It can't all be the price. Most luxury cars, including Cadillacs are leased. And here in L.A., they lease for dirt cheap. Yet that hasn't seemed to make one bit of difference. Let's also be honest and factor in the massive discounts the factory throws in. A sticker on a Cadillac may be $55k, but it's not going to sell for anywhere near that once multiple incentives are factored in (more like $47k). Suddenly, Cadillacs are not so expensive. So since they are deeply discounted, drive well and get good reviews from everyone, there is only one other thing left.

Sometimes being the alternative only lends to a very small slice of the market. I don't think GM wants to be the odd man out with a small piece of the pie. If they want to rise up and make money, they have to enter into modern times by dumping the 70's eggcrate grilles, 60's taillights, chrome-trimmed everything, and overall flashiness. These are features most people shopping for BMW's and Mercedes cannot relate to.

 

You absolutely do not want to be an "alternative" under any circumstance when you are competing in a segment. When a car company is trying to compete, it has to be competitive within segment, the car must look contemporary and line up well with the standard players. In the case of Cadillac, the entire line up of cars is completely opposite of what the cars they are chasing are offering, the touchscreen style dash is not contemporary for modern luxury tastes, neither is the styling. But what the DID get right was the powertrain options.

In the case of the XTS, which is a superb car, they got the price point wrong. The XTS should be a ES350/h competitor.

 

^ I'll argue that Cadillac's problem isn't the exterior styling, its the marketing and the interiors in their cars. The ATS interior has a horrible gauge package, the fit/finish is just meh, and it has that awful Cadillac CUE system that's clunky and hard to use.

From a tech/infotainment/screen standpoint, Cadillac's CUE system sucks. With Cadillac STILL suffering from the "only for old fogies" mindset of most buyers, they don't need another reason for people to cross them off their list.

 

Cadillac's CTS already competes with the ES, at least in the non-V versions.
And we've all gotten off topic, which is Buick and long test-drives.

 

The exteriors are not horrible, they just are not as good looking at the big players. The Acura lineup and the Cadillac line up both are far behind in exterior design.

 

Let's check the facts. The XTS starts $44,660 while the CTS starts at $45K. The ES350 starts at $38K. Like I said, the XTS is priced a little too high. CTS competes with the G350 and 5 series.

 

CTS does not compete with the ES, it competes with GS.

 

It's not opinion, I"m presenting sales and revenue facts...

 

OK...I'll agree with the CTS/GS/5-series comparison in terms of RWD/AWD. Also, the fact that all three are offered in high-performance V, F, and M versions.

 

But how well a car sells often depends on potential buyers' opinons of it. People (usually) don't purchase or lease a vehicle they don't like, unless they are forced to by economic necessity. That's why Cadillac spent the time and money to develop the CT6...research showed the XTS, in the long run, was a mistake. Lincoln came to more or less the same conclusion with the MKS...which is why the new Continental concept was done.

Now, to be fair (since you earlier claimed I unfairly panned the XTS)...it DOES offer some improvements over the DTS....interior trim, more efficient (and hopefully more reliable) engine than the unreliable Northstars, better handling, and the AWD option for bad weather. But it does not, IMO, offer the same comfort....I wouldn't want to take it on a long trip.

 

this thread is about buick, not cadillac.

 

Thank You. That's what I tried to say earlier.

 

The XTS was a mistake because it is too expensive and too sophisticated for the market (ES350, MKS) that Cadillac should of been targeting. Buick Lacrosse gets the formula dead-on for the ES/MKS segment but in fact competes with the Avalon. This is the exact segment that Cadillac should of targeted with their XTS.

As for the North star, there was nothing unreliable about it. In fact, it was probably one of the best ever GM engines that they have made.

 

Ahahahahahaa. Surely you are kidding.

If not, go read on the Cadilac forums about the Northstar V8. Its an oil leaking and head gasket blowing pos. GM never could get the metallurgy or fasteners right to keep the head bolts from stripping out of the block.

They went through a couple different designs on the head bolts and never did fix the problem until they completely redesigned the Northstar for RWD in the STS and XLR. As for if your Northstar will blow a headgasket, some do it at 50k miles, some at 150k, and some people are lucky and never have that problem. I can't tell you the number of N* Cadillacs in my local yard that obviously were pampered, low mile cars with straight bodies and nice interiors. Nobody wants to spend the $4000 to fix a blown Northstar headgasket, since used you'd be lucky to get $4000 for a 90's N* Cadillac if you sold it.

 

Lets put it this way. Theres a reason why Cadillac stopped using the name "Northstar" for their engines. Reliable...no.

FYI...we had one...a 1995 Cadillac STS.