: Here's your chance to suggest something directly to GM - don't waste it...



Lord Cadillac
01-03-11, 06:04 PM
It's a long story but I have a meeting with GM executives in about a week. I was invited to the GM Proving Grounds as well as the Detroit Auto Show during the week of "media only" - otherwise I'd have worked on meeting those of you out in Detroit during the main show..

ANYWAY. The question is: What should GM do going forward?

I'd like to get as many good answers as possible.. Please speak your mind...

Thank you!

Stingroo
01-03-11, 06:14 PM
Moar wagons... moooooaaaaarrrrrrrrrrr.



But seriously (actually, that was serious...) that's pretty awesome. I demand a copious quantity of photographs from the event.

orconn
01-03-11, 07:30 PM
First and foremost put the emphasis on quality, then on reliability and then on great, attractive exterior and interior designs. GM should become a leader again in styling, if they have to copy someone copy VW/Audi not the next "Bangle-Butted" fad from a mislead maker.

Each division should be distinctive and have a clearly identified automotive objective and should have a suitable flagship with the parameters of the division's market/performance segment.

Cadillac should have high quality products suitable to satisfying customers in "executive/luxury" segment. It should also have a product that can capture acceptance and desirability among the world's power elite. Not some hokey frosted truck, but an luxury passenger car that conveys the prestige of the owner or his office.

Buick should build cars suitable to the upper middle class socially and economically. This lineup should include some perform ace models like the "Wildcats" of the sixties. Buick not market cars meant for middle income folks leave that segment to Chevrolet.

Chevrolet should have a broad spectrum of vehicles suitable for the various tasks middle class families are called upon to perform, but not to include trucks (leave trucks to GMC).

SDCaddyLacky
01-03-11, 07:41 PM
Wow, your able to meet up with GM executives? How is that possible?

Anyways, I would love for you to tell then, that they have let down many car enthusiast of the world, people that live in die for Cadillac, and we are watching and waiting for the company to bring out something that catches our eye, because so far GM isn't listening to us car lovers, but more so to what the "Market" thinks is needed.

Also tell them, to stop acting like executive businessmen for once, and become a fan, tell them to tell the bean counters to go screw themselves, because these bastards are destroying the industry.

Last thing, bring back the FLEETWOOD! Make it $80,000 for crying out loud, they need something in the higher end bracket for consumers, go above and beyond, show the world that Cadillac is serious. People will buy big cars, look at the 300, it all depends on the design, they can do it, someone just needs to take the risk to make it happen.

Jesda
01-03-11, 07:44 PM
"Stop smoking." -- Bad habits are hard to break. Its too easy to run an organization without a long-term vision, without regard for stakeholders in the interest of short-term profitability. I don't know what GM wants to be in 10, 20, or 30 years from now since its been in survival mode for the past decade. "Be really big and profitable!" isn't a vision. A corporate vision is a dream, set in place by leadership, of what an ideal General Motors would be, what it would produce, what it would mean to the public, and how it would function.

Whatever happened over the last 30 years, study and review those mistakes tirelessly and don't ever do it again.

hueterm
01-03-11, 08:28 PM
Assumptions are that the build quality and reliability are there -- which should be a given. As well as appropriate and timely updates of their current offerings.

CHEVROLET is in pretty good shape:
-- The trucks need more rear seat legroom, even if bed length has to be cut by a few inches. Just don't take it out of the front, like they did on the Tundra.
-- A new compact pickup is needed. Think '80s Mazda B2000, only updated but cheap enough to be worth buying.
-- Screw CAFE -- do not get rid of the Suburban/Tahoe/Avalanche.
-- The Impala needs to be RWD, and a V8 optional. (Smaller Holden)
-- A Caprice needs to be added that is bigger, RWD, and a V8 optional. (Larger Holden)
-- REPLACE THE MONTE CARLO...
-- The small cars and the sports cars are pretty much where they need to be.

BUICK/GMC
(See notes on Chevrolet trucks)
-- Bring over the large Holden RWD sedan and give it a premium interior and a V8 option.
-- Make a new Riviera that is NOT that hideous 2 seater. Large, COMFORTABLE 4 seater, short trunk/long hood. Either V8 or 3.6DI powered.

CADILLAC is about to become a hot mess!
-- Quit relying on the 18 versions of the CTS to save your bacon.
-- REPLACE THE NORTHSTAR and make it optional for the XTS. (The concept was gorgeous...however V6 only is FAIL.)
-- Make a SWB and LWB "Flagship/Sport'ish" sedan, RWD, V8 only (LS powered if necessary), positioned in between the LS and the 7-Series/S-Class. Price it between the Equus and the LS. If you think you're going to get 7 or S money, you're crazed.
-- Make a Lambda CUV if you want, but not at the expense of the Escalade.
-- Make a larger coupe that does not bow at the altar of the Infiniti G's rear end -- short trunk, long hood, V8 only, COMFORTABLE 4 seater...a true successor to the Eldorado.

If you're able to get this ship righted, then we can think of more things for you to do...

Oh, and give me back my stock that I got screwed out of.

Aron9000
01-03-11, 09:00 PM
Cadillac needs that $70-90k flagship RIGHT NOW.


Throw the LSA motor into a reg cab/short box 2wd silverado. Put a lowered sport suspension on it, but make sure you can still use it as a truck, ie it will tow, haul crap, etc. Maybe put it also in a 4 door silverado, since those seem to be all the rage now days so it will actually have a volume seller.

D3l7a3ch0
01-03-11, 09:03 PM
the little features like interior lighting and making them work together, like fan speed and volume reduction for incoming phone calls. more of that

"integration"

rented an Escalade on two occasions and it was those little things that made me go wow.

//also ask about the flying cars please thanks :-D

Ranger
01-03-11, 10:18 PM
When they find a problem (like the Northstar head gaskets) for God sake jump on it and fix it ASAP. Lack of reliability (or even the perception of it) does more (and lasting) damage than any competitor could possibly hope for with advertising.

EChas3
01-03-11, 10:54 PM
Don't make me buy a truck (SUV) to get a RWD or AWD V8!

I like big cars. A lot of Americans do.

Koooop
01-03-11, 11:31 PM
I love my 2005 CTS-V. The new CTS-V is very sweet, but please offer up a second trim level with an LS3 and no supercharger, while many of us love all the power you can offer up it's just not for all. The Northstar has no low end, please put it out of it's misery and give us pushrods. I have yet to hear complaints about the LS1, LS2, LS3 or LS6 (okay, the LS6 is a gas hog).

CTS wagon. Super good looking, but my wife isn't going to drive it, if you want me to drive it, it needs a pushrod V8. V6 is "for the woman".

Speaking of women. My wife needs a new minivan, the Olds Silo Premiere is getting tired. If you insist on using the Northstar, a minivan would be an excellent location for it. The next minivan I buy is going to be a top of the line Chrysler since GM doesn't make one. Please don't make me suffer in some POS Chrysler minivan. It's bad enough that I have to ride around in a Minivan, if it was a Cadillac I wouldn't have to tint the windows!

I don't make my Northstar comments lightly, there have been a few in the family. Currently my Dad has an XLR. Lets face it, I could barely get out off the line ahead of a pool guy in an F150. I suppose the lack of low end is okay for my 70 (something) Pop's, but not me!

RippyPartsDept
01-03-11, 11:49 PM
N* engine is at it's end of life... they're not going to be considering it for new/future projects

Playdrv4me
01-04-11, 01:09 AM
When they find a problem (like the Northstar head gaskets) for God sake jump on it and fix it ASAP. Lack of reliability (or even the perception of it) does more (and lasting) damage than any competitor could possibly hope for with advertising.

This is probably the single most important quote in this entire thread so far.

Next...

Buick:
Quit pussfooting around with the Buick Regal and put a proper powerplant in there.

Cadillac:
Throw the Northstar engineering schematics in the trash and burn them... hell throw any residual engineers from that project in the pile too... Then devote resources ASAP to building a PROPER, RELIABLE all aluminum V8 for your premier luxury brand, then introduce this engine in a PROPER RWD luxury sedan with decent quality, and an appropriate price. Understand that regardless of energy market trends, you can NOT have a luxury brand without a dedicated V8 engine

That is all.

thebigjimsho
01-04-11, 01:27 AM
Yeah, the one thing that is most embarrassing to me is watching Ford drop 4 new engines in its F-150 lineup, with new engines showing up throughout their product line while GM is relying on too few engines with very little in the pipeline...

thebigjimsho
01-04-11, 01:29 AM
And we have an entire industry that was left alone by Lincoln. The Town Car is just about done and the MKT is what they're trying to sell us on. GM needs the XTS to work for the limousine industry. A proper trunk, good rear leg room, a reliable drivetrain...

77CDV
01-04-11, 01:47 AM
Assumptions are that the build quality and reliability are there -- which should be a given. As well as appropriate and timely updates of their current offerings.

CHEVROLET is in pretty good shape:
-- The trucks need more rear seat legroom, even if bed length has to be cut by a few inches. Just don't take it out of the front, like they did on the Tundra.
-- A new compact pickup is needed. Think '80s Mazda B2000, only updated but cheap enough to be worth buying.
-- Screw CAFE -- do not get rid of the Suburban/Tahoe/Avalanche.
-- The Impala needs to be RWD, and a V8 optional. (Smaller Holden)
-- A Caprice needs to be added that is bigger, RWD, and a V8 optional. (Larger Holden)
-- REPLACE THE MONTE CARLO...
-- The small cars and the sports cars are pretty much where they need to be.

BUICK/GMC
(See notes on Chevrolet trucks)
-- Bring over the large Holden RWD sedan and give it a premium interior and a V8 option.
-- Make a new Riviera that is NOT that hideous 2 seater. Large, COMFORTABLE 4 seater, short trunk/long hood. Either V8 or 3.6DI powered.

CADILLAC is about to become a hot mess!
-- Quit relying on the 18 versions of the CTS to save your bacon.
-- REPLACE THE NORTHSTAR and make it optional for the XTS. (The concept was gorgeous...however V6 only is FAIL.)
-- Make a SWB and LWB "Flagship/Sport'ish" sedan, RWD, V8 only (LS powered if necessary), positioned in between the LS and the 7-Series/S-Class. Price it between the Equus and the LS. If you think you're going to get 7 or S money, you're crazed.
-- Make a Lambda CUV if you want, but not at the expense of the Escalade.
-- Make a larger coupe that does not bow at the altar of the Infiniti G's rear end -- short trunk, long hood, V8 only, COMFORTABLE 4 seater...a true successor to the Eldorado.

If you're able to get this ship righted, then we can think of more things for you to do...

Oh, and give me back my stock that I got screwed out of.

This.

drewsdeville
01-04-11, 09:21 AM
No offense, but why should GM listen to anything we have to say?

I've said this before, but 95% of this forum won't buy a new Cadillac off the showroom floor, whether that's because they can't afford it or because they refuse to take the depreciation hit of buying a new car. Most who have commented in this thread have admitted or displayed this in one way or another at some point.

Much of this forum is all about bang for the buck, value; comfortable, decent performing cars that don't break the wallet on initial buy-in. There's nothing wrong with that and that's why most of us have purchased our Cadillac vehicles used. However, this place is riddled with comments about how that is exactly the customer that Cadillac should NOT be chasing (and, arguably, ARE chasing with the current lineup), which is absolutely correct.

No doubt that there are some interesting ideas here, but we really don't have the money in our hands while foaming at the mouth, ready to it hand over to GM even if our ideas come real. That really doesn't make anything in this thread valuable to them. We are the enthusiasts, but only if it's cheap enough. We rattle off all of the ideas in this thread, and think about how great it would be to have one of these in a few years after they've been through the hands of the initial owners for some time. How does GM benefit from that?

Sal will go over there representing CF.com, they'll research us a little bit and find a bunch of threads about how most of us purchased our Cadillacs when they were 5+ years old for $15k or less: used.

Those that actually have interest in purchasing the said $80k Fleetwood or any of the other ideas new, from GM, are really the only ones that GM should be listening to. If those are the ones who have actually posted the said ideas, then great, I'll say no more. But somehow, I doubt that. Sal is really the only one here who I recall actually expressing the want to purchase a new Cadillac.

If they can't even sell our own ideas to us, the supposed enthusiasts, then why should they consider it?

hueterm
01-04-11, 09:32 AM
No offense, but why should GM listen to anything we have to say?

I've said this before, but 95% of this forum won't buy a new Cadillac off the showroom floor, whether that's because they can't afford it or refuse to take the depreciation hit of buying a new car. Most who have commented in this thread have admitted or displayed this in one way or another at some point.

Much of this forum is all about bang for the buck, value; comfortable, decent performing cars that don't break the wallet on initial buy-in. There's nothing wrong with that and that's why most of us have purchased our Cadillac vehicles used. However, this place is riddled with comments about how that is exactly the customer that Cadillac should NOT be chasing (and, arguably, ARE chasing with the current lineup), which is absolutely correct.

No doubt that there are some interesting ideas here, but we really don't have the money in our hands while foaming at the mouth, ready to it hand over to GM even if our ideas come real. That really doesn't make anything in this thread valuable to them. We are the enthusiasts, but only if it's cheap enough. We rattle off all of the ideas in this thread, and think about how great it would be to have one of these in a few years after they've been through the hands of the initial owners for some time. How does GM benefit from that?

Sal will go over there representing CF.com, they'll research us a little bit and find a bunch of threads about how most of us purchased our Cadillacs when they were 5+ years old for $15k or less: used.

Those that actually have interest in purchasing the said $80k Fleetwood or any of the other ideas new, from GM, are really the only ones that GM should be listening to. If those are the ones who have actually posted the said ideas, then great, I'll say no more. But somehow, I doubt that.

Oh, the irony...

There are plenty of people who post in the new sections of the forum -- A

The people here know about the product...good and bad -- B

And so what if a lot or most of the people here bought used...what do you think drives resale value? -- C

D, anyone?

drewsdeville
01-04-11, 09:40 AM
Oh, the irony...

There are plenty of people who post in the new sections of the forum -- A



Yes, very true. However, not many of them have posted in this thread, yet. Like stated before, GM isn't getting valuable feedback from those who purchase new: those who generate GM's profits. The point of being in business is to profit. A list of ideas from current and future Don's Auto Sales customers really won't benefit them...

As far as the irony, I don't hide the fact that I have no interest in buying new. I never have. That's exactly why I can appreciate the fact that most of us buy used. At the same time, I don't expect GM to treasure my opinion on their current position.

GM needs to retain those customers who have purchased new in the past and needs to attract those who are potential new-car sales in the future. Those who have already made up their mind that they will be going back to Don's Auto Sales (buying used) aren't of much interest.

ThumperPup
01-04-11, 09:49 AM
When they find a problem (like the Northstar head gaskets) for God sake jump on it and fix it ASAP. Lack of reliability (or even the perception of it) does more (and lasting) damage than any competitor could possibly hope for with advertising.

yup i second this

ThumperPup
01-04-11, 09:52 AM
Bring back a few of the Old Body Styles personaly i like the older Impalas not the new body style ones
Bring back the Eldorado And the Seville put a RWD in them or even a 4 wheel drive

build something that can show up to the LS the S make something that can lead flagship again

The Tony Show
01-04-11, 10:25 AM
Drew makes a good point. I've tossed my hat in several conversations here where members are calling for huge, floaty, RWD V8 sedans with tufted leather called "Fleetwood" to save Cadillac- because it's ludicrous.

Cadillac is headed in the direction of Mercedes and Audi, so even their flagship car is going to be a high performance car. It'll be called the XYZ or ABC, because words like Fleetwood and Eldorado bring up memories of gas guzzling, unreliable and poorly built cars today's high line buyers' grandmother owned.

The best feedback you can get for this is going to come from the new CTS and SRX forums, Sal, and most of that is going to focus on reliability, fixing quality issues like squeaks and rattles, and offering more content. The other sections of the forum, especially this one, are largely populated by people (with a few exceptions, of course) who are driving older GM products, are stuck in the past and think a huge Impala or Brougham would sell in today's market. The past is what nearly killed GM, people- time to move forward.

D3l7a3ch0
01-04-11, 10:30 AM
I work for a living--I'm not too good to buy used. The sooner these features show up, the sooner I get them :-) I'm already happy with what I'm looking to have in 2 years.. The '09, hopefully

Girls don't know my V isn't the latest gen, I get remarks all the time. Who's being smart? This guy.

RippyPartsDept
01-04-11, 11:29 AM
Sal, what about asking about an android infotainment system that would compete with ford's sync/mytouch/whateverit'scallednowadays ??

Koooop
01-04-11, 12:57 PM
No offense, but why should GM listen to anything we have to say?

I've said this before, but 95% of this forum won't buy a new Cadillac off the showroom floor, whether that's because they can't afford it or because they refuse to take the depreciation hit of buying a new car. Most who have commented in this thread have admitted or displayed this in one way or another at some point.

Much of this forum is all about bang for the buck, value; comfortable, decent performing cars that don't break the wallet on initial buy-in. There's nothing wrong with that and that's why most of us have purchased our Cadillac vehicles used. However, this place is riddled with comments about how that is exactly the customer that Cadillac should NOT be chasing (and, arguably, ARE chasing with the current lineup), which is absolutely correct.

No doubt that there are some interesting ideas here, but we really don't have the money in our hands while foaming at the mouth, ready to it hand over to GM even if our ideas come real. That really doesn't make anything in this thread valuable to them. We are the enthusiasts, but only if it's cheap enough. We rattle off all of the ideas in this thread, and think about how great it would be to have one of these in a few years after they've been through the hands of the initial owners for some time. How does GM benefit from that?

Sal will go over there representing CF.com, they'll research us a little bit and find a bunch of threads about how most of us purchased our Cadillacs when they were 5+ years old for $15k or less: used.

Those that actually have interest in purchasing the said $80k Fleetwood or any of the other ideas new, from GM, are really the only ones that GM should be listening to. If those are the ones who have actually posted the said ideas, then great, I'll say no more. But somehow, I doubt that. Sal is really the only one here who I recall actually expressing the want to purchase a new Cadillac.

If they can't even sell our own ideas to us, the supposed enthusiasts, then why should they consider it?

I suppose that the 5% of us that can and will buy new cars that are on this forum are important to GM. Where else are they supposed to go? This is a great resource for GM and I'm happy to think that they might actually be using it and listening to us.

Put a pushrod V8 (LS3 please) in the CTS wagon and I'll buy one. This is the same comment I made when I drove one of the first CTS sedans. Cadillac did it and look what happened! I bought a CTS-V! Put a N* or a V6 in a Cadillac and I didn't/won't buy one.





Besides, how are you ever going to get your used Cadillac if someone doesn't buy a new one and use it all up for you?

SDCaddyLacky
01-04-11, 02:00 PM
All I am trying to say is Cadillac desperately needs a flagship vehicle, the DTS isn't cutting it anymore.

I do like the XTS, hopefully Cadillac will make some small improvements before it goes into production.

The biggest problem for taller than normal car buyers today, is they don't have too many options when it comes to big cars with good rear seat leg room. Hopefully the XTS will have rear seat leg room of about 41-42 inches, to help big guys feel comfortable back there.

Even for families, the days of loading up your 4 door sedan with 6 people are over, even 5 is getting harder to squeeze in. I just want Caddy to have a car that truly is a flagship, no I am not asking for a massive Fleetwood size car like mine, but something slightly smaller that still has a presence (215 inches long), which could be called a Fleetwood or whatever FW or BRO maybe XTS Bro or XTS FW lol. The CTS, nor does the DTS give you that feeling.

They can work around the short length, by adding a lot of body to the exterior. Kinda like the 300, it's short and stubby, but still looks big and buff, this gives it a presence.

Jesda
01-04-11, 02:23 PM
No offense, but why should GM listen to anything we have to say?


Because you are now a GM shareholder whether you like it or not.

RippyPartsDept
01-04-11, 03:09 PM
FTW would be a good name for a 'fleetwood' redesign ...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-04-11, 03:19 PM
Cadillac needs a full size, V8 RWD flagship to compete with the S Class/A8/XJ/LS, etc etc. I don't care what they name it, but it has to be:
-Big (atleast 210 inches)
-RWD (possibly offering an AWD variant)
-V8 (maybe not standard, but definitely offered)

thebigjimsho
01-04-11, 03:34 PM
Drew makes a good point. I've tossed my hat in several conversations here where members are calling for huge, floaty, RWD V8 sedans with tufted leather called "Fleetwood" to save Cadillac- because it's ludicrous.

Cadillac is headed in the direction of Mercedes and Audi, so even their flagship car is going to be a high performance car. It'll be called the XYZ or ABC, because words like Fleetwood and Eldorado bring up memories of gas guzzling, unreliable and poorly built cars today's high line buyers' grandmother owned.

The best feedback you can get for this is going to come from the new CTS and SRX forums, Sal, and most of that is going to focus on reliability, fixing quality issues like squeaks and rattles, and offering more content. The other sections of the forum, especially this one, are largely populated by people (with a few exceptions, of course) who are driving older GM products, are stuck in the past and think a huge Impala or Brougham would sell in today's market. The past is what nearly killed GM, people- time to move forward.Yep, I said that in another thread. Even if they made a world-beating large sedan, if they called it "Fleetwood" it would die. The past was great for big cushy vehicles that offered little in driving dynamics. That's the past.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-04-11, 03:36 PM
I love the name Fleetwood. It sounds fast (Fleet) and luxurious (wood), but it wouldn't sell nowadays. Maybe if they made it a package or something for their full sized car, then it would work, but who knows.

The Tony Show
01-04-11, 03:37 PM
Sal, what about asking about an android infotainment system that would compete with ford's sync/mytouch/whateverit'scallednowadays ??

You mean the one Consumer Reports just trashed as being obtuse, slow to react and difficult to use? No thanks.

The current crop of Cadillacs, especially the SRX, have a very nicely integrated infotainment hub to control the Nav, iPod, Bluetooth, etc. Other than the voice control requiring too many command strings, it works beautifully.

thebigjimsho
01-04-11, 03:44 PM
You mean the one Consumer Reports just trashed as being obtuse, slow to react and difficult to use? No thanks.

The current crop of Cadillacs, especially the SRX, have a very nicely integrated infotainment hub to control the Nav, iPod, Bluetooth, etc. Other than the voice control requiring too many command strings, it works beautifully.
They do need to continually improve and innovate, however. It does seem that the electronics are just on the backside of what's revolutionary in today's markets. Computers are coming to the automobile. I want to see GM stay in touch, tis all...

thebigjimsho
01-04-11, 03:46 PM
I work for a living--I'm not too good to buy used. The sooner these features show up, the sooner I get them :-) I'm already happy with what I'm looking to have in 2 years.. The '09, hopefully

Girls don't know my V isn't the latest gen, I get remarks all the time. Who's being smart? This guy.
Nah, I'd use the word thrifty.

Playdrv4me
01-04-11, 03:49 PM
Consumer Reports is the LAST publication I trust to know SQUAT about anything they are reviewing, especially with the way they've incessantly trashed domestic marques up until very recently. I trust them even LESS on electronics and technology.

As someone who follows the tech industry obsessively I can tell you that Ford's Sync version 1 and MyFordTouch (version 2 of Microsoft "Car") are absolute marvels at what they do, and do it WELL. I could only wish that some of the foreign makes I like could get it half together enough to put such a seamlessly integrated and simple system in their cars. It is universally compatible with just about ANYTHING you can plug or Bluetooth into it, it increases safety by READING your incoming texts back to you on a connected Bluetooth phone, manages playlists, identifies playlists and a lot more. It is everything we had hoped to come to the automobile from an automation standpoint. In fact, if I had a single complaint about the whole thing it would be the fact that Ford has it locked in right now. And this is just version 2....

I do agree that you can not call anything "Fleetwood", "Deville", or even "Eldorado" anymore. That time has passed, but the need for a RWD V8 powered sedan (and I certainly didn't say it had to be a cush-mobile, just a proper entry into that market) is very real.

RippyPartsDept
01-04-11, 04:05 PM
the navigation side of the infotainment system is severely lacking (in my opinion, and i'm sure i'm not the only one with such dour views of the nav system)

google's navigation app for android has got to be the best navigation experience ever - and they will pay GM to use it!
it's called the less than free business model (http://abovethecrowd.com/2009/10/29/google-redefines-disruption-the-%E2%80%9Cless-than-free%E2%80%9D-business-model/)

and since android is opensource GM can add to it and change it how they see fit - instead of contracting with some other company (like they currently do with alpine) they could be in control of their infotainment destiny

The Tony Show
01-04-11, 04:32 PM
The Nav unit could use some improvement, but dismissing CR scores is a mistake. Regardless of the fact they're a bunch of buffoons who know nothing about cars, a lot of buyers put stock in their opinions.

Like 'em or not, right or not, the manufacturers need to please them. A whole lot of the public believes what they read in that rag.

drewsdeville
01-04-11, 04:40 PM
You mean the one Consumer Reports just trashed as being obtuse, slow to react and difficult to use? No thanks.

For those that missed this: http://www.dailytech.com/Consumer+Reports+Hates+on+Ford+MyTouch+Due+to+Dist ractions+Complexity/article20561.htm

thebigjimsho
01-04-11, 04:44 PM
Consumer Reports is the LAST publication I trust to know SQUAT about anything they are reviewing, especially with the way they've incessantly trashed domestic marques up until very recently. I trust them even LESS on electronics and technology.

As someone who follows the tech industry obsessively I can tell you that Ford's Sync version 1 and MyFordTouch (version 2 of Microsoft "Car") are absolute marvels at what they do, and do it WELL. I could only wish that some of the foreign makes I like could get it half together enough to put such a seamlessly integrated and simple system in their cars. It is universally compatible with just about ANYTHING you can plug or Bluetooth into it, it increases safety by READING your incoming texts back to you on a connected Bluetooth phone, manages playlists, identifies playlists and a lot more. It is everything we had hoped to come to the automobile from an automation standpoint. In fact, if I had a single complaint about the whole thing it would be the fact that Ford has it locked in right now. And this is just version 2....
well, hopefully MyFordTouch works. Many of the Ford guys have had their share of problems with the Sync system...

Playdrv4me
01-05-11, 12:02 AM
MFT is only the second version of the system, and Sync before it was so hotly demanded that it ended up being a brilliant way for Ford to continue pooping otherwise outdated Focii out from coast to coast.

They all have teething problems, but the intent and approach of Sync and MFT is on the right track.

blue07cts
01-05-11, 04:25 PM
QUALITY! As someone who bought both an 07,then 08 CTS brand new I would say the main thing that would keep me going back (as far as the actual vehicle's go anyways) is DETAIL quality, GM seems to have materials quality and drive train reliability going in the right direction it's in the details where they fall short, BOTH of my CTS's had rattles loose fitting trim pieces and cheap detail pieces of trim (like the fake chrome plastic around the speedometer area) on the 08 the drivers lumbar support broke at 33k miles causing the seatback to fall off, exposing the horribly cheap plastic lumbar system (witch also was attached with zip ties and used plastic gears). A friend of mine bought a brand new silverado last year and his seatback is already falling off and the headliner is sagging on the passenger sunvisor and around the a pillars. I think GM is getting there but they need to do all of there product testing BEFORE there new models are released and not on customer cars (even though I know that SOME issues must be learned by trial and error)

Overall I think this is where GM gets there poor quality reputation despite the fact that so many of there older vehicle's are still on the road, most without proper maintenece, it's the trim piece that falls off here, or never fit right in the first place, these are the area's where other manufacturer's have them beat in spades. Think of it this way, if you buy a new CTS and a new E550 and the CTS constantly sqeaks,rattles and has to go in for trim issues while the E goes in for a 1800 dollar censor, the CTS owner will bitch about poor quality way more due to the fact that they feel trim should be something any idiot could get right where as some censor they don't understand will be forgiven for perceived complexity and the fact that it simply failed, not annoyed them EVERY time the drove the car (as a rattle or fit issue will). I know I've rambled a bit but I think the concept of what I am trying to communicate is apprent :bouncy:

Stingroo
01-06-11, 12:29 AM
I've never thought about it that way, honestly. That actually makes sense.

Though sometimes I think people like to bitch for the sake of bitching. But that's just my two-cents. I won't be in any position to buy a $50k+ car for quite awhile.

Koooop
01-06-11, 12:44 AM
Damn I want one of those 6.3 E class wagons and the Panamera sure is whistling at me!

CTS pushrod V8 (sans supercharger) wagon could prevent me from going back to a furrin ride.

If I say it enough will they listen?

RightTurn
01-06-11, 01:23 AM
BUILD QUALITY. Please GM, get it right for a change. The last three vehicles we've bought ('07 CTS, '08 Tahoe, '10 SRX) have all been rattle-cans. This makes me crazy, and has guaranteed that I am moving away from GM for my next purchase. As others have stated, it's the quality and RELIABILITY that customers want for their money.

Oh, and as long as we're asking for the impossible, I'd like my "AMERICAN" car to be built in the USA. :thumbsup:

SDCaddyLacky
01-06-11, 02:53 AM
Rattles in a newer modern Cadillac?? That should not be happening in such a expensive car, it's inexcusable.

Ford interiors feel a little nicer than GM at the moment. Hyundai is the most impressive at it's price point. GM is getting there, but "Getting there" or "almost" doesn't cut it anymore. The competition is too fierce to be lagging behind.

I didn't mention Buick, but I was very impressed by the La Cross when I was at the auto show. The interior's are really nice, don't care for it's exterior styling all too much, but they do seem more upscale than Cadillac as of now, especially for older buyers.

I think all auto manufacturer pretty much have performance and technology down, the only focus what's needed, is on build quality and better styling. That's it! How hard can it be for Cadillac to eliminate squeaks and rattles from their vehicles? Do they even test drive them first in case problems pop up, before they get shipped off to the dealers? If not, that is unacceptable for cars that cost as much as a down payment towards a house. Not to mention none of Cadillacs cars look like they are worth almost $70,000. Other than it's technology and engine specs, they are just regular mid size cars rolling around with the Cadillac emblems. Ok, now the V series got something going for them, but are they truly worth the asking price?

V6 engines are nice in all, but they really don't provide the huge performance gains like a V8 does. Your asking too much from a 3. whatever DI V6 supercharged engine to pump out over 300 hp. Adding that kind of stress to a motor with a low displacement is asking for trouble years later down the road. I still think another V8 is desperately needed in it's lineup as an option other than the 4.6 NS and the super 6.2. But it wont matter until Caddy finally decides it would be a good idea to build a "true" flagship vehicle again in the future with much edgier styling inside and out. The DTS is looking tired on the inside.

The only Cadillac I remember driving that squeaked and rattled it's ass off, was my 72 Deville. My 94 Fleet doesn't even make those kinds of sounds, none.

Playdrv4me
01-06-11, 04:57 AM
The 1992-'96 Fleetwood is to Cadillac as the '98-2000 LS400 is to Lexus. Really the height of solid, well put together build quality (for GM), top notch materials and that "solid hunk of steel" feel. I say "for GM" because they did still have their share of small problems... such as OptiSpark and the poor quality adhesive used on the cloth material attached to the pillar covers and of course the headliner.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-06-11, 08:16 AM
Nah Ian, I never thought the Fleetwoods were that well built or built of great materials. I've seen various Caprices, Fleetwoods and Roadmasters with loose, rattly faux wood trim, cheap leather and hard plastics. Not a peak of construction and quality, but considering what else GM was putting out at the time, they weren't awful.

drewsdeville
01-06-11, 09:08 AM
^^^ I was going to say exactly the same thing. The Fleetwoods had that same GM "corporate" feel and styling as pretty much everything else they were producing at the time.

Stingroo
01-06-11, 10:50 AM
I'll agree to that, actually. There were some small differences, but really, it's a B-body with extra rear legroom.


But everyone here knows I loves me some B-bodies. :thumbsup:


And Ian I think you meant '94-96 to address your comments ('93 didn't have the LT1, and '92 was still the boxy version from 1980, albeit with a few updates).

blue07cts
01-06-11, 10:58 AM
I've never thought about it that way, honestly. That actually makes sense.

Though sometimes I think people like to bitch for the sake of bitching. But that's just my two-cents. I won't be in any position to buy a $50k+ car for quite awhile.

Yeah I totally agree that there are a lot of people who have nothing better to do then complain and for these people nothing will ever be good enough. I bought the08 cts because despite all of this being a car guy i loved the 07 even with it's oddball issues. On the other hand these types of issues would be OK on a 11k aveo but not on ANYTHING more exspensive especially a cadillac. I mean where would hyundai/kia be if they still had these sorts of issue's? There growth would have been severely stunted if not stopped.

Playdrv4me
01-06-11, 01:20 PM
Whoops, yes 'Roo I meant '94 to '96. I still stand by my statement though, if you compare a Fleetwood to modern day STS or especially to a comparable Crown Vic or Town Car of the time all the parts and pieces just felt heftier to me. The STS has plastics that flex when you push on them like so many things these days, hard leathers, etc. The CV and TC of that time didn't feel as if there was much substance to them, especially when closing the doors. It was that tinny Ford metal used on everything they made around that time. So yes, they probably still had rattles and quality problems, but I still consider them a height of manufacturing quality in many ways keeping in context the rest of what GM and Ford were putting out at that time.

The only other GM product that I might give that designation to is the 1992, and ONLY the 1992 Seville and '92 and '93 Eldorado with the 4.9. The '92 STS Jesda had was an incredible testament to build quality as compared with the '98+.

Now, let me reiterate that I am NOT asking for Cadillac to build another Fleetwood either. That car is a land yacht and that's what SUVs are for these days. Just a large V8 RWD sedan on par in size with its competition, with similar driving characteristics but without forgetting its comfort roots (a-la Equus/LS460) and without all those squeaky hollow plastics.

orconn
01-06-11, 04:34 PM
Whoops, yes 'Roo I meant '94 to '96. I still stand by my statement though, if you compare a Fleetwood to modern day STS or especially to a comparable Crown Vic or Town Car of the time all the parts and pieces just felt heftier to me. The STS has plastics that flex when you push on them like so many things these days, hard leathers, etc. The CV and TC of that time didn't feel as if there was much substance to them, especially when closing the doors. It was that tinny Ford metal used on everything they made around that time. So yes, they probably still had rattles and quality problems, but I still consider them a height of manufacturing quality in many ways keeping in context the rest of what GM and Ford were putting out at that time.

The only other GM product that I might give that designation to is the 1992, and ONLY the 1992 Seville and '92 and '93 Eldorado with the 4.9. The '92 STS Jesda had was an incredible testament to build quality as compared with the '98+.

Now, let me reiterate that I am NOT asking for Cadillac to build another Fleetwood either. That car is a land yacht and that's what SUVs are for these days. Just a large V8 RWD sedan on par in size with its competition, with similar driving characteristics but without forgetting its comfort roots (a-la Equus/LS460) and without all those squeaky hollow plastics.

I agree the fourth series Seville (at least STS) from 1992 thru 1995 had pretty decent build quality in both materials and assembly. Both the '93 and the '95 that I have had were decently put together and the materials, while not the fanciest or most expensive have stood the test of time (in the case of the '95 STS, 15 years and continuing) well. The fifth generation Sevilles were not only decontented, but showed cheapened materials,but also shoddier assembly standards. The fifth generation Sevilles have a more European driving dynamic, but somehow lack a certain "presence" in the way they drive and certainly in the way they come across. The 1998-'04 Sevilles were an attempt to more closely emulate a BMW 5 series and not to be a Cadillac per se. Of course it is all a matter of taste, but for American driving I prefer the driving dynamics of the 4th generation cars over that of the 5th generation Sevilles.

Destroyer
01-06-11, 10:12 PM
First and foremost put the emphasis on quality, then on reliability and then on great, attractive exterior and interior designs. GM should become a leader again in styling, if they have to copy someone copy VW/Audi not the next "Bangle-Butted" fad from a mislead maker.

Each division should be distinctive and have a clearly identified automotive objective and should have a suitable flagship with the parameters of the division's market/performance segment.

Cadillac should have high quality products suitable to satisfying customers in "executive/luxury" segment. It should also have a product that can capture acceptance and desirability among the world's power elite. Not some hokey frosted truck, but an luxury passenger car that conveys the prestige of the owner or his office.

Buick should build cars suitable to the upper middle class socially and economically. This lineup should include some perform ace models like the "Wildcats" of the sixties. Buick not market cars meant for middle income folks leave that segment to Chevrolet.

Chevrolet should have a broad spectrum of vehicles suitable for the various tasks middle class families are called upon to perform, but not to include trucks (leave trucks to GMC).Very well said!!!!!:cool2:

Jesda
01-06-11, 11:29 PM
The middle and working class buys tons of trucks. Would seem silly to not offer those at a Chevy dealer.

RightTurn
01-08-11, 12:52 AM
The middle and working class buys tons of trucks. Would seem silly to not offer those at a Chevy dealer.

And...there's this. Chevy trucks outsell the crap outta GMC:
YE 2008, Units Sold

Chevy Silverado 465,065
Chevy Avalanche 35,003
GMC Sierra 168,544
Dodge Ram 245,840
Ford F-Series 515,513
Toyota Tundra 137,249
Nissan Titan 34,053

Eliminating Chevy trucks would be fraught with dumbassery. :coffee:

Nutz
01-08-11, 01:41 AM
Hire Jill Wagner now. In the late 60's, Oldsmobile crawled out of a luxury-only reputation with a Hurst/Olds (shifter) ad campaign that needed a boost in performance recognition. Cue in Linda Vaughn. It also secured a piece of performance history with not only a good luxury performance reputation, but a pretty face to carry the torch and re-light the flame (even after the Oldsmobile production ended).

Playdrv4me
01-08-11, 04:16 AM
Jill Wagner is the only lamentable casualty in the death of Mercury...

http://www.angelic-scarlett.com/sexy-jill-wagner.jpg

Stingroo
01-08-11, 08:20 AM
I'd smash.

DouglasJRizzo
01-09-11, 01:08 PM
Less front drive. Less badge engineering. Less engine sharing.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-09-11, 02:26 PM
Jill Wagner is the only lamentable casualty in the death of Mercury...

http://www.angelic-scarlett.com/sexy-jill-wagner.jpg

Suddenly, I have the strangest desire to go purchase a Mercury Topaz.

Koooop
01-09-11, 06:09 PM
Hire Jill Wagner now. In the late 60's, Oldsmobile crawled out of a luxury-only reputation with a Hurst/Olds (shifter) ad campaign that needed a boost in performance recognition. Cue in Linda Vaughn. It also secured a piece of performance history with not only a good luxury performance reputation, but a pretty face to carry the torch and re-light the flame (even after the Oldsmobile production ended).

LOL, I saw Linda Vaughn at Cars n Coffee in Irvine Ca a few months ago. I didn't think I'd ever see her name in here.

The "Shifty Dr." was always a favorite of mine, I have an old school Hurst T style shift knob in my V (on top of a B & M shifter) as a tribute to the Dr. of course.

I love the history that goes with Cadillac (or Oldsmobile) nameplates. Eldorado, Seville, Brougham, Fleetwoot etc. are rich in that history. I like the use of V in the HO cars, good idea that can carry on for a long time. V could be the Cadillac version of SS in the not to distant future.

Nutz
02-23-11, 08:39 PM
Hmmm
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/23/video-mercury-spokesmodel-jill-wagner-defects-to-gm-for-inside-the-vault/

Playdrv4me
02-23-11, 11:47 PM
Woooo! Moar Jill!

Stingroo
02-24-11, 12:16 AM
Wow. That's kinda cool. Maybe they DO listen to us.


Here's hoping for that triple-tail-lighted Impala Gary D. dreamed up.

Koooop
02-25-11, 05:56 PM
I went and had a look over the new CTS-V wagon. I still hold out hope for an LS3 CTS-V wagon, but I have my doubts.

The salesman actually took an up call while he was with me. I guess showing up in a V1 wasn't good enough for him.

thebigjimsho
02-25-11, 07:42 PM
I went and had a look over the new CTS-V wagon. I still hold out hope for an LS3 CTS-V wagon, but I have my doubts.

The salesman actually took an up call while he was with me. I guess showing up in a V1 wasn't good enough for him.
Just get the damn LSA...

Koooop
02-25-11, 10:46 PM
Me thinks I would go to jail with an LSA...

It's possible that an LSA powered V will be in my garage at some point, but the Panamera is awfully sweet and I don't have to get FI or a V6. I never would have thought it was going to be possible to cross shop Porsche and Cadillac someday, I doubt the folks at Cadillac anticipated such a thing but here it is. Porsche gives the choice of V6, normally asperated V8 or a forced induction V8 power (a full menu). Cadillac is not offering middle ground in the line up which is unfortunate. A V6 is for the wife, 556HP is for the maniac. Where's mine at? When I do get serious, it'll be tough not to grab a slightly used Panamera.

Whatever the outcome for me, it won't be for a bit since V1 only has 65,000 miles on it.