By Jehovah Johnson
December 18, 2006 -
When I was growing up in South Africa, Cadillacs were gaudily chromed boats adorned with absurd fins. I thought they were stupid. I simply couldn’t reconcile Caddy's grandiose luxury land yachts with the small, sensible cars of my youth. As my horizons widened, as I learned about art, décor and design; I eventually “got it." I understood why enthusiasts waxed nostalgic about the great Caddies of yore, even though we saw precious few models in my corner of The Dark Continent.
So there I was, attending a ride ’n drive event for the Hummer H3. Instead of putting us behind the wheel of GM’s gangsta’ Chevy Colorado, the company’s PR flacks pulled the sheets off a brand new car and announced it was right here, right now: Cadillac! The erstwhile luxury brand’s brand latest and greatest model was now available in RSA, and we’d get to drive this Saab-based mid-size sedan. Here are the keys. Off you go.
Now cast your minds back to great Cadillacs of our collective imagination. Skip tracer Tommy Nowak’s 1959 convertible. The pearlized pink Caddies proudly gracing the driveways of Mary Kay’s super sales force. Hunter S. Thompson’s 1971 Eldorado fearing and loathing the Nevada desert. Elvis’ 1955 Fleetwood 60 Special, or the pink Cadillac in his rockabilly classic “Baby Let’s Play House.” The Caddy ambulance in Ghostbusters. Now, behold: the BLS!
Actually, you can’t behold a car as pleb as the BLS. You can hardly look at it without turning away in schadenfreude-inspired shame. This “B-grade Luxury Sedan” (Cadillac’s designation, not mine) looks like nothing but a bunch of creased cardboard from a package designer seeking maximum rigidity. The BLS sports the high beltline that’s quickly becoming synonymous with the modern American cars. From the rear three quarter, the derivative design apes the Chrysler 300’s urban flava. ‘Art & Science’? More like ‘Compromise & Cowardice’.
Yes, modern BMW and Mercedes designers have overdone it on the concaves and convexes and swoops and fussiness. But Cadillac practically invented concaves, convexes, swoops and fussiness. The BLS has been sterilised of anything you could dislike– or like. It’s the gauda, the unwooded chardonnay, the Castle Lite, the Phil Collins of cars.
The BLS’ interior is equally anodyne. It’s better than a Ford or Chrysler’s cabin, but invites Audi and Volvo to an ergonomic pity party. The classy retro-feel dash-mounted clock’s attempt to jazz up a dour, drab space is about as convincing as double dubs on a Vee Dub. And then there’s the build quality by which a luxury marque lives, or in this case, dies. I sussed three different test cars with three different sets of dashboard rattles. One car’s wipers whistled at a workaday Karoo-eating 150kph. Another boasted a broken rear seat latch. Never mind. Only a masochistic full-sized adult would dare darken the BLS’ cramped rear compartment.
The Trollhatten-built BLS comes in four engine flavours: a 1.9-liter four-cylinder common-rail diesel, the same engine with a turbo, a 2.0-liter turbo Ecotec four and a 2.8-liter turbo V6. If you’ve driven Saabs, then you know the score. The diesel is the strong, silent type; the two-litre the sensible, boring sort; and the V6 has a bit of much needed swagger (0 - 60mph in 7.1 seconds).
The BLS sits on the same Epsilon platform underpinning the Saab 9-3 (Saabilac?), Opel Vectra (Opelac?) and Chevy Malibu (Malibac?). Saab, Opel, GM, Cadillac – someone tuned the BLS’ suspension to Euro-driver firmness. While the BLS’ initial turn-in is eager and its body control exemplary, the brakes and steering provide less feedback than the Home Affairs department to a telephone query. If you push the front wheel-drive Caddy (how great does THAT sound), you can get some dramatic tire-squealing understeer, but little in the way of agility or fun. It’s best to drive as if you’re not insured.
Compared to the comfort, ride, handling, performance and cachet of Europe’s midrange luxury offerings, the BLS is a joke. It isn’t on the same planet as a rear wheel-drive BMW, Mercedes or the well-poised (if somewhat crashy) Audi. No wonder the BLS hasn’t lived up to GM’s initial [and modest] sales expectations.
In fact, the BLS is another in a long line of badly judged badge-engineering bodge jobs that’ve been ruining The General's brands for decades. GM’s decision to export the BLS to South Africa and, gulp, Mexico, is a cynical attempt to see if car buyers in smaller markets are more amendable to mediocrity than the Euro Zone. If I can speak for the Mexicans, we aren’t. In fact, GM should kill this model before it pisses away any remaining respect for the once great Cadillac name, or teaches new drivers that Cadillac is the sub-standard of the world.
Subscribe to Newsletter
More Reviews60 Responses to “ Cadillac BLS Review ”
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All Reverse Order
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All Reverse Order
Leave a Reply 
Back to Top
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Digg
del.icio.us
Blinklist
Furl
Netscape
Google
NewsVine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Windows Live
POWERED
December 18th, 2006 at 7:36 am
From the rear three quarter, the derivative design apes the Chrysler 300’s urban flava.
Was wondering and wondering and couldn’t quite place it, but you did. Indeed, it is the 300.
Caddyshack.
December 18th, 2006 at 7:51 am
Oh my. I hear the ghosts of the Catera and Cimarron rattling their chains… and it’s not pretty. What a great way to erode the nameplate overseas. Hopefully Cadillac will not attempt to foist this car on the US market.
December 18th, 2006 at 8:15 am
BLS in Mexico? Weird how exchange rates work out.
Yes, get those Cimarron badges out, they’re needed.
December 18th, 2006 at 8:27 am
This car is the answer to euro-customers question:
“Does Cadillac sell a car with a diesel engine?”
Moreover, the author totally misses the opportunity to namedrop Fiat and Alfa, or FIFA as he would have put it. They are the main source of the 1,9 litre diesel engine.
I would maintain that this car is far from the worst in the GM-lineup, and in size, design and price is rather sensible considering the european market.
BUT it’s not easy to establish a “new” brand here. Even Lexus is struggeling somewhat, and they easily spend 100 times as much as Cadillac on advertising. I have yet to see a BLS ad. So when Cadillac have a sellable car, they lack the organisation to sell it.
Or, as I put it earlier:
You can’t fool consumers. It’s all about having a company(structure) that enables the development, manufacturing and marketing of great products.
2 out of 3 isn’t enough GM!
Let me tell you another story of a failed launch. When the Cadillac V-16 was launched they had a small rally one day driving from the south of Sweden up north to Stockholm. The problem was that they never came to Stockholm - and the awaiting journalists and invited guests. They got stuck halfway there.
Quality problems? No! This was during the USA Prohibition-days. So the USA-team had been unable to resist drinking (too much) during the day. So they never reached Stockholm that day. Perhaps GM didn’t want risk repeating that one… :-)
December 18th, 2006 at 9:05 am
I just came back from Germany, and if you think auto competition is strong in the US, go there. In Europe, where they already have everything we sell in the states, the French & Italians (who don't sell here) weigh in with another dozen or so mfgs. bringing a full line of products to market. If you ain't good you ain't there. The Japanese are now staking out their claim with what we know to be saleable products.
Interestingly, in Germany, the Chrysler 300 is the most seen new American car. I understand it has a diesel not the hemi or the second rate american 6 cylinder engines of Chrysler. Yes, Cadillac can be happy if they stay a force here in the US where the name was invented, made number one in luxury and then trashed by the proctor and gamble people who used to run GM.
December 18th, 2006 at 9:48 am
Not digging the stealth fighter looks because thats what the creases on this car remind me off. Ever seen an F117? Go look and compare. Not the ugliest car on the planet by any means but I would not call it pretty either.
Cant see why I would buy this over an Audi/BMW/Mercedes. I get shivers down my spine when I thing this thing shares the same platform with a Saab and Chevy. Yeah that makes for good marketing. Speaking of Saab’s they are not what they used to be. I like the rebadged GMC with a Saab name - NOT.
December 18th, 2006 at 10:00 am
When I grew up, Cadillacs were bigger’n Dallas, owned by silver-haired gentlemen who lived down the street and appeared not to have a care in the world. Cadillac reached their pinnacle with the Eldorado of the mid-seventies, sporting a 500 cubic inch engine! I truly wanted the last American hero, the 76 Eldo convertible.
Things never clicked, and sadly, Cadillac and I moved in opposite directions. Maybe there was a bit of revived interest in that Cadillac they featured in the HBO series with Larry David, but by that time there was so many different three-initial Cadillacs, I didn’t know which was which.
I travel a bit, and think I have ridden in every version of the Lincoln Town Car ever made and used by the limo services; yet I have never never ridden in the back of a Cadillac. Oops, my bad, I was picked up by an Escalade once. (Epiphany time) So that is all that Cadillac has become, a rebadge? How far the mighty have fallen.
December 18th, 2006 at 10:14 am
i would love to see one of these in person, i cant help but get the feeling that most people who dont like it are comparing it to the 1959 coupe de ville, as this writer seems to be doing. It has a Saab content, which is a good thing, i think - certainly the reviews of the saab on which it is based have been good - it has a 1.9 L diesel engine, which is a perfect size, as far as i can tell - especially if you are concerned about fuel consumption. And gang - Italian engines are the best in the world for torque and they sound - ah! mamma mia! The pictures I have seen of the interior I have seen look fine. I can’t understand all the fuss.
I really like the (non-american) idea of lux cars having small engines. Most european manufacturers do not import their smallest engines here - Audi’s with 4’s non turbos, and small diesels. I would personally look at a caddy with a small four diesel in it, assuming it had a superior interior ( a - a poem!), and excellent driving dynamics. Perhaps this car does not have that - i dunno - i would like to see it. I don’t feel this reviewer and others who start their reviews talking about chrome and 22 foot late 60’s barges are giving it a fair shot.
December 18th, 2006 at 10:14 am
Actually Cadillac in Europe has always been a name of Legend. The American land-yact… I actually remember growing up in Paris that a Caddie turned more head than a Ferrari. I think there is still an ethos to the name in europe. But GM should use caution not to try to emulate Euro offering because thay will lose at that game.
December 18th, 2006 at 10:16 am
The reason why you see so many 300s in Germany is probably because every DCX employee can get special pricing on every car from the company, no matter if it’s Mercedes, Smart or Chrysler.
The 300 Diesel is actually a great car. It costs 10,000€ less than the Hemi (at least in Germany), 0-60 in 8.6s compared to the Hemi’s 6.8s but has almost the same torque and already at much lower rev and reaches 35mpg on the Highway (at least these are the official numbers).
But back on topic, maybe GM should give its European employees the option to take any brand as well. There are so many people working for Opel, Vauxhall and Saab. If only a couple of them would drive Caddy, the visibility of the brand would already be much higher.
Of course, GM would finally degrade Caddy in Europe to a “not-quite” luxury brand, for people who want their Opel to be a little bit more exotic. But at this point it hardly matters anymore.