Cadillacs first $100,000 car.

http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/all.jsp

Click on the XLR-V

Granted I'm not the target demographic for the car, but I think they would have been better off pricing it in the $90K's

:shock:

I knew it was going to be close to six figures, but I'm surprised it actually starts at an even $100,000.00. Figured it would be in the $90k-$100k range as well.

On the other hand, a non-AMG SL500 can approach $100k when loaded up, IIRC, and the non-AMG V12 version is well over $100k.

Definitely a sweet car! :thumb:

I think that car will be somewhat popular based on pure novelty, but based on specs I just am not that impressed by it.

443 hp @ 6,400 rpm / 414 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm in a 100k dollar 2-door convertible? Glancing at the interior pics it doesn't look befitting of a 100k dollar luxury sports car, either.

You can get almost that kind of power out of just a regular ol' C6 for half the price, on the same chassis.. so what features would you be missing? Enough to excuse 50k dollars in markup?:think:

Looks like a loser to me.

Theres nothing there befitting of a 100K car.

for that thing to be worth $100k they better have shipped the thing to germany for the interior design then southern california for the interior build.

I think that car will be somewhat popular based on pure novelty, but based on specs I just am not that impressed by it.

443 hp @ 6,400 rpm / 414 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm in a 100k dollar 2-door convertible? Glancing at the interior pics it doesn't look befitting of a 100k dollar luxury sports car, either.

You can get almost that kind of power out of just a regular ol' C6 for half the price, on the same chassis.. so what features would you be missing? Enough to excuse 50k dollars in markup?:think:Yeah, but in those price ranges, you never get a linear relationship between increases in price and increases in features vs. lesser priced cars.

I just looked it up, and the '06 SL500 bases at $94k ($93675), with a 302 hp/339 lbft 5.0L 3 valve V8 and seven speed auto. The regular, 320 hp XLR starts at $77k, and the 443 hp version starts at $100k. Seems reasonable, as far as "reasonable" goes in the realm of six figure cars. :)

The next step up in the Benz class is the $126k SL55 AMG (493 hp/5xx lbft 5.5L s/c) or the $132k SL600 (493 hp/590 lbft V12 tt).

As far as cars for much less $$ offering similar stuff, Mercedes has within its own lineup the new SLK. The SLK350 has 268 hp from its V6 and a seven speed auto. The AMG version is only $62k and has a 355 hp 5.5L 3v V8, also with a seven speed auto. Is the SL500, with only 302 hp, really worth $30k more?

(By the way, I'm not remotely saying that only the engine/tranny combo matters at the given prices; I just mentioned them because you mentioned the Vette roadster having similar power to the XLR-V for a lost less dough).

:shrug:

By the way, those wondering about the interior should check out some pics. I think it is damn classy looking. It isn't as "warm", at least in the color combo chosen for the photo gallery, as the one in the SL500 gallery, but it is still a very nice, luxurious, classy interior IMHO.

SL500 (http://www.mbusa.com/models/main.do?modelCode=SL500R)
XLR-V (http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/gallery.jsp?model=xlrv)

http://www.mbusa.com/media/images/main/models/gallery/photo_gallery/sl/roadster_ext_0_main.jpg
vs
http://www.car.ee/wallpapers/previews/cadillac-xlr-v-280.jpg

http://www.mbusa.com/media/images/main/models/gallery/photo_gallery/sl/roadster_int_4_main.jpg
http://www.mbusa.com/media/images/main/models/gallery/photo_gallery/sl/roadster_det_5_main.jpg
vs
http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/02/xlrv06_inter2.jpg


SL55: 493 hp @ 6,100 rpm / 516 lb-ft @ 2,750 - 4,000 rpm
vs
XLR-V: 443 hp @ 6,400 rpm / 414 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm

SL55: 8-piston front and 4-piston rear calipers with 14.2" perforated and internally ventilated front discs. 13.0" perforated and internally ventilated rear discs.
vs
XLR-V: 2-piston front, 1-piston rear calipers with 13.4" front and 13.0" rear cross drilled rotors




Now granted the XLR-V is 25 grand less, but also consider that it's also the contender or newcomer to this market, seems to be missing in quite a few key areas (performance specs, interior design, etc), and is missing some lux featutres that the SL55 has standard.

Anyhow... I'm not saying the XLR-V is a bad choice, but I'm just saying I don't think it's going to make as big of an impact on the market as some had hoped given its price...

I certainly don't expect a huge impact from the car, other than beginning to raise make people in that price range aware that Cadillac is becoming a player.

I still think that as an exclusive, high style ride, the V makes very good sense against a regular SL500 (which starts at $94k and can no doubt be optioned well above $100k, while the XLR is probably pretty much loaded as is at $100k). As for the interiors, I think it comes down to which style one likes better. I don't see a huge advantage for the Benz in terms of materials or features. In fact, I see the standard plastic dash (nice and soft, of course, but still normal fare) in the pics you showed for the SL (is that the AMG interior or the standard SL?). The V's dash pad is actual leather, and it also has a more unique/rare choice for the wood trim (and also uses it more sparingly).

For me personally, the current SL roadsters from M-B are among the most beautiful cars on the road, at least on the outside. But other than a style preference, I don't see all that much that would recommend the Benz over the Caddy, especially at those prices, other than the names themselves (Benz established and respected at the country club for the status slaves, while the Caddy is a newcomer in that market...). Which, of course, is why I too am slightly surprised that they didn't price it in the mid $90s. I guess they really want the six figures to push the Caddy name more upmarket in the heads of those country club status guys.

XLR sold 24.3% better than original sales goals in 2005, and 2005 beat 2004 sales. What % of XLRs is intended to be V-series? 20%? I bet they have no trouble selling that many.

I remember reading that the XLR is the best built car on the market somewhere (JD Power?) They went through a lot of trouble to make sure every car is built perfect. That is one of the reason volume is so low and price is kind of high. They will build so few XLR-V that they can make sure quality is extremely high.

I certainly don't expect a huge impact from the car, other than beginning to raise make people in that price range aware that Cadillac is becoming a player.

I still think that as an exclusive, high style ride, the V makes very good sense against a regular SL500 (which starts at $94k and can no doubt be optioned well above $100k, while the XLR is probably pretty much loaded as is at $100k). As for the interiors, I think it comes down to which style one likes better. I don't see a huge advantage for the Benz in terms of materials or features. In fact, I see the standard plastic dash (nice and soft, of course, but still normal fare) in the pics you showed for the SL (is that the AMG interior or the standard SL?). The V's dash pad is actual leather, and it also has a more unique/rare choice for the wood trim (and also uses it more sparingly).

For me personally, the current SL roadsters from M-B are among the most beautiful cars on the road, at least on the outside. But other than a style preference, I don't see all that much that would recommend the Benz over the Caddy, especially at those prices, other than the names themselves (Benz established and respected at the country club for the status slaves, while the Caddy is a newcomer in that market...). Which, of course, is why I too am slightly surprised that they didn't price it in the mid $90s. I guess they really want the six figures to push the Caddy name more upmarket in the heads of those country club status guys.

The SL55 is moreso meant to compete with the XLR-V than the SL500 is. No doubt the Benze is more expensive but also better featured IMO.

And FWIW the SL's dash is covered in Nappa leather.

The SL55 is moreso meant to compete with the XLR-V than the SL500 is. No doubt the Benze is more expensive but also better featured IMO.

And FWIW the SL's dash is covered in Nappa leather.Ah, I see the stitching now. I thought they had used leather on their higher end cars, but I couldn't make out the stitching at first b/c of the dark leather and the lighting in the pics.

:cool:

No doubt the AMG is more of the spiritual competitor for the XLR-V. As far as "intending" to compete, remember that the AMGs have already been here and priced as they are, so it is more up to Caddy as to who they are "intending" to compete with since they are the newcomers. Yes, the AMG offers some hardware advantages (particularly the engine - both are s/c'd and intercooled, but the AMG has a 1.1L displacement advantage), but at a premium price.

If I were looking at a regular SL500, I think it would behoove me to check out the basically equally priced Caddy offering a bit more sportiness and a lot more power (and rarity). If I were already looking at an AMG SL55 and can afford the big price difference, then yes, I might find the XLR's power and torque deficiency (plus the brakes, etc.) enough to keep me from going that route.

Hard for me to say anything for sure, though, since I don't shop in the $100k+ automotive price range. :o :D

On a different note about the XLR-v, it is a very dramatic vehicle. It has a presense that the SL500 does not have and to me looks more exotic. I really like the V exterior touches over the standard car. It really addresses most of the issues I had with the car.

I like the XLRv, but for the life of me, I still can't see paying that much money for a Cadillac... especially one based on a Corvette and made of fiberglass.

I know we're talking oranges to tangerines here, but this makes the alumunum & titanium structured, handmade engine powered, carbon fiber skinned, highly capable Z06 Corvette seem like a steal, and I'm even hesitant on the price of that car.

It seems like only yesterday I was recovering from the sticker shock of a factory (glorified Suburban) $75,000 Escalade! :shock:

At first, i was really surprised at its weight - 3800 lbs. That's a jump of around 600 from C6, and the power increase is only 43 HP from C6. A little disappointing, but then i realized that the MB weighs over 4000 lbs and realized that Caddy is not too bad.

For 100K, they should've made this car compete more with AMG, with 500HP.

yea its a great intial offering, but I hope GM steps up power wise.

The STS-v was the slowest in the comparo between the M5 and an AMG.. It was relatively dreadfully slow in the triple digits catagory.. I'm wondering if heat soak from being on the gas all that time with the supercharger slows the car's accel down when you go into triple digits... I was like a 10 second difference to hit 160 compared to the others.. the 6 speed gearing didn't look that bad either.. it was just strange.

yea its a great intial offering, but I hope GM steps up power wise.

The STS-v was the slowest in the comparo between the M5 and an AMG.. It was relatively dreadfully slow in the triple digits catagory.. I'm wondering if heat soak from being on the gas all that time with the supercharger slows the car's accel down when you go into triple digits... I was like a 10 second difference to hit 160 compared to the others.. the 6 speed gearing didn't look that bad either.. it was just strange.I thought the same thing about that test - the numbers seemed too slow. 0-60 was about what I expected, but I thought the 1/4 mile would be closer to 13.0 or high 12s. The car is a couple hundred pounds heavier than the CTS-V, but supposedly has a 69 hp advantage. But that STS-V was SLOWER than the tests I've seen for the 400 hp CTS-V. I'm hoping subsequent tests will be quicker...

:confused:

At first, i was really surprised at its weight - 3800 lbs. That's a jump of around 600 from C6, and the power increase is only 43 HP from C6. A little disappointing, but then i realized that the MB weighs over 4000 lbs and realized that Caddy is not too bad.

For 100K, they should've made this car compete more with AMG, with 500HP.

That retractable hardtop adds a lot of weight as does the Northstar.

There are a few things I don't like about the XLR-V.

one, it's a automatic only, as is the XLR. If I want a fast sporty looking car, I want a manual. This is the reason I'll never own a MB SL. If I was given one, I'd trade it in immediately.

THis brings up the second concern, the resale value. I have already seen a few CTS-Vs for sale around here for Under 40k. A bargain and a half. I have also seen a few XLRs go for under 50k. Pretty bad for a 75k car.

I think they should have taken it a little sportier. It reminds me of the Allante. Granted this is RWD but it should be just a little sportier.


Maybe if the aftermarket steps up and offers an upgrade package, maybe a manual trans, power adder (for the NA version) etc, then maybe it'd turn into a desirable car, but to me it just doesn't do it.

It seems like it is tryign to appeal to the rich old men who want sports car looks but caddy ride quality.

XLR sold 24.3% better than original sales goals in 2005, and 2005 beat 2004 sales. What % of XLRs is intended to be V-series? 20%? I bet they have no trouble selling that many.

I remember reading that the XLR is the best built car on the market somewhere (JD Power?) They went through a lot of trouble to make sure every car is built perfect. That is one of the reason volume is so low and price is kind of high. They will build so few XLR-V that they can make sure quality is extremely high.

That doesn't surprise me at all. Last year I toured the Corvette plant also the home of the XLRs. The Corvette line crawled along at a snails pace, but the XLR line actually stops at the assembly stations. I think they said that it was the only GM assembly line that actually makes stops.

I would take the XLR-V over the MB mainly over the unique styling of the XLR, but for $100K they need to tune the Northstar to around 500hp.

It seems like it is tryign to appeal to the rich old men who want sports car looks but caddy ride quality.
geeeee, what gave it away?

i would never ever consider owning an XLR for 2 reasons.

1) i think it looks aweful. the lines are all over the place. the front end especially with it's "GM of old" panels and gaps. the new DTS and STS are a much better face for Caddy.

2) that retractable hard top makes the trunk swing the wrong way. if you notice, all of the retractable hardtops on the market have a mechanism where the trunk swings on the "outboard" hinge; in other words opposit of how you'd normally think of opening the trunk. this is for a good reason and GM would do well to redesign their operation ASAP. imagine it rained the night before, but the morning is beautiful and there's a warm breeze. perfect time to drop the top right? well not if you have an XLR... better make sure you wipe up ALL of the water on that trunk or the XLR is going to dump it on you like a bucket of Gatoraid when it swings inward. MORONIC desing decision.

:mad:

2) that retractable hard top makes the trunk swing the wrong way. if you notice, all of the retractable hardtops on the market have a mechanism where the trunk swings on the "outboard" hinge; in other words opposit of how you'd normally think of opening the trunk. this is for a good reason and GM would do well to redesign their operation ASAP. imagine it rained the night before, but the morning is beautiful and there's a warm breeze. perfect time to drop the top right? well not if you have an XLR... better make sure you wipe up ALL of the water on that trunk or the XLR is going to dump it on you like a bucket of Gatoraid when it swings inward. MORONIC desing decision.

:mad:
Actually the trunk goes straight up to store the top. Also if you aren't storing the top you can open the trunk in a normal, rear opening toward front, manner.

We had a guy driving a regular XLR come into my dealer(BMW), I was actually pretty impressed with the material quality of the interior. That and the hardtop convertible was a step ahead of BMW's 6 series cloth top and at a lower price. The only thing I thought was kind of cheesy was the GM badge slapped on the fender. It looked like it came off one of their mid 80's seat buckles.

Actually the trunk goes straight up to store the top. Also if you aren't storing the top you can open the trunk in a normal, rear opening toward front, manner.
exactly. it acts like a psychotic dump truck. it dumps any/all debris/crud/fluids present on the trunk on the exposed interior. it's exactly the opposite of what you'd want and expect.

exactly. it acts like a psychotic dump truck. it dumps any/all debris/crud/fluids present on the trunk on the exposed interior. it's exactly the opposite of what you'd want and expect.

Are you sure about this? I mean, have you see or heard that this is the case or is it just an assumption you've made by looking at the standard operation/opening of it? I can't see any company being quite that dumb when it comes to engineering. Even GM.

SL55: 493 hp @ 6,100 rpm / 516 lb-ft @ 2,750 - 4,000 rpm
vs
XLR-V: 443 hp @ 6,400 rpm / 414 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm

SL55: 8-piston front and 4-piston rear calipers with 14.2" perforated and internally ventilated front discs. 13.0" perforated and internally ventilated rear discs.
vs
XLR-V: 2-piston front, 1-piston rear calipers with 13.4" front and 13.0" rear cross drilled rotors
I wonder what Genius decided to drop the displacement down on the blown Northstar? That extra .2L would give another 20hp. I've been thinking for years that the Northstar should be increased in displacement up to an even 5.0L. That would be good for ~500hp given the same hp/cid as the LC3.

And just how hard would it have been for the XLR-V to get the Z06's brake package? Sure, there are problems there, but I seriously doubt the XLR-V would be pushed to the limits as often as a Z06.

I wonder what Genius decided to drop the displacement down on the blown Northstar? That extra .2L would give another 20hp. I've been thinking for years that the Northstar should be increased in displacement up to an even 5.0L. That would be good for ~500hp given the same hp/cid as the LC3.

And just how hard would it have been for the XLR-V to get the Z06's brake package? Sure, there are problems there, but I seriously doubt the XLR-V would be pushed to the limits as often as a Z06.
It was the genius that wanted it to stay in one peice. The extra block area adds strength. It is an aluminum block, remember.

exactly. it acts like a psychotic dump truck. it dumps any/all debris/crud/fluids present on the trunk on the exposed interior. it's exactly the opposite of what you'd want and expect.I think the rear trunk cover does pitch forward after it raises up from the car, but I don't think any water drops would go into the interior of the car. Some might go into the top storage area, but I don't think it would go where you sit. An annoyance? Sure, but hopefully most owners would have the sense to realize it. Is it really that hard to drive the car for a 1/2 mile to blow water off before lowering the top? Plus, ANY convertible (hardtop or softtop) will be putting plenty of water into the top stowage area if you decide to put the top down while it is still all wet from a rainstorm. Not from the decklid, perhaps, but from the top itself.

As for dirt and debris on top being washed into the trunk by rainwater, again, the owner could have some sense. Plus, if you have just spent $75k+ on a roadster, you ought to have the damn thing in the garage, not sitting under a tree collecting leaves and twigs and bird crap.

:p

Someone ought to find a video link of the top operation. I've seen the top operate in person a few times, but it was a long time ago, and I don't remember the exact motion.

Again, if it were to dump rainwater into the interior (as in where you sit), that would be lame (though again, easily avoided by simply driving the car briefly to blow the water off before pushing to top down button). But if it just would allow a little bit of water into the top stowage area (which is what I'm thinking is the case, but I'm definitely not certain), that would make it not much different than any other convertible driven after a fresh rain.

Either way, it strikes me as sort of a mountain out of a mole hill... :shrug:

EDIT: Here is a video (http://www.autobytel.com/content/research/channels/index.cfm/channel/cartv_video/action/showvideo/vid/r_0005/make/Cadillac/vcat/Review/MAKE_VCH/Cadillac/MODEL_VCH/XLR?s_prefs=h&vid=r_0005&vcat=Review&make=Cadillac) about the whole car from when it was first introduced. There is a brief section toward the end that shows the top going down, though it is sped up (not real time) for editing purposes, and isn't a direct profile shot. Looks like it would not dump a bunch of water into the interior of the car, but it is hard to tell for sure. Surely there is a quick video of just the top operation, or even a succession of still pictures showing it.

The interior is horrible for a 100K car. They need to redesign it.

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0307_luxcadt_z.jpg
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/CadillacXLR/Images/TopOperation.jpg

Looks like the interior and occupants would stay dry. In fact, if the concern is what would happen if you wanted to LOWER the top with water on the decklid (i.e. after a fresh rain), the pictures make it clear that any water that ran forward from the decklid when it tips up would simply be caught by the rear glass. So it would definitely NOT go into the seating area/interior of the car, but you would get some water inside the trunk/top stowage area (as you would on about any hard or soft top convertible). The XLR might be a bit worse because you'd get water from the top itself, plus some from the decklid, but other than that it seems like it would be just like any other convertible.

As in any convertible, if it has just rained and you have standing water droplets/sheets on the roof/rear window, a quick drive down the road will blow it off before lowering the top.

:)

The interior is horrible for a 100K car. They need to redesign it.

I take it you havn't sat in one then or any other $100K car like a Ferrari.

I take it you havn't sat in one then or any other $100K car like a Ferrari.

Actually I have. And it still looks like a horrible design.

Are you sure about this? I mean, have you see or heard that this is the case or is it just an assumption you've made by looking at the standard operation/opening of it? I can't see any company being quite that dumb when it comes to engineering. Even GM.
C&D slammed the XLR for exactly that reason. They tested it in the fall, and guess what happened when they went to open the hatch... :rolleyes: Yup! Interior hosed.

EDIT: it was the trunk interior C&D complained about not the actual interior. so either I originally read that wrong or my memory got twisted in the 2 years since... bottom of third paragraph (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=7061&page_number=4). but that's still horrible design either way.

C&D slammed the XLR for exactly that reason. They tested it in the fall, and guess what happened when they went to open the hatch... :rolleyes: Yup! Interior hosed.

EDIT: it was the trunk interior C&D complained about not the actual interior. so either I originally read that wrong or my memory got twisted in the 2 years since... bottom of third paragraph (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=7061&page_number=4). but that's still horrible design either way.Like I said, it is certainly not ideal, but I don't see it as a huge problem (and neither do buyers, it seems).

1) All folding hardtops that have the trunk share space with the top will allow the trunk/ luggage to get wet if you drop the top when it is covered in water (after a fresh rain). Perhaps you get more water in the XLR (water from the decklid and the roof itself, vs. just the roof), but all will do it.

2) All will allow water to get in if the top is already down and a rainstorm comes, causing you to put the top UP while it is raining. Hell, that could come down to the angle at which the rain is falling, etc.

3) Even a traditional softtop, whose top does not go in the trunk, will still allow water into the top stowage area if you put the top down while it is wet. In my Miata, I'll occasionally drop the top while it is wet (from morning condensation, for example). Some water will then make its way onto the parcel shelf, which is part of the interior, not the trunk, in that car. It dries. :shrug:

4) Dropping the top while it is covered in fresh rainwater (or condensation) can be avoided in any of these cars by simply driving for a mile or two to blow the standing water off. Problem solved.

I guess I don't see the big deal here, since it is a problem common to one degree or another in any droptop. I mean, I don't think it would be the deciding factor for most people. What it will come down to is, which car do you like better? If someone prefers the stealth fighter styling and conservative but rich interior of the XLR, along with its sportier roots and lighter-on-its-feet feel, I doubt the top alone is going to push them into a much more expensive SL. If someone likes the more elegant styling and the carved from a solid billet, heavier GT feel of the SL500 (or just wants a 3 pointed star), they will go that route and enjoy its fancier, quicker to operate folding top.

:)