By on May 1, 2016

2016 Cadillac ELR, Image: Cadillac

American luxury car shoppers are driving right past Chevrolet/Buick/GMC/Cadillac dealerships it seems, according to 247WallSt.com.

The website collected a list of best- and worst-selling vehicles based on time spent on dealer lots, and all Cadillac’s cars — save the CT6 — are in the top 15 worst sellers based on that metric.

At the very top of the list is the Honda Insight, a hybrid that Honda discontinued (for the second time) in mid-2014. The Insight now boasts a 231.7 “days to turn” average.

Immediately behind the Insight is another electrified vehicle, the Cadillac ELR Coupe, which has a 208.6 days to turn average. Part of the ELR’s long time spent on dealer lots is the company’s decision to forgo the 2015 model year for the vehicle.

Another discontinued vehicle, the Dodge Avenger, places third at 194.4 days, followed by the Cadillac ATS (153.3 days) and Fiat 500L (145.0 days) to round out the top five.

Cadillac’s other sedan, the CTS (141.3 days), places eighth behind the canceled Honda Crosstour (sixth, 145.0 days) and Chevrolet Sonic (seventh, 142.0 days).

On the opposite end of the spectrum are happy Subaru stores. The Outback is the quickest vehicle on and off dealer lots with a 16.0 days to turn average, easily putting it at the top of the best-performers list. The Honda HR-V (17.7 days), Toyota Highlander (18.2 days), Mercedes-AMG GT (18.7 days), and BMW i8 (19.3 days) round out the top five.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

205 Comments on “Cadillac Tops 247WallSt.com’s ‘Cars Americans Don’t Want to Buy’ List...”


  • avatar
    Firestorm 500

    Dead Brand Walking, except for the Escalade?

    • 0 avatar

      The Escalade is the only vehicle Cadillac has which justifies its pricetage.

      Also the only one the average person can remember.

      I just leased my mom a Red Passion SRX 2016.
      The CT6 was too much car.
      XT5 didn’t get here yet.

      I really wanted the XTS – since it is the most well-rounded Cadillac for a retiree buyer but I couldn’t get Crystal Red Passion.

      • 0 avatar
        VenomV12

        Just saw a guy driving a red XT5 yesterday by me, they are here now. It doesn’t look too bad other than the headlights.

      • 0 avatar
        NormSV650

        Good deals can be had at Cadillac! We’ll keep that our secret.

      • 0 avatar
        ttacgreg

        Hmm, take a pick up truck, put a station wagon body on it, add Cadillac bling, and that make its price justifiable?
        Don’t see it.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          And yet every other brand with a BOF truck and a luxury mark copies the formula. Literally, every other brand.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Ehh, all but the Escalade miss two major marks that keeps the Escalade at the top,
            1) Girth (required to be a true American luxury, all the competition look like LC Prado’s, tall and narrow),
            2) The solid rear axle, drop this feature and you have a bunch of also ran’s, the segment would most likely cease to exist in less than a decade.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            Please expand on how the SRA can be definitively proven to have a role in keeping the Escalade at the top.

          • 0 avatar
            smartascii

            DrZhivago, opinions vary, but the solid rear axle goes a long way toward stability and driveability when a vehicle is under heavy load. Which is to say, the Navigator drives better, unless you use its 8,500-lb tow rating or load it to payload capacity, because the SRA keeps the tires parallel to each other and keeps the contact patches parallel with the road. This is hardly definitive proof, but I expect that there are at least some sales coming from this fact.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            It’s a truck, if IRS is so great the Ridgeline wouldn’t be at the bottom, all of Cadillacs competitors use IRS, and they all sell poorly. It’s about having choices, the consumers choose not to put up with the hassles of IRS because they want reliability. IRS has one advantage, ride, and the difference is so small it’s not worth the trade off. The added wear on tires with IS is simply unacceptable on anything over 4000#.

          • 0 avatar
            Carlson Fan

            Hummer I don’t think the ‘Slades success has anything to do with a solid rear axle. Size, styling (in/out) and the sound of that beast of a motor under the hood exiting.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            I’m still not seeing any definitive proof. The Ridgeline analogy doesn’t hold water because the Ridgeline isn’t a truck. You say IRS has the advantage of ride–and isn’t that one of the biggest factors when buying a luxury vehicle? Something tells me that the majority of Escalade buyers don’t know and couldn’t care less that their SUV has a solid rear axle, but would greatly appreciate a better ride (not that the Escalade rides badly as it is now).

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            *New* Escalade buyers don’t tend to be your average consumer, they know what they’re buying and could just as easily buy the Infiniti equivalent.

            You tell me, why pick the Escalade over a competitor if not for the solid rear?

            The truck is the next logical step up from the Denali Sierra, consumers don’t want to give up having a truck just to have luxury. I think the argument against the SRA may hold water if the axle was sprung by leaf springs, but coils/air suspension/pan hard rod really hurt the argument against the SRA when you want a no bars held SUV.

            Besides the SRA means consumers have more choices, don’t advocate that we all drive beige blobs. Why buy a BOF vehicle without a solid rear axle? Can you opt for it to have no engine as well?

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            “[D]on’t advocate that we all drive beige blobs.”

            Please point out where I did.

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          Maybe it’s BECAUSE there’s a truck underneath?

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Just so you know – the people over at 247WallSt. aren’t the greatest “analysts” – much less when it comes to the auto industry.

      A few years ago – they had pegged Kia as one of the auto brands most likely to disappear which was ridiculous.

      Don’t know how old the data 247 was looking at – but as of March of this year, Cadillac had reduced inventories by HALF from a year earlier (so in all likelihood, 247 was looking at outdated data).

      The biggest problem for Cadillac is that the prior regime had messed up when it came to the packaging of the ATS and CTS (cramped passenger space) and didn’t develop the Alpha platform so that it was suitable for crossover duty.

      The XT5 and CT6 hitting dealer lots should help some, but the XT5 really only replaces the aged SRX and the much needed additions to Cadillac’s crossover lineup won’t start happening until 2018 or so.

      Yes, CTS sales aren’t where Cadillac wants it to be, but CTS sales are right on par with Lexus GS sales for the year – 3,973 vs. 3,989 and Lexus does not have another sedan in the same price-range as does Cadillac with the XTS which has done 5,973 in sales YTD (so in the mid-price, luxury sedan segment, Cadillac is doing a lot better than Lexus and pretty much everyone else that is not MB or BMW).

      Also, i8 sales have cooled off a bit.

      • 0 avatar

        The XTS is Cadillac’s best sedan. Its size and luxury justifies its $55,000 sticker.. Too bad it lacks a good name. Too bad the CTS runs neck to neck with it in price. The CTS should be at least $5000 cheaper.

        The V-sport prices are insane.

        ELR, I will continue to say, is a loser simply because it lacks 4-doors. Had the ELR been a PHEV model of the CTS it would have done better.

        • 0 avatar
          NormSV650

          Watch Goldcoast for good VSport deals. I almost snagged a VSport Platinum from them but ended up getting another one.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          I’d say the XTS was the best Cadillac sedan when it came to passenger space (until the CT6).

          The CTS should run with the XTS in price as transverse, full-size FWD luxury sedans are priced against the RWD midsizers.

          The problem with the CTS wasn’t so much the price, but the fact that it was lacking in passenger space compared to the competition (hence, lost the value proposition despite being priced lower than the German competition).

          The CT6 is the RWD Cadillac sedan that finally gets the packaging and pricing right (roomier than a SWB flagship, but starting at a price competitive with the midsizers).

          The CTS was the better handler than the XTS and arguably had a little bit nicer interior, but most American luxury buyers want room (hence the move to crossovers).

          Doing the ELR was stupid to be begin with and especially at the price they were looking for (even for $15k less, would have been a hard sell).

          In lieu of the ELR, should have done a family-friendly-sized Buick Voltec crossover (Electra?).

          Something like the Bolt is too small for many families and with lugging kids around to practice/lessons, etc. – don’t need the range anxiety.

    • 0 avatar
      MrGreenMan

      It doesn’t help that there’s no CT6 to be test driven.

      I don’t understand the Cadillac dealership mentality. I took my father to go look for something. He wanted to see the big car as he contemplates whether to get another Lincoln or not. He wanted to lease something since he’s retired, and he had to do a lease return recently.

      Not one Cadillac dealer employee talked to us. We drove in a newish Mercury Sable – so we’re not showing up in the rusted truck from poverty pocket.

      The only guy we saw walking the lot for the dealership looked more of the dandy than Milo Yiannopolous, and was whining in some awful falsetto into his bluetooth headset about something. He had no interest in making a sale.

      Make a dealership not like a dealership and find that you never make any deals! We went back to look at Lincolns.

      • 0 avatar
        mmreeses

        Hyundai Genesis—the car that the closest spiritual successor to old-school Lincolns and Cadillacs.

        Ymmv.

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          The XTS and CTS are closer to that than the BMW-wannabe models, and sell better. But the Cadillac brass hasn’t noticed. They’re busy chasing the millennials, who won’t have the money to buy a Caddy for a couple decades.

          Meanwhile, the older generation that has made it and has the cash to buy is ignored, because they’re gonna die. Of course, they’ll be replaced with the younger generation as it, in turn, gets older, and eventually the millennials.

          The fallacy that the older clientele will die off ignores that cycle of life and wealth. It also ignores the impact of the older, richer generation’s choices of comfort, quiet, quality materials, and elegant luxury touches over firm riding performance in the twisties and electronic toys.

          It’s just a matter of waiting for your aching tailbone and joints to overrule your testosterone and savor the finer things in life.

      • 0 avatar

        I drove the CT6 in two different trims.

        It’s so long and big it handles like a boat. It feels larger than the S-class W222 does.

        Engine’s overall feel is roughly the same as the XTS’ 3.6-L.

      • 0 avatar
        KixStart

        MrGreenMan: “Not one Cadillac dealer employee talked to us. We drove in a newish Mercury Sable – so we’re not showing up in the rusted truck from poverty pocket.”

        I don’t understand it, either. A seven (minimum) year old Mercury just screams “We’ve got money!”

      • 0 avatar
        VenomV12

        @MrGreenMan

        That’s exactly the problem with Cadillac dealerships and American car dealerships in general, most of their salespeople suck. Porsche for example is the opposite, I remember when I was looking at buying a Cayman, I went to test drive one and after I was done the guy practically forced me to test drive a 911 also. I told him I wasn’t looking to buy one so I wouldn’t waste his time driving one and he said it was okay, don’t worry about it. You go to a chevy dealer on the other hand and they act like a Corvette is the Holy Grail and don’t want anyone to drive it.

  • avatar
    highdesertcat

    No surprise here.

    Not a brand to buy when it has to constantly compare itself to MB, BMW and Audi and portray itself as somehow “better.”

    What once was the Cadillac standard of the world, today is the Lexus standard of the world.

    • 0 avatar
      nickoo

      Cadillac is the new Pontiac minus the glaring red dashlights.

      Art and Science is the new body cladding. The fit and finish are about on par…

      GM might as well source everything from Korea, that seems to be their only competent division.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        nickoo, I don’t think Cadillac will disappear. It’s the “prestigious luxury” brand of GM. Without it, all GM would have is Chevrolet.

        Buick and GMC just aren’t significant players and could easily be folded into Chevrolet as another trim level. That is what I like to see GM do, or give Buick to GM-Shanghai and import their best into the US.

        Cadillac WAS something, at one time, a long time ago. But Cadillac is no longer relevant today because the industry has simply passed them by years ago. Lexus is now the new standard bearer of quality, and MB, BMW and Audi are now the prestige marks.

        Ask any young, upwardly mobile, professional these days, and their choice will not be Cadillac. Not even an Escalade.

        • 0 avatar
          Snooder

          I’m a young professional (not quite so sure about the upwardly mobile part) and I drive an ATS coupe. Pretty much everyone my age likes it.

          Why did I get it? Because when the bmw dealer was dicking me around with $600 a month on a 2 series with even the smallest options, I drove down the road and happened to stop in at the cadillac dealer. Drove the same, interior was nicer, and I like CUE. BMW, Benz and Lexus all have the same shitty retro controls. I like a nice big touchscreen. I like the piano black. I don’t want buttons that looks like they haven’t been updated since 1986. I don’t want a goddamn fake 1940s radio UI. And I sure as fuck do not want a shitty fucking knob wheel thing. With all that, plus being a hell of a lot cheaper than the rest and including free maintenance, it was a great deal.

          Maybe it’s because I wasn’t born in the US, so I don’t have that long family history of shitty Cadillacs. I do remember my parent’s Audi being crap so I didn’t bother to even check one out.

          Honestly, what Cadillac has is a purely marketing problem. People just don’t go looking for the ATS, so they mostly don’t even know it exists. I think if Cadillac spent some effort on two fronts, they’d make bank. First, get the damn cars out there. Saturate the market with ads all over the place. Second, hype up how much more reliable and less expensive to maintain their cars are than the competition. A couple pointed ads about some dude in his German autobahn destroyer assuming the service position while the Cadillac guy drives off after a quick checkup and some new parts free o’ charge and they’d change impressions. Hyundai managed to get people forget about their shitty reliability. And that’s Hyundai.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            “BMW, Benz and Lexus all have the same sh-tty retro controls. I like a nice big touchscreen.”

            Ugh. And stop cursing, it makes you sound more idiotic than you already do.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Yup, but your first choice was a Beemer and you would be driving one today had it not been for the dealer dicking you around.

          • 0 avatar
            smartascii

            Right. You “happened to stop” at the Cadillac dealer. You went for a BMW. You considered, then rejected, an Audi. I have no idea whether a Mercedes was in the mix. But the point is, you didn’t start your car-shopping day with a plan to see the Cadillac. And, listen, you are a cost-conscious buyer, because the $600/mo for the BMW bothered you, and because the free maintenance was a selling point (BMW has that, too, but whatever). Cadillac needs to actually make money to stay afloat, and selling their smallest offering to cost-conscious buyers at a tremendous discount is not what’s going to do that for them.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            People really spend $600/mo to lease a BMW 2-Series? Is that ridiculous, or am I just delusional on leasing prices. A lease on a Range Rover Evoque HSE is $588.

          • 0 avatar
            TMA1

            I’m sure whatever that “young professional” job is, it’s not a spokesmanship for fucking Cadillac.

            Your nonsensical rant is as harmful to the image Cadillac is trying to project as a vinyl top and gold wheels on a new XTS.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            @CoreyDL

            You are delusional on lease prices, like most people around here. By the time you option a 2 or a 3 the way you would actually want one, you are looking at $5-600/mo for a lease. My M235i would have been well over $700. BMW doesn’t heavily subsidize leases nearly as often as people think they do, and certainly never on anything in relatively short supply like a 2-series. A Range Rover Evoque is about the same price as a 2-series, and of course the advertised prices never include taxes and fees.

            Anyone who prefers CUE to iDrive probably should buy the Cadillac. :-) I won’t even go there on the subject of shopping by monthly payment…

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Hm, so leasing is even more ridiculous for anything desirable than I had thought previously. More incentive for me never to do it.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            CoreyDL, the cost of Leasing is relative to other factors in your life.

            Lots of old people I know Lease their latest and greatest vehicle.

            But it is not their only vehicle. Some have as many as three or four older vehicles they keep around and use the newest one for long trips.

            The motivation behind Leasing for many old people often is that they do not want their heirs fighting over their estate in case of their deaths. Who wants to lay claim to an old car?

            Other people Lease because they have it as an expense they can write off, like traveling sales people, business people, restaurant owners, franchisees, etc.

          • 0 avatar
            badreligion702

            Looks like we found the one guy who likes Cue. You really like a touchscreen? Really?

          • 0 avatar
            SP

            Not sure Cadillac’s cars are any more reliable than the German luxury cars. I am sure they are less so than the Japanese ones.

            One of Cadillac’s long-running flaws is that the cars have been fancier and faster than the other GM cars, but still built just as cheap. The materials inside were better, the paint and chrome were nicer, but the mechanicals were built to the same level of quality. On a Cavalier, low quality parts are not so bad, since there are fewer of them to break. But a complicated Caddy with lots of electronics becomes a mess when things start to break.

            At least the parts seem to be cheaper than the German parts in general.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Really?

      Have you looked at GS and LS sales lately?

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        How do they stack up against their peers, and where does Cadillac fit in?

        Lexus products are consistently rated top of the line by different evaluators. Nice retention value too. Cadillac is not even mentioned.

        The only thing that matters is s-a-l-e-s. And nothing that Cadillac offers comes close to any of its peers and class-mates.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Like I stated above – CTS sales are right there with GS sales for the year and that’s even with the XTS in the same price range.

          Once the CT6 starts hitting the lots in nos. – Cadillac will be selling a good bit more sedans at the mid-higher price range than Lexus.

          And despite their shortcomings (mostly passenger room) – the ATS and CTS are widely regarded as the best handling duo in the compact and midsize segments for a luxury brand presently (the other in running being Jag with the XE and the new XF).

          And the ATS-V and CTS-V simply run circles around what Lexus has to offer (RC-F and GS-F which are not selling).

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Cadillac derives their inspiration from Opel, a second-stringer in Germany. I would be surprised if Americans would be so gullible as to think Cadillac is on par with anything Lexus.

            No doubt time will tell. But so far it has not been good for Cadillac.

          • 0 avatar
            bd2

            Are you confusing Buick for Cadillac?

            Must have missed the memo about the CTS-V being a 4-door Corvette.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        According to your normal logic, the GS and LS are just Toyotas – so I’m surprised you’d bring them up separately. Just lump their sales figures in with the Corolla.

        • 0 avatar
          krhodes1

          Technically, they are just Toyotas. Nice Toyotas, but they are Toyotas. Just like Cadillacs are just nice Chevies when you come right down to it.

          Say what you will about the entry-level Germans, but at least they are not based on much cheaper cars, A3 excepted. Even the A3, which is a fancy Golf, is based on a car that is nice enough to be considered a premium option in it’s own right. And there are equivalent Golfs that cost just about as much, in a different form factor.

          Ultimately, to me Cadillac has the same issue as Acura and Lincoln. Not enough better, too similar to cheaper siblings across the showroom floor. And just not in the same league as the actual premium cars. And they have a tacky image that no amount of NY headquartering is going to fix anytime soon.

          My other issue with Cadillac is that they are 95% cars. They are 95% right, but The General just can’t seem to sweat the details to get that last 5%. The back seat and instrument panel of the ATS, for example. CUE, for another example. Stupid engine choices. 95% is just not good enough at this point.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            The GS and LS don’t have cheap equivalents!

          • 0 avatar

            95% right exactly describes my CTS.

            Great interior. Usable electronics (no cue), nice materials. Seats are old school wide, not the grippy things you expect, even in a lux BMW. You get used to them, but I look at the sport seats in my other car and sometimes think Frankenstein.

            Chassis engineers got it right, at least with the FE3 package.

            Engine has lotsa power, the trans shifts well most of the time. Occasional confusion in the 2-3 range, and a bump every 100th shift from 1-2. There is a sport mode with replaces the rubber band throttle curve with a linear one, and the transmission has a sport mode which works, even if you don’t oft toss a CTS around like a GTi … (well,…ahem…)

            Based on what I paid, I’m still in “screaming deal” range, but if you are the guy who leases these in succession, you might like the MB seat better or the slickness of the autobox in the BMW.

            Cadillac should be “The Best GM Can Do, not at a price point”. We would hope the home team can pull with Honda and Mercedes at their best. The CTS is just degrees shy of great…still very good (dead quiet, fantastic road isolation without novocaine) but one or two details needed sweating.

            I would totally buy a low mileage ATS used at the 20k price point. I’ve even seen cpo examples online. This isn’t very good, to be selling a 50k car to a guy who will park it next to a 20k car that IS the same….

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          They are Toyotas, just sold under a different sales-channel.

          Just like how Toyota got rid of Scion all of a sudden with the ongoing models rebadged as Toyotas.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      Cadillac, nor Buick, are going anywhere soon with combined sales that ecelipse all luxury/near-luxury sales in the $30,000+ and up.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Chevrolet sells a luxury car???

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      Yeah, my grampy had one.

    • 0 avatar

      Actually, they used to. Back in the days when GM had 50%, there was an edict that the Division folks had to drive cars from their division. The practical result is that each division had a super duper luxury car that should have been left to Buick-Caddy. There are some 70’s Impalas that approach “named Cadillacs” in luxury.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Arguably the Chevy SS which has a starting MSRP of $46.5k, but the SS to me is more of a performance sedan (and not really luxury).

      And if one counts sports coupes like the Cayman and 911 to be “luxury” – then hard to leave the Vette out.

  • avatar
    tonycd

    It should be pointed out that days sitting on the lot is a flawed measurement. It’s really a ratio between demand and supply. In other words, we know Chevy sells some Sonics, although they built more than they could sell. Conversely, the Outback is a good seller but not the best-selling car in America, but Subaru knowingly doesn’t build enough of them to meet demand, because they want to avoid being financially exposed in case the demand sags. Really, this is more a measurement of the inventory management prudence of the maker than the merits of the car.

    • 0 avatar
      Counterpoint

      Subaru builds as many Outbacks as they can. They aren’t intentionally restricting production to stimulate demand. They are capacity constrained. Additional capacity should be coming in line soon but there’s a long lead time.

    • 0 avatar
      Richard Chen

      Yes, days unsold are akin to percentages: small changes in small numbers appear huge. For example: 1268 Avengers sold last year, 194.4 days to sell means there are roughly 676 still on the lots. (Please correct me if my math is wrong, I’m using 308 selling days in 2015 as well as sales via Timothy Cain’s site.)

      Sonic: about 30K on the lots, a serious floorplan disaster
      Outback: just under 8K
      GT-R? 479 poor, unwanted supercars

      • 0 avatar
        Drew8MR

        I live in coastal Orange County and the Nissan dealer has had the same 4 or 5 GT-Rs sitting on the lot for at least a year. And this is a place where there’s Ferrari,Lambo,McClaren and an enormous Porsche/Audi/Bentley all within a couple miles. That car has zero market for anyone that’s not an Asian college kid.

        • 0 avatar
          stuki

          I winder how much of that is partly the $5 Detroit house syndrome (Where you’re still stuck paying property taxes as if the place was somehow worth more than a sixpack…) When the GTR was a few years old, I checked insurance quotes, and it was, by far, the most expensive car to insure. Over twice what a twice as expensive 911 turbo would cost, from what I recall. And I’m a good bit older than the “Asian college student” demographic….. For a college kid with a “street racer’s” driving record, it would probably be cheaper in total per month, to just buy a Ferrari or McLaren.

          • 0 avatar
            Drew8MR

            I would usually feel bad generalizing but I see GTRs pretty regularly and noticed without fail that they were all driven by young Asian guys. I got to a point that I couldn’t actually believe it so I started paying more attention and it’s become a running joke. I’m a 50 year old white guy and would seriously consider one if they came with 3 pedals since I will never,ever,ever pay my own money for a 2 pedal car.

    • 0 avatar
      TrailerTrash

      I guess I am with you on this measurement.

      By this I would think the Tesla is the top selling car in the world while X even better…and I guess the 3 the fastest of all time. After all…it sells years before it even gets produced so it NEVER sits on a lot.

      It needs to be better explained how exactly this is used. Production and availability, both in cars and dealers, seem to play a major hand in this.

      This has the smell of other stats. It belongs in all the other monthly measurements we get annoyed with…like jobs and housing and unemployment.
      Can any of these really be trusted?

      • 0 avatar

        Exactly – Tesla has a zero vehicles seating on the dealers lot at any given time – cannot beat that. Tesla S is the new standard of the world – everyone is trying now to imitate it. Even German chancellor Angela Merkel demand German automakers to do something about it.

        Cadillac is chasing BMW while BMW chasing Tesla. It is a wonderful world. Reminds me how Apple killed Nokia and Sony with just couple of products.

        • 0 avatar
          mattmers

          Apple didn’t kill Nokia. It was a combination of Apple, Android oems and Nokia’s slow corporate reaction time to the popularity of smartphones. Nokia was one of the first companies to offer a smartphone but because dumbphones was the most popular and profitable at the time they decided to let that division have a much higher say in the companies direction. By the time the Smartphone Boom hit Nokia was deinvested in smartphone development and could not react fast enough. They has Symbian which was fully fledged but was falling behind. They reinvested and redeveloped Symbian and emerged quite good, (more polished then Android and more feature rich than iOS) and was also developing Meego. Nokia made the unfortunate mistake of pulling both their plugs and adopting WP7. Not that is was bad but it just was not fully fledged as either of their own OSs. Then the WP8 refresh and at that point Nokia was smart enough to sell the smartphone division to Microsoft. Nokia is happily making money and telecom infrastructure.

          Sony is similar but it was heavily invested in smartphones. Originally Symbian, then windows mobile and finally Android but its struggle was competing with HTC and Samsung. Sony’s pricing was to high to get the volume required for profitability in the likes of the competition.

          And don’t get me started on Palm/webOS

  • avatar
    dont.fit.in.cars

    Disagree its a flaw measurement. It measures return on capital within a time period. Shorter turn quicker cash. Completely agree with your comments on Subie inventory control.

  • avatar
    Sjalabais

    Neat. Are there any cars in the US that tend to be build to spec? I was thinking that the hordes of manual Chevy SS buyers might draw that car’s average down with their 0-days-on-the-lot buying policy.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      If you go by the numbers above, the Mercedes-AMG GT and BMW i8 are essentially built to spec, with a few demos at select dealerships. Most people I know who purchased new Porsches had them built to spec.
      Ram 1500s with diesel are also built to spec. If you want one, you’ll have to convince a dealer to order it for you. Not so easy when they’ve got a back lot full of Hemis to sell you.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @heavy handle – In relation to Ram it must depend on where you live. The Ram dealer in my town has quite a few Ecodiesels in stock. They also have a large inventory of Pentastar Rams. The 5.7 is the most common motor.

      • 0 avatar
        Drew8MR

        Jesus, ecodiesels are a dime a dozen compared to a regular cab long bed.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      Tesla.

      I’m eagerly awaiting my Model 3.

      I haven’t received my invitation to configure, yet, obviously, and don’t expect to receive it until Q3 2018. When we eventually get the invitation, I’ll probably take my wife to Chicago for the weekend, and we’ll finalize the options at the store.

  • avatar
    olddavid

    It is unfortunate, as in my view, they seem to be making some decent cars these days. But, when my peers are gone, there will be no institutional memory of the 1957 Eldorado Biarritz, or those great 472-500 front drive coupes, or the elegant simplicity of the Coupe DeVille. One of my last standing classmates at GM is running the local Buick-GMC-Cadillac point, so I drive them more than most other new cars, and they now seem class competitive to me, but my reference has diminished. Regardless, the dealer body sees this new chief as a poseur that cannot relate to their problems, especially with the lingering inventory. He should be thinking maybe 120 days free flooring? Surely if Audi can bring themselves into class prominence within two product cycles GM should be able to, too. But seeing GM underachieve has become the norm, despite the history of the American public being in their corner. Perhaps no one having GM preferred shares in their dividend portfolio any longer has diluted the goodwill of the populace. Too bad

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      This is so true. My dad’s generation dreamed of “one day owning a Cadillac.” But whether or not Cadillac makes better cars today or not, they can’t find many takers.

      More of my generation, those 70 and under, seem to favor “anything but Cadillac.”

      • 0 avatar

        The problem is that they do not make best vehicles and which is also important their dealerships suck big way to the point you want to avoid them.

      • 0 avatar
        Dave M.

        Three reasons –

        1. They chased after greater production numbers in the 60s and 70s, cheapening the brand. What was a retirement dream car for the average Joe became easier to obtain as the prices and exclusivity of the brand dropped. It’s interesting to see MB and Audi doing the same thing in a sense by chasing every niche and starting their base series off in Camry XLE territory, but I think the impact will hurt less in the long run than it did Cadillac because we are much more of an “instant-gratification” society.

        2. The unmitigated crap GM (and the rest of Detroit) was pushing out the door in the ’70s and 80s. They were slow to react to the non-brougham era, and had nothing of the build quality of mid-late 80s MB or even Audi. Sure the Euros were more expensive to repair, but if you could afford the price of entry you should be able to afford the cost of repair. After a lifetime of Buicks (and some 2nd hand since she and her husband were blue collar salt of the Earth types), my aunt’s last car was a 2010 Camry. She’d had enough with her Buicks.

        3. It’s a cyclical thing. True, there are so many more options for a luxury or semi-luxury car today than during Cadillac’s heyday back in the 50s and 60s. But it will be interesting to see who’s at the top of the heap in 10 and 20 years. Tesla? Genesis? Someone we don’t know yet? Remember Lexus entered the stage in 1990 and over the next 3 years sent the well-established luxury leaders (who scoffed at Lexus’ introduction) scurrying off to hit the reset button.

        All in all, Cadillac makes some decent vehicles these days – I personally fancy the look of the CTS and am eager to see an XT5 in the wild. But as my daughter takes over the Outback in the next 2 years, I’ve grown very fond of the FX-37.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          ” Cadillac makes some decent vehicles these days ”

          I agree! Everybody makes better vehicles these days.

          It took the death of GM and Chrysler in 2009, and many Billions of taxpayer dollars, to turn the US automakers around and bring them up to the level where the foreigners and transplants had been for at least three decades before them.

          But why would I want to reward them for the bad experiences I had with their products in the past, by buying another one of their products today?

          As one guy put it some time ago, and I quote here,

          “If you got ptomaine poisoning at some restaurant where you ate, why would you want to eat there again?”

          • 0 avatar
            Dave M.

            Very true. The bankruptcy changed a few minds of pro-GM people just on the basis of schadenfreude.

            Although it was designed in mid-2000’s, our 2010 Ford Edge was less than impressive quality-wise. We dumped it at 110k miles because we didn’t know where the next breakdown would take place.

            She drive a Lexus now….

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            “Cadillac makes some decent vehicles”

            And that’s the problem. They’re supposed to be high end pieces of achievement. Not “sorta alright, some of them.”

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        True, HDC, but what else really qualified as a luxury car in “dad’s generation”?

        Cadillac, Lincoln, maybe Chrysler or Imperial. And that’s it.

        Translation: yes, Cadillac’s lost some prestige, but that’s because it largely had the market to itself for a long, long time. Not so anymore. That’s definitely part of the problem.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Lincoln was pretty popular back then but the venerable 430 cubic inches were no match for Cadillac’s 500 cubes.

          And Chrysler’s 440 cubes also fell short of Cadillac’s.

          You know, I loved those huge Yank tanks. I owned an Olds Custom Cruiser and later a Toronado during my GM fan days. But by no means were they trouble free.

          I find it ironic, as a former GM fanboi, that I would prefer a 2015 Sequoia and a 2016 Tundra over anything GM has to offer.

          But in my mind, as in the mind of many others of my generation, I’ll take anything but Cadillac.

          As an aside to this quandary, Millennials now outnumber Baby Boomers.

          So, if GM can hook those Millennials, luring them into buying or Leasing a Cadillac vehicle, that’s where Cadillac’s future is.

          You know, like “This is not your grandpa’s Buick”?

          But why would anyone in their right mind choose a Cadillac product over the equivalent MB, BMW, Audi orrrrrrrrrr…. Lexus?

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “But why would anyone in their right mind choose a Cadillac product over the equivalent MB, BMW, Audi orrrrrrrrrr…. Lexus?”

            Although I don’t really like Cadillac’s current lineup I would certainly go for them over any BMW and almost any Audi.

            Against Mercedes or Lexus? Probably not.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            ajla, I was faced with a similar choice when it came to buying “the last cars of my driving life” recently.

            I could have chosen to buy anything within my financial limits, including an Escalade.

            Considering the alternatives, I wanted an AWD SUV and a 4×4 half-ton pickup truck.

            GM makes those but they weren’t even part of my consideration process. The name Cadillac didn’t even enter my mind, even though I was a GM fanboi for decades, at one time.

            And while 24/7 WS is not on the same level as real auto-industry analysts, they report the sales data that’s already out there.

            So the Cadillac sales numbers reflect that Cadillac is just not a popular goto for car shoppers.

          • 0 avatar
            bd2

            Many would take the CTS-V over the M5 (and the GS-F wouldn’t even be in the discussion).

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          Cadillac’s Golden Era was actually in the 20s, 30s, and 40s. And, in that time period they had to deal with some serious competition.

          The 50s and 60s were more of the “Fat Elvis” period.

          From ’71-’96 was the “Dead Elvis” period.

          And ’96-Present is the “Zombie German Elvis” time.

    • 0 avatar
      George B

      olddavid, Cadillac has done worse than dilute its goodwill. It has achieved negative brand image among potential luxury car buyers. Nobody thinks “classy” except in an ironic way when you say Cadillac. Classic Cadillacs and Elvis. Customized Escalades and rap stars. When even a teenager in New Zealand associates Cadillac with crass bling in her hit song Royals, you have a brand image problem.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      I’m pushing 40, and my first encounter with Cadillac was in the mid 1990s when their cars were distinctly recognizable as rebadged Chevies.

      The owners seemed happy to have those cars, but I couldn’t find a mechanical reason for it — I guess I was born decades too late to have seen th Cadillacs their cars reminded them of.

      Luxury brands need to justify the price premium in concrete terms in order to attract new people into the fold. Which is why I’ve ordered a Tesla Model 3, and not a Cadillac, or a German car.

      Tesla is building something interesting and different. Also, I’ve wanted an EV since 2006. I’ve been able to afford a $42k car for a while now — the question has always been: why is this better than the paid off car in my driveway? Tesla actually has an answer to this question: it’s a no compromises EV. It’s the future, a few years early. It’s also a celebration of America’s ability to innovate, in a way that Cadillac might have been 70 years ago.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “it’s a no compromises EV.”

        It has below-average reliability, i.e. something along the lines of the VWs that you love to complain about.

        http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance/

        If you get a Tesla and it starts giving you problems, then you won’t have any reason to whine about it. You were given ample warning.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          @pch101:
          “[Tesla] has below-average reliability, i.e. something along the lines of the VWs that you love to complain about.”

          Fair enough.

          However, there is an important difference. If you read what I write carefully, one of the things that I complain about with Volkswagen is that they didn’t do any post-sale engineering to come up with an improved design for the faulty gearboxes they put into my car, even though the warranty costs must have been astounding. They refuse fix their own problems, and the recent scandal shows that this is endemic to the company.

          I’ve worked in Silicon Valley and understand a fair bit about how these companies make and fix mistakes. From what I’ve seen of Tesla, they operate the same way whenever possible. The owners who admit to problems all claim that their cars were fixed with minimum hassle.

          So, I’m willing to gamble that the ownership experience will be better than I had with my Volkswagen. If they fix the problems and move on, I’ll be happy – I’m an engineer and I understand the process.

          For comparison, Volkswagen wouldn’t sell me an 01M gearbox that was expected to last over 50k miles before an internal wall cracked, at any price.

          Lastly, I’m not likely to get one of the first 100k Model 3s (based on geography, order time, and my likely choice of options), so there’s a good chance the teething problems will be worked out by that time. And I can delay delivery of my car, if I have concerns once I get to the front of the line.

          The mass market (even the top end of it) is a tougher crowd than Tesla has faced yet, though. So it’s going to be an interesting few years of Tesla watching before I get my “invitation to configure”.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        Which mid-’90s Caddys were distinctly recognizable as rebadged Chevys?

    • 0 avatar
      porschespeed

      The ’57 Biarritz may have been the last hurrah for a failing brand.

      By the late ’60s/early ’70s? It was utter dogshit compared to a Benz of the same vintage. I owned a ’70 Eldo back in the day, and it was a pile of crap-tastic rattle fest with cheap feeling/looking everything. That could do nothing but go sorta fast in a straight line, making you seasick in every corner.

      A late ’60s Benz in heaven to drive by comparison.

    • 0 avatar
      smartascii

      I think it has a lot to do with the dealership experience. Lexus, BMW, Audi, Mercedes – very few interactions with any of their dealers feels like a “car dealer” experience in the traditional and dreaded sense. And it isn’t because they have cookies or cappuccinos, it’s because everyone generally treats you like a grown-up who isn’t stupid and whose time is worth something. The nearest BMW dealer is nearly 80 miles away, and yet, when it’s time for an oil change, they send someone out with a loaner car and take my car in for me. Mercedes is similar. And the buying experience for both cars was simple, straightforward, and not the typical “I’ll have to check with my manager” BS that happens at the other places. But many Cadillac dealers are populated by old-school guys who also sell Buicks and GMCs, so the experience is a lot more like a volume dealer, and that tells you before you even take a test drive that Cadillac is not operating at the same level as the others.

      • 0 avatar
        Featherston

        @ smartascii – It’s too bad, because they’re not doing things uniformly wrong. My parents bought an RX 350 several years ago, and they found Cadillac to be competitive both in terms of product (2nd-gen SRX) and in terms of the dealership experience. After buying the Lexus, Dad received a follow-up call from the Cadillac sales manager and actually gave him a bit of a “keep up the good work” pep talk. But it’s got to be tough if your entire dealer network is not on board, which I suspect it’s not.

        The low resale of post-1960s Cadillacs also hurts. I see plenty of ’10 and ’11 SRXs that look look like they’re running fine but that also are cosmetically beaten up by careless second (and third?) owners and their neighbors. Lower resale values correlate to less affluent second and third owners, which leads to beaten-up used cars that hurt brand value. It’s a vicious circle.

  • avatar
    tnk479

    What is up with American “luxury” automakers and capacitive buttons??

    Looking at the ATS which I guess is their terribly poor attempt to compete with A4 and 3-series, the styling is all wrong.

    The blingy chromed out grille with the giant wreath emblem is a non-starter for me. The tall vertical tail lamps evoke the old Cadillac’s that I hated so that has to go. They shiny black interior bits need to go. The polished rose wood interior trim has to go. The headlights with the sliver that stretches way back into the hood — just, no.

    The Escalade and the people that buy them are abominations. Just the fact that Cadillac sells it is an impediment to growing their brand.

    The rest of the lineup is as much of a joke as Lincoln. I could not be less excited about their new CT6 uber sedan.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Audi builds a fancy VW and its wonderful. Lincoln builds a fancy Fusion (a well-regarded car) and everyone hates it.

      Just admit it, if their cars were not sold under their name, you’d give them a fair chance and judge their worth based on their actual strengths and weaknesses. If youre totally biased against them based on their name and country of origin, you have no right to judge their cars. It simply isnt fair.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        To be fair, Audi does an excellent job of achieving almost RWD proportions out of a FWD platform. The Audi A4 and above have most of the fender real estate between the front wheels and the doors that a luxury car buyer would expect. They achieve this with an Audi-specific engine-transmision layout not shared with Volkswagen.

        • 0 avatar

          Thank you. I was wondering how they did it. It pays off. Too bad they also seem to have backseat room comparable to RWD cars.

        • 0 avatar
          tnk479

          There is no VW built on the A4 platform. All of the VW models are front wheel drive traverse vehicles.

          The A3 which does share a VW small car platform is not exactly popular in the US.

        • 0 avatar
          Kenmore

          “fender real estate between the front wheels and the doors that a luxury car buyer would expect”

          Someday the gene bundle causing that to be attractive will be tweezed out for study. I don’t have it.

          Is it because of the long, smoother riding wheelbase it provides or just an anachronism left from the days of necessarily long engine blocks sufficiently powerful for massive limos but that today merely makes an embarrassingly frank Freudian statement?

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            IN a “driver’s” (front engineed) car, the driver should ideally be situated midway between front and rear wheels. With the engine mostly behind the front axle. And a short front overhang and long rear overhang.

            Sitting in the middle, means at the smoothest riding point, allowing for tauter suspension tuning for any given ride comfort. The overhangs and engine placement contributes to quick turn in, and minimizes front heaviness.

            The Classic BMW 3 proportions, is pretty much perfection. For a Driver’s car. BMWs layout go all to shits for a car optimized for the rear seat passengers, as they end up sitting right on the rear axle. Some form of Cab Forward would better position the passengers in the middle. Or a Crew Cab with an 8 foot bed behind it. Or even better, a typically laid out bus, with the engine in the back, driver in the front, and passengers in the middle.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            It’s a visual indication of weight distribution, and the dynamic compromises made for the sake of practicality. The farther behind the front axle the engine sits, the better the weight distribution. Placing the engine further toward the front of the vehicle is good for cost and space efficiency, but not driving dynamics.

            Of course, many modern front-heavy cars have excellent driving dynamics, especially for real-world purposes where stability is of great importance. Even on track, they can put those long-hooded vehicles of yesteryear to shame. But there are still dynamic advantages to shifting the weight rearward, and locating it within the wheelbase, as centrally as possible.

        • 0 avatar
          Dave M.

          Luxury car buyers have shown time and again that it doesn’t appear to matter which wheels drive the car. Optimum would be AWD. Which is why a lot of 4Matics, Quattros, and “-4″s get sold.

      • 0 avatar
        gakoenig

        Oh FFS…

        Audi works because VW has a reputation for decent quality and fantastic design (pre-Crisis). To make an Audi, they mix in even better interior materials, more performance and a premium dealership experience, and it works quite well. Audi is the choice cut of steak from a good cow.

        Cadillac is the lipstick on the pig, or an attempt to make a silk purse from a sow’s ear. They are gussied up versions of cars people generally don’t want, unless they are at the rental counter at the airport… And consumers aren’t complete morons, they can sniff that out on the brand.

        To say nothing of Cadillac’s dealers. Here in Portland, the Caddy dealer is this shitty, run down thing tucked behind nothing on the East side of town. The lines of the Hummer dealer’s dilapidated faux quonset hut brand roof hang off the side of the building. I literally saw octogenarians shuffling up the shallow incline ramp to the door the last time I drove by, while 12′ of new Caddy blandness pulled out of the lot with brand new temp tags, already affixed with one of those atrocious canvas fake convertible top things.

        Cadillac is simply disgusting.

      • 0 avatar
        derekson

        Audis larger than the A3 are not, in fact, fancy VWs but are instead built on their own longitudinal platform designed specifically for Audis. This is the difference between Audi and the Lincoln Continental, and it is a huge one.

        • 0 avatar

          Exactly. Audis look like proper luxury cars – low,wide, elegant. Lincolns look and are chunky FWD cars. RWD does not sell by itself. There was some magic about how Continental concept looked at Detroit auto show which disappeared in production car.

          • 0 avatar
            TrailerTrash

            Oh no.
            I don’t want to accept this anymore.THis urban/auto folklore has seen its day.
            There is no way anybody can convince me the Audi line is luxurious looking.
            Perhaps driving, I dunno. I drove them from the 6 down and they sure don’t drive like that to me.
            And they certainly have no more a look than do the Lincolns. And don’t bring up the MKS whale look again. I love the MKS. Sure, its old as hell now, but it was a decent car 09 through 13.
            Perhaps you and many others have convinced yourselves of this look.
            But not me. That big mouth bass look just ain’t that elegant. That plain look side and back ain’t luxurious. Bland. Plain.

            And what is up with the constant RWD thing? Nobody drives their large luxury liners to the point that RWD even comes into play!
            But it DOES come into play interior wise.
            In a bad way.
            It takes up space and requires the long, silly and hard to park front end.
            A male thing, I guess. Must have some meaning I don’t need.
            This long hood is the age old rich man’s power car from days looonnng past.

            So get with the modern world..the world of FWD.

          • 0 avatar
            bd2

            Even the larger Audi sedans still have that FWD look notwithstanding their longitudinal set-up.

            Audi still has trouble competing against the E Class/5 Series and S Class/7 Series in the States.

            The new Conti will vastly outsell the A8, but that’s a reflection of its price-point as a full-size, tranverse FWD-based luxury sedan.

      • 0 avatar
        nickoo

        That’s not true at all. The only audi model that is similar to a VW is the A3.

        Tell me where I can go buy the VW version of the A4, A5, A6, A7, or A8.

        Audi builds outstanding class competitive or even class leading vehicles, the same can’t be said for Cadiac.

      • 0 avatar
        Dave M.

        Lincoln’s fancy Fusion is certainly an attractive car – but Lincoln over-shot in the pricing department. Lincoln is now a premium brand (think Acura); the MKZ should be a $35-40k car, not $50k.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          The MKZ is priced at $35k to start; the new Conti (which replaces the MKS) is priced at around $45k to start, which is right where it should be (right alongside the Cadillac XTS).

          Acura, in fact, overpriced the RLX which starts at $51k.

  • avatar
    John

    You turn 70 1/2 years old this year. You did well. You put your money in quality US blue chip stocks, and some AAA bonds, ignoring the silly tech stocks in the late ’90’s, and the ridiculous real estate prices in the mid oughts.

    Required minimum distributions from your well-padded IRA kick in this year. You and your wife live well enough in your paid-for house, with no debt, but your financial advisor tells you you HAVE to withdraw $80,000 more from your IRA than you want to this year or the government will rake you over the coals with taxes.

    Hmm – maybe a new car?

    Is this ad designed to appeal to you???

    • 0 avatar
      SoCalMikester

      or just take it out and put it into a vanguard index fund

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        We put ours into buying rental properties, and it creates monthly income for us. People who can afford it, always need a place to live.

        • 0 avatar
          tnk479

          People always need to eat but that doesn’t mean I am going to buy a farm and assume it’s a sure thing as a long term investment.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            You’d be surprised at how many people financially invest in farms, ranches, fast-food outlets, restaurant chains, food processors, food distributors, etc.

            They don’t run them. They provide capital for the franchisees and owners and get a pretty decent ROI. It’s all done legal, and with contracts. Check it out with your investment advisor.

            Buying one or more homes and using them as rental property and a monthly source of income also works very well.

            My wife’s parents have been successfully doing it since he retired from Civil Service almost four decades ago.

            And now his kids are continuing the practice.

            However, this is not the place for such discussions. The Money Boards are.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            The best way to make a million dollars in farming is to start with two million.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            The small farms located within some of the upscale suburban towns in Massachusetts are thriving. They sell directly to the public. They’re a step above Whole Foods. Many of them have bakeries, fruit orchards, fresh eggs, fresh poultry, and in some cases wineries. They also have attractions like corn mazes in the fall.

            The dairy farms like Richardsonsicecream.com and KimballFarm.com with ice cream operations pull in massive amounts of money and huge crowds. The ice cream operations are also great places to spot all sorts of cars from classics to exotics. On a weekend, the lines are long, but you’re almost guaranteed to see something interesting rolling into the parking lot.

    • 0 avatar
      Kenmore

      “You turn 70 1/2 years old this year.”

      You only age 0.5 John-years for every 1 rest-of-us years?
      Did you vote for McKinley or Bryan?

      Interesting that in 1900 California was a red state and Texas was blue.

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        “Interesting that in 1900 California was a red state and Texas was blue.”

        That’s because the political parties swapped platforms. The regional culture didn’t change much, but the parties did.

        I mean, seriously, Lincoln was a Republican and his progressive Abolishionist views were in line with his party at that time. When I hear Trump speak, I learn that Republicans are struggling with racial equality as a concept, which is not where the actual Party of Lincoln would be after 150 years of refining their progress. But they’re not the party of Lincoln, because they switched positions some time in the mid-1900s.

        So, the answer to the question you raise is that the California was full of fruits and nuts in 1900, just like it is today. And Texas wad full of cowboys and hispanics in 1900, just like it is today. And those people’s grandparents all pretty much voted the same way ob the issues their descendants do today. It’s just that the names of the parties don’t mean what they used to.

  • avatar
    VenomV12

    It really is true, I go all over the country, you will see lots of Cadillacs in the Midwest and then nothing except really Escalades outside of the Midwest. There are probably a lot of SRXs also, but I probably just don’t notice them. The CT6 should be a good test for Cadillac though, if they can’t sell that, then they basically will just have to become a two model brand with the XT5 and Escalade.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      In my region, the Southwest, the “Texas Cadillac” remains the Suburban and its various versions like the Yukon XL and Escalade.

      But the stratification is along income lines with Escalades being popular among people with money and/or great credit, and the remainder for everyone else.

      Cadillac sedans and CUVs not so much.

      • 0 avatar
        Dave M.

        GMC Yukon SLTs and Denalis are for people with money and good credit. Escalades are too crass.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Changing with the new Escalade which is more popular among the wealthy than the prior gen.

          • 0 avatar
            VenomV12

            I know a lot of guys that had the previous gen Escalade that switched to Denalis. I think Cadillac might have made the new Escalade a little to blingy for a lot of people’s taste. I would probably take a Denali over an Escalade too to be honest.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          ” Escalades are too crass.” Hummers used to be popular with the same demographic that drives the Escalade today.

          I didn’t know that Yukon SLTs and Denalis even came close to the artificially inflated prices of Escalades.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            What HAPPENED to all those H2s? They just went away.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            They didn’t go away. They’re still around, relegated to “classic” status and “Sunday driver” use.

            Quite a number of them running around my region. See them all the time, everywhere.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I don’t think I’ve seen one in months. They vanished in the Midwest. I can see their “classic” appeal, as a monument to bad taste and conspicuous consumption.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            Lightly-used, high-option American SUVs are a popular export.

          • 0 avatar
            Zackman

            FWIW, I saw a purple Prowler on Saturday in Fairfield, OH parked at a chicken plant. In the rain. Poor guy must have had to work.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Is there a Tyson plant over there or something?

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            I still see a few H3s every now and again, but the H3 is the most livable Hummer on a daily basis.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I do see those H3s more occasionally. My cousin had one, and the interior on that thing was appalling for the price point.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            The H2s moved to NC, I see more now then when they were produced. I disagree the H2 is the most livable, it’s easy to see it of, has good power delivery, and comfortable on all trims. My problem with the 3 is seeing outside of it, and being so small it’s no better than the current crop of crossovers. The V8 makes the 3 livable.

            It’s hard to say it’s in bad taste or conspicuous consumption when we have every manufacture pumping out crossovers that have no capability outside of moving people. It makes the Hummers look quite conservative in nature.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Edit the above post should NOT read ” My problem with the 3 is seeing outside of it, and being so small it’s no better than the current crop of crossovers. ”
            But rather, ” It’s too small and the visibility is no better than the current crop of CUVs

            A few months after the brand was shuttered I found the brands total sales numbers, I’ve been trying to refind that page for a couple of years now to no success, but as I remember the sales per model goes like this

            2003-2009 H2 ~256k
            2006-2010 H3 ~255k

            H1 sales are readily available and without looking them up I want to say total sales from 1992-2004,2006 were ~12-14k
            H1&H2 were made at AM Generals plants in Mishawaka, Indiana
            H3 was made with the Colorado in Shreveport, LA as well as (Elizabeth port?) South Africa, additionally Russia had a Knock-down kit factory that built multiple GM SUV & Truck from kits sent from the US.
            Little nugget of information, I’ve seen a couple 4.5L Duramax H2 test mules, as well as the South African plant built a handful of 4 cylinder diesel H3s.

          • 0 avatar
            Zackman

            Yes, CoreyDL, Koch Chicken on Port Union Road just east of Seward. Right across the street from Wifey’s place of work (less than 5 miles from home, unlike me…).

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Oh okay, never heard of that one. It’s further off RT4 over there than I’d ever go. I went to the mountain putt-putt with my family last weekend. Good to see they had put some more money into it and revamped it a bit.

            (But now it costs $9 a round.)

  • avatar
    NormSV650

    HR-V rules…!?

    Honda HR-V sales still lags the Trax/Encore by 2-to-1.

    • 0 avatar
      Dr. Doctor

      It’s more of a supply issue at this point. Honda is having trouble putting enough HR-Vs in inventory to meet demand.

      The Trax and Encore benefit from wider availability and GM’s tendency to put a fair amount of cash on the hood.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I am 100% sure I’d pick an Encore over an HR-V.

        • 0 avatar
          tekdemon

          The HRV is much better packaged than the Encore but Honda really needs to put a better motor in there so it’s not crawlingly slow. If they put the new turbo Civic motor in the HRV it’d be pretty much perfect. The Chinese market Acura CDX is pretty much an HRV with the Civic’s turbo motor mated to Acura’s 8-speed dual clutch. Hopefully we get something like that in the US, I think it’d sell like hotcakes.

  • avatar
    jammyjo

    I liked the ATS, but they were asking too much for it.

  • avatar

    it’s the lousy image caused by distressed merchandising of incompetent marketers.

    Buickma
    Founder
    GeneralWatch.com

  • avatar
    Corollaman

    My father worked hard all his life and he approached retirement age, he bought himself a Caddy, just like he always wanted. It was a new 86 Sedan de Ville, I don’t need to continue, do I?

  • avatar
    LS1Fan

    Cadillac makes cars?

    The division hasn’t been relevant among younger buyers for a long time.
    The problem , IMO is this- Cadillac ain’t BMW and never will be. Even if Cadillac made a 3 series beater which was faster, cheaper , and more reliable, guess what?

    Don’t care. I’m buying the BMW, and so will my peers. Why drive home the copycat?

    At that price point image , history and desire matter a lot more then qualitative merits.

    What Cadillac is good at and known for?

    Big cars. Luxurious big cars.
    The Escalade is just one example. If all Cadillac made were big, large sized luxury cars with Eco-friendly power plants and great creature comforts they’d be set.

    Cadillac will never be the sports luxury import beater the brand masterminds at GM HQ keep trying to make it.

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

    I actually saw an ELR for the first time in the wild yesterday. At Walmart…go figure. Its a very striking car, just overpriced by a huge amount, and too compromised.

  • avatar
    talkstoanimals

    To this guy in his late 30s, Cadillac suffers from the same flaw that many current GM products share – they are very close to being right, but include one major flaw that just kills the desire to live with them day-to-day. In Cadillac’s case, that major flaw is CUE. (Well, CUE and the prospect of crippling depreciation.) I would actually consider a CTS Vsport or ATS-V if it weren’t for that damned CUE.

    Another example is the new Camaro – it’s almost exactly what I’d consider owning, if only it weren’t impossible to see out of. For a fun occasional drive, it’d be great. But to live with day-to-day, it’s just too much of a cave.

    • 0 avatar
      joeveto3

      I can’t agree more on both points.

      The ATS CUE system is a joke. And frankly, Cadillac gauges are also very cheap looking. I don’t feel the same about Lexus,Mercedes, Audi, and BMW. Why can’t Cadillac get this right? Is it that difficult? Does it cost that much money to get right?

      The exterior styling is fine, but it makes for a very tight interior. Every time I sit in the ATS, I shake my head and say “no way.” I do not do this in the A4, C Class, etc.

      And the Camaro…I’ve rented it a bunch of times, and loved it every time. I loved the Camaro enough to build it on the Chevy website each time I got to my hotel room. But after the first day of driving, that limited view out really begins to annoy. It’s claustrophobic.

      I don’t see why adding more visibility would kill the style. I really don’t.

      • 0 avatar
        talkstoanimals

        “I don’t see why adding more visibility would kill the style. I really don’t.”

        Nor do I. The Mustang is pretty stylish, and it has decent (if not Trooper II) levels of visibility. Same deal for the 4 Series, the A5, the C Series Coupe, etc., etc., etc.

    • 0 avatar
      baconator

      I think you’re right. I love the Alpha platform’s dynamics enough to defend those cars on the Internet and recommend them to my Audi-buying friends. But CUE/intstrument cluster/etc. deal breakers have kept the ATS from being a car I want bad enough to give up my perfectly good current car and have a lease payment again.

      To be fair to Cadillac, I think the current 3-Series is similarly fatally flawed, and I’ve owned 4 prior versions. I just can’t imagine why I’d pony up the money they’re looking for to get the F30.

    • 0 avatar
      akatsuki

      ATS’s rear seat is too small. The styling isn’t luxury at all, more like try hard. The branding is meaningless, and there is not enough price difference to justify it. And that is the real problem. $5K off isn’t nearly enough to get me into a Caddy. Get to $10K, I might think about it. Hell, I test drove a Hyundai Genesis at that price point compared to its competitors.

      GM and Cadillac think they have brand equity and goodwill. They don’t. They have negative equity if anything. Cadillac could come out with the most amazing car in the world and slapping a Cadillac crest on it lowers its value immediately.

      You wan’t to break into the luxury market. Make the best car on the market – by a lot. Then price it below the competition by a lot. In fact, make a 5-series competitor and charge 3-series pricing, and so on up the line.

      Do that for 10 years. Make your cars ridiculously reliable, make the dealers take care of your customers, and then you will have a brand that means something. Somehow everyone forgets that is pretty much how Lexus got to where it is – they all think they can skip ahead to the end.

    • 0 avatar
      smartascii

      As re: crippling depreciation, with the exception of the G-Class Mercedes or something extra rare like the BMW Z8, are there any luxury cars that don’t depreciate very quickly? I know Lexuses are the least bad about it, but even a $100,000 LS is worth half that 3 years later.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I wouldn’t consider a German or most European cars because of the expensive maintenance. I would be more inclined to buy a Japanese or South Korean vehicle over a German one. As for Cadillac I would rather have a full optioned Buick LaCross or Impala LTZ over a Cadillac sedan.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Jeff S – I agree. I see zero appeal with Cadillac and that is based upon name appeal and more specifically, the products they build. Mind you, the other day I saw an ATS- V parked next to a new Camaro at the local dealer and I liked the looks of it better than the Camaro. That isn’t really saying much since I’m not a fan of the Camaro either.

    • 0 avatar
      TrailerTrash

      I agree. To me the Euros are very expensive. Most folks I know that have them get rid of them as the warranties end.
      So…exactly how is this superior????

      I would, however, consider a Caddy. Depends upon which one and what is the price. I seriously considered the CTS in 09 but thought that back seat again was to close to the Euros for smallness.

      It just seems the Japanese cars found a way to make the right…and lighter.
      Not to mention more sold and longer lasting.

      But then again…I like my MKS ecoboost all these years later.

  • avatar
    Kenmore

    It strikes me that Cadillac is one of the very, very few car companies that maybe ought to heed internet car guys.

    ‘Cause most of you are saying something 180⁰ opposite of what GM management thinks is gospel as their product becomes more and more derided.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    I can’t wait to see Johann Baghdad Bob his way out of this one.

    “Be assured. Cadillac is safe, protected”

    “I blame Consumer Reports – they are marketing for the Germans & Japanese!”

    “My feelings – as usual – we will slaughter the competition next quarter”

    http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/#quotes

  • avatar
    zip89105

    I’d consider buying a Caddy, but they’re way overpriced.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    Days on the lot is a measure of inventory management, not popularity.

    The best measure of popularity is obvious: Retail deliveries.

  • avatar
    Big Al From 'Murica

    I don’t give a rats keister about Cadillac but I scrolling all the way through here for Deadweight’s take and it was nowhere to be found. He must be slipping.

  • avatar
    rcx141

    I’d totally buy a Caddy. What is wrong with people? My BIL has had a load of Subarus, he keeps buying them, dumping a ton of cash into them, and then…. buying another one. Just buy a Ford Focus RS I tell him. No thanks, he’d sooner dump 2 grand a month into a money pit.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Some cars are worth keeping. No Cadillac of the past has been worth keeping. Very few old ones still on the road. Most were taken to the crusher.

      And once a brand falls out of favor, those customers are lost to other brands forever.

      The only hope for Cadillac is to fool the Millennials into thinking that Cadillac today is better than MB, BMW, Audi or Lexus.

      Fat chance of that happening. Millennials are by far the sharpest, smartest, most intuitive generation to date.

      Cadillac will remain an also-ran.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “No Cadillac of the past has been worth keeping.”

        HDC, they made the V16 Fleetwood. That is a Concours d’Elegance level machine.

        Ain’t no one gonna crush a Gatsby Era Cadillac.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          You’re right. Those machines were/are worth keeping and have appreciated in value over the decades.

          I should have been more specific.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            The ’71-’76 Fleetwood 75 deserves to be kept, if only as a curiosity (the longest Cadillac ever).

          • 0 avatar

            There are plenty of post WW2 Cadillacs worth keeping, especially from the Fifties and Sixties. I would add the first 12 years of the FWD Eldorado, the 1976-79 Seville, the 1977-79 “downsized” DeVille/Fleetwoods as well.

            Beyond that, I can’t think of one past 1980 worth saving. With the V8-6-4, 4.1 aluminum V-8, Cimarron, cheap and chintzy FWD DeVilles, etc. That’s when the rot truly set in. Maybe the Allante or XTR has some collectible value for Caddy aficianados, I don’t know.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            BklynPete, “There are plenty of post WW2 Cadillacs worth keeping”

            I thought so too at one time, like the 1976 Eldo Convertible, for instance.

            But I have not seen any older Cadillacs in my arid area where rust is unknown. So it appears that the people who owned them, dumped them.

            Shame too!

            No doubt C4C had a lot to do with their premature demise. C4C: another great idea gone bad resulting in unintended consequences.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            Axiomatically, if a given vehicle was turned in for C4C, then it wasn’t “worth” saving.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Caddy needs more Escalade, and more Lexus LS, just take everything 4 & 6 cylinder, smaller than midsize, and lastly FWD to the curb and set it on fire. They may be building the standard of the world, but when the standard of the world is pretty p-poor, why follow the same drab? Blaze a new path and build BOF luxury cars. They sell, there are literally a million Americans every year buying fullsize pickups because there is a massive void in the auto market, to not tap this void with a quality product when Cadillac is positioned so well to take it, is GM at its finest.
    Across the board should be a range of engines 5.3L base, 6.2L, S/C 6.2L, S/C T/C 6.2L, and then a new range topping V8/I8.

    Mark of Excellence indeed.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      “Blaze a new path and build BOF luxury cars.”

      That’s hardly a new path. That’s the old path. Cadillac used to do that. Some of their competition does now.

      Its not going to draw in new buyers from the ranks of appliance owners.

      If they’re going to ape another brand, they need to ape Tesla. That has a chance of increasing their appeal, rather than squabbling over a niche dominated by the Germans.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        The only other car I can think of that uses a BOF architecture is the little electric BMW i3 or i5 or something. Cadillac would have essentially zero competition.
        Tesla is selling on name, the same exact product at Cadillac, coming out of the same factory, couldn’t sell 1/8 of what Tesla could. If that wasn’t enough you basically have every luxury maker aping Tesla and saturating that market. Cadillac is in a great position to expand its market to a very large set of Americans that just want an American class vehicle, we’re tired of getting the same crap as the ROW.

        They “shouldn’t” want appliance owners, you don’t build a luxury brand by selling cars to appliance owners, you sell them to people that are interested in cars and chose Cadillac because their products were the most exciting. Once that happens the directionless appliance owners will line up with money. Figure A should be BMW which sells on its name and has all but abandoned its core, and figure B should be Acura that’s (with a few exceptions) sold to appliance owners and are still a tier 3 luxury brand.

  • avatar
    bunkie

    This subject is the automotive journalism equivalent of classic rock stations playing “Hotel California” at top of every hour for the last 30 years.

  • avatar
    Xeranar

    Every time we have this discussion I can’t help but look at the basic reality that generational shifts drove Gen X to BMWs & MBs. Then as they grew older the parents of Gen X and then Gen X itself joined with Lexus and now Infiniti to some extent. Will the generational market turn back to Cadillac? One day perhaps. The best answer may actually be to move downmarket, make their way into the intro-lux market and aggressively market to Gen Y with hopes of developing a relationship rather than trying to be BMW.

    Cadillac has long had a too ostentatious appeal and when the market went away from that they suffered but that’s really all they can do….

  • avatar
    Jack Denver

    Gotta love all the contradictory advice – the cars should be MORE like Escalades. NO they should move away from everything that Escalade represents. They should be more like the Europeans . No they should be nothing like a European car. They should move UP the price scale, they should move down. They should sell to old people. They should sell to young people.

    Aside from proving that you would go broke fast listening to internet comments (9 out of 10 people don’t know their derriere from their elbow) the range of comments also proves that Cadillac is lost as a brand – people can project their fantasies onto them because they are essentially a blank slate now. People know what the Cadillac of the past was but they have no idea what the Cadillac of the future should be. If I asked you to picture the 2018 Mercedes S Class or the 2017 BMW 5 series you would be able to come up with a reasonable guess but if I tell you that next year Cadillac is coming out with a new CTZ, what does that look like and who does it appeal to? No one has the slightest idea.

  • avatar
    Spartan

    I’m 32, married with 2 kids and we considered an Escalade. We bought an XC90 T8 instead for far less money. The Volvo is more comfortable, smaller, safer with a better interior and drives better. It just fit our needs better as our family. If Cadillac made an Escalade Sport with a hybrid option, I would have bought one if all things were equal between it and the Volvo.

    Cadillac is late the party with the CT6. Cadillac needs to capitalize on the Escalade brand. Get rid of the solid rear axle and build a smaller Escalade with a vSport and hybrid option. They’ve already spent billions of dollars revamping the brand for sedans that people aren’t buying. What’s a few billion more to give the people what they want?

  • avatar
    dougjp

    With the ATS and why it rates so low, I just look for a few minutes at why something that fits my size criteria and handles well isn’t even on my buy list.

    Poor visibility. Same design issues as the Camaro. I want to see all around, and cameras are unacceptable.

    Run flat tires with no option to have a spare and a jack, even no jacking points on the car. A deal breaker.

    Cue, why do things in multiple steps (and with a reach and eye focal change too) when one step will do (ie; traditional knobs)? How stupid do they think we are, this “differentiating push” for the sake of doing it by manufacturers. If I have that much spare time, I’d waddle around playing with my tablet instead ;)

    Piano black. Fine for a sub compact but dust and smudge collectors aren’t my style.

    Adjustable suspension settings which aren’t, the only choice is an overall change in the car. In other words, if you choose to have a softer suspension because the run flats are punishing you, the engine and transmission go into comatose mode.

    Many of these things are overlooked by the poorly researched car buyers, who then get buyers remorse.

  • avatar
    bunkie

    I’ve owned three CPO Cadillacs, an ’03 CTS and ’06 STS and a ’10 CTS Wagon. Overall, I’ve been happy with the experience. Of the three, the STS (Northstar, Magnetic Ride) was the one that I wish I could have bought again. It had its shortcomings, but its strengths were considerable: a great engine with smooth, effortless power, excellent ride/handling balance and an overall feeling of competence. There were many things I liked about the CTS Wagon but, in the end, the thrashy 3.0 V6 and the lack of roll control made it less satisfying to drive.

    I’ve often criticized DW for his hyperbole but he’s dead right about the Cadillac powerplants. The fact that you can’t get a V8 in any Cadillac non-V model is a serious issue. In my opinion, the current CTS could be fixed as follows: drop the LT1 or LS4 into it, add magnetic ride and price it at $50K. Oh, and get rid of the Bose stereo, it’s crap.

    I’ve moved on. The Wagon got traded on a CPO 3.7 AWD MKZ. The attraction was actually certain specific options: the glass sliding roof and the massaging seats. By way of comparison, the MKZ is quieter than the CTS, it has a much better powertrain (the V6 makes smooth, effortless power) and I can hustle it around corners much more smoothly than the CTS, it’s balanced and feels really planted. Oh, and because of the magic of depreciation (this was 17-month lease return with 17K miles) we got a killer deal.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    There are only three things I can add to this thread about Cadillac:

    1) Cadillac is supposed to be about luxury – big, imposing, a smooth-riding competent conveyance. It’s not. They’re trying to be BMW. Hey, Caddy – for the record, BMW still exists!

    2) I see no difference in workmanship or materials about the brand – same plastic stuff as your average Chevy. Why? Everything about Cadillac should shout PREMIUM!

    3) Finally, there’s nothing to aspire to. If Cadillac will not produce a car like #1 above, then take the coupe and re-introduce a true pillarless hardtop coupe with non-fixed rear glass. C’mon, GM, you INVENTED the pillarless hardtop. Don’t you think it’s time you brought it back?

    Nothing worth seeing in your showrooms, Caddy. Sorry, I’ll just take a humble Chevy, thank you.

  • avatar
    Brett Woods

    With regard to the Insight and the ELR, I haven’t seen any of these at the local lots where I am an occasional but regular window shopper, ever. Never seen them. An opinion article this mornning relates a Toronto buyer’s experience. I’m in the West but I can relate.
    ***

    From 30-1-16 http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/hybrid-cars-april-auto-sales-1.3557316

    “From personal research, I can reveal now that in April, the vast majority of Canadian new car buyers were shelling out for vehicles powered by the fossil-fuel burning internal combustion engines that were a brilliant modern invention about 160 years ago.

    A trip to my nearest car lot, a Toronto GM dealership, shows that there is really nothing else being sold. Literally.

    In fact at my local car dealership, despite explaining that I was looking for a really high

    efficiency car to replace the VW, and that I was not buying till autumn, the very agreeable salesman directed me exclusively to gas-burners.

    But I asked for something with even better fuel economy and hinted I wasn’t worried about the price. Only after I asked directly after the Chevy Volt did he tell me about GM’s gas-electric hybrid that offers 75 kilometres of range before the gasoline motor kicks in. But they were hard to get, he said. The 2016s had all been snapped up and there were none on the lot.

    Despite rave reviews, …my salesman said he had never sold a Volt. Besides, he said, they were very expensive. There’s little wonder that electrics are so far behind in sales if there are none available and salesmen don’t mention they exist.

    Of course GM is not alone. For all the hype, getting your hands on the hottest electrics and hybrids isn’t easy. You don’t see them on sale in your auto flyers….”

  • avatar
    Brett Woods

    “…the top 15 worst sellers…. At the very top of the list is the Honda Insight…. The Insight now boasts a 231.7 “days to turn” average.”
    ***

    A Honda Insight. Sitting on a Honda showroom floor for 33 weeks. I call bullshit.

  • avatar
    bd2

    Wouldn’t take 247WallSt. too seriously.

    They are using outdated data which wouldn’t be the 1st time.

    They recently listed the universities with the richest endowments and they evidently were using old data as figures were off by the billions for some schools (so not just one year old, but 3-4 years old).

  • avatar
    jmiller417

    I own an ATS and sometimes after reading these threads I get into the backseat just to remind myself what all the hubbub is about. I must say it never seems as bad as all that. It’s comparable to the last-gen C-class, which the ATS overlapped in the market for a couple of years. (And I can’t imagine the Jag XE is any better after sitting in one at the NY show. The website didn’t mention interior dimensions last I looked.) I also never thought to complain about the gauges until I read the online commentary; however, I can see why they’re a problem, albeit a minor one to my eye.

    But the ATS’s big problems are the baggage of the Cadillac name and the fact its advantages become apparent only after you get in and drive.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Art Vandelay: I’d have paid extra for that color too
  • Rick T.: You must be having some spectacular spring weather there in Chicago. The trees are much farther along than...
  • Lie2me: $30K is loaded Renegade Trailhawk 4X4 177hp turbo money, I’m not feeling this Kona
  • Art Vandelay: “But we would at least like to have the opportunity not to buy it.” I can say 100 percent,...
  • SCE to AUX: As long as mfrs hedge their bets by not going all in on EVs, they are effectively planning to fail in the...

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