Motor Trend Pimps The Caddy Future

by Edward Niedermeyer

Published: October 23rd, 2008

We’ve long held that Cadillac is one of two “core brands” for GM that should be preserved (along with Chevy) at all costs. To compete with the big boys of luxury (Hyundai, anyone?) Caddy needs new product, and unlike Pontiac it’s going to get it. But will Cadillac’s product pipeline be filled with unique, desirable products or cannibalistic also-rans? I know, let’s ask that font of balanced coverage and journalistic integrity, Motor Trend! In fairness, MT admits that “It’s been four or five decades since Cadillac built a car that came close to being ‘The Standard of the World.'” “But” comes the now-customary about face that emerges any time a mainstream journo discusses the failure of an American automaker, “with the new CTS, and especially the world-beating CTS-v sport sedan, (Cadillac’s) rehabilitation is well underway.” Oh really? Let’s take a look.

The first new Cadillac products to be highlighted are the CTS Coupe and Wagon. Admitting that both are quick-and-dirty ways to leverage the existing CTS platform, MT goes on to hype both as fundamental to Cadillac’s turnaround despite their niche-within-niche status and cannibalistic tendencies. Specifically, MT reckons the CTS Wagon will be less popular than the otherwise quite similar SRX, also expected (by MT) to help turn Caddy around. By switching it to a front-wheel drive platform. Because that went well for Cadillac in the past. Cannibalism and intra-brand positioning worries don’t stop when we hear that the Escalade is downsizing to the Lambda platform, creating the fifth Lambda-based CUV in GM’s portfolio, and the third wagon/crossover in the Caddy stable. Oh, and then there’s the DTS replacement which is set to turn Caddy around by… languishing in development hell. The only ray of light anywhere? The RWD-compact Alpha, which GM is said to want to keep “lean” and “nimble.” Of course, for that GM needs to develop a whole new platform. This doesn’t look promising.

Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 19 comments

Raskolnikov on Oct 24, 2008

So the CTS retained more of its original value than the Azera. Thank you for that.

Like Reply
S is for Supra on Oct 24, 2008

The smallest car in Caddy’s stable is the CTS and that is the size of a 5 series. The need to make something 3 series sized that is targeted to beat the 335 and beat it soundly. I’d like to see a 3,400-3,500lb car with the Camaro/Vette’s LS3 in it and then the DI v-6 with say 315hp to go against the 328i. The match trim, wagon, sedan, coupe and convertible. You want to prove you can be the best? You need to go head to head with the best in the segment (if you are speaking of a driver’s luxury car) and then do it for a little less money. If my wife downsizes from a van in the future a CTS wagon or A4 Avant are likely choices.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.