Coming of age in the 70’s (lucky me), Cadillac represented everything I didn’t like about American cars. Like its lesser-priced sibs, it was an anti-sports car. With the possible exception of Lincoln’s Continental Mark My Words This Car is as Good as a Cadillac, a Caddy was THE anti-sports car. The idea of hustling one of those land yachts around a corner was laughable. And for me, it was all about the handling. (Driving a Dino had changed my life.) I remained contemptuous of America’s love affair for Caddy’s “sofas on wheels” right until the moment I met a girl in Aspen who drove a meticulously maintained 1962 Cadillac convertible like the one shown. Suddenly, all the curves I needed were inside the car. You know that song Slow Hand by the Pointer Sisters? It was on the Caddy’s radio during one especially memorable drive. I got it. And Caddy, I reckon, has lost it.
83 Comments on “Rant: What Is A Cadillac?...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
The idea at the time was to glide rather than drive to your destination.
Cadillacs of my youth were big gaudy ugly boats that had trunks big enough to stuff a classroom of dead children in and were driven only by bluehaired old people who forgot the turn signal they left on that would flash incessantly for over three miles.
This obsession with Cadillacs of old needs to stop. If they built them like that, nobody younger than my great grandmother would be interested in them. Certainly nobody younger than my grandmother is interested in the vehicles that’s one step down (Buick) that offer the plush ride, riverboat handling, and overassisted power steering that allows you to turn the wheel using your pinky. It’s about time somebody yanked Cadillac into the 21st century, and if it means they have to give up the things that used to make a Cadillac a Cadillac, then so be it.
Some folks still don’t get it. Cadillacs don’t need to be “yanked” into the current century. Cadillac needs to get back to doing what it always did best – luxury and style, with a certain element of ostentation.
A Cadillac needs a certain size, a certain heft. But, what it most needs is to be anticipatory – recognizing what features a driver/owner might want before others, rather than copying features already introduced by others.
And, of course, it need quality – and a dealer network that treat its customers as kin.
What used to make a Cadillac a Cadillac is still what they will need to include to make a Cadillac a Cadillac in the future. It’s the essence of the brand.
The best American luxury car on the market is the new Lincoln MKS. It’s quiet, spacious, has a great stereo, rides well, runs down the freeway like an arrow, and brings you to your destination without irritation.
Unfortunately, the press is busy crucifying it for not being a BMW competitor.
The current Cadillac lineup is a group of technically excellent, hugely impressive cars that simply don’t provide traditional “luxury” virtues any more.
My Cadillac Story:
Since I was young, I always liked Cadillacs. When I was in high school in the late 1990’s my father, who owned an auto body shop, restored a 1971 Cadillac Sedan deVille for me as my first car. It had a off white leather interior that was in excellent shape. He eliminated the vinyl top, painted it 1993 Cadillac Allante red, (I think it was called Crimson Pearl) put 1.6″ white walls on it and gave it to me. It was truly a spectacular sight.
One sparkling south Florida winter day I was driving three beautiful 17 year old female classmates home from Catholic school, with the windows down in my big, red, shiny, early seventies deVille.
As we’re stopped at a traffic light, up rolls a young man in a yellow Porsche convertible. He looks over… The girls started giggling because they think that they are getting checked out. The Porsche driver then says “What year is that Cadillac, it is really awesome” It was amusing to me that the Porsche driver thought I was the one driving the hot car.
To me a Cadillac must be large, flashy, and uncompromised. I do not think there is a car built by any auto maker right now that really fits the description of what a Cadillac is. The classic Cadillacs are awesome vehicles but todays Cadillacs should be better than those. Like a new Mercedes or BMW makes one from the 70’s or 80’s look like a joke, the classic Cadillacs should pale in comparison to the new ones, not make the new ones look like a shadow of their former self.
Cadillacs should be of their time. A technological tour de force. Americans like smooth riding car but the handling does not have to be sloppy. It should be on its own platform, not shared with other GM rigs. They should have amazing engines and transmissions. They need to be large because it is human nature to think bigger is better. ( I think GM has enough other brands to sell great quality small cars under)
The problem is that the Cadillac image has gone to seed for a long time. It should have been cultivated over generations and is not something that could be won back over night.
But I think it is a battle worth fighting for.
Cadillac needs to be a Rolls/Bentley competitor. GM’s peculiar obsession with avoiding the gas guzzler tax has hurt that brand more.. I was about to say more than anything else, but there is a lot of competition for that title.
[Beavis voice on] Heh, heh!…..he said Evoq…heh!heh! [Beavis voice off]
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/1162/Cadillac-Evoq.html
The only Cadillacs I ever really liked were the 2 door ones.
I like the Lincoln Mark series a lot.
I’m a big fan of personal coupes, anti-sports cars but still cool enough for a person with no kids own. I think the biggest problem with the car biz was the “family values” hoopla where every car suddenly had to have 4 doors and roomy back seats and latch anchors. Plus excessive attention paid to family vehicles. Either that or supposed “sport cars” that were cramped and designed for high schoolers.
Driving a Dino and meeting a girl in Aspen explains a lot of the viewpoints and opinions on this site.
Especially on the D3 and bailouts and bankruptcy.
Isn’t the Evoq on that page the XLR?
I suppose it would be cool if Cadillacs were ridiculously expensive cars like RRs and Bentleys . It would mean more to the press than to GM. If GM did go that route, they would have to keep Buick and/or Saturn around to sell the semi-luxury cars.
I think that npbheights has pretty much nailed it. Unfortunately, I have no story involving 3 beautiful 17-year-old coeds to perk up my comment, so I’ll be succinct:
Size, Power and Style. In any given vehicle class, a Cadillac should be bigger, more powerful, more comfortable, and more boldly styled (in a “Pimp My Ride” sort of way).
This likely means compromises in the handling and various details of the car (such as silky-feeling switchgear, perfectly engineered hood struts, etc), but the handling and details should be on par with the top family cars, so buyers don’t feel shortchanged when the novelty of the stylishness wears off.
Springsteen’s “Pink Cadillac” says it all.
big 2 door personal luxury coupe. Big brash styling with acres of fine leather and aluminum as interior furnishings. 18 feet long with still little room in the back seats, rear wheel drive 6sp auto and a big v8 up front. Then slap a little battery on it and call it a hybrid.
There’s still a place in the world for a real Cadillac.
Big, fast, solid, a little flashy. To me, the look of the CTS is about right – except it seems like a deflating ballon of a Cadillac. It literally needs to be longer, lower, and wider (except for the a$$ which needs to lose a visual ton or so).
Really, a 3/4 size 1964 Caddy with a Corvette engine and the CTS suspension – that’s the 21st century car they should build.
I guess nbpheights said it better:
Cadillacs should be of their time. A technological tour de force. Americans like smooth riding car but the handling does not have to be sloppy. It should be on its own platform, not shared with other GM rigs. They should have amazing engines and transmissions.
Give that man a cigar, and a new Caddy.
A Cadillac needs to be a first class car. It is not any particular body style but it is admired. It should have top-of-the-line engineering since the builders have a bigger budget. You should be able to tell a Cadillac from a Chevrolet.
If “Cadillac” still meant something, Cadillac would have built the Lexus LS600hL.
Cadillac essentially suffers the same problem as Hummer – done right, Cadillac represents the tastes of a bygone era. Premium import brands can sell premium-ness for its own sake, but Cadillac will never be able to do that. The window for redefining the Cadillac brand in such a way has closed. Cadillac’s existence is assumed to be essential only because GM “needs” a premium brand. But can any domestic automaker really convince people outside the flyover states that it is capable of building not just solid automobiles, but top shelf products? I don’t think so.
quasimondo : This obsession with Cadillacs of old needs to stop. If they built them like that, nobody younger than my great grandmother would be interested in them. Certainly nobody younger than my grandmother is interested in the vehicles that’s one step down (Buick) that offer the plush ride, riverboat handling, and overassisted power steering that allows you to turn the wheel using your pinky.
Have you driven a new Camry? Seriously, its a bargain basement yacht in the spirit of the Ford LTD or Chevy Caprice Classic. Everyone loves Cadillac dynamics of yesteryear, they just haven’t drawn the connection yet.
And its absolutely no surprise that (one of?) the best selling late model Caddies is the Escalade.
————
Jack Baruth : The best American luxury car on the market is the new Lincoln MKS…Unfortunately, the press is busy crucifying it for not being a BMW competitor.
Or (rightly) panning it for being less of a Lincoln than the Hyundai Genesis 4.6. Sure it has the gadgets, but reskinning a Taurus in the “where did it come from?” luxurious spirit of the Acura RL is a recipe for another failed iteration of this platform.
And its not exactly setting the sales charts on fire, even with Employee pricing and a catchy lease deal that’s meant to lure Retail Town Car buyers away from the yacht they love. (according to my inside source)
I understand where you are coming from Robert. I had my dad’s TR in the 70s. My folks best friends always had an Olds 98 but they wanted a Sedan de Ville. Those people today would likely have a Lexus LS. In those days your foreign options were limited to MB, Jag, and for crazy people like us a Rover. But they were much stiffer than a caddie. It was considered the best us car. The term “it’s the caddie of________”
agree here: I guess nbpheights said it better:
Cadillacs should be of their time. A technological tour de force. Americans like smooth riding car but the handling does not have to be sloppy. It should be on its own platform, not shared with other GM rigs. They should have amazing engines and transmissions.
Better the use the Brooks Brothers model. Change enough to keep new customers interested while keeping the target demo. Caddy has done neither. I go to Brooks for a number of reasons one is my dad did and if it was good enough for dad….. But I can buy a striped shirt there now and the shirts are AS baggy.
I think it’s too late.
Or (rightly) panning it for being less of a Lincoln than the Hyundai Genesis 4.6. Sure it has the gadgets, but reskinning a Taurus in the “where did it come from?” luxurious spirit of the Acura RL is a recipe for another failed iteration of this platform.
Ah, I think we could go around a couple times about this. :)
To begin with, calling the MKS a “reskinned Taurus” is a little facile. It doesn’t even share all the hard points; there’s more difference between an MKS and a Taurus than there is between an Accord and a TL.
The Genesis is a pastiche of imitation; it looks like nothing so much as everything else. The exterior is heavily imitative of Lexus, which is to say it’s a second-generation imitation of the W220 plus flame surfacing. The interior resembles nothing so much as that of the outgoing 745i viewed through a Cybil Shepherd filter.
By contrast, the MKS is a dynamic styling statement inside and out. The taillights are a little Quattroporte but that’s it.
With the exception of the Phantom, I’ve driven or owned all the major luxury contenders throughout the market, and I am hugely impressed with the Lincoln. The MKS succeeds because it tries to be nothing else. It’s simply good at its job.
It’s not RWD. So what? A luxury car needn’t be rear-wheel-drive; ask Andre Citroen.
My personal taste in 60s luxmobiles has always been for the Elwood Engel-designed Lincoln Continentals. Through a turn of events, I also became owner of a 1962 Cadillac series 62 convertible that is an exact duplicate of the art car. In the process of doing a frame-up resto on the Cad I gained a great deal of respect for the car and its designers/builders. The dashboard alone is a museum-worthy work of art. No expense was spared and the quality of materials and workmanship was incredible.
In 1962, the Cadillac, Lincoln/T-Bird and Imperial had no equals. There were some nice Jags and Benzes around, but they had busy 6s, and poor-to-none air conditioning. The Americans were not so good in the twisties, but they excelled at long distance freeway travel. They were rediculously overbuilt (and built to last) and if they needed repair, any gas station could have done it. (Gas stations had actual mechanics on duty back then.)
Of course, the Detroit products were flawed. Brakes were marginal; ditto the bias-ply tires. The frame/body structures were sometimes not as rigid as they should have been. And fuel mileage was poor. But gas was like .30 a gallon.
The story of Detroit’s decline begins just a bit later, around 1970. Europe (and later Japan) began to offer superior (and larger) luxury cars that offered many of the bells and whistles that Cadillac drivers expected. Instead of directly confronting the Europeans with cars that could offer luxury and handling, they just offered the same ole thing only more of it. Plus started cost-cutting the construction standards. Reliabilty and durability, long Detroit hallmarks, began to erode.
After Imperial faded away, Cadillac and Lincoln continued the old formula. Cars like the first Sevilles were neither fish nor fowl. (Foul, maybe.) Lately the Lincoln LS and certainly the current CTS shows that Detroit can actually compete with the best foreign models. But only in the intermediate sizes. They offer nothing in the S Class/7 Series/ or LS- type car.
While I like getting nostalgic about classic Cadillacs as much as the next guy, it is an undisputable fact that when the Europeans and Japanese moved into the North American luxury market, many consumers decided that they liked their brand of luxury better than the domestics. Just look at who is getting the bulk of the $60K+ luxury market.
Its a very competitive segment where consumer expectations are high and the domestics simply haven’t invested enough to be competitive, instead often resorting to thinly disguised badge engineering. Ford and GM need to focus on their real luxury brands by scrapping their Mercury and Buick quasi-luxury divisions, fund the engineering of competitive products, back it with a quality dealer network and promote it with consistent marketing.
The current CTS should be a Buick.
I have been thinking more about this question, what is a Cadillac.
A Cadillac should be the ultimate luxury car, a car that makes you FEEL that others are second best. Other cars should put thoughts into your mind as to why they are not as good as the ultimate.
Imagine if a Cadillac made you think this about the best car from each of these makes:
Mercedes: The Cadillac is more composed at high speeds.
BMW: The Cadillac handles better.
Audi: The Cadillac has more sophisticated running gear
Rolls Royce: The Cadillac has a fancier interior.
Bentley: The Cadillac is faster.
Lexus: The Cadillac is higher quality and is more reliable.
It should be a car that you would park next to a Maybach and say to it’s owner:
“Personally, I prefer a Big car”
That’s how a Cadillac should make you feel.
You want brash?
http://tinyurl.com/7wqaar
“What is a Cadillac”
Its a show piece: BLING
As much as I hate it, The Escalade is the quintessential cadillac. 1) It’s BIG 2) its POPULAR 3) Its EXPENSIVE. VIOLA … CADILLAC!
It’s deco style, seats that envelop you in luxury, and land yacht driving dynamics. The style of the Caddies, Lincolns, and Imperials of ‘55-’65 was amazing. The Lincolns of the early to mid-’60s were especially cleanly beautiful in my opinion, and the ‘64 Imperial was just a gorgeous and interesting looking car, while the Caddies looked like the automotive personification of Dixieland jazz, the kinds of cars that would probably look in their element parading down Bourbon St. When I was still living in DC, in the late ’90s, the guy who brought Jazz to the Kennedy Center had a ‘59 Imperial–very appropriate.
The modern versions of these cars simply don’t have the style. And as at least one person has commented, the window for reinventing them is closed. Well, who knows, maybe not. But I’m not holding my breath.
In his latest post, I think npbheights is dreaming. If only GM could dream like that.
And I think westhighgoalie has a point, although I think the ’50s and ’60s Caddies were far more interesting pieces of bling than the Escalade.
I’ve ranted about this before, but nbpheights absolutely has it nailed.
One thing to add: A Cadillac has at least a V-8. No V-6’s, no turbo 4’s. Horsepower is nice, but real Caddillacs have torque by the boatlaod.
“it should be on its own platform”
I hate to break it to you all, but all Caddies since the late thirties shared the same “C” body with the “senior” Buicks (Electra) and Olds (98). The only differences was the exterior skin; underneath that, they shared the same body/frame. Yes, the engines were different, but who could tell the difference of one GM big block from another?
Today’s Cadillac: Lexus LS
As one of those of the younger generation, the one time I drove one of the giant boats with overassisted power steering, I was blown away. It was awesome. Bone chilling AC, hood out to the horizon, working 8-track, gigantic amounts of leg room, and a steering wheel that nearly floated. It was the only luxury car (and I admit I haven’t been in that many) that actually FELT like a luxury car, rather than an fully loaded Accord.
If they still built em like that… the DTS I was in a few weeks ago just didn’t have that same je ne sais quoi. It felt like a pale imitation of that old Caddy.
Of course the old Caddy probably got 12 to the gallon, but you didn’t care when you driving it.
Today’s Cadillac: Lexus LS
Yes, and a coupe version of the LS.
Maybe an LX, though if I ran Caddy we’d just leave the Luxury SUV market to Buick.
RF, I agree with what you said in your podcast –
The brand is in the mind of the consumer.
That doesn’t mean it’s frozen in time in 1983, but it does mean that Caddy doesn’t make sports cars, doesn’t make pickups, and DOES make large comfy, floaty cars.
People who think the maket for larger floatmobiles is gone simply fail to recognize the existance of the Lexus LS. No one pretends this is a driver’s car, and it doesn’t need to be. Few Lexus buyers want a driver’s car.
Caddy’s should start at about 60K and go up from there. Caddy doesn’t need a competitor for the SC, the IF, the ES, or the IS. That’s what Buick and Olds (oh, wait, um, Saturn?, um well, ) and other divisions are for. (Yes, I’m chanelling Alfred P.) Caddy also doesn’t need an RX competitor – is this what the SRX is for?
I also want to weigh in on the idea that only old people are interested in caddies – yes and no.
If they were priced as they should be, few young people could buy one. Most people in fact would never own one – which is as it should be.
People buying Caddies today didn’t want one 40 years ago. Then, today’s Caddy buyer (or more likely Lexus buyer) wanted a Mustang, or a Camaro, or a Firebird. The idea that Caddy should cater to a young demographic is absurd. People change as they grow older. If you’re young now, Caddy is your future, not your present.
What is a Cadillac?
Look to the film “Tin Men”. It is a fairly accurate portrayal of what ownership of a Cadillac signified. It made hucksters into legitimate businessmen.
I am a child of the late fifties and early sixties. Then, a Cadillac, even a ten year old model, was still preferable to a brand new Dodge or Ford or Chevy.
Way back when in 1969, my wife’s grandfather, swapped a 1966 Cadillac de Ville for a new 1969 Buick Electra 225 Limited, STRAIGHT UP. The used Cadillac was worth as much as a new Buick.
Giving Cadillac some hope, though, is the fact that a CTS or a SRX or even an Escalade is instantly recognizable as a Cadillac. The same cannot be said of a Lincoln MKS, or a Lexus 400; they’re somewhat generic looking compared to a Cadillac. The CTS is proof that Cadillac can still make a relevant car, and although it may not be the “Ultimate Drving Machine”, it is as close as any of the domestic companies have come to a Beemer.
Cadillac to me is just another car company. Prestige, History and Heritage my butt! Good cars at competitive or near competitive prices. A Ford with RWD, Leather, and a little more daring style. If the old cars were that good, anybody can try and build them. The LS460 and S550 seem to fill that role pretty similarly. Also Big American SUVs act like yachts, like the Escalade. The STS actually reminds me of a car thats not suppose to handle, its just good for getting from point A to point B with minimal demand and/or concentration from the driver. No that anything is wrong with the Old Cadillac, just I think its probably a lot about image and manipulation, not real substance. I may be wrong. For now I’m just irritated by the Cadillac nostalgia.
Problem is that people who like big floaty cars found their nirvana in sport utes. Hence the reason Cadillac is more known for Escalades then anything else at the moment.
That is what a Cadillac is now, an Escalade. Everything else they make is just a wanna be something else.
Take everything Anti-American’s hate and implement it in a car. That’s what a Caddie should be. Unapologetic American.
The Cadillac Sixteen show car should have been made, maybe not with a sixteen cylinder engine, but it should have been made. Perhaps with a hybrid drivetrain. GM should be able to play with the big boys if it really is a world class automobile company.
We know there is talent in the Tech Center. The CTS is a fine car, but unless GM has a competitive or better product that can go up against the LS460, 745, and S Class, Cadillac can’t even pretend to be The Standard of the World. Assuming that GM survives, a lack of funds is still a problem. Could they develop the STS into a top flight large luxury sedan? It’s possible. After all, that kind of continuous incremental improvement is what people say GM has to do with all their models.
When the luxobarges defined luxury cars in the USA, I was coming of age in the late 60s and early 70s. The first car I bought was a rather beat up Lotus Elan. That should give you an idea of where my automotive preferences lay. Still, I never disliked big American cars because they did exactly what they were designed to do. They were big and fast and as comfortable as your living room. Okay, so they couldn’t pull .8G on the skid pad, but the mere fact that you can pilot a 500 cu FWD Cadillac Eldorado around a corner without those front tires making any audible complaints is a pretty impressive engineering feat. Getting those cars to ride like glass was also impressive. It’s more than just soft springs and shocks.
Like I said, the engineers in Detroit are world class talents. If you tell them to make a luxobarge, they can make a fine luxobarge. Give them the reins and say make a working man’s supercar and you get the ZR1.
Interesting responses, all. Having grown up in the 90s, I don’t have any preconceptions about what a Cadillac “should be” based on its heritage from the 50s and 60s. I actually like the CTS and CTS-V quite a bit, and I would love to see more Caddies like them. It’s pretty much the only GM car I’d ever consider buying.
Honestly, I wouldn’t mind seeing this topic for every GM brand. What is a Buick? What is a Saturn? Someone needs to figure that out, because GM apparently can’t.
Bone chilling AC
For a long time US cars were the standard for HVAC. They’re still pretty good. It gets really cold in Detroit in the winter and can get really hot in the summer. I loved the old AMC’s “Desert Cool” setting.
American automatic transmissions were still the best well into the 1970s. The imports’ slushboxes were not very good in the late 60s and early 70s.
Strippo, we who live in the “flyover” states still buy most of the cars in this country, and frankly we resent having our tastes, and lifestyles denigrated by those who live on the coasts.
If the American auto industry is to be saved, it will be save by selling cars and trucks to us. I think this is what got GM, Ford and Chrysler into trouble, trying to cater to the over-finicky, whimsical and fickle tastes of the stuffed shirts and pretentious wanna-be intellectuals, while Toyota and Honda came in, realizing that what Americans need is, in this order, reliability, safety, efficiency and comfort.
we are still making that mistake, because Ford is announcing cars like the Mustang Shelby with 500+ horsepower. For what? Some east-coaster writer says horsepower is the bomb.
Here in the midwest, we know the value of hard-earned money, and we spend it with companies who recognize the same values. When Ford (which has started to, BTW) and GM start to share those values again, we will consider them. (It is too late for Chrysler.) If they don’t, good riddance. Caddilac, and Lincoln can take their places in history next to Duesenberg and Auburn.
What is a Cadillac? Big, bold styling! Cadillac styling should always stand out from the crowd. A Cadillac must have chrome plated metal incorporated into the design. Cadillac hasn’t been a world class top of the line luxury brand in a couple generations, but the good ones have been more interesting to look at than their Chevrolet relatives. A Cadillac can share many of the same parts as a Chevrolet, but only if they are well hidden. Exposed materials should be a step up from Chevrolet to help keep up the illusion of exclusivity. A Cadillac doesn’t have to have land barge handling, but the ride should be comfortable. Three or more passengers should be able to enjoy the Cadillac experience along with the driver. A Cadillac is never compact. The driving experience should feel upscale with smooth power delivery. A Cadillac may have a V6 engine as long as its NVH is up to V8 standards. V8 engine note isn’t essential to being a Cadillac. RWD also isn’t essential to the Cadillac experience, but a FWD Cadillac must not have torque steer.
I remember when I was a kid if something was the best of the best it was called the “Cadillac” of it’s field. If something was garbage people would say “It must have been made in Japan”. Man, how times have changed.
Strippo, we who live in the “flyover” states … resent having our tastes, and lifestyles denigrated by those who live on the coasts.
We stuffed shirts and pretentious wanna-be intellectuals with over-finicky, whimsical and fickle tastes think you flyover folk should worry a little less about what we think of you.
Are the people commenting here living in the alternate universe? Who foresees a big market for humongous cars with even bigger engines in the future, say 5, 10, 20 years down the road? And who on the Earth thinks that there is going to be a huge demand for the ultra-premium luxury market that Rolls, Bentley, Masi won’t be able to satisfy?
I agree with most here in that under the skin, the modern day Cadillac is the Lexus Ls, or perhaps the new large Citroens. However, the body should be that of a 300c. The car should be about style, comfort, and ride quality. No more of this nurburgring crap. This is coming from a 25-year old guy who loves good handling cars above all else. But, I’d still buy a proper Caddy to deal with the pothole-ridden roads of New York.
Jack, let’s dig deeper.
To begin with, calling the MKS a “reskinned Taurus” is a little facile. It doesn’t even share all the hard points; there’s more difference between an MKS and a Taurus than there is between an Accord and a TL.
So? The same is true of the 1988 Continental and the 1986 Taurus. And the 1995 Continental and the 1996 Taurus. The end result was a brand corrosive FWD imitator when imports were doing the same thing better and retaining more customers…and once the Town Car fizzled and the Bro-ham died, it was only a matter of time before RWD American car fans migrated to RWD Lexus and Infinitis.
The only time the MKS’ strategy ever worked was 1988 and 1989, when Ford could do no wrong with their new offerings. After that Lincoln has been cramming product down dealer’s throats with heavy incentives and unbelievable lease terms. Judging by the MKS’ sales, its mediocre performance would be even worse if they sold the Town Car in more trim levels and actively promoted/leased to retail customers.
The Genesis is a pastiche of imitation; it looks like nothing so much as everything else.
But its a Hyundai. Are you really gonna tell me that the MKS looks like a Lincoln? There’s the Grand Prix front, Lexus GS from the side and I won’t give the cheap Chinese knockoff of a Quattroporte from the back any slack: Lincoln has a history of unique posteriors, they didn’t need to make a Hyundai with a four-pointed star.
The MKS succeeds because it tries to be nothing else. It’s simply good at its job.
Maybe with Ecoboost I’ll change my tune, but right now the MKS is a mediocre vehicle designed to appeal to nobody in particular.
It’s not RWD. So what? A luxury car needn’t be rear-wheel-drive; ask Andre Citroen.
RWD is as important to the Cadillac and Lincoln brand as their corporate logos. It affects driving for sure, but also proportioning. And your analogy to Citroen is fine, but they never made JFK’s limo, or any of the hottest rides for America’s upper crust for 50+ years.
Honestly, I wouldn’t mind seeing this topic for every GM brand. What is a Buick? What is a Saturn? Someone needs to figure that out, because GM apparently can’t.
A year and a half or so ago, TTAC ran a very nice series showing where each of the traditional brands stood on the “ladder of success”. They did Olds, because it was in the middle of the brand hierachy for decades. They didn’t do Hummer or Saab. I can’t recall if they did GMC or not. Anyway, if you can find this in the archives somewhere, it’s well worth your time to read. An interesting feature of the series was that the price of cars was measured against median annual income of the time, and with that we could see that brands like Caddy and Buick have come way way down in price. You can’t be the standard of the world unless you charge for it.
Today’s cars have to be differentiated on more than wheelbase and horsepower, but still there is more to Sloan’s “laddder” than most people today give him credit for.
Drove a friend’s 2005 DTS recently; now I know why Suburbans are referred to as tall Cadillacs. Very similar feel in general, except maybe a tad bouncy on bumps for the Suburban.
When I was a kid, Cadillac ads always had a big V emblem in jewels at the top of the page, with a picture of the car underneath. Lincolns were just big Mercurys, and Imperials were almost as rare as Packards. By the time I actually owned a Caddy, it was a 1953 black sedan that I traded a ratty stick-shift 55 Dodge for, in about 1964. Six weeks later I used it as the down payment on a new Barracuda. In the next 30 years I owned a whole series of Chrysler products, from the fin car era to mid-60’s models. Ford and GM guys that I knew were always amazed at how well the Mopars handled, especially the 300L hardtop.
There were a lot of great-looking Caddies back in those days – I liked the 65 and 66 cars best – but I just never ran across one at time when I was looking to buy a car.
Now I’ve got a 99 Accord, an 03 Chevy pickup, and an 84 RX7 that’s basically a summer play-toy. Definitely no one’s idea of a Cadillac customer.
But it’s true that today’s Cadillac isn’t what Cadillac was in the days of the jewelry ads. GM was still making money in those days, and no one thought the whole shitaree was about to go down the tubes. The question now is, will there even be a Cadillac in two years, except for those in our memories?
I don’t get the point of this thread. For YEARS, the so-called experts and so-called enthusiasts complained that Cadillacs were too big, floaty and thirsty, and that they should be competing with (insert European luxury manufacturer here). It took a while (wither the Catera) but the first generation CTS started moving things in the right direction dynamically, and the current CTS seems to have nailed it pretty good. Now the so-called experts and the so-called enthusiasts are complaining that Cadillac has lost it way and that their cars aren’t big, floaty and thirsty anymore?
Make up your minds already.
My favorite Cadillac of all time is the 2002 Eldorado ETC. At one point the northstar powered cadillacs where the fastest front wheel drive production car ever built. At the local speedway on street night I watched one turn a 13.75 quarter mile while it walked away from a Trans Am.
Nathaniel claims Cadillac = Escalade and the rest of their cars wanna be something else. WRONG.
cadillac = style, luxury and quality.
No other cars look like Cadillacs and no other cars America makes, scream “i’ve made it” like a Cadillac does.
Lincoln and Cadillac are like America;s BMW and Mercedes. If you don’t have a good career, you probably ain’t driving one.