balthazar

>>"you're not being entirely factual here. this is a RWD-based AWD car."<< Aware ... point was it was NOT only RWD, as the implication above demands for success. This car is AWD and is competitive (laughable styling aside), no reason an AWD XTS cannot likewise be competitive, esp. in a less performance-demanding segment. >>"how do you step down from something that is the best to something that is not."<< Preferences change obviously- or the entire theory of 'getting a consumer in your entry-level car then having him trade up thru the line over time' is completely nullified. And if BMW has the "best" steering & handling, they would never lose a consumer to -say- mercedes ever ... I'm willing to bet this happens frequently. No one car is the best at everything and driver's have different criteria. In the segment of S-class/ 7-series/ etc, ultimate handling & steering are not paramount to a significant portion of the buyer pool. Therefore, other factors & features rise closer to the top. Olds said his grandmother drives a 7-series after having a number of Park Avenues. Is her driving suddenly aggressive & canyon-carving ?? The harping on the XTS being FWD-based AWD is immaterial to the bulk of this demographic, no matter what the perception of 'BMW' in general is. But given a fresh, dynamic shape & holysh!t electronic interfaces, plus the hype of hybrid power, and you have real, unique reasons to pull a weary S/7 buyer out of that circle. Will there be those that will demand a V-8 XTS ?? Yes, of course. Cadillac has had V8s longer than anyone else, since 1914, that's real heritage the others can't touch. And they should offer a V8, I agree. Still, I would strongly like to see how the XTS plays out and what upgrades Cadillac brings to it over a few model years... and I would be willing to meanwhile see it go against similar-power models of it's competition. The reports that BMW & MB are going 'down market' underhood are not wild theories with the realities of fuel prices, unemployment & shifting markets to contend with. Someone from GM said they were now relatively flush with cash, and others have confirmed that some projects shelved because of the bankruptcy were back online. We can hope that Cadillac resumes development of a new generation V8 soon. On the other hand, we've all read numerous threads on how the 'V8 is dead' and 'why stick with a V8 when a V6 is just as powerful' ... and here we have a V6 with more power than Cadillac's previous N/A V8s AND mercedes' V6 ... and everyone is still b!tching.

WallyWorld ~ >>"A front drive Cadillac is just as bad as GM making a front drive Camaro with a turbo V6 and claiming it to be a sports car."<< Riiiiight, because Cadillac & mercedes sedans are driven like sports cars, so they need V8s & RWD ONLY. Uh-huh. And this "sports car" also fails because it lacks a V8 & RWD only. Uh-huh. >>"The S-class has a 612 hp/738 lb-ft V12 option also."<< Wonder which one sells more.. and which one will sell more 5 years from now ? >>"That is the difference, I can't choose a V12 XTS, I have to get a V6. "<< So these people only buy by cylinder count? In other words, while you mention BMW's claimed HP, you continue to ignore that a Cadillac with 350 HP trumps a mercedes with only 295 HP and HERE focus on cylinder count instead of HP. Nice consistancy.

What's interesting is that olberman calls out people for 'inciting hate', then openly wishes them dead after decrying the worth of their lives to be less than zero / being the devil. I initially didn't get that he meant 'inciting hate' was within himself...

ANyone know when this style of dealer sign came out ? Late '70s... or later ?

Of course, that's correct. My point was, the AWD XTS should be pretty damned near the exact weight distribution match to the 'excellent' A8. -- -- -- -- -- Aren't the rumors of a 'narrower, less aggressive' XTS based from one of the auto rags, not GM ?? Guesswork at this point, no? I wouldn't sweat that yet.

When did acura have a 350-HP hybrid engine ?? Still waiting to learn why mercedes has a 295-HP hybrid in their s-class, too....

Cubitar ~ >>"...you have this 'oracle of all automotive knowledge' image on this board..."<< {blinks} I do ?? Aww shucks. Actually, I only feel confident RE the '50s & '60s... but I take stabs outside of that. >>"...but really, you... have strong opinions, as many of us do. "<< True, true (watching the game, having a Bud). >>"The interior is the best part of the car. I've sat in one."<< I sat in a new one in '01 or '02, guy I worked with had one. I was impressed with how it was put together and the perception it was 'luxurious' inside... but there still was an impression of sterility and... soulessness about it all the same. That gen, with the big tacked-on Baleen whale grille, is the last LS that EVER caught my eye on the road; the gen(s) since then just do not. But interior & exterior success don't necc. go hand-in-hand. >>"...maybe I'm becoming my Dad..."<< My Dad owns a Lucerne (which is very quiet & smooth- but I don't like it otherwise, at all), I own a B-59. I don't think I'll 'move up' in this case.

>>"You are stating your opinions as if they were facts."<< We ALL do this. >>"Lexus has it's own design language, it just may not be apparent to you. If you actually looked at the car in person..."<< I certainly have seen these in person. Here in central NJ; they're quite common. >>"...you would see it's much more than a Camry..it's a very nice product, beautifully built."<< Being nice & well-built is not a reflection on it's design/styling, which is what I was referring to. But let's take a look here : Same soft, amorphous surfacing, same trapeziodal grille, same greenhouse, same door pulls, same fender-to-hood scallop, same stretched inner corner headlights... not the same parts, but the same 'language'. You cannot get more generic than the camry. At least the others in this segment (7-series, S-class, no matter their repective awkward bits) are unmistakable and take some chances, plus they expand upon the respective brand's cues. LS= no character, no spunk, no individuality. Nice car, well built, but boring & invisible as hell to look at. IMO, I don't think that's naught but opinion, as the pics show rather well.

In this segment, the LS is bland, anonymous & generic. It has no design language or design heritage, and the only way it can slime it's way to being termed 'handsome' is because it's so utterly homogenized. It looks no more expensive than the camry, and if you agree that 'perhaps' 75% don't know it's RWD, then the profile view-only RWD proportions are lost on that 75%. A car in this class has to bring a HELLVA lot more to the table than a stand-back, profile-view implication of RWD. Remember, in this class, RWD is the mainstream/generic. (<-- that doesn't mean I personally want FWD because of traction or it's 'different'.... just saying the focus on such in the upper lux seg is highly overrated.)

>>"The FWD Lacrosse CXS is 58/42. An AWD CTS is 52/48. I would assume the AWD Lacrosse is somewhere in between that."<< I would agree the AWD LaC should be between the above. Let's peg it at 55/45. AWD XTS, with a longer rear, might nudge that to 56/44. A8 is 56/44, but the XTS is "obviously" going to be uncompetitive with that based on... I'm not sure what. >>"I doubt this car will be pulling in people shopping for a 5 series or a Lexus LS."<< 5-series, prolly true. But the LS?? You think people are tossing these around thru corners ?? It's a jelly-bellied cruiser, where an AWS XTS with a tuned suspension will likely outhandle it at limits... even tho neither are going to be driven beyond 7/10th of their capabilities and neither will be sold on those capabilities either. I'm willing to bet not a single LS was sold primarily because it simply was RWD, and that 75% of it's owners have no idea which are the drive wheels.

With some of the design work coming out of GM recently, I give appropriate credit to Welburn's comments RE the XTS. DeLorenzo... I have had major issues with in some of his past pieces... he has a chip on his shoulder WRT GM... but perhaps that earns his comments even more legitimacy coming from him, if that's true. I would truely like to see this one in person, more than any other modern vehicle I can remember.

^ So what does this mean then ? : >>" “A real luxury flagship is still on our wishlist,” says Clay Dean, Cadillac design chief.<<

I really, seriously think that the much-maligned 'grandpa' demographic is going to be seriously turned off by the wild electronics/digitals inside (at least as presented on the Platinum). Too confusing and 'new fangled'... but I CAN see it appealing to the youthful techies quite readily. Agree with everyone who said this need to be the ONLY XTS offered: hybrid, AWD. The performance would be competitive, and there'd be no 'torquing into the next lane' with AWD & 350 HP. Also agree with those that said this is NOT the Cadillac flagship- it is the DTS replacement with the same degree of step-up over the DTS as the CTS was over the Catera. But with European pedestrian impact requirements, and the ever-present emphasis on interior volume, enlongated greenhouses & higher hoodlines are the future- A8 & s-class are old school. With the CTS sedan & coupe vs. their concepts, I have high hope the 'XTS' will show a like degree of faith to this concept in every regard.

Cubical-aka-Moltar =>>"Well, whether you 'buy it' or not, things certainly seem to be moving that way."<< 2009 hybrid marketshare in U.S. by sales : 3%. It's moving that way... very very slowly.... -- -- -- -- -- I read quite a bit here & elsewhere about the XTS last night, and images of the pics kept popping into my head thruout the day. More & more I am liking this car. And I am not going to make complete guesses as to other versions, to be fair I can only comment on what was presented- this XTS Platinum. First, the styling : The top 3 are all immediately dated. Esp the horrible s-class- with it's '90's Taurus-esque bubble greenhouse & it's mazda-inspired north-south fenders. The car is a styling wreck. Lexus is an anonymous blob with no brand ID. 7-series is just weird with numerous awkward touches. Where is the CS BMW teased us with a couple years ago ?? a8 looks ancient in comparison. The steep angle between the hood & upright windshield, the obvious black outlining the side glass, the laughably cheap plastic triangle at the rear quarter window, the same, blocky fist-dent/ basket handle door pulls we've seen on everything down to $9K econoboxes, and the Lego-inspired, interchangable front & rear fascias... those vertical seams that make it look like they snap on & off--- ruins any fluidity that car attempted to have. Ahh, and the swollen, bulbous, heavy FWD nose....

I, too will wait until another set of pics shows up. Offhand- the 'cab-forward-esque' styling is unusual for Cadillac, but as the large cars keep shrinking, more & more are going to go this way, esp with the regular publication of EPA interior volume determining for folk which car is more "eficient", space-wise. I am positive engine orientation has zero bearing on the demographic for this car OR the S-class/7-series. None of the owners of these cars ever looks under their own hood. And if the XTS comes as AWD standard, that -in this category alone- WILL compete with the RWD-only S-class/7-series fine. From the pics- it has a nice flow thru the body stem-2-stern, but the profile & rear are a bit bland to my eye. Interior does look fantastic, tho. Esp like the 'V' theme echoed subtly thruout. Need more pics.

Years back, a buddy told me he spotted an old Chrysler behind a highway motel. We motored over and sure enough- a '58 Chrysler Saratoga 2-dr hardtop. That era MoPars didn't have the traditional door lock buttons, the doors locked via the inside door handle. I worked open the vent window to where I could slip my hand & arm in, then popped the door. We took turns admiring & sitting in the car, checking it out thoroughly & making 'brum-brum' Wedge sounds. I caught what I thought was a motel room curtain falling, so we buttoned her back up & walked back to our ride, just as police ruiser rounded the corner. Someone had called... but the cop didn't speak to us; no evidence. We had no intentions of vandalism or theft, just admiration.... tho of course we did commit automotive B&E. -- -- -- -- -- I have often wanted to do what's been mentioned above; move an idling vehicle around the corner. Anyone SO lazy they cannot shut off their car (I assume it's laziness.... can't think of another legitimate reason), deserves a rude awakening.

You mean the physical style of the camera ?? It's a tool for me, not a piece of jewelry. If it takes good pics and can interface with the computer easily, that works for me. The Panasonic seems a good candidate- I wonder what the longevity/ reliability of it is. Can I get a quick primer on optical vs. digital zoom ?? Are the numbers indicitive of how close-up you can get ?

>>"Sad state of affairs. Globalism just sucks."<< Right: not funny, but sad.

Read the 5 topics that came up when searching for 'digital camera'. Being the Thriftyosaurus that I am, I am finally ready to replace my 10-yr old Canon 2.1 MP digital. It actually still works fine, except the battery is tired, and the recent replacement isn't much better. I can shoot about 12 pics B4 both are dead. For kicks, this lil unit cost right around $500 10 years ago (!!) but at least I got my money's worth (sold about $4k of stuff over the years). I primarily use a DC to shoot items I sell, so any image issues the relative quality level of the Canon has.... being an old hand @ PhotoShop- they are no problem. I do not need to photograph butterfly eyebrows or the like, nor do I need it to anything beyond 1.) shoot decent pics, and 2.) have a decent, uncomplicated interface to download into the comp with. In other words, in that 2.1 MP quality is servicable to me (except 3' is about as close as you can get), I do not need 15 or 13 or 10 MP, I'd imagine. Couple that with I don't want to spend over $200 this time.... and I'm open to recommendations.

>>"all you folks who think you hate the looks of the terrain, have you actually seen one in the real world, two, have you even seen an equinox? The terrain looks very upscale in comparison to the equinox."<< I have, and agree. >>"...its more different than the edge is to the MKx or Escape to the Mariner."<< Agreed again, and by far. Same with the Acadia & Traverse. But while I agree the Terrain looks more expensive/ upscale than the EQ, I see them as just different vehicles period. The EQ is a nice, trim lil CUV, and I favor it's styling greatly over the (still more expensive looking) Terrain.

'70 Cutlass hardtop, blue w/ blue bumpers, driver condition, growling fiercely as it drove by twice. '63 Chevy II 4-dr sedan, dark blue over med, stock & nice, driving. '62 Belvedere 2-dr sedan, white w/ a jaunty red insert at the beltline, 3-spd on the column, exc, parked @ gas station.

>>"...GM does have a reoccurring problem of cars tuned to get in the tallest gear just for the sake of mileage. This was a criticism of the Malibu when it first got the 4-cylinder and 6-speed"<< I assume this was early production shift programming since changed, because there are zero issues with my wife's 2.4L / 6-spd Malibu's shift characteristics. I got to drive it thrice today (taking care of a buddy's German shepard for the weekend)- that's a 40-mile round trip plus some side errands... prolly 140 miles today on all sorts of road (asphalt, concrete, residential, highway). Whether in drive or using TapShift, the car shifts well & appropriately. Power is quite good, and under moderate throttle it does not skip in the 1st 4 gears. After that, if you cruise, it may jump 5th into 6th depending, but that's certainly not an issue, either. I would like to read these 'criticisms' if they are available...

I personally find the styling of the Terrain rather distasteful. -- -- -- -- -- >>"I have tried to love the Terrain and even the stying while not my favorite has grown on me. But to be honest I have checked this out and I can not find a good reason to pass over a Nox LTZ for this vehicle. This is a case where it is like the G6 over the Malibu. Unless you wanted a 2 door there was little reason to buy the G6 other than styling. In other words offer me things in this I want but cant have in the Nox and you might get more money out of me."<< I have the strong feeling that IF -say- a G6 (you forgot the convertible & the GXP) and Malibu were to offer different 'things', there would be a contingency that loudly cried 'Why can't I get Widgit 3.0 on the Malibu- it's on the G6 fer Pete's sake??' In other words, there are ALWAYS going to be those who are dissatisfied and going to make themselves heard about it (thanks to the Godsend- the InterWeb). In OTHER words, one could apply the same position to a Chevy mid-sized sedan with 4cyl/6-spd and options A, B, C and a nissan mid-sized sedan with 4cyl/6-spd and options A, B, C. Don't we really only need ONE mid-sized sedan with 4cyl/6-spd and options A, B, C; aren't the rest just redundant regardless of the parent corporation ?? {^ Not directed at you, hyper} Either we embrace the diversity that -in this case- the G6 & Malibu represent, or we slide ever forward toward homogenization and limited choice.

Neil has a long history of Just Not Undertanding.

Seeking to burn the 'geoamino' out of everyone's eyeballs :