smk4565

Buick will never be Lexus or close to it. Buick isn't even at Lincoln level. Look at either sedan in CX trim, they have a cloth bench seat and fake wood and hardly any features. I really don't see Buick getting new buyers. The current cars are bad, that is why Oldsmobile buyers didn't go to Buick and probably went to Japanese brands. Toyota builds a mush riding sedan and does it with better materials than Buick uses. And the imports have DOHC engines with 250+ hp and not a 3800 with a 4 speed auto from the 80s. Current Buick owners are the only people that will buy a future Buick. Personally I wouldn't even make them past 2011, and would send them off with Oldsmobile. The market is changing, Buick still builds the same style of car that sold in the 80s, hardly anyone buys a car like that anymore, buyers want different and even if Buick builds different, people won't notice or they will refuse to buy it because of the badge on the front. I am one of those people, I like GM cars and I wouldn't ever buy a Buick no matter what they make because of the image they have.

They do need to upgrade the smaller pickups, the Japanese seem to make better ones. The Tacoma and Nissan Frontier sell pretty well and do well in magazine write ups. I think they made the Lambda's too big and too close in size to the GMT900s. The Lambdas are so heavy they'll need a V8, then they are back to 16/20 mpg SUV like they had with the Envoy. The smaller SUV they make will probably have to straddle classes, because the Escape and CRV class are under 180 inches in length, the Edge and RX350 are about 186. The Envoy is 190, the Lambdas are over 200. So I wonder where they will slot the new SUV, they should probably go small since that is where the market is, but then they might have a 20 inch length difference from small to medium SUV, and a 1 inch difference from medium to large.

FWD isn't needed, because rear drive handles better and rides better. They can make a rear drive car just as roomy too. The BMW 7-series and Lexus LS460 are both 9 inches shorter than a DTS, yet to me they are equally roomy inside. The DTS's platform doesn't use space that well. A smaller in dimension, modern rear drive car makes much more sense. I don't think they should make any wagons, even for outside the US, unless they have a BTS/BLS wagon for Europe. The Escalade pickup should get canceled too, I don't think that helps the overall image of the brand, and they need to sell image. Which is the reason they need high end cars over $55,000 too.

Front drive or anything with a transversely mounted engine and all wheel drive has to go. If they build that, they are making an Linclon MKX, MKX or Buick style car. Demand for big mushy ride cars is dropping fast, it shows in Cadillac's poor resale values. Luxury buyers now want performance and technology and status/image and the imports are delivering on that. I like Cadillac's shift toward BMW, I hope they go full force this time, in 2003-2005 they wimped out. Cadillac probably isn't going to steal away a lot of long time import buyers, but they could get first or second time luxury buyers (people 30-50 hopefully) and then they'll have a customer base that can be there for 30 years to come, rather than a 70 year old to buying a DTS. The XLR needs a far better interior, it is only marginally better than the Corvette's with a big drop in performance, that isn't worth $80,000. They need more power too, the ultra V8 can't get here soon enough. The exterior look is good, needs a more expensive looking grill and slight refresh. They desperately need a $75-100,000 sedan. BMW, Mercedes and Lexus all have one, and the top end car boosts their image. Lexus advertises the car that parks itself, and people think the brand is so technologically advanced, and ignore the Camry based cars. Cadillac still isn't taken seriously by long time import buyers, and they aren't thought of as a truly high end brand. A legit super sedan (LS460 or 7-series size, smaller than the DTS) could be used as a marketing tool and restore image. Even if they lose money on the car, they will make it up elsewhere, Toyota did that with the Prius at first. SRX looks like a station wagon, that is why it doesn't sell. Thus a CTS wagon will sell even less, waste of time. BRX is a bad idea, sure it will sell some, but selling an upgraded Vue doesn't make them "standard of the world." SRX needs 3 inches less length, 2 inches more width and height and new grille and sheet metal, then it would look like a truck, not a wagon, add the DI engines and I think they could turn it into a winner. It is one of few GM vehicles that are class leading, I'd hate to see them bail on it. CTS is too big right now, so it will have to gain in price around 2010 to around $44,000 base. So the interior will need an upgrade, far more standard equipment, maybe a 2.8 DI V6 + hybrid, 3.6 DI, and Ultra V8 for engine choices. Then they will be closer to the E-class, 5-series, Lexus GS, Infiniti M. BTS (which I would call CTS, and rename CTS to STS) should be about 182-183 inches long and cover the $32-42,000 price range the current CTS is in. A 2.8 DI V6 could work well here too as gas mileage concerns grown, then the 3.6 DI V6 as an option, hybrid or turbo V6 as well. There should be a coupe version of this car as well. They need to make this car fast enough to hang with the 335i and G37 coupe.

Why should they get more products when the ones they make don't sell? Investing a few billion on a dying brand makes no sense. Toyota builds a better Buick than Buick does, thus the baby boomers have gone to the imports. Once the 70 and up crowd dies off Buick will have little to no customer base left. When Oldsmobile died, they gave Buick the minivan and Bravada became Rainier, and sales still dropped. GM has too many rebadged cars as it is, they can't rebadge more. I think the G5 and Torrent need killed too. They gave more models to Pontiac dealers because they complained sales were dropping, Pontiac sales have dropped for 8 or 9 of the last 10 years and the G5 and Torrent did nothing to change that. Two good cars will outsell 8 bad ones, just look at how the Camry and Corolla are going to combine to sell over 800,000 cars this year in the US, vs Buick and Pontiac combined will probably be around 500-600,000. I agree with you that the CX trims need to be dropped, those are worse than what is on a Chevy, basic rental cars are nicer. Plus Buicks are built on 90s platforms with an engine from the 70s, which doesn't help sales. I support sacrificing Buick and Saab for the overall good of GM. Take every dollar spend on those 2 brands and spend it on the Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, and Alpha platform, and GM would be better off.

Regal makes more sense, GM changes names too much. But they allow cars to stay on the market too long (8 model years for the last Regal), so they get a bad image, then they change names and some people don't know what a LaCrosse is, so it has less recognition. To stay successful you have to update cars often and continually advertise to keep awareness up. GM has too many models to do this, so they often introduce a car, advertise it for a year or 2 and then forget about it for 4. They have gotten better with consolidation, but still too many models and rebadges. Avg. age of 65 is sad. I don't think that is reversible either. Brands (in any industry) get an image and reputation and people make purchases based on that. Personally I think they should plan to make Buicks for about 5-8 more years and phase them out. There is still a small market for them now, but 5 years from now they might have an average age of 70 and selling 130,000 cars a year. If that happens they need to phase out. Focus on other products and growing segments.

.3 seconds would be hard to tell, but .5 or more I can feel the difference. It also depends on drive train, front drive cars often feel faster than they really are because they pull you. I wouldn't buy a car on 0-60 time alone, ride handling balance matters a lot to me, but at the same time there are 6 cars that are 0-60 in 4.9-5.4 seconds, and one car that is 5.9 seconds, that one car doesn't look as appealing. People and car mags alike brag about the Corvette's .5 second 0-60 time advantage over an Aston Martin or Porshe Cayman, base 911, etc so I think it is reasonable to wish for class average from the CTS. I enjoy having bragging rights, but I wouldn't buy a car just on 0-60 time. But if people didn't care about it, why is there a V-series. The STS-V doesn't handle or brake any better than a CTS, it just has a good 0-60 time. It is also a marketing tool, it is hard to advertise how well a car brakes or handles, it is easy to flash a 0-60 stat up on a commercial, and BMW has a big advantage there, plus as much as I dislike BMW styling, I have yet to drive a better handling sedan than the 5-series. I hope the CTS can match it.

And so they can bag the base model and move the CTS upmarket. When you see the grille close up, it has a ton of plastic, I'd like to see the metal or wire mesh background that the Escalade has and the Sixteen had. The 08 Malibu even offers a wire mesh grill. Personally, I wouldn't use the BTS or BLS name, I would call the small car the CTS, and rename the current CTS, STS and upgrade the interior, grille, offer a V8 and most of the optional stuff standard, and pump the price up to $46-50k base. Then they have familiar names and match the competition better, and they don't have to convince people to buy a $52,000 CTS like I think they are going to try to do in 2011.

I think it is very easy to tell the difference in 0-60 times. If I drive my mom's A4, I can feel a huge drop in acceleration from my Aurora, and the difference is probably only .3 or .4 seconds, but the Aurora's V8 makes the Aurora feel stronger. My mom used to have a 9-5 Aero that was 6.7 seconds 0-60, and I could feel it was much quicker than my Aurora which is about 7.4. My step dad has a 540i, it is 5.9 seconds 0-60 and I can feel a huge difference in that, than in any of those other cars, especially on hills. You can be going uphill at 40-50 mph and hit the gas and the BMW takes off, the V8 rocks, it has a lot of torque. The 335i is a full second faster than the CTS 0-60. The DTS is about 1 second slower than the CTS, and a Honda Accord or Nissan Altima with a V6 are less than that. I doubt many people could drive a DTS and CTS and think they were about the same in acceleration or drive an Accord and CTS and find them the same.

That is good news, a 40% gain is probably need to get people to keep buying big trucks. Even with a 40% gain and 20 mpg , I think a lot of people will still opt for smaller like the Highlander, and CRV and Escape, unless they absolutely need 7-8 seats and towing ability. Oil just went over $77 a barrel, gas mileage is so important now to most buyers. The Lambdas are still really big and heavy, the Edge, Escape and CRV seem to be what are hot. I'd like to see the 2 mode on some smaller vehicles where they can really maximize economy and make some 30 and 40 mpg cars. Perhaps even 50 mpg. Just building a 50 mpg car helps image, look at the Prius, which is one of 3 Toyotas in the top 8 in sales.

I miss the 4 spoke steering wheel, I think it looked better than this new one, like the 07 STS wheel for example.

Interesting they note the roominess. The CTS has only 1 inch more rear legroom than the 3-series, even though the CTS is about 12 inches longer overall. I am still not sold on the interior, the metal center cluster looks too much like plastic and I despise analog clocks, pop-up navigation I am not a fan of, but that is an option so I can save money and not get that, and be happier. 5.9 is too slow for me though, I want 5.5 0-60 or better, and I won't buy a pushrod every again so I won't be getting a V. I am really hoping for a 400hp DOHC V8 that gets over 20 mpg (Lexus has 381 and 19/27 mpg), that might get me to buy one.

This is a rather positive review, which is good, Cadillac needs a lot of good press since the 3-series outsells the CTS over 2-1 in the USA. Hopefully they can close the gap. My concern is the base model looks too cheap and resale values of all could suffer, plus the weight is way too high. The CTS is over 150 pounds heavier than a Mercedes E550 and that has 382 hp, 391 lb-ft. 0-60 in 5.8 seconds is good, but not good enough when Lexus, Infiniti, and the BMW all have sedans in the 4.9-5.5 second range. I fear this CTS has to wear too many hats, which isn't the car's fault, it is the fault of poor GM planning. If they had a 3 series fighter, this midsize car wouldn't need the low end cheap model, wouldn't have some of the interior flaws and would have a V8 offered. Then it would align better against the competition instead of being in the middle trying to take on the 335i, 535i, IS350, GS350/GH450h, M45, G35, etc. I get their point about the engine, I've driven the Aura with the 3.6, it it is a little loud and harsh when it revs up, BMW engines are smoother, especially their V8. Luckily I don't need a car for a few years, maybe Cadillac will get a V8 in there or get the car on a diet.

I think they are wasting their time with Hummer. They never should have made it a new brand, just made it a GMC Hummer, and done 1 model, like the Toyota with the FJ Cruiser, just one odd ball model. They cashed in for a couple years, but Hummer sales are something like 20,000 a year now, with high gas, no one is going to buy these things. Sure there is a market, but it is tiny. I'd rather see effort put on the Cobalt, Impala, Camaro, Equinox replacement, smaller than a CTS Cadillac, V12 Cadillac, etc. Anything but more hummers that hardly sell.

Just wait a year or two and get is used, after a year Cadillacs usually drop 8-10,000 in price. Although I hope they can correct their resale value problems. Until they do it is almost nuts to buy a new Cadillac when year old models are drastically cheaper. I'd like a Cadillac for my next car also, but my car should be good for another 4 years. I've heard now the 335i is underrated also, it makes 272 rear wheel horsepower I think, I forget the nexact number, but there was no way the car only lost 25 hp or so through the drivetrain, 315 probably is more accurate. I am a V8 fan, although a twin turbo V6 making 375 hp would be awesome in the CTS. Gas mileage matters, maybe they should follow BMW's twin turbo idea. I don't like pushrods so I wouldn't get a V-series, plus 500 hp isn't really usable, where as 375 puts them in E550 and 550i range.

I hope they don't get content with their 304 hp engine. Infiniti has 330 hp, they had 306 3 years ago, Lexus has 306 hp, BMW 300 hp/300 lb-ft and all those cars are hundreds of pounds lighter. This is a tough class, Cadillac needs continous improvement.

I'd like to see a V8 option, not a V-series either. But if they are going to make it 5-series size and weight, I think they need a 400 hp V8 to put in it. I'd liked to see the base model scrapped too, and just start it at $35,000 with Lux 1 and seating package standard, then in 2010, push it up market, I'd rename it to STS though, and call the BTS the CTS.

Very good looking coupe, I hope it gets an interior that fits how good it looks on the outside. The GTC concept had a nice interior, I hope they don't cheap it out like they do with Pontiacs.

One problem is some people don't want a car as big as the CTS. Most that are close to or live in a city want smaller. My mom drives alone all the time, and has no need for a car as big as the CTS, she likes the A4/3-series size. Cadillac misses out on a market there. Just like how the Jetta used to sell well, and it was a tiny car, but nicer than the other compacts. There is a market for small and nice and GM usually forgets about it. Plus in Europe, the CTS is a giant. I'd like to see the BTS at about 183 inches long, that gives them slightly more size than the other compacts, but still small enough for cities and Europe and small car fans. The CTS can stay about the size it is, or grow and inch then they need a nice car that is 198 inches long, and 203 if they do a long wheel base version. Once they get that sorted out, upgrade the 08 CTS's interior, add a V8 and more content they will be all set. If they can pull that off by 2011 they could have a good future. I actually prefer the size of a CTS to that of a 3-series, but a lot of people like really small. Car Magazines will compare the CTS's performance to the 3-series, and the size will probably hurt the CTS, thus it will start getting weak reviews, and that american = bad, foriegn = good, perception gets reinforced, and I am sick of that.

They shouldn't do a classic because they don't need more fleet sales. GM says they are going to reduce fleet sales, yet they are making a Malibu solely for fleets. That doesn't help the new Malibu's reputation which is already less than the Camry and Accord. The new Malibu should have been out in September, with the hybrid available at launch time. They need a winner badly in the midsize segment, and they need less fleet and base models, it hurts reputation overall, those few junkers like the Grand Prix, Taurus, Intrepid, Sebring, etc are enough to give American cars a bad name, then people don't consider them.

The CTS is going to be heavier than a Mecedes E550 though, and the Mercedes has a 380 hp V8 and it is pretty solid. I don't think anyone will say and E-class is unsafe, or dings easily or is not solid feeling. Jaguars use aluminum frames, no one thinks they are unsafe or not solid. Weight hurts performance and gas mileage, people are really concerned with gas mileage now, and Caddy needs all the help they can get in the performance area to take on all the 300+ hp Lexus, Infiniti and BMWs. I think by next summer there will be a decent sized incentive on the CTS, because of end of model year, and used ones will be on the market, and used Cadillacs are cheap.

I agree with the rubber strip mid way up on the door for Saab and Volvo. My mom had 3 Volvos and 1 Saab in the past, all had that and it looked bad. The new CTS has the plastic down low, instead of painting the lower molding body color. On the 5-series it is body color and looks better. Same goes for Explorers or Escapes with the gray plastic, vs painting it all body color, all body color always looks better, and ages better. The 2000 Monte Carlo SS with spoiler and painted molding looks way better than the base with no spoiler, plastic wheel covers, and gray lower body molding for example. I think every Cadillac should have fog lights, everything painted body color, metal or body painted grille (escalade does this well) and dual exhaust. The new CTS has a lot of plastic in the grille, it should have had the Escalade treatment, body painted egg crate with wire mesh behind.

I have driven the current CTS, obviously not the new one, I'll go check it out when it is out. My step dad has a BMW 540i, it is a much better performer than the current CTS, it costs more, but it is older too. The BMW 3 and 5 series offer adaptive cruise control, night vision on the 5 series and some other stuff that even a gadget fan like me wouldn't opt for. I went to the BMW website today, the 335i and CTS line up pretty closely in price, the 535i is about $53,000 lightly optioned to about $58,000 if you get everything. Which is a lot of money, I agree, but their resale values hold up and people out there are willing to pay it. Personally I'd rather have a Cadillac that can out perform it and match it's resale value. The 3-series in the USA outsells the STS, DTS, CTS, XLR and SRX combined. I didn't look at worldwide sales, in that case it wouldn't even be close. The 3-series sedan, coupe and convertible (I forgot wagon sales but they are tiny) have sold about 72,000 for the first half of this year, those 5 Cadillacs have combined to sell about 69,000. Lexus, Infiniti and Mercedes line up much better the BMW's class sizes, Cadillac needs to align them selves in size and price with those other brands, doesn't have to be exact, but has to be close. One other gripe of mine about all GM cars (Ford too) is the cheap looking base models with gray plastic on the exterior, lack of fog lights and just plastic slots where they should be, cheap wheels with plastic covers, etc. The CTS has some of this, and the resale values will suffer, because cars with gray plastic look old, dull and cheap faster. When all molding is painted body color, and the car has fancy wheels, it doesn't age as much. This is an area BMW and Lexus seem to be good at, and they have high resale value.

The weight is a problem. Just like the Lambdas are 500 pounds heavier than the Trailblazer and Envoy, Vue got heavier, CTS got heavier. Weight hurts handling, acceleration and gas mileage. GM needs to be more efficient with the weight on all their vehicles. People notice that heavy weight on a test drive because heavy cars often are not nimble in turns and can feel sluggish on hills.

I noticed the specs on the Lexus website the other day. The 4.6 liter V8 is really efficient, you get the same performance and economy with it that you get with the hybrid, so there is no point to buying the hybrid V8. If it was a 500 hp hybrid V10 that got 20/22, I could see the point, but the LS600h is just marketing and image. Sadly people will buy it just to say they have a $100,000 hybrid. I am so sick and tired of people that buy Toyotas on some fake image that they are so much better. And I think I am equally disappointed in GM for not challenging them more. GM needs a 50 mpg car so badly, if you have a hybrid perception is that you are the greatest thing ever.