Ooof.... Alpha platform can't catch a break.

[MrH]

I want every Cadillac model to be profitable and in demand.
Those are some optimistic ass numbers from IHS (there goes your faith in those analysts again ). Last year the ATS/CTS sold about 80K worldwide. Like 95% of that volume is in the US and China... probably 70% is in the US, and sales of both cars are tanking here. CT6 is a non factor. Camaro looks like it's gonna do 70K this year, but like MX793 said the 5th gen's market isn't into it and cars like this usually trail off in sales after the release. Nobody is buying Camaros out of the US/Canada either. So absolute best case scenario is like 150K/yr and prob gonna trail off... no way are they gonna hit 1.7m.

Plus even if that's only a couple hundred per car... how much does that compare to the five figure discounts they have to apply to get people to buy these things? Why aren't people buying them.... a bunch of reasons but a biggie is platform based. The rear seat and trunk on all Alpha cars is a good clip behind the competition. Not an issue with the previous CTS and an issue GM specifically sought to address with the Epsilon II platform
Right.... VW's entrant in these segments (Audi) is built around a modular FWD platform. Just like the Epsilon II

Only place RWD dynamics still matter on a high volume scale is Europe, which just happens to be a place that always has, still does, and always will want absolutely nothing to do with Cadillac. So developing cars within the framework and requirements of Europe was fucking retarded. Yes I think RWD was a mistake. Again Audi has shown for 20+ years people are OK with paying big $$$$ for a FWD car. Lincoln's new Continental generated way more buzz than the CT6, despite starting with wrong wheel drive. And FWD lines up with exactly what Cadillac's only realistic markets want- big comfy interiors. US & China have completely shit roads so this idea that there are hundreds of thousands of folks looking for canyon carvers is ridiculous. Especially in the guise of 3500-4000lb cars. Again there is a good reason the ES is the top selling luxury sedan and Audi continues to succeed here. Alpha platform for Cadillac's cars was a huge mistake and I called it long before it all came to be

So your gut is better than teams of analysts doing this for a living? Alright bro.

Again, you just keep arguing against yourself. Yes, a few hundred bucks in platform development is a drop in the bucket compared to the massive discounts on the vehicle. So stop acting like the development of the alpha platform is the cause of their demise. Besides, what were they supposed to do about the camaro if they didn't create the alpha platform?

And what are you talking about with Audi? They're using the MLB platform for the A4, A6, Q7 etc. It's longitudinal. They use MQB for small stuff like the A3, Golf, etc. Audi doesn't sell FWD versions of MLB in any meaningful volume here (honestly, I don't even know if it's offered). No idea where you think Audi has been pedalling tons of FWD for years for big dollars.

Daimler is in the process of doing the same thing. MRA underlies c-class, e-class, etc. MFA for the CLA, GLA, etc.

[2o6]

Um, Sigma cars did have bad rear seats, and the right rear seat isn't always a direct fault of the platform.





Besides, there are a lot of things (MrH could explain better) that are inherent with a transverse application FWD luxury car.


The MLB cars are def a step up quality wise; so much so that it seems like VW un-United the parts commonality between the Audi and VW cars, aside from things like engines of course. Remember when the Passat and A4/A6 were on similar/same chassis? Yea not anymore. The Passat's now transverse layout and MQB. A4 is more espensive and has the engine facing a different way.


Besides, the XTS is what you're saying and it sells and is reviewed mediocrely, and the new Lacrosse makes it entirely redundant.



There's more at play than drive wheels here

[2o6]

The only one who gets away with a transverse layout FWD platform is Volvo. And they don't get away with it because they sell like two cars a year, and he S80/S60 were fucking lame.



But Volvo sells in far fewer numbers, and has the Chinese Geely bankrolling development to use for their Geely brand in China.

[12,000 RPM]

How does a longitudinal engine make a FWD platform higher quality? You guys are grasping for straws. If the Epsilon II platform is OK for the XT5, which is easily going to be Cadillac's top seller once it gets momentum, it's good enough for the smaller sedans too.

[MrH]

I don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore. It changes every time you post.

[2o6]

I don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore. It changes every time you post.

this

[Char]

Who?

[68_427]

Somehow I feel that domestic sports cars, at least from an American's perspective, should be a bit raw and untamed without luxurious frivolity.  The Dodge Viper was the epitome of this.  Americans don't want a domestic luxury sports sedan. 

They don't want the Viper either though.

[12,000 RPM]

I don't even know what point you're trying to make anymore. It changes every time you post.

No it doesn't. Again you have just turned your brain off. I've literally been making the same points for years. Alpha platform didn't need to be made. Epsilon would have served as a better basis for Cadillac's luxury sedans. Why?

Only place RWD dynamics still matter on a high volume scale is Europe, which just happens to be a place that always has, still does, and always will want absolutely nothing to do with Cadillac.

FWD lines up with exactly what Cadillac's only realistic markets want- big comfy interiors.

VW's entrant in these segments (Audi) is built around a modular FWD platform. Just like the Epsilon II

Etc.... literally can't make it any more clear for you.

[2o6]

Holy Mary - Epsilon isn't as modular as MLB or MQB! Not to mention the latest variant JUST came out!

If you look at the impala, XTS and lacrosse - they all share very common proportions; high and short trunk, short and comparatively stubby nose. The latest P2XX platform will likely give more leeway to these hard points, but the current one probably can't (at least not cost effectively)

if what you say is so damn true, why would Audi have even made MLB in the first place? Why not just use MQB for everything?


Drive wheels and performance is just ONE aspect of the total package, isolation, chassis flex/dynamics, and numerous other things are at play here, especially since P2XX's variants aren't supposed to be that expensive. The Lacrosse is the FWD shape here that is the luxury variant of that chassis, and the Cadillac needs to better and be different than the Lacrosse.


The car you KEEP describing Is the latest LaCrosse; which is a very nice, FWD, soft yet taut sedan made by GM on their Midsized car platform. Why would Cadillac need a clone of this car? Especially since the Lacrosse outsells the XTS

Do you want GM to just stop building RWD sedans entirely? Because the Zeta platform had a known weight issue, and this new alpha/omega platform



You're basically saying that GM should be able to tart up a Midsized, cheap platform to compete with an architecture from Audi that was designed from the ground up to be premium. This is what got GM into the place where they are now with Cadillac


I'm honestly not seeing what the hell Youre getting at

[CaminoRacer]

He wants a Cimarron

[MrH]

Holy Mary - Epsilon isn't as modular as MLB or MQB! Not to mention the latest variant JUST came out!

If you look at the impala, XTS and lacrosse - they all share very common proportions; high and short trunk, short and comparatively stubby nose. The latest P2XX platform will likely give more leeway to these hard points, but the current one probably can't (at least not cost effectively)

if what you say is so damn true, why would Audi have even made MLB in the first place? Why not just use MQB for everything?


Drive wheels and performance is just ONE aspect of the total package, isolation, chassis flex/dynamics, and numerous other things are at play here, especially since P2XX's variants aren't supposed to be that expensive. The Lacrosse is the FWD shape here that is the luxury variant of that chassis, and the Cadillac needs to better and be different than the Lacrosse.


The car you KEEP describing Is the latest LaCrosse; which is a very nice, FWD, soft yet taut sedan made by GM on their Midsized car platform. Why would Cadillac need a clone of this car? Especially since the Lacrosse outsells the XTS

Do you want GM to just stop building RWD sedans entirely? Because the Zeta platform had a known weight issue, and this new alpha/omega platform



You're basically saying that GM should be able to tart up a Midsized, cheap platform to compete with an architecture from Audi that was designed from the ground up to be premium. This is what got GM into the place where they are now with Cadillac


I'm honestly not seeing what the hell Youre getting at

+1

Glad I'm not the only one who can't follow.  Sporty wants a bunch of Buick clones for no apparent reason.

[veeman]

They don't want the Viper either though.

Ah yes but that's because it was too expensive and wasn't updated enough through the years.  Also Dodge wasn't in great shape during the Viper's end run.  Especially initially when it came out, people salivated over it.  No stability control offered was one of it's selling points.  I don't know if it was ever meant to sell in high numbers.  More a halo model.  Just as raw as you can get unadulterated power for a street car and loud.  It screams old school American.

[Rich]

Ah yes but that's because it was too expensive and wasn't updated enough through the years.  Also Dodge wasn't in great shape during the Viper's end run.  Especially initially when it came out, people salivated over it.  No stability control offered was one of it's selling points.  I don't know if it was ever meant to sell in high numbers.  More a halo model.  Just as raw as you can get unadulterated power for a street car and loud.  It screams old school American.

I'm sure more Americans would buy more of them if they could pick one up for a couple $grand

[68_427]

They lowered the base price to $84k for the latest one and still couldn't sell any

[Yawn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YkddjbcQew

5 stars.....

[Galaxy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YkddjbcQew

5 stars.....

It just occurred to me, should test like that not have caught the Takata Airbag hoopla?

[12,000 RPM]

It just occurred to me, should test like that not have caught the Takata Airbag hoopla?

No, because the danger comes over time as humidity makes the propellant more volatile/aggressive.

[Vinsanity]

I think this all comes down to mis-predicting the type of product customers want. Cadillac is basically trying to sell an A&S styled E46 BMW in the 2010's. The enthusiast wet dream. And once again, enthusiasts shun GM.

I still think that the 1st/2nd generation CTS was the formula that worked for Cadillac. E/5 size for C/3 price with some pretense of sportiness. The tight quarters in the ATS would already be enough to make potential customers look elsewhere, especially if they care more about the brand than the car's actual handling characteristics. And don't even get me started on CUE...

[MrH]

   Damn Alpha platform ruining everything!

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gm-results-idUSKCN1011H9

[12,000 RPM]

Where in here did it say anything about Cadillac helping? Can you show me? Because YTD literally every Alpha platform car is down in sales in double digit percentages:

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2016/07/usa-car-sales-figures-by-model-june-2016-ytd.html

Would it be worse on the old platforms? Who knows, but they wouldn't have been out a billion dollars to sell less cars at lower margins.

Being a sarcastic asshole only works when you're right.

[2o6]

1B dollars is pocket change

[12,000 RPM]

1B dollars is pocket change

Indeed, 1B was such a bargain to lose sales and chop down margins

[CaminoRacer]

Why do you care about sales so much?

[FoMoJo]

Why do you care about sales so much?

Is that not the prime objective of a corporation?

[CaminoRacer]

Well none of us here work for GM. Supposedly we're all here because we're car enthusiasts, and the alpha platform is great news for enthusiasts. So I don't get why sales are being prioritized over performance.

[12,000 RPM]

Why do you care about sales so much?

Why do you care what I care about?

To answer your question, cars are pretty boring these days, at least from an ideological/risk standpoint. GM Alpha cars included. As a data dude and someone generally into business and economics, I find the business of cars to be way more interesting than cars themselves.

And as far as the Alpha platform, I'm not quite sold on it being great for enthusiasts. You can't get the regular ATS with V6 and a stick and the turbo 4 is less than great. ATS-V should have got the LT1. Camaro generates great headline/bench racing numbers but is a packaging and daily driver nightmare. And CUE still sucks, no matter what the contrarians and GM fanboys say. "B-b-b-but it has great steering feel and chassis balance!" can't make up for all that IMO. I wanted GM to do better and I'm really disappointed. Not to mention our tax dollars bailed them out and were spent on this. You don't have to participate in these discussions if they make you uncomfortable.

[2o6]

As I said before, MQB and MLB cost several times as much to develop, and Alpha/Omeha are actually just evolutions of the old Sigma/Zeta platform.



Not to mention that this platform will likely soldier on with revisions and tweaks for another 15 years.



You have a vendetta against this platform for no logical reason.


GM is killing it right now, across all their brands. They've never been more competitive.


1B is pocket change considering it will underpin a product line that has higher profit margins than a basic platform.

[CaminoRacer]

It's not a discussion, we're all laughing at you and your insistence that Alpha is the worst thing ever

[2o6]

It sounds like Sporty wants Cadillac to start making the 1991 Seville and Deville again.