2007 Cadillac on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Cadillac can't keep up with Escalade demand, can't move its sedans

No matter how much Cadillac revitalizes its lineup and its image, it seems that all consumers want is the Escalade. In fact, Automotive News reports that General Motors can't keep up with demand for the fullsize luxury SUV, despite sticker prices that start at over $70,000 and approach six figures at the top end of the spectrum. Contrast that with sedans like the ATS and CTS, which are far cheaper but which Cadillac hasn't been able to move fast enough to keep up with production, prompting both the manufacturer and dealers to offer substantial incentives to keep them from piling up. Cadillac had been resisting a price cut of the ATS or CTS, lest it hurt resale values – itself a factor that could explain consumers' reluctance to buy them in the first place – but been offering subsidized leases, discounted financing, rebates and cheaper options. Combined with incentives from individual dealers, according to AN, buyers can be looking at five-figure discounts on buying a new Cadillac sedan. And now, finally, it seems the CTS will indeed get a little bit off its bottom line. Yet GM has been producing the ATS and CTS at rates that their sales can't keep up with. The automaker was forced to idle the plant in Lansing, MI, where it assembles the ATS and CTS for six weeks starting this past December. And since it reopened late in January, it's been reduced to a single shift as dealers try to move the metal they've already got. Meanwhile the plant in Arlington, TX, that produces the Escalade and its Chevy and GMC siblings has been running on overtime, with three shifts throughout the week and even into the weekend to keep up with demand. Profitable as it's been for Cadillac and GM, though, the Escalade does not represent the future of where it wants to take the brand - separating the Escalade as almost a brand unto itself that's been left out of the company's new naming scheme. If only it could make its sedans as successful as its fullsize SUVs, it'll be all set.

What will the next Presidential limo look like?

With recent news that the Secret Service has begun soliciting proposals for a new armored limousine, we've been wondering what the next presidential limo might look like. The current machine, nicknamed "The Beast", has a design based on a car that's no longer sold: the Cadillac DTS. If General Motors gets the job again, which wouldn't be a surprise considering the government still owns a chunk of the company, the next limo's shape would likely resemble the new XTS (below, left). But Cadillac hasn't always been the go-to car company for presidential whips.
Lincoln has actually provided far more presidential limousines throughout history than Cadillac. In fact, the first car modified for Commander-in-Chief-carrying duty was a 1939 Lincoln K-Series called "Sunshine Special" used by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the last Lincoln used by a president was a 1989 Town Car ordered for George H.W. Bush. If President Obama wanted a Lincoln today, it would likely be an amalgam of the MKS sedan and MKT crossover, as illustrated above.
And what about Chrysler? The only record we could find of a President favoring the Pentastar is Nixon, who reportedly ordered two limos from the company during his administration in the '70s, and then another one, known today as the "K-Car limo," in the '80s after he left office. Obama, however, has a personal - if modest - connection to Chryslers, having owned a 300 himself before he took office. A 300-based Beast (above, right) would certainly earn the U.S. some style points.

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.