GM Inside News Forum banner
81 - 100 of 117 Posts
Discussion starter · #81 · (Edited)
Lesson #1: Just because you "need it now," still doesn't make it the right product.
I was trying to bring in a Batman reference this close to the new movie.


Al... You need to work on your sentence structure a bit. That was kinda painful.
Over the the course of about 12 years, Cadillac went from relatively acceptable interiors to complete crap and back to acceptable interiors. I don't believe their class leading, but they're certainly not bottom dwelling either. And they seem better than mid-pack too.
I can't remember a time where the interiors were acceptable, at least not over the 12 years.


Which also gives it a weird stance.
Debatable. I kinda like the look of the longer tail, but that's me


Is the LED light pipe standard or is it omitted on the base XTS model only and standard on up?
Is it brushed metal or matted metal?
Standard, not like the ATS.
As for the metal, there are about 2-3 different finishes. The Platinum's wheels have two different finishes on the wheels for example.


Vinyl? Or Pleather? I wish the concept's door handles had made it to production. But oh well.
It was described to me as vinyl, but until they said something I thought they were all leather. The Platinum's dash feel is different, little bit more coarse.



Seriously? A white glow for ambient lighting??? IS this going to be the new revised color for Cadillac's ambient lighting? SRX is white. CTS is blue. Can we please just get 1 color!! White seems to be unimaginative.
No, CTS has white as well. Chevy and Buick are blue, GMC is red, Cadillac is white.



Let's try this again. You synced your Droid to CUE, right? That means you moved all your contacts to the CUE system. Or did you mean, you established a connection to your Droid using CUE? I'm assuming this will also work with Pandora, Spotify, and iTunes.
I don't have a Droid, I have a Galaxy Nexus. I could access my phone book, Google Play, Pandora, and Stitcher through CUE. There is no app for Spotify or iTunes like there is with Pandora, but you can still play music through the the BT connection. Since I don't have Spotify nor iTunes, I couldn't test that, but they work the same way as Google Play.

Bose systems in Cadillacs are generally engineered to the acoustics of the car. So despite the "inferior" speakers, it often sounds great. STS had one of the best systems out there.
Well then you will like the upgraded speaker system in the XTS.


The fundamental problem with XTS is that it's the car that Cadillac MUST STOP BUILDING!!!
Cadillac reverts to this vestigial part of its history, insisting that it must build this type of car for its "traditional buyers." Sorry, but these "traditional buyers" can be moved to an ATS or CTS.
Are you talking about a large FWD car, or just a large luxury car? I'm assuming the FWD part as you demand a proper flagship from them.

While it's nice that Cadillac is learning to build a luxury interior again, after forgetting how to, they need to learn how to do it and apply it across the entire model line. THey need a unified look and feel. THey need each and every interior to say "Cadillac." SRX and Escalade need to be brought into line. And initial looks of CTS seems to be falling in line. So that's a big plus.
If you look at the new stuff, all 3 cars are matching. SRX gets an CUE upgrade, so it will look the part. Escalade is due up soon, and I expect the same type of style of the other 3.

But remember, as Cadillac moves up and up the food chain, each interior must become progressively better and better. XTS seems to align with the German and British mid-sizers. But the next level up, the competition is far stiffer and robust with options and details and technology. So, we'll see how it goes.
I know, but XTS shows that Cadillac has what it takes to at least attempt at an interior that can take on the big guys. You wouldn't say that if you looked at the interior of the current CTS.

Sharp design:
Image


Soft design:
Image


Abandoning the horrendously cheap looking design language of the SRX means Cadillac is on the right track.
SRX doesn't have the same surface language as CTS, but it fits the A&S design theme better than the XTS or ATS do. SRX's problem is the tall firewall which gives it a bit of a fat face with a bit of an underbite.

As for the rather large trunk, I think it gives it much better proportions than say the MKS.

Image


Image
 
This is a very good looking an competent vehicle for the demographic Cadillac is going after. This vehicle will end up being bought by senior with money and business types that need to port clients around. To do those two tasks, one does not need an S class price tag, nor 7 series power. The XTS provides everything that is needed and at a price that is very profitable and appealing. This will sell well.
 
The XTS is going to be Cadillac's money making car for now, not some RWD Uber sports sedan. This is a car for the times we are in. Some of you people behave like the US economy is roaring along like a freight train at full speed.. it aint. The XTS fits the bill until the real deal LWB RWD Cadillac sedan is released.
 
I was trying to bring in a Batman reference this close to the new movie.
Yeah... went over my head...

I can't remember a time where the interiors were acceptable, at least not over the 12 years.
There wasn't. Just a lot of people making excuses for Cadillac.

Debatable. I kinda like the look of the longer tail, but that's me
Yup. It's debatable. From some angles, it's OK. From others it's not.


Standard, not like the ATS.
As for the metal, there are about 2-3 different finishes. The Platinum's wheels have two different finishes on the wheels for example.
THat's promising.


It was described to me as vinyl, but until they said something I thought they were all leather. The Platinum's dash feel is different, little bit more coarse.
When I hear vinyl, I think of 1970's GM cars with the rubbery vinyl seats. Must be some different type of vinyl like material.


No, CTS has white as well. Chevy and Buick are blue, GMC is red, Cadillac is white.
I swear CTS was blue. Or at least in some point was blue.


I don't have a Droid, I have a Galaxy Nexus. I could access my phone book, Google Play, Pandora, and Stitcher through CUE. There is no app for Spotify or iTunes like there is with Pandora, but you can still play music through the the BT connection. Since I don't have Spotify nor iTunes, I couldn't test that, but they work the same way as Google Play.
Fine. You have an Android. Did you move your contacts to CUE or did CUE just read the contacts off the phone?

Are you talking about a large FWD car, or just a large luxury car? I'm assuming the FWD part as you demand a proper flagship from them.
Large FWD car.


If you look at the new stuff, all 3 cars are matching. SRX gets an CUE upgrade, so it will look the part. Escalade is due up soon, and I expect the same type of style of the other 3.
Yeah. It looks like they're finally doing it properly.

I know, but XTS shows that Cadillac has what it takes to at least attempt at an interior that can take on the big guys. You wouldn't say that if you looked at the interior of the current CTS.
Very true. At least they're in the same ballpark now.
 
There is nothing wrong with my usage of they're and their in my post.
"I don't believe their class leading, but they're certainly not bottom dwelling either."

"their" is wrong dude. After years of your unrelenting negativity and pretentiousness and air of superiority and condescension to some truly fine posters, I'm finally resorting to "Ignore" for you as one of the few aspects of GMI I do not enjoy.
 
Wish the rear door cut line went to the C Pillar like the concept instead of to the quarter window. This moves the door handles closer together.

Likewise, the rear side window divider lost its sleek line in favor of a more robust and awkward looking divider
so the glass could go all the way down on the shorter door. The chrome on the C Pillar also grew fatter at the base.

Of course the mirrors had to get bigger but they were moved from exactly at the base of the A Pillar, rearward toward the driver. Probably a safety issue.

The combination of those changes unfortunately visually shrink the wheelbase, IMO.
 
Wish the rear door cut line went to the C Pillar like the concept instead of to the quarter window. This moves the door handles closer together.

Likewise, the rear side window divider lost its sleek line in favor of a more robust and awkward looking divider
so the glass could go all the way down on the shorter door. The chrome on the C Pillar also grew fatter at the base.

Of course the mirrors had to get bigger but they were moved from exactly at the base of the A Pillar, rearward toward the driver. Probably a safety issue.

The combination of those changes unfortunately visually shrink the wheelbase, IMO.
I did not notice that change in the rear door cut line, will look for images to compare, thanks for pointing that out. When the XTS came out I was very disappointed but I must admit it is growing on me whenever I see the DTS and STS on the road now. I can't help but see it as a GREATLY improved DTS ,and it does make me hopeful for what is to come, like the next-gen CTS. My interest in cars since childhood has been mainly about exterior design, so I am looking forward to seeing if/how the jaw-dropping Ciel influences future models.
 
Wish the rear door cut line went to the C Pillar like the concept instead of to the quarter window. This moves the door handles closer together.

Likewise, the rear side window divider lost its sleek line in favor of a more robust and awkward looking divider
so the glass could go all the way down on the shorter door. The chrome on the C Pillar also grew fatter at the base.

Of course the mirrors had to get bigger but they were moved from exactly at the base of the A Pillar, rearward toward the driver. Probably a safety issue.

The combination of those changes unfortunately visually shrink the wheelbase, IMO.
I think I see what you mean after I went to their sales site....the concept looked longer and sleeker.

http://www.cadillac.com/xts-luxury-sedan.html
 
Wish the rear door cut line went to the C Pillar like the concept instead of to the quarter window. This moves the door handles closer together.
Likewise, the rear side window divider lost its sleek line in favor of a more robust and awkward looking divider
so the glass could go all the way down on the shorter door. The chrome on the C Pillar also grew fatter at the base.
The combination of those changes unfortunately visually shrink the wheelbase, IMO.
The greenhouse is significantly longer than the concept's to improve rear headroom to what I consider barely adequate (the LaCrosse doesn't have near enough for tall people). If the rear door is too long, it's difficult to use in parking lots (plus it reduces rigidity). If they left the third window out, the C pillar woud be very thick even if they enlarged the door a bit. Remember, the concept had frameless windows, which changes the look considerably.

I would have preferred the backlight were more upright and the roof more level to improve headroom and have a more normal trunklid, but aerodynamics conquers all. I also like the limousine-style doors on my Deville, which the XTS may not need since it's several inches taller.

The wheelbase is less than an inch longer than the dreadfully mis-timed 1985 Deville (which weighed less than the ATS despite the V8).
 
^ If 'abandoning' means going to a generic, amorphous quivering mass of soft radiuses from the 1990s, with less distinction, that would be the wrong track.
As opposed to the boxy shape, sharp lines, poor surface transitions and an almost complete lack of body sculpting from the 70s and 80s? Give me a break.

Even all that aside, little things in the execution is just horrendous for any modern vehicle let alone one trying to pass for a $40k luxury SUV. Look how the fender meets the bumper:

Image

Image


And those chrome wheels, my god the chrome wheels... What you call "distinct" I call piss poor cheap looking car design. If this is how you want Welburn to design future Cadillacs, then the brand will forever remain the laughing stock of the luxury car market.
 
I finally saw a XTS in the flesh today. I thought it was great. The interior felt and "sat" even better than I expected. It's a beautiful, sleek car and looks to me to be every inch a Cadillac.

And I'm happy to say, the XTS I saw bore little resemblance to this car:

Image


The flattening effect of a telephoto lense is not flattering to any car.


The salesman I know at the dealer told me that he has sold 2 this week. One to a 40 year old MD and his wife (also an MD).
 
Wish the rear door cut line went to the C Pillar like the concept instead of to the quarter window. This moves the door handles closer together.

Likewise, the rear side window divider lost its sleek line in favor of a more robust and awkward looking divider
so the glass could go all the way down on the shorter door. The chrome on the C Pillar also grew fatter at the base.

Of course the mirrors had to get bigger but they were moved from exactly at the base of the A Pillar, rearward toward the driver. Probably a safety issue.

The combination of those changes unfortunately visually shrink the wheelbase, IMO.
I think the concept has a longer wheelbase, it's not just a visual shrink.
 
As opposed to the boxy shape, sharp lines, poor surface transitions and an almost complete lack of body sculpting from the 70s and 80s? Give me a break.
Even all that aside, little things in the execution is just horrendous for any modern vehicle let alone one trying to pass for a $40k luxury SUV. Look how the fender meets the bumper:
And those chrome wheels, my god the chrome wheels... What you call "distinct" I call piss poor cheap looking car design. If this is how you want Welburn to design future Cadillacs, then the brand will forever remain the laughing stock of the luxury car market.
You have issues with chrome? Sorry; we disagree. Matte grey painted rims have been the default wheel look for 30 years, right down to the stamped steel rims of the lowliest civics of the '70s. The finish is not hardly upscale in the least. Mind-numbingly boring.

WRT the 2 pics above; at least the SRX fades the horizontal surface of the bumper away gradually, aligns it with the seam, and the seam angle is inline with the side sculpting. On the BMW (what happened to the toyota?)... the horizontal sharp crease of the bumper melts into nothing, and the seam angles downward when everything else angles upward. There's another 'appear-then-disappear' crease above the wheel. The way they chopped out the black plastic down in front of the tire for the 'fog light nacelle' is awful, grade-school. Element overlapping element, or completely ignoring it. A stylistic mess.
I'm no fan of the SRX, but it's much more of a cohesive design than either of the two competitors you posted. IMO.
 
I saw 3 of these this evening. Probably my favorite side of the car is the full on rear view. It is very clean looking. The car doesn't have a lot of road presence. It is too much on the narrow side, which is also apparent when you look inside. No spread out room.
3 across the backseat I'll be tight. I also felt the seats bottoms were close to the floor. The ones I saw had $60k msrps.
It is not a home run bit is an attractive car.
 
As opposed to the boxy shape, sharp lines, poor surface transitions and an almost complete lack of body sculpting from the 70s and 80s? Give me a break.

Even all that aside, little things in the execution is just horrendous for any modern vehicle let alone one trying to pass for a $40k luxury SUV. Look how the fender meets the bumper:

Image

Image


And those chrome wheels, my god the chrome wheels... What you call "distinct" I call piss poor cheap looking car design. If this is how you want Welburn to design future Cadillacs, then the brand will forever remain the laughing stock of the luxury car market.
What you don't know is alot


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 
You have issues with chrome? Sorry; we disagree. Matte grey painted rims have been the default wheel look for 30 years, right down to the stamped steel rims of the lowliest civics of the '70s. The finish is not hardly upscale in the least. Mind-numbingly boring.
I dislike chrome wheels with passion. They're the epitome of tacky.

WRT the 2 pics above; at least the SRX fades the horizontal surface of the bumper away gradually, aligns it with the seam, and the seam angle is inline with the side sculpting. On the BMW (what happened to the toyota?)... the horizontal sharp crease of the bumper melts into nothing, and the seam angles downward when everything else angles upward. There's another 'appear-then-disappear' crease above the wheel. The way they chopped out the black plastic down in front of the tire for the 'fog light nacelle' is awful, grade-school. Element overlapping element, or completely ignoring it. A stylistic mess.
I'm no fan of the SRX, but it's much more of a cohesive design than either of the two competitors you posted. IMO.
I decided to compare the Chevy to the BMW instead (another example of soft design). All your aesthetic critiques aside, the bodywork on the BMW gives reflection, light, and shadow something to do. That's one positive by-product of soft surfacing. When you have vast expanses of flat featureless panels followed by super sharp surface changes, those things are not as prominent.

I'm happy to see both the ATS and XTS move away from the SRX/1CTS/Mercedes and towards a BMW/Lexus level of design execution. This I am absolutely certain is the right direction for Cadillac to go. I'm glad GM agrees.
 
81 - 100 of 117 Posts