balthazar

"over 600" is not 750, is it? I can see a bump of 50 HP, but you were predicting 100-150. Does HSV have dedicated sports/pony cars to put these engines in? I'm not aware of any, so there's a different dynamic in AU. There's also only 1 car division in GM AU. The difference is, if Chevy has a "600-750" HP sedan, and Cadillac's top performance sedan is in the 550-600 range, it's upsidedown and any non-GM-fanboy / numbers nut will crucify GM over it. Thats why it doesn't work here. If GM, now pared down & running lean & profitable, doesn't start crafting the long-term image of everything in concert, they're not going to move forward. And, if they're focusing on removing weight, why would they need 750 HP?? Huh? The Shelby GLH-S was over 25 years ago...ancient news. You're not following the conversation, Moltie, keep up. I made the distinction above; mega hi-HP cars are fine in dedicated sports/pony cars, but they don't fit in the sports sedan segment if Cadillac is going to fall UNDER Chevy in the numbers.

I don't expect to see the next CTS-V jump 100-150 HP- it's still exceeding mercedees & BMW in it's class. That, and sorry to burst the bubble; but the HP climb cannot continue steadily forward to 1000. Just not going to happen. It IS surprising no one is complaining about the ZL1 & Shelby 4-dr sedans. Huh, I missed that.

For someone who dotes on the spec sheet, this isn't consistent with your usual position. IE; the CTS 'cannot compete' with the XTS on the simple fact that they are too far apart in overall length. Kinda how you proclaimed the CTS didn't compete with the 3 series because they were 10" apart in overall length. See; it's impossible.

^ Disagree on the uber hi-HP model. The wags will only use it as another bullet against how 'GM does everything wrong', and frankly, they're right here. There should not logically be a 600-HP sedan @ Chevy and a 550-HP sedan @ Cadillac. The tiers have been badly out of whack for a long time. I do agree that if there is an uber-hi-HP Chevy sedan, it will be priced too high, another 'wrong'. GM has no direct control over dealership pricing, only indirect. It'll happen.

I realize no car sells on average at full retail; mercedes knocks $15K off the s-class to move them. The point was- it was disingenuous to mention retail sticker price when talking about fleet sales. >>"The XTS is over 1 foot longer than an E-class though"<< 202" inches isn't huge at all. BTW; E-sedan is 192", so that's LESS than a foot, not more. But I really don't think that matters to the majority of buyers, so no; we don't agree here. But all the talk about "targets" is immaterial- the buyers will decide, due to the huge amount of variables, what they will cross-shop, not the manufacturers.

^ That certainly doesn't stop the practice (tho it may cut down on it).

>>"It was the retail price with the value added tax..."<< Right; they are NOT selling 250K fleet vehicles at full retail. >>"...it would be nice if it was a rear driver at least. Or at least have Cadillac call it what it is and compare it to the MKS and smaller ES350, and not make comparisons to the A6 or E350 on the Cadillac website. How is a mid-size rear drive sedan a direct competitor for a FWD large car?"<< These minor things just don't matter to the average consumer OR the livery segment. A6 & e350 buyers don't care what wheels drive the car, and don't know, either. Size differences, for the vast majority of buyers, are not prime criteria here, because they're too close, IMO. >>"And once the CTS has every bell and whistle from the XTS, a better chassis, better transmission, better engine, better steering and handling, what is the point of the XTS? "<< I dunno; I asked the same question about the s-class/maybach; melted sheet metal, bad 1970's 2-tone paint, worse handling, worse steering, worse braking, worse performance, a 5-speed !! auto vs. the s-class's 7... Seriously, different cars to appeal to different buyers I assume is the thinking- the same as just about all other makes out there. Look at audi. Doesn't always work, but it usually does. XTS has no relation to the abandoned STS. Cadillac doesn't have a flagship, but mercedees just KILLED their's off. Now THAT'S frustrating.

If this is the 'new GM', we had best not see the same sort of mistakes repeated with this car. Chevy should NOT be getting a LWB version here. In a non-Camaro or Corvette, no way should Chevy be building a 600 or 700 hp sedan. Get it straight, GM, and work these divisions together. BTW- I find the render a combo of 'quite lumpy' and 'too generic'.

^ are those retail prices, or fleet prices? Mercedees moves so many thousands upon thousands of fleet vehicles, undoubtedly they discount them heavily. The puzzle is, why even go after the livery market unless you are chasing sales marks? At least when Cadillac traditionally sold to the livery market, it was only a few thousand units/yr, not 100,000 or more.

My next goal(s) are my last goals. In other words, finish what I started.

I like it's overall shape/lines, except for the really unusual 'extension' thru the front fender flare. Looks like a mistake. That said- it & the Ford trucks are bearing strong similarities in front end cues. Not sure which way that falls for which brand. How many times did something break on you during your fling?

I hate generalizations, especially demonizing ones. I'm Gen X, but I fully acknowledge I fall 'off the charts' as far as 'normal' goes. I like cars built before I was born (my current Average Year Owned is older than I am, over 21 vehicles) and real full-size ones at that.

The internet is a colossal time waster, so getting away from it on occasion is probably good practice for everyone. 'Good vibes' to Cort on working thru his business.

These could all disappear and I really wouldn't be sad about it.

Was taking some band pics yesterday, and I piled them into the '60 Bonneville I have out back. You should've heard them (5 of them) raving about how comfortable it was inside. One of them offered to pay me to get it back running so he could drive it (not remotely financially practical). True full-size, not marketing spin from rental companies or head-up-its-arse Gov't agencies.

^ To boil it down then I guess; why buy a range rover when you can buy a Tahoe for $60K cheaper?

You seem to have the personality/devotion to make it happen. Keep us posted, B, and good fortune to you.

You're not incorrect, friend. I see lots of folk calling it a 'spindle' grille..., waiting for 'hourglass' to pop up too. toyota has no design sense whatsoever.... UNLESS they have an option for the car to turn invisible like the movie villian. ;P

I'm holding out hope that the talked about 'footprint' thing results in some actual full-size cars for a change. I miss 'em.

I find it amusing how people try to give it (the grille) a name, like there was any sort of concept behind it.

I've learned one of the few absolute truths of life from direct observation; the statement 'money is a little tight right now' (or the like) is ALWAYS relative.

Rare car, VG unrestored shape, price is not out of line. I prefer the lines & open RR wheelwells of the '64 tho.

^ Correct; it was an 'Endura delete' option.

I cannot get a car into my 2-car attached garage. Too neat, and I don't mean that to be a compliment, buddy.

>>"BMW is working on a new FWD platform"<<