Cadillac is like the guy who hits his head against the wall because it's fun to stop. Only they forgot the stopping bit. Australia's GoAuto reports that GM's premier luxury brand will not do the right thing and send the brand-defiling sales flop known as the Cadillac BLS back to whatever corner of Hell is reserved for hideous mutants. "An American GM insider suggested to GoAuto that the next-generation BLS – which may be made in America or Mexico since it shares much of its Epsilon II architecture with the next-generation Saab 9-5 and 9-3 due in 2009 and 2010 respectively – will have bespoke bodywork as well as a stronger driving character, as Cadillac attempts to redress two of the biggest criticisms levelled at this vehicle." See? They just don't get it, do they? Meanwhile, according to GM Car Czar Bob Lutz, the new "entry level" Cadillac ATS "is, or would be, about the size of a BMW 1 Series – maybe just a tiny bit bigger to enable larger wheels.” Based on GM's new rear wheel-drive Alpha platform, no less. Maybe. Yup, you guessed it. "Alpha is still under consideration, but we haven’t kicked off any design work or any engineering work because we have to sort our way through this 35mpg task." Maybe someone should tell Lutz and co. that a bad plan is a whole lot better than no plan.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Why does GM think that RWD necessarily means bad fuel economy? Does the lame-duck DTS get decent fuel economy? Our 2001 Aurora – with a detuned Northstar V8 (4.0L, 250 hp) will reluctantly crest 20 mpg combined city/highway under an easy foot. It’s worse if you do anything resembling spirited driving.
Meanwhile, BMW makes 735d sedans that get more than 35 mpg, and in a recent test I’ve read about, an Audi A8 diesel was able to keep up with an LS600hL and still get nearly 40 mpg (Imperial) combined – in a magazine test (i.e. they didn’t drive like Grandma).
Why GM – the supposed “engineering leader” of the automobile world – can’t make a small, light, RWD vehicle like those that have been made by European and Japanese companies and sold in the Eurozone since, uh, 1980, is beyond me.
Maybe someone should tell Lutz and co. that a bad plan is a whole lot better than no plan.
I think you already did. Of course, you and lots of others were trying to tell them this about loading the inventory with trucks and before that about making crap cars. They don’t seem to listen very well.
But here goes: Hey Bob! We don’t need another steenking FWD faux-“Luxury” automobile. Call your pals over in Dearborn and ask them how much cred the “Lincoln” brand has these days. Or you might ask even mighty Honda how well the better-than-any-FWD-GM-ever-built TL is going now against its rear-drive competitors. I’m hoping even Honda figures this one out.
Then again, why not start another brand and dealer network using recycled GM FWD platforms? Since you already have Saturn, might I suggest you move out one orbit and try URANUS; that way you could complete the folly.
So this is a 1-series RWD competitor… BMW can make a GTI-beating 123d get 46 mpg, and Bob Lutz still talks about RWD as if it automatically makes youur nice little compact get 8 mpg?
It will be a stretch for BMW to pull off the 1-series without damaging its brand with what may be perceived as an fancy econobox. And BMW already has lots of credibility as a manufacturer of sport-luxury vehicles in the bank.
On the other hand, Cadillac is still trying to convince the automotive market that it’s a player in the luxury category, and so far it hasn’t been all that successful. No too many buyers of the German brands or Lexus seem to be giving up their rides for a shiny new Cadillac.
With the stench of Cimarron and Catera still hanging in the air, how does GM think it can pull off a badge-engineered Mexico-built small Cadillac successfully without undoing the little progress that its made trying to get potential buyers to forget its past? Somehow, I don’t see this working out well.
Alpha is still under consideration, but we haven’t kicked off any design work or any engineering work because we have to sort our way through this 35mpg task.
Maybe Bob should stop talking everywhere and get to work trying to figure out how to do it. What happen to the American “can do” attitude and breaking new ground. Sounds like the same old GM attitude of saying it’s too hard and quitting before they even try. Oh wait I get it, there is more profit in a Mexican built BLS than in taking on the challenge to build something RWD. Except if no one buys it you can’t make a profit, kind of like what is going on now with the BLS.
With the stench of Cimarron and Catera still hanging in the air, how does GM think it can pull off a badge-engineered Mexico-built small Cadillac successfully without undoing the little progress that its made trying to get potential buyers to forget its past?
Judging from the CTS, I think they could pull off a decent baby Caddy. I strongly desire a 1-series BMW, but if Cadillac matched the performance of a 1-series with a decent value proposition, I’d certainly consider one. That’s progress: five years ago I would never have considered buying a Cadillac.
L47V8
“Meanwhile, BMW makes 735d sedans that get more than 35 mpg, and in a recent test I’ve read about,”
Really? How come their rated at best 25 mpg highway?
Ans which small, light RWD japanese vehicle are you referring to?
L47V8
“Meanwhile, BMW makes 735d sedans that get more than 35 mpg, and in a recent test I’ve read about,”
Skooter:
“Really? How come their rated at best 25 mpg highway?”
BMW doesn’t make a 735d. They put that engine in everything but the 1, 7 and Z4.
They do however make a 730d, with an European highway rating of 38 mpg (US) and a 7.8 seconds 0-62 time. Which is the best selling 7 in Europe.
Datasheets can be found at BMW’s own site:
http://www.bmw.de/de/de/newvehicles/7series/sedan/2005/allfacts/engine_data.html
For more performance-hungry people, they have the 745d, with only a 35 mpg highway rating. (and 553 lbs-ft of torque)
Lutz: “…maybe just a tiny bit bigger to enable larger wheels.” Why? GM is still modeling its cars on the P-51 airplane, famous for its long nose. Add needlessly large wheels and the result is a vehicle with small interior space for its size. GM hasn’t changed its styling for 50 years. Take a look at the 1958 models, infamous for bulk and chrome. Then look at the long-nosed 2008 models. Talk about poor use of space! Add to that cost-cutting where buyers are not likely to look, such as HID headlights that do move with steering angle, but do not self-level, no flash-to-pass headlights unless the headlights are on, no Bluetooth, and the list goes on. The German cars are no bargain, but do offer useful features and benefits. The Japanese high-end models come close, but still lag behind Audi, MB, and BMW. I looked at a loaded CTS. Close, but no cigar. I’d choose an Audi or an Infiniti. Costlier, but more for the money.
“They do however make a 730d, with an European highway rating of 38 mpg (US) ”
Which will be reduced to about 31 mpg (US) to meet US emissions laws…Lean burn is an EPA no-no.
Could we get a 1-series competitor without all the electronic gizmos please?
Could we get a 1-series competitor without all the electronic gizmos please?
Ditto: How about an update on a RWD Datsun 510 with a modern DI four-cylinder and a six-speed manual? Electric window lifts, leather interior and automatic climate control optional… I’ll take mine in a hatch about the size of an Audi A3.
Face it, everyone: GM is addicted to badge engineering. They just can’t help themselves. When any brand has any kind of success, they immediately try to fill out that brand’s model offerings in the hope that the shine of, say, the CTS will rub off on, say, a Saab with a body kit.
The first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem, GM.