[hotlap]

Cadillac also raise prices significantly when they introduced this generation CTS as part of their strategy to rebuild their image as a premier brand. That takes time and the product must be right.

My take on the CTS is that more attention needs to be spent on the interior materials. IMO...the piano black surfaces are horrible.

To help rebuild its image as a premier luxury brand, Cadillac recently embarked on a pricing strategy that saw prices on many models rise significantly as redesigned versions were launched so that they matched pricing on comparable models from Germany’s three major luxury brands

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1...ts-trim-levels

[6spdhyperblue]

The SS is what should fit that gap but in many eyes it not very good looking.

IMO the Camaro isn't good looking either compared to the challenger and s197. I bought Bc I love the GM powertrain...and the chassis and brakes were world class

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by lbls1

CTS-V is GM's best sedan. How could they kill it??? The V I might understand due to tightening CAFE, but why CTS???

I give up on these guys.

What makes you think the eventual CT5-V isn't going to be better than the current CTS-V?

[lbls1]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

What makes you think the eventual CT5-V isn't going to be better than the current CTS-V?

That's part of the problem. I have no assurance that it will be. The other problem is that GM is going back to their usual tactics of cutting, and if they cut and replace so much, this new CT5-V may not sell because no one will know what it is or what its supposed to be.

[lbls1]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

This isn't like the 80s and 90s when GM spat out crappy passenger cars and then shrugged their shoulders when they didn't sell. They aren't selling now simply because people are buying other types of vehicles, the difference is that for the most part, GM has plenty of that other type of vehicle, and the sales figures for those vehicles reflect that.

Go look at the sedans GM is having issues with right now and tell me exactly what you think they should do to improve sales. I'd love to hear your ideas. The fact of the matter is all of those cars are really damn good cars, but the sedan market across the board has simply collapsed. I know you've been shown the data on this before, you just refuse to accept it for whatever reason. If you haven't noticed other automakers reworking their product mixes, you just haven't been paying attention.

EVERY manufacturer is dealing with a drop in passenger car sales and an uptick in crossovers and light trucks. It's not just GM. Saying that it's their fault for a shift in consumer preference is simply laughable.

#1. No where did I say or did I recall hearing that we're in the 80's or 90's. You are paraphrasing something from I don't know where. You also didn't hear me say that the current GM cars are junk or are not dependable. Far from it. What I was saying is that GM needs to examine their marketing strategies and improve them, instead of eliminating once successful lines in lieu of others.

#2....May I????? Alright..... Impala. It should stay. The design is ok. Perhaps it needs to be a tad smaller. Perhaps it needs to stop trying to imitate its chinese rivals. Perhaps Impala needs to re-connect to its earlier styling roots, where many of us fondly remember older, more successful Impalas. I had a sad feeling once GM got away from some of the smaller styling cues of Impala, that this model would eventually get lost and become obscure. It appears that this fear might be coming to light.

CT6. It should stay. The design is ok. It hasn't been on the market long enough to make an impact. Cadillac and Buick have long discussed bringing in a flagship full sized vehicle to challenge the likes of Mercedes and BMW. CT6 could be a great opportunity to do this with a little work and more exposure. As of now, the CT6 is barely distinguishable from its stable mate XTS, in which it was supposed to either replace it or aid it. Now both sedans are in peril.

XTS. It could stay. The design is boring, predictable. The car is unecessarily large, and it actually is less exciting than the Impala. Cadillac needs to decide what its target market for it is. Cadillac could eliminate it and focus on CT6. They need to do something with it.

CTS. It should definitely stay. The design is good. The CTS-V is the best sedan in the company...meaning ALL of GM. The lower levels of CTS perhaps could use a little spicing up with unique trim touches, an array of affordable options, and more aggressive marketing. Cadillac needs to take a page out of Toyota/Lexus' marketing strategy, and hit harder in promoting Cadillac.

ATS. It should stay. The design is ok. It is a good sedan, but in reality the styling leaves one with a bit to be desired. In some angles it looks akin to the Malibu LTZ (They share a couple of components, like the engine, and are close in size), and in other angles it looks like a dwarfed XTS. ATS needs to make its designs more aggressive in the body profile....it needs to make a bold statement. As of now, its pleasant but a tad forgettable in appearance. ATS also has great potential, in that it has a wide array of models and options. The strategy is good with ATS: It just needs a bit more force in its improvement.

ALL OF BUICK; GM needs to decide and focus on its mission. I feel that the entire brand is in peril. Most of its designs, while some cues are interesting, still leave one bored and wishing for more excitement. They have an interesting line up with nice options and reachable price points. Buicks are still very boring to look at and to compare. At one point I thought they were benchmarking Acura and Lexus for their designs, but it looks like some of that flare got lost.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by lbls1

That's part of the problem. I have no assurance that it will be. The other problem is that GM is going back to their usual tactics of cutting, and if they cut and replace so much, this new CT5-V may not sell because no one will know what it is or what its supposed to be.

Think back

What assurances were there that the CTS would be better than the Catera? None. And yet it was. Also ... what the hell was a CTS anyway? Yes, enthusiasts know its the Catera Touring Sedan. But I bet 99.99% of buyers didn't know or care.

What assurances were there that the replacement for the original CTS-V would be better? None. And yet it was.

What assurances were there that the replacement for the 2nd CTS-V would be better? None. And yet it was.

So logically, with no assurances that the replacement for the 3rd CTS-V will absolutely be worse and GM is moronic and every choice they make is wrong.

EVERYTHING eventually ends production, no matter how good it is. Should Cadillac still be building Runabouts, like they were 110 years ago? Afterall, what assurances were there in 1908 that the new Cadillac would be better?




You know the phrase 'The King is dead. Long live the King!'? Ever thought about what it actually means? Its a reassurance. You don't have to worry about there not being a King. When the old King dies, his successor takes his place right after.

[DGthe3]

Plus ... the new CT5 is supposed to be roughly the same size as the previous generation CTS. That is, the CTS that was vastly more successful than the current gen (due in part to the fact that it didn't have a little brother poaching sales from it). So GM is going back to what used to work. Oh, how DARE they! The nerve of looking at history, learning from a mistake, and taking corrective action at the next reasonable opportunity. Who runs a company like that? No no no NO! You have to stick with that mistake and figure out ways to trick buyers into sharing your vision (otherwise known as 'marketing')

[lbls1]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Think back

What assurances were there that the CTS would be better than the Catera? None. And yet it was. Also ... what the hell was a CTS anyway? Yes, enthusiasts know its the Catera Touring Sedan. But I bet 99.99% of buyers didn't know or care.

What assurances were there that the replacement for the original CTS-V would be better? None. And yet it was.

What assurances were there that the replacement for the 2nd CTS-V would be better? None. And yet it was.

So logically, with no assurances that the replacement for the 3rd CTS-V will absolutely be worse and GM is moronic and every choice they make is wrong.

EVERYTHING eventually ends production, no matter how good it is. Should Cadillac still be building Runabouts, like they were 110 years ago? Afterall, what assurances were there in 1908 that the new Cadillac would be better?




You know the phrase 'The King is dead. Long live the King!'? Ever thought about what it actually means? Its a reassurance. You don't have to worry about there not being a King. When the old King dies, his successor takes his place right after.

The letters CTS. Cadillac stuck to it, and it eventually became a living legend in its second iteration. By its second generation, the established brands got knocked off of their perches, and started looking closely at this angular, old branded sedan that just beat the pants off of them. CTS was King for a little while.

So after all of its accomplishments in the second season, Cadillac now wants to eliminate it because its slow sellling. Why don't we all take a look at this. Who says that the new CT5 will sell any better?? Will it really, given the same marketing strategy that might be used???? My bet is that it will flop, just like CT6.

Instead, Cadillac should take a page out of the Malibu playbook. Chevy knew it had to stick by Malibu (for good and other reasons). It didn't abandon it, it didn't let it wallow in woefully poor designs (generation 6!). It went to work on its design, materials, and image, and it became one of the most memorable Malibu generations in a few decades by season 7. Malibu is now on a successful stride, and while it isn't a sales leader yet, it certainly is well respected in its genre, and it is selling.

What Chevy did with Malibu is what all of the divisions need to do with their slow sellers. Develop them, mold them, re-invent them, market them. Put a little muscle in the promotion, instead of crying and pointing its finger.

[JerTM]

Originally Posted by Nicul15

The SS is what should fit that gap but in many eyes it not very good looking.

IMO the Camaro isn't good looking either compared to the challenger and s197. I bought Bc I love the GM powertrain...and the chassis and brakes were world class

I think it's because the SS was too pedestrian looking. I passed a police version the other day and I could have sworn it was a Malibu. The Charger does well because it at least partly looks the aggressive part you want in a performance sedan.

[FenwickHockey65]

http://www.tfltruck.com/2017/08/2020...fighter-spied/

T1XX Silverado ZR2?

[huggercamaro21]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

http://www.tfltruck.com/2017/08/2020...fighter-spied/

T1XX Silverado ZR2?

I hope so. We cannot keep the ZR2 on our lots.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

What makes you think the eventual CT5-V isn't going to be better than the current CTS-V?

BC CT5-V is a stupid name

[Expunge]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

http://www.tfltruck.com/2017/08/2020...fighter-spied/

T1XX Silverado ZR2?

About F'ing time.. Only been saying this from year one of the Raptor.

[snizzle]

But isn't a smaller truck (Colorado) better suited for off-road. Shove the 6.2 V8 in it and call it a day.