: In the future, I hope it can be said.



orconn
12-08-10, 04:13 PM
I hope, one day soon , that it can be said that Cadillac produced a "real" luxury car that wasn't a gussied up truck! I know we have many fans, on the forum, of GMC models spruced up by Cadillac, but let's face these embellished denizens of the job site, will never take their place alongside a Rolls or Bentley shooting break, or even a '54 Buick Roadmaster "woody." Come on Cadillac give us something that will one day be admired, not for its' size and gleam, but for the way it states luxury and power!

hueterm
12-08-10, 04:17 PM
I'll take one of each, please...

drewsdeville
12-08-10, 06:27 PM
Er, I know I'll get flamed hardcore for this, but seriously, does any car fit the "gussied up truck" description more than the late FWB's? Full framed, RWD, low horsepower/"high" torque V8, double wishbone front suspension, solid rear axle, coil springs w/ shocks...it's all truck under the skin. Many of the members here wish Cadillac kept them going or brought them back.

You could think of it this way: the SUV's are just a FWB jacked up a few inches.

mhamilton
12-08-10, 07:18 PM
does any car fit the "gussied up truck" description more than the late FWB's? Full framed, RWD, low horsepower/"high" torque V8, double wishbone front suspension, solid rear axle, coil springs w/ shocks...it's all truck under the skin.

That describes all passenger cars made from the '30s (after the solid front axle was abandoned) through the early '80s (when uni-body MacPherson strut cars rolled in).

The solid rear axle was outdated for sure, but today only a few of the highest priced luxury cars have "old fashioned" A-arm front suspensions.

Sevillian273
12-08-10, 07:24 PM
I thought this thread was gonna be about a certain word with two g's in the middle.:canttalk:

orconn
12-08-10, 08:14 PM
Er, I know I'll get flamed hardcore for this, but seriously, does any car fit the "gussied up truck" description more than the late FWB's? Full framed, RWD, low horsepower/"high" torque V8, double wishbone front suspension, solid rear axle, coil springs w/ shocks...it's all truck under the skin. Many of the members here wish Cadillac kept them going or brought them back.

You could think of it this way: the SUV's are just a FWB jacked up a few inches.


I guess the you could say that we have always been a nation of truck drivers, Drew, at least by the reasoning voiced above. In fact, according to your take on the matter, prior to the advent of unibody construction the world had no alternative to the truck for automotive transportation. Of course, body on frame construction, in fact had many different applications; racing cars, passenger cars (both luxury and mundane) of all sizes and to be sure trucks. But then I am sure you are well aware of all this.So please Drew, give us a true, all in compassing definition of a "passenger car" so we can be enlightened as to the true meaning of the term.

drewsdeville
12-08-10, 08:32 PM
No need to compare to vehicles of the past...neither the late FWB nor the new SUV's were/are competing with vehicles from decades ago. They are competing with vehicles AFTER the advent of unibody construction. What are you accomplishing with that comparison between separate eras?

It's not a rip on the FWB or other full framed cars...it's a direct comparison between the FWB, which many Cadillac enthusiasts claim were Cadillac's pinnacle of a statement of "luxury and power", and the SUV's that your OP says are replacing cars like it. When you think about it, the FWB isn't all that different from today's SUVs, with the exception of ground clearance and ride height. I even distinctly recall Sal telling us how much his Escalade reminded him of his previous FWB. Go figure.

If the FWB is really as loved for it's "luxury and power", as some here make it seem (even though it was losing to other Cadillac models in both respects in it's final years), and if the SUV's are very similar in comparison (offering more in each respect), then what's the problem? Seems like the SUV's cover what was lost through the FWB just fine.


Personally, I think the SUV's don't get as much love here solely because they aren't as "exclusive" as the FWB was and people here like to be different. Unlike the FWB, many LOVE the SUV's and therefore you see them all over the road. But by technical comparison, the forgotten FWB was actually very similar in many respects.

To sum up, the SUVs easily offer the "luxury and power" mentioned, but lack the exclusivity that the similar FWB had. Is it actually that exclusivity that you are looking for?

hueterm
12-08-10, 09:01 PM
Er, I know I'll get flamed hardcore for this, but seriously, does any car fit the "gussied up truck" description more than the late FWB's? Full framed, RWD, low horsepower/"high" torque V8, double wishbone front suspension, solid rear axle, coil springs w/ shocks...it's all truck under the skin. Many of the members here wish Cadillac kept them going or brought them back.

You could think of it this way: the SUV's are just a FWB jacked up a few inches.


And yet...

:annoyed:

Jesda
12-08-10, 09:09 PM
Er, I know I'll get flamed hardcore for this, but seriously, does any car fit the "gussied up truck" description more than the late FWB's? Full framed, RWD, low horsepower/"high" torque V8, double wishbone front suspension, solid rear axle, coil springs w/ shocks...it's all truck under the skin. Many of the members here wish Cadillac kept them going or brought them back.

You could think of it this way: the SUV's are just a FWB jacked up a few inches.

Thats kind of how I see it. The driving characteristics are similar too. The Escalade lacks the FWB's grace and elegance, but it does have gobs of charisma.
Something less vulgar with the same kind of substantive feel would be nice to have.

I also agree with orconn -- Americans do like the truck "feel" of perceived weight, solidity, and strength whether it comes from a sedan, pickup, or sport-utility.

hueterm
12-08-10, 09:12 PM
Now granted, I've never driven an FWB, however I don't think my EXT drives anything like either my RM sedan or wagons. The EXT would be pretty responsive, if it didn't have such a high center of gravity. The RMs have probably one of the lowest centers of gravity around, given their width and length -- but they are total barges. I can't imagine that an FWB would be significantly different.

mhamilton
12-08-10, 10:21 PM
No need to compare to vehicles of the past...neither the late FWB nor the new SUV's were/are competing with vehicles from decades ago. They are competing with vehicles AFTER the advent of unibody construction. What are you accomplishing with that comparison between separate eras?

You're right, I did miss the point I was trying to make. Historically trucks lagged behind car technologically by quite a bit. In the '50s cars were starting to get all the power accessories and certainly had the same underpinnings we'd be familiar with on the FWB. Meanwhile trucks (at least I know for sure the '51 Ford) still had a piece of railroad track connecting the front wheels. Similarly in the '80s, trucks were the last to get fuel injection, etc.

I also don't think it's really fair to compare trucks to the old FWB simply because of their chassis construction. I honestly don't find driving a truck to be anything like an old or big car, full frame or not.

I do see your point, though, in respect to the SUVs being about the only cars you can get with decent room. Aside from long wheelbase MB, Jag, BMW, etc, you can't get a true "big" Cadillac like the old C or D body (actually that Ford 500 a few years ago had a really big back seat, but that's the only recent car I can recall). Apparently we've been told that is what consumers demand. So now if we want lots of room without buying a 7 series, we have to buy a SUV.

Destroyer
12-09-10, 12:25 AM
I hope, one day soon , that it can be said that Cadillac produced a "real" luxury car that wasn't a gussied up truck! I know we have many fans, on the forum, of GMC models spruced up by Cadillac, but let's face these embellished denizens of the job site, will never take their place alongside a Rolls or Bentley shooting break, or even a '54 Buick Roadmaster "woody." Come on Cadillac give us something that will one day be admired, not for its' size and gleam, but for the way it states luxury and power!They did but it was a long, long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.............:sneaky:

Lord Cadillac
12-10-10, 12:23 PM
The problem is partially finances, but mostly politics within the organization. Half the executives want a full-size premium luxury sedan with a wreath and crest on it - the other half does not. There's a constant pull in both directions and the plans always fall through. Even still in 2010.


I hope, one day soon , that it can be said that Cadillac produced a "real" luxury car that wasn't a gussied up truck! I know we have many fans, on the forum, of GMC models spruced up by Cadillac, but let's face these embellished denizens of the job site, will never take their place alongside a Rolls or Bentley shooting break, or even a '54 Buick Roadmaster "woody." Come on Cadillac give us something that will one day be admired, not for its' size and gleam, but for the way it states luxury and power!

77CDV
12-10-10, 04:36 PM
Welcome to corporate America.

hueterm
12-10-10, 11:36 PM
With just enough government to make it really efficient......