When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The Tundra used to come in the reg cab short bed with the 5.7 in the past. Its been discontinued.
Again, to me, that's strange. Why use the larger engine in the smallest, lightest body style? IMO, it doesn't make sense. Oh well, such is the world of car (and truck) marketing.
Again, to me, that's strange. Why use the larger engine in the smallest, lightest body style? IMO, it doesn't make sense. Oh well, such is the world of car (and truck) marketing.
"though a later jaunt in the base 2.0-liter version of the sedan ends up being our favorite engine of the three. The 265-hp unit feels the best suited to the eight-speed transmission, gently producing shifts without announcing every change of the cogs. The 2.0-liter also wins us over with its linear, predictable throttle response and quiet operation, in addition to noticeable weight savings as we sample the various versions of the CT6 back to back."
From Automobile:
"Biggest surprise: the jewel in the new CT6 lineup is the rear-drive, turbo-four base car. This version feels distinctly different from its V-6, AWD siblings: it’s more agile, more fun, with livelier steering and an agreeable sizzle under the hood. Never expected it, but the bantam four-banger is amazingly refined and eager. You’ll smile as you gun this CT6 from corner to corner".
Main thing about the new "Cadillac" is that it really is not a "Cadillac".
Why can't I have the modern equivalent of my 1995 Fleetwood should have been. Standard V8 power, cream puff ride, interior appointments rivaling a Rolls Royce Ghost(I concede that the Benz S-class is damn near that RR mark for interior luxury) Standard for about the price of an S-class.
Main thing about the new "Cadillac" is that it really is not a "Cadillac".
Why can't I have the modern equivalent of my 1995 Fleetwood should have been. Standard V8 power, cream puff ride, interior appointments rivaling a Rolls Royce Ghost(I concede that the Benz S-class is damn near that RR mark for interior luxury) Standard for about the price of an S-class.
A 1995 Fleetwood having interior appointments rivaling a Rolls Royce ghost?!? Not quite lol
Main thing about the new "Cadillac" is that it really is not a 1995 "Cadillac".
fixed for you.
Why can't I have the modern equivalent of my 1995 Fleetwood should have been. Standard V8 power, cream puff ride, interior appointments rivaling a Rolls Royce Ghost(I concede that the Benz S-class is damn near that RR mark for interior luxury) Standard for about the price of an S-class.
times change and i doubt a 1995 fleetwood was the price of an s-class at the time.
this ct6 is interesting in its positioning by being bigger than a midsize, but smaller than an s-class. will it be successful? i don't know, but i applaud cadillac for trying and to me it looks like an awesome vehicle. don't care for the busy multiple interior trim materials in light color in particular, however, i like the DESIGN / proportions of the dash... better than the s-class in some ways.
"though a later jaunt in the base 2.0-liter version of the sedan ends up being our favorite engine of the three. The 265-hp unit feels the best suited to the eight-speed transmission, gently producing shifts without announcing every change of the cogs. The 2.0-liter also wins us over with its linear, predictable throttle response and quiet operation, in addition to noticeable weight savings as we sample the various versions of the CT6 back to back."
From Automobile:
"Biggest surprise: the jewel in the new CT6 lineup is the rear-drive, turbo-four base car. This version feels distinctly different from its V-6, AWD siblings: it’s more agile, more fun, with livelier steering and an agreeable sizzle under the hood. Never expected it, but the bantam four-banger is amazingly refined and eager. You’ll smile as you gun this CT6 from corner to corner".
Why can't I have the modern equivalent of my 1995 Fleetwood should have been. Standard V8 power, cream puff ride,
Because the people in Cadillac marketing (not to mention Buick and Lincoln) think that the only potential buyers for those cars quit driving ten years ago and are now all in nursing homes LOL. Of course, that is not a fact, but it is so strongly stereotyped in the auto industry that marketers are convinced it is. Also, CAFE and emission regs are taking a toll on larger engines.
Given what the disappointing XTS was, though, the CT6 appears to be at least a step in the right direction, though I won't be able to comment on the actual ride comfort until I sample one myself. It's definitely on my review list.
And, BTW, a car's ride and suspension can be SO soft and unresponsive that it is actually detrimental, even if one is not an aggressive driver. I remember test-driving an early-90s Buick Roadmaster (mechanically almost the same car as your 1995 Fleetwood). It was so heavy and flabby that it heeled over like a boat, with extreme body roll, plowed straight ahead, and squealed its tires even cornering at low-to-moderate speeds and with little steering input. It was, IMO, in some instances, borderline dangerous if sudden maneuvers were needed for any reason. I later found out, after doing some research, that Buick had tuned the suspension in the Roadmaster to be even softer and more flabby than the Fleetwood's.
Propulsion system specs for the upcoming 2017 Cadillac CT6 plug-in hybrid were recently revealed at the SAE 2016 Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Technologies Symposium in Anaheim by GM’s General Director of Electrification and its General Director of Electric Drives and Systems Engineering, according to recent reports.
The technical overview of the new rear-wheel drive plug-in hybrid (PHEV) propulsion system revealed that the Cadillac CT6 PHEV will feature a combined system output of 335 kilowatts (449 horsepower), and a combined fuel consumption of under 2.0 L/100 km (117.7 mpg US). The new PHEV will do 0-100 kilometers-an-hour (0-62 mph) in 5.6 seconds, possess an all-electric top speed of 125 kilometers-an-hour (78 mph), and an all-electric range of 37 miles (60 kilometers).
he battery pack that will be used is an 18.4 kilowatt-hour (kWh) lithium-ion battery pack — identical in nominal capacity to the second-generation Chevy Volt battery pack, though packaged differently.
The GM General Director of Electrification, Tim Grewe, commented: “We have a PHEV system that has incredible efficiency, but it is also one of the highest performing vehicles on the road with extraordinarily connected feel to it.”
“Often it is very enticing to say, ‘Well I’m just going to load the battery pack into an existing structure in the car.’ But basically we cut out the whole back of the CT6. We use the tray of the battery pack as the main floor structure. With the ability to handle the weight of the battery in the car structure, it really improved the stiffness. To handle that mass on the rear wheel drive, it actually made driveability better, because it is stiffer and engineered to go together.”
Green Car Congress provides more:
The new electrically variable rear wheel drive transmission comprises 2 electric motors, 3 planetary gears (two simple, one double-pinion) and 5 clutches that deliver four continuously variable transmission modes with 3 fixed gears.
Providing all-electric launch, selectable regeneration, and power blending with the turbocharged engine, the transmission provides smooth and seamless power through the entire driving range.
…For the CT6, GM took the basic design of the drive unit in the Volt (two planetary gearsets, two motors, two clutches)—which enables the CT6 to perform well as an all-electric vehicle—and added a third planetary gearset and two more clutches to enhance the “fun-to-drive”.
“Basically, that gives you a Volt on steroids. It gives you tremendous launch torque. It’s actually a 6.8 step down in the EVT low. You look at some of the EV effort we have here, you’re almost above 5,000 N·m. You have that EV launch feel,” Grewe continued.
The Cadillac CT6 PHEV is actually going to be manufactured in China, it should be remembered. It’s currently expected to be released here sometime later this year.
The Cadillac CT6 PHEV is actually going to be manufactured in China, it should be remembered. It’s currently expected to be released here sometime later this year.
Good post, Jill....quite informative.
That's one thing that concerns me, though. Cadillac needs to improve its overall reliability scores (even its own brother Buick is crushing it in that area). Given the way that Chinese industry builds and produces a number of other products (even including some of the foods we eat), I don't see how that's going to help very much. And, though I won't make final comments on the upcoming Chinese-built Buick Envision until I actually review one, I'm afraid that Buick might also be making the same mistake...and that the Envision might drag down the current good Buick reliability. We'll see, though. At one time, Korean manufacture meant junk (and even Japan, for that matter, if you go back far enough to the 1950s), but both countries learned very well how to produce good, reliable vehicles. Perhaps China will, also.
Finally got to sit inside not one but two of these at my local auto show. Came away unimpressed with the interior. It wasn't bad, but relative to what I saw from the Germans it didn't hold up. While there is your leather, wood, metal accents, and even leather dash and doors in the Platinum model, the interior is still rough around the edges. Meaning that a lot of components, namely the buttons, are black plastic. The door plungers are also black flimsy plastic. The TVs in the rear are black plastic and don't have impressive resolution. The new E-class, while a tad bit smaller, is on another level for roughly the same price (if not even lower)
Also saw one in person today, during a commercial shoot. Compared to what it's replacing, it had a lot of exterior presence. Compared to it's competitors, I feel it falls short.
03-21-16, 10:19 PM
Why use the larger engine in the smallest, lightest body style? IMO, it doesn't make sense. Oh well, such is the world of car (and truck) marketing.
