V12 Coming..... Lutz says so....

[Drew Dowdell]

Lutz confirms V12 in development for Cadillac flagship

It's official. It's been confirmed: Cadillac is preparing a new V12 flagship. That's straight from the mouth of our favorite man in the business, Bob Lutz. On a recent trip across the pond, GM's venerated product guru confirmed in an interview to the British car magazine AutoWeek that they are indeed working on a twelve-cylinder engine, slated to power a new range-topping, import-beating "Cadillac of Cadillacs," a super-luxury-sedan to rival the likes of the Mercedes S-Class and Lexus LS in the grandest of American style.

he new powerplant is being fabricated from two of GM's 3.6-liter 60-degree V6 engines mounted on a common crankshaft. Far from relying solely on cylinder count, sources speculate the engine will also benefit from such features as direct injection and cylinder deactivation, resulting in a 7.2-liter V12 with somewhere in the neighborhood of 600 horsepower and 540 lb-ft of torque.

Edited March 21, 2007 by Oldsmoboi

[Northstar]

So they approved it. Too bad it won't be here until late 2010 at the earliest.

The engine sounds ok, I guess. Not very unique really, but if they can make it world-class then I have no problem with it just being two HF V6s joined together. Perhaps the UV8 is a HF V8?

[Cory Wolfe]

Cool. Hopefully it turns out to be a great engine.

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

Okay... this is good news.

How big is this car going to be?

If this happens as they say it will, that will:

Keep the DTS where it is as the traditional Cadillac for older buyers and Cadillac/fullsized GM loyalists.

Put the STS in question or out to pasture.

You will have BLS: small Cadillac( not for North America)

CTS: 5 series/E Class fighter

DTS: Traditional Cadillac

FTS: the super Cadillac ( FTS )( Fleetwood was the longest and biggest Cadillac for years)

Either that car will become STS or carry a new name.

A short wheelbase 7 Series and Lexus LS is 196-198 inches long.

A long wheelbase is 201-203 inches long.

The current STS is a 196 inches long.

Cadillac China is selling a long wheelbase SLS.

The Buick fullsized range gets interesting. Lucerne switches over to rear drive with DTS. Buick in China has a different rear drive car using the Park Avenue name.

This is getting confusing. Too many possibilities.

[Windy-57]

This is getting confusing. Too many possibilities.

Part of why it is confusing is because Caddy is the only American luxury brand left (That's right, Lincoln is not luxury). And, part of the American brand persona is having big cars, bigger than your competitors. So don't compare size, compare everything else and you get something like:

CTS=3 Series=A4=IS/ES=C-Class - $30K-$50K

STS=5 Series=A6=GS=E-Class - $40K-$70/80K

DTS=Nothing else like it in a lux brand (It's like the Town Car, but like I said, Lincoln isn't luxury) - $40K-$50K

FTS/ULS/XTS=7 Series=A8=LS=S-Class - $80K - $120K

So in this progression upward, the DTS is sort of off to the side, they can't jump from the CTS to the FTS/ULS/XTS whatever they'll call it, which is why the STS is still necessary.

[FAPTurbo]

The engine sounds OK... but everybody has a V12.

BUt I cannot wait to see what the vehicle looks like!

[Z-06]

Part of why it is confusing is because Caddy is the only American luxury brand left (That's right, Lincoln is not luxury). And, part of the American brand persona is having big cars, bigger than your competitors. So don't compare size, compare everything else and you get something like:

CTS=3 Series=A4=IS/ES=C-Class - $30K-$50K

STS=5 Series=A6=GS=E-Class - $40K-$70/80K

DTS=Nothing else like it in a lux brand (It's like the Town Car, but like I said, Lincoln isn't luxury) - $40K-$50K

FTS/ULS/XTS=7 Series=A8=LS=S-Class - $80K - $120K

So in this progression upward, the DTS is sort of off to the side, they can't jump from the CTS to the FTS/ULS/XTS whatever they'll call it, which is why the STS is still necessary.

I could not agree with you more. People simply cannot perceive CTS as a 5 series fighter, just because it has the size. It does not have a V-8 as a high end version to compete with the bread and butter Mercedes and BMW V-8's in that class. The V is coming no doubt but it will be congruous to the M-3 and C-63 not the E-550 and 550i. Car magazines are still comparing it with the 3 series and G-35, so it is hard to think we can call it a 5,E fighter.

STS does need to be there and also should have a more powerful version of the Northstar V-8 and also the 3.6DI V-6.

And Caddy needs to be unique to BMW and Lexus and MB and Audi, by offering a DTS, hell 70K of annual sales for a FWD is not a bad idea, just put it on a modified EP-II and we have a cash cow.

[Northstar]

STS is dead, DTS will likely slot in above the CTS with the ULS above the DTS (I suppose the DTS could be dead and they could use the STS name). I could see the Alpha Cadillac slot below the CTS too, in the $29-40k range with CTS in the $35-45k range, DTS/STS $45-65k and ULS $70k-100k.

[Drew Dowdell]

STS is dead, DTS will likely slot in above the CTS with the ULS above the DTS (I suppose the DTS could be dead and they could use the STS name). I could see the Alpha Cadillac slot below the CTS too, in the $29-40k range with CTS in the $35-45k range, DTS/STS $45-65k and ULS $70k-100k.

Can you really see them retiring the Sigma platform this soon while keeping the G-body DTS around? If what you say is right, the CTS will be the only vehicle left on Sigma and that's a LOT of development dollars and factory dollars to just have one car on.

[Northstar]

I think it's quite possible that after the new CTS is done it will move to Zeta. Or, the ULS could go on Sigma, which was the plan before approval, but I don't know if it was altered when approved or not.

[carstar]

I could not agree with you more. People simply cannot perceive CTS as a 5 series fighter, just because it has the size. It does not have a V-8 as a high end version to compete with the bread and butter Mercedes and BMW V-8's in that class. The V is coming no doubt but it will be congruous to the M-3 and C-63 not the E-550 and 550i. Car magazines are still comparing it with the 3 series and G-35, so it is hard to think we can call it a 5,E fighter.

STS does need to be there and also should have a more powerful version of the Northstar V-8 and also the 3.6DI V-6.

And Caddy needs to be unique to BMW and Lexus and MB and Audi, by offering a DTS, hell 70K of annual sales for a FWD is not a bad idea, just put it on a modified EP-II and we have a cash cow.

Finally someone had my idea and said better.

I'm not too sure that the EP-2 can be streched to fit the dts. If the ULS/FTS/V12 is going to look like the 2004 cadillac sixteen concept, and the ng dts will be produce at the same time, how would it look like? Is it going to be like the 1995 deville/ fleetwood, just strech the wheelbase and change the front and back a little bit?

[Northstar]

Finally someone had my idea and said better.

I'm not too sure that the EP-2 can be streched to fit the dts. If the ULS/FTS/V12 is going to look like the 2004 cadillac sixteen concept, and the ng dts will be produce at the same time, how would it look like? Is it going to be like the 1995 deville/ fleetwood, just strech the wheelbase and change the front and back a little bit?

If the DTS is on Zeta and the ULS is on Sigma, which was the plan at one point (I don't know about now), then the ULS won't be a streched DTS.

[Drew Dowdell]

I think it's quite possible that after the new CTS is done it will move to Zeta. Or, the ULS could go on Sigma, which was the plan before approval, but I don't know if it was altered when approved or not.

I hope that the new "technological marval" plant they built for Sigma can be used for Zeta then.... they spent a LOT of money on that new plant.

[Northstar]

I hope that the new "technological marval" plant they built for Sigma can be used for Zeta then.... they spent a LOT of money on that new plant.

I'm sure it can be converted. They aren't just going to let LGR die when it is one of, if not their most advanced plant.

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

Very telling statement from AutoNews:

At this stage, it is unknown whether GM plans to base the upmarket Cadillac on the same platform, but given the need to spread the cost of rear-wheel-drive development over as many models as possible, such a move cannot be ruled out.

In order to make that car, some other GM division has to get it.. Spread the costs.

[Z-06]

The way it looks like, GM may end up with three or four RWD car platforms.

1. Zeta

2. Sigma

3. Alpha (Or whatever the proposed small one is called)

4. Solstice Platform

Zeta will be the main platform as comparable to our dear ol' W-bodies with lots of vehicles on it.

Sigma may occupy the niche. CTS, STS, may be one or two Caddy Crossovers, and some other niche cars.

Alpha may be the smaller Zeta.

[Windy-57]

STS is dead, DTS will likely slot in above the CTS with the ULS above the DTS (I suppose the DTS could be dead and they could use the STS name). I could see the Alpha Cadillac slot below the CTS too, in the $29-40k range with CTS in the $35-45k range, DTS/STS $45-65k and ULS $70k-100k.

Do you have good information about the STS dying, because I just can't see that happening.

[AxelTheRed]

V12 - Close but no cigar. I was holding out for the Sixteen, but I guess I'll have to make due with four less cylinders.

A flagship of this stature should be built in the brand's hometown, so hopefully this'll give Detroit another factory.

[ZL-1]

resulting in a 7.2-liter V12

I read the article, and I'd like to commment on something: the V6 comes in 2.8L and 3.6L versions (excluding the 3.2L version sold to Alfa Romeo). Pairing each of these versions would yield something from 5.6L to 7.2L (with a mid-point of 6.4L). Maybe what they mean is that they're using the HFV6 as the basis for developing the engine? I think 7.2L is a little excessive and I'd see GM aligning the engine's displacement with the competition, much like what happened to the 2.8L and 3.6L V6's.

A 6.4L engine could be strong enough for some form of turbo-/supercharging like Mercedes does with AMG models, no?

[Northstar]

Do you have good information about the STS dying, because I just can't see that happening.

Yes. An STS-like car is not necessarily dead, as that is what it sounds like the NG DTS may be, but it appears that the STS name may be dead (either "DTS" or "STS" is dead, however the car replacing both seems more like the current STS than current DTS seeing as how it is Zeta based and will likely have something bigger than it above it, meaning it won't be as big as the current DTS, most likely).

I read the article, and I'd like to commment on something: the V6 comes in 2.8L and 3.6L versions (excluding the 3.2L version sold to Alfa Romeo). Pairing each of these versions would yield something from 5.6L to 7.2L (with a mid-point of 6.4L). Maybe what they mean is that they're using the HFV6 as the basis for developing the engine? I think 7.2L is a little excessive and I'd see GM aligning the engine's displacement with the competition, much like what happened to the 2.8L and 3.6L V6's.

A 6.4L engine could be strong enough for some form of turbo-/supercharging like Mercedes does with AMG models, no?

This is an interesting thought. It is quite possible that the V12 could be two 3.2s paired together to make a 6.4L.

[turbo200]

from the article at autoblog, the idea sounds exciting, a truly large and substantial sedan to compete with the S-class with some innovative gorgeous Cadillac style and all the technology and features needed to compete with those kinds of cars. I don't even care if it's based on Zeta, as long as that platform allows for some truly great dynamics to rival the best in class, or beat them.

I still argue that Cadillac needs to figure out what to do about an entry level car, because the CTS is too large to truly compete with the 3-series, C-class, IS350, A4, etc. An intermediary car above the CTS but below the S-class competitor in the position of the current STS/DTS would also be a requirement. A 4 car luxury lineup works for Lexus, very well, it can work for Caddy too.

[Intrepidation]

They should have taken 2 V8'S, made a V16 and build the Sixteen

[CSpec]

I hope they know what they're doing, this has the very real danger of losing a bunch of money and hurting the reputation of the brand. A better effort is needed than the XLR.

[Drew Dowdell]

They should have taken 2 V8'S, made a V16 and build the Sixteen

Just a guess, but there may be packaging issues.....

[Cadillacfan]

V12 is good enough. I don't think we'll see a V16 vehicle on our roads before the decade is out.. but don't think the luxury automakers aren't already developing their own.

What Cadillac has to worry about is styling, luxury, technological goodies. They need to throw as much as they can into this baby in order to meet the needs of this class of buyer. It may sound over-the-top, but that's what GM needs to do to make this car a real player.

[gm4life]

I would love to see this thing. Maybe the DTS will live!

My future Cadillac line-up...

Dream List

CAR'S

BLS-Midsize Sedan FWD/AWD 25-35K

BLS-Estate-Midsize Wagon FWD/AWD 25-25K

CTS-Midsize Sports Sedan RWD/AWD 30-45K

CTS-C-Midsize Sports Coupe RWD 35K-45K

CTS-V-Midsize Sports Sedan RWD 50K

DTS-Fullsize Traditional Sedan FWD 40-60K **like Deville**

FLS-Fullsize RWD Ultra Luxury Sedan V12 75K-90K

XLR-Luxury Roadster RWD 75-80K

XLR-V-Luxury Roadster RWD 95K

SUV'S

BRX-Smaller SUV FWD/AWD 30K-40K

SRX-Midsize Performance SUV RWD/AWD 40K-55K

Escalade,ESV,EXT-Fullsize Luxury SUV RWD/AWD 55K-75K

What we will prolly get...

CAR'S

CTS

CTS-V

DTS

FLS

SUV's

Escalade,ESV,EXT

SRX?

BRX?

I think keeping a traditional FWD Cadillac (DTS) and sharing the cost of developement with Lucerne would be wise I would love a new FWD platform, maybe losely Lambada based? And you could export it as other makes... Or send it over to Japan and China from the Detriot-Hamtrack plant.

Edited March 22, 2007 by gm4life

[jbartley]

This is an interesting thought. It is quite possible that the V12 could be two 3.2s paired together to make a 6.4L.

Two Supercharged 3.6 V6's, isn't that what they said on Leftlane?

PLEASE can we stop with the "ideal cadillac lineup" for one thread

[vrazzhledazzle]

Yea stop with the ideal Caddy lineup thing. Killing STS would be just dumb, leaves a huge gap between CTS (few face of Caddy targeting MB&BMW buyers) and the DTS (all school all american luxury).

Anyway, the Cadillac Sixteen (or anything that looks remotely like it) would be the greatest car ever in my opinion because the concept was....beyond 'the best' design ever.

[radioactivesob]

This thing is probably going to be built on Zeta, "long front section, long middle section, and long rear section." The reason that Zeta was delayed was so that GM could figure out a modular approach. Now they get muscle cars, mid-size cars, and the Cadillac "Twelve." It does not sound nearly as cool as the "Sixteen," but there is thought behind it. GM rarely builds an engine for one vehicle (the I-6 is an unfortunate exception) and a twelve cylinder would fit nicely in a Escalade....

[titan]

I could not agree with you more. People simply cannot perceive CTS as a 5 series fighter, just because it has the size. It does not have a V-8 as a high end version to compete with the bread and butter Mercedes and BMW V-8's in that class. The V is coming no doubt but it will be congruous to the M-3 and C-63 not the E-550 and 550i. Car magazines are still comparing it with the 3 series and G-35, so it is hard to think we can call it a 5,E fighter.

STS does need to be there and also should have a more powerful version of the Northstar V-8 and also the 3.6DI V-6.

And Caddy needs to be unique to BMW and Lexus and MB and Audi, by offering a DTS, hell 70K of annual sales for a FWD is not a bad idea, just put it on a modified EP-II and we have a cash cow.

Precisely. Whether the car is called STS or DTS, a replacement is needed to fill the segment between the CTS and the FLS. A car that replaces the current DTS (in spirit) is not needed. FWD, floating, isolated Caddy's need to go away after this DTS.

[regfootball]

this v12 had better have fully variable intake and exhaust cam timing. lift and duration possibly too.

[RJB]

I hope they know what they're doing, this has the very real danger of losing a bunch of money and hurting the reputation of the brand. A better effort is needed than the XLR.

I fear the same thing. Look at the VW Phaeton, it was a flop and now they are trying to push it back into the market again. I think Cadillac should focus on improving the products they have at hand instead of trying to branch out into other areas. This will only go back to where GM was at, too many cars + too many segments = too much excess. Lets strip away the fat and stay lean and mean!! Wait until you see the next XLR :AH-HA_wink:

Edited March 22, 2007 by RJB

[Oracle of Delphi]

I hope they know what they're doing, this has the very real danger of losing a bunch of money and hurting the reputation of the brand. A better effort is needed than the XLR.

I could not agree with you more.

[ZL-1]

This thing is probably going to be built on Zeta, "long front section, long middle section, and long rear section." The reason that Zeta was delayed was so that GM could figure out a modular approach. Now they get muscle cars, mid-size cars, and the Cadillac "Twelve." It does not sound nearly as cool as the "Sixteen," but there is thought behind it. GM rarely builds an engine for one vehicle (the I-6 is an unfortunate exception) and a twelve cylinder would fit nicely in a Escalade....

Which means the DTS/STS successor's range might be offered from an entry-level traditional V8 model up to a V12 top-of-the-line car. That could open an opportunity in overlapping a V8 CTS (more performance-oriented but below the V-Series) over that entry-level DTS/STS. That could be a good kind of overlapping IMHO.

[Sixty8panther]

V12? Cool Buick needs a flagship motor.... now give Caddy the V16!!!

[titan]

I fear the same thing. Look at the VW Phaeton, it was a flop and now they are trying to push it back into the market again. I think Cadillac should focus on improving the products they have at hand instead of trying to branch out into other areas. This will only go back to where GM was at, too many cars + too many segments = too much excess. Lets strip away the fat and stay lean and mean!! Wait until you see the next XLR :AH-HA_wink:

You make it sound like VW and Caddy's brands are equal. VW was NEVER a luxury brand, and theycome out of the blue with a $70K fullsize flagship. That should have never happened, and VW should not have tried to elevate the brand. That's what Audi was for. CADDY IS THE LUXURY BRAND FOR GM. It will never be the "Standard of the World" if it doesn't have a full size flagship every bit (if not better) than the S-Class and 7-Series. Period. Entering this segment isn't one to many; it's necessary for this luxury brand. Don't question whether Caddy should make the car... it's needed. Just hope they get it right (like the CTS).

[Imaj]

Finally something solid from GM about the V12, imagine the possibilities with this new engine. A new Ultra Cadillac, a Cadillac Supercar, a V-Series Escalade, etc..

[David]

YEA I want a V12 powered Escalade ESV Platinum V series to replace my current 2006 ESV Platinum version. This will rock! :smilies-38096:

[91z4me]

This thing is probably going to be built on Zeta, "long front section, long middle section, and long rear section." The reason that Zeta was delayed was so that GM could figure out a modular approach. Now they get muscle cars, mid-size cars, and the Cadillac "Twelve." It does not sound nearly as cool as the "Sixteen," but there is thought behind it. GM rarely builds an engine for one vehicle (the I-6 is an unfortunate exception) and a twelve cylinder would fit nicely in a Escalade....

Interesting that you bring up the Atlas 4.2 I6 b/c if I were planning a V12 for GM it would be based off the I6 instead of the 3.6 V6. Sure it would be tall, and large displacement but imagine what an 8.4L Dual VVT, DI Atlas V12 could do!

[Sevenfeet]

I could not agree with you more. People simply cannot perceive CTS as a 5 series fighter, just because it has the size. It does not have a V-8 as a high end version to compete with the bread and butter Mercedes and BMW V-8's in that class. The V is coming no doubt but it will be congruous to the M-3 and C-63 not the E-550 and 550i. Car magazines are still comparing it with the 3 series and G-35, so it is hard to think we can call it a 5,E fighter.

STS does need to be there and also should have a more powerful version of the Northstar V-8 and also the 3.6DI V-6.

And Caddy needs to be unique to BMW and Lexus and MB and Audi, by offering a DTS, hell 70K of annual sales for a FWD is not a bad idea, just put it on a modified EP-II and we have a cash cow.

I certainly can perceive the CTS as a 5 series fighter. Heck the automotive press were certainly trying to for the last 4 years since the CTS debuted at te size that it did. Sure the previous CTS didn't have a V8 option, but do you really think that this new car doesn't have that planned for a future upgrade? What do you think the wider track is for? When the outgoing CTS was first designed in 1999, Cadillac wasn't being taken seriously by anybody in this space and they had to design a car with certain constraints. First that they were lucky to get a new V6 engine at all, but they wouldn't get it in time for launch. Second was that the Northstar was considered to be too expensive for this price class and updercut the existing FWD STS with a potentially better handling product. And nobody was even thinking about a CTS-V. That only came about after the CTS turned into a sales hit and they started looking around for more things to do for it. They couldn't do a coupe since it wasn't designed for it in the first place (they probably barely got budget for the sedan!) and the aformentioned Northstar was too wide. Enter the good 'ol Chevy smallblock, compact enough for this application and easy to apply engine management systems.

The new 2008 CTS got the benefit of a bigger design budget and wider thinking about other companion products from the start. So coupes, convertibles, wagons, hybrids and the next gen SRX were all thought about from the beginning. So if any of those ideas would get the green light later, it wouldn't cost that much to build and systems would already be in place to support them.

Here's some unsolicited advice for GM. Cadillac's product matrix is a classic Business School marketing class case study. You have a product mix that is inconsistent and not directly comperable to the competition...in a bad way. Let's start with the bottom. The competition for the case of argument is defined as Audi, BMW, Lexus, Infiniti, Mercedes.

In the entry level small sedan/coupe market, there is:

Audi: A3/A4

BMW: 3 series

Lexus: IS

Infiniti: G (maybe, like Caddy, it's large for the class)

Mercedes: C class

Cadillac: None. The B series car was introduced in Europe but that vehicle (a rebadged Saab) isn't even passing muster there. A proper RWD effort would work but that needs a commitment to the platform on both shores. The CTS is often portrayed in this class for price, but not for size.

In the midsize sedan market:

Audi: A6

BMW: 5 series

Lexus: GS

Infiniti: M

Mercedes: E

Cadillac: CTS or STS. The STS is large for the class but not large enough for the next class. The current CTS is the right size but appointments are downmarket. The 2008 CTS will largely be a precise fit for this class, minus an option V8 engine (non-V-series).

For the large sedan market:

Audi: A8

BMW: 7 series

Lexus: LS

Infiniti: Q (discontinued for 2007)

Mercedes: S

Cadillac: None. The STS would like to play here but it's too small and appointments are again lacking for the class.

With the 2008 CTS getting larger and better appointed, it's likely to fill the midsize sedan slot for size and price better than the STS, which is too small in the inside for both the midsize and especially large size classes. The STS also suffers from poor exterior styling and its a bit too heavy. Sales are poor compared to the CTS or anything else it tries to compete with.

My solution to the exercise is to let the CTS go upmarket where it appears to be headed anyway. Introduce a next generation Northstar V8 as an option for 2009 when that engine is ready, as well as the next gen V-series. Do a V6 hybrid in 2010. A coupe/convertible are natural introductions in 2009/10. Make the most of the good press of this car and broaden the market appeal with wise product selections and price points like Audi/BMW/Mercedes, but be sure to undercut them by a few G's if possible like Lexus/Infiniti....after all, they are the market leaders, not you. Lexus spent years undercutting the competition on price while making outstanding product.

As far as the STS is concerned, either rebadge the car on the upcoming S-class fighter that's being talked about, or let the nameplate die. I would give the current car a live through 2008 and withdraw it from the market in 2009 when the CTS gets a V8 option.

A high end sedan would have to compete in size and features versus the BMW 7/Audi A8/Mercedes S550. Price it against the Lexus LS. Design a vehicle that will compete against these car's replacements, not the current stuff on the market (think ahead here). Think ahead about a large superluxury coupe on a shortened wheelbase like the BMW 6/Mercedes CL...best to design for it now than make the same mistake that you did with the CTS a decade ago. Introduce V8, V12 engines as options. A V-series is certainly doable so think ahead. Make the business case but spare no expense in making it right. I like the name FTS.

A small sedan will be a challenge for Cadillac, mostly in pricing so not to canabalize other divisions. I do think it's possible. A suitable RWD platform would need to be found...possible a shortened Zeta, using much of the work being done for the Camaro. Make a distinct difference between it and the CTS in terms of size and styling, but don't make it look cheap. Offer the V6 (maybe two sizes). Do a small-block Chevy V-series later on at or below a price point of the old CTS-V (which will be more expensive anyway). Pour as much money as you can in the handling equation since the BMW 3 series is the obvious benchmark. And do a coupe, PLEASE! A wagon will be needed, at least for Europe, a small SUV would be better here. The B-class name could remain but I might rebadge it to differentiate it from the current product in Europe that noone cares about anyway.

The XLR needs serious work. Try to make the next one not look like it's the Vette's red headed stepchild. Don't accept a folding roof design that clearly is behind the competition in speed and luggage room. The interior was once "the best interior Cadillac had ever done". Now it's painfully behind the 2008 CTS, 2007 SRX and even the 'Slade. Rip it out and start over. Get better/ slightly wider tires. Never do a study "cobranding" experiment like you did with Bvlgari...it looks dumb every time you look at the dash. And try to see if the Vette plant can make you a steel body. Try to see if Holden can make that V12 it's designing for you fit under the hood. And please deliver by 2009 or 2009 1/2, at least for the V8 base model.

SRX: More crossover, less truck. Much like it's CTS cousin, it needs a wide variety or trim levels, engines and choices. A V-series should be considered. Better mileage is mandatory...and if Saturn can have a hybrid crossover, than so can Cadillac.

Escalade: Two words...hybrid and V12. They both need to happen.

The DTS is the odd duck of the bunch, but also extremely important. It's still a best seller for Caddy's over 60 Deville buyers crowd, and one of Caddy's best selling cars, period. It is the dominent car for the livery and funeral coach business. I've heard people argue for keeping it or doing away with it for years. First things first, can you convince the over 60 crowd to buy someting else? I think you can. I see a lot of little old ladies in Nashville driving CTS's that used to be Deville owners. The next CTS will be a much better car all around.

Here are the choices you have to make in keeping the DTS:

1. Keep it fresh and keep the quality control high.

2. Limit the trim levels and keep it to one engine choice.

3. No V-series.

4. Accept the financials and keep the car as a cash-cow.

For killing the car:

1. Give your customers plenty of time to switch to other products. Let the car run its course after 2010 when the FTS bows...heck, you might keep it around for an additional year for transistion.

2. Work with the coach builders to get a FTS commercial chassis car stripped of many of the hyper-expensive amenities to keep it affordable to their customers.

3. Make a version just for livery customers that's priced for them and not sold to anybody else....either that or just cede the market to Lincoln and Chrysler (300).

Just my 2 cents...or two dollars as it were.

[carstar]

the V-12 is less likely to foretell a model all by itself. It could be nothing more of a high-performance trim (like an AMG 65 or a XLR-V) that would cost 100k, and the rest would be V8. I don't expect that the DTS will make a great huge leap in price and features. Instead of the current Fwd floating, isolated Caddy, the next gen could be a RWD, caddy that float a little bit and offer two different sizes, thus the longer size that has the V12 costing 100k.

[gm4life]

I think getting rid of the tradition FWD Cadillac DTS is mistake just that simple. However I would love to see a V12 super Caddy sedan.

[Sixty8panther]

1. Yes, an atlas-6 based V12 would be cooler, that's what a V12 is... two Inline Sixes.

2. Much cooler still would be a 4.6L No* based V16

3. Even a 12 cylinder motor calls for a separate model

[balthazar]

Uhhh- it's obvious that the "two 3.xL V-6s together on a common crank" is a figurative, not literal statement, right? Guys??

Displacement can easily vary beyond 'a + a = b'. We need to forget the engineering basis for this engine and address it as what it will be: new engineering and a fresh casting with unique major components, or we'll all get caught up in relentless comparisons to a relatively paltry V-6, which will only taint the image of the V-12.

Trust me, I've seen the very same thing happen before. The '76 Seville is still heavily burdened by those who will swear it's a badge-engineered Nova.

You've been forewarned.

[Windy-57]

I'd like to see GM try and put the dual-stage hybrid technology on this. I like what Lexus did with the LS hybrid. They didn't do it to add fuel efficiency, but rather to add more power and torque in a more fuel efficient way. Wouldn't it be great to take the 600 hp and add some electric power while simultaneously helping it achieve 20mpg? And, the hybridization cost can't be a big concern at this price point.

That's a bit off the cuff, so don't ridicule me if that's the worst idea ever.

[pow]

I'd like to see GM try and put the dual-stage hybrid technology on this. I like what Lexus did with the LS hybrid. They didn't do it to add fuel efficiency, but rather to add more power and torque in a more fuel efficient way. Wouldn't it be great to take the 600 hp and add some electric power while simultaneously helping it achieve 20mpg? And, the hybridization cost can't be a big concern at this price point.

That's a bit off the cuff, so don't ridicule me if that's the worst idea ever.

I think that's the best idea ever, given the increase in ecological concerns.

If the Sixteen is going to be a halo, low-volume, high-style, low-engineering, image-over-substance exotic, they might as well coachbuild one from the GM partsbin. GMT900 frame, Tahoe Hybrid drivetrain, kinda like the SSR...

Usually people who plunk down $200K for a one-of-a-kind good don't care how quickly it'll go around the Nurburgring. It'll stay in the garage except for the occasional Sunday cruise or music video.

[Sevenfeet]

Uhhh- it's obvious that the "two 3.xL V-6s together on a common crank" is a figurative, not literal statement, right? Guys??

Displacement can easily vary beyond 'a + a = b'. We need to forget the engineering basis for this engine and address it as what it will be: new engineering and a fresh casting with unique major components, or we'll all get caught up in relentless comparisons to a relatively paltry V-6, which will only taint the image of the V-12.

Trust me, I've seen the very same thing happen before. The '76 Seville is still heavily burdened by those who will swear it's a badge-engineered Nova.

You've been forewarned.

But it done properly, no one will care. Example? The Aston Martin V12, which is basically a couple of lowly Ford Duratec V6's with a common crank and a lot of uprated technology. Nobody faults that engine's humble beginnings.

[bcs296]

FWD HAS NO PLACE IN THE CADILLAC LINEUP. PERIOD. END OF STORY.

Edited March 23, 2007 by bcs296

[Carguy]

My only worry is that it will be a premium model useing a lower cost platform as a bases. That would be a good thing for Cost reasons but not for IMAGE! To compete with MB-BMW ect there should be a premium version of ZETA to replace SIGMA useing duble A arms instead of struts with other inhanced features that the lower cost ZETA wouldent have. Dont DOWNGRADE CADILLAC by eventually replaceing SIGMA with the nice but lower level equiped ZETA platform GM! Keep CADILLAC eather on SIGMA or a new more premium version of ZETA with duble A arms and sound deadening along with other inhanced features like Aluminum suspension components ect. Make CADILLAC the STANDARD OF THE WORLD again not the STANDARD OF COST CUTTING!! The idea of a premium V12 CADILLAC model is GREAT but DONT RUSH IT GM with a STREACHED G8 with a Caddy body!---DO IT CORRECTLY and RULE THE LUXURY WORLD AGAIN!!

[Oracle of Delphi]

The way it looks like, GM may end up with three or four RWD car platforms.

1. Zeta

2. Sigma

3. Alpha (Or whatever the proposed small one is called)

4. Solstice Platform

Solstice platform is called Kappa!