Cadillac Is Replacing The ATS And CTS With Just One Sedan

Mook

Mr. Manager
Staff member
Admin
May 23, 2007
206,715
117,596
Elgin
Real Name
Mike
deadspin-quote-carrot-aligned-w-bgr-2')}.f_branding_on.blog-group-deadspin .editor-inner.post-content .pu

Cliffs:

We at Jalopnik have screamed to anyone who will listen that the Cadillac ATS and CTS sedans are not only good, but great, especially in their high-performance V versions. But*things are tough for sedans right now. That’s a problem for Cadillac, which pinned a lot of its early comeback hopes on those sedans. The solution:*more crossovers, and combining the ATS and CTS into just one vehicle.

After some initial confusion*over whether the larger Cadillac CT6 had a future, Cadillac boss Johan De Nysschen came clean with*Reuters*and explained the replacement plan: a new car called the Cadillac CT5 will replace the ATS and CTS.

Also, the last we heard, this smaller A3-fighting Cadillac sedan*is supposed to be rear-wheel drive too, and that could be a lot of fun to drive.

Let’s just hope Cadillac keeps the V program going. I’ve neither heard nor read anything to indicate otherwise, so as long as the performance cars are still there, they can call these sedans whatever the hell they want.
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
The problem is they are overpriced. That is why they are not selling.

Hyuandai/ Genesis did this right. They offered a similar product for substantially less money and sold a decent amount of cars. Cadillac didn't do it this way. They have a well earned reputation of building garbage and suddenly decided to give a go at making decent cars again, which they did but then they immediately threw them out there for German money.

It's kind of sad. The base CTS has more standard features than the base 5 series and comes in for $7,000 less but I wouldn't give the CTS a passing glance. I just don't perceive it as being a premium product worthy of the price.

Whenever I see them compared to the Germans they talk about how dialed in they are to drive but how far short they fall in terms of cabin materials and overall quality perception and when you're buying a luxury car that's huge.
 

CoppeR

snappydresser
Oct 2, 2008
299
349
West Burbs
So GM is replacing the ats and cts = CT5 and building a smaller sedan (ats) and calling it something else eventually.

So basically nothings changed except renaming the cts and ats. CTS-V to big and only comes in sedan form, ATS-V small and I'm not doing a V6. Guess ill keep my V2 for a while longer.
 

YoushallgoFo

TCG Elite Member
Dec 26, 2008
3,137
2,221
anyone else think they should forget trying to match the germans in quality and just try to come out with something really good looking instead? I'm personally a little tired of the german boxy sedan that comes in 3 sizes that they keep trying to fight. I'd rather have something like the lexus coupes like the RC and the LC. idk thats juse me.
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
Sounds like Tesla.

The difference being that Tesla doesn't have a pedigree of building garbage. They built a revolutionary, game changing car right out of the gate and are riding high on that brand perception. Comparatively you have companies like Lincoln and Cadillac that built hot trash for decades.

If you took away Autopilot and stuck a GM 3.6L V6 in a Model S nobody would give it a passing glance. People buy Teslas despite their interior; not because of it.
 

jason05gt

TCG Elite Member
Jan 17, 2007
15,307
7,195
Naperville
The difference being that Tesla doesn't have a pedigree of building garbage. They built a revolutionary, game changing car right out of the gate and are riding high on that brand perception. Comparatively you have companies like Lincoln and Cadillac that built hot trash for decades.

If you took away Autopilot and stuck a GM 3.6L V6 in a Model S nobody would give it a passing glance. People buy Teslas despite their interior; not because of it.


I think Tesla is still TBD. They've relied heavily on Government subsidies, both at the Federal and State level that makes the car attractive to the affluent. Additionally, their business model has in the past relied on revenue from tax credits. Take all of those credits away and we wouldn't be talking about the Model 3.

Lincoln and Cadillac in the past have built over a hundred thousand vehicles a year. That's Tesla's biggest hurdle in scaling their production and building a car that has is reliable.
 

CMNTMXR57

GM, Holden & Chrysler Mini-Van nut swinger
Sep 12, 2008
26,172
31,303
Elgin
The V-series won't be going away. It is their halo performance vehicle (and a killer at that), and as long as BMW has their M division, and Mercedes has their AMG line, Cadillac will have a V-Series of some way, some sort.

The one thing I don't like is the new naming convention. I hated it when Johan first announced it I hate it now

The old way was simple;
- ATS
- CTS
- STS
- DTS
- XTS

It was simple and for the most part, you knew by letter, where it ranked on the Cadillac totum poll. Now you've got a CT6.2.7.25 WTF!

The difference being that Tesla doesn't have a pedigree of building garbage. They built a revolutionary, game changing car right out of the gate and are riding high on that brand perception. Comparatively you have companies like Lincoln and Cadillac that built hot trash for decades.

If you took away Autopilot and stuck a GM 3.6L V6 in a Model S nobody would give it a passing glance. People buy Teslas despite their interior; not because of it.

Mine is now 11 model years old, and pushing 12 since it's "in-service" date. I drive it like an absolute lunatic. The amount of time that the throttle is less than @ 100% is significantly less than it being at 100%. I probably went WOT at least 10x today on my way to work because the car is so gawddamn fun to drive and my commute is ~12 miles.

In that time, it has been back to the Cadillac dealer ONCE for warranty/recall! ONCE! And it wasn't even anything "wrong" per-se. It was because GM finally got their shit together on a fuel pump relay recall that they had been dragging their feet on, and I figured, I had better get it done.

I had GREAT service from the dealership (Dekalb/Sycamore Chevy/Cadillac). The car was treated like royalty. It sat inside from the time I dropped it off, until the time I picked it up. It had more people coming to check it out (it is one of 2,503 made), in the spot they gave me to park it, while I detailed it waiting for my rental to come. The parking spot was right next to the guy who was my service advisor. So it never left his sight.
 

jason05gt

TCG Elite Member
Jan 17, 2007
15,307
7,195
Naperville
Cadillac needs to ditch the "art and science" angular design. While it looks good on V models, it dates the mainstream models quickly. I think that the ATS, CTS, etc. design looks dated.

More importantly, build a nice interior. Cadillac's still have cheap looking interiors. GM reverse engineered BMW models in the past to try infuse BMW's secret sauce into the chassis. They need to do the same with interior materials. It shouldn't be hard to quickly track down BMW, Audi, etc. interior suppliers and spec comparable materials.
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
I think Tesla is still TBD. They've relied heavily on Government subsidies, both at the Federal and State level that makes the car attractive to the affluent.

Inherently this statement is flawed. A modest tax credit does not make a high end luxury car significantly more attractive to the affluent. These guys are paying in some cases $40,000 just for a modest increase in range and a substantial reduction in 0-60 time. And as the price of the car has marched up since it's introduction, sales have as well which flies in the face of that logic. The $7500 tax credit represents a 7.5% discount on a $100,000 Model S. Anyone buying a $100,000 depreciating asset in the first place likely isn't making or breaking the deal on $7500. There have been studies that have largely debunked this as well, stating that the credit affects sales of cheaper cars exponentially more because it represents a substantial difference in the overall price of the car as the price of the car goes down. That same $7500 tax credit is a 24% discount on the Model 3. A buyer of a $35,000 car is definitely going to consider a $7500 credit in their purchase. I will agree with that and time will tell how the phase out of the credits affects the 3 but to insinuate that the S has been largely floated on tax credits is not an accurate statement. It's been floated on the wealthy and strivers like me.

Additionally, their business model has in the past relied on revenue from tax credits. Take all of those credits away and we wouldn't be talking about the Model 3.

You have to look at this in the proper context because on it's face, yes the sale of ZEV credits pushed them from red to black on a few quarters but as an overall business they represent such a small portion of their revenue as to be inconsequential. It would be as if I had a $10,000 in expenses and and $10,001 in revenue and the $1 difference was from selling ZEV credits. Technically they're what pushed me into the black for that particular quarter but they represent such a statically small part of my revenue as to be insignificant. Far more significant would be the fact that the company is dumping hoards of cash into Model 3 production ramp up and the Gigafactory, the latter of which is a one time expense, not to mention it creates an economy of scale benefit for them that literally nobody else can touch. The Gigafactory will output more batteries than every battery factory in the world... times two. If they were a company not in expansion, trying to turn a profit on an existing product line and this was the case then I'd be in full agreement that they can't rely on credits but the truth is they're not relying on credits and they've said time and time again that selling the credits is not part of their business plan. Indeed, as I mentioned in previous posts, Musk is on record as saying he wishes those credits would either be better enforced so they could realize their entire value or simply go away as they subsidize traditional manufacturers more than they subsidize Tesla. It's just easier to point the finger at Tesla since Tesla receives the benefit directly whereas other manufacturers receive it indirectly.

This is a topic I'm happy to cover in detail if there's anything you're not sure about and as a business owner I consider myself pretty objective on the math. I've studied it pretty extensively which is why I get my knickers in twist when I see people continuing to share the same inaccurate info year after year. A lot of people like to speak of tax benefits and credits while having a tenuous grasp (at best) of what they are and how they work. A few times here people have talked to me about the carbon credits only for me to have to explain to them the very credit they're referring to in their argument. Seems kind of silly on it's face.

Lincoln and Cadillac in the past have built over a hundred thousand vehicles a year. That's Tesla's biggest hurdle in scaling their production and building a car that has is reliable.

I'm not sure reliability will be an issue but I want to see consistency in build quality.

driving to/from wisco this weekend i saw a metric fuck ton of the new xt5's.

they look good.


saw my first continental this weekend too. already looks dated

I haven't seen a single XT5 but I do see the Continentals. I like the Continentals. I feel like they're a step in the right direction. There's something about the rear of the car I can't put my finger on though. It just doesn't look right and it ends up ruining the rest of the car for me. The same goes with the MKZ. The MKZ feels like it has two competing styles going on now. The nose and the rear used to be very similar in concept but now they just slapped their new face on the front of the car without touching the rear and it looks odd.

Cadillac needs to ditch the "art and science" angular design. While it looks good on V models, it dates the mainstream models quickly. I think that the ATS, CTS, etc. design looks dated.

More importantly, build a nice interior. Cadillac's still have cheap looking interiors. GM reverse engineered BMW models in the past to try infuse BMW's secret sauce into the chassis. They need to do the same with interior materials. It shouldn't be hard to quickly track down BMW, Audi, etc. interior suppliers and spec comparable materials.

Cadillacs are pretty boring too. The CTS especially is a good looking car but it's just meh. The CT6 is a good looking car too but I have to see one next to a CTS to know it's not a CTS.
 

jason05gt

TCG Elite Member
Jan 17, 2007
15,307
7,195
Naperville
[MENTION=396]Mike K[/MENTION], I would like to see that survey.

The $7,500 Federal tax credit combined with State incentives is pretty significant, plus the savings on gas. I think there's a few States that offer $5,000 in credits, so that's $12,500 total. That's a big discount when looking at cars in that price range. A $100,000 Tesla S with tax credit looks attractive compared to a $100K S-Class or 7 series. The rich love tax credits, write offs, and tax cuts!
 

Mike K

TCG Elite Member
Apr 11, 2008
13,214
2,586
There were several studies. I'll dig them up for you. You got to keep in mind that it's a 100k car and it's a popular 100k car. Look at the Mercedes S Class. Do you think a $7500 credit would have an appreciable amount on sales? No way. It would be completely negligible. If anything, people would justify $7500 more in options but it wouldn't be the deal breaker for them buying the car.

One of the most recent observations was in Georgia where they offered subsidies and then suddenly decided to stop. Overnight registration of electric vehicles fell by 90%. On it's face one might that's absolutely horrible and ohes noes! Electric needs government to sell their product. In reality, most of the registrations were for the Nissan Leaf which after the rebate could be leased for about $60 a month. So basically free. Sales of those dropped to almost nothing. The much more expensive Model S was also affected though not nearly as much because as a factor of overall price, the $7500 is much less impactful on the S than it is on the Leaf, which was basically given away on the tax payer's dime.

And an argument can be made that Tesla sales were adversely affected because the elimination of the credit was well advertised and thus people rushed to buy cars before the cutoff which would naturally exaggerate any sales decrease after the change. Truth be told, I don't know if sales of the S rebounded or not or how adversely they were affected. I need to pull it up. I do recall the article suggesting it was a minimal impact though.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 90 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant. Consider starting a new thread to get fresh replies.

Thread Info