GM Building a Cadillac V12 Sedan

[jpd80]

Like I said, not one zeta has turned a wheel and the media are already hyping every word coming from Bob Lutz. Building an aura around a car is OK to a point but, is there going to be a big credibility vacuum when the cars actually arrive? Sure they're nice to drive but saying youre going to use them everywhere from $25K - $90K price points is extremely hard to swallow.

 

On the V12 rumor, who's to say Caddillac aren't doing the all developments themselves in North America? I think either loose lips Lutz told more than he should, or he was off in the 1950s dreaming about Fisher Bodies. Either way, the man has to take some responsibility for these rumors.

 

I often wonder at the market niches chased by GM. Personally, I would have thought it wiser to persue roll out of low end products. I think this would have been more important given current gas prices.

Edited March 28, 2007 by jpd80

[Deanh]

I think this would have been more important given current gas prices.

TOUCHE!

[RichardJensen]

Richard...they WEREN"T knocking down the doors..

Weird. They were selling on eBay with pretty hefty markups.

 

You must not have the *it* dealership in LA. Now if Jay Leno would've bought his GT from you..............

 

Wait--are you in LA, or just in So. California?

[Deanh]

Weird. They were selling on eBay with pretty hefty markups.

 

You must not have the *it* dealership in LA. Now if Jay Leno would've bought his GT from you..............

 

Wait--are you in LA, or just in So. California?

the e-bayers were on there forever...thats where we got half of our out of staters....and sorry but I'm guessing Jay with his NUMBER one status probably either stole the car, got given it or paid diddly squat...ahhhhhhhh, the rich get richer......and the power of celebrity.......So Cal boy here...nice enough to ride the motorcycle today....

[RichardJensen]

Jay with his NUMBER one status probably either stole the car, got given it or paid diddly squat...ahhhhhhhh, the rich get richer......and the power of celebrity.

Nothing about the Super Bowl annoys me half as much as seeing some overpaid athlete GIVEN a Cadillac at the end of the game.

 

Why not say, "In recognition of your performance, Cadillac is donating $70,000 to the charity of your choice"?

[Deanh]

Nothing about the Super Bowl annoys me half as much as seeing some overpaid athlete GIVEN a Cadillac at the end of the game.

 

Why not say, "In recognition of your performance, Cadillac is donating $70,000 to the charity of your choice"?

What about golfers making MILLIONS just to appear and then being given keys to a Mercedes SLR....ahem.....LONG LIVE EDDIE GRIFFIN.....hahahahaha

[PolarBear]

But more disturbing is what happens after he leaves: He leaves FoE, and it's not even five years later, they're in hot soup. He leaves Chrysler, and they make it three-four years before collapsing. The man leaves a huge hole that no one else fills.

 

Why?

 

Because he's all about the decision, and nothing about the process.

 

He can preside over an empire of 'creative destruction', but he has yet to find a successor that has been able to measure up to his own abilities.

 

He's like Alexander the Great: a man of genius who left behind a power vacuum.

When Lutz leaves, who fills his shoes?

 

That's why I don't like Lutz, and why I think he's bad news for GM.

 

One of your best recent posts. :shades: He's a brilliant man... but I think you nailed the aftermath flat.

[jpd80]

One of your best recent posts. :shades: He's a brilliant man... but I think you nailed the aftermath flat.

 

So by comparison, Ford is building sedans mainly as FWD with AWD versions and, a view to RWD variants for the remainder of sedan customers. Takes a lot of work but it's sound logic and makes use of flex plants.

 

So while Lutz is pushing RWD Zeta and smaller RWD Alpha, where does that leave GM's sedan roll out? Are they replacing their main FWD products with these or are they more platforms?

Edited April 1, 2007 by jpd80

[RichardJensen]

where does that leave GM's sedan roll out? Are they replacing their main FWD products with these or are they more platforms?

GM's Delta, Epsilon, Lambda and whatever they call their small crossover architecture are their primary FWD architectures. Epsilon II will allegedly be AWD capable, Lambda and the small crossover architectures already are.

 

The W bodies--the Impala, LaCrosse, and Grand Prix have dwindled down to almost nothing (at one time there were sedan and coupe versions of the Chevy, Oldsmobile and Pontiac models, and two Buick models), and the limitations of the original 1987 architecture are still there: imprecise ride/handling, small back seat, as well as the descendants of the 1987 engine and transmission (3.4L OHV + 4 speed transmission go back to 1980 & the Chevy Citation actually).

 

These W bodies are going to be replaced by Zeta cars, apparently. By then retail volume on these things will probably be so low that the transition to Zeta should be smooth and easy.

 

The G bodies (derived from the Olds Aurora & Buick Riviera of the mid 90s), the Lucerne and DTS, are in something of a limbo. I don't believe major upgrades are planned, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they're being replaced by Zeta cars either.

 

GM still has some absolutely ancient FWD architectures in the G & W. They have improved them regularly, but they retain many of the shortcomings the original vehicles had.

Edited April 1, 2007 by RichardJensen

[PolarBear]

GM's Delta, Epsilon, Lambda and whatever they call their small crossover architecture are their primary FWD architectures. Epsilon II will allegedly be AWD capable, Lambda and the small crossover architectures already are.

 

The W bodies--the Impala, LaCrosse, and Grand Prix have dwindled down to almost nothing (at one time there were sedan and coupe versions of the Chevy, Oldsmobile and Pontiac models, and two Buick models), and the limitations of the original 1987 architecture are still there: imprecise ride/handling, small back seat, as well as the descendants of the 1987 engine and transmission (3.4L OHV + 4 speed transmission go back to 1980 & the Chevy Citation actually).

 

These W bodies are going to be replaced by Zeta cars, apparently. By then retail volume on these things will probably be so low that the transition to Zeta should be smooth and easy.

 

The G bodies (derived from the Olds Aurora & Buick Riviera of the mid 90s), the Lucerne and DTS, are in something of a limbo. I don't believe major upgrades are planned, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they're being replaced by Zeta cars either.

 

GM still has some absolutely ancient FWD architectures in the G & W. They have improved them regularly, but they retain many of the shortcomings the original vehicles had.

 

Don't beat on the W-bodies too hard. the Impala is on track to hit 350,000 units this year- making it the largest selling domestic sedan by a country mile. GM has also cut back dramatically on fleet deliveries in this body- it works in retail land, the Malibu is turning into the fleet stepchild. You're also a bit off on the lineage of the mechanicals- the Impala shares as much with the Citation as the Five-Hundred does with the Taurus. Which is to say, not a helluva lot.

Edited April 1, 2007 by PolarBear

[ehaase]

The G bodies (derived from the Olds Aurora & Buick Riviera of the mid 90s), the Lucerne and DTS, are in something of a limbo. I don't believe major upgrades are planned, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they're being replaced by Zeta cars either.

 

I have. They are moving to Zeta also.

[RichardJensen]

Don't beat on the W-bodies too hard. the Impala is on track to hit 350,000 units this year- making it the largest selling domestic sedan by a country mile. GM has also cut back dramatically on fleet deliveries in this body- it works in retail land, the Malibu is turning into the fleet stepchild. You're also a bit off on the lineage of the mechanicals- the Impala shares as much with the Citation as the Five-Hundred does with the Taurus. Which is to say, not a helluva lot.

Actually, the Impala shares a bit more with the Citation than the Five Hundred does with the Taurus.

 

The Five Hundred used the 3.0L Duratec from the Taurus; the 3.4L V6 in the Impala is the same basic engine as the 2.8L V6 from the X-Bodies; the Five Hundred uses a different transmission, the Impala's 4-speed is a direct descendant of GM's first 4-speed FWD auto, as introduced in the Citation.

 

D3s share more in the engine compartment (at least until they get the 3.5L), less in the transmission department. Of course the 3.4L & 4-speed in the Impala probably have almost no interchangeable parts with the 1980 Citation equivalents--however, the failure to completely re-engineer both items means that they've only partially implemented new technologies developed since then.

 

---

 

While the Impala has managed to more or less hold its own (I heard that they're still sitting at around a 40% fleet volume, making retail Impala deliveries in the high 100k range), the other W bodies have just vanished. GM used to build well over 800k Ws a year.

[PolarBear]

dupe

Edited April 1, 2007 by PolarBear

[PolarBear]

Actually, the Impala shares a bit more with the Citation than the Five Hundred does with the Taurus.

 

The Five Hundred used the 3.0L Duratec from the Taurus; the 3.4L V6 in the Impala is the same basic engine as the 2.8L V6 from the X-Bodies; the Five Hundred uses a different transmission, the Impala's 4-speed is a direct descendant of GM's first 4-speed FWD auto, as introduced in the Citation.

 

D3s share more in the engine compartment (at least until they get the 3.5L), less in the transmission department. Of course the 3.4L & 4-speed in the Impala probably have almost no interchangeable parts with the 1980 Citation equivalents--however, the failure to completely re-engineer both items means that they've only partially implemented new technologies developed since then.

 

---

 

While the Impala has managed to more or less hold its own (I heard that they're still sitting at around a 40% fleet volume, making retail Impala deliveries in the high 100k range), the other W bodies have just vanished. GM used to build well over 800k Ws a year.

 

Well, yes.... and no. The 3.5 and 3.9 derive from the old 3100, which shared the 60 degree architecture with the 2.8 (which meant they could share tooling), but that's about it. interestingly, the 3100 V6 was one of the most durable engines GM ever produced- 300K+miles is not at all uncommon. The transmissions share nothing with the old X-bodies- either in number of gears or basic design. The Impala platform dates back to the 2000 re-engineering of the W-body. It's getting a bit long-on-tooth, but the Impala/Grand Prix will get replaced on '09 with Rear-wheel drive replacements. The La Crosse may soldier on, though.

 

In any event, the Impala does prove that high-tech isn't necessary for sales success in the mid-priced family car arena. It presents good value for the money, sells equally well in fleet or retail applications, and seems to be holding better resale than other GM counterparts. That 40% fleet penetration may be a bit on the high side- about 18% is allocated to rentals, the balance go to "true fleet" customers (sales rep cars, law enforcement, etc). Of interest, the Camry's fleet penetration is starting to get significant as well- GM isn't the only company pursuing that venue.

 

Bottom line to all this, though, is that GM is swatting a boatload of "old tech" cars out the door. In no way do I want to represent the Impala as superior to the Five-Hundred (it isn't). But..... GM does a better job of marketing the car, and put powertrains in them commensurate to customer expectations.

[RichardJensen]

Well, yes.... and no. The 3.5 and 3.9 derive from the old 3100, which shared the 60 degree architecture with the 2.8 (which meant they could share tooling), but that's about it. interestingly, the 3100 V6 was one of the most durable engines GM ever produced- 300K+miles is not at all uncommon. The transmissions share nothing with the old X-bodies- either in number of gears or basic design. The Impala platform dates back to the 2000 re-engineering of the W-body. It's getting a bit long-on-tooth, but the Impala/Grand Prix will get replaced on '09 with Rear-wheel drive replacements. The La Crosse may soldier on, though.

 

In any event, the Impala does prove that high-tech isn't necessary for sales success in the mid-priced family car arena. It presents good value for the money, sells equally well in fleet or retail applications, and seems to be holding better resale than other GM counterparts. That 40% fleet penetration may be a bit on the high side- about 18% is allocated to rentals, the balance go to "true fleet" customers (sales rep cars, law enforcement, etc). Of interest, the Camry's fleet penetration is starting to get significant as well- GM isn't the only company pursuing that venue.

 

Bottom line to all this, though, is that GM is swatting a boatload of "old tech" cars out the door. In no way do I want to represent the Impala as superior to the Five-Hundred (it isn't). But..... GM does a better job of marketing the car, and put powertrains in them commensurate to customer expectations.

Hmpf. My understanding was the 3.1L was an outgrowth of the 2nd gen. 2.8L which was basically the previous 2.8L block with different heads.

 

Transmission--same story; the 4-speed launched with the W-bodies (IIRC) was developed from the 3-speed in the X & A, and not a clean sheet.

 

Also, the re-engineered W-body in 2000 I would put in the same category as the re-engineered Fox in the '94 Mustang: definite improvements, but still very much limited by the original platform's quirks (e.g. high seating position, awkward shift lever placement, and chassis stiffness). I wouldn't draw too bright a distinction between the 99 Lumina and 00 Impala.

 

---

 

Interesting that you mention the Impala as proof that the latest & greatest isn't needed--the Camry is also proof. That thing has been updated many times, but remains very much the 1992 model. As the vehicle has gotten longer and wider, the C pillar has reached enormous sizes in order to provide stiffness to the vehicle (incorporating that big C pillar in the design could be called making a virtue out of necessity).

 

---

 

While the 60 degree GM V6s are reliable, Ford's Vulcan V6s are not that bad either. Where GM, IMO, had it all over Ford was in transmission reliability, and 90 degree V6 reliability.

[PolarBear]

So looping around for a minute:

 

The Five-Hundred is a nice car. A really nice car, with many state of the art features. It should sell better than it does. My own take from retail world is

1) Needs more powertrain choices.

2) Desperately needs more marketing support. These cars don't sell themselves.

3) Someone needs to revisit the pricing strategy. The base car is a good value, but they can get frighteningly expensive if you start throwing all the goodies at it.

 

Back to Cadillac. Their big seller is still the Escalade line- roughly 4,300 units last month, followed by the DTS and CTS lines. Considering an average transaction price on an Escalade of somewhere north of $70,000, that has to get someone's attention. For all the about gas mileage, enviornmental considerations, yada yada..... the truth of the matter is buyers in this segment could care less. More importantly, Cadillac's strength seems to be on the high end..... not the low end.... of the pricing schema.

 

Link to GM Sales

 

Given that, a $90,000 high-end car may not be completely out of whack, at least from a marketing point of view. Makes more sense than 25 years ago, when a fully loaded Chevy Caprice was only three or four grand cheaper than a Cadillac DeVille. That takes us right back to the Five Hundred- a loaded version gets too close to Mercury's and Lincoln's offerings, not to mention the extrememly competitive near-luxury import segment (Infinity, Lexus, BMW).

[RichardJensen]

Back to Cadillac. Their big seller is still the Escalade line- roughly 4,300 units last month, followed by the DTS and CTS lines. Considering an average transaction price on an Escalade of somewhere north of $70,000, that has to get someone's attention.

 

...

 

Given that, a $90,000 high-end car may not be completely out of whack, at least from a marketing point of view.

But, bear in mind the purchasers of DTSes can also afford MB E-Class & BMW 5-Series offerings. They are electing to purchase the Cadillac for some reason. Cadillac would be better served exploring why people -are- buying the stuff they're selling, as opposed to wishing and hoping to sell some odd-ball product (like a $90k V12 sedan) to someone who is at the moment not interested in anything Cadillac is selling.

 

Also, along those lines, while Cadillac is doing decent business on the Escalade, would that volume translate to a sedan? Again, people buying +$70k Escalades could be buying sedans, but they are not, and it is likely not because Cadillac is not selling $70k sedans.

 

Once again you find yourself trying to figure out how to convince people that are simply not interested in Cadillac products to buy Cadillac products.

 

----

 

The greater the departure from your existing lineup, the harder you will have to work in order to make this product fit, the harder you will have to work to get people buying this particular product to upgrade to other products in your lineup, etc.

 

Classic example of this is the Lincoln LS: Had Ford done what the General did with the Sigma, and quickly replaced the Continental with a stretched LS, launched an Aviator type vehicle off the LS platform, and completely revamped Lincoln's advertising strategy, they would've been on their way (by now) to redefining popular perception of Lincoln.

 

They would be a long way from succeeding, as Cadillac is similarly far off among the general public, but they would at least be making progress.

 

For all GM has done with the Cadillac brand they are a long ways away from having a brand which will make this putative V12 sedan palatable to the customers looking at vehicles in this class.

 

---

 

Having failed with the LS, Ford is aiming for the low-hanging fruit with Lincoln. While they can certainly be criticized for failing to build 'exciting' product, how much of that criticism is coming from people able to plop down 40 large on a vehicle, and willing to plop it down on a Lincoln? So many of the people clamoring for these vehicles either can't afford them, or would find an excuse to go elsewhere with their money if the were built, that it raises the issue of 'effective demand'. 'Effective demand' is demand for a product among people able to pay for a product and willing to purchase that product if it's available.

 

Demand and effective demand are often confused on this board.

Edited April 2, 2007 by RichardJensen

[PolarBear]

Some outstanding points there. Buying motivation behind a Cadillac DTS....... you're going to laugh, but I think the biggest single factor is that the Cadillac isn't a BMW/Mercedes/Lexus/Infinity... and doesn't look like one either. The Caddy has some endearing qualities, but the most common thing I hear from owners is 1) unique styling 2) loved the power and features 3) wanted to own a domestic car. Where Cadillac cooperated is by offering a line of cars that lost the "over-50" curse. They did it the same way they did in 1966, when the '67 Eldorado saw the light of day. In that context, the "art and science" design theme isn't really new- more retro to that landmark car.

 

 

 

 

Keeping in mind that I hang around a crowd that drives mostly big trucks (generally with Blue Ovals on the grill), you'd be surprised at how many have a Cadillac and/or a Corvette in the garage. These are folks that I would describe as "rich rednecks." Fairly high-income blue-collar folks (or small business owners) that wouldn't dream of buying an import. Not an Escalade in the group- which doesn't surprise me because the 'Slade appeals to a completely different demographic.

[RichardJensen]

Ironically, Ford has targeted that exact buyer for Lincoln. Unlike Cadillac which is unabashedly pursuing 30-something import buyers, check out Ford's description of the typical Lincoln customer:

 

Meanwhile, the Lincoln target customer has been dubbed the American Dream. These are self-made men and women who are proud of where they came from. They continue to be motivated to make life better for themselves and their families, and believe they deserve recognition for their hard work. To them, luxury purchases are a reward rather than an indulgence. When car shopping, these customers look for refined American design with smooth power on demand and exceptional comfort.

 

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=24087

[PolarBear]

Just as ironic, if Ford would restyle the Town Car, they could be there too. The Town Car is a great automobile, and is well-respected as such. The latest rounded version just wasn't the prettiest car they've ever brought out. And- as a Lincoln, it should offer something more substantial than just the 4.6 (a great motor, just not enough of it for luxury-car land).

 

If Cadilllac could go back to that Eldorado for inspiration, here's something for Lincoln to mull over.

 

[wescoent]

GM's Delta, Epsilon, Lambda and whatever they call their small crossover architecture are their primary FWD architectures. Epsilon II will allegedly be AWD capable, Lambda and the small crossover architectures already are.

 

The W bodies--the Impala, LaCrosse, and Grand Prix have dwindled down to almost nothing (at one time there were sedan and coupe versions of the Chevy, Oldsmobile and Pontiac models, and two Buick models), and the limitations of the original 1987 architecture are still there: imprecise ride/handling, small back seat, as well as the descendants of the 1987 engine and transmission (3.4L OHV + 4 speed transmission go back to 1980 & the Chevy Citation actually).

 

These W bodies are going to be replaced by Zeta cars, apparently. By then retail volume on these things will probably be so low that the transition to Zeta should be smooth and easy.

 

The G bodies (derived from the Olds Aurora & Buick Riviera of the mid 90s), the Lucerne and DTS, are in something of a limbo. I don't believe major upgrades are planned, but I haven't seen anything to suggest they're being replaced by Zeta cars either.

 

As for the V12 Cadillac... if it does go through, GM should build it on the Zeta. It won't sell well, and won't be as good as the S-Class, but if they stay in the game long enough, they might establish a foothold.

GM still has some absolutely ancient FWD architectures in the G & W. They have improved them regularly, but they retain many of the shortcomings the original vehicles had.

 

It is my understanding that in general, GM is going to replace the Epsilon and W-Body cars with a new, flexible version of Epsilon that can be stretched lengthways and sideways, and is AWD-capable. The G6 will move to Alpha (a small RWD platform which is a hybrid of Zeta and Kappa, which will also serve as the basis of an all-new entry-level Cadillac, the BTS). The 9-3 will remain on the short wheelbase version, with the Malibu, Aura, LaCrosse, and possibly the 9-5 moving to the LWB version, which will be a tweener size between the current Malibu and Impala.

 

In turn, the G-Body will be replaced by Zeta, after some temporary thoughts of creating an an all-new FWD platform based on Lambda. The DTS, Lucerne, Impala, and G8 will all be on varying sizes of Zeta. The Impala and G8 will be larger than the Impala and Grand Prix they are replacing.

 

GM will be ditching its pushrod V6s, and replacing them all with the 3.6L DOHC and 6-speed automatics. The 4-cylinders will also see a phase-in on the 6-speed.

Edited April 2, 2007 by wescoent

[mettech]

Guess what I am trying to say is that I do like the Cadillac Sixteen and Cien better than actual production models.

 

Some of the art and science design theme is directly related to the 1967 Eldorado and full-sided Cadillacs of the mid to late 60's.

 

 

If you look at this picture of the Cien, it takes a few complex curves and arcs to balance out the hard edges. The most beautiful thing is the rake and tumble of the greenhouse, the way the trailing edge of the front fender is bladed and beveled with a gentle curve inward to the grille... That raised bladed edge flows into the side window beltline. Then from the rear, the classic tailfin is wonderfully interpeted with a bladed edge that runs forward and fades in the front door. Most importantly notice that the bodysides are gently curved, not slab sided and that the wheel flairing is soft then yeilds to the edgy circular arch at the wheel lip.

 

The actual Cadillac production cars have been flat surfaced and rather boxy.

 

 

The Sixteen is stunning. Modern tailfins done right, complete with integrated exhaust outlets, and the beveled decklid details...

 

 

Beautiful beautiful.... I love the way the fenders rise above the center of the hood in a beveled fashion and curve in to meet the grille... Nice straight lines blanaced out by gentle curves.. Nothing is too flat... When you put curves into the look of a manmade object it gives you the sensation of looking at beautiful forms found on the human body...

 

I want inside of it NOW!!!!!!! :happy feet: