smk4565

It will no doubt compete well with the front drive offerings from Jaguar/Land Rover, BMW and Mercedes, oh wait...

Fail.

No one will buy that. If Mercedes is selling 100 wagons, Cadillac would sell 50, why bother. Worry about getting the CTS to E-class price, getting a 3-series competitor, an S-class competitor, making the XLR relevant and competitive with the SL, getting a unibody Escalade that isn't a front drive platform share, etc.

This car is horrible. Acura is already kind of a joke luxury brand, this just seals the deal.

To do a Cadillac version, it would (or at least should) offer Cadillac performance, and be able to do 0-60 in under 7 seconds, which is a far cry from what the Volt can do. Cadillac doesn't need a slow, front drive compact based on a Chevy, that was an epic failure in the 1980s. If they take the technology and implement it into a rear drive electric vehicle that at least matches the CTS DI in acceleration and handling then they are on to something. But that won't happen, even the Escalade is going front drive. If a Chevy Volt is $40k, what is a Cadillac version, $60k? And can Cadillac get people to pay $60k for a small sedan?

The concept looked better, the headlights look too much like a Civic, and the car looks like it is made out of plastic. $40k for a Chevy will be tough when people can get a Prius (with the more reputable "T" on the front) for $26k. Some will buy it because it is all electric, but people that just want high mileage and low purchase cost will look at the Insight or other non-hybrid compacts.

The 335d has 265 hp and 425 lb-ft of torque and 23/33 mpg, that is better than CamCord 4-cylinder economy, but with Corvette level torque, so it should be quite good. The 335d and 535d are quiet too, about 66 dBA inside, which is Lexus LS460 territory. And the 3 and 5 series has always carried their brand volume, for the past 25-30 years those 2 cars have been considered best in their segment. Worldwide they are selling 1.3 million or so vehicles, they're doing fine and will continue to do so.

With the new $250,000 entry-level Rolls, sales should really take off! I do like how the Rolls-Royce emblems on the wheels stay in place while the car is moving though. The 5-series sells pretty well for a car that has been around a while and is $50-70k. The 8-series is coming back, and bringing a new V12 with it, should be interesting.

I don't like how it looks, because I hate how the Prius looks and it is too similar. This is a little better looking, but it is still odd. But no matter how ugly it is, if it gets 70 mpg and costs $20,000 they will sell a ton of them. 70 mpg (even 50-60) is huge.

I don't think they should throw in the towel, 2 years ago I said they should dump Saab, Hummer and Buick and just put more money into Cadillac. Saab and Hummer have to go, maybe dump Pontiac and keep Buick, regardless, Cadillac needs more money, more current models, nothing with a transversely mounted engine.

Agreed. The public isn't buying it, the Impala is around 55-60% fleet sale. Avis probably needed cars this month and got a nice deal.

I get my car serviced at a Cadillac dealership and it is no nicer than the Honda dealership down the road, and pails in comparison to the Benz or Jag-Land Rover dealer that are near it. Most Cadillac dealerships aren't that nice and could use an upgrade. They can't even make a V8, they'll never make a V16. Mark LaNave believes most luxury car buyers want a V6 engine. Which is why we get a V6 only front drive SRX and the competing vehicle from Infiniti Infiniti has a 390 hp V8 and 7-speed transmission and is rear drive.

GM can talk about how the CTS, Malibu and some crossovers were up, but Cadillac was down 20%, and GM as a whole was down 20%. There are far more weak models in the lineup than there are strong, and that leads to a perception problem and sales problem. The cars like the CTS and Malibu that were up, still get beat on volume by other cars in the segment, GM lacks a car like a Camry or 3-series that sells in massive volume. I find it interesting that Infiniti is up 8%, because all the other luxury brands dropped. I just saw a commercial for the new FX, 390 hp V8 and 7 speed transmission, which seems better than the front drive SRX that is coming.

They're dead. Bad product mix in their lineup, and their products have poor interiors and just aren't competitive. The Chrysler brand was outsold by Kia.

An STS with the chinese interior would be better than what we have now, but still not better than a Jag XF or the German trio and no where near the S-class. Cadillac can't just make a lineup better than what they currently have, they have to make one better than what Mercedes or BMW has. And the E-class and 5-series are all new in under 2 years.

I know the Aurora's overhangs aren't excessive, but there is still a good bit up front. The Aurora is better designed than the Lucerne though, Buick took what Oldsmobile had and made a step backwards. I agree that Zeta has a weight problem.

The G-platform was fine back in the day, I have a G-platform I agree that there is nothing wrong with it. However, for $40k or more cars, there is better out there now. In 3 years there will be even better stuff out there, the G-platform is just past its prime, as is the Northstar. I am pretty sure the G-body can't accommodate the 6-speed, and the overhangs on the Lucerene are bad. Buick sold 309,000 cars in 2004, yet is on pace for 180,000 or so this year. This brand is sinking, it is almost impossible for them to get younger buyers at this point.

The Lucerne platform is already 14 years old, come 2011 that car is going to be ancient, and that is their flagship. Much like the DTS does to Cadillac, it just makes the brand seem outdated and geared toward senior citizens. A Buick car on Delta could work if it is nice, and not just a rebadge.

The DTS has already "soldiered on" too long. It looks like Cadillac is headed for 2 crossover SUVs based on platforms form other brands, a CTS in the $40-50k range and a BTS in the $30-40k range, and maybe a luxury Volt. So they are Lincoln plus an electric car.

Maybe not, the straight is about 2 km long and part is up hill and there is a turn at the end. the ZR-1's top speed is around 204, it is possible that 175 is all it can do on the ring. The GT-R got to about 170 mph there. What is crazy is the 1983 Porsche 956 race car did the lap a full minute faster than the ZR-1.

But more people spend $120,000 on a Lexus LS hybrid, it isn't necessarily about the gas mileage number, it is a status symbol for the "green" movement. It is why people in Sedona, AZ or Hollywood, CA that are millionaires but put solar panels on their roof or drive a Prius because they want to save the environment. A V16 would make Cadillac look like a gas guzzler, harmful to the environment brand like Hummer is now. A smaller V12 would be nice if they had a car to use it in, but I think they'd be fine with a new DOHC V8 that can be made in 4 and 5 liter versions with or without turbos and with a hybrid option. Another downside to a V16 is how heavy would that engine be, and how to you keep a 50/50 weight balance with that big of an engine up front. If they want to compete with the Germans they have to do it in corners also, not just a straight line.

I don't only bash GM product. I have complimented the good cars, and picked on the ones that are dated or uncompetitive. The CTS is good for it's price, but I disagree with comparing it to an E-class or 5-series. The CTS doesn't base at $50k and go up to $85-90,000. The is a reason the German sedans are $20,000 more, and it isn't only because of bagde/snob appeal. I don't even like Mercedes or BMW, my current favorite car is the Jaguar XF, but I've driven the current 5-series and the old 5-series and I recognize that BMW makes a great handling car with a great engine. The styling, interior and iDrive are no good, but it drives well enough to forget about how ugly the trunk is. The MotorTrend review made a great point about how Chrysler could put a Viper engine in a 300C and crush everyone in power, but would anyone buy it? The CTS-V's performance numbers make it belong with the Germans, but at $20k less they are leaving something out, and GM didn't price it like that because they are in the charity business, they need all the profit they can get. If Cadillac says it is better than an M5, they should price it higher than an M5. I would love to see Cadillac make a car better than an S-class or a car better than the 3-series, but they are non existent and they came up with a Vue-style crossover instead.

In general DOHC revs higher, obviously there are some OHV engines that could out rev some DOHC engines. The CL65 (or S65) redline is 5950 rpm, it just makes peak power at lower rpm. One argument I always hear for pushrods is it makes power at a low revs, well that engine makes peak torque and peak hp at low rpm. There is no way the CTS-V will get 16/25 mpg, it will be closer to 13/20. The AMG cars have limiters, they could be faster, there are a lot of DOHC cars that can do more than 191 mph. A company in California adds two turbos to the M5 to get 810 hp and a 240 mph top speed. BMW I am sure won't do that, but they could easily make it a 600+ hp car with a 210+ mph top speed.

The Camry outsells the entire Pontiac brand. Toyota made $15.5 billion in profit last year, GM lost billions with it's build 5 models off 1 platform for 5 brands strategy. They could kill Pontiac and increase volume if the cars that they make are class leading. I'd kill Saturn, Hummer and Saab first though.

I have driven an LS1 Firebird, a friend has an LS1 Corvette, which I haven't driven, but the engine sounds loud and harsh compared to a Northstar or Euro DOHC V8. I own a DOHC V8, I would never buy a pushrod from any manufacturer. Mercedes has a 6.5 liter SOHC V12 with 738 lb-ft of torque at 2,000 RM, so OHC didn't limit it's displacement any, and it surely doesn't limit torque any. The CTS-V has a pushrod for one reason and it is cost. It was cheaper for Cadillac to put a supercharger on an Escalade/Vette motor than to develop an engine from scratch.