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
|
I agree with a previous poster that a CTS with a ‘regular’ LSx series V8 – say the 6.2L LS3 or L99 – and with a base list price close to $50K would actually sell very well. I have driven a CTS-v [ see above ] and I found it to be a truly exciting sedan to drive. [[ I am also on record as believing that the STS-v would have been better served with an LS2 \ LS3 – than the s/c NorthStar. ]] Given the weight of the CTS & CTS-v, I expect that such a “CTS V8” with 400-425-ish HP & TQ would have delivered very significantly improved acceleration [ both ultimate and typical ‘real world’ ] over the top DI V6, and also significantly better fuel mileage than the CTS-v. The combination of EPA Highway = 18 [ ! ] and an 18 gallon fuel tank does rather limit cruising range. I do think most Caddy buyers these days actually ** DO ** care at least somewhat about fuel costs. A version of the LS3 offered in the Corvette & the Camaro SS seems like a logical & reasonable choice – and would allow the use of the [ somewhat smaller, lighter & cheaper ] 6L80 vs 6L90 automatic trans. And even the option of a manual trans. – for those few so inclined. The L99 version used in the Camaro SS with automatic [ with AFM \ DoD ] is EPA rated at 16 \ 25. Even with a somewhat less slippery body shape than the Camaro & a couple hundred more pound to deal with, I expect that ‘my’ hypothetical CTS V8, with this motor & 6L80, would deliver something like 15 \ 22 – or even 15 \ 23. And quarter mile acceleration numbers in the low 13s  108-ish. This would be quite noticeably quicker than the CTS V6s. This sort of package, I would personally find seriously interesting – when the time comes to trade my G8 GT. The CTS with 3.6L V6 & Direct Injection is OK, in my view, as a [ near? ] luxury cruiser. Capable & competent & offering many of the amenities expected in the segment – lika touch screen NAV, etc. I really doubt this would be seen as ‘cost cutting’ by potential customers – though I expect that it could undercut the CTS-v by some $8K or $10K. Particularly if the base model is offered without NAV – now standard on the 2010 CTS-v. And the MagRide [ much as I appreciate & respect this technology ] could also be made optional. Again, I really think this would create a viable \ credible ‘bargain’ BMW 550 competitor. [ Base MSRP for a 2010 BMW 550i is $60.4K. Base MSRP for a 2010 BMW 535i is $51.1K. ] In fact, if GM \ Caddy could bring something like this to market at a base MSRP of $49,995 [ including destination ] I think this would be Marketing Genius. AND I think this would even be a sales success. Caddy & GM could certainly use more of THOSE! AND really I don’t think it would cost all that much to engineer this package – Caddy would effectively leverage much of the CTS-v development & could spread the costs over a larger number of sales. Just my 0.2 gallons worth . . . - Ray NOT a Marketing Genius Aside: As I recall, this approach appears similar to the direction that Jaguar chose a while back - with the XJ and the XF – with an ‘uplevel’ V8 [ s/c as it happens ] and then a ‘full blown’ R version.
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Aug 10, 2009 4:28 pm) Regards, OW |
|
|
Replying to: berri (Aug 10, 2009 11:38 am) ________________________________ Caddy is working on it?  Well let's see, the first high-end Lexus automobile was introduced in 1986. Today is it 2009. This means Cadillac, which is a division of the biggest car company in the world; has had 23 years to get it's flagship brand to catch up to the Asian competition and it hasn't done so. Something is terribly wrong in Detroit, terribly wrong. At this stage there is no excuse for "Working On It". What's even more striking is that before Toyota rolled out their Lexus division, they had absolutely no experience or history in the luxury car market whatsoever, at least not in the U.S.A. and they took the world by storm the moment the first LS400 was introduced 23 years ago
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Aug 10, 2009 7:21 pm) I think another part of it is many who do shop in that class have no problem dropping another 10-20K to get the refinement and features they want. All 4000sq ft houses are not equal. |
|
|
Replying to: slimtire (Aug 11, 2009 7:20 am) They are also used to slow the car down when the front seam separates from the steel! AFAIC, the only place a Caddy should have a landau roof is on a HEARSE! Regards, OW
|
|
|
Replying to: xrunner2 (Aug 11, 2009 4:25 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Aug 10, 2009 7:21 pm) But if Cadillac wants to be the "standard of the world" then why shouldn't they put more money into the interior and equal or even beat the E-class? |
|
|
Replying to: alain_changer (Aug 10, 2009 8:37 pm) I don't think that's a big problem. Audi shares platforms with VW and people aren't complaining about the A4. Toyota shares with Lexus and even though the RX is on the same platform as Camry it is a completely different vehicle. The real problem is rebadging - when a Cavalier becomes a Cimarron - then THAT'S a problem. |
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Aug 11, 2009 7:52 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: rayainsw (Aug 11, 2009 7:21 am) It would help to do what Caddy needs to do...make the car better than the competition, for less. Making it almost as good (size, features, engines) for less IMO doesn't do what is needed.
|
|
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
