TRDFantasy

Wait, wasn't the FRONT-wheel drive Cadillac XTS supposed to be the 7 series and S Class competitor? Now they are flip flopping on their word again?

Fail .

Totally agreed.

Fizzboy7

Art and Science was tired the first month it debuted. Why? Because we have all lived through 15-20 years of that styling back in the 60's and 70's. Here's a big secret I'm going to let you guys in on. Get ready...
*** Art and Science styling is nothing more than a failed take on retroism and a total lack of styling progression into modern times. Cadillac had absolutely no clue how to compete with Lexus, Mercedes, or BMW and so the Art and Science moniker came up to warm over another failed GM styling idea. (The word Bail-Out just popped into mind.) Art and Science flavor is nothing more than peddling the idea that you get girls by eating a messy Carl's Jr hamburger. Same American shallowness, cheesiness, sloppiness, obnoxiousness, and lack of polish.
This concludes today's lesson.

mmarshall

Well, that's looking at it from one point of view. But an equally valid one is that it is nice that there is still someplace one can go to escape the almost constant aero/jelly-bean/hump-back-whale look, which I find about as appealing as watching paint dry.


Of course, Cadillac is not alone in the anti-aero look. There are also vehicles like the Scion xB, Kia Soul, Nissan Cube, Honda Element, Mustang/Camaro/Challenger, etc.....

IS-SV

Ugly is ugly, which contributes to Cadillac's struggles in the market place. My styling analysis is meant as suggestions to improve on the division's success (and as a lux car business, performance is subpar still). A Caddy can still look like a Caddy without looking like a Escalade.

And the most significant jelly bean style car (and it was very ugly for sure) was the previous Ford Taurus, a car of the past. I brought up my styling point of view regarding Escalade-like artzy fartzy science especially as it relates to sales resistance in the American car place. Yeah whatever we can all come up with names and overused cliches like aero/jelly-bean/humpback whale or even artzy fartzy science, like Cadillac.

Not aware of any humpback whale cars, since I have some experience on humpback whale sightings as I saw them from a boat once. But unlike geezer-pleazers of the past, I happen to like the successful CLS, Sonata, etc. which I know you don't like. Yes I know you like old style Amantis, the past Sonata, body on frame station wagons, vinyl roofs, velour seats, white wall tires, that's cool, I remember That 70's show too (yes we've been reminded over and over and over and over and over..............).

More on topic, I think Cadillac should spend the money on its mainstream products to better establish itself as a top luxury brand. Regarding a $130K Cadillac, good luck.

mmarshall

Virtually all of today's Cadillac styling, in one form or another, goes back to the Evoq concept car of the late 1990's. I'm sure you remember it, so I won't go into its details here.

Agreed. I was not of a fan of the original 1986 Taurus, and the 1995-2000 bug-eyed models were, IMO, a joke. But there is no denying that, my opinion or yours aside, it set off a revolution in auto-styling that probably had not been seen since the 1950's.



The humpback-whale rooflines, of course, refer to the rounded, sharply-arced profiles that, while (isometimes) aiding aerodynamics, impede on rear headroom and entry/exit. And, to see a humpback-whale for real, you don't necessarily have to go out on a boat......just watch a Pacific Life Insurance TV commercial, LOL.



No problem......I respect your opinion on that. You're not alone...but they just don't happen to be my thing.


Vinyl roofs and whitewall tires CAN be nice, IF they are done right, but I have stated (several times) what a PITA they can be if low-quality or poorly-fitted (some of the 1980's-vintage GM/Chrysler products come to mind). And, well-done or not, they do make car-washing/cleaning harder and more time-consuming. And, again, some of the old velour seats were plush and comfortable, but a number of them offered exactly ZERO support for your lower-back or thighs.



I'm going to agree with you on this one......I doubt if there is a market for a 130K Cadillac right now. Cadillac, for example, was forced to drop the 90-100K XLR-V a few years back, from lack of sales, so it doesn't look like an even more expensive Caddy will go over very well, right now. A sedan in that price range (130K) would be bumping squarely into upper-level, non-AMG versions of the Mercedes S-Class, which is solidly-entrenched in that market. It would be like the Toyota Tundra trying to knock the Ford F-150 out of first-place truck sales......and we all know how that turned out.

IS-SV

Good examples, especially the SL and S-class against possible Caddy offererings, the reality is no way, not going to happen or sell well in that price range.