GM Inside News Forum banner

Cadillac requesting permission to use 2 new nameplates. New nomenclature?

14K views 99 replies 59 participants last post by  2b2 
#1 ·
Cadillac requesting permission to use 2 new nameplates. New nomenclature?
Two letters and a number
www.GMInsideNews.com
July 28, 2014
By: GMSilverado - GMI Contributor


Last March, during the Geneva Motor Show, the Cadillac marketing chief Uwe Ellinghaus announced its critical position in regard to the structure of alphabetical names used by the brand. The executive expressed concern at the evident mess that currently exists with Cadillac nameplates, saying the brand "might lose customers who simply do not know where the car fits."

The problem could worsen with the arrival of new models to the portfolio. Ellinghaus is aware that he has to change course and promised to sort the nomenclature before it is too late: "There's no doubt with an expanding product portfolio we need to revise our entire nomenclature". "I'm on the case," he said. "We are aware that this is currently a weakness of the Cadillac brand."

After 4 months without the slightest clue of the future direction take the Cadillac nameplates, today I share what could be the first sign: Cadillac requested on Monday July 21 a permit from the authorities to use 2 new nameplates, "CT5", and "CT6". Both with the same description "Motor land vehicles, Namely, automobiles, sport utility vehicles, trucks, vans, engines therefor and structural parts thereof".

"Cadillac CT5":



"Cadillac CT6":



Open questions: "CT + number" is part of the new Cadillac nomenclature? Do any of these nameplates is for the upcoming flagship sedan?
 
See less See more
3
#6 ·
Madness. But didn't they preview a few years ago with rumours of ST5 and DT7 etc?
 
#8 · (Edited)
I think they want to use the number to indicate to the plebs where in the pecking order the car is in.
Like 1 series is smaller than, 3,5,7 etc. a CT5 is lower than a LT8 ???

Are we as dumb as they think? We need this ****?
My advice - Cadillac, yes use letter combinations..... Form WORDS.
 
#9 ·
Fact is, they need to do something, because there's no rhyme or reason to the current naming scheme.

-You've got alphanumeric names (CTS, ATS) mixed with real names (Escalade).
-They use *LR for one coupe, and '*TS Coupe' for another.
-The XTS name doesn't really fit in if the first letter is supposed to signify the general pecking order (what are they going to call the upcoming flagship? ZTS? Zits?), and neither does the SRX, unless they're trying to communicate that it's positioned way above the CTS, which it isn't.
-There's no room below the ATS either, unless they're going to introduce yet another suffix (*TS, *RX, *LR + ?).


A lot of this confusion is a direct result of repositioning certain cars while holding on to the nameplates (CTS moving upmarket, SRX moving downmarket), and now it's a mess that only makes sense to people who are already intimately familiar with the Cadillac lineup. As far as everyone else is concerned, the names might as well be entirely random.
 
#70 ·
Fact is, they need to do something, because there's no rhyme or reason to the current naming scheme.

-A lot of this confusion is a direct result of repositioning certain cars while holding on to the nameplates (CTS moving upmarket, SRX moving downmarket), and now it's a mess that only makes sense to people who are already intimately familiar with the Cadillac lineup. As far as everyone else is concerned, the names might as well be entirely random.
I'm not proud to admit this, but I find the naming scheme quite confusing and meaningless to the point I don't clearly understand Cadillacs lineup. Admittedly, I have never cared enough to invest the time to figure it all out...

The reality is BMW's designation seem crystal clear and logical. They just make sense and Cadillac's don't. I have to believe it's a turn off to buyers.
 
#11 ·
I would strongly recommend converting to series names as the competition is mostly going with alpha-numeric. But instead of doing it cold turkey, they could use the current series name and append an extra name after it (CTS Seville, for example) and then in one or two years drop the CTS part of the name. Of course this would require an advertising blitz, something the Cadillac brand has been sorely lacking, but I think it could ultimately work. IMO, the alphabet soup the competition uses does not connote anything upscale or memorable. Whether Cadillac should use heritage series names or something completely fresh and new is another topic altogether. What this thread is suggesting (that Cadillac is going from strictly alpha to alpha-numeric) just screams they're chasing the Europeans... Let the Germans be German, and let Cadillac be American.
 
#14 ·
I do get what they are trying to do. The convention for a lot of luxury car brands is to put the focus on the brand not the model. So, people buy a Mercedes, not a specific model (unless its a sub-brand like AMG or M). The exceptions seem to be brands that don't have a lot of models (Bentley and Rolls, for example), where the focus remains on the brand.

Part of the convention is to signal with 'level' the car is in the brand hierarchy, either with numbers (BMW), letters (Mercedes) or a combination of both (Audi). As BMW has added a lot to its model names, its become a bit clunky and comical, whereas I find Audi can convey a lot about the car with just a letter number combo (regular -A, sport - S or more sport - R or RS; position in range=number).

If Cadillac must do this (and I see why they might) please come up with a short, easy-to-understand system like Audi! CT5 (Cadillac Touring 5?) still seems necessarily clumsy. Why not just go with numbers spelled out? You might even reverse-order it so that flagship was #one!

Right now, you'd have:

Flagship= Cadillac One
CTS= Cadillac Two
XTS= Cadillac Three
ATS= Cadillac Four

V-Series had value and should remain (Cadillac Two V-Series). Trucks could continue to use names or, like BMW, add a letter to modify (Escalade becomes Cadillac T-One?).
 
#19 ·
I do get what they are trying to do. The convention for a lot of luxury car brands is to put the focus on the brand not the model. So, people buy a Mercedes, not a specific model (unless its a sub-brand like AMG or M). The exceptions seem to be brands that don't have a lot of models (Bentley and Rolls, for example), where the focus remains on the brand.

Part of the convention is to signal with 'level' the car is in the brand hierarchy, either with numbers (BMW), letters (Mercedes) or a combination of both (Audi).
Exactly! As simple as that... Or is that Mercedes, BMW and Audi have spent decades studying the target market in vain?

Obviously, so far, Cadillac had not studied the market very well; the lot of setbacks they have had in the past decades prove it. Now that you have actually trained executives, with experience in building global luxury brands, should perform all necessary steps to start rebuilding their name and, in the future, aspire to a prominent place in the car segment world Luxury.

Forget the return of the names... Turn the page! ;) Despite having recognition in the United States, are completely irrelevant to the more than 140 automotive markets in the world. The brand now has global aspirations, you should consider global strategies, not one that perhaps can only result in its market of origin (same for those who think that Buick can complement input segments).

As BMW has added a lot to its model names, its become a bit clunky and comical, whereas I find Audi can convey a lot about the car with just a letter number combo (regular -A, sport - S or more sport - R or RS; position in range=number).
No doubt, at least for me, BMW is the luxury brand that has the best and most orderly nomenclature. Odd numbers = Main body; Even numbers = Coupe body:

Cars​
SUV's​
1 Series​
X1​
2 Series​
3 Series​
X3​
4 Series​
X4​
5 Series​
X5​
6 Series​
X6​
7 Series​
Next X7​

Audi in second place, and Mercedes... a complete mess!

If Cadillac must do this (and I see why they might) please come up with a short, easy-to-understand system like Audi! CT5 (Cadillac Touring 5?) still seems necessarily clumsy. Why not just go with numbers spelled out? You might even reverse-order it so that flagship was #one!

Right now, you'd have:

Flagship= Cadillac One
CTS= Cadillac Two
XTS= Cadillac Three
ATS= Cadillac Four

V-Series had value and should remain (Cadillac Two V-Series). Trucks could continue to use names or, like BMW, add a letter to modify (Escalade becomes Cadillac T-One?).
I do not know if "CT[number]" be the best solution. I'm not a marketing expert, nor do I know the reasons and/or limitations that find to get to it (apart from the obvious reference CTS); but I see it with good eyes, as long as the scheme is framed in such a way that ensures a coherent growth in portfolio of models.

From our position, we are only seeing a few pieces of the puzzle... Let's wait to see the final result.
 
#27 ·
I agree. Engines, okay. Models, no.

Secretly, I'm really hoping that they rename CTS to CT5, because that would be just about the most retarded thing they could do short of going back to the old names (which is actually retarded).

ATS = Alpha Touring Sedan
CTS = Catera Touring Sedan
CTS Coupe = Catera Touring Sedan...Coupe
XTS = eXample-of-nonsensical Touring Sedan

ELR = Electric Luxury Roadster...that's not a roadster.

SRX = Some Random X-over

Escalade
---------------------------------------------
I still think they should go back to the Series __ naming scheme. It's obvious that a Series 60 is less than a Series 75...
Everybody gets too hung up on their naming convention. Who really gives a ****? ATS, CTS, Escalade, SRX, they're all part of an established naming scheme.

As ridiculous as it sounds, the best way to move forward is to CONTINUE USING IT and to CONTINUE TO MAKE **** UP AS YOU GO ALONG and to name your halos. They're the ones that really count/that stand a chance to distinguish themselves in the minds of your customers.

ATS, CTS, we can all wax our internet wieners all day long about what they should be named, but the fact is that they're ALREADY named and they aren't Mercedes-Benz, Audi, or BMW models, nor is it 1980 and should we go back to deVille or Seville or Brougham or any of the fuddy duddy history that should REMAIN history.

Also, going back to Series xx because "60 is less than 75" is also a terrible idea. Why? Because every Cadillac should be a CADILLAC and should be no less of a vehicle than anything else in its lineup. Why should a 5 buyer feel like he's getting any less of a BMW than a 3 buyer?

So when someone buys one of these cars with 4WD, the nameplate will say CT54 or CT64.....this is getting ridiculous!
Maybe if that AWD CT6 comes with a Northstar, it can be a CTN64!

To me it makes sense....
I'm no fan of the whole idea, but your scheme does make sense. I just don't like it.

And I really don't like the alphanumeric name + heritage name combination. Sounds corny.

I also find BMW's naming convention severely limiting, but then again... how many numbers do you really need to flush out a lineup?
 
#16 ·
ATS = Alpha Touring Sedan
CTS = Catera Touring Sedan
CTS Coupe = Catera Touring Sedan...Coupe
XTS = eXample-of-nonsensical Touring Sedan

ELR = Electric Luxury Roadster...that's not a roadster.

SRX = Some Random X-over

Escalade
---------------------------------------------
I still think they should go back to the Series __ naming scheme. It's obvious that a Series 60 is less than a Series 75...
 
#17 ·
Pitiful? Laughable? Pathetic? Absurd? :fall: :lmao: :p: :eek: :confused:

So THIS is what goes on at meetings of The High And Mighty?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ed753
#18 ·
Cadillac nomenclature is now as confusing as Lincoln's. Unless you are a devout student of Cadillac, it's hard to remember what's what. Last week, I had a 10 minute conversation with a friend, who I consider automotively literate, on where/what/how the ATS, CTS and XTS find themselves positioned in Caddy's line up.

Time to fix it.
 
#36 · (Edited)
I wonder if Cadillac has tried putting all 26 letters (or maybe 2 sets?) in a bag along with 0 thru 9 (again maybe 2 sets?)
and just see what the gods of chance decree?


imho Cadillac's nomenclature currently is quite simple**

Lincoln IS messy BUT if "Aviator" replaces the MKT (can't think WHY anyone would want to keep "T"arnished MucK around)
and they change to "The MARK" for the nextgen MKS (as top of the F-Awd "MarK-Series")
All Of A Sudden - Who'd'a Thunk - Oh MY Oh MY...
the letters actually proceed alphabetically from small (C) to medium-long (X, then Z)
with plenty of choices in between for "product acceleration"
(( flagship = Continental ...OrElse ...DUH ))

** my problem with Cadillac is
- for repeat buyers & people who have been paying attention;
since sizes have changed for this generation and seems will continue to change for a while...
...wonder if they'll ever build a direct size-replacement for the gen1/2 CTS?
- and how they'll add more models
 
#20 ·
To me it makes sense....

C is for Cadillac T is for Touring and then there is the size ranking.

CT1
CT2
CT3 - ATS
CT4 - ATS Coupe
CT5 - CTS
CT6 - CTS Coupe
CT7 - Omega
CT8 - Omega Coupe
CT9 - Omega+

Then crossovers and SUV's with say R for Recreational

CR1
CR3 - SRX
CR5
CR7 - Escalade

While I love real names these can be added to the high end models so Escalade can be badged "CR7 Escalade". CT7 can be badged "CT7 Fleetwood". CT8 badged as "CT8 Eldorado".

That way you get to have your cake sand eat it too... people know where the vehicles sit in the line-up and you can add heritage names as well.




;)
 
#21 ·
Is this proof they really don't know what they're doing or what. I like the idea of going back to names but as was earlier posted outside of the US they really don't know about that routine with Cadillac and would be meaningless. Maybe they should have spaced the letters chosen farther apart so they didn't end up all bunched together with nowhere to put something new when it came along.
 
#23 · (Edited)
CT5 would make sense for a CTS-based CUV.

The biggest problem w/ Cadillac's nomeclature are the XTS and the presumably the LTS to be named Omega sedan.

LTS is boring for the Cadillac flagship and if anything, the 2 should be switched.

Also, the ATS should have remained the CTS (allowing the ATS to be a sub-entry model slotting below the CTS) with the midsizer being something like the RTS or bringing back STS.
 
#25 ·
ALL names are either
1. meaningless (until marketing & exposure gives them meaning), or
2. are obviously directed at slavering morons (such as BMW's 'system'). Few and far between are
3. those names than mean something by themselves; OEMs don't trot out a 'Barracuda' anymore.

Give a vehicle whatever decent name / alpha-numeric you desire, build a competitive vehicle and market it... and the rest falls readily in place. A -say- 'Deville' will gain it's 'meaning' in other markets just as -say- 'Gallardo' did (which was 100% 'meaningless' here prior to).
 
#26 ·
Cadillac will make the name through branding.

Historical Cadillac names mean tiddly these days. Cadillac has done nothing for decades to either promote or grow their historical names and they mean nothing to anyone other than people that are about to die in the next ten years.

If Cadillac has to start over, they might as well create a logical and easy to understand tier structure for people to associate with.
 
#95 ·
It costs literally hundreds of millions of dollars to brand a new car. Advertising, car shows, you name it. It ain't cheap to get people who don't follow cars obsessively to register in their minds what a new name means. Detroit has always been stupid about tossing aside or degrading established car names.
 
#29 · (Edited)
This may help you with some of Lambos names. They all have a connection with bulls, bullfighting and perhaps matadors (not sure). The only two that didn't were the first ones 350 and 400.
The Miura bull line line traces its roots to five historic Spanish bull breeds, namely the Gallardo, Cabrera, Navarra, Veragua, and Vistahermosa-Parladé.

Can't wait until lambo bring out a Vistahermosa-Parladé - I loved the Muira and like the Gallardo.

They did bring out a low volume car for the track that didn't have a bull name - sesto elemento. which I assume refers to Carbon being the sixth element -but maybe that's just bull!
 
#30 · (Edited)
At the time, didn't Chevy claim 'Camaro' was French for 'friend'?

Point RE 'Gallardo' was that it was meaningless in the U.S.... counter to the claim that a heritage Cadillac name would be 'meaningless' in Europe.

-- -- --
No doubt someone in a primarily Euro-based forum can explain the heritage definitions for Cadillac names, should they be used.
 
#33 ·
Maybe the current ATS can be re named BTS and a smaller car can pick up the name ATS and the flagship DTS......
At least for the sedans there is a pattern involved which makes since....... though maybe wait until the next generation ATS to change the name to BTS.
Please stop. We need another imbecilic naming convention like we need to revisit 1975 performance levels. Exactly who is this ankle-biter theory marketing to??

 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top