CarSPIN Forums

Can we acknowledge the failure yet? :mask:

To put it in context, 3 series is up 17%, IS is up like 100%

I still don't think this was the space GM should have sought to occupy. I said last year they needed to make their own segment, if possible... Mercedes beat them to the punch and are cashing in big time. What a shame.

I think GM took the E46 a bit too seriously.  Sure it's great the car drives like the E46, but it shouldn't have been the size of the E46 considering the rest of the class gets larger with each new generation.  The ATS is just too small to compete.

Seems like it needs a bit more powwaaarrrrr too.

Quote from: 68_427 on August 01, 2014, 03:06:33 PM
I think GM took the E46 a bit too seriously.  Sure it's great the car drives like the E46, but it shouldn't have been the size of the E46 considering the rest of the class gets larger with each new generation.  The ATS is just too small to compete.

The ATS and the current 3 series are nearly identical in every dimension.

You're right.  I should have specified the interior packaging.  I think that is a big issue with the ATS.

ATS back seat is lacking. That plus CUE can't be good. 2.0T is thrashy and 3.6 is OK but average for the class. Dynamics? 3 is behind, but a couple gs in suspension and brakes and the playing field is level again. Plus I think they are priced the same. I called it like 3 yrs ago....

ATS would appeal to me if it had a manual with the V6 and didn't have CUE.  Since neither of those is reality, I would rather get the 328i.

As much as I saw it coming, it still makes me sad. The ATS is a car I really, really like against my better judgment. It's engine was thrashy and didn't feel as powerful as its numbers would suggest, it had a shitty gearbox, and I can't believe they're trying to compete with iDrive with CUE. However, the thing was a lot of fun to drive, powertrain aside. It handled really well and I quite liked its steering. I think it is a fantastic, fantastic looking car inside and out. I was definitely disappointed with the one I drove, but I still find myself liking the car. Whenever I see a V6 or a 2.0T ATS around, I can't help but turn my head. The single-exhaust 2.5L looks kind of dumpy, however.

It may not be a failure - depends on what Cadillac's target was, which probably isn't public knowledge.

I see one major issue is price - $43k base to get the V6 - the lesser models are plain and boring looking. The V6 looks great.

I dont find its design very appealing. The weirdest thing about it is its profile is pretty conventional and upright- i.e. no fast back or sloping roof- but it still has a small back seat, despite being the same size as the 3 series and with shorter engines.

I really think they could have had more success gussying up a Cruze or something, making a budget mini IMAJ or something. CLA's success is all style- it doesn't handle well, it's not very practical, it's not very upscale or well built.  Thats the angle GM should have played.

Agree about the CLA. It's a POS en every way except looks.

Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on August 01, 2014, 05:59:17 PM
Agree about the CLA. It's a POS en every way except looks.

IMO it looks like a Canal St. version of a real MB. It has the proportions of a hog, with tacked on details. It sort of reminds me of a Power Wheels car, actually. I really dislike the CLA.

I think Caddy is still at a disadvantage when it comes to brand image compared to Mercedes and BMW.  Cars like the 1 and 3 series, A3, or CLA appeal to young(-ish) professionals looking to give the impression they're doing well.  Thanks to the mediocre land yachts of the 80s and 90s that appealed largely to senior citizens (and Mafiosos), younger people today don't aspire to own Cadillacs as they do BMWs and Mercs.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 01, 2014, 05:52:43 PM


Thats the angle GM should have played.

Cadillac doesn't have the MB brand appeal and never will.

Quote from: Lebowski on August 01, 2014, 09:11:00 PM

Cadillac doesn't have the MB brand appeal and never will.

There was a time when Hyundai = POS.... look at them now

GM/Caddy can overcome, but they have to build good cars that people want. They might never be MB, but they can at least be  taken somewhat seriously. A store brand 3/5 series for name brand 3/5 prices isnt the answer

BMW also has umpteen permutations of the 3 series, and looking at my dealer's stock, a lot of them are 320 and 328 xi's. The buying experience is so much more tailor made versus the typical buying experience.



And besides, an ATS coupe and mid cycle refresh are coming very shortly.

Quote from: CALL_911 on August 01, 2014, 06:52:35 PM
IMO it looks like a Canal St. version of a real MB. It has the proportions of a hog, with tacked on details. It sort of reminds me of a Power Wheels car, actually. I really dislike the CLA.

God yes

I say "meltybutt" and point whenever I see a CLA.

Quote from: Laconian on August 01, 2014, 10:29:27 PM
I say "meltybutt" and point whenever I see a CLA.

Funny thing is, the only part of the CLA that I don't totally (but still dislike) hate is the "meltybutt." Still looks cheap, however.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 01, 2014, 05:52:43 PM
CLA's success is all style- it doesn't handle well, it's not very practical, it's not very upscale or well built.

And you know this because...?

I agree that's it's Cadillac's image, not the car, that is the cause of low sales. GM is gonna have to wait it out and continually work at changing the image before sales will increase.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 01, 2014, 09:42:42 PM
There was a time when Hyundai = POS.... look at them now

GM/Caddy can overcome, but they have to build good cars that people want. They might never be MB, but they can at least be  taken somewhat seriously. A store brand 3/5 series for name brand 3/5 prices isnt the answer

I think Hyundai has/had less to overcome than Caddy.  Brand image isn't as big of a deal to overcome in mainstream brands as it is when you step into the premium and luxury segments where the badge on your car makes a real statement.  Caddy flushed their brand image down the toilet in the malaise era and did little to try to raise it back up until the turn of the century.  They went from being the kinds of cars that movie stars and musicians drove to lame, FWD boats driven by retirees (who remembered Caddy's heyday in the 50s and 60s and still held the brand in high esteem).  The demographic Caddy is now trying to win over, the upper-middle class, professional 30- and 40-somethings who aspire to buy lower level BMWs and Mercs, grew up in a time when Caddies were what their grandparents drove to the bingo hall Thursday nights while the hip, successful people (celebrities) were all driving Mercs and BMWs.  When was the last time you saw a late 80s or early 90s Merc or Bimmer with white-walls?  I don't think I've seen a Caddy of that vintage in good running order without them.

Basically, Caddy is trying to attract a demographic that grew up around Caddies like these:

1990 Seville
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/1990_STS_front.jpg)

1990 Coupe de Ville
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/89-93_Cadillac_Coupe_de_Ville.jpg/1920px-89-93_Cadillac_Coupe_de_Ville.jpg)

1991 Sedan de Ville
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/1989-93_Cadillac_DeVille.jpg/1920px-1989-93_Cadillac_DeVille.jpg)

Note the whitewall tires that went out of style 10 years earlier, and while not shown, faux convertible tops (vinyl or felt covered roofs) were a factory option.

While BMW and Merc were building cars like these:

~1990 5 series
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/E34_525i_skyline.jpg)

~1990 7 series
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/BMW_E32_Front.jpg)

~1990 E-class
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Mercedes-Benz-300.jpg)

Note the more restrained use of chrome, no whitewalls, and I've never seen any of these fitted with felt or vinyl roofs (well, maybe an old E-class that somebody slapped an aftermarket piece on...).  As a young professional, I know which of these I'd want to be seen driving.

Caddy can overcome, but it will take time (a lot of time, I fear) and they're going to have to keep putting on their A-game even if the results aren't immediately apparent.  The CTS was really the first "youthfully appealing" model Caddy has produced since the Malaise era, and that came out in '02.  Caddy has been moving in the right direction since that point.  So kids born in the early to mid 90s will be the first generation to really grow up with a more youthful, energetic, and Euro-competitive Cadillac lineup.  So in another 10-15 years, when these kids are old enough to start affording cars in that segment, Caddy will be in a good position if they keep it up.  In the mean time, they need to keep trying to win over Millennials.

I dont buy that its the brand. Its the cars. Infiniti's G came out around the same time as the CTS and they both kind of sold around the same volumes, up until 2012 where CTS sales started to fall off. Remember the CTS was coming off the heels of the Catera, which, sorry Madman, was awful compared to the best of the sport sedan segment. People liked em and bought em in spite of Caddy's bad image. The current ATS/CTS are kinda stodgy and don't really bring anything to the table the competition doesn't. Instead of turning up the weird + distinctive looks of the last CTS they went too conservative and "me too". It was a mistake. Plus nobody remembers those awful Caddys, really. I dont think branding is that big of a deal.

If you have 40 - 50 thousand to send and you're looking for a BMW 3 series kind of car, why would you go for the ATS?  The main reason would be trying to be different, you love the styling, or you're in to the domestics for emotional/political reasons. 

People think that Cadillac has shitty resale and poor reliability. 

I think Cadillac should have offered a hyundai type of warranty on their sedans and a white glove dealership experience like hyundai offers on their Equus.  That would at least get people to talk about them. 

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 02, 2014, 02:07:30 PM
I dont buy that its the brand. Its the cars. Infiniti's G came out around the same time as the CTS and they both kind of sold around the same volumes, up until 2012 where CTS sales started to fall off. Remember the CTS was coming off the heels of the Catera, which, sorry Madman, was awful compared to the best of the sport sedan segment. People liked em and bought em in spite of Caddy's bad image. The current ATS/CTS are kinda stodgy and don't really bring anything to the table the competition doesn't. Instead of turning up the weird + distinctive looks of the last CTS they went too conservative and "me too". It was a mistake. Plus nobody remembers those awful Caddys, really. I dont think branding is that big of a deal.

And, year for year, BMW sold nearly as many 3-series in the US as Infiniti and Cadillac sold Gs and CTSs combined.

People may not remember the specific cars, but the stigma of them still remains.  The Caddies of the later 90s were an improvement from the late 80s to early 90s cars, but they improved from awful to forgettable.

I agree that the latest CTS will likely prove a misstep.  The styling, particularly the rear, is not nearly as handsome as the previous model.  It does indeed seem a bit more conservative and stodgy.  I think the ATS is the best looking car in their lineup now, and even it isn't as sharp as the previous CTS.

It is both the brand and the cars. The brand has the issues many have mentioned (very noticeable here in Mexico) and the cars are great to drive but lack in many other very visible aspects like cabin tech that people today care a lot about.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 01, 2014, 09:42:42 PM
There was a time when Hyundai = POS.... look at them now

GM/Caddy can overcome, but they have to build good cars that people want. They might never be MB, but they can at least be  taken somewhat seriously. A store brand 3/5 series for name brand 3/5 prices isnt the answer

Yeah, they can't out-German the Germans.

I honestly don't know how Cadillac or Lincoln could possibly sell a luxury car to anyone under 60.

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on August 02, 2014, 11:15:03 PM
Yeah, they can't out-German the Germans.

I honestly don't know how Cadillac or Lincoln could possibly sell a luxury car to anyone under 60.

Chrysler did for a minute. They outsold the 3, 5, E class and all the other cars in those segments that sold less (not combined) for like 2 years with the 300. Chrysler, the most despondent, badge engineered, low badge equity domestic luxury brand by a landslide, at that time.

Americans care about brand, but the ones who can't afford big brands are cool with just going for big style. That's the domestic luxury brands' in. The Germans can afford to do boring ass same sausage different length designs because they have the brand equity to do whatever they want. Caddy made a mistake thinking they could too.

I wish we could @ posters, Im really curious to see what Mr H has to say about this.

Chrysler isn't a premium or luxury brand, they're on the higher end of mainstream.  They are, at best, at the same level as Buick, though perhaps closer to what Mercury was.  And the 300 as vastly cheaper than any midsize or fullsize car from any of the premium/luxury makes.  Back in '04, an E320 or 530i cost 5-figures more than a 300C.  A well equipped 325i was about the same price as a top of the line 300C, and was undercut by the V6 models, not that anyone shopping for a Chrysler 300 would even look at a 3er.

When the CTS came out, it was a lot cheaper than the German cars it was priced like. I wouldnt call Cadillac in 2003 a premium brand either. Hell, I wouldn't call Cadillac or Infiniti premium brands now, at least not on the level of the Germans or Jaguar.

And in any case, chasing pedigree/prestige is kind of a fools errand. MB/BMW's reputation is 40 years strong in the US. Audi's is about 20. Caddy was destroying theirs over that time. So they can't fight on the same playing fields as the Germans, they will always be considered also-rans. Better to find a niche like Chrysler did, and milk the hell out of that. I think there are a lot of Americans who want a luxury car with a name rather than an acronym, and as the 300 showed, a car that makes a statement and is built to American tastes, rather than some adapted Euro cab world car something or other. Like I said before... Lexus' biggest sellers are the cars they made that deviated from the Germans and catered to Americans (ES/RX)... Caddy's comeback kid would be no different. They just need to figure out what the hell it will be.

The original CTS has the distinction of being the only domestic car (not truck) that isn't a Corvette/Viper that doesn't scream "trailer trash" or "BHPH" a decade after its inception

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 03, 2014, 03:11:26 PM
When the CTS came out, it was a lot cheaper than the German cars it was priced like. I wouldnt call Cadillac in 2003 a premium brand either. Hell, I wouldn't call Cadillac or Infiniti premium brands now, at least not on the level of the Germans or Jaguar.

And in any case, chasing pedigree/prestige is kind of a fools errand. MB/BMW's reputation is 40 years strong in the US. Audi's is about 20. Caddy was destroying theirs over that time. So they can't fight on the same playing fields as the Germans, they will always be considered also-rans. Better to find a niche like Chrysler did, and milk the hell out of that. I think there are a lot of Americans who want a luxury car with a name rather than an acronym, and as the 300 showed, a car that makes a statement and is built to American tastes, rather than some adapted Euro cab world car something or other. Like I said before... Lexus' biggest sellers are the cars they made that deviated from the Germans and catered to Americans (ES/RX)... Caddy's comeback kid would be no different. They just need to figure out what the hell it will be.

Cadillac was certainly a premium brand, though not at the same tier as the Germans.  I would have put them somewhere in the vicinity of Acura and Infiniti (and Saab).  The CTS, when it first came out, was only slightly less than the other cars in class (3-series, A4, C-class...), very similarly priced to the G35 and IS.  Size-wise, it was a bit bigger than the 3/A4/C, closer to the 5/A6/E.  But unlike those in the next class up, it did not offer a V8 (and when it did, it was only in the hi-po -V model).  It was squarely a 3-series class competitor, with the slightly larger STS stepping in to fight with the next larger tier.  The Chrysler 300 was not built to compete against the 3 series and the like.  It was bigger than even the 5/A6/E class.  It was really more a Mercury Grand Marquis or Buick Lucerne competitor.  A full-size sedan with near luxury appointments.  And compared to the others in that size class, it was worlds better than the Mercury or Buick and half the price of a full-size Euro car (and well less than a Town Car or DTS, for that matter).  It pretty much owned the segment.

Arguably, the Escalade has been Caddy's comeback kid.  The Europeans offer nothing that directly competes.  The woefully outdated Lincoln Navigator is really the only other vehicle in that segment.  But you can't build a brand around a big-ass SUV, especially with fuel prices rising.  Caddy needs to fatten their portfolio.  They need conquest sales.  They need people to not snicker when they are mentioned in the same sentence as BMW and Mercedes.  They either need to build a better ES than Lexus (which would have them stepping on Buick's toes, as that's the segment the Lacrosse fights in), or they need to step up and play in the same sandbox as the 3-series, C class, and A4.  GM's brand hierarchy kind of forces the latter, since they have Buick trying to carve a niche in the lower end of the entry-lux segment, duking it out with the Lexus ESs and Acura ILXs, TSXs, and TLXs.  Caddy has to be either sportier or more upmarket (or both, really) than Buick.  They can't be just another near/entry-lux marque, they have to be a full-blown premium/luxury marque.

And they need to not sway from that.

The thing is, the conventional luxury channels are either at capacity or dwindling. An S-class fighter would be a complete waste of time- nobody would buy it out of the US, and S/7 sales in the US are way down from their peaks. We already see Caddy's 3/5 fighter didn't take, no reason why their 7 fighter would. They have to try something else. They can be a full blown luxury marque without playing the Germans' game.... they did it before :huh:

So what are they supposed to do? Make a '59 retro model? That'll sell like hotcakes...

Im not an automotive brand manager, Im just an armchair quarterback. I dont know what they should do but I do know what they are doing isn't working. This German sausage fighting deal is about 10-15 yrs too late. Cadillac isn't as strong a brand as the Germans but its still worth something.

Remember the Ciel?

(http://www.auto-types.com/images/_autonews/Cadillac-Ciel-by-Prestige-angle-front_63.jpeg)

Maybe they should come out with a V8 powered land yacht called the Deville. Give it tail fins and RWD. Bring back the 1950's and 1960's elegance. The big Chrysler cars are kind of retro, maybe it would work for Cadillac.

Cadillac needs to build "lifestyle" cars.  Build a better looking BMW 6 series at 2/3 the cost. Build cars that people WANT to be seen in.  They need to have distinct styling that may be polarizing.  Build cars people just have to have...like the Ciel.

Retro is a terrible way to look. Retro is a way of hiding a products flaws, IMO.


Cadillac needs avant-grade appeal. The XTS needed to be this flamboyantly styled FWD thing that makes you notice it. 


That's what Cadillac is missing; the 2003 CTS was such a head turner for it's day - the current lineup is stylistically too tame for a luxury make. High end makes should throw caution to the wind, have your hand on the pulse of fashion. Arguably, the 2003 CTS has that impact.


The current crop does not.

Quote from: 2o6 on August 03, 2014, 10:52:18 PM
Retro is a terrible way to look. Retro is a way of hiding a products flaws, IMO.


Cadillac needs avant-grade appeal. The XTS needed to be this flamboyantly styled FWD thing that makes you notice it. 


That's what Cadillac is missing; the 2003 CTS was such a head turner for it's day - the current lineup is stylistically too tame for a luxury make. High end makes should throw caution to the wind, have your hand on the pulse of fashion. Arguably, the 2003 CTS has that impact.


The current crop does not.

Agreed on all accounts

Exactly, you guys get what I'm saying

Lets face facts, the avg consumer doesnt give a shit about Brembo brakes or Ring times. They want a car that looks good in and out, has a nice UI, has decent performance and gets good gas mileage. The Germans have their pants down on styling- way too conservative/derivative. That's where Caddy need to strike. But they def failed with the ATS/CTS on that part IMO.

But they can't just ditch the current direction completely. Gotta stick with something or they'll forever be that brand the exists but no one knows why.

Yes, sticking with a consistence theme/direction is vital.

Cadillac needs to looks to the first gen G35 and LS400 for inspiration. It can be done, it just needs guts and leadership. The ATS is good but it doesn't differentiate and it costs a bunch.

GM can't price Cadillacs worth a damn. Some of their products are interesting, but 9 times out of 10, the pricing is just too ambitious. They are not BMW. They need to embrace their betahood and look at the 2nd tier luxury competitors for price cues.

IMO, Cadillac will never again be a remotely desirable brand (and hasn't been for decades). GM can't even make a desirable mainstreamer, you guys don't honestly think they can realistically revive Cadillac in this lifetime do you?

Sure if the ATS did away with the POS N/A 4 banger model, dropped price by 15-20% on all models, matched the tech (esp. dumping the 6sp AT), offered a true sport model (V6 w/MT) and debuted the ATS-V at the same time, things would have gone notably better.

Take the new CTS. The CTS TTV6 is getting huge reviews (which is no surprise - GM has been killing it with hi-po models lately - ZR1, ZL1, Z28, etc.). Thing is that is going to be a low volume seller.

The issue is both the LS400 and G35 were at the tale end of the Germans' era of mostly value-independent design and engineering. The Japanese were much much better at value engineering at this time and were simply able to offer a higher value product (who wants to pay more for a drop forged vs. stamped steel trunk hinge?). Those days are over for ze Germans. They're value engineering like everyone else now so you're not going to join them, let alone beat them, by offering an equivalent product at an equivalent price.

Quote from: Lebowski on August 04, 2014, 11:14:29 AM
IMO, Cadillac will never again be a remotely desirable brand (and hasn't been for decades). GM can't even make a desirable mainstreamer, you guys don't honestly think they can realistically revive Cadillac in this lifetime do you?

GM's passenger car line is the most competitive it's ever been.


The Cruze, Sonic, Spark, and Impala all compete well in their segments. The only "bad" car is the Malibu, and bad is a relative term. It's still far nicer than the old car.




Also, cadillac interiors suck.

Quote from: GoCougs on August 04, 2014, 11:30:43 AM
Sure if the ATS did away with the POS N/A 4 banger model, dropped price by 15-20% on all models, matched the tech (esp. dumping the 6sp AT), offered a true sport model (V6 w/MT) and debuted the ATS-V at the same time, things would have gone notably better.

Im not so sure. The existence of the 2.5 4 doesn't affect the other engines- i.e. the 2.0T would still be gutsy, but thrashy. Their pricing is what they can turn a profit on (though ultimately it's not proving to be what the market can bear). MT V6 and ATS-V will have a take rate about 3-4 significant figures on the right of the decimal hovering above zero, and contrary to what the internet claims, halo cars dont mean crap. ATS/CTS-V could have stood a chance if they had gone with some LTxs, but instead GM is choosing to not offer anything over the competition and go with turbocharging their mainstream engines.

We are all engineers and enthusiasts here so we place far more importance on specs and figures than the avg person. The avg buyer in this segment would gladly have traded "tuning the ATS on the Ring" for a sexy exterior, or adult sized back seat, or class beating fuel economy, or a working ICE interface etc. GM focused on all the wrong things, and now since they were banking on this platform to take them to the top they are stuck.

As cynical as this sounds, a swoopy hybrid A&S A7 clone priced in the 30s-40s built on one of their FWD platforms would have made more sense. It would have shown forward thinking, placed itself in a niche apart from the competition, and actually delivered on some of the things the average customer wants. Would have been a smaller gamble as well, while coming across as a bigger departure from GM and the industry status quo. Hell, a bigger, more powerful, more luxurious Volt would have been a better idea for the basis of the company's new trajectory. They need a real hail mary, not this run up the middle BS. The competition is just too damn strong for that.

Let's take a look at the SRX.

The first one was a dynamically solid car, got great reviews, was generally heralded as one of the best in its class. Supposedly, it didn't sell well because it looked too boxy (I always thought it was a looker). The second one is a gussied up Equinox, but it's stylish and inexpensive relative to its class (correct me if I'm wrong), and I'm pretty sure it has been quite successful.

Would anyone on this site take the 2nd gen over the 1st gen? Hell naw, but the public has spoken.

As much as it pains me to say it, cutting down the emphasis on high performance and increasing it on style and a competitive price would probably do wonders for the ATS' bottom line. Shame, as I've said myriad times, I irrationally absolutely love the ATS.

I would go as far as to say GM shouldn't have built the Alpha platform at all. It's not a bad platform, it's just the wrong platform for where the industry seems to be going. The Rustang just now caught up to the Camaro platform wise, so the Sigma can probably soldier on with tweaks (unless they decide to address the ridiculous shoulder line height/visibility issues). The ELR was ridiculously half assed, which is sad, because IMO it represents an avenue Caddy could be capitalizing on. The Volt is cool as hell, but it feels cheap outside of its powertrain, and was built on an existing platform instead of from the ground up.... GM could use Caddy as an opportunity to build their Delta/Epsilon FWD platforms to cut down weight and be more hybrid/electric friendly. Etc. Just a huge missed opportunity here.

CALL_911 nothing irrational about likign the ATS- it's a good car, aside from its faults. Pains me to say it but the industry is moving in a way that doesn't line up with enthusiasts on the grand scale.  Still though, there are plenty of great one-offs across the board, from the Ford ST hatches to the 911 and everything in between.

Quote from: CALL_911 on August 04, 2014, 12:09:39 PM
As much as it pains me to say it, cutting down the emphasis on high performance and increasing it on style and a competitive price would probably do wonders for the ATS' bottom line. Shame, as I've said myriad times, I irrationally absolutely love the ATS.

I think it's a good looker, as is the CTS. 

The only Caddy I've recently spent any appreciable time in is the XTS, and I was underwhelmed to say the least.  My fiance and I went up to visit my parents in Vermont - took Amtrak and got picked up by a car service in Albany.  Everything about it, and I mean everything inside, felt cut rate.  However, what was most shocking was both the ride quality and ride noise - horrendous. 

By comparison, the 10 year old Town Car we took back floated over the road, and was dead quiet inside.  A terrible car for sure, but even with 150k on the clock, it was buttery smooth. 

How they could fuck the XTS up so badly, I'm not sure.  But I was deeply disappointed.

Quote from: 280Z Turbo on August 03, 2014, 10:03:44 PM
Remember the Ciel?

(http://www.auto-types.com/images/_autonews/Cadillac-Ciel-by-Prestige-angle-front_63.jpeg)

Maybe they should come out with a V8 powered land yacht called the Deville. Give it tail fins and RWD. Bring back the 1950's and 1960's elegance. The big Chrysler cars are kind of retro, maybe it would work for Cadillac.

Jesus.  That is epic. 

Quote from: Submariner on August 04, 2014, 02:55:30 PM
I think it's a good looker, as is the CTS. 

The only Caddy I've recently spent any appreciable time in is the XTS, and I was underwhelmed to say the least.  My fiance and I went up to visit my parents in Vermont - took Amtrak and got picked up by a car service in Albany.  Everything about it, and I mean everything inside, felt cut rate.  However, what was most shocking was both the ride quality and ride noise - horrendous. 

By comparison, the 10 year old Town Car we took back floated over the road, and was dead quiet inside.  A terrible car for sure, but even with 150k on the clock, it was buttery smooth. 

How they could fuck the XTS up so badly, I'm not sure.  But I was deeply disappointed.

The Town Car rides like Jello. The XTS is far better.


Tr XTS is on par with modern Bmw cars.


It's just that modern BMW's don't feel that expensive inside.

BMWs never felt expensive inside, at least on the low end.

Material quality is definitely a step up from normal cars. :huh: Design isn't super luxurious, but it's nice.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 04, 2014, 04:36:01 PM
BMWs never felt expensive inside, at least on the low end.

Only the 5 & up feel expensive. The E46 is better inside than the E90. IMO the F30 is also better than the E90.

Quote from: 2o6 on August 04, 2014, 03:59:00 PM
The Town Car rides like Jello. The XTS is far better.


Tr XTS is on par with modern Bmw cars.


It's just that modern BMW's don't feel that expensive inside.

Okay, but an XTS should not ride like a BMW. It should ride as close to (or better than) a Lexus LS as possible

Are the Magnetic shocks standard on the XTS?

Quote from: CALL_911 on August 04, 2014, 05:07:47 PM
Okay, but an XTS should not ride like a BMW. It should ride as close to (or better than) a Lexus LS as possible

I don't agree. I think a slightly firmer than old Cadillac ride goes a long way to bringing in a younger clientele.

Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on August 04, 2014, 04:51:15 PM
Only the 5 & up feel expensive. The E46 is better inside than the E90. IMO the F30 is also better than the E90.

I don't think the 5 series feels that expensive, either. BMW has been on a downtrend as far as interiors go for the past 10 years or so. The modern BMW's (3-series is the worst offender) is kinda cheap, honestly.

Quote from: hotrodalex on August 04, 2014, 04:47:28 PM
Material quality is definitely a step up from normal cars. :huh: Design isn't super luxurious, but it's nice.

Your BMW is, new BMW's aren't.

A pity if they've gotten worse. I kinda assumed they just stayed the same. Have only sat in a newer 5 and 7, however.

The American made models are horrible.  Especially the switch gear.  Paint chips off two years in...

Quote from: 68_427 on August 04, 2014, 06:03:45 PM
The American made models are horrible.  Especially the switch gear.  Paint chips off two years in...

There's a ring on iDrive that always scratches my nails. It hurts.

My friend had to memorize his steering wheel buttons because all the paint rubbed/chipped off them in less than 3 years.  (last gen X5)

Quote from: 2o6 on August 03, 2014, 10:52:18 PM
Retro is a terrible way to look. Retro is a way of hiding a products flaws, IMO.


Cadillac needs avant-grade appeal. The XTS needed to be this flamboyantly styled FWD thing that makes you notice it. 


That's what Cadillac is missing; the 2003 CTS was such a head turner for it's day - the current lineup is stylistically too tame for a luxury make. High end makes should throw caution to the wind, have your hand on the pulse of fashion. Arguably, the 2003 CTS has that impact.


The current crop does not.

Audi is doing quite well w/ pretty conservative styling.

The ATS's problems are: price, marketing, engine, and CUE.

If I was shopping in this segment I'd give a hard look at a V6 model.

Quote from: TBR on August 04, 2014, 07:42:04 PM
Audi is doing quite well w/ pretty conservative styling.

The ATS's problems are: price, marketing, engine, and CUE.

If I was shopping in this segment I'd give a hard look at a V6 model.

I wouldn't call Audi conservative, and Audi only got noticed when they stopped making odd looking crap with the 1st A4. Cadillac can't carve out that niche; the luxury market is different now.

I think Art and Science is getting a bit tired. It's just kinda jagged and slab sided nowadays.

Its not A&S, its the underlying cars. No detailing can fix the CTS's weird prototype style wheel gap for example. Or the ATS' slab sided anonymous profile. But the IMAJ and Ciel still look like $300K flagships from the future. With good proportions its hard to mess up a design (see: Lexus RC)

Had an ATS rental for a long weekend while visiting family in texas.

Overall I liked the car, but it had a few flaws that would probably prevent me from buying one:

1. Sun glare could wash out the entire center stack display. it wasn't all the time, but at certain angles I couldn't make any adjustments because I couldn't read any of the digital dials. Since I wasn't familiar with the layout I didn't know where stuff was without looking.
2. 2.0T engine felt weaker than I would have expected. When I first got the car I assumed it had the 2.5L V6, but it turned out it did have the supposedly more powerful 2.0T. Note that I didn't feel the engine was thrashy nor did it have any noticeable lag so from that POV it felt fine. But I would have expected a ~250 HP engine to feel faster than a VW GTI. The problem may have been the transmission instead of the engine, but either way it simply didn't feel as powerful as it should have (although it was perfectly adequate, its not like a VW GTI is a slow car after all).
3. Price is on the expensive side IMHO. Considering its engine options I thought it should be at or below an Audi A4, but I think it may have actually been more expensive (unless stepping up to the S4, but then you had access to options not available on an ATS).

It did have some very positive attributes. I have seen people complain about the backseat, but it seemed to fit 4 adults comfortably. Admittedly the two people in the back seat were on the shorter side (female - Mother and Sister-in-law) but they said it wasn't bad at all. It was smaller than my S4's backseat, but not by a lot.

1. Its main positive attribute was definitely its handling. It felt more tossable and eager to change directions than my S4.
2. It had skinnier tires but it didn't seem to give away much grip, either.
3. The positive aspect of the smaller backseat was that the car itself also had tidier proportions (IMHO) than the A4/S4.
4. Steering feedback was superb.

Overall I really enjoyed the car. Its a shame that it isn't selling better. Hopefully Cadillac doesn't exit this market niche as I thought its negatives were easily fixable.

Your impressions of the 2.0T are identical to what mine were, down to the GTI comparison. Except I thought it was kind of thrashy (but not laggy)

Also very similar to my CTS impressions from a few months ago. Caddy does build the best handling/tossable cars in their segments today. Both ATS & CTS. But everything else is subpar which is a pity. Particularly the drivetrain and cabin tech.

I hear Lexus is not far behind on handling these days, with much better interiors. I'm sure Toyota's 2.0t will be better than GMs too.

I drove a brand new IS250 F-Sport a few weeks ago. While that engine is dated, that thing handled really well.

Quote from: 2o6 on August 04, 2014, 03:59:00 PM
The Town Car rides like Jello. The XTS is far better.


Tr XTS is on par with modern Bmw cars.


It's just that modern BMW's don't feel that expensive inside.

I disagree.  The ride was harsh and noisy.  I don't know how it is as a drivers car, but sitting in the rear seat, I was thoroughly unimpressed.  Not to mention the materials, everywhere, looked and felt cheap. 

The current generation 5er I sat in felt much better put together, though it too has a few cheap touches I'd like to think wouldn't have been acceptable in say, an E39. 

Quote from: Submariner on August 06, 2014, 05:51:53 PM
I disagree.  The ride was harsh and noisy.  I don't know how it is as a drivers car, but sitting in the rear seat, I was thoroughly unimpressed.  Not to mention the materials, everywhere, looked and felt cheap. 

The current generation 5er I sat in felt much better put together, though it too has a few cheap touches I'd like to think wouldn't have been acceptable in say, an E39.

I don't know man, the entire new 5 series dashboard is as a whole not as nice as older models.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 05, 2014, 10:46:46 AM
I hear Lexus is not far behind on handling these days, with much better interiors. I'm sure Toyota's 2.0t will be better than GMs too.

I vastly prefer the ATS's interior to the IS's. The Lexus felt very claustrophobic, although I am sure its tech is better.

I def preferred the IS' interior. Feels super Japanese and is relatively easy to use. Also had a roomier back seat.

FWIW, I really liked the look of the ATS's interior design, but the glare problem was an issue. The quality of materials seemed about the same as my S4.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 07, 2014, 06:22:09 AM
I def preferred the IS' interior. Feels super Japanese and is relatively easy to use. Also had a roomier back seat.

I disagree that the back seat was roomier. Certainly didn't feel that way.

I like the Lexus aesthetically, but once I actually sat in it...ugh.

Quote from: 2o6 on August 06, 2014, 05:55:11 PM


I don't know man, the entire new 5 series dashboard is as a whole not as nice as older models.

:confused:  Wat?

Quote from: MrH on August 07, 2014, 07:13:16 AM
:confused:  Wat?

I'm in and out of 5-series all day. Some elements of it feel kind of cheap



An E-class beats the brakes off the 5-series.

Quote from: 2o6 on August 07, 2014, 07:30:25 AM
I'm in and out of 5-series all day. Some elements of it feel kind of cheap



An E-class beats the brakes off the 5-series.

What areas?  I put the F10 5-series waaaay ahead of the E-class.  To say it's not as nice as an E60 is way out in left field IMO

GM needs to fire their analysts and hire me. I will give them a discount rate and recommend them a real winner, down to the milimeter.

Quote from: 68_427 on August 04, 2014, 06:03:45 PM
The American made models are horrible.  Especially the switch gear.  Paint chips off two years in...

Hmm, my Z4 looks brand new on the inside. Must be an issue with the larger production numbers.

The ATS is really good looking. Might be the second best looker in its class.

Quote from: MrH on August 07, 2014, 08:22:37 AM
What areas?  I put the F10 5-series waaaay ahead of the E-class.  To say it's not as nice as an E60 is way out in left field IMO

The 5er has a much more modern and IMO better design. But the Merc's materials are better all across the interior. Unfortunately, it is designed for old men right down to the ridiculous watch.

Quote from: MrH on August 07, 2014, 08:22:37 AM
What areas?  I put the F10 5-series waaaay ahead of the E-class.  To say it's not as nice as an E60 is way out in left field IMO

In terms of materials?  Nah.  Design?  That's subjective but I like the BMW a bit more.

Quote from: Raza  on August 07, 2014, 04:11:14 PM
The ATS is really good looking. Might be the second best looker in its class.

I remember a few years back hearing a lot of complaints about Range Rover switchgear (the Sat-nav, buttons, etc that came from BMW) paint rubbing off after a few years.  My folks Range Rover, circa 2009, has faded paint on all four door handles which IIRC was a problem even when BMW owned them. 

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 07, 2014, 11:27:56 AM
GM needs to fire their analysts and hire me. I will give them a discount rate and recommend them a real winner, down to the milimeter.

Sure, why not? It's always amateur hour at GM, in my experience.

172 day inventory

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/08/bloated-inventories-lead-gm-idle-cadillac-plants/#more-888081 (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/08/bloated-inventories-lead-gm-idle-cadillac-plants/#more-888081)

I want Mr H to be a man, and say he and the analysts were dead wrong.

172 day inventory.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 11, 2014, 10:26:39 AM
172 day inventory

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/08/bloated-inventories-lead-gm-idle-cadillac-plants/#more-888081 (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/08/bloated-inventories-lead-gm-idle-cadillac-plants/#more-888081)

I want Mr H to be a man, and say he and the analysts were dead wrong.

172 day inventory.

172 days?  That's rough. 

Quote from: Submariner on August 11, 2014, 11:31:19 AM
172 days?  That's rough.

Y buy this over a comparable BMW? They are good cars but that question looms heavy w/no answer.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 07, 2014, 11:27:56 AM
GM needs to fire their analysts and hire me. I will give them a discount rate and recommend them a real winner, down to the milimeter.

I bet they prefer analysts who can spell millimeter correctly.  :evildude:

Looks better, drives better.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 11, 2014, 11:40:32 AM
Y buy this over a comparable BMW? They are good cars but that question looms heavy w/no answer.

Why buy any car other than the best in class?

Quote from: hotrodalex on August 11, 2014, 01:35:06 PM
Why buy any car other than the best in class?

There's no clear winner in the class. But for the average buyer in the segment, the ATS/CTS compromised on what mattered to go after what didn't. Average person wants a big back seat, easy interface, refined base engine... not razor sharp handling and Brembo brakes....

Plus its competitions' problems are either minor or fixable... BMW's weak handling can be fixed with some springs and shocks.... IS' look is in the eye of the beholder... etc. No easy fix for ATS' small back seat or CUE.

The IS's back seat is just as small as the ATS. Actually, felt noticeably smaller to me.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 11, 2014, 01:59:20 PM
There's no clear winner in the class. But for the average buyer in the segment, the ATS/CTS compromised on what mattered to go after what didn't. Average person wants a big back seat, easy interface, refined base engine... not razor sharp handling and Brembo brakes....

Plus its competitions' problems are either minor or fixable... BMW's weak handling can be fixed with some springs and shocks.... IS' look is in the eye of the beholder... etc. No easy fix for ATS' small back seat or CUE.

CUE is a biggie.  That's one thing I like about my G37.  The interface is knobs and buttons.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 11, 2014, 01:59:20 PM
BMW's weak handling can be fixed with some springs and shocks

The vast majority of people do NOT go modding their car after buying it....

Quote from: AutobahnSHO on August 12, 2014, 05:25:06 AM
The vast majority of people do NOT go modding their car after buying it....

Vast majority of 3 buyers won't miss the lost handling prowess in the first place :ohyeah:

But if it was me and I was shopping in the segment, the 3 is the clear winner. Costs a little more, but the fact that it pairs its 6 with a stick, and can yield another ~100 crank HP for ~$500 out of the box kind of makes it a no brainer for my inner backwards cap ricer child.

Cadillac needs to compete at every level, they need the ATS.  The problem is the price more than anything else.  Secondary is interior packaging and the need for better, more intuitive technology.   

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 12, 2014, 05:57:07 AM
Vast majority of 3 buyers won't miss the lost handling prowess in the first place :ohyeah:

But if it was me and I was shopping in the segment, the 3 is the clear winner. Costs a little more, but the fact that it pairs its 6 with a stick, and can yield another ~100 crank HP for ~$500 out of the box kind of makes it a no brainer for my inner backwards cap ricer child.

I don't think the manual transmission should be a consideration for Cadillac, at least in the short term.

Manual transmission might get them an extra 5 cars sold.

Quote from: hotrodalex on August 12, 2014, 11:56:17 AM
Manual transmission might get them an extra 5 cars sold.

:hesaid:

Quote from: Catman on August 12, 2014, 10:59:12 AM
I don't think the manual transmission should be a consideration for Cadillac, at least in the short term.

Never said the MT with the 6 would yield em big sales. Just that it's why of all the cars in the segment, the 3 is probably the only one I would buy... used.

Quote from: Catman on August 12, 2014, 10:57:44 AM
Cadillac needs to compete at every level, they need the ATS.  The problem is the price more than anything else.  Secondary is interior packaging and the need for better, more intuitive technology.   

The #s dont agree. Lexus biggest sellers are the ES and RX... i.e. the only cars in their lineup that don't go head to head with the Germans (and aren't redundant and terrible like the CT/HS). The next big thing with cars is hybrid/plug in shit... would have been smarter for GM to make a "Super Volt" and hopefully drop the cost through planned higher volume than to try and make the 3 fighter they should have made 10 yrs ago.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 12, 2014, 02:44:23 PM
Never said the MT with the 6 would yield em big sales. Just that it's why of all the cars in the segment, the 3 is probably the only one I would buy... used.
The #s dont agree. Lexus biggest sellers are the ES and RX... i.e. the only cars in their lineup that don't go head to head with the Germans (and aren't redundant and terrible like the CT/HS). The next big thing with cars is hybrid/plug in shit... would have been smarter for GM to make a "Super Volt" and hopefully drop the cost through planned higher volume than to try and make the 3 fighter they should have made 10 yrs ago.

Isn't that the ELR? My only problem with that car is price.  :(

Lol the ELR has like 400+ days of inventory.

Also the transaction prices of comparable ATS' are quite a bit lower than the 3er.

Quote from: SJ_GTI on August 12, 2014, 03:02:29 PM
Isn't that the ELR? My only problem with that car is price.  :(

No the ELR is just an overpriced Volt

I'm talking something 4 doors, 5 seats, way more power/performance than the Volt. Prob just not possible at the moment, IDK.

An ATS pulled out to pass me today, and two things really surprised me about it. One, was that a barely recognized it in the mirror (Cadillacs should not blend in so readily), and the other was the disconcerting amount of black smoke coming out of the tailpipe as the driver put the hammer down.

Quote from: Catman on August 12, 2014, 10:57:44 AM
Cadillac needs to compete at every level, they need the ATS.  The problem is the price more than anything else.  Secondary is interior packaging and the need for better, more intuitive technology.   

:hesaid:  GM can't get their heads around that they can't sell their luxury cars with the goal of making 10 thousand dollars per vehicle like they do on their Tahoes/Escalades.  They just can't admit it and its killing them.  They can't blame pension/health care costs either since they've been bailed out and restructured.  I know a bunch of entry level BMW/Merc/Audi owners.  Cadillac wasn't even on their radar.  You gotta be a GM fanboy to get an ATS over a Bimmer and GM fanboys are more inclined to get a loaded V8 Camaro than a wannabe German taut sports sedan. 

Quote from: veeman on August 12, 2014, 05:44:47 PM
:hesaid:  GM can't get their heads around that they can't sell their luxury cars with the goal of making 10 thousand dollars per vehicle like they do on their Tahoes/Escalades.  They just can't admit it and its killing them.  They can't blame pension/health care costs either since they've been bailed out and restructured.  I know a bunch of entry level BMW/Merc/Audi owners.  Cadillac wasn't even on their radar.  You gotta be a GM fanboy to get an ATS over a Bimmer and GM fanboys are more inclined to get a loaded V8 Camaro than a wannabe German taut sports sedan.

I think u just talked past dude's post. I agree though. GM has to offer something others don't to move metal, not make a carbon copy of cars that sell largely on brand image.

If Cadillac built the Ciel, they would sell a fuck ton of them. I would find a used a one a few years down the road. Cadillac needs to throw caution to the wind and build a full slate of cars that teenagers put posters of on their walls. 

Oh and Cadillac needs to revert back to the old badge because the new one is terrible.

Quote from: SVT666 on August 12, 2014, 08:47:29 PM
If Cadillac built the Ciel, they would sell a fuck ton of them. I would find a used a one a few years down the road. Cadillac needs to throw caution to the wind and build a full slate of cars that teenagers put posters of on their walls. 

Oh and Cadillac needs to revert back to the old badge because the new one is terrible.

Yeah, the new badge isn't an improvement and the positioning on the grill is dumb.

Quote from: SVT666 on August 12, 2014, 08:47:29 PM
If Cadillac built the Ciel, they would sell a fuck ton of them. I would find a used a one a few years down the road. Cadillac needs to throw caution to the wind and build a full slate of cars that teenagers put posters of on their walls. 

Oh and Cadillac needs to revert back to the old badge because the new one is terrible.

Convertibles are a dying breed, but I agree with the general point that Caddy needs to build cars that make peoples' jaws drop

Germany is all about that modest austerity bullshit.... this is why folks debadge or even downbadge their V12 Benzes there. Over here we are anything but modest, and a domestic luxury car manufacturer should reflect that.

Lincoln should do the same thing. Pillarless suicide doors across the lineup. They can sell it as an accessibility feature. They need a modern day '67 Continental real bad.

Quote from: 68_427 on August 12, 2014, 03:08:25 PM
Lol the ELR has like 400+ days of inventory.

Also the transaction prices of comparable ATS' are quite a bit lower than the 3er.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 12, 2014, 04:50:18 PM
No the ELR is just an overpriced Volt

I'm talking something 4 doors, 5 seats, way more power/performance than the Volt. Prob just not possible at the moment, IDK.

FWIW I know the ELR is an overpriced Volt. That was kind of my point. I like the Volt, mechanically, but think the ELR looks way better. I would happily pay extra for an ELR (compared to a Volt), but GM is charging Tesla prices for the  ELR, which is why I said:

QuoteMy only problem with that car is price.

A great uncle of mine had a humongous black 60's Cadillac. Now that was luxury!

Quote from: SJ_GTI on August 14, 2014, 07:08:58 AM

FWIW I know the ELR is an overpriced Volt. That was kind of my point. I like the Volt, mechanically, but think the ELR looks way better. I would happily pay extra for an ELR (compared to a Volt), but GM is charging Tesla prices for the  ELR, which is why I said:

I think the ELR looks sexy as hell.  Maybe I will pick one up in a few years for Civic prices.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 11, 2014, 11:40:32 AM
Y buy this over a comparable BMW? They are good cars but that question looms heavy w/no answer.

It's a fair point. 

The original CTS stood out from the crowd, offered good dynamics and offered 5er space for 3 series money.  There was definite value for customers. 

But while the new ATS looks good, it's a bit bland and there really aren't any defining characteristics that make it an exciting choice for customers.  It's a good drive, but so is the 3-er and the IS.  It's decent inside, but the C-class is a good deal nicer (especially the new one).  And of course, it doesn't have a three pointed star, a blue or white roundel or four interlocking rings on the grill, and that matters. 

Saw a black ATS yesterday. :wub:

Quote from: Submariner on August 16, 2014, 09:55:27 AM
It's a fair point. 

The original CTS stood out from the crowd, offered good dynamics and offered 5er space for 3 series money.  There was definite value for customers. 

But while the new ATS looks good, it's a bit bland and there really aren't any defining characteristics that make it an exciting choice for customers.  It's a good drive, but so is the 3-er and the IS.  It's decent inside, but the C-class is a good deal nicer (especially the new one).  And of course, it doesn't have a three pointed star, a blue or white roundel or four interlocking rings on the grill, and that matters.

And it costs exactly the same as the most expensive offerings in the segment. It's a no go as is... its not fair but Caddy has to offer more car for the money to compete. Real shame as again these are damn good cars. But good is not good enough in this super competitive market.

With sales on the decline, General Motors' Cadillac division is devising new pricing a marketing strategies for its CTS sedan.

Launched late last year, critics have largely lauded the Cadillac CTS for its sharp handling, slick styling and well-appointed interior, but buyers have balked at a starting price that is $6,000 more than the outgoing model. As a result, CTS sales are down about 6 percent this year while the overall luxury market is up by 8 percent.

"While it may have been a terrific car, it may not have been perceived as having earned its stripes for that kind of pricing against the Germans," Autotrader senior analyst Michelle Krebs told Automotive News. "Cadillac has just not earned its way to charge the kind of premium that the Germans can get."

Cadillac isn't interested in lower the CTS' price, but the company is considering adding more standard content or offering some features like heated seats as stand-alone options.

"These are things that we can do relatively quickly," Uwe Ellinghaus, Cadillac's chief marketing officer, said.

Ellinghaus added that Cadillac will also be changing its marketing message early next year. Rather than comparing the brand to its German competitors, Cadillac will instead focus on its American roots.

"We definitely cannot build a brand on being as good as," Ellinghaus said. "We are not German -- and that's a good thing. We are American. We need to build this brand on what differentiates Cadillac from our German competitors."

Quote from: SVT666 on September 05, 2014, 12:19:29 PM
"We are not German -- and that's a good thing.

I don't think I have ever been insulted by a car company before.   :lol:

Quote from: SVT666 on September 05, 2014, 12:19:29 PM
With sales on the decline, General Motors' Cadillac division is devising new pricing a marketing strategies for its CTS sedan.

Launched late last year, critics have largely lauded the Cadillac CTS for its sharp handling, slick styling and well-appointed interior, but buyers have balked at a starting price that is $6,000 more than the outgoing model. As a result, CTS sales are down about 6 percent this year while the overall luxury market is up by 8 percent.

"While it may have been a terrific car, it may not have been perceived as having earned its stripes for that kind of pricing against the Germans," Autotrader senior analyst Michelle Krebs told Automotive News. "Cadillac has just not earned its way to charge the kind of premium that the Germans can get."

Cadillac isn't interested in lower the CTS' price, but the company is considering adding more standard content or offering some features like heated seats as stand-alone options.

"These are things that we can do relatively quickly," Uwe Ellinghaus, Cadillac's chief marketing officer, said.

Ellinghaus added that Cadillac will also be changing its marketing message early next year. Rather than comparing the brand to its German competitors, Cadillac will instead focus on its American roots.

"We definitely cannot build a brand on being as good as," Ellinghaus said. "We are not German -- and that's a good thing. We are American. We need to build this brand on what differentiates Cadillac from our German competitors."

Huh, that's funny, sounds a lot like what I was saying about Cadillac's strategy 2 years ago. But hey, what do I know.

As soon as I read it, I thought, "Sporty is gonna love this"

I should have put money on it. Someone go fetch Mr. H, some Friday night gloating is in order.

Personally, I think the styling of both cars is too bland, CUE is a nightmare, the 4 pot is coarse, and the pricing is too high.  Dynamically, they are great cars, but that's not enough in that category.

Dynamics don't matter at all in that category, outside of a base level of competence. GM went in completely the wrong direction... literally everything you listed were all things they should have prioritized over dynamics. And now they have to convince the market that these cars are something they aren't... a familiar GM refrain.

I would love a last gen CTS but the centre console is a POS and squeaks in every corner.  I was already tired of it after my test drive.  The current car's styling is too bland and CUE is a nightmare.  Same goes for the ATS.  Cadillac needs to build lifestyle cars.  Give us in your face show car styling, like the Ciel.

The new CTS looks sharp - definitely best in class save for maybe the GS.

But like the ATS it's simply too expensive, or it needs to do and be more at Germanic pricing.

Quote from: GoCougs on September 05, 2014, 05:10:51 PM
The new CTS looks sharp - definitely best in class save for maybe the GS.

But like the ATS it's simply too expensive, or it needs to do and be more at Germanic pricing.

Funny, I totally agree with your best in class picks. Never thought I'd say the GS350 is my pick in its class.

GM has let their chassis engineers start to play, time for the rest of the team to catch up.

I think they should steal a page out of Hyundai's playbook and offer long warranties and a certain guaranteed percentage of retail when they go to trade it in. People who buy these type of cars usually don't keep them for 10 plus years, particularly wealthy wives.

A 10 year power train and 6 year comprehensive warranty would get lots of people talking.

Quote from: veeman on September 06, 2014, 12:12:44 PM
I think they should steal a page out of Hyundai's playbook and offer long warranties and a certain guaranteed percentage of retail when they go to trade it in. People who buy these type of cars usually don't keep them for 10 plus years, particularly wealthy wives.

A 10 year power train and 6 year comprehensive warranty would get lots of people talking.

GM would go bankrupt again just fixing everything.

Quote from: SVT666 on September 06, 2014, 01:25:21 PM
GM would go bankrupt again just fixing everything.

:lol:

Quote from: SVT666 on September 06, 2014, 01:25:21 PM
GM would go bankrupt again just fixing everything.

The thing about Hyundai's 10-year warranty that most people aren't aware of is that it's non-transferable.  Only the first owner gets the 10 year/100K mile warranty.  Upon transfer or ownership, the warranty reverts to 3 yrs/36K miles.  You only get a factory warranty on a used Hyundai if you buy one that's new than 3 years and has less than 36K miles.  No reason Caddy couldn't do the same.  Few buyers in this segment keep their cars more than 4 years, and they wouldn't have to worry about covering used vehicles.

Quote from: MX793 on September 06, 2014, 01:32:07 PM
The thing about Hyundai's 10-year warranty that most people aren't aware of is that it's non-transferable.  Only the first owner gets the 10 year/100K mile warranty.  Upon transfer or ownership, the warranty reverts to 3 yrs/36K miles.  You only get a factory warranty on a used Hyundai if you buy one that's new than 3 years and has less than 36K miles.  No reason Caddy couldn't do the same.  Few buyers in this segment keep their cars more than 4 years, and they wouldn't have to worry about covering used vehicles.

Agree.  Also most people don't realize the 10 year 100,000 mile warranty only covers power train.  Bumper to bumper is I believe 5 or 6 year, 60 thousand mile.  Plus brake pads aren't covered. 

Quote from: MX793 on September 06, 2014, 01:32:07 PM
The thing about Hyundai's 10-year warranty that most people aren't aware of is that it's non-transferable.  Only the first owner gets the 10 year/100K mile warranty.  Upon transfer or ownership, the warranty reverts to 3 yrs/36K miles.  You only get a factory warranty on a used Hyundai if you buy one that's new than 3 years and has less than 36K miles.  No reason Caddy couldn't do the same.  Few buyers in this segment keep their cars more than 4 years, and they wouldn't have to worry about covering used vehicles.

Doesn't it go to 5/50, not 3/36?

First off, liking a car's styling is highly subjective.  Anybody think part a Cadillac's problem may be that their car's aren't very good looking?

Personally, if I were in the market in that segment I'd eliminate Cadillac based solely on the styling.  I think they are rather ugly.


(This may already be mentioned, I didn't plow through 5 pages worth of posts.)

Yea the ATS and CTS are incredibly dull, IMO.

They aren't ugly, per se, but they definitely aren't selling on looks.

I'm kind of blown away that with this hail mary opportunity, and the aesthetic conservativeness of the ATS and CTS' markets, GM decided to play it so safe. The segment needs a serious dose of style, and with no expectations or constraints I'm confused as to why Caddy didn't seize it. The ATS is OK but very anonymous... the CTS on standard wheels with the non sport suspension is bordering on ugly, with way too much metal to wheel, and wheel gap that would be awkward on a development mule.

"B-b-b-but they have the best ring times of the segment!" Lol.

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on September 07, 2014, 12:16:51 PM
Yea the ATS and CTS are incredibly dull, IMO.

They aren't ugly, per se, but they definitely aren't selling on looks.

I'm kind of blown away that with this hail mary opportunity, and the aesthetic conservativeness of the ATS and CTS' markets, GM decided to play it so safe. The segment needs a serious dose of style, and with no expectations or constraints I'm confused as to why Caddy didn't seize it. The ATS is OK but very anonymous... the CTS on standard wheels with the non sport suspension is bordering on ugly, with way too much metal to wheel, and wheel gap that would be awkward on a development mule.

"B-b-b-but they have the best ring times of the segment!" Lol.

Cadillac needs to quit trying to be the U. S. alternative to the Mercedes, BMW, Lexus or whatever and start being the best Cadillac they can be.  there is a difference between those choices.

eek maybe this will be a difference maker

https://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/cadillac-vows-self-driving-car-by-2016-%e2%80%94-but-industry-wants-legal-shield-first-172125123.html

Quote from: AutobahnSHO on September 08, 2014, 03:05:40 PM
eek maybe this will be a difference maker

https://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/cadillac-vows-self-driving-car-by-2016-%e2%80%94-but-industry-wants-legal-shield-first-172125123.html

Maybe they should work on making ignition switches that work properly and infotainment interfaces that are user friendly before venturing into something complicated like self-driving cars?

Quote from: MX793 on September 08, 2014, 08:27:12 PM
Maybe they should work on making ignition switches that work properly and infotainment interfaces that are user friendly before venturing into something complicated like self-driving cars?

You read my mind.   ;)

http://blog.caranddriver.com/unleash-the-hounds-cadillacs-ultra-luxe-flagship-confirmed-for-detroit-production/ (http://blog.caranddriver.com/unleash-the-hounds-cadillacs-ultra-luxe-flagship-confirmed-for-detroit-production/)

Maybe this will help?

(Note: and there's a familiar face for the old school C/Ders here down in the comments)

ooh, Maarp.

Wonder why he never made it here.

Quote from: mzziaz on September 20, 2014, 02:53:01 AM
ooh, Maarp.

Wonder why he never made it here.

He registered here and posted a few times.  Just never stuck around.

Quote from: MX793 on September 20, 2014, 05:00:13 AM
He registered here and posted a few times.  Just never stuck around.

I believe his comment was something about it being a bit juvenile :huh:.

Quote from: FoMoJo on September 20, 2014, 05:35:22 AM
I believe his comment was something about it being a bit juvenile :huh:.

Uh doi....it's an Internet forum.

Quote from: FoMoJo on September 20, 2014, 05:35:22 AM
I believe his comment was something about it being a bit juvenile :huh:.

Compared to...the C&D forums?

Quote from: Raza  on September 20, 2014, 07:29:35 AM
Uh doi....it's an Internet forum.

Quote from: Submariner on September 20, 2014, 07:54:32 AM
Compared to...the C&D forums?

Bear in mind it was several years ago.  Most of the members have matured somewhat, since then. ;)

Quote from: FoMoJo on September 20, 2014, 07:59:01 AM
Bear in mind it was several years ago.  Most of the members have matured somewhat, since then. ;)

I shouldn't have read that while I was drinking a soda.  I almost choked I was laughing so hard

Yeah, we've probably just regressed, if anything. :lol:

Lol. Caddy is fucking clueless.

Quote from: FoMoJo on September 20, 2014, 07:59:01 AM
Bear in mind it was several years ago.  Most of the members have matured somewhat, since then. ;)

We've gotten way worse overall. 

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on September 20, 2014, 08:13:45 PM
Lol. Caddy is fucking clueless.

Totally - FBC and RAGE Hide CLKid are hilarious not so.

Cadillac's upcoming CT6 flagship sedan will usher in a new naming scheme for the luxury automaker, General Motors has revealed.

Following in the footsteps of luxury brands like Infiniti and BMW, Cadillac will overhaul its naming structure to better communicate to buyers the hierarchy of Cadillac vehicles. That move should come as little surprise as Cadillac president Johan de Nysschen oversaw a similar shift while leading the Infiniti brand.

Moving forward, all Cadillac sedan models will start with the CT designation followed by a number indicating its size and positioning. The CTS and ATS will eventually be renamed under the new scheme, but it will take some time to complete that transition.

"As we expand the portfolio, we can assist consumers in placing the cars within a structure, as they compare cars both within our showroom and across the market generally," said Uwe Ellinghaus, Cadillac chief marketing officer. "However, this will be an evolutionary process - we will only change a product's name when the product itself is redesigned or an all-new model is created, as in this instance."

Cadillac will presumably move forward with a similar naming plan for its utility models, but the automaker didn't address that issue. It also remains unknown how Cadillac will designate two-door models like the current ATS Coupe.

What does "CT" even stand for???

de Nysschen is an executive troll. He was behind Infiniti's switch to the Q names.

If Caddy needs anything it's to switch back to actual names. The less Cadillac differentiates itself the less value it brings to the marketplace

How in the world is CT-whatever better at communicating the hierarchy? Dude should be fired, that's baloney.

Everyone is trying to be all high tech and German and just end up with nonsense on the trunk lid. I agree that they should go back to real names.

At least a number system can convey where in the range the vehicle sits.  Bigger number = higher up the food chain.

When I visited China in '98, a lot of the domestic car models were seemingly produced by a random number generator.

CN83129357

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on September 25, 2014, 10:56:13 AM
If Caddy needs anything it's to switch back to actual names.

:hesaid:

How about just going all original and blending bmw and benz together.

Cadillac 1 Classe for entry level
Cadillac 3 Classe Mid range
Cadillac 5 Classe

and of course every few years a prototype of a "production" 7 Classe that we will never see. Complete with full range of imaginary motors that they don't make.

IDK guys. Flagship seems to only be getting V6s here

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/03/cadillac-ct6-fitted-pair-v6-engines/ (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/03/cadillac-ct6-fitted-pair-v6-engines/)

On one hand, 400 HP/lb-ft is plenty. On the other hand, now Caddy seems poised on offering LESS car for the same money with this flagship that is supposed to be the face of the brand. *Krusty groan*

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 21, 2015, 05:10:12 PM
IDK guys. Flagship seems to only be getting V6s here

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/03/cadillac-ct6-fitted-pair-v6-engines/ (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/03/cadillac-ct6-fitted-pair-v6-engines/)

On one hand, 400 HP/lb-ft is plenty. On the other hand, now Caddy seems poised on offering LESS car for the same money with this flagship that is supposed to be the face of the brand. *Krusty groan*

There is a reason all it's supposed competition (S, XJ, A8, 7, LS) have V8's, and it's not for the extra power.

Will they have v8s next gen, though,?

Looks like instead of chasing ze Germans, Caddy's set its sights on the Lincoln MKS (or whatever their Taurus-based flagship is).  Next we'll find out it's actually just the next iteration of the FWD DTS/XTS, or is a LWB version of the XTS.

Quote from: MX793 on March 21, 2015, 06:57:59 PM
Looks like instead of chasing ze Germans, Caddy's set its sights on the Lincoln MKS (or whatever their Taurus-based flagship is).  Next we'll find out it's actually just the next iteration of the FWD DTS/XTS, or is a LWB version of the XTS.

:lol:

Quote from: hotrodalex on March 21, 2015, 06:56:18 PM
Will they have v8s next gen, though,?

They all have options for a 6 now but I think V8s will always at least be an option. Still don't get how of all companies GM is weak in V8 coverage in their luxury cars.

Quote from: hotrodalex on March 21, 2015, 06:56:18 PM
Will they have v8s next gen, though,?

Probably - my guess is some will have 12 cylinder options, too. 

Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 21, 2015, 07:20:02 PM
They all have options for a 6 now but I think V8s will always at least be an option. Still don't get how of all companies GM is weak in V8 coverage in their luxury cars.

Because the only V8 they have is the SBC, which really isn't "refined" enough for luxury duty.  They abandoned the OHC Northstar, which was originally designed for luxury car duties.

SBC is good enough for 6 figure Escalades bought en masse by NYC Park Ave families... plus if they turbo it that would remove a lot of NVH, improve efficiency (esp if they cut down the displacement) etc etc.

4V is not really needed for luxury cars as high revs are uncivilized. It would be good if they could phase the intake/exhaust cams individually like they did with the Viper though

Most people don't know or give a solid fuck what's under the hood of their 7 series.





Honestly, the best route for the CT6 (which is a completely Not memorable name and overall bad) was a very radical shape with basically a big volt power train. (2.0T + electric motors = series hybrid)


But the CT6 will never stand out. It looks milquetoast in previews, and the way Cadillac is previewing it is amateurish. There's no anticipation for this model. It isn't avant grade. It isn't groundbreaking. It's not something that makes you want to buy it.


It's DOA.

I think people care. Not in the, "a more efficient drivetrain will save me $200 a month in gas on a car that costs me $2000 a month to drive" way, but in the same way the Model S stands way out from the S/7/A8/LS etc. Ultimately though engine choice is a decision people have to make... for some people the smaller powertrain is important, whereas for others the larger one is, whereas for others the greenest one is. People still buy AMG S classes which is absolutely ridiculous to me, but shows some people do care. Those folks would be lost to Cadillac w/no "high performance" option.

Ugh that name though. CT6-V.... sounds like a virus strain.

Most people don't have a clue what's under the hood. As long as it's not underpowered or unrefined, they won't notice.

And I thought you were against the whole performance Cadillac thing...

I totally agree about the name, though. Stupid.

Well, 425 hp is in the ballpark of the base Germans' V8s (which they've ruined), so I'm not sure what the big deal is.

Given a number of brands have abandoned the large luxury segment (Acura, Infiniti, Cadillac) or aren't putting much work into it (Lexus) my hunch is there's not a lot of cream there, or in the least there is FAR more in small/medium luxury sedan and SUV markets.

Pretty hard for Acura, Infiniti and Cadillac to abandon a segment that they were never really in.

Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 22, 2015, 11:42:18 AM
Pretty hard for Acura, Infiniti and Cadillac to abandon a segment that they were never really in.

To their credit, Infiniti tried to break into that market.  The Q45 just never caught on (poor marketing and awkward styling I'm sure didn't help).

Caddy has always had a full-size barge in their lineup, but hasn't been competitive with the top dogs from Europe for at least 30 years.  They seem to be content duking it out with Lincoln's full-size offerings in the "luxurious but not prestigious" full-size sedan segment.

Quote from: MX793 on March 22, 2015, 12:09:53 PM
To their credit, Infiniti tried to break into that market.  The Q45 just never caught on (poor marketing and awkward styling I'm sure didn't help).

Caddy has always had a full-size barge in their lineup, but hasn't been competitive with the top dogs from Europe for at least 30 years.  They seem to be content duking it out with Lincoln's full-size offerings in the "luxurious but not prestigious" full-size sedan segment.

I'm aware of what models were available.  I figured it would be obvious that my comment was in regards to competing in those segments.

Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 22, 2015, 11:42:18 AM
Pretty hard for Acura, Infiniti and Cadillac to abandon a segment that they were never really in.

Sure they were, in the early '90s - Legend, Q45, STS...

Were in competitively,  is what I meant.

While those may have been good cars, none of them had any influence or large presence on the full size luxury market.

Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 22, 2015, 12:51:46 PM
Were in competitively,  is what I meant.

While those may have been good cars, none of them had any influence or large presence on the full size luxury market.

Its a real dead market now.... everyone but Mercedes, even with legit strongholds, has seen big declines over the last decade. Its become a self fulfilling prophecy, because the less something like an LS sells, the less Lexus puts into it, and the more the S Class pulls away.

Mercedes is low key on fire right now with their sedans. Once they bring the E up to snuff it will be kind of game over.

I like the 5GT a hell of a lot more than the 7series.