GM Inside News Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As I lamented the use of GMT360 for the Saab 9-7, I began to wonder why GM didn't allow the Scandinavians to crib the SRX instead of the Envoy. At one point, I joked that the plan was for the 360 to go to Cadillac and the Sigma-ute to go to Saab, but styling got the orders mixed up.

Then I wondered.... is that really a joke? Sure, something like an SRX cross-ute would be better for Saab. But what's right for Cadillac? Sure, the authenic appeal of the CTS and XLR grew the party, but the in-yer-face Escalade remains the rum in the wreath-and-crest's punchbowl.

If Hummer's fortunes rest on a big, tough guy that reproduces into smaller and more affordable offspring, then why not Cadillac? I look at the 9-7, and other than fascia I see what could be a pint-sized Escalade. As a premium import fighter, the SRX gets the job done for Cadillac. Nonetheless, I'm beginning to think "import-fighter" was no better a mission for Caddy's small ute than it was for the big one. The Escalade is NOT chasing anything, and that's the draw. The SRX has yet to meet much success in its "CTS meets Lexus RX" persona.

Mini-Escalade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44,081 Posts
Couple things at work here most likely:

GM internal politics: Sigma is Cadillac only, as "platform sharing" in the upper echelon of cars is now considered a no-no. Or at least the utilization of cheap platforms.

Fact is... a Sigma SRX at $52K with 320HP or the Escalade at $52K with 345HP. And the Escalade has a lot of impact when people see one.

SRX also is entering a new product market -- luxury crossover utilities. Just because a car doesn't have the same impact as the C or E series cadillacs doesn't mean it's going to be successful down the road. Not everyone can have instant success. That and Cadillac had the incorrect feature mix to start off with. Maybe it's because that V6 was in short supply or something. Who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Originally posted by mgescuro@Apr 26 2004, 07:49 AM

GM internal politics:  Sigma is Cadillac only, as "platform sharing" in the upper echelon of cars is now considered a no-no.  Or at least the utilization of cheap platforms.

Not to restate the obvious, but the Escalade is off of a shared platform... in fact it's beyond that -- it's rebadged!

I was using Hummer as the model here. I see parallels between the H2 and the Escalade. If the H3 is directionally correct, then a smaller Escalade oughta be. You take the essence of the bigger one and scale down the size and price tag. The SRX and Escalade are cut from totally different cloth. Cadillac is not leveraging the Escalade's success in the rest of Caddy's SUV lineup.

Cadillac's image is characterized two ways... the premium-politeness of the cars in one corner, and the urban-toughness of Escalade in the other. Quite a bit of contrast.

I think SRX went to the wrong corner.

Sales charts will tell all.

----
(oh, BigAls.... useless response. Why bother wasting pixels???)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,085 Posts
The Escalade is not a rebadge. A rebadge means nothing but a grill popped on a car... this SUV uses unique body panels. The interior, however, is merely warmed over, and that's the weakness of the vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Originally posted by cyboexpo2002@Apr 26 2004, 04:21 PM
The Escalade is not a rebadge. A rebadge means nothing but a grill popped on a car... this SUV uses unique body panels. The interior, however, is merely warmed over, and that's the weakness of the vehicle.
While it's one of the most successful rebadges in GM's history, the Escalade is nonetheless a rebadge by definition. They added some body-side molding and drastically changed the fascia, but most of the sheetmetal and the interior is the identical to the Chev/GMC siblings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
Cadillac is not leveraging the Escalade's success in the rest of Caddy's SUV lineup.
Cadillac has leveraged the Escalade's success quite well in its SUV lineup.

First came the Tahoe-Based Escalade. Then, following the popularity of the first, came the Avalanche-based EXT. Then, since the car buying public didn't seem to be satisfied with only two, came the Suburban-based ESV.

A perfect case of leveraging across a huge platform (GMT800).

The decision to make the SRX a car-based platform makes alot of sense when you look at the direction the market is heading. Smaller SUVs (cross-overs if you will) are becoming more in vogue. Anticipating the further shift of the market into crossover-type vehicles, Cadillac chose wisely in placing the SRX on a stretched Sigma.

This gives the vehicle a driving dynamic more akin to a sedan (lower cg, performance oriented suspension points), than a truck (high cg, suspension initially derived for more utilitarian goals).

The SRX dovetails nicely with Cadillac's 21st century purpose. Bold, stylish, peformance machines.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,692 Posts
Just say no to a Cadillac Trailblazer.

But I must admit that a Saab SRX and a Cadillac Trailblazer would seem to make more sense than a Saab Trailblazer...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,174 Posts
This topic asks a great question. Maybe just maybe GM drew a line in the sand and said we can not make yet another version of the GMT360 platform. Then again why did SAAB get a version.
Someone should ask Lutz or Cowger why there is no Mini-Slade.
Such a SUV would sell. It might even steal from the SRX. Could this be actual market planning?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Originally posted by SmallBlock@Apr 26 2004, 07:35 PM


Cadillac has leveraged the Escalade's success quite well in its SUV lineup.

I meant leveraged outside of the GMT800 trio. Making an Avalanche-based Escalade may be good leveraging, but as for making a longer, Subarbanesque version? You can apply more leverage with a toothpick.

I agree with the sentiment regarding direction of the SUV market, and the relevance of the SRX on that basis. But the trucky ute segment isn't going anywhere just yet.

SRX sales are disappointing so far. GM cites "sticker shock" as a result of flooding the dealer lots with loaded models (you'd think they'd have heeded the lessons of DC's Pacifica launch!) But the well-equipped SRXs were still in the price range of other premium utes. For some reason, then, it's doing about as well as a CTS wagon would fare. Acceptably, but not stellarly. Perhaps the market sees it as... a tall CTS wagon?

If the game is to move more iron, the small Escalade would have done better... like the H2. If not on the 360, then something else. But the 9-7's look would have done the job, I think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,864 Posts
Originally posted by desmo9@Apr 26 2004, 12:09 AM
The SRX has yet to meet much success in its "CTS meets Lexus RX" persona.
Isn't a tad bit early to say the SRX isn't doing well?

Do we have any figures yet? What are we going on?

I want to examine this statement carefully before we bury the SRX. I like this short-ute/tall-wagon (especially after renting a CTS recently), and I'm hoping it does well.

So what do we have on this, guys?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
Originally posted by desmo9@Apr 26 2004, 04:19 PM
----
(oh, BigAls.... useless response. Why bother wasting pixels???)
oh, sorry for posting my opinion. Keep it up big guy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44,081 Posts
Originally posted by desmo9+Apr 26 2004, 11:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (desmo9 @ Apr 26 2004, 11:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-mgescuro@Apr 26 2004, 07:49 AM

GM internal politics:  Sigma is Cadillac only, as "platform sharing" in the upper echelon of cars is now considered a no-no.  Or at least the utilization of cheap platforms.

Not to restate the obvious, but the Escalade is off of a shared platform... in fact it's beyond that -- it's rebadged!

I was using Hummer as the model here. I see parallels between the H2 and the Escalade. If the H3 is directionally correct, then a smaller Escalade oughta be. You take the essence of the bigger one and scale down the size and price tag. The SRX and Escalade are cut from totally different cloth. Cadillac is not leveraging the Escalade's success in the rest of Caddy's SUV lineup.

Cadillac's image is characterized two ways... the premium-politeness of the cars in one corner, and the urban-toughness of Escalade in the other. Quite a bit of contrast.

I think SRX went to the wrong corner.

Sales charts will tell all.

----
(oh, BigAls.... useless response. Why bother wasting pixels???) [/b][/quote]
THere is a recent article somewhere... Fortune, Forbes, BW... somewhere that was railing on automanufacturers about platform sharing and the current "enlightenment" among makers that "platform sharing" among the luxury brands... in a market where discernable tastes abound, and consumer education is extremely high... isn't the way to go.

Yes.... I know the Cadillac E-series is a "rebadge." Well.. it's somewhere in between rebadge and platform sharing. no one is going to mistake a Suburban for an ESV. H2 isn't a rebadge. I've always stated that Cadillac should have gotten a GMT360. That would fill out the E-series lineup quite nicely.
BUT I do understand the motivations for the SRX. SRX is a very competent car in every respect.

But in turn... the market wants what it wants. Is there a need for an Escalade? an LX470? A G500? A navigator? True... probably not as "brutish" as teh E-series... but still.

Just remember... the last remaining fogey car is being redone next year. And it's still a fogey car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Originally posted by AMcA+Apr 27 2004, 03:47 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (AMcA @ Apr 27 2004, 03:47 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-desmo9@Apr 26 2004, 12:09 AM
The SRX has yet to meet much success in its "CTS meets Lexus RX" persona.
Isn't a tad bit early to say the SRX isn't doing well?

Do we have any figures yet? What are we going on?

I want to examine this statement carefully before we bury the SRX. I like this short-ute/tall-wagon (especially after renting a CTS recently), and I'm hoping it does well.

So what do we have on this, guys? [/b][/quote]
I wasn't burying it, or predicting its failure. However, last weeks press reported that SRX sales have thusfar not met expectations. In my other post, I elaborated on their reasoning (early models on the lots were mostly well-equipped and $10K over the $37K base). But my two cents worth is that if it were truly sought after, people would pay the $48K, as they are for the X5 and M-class.

You're right, it's too early to be sure, but it seems the SRX is so far only doing so-so... certainly not the runaway success of the Escalade or CTS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
many people like crossovers...many people like trucks. lexus figured this out.

Luxury Crossover: RX300/RX330
Luxury Truck: GX470

Can be priced similarly because they are competing for different buyers. And PS the RX way outsells the GX, so if Caddy has to choose only one segment to sell in, crossover was the better choice. Lincoln is experiencing this with bad Aviator sales - it's a rebadged truck. The next aviator will be a crossover.

still a mini sclade could sell against the GX470.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,519 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Originally posted by jsb57@May 3 2004, 07:53 PM
many people like crossovers...many people like trucks. lexus figured this out.

Luxury Crossover: RX300/RX330
Luxury Truck: GX470

Can be priced similarly because they are competing for different buyers.  And PS the RX way outsells the GX, so if Caddy has to choose only one segment to sell in, crossover was the better choice.  Lincoln is experiencing this with bad Aviator sales - it's a rebadged truck.  The next aviator will be a crossover.

still a mini sclade could sell against the GX470.
Beware statistics. If I'm not mistaken, the RX is priced in range of many more buyers, the GX being way, way more pricey. I mean, the GX costs more than a FULL-sized Escalade. I think that accounts for most of the sales difference between GX and RX. Offer a GX for the price of an RX and watch RX sales virtually dry up overnight. Aviator, also, was overpriced. Ford was about to discontinue it, but realized there's actually alot of demand for it at a somewhat lower price. In addition, Navigator does not have the image-quotient of the Escalade...so a mini Navigator called an Aviator has no brand equity.

If I were Caddy I'd have done a staunch CTS sportwagon, a la Audi Allroad, and then done the mini-Escalade.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top