Jump to content

More proof GM doesn't know what it's doing: CTS-V not bound for Europe


Recommended Posts

large.jpg

CTS: no V

The Cadillac CTS is heading to the UK in September... but we won't see the mental V8-powered CTS-V. Ever. Boo.

Less boo, however, are the prices: the 'entry-level' 2.8-litre V6 version of the CTS weighs in at £26,995, while the bigger 3.6-litre V6 starts at £32,995.

Not bad for something that's close to the BMW 5-Series in size, and you get plenty of kit for your cash, too: internal hard drive, DVD player, sat nav and TV tuner, as well as leather bits and a neat set of 18-inch alloys.

But what the good lord GM giveth with one hand, he taketh with t'other. It's looking highly unlikely we'll see the CTS-V in the UK, with Cadillac chiefs arguing that the big V8 isn't viable for European markets.

Which is a pity... we were rather looking to an M5 v RS6 v E63 v CTS-V shootout. If not the ensuing fuel bills.

Source: Top Gear

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, if this is true, what the hell are they thinking? The CTS-V is Cadillac's chance to finally take on the Europeans and crush them, finally earning it some respect.

Proof once more GM doesn't know what it's doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly, if this is true, what the hell are they thinking? The CTS-V is Cadillac's chance to finally take on the Europeans and crush them, finally earning it some respect.

Proof once more GM doesn't know what it's doing.

GM probably figured that a couple dozen sales a year wasn't worth the cost of getting it into those markets. Which is too bad, because it seems the UK esp. is the most fanatical market for super sedans like the AMGs, BMW Ms, Audi RSes, etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites

GM doesn't know how to design global cars and that hurts them. Cadillacs should be made to sell anywhere in the world, like Audi, BMW and Mercedes do. The 2.8 liter is too old of an engine, they need a 240-250 hp DI V6 that gets over 30 mpg highway, and a really good diesel. The CTS needs to get on a diet also. I am eagerly awaiting Clarkson's review of the new CTS. Europeans tend to laugh at pushrods, but if the CTS-V's engine isn't viable in other markets, then they picked the wrong engine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More ignorance...

Wonder how much our fun friends at GME had to do with this? God forbid anything ever out do CPF & PCS' POS Saab division.

A couple of thoughts:

1) GM finally has the car and the balls to 'take it to' the Euros in their home market, yet it won't. I'll still be laughing when MB and BMW are killing Cadillac here on its turf 10 years from now. (IF the division hasn't been phased out in favor of Saab)

2) When will the day come that cars like this are deemed to 'ridiculous' for OUR country. Guess we'll jhave to move to China (The new superpower) to buy real cars in the not too distant future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I too would agree: just ship the V over... but just as some will criticize NOT send it over, there would be, 1 for 1, criticizers blasting GM for importing a 'monster-engined gas guzzler' in 'times such as these'. Damned if you do...

Link to post
Share on other sites
All of Europe or just the UK? I could see there being an issue making the car RHD for what would be a small number of CTS-Vs

That I'm not sure, if it was just the UK then it wouldn't be a big deal I think, but not sending the V over to Europe at all is a huge mistake, because it has what i takes to crush the competition.

Edited by Dodgefan
Link to post
Share on other sites

With Gas prices over $8.00 and expected to reach possible as high as $12.00 in some areas GM has more important things to do than send this car.

For as few as they would send would it really make a differance other than some bragging point.

I admit it would be great to kick butt and take names but work comes before play.

I suspect in time we will see some V series make the trip over at some point.

A diesel wagon might do much better over there to convert the peoples preception on Cadillac.

Edited by hyperv6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Europeans would not be inclined to buy a V8, with gasoline over 8 Euros a gallon and in some places even higher, that would not be a car a European would choose and would just give them more reason to hate American cars. In many respects, Europeans act like Greenies. So IMHO, GM is doing the right thing in Europe! :yes:

Edited by Pontiac Custom-S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cadillac needs to sell cars in every part of the world to be considered a world-class brand. Right now they are a tier 2, US luxury brand. Unfortunately I don't see them ever getting to tier 1, although I wish they would.

Europeans would see the CTS-V's engine as too big, too low-tech, and wouldn't respect the car enough to consider buying it. It is kind of like Hyundai attempting to sell a 500 hp car in the USA, although at least they took a try at aiming upward with the Genesis, GM seems to not even want to try the CTS-V over there, which is sad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Europeans interested in neck-snapping, killer track performance absolutely would buy a CTS-V. And a Cadillac CTS is NOTHING like a hyundai 'hi-po' sedan or whatever- genesis is a hokey derivative also-ran w/ zero image, CTS-V runs with the best of the pack regardless of where or where it's not sold. Dealerships locations do NOTHING to alter the product itself. bmw m-3 is bought for 1 or 2 reasons- performance, and/or image/snob-appeal (lots of posers out there, as witnessed by the sheer volume of 'M3' badges on what clearly are NOT M-3s) - - not a single M3 buyer is specifically buying that car primairly because of how the vales are actuated- that's ridiculous, outmoded thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
All of Europe or just the UK? I could see there being an issue making the car RHD for what would be a small number of CTS-Vs

Only in UK. I think I read an article from Jim Press saying that it was not worth spending R&d for a RHD sedan that will sell in double digits annually. However, the LHD version shall be sold everywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Europeans that want neck snapping performance can buy a Mercedes AMG, BMW M, or Audi RS. Or the Jag XF-R that is coming. The CTS-V doesn't have the class or image that those cars have, the Europeans will see it as no more than a muscle car. It does have a great Nurburgring time, which is a plus, but the interior isn't good enough, it doesn't have a DOHC engine or 7 or 8 speed transmission or carbon fiber body panels, etc.

Just as most Cadillac/Lexus buyers in the USA doesn't see the Genesis as an equal, the Europeans don't see Cadillac as equal to their cars, they see it as a second rate car, that sells at a discount for a reason. The Genesis actually stacks up well against a CTS, it is cheaper, roomier (which people always say make a Cadillac better than a BMW) and the Genesis handles just as well and is faster. The arguments used as to why a CTS is better than a BMW (roomier, cheaper, bigger engine) can be used to say a Genesis is better than a CTS, but when you get down to the little details and the image there is a difference.

I want to see Cadillac challenge the Germans, but the CTS isn't enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jag has little image in europe anymore: based on decades-old archaic underpowered sedans that spend the bulk of their time getting overpriced repair work done. Last coupe (XK??) was a dud, x-type was an embarassing rebadged dud, no one bought the only decent-looking model, the s-type. Jag has been in a real stinky funk since the E-type was canceled. No one is going to cross-shop even an upcoming jag with an amg or rs, nevermind any current ones- it's just not in that class, the image is too damaged- jag's rep was all built in the '40s & '50s, and into the '60s with the E-type... after that, the primary public face of jag was the XJ that carried the same design from the late '60s to today. I was behind one recently, I believe it was from the '90s (who can tell) but the taillights still had exposed screws going thru the lenses to hold them on, with fat exposed rubber gaskets squeezing out. Unrefined bullsh!t like that is more in tune with the 1940s; at least it is in the American luxury market.

C'mon:

1968:

52-jaguar-xj.jpg

2008:

usa_2008_jaguar_xj-series_sdn_4_x_exfrdr

Same damned car!! Can you imagine if Cadillac was selling a 1968 SdV on 20"s and calling it a 2008 ??

We'll see how the new sedan shakes out, the one with subaru headlights, but there's a lot of baggage to overcome there to get back to where Jag once was.

Edited by balthazar
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jaguar XF is the real deal. Ford ran Jaguar into the ground, they are going to make a comeback with TATA financing behind them. Car and Driver like the XF a lot, Edmunds.com said it was better than the 550i, E550 and A6, Motor Trend said it was better than the 550i, E550, and GS460, even AutoCar magazine in Germany said it was better than the 550i, and obviously the UK car rags like it.

Jaguar went through a bad time in the 70s and 80s, but they are back. The XF interior is amazing, it is better than anything short of an S-class. It is a car you have to see in person and sit in to appreciate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah- I've seen the XF in magazines & online- the concept was truely aggressive, it looked like it was leaping forward, predatory... but what the hell happened to the production sedan ?? Upright, ridin' high, slab-sided, subaru headlights = yawn on the exterior. Didn't go NEARLY far enough to erase the malaise of the last few decades. And where have I seen that steering wheel before? Egads- the '04 GP !! (XKR has the same parts bin wheel).

Rest of the interior is BO-RING- too conservative. I realize concept car interiors are too expensive for production cars.... but there's NOTHING in the production car that was shown to us in the concept. The xf's is not going to pull anyone away from their preferences based on design. Oh yeah- it has jag iDrive, too. :rolleyes:

XKR seems VERY long in the tooth- has this identical car been around since the late '90s, or is it longer than that? '09 upgrades shouldn't even ripple the water. Car just doesn't pass off as expensive at the curb; looks like a stretched fastback miata. And you'd think for $87K you wouldn't have to pay another $5000 just for the 20" wheels.

Still seems pretty messed up over there in Mumbai.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jaguar XK came out in 2007. I wish the XF had headlights more like the concept, but the car looks better in person than in pictures. Plus they have 2 new engines and a hybrid system coming. The new XJ is an all aluminum chassis, 8-speed transmission, all new 5 liter DOHC V8 with plus hybrid option and the styling is said to be more modern and aggressive than the XF.

The 2010 Audi A6 is all aluminum, Mercedes is cutting the weight of every car by 5% and hybrid S-class coming this fall, the 7-series has in car internet and a new twin turbo V8 that gets better mileage than the old V8, the 3-series has an 80 gig hard drive now. Where is Cadillac's aluminum car, or 8-speed transmission, or diesel engine or 2-mode hybrid sedan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Europeans that want neck snapping performance can buy a Mercedes AMG, BMW M, or Audi RS. Or the Jag XF-R that is coming. The CTS-V doesn't have the class or image that those cars have, the Europeans will see it as no more than a muscle car. It does have a great Nurburgring time, which is a plus, but the interior isn't good enough, it doesn't have a DOHC engine or 7 or 8 speed transmission or carbon fiber body panels, etc.

Just as most Cadillac/Lexus buyers in the USA doesn't see the Genesis as an equal, the Europeans don't see Cadillac as equal to their cars, they see it as a second rate car, that sells at a discount for a reason. The Genesis actually stacks up well against a CTS, it is cheaper, roomier (which people always say make a Cadillac better than a BMW) and the Genesis handles just as well and is faster. The arguments used as to why a CTS is better than a BMW (roomier, cheaper, bigger engine) can be used to say a Genesis is better than a CTS, but when you get down to the little details and the image there is a difference.

I want to see Cadillac challenge the Germans, but the CTS isn't enough.

I thought we were done with your idiotic comments. You seriously think a Hyundai Genesis handles just as well as a CTS?

From Edmunds:

Tuned more toward the luxury end of the spectrum, the Genesis' suspension offers a soft ride with respectable handling. The latter is surprisingly neutral -- a run through the slalom showed the Genesis to be a little soft and slow, but impressively obedient. The electrohydraulic steering assist leaves the rack-and-pinion steering feeling more isolated from the tires than we'd prefer, but the steering itself is still precise and appropriate, given the scale and mission of the car. Nobody would ever mistake the Genesis for a BMW when it comes to steering, but Infiniti or Lexus owners will find it familiar.

While a stopping distance of 124 feet from 60 mph isn't what we'd call world-class, it's still pretty good for a 4,000-pound sedan wearing all-season tires.

The CTS is world class.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Jaguar XF is the real deal. Ford ran Jaguar into the ground, they are going to make a comeback with TATA financing behind them. Car and Driver like the XF a lot, Edmunds.com said it was better than the 550i, E550 and A6, Motor Trend said it was better than the 550i, E550, and GS460, even AutoCar magazine in Germany said it was better than the 550i, and obviously the UK car rags like it.

Jaguar went through a bad time in the 70s and 80s, but they are back. The XF interior is amazing, it is better than anything short of an S-class. It is a car you have to see in person and sit in to appreciate.

Tata is financed to the hilt. I wouldn't count on them to turn Jaguar around. Tata is like those people who got a 1.2 million, zero down, negative amortization loan on a 2,200 sq foot, 15 year old McMansion in Southern California and then couldn't afford to furnish it. The development of the XF was done by Ford as a last gasp effort to avoid having to sell the brand. It didn't arrive in time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought we were done with your idiotic comments. You seriously think a Hyundai Genesis handles just as well as a CTS?

The CTS is world class.

The Genesis gets .86 g on the skidpad, same as the CTS, and the Genesis does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, which is better than the CTS. I have driven the CTS, but obviously not the Genesis, I would guess the CTS is firmer and handles better since the Genesis is aimed at comfort/luxury not performance. Although the CTS to me feels too heavy and not as agile as I would like. My real point was just as we laugh at the Genesis, the Europeans laugh the same at an American performance/luxury car. Cadillac's challenge is to make global cars that are respected everywhere, so they need better cars. Even in the USA they are the #4 selling luxury brand, if they can't be #1 here, how can they compete in Europe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, this talk of $8 gas and Europeans don't want V8's is a BS excuse...or does everyone forget about the Jaguar XF, M3, M5 (V10), and so on.

Another reason Europeans won't buy it, is because it's American. Most Europeans unlike Americans are very nationalistic when it comes to buying cars, they buy their home team's vehicles (either their country's or at the very least an EU made car) the majority of the time. A lesson Americans should have learned and put into practice in North America. Most North Americans are perfectly happy to whore out their buying dollars to Japan or Korea, while the North American governments sit on their collective asses and do nothing about it. What you're seeing is the largest transfer of wealth, leaving North America and going to Asia, in the history of the world.

Edited by Pontiac Custom-S
Link to post
Share on other sites
Another reason Europeans won't buy it, is because it's American. Most Europeans unlike Americans are very nationalistic when it comes to buying cars, they buy their home team's vehicles (either their country's or at the very least an EU made car) the majority of the time. A lesson Americans should have learned and put into practice in North America. Most North Americans are perfectly happy to whore out their buying dollars to Japan or Korea, while the North American governments sit on their collective asses and do nothing about it. What you're seeing is the largest transfer of wealth, leaving North America and going to Asia, in the history of the world.

I agree 100%...

americans care more about the advancement of other countries than their own.

Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM
Link to post
Share on other sites
Another reason Europeans won't buy it, is because it's American. Most Europeans unlike Americans are very nationalistic when it comes to buying cars, they buy their home team's vehicles (either their country's or at the very least an EU made car) the majority of the time. A lesson Americans should have learned and put into practice in North America. Most North Americans are perfectly happy to whore out their buying dollars to Japan or Korea, while the North American governments sit on their collective asses and do nothing about it. What you're seeing is the largest transfer of wealth, leaving North America and going to Asia, in the history of the world.

The best-selling vehicle in the UK is the European-developed and assembled Ford Focus.

The best-selling vehicle in the US is the American-developed and assembled Honda Accord.

I'd say the US is similarly 'nationalistic' when it comes to buying cars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're welcome to say so.... assuming you enjoy people looking at you with one eyebrow raised and their heads tilted slightly to one side.

In reality : do you think even 15% of the consumer pool knows where a given car was "developed" ?? Or is influenced to buy solely by such ??

A car's nationality is determined by where it's corporation headquarters' are/ where it is legally organized. Period. When people start calling the mercedes' & bmws SUVs assembled here, 'American', we can argue this further. Development location is immaterial here, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're welcome to say so.... assuming you enjoy people looking at you with one eyebrow raised and their heads tilted slightly to one side.

In reality : do you think even 15% of the consumer pool knows where a given car was "developed" ?? Or is influenced to buy solely by such ??

A car's nationality is determined by where it's corporation headquarters' are/ where it is legally organized. Period. When people start calling the mercedes' & bmws SUVs assembled here, 'American', we can argue this further. Development location is immaterial here, IMO.

For the U.S., I agree with you, but the Germans seem to be very conscious of where vehicles are developed. Apathy towards development location seems to be a particularly US trait.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The best-selling vehicle in the UK is the European-developed and assembled Ford Focus.

The best-selling vehicle in the US is the American-developed and assembled Honda Accord.

I'd say the US is similarly 'nationalistic' when it comes to buying cars.

I'd say you're wrong. People in the U.S. buy the Accord because they think it is entirely a Japanese car.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tata is financed to the hilt. I wouldn't count on them to turn Jaguar around. Tata is like those people who got a 1.2 million, zero down, negative amortization loan on a 2,200 sq foot, 15 year old McMansion in Southern California and then couldn't afford to furnish it. The development of the XF was done by Ford as a last gasp effort to avoid having to sell the brand. It didn't arrive in time.

Tata is a multinational conglomerate...IIRC, one of the largest in India and the world....what are you talking about? They have all the resources necessary to redevelop Jag, including the $ to bring in tech help. How often do you simply mislead with nonsense like this?

Ford Sold because Mullally determined that Jag & LR couldn't be afforded, given the direction of int'l issues...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tata turns a couple billion a year in profit and their revenue grew 29% in 2007. They are a growing and profitable company, Tata can get Jaguar turned around. They already approved 2 new engines, and the return of the E-Type and an all new XJ. Ford is a shrinking company that is losing money, they had to sell. Plus Ford can focus on their core brands, maybe sell Volvo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"Tata turns a couple billion a year in profit and their revenue grew 29% in 2007. They are a growing and profitable company, Tata can get Jaguar turned around."<<

If money was all it took, why was the tundra so uncompetitive and a sales dud? Why are tacomas breaking in half and costing billions to buy-back? Why is the land cruiser such a dismal unwanted dinosaur?

Not that I really care, but I would find it far more creditable if tata had an admirable portfolio of tata-developed vehicles under their elbow... do they ??

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're welcome to say so.... assuming you enjoy people looking at you with one eyebrow raised and their heads tilted slightly to one side.

In reality : do you think even 15% of the consumer pool knows where a given car was "developed" ?? Or is influenced to buy solely by such ??

A car's nationality is determined by where it's corporation headquarters' are/ where it is legally organized. Period. When people start calling the mercedes' & bmws SUVs assembled here, 'American', we can argue this further. Development location is immaterial here, IMO.

Yeah,

Why is everyone so quick to quel their own guilt about buying Japanese by saying "they're american cars" yet, no one ever mentions the same about the Euros. Seems like it's just another media scam to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops. Jeremy tested the old CTS-V and liked it well enough; his biggest complaints were the price, steering wheel location, and annoying bongs and beeps if I remember right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tata is a multinational conglomerate...IIRC, one of the largest in India and the world....what are you talking about? They have all the resources necessary to redevelop Jag, including the $ to bring in tech help. How often do you simply mislead with nonsense like this?

Ford Sold because Mullally determined that Jag & LR couldn't be afforded, given the direction of int'l issues...

NY Times

India’s Tata Motors plans to borrow $3 billion from nine banks to finance its purchase of Ford Motor’s Jaguar and Land Rover luxury-car brands, Bloomberg News reported citing unnamed sources. Among the banks Tata will use are Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, these unnamed sources told the news service. Others include the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, BNP Paribas, Calyon, ING Groep, the Mizuho Financial Group, Standard Chartered and the State Bank of India.

The Truth about Cars

Not only have JLR lost billions of dollars for Ford, but apparently Tata wasn't just pulling a fist full of coins out of the sofa to pay for the brands. Reuters reports this morning that "Tata has announced plans to raise $4 billion, expected to help finance the Ford deal and the manufacture of the Nano."

Biz-Info India

The carmaker's loans to finance the purchase may boost interest payments and profit may fall by 30 percent next year, said Vaishali Jajoo, an analyst at Angel Broking Ltd. Tata Motors has tied up $3 billion of short-term loans to fund its biggest ever acquisition, seeking overseas markets and new technology....Tata Motors' acquisition, costing more than five times 2007 earnings, was announced after the stock market closed yesterday. The company's American depositary receipts fell 6.8 percent.

Borrowing $3 billion to pay for a $2.3 billion acquisition of companies that have lost money for years and fund development of a car you've already said you'd build while using 9 different banks to do it...... nope, doesn't sound like being financed to the hilt at all......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oops. Jeremy tested the old CTS-V and liked it well enough; his biggest complaints were the price, steering wheel location, and annoying bongs and beeps if I remember right.

And the interior, and that it didn't feel like a quality product. I think the new one solves all of that..besidesmaybe the bong. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
>>"Tata turns a couple billion a year in profit and their revenue grew 29% in 2007. They are a growing and profitable company, Tata can get Jaguar turned around."<<

If money was all it took, why was the tundra so uncompetitive and a sales dud? Why are tacomas breaking in half and costing billions to buy-back? Why is the land cruiser such a dismal unwanted dinosaur?

Not that I really care, but I would find it far more creditable if tata had an admirable portfolio of tata-developed vehicles under their elbow... do they ??

The Tundra isn't a total dud, they sold nearly 200,000 of them, all pickups are falling now. The Tundra is ugly as can be, and pickup buyers are generally loyal, that is what really hurts it. Plus the Tundra is not better than the Silverado. The Tundra faces the same problem Cadillac has breaking into Europe. To break into a new market you have to blow away the competition, not just get 90% of the way there.

Toyota has the new Sequoia that is nicer than the Land Cruiser and does 0-60 in 6.2 seconds, so people will buy that instead of the Land Before Time Cruiser.

I am glad that the CTS-V is going to Europe after all. I hope Clarkson tests the regular and V versions of the CTS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Tundra isn't a total dud, they sold nearly 200,000 of them, all pickups are falling now. The Tundra is ugly as can be, and pickup buyers are generally loyal, that is what really hurts it. Plus the Tundra is not better than the Silverado. The Tundra faces the same problem Cadillac has breaking into Europe. To break into a new market you have to blow away the competition, not just get 90% of the way there.

Toyota has the new Sequoia that is nicer than the Land Cruiser and does 0-60 in 6.2 seconds, so people will buy that instead of the Land Before Time Cruiser.

I am glad that the CTS-V is going to Europe after all. I hope Clarkson tests the regular and V versions of the CTS.

Tundra is on pace to do 150,000 this year....

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say you're wrong. People in the U.S. buy the Accord because they think it is entirely a Japanese car.

And Mitsubishi, Suzuki, and Isuzu are doing so well here?

Or, perhaps people buy the Accord because of the reputation that the Honda brand has earned in the US, and because they admire the company's perceived achievements and contributions to the community, much like... oh, how Europeans buy Ford because they trust and admire the Ford brand and company.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah,

Why is everyone so quick to quel their own guilt about buying Japanese by saying "they're american cars" yet, no one ever mentions the same about the Euros. Seems like it's just another media scam to me.

W.T.F. This is sounding like Nicole Richie blaming everything, and I mean everything, over her period. Except for you, it's the media.

Saying the European Focus is as European as the American Accord is American is NOT quelling whatever "guilt" I have - it is based on reality, the fact that certain Hondas are dreamt up by Americans, designed and engineered by Americans, and built in America exclusively for Americans from start to finish, whereas neither BMW of NA nor Mercedes-Benz USA have the capacity to do the same.

Does this make HoMoCo American? No. But I don't see how most European countries really are so much more "nationalistic" about their car purchases than Americans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Genesis gets .86 g on the skidpad, same as the CTS, and the Genesis does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, which is better than the CTS.

You're really comparing the V8 Genesis to the V6 CTS? Really?

And I bet you wonder why we hardly ever take you seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jaguar went through a bad time in the 70s and 80s, but they are back. The XF interior is amazing, it is better than anything short of an S-class. It is a car you have to see in person and sit in to appreciate.

I don't find the XF interior "all that" at all......it's surprisingly tight inside and the gimicks like the rotating shift knob and rotating HVAC vents are just that.....gimicks.

I think the vast plateau of silver plastic trim on the dash and center stack looks and feels like plastic. I don't think the dashboard or instrument cluster are very stylish.....

To me, if you sit inside a current XJ, it feels like it has a real sense of occasion. Sure it may be dated, and the switchgear may be older....but you sit inside it and it feels like a Jaguar....feels special.

Basically it the XF just doesn't feel special to me....I tend to feel the same way about the XK interior as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You're really comparing the V8 Genesis to the V6 CTS? Really?

And I bet you wonder why we hardly ever take you seriously.

We might not know where his logic came from, but, the V8 Genesis is a $40K - $42K car.....right on top of most decently-equipped non-D.I. CTS sedans......

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't find the XF interior "all that" at all......it's surprisingly tight inside and the gimicks like the rotating shift knob and rotating HVAC vents are just that.....gimicks.

I think the vast plateau of silver plastic trim on the dash and center stack looks and feels like plastic. I don't think the dashboard or instrument cluster are very stylish.....

To me, if you sit inside a current XJ, it feels like it has a real sense of occasion. Sure it may be dated, and the switchgear may be older....but you sit inside it and it feels like a Jaguar....feels special.

Basically it the XF just doesn't feel special to me....I tend to feel the same way about the XK interior as well.

The XF uses aluminum trim not gray plastic imitation stuff like some cars. The leather wrapped dash (premium or supercharged) is real leather, not imitation, and I happen to like the gimmicks. I'll agree that it can be a little tight feeling because the console is high in the middle. The XF interior is better than the A6, 5-series or E-class. The XJ is like a fancier, better made Town Car. It has that old fashioned feel with gobs of burled walnut wood trim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
W.T.F. This is sounding like Nicole Richie blaming everything, and I mean everything, over her period. Except for you, it's the media.

Saying the European Focus is as European as the American Accord is American is NOT quelling whatever "guilt" I have - it is based on reality, the fact that certain Hondas are dreamt up by Americans, designed and engineered by Americans, and built in America exclusively for Americans from start to finish, whereas neither BMW of NA nor Mercedes-Benz USA have the capacity to do the same.

Does this make HoMoCo American? No. But I don't see how most European countries really are so much more "nationalistic" about their car purchases than Americans.

The comment wasn't directed at you.

DUPLICATE: " 'nuff said."

Link to post
Share on other sites
We might not know where his logic came from, but, the V8 Genesis is a $40K - $42K car.....right on top of most decently-equipped non-D.I. CTS sedans......

My logic behind it was that Europeans look at a Cadillac as 2nd class, like we in the USA look at Hyundai as second class. The way people here think the Genesis is not a worthy competitor is exactly how Europeans think of Cadillac.

But the comparison is valid. $42,000 for a Genesis V8, A CTS DI can easily go high $40s (the one I test drove was $50,200). Their skid pad numbers are the same, options lists are similar, but the Genesis has a 17 speaker 500 watt stereo compared to 10 speaker, 300 watt in the CTS, and the Genesis is faster and roomier. The Genesis V8 even gets 17/25 mpg, the CTS V6 is 17/26. The CTS is closer to the Genesis than it is to a 335i or 535i.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry; we in the U.S. look at hyundai as fourth class, just approaching third.

No one who's shopping Cadillac will cross-shop a hyundai- ridiculous. No one buys a car by counting the # of speakers, ridiculous. Skidpad numbers are routinely dismissed as primary markers for handling : what is the hindend's slalom or lane-changing numbers?

As if it really matters- it's a cush-mobile at best, not anything with sporting pretensions- it's an avalon w/ RWD & a V-8, tho I suppose it may make a big impression on the set of "I LUV the '90s' due to it's cribbed styling efforts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's too bad that the CTS-V wont be in the euro market to compete with the BMW M's, Mecedes AMG's or Audi RS'. The V series will be a world beater for sure, but Cadillac is late in the game anyways and the others have already moved on. While Cadillac is just joining into the super fast club, what about the next trendy segment called the "four door coupe". Mercedes CLS is hot, Audi A7 is coming out in a few years as well as Porche's Panamera. BMW's CS concept car is supposed to be coming out as an 8 series as well.

I love Cadillac and have owned a few before but I wish they were more in step with the other premium brands. By the time Cadillac even designs a concept for that segment I'm afraid there will be a new trend already out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"The V series will be a world beater for sure, but Cadillac is late in the game anyways and the others have already moved on."<<

So the AMGs and Ms are all cancelled? That's some shocking news!

CTS-V is 4 years old and counting. If that means late to the game, what is the A7's timing vs. the CLS?? How late to the game is porsche with their sports sedan ??

I hear what you are saying- things could always be better, (IMO, the BMWCS should've been the Bangled 7-series years ago), but I see no reason to seemingly 'dis' the CTS-V because it didn't appear the same year it's competitors first did. Hopefully Cadillac will spread the CTS/SRX/Escalade segment successes throughout the portfolio.

Edited by balthazar
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's too bad that the CTS-V wont be in the euro market to compete with the BMW M's, Mecedes AMG's or Audi RS'. The V series will be a world beater for sure, but Cadillac is late in the game anyways and the others have already moved on. While Cadillac is just joining into the super fast club, what about the next trendy segment called the "four door coupe". Mercedes CLS is hot, Audi A7 is coming out in a few years as well as Porche's Panamera. BMW's CS concept car is supposed to be coming out as an 8 series as well.

I love Cadillac and have owned a few before but I wish they were more in step with the other premium brands. By the time Cadillac even designs a concept for that segment I'm afraid there will be a new trend already out.

Maybe GM does know what it's doing after all:

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/14/lock-an...rope-after-all/

:thumbsup:

Edited by Dodgefan
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry; we in the U.S. look at hyundai as fourth class, just approaching third.

No one who's shopping Cadillac will cross-shop a hyundai- ridiculous. No one buys a car by counting the # of speakers, ridiculous. Skidpad numbers are routinely dismissed as primary markers for handling : what is the hindend's slalom or lane-changing numbers?

As if it really matters- it's a cush-mobile at best, not anything with sporting pretensions- it's an avalon w/ RWD & a V-8, tho I suppose it may make a big impression on the set of "I LUV the '90s' due to it's cribbed styling efforts.

You could argue that no one shopping for a BMW 5 or 7 series or Mercedes E, CLS or S-class is cross shopping Cadillac. Those cars are $50-180,000, Cadillac doesn't operate in that price range (except Escalade or slow selling XLR and I am comparing sedans).

The Genesis has to be cross shopped with something. I think Chrysler 300, Buick, Avalon, Lincoln, and Lexus ES are the targets. I personally am not going to buy a Genesis, but it would make for an interesting test drive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Genesis has to be cross shopped with something. I think Chrysler 300, Buick, Avalon, Lincoln, and Lexus ES are the targets. I personally am not going to buy a Genesis, but it would make for an interesting test drive.

Right there you justa dmitted that the idea of cross shopping the CTS with the Genesis is a stupid idea. The cars you just listed are the cars that will be crossed-shopped, with the Chrysler 300 being the closest logical match to the Genesis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We might not know where his logic came from, but, the V8 Genesis is a $40K - $42K car.....right on top of most decently-equipped non-D.I. CTS sedans......

My point is... if you compare V8 performance numbers to V6 performance numbers, and they stack up... who looks better and who looks worse?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Tundra isn't a total dud, they sold nearly 200,000 of them, all pickups are falling now. The Tundra is ugly as can be, and pickup buyers are generally loyal, that is what really hurts it. Plus the Tundra is not better than the Silverado. The Tundra faces the same problem Cadillac has breaking into Europe. To break into a new market you have to blow away the competition, not just get 90% of the way there.

Toyota has the new Sequoia that is nicer than the Land Cruiser and does 0-60 in 6.2 seconds, so people will buy that instead of the Land Before Time Cruiser.

I am glad that the CTS-V is going to Europe after all. I hope Clarkson tests the regular and V versions of the CTS.

Tundra is, as I predicted, a real loser.

In fact, it is the worst mistake Toyota has made in recent memory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tundra is, as I predicted, a real loser.

In fact, it is the worst mistake Toyota has made in recent memory.

The goal was to sell 200,000 of them, and they sold 197,000 in calendar year 2007. It's not as good as the Silverado or F150, so less people bought it, but over time Toyota will get the quality issues fixed. If selling 197,000 units and making $6 billion in revenue is their worst mistake, Toyota is in a pretty good place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The goal was to sell 200,000 of them, and they sold 197,000 in calendar year 2007. It's not as good as the Silverado or F150, so less people bought it, but over time Toyota will get the quality issues fixed. If selling 197,000 units and making $6 billion in revenue is their worst mistake, Toyota is in a pretty good place.

Umm, no.

Toyota reduced the goal to 200k and then failed to meet this reduced goal. The truck has glaring design flaws, and was trending down in sales even before the oil crisis hit. Not to mention the billions spent on development and all new plant (the second plant is cancelled at this point, if I recall correctly). Toyota has now swung and missed three times with this product. Yes, it is their biggest mistake - and a very expensive and embarassing one at that.

The Tundra, simply put, is a POS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the Tundra is ugly inside and out and has had quality issues, and it isn't as good as the Ford or Chevy. Maybe it performs as well a Ram (Ram looks better though), I'd never buy a pickup so it doesn't matter to me.

Toyota's net income last year (year ending March 08) was $17.15 billion, so even if the Tundra is a total bust, it doesn't seem to be hurting them. There is no Toyota/Lexus I'd want, but they are the most efficient and well managed automobile company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"Toyota reduced the goal to 200k and then failed to meet this reduced goal. The truck has glaring design flaws, and was trending down in sales even before the oil crisis hit. Not to mention the billions spent on development and all new plant (the second plant is cancelled at this point, if I recall correctly). Toyota has now swung and missed three times with this product. Yes, it is their biggest mistake - and a very expensive and embarassing one at that. The Tundra, simply put, is a POS. "<<

Very true.

allow me to add to this: tundra debacle also had major warranty issues and very high incentives. Plus- no way did toyopet make $6B profit on the tundra alone- don't forget whatever slim profit the tundra may or may not have made, the plant/ tooling and all major pieces of the tundra were brand new- none of that is paid off. PLUS the plant ran overbudget to construct by millions. This truck, taking into account the potential future of the segment, may take a decade to make a profit.

And finally- the cherry on top is, even tho it's only 2 yrs old (or whatever) - toyopet is already pulling the tundra from the factory to build priuseessees, so add retooling to that ever-growing figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't find the XF interior "all that" at all......it's surprisingly tight inside and the gimicks like the rotating shift knob and rotating HVAC vents are just that.....gimicks.

I think the vast plateau of silver plastic trim on the dash and center stack looks and feels like plastic. I don't think the dashboard or instrument cluster are very stylish.....

To me, if you sit inside a current XJ, it feels like it has a real sense of occasion. Sure it may be dated, and the switchgear may be older....but you sit inside it and it feels like a Jaguar....feels special.

Basically it the XF just doesn't feel special to me....I tend to feel the same way about the XK interior as well.

Totally agree. The XF looks fat and bulbous, and the interior reminds me of an early-2000s Lincoln. Once the novelty of a new sedan that isn't a BMW, Audi, or Merc wears off, I can't imagine it sustaining the same level of sales throughout its product cycle. There isn't even a six-cylinder available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

$6 billion in revenue I said, not profit. Even if the Tundra made $0 profit, Toyota still made $17.1 billion in profit overall, so if that is all off cars, then they are in good shape for the future. GM or Ford would be thrilled to make even $1 billion in profit from car sales, let alone $17B.

Pictures don't do the XF justice, I wish the headlights were more like the concept, but oh well. The interior is better than anything form America or Japan and the back looks like an Aston Martin, which is a good thing. Jaguar wants to go up market with a performance image so they went V8 only. People paying $60,000 probably don't care if it gets 18-19 mpg rather than 20-21 from a V6. Although I think a turbo V6, or diesel would help as gas prices rise. Jaguar does have a hybrid system coming for their new V8, maybe that combo will get V6 mileage.

CTS-V vs XF-R vs 2010/11 M5 vs 2010 E63 should be good though. The 2010 A6 will have a full aluminum chassis, so the RS6 may become a threat again, once it doesn't weigh 4500 pounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why does Jag tease us (well, smk, mostly) with a dynamic concept, then give us a watered-down, generic '90s taurus body with subaru headlights?? Jaguar- the perpetual bridesmaid.

in the extra salvation army dress.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the XF has won every comparison test it has been in. Edmunds.com picked it over the 550i, E550, A6 4.2, Motor Trend picked it over the 550i, E550 and GS460, a German magazine even picked it over the 550i and E550, and of course the British car rags think it is the best luxury sedan. It' s a great car, and for those that want styling closer to the concept version, the XJ is said to be more aggressive like the CX-F, plus it is aluminum and lighter than the XF.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the XF has won every comparison test it has been in. Edmunds.com picked it over the 550i, E550, A6 4.2, Motor Trend picked it over the 550i, E550 and GS460, a German magazine even picked it over the 550i and E550, and of course the British car rags think it is the best luxury sedan. It' s a great car, and for those that want styling closer to the concept version, the XJ is said to be more aggressive like the CX-F, plus it is aluminum and lighter than the XF.

I for one never had a problem with the XF. It is a good looking car, and far more so than the Germans. I do hope the next XJ has the agressiveness of teh C-XF though, because while teh XF is very good, it lost that aggressive edge from concept to production.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a lot farther removed from the concept than -say- the G6 was. But what I want to know is- why change any of it at this price level??

>>"It's not as good as the Silverado or F150, so less people bought it, but over time Toyota will get the quality issues fixed. If selling 197,000 units and making $6 billion in revenue..."<<

The crime here is toyota had decades and decades of studying/copying the class leaders, endless buckets of bux, and they weren't. even. close. And with all that mad, crazy, outrageous R&D spending.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The C-XF front end was too expensive to do, even at $50-65,000.

GM has had 25 years to copy the 3-series and never did, 40 years to copy the S-class and never did. At least Toyota tried, Cadillac won't even try.

I don't like Toyota and wouldn't buy their cars, but I recognize that they are the wealthiest and most efficiently managed car maker. Toyota could buy 100% of GM's stock with 6 months worth of profit. At least they can afford to spend $8 billion a year on R&D, GM never spent that much and has to cu