smk4565

No Verano anymore, Regal sales were never strong to begin with and are bottoming out, Lacrosse operates in a dying segment.  Impala was way down too, full size sedans just don't sell anymore.  

What is sort of shocking is Malibu down 43% because that segment isn't small or going away.  Cadillac sedans had a brutal month, but people want crossovers.  

XTS could have a Town Car like life span.  The markets it caters to don't care if it is old or front drive, as long as they are roomy and relatively cheap.  The Town Car went 13 years with basically no improvements and the livery market still bought it.  The current XTS could last until 2022 easily caring to fleet and livery buyers.

 Couldn't Cadillac build the Escalade, XT5, and an Alpha platform crossover and an Omega platform crossover?  And an XT3 or XT2 compact crossover.  They could easily support 5 SUVs.

2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Conjecture as you have zero proof that a make believe vehicle is better than the current one. All we know for certain is that the current vehicle is better than anything Merecedes offers.

The CT6 is admittedly compromised by Casa, if they took out the compromises and add the optional V8 we know is coming and make a crossover out of it, I don't know why it wouldn't be better than an Escalade.  Omega is a heck of a lot better platform than what the Silverado rides on, and GM does crossovers better than they do sedans.  No reason to believe that a CT6 based crossover without the penny pinching wouldn't be the best SUV/Crossover in GM history.

Yeah, I wouldn't back off the 54 mpg CAFE number though and I'd make crossovers the same as cars.  People buy RAV4 as a replacement for a Camry, they should be treated the same with CAFE.  Something like a Transit or F150 I can see under a truck standard.

A delay to 2030 could help them.  By then I'd imagine electric will be in a lot of powertrains, whether full EV or plug in hybrid of some sort.  I see no reason to lower the CAFE number, but perhaps give them another 5 years to get there, and get cost down to where the market will buy these hybrids.

I still don't get why Cadillac doesn't have a full size SUV on Omega that is like 4900 lbs with the 3.0TT V6 base and a 4.2TT V8 optional.  But then it would be better than the Escalade, so they won't make it.

29 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Baffling how he thinks that Benz is the only make capable of advancing tech. All I know is that more folks prefer the overdressed Chevy over the Benz. 

Not only Benz, as I said Alfa Romeo's SUV has 505 hp from a 2.9 liter engine.  Tesla's SUV has like 650 lb-ft or torque and can do 0-60 in less than 3 seconds, BMW has a plug in hybrid X5.  

If you go back to 2010 the Mercedes GL had 4.7 and 5.5 liter natural aspirated V8s while the Escalade had a 403 hp 6.2 V8.  The GL went to 3.0 and 4.7 liter biturbo engines and in 2019 will have a new inline 6 and 4.0 V8.  That is 2 generations of new engines, the Slade will still have the same engine.

1 hour ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Actually. U are wrong. The CT6 on the bottom spectra was laxed in the interior to justify the price. The CTS actually has a better interior than the CT6, IMO, until U get to the Premium L and Platinum CT6. The CT6 in this comparo is a BASE car for all intents. The only CT6 that should be sold, if it is gonna be held to the same level of expectation as the S-Class etc.. would be the Platinum.. which I have yet to read an true negative word about its interior even in comparos against the aforementioned leader of the segment.

Otherwise.. realize that if U take a car that should only be sold to people with the "XYZ means.." and downgrade it cater to those who only have the "XY" sans the Z.. corners will have to be cut.. and they damn sure are better cut from the insides than the bones. Point is.. if U have a car like the CT6.. on Omega.. and U have to snatch out things to bring cost down.. where do U snatch? Do U add in heavier steel instead of the lighter stuff? Do U put in less sound-deadening?? How about less forgiving sound-proof glass??? No what Caddy did was put less high quality leather in, deleted the MRC, and added no performance tires. U want a real CT6?? Buy a Platinum or even Premium Luxury. 

The CT6 in the comparison was $70k so it is hardly a base car.  And I suspect even a Platinum CT6 is going to lose an interior battle with a lot of cars in the $70-90k range.

But why is the CT6 so compromised in the first place?  Why did they have to cut corners at all?  This is just Cadillac mentality on display.  They cut corners on the bones of the XT5, it is just the Cadillac way to take shortcuts.

11 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Who cares where the other brands are at?? We're talking about the Escalade and where IT'S at.

6.2L engine is NOT a detriment to Chinese sales because realistically the only displacement decrease would theoretically take it to is between 3.0 & 4.0L, which like I said; the difference is only 5% of the vehicle price, or in other words, negligable. This tier of buyer is not pinching pennies, everything it this price tier is about conspicuous consumption. It would be interesting to see a 4.2TT V8 in the Escalade, but it would NOT be interesting to see a 2.4L engine there, regardless of stated power specs.

But they don't even sell the Escalade in China, so they have no sales at all.   I do hope in 2022 Cadillac is still pushing the Escalade with a 6.2 liter V8 pumping out 420 hp at 5,800 lbs getting 15/20 mpg.  Makes it easier for the GLS to win since they keep advancing with new powertrains.

At some point I'd expect Cadillac to make an Omega based SUV, or some sort of performance SUV.  They can't just sit around and let Porsche, BMW, Audi, Jaguar and Mercedes rack up profits on performance crossovers, even Alfa Romeo and Maserati are getting in that space, and they'll get some sales.  The Stelvio has 505 hp from a 2.9 liter V6, sort of makes the Escalade's 6.2 V8 look weak and out dated.

10 minutes ago, balthazar said:

3 - 4 liters is the same tax rate. You'd have to go from a 2.xL to a 3.xL, and the increase there is only 3%, not 8% (as of 2010). Everything OVER 4.0L is the same rate; a 4.1L is the same as a 8.2L.
That's $4500 on $150K, not $12K. Big deal, those paying these prices are grooving on overpaying, anyway, if it even matters.

But the Audi, BMW and Mercedes six cylinder engines are all like 2.99 liters, so they are under 3, the Audi and Mercedes V8s are 3.99 liter so they are under 4.   A GLS450 is taxed at the 2-3 liter rate.  So that is like 8% vs 20% on an Escalade.  Plus they have an annual displacement tax.

I found a tax table for annual taxes.

2400 RMB is $349 per year the 5,400 RMB for over 4 liter is $785 per year tax.  And this is why they don't sell any Cadillacs with an engine larger than 3 liters in China.

34 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

So a 6000 lb. SUV with a V6 could do 0-60 in 6.5 seconds? Want to explain the physics behind that?

A V8 Escalade is 5,520 lbs, a V6 should be a little less.

The GLS450 has a V6 and is 5,335 lbs and does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds, so the physics must be possible.  And that is with a 362 hp engine, when 400 hp is possible from a V6.   And they have a new GLS about 1-2 years away with more power and less weight.

33 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I'm surprised no one called U out on this idiotic comparo.

Let's be clear.. with $70K U could have gotten a CT6 3.0L TT with AWD that would have put the weaksauce Chinaman car on the trailer with the Kraut.

 In fact.. why was the CT6 in this run at all? Why not simply bring in a CTS 2.0L AWD loaded to the hilt? To MT it made sense to take a 204 inch car and put it up against 2 vehicles that were smaller than even the smaller than CT6s lil sis the CTS. 

Can U say BULLCRAP???

When I first saw the comparo in the magazine, I thought it was a CTS, but I guess they went with the CT6 since it is newer.  Given the CT6 has more room and equipment than the CTS, that should have helped it.   And the CT6 was the middle priced car of the 3 and they made it a 4 cylinder comparison.  They could put an E43 in a comparo with a CT6 3.0 and same result would happen as it did with the 4 cylinder engines.  The CTS would have done worse than the CT6, the interior and fit and finish and build quality were the biggest reasons the CT6 was in last place, and the CTS is worse than the CT6 in all of those categories.

The Escalade isn't sold in China, the Mercedes GLS and Audi Q7 are.  So in world's largest auto market the Escalade doesn't even compete.  All the more reason Cadillac needs an XT7 and more crossovers.  And an 8% tax difference to go from 3 liter to 4 liter is a lot on a $150,000 car which is about what the GLS sells for in China, that is $12,000 tax.  

To be clear, I think the Escalade should always have a V8 option, but they could easily make the base engine a 3.0TT V6.  If we aren't concerned about 0-60 SUV times, a V6 Escalade that does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds will sell just as well as a V8 model doing 0-60 in 5.9 seconds.  

This is part of Cadillac's problem for the past 30 years though, they are stuck in the past, and don't adapt to the market changes fast enough.  Always a step behind, always playing catch up.

China (which happens to be the world's #1 auto market) taxes displacement every 0.5 liters, anything over 2 liters is taxed heavily, over 4 liters it is taxed a lot.  

An S400 V6 in China costs $181,366, but an S500 with a 3.996 liter V8 is $290,360.   On the E-class going from the 2 liter four to the V6 adds $19,000.  A GLS V6 Luxury trim to a V8 is $31,000 increase with all other equipment being the same.  Crazy taxes!

7 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The Q8 is a 5-seater "4-door full size crossover coupe"   I'm sure Audi will sell about 10 of them.

Eventually they'll make a Q9 3 row SUV and sell 37 of those.

The X7 and Maybach GLS are going to bring the competition.

52 minutes ago, balthazar said:

They're "not buying" German luxury sedans either.

BTW- the Escalade is exempt from CAFE. 

German luxury sedans are the only ones that sell.  

The Escalade should impact CAFE, the F150 will.  Large trucks have to be 23 mpg EPA sticker by 2025.  But if they want to continue to offer 15/20 mpg with 420 hp while Mercedes I-6 offers 408 hp with way better mileage, they can go ahead.  BMW X7 and Audi Q8 are on the way too, the Euros are going to attack that segment with lighter, better handling, better braking, faster, better equipped SUVs the the Escalade is.  They can't live on name forever.

Motor Trend has a comparison this month of the E300, CT6 and Volvo S90 and the CT6 was last place.  I don't think it is near perfect if it can't even beat the mid-size luxury cars, it is a far cry from the real flagships.

3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The 6.2L V8 Escalade gets better fuel economy than the 3.5TT V6 Navigator.... so there goes that idea.

The GLS450 with the 3.0TT only gets 1mpg better highway and 1mpg better city... but it's also 60hp and 100 lb-ft behind the Cadillac. 

The GLS550 gets a 1999 like 14/18. 

The Escalade 4wd is rated at 15/20 mpg, not like it is much better, and the GLS550 is more powerful and faster.  The current GLS is too thirsty though, the GLE's hybrid engine would help.   I imagine on the next generation GLS due in 2018 they will fix fuel economy.  Weight should drop a few hundred pounds, the inline six and 4.0 V8 with the 48 volt electric system will be a big improvement over the 4.7 liter V8 that is a gas hog. 

3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Doesn't seem to stop the XT5 from being the second best selling crossover in its segment after the RX.   I agree that a Turbo V6 would be a nice option to have, but a the moment it certainly isn't slowing down sales. Cadillac just had to add another shift to Spring Hill to keep up with demand. 

0-60 in these beasts largely doesn't matter in terms of sales. Once you get beyond "sufficient", every 0.1 second subtracted from the 0-60 time has drastically diminishing returns.

Fuel economy would matter more, which would be the argument for a turbo 4 or hybrid going into the XT5.  In general though, across ATS, CTS, XTS, XT5, etc, the 3.6 isn't the best option anymore.  Same goes for Lexus with their 306 hp 3.5 liter V6 that they have been selling since 2006.  It is tired and dated.

XT5 is a new product and the only crossover at the Cadillac lot, that helps it sell, plus GM has a big SUV following.  But all the more reason that Cadillac should have about 4 crossovers on sale to capitalize on American's willingness to buy American trucks and crossovers.  Americans don't seem to want to buy American made luxury sedans.

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Let me make something abundantly clear here. The Escalade does not ever need a V6 of any kind. It has earned part of its reputation on the 6.2L and that should not change. They have plenty of smaller models in their lineup that could use a turbo six but that brute is not one of them. 

CAFE says it will need a V6, and they could easily get over 400 hp and lb-ft from a V6 that would drink less gas than a 6.2 liter.  I would still offer the V8 as an option, and I'd probably make it a turbo or supercharged V8.  The original Escalade had a 255 hp V8 while the age of the same year had a 300 hp V8.  The CTS has replaced the STs with a 4-cylinder, if they cut cylinders in half there, they can cut 2 off the Escalade.

I am in favor of a six cylinder S-class too which i think is happening this year, you don't need to offer a standard V8 just because.  And there isn't a reason a base S-class needs 476 hp which the 4.0 V8 will make in it when they replace the 4.7.  Just like you don't need 450 hp ina truck with poor handling.  The average buyer doesn't care.  Just the the Corvette could offer a base V6.  But in all cases I support the optional V8.

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

They are able to hide behind the excellent 8-speed and 9-speed automatics for the moment, but that moment isn't going to last very long and may already be over. 

The XT5 I drove felt way faster than its numbers suggested it should, but I really feel it is because of the way the transmission is geared. 

But everyone has 8 and 9 speed transmissions and Audis are much quicker than Cadillacs with comparable power.   Compare an XT5's performance to a Jaguar F-Pace or Mercedes GLC43 and it isn't even close.  The GLC43 does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, that is CTS V-sport performance out of a V6 crossover.   The 3.6 V6 just can't match any of the Euro sixes.

2 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

 

It blows me away that Cadillac even still uses the 3.6L at all considering the under-utilized LF3, LF4 and LGW. The LGX is simply not necessary anymore. The use of the 3.0L TT would be perfect even it was just re-tuned to 335HP.. which would be bonkers when a sweet spot would be 360HP and the given torque advantage of the forced induction

I agree, Cadillac should have an all turbo line up at this point.  Even with Escalade they could do a turbo V6 and a turbo V8 option.  The 3.6 V6 is useless, it has no torque and doesn't get good gas mileage. 

8 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

Note you have an issue here. Each and every one of these cars are sold globally. Cadillac for the near future is only going to be sold here and China where coupes are not really prized. Till Cadillac goes global your volume will suffer.

Just look at the volume the CTS and even today the ATS coupes sell at. Just no money there in the North American market.

 

It is not what I think it is the fact Cadillac just does not have the name equity it once had and still has less than the other brands. Not many people name drop Cadillac to impress people. 

You can say you own a Cadillac and be like my old neighbor with a old STS winter beater. With a BMW most people [not me]  think of an expensive car and not some piece of crap on a used car lot. Yes there are plenty rolling wreck BMWs too but that is not the first reaction people get.

Lets face it the big names do not make cars for Mary Kay.

You can't build any brand equity with sedans and a couple crossovers based on a Chevy.  That is why they need a convertible, to get some image.  That is why they need some sort of sports car too.  And to your point about volume, it is why they need to sell in more countries and build product that can compete in places outside of North America and China.

10 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

420hp 390 lb-ft of torque and AWD in a big comfortable luxury car that has a bit of handling prowess (not the best, but enough) for $65k before incentives isn't a bad deal.  You can spend that much at Audi and come up 90 HP / 75lb-ft short.

Except an Audi A6 Prestige with the V6 does 0-60 in 5.1 seconds and gets 21/29 mpg.  While the XTS V-sport does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds and gets 16/23 mpg.  And you can get the Audi for $65k too and no doubt the A6 will handle better and has a better quality interior.    

10 hours ago, dfelt said:

I have to totally disagree with you on this statement. 

The mistake is of auto companies and marketing groups that say you always have to grow. BS, As long as the car is in the right size inside and out for the class of auto, then leave the size alone and just always make it better. 

Enlarging an auto is what has always screwed up the heritage and history of that auto.

Mustang and Camaro owners do not want a car the same size as an Eldorado with 2 doors.

We need to stop this lie that auto's will and must grow in size from generation to generation.

Drew, same here in Washington. I believe it is the baby boomers as my dad loves the XTS but my mom refuses to give up her SRX and hates how low the car is so my dad traded in his truck for an SRX so they have two now.

The XTS at the dealership I go to are almost all sports. They usually only have one lower tier and one or two higher. Seems according to my salesman that the bulk of buying is the v-sport. Crazy but cool I think.

I agree that cars should stay the same size, I don't like size creep either.  I am just stating it is what car companies do.  I think they are wrong for doing it, but they keep doing it, which all that does it force out your top end model, as Chevy and Ford are about to do when they kill the Impala and Taurus because Malibu and Fusion will get too big.