Here’s how the CTS started the biggest turnaround in Cadillac’s history

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

 

[riviera74]

Just watched it earlier this afternoon.  Excellent video.

Just think, if Olds had the same effort applied to the Intrigue AND the Alero that was applied to the 1st Generation Aurora, Olds might still be around, admittedly making the next Bravada and a replacement for the Buick Terraza.  Cadillac needed Arts & Sciences; otherwise it would have been binned as quickly as Pontiac or Saturn in 2010.

As for Cadillac, no CTS means no 2nd Generation Escalade or anything after.  That would have been sad. . . . unless you LOVE the XT series of crossovers.

[Drew Dowdell]

Three thumbs up for that video! 👍👍👍

He does talk about the size confusion that plagues @smk4565 all the time. The original was called a compact and was priced against the German compacts, but in its debut year, it was slightly longer than a 5-series.  That simply meant that the Cadillac was giving you more car for your money.

[oldshurst442]

Good video.

Id like to question some one of the facts on it though. 

The narrator says that the CTS stands for Catera Touring Sedan.  I never heard that. More than that,  Ive read in SEVERAL GM sourced media that the C in CTS is definetely NOT for Catera.   

 

Like @Drew Dowdell mentions and mocks SMK, Im glad the video stated that the CTS was a tad bigger than the the compact competitors it wanted to compete with but smaller than the mid sizers.  I just wished the video mentioned that the German competition of BMW 3 Series and Mercedes C Class eventually grew in size to BE 1st and 2nd generation CTS sized.

Many folk dont realize that the CTS actually created its own niche size that even Cadillac itself didnt realize...  

The Escalade, the 1st and 2nd generation CTS,  and the FWD SRX is what started Cadillac's turnaround and in that order of vehicles, in my opinion. 

 

 

[Drew Dowdell]

20 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

The narrator says that the CTS stands for Catera Touring Sedan.  I never heard that. More than that,  Ive read in SEVERAL GM sourced media that the C in CTS is definetely NOT for Catera.

There have been conflicting reports on that story for years.  GM’s staunch denial tells me that it was originally going to mean Catera Touring Sedan but then they decided there was too much baggage after the badges were made and the press releases went out. 

Later, when the CT6 came out, DeNychen introduced it as the “Cadillac Touring Six”. I was there in the audience when he first said it.  A very good friend of mine was with Cadillac PR at the time, so I asked him about it, and he rolled his eyes and said “I guess that’s what we’re going with now”.  I’ve never hear of the CT4 and CT5 referred to that way…. And it doesn’t tell me what the X in XT4 and XT5 means.  Crossover Touring 5? But Crossover isn’t a brand, and it starts with a C….

At least they’re going back to names so we don’t have to deal with this much longer. 

[smk4565]

15 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Three thumbs up for that video! 👍👍👍

He does talk about the size confusion that plagues @smk4565 all the time. The original was called a compact and was priced against the German compacts, but in its debut year, it was slightly longer than a 5-series.  That simply meant that the Cadillac was giving you more car for your money.

They gave you more size for the money but not a better car.  I think the Gen 1 CTS (and the XLR) had great exterior styling and they still hold up, where as the more rounded off STS of the mid 2000s looks pretty dated now.  GM nailed the exterior styling, but the interior was crap plastic and the first year CTS had the underpowered Opel V6 because the 3.6 liter didn't arrive until 2004.  No all wheel drive on the first Gen CTS either which the Germans had.  They did a lot right, but not enough to beat the Germans.

And the Gen 1 CTS was the best selling (for a single model year), which makes sense because each CTS since got worse styling, but they kept up the theme of always cost cutting somewhere or dropping the ball somewhere.    The CTS came out the last model year of the E39 5-series, so by 2004 BMW hade moved on to the next thing, Cadillac was trying to sell a copy of the last generation BMW rather than leapfrog BMW.  But they did the same mistake with the ATS, designed it around a germination old 3-series.  That is why BMW is where they are today and Cadillac is where they are.

[Drew Dowdell]

4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They gave you more size for the money but not a better car.  I think the Gen 1 CTS (and the XLR) had great exterior styling and they still hold up, where as the more rounded off STS of the mid 2000s looks pretty dated now.  GM nailed the exterior styling, but the interior was crap plastic and the first year CTS had the underpowered Opel V6 because the 3.6 liter didn't arrive until 2004.  No all wheel drive on the first Gen CTS either which the Germans had.  They did a lot right, but not enough to beat the Germans.

And the Gen 1 CTS was the best selling (for a single model year), which makes sense because each CTS since got worse styling, but they kept up the theme of always cost cutting somewhere or dropping the ball somewhere.    The CTS came out the last model year of the E39 5-series, so by 2004 BMW hade moved on to the next thing, Cadillac was trying to sell a copy of the last generation BMW rather than leapfrog BMW.  But they did the same mistake with the ATS, designed it around a germination old 3-series.  That is why BMW is where they are today and Cadillac is where they are.

It's a pretty big leap to say that the first and second gen CTS are why Cadillac is leading BMW in EV and autonomous driving tech, but I guess I'll take it.

The 3-series plastics and CTS plastics where virtually the same in quality and the 3-series had every bit as much plastic.  They both had wood trim, and yes the Cadillac's was real, they just had it in different places.  The CTS's interior was quite functional and comfortable, a big reason why I got one over the 3-series. I could take 3 friends with me on a road trip and no one would complain about space or the ride being rough like in a 3er.

If the 3.2 Opel engine was underpowered, what was the 228hp / 221 lb-ft in the 530i of that year... or the 184 hp in the 325i (which was the bulk of their sales)?  From a power to weight ratio standpoint, the CTS 3.2 was dead on with the slightly heavier 530i and slightly lighter 325i.  By the time the 3.6 got there, it matched the new inline-6 in output. If you wanted more, you got yourself a V-series which still less money than a 550i for more power.  So you got an M3 beater in power and handling in a 5-series sized body... and the only time the M3 beat the CTS is when there was an 82 year old man behind the wheel of the Cadillac and a 26 year old in the BMW.

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It's a pretty big leap to say that the first and second gen CTS are why Cadillac is leading BMW in EV and autonomous driving tech, but I guess I'll take it.

The 3-series plastics and CTS plastics where virtually the same in quality and the 3-series had every bit as much plastic.  They both had wood trim, and yes the Cadillac's was real, they just had it in different places.  The CTS's interior was quite functional and comfortable, a big reason why I got one over the 3-series. I could take 3 friends with me on a road trip and no one would complain about space or the ride being rough like in a 3er.

If the 3.2 Opel engine was underpowered, what was the 228hp / 221 lb-ft in the 530i of that year... or the 184 hp in the 325i (which was the bulk of their sales)?  From a power to weight ratio standpoint, the CTS 3.2 was dead on with the slightly heavier 530i and slightly lighter 325i.  By the time the 3.6 got there, it matched the new inline-6 in output. If you wanted more, you got yourself a V-series which still less money than a 550i for more power.  So you got an M3 beater in power and handling in a 5-series sized body... and the only time the M3 beat the CTS is when there was an 82 year old man behind the wheel of the Cadillac and a 26 year old in the BMW.

Yet BMW outsold Cadillac back then, outsells them nearly 3-1 in the USA now, probably like 8-1 globally.  And people will pay $50k for a good condition E39 M5, and pretty much no one is collecting the CTS or any other Cadillac of the past 20 years.  

BMW also sold more EV's than Cadillac last year, and BMW has 3 EV's and 4 plug-in hybrids, to Cadillac's 1 EV and 0 PHEV's.  Mercedes has 4 EV models on dealer lots now, a 5th coming this year.  Cadillac is pretty far behind in the EV and PHEV game, I guess if Celestiq hits production this year that gives them 2, but that isn't even scheduled to start production til December, so they won't be in customer hands until 2024.  And GM Ultra Cruise is behind Mercedes Drive Pilot, and Ultra Cruise isn't even available yet, so even when it comes out Cadillac is still behind.

 Too much following and chasing over the past 20 years, not enough leap frogging. 

[Drew Dowdell]

Mercedes' EVs are pretty lame and ugly. I've driven three of them. Only the i4 is attractive at BMW.  The iX and XM are really freaking ugly.  There was an iX at the Waterfront over the weekend and its even worse in person.  The i7 is decent looking but it's $120k with a base range below 300 miles. The i4 is a hoot and half and I'd totally own one in a different life. But why did they make it so tiny inside with a tiny trunk. A Jetta is bigger inside.

GM's EV tech is above the Germans on range and power.  Better controllers, better batteries, faster charging, plus most GM dealers are getting chargers installed, so even when you're in Pig's Knuckle Alabama, there's probably a Chevy dealer with a charger nearby.

Have you ever actually used Super Cruise? Super Cruise and Ultra Cruise are sufficiently advanced to be equal or superior to Mercedes. Any limitations of Ultra Cruise are imposed by the legal department, not R&D.  Ultra Cruise can get you driveway to driveway autonomously.  Yes you have to pay attention, but I don't believe that is a bad thing. The system is perfectly capable of continuing to function without you paying attention, but GM doesn't want to take that liability. Given the press surrounding people watching movies and hooking up in moving Teslas and crashing into things, I don't blame GM one bit. That does not mean that GM is behind on the tech. One of the main reasons for that is their LIDAR maps. That is something they have that no one else does on the same scale.  Not Benz, not BMW, Honda is buying it from GM.

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Mercedes' EVs are pretty lame and ugly. I've driven three of them. Only the i4 is attractive at BMW.  The iX and XM are really freaking ugly.  There was an iX at the Waterfront over the weekend and its even worse in person.  The i7 is decent looking but it's $120k with a base range below 300 miles. The i4 is a hoot and half and I'd totally own one in a different life. But why did they make it so tiny inside with a tiny trunk. A Jetta is bigger inside.

GM's EV tech is above the Germans on range and power.  Better controllers, better batteries, faster charging, plus most GM dealers are getting chargers installed, so even when you're in Pig's Knuckle Alabama, there's probably a Chevy dealer with a charger nearby.

Have you ever actually used Super Cruise? Super Cruise and Ultra Cruise are sufficiently advanced to be equal or superior to Mercedes. Any limitations of Ultra Cruise are imposed by the legal department, not R&D.  Ultra Cruise can get you driveway to driveway autonomously.  Yes you have to pay attention, but I don't believe that is a bad thing. The system is perfectly capable of continuing to function without you paying attention, but GM doesn't want to take that liability. Given the press surrounding people watching movies and hooking up in moving Tesla's and crashing into things, I don't blame GM one bit. That does not mean that GM is behind on the tech. One of the main reasons for that is their LIDAR maps. That is something they have that no one else does on the same scale.  Not Benz, not BMW, Honda is buying it from GM.

I have not used super cruise but a semi autonomous system that you still have to watch the road doesn’t really do anything for me.  If I don’t have to watch the road and can do something like work on a laptop computer while the car drives to my next appointment, then it is a huge productivity gain and that has value.

[surreal1272]

9 hours ago, smk4565 said:

 If I don’t have to watch the road and can do something like work on a laptop computer while the car drives to my next appointment, then it is a huge productivity gain and that has value.

You go on and trust something like that completely but there are reasons why even the best systems say to still keep your eyes on the road, Mercedes systems included. When your car wrecks, it will be interesting to see who would get the blame. The automated car or the driver who was supposed to keep their eyes on the road?

[Drew Dowdell]

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I have not used super cruise but a semi autonomous system that you still have to watch the road doesn’t really do anything for me.  If I don’t have to watch the road and can do something like work on a laptop computer while the car drives to my next appointment, then it is a huge productivity gain and that has value.

Again, it is not a technical limitation, it is a legal one. Why can't you understand the difference?

Super Cruise has the ability to pull you over and stop if it detects you are incapacitated.  The Tesla and (presumably the Benz) will happily keep driving your dead body to your destination.  Ultra Cruise can get you door to door to door at legal speeds above 35 mph but you have to pay attention for legal reasons so that your Cadillac isn't doing freelance work as a hearse. The Benz can drive you through suburbia but can't take you on the Turnpike... so what's the benefit?

[David]

14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Yet BMW outsold Cadillac back then, outsells them nearly 3-1 in the USA now, probably like 8-1 globally.  And people will pay $50k for a good condition E39 M5, and pretty much no one is collecting the CTS or any other Cadillac of the past 20 years.  

BMW also sold more EV's than Cadillac last year, and BMW has 3 EV's and 4 plug-in hybrids, to Cadillac's 1 EV and 0 PHEV's.  Mercedes has 4 EV models on dealer lots now, a 5th coming this year.  Cadillac is pretty far behind in the EV and PHEV game, I guess if Celestiq hits production this year that gives them 2, but that isn't even scheduled to start production til December, so they won't be in customer hands until 2024.  And GM Ultra Cruise is behind Mercedes Drive Pilot, and Ultra Cruise isn't even available yet, so even when it comes out Cadillac is still behind.

 Too much following and chasing over the past 20 years, not enough leap frogging. 

WOW, are you that incapable to look at the long history of what it took Mercedes and BMW to surpass Cadillac and yet Lexus is considered better than them, Genesis is now doing better than the Germans. 

Mercedes might be second to get EVs out behind BMW, but that does not mean it is the best. As we have seen, Cadillac is an 800v EV and all will come out as 800v EVs. Out of your own mouth, Mercedes is only making 400v and will have to make an upgrade to their system to move to 800v industry standard.

In this case, making sure you have a quality EV over quantity is a better long-term Solution.

[surreal1272]

15 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Too much following and chasing over the past 20 years, not enough leap frogging. 

Kind of like what Mercedes is going through with their EVs right now. Hell, they don't even want to keep the "EQ" name anymore yet not a damn peep regarding their about face moves, even on a page about their EVs here. Interesting.  

[surreal1272]

22 hours ago, smk4565 said:

And the Gen 1 CTS was the best selling (for a single model year), which makes sense because each CTS since got worse styling

While I get that looks are subjective, you are off your meds if you think the 1st gen CTS looks the best out of the three. It sold well because it looked different, at the time, but that was a look that wore very quickly on the average buyer. The 2nd gen. was leaps and bounds better than the slab cut 1st gen., inside and out. The 1st gen. came way too close to being the Aztec of luxury sedans IMO because of those notorious GM bean counters. The 2nd gen. corrected those mistakes IMO.

[Drew Dowdell]

16 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I have not used super cruise but a semi autonomous system that you still have to watch the road doesn’t really do anything for me.  If I don’t have to watch the road and can do something like work on a laptop computer while the car drives to my next appointment, then it is a huge productivity gain and that has value.

You haven't actually read the materials from Mercedes about Drive Pilot have you? I went out and did some research.  Here they are, linked for your pleasure.

Turns out that Drive Pilot does monitor you.  You can't be asleep. You can't leave the driver's seat... and even using a laptop might not be possible.  Yes, you can check your e-mail, but you have to do it on the infotainment screen.  Yes you can watch a movie, but you have to do it on the infotainment screen.

I quote:

Quote

The fallback-ready user may use the in-vehicle multi-media system for communications, productivity and/or entertainment purposes,

Furthermore, in the future, the in-car cameras will upload data to Mercedes for analysis.... so Smile! You're on Camera!

[smk4565]

8 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Again, it is not a technical limitation, it is a legal one. Why can't you understand the difference?

Super Cruise has the ability to pull you over and stop if it detects you are incapacitated.  The Tesla and (presumably the Benz) will happily keep driving your dead body to your destination.  Ultra Cruise can get you door to door to door at legal speeds above 35 mph but you have to pay attention for legal reasons so that your Cadillac isn't doing freelance work as a hearse. The Benz can drive you through suburbia but can't take you on the Turnpike... so what's the benefit?

The Mercedes can also do what Super cruise does on the highway with following lanes, making lane changes etc.  Common level 2 stuff.  Drive Pilot goes to level 3 and lets you not watch the road up to 37 mph.  
 

And when Drive Pilot is engaged Mercedes accepts legal responsibility if there is an accident.  If it is just legalities then GM should accept liability for any accidents while Ultra Cruise is engaged.  Also GM, doesn’t have level 3 certification from the government, nor does anyone else but Mercedes.

[Drew Dowdell]

4 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Mercedes can also do what Super cruise does on the highway with following lanes, making lane changes etc.  Common level 2 stuff.  Drive Pilot goes to level 3 and lets you not watch the road up to 37 mph.  
 

And when Drive Pilot is engaged Mercedes accepts legal responsibility if there is an accident.  If it is just legalities then GM should accept liability for any accidents while Ultra Cruise is engaged.  Also GM, doesn’t have level 3 certification from the government, nor does anyone else but Mercedes.

UltraCruise operates on 97% of all road ways. UltraCruise has access to the most extensive LIDAR maps ever made.  GM has Level 3 on the road today with its Cruise division., and it's been operating over a year.

Mercedes is not technologically ahead here.  Who want's to watch The Incredibles at 37 mph?

[smk4565]

6 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

While I get that looks are subjective, you are off your meds if you think the 1st gen CTS looks the best out of the three. It sold well because it looked different, at the time, but that was a look that wore very quickly on the average buyer. The 2nd gen. was leaps and bounds better than the slab cut 1st gen., inside and out. The 1st gen. came way too close to being the Aztec of luxury sedans IMO because of those notorious GM bean counters. The 2nd gen. corrected those mistakes IMO.

The 1st Gen CTS not only looked good and different for its time but it aged the best.  The original CTS design today holds up now, the Gen 2’a looks bloated and wide in the back, Gen 3 is boring and forgettable, Gen 3’s already look dated, imagine 10 years from now.  And I am talking exterior styling.

Gen 2 was a big leap in interior, but they made the car bigger and raised the price too so it started getting blurred with the STS.  But the point still is Cadillac is no better off now than they were 20 years ago and they might even be further behind BMW now.

 

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You haven't actually read the materials from Mercedes about Drive Pilot have you? I went out and did some research.  Here they are, linked for your pleasure.

Turns out that Drive Pilot does monitor you.  You can't be asleep. You can't leave the driver's seat... and even using a laptop might not be possible.  Yes, you can check your e-mail, but you have to do it on the infotainment screen.  Yes you can watch a movie, but you have to do it on the infotainment screen.

I quote:

Furthermore, in the future, the in-car cameras will upload data to Mercedes for analysis.... so Smile! You're on Camera!

To me any autonomous drive tech doesn’t really add value unless I could be taking a nap, watch a movie, work on a laptop, eat lunch, whatever.  Whether that be Mercedes system or anyone else’s.  Because if the car can drive for you, that is giving you time.  Whether it be a half hour commute or 8 hour road trip, if the car can do it all, you are buying free time.  To me that is where the value add is.  On the commercial side the value add is in having Uber with no driver to pay.

[Drew Dowdell]

15 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

To me any autonomous drive tech doesn’t really add value unless I could be taking a nap, watch a movie, work on a laptop, eat lunch, whatever.  Whether that be Mercedes system or anyone else’s.  Because if the car can drive for you, that is giving you time.  Whether it be a half hour commute or 8 hour road trip, if the car can do it all, you are buying free time.  To me that is where the value add is.  On the commercial side the value add is in having Uber with no driver to pay.

So... the Mercedes system isn't that good anymore since you can't nap?  Funny how that works.

[surreal1272]

27 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The 1st Gen CTS not only looked good and different for its time but it aged the best.

Again, off your meds to think any of that. It aged like a block of half cut cheese. 

45 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Drive Pilot goes to level 3 and lets you not watch the road up to 37 mph.

So you’re admitting that even Benz can’t give you what you want unless you keep it slow. So much for napping at highway speeds lol. 

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

So... the Mercedes system isn't that good anymore since you can't nap?  Funny how that works.

You can still do a lot of other things, but the end game is you can sleep in the car and arrive at your destination without even doing anything.  And GM may have level 3 with Cruise, but you can't buy it on a Cadillac Lyriq.

And it goes back to my original point, Cadillac 20 years after the CTS isn't any better off now, they might even be falling farther behind.  The original SRX was pretty competitive and they had the XLR as a halo, they don't even have that now.

[Drew Dowdell]

2 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

You can still do a lot of other things, but the end game is you can sleep in the car and arrive at your destination without even doing anything.  And GM may have level 3 with Cruise, but you can't buy it on a Cadillac Lyriq.

It's on the Celestiq first. Top level Lyriqs can have the hardware for it and GM will activate it once the system rolls out.

[oldshurst442]

I had, and still have 2 problems that dont sit well with me with the 1st gen CTS. 

I dont like the interior and I HATE that grill...   I love the over all look of the car. Still do today.  But that interior and grill sucks for me.  

I do like the V version grill though.

 

I have nothing to complain about the 2nd gen.  The sedan.   Like the regular CTS, LOVE the V. 

 

Its the coupe I cant stand. Its such a slob blob of a car. ESPECIALLY from the back.  Ugly thing man! 

If one wants to talk about a vehicle not aging well, the 2nd gen CTS coupe SHOULD be the vehicle to be discussed.  

[ccap41]

15 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Mercedes is not technologically ahead here.  Who want's to watch The Incredibles at 37 mph?

Agreed. If it can't go 55-70mph, I don't care about some autopilot. I don't need it for around town driving but I'd love it for actually going somewhere, and that doesn't mean only road trips. 

I live in a small town of 10,000 people and it's 20-30 miles to other, larger, areas. I'd use that all the time on those drives.