CaddyXLR-V

I have no problems with the XTS as is, but I'd love to see this just be a design study that ultimately ends up on Zeta so a whole bunch of you can drink a nice steaming cup of STFU and still not buy it.

I mean really, this much vitriol for a car that 99.9% of you couldn't afford new anyway.

Considering that many people on here are younger than 25 and still in school or college, it is to be expected many here can't afford it. But does that mean they shouldn't voice their opinions? Maybe you should limit the threads talking about cars over $40,000 to the .1% that can afford them.

Apples and oranges.

I may not like the execution of the XTS, but a FWD-based Caddy is a far more legitimate entry in the market than one from MB or BMW would be. Those two have zero history building FWD luxury cars - but Cadillac does.

The wreath and crest still has meaning, in fact it has a reputation on the upswing. My opinion is that the XTS doesn't move it forward very much, but as a brand, Cadillac's identity is solidifying generally.

Far be it from me to endorse the XTS, but it isn't the embarassment you seem to think it is.

It's not apples and oranges. Substitute Mercedes and BMW, with Infiniti, and the reaction would be the same, yet Infiniti also has has made FWD cars in the past. But this isn't about the past, or history, it is about current trends. Infiniti stopped making FWD about the same time they started becoming relevent in the luxury market. Cadillac appeared to be on the same path, with the CTS, STS, SRX, and XLR, with only the outdated DTS left for FWD. Then they got scared when the STS didn't sell up to expectations, and instead of fixing the cars shortcomings, they did a 180, and are giving an XTS instead. Same for the SRX. If Infiniti made a new Q, but decided to put it on a FWD biased platform, is would be just as dumb a move as the XTS being put on the Epsilon 2 platform.

Just imagine if Toyota had corporate ADD like GM does. They would have released the T-100, it wouldn't have sold up to expectations, and they would have made a Ridgeline like truck instead. But they don't back down from the competetion. And when it comes time for the new Tundra, they still won't back down and concede the market to the American trucks. What Cadillac is doing, is conceding the market to BMW, Lexus, and Mercedes, and admitting they can't go head to head with them.

Well, I actually like the looks of the Scion TC, but that doesn't change the fact that what Toyota did by creating a whole separate-but-not-really brand was dumb. Same as GM was dumb for building GEO and Saturn.

The difference is that I've seen the XTS in person and none of the pictures, not even my own, do it justice. I'm not the only person at NAIAS who has said this. There are some certified GM haters out there that like the XTS once they see it in person.

I wasn't too concerned about people bashing the CR-Z because I've seen it in person and it's even worse than in pictures. At this point, people are being nice relative to what their reaction will be when they first see one in person.

For me, it doesn't matter what the XTS looks like. I wouldn't like it or consider it based on the platform alone, so seeing it in person won't change my mind. Put it on Zeta and I would consider it. I'd rather have the STS, even if the XTS ends up looking twice as good as it.

Also, both the Q and the Phaeton are out of production in the US. I'd rather have the M45 anyway.

I too am concerned with the willingness to bash a vehicle that maybe 4 of us have seen in person.

You weren't concerned when everyone bashed Scion before anyone saw them in person though. Or any Lexus, or any Acura. GM doesn't get any more free passes, or benefit of the doubt from some of us anymore.

CaddyXLR-V ~ >>"And why does everyone feel the need to bring up the A8. A sedan that sold..."<<

The reason the A8 is repeatedly brought up here, is that in too-numerous-to-count previous Cadillac threads, audi is frequently in the half-handful of competitors who 'show Cadillac how it's done'. Here is a Cadillac which has jettisoned a 275 HP V8, FWD, & 4-spd auto for a 350 HP hybrid V6, AWD, & 6-spd trans, much more in line with that handful when equipped that way.

Sales are besides the point and certainly are not primairily predicated on powertrain layout. Look at the BMW 6-series for proof there (150 units/mnth).

I for one am only searching for consistancy. If the A8 quattro is accepted as a well-performing platform being FWD-based AWD, then we should all be open to what a FWD-based AWD MRS XTS can achieve- and not bash it dead before it rolls a foot under independant evaluation.

I'd rather bash it dead. But I also wouldn't buy an A8 either. If I was getting a larger luxury car it would be a 5 or 7 series. Audi hasn't been able to tap into even 5% of the market, despite having an entry in the market for years. Why are we supposed to praise Cadillac for matching the bottom of the class? Maybe you would all support the CTS moving to a FWD/AWD platform too?

And why does everyone feel the need to bring up the A8. A sedan that sold 105 units in Dec 09, 1463 for the entire year, and that includes the S8, and A8L. We never bring up the A8, because it is invisible in the market. The 7 series sells 1200 a month, and had 7,159 sales through Oct 09. If you let the money vote, it is going to BMW, Lexus, and Mercedes, which all happen to be on RWD platforms.

I'm starting to agree with Balthazar that had Cadillac called this a "new, exclusive to Cadillac, platform" and "uses an innovative new AWD Hybrid powertrain that can route the majority of torque to the rear wheels" and "due to production line flexibility can be built along side the Regal", we wouldn't be having this fight.

Except for the fact that the AWD system is not new, since it was already used for Saab, and that the platform isn't exclusive to Cadillac since Buick uses it too. And I would still complain about it even if both of those were true.

Because you've driven the XTS right? Was that you in the video I shot of them loading it on the turntable?

And are we going down the "It's gotta handle like an M3 or else it's crap" route again?

As long as the XTS handles within the margin of it's typical driver's capabilities compared to the competition, it'll do fine.

Acuras handle pretty good too don't they. But for some reason they haven't reached the status level of Lexus, BMW or Mercedes. I guess there's more to it than just throwing in AWD and a powerful V6.

MKS, RL, and ES are the obvious competitors for the XTS.

We both get that. I wonder why the rest of the people here don't. I doubt this car will be pulling in people shopping for a 5 series or a Lexus LS. The problem I have with this car is that I know GM can, and should do better.

Info and pictures of all GM engines

"This new generation V-6 allows a high level of flexibility, with common castings over a range of displacements. The 3.9L V-6 shares its block, pistons and cylinder heads with GM’s new 3.5L (RPOs LZ4 and LZE). A common bore measures 99 mm; displacement is increased in the 3.9L with a longer stroke (84 mm, compared to 76 mm for the 3.5L). The two engines share 80 percent of their parts.

Thanks to its relatively narrow 60-degree block angle, the 3.9L V-6 is compact, giving vehicles teams more latitude with platform design and styling. More importantly, the 60-degree configuration is inherently balanced, ensuring powertrain smoothness without the additional cost of balance shafts. The new 3.9L V-6 differs from previous GM 60-degree designs in its offset cylinder bores. The centerlines through the bores on each bank do not intersect at the crank axis; rather, they intersect 3 mm below the crank axis. The offset bores present a number of advantages, including room for larger cam journals and flexibility to stroke the engine for more displacement."

Well then what are Infiniti, Audi, and even BMW and Mercedes? They're not all M and AMG cars. There is nothing to the XTS suggesting that it wouldn't be a capable handler like an A8 or 7-Series with AWD.

Infiniti is all RWD/AWD, Audi's handle the worst out of the brands mentioned but they are all consistant with their N/S FWD/AWD with the exception of the A3, BMW is all RWD/AWD, and so is Mercedes. The XTS must be competition for the RL, because it's not a competitor to any of the other cars listed.

Well, what's the weight distribution on an AWD Epsilon II? 75/25? 65/35? I can't imagine it would be very good..

My guess would be around 60/40. The A8 is about 56/44 and the 750i is 51/49. 550i is 52/48.

Again, this is a Fritz car that was designed when Zeta was dead to the U.S. That's why it's set up the way it is.

And that's why GM needs to stop with it's split personality disorder. It causes confusion as to what Cadillac is supposed to be. It is a luxury performance brand, like the CTS and CTS-V, or is it just plain luxury with some power like Lincoln? It seems like GM can't get away from trying to have a car for everyone in each brand. What's the point of keeping Buick if Cadillac is trying to get the same buyers?

Um, it is a Hybrid because of CAFE

That doesn't change the fact that they can make a AWD car despite CAFE, but use CAFE as a reason to why they can't make more RWD cars. Why not a RWD hybrid if they are so worried about CAFE? It's just an excuse.

Also, I don't think a lack of RWD products from GM has been because of CAFE. I think it has been because their business plan from old school bean counters said no to it.

That didn't stop them from using that excuse. And it didn't stop everyone on here from giving that excuse either. All I see is everyone making excuses as to why GM does what it does. If this car was FWD everyone would be saying it is for efficiency and CAFE. Now that its AWD, it's because that it is just as good as RWD despite being worse on CAFE.

If the Regal GS can have AWD with torque sent primarily to the rear, why can't the XTS?

The strangest part to me, is that GM always backs out on RWD, and uses CAFE, and weight as an excuse. So they can't make a RWD car, because it is too inefficient, yet they can make a heavier AWD car? For efficiency purposes, which they must care about or this car wouldn't be a hybrid, wouldn't RWD be more efficient, with less drivetrain losses and lower weight?

I still think the data needs to be hashed out a bit more. Employment data is notoriously.... fudged.

That's true. A lot of people may have given up looking for jobs, so they are technically not unemployed since they are not looking. But being over a year into the recession, a lot of those people probably gave up looking a long time ago. And since some of our economy is based on consumer confidence, any good news could provide a spark.

The BLS releases their state-by-state employment stats today. They release at around this time every month.

The news is that 36 states posted unemployment drops and 8 states posted increases. It's going in the right direction. California is STILL over 12%.

Here's the link:

BLS Labor U.E. by state

I interviewed for a different job on Dec. 3, was interviewed again on Dec. 8 and then found out on Dec. 14 that I didn't get it. It took me about 1 hour to get over it. I thought about how geeky and uptight those present at the second interview were, that it may not have been a good long-term fit.

It may take a little bit, but things ought to get better.

I think I remember saying things would start to get better, and not continue to get worse, about a month or so ago. No one believed me though. We are not out of the woods yet, but it is a start.

>>"75,000+/year worldwide should be within reach if the car isn't an absolute bitch as a daily driver. Remember all those people paying over sticker for the Prius? Or the people who think its fantastic that the compact Volt will be $40k? They're going to be Fisker's target."<<

Point out a post where someone expressed it was "fantastic" a Volt is allegedly going to be $40K ??? Everything I've read here & elsewhere has damned that number. Here's a car that's $9K more (w/ tax), and suddenly we're thinking 100K volume is do-able? Volt should be looking at 300K unit sales then. And I obviously missed where exporting & worldwide distribution was part of Fisker's immediate plans; I interpreted 100K to be U.S. sales only. Do they have overseas dealers set-up, or would it be manufactured under license abroad?

It just sounds VERY optimistic, IMO...

It does seem very optimistic. If they could get the price down to the mid $30s I could see them reaching it. But it is a much better car compared to the Volt. It is projected to go 50 miles on electric power, the Volt will probably come in under 30, and it is supposed to go 0-60 in around 6 seconds, compared to 10 for the Volt.

Just imagine if the Volt was badged as a Cadillac, had a 0-60 time of 6 seconds, and went 50 miles on battery power alone. I doubt anyone here would be damning a price of $48,000.

GM did that with the G8. The quality was fantastic, the styling was nice and it had a V8. However, not only a few months ago up my way, they were giving 6.5K cash on the hood of a G8 GT. Now, you can still nab a G8 GT for $4500 off.

GM built a fantastic car for enthusiasts, and it didn't exactly turn out too well. I'd rather GM spend their time making class beating family sedans, and hauler's instead of looking at another large foray into 'for-the-masses' RWD that isn't a halo car like the Camaro.

That might have something to do with wanting to clear out their remaining inventory. Like when you see Circuit City giving 50% discounts because they are closing, it's not because their PS3s dont work as good as Best Buys PS3s. There are 0 G8 GTs left in my area. The closest G8 V6 is 3 hours away.

I looked on the Pontiac website, and it said there are 0 G8 GTs in my area. There's probably not many left in the country, and if there are, they are probably all in the northern cold weather states.

The Atlas engines just had a smoothness to them that the LNF didn't

Inline engines get smoother with more cylinders. I don't remember any great reviews of the I4 based Atlas engine.

If the hood is long enough, an Atlas based I8 turbo could be a very interesting, unique, engine in the segment.

Why use an engine that is going away, and not the LNF, which already had turbo applications and DI. 2 LNFs would make a 4.0L I8.

Hadn't heard anything about this..the ES is their biggest seller as far as cars, I thought. It and the Avalon are Toyota's Buicks, sort of.

I read somewhere that it is getting a refresh, then at the end of that cycle around 2013/2014 it would be discontinued.