Only@GMI: Cadillac Zeta Car Rumored Dead

[asrapid]

Originally Posted by Docray1

Cadillac is "considering" both options right now; both "news sources" are correct. The "DT7" is "delayed" right now, but may well be axed; certain components already have been terminated (V8, V6 Twin-turbo, hybrid, etc). The decision to be made will be whether to resurrect the project which is now emasculated or whether to drop it altogether and focus capital on smaller sedans (ie: Alpha) and crossovers. Meanwhile, Cadillac has no "flagship" aside from the DTS (or the CTS-V, depending on your point of view).

If V6 with TT is also terminated the most powerful engine in DT7 (if it comes ) will be V6 DI with 300 hp+..when competiton has well over 400 hp engine. Even Hyundai.
What will be most powerful engine in Alpha cadillac? 300 hp also ? If future v6 TT is gone only other choice for alpha cadillac in V version (if GM is even thinking about that) is gen V V8.

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

Kinda sucks when everything I've been preaching for the past 3-4 years I've been here is actually coming true.

HBS should write a new case study: "General Motors: A Textbook Case to Failure."

Everything they do is wrong, delayed, too slow, half assed, DOA, whatever.
And there is no longer anything they can to about it.

Wharton already has one... covers GM's plan in the late 1970's to spend $40 billion in R&D to blow Ford, Chrysler, and the foreigners into the weeds.

[schmallz]

Originally Posted by asrapid

If V6 with TT is also terminated the most powerful engine in DT7 (if it comes ) will be V6 DI with 300 hp+..when competiton has well over 400 hp engine. Even Hyundai.
What will be most powerful engine in Alpha cadillac? 300 hp also ? If future v6 TT is gone only other choice for alpha cadillac in V version (if GM is even thinking about that) is gen V V8.

When the Alpha V comes out...

It will probalby have the LS3. That will put it right in the middle of it's competitor's: M3 414, IS-F 420, RS4 420, C63 451.

And a Twin Turbo V6 wouldn't cut it.

And the LS3 should be the base engine in DT7.

[schmallz]

Originally Posted by wescoent

Corporate finance... TONS of fun.

Cadillac is deciding between volume (Alpha BTS) and prestige (DT7).

Further proving that they have the mindset of being no more than a blinged-up Chevrolet.

Actually looks like they want volume from the DT7, just like the DTS. That is so wrong. Why have your flagship be you sales leader?

[CmicasatheGreat]

Can We get some good news for a change for Cadillac buyers who are ready to move up but still love the Cadillac Design???

Damm... Take a STS... Stretch it out on Sigma... or Zeta, give it a 380-430HP version of the LS3, revise the interior to CTS Vseries quality and let's MOVE ON.

and While U are at it... take the Saab 9-3 Turbo X (280HP).. make it into a BLS with CTS styling cues... make it available in AWD only, and send it over here ASAP...

DAMM It's a Cadillac. No apologies are necessary. Benz isn't worried about CAFE

[asrapid]

Originally Posted by schmallz

When the Alpha V comes out...

It will probalby have the LS3. That will put it right in the middle of it's competitor's: M3 414, IS-F 420, RS4 420, C63 451.

And a Twin Turbo V6 wouldn't cut it.

And the LS3 should be the base engine in DT7.

Assuming LS3 doesn't get any power up or V version of alpha comes before GEN V engine . Wasn't there not so long ago rumor (i think it was rumors) that there won't be any more ohv engines in cadillac (after MCE of present CTS)?. But i think it that was before ultra v8 was canceled.

[PAULSTS1]

Originally Posted by schmallz

Actually looks like they want volume from the DT7, just like the DTS. That is so wrong. Why have your flagship be you sales leader?

Schmallz:

I highlighted the part of your comment that I don't understand? I thought the one "bringing home the bacon," was the most important in this household? Or perhaps you think it's the one that saves .50 on groceries?

Sarcasm aside: GM requires big cash to survive; small profits associated with small cars won't pay the bills. First of all, at this time they won't sell that many. The Credit crunch and falling credit from the reports I've seen makes all manufacturer's reliant upon seeking those who can pay. With other issues to face a company must get the most amount of money available from each sale.

[megeebee]

Originally Posted by Docray1

Cadillac is "considering" both options right now; both "news sources" are correct. The "DT7" is "delayed" right now, but may well be axed; certain components already have been terminated (V8, V6 Twin-turbo, hybrid, etc). The decision to be made will be whether to resurrect the project which is now emasculated or whether to drop it altogether and focus capital on smaller sedans (ie: Alpha) and crossovers. Meanwhile, Cadillac has no "flagship" aside from the DTS (or the CTS-V, depending on your point of view).

Well, we know Hamtramck is being converted to build Delta II cars including the Volt.

Would GM spend the time and money moving production of the DTS/Lucerne to a differrent plant? For a platform THAT OLD? With sales falling? I shouldn't think so. (But the older I get, less and less suprises me.)

The STS, for all it's shortcomings, is built in a farily new ( honored for it's efficiency and quality) plant that builds it's best selling car, the CTS, and some newer variants coming soon. The SRX is already dead, its replacement designed, and the tooling ordered for production at another plant.

Why not simply continue with a low volume STS production schedule? Eliminate its lower price variants. Perhaps soften the suspension settings a bit. Let the CTS's have that mid- upper $40K range. Produce only a high-content DII V6 and a Platinum Edition for those who like that kind of thing. This alone could make it special if only by virtue of its low numbers. This would not "cost" money. In fact it might lower costs by building only 2 or 3 configurations. It would take up the spare capacity at the plant and concentrate production of all Cadillac passanger cars in one place.

This would give Cadillac SOMETHING like a flagship sedan while the Board figures out something else. And it would be a fairly modern RWD/AWD platform, still exclusive to Cadillac. Not a decade-old FWD one. While the CTS is now of a similar length to the STS, it is not as roomy inside. They really do feel like very different cars. And, with the DTS gone and the 2 new CTS variants coming along with the new SRX, traffic at Cadillac dealers should improve and an upmarket-only STS would appear more like the top-of-the-line it was intended to be.


(..and if you decide to repeat any of this to a well-placed ear, please add for me: "18" Wheels STANDARD PLEASE. Make 19"'s available. The poor thing looks so bloated and mal-proportioned with 17"-ers)

[gmcbob]

Maybe I'm trying to be optimistic, but from what I'm reading, it doesn't sound like GM is going to completely kill the DTS or STS, it just isn't going to replace them with anything just yet. Who knows? I do think that getting rid of both of them would be completely insane, but then again, we're talking about GM, that makes some of the most insane moves in the industry (and I mean insane in a bad way)

I don't know, I love Cadillac as a brand, and the new CTS is awesome (but a little too expensive quite frankly - considering our G35 cost about $7,000 less and is equipped exactly the same). But in all actuality GM really does need to start getting people interested in their bread and butter, high volume, high mileage cars way more than they need to have people excited about a $75,000 Caddy (I think both are important, but sit back and look at where GM is at the moment). Lets face it, other than some of the die hard GM people and/or those who just simply won't ever look at an import no matter what, most people don't consider Chevy Malibu's, Cobalt's and Pontiac G6's as being competitive to a Camry, Accord or Civic. Whether it's true or not is debatable (I think they're very competitive cars actually), but GM really needs to focus on that bread and butter $12k-$24k sedan market right now. Pulling resources from a section of the market that demands less and less, and putting it towards a resource that demands more and more (like 40 mpg **** boxes), actually makes quite a bit of business sense.

So, sentimentally, I'm pretty bummed that Caddy doesn't have a proper LS460 type flagship (which they should have had, oh, 15 years ago???) - but right now I think focusing on small, fuel efficient cars and mid size cars is probably a pretty smart thing to do. I think in the meantime though, GM should keep at least one of them (DTS or STS) around for those who do want a bigger sedan from Caddy. Those cars still bring a certain type of buyer in the showroom, and they still generate revenue. I think only having the CTS as your only sedan offering in the mix for a brand that is supposed to be competing with Lexus, Infiniti, Merc, etc, would be really foolish.

Ultimately, if Caddy could have a really large flagship, say, the size of a Bentley or something, alongside a CTS - that would be pretty cool. I always thought that GM should have sold the Pontiac G8 dressed as a Cadillac as well - they probably could have charged a lot of money for it.

Oh well, good luck GM - if you kill both of the big Caddy's in the near future and expect the CTS to be the only real sedan you have, then you're going to be the laughing stalk of the luxury car world.

[New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66]

I doubt that they want to spend all that money to develop the Zeta just for the Camaro. Look at your competition, Infiniti, Lexus, BMW, and they are offering RWD products. That's where the consumer will go to get sated. Maximize this platform and offer 4 products off it, the Camaro, G8, a Buick Zeta and Caddilac Zeta. Done. If CAFE is scaring you, don't let it. It's possible to get mpg of the mid-high 20s out of these.

Secondly, imagine an ALMS GT1 or GT2 car, or a Grand Am GT car using these products. I saw many folks waving Acura, Porsche and Audi flags at Road America at the podium following the Generac race. A Buick or Cadillac racing has several benefits. The owner feels better about their car, and it's advertising.

I am one who wants to see more American manufacturers involved in big time road racing. There are more like me. Then with your help road racing can be better marketed to attract those disillusioned with NASCAR.

It makes no sense, they are giving away a market. Watering down your product to produce a Coors Light type of car, when the competition is offering a full bodied Red Hook or Sam Adams type of car.

Percpetion changer is what these are.

[eaton53]

Originally Posted by megeebee

Why not simply continue with a low volume STS production schedule? Eliminate its lower price variants. Perhaps soften the susupension settings a bit. Let the CTS's have that mid- upper $40K range. Produce only a high-content DII V6 and a Platinum Edition for those who like that kind of thing. This alone could make it special if only by virtue of its low numbers. This would not "cost" money. In fact it might lower costs by building only 2 or 3 configurations. It would take up the spare capacity at the plant and concentrate production of all Cadillac passanger cars in one place.

Well they already have the STS-V. However...
Why is that car not AWD and why does it not have MRC?
I'm sure it's a great car but when I look at STS, those two things are a must.

If they've killed or are re-thinking the flagship they should definitely continue building the STS and STS-V.

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by megeebee

Well, we know Hamtramck is being converted to build Delta II cars including the Volt.

Would GM spend the time and money moving production of the DTS/Lucerne to a differrent plant? For a platform THAT OLD? With sales falling? I shouldn't think so. (But the older I get, less and less suprises me.)

The STS, for all it's shortcomings, is built in a farily new ( honored for it's efficiency and quality) plant that builds it's best selling car, the CTS, and some newer variants coming soon. The SRX is already dead, its replacement designed, and the tooling ordered for production at another plant.

Why not simply continue with a low volume STS production schedule? Eliminate its lower price variants. Perhaps soften the susupension settings a bit. Let the CTS's have that mid- upper $40K range. Produce only a high-content DII V6 and a Platinum Edition for those who like that kind of thing. This alone could make it special if only by virtue of its low numbers. This would not "cost" money. In fact it might lower costs by building only 2 or 3 configurations. It would take up the spare capacity at the plant and concentrate production of all Cadillac passanger cars in one place.

This would give Cadillac SOMETHING like a flagship sedan while the Board figures out something else. And it would be a fairly modern RWD/AWD platform, still exclusive to Cadillac. Not a decade-old FWD one. While the CTS is now of a similar length to the STS, it is not as roomy inside. They really do feel like very different cars. And, with the DTS gone and the 2 new CTS variants coming along with the new SRX, traffic at Cadillac dealers should improve and a upmarket-only STS would appear more like the top-of-the-line it was intended to be.


(..and if you decide to repeat any of this to a well-placed ear, please add for me: "18" Wheels STANDARD PLEASE. Make 19"'s available. The poor thing looks so bloated and mal-proportioned with 17"-ers)

Big +1 from me on this.

Of the two options, I'd definitely keep the STS around. With the DTS/Lucerne getting turned to Volt production, it just makes no sense to move the tooling when the CTS plant has plenty of spare capacity.

My best practices plan would be similar to yours. Add more content to the CTS and push it right up to 50k. Then, sell the STS in two trim levels, both with the DI 3.6L.

Then, if Cadillac really wants to get serious, put in the front engine bay of the CTS-V, and give it the full-tilt Corvette ZR1 V8, for a REAL STS-V.

[eaton53]

Originally Posted by wescoent

Then, if Cadillac really wants to get serious, put in the front engine bay of the CTS-V, and give it the full-tilt Corvette ZR1 V8, for a REAL STS-V.

Hell yeah! Could you imagine the ZR1 V8, AWD and MRC in the STS? That would be something.

But if they did that to the STS-V (and why stop there, do the XLR-V, too) some people would cry because it has those durn pushrods.

Never mind that it kicks everything's ass...

[megeebee]

Originally Posted by wescoent

Big +1 from me on this.

Of the two options, I'd definitely keep the STS around. With the DTS/Lucerne getting turned to Volt production, it just makes no sense to move the tooling when the CTS plant has plenty of spare capacity.

My best practices plan would be similar to yours. Add more content to the CTS and push it right up to 50k. Then, sell the STS in two trim levels, both with the DI 3.6L.

Then, if Cadillac really wants to get serious, put in the front engine bay of the CTS-V, and give it the full-tilt Corvette ZR1 V8, for a REAL STS-V.

In all seriousness, thank you. I'm flattered you found so much to agree with in my post.

One point: The CTS already hits $50K in AWD/ fully loaded guise.

I would start STS at about that price. The Northstar is all but gone anyway. Kill it. The new DI 6 is so good it has rendered the Northstar useless. Keep standard equipment rich and high. Options few, like Nav, sunroof, and 19" wheels. And a Platinum Edition above that. That's all. 2 trims. 3 factory configurations.

I will say this about the Lincoln. They have learned a good lesson in wheel size. The MKS STARTS with 18's and goes up from there. As I wrote, the STS is made ridiculous by the 17's most of them are sent out with. As everyone knows, I dislke the MKS intently. But at least it's NOT handicapped by its maker with puny rolling stock.

None of this is as good as a new, modern, competitive car for the Cadillac name. And I don't pretend to know what the Board of GM knows. But given what is the situation now, I can't see dumping a car like STS if it is not necessary. The DTS, for the sake of the brand, needs to go. The STS could continue with some fiddling like this and Cadillac would have at least a credible place holder in the upper market. Temporarily.

[mikmak]

So if we are on page 20 then it should be safe to assume that the fact Zeta has already had MRC applied, will have already been mentioned. The only missing function is AWD and I was lead to believe, early on, that this was factored in to the original development program (and doesn't need to be brought on line on release). I really can't see how they (GM) can not afford to develop an interior (which would be mostly cosmetic), an exterior (which would be mostly cosmetic) and the necessary electrickery (ECU etc transplanted from a CTS basis) into the Zeta platform. Would it really be that hard? Surely tooling would be the most significant cost as most of the engineering is already in the bag. Holden Special Vehicles has already received plenty of praise for the handling of the Zeta MRC setup in the HSV Senator.

WEBWOMBAT

Originally Posted by WebWombat

From the get-go it was clear that the FPV Force6's lighter front end and turbo power rush were giving it the edge when we started pushing the cars hard, but that was before we discovered the HSV Senator's secret weapon that, ultimately, gives it a slight edge in terms of both ride and handling over the FPV - and it's called MRC.

All hail the magnetic ride control!

Similar systems are used by some Ferrari models and the new Audi TT to reduce a cars body roll at the touch of a button. The system essentially changes the viscosity or thickness of the oil in the shock absorbers by running a current through it, which agitates tiny metallic flecks in the oil and, in turn, this makes the cars sit incredibly flat through even the tightest of corners. It also improves braking slightly as the car doesn't pitch forward as much under strong deceleration.

Currently FPV doesn't have a variable ride system like the MRC, and as such - little by little - the HSV began to assert itself as we wound our way higher into the hills.

When driving without the MRC system the HSV Senator had a fairly pliant ride. It is comparable to wearing a pair of comfy loafers when the system is switched off, but when you hit the MRC button, it's like donning a pair of running shoes. Not very comfy, but they're laced up tight and there's heaps of grip.

The HSV Senator felt great round corners, which is due to both the MRC and Holden Special Vehicle's upgraded suspension system. The steering didn't quite have the positive feel nor the grounded feedback of the FPV Force6, but as soon as we switched magnetic ride control on, body roll was virtually eliminated and the difference between the two became more pronounced.

The required capacity would surely be available alongside the Camaro.

Where's the challenge? I just don't get it. (and no, I am not hoping for a rebadge, but the frame work is already there)