Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

balthazar

In Hibernation
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    40,855

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    583

 Content Type 

Everything posted by balthazar

  1. balthazar
    The real thorn of the issue is; if 'Segment A' is not only selling well, but burying 'Segment B', regardless of any specs involved :: Is not 'Segment A' therefore, literally, "DESIREABLE"? I don't think 'forgettable' is the lead descriptor here.
  2. balthazar
    IMO the Tesla Model S (and to a lesser extent- the 3) are good/fine looking sedans, they're just dated at this point. Problem as I see it for Tesla is they have no design direction; it's been nine years of a 'one-trick pony', stylistically.
  3. balthazar
    We always pronounced it 'Pig-Knot'.
  4. balthazar
    It's a fallacy not supported by any large-scale evidence, but hoped for by marketing. Brand loyalty in general is not great, and each tier going up the ladder of a given brand sees only a fraction of the sales of the tier below it. I don't put much stock in rumors circa 2 years out from an actual window sticker, but $60K would be a great level to come in at. EV SUV sales are terrible largely because they're such a poor value, but the flip side is no one makes money on them, so selling MORE vehicles at a loss only INCREASES your loss.
  5. balthazar
    Everybody loses money on electrics.
  6. balthazar
    Some structural sections of it- sure. but that's not a "Ford body". Regardless of the family, the engine was developed specifically for and only used in the Edsel. That makes it an Edsel V8. Ford had a 430 CI V8, they could've just used that, but didn't. 410 CI was a big motor- well north of anything General Motors had in their car lines in '58. Cadillac was down at 365 CI.
  7. balthazar
    Consumers do not 'move up' thru an existing brand, but perhaps they do within a corporation.
  8. balthazar
    What's this happy horseshit? You talking about the same GM that made 8 and a half billion in profits in 2019? That GM?
  9. balthazar
    It's 1.7 inches shorter, not "3" [195.5" vs 193.8"]. Numbers. Of course, in this context you are correct : neither 1.7", nor the fictitious 3", makes a difference. So why bring up the stat? CT5-V goes all the way to $70K, and the Blackwing hasn't even been released yet. As discussed, base MSRP is meaningless. Cadillac literally doesn't build any cars at base MSRP. Regardless, the point, which seems to blow by you like dandelion fluff at 60 MPH, is that that Cadillac which you claim was canceled, WASN'T. It's right here :
  10. balthazar
    ^ They shared chassis', not bodies. In '58, Edsel's junior series cars used an overbored version of Ford's 352 V8, measuring 361 CI. But the senior Edsels used a proprietary 410 CI V8. It was '59 that the Edsel got 'corporatized', including offering a I6 from Ford.
  11. balthazar
    Seems like a neat opening to go on record by stating; every vehicle I've owned (23) has been designed & built in the U.S by a U.S. manufacturer. Silverado 2500HD was built in Flint MI. Yeah; the motor floozies dig that.
  12. balthazar
    '57 Chevbo is either a mid-series 210, or a Bel Air. '59 Edsel indeed has some similarities with the rear of the '58 Chevbo. Ford was arguably top shelf in design in the '30s- Bob Gregorie was head of styling and he just KNEW how a line should go on a body. Perfect radiuses, too. And Ford still created the High Art that the first gen T-Bird is... but by '57-58, I feel Ford started to stumble. The Edsel above's rear bumper, for example, has little flow with the rear of the body- it's just kind of hanging there. Look what General Motors / Pontiac was doing the same year; bumper flows with the rear quarter, including the fender spear, and beautifully with the rear cove. General Motors was swiftly moving into the premier design house in the industry in this period.
  13. balthazar
    ^ We literally weren't talking about that, tho. -sigh- : CTS is still here, it's called the CT5. Same exact size & configuration. How are you so confoozled on this point? Were you likewise confoozed when the MB 430S was cancelled and a S430 took it's place?
  14. balthazar
    I may have had a single Krispy Kreme in my life.
  15. balthazar
    No-ooooo, you stated : That means only 1 thing; a high performance sports sedan. What's the Nurburing auto at mercedes, the sprinter? The CLA? No-ooooo, it's AMG-spec sedans. My point stands; Cadillac came into a segment they never were before, and immediately rose to Tier 1 with their American interpretation of an uber-hi-po sports sedan. Where MB / BMW had the segment to themselves (maybe a few other stragglers), Cadillac took MARKET SHARE from them (it was 0% prior to) in what you seem to think is the Most Important segment (volume, here, be damned). By your constantly shifting definition; SUCCESS not 'failure'. It wasn't headroom. Family sedans are taller now than they've been since the 1950s. A modern camry is 3 inches taller than my '64 full-size Pontiac. It WAS cargo room to a degree, most definitely interior width (damned fat consoles), and vision height. Rooflines are not the issue.
  16. balthazar
    Pictures, of everything, where are they? Less dinner plates, more construction pics!
  17. balthazar
    Tire diversity, out for scrap : wide whitewall bias ply, prob from the ‘60s (came w the B-59), snow tire from the ‘70s (from dad’s ‘77 Safari), blackwall bias-belted prob from the 80s (came on my ‘64 Cat in ‘91), and a modern radial from my ‘94 F-150 from the ‘90s or 00’s.
  18. balthazar
    ^ Really? What was Cadillac's high performance sports sedan market share prior to the appearance of the CTS-V? When you have a brand that's never offered their own interpretation of such a vehicle, then -once it arrives and had been around for going on 20 years now- garners instant cred and even eclipses the established players... that's the OPPOSITE of 'failed'. Mercedes / BMW have to not only acknowledge, but keep pace with the Cadillac V-series. That's the very definition of 'success'.
  19. balthazar
    You listed 'XTS' twice, so your list would be '6'. The ATS and CTS are still right there in the catalog, they just have new generations with altered names, so your list drops to '4'. SRX was replaced with a new generation product with an altered name... so your list drops to '3'. Now add back in the brand new models XT4 and XT6. That's a net cut of ONE. Don't you need to be decent at math to work in a loan department? Those would be "failures" by your definition. You mean one of the most brutal & acclaimed performance sports sedans of all time? The one that burst into the German segment, up-ended their comfort levels and stole their market share? That 'strategy'?
  20. balthazar
    Oh, now it's "$200K" or "$150K", when 12 seconds ago it was "$100K". Typical. - - - - - Hummer has as good a chance as any luxury EV- the 11,500 TRQ is going to draw a segment of the demographic like flies. Meanwhile, mercedes is cutting employees, budgets and models, and delaying their too-late response to Tesla. No buzz, no interest, yet another alpha-numeric lost in a catalog of 84 77 models. Pickin' and choosin'. What about the 1-option truck that stickers for $86K I mentioned 3 posts above yours? Is $86K still "far" from $100K? OK, add 3 or 4 more options. There's your backyard BBQ bragging point; have another bratwurst and go sit over on the other side of the yard.
  21. balthazar
  22. balthazar
    Whew- just had some home-made stuffed mushroom pie. Terrific!
  23. balthazar
    We've discussed this before- base MSRP is irrevelant. No one buys vehicles at the base, no-options status, and vehicles starting around $100K have short option lists. A '20 Sierra Denali HD 3500 starts at $76K. Add ONE option, the Duramax, and you're already at $86K. But even at this price level, there are SO many equipment & options you can add, way more than most sedans ever have, it's ridiculous.
  24. balthazar
    That is an awesome-looking SUV. Love the bumperless look up front.
  25. balthazar
    Silverado is already reaching into the mid $80K range. Sierra Denali is probably possible to bridge $90K. 'Why not'? Because trucks are better built, last longer and are far more versatile than sedan 'counterparts', with hearly as many technological features. Frankly, other than 'exotic' sports cars, trucks should already be higher priced than sedans based on that alone. New Tahoe is quieter at 70 MPH cruising than a mercedes s-class, and also out-brakes it 70-0 by 6 feet.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search