Jump to content

Build Theme!

Photo

Cadillac News: Spying: Cadillac CTS


94 replies to this topic

#61

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,364 posts

Posted 20 February 2012 - 09:46 PM

SRX sells because it is cheap. It also sells because Americans are suckers for domestic SUVs in the same way they are suckers for Camry and Accords. On the plus side, it looks better than an RX350 or MKX and it has more power than either one also. Lexus may have it in build quality and technology , but the Lincoln and Acrua offerings don't have an interior as good as the SRX. The German midsize luxury SUVs are considerably more expensive than an SRX.

To bring this back to the CTS, here is where the challenge will lie. When the CTS goes up in price to make way for the ATS, what happens to CTS sales? And then also, what happens with the XTS and CTS fully overlapped in price point?


Let's play the "How many times is SMK wrong?" game... this isn't a drinking game because I don't want to have to check you all in to Betty Ford....
  • SRX transaction prices are equal to the X3 and GLK. The SRX is the same size interior as those which is how car classes are determined... interior room. If the SRX is cheap, then so are they.
  • SRX has a 71% conquest rate
  • There simply weren't enough MKXes and Aspens sold for "domestic only" SUV buyers to come flocking to Cadillac at that volume.
  • The Lexus build quality on the RX hasn't advanced since 2004, in some areas they've reversed course.
  • The X5 and M-Class are a completely different class from the SRX, neither are entry lux CUV.
  • Asking "what happens when the CTS and XTS overlap in price point?" is like asking "What happens when the Escalade and Corvette overlap in price point?" or "What happens when the Sprinter and C-class overlap in price point?".. and roughly equal to "What happens when the ATS and Lacrosse overlap in price point?!?!?!?!?!11?!!?!"

  • 0

#62

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,364 posts

Posted 20 February 2012 - 09:54 PM



None of which actually matters, because the XTS is Cadillac's ES350.

I suppose GM just couldn't use the LaCrosse to compete w/ the MKS and ES, which is a more natural competitor for those models than something from Cadillac...


I don't think Buick competes with Lincoln or Lexus. There in lies part of the problem. The LaCrosse competes with the Avalon, Taurus and Maxima. A Maxima can even hit $41,000, so can a SHO. I'd say the Chrysler 300 and Genesis are competitors also on size and price point, different drive wheels, but they would still get cross shopped I think.

Since Buick is not a luxury car, Cadillac has to wear many hats, thus they need an XTS to cater to those in Florida that like pastel pearl paint jobs and seats you sink in to. I question if they really need to cater to this market though. Or if the CTS were as well executed as the E-class that it couldn't attract both those that want smooth ride and those that want performance.


The Lacrosse and Enclave are most certainly luxury vehicles. They do quiet, power, and handling better than their counterparts at Lexus
  • 0

#63

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,364 posts

Posted 20 February 2012 - 09:56 PM



SRX sells because it is cheap. It also sells because Americans are suckers for domestic SUVs in the same way they are suckers for Camry and Accords. On the plus side, it looks better than an RX350 or MKX and it has more power than either one also. Lexus may have it in build quality and technology , but the Lincoln and Acrua offerings don't have an interior as good as the SRX. The German midsize luxury SUVs are considerably more expensive than an SRX.

To bring this back to the CTS, here is where the challenge will lie. When the CTS goes up in price to make way for the ATS, what happens to CTS sales? And then also, what happens with the XTS and CTS fully overlapped in price point?

New CTS will be a test to see if Cadillac can sell a $50-60K sedan in non-niche volumes. This has been a struggle for brands like Acura, Volvo, and Lincoln, but I think Cadillac can do it--think Escalade.

Escalade is a truck though, and huge SUVs have had success in the high dollar range, although obviously popularity has declined over the past few years. CTS V6 has to sell at a similer price point as the STS V8, and we know how few STS V8s they were selling the past few years.


What SMK meant to say what that it needs to sell at the same price point as a 3900lb 4-cylinder 5-series with "leatherette"
  • 0

#64

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,780 posts

Posted 20 February 2012 - 10:20 PM

I agree profitability is most important. But they need to sell more than 700 CTS's a month like Audi does with the A6.

CTS sold 5200 units in Dec.
Last time I checked, 5200 is more than 800.
  • 0

#65

ocnblu

    C&G's Boldest Member

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,611 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 04:49 AM

"smk" persona seems like a device to me.
  • 0

#66

dfelt

    Ultra Member

  • Editor/Reporter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,678 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 10:07 AM

I wonder if some of the people on here like to post just to post rather than contribute? I know we all like to agree with others at times, but it seems some tend to be specific in posting stretched info.

Comparing Apples to Pears seems to be common place now.
  • 0

#67

hyperv6

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,568 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 03:56 PM

MYOPIA
1: a condition in which the visual images come to a focus in front of the retina of the eye resulting especially in defective vision of distant objects

2: a lack of foresight or discernment : a narrow view of something

my·o·pic \-ˈō-pik, -ˈä-\

I think I may start a chairity for suffers if this infliction. What color should the ribbon be?

I see more and more cases all the time where many can't step back and look at the big picture for GM or the auto market.

Sometimes they are wrong because they don't understand the market or interject personel wants before market wants. Also they don't account the reasons GM is doing something because they either don't know or understand the internal reasons for some of GM's actions. GM can not always just go out and do what they want as even they have limits.

Desiging building and selling autombiles is not an easy task and it even trips up the sharpest minds at times. Even Lutz who is one of the few who has a pretty good grasp of the market as admitted his errors.

The XTS is the best they can do short term and it is better than nothing. Even GM can make lemonaide out of a lemon. [Not saying the XTS is a Lemon] Time will prove who wins here witht he XTS. I think we all have placed our bets and will just have to wait and see who wins. By then the losers will remain quiet and the winners will forget about who said what as the next argument with new distorted facts will be on the table.

Edited by hyperv6, 21 February 2012 - 03:58 PM.

  • 0

#68

smk4565

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,487 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:19 PM

I agree profitability is most important. But they need to sell more than 700 CTS's a month like Audi does with the A6.

CTS sold 5200 units in Dec.
Last time I checked, 5200 is more than 800.

Yes, but that is without the ATS in dealerships, and no STS in dealerships either. The CTS sells well now, but what if base price goes up $10,000 over night, and a cheaper car is offered. They want the CTS to get bigger and more expesnive, thus exactly what the STS was, and the STS was a dud. So my point was only that the CTS better be fantastic, and not another STS, because they can't afford STS sales volumes.
  • 0

#69

smk4565

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,487 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:35 PM




None of which actually matters, because the XTS is Cadillac's ES350.

I suppose GM just couldn't use the LaCrosse to compete w/ the MKS and ES, which is a more natural competitor for those models than something from Cadillac...


I don't think Buick competes with Lincoln or Lexus. There in lies part of the problem. The LaCrosse competes with the Avalon, Taurus and Maxima. A Maxima can even hit $41,000, so can a SHO. I'd say the Chrysler 300 and Genesis are competitors also on size and price point, different drive wheels, but they would still get cross shopped I think.

Since Buick is not a luxury car, Cadillac has to wear many hats, thus they need an XTS to cater to those in Florida that like pastel pearl paint jobs and seats you sink in to. I question if they really need to cater to this market though. Or if the CTS were as well executed as the E-class that it couldn't attract both those that want smooth ride and those that want performance.


The Lacrosse and Enclave are most certainly luxury vehicles. They do quiet, power, and handling better than their counterparts at Lexus

I still don't see Buick as luxury. A Nissan Maxima is $2,000 more than a LaCrosse, is that a luxruy car? The LaCrosse and Enclave are also full size vehicles, a car or SUV of that size from a luxury brand would cost far more. Enclave is the same size and seating capacity as an Escalade, yet the Escalade is $30,000 more. So if the Enclave is a true luxury SUV, then why are people buying Escaldes, or why aren't they charging $60k for an Enclave? The reason being the Envlace nor any Buick are luxury vehicles.
  • -3

#70

hyperv6

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,568 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:35 PM

The CTS will take the place of the STS in a way but it will not be the STS. Don't be so focused that that a larger CTS=STS.

The Alpha will let it be the car the STS could never have been.

If they can give you a CTS with more interior room, faster magnetic tuned suspension and more power than the present car at nearly the same weight or possibly less? Would you find that acceptable? This is what we know could be possible with this new car. This will be a car built on the new platform and not just a rehash of an old outdated platform that has it's limits to get anylighter or flexible.

Step back and take a look at the big picture and what the Alpha is telling us that it can do. there is a lot to learn by understanding the thinking that went into the Alpha. This is GM platform they wanted a long time ago and could not afford to build. This time they got what they wanted.

Lighten up on Buick as they are like Cadillac and only are starting to evolve to where they need to be. We have yet to dee an all new post Chapter 11 Buick and we have only seen the first Chapter 11 Cadillac. This will take some time to move up fully to the segment where they will live. Each new model will be a building block.

Edited by hyperv6, 21 February 2012 - 05:38 PM.

  • 0

#71

CanadianBacon94

    GXP Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 785 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:36 PM


I agree profitability is most important. But they need to sell more than 700 CTS's a month like Audi does with the A6.

CTS sold 5200 units in Dec.
Last time I checked, 5200 is more than 800.

Yes, but that is without the ATS in dealerships, and no STS in dealerships either. The CTS sells well now, but what if base price goes up $10,000 over night, and a cheaper car is offered. They want the CTS to get bigger and more expesnive, thus exactly what the STS was, and the STS was a dud. So my point was only that the CTS better be fantastic, and not another STS, because they can't afford STS sales volumes.


But, was the STS better than the current CTS?
No, it wasn't the STS worked when it was the first gen, by the time the current gen CTS was two years old the STS was outclassed
  • 2

#72

smk4565

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,487 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 06:54 PM

The CTS will take the place of the STS in a way but it will not be the STS. Don't be so focused that that a larger CTS=STS.

The Alpha will let it be the car the STS could never have been.

If they can give you a CTS with more interior room, faster magnetic tuned suspension and more power than the present car at nearly the same weight or possibly less? Would you find that acceptable? This is what we know could be possible with this new car. This will be a car built on the new platform and not just a rehash of an old outdated platform that has it's limits to get anylighter or flexible.


I don't think the CTS will become like the STS, but there is that risk. At the time Sigma came out, it was supposed to be as good as an E39 5-series, yet it wasn't. So we here Alpha is as good as an E46 3-series but we'll see. Maybe it is, maybe it out handles an E36 M3, only time will tell.

I would be satisfied with the CTS if it had more interior room, better materials and build quality, and the exterior didn't look bulky and fat. The 1st Gen CTS had better proportions than the current one, they it got fat and blingy. Powertrain needs upgraded to, the CTS isn't that quick or fuel efficient compared to the Germans or Infiniti M-hybrid.



I agree profitability is most important. But they need to sell more than 700 CTS's a month like Audi does with the A6.

CTS sold 5200 units in Dec.
Last time I checked, 5200 is more than 800.

Yes, but that is without the ATS in dealerships, and no STS in dealerships either. The CTS sells well now, but what if base price goes up $10,000 over night, and a cheaper car is offered. They want the CTS to get bigger and more expesnive, thus exactly what the STS was, and the STS was a dud. So my point was only that the CTS better be fantastic, and not another STS, because they can't afford STS sales volumes.


But, was the STS better than the current CTS?
No, it wasn't the STS worked when it was the first gen, by the time the current gen CTS was two years old the STS was outclassed

So like how the ATS will outclass a CTS that has been on the market for 5 model years?
  • 0

#73

hyperv6

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,568 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 07:19 PM

The Sigma was only what GM could afford and not what they so much wanted. They did the best with the funding they had at the time. The STS was like all other GM cars at the time about 75% of what it needed to be. Just like the 4 th gen Camaro it got all the driveline and chassie they could afford but then they had nothing left for interior and power windows that would not fail.

The ATS ws designed from the start to be expanded and changed to different configs. The key to all of this will be the weight. No more heavy platform here. The Sigma and Zeta both were done in a way they could never remove the weight. They could remove a little but they had limits. The Alpha was designed to be lighter from the wheels up as they say. Also it is at the start of it's life.

As for your critic on proportions it is nothing put your subjective opinion. The CTS will see a Turbo 6 and a new DI V8. You really need to look ahead and not at what is at hand.
  • 0

#74

CanadianBacon94

    GXP Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 785 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 08:28 PM

So like how the ATS will outclass a CTS that has been on the market for 5 model years?


depends if the new CTS wont be out for five more model years
  • 0

#75

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,547 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 08:30 PM


So like how the ATS will outclass a CTS that has been on the market for 5 model years?


depends if the new CTS wont be out for five more model years

MY 2014, I think..
  • 0

#76

smk4565

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,487 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 08:30 PM

Low weight RWD platform is a good start, but it is only a start. The Germans have had boosted sixes and DI V8s for years, so that only gets Cadillac caught up. But by 2014, the bar may have moved again. Plus, Mercedes is planning a 2800 lb E-class, so is low weight where Cadillac really wants to pick its battles?
  • 0

#77

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,780 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 06:57 AM

>>"Plus, Mercedes is planning a 2800 lb E-class"<<

Believe it when I see it - that sort of weight range is impossible in that size class anymore.
Or have they hinted they're going to strip the safety & electronics out of it?
  • 0

#78

smk4565

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,487 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 08:14 AM

>>"Plus, Mercedes is planning a 2800 lb E-class"<<

Believe it when I see it - that sort of weight range is impossible in that size class anymore.
Or have they hinted they're going to strip the safety & electronics out of it?

Carbon fiber chassis and body, and possbily a fuel cell powertrain. They expect to only make 20,000 globally per year.
  • 0

#79

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,547 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 09:35 AM


>>"Plus, Mercedes is planning a 2800 lb E-class"<<

Believe it when I see it - that sort of weight range is impossible in that size class anymore.
Or have they hinted they're going to strip the safety & electronics out of it?

Carbon fiber chassis and body, and possbily a fuel cell powertrain. They expect to only make 20,000 globally per year.

So it will probably be $150k...back down to earth, we could expect a normal $50k E-class to be 3500-3800lbs or so?
  • 0

#80

smk4565

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,487 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 02:21 PM

I believe they thought an E-superlight would be priced like an E63 AMG, but yes it could be pretty expensive. A regular V6 E-class is 3825 lbs, which I suspect is about what they will weigh for several years to come.
  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users