Cadillac XTS and Buick Regal Confirmed!

[megeebee]

Originally Posted by govey

It is really annoying that so many people and the automotive press all rag on Cadillacs being based on Chevys and Buicks. Maybe Chevys are based on Cadillacs. And nowadays almost every car within a brand is based on some other car. No one complains that Audis are tarted up VWs. Everyone needs to get off their automotive high horses and take each car for what it is. A good car or a bad car.

Agreed on all points. (Many here seem to feel that unless Cadillac becomes an American BMW overnight then it shouldn't exist at all.)

The Asians especially are famous (infamous) for this. Look at Acura and its "Hondas-In-Drag" line up.( Yet, they enjoy a very high retained value over time.) Lexus also to an extent; though the LS and IS lines are things unto themselves.

And to that point it should be noted that the Sigma platform is still exclusive to Cadillac. A majority of Cadillac product will, once the DTS dies and the CTS Coupe and Wagon ramp-up, be built on it. These vehicles are built in only one, Cadillac exclusive factory. Lansing-Grand River.

[tbirderic]

Originally Posted by johnstarnes

Maybe this dates me, but I like the sound of 'Cadillac DeVille' or 'Cadillac Brougham'. This numbers and letters stuff leaves me cold, and I think if Cadillac embraced their enviable heritage by using some of those time-honored names starting 2010, they'd be rewarded....as long as the cars themselves are stunning to look at, and are powerfully, sensuously luxurious to drive, with killer interiors. I hope they have fins, but this time around as extensions of the tail lamp lenses vs. the rear fender itself, as on the Converj. I'd love it if, as the years go by, those fins get bigger and bigger just like in the 50s. I think that if Cadillac honors and expands its current momentum, it could help save GM from itself.

In full agreement with you John. Cadillac should definitely have kept its product names. The names were part of Cadillac's heritage and were instantly recognizable to most people. Cadillac should not have been so quick to shun its past when moving foward.

[LeSabre]

Originally Posted by MonaroSS

Hasn't said anything about this car in China, but agrees with you on selling in NA. They don't want to badge engineer anymore....

Thank you for the reply.
It is nice to know that Lutz & I agree on something.


!!!

[LeSabre]

Originally Posted by tbirderic

In full agreement with you John. Cadillac should definitely have kept its product names. The names were part of Cadillac's heritage and were instantly recognizable to most people. Cadillac should not have been so quick to shun its past when moving foward.

This is true of all of GMNA makes including Oldsmobile in its last, say 5 years though excluding Chevrolet & Saturn. GM abandoned all of the monikers of most of its brands or dropped the model completely like the Camaro/Firebird.

Very bad management decision & one of many.
Just b/c some models weren't selling well wasn't the fault of the name of the car/model. It was other factors.


!!!

[Dr. Show-Me]

I think it was Carroll Shelby who said of the GT350 that if it's a good car, the name won't hurt it, and if it's a bad car, a good name won't save it.
For Cadillac, there was nothing wrong with the heritage names the cars had. Their sales went away because of mediocre product. If they produce a superior product, the name won't matter, but I prefer heritage names, such as Deville, Fleetwood and the like.

[johnstarnes]

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

I think it was Carroll Shelby who said of the GT350 that if it's a good car, the name won't hurt it, and if it's a bad car, a good name won't save it.
For Cadillac, there was nothing wrong with the heritage names the cars had. Their sales went away because of mediocre product. If they produce a superior product, the name won't matter, but I prefer heritage names, such as Deville, Fleetwood and the like.

I agree...I always suspected they dropped those hallowed names in favor of the letters in an effort to sound "European" rather than just match or surpass the QUALITY of European cars, like pretentious developments here in Florida that spell harbor "Harbour". etc.

[member12]

God this XTS situation is really upsetting me.....and even though I know the SRX is competent, it's no Cadillac.

GM killed Pontiac and Saturn because they lacked brand identity and a decent reputation. Now they are blurring the lines between an appropriate Buick and Cadillac.

[SierraGS]

Originally Posted by member12

God this XTS situation is really upsetting me.....and even though I know the SRX is competent, it's no Cadillac.

GM killed Pontiac and Saturn because they lacked brand identity and a decent reputation. Now they are blurring the lines between an appropriate Buick and Cadillac.

Might be too late for Cadillac, GM should have redone the SRX on the Sigma II like the new CTS and not done the CTS wagon which I am not sure will catch on. There was little wrong with the way the old SRX drove, it's rear styling was cumbersome and turning it into a 5-passenger model would have cured that along with some of the new CTS front styling and of course new interior - not that the last SRX interior was that bad after it was freshed.

The new SRX makes little sense with the Equinox and Terrain, not to mention the possible 9-4X that will compete with it.

I have no problem with the XTS since the DTS did sell well and there is a market for a quality FWD/AWD luxury sedan, but as you point out Buick makes Luxury cars - Cadillac is supposed to make Prestige Luxury cars, there is a difference.

The worst mistake is banking on the BTS, CTS and XTS to define Cadillac, the BTS and CTS can be made into small and midsize prestige models if GM does them correctly, but the XTS cannot straddle the A8 and S-Class market which are (2) different segments and no one car from any company is going to cover them both.

[PAULSTS1]

When out dining you judge the best China and utensils, not what the dog is being served out of. Cadillac best is what should be judged and right now there is no product available.

[red_rider]

Originally Posted by SierraGS

Might be too late for Cadillac, GM should have redone the SRX on the Sigma II like the new CTS and not done the CTS wagon which I am not sure will catch on.

I personally think Buick should've got the small suv and Caddy keep the wagon.

There was little wrong with the way the old SRX drove, it's rear styling was cumbersome and turning it into a 5-passenger model would have cured that along with some of the new CTS front styling and of course new interior

You mean like this?

[cad1cts]

LOL.....Well I'm still having a tough time getting over the fact that Sigma will only be used for the CTS. Even though they're giving it the wagon and coupe, those models aren't going be volume sellers. It's too bad they can't make greater use of it.

[LeSabre]

Originally Posted by cad1cts

LOL.....Well I'm still having a tough time getting over the fact that Sigma will only be used for the CTS. Even though they're giving it the wagon and coupe, those models aren't going be volume sellers. It's too bad they can't make greater use of it.

The same can be said of the Zeta platform.
Due to GM obvious lack of vision.


!!!

[mikmak]

Originally Posted by LeSabre

The same can be said of the Zeta platform.
Due to GM obvious lack of vision.


!!!

Hopefully, it is a lesson learned....and remembered.

Layer build may provide the flexibility required to create an alpha platform with enough differentiation to be employed across a range of marques.

[johnstarnes]

I would still love to see that secret Cadillac that was being developed in Australia (on Zeta?) that was cancelled.....I am assuming its looks were CTS-inspired.

[cad1cts]

Isn't that so true LeSabre....oh well.....