THe irony of pointing out the (miniscule) historic world leader s-class useage is that those were all

FLEET SALES.

Actually, a fairly famous world leader was driven around in this in 1963:

His counterpart was driven around in a Packard knock off.

The English prime ministers were driven around in Daimlers.

The French President Charles De Gaulle opted for a Citroen DS.

The Japanese Prime Minister used Toyota Crowns

So yeah.... aside from those.... they all used Benz....or Cadillac, or Rolls, or Lincoln

Recently the Prime Minister of Canada has had a 1992 Buick Roadmaster and a 2001 Cadillac Deville

A big part of the reason Mercedes spends so much money on the interior is because that is what you see. The mechanics are top notch as well because they recycle what they use on performance models elsewhere in the lineup. That being said, Merc makes TONS of money on the S-Class. The base model Merc S-Class sells at 80k with a platform, engines, suspension, and technology paid for by its lesser models with the price of prestige. Look no further than an S-Class trunk for proof that it is a cleverly package unit.

Don't get me wrong and think I am hating on Merc or the 7er as much as I am pointing out the big picture. Both marques make a lot of profit on their range toppers which doesn't mean that you are getting what you pay for hence why the used market is crap for these cars. So for Cadillac to 'get it right' they need to make sure the range topper uses the best and paid for mechanicals from other GM cars. Tart it up with the highest design exterior and interior GM can muster, throw in a good measure of quality (which will be more than MB and BMW), and service before and after the sale. Done. Tons-O-Profit and half the capital.

PS The LS is EPICFAIL because the cost of technology and platform engineering is not shared with other models. The closest thing is the engine which is shared with other models. No too mention the LS doesn't sell very well comparitively either. I would venture to guess Lexus is close to loosing money on every LS. GM can't do this.

Edited December 12, 200916 yr by SingleStylish

SingleStylish, you make a very good point. I wonder how much profit MB and BMW make on the S and 7 here versus on home turf...

Caddy wouldn't have a problem getting technology from other cars, especially in lower/base engines (the LLT could serve for an entry model, and I'm pretty sure a mild hybrid would be in the works). But where to go up after that? I personally wouldn't mind using LSx engines ( ) but can they somehow fabricate a 12-cylinder mill?

I agree Lamar the LSx Gen VI is a very refined set of mills. Consider that damping and sound deadening will take care of any vibration and harshness on the edges. Throw in a good 6-speed transmission with two extra overdrives and voila...

GM V8s have nothing to be ashamed of just because their largest application is in SUVs and trucks. In fact, while fuel consumption may be a concern V8s are GMs biggest assest with the least leverage.

SingleStylish, you make a very good point. I wonder how much profit MB and BMW make on the S and 7 here versus on home turf...

Caddy wouldn't have a problem getting technology from other cars, especially in lower/base engines (the LLT could serve for an entry model, and I'm pretty sure a mild hybrid would be in the works). But where to go up after that? I personally wouldn't mind using LSx engines ( ) but can they somehow fabricate a 12-cylinder mill?

Close to 30% of Merc's profit comes from S-Class based on an article that was published in the German magazine about 3 years ago. If you look at basics, the cost of design, testing, and engineering a car model regardless of size is the same. The prices are charged based on the "status" of the car, therefore volume is where games are played. That also explains why D3 pulled profits from Trucks as they had volume and price to work in their favor. When volumes plummeted on S-Class you saw Merc go in red almost instantaneously. E is Merc's bread-winner, while S is Merc's pastry-maker.

There was a rumor of using two 3.6 or 3.0 DI engines as 12-cylinder, but given the GM's capability in V-8, I do not see GM investing in such an engine.

That being said, Merc makes TONS of money on the S-Class. The base model Merc S-Class sells at 80k with a platform, engines, suspension, and technology paid for by its lesser models with the price of prestige. Look no further than an S-Class trunk for proof that it is a cleverly package unit.

They do make a lot of profit on every S-class, but they aren't selling at $80k. $92k for a base S550 and that is before you start with the options list that will easily put it over $100,000. If you want an S65 AMG be ready to spend $201,000.

GM doesn't have $100,000 car stuff in their arsenal, look at how badly the XLR-V failed. And the LSx engines aren't the answer, that will get laughed out of the segment, a 6-speed isn't enough either. Cadillac as a new entrant has to earn credibility, so they'll have to come up with never before seen technology and equipment to get attention and respect. It doesn't matter if it is Cadillac or Lincoln, Acura, Volvo, Infiniti, etc, any of those brands selling a $95,000 sedan are fighting a lost cause.

There was a rumor of using two 3.6 or 3.0 DI engines as 12-cylinder, but given the GM's capability in V-8, I do not see GM investing in such an engine.

The V12 I'd like to see, but I doubt it would ever happen. Using 2 of the 3.0's would be good, then they could twin turbo it. BMW already has a twin-turbo V12 with an 8-speed, GM would need that and perhaps a 2-mode hybrid system added on to it, plus an all aluminum chassis/body. If they did all that, Cadillac would have a chance.

The V12 I'd like to see, but I doubt it would ever happen. Using 2 of the 3.0's would be good, then they could twin turbo it. BMW already has a twin-turbo V12 with an 8-speed, GM would need that and perhaps a 2-mode hybrid system added on to it, plus an all aluminum chassis/body. If they did all that, Cadillac would have a chance.

Dwightlooi (sorry if i misspelled it) kinda did that already...

if it was a 3.6 based...an 8 would be 4.8, but what's this, already have one in the trucks. yes i know the differences. slap 4 more cylinders on that, poof, it's a 7.2L IBC V12. yes, i know it's not that simple. hehe potentially it could have ~450hp and lbft in a relatively small package. and maybe a 3.6 inline knock off too. ooooooo. cause cutting off 1/2 the engine and moving the cam to the top is absolutely workable.

If the hood is long enough, an Atlas based I8 turbo could be a very interesting, unique, engine in the segment.

If the hood is long enough, an Atlas based I8 turbo could be a very interesting, unique, engine in the segment.

Why use an engine that is going away, and not the LNF, which already had turbo applications and DI. 2 LNFs would make a 4.0L I8.

The Atlas engines just had a smoothness to them that the LNF didn't

The Atlas engines just had a smoothness to them that the LNF didn't

Inline engines get smoother with more cylinders. I don't remember any great reviews of the I4 based Atlas engine.

A straight-8 I'd be in favor of. That would be Duesenberg-like!

Well the XTS is definitely still on.

I just got an out of office reply from someone @GM.Com referring me to another engineer "for any XTS issues".

The Out Of Office reply was set on 9/28

A straight-8 I'd be in favor of. That would be Duesenberg-like!

Or Pontiac-like!

Or Oldsmobile-like!

Or Buick-like!

Edited October 5, 201015 yr by balthazar