Seats with support are not uncomfortable to us that dont have butts as wide as a double door entry to a house.
I think you have it just backward. The hard cardboard seats they are pushing off as sporty are built for our average citizen that has a fat cushy posterior. A fat rear end has its own built-in padding.
Cadillac built its reputation on plush cars with plush seats. I think it is a mistake to try and compete with automakers that strictly build sport sedans like BMW.
Of the new luxury SUVs I have checked out, the only seats that did not feel like they were cheap cardboard backed, was the Mercedes GL/ML. The 2007 Cadillac is headed that direction and the worst seats are in the 2007 Acura MDX. sorry Rocky. The nicest was the 2006 Escalade.
Then explain the union labor that builds the Corollas, and have been since 1986. In fact, if you look at a Corolla sticker, it should say " Manufactured for Toyota by New United Motors, Fremont Ca." whereas a Camry will say "Manufactured by Toyota Motor, Lexington Ky" (I know, a technicality, but they are STILL union built)
Datsun Patrol? Never saw one. Do you have a picture?
I believe Datsun beat Toyota into the US market around 1959. The Datsun patrol was a better built vehicle than the Toyota Land Cruiser. I only had enough cash to buy the LC so I left the Datsun Patrol the the wealthier off road guys. Both were cheaper than the Jeep CJ.
PS No Caddy off-road vehicles in 1964. Though my father in law took his Caddy 4 door sedan way out into the desert camping.
Small cars made from GM Daewoo and Opel designs do sell quite well in other parts of the world, but GM's small car profit margin in North America isn't as high in comparison for a variety of reasons.
Man, no offense, but somebody who thinks the Cobalt is a Korean car shouldn't be posting anything about GM! This is basic information at the lowest level. The car is built in Lordstown, OH, a GM plant in northeast Ohio that has been open for 41 years.
Bill P.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
"Pletko, as far as I know, GM outsources the manufacturing of most of the small cars you see with their nameplate on them."
What are you talking about. Obviously this is something you don't know. The Aveo (Korean-Daewoo) is the only so-called outsourced car for a small car. It was designed in Italy, now how does that through you off. If you want to talk about outsourcing you have to put Toyota in front of that comment. The GTO and Prizm are not even made anymore. The Prizm was a compact car from Toyota just like the Chevy Nova was before it, and the GTO is a mid-sized car from Holden of Australia. The previously imported GTO wasn't a joke in anyway according to the magazine writers, and with its price was the best bang for the buck with more performance than its closest rival Ford Mustang. I am surprised mediapusher that you didn't like that car. It had the usual Japanese car look so I would think you would have liked it. I personally didn't like it because I owned an original 1960's GTO that I sold a couple years ago so yes, I didn't care for Pontiac putting a GTO name on a car with no heritage resemblance.
"The only way GM is going to get out of this financial mess is if the get rid of union labor and I don't know how they're going to do that. Toyota and Honda don't use union labor do they? And their employees look pretty happy to me, why? Because their cars sell themselves."
Obviously you don't pay attention to current auto news, business reports. The latest at Toyota labor is not good in the U.S. because of Toyota's practice of hiring part-time employees to avoid labor costs/benefits. Employees are starting to complain and people are listening. Toyota is now under the watchful eye of the UAW and there has already been organized meetings that have taken place. There was an article on the autoblog a couple weeks ago on how Toyota is really worried about the unions becoming a problem for them. That is one of the reasons they build in non-union states but it looks like their running from the unions has finally caught up to them. Don't be surprised if something comes out of this in the next 6-months. Toyota has peaked and now the downfall looks just over the horizon.
"Are you blind? Toyota has plenty of icons. What do you call the Toyota Corolla, Camry, Land Cruiser, Toyota 4 Runner truck?"
Sorry to correct you again but the above cars are not icons, some are just excellent sellers. An icon (classic car) is something that stands out, something that is special and is produced at low levels not mass produced. The 1969 Toyota 2000 GT is such a car and possibly the Toyota Stout pickup truck from the 1960's as well.
"You're kidding right? The Chevette was a decent little car??? ewwww"
It wasn't a bad car either. We had the original one (1976) in our family after inheriting it from our grandmother who passed away in California. The 1976 model was supposed to be problematic for whatever that means. Other than replacing the 1 barrel carburator once or twice, it was a great econobox that returned about 30 mpg highway. I would have hate to gotten in an accident with a car this size but it always started. What I hated about it was the lack of manual transmission, AM radio, and no air-condioning. My sister and her husband took it to Ohio as a second car after they got married and had it for a few years before my sister got it broadsided, and it was losing motor power after 18-years so they retired it. A friends mom also had one in the 1980's. As far as looks it wasn't any less unattractive than the other cars out at this time.
I might add that the reason you do not find many Japanese cars older than 25 years is RUST. That was the downfall of Toyota and Honda in their early years. I am told they have figured out how to prevent rust. Even my sons 1993 4Runner has horrible rust. Something about a rusty icon that is not appealing. I think Cadillac has many more Iconic vehicles than has Toyota.
Not sure I know what you mean bumpy. I did say the Camry also comes from Canada based on a news report that I saw. There are several Japanese manufactures up there.
I didn't think any modern cars (mid 1980s-on) still rusted like that! Is this truck near a marine environment? I imagine your son takes care of his truck. My 1988 Buick Park Avenue doesn't have a speck of rust on it and it sits out on a city street.
Per icons - Cadillac has MANY!!!
1930-40 Cadillac V-16s 1938-1941 Cadillac Sixty Special 1949 Cadillac Coupe DeVille 1953 Cadillac Eldorado 1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham 1959 Cadillacs with the big fins 1967-70 Cadillac Eldorado 1971-76 Cadillac Eldorado convertible 1975-79 Cadillac Seville
Shoot, I'd say just about any late 1940s through mid 1970s Cadillac can be an icon. I, personally, like the 1977-79 Cadillac DeVilles and Fleetwoods.
He bought it used 3 1/2 years ago in Alaska. It was starting to rust through when he bought it. He just needed a cheap 4WD. I was surprised it was so bad when I saw it. All wheel wells are like that and along the bottom of the doors. Alaska is tough on vehicles. However you see a lot of GM and Ford trucks that are much older without any rust through.
I live down here on the Gulf of Mexico. I guess you could say "in" the Gulf since Galveston, TX is an Island and don't see much body rust on any cars unless they're older than 10 years or so. The exceptions to that are exhaust parts and such and any vehicle with body/paint damage (which starts to rust within days).
I don't even think about rust when purchasing a car anymore, especially if I'm purchasing new.
It looks to me like Audi, VW and BMW are the only automakers that trust their rust proofing. They are double the years of the others. They should all be required to give at least a 15 year rust through warranty. Heated garages in cold climates is a big contributor to rust. If you drive your frozen Escalade into a nice warm garage the condensation will rust the car from the inside out.
If a pesron wants to stand out, they should wear one of Diana Ross' sequined gowns.
This mentality of STAND OUT doesn't jive in the real world. That's old school thinking. If a person wants to stand out, they can "trick" out any car with a little help from talented people like those on the TV show of MTV's "Pimp My Ride". That's for people that don't have anything else better to do than lust over their cars, or be arrogant and show off or for whose employment status it helps.
Most people want practicality, reliability and functionality when it comes to a car. Iconic doesn't factor.
Since when has Cadillac ever built anything remotely close to a Ferrari, Maserati or Rolls Royce. Those are iconic cars. I don't remember Cadillac as ever being that. The Cadillac Allante wasn't even this. It was laughable at best for reasons other than its looks.
Most people want practicality, reliability and functionality when it comes to a car. Iconic doesn't factor.
I think the first generation Miata is another iconic car and I'd like to have one for the reasons you list (not so functional I suppose, but good on gas for road tripping and that's a required "function" for some of us).
The Escalade is so over the top, or was when it was first adopted by the b-ball players, that I think it could qualify as a genuine icon. Before the bling dubs it had the bling badges. It's what I think of now when people say they drive a Caddy.
I remember when a Pop star, Sports star or Movie star would not feel like they had made it until they had a Caddy Convertible. Not sure if any Japanese car ever had that kind of pop following. What Japanese car will bring at auction as much as the early Cadillacs are bringing. Just a run of the mill 1950s Caddy will bring $30k plus. I would consider that a collectible Icon.
Corolla may be the biggest selling car in the World. When it is worn out they crush and make another one. It is no different than buying a washing machine. No class or lasting appeal.
Cadillac a top level manufacturer? LOL! Now that's the joke of the century. Sorry honey, but Cadillac isn't even on the radar of most people that can afford a Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, unless they want a Cadillac Escalade. Is that Cadillac's standard of the world??? The Escalade isnt even a car, it's a truck.
And uhhh, excuse me, but how long ago was 1979, How long ago was 1930? You're living in the past. You're still thinking that style will conquer substance. Wrong. People don't buy cars simply based on style anymore.
We are talking about car sales here and what people WANT TO BUY, aren't we?? The only people worried about iconic are the ones participating in this blog with the exception of me. Ask Cadillac if they're worried about iconic. Puhleeeez.
Who in the hell remembers a 1930 Cadillac V-16? And I'm sorry to burst your bubble, the Cadillac Seville was not iconic. At best it was a land barge style luxury Toyota Camry.
Maybe if Cadillac would stop churning out such "wonders" of automotive design and engineering as the Cadillac Cimarron, Cadillac Catera :lemon: , Cadillac V-8-6-4 tech engines :lemon: , people would have more respect for their nameplate.
You people can say what you want as if you know what you're talking about, cause it seems that many have already voted with their WALLETS, and they're not buying Cadillac.
All Cadillac knows how to build for the most part are "land" ocean liners, certainly not what a driving enthusiast wants. The Cadillac STS seems to be the best attempt at blending these concepts of peformance, style, size, but for some reason not many want the STS.
And I admit, perhaps my thinking is bit biased, but I live on the west coast (left), and apparently we think very differently. The only Cadillac I see on the road is the Cadillac CTS. It USED to sell in droves. It doesn't sell that well out here anymore, hmmmm, I wonder why that is....:\ I know the answer, and you should too. ______________________________ reference text:::::::::::::
As lemko mentioned, these are quite iconic Caddies:
1930-40 Cadillac V-16s 1938-1941 Cadillac Sixty Special 1949 Cadillac Coupe DeVille 1953 Cadillac Eldorado 1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham 1959 Cadillacs with the big fins 1967-70 Cadillac Eldorado 1971-76 Cadillac Eldorado convertible 1975-79 Cadillac Seville
Just because you're too narrowminded doesn't make Caddy any less of a top level manufacturer.
...uh, I can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes. Cadillac is on my radar bigger than a meteor the size of Texas. I'm not interested in an Escalade or any other SUV regardless of the manufacturer.
I'm talking about the masses, not just one person or a few _______________________ reference text:::::: lemko Apr 16, 2007 (12:48 pm) Replying to: mediapusher (Apr 16, 2007 11:31 am)
...uh, I can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes. Cadillac is on my radar bigger than a meteor the size of Texas. I'm not interested in an Escalade or any other SUV regardless of the manufacturer.
They did have standout cars like your Rolls Royce back in the 1930's when they had that big 16 cylinder touring car. The Allante as you mentioned wasn't a standout car, but it did help develope important things for the Cadillacs that came after it.
They did have standout cars like your Rolls Royce back in the 1930's when they had that big 16 cylinder touring car. The Allante as you mentioned wasn't a standout car, but it did help develop important things for the Cadillacs that came after it.
The first generation Seville was a much better Cadillac than the Cimarron was. It is not unreasonable to call the Cimarron a "tarted up" Cavalier, but the first Seville was more than the Nova.
One could say that all Cadillac's have been little more than tarted up Chevies, which may be a valid point about the Cadillac's of the 50's and 60's, but I think that they were somewhat better than that. The Escalade is little more than a tarted up Suburban. The CTS, STS and SRX at least do not share a platform with any other GM model.
Mediapusher, give us dates and models of GM cars you owned. Tell us what the problems with each one was BESIDES STYLING OR HOW IT DROVE. Mechanical problems only.
I'm sure the masses appreciate your spokespersonship, although attempting to speak for the masses does strike me as somewhat arrogant.
As one member of the masses, however, I'll have to weigh in with Lemko on this one. Not all of us of the masses who can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes would buy one over a Cadillac. ________________________ reference text::::::: mediapusher Apr 16, 2007 (12:58pm) I'm talking about the masses, not just one person or a few.
>Not all of us of the masses who can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes would buy one over a Cadillac.
I agree with that. I've picked cars very carefully and enjoyed the making of the decision. I might choose the Lucerne model of the Cadillac again, but I certainly can pick whatever I want from the ones listed. I notice doctor's parking lots in hospitals and branch hospitals as well as certain offices (not a random survey) contain a mixture of cars mentioned along with Avalon or two and lots of GM SUVs from Chevs, GMCs, to Cadillacs.
>Not all of us of the masses who can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes would buy one over a Cadillac.
I agree with that. I've picked cars very carefully and enjoyed the making of the decision. I might choose the Lucerne model of the Cadillac again, but I certainly can pick whatever I want from the ones listed. I notice doctor's parking lots in hospitals and branch hospitals as well as certain offices (not a random survey) contain a mixture of cars mentioned along with Avalon or two and lots of GM SUVs from Chevs, GMCs, to Cadillacs.
A bit???? That's like saying your wife is a BIT pregnant!! The Catera was not a lemon. People didn't think of an Opel as a Caddy. The V8-6-4 eng was a good idea. Only problem was computers weren't fast enough to keep up with the engine. IT's a technology employed today, and it works fine. CTS sales are slowing because the body style is old and a HIGHLY regarded replacement is around the corner.
I also have given the Cadillac a close look. Cannot make up my mind. Heck I cannot even decide where I want to live now that I have retired. Of the four mentioned luxury cars I would trust the Cadillac dealer over any of the others. And he has been in business the longest.
"The V8-6-4 eng was a good idea. Only problem was computers weren't fast enough to keep up with the engine. IT's a technology employed today, and it works fine."
Oh my gawd the humanity. Somebody shoot me now please. I can't handle this torture. The V-8-6-4-tech is what caused massive defections from Cadillac. Are you aware of that? It wasn't ready for market when released, and not surprisingly was a maintenance nightmare. Apparently you're fine with GM using the U.S.A. public as "guinea pigs".
In response to my earlier posts people see nothing wrong with comparing SUVs to cars. This strikes ME as strange.
How anyone can sit here with a straight face and claim the Cadillac Catera :lemon: wasn't a lemon is preposterous. I'll let you WASTE your money and I'll use mine wisely.
The CTS was a top selling car. It's reliability has always been average. Cadillac is fine with that :sick: . It's not selling because of the reasons you mentioned I agree, yet Cadillac will do nothing to speed up the release schedule for spring or summer. This is NOT good marketing.
And I don't have a wife, so I don't know what you're talking about. I have a husband. _______________________________ reference text:::::::::::: by cooterbfd Apr 16, 2007 (5:32 pm) Replying to: mediapusher (Apr 16, 2007 11:31 am)
And I admit, perhaps my thinking is bit biased
A bit???? That's like saying your wife is a BIT pregnant!! The Catera was not a lemon. People didn't think of an Opel as a Caddy. The V8-6-4 eng was a good idea. Only problem was computers weren't fast enough to keep up with the engine. IT's a technology employed today, and it works fine. CTS sales are slowing because the body style is old and a HIGHLY regarded replacement is around the corner.
That's not how things are supposed to be done. The car should be ready for market. Management should have a well planned strategy with a pretty good idea that the car is going to sell. Cadillac should have know the Allante wouldn't sell. How many people did they ask in terms of whether they would mind spending $65,000 on a half baked idea for a Cadillac nameplate car that was put together with what seemed like every corner of the world? . Would you want to spend that kind of money on a car whose convertible top didn't even fit properly and also had squeaks and rattles ? And this was back in the day when people were still silly with "buy American". That car was anything but American. It was distinctly Italian looking, because the body was Italian.
I never thought the Cadillac Escalade was over the top. Cause to me like many we could instantly see through what it is (A COSMETICALLY ENGINEERED GMC YUKON OR CHEVY SUBURBAN) To me the Miata was a phenomenon for a while cause it was different. We only had the FIAT before then, and people were sucked into the affordability, and reliability probability, because of the Asian background of the car. Whether it was reliable, I don't know. Compact convertibles are a specialty market and don't sell well. We didn't have Honda S2000's or Toyota Spyder's back then so there weren't a lot of choices for those types of vehicles. I'd love to have a Honda S2000. Perfect car for those trips to the beach or short trips to the store. Not sure if a car like that would be appropriate for long trips. I'm 6'1" 180 lbs, so it might be a little cramped for that.
I don't think of Escalade when I think of Cadillac, I think of the CTS. It's what Cadillac should have been years ago. The CTS is far to late in arrival to the market. But again, that's my bias. I don't like land barges, and I never have. The new CTS seems to be inching up when it comes to length. This could or could not be a good thing. It certainly worked with the Honda Accord. But the Honda Accord is not a sports sedan/coupe.
Am I the only one that thinks the new CTS looks too Eldorado retroish in the back?
And I have to admit, I'm not the kind of person who buys a car cause a celebrity is driving it. It's too important of a type of purchase for me to buy just based on that. I do my research. Only rich people buy cars like that. ____________________ reference text::::::: Most people want practicality, reliability and functionality when it comes to a car. Iconic doesn't factor.
I think the first generation Miata is another iconic car and I'd like to have one for the reasons you list (not so functional I suppose, but good on gas for road tripping and that's a required "function" for some of us).
The Escalade is so over the top, or was when it was first adopted by the b-ball players, that I think it could qualify as a genuine icon. Before the bling dubs it had the bling badges. It's what I think of now when people say they drive a Caddy.
That's because people that buy Hondas and Toyotas actually drive them (imagine that) We don't buy them to put them in the garage like the owners of Merle Norman Cosmetics.
To me and many others, GM cars have never had any lasting class or appeal. With their ill fitted body panels, GAPS galore, and other pieces that clearly don't fit, poor craftsmanship, faulty mechanics, no ergonomics whatsoever, pervasive aura of gaucheness, cheap and flimsy quality interiors and materials, etc... Saying GM cars have class is like saying Larry Flynt has class. Like Larry Flynt, GM cars have style, they don't have class. There's a difference.
Your "I remember" intro speaks volumes. What happened 55 years ago has nothing to do with want people want today when it comes to cars. Would you buy a Model-T Ford?? Based on your logic we should all be desiring Model-T Fords. ________________________ I remember when a Pop star, Sports star or Movie star would not feel like they had made it until they had a Caddy Convertible. Not sure if any Japanese car ever had that kind of pop following. What Japanese car will bring at auction as much as the early Cadillacs are bringing. Just a run of the mill 1950s Caddy will bring $30k plus. I would consider that a collectible Icon.
Corolla may be the biggest selling car in the World. When it is worn out they crush and make another one. It is no different than buying a washing machine. No class or lasting appeal.
Comments
Why buy new? Buy used, Buy at auction, and save yourself $25,000. Cars are bad investments anyway.
I think you have it just backward. The hard cardboard seats they are pushing off as sporty are built for our average citizen that has a fat cushy posterior. A fat rear end has its own built-in padding.
Cadillac built its reputation on plush cars with plush seats. I think it is a mistake to try and compete with automakers that strictly build sport sedans like BMW.
Of the new luxury SUVs I have checked out, the only seats that did not feel like they were cheap cardboard backed, was the Mercedes GL/ML. The 2007 Cadillac is headed that direction and the worst seats are in the 2007 Acura MDX. sorry Rocky. The nicest was the 2006 Escalade.
Rocky
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I believe Datsun beat Toyota into the US market around 1959. The Datsun patrol was a better built vehicle than the Toyota Land Cruiser. I only had enough cash to buy the LC so I left the Datsun Patrol the the wealthier off road guys. Both were cheaper than the Jeep CJ.
PS
No Caddy off-road vehicles in 1964. Though my father in law took his Caddy 4 door sedan way out into the desert camping.
Bill P.
What are you talking about. Obviously this is something you don't know. The Aveo (Korean-Daewoo) is the only so-called outsourced car for a small car. It was designed in Italy, now how does that through you off. If you want to talk about outsourcing you have to put Toyota in front of that comment. The GTO and Prizm are not even made anymore. The Prizm was a compact car from Toyota just like the Chevy Nova was before it, and the GTO is a mid-sized car from Holden of Australia. The previously imported GTO wasn't a joke in anyway according to the magazine writers, and with its price was the best bang for the buck with more performance than its closest rival Ford Mustang. I am surprised mediapusher that you didn't like that car. It had the usual Japanese car look so I would think you would have liked it. I personally didn't like it because I owned an original 1960's GTO that I sold a couple years ago so yes, I didn't care for Pontiac putting a GTO name on a car with no heritage resemblance.
Obviously you don't pay attention to current auto news, business reports. The latest at Toyota labor is not good in the U.S. because of Toyota's practice of hiring part-time employees to avoid labor costs/benefits. Employees are starting to complain and people are listening. Toyota is now under the watchful eye of the UAW and there has already been organized meetings that have taken place. There was an article on the autoblog a couple weeks ago on how Toyota is really worried about the unions becoming a problem for them. That is one of the reasons they build in non-union states but it looks like their running from the unions has finally caught up to them. Don't be surprised if something comes out of this in the next 6-months. Toyota has peaked and now the downfall looks just over the horizon.
Sorry to correct you again but the above cars are not icons, some are just excellent sellers. An icon (classic car) is something that stands out, something that is special and is produced at low levels not mass produced. The 1969 Toyota 2000 GT is such a car and possibly the Toyota Stout pickup truck from the 1960's as well.
It wasn't a bad car either. We had the original one (1976) in our family after inheriting it from our grandmother who passed away in California. The 1976 model was supposed to be problematic for whatever that means. Other than replacing the 1 barrel carburator once or twice, it was a great econobox that returned about 30 mpg highway. I would have hate to gotten in an accident with a car this size but it always started. What I hated about it was the lack of manual transmission, AM radio, and no air-condioning. My sister and her husband took it to Ohio as a second car after they got married and had it for a few years before my sister got it broadsided, and it was losing motor power after 18-years so they retired it. A friends mom also had one in the 1980's. As far as looks it wasn't any less unattractive than the other cars out at this time.
Or it may say built in Ontario, Canada where a good amount of the Camry's and I believe the Corolla also come from.
Not sure I know what you mean bumpy. I did say the Camry also comes from Canada based on a news report that I saw. There are several Japanese manufactures up there.
Camry, and Supra, are American icons.
Oh yeah!
It would be nice if Cadillac could build a flagship sedan. Sixteen is, or was, their chance. I guess they just aren't ready to sit at the Big Table.
DrFill
Per icons - Cadillac has MANY!!!
1930-40 Cadillac V-16s
1938-1941 Cadillac Sixty Special
1949 Cadillac Coupe DeVille
1953 Cadillac Eldorado
1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham
1959 Cadillacs with the big fins
1967-70 Cadillac Eldorado
1971-76 Cadillac Eldorado convertible
1975-79 Cadillac Seville
Shoot, I'd say just about any late 1940s through mid 1970s Cadillac can be an icon. I, personally, like the 1977-79 Cadillac DeVilles and Fleetwoods.
I don't even think about rust when purchasing a car anymore, especially if I'm purchasing new.
Even if it is built in the U.S.A, where do the parts come from??????
This mentality of STAND OUT doesn't jive in the real world. That's old school thinking. If a person wants to stand out, they can "trick" out any car with a little help from talented people like those on the TV show of MTV's "Pimp My Ride". That's for people that don't have anything else better to do than lust over their cars, or be arrogant and show off or for whose employment status it helps.
Most people want practicality, reliability and functionality when it comes to a car. Iconic doesn't factor.
Since when has Cadillac ever built anything remotely close to a Ferrari, Maserati or Rolls Royce. Those are iconic cars. I don't remember Cadillac as ever being that. The Cadillac Allante wasn't even this. It was laughable at best for reasons other than its looks.
I think the first generation Miata is another iconic car and I'd like to have one for the reasons you list (not so functional I suppose, but good on gas for road tripping and that's a required "function" for some of us).
The Escalade is so over the top, or was when it was first adopted by the b-ball players, that I think it could qualify as a genuine icon. Before the bling dubs it had the bling badges. It's what I think of now when people say they drive a Caddy.
Corolla may be the biggest selling car in the World. When it is worn out they crush and make another one. It is no different than buying a washing machine. No class or lasting appeal.
1930-40 Cadillac V-16s
1938-1941 Cadillac Sixty Special
1949 Cadillac Coupe DeVille
1953 Cadillac Eldorado
1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham
1959 Cadillacs with the big fins
1967-70 Cadillac Eldorado
1971-76 Cadillac Eldorado convertible
1975-79 Cadillac Seville
Just because you're too narrowminded doesn't make Caddy any less of a top level manufacturer. :P
And uhhh, excuse me, but how long ago was 1979, How long ago was 1930? You're living in the past. You're still thinking that style will conquer substance. Wrong. People don't buy cars simply based on style anymore.
We are talking about car sales here and what people WANT TO BUY, aren't we?? The only people worried about iconic are the ones participating in this blog with the exception of me. Ask Cadillac if they're worried about iconic. Puhleeeez.
Who in the hell remembers a 1930 Cadillac V-16? And I'm sorry to burst your bubble, the Cadillac Seville was not iconic. At best it was a land barge style luxury Toyota Camry.
Maybe if Cadillac would stop churning out such "wonders" of automotive design and engineering as the Cadillac Cimarron, Cadillac Catera :lemon: , Cadillac V-8-6-4 tech engines :lemon: , people would have more respect for their nameplate.
You people can say what you want as if you know what you're talking about, cause it seems that many have already voted with their WALLETS, and they're not buying Cadillac.
All Cadillac knows how to build for the most part are "land" ocean liners, certainly not what a driving enthusiast wants. The Cadillac STS seems to be the best attempt at blending these concepts of peformance, style, size, but for some reason not many want the STS.
And I admit, perhaps my thinking is bit biased, but I live on the west coast (left), and apparently we think very differently. The only Cadillac I see on the road is the Cadillac CTS. It USED to sell in droves. It doesn't sell that well out here anymore, hmmmm, I wonder why that is....:\ I know the answer, and you should too.
______________________________
reference text:::::::::::::
As lemko mentioned, these are quite iconic Caddies:
1930-40 Cadillac V-16s
1938-1941 Cadillac Sixty Special
1949 Cadillac Coupe DeVille
1953 Cadillac Eldorado
1957-58 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham
1959 Cadillacs with the big fins
1967-70 Cadillac Eldorado
1971-76 Cadillac Eldorado convertible
1975-79 Cadillac Seville
Just because you're too narrowminded doesn't make Caddy any less of a top level manufacturer.
_______________________
reference text::::::
lemko Apr 16, 2007 (12:48 pm)
Replying to: mediapusher (Apr 16, 2007 11:31 am)
...uh, I can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes. Cadillac is on my radar bigger than a meteor the size of Texas. I'm not interested in an Escalade or any other SUV regardless of the manufacturer.
One could say that all Cadillac's have been little more than tarted up Chevies, which may be a valid point about the Cadillac's of the 50's and 60's, but I think that they were somewhat better than that. The Escalade is little more than a tarted up Suburban. The CTS, STS and SRX at least do not share a platform with any other GM model.
As one member of the masses, however, I'll have to weigh in with Lemko on this one. Not all of us of the masses who can afford a Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes would buy one over a Cadillac.
________________________
reference text:::::::
mediapusher Apr 16, 2007 (12:58pm)
I'm talking about the masses, not just one person or a few.
I agree with that. I've picked cars very carefully and enjoyed the making of the decision. I might choose the Lucerne model of the Cadillac again, but I certainly can pick whatever I want from the ones listed. I notice doctor's parking lots in hospitals and branch hospitals as well as certain offices (not a random survey) contain a mixture of cars mentioned along with Avalon or two and lots of GM SUVs from Chevs, GMCs, to Cadillacs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I agree with that. I've picked cars very carefully and enjoyed the making of the decision. I might choose the Lucerne model of the Cadillac again, but I certainly can pick whatever I want from the ones listed. I notice doctor's parking lots in hospitals and branch hospitals as well as certain offices (not a random survey) contain a mixture of cars mentioned along with Avalon or two and lots of GM SUVs from Chevs, GMCs, to Cadillacs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
A bit???? That's like saying your wife is a BIT pregnant!!
The Catera was not a lemon. People didn't think of an Opel as a Caddy. The V8-6-4 eng was a good idea. Only problem was computers weren't fast enough to keep up with the engine. IT's a technology employed today, and it works fine.
CTS sales are slowing because the body style is old and a HIGHLY regarded replacement is around the corner.
I look forward to that dilemma!
Rocky
Oh my gawd
In response to my earlier posts people see nothing wrong with comparing SUVs to cars. This strikes ME as strange.
How anyone can sit here with a straight face and claim the Cadillac Catera :lemon: wasn't a lemon is preposterous. I'll let you WASTE your money and I'll use mine wisely.
The CTS was a top selling car. It's reliability has always been average. Cadillac is fine with that :sick: . It's not selling because of the reasons you mentioned I agree, yet Cadillac will do nothing to speed up the release schedule for spring or summer. This is NOT good marketing.
And I don't have a wife, so I don't know what you're talking about. I have a husband.
_______________________________
reference text::::::::::::
by cooterbfd Apr 16, 2007 (5:32 pm)
Replying to: mediapusher (Apr 16, 2007 11:31 am)
And I admit, perhaps my thinking is bit biased
A bit???? That's like saying your wife is a BIT pregnant!!
The Catera was not a lemon. People didn't think of an Opel as a Caddy. The V8-6-4 eng was a good idea. Only problem was computers weren't fast enough to keep up with the engine. IT's a technology employed today, and it works fine.
CTS sales are slowing because the body style is old and a HIGHLY regarded replacement is around the corner.
That's not how things are supposed to be done. The car should be ready for market. Management should have a well planned strategy with a pretty good idea that the car is going to sell. Cadillac should have know the Allante wouldn't sell. How many people did they ask in terms of whether they would mind spending $65,000 on a half baked idea for a Cadillac nameplate car that was put together with what seemed like every corner of the world?
I don't think of Escalade when I think of Cadillac, I think of the CTS. It's what Cadillac should have been years ago. The CTS is far to late in arrival to the market. But again, that's my bias. I don't like land barges, and I never have. The new CTS seems to be inching up when it comes to length. This could or could not be a good thing. It certainly worked with the Honda Accord. But the Honda Accord is not a sports sedan/coupe.
Am I the only one that thinks the new CTS looks too Eldorado retroish in the back?
And I have to admit, I'm not the kind of person who buys a car cause a celebrity is driving it. It's too important of a type of purchase for me to buy just based on that. I do my research. Only rich people buy cars like that.
____________________
reference text:::::::
Most people want practicality, reliability and functionality when it comes to a car. Iconic doesn't factor.
I think the first generation Miata is another iconic car and I'd like to have one for the reasons you list (not so functional I suppose, but good on gas for road tripping and that's a required "function" for some of us).
The Escalade is so over the top, or was when it was first adopted by the b-ball players, that I think it could qualify as a genuine icon. Before the bling dubs it had the bling badges. It's what I think of now when people say they drive a Caddy.
To me and many others, GM cars have never had any lasting class or appeal. With their ill fitted body panels, GAPS galore, and other pieces that clearly don't fit, poor craftsmanship, faulty mechanics, no ergonomics whatsoever, pervasive aura of gaucheness, cheap and flimsy quality interiors and materials, etc... Saying GM cars have class is like saying Larry Flynt has class. Like Larry Flynt, GM cars have style, they don't have class. There's a difference.
Your "I remember" intro speaks volumes. What happened 55 years ago has nothing to do with want people want today when it comes to cars. Would you buy a Model-T Ford?? Based on your logic we should all be desiring Model-T Fords.
________________________
I remember when a Pop star, Sports star or Movie star would not feel like they had made it until they had a Caddy Convertible. Not sure if any Japanese car ever had that kind of pop following. What Japanese car will bring at auction as much as the early Cadillacs are bringing. Just a run of the mill 1950s Caddy will bring $30k plus. I would consider that a collectible Icon.
Corolla may be the biggest selling car in the World. When it is worn out they crush and make another one. It is no different than buying a washing machine. No class or lasting appeal.