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?

1129130132134135201

Comments

  • 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: 2,731
    "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

  • Does that include the naysayers who had such bad experiences with GM products that had plenty of time to hear themselves talk whist waiting for the Caddy to be repaired.

    Must've been you because nobody in my family has ever had a bad experience with a GM product, much less a Cadillac :blush: And I highly doubt we were the only family to ever have great luck with our GMs.

    Are you serious or just making stuff up? :confuse:

    Maybe you meant Toyota? Cause that I CAN believe.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    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.

    Boy, this is getting better and better...

    :sick:
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Now, was your first post serious? Or just to keep this discussion heated...?

    I am pretty sure he's serious (in his own way).

    Apparently rockylee's cousin has arrived...
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Posts: 2,731
    GM builds a lot of cars. I'm sure some percentage of them spend more time on the road than in the service bay... Well, probably... :blush:

    Just kidding folks. There's a new Malibu in my parking lot at work, looks nice. I'll keep an eye on it, see if there's anything leaking or any pieces falling off...! :P

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

  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    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

    Maybe when "you" think of "beauty", the Escalade pops in your head. But I suspect not everyone here is a pimp or bling crazed. There is hardly an SUV out there that I wouldn't rather be seen in than an Escalade.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "Didn't the Escalade basically start out as a Chevy Tahoe? Chevy not in same league as Merc, BMW, Audi, Acura. "

    The MDX started as a Pilot/Odyssey. The RX started as a Highlander. The QX56 started as an Armada, etc. Parts sharing is common. The Escalade has a totally unique interior, HIDs, 9" nav screen, 22" wheels and a better powertrain than the Tahoe. They are not the same vehicle.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "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... "

    I find it interesting how GM bashers continue to talk about the Cimarron even though it was in production about 25 years ago. How is that vehicle relevant today? People feel a 25 year old Cadillac mistake is reason not to buy a current Cadillac but dont feel MB or Audi's recent quality issues are enough reason to be skeptical about those brands. Do we have any poor quality Cadillac stories more recent than the Cimarron? I think I was a toddler when that car was out, its time to move on.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    The ugly new LX570 isnt going to make a dent in Escalde sales, especially at $73k.

    No it's not going to because the LX570 is totally in a different category/time zone/universe than the bling-bling 'Slade.

    When the day comes that I link "beauty" with "Escalade" I hope someone could put a bullet in my head to end my misery...
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Why don't you try to compare 80s Caddy with 80s MB and BMW? Then try 90s Caddy with 90s BMW, MB and Lexus...

    Apples to apples here please.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    Hmmm. If style over substance floats your boat, then yes, Cadillac has plenty of pimpadelic g-crunk for you. :sick:
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "Apples to apples here please. "

    let me be crystal clear: Most cars from the 80s look like crap to me and I admire none of them. A 20 year old Cadillac is just as pathetic as a 20 year old MB. I do not find vehicles from the 70s and 80s to be desirable or stylish and that includes German cars. Please name 3 German cars that are more than 20 years old that are worthy of admiration by today's standards. Their interiors were plain and had poor ergonomics, their prices were sky high, their exteriors were dull, their engines were unimpressive by today's standards, their reliability was suspect and in many cases they lacked luxury features found in Cadillacs of similar vintage.

    By the 90s Cadillac was making vehicles with nice interiors and state of the art technology. The '98 STS and ETC had 300hp engines (more than the 540 or E430), nice wood trim, a fantastic Bose 4.0 sound system with 425watts and a 12" sub in the back, computer controlled suspension, auto wipers, adaptive seats, stabilitrak, etc. Cadillac began to come around as far back as the '92 STS which was MT car of the year. With the next generation they added refinement and interior quality. After that the next step was to go RWD to better compete with the Germans and Lexus.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Please name 3 German cars that are more than 20 years old that are worthy of admiration by today's standards.

    I believe we are talking about Cadillac here so I propose let's stick with the topic. I really don't want to be part of another Caddy vs. the World discussion.

    But if you insist I can definitely come up with a list on top of my head.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 34,355
    "Please name 3 German cars that are more than 20 years old that are worthy of admiration by today's standards"

    I'd say the MB W126 (80s S-class), MB W124 (E-class) and R107 (70s-80s SL) are still worthy of praise. The 126 was the first truly modern large luxury car - a milestone vehicle of the period, the 124 was the first modern midsize luxury sedan that at least tried for a little performance (and was also sturdy and competent enough to spawn wagon, coupe, and cabrio variants), and the SL has been a moving target Caddy has been eyeing - and missing - for over 20 years. There are endless examples of these cars on the road today, so many years after the last ones rolled off the line. Poor ergonomics? I don't think GM designers even knew the term 'ergonomics' until about 1992 :P

    I've never bought the 'plain interior' argument either...some of us don't want button-tufted pillows to sit on as we drive. Many people could look inside an S-class built in 1980 and think it was 15 years newer. That's more significant.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "But if you insist I can definitely come up with a list on top of my head. "

    You suggest that Cadillacs of the past were crap but then say you dont want to get into specific comparions vs older imports. In my eyes the list doesnt matter. Cars of that era were inferior to today's vehicles in every single way and nothing being done by luxury imports was light years ahead of Cadillac. Cadillac made a different type of car than the Germans back then. it was a car that was designed for American tastes and at that time it made sense becaue Cadillac was the top selling brand until Lincoln passed them in 1998 or 1999. Cadillac's werent "bad" cars they were just cars made for luxury cruising, not attacking curves on the Autobahn. Over time the press and the public began to feel that Euro luxury was the only true definition of luxury and large, soft riding American luxury cars began to lose popularity as people wanted smaller, better handling vehicles with more emphasis on driving dynamics than luxury isolation.

    Bottom line, I'm not pining for ANY car from the 80s regardless of who made it.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I love those veiled insults in which people act like they are too upscale to drive an Escalade. I hate to break this to you but rappers probably make up 2% of Escalde owners. The rest are high income suburbanites of various races and backgrounds.

    And I suspect quite a few of these "high income suburbanites" drive their Escalades into the garages of their 6,000 s.f. brick front, vinyl sided box McMansions in tract housing subdivisions. And wouldn't know good architecture if Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater fell on them.

    It's not a matter of how much money one has, it's how much taste they exhibit in spending it. I'd rather have our 1996 Isuzu Trooper 5-speed manual transmission back than be given an Escalade. If the Escalade was a house, it would be an ostentatious McMansion. Just not my style.

    I accept that some people have different tastes than me. Some have no taste at all. But don't tell me that because I don't get giddy over a crome and bling crazed locomotive shaped escalade on 24" inch wheels with the driving dynamics of an oil tanker that somehow I must not "get it". There isn't a single one of those behemouths in my neighborhood. Nor is vinyl siding an acceptable architectural material.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    what substance does the Escalade lack? 403hp? check. 6 speed auto? check. Great sound system and nav? check. Style? check. HID lights, automatic high beams, variable suspension, heated/cooled seats. check again.

    Is there anything in there you can't get on a Tahoe or a Yukon?

    Stuff you can't get on any Escalade: IRS, foldaway seats, diesel engines, hybrid transmission, etc. Things that actually improve the driving experience.
  • mrsyjmrsyj Posts: 77
    "Poor ergonomics? I don't think GM designers even knew the term 'ergonomics' until about 1992 "

    same applies to German cars. Lexus taught them otherwise. I'm pretty sure GM has known how to label buttons and switches in an intelligible manner for quite some time. German cars were also amongst the last to incorporate useful features like cup holders and steering wheel controls because they insisted buyers didnt need such gimmicks.

    "I've never bought the 'plain interior' argument either...some of us don't want button-tufted pillows to sit on as we drive. Many people could look inside an S-class built in 1980 and think it was 15 years newer. That's more significant. "

    German interiors in the 80s were dull, angular and dark. By today's standards they are sad looking. I would never think any MB from 1980 looked "futuristic" or modern. When I look at older Euro cars I often wonder why people thought they were worth a premium at the time. They dont look any better than the other dull designs offered by lower end manufacturers. The 70s and 80s were a low point for automotive design.

    "the SL has been a moving target Caddy has been eyeing - and missing - for over 20 years"

    caddy tried to compete twice last time I checked. Atlante was barely a GM car and didnt do well. The XLR is a credible challenger. Its cheaper, more distintive looking, fast and has state of the art technology. Seeing as though the XLR-V costs about the same as a compable SL550 I would say the XLR can hold it's own. BTW, when have Lexus, Audi or BMW been able to hit the SL target? Oh yeah, they havent even come as close as Cadillac. The SC430 has been a joke for some time and was beat by the XLR every time they were compared.
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    Cadillac made a different type of car than the Germans back then. it was a car that was designed for American tastes

    American tastes circa 1965, which is fine and good except that it wasn't 1965 anymore and the luxury buyer moved away to greener pastures, to be replaced by increasingly geriatric former Buick buyers.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    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.

    I agree. Of course the Cimmarron was an exception they will use to attack us with.

    When the Northstar V8 entered into the Seville and created the 300 hp. Cadillac Seville STS, that at that given momment was "The Standard of the World" for all luxury cars. :shades:

    I believe the Seville STS was car of the year in a few magazines. ;)

    -Rocky
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    The Tahoe doesnt have 403hp, 6 speed, 4 year warranty, cooled seats, 9" DVD Nav screen, high end BOSE 5.1 sound system, HIDs, 22" wheels, intellibeam headlights and several other features.

    The Tahoe either has or is getting the 6.2 V8 any day now, and I think the Yukon already has that and all the other trinkets you mentioned. MB has a couple of diesel SUVs and BMW is building one next year.
Sign In or Register to comment.