: Cadillac sells only 197 DTS's in 2010



Ralph
12-03-10, 02:21 AM
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/canadas-10-worst-selling-new-cars-in-2010/#3626254

77CDV
12-03-10, 02:22 AM
It's a moribund model they've done everything in their power NOT to promote. Pity, as it's really a rather nice car.

Aron9000
12-03-10, 02:25 AM
Well they've sold a lot of DTS's to rental fleets here in the states. Any time somebody gets a "luxury" car at the rental counter, its usually a DTS.

Jesda
12-03-10, 02:43 AM
In general, Canadians prefer smaller and more utilitarian vehicles.

Ralph
12-03-10, 03:15 AM
I've also read that we buy over 50% of American cars, so this is pretty devastating. I don't think they sold well in the US either, hence the STS And DTS are pretty rare birds, or soon will be. Its pretty rare to see a new STS here. Thwy have had the same black CTSV at our showroom for 2 months and it hasnt moved, yet mercedes and BMW had record years........no......i dont think this is isolated to Canada.

MauiV
12-03-10, 03:20 AM
DTS needed a design overhaul 10 years ago. I got some a few times as a loaner and found absolutly nothing about them as memorable.

Ralph
12-03-10, 03:23 AM
Its my understanding the DTS and STS are being killed off and a larger car will replace both of them. Time to say goodbye.....

Ralph
12-03-10, 03:36 AM
i guess things are better in the US but going by sheer population, i would HOPE so. Not earth shaking though......



*-- *Cadillac: Total sales of 12,689 for August were 83 percent higher than
* * *last August, with retail sales increasing 83 percent. This strong
* * *retail performance was driven by continuing strong consumer demand for
* * *the SRX and the CTS, with retail sales up 410 percent and 77 percent,
* * *respectively. August was the seventh month in a row that Cadillac
* * *total and retail sales have increased. With total sales up 50 percent
* * *for the year, the brand is the fastest growing luxury auto brand in
* * *the industry (read more).
*-- *Fleet sales for GM's four brands were 51,951 for the month.


* * * * GM U.S. Deliveries for August 2010 - Divisional Brand Level

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-03-10, 07:37 AM
It's a moribund model they've done everything in their power NOT to promote. Pity, as it's really a rather nice car.

Kinda reminds me of the last generation Fleetwood Broughams eh?

Destroyer
12-03-10, 08:18 AM
At first I thought those numbers were for the U.S. and I was like........damn! Then I saw it is just for Canada but it's still not good. According to that list there were only 40 Cadillac STS sold. I imagine this could be a good thing for the owners of these new Cadillac's there. Chances are you wont see 2 of them in the same neighborhood. :cool2:

drewsdeville
12-03-10, 08:56 AM
It's a moribund model they've done everything in their power NOT to promote. Pity, as it's really a rather nice car.

This is usually what happens when the (any) manufacturer already is set on killing the product. Doesn't make much sense to spend resources promoting a product that you are soon putting under the guillotine.

The lack of promotion is the result of the decision to terminate, not the other way around (lack of promotion causes termination). There are usually hints years ahead of time that the manufacturer is considering termination, then the lack of promotion follows.

Like the previously mentioned Fleetwood, there are many examples of this throughout the past.

Playdrv4me
12-03-10, 11:16 AM
I agree, I think Cadillac has sucked every last bit of profit out of this platform at this point and they're preparing it for retirement. While I like the comfort of the current DTS, I can't help but always feeling like all the 2006 redesign cues seem "tacked on" to the very rounded previous car. It was a commendable, and likely successful attempt given the age of that platform, but it's time has passed.

On the flip-side, the 2006+ DTSs are going to make amazing used car buys down the road. For anyone looking to replace their 2001-2003 STS Luxury Performance model at very low cost, the DTS will be an excellent replacement.

Ralph
12-03-10, 12:45 PM
The only good thing i can draw from all of this is that Honda finally announced the end of the Element......which almost makes it all worth it:p Not fair to say the least. :p

MudAnt
12-03-10, 08:06 PM
Does this mean I'm going to have a hard time buying an STS-V in about 10 years?

Ralph
12-03-10, 08:16 PM
Does this mean I'm going to have a hard time buying an STS-V in about 10 years?

Haha, I think that is a safe bet

77CDV
12-04-10, 01:15 AM
Kinda reminds me of the last generation Fleetwood Broughams eh?

"There are some things we are going to drive. We are a front-drive company."--Robert Stempel, former GM CEO.

"We have always been at war with Oceana."--George Orwell, 1984

jedhead
12-04-10, 02:15 AM
Does this mean I'm going to have a hard time buying an STS-V in about 10 years?


Haha, I think that is a safe bet

With less than 2500 made 2006 - 2009 with less than 100 in 2009, I agree. Even in car crazy Southern California, I know of only one person who owns a STS-V and I just met him at a meet last month. All the shows and meets I go to, I am usually the only STS-V among the other V's.

Bob

ben.gators
12-04-10, 04:11 AM
Oh, that sucks... Cadillac really needs to start to design a full sized luxury sedan from scratch....

Jesda
12-04-10, 06:33 AM
Anyone catch the silver DTS on Thursday's episode of Sunny?

http://www.q45.org/cpg/albums/sunny/normal_Screen_shot_2010-12-03_at_4_35_49_AM.jpg
http://www.q45.org/cpg/albums/sunny/normal_Screen_shot_2010-12-03_at_4_35_56_AM.jpg
http://www.q45.org/cpg/albums/sunny/normal_Screen_shot_2010-12-03_at_4_36_31_AM.jpg
http://www.q45.org/cpg/albums/sunny/normal_Screen_shot_2010-12-03_at_4_36_38_AM.jpg
http://www.q45.org/cpg/albums/sunny/normal_Screen_shot_2010-12-03_at_4_37_43_AM.jpg
http://www.q45.org/cpg/albums/sunny/normal_Screen_shot_2010-12-03_at_4_42_32_AM.jpg

It even has those obnoxiously big PA inspection stickers that were on my Seville.

C&C
12-04-10, 09:00 AM
Did I read it wrong, I thought the number quoted was for February 10, 2010 (and while still a low number, maybe not near as low as this post suggests for the year).

King-German-Fool
12-04-10, 10:57 AM
The problem of the DTS is that its FWD. No one who buys a car of this class want shitty FWD. I hope they switch it back to RWD in the next version.

Jesda
12-04-10, 11:01 AM
Most car owners don't know if their car is RWD, FWD, or powered by the souls of garden gnomes.

hueterm
12-04-10, 11:19 AM
The problem of the DTS is that its FWD. No one who buys a car of this class want shitty FWD. I hope they switch it back to RWD in the next version.


It's called an XTS, and the answer is no...

miwise
12-04-10, 11:21 AM
Most car owners don't know if their car is RWD, FWD, or powered by the souls of garden gnomes.

Haha. Its magic!!

drewsdeville
12-04-10, 12:04 PM
http://www.bmwblog.com/2010/03/24/bmw-survery-reveals-1-series-owners-think-its-fwd/

Playdrv4me
12-04-10, 12:31 PM
http://www.bmwblog.com/2010/03/24/bmw-survery-reveals-1-series-owners-think-its-fwd/

:ill: Oh dear...

orconn
12-04-10, 03:24 PM
Does this portent a return to the psyche of the early 1980's when we were told by the auto press, and other opinion makers, that front wheel drive was far superior and would be universally adopted by car makers because of the overall inferiority of rear wheel drive? This was the case when we bought my wife's Peugeot 505S which had rear wheel drive and was denigrated by "Car and Driver" for this fact. Living in Southern California and not having to deal with ice and snow I preferred rear wheel drive .... but, NO!, said the powers that be, it was to be FWD or nothing in the future!

drewsdeville
12-04-10, 03:41 PM
Well, considering most of the best selling automotibles since the '80's were FWD, I guess they were right.

Jesda
12-04-10, 03:53 PM
When the big three still had over 80% of US market share, most of their vehicles were RWD.


Outside the 20-25% of car buyers who call themselves enthusiasts and can actually tell the difference, it doesn't actually mean anything. Its just a trend that shifts back and forth.

drewsdeville
12-04-10, 03:57 PM
When the big three still had over 80% of US market share, most of their vehicles were RWD.


Most of the "other" branded cars that took away that 80% were/are FWD.

ben.gators
12-04-10, 08:10 PM
Well they've sold a lot of DTS's to rental fleets here in the states. Any time somebody gets a "luxury" car at the rental counter, its usually a DTS.

Indeed I consider this as a red flag for Cadillac! It means the marketing condition of DTS is something like Chrysler Sebring, a car that no one buy it, but renting companies....

Jesda
12-04-10, 08:40 PM
Most of the "other" branded cars that took away that 80% were/are FWD.

Yeah, but when those cars arrived in the US, they were, like the Corolla, Corona, BMW 2002, and Datsun Maxima, all RWD. The point I'm making here is that the drive wheels don't really matter. You can pick out two statistics and claim correlation, but there is no causation.

The unwashed masses don't know or care unless its AWD/4WD and specifically optioned.

77CDV
12-04-10, 08:47 PM
Manufacturers love FWD because it's cheaper to build and takes less space in the overall design of the car, allowing for smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. Which is great, if you're buying an econocar where that's a salient issue. For a full-sized luxury sedan, it's largely irrelevant (though I prefer RWD every day of the week). Like Jesda says, most steerers neither know nor much car what makes their car tick.

Aron9000
12-05-10, 03:01 AM
I actually prefer RWD over FWD in snow driving. My 91 Brougham is a lot better in the white stuff than my old 90 Seville STS. If you start losing it and are plowing around a corner, you can goose it, bring the ass end around a little and maintain control. With the FWD, you just kind of hold on and hope you can stop before you plow into the ditch on the opposite side of the road.

Jesda
12-05-10, 04:21 AM
I prefer RWD in general, but I normally wouldnt pass over a nice car for being FWD.

C&C
12-05-10, 04:59 AM
FWD gained ground in the early 80's due to fuel economy. The manufacturers were fighting CAFE back then (as they are again now) and FWD was good for near a 10% improvemnet. The 80's also saw the foothold of unibody construction (eliminating the full frame/chassie), which vastly reduced the weight and complexity of assembling a car. The purists (most likely most of us here) still lauded the superiority of RWD, but for the masses, FWD was darn adequate (and superior for most in snow and slippery conditions).

drewsdeville
12-05-10, 08:41 AM
Don't forget that in the '60's, the award winning Toronado came out as a FWD and unibody, and was indefinitely praised for it's stellar handling, strength and relaiblity, and overall packaging with it's completely flat floor (no transmission hump/driveshaft tunnel)

I~LUV~Caddys8792
12-05-10, 10:29 AM
I prefer RWD in general, but I normally wouldnt pass over a nice car for being FWD.

Me too. RWD is more of a driving purist's sort of layout, and I like it because it shares the responsibilities between the front and rear wheels, and the engine bay isn't so cramped in a RWD car, especially when equipped with a V-8. However, FWD is SO much better in the snow, so in my area it's almost a necessary. For example, my 3500 lb Regal GS is miles better in the snow than my buddies' 4200 lb Roadmaster Limited. Even with all that weight, he can't get any traction in the freshly fallen snow, so his car is pretty much useless until the roads are plowed and his driveway is cleared out. Granted, it would be much better with the positraction, as our friend with an '01 Crown Victoria LX has demonstrated, but FWD >> RWD in snow, atleast in terms of accelerating from a stop and getting yourself unstuck.


Don't forget that in the '60's, the award winning Toronado came out as a FWD and unibody, and was indefinitely praised for it's stellar handling, strength and relaiblity, and overall packaging with it's completely flat floor (no transmission hump/driveshaft tunnel)

That is the truth, but I bet a lot of that car's praise was granted because it was the first FWD full size american car since the Cord. It was unusual and ahead of the time. Come 40 years later when FWD was the norm, then the new RWD cars (Charger, 300, G8) were roundly praised as a breath of fresh air and highly desirable.

gary88
12-05-10, 10:32 AM
I actually prefer RWD over FWD in snow driving. My 91 Brougham is a lot better in the white stuff than my old 90 Seville STS. If you start losing it and are plowing around a corner, you can goose it, bring the ass end around a little and maintain control. With the FWD, you just kind of hold on and hope you can stop before you plow into the ditch on the opposite side of the road.

+1, RWD is much more predictable and controllable. FWD is better to get you initially moving, that's about it. With a proper set of snow tires on a RWD car you can tackle just about anything provided you have enough clearance.

EChas3
12-05-10, 02:38 PM
The best performing cars in the world are RWD. AWD can be better but is costly and can hurt handling due to weight and rotating mass. Are not F1 cars the peak of automotive performance?

About 75 years ago, the cars competing at Indianapolis also ran dirt and board tracks. Several FWD designs were tried. They handled great, right up to their 'bleeding edge' of performance. However, they would often snap out of control and give the driver little or no opportunity to correct and regain control.

What's more, RWD provides an intuitive response in unstable situations. If one enters a manuver too fast, lifting one's foot off the throttle increases stability through drag on the rear wheels. This is a natural and intuitive response. (Oh, I'm going to fast... Lift a little and regain control.)

In a FWD car, lifting the throttle can decrease stability and even induce a spin. Putting more traction demands on the front tires makes recovery harder. FWD is cheaper to design, build & drive (mileage). But performance is where it's at!

Of course, this is all just my humble opinion. Please feel free to disagree (as if you needed permission!)

:duck:

Playdrv4me
12-05-10, 02:43 PM
Another advantage of RWD that isn't usually brought into these discussions is the ridiculous packaging necessary in the engine compartment as engines get larger and larger. In general, working on a RWD vehicle is quite a bit more straight-forward with easier access than one in which the transmission, engine, accessories and a transverse layout are all fighting for space. This is not always the case but in general, repair costs are lower when things are more accessible.

Completely unrelated is this odd thing I have about liking the fact that in a RWD car all of the mechanical parts and pieces are involved in the spectacle of moving me and the car along, including the rear wheels. In a FWD car it seems like the rear wheels are no different than the little spindles on hot wheels cars, they just kinda hang out back there and follow the lead of the rest of the vehicle. Gross oversimplification, but basically that's what happens.

drewsdeville
12-05-10, 02:59 PM
The best performing cars in the world are RWD. AWD can be better but is costly and can hurt handling due to weight and rotating mass. Are not F1 cars the peak of automotive performance?

About 75 years ago, the cars competing at Indianapolis also ran dirt and board tracks. Several FWD designs were tried. They handled great, right up to their 'bleeding edge' of performance. However, they would often snap out of control and give the driver little or no opportunity to correct and regain control.

What's more, RWD provides an intuitive response in unstable situations. If one enters a manuver too fast, lifting one's foot off the throttle increases stability through drag on the rear wheels. This is a natural and intuitive response. (Oh, I'm going to fast... Lift a little and regain control.)

In a FWD car, lifting the throttle can decrease stability and even induce a spin. Putting more traction demands on the front tires makes recovery harder. FWD is cheaper to design, build & drive (mileage). But performance is where it's at!

Of course, this is all just my humble opinion. Please feel free to disagree (as if you needed permission!)

:duck:

Sure, no one will argue that RWD isn't superior when it comes to performance. But this is a regular passenger car discussion. Using the last example, the Oldsmobile full sizers, no one is taking a Delta 88 around Laguna Seca, shaving 1/100's of a second of their times.

The only time numbers like that pop up are in useless sections of car reviews. Motor Trend likes to do this. Who really cares how many lateral g's a Toyota Sienna can pull?

Jesda
12-05-10, 06:07 PM
Yeah I agree with Gary. After driving both FWD and RWD in the winter, I find that RWD does give more options for control and correction, though it requires some experience to do it.

Most people just mash the throttle and say a prayer and hope it works out -- FWD is a better fit for that state of mind. Also, if a RWD car isn't balanced like, say, a BMW, you run into all kinds of problems. My Q45s were 59/41 and took some sandbags to keep the rear planted. My friend's Lincoln Mark VIII felt much more secure.

Drivers should be subjected to emergency situations as part of their exam. This "back up around that curb and you can have your license" bullsh*t is idiotic.

Stingroo
12-05-10, 07:25 PM
No joke, the only times I used reverse when taking my driver's license test were when I backed out of the parking spot the car was in, and doing a 3 point turn.

Here's what my license test was:

Get in car, start it, demonstrate brake lights working and both turn signals.
Back out of space, turn right, stop at stop sign in parking lot.
Turn left around the rear of the building, accelerate to 20 mph and stay there for 3 seconds.
Stop.
Continue on smoothly without jerking the vehicle.
Stop.
Turn left.
Stop.
Make three point turn without getting into grass (two lane area).
Take right around the building again.
Accellerate to 30mph and stop smoothly.
Continue on, park car.

License acquired.

It was a joke. I actually failed it the first try because supposedly I didn't stop long enough at the first stop sign. You can't take the test twice in one day, so I had to come back the next day, and I got the same guy. When we reached the first stop sign, I was a douche and counted obnoxiously loud and slowly to five before continuing on. He got the message.

orconn
12-05-10, 07:36 PM
Me too. RWD is more of a driving purist's sort of layout, and I like it because it shares the responsibilities between the front and rear wheels, and the engine bay isn't so cramped in a RWD car, especially when equipped with a V-8. However, FWD is SO much better in the snow, so in my area it's almost a necessary. For example, my 3500 lb Regal GS is miles better in the snow than my buddies' 4200 lb Roadmaster Limited. Even with all that weight, he can't get any traction in the freshly fallen snow, so his car is pretty much useless until the roads are plowed and his driveway is cleared out. Granted, it would be much better with the positraction, as our friend with an '01 Crown Victoria LX has demonstrated, but FWD >> RWD in snow, atleast in terms of accelerating from a stop and getting yourself unstuck.



That is the truth, but I bet a lot of that car's praise was granted because it was the first FWD full size american car since the Cord. It was unusual and ahead of the time. Come 40 years later when FWD was the norm, then the new RWD cars (Charger, 300, G8) were roundly praised as a breath of fresh air and highly desirable.

Mais non, mon ami! I drove a brand new Olds Toronado demonstrator both in the dry and in with a light snow covering the road. AT the time my daily driver was a 1962 Cadillac convertible that was in tip top shape. The year was Autumn 1966, and I can say up to that point the Toronado was the best handling full size car I had driven. The car was superior in directional stability on the freeway and had much better traction in the snow (I was already a very good snow driver having had to drive through the snow for the previous six winters in rear drive cars). Subsequent to having driven that early Toronado, I drove several Toros (my family owned a '68 and two other relatives had '67s, and 2 family members had Eldorados), I also drove regularly rear drive Cadillacs (my own and my mother's) and I have to say that the Toros were far better handlers than the rear drive cars. However, it must be remembered that American rear drive cars had rather unrefined and unsophisticated rear suspensions compared to their counter parts today. Live axle with rear coil or leaf spring suspension were all that were available at the time when Toronado came out. Mercedes and VW had those atrocious "swing axle" rear suspensions, and only a few cars like Jaguars, Lambos and Corvettes had the beginnings of the multi-link independent rear suspension of today.

drewsdeville
12-05-10, 08:57 PM
I believe the early Toro's had a solid axle in the rear as well

Lord Cadillac
12-05-10, 10:02 PM
Its my understanding the DTS and STS are being killed off and a larger car will replace both of them. Time to say goodbye.....

Not really. The XTS isn't larger than either car and only technically replaces the DTS. It's called "XTS". It should simply be called "DTS"...


The problem of the DTS is that its FWD. No one who buys a car of this class want shitty FWD. I hope they switch it back to RWD in the next version.


Most car owners don't know if their car is RWD, FWD, or powered by the souls of garden gnomes.

It's true that most car owners don't have any idea which wheels power their vehicle. However, in the case of the DTS, all you have to do is have a need to make a sharp turn (in a parking lot or any tight space) and you'll have some problems...

orconn
12-05-10, 11:40 PM
I believe the early Toro's had a solid axle in the rear as well

The Toronado did have a solid rear axle suspended by single leaf springs and using a vertical and horizontal shock absorber for location and damping. The front suspension used torsion bars for the first time on a GM passenger car and "A" arms. I can tel you it worked quite well and as tuned was a superior handling American car. Incidentally the second generation Corvair that came out about that time, which also employed a new sophisticated independent rear suspension, also delivered a new level of handling in an American car. I drove a new Corvair coupe in the Fall of '66 and if hadn't had been for the poor build quality I would have been sorely tempted to buy one. Corvette had also gone to a much improved independent rear suspension at this time. GM was way out in front of other American makers when it came to suspension systems in the mid sixties.

Jesda
12-06-10, 01:31 AM
DTS's turning radius is indeed large, but most folks won't blame FWD because they don't understand the mechanical connection. They'll just say its because the car is big.