balthazar

It's such a curious ideology when you read people harping on vehicle 'packaging': comparing interior vs. exterior dimensions…. then readily advocate putting the automatic shifter on a space-hogging console to free up the area behind the steering wheel. The other likely cause of course is air bags/Nav screens, but there's ways to work around that. In resto-modding my Buick, naturally the opportunity to put buckets/console in is there, but I'm just not interested.

I don't believe I've ever seen a Fiskar in person. Surprising, given this area. Wiki says about 2450 were built.

Curious. God, please, no. msg needs serious psychological intervention. - - - - -

And here's how anecdotes work : the wife had a Grand Am, bought new, sold at about 95K, that car never had a single hiccup, single rattle, single misalignment. Assembly, mechanical, reliability-wise it was excellent. The only reason we traded it was to get a larger vehicle. :shrug:

Well, I would say its the 'least dynamic' view. Here you go : - - - - Naturally, I've perused conceptcarz.com countless times. They are not infallible, of course. To wit: they identify the famous '51 LeSabre concept as a "Buick". In the Aerodynamic entry they state thus : "The 'Aero-Dynamic Coupe' was introduced as a prototype at the 1932 World's Fair, and joined the Cadillac lineup as a production model in 1933." Of course, anyone with internet access can find they are off by 1 year on both years stated.

Is EVERY SINGLE PRODUCTION AUTO going to feature the same conceptual 4-spoke steering wheel ? Has this been federally mandated and I missed the update??

^ Unfortunately, the current unilateral trend is to forego a bench seat for the "sportier" individual seat & console, yet note no car dimensional charts pay ANY heed to said console when publishing hip room numbers. My vintage Buick has 66" of hip room (with of course; no console) on an 81" body (15" difference). Current LaCrosse is listed with 55" of hip room on a 73" body (18" difference). Where'd the console go?? Hang in there, JerryK; at least you have plenty of volume of FoMoCo's to look over at your next purchase.

The Cadillac Fleetwood Aerodynamic Coupe debuted in the 1933 World's Fair. That car was a singular 'prototype' (actually, this is the 2nd; a prior one had differing details), it had brightwork trimmed windows and 4-bar bumpers. This is that car : Though I've never seen anyone term it so, the radical, future-trend elements of it's design were far enough removed from the industry in general for '33 that one could easily make a case for it being the first GM concept car, pre-dating the Buick Y-Job of '38. I digress. The Aerodynamic Coupe went into very limited production from '34-37. 1934 / Series 452D / style# 5799 1935 / Series 60 / style# 5799 1936 / Series 90 / style# 5799 1937 / Series 90 / style# 5799 Only 20 production, custom-ordered cars were built; five V-8s, seven V-12s and eight V-16s. The fate of the 'World's Fair' car is unknown. Most recent accounting has 6 known Aerodynamic Coupe survivors today. It truly was a milestone in the industry's history.

1933.

“No one wants buttons hidden down in the dark areas around the seats,” said Samuelsson. ​Really… I drive my daily driver 99.9% of the time. Why would I want or need power seat buttons anywhere but out of sight where I can feel/operate them the 0.1% of the time I MIGHT want to? Even the car in the driveway that has regular drivers between 5'3" and 6'0" has buttons "down in the dark" for the seat, and it works excellent. That rant aside, I do think less buttons is a noble goal, but all that's going to mean is more HITS per button to get the function you want. Let's face it; Volvo isn't taking NAV & cruise & A/C out of their cars.

50 is up there to be swabbing butts. My grandfather was 26 when my father was born, my father was 25 when I was born & I was 28 when my first son was born. My B-I-L has a similar story to yours; falling out and '2 sides' to the family. It's a shame when personalities/ family politics get in the way of a family relationship… tho as I get older and have more & more exposure to other families, I'm still learning there is no "normal" family. Because my interaction rate with 'abnormal' families seems to be about 80%.

So Cubie, do your folks "get" you? - - - - I have 2 sons, the one is causing me to move up my long-penciled in life event entitled "Heavy Drinking".

$135,000 ?!?!?!?!? What the hell ever happened to 'empowering the people under the boot of Big Oil' (or whatever the hippie war chant was)? Good gravy that's pricey. I don't dislike the Fiskar's look, I would like to see more pics and one in person. It is slinkier than the Tesla, IIRC. But at that price and being the #2 banana on the market, it'll be interesting to see if China can make it work.

^ Continuing that thought, does anyone think any given generation ever fully "gets" the subsequent generation?

What this thread needs is CTS SEDAN only sales numbers for the last 3-4 years, with MSRP for each year.

And BMW could stretch a 5-series 6 inches and call it a 7…. whoops.

Would probably be a lot more profitable if they put a 3rd row in the smaller cube van and dressed it up a bit.

Immaterial if strong press & image-boosting is the result. Periodic evaluation is always good practice, but Cadillac hopefully has moved beyond individual model accounting tables and is looking at the bigger picture now.

s-class is bland on the exterior, stale even.

'They were too early' on what; a minivan-shaped me-too vehicle with no sliding doors? I have to give to to MBUSA; first the maybach then possibly the r-class flops trying to make a comeback. Nothing quite screams 'desperate for volume' like that.

300/mnth is an excellent sales goal for the CT6. Image cars often are built with a 'big picture' WRT profits.

By far the most sophisticated treatment is the retracting screen. Plus you get the 'gee-whiz!' effect of moving dash parts. Many of BMW's have these rounded gauge pods right next to a rectangular screen- you'd think they'd make an attempt to stylistically integrate them. Like in the s-class; that sharp-cornered screen when there isn't another 90-degree angle in the entire interior. Just poor integration, IMO.

I sure as hell hope the El Miraj styling isn't used in this class. It's not refined or advanced enough for 2015, never mind 2019 (not that styling advances that quickly at all). Ciel body is the way to go in this segment; tweak the front fascia and it would be an absolute killer.

In that studio shot above, the C interior looks nice, tho it's VERY busy. It's good to see MB finally unburying their wood trim from the gallons of thick laquer they've always used. That said, they still have more work to do, such as integrating the screen, going to a less overwrought vent system (shades of Pontiac there), and I do hate the seat controls on the door- a growing trend. In that they are so infrequently used, they should be in a less conspicuous location.

2015 sees the auto industry creating tech for tech's sake, then expending an equal amount of energy convincing us it's "necessary". Look no further than the decades of emphasis on creating a better 'driver's car', now some are preaching 'autonomous driving', or the exact opposite of driver involvement.