Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Can GM make Cadillac the standard of the world Again?
6098 messages, Last post on Aug 14, 2009 at 4:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: lykourinou (Feb 19, 2008 5:08 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 20, 2008 6:08 am) |
|
|
|
|
More reliable? I have 2 3800s in full-sized comfortable cars that get great gas mileage and don't cost me double for service in a foreign car store's service department for repair let alone piled on maintenance mandates from a dealer who sold me a totally reliable car but seems to think it needs constant over-servicing and replacements to keep it 100% perfect? I'm not sure where this world commission is that determines what is out-dated and what is world standard choices. I want a car that has lots of torque and doesn't have to wind to 5000 rpm before high torque appears and then it's time to shift again... As for Japanese cars don't break down--I have been collecting complaint posts asking for help with those Japanese brand cars failing their owners in my Watched Items page. I can link to some of them if lykourinou needs help finding them. Sometimes I realize that people live in the past and think they can still hang problems of the 80s and 90s where a higher problem rate occured for some owners of US brand cars rather than stepping into the current world where JDPowers ratings show US built cars on a par with the Japanese brands. Things have changed in the build of US brand cars; and things have changed in those Japanese cars. Does anyone have a link to the JDPowers ratings. I have to look through lots of bookmarks to find the last ones I saved and can't find it quickly.
|
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 20, 2008 6:08 am) |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Feb 20, 2008 7:49 am) |
|
|
|
|
the 3 of you must work for GM. I give up, It will make you happy to hear this so I'll say it.ok GM builds the most modern and most dependible cars in the world. The rest of the world is wrong for having standard intelligent keys with push button start on base models. The rest of the world is also behind GM for having DOHC engines and independent rear supsensions. Although GM is starting to sway and build cars backwards. 2007 Buick Enclave DOHC engine, 2007 CTS DOHC engine.
|
|
|
Replying to: lykourinou (Feb 20, 2008 12:29 pm) GM does have DOHC engines. Their 4 cylinders are either all, or mostly all DOHC designs. The V6 and V8 engines are a mix. Intelligent keys are cute, but not needed for anything useful.
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Feb 19, 2008 10:52 am) |
|
|
Replying to: lykourinou (Feb 20, 2008 12:29 pm) Why is Porsche the most successful earner year after year? Because they make junk? They are rolling in the dough so it must be that their customers are "not in the know" regarding pride of ownership. That pride is long gone from everything except US Trucks and the Corvette, IMHO. If they keep offering CTS, Malibu, Lambda, Camaro products that prove reliable and strong enough to win back from the rest of the World, the tide will eventually turn back. Time alone will tell. Pontiac needs to get rid of the "G" designation and Buick needs a car with a soul or die. Regards, OW
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Feb 20, 2008 7:49 am) There's still no substitute for CUBIC INCHES--as opposed to litres. The mid-50's to the early 70's were the glory days for those kinds of cars. The ultimate would be a 1970 Buick Electra with a 365 HP 455 driving a 2.56 axle ratio--loafing along at about 1,800 RPM at 60, it could be kicked down to second and blast to 75 with no strain whatever at 15 MPG--those days and engines are gone for good. The engines were still large into the 70's, but they became strangled with emissions gadgets. I still keep one on hand, 'tho--I've got my 4th '77 Mercury Grand Marquis in 23 years. It has a 460 with a 2.5 axle ratio--only 202 HP, but the torque from the displacement is incredible. Just by default of their size, these engines were virtually indestructible--they were designed to power motor homes and trucks. Placed in a 4,700 lb. chassis and running around 1,900 RPM to move a car is like they're not even working. If the coming trend over the next 10 years is indeed to smaller engines to meet mileage requirements, then we'll be back to screaming little four cylinders that will work their hearts out like they did in those hilarious Castrol ads back in the 80's. High specific horsepower can indeed be gotten out of little engines, but they can't make the torque that gives you that satisfying feel of effortless performance. The single worst mistake Cadillac ever made was in placing that disgusting 4.1 litre engine with 125 HP in the full size chassis--a chassis that just three years earlier had 425 cubic inches. You literally had to go back to the late 40's to find performance that was as sluggish as those cars--'49 six cylinder Chevy territory. I remember driving a couple on used car lots just to laugh at them. Cadillac lost so much momentum with that boondoggle, plus all the other GM blunders, an entire generation only remembers Cadillacs as trash. My frame of reference is the Cadillacs of the mid-50's on--cars easily the equivalent of anything BMW or Mercedes can produce today.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Can GM make Cadillac the standard of the world Again?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Cadillac Escalade
2009 Cadillac XLR
2010 Cadillac STS
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
