Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Introduced at the Frankfurt Auto Show in 1963 Daimler-Benz built 3 cars for the show to introduce the model. Over its 18 year lifespan 600's were built at an average rate of 148 cars per year, with regular "production" ceasing in 1972, and customer orders filled until its demise in 1981 for a total of 2,677. Mean maximum speed was 130mph for the standard wheelbase model weighing in at 5,748lbs, doing 0-60 mph in 9.7 seconds and 17.3 for the quarter mile. Fuel consumption was rated between 11.2 and 13.3 mpg. Granted its myraid of hydraulic systems to operate many features made the car a unique engineering achievement.
However, Rolls-Royce began its development of the Silver Shadow in its "Burma" and "Tibet" prototypes a decade before the final introduction of the Shadow in late 1965, the formal decision being made in 1954---prior to the development of the 600---by Harry Grylls and John Blatchley. Even V8 Hemi-engines were considered at one point before settling on the design that is still being used today in the Bentley Arnage. Out went the 1920's Birkigt designed Hispano-Suiza licensed inertia braking system. In went the Citroen-licensed hydraulic leveling and four wheel disc braking system with no less than four separate systems to stop the car. With the Shadow, R-R became a modern car in the best sense of the word, surpassing most concurrent automobiles. Production commenced in 1966 and ran through late 1981, almost as long as 600. Not counting coachbuilt models and two door varients (or Bentley versions), the Shadow was the most successful Rolls-Royce ever, with 30,009 produced---an average of 1,768 cars per year.
Concurrent road tests of the original Shadow resulted in lively performance for the 4,660lb sedan. While slower than the 600 off the mark, its 0-60 times at 10.9 seconds, it matched 600 in the quarter mile at 17.6 seconds, with top speed at a mean rated 127mph. Fuel consumption provided a greater range between 12.2 and 15 mpg. My own 1975 RHD British Shadow would return 16 mpg@65mph with 100K on the engine. Thus the two cars were essentially equal in performance, yet the Shadow was far more miserly in the fuel economy department.
In a match up between the two cars one tester wrote: "The Rolls just digs its tail in and runs its nose wide...You soon learn that the only way is to corner fast is to aim for the inside apex getting a lock on good and early, leaving room for minor adjustments..." Admittedly gearing between the two cars favored the 600 in 1966, but that would change as the Shadow was developed in later years, improved with a larger engine and rack & pinion steering, plus radial tuned suspension. Of the 600 the same tester wrote: "With the suspension set hard for best handling the Mercedes has a trace of sports car in its ride and certainly falls short of ultimate luxury..." Both cars were assessed fairly, with faults and niggles brought to light. The Rolls took the crown for its attention to detail and finish, whereas the Benz won appropriate laurels for its handling despite weighing nearly 800 lbs more.
While 600 remained the corporate talismen for more than a decade, it was outshone by the 'skunk-works' developed 300 SEL 6.3 using the same 600 engine stuffed into the 109 bodyshell...that was developed by accident by Rudolf Ulhenhaut and Erich Waxenberger, and introduced in March 1968. THAT was a car that put-paid to many a competitor, once you got past the austere interior of the 300SEL compared to Jaguar, R-R, or numerous other makes. It was two seconds faster off the mark in all catagories, top speed of 134mph plus, attained the same fuel economy as a Shadow and wieghed 1,450lbs less than a 600, and 600 less than a Shadow. THAT car attained a benchmark to which everyone paid attention, (or not!).
However the running costs of a 600 are nothing short of astronomical: $1,600 for a new starter, and $4,500 for a 'rebuilt' fuel injection pump to name two items. Having been "caretaker" of a 1966 300SE Coupe, I became well acquainted with the effect of the prices on parts for 300/600 series Benz...upon my wallet. D-B intended the car to be used by ultra-wealthy people and governments, ergo the average cost per annum to keep the car on the road is about $5-7,000. Rolls-Royce never took that view in its corporate history. It built its cars to be run hard, and every day in remote parts of the world---thus many spares are obtainable at reasonable prices---though granted unique parts do come dear, but nothing approaching the Benz running costs. A good Shadow will cost you less than half what a 600 costs to run.
Neither Cadillac or Lincoln offered the kinds of features found en-masse or in-toto on either the 600 or the Shadow. Although Lincoln was first with disc brakes in 1965, Cadillac followed shortly thereafter. Both companies often tried, but discarded numerous features later found on the European cars, and never put them into production or developed them. (Prototype Lincoln's were built with disc brakes in 1957, Eldorado used air-suspension long before Benz went hydraulic in 1961.) Both Lincoln and Cadillac sported engines of nearly the same displacement at 430/462 & 429/472 CID when the Shadow and 600 were new---allowing both brands to at least match the two cars in acceleration and top speed---its extra cubic inches giving them that edge. yet neither company put a premium on road-holding during the 1960's and 1970's vis a vis its German and British competitors. Driving my Lincoln against the Rolls, I could not keep pace with my friend in the Shadow...with both of us pressing hard...what I gained on the straight, I lost in the turns....the Shadow's hydraulically powered brakes and independent suspension all round left me behind...(I had to buy dinner!)
One reason why Cadillac has decided to enter the fray in recent times....making up for much lost ground. Cadillac, today, is at least in the game and giving a fair challenge to German, Japanese and other European makes. Acceptance of the marque is proved by the fact that Cadillac sold 2,185 cars in Europe in 2005. Lincoln is suffering from its disconnected leadership at the top of Ford Motor, and it will be some time before it rejoins the competative ranks---if it can do so at all. The truth is that American luxury marques as Cadillac and Lincoln have taken a long time to see that performance all 'round indeed can be part of the luxury package. But Rolls-Royce and Mercedes-Benz were there along time ago. At least we have Mr. Lutz to thank for today's Cadillac automobiles.
DouglasR
(Sources: 'Mercedes-Benz V8's', F. Wilson McComb, Motorbooks International, 1980; 'Mercedes-Benz since 1945', James Taylor, Motor Racing Publications, 1985; 'Rolls-Royce & Bentl
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I recognize the technique you use.
One car, one datum. I have two GREAT leSabres that have served well; two points, two data. Congratulations on your car's service.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I know what you mean about the Country Squire. My Dad had a 1972 Ford Country Squire. That car rusted with a vengeance and always suffered some mechanical malady. My grandfather's 1974 Chevrolet Impala was infinitely better.
If you are making the (veiled) accusation that Consumer Reports is taking money from a manufacturer, and allowing this exchange to influence its vehicle test scores and the results of reliability surveys, you need to go to the media immediately.
Given the CBS News and The New York Times scandals over the past 2-3 years, it is safe to say that Consumer Reports is more trusted than those media outlets.
If you - or the friend you repeatedly reference - really has proof to back up these accusations, then this would be one of the biggest stories of the year.
If you have documented proof, then contact the media. You (or your friend) are sitting on one of the biggest stories of the year.
Until then, I'm putting as much faith in your accusations as Bigfoot sightings and stories of alien abductions.
But your post confirms what I was getting at: the 600 was a flop unless of course the purpose was advertising. The Allante may have been a way for Cadillac to boost itself in the marketplace too.
If the Rolls was such a bad car, why did it out sell the 600 by 20 to 1
Your point of view on the Allante seems to be that since it was not designed to out perform the Mercedes SL it was junk. My point of view is that the Allante was designed to be a fuel efficient luxury roadster based on Cadillac's FWD drivetrain. The issue at question here is whether there was a market for it. In the 7 years of production, about 20,000 units were sold. This was a very expensive Cadillac, not unlike the Eldorado Brougham, or the Mercedes 600.
Judged on the basis of what the Allante was, I think that sales were good. It certainly sold better than the much cheaper, and probably less troublesome Reatta. The Allante was not a sports car and was not designed to out perform the Corvette. I did own a 91 Reatta. I also owned an 84 and an 86 Corvette.
Recall that Allante was in one comedy TV show of "Married with Children". Shoe salesman Al Bundy's flaky daughter was competing with other young women to be selected as a model to work with an Allante display or commercial. :P
Why did GM/Caddy apparently allow its premier coupe to be used in a silly comedy? Was that a good decision? Did that help Caddy image?
J. D. Powers collects data from all owners of various makes, not just consumer reports subscribers, with the specific intention of comparing one make with another.
business.
GM/Caddy went to Italy for Allante body apparently, then put in GM/Caddy parts for engine/susp/etc. Perhaps they could reverse this procedure and take the upcoming CTS body, pretty decently styled, and with agreement with Acura, have Acura engine/susp/brakes/interior. This joint venture would be a win/win for both Caddy and Acura. Buyers would get a very nicely styled CTS with Acura running gear. Also, many Acura fans have been clamoring for a bigger model having RWD to replace the RL model and this would satisfy it.
So I guess a simplistic way of saying it is that Mercedes saw a plump, slow target in both Rolls and Cadillac and after figuring out how to do it, ate them for breakfast. It just took a few years.
Same with Lexus...they saw an overpriced, rather blase Benz in a market all by itself, (Benz having killed off any potential Lexus competition for them) and figured out how to make a comparable car for a good deal less of an MSRP.
Rolls Royce was kind of an icon, like Harley Davidson. You could capture a buyer, bury him in evidence as to why his car/bike is sub-standard in every respect to another product, as well as grossly overpriced, and then torture them with electric prods, and most of them would still buy their "icon".
Sometimes a product reaches a level of brand equity that defies all logic. You CAN make a substandard product and survive as long as you somehow manage to make money doing it.
Rolls would have continued to make bad cars into eternity if the British government would have been willing to continue subsidizing them.
But somebody in Britain woke up and realized that it was the aviation department of Rolls that was making all the money.
Rolls had a modern car "in theory" but Benz had one in practice. Big diff. Rolls had horrendous problems with their series I Shadows...absolutely horrendous. I'm surprised buyers didn't burn the factory to the ground with that car.
To be fair, later cars were better.
Yes, but it drove their warranty expense up 900% because that engine was total junk, lasting in most cases, just over 20,000 miles before needing a complete replacement engine.
This is not the sort of problem one would expect the winner of Dewar Trophy for standardization to have.
That's why I wonder if they ever can regain the "standard" title, even if they deserved it - which I doubt they ever will.
But I'm not bitter.
The question should be: Did they know how to properly address manufacturing tolerances and variation to best of their knowledge back in 50's, 60's and thus build engines without problems back then? Did the GM corporation know best practices and procedures on variation throughout 70's and 80's of what they had previously learned? If so, what happened in 1982 on that 4100 design?
Think that Japanese manufacturers embraced American statistical/quality experts such as Deming and Juran after WWII to continuously work on reducing variation in manufacturing and other processes. American car companies finally discovered Deming/Juran in mid to late 80's and are still working to catch up to Japan.
My question is: would the 300C with a nice 4.5 liter engine get better mileage and still have decent performance?
I just figured out where my 1986 info on the Riveria/Toronado was. Anyway, the 86 BMW 635CSi ($41,000) would do 0-60 in 10.5 seconds, while the 3800 Buick/Olds's would do it 11.1 seconds. The Allante was about 10.3 seconds. If the BMW was an indicator of good performance, then in the late 80's a 0-60 time of 10 seconds is not bad.
Exactly right. And the word "judgement" in there is where they end up adding their own opinions and preferences.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That is a far more serious accusation than saying that their survey results are not accurate because of a limited responder base, or even the built-in bias of the staff at Consumer Reports.
If this is true, it is a huge story, given the influence that Consumer Reports wields over vehicle buyers, and the attention their annual auto issues receives when it debuts with its reliability survey results.
It's a conspiracy!
I do think that if one is looking for a used car, looking through back issues of Consumer Reports might be useful in deciding what years to avoid, or possibly what might be a good one to buy. One needs to look through several issues to really see a trend though, and sometimes there really isn't one.
****
You do realize that almost everything we gt over here in the U.S. is a generation old? In Japan, Toyota and Honda have just as many reliability problems as GM and Ford do - and they're not seen as special at all - just average.
We just get them over here after the problems have been worked out. So first generation "imports" are closer to second generation domestics.
That said, the CTS will be a good entry. Bugs worked out, good interior, and yeah, it's no Porsche, but it's also no Camry, either.(and don't even get me started on Totoya's bonehead move to ditch the manual in the IS350)
Even now, there's a 1-3 year lag time for most manfacturers. It's not much, but it does spare us most of the glitches. And makes them look artificially good(which is admittedly part of their plan)
GM and Ford - they could do the same. Just sell us the European models, which are pretty much debugged after a few years - and often better than what they sell in the U.S.
Just saying that the subscription charged barely covers the cost of printing and mailing their magazine, if it even covers that. Now where do they get the gobs of cash to pay their staff and buy everything they test?
If you have documented proof,
Tell you what, come on over and we can have a few beers with a friend of mine and you two can talk CR. I'll tell you what to say to get him going.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
As matter of fact, many of the Japanese models are designed right here in the states and are exclusive for US market only.
________________________________________
imidazol97 wrote ----
Heck, I have two GREAT Cadillacs and a GREAT Buick Park Avenue.
They must have done much more than just rebadge it, cause I'm tellin' ya, the Cadillac Catera was a stinker
How does Cadillac expect to become the "standard of the world" when in the recent past they produce nonsense like the Cadillac Catera. And keep in mind most people know, unless they are brain dead that that Cadillac also means General Motors, so it in turn also makes not just the Cadillac brand look bad, it makes the corporation look bad too.
_________________________________________________
The Catera was an import. It was manufactured in Germany and based on the Opel Omega.
I know what you mean about the Country Squire. My Dad had a 1972 Ford Country Squire. That car rusted with a vengeance and always suffered some mechanical malady. My grandfather's 1974 Chevrolet Impala was infinitely better.
How about "Slade"?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I've heard that they receive donations...now, if the allegations are that the donations are from Japanese manufacturers, and that these donations influence both their tests and reliability results, then that is a HUGE story.
One that is far too big to merely be bandied about on Edmunds.com.
snakeweasel: Tell you what, come on over and we can have a few beers with a friend of mine and you two can talk CR. I'll tell you what to say to get him going.
He shouldn't waste his time on me. As I said, if true, this would be one of the hottest stories of 2007. And I'm not saying that to be facetious. He needs to gather his evidence and take it to a major paper. (What is the big newspaper in Chicago? Doesn't Jim Majeta - I believe that is the correct spelling - write a regular automotive column for that paper? He would be perfect to break this type of story.)
Given the faith that not only consumers, but major media outlets and the automakers, place in Consumer Reports test results and reliability surveys, this would be front-page news across the country.
That's certainly stereotyping a whole group of people in a negative way.
Does that fit Rules of the Road?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
_________________________________
Old age tends to do this to some people. They get very set in their ways and don't like change
That's certainly stereotyping a whole group of people in a negative way.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Heck, I have two GREAT Cadillacs and a GREAT Buick Park Avenue.
Hey. I don't have two Cadillacs and one Buick. I think someone got their links mixed up. First sign of old age, my older friends tell me.
You might mean our friend Lemko. I have two great, comfortable Buicks that will whip around corners as much as I need them to do.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The most recent examples are the Cadillac Catera and the way they degraded an Australian import --> Holden (the ill fated and now defunct Pontiac GTO) How long did the Pontiac GTO last before they scrarpped it, 1 year? Holden brand cars in Australia last for years and years and sell like hotcakes, but General Motors managed to turn it into lead like many things they touch, when it comes to cars. The American Holden (Pontiac GTO) probably didn't sell because it was marketed totally wrong
We've already beaten the dead horse about "don't make bad cars anymore", haven't we?
HOw 'bout someone suggests a whole new line up for 2010? What more successful makes or models should Cadillac try to mirror? Should they go upscale, downscale, all across the board? Should they give up something they are making now?
----mediapusher
__________________________________________
grbeck wrote:
I've heard that they receive donations...now, if the allegations are that the donations are from Japanese manufacturers, and that these donations influence both their tests and reliability results, then that is a HUGE story.
You could be right re: marketing. I'm not sure that I can actually recall any marketing/advertising of note for the "New Goat."
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)