To you they may be completely useless. Hell, even to me they might be completely useless, but uhhh...these kinds of items are what make a luxury car a luxury car...and part of why the Cadillac is a higher priced luxury car and why the SRT 300 is just a bonzai-fast family sedan. Get it? You didn't respond to my question of what makes a 5 Series worth more than a SRT 300....or an E-class....or the Lexus GS....

Well let's see, of the three Sigma vehicles you mention....the CTS started the revival of Cadillac and still sells briskly more than 2 years after its intro....the SRX is regarded as being in the upper echelon of luxury SUVs....Car and Driver best luxury SUV last year in fact (wow C&D likes it! )....and the new STS by every review I have seen is better than the Japanese competition and certainly on the level with what Germany has to offer.

Yup all on Sigma. The "failure" platform.

My goodness, anyone who argues that the Sigma platform has been a failure for Cadillac should be lobotomized. Seriously.

 

It's interesting to note that in the classical sense, "luxury" meant things like fancy interior materials, proper ride tuning, big power, and reliability. I mean, the 15-year-old Mercedes 300D that my friend had in high school was the pinnicle of automotive engineering, feeling brand-new with a quarter-million miles on the clock and the car I'd want to drive into a nuclear blast site.

Nowadays, one can get those characteristics in any number of "low-end" vehicles. The reason the 300C is so impressive to me is that it offers dang nearly everything that a 750iL or S-class offered 10 years ago, at a inflation-adjusted price that's well less than what a Caprice cost.

So how to differentiate modern luxury cars? Apparently, through a bunch of useless (to me) features. And that's why I don't see myself purchasing a vehicle in that segment any time soon, if ever. That $75K market has been reduced to the sort of silliness that previously defined the $100K+ market, and for us mortals, that's actually a good thing.

 

My feelings exactly.

 

When looking at vehicles considered "luxury" (for taxation purposes? I don't remember the standard), something like vehicles priced north of 40 grand, Cadillac is actually the highest.

Lexus has the ES, the IS, and the RX that all can be had for far below the 40 grand mark. Same with the 3 Series (BMWs bread and butter). Whereas at Caddy, the Deville/DTS is sort of their bread and butter car (along with the CTS now, of course).

Of course, that "luxury" cutoff is probably based on MSRP, not actual transaction price, so in reality ALL the manufacturers have more cars below 40 grand than one might guess based on MSRP alone.

There was an article or two about it in the last few months, IIRC. You can probably do a search.

You are right though, in terms of full line sales of a "luxury brand" (Lexus, Caddy, BMW, etc.), Caddy is not number 1.

 

Ah, I see. That's a good question about the MSRPs, though. GM has a habit of having an MSRP that is much higher than anyone would ever actually buy the car for.

FWIW in regards to Lexus' entry level models:

ES330 starts at $32,175 + dest and gets up to $40,479 + dest with every option under the sun (Mark Lev, Nav, heated/cooled seats, adaptive variable suspension, vehicle stability control, upgraded wheels, etc)

IS300 (only months away from a ground-up redesign) starts at $29,735 + dest and goes to $38,450 loaded up. (plus dest)

RX330 (not the RX400h hybrid) starts at $36,025 and gets up to 48,150 (plus dest)

 

Actually, I'm not really sure is a BMW 545i is really worth more than a Chrysler 300C SRT-8 - unless you're a sucker for BMW's "European delivery" program. The same goes for the E-class (which I like less than the Chrysler 300 that's based on the same platform) or the very disappointing Lexus GS300/430.

Still, BMW's customer service and quick ordering are tempting.




Is a lobotomy a prerequisite for Cadillac ownership?