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?

1194195197199200302

Comments

  • It's real, and MB has some of the best interiors in the industry, but others are catching on. GM had done a superb job on the new Escalade. I was shocked when it first came out..
  • :D i'm a little confused as to why you are getting offended. I said nothing "persona", I could have substituted "people" for you. In other words most people wouldnt be skeptical of buying a Lexus in spite of the rash of recent Toyota quality issues but when GM issues a recall its like the end of the world.


    My apologies. Sorry about that! :D

    I see your point, but you want pele to forget the past and they won't. That's why Toyota quality issues haven't hurt them yet. There's a lag time in both cases.
  • Just saying recalls are issued for numerous reasons, not all of them serious. Toyota has been issuing them left and right in the past year or so. GM lost share for MANY reasons. To blame it all on quality is shortsighted. Toyota gained share for many reasons, the primary one being that they have expanded their lineup over the last 50 years and now compete in every single segment in this market. If you compared Toyota's 2007 sakes with its 1987 sales and subtracted all the vehicles that werent available in 1987 their share gains wouldnt be all that impressive. The early leaders in any segment have the most to lose when competition heats up. Same applies to chrysler and minivans. Their share was much higher when they had the market to themselves.

    It's almost as if you're mking excuses for GM. So are you saying that they couldn't have doe anything to prevent Toyota from as GM helpless and did everything they could to prevent them from being in the situation they are in?
  • In the last year or so I'm developing faith in GM with products such as the new Escalade, CTS, Pontiac with their hardtop convertible, and Buick with the new Enclave. They are putting out vehicles that people want, they have extended the warranty coverage and are starting to stand behind their vehicles.

    I know the Esclade lacks some basic standard features that MB and Infiniti deam standard but GM is coming around. That being said I know some people have had issues with the new Esclade from vibrating mirrors to transmission failures to engine hesitations. Not all the Esclades do this, this is definately a quality issue, but that being said we have to sometimes resist the temptation of purchasing a vehicle (brand new or redesign) when it first comes out.

    It's good to let a model year or two go by just so manufacturers can get the bugs out. As far as the driver mirror on the Escalade that vibrates, I read the review on JD power.com that said that they noticed upon testing the vehicle that at speeds of 50 mph or more their was an annoying whistling sound coming from the driver mirror. The second Escalade they drove did not exhibit this..

    Long term tests that I've read on other sites list the engine as the most powerful in it's class and say that it is of great quality and endurance. With active valve timing as a first on a pushrod engine. GM has seem to hit a homerun.

    At this point we can only sit back and watch and hope and pray that GM continues to put out the vehicles that we want and that they produce the quality that meets or exceeds it's competitors.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "The Sable was fine as was the Dodge. What was noticeable in both, compared to my personal cars (Nissan, Saab Lexus) was lesser build quality (moreso the Intrepid) & interior materials, floatier rides and noisier. But no reliablity issues that I can really recall. "

    To be honest I think the perceived quality of 10 year old domestics is worse than their actual quality. Materials, and to some extent build quality, lagged the imports 10-15 years ago as did refinement. Those days are over now. A quick drive of a current domestic car and a look at the dB measurements at idle and at 70mph show that refinement has come a long way. As for build quality and plastics, todays domestics (except some Chryslers) are on par with anything Toyota and Nissan are putting out. In fact I find GM's interiors to be better than those two Asian companies generally speaking. No one who defends Toyota should have any critical words about GM's recent interiors. The Tundra, Camry, Rav4 and Scion models are full of hard plastics.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "At this point we can only sit back and watch and hope and pray that GM continues to put out the vehicles that we want and that they produce the quality that meets or exceeds it's competitors. "

    I dont think you have to worry about anything. GM has totally changed the way it designs vehicles and is now pulling resources from Europe, Asia and Australia to get the best vehicles possible. No longer will people have to ask why GM's best vehicles are only sold overseas. And the best part is GM is doing all this while making no money in the US market. If that ever changes you can expect them to take things to another level.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "I agree GM could do better in their Cadillac interiors......the XLR in particular the interior is dissapointing. "

    The XLR needs to be updated as does the STS to some degree. I like the CTS, DTS, Escalade and SRX interiors. They are very competitive with anything from MB or Lexus. The 2007 refresh of the SRX interior took it from worst in class to one of the best.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "I hear what you are saying, but you will have to admitt that GM / Chrylser / Ford all use SOC engines while the rest of the world uses DOC. The push rod American engines are outdated and barbaric."

    First of all Ford uses SOHC and DOHC engines. GM doesnt make one single SOHC engine. SOHC and pushrod are not the same thing. The 6.2L engine in the Escalade is extremely powerful and outpowers the 5.5l DOHC V8 from Mercedes. It is state of the art with all aluminum construction and VVT. MB just started using VVT about two years ago for the record. Chrysler uses all OHC engines except for the HEMI and their lower end minivan engine. The HEMI is low tech compared to some of GM's pushrod engines but its very effective and refined for the price. Today's OHV engines are anything but archaic and if you review the tech specs you will see that. It should also be noted that the SRX, CTS, STS and XLR use DOHC engines. The only Caddies that do not are the CTS-V and Escalade. The new CTS-V is likely to produce in excess of 500hp from its "low tech" supercharged 6.2L V8 which is enough to leave the C63 and IS-F in the dust.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "I'm glad U said that. That's my point. Why couldn't GM do that? If they did, we wouldn't have this thread, and they wouldn't be playing catch up to all the imports."

    Gm marketshare loss was inevitable. This is a fact whether you chose to accept it or not. GM had 50% share because of lack of competition and the desirability of their vehicles. GM has better quality than ever but their share is lower than ever before so your argument that high share is ONLY related to quality doesnt make sense to me. Toyota is supposedly the highest quality manufacturer in the business and they only have 16% US marketshare. Why is that? Should they be exceeding GM's 1970 share? Of course not because the market is too competitive and NO ONE will EVER have the share GM had in the 1960s. Again, just look at Europe for example. Toyota has about 45% share in Japan due to lack of foreign competition.

    "That's because Toyota isn't known for their interior. If a person wants a good looking interior they'd get a Lexus. When did Toyota put quality interiors in their cars anyway???? "

    My point was that if american cars are going to be heavily criticized for cheap interiors then the same should happen to Toyota. For the most part it does not because the media is in love with Toyota, especially in the post Prius era. characteristics that get american cars blasted by the press barely get mentioned in reviews of Toyotas. Edmunds did a review of the new Sequoia and made nary a comment about its abominable interior that is the worst in class. Its a disgrace and would not be tolerated if it was in a Chrysler or Chevy.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "Many people think the real MB wood is fake anyway, so maybe it isn't a huge deal.

    Some cars such as my E55 have the dark or grey wood, some people don't even think it is wood, but marble. "

    I agree 100%, the wood in the M class looks very fake to me. I find Lexus and Cadillac real wood to be more authentic than the wood used in MB models.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "It's almost as if you're mking excuses for GM. So are you saying that they couldn't have doe anything to prevent Toyota from as GM helpless and did everything they could to prevent them from being in the situation they are in? "

    I said nothing of the kind. I didnt know GM bashing was a prerequisite for this forum so I'm not sure why I am being attacked for "making excuses" for GM. I am merely acknowledging facts that many anti GM people chose to ignore. GM could have done a better job adopting the quality initiatives pioneered by the Japanese. They could have done more to stem the marketshare losses. They could have made better small cars in the 80s and 90s. Happy now? That said, marketshare losses could not be averted and to suggest otherwise ignores the competitiveness of this market. If Toyota had 50% share in 1970 and then was faced with several major offshore competitors invading its market it too would have lost share. Have you not noticed the growth of Toyota and Nissan's lineups in the last 20 years? Have you not noticed new players like Hyundai and Kia and Mini? Have you not noticed that BMW and MB have expanded into the SUV market and the lower end sub $30k market? All of the foreign players have expanded their lineups and dealership bases in the last 20 years and now most of them compete in almost every segment. Toyota just built a $1B factory to build 200k Tundras a year. In the long run that is likely to lead to lower share for GM and Ford. Thats the way the business works. Going forward we will likely see Toyota start to lose share as Hyundai and Nissan step up their efforts in the US market and go after Toyota customers. The hybrid segment is a great example. How much to you want to bet that Toyota's share of the hybrid market will be FAR lower in 2017 than it is in 2007? Toyota dominates due to lack of competiiton. Even if every Toyota hybrid is totally perfect from a reliability standpoint Toyota will lose share as GM, Ford and Honda launch hybrids over the next 5 years.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Overhead cam engines come in the single and double types, where the double overhead cam pushes directly on the valve stem. The single overhead cam needs a rocker arm to push on the valve stem, as does the pushrod engine. The pushrod pushes the rocker arm and the cam (which is in the block) pushes the pushrod.

    All of these engines have over head valves. If you want to consider a "barbaric" engine design, consider the L-head, where the in the block cam did push on the valve stem, but the design limited the compression ratio (and therefore the power output).

    The basic limitation of the pushrod design seems to be that only 2 valves per cylinder are the common design, where the overhead cam design (particularly double OHC) uses 4 valves per cylinder. There are variations in the number of valves, but either two (pushrod) or four (dohc) is most common.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    The two major issues with pushrod engines is that they tend to have lower redlines and they cannot generate the same specific output as OHC engines. In trucks this isnt a big deal since most large V8 truck engines are relatively low revving and thus the 6.2L V8 in the Escalade (and the other vortec V8s) are perfectly acceptable solutions. Interestingly enough the GM truck V8s rev higher than several competing OHC designs. Its difficult to match the hp/l of a DOHC engine with a pushrod engine with 2 valves/cylinder but the gap is smaller now that it ever was before, especially when it comes to large V8s. Toyota's 5.7L makes 381hp and GM's 6L makes 367hp which is VERY close considering the Toyota V8 has 32 valves vs 16 for the GM V8.
  • Just wanted to pop in here and clarify things:

    Cadillac is and always will be the "Standard" that all others will strive to become. I don't know why it's even questioned :confuse:

    Take for example the Escalade. There is nobody, not Mercedes, not BMW, not Audi/Lexus/Acura/Volvo who could design a more beautiful or powerful SUV like GM can. The Escalade is the Standard when you think of Luxury SUV's just like the Cadillac DTS and CTS are the best in their respective classes. The others just don't have the engineering prowess or the design engineering talent to build such a winning vehicle like GM can.

    All the naysayers have no clue what they are talking about and are just bashing Cadillac just to hear themselves talk. There just jealous of Cadillacs success and future successes.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    Take for example the Escalade. There is nobody, not Mercedes, not BMW, not Audi/Lexus/Acura/Volvo who could design a more beautiful or powerful SUV like GM can.

    Didn't the Escalade basically start out as a Chevy Tahoe? Chevy not in same league as Merc, BMW, Audi, Acura.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    Cadillac is and always will be the "Standard" that all others will strive to become. I don't know why it's even questioned :confuse:

    A quick refresher:

    image
    http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1970-1979-cadillac7.htm

    image
    http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/663755

    image

    image

    image

    image

    Cadillac hasn't built a world-class car in my lifetime, though the 2008 CTS is within striking distance.
  • Your right it's not. Because Merc. BMW, Audi or Acura couldn't design or build a Tahoe either. GM rules when it comes to trucks. Just like Cadillac rules when it comes to being "The Standard of the World"
  • I see nothing wrong with any of those. I'm sure if you went back in time to when ANY of those cars were on the market you would find that Cadillac was just as good if not better than the competition.

    They had more style, were probably better built, had more horsepower and way more luxury than anything on the market.

    The CTS is beyond striking distance, it has clearly made the others look like econoboxes. The first CTS was within striking distance.

    Then it went on sale and hasn't looked back. :shades:
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    :surprise:

    There is an automotive industry outside of the Ren Center, ya know.
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Posts: 2,487
    "All the naysayers have no clue what they are talking about and are just bashing Cadillac just to hear themselves talk. There just jealous of Cadillacs success and future successes"

    Does that include the naysayers who had such bad experiences with GM products that they had plenty of time to hear themselves talk whilst waiting for the Caddy to be repaired. Again. And again... :sick:

    It does appear that GM/Caddy is righting the ship, though. But, please, let's not rewrite history. The Cavalier, I mean Cimarron, was only memorable for one reason...

    Now, was your first post serious? Or just to keep this discussion heated...?

    '13 Jaguar XF, '11 BMW 535xi, '02 Lexus RX300

Sign In or Register to comment.