By on August 21, 2014

elmiraj

General Motors global product development chief Mark Reuss revealed Tuesday that Cadillac will press ahead with an F-segment sedan built upon a new platform.

The Detroit News reports the new Cadillac will slot above the full-size XTS, and will throw down against the Mercedes S-Class and BMW 7 Series.

Reuss adds that the flagship sedan is important for the brand “if it is to compete as a serious luxury carmaker” in the top luxury segment:

What we do there has got to be a symbol of excellence… This is a car that Cadillac needs that will define this brand in terms of innovation and excellence.

The flagship Cadillac is expected to go into production near the end of 2015, and will likely be joined by a compact slotted below the ATS for the lower end of the luxury segment.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

179 Comments on “Reuss: Cadillac F-Segment Flagship Is A Go...”


  • avatar
    tjh8402

    I’ll be curious to see what engines they use. With the death of the Northstar, GM now lacks a OHC engine with more than 6 cylinders. Will they try to pit the CTS V spec turbo 6 against the German V8s? Maybe go the hybrid route a la Lexus positioning the hybrid V8 against the 12 cylinder models? Are OHC’s even necessary? Bentley gets buy with pushrods in their flagship V8s, and the new generation GM small blocks can certainly match if not exceed the Europeans V8s in specs (I think I recall that the LT1 is lighter than a BMW N63 while offering more power), so will buyers accept that or even care? Will GM go ahead with the expense of developing a new line of premium OHC motors?

    • 0 avatar
      th009

      Few buyers will know the difference between OHC and OHV. Just like few buyers know the difference between FWD and RWD.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        So, does wealth breed ignorance in this case? The one Tesla owner I encountered seemed to know much about his car. I would hope for big money the small pool of buyers knew a little about the car they purchased.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          I’m not sure it’s a case of ignorance, but whether the valvetrain layout actually matters to buyers of this car. An FI version of the LT V8 would likely be perfectly acceptable as a high end offering while I imagine the standard motor would be the 3.6L TT.

          As an interesting tangent, a high performance electric version would steal some thunder from the Model S. However like the Model S, it would almost certainly be a money loser.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I haven’t driven a (new) LT-powered car or truck, but if the LT is to serve as a luxury car engine it will need far better NVH characteristics than the LS.

            The LS in all its applications has a characteristic shake at some rev ranges that would just not do in a luxury car, and I also haven’t heard an LS car that’s quiet enough inside for the luxury sedan market.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            Those NVH concerns can be dealt with in similar ways as other luxury makers deal with them. Things like active engine mounts, active noise control, sound deadening etc.

        • 0 avatar
          redav

          I expect Tesla buyers know more about their car because it’s different, and because Tesla does a much better job educating shoppers about their differences.

          It isn’t about wealth or the expense of the car, but rather the expectations of the buyer. Buyers of big-car, high-end luxury generally don’t require the same things as sports car buyers. For example, these pages are full of people loving the sound of a V8, but probably more wealthy luxury buyers probably don’t want to hear the engine at all. That doesn’t mean they’re ignorant, just they have different priorities.

          • 0 avatar
            ect

            Agree. Buyers in this segment typically care about the experience the car delivers, and not at all about how it does it.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          …The one Tesla owner I encountered seemed to know much about his car…

          I would venture to say that probably just about all Tesla Roadster buyers and most Tesla Model S buyers fall into “early adopter/evangelist” category from a marketing standpoint.

          They are, as enthusiasts of technology, going to be far more likely to understand and talk about why they made their choice. If you have a good product and good service, those early adopters will drive a high NPS, and will help move you into mainstream adoption (mainstream adoption of a consumer technology is considered achieved when 10% of households have the product/device – electric cars are no where near that adoption point).

          The average buyer of a 7-series, S-class, A8, isn’t going to likely be as technologically savvy.

          It points to the near pointless argument that OHV pushrod engines are so “awful” because they are so inefficient given their displacement. It ignores that they are typically by design, lighter than OHC engines that are half their displacement (as could be pointed out LS2 versus the BMW I-6 for one example) and they are boat anchor reliable, and very simple to work on. They are more harsh on the other side, and make a bit more noise (GM LS engines are a symphony of solenoids when idling – no that isn’t a compliment).

          But the argument is kind of pointless – really neither is better than the other – beyond a religious discussion. To that point, even for the most ardent GM hater among the B&B, if an LSA long block crate engine showed up on their door step paid for, and the guy said, “sign here,” I’m guessing 99.9% would gladly sign (and the same would go for a BMW I-6 twin turbo V6 for that matter, or a Chrysler 6.4 HEMI, or….)

          • 0 avatar
            duffman13

            I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: There aren’t many vehicles that aren’t improved by dropping an LS in them.

            And I always like to trot out the VQ vs LS picture and specs when people say “V8s are too big/heavy.”

            The fact is, aside from not sounding as refined as some other motors off throttle, an all-aluminum LS offers better horsepower and torque per pound and overall motor size than pretty much anything else on the market. And they get very good fuel economy not just for a V8, but compared to anything making similar power figures.

            Plus, I’m pretty sure most people like saying “it has a corvette motor in it” when asked about what powers their car. I certainly wouldn’t mind it.

            Insert LT series instead of LS as applicable into what I just said for the years going forward.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Completely agreed on all points. Years back when the Whale era B-bodies were more plentiful, I remember many a person edging in “its got a Corvette motor” in conversation.

            Today its “its got a Cruze motor” or “its got an W-Impala motor”

          • 0 avatar
            matador

            Ah yes, “It’s got a Corvette motor”

            My Chevrolet 1/2 Ton truck also has the Corvette motor. If I throw some stuff in the back, I can probably get 50/50 Weight Distribution, too!

            Now, let’s have a race, shall we ;-)

        • 0 avatar
          bosozoku

          Teslas are still not a mainstream car. One must seek out a Tesla, rather than passing a lot full of them and having your interest piqued. So it stands to reason the folks buying them, especially over comparably-priced cars, probably did a little homework beforehand.

        • 0 avatar
          stuki

          I doubt handing someone with car knowledge a few shekels will cause him to forget what he knows, but being knowledgeable about cars just doesn’t pay as much as playing chicklet to Yellen’s hen in a New York condo, does anymore.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        And those who do know, reflexively prefer OHV in big luxo cruisers anyway :)

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Good points, I for one hope they do not. They’ve already got one of the premier V8s in the world, why spend billions to develop Northstar 2.0?

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      For the weight penalty and the MPG penalty, I highly doubt they would invest a Billion on a one horse engine.
      A new 7.0 based off the current lineup would probably be as good as it gets for a new engine, but realistically they can do everything with the 6.2.
      Proven it can be fuel efficient, if 460 N/A HP is too little a simple S/C or turbo can fix that quick. It’s light, compact, easy to work on and cheap.

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        I was just thinking its somewhat ironic – the old V spec Northstar as found in the STS and XLR is, by its specs, pretty much in line with modern luxury V8s.

        Mercedes M278: 4.7L twin turbo 402-455 hp 443-516 lb-ft
        BMW N63: 4.4L twin turbo 402-440 hp 440-480 lb-ft
        Audi 4.0TFSI: 4.0L twin turbo 429 hp 443 lb-ft (more in Bentley spec)
        Cadillac Northstar V – 4.4L supercharged 469 hp 439 lb-ft

        I do think the LT1 should be sufficient, assuming it isn’t more vibration prone than the OHC engines. Could give Cadillac something to differentiate themselves from the rest of the pack. I also don’t see this car being a big player in Europe. it’s for the American, Middle Eastern, and Chinese markets. Cadillac and GM will need a (luxury) diesel V6 and V8 to play in Europe, and even then, I don’t think it’s worth it. The European car market still sucks and the domestic makers are pretty well entrenched there.

    • 0 avatar
      jacob_coulter

      I would bet 99 out of 100 Cadillac buyers could not tell you the difference between an overhead cam engine and a overhead valve one. Even “car guys” I know wouldn’t be able to explain the difference.

      Personally, I would greatly prefer a “dinosaur” LS engine to some new Cadillac exclusive, Northstar 2.0 over head cam V8.

      Ask Northstar owners how they liked their super awesome V8s when they were told the head bolts let go and the repair is more than the car is worth. There’s a reason Nortstar era Cadillacs are dirt cheap, they’re ticking time bombs.

      I just don’t trust GM with a small volume engine, especially when their “generic” small block is arguably the most beloved engine of all time and has a track record.

      Had GM simply put LT or LS small block Chevys in those Caddys, you’d probably see a lot more loyal Cadillac buyers.

    • 0 avatar
      KixStart

      tjh8402: “With the death of the Northstar, GM now lacks a OHC engine with more than 6 cylinders. Will they try to pit the CTS V spec turbo 6 against the German V8s?”

      I wouldn’t recommend that.

      I was hoping they’d do a V-12 or V-16. Much depends on exactly what they mean by “flagship.” If that really means “a little better and much more expensive than an XTS,” then I don’t see a bright future for this car.

      • 0 avatar
        KixStart

        And… if they’re aiming for “technically advanced,” OHV is probably not the way to go. Sure, they have a very good OHV engine but “OHV” doesn’t evoke “high tech.”

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      Despite the fact that it certainly delivers the goods, if GM thinks they are going to stick a pushrod V8 (AKA what powers the gardeners pickup truck) into a car that is supposed to go head-to-head with Germany’s finest, well, good luck with that, they are going to need it. Bentley gets away with it because their gigantic turbocharged V8 has serious heritage, and power delivery like a steam engine, not a Corvette.

      I think you will find that $100K+ luxury car buyers are more sophisticated than you give them credit for.

      GM has long been guilty of development by and for the numbers while ignoring the subtleties, and a $100K+ luxury car is all about the subtleties.

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        Big power and smooth and muted delivery is what matters. GM powertrain is capable of delivering an FI LT V8 that will match or better the direct German competition in every measure. Only obsessive compulsive ned-nerdly enthusiasts will make a fuss about whether the camshaft(s) are above or below the cylinder heads.

        Case in point; the C7 is an excellent car, everyone admits it and only the few who don’t matter actually care enough about where the camshaft is to not buy one.

  • avatar
    mcarr

    Unless they have a brand new engine somewhere, I hope they use the 455 hp 6.2L and 8-speed auto from the Corvette. Apart from having the cam in the “wrong” place, it certainly checks all the boxes for an advanced V8 engine. A V6, even in turbo form, doesn’t say “flagship” to me.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      The Small Block has the cam in the right place. In fact more so for a big cruiser with and automatic, than for a sports car.

      An LT 12….., now THAT would be a Caddy flagship to remember…… Particularly as the rest of automotive blingdom is busy sacrificing all joy on the altar of turbocharged boredom.

  • avatar
    Da Coyote

    Good looking, and if I didn’t loathe, despise, and f*rt in the general direction of GM, I might even think of purchasing one.

    But nope. Never again.

  • avatar
    ClutchCarGo

    “What we do there has got to be a symbol of excellence”

    It needs to be more than a symbol of excellence. It needs to be the realization of excellence.

    • 0 avatar
      kmoney

      Yeah, this. It needs to be a loss leader with build quality rivaling the original LS400 if it hopes to give the brand any chance of being taken seriously as a luxury car maker again. I would love to buy a true flagship Cadillac, but have been soured by reliability and corner cutting on interior parts even on top-of-the-line domestic cars to get excited just yet.

  • avatar
    stars9texashockey

    Looks amazing and it sounds like Reuss means business. However, they will probably make the same mistake with this one as they have with the current ATS and CTS. That is, price it like an S class or 7 series. Cadillac doesn’t have that prestige/cachet yet (again?) and needs to undercut its competition by $5000-$10000 to get people to look. Otherwise, cash on the hood later on is the almost certain result.

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      +1 for using “cachet” correctly.

      As for your main point, I’m afraid I have to agree. As I see it, there’s a lot to like about what Cadillac is doing product-wise, but the well is so poisoned that even the slightest flaw is magnified beyond reason by all the usual critics.

      There’s another issue that, I feel, is even more important: dealerships. Here in Manhattan, the local dealership seems more like a 3rd-world operation than a luxury car palace. Pick up your Cadillac after service at the Manhattan dealership and you are left to stand around a dirty garage entrance that has no organization whatsoever. What makes it worse is that it’s the new dealership location. They had a chance to get it right and, it seems, they just didn’t care. Walk a block to the Mercedes dealership and you are transported to a futuristic glass and steel world where cars are displayed hanging in mid-air. The local BMW dealership is similar: airy, beautiful and downright upscale. There are good Cadillac dealerships, but it’s criminal that GM presents such a poor image here in one of the most affluent markets in the US.

  • avatar

    I drove the C-class 2015 all day yesterday. The interior and exterior is “a baby S-class”, but the engine note was HORRIBLE. Ridiculously LOUD at any speed. They’d have been better off with a naturally aspirated V6.

    That said, the interiors of Cadillacs are the nicest they’ve ever been, but they are still a world away from matching the coherency of Mercedes Benz’ design language. the new S-class W222 we leased and the new C-class are close to perfection.

    Cadillac keeps doing stupid things and going cheap where it counts.

    Interior should have powered headrests, powered thigh cushions, MASSAGE SEATS, heated/cooled seats all around, as much leg space in front as in back (you should be able to get 4 of me in there for a 7 hour ride).
    -A Navigation system that doesn’t suck.

    The material quality I’m OK with (in the XTS and CTS)

    The art-and science-design language gets dated way too quickly.

    And for Gods Sakes…a naturally aspirated V8 with option for a supercharged V8. RWD and AWD optional.

    A CADILLAC AIN’T A CADILLAC without a V8. PERIOD.

    Some people hate the XTS, but I really like it. The only downside was that you have to buy the V-sport to actually approach the power of a V8 and the engine was loud and buzzy.

    I absolutely HATE twin Turbo V6’s in big cars. THEY SOUND HORRIBLE.

    There is a mentality among “older” people which says that they must have the “top spec” car and that a V8 is a mark of top spec. When I was with the C-class 2015 yesterday, an older couple (picture on my Youtube video) came up and the guy IMMEDIATELY asked about the C400 without even having driven the C300.

    That right there tells me something.

    • 0 avatar
      319583076

      (you should be able to get 4 of me in there for a 7 hour ride).

      What a ridiculous criterion. Pray tell where 4 BTSRs would be road-tripping together in their luxury sedan for 7 hours? Anyone shopping this class has access to business class, first class, or private air travel which obviates the need for for the BTSR road trip. I should probably also mention the fact that 4 BTSRs likely wouldn’t be road-tripping in the same car, either. I rather imagine they would be dominating (terrorizing?) traffic in all variety of Mopar V8 machinery.

      • 0 avatar

        319583076

        Eventually you’ll realize that I understand this market.

        Whether you realize it or not – people like me are the buyers of cars like this.

        Not the “enthusiasts”.
        Not the “reviewers”
        And certainly not the people sitting behind keyboards who only dream of driving this stuff.

        I am a hypercritical consumer.

        I am not afraid to admit that my 300 and my Jeep aren’t big enough for a 7-hour ride. Our S-class W222 is. You know why? CAUSE IT’S LIKE 17 FEET LONG.

        • 0 avatar
          319583076

          Why are you driving anywhere 400-500 miles away when you can fly?

          If you can afford cars in this class, your time is worth more than a 14-hour round trip by car.

          There is an incongruity in your position. Ridiculous demands are not forgiven by your self-applied “hypercriticality”.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            Because airports and airlines suck, and even many buyers of S-Classes wouldn’t spend the money on a private flight for that kind of distance.

          • 0 avatar
            319583076

            Airports do suck, but like everything else, not nearly as much for the wealthy.

            Look, if you can afford a $100k automobile, you will already have status with an airline – probably corporate – meaning that at a minimum you have access to shorter security lines and hospitality lounges at major airports and some of these amenities at the smaller airports.

            I don’t buy it.

          • 0 avatar
            hubcap

            I don’t see why your choice would be solely distance dependent, especially for a 400-500 mile trip.

            Judging from friends and acquaintances, duration of stay is also a factor. Driving 500 miles to stay a day wouldn’t cut it. That same distance for a two week sojourn is not a problem.

            Of course, these are all just data points. I have no knowledge of results from a comprehensive study but in my circle people drive these distances regularly and judging by some of the high priced iron I see on the interstates others do too.

          • 0 avatar
            319583076

            We’re talking about people with the (alleged) means to purchase a $100k automobile. For the sake of argument and availability of data: Median US Income $50k, Average US auto sales price $31k – I know the difference b/w median and average but we’re ballparking here. If we assume the ratio holds across all incomes and shopping preferences (which it certainly doesn’t, but we’re ball-parking).

            We presume that the median income of someone that purchases a $100k auto is $165k, which is almost assuredly too low. There are 2080 working hours in a year, so we ball-park this person’s time value as $77/hour.

            I can fly from Omaha to Chicago (about 500 miles) in about 45 minutes flying time. Add 60 minutes to each end for door-to-door and it’s under 3 hours one way. I can drive from Omaha to Chicago in about 7 hours. Figure another 60 minutes and call it 8 ours door-to-door.

            The time-value difference for this fictious person is $385, which is almost exactly what the airfare costs most of the year. And, we haven’t even figured in gas, food, and costs for the drive. And, this person gets another 1,000 flyer miles (possibly more) in addition to spending less than half of the travel time.

            My point, again, wealthy people do not take 7 hour road trips because there is no reason for them to do so. They have access to better airport facilities across the board and that access is discounted because they are rewarded for using those facilities. They also most assuredly value their time and calculate the costs of their time when deciding what mode of travel to pursue.

            Most of us have more time than money. Wealthy people have more money and their time opportunity costs are greater. Wealthy people don’t waste their time driving long distances because they can’t afford to.

          • 0 avatar
            GarbageMotorsCo.

            LOL, Maybe he is afraid of flying.

            I have a friend in very high places who cannot, will not and never will set foot on a plane. If he can get there by train, boat or his Bentley, he goes.

            Deathly afraid of flying.

          • 0 avatar
            el scotto

            “Most of us have more time than money. Wealthy people have more money and their time opportunity costs are greater. Wealthy people don’t waste their time driving long distances because they can’t afford to.”

            Just the opposite. Took a week off in July to travel from DC to the Carolinas. Did I care if old girl wanted to stop at every freaking pottery place between Greensboro and Rockingham? No a wit. Ditto for the side trip to Wilkesboro. Did we care? Not a wit. Not having to say “next slide please”, reply to mindless emails, or deal with the crisis du jour was priceless. For leisure, time is a luxury. For business who cares? I’m sleeping in another Mariott.

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            I’ll drive any time, if it’s less than 1000 miles. Perhaps even longer. Living in the Bay Area (or LA), an excuse to actually drive, and not simply sit in traffic like a caged schmuck, is actually a time to be cherished. <2 miles, walk. < 10, ride a bicycle. <300, Motorcycle. <1000, car. Beyond that, preferably boat or train, but in practice……

            Flying…….,aaaaaaaaaaaarggggh!!! Huffing jet fuel for hours while having sleazeballs body cavity search you and ebola carrying involuntary bio terrorists cough down your throat as you sit there hating in an under pressured tin can pretending to be privileged because your seat is an inch wider than that of some sap even more repressed a few rows back….. Screw that! Heck, make that 1500 miles. Disgusted to even be reminded of flying.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            “Look, if you can afford a $100k automobile, you will already have status with an airline – probably corporate – meaning that at a minimum you have access to shorter security lines and hospitality lounges at major airports and some of these amenities at the smaller airports.”

            I have access to these things and would still rather drive if the timeline is realistic. I’m acquianted with several people who own their own planes for the purpose of saving time, but when time permits will sometimes make the trip in their car. There are also many older retired folks who would rather take the time and drive.

            The point isn’t that flying sometimes makes more sense or saves time thus buyers with the means will never take road trips in their S-Classes. The point is that sometimes they do and when they do they will want to be comfortable.

        • 0 avatar
          ellomdian

          “Eventually you’ll realize that I understand this market.”

          Sure. Where ‘this market’ is shorthand for ‘cars that aspirational young urban males covet in rap videos.’ The fact that you even refer to ‘buyers’ is more damning that anything else you could say – old white money (that is, people this stuff is marketed towards) do not buy.

          The Cadillac will likely have a turbo-6 as a base outside of NA, and depending on the curb weight, might even have it here. You know, like the BMW and Mercedes have. There will probably be a hybrid version, much to the shock of ‘enthusiasts,’ and if they have the stones to actually compete outside of the US, a diesel version.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            BTSR…

            – The best-selling 7-series is now the 740i. Turbo six.
            – The best-selling A8 is now the 3.0T. Supercharged six.
            – The S550 will soon be supplemented by a S400 with the new Benz turbo six. I’d put down some of that Bigtruckseriesreview money that within two years of the S400’s introduction it will be the best-selling S-class.

            I tend to agree that the Caddy flagship will need a V8 as an *option* to shut up the magazines. But the bulk of the sales will be with the excellent turbo 3.6, probably making 430 hp in this application, which is more than enough for the effortless wafting these buyers prefer.

        • 0 avatar
          Maxb49

          You’re absolutely right.

        • 0 avatar
          bosozoku

          “CAUSE IT’S LIKE 17 FEET LONG”

          Hmm.. A 300 is 16.5 feet. The extra six inches must make all the difference.

        • 0 avatar
          krhodes1

          Dear God, the world must be ending as I find myself in complete agreement with BTRS on something.

          You better believe rich people drive long distances, because one of the perks of being rich is not HAVING to be somewhere in 4hrs. Many of the folks who buy these cars are retired or semi-retired, and they vacation. Yes, vacation as a verb. With golf clubs in the trunk. Ever tried to take golf clubs through an airport?

          I grew up with and still know some seriously wealthy folks – they don’t fly unless they HAVE to.

          And I can assure you – Old Money buys, New Money leases.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            “Dear God, the world must be ending as I find myself in complete agreement with BTRS on something”

            Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

      • 0 avatar
        el scotto

        Four El Scotto’s for a 12 hour ride? I’ve done the four-person with all their assorted luggage from Metro DC to the Cornfields trip more than once. All four of us have the TSA express boarding card or whatever the hell they call it, enough premium credit cards or ariline miles to get into ANY airline lounge (or a commbination of both. We just pack a lot of stuff for for a week or longer stay; golf clubs in the summer, presents at Christmas. To us flying is anything but “cool” or “adventourous”, it’s just a means to an end. Also most airlines these days have morphed into the “Trailer Court Comet” with fat guys going into full recline for a 90 minute flight and momma holding junior on her lap to save the price of a ticket. Throw in 20 dollar hamburgers at the airport restaurant(?) and rental cars from hell. Then you’ll understand why some of us LIKE taking long road trips. Radio Margaritaville and a large Sheetz coffe and I’m good for the next 200 miles. PS. Did I mention I want somethign that will hold four guys, four sets of golf clubs, and a beer cooler for weekend trips to the course?

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        I know more than a few owners of this class of car who drive between their winter homes in Florida and their summer homes in Maine every year. I would assume the same is true to lake houses in the UP, and all the other vacation destinations.

        Baffles me why there is a meme on here that rich folk fly everywhere. Until you get to private jet rich it just isn’t so. 95% of those in the big chairs in the front of the plane are working stiffs like me who fly enough to get the free upgrades (tomorrow marks my 97th-100th flights this year). Domestic first class is a loyalty perk, and little more.

      • 0 avatar
        tekdemon

        Not every well off person has status with airlines, and airlines have been much worse about upgrades lately even with status unless you buy ripped off fare classes anyway. Sure, I know plenty of well off people with lots of frequent flier miles because they’re constantly being sent on international treks in business class, but there’s also lots of well off people who don’t travel for business and who are too busy in their jobs to go travel for leisure enough to rack up status. The well off people I know who actually have to pay for their first class seats don’t do it all the time, they might be multimillionaires but for most flights they still end up booking coach! That said, I honestly can’t remember the last time four rich people I know crammed themselves into a C class for a road trip so you are right on that point.

        To be honest most really wealthy people I know don’t even give a crap about cars. An extended family member had a completely ridiculous $20 million NYC apartment and didn’t even own a car. And you would think they’d be taking limos everywhere then, but in reality whenever they visited friends or family they’d ask for a ride back from the airport. Did they blow money on crazy stuff? Sure, but most rich people I know are really good with their money and not wasting it needlessly. Even that ridiculous apartment they ended up flipping for a huge profit so they weren’t really wasting money so much as investing it really well.

        And for the record I could buy a new C class or S class pretty comfortably but I still think they’re ripoffs once you load them out the way a luxury car ought to be. That and the fact that I can’t get over that stupid tablet stuck to the dashboard in the C class. It’s ok in a Mazda 3 that costs $20K, not ok in a C400 that’s $60K. If I was really gonna waste my money on this nonsense I’d probably get a freshly off lease high end AMG vehicle (something like a 2011 CL63) that someone else bought fully loaded new, and make sure it has a good warranty on it. That way someone else ate $100K in depreciation for you. But frankly I’d rather buy a more reasonable high performance car new so I don’t feel like I’m sticking out like a sore thumb when driving to visit people.

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      Powered … headrests?

      That’s a thing?

      A quick search suggests I’m not smoking crack, and the Googlers haven’t heard of a powered headrest in a car either.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        My 00 A8L had powered headrests front and rear. Certainly is a thing.

        http://ipocars.com/imgs/a/a/m/c/u/audi__a8_2_8_2000_6_lgw.jpg

        Button to the right of the circular dial button (lumbar) is the one which does the headrests

      • 0 avatar
        tbonejazzman76

        My 1994 BMW 525i wagon had powered headrests. A gimmick to be sure, but a nice gimmick.

      • 0 avatar

        Park Avenue Ultras have powered headrests. For the first few years, ’00 DeVilles had motorized seatbelt towers, too.

      • 0 avatar
        kmoney

        Our 1991 LS400 had them as well. They are pretty cheesy, but the only thing cool about them is when they are tied into the seat memory system they semi-automatically adjust to drivers of different height — vs probably not bothering at all with manual. In that way they are a form of passive safety.

      • 0 avatar
        itsfred

        I don’t want to get all pretentious and stuff, but my SL550 has power headrests specifically so the AirScarf TM system can direct a warm, comforting cloud of air to just the right spot on my neck when the top’s down and there’s a slight chill in the air. Life is good….

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        Of just the cars I have owned/own, the ones with powered headrests were:

        ’86 BMW 535i
        ’88 MB 300TE
        ’01 Range Rover HSE

        Pretty much everything over $60K has this today.

    • 0 avatar
      Maxb49

      I absolutely HATE twin Turbo V6′s in big cars. THEY SOUND HORRIBLE.

      While I’m a big fan of yours, and generally agree with you, I have to disagree with this point. The 3.5 Ecoboost in the Lincoln has a nice growl to it on the highway. Tuned, it puts out 435 horsepower.

      Someone should dyno another XTS Vsport. It’s only putting our 290 horsepower at the wheels. The last dyne figure I saw was 280 at the wheels, which is far short of the claimed 410 horsepower figure.

      A well executed twin-tubo V6 can work well in a large car, but GM phoned it in on the XTS Vsport.

      That said, Lincoln should have included the 5.0 Coyote as an option on the Lincoln with an optional 5.0 ecoboost. I am seriously considering a 300C.

    • 0 avatar
      usernamealreadyregistered

      “There are 2080 working hours in a year….”

      For people who buy $100,000 cars, that number is probably closer to 4000. Or zero.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    “the new Cadillac will slot above the full-size XTS”

    Axe that fugly POS after this goes live. FWD oriented customers mostly buy AWD now.

    “Reuss adds that the flagship sedan is important for the brand “if it is to compete as a serious luxury carmaker” in the top luxury segment”

    I wonder how it feels to be the only person in the tubes with a clue.

    “will likely be joined by a compact slotted below the ATS for the lower end of the luxury segment.will likely be joined by a compact slotted below the ATS for the lower end of the luxury segment.”

    Really? No dignity at all huh? So… on one end of the spectrum we’ll have a real car and on the other end one less than ATS sedan which is already a sales flop?

    • 0 avatar
      Lie2me

      Put a crossover on the ATS platform and step aside

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        How does that slot below the ATS?

        I’m thinking, they’re thinking… Cimmaron by Cadillac.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          Clearly, the below-ATS model will be an AWD Cruze variant.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          I thought the same thing, but how can a rep of Cadillac say, “will likely be joined by a compact slotted below the ATS for the lower end of the luxury segment” and not realize what that means to a lot of people “CIMMARON”?

          The ATS based crossover is just an idea if Cadillac wanted to move a few cars

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I think its a good idea and I once suggested the same, but the article implies something “under” ATS. I would personally dispense with the idea of something less than ATS and leave the BMW 1 series playbook at home.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            A Cadillac slotted below ATS is what Corey said, a Cruise and I believe it will happen to complete the Cadillac self-sacrificial trilogy of death

            “Cimmaron, Catera, Cruise”

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Cimmaron, Catera, Cruise… all Crap by Cadillac.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            The curse of the letter “C” brought down on the House of Antoine Laumet de La Mothe, sieur de Cadillac for stealing Detroit from the Indians

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I’m pretty sure the Native Americans can have it back now if they really want it.

          • 0 avatar
            Lie2me

            Lol, exactly

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        They did something like that with the old SRX, and people didn’t like the RWD space utilization. The current SRX is the right type of product for them in the crossover space.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          SRX is a great seller for Cadillac (hint, hint) it is also six years old and needs an in house companion ala Cayenne/Macan

          The original SRX was great, but too “wagony”

          • 0 avatar
            Sigivald

            Must be a regional thing?

            Here in the Northwest I’m not sure I’ve *ever* seen an SRX.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            You’ve never seen the SRX, their best selling model. You also were not aware of powered headrests.

            I’m now doubting your knowledge of current automobiles! How is your Netscape working these days? Still using Lycos? LOL

          • 0 avatar
            Firestorm 500

            “The original SRX was great, but too “wagony””

            CTS with a metal camper shell. No one was fooled.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            I’m also in the Northwest and I see SRXes all the time. We don’t have as many Cadillacs in general as other parts of the country, but they’re out there. You probably just lost them in the sea of boring CUVs.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            I see more Saab 9-4xs than SRXs, but I am pretty sure 90% of all they built went to New England, or have ended up here.

    • 0 avatar
      celebrity208

      I normally can see your point but w/r/t a sub-ATC class car I think you’re wrong.
      1) the whole car market is going “Luxury/Premium” (or at the truly lower price points the appearance of “Luxury” with mid level, not premium, materials)
      2) Audi, BMW, and MB are all moving into the B and A segment
      So a sub-ATS car sounds like a totally appropriate plan.

      That said I’m not totally sold because I kinda subscribe to TTAC’s argument that the small car revolution is only temporary.

      But, to flip flop some more, if GM can engineer a premium B-class car platform and charge more for it when it wears a Caddy badge then it’s a way to subsidize a Chevy b-class car.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I agree with your observation but I think Audi/BMW/Mercedes are in a far different position. While Audi is a division of VAG similar to how Cadillac is a division of GM, BMW and Mercedes are standalone marques. Unless BMW or Mercedes wanted to spin up a serious entry level brand and go two tier, they are forced to offer cheaper models under their overall expensive brand. I can’t comment on the 1 series, but we have all discussed the poor quality and overall doucebaggery of CLA. I think in the long run it hurts the brands more than helps, but I imagine all three are desperate to get into the cheaper space for volume sales purposes. Cadillac might have been the second major high end brand to abandon exclusivity and high quality for volume sales in the early 70s (Packard being the first) but in both Packard and Cadillac’s case the brands have suffered (had Cadillac not been a GM division it would have gone the way of Packard, IMO). GM should be using Cadillac to produce high quality, high profit, low volume models and rely on Chevrolet and Buick for the bread-and-butter money. Their German counterparts are in an opposite position for the most part, they need volume to survive.

        “if GM can engineer a premium B-class car platform and charge more for it when it wears a Caddy badge then it’s a way to subsidize a Chevy b-class car.”

        Which is what the Germans are doing, but for Cadillac this would quickly become the butt of jokes.

        • 0 avatar
          Lie2me

          In other words to reach down market you start from the top, S-Class to CLA, BMW 3,5,7 to 1,2 whatever. When you have a top people will buy your bottom crap. Without a top to reach down, people will laugh at you.

          Cadillac has a lot of trouble with this

        • 0 avatar
          sproc

          “Unless BMW or Mercedes wanted to spin up a serious entry level brand and go two tier”

          Doesn’t Mini fill this role for BMW?

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I thought about that (as Smart is to Daimler) but I’m not so sure Mini is BMW’s entry level line. I would say Mini is an enthusiast’s niche brand engineered by BMW.

          • 0 avatar
            sproc

            Good point, and I probably would have agreed with you until the 2 Series Active Tourer showed up, suggesting that Mini is no longer niche engineering.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            @sproc

            No. Mini is too hobbled by its heritage.

            Really, this whole thing is only an issue in the US. In the rest of the world BMW and MB have always been much wider range automakers than here. There was nothing amazing or luxurious about a 316 or 518 with a single carb, or an A-class, or a 200D taxi with a stickshift.

            Especially MB, who make everything from garbage trucks to busses to the S-Class everywhere else but here. The rest of the world accepts the situation as normal, but internet punters living in their parent’s basement wail and gnash their teeth at the insanity of it all.

        • 0 avatar
          Maxb49

          The small Mercedes A class did nothing to hurt the brand in Canada or Europe.

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    Great each Cadillac dealer can have one to display out front, while the real upper middle class world drives by in their GLs, Q7s, Macans and Rovers, don’t worry you still have the 6 year old SRX and the new, but not really Escalade. Stay the course

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    What a colossal waste of time, effort and money. Cadillac will never have presence in Europe no matter how hard they try. So we can discount that volume. In the US, the F-segment volume is down by 50% from its peaks with no indication of returning (i.e. the peaks were around 2000, not 2007- the decline started way before the recession), and newcomers/unestablished players (XJ, A8) are barely hanging on, moving 500 cars a month if they’re lucky. Why? Why pay 6 figures for an XJ, when an XF delivers 95% of the comfort, luxury and content for 60% of the price?

    What was the rule of thumb here for the cost of developing a new platform… $1B? $1B, for a platform to put under 1 car, that won’t sell well. If they move 10,000 of these worldwise (US, Canada, China) at $100K a pop and a 20% profit margin (all incredibly generous numbers), that’s a profit of $200M or a payback of 5 years. IF they move that much metal. The reality is, people are barely able to stomach paying $60K for a CTS, and its sales this year are down 50% from the last generation. Realistically this thing will probably do XLR numbers, and need 5 figure incentives to move the last ones out the door.

    And for what? Bragging rights? GM has already wasted billions on the Alpha platform, which frankly I don’t think they even needed. Infiniti has been juicing the hell out of the FM platform for the past 10 years, and the last CTS was not in need of a new platform. Meanwhile, MB and BMWs headliners are not their F-classers… the S-Class is cool, but it’s expected, and frankly the whole segment concept is stodgy and outdated. The cars from these companies people are talking about are BMW’s i line, the CLA, and all the weird little niches.

    I have said it about 10 times already, but Caddy should have just refreshed the old CTS, and used the brand as a test bed and platform to develop and drive down the costs of their plug in hybrid tech. THINK! What do you think the average person cares more about… a store brand S-Class for S-Class money + “Brembo Brakes”, or efficiency and the technologies of the future? From where I’m sitting it’s a no brainer, and the success of the Volt + BMW’s i cars vs the decline of all the F-classers prove it….

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Says the guy that’s complained on every recent caddy article for a hybrid cadillac. Go buy an ELR and be happy. Don’t forget GM just like most automakers have already been burned, no one wants to enter a niche that even the winners make small profits.

      This will sell more than any hybrid CTS ever could.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      “Why pay 6 figures for an XJ, when an XF delivers 95% of the comfort, luxury and content for 60% of the price?”

      I have not driven or been inside the new XJ (X351) because as you point out, there are only a few thousand floating around in North America. Whether it drives well or not I cannot say, but I will say it is a car with incredible presence. If I’m dropping 90K on one new, I can probably afford the chauffeur on at least a part-time basis. This is who the XJ was intended for, the elites of Europe, India, and China, not so much the traditional XJ6/8 non-LWB customer. I was in an XF when it debuted in 2008, nice car but its a DEW98, which means its a Lincoln LS/Jag S-Type/Ford Thunderbird underneath. I’ve driven the LS and I liked it, but do I want to drive it again for 70K and in a Jaguar lacking proper presence? Not as such.

      “The cars from these companies people are talking about are BMW’s i line, the CLA, and all the weird little niches.”

      But how much of this is good talk?

      “used the brand as a test bed and platform to develop and drive down the costs of their plug in hybrid tech”

      They tried that, its called ELR, and its a disaster.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        When it comes to presence, prestige, styling, distinction & overall symbolism of a brand’s (positive) heritage, the XF can’t hold a candle to the XJ.

        I’ve driven both many times; I have relatives who’ve owned both (a cousin just dumped her POS XF).

        The XF is a hollowed out shell of everything Jaguar used to stand for, with its cheap (truly) and completely sterile/generic interior.

        Jaguar should have updated the XJ in a tasteful way, doing those things to evolve their brand through it, rather than idiotically trashing their heritage & goodwill (and alienating their loyal customer base) by going in the direction of the me-too F-Type and XF.

        The XJ stood out as a worthy alternative to upper end Daimlers, BMWs, etc.

        The XF, and to an even larger degree, F-Type, are cribbing Aston Martin, have resulted in the destruction of Jaguar’s heritage, purpose and distinction of its brand identity.

        Jaguars are meant to coddle, not stress.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          If the XF is this bad, I can only imagine how horrible and brand-damaging the XE will be. Maserati is already taking a beating for the Ghibli. I don’t think any luxury company has successfully moved downmarket- all the established players either got in at the ground floor (Infiniti, Lexus etc) or made cars that defined segments (3 series, E class). At this point in the game, if you haven’t been in, or aren’t the first one in (Lexus RX), you lose.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            XF was ultimately a legacy model, probably built because Ford did not want to invest the money into a dedicated platform. Tata is now running the show, so XE will be the first major post Ford model (F-type being a Ford era concept car come to life).

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            “Maserati is already taking a beating for the Ghibli.”

            And what a beating with sales up over 300% and generating significant profit.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      “The last CTS was not in need of a new platform.”

      You may be right about the F-segment, but this couldn’t be more wrong. Sigma was just not competitive with the rest of the luxury market, mostly because it was so damned heavy. It led to cars that had D-segment interior space with E- to F-segment curb weight. Alpha took Cadillac from being an also-ran to competitive in product terms. The issue with new-gen CTS sales isn’t product, but overly ambitious pricing.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I might argue both, but in fairness to the Alpha derived model I have yet to experience it in any way.

      • 0 avatar
        sportyaccordy

        The old RWD CTS was about 3900lbs. Compared to cars in the 5 series segment, that’s about average. Its dimensions were pretty much spot on with an E-Class both inside and out as well (the rest of the cars in the segment are either AWD only or a little bigger).

        You have to think… the chassis is stiff enough for use in the Z/28. The chassis was not the problem. Hell, the old CTS didn’t have any problems, it was a good car that just needed a little refreshing. It was a better proposition in its high value niche than this head on challenge Cadillac is trying to do now.

        Cadillac needs to find its own space to operate… they just cannot compete with the Germans on equal footing, even with cars that are just as good or better (which in many ways the current ATS/CTS are).

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Every published weight I saw for the old CTS was over 4000 lbs. (RWD) or 4200 lbs. (AWD).

          And it really didn’t have E-class room… it was E-class-sized on the outside, but a tweener on the inside. It was priced alongside and competing with cars 400 pounds lighter. Alpha has closed that gap, even surpassed it, in many cases.

          • 0 avatar
            sportyaccordy

            I’m seeing curb weights as low as 3850lbs here, and interior dimensions pretty much match the E-Class everywhere but width.

            http://autos.msn.com/research/compare/interior.aspx?c=0&i=0&ph1=t0&ph2=t0&tb=0&dt=0&v=t113250&v=t115084&v=t114920

            It was an 5 series sized car at a 3 series price. It would have been a lot cheaper to lighten the existing platform with more aluminum and UHS steel than to create an all new platform. All the money Cadillac is putting on the hoods of ATSs and CTSs could have gone to that cause.

        • 0 avatar
          OM617

          I recently sat in the back of a previous generation CTS and was shocked how cramped it was. Regardless what the figures tell, not comparable in interior spaciousness to an E-class at all.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      @ Hummer and 28-Cars-Later:

      The ELR is not the plug in hybrid Cadillac needs. Non-sporty coupes are pretty much DOA- notice GM’s only coupe offerings at the moment are the Camaro and Corvette. The ELR almost seems like it was planned to fail. They need something with the performance, luxury and practicality of something like an E-Class, with a beefed up Volt powertrain (maybe with a small V6 instead of the 4 and obviously a larger battery). The ELR has none of those things.

      And don’t get me wrong, I think the SWB XJ is the most beautiful car in the class by a long shot. I haven’t driven any cars in the class but I sat in all of them at various NYIASs, and Jag’s interiors are orgasmic. But just because a car is good, doesn’t mean it’s a good business idea. Caddy would do much better to take that money and invest in cars that will sell.

      What Caddy and its fans dont seem to understand is it gave its seat up at the big boy luxury table long ago. And once you are not at the table, you can’t go back. Mercedes tried to get to the next level with the Maybach and failed… that is the position Cadillac is in now. They should just focus on where they have a presence and market, instead of trying to “play with the big boys”. That will never happen.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      The platform (Omega) will be used for other large vehicles. Presumably, there will be something in China that will sit on top of this architecture, too.

      If the company is going to go to the trouble of making large vehicles at all, then it probably makes sense to produce a low-volume, high-cost halo variant. But yes, it will be next to impossible at this stage for Cadillac to compete on a world stage, no matter what it does.

      • 0 avatar
        sportyaccordy

        What other vehicles…. Holden is closing its doors, the large sedan segment in America is in a steady decline, and the Chinese are OK with smaller cars with stretched rear doors. Maybe they can parlay it into something to slot between the SRX and Escalade, but I don’t think there’s as much of a need there as there is for something under the SRX. GM doesn’t need the Alpha or Omega.

  • avatar
    heavy handle

    This has the potential to be what the S-Class is in the rest of the world: the default executive limo.

    There’s nothing wrong with that, and it will probably move enough units to turn a profit.

    • 0 avatar
      Maxb49

      This has the potential to be what the S-Class is in the rest of the world: the default executive limo.

      Doubtful. GM stopped producing fine automobiles in the 1960s. Enough said.

  • avatar
    daviel

    Could it be any uglier?

  • avatar

    A great flagship sedan is necessary for a luxury brand to be truly considered a luxury brand, but in terms of what the market is buying right now, Cadillac needs a compact crossover.

    • 0 avatar
      Ihatejalops

      Sort of. They need a Crossover instead of a truck based option such as the Escalade which has way too much in common with Tahoe’s. People want comfort, luxury and ride height which is why Range Rover does so well. If they can master that and change their current design language, they’ll be better off. Then again, the people there need to know HOW to sell a car, rather than build a statistical model on it’s potential performance.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    What they won’t do is price it reasonably. What they will do is charge S-Class money thinking that melty plate on the front means the same as the tri-star, and it doesn’t. The 3.6T RWD will cost the same as the S550 4MATIC, because hey it’s a real Cadillac, and that “means a lot.”

    They won’t sell well because of this, and likely in the first couple years there will be some recalls and trim issues – because it gets built by the same people as the ATS or whatever and with the same attention to detail.

    Then three years later it will be dumped, and they go back to XTS 2.0 because it’s so much cheaper for them. That is unless they use the platform for some huge Chevrolet Biscayne and a Buick Park, which they won’t.

  • avatar
    geeber

    Cadillac is having a tough time getting people to buy the ATS and new CTS. Taking on the iconic S-Class hardly seems like a good move right now. Especially given that much of the current Cadillac dealer body simply cannot meet the expectations of people who buy cars in the class.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I agree but most likely the decisions made on this model were put in motion prior to the release and subsequent struggle of the Alpha Cadillacs. I suppose they could cancel it but then all the money spent in the mean time is wasted and they start their development cycle over again.

  • avatar
    86er

    Seeing as though they still need economies of scale to pull this off, I wonder if they’re thinking of it being a LWB Buick Park Avenue in China and a Cadillac in North America.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    I thought the ELR was their flagship, but that doesn’t seem to be working out.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    The target for this car SHOULD NOT be the Mercedes S-Class. The S-Class is the king of luxury cars (not ultra-lux) and it won’t be beat. The only thing Cadillac has that can even blip the S-Class’ radar is the Escalade.

    The Jaguar XJ and Audi A8 are better targets. Or pull a hyundai and build a Bentley Continental/Maserati Quattroporte killer at a lower price. Heck, Dodge is now going head to head with the Aston Martin Rapide.

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Um what?

      “Or pull a hyundai and build a Bentley Continental/Maserati Quattroporte killer”

      Which model is this for Hyundai?

      Which Dodge is going against the Rapide?

      Generally I agree with your points, but you’re REALLY reaching here.

      • 0 avatar
        sportyaccordy

        I am guessing “pulling a Hyundai” = building a store brand copy and selling it at store brand prices.

        Won’t work… even a “bargain Quattroporte” will still be a six figure car, which nobody is going to pay for a Cadillac.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          It’s just… Hyundai has no Quattroporte/Contiental killer.

          Dodge has no Rapide competitor.

          • 0 avatar
            sportyaccordy

            Don’t be a pedant.

          • 0 avatar
            Mandalorian

            Point is punch above your weight class. Thanks for the literal interpretation guys. Hyundai has the Equus which takes on the S-class, but is a price class below it.

            The Hellcat Charger is a competitor of the Rapide. I’m not saying it’s in any way better, but it never the less competes.

    • 0 avatar
      tekdemon

      I disagree. For Cadillac to reboot itself and reclaim the right to be recognized as a true luxury brand they need to aim ridiculously high. Maybe even higher than the S Class but then price it to be competitive with an A8. I’m not sure how the heck Cadillac is gonna be able to pull this off, and they probably won’t, but that’s really the only way to get people to take them seriously. The Lexus LS didn’t start off afraid to challenge the S class head to head and Cadillac can’t shy away from that either. It’s like prison rules in movies, you’re gonna have to beat up the baddest mofo around lol.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    I don’t give a hoot for what platform a car has – I admit I like the W-body, but that’s just me. Just stick with a platform that works and keep refining it, it’s a lot cheaper that way.

    Actually, the only thing I’m REALLY interested in is: Is this car a REAL pillarless hardtop, or just another car show teaser like the Camaro & Challenger that made the show circuit appearing as a pillarless hardtop and ends up in the market with a thick B pillar and fixed glass? No sale.

    If Cadillac is serious about becoming a true premium brand, then knock off the cheap black plastic parts bin sharing of buttons, stalks, etc. and use quality materials that are durable and reliable and feel “premium”.

    In any event, I’ll never buy a Cadillac anyway, so I suppose it doesn’t matter to me what they do…

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      The spy shots make it absolutely clear that this is not a pillarless hardtop.

      I don’t think we’ll ever see a 4-door pillarless hardtop again. It would just cost too much in weight and visibility to make it meet modern safety standards. Even the 2-door versions have become very difficult to engineer.

  • avatar
    Ihatejalops

    An exciting proposition. The problem is they need to make it look different than their current line-up. No car that’s $100,00+should look the same as their cheaper brethren; the Germans get away with it because what else is there? People at that price range want unique, hence the rise of Tesla. Definitely a unique looking product.

  • avatar
    Boxerman

    If It looks like the car in the pohto they are on to a winner.
    SAs to motor a pushrod V8 is fine but as others have said NVH needs raidcal imporvement. That probably means a heavier crank different heads etc to smooth out those vibes.
    Try an ild caddy with the 425 or 500 cu v8 and you know a pushrod mtor can be real smooth.
    With a supercharger and GMs new 8 speed tranny powettrain should not be an issue.

    For ride just benchmark a new S calss. The newer cadillacs are too hard in ride, no one is cornering aboast on the dodorhandles, But at the same time it cant be marsmellow soft anf loaty like a lexus because thta amke yous seasick.

    As to inetrior, all the current caddys are sub par. the cue system is a deal breaker siaster. Look to audi/bently as to how it shoudl be done in terms of materials, or even range rover.

    Ie no hard shiney platics, no crappy plastic chrome strps on the wheel or door trim. take the cheap and chintz out.

    As to electronics the S class goes too far, and most people int his price range could care less about uber electronic crap.

    Lastly big comfy seats.

  • avatar

    Size matters.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    What will the new platform be?

    Building a flagship only platform seems to be a waste of resources if they don’t amortize it over other brands. GMC being “trucks” likely makes it a non-starter. That leaves Chevrolet and Buick.

    With the ending of the Zeta platform in 2016/2017 – a fullsize Chevy replacement (as well as for law enforcement) might make sense. However, if the platform is a S-class / 7-Series / A-8 fighter, truly a fighter in these classes, it seems that a new Chevy Caprice PPV vehicle would be grossly overbuilt and over priced for that service.

    Cadillac has some solid product offerings, and after reading the V-Sport review yesterday, maybe, just maybe for what you get, the price is justifiable – but buyers are probably not ready to shell out 6-digits for a 7-series fighter with a Cadillac crest on it.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Re: platform… is there some long wheelbase China only car platform that GM could snag, or a Holden platform that they could grab the tooling for before the factory is shutdown?

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        As far as I know, the VF Zeta is the end of the line.

        Camaro is going to Alpha, Theta/Delta II is being replaced by Delta III (not official name, but I see it referred to as Delta in the press). GM has said a “new” platform. I may be a big fan of Zeta, and I’ve heard that the SS is a lot more than just the son of G8 GXP in driving dynamics, NVH, feel, ride, (and that’s before magnetic suspension).

        Could they be creating a VG platform off of Zeta? It certainly is big enough.

        In China the Buick Park Avenue is a stretched Commodore – but that is no where near ready for Cadillac flagship duty. Yes, even the entertainers on Top Gear, when driving an LSA powered Vauxhall VE compared it favorably to the BMW M5 (from a performance stand point) – it still wasn’t up to the task from a luxury stand point.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          As a Zeta owner I second this comment. It’s a fantastic performance platform but has a long way to go before it’s suitable for duty in the top echelon of luxury cars.

          Hell, if it didn’t, there would have been no reason to develop Omega. Omega will only be a bit bigger than Zeta LWB.

          • 0 avatar
            Mandalorian

            This may sound crazy, but making it Body on Frame wouldn’t be a bad way to go.

            Let’s face it, no one knows BoF as well as GM.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            @Mandalorian, do those guys still work for GM? The engineers doing BOF cars likely retired a few years back.

            But OTOH, REBIRTH OF THE C/D BODY, BABY!

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Nothing BOF has ever had the structural stiffness necessary to meet today’s ride and NVH standards in the luxury market.

          • 0 avatar

            dal, agree. There are a few outliers (G Wagen comes to mind), but CUVs have literally destroyed the market for lux SUVs.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            The 80,000 Tahoes and Yukons sold this year at $50,000 and up would strongly disagree with you.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Chevy and GMC are not luxury brands even if they get away with charging astronomical prices for their leather-lined, covered pickups. As for the Slade, its ride is the worst in the segment, and everyone knows it.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            In 2005, GM moved 300,000 Tahoes and Yukons. 2014 sales will be a disappointment in comparison.

            The large mainstream SUV market has taken a considerable hit since 2005, but the luxury segment (which does not include Ford, RAM, Chevy or GMC) has made gains. Those luxury sales are largely going to crossovers, not to body-on-frame. For GM, the SRX outsells the Escalade by more than 2:1.

  • avatar

    To those wanting to go back and have Caddy make plush luxo-barges that nobody wants, remember Marx.

    To those who say it can’t be done, well it never will if they don’t try, and if successful, the rewards in profits can be very, very attractive. Many times, only the crazy ones make the world advance.

    Cadillac has to emulate the Germans without absolutely reneging the past. That can be done with design and doing an interior considered plush (without being gaudy). They pretty much have a good plan already, being the base ones as good or better than the Germans and the upper ones are coming close in dynamics to the Germans. Focus on them as tightly as possible, adding some dynamic of comfort and careful detail to the interiors. Stay the course and in 10 to 15 years Cadillac will be uttered in the same sentence with the über lux trio with no surprise.

    Forget Lexus and Hyundai/Eqqus, they re not the competition (the same as Jaguar and some others).

    Keep prices high, but offer more content. Talk little to the press of sales plans. Work with on line publications and magazines closely, not censuring them, but being available.

    It takes discipline. It can be done. The car shown above is a good start. It makes a statement and is a car not an SUV/CUV.

    Remember, there are people out there, who cheer the underdog (me!). Don’t want any of the Germans for reasons of image (because if I ever had one I’d have enough that reliability, maintenance would not worry me). Would dearly love an Alfa for that reason. A Cadillac, for similar reasons, always catches my eye. It’s an alternative.

    Will be interesting to watch.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      Groucho or Karl?

      • 0 avatar

        Which one made comments as to repeating history?

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
          Groucho Marx

          Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.
          Groucho Marx

        • 0 avatar

          I have to disagree I think luxo-barges are just what they need. Think RR, Bentley, S Class size for a fraction of the price.
          Chasing the Germans to me is a mistake, the market to go for is, the America, China, and the Middle East.

          • 0 avatar

            How many of those cars are sold worldwide in any given year? no, they need a fuller line of cars starting from small to very big. I’d concentrate on the volume leaders first, then go bigger. Emulate the Germans. Audi did it very successfully, so can Cadillac. And go after them everywhere they are. China and America first, but Europe is also a necessity for them.

            I’ve read your comments crazycar and I respect your point of view, but repeating the past won’t take you forward. Not even Americans buy huge, soft cars anymore. That market was taken over, to a large extent by the Germans and Lexus. Now there are also CUVs to consider (real SUVs are not doing it really in the lux market anymore and Chevy has that covered with their huge SUV-thing).

            If this segment still existed in any significant number (a profitable one), no amount of CAFE would keep makers from providing. There is no conspiracy here, the market changed. So must Cadillac, with the added advantage that if they become really competitive to the Germans, they do so the world over.

          • 0 avatar
            Mandalorian

            Going head to head with the Germans especially in terms of pricing is dumb. Cadillac needs to focus on what it is, AMERICAN luxury. Big V8s, tailfins, chrome, etc, but do it WELL. Not everyone wants to go around the Burgerkingring. Some people just want to cruise down the midnight strip at 80mph.

  • avatar
    bd2

    Is the Omega flagship really news?

    As it has been confirmed a good while ago (I guess Cadillac deciding to not reverse course and cancel the Omega-based flagship sedan constitutes as “news”).

    Cadillac is supposedly mulling a 4-door coupe and/or a CUV based on the Omega platform as well.

    While the Omega sedan seems like it will be a nice flagship and Cadillac also seeming intent on a sub-ATS sedan (with the next gen ATS getting larger as needed) – what Cadillac really needs to do is expand/revamp its CUV lineup.

    Cadillac needs 3, if not 4 CUVs in the fast growing segment; an aging, subpar SRX just will not do.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      A “4 door coupe” would make a lot more sense. Audi sells more A7s than A8s, for not much, if any, less money. A conventional S-class size sedan is old hat. In NYC they are primarily used as very high end cabs and executive shuttles. People who spend $100K on a personal car are more likely to get an SUV or a “4 door coupe”.

  • avatar
    koshchei

    Depending on how the production model looks, I’d say that this one is Cadillac’s to lose. It’s nice to see them move upscale, and about time that a North American car maker got over our ’80s induced inferiority complex.

    Next stop: Imperial? God I hope so.

  • avatar
    64andahalf

    Have to disagree that folks that can afford this car don’t drive for 400-500 mile trips.

    First off, on MythBusters they showed that time-wise, it’s basically a wash for a trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles (drive vs fly).

    Second, my neighbor owns many businesses, one of which is large chain of franchises. When he visits his (remote) franchises, he does the ~450 mile drive instead of flying. He can certainly afford first class flights, but can’t tolerate the nonsense.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      The vast majority of people that can afford this car would absolutly never drive a 400-500 mile trip. I know a lot of people in this category (7 figure+ per year income) and they won’t fly even 100 miles. They either have NetJets memberships or their own plane, or a combination of both. Going in and out of the small general aviation airports eliminates a lot of the hassles and gets you closer to where you’re going. Fractional ownership etc. lowers the cost of private flying.

      • 0 avatar
        tekdemon

        @mcs it’s probably not a good use of money to fly netjets or private charters between all his franchises though. If he owns a bunch of mcdonalds or something you’d be using up a pretty big chunk of your profits just to go visit and check in on it. Fractional ownership or something like netjets lowers the cost but not nearly enough to where you could visit a whole bunch of rural franchise locations without severely hurting your profitability so I could still see a place for driving for his neighbor. I mean if you make $1000000 a year you really don’t want to spend $300K on netjets if you can just drive. And anyways, even rich people can be cheap lol.

    • 0 avatar
      tekdemon

      I think your neighbor is an exception for wealthy folks though for many remote areas driving will be far faster than flying because flying often requires bizarro transfers unless you’re chartering a private jet. There just aren’t many direct flights from one small city to another and the layovers are a waste of time. The other thing is that your neighbor can elect for a per mile deduction for his business so by driving all over the place you can rack up pretty huge tax deductions. But most rich people aren’t physically driving between franchise locations in remote locales so I don’t think this is something you should generalize.mm

      • 0 avatar
        petezeiss

        My local regional airport has seen such prolonged decline of passenger numbers that the county planning commission has issued a white paper conceding this as a permanent situation and promoting recruitment of small businesses to locate on airport property.

        Meantime, the two largest FBOs there have built huge new hangars and expanded their parking lots. Rich folk and their most crucial employees still gonna fly, just not as much with the rest of us.

  • avatar
    Nigel

    Just hope they give the car a NAME and not some three letter alphabet crap. Fleetwood, Eldorado, Biarritz, Seville, even George. Just a name and give it gravitas. Caddy can give it a alpha designation overseas, but for crips sake enough of the gobbledygook.

  • avatar
    James2

    The Cadillac Z(i)TS???

    Time to bring back Fleetwood or something…

  • avatar

    So I heard that Volkswagen Automotive Group loses around $6.25 Million on every Bugatti Veyron it sells. A hell of a loss leader, that car.

    Cadillac’s gonna have to do the same in order to get any respect. No, not make a roughly $2.5 million car for $9 million a pop – but they will have to put an extraordinary amount of no-expense spared effort into its flagship. No more half-arsing it or phoning it in as is usually done at GM and elsewhere.

    That means there has to be careful consideration about what goes in it, from the drivetrain choices to the interior trim, instrumentation and yes, even the little details, right down to the cupholders and infotainment system labeling.

    A V8? Sure. Toss that all-aluminum LS engine under the hood and link it up to a hybrid-assisted AWD system with an eight-speed (or better) gearbox. Plenty of low-end grunt from the electric motor and generator, starting at 0 RPM.

    V12? V16? They’ll make for wonderful tech showpieces. Ultra-low volume, yes, but they should be available nonetheless. Twin-turbo V6? That’s a stretch. Stuffing the same engine from the XTS in this flagship is just reaching, even if Mercedes does it, too.

    High-quality materials that’d give the folks at Crewe pause. Solid engineering that makes Daimler take notice. Plenty of effortless power and torque that American luxury car buyers crave, but with the effortless top-speed cruising that the Europeans appreciate. Wrapped in a body that’s as distinctly American as all get out, but also incredibly appealing to buyers around the globe. That’s what this flagship needs.

    The only problem is the price tag. Price it above and beyond S-Klasse territory and people won’t take it seriously. Price it well below S-Klasse territory and people will think something’s wrong with it. Hyundai might be taking a page out of the Lexus LS400 playbook by undercutting the competition with the Equus, but Lexus did it at a time when the Germans – all of them – were resting on their laurels. Pricing it in Buick territory will have it treated like a Buick. Bad idea.

    Sadly, I think Cadillac will run with the former and try to cheapen it out just to meet a profit point. When people see through the cost-cutting and the half-arsing, they’ll just chuckle, probably on their way towards an S-Klasse or an A8.

    BTW, I think Cadillac would be doing itself a favor by making a few CUVs in the mold of the Range Rover Sport and Evoque. Just my humble opinion.

    “Chasing the Germans to me is a mistake, the market to go for is, the America, China, and the Middle East.”

    China IS the future – well, at least as long as they don’t suddenly decide to shut foreign automakers out in favor of their own homegrown goods. But that’s a long ways off, anyways.

  • avatar

    I would start with a rigid low height frame, as light and strong as possible. the frame have 3 possible wheel bases, based on the number of rows of seats two three or four. The suspension would be parts bin GM light truck, torsion bar upper and lower control arm independent suspension, used on all four corners. Two and all wheel drive versions. Power would come from a gas or diesel electric hybrid but I feel a small block V8 along with a hybrid 8 speed automatic should be more than adequate. on the other end of the prop shaft would be low profile banjo differentials to maximize interior space, Gm propriety corrosion proof disc rotors provide the stopping power.
    Batteries would be positioned Tesla style under the floor protected between the frame rails. and additional battery packs fit under the seats. which should provide long electric range if requested and will change the economics of the limo business.
    There would be a limited variety of body styles geared either to the individual owner or the Fleetwood brand for professional uses.

  • avatar
    baconator

    Hm. I’d question the wisdom of making this a sedan. That’s a shrinking market at the high end, with Tesla eating up market share from BMW and Audi at a very surprising pace, and Mercedes maintaining share with the semi-autonomous driving technology as the W222’s set piece.

    The El Miraj concept coupe was stunning – they don’t need to change a thing to have an attention-getting halo car. Price it at $85k base, right between the 6-series and the SL, and offer a convertible version. Make two dozen interior and exterior colors, some as extra-cost options, and then market it as a stylish and powerful Bentley Continental alternative at half the price. It should be in every rap video in 2015 and every golf course parking lot in West Palm Beach for years thereafter.

  • avatar
    stanczyk

    XLR and previous CTS(especially coupe) are unique A&S, clever design , that’s the way to go , not the new ‘pseudo-elegant’ Emiraj concept..

    Cadillac has it’s new favourite ‘focus group’..
    Chinese nouveau-riche would love it .. :)
    Where’s american pride ?(ohhh, corporation$ don’t don’t care about that..)..:)


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Menar Fromarz: Ah, you obviously haven’t dealt with the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia. AKA The Dark...
  • ToolGuy: JimZ, You’re not serious, but trade Jim Hackett for Elon Musk (keep Gwynne Shotwell) and see if...
  • Art Vandelay: They didn’t cost extra either
  • ToolGuy: …which is why I’ve left two OEM’s so far. And come to think of it, maybe why my kids...
  • ToolGuy: Some really old guys with broken wrists, arms and jaws might disagree with you – kidding. But if you...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States