smk4565

I find it interesting that of the top 10 selling SUVs, only the Traverse and Pilot are close to full size, and the Pilot is probably closer to a midsize than a full size. The SUV market really shifted from bigger SUVs and even the Explorer/Trailblazer size SUVs down to the small guys.

The 2.8 Turbo sure didn't last long, but isn't very fuel efficient given it's displacement or power output. And that engine was already sort of dated when the SRX came out. So now if you get it optioned up, it is $50k for a Cadillac Vue with a platform/engine/transmission of a Malibu and Equinox. Sign me up.

No one will ever compete with the British Top Gear, it is so far and away better than any car show, because it is indeed about entertainment. Not like Motorweek which is a monotone voice over of a car being put though some basic tests and seat adjustments. Matt is right about the Camaro, good styling but you can't see out of it, and the interior is all plastic and just looks retro cheesey.

Tucker Torpedo and Cadillac Cien

I think a V12 in the 5.5-6.0 liter range (like Merc's) would be better. And add two turbos to it. You want massive low end torque out of this engine. The V8 could be in the 4.0-4.5 liter range.

Big Lincolns don't sell though. The MKS is already huge, they don't need to go bigger than that. MKZ does need a real name, Zephyr perhaps. Take the Mustang 5.0, give it an independent rear suspension and MKS-dash, and there is new Mark VIII, make a 4 door version and that's the Continental.

XLR was my original pick, I'd stick with that, even though many of those are good choices. I do believe Lincoln needs a rear drive car. The LS/Continental/Mark VIII replacement could all be meshed into 1 rear drive car with coupe and sedan body styles, possibly off a tweaked Mustang platform. Problem could be where to slot it into Lincoln's lineup, maybe MKZ size, but $40-55k range. If you put MKS-like luxury and technology with a Mustang chassis and 5.0 V8, you've got something good brewing.

I think the 3.6 V6 could use some refinement, that would help Cadillac and the other brands as well. I don't see a problem with lower end Cadillac's sharing engines, especially when in a Cadillac it makes 304 hp and in a Buick 280. As you go up the price ladder though, you do have to offer more than what's in a Chevy. If Cadillac doesn't make their own unique engine (like when they had the Northstar) I'd rather see Cadillac buy engines off AMG than use Corvette engines. I'd like to see a V12, why stop at V8. And to appease the greenies, a 300 hp/50 mpg hybrid-diesel drivetrain.

The way to beat the 3-series is not with horsepower, it is with steering and suspension. Any one can put 300 hp in a car, but no one has been able to beat BMW's ride and handling. IS350 for example.

The 535i gets 20/30 mpg. No GM 6-cylinder hits 20 city or 30 highway. Even the 2.4 liter (184 hp) Regal is 19/30 mpg. And according to former GM management, RWD got bad fuel economy. So why is a 300 hp rear driver edging a 184 hp front driver in fuel economy? It isn't weight, the 535i is heavier, it's the ZF transmission. I see 300 hp and 30 mpg as the minimum for the ATS and next-gen CTS. Hyundai has a 270 hp, 34 mpg car now, Cadillac has to one-up all these cars. Maybe 300 hp and 35 mpg is their target, no one has done that yet, but Ford already did 310 hp/31 mpg with the Mustang. Cadillac in 2013 should be better than a 2010 Mustang.

The 528i has had great low end torque forever, the engine is the same as the old car, but they are getting 4 mpg more now. 5-10 years ago when Toyota and Honda had 5-speeds, and GM was rolling out the 3800/4-speed combo, GM defenders said that was good enough, it had good fuel economy, etc. That didn't work out, the DOHC/5-speed Japanese cars continually racked up more market share. Cadillac can use a 6-speed, but when Mercedes, Infiniti, BMW, Lexus and Hyundai are using 7 or 8 gears, consumer perception will be that Cadillac is behind the curve.

I'd agree on execution, that is what BMW does so well. But even the X3 now has an 8-speed, my guess is the next 3-series will as well. The 5-series because of its 8-speed gets 32 mpg. Cadillac has 2 more years to work on the ATS, a 32 mpg V6 should be there.

Badge in the grille for ATS and CTS, raised hood ornament on the big car. S-class has the raised hood ornament so you can line up poor people in the crosshairs before running them down. Gives the car that 3rd world dictator feel.

It needs one other thing to be successful: That right there lets you charge $5,000 more for the car.

8-speed auto on the base model is a must for this car at launch. BMW has 8-speeds on everything above a 3-series right now, Merc has had 7-speed for years and is working on 9. Hyundai is going to offer 8-speeds in 2011. Cadillac can't be behind them right out of the gate. Car needs a V6. I'd wish for a straight six, but I know that isn't happening, so V6 I'll take. But a V6 is an absolute must, the whole segment has one. The ATS can have one turbo-4 with hybrid system to get the greenies, after that leave the 4-bangers to Chevy and Buick. I do hope Cadillac goes for broke on this one, but Cadillac never has on any vehicle in the past, at least not in my lifetime. So I remain cautiously optimistic. Remember also, for this car to be a "3-series killer" it has to be a "CTS killer" as well. Will Cadillac really make a car good enough to make the current CTS irrelevant and obsolete?

I had a Pacifica rental twice on vacations, it is good for that job. What I like about the Pacifica, is it is roomy (2nd row captains chairs), and you have a good seating position without being nose-bleed high. I drove the 4.0 V6 with the 6-speed, not a bad car to drive. When the Pacifica died, the Toyota Venza sort of took its place, maybe Dodge Journey to an extent, but the Journey just seems like a piece of junk.

I'd second the vote on a minivan, assuming it is done right, and not the way the Uplander/Relay/Terrazza/Montana were. To further elaborate on my XLR suggestion, I could see the car going one of tow routes. One being the $50k V6 roadster like an SLK, Z4 or nicer 370Z. Or as a GT sort of car like the Jaguar XK that could be coupe or convertible. In that scenario the XLR would stay at $80,000, but need a lot better execution than just dressing up a Corvette like the last go around. Either way the car came back I'd like.

Cadillac XLR. I think it was the best looking Cadillac of the past 10 years. The price for what you got was the problem. Either the interior and engine needed upgraded, or the price needed to come down. The XLR may do better at the $50k price point against the SLK and Z4 type vehicles with V6 and perhaps turbo V6 power. Cadillac needs a sports car, 2-door, and convertible, the XLR fits the bill and gives Cadillac some sportiness to it's image. And it is somewhat unique, not just another sedan that can get lost in the shuffle.

I don't like it. They just took a car from 05 and added some chrome to it, put the hideous bright work around the lights as Croc stated, and the headlights have a Euro-wannabe look to them. I think the current car actually looks better. Question is, how long is this car going to be on market? Because it is just a mid-cycle refresh of a 7 year old car, if this goes another 5-7 years, they basically have what the Ford Panther platform cars were. Just big, old and dated.

Can you see out the back of it?

My experience with the first round of Epsilon 1 was that, but it is good that Ep 2 has solved that. You can power slide a Jaguar XJ at 70 mph, and you can turn the nannies in the S-class off and power slide or drift it as much as you please. Top Gear had an S-class and 7-series doing plenty of sideways maneuvers on their track. The A8 is weak, and LS will probably run away and hide when it sees a corner, so I don't know about those two.

Well I am glad that the biggest and most expensive Cadillac sedan will have the abilities of the a Buick and a Saab. Not only that, but a Buick and Saab that had already been on sale for a few years by the time it comes out. I'm so glad "the new standard of the world" has set their sights so high.

The XTS isn't supposed to out-handle a CTS, but in a way that is my point, why build a land barge that will get ridiculed and doesn't fit with the rest of the lineup. And you are right, a 7-series can't handle with a 3-series, but a 7-series can hold it's own, and it has ride quality. You can power slide a 7-series or S-class, can't do that with a LaCrosse/XTS type vehicle. I haven't driven a Lacrosse, maybe it can handle better than the Aurora, but it is also 10 years newer. My next car will be rear wheel drive, front wheel drive already hit it's limit. I bet the LaCrosse still has a lot of body roll to it, it is heavier than the Aurora, and is Epsilon 2 really any better than the G-body platform? Epsilon 1 twisted and shuttered over bumps like a plate of jell-o during an earthquake.

I agree they are more flexible, they are in much better shape than they were, and can actually compete now. I just don't like when people use bankruptcy as an excuse. It is like the Pirates complaining that they don't have as much money as the Yankees. They are all in the same league, so you just have to deal with it. Yes, Mercedes has an unfair advantage globally, but that is how it is, so Cadillac just has to overcome that somehow.

For luxury cars, I find the CTS average at handling (but I drove an FE2 AWD, which could be the problem), I doubt the XTS handles better than a CTS, so I have zero interest in a car like that. Silent is nice when cruising around, but performance/luxury should be able to sound like a race car when you want it to. That is the one good thing about a Maserati, when you wind it up the noise it makes is insane.