You are here: Forums SUVs Cadillac Escalade Cadillac Escalade

Cadillac Escalade

994 messages,  Last post on Oct 13, 2009 at 4:12 PM

You are in the Cadillac Escalade Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Cadillac Escalade, Cadillac Escalade EXT, Cadillac Escalade ESV, SUV

Messages Page 24 of 100 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ... 100 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#230 of 994 thor8 by rsholland Oct 26, 2000 (1:05 pm)
Agreed! Bob
#231 of 994 thor8 by robh3 Oct 27, 2000 (12:44 am)
Most people who have an SUV meet the criteria of the old saying you shared, that is; they HAVE an SUV, but they do not NEED an SUV/truck of any type. Simple as that. The new '02 Escalade will be the top selling high-end luxury SUV because it will appeal to the masses of those who are in the market for such a vehicle by virtue of its features, power, towingf capability, style, comfort, new/uniqueness, and yes, "pinache". No sense in adding stuff that will not be used in the real world (other than perhaps for bragging rights) that will only add more to the cost. This SUV will be priced right to sway people away from the Navigators and Land Cruisers/RX470's of the world. I see a winner coming and I am frankly not even an SUV fan. Am I biased, yes, but if someone where to tell me that my only choice in vehicles was among all of the luxury SUVs, I'd choose the '02 Escalade based on what I have seen and know about the choices out there.
#232 of 994 Seems Cadillac... by tccad1 Oct 27, 2000 (1:13 am)
has just bumped up production on it. I should start to see them in Mid February now. The current Escalade will be built in VERY small numbers until end of November, beginning of December. And Thor8, I agree. I do wish that cadillac put in a low range. However, like Robh said, that would just add to the cost. Seems we agree and disagree on the low range issue. That is why they have these boards.
#233 of 994 But consider this by thor8 Oct 27, 2000 (4:43 pm)
Less than 3 years ago the wife and I, while towing two jet skies with my pickup while driving along the gulf coast decided to go off the road, park in the sand and explore the beach behind the sand dunes, needless to say I got stuck, in a desolated place, a couple of hours later help came, after huffing and puffing in the sand for a long time, just that inocently things can happen. I also obverved in a particular marina I frequent a lot, how many times a pickup can not pull on the steep slipery incline the boat on tow, the wheels are spinning too fast and smoking, the good thing is that there are always lots people and they help each other, but what if one comes in an off day or after hours? For these reasons I decided to get the ML430, not for off roading, but because of personal experience, I decided I wanted AWD, traction control and a low range, in this particular marina I can come out easily, the low range in first gear is so slow that it truly is a creeping gear and will not break the grip of the tires. Please, I am not advocating the ML, I know this is an escalade topic and I respect that, I just want to point out the benefits of these features, maybe if enough prospective buyers let their feelings known..... is like insurance, it sooths the mind or again, is better to have and not need than need and not have. Reading prior postings, if cost is a factor, why not eliminate some frugals and add a more utilitarian feature. I ask, an SUV being what it is, what is the harm in having these features, is it not better in having substance behind the vehicle too? Again, I am not brand advocating, just pointing the merits of a feature that I fell strongly about.(Obviously) Enjoy,
#234 of 994 About Low Range... by mbml55amg Oct 28, 2000 (4:59 am)
I also own an M Class, presently an ML55, previously an ML430 & am glad these vehicles have a 2-speed transfer case. As the previous post(er) does with his M Class, I tow my Waverunners & use Low Range extensively when launching. It is very nice to be able to creep up steep ramps with Zero wheelspin. But, to keep everything in perspective I also have a Suburban I occasionaly tow the skis with, 454 engine 2WD with a locking rear differential, it will also creep up these ramps without spinning a tire using the abundant low end torque to literally idle up & away. I have a 2001 Denali XL ordered & am glad to see the new AWD system used & seriously doubt I'll ever miss the 2-speed transfer case. (If I indeed need Low Range, I'll just use the ML55 that day!) I will not be using the Denali to tow an 8,500 lb. trailer over the Rockies either, if this was my objective, the 3/4 ton Yukon XL with 4WD, the 2-speed transfer case, & the 8.1L engine would be my choice, or possibly the Diesel with the Aliison trans.! With all that said, I gladly chose the Denali over the 3/4 ton & believe it will exceed my demands, as the Escalade will the demands of it's owners. Thank you for your time.
#235 of 994 Post 251... by mbml55amg Oct 28, 2000 (5:20 am)
Sorry, I misspelled "Allison" trans. in the previous post.
#236 of 994 Ugly by fullsize Oct 28, 2000 (5:44 am)
I'm sorry. The front end on this thing (Escalade) is just plain ugly. No. It's not "plain" ugly. It's extra-special ugly. Someone in GM's exterior design department took too many experimental drugs in college, or something. And this is coming from a HUGE Tahoe/Yukon fan. Isn't this the same hideous headlight design that Cadillac's putting on the DeVille now? p.s. I saw an Aztec today. Wow. Those must have been some good mushrooms.
#237 of 994 Styling is Subjective... by glamourlife Oct 28, 2000 (4:38 pm)
I happen to really like the styling of the "02 Escalade. I think that is one of it's strongest suits. The same thing goes for the redesign of the Deville. That sedan represented a quantum leap for Cadillac styling, especially the front end. The new designs from Caddy are sleeker and some of the best designs from GM in years.
#238 of 994 The new Escalade looks... by mbml55amg Oct 28, 2000 (8:26 pm)
So Tina, let me understand, you find the '02 Escalade sleek looking? If that is true, then styling must indeed be subjective. I find the Escalade an extremely interesting vehicle with many innovative features. The front end styling however I find is it's weakest point, by far. It may be that when I see the actual vehicle I'll feel differently, but for now I'll stick with my initial review; "Anyone who can afford an Escalade, should be able to buy an Aztek to park beside it, the Aztek (I hope you don't find it sleek as well, Tina) is SOO extremely ugly, that by direct comparison the Escalade will appear, dare I say, even attractive!"
#239 of 994 Styling by rsholland Oct 28, 2000 (11:23 pm)
Cadillac is trying to apply the new design direction of their cars to a (already designed, and in production) truck. It's the 4WD equivalent of the square-peg-in-the-round-hole. It flat out does not work. I do like the new styling direction that has been shown on their recent concept cars. In fact, I think it's excellent - and I've been a graphic designer for nearly 30 years, so I "know" something about design (what works, what doesn't, and why). The softly rounded shapes of the Tahoe/Suburban's main structure (doors, windows, etc.) do not mesh with the razor-edge shapes/creases that Cadillac is using on their cars. The styling really looks "forced," and not at all natural. It looks like exactly what it is: A Tahoe (sorry, a Denali) with Caddy frosting. Bob

Messages Page 24 of 100 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ... 100 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Cadillac Escalade Cadillac Escalade