556hp Cadillac CTS-V vs. Stock EVO X MR - Revenge FQ400 vs. CTS-V (Merged)

[hotdog]

I honestly don't understand GM's aim of making cars like ZR1 and CTS-V in their current situation. Sure they are hella fast, sets many records in production cars, but is this really going to help them in a long run? They should be cutting down every possible model and stick with an economy sedan, a mid-size sedan, couple of trucks, a minivan and an entry level premium sedan spending every dollar they have left to make those cars competitive in their market segments. Or perhaps they already know that there is no hope so they're trying to have as much fun as they can with the freebie tax money they received.

The CTS-V and ZR-1s sell for a tidy profit, I'm sure. It's not like they're bleeding money because of these cars; they're bleeding money for a variety of reasons, but "building the CTS-V" ain't one of them.

[mike100]

Originally Posted by 4Trouble

....

I honestly don't understand GM's aim of making cars like ZR1 and CTS-V in their current situation. Sure they are hella fast, sets many records in production cars, but is this really going to help them in a long run? They should be cutting down every possible model and stick with an economy sedan, a mid-size sedan, couple of trucks, a minivan and an entry level premium sedan spending every dollar they have left to make those cars competitive in their market segments. Or perhaps they already know that there is no hope so they're trying to have as much fun as they can with the freebie tax money they received.

That would surely bankrupt them again. May as well be getting directives from the Soviet Central Planning Committee as to what the production will be this year...oh wait, that didn't work too well. The best companies make what people want.

[sizquik]

Originally Posted by boondoc

Is it just me or does Wes suck at driving? Or maybe it was editing favoritism for the CTS?

His excuses I heard from a few videos:
1. the evo felt slow compared to others he drove (extra weight of MR touring package?)
2. fuel starvation issues in the turns
3. gearbox overheating
4. the tires did not work well in the wet.

[RobY]

They really need to fix the gas tank issue. It severely limits the capability of the car as a track machine.

[cnj4ever]

Originally Posted by 4Trouble

I honestly don't understand GM's aim of making cars like ZR1 and CTS-V in their current situation. Sure they are hella fast, sets many records in production cars, but is this really going to help them in a long run? They should be cutting down every possible model and stick with an economy sedan, a mid-size sedan, couple of trucks, a minivan and an entry level premium sedan spending every dollar they have left to make those cars competitive in their market segments. Or perhaps they already know that there is no hope so they're trying to have as much fun as they can with the freebie tax money they received.

The reason they make cars like these is bc it is otherwise a bunch of parts they have sitting around taking up a stockroom for a catalog somewhere, so they throw them together in a "new" car and then jack the price up. But all most people see is an expensive car but in reality it is just a bunch of random catalog performance parts on an otherwise stock car. Hence why they aren't limited production like FQ-400 or STi Spec C Type RA-R.

[4Trouble]

Thanks I understand the parts bin sharing reasons but why are their exec spending so much time marketing a car they may only sell about 2000 a year at most? If the same amount of time and resources are used for removing the rebate program that will permanently tag the brand as 'disabled', and improve models like Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, Colorado, Silverado, LaCrosse, Lucerne etc? Looking at Corvette production figures, it doesn't seem like introduction of Z06 for C5 nor ALMS wins helped much, only fluctuating according to world economy health. Would CTS-V improve sales of regular CTS? Probably, but significantly? Probably not. I don't think the image of Evo or M3 is the significant part of Lancer and regular 3 series sales, of course they are affected but not as much as overall quality of the base car, looks and brand image, and general spending power of consumers each year.

I mean lets look at Malibu. They have finally made a worthy competitor to Camry and Accord, and even bettering them in some reviews (or have they paid enough?). But how long would it stay that way? By next update on the Japanese competitions Malibu will be heavily outdated. Why? Because the engines are already underpowered compared to current competition and the transmission has 1 cog less (they are finally using 6speed auto for the top of the line trim but 4 speed for the others? Come on...). The aging of interior and exterior is inevitable but at least they could have let the powertrain stay competitive even against future updates on its competitors. Also in order not to be left out again, it should already start considering a fuel efficient version, smaller size and lower weight while having improved interior etc.

Sometimes jumping on the bandwagon may not be a good idea as the last one can be the one that lose the most, but there are trends that if you don't follow you will just be left out. Some examples; ABS, airbag, HID, variable valve timing, SUV, dual clutch auto. If all manufacturers as well as governments of many countries are working hard on fuel efficient vehicles, then this must be one of those trends, and if the general trend of companies drop everything else and focus only on their mainstream products, it must be a strategy that works. Sure nothing will prevent GM from using innovative method to emerge from bankrupcy but I don't think they are in a situation where they can take a lot of risk.

[atombomb33]

Originally Posted by 4Trouble

Thanks I understand the parts bin sharing reasons but why are their exec spending so much time marketing a car they may only sell about 2000 a year at most? If the same amount of time and resources are used for removing the rebate program that will permanently tag the brand as 'disabled', and improve models like Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, Colorado, Silverado, LaCrosse, Lucerne etc? Looking at Corvette production figures, it doesn't seem like introduction of Z06 for C5 nor ALMS wins helped much, only fluctuating according to world economy health. Would CTS-V improve sales of regular CTS? Probably, but significantly? Probably not. I don't think the image of Evo or M3 is the significant part of Lancer and regular 3 series sales, of course they are affected but not as much as overall quality of the base car, looks and brand image, and general spending power of consumers each year.

This program didn't cost Cadillac very much. It certainly isn't even 1% of what they spend to support the Malibu or other "mainstream" models. Caddy builds the CTS-V for the same reason Mitsu builds the Evo. These cars provide a halo for the entire brand. They are an opportunity for the manufacturer to show their engineering merits and get consumers to believe that there's a little bit of that engineering going into every car that they build. It's less about production numbers for specialty vehicles like this, but more about the impression they leave with consumers that will (hopefully) impact a future purchase decision. There are plenty of members of this forum who own other Mitsu vehicles simply because of their good experience owning an Evo. It's worked in those situations and has worked for every other auto manufacturer.

[oneofakindtrini]

Lmao@ please rain!

[GPTourer]

Originally Posted by 4Trouble

Thanks I understand the parts bin sharing reasons but why are their exec spending so much time marketing a car they may only sell about 2000 a year at most?

"So much time" amounts to one morning/afternoon at a track. Bob Lutz is in semi-retirement as it is. Its not like some important project had to be put on hold to carry out this event. GM is a big corporation.

If the same amount of time and resources are used for removing the rebate program that will permanently tag the brand as 'disabled', and improve models like Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, Colorado, Silverado, LaCrosse, Lucerne etc?

I have no idea what this means, could you clarify?

Looking at Corvette production figures, it doesn't seem like introduction of Z06 for C5 nor ALMS wins helped much, only fluctuating according to world economy health. Would CTS-V improve sales of regular CTS? Probably, but significantly? Probably not. I don't think the image of Evo or M3 is the significant part of Lancer and regular 3 series sales, of course they are affected but not as much as overall quality of the base car, looks and brand image, and general spending power of consumers each year.

Corvette is probably not a good comparison, but I believe its credibility through motorsports is more important to it then the V is to CTS sales. However the whole V lineup is very important Cadillac as a brand and not just one particular car. AMG and M sales also only make up a small percentage of M-B and BMW sales, but both brands spend lots of money promoting and developing each car. Cadillac knows going forward they have to improve the V lineup to gain credibility for its luxury car brand as a whole, world wide.

I mean lets look at Malibu. They have finally made a worthy competitor to Camry and Accord, and even bettering them in some reviews (or have they paid enough?). But how long would it stay that way? By next update on the Japanese competitions Malibu will be heavily outdated. Why? Because the engines are already underpowered compared to current competition and the transmission has 1 cog less (they are finally using 6speed auto for the top of the line trim but 4 speed for the others? Come on...). The aging of interior and exterior is inevitable but at least they could have let the powertrain stay competitive even against future updates on its competitors. Also in order not to be left out again, it should already start considering a fuel efficient version, smaller size and lower weight while having improved interior etc.

Now that the no longer have to develop an Aura, or Pontiac counterpart, all of GMs developers can concentrate on making sure the Malibu (and the upcoming Cruze) stay competitive with all the Camcordtimas and Civorollas of the world.

but I don't think they are in a situation where they can take a lot of risk.

I may not have access to their balance sheet but I think I'm qualified enough to say that this event is no where in the realm of risky.

[4Trouble]

Thanks for your insights GPTourer and atombomb33

For below:

If the same amount of time and resources are used for removing the rebate program that will permanently tag the brand as 'disabled', and improve models like Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, Colorado, Silverado, LaCrosse, Lucerne etc?

I meant the rebate program is like cannibalizing the brand name for short term gains and they should be rid of it slowly. Improving those cars mentioned are already covered in other paragraphs (such as Malibu etc)

[atombomb33]

Agreed that the rebate program is a bad idea. When you have to dig that far just to get people to even TRY your vehicles, you've fallen so far that you might never climb back up. GM has been mismanaged for years. On the other hand, you have Ford who has worked hard over the past 10 years to start developing cars that consumers actually want to buy. In fact, Ford just posted a $1 billion profit. They avoided the government bail out and it did them a whole lot of good. Nice job by Ford.

[sblvro]

it is all just perception. having driven/owned japanese brands all throughout and some isolated german ones, it is the consumer that actually decide whether a brand should fail or not. I was all set to get the lexus SUV hybrid to replace my evo(after the crash) and it wasn't until I stepped on a cadillac dealer that I saw what I was missing. they build fine cars(GM/Cadillac) worthy of its name. Options-wise, it has everything that any consumer would want. I ended up getting the escalade hybrid, which is actually a feat in itself in getting 20mpg city and 21 highway compared to a lexus LS650h which gets the same mileage but at $120K price. the CTS loaner I get also exudes luxury. btw, mitsubishi is right in keeping the evo as a niche car. the other models will just follow.

[cy08x]

bad ass car but worth the $$$? i'll stick to my evo x

[GPTourer]

Originally Posted by 4Trouble

Thanks for your insights GPTourer and atombomb33

For below:

If the same amount of time and resources are used for removing the rebate program that will permanently tag the brand as 'disabled', and improve models like Aveo, Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, Colorado, Silverado, LaCrosse, Lucerne etc?

I meant the rebate program is like cannibalizing the brand name for short term gains and they should be rid of it slowly. Improving those cars mentioned are already covered in other paragraphs (such as Malibu etc)

If you mean rebate program as in like $2000 cash on the hood of a new CTS, then yeah I hope they can reach a point where they can cut back on that, but every manufacturer does it, including the Japanese - especially when its time to close out the outgoing model year. If you mean the buy back program, I'm not so sure that's a bad thing. People have the opportunity to waive the right to do it and take $500 and from what I've heard, most are taking the $500.

[James Bond]

Here is my impression of this thread

"If, If, If only, yea but, well if they, if that guy"



I wonder why nobody entered a gt-R