Also remember that American auto shows and mags NEVER put down the cars. Ive been reading Road & Track since ive been able to read and even in comparisons they NEVER say a car is terrible, mediocre even...
Also remember that American auto shows and mags NEVER put down the cars. Ive been reading Road & Track since ive been able to read and even in comparisons they NEVER say a car is terrible, mediocre even...
It is encouraging that they have made a big effort to improve the car, and who knows, maybe in 6 years they'll have plucked up courage enough to actually have a proper go at equalling or bettering the Germans. (Why not?)
However, the reality is that the old CTS was not even close to what Cadillac seemed to imagine, and the already small number of people who know that Cadillacs are available to buy in this country have an opinion of the company and its products influenced by the cars they have experienced, and that experience has not been particularly positive - if it were they'd be able to sell more than 500 across all of Europe.
You are left with a buying public that either doesn't know the car exists, or does know it exists and thinks it is rubbish.
The improvement is going to have to be massive to turn the CTS from a car which sells maybe 100 a year into one that sells 10,000 a year, and from looking at the information, whilst it is evident there is a big improvement, I don't really see a breakthrough.
As I said before - Cadillac is realistically in the same sort of arena as Hyundai's larger offerings over here. Their cars are not particularly bad in any way, but they are in no danger or defining the segment, and their only major defining feature is typically the relatively low pricing.
Because then they don't get test cars, they make it obvious which ones they don't like though.
I've read decades of car comparisons from both Australian and US magazines, and noticed one predictable constant. This being that straight-line performance is rated above all else and thus the fastest car in the field will almost invariably be adjudged the victor of the comparo. It is with extremely rare exception that magazines prioritise any of those other important automotive attributes (better handling, ride, comfort, economy, design etc) above the god of performance
Hate to defend Car and Driver again (fanreader?) but they constantly get hate mail for cars like the RSX beating cars like the SRT4 even though the RSX is much slower. I think they really stand out as a shining example of how to really review cars. I remember a qoute from the letters to the editor section being along the lines of "If you want to know which car is faster or cheaper, read consumer reports, we'll tell you which car is better,"
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
– Hunter Thompson
I think that the main reason that Cadillacs don't sell as well as their competitors is that they are not as trendy. There used to be a time when people bought Cadillacs just for the name, but now people buy Benz and Bimmer just for the name. The cheaper priced and similarly performing Cadillac did not sell as well as it;s counterpart simply because the people wealthy enough to afford a car are more concerned with the name of the vehicle that they own rather than the bang for the buck or what's best. I've been inside the last generation of 3-series - the competitor to the CTS and it was hardly remarkable - it was downright plain and unimpressive. We must remember, the CTS is an entry-level luxury car, not a full on luxury car, and frankly, I don't think the discrepancy in interior is worth thousands of dollars more for an import car.
Do read my previous post quoted above before you bark around cowboy. I'm fine with the new CTS, hence checking on the 'upper market' STS and was shocked by it. Trying to defend that rubbish STS by posting a new CTS interior wouldn't help it much. And perhaps you 'missed the part on why I compared my supposingly 'WRONG INTERIOR PIC" with 5, A6, GS, RL etc ...
www.secondaryperspective.blogspot.com
Rarely do the manufacturing world sells stuffs by production costs + mark up. They produce as lean as they could, market as good as they can, and create a price point where it fits in the market demand's perceived 'value' from their marketing effort. Hence if people continues to believe BMW is worth at least 10 - 15% more than a similiar CTS, so be it, in a business standpoint, there's no reason they would want to reduce the pricing. And the more they earn, the more they can budget for their R&D, which is a good thing.
www.secondaryperspective.blogspot.com
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)