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

    Ladies & Gents, I Give You The Cadillac XTS

    gallery_51_134_8996.jpg

    The picture you see here is the brand new 2013 Cadillac XTS. The picture was accidentally posted on Cadillac's home page today before being taken off. Luckily, a reader from Jalopnik captured the picture for all of us to see. Since then, Cadillac has confirmed this will be the XTS we see next week at the LA Auto Show.

    The production model is almost a carbon copy of the XTS Platinum concept shown at last year's Detroit Auto Show, with a different design for head and foglights. The XTS will also have Cadillac's new CUE infotainment system.

    Source: Jalopnik

    Edit: GM has since officially released the XTS photograph. I've updated the photo in this article with the GM Media supplied one - DD

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Reminds a lot of the Sonata but with Cadillac styling cues..I'm wondering about the dimensions..is the wheelbase as short as the LaCrosse or longer? I see differences from the concept in the greenhouse (now a 6-light design) and side contours...

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I like the grille and headlamp treatment but there are a couple things (since the concept really) that I'm not as big a fan of, mainly the short rear deck and the opera windows behind the door. The former takes away from the presence of the car and the latter is an un-Cadillac styling cue. Nonetheless, if that's all I've got to complain about all in all it's probably a pretty good car LOL. Freakishly better looking than that sack of potatoes they call a Lincoln MKS.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The blue hairs are gonna need a spotter for parking at the Denny's due to that unnecessarily long hood. pfffft. :P

    Anyhoo, I want to see it in a gallery of live photos at the show before I make too many more jokes.

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, that just looks jacked up. What's with the headlight looking like it fits against the sheetmetal so poorly? Looks like huge gaps, whether they actually are or not.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, that just looks jacked up. What's with the headlight looking like it fits against the sheetmetal so poorly? Looks like huge gaps, whether they actually are or not.

    GMI has a HighRes Picture that GM released to them tonight. If you zoom in you can see that the "big gap" is actually what the edges of the headlamp look like at a distance.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, it's time to drop my two cents into the cup here, so be forewarned: some of you will not like what I have to say.

    In the past I know I wasn't the biggest fan of the XTS concept, but after seeing the production version ... well, I think I can honestly say I appreciate it far more now and would rather have it back. I loathe what they've decided to build for production here.

    The production car does seem to follow the essence set by the XTS concept car, but it's also a complete deviation from it at the same time, to the point where it's almost a different car entirely. It's rather bizarre seeing how the concept car looked virtually production ready, aside from the side view mirrors. In hindsight and contrast, compared to the production car, the concept looked like you could manage to pass it off as a $55,000 car. The production car, however, looks like it might would belong in the $30,000 to $40,000 segment (and that is being generous to a degree).

    It's not completely irrational hate, either. Sure, I do have one photo to go by, but that one photo tells me quite a lot.

    The original concept car had a sharper, knife-edged presence, a trait typical of Cadillac these days. The production car, on the other hand, is considerably softer than the vehicle that set its foundation. It's almost quite drastic, really; there's far more marshmallow creme in the mix now than concrete.

    The glasshouse has been stretched in ways it didn't have to be stretched. Due to that change, the sideview mirrors no longer mount in front of the front windows, and a nasty piece of square plastic is in that area instead. The concept car also did not have a sixth window, another side effect from needlessly changing the greenhouse, which only serves to clutter up the design in the case of the XTS production car. The rear side glass should have been left integral.

    The crease that ran below the lower window line has been needlessly raised upward, which will undoubtedly make the production car look a touch slouchy in profile when compared to the original concept car. The door handles are, as a result, moved upward as well and lose their nice, teardrop scallops in favor of something more parts-bin friendly. There was also a nice isosceles crease near the bottom of the doors on the concept car. The production XTS throws that nice touch completely in the trash and chooses to substitute it with what seems to be a cheap piece of flat door molding instead.

    The headlights seem more fitting on a pre-2010 Ford Fusion and the black trim that runs their perimeter gives the impression of nine mile-wide panel gaps. The changes to the foglights and their surrounds are, no doubt, tacky, tasteless, and pointless. The grille, which looked sturdy on the concept, now looks brittle and cheap on the production car, with it having a nasty gap above it's upper banner.

    If you think this is all exaggeration, think again. Here's the concept and production car side by side. Look for yourself.

    cadillac_xts_platinum_concept_press_images_007.jpg?9707a5

    2013-cadillac-xts-official-preview.jpg?9707a5

    From a design perspective, this looks to me like the inbred bastard offspring of a Saturn Aura and a Chevrolet Impala. It's absolutely terrible. It is not a Cadillac nor is it what they should aspire to build. I hope for GM and Cadillac's sake they don't try to abandon the Ciel concept like they did the Sixteen.

    Edited by black-knight
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What an awkward, unfortunate looking car. Sorry to sound like smk here, but this looks like a MKS/S80/RL-type second-tier luxury sedan. Its Epsilon II roots are obvious.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I want to see the rear. The production version looks to have a hump in the rear decklid. The black lines around the headlights make it look like it's already been in a collision.

    Honestly? I think someone at Cadillac got a little too inspired with the swooshy profile of the Mercedes CLS...and typical of middle America, the taste level with regards to the "bling" is just so trailer park kla$$y.

    Less is more, but then again, the coasts know that. My father is so buying this when it comes out it isn't even funny--he took a 2000 DHS and a 2006 DTS and put on canvas roofs, gold packages, blingy chrome rims with gold center caps, and custom grilles with gold and blingy chrome, The dealership that sold him those cars has since had its Cadillac franchise revoked.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think I will wait till I see it in person first. like many cars GM has done of late they present so much better in person. The CTS coupe looks ok in photo's but presents so much stronger in person.

    But like I have said this car was not going to be a home run but will make money and not harm Cadillac till they get the car they really want. God knows it is an improvement over the DTS.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I was so ready to like this car. I really was. I knew something did not seem right when I saw all the spy photos. I do not like the rear door and that window behind the rear door design. That is called a opera window or quarter window. I do not like where it is placed because so many cars have that same six window design that looks like an after thought. The Chevrolet Impala has had it for years, The Toyota Avalon used to have it, the Hyundai Sonata has it, Audi uses it on every last sedan it makes. It is too common and over done. The last time Cadillac had a six window design like this was 1976. I am not a fan of the headlights. It looks like one projector beam headlight on each side of the grille work. Not a fan of that. I think a car should have two headlights on each side of the grille work. The sides with the swoopy line looks too much like Hyundai Sonata and Mercedes Benz E Class. The inside is nice, but of course no bench seat and the seat controls are most likely on the side of the seat instead of being on the door. Not everyone wants bucket seats. GM and everyone else who makes cars seems to think so. The car looks more Asian than American Cadillac. This tells me this car is going to be exported. It looks ready for the Chinese market. I think the concept car looked better.

    I do feel it will be a hit and a success in the market.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    After staring at this long enough, I think the XTS looks like someone took the EpII platform, added an ATS rear and front and a '91 Caprice roofline.

    The ever-shortening trunk and hood just does not make this look prestigious.

    Art & Science has outlasted its stay... and GM squandered the time it had to exploit it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I posted this in the other XTS thread and will post it here, as it appears as Cadillac has laid down a bunt with this car.

    Looks huge and tall like a Lincoln MKS, and the grille looks a lot like the STS, which is a boring car. To me, they make an MKS with a Cadillac grille, this is lame. I am not a fan of this trend to make headlights go back halfway over the hood either, and multiple automakers seem to be doing that recently. Looks rather slab sided with a high belt line, aside from the one character line they put in it, trunk looks short and stubby, that car is sad.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Judging by just this one pic and the concept pic together, it looks like the production version is less attractive than the concept, IMO. One detail that I noticed is that little triangle on the rear door upper window frame, which is a weak copout that so many cars have..and the triangle in front of the door at the base of the A-pillar? Predictable and common.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am not a fan of the high belt line look in general, it sort of works on the Chrysler 300. But to me the MKS is a tall, bulky car, the Buick LaCrosse looks very tall to me also, the dimensions just don't seem right. I think the XTS will be the same. And big sedans don't have to look bulky, the Jaguar XJ for example is a big car and it looks sporty, athletic and ready to pounce.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    First thing we all need to do here is let go of the concept as it is just that a concept. It has things and features that do not easily translate into production due to MFG, cost effective, quality etc.

    If something did not make production there is a reason.

    As for passing final judgment here I will wait till I see the real production car. Once I have seen it, sat in it, seen the option list and driven one I can make better judgment on this vs just looking a one photo.

    As of now I am not hating the car but I still know too little to pass similar judgements some already have. I also plan to keep in mind what this cars mission is and not expect a 7 series or AMG beater.

    Like stated before I too think China will eat this one up and it will make money here in several roles. This is not a flagship and should not be expected to fill that role.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't have much to add to what's been said (Hyundaiesque side sculpting, poor proportions, unfortunate six-window greenhouse), but I suspect the car will look better in the flesh than the photo suggests. A positive note: no tired front fender vent. But cover up the overly ornate grille and the vertical taillights, and you'd be hard-pressed to figure out that this was even a Cadillac.

    On the bright side, it's great to see 98 post again here!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am not so sure China will eat this up, for one it is huge, and secondly, they don't buy that many Cadillacs. Cadillac sold 2,000 cars in China last month, half of those were SUVs. Mercedes sold 16,500, BMW sold 18,000 and Audi sold 27,700. Although with those Audi sales, it does seem that the Chinese like bland, boring, FWD and AWD sedans with stubby trunks.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Another change I noticed that only serves to further cheapen the car's appearance is the loss of the contrasting grille work that the concept XTS had. I don't understand this one, considering the CTS and Escalade Platinum both have it.

    First thing we all need to do here is let go of the concept as it is just that a concept. It has things and features that do not easily translate into production due to MFG, cost effective, quality etc.

    If something did not make production there is a reason.

    I'm not inclined to agree here. The concept car was, reportedly, based around the EPII architecture itself, meaning that cowl height, hard points, and things of that nature regarding the design were supposed to be production friendly. The only details that I see that would have to be changed for production from the original concept would be the internal lighting elements of the headlamps (not their shape) and the size of the sideview mirrors. (Additionally, certain aspects of the interior would undoubtedly have to be changed as well, but that's another story for right now.)

    No, instead I think all of those unnecessary changes were made so that the hard points of the car could more easily translate to and be shared with the upcoming EPII Impala, forsaking what little exclusivity the concept had to offer. Mark my words on this; it's little more than a '77 Seville for the twenty-first century.

    If something didn't make production, there is a reason and that reason is bureaucracy.

    As for passing final judgment here I will wait till I see the real production car. Once I have seen it, sat in it, seen the option list and driven one I can make better judgment on this vs just looking a one photo.

    Like I said, that one photo tells quite a lot. Put it up next to the concept car and the bigger picture is right there for you to see, plain as daylight.

    As of now I am not hating the car but I still know too little to pass similar judgements some already have. I also plan to keep in mind what this cars mission is and not expect a 7 series or AMG beater.

    Again, you don't need a full press-kit to analyze this thing from a design standpoint. It's a mess and it's been needlessly tampered with from the original concept car.

    As for what powertains this car will have and how it will drive, no one has made any criticisms regarding those two areas in this thread.

    Regarding it competing with the 7-Series and S-Class, well, we knew when Fritz the Ditz introduced the original concept car last year this would be anything but a competitor to those cars. That's why there was so many people here up in arms about it, people were worried that GM would position this car above the CTS and call it quits, especially considering the ongoing uncertainty of a future large, rear-drive Cadillac and also when it was revealed it was not only going to replace the DTS but the STS as well.

    I think we all realize that this car is competing with the Lincoln MKS, Acura RL, and Lexus ES. That's also troublesome because those are cars that are in the Buick LaCrosse's territory and that car has done a wonderful job of going after those buyers. Honestly, the LaCrosse is a much nicer car than the XTS. I just hope that the XTS doesn't somehow sabotage the footing the LaCrosse has managed to make here.

    Like stated before I too think China will eat this one up and it will make money here in several roles. This is not a flagship and should not be expected to fill that role.

    I'm not so sure GM's going to see a big return on this one in America, if they're building it solely to get old Ma and Pa Kettle to trade in their Devilles and DTS's. As for China, that's really anyone's guess.

    Yes, it's not a flagship. But that doesn't mean the original concept should have been thrown away like it has. The XTS is a Cadillac and some people, regardless if they intend to buy one or not, hold the marquee to standards higher than what this production XTS has been designed and (perhaps) built to.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think we all realize that this car is competing with the Lincoln MKS, Acura RL, and Lexus ES. That's also troublesome because those are cars that are in the Buick LaCrosse's territory and that car has done a wonderful job of going after those buyers.

    XTS will probably compete with those 3 cars, but 2 of them are sales duds, and the ES350 is on decline. And the LaCrosse doesn't really compete with those 3 cars. The LaCrosse competes with the Taurus, Avalon, Chrysler 300, maybe the Maxima. LaCrosse originally started under $27k, now it is near $30k so figure a $30-40k price spread. The ES350 starts at $37k and is closer in size to a Regal or CTS.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Another change I noticed that only serves to further cheapen the car's appearance is the loss of the contrasting grille work that the concept XTS had. I don't understand this one, considering the CTS and Escalade Platinum both have it.

    First thing we all need to do here is let go of the concept as it is just that a concept. It has things and features that do not easily translate into production due to MFG, cost effective, quality etc.

    If something did not make production there is a reason.

    I'm not inclined to agree here. The concept car was, reportedly, based around the EPII architecture itself, meaning that cowl height, hard points, and things of that nature regarding the design were supposed to be production friendly. The only details that I see that would have to be changed for production from the original concept would be the internal lighting elements of the headlamps (not their shape) and the size of the sideview mirrors. (Additionally, certain aspects of the interior would undoubtedly have to be changed as well, but that's another story for right now.)

    No, instead I think all of those unnecessary changes were made so that the hard points of the car could more easily translate to and be shared with the upcoming EPII Impala, forsaking what little exclusivity the concept had to offer. Mark my words on this; it's little more than a '77 Seville for the twenty-first century.

    If something didn't make production, there is a reason and that reason is bureaucracy.

    As for passing final judgment here I will wait till I see the real production car. Once I have seen it, sat in it, seen the option list and driven one I can make better judgment on this vs just looking a one photo.

    Like I said, that one photo tells quite a lot. Put it up next to the concept car and the bigger picture is right there for you to see, plain as daylight.

    As of now I am not hating the car but I still know too little to pass similar judgements some already have. I also plan to keep in mind what this cars mission is and not expect a 7 series or AMG beater.

    Again, you don't need a full press-kit to analyze this thing from a design standpoint. It's a mess and it's been needlessly tampered with from the original concept car.

    As for what powertains this car will have and how it will drive, no one has made any criticisms regarding those two areas in this thread.

    Regarding it competing with the 7-Series and S-Class, well, we knew when Fritz the Ditz introduced the original concept car last year this would be anything but a competitor to those cars. That's why there was so many people here up in arms about it, people were worried that GM would position this car above the CTS and call it quits, especially considering the ongoing uncertainty of a future large, rear-drive Cadillac and also when it was revealed it was not only going to replace the DTS but the STS as well.

    I think we all realize that this car is competing with the Lincoln MKS, Acura RL, and Lexus ES. That's also troublesome because those are cars that are in the Buick LaCrosse's territory and that car has done a wonderful job of going after those buyers. Honestly, the LaCrosse is a much nicer car than the XTS. I just hope that the XTS doesn't somehow sabotage the footing the LaCrosse has managed to make here.

    Like stated before I too think China will eat this one up and it will make money here in several roles. This is not a flagship and should not be expected to fill that role.

    I'm not so sure GM's going to see a big return on this one in America, if they're building it solely to get old Ma and Pa Kettle to trade in their Devilles and DTS's. As for China, that's really anyone's guess.

    Yes, it's not a flagship. But that doesn't mean the original concept should have been thrown away like it has. The XTS is a Cadillac and some people, regardless if they intend to buy one or not, hold the marquee to standards higher than what this production XTS has been designed and (perhaps) built to.

    I just want to have an informed opionion. I am not a fan of this class of car but I am willing to give it a shot and to be fair I need to see it in person first. Too many have made harsh comments about a car only to have to take back or change their opinion later once the car is seen in person and does well on the market. .

    It's kind of like me forming an opinion on you. I would rather meet you first vs Just hating you based on seeing you in one drunken photo on facebook! LOL!

    As for the concept vs production car. I think most are smart enough to understand the need for many changes. There is no need to explain on further.

    I look at cars like this as how the public will react and if there is a market segement to support it. I see there will be enough of each for this car if they keep the price down untill they can get to the kind of car they really want here. It was either this car for 4-5 yerars in the show room or an empty space in the showroom for the next 4-5 years. It will make money and do well till the right car is ready.

    Livery sales alone will make back any investment here. The Ma and Pa buyers need cars too. As for China it will do well. It will return better than average MPG and the back seat I suspect will be the best seat in the house in their version. Most owners in this class do not drive they are driven there.

    The bottom line is this is not a Cheers and Gear kind of car. I only see a few here that would be interested in this kind of car. But there are more people out there than just us and they buy a lot more cars too.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I just want to have an informed opinion. I am not a fan of this class of car but I am willing to give it a shot and to be fair I need to see it in person first. Too many have made harsh comments about a car only to have to take back or change their opinion later once the car is seen in person and does well on the market.

    I can understand having an informed opinion about the car, sure. As I've said, though, the one photo we've got is enough to form an opinion on this car from a design standpoint and regarding how the changes made from the concept car affect the design overall.

    Once again, I've only condemned the car from a design standpoint.

    It's kind of like me forming an opinion on you. I would rather meet you first vs Just hating you based on seeing you in one drunken photo on facebook! LOL!

    Well, no ... not really. While you can't form a rounded opinion about my behavior and personality from one photograph, you can certainly form an opinion about my appearance (e.g. "He's got a nice smile" or "He looks like he might be a bit of a slob").

    No one here, myself included, is making any firm assumptions about the car aside from how it has been designed. Again, notice no one has said in this thread that the car "is going to drive like shit" or "will be weak and underpowered." We don't have any hard data to go on here, hence why no one has said anything regarding those two aspects of the car, myself included.

    As for the concept vs production car. I think most are smart enough to understand the need for many changes. There is no need to explain on further.

    Really? Again, I'm going to have to disagree with you here unless you can explain why so much had to be changed from the production-ready concept car.

    I've given my explanation here and -- I'm sorry -- that's the only thing that makes logical sense. It's certainly not because that the original concept car would be expensive to produce on the outside.

    I look at cars like this as how the public will react and if there is a market segement to support it. I see there will be enough of each for this car if they keep the price down untill they can get to the kind of car they really want here. It was either this car for 4-5 yerars in the show room or an empty space in the showroom for the next 4-5 years. It will make money and do well till the right car is ready.

    Livery sales alone will make back any investment here. The Ma and Pa buyers need cars too. As for China it will do well. It will return better than average MPG and the back seat I suspect will be the best seat in the house in their version. Most owners in this class do not drive they are driven there.

    I don't know if the general public will get behind this one if it's going to max out beyond $50k price wise.

    Then again, it's really too early to assume anything about this car sales wise. That doesn't mean I won't speculate, though.

    However, I will guarantee this: if this car does not deliver on all expectations regarding fuel economy, an involving driving experience, interior fit and finish, the level of standard content, and overall quality then the press will crucify this car, Cadillac, and GM as a result. They had better hope that they've built a good enough stop-gap until they decide to produce the Ciel for general consumption (but I'm not holding my breath regarding the Ciel), otherwise this car will haunt them until they pull the plug on it.

    Regarding China, I really think this car will consistently lose out to the Park Avenue. Just saying and speculating.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I just want to have an informed opinion. I am not a fan of this class of car but I am willing to give it a shot and to be fair I need to see it in person first. Too many have made harsh comments about a car only to have to take back or change their opinion later once the car is seen in person and does well on the market.

    I can understand having an informed opinion about the car, sure. As I've said, though, the one photo we've got is enough to form an opinion on this car from a design standpoint and regarding how the changes made from the concept car affect the design overall.

    Once again, I've only condemned the car from a design standpoint.

    It's kind of like me forming an opinion on you. I would rather meet you first vs Just hating you based on seeing you in one drunken photo on facebook! LOL!

    Well, no ... not really. While you can't form a rounded opinion about my behavior and personality from one photograph, you can certainly form an opinion about my appearance (e.g. "He's got a nice smile" or "He looks like he might be a bit of a slob").

    No one here, myself included, is making any firm assumptions about the car aside from how it has been designed. Again, notice no one has said in this thread that the car "is going to drive like shit" or "will be weak and underpowered." We don't have any hard data to go on here, hence why no one has said anything regarding those two aspects of the car, myself included.

    As for the concept vs production car. I think most are smart enough to understand the need for many changes. There is no need to explain on further.

    Really? Again, I'm going to have to disagree with you here unless you can explain why so much had to be changed from the production-ready concept car.

    I've given my explanation here and -- I'm sorry -- that's the only thing that makes logical sense. It's certainly not because that the original concept car would be expensive to produce on the outside.

    I look at cars like this as how the public will react and if there is a market segement to support it. I see there will be enough of each for this car if they keep the price down untill they can get to the kind of car they really want here. It was either this car for 4-5 yerars in the show room or an empty space in the showroom for the next 4-5 years. It will make money and do well till the right car is ready.

    Livery sales alone will make back any investment here. The Ma and Pa buyers need cars too. As for China it will do well. It will return better than average MPG and the back seat I suspect will be the best seat in the house in their version. Most owners in this class do not drive they are driven there.

    I don't know if the general public will get behind this one if it's going to max out beyond $50k price wise.

    Then again, it's really too early to assume anything about this car sales wise. That doesn't mean I won't speculate, though.

    However, I will guarantee this: if this car does not deliver on all expectations regarding fuel economy, an involving driving experience, interior fit and finish, the level of standard content, and overall quality then the press will crucify this car, Cadillac, and GM as a result. They had better hope that they've built a good enough stop-gap until they decide to produce the Ciel for general consumption (but I'm not holding my breath regarding the Ciel), otherwise this car will haunt them until they pull the plug on it.

    Regarding China, I really think this car will consistently lose out to the Park Avenue. Just saying and speculating.

    Just let it go I will form my final opinion after I see the car and you can quote me on that! LOL! The bottom line is I am not going to argue a car that you nor I have seen. You comments speak volumes....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I just want to point out that GM Photography is one area that has shown zero improvement since the bankruptcy.

    That is why I will wait. The photography has not improved and many of GM's designs even in a good photo don't really show how good they look in person. The CTS coupe looks ok in photo's but in person the way the wide shoulder quarter panels flair out when it is coming at you on the road really is impressive. Few people can photograph cars well and some just do not show the detail you can get in person.

    The Cruze also was not a car that photo'd well but on the road and in better trim and colors it really is a good looking car that will not be mistaken for a Honda, Hyundai or Toyota want a be. It says Chevy in its own style and for a small car in LTZ trim look more expensive than it really is.

    Same for the interiors. The photos just don't comunicate the full story as you need to sit in it and feel it ti get the full on idea.

    Of late so many base all or nothing on cars not ever seeing more than a photo. At times the photo is even of the camo version. They also do not have any idea of what options the car will offer let alone the engine packages and they start the sky is falling deal. I too used to fall for this but with GM's latest cars I am learning to wait and see as I am finding the cars once they hit the market are better than I first expected. I had my doubts on the Cruze and now having drive one and spent time with it I can say GM did this one right. Also sales show the public also has connected to it. I found the same on the Nox and other new GM cars. Few have disapointed me and are showing GM is finally getting it together. There are still things they need to work out but what car company doesn't?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just let it go I will form my final opinion after I see the car and you can quote me on that! LOL! The bottom line is I am not going to argue a car that you nor I have seen. You comments speak volumes....

    That's all well and good, hyper. Just for the record, though, my posts weren't written to try and convince you to join my side in this, they were constructed to simply:

    1. Explain to you that, from logical observation, I see no reason why the exterior design of the original XTS concept couldn't have been carried over intact as very few details were unfriendly for production.
    2. Explain why I condemned the design of the car.
    3. Explain to you that by simply studying the original concept and the production car, I did not need any further photos to know that the production XTS is far removed from the original concept and the design ultimately suffers from it.
    4. Remind you that I did not make any other definite comments regarding the car.

    Perhaps I didn't communicate that clearly in my past two posts.

    I will also add in this bit of food for thought: Robert Cumberford bases his design analysis articles for Automobile on what he sees in photographs. He's been in the field of automotive design for quite some time too, sooooo ...

    I realize GM Photography sometimes is terrible, but that is only so much truth and so much excuse in the current circumstances.

    Anyway, that's my stance on the exterior design of this car. Deride it all you want, but I'm standing firm with my opinion: it's an utter disappointment externally versus the production-ready concept car from last year.

    Again, I'm not trying to convince you to think any differently about how you see this car.

    I'm also terminating any future argument about it with you from this post forward, but discussion is certainly welcome.

    Edited by black-knight
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    God knows it is an improvement over the DTS.

    I don't think it's an improvement over the DTS. It's too narrow, and I don't care for the third window in the C pillar.

    I think it could succeed modestly if priced at the level of the Lexus ES350, but I fear Cadillac will price it much higher.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just let it go I will form my final opinion after I see the car and you can quote me on that! LOL! The bottom line is I am not going to argue a car that you nor I have seen. You comments speak volumes....

    That's all well and good, hyper. Just for the record, though, my posts weren't written to try and convince you to join my side in this, they were constructed to simply:

    1. Explain to you that, from logical observation, I see no reason why the exterior design of the original XTS concept couldn't have been carried over intact as very few details were unfriendly for production.
    2. Explain why I condemned the design of the car.
    3. Explain to you that by simply studying the original concept and the production car, I did not need any further photos to know that the production XTS is far removed from the original concept and the design ultimately suffers from it.
    4. Remind you that I did not make any other definite comments regarding the car.

    Perhaps I didn't communicate that clearly in my past two posts.

    I will also add in this bit of food for thought: Robert Cumberford bases his design analysis articles for Automobile on what he sees in photographs. He's been in the field of automotive design for quite some time too, sooooo ...

    I realize GM Photography sometimes is terrible, but that is only so much truth and so much excuse in the current circumstances.

    Anyway, that's my stance on the exterior design of this car. Deride it all you want, but I'm standing firm with my opinion: it's an utter disappointment externally versus the production-ready concept car from last year.

    Again, I'm not trying to convince you to think any differently about how you see this car.

    I'm also terminating any future argument about it with you from this post forward, but discussion is certainly welcome.

    Now I know why I seldom like or agree with Cumberford. To do a review like this is kind of like a food critic basing his review on a dish based on a photo...or one of us reviewing Italy based on a Video.

    Lets just wait and see what we get before we roll all the dice on one photo. That is all I am stating.

    Well, the new Malibu is wider than the current version, maybe this Cadillac will not look high and narrow like the LaCrosse can from certain angles.

    That is why I want to see the car in person as some assume the car is Lacrosse in size when the platform can be made longer and wider based on need. I think we will find this to be a little larger than the Buick.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm not seeing the crazy modifications to the production design over the concept. The windows on the side are now functional and the fog lamps are a bit different.

    There are some small detail things that if you put both photos side by side you can find them. Overal they kept the car pretty close to the show car and what changes were made were based on practical needs and cost. The people who will buy this car will never know the differeve.

    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
  • Posts

    • Yeah, it doesn’t pass the sniff test at all. No vehicle, not even a full size SUV, takes even 10 minutes to fill up much less 22. That doesn’t even qualify as making sense to believe it takes 22 minutes to fill up ANY vehicle that only has four tires on it. 
    • I've literally timed myself AND posted it here at one time. I don't know if your PNW nozzles are the size of a drinking straw, but it never takes more than 5 minutes at a pump.  You have lost your mind if you think you'll convince any human that you've stood at a pump for TWENTY-TWO MINUTES just filling up an Escalade. There a 100% chance you're lying if you're saying it took you 22 minutes to fill-up an Escalade from E every time.  Damn. 14 minutes. That's a good 9-10 minutes longer than it would take to fill-up most anything with a gasoline engine.  @Drew Dowdell, your Avalanche probably has the same or very similar size gas tank of an Escalade, right? Do you stand there for 20 minutes or more regularly? 
    • FUD - Unless your driving a subcompact, 5 minute fueling is not true. Compacts to Midsize to Full size can take from 8 to 22 minutes to fuel. If the filters of the gas station are dirty, it can take longer. Yes I realize not everyone drives an Escalade ESV, but that is 22 minutes of standing and fueling at Costco, longer at other stations it seem to be. Yes, I spent a few minutes waiting, but over all I got all my shopping done, so a few minutes was no different than at a gas station. I charged this morning for the wife, was 52 degrees outside and the 350kW Electrify America charger did the 80% charge from 14% in 15 minutes and then I left to go get the grandkids and drop them off at school, so the 10 to 80% charge is fast as my Escalade.
    • You just said you still had to wait a few minutes after you were done shopping. That few minutes is all it takes to go from E -> F in an internal combustion vehicle. Until you're charging at home, overnight, there is no real savings or convenience involved. Once your free trial period of public charging has expired, it costs about the same to charge publicly at those fast chargers.  At home charging is really the only way to save money and time with an EV, when it comes to fuel costs. 
  • 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