surreal1272

And if GM scrubbed to your stealing sales suggestion, then their other brands would be struggling and you'd be speaking negatively of that. 

I never said it was a negative for Cadillac to steal from other GM brands.  If I were Johan, I'd want to steal every single GMC Yukon Denali sale and get that person to buy an Escalade.   That helps GM's overall profit margin too.   Or if Customer X has $50,000 to spend on a vehicle, I wouldn't want them to buy a loaded up Enclave, I'd want them to buy a Cadillac.

 

A Honda Pilot Touring is $43,000, and there is an Elite trim for $48k.  Explorer Titanium is $50k.  A Cadillac XT5 awd with luxury package is $48k.  So once again, if Mr. or Mrs. Customer has $48k to spend on an SUV, I'd want that sale.

 

And my lineup can't be applied to Benz or BMW because they don't have that many platforms to build cars on.  Cadillac could build 4 front wheel drive platform crossovers on existing Chevy/Buick platforms, and then build 3 more rear drive platform crossovers on alpha and Omega, and still have the Escalade as an 8th crossover/SUV vehicle.  

 

With XT1, XT3, XT4 and XT5 all starting under $40k you can steal massive sales away from Lincoln, Acura, Honda, GMC, Jeep, whomever.  Then your XT6 and XT7 come in around $50k base price, ranging up to $75-80k.  Then the XT8 comes in around $80k base to compete with Mercedes GLS, BMW X7.

 

Buyers want crossovers/SUVs, the reason people spend $50k on an Explorer or Grand Cherokee is not enough luxury SUVs are on the market.   Sedan segments are shrinking across the board.  Makes sense to hit crossovers hard and leave no niche uncovered.

You implied that it was a negative, plain as day. Everything you say about Cadillac, even when you think you are being objective, just comes off as a backhanded compliment half the time. 

 

Again, no one, I repeat, no one is cross shopping Hondas and Ford with a Cadillac. That would be like cross shopping those cars you mention with Mercedes, which I am also sure no one does (with the rarest of exceptions).

 

And yes, Cadillac could build off of those platforms. That way, you have more ammunition for their "gussied up" Chevys when you go on your next trolling spree.  

Camaro is a coupe, ATS is mostly sold in Sedan trim, and Chevy to Cadillac is a big step up.    Buick Enclave or GMC Acadia Denali to Cadillac XT5 and XT7 is less of a jump.  Those could get cross shopped.  And yes I have said that it is a good thing if they sell more Cadillacs because they in theory have higher margins.  GM doesn't break out the numbers, but we can assume a luxury brand has the best margins in any company.

 

I have been saying for years to turn Cadillac loose and give them the product they need.  Cadillac should be stealing off Buick, GMC, top end Honda Pilots, Ford Explorer Titaniums, Lexus, Acura and Lincoln with ease.  All those brands have crossovers in the $40-55k space, Cadillac should be in there kicking butt.  That is a winnable fight.  For the past 15 years they have been trying to fight BMW on the sedan front and they let also rans like Lincoln actually go up in sales the past couples years.   

 

If I we running Cadillac this would be my crossover line up:

 

XT3:  D2XX platform, turbo 4 engine, similar to Lincoln MKC, Lexus NX

XT4:  Alpha platform, 2.0T, 3.0TT and 3.6 TT V6 (ATS-V engine) similar to GLC/X3

XT5: we have

XT6:  Alpha or Omega, crossover of current CTS size, 2.0T, 3.0 TT, and 4.2 TT V8 engines

XT7:  C2XX lwb, the Cadillac Enclave with 7 seats, 3.6 V6, this would be a $48-60k type vehicle against Infiniti QX60.

XT8: Omega 3 row crossover, 3.0TT V6, 4.2TT V8

 

Escalade:  add CTS-V engine, leave BOF for now as people that want a big truck like it how it is

 

6 crossovers plus Escalade, on a 6-7 year life cycle, you have 1 all new crossover per year, and one mid-cycle refresh per year.  There is probably even room for an XT2 in there.  Something GLA size or even Audi Q2 size.  That might be more for Euro or China market.

 

Kill XTS at the end of the cycle, add a convertible somewhere, anywhere.

I could have saved you a whole lot of typing with the following. Everything you have posted about Cadillacs lineup can easily be applied to Benz. You think people aren't doing the same exact thing when they go to a MB dealership?

 

You also contradict yourself to the point of making no sense. You say in one breath that it is a negative for Cadillac to be stealing sales form other GM brands and then, in another breath, say that they SHOULD steal sales from GMC and Buick. I was just shaking my head the whole while reading your outlandish post. Just makes me glad that you are not, in fact, running Cadillac. Seriously. Why in the hell would you lump in any Cadillac with a Honda Pilot or a Ford titanium trim? That just officially kills your credibility (which wasn't much to being with). That is clearly the job of GM's other brands. Buick competes with Acura and Lincoln so that Cadillac can compete with the bigger boys (and they do but they need more models which has been well discussed). 

 

 

Sorry to sound like a dick here but posts like that just hurt my head to read with all of it's absurdity. 

 

You know what? Maybe it isn't so absurd. MB is doing that with cars like the CLA competing with much lower end cars they have no business competing with because it just dilutes the brand). Guess I see why you would want Cadillac to go down the same silly path (because that tactic worked so well for them with the Cimarron and the Catera).

Well that is like saying most cars are silver and beige, and it is boring. If a company offers 10 colors and 50% of the consumers pick gray/silver, then it isn't the companies fault that more people don't buy red or yellow.

Good grief. Not the point SMK. THe point is that you were not paying attention to what he actually said and had to go out of your way to show some pretty pictures that probably account for less than 10% of the S Class sales out there.

And yes I down voted you for it and stated why.

Also, I swore this was about the Camaro spanking a BMW, not how many colors and completely unrelated car has.

What is funny here is that SMK could only point out their most expensive car as having a "variety of colors". There's a reason for that I'm sure.

Yes, these are so dark, drab and monotone.  Any car with black on black interior is monotone, so don't pick all black, they offer other colors.

 

 

 

 

 

This one is really dark...

And, once again, you are not paying attention. He mentioned that they offered the lighter colors but the majority out there are of the black and drab variety. He never said, not once, that they ONLY offered the dark and drab. Go ahead and deny that if you want, but me personally, I have rarely seen any of those colors you have shown here out in the wild. Clearly, most MB buyers (and BMW buyers as well), prefer dark and drab looking. 

 

BMW styling is beyond tired. Same thing, minority tweaked, over & over & over & over again. Bo Ring.

Same old thing, like the Camaro, Corvette and Mustang.  Yet those are considered America's best.

 

Could you have made a more ignorant post?

I posted that interview earlier.  I think the new path of Cadillac is to introduce a ton of crossovers.  The quickest and easiest way to do that is to build them on existing GM platforms.  So I can see an XT3 based on the Envision or new Equinox, and XT7 Enclave, could do a version of the Buick Encore, or even something the size between Encore and Envision.  They could take the existing XT5 and make a crossover coupe out of it.

 

Johan wants 500,000 units a year by 2020, and he talks about being global, but they are basically an American and Chinese market player.  They need to get to more markets to get the volume he wants.  I suppose rolling out 5 more crossovers and stealing sales of Buick and GMC will boost volume, but that won't get them to 500k I don't think.  China's growth is slowing.

So much fail in your post (more than usual), I don't even know where to start. Any production of more crossovers for Cadillac will not cannibalize sales from GMC and Buick. Thus far GM has done a much better job of making their share platform cars/trucks more distinctive. One only needs to look at the ATS and the Camaro to see that. Knowing that, it slams the door on your asinine claim of sales stealing. On top of that, who the f@#k really cares? If more Caddy's are sold, then that means higher profit margins. The last time I checked that was a good thing according to you.

 

Seriously man, if you are gong to troll GM every chance you get, can you make it look a little less obvious?

Ah. Beautiful. Glorious Victory.

 

You're a month late on this one Suave  . Like I said in the other though, the Camaro is just a flat out beast!

http://www.cheersandgears.com/topic/86548-2015-bmw-m4-vs-2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss/#entry785278

But the thing is I'm not enamored with the car. I'm not really defending the car as much as I was some intelligible debate.

 

I like it - yeah. But remember, it's turned me over from it being in total failure territory. And I like it for different reasons. I would say given what you want, this and the new CT6 are near equals. And I'm not the only one who would say that. The owner of this site, having spent some decent time with it had this same impression. William didn't. But William just didn't like the styling of the car.

 

I've stipulated the whole time - it's got a fair shot, and in China it's just a shoo-in.

 

It seems like the right way to build a large sedan if you're trying to see the field 5-6 years from now. They're not too vested in it if the large sedan segment dies entirely over here. And compared to the car it's replacing, it's a far cry from the bloated and deficient mutilated Taurus pig.

An intelligible debate was had and reasons were laid out. Sorry if that doesn't meet this mysterious criteria you seem to want to hang your hat on.

Mercedes also floats of a lot of rumors about what they are considering to gauge interest.  They also said they are thinking of a GLC convertible and a GLS coupe SUV.  How you make a coupe out of a 17 foot long SUV is beyond me.  But at any rate, they float ideas out there to see what sticks, before committing to anything.

Which is the same tactic used by just about every other automaker.

You can't sell dreams, you cannonly sell the product you have.

Let's first look at the TT V8. I for nearly 10 years have been arguing for a DOHC V8 to replace the Northstar. So I hope they build it. But if it is a CT6 only engine it would never have enough volume. So I hope it is used on ATS-V, CTS, Escalade etc. I just question if GM would really invest the money to do it.

As far as a mid-engine supercar goes, that has to be a carbon fiber chassis car, they don't have that now and it is too expensive to use on a Corvette. I'd like to see Mercedes build a LaFerrari competitor, but I get that they have to make a choice between that and updating their core products.

Cadillac might be able to do a front engine Grand Touring coupe. That could be Corvette, Alpha or Omega platform with the 4.2 V8.

And Mercedes doesn't try to sell their dreams? Seriously?

Mercedes doesn't put out lots of concept cars that show a convertible, sports car, flagship, or whatever to draw up excitement and then not deliver.  GM likes to make these exciting concepts and say things like an S-class fighter is in the works, well in 2010 they were talking about and S-class fighter, in 2016 they now say it is dead.  6 years or talk and no action.  

 

Remember these?  Great looking concepts that never saw the light of day.

 

 

The Avenir, Avista, Ciel and El Mirage will join those 3 as dream cars that would elevate the brand, but never materialized.   Mercedes showed an S-class convertible a few years ago, they put an S-class convertible on sale this year.

 

Mercedes built stuff like this:  Over the top cars that don't really make sense, but they built their dreams and put it on sale.

 

 

You have to be kidding me right? You're going to act like Benz, as well as everyone else for that matter, doesn't put out concepts unless they are hitting the road for real? Tell me more about that F400. How about the Vision Gran Tourismo concept from 2013? Or how about the concept IAA?

Haven't seen any of those on the road so...

See SMK, it's easy to cherry pick until you realize others can do that too.

You can't sell dreams, you cannonly sell the product you have.

Let's first look at the TT V8. I for nearly 10 years have been arguing for a DOHC V8 to replace the Northstar. So I hope they build it. But if it is a CT6 only engine it would never have enough volume. So I hope it is used on ATS-V, CTS, Escalade etc. I just question if GM would really invest the money to do it.

As far as a mid-engine supercar goes, that has to be a carbon fiber chassis car, they don't have that now and it is too expensive to use on a Corvette. I'd like to see Mercedes build a LaFerrari competitor, but I get that they have to make a choice between that and updating their core products.

Cadillac might be able to do a front engine Grand Touring coupe. That could be Corvette, Alpha or Omega platform with the 4.2 V8.

And Mercedes doesn't try to sell their dreams? Seriously?

I don't buy it.

 

Of course GM is doing much better now in terms of retail sales - but again. When their showroom ages - because GM has already said they'll slow down the pace of clean-sheet redesigns...

 

Fleet sales will go up to keep the lights going. It's a fact. It's how they've operated. All of the domestic brands.

 

I've read car mags for like 10 years in a row now. And every time some automakers says "We're going to chase retail!"

 

It ends up being a short-term campaign, once the models start becoming older they start selling to fleets more. I expect nothing to change in this dynamic. Numbers may, but the whole system won't.

You don't have to buy it but the facts were right there in front of you. I cannot help you if you decided to ignore that fact by saying "I don't buy it". 

It's a temporary condition caused by the lack of ramped up production, and needed to fulfill customer backlog. And Lincoln more than made up the loss in MKC. They're up 11% because of MKX and Navigator. Cadillac was down this month - because of SRX winding down. But the MKX carries a higher transaction prices than the other Lincolns other than Navigator.

 

Once production normalizes the fleet sales will be used as mechanism to smooth sales year-over year. Like how it's always been done. However, breaks from the norm do happen. This year, Ford's fleet sales were front loaded, their fleet customers wanted their vehicles earlier, so production was timed to deliver vehicles in March. It's got everything to do with their vans. Remember. GM does not have really anything AT ALL that is competitive in the commercial van segment anymore.

 

I do agree - GM is making the some of the best products out there right now. But the reasons why fleet sales are down are pretty clear. The fleet queen Cruze is gone, being replaced with the new Cruze which is barely out yet. No more bread vans of any kind other than the rebadged Nissan NV. Chevy Captiva is gone. Other thing such as production either winding down for some outgoing cars or production now even up fully for others yet.

 

You look at it another way, Ford had 160,467 retail sales, and GM had 30,000 more. I do believe that GM just has more models and more segments covered with its 4 family of brands. They're supposed to outsell Ford in retail. I mean it's not a shocker. It's what I expect, at the very least. And those retail numbers should do even better with the new products at the full speed. But again, It's no shocker to expect GM to outsell Ford in both fleet and retail.

Why do you seemingly ignore evidence that is contrary to your statement and then when you see that you are wrong, try to make excuses for the wrong?

Maybe you'd do a lot better here Suave if you would stop acting everyone has an "underlying" reason for not being as enamored with the car as you are. That's the defensive posturing I was taking about and you proved it in spades.

I gave you their history. Seriously. I did and that is all need right now until it proves otherwise.

Seriously. What are you being so damn defensive about? What?! What Sauve? What?! That is how you're coming off right now so I'm just going to leave it at that. Enough space has been wasted here.

For the record, I made the same statements about the first gen CTS 12 years ago for the same reasons. In that case, I referenced the Cimmaron and the Catera.

Look, I called you on something you claimed to have not said, and I never really praised the this vehicle other than say why it is differentiated against everyone else.

Go ahead, speak volumes how it's going to fail. RE : See my post about how many things I give....

I just meekly said, it'll do what Lincoln needs the car to do. Any sales in America are just a bonus. This car is pretty viable too. It won't suffer from recuperating an immense overhead of an all new platform (and rumoured cancelled outlets to increase scale) that some of its rivals are debuting.

And it just has more brand awareness than something like the new Genesis, which I think arguably makes a better product - but is devoid of a soul or heritage.

It's going to sell. And there is credible market positioning for it.

And people making posts about my character instead of this vehicle? I don't get into those theatrics. They're just lame statements. Don't post something without understanding the consequences of being quoted.

Again, I posted everything linked to why this vehicle will do well. It won't overturn the status quo. But that's not what it was meant to do, and it's not like a carmaker leading everyone to believe that their car will be a return to greatness only to have a change in management to call that same vehicle less than flagship worthy.

Or you could just stop rambling. Oh and I admitted my mistake which is more than I can for some folks. I am not hating on it. I'm being realistic which is far more than I can say for you right now. You have reason for hope while I have reason to doubt it. It's that simple. Just stop acting like your opinion carries more weight when there is zero proof that it actually does.

And I'm done. You may now, as Led Zeppelin once said, ramble on if it helps you feel better Suave.

Oh good grief Suave. Here I thought dramatics was not in your nature.

Alright, you want to keep churning? Alright

 

Of course I like the car. But more than that.,the same people who haven't driven the car rag on it without driving either. And then some General Moron told me that "you're not an optimist!"

 But I'm just saying it won't be a sharp scalpel like the Cadillac CT6. I won't be a super-sport sedan that "driving" enthusiasts say they love. 

 And there is nothing wrong with that. Driving enthusiasts FOR large sedans are about to be extinct. 

 And for what factual reason am I wrong in saying it'll drive like a sedan version of the Lincoln MKX! You're the one who said it's more of the same!

 And it is what I just iterated. Sheesh.

Okay suave. I'm trying to be civilized here. Show me where I said it was "more of the same" because I'm sure I didn't and that's your problem. You don't even know who you are arguing with at this point. Bong said it was more of the same. Now are you trying to equate my argument with his? If so, then that is pure fail on your part. It's a f@#king car so ease up on the throttle and keep your arguments straight next time.

To the down vote troll: Sorry you are only allowed one per day.

 

My arguments have always been the same, always consistent. And I don't know what anyone is trying to prove. I dismissed the 40,000 people interested in this car. All I said was there are some tangible reasons to consider this car. And none of those elicit comparison to sport sedans at the same size and price point.

 

Then I projected its performance, which is a sin to do.

 

But again, what are you comparing the car to?! A sport sedan - go ahead, pick apart how the car will drive, even though no one has driven it yet. And then I used the more of the same thinking to pull up relevant anecdotes of how the recent MKX has fared in reviews. And if the car drives like a sedan version of that - then it's pretty clear the appeal of the vehicle is exactly what Lincoln says it will be - comfort and not ground-breaking handling, but surprisingly competent. 

 

t's pretty clear to me, anyone who has posted against me just flat out hates the car or what it represents. Why I am to bother trying to explain that the brand that will make this car has already forgone the possibility that those people will consider the car, even though they've never driven the car either.

 

I can trace every word I've posted, and all of it ties back to this.

Okay, let me make this short since my last post did not take apparently. You were right regarding my post. I wasn't 100% sure when I said it. I can accept that 100%. What I cannot accept is your absolute thinking on this. So if anyone hates the car, they are just being a hater but because you like the car, even though you also have driven it, yet you think your words should carry more weight. That is the problem with your logic from the get go and for you to simply dismiss what I am saying because you feel I'm being a "hater", is simply asinine. Sorry but that is how I feel you are acting right now.

Alright, you want to keep churning? Alright

 

Of course I like the car. But more than that.,the same people who haven't driven the car rag on it without driving either. And then some General Moron told me that "you're not an optimist!"

 

But I'm just saying it won't be a sharp scalpel like the Cadillac CT6. I won't be a super-sport sedan that "driving" enthusiasts say they love. 

 

And there is nothing wrong with that. Driving enthusiasts FOR large sedans are about to be extinct. 

 

And for what factual reason am I wrong in saying it'll drive like a sedan version of the Lincoln MKX! You're the one who said it's more of the same!

 

And it is what I just iterated. Sheesh.

Okay suave. I'm trying to be civilized here. Show me where I said it was "more of the same" because I'm sure I didn't and that's your problem. You don't even know who you are arguing with at this point. Bong said it was more of the same. Now are you trying to equate my argument with his? If so, then that is pure fail on your part. It's a f@#king car so ease up on the throttle and keep your arguments straight next time.

To the down vote troll: Sorry you are only allowed one per day.

This isn't stupid hypotheticals, And if it is, then damn well I'll call it out like it is, people all over the net salivate when they project how a car will drive for other brands.

 

People here project ALL the time that if a car is Cadillac it'll drive a lot like a preceding car - or that it'll follow their mantra of beating the roundel at their own game. OR if's BMW it's going to be softer than they used to be. Or that Audi really hasn't changed much in their recent redesigns. Or how the S90 will be a sedan version of the XC90.

 

Example: CT6 will drive like larger in size CTS.

 

And no this is no hypothetical. It's a fact. They're loosely based on the same architecture - the Lincoln MKX and the Conti.

 

Do people here really think what I said is really inconceivable? Given how much emphasis Lincoln has put on one theme, I'm beyond sure that the Conti will drive exactly how I explained it. 

 

It's mind-boggling that you would disagree with me Surreal.

 

You don't even have a point to make.

 

I find a lot of nonsense that quite is just out of bad taste. People just have it for Lincoln just because they want that automaker to make a car to please them. I'm not even a staunch supporter of the brand. But I know exactly how the car will drive. That is a fact.

 

It's stupidity. I don't why people get off of it for other brands. And I'm not making a big IF, and if I am, I just called it on other cars as well.

 

The Lincoln will drive exactly like how I said it will. The details might differ - the overall theme won't. 

Good grief Suave. We get it. You love the car no matter what and anything anyone else says about it just makes them stupid.

Again, point proven.

Actually I can tell almost exactly how it will drive.

 

It'll drive like a sharper version of a new Lincoln MKX. It'll probably be faster than it by an appreciable amount.

 

The AWD system will help powering through corners.

 

Generally the auto press that has driven the new MKX have said quite simply that it is be the best crossover for those who want a pillowy soft ride, but atleast content driving dynamics - much better than any competing Lexus or Acura.

 

The XTS does that, but unlike the Lincoln, it had a pretty harsh ride with the large wheel options and Magnetic ride control. The MKX on the other hand, even with the large wheel option on a loaded model handled Detroit's bombed roads just fine.

 

And yes. The vehicle will deliver exactly to the customer that Lincoln says it will. I mean they are pretty forthcoming, if you want a sports sedan, this ain't it. And most likely it'll have some inspired driving. It may even upset a Lexus LS.  

 

There's a whole lot of nonsense going around that the driving dynamics of this vehicle will be incompetent, and its just ridiculous stupidity. 

 

If there's any company that knows how tune a steering rack right on a FWD based car that has a a good amount of power it's Ford Mo Co. You can look at all the Ford Performance branded cars as proof of it. The agility of the MKX - for its intended purpose, surprised almost every journalist. It's a fact.

So you have not actually driven one and you are using hypotheticals to justify your absolutely line of thinking because some here are critical of it. Thanks for clearing that up Suave and proving my point.

 

Peace.

So you think the rest of the industry isn't doing that concurrently?

 

Is that the argument? Well let me tell you, Mercedes is making more AMG models to raise the entry price of what would have been an E450 equivalent.

 

BMW is also going to produce ultra-luxury variants of this X7 and 7 Series.

 

Every luxury automaker is focused on higher margins per sale. Every one of them!! 

 

Don't be dogmatic. We all know why Cadillac ATPs appear to be higher - they're not going to sell vehicles that Buick sells really well. But I'd also like them so sell a million vehicles around the globe.  But I also recongize that they shouldn't be dealing with petty sales from the rest.

 

But the way they're building themselves up - they're inadvertently just competing against the brands it wants to distance itself from. The reasons why Mercedes and BMW make lower end models is that they don't have a large stable of mass-market brands to support them. They don't. And they've been making entry level models for a long time.

 

I have always been saying that they should be building the El Miraj, the top notch, profit per vehicle driver you just mentioned. But whoop de do, the new Cadillac has to deliver just that, but even more ostentatious, because the launch window sailed by.

Never mind Suave. You have 100% missed the mark and it's not worth devolving into a pissing match you claim you don't want to take part in. You just have gone off into deep left center field with this while missing the point entirely.

It's well known that the Continental has a great interior, and recent Lincoln features like the seats and the audio systems are placed at or above top-end Mercedes features.

 

Add to that the trick AWD system that many in the industry recognize as one of the best, it's hard not imagine this car not doing quite well.

 

And in China i'ts going to sell. Really, really, well.

 

I'm not kidding. You don't have to like the car. But to pretend that this vehicle isn't delivering exactly what they say it does - namely top-end creature comforts,,, I can't help anyone not recognize that.

So if I don't think it measures up the same way you say it does (even though neither one of us have driven it), then my thoughts don't matter? Is that what you are saying? I mean if you can't help anyone recognize that (using your words here) then that must mean you somehow think your opinion has more weight than anyone else who disagrees with your assessment. Why the absolute thinking over something that is purely subjective up to this point?

BTW Suave, I'm not trying to sound like an ass but I just don't think you are seeing the whole picture on some matters and getting things twisted up. Nothing personal.