Croc

Wait, this is news? I'm not trying to be snarky here...obviously I'm not around as much as I used to be, and I haven't been following things too closely, but when I checked the Cadillac site last week I noticed the ELR listed under "Future Vehicles" along with the XTS and ATS...NOT under "Concept Vehicles." Page here: http://www.cadillac.com/elr-electric-car.html

There's nothing "wrong" with the grammar.

Truthfully, I never understood the need for a Silverado AND an Avalanche. Unless someone with greater truck knowledge than I possess can break it down, why couldn't the midgate just be included in a Silverado? Is there a necessary reason for a structurally-separate bed that offers real, practical value for a large customer segment?

The first gen RWD SRX had LEDs, but the FWD SRX did not. WOW, Guess the dealership I have bought all my caddy's from must bring in mostly AWD then as I have not seen anything except LED tail lights. Thanks, I did not know they had two different lenses. You misunderstand...let me clarify: No LED: LED: Regardless of whether or not AWD was selected. Now, GM may have later added in LEDs to the 2010 design, but someone more knowledgeable than I will have to vouch for that, however, I have only seen incandescent brake lights on all the ones I've seen in the wild. I was pretty shocked, to say the least, especially because the taillights LOOK like they'd be LED, but when illuminated are clearly not.

Speechless. I love it, and I would have never believed anyone who would have told me to eagerly anticipate the next Impala.

The first gen RWD SRX had LEDs, but the FWD SRX did not.

Does it now use LED taillights (in addition to the front fender LED light pipes), or did they keep the stupid incandescent ones it launched with?

I like both of these designs a lot...and I can see the LA inspiration came from. The white one is clearly inspired by West LA and the exotics you see around the Platinum Triangle (Bel Air, Beverly Hills & Holmby Hills), while the red one was probably inspired by the Beach Cities and all the classics you see tooling about on a Friday evening going to/coming from the Redondo Harbor meet-ups off Harbor Boulevard. I'd bet my money on it.

I like it; can't wait to check one out. Fuel economy is a huge unknown at this time, though...

...and apparently different doors, too. Looks good, so far!

Why am I seeing any of loki's posts? His are supposed to be hidden according to my site preferences, for obvious reasons.

Oh, I'm sure I'd find the interiors cheap, but that's not what I was writing about--I was referring to the exterior styling. The new KIAs look sharp and sporty, without looking "cheap" with body cladding, fake hood scoops, ribbing, blacked-out taillights...basically they look sporty without looking like a Pontiac.

Wow, this is a lot better-looking than the last decade of Benz...reminds me of that sturdy, vault-like presence the 90s S-Classes exuded.

"...low-frills and inexpensive operating costs over a 10 year period would be key focus points for the new truck in America..." sounds like marketing code for plastic cladding and a cheap interior. Oy vey...

They're already pulling it off, and they'll continue to. I have to say, the new KIAs look sharp on the road. This is how you style "sporty" that doesn't look "cheap."

Like I said in the MKT thread--while the styling is slightly improved, it still looks cheap and flimsy.

Styling, while slightly improved, still looks cheap...flimsy, even.

Just because it works differently than how you are used to doesn't make it "bad."

Disagree, The styling of recent Lincolns has been fairly cheap.

Whoops, guess I missed them on first look. I see them on the far side of the first photo now...pity. I wouldn't mind them if they weren't so blingy and tacked-on.

Funny, my first thought was that they finally toned it down with all the bling. Look--no Ventiports!!

I want to see the rear. The production version looks to have a hump in the rear decklid. The black lines around the headlights make it look like it's already been in a collision. Honestly? I think someone at Cadillac got a little too inspired with the swooshy profile of the Mercedes CLS...and typical of middle America, the taste level with regards to the "bling" is just so trailer park kla$$y. Less is more, but then again, the coasts know that. My father is so buying this when it comes out it isn't even funny--he took a 2000 DHS and a 2006 DTS and put on canvas roofs, gold packages, blingy chrome rims with gold center caps, and custom grilles with gold and blingy chrome, The dealership that sold him those cars has since had its Cadillac franchise revoked.

That's VERY production-ready. As I said in the other thread, it looks good! Proportions are spot-on, the front styling is masculine enough without being "angry"-looking...and the lines are just soft-enough that I think women would like it, too. Rear styling looks pretty strong, too, though I prefer the passenger's-side taillight design better than the driver's-side taillight (could that be more incongruous of a chop?). I really like the hatch design, integrated wiper, and the amount of visibility that it appears to have. D-pillar, however, looks massive. I LOVE the style of the interior, but in the chop the materials look cheap. Obviously that's the reflection effect of the chop. Here's hoping GM shows off a current-generation interior, not a last-generation interior with too much hard plastic. That was the downfall of the GMT-360s and the GMT-355s. This needs to be built and sold in North America. With all of the hybrid technologies GM is working on, CAFE shouldn't be an issue.

Looks good!

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