Z-06

Porn

While I agree with need for proper names for Cadillac. In someways I am a little concerned. Especially for the CTS, all that positive and brand image it has garnered over the three generations will disappear with a new name.

This strategy is nothing different than naming a Cobalt a Cruze, Aveo a Sonic and list goes on. All the value that name has generated over the years suddenly becomes useless. For one at least ATS and CTS should not change. GM apparently is packaging the same wine in different bottle, i.e. from names to alphanumeric to names. Spend that amount of time, energy and efforts to make those vehicles stronger. Like replacing the weak 3.6 compared to the competitors' offerings, improving flaws of the ATS, etc.

I think AWD is a great idea for this car. Some additional sales for additional profit.

Remember GM should be a leader not a follower.

With Alpha, GM can bring the weight to the 3300 - 3400 limits like the ATS. I think that is not bad for a performance oriented RWD, given the Corvette now weighs that much.

So that is like waiting for 70 car-years for him. He will have two new vehicles by then. How old is he again?

There is actually a growing fan base. I am thinking of converting my 330i ZHP into a 6.2L.

Look at the guy's creativity below. He is from UK and put a 5.7L from the vette. Imagine a 370i.

E46 is a good chassis. Possibly the best BMW. Nothing spectacularly wrong other than electronics. Watch for the subframe structures - there was a class action going on or rust in suspension area.

The 325 without sport package is a dog. Auto or Manual?

The best thing about this car is because of its weight distribution you can put a small block in it without affecting the car's balance and it will surprise and scare many away.

What the other side of the story people are missing is that NHSTA had known about this issue but put it under the rug. As much as GM is to blame, the government agency is on the same pedestal.

What is now going on is damage prevention act and political dog and pony show with Congressional hearing. GM is going to be a loser here unfortunately.

Then what brand would you put it as?

True that. GM has become too much of a defensive company.

Avalanche pre-owned.

I thought Cherokee was Liberty replacement.

There's certainly not a lot of distinction in this increasingly-crowded segment, but the question remains what the association with the luxury aspect of the badge being increasingly seen on one of the most elemental & spartan vehicle on the road will do over the long run to perceptions. Because there's nothing 'mercedes' WRT a sprinter van...

Offering spartan commercial vehicles has not tarnished the Mercedes-Benz nameplate here in Europe, so I really wouldn't expect it to do so in the US.

The images of the brand differ a great deal from there to here from what I've seen.

MB's image in the US is one of snobbery, to put it in a very politically incorrect way. Over here the image is of a top-of-the-line car maker that also makes other products such as commercial vehicles (which it has for decades, BTW). The fact that the company produces delivery trucks under the Mercedes-Benz name has never stood in the way of the company's other cars being regarded as top-of-the-line.

May be Europe is an exception than rule, because almost every other part of the world thinks MB as a snob badge. Just ask an Indian or a Chinese or a Kenyan and snobs throb to MB. Europeans may be have accustomed of having two different flavors of vanilla.

The perception MB portays in US is that not of a vanilla but of triple chocolate strawberry with banana bits mashed in pineapple and complete with Acai berry. Of course when a mediocre van comes into picture those high standars wll be doubted. SMK hardly bought the car because it was bulletproof but because it was his favorite brand which reeks luxury.

If the concept carries over, it is the best looking entry level luxury car. Now let us see the interior.

There should be another diesel in this segment to make VW run for its money. Too bad Mazda freaked out - at least temporarily.

Open your eyes SMKelt.

Disagree. To me it is better looking than its competitors. For a car hamstrung with size, it does not look frumpy or bloated. Interior is a design exercise, which I will ignore. But basic cluster makes it no nonsense. Much better than the current Mazda2.

Six years since and the Cruze has definitely aged well. The diesel in that vehicle is bulletproof. Keep posting us about your updates. I am really happy that someone bought a non-truck GM diesel to really understand the experience.

Do not tag other issues with the engine. GM is contemporary with the 5.3L.

Wow factor is relative. It wowed Car and Driver, it wowed other magazines with how quiet and car like it rode. The truck is bling-free and honest. It has rough edges, but it's not horrible. But that said, are there improvements needed yes. Is the price justified may be not. I think the cars have become expensive in general. But then again, I think purchasing power of people has decreased much more in this decade and prices have spiraled due to inflation.

There is an article, which stated GM had almost $1,500 less discounts on the trucks than next nearest Dodge followed by Ford. And the time the trucks sat on the lots is less than the others' times. Also, the average transaction price was higher than Ford and Dodge vehicles. BTW discounts are back in March so you will get your volume wish fulfilled.

So for same displacement if Chevroletdes Benz and GMW put direct injection and VVT, etc. and ride it forever it is considered advancement, but for GM doing the same for the 5.3L, it is considered, it is still 5.3L? Unlike BMW, GM has made no engine additions and enhancements? DI 2.0L T was in Solstice in 2006, GMW only came to the party in 2011, so much for being a tech leader!

The new Silverado looks similar to the old one, it is hard to tell them apart unless side by side. And the engines and transmissions are basically carry over, they might claim it is new, but it is still a 5.3 V8. HP and gas mileage might be up slightly, but there is nothing ground breaking added to these trucks. They have up to $7,000 discounts in March so maybe that will get sales going.

Partially agreed. Sometime incremental improvements go long way. Triple sealed doors, much better dash interiors, full box frame for structural rigidity are welcome features along with others. What these trucks lack are no innovations in space usage or tech transferred from Avalanche.

Regarding your comment on it is still a 5.3:L. Chevroletdes Benz and GMW have been using their 3.5 and 3L, respectively, for eternity. Those are basically carry overs too right?

Not bad. Dorky but better than Souls and Jukes.

If only GM had balls to bring this with raised clearance:

Congrats and happy oil burning miles.

Ahh if it only came in manual transmission.

Back to Cadillac. We are not here for AMG history lesson. We get that you love MB and AMG and data will be twisted to distort your pony to win the race.

There is ONE vanilla engine from AMG which is put in all appliances MB manufactures to tart them up. AMG introduces one engine in a mid-cycle while phasing out the other, enough to give the perception of it has two engines. From 5.5 N/A and Kompressor to 6.2 to now the TT and now the desire to go to a smaller TT and hybrid! AMG should be ashamed of putting the same engine in a $276,000 car as it puts in a $60,000 car.

Mclaren did the SLR and because it decided to show middle finger to MB and have its own supercar, AMG was selected to design the next vehicle. Just because the R&D operating structure of MB/AMG is different does not mean it is the best and the people working there are with God status.

The fact that you constantly bring your storied brand to compare lowly Cadillac is a victory for Cadillac itself. In less than 10 years since the first CTS-V rolled out from a ragtag team of GMPP division rednecks who did not have a bluechip of AMG tattooed on their shoulders to a formidable sedan enough to twirl around the Nurnburgring faster than many of AMG's so called sports cars.

Is Caddy perfect? Heck no. But it is not as miserable as every drivel you save and spend on any topic remotely related to Cadillac. Cadillac needs its own identity not a carbon copy of that of the German high end generic appliance manufacturer.

I think 2015 model year should be doable for the CTS-V. It shouldn't take 2 years after the initial car comes out to drop a bigger engine in and add some trim. Model year 2 of the body style is reasonable, many cars are done like that, the base sedan comes out, in year 2 the coupe and sport version arrive, a couple years later a mid-cylce refresh.

SMK... are you able to ever make a post that doesn't contain some reference to the S-Class?

I guess not.

Unlike AMG studio, which just dumps a specialty vanilla engine in all the hi-performance cars while giving some nose job, carbon fiber lipstick and little botox in the suspension, M, RS, V and even F studios actually do more to aerodynamics, handling, and suspension tuning. Many times engines come unique to the car. CTS-V had its own engine when introduced. These things need time. A staggered launch helps the lineup fresh rather than dumping all models in one go. It also helps to improve any initial niggles to have a smooth launch for a model that is considered top of the line.

Per your Cadillac theory (Other luxury manufacturers do it so should Cadillac) - to the contrary - everyone else does it so should MB.