No Reserve-etc One Fl Own Bose Leather Full Cloth Sim Top Chromes Low Mi on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The syrupy sweet tale of the Pink Cadillac Margarita

In our last installment of the irregular and irreverent series on drinks loosely connected to – or named after – automobiles, we sipped a Taxi cocktail, which in its original form tasted a bit like a margarita infused with Blackjack chewing gum , except worse. This time, we explore mythos behind a drink so pink it usually doesn't make you stop and think. But that's what we're going to do. And, as always, enjoy cocktails (and reading about them) while you're not behind the wheel. Our brother lives in Detroit, where old American cars go to not die. On the streets of the Motor City, you will see all manner of holey-mufflered, salt-rotted, spring-sagging Big Three iron plowing along shoddily. Our brother's next-door neighbor is a connoisseur of such vehicles, and thus populates his driveway with a cache of Malaise Era Cadillacs. (His dog lives in one.) His latest addition, which our brother texted us a photo of recently while we were eating fish tacos in Los Angeles, is a Desert Rose 1977 Coupe DeVille (seen below). Since we're always thinking about cars or drinking (or both), and we were eating Mexican, this put us in mind of a cocktail our cousin's trashy bridesmaid made us try at her wedding in Charleston: the Pink Cadillac Margarita. Suddenly, we were thirsty. The Pink Cadillac Margarita is, quite obviously, a pink drink – a somewhat cloying, if deliciously chuggable concoction colored with a spritz of Ocean Spray, or Chambord liqueur if you're classy. Pink drinks get a bum rap. Blame it on the Cosmopolitan, and everyday misogyny, but many people find pink drinks frivolous. As expert drinkers, and drink experts, we would counter that the consumption of alcohol is, at its essence, about being frivolous. Never mind that the chemical is a depressive; Consuming it is about putting on your rose (or rose) colored glasses, and getting ready to make some mistakes. The Pink Cadillac is apparently so named not just because of its signature color and the irresistible musical connection between Cadillacs and pinkness (see: Aretha, Springstein, Natalie Cole). The moniker also derives from the quality of the ingredients – drawing on the historical expression "The Cadillac of..." to signify something top-shelf. "It's difficult to know quite how that name was derived," says Melody Lee, Cadillac's director of brand strategy.

Cadillac recalls 17,500 SRX CUVs in Canada

When reporting on recalls, Autoblog generally tries to focus on the US market. However, a recent campaign in Canada seems important enough to be worth mentioning because it could eventually affect American drivers. General Motors is repairing 17,481 Canadian examples of the Cadillac SRX from the 2010-2015 model years because of the possibility of a loose nut in the rear suspension. For the moment, the automaker hasn't yet announced whether the CUV in the US would require a similar campaign.
The notice was dated September 18, 2014, on the website for Transport Canada, similar to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the US. It says, "the rear suspension toe link jam nuts" might not have been sufficiency tightened, which could allow a rear wheel to turn "inboard or outboard" while driving. If this happens, it could cause a sudden change in handling. Canadian Cadillac dealers are inspecting the parts and replacing the toe link if necessary.
This campaign isn't listed on the GM's running recall tally from September, which includes exported models, but it does list four other campaigns for the SRX this year - three in this range of years and one for the 2004-2006 model. Autoblog reached out to the company to ask about the possibility of this recall expanding to the US and were told "We have not publicly announced US recalls" for the issues affecting the SRX. The New York Times was given a similar quote. Scroll down to read the notice from Transport Canada.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.