Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Is Cadillac's Image Dying and Does Anyone Care?

24567302

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Well the early-mid 90's STS was better than the E-class, IMHO.

    Rocky
  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,907
    In some ways, I am sure it is. Especially if one doesn't like a 6cyl engine.
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Well the E-class today is better than the current STS. that is hard for me to say *gulp* because I like the STS. ;)

    Rocky
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    For status, the Rolls Royce is it. Possibly, since BMW took over, it may even have decent engineering.

    Syling depends on what one likes, however, most luxury cars are not Azteks.

    J. D. Power has Lexus at the top of the heap. They are mostly concerned with quality and dependability.

    If the point of this discussion is:
    "what is the worlds best luxury car?"
    Then I think that the Rolls Royce, Bentley and Maybach are very good. Cadillac does not have anything in this catagory. Cadillac does not have any sedans that compare with an S-class Mercedes either, except perhaps for size. For the "best" luxury car, the standard of the world would have to be very refined, something GM does not quite grasp.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,907
    I don't think the STS is a bad car either...and I have seen them fairly cheap at a year or two old here. It might even be a better value than the competition...but the segment isn't really about value.

    It comes down to an old GM problem - you have to keep on moving. These new models come out that are competitive, but don't seem to receive upgrades like the competition. Too often they live on for many more model years than they should.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I think that Cadillac's sigma platform is quite good. Where Cadillac falls short is on interior quality and general refinement. The CTS interior has a bit too much firm plastic in it I think. Not sure how it compares with a 3-series BMW though.
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Yeah I agree with ya fintail. It's so difficult because smaller car company's are changing designs every 4 years. I here some are going to try to get it down to every 3-years to cater to leasing customers that want the latest and greatest.

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Yep, the current STS missed out on GM putting the few extra bucks more on interior quality. The CTS interior spy photo's I've seen give me hope. :)

    Rocky
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Do not confuse styling changes with design changes. For example, the 2008 CTS will have new styling, but will still be a sigma platform design. The best that we can hope for is an improvement to the sigma design, but the basic platform design is probably not going to change a lot. But the 2008 CTS should have a lot of improvement in refinement, which can be done with some refinement in the basic sigma design.
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    Agree....I think the next STS, which BTW needs to come soon needs to be built on the Signma II platform. Buick needs to replace the FWD Lucerne with a RWDer. The LaCrosse needs to be more sporting and I'd go with a Velite styled grill. Then Buick, needs to use the Sigma II for a RWD hardtop convertible like that found from Volvo, with the C-70 and call it Velite. :shades:

    Rocky
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,071
    If Cadillac would actually build something like the Sixteen, it would easily outclass Rolls-Royce, Bentley, Maybach, etc.
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    lemko, I 100% agree pal. The sixteen coupe and ULS Sedan, along with the V-12 lookin' exotic they had a few years ago would push Cadillac, to new heights. Perhaps one day we will see cars like that being built at GM. :shades:

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Posts: 14,011
    I was reading in the 07' Navigator forum of how some tried to justify why they traded in their 07' Escalade for a 07' Navigator. :confuse: I'm scratching my head and can only come up with this conclusion. They are chronic car buyers. They were trying to justify their car purchase because the Escalade didn't have power running boards. Well the Navigator, doesn't have a rear view camera, so what gives. The Navigator, also doesn't have the interior quality and materials of the Slade, either. :surprise: I guess if you want to get worse gas mileage, lose 103 hp. and not have a refined machine like the slade, then perhaps the swap can be justified by the few options the slade doesn't have for the many the Navigator doesn't have. :confuse:

    Rocky
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,071
    Maybe they dig the Navigator's groovy retro '70s instrument panel?
  • "Standard of the World" implies leadership and something that everyone else (i.e., the competition) aspires to equal.

    Given GM's record for the past 30+ years, I find it impossible to believe that its corporate culture is capable of conceiving of, much less producing, anything that is the "standard of the world."

    Neither the UAW - or the beancounters - would ever stand for it.

    GM aspires to mediocrity, nothing more. It is a rental car producer, in slow decline due to union expense and featherbedding coupled with short-sighted management.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    How would it outclass Rolls? The Rolls has a V12 with DOHCs, so a pushrod V16 is not better. The Rolls interior is wood and leather, while current Cadillacs tend to have lots of plastic. Rolls has a very long history of being a status symbol, and Cadillac would have to build a very fine Sixteen for decades to even begin matching the Rolls mystique. Cadillac simply does not have what it takes, the Eldorado Brougham of the late 50's would now be at the point of toppling the Rolls, and Mercedes would never have tried making something of the Maybach. But Cadillac dropped the Eldo Br when it was just getting started.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I think that you have it right. GM makes good middling cars and as long as they are not overpriced, they are a good buy.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 17,702
    >GM aspires to mediocrity, nothing more. It is a rental car producer

    Could your negative attitude have something to do with a bad experience with Saabs?

    This message has been approved.

  • Actually I had a good experience with a 2000 SAAB 9-5, which was designed before GM took full control of the company.

    My terrible experience with a post-GM SAAB 2003 9-3 - an experience confirmed by Consumer Reports and others - did not create my poor opinion of GM, merely confirmed it.

    I worked for a multi-franchise car dealer from 1971-1996. Among their franchises (since the lates 1980's) was Cadillac / Oldsmobile and Chevrolet.

    What I saw was indifferent design, sloppy execution, sloppy assembly, cheesy interiors and "luck of the draw" reliability. In other words, vehicles clearly subject to beancounter final word and assembled by UAW hacks who couldn't care less, because they didn't think they had to (cheerfully oblivious as their numbers kept shrinking, their jobs being displaced by nonunion plants in the South).

    My experience with the 9-5 prompted me to take a chance, with some trepidation, on the 9-3 / Malibu / G-6.

    That experience taught me that not much has changed with GM since 1996, notwithstanding their current spin that they've "caught up" in quality.

    Any quick perusal of the black dots in Consumer Reports tells the real story ...
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,706
    Check to see if it has glass headlights.

    The 2000/2001 Saab 9-5s do. The newer ones have plastic that is shaped the same.

    Also check out the sills between the doors(the uprights/pillars) - it used to be anodized aluminum or painted steel. Now it's plastic. GM *and* Ford seem to know how to bean-counter all of the quality and ergonomics out of anything they touch. Like a big evil sponge.

    As long as there's more plastic than wood and cloth(leather seats don't count here as any maker can add them) in the interior, Cadillac doesn't get my vote. Not anymore.

    Plain and simple - plastic is cheap and NOT luxury.
Sign In or Register to comment.