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 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: sls002 (Feb 20, 2008 12:42 pm) And by the way remote start...is cute, That is what the 56k Escalade has. I had remote start that came with a Viper alarm that I had on my lowrider back in 1997. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: circlew (Feb 20, 2008 12:46 pm) As of today I have offiically given up on them I wanted to get my mom a full sized SUV. I have decided on the QX, just talking to these guys in here helped me to realize, that GM wont' change. I refuse to pay full price for outdated technology. Besides the reveiws on the Escalade are horrible, I was literally ignoring them. Hoping that GM would turn it around and offer what other manufacturers offer, most consumers have been burned. Sucked in by the looks and left broken hearted due to mechanical failure.. If we built cars that way we build weapons....we would have an owner loyalty, a hundred times stronger than Toyota or Nissan. I'll be hanging out in the Infiniti forums.....
|
|
|
|
I know of all that I have said about the lade and GM's committment to quality. That being said, if GM incorporates a DOHC V8 and an independent rear end, including the implementation of STANDARD power fold flat 3rd row seats AND IMPROVE ON QUALITY I would gladly purchase an Escalade. Even in all it's glory due to ride height the LX570 does not have HID lights....that is pretty bad for a 74k SUV. I love HID driving at night is alot better for me, and I have to hand it to GM the Vette and the Escalade do have some of the best HID I have seen. I'm not being funny either...
|
|
|
Replying to: lykourinou (Feb 20, 2008 5:28 pm) That's what always frustrates at GM...every once in a while they do really good things in the midst of the usual games. BTW, the wallet ripping on the imports is mainly due to the U.S. auto companies themselves. High costs have driven their quality and profits down so their cars, including Cadillac ARE NOT the Gold Standard of the world. Yes, the cars do not break as much but the craftsmanship and quality of parts/materials is inferior. Can they be the standard? Only if the desire is there. Do I have faith it will happen? Not really. The competition has a HUGE lead and the desire is in spurts and dies. Regards, OW |
|
|
Replying to: lykourinou (Feb 20, 2008 2:02 pm) http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080221/COL14/802210312/1015/BU- SINESS02
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Feb 21, 2008 9:15 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: lykourinou (Feb 20, 2008 5:28 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Feb 21, 2008 9:15 am)
|
|
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
