Since its early 21st century reboot, Cadillac’s biggest weakness has been its tendency to constantly benchmark its cars against BMW and Mercedes. While the Escalade successfully built its own identity, the brand’s cars have struggled to set themselves apart from their European competitors. As a result, it appears Cadillac is beginning to have second thoughts about its sedans. The CT6, once the poster child of a revitalized Cadillac, is now a pariah. And pretty soon customers will only be able to find one in the CPO lot because it’s officially dead in America.
Originally touted as the new face of Cadillac, the CT6 was supposed to be a big deal for GM. It was the first full-size, rear-wheel drive sedan from the brand in over twenty years. But the car never really gained any traction. It’s possible there’s nothing Cadillac could have done to save the CT6, as the car was well reviewed, at least when equipped with V6 and turbocharged V6 engines. Nevertheless, the car itself still represents a huge misstep for GM, as the company decided to spend billions on the Omega platform and utilize that architecture on a sedan instead of an SUV. To make matters worse, the Blackwing V8, perhaps the most promising aspect of the program, is itself an orphan, as it cannot fit in any other Cadillac at the moment.
Super Cruise also found itself inextricably tied to the CT6. Like the CT6 itself, the automated driving technology was well reviewed. But it’s only been available on the sedan. It will enjoy an extended roll out this year. What took so long? Perhaps Cadillac thought CT6 sales would crater if they offered it throughout the lineup. The more likely explanation is that GM didn’t want to spend the extra money outfitting Super Cruise in other vehicles until they were scheduled for a significant refresh or redesign.
In some ways, the CT6 is a victim of circumstance. It also represents how strategic errors made in the past can have ramifications for the future. And it quite possibly demonstrates the need for Cadillac to forget about sedans altogether. After all, if the brand built a three-row unibody crossover off the Omega platform instead of the CT6, Cadillac could have fielded a dynamic entry in the segment years before the 2020 Lincoln Aviator arrived. But they didn’t. And the losses incurred by Omega likely resulted in GM’s decision to base the XT6 on the same transverse front-wheel drive platform as the Chevy Traverse.
And even though the new CT4 and CT5 are based on the same platform as their predecessors, their development costs could have plausibly prevented Cadillac from investing more money into other vehicles or technology. But they’re not the only luxury brand struggling to sell sedans in today’s market. Acura, Infiniti, Lincoln, and pretty much any company not named BMW or Mercedes is facing the same problem. The Europeans aren’t doing too hot either. The Tesla Model 3 is eating everyone’s lunch.
Ultimately, the brand isn’t in danger of imminent collapse. China is Cadillac’s most important (and lucrative) market now. The XT6 isn’t a game changer but it’s a solid three-row that will likely win over a substantial number of customers. But the CT6’s cancellation in America cannot be talked about without discussing the missteps of a brand that has continually failed to define itself in its home market, even when it has the necessary ingredients to make that happen.
I’d say Cadillac’s tendency to overprice its cars and relatively sub-par interiors were bigger weaknesses than “benchmarking BMW and Mercedes”.
Cadillac’s cars did get the ride and handling part part down, especially the Alpha platform (ATS/CTS). Unfortunately, GM priced the ATS too close to a 3-series, and Cadillac’s brand equity just wasn’t—and “ain’t” so good.
It probably would have been smarter to benchmark Lexus. But the result would have been the same, since GM has a tendency frequently overprice its products and often delivers cheaper interiors than the competition.
Why that is the “GM way” is a subject for another day…
The Lexus LS400 was essentially what a Cadillac should have been in 1990. Or in 2000. The LS400 had a V8 and was exceedingly comfortable–the worlds best isolation chamber. And it was not small (though not terribly large). THOSE were traditional attributes. Ironically, the CT6 comes closest to that standard, while delivering better handling (per car magazines).
Then again, like most sedans, I don’t think today’s LS400 sells like it used to.
As to the CT6 being a pariah…, the auto press’ biggest nit seems to be…the interior. Automobile magazine laments its passing.
The pricing was definitely a significant issue, but I also think the 3/5 Series and C-Class/E-Class were too well established by the early 2000s to have anyone seriously challenge them.
Cadillac chased the Germans too hard. Like you said, it would have been better for them to benchmark Lexus. That’s what Lincoln did in the early 2010s and it seems to be paying off now.
Audi did a pretty good job though of challenging, at last until Tesla came along and started to gobble a good chunk of that market up, at least in the US. Cadillac had too much baggage. And too many dealers putting vinyl tops on things.
On that note, I don’t think I have EVER seen an Audi or a BMW for that matter with a dealer commissioned vinyl top. I have to assume that someone in South Florida for example might want one, perhaps there is a clause in the dealer franchise paperwork prohibiting their dealers from defiling the cars in such a manner? I (and most of us) have seen every possible Cadillac including the CTS and STS with stuff like this though…
Time will tell with Lincoln, wasn’t there just a report here that they were canning all their non-trucks too? It’s hard to really compete when you cancel half the lineup and don’t sell on other continents.
Lincolns are sold in China.
Right you are to the tune of about 34k sales in q1-q3 2019, not bad!
In China, Lincoln has a chance to make some headway.
Lincolns would be DOA if Ford tried to sell them in Europe, so perhaps it’s best that Ford’s global ambitions for Lincoln are limited/realistic.
Lincoln didn’t benchmark Lexus, Lincoln merely found its old self.
XTS or XT5? CTS or CT5? Someone at Cadillac should be working at Burger 🍔 King.
I work at a Cadillac Dealership at the moment. I’ve driven several CT6’s at work and I agree that the interior wasn’t that great all things considered. However, the dynamics of the car were good. Okay, so it wasn’t the couch on wheels I expected and associated with Cadillac, but it’s still comfortable for daily driving while not feeling lethargic going around a corner and the engines were all decent options (although driving a final year V sport with the 4.2 Twin Turbo V8 was pretty cool, even if it was just around town.) I’m bummed to see it go, but at the same time, it’s not like it was the greatest seller on the planet.
Out of all the crossovers Cadillac is pushing, the XT6 is the only I would take out of all of them, but that’s still more or less “gun pointed to my head, force me to choose option” than something I would plunk down money for. (If I had money obviously)
I’m having a hard time understanding why people are rejecting cars (sedans) en masse. According to CC posts, Ford, Chevy, and now Cadillac is discontinuing them. I only want to drive a car; not a truck, SUV, or CUV, which to me are big, clunky things which you have to step up to get into, and have more rear storage space than I need, without the privacy of a trunk. They also lack the “charisma” of a regular car.
If something happens to my present car, I was thinking of a 2008 Cadillac CTS. It has distinctive Cadillac style, and according to online reviews, the ride, handling, smooth power, quality and reliability are excellent–all the things that caused people to reject Cadillac since the ’80s have apparently been rectified. This 2020 model would be even more refined than the 2008. So why don’t they sell? It’s hard to believe that people with my views are now such a tiny slice of the market.
Because CUVs represent a better value in the eyes of most new car buyers. You don’t have to step up to get into a car-based CUV (that would be more true of a truck-based SUV), but you often do have to step down into a car. Modern cars often feel cramped or constricted, and the fastback-style rear roofline turns even large trunks into mailboxes with slots for trunklids, while at the same time decreasing head space for rear passengers. I can’t recall the last modern sedan I sat in that had room for a proper hat. The decreasing quality of US roads also increases demand for something with more suspension travel. Yes, center of gravity is higher, but it’s not like the average driver does autocross on their commute.
Hat room? Is that even still a thing?
For me, it is.
Harry Truman enjoying his 1955 Chrysler.
The CTS is very nice in my opinion. I owned a 2012 CTS Performance and loved it. I’d recommend at least a 2012 version because that’s the first year the rear camera was introduced for parking, a feature much needed with the deceptive rear visual from the mirrors alone. I traded it only because I came across a deal on a 2016 CT6 that I could not pass up, and am loving it as well. Not sure what the issue is people are having with Cadillac but I’ve owned several and have been overall please access the board, more so with the two I’ve mentioned here.
“And the losses incurred by Omega likely resulted in GM’s decision to base the XT6 on the same transverse front-wheel drive platform as the Chevy Traverse.”
If the XT6 was actually based on the Traverse/Enclave’s LWB C1XX platform, that would be an improvement. As it stands, it’s a SWB model–basically a 3-row variant of the XT5 or Blazer.
All of those vehicles you mentioned are on the same platform. They’re just slightly modified variants of the same architecture.
Never said they weren’t. But GM/Cadillac claims the Traverse and Enclave as the CT6’s closest relatives, when it’s closer to the SWB models.
It’s complicated,
C1YB, C1YC: Enclave, Traverse,
C1UH, C1UG, C1UC, Holden, GMC, Chevrolet Blazer,
C1UL, Cadillac XT5,
C1TL, Cadillac XT6.
C1 is the platform, Y/U/T is the wheelbase,
the last stands for the brand
I blame auto journalists/magazines and us overly opinionated commenters. We wanted Cadillac to be BMW/Mercedes so bad back then. “Build RWD sport sedans” they said, “Nobody wants a soft pillow ride” “Everyone wants carving cornering sedans and coupes”….well Cadillac did all that starting in 2003 with the 1st gen CTS in 2003…won COTY for 2008 and 2014 yet the CTS continued to decline. They even built wagons and coupes with V badges. Interiors were terrible ppl said yet it looked strikingly similar to a sparse BMW 5 series boring black interior lol and I didn’t have a problem with the Caddy or the Lincoln interior personally. Caddy Invested millions of dollars in a platform for RWD because that’s what the ppl said they wanted yet nobody I bet that was screaming all this bought one. Same harsh criticism for Lincoln even though they stuck to FWD. The Continental even if RWD still wouldn’t have sold any better. Ironically the best seller for Cadillac sedan wise in the last several years was the XTS…a full side FWD car. Cadillac should have stuck to that formula and continued to refine it. My best friend had a CT6 he leased and just turned in a few months ago. Beautiful card and ride. He got compliments everywhere. The one thing I did hate about it was the start/stop feature. I could not get use to it and I wouldn’t want that in a car if I bought one. I leased a 2016 MKZ and he leased the CT6. I liked my Lincoln over his Cadillac.
I want a Lincoln Continental and hope to buy a CPO one in the next year or two.
IMHO The auto journalists killed the luxury American sedans…giving props to foreign makes that had crappy reliability but good driving dynamics…..BMW 750 Audi A6 but harping on American luxury for providing smooth and quiet isolation. Well growing up I thought that was the definition of a luxury car. Apparently not but Cadillac will be happy to sell you a XT6 or Lincoln a Aviator or $60-70k.
“giving props to foreign makes that had crappy reliability but good driving dynamics”
Cadillac finished dead last in this year’s CR survey behind every single import. Of course I’m starting to wonder exactly how great the difference is between first and last and exactly what parameters cause something to be that bad. I don’t see Cadillacs or Fiats or Acuras sitting beside every road waiting for a tow. Just Land Rovers (joking!) It’s somewhat rare to see any car being towed without obvious accident damage.
The first CTS was poorly styled (distinctive isn’t always good) in my opinion and the interior materials/plastics were of pickup truck quality. A decade down the road the newer CTS finally looked good on the outside but if you’ve ever sat in the back, forget it, way too tight to get in and try to get comfortable. The newest one, I can’t even recall exactly what it looks like.
Then Cadillac started to chase Nurburgring times. Nobody who actually buys cars really cares and those that do for whatever reason will buy brands with greater brand equity, i.e. not Cadillac. The Escalade is the only thing that they sell that has any cachet and not necessarily for the right reasons, it likely turns off as many people to the rest of the line as like it and buy it. Those liking it but wanting something less ostentatious generally buy a Yukon Denali.
Unfortunately Cadillacs time has come and gone. They’ve been flailing without any coherent strategy for at least two decades. I don’t see that changing any time soon.
Cadillac acted embarrassed that the XTS was still being sold, and that it was their best seller. That really should have signaled Cadillac that people really do want good-sized, comfortable sedans. But Cadillac wanted to be hip like the Germans and please the car magazines. I recall Caddy insisting the CT6 was not their flagship – that was yet to come – and the rumors at the time was that there was going to be an even bigger XT8 sedan that would finally take down the Mercedes S class. The big sedan market was getting hammered though so that never happened.
My analysis is the same as everyone else’s here – Cadillac’s sedans of the ’10s had world-class handling and performance but cheap-looking and -feeling interiors that didn’t look nice enough to be in a Honda Accord, tiny back seats, substandard infotainment, less than supple ride, and lack of cachet needed to sell at MSRP. And the Escalade seemed antithetical to the Euro sports sedan dynamic they were striving for with their sedans (something also reflected by its having a proper name – anyone think the Escalade would have been as popular if it were called the XT7?)
I agree. Cadillac should have kept producing the XTS and renamed it 60 series in honor of the Fleetwood 60 series sold through the 80s. That XTS name wasn’t cutting it. They kept trying to please car magazines who only test drive these cars and then give biased opinions and they listen to forums like these as well I bet. There’s nothing wrong with a big luxury cruiser that can ride over bumps. Personally I don’t want to feel every bump and road imperfection. Low Profile tires do that enough.
Cadillac screwed itself, just like it has been doing since the 1960s decontenting. They seem to be building vehicles based on focus groups, much like GM did with the Aztek, and with the same results. People will tell you what they SAY they want, but when it comes time to plunk down money, they go with something entirely different. And then make excuses to justify why they didn’t buy the thing they said they wanted, even if they are not really true.
So go on, Cadillac, stop making sedans. Who cares, I and most people will never aspire to drive one of your vehicles again. Maybe you can rehire JdN and move back to NYC, as that is more likely than you making a real American luxury sedan again. You gave up your lofty position to appease bean counters, and now you are reaping the results.
I disagree, They did not use focus groups. Focus groups ask a diverse group of people what they want and what you get is mediocrity. Cars that try to do everything but nothing well…Cadillac had a laser focus on BMW. Handling, driving dynamics, track capability…ironic since BMW began moving away from that focus. Now BMW produces mediocre cars for the masses, which I believe will catch up with them eventually.
Cadillac was focused…Just on the wrong thing at the wrong time.
Caddy has been and gone here only one model ever showed up new the CTS? shipped in by a local GM Holden dealer and priced at half expected retail upper Holden money they sold well a friend has one and likes it, but that was it one more shipment of a cancelled UK order and we got no more, you might miss them we hardly knew them except of course for the used classic models that continually show up from the chrome n fins era.
The auto journalists didn’t help, but IMO, GM didn’t help itself.
GM diluted the Cadillac brand, starting in the 1960s. Where’s the innovation associated with the “Standard” of the world?
Still, up until 1979, Cadillacs were still plausible luxury cars. The Caddy had the biggest engine on a GM car, and GM’s 1977-79 full sizers were winners. Everyone knows that.
Then GM foisted the disastrous V8-6-4 engine, and the anemic 4100 V8 in the 1980s on Cadillac owners. Basically, GM took it’s full-size car, tarted it up a tad, and sold it for a lot of money. Then fwd variants came out, and were justly panned.
For the demographic of the “Greatest Generation”, who were more “patriotic” and perhaps more importantly, came of age in the 1930s thru the 1950s, when, NO KIDDING, Cadillac was the “Cadillac of automobiles”, many of them kept buying Cadillacs. But Cadillac loyalists were dwindling.
(And brand loyalty ain’t what it used to be. I liked my 91 3-series. But nothing BMW makes now interests me. NADA)
So GM had to do something.
Part of GM’s challenge is that, unlike BMW and Mercedes, since the 1980s, Cadillacs are built on the same lines with lesser cars, sharing the same drivetrains. This is a big disincentive to develop a unique product.
When you do, it’s difficult to build them on the same line as other products.
The original CTS was a unique platform built on a dedicated line in a dedicated plant. For better or worse, Cadillac chose to make BMW/Audi the target. The derivatives got better (2nd gen CTS, then ATS, then 3rd gen CTS), but when GM raised the price on the ATS/CTS (the premature ‘victory lap’ just when you finally were in the pros, but hadn’t yet won the title), that torpedoed sales.
The idiotic naming convention didn’t help, and the general decline of sedans didn’t help.
The next unique Cadillac, the CT6, aimed at the Audi A8. It is, or was, a sophisticated car. Part aluminim. Rather exotic. It is larger, but not large. It has a gentler ride, without being flabby. It even looks more “Cadillacish”, IMO. But, it is an expensive car to build. It probably had modest sales targets. However, it was built alongside lesser Impalas, Buick LaCrosses,and Volts.
Car makers just can’t snap their fingers and move model A to from plant A to plant B. It costs a lot of money to move production. Or, there are physical and facility constraints that make it infeasible.
So, all we can say is that, the CT6 alone was not generating enough money to save the Hamtramck plant, so it’s gone. Unless GM wants to import it from China–I think they make them there. GM spent a lot of money to develop and build it. The decision to go ahead was probably made around 2011-12. They foresaw the rise of CUVs at GM–all these products, Equniox, Trax, Blazer, Terrain, XT4,5,6 didn’t just pop up out of the blue. But GM failed to see the contraction of luxury sedans. Expensive oversight.
Nor can they just “CUVize” the expensive CT6 (or even ATS/CTS for that matter) underpinnings to make a CUV. (they did make a Camaro out of the ATS) That’s why the XT6 is based on the Traverse.
Cadillac’s top image car today: the Escalade. And GM has the good sense not to name it XT8 or some other dumb alphanumeric
Actually the original SRX shared its platform, sigma, with the CTS. Do we know that GM can’t use the CT6 platform for an SUV?
Good point, original SRX was really a tallish CTS wagon trying to be an SUV (it even had 6-lug wheels, vs 5 on the CTS)
Orig SRX/CTS shared same suspension design. I don’t know if they shared the same floorpan–probably not, but close enough. And they all had conventional steel bodies
The CT6 aluminum body has some pretty exotic processes. I guess GM would have to transplant the Body Shop into a plant that builds CT4 (aka new ATS), the longer CT5 (aka new CTS) and Camaro, and make a CUV variant. More money.
Is is possible? If so, is it worth it?
And if it was, would it compete with money-maker Escalade?
I think there is your answer, in all these ‘negatives’ and ‘ifs’
I wonder if one of the reasons for restricting super cruise to the CT6 may be an intentionally restricted rollout for early public release. To then expand once there’s confidence, both internally and externally, that bugs have been ironed out.
I hate that I don’t care. But I don’t. And I can’t remember when that happened. When someone interested in cars has trouble telling one model from another there is a problem.
I saw one of (what I believe was) one of these at church last Sunday morning. It was a black one, and I recall thinking that Cadillac was finally moving in the right direction because it was the most attractive Cadillac sedan I could recall seeing in awhile. Then I saw that “3.6” badge – isn’t that the same 3.6 V6 that is in most of the larger vehicles GM builds these days?
I have no answers. I have been trying to talk myself into believing that the right product will help, and the right product has to be a brawny, all-American sedan in the vein of the Chrysler 300. But the 300 isn’t selling well anymore either. None of the sedans is. Cadillac has no worthwhile place in the GM hierarchy. GMC builds all of the really nice big trucks and SUVs. Frankly, I would sooner buy a Genesis.
Another dire thought – I wonder how many cars Cadillac is going to sell in China over the next year or so? Their botched reaction to the Coronavirus may set off a nasty recession there. And because their current odd hybrid system of communism and capitalism has never experienced something like that, what might happen is up in the air.
Welcome to the Roaring 20s, 2020 version. I just wonder if we end up as we did on October 29, 1929? Or perhaps sooner?
It seems that history, if not repeating, is certainly rhyming.
That’s an interesting point. There will surely be an impact on car sales in China, and I think GM will be particularly prone.
Exactly. The Genesis G90 is what Cadillac (or Lincoln) should have done. Imagine if Hyundai had bought and revived the Packard name.
Bingo. That was my thought the first time I saw the G90’s predecessor, the Hyundai Equus. Cadillac in the last 10 years has gone too far in the Teutonic austerity direction, especially in the interiors/. The Equus/G90 looks and feels, inside, like a modern version of the ’66 Fleetwood Brougham (which I select on purpose, as it might just be Peak Cadillac, ever).
> Cadillac has no worthwhile place in the GM hierarchy. GMC builds all of the really nice big trucks and SUVs.
To say nothing of Buick, now that the discontinuation of the Regal leaves Buick an all-crossover brand. But unlike Cadillac, Buick is sold out of the same showrooms as GMC which seems to me a stronger brand, leaving Buick without much purpose. At least in North America; it a whole ‘nuther story in China.
Such a sad story. I miss the Fleetwood dearly and the ingredients to build a proper size and spec Caddy sedan finally came into fruition, the CT6 (Blackwing!) is here. Now its gone. WTF! I just don’t understand why people hate sedans so much. I own a DTS and I also got a Escalade EXT. There’s a benefit to having a SUV or CUV but sedans still need to be offered.
I really hate FWD (even though I love my couch on wheels DTS) but discontinuing the XTS (the most successful Caddy sedan) was a terrible decision. The American companies are just handing the sedan segment to all the foreign competitors. There’s still a market for sedans! I’d love to get a CT6 but the price of a new one is just not in my reach right now but given the chance I’d get one in a heartbeat. There’s always the used route.
The XT6 is also an embarrassment (meh another fwd CUV and can’t compete with the Aviator) and whoever decided this new naming convention needs to be fired. The Escalade shouldn’t be the only Caddy with an actual name.
Its a damn shame to see another American sedan go but I guess it’s the way of the future. Hopefully the The 300 soldiers on. GM should’ve at least made a pure electric CT6 to compete with Tesla. I’ll save for a used CT6-V if I can find one.
I think that we can consider the Cadillac CT4, 5 and XT6 as temporary products. All are based on current or modernized current platform. Certainly, in anticipation of future electric cadillacs, based on the BEV3 Platform but it doesn’t mean that Cadillac will no more produce cars. Why spending more money to develop petrol cars if Cadillac envisions to become a electric carmaker?
I think that we can consider the Cadillac CT4, 5 and XT6 as temporary products. All are based on former or modernized current platform. Certainly, in anticipation of future electric cadillacs, based on the BEV3 Platform but it doesn’t mean that Cadillac will no more produce cars. Why spending more money to develop petrol cars if Cadillac envisions to become a electric carmaker?
I’d say all of Cadillac runs the risk of going the way of the Dodo bird. We’ll see how great the new Escalade is tonight when they officially unveil it in Beverly Hills. For buyers who want a supersized gaudy SUV, the newest Escalade should fill the bill, though a Yukon Denali looks mighty close. And therein lies the problem: the Escalade will continue to be nothing more than a Chevy/GMC with an upgraded interior and flashy trappings. Different front clip, taillights and wheels outside, and the “amazing new huge high definition touchscreen instrument panel” inside (kinda like what Tesla has been doing since the launch of the Model S). How can a genuine luxury brand succeed based solely on that?
The XTS sales declined to 1/3 of their peak. Sales of the ATS and CTS together are better than the XTS. The CT6 sales were running about 9000 to 10,000 annually. Now the crossover market seems to be taking over.
BMW and Mercedes are at the top of luxury car sales, so I think Cadillac has to build something to compare. The Lexus LS was chasing the Mercedes S class.
I had an XT5, which was not a bad crossover utility, but also not great. I now have a CT6, which is a very nice fun to drive car.
Cadillac’s current problems are several, which the CT6 made baby steps toward addressing.
First, Arts and Sciences design language, while hideous when it came out, has aged with the grace and dignity of a drugged-up homeless man. The newer ones even have tears streaming down their face because, presumably, they caught a look in the mirror. CT6 was less bad, but it still has too much A&S in it.
Then there’s the interiors. Aside from the Cadillac IPs that looked like reskinned truck dashes, I never found them horrible. But, I never cared for the alcantara or heavy use of gloss piano black over the past several years. And, although they were nicer than BMW for awhile IMO, they weren’t nicer than most others in that class. CT6 made the interior nicer, right after Lincoln showed everyone how to do an interior and BMW started making Ultimate Loafing Machines. Oops.
And finally, there’s the identity thing. The only thing Caddy’s known for really is the Escalade, and who wants to look like a drug dealer? So Caddy has good driving dynamics now? Whoopdie doo. BMW’s been known for that for a couple decades now and has more brand cachet. What else is Caddy good at? They’re ugly outside, ugly inside, don’t coddle their occupants, aren’t uber-reliable, and aren’t cheap.
So of course Caddy’s hosed.
Escalade’s image isn’t “drug dealer” anymore, now it’s more “ooo, someone called a *fancy* Uber.”
Hang around Hartsfield-Jackson for an hour and count how many Escalades you see picking up and dropping off passengers.
XT5, CT6, XYZ, etc. As J.P.C. said earlier, for someone who really cares about cars being unable to distinguish one from another, especially in discussions, the alpha-numeric naming convention sucks. Back when you could say, Sedan/Coupe de Ville, Seville, Fleetwood; everyone knew instantly what car you were speaking of. Today, we only have Escalade; and when I think of those tantalizing concept teases (El Miraj, for instance!) I feel sad for Cadillac, but I can’t really say that I care.
Its the same GM slight of hand tricks that date back to the seventies. Go to the parts bin and tart up some crap the other divisions are selling. Chevy, GMC and Cadillac trucks, all basically the same stuff so why not just buy the Chevy. I have a 2015 ATS sedan, turbo 4, fun car, and now I can buy it with a Camaro skin. Badge engineering.
yes, the Camaro costs less, but you can’t see out of it…
Build quality, reliability, and residual value. Cadillac (and all of Detroit for that matter) is O for three in those areas. The core issue isn’t styling, and certainly isn’t marketing. For the last 40 plus years Detroit has studiously avoided facing the significance of Consumers Report. The only other ace to play was major technological innovation. Tesla did that, Detroit didn’t. No marketing campaign, no advertising approach, can compensate in today’s marketplace for inferior machines. Sure, the alpha numeric naming hurt, but ‘perfect names” and “perfect marketing” can’t overcome inferior machines. Contemporary consumers are too well informed, and too sophisticated, to fall for the hype.
Looking at the side view of that CT5, it’s obvious it was designed by a monkey with a computer. It’s hideous looking. It’s time for Cadillac, and GM in general, to go back to real car designers. Soon, GM’s only car will be Corvette. Time to clean out the corporate offices, send Mary back to her cashier job at the local Walmart, and bring in real car people to run the company.
Count me as a fan of the CT6. I’m looking at a CPO Premium/Platinum now (due to the model year/color/interior color combo). The current version’s recent exterior refresh made it even more striking than when first introduced (IMHO, but your mileage may vary). I find the car to have real presence on the road.
The car bristles with technology. MagnaRide adjustable suspension with auto leveling. All-wheel drive. Four-wheel steering. Brembo front brakes. Love it or hate it, CUE technology. SuperCruise. Battery/electric/ICE hybrid powertrain. Innovative construction techniques.
Others point out a variety of valid criticisms. An interior that, while comfortable, didn’t feel like a substantive step above an XTS or Lacrosse. Failure to market/highlight the technology sufficiently. Not enough of a cost/value ratio to justify the car’s price when compared to competitors, including pricing at the top of the market. Chasing the wrong market in terms of both competitors and customers.
For me, it all boils down to Cadillac’s confidence. Cadillac wasn’t confident enough in the product so they tried to make it all things to all people.
–“Let’s give the entry level version a four-cylinder engine with vinyl interior. We’ll keep the price lower, and give those buyers a move-up option to a v-6 or turbo v-6 or later, a v-8.” (Only in recent times have Cadillacs offered a choice of engines; previously, they had one engine, one among the most powerful/prestigious of GM engines.)
–“Wait, we need to show we’re somewhat environmentally conscious. Let’s add a hybrid powertrain, but we’ll not seriously market it; after all, no one buying one of these would seriously be interested in a hybrid–but it’s great PR.” Thus, a one or two year experiment that quietly disappeared…and was there ever any marketing push for that version?
–“Let’s cover the broadest pricing range possible, competing with imports, other domestics, and even other GM brands. We can price it from a mid-trim Lacrosse price-point to almost Mercedes S-class entry levels with our top version loaded with all the options and appearing like a real value.” Again, a recent approach to Cadillac pricing. Entry CT6 pricing started in the upper 40’s but ran to almost double that for the loaded Platinum version; there may have even been some pricing overlap between the CTS (an “almost” midsize/full-size) and CT6 (an “almost” full-size/luxury flagship at the time). Compare this to previous pricing, which had a much smaller spread steps between the Calais/Sedan DeVille/Fleetwood Sedan.
–“Always refer to the car as ‘almost’….it’s almost S-class/7-series size, but priced like a midsize. It’s ‘almost’ a flagship, but really isn’t, since a ‘true’ flagship is going to come later, we hope.” Nothing says product confidence like “it’s almost a direct competitor, but not really. And it’s really not the best we can do, since it’s kinda-sort but not our flagship.”
–“To make sure no one calls us out on this, let’s run away from home. We’ll leave Detroit and move to New York to make it on our own–despite the parts-bin selections we’ve made for the car. See, but don’t pay attention to the car; look, we moved. We’re big competitors now!” Really? REALLY? Why not focus on doing the best job possible, regardless of location?
Certainly, there are fingers that can and should be pointed. Cadillac designers, who perhaps weren’t allowed to “push the design envelope enough”. GM bean-counters who demanded–and got–“just good enough” accommodations. Cadillac marketing, who didn’t know how to market a maybe sporty/luxury/almost but not quite flagship, with confusing pricing instead of “an American best”. And plenty more suspects in this, including auto journalists at other magazines. I understand many of them don’t own recent model vehicles, but instead rely on beater weekend vehicles to use when they can’t/don’t have a “demo” otherwise–and never really get to know a vehicle for what it is, or what it can be. They simply swallow the pablum the makers and other journalists give them, and then move on to the next “demo”.Thank God, writers here at CC genuinely seem to care about each vehicle.
Now the question becomes: will the CT6 become a collectable? It’s produced in limited quantities, is aspirationally priced when new, and has a currently small fanbase. Will the masses later wake and see this as an “investment” opportunity?