By on March 31, 2015


Finally, our first look at Caddy’s new flagship. Full details tonight.

H/T Carscoops

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

59 Comments on “New York 2015: Cadillac CT6 Revealed...”

  • avatar

    The gauge cluster is a disaster.


  • avatar

    Buick version looked so much better, this is too reserved.

    Wasn’t FCA first with the Amber side markers that looked like the stick on reflective material?

  • avatar

    Lincoln beat Cadillac to the punch with the Continental. Poor timing on Cadillac’s side. The Continental looks like it’s aiming for a different league compared to the CT6 which looks like all the other Cadillac’s. You will not see Bentley scared of the Cadillac.

    • 0 avatar

      Meanwhile, the S-Class looks like all other Mercedes, and the A8 looks like all other Audis. Cadillac has a successful-enough design language that the same-sausage-different-lengths method can work for them. Lincoln, where every car simply looks like the neighboring Ford that’s had a face transplant with a baleen whale, is not.

      The Continental at this stage is only a concept, but it may represent a new direction for Lincoln. It had better.

      • 0 avatar

        In what way is Cadillac’s design language successful? The marketplace begs to differ.

        This particular example of the breed seems almost phoned in. And are those hood strakes I see?

      • 0 avatar

        As I already stated. This Cadillac is not breaking any new ground. It looks like a copy of the other Cadillac’s. Just larger.

    • 0 avatar

      Lincoln Continental is a code name for the concept that never goes into production. We should see production MK-whatever to judge and it have nothing in common with Continental. Lincoln Continental concept thing is older than I am. It is like comet that comes and go every 5 years.

    • 0 avatar

      This car won’t scare Bentley but neither will the Continental, which even in concept form is just a gussied up Taurus. As much as the CT6 is (apparently) poisoned beyond redemption by its badge, it is at least using a platform unique to Cadillac, with some impressive engineering (3700 pounds, considerably lighter than any of its rivals).

  • avatar

    So yeah, big CTS with ugly lights. The LED light strips are one of the things the CTS gets right with its design. Way to screw that up guys!

  • avatar

    Looks like the CTS came again, with length.

  • avatar

    Damn it Corey – I was going to write the exact same thing – you beat me to it.

  • avatar

    I can see one of these finding it’s way into my driveway soon – with the livery driver standing next to it and the trunk open waiting to take me to the airport.

  • avatar

    While it won’t be on my shopping list, the styling meets two important luxo barge criteria:

    1. Conservative styling. Like the 7 series and S class this will not offend anyone old enough to buy one.

    2. It is in harmony with the brand design language. Like Audi, BMW and Mercedes (and unlike the Lincoln Conte) this is immediately recognizable being a member of the brand family.

    Let’s hope it will have an updated (and by that I mean “completely redesigned”) version of CUE.

  • avatar
    S2k Chris

    I can quibble with the details (headlight is atrocious), but you can’t say 1) it doesn’t look like a Cadillac, 2) it doesn’t look like a luxury car, or 3) it looks like it’s copying something else. For all their flaws, I think Caddy has basically nailed its styling language since about the 2G CTS (bulbous FWD-looking XTS aside).

  • avatar

    Looks like a CTS with a funky nose job. The nose is bold, but its as square as an Escalade, and thats not a compliment for a car.

  • avatar

    Cadillac really had something special going with the Elmiraj. I’m not sure why they decided to play it safe with a stretch CTS. It looks nice, but I’m certainly not getting any “wow” factor

  • avatar

    Mazda Grin, anybody?

    Come on. Let us be honorable auto folks here. Why in hell would Mazda get hit soooo badly these past years with its grin and this Caddy approach is considered elegant? At least Mazda was trying to show “fun” to its younger buyers.
    I mean…the grin covers the entire front!
    How can anybody allow Audi with its HUGE fish look and other ridiculous front grills continually bash the Mazda fun grin?
    Lincoln got worse for its “whale” look…even thought to me it is still an awesome look…although a bit over done in the MKT.
    The MKT is nowhere near as in your face stupid as this new Caddy.
    The continuing Internet group thought bugs the hell out of me.
    Individual thought has passed away.

    • 0 avatar

      Meh, its more “crazy-ex-girlfriend-im-going-to-kill-you” grin than the happy stupid grin of the mazda.

    • 0 avatar

      What are you talking about? A lot of us here on TTAC have been ripping on Cadillac so much for the past few months that the editorial staff and other commenters have respectfully asked us to tone it down.

      No brand on TTAC has received more critical comments and tough reviews the past year than Cadillac.

      • 0 avatar

        well….because I wasn’t talking about rippin on Cadillac for the sake of rippin.
        I was specifically talking about the front grills.
        Is this a bit easier to follow?

        • 0 avatar

          There’s been talk in the past about how people subconciously anthropomorphize the faces of cars. The Mazda3 made the lower grille, typically perceived as the “mouth” part of the face, extremely large and pointy, very very much more so than almost any other non-Mazda I can think of. Hence, idiot grin.

          I never entirely understood the criticism of the MKT but I think the overly large grille with vertical instead of horizontal slats made the car look narrower and clumsier than it was. Notice how much better received, design-wise, the new MKZ and MKC have been, partially, I think, because the grille slats are horizontal instead of vertical.

          The CT6’s face, on the other hand, is quite conventional apart from the running-mascara headlamps. The upper and lower grilles in particular are pretty normal and rectangular in shape; it looks like it’s smiling slightly, yes, but in a more reserved, Mona Lisa way, in contrast to the grinning idiot Mazda.

          “Individual thought has passed away.”

          A nonsensical statement if I ever saw one. Aren’t there some kids on your lawn you should be shaking a cane at?

  • avatar

    …that could make a respectable oldsmobile…

    …in their prime, oldsmobiles were always discreet and dinstinguished, whereas cadillacs pushed their design language toward more loud and ostentatious statements: this car gives me an impression of the former more than the latter…mind, that’s probably a good thing for the market cadillac’s chasing these days, now that they’ve set their sights a rung or two lower, where the volume lay…

  • avatar

    It’s the best interpretation of arts & science yet. Really liking the mixture of curved lines and creases.

  • avatar

    Only BOSE could convince a rich dummy that he only needs one speaker in his house, but 34 in his car.

    All they really did was put the CTS frontend on the CT6 – when they should have put it on the XTS.

    And under the hood?

    A PATHETIC 400HP V6.


    • 0 avatar

      Bose is well known as mid level sound at high level prices. It sounds really good if you aren’t familiar with real high end stuff. If your ears are calibrated already, it is a bit colored. Twas ever thus, even in the 70’s when I worked at a stereo store. You’d like the Bose until you heard the Klipsch Horns…and then could never accept the Bose sound again.

      Car stereo in general has gotten way better over time, but I don’t get why car makers feel they need a “name” system. Save the licensing money and put it into speakers or a better amp. Paying Harmon, Becker, Alpine, Bose or anyone else seems foolish. BMW and GM don’t have the acoustic expertise for a real sound system ? I’m sure they do….

      The great enemy of factory sound is the factory bean counter….

    • 0 avatar

      The “pathetic” 400 hp V6 is competing with a 320 hp I6 from BMW, a 333 hp V6 from Audi, and a 386 hp V8 from Lexus. This will be priced well below the V8 barges from the Germans.

  • avatar

    Why are the headlights crying?

    • 0 avatar

      Because it knows that its interior dashboard is just a gussied up Impala’s?

      To Cadillac dealers everywhere: I’m sorry. This is even more embarrassing than expected.

  • avatar

    I’m no American exceptionalism jingoist. Hello I’m the resident ToyLex fanboi. But let’s support the real possibility of an American car that truly competes at the upper level of S-Klasse/7er/LS level. why the hell not? I couldn’t be happier at the prospect. And it looks damn good. Art & Science? Should be perfect at this size. Wasn’t the ’77 DeVille the archetype for this design language. It’s a classic, no?

  • avatar

    Only for those who dare…pity they didn’t…

  • avatar

    I like it. The headlights could be toned down a bit (that drop effect), but they are a nice size. The hood id good and the greenhouse seems passable for today. I also like the grille. Still wish it was smaller. From what journalists I respect say, it should also drive very well. If the interior follows the external quality, and they keep it up another generation or two, it could grow. Nice job.

  • avatar

    Just about what was expected. Hope the GM boys had a good tri

  • avatar

    About what was expected. Trust the GM guys had a good trip to JLR in Blighty to learn how to use structural adhesive, self-piercing rivets and flow drill screws. And the visit to BMW to see how they avoided galvanic corrosion on the previous 5 series with aluminum front end and steel from firewall back. Maybe Audi too to see how to make a combined steel/aluminum body.

    All these techniques are described at the following link, so not sure how Cadillac can claim exclusivity:

    Oh wait, GM patented laser-welding aluminum as well. Not that other people haven’t laser-welded aluminum. An excerpt from the article:

    ” A look under the paintwork of the Audi TT – which combines sheet steel parts with aluminium castings, aluminium extruded sections and aluminium sheet-metal parts in the body structure – reveals no fewer than eight joining methodologies, including punch riveting, clinching, MIG welding, resistance spot welding, adhesive bonding, solid punch riveting, flow drill screwing and aluminium laser welding.”

    So Cadillac has finally caught up on the manufacturing front, which is good. Now all they need to do is to hire a decent stylist or promote the ElviraJ (or whatever they called it) designer.

    • 0 avatar

      Flow drill screws are disgusting. Why do it when you can rivet? Threaded anything in any auto application is a quality concern waiting to happen.

      Structural adhesive? Please. That’s been around forever and used across every OEM. How do you think your door skins are bonded to your frame? Hem sealing is wide spread. It’s necessary to advance corrosion resistance.

      You are rightfully miffed by this PR jargon, but none of this stuff is exclusive.

      If you want to talk about advanced stuff, look at VW Group’s lack of ditch molding then look at the troubles Ford had with the MkZ.

      GM claims their Al riveting process is the most advanced out of any OEM. I would venture to guess there is validity to this statement due to the Corvette.

  • avatar

    (whispers) It’s like they don’t want you to find it at the dealership.

    Must be that new “easter egg” marketing they debuted with the Chevy SS.

  • avatar

    Big and brash, this car will definitely stand out. The interior doesn’t really do anything to excite me, but it’s also pretty non-offensive and looks fairly well thought out.

    Solid entrant, Cadillac. Not my cup of tea, but good work.

  • avatar

    If Lincoln makes that Continental, and these two go head to head – even though the Lincoln is FWD based, it will still get more sales. It’s a completely new styling item for them. That’s what’s expected in a new flagship.

    This CT6 is not a new styling item. This could have been released in 2011 and called a DTS4, and nobody would’ve bat an eye.

  • avatar

    It certainly has alot of goodies and looks great. I personally feel that they went too conservative on the styling. I understand why, the sticker on this car is provably starting in $60’s I would think based on the MSRP of the CTS. I would love to see this in person next to a CTS. I think that is going to make or break this car. How many people will pay the extra over a CTS for what the CT6 has on tap. I think a 3.0 turbo as a base engine and a V8 model would have made more sense for a car in this price range. I would guess that it is a whole tax bracket above the new Continental in price.

  • avatar

    That looks awesome. Looks like a concept car of yore. Nice to see concepts of old are actually production cars of today.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • Corey Lewis: From what I see on other examples, that nice wheel was installed by an owner after the fact. 82:...
  • bullnuke: ToolGuy – figure 2/3 of a bale of hay per day @ $7.50/bale (price depends upon where you live)....
  • Jeff S: Most of us have more than 1 vehicle especially if you are married and have children. Owning any motorized...
  • Jeff S: @ToolGuy–I have noticed fewer gas stations in rural areas as well but I don’t know if that is...
  • RedRocket: Thanks for the laugh. Voice recognition is the most worthless thing ever introduced to the modern software...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber