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?

1109110112114115201

Comments

  • poncho167poncho167 Posts: 1,178
    "Just like The Range Rover kept using BMW V8s for several years after Ford bought Land Rover. It takes a while to make a big design change like that."

    "I bit you didn't know that the XC90 used a GM transmission for a while either did you?"

    And Rover bought the tooling/molds for a early 1960's Buick V8 that Buick nolonger needed, and used it up until recently. Remember that.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    Yeah so what is your point?

    The Buick/Oldsmobile/Rover V8 became the Chevy small block of the United Kingdom.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    Anyone that's ever driven an underpowered vehicle knows how frustrating it is, hence the advertising of vehicles with power. They want you to know it can do the job well. Power is important when it comes to passing ,entering freeways and towing.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    Land Rovers suck. One of the most unreliable if not THE most unreliable vehicles on the road. Ask my sister, she has one, it's always in the shop.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    That's what we're talking about on here, because the "Standard of the World" question is stupid, and doesn't make any sense.
    _____________________
    reference text::::::
    displacedtexan wrote :::::
    Maybe there's no answer to the question posed at the start of this thread. Maybe the hosts should rename it something like what's on the Lincoln forum: Where is GM taking Cadillac? Most of the discussion around here isn't so much about answering the original question of standard of the world, but instead is general discussion about the direction and future of Cadillac.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    Well based ont their performance, they don't want to be "Standard of the World". Whatever the hell that means
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    That's because instead of the same old trite nonsense that they had been doing before, the CTS was a fresh idea from the ground up, designed by automobile enthusiasts, tested and driven by American and European professionals with accolades.

    The Catera, technically wasn't even a Cadillac persay. It was a cosmetically engineered car imported from Germany (Opel). It was a mediocre version of the car at best, which may have been fine in Germany, but was plagued with maintenance nightmares once Cadillac got their hands on it. On top of that the Catera's styling was far too bland. It ranked right "up there" with the Cimarron.

    The Cimmarron, puhleeez, what an embarrassing example of cosmetic engineering that was. It should have never went into production. It was Cadillac's version of a Chevy Cavalier. The only one who was fooled by it was General Motors, certainly not the public or the automotive press.

    You're wrong about the Cadillac Escalade. It still remains a top seller and status symbol for Cadillac. As long as people continue to buy it, they'll make it, environmentally friendly or not. And Toyota/Lexus does make an SUV out of one of their trucks. It's called a Toyota Land Cruiser or Lexus LX470.

    The XLR may seem weird to some people, but this car isn't meant for tons of people to be able to afford it, and it's definitely an eye turner and perfect for someone that grows money on trees and wants something a little different than what's already out there, even if it does need refinement. I've heard it is not as exciting to drive as a Corvette and has some problems that one just shouldn't find on an $80,000 car. Face it, it's a rich man's toy.
    __________________
    reference text:::::
    Cadillac CTS is a quantum leap over the abyssmal Cimmaron and mediocre Catera. The 2008 CTS looks even better. Hope to see it in the metal soon!

    Cadillac Escalade truck - get rid of this stupid anachronism! It might've made sense back in the 1990s, but it's an embarrassment today. You don't see Toyota making a Lexus truck out of the Tundra!
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    The STS may not need as much horsepower as the DTS. Isn't it lighter and sleeker?
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    CAn you be more specific in terms of what you mean by cheap steering wheels? Cheap materials? Cheap feel? Steering wheels that aren't large enough?
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    I just re-read what "Standard of the World" was based upon. I and many others on here had probably forgotten. If that's the criteria for becoming standard of the world is, then god I hope not. I hope they never become standard of the world again. That's what has led to their semi-demise. It may have worked at one time, but those days are over

    Why would they have received an award for that? It seems silly.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    Cadillac Escalade truck - get rid of this stupid anachronism! It might've made sense back in the 1990s, but it's an embarrassment today. You don't see Toyota making a Lexus truck out of the Tundra!

    Sorry to be a spoiler. The new 2009 Sequoia is just that. It is a big Tundra based SUV 5.7L engine and all. Bigger than the Escalade/Tahoe.. I suppose they will build the new Land Cruiser to compete against the Suburban or even bigger than the Excursion.

    2009 Sequoia
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    SO what are you going to do reply to every post between now and June?

    Multiple back to back replies on a topic have always been my definition of insanity for online forums.

    EDIT second reply...

    Cadillac Escalade truck - get rid of this stupid anachronism! It might've made sense back in the 1990s, but it's an embarrassment today. You don't see Toyota making a Lexus truck out of the Tundra!

    Sorry to be a spoiler. The new 2009 Sequoia is just that. It is a big Tundra based SUV 5.7L engine and all. Bigger than the Escalade/Tahoe.. I suppose they will build the new Land Cruiser to compete against the Suburban or even bigger than the Excursion.

    2009 Sequoia


    He meant the Escalade EXT truck thing with the useless tiny bed in the back.

    image

    And I agree it is even stupider then the regular escalade.

    The new LX570 looks like a over inflated RAV4.

    image

    image
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    My mistake. I agree the truck makes little sense. I see a quite a few of them. I should read closer before I post. lemko please accept my apology....... :sick:
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    What do you think about the LX570 equals over inflated RAV4?
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    I think most all the SUVs have gone down hill in appearance. I like heavy duty frames and steel bumpers. The LX570 will have to be a big improvement over the last model to compete with the Escalade for handling and performance. To me the Land Rover and G500 from Mercedes are the only true luxury SUVs available in the USA. I doubt the LC/LX would hold up under the abuse an SUV should be built to sustain.

    I really do not like the looks of the RAV4. I think the CR-V is better looking. I think sales bear that out. I did go and sit in the Cadillac SRX. I liked the full length moon roof. I would not buy one as it is too small for my taste.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    I agree the truck makes little sense. I see a quite a few of them

    Ahh, the truck makes little sense (avalanche/EXT), that is why we so many of them.

    The truck is a great truck for a contractor that needs the bed for his work stuff (with covered storage) AND needs the 2nd row seat for family, or workers, and if he sometimes hauls long items.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    Ok if you have ever actually seen a contractor driving a Avalanche/EXT and actually using it to haul stuff I will eat my breakfast plate.

    There are plenty of other trucks that would make better use of the Crew Cab covered bed design then the EXT.

    The handful of them that I see that are actually owned by business people, taking the 6,000 lbs write off I am sure, that might actually use them as work vehicles aren't carrying anything bigger then a blueprint in the truck.

    The only version of this truck more stupid then the Caddy version is the Hummer one. The H2 SUT has a bed that is less then three feet long. Even with the midgate down it is only about 6 feet long and then you can only put long thin objects into the truck.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    Ok if you have ever actually seen a contractor driving a Avalanche/EXT and actually using it to haul stuff I will eat my breakfast plate.

    The guy who built my house drives the avalanche and swears by it. It is both his work truck and his personal vehicle (his wife has the 2nd vehicle). Have a good snack.

    I was going to buy one also when I was going to go into a venture installing closet systems because it would be perfect for me. However I decided not to go into it.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    The guy who built my house drives the avalanche and swears by it. It is both his work truck and his personal vehicle (his wife has the 2nd vehicle). Have a good snack.

    Yum Fiber... :surprise:

    I have never ever seen an Avalanche hauling anything in the bed let alone being used for work. They just aren't that popular in the Northeast though. I can't remember the last time I saw an avalanche on the road that wasn't on a dealer plate. There is a chevy dealer nearby me that only sells Trucks/Suvs, Vettes and Harleys along with assorted used cars so I see them on his front line sometimes.

    The last time I saw an EXT was a year and a half ago when I was appraising one for trade on a Range Rover.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    have never ever seen an Avalanche hauling anything in the bed let alone being used for work

    Maybe because the cover is covering? He mostly uses it for hauling his power tools and stuff. The cover covers the stuff for securty. Otherwize he would have a pickup with a cap.
  • british_roverbritish_rover Posts: 8,476
    I never see these trucks period. Like I said the last time I remember seeing a EXT was over a year ago.

    I can't remember the last time I saw an Avalanche that wasn't a dealers car.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    I just don't like all the foo foo plastic add-ons. I was looking forward to the Avalanche when it first came out. When I saw it at the fair I almost threw up I thought it was so ugly. I see more of them in So CA than I would like to. Including the Caddy and Lincoln PU trucks.

    TO each his own I guess. No dumber looking that the big 22inch wheels and tires on half the Vehicles down here.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,940
    My nephew down in the Nashville area is a home contractor. He drives an Avalanche - loves all the lockable cubbies for hauling tools and stuff. He doesn't haul much in the way of building supplies in it - the supply companies deliver most of that stuff to the job site.

    He carries a lot of paperwork in his too. He'd probably like an Escalade just fine though. :shades:

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,577
    In the Caddy STS forum here, I “requested” way back in 2005 and \ or 2006 that Caddy revamp their option and equipment availability policy – to allow configuration of what I’d call an STS GT. Less ( mandatory ) luxury and convenience options required before one could order the PCZ “Performance Handling Package” with the NorthStar V8.

    It appears that, with the introduction of the substantially upgraded V6 version of the 2008 STS, Caddy has in fact decided to allow something quite similar to what I had in mind back then.

    Essentially, I was looking for the highest \ best performance & handling equipment, without pushing MSRP well over $60K – for ‘stuff’ I really did not care that much about. ( Such as the Navigation system, Bose sound system, HIDs, rear heated seats, and a few other items. )

    This V6, with 300+ HP and a flat TQ curve, implying good general drivability in addition to that rather high specific output, mated to GM’s 6L50 6 speed automatic ( a version of the trans. in my Corvette ) intrigues me. Particularly with the imminent release of the CTS. ( Still waiting to see pricing. )

    ** IF ** the dynamics of the 2008 V6 STS are actually much as described in the previews I have read, and the quality ( mechanically & cosmetically ) is improved – in addition to the revamped interior & exterior. ( The 4 previews I have read so far, including 1 here on Edmunds, have been quite positive. )

    And ** IF ** the acceleration feel and handling feel of the V6 is truly as good as initial reviews, based on pre-production examples, is as good as reported. And the NVH control is refined.

    And ** IF ** the [ real world ] fuel mileage is reasonable.

    Etc.

    THEN, I see this as an advance toward Caddy making the STS a sales success. And building a base of [ very ] satisfied Caddy customers. I see potential to sell more V6 STSs than V8s, as has always been true – and these advancements sound like they’ll make the STS V6 something that will impress.

    And I also see this as a move toward making Caddy far more competitive – if not exactly “The Standard Of The World”. And certainly, if the V6 STS sells in larger numbers, and the upcoming CTS ( same motor available ) also becomes a sales success, these revenue stream enhancements ** MAY ** allow Caddy to invest in the other aspects that would push the Brand higher. If GM so chooses.

    I have asked the Internet Manager at my closest dealer to notify me when 2008 V6 STSs start arriving. I plan to test drive one, equipped as close as possible to how I’d buy one: 1SC, PDQ & PCZ. MSRP just under $55K. ( Where previously a V8 with PCZ had to be a 1SG, and had an MSRP well over $60K. A 2007 1SG – V8 w/Sunroof and premium paint currently on my Dealer’s lot lists at $62,940. That is without a HUD. And with no PCZ. )

    In addition to the larger ( Summer only ) tires & wider wheels & Brembo brakes, a 2008 STS V6 so equipped would even include a HUD – something previously only available bundled with (K59) Adaptive Cruise Control, and priced at something over $2,000. And again only available on the V8 with 1SG. I have had a HUD on past vehicles and have one on my Corvette – and appreciate the usefulness.

    It would include the Navigation system, heated AND VENTILATED front seats – and even a heated steering wheel. For a much more reasonable actual transaction cost. IMHO. And at a ‘penalty’ ( vs the V8 version ) of only 0.2 seconds in 0 – 60 acceleration. A difference I suspect very, very few could discern. IMHO.

    I see all this as Caddy making progress – movement in what I consider “The Right Direction”.
    Cheers,
    - Ray
    Willing to be convinced that this is a satisfying sedan to drive . . .
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    The cladding on the old model was optional.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    See? now you guys are acknowledging the incredibly dumb things that GM does, just like I did from the start, yet I don't see anyone bashing you.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    It looks like an overinflated RAV4 because that's what it is
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Posts: 2,770
    That's because his statement wasn't totally overboard like most of yours are regarding Cadillac. BTW Caddy doesn't have to be the Standard of the World anymore. It will ALWAYS be the CADILLAC OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY.
  • mediapushermediapusher Posts: 305
    Yeah, "CADILLAC OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY" = "STYLE, BUT NO SUBSTANCE".
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    You want substance with no style you can buy a ToyLex vehicle. This is not about the perfect vehicle. Though I must say, the Escalade comes close :)
Sign In or Register to comment.