Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Cadillac Is Working On A RWD Sedan To Sit Below ATS

      Cadillac May Have A Wolf Among the Sheep in the Entry-Level Luxury Class

    The entry-level luxury class could be getting a model from Cadillac.

     

    Dave Leone, Cadillac executive chief engineer said in an interview with Road & Track that they are developing a new sedan to sit under ATS.

     

    "We are working on something below ATS," said Leone.

     

    Leone didn't go into further details about the vehicle but did say "one of our strengths in sedans is that we are known for being rear-wheel drive."

     

    Road & Track speculates the new sedan will use the Alpha rear-drive platform. This gives a Cadillac an edge as all of the entry-level luxury sedans are front-wheel drive based. But using Alpha introduces a big problem. As we have noted in our two ATS reviews, the back seat is quite tight for being a compact luxury sedan. Shrinking it down to something smaller could make the back seat useless.

     

    Price is also a concern since are either below or start at the $30,000 mark. However Cadillac could make a case for using Alpha on a $30,000 vehicle since the Chevrolet Camaro - based on Alpha as well - starts at $25,700.

     

    We'll be keeping an eye on this developing story.

     

    Source: Road & Track

     

    Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    First off, again with the laser focus on starting price? Do you have any figures on how many $40K plus cars sell for base price? Is it even 5%, regardless of brand? It's a non-issue, meaningless.

     

     

     

    they have to go down in price to the low 30s

    ​Cadillac is already there (your metric: starting price of $33K). No 'need to go' ; already there… and has been there for what- 3 years?

    Mercedes "had" to go to the high $20s - pffft; how embarassing & desperate-appearing.

     

    Class 6/7 trucks aren't passenger vehicles, they're commercial. Sprinters are retail sales, and a bunch are passenger buses, which is why they get grouped with the cars & SUVs.

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Personally, I'd rather see the heritage names but I know those won't fly since they are trying to be international..

    And yet the people that sell the Ghost, Phantom, Mulsanne, Panamera, Cayenne, Aventador, Gallardo, Rapide, Range Rover, and Quattroporte are international.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Personally, I'd rather see the heritage names but I know those won't fly since they are trying to be international..

    And yet the people that sell the Ghost, Phantom, Mulsanne, Panamera, Cayenne, Aventador, Gallardo, Rapide, Range Rover, and Quattroporte are international.  

     

    Maybe 'international' was the wrong word... the reality is that Audi, BMW and Mercedes Benz use alphanumerics..Cadillac is trying to emulate the leaders rather than lead..as are Lexus and Infiniti.

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    But BMW/MB's alphanumerics SUCK. Not to mention, both brands just reshuffled their 'systems'.

     

    Everyone loves to trot out the tired 'Cadillac is only following' when all the other regularly-pointed to lux brands just follow each other. It's called playing the segment.

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    Or they could do something like CS* for the coupes...CS4, CS6, etc...  and then have something like a XS5 for a sport utility coupe...(X4 or X6 competitor).

    Who is all this BMW shadowing supposed to appeal to, that's going to sign for a Cadillac? These folks want a misshapen & bloated 4-dr hatchback, they can march over to BMW for their fat dozen sedans and kindergarten naming schemes.

     

    Again: Cadillac does not "Need" to answer all 43 models at BMW.

     

    Well, they are trying to compete w/ the big 3 (Audi, BMW, MB) so it's natural they are going to try and match them at some level...maybe not in lock step, but be competitive in the major niches...

     

    They ARE competing, but Cadillac's 'upper hand' is that they DON'T have to offer 43 models; they can pick & chose.

    Far too often, people think "competing" means matching every tiny, worthless, niche model that others do. That's not 'competing', it's shadowing.

    I'm arguing elsewhere, right now, with a guy who thinks the 3-series is "much larger" than the ATS, when they are virtually identical in size. These sort of folk will never be happy with even what they suggest Cadillac should do, because first & foremost they will NEVER be Cadillac customers (the badge is wrong). It's a colossal waste of time & money to pursue these people, with these fringe, niche models even the other brands' customers don't buy (IE: the 1-series, or the R8, for example).

     

    There HAS to be a strong, long-term vision for the core models, above ALL else.

     

     

    A 3 Series and ATS are the same size. The 3 Series just has better packaging. The back seat is much roomier in the BMW.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    Or they could do something like CS* for the coupes...CS4, CS6, etc...  and then have something like a XS5 for a sport utility coupe...(X4 or X6 competitor).

    Who is all this BMW shadowing supposed to appeal to, that's going to sign for a Cadillac? These folks want a misshapen & bloated 4-dr hatchback, they can march over to BMW for their fat dozen sedans and kindergarten naming schemes.

     

    Again: Cadillac does not "Need" to answer all 43 models at BMW.

     

    I agree.  BMW's history is the 3-series, I actually thought the coupes and convertibles should have stayed 3-series.  That is their bread and butter product, variants of it are a good thing, but I don't like the 4-series split, and a 4-door 4-series is just stupid.

     

    I also don't get why Cadillac wants to be so much like BMW.  It is like they sat around the product development table at Cadillac and said Joe says "we need a BMW X5 competitor."  Then Sally says "oh I have a great idea, lets make an SUV the same size and call it XT5!  Then buyers will know it matches up to a BMW X5, and by putting a "T" in there we can't get sued for trademark infringement."  Then Joe says "great idea Sally, and we can make an XT1 and an XT3 as well to compete with the X1 and X3!!!"

     

    It's pathetic.  Even in their own brand "Escalade" is there most recognizable and successful product.  Yet they don't want to follow use of word names, or pay homage to the Eldorados and Fleetwoods of the past (which were mostly good cars until the mid 80s).  This copy BMW will get them no where.  Cadillac should be Cadillac.

     

    I don't think they need 43 models, but they need 3 crossovers plus Escalade on the SUV side, 4 car lines and some sort of sports car.

     

     

     

    I very much agree with this. Cadillac building 10 year old BMW's obviously isn't working. They are going to have to find the right balance of driving dynamics, luxury, style, and identity. When you are perceived to be inferior to the competition in any regard, you have to outdo your competitors in those aspects. Not almost match them, not even do just as good. You have to beat them. BMW, Mercedes, and Audi are building too many models. And they're cutting too many corners in too many products. It will catch up with them if they don't get it in check. Cadillac does NOT need to follow down the same path.

     

    I personally think a sub-ATS is unneeded. They need to continue to improve the ATS as it is, build a proper S Class competitor, and something above that. Then some sort of sports/super halo car. As for CUV's, 2 is plenty. 3 at absolute most.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    Or they could do something like CS* for the coupes...CS4, CS6, etc...  and then have something like a XS5 for a sport utility coupe...(X4 or X6 competitor).

    Who is all this BMW shadowing supposed to appeal to, that's going to sign for a Cadillac? These folks want a misshapen & bloated 4-dr hatchback, they can march over to BMW for their fat dozen sedans and kindergarten naming schemes.

     

    Again: Cadillac does not "Need" to answer all 43 models at BMW.

     

    Well, they are trying to compete w/ the big 3 (Audi, BMW, MB) so it's natural they are going to try and match them at some level...maybe not in lock step, but be competitive in the major niches...

     

    They ARE competing, but Cadillac's 'upper hand' is that they DON'T have to offer 43 models; they can pick & chose.

    Far too often, people think "competing" means matching every tiny, worthless, niche model that others do. That's not 'competing', it's shadowing.

    I'm arguing elsewhere, right now, with a guy who thinks the 3-series is "much larger" than the ATS, when they are virtually identical in size. These sort of folk will never be happy with even what they suggest Cadillac should do, because first & foremost they will NEVER be Cadillac customers (the badge is wrong). It's a colossal waste of time & money to pursue these people, with these fringe, niche models even the other brands' customers don't buy (IE: the 1-series, or the R8, for example).

     

    There HAS to be a strong, long-term vision for the core models, above ALL else.

     

     

     

     

    If the argument is going on where I think it is be careful.. They don't like GM lovers over there. 

     

    I agree with your assessment on the lack of need for Cadillac to go full-line.. but in I have to add that the at least need to provide the basics within the segment. 

     

    Minimum 6 Cars, 

    CT3 (ATS), CT5(CTS), CT6, CT8, niche CT7 (Elmiraj)Coupe, CT2 Sports Car.  Within the CT3 and CT5 lines, there be a coupe and a wagon... or at least a coupe for the smaller and a wagon for the mid

     

    Minimum 5 SUV/CUVs

     

    XT3 (Keep current SRX and give it a nose job and some of the new tech)

    XT5

    XT6 (LWB C1xx the size of the Lambda

    Escalade

    Escalade Prime (Think H2, but capable)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    True Drew, about ST...

     

    I LOVED the name STS...but I loved the name Seville Touring Sedan even better. 

    Cut short to Seville is still best in my opinion.

     

    Its grateful that the powers that may be cut short the STS moniker, or else we would have STDs running around today for other model names....

     

    So yeah, I dont like the ST# either. But...I guess where their is a will, there is a way.

     

    It was a purely hypothetical designation that I made up while waiting for a flight.  But it's true... there is no reason the sedans have to be CT and the coupes do too...The coupes/convertibles can be anything. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Cmicasa- I agree w/ your lineup, but the ATS need to stay at the very bottom… so any 'CT2' needs to slot above it (CT4).

    Also agree with 'at least 1 wagon & 1 coupe… but more would be nice. I would love to see, right now, the ATS coupe & a CTS coupe together in the catalog.

    Also, you mentioned "at least 6 SUVs but your list shows 4, and IMO that's perfect. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Cmicasa- I agree w/ your lineup, but the ATS need to stay at the very bottom… so any 'CT2' needs to slot above it (CT4).

    Also agree with 'at least 1 wagon & 1 coupe… but more would be nice. I would love to see, right now, the ATS coupe & a CTS coupe together in the catalog.

    Also, you mentioned "at least 6 SUVs but your list shows 4, and IMO that's perfect. 

     

     

     

    Actually I meant to type 5.. and it shows 5, as the Escalade PRIME would not be the Escalade as we kno it.. but more along the lines of a capable Hummer H2, ostentatious as hell. 

     

    The CT2,.. well I say that because it wouldn't be a sedan but a sport coupe/convert about the size of the Sky. In fact.. if it were OK to do it. I would dust off the Sky, change the fascia, add the Alpha platform under it and put it on lots as a Cadillac

     

    2007_saturn_sky_in_phoenix_az_2090055421

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ellinghouse says there are going to be 2 crossovers below XT5 and a 3 row crossover above XT5.  He said there could even be a 5th crossover in the line-up, that would also be above XT5.  I am curious how they price the XT5, because if they price it against the Lexus RX it is going to be hard to get 2 vehicles below that.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ellinghouse says there are going to be 2 crossovers below XT5 and a 3 row crossover above XT5.  He said there could even be a 5th crossover in the line-up, that would also be above XT5.  I am curious how they price the XT5, because if they price it against the Lexus RX it is going to be hard to get 2 vehicles below that.  

     

    I dunno.. the idea I think is purveyed in the quote:

     

     

     

    Ellinghaus confirms that the XT5 will be bracketed by a larger, three-row model and a smaller, compact entry. And the fourth? “We can envisage an even more compact [model], but we can also envisage something between a three-row SUV/crossover-derived car and the Escalade,” he says.

    “The Escalade is so huge, and it’s different because it’s truck-based, that if the growth of the SUV segment continues, I really think there is space for maybe even two smaller cars than the XT5 and maybe even two larger ones.” So five in total.

    “But that’s the ultimate range that I can envisage—far out. The first step is the smaller one, and that’s because compact SUVs are hot. Look at the X1, look at the Q3. And then the second priority is to close the gap between XT5 and Escalade.”

    C&D

     

     

    As to the underling CUV. I still say that the SRX is still capable of being sold with a quick refresh on the front.. and a nice update to the inside tech, such as Apple CP and Android Car. The XT5's size internally is significant enough to do this over the SRX

     

    xt5srx.jpg

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As to the underling CUV. I still say that the SRX is still capable of being sold with a quick refresh on the front.. and a nice update to the inside tech, such as Apple CP and Android Car. The XT5's size internally is significant enough to do this over the SRX

     

    xt5srx.jpg

     

    So are you saying to have the current SRX refreshed and then sell it as an XT4 or XT3?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ^ Yeah.

     

    The only ones that are making sense to me are competition to the X3, X5, X7? and then the Escalade but I actually don't put that up against anything else because it is just what it is, Escalade. So I'm only really seeing 3 CUVs. I could see adding something tiny like the X1 down the road as CAFE tightens up and the brand gains a little more equity but I don't see where a 5th CUV would go. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 CUV's for Cadillac is too much. Sorry, it just is.

     

    Remember, think globally.  Some of the CUVs/SUVs that will sell great here will sell terrible in Europe and China.  Some of the CUVs/SUVs that sell great in China and Europe won't sell that great here.   Cadillac needs a full portfolio to cover all of those bases.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As to the underling CUV. I still say that the SRX is still capable of being sold with a quick refresh on the front.. and a nice update to the inside tech, such as Apple CP and Android Car. The XT5's size internally is significant enough to do this over the SRX

     

    xt5srx.jpg

    So are you saying to have the current SRX refreshed and then sell it as an XT4 or XT3?

    Yes.. At least til the "real" XT3/4 arrived.. Which will be 2 years minimum. The SRX is still competitive, but some refreshment wouldn't hurt. Sorta like the one did to the Lambdas in 13

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    XT5 should be priced $10,000 above SRX, the XT3 would be smaller like ATS size and priced where the current SRX is, that still allows for a compact $32k crossover around 178 inches long. Make a 3 row crossover and that gives you 4 total.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So I wonder what Cadillac will call their EV line when they launch it? Should they have their own designation like what BMW did or more like MB where they just take existing models and have an EV version? Should it be a sub category all on it's own under existing categories?

     

    Cars are - CT

     

    CUVs are - XT

     

    Escalade is Escalade

     

    EV cars are - ?

     

    EV CUVs are - ?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So I wonder what Cadillac will call their EV line when they launch it? Should they have their own designation like what BMW did or more like MB where they just take existing models and have an EV version? Should it be a sub category all on it's own under existing categories?

     

    Cars are - CT

     

    CUVs are - XT

     

    Escalade is Escalade

     

    EV cars are - ?

     

    EV CUVs are - ?

    Why do they need something special for EV cars/CUVs? Why not just continue with the CTe# or CT#e ? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    So I wonder what Cadillac will call their EV line when they launch it? Should they have their own designation like what BMW did or more like MB where they just take existing models and have an EV version? Should it be a sub category all on it's own under existing categories?

     

    Cars are - CT

     

    CUVs are - XT

     

    Escalade is Escalade

     

    EV cars are - ?

     

    EV CUVs are - ?

    Why do they need something special for EV cars/CUVs? Why not just continue with the CTe# or CT#e ? 

     

    That is the whole point of posting this, what do people think Cadillac should do when it comes to pure electric auto's?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    5 CUV's for Cadillac is too much. Sorry, it just is.

     

    Remember, think globally.  Some of the CUVs/SUVs that will sell great here will sell terrible in Europe and China.  Some of the CUVs/SUVs that sell great in China and Europe won't sell that great here.   Cadillac needs a full portfolio to cover all of those bases.

     

     

     

    I thought that's what Buick was for.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    So I wonder what Cadillac will call their EV line when they launch it? Should they have their own designation like what BMW did or more like MB where they just take existing models and have an EV version? Should it be a sub category all on it's own under existing categories?

     

    Cars are - CT

     

    CUVs are - XT

     

    Escalade is Escalade

     

    EV cars are - ?

     

    EV CUVs are - ?

    Why do they need something special for EV cars/CUVs? Why not just continue with the CTe# or CT#e ? 

     

    That is the whole point of posting this, what do people think Cadillac should do when it comes to pure electric auto's?

     

    I see what you mean and it does get a little fuzzy when you have a stand alone EV which shares nothing with a gasoline car. My initial thought was, " Electric CT6...throw an 'e' in there. CT6e" but I wasn't thinking of a stand alone car like the ELR which isn't an electric version of anything. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    5 CUV's for Cadillac is too much. Sorry, it just is.

     

    Remember, think globally.  Some of the CUVs/SUVs that will sell great here will sell terrible in Europe and China.  Some of the CUVs/SUVs that sell great in China and Europe won't sell that great here.   Cadillac needs a full portfolio to cover all of those bases.

     

     

     

    I thought that's what Buick was for.

     

     

    Cadillac is going there too.  Cadillac sells at a much higher price point in other countries, particularly China.  Buick actually has models priced below the Verano in China that we don't get.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So I wonder what Cadillac will call their EV line when they launch it? Should they have their own designation like what BMW did or more like MB where they just take existing models and have an EV version? Should it be a sub category all on it's own under existing categories?

     

    Cars are - CT

     

    CUVs are - XT

     

    Escalade is Escalade

     

    EV cars are - ?

     

    EV CUVs are - ?

     

     

     

    I hear that a SUPER/Sports CAR is in the works after 2020.. that will be the "STx" Line

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This could prove good for a small Chevy coupe or even a Buick/Opel/Holden. 

    I really don't think many really understand how much Cadillac is going to change in the next few years. The ATS and CTS will see major changes as will the XT5 and CT6 at some point. These are not products of the present management and they are wanting better style and quality so if you like what we have it should only get better. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    So I wonder what Cadillac will call their EV line when they launch it? Should they have their own designation like what BMW did or more like MB where they just take existing models and have an EV version? Should it be a sub category all on it's own under existing categories?

     

    Cars are - CT

     

    CUVs are - XT

     

    Escalade is Escalade

     

    EV cars are - ?

     

    EV CUVs are - ?

     

     

     

    I hear that a SUPER/Sports CAR is in the works after 2020.. that will be the "STx" Line

     

    But what about the XTS?  or the Dodge Charger SXT?  or the SRX?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I am not aware of travel cases for internal drives. Usually you have the drive and once you have made sure you own static electricity is discharged on your body, open the computer and unplug the power cable and data cable to the HD. Then you unscrew the screws holding the drive in. Put the drive into an Anti-Static bag and then usually into a box that has foam padding on all sides to protect the drive and then tape it up to close it.  With both drives in their proper storage bags, you can then have both drives in between foam insulation for handling any dropping of the box, etc. Pack them in a box and tape shut, should then easily handle going through your carry on or checked in luggage. To ship a hard drive, you need to: Secure the hard drive in its original packaging or anti-static bag. If you don't have an anti-static bag, place the drive into a zipped freezer bag to prevent any moisture getting into the drive during transit. Sandwich the drive between foam or wrap it in bubble wrap to absorb any minor shocks. Put the hard drive in a padded shipping box. Close and seal the box. Label your package. Amazon.com : hard drive shipping box This is pretty much all you need.
    • Either a co-pilot first time landing or something truly went wrong on the plane.
    • The incoming rectangular lamps on many GM cars in that era made them much more attractive.  They made a big difference. Now, as far the powerplant went, the notion of 500 cubic inches was mindboggling even during the malaise era.  If you want to see someone's jaw drop, tell a European that their engines have 8200 cc or 8.2 liters.  For those who aren't driving the occasional Mustang or Camaro you see, they freak out at anything over 2,500 or 3,000 cc.
    • Thank you for the response. I want to reinstall them into the computers, especially the "newer" one.  The old one has been a real champ.   The reason for not leaving them in the desktop is that the basic tower might have to be transported ... and not by me.  That means it will be out of my possession for a while.  Since the HDs would be traveling with me, they'll have to get scanned through airport security a time or two.  I'm guessing that shouldn't mess with the data.   I've already backed up the C drive on several large 1 TB portable hard drives.  I don't want to touch the basic functions and files on the computers since I don't know how that all works.  I stay away from the drives and files I am not familiar with. I tend to donate other things to charity.   I did give the Regal I once owned to charity.   A good friend told me that, about a month or two later, he saw it being driven around the city by its new owner and we had a good laugh. This is what I want to do.  I'm just trying to figure out if the guy or gal at Office Depot can size a case based on looking up the unit and the HD in it.  Any ideas on that part?  Or should I do that and approximate the size and weight of the part to get the cases?
    • I'm wondering about a lot of things related to this.  I am sure that, sadly, the passengers inside were jolted.  This is way different from a rough landing. Why was it even necessary to do it?  What was going on at the airport property at that time?  How does one even pull this off?  I've seen some vids of where they barely touch and then go off again, but this one looks way more complicated.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings