New York 2019: Cadillac CT5 to Debut: Comments

[Robert Hall 5,429 4 Vehicles]

2 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Thanks, I had just never heard it described like that before. I don't keep up on my design language language.

probably something I picked up long ago in a car magazine..

[regfootball 1,081]

19 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Cadillac has been providing not just a boosted 6, but one of the most powerful of the boosted 6es since 2013.  So yeah... 6 years now.

Having the 3.6 as an extra choice hurts nothing.

But not with AWD on the CTS. 

[regfootball 1,081]

17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Parts sourcing aside, how are they going to get this to sell when the CTS, ATS, XTS and CT6 all have pretty lousy sales numbers.

Obviously the shape a a bit different this time around with the fastback/GT rear end, but only 2 sedans sell in this segment in the USA, and 3 in this segment do well in China, so what is the selling point of the CT5 going to be to break the sales decline?

With the new stocky greenhouse, interior room should be improved over the CTS. IF it is, that will bring some people back. If it’s cheaper than the CT6, and has room and performs well it should sell well. The CT4 if that occurs will be a problem because why would anyone want it?  The CT5 is adequate as entry level caddy sedan in USA by my feeling. People expect a certain minimum of comfort and size from any Cadillac and so if CT5 delivers that i think sales will be ok, styling be damned. 

[Frisky Dingo 934]

36 minutes ago, dfelt said:

I would say they were building a scaled down Escala and then the Bean Counters showed up at the point of the B Pillar and said you have X amount of cash left, finished the car with X dollars and we ended up with that back end mess.

 

This is EXACTLY what happened, I guarantee it.

[Cmicasa the Great 1,380]

I loved the Escala and I love this. Coupla observations.. I see exactly what they did.. but because of size, the design exercise of the longer Escala (2010.5 inch vs this being probably 193-195 inch) could not be completely translated over to a smaller car particularly in profile. I still doubt that the CT5 will be much smaller than the current car with the CT4 still yet to debut. I am betting a longer wheelbase for both, even if the actual length drops a bit.

Anyway,.. The black "faux window in the rear doesn't even bother me because tinting the car as I always do will make it a moot point. Only real disappointment is the door handles aren't the hideaway like the Escla.

So cool that they are done with the 3.6L NA in this car and have gone onto feature forced induction as a sole means of propulsion. I am expecting changes in current HP rating from those as well. If the SPORT is available with the 3.0L... outside of an actual V, I see very little reason to break from the "Y" philosophy and offer a V-Sport. What I have noticed Cadillac has done of late with the VSeries program is put them on their website as separate models. Thus allowing them to stick tothe Y with Lux, Prem Lux, Platinum cars even in the V

As a current CTS owner I love it.. and look forward to the VSeries debut in a year or so. I'll be sitting that one out as I want to go into the CT6-V, but curious and excited nonetheless

Again its basically the same vehicle..there's an obvious nod to the Escala in the C-pillar, but what some seem to have issue with is the curved point.. I think it was added to give some flare..:

the one singular interior shot looks to be very nice.. The fastback design comes off as nice and a very welcome change that may just shake things up a bit in the mid-size luxury category. I remember reading here just a few weeks ago, someone saying that the new CT5 wasn't a departure from the current one.. and once again that is proven wrong. The idea has been floating for sometime that the Escala was the design exercise to bet on for cues towards the new Cadillacs.. this is basically a 85% view of that car. This is its competition.. I'm inclined to once again side with Caddy

Edited March 19 by Cmicasa the Great

[ccap41 3,516 3 Vehicles]

Not everything can be shrunk and get the same results. 

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY 419]

Lincoln learned that one the hard way with the transition from Mark V to Mark VI. 

[Frisky Dingo 934]

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Better styling, reliability.. I see nothing about this vehicle that suggest Chinese knock-off.. I see Escala scaled down. That's it.. I'm ate up.. Eat these nuts B***h 

 

I think it's hilarious that you are like the personal embodiment of a GM product. You're every bit as classless, and as much a piece of trash. It's no wonder you love them so much. 

 

 

@Drew Dowdell

 

Is there any reason why we let let this vile, GM leg humping garbage pile continue to plague this site?

[Cmicasa the Great 1,380]

3 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

 

I think it's hilarious that you are like the personal embodiment of a GM product. You're every bit as classless, and as much a piece of trash. It's no wonder you love them so much. 

Check your inbox

[Frisky Dingo 934]

Nah, I'm good. 

[oldshurst442 2,717]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

Not everything can be shrunk and get the same results. 

That's what SHE said!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

Nah, I'm good. 

 

Kinda like this...yes?!

Edited March 19 by oldshurst442

[Paolino 223 1 Vehicles]

I think this could sell... it has coupish looks and a few design elements that although I don't care for, people seem to eat them up.

[smk4565 1,088]

Oddly enough, Car and Driver is stating the CT5 is a 3-series/C-class competitor, although it looks way bigger than those cars.  C-class pricing of a CT5 is probably a good idea for Cadillac to pursue though.

[oldshurst442 2,717]

28 minutes ago, Paolino said:

I think this could sell... it has coupish looks and a few design elements that although I don't care for, people seem to eat them up.

Im one of those folks...

Im disappoint because it has Honda Accord aspirations rather than Cadillac ones (nah...no Escala in this) despite what @Cmicasa the Great  says. 

But it aint a bad looking vehicle.  I get why the CT5 could never be as sexy as the Escala. Shorter vehicle with a much shorter wheel base. Therefore one should never expect a midsizer to exude a certain type of look that a bigger, and longer wheel base car can achieve, but, Cadillac could have done the controversial  C pillar design a tad better, a tad more coherent and hella more sexier because its a damned Cadillac!!!

But I dont have a problem with that C Pillar design per se.  I do have a problem with the CT5 imitating a Honda. 

Kudos to Honda for making a FWD appliance car look desirable. (I like the new Honda Accord)  Or Ford for its Fusion. Or Chevy for its Impala and Malibu, etc...

Boo to Cadillac for not making  its new CT5 more  prestigious in terms of looks. I mean, it takes a page out of Honda's playbook. Not a bad thing per se, but not good for Cadillac trying to be unique and expensive....

But I said I was one of those folk that would buy a new CT5...

Well...I would buy one. I like the way it looks. But Im disappoint  because once again, yet another model does not inspire Standard of the World...

Maybe, its because its the nature of the segment the CT5 is in. I dont inspire to a Mercedes C Class or BMW 3 Series either...

I dont inspire to the last couple of E Class generations nor do I inspire to the 5 Series either. The last 5 Series I insipred to was the E39...

Because all those models I mentioned, the last 15 years, are nothing but lease queen specials (along with their CUV counterparts) that have over extended debt morons lease them trying to impress their Facebook friends with them taking selfies and talking about how perfect their life is...

So...there is that why I may not be impressed with the CT5, because Cadillac and BMW and M-B know that most of those leased cars in that niche are just broken cigar morons that will lease them so they dont try hard to design a wow factor car because its not about the wow factor exterior, but more about the badge on the hood....

 

 

 

Edited March 19 by oldshurst442

[Drew Dowdell 11,306 2 Vehicles]

35 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Oddly enough, Car and Driver is stating the CT5 is a 3-series/C-class competitor, although it looks way bigger than those cars.  C-class pricing of a CT5 is probably a good idea for Cadillac to pursue though.

Really? I think it looks very 3-series sized. 

[Robert Hall 5,429 4 Vehicles]

4 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Really? I think it looks very 3-series sized. 

I thought it was supposed to be the CTS replacement?  

[Drew Dowdell 11,306 2 Vehicles]

2 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

I thought it was supposed to be the CTS replacement?  

I thought so too.  I'm going by appearance. 

[Robert Hall 5,429 4 Vehicles]

Have to wait and see what the dimensions are.  

[oldshurst442 2,717]

I thought they downsized the CT5 from the CTS to become a tweener again like how the 1st and 2nd generations CTS were.

 

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY 419]

No one knows what the dimensions are.  It will be interesting to see. The current CTS is as big as a downsized 1980's full sized GM car. The one that it matches is a 1986-1991 Oldsmobile Eighty Eight.( 196 inches long, 72 inches wide).  I thought that was odd. The trunk is smaller.  The wheelbase is longer. So why didn't it have any interior room?   This car CT5 will probably be 190 - 195 inches long. 

I know XTS is shorter than a CT6, but XTS has a bigger trunk.  The CT6 is as a big as a 1990's C Body( Ninety Eight or Buick Park Avenue.). It rides on a longer wheelbase, but the width is about the same. So why is CT6's trunk only 15 cubic feet?  

XTS is as big as a 1990's H Body at 201 inches long, 73 inches wide( narrower by one inch) and the wheelbase is about the same.

The reason I say all of this why is the packing different on these cars( CT6 and CTS).   

 

 

[Robert Hall 5,429 4 Vehicles]

3 minutes ago, NINETY EIGHT REGENCY said:

No one knows what the dimensions are.  It will be interesting to see. The current CTS is as big as a downsized 1980's full sized GM car. The one that it matches is a 1986-1991 Oldsmobile Eighty Eight.( 196 inches long, 72 inches wide).  I thought that was odd. The trunk is smaller.  The wheelbase is longer. So why didn't it have any interior room?   This car CT5 will probably be 190 - 195 inches long. 

I know XTS is shorter than a CT6, but XTS has a bigger trunk.  The CT6 is as a big as a 1990's C Body( Ninety Eight or Buick Park Avenue.). It rides on a longer wheelbase, but the width is about the same. So why is CT6's trunk only 15 cubic feet?  

XTS is as big as a 1990's H Body at 201 inches long, 73 inches wide( narrower by one inch) and the wheelbase is about the same.

The reason I say all of this why is the packing different on these cars( CT6 and CTS).   

 

 

You are comparing FWD cars (XTS and 90s C/H bodies) w/ RWD cars.   FWD cars usually have more interior space and a shorter wheelbase than a RWD car of the same overall length.  Just the nature of FWD vs RWD packaging in general. 

[dfelt 4,986 5 Vehicles]

I think the one thing we are missing here is the safety requirements. Newer auto's like the CT6 have far more nanny devices / safety features on how an auto is to crumple and fold around the cage holding the humans. As such, I suspect one thing we are all forgetting is that the safety requirements of the auto's are going to eat into the interior room of the auto.

I do not know for a fact, but that is one thing we have not touched on is the increased safety crash testing requirements. This could explain the reduced size of trunks.

[Robert Hall 5,429 4 Vehicles]

I’d assume the smaller trunks are related to the more aerodynamic short deck fastback shapes.  Crumple zones are nothing new, the 80s Merc S class had them and a big trunk.  

[smk4565 1,088]

47 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

I thought they downsized the CT5 from the CTS to become a tweener again like how the 1st and 2nd generations CTS were.

 

I have heard that was the plan.  We really need to see some dimensions of this car to know how it is sized, in and out.  At least with real specs which I imagine will come in April then maybe we know what they are going for.  I get they hold off on pricing until the fall though.

[Robert Hall 5,429 4 Vehicles]

So if the CT5 is to be a tweeter, then the CT4 might be between the 2 and 3/4 series in size.  Curious.