: I'm Baaack!



kcnewell
07-16-03, 09:40 PM
Well......I'm back! It seems like a month since I was here last! Quite a few new names here.....Cool! I'm now a resident of the great state of Nevada. It's unbelievably nice to get out of the "Peoples Republic of California" Lookin' Forward to getting to know some of the new folks!

JerseyGirl
07-16-03, 09:48 PM
Well it's about damn time KC! I missed ya something awful! It just wasn't the same without ya. Nevada huh? Cool! Make sure ya stay put now, ya hear? :histeric:
I missed ya babe, really! Glad you are back! :thumbsup:

Katshot
07-16-03, 11:32 PM
Well it's about damn time KC! I missed ya something awful! It just wasn't the same without ya. Nevada huh? Cool! Make sure ya stay put now, ya hear? :histeric:
I missed ya babe, really! Glad you are back! :thumbsup:

You keep that up and there'll be no living with him! :bighead:

Elvis
07-17-03, 03:30 PM
Now that KC's back, I'll bet a lot of this FWD vs. RWD crap dies down... bouncer: :canttalk:

Katshot
07-18-03, 04:19 PM
Now that KC's back, I'll bet a lot of this FWD vs. RWD crap dies down... bouncer: :canttalk:

Yeah right!! :histeric:

kcnewell
07-18-03, 08:13 PM
Yeah right!! :histeric:
As long as there's a single person out there in cyberspace to respond Kevin will continue to bleat about how nice it is to drive a fishing boat disguised as a car :annoyed: As long as it has RWD!

HotRodSaint
07-18-03, 08:57 PM
As long as there's a single person out there in cyberspace to respond Kevin will continue to bleat about how nice it is to drive a fishing boat disguised as a car :annoyed: As long as it has RWD!

Oh my gawd, do you see this insult Kevin? He called the Fleetwood a fishing boat disguised as a car! That's it. Thats the last straw. This just can't go on. To call a Fleetwood a fishing boat, why thats just mean. Next he'll probably start saying it's a land yacht or worse, a barge! I don't know if I can maintain composure with those kind of slanderous comments being thrown about. I haven't heard anything that mean and nasty since....since...since 3rd grade! :bonkers:

JerseyGirl
07-18-03, 09:48 PM
You keep that up and there'll be no living with him! :bighead:

:banana: :nyanya: :histeric:

Allante North *
07-18-03, 10:14 PM
Did Fleetwoods come with Fog Horns?

How bout downriggers and a marine radio? :wave:

Katshot
07-18-03, 10:48 PM
As long as there's a single person out there in cyberspace to respond Kevin will continue to bleat about how nice it is to drive a fishing boat disguised as a car :annoyed: As long as it has RWD!

Say what you want KC. Just remember, it wasn't RWD cars that brought Cadillac to their knees. Just because your car has more in common with a Chrysler K-car than a REAL Cadillac..... :nyanya:

elwesso
07-19-03, 12:17 AM
Oh lord.... not the real cadillac deal again!! Oh the memories!!! Ralph!!! :histeric:

kcnewell
07-19-03, 12:50 AM
Say what you want KC. Just remember, it wasn't RWD cars that brought Cadillac to their knees. Just because your car has more in common with a Chrysler K-car than a REAL Cadillac..... :nyanya:

Really?....Do your homework. The models that put Cadillac back on the map and began the trend in the direction of performance were the STS and the ETC in that order. Putting a de-horned Corvette motor in a schooner was an afterthought so the geezers would have a little more power when they were driving out to the Wal-Mart.

What really brought Cadillac to their knees was a few years of really bad engines ( See: HT4100 ) And a general decline in quality that fortunately started to turn around with the introduction of the '92 STS and the Northstar engine a year later. NOBODY Gave a damn about FWD/RWD and MOST people couldnt even tell the difference.

You're just obsessed :banana:

Katshot
07-19-03, 10:21 AM
Really?....Do your homework. The models that put Cadillac back on the map and began the trend in the direction of performance were the STS and the ETC in that order. Putting a de-horned Corvette motor in a schooner was an afterthought so the geezers would have a little more power when they were driving out to the Wal-Mart.

What really brought Cadillac to their knees was a few years of really bad engines ( See: HT4100 ) And a general decline in quality that fortunately started to turn around with the introduction of the '92 STS and the Northstar engine a year later. NOBODY Gave a damn about FWD/RWD and MOST people couldnt even tell the difference.

You're just obsessed :banana:

Think again Buckwheat!
The slide started in the 70's and continued damn near until the CTS and Escalade (2nd Gen.). Of course I beileve the piss-poor engines that Cadillac chose to put in their cars was quite possibly the single greatest kick in the head but most industry insiders will agree that the down-sizing of 1985 was when the Cadillac reputation really went down the tubes. Cadillacs choice to not only go with a smaller car but to throw in a total P.O.S. FWD drivetrain was the death blow. And then to subsequently STAY with such a lousy combination for so many years put them out of the race totally.
It wasn't until Cadillac started going back to what made them great, that they are starting to get some respect. Although I may not like the "Art and Science" styling, or the choice to sell trucks, they are both bringing people back to Cadillac. And the current descision to go back to RWD across the line is going to further promote their heading in the right direction. Cadillac has to be BIG, DIFFERENT, POWERFUL and do it RELIABLY. None of those can be applied to any of the FWD junk they've built in recent years.

HotRodSaint
07-19-03, 10:49 AM
Think again Buckwheat!
The slide started in the 70's and continued damn near until the CTS and Escalade (2nd Gen.).

Yea, wasn't the Seville developed as an attempt at the end of the '70's to compete against Mercedes? Even then GM saw the writing on the wall. They just didn't know how to read.

When the Japanese threat of the '80's finally caused them to react, they blindly forgot about the Europeans. (Why would you copy the Japanese for your luxury car, when the Japanese didn't have luxury cars in the US then?)

So while BMW and Mercedes (and later the Japanese) stayed on a steady predeteremined coarse, the 'boat' makers sent their boats adrift with no navigational assistance. The only goal was this years market share.

Now imagine a 3rd or 4th generation Seville. Had it been allowed to evlove through the '80's, we might be seeing LT-1 or Northstar powered RWD Sevilles. Hell, they could have shared platforms with the Malibu and we would all really be happy campers.

GM ruined pretty much every nameplate they had during the late '70's through the '90's. But at least they make some good trucks!! And that's important for all those who need to carry 10 sheets of plywood to the black tie party.

the Sandman
07-19-03, 10:51 AM
For those members who still do not recognize it, this topic is 90% male bonding ritual and 10% real substance. Granted there are fundamental differences in front and rear wheel drive vehicles. Granted that for the enthusiast, rear wheel drive offers some advantages over front wheel drive. However, the differences were by far most significant when front wheel drive was a new offering. As the technology matured, the disadvantages of front wheel drive were greatly attenuated to the point now where it really doesn't make that much difference except to the most rabid supporters of rear wheel drive. Sure, if you add a bunch of horsepower to a front wheel drive vehicle the problems will resurface - to that extent the rear wheel drive platform is still far superior. However, to dismiss the current Cadillac front wheel drive vehicles as "FWD junk they've built in recent years" is just wrong. It may not be to your liking, but my STS is certainly not junk and I completely agree with KC that it was the redesigned STS and ETC which started to put Cadillac back on the right track. They are a pleasure to drive.

And remember, the decision to go RWD or FWD, what size, which engine - these are all dictated by marketing factors and bean counters - not by discussions such as we have here.

HotRodSaint
07-19-03, 11:03 AM
And remember, the decision to go RWD or FWD, what size, which engine - these are all dictated by marketing factors and bean counters - not by discussions such as we have here.

Until very recently Cadillac was just another GM division. It was in response to the 'luxury' car revival in the '90's, that GM finally remembered that Cadillac was a once a luxury division and not just a high content Chevy platform.

It will take a few generations of the art and design sedans and some wholly unique bodies for their truck line before they are considered anything more than a just the latest fad.

HotRodSaint
07-19-03, 11:09 AM
...some wholly unique bodies for their truck line before they are considered anything more than a just the latest fad.

Look at Lincoln, who started this American luxury truck fad. Their star is already fading.

I'm really surprised we haven't seen a Trailblazer with the optional 'Cadillac trim package' yet.

At least the Fleetwood was a 'stretched' and uniquely bodied Impala.

elwesso
07-19-03, 12:30 PM
Lets think here..... If you were to go up to someone completely random and said..... Describe cadillacs in 20 words or less...... They wouldnt say "FWD sideways mounted engines, small bodies, and a really sporty ride"..... They would say "big".....

To me, this is what makes the fleetwood so unique.... it is the last of the "traditional" cadillacs, we will probably never see something like it again!!!

And in 20 years, we'll see whose cadillac is worth more!!!

the Sandman
07-19-03, 02:10 PM
Let's think here..... If you were to go up to someone completely random and said..... Describe cadillacs in 20 words or less...... They wouldn't say "FWD sideways mounted engines, small bodies, and a really sporty ride"..... They would say "big".....OK, they might say big. They might also say luxurious. Powerful. Stylish. These are good things. I would venture to say that *most* Cadillac drivers are more concerned with these factors than FWD vs RWD. In terms of size, today's Cadillacs are relatively large. And you can opt for the "plush" ride or the "sporty" ride when you place your order, except maybe in the newer Art and Science models, which are kinda plush AND sporty with the Magnetic Ride option (STS too for that matter). Look at the cars Cadillac is competing with - they too are smaller than in past decades, and they too are biased more toward tighter handling than before. Times change, technologies change, tastes change, perceptions change, political and social agendas change...cars change too. It's called evolution. It even happens in people.
To me, this is what makes the fleetwood so unique.... it is the last of the "traditional" cadillacs, we will probably never see something like it again!!!This may be true - it's as much a matter of personal taste as anything else. One has the option of staying with the old rather than going to the new.
And in 20 years, we'll see whose cadillac is worth more!!! You have a Cadillac??

elwesso
07-19-03, 03:49 PM
I will agree with that..... Most people today that drive cadillac are not concerned about FWD or RWD.... They just want it to be a cadillac and all the perks that comes with owning one.......

And no, I dont own a cadillac, but I can bet that a 95 fleetwood will be worth more in 2015 than a 95 seville or eldorado..... Could be speculation, but a 95 fleetwood is worth more NOW than a 95 seville, mileage and condition similar....... Except, it seems to me that the sevilles hold their value better at higher miles than the fleetwoods do........

the Sandman
07-19-03, 04:08 PM
I will agree with that...Most people today that drive cadillac are not concerned about FWD or RWD...They just want it to be a Cadillac and all the perks that comes with owning one.That's what I'm talkin' about. My STS may be "FWD junk", but it's a *damn* fine ride back and forth to work each day (85 mile round trip). It's quiet, comfortable, handles well, and has adequate power for the long commute. When I want to go really fast I get into one of my turbotrucks...AWD turbo, now that's for REAL MEN...none of this 2WD naturally aspirated junk.:histeric:
And no, I dont own a cadillac, but I can bet that a '95 Fleetwood will be worth more in 2015 than a '95 Seville or Eldorado... Could be speculation, but a '95 Fleetwood is worth more NOW than a 95 Seville, mileage and condition similar... Except, it seems to me that the Sevilles hold their value better at higher miles than the fleetwoods do...I was just messin' with you - I did see your point and it may or may not be valid - we can't finish this conversation until 2015.

kcnewell
07-19-03, 04:59 PM
I will agree with that..... Most people today that drive cadillac are not concerned about FWD or RWD....

And no, I dont own a cadillac, but I can bet that a 95 fleetwood will be worth more in 2015 than a 95 seville or eldorado..... Except, it seems to me that the sevilles hold their value better at higher miles than the fleetwoods do........


I agree with your first point Wes....The second point however is a major contradiction and makes NO SENSE!

Katshot
07-19-03, 06:35 PM
It is not just MY OPINION that RWD is a superior platform for a luxury sedan. It is the opinion of the world in general and only Cadillac has chosen to swim against the tide all these years. I believe that had Cadillac NOT switched to FWD in the 80's (yeah, I know the Eldo was FWD in the 60's), it would have put them in a much better position now than they find themselves. I also believe it is undeniable that a RWD Seville or Eldorado would be a superior car to the current (and recent) FWD models. The FWD cars that Cadillac sold over the last couple decades should've been left to Buick or Oldsmobile while Cadillac should've continued to develope a better RWD platform.
I personally love the last generation Fleetwood but as I've said many times it is nowhere near as good a car as it COULD have been. I did my best to convince Cadillac in the 80's that they were going the wrong way, and again in '93 when I found out what their plans were for the Fleetwood. Again, they wouldn't listen. Now they're paying the price.

the Sandman
07-19-03, 07:00 PM
It is not just MY OPINION that RWD is a superior platform for a luxury sedan. It is the opinion of the world in general and only Cadillac has chosen to swim against the tide all these years. I believe that had Cadillac NOT switched to FWD in the 80's (yeah, I know the Eldo was FWD in the 60's), it would have put them in a much better position now than they find themselves. I also believe it is undeniable that a RWD Seville or Eldorado would be a superior car to the current (and recent) FWD models. The FWD cars that Cadillac sold over the last couple decades should've been left to Buick or Oldsmobile while Cadillac should've continued to develope a better RWD platform.
I personally love the last generation Fleetwood but as I've said many times it is nowhere near as good a car as it COULD have been. I did my best to convince Cadillac in the 80's that they were going the wrong way, and again in '93 when I found out what their plans were for the Fleetwood. Again, they wouldn't listen. Now they're paying the price.I don't see anywhere in this thread where someone disputed that RWD has some advantages over FWD. How big an advantage in the current crop of cars is debatable. Calling all FWD Cadillacs junk - you're certainly entitled to your opinion but I strongly disagree.

If they had listened to you back then would they now be called Katillacs?

Katshot
07-19-03, 08:41 PM
I don't see anywhere in this thread where someone disputed that RWD has some advantages over FWD. How big an advantage in the current crop of cars is debatable. Calling all FWD Cadillacs junk - you're certainly entitled to your opinion but I strongly disagree.

If they had listened to you back then would they now be called Katillacs?

Cute!
OK, I'll be a little more specific about the FWD cars I called junk.
IMO, I believe that they are not anywhere near what a Cadillac should've been so in my mind I call them junk. Maybe too strong a word but I feel strongly that they were the wrong product for Cadillac and only hurt the marque in the long run.
Like you said, I'm entitled to my opinion. But I also believe that time has proven me correct in this matter.

the Sandman
07-19-03, 09:27 PM
Cute!I thought so too. :D
OK, I'll be a little more specific about the FWD cars I called junk.
IMO, I believe that they are not anywhere near what a Cadillac should've been so in my mind I call them junk. Maybe too strong a word but I feel strongly that they were the wrong product for Cadillac and only hurt the marque in the long run.
Like you said, I'm entitled to my opinion. But I also believe that time has proven me correct in this matter.Well, now that you put it that way, we're coming to a point where we can both agree. And I can't believe you caved on the "junk" thing :histeric:.

kcnewell
07-19-03, 10:12 PM
Like I said before......He's obsessed! But it's fun to watch him chase his tail evry time someone mentions the subject...

ljklaiber
07-19-03, 10:57 PM
I will agree with that..... Most people today that drive cadillac are not concerned about FWD or RWD.... They just want it to be a cadillac and all the perks that comes with owning one.......

And no, I dont own a cadillac, but I can bet that a 95 fleetwood will be worth more in 2015 than a 95 seville or eldorado..... Could be speculation, but a 95 fleetwood is worth more NOW than a 95 seville, mileage and condition similar....... Except, it seems to me that the sevilles hold their value better at higher miles than the fleetwoods do........
Dear Mr Infiniti,

Since I will probably be dead by 2015, and will not give a damn what my seville is worth, I would like to say that hi mileage and BS about the model mean zip when I'm cruisin across Ga at 90 and its cool inside.

I drive a Cadillac (95 Seville) because it is the 'best' ride. Kinda like a word we used a long time ago in High School.......'COOL'

kcnewell
07-20-03, 12:12 AM
I'm entitled to my opinion. But I also believe that time has proven me correct in this matter.


What a surprise......

elwesso
07-20-03, 12:13 AM
I agree with your first point Wes....The second point however is a major contradiction and makes NO SENSE!
Allow me to explain myself....

I have seen many fleetwoods for sale around here.... and with 30k miles they seem to go for 15-25k........ Where the same seville may go for 8-12k..... But once the fleetwood hits 100k, it seems to loose a lot of value, but the seville seems to hold it a little better...... A fleetwood with 100k may go around 5-7, whereas the same seville might go for 6-8...... Not a huge difference, but enough.....

I guess that means that the FWs are worth <lots> more when they have low miles.....

elwesso
07-20-03, 12:16 AM
Thats fine.... I am not concerned about resale on my Q, nor should I be....... I will keep it, and when it dies or when it starts giving me too much trouble, I will sell it and move on to bigger and better things.......

And when it all boils down, the cars real value is how YOU value it...... You may have a car thats worth 3000, but it may be a priceless artifact to you......

Katshot
07-20-03, 10:27 AM
Like I said before......He's obsessed! But it's fun to watch him chase his tail evry time someone mentions the subject...

Give me a break!
Chase my tail? Dude, you couldn't BUY a clue. :rolleyes:
I, at least manage to make a point in my posts unlike you who only tends to make little barbed comments and run off. Try some helpful comments sometime, or maybe even something with some REAL substance.

kcnewell
07-20-03, 10:53 AM
Give me a break!
Chase my tail? Dude, you couldn't BUY a clue. :rolleyes:
I, at least manage to make a point in my posts


OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN........As though we didn' it get it the first 700 times :banghead2

HotRodSaint
07-20-03, 11:08 AM
Give me a break!
Chase my tail? Dude, you couldn't BUY a clue. :rolleyes:
I, at least manage to make a point in my posts unlike you who only tends to make little barbed comments and run off. Try some helpful comments sometime, or maybe even something with some REAL substance.

What he said. :thumbsup:

The bitter old man routine is getting really old. :boring:

kcnewell
07-20-03, 11:21 AM
The bitter old man routine is getting really old. :boring:
So is the I disagree with everything you say regardless of what it is routine....So Get over it! :farting:

HotRodSaint
07-20-03, 11:44 AM
So is the I disagree with everything you say regardless of what it is routine....So Get over it! :farting:

Read your signature. I think it typifies your attitude here. Now do a search for your posts. What have any of them had to do with Cadillacs?

You are very quick to call someone a sophmoric name for watching a movie, tv program or sporting event. Your world view seems to be the only one thats exceptable. Everyone else is simply being indoctrinated by the black helicopters overhead.

I don't mind if you want to be a bitter old man. It certainly can be entertaining to read your very opinionated rantings. Just don't pretend that they are anything else.

Mad'lac
07-20-03, 12:34 PM
I'm glad KC is back. He brings life back to this party.

elwesso
07-20-03, 01:09 PM
That is true....... Sometimes I really LOL when im reading...... people in the room think im crazy!!

MMNineInchNails
07-20-03, 01:55 PM
ohhhhhhh moderator show down brawl.... :thumbsup:

kcnewell
07-20-03, 02:06 PM
Your world view seems to be the only one thats exceptable.

Acceptable.....Would be the proper spelling here...

the Sandman
07-20-03, 02:23 PM
ohhhhhhh moderator showdown brawl...

For those members who still do not recognize it, this topic is 90% male bonding ritual and 10% real substance.And I was being generous with the 10%...

elwesso
07-20-03, 03:10 PM
This is NOTHING compared to what it used to be like..... Before we had a lot of members, it used to be just us moderators talking.....

Take a look at the old posts, and you'll see what im talking about........

Brett
07-20-03, 05:33 PM
They wouldnt say "FWD sideways mounted engines, small bodies, and a really sporty ride"..... They would say "big".....


The size argument always cracks me up. Specs from edmunds.com:

Vehicle Length:

Deville: 207 in
Seville: 201
S-Class: 203.1
BMW 745"L"i: 203.5
LS430: 196.7
Escalade: 198.9

While the current Cadillacs arent as big as the old days, they are still big cars by todays standard.

Brett
07-20-03, 05:39 PM
Not much else to say about the rest of this thread. Fleetwood owners seem to have very strong feelings.

Basically, the kind of customer that Cadillac is currently trying to attract wouldnt be caught dead in a fleetwood. The current Seville is by no means a bulls-eye, but its closer to the mark. How do I know? Because I'm the exact type of person that Cadillac wants as a customer and owning something like a Fleetwood would never even cross my mind.

Katshot
07-20-03, 06:37 PM
Not much else to say about the rest of this thread. Fleetwood owners seem to have very strong feelings.

Basically, the kind of customer that Cadillac is currently trying to attract wouldnt be caught dead in a fleetwood. The current Seville is by no means a bulls-eye, but its closer to the mark. How do I know? Because I'm the exact type of person that Cadillac wants as a customer and owning something like a Fleetwood would never even cross my mind.

That's the problem. The Fleetwood was left to rot on the vine by Cadillac. It ended up being nothing more than a big dinosaur. Definately shows a lack of respect. The guys that just let the old car die a humiliating death should not have had anything to do with descision making. If the proper path would've been taken, Cadillac would've produced a car like the LS400 instead of the Seville, and still kept improving a top-line premium sedan out of the Fleetwood.

Elvis
07-20-03, 06:56 PM
I think the rationale was that the hogs will eat whatever you put in the trough.

Meaning, that the over-60 crowd will continue to buy the biggest Cadillac made, whether it's RWD or FWD. They proved it in the mid-80's.

That's probably why they put the R&D money into the Seville. They wanted to attract a younger crowd.

HotRodSaint
07-20-03, 06:56 PM
Basically, the kind of customer that Cadillac is currently trying to attract wouldnt be caught dead in a fleetwood.


That all depends on what the funeral home is using as a hearse! :histeric:

Brett
07-20-03, 06:57 PM
That all depends on what the funeral home is using as a hearse! :histeric:


LOL :histeric: :histeric:

Katshot
07-20-03, 07:35 PM
For the life of me, I could never figure out why Cadillac went with the FWD other than cost and packaging. And don't fool yourself that Cadillac is going back to RWD because it all of a sudden saw the light. The FWD platform has reached it's limit and to procede any further they NEED to go to RWD. They (Cadillac) didn't figure on future customers REALLY wanting a performance biased car.

Brett
07-20-03, 07:50 PM
For now, i take comfort in the fact that I drive a version of the most powerful, technologically advanced, luxurious...........................fwd car in the world :)

HotRodSaint
07-20-03, 07:56 PM
Not much else to say about the rest of this thread. Fleetwood owners seem to have very strong feelings.

Basically, the kind of customer that Cadillac is currently trying to attract wouldnt be caught dead in a fleetwood. The current Seville is by no means a bulls-eye, but its closer to the mark. How do I know? Because I'm the exact type of person that Cadillac wants as a customer and owning something like a Fleetwood would never even cross my mind.

While FWD would make me hesitate about buying a recent vintage Cadillac, style is more of a concern to me, as I think it is to most consumers. To me, of the '90's era Cadillacs, only the Deville and the Fleetwood embody what I consider to be Cadillac style.

This is my second Cadillac. The first I owned was a '67 Coupe De Ville. My feeling is that Cadillac reached it's design peak in the mid '60's. I think after about '68 they were struggling in their design department. The same could be said about their engineering. But all US car makers were playing engineering catch-up during the '70's because of the gas crisis and emission control, so I won't go to hard on Cadillac for that.

There are a few good designs to come out of the '70's, '80's and '90's. I like the Coupe Deville on the late '70's. The 1st Seville and the early '80's Eldorado had some good styling for cars of that era too. Maybe it's just because they now represent a by gone era. Even those I didn't care for then, like the 2nd generation Seville have grown on me. Looking back, that design was really a bold move on their part.

I bought my Fleetwood because it embodied those old school design elements. But more importantly, it did so with aftermarket support because it's a Chevy Impala SS under it's skin.

The criteria I used for purchasing this car, isn't the same criteria I will use in purchasing my next car. I have always intended this to eventually become my second car. It does what it does well enough. It's not perfect. No car is. But it can carry 6 passengers and tow a boat. It can also handle 500+hp if I choose to go that route.

I like the design of CTS (with the exception of the rear license plate insert). I love the fact that it will have 400hp and a 6sp. I, love even more that it may eventually have 500hp!

My next car will be a sports sedan. Whatever anyone thinks about the recent FWD Cadillacs, they are not sport sedans. (Niether is the Fleetwood and I make no claims that it is.) There is no way, short of going to AWD that they could increase the hp beyond where it is today. And they can't tow a large boat. Since driving in the snow is the least of my worries, I see no advantage for me in purchasing a FWD Cadillac. But those are my criteria. Others have different priorities and thus there are FWD Cadillacs for them.

I would never advocate introducing a Fleetwood successor based on it's potential to be a best seller. In fact being a traditionalist. I'd rather see the Deville take the role of the big Caddie again. I'd also like there to be a big Coupe Deville to take on the german coupes.

I think Cadillac is too soon into it's revival to pronounce it a success. I wonder what the long term effects on the brand will be by rebadging Chevy trucks. While SUV's are the rage people will accept this. But eventually, the smart people will catch on. GM has no problem engineering a unique truck for Hummer. I think they need to do the same for Cadillac.

I also don't care for the DTS, STS, SLS etc.. nomenclature. Mercedes and BMW have a long history of using numbers or letters. In the same turn, Cadillac has a lot of history invested in names such as Sedan Devile, Seville, Eldorado, etc... The fact that they think it's about names and not superior design and engineering, makes me wonder if they are truly on a road to recovery. Or is this just another false start amongst many these past 30 years.

To sum it up, if I needed any vehicle today, I would carefully study my needs and see what is available on the market. For my needs, no FWD car's would be on my list. I think Cadillac understands my needs much better today than they have in the resent past. So for the first time ever, a new Cadillac is on my short list of sports sedans. But a used one might still be a better value. They need to stop selling Devilles to rental car agencies so that ALL Cadillacs can begin to hold their value better.

HotRodSaint
07-20-03, 07:58 PM
The FWD platform has reached it's limit and to procede any further they NEED to go to RWD. They (Cadillac) didn't figure on future customers REALLY wanting a performance biased car.

Or AWD. That way the snowbirds will get their traction and the sports sedan buyers will get their handling.

Brett
07-20-03, 09:12 PM
When i bought my SLS i lived in Illinois, since then I have moved to Tampa. While I'm not a hater of FWD as much as you guys, I will admit I probably wouldnt have bought it if I knew I'd be in Florida. That being said it has been a great car and with only 1 warranty repair in 31 months, I couldnt have asked for more

Katshot
07-20-03, 10:34 PM
Great post HRS :thumbsup:
You're right about AWD also being a possibility but it would certainly drive up the cost. I DO think there will be a AWD Caddy soon though, probably the Seville.

Brett
07-20-03, 10:44 PM
AWD STS-V with a 400hp supercharged Northstar. That might be a car we all could love

HotRodSaint
07-20-03, 10:47 PM
AWD STS-V with a 400hp supercharged Northstar. That might be a car we all could love

You might be right.

But I'd have to see it in the color Coral! :banghead2

elwesso
07-21-03, 12:08 AM
Ill tell you one thing..... When I was looking for a car, I HATED the fact that the STS, ETC were FWD...... Everything else I liked about that, and because of that, I figured it wouldnt be a big deal....... FWD isnt a bad thing to have in indiana, and is better than RWD in the snow, although I have a set of snow tires for this winter.... But to be honest, I dont resent the purchase of my Q45, and Ill probably keep it until it dies, or I can afford a cadillac with RWD...... Id really like one of those XLRs, man those are SWEET!!!

HotRodSaint
07-21-03, 09:46 AM
While I'm not a hater of FWD as much as you guys...

I'm not a hater of FWD. For the Camry, Accord, Maxima and Taurus, it serves its purpose of making affordable reliable cars.

What I really hate, is the fact that in the US, there are no RWD sedan choices under 30,000.

Now think about that for a second.

All sedans under 30,000 are FWD (or AWD Subies). Most of the sedans above 30,000 are RWD (or AWD Audis). Wouldn't that alone suggest that FWD is a cost savings measure? The only cars above 30,000 that are FWD (besides the Caddies), also share their platforms with under 30,000 sister brands.

Now that Cadillac is being reborn, I'd like to see GM offer the next Impala 1.) In a much better looking design than the current version and 2.) Offer it as a RWD car. They got Aussie platforms they can use.

Katshot
07-21-03, 10:31 AM
I'm not a hater of FWD. For the Camry, Accord, Maxima and Taurus, it serves its purpose of making affordable reliable cars.

What I really hate, is the fact that in the US, there are no RWD sedan choices under 30,000.

Now think about that for a second.

All sedans under 30,000 are FWD (or AWD Subies). Most of the sedans above 30,000 are RWD (or AWD Audis). Wouldn't that alone suggest that FWD is a cost savings measure? The only cars above 30,000 that are FWD (besides the Caddies), also share their platforms with under 30,000 sister brands.

Now that Cadillac is being reborn, I'd like to see GM offer the next Impala 1.) In a much better looking design than the current version and 2.) Offer it as a RWD car. They got Aussie platforms they can use.

I agree 100%. Of course when I said that the OEMs went to FWD for cost-saving reasons, I was blasted for it. You're right though, I think it's pretty obvious. :rolleyes:
Anyone with even a tiny amount of automotive design/engineering/manufacturing experience, will tell you that the move to uni-body, FWD cars was merely a cost driven move.

Brett
07-21-03, 11:21 AM
Im sure you can get a Crown Vic under 30k

HotRodSaint
07-21-03, 12:50 PM
Im sure you can get a Crown Vic under 30k

Why would anyone want to drive a boat like that? :eyebrow:

I stand corrected.

Funny thing is, in some parts of the country Cadillac is likely crossed shopped against the Grand Marquis.

elwesso
07-22-03, 12:49 AM
I like the Grand Marquis, but it is stupidly underpowered...... But, I will say, one 1 car I know of beats it as a highway cruiser........

Tonyny
12-25-03, 09:15 PM
I will agree with that..... Most people today that drive cadillac are not concerned about FWD or RWD.... They just want it to be a cadillac and all the perks that comes with owning one.......

And no, I dont own a cadillac, but I can bet that a 95 fleetwood will be worth more in 2015 than a 95 seville or eldorado..... Could be speculation, but a 95 fleetwood is worth more NOW than a 95 seville, mileage and condition similar....... Except, it seems to me that the sevilles hold their value better at higher miles than the fleetwoods do........

This is too funny -- an el wesso with a rice burner is a "super moderator" here. To say nothing about that moron's picture you use. I guess "super contributor" $$ talks more than anything else.........wink

bob2231
12-26-03, 06:32 AM
This is too funny -- an el wesso with a rice burner is a "super moderator" here. To say nothing about that moron's picture you use. I guess "super contributor" $$ talks more than anything else.........wink We don't need to hear this again, just stop. 3 posts and you're an expert on who the moderators should be ? It's not the "$$" he contributed, it's the info, time and effort. Get a grip.
Bob

BeelzeBob
12-26-03, 10:55 AM
You need to do your best to not insult people who haven't done anything to insult you.

kcnewell
12-26-03, 11:07 AM
This is too funny -- an el wesso with a rice burner is a "super moderator" here. To say nothing about that moron's picture you use. I guess "super contributor" $$ talks more than anything else.........wink


While I don't think it necessary to slam the guys picture ( That's just not cool ) I have always agreed with the rest of this!

BeelzeBob
12-26-03, 11:11 AM
This thread is far-off enough topic that it's going to be closed very shortly. If it's going to turn into another heep of BS, the thread will be split-off and the Crap will be deleted.

bob2231
12-26-03, 01:44 PM
You need to do your best to not insult people who haven't done anything to insult you. Arghhhhhhhh, I didn't know I insulted anyone. I have a permanent mark from being slapped so much.
Bob

kcnewell
12-26-03, 01:48 PM
Arghhhhhhhh, I didn't know I insulted anyone. I have a permanent mark from being slapped so much.
Bob


Guess whos picture it is...

Brett
12-26-03, 02:07 PM
Arghhhhhhhh, I didn't know I insulted anyone. I have a permanent mark from being slapped so much.
Bob

I beleive Sal was referring to tonyny