A commentator named Peakay recently posed a pointed question: “Do you guys like anything?” While there are plenty of positive reviews hereabouts, I understand Peakey’s frustration. When ttac.com publishes a rash of reviews describing nasty looking, badly built, dynamically dim-witted vehicles, the negativity eats away at this car lover’s soul. Which made the prospect of reviewing the Cadillac XLR-V a daunting proposition. I really wanted to like this car.
Walking up to the XLR-V did nothing to dampen my anticipation, and much to increase it. The roadster is the only Caddy that doesn’t wear the brand’s “Art and Science” motif like an aging prostitute sporting a K-Mart pants suit. The XLR-V’s creased fiberglass strikes the perfect balance between edgy aggression and proportional elegance. The model-specific hood strakes and wire mesh grill add welcome wickedness to a minimalist masterpiece.
This is one of the few convertibles that sings the same siren song whether the lid’s fitted or flipped. With the hardtop deployed, the XLR-V offers more chop top chic than Chrysler’s gangsta 300C. With the top down, it’s sexy enough to run with ze Germans and Jags of the world. Either way, the XLR-V is confidently Cadillac, without resorting to Elvis-era clichés (although the taillight design pokes fun at the whole fin thing). If only the other Caddies had such great bones.
I’d like to say I walked up to the XLR-V and discovered one of the smoothest paint jobs you’ll find outside of Pebble Beach Concours D’Elegance. I’d like to say that the XLR-V’s trunk hinges were free from duct taped wiring and an exposed fuse, and that the teeny tiny little trunk (sausage shaped and smaller than ONE of the Boxster’s boots) wasn’t covered in the same rat fur blighting last week’s DTS. Unfortunately, the XLR-V put OCD boy right back in bean counted Hell.
Damn my eyes! Niggling little faults I wouldn’t even think to check in a Mercedes SL clamored for my attention. The driver’s portal slammed shut with a resounding thunk– and the panel housing the window switches vibrated independently of the door. The disappearing tin top performed an artful ballet– with all the jerkiness of an arthritis sufferer tying his shoes. The Zingana (son of Zebrano?) wood surrounding the shifter was silken to the touch– and looked like a faded panel from my parent’s old rec room.
Although iPoditude and Bluetoothedness are MIA, there are toys aplenty, including a way cool head-up display. Still, there’s no getting around it: the XLR-V’s interior is a little, um, cheap. The plastic speedo bezel emblazoned Bulgari is more airport duty free than Fifth Avenue swank. The material surrounding the vents is ew-inducing. How much would it have cost to upgrade the convertible’s cabin materials, or provide some chairs with a bit more lateral bolstering than a La-Z-Boy recliner?
Cadillac apologists are free to deploy the old Ferrari defense: Caddy sells you an engine and throws in the car for free. Even before the supercharger kicks in, it’s clear the XLR-V’s 443-horse 4.4-liter Northstar V8 is a serous torquemeister. Tickle the go-pedal and the big Caddy gently kneels on your lower back. Floor it and mayhem is your co-pilot. The XLR-V accelerates from zero to sixty in 4.6 seconds and hits the quarter in 13. Do you believe in muscle cars Miss Turner? WELL YOU’RE IN ONE.
This much is clear the moment you throw the 4000lbs. drop top into some curves. With 19” rubber and Magnetic Ride Control at all four corners, the XLR-V stays flat, level and griptastic deep into lateral G-land. But unless the pavement is glassine, confidence is low. Over broken pavement, the XLR-V has no natural handling fluency whatsoever. You could just wrestle the beast around the bends (in the great muscle car tradition)– if those support challenged seats didn’t make it such a supremely uncomfortable exercise.
Better then, to just stunt and floss and drag race from time to time. And believe me, I’m down with that. The XLR-V is a bit rough around the edges and it ain’t no sports car, but the hardtop drop top looks like a genuine Cadillac and goes like Hell. What's more, the XLR-V has an X-factor, an appeal that can't be measured or rationalized. If only it cost $25k less.
Yes, there is that. At $100k all-in, the most expensive Cadillac ever is a joke. The similarly-priced Mercedes SL550 is better-looking, better-built, better-handling, far more practical (its trunk is cavernous in comparison), offers less at-speed top down turbulence, doesn’t depreciate like a stone thrown into a deep dark well and isn’t that much slower.
Cadillac should have priced the XLR-V lower or pulled-out all the stops and built a world beater. They did neither and paid the price. (Which is more than you can say for their potential consumers.) That said, I can understand those few hundred people who bought an XLR-V. It's another GM "almost car," but it IS a Cadillac.
79 Comments on “Cadillac XLR-V Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Funny.. a dealer in one of your sponsored links is offering an ‘06 with 6000 miles for $74k… now THAT’S depreciation! (still 50k high for me, though.) A very fine looking beast, though; the mesh grille is much less garish than the Caddy eggcrate.
For years Cadillac has been the only american brand doing anything progressive in the style department. For that reason critizising “Art and Science” seems pretty outrageous. Did you prefer the “Home for the Elderly” on wheels look that came before?
I for one wish that they had played up Art & Science even more with this car. From what i hear the next gen of Cadillacs will be toned down significantly and that really worries me. We’ll see…
Dayveo:
I wasn’t criticizing “Art and Science.” I was criticizing its implementation in Caddy’s other models (How silly is the Escalade?).
I’m praising it here. On the XLR-V it works.
I am a huge fan of the looks, I like it better the the Mercedes, takes the looks a little edgy and less safe and at a $100k it is a steal compared to everything else it competes against.
The cheap interior doesnt bother me, looks good and it is user friendly (no iDrive or w/e Mercedes has.) There is no excuse though for the trunk trim and non-supportive seats in a performance car.
Does anyone really LIKE heads up displays? On a long journey I find them distracting and then thoroughly annoying. Price apart, that feature alone would “unsell” me in a hurry.
It’s hard to believe, but 40% of the people who buy a new car never drive their intended before purchasing it.
That’s where most of the sales will be made for this one.
tones03:
A steal compared to the Mercedes SL500? Uh, I don’t think so.
The Jaguar XK or XKR? Similar depreciation, different look; I’d hardly say the Caddy blows it away.
A Porsche Carrera Cabriolet? It may look like a suppository in comparison, but it’s better built, depreciates less and it’ll run rings around the XLR-V in the corners.
Now that GM is putting direct injection in their 3.6L V6, it puts out 300hp. I wonder if Caddy could see their way to putting that engine in a $40-45K XLR.
Who knows, add a clutch, seat bolsters and a trunk mat, and you might have something…
tones03:
Cheap interior is OK in a $100k car??? You have GOT to be kidding me!!!
I’m looking forward to a review of the ‘08 CTS. Caddy has got to get this car right. The CTS is akin to BMW’s 3 Series in terms of establishing Caddy’s rep as making a serious sports machine.
BTW, the flip side of Caddy ridiculous depreciation rates is the values to be had on the used car market. The CTS-V may be a flawed car at $50k, but a 2 yr old CTS-V with low miles can be had around $35k. That makes the CTS one of the better used sports sedan values around. Interestingly, the flaws in the $50k vehicle don’t seem to matter as much at $35k! lol!
Great car, overpriced…
I have not driven an XLR-V but I think it is fair to say that Robert has hit the nail on the head here. It is an “almost” car. While I don’t think a Caddy needs to run with a Porsche (GM has Corvettes to do that) it does have to hold its own against the Mercedes, BMW’s and Jags out there. A subpar interior in a $100K car? People who buy this car notice these kinds of things! It can’t handle? I hope the Corvette team came over and beat the Caddy team with a stick for ruining their platform!
While I can (and do) forgive GM for a multitude of sins for cutting corners in other vehicles, they should not do it in what is arguably their most aspirational vehicle.
To end on a positive note, like the Jag XK when a XLR comes into view it stops traffic like SL’s and 6-Series only wish they could.
I am saying i dont mind the “cheap” interior on this car, I think it looks great and is very functional. Saying it was ok was poor choice of wording, but it still doesnt bother me.
Robert: I would not put this in the same league as a Porsche, if I wanted something to handle like a Porsche, I would buy a Vette. In the “luxury” roadster class, this is a great vehicle. I was also talking about the SL55 AMG, performs closer to the V series. Which at 30k less is a great deal.
Looks wise is a personal opinion, I like the sharp edges over the rounded ones on certain vehicles, and this is one.
I also think the “Slade” is one of the best looking SUV’s on the road. Much better then uni-brow Navigator and the outdated Lexus.
“Cadillac should have priced the XLR-V lower or pulled-out all the stops and built a world beater. They did neither and paid the price.”
Why…Cant…Are they…Cant they see this? Still the GM Accounting Corporation that shoots for the moon with a .22 rifle.
I would own an SL550 if I weren’t such a cheap fishfeces. Wish the SL550 would depreciate like a Caddy.
I genuinely like the looks of this machine. But am I the only one who has the urge to grab a large wooden spatula and begin making fudge when I see the slab-like rear deck when the top is down?
Luther:
If you want to know why Cadillac couldn’t lower the price, head on over to Frank William’s union editorial (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=3392)
If you want to know why they didn’t “go for it,” look at GM’s culture. A luxury brand within a mass market automaker. In America, that equation just doesn’t seem to work out.
i am not sure why one would buy one of these things over a vette – which it essentially IS – and the vette is like half the price. I saw one once in a supermarket parking lot – it seemed – well like it was a vete in really obvious drag.. kinda uncomfortably comical, like you dont know if its serious or all dressed up like for a party.
I suppose it was inevitable, but car design is actually getting to the point now where I (traditionally a big fan of cool wheels) think that the wheels on this vehicle look too big.
It looks kinda “donked”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donk_%28automobile%29)
I like the styling otherwise, and as usual, I’m bummed that GM couldn’t quite make it a complete package.
My stereotypical Cadillac driver likes to drive his to the golf course. If so, that small trunk may be a killer.
John
caddy wants to drive chick of kimono, artisan nuances of interior sophistication, yet drives it bumping into hillbilly seams of finish.exterior looks empty. having nice , skinny ( too skinny for 21st century) proportions,it has poverty of details on front part, and the same goes for sides, empty and boring as if some chrome handles or claddings were ripped off.
the same goes for the interior. too many parts have gaps, or are made of subpar plastic. and what the hell is this huge football field of black plastic where in the middle stands cd slot? is this place where to stick m3 post-on notes like on a fridge.luxury is about detailing not stuffing expensive materials only.
so guys at gm , before you push your employees with timetables( no time, no money, should be ready yesterday), maybe you should push your engineers with gap tolerances.
the problem is that the audience for duty truck and caddy xlr are pretty different. caddies are driven by rich people, mostly with BA or MA , that know how to make a knot on their ties. and they are picky- on details especially. if gm wants to avoid 11 (not sptember, but chapter)then they should start pushing their caddies into 9 of fit and finish column in motor trend magazine. make it done faster and better never fits together.teach your engineers to make precision moulds.
people STILL buy caddy because it`s american ( otherwise they wouldn`t rebadge daewoos as chevy`s ,would they?)SO APPEALING TO AMERICAN, maybe make american caddies, not opel omega chassis derivatives tuned up by aussies with aisin gearboxes, bosch electronics( well, would live with that) as your new cts.
you know where is rover( honda union jack rebadge)- it is chines roewe. i am afraid if gm doesn`t change, you might hit cadillaceve. more stress on eve. and for gods sake weld those 2 northstars together and roll that 16 cyl caddy coupe( that you have in plastiline mock-up) out to prototyping.elbowgrease is the password.
lunatics@inbox.lv
Jon wrote: My stereotypical Cadillac driver likes to drive his to the golf course. If so, that small trunk may be a killer.
I imagine that the driver of this car will just drive up to the valet, toss the keyfob and walk the twelve steps to the starter. The starter will snap his fingers and the golf cart already loaded with golf clubs, freshly buffed golf shoes and bottled water will be driven over for the golfer to begin his round.
Yeah, Buick has taken over the “3 golfer/bag/ guests at a friend’s country club” gig.
“maybe make american caddies, not opel omega chassis derivatives tuned up by aussies with aisin gearboxes, bosch electronics( well, would live with that) as your new cts.”
I think you are mistaken, It is on the sigma platform, designed and engineered in America, the Zeta has not came here yet. Also every company is full of supplier electronics.
Top up, the XLR’s trunk is 11.6 cubic feet, allegedly enough to hold 2 golf bags. Top down there’s only 4.4 cubic feet. Cadillac says that’s enough room to fit a small golf bag in the trunk. I have a feeling the emphasis is on “small.”
And on the topic of the trunk, have any of you seen how the trunk on this thing opens? Instead of doing like Mercedes et al and designing the trunk so it hinges from the bumper to accept the top but opens conventionally for luggage, the trunk lid opens conventionally but then lifts and moves away from the body enough for the folded top to slip under the front edge.
Not only does this look awkward, if it’s raining when you open the trunk, the deck lid dumps whatever water is on it directly into the trunk and onto whatever you have in there.
Simply put, it’s a really dumb design.
Personally, I like the design of the XLR much better than the blowfish design of the SL. While the SL has plenty of chintzy cost-cutting (cheap plastic slats on the hood for example,) it doesn’t excuse Cadillac for dropping a last-gen GM partsbin interior into a $100k car. This car should demonstrate Cadillac’s ability to produce a world-class car. However, it’s Caddy’s cheapest car that has successfully done that. Wrong strategy.
Frank, I think they did the top design for show more then anything because GM used the mercedes design on a $25k G6, I think the XLR motion looks cool, but never had to use it so I dont really know about functionality.
jurisb: “…maybe you should push your engineers with gap tolerances.”
It’s not that the engineers are designing the car with big tolerances by default. They’re choosing the big tolerances because of budget constraints. NICKNICK can give us real numbers, but my feeling is that manufacturing cost increases exponentially as tolerances are tightened. So because of other costs, GM can’t afford the tight tolerances that other companies do.
Now here’s what really bothers me. I can see having wide open panel gaps and duct taped wiring on a Caviler (um Colbalt) when you’re making 100,000’s a year and selling them for under $20K. The manufacturing costs built up quickly when you’re making a ton of cars. But really how many XLR-V’s is GM making? Can’t be that many, I’ve yet to see one and I live in a pretty affluent area. I’m sure that the difference in costs in making a tight-toleranced high-quality plastic interior vs. standard GM interior wouldn’t have been a big deal on a $100K car. If I were the kind that would even consider paying $100K for a car, I’d pay $100,100 for a nice interior. (and I bet the nice interior wouldn’t even be $100 more.)
Think not of the XLR-V trunk as a place to stow golf clubs or luggage, but rather as a place to stow hard toppage and you get the idea. There really is no space for a golf bag with the top down.
I like the car but you’re right…waaay overpriced.
miked is right–the tighter the tolerance required, the more parts cost to make because additional processing, such as otherwise unnecessary machining, is needed. you also have to account for increased scrap–that is a huge cost driver.
in my experience, there is often a huge disconnect between design engineers and manufacturing. often a textbook says that a lathe is capable of easily holding +/- .003″, so by golly, that’s what the part tolerance is going to be on the blueprint, even if the part is something completely functionless and decorative. lots of wasted money there.
molded plastics such as in car interiors can be tricky due to shrinkage–consistent mold and plastic temperatures are a must. because there are so many parts in a car, everything must be designed properly from the beginning. think of it this way: if you have a dozen 1 inch blocks that are supposed to fit inside a space defined as 12″ +/- .100″, what happens if each block is defined as 1″ +/- .1″? your total size can be anywhere between 11.8″ and 13.2″–THAT’s how you end up with huge gaps–trying to account for all possible sizes of each individual part.
this is a management issue–there needs to be more communication between the art designers, mechanical design engineers, and manufacturing engineers. there often wouldn’t need to be cheezy plastic trim pieces to hide gaps and such if *everyone* got involved early enough to come up with pretty designs that can actually be produced at a reasonable price.
management needs to get designers and engineers together, and then get the heck out of the way. bean counting comes last–if the engineering is done properly, there’s a lot less to worry about. the beans will come rolling in.
If not for golf, well it may be the car for mid-life extra-marital affairs…
Anyway, there seems to be a little Allante in the interior layout, though a bit less “angular”.
I tend to agree with CS Johnston & Blue Adidas.
I’ve seen a few XLRs and one or two XLR-Vs on I-93/I-95 in the Boston area, and it definitely turns heads. Truly a stand-out design. It’s just so different than everything else out there, and different in a good way. Blue’s comments about the “blowfish” ring true. Maybe I’m in the minority, but I think Cadillac’s angular motif is pretty refreshing.
I’ve always been a fan of Caddy and always wanted one (must be the old man Italian in me). Unfortunately (and not like I have $100K sitting around to blow on a car, but even if I did) I don’t know that I’d get one of these, as beautiful as it is. Maybe in a few years when the 06s and 07s have depreciated by 72%…
Never particularly liked the diamonds styling or whatever they called it. It kind of reminds me of a stealth fighter. All angles and high tech but I would not call it a pretty car by any means.
As for 100K for a Cadillac you got to be kidding me. First off its a GM car and has all the favorite GM attributes:
Crappy interior: check (go study Audi, please)
Chassis from somewhere else: Check
Strange styling: Check
Cheapness in the details: Check
Fake wood: Check
Uncomfortable seats: Check
I have a hard time believing that this car will woo the average BMW/Porsche/Mercedes owner. I wonder who the Cadillac brand appeals to? I dont associate the Cadillac logo with engineering, prestige or money. Now elderly people, yep. I doubt many of my generation do.
Not feeling the love.
tincanman99: on the chassis from somewhere else, how is this a bad thing? And every other car company does it. Just want to know.
I like the XLR-V. It’s one of the best looking domestic on the market. And there’s always a soft-spot in my anti-domestic heart for Caddies. BUT THE DAMNED THING IS OVERPRICED!
At $100K, my choices include:
1. The aforementined Mercedes SL500 (which I don’t like, but still represents a MUCH better buy than the XLR-V)
2. BMW 6-series cab (about $10-20k cheaper)
3. BMW M6 cab(V10, 500hp)
4. Maserati cab (Ferrari-made engine & that interior!)
5. Jag XK-R cab (still cheaper, but with better interior)
6. Porsche 911 S or 911 4S cab (not a better interior, but the performance)
7. AND, the Corvette Z06 (supercar performance & same interior and heads-up display @ $30k discount)
Tell me if there is an idiot out there that would take the XLR-V over these alternatives.
NOW, if it is sold at $60k, start a waitlist and write down the orders.
NICKNICK said: “…this is a management issue…there often wouldn’t need to be cheezy plastic trim pieces to hide gaps and such if *everyone* got involved early enough…”
“management needs to get…the heck out of the way…if the engineering is done properly…the beans will come rolling in.”
IMHO, that’s the truth.
Here’s just one example:
(From Wards Auto) The “he” the author mentions is a senior vice president of procurement at Honda).
“Plant yourself in the front seat of a Honda vehicle – from an entry-level Civic to the sporty and luxurious ’04 Acura TL – and it’s hard to find fault with the interior.”
“While seated in the driver’s seat of the [‘04] TL, he runs his finger along the dashboard, along the top of the glovebox door.” Look at this fit right here and that crucial line,” where the glovebox door closes against the dashboard:
“The supplier and our [factory] team worked together and ended up redesigning the process months before the mass-production launch to make sure we could keep this tolerance on this radius here.”
The glovebox supplier ultimately installed a secondary work station with a cooling fixture to ensure Honda could maintain the tolerance. Part of the challenge–as with any glovebox–is that it’s a moving part, made of plastic.
“When you mold plastic, it has a tendency after it cools to move. To get the mold right and to get the tooling fixture exactly right is where that challenge is.
We probably had four Honda people stationed at the supplier working with them hand in hand for months to perfect that process.”
As he studies the seam a bit closer, he realizes it’s not quite right: With the glovebox closed, the seam along the door is not uniform. It’s slightly wider at one end of the glovebox than at the other. Even Honda can’t guarantee perfection.
He admits the gap is troubling and will begin an investigation. “I’m going to find out when this car was made,” he says.
“This (gap) may not be from the supplier. This could be in-house. Is that within tolerance? I don’t know. Do I like the way it looks? Do you like the way it looks? No. It should be seamless.”
Despite the seam on that particular model, the design aspects of the TL glovebox will be applied to other Honda and Acura vehicles.”
“’Making it right means the ultimate customer is the one saying it’s right.’”
I think it is worth mentioning that the XLR-V regardless of what we think about the packaging is not targeted against the stock versions of the SL, 6-Series, XK, etc.
The stock XLR, which has all the right bits and pieces (execution aside) is a proper point of comparison for those vehicles.
As for whether the XLR is attractive to a younger buyer or not, what kind of buyer are we talking about?
If you’ve got $100K to drop on a car you’re either (A) in your salad days (50+) (B) a trustfundinista (C) a well-deserving young entrepeneur (D) a pro athelete or celeb (E) a criminal.
I would say that someone in their late 40’s or early 50’s who was not a lemming (ie. gotta buy something European or I’ll be laughed at) might consider this car.
We know what the pro jocks think of Caddy.
I could care less what the idle rich think and that’s an oxymoron anyway.
Young entrepreneurs, since I am jealous of them or until I become one, have no taste.
Criminals, since I am jealous of them or until I become one, have no taste.
Would I buy one? Even if the Caddy was remotely in my price range, no. Not when I can have just as much fun in the mostly-wonderful CTS-V for half the price… and the kids can come too.
CSJohnston: Well said!
“But really how many XLR-V’s is GM making? Can’t be that many, I’ve yet to see one and I live in a pretty affluent area.”
and
“1. The aforementined Mercedes SL500 (which I don’t like, but still represents a MUCH better buy than the XLR-V)
2. BMW 6-series cab (about $10-20k cheaper)
3. BMW M6 cab(V10, 500hp)
4. Maserati cab (Ferrari-made engine & that interior!)
5. Jag XK-R cab (still cheaper, but with better interior)
6. Porsche 911 S or 911 4S cab (not a better interior, but the performance)
7. AND, the Corvette Z06 (supercar performance & same interior and heads-up display @ $30k discount)
Tell me if there is an idiot out there that would
take the XLR-V over these alternatives.”
I live in one of the most affluent areas in the county (Orange County, CA). I live in Lake Forest, a community adjacent to Irvine, Newport Beach and Laguna Beach. I see more Lambo’s, Ferrari’s, Mercedes AMG’s, M5’s, M6’s, Porsche’s, Maserati’s, Bentley’s, Aston’s, etc. than I have XLRs.
It’s clear to me that people with money are not buying these things and for a good reason.
Ebay motors posted an 06 XLR-V sale for $65.5k with 7200mi. Steep depreciation indeed.
I would be very surprised if ANY of the following has 10K in sales in the US: M6 cab, SL55, SL600, Maserati cab, XK-R cab, 911 4S cab.
I think the XLR is a fairly nicely executed design with a few minor exceptions. The proportions are dead on, and the 'art & science' (or whatever the hell they're calling it) styling has never looked better.
Unfortunately, though, the detailing is subpar- the tail lamps push the angular motif into Flash Gordon territory, and the headlights look awfully undistinguished for a car costing $100k.
Still, not bad.
ktm,
While I don’t live in Orange County (hopefully it is not populated by the type of people depicted in the movie of the same name) I too, live in an area where there is a lot of wealth and a lot of new, young wealth at that.
My city is rotten with BMW 3-Series (as common as the cold), Range Rovers, Mercedes, etc too. However, I would propose that many of these brands’ sales are due to the groupthink, not because they are vastly superior products.
Besides most people I know who purchase these vehicles are more interested in the badge on the hood as opposed to what’s underneath it.
How will I look at the club? How will I look at work? Will my peers give me the thumbs up or will I have to actually explain my purchase?
The luxury dealers know this, play on this and leverage it to the hilt. Of all dealers they are more ready to sneer at you if you dare think someone else has something as good as what’s on their showroom floor.
I’ve said in previous comments that Caddy needed to put more effort into the details of this model but I would never call anyone an idiot for buying one, in fact, I would call them independent thinkers.
Cadillac once had the same brand cachet as the brands you outline, just as BMW once had far less appeal than it does now.
Nothing is static.
Cadillacs that have been successful have always been more about the engine than the accoutrements surrounding it; from the wonderful V12 and V16 engines of the 1930s, to the Ketterling-inspired overhead valve V8s of the period from 1949 through (about) 1970, and even the behemoth 500 cubic-inch engine in some Eldorados of the Seventies. The dark period started in 1980 (or so) and continued until the debut of the Northstar DOHC V8 in 1993.
This car was supposed to be one that didn’t follow a path down the tubes that the Allante did. It sounds as if there’s hope here; but maybe the heads of Cadillac need to worry less about counting beans and more about competing the Mercedes-Benz SL series, in terms of fit, finish and overall industrial design. That was their target with the Allante, and while they’ve gotten closer, it is still the elusive target indeed.
You can put the golf clubs in the passenger seat. If you come home with this thing, your wife has already left you anyway.
SherbornSean: I would be very surprised if the XLR-V has a single sale anywhere else. (excluding gifts to Saudis)
$100K?
Makes the Tesla Roadster look like a steal!
Sorry – had to say it.
Robert: Great and balanced review. I won’t even add a comment about *still* not liking anything…
I DO live in OC and right smack in NB. I have seen one, but they are rare. I’ll tell you this, they have wayyyy more road presence than the SL or any of the other cars mentioned above. They truly look special and expensive. I bet this car was built more for image value than volume and on that I think Cadillac succeeded.
CSJohnston
There are quite a few people down here who drive Cadillacs……that is, the Cadillac Escalade. Case in point, my wife’s boss. Here is his collection of cars:
Lamborghini Gallardo
Porsche Carrera GT
Ferrari 355
Porsche 911
C5 Corvette Convertible
Cadillac Escalade
I see quite a few CTS-Vs running around, as I do 300C SRT-8s. However, in living here for close to 4 years now, I have only ever seen two (2)!! XLR’s. Hell, on one memorable day I saw 2 Mercedes Mclaren SLRs and 3 Porsche Carrera GTs (I was driving from Irvine to Santa Barbara).
While many down here do buy a vehicle based on what others think, the fact that the XLR-V costs $100k and has the same craptastic interior as their $30k vehicles says a lot about GM. It shows that they are not willing, or more frightenly do not know how, to fully execute a design.
I can forgive Mitsubishi for giving me an engine and drivetrain wrapped in a crappy interior in the form of the Evo IX. Then again, the car costs $33kish and will cream the XLR-V.
“Cheap interior is OK in a $100k car??? You have GOT to be kidding me!!!”
I would have to agree. What am I paying for then?
I haven’t heard it referred to as an “arts and crafts” exterior before. I call it “Back to The Future Reject” look.
John
“The XLR-V’s creased fiberglass strikes the perfect balance between edgy aggression and proportional elegance. The model-specific hood strakes and wire mesh grill add welcome wickedness to a minimalist masterpiece… With the top down, it’s sexy enough to run with ze Germans and Jags of the world.”
I almost couldn’t make it beyond these sentences, but I muscled through it, hoping for an early April Fool’s “GOTCHA!,” while trying to remember Jeremy Clarkson’s crack at the CTS-V’s similarly insulting appearance. Cubist sculpture was a monumental failure in 20th century art, yet GM seems to think they’re entitled to ask 100 grand for it here.
Kudos, Mr. Farago, for recognizing that the biting cynicism – despite being warranted by the vast majority of automakers for their shameless offerings – now seems a bit affected. I think many of the readers would agree: the suggestion that CUVs are shaped like giant suppositories is insulting, even for a 20-year-old’s sense of bathroom humor (Montgomery’s review of the Jeep Patriot). But reading praise for something so visually gag-inducing is almost too much to stomach.
Everything else [read: General teasing], I’m pleased to report, seems to be in order.
Perhaps GM’s thinking goes like this:
“Wow, if there are people lining up to pay $70-$80k for a pickup truck with back seats (Escalade) then for sure they will pay $100k for a tarted up Corvette.”