2011 Cadillac Cts Base on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Cadillac's new ad campaign to tell you how to get lucky

Cadillac is set to launch a new ad campaign this fall, as it attempts to maintain the momentum established by new models like the ATS. The campaign comes from an agency called Rogue, and according to AdAge, will lean on American values. It's called, "Work Hard. Be Lucky."
The campaign is fairly self-explanatory, just from the tagline. It's meant to make a Cadillac seem more attainable to the average, aspirational buyer. It does kind of pander to that American idea that everyone's hard work gets rewarded, but as ad campaigns go, that's not a bad thing.
Somehow, it doesn't roll off the tongue quite like "The Standard of the World." As AdAge points out, Cadillac's advertising over the years has lacked a real coherent theme, although we'll admit to enjoying the most recent campaigns, particularly the around-the-world jaunts with the ATS. It's unclear if the "Work Hard. Be Lucky." theme will evolve into an actual tagline for the brand, with Caddy spokesman Dave Caldwell telling the advertising mag, "It could very easily end up being a line of copy along with other lines; we don't really know yet. It's an open question as to how dramatically it will be featured."

How Cadillac improved power output in 2016 ELR by 25 percent

Earlier this year, Cadillac announced that the 2016 ELR would come with a big price drop and a powertrain that packs 25 percent more power output. That's a lot more oomph, but it didn't sound like the Caddy engineers made any major changes to the engine or motors. So, what happened? Let's refresh our memories with the numeric details. The 2016 car is 1.5 seconds quicker to 60 miles per hour than the 2014 model (there was no 2015), down to 6.4 seconds. The 2014 put out 295 pound-feet of torque. For 2016, it will be 373 lb-ft. The specific breakdown of the various components in the powertrain has not been disclosed, but from what we can tell, the two electric motors and the 1.4-liter inline-four engine in the new ELR are not that much different than those in the old one. Sam Abuelsamid, senior research analyst at Navigant Research (and former writer here at Autoblog) said that any of the unspecified upgrades would be difficult to tell on a part-by-part basis, but the overall effect will be noticeable. "The changes to the ELR as I understand them are analogous to getting more performance out of a 1965 Mustang with the entry version of the 289 cubic-inch V8. You can replace the carburetor with a larger version that enables more air and fuel to flow into the engine, thus producing more power. The basic engine hasn't changed, but power capability is being unleashed by feeding it more." "Cadillac has changed components in the power electronics to enable more current flow into the motor and thus produce more torque. When you do this in the Mustang, you probably need to replace the rear axle gears and use a beefier clutch to transmit the power to the wheels. Similarly, the ELR probably has some upgraded clutches, bearings, and gears to withstand the increased total output." Cadillac spokesperson David Caldwell told AutoblogGreen in an email that the new ELR does indeed have more than just new lines of code. "One could not 'reflash' a previous ELR to get the performance of a 2016," Caldwell said. "If one only changed software you would not get the performance upgrade fully, as the 2016 creates higher current, more power. So these have been upgraded physically – hardware.

The biggest gas-guzzlers of 2024: 'The Meanest List' is the opposite of greenest cars

In some circles — especially some automotive circles — bigger is better. This explains the Hummer, for example. In its so-called “Meanest List” of a dozen models, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) makes no apologies for berating “the worst-performing mass market automobiles” sold in 2024 in the U.S. The most diminutive car on the list is a Chevy Corvette Z06. At the top of this particular heap is the Mercedes-Benz AMG G63, a gas-powered SUV that the environmental agency says was “the worst-performing vehicle of the more than 1,200 models assessed by Greener Cars and has an annual fuel cost over $4,000.” Not to mention its MSRP of around $184,000. Rank Make & Model Powertrain Green Score MSRP Estimated Annual Fuel Cost* 1 Mercedes-Benz AMG G63 Gas 20 $184,000 $4,242 2 Ram 1500 TRX 4x4 Gas 22 $98,335 $3,819 3 Ford F150 Raptor R Gas 24 $79,975 $3,777 4 Cadillac Escalade V Gas 26 $152,295 $3,388 5 Dodge Durango SRT Gas 26 $74,995 $3,332 6 Jeep Wrangler 4dr 4X4 Gas 27 $35,895 $3,260 7 Jeep Grand Wagoneer 4x4 Gas 28 $91,945 $3,058 8 Mercedes-Benz G550 Gas 28 $143,000 $3,186 9 GMC Hummer EV SUV EV 29 $98,845 $1,746 10 GMC Sierra Gas 29 $37,700 $3,069 11 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Gas 30 $114,395 $3,169 12 Mercedes-Benz Maybach S680 Gas 30 $234,300 $3,031 *ACEEE analysis using EIA data of the annual cost of driving 15,000 miles In terms of numbers, the dirty dozen of the meanest includes seven SUVs and three trucks. Lonely at the middle of the list is the sole electric, the GMC Hummer EV, which weighs in at 9,000 pounds. The council notes that “though EVs have lower emissions than similarly sized gasoline models, the Hummer demonstrates that size and efficiency, not just fuel source, are important factors in a carÂ’s environmental impact.” ItÂ’s also worth reminding prospective buyers that the average fuel cost of a vehicle on the “Greenest List” eats up only a fifth of the fuel cost of a vehicle on the Meanest List, “showing that greener options can also be more affordable.” The ACEEE also put out a "Greener List" of efficient gasoline and hybrid cars that don't require plugging in.  By the Numbers Green Cadillac Chevrolet Dodge Ford GMC Hummer Jeep Maybach Mercedes-Benz RAM Emissions Fuel Efficiency Green Automakers Truck SUV Electric Hybrid