20" Davinci Rims, New Paint, Classy, Two Tone Leather!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Johan responds to critics again about Cadillac's NY move

Cadillac's new President Johan de Nysschen has faced a fair amount of criticism since assuming his position at the head of the American luxury manufacturer. From the company's move to New York City to a controversial new naming scheme, the first few months of his tenure have not been smooth sailing. Now, the embattled exec is firing back against his critics, notably Automotive News Editor-in-Chief Keith Crain, in a new column running in AN.
De Nysschen countered Crain's claim that the move to the Big Apple, "can only mean that someone wants to live in New York."
"The relocation decision is entirely unrelated to the personal living preferences of any Cadillac executive. No corporation would tolerate such indulgence by its leadership," de Nysschen wrote. "It is about structurally entrenching a challenge to the status quo by reinforcing the psychological and physical separation in business philosophy between the mainstream brands and GM's luxury brand."

Cool car technology is cool until it breaks

Ah, technology – the beautiful date that impresses all your friends but costs you a fortune to keep happy, up-to-date, and working. Automotive News puts some numbers to the economic toll we're paying to jockey this technological Trojan horse, an analysis it sums up with "Technology is great - until you have to replace it." Back in 2000, for instance, you could replace a Cadillac Escalade taillight lens for $56.08, or replace the entire unit for $220.49. Crack the rear lens on your 2015 Escalade and you have to buy a new unit for $795 - there's no such thing as just replacing a lens anymore. What about headlights? It was $210 for an Escalade headlight in 2000, it's $1,650 for the current unit (pictured). This is nothing we didn't know, these are just hard numbers to demonstrate it. Edmunds recently provided the same with its sledgehammer-bashing of the 2015 Ford F-150, Tesla Model S buyers have been shrieking about repair costs to their electric sedan's all-aluminum bodywork, and used-car sites are full of articles about which expensive-to-repair features to steer clear of if you want to avoid big repair bills. Those expensive bits increase the price of a car - Kelley Blue Book says the average price of a car is now more than $33,000 - and that raises rates for repairs and insurance. This comes in spite of some carmakers that have been collaborating with insurance companies and repair shops at the design stage in order to engineer parts that are easier and less expensive to replace. But the tech can have its cost-saving benefits: a 2011 study by the Highway Loss Data Institute found that Volvos fitted with that company's City Safety feature "filed 27 percent fewer property-damage liability claims" than luxury SUVs without it, and just last month the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety called adaptive headlights one of the top four crash-preventing technologies on cars today (after coming out against them in 2006). So yes, the technology costs a mint when it needs to be fixed - but being able to avoid an accident in the first place might make it worth it. News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Copyright 2015 AOL Cadillac Car Buying Used Car Buying Auto Repair Insurance Maintenance Safety Technology Luxury replacement parts

Cadillac CTS Vsport laps the N"urburgring in 8:14.10 [w/video]

You don't have to be German to test your car at the Nürburging. You just have to be serious about beating the Germans on their own home turf. That's why Nissan tests its GT-R at the Nordschleife to challenge the Porsche 911, and why Cadillac - which is no less serious about putting up a fight to German performance sedans - has returned to the 'Ring once again with its latest.
This time it's the turn of the new CTS Vsport, the sportier version of Cadillac's new mid-range sedan that aims to bridge the gap until the arrival of the next CTS-V. So how'd it fare? At the end of what we're sure was an exhaustive test session, the new CTS Vsport clocked a time of 8:14.10.
To put that into context, General Motors points out that the time places the new sedan six seconds ahead of the first-gen CTS-V, whose 400-horsepower V8 engine was actually less potent than the Vsport's new 410hp 3.6-liter twin-turbo V6. That's still a good fifteen seconds slower than the outgoing CTS-V that clocked a 7:59 in 2009 with its 556hp supercharged V8, but only a second behind the E60-generation BMW M5 with its high-revving 500hp V10.