We’ve spent an inordinate amount of time here debating Cadillac’s painful past. But what about its present, and future? GM has spent huge amounts of money in trying to reboot Cadillac in the past fourteen years, ever since the CTS came out. And in the past year or two, they’ve escalated their commitment and intensity, by hiring Johan de Nysschen from Audi and moving its headquarters to NYC, in an effort to recreate Audi’s slow but steady rise in the global premium car segment. Genuine success with the CTS and ATS have so far been somewhat muted and elusive, and their momentum seems to be slowing. de Nysschen’s strategy is to achieve higher transaction prices, but buyers seem reluctant to pay anything near full price for them.
Meanwhile, the Cadillac Escalade is on a tear ever since its 2014 redesign. Yes, everyone knows it’s just a Chevy truck with a lot of bling, but folks are literally tearing them out of dealer’s hands, at or near full price. That amounts to an average transaction price of $85 k for the lwb ESV version, or a whopping 33% more than what the CTS can garner. $100k Escalades are not unheard of. And the average age of Escalade buyers is well below the rest of the line. While the Escalade undoubtedly generates the lion’s share of Cadillac profits, de Nysschen frets about the (negative) impact the Escalade has on his long-term positioning of the brand. As Cadillac marketing chief Uwe Ellinghaus said “As much as I want to feature that it is a great-looking and -driving car, and it’s a cool Cadillac and we’re proud of having it, … we must avoid the impression that this sets the direction for Cadillac as the brand,”
Is it a real problem, or a case of these foreigners not “getting” the fact that the Escalade is perhaps the only “genuine” Cadillac in their portfolio? And maybe they need more of the same?
Ironically, the Escalade has given Cadillac and its dealers a glimpse of how life would be like if the vision as laid out by de Nysschen comes true: tight supply and inventories; low incentives, and genuine demand driven by desire rather than a good deal. But the Escalade is intrinsically so outside of Cadillac’s core mission, which is why it makes the brand’s execs uneasy.
Previous Cadillac head Bob Ferguson had proposed a whole family of Escalades, including crossovers. But that’s been nixed. Yet there’s talk of a $100k plus VSport model. The profits are too seductive. “How do you balance the desire to bring it into alignment with where we’re taking the brand and the equally intense desire not to screw up a good thing?” de Nysschen wondered aloud last April.
Although I’m no fan of the Escalade, is it really any less tasteful than a lot of the loud, brash and flashy Cadillacs of the past? Who bought an Eldorado in 1953? A newly-minted celebrity, someone who drilled a gusher, or anyone else who fell into some money rather more quickly than average. And who buys a $100k loaded Escalade today? Clearly it’s the anti-Tesla, yet of the same demographic. The “Tesla buyer” of 1953 would have bought a Jaguar XK 140. There’s always some who seem to gravitate to a big, brassy Cadillac.
Cadillac is hoping that the CT6 will make some serious inroads into the market dominated by the Merceded S-Class and BMW 7 Series. More specifically, the dealers are hoping that buyers looking to buy an Escalade for the wife will consider a CT6 for themselves. As one NJ dealer said: “I’m going to park the CT6 right next to the Escalade in the showroom, that’s for sure.” Who would have thought that a truck would become Cadillac’s halo vehicle?
Source: autonews.com
The SRX is Cadillac’s best selling series, with the ATS and XTS a close second. The Escalade is doing better than the CTS. The CT6 will be a BMW 7 series class perhaps, but not quite a Mercedes S class. I think a problem with the CTS is that is started out as the bottom of the Cadillac line and customers are confused perhaps, or want less sports sedan and a softer luxury car. I think that the CT6 will be less sports sedan and more of a softer luxury car, but the price tag is fairly steep.
The Escalade has to be very profitable, and they are quite popular here, but it’s basically a rebadged Suburban (actually the GMC Denali is close).
CTS still suffers from an overly expensive platform,wrapped around a cramped interior (residue from the Lutz Era).
“As much as I want to feature that it is a great-looking and -driving car, and it’s a cool Cadillac and we’re proud of having it, … we must avoid the impression that this sets the direction for Cadillac as the brand,”
This won’t happen until Cadillac brings a passenger car that competes in the same price class or above as the Escalade. Ideally a true large sized high end luxury sedan. The CT6 isn’t even close…
“The CT6 isn’t even close…”
At best, marginally passable as a mid-size car.
Its 204in long? How big does it have to be to satisfy your fantasies? There aren’t going to be 226in long cars again…..
I have not been in the CT6, and look forward to getting in one next month at the auto show.
But, its two inches longer overall than the XTS. The XTS is actually a bit cramped in the rear seat – I hate to say it, but the simpler Impala is more comfortable, and everyone’s whipping boy, the Camry, is subjectively a lot more comfortable in back – at half the cost.
Granted, the CT6 has an 11 inch longer wheelbase over the XTS, but it is also RWD, so the jury is out on the interior dynamics.
The CT6 appears on paper to be an ever so subtly massaged Chrysler 300, which feels claustrophobic to me. And, the 300 offers a V-8. I know things are changing, but really good V-8s are where GM is winning the big SUV game. The top rung Caddy sedan NEEDS a V-8.
I agree that you are likely right that there are not likely to be 226 inch cars again. But, there may not be ANY cars, for that matter.
I think the length is OK but I want an interior width close to the Escalade. When two 6′ plus guys hop in the shouldn’t hit their elbows together.
The Escalade’s interior width (shoulder room) is over 64 inches. This is wider than some cars.
I don’t know why, but there will never be a modern sedan that’s the same width as old full-size cars–78″ or more. It seems the only things that are “allowed” to be that wide are full-size pickups and SUVs/CUVs. Which is a shame, really.
They are allowed, but the fuel consumption would impose massive taxes.
Well the newest Cafe formula favors cars with a larger foot print (wider with a longer wheelbase) but you are correct if your already in the largest category an increase in width would cause some additional drag and possible lowering of fuel economy.
And more width = more weight.
Width=lower MPG? I guess because it has more frontal area to push through the air?
And also if your vehicle is 78″ wide, a “reasonable” 110″ WB is too short, proportionately, and you’d have to have something closer to 116″ or more, and by then your car is so big you might as well go to an SUV.
The Cadillac CT6 wheel base is 122 inches.
Perhaps my biggest gripe with modern cars is the width. You can’t fit 5 people in most of them for any distance.
Perhaps my biggest gripe with modern cars is the width. You can’t fit 5 people in most of them for any distance.
That’s a consequence of going to global platforms – in Asia and Europe driving and parking a wide car is quite troublesome.
You really noticed this when GM went from W-Car to Epsilon for their mid-size cars…
Outside of the North America with parking spaces that cater for full-size pickups, you would struggle to park the thing
Interesting that the Escalade seems to get short shrift by management because it does not fit the image of what they want to sell. To urban, to American, to big. Just not who I am. Sounds like the late eighties Brougham all over. Shouldn’t liking Cadillacs be a prerequisite for the job of running it. Big, urban, and American is a big part of what Cadillac is about.
I’d love an 80’s Brougham with modern driveline and platform (still RWD!) I’m not interested in a pseudo German car. (If I want a German car, I’d just Buy a German car.) I do want the best American luxury sedan, in American style. I’ve always thought many Escalades were purchased by folks who would have otherwise brought Broughams.
Same here. I like the old school 80s Fleetwoods and Devilles a great deal and up to the DTS they still kind of had that same classy image. Now, they are trying to do “sports sedan”, even the bigger XTS, and no-that isn’t what a Cadillac is. If I want a “sports sedan”, I’d get a German car. If I want a high end luxury car, I’d still get a German car. If I want a Cadillac, I’d get an old 80s Fleetwood.
Completely agree. Cadillac should be a big, long,chromey sedan with a soft ride. if what you want is a Benz or a BMW, you’re going to buy one of those. Trying to copy them has just led to Cadillac being the offbrand, lower priced “value ” option, and in this price bracket, people pay for what they want and don’t worry about cost too much. The Escalade is the closest thing to a real Cadillac they make, ergo it sells.
Well, it IS a real Cadillac. It’s the evolution of the Brougham. The same people who bashed the Brougham for being a dressed up Caprice since 1945/1967/1968/1971/1977/1980/1993 (depending on who you ask since this is highly controversial!) bash the Slade for being a dressed up Suburban.
The Slade appeared right after the last Fleetwood Brougham rolled off the line.
People decided they prefer SUVs to sedans. So instead of a big honking sedan, Caddy makes a big honking SUV and darned if it doesn’t sell.
They should focus on making the Escalade awesome. Not German awesome. American awesome. It is the last real Cadillac. That’s why it sells, and embarrasses those imported executives.
Cadillac may as well ride the SUV wave, since keeping up with prestige German sedans, wannabe fashion, seems to me a lost cause, & moreover, “light” trucks are money-machines for domestic makes. Motley Fool just posted an article about how the F-150 is crazy profitable for Ford, with transaction prices way above MSRP.
Since when are American companies too proud to appease the hungry mob?
BUT…if Escalades are sold at/near sticker, inventories are tight and demand driven by desire, as contended in this article, how is it antithetical to Cadillac’s direction?
They must have models that represent value for the investment, as I believe they had back in at least the latter part of their glory days. But they also need top-tier models to be the ’57 Eldo Biarritzes of today, which is probably the niche filled by the Escalade. It would be good to see a Ciel or similar in that position too.
Exclusivity remains a key. So max profit per transaction will be essential. But the offerings must increasingly be perceived as quality and best in class.
This marque once stood toe-to-toe with Rolls-Royce, Packard and Duesenberg and even as late as 1965 was seen as equal if not superior to a Rolls. That road test resides on these pages. What changed was a debasing of the brand by chasing market share. Once it went downmarket and became “common”…the target audience ceased to care.
So I say, quit apologizing for Escalade’s success and don’t build an S-class fighter, build an S-class BEATER.
Cadillac needs to aim higher than the Germans. Cadillac needs to be the 2016 version of its 1955 self.
Its antithetical to Cadillac’s direction because its a truck, not a sports sedan. They want the CTS and ATS to sell like the Escalade, they don’t want the Escalade to be so popular because that isn’t what they want to sell.
An Escalade doesn’t fill the niche of an Eldorado other than being a big gaudy thing. However, the Eldo was sleek and classy like no truck can ever be. A tarted up Tahoe is just a gauchemobile for people with more money than style sense. I’m a farmboy and I love my trucks but a truck should be a working vehicle. You can get a nicer truck, but a “luxury truck”? No.
With that said, a company is in the business to make money. If I was Cadillac, I’d go where the market it going, regardless of where I think Cadillac “should” go. Playing “chase the Germans” is getting really old. Do something else, hell, maybe even go back to your heritage and see what you might be able to dust off and try again. That is the only way to build something that could steal the limelight away from an S-class for the elite luxury crowd not to mention build something that buyers might be ready for after a glut of “sports sedans”.
I really don’t understand de Nysschen’s consternation. Don’t all of the luxury/aspirational brands have (M-B, Audi, BMW, Porsche) or will have (Jaguar, Bentley, Lamborghini) large, expensive SUV’s in their portfolio? I don’t think they’re complaining about an image problem.
Here’s a solution for de Nysschen—-differentiate the Escalade even more from the Tahoe and jack up the price. Only at GM would they complain that they’re selling too many profitable vehicles.
Yes, but those big Euro SUVs aren’t dressed up station wagon versions of a big pickup truck. They are purpose built unit body luxury SUVs.
I think that it’s too successful, because it paints a bad image for the brand.
Cadillac has been trying to reinvent itself into a genuine luxury brand again, a noble effort considering the sordid past. I don’t mind Cadillac’s new lineup, (in fact I’m actually looking forward to see how well the CT6 does), but whenever people think of Cadillac they think of the Escalade. You know what I think of when I think of the Escalade? The early-mid 2000s image of tasteless modifications, spinning rims, even more chrome, driven by either wannabe hip-hop stars or trophy wives with the same amount of leather stitching in their faces that the car has in its seats. In other words, people with more money than taste. Not exactly something that you want, and people still have that image in their heads as well, its poisonous.
I refuse to accept the Escalade as a “Real” Cadillac. Yes, I get that the top of the line Cadillacs were always ostentatious, vulgar, loud, flashy, and brash. That’s why I like them. But the Escalade is all of those things, and something worse. Pretentious. It’s a pretentious car, a 100k Suburban passing itself off as the genuine article simply because of the overt chrome trim and the badge on the front. Cadillacs of the past may have been many things, but they always felt like the real thing (notable exceptions like the Cimarron excluded). To have such a blatantly idiotic car pass itself off as a genuine bespoke product, when all of us know its just lipstick on a pig, is why I hate this thing, why I refuse to call it a real Cadillac.
But, as long as you appeal to the idiots that get lured in by the shiny baubles and the massive size, why get rid of it? I think the Escalade is doing more harm than good for the brand right now, but they won’t get rid of it, because its one of the best selling products they have. They axe it now, they get rid of a huge chunk of money. They keep it around, the undesirable image this thing produces will follow the brand like a bad smell and keep it from being taken as seriously as they want it to. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
I don’t think Cadillac’s success (certainly not after WWII) was because Cadillacs were “bespoke”, but because they were pretty much the best and most capable all around large cars money could buy. I am not sure that the Suburban strays too far from that basic formula, and the Escalade runs it up into the price class where high-end buyers take it seriously. Is the Lexus version of the Land Cruiser any less worthy since the Land Cruiser is, itself, such a good vehicle?
JP, I realize I misused the term bespoke, sometimes that just happens.
I agree with you that SUVs have supplanted the large American sedan as the aspirational car. I certainly have no problem with the Suburban, in fact, I don’t have a problem with most SUVs. But I just can’t take the Escalade seriously as a vehicle, part of it is just the connotations and image of it that I witnessed at the height of its popularity when I was a kid. But, I just can’t take it seriously. It still remains a pretentious vehicle. Let’s take the Land Cruiser example, I won’t deny that the Land Cruiser is a competent vehicle, the Land Cruiser has its place. But the Lexus version is something that seems ridiculous, the styling isn’t as nice, and in the end it’s the exact same car. What am I paying extra for the Lexus over the comparable Land Cruiser? The privilege of driving around the same car as it’s cheaper sibling but a few extra goodies and the badge stuck to the grille?
There’s such little differentiation between a Suburban and an Escalade other than the grille and a couple options you can add, that I refuse to see why it’s viewed as the genuine article. Add to the fact that GMC Yukon does the exact same thing as the Escalade but cheaper, and again, the question is asked. Why am I paying more for the same vehicle as two others, simply because it has the Cadillac logo on the grille. Obviously it’s something I’m open to debating on, but I just refuse to agree with the assessment made by some that the Escalade is a “real” Cadillac.
Cadillacs have always been pretentious. The old money or bankers would buy a less flashy Buick.
I was going to jump in and say this. When has Cadillac ever not been pretentious? Old or low key money drove Buicks or even Oldsmobiles.
Great article and discussion Paul. Personally the Escalade is not my style, but it’s definitely a Cadillac. If I wanted to make a statement I’d buy a loaded black Tahoe.
Or the aforementioned Land Cruiser. Or a GMC Yukon Denali. Or a Tesla Model S. These are all the preferred rides of wealthy people who want to be low-key about their wealth.
I wonder if part of the problem today is that people misinterpret Cadillac’s prewar and postwar history. Paul hits on this when he notes that today’s Escalade really isn’t all that far apart from the 1953 Eldorado in terms of who likes it and is actually buying it.
Prior to World War II, Cadillac was NOT the brand of choice for old-money, discreet, well-to-do people. That role was filled by Packard, Pierce-Arrow and, to a lesser extent, Lincoln. (Packard even ran ads that boasted of how many “old money” families had driven the brand’s cars for decades.) Cadillac was seen as more brash and stylish – or a car for the “new rich” – even then, thanks to Harley Earl’s styling, which was anything but subdued, even for the 1930s.
The years prior to World War II witnessed the slow death of the market served by Packard, Pierce-Arrow and Lincoln. Packard and Lincoln abandoned it, and Pierce-Arrow was forced to completely exit the business.
But neither Packard or Lincoln really came up with an alternative that hit the sweet spot. That role fell to Cadillac, with the Series Sixty, which it followed up with the Sixty Special and then the early adoption of an automatic transmission.
Cadillac continued to set the pace after World War II with the tailfins of 1948, the ground-breaking ohv V-8 for 1949, and the sporty Coupe de Ville hardtop that same year. As jpcavanaugh notes, Cadillac won its reputation in the postwar years by offering a car with performance, comfort and quality that was unbeatable. It also benefitted from the total absence of any real competition – foreign or domestic.
The Escalade represents an opportunity. Cadillac should built upon its success by improving the next-generation version, particularly focusing on increased refinement, opulent interiors and more differentiation from its Chevrolet and GMC brethren. Like it or not, the Escalade really does fit in with the brand’s history.
I get the impression that Cadillac management wants to capture sales among “old money” families…but are those people even buying ultra-luxury cars these days? It seems as though most of the high-end, ultra-luxury cars are being bought by professional athletes, movie stars and other members of the “new rich” class. I remember seeing a late model Rolls-Royce convertible in Miami last year. It was being driven by a young fellow who was obviously some sort of professional athlete (based on his looks and build).
Sure, but the Land Cruiser itself starts somewhere in the $80k range already so it’s hardly a discount offering comparatively speaking. The Sequoia on the other hand can give the LC a serious run for its money capability-wise for a bit over half that. Same for Suburban vs Escalade.
At one time (perhaps still?) the net worth of the LC buyer was HIGHER than that of the Lexus LX570 buyer. The same held true for the GMC Denali buyer vs Escalade buyer. Apparently many very wealthy people are happy to still get a relatively good deal rather than paying more for extra style without any significant extra substance. I suppose that helps explain why they are wealthy to begin with…
Suburban LTZ lists at $67K, Escalades start at $72K and have the 6.2 engine and upgraded suspension. So there’s really not that much difference and you do get something for that extra money.
I really think it is also a question of packaging. The current line up of Cadillac cars is cramped inside…in fact most sedans are now, the only vehicles that give you any sense of space anymore are crossovers or SUV’s so If you want a big roomy Cadillac…the ONLY choice is the ‘Slade…even the XTS is a 2 + 2, for such a large car in exterior dimensions it is a tight fit inside.
You must be gargantuan if an XTS is a “2+2”, what name do you use when you wrestle?
To be fair I am 6’5″ and I was kidding- but it really is only comfortable for 4 people was my point, I expect no less of my “full size Caddy” than to accommodate me in the driver seat and then someone my size behind the driver. I’m sure its because of roll over standards and side front and rear airbags, beefed up a-pillars,etc. The sedan just can not accommodate all of that and maintain a sense of space the way a crossover/SUV does. I miss the packaging of late 80’s through early 2000’s cars…the FWD C bodies, cab forward Chryslers, the Le Sabre & the DTS. I found the XTS to feel too tight inside for a car of its size…its still handsome in a 2010’s sort of way.
4 is really what most people will carry, there really isn’t any car that has comfortable 3 across rear seats anymore, and even in “big” cars from back in the day, 3 across was ok, depending on who the 3 were. The XTS does feel a little narrower than the DTS because it is, but, to me at least, it doesn’t feel cramped inside.
The 3 across thing annoys me as I have 3 kids. A big sedan should be fine but none are wide enough. Now a full size truck works great 3 across the back. On the XTS I like the car but it’s the same width as my XC70 which is considered a midsize just doesn’t seem right.
Same here Mopar4wd. I think that’s a big reason why crew cabs are the new family wagon. I’d like a car, but it’s a minivan and pickup for us because cars are too narrow. They can fit 3 across in a pinch, but not really suitable for a daily driver.
Many coupes from the 70’s and 80’s made for better family cars than most of today’s sedans.
FWIW I rarely observe a vehicle filled with occupants. In other words, the vast majority of the time there’s only a driver, then in a distant second there’s a passenger, and so on.
Chas108 has nailed it. Memo to Mr. de Nysschen: This is Cadillac. Cad-di-lack. Wait, you’re not hearing me. You are running frigging CADILLAC!
Cadillac is America. Cadillac is big. Cadillac is real. Cadillac is not about compromise. Europeans live where the roads are too narrow and the garages are too small. Not here.
Cadillac is the car you take off in to cross the desert or to eat up mile upon mile of interstate. Or to take across town to the cigar bar and for a big steak dinner afterwards.
Cadillac dumbed itself down in the 70s and an entire generation or more snubbed it for Mercedes, BMW, Audi and the whole “German luxury” concept. It is my feeling that a new generation of American high-income car buyers is just waiting for one of the American auto manufacturers to offer something worth the money. Which will it be? This Escalade puts Cadillac on the inside track. Most generations have turned their backs on what their parents and grandparents drove. C’mon, Cadillac, they want to come back to you. Give them something.
Cigar bar? Well, that’s the Escalade demographic I guess.
Hey what is wrong with cigars and cigar bars?
I can’t think of many things I enjoy more than rolling down the highway listening to Hank Jr singing ‘Family Tradition’ while I puff on my Arturo Fuentes.
As long as they’re taking the hefty profits from the Escalade and actually putting them back into new Cadillac product R&D, I say let the good times roll! Wasn’t that Porsche’s justification for the Cayenne?
I think the CEO where I work is on his 4th Escalade. If you want a luxury SUV but it has to be a domestic brand, Escalade is really the only answer. A sport model of Escalade might be a big seller as well. From the domestics, the closest thing is the Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT; considerably cheaper but also smaller and not a “luxury” vehicle.
That’s not really how the car business works. And Porsche built the Cayenne because that’s where the money is.
What you’re saying is what enthusiasts would like to believe, in order to help justify in their minds why Porsche would sully their personal image of Porsche (or Cadillac).
Companies budget the R&D for their car lines years in advance. And they can’t really justify having a higher-profit vehicle subsidize a lower profit one. If a model line can’t stand on its own feet, profit-wise, there’s going to have to be some difficult explanation. Or more likely,new management.
AFIW, the Porsche 911/Cayman/Boxster line is extremely profitable. Porsche didn’t need help there; they just wanted more. Which is what every corporation wants. And it’s been madly successful for Porsche.
But if the 911 die-hards want to believe that the Cayenne/Panamera/Maycan were “necessary evils” to keep the “true Porsches” going, who cares if they want to delude themselves.
OK fine, but you’re picking on a single sentence of my comment, a sentence which I actually added as a tongue-in-cheek afterthought.
How about the WEC racing program? I imagine the extra $$ coming in the door from the Cayenne help pay for that
The CEO would be equally well served by the GMC Yukon XL Denali though. Basically the same thing at a similar price, still considered plenty luxurious but not a Cadillac and the baggage that comes with it (or the baggage it leaves behind going forward, if that’s what the discussion is about). The point being that the Escalade and GMC YXLD are basically badge engineered copies of each other, which in and of itself causes both to lose points in my mind.
I think the Denali appeals to those who in GMs golden era would have bought a Buick Roadmaster or later Electra 225. You’d pretty much get the Cadillac “goodies” for a few bucks less and a more conservative “image”. Given the current lineup that has GMCs at Buick dealerships, I can’t be far off.
Denali is roughly equal to Buick (we’ll momentarily overlook the fact that GM sells both the Acadia Denali and the Enclave), and regular GMC is roughly equal to where Oldsmobile was.
And GMC is usually at a Buick dealer’s.
Exactly. Where there used to be Oldsmobile/Buick dealers, there’s now Buick/GMC dealers.
We had an Oldsmobile Cadillac dealer. Not seen a Buick Olds, but more Buick Pontiac or sometimes a full range dealer.
Yeah, I’m not a marketing expert, but that seems to be right.
Olds and Buick were rarely dualed, usually those two were with Chevy, Pontiac, or GMC in rural areas, I think.
By the 90’s, Pontiac and GMC were one division, then joined with Buick by 2000’s.
Here we had Olds-Cadillac-GMC till Olds went under. Then the dealer wanted to take over Buick-Pontiac but GM said that Caddy must go to Chevy.
They arent sold here new only the CTS was but landing an Escalade would run in excess of 200k on the road so serious luxury money, I saw a white one last week still LHD since thats allowed and I bet it isnt the only one in the country, late model US cars like Chargers Mustangs and Camaros are landing by the shipload so no doubt some of the upmarket stuff will keep appearing too.
“Although I’m no fan of the Escalade, is it really any less tasteful than a lot of the loud, brash and flashy Cadillacs of the past?”
No it is not. A lot of the complaints of the Escalade are about the brash and flashiness of the truck and that is a gas pig. However couldn’t the same be said about the 1970’s Cadillacs and the 500 cu in V8. In 1976 this monster V8 got 190 hp and returned about 12-13 mpg Hwy. By contrast the 2016 Escalade with the 6.2l V8 and 4×4 gets 21 mpg.
As for flashiness, isn’t the whole point of buying a Caddy to show you “arrived”? Nobody sung songs about or aspired to save up money to buy a Ford Model T or a Chevy with a Thrift-Six in it. They were singing about Devilles and Eldorados.
Actually there were songs about the “T”- perhaps many of them. And plenty of songs about non-Cadillacs.
The Escalade is the Cadillac of Cadillacs.
Cadillac should represent AMERICAN luxury.
The cars should be BIG and POWERFUL. V8 only.
They should look flashy, but good (late 70s DeVille, 92 STS, current CTS come to mind).
They should off enough technology or toys so people don’t feel they are buying “more for less”. By the early 70s, Caddy’s were basically big GM cars with a big, Cadillac-only V8. And more power features.
Now that power features are ubiquitous, Cadillacs need to be quiter than Lexus, and crafted with precision.
That’s hard to do with platforms shared with more plebian Chevies.
Leave the BMW competitors to Buick or Chevy or….make GMC “cars” the new Pontiac—an BMW/Audi/Benz competitor. The current CTS/ATS show GM can do that well. But the CTS/ATS aren’t really Cadillacish….too sport-sedanish!
Good luck Cadillac!
As an aside, but perhaps indicative of current management. Look how terrible the photography of these brochure shots are. That mid century modern house or it’s twin is in every Volvo brochure of the last 20 years. Imagine the results if they hired our own Joseph Dennis to get shots of the Escalade around Chicago.
They don’t look like real photos to me, but computer-generated images, which is common for many auto publicity images these days. I agree they look pretty poor.
The only possible explanation is that people are stupid.
I remember when the Escalade first debuted. I was less than impressed with it. I thought that Cadillac was supposed to be a luxury car division, not a truck division or SUV. Several generations later, I’m even less than impressed with this generation Cadillac Escalade.
That was the original idea. Somewhere along the line, at the beginning of the SUV craze, GM went on record saying that any luxury SUV would be a GMC. Cadillac would not make trucks, Cadillac was a car division.
And then the Lincoln Navigator came out. And shortly afterwards, the Cadillac dealers started screaming . . . . . . . .
Well actually, the original 1st gen 1999 Denali was first pitched to Cadillac as a luxury SUV in 1995-1996, right about when the Fleetwood was going out of production, Cadillac passed, GMC got it, the Navigator came out, and now Cadillac wanted it.
Which is why the 1st Denali and Escalade are identical pretty much.
I don’t know anything about Mr. de Nysschen, but maybe Cadillac’s mistake was hiring an Audi guy. Cadillac’s aren’t Audi’s, never have been and never should be. Although since a lot of criticism of the Escalade is that it’s just a blinded-out Suburban, one could ague the same about some Audis vs VW’s. And as for SUV’s, a recent comment I read described Porsche as a manufacturer of luxury SUV’s that happens to sell a few high performance sports cars to reinforce its brand legacy.
“Who would have thought that a truck would become Cadillac’s halo vehicle?”
A truck, along with a bunch of trucklets (SUVs, CUVs) is becoming everybody’s halo vehicle.
Bentley Bentayga anyone?
The sedan business is slipping into the abyss. Who knows where this will level off? It’s likely wise for Cadillac to focus on building some world class luxury sedans in case the segment stays at least somewhat relevant.
However, has anyone noticed that Mercedes now offers FIVE SUV vehicles? (Perhaps more depending on how you want to look as some of their vehicles – the GLE Coupe is an odd one.)
Cadillac (GM for that matter) has a world class foundation in the SUV business with the Escalade. Ever notice that unless world leaders are in a formal motorcade, most of them are being ferried about in Suburbans? Same with celebrities that aren’t looking to show off at a given moment? Ambassdors and diplomats in foreign countries? Walk around Washington DC for a bit, and you’ll notice what seem to be official use ‘Burbs everywhere.
Cadillac offers two SUV’s – generally the most successful vehicles in their portfolio. They likely need to focus on getting a few more good solid entrys into the market, and keeping their current entries fresh and relevant – or Mercedes and the half dozen other luxury manufacturers or going to completely knock Cadillac out of the segment where it is doing well.
Ford has a pretty good foundation in the large SUV business themselves. If they ever get serious about the details and marketing they could very well knock GM out of the core full-size SUV market. They surprised the heck out of GM with the original Navigator. History easily repeats itself.
de Nysschen will be known as the hardest working fool in the auto biz if he mucks up Cadillac’s best selling products.
Cadillac Escalade is more or less the king of SUV, even though this segment was created by Lincoln Navigator. During the same time, Mercedes made ML, Lexus made RX and BMW made X5. Probably BMW had a fairly well shot, Lexus not so bad, but Mercedes’s was way off.
Supposedly the next-generation Lincoln Navigator will benefit from a much more serious effort (read, much more money spent on development) by Ford.
I’ve driven both the Expedition and the Suburban. I very nearly bought a 2012 Expy a few years ago (went the F-150 route instead). The Burb has some very valid quality points over the Ford, but the Ford interior is the anti-Ford of late – excellent layout, very space efficient, and better riding. It would not take much for Ford to win the hearts and minds of more than just me. The Lincoln vs. Caddy stacks up the same way.
I read a write-up by somebody recently, I don’t recall. Maybe Edmunds. They liked the Ford the best over the current crop of king-size SUVs. Not bad for an ancient vehicle with some handicaps.
IMO, the Expedition and Navigator are poised to get even better–the new 2018 models will be based quite heavily on the current aluminum F-150 chassis, even sharing the front doors and some interior parts (probably, don’t quote me on anything). This is a good thing in my eyes because I like it when a company is able to share parts and save money while still having some uniqueness to each model…and also because it means you could theoretically make a new Excursion or heavy-duty Navigator by mixing parts from an aluminum F-250 Super Duty and Expedition EL.
De Nysschen better come to his senses quickly or he will be out of a job. Like it or not (and I’m firmly in the Not camp) the CUV seems to be the vehicle of the moment, he should ride it rather than insiunate those pesky customers are getting in the way of his “vision” for Cadillac. Come to think of it, that seems like a standard VW/Audi attitude toward North America.
As a Cadillac salesman, I feel like my opinion has some weight, but in fact it’s just a restatement of a few of the items mentioned above, and maybe one or two thoughts that haven’t quite been mentioned.
1. Sedans today are sort of like personal luxury cars were in the 80s and 90s. Still there, but no longer aspirational. And probably on their way out. A lot of single folks who would have driven a Cadillac or Mercedes sedan in the past, drive a Range Rover today. Many of those who don’t drive a Range Rover drive an Escalade.
2. Bob Lutz has defined luxury as “the presence, in the product or service, of way more than you’ll ever need.” In the Cadillac portfolio, the Escalade is the only vehicle that is capable of doing way more than you’ll ever need. Want to watch three movies at once? No problem. Want to tow a boat, sure. Want to drive to the construction site of your new summer house in a downpour, no prob. Want to take your friends’ friends to the game or dinner, just pile in.
3. I think Cadillac’s CEO is a bit behind the times because he had success at Audi in doing what only Lexus has been able to do, and that is to penetrate the top tier of the luxury sedan market. But it seems to me that now he’s fighting the last battle. Sedans in general are losing market share to other forms of vehicles.
4. Cadillac’s have absolutely been fancy Chevy’s with more powerful engines and better suspensions and fancier interiors for as long as anyone on this web site can remember. The Escalade in that sense is the most honest and traditional Cadillac there is. It has a more powerful engine and far more sophisticated suspension, as well as upgraded interior when compared to the Chevy.
5. As Paul so clearly states, the longer, lower, wider mantra at General Motors was about style, but not about comfort. Anyone who would choose the back seat of a CTS over a captain’s chair in an Escalade for a multi-hour ride has probably not taken a ride in both.
6. Rear-wheel drive, solid axle, V-8 is also about as American and Cadillac as it gets. CAFE standards, which I support, changed the whole calculus, but the loophole for farm trucks allowed this glorified pickup to remain a living throwback.
7. I personally think that Cadillac could compete with Rolls Royce by creating an Escalade “sedan” limo on the ESV wheelbase, but with a trunk.
So I guess what I’m saying, as someone who is not a Cadillac customer, but also as someone who loves Cadillac’s, is enough of the hate. The Escalade is a pretty awesome vehicle to drive, and a well engineered competitor to the Range Rover. I hope Cadillac’s CEO grows to love it too!
I think the Escalade is cool, but if you were to give me the choice of any new Cadillac, it would be a CTS V-Sport, and since I don’t have a driver, knowing how nice the captains chairs in an Escalade are is cool, but I’m sitting in THE only “captains chair” that matters.
I don’t get though, how people seem to think that there is only “one direction” Cadillac can go, as if it were impossible to make cars like the V’s, the CT6 and the Escalades at the same time? Isn’t luxury about choices?
Carmine, I hear what you’re saying. I was mostly speaking from a market perspective. One thing though: I find the cts-v overpowered. I loved the previous gen cts-v, but this model gets sideways very easily under acceleration.
Not the V, the V-Sport with the TT 3.6. I love the CTS-V, but that’s a bit overkill.
Sorry I was reading on my phone and didn’t see the “sport”! You’re exactly right, the CTS-V Sport was just about my perfect sedan as well! You know your stuff!
Well made points, Matt.
With regards to your bullet point #7, I thought I was alone with that idea! I like it….a lot.
I told the owner of my dealership about my Escalade Sedan idea in the hopes that he might have the ear of someone who could affect such a decision and he thought it was a fairly stupid idea! But I’m not giving up and I’m so glad to hear you agree!
I think it would look incredibly silly and Cadillac should make one right now.
They did….
No, like with a trunk à la the Lincoln Blackwood.
Driving today I passed a M-B GLE Coupe, which struck me as looking just like the jacked-up, and bulked-up, version of a lot of sedans today. It certainly does not look like a coupe, the roofline is too high (headroom in the rear no doubt), and the little small lip/spoiler/trunk lid looks out of place.
Mr Spencer – I think you have hit the nail squarely with your comment. I think that you’re absolutely correct that Cadillac would be best served by an even larger Escalade type vehicle. What many people tend to forget, in my opinion, is that one of the things that the Escalade offers – which sedans no longer do- is real space. Space for passengers, and space for luggage.
There is an area where Cadillac needs to improve its image I think, and that is in perceived quality. I am not saying that there is actually a problem with quality, but that there is still a perception that Cadillacs are simply over-dressed Chevys. This is the remaining legacy of the 80’s to be overcome. I would like to see some bespoke switches and use of brand specific heavy duty components. Then I’d put a Caddy on display in Time Square for a month, engine running, and with Robot arms opening and closing the doors, raising and lowering the windows, flashing the lights on and off as a demonstration that quality is of more importance to the company than styling. THAT would get people talking much more than the introduction of a 7 Series wanna-be, and give a justification point for people who want to ‘dare to buy American’.
FWIW
I think that the new Escalade is very impressive looking, like a locomotive let loose on the highway. The fact that it is desirable, and a hot seller means that the buyers think it is worth the money. That CT6 looks pretty good too. Is it going to be a world beater when it comes to the powertrain? There’s no room at the top for FWD. Flagship sedans need to be V8 RWD. Cadillacs used to be very good cars in comparison to their competitors, and they were a relative bargain. The Cadillac image has to be set at the top of the range, the influence can filter down to the rest of the model range. Cadillac can never regain it’s former position until it produces a car that surpasses it’s competition. But I don’t know that Cadillac can do this. GM doesn’t have the basic platform that Cadillac can develop. The same problem has hamstrung Lincoln over at Ford. They both need their own bespoke platforms. Unfortunately, large rear wheel drive sedan platforms don’t have widespread corporate applications anymore. All that leaves is these truck platforms.
Did you know the new CT6 is on a Cadillac only platform and it is large and RWD?
And until 2016, the ATS and CTS were also on Cadillac only platforms.
I did not know that. I hope that Cadillac can sell enough sedans to recoupe their investment. I think I read that the former ATS platform was shared with the last Camaro. The new Camaro is now on a different platform. Nothing wrong with sharing platforms. I think Matt’s observation that sedans are out of fashion are very germane. Look at all the vehicles sold, and so many are trucks, SUVs or cross overs. I really miss the personal luxury coupes and it doesn’t appear that these are coming back soon if ever.
Actually, the 2009-2015 Camaro was a Zeta based car, shared with the SS, G8 and Aussie Commodore.
The new 2016 Camaro is an Alpha base car, like the ATS and CTS, all are made at LGR.
The previous CTS, STS and RWD SRX were Sigma cars.
I miss the personal luxury coupe, I think there is room for one in the current Cadillac line up, there should be a replacement for the previous gen CTS coupe on the horizon soon hopefully.
Count me in too on personal luxury coupes. I’m still on the hunt for a nice late 70’s or 80’s example for next Summer.
The new Camaro does not look anything like the Cadillac’s, so it does not detract from the ATS or CTS, although on the same platform. Whereas the Escalade does look like the lower end SUV’s.
There is really on so much you can do with “Esuvee” styling, a big box, with a smaller box at the front for the engine. Also, its not like the Tahoe, Suburban or Yukon have an air of poverty about them, they are all expensive vehicles with positive images.
I think (as someone above suggested) turning it into a car is a bad idea. I don’t know what we will get with the CT6, but the CT8 should be closer to what many think Cadillac should have for a sedan. It will be much more expensive than most people can afford, which is as it should be. I find that the CTS is a larger and more comfortable car than the ATS was. Thus, I think the CT6 will also be a bit more comfortable. I doubt that we will get Cadillac’s like those from the 60’s, which I think were far better than any of the RWD Cadillacs after 1970.
Wasn’t the ATS platform developed for pontiac which has caused it some of the issues it has as they refused to cough up the money to redesign enough parts to make it a caddy?
Way back at the start of the development of Alpha, it was rumored there would be a Pontiac/Holden variant, a possible RWD replacement for the G6 and a revival of the Torana believe it or not.
The ATS (2014 CTS sedan and 2016 Camaro) is on the Alpha platform. This platform was designed to reduce weight. A platform based on the Sigma II platform (2008 CTS) was expected to be too heavy (if Wiki is to be believed).
I’ve commented many times before on CC about 2 things I feel regarding Cadillac:
1) I think the Escalade is too vulgar and too close to being a Chevy to carry off the charade of being a true luxury vehicle. It is a cynical money grab, smart for short-term business, rotten for long-term brand equity.
2) Cadillac does not need to be a pseudo BMW. The current obsession with “beating” the Germans in irrelevant performance data is foolish. The total package is what makes a unified luxury vehicle, and there is subtlety and finesse to the best designs, even if they are brash and showy (S-Class Mercedes comes to mind). Cadillac still misses this mark, while Mercedes is figuring it out again.
I live in the North Shore suburbs of Chicago, which is an affluent area and high-end SUVs are as common as sand on a beach. I know a few people who have Escalades, but I know many more who have BMW X5s, Mercedes GLs, Audi Q7s, Porsche Cayennes and most of all, Range Rovers. To a person, the people driving any of the Imported brands feel that they have a luxury vehicle, while the people who have the Escalade are looking for an expensive station wagon. The Escalades around here are viewed as disposable kid haulers and livery vehicles–deliberately expensive but not at all special. Imagine in the ’60s, where a well-to-do family might have a Lincoln Continental and a loaded Ford Country Squire. The former was treasured while the latter was used up and thrown away. The Country Squire signaled affluence by being expensive, but it was not considered a luxury good by any stretch of the imagination.
Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Porsche make integrated, sophisticated vehicles (mostly). Range Rover and Jaguar make vehicles that are expressively styled and tastefully finished. Each of these brands has a distinctive persona and each is considered a luxury vehicle. Cadillac makes expensive, flashy vehicles with a thin veneer of superficial trim over corporate parts. But Cadillac’s claim on being a true luxury brand is tenuous at best.
For many years, Cadillac used to make the best big cars available in the world, at least for what they did so well, with a smooth ride, responsive performance, luxurious trim, cutting edge comfort/convenience features, gobs of power, rock solid reliability, and distinctive, uniquely American styling. Cadillacs carried an expensive but justifiable price (not as super posh as a Rolls Royce, but not priced like one either, at a time when that was considered a good thing). I so wish they could get back to this standard of excellence, and make it relevant for 21st century needs (that means things other than big cars which are no longer at the leading edge of the market). The Escalade just isn’t it, nor is anything else in their portfolio at the moment.
I agree with your assessment 100%
GN – In a sense Cadillac is doing just that but in a market that has transformed completely. Everything is cyclical – the BMW generation that wanted luxury cars not like their parents’ Cadillacs now has spawn that want luxury cars not like theirs.
The market is so wide now, with so many sub-phylum (much like the music industry has transformed and fragmented in the past 30-40 years), there will never be one completely dominant player anymore. BMW, MB, Audi, and Lexus have all torn that pie up…they’re not going anywhere. Cadillac, and Lincoln, can only hope to have a chair at the table.
Cadillac’s biggest problem is GM’s as well – decades of shitty products and lack of customer care. The best design in the world may not conquer the rotting carcass stench.
Escalade never lost sight of its “mission statement” as it were.
With continuous improvement (recognize that phrase from anywhere?) it thrives.
The one thing for me – no expert on the modern GM range – that makes Escalade a proper Cadillac is the name. While I’m not certain what an “escalade” might be, it does sound like the sort of name a Cadillac ought to have. Everything else has a bunch of letters that might as well be Dell laptop models.
Sure, the Germans use number/letter combinations, but they’re rooted in series whose reputations have been built up over decades. Luxury American automobiles should have luxury names – it’s a part of what makes them special.
I actually spit out my coffee on the line about names that sound like Dell laptop models. Given my last two Dell laptops, (both the biggest P.O.S.s I’ve ever had…) I’ll take an Escalade or even a Cimmaron laptop, LOL!
“BMW X5s, Mercedes GLs, Audi Q7s, Porsche Cayennes and most of all, Range Rovers..”
Cadillac does need a middle size Ute between CT5 and ‘Slade to get the North Shore society folks.
The nice thing about a Range Rover is all the different cars you get to sample as rentals while its in the shop.
There about 3 new crossover type vehicles headed for Cadillac, the first is the new XT5 replacement for the SRX, that’s at 2017, its already been shown, and there are 2 more which haven’t been described yet.
XT5
de Nysschen: Worry not. Give your customers what they want. If they want obscenely tarted up Suburbans with platinum window stickers, so be it. Your “brand” can adapt.
America wants a big car – even if it has to be a truck. I’ve said this for years after noticing that when US cars downsized, people started buying more SUV’s.
I think that people are buying SUV’s for a number of reasons, and a big car won’t satisfy. One thing is sitting up higher, and seats are more upright. SUV’s are more like cars from the 1930’s.
I always wonder about that when people say they like to “sit up higher for better visbility” but if everybody’s driving tall vehicles you’re visibility isn’t going to be any better!
I agree with SOITWW. SUVs came of age not for their off-road ability, but because they replaced the family wagon. High driver POV coupled with easier to put a child in the child seat.
And another aspect – bunker mentality. The same thinking that had high brick walls replacing tasteful picket and wrought-iron fencing in the well-to-do suburbs. That increasingly-desired feeling of ‘security’.
Even if “everybody” is driving them, visibility is still better seeing over shrubs, snowbanks, and everybody else who isn’t driving one.
I don’t have a problem with the Escalade. Even if it is a gaudy tarted-up Tahoe, it still represents Cadillac to many. What actually does bother me is Cadillac’s “cargo-cult” sedan strategy, complete with cryptic alphanumeric names. If you build a better (or at least similar) BMW, will BMW drivers come? Probably not, just like a runway on a remote island doesn’t suddenly make you a vacation paradise.
To be clear, I have no problem with benchmarking the Germans for performance products (the ATS-V pulls excellent numbers). What I have a problem with is thinking that by being somewhat similar to the Germans, people will suddenly flock to your product. Even if the CTS, XT6, etc. are fantastic cars, what is the compelling reason to buy the Cadillac? Perhaps there are many, but Cadillac has to learn that “well, we’re sort of like BMW” isn’t one of them. The proposition has to be unique. Cadillac, please look at how Lexus shook up the market in the early ’90s: yes, the LS400 looked like a W126, but there was a strong value proposition and “wow” features like the dealer experience that gave people reasons to consider the then-new brand. Then look at 1990s Nissan for an example of bad cargo-cult thinking.
Cadillac, what will your verse be?
For me having a dealer 10 miles from home is much better than having the dealer 300 miles from home. The nearest BMW, Mercedes, Audi or Lexus dealer is more like 350 miles away.
When Cadillac brought out the Cimarron people were not buying Cadillacs, but were buying BMWs. What Cadillac was selling in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s were cars that old people wanted. Cadillac’s owner’s age was getting older, not younger. This is a problem.
A Chevy truck with even MORE things to malfunction. Yuk.
Quoting my Grandfather: “Flashy people, gangsters and nouveau riche buy Cadillacs. Old money and people with quiet, conservative taste buy Lincolns & Buicks.”
True 50 years ago, still true today.
The Escalade is ridiculous. But man, it does ridiculous sooooo so well! People want SUVs. And for those who want to show off and have $90k to do it, it’s the best game in town. Shameless, unapologetic excess, but with a practical side. And sure, it’s Chevy based (a good truck to begin with). But there’s definitely a difference. I disagree that it’s not a true Cadillac. Of the current line up, like it or not, it’s probably the most authentic. Just don’t look too deep.
The market is waiting for the come back of the ultimate Cadillac
V16 AWD sedan
8 litres, long Hood -short deck, design
225 inches long with suicide doors and 800 HP
priced at $150K .
Hurry up ! Put your name in the waiting list
Remember, you’re talking to the Internet. Nobody here will buy it until it’s at least three years old. Let some other sucker take the depreciation.
Finally! GN’S comment above finally mentioned “smooth ride.” Let’s face it – a lot of Cadillac buyers are older, have more money, and also have bad backs. Back in the day, when you bought a Cadillac, you got a smooth ride, a plush interior, and more sound-deadening than was installed in any other GM car, period (I know – I have parted out 1960s – 70s Cadillacs and the thickness and numbers of layers of insulation on the floorboard was second to nobody).
Today? You get a hard plastic interior – fail! You get a harsh ride – fail! So wait, why am I buying a Cadillac again? If I wanted a canyon carver, I’d be over at the BMW, Audi, or Acura dealer.
I drive by a Cadillac dealership daily (it’s about a block away from where I work). While stopped at an intersection this morning, I looked over and was noticing the tires on a new Cadillac sedan – they couldn’t have been anything higher profile than 55-series, which is going to transmit every tiny bump and freeway expansion joint right into the cabin. Not to mention bending an expensive alloy rim on a pothole.
Just one getting-older-with-bad-back person’s opinion . . . Yes, sedans are a dying breed, so they offer me the SRX (that’s a Cadillac?) or the Escalade (I don’t want to be confused with a rapper or pro football star, so I think I’ll go over to the GMC dealer and get their version instead).
I think Cadillac is trying to hard to be something that they are not. Lincoln is in a similar boat. Time will tell if these luxury brands will continue to exist.
Previous Cadillac ownership: two 1969 Cadillac M+M ambulances, and two 1971-2 Sedan Devilles. The last time I sat in a modern-day Cadillac, at a shopping mall car sales event, I was shocked at how hard the seats were, how hard and plasticky the door panels and dash were – nothing like I would expect from a Cadillac. Did not take it out on a test drive as it was off my list from the interior alone.
Prediction- in the year 2020 one of these two will be gone. You heard it here first.
My CTS tires are 255/35-19
The ATS ride is firm, but not harsh. My CTS rides very nearly as good as my 2002 Seville did I think.
I liked Cadillacs better when they were, well, Cadillacs. Their current styling theme on the non Escalade models just looks plain to me. I’d never even consider one if I were in the market for a car of that class. I know that they are trying to court younger buyers, and I am closer to 60 than 50, but still Caddy just does not excite me at all.
‘Is it a real problem, or a case of these foreigners not “getting” the fact that the Escalade is perhaps the only “genuine” Cadillac in their portfolio?’
The key to this conundrum. The Escalade makes perfect sense to a domestic economy where the greatest volume seller is the F-series. But overseas it’s an anomaly.
When Cadillac actually became ‘The Standard of the World’ in the post-war years, this was predicated upon two things:
1) They made superb luxury vehicles
2) The USA was THE benchmark production country and the crucible of the world’s aspirations.
To state the bleeding obvious, things have changed. Today, Cadillac for too many is as reflective of fine automobiles as Hispano Suiza is for some CC readers. It’s a memory rather than a direct experience. And the benchmark has shifted to Germany. For now.
Porsche nearly went under in ’91 because all their eggs were in a niche of niche market. The Cayenne and Panamera (and Macan) now carry the volume for this automaker, yet the 911 cannot (and will not be allowed to) die. The 911’s continuous lineage is literally a PRICELESS asset to the brand equity of this (now subsidiary) automaker and, as Paul has noted, still makes good money for Porsche. Cadillac has failed to sustain a model along these lines.
I don’t think Cadillac is a dead brand, but it needs to look at something like MINI for its future. No, that doesn’t mean pint-sized vehicles, but rather how does GM exhume the salient aspects of the brand and turn them into a forward-looking market-relevant range of products.
In terms of my above two points: today’s Cadillac? Tesla.
^
Spot-on.
Actually Cadillac became the Standard of the world in 1908. The Royal Automobile Society gave Cadillac the Dewar trophy then proclaiming the Standard, or actually the trophy was for standardization, something quite different, but truth in advertising is fuzzy.
Cadillac also won the Dewar trophy (in 1913?) for the “self starter”. As far as advertising goes, the 1915 Cadillac Ad ” The Penalty of Leadership” is “must read”.
I don’t think the Escalade detracts from Cadillac’s image nearly as much as the interiors of some of the sedans they are trying to sell. I took these photos of an ATS at the recent LA Auto Show. Between the plasticky dash and this terrible cloth material covering the steering wheel and shifter – what else can you say? An Audi A4 – heck even the A3 – is so much better there is no comparison. Keep selling the Escalade, fix these interiors, and improve the reputation for quality and service.
Another.
Umm…that’s called Alcantara its a simulated suede, I’m not sure if you should really be critiquing something when you don’t even know what it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcantara_(material)
I know what it is but it seemed inferior, both in touch and appearance, to other versions I’ve seen in luxury cars from other makes. I also think the dash is quite unattractive. Plenty of unfavorable feedback from others at the show as well. And trust me, I would like to see Cadillac do well.
Sorry, that came across as a bit snarky, and thanks for the welcome back from the other thread.
Maybe it was worn, lots of these auto show cars make the rounds for month and months with everyone rubbing their hands over everything.
A friend of mines just leased a pair of ATS’ a sedan for his wife and a coupe for himself, I like the interior on the ATS, its not as good as the CTS interior though, the ATS interior is the oldest one in the line up and probably is due for a change next.
I had an unfortunate Catholic grade school experience, thanks to Sister Alcantara, so every time I see a reference to that product, I just cringe. She was even more mean and evil than Sr. Consolata in 1st grade, and Sr. Bertil. And don’t get me started about Monsignor Tensing…he was a scary old guy.
Never thought of it that way, but that helps me to feel better about these vehicles — of the Escalade being perhaps the one “‘genuine’ Cadillac in their portfolio…”
Normally when my stomach squeezes as I come across one of these ‘things’ I remind myself that the driver is ferrying around nothing more than a Chevy Suburban underneath, and that helps me get a chuckle out of it which further helps me to psychologically loophole my head to let go of my stomach, already. But now, I have a newfound respect for these vehicles. It is the new age BOF Cadillacs of yore. The ones that aren’t rolling F/AWD computer mouses.
Of course, I knew the Chevy Suburban was already a BOF, but from this new journalistic angle, it really does help out my admittedly self induced insanity. Thanks!
Oh look, another complainy post on GM. Color me surprised.
GM makes a car that doesn’t sell, so they’re stupid. GM makes a car that DOES sell, and they’re still stupid. Mmm-kay.
Coming this spring! Five Thousand Ways to Complain About a Car Company, with Gilbert Gottfried as The Editor.
So what is your opinion on the question?
I will point out, since everyone is sharing “opinions”
Cadillac currently makes THE BEST LOOKING 4 DOOR CAR IN THE WORLD.
Period.
mmmmm…….
And if you like the looks of the ATS, you undoubtedly also like the Camry too. And the Camry came first. 🙂
(piano suddenly stops playing)
One might also argue that it looks a lot like the BMW 3 series or Mercedes C-class, or any of the Chevrolet’s from the Impala down to the Cruze when viewed from the side. Many people posting in various articles at this website claim that all new cars look alike.
I miss the old days when you could tell cars apart and they didn’t all look alike….
+1
Beautiful point, Carmine. And it was just as bad in the late 30’s/early 40’s. And equally bad in the post-WWII/first half the 50’s era. As well as a few era’s afterwards.
I agree, I really like Cadillac’s current design language.
I don’t like that I can’t tell generations or models apart though.
When I was a kid say around 10 or 11 I could tell what year make and model most any American car was from the 70’s to 80’s in the dark. Just try doing that today. Line up 5 mid size sedans from the side profile from the past 5 years and try telling them apart.
That’s normal for a car crazy kid of that age. I kept that kind of behavior up for decades then lost it for about twenty years in the mid-70’s. Which means I can’t pick too many cars out at a distance on first glance between 1975-1999. Just didn’t have the interest.
I’m willing to bet some car crazy ten year old today (assuming they exist anymore) can pick up year and model of most recent Camrys at 50 meters. Just like we could do the equivalent when we were kids.
Cadillac has indeed come a long way. From the tacky vinyl roofed gramma sleds to this which does have some style and boldness…they’ve reclaimed a bit of mojo. Im a coupe guy when it comes to cars, and I have to admit that the ATS-V coupe is pretty appealing. Even offers a manual!
As to sedans, Ive never been a fan. But if I had to own one….make it a Hemi of course.
An exceedly handsome sedan I’ll grant you, but…
+1Carmine
In a way, I think it is. Definitely. If the rest of Cadillac’s lineup were taken more seriously, there’s no problem whatsoever with the Escalade. Everyone else sells huge, gaudy SUVs and there’s certainly something to be said for selling the hugest, gaudiest SUV.
But for whatever reason, they’re not taken seriously. Cadillac still isn’t viewed as being on par with BMW, Mercedes, Lexus or even Audi. Part of that just comes down to the fact that a product from Europe has more “snob appeal” in the U.S. than a product from Ohio (or wherever Cadillacs are built), but that can’t be the whole story. Cars like the ATS and CTS seem every bit as good as their German counterparts, and more interesting in many ways, so their lack of success doesn’t seem entirely fair to me… but clearly there’s something holding them back.
Maybe Cadillac just needs more time for their decrepit old image to shake off, maybe they really do need to come out with something mindblowing and paradigm-shifting to get their mojo back for real, or maybe I’m blinded by my own personal enthusiasm for their current lineup and there’s something seriously lacking that I’m not seeing.
I also notice that there aren’t many women driving Cadillacs, aside from the SRX (which is their most successful model). Is that actually the case or am I just imagining this? All the other luxury makes seem evenly split among the sexes, but Cadillac drivers seem to be overwhelmingly male.
And this all relates to the Escalade because if the Escalade is the only thing that people associate with the name “Cadillac”, then they’re screwed. Pickup trucks – and pickup-based SUVs – being used as regular vehicles is a fad like any other. There’s no practical reason for it, and eventually some new fad will come along. I’m sure it was very hard to imagine a world where Oldsmobile didn’t sell a bajillion Cutlass Supremes in 1975 but there was no practical reason for the popularity of the “personal luxury coupe” either. It’s a fashion statement. The long-term trend has been for SUVs, big and small, to get more car-like, and the Escalade can only exist outside of that trend while it remains fashionable. Yes, some people need to tow things, and yes some people have Mormon families with way too many kids, but those people are an exception to the mainstream American buyer. There’s always going to be a place in the world for vehicles like the Escalade, but there’s not always going to be 40,000 buyers a year for them.
If the Escalade is just one facet of the Cadillac brand, then that’s no problem… but if it’s the only thing Cadillac is any good for, then we can start the extinction countdown.
Not an easy problem to solve… although I’m sure the internet’s foremost Cadillac superfans have figured out an awesomely patriotic way to Make Cadillac Great Again with patriotic floaty suspensions, more AMERICAN chrome and other woefully outdated styling gimmicks from AMERICA.
I agree that the SUV and CUV trend is unlikely to continue indefinitely. I don’t know what the next trend will be, as fads are hard to predict and they don’t necessarily make much logical sense. It may be a generational shift, as has happened before; the Millennials have been so colossally squashed in any economic sense that I really don’t think the current market meaningfully reflects their tastes. By the time they’re out of hock to the point of having a lot of real automotive buying power, Gen X may be nearing retirement age and the Millennials and their kids may go some completely different direction.
The issue for Cadillac at that point will be that the Escalade will be the principal emblem of the Cadillac brand for those buyers. Those younger generations won’t have any real direct perception of earlier Cadillacs other than the random classic cars that show up in movies or music videos. If they end up looking at trucks like the Escalade the way mid-80s Boomers regarded a mid-’70s De Ville (i.e., with a mixture of dismay and disgust), Cadillac will run into the same problems they did then. In the ’80s, Cadillac faced the dilemma that there was no real way to reinvent themselves for Boomer tastes without alienating most of their established base, and by the time the latter had started dying off, it was too late to make a lot of headway with buyers who’d long since dismissed the entire brand.
A lot of what hurts Cadillac is why I call “little sister snobbery”.
My little sister (7 years younger) is an MD, political liberal, married to a professional engineer who does contract work for PennDOT. DINK’s. Yuppies. The trendy wine-and-cheese party at the local galleries, catching Arlo Guthrie on the 50th anniversary Alice’s Restaurant tour. In PA, it’s Bucks County. In CA, it’s Marin County. Stylish and trendy.
And what you’ll never see in their garages is an American branded automobile. Because those cars are for the red-state midwesterns. People from flyover country. People who’s sense of style is good beer at the NASCAR tailgate party at the track for this weekend’s race.
And that, more than anything, is what Cadillac is fighting against.
So I’m curious, did they grow up hating this country or was it something that was acquired over time?
Its in good humor of course, but I sometimes I do love the irony of how bigoted and close minded some of the most supposedly open minded people are….
Carmine, for you to jump to the absurd conclusion/judgement that folks who have a certain preference in car brands, art, food, entertainment or politics “hate this country” is why your presence here is problematic. Do you even have a clue as to what an asinine and inflammatory statement that is?
Your seemingly compulsive need to judge people and put them down whenever they don’t seem to fit your particular world/automotive/political or other points of view is a serious problem. It’s what got you in trouble before, and will almost inevitably again.
Can’t you get that it’s not welcome here, and violates our commenting policy? Consider this a final warning. I have taken to banning repeat offenders; I have better things to do than babysit problematic commenters. Three strikes and you’re out; this is number two.
Stick to talking about cars, and not about judging people who you know nothing about. Or making snide and derogatory comments about me and others that comment here.
I am sure Syke’s sister has carefully analyzed quality trends and based her buying decisions entirely on that. Politics never come in to it. If Cadillac would only offer the kind of car she has in her garage, she would be beating a path to the dealer. Of that, current management is sure. Me, not so much.
I’m assuming you’re being sarcastic?
Trendy,Maybe? Stylish? Not so much, at one time having a “furrin” car (even a low quality one) seemed “exotic” or “stylish”. Today’s commodity styling leaves most cars with an ” international ” (Read,similar.) “style”. To me a newer BMW is as stylish as a Hyundai. Newer MBs are even less distinctive.
The ’05 Chrysler 300 got a lot of attention because it wasn’t another blob. In reality it’s styling roots could have been the 1949 Plymouth, But in ’05 there was very little like it on the market. The Escalade sells because it is what it is without trying to be what it ain’t. Is it a tarted up Chevy, Yup? But then my ’89 Brougham was also a higher priced copy of my ’77 Buick Electra. Some of us still want BIG and American. I’m not really an SUV guy, so a 300 for me!
In one way nobody has mentioned yet the Escalade truck harkens back to Cadillacs roots when they were reknowned 7 passenger service cars sort of mini buses, Cadillacs were so mechanically rugged the Nairn brothers used them on their Beirut to Baghdad mail run reliably for years they kept up a good regular schedule using those cars leaving Beirut down thru Palestine then across the desert into Iraqs capital return, luxury back then didnt mean do dads everywhere and acres of chrome slathered on it meant mechanical perfection that didnt break down, that and the Dewar trophy are where the standard of the world was born not in the mass produced rubbish that followed WW2.
Ya’ll can blather on and on and dissemble all you want.
BUT
Ya’ll are paying Big Bucks for a tarted up Chebby pick up.
The biggest risk I see can be summed up in three words: Lincoln Town Car. And two more: Uber SUV.
In the ’80s the Town Car was still aspirational and sold well while still being seen as a luxury good (conquest sales from people who’d rather have a Ford 302 in their luxobarge than the HT4100 helped…), its’ early ’90s redesign was solidly elegant, distinctly American and just Broughamy enough to appeal to the traditional crowd while reaching beyond it…but by then it became the go-to car for livery services, Ford decontented them in parallel (decontented luxury!) with the lesser Panthers to keep that fleet market and after the late 90s restyle went a decade with only one facelift. By the end, the only ones buying them were town-car services (as they’d come to be called) and a few of the old and the old at heart.
I think de Nyschen has a valid concern, but he’s probably expressed it wrong.
Nearly every ill word spoken of the Escalade goes double for the post-2000 Mercedes G-wagen, “starting at $119,900.00.” Both are old-style, remarkably capable chassis, given honkin’ engines and lots of trim. (If you like, you can add the $65k “GL class” here.)
Nobody says that Mercedes is losing out because people who should be buying C/E/S-cars go to the MB dealer and come home with a SUV. I haven’t heard of anyone that was so mad about getting run off the road by a G-wagen that he decided to buy/lease some other brand of car. AMG buyers don’t seem to feel that they’ve been scanted horsepower, acceleration, or anything else because of the development or marketing budget for SUVs. In spite of the quality and other problems of the 1990s and 2000s, people buy or lease MBs at a staggering rate, considering their prices.
If Cadillac has a problem, it’s not that people come to the dealer for the Escalade, it’s that people don’t come to the dealer for “whichever Cadillac I like and can afford to buy or lease.” That’s probably how people came to Cadillac dealers from the end of the depression, until the endpoint we’re always debating here–was it 1972? 1985?
Creating that excitement, and demand, for the whole model lineup will be a challenge. Maybe they can do it with engineering, maybe styling, maybe just plain marketing and spin.
Lets see, more bling more luxo gingerbread and a much larger price tag but no low range in that AWD system….Um ya….nope.
Bling is part of the raison d’etre of the Escalade. Nobody that owns one is going to take it far enough off-road that low range gearing would be required. You’re not in the target market for an Escalade.
Cadillac’s global sales through October were 222,000. SRX was the best seller at 81,000; ATS 48,000, XTS 38,000, then Escalade @33,000 and the CTS @18,000. These number are truncated, so there a few more and the ELR under a 1000.
The SRX is really a good seller. It does look much better than the first generation RWD version. A V8 is supposed to be in development for the CT8.
Interesting discussion. In one way the Escalade is a ‘traditional’ Cadillac because since the 1950’s the basic body structure has been shared across all GM cars, lengthened/widened/prodded/poked as needed. This was discussed on the 1959’s in an article a little while back from memory, plus on every 1970’s GM car they all have the same basic shape to the windscreen and cowl area where the hood transitions to the front doors.
As for the Escalade being pickup-based, I expect many buyers are happy to rely on proven mechanicals and ready parts and expertise availability. What is interesting is that Cadillac has chosen not to echo Lincoln and adopt an IRS when the Navigator has been praised for better ride and space utilisation.
If Cadillac made an Alpha-based CUV that was similarly-spacious to the Escalade with 3 rows, with all the advantages of a more modern architecture, would people still go for the BOF pickup-based vehicle? What if it was called Escalade, if they worked out they could make more money off it?
As has been mentioned above in discussions on overall vehicle format, it would be interesting to read about Cadillac’s internal considerations of building much more upright/spacious sedans. But then again there is the view that if you are buying a sedan and not a crossover, don’t you want something lower and more athletic? I think that the market moving to CUVs shows more people would go for the space than the style of a ‘low’ car.
Guys;
I think a lot of you are missing the point here. I hear comments like “its nothing but a tarted up chevy” “they’re not European enough” etc.
what has a Cadillac always been? its been an AMERICAN way of saying “I got money!” nothing more nothing less. anyone who wanted cutting edge technology, better packaging, handling always bought foreign. that hasn’t changed in 50,60 years.
I’m 52. if I came into some serious cash would I buy an escalade? damn right! cause its what I want to show I arrived. if I want a fun car, or a toy, would I have a Cadillac car in my garage? nope! it would be a vette or a Porsche or the like.
back in the day a Cadillac was a statement. until Cadillac either accepts its history and builds to it or figures out how to change the public perception of the brand, it can build the coolest, most European cars on the planet and people still won’t buy.
think about it in reverse. if Mercedes came out with a new v-8 rwd sedan with mediocre handling, questionable reliability and American looks, how well would it go over?(oh yeah, I think we had a discussion on how well that went a while back;))
let’s face it…people(myself included) buy the brand. we all know of some great cars that went nowhere because of the public perception of that brand, and some WTF wonders that had the right marketing from the right people.
“build it and they will come” may work for baseball, but “sell it and they will come” works better for cars
bill shields: if Mercedes came out with a new v-8 rwd sedan with mediocre handling, questionable reliability and American looks, how well would it go over?(oh yeah, I think we had a discussion on how well that went a while back;))
This is a big part of the division’s problem right here. We talk about Cadillac’s “history,” but the division’s history from about 1980 through the mid-2000s is poison. Not only was the reliability questionable, but interior quality fell short of international standards for a luxury brand. Cadillac needs to run away from that “history” as fast as possible.
The division’s cars up through the mid-1970s may have had mediocre handling (as did all full-size American cars, compared to European cars), but no one questioned the reliability of a Cadillac. The drivetrains were bullet-proof and very easy to maintain. In the pre-emissions era, Cadillacs were also able to get-up-and-go – at least in a straight line.
And during the 1950s and 1960s, the quality of interior components was high, too. The components that the driver and passengers could see and touch looked and felt expensive.
I think part of the reason that the Escalade makes some people uneasy is the concern that the luxury is only on the surface, as has been the case with too many Cadillacs during the division’s recent decades.
Nothing says you’ve actually made it AND you have a sense of style and class like a V12 Mercedes S-class. The Escalade at around or over $100k is just a waste of money.
Hell, Cadillac doesn’t even put a stand up hood ornament on their cars any more.
If Porsche can sell Cayennes and Macans and still maintain credibility, de Nysschen can shut up and sell Escalades.
As alluded to in the subject post, the irony is that the Escalade has been the closest thing to the traditional Cadillac model in existence for the past decade or so. It’s not about autobahn-worthy dynamics or skid pad prowess, it’s about a big, comfortable, obscenely well-equipped luxury land yacht that makes its owner and passengers feel special and forces everyone else to pay attention to them. The CT6 may end up heralding the return of the traditional american luxury car as status symbol and object of desire. If Cadillac, Lincoln, and to an extent Chrysler stopped trying to “Out-Benz” the europeans and focused on producing a modern, beautifully styled and impressively put together luxury sedan that doesn’t rely on vinyl tops, vogue tires and fiberglass continental kits it might represent an era in which keeping their eyes on the ball for a change will pay off in spades. The typical american luxury car as we once knew it died on the vine because of its inefficiency, and was given a brief stay of execution by being tarted up with gingerbread and goo-gaws to impress a dying customer base. In the era of hybrids and once unimaginably efficient and powerful powertrains it is possible once again for a well-styled, well-packaged big luxury car to be practical as well as impressive. A modern version of the ’63 Sixty Special we saw here the other day is possible now, and it wouldn’t necessarily require a second mortgage to keep fuel in it. Cadillac has re-imagined itself and emerged from the darkness of its past, but it might benefit from taking a peak in the rear-view.
As a footnote to my comment above, I perused Cadillac’s website out of curiosity, and the CT6 is indeed a strikingly beautiful car with a presence I can’t recall seeing from Cadillac since God-only-knows-when. I’m a bit smitten with it. Even better: In addition to multiple shades of gray and black, as well as one obligatory red and one blue, it’s available in deep metallic green. Nice to see some degree of color coming back to high-end cars. It’s a start. I haven’t seen a new green large car since the mid 90’s, I think.
In an interesting case of the CC effect, today at lunchtime I wound-up behind an Escalade with the bling turned up to 11. It either had a silver vinyl body wrap or had been painted with mirror-finish paint (which exists but is very expensive).
Anyone expecting a return of the BOF, full size, Caddy Brougham/Fleetwood or Lincoln Town Car is dreaming. Sorry, but this is the real world of the 2010’s to 2020’s.
Even a return to the downsized 77 GM cars would not give you a 3 adults across seating. I am not sure about child seats, but probably only two.
I can’t help but wonder who drives this Escalade with Czech plates that I saw in the old section of Bratislava, Slovakia in October.
Keyzer Soze…..
(click to enlarge)…just checking his latest investment.
What Cadillac (and Lincoln for that matter) is missing is a true luxury car. A Fleetwood Brougham for the millenia. A true luxury car has a dedicated and exclusive platform (MB S class, Lexus LS…etc), along with dedicated or well disguised switch gear, and last but not least an exclusive engine. Granted Cadillac has had all these things at one time or another but the execution was horrible. Remember the NorthStar, or the 4.1 V8.
The car has to be near perfect out of the box. No development by customers after the fact. There are so many other factors as to what makes a true luxury car that I can’t go into in this post. This would not be a high volume car but one for Cadillac to build a new reputation as the Standard of the World. There is nothing wrong with the Escalade it is what it is no one is forcing you to buy one.
What you’re describing is 95% of the new CT6, the first 2 engines choices aren’t Cadillac exclusive, but the twin turbo V6 and V8 options will be, the platform is also Cadillac exclusive, though it could possibly spread down to Buick and Chevrolet(and Holden too) in a less expensive version in a few years.
Carmine I have to admit that I am not up to date on what the automakers are up to these days. I was a die hard GM fan since I was a kid. My views changed over the years these days I am partial to Ford. If for no other reason they were the only ones that didn’t take bail out money. Also in the last 10 year I had a couple of Panthers that have been great. I want to see the domestic automakers succeed.
I wonder, will the same question could be applied to BMW and Mercedes as well? Could they have a model a bit too successeful for the brand?
I think the Slade is great for Cadillac and they should double down on making it better.
In terms of size and presence it is the only real successor to the Fleetwood Brougham. We can’t have big sedans now because sedans don’t sell anymore. But we can sure as shootin’ have mondo SUVs, and as stated more politely above these imported CEOs should remember where they are and what they joined.
Escalade sells because Americans still want their Cadillac big, long, and flashy, just higher up than their dad’s or grandfather’s was.
But the ethos of the Fleetwood is with the XTS, a truck just cannot be properly said to replace a sedan. We’re just at a stage in which style and class are in hibernation. These days we have Jersey Shore gauche as well as folks who have the money but can’t figure out you are supposed to match your shoes and belt, let alone any of the finer points of, well, anything. Big, beautiful sedans are on the wane because the times don’t deserve them. They will be back in the limelight if we ever make it out of this dark age.
Just my two cents,
The Escalade is not my cup of tea but I do still admire it. It doesn’t apologize for being what it is. It’s big, bold, brash, and in your face. You have to notice it. Isn’t that the point of a Cadillac anyway? If you want to go unnoticed in a comfy ride, you buy the GMC clone for less money.
Perhaps Cadillac would do well to do somewhat as Porsche does. The Escalade is clearly the Cadillac that people want to buy most, despite the division’s leadership’s desire for its image to be centered somewhere else. Better, then, to expand the range and make as much money as possible off of it to better allow building really nice sedans that they can accept selling in smaller numbers. I know this isn’t quite Porsche-like, in that the 911 is what ‘Porsche’ means to people and not the SUVs that rake in the money, but it’s close. I think they’re foolish to try to convince people that the Escalade isn’t the most Cadillac of Cadillacs.