly 100 years with RWD cars on crap tires with no electronic aids. Now we have good tires with traction control, stability control and anti lock brakes and if you can not get around you should not be on the road. FWD traction is the big lie as simple physic prove it for traction as the weight transfer away's goes to the rear wheels. John Force is not FWD is he? The real killer is the sun roof only option that takes this car price wise few that buy chevys want to go. If they want to spend that much they would just pay a little more for a Corvette or less for a Camaro. Now make a sedan with a smaller engine at a little lower price in a much more modern styling and you will attract many more buyers. Even Chrysler has shown that even with an older outdated car.

Just like that Nissan no one bought with the top chopped off?