smk4565

How does the optional engine have less horsepower and fuel economy than the base engine? Other than that it looks great inside and out.

If the theory that the CT6 was better than a 7-series is correct, then why can BMW get $130,000 for an M5, more than what any Cadillac costs and $175,000+ for a 760. Is Cadillac’s image that bad that they have to give that much in MSRP and profit mating to BMW?

The GLB has the same torque as an XT4 or X1 and more than a Q3. There is nothing wrong with the power output of the base engine. I would argue the A220 is underpowered though. There is no power upgrade for XT4, Lexus NX, Q3, RDX, etc. GLB is going to have engine upgrades that the others don’t.

I don't think the 4-cylinder 0-60 time matters too much on a CT5 or 5-series, as long as the car feels like it has enough power in regular driving. The people buying the 4-cylinder are not in any hurry to get anywhere. There is a 6-cylinder if they do want power, I'd be more concerned with V6 acceleration because that is what the enthusiasts and bigger spenders will compare. Interior quality, technology and refinement and ride quality are going to matter. Cadillac has to win those daily driver categories that it rarely wins vs the Germans. Here's and A6 interior, gotta beat that:

It is 5-series size, but I was reading some rumors that it is 3-series price. Which I think is actually a good strategy, the first CTS was 5-series size for 3-series money and that was the only CTS that was a strong seller. The 5-series costs more than a CT6, so they can't price the CT5 like a 5-series. The new 330i, which I guess isn't the cheapest model but is a turbo 4 model does 0-60 in 5.2 seconds. The 340i adds another 130 hp, so I have to believe that is doing it in near 4 seconds. Which is crazy because that was M3 fast like 5-10 years ago.

But the C-class and E-class have more horsepower in 4 and 6 cylinder spec than a CT5. Regardless of that, I don't see how V-series package that adds $20k to the price of any Cadillac crossover isn't easy profit, even if it is only a 10% take rate.

Genesis brand is out of business soon if they don't get some crossovers on the market.

A lot of those cars are dead or will be in 6 months. I assume there will be a V of the CT4 and CT5, but who knows, maybe they can't find the business case for that either. Cadillac sells like 5 SUVs to every one sedan probably. I still think since they Denali everything, they might as well V-series everything. Although putting the crossovers on Alpha/Omega chassis would help make that more plausible. I don't see how there isn't a business case when they make $80,000 Camaros and $130k Corvettes and $70k pickups. They find buyers for top trims on Chevy's I don't see how they can't on Cadillacs.

Nissan realizes this car came out in 2009 right? And they haven't redesigned it yet.

Might as well build it, the market doesn't have smaller sized pick ups now and I think one would sell. 147 hp won't get it done in the USA, but they can drop the 2.0T motor in there and be fine. They could probably sell more of these than Arteons.

I know, but if a CT6 starts at $50k, it has to be less than that. And GM has some crazy pricing on some product, but even they are not foolish enough to price the CT5 on par with an E-class. And the CT6 is cheaper than an XT6. CT5 could cost less than XT5.

Correct on all counts. And the New CLA45 and A45 have 406 hp I think now. So 400 hp is very likely as an option to the GLB in a class where about 240-250 hp is the norm. Cadillac not doing V-series on everything is sort of like GMC putting Denali on 2 models only, and saying we don't want extra money .

So will a CT4 cost less than an XT4? SUV’s usually cost more than similar size sedans. I have to imagine CT5 starts around $40k.

That looks hideous. Although I don’t think a luxury minivan is a bad idea considering how many 3 row luxury SUVs there are and a minivan would offer more passenger space than any of them and space and roominess does add to luxury and comfort.

So it is not a C-class competitor, nor is it replacing both the ATS and CTS. Which this is a good size for a car, it isn’t as nice as an E-class or A6, but if they it like a C-class they should be fine. Or as fine as a sedan can be in a crossover market.

Looks like a RAV4. A lot of Toyota in that design.

The other articles I read state the CT5 is a 3-series and C-class competitor but it looks bigger than those cars. I am curious what the dimensions are. If it is priced like a C-class I think it should do fine. The interior looks on par with a A4 or C-class, a lot of plastic/rubber in that center console area but the doors look nice. Still not a fan of the shape or exterior styling.

My complaint with XT4 and XT5 and XT6 is only 1 engine choice. If 224 hp isn’t enough a 300 hp will be available probably at launch or close to given that the work is done on the 35’s. And they might do a 400 hp GLB45, I would be surprised if they AMG everything.

The Altima has awd but only on 4-cylinder models as with Subaru. If the Singer was good value, then awd and 2 extra doors should make it steal sales off Mustang and Camro all day long but that hasn’t happened. And people aren’t paying $10k more than an Optima because Stinger has all wheel drive. And the Stinger isn’t luxurious, the interior is below what you get in a Mazda 6. Thus it has low sales.

No one offers 7 seats in this segment. A win for Mercedes. The GLB 35 won't be a $20k premium, the 45's are a $20k premium.

My gripe is the Stinger is overpriced. The V6 Stinger costs more than a V8 Mustang or Camaro for example. And the Stinger isn't really any more luxurious or better equipped than a Mustang, it just has back doors. A Stinger is more than a Hemi Charger, too, and again the Stinger is maybe marginally better on interior, only because the Charger is ancient. I love the fact that Kia made a rear drive sports sedan, something different than all the FWD generic stuff that is out there. But they missed the mark on pricing. Kia has sold 3,227 Stinger in the first quarter, (which is down from 3,920) and they sold 22,668 Optimas which is up from last year. Same size car, I think similar interior quality/luxury in both. You can even get the same 2 liter turbo in both, but in the Stringer they change you $10-15k more than Optima because they turned the engine the correct way. Way too much of an up charge to send power to the back wheels instead of the front.

I don't think it will be that cheap. I am thinking like $80k base model. Although that is also without me seeing the interior or knowing engine specs, but I predict price is going up.

But nothing else is going to look like the G-wagen, that is why it is an icon. The biggest flaw I see in Mercedes design is with the SL. That should look like the 1955 version and be a retro style to be to the car side, what the G-wagen is to the SUV side. Compare the GLB to an XT4 or NX200 or 250 or whatever Lexus calls their small SUV which has almost the exact name a s Nissan commercial van. And we know 300 hp is right around the corner from launch of the base model, which is more than any of these other compact 4-cylinder SUVs have.

That was never a future G-wagon, why would they ever change the styling? in 2040 the G-wagen will look the same as it does today.

GLB looks a lot like that. That concept "invokes genes" of the G-class, that is like when Chevy puts out a Blazer that is inspired by a Camaro, that is all marketing speak that has nothing to do with anything. They never said Ener-G was a preview of the next G-wagen, the G-wagen wasn't going to change styling. GLB is for "tomorrow's off road adventures"