smk4565

The V6 looks promising, that would give the XF a nice entry level engine here and broaden the range a bit, rather than just offering V8s. Perfect for a smaller sports car. A supercharged V6 would be nice in the XK also, it may get the weight down some, and almost makes the power the V8 makes. The Evoque engine I see used in a small sports car, not enough muscle for current Jag sedans and they have a turbo diesel four in europe for the frugal buyer. Now if (or when) Jaguar does a 3-series competitor, the turbo 4 would be a good base engine, then the super V6 as the optional.

Well the 3-series has been on the Car & Driver 10 Best award list for 21 consecutive years. That is a pretty good run. I generalized when I said 30 years, BMW has been a benchmark for over 20 though, and Mercedes much longer than that. Mercedes invented the car after all. And the CTS is no longer going to be an entry level car, if they push it to mid-lux against the E-class and 5-series Cadillac better not bring another knife to a gun fight like with the STS.

You all can bash Mercedes or other imports of the 80s, but that is when Cadillac started to lose, and it got worse in the 1990s. If Mercedes wasn't any good, why isn't Cadillac dominating them? And since this was about the CTS, can Cadillac add $10,000 or even $15,000 in price to that car and see a sales increase on it? That is a tall order.

BMW and Audi got a later start, Mercedes was the standard in the 1960s even, the other 2 came a bit later. But Cadillac did the Cimarron in the early 80s because they were worried about the sales BMW and other European imports were taking sales away. Lexus in the 80s built the LS400 to compete with Mercedes (albeit at a discount) even the CTS-V was done to compete with the M5, a car that came out in 1985. The Germans have been at this game a long time is all I'm saying. And in the 1970s when the top Cadillacs were $16,000, a Merecedes 450SEL 6.9 was nearly $40,000. The S-class has always been the standard, and that is the difference between Mercedes and the rest. Lexus, Infiniti, Cadillac, etc can compete on $35-50,000 cars, but they can't play in the big leauges. Even the Lexus LS is about $30,000 cheaper than an S-class.

That's terrible.

150 hp and cloth seats for $25,900, what a rip off. I don't get why people still buy Acuras, they are barely any nicer inside than a Honda and Honda's aren't even that nice.

Moving in the rigth direction is good, and ATS and CTS seem to be doing that. But 10 years ago the first CTS came out, and we heard of a rear drive STS and rear drive convertible to follow shortly after. 10 years ago Cadillac was supposed to be moving toward being a global player and challenging the Germans. So we've heard this story before. We are also about 1 year away from a new S-class and a reminder of what Mercedes is capable of and why they are Mercedes and Cadillac, Infiniti, and the others are second teir.

Could just be to protect the name since they have had many SS models over the years, and a Camaro SS right now.

300 hp in a front driver is already pushing it. So I would say in Impala SS doesn't make sense. if you want power and performance that is why rear drive cars exists. I just read in USA today that large cars are 3% of car sales and the average buyer of a large car is 65. So I can't see much volume on a high power Impala. It would be like a V8 Toyota Avalon, pointless.

Not sure how the SRX helps them become a world standard, when it competes with the RX350 and MKX, and the Germans have rear drive, more expensive SUVs. Plus the MKX is sold in North America only, and even 56% of Lexus brand sales are in the USA. Also not sure dfelt how the XTS is already a winner when it isn't on sale yet, and many are already saying it is here to handle fleet sales. ATS might be world class, and the next-gen CTS might be world class, but those are still 2 "might be's" and BMW and Mercedes have been world class for 30+ years. So while I see the ATS and CTS being steps in the right direction, they may not get Cadillac across the goal line.

Not sure you can be the "world standard" when you pretty much only sell in North America and even in the USA Cadillac is mid-pack in sales.

Too much power for a front wheel drive car, even with all wheel drive, I wonder how bad it will understeer. But I suppose people will by it because it will be low on weight and high on power and they will forget about the drive wheels.

Let's hope, the STS was a dud.

Looks promising so far, and agrees about the Benz look, I think they used those wheels to make it look more like a Benz. I just hope it doesn't get too big, the CTS is already bigger than an E-class. This car could make the XTS irrelevant (which I would love). This car will have a longer wheelbase, and possibly more interior room than an XTS, they could fit it with magnetic ride control, a better interior, and 8-speed transmission (if they ever get one). Then you have RWD ride and handling that beats the XTS, better fuel economy because of the turbo 4 and even the V6 with a better transmission and less mass to move around should do better on the CTS than XTS. I assume this CTS will be priced the same as the XTS in order to line up to the 5-series.

Ouch, what is up with the paint color?

Diesel is awesome! It has probably only done 12,000 miles though because the engine blew after that.

Nice 70s car. Not an era I like, but I like that dash curved to the driver. If you like big 70s cars, this is a classic example.

7 miles in 35 years is pretty insane. Cheers on keeping the car original as is. But it is an ugly car. They preserved the wrong car.

Hyundai is smart, they know what they are doing. And they have been on a roll for the past 3 years.

Good, Cadillac will get rid of that pickup truck they sell.

What is amazing is it is only 184 inches long and weighs 5,600 lbs. Even more amazing is that after 33 years of looking the same, Mercedes can still charge $110,000 for this thing. But where this vehicle will become cool and desirable is other cars all surrendered to the green movement, while this basically gives a middle finger to the environmentalists.

Cars do take a while to produce, and to build a brand takes even longer. But my complaint with Cadillac is why they didn't do more earlier on. Even if you say the management of the 80s was too clueless to see the imports coming, or how much of a threat Lexus would be, and give a pass on that. Fast forward to the late 90s when they realized they were in trouble, and decided to do Sigma. In 2003 when the first CTS came out, then STS, SRX, XLR, they should have been planning the replacements. Instead they re-did the CTS on the same chassis and killed the other 3 off. When Mercedes puts out a new S-class, they then go to work on the replacement, so that 6 years later they have another S-class to put on sale. Then they don't get caught with holes in the lineup or needing stop gaps.

GM spent a couple billion on Saturn, GM had money, they just wasted it.

Wait, GM in the 1980s when they ahd 40% domestic market share, and were the largest corporation in the world, didn't have any money? But Daimler-Benz had over $1 billion to spend on a redesign of the S-class and Toyota had $1 billion to spend on the Lexus LS400? How did they afford it?

First point is true, the XTS is another bridge, but GM has had that mentality for 30 years. Why didn't Cadillac start working on a flagship in the 80s when Lexus did with the LS400? Or why not in the early 2000s when they decided to launch Sigma? Cadillac needs to bring their future to the present ASAP. What segment wants a huge FWD luxury car? The 1,000 people that bought an MKS last month, most of which are all wheel drive, those few dozen non-fleet DTS buyers last year. There are only 3 front wheel drive cars with a base price over $40,000: the A6 2.0T, MKS and XTS.