Sounds like Cadillac still hasn't found the way to get the train back on the track. They came to the table late with SUV's, and still don't produce cars that the public wants.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20171205/RETAIL/171209879/-cadillac-gives-dealers-reprieve-after-many-miss-pinnacle-sales-goals?cciid=email-autonews-blast
Will certainly understand if my comment is expunged-- here's my reaction: His logic escapes me. Perhaps a less problem prone car that is well supported by the company are the answers. Holding the average price higher and selling fewer cars, and off loading design issues to be absorbed by the dealers sounds like a toxic mix to my untrained ear. I am reading about failed direct injection engines and other not so minor problems that dealers are having to fix.. Happy day, James
The biggest problem is that all cars will one day become a product of market demand.
And when that happens, it could possibly be that the Cadillac & LaSalle Club, this, our club, will still flourish, as people will want to get back to enjoying transportation with class.
We cannot complain about new cars, and the way they are built, as the Club, actually doesn't recognise Cadillacs until they are Ten Years Old. Yes, some complain about new cars, but these people have an agenda which involves being able to buy a nicer Cadillac once it is at least Ten Years Old.
Down here in Australia, Vintage cars aren't recognised until they are at least 30 years old. Newer cars are called "Special Interest".
The way for the car makers to steady things down is to only make vehicles when they get actual Signed Orders in to make them, and people should be prepared to wait for their car to be built. Remember the "good old days".
No good comes of forcing targets for sellers to reach, and having huge areas filled with unliked vehicles, that eventually will get crushed. What a waste of resources.
And oh, yes, it is always the darkest before the dawn.
Bruce. >:D
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 01, 2018, 08:31:44 PM
The biggest problem is that all cars will one day become a product of market demand.
Bruce. >:D
One day become? I believe its been that way for many decades. Meeting market demand, has been Cadillacs downfall. They simply don't make cars that appeal to many people, as they did in the past. Cadillac used to be the pinnacle of luxury cars. We all looked to Cadillac to define luxury. Used to be, all the other makes played catch up to Cadillac. The tables have been turned, and now Cadillac is playing catch up.
Note to Cadillac: try making a product people want and see what happens.
MB, BMW, Lexus *OWN* the luxury sport sedan market, trying to compete with that is futile. Stop naming cars after rockets, loose the letters and numbers, its confusing and so phony 'european'. Go back to the future. Have actual 'car people' design the cars, especially the engines and drive trains, instead of kids who can't change a tire but are wizards driving computers. "Name" the cars, everyone can recognize the name El Dorado, Seville, Fleetwood, etc. XT5, JH4, RT7, c'mon will ya? Work for NASA. And the catastrophic failures of those 100K 'slade tranny's is inexcusable in this day and age. Go back to how Cadillac did business and designed/engineered the cars in the 60's and 70's. Who did they hire, how did they test, which advertising worked best... the answers for the future are there. After a 10 year depression the American economy is BOOMING again and will be for the next 8 years at a minimum. Build those boats again, people can afford a few extra bucks for fuel now, many have never experienced owning/driving a car that weighs more than 3K pounds. Stress the inherit safety of larger, heavier cars, and the pure, actual luxury a rolling living room can provide. Then you're back in business. JMHO
Laurie
Won't happen until all the Federally mandated safety and anti-pollution stuff is removed from the design criteria.
This stuff is why everything now looks the same.
Bruce. >:D
I don't think Cadillac's issue is with the model names as practically all luxury cars have alphanumeric model names. I also don't think the issue is with the designs as all automakers have to deal with various "regulations" and besides, as has been discussed on here in other topics, people have been complaining about cars looking too much alike for ages and ages.
Brands like Audi, BMW, Mercedes, etc have been doing quite well here with their alphanumeric names and meeting regulation requirements. The biggest issue for Cadillac is that the types of cars, large sedans and coupes, that once dominated the luxury landscape here are no longer selling as they used to. This fact has hurt Lincoln too. When or if large cars make a comeback, Cadillac and Lincoln will be in a better position again but until then the focus needs to be more on crossovers and SUVs which are the hot items right now and why Cadillac will be adding the XT4 and XT6 in the coming years.
Despite what I assume will be a down year here in the U.S., Cadillac is doing very well overall (globally) and should end up with a record year for 2017.
American car companies have historically made very poor copies of foreign models. It seems that if nothing else, they're consistent.
All exceptionally interesting replies. Everyone seems to agree that Cadillac has gone off track in being the leader in luxury cars.
#Why did the feel the need to drop naming, instead of designating their models? Is it too obvious that they were trying to achieve the same status as the German imports? Interesting how they eased into it. The DTS was the Deville, STS was the Seville and and the ETC was the Eldorado. Still was somewhat easy to know where the models fell into the pecking order. I think they should have maintained names as they did with the other 3 divisions.
#While it is true, that cars basically all look the same, because of Federal Regulations. It is my contention that today's car buyers aren't all that interested in looks as most of us were in the past. I think most want amenities, safety and reliability. Just looks at the success of the Soul. It looks like a box on wheels.
Quote from: e.mason on January 02, 2018, 10:13:30 AM
I think they should have maintained names as they did with the other 3 divisions.
The other three GM divisions predominantly sell in markets where so-called real model names are more the norm even among imports. Cadillac, however, for GM competes in the luxury market where alphanumeric model names are the norm. To me, if Cadillac were to go back to real model names it would almost be like admitting that they can't compete in that luxury segment so they're using real names like Buick, Chevy, Dodge, Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota, Volkswagen, etc do because that's closer to the level where they belong.
Like most on this forum, I grew up with Cadillac having real model names and prefer them for
nostalgic reasons. I just don't know if it would be the wisest things for Cadillac to use for their vehicles right now.
At least the new model names will clearly identify cars (CT) versus crossovers (XT) and the corresponding numbers will clearly identify position in the lineup.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 02, 2018, 11:52:25 AM
At least the new model names will clearly identify cars (CT) versus crossovers (XT) and the corresponding numbers will clearly identify position in the lineup.
Where do the AT's fit in? Interesting that one of their highest priced models, the Escalade, uses a name for its nomenclature.
I am not a buyer of the modern GM. Sorry, that boat has sailed. The GM culture is systemic and I am not sure what kind of leader can turn it around.
I thought they had 2-3 crossovers already, Chevy platform SUV's? I see an ad for hand stitched this and that and I have seen the squared off crossovers over the years.
Anyway, I think the number of platforms are fine. You don't need more than 3 "car" platforms. Mercedes uses essentially 3 then swings out from them. C Class, E Class and S Class. Obviously a lot of you guys know this already.
Just make 3 wheelbase sizes, offer AWD in all 3 sizes, spin off a couple of roadsters or 2 door sports oriented models and go techno - hybrids with great gas mileage and even all electric (it's coming)
For me, I would love to see a new Eldorado. This would be built on the "mid" platform, not the S Class platform but have S Class levels of luxury, sport and technology.
No one knows what numbers and letters mean. It's not like Cadillac has a 75 year history of the alpha-numerical manner of car naming like the Germans and Lexus.
When the F150 gets paid off in 3 1/2 years, I am getting a 2 door coupe - a Mustang GT, Lexus offering, maybe even a Jaguar or Alfa. I am frankly afraid to buy a Cadillac but I'll go look.
Quote from: e.mason on January 02, 2018, 10:13:30 AM
Just looks at the success of the Soul. It looks like a box on wheels.
Hang on, once we start talking about "Sou"l, and a "box on wheels", I hope we aren't referring to a Coffin and its' contents, where the Soul has flown the Coupe?
Bruce. >:D
Art,
You have the right idea.
The fact that what you said is short, to the points, and it's easy to understand - by most, says it all.
All the corporate chatter is rhetoric and is nothing more than whisking in the dark and hoping against the facts that things will get better.
Pointing to the global success is nothing more than looking beyond the US (in which they are failing) to other markets, where - sarcastically perhaps - not long ago were driving a Yugo - or their ilk.
The old saw of alpha-numeric naming is bunk - that is unimaginative thinking of those who mimic the corporate line - and who are trapped "in line" - not leading, but will shortly be forced out and left behind.
There is nothing emotive about numbers and letters, but Eldorado, Brougham, De Ville, Fleetwood, Seville, Biarritz, Ciel, Elmiraj, Converj, Eco-jet, these names that bring forth feelings of what the names represent to the reader, and how each visualizes the named car, and how they relate to them.
The only number letter combination that strikes an emotional note to all, is the V-16.
No apologizes hidden within "IMHO".
Have fun,
Steve B.
Quote from: e.mason on January 02, 2018, 12:26:52 PM
Where do the AT's fit in? Interesting that one of their highest priced models, the Escalade, uses a name for its nomenclature.
They don't. The ATS, CTS and XTS names will all be going away. Under the new naming, CT and then a number (CT6, CT5, etc) will be for cars and XT and then a number (XT6, XT5, etc) will be for crossovers.
Quote from: BJM on January 02, 2018, 02:04:55 PM
I thought they had 2-3 crossovers already, Chevy platform SUV's? I see an ad for hand stitched this and that and I have seen the squared off crossovers over the years.
Cadillac currently has one crossover (XT5) and the Escalade SUVs.
Quote from: BJM on January 02, 2018, 02:04:55 PM
Anyway, I think the number of platforms are fine. You don't need more than 3 "car" platforms. Mercedes uses essentially 3 then swings out from them. C Class, E Class and S Class. Obviously a lot of you guys know this already.
I'm not sure exactly how many specific platforms Mercedes uses in the states as some differing models uses variations of platforms but their model lines include CLA, C, E, CLS, S, SLC, SL and GT classes on the car side and GLA, GLC, GLE, GLS and G classes on the crossover/SUV side.
Quote from: BJM on January 02, 2018, 02:04:55 PM
No one knows what numbers and letters mean. It's not like Cadillac has a 75 year history of the alpha-numerical manner of car naming like the Germans and Lexus.
Whether alphanumeric or real names, anything new would be unfamiliar initially. Alphanumeric model names dominate the luxury segment and that is where Cadillac wants to compete.
I think we are in a completely new era for what consumers want from their automobiles. In the beginning people were satisfied to have a vehicle that offered more distance and speed their horse and wagon. As cars developed, style came into play. Next creature comforts i.e. radio and heater. Along the way there were always the luxury offerings, such as Cadillac, Lincoln, Packard etc. Until Federal regulations came along and put restrictions on the manufacturers, styling was a big part of the appeal of cars. Move the clock ahead to the present day, cars are all about technology. Styling has taken a back seat to all the technology offered in todays cars. I personally enjoy the backup camera, the paring of my cell phone to my car, all the safety features offered. I just read that the new Cadillacs have a sensor/camera built into the steering wheel, that will detect when the driver takes his/her eyes off the road.
I don't know how many people have seen this, but it has been reported that Lincoln is planning to drop the numbers and letters and return to names for its models. Continental is the first of the names to go into place, but others are supposedly going to follow.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/28/luxury/lincoln-nautilus/index.html
Quote from: Alan Harris CLC#1513 on January 02, 2018, 09:47:18 PM
I don't know how many people have seen this, but it has been reported that Lincoln is planning to drop the numbers and letters and return to names for its models. Continental is the first of the names to go into place, but others are supposedly going to follow.
This sort of came up in another topic here. My question related to this was whether Lincoln was doing so because they felt the brand wasn't competing successfully enough at the luxury level and decided to essentially go down to more Buick level where real model names are common. Despite Lincoln bringing back their iconic Continental name sales for that model haven't been great but this may be more because large sedans just don't sell like they used to.
As new or redesigned models are introduced, Lincoln is expected to go with real model names like Aviator, Nautilus, Zephyr, etc.
Quote from: e.mason on January 02, 2018, 09:05:26 PM
..... I personally enjoy the backup camera, the paring of my cell phone to my car, all the safety features offered. I just read that the new Cadillacs have a sensor/camera built into the steering wheel, that will detect when the driver takes his/her eyes off the road.
The Back-up Cameras are there for the simple reason that the shape of the current cars is that one can physically not see anything when turning the head around to see to enable reversing and parking.
The anti-drowsing sensors are there simply because the modern cars are so quiet, draft-free and so comfortable, like a lounge room, that drivers simply fall asleep.
Take a drive in a '59 or '60 Cadillac, and when turning the head, the rearward and side visibility is tremendous, and the noise emitted by the engine, and the roadway is sufficient to keep everyone awake. Plus, it is a pleasure to stay awake by taking in the ambiance of the scenery, and the simple pleasure of being alive.
Bruce. >:D
PS. We, as Cadillac and LaSalle people, shouldn't really care about the inferior makers, or we would be members of those clubs. (Which some of you could well be) I don't care much for Lexus, Lincoln or Mercedes, unless I see parts within them that I can use in my own cars. My '70 Ranchero is fitted with Lincoln Continental MK IV Bucket Seats, and boy, are they comfortable.
One thing that I think about is how easy it is to get a Cadillac. You don't have to work for it-just get a $250/month lease and you have one. A few years ago a Cadillac dealer by me had a huge sign up that's said "Credit Help Here."
If it's something that anyone can get, what is special about it? Any car can have technology.
Problem is that if it is hard to get then yoi don't sell enough of them to stay in business. Catch 22.
My daily driver is an 8 year old Honda. They run forever (I hope) and hold their value.
Jeff
Oh yah, I forgot to say that I am also boring.
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 01, 2018, 08:31:44 PM
The biggest problem is that all cars will one day become a product of market demand.
And when that happens, it could possibly be that the Cadillac & LaSalle Club, this, our club, will still flourish, as people will want to get back to enjoying transportation with class.
We cannot complain about new cars, and the way they are built, as the Club, actually doesn't recognise Cadillacs until they are Ten Years Old. Yes, some complain about new cars, but these people have an agenda which involves being able to buy a nicer Cadillac once it is at least Ten Years Old.
Down here in Australia, Vintage cars aren't recognised until they are at least 30 years old. Newer cars are called "Special Interest".
The way for the car makers to steady things down is to only make vehicles when they get actual Signed Orders in to make them, and people should be prepared to wait for their car to be built. Remember the "good old days".
No good comes of forcing targets for sellers to reach, and having huge areas filled with unliked vehicles, that eventually will get crushed. What a waste of resources.
And oh, yes, it is always the darkest before the dawn.
Bruce. >:D
Is that down in Oz or everywhere, because I Never heard of that restriction, and I see very recent cars listed in the directory every year including my two newer ones.
What I'm still waiting for, but not holding my breath for, are
A: a V8 equipped car - not a Suburban Uhttack Vehicle
and
B: a convertible that hods 4 or 5 adult passengers.
G'day Mike,
I thought the 10 years old was simply because of a couple of things.
The Self Starter doesn't print For Sale adverts for vehicles newer that 10 years old.
Plus, The Show Judging doesn't have classes for vehicles newer than 10 years old.
From the International Membership Directory.
Article 1 (Name and Purpose) Section 3 Recognition. States The Club recognises all Cadillacs and LaSalles, regardless of year or model.
Jugding - Divisions - Primary - is for Cadillac and LaSalle automobiles manufactured as 1999 models and older and/or which are 20 years old and older......
Touring Division - is for Cadillac and LaSalle automobiles 10 years old and older.....
Bruce. >:D
can you imagine a 60 's sized something cadillac with all the bells whistles tvs, etc that populate the current cars.. and actual have leg room, wiggle room, and some one saying, thats a cadillac,, and not wonder if its one of the many cars that look identical, regardless of price,,, would be something imo
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 02, 2018, 10:47:54 PM
The Back-up Cameras are there for the simple reason that the shape of the current cars is that one can physically not see anything when turning the head around to see to enable reversing and parking.
The anti-drowsing sensors are there simply because the modern cars are so quiet, draft-free and so comfortable, like a lounge room, that drivers simply fall asleep.
Take a drive in a '59 or '60 Cadillac, and when turning the head, the rearward and side visibility is tremendous, and the noise emitted by the engine, and the roadway is sufficient to keep everyone awake. Plus, it is a pleasure to stay awake by taking in the ambiance of the scenery, and the simple pleasure of being alive.
Bruce. >:D
PS. We, as Cadillac and LaSalle people, shouldn't really care about the inferior makers, or we would be members of those clubs. (Which some of you could well be) I don't care much for Lexus, Lincoln or Mercedes, unless I see parts within them that I can use in my own cars. My '70 Ranchero is fitted with Lincoln Continental MK IV Bucket Seats, and boy, are they comfortable.
With all due respect, I think you are missing the point of all these safety features being available through the use of technology.
#Here in the USA the rear cameras are going to have to be a standard feature on cars in the very near future. They allow drivers to see things that would not be in their normal range of viewing i.e. small children, bicycles in the driveway etc.
#The sensors in the steering wheel are not for anti drowsing. Mostly for people that take their eyes off road for texting, applying makeup, reading etc. I also love the warning radar on cars, especially when wanting to change lanes when a car is in my blind spot. All these safety features allows us the pleasure of staying alive longer.
#Hasn't Cadillac and other makes always taunted how comfortable and quiet their cars are? Wasn't this part of having a luxury car?
Quote from: Jeff Rose CLC #28373 on January 02, 2018, 10:50:20 PM
One thing that I think about is how easy it is to get a Cadillac. You don't have to work for it-just get a $250/month lease and you have one. A few years ago a Cadillac dealer by me had a huge sign up that's said "Credit Help Here."
If it's something that anyone can get, what is special about it? Any car can have technology.
Problem is that if it is hard to get then yoi don't sell enough of them to stay in business. Catch 22.
My daily driver is an 8 year old Honda. They run forever (I hope) and hold their value.
Jeff
Oh yah, I forgot to say that I am also boring.
Easy to get a Cadillac? $250/month lease? Please show me where.
Quote from: e.mason on January 02, 2018, 11:23:11 PM
With all due respect, I think you are missing the point of all these safety features being available through the use of technology.
With all due respect, the use of modern technology has come about due to the fact that the majority of crashes and fatalities are caused by stupid drivers. Not being able to see is a direct result of cars being made "safer".
I rented a Toyota Rav 4 a couple of years ago, and even though I was a trained high-performance driver, and dragster driver, I couldn't see a damned thing out of the back of it when I was attempting to park it. Everything got in the way of my sight. High Tail Gate, high sides, head restraints, B and C Pillars, and even the rear vision mirror was marginal at best. Got better rear vision from the outside mirrors.
Bruce. >:D
Quote from: e.mason on January 02, 2018, 09:05:26 PM
I just read that the new Cadillacs have a sensor/camera built into the steering wheel, that will detect when the driver takes his/her eyes off the road.
GREAT! Another weapon the insurance companies can use against you after an accident. Has anyone else nuked their "black box"?
And another thing.... (c'mon, you've all heard your wives say that when you thought the fight was over)
Allow me to interject a bit of ribaldry here - there are 3 generations of drivers out there now who have never owned/driven a car with a back seat big enough to - >:D
And if they tried and were taller than jockey's they'd be in physical therapy for a year.
Cadillac bring back a 'boat', a 'land yacht' for the masses. Stuff a GMC Sierra engine it, run it up the flag pole and watch everyone salute. No it won't get 50mpg, we can afford gas now, we have the American supply again and the economy can support it. 19' long, 8' wide, no back up cameras or radar, it would have sonar. Get busy GM. Laurie!
I can't believe what I am reading about the negativity towards regulations dealing with safety! I take you back to the days before regulation, a time when cool guys used to add their own safety devices. Remember curb feelers? How about the stand up guides you used to add to your headlights to assist you in parking. How much rear visibly did we have with the small private windows in our convertibles? How about seat belts and air bags. I am old school and hardly ever used my seat belt...................until. I witnessed an accident where a older Mustang, 67 I believe, T-boned a newer Chrysler. The driver of the Chrysler had on his seat belt and the air bag deployed. He got out and assisted the other driver who had to be Medevaced to the hospital! Made a believer out of me. I have never felt safer, then when in the SUV's I have owned. Extra large rearview mirrors, and glass all around, virtually eliminating any blind stops. Sitting higher and being able to have a better view of the traffic situation all around me.
Yes, many accidents are caused by drivers doing stupid things. Not paying attention, texting etc. Don't you feel it is better if they have options on their cars that would make them, just a little bit smarter?
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 02, 2018, 10:47:54 PM
The Back-up Cameras are there for the simple reason that the shape of the current cars is that one can physically not see anything when turning the head around to see to enable reversing and parking.
A reason backup cameras exist is because the technology has become cheap enough to do so. The concept for backup cameras in cars was created back in the 1950s, if not before. Lots of things would've existed long ago if the engineering, technology, etc had existed in a cost effective manner to do so. Things often become reality because they
finally can and not because some new or urgent need has been created. "Needs" can exist a long time before a "solution" becomes a reality.
Quote from: kkkaiser on January 02, 2018, 11:15:39 PM
can you imagine a 60 's sized something cadillac with all the bells whistles tvs, etc that populate the current cars.. and actual have leg room, wiggle room, and some one saying, thats a cadillac,, and not wonder if its one of the many cars that look identical, regardless of price,,, would be something imo
1960s Cadillacs while large on the outside weren't necessarily large on the inside at least not when It came to things like leg room and head room compared to even smaller (exterior) modern cars. Also, people were complaining about cars looking alike in the 1960s as well as before and since.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 03, 2018, 09:10:53 AM
A reason backup cameras exist is because the technology has become cheap enough to do so. The concept for backup cameras in cars was created back in the 1950s, if not before. Lots of things would've existed long ago if the engineering, technology, etc had existed in a cost effective manner to do so. Things often become reality because they finally can and not because some new or urgent need has been created. "Needs" can exist a long time before a "solution" becomes a reality.
I remember, as a kid, many years ago in the 50's, being at a GM exhibit. One thing that stands out in my mind, was a exhibit showing a car of the future. It had radar and could be driver less! Like it or not, the future is here. It's what is called progress. Sure we can all, in our minds, live in the past. We can drive our classic Cadillacs and remember how it used to be. Eventually we have to park the pride and joy and return to reality and the present day.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 02, 2018, 10:34:59 PM
This sort of came up in another topic here. My question related to this was whether Lincoln was doing so because they felt the brand wasn't competing successfully enough at the luxury level and decided to essentially go down to more Buick level where real model names are common. Despite Lincoln bringing back their iconic Continental name sales for that model haven't been great but this may be more because large sedans just don't sell like they used to.
As new or redesigned models are introduced, Lincoln is expected to go with real model names like Aviator, Nautilus, Zephyr, etc.
I read an article not long ago and I wish I would've saved it to back up what I'm about to say.
The Lincoln Continental is doing exactly what FoMoCo had hoped . . . it is driving traffic into their showrooms and helping sales on other, less expensive models like the MKX and MKZ.
Just for comparison sake, I priced out 2 top end cars yesterday online. A CT6 and a Continental. Here in Canada, with every option box ticked off on the highest model, the CT6 came out at $108,000 while the Continental came out at $85,700. That's quite a difference.
I believe it was Motor Trend that also named the Continental the most satisfying new car to own - satisfaction ratings are through the roof on it, reliability is up there. From what I've been reading, the CT6 hasn't been so fortunate.
Not that I'm following this stuff as much as I used to. All I can say is that if I lived somewhere where there was no snow and salt, I wouldn't drive anything newer than 1979 if I could.
Its just a shame the new Continental looks like a Toyota Avalon from the rear. Lincoln has been having an identity crisis ever since they dropped the Town Car.
People on this board for years have been saying Cadillac needed a six figure Flagship to compete with Mercedes. Well now they have one. You need to compare apples to apples. The Continental was made specifically for the market in China where they have no idea what a Lincoln should look like.
Cadillac at least has a continuity of styling. Now if they could just make an engine that will last 10-15 years without blowing head gaskets or leaking oil like the Exxon Valdez.
Quote from: BJM on January 02, 2018, 02:04:55 PM
No one knows what numbers and letters mean. It's not like Cadillac has a 75-year history of the alpha-numerical manner of car naming like the Germans and Lexus
quote.
Whilst I prefer names as opposed to numbers Cadillac actually does have a long history of numbering their carsAll the 30s were numbered 50 through 90 series sadly.
Quote from: Dan LeBlanc on January 03, 2018, 09:41:04 AM
The Lincoln Continental is doing exactly what FoMoCo had hoped . . . it is driving traffic into their showrooms and helping sales on other, less expensive models like the MKX and MKZ.
While higher end cars in an automaker's lineup may always to some degree be considered "halo" vehicles, if the Continental's goal was to drive up sales of Lincoln's less expensive models like MKZ and MKX it doesn't appear to be doing a very good job. MKZ sales for the year in the U.S. were down 10% and MKX sales were basically flat. Meanwhile, Continental itself only managed U.S. sales of a little over 12,000 units for the year. 12,000 isn't great when you consider that when FoMoCo officially announced in early 2002 that they were discontinuation the Continental, its sales in 2001 while down had still been over 20,000 units. The new Continental seems like a very nice car but I feel that the bigger issue is that large sedans just don't sell like they used and may never sell well again especially if this crossover/SUV craze continues. At least Ford does have the China market to sell Continental, and other models, these days which is a plus. Maybe a shift to more electric cars will change and improve attitudes toward large sedans. I just don't know.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 03, 2018, 12:14:26 PM
The new Continental seems like a very nice car but I feel that the bigger issue is that large sedans just don't sell like they used and may never sell well again especially if this crossover/SUV craze continues. At least Ford does have the China market to sell Continental, and other models, these days which is a plus. Maybe a shift to more electric cars will change and improve attitudes toward large sedans. I just don't know.
Crossover/SUV craze? I suggest that SUV's, Crossovers, Trucks etc. are not just a craze. I think they are just part of the evolution of the automobile. SUV's and Crossovers, are really nothing more then the station wagons are years gone by. They are just more stylish and versatile. Nothing better then a SUV to go shopping at the local warehouse store, and have enough room to bring home the 55 gallon drum of mustard. Crossovers derived their name because of them being a cross between a sedan, SUV and a van. If you want room and comfort. Jump aboard a full size pickup.
Quote from: Cape Cod Fleetwood on January 03, 2018, 01:26:13 AM
And another thing.... (c'mon, you've all heard your wives say that when you thought the fight was over)
Allow me to interject a bit of ribaldry here - there are 3 generations of drivers out there now who have never owned/driven a car with a back seat big enough to - >:D
And if they tried and were taller than jockey's they'd be in physical therapy for a year.
Cadillac bring back a 'boat', a 'land yacht' for the masses. Stuff a GMC Sierra engine it, run it up the flag pole and watch everyone salute. No it won't get 50mpg, we can afford gas now, we have the American supply again and the economy can support it. 19' long, 8' wide, no back up cameras or radar, it would have sonar. Get busy GM. Laurie!
I have it on very good authority that the back seat of RWD 133" WB Fleetwods is plenty big enough.... :P
Hey if bmw can make 7 series that are huge compared to just about every Cadillac sedan out there (I haven't parked one next to a CT6) and mercdaisy can make a S series they why can't Cadillac??? And both of those companies have several convertibles...
And as to after the fight is over - it's Never over... :-X
Quote from: e.mason on January 03, 2018, 02:46:46 PM
Crossover/SUV craze?
I still try to classify it as a "craze" in hopes that sales of crossovers and SUVs don't continue to take away so many sales from the types of vehicles I prefer and grew up with i.e. sedans and coupes. First, personal coupes lost cachet and now sedans are too. I don't dislike crossovers and SUVs, I just prefer them as Jeeps, GMCs, Land Rovers, etc rather than Cadillacs, Lincolns, BMWs, Mercedes, etc. Today's market is what it is and that's fine.
Quote from: cadillacmike68 on January 04, 2018, 05:55:51 AM
Hey if bmw can make 7 series that are huge compared to just about every Cadillac sedan out there (I haven't parked one next to a CT6) and mercdaisy can make a S series they why can't Cadillac???
The BMW 7-Series isn't significantly larger than the Cadillac CT6. The BMW is only 2.5" longer and has less front head room and leg room. And like most large sedans, the BMW 7-Series has seen sales declines. Its 2017 sales in the U.S. fell 28% are and down 58% from 15 years ago.
A very simple business truth I learned many years ago.
It is difficult to get to new customers and not too difficult to retain them. People are slow to change and will put up with some issues. So you need to keep your current customers happy and they in turn tell other people. Much better than advertising and much more effective in the long run. But executives are not in it for the long run today they want their bonuses now and so they send the company into a slow downward spiral.
So Cadillac caused their own customer alienation. From the HT4100 to cheap interiors and so on you fill in the blank why people left the brand. Now even if they made nicest luxury car in the world you need to do it for many years and slowly win people back. A difficult and expensive task.
In today's short time span for results and gratification not easy to do. Also there are many luxury competitors to choose from.
Quote from: gkhashem on January 04, 2018, 10:24:52 AM
So Cadillac caused their own customer alienation. From the HT4100 to cheap interiors and so on you fill in the blank why people left the brand. Now even if they made nicest luxury car in the world you need to do it for many years and slowly win people back. A difficult and expensive task.
That's part of it but an even bigger part of it is the market shift away from the types of vehicles that once dominated not just Cadillac's business but Lincoln's too. 20+ years ago large sedans and personal coupes accounted for the bulk of their sales and when key segments of a business diminish as these have, sales suffer regardless of any quality issues. Mercedes-Benz quality reputation compared to other brands isn't what it used to be in say the 1980s, for example, yet they have seen record sales here in the states as late as 2016.
Cadillac's, and Lincoln's, bigger struggle has been trying to shake their reputations as land yacht, old man car companies.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 04, 2018, 08:54:15 AM
I still try to classify it as a "craze" in hopes that sales of crossovers and SUVs don't continue to take away so many sales from the types of vehicles I prefer and grew up with i.e. sedans and coupes. First, personal coupes lost cachet and now sedans are too. I don't dislike crossovers and SUVs, I just prefer them as Jeeps, GMCs, Land Rovers, etc rather than Cadillacs, Lincolns, BMWs, Mercedes, etc. Today's market is what it is and that's fine.
I associate the word "craze" with the word "fad". In any event craze/fad? Perhaps, but I don't think so. Here's my take on current sales on trucks, suvs, vans, and crossovers. Lets go back to the late 60's and early 70's where it all began. In the 60's the Volkswagen Kombi/Minibus was the vehicle of choice for Hippies. They saw the value of having a utilitarian vehicle, and forsaking contemporary values in modern automobiles. Next came the introduction of a new word in our lexicon "Sticker Shock". Buyers would enter a Chevrolet dealership, and were literally shocked by the sticker price. Many then noticed the lowly pickup and its more affordable price, and thought "Why not?" The rocket took off. While SUV's were already in production, it was at this time the majors, saw the benefit of mass producing a SUV, that would appeal to the masses. Along the way the pickups were made more comfortable and better riding. Sales then snowballed. There was no stopping the craze. Next came the crossovers. I remember being on Buicks mailing list for the introduction of the Rendezvous. They used Tiger Woods as their pitchman. It was touted as having the all the comforts of a sedan, SUV and van, hence "crossover". It should be noted that all through this evolution. Cadillac resisted in joining in the party. They came late to the party. In any event, I think the SUVs etc., are here to stay for the masses.
There's more to it than that. Punitive CAFE regulations played a significant role in effectively legislating full size cars out of existence while encouraging truck & truck-based vehicles to flourish because EPA regulations are different depending on how vehicles are classified.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 01:08:19 PM
There's more to it than that. Punitive CAFE regulations played a significant role in effectively legislating full size cars out of existence while encouraging truck & truck-based vehicles to flourish because EPA regulations are different depending on how vehicles are classified.
Yes that was also a big factor. If I remember correctly. Trucks didn't have the same safety regs as automobiles, which did make them cheaper.
Not safety, CAFE regs. (ie MPG).
For the record, the net result of safety regs was decreased overall fleet safety because the mandates drove the price of new cars up so high, it therefore paid to keep older (unsafe) vehicles on the road longer. This has been written about.
Things have been tightened up in the last 10-15 years, but at the beginning of the “light truck†craze (that is what NHTSA called vehicles that were not conventional passenger cars, the light truck category was not subject to the same degree of safety standards. Varous requirements, including airbags, were not imposed on the light truck category until well after they were imposed on passenger cars. And the CAFE standard for trucks was frozen at 20.2 mpg (meaning 15-16 in reality) for about 25 years.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 01:13:35 PM
Not safety, CAFE regs. (ie MPG).
Its only been since the 1999 model year, federal regulations have required light trucks to meet the same major safety requirements as passenger cars. These regulations require that pickups include dual front airbags and meet side-impact structural standards. Heavy-duty models with gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWRs) above 8,500 pounds remain exempt from certain standards â€" most notably, airbag requirements.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 04, 2018, 12:27:12 PM
That's part of it but an even bigger part of it is the market shift away from the types of vehicles that once dominated not just Cadillac's business but Lincoln's too. 20+ years ago large sedans and personal coupes accounted for the bulk of their sales and when key segments of a business diminish as these have, sales suffer regardless of any quality issues. Mercedes-Benz quality reputation compared to other brands isn't what it used to be in say the 1980s, for example, yet they have seen record sales here in the states as late as 2016.
Cadillac's, and Lincoln's, bigger struggle has been trying to shake their reputations as land yacht, old man car companies.
Really? So why has Mercedes or Lexus or fill in the blank having record sales. Certainly not all of their cars are SUVs? Cadillac SUVs have been some of their best sellers. People buy on reputation often and Cadillac has a poor one. That is hard to reverse. The brand has been damaged and mismanaged. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. So people stay away whether true or not.
Other makes stole the American luxury car customers years ago. So as the old men die off and got stiffed by a junk the next generation (junior) would not buy a Cadillac since they dropped the ball. So the die was cast. They lost reputation and lost future customers. I remember families would be loyal to a car brand and always buy the same brand. But if you get a lemon you switched. Once you switched you are hard to get back.
Now are they making better quality vehicles? Maybe but it's s difficult battle to get people to consider a Cadillac when everyone alive in recent history has a dim perception of the brand.
Cadillac has damaged itself, GM got arrogant and did not treat the customer as king. GM has tried to prune Cadillac dealers and make them stand alone from other GM brands. Why? They are trying to make the customer experience like a Mercedes, to cultivate a new generation of buyers since they killed off the potential buyers because of poor cars 30 years ago and lost the connection within families that were loyal Cadillac buyers for years. So now they need to cultivate new buyers, hard to do in a competitive field.
They are trying to create a new image, They remade the emblem etc etc. So far it's not working.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 01:18:20 PM
For the record, the net result of safety regs was decreased overall fleet safety because the mandates drove the price of new cars up so high, it therefore paid to keep older (unsafe) vehicles on the road longer. This has been written about.
Yet with all of the various added safety features in recent times, the overall price of many cars has dropped. For example, the base price of a base 1998 Chevy Malibu twenty years ago was $15,670 or approximately $24,000 in 2017 dollars while the base price of a 2018 Chevy Malibu L is just $21,680 or approximately 10% less inflation adjusted.
As this is a Cadillac forum, let's look at Cadillac. The base price of a 1998 Cadillac DeVille twenty years ago was $37,695 or approximately $57,700 in 2017 dollars while the base price of a 2018 Cadillac XTS is just $46,395 or approximately 20% less inflation adjusted.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on January 04, 2018, 03:24:49 PM
Yet with all of the various added safety features in recent times, the overall price of many cars has dropped. For example, the base price of a base 1998 Chevy Malibu twenty years ago was $15,670 or approximately $24,000 in 2017 dollars while the base price of a 2018 Chevy Malibu L is just $21,680 or approximately 10% less inflation adjusted.
As this is a Cadillac forum, let's look at Cadillac. The base price of a 1998 Cadillac DeVille twenty years ago was $37,695 or approximately $57,700 in 2017 dollars while the base price of a 2018 Cadillac XTS is just $46,395 or approximately 20% less inflation adjusted.
I wonder what today's new car prices would have been if GM had to scratch for itself without the benefit of multibillion dollar bailout. ???
Quote from: gkhashem on January 04, 2018, 03:15:45 PM
Really? So why has Mercedes or Lexus or fill in the blank having record sales. Certainly not all of their cars are SUVs? Cadillac SUVs have been some of their best sellers. People buy on reputation often and Cadillac has a poor one. That is hard to reverse. The brand has been damaged and mismanaged. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. So people stay away whether true or not.
Much of Mercedes sales growth has come from the crossover/SUV segments. The fact that they have gone more down market over time with lower entry prices has helped too. Thirty years ago you couldn't get into a new Mercedes for less than around $56K (when inflation adjusted) retail in the states. Today, Mercedes has over a half dozen models with starting prices less than that including the CLA which starts at under $34,000.
Cadillac's reputation issue is as a land yacht, old man car brand which hasn't been easy to shake. They will finally be adding more crossovers to satisfy that market need which will help sales. One crossover (XT5) and the Escalade SUVs aren't enough.
Mercedes quality is nowhere what had been either.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 03:40:50 PM
Mercedes quality is nowhere what had been either.
True.
As I stated in an earlier post in this topic,
"Mercedes-Benz quality reputation compared to other brands isn't what it used to be in say the 1980s, for example, yet they have seen record sales here in the states as late as 2016."
I have a question -
When a lot of people talk about Cadillac, and talk about the sedans, they are talking about I suppose the 50s and 60s.
What about the pre-war cars and design language? They had several different designs, some termed sedan, some phaeton - I have never been exactly clear on it all, but I always thought a sedan had a trunk, with the rear window positioned in front and above the trunk - but those 30s cars, dare I say it, you could design one with a tailgate like a crossover. I don't know if they could incorporate cues from that era, given the radical differences in so much, including safety requirements, but I do wonder from time to time if a crossover that wasn't built like crap (like a pt cruiser), but that was graceful and had ample odes to the 30s cars would be a exciting direction,.
How far is this car really, body wise, from a crossover? http://www.happycarz.com/showroom/1934-cadillac-series-20-model-355-d-four-door-sedan/ Yeah ground clearance is less, but most people buying crossovers aren't really in it for 4wd anyway, they are using them as station-wagons - something the 50s and 60s had plenty of.
The modern SUV's came about to the cheapness to build, simply because they didn't have to meet the stringent requirements of passenger carrying vehicles, which were 2 wheel drive.
Sumary came into Australia in droves simply because there was a lower taffif for 4 Wheel Drive Vehicles, and once people found out how comfortable they were, and really cheap, they were hooked.
By the time the Government finally realised what Subaru were doing, it was too late, then everyone came on board.
Subary never made a totally 2 wheel drive vehicle.
The good old days :<)
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 04, 2018, 03:51:21 PM
Subary never made a totally 2 wheel drive vehicle.
There were many FWD Subaru cars. (Not 4WD or AWD).
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 03:31:56 PM
I wonder what today's new car prices would have been if GM had to scratch for itself without the benefit of multibillion dollar bailout. ???
*BOOM* <mic drop>
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 03:31:56 PM
I wonder what today's new car prices would have been if GM had to scratch for itself without the benefit of multibillion dollar bailout.
Tough to say but prices had been dropping in the market, far beyond just GM, before their bailout and the company would've wanted to try to remain price competitive going forward with or without bailout monies.
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on January 04, 2018, 03:51:21 PM
The modern SUV's came about to the cheapness to build, simply because they didn't have to meet the stringent requirements of passenger carrying vehicles, which were 2 wheel drive.
I don't quite get the specific 2 wheel drive versus 4 wheel drive relevancy as both SUVs and cars can be either 2 wheel drive or 4 wheel drive. Also, as Eric mentioned, Subaru has made 2 wheel drive vehicles.
Quote from: WTL on January 04, 2018, 03:49:08 PM
I have a question -
When a lot of people talk about Cadillac, and talk about the sedans, they are talking about I suppose the 50s and 60s.
What about the pre-war cars and design language? They had several different designs, some termed sedan, some phaeton - I have never been exactly clear on it all, but I always thought a sedan had a trunk, with the rear window positioned in front and above the trunk - but those 30s cars, dare I say it, you could design one with a tailgate like a crossover. I don't know if they could incorporate cues from that era, given the radical differences in so much, including safety requirements, but I do wonder from time to time if a crossover that wasn't built like crap (like a pt cruiser), but that was graceful and had ample odes to the 30s cars would be a exciting direction,.
How far is this car really, body wise, from a crossover? http://www.happycarz.com/showroom/1934-cadillac-series-20-model-355-d-four-door-sedan/ Yeah ground clearance is less, but most people buying crossovers aren't really in it for 4wd anyway, they are using them as station-wagons - something the 50s and 60s had plenty of.
As I posted before. Crossover, as defined by Buick, when they were introducing their Rendezvous, had the feeling and conveniences of a sedan, van and a SUV. There is no denying that today's SUV's and crossovers are really nothing more then updated station wagons. Consumes have given up going for styling and looked for vehicles that were more practical. By the way, we had two Rendezvous and loved them. Probably would still have one, except for the fact they stopped making them.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on January 04, 2018, 01:08:19 PM
There's more to it than that. Punitive CAFE regulations played a significant role in effectively legislating full size cars out of existence while encouraging truck & truck-based vehicles to flourish because EPA regulations are different depending on how vehicles are classified.
This is exactly correct, and its why mfrs can make a significantly higher profit on the suburban uhttack vehicles as well.
They don't have the same fuel economy requirements, because they are not "passenger cars" ???
When is the epa going to correct its self inflicted case of cranial rectal inversion or what we in the Airborne community refer to has heaving one's head up their 4th point of contact? >:D
Quote from: cadillacmike68 on January 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
This is exactly correct, and its why mfrs can make a significantly higher profit on the suburban uhttack vehicles as well.
They don't have the same fuel economy requirements, because they are not "passenger cars" ???
When is the epa going to correct its self inflicted case of cranial rectal inversion or what we in the Airborne community refer to has heaving one's head up their 4th point of contact? >:D
Yes the profits are higher with "trucks". On the flip side. Have you noticed the discounts on new Chevy trucks? The discounts are more then the cost of a new Cadillac of the 70's! Many of the newer mid size SUV's and Crossovers over fantastic fuel mileage. 2018 Buick Envision/MPG
Up to 22 city / 29 highway
Quote from: e.mason on January 07, 2018, 01:55:50 PM
Yes the profits are higher with "trucks". On the flip side. Have you noticed the discounts on new Chevy trucks? The discounts are more then the cost of a new Cadillac of the 70's! Many of the newer mid size SUV's and Crossovers over fantastic fuel mileage. 2018 Buick Envision/MPG
Up to 22 city / 29 highway
But it's
still not as high as the requirements for "cars"...
Quote from: cadillacmike68 on January 07, 2018, 02:24:52 PM
But it's still not as high as the requirements for "cars"...
Is that so?
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymake/Cadillac2018.shtml
Worst on that chart is escalade. xt5 is worse than some of the sedans, better than a few, but that's the cars themselves, NOT the fed REQUIREMENTS.
Quote from: cadillacmike68 on January 10, 2018, 10:45:05 PM
Worst on that chart is escalade. xt5 is worse than some of the sedans, better than a few, but that's the cars themselves, NOT the fed REQUIREMENTS.
Maybe this will help. For many car experts, the difference between the two is simple: A crossover is based on a car's platform, while an SUV uses the chassis of a truck. The result is that crossovers use "unibody" architecture, meaning the body and frame are one piece, while SUVs use a "body on frame" design.