Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

Cadillac says 'no' to XTS-V, considers larger flagship

What a difference a letter can make. Having an extra one or two after your name shows the world you're better schooled than most. But the right application of a special letter on a luxury sedan signals something else altogether: it's a mark of performance. So a BMW 5 Series becomes an M5. A Mercedes-Benz E-Class becomes an E63 AMG. A Jaguar XF becomes an XFR or even an XFR-S. An Audi A6 becomes an S6 or RS6.

You get the picture, and so does Cadillac: with the CTS-V it launched its own assault on the best European machinery. But while an ATS-V is expected to follow with the same formula applied to GM's new 3 Series rival, don't expect the same of the Cadillac XTS flagship.

According to reports, Cadillac has ruled out the possibility of an XTS-V. The new XTS is powered by a V6 engine, but while a turbo variant could follow, we're told not to expect a V8 model, let alone a performance version. Apparently Cadillac feels its flagship isn't meant to go fast, focusing instead on its vast space that includes enough room in the back seat to cross one's legs and enough space in the trunk for four golf bags.

What Cadillac is reportedly looking into, however, is an even bigger model. That's right, the full-size XTS apparently isn't big enough, so Cadillac is looking at a flagship that will be larger still – something like a proper BMW 7 Series competitor. Which we can only hope will hold, like, at least five golf bags, easy.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/13/c...rger-flagship/

mmarshall

Good. I looked at the XTS at the D.C. Auto Show up on a turntable (they didn't have one on the floor). IMO, it is clearly not a flagship in the true sense that the DTS was. And one look at the low-profile tires on the new XTS shows that it will (probably) not have the DTS's soft, smooth ride. Most of the people who bought the DTS were looking for smooth ride-comfort......and I don't think the XTS will deliver it, at least to the same extent. Lincoln made the mistake, when the MKS replaced the Town Car, of stiffening the tires and suspension too much (there's been a lot of complaints in Lincoln-chat-forums about that from MKS buyers)....so I hope Cadillac doesn't make the same mistake with its new upcoming flagship.

I also agree with Cadillac's decision not to do an XTS-V. Not only is the concept, IMO, ridiculous, but I don't think that many people would actually buy or lease one. Leave the V-series to smaller Cadillacs, like the CTS, where they belong.

Trexus

Wow, Cadillac will be running out of letters to designate a model. I figured XTS would be Cadillac's fullsize sedan. I guess Cadillac could use ZTS...if not AATS?

Fizzboy7

Cadillac is full of waste and is lost in my opinion. They went south when the "bigger is better" syndrome got the best of them with the CTS. Since that car seperated from the BMW 3, A4, and MBZ C, they've not had any model to compete head to head in any class (SLS is too dated to count). This is simply bad marketing which causes the playing catch game. Recently showing the new XTS and and now having to come out with yet another new sedan is a waste of opportunities. The XTS should have been the range topper and the CTS should have stayed small enough to not need another competing model (ATS). Here it is 2012 and they are still spinning their wheels trying to match the other brands. More waste. This is not impressive or flattering at all. In fact, it's insulting, considering the bailouts.

mmarshall

How is the CTS a "Bigger is Better" philosophy? Granted, it's larger than the brand-new ATS, but it is smaller than other Cadillac sedans. So was the Catera, which preceeded it.

Fizzboy7

GM, in following the overweight American market and SUV craze, kept redesigning their vehicles larger. According to them and most car review magazines, the CTS is now too large to be paired with the A4, C class, and 3-series. That's been documented and discussed for a few years now, even though I've never bought into the idea. The CTS should have, and still does, match this class. The real reason why the CTS is not classed with these vehicles is simply because it's overpriced. That's why Caddy invented the ATS. They went wrong with the CTS's position and it's now setting off a chain reaction of wastefull inventions.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

The new ATS tips the scales at 3,400lbs the CTS at 3,849lbs a comparable IS is 3,500lbs, GS 3,700lbs, and a 5-series at 4,075lbs

This is a great move for Cadillac to add the ATS to their line-up. It allows the CTS to move upmarket and compete in a more luxury oriented segment. Something it hasn't been able to do since it was serving both entry and mid level price points. Where it went wrong was giving up on the full-size RWD sedan, something the XTS is sadly not. Rather than make it ATS, CTS, STS, seems the STS and DTS were merged in what we now call the XTS in the sense that both were large one sporty the other comfortable and plush RWD/AWD and FWD and the result was a "sporty" FWD sedan that seems to accomplish non of the STS's sport or the DTS's comfort. Seems destined to be a niche vehicle. I say back to the drawing board and make a proper 7-Series, LS, S-Class competitor. Like another member mentioned, ZTS anyone? lol

A4 - 185in
IS - 180in
G37 - 187in
3-Series - 182.5in
C-Class - 180in
ATS - 182.8

5-Series 193.1in
E-Class 191in
CTS - 191.3

https://www.clublexus.com/forums/car...-revealed.html

Lexuslvr91

Actually cadillac seems more focused than ever. The new ATS is a direct shot to the 3-series and having seen it in person it is an amazing vehilce. The XTS serves its role as the DTS replacement. a quasi-flagship that will be based on comfort, pampering and luxurious technologies/features. The CTS will become a true 5-series fighter. Next is the new Escalade followed by a roadster and then there will be the true flagship in about 2015.

LexFather

Agreed in theory. A CTS currently starts around 35k-65k. If they truly go for the midsize bracket, then I assume the next CTS starts around 45k eliminating a 10k buffer. Will sales maintain at the same level or will they dwindle as the price goes up or people then jump to the ATS? There is no doubt the current CTS is a huge hit in sedan and coupe forms at its current price point.

I completely agree they should have kept the name STS and even DTS is pretty well known. Some of these luxury brands really are clueless about how changing names constantly and picking AWFUL letter combinations hurts them.

Since this XTS is simply a new DTS why change the name? Why drop STS? Mind you I think they need this DTS/XTS to appeal to Caddy's core buyers who want big cushy cars.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

the CTS is WAY bigger than an IS. it's close to a GS in size.

as your stats show:

IS - 180in
CTS - 191.3

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

I know, I was trying to point out that the ATS matches the IS as the CTS does the GS. I threw in the 5-Series to show that Cadillac was bucking the "overweight" trend that another member mentioned

sorry I didn't organize my wording lol

LexFather

Right, the ES/G37/TL/CTS have always been "tweeners" cars bigger than the others in class but priced and aimed for the smaller class. Part of their "value" proposition or "trickery" is you get a larger sized car for the price of a 3/IS/C/A4.

With the ATS aimed solely at the 3/IS/C/A4 they clearly will position the CTS higher and price it higher. We will see if that strategy works or will people balk at higher pricing for a CTS they are used to seeing cheaper. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Its going to be a challenge for the ATS too as most people still want large Caddy's not small ones. Thus the XTS being produced.

I used to be a huge STS fan. Amazing to think they offered the CTS-V, STS-V and XLR-V and all that is left is the CTS.

rkyat

^To this day i've yet to see an STS-V in person.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

yeah pretty uncommon. saw one a few years ago, non since lol

mmarshall

I fully agree, Hoovey.........I've mentioned this myself, a number of times. But the main problem was (and I don't know if you remember it) that, in the mid-1990s, GM wanted more factory-space to satisfy the then-exploding demand for trucks and SUVs. To get it, they sacrificed the Chevy Caprice/Buick Roadmaster/Cadillac Fleetwoods built at the Arlington, TX plant to convert the plant to those trucks and SUVs. In doing so, of course, they also lost the police/taxi-market for the Caprice and the limo-market for the Fleetwood.

But before you shed too many tears for the demise of those big RWD cars, consider that, except for the durability of the body-on-frame design, those cars, in general, were, IMO, not well-built. Not only was overall fit/finish quite poor, with cheap-materials, but a lot of their hardware tended to squeak/rattle, work loose, and come off. That's primarily why, even though I liked their smooth rides and low noise-levels, I did not buy one myself. And, more-so than with the Caprice and Fleetwood, the Roadmaster's handling and body-roll was so sloppy that even I, who doesn't mind some float, couldn't stand it. I found it borderline-dangerous on all but straight-roads and gentle-cornering.....anything more would squeal the tires like a stuck-pig.