akirby Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 12 minutes ago, bzcat said: Neither the alpha (CTS, ATS, Camaro) nor the omega (CT6) platforms were engineered to handle SUV duty. I think the combination of suspension travel, load leveling, and chassis dynamics ruled out such use. May have been cost containment decisions by GM to limit design/use of those platform to cars only but once that decision was made, there is no going back. Well that's just doubly stupid. Double down on cars when buyers are moving to utilities by creating expensive bespoke platforms that can't be adapted to utilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 15 minutes ago, akirby said: Well that's just doubly stupid. Double down on cars when buyers are moving to utilities by creating expensive bespoke platforms that can't be adapted to utilities. Yes, but those were rear-wheel-drive Cadillacs. According to internet car enthusiasts, those rear-wheel-drive ersatz BMWs should have sold faster than the factory could build them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 It looks nice, but it's boring, and "as expected." The exclusion of full height (all the way up the pillar) tail lamps is odd, considering that's become a Cadillac SUV hallmark. The front looks decent, but from there back, they phoned it in - and that's been my complaints with most of the recent Cadillac designs. I also find it amusing that they're obviously downright embarrassed by the interior since they're not showing it in any press photos. The interior is basically XT5's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted January 14, 2019 Share Posted January 14, 2019 2 hours ago, akirby said: Well that's just doubly stupid. Double down on cars when buyers are moving to utilities by creating expensive bespoke platforms that can't be adapted to utilities. It's easy for us to say that in hindsight but that was at all clear that car sales would collapse as fast as it did. Alpha platform came out in 2012 with ATS which means the design parameters were set in maybe 2009. The previous version of this platform (Sigma) was designed to handle SUV use - note the original SRX. It's the law of unintended consequences... The first gen SRX sold poorly so GM decided the 2nd gen (came out in 2009) will switch to a corporate FWD platform (Theta II) to save money. They were also imitating market segment leader Lexus so it seemed like a good idea. Ford did as much with MKX. So once SRX left Sigma, which morphed into Alpha, there wasn't any need to over design the platform to handle SUV. 10 years later, here we are... luxury SUV are ascendant and GM is stuck with building Cadillac SUVs with FWD corporate platforms that can't use the longitude turbo V6 and V8 drivetrain designed to work with Alpha platform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assimilator Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Cadillac had to have known they were making too many different sedans closely related to each other, even before the sedan market collapsed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 We’ve been saying that about Cadillac sedans since the ATS debuted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 On 1/13/2019 at 9:39 AM, Assimilator said: Goodness I'm glad I'm a Lincoln buyer, for once! It's shocking how much it looks like a Volvo XC90, not something I was expecting. And again this is another GM SUV that underwhelms on technology and performance. But ultimately that may not matter and GM probably knows that. They are under-spending their way to profit. There has to be consequences for that, but I'm willing to accept this is part of their strategy to bridge to the next thing they want to do. But for now, I think Explorer and Aviator are very possibly the best utilities coming out of Detroit which makes me very grateful. That being said, I think they'll sell well considering how easily Caddy sells their phoned-in Crossovers. A very poor copy of the XC90, I might add. Wow, this may be the poorest effort by Cadillac to date. That is almost MKT effort right there...almost. I would say the Aviator is very well positioned against Cadillac in this class. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 12 hours ago, Assimilator said: Cadillac had to have known they were making too many different sedans closely related to each other, even before the sedan market collapsed. And now they did it with CUVs. XT4, XT5, and XT6 are all too close to each other in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, tbone said: A very poor copy of the XC90, I might add. Wow, this may be the poorest effort by Cadillac to date. That is almost MKT effort right there...almost. I would say the Aviator is very well positioned against Cadillac in this class. Actually, when MKT was first developed, Lincoln did a fairly decent job differentiating it from Flex that shared architecture with it and Explorer....styling being subjective, MKT looked like nothing else in the marketplace...it is a shame that it never "took off" as its "look" was mostly compared to a baleen whale due to its outsized grille styling...now, it just putters along down the same line as Flex with production numbers that only really sustain the custom coach and stretch limo biz....barely. Edited January 15, 2019 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 6 minutes ago, atomcat68 said: And now they did it with CUVs. XT4, XT5, and XT6 are all too close to each other in my opinion. Ahem....... MKC/Corsair, Nautilus, Aviator....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Corsair and Nautilus are not even on the same platform as Aviator, which should deliver a totally different driving experience being the weight distribution and driving dynamics are different from FWD based cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 28 minutes ago, atomcat68 said: Corsair and Nautilus are not even on the same platform as Aviator, which should deliver a totally different driving experience being the weight distribution and driving dynamics are different from FWD based cars. I thought you were referring to size where XT4 = Corsair, XT5 = Nautilus and XT6 = Aviator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 12 hours ago, tbone said: A very poor copy of the XC90, I might add. Wow, this may be the poorest effort by Cadillac to date. That is almost MKT effort right there...almost. I would say the Aviator is very well positioned against Cadillac in this class. The XT6 has most likely been rushed to market in order to placate dealers screaming for a crossover of this size. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assimilator Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 (edited) In reality, the only hit to Caddy will be its reputation, I'm sure the XT6 will sell well on a tiny investment. But I remember using this line to defend Lincoln back in the day....passive aggressively. I'm so glad I don't have to gripe about Ford or Lincoln anymore, I'm really excited by what they are doing...in NA anyway. Edited January 15, 2019 by Assimilator 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 It will sell ok but I don’t think it will do well unless they put some serious cash on the hood. To me this screams MKT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assimilator Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Geez, even the MKT offered far more excitement interns of drivetrains. Beyond appearance packages, GM can't pump any form of excitement into their utilities at all. I guess they intend to save that for BEVs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 44 minutes ago, Assimilator said: Beyond appearance packages, GM can't pump any form of excitement into their utilities at all. I guess they intend to save that for BEVs? The mainstream BEV market is still at least 10 years down the road-Unless a standard recharging system is developed and you can get at least 150-200 mile range in cold weather, BEVs aren't ready for prime time yet in the eyes of most consumers. Its coming, but not in the next 5 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 9 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: The mainstream BEV market is still at least 10 years down the road-Unless a standard recharging system is developed and you can get at least 150-200 mile range in cold weather, BEVs aren't ready for prime time yet in the eyes of most consumers. Its coming, but not in the next 5 years. I was thinking about that - there will have to be a global charging plug standard like how all gas tanks/nozzles are the same. I was also thinking last night about autonomous systems - all these companies are developing these systems for the cars to talk to each other.......but won't they only talk to cars running that system? i.e. a Ford talking to a Ford, GM to GM, etc.? They'll have to make these systems talk to other companies systems as well as their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 5 minutes ago, rmc523 said: I was also thinking last night about autonomous systems - all these companies are developing these systems for the cars to talk to each other.......but won't they only talk to cars running that system? i.e. a Ford talking to a Ford, GM to GM, etc.? They'll have to make these systems talk to other companies systems as well as their own. Plus a common way for traffic signals to send out code for when lights are red, etc. Maybe even traffic load of some sort, or accident congestion. Road construction... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 1 hour ago, 92merc said: Plus a common way for traffic signals to send out code for when lights are red, etc. Maybe even traffic load of some sort, or accident congestion. Road construction... In other words, it'll be a long time before any of this works like the pie-in-the-sky utopia that all these people dream of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Connected cars will have some sort of standard protocol - like Bluetooth. Eventually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 I guess systems could extrapolate what the traffic is doing by each car reporting what they are doing. So a roadway system may not be needed. But all of that is predicated on the industry getting together a common protocol for V2V communication. Last time that happened was ODB, that I can recall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 16 minutes ago, akirby said: Connected cars will have some sort of standard protocol - like Bluetooth. Eventually. Well that's my point - this interconnected autonomous electric utopia they all want won't be possible until things are standardized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 6 minutes ago, rmc523 said: Well that's my point - this interconnected autonomous electric utopia they all want won't be possible until things are standardized. And not until there are a large number of them on the road together. That will take longer than standards probably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 34 minutes ago, akirby said: And not until there are a large number of them on the road together. That will take longer than standards probably. The way our government operates, I highly doubt it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.