Cadillac CT5 Blackwing Precision Package

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

Any car company being bought by Detroit is pretty much that company's death knell. Has there actually been a circumstance where it was successful?

All I can think of is JLR, Saab, Holden, etc. None of those companies were better off – if they even survived – for having been bought by a Big Three manufacturer. You'd think they'd get the hint, but here we are. Every CEO is convinced he/she has to make a big splash...

I'd say those companies were on the cliff well before the legacy manufacturers bought them in an effort to save the nameplates. Ford should have never bought JLR. Ford should have spent the money taking Lincoln back its independent platform-based unit of FoMoCo. IMO.

SaaB was just too small to save.

Government regs have killed off the ability to have boutique manufacturers or boutique brands. All the diversity, inclusion and choice bullshit world governments preach does not get practiced when it comes to the automobile industry. Boutique brands are good for the industry and good for the consumer.

[afadeev]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

You must have missed the ATS commercials circa 2012.

That is not impossible. What were they? What is ATS?

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

The whole old man stigma went out long ago. Cadillac was originally a prestige brand that generally only old people could afford ...

Are you sure it's not age talking?
Something happens to folks in social security age bracket when they "discover" Cadillacs and how lovely they look even without glasses on.

Not a stigma, more of a natural phenomena.



https://www.city-data.com/blog/6719-...ngest-drivers/

Originally Posted by Davil

As for marketing, remember they are in F1 next year. That’s a substantial outlay and should hopefully end the old chap from Florida connection.

They are in F1 with Ferrari engines, gearboxes, and whatever else!
Does it make them a Cadyrarri?

a

[Phillies8008]

I'm surprised to see Chryslers skew so old – I thought people got wiser as they aged.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by afadeev

That is not impossible. What were they? What is ATS?



Are you sure it's not age talking?
Something happens to folks in social security age bracket when they "discover" Cadillacs and how lovely they look even without glasses on.

Not a stigma, more of a natural phenomena.


Attachment 3833924
https://www.city-data.com/blog/6719-...ngest-drivers/



a

If you think 52 is old, then all I can do is LOL. The era of old man's Caddys were 1940's to 1970's. My best friend in high school dad was a dentist, Dr. J we called him. Dr. J would only buy 2-year-old used Caddys for him and his wife. In 1978 he had matching colors 1976 Sedan DeVille and a Coupe DeVille (for him). Nice frickin' cars they were. All just to exude wealth (Dr. J said they were for "safety").

I'm easily a decade past 52 and have a Z4 Coupe, Z3 Roadster, a Bronco, and H3T. Skewing the average I guess... LOL.

Lexus...

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

I'm surprised to see Chryslers skew so old – I thought people got wiser as they aged.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I'd say those companies were on the cliff well before the legacy manufacturers bought them in an effort to save the nameplates. Ford should have never bought JLR. Ford should have spent the money taking Lincoln back its independent platform-based unit of FoMoCo. IMO.

SaaB was just too small to save.

Government regs have killed off the ability to have boutique manufacturers or boutique brands. All the diversity, inclusion and choice bullshit world governments preach does not get practiced when it comes to the automobile industry. Boutique brands are good for the industry and good for the consumer.

100%

JLR was way better off under Ford than they are today. Volvo as well. Arguably Mazda's best years were under Ford as well.

Saab was never going to work. GM kept them alive far longer than anyone else would have. Opel, Vauxhall, and Holden were all victims of cheap transoceanic shipping. Cottage industries like those had little chance of success in the face of significantly cheaper competition from Asia.

Reality is, companies from high cost countries will not be able to compete at a global scale with low cost countries. Australia was never going to be able to build cheaper than China or Vietnam or wherever unless they protected their markets, and Western governments and medias see protectionist policies as racist when we do them, but no issues when economic adversaries do it.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

I'm surprised to see Chryslers skew so old – I thought people got wiser as they aged.

They only sell the Pacifa now. Minivans are very popular with older folks.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

They only sell the Pacifa now. Minivans are very popular with older folks.

Listen man, don't bore me with facts when I'm taking cheap shots! If we can't point and laugh at Stellantis brands, who can we point and laugh at??

Really, at this point, why even have Chrysler as a brand? Maybe they should just rename the division "Pacifica" – introducing the all new 2027 Pacifica Pacifica!

Which I guess would really just be Stellantis' version of the Ferrari La Ferrari?

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Arguably Mazda's best years were under Ford as well.

Totally disagree. Mazda's worst designs and most unreliable years were those when they were directly tied to Ford and controlling interest (1996-2008). They make quite reliable and stylish cars now, starting in around 2010. Great driving cars for the most of the driving public as well.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

100%

JLR was way better off under Ford than they are today. Volvo as well. Arguably Mazda's best years were under Ford as well.

Saab was never going to work. GM kept them alive far longer than anyone else would have. Opel, Vauxhall, and Holden were all victims of cheap transoceanic shipping. Cottage industries like those had little chance of success in the face of significantly cheaper competition from Asia.

Reality is, companies from high cost countries will not be able to compete at a global scale with low cost countries. Australia was never going to be able to build cheaper than China or Vietnam or wherever unless they protected their markets, and Western governments and medias see protectionist policies as racist when we do them, but no issues when economic adversaries do it.

Agree. We keep hearing tariffs "don't work", yet practically every country has them as economic policy.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

Listen man, don't bore me with facts when I'm taking cheap shots! If we can't point and laugh at Stellantis brands, who can we point and laugh at??

Really, at this point, why even have Chrysler as a brand? Maybe they should just rename the division "Pacifica" – introducing the all new 2027 Pacifica Pacifica!

Which I guess would really just be Stellantis' version of the Ferrari La Ferrari?

Chrysler should have died off in the 1970s. My opinion of course.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by Bumpinjeep

TL-DR
Way to go Cadillac for making a car that brings a smile to your face as you shift gears, pull Gs in corners, bombastic exhaust belching, with 4 of your friends along for the ride.

Great car, no doubt - but you aren't fitting four of your friends in there unless you're friends with kids...like MJ was.

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by mirob

Great car, no doubt - but you aren't fitting four of your friends in there unless you're friends with kids...like MJ was.

Not sure why everyone is so concerned with fitting adults in the back of a car. Rear seats are for kids, dogs, and the elderly.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Not sure why everyone is so concerned with fitting adults in the back of a car. Rear seats are for kids, dogs, and the elderly.

I don't disagree...I'm just highlighting a simple fact: he's going to be taking his friends on joy-rides one at a time.

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by mirob

I don't disagree...I'm just highlighting a simple fact: he's going to be taking his friends on joy-rides one at a time.

Not long trips anyway. It does have 4 doors and I'm sure they could make do to get to the pub if they had to...

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

Listen man, don't bore me with facts when I'm taking cheap shots! If we can't point and laugh at Stellantis brands, who can we point and laugh at??

Really, at this point, why even have Chrysler as a brand? Maybe they should just rename the division "Pacifica" – introducing the all new 2027 Pacifica Pacifica!

Which I guess would really just be Stellantis' version of the Ferrari La Ferrari?

We can make fun of BMW real easy. You seen their new designs lately? Lol.

Frankly I agree about Chrysler. They're utterly pointless in the lineup at this point. The Hornet should have been a Chrysler, withore squared off and elegant styling. Grand Wagoneer should have been a Chrysler as well, again with its own styling. At this point, I don't think they have any real value left, but it also probably costs them nothing to operate, I doubt they have any standalone employees for just Chrysler.

Really, Chrysler should have been their EV brand. That way if/when they failed, no big deal.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Not sure why everyone is so concerned with fitting adults in the back of a car. Rear seats are for kids, dogs, and the elderly.

Adults fitting in rear seats is an easy analog for car seats and kids fitting. If there's enough space for an adult, there's enough space for a car seat and a kiddo to climb in.

That said, a lot of people also have to cart around adult family when they come visit.

[ShocknAwe]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Adults fitting in rear seats is an easy analog for car seats and kids fitting. If there's enough space for an adult, there's enough space for a car seat and a kiddo to climb in.

That said, a lot of people also have to cart around adult family when they come visit.

Adult family on visits is the best argument.

There's not much argument in kids and car seats. Been there done that it's no big deal unless you're lazy or your kids are fat.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by ShocknAwe

Adult family on visits is the best argument.

There's not much argument in kids and car seats. Been there done that it's no big deal unless you're lazy or your kids are fat.

When was the last time you had a rear facing car seat? Getting a kid into one of those in the back of a 2 door car, is a literal impossible task. Doing it in the back of a small 4 door is a freaking pain in the butt. Especially if you're tall and hot your head on the roof.

Beyond all that, it's truly a packaging issue. I've found that a rear facing car seat is usually about the same size as an adult having decent legroom. These car seats so.ply just extend past the seat cushion, requiring the extra space.

I suspect a lot of people who don't get these issues being a pain are just little people. I had a great friend back in college who never understood why people would want SUVs and he thought his Civic coupe was a very large car and said he's sat very comfortably in the back multiple times. He was like probably 5'5 on a good day, lol. I'm or a huge guy, only 6'2, but when I drove his car the front seat and back seat touched lol. Many of my friends are 6'5 or taller, and that makes a big difference.

[RM7]

My Master's is equal parts ergonomics/human factors and safety. There's no getting around that an SUV/crossover is more ergonomic for getting in and out and other aspects like visibility and so on. One of my professors was head of GM ergonomics for a while and there were tales of lots of disagreements between the department and management, for the purpose of ergonomics. Lots of that was due to established supply chains and mfrs that wouldn't change their ways. But I digress. The optimal vehicle ergonomically was something like a lowered truck, as far as getting in and out. It definitely wasn't a sedan/hatch/wagon unfortunately.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by RM7

My Master's is equal parts ergonomics/human factors and safety. There's no getting around that an SUV/crossover is more ergonomic for getting in and out and other aspects like visibility and so on. One of my professors was head of GM ergonomics for a while and there were tales of lots of disagreements between the department and management, for the purpose of ergonomics. Lots of that was due to established supply chains and mfrs that wouldn't change their ways. But I digress. The optimal vehicle ergonomically was something like a lowered truck, as far as getting in and out. It definitely wasn't a sedan/hatch/wagon unfortunately.

My ZQ8 Colorado was insanely comfortable and easy to get in and out of. It rode like a truck, but entry and exit was so easy. And I could easily reach anything in the bed from the side of it.

That was a great little truck. 300hp V8, comfortable but not fancy interior, very reliable, very practical.

[kudos]

Where is the 2 door sport car with the power of a CT5 blackwing? It may exist I don't know but I can't find one on the site.