smk4565

Yet not as powerful as the 429 hp V8 Hyundai will be selling this summer. Or as powerful as the 400+ hp V8s Infiniti, BMW and Benz have.

Right, so make an ATS model that gets 40 mpg, you can get 36 mpg form the 3-series, 42 mpg from an Audi A3, 41 mpg from a Lincoln MKZ. The people willing to pay for a green are are also the type that would buy small or perhaps midsize, rather than full size. The XTS is basically a V6 DTS on a newer platform, not exactly answer to high gas prices. But in 10 years probably most V6s will have some sort light hybrid system, so they might as well offer it. But I don't expect being a hybrid is what will draw people to the XTS, most prospective buyers probably won't even care. I mean these are the same people that were buying the 17 mpg Town Car built on an 80s platform up til last year.

Mercedes makes hybrids and diesels partly because Europe is full of environmentalists and gas is $6-8 a gallon. Plus governments, which are also full of greenies (especially European ones) buy the S-class. And it is a way to test hybrid technology on the high priced car before price comes down to fit it to a C-class. I would also imagine the S400 hybrid is a small percentage of American S-class sales, and the LS600h and Escalade hybrid are probably even a lower percentage than that. Because people that are worried about saving the planet and being economical and efficient aren't buying a 5,000 lb full size car or SUV. For that reason I think an XTS hybrid would be a slow seller. A person willing to spend an extra $5,000 to "save the planet" isn't looking to buy a 17 foot long Cadillac.

I agree with oncblu's last 2 posts. I think hyper is right also that hybrids have been used as a bit of a sales ploy. But luxury buyers for the most part aren't as concerned with fuel economy. Plus look at the demographic that Cadillac and Lexus go for, the baby boomers and older living in big houses with big electric and gas bills. This isn't a generation particularly concerned with environmental impact. Gen X and Gen Y on the other hand for the most part don't car about the McMansions and are more into living "green" and urban lifestyle and less is more and all that. I think hybrid, diesel, electric would play better with 20 and 30 somethings rather than 60+ years old, and the XTS is a 60+ year old kind of car. Cadillac is better off putting their hybrid, diesel, electric technology into an ATS rather than an XTS.

Hybrid on the base model would drive the price up too much. And there may be some in the older demographic that get confused by the "electronic mumbo jumbo." And they've probably looked at hybrid vs regular sales of the Escalade, MKZ, Lexus GS, RX, etc and found that most buyers still opt for the gas only version. Problem with hybrids on luxury cars is hybrids often take 5-7 years to pay back, and many people lease luxury cars for 3 years.

I also think the 3.6 V6 out of the Lacrosse and eAssist or hybrid option. I could see them in the second model year offering a turbo V6 on the AWD version to compete with the MKS ecoboost. Although I think the demographic buying this car doesn't care that much about speed, unless they are looking to get people trading in 300C's.

The same could be said about the Escalade and Tahoe. The content and price point is different, but underneath it is the same. LaCrosse/XTS is just like a modernized version of Lucerne/DTS. Improved version of an old formula, but not the path to save Cadillac.

Looks like a big, sensory deprivation tank with sizable overhangs. The interior shape is a bit similar to the DTS, but with the A/C vents on top of the center stack. The wheels are probably just for the test car, unlikely that wheels like that with low profile tires would be fitted on a car like this. This car looks DTS size, with a more upright front end and the grille looks STS-like. So far I see a car for 70 year olds. IF.

Proportions look better than the CTS. I really like the shape of it, this shows a lot of promise. The overhangs might be a little big, but that could just be all the camo and the angle of the photo. They are off to a good start, I hope they get the powertrains right.

They made an additional brand to sell what they already make. Pointless. Dodge already is just Chrysler clones, now Ram has Dodge clones. No lessons learned form Plymouth, Mercury, Pontiac, Olds, and Saturn I guess.

I've read and heard from a local tire dealer than the Continental DWS is the best all season tire. It was sold out though when I needed tires so I got the same Pirellis I had. I did have Michelin Pilot Sport tires before, they were great, but cost near $200 each, so I don't think they are really worth that when there are good tires for a lot less.

A Scion is a lame car, it's like buying a low end Toyota, minus the Toyota badge that at least gives the car resale value. Sort of like buying a Geo when the Chevy or Toyota model was the same, why buy the lesser badge. An HHR, used Mini, Fiesta, Honda Fit, even Honda Element are better options. Or Hyundai Veloster is coming.

Death of Saturn and Pontiac has helped out Buick and Chevy. For one, GM has been able to put new product into Chevy and Buick without spreading it around to 8 brands, and secondly not having those extra brands means people have to look at Buick and Chevy if they want a GM car.

So they took a great looking car, made it ugly and will charge you more for it. That's weak.

Holden's 2 liter diesel is 160 hp and 265 lb-ft, that is the engine. Put that in the Cruze, Malibu, Equinox, Terrain and GMC Granite or whatever the HHR replacement is. That's more torque than a V6 Malibu and likely pushing 40 mpg.

They should ready this engine for the Malibu, Equinox and Terrain as well. If gas hits $4.25 a gallon again this summer, it may be here to stay, and there are lessons to be learned from 2008. The Detroit 3 were able to recover partly because gas prices went back under $3 a gallon, but had gas prices stayed at $4.25 a gallon for the past 2 years, GMC and Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep probably would have been wiped out completely.

I actually forgot the Malibu has less than 182 hp, and just the Equinox/Terrain have the Direct Injection 2.4. GM should make every 2.4 with DI. The Acura TL or Lincolns are closer to what the Aurora was, but since the Aurora was a luxury car from a non-luxury brand I think the Genesis has some similarities. The Regal is the successor to the Regal/Intrigue of 10 years ago, or the Saturn Aura. It just costs too much or what you get in my opinion. I have not heard the Regal stereo, but I was never a Harmon Kardon fan, the one Saab uses is nothing special. Best stereo I ever heard is the Bowers and Wilkins in the new Jag XJ.

No. It isn't. The Aurora was bigger inside and out, more luxurious, and had a V8, not a 4-banger out of a base Malibu. I drive an Aurora 4.0, I would see the Regal as trading down. I don't think GM has a successor to the Aurora, the Lacrosse is similar in size, but taller and more of a comfort car. I see the successor to the Aurora as the Hyundai Genesis, similar size, price point, and V6 and V8 engines, just a different drivetrain.

I wouldn't buy a 4 cylinder econobox at any price. But at $40k, as you stated the Camaro SS is there, or the 3-series, C-class, G37, Genesis, MKX Hybrid, CTS, a Prius with $10k to spare, etc. A lot of good cars. I think for any of these Eco cars to really catch on, price has to come down a lot.

No I am not. Motor Trend tested a Regal turbo, 3,773 lbs, 59/41 weight distribution and a price of $35,380. 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, and it is 18/28 mpg.

True, but how great can the handling be on a 3750 lb front driver with 59% of the weight over the front axle. It may handle better than a Fusion or Camry, but it is no 3-series. It won't even handle like a Mustang or Camaro that cost less. So if you aren't getting a great handler, it isn't fast, it isn't as fuel efficient as an Accord or Sonata, it isn't as luxurious as a Lincoln or Lexus, what exactly are you paying $35k for?

Possibly, but a Camry V6 does 0-60 in 6.1 seconds and that isn't exciting. The Regal GS is adding 35 hp and lb-ft, that isn't going to get 1.2 seconds off the 0-60 time, and if it has AWD, that is adding weight. Plus the CXL 2.0 turbo is $35k, a GS could be nearing $40k. The Regal isn't necessarily bad, but it is priced at least $5,000 too high. And it is slow for a so called sport sedan.

Big question is, if you aren't a Sierra Club activist, would you buy a Volt over any other $35,000 car? The environmentalists will buy it (and the Leaf), but will regular people?

True on both counts. Diesel will give awesome fuel economy, but the fun-factor and personality aren't there. It is boring, but so are the Corolla and Civic and they sell. Although Corolla and Civic are nameplates that have been around for 40 years and are well known.

It is still true today. An LS460 is $65,000 and an S-class is 93,000. Lexus for the most part is a dressed up Toyota, with incredible reliability. But is a GS on par with an E-class? Is the GX470 (with 4Runner underpinnings) on par with a Merc GL550? Lexus may have as much sales volume as Mercedes (in the US) but most Lexus sales are $30-40,000 cars. Wow, Oldsmoboi and said the same thing, I didn't read his post til after I wrote mine.