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?

15455575960302

Comments

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    I think Cadillac needs a smaller 3 series car out there(RWD/AWD). It must bring in the same age/demographic group as those who aspire to the 3 series and others. It needs a "cool" demeaner to do that. It will take quite a car to bring those customers over. GM can do it. I look at the folks who drive Escalades and know it can be done.

    Price wise they cannot go too low. Let the CTS start a little closer to what they actually equip them at (upper $30's), well featured and drop the 2.8. The "BLS" would take the entry level. Just under $30k well underprices a 3 series($35k and up). Make sure it is well equipped (2,8L) at that price point and let it max out for a "normal" optioned vehicle at $33K.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    The Allante's horsepower per liter (170/4.1=41.5) was actually better than the 560SL (227/5.6=40.5). The Corvette, which actually outperformed the SL, was rated 16 city, 25 hwy.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    The BLS interior is very similar to the 2007 SRX (or should I say the SRX interior is simialy to the BLS).

    I think that the next generation BLS may come to the US.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Posts: 992
    The BLS uses the 2.8 to muster up 255hp. Thats where the old 330i was. The BLS should use engines to make:

    225hp hence 328i, Is250, C230, Ect.

    255is good but not enough. The number to reach is 300hp so maybe the 3.6 can handle it.

    Price the 225hp one at $26,*** and the 300hp one at $33,*** and thats makes it a value! Something cadillac could use in the US..

    The Next CTS may start at the TL's price and thats $36k but that not something people want to pay for an "Entry Level" sedan.

    Now the whole FWD issue... I guess Fwd is ok. Look at the A4! Make AWD and option and you've got a deal/Steal! Acura's doing it!

    Cadillac shouldn't wait to bring it! Bring it now since the 9-3 is an 05 model, it may not get redesigned until 2010. Since they have them in LHD (Left Hand Drive), they should bring it NOW or summer 07!

    -Cj :P
  • aldwaldw Posts: 82
    A RWD BLS replacement similar to the Torana concept may be in the works as long as Caddy managers can get it through the product approval process.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    GMinsideNews, not a great source of information, but more rumors, says that the BLS, on the epsilon II platform, would arrive for the 2010 model year. They also say that the CTS wagon will be in production then, and the SRX will be out of production. The SRX might be replaced with a lambda platform model.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 58,856
    HP per liter comparisons really isn't playing fair...horsepower can't go up proportional to displacement on NA engines...science doesn't work that way. So what I mean is that the SL's hp per liter ratio is probably more efficient than the Allante's, given the effect of pumping losses, etc. which larger displacement imposes on engine designers.

    MODERATOR --Need help with anything? Click on my name!

    Share Your Vehicle Reviews Here

  • gsemikegsemike Long Island, NYPosts: 1,989
    The BLS definately offers a nice smoothed out interpretation of the art & science look. If positioned correctly and priced right to fight the TSX, I think that it could be a nice addition to the stable.

    I can't find a side shot. How obvious is the Saab DNA?
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Would comparing the torque per liter be fair? The Allante had 235 lb-ft of torque at 3200 RPMs; the SL's was 279 lb-ft at 3250. I suppose that this is also bad...

    Anyway, the Allante's engine was more fuel efficient, but certainly had less performance. For 1987, was the performance fairly good? Today's expectation are certainly much different. Compared to the Oldsmobile diesels of the late 70's and early 80's, the 1987 Allante's performance was quite good. Compared to the Corvette, which had similar fuel consumption, the Allante was a dog.

    The current two seaters from GM (XLR and Corvette) are rated at 17 city, 27 hwy. Mercedes Benz 2 seaters are worse, unless you consider the 6 cylinder models.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Another option would be to take the 2.8 engine and just drop huge amounts of bloat and weight. 255HP but only 2800 lbs - that's a several hundred pound advantage on the 3 series, and more than enough to toast the IS350 as well.(lees mass, significantly less time to get it moving and turning)

    What we are seeing lately is a repeat of what we saw in the 50s and 60s. The cars are getting more power and also getting bigger at the same time. But the problem is that a 4000lb Lexus (in a few years, given the way they are heading) won't be any different than the old 60s musclecars were - good in a straight line and not much else.

    2006 IS350 - 3527lbs (dry weight)
    2005 IS300 - 3255lbs

    2006 330i - 3417lbs
    2000 328i - 3197lbs
    1990 325i - 2854lbs
    In 15 or so years, the thing has grown by almost 600 lbs.

    More power - more weight as well - the trend is disturbing to those of us who want performance. But this is where GM could make up ground. Less power but.. lookie here... 2800lbs!
    (Btw - the Altima is almost exactly 3000lbs, so it isn't impossible to make a 4 door car without the bloat.)
  • That would be a good idea but I don't see GM doing it.

    Jag has done something similar by going to aluminium for the XJ and XK and it has saved about 300 or so pounds per car but hasn't seemed to help their sales much.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Consider the RX-8. With stickshift, it is *just* under 3000lbs by a hair(like 2997 or something). It's also a very fast car. It's not made to compete with a 350Z, but auto magazines love to do this and yet it still does about 85% as well.

    The reason is simple - it weighs a lot less. And it handles, quite honestly, better than the IS350 or most of the sports sedans as a result.

    http://www.edmunds.com/used/1991/mazda/rx7/3063/specs.html
    Same deal here - 3000lbs and 200hp.

    Cadillac or anyone for that matter - who can stuff 250hp in a 2800-3000lb car will instantly have a winner.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    The weight problem is in large part due to the current trend in making the bodies "stiff".
  • bumpybumpy Posts: 4,435
    Cadillac or anyone for that matter - who can stuff 250hp in a 2800-3000lb car will instantly have a winner.

    Cadillac definitely needs a light RWD 4-door if they're going to make any headway at all in Europe; the CTS is huge by their standards. Heck, I might even consider a Cadillac if they made one like that, but I've pretty much decided to just wait until 2014 and pick up a nice R32 Skyline.
  • robbiegrobbieg Posts: 340
    I think Cadillac has to price itself significantly less than both BMW and Lexus. If Cadillac wants a winner the should price the BLS with automatic, leather and a moonroof a little less than 27,000.

    Anyone have any idea what the average price of all CTS sold?
    2014 Highlander XLE AWD, 2009 RX 350 AWD and 2007 Odyssey EX
  • gsemikegsemike Long Island, NYPosts: 1,989
    The last thing that GM is going to do is gain competitve advantage by making a lighter car. If anything, their cars are always heavier. A Solstice is about 500 pounds heavier than an MX-5 and roadsters are all about being tossable.

    For whatever reason, GM is incapable of making a light car. In the new C&D midsize comparo, the Aura is the heaviest in the field by about 200 pounds yet has the smallest backseat and middle of the field front seat.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    The Solstice has a stiffer body than the MX-5. Still, it is heavier than it needs to be.
  • autoboy16autoboy16 Posts: 992
    Not very. Only the pillars, steering wheel, shift knob snd gate, and some interior designs. Google Cadillac Bls.

    -Cj :)
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    The weight problem is in large part due to the current trend in making the bodies "stiff".

    AND adding all kinds of equipment. Folks are buying much more features than they used to and their is a lot more safety stuff.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Posts: 6,048
    In looking at the features and assuming(which may be incorrect) that most buy the 3.6 it would MSRP at about $38k or so. There are other features/packages I did not include.

    3.6L, sunroof, Lux packg ( 3.6L V6 Luxury Package, includes (A45) Memory Package, (DD7) inside rearview auto-dimming mirror with compass display, (AH8) 8-way power front passenger seat adjuster, (AL2) 2-way power driver and front passenger lumbar control, (KA1) driver and front passenger heated seats, (UG1) Universal Home Remote (UA6) theft-deterrent alarm system, (QWJ) P225/55R16 H-rated, all-season, blackwall tires and (PX0) 16" (40.6 cm) bright machined-finish aluminum wheels)
Sign In or Register to comment.