I'm becoming more and more concerned about Cadillac and it's future.

Here are some things to consider:

- Jim Taylor, the guy who pushed Cadillac to once again become the "standard of the world", is no longer managing the brand.

- RWD seems to be dying at Cadillac.

The Zeta Cadillac is dead. The FWD DTS soldiers on for awhile, but there is a proposal to build a FWD Epsilon as Cadillac's "flagship"

The SRX is being replaced with a FWD.

The STS will be gone soon.

The XLR will be gone at the end of the C6's run.

Alpha, (which IMO is currently Cadillac's most critical program), may get canned due to lack of funds, and get this, it's replacement could be, what was once the next gen Aura.

- No V8's (except for CTS-V), once Northstar hits the boneyard.

- No turbo V6 program now, (not to be confused with the '10 SRX's turbo 2.8, which is an existing GME product).

It doesn't look good gang....

 

To me things are looking up for Cadillac from a product perspective.

This is the first time since I've been alive that Cadillac has put out vehicles truly competitive if not possibly superior when placed side by side with its foreign competition.

Now whether management or financials are going to drag the lineup and the rest of the brand down with them I don't know.

But FWIW I don't see FWD replacing RWD on the SRX as something automatically negative.

 

Actually, I don't necessarilly do either for the SRX.

Eviscerating it's RWD car and powertrain line-up and losing it's focus worry me though.

 

coming from a guy that doesn't own anything domestic anymore (except maybe a craftsman toolset)

 

A lot will all depend on what they replace the CTS with and whether they sell a smaller car than the current CTS. I think Infiniti shows how to do this with a single platform. The G37 is larger than the 3 series, but not too much larger. It's shorter, narrower, and quite a bit lighter than the CTS. Then the M35/45 is about the same size and weight as the CTS and STS.


I would really like to know why they didn't just use the DI 3.6 as the optional engine.


On a related note, the latest MT reports that current thinking in Ford is that the next gen Mustang will keep its solid axle, and they speculate that this is further intication that the Global Rear Wheel Drive is dead.

 

I was unaware that simply currently owning some domestics makes one's opinion more valid than those who don't. So does that mean that those who don't own a German or Japanese car aren't qualified to talk about imports?

 

Unfortunately with GM in it's current financial state I think they won't be putting much development money into anything for awhile. That means that they'll be looking to do it as cheaply as possible unless it's something that was already pretty far along before the bottom fell out. So I'm not all that surprised that Cadillac is slowly reverting to an all FWD lineup based on corporate chassis. Economically it makes sense, but unfortunately, it will also cost Caddy the image they've tried so hard to rebuild. Long live the beancounters!

 

That plan worries me a little. GM should not skimp on vehicle quality but they could downsize and maximize returns on investment. Lord knows the market is soft enough for them to evaluate their product mix without caring about volume as much as previously.

The Camaro is an obvious sign of life at GM...

 

Cadillac lost the Zeta DTS and will lose the STS but has gained a Sigma coupe and wagon.

FWD bias SRX doesn't bother me since most will be AWD and I don't think AWD customers car which way the engine is mounted. Plus the AWD setup sounds impressive. New SRX is a real nice looking product with great powertrains.

I've wanted the DTS to die for over 5 years now. That is the Vehicle that doesn't fit in with 2010 Cadillac. STS is almost the same size as the new CTS. Alpha Cadillac will be a more important product than the STS.

I think Cadillac is on the right foot. The 3 new 2010 vechicles look awesome. Also lets not forget that the trend is higher fuel prices despite what has happened in the last 4 months. I think we will see $100 oil again in 2009. Investing in CTS coupe and wagon over a new STS and DTS will probably so to be a good move. As will a smaller Turbo 2.8L SRX over the larger V8 SRX.

 

I think I've expressed my concern for Cadillac a bit here already over the last month or so.....

I was one of the most vocal applauders of Cadillac's AMAZING turnaround that started (IMO) with the 2001 CTS, and carried forward.

So much so, that I bought my first Cadillac... putting the proverbial money where my mouth is.

I am not so much concerned about the styling of these new Cadillacs (they still have great styling comeing out so far), as I am about them becoming gussied up rebadges of other products in GM's lineup.

Cadillac NEEDS to have V8 availability throughout the majority of it's lineup. On top of that, I think the Cadillac V8 should once again be exclusive to the Cadillac lineup.

Cadillac NEEDS to be RWD based to be taken seriously in the segment. Even on the AWD vehicles... they should be RWD based and biased.

Cadillac NEEDS to have unique arcitectures for the majority of it's vehicles... if not, ALL of them. I understand this one may be hard to achieve.


Once again, I will have a very VERY hard time dropping CADILLAC money on a product that is essentially a rebadge of other GM products with upgraded features of some extent.


PS: In a LUXURY BRAND, smaller is NOT automatically better... period.

 

I think Cadillac needs to avoid FWD, but it's okay to have 1 or 2 models. Buick should be the premium FWD brand.

 

Now that's the big question! If we do the RWD rundown, Zeta is dead to Cadillac. If Sigma isn't replaced mid-decade and Alpha isn't funded, Caddy's car line becomes exclusively Epsilon. Essentially, rebadged Buick/Opels.

Alpha is critical right now IMO. First, because it keeps Cadillac firmly in the RWD camp, and second, it's Cadillac's only path to a premium global presence.



Me too. There's probably an interesting backstory here.


If not dead yet, the GRWD program is in it's death spiral.

 

Why would Sigma need replaced mid-decade? Couldn't it just be updated and continued?

 

It's considered too heavy and too expensive. Plus it was hoped that it's replacement could spawn larger than CTS cars, with Alpha handling the smaller than CTS cars. If Alpha doesn't go forward, the house of cards comes down.

 

To a point I question why GM isn't simply expanding it's use of Sigma. Lets see it is PAID FOR (something very important now), has a smaller version completely engineered (last gen CTS), has a LWB/more upscale STS on sale NOW in China, and has been adapted to a 7 seat crossover.

Why doesn't GM modify the last CTS chassis into something A3 like w/ the LNF and sell it as a BTS, modify the current SRX into an Escalade replacement, and make the Chinese STS-L the current STS in the states?

Seriously wouldn't these be low cost ways to keep Caddy unique? Please someone explain this to me.