European Distributor for Cadillac, Hummer, and Corvette files for bankruptcy.

[Galaxy]

The Kroymans Group from The Netherlands was responsible for selling Cadillac, Hummer, and Corvette. They built a lot of pretty dealerships in the last few years. I guess the figured they would sell thousands not hundreds of Cadillacs.

Besides the US brands they also owned dealerships that sell many other brands.

http://www.autonews.com/article/20090320/COPY01/303219998/1193

[nickdrinkwater]

What a surprise.  Why do they even bother selling these marques in Europe.

[TBR]

Yep, Europeans are too brand conscious (in other words: snobby) to consider American cars.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Yep, Europeans are too brand conscious (in other words: snobby) to consider American cars.

Couldn't be that our cadillacs don't mesh with the euro market and that the consumer over there has completely different priorities than cadillacs buyers stateside.

[TBR]

Couldn't be that our cadillacs don't mesh with the euro market and that the consumer over there has completely different priorities than cadillacs buyers stateside.

When you consider what cars Cadillac imported (CTS, STS, and, maybe, the SRX), I don't think that's really the reason.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

When you consider what cars Cadillac imported (CTS, STS, and, maybe, the SRX), I don't think that's really the reason.

did they have small displacement diesels?

[2o6]

did they have small displacement diesels?

That's the problem. Also, the BLS is nothing more than a reskinned Saab 9-3, and the europeans knew it.

[nickdrinkwater]

Yep, Europeans are too brand conscious (in other words: snobby) to consider American cars.

Well, there is that, but that's not the only reason.  They don't market these cars.  And when fuel is ?4-5 a gallon in the UK, who wants a 2.8 or 3.6 litre CTS or a Hummer?  And going back to the badge issue, people rightly have bad perceptions of Cadillacs.  The STS was poor, the old CTS so-so and the CTS the first decent Cadillac sold here.  Before they turned Daewoo into Chevy, Chevy tried to sell cars here like the Blazer.  This failed for the same reasons.  The effect of all this is that the cars have shockingly bad residuals, so you'd be a fool to buy one new.

It's not strictly badge snobbery.  The Chrysler Voyager was always quite successful and so was the PT Cruiser.  The 300C CRD has shown people will buy American cars if they are adapted to suit British needs.

[Galaxy]

Well, there is that, but that's not the only reason.  They don't market these cars.  And when fuel is ?4-5 a gallon in the UK, who wants a 2.8 or 3.6 litre CTS or a Hummer?  And going back to the badge issue, people rightly have bad perceptions of Cadillacs.  The STS was poor, the old CTS so-so and the CTS the first decent Cadillac sold here.  Before they turned Daewoo into Chevy, Chevy tried to sell cars here like the Blazer.  This failed for the same reasons.  The effect of all this is that the cars have shockingly bad residuals, so you'd be a fool to buy one new.

It's not strictly badge snobbery.  The Chrysler Voyager was always quite successful and so was the PT Cruiser.  The 300C CRD has shown people will buy American cars if they are adapted to suit British needs.

[cawimmer430]

Yep, Europeans are too brand conscious (in other words: snobby) to consider American cars.

They simply lack the heritage, history and prestige! 



American cars have a poor reputation in Europe. The average European will perceive an American car to be equipped with inefficient engines, inferior workmanship inside and out and add to that piss poor resale values and you'll have people avoiding your dealerships (what dealerships by the way?). Like Lexus, American cars aren't really adapted to the European market. How do these companies expect to sell cars here if the local competition does everything the European consumer is looking for in a car better?

To this day I wonder how the hell Chevrolet thought the Tahoe would sell overhere. Ford also thought their diesel Excursion was just the thing we needed but thankfully gave up after a few months.



Oh yeah, saw my first Cadillac BLS on the street yesterday - even took a photo. The other two times I've seen a Cadillac BLS were at a GM showroom in London.

[Xer0]

The same reason that the 318 failed here, those cars fail there.  The badge is one thing, selling a car that the market actually wants is another completely.

[MX793]

Yep, Europeans are too brand conscious (in other words: snobby) to consider American cars.

Indeed, they would much rather pay the same, or more, money for a BMW or Mercedes with less equipment than buy a car with more features than they want or need.

[MX793]

They simply lack the heritage, history and prestige! 

Cadillac is among the oldest brands around.  Do you enjoy your car's electric starter and ignition system?  Cadillac invented it.

[cawimmer430]

Cadillac is among the oldest brands around.  Do you enjoy your car's electric starter and ignition system?  Cadillac invented it.

Do you know what this smiley ---->  <---- stands for? 

[Autobahn]

Yep, Europeans are too brand conscious (in other words: snobby) to consider American cars.

Which is not true. The Voyager, (Grand) Cherokee and PT-Cruiser sold quite well here (heck I even see a lot of last-gen Sebring convertibles around here in the summer).

A CTS starts at 36.000 Euros, thats a lot for a car where there are virtually no dealers, that you have never seen on the road, that cannot do anything better than your average Mercedes C-Class or Audi A4.

The C 220 CDI costs about the same, is as fast from 0-60, has about the same topspeed has an indicated fuel consumption of 5.9 liters (versus 11.8 of the Cadillac - yes that is half of it!). Oh yes, the Caddy has 40 more horsepower and 2 more cylinders, but apparently they are only used to consume fuel as the performance numbers are the same. So why bother with the Cadillac?

To be fair, the Cadillac is probably way better equipped, but it is about 10 years behind in engine technology. Yes there are also 6-cylinder C-Classes that also consume around 10 liters / 100 km, but the main seller are the 4-cylinder CDIs and there is nothing Cadillac has to offer.

[cawimmer430]

Which is not true. The Voyager, (Grand) Cherokee and PT-Cruiser sold quite well here (heck I even see a lot of last-gen Sebring convertibles around here in the summer).

A CTS starts at 36.000 Euros, thats a lot for a car where there are virtually no dealers, that you have never seen on the road, that cannot do anything better than your average Mercedes C-Class or Audi A4.

The C 220 CDI costs about the same, is as fast from 0-60, has about the same topspeed has an indicated fuel consumption of 5.9 liters (versus 11.8 of the Cadillac - yes that is half of it!). Oh yes, the Caddy has 40 more horsepower and 2 more cylinders, but apparently they are only used to consume fuel as the performance numbers are the same. So why bother with the Cadillac?

To be fair, the Cadillac is probably way better equipped, but it is about 10 years behind in engine technology. Yes there are also 6-cylinder C-Classes that also consume around 10 liters / 100 km, but the main seller are the 4-cylinder CDIs and there is nothing Cadillac has to offer.

Ding Ding. 

[93JC]

WTF is wrong with German fuel economy tests? There is just no way a 2.8 L CTS has a combined fuel economy rating of 11.8 L/100km. No way. Even with the 304 hp V6 and all-wheel drive it's at most 10.9 L/100 km in Canada.

It's just not possible. A conspiracy on the part of the German government to purposely inflate foreign automakers' cars' fuel economy numbers is more plausible.

[cawimmer430]

WTF is wrong with German fuel economy tests? There is just no way a 2.8 L CTS has a combined fuel economy rating of 11.8 L/100km. No way. Even with the 304 hp V6 and all-wheel drive it's at most 10.9 L/100 km in Canada.

It's just not possible. A conspiracy on the part of the German government to purposely inflate foreign automakers' cars' fuel economy numbers is more plausible.

Cadillac CTS 3.6 (16.09.2007)

Verbrauch (l/100 km) - CO2     11,5 l S

Link: http://www.autobild.de/artikel/test-cadillac-cts-3.6_415166.html


Cadillac CTS 2.6 V6 24.06.2003

Testverbrauch (l/100 km)     11,4 l Super

Link: http://www.autobild.de/artikel/cadillac-cts-2.6-v6_42019.html

[Galaxy]

WTF is wrong with German fuel economy tests? There is just no way a 2.8 L CTS has a combined fuel economy rating of 11.8 L/100km. No way. Even with the 304 hp V6 and all-wheel drive it's at most 10.9 L/100 km in Canada.

It's just not possible. A conspiracy on the part of the German government to purposely inflate foreign automakers' cars' fuel economy numbers is more plausible.

The German government has no say in the fuel economy ratings, that is EU terrain.

What destroys the 2.8 CTS is the 16.8 rating in the city. For comparison the 367ps BMW 550i gets a 16.6 city rating.  That is very odd indeed.

[93JC]

It's impossible! No frickin' way! That's 14 mpUSg!

For the record the 550i is (with an automatic transmission) 13.5 L/100km in the city in Canada, the CTS 3.6 DI AWD is 12.5, and the CTS 3.6 (non-DI, ~260 hp) with an automatic is 11.7.

The CTS-V (with the 6.2 L V8 and manual transmission) is rated at 15.0 in the city. I find it extremely hard to believe a 2.8 L V6 is anything close to this.

[Galaxy]

To make things even more odd the CTS 3.6 auto is rated at 16.6.   


I am starting to wonder if Cadillac frakked up the specifications on the euro website.

[cawimmer430]

Maybe Cadillac fooled around with the gear ratios for the Euro-spec CTS in order to give it a higher top speed for some reason - at the expense of fuel economy. 

[93JC]

Why would it need a higher top speed? A regular North American CTS could do well over 200 km/h, easily.

[MX793]

Why would it need a higher top speed? A regular North American CTS could do well over 200 km/h, easily.

Not to mention that if they were to change something for autobahn use, they'd tweak the upper gears, not the lower gears that you'd use in the city.  Unless they went the cheapest route possible and put in a taller rearend gear.  Then again, GM almost always gears their cars tall, so they shouldn't have had to touch the gearing for higher speed travel.

[Autobahn]

It's impossible! No frickin' way! That's 14 mpUSg!

For the record the 550i is (with an automatic transmission) 13.5 L/100km in the city in Canada, the CTS 3.6 DI AWD is 12.5, and the CTS 3.6 (non-DI, ~260 hp) with an automatic is 11.7.

The CTS-V (with the 6.2 L V8 and manual transmission) is rated at 15.0 in the city. I find it extremely hard to believe a 2.8 L V6 is anything close to this.

The number is from Cadillac's Web site. So I don't know, sometimes I have the impression that they do not want to sell their cars over here

[nickdrinkwater]

I did read somewhere that the fuel consumption and emissions of the CTS 2.8 are practically the same as for the 3.6, so maybe it is true...

[cawimmer430]

Why would it need a higher top speed? A regular North American CTS could do well over 200 km/h, easily.

Sure, but maybe Cadillac wanted this baby to do 250 km/h to make it on par with its German rivals. 

And even if that only means tweaking the higher gears, something must have gone wrong for the Cadillac CTS to be so thirsty.


But that's not all. Cadillacs sells extremely poorly here because there is no extensive dealer network. And poor resale value, as mentioned before.

[Tave]

heck I even see a lot of last-gen Sebring convertibles around here in the summer

I'm sorry.

[93JC]

Sure, but maybe Cadillac wanted this baby to do 250 km/h to make it on par with its German rivals. 

The North American CTS already has a top speed of 265.

The CTS-V can do 307...

[cawimmer430]

I'm sorry.

They were "quite popular" here too.