Find Reviews by Make:
Cadillac’s Oscar night ad revealed a glimpse of the all new CT6 flagship.
While the full reveal will be at this year’s New York Auto Show, a brief preview of the car can be seen above.
114 Comments on “Cadillac CT6 Revealed On Oscar Night...”
Read all comments
THAT’S IT?
I’m anxious to see how interior space and materials compares to our W222.
I’m sure it’s gonna cost roughly the same, ($90,000+) but I truly hope Cadillac doesn’t go cheap on the electric features:
Power headrests, powered thigh cushions, heated/cooled seats with massage functions, etc.
No – the CT6 is going to start more in the $70k range as it is not Cadillac’s W222 competitor.
Cadillac is splitting its SWB and LWB “flagship” into 2 models, so the CT6 will compete against the SWB 7 Series and the like and the CT8 will compete against the S Class and LWB 7 Series.
Anyhow, while MB has done a very impressive job with interior materials and amenities for the W222, the sheetmetal is kind blah, but then again, flagship sedans tend to be on the blander/more sedate side as appropriate for its more conservative-minded clientele.
Were you expecting the Batmobile? That looks exactly what I’d expect Cadillac’s new big sedan to look like. Corporate face with some updates and new stylistic flourishes.
I’ll be interested to see the dimensions for this “big” sedan.
I feel like it’s too early too judge until more comprehensive shots are out, BUT….
Looks kinda meh. Surprised to see such an understated look after the Ciel concept in 2011, the bold Elmiraj and all the hype GM has ever spewed.
The more aggressive lines of the Ciel were never intended for Cadillac’s flagship sedan(s) as flagships tend to be more sedate design-wise.
Look for more of the Ciel’s lines when Cadillac does a 4-door coupe on the Omega platform.
I saw this commercial both times it ran during the Oscars, and I didn’t even notice it was the CT6 until I read this article this morning. Not really a standout, though part of the was the passing glance given to the car in the ad.
I like the music with this ad. Its stuck in my head now.
This commercial, the euro-esque setting, the euro music, would have been a knock-out for Maseratti. It makes no sense at all for Cadillac as an American Brand. (Even though Cadillac the man, was French.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_de_la_Mothe_Cadillac
Why not, Cadillac is named after a frenchmen. The one who founded Detroit.
Euro-esque? It felt like it was in New York.
I didn’t get a viseral reaction of embarrassment for who made this, unlike so many that Cadillac has made recently.
I could be wrong here but I believe that was supposed to represent NYC if not actually filmed there.
Yes, well if you’re trying to appear modern, you shouldn’t use a song from the 40’s or as millenials might say that song from Saving Private Ryan. As a millenial, I’m just sayin. The design sucks.
I was thinking the song from Inception, but the point remains,this song isn’t all that new.
Is it a f***ing four door?!
God damn it!
Yeah, I’m left wondering what the value proposition of the vehicle is as compared to any other four door passenger car.
For instance, a Camry or Sienna XLE with leather seats looks to have the same benefits, for roughly half the price.
Where’s the value in the Cadillac?
(I have the same question for most luxury cars, and it’s relevant since I’ve been able to afford one for a couple of years now. But where’s the value? It’s hard to believe that the interior trim and seat upholstery and a big engine are worth $35k on their own.)
P.S. My dad managed to look really classy in a series of 1990s Honda Accords.
The cars didn’t have much to do with it, of course, even though his 1997 Accord EX-L was comfortable and had leather seats. As Chuck Yeager said: it’s the man, not the machine.
My dad may have saved me a lot of cash by setting the example. :-)
Even with leather seats, the Camry’s interior is a far cry from luxury grade interiors, and there is also a premium for RWD and/or AWD.
Evidently there is a market since the ES was a “tarted up” Camry (now an Avalon) and is the top selling sedan for Lexus.
Everyone is going to clap, say Cadillac did a great job, they are saved (again), hallelujah and then go right back out and buy Mercedes, BMWs and Audis, that’s reality.
It’s really hard to make any argument against a W222 S-class.
BMw’s 7 is old and boring. The Audi A8 is boring. The W222 owns them all and you have to be doing drugs to spend more for a P85D.
Mmm…black S550.
The feeling of being a mafioso without having to kill anyone.
Around here, you can get an S-class used for less than $40,000 (less than $35,000 for a 2007). That car is functionally perfect if you need a spacious touring cruiser for a family of 4.
The interior materials and design still hold up well 8 years later.
The used/depreciated W222’s are going to be Heaven on Earth for main street in 4 years.
Because they are ubiquitous livery cars – parts are relatively easy to get. Still expensive, but relatively easy.
A spacious touring cruiser for a family of 4 is a Sienna.
My van has more-better space than any sedan or SUV, and it has better doors. It’s also designed to run on a middle class budget for a decade or two.
I have a family of four and a minivan, and I wouldn’t trade my van for an S-class at any price.
+1 for the minivan
Though I usually find that BT makes more noise than sense, today I 100% agree.
-1 for the minivan. I have a family of five and I’m shopping for a used S-class right now. I can fix my own and I’d much rather sweat the wrenching and parts rather than roll around in a bloated uterus with wheels. If I want to move stuff around, I’ll buy a second-hand truck. If I want to move more than five people, I’ll tell them to drive themselves, there ain’t no mustache on the front of my car.
zamoti
Every single thing I say is 100% correct. The problem is that I’m so far ahead of the curve that many people can’t understand me…yet.
Yeah, that must be it
I figured it out. BTSR is Charlie Sheen.
Tiger blood FTW.
It’s been stated elsewhere the CT-6 is not intended to be their S-class entrant, that will be filled later in the decade by CT-7, -8, or -9. It’s confusing since the CTS is their entrant against the 5 series/E-class/A6. Originally I thought so I don’t know where this exactly fits, maybe more against the 6 series/A7 though this is not as sleek or sporting as either of those designs. Then as I looked at it more it dawned on me that this is really aimed as a Sedan de Ville/Fleetwood replacement, which means it actually completes against a dead slot in the market.
What’s even more idiotic is that Johan is pushing this to represent the re-invention of Cadillac, when it’s inevitably destined to sell in niche level numbers, to be seen by very few people in dealerships or on the street, since it’s a twin turbo V6 ICE motor vehicle, coupled with a battery pack & plug in recharge feature.
So, this CT6 is akin to the now defunct Fisker Karma.
Johan announced on an open question session on Jalopnik that the CT6 will get a V8 Bi-Turbo
The CT6 is going head to head with the SWB flagship sedans, basically splitting the SWB and LWB into 2 models.
And since the S Class isn’t offered in SWB form, the CT6 is not an S Class competitor.
The A8 is suppose to be “boring” You want excitement pony up to the R8.
Except chances are very good that Cadillac will outsell Audi in the mid-high sedan segments.
So now, “dare greatly” is there slogan? The slogan ripped from Teddy’s Man in the Arena speech which was all about the glory of reaching for the stars yet falling short? Irony…
They did another ad with a voiceover from the Arena speech, which isn’t just about failure. See Browning on reach exceeding grasp.
Even if they did take TR’s speech out of context, I don’t see it as bad as Mitsubishi (and some cruise line, too) using Iggy Pop’s Lust For Life (Johnny’s on the corner trying to score some heroin in the song).
Lots of commercials use lyrics out of context because they fit the product. I’m pretty sure that Bob Seger’s Like A Rock isn’t really about pickup trucks (but then Joni Mitchell’s Big Yellow Taxi isn’t about protecting the environment).
I’m not persuaded by marketing (not even at a deep, subconscious level, understanding concepts such as operant conditioning & tactics such as astroturfing).
However, this commercial by Publicus is just awful on every level, from the out-of-context context, to the narration, to the slow motion, black & white/gray, urban street level perspective.
They should have thrown in dirty snow, dirty water hot dogs & splashing pedestrians with dirty, stagnant storm water while they were at it.
Let’s compare some past GM ads, for merely comparison’s sake:
“Like a Rock” Chevy Silverado commercials featuring Bob Seger
Cadillac’s “Break Through” Led Zeppelin crescendo’d campaign (unveiling Cadillac’s Art & Science styling with the goal of “reaching” younger consumers):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpD7f8gWgDg
Or the “See the U.S.A. in your Chevrolet” themed commercials.
All, much, much better, and at the very least, having a rational & immediately understandable narrative.
Or for different manufacturers, merely two examples:
Lexus LS400 champagne glass commercial –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExcavatoRs
God Made A Farmer RAM commercial (with speech written by & narrated by Paul Harvey) –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMpZ0TGjbWE
Or –
Nearly all recent plain, informative Honda CR-V, Accord, Civic ads, whether voiced by Dreyfus, Spacey or not.
VW GTI commercial (little GTI)
Mercedes Best or Nothing C, E & S Class ads
VW Passat Darth Vader ad
As the car goes by, the reaction is: “Wider, lower, longer, 4 door … Nissan Altima!”
One last thought: This commercial is a 100% rip off of “the mazda way” advertising campaign, GMs ad agency clearly has no shame.
In a world of confident, nearly-perfect stable mates coming from Germany and reasonable bargain-clones from the Far East, this Caddy is a lost cause even before it hits the dealership lot – where, incidentally, it will spend a lot of its time until it gets marked down by, say, $15k in a year-end closeout.
Cadillac bases new ad campaign on book by shame researcher Brené Brown:
http://theweek.com/speedreads/540284/cadillac-bases-new-ad-campaign-book-by-shame-researcher-bren-brown
From the article:
“Scarcity” is the title of the first chapter of her book Daring Greatly, and it focuses on America’s “culture of ‘never enough\'” — which is to say, the idea that we are always needlessly striving for something, and always come up short. “
I think Brown and her interviewer miss the point of that part of Roosevelt’s speech, which is that while we all fall short of perfection, it’s the people who try that actually get stuff done, however flawed it is.
She thinks the proper reaction to shame is resilience, I think the proper reaction to shame is to fix what’s causing you shame, but then I also think that you’re only really ashamed when you know you’re flawed.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding her but I get the impression that she’s a bit too accepting of failure. Yes, accepting that you failed is the first step to improving. Almost every successful entrepreneur or inventor has a failure or 12 in their story. She says that men primarily experience shame from a sense of failure, but then attributes that to the singular motivation of “do not be perceived as weak”. Besides what is perhaps some misandry that attributes a more complex and nuanced internal dialog to woman than to men, I don’t think that men’s shame at failure is about being seen as weak but rather an internal motivating force to get past that failure. If you have no shame at failure, you’re not going to care enough to work to get better.
If Cadillac (or their ad agency) genuinely was inspired by this stuff, I’d be concerned.
Lexus = Tiger Mom since birth
Cadillac = 45 years of failure to engineer, design, build good product, but give us yet another (post taxpayer sponsored-BK, btw) Mulligan (our 100th+), because our current vehicles can’t compete in terms of sales nor quality, but this commercial should give faith that we’re really, really going to turn this ship around, being in SoHo, distanced from that dullard, behemoth that is GM, and we’ll do it with a 70k or 80k V6 powered long CTS.
Really.
Not much of a “Tiger Mom” when Cadillac sells way more mid-priced lux sedans than Lexus.
Good summary Ronnie! Growing up next to and spending lots of time in Greenfield Village, an early inspiration for me was Thomas Edison. Many times I heard the quote from him regarding his light bulb filament research “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10000 ways that won’t work”. So, for Edison (and me) there was never any shame in failing, it was just part of the process and to be expected. Consequently, I never feared failure and definitely had no shame and succeeded at pushing the envelope.
Look, a stretched CTS with extra headlight fill-in.
I’m sure the GMINSIDE NEWS fanbois are creaming themselves.
*Yawn*
These will ambiguously fill in any rare empty dealer lot spaces not occupied by the glut of ATSs, CTSs, XTSs & Whatever Ss and CTs follow.
#DareGreatlyNOT/tapioca-jello-pudding-blah
So should I buy a ’76 Eldorado and a huge tank filled with gasoline instead of a CT6?
I have one sitting in our showroom…now THAT is a Cadillac that Dared Greatly!
Ooh, what color? Do the centers of the wheel covers match the color of the car too? Does it have EFI?
We had two believe it or not – one my dealer principal bought for his personal enjoyment (Emberglow Firemist on White Leather w/24k original miles, factory top, rear glass, everything works, etc) and a near-identical but worse-for-the-wear ’76 Eldo convertible (Emberglow Firemist on White Leather w/64k indicated miles, but color-keyed wheel covers, 50/50-split bench, and thermometer). Sold the ‘fixer-upper’ one to someone in Texas who bought it fer her son’s high school graduation gift.
Mmm, sexy…
Got any ’71 or ’72 Eldorados? I’m in the market for one. The search has put me on the phone with some very colorful characters but has not netted me a car.
I typed in Cadillac Eldorado 1972 using DuckDuckGo as my search engine and found several.
I didn’t know they were worth this much today. It makes me wonder how much my 1977 Toronado would have been worth today.
Too new. ’59 and ’66 were prime el dorado years.
Nonsense, every Eldorado up to the launch of the Hardly Together 4100 is great!
’59 and ’66? Those were just tarted-up De Villes. 1967 was the first Eldorado with it’s own body and (at the time) state of the art FWD
http://i308.photobucket.com/albums/kk336/MJEH5712/CADILLAC%20WALLPAPER%20DELUXE/1967Eldoradocoupe.jpg
Exactly, the ’67 was the first Eldorado to be a different platform from the DeVille. That’s significant.
I personally like the looks of the 79-85 Eldo, but hate the awful 4.1 engine, so I guess 67 through 81 is a good timeline for Eldorados to me. The 92 looked pretty good, but early Northstars are too risky…
MY92 is 4.9, its the unicorn with both a revised E-body and a working motor.
93, then. Though I think there were Northstar Eldos in 92, it was just optional.
There was no Northstar in MY92, it was supposed to debut on the new revised platforms but it was late. In today’s world if you see a initially revised E-body not on blocks or in a junkyard, there at least an 8 in 10 chance it is a 4.9.
I saw a nice Eldorado Touring Coupe in green…based on what Google is showing me, it’s a post-95 model. Guess that guy got lucky with his Northstar, or knows a good mechanic.
There is a head bolt kit which supposedly fixes the problem, it just doesn’t happen much because its cost/labor outweighs the value of the cars.
@NoGoYo I personally like the looks of the 79-85 Eldo
I saw a beautiful dark gray example of what looked like an 82 coming up behind me on I-95 North in Woburn MA today. Wanted to let him catch up so I could take a closer look, but I had to exit to 93 north.
Edit: Oops – just remembered it was a Toronado.
I was waiting for you to get here!
I think it looks like a slightly stretched and lowered STS, not that that’s a bad thing. I thought the STS was a fine looking car, but it must be said it was not successful against the E-class.
I guess we’ll find out if this will be any more successful against the S-class. I have my doubts.
I saw a STS for the first time in a long time today. Damned Northstar design flaws send them to an early grave, I guess.
Most STS’s were sold with a V6.
Sigh…
By the time the STS was introduced, the Northstar issues were addressed. As Mr. Orange said, most STS models were equipped with the V6. As such, they weren’t all that impressive. By ordering the Northstar, however, things improved quite a bit. It brought the fabulous Magnetic Ride and staggered tires. This transformed the car. I owned an ’06 STS with the Northstar and it remains the best car I’ve ever owned. It rode like a Cadillac but any aggressive control input instantly revealed a sporting character. The Northstar was smooth, powerful and made very nice noises on the throttle.
What Cadillac needs to do is put the LS-3 in the CTS, make Magnetic Ride standard, price it at $55K, bring back Led Zeppelin and go kick some ass in the marketplace. I’d buy that car in a heartbeat.
Looking back, I think the V models were a big mistake. Yes, they were fabulous cars. But the pricing and the power levels were beyond what mainstream buyers could live with. The issue is that the next level down is, by comparison, deeply disappointing. I’m on my third Cadillac, a 3.0 CTS Wagon. The 3.0 doesn’t belong in a Cadillac, it has absolutely the wrong character. With the Northstar or an LS-3, it would be an awesome car.
Huh, I thought the STS was Northstar only.
This one was a STS-4 too!
In a way, yes. The STS was N* only from introduction until it got the do-over for 2004. There may have been some early Seville SLS models which got the old 4.9. Not sure on that.
MY92 Seville and Eldorado both carried the 4.9, some MY93s I believe did as well but the MY93 Touring models did not. By MY94 L37 was the standard motor for Seville and Eldorado but I believe the change occurred during the 93 model year.
‘Huh, I thought the STS was Northstar only.’
uhh .. I think Bunkie is referring to the RWD Sigma platform STS built from 2005 to 2011. High feature 3.6 LY7 V6 was standard.
They’re basically doing that, except for the sticker price. The uplevel engine isn’t the loud, rude, crude LS3, it’s the much more refined (and similarly powered) LF3 twin-turbo V6.
My car has an LS3. It’s a marvelously entertaining engine but just plain unfit for luxury car duty. NVH is like an old Quad 4, just with the nicer sound of a V8. It shakes, rumbles, coughs, pops, and roars. Quieter exhaust would subdue it a bit, but only a bit.
The only metric now shown is projected reliability over time. I realize it would be a little out of place after three decades of not considering it, but GM should consider reliability of it’s models.
METRIC 6.2L V8 L86 3.6L V6 TT LF3
TYPE 6.2L V8 3.6L V6 TWIN TURBO
DISPLACEMENT 6.2L 3.6L
VALVETRAIN OVERHEAD VALVE, TWO VALVES PER CYLINDER, VARIABLE VALVE TIMING DUAL OVERHEAD CAM, FOUR VALVES PER CYLINDER, VARIABLE VALVE TIMING
FUEL DELIVERY DIRECT HIGH-PRESSURE FUEL INJECTION DIRECT HIGH-PRESSURE FUEL INJECTION
COMPRESSION RATIO 11.5:1 9.5:1
RECOMMENDED FUEL REGULAR UNLEADED OR E85 PREMIUM REQUIRED
MAXIMUM ENGINE SPEED 6000 6500
POWER HP / kW @ RPM 420 / 313 @ 5600 420 / 313 @ 5750
TORQUE LB-FT / Nm @ RPM 450 / 610 @ 4100 430 / 583 @ 3500 – 4500
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2013/06/gms-new-6-2-liter-v8-l86-vs-new-3-6-liter-twin-turbo-v6-lf3-by-the-numbers/
*not
It seems the STS with a Northstar and Magnaride should have been an impressive ride, ticking most of the boxes people say they want from Cadillac. I’ve never heard of catastrophic problems from them, either.
Any thoughts on why the STS sold so poorly?
“Any thoughts on why the STS sold so poorly?”
Well, it was expensive which might have had something to do with it. Mine stickered for about $55K in 2006. I bought mine as a CPO car in 2008 for less than half that. It was a screaming deal.
BTW, the terms STS and SLS were originally trim levels on the Seville (Seville Touring Sedan, Seville Luxury Sedan). Only the RWD car had the model name STS.
They keep going to the blind car designer; brutal. Their whole line is brutal, can’t get younger when it looks like crap.
They shoulda dared harder…at least there’s no DLO Fail, so I’m happy.
This car has zero presence, the worst possible attribute for a fullsize car made worse by the intent of being a flagship luxury. It’s too small, the headlight design should have died in 2006 and that plastic bumper belongs on a Kia Rio.
Side note, just saw an ad that used the word presence to describe a Cruze, first, no, but I’ve never seen that angle used to sell a car ever. GM reading TTAC?
Hint: your doing it wrong GM.
When pictures were first released of the W222 chassis S-Class, many people thought the same thing. You have to see it in the flesh. It’s presence comes from it’s size. To early to tell on the Cadillac. I hate the name. (Or lack there of) Maybe it’s BMW’s and Audi’s numbering, but 6 doesn’t scream flagship to me. 6 is kind of in the middle.
How big do you want it? Judging by the other proportions compared to the height (which should be consistent with the CTS) and the wheels (presumably 22s) this car is as wide as anything in the class and well over 200″ long.
So, this is it, huh? I think Ford wore the slogan better one month ago.
Unimpressive, its like what the CTS is already supposed to be. Could this be the new platform or is this an Alpha variant as well?
Additional: “How dare Cadillac reinvent itself” Reinventing yourself would have been to drop the Art and S*** and do something completely new (like you should have done).
I believe this is a new large RWD platform called Omega.
I thought so too but it doesn’t look much different, its not what I expected.
It’s completely a stretched CTS.
How non-daring.
It’ll have CUE, haptic/virtual non-responsive HVAC, cruise & audio controls with a glitchy interface, be as (un)reliable as a 90s era Jag, depreciate from 80k to 40k in 2 1/2 years flat, have a twin turbocharged V6 that will require an oompa loompa’s hands to change the oil or spark plugs on, and Cadillac will brag about its V-Sport trim BurgerKingRing times to a prospective audience that doesn’t care.
Johan & Melody CT-Lee were given this Elmiraj design aesthetic –
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/cadillac-elmiraj-concept-monterey-2013/#image-2
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/cadillac-elmiraj-concept-monterey-2013/#image-1
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/cadillac-elmiraj-concept-monterey-2013/#image-3
& turned it into a longer sausage of the unquestionable sales & revenue failure that is the current CTS, that now entices whatever few buyers it can with a minimum of $13,000 off MSRP (to much, much higher discounts in higher trim levels).
Good going, Johan.
Dare to fail & you sometimes will. Find new roads to failure.
“un)reliable as a 90s era Jag”
Hey now some of those sorta worked, the X305s did. Kinda. Now if we’re talking XJS 5.3…
“have a twin turbocharged V6 that will require an oompa loompa’s hands to change the oil ”
There will probably be a fail in the powertrain but I’m holding out hope for a real motor. Maybe the beancounters will chime in: “Um Johan it would be much more cost effective to use an off the shelf LSx from our truck line than to install the rainbow puking unicorns you’ve requested for the powertrain”
“Find new roads to failure”
A new slogan!
“depreciate from 80k to 40k in 2 1/2 years flat,”
I’ve got a real suggestion for them, DARE to find new pricing. Catera is a 35K car, and Alpha a 22-25K one. This, maybe 45-50K. Price them accordingly and watch them move despite their many, many drawbacks. You really think people want to spend 80,000 USD for a correctly sized Catera? Doesn’t the MB E-class start in the 50s and isn’t it pretty much the same thing?
I’ve driven every Cadillac either by relative, friend, co-worker rental, or dealer demo.
Here’s how they should be priced by MSRP given their market value/desirability/qualities (aka true price discovery) before manufacturer & dealer additional incentives (I will end all prices in traditional window sticker $xxx,999.99):
ATS: $27,999.99 to $35,999.99 (Lease $259.99 per month $0 down sign & drive)
CTS: $31,999.99 to $39,999.99 (Lease $289.99 per month $0 down sign & drive)
XTS: $319.11 per month $0 sign & drive (No one should be buying these things, period)
CT6 (aka LWB CTS): $40,009.91 (Lease $359.99 per month $0 sign & drive)
SRX: $30,000.911 to $34,000.911 (Lease $299.911 per month $0 sign & drive)
Escalade: Survey says no adjustment needed until gasoline hits $3 and up again
ELR: $319.11 per month $0 sign & drive (No one should be buying these things, period)
Boom!
#Dare2PriceBasedOnPresentReality
DeadWeight, your pricing is perfect.
That’s exactly where I expected these Cadillacs to be based on the cars that I’ve seen. Imagine my shock when I saw the actual sticker.
So… I guess looking at GM’s past pricing strategies, they will tack an additional $35K or so of GM ego fee for CT6 because they are “just as good as 7 series” and no way will they be “cheaper than a Lexus/Toyota”?
How ’bout some reality.
The CTS is nicer than the Lexus GS and the GS starts at $47,250 (so, stating that the CT6, which is one segment higher, should start at $40k is just silly).
So even taking into account the base CTS having a T4, should be around the low $40k to start.
And no, the CT6 is NOT a LWB CTS.
The CTS is on a stretched Alpha platform, just like how the Lexus GS is on a stretch version of the platform underpinning the IS.
This is a big reason why the CTS is a better handling sedan than the 5 Series which is on a shortened 7 Series platform.
“The CTS is nicer than the Lexus GS and the GS starts at $47,250 (so, stating that the CT6, which is one segment higher, should start at $40k is just silly).”
I’d like to live in the reality where this is in any way accurate.
Lex GS350 (available in US) starts at $48K with a standard V6, available hybrid, and is built in Japan. Cadillac’s cars can’t claim any of those facts, so they have already lost. We don’t even get into the superior materials Lexus uses on its models vs GM which I know very well cuts corners with materials in all model lines and is famous for it.
“And no, the CT6 is NOT a LWB CTS.”
Certainly looks like one, maybe it should look better than its lesser brethren and not a carbon copy.
DW,
Do candy bars cost a nickel in your scenario?
I thought you disliked the brand, in which case any price is too high (for you). Do you mean to tell us that you would buy a Cadillac if they listed them a little lower?
@28-cars-later
So what if the Lexus GS comes standard with a V6?
These days, T4 for the midsize segment is the norm (heck, even the Audi A8 comes with a T4 in other markets) and just b/c the 5 Series and A6 are available with a T4 doesn’t mean that they aren’t more luxurious than the GS.
And part of the whole luxury equation is giving the buyer OPTIONS.
Lexus only really offers that long in the tooth V6 as an engine option.
Sure they offer the GS in hybrid form, but that was a poor substitute for V8 power and the GS hybrid has been a complete sales dud (as has been the hybrid LS).
BMW offers the 5 Series with a wide range of powerplant options ranging from a T4 to a T8, as is Cadillac.
Apples to apples – the V6 RWD CTS starts at $53k vs. $48.6k for the GS.
And putting aside that the Cadillac is the better handling machine (which doesn’t have a direct bearing to luxury), the Cadillac has more tech features available and has just as nice, if not nicer, interior.
As for looking like a bigger CTS, have you compared the 5 and 7 Series and the A6 and A8?
The new C Class is seen as a mini- S Class so would be surprised if the new E Class follows suit (in mid-size form).
And there really isn’t that much difference btwn the GS and LS – share same basic front end design and have similar Hofmeister kinked greenhouses.
This car was in the pipeline before Johan and Melody had their current jobs.
“It’s completely a stretched CTS.
How non-daring.”
+1000!
And the new C Class ia a mini S Class.
Sausages of different lengths for BMW with the 3/5/7 Series and Audi with the A4/A6/A8.
The advertising campaign is horrible, but at least it looks like the car might be an appropriate size for a Cadillac.
I’m not really sure that you can evaluate the styling of a car from 8 seconds of one driving by the camera in a commercial. Since the car appears first in a cloud of smoke and then drives by there’s really only a second or two where you get clear view of it.
One of the things that I’ve learned from shooting 3D is that things look different in real life than in mono photography, so I usually reserve judgment about car styling until I actually see the car with my own eyes.
Yeah, you can. Cadillac had 8 seconds to wow me. It took 30 seconds before I realized it was a car ad, then I thought it was a Citreon ad (too French for an American classic). When the Cadillac finally appeared… Stretch CTS, meh!
This should have been, it needed to be the Elmiraj. Everyone was blown away with that concept. Instead we get a stretch CTS
FAIL!
The car in the ad seemed to be CGI to me. The closeup on the wheel was the clue. The tire seemed suspiciously thin. Looked like a quarter inch sidewall height. I could be wrong.
I can certainly judge the excessive number of doors!
Cadillac needs a big coupe.
That first pic looks like someone ‘dared’ to run that bad boy on two stroke fuel :)
garbage.
These two resemble that remark:
http://s1.cdn.autoevolution.com/images/news/johan-de-nysschen-named-cadillac-president-83803_1.jpg
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-09-25/what-i-wear-to-work-cadillacs-melody-lee
*What I Wear to Work: Cadillac’s Melody Lee
By Arianne Cohen* September 25, 2014
*Arianne Cohen is the author of The Sex Diaries Project: What We’re Saying About What We’re Doing (John Wiley & Sons).
Cadillac was promising a lovely coconut, the new dashingly-named CT-6, but reality intruded and delivered instead a gnarly walnut.
Said Melody Lee, Chief Astrologer and Brand Marketing Leader, “WTH? That doesn’t look like the pictures they emailed us here in The Big Apple from Detroit. We’ve been really, really busy inventing ephemera as the basis for the New Cadillac, so didn’t have the time for a visit back to the mothership to give final approval. We trusted them, and look at the mess they delivered!”
Lee sobbed and whined, “This will ruin the introduction of CT brand boutique quality jewelry and watches at malls across America! What are we going to do?”
“only those who dare”, was that not the lyric to a Lady Gaga song?
This thread is a predictably hilarious mixture of:
1. Somewhat complementary but largely neutral responses.
2. DW hating on every component of every detail to do with the car, the commercial, and the brand.
3. A couple randoms stating their Sienna does everything better so why bother.
Imma just get my popcorn and keep watching.
It ain’t over until someone criticizes it for not being a brown, manual, diesel wagon.
Echild I actually laughed aloud at that comment. So accurate
The headlight assembly needs like, eight more vertices. Then it’s PERFECT.
Johan stated on jalopnik that the CT 6 will get an all new V8 bi-turbo engine. So a new V8… interesting.