[eaton53]

Has this guy ever been in a BMW X1??
Frankly, it suxs... XT4 is WAY nicer.

X3 is overrated as well.
The MB GLC I drove right after the X3 was not only a nicer ride but it was $5K less to boot.
I wouldn't pick the X3 over the MB even if the pricing were reversed.

 

[Ed753]

XT4 is a good attempt by Cadillac but if you look at it, Cadillac had to make it almost a Mid Sizer with a bobbed tail to keep it classed as a Compact. To me, this product just distracts from and draws buyers away from the XT5 which would IMO, normally sell at higher levels. IMO, it's another example of Cadillac doing two vehicles when it only really needs one*. Take that a step further, XT4/XT5 and XT6 should have all been variations of XT5
- XT4 becomes a bobbed version of XT5 (XT5 Sport)
- XT5 stays as it is now or maybe an inch wider.
- XT6 becomes a LWB XT5 or XT5 3-row.

Why is this stuff so hard for Cadillac to understand. They are adding unnecessary differentiation to vehicles in areas that don't matter to SUV buyers.


(*ATS, ATS-L and CTS could have all been just one vehicle, a wider ATS-L)

What is the goal; have one model represent ~70% of the brands sales, or sell more vehicles?

With a CUV dominated world and a naming convention as simple and generic as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Why consolidate?

Hyundai has Sante Fe and Sante Fe Sport, Nissan has Rogue and Rogue Sport, but that is building off of the equity those model names have, XT5 is both generic and new.

XT5 Mini (XT3), XT5 Sport (XT4), XT5, XT5 XL (XT6), XT5 2XL (XT7), XT5 3XL (XT8)?

 

[rougeriver]

What alternative universe does this guy live in?

Our C Class has plastic lower door trim. The materials surrounding the center console are a hard plastic with a faux wood finish that creak when I make sharp turns or hit rough pavement. And our C Class (2017) has the higher trim level with best leather seats offered. The leather in the seats is excellent.

Our C Class creaks like this video:

 

[rougeriver]

What alternative universe does this guy live in?

Our C Class has plastic lower door trim. The materials surrounding the center console are a hard plastic with a faux wood finish that creak when I make sharp turns or hit rough pavement. And our C Class (2017) has the higher trim level with best leather seats offered. The leather in the seats is excellent.

Our C Class creaks like this video:

My point is that some reviewers seem to go out of their way to nit pick Cadillac to "prove" that they are not up to world class standards, but blithely ignore that the OEMs setting those standards have their own problems with plastic.

 

[jpd80]

What is the goal; have one model represent ~70% of the brands sales, or sell more vehicles?

With a CUV dominated world and a naming convention as simple and generic as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Why consolidate?

Hyundai has Sante Fe and Sante Fe Sport, Nissan has Rogue and Rogue Sport, but that is building off of the equity those model names have, XT5 is both generic and new.

XT5 Mini (XT3), XT5 Sport (XT4), XT5, XT5 XL (XT6), XT5 2XL (XT7), XT5 3XL (XT8)?

No not suggesting they all be called XT5, consolidate the vehicles on one platform,
Compact XT4 is wider and longer 109.5" wheelbase than Equinox
Mid sized XT5 is on a 112" wheelbase
The XT6 is still on 112" wheelbase but 1" wider, longer rear for3rd row

Seriously, all of these could be one Utility platform in one width but with variable wheelbase and variable tail section. I just don't see why all of these need to be on three different platforms and three different plants.

 

[CMiatso DaBang]

I'm going to have to disagree with Jerry Perez here. I'm a fan of the XT4, and think that Cadillac needs more cars like it.

As many on GMI know, I'm a very picky person when it comes to interiors, particularly about materials and fit and finish of said materials. I think the XT4's material usage is very class appropriate, and I think the overall fit and finish is as well.

I think the XT4 is the best looking CUV in its segment, especially when it's sitting on the 20" wheels. It's very attractive.

Where I think the XT4 lags is in the powertrain department. The base 237 HP 2.0T just isn't enough motor for this car IMO. It's fine for a base level XT4, but once we start getting into the $50,000 range, it isn't enough. I didn't like the power delivery when I drove one either, which was mentioned in the review. I think it's by far the weakest link in an otherwise excellent package.

With all that said, I don't think the XT4 has anything to worry about. It's a solid CUV and is selling well.

Agreed. I look at the competition and see absolutely nothing in it's size category with exception to one.. the Macan. With the XT4, truthfully Cadillac could theoretically have a VSERIES (yup I said it) model that could go up against it

Maybe a V-series is on the horizon to solve the power dilemma? I also really like the XT4, a bigger engine offering would help greatly imo.

This

 

[dannyg]

No not suggesting they all be called XT5, consolidate the vehicles on one platform,
Compact XT4 is wider and longer 109.5" wheelbase than Equinox
Mid sized XT5 is on a 112" wheelbase
The XT6 is still on 112" wheelbase but 1" wider, longer rear for3rd row

Seriously, all of these could be one Utility platform in one width but with variable wheelbase and variable tail section. I just don't see why all of these need to be on three different platforms and three different plants.

As you prob know the XT5 and XT6 are on the same platform, so the XT6 basically is a three-row XT5. Modern platforms are flexible length/width/etc. Having seen the XT6 at a car show, I really liked it, but don’t personally need all that room.

The heaviest XT4 is lighter than the lightest XT5, so I’m glad they went with a smaller/lighter platform for that one. IMO.

 

[CMiatso DaBang]

My point is that some reviewers seem to go out of their way to nit pick Cadillac to "prove" that they are not up to world class standards, but blithely ignore that the OEMs setting those standards have their own problems with plastic.

How long have I been saying the same thing old friend? Since our AWCC days?Its not just the reviewers. Here we are on a forum.. where people know that the Euro makers are not only flawed, but very often worse in certain executions, but the very same posters would rather BS themselves and then U and I, into believing that some how.. some way.. the Mercedes ****ty plastic is better than the Cadillac ****ty plastic. And maybe it is GM's fault as well. My CTS-V has door panels that are in no way hard plastic on the bottom.. soft and supple covered in "leather." But why didn't they do the same with the CT6? Why are they inconsistent in pushing forth the perfection that they are so capable of? They have the capability to decimate the competition.. but I believe I know why they don't do it consistently.. they believe it will be wasted. Think about the fact that they built the absolute best lux sports sedan on the planet in the Gen 3 CTS... and people still tried to nit pick it to death.. going so far as to say that it wasn't worth $46K while a 5Series was worth $51K. IN WHAT WORLD? Have U ever driven or been in a 5series? No freaking way.. Hell.. I would have said the Chevy SS was a better car than it.. fit, finish, and damn sure engineering.. as in my crazy messed up world.. I believe still to this day.. that GREAT ENGINEERING is engineering that WORKS reliable. I don't know if U remember when BMW drove me to Cadillac and I purchased my '05 STS. That was after 2 months of a brand new M5 constantly having me on the phone with roadside assist.

 

[CMiatso DaBang]

To me, this product just distracts from and draws buyers away from the XT5 which would IMO, normally sell at higher levels. IMO, it's another example of Cadillac doing two vehicles when it only really needs one*.

A line-up of variety is a necessity in a luxury car line-up. Simple as that. small, medium, and large.. and extra large.. and extra small. Cadillac needs to do the same with its cars. Not deviate. Expand Your way of doing things forces a buyer to buy an SRX (going back) and that's it, thus losing a sale to the RDX, NX, X3, or GLC

 

[dannyg]

That’s if Cadillac or GM can justify the cost of developing that engine for transverse applications, based on the numbers they think they might sell. Also do they have a transmission that can handle that much torque in a FWD/AWD vehicle?

I suspect the lack of a suitable transmission is why we don’t have a C1XX based CUV with more than 300 ft/lb of torque, however if they have one, then the XT4 with the 2.7L 4 banger would be a pretty awesome car.

If the 2.7T won't fit, another option would be an optional hi-perf 2.0TT. Say 300hp. That's roughly what Merc has for latest gen 2.0Ts. Then you could have:

CT4/XT4: base 237hp 2.0TT / optional 300hp 2.0TT for Sport/Prem Lux
CT4-V: 320hp 2.7T (would have more torque than 2.0TT yay)
XT4-V: I don't think I'd do it, not performance/track related enough due to FWD/AWD platform. Gotta draw the line somewhere to maintain V prestige. I'm fine with current RWD/AWD CT4-V/CT5-V.

For the record I'd be fine with a hypothetical RWD/AWD XT7-V with +400hp!

 

[ryannel2003]

XT4 is a great vehicle and one I truly enjoyed driving. It does need a bit more power but overall I can find very little to complain about.

 

[SKH]

No not suggesting they all be called XT5, consolidate the vehicles on one platform,
Compact XT4 is wider and longer 109.5" wheelbase than Equinox
Mid sized XT5 is on a 112" wheelbase
The XT6 is still on 112" wheelbase but 1" wider, longer rear for3rd row

Seriously, all of these could be one Utility platform in one width but with variable wheelbase and variable tail section. I just don't see why all of these need to be on three different platforms and three different plants.

Equinox could be on the XT4 platform for sure, but C1XX already has two wheelbase lengths 112.5-112.7” for the XT5/Acadia/Blazer/Blazer XL and 120.9” for the Enclave/Traverse. I think a third 116” WB would be great, (especially the XT6 for a Goldilocks WB) but the C1XX is probably going to be replaced or slowly phased out in 2-3 years in favor of VSS-F, so any further developments on C1XX are unlikely.

 

[BlackGTP]

I'm going to have to disagree with Jerry Perez here. I'm a fan of the XT4, and think that Cadillac needs more cars like it.

As many on GMI know, I'm a very picky person when it comes to interiors, particularly about materials and fit and finish of said materials. I think the XT4's material usage is very class appropriate, and I think the overall fit and finish is as well.

I think the XT4 is the best looking CUV in its segment, especially when it's sitting on the 20" wheels. It's very attractive.

Where I think the XT4 lags is in the powertrain department. The base 237 HP 2.0T just isn't enough motor for this car IMO. It's fine for a base level XT4, but once we start getting into the $50,000 range, it isn't enough. I didn't like the power delivery when I drove one either, which was mentioned in the review. I think it's by far the weakest link in an otherwise excellent package.

With all that said, I don't think the XT4 has anything to worry about. It's a solid CUV and is selling well.

Just when I think you are totally biased against GM & Cadillac, you go and post something like this.

Cadillac did a nice job with the XT4, I had one for 5 days - I really liked it! Had a few imperfections, but overall I really liked it!

 

[BlackGTP]

How long have I been saying the same thing old friend? Since our AWCC days?Its not just the reviewers. Here we are on a forum.. where people know that the Euro makers are not only flawed, but very often worse in certain executions, but the very same posters would rather BS themselves and then U and I, into believing that some how.. some way.. the Mercedes ****ty plastic is better than the Cadillac ****ty plastic. And maybe it is GM's fault as well. My CTS-V has door panels that are in no way hard plastic on the bottom.. soft and supple covered in "leather." But why didn't they do the same with the CT6? Why are they inconsistent in pushing forth the perfection that they are so capable of? They have the capability to decimate the competition.. but I believe I know why they don't do it consistently.. they believe it will be wasted. Think about the fact that they built the absolute best lux sports sedan on the planet in the Gen 3 CTS... and people still tried to nit pick it to death.. going so far as to say that it wasn't worth $46K while a 5Series was worth $51K. IN WHAT WORLD? Have U ever driven or been in a 5series? No freaking way.. Hell.. I would have said the Chevy SS was a better car than it.. fit, finish, and damn sure engineering.. as in my crazy messed up world.. I believe still to this day.. that GREAT ENGINEERING is engineering that WORKS reliable. I don't know if U remember when BMW drove me to Cadillac and I purchased my '05 STS. That was after 2 months of a brand new M5 constantly having me on the phone with roadside assist.

I am torn on this argument. I do agree that Cadillac is held to higher standards than the German competition. But, Cadillac spent a lot of time tarnishing their image and they should be fully aware that they are held to higher standards. So should they repent by building higher quality cars until their image catches up with the Germans? I sometimes feel like it will be a much longer road to redemption if they stick to being on par.

 

[SKH]

If the 2.7T won't fit, another option would be an optional hi-perf 2.0TT. Say 300hp. That's roughly what Merc has for latest gen 2.0Ts. Then you could have:

CT4/XT4: base 237hp 2.0TT / optional 300hp 2.0TT for Sport/Prem Lux
CT4-V: 320hp 2.7T (would have more torque than 2.0TT yay)
XT4-V: I don't think I'd do it, not performance/track related enough due to FWD/AWD platform. Gotta draw the line somewhere to maintain V prestige. I'm fine with current RWD/AWD CT4-V/CT5-V.

For the record I'd be fine with a hypothetical RWD/AWD XT7-V with +400hp!

Not sure if the 2.7L four would fit in the XT4, (likely it would)doing it is more about GM having a suitable transmission/Transaxle to handle the torque, and whether they can justify development costs. Failing that, as you said just tune the eff out of Cadillac’s new four banger, 300/300+ and that’ll suffice for now.

 

[SKH]

I think Mercedes just announced an AMG A class FWD/AWD variant with a 419HP four cylinder, so GM is being absolutely spanked in this department.

 

[CMiatso DaBang]

I am torn on this argument. I do agree that Cadillac is held to higher standards than the German competition. But, Cadillac spent a lot of time tarnishing their image and they should be fully aware that they are held to higher standards. So should they repent by building higher quality cars until their image catches up with the Germans? I sometimes feel like it will be a much longer road to redemption if they stick to being on par.

granted.. and I agree on the tarnishing to a degree. Part of the tarnishing was simply not catching up with what the public wanted.. remaining a perceived old mans luxury with no sporting edge brand, while the Germans were elevating themselves into the hybrid Sport Lux that the younger Americans wanted. Even I didn't want what my dad loved in his old Brougham. It was a boat.. it had a LT1 in it yeah.. but hit a corner to hard and U might flip the thing. EFF that. When the Sigma platform arrived I knew I was a potential Cadillac customer. Alpha arrived and I had the handling of a Vette in a Cadillac Sport Lux package. Omega? Best of both worlds. Omega with a V? Best of every world.. and no need for me to even consider an S-Class.

 

[rougeriver]

How long have I been saying the same thing old friend? Since our AWCC days?Its not just the reviewers. Here we are on a forum.. where people know that the Euro makers are not only flawed, but very often worse in certain executions, but the very same posters would rather BS themselves and then U and I, into believing that some how.. some way.. the Mercedes ****ty plastic is better than the Cadillac ****ty plastic. And maybe it is GM's fault as well. My CTS-V has door panels that are in no way hard plastic on the bottom.. soft and supple covered in "leather." But why didn't they do the same with the CT6? Why are they inconsistent in pushing forth the perfection that they are so capable of? They have the capability to decimate the competition.. but I believe I know why they don't do it consistently.. they believe it will be wasted. Think about the fact that they built the absolute best lux sports sedan on the planet in the Gen 3 CTS... and people still tried to nit pick it to death.. going so far as to say that it wasn't worth $46K while a 5Series was worth $51K. IN WHAT WORLD? Have U ever driven or been in a 5series? No freaking way.. Hell.. I would have said the Chevy SS was a better car than it.. fit, finish, and damn sure engineering.. as in my crazy messed up world.. I believe still to this day.. that GREAT ENGINEERING is engineering that WORKS reliable. I don't know if U remember when BMW drove me to Cadillac and I purchased my '05 STS. That was after 2 months of a brand new M5 constantly having me on the phone with roadside assist.

I didn't know you had trouble with BMW. I do remember your troubles with the Toyota Camry V6 that turned oil into sludge.

 

[bmwboy2007]

Its a Great CUV that should be a Buick instead.

It's fine as is,.. as a Cadillac, arguably a solid choice for people attracted to the Buick Encore but wanting something a bit larger and more upscale..

 

[rougeriver]

I think Mercedes just announced an AMG A class FWD/AWD variant with a 419HP four cylinder, so GM is being absolutely spanked in this department.

This engine:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a27813866/mercedes-amg-most-powerful-four-cylinder-m139/