We know that Cadillac is planning to shrink down the car lineup with the ATS, CTS, and XTS being replaced by the CT5 in 2019. But there are some other changes afoot for Cadillac's car lineup for 2019 according to GM's VIN Decoder document. 

The Truth About Cars reports that the ATS and ATS-V Coupe will be sticking around for the 2019 model year. Powertrains and the choice of rear- or all-wheel drive will carry over. It is unclear what transmissions will be offered. Meanwhile, the 2.0L turbo engine for the CT6 will be dropped. The 3.6L will now become the base engine. All models except the for CT6 Plug-In Hybrid will have AWD as standard equipment.

Cadillac declined to comment when asked about the changes by TTAC.

Source: The Truth About Cars
Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers and Gears

View full article

That's a shame for the ATS.. 

Totally makes sense and is understandable. I am very interested in their CUV/SUV plans along with EVs.

I'm reading this slightly different.

Yes, the ATS sedan will be dropped, but that's because the CT4 will replace it and likely won't be a sedan but rather a hatchback in keeping with JDN's very qualified statement about Cadillac sedans.

What this sounds like to me is that there won't be a CT4 coupe, at least at first, and the ATS Coupe will stick around for that role until a replacement is ready to go.   

I'm guessing the CT4 will be a more direct competitor to the CLA/A3... meaning FWD and 4-cylinder turbo only. It will be some sort of sport hatchback coupe crossover with 4 doors.

The CT5 will be only slightly smaller externally than the current CTS, but will have better packaging and ride on the Omega platform with the CT6.

Here is where the giant question mark comes up..... If ATS and CTS are going away, what happens to Camaro when its platform mates are dead?  The only possibility I see is if GM has some sort of Alpha 2.0 in the works for CT4/CT5/Camaro to ride on that has the weight savings enhancements that come with Omega.

They could carry on with a single model exclusive platform for the Camaro as Ford has done with the Mustang.  

Meh. This car was always too niche and compromised to have ever been a major sales success.

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

but that's because the CT4 will replace it and likely won't be a sedan but rather a hatchback in keeping with JDN's very qualified statement about Cadillac sedans.

Cadillac. Hatchback. ? 

INTEREST PIQUED! 

9 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Cadillac. Hatchback. ? 

INTEREST PIQUED! 

Yeah... it's sort of a process of elimination.  They've said that the ATS sedan is going away and that Cadillac is cutting down on the number of sedans.  But there will be a CT4 that replaces the ATS in the lineup, so what will that car be?  We know they won't do coupe only, it doesn't make economic sense to. We know that a CT4 won't be a crossover, that's what XT4 will be.  So that leaves hatchback and wagon as possibilities.

Given that there is technically no longer a Regal sedan,  I'm guessing the correct answer here is "hatchback" or "sportback" if you want to use Buick's terms.

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I'm guessing the CT4 will be a more direct competitor to the CLA/A3... meaning FWD and 4-cylinder turbo only.

That's insane if that happens. RIght now the ATS as configured has numerous advantages over the CLA, primairly much better interior room and RWD / RWD proportions.

Like the  CTS2 being simultaneously offered as a COUPE only along with the current gen CTS3.. I expect what they are saying is that the ATS Coupe will be offered as a stand alone option while the CT3/4 will be the Sedan/Hatch car

5 minutes ago, balthazar said:

That's insane if that happens. RIght now the ATS as configured has numerous advantages over the CLA, primairly much better interior room and RWD / RWD proportions.

Well it's just my own guess.  They could keep it on Alpha and have it RWD/AWD.... but the CLA and A3 have proven that RWD is not needed for sales success.  Mercedes is selling as many 98-Taurus-Shrunk-In-The-Wash as they can while the superior chassis of the ATS doesn't move that well.   If  Cadillac can sell 1.8T/2.0T powered rebadge Cruzes for $30k, I totally see them going for it if the sales are there.

I will also point out that these VIN cards are not set in stone.  GM can add to them at any time. 

3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Well it's just my own guess.  They could keep it on Alpha and have it RWD/AWD.... but the CLA and A3 have proven that RWD is not needed for sales success.  Mercedes is selling as many 98-Taurus-Shrunk-In-The-Wash as they can while the superior chassis of the ATS doesn't move that well.   If  Cadillac can sell 1.8T/2.0T powered rebadge Cruzes for $30k, I totally see them going for it if the sales are there.

Mercedes could sell flaming bags of dog poo as long as they have a 3-point star on them.   The ATS isn't that good of a car, and more importantly Cadillac is a damaged brand that they haven't been able to fix 30 years of damage to.

C-class, 3-series and Q50 are the top sellers of their brand and Lexus IS is #2 seller at theirs, I think the A4 is the #2 selling Audi.  ATS is in the biggest segment of the luxury market and can't move metal.

Keeping the ATS Coupe around a model year makes sense, they can probably build a model year's worth of them in about 2 months and have them so there is a 2 door option until something else comes along.

Who knows on CT4, Cadillac seems to be giving up on cars, and just rebadging Chevy/Buick SUVs.   Dropping the CTS makes 100% sense, there should have never been a 2.0T CT6 just like there never should have been a 2.5 ATS.

Why not? There is a 4 cylinder turbo E class and the CT6 weighs less. 

 

The ATS is a substantially superior vehicle to the CLA in every objective measure... But brand whores prefer the fake pleather Gucci bag over and actual entry luxury performance sedan.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Mercedes sell flaming bags of dog poo as they have a 3-point star on them.  

Good to know you finally admit what MB really is, a badge on dog poo! 

Whoa!

The ATS is EXACTLY what enthusiasts were asking for from a performance  "entry level"  luxury compact car.

It would be the first of its kind to actually give a BMW 3 Series run for its money.

Mercedes all through the 1980s, all through the 1990s, all through the 2000s tried and failed BIG TIME and decided to quit on that formula. 

Cadillac FINALLY got it right! 

Problem is:

1. That type of car is no longer in vogue. CUVs from lux brands are what is in vogue.

2. That type of car was needed for Cadillac in the 1990s. After 2010, many wanting to return to Cadillac seem to want Cadillac to go back to their own true roots. Cadillac seems to not only miss the boat in 1990 in ignoring that segment and half-assing it, but they seem to be ignoring the cry from their own Cadillac following from the 2010s that to be relevant going forward, Cadillac needs to be Cadillac...

So...although its a sales flop, the ATS is....its NOT because its a bad car. Its just the wrong car for the brand! 

 

Edited December 19, 20178 yr by oldshurst442

13 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Whoa!

The ATS is EXACTLY what enthusiasts were asking for from a performance  "entry level"  luxury compact car.

It would be the first of its kind to actually give a BMW 3 Series run for its money.

Mercedes all through the 1980s, all through the 1990s, all through the 2000s tried and failed BIG TIME and decided to quit on that formula. 

Cadillac FINALLY got it right! 

Problem is:

1. That type of car was is longer in vogue. CUVs from lux brands are what is in vogue.

2. That type of car was needed for Cadillac in the 1990s. After 2010, many wanting to return to Cadillac seem to want Cadillac to go back to their own true roots. Cadillac seems to not only miss the boat in 1990 in ignoring that segment and half-assing it, but they seem to be ignoring the cry from their own Cadillac following from the 2010s that to be relevant going forward, Cadillac needs to be Cadillac...

So...although its a sales flop, the ATS is....its NOT because its a bad car. Its just the wrong car for the brand! 

 

It was a victim of timing, and Cadillac's image.  Infiniti and Lexus have found some success w/ their compact luxury sports sedans and coupes in part because of their 'newness' as brands and their Japanese quality reputation.  Cadillac, for better or for worse, has a lot of history and a lot of baggage.  

So many people my age and younger still today seem to only think of Cadillac as grandpa cars or bling trucks  (Escalade).

Edited December 19, 20178 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I will also point out that these VIN cards are not set in stone.  GM can add to them at any time. 

Correct, NHTSA's rules say an automaker can submit information until 60 days before production.

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Why not? There is a 4 cylinder turbo E class and the CT6 weighs less. 

 

The ATS is a substantially superior vehicle to the CLA in every objective measure... But brand whores prefer the fake pleather Gucci bag over and actual entry luxury performance sedan.

Because the CT6 is Cadillac's flagship full size car and the $10,000 cheaper XTS has a V6.   The CT6 should have had the 3.0TT V6 standard because that is what you find in a base model A8 or Lexus LS, and they should have had a V8 option.  At very least the 3.6 V6 could have been the rental/livery spec engine if they needed a value leader at $55k.  

This is the problem with Cadillac and has been for years, they undershoot the competition and they always make this play as the value choice and water down the car with cheap door handles, cheap trim pieces, Chevrolet engines, etc.

The CT6 is a larger, roomier E-class competitor.   E-Class comes base with a 4-cylinder turbo. Case Closed.

In reading all of this....I will say I'm digging the hatchback idea...Caddy really needs to be different to pick up some success here.

It's time they just benchmark themselves.....

12 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

So many people my age and younger still today seem to only think of Cadillac or bling trucks  (Escalade).

The funny thing is, the Escalade is no more 'blingy' than the top MB or Range Rover, or most other lux SUVs. It's what sells these top shelf beasts.

48 minutes ago, balthazar said:

The funny thing is, the Escalade is no more 'blingy' than the top MB or Range Rover, or most other lux SUVs. It's what sells these top shelf beasts.

No waaaaaay none of those offer chrome wheels from the factory, chrome door handles, chrome mirror covers... 

The Escalade is definitely blingy. 

9 hours ago, daves87rs said:

It's time they just benchmark themselves.....

Couldn't agree more. 

I'm glad Lincoln finally realized this and they're just doing themselves now. 

24 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Couldn't agree more. 

I'm glad Lincoln finally realized this and they're just doing themselves now. 

Yep, and naming the cars again too....

And in honesty, Caddy is never going to be able to beat the Gucci crowd because the other two simply win on image.

I know GM can do a bang up job when they want to.....but bringing back some hertiage might be a good idea....

16 hours ago, dfelt said:

Good to know you finally admit what MB really is, a badge on dog poo! 

GOT!!! EM!!

3 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

GOT!!! EM!!

16 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

It was a victim of timing, and Cadillac's image.  Infiniti and Lexus have found some success w/ their compact luxury sports sedans and coupes in part because of their 'newness' as brands and their Japanese quality reputation.  Cadillac, for better or for worse, has a lot of history and a lot of baggage.  

So many people my age and younger still today seem to only think of Cadillac as grandpa cars or bling trucks  (Escalade).

I agree with the timing thing but in truth.. the Infiniti compact is more of a tweener.. ironically pulling a page from Cadillac's book when the introduced the successful first and second gen CTS. The ATS again.. should have taken the CTS moniker.. and been a few inches larger in the interior to accommodate FAT ASS Americans. The CTS??? Should have been STS. Simple as that.

Those calling for names have to realize that the company is now Global.. and Globally there is an idea that names are not desirable or always viable for luxury car brands. I disagree. I think if the effort is put into coming up with proper names there will be no issue. Going back to previous names would be a mistake tho. It rings old. Names LIKE.. El Miraj, Ciel, Cien, Provoq, Solitaire.. would be a strong marketing component. In fact.. I take back my comment about previous names.. as I would grab Catera and put it on a entry car no issue. 

40 minutes ago, daves87rs said:

Yep, and naming the cars again too....

And in honesty, Caddy is never going to be able to beat the Gucci crowd because the other two simply win on image.

I know GM can do a bang up job when they want to.....but bringing back some hertiage might be a good idea....

They sure can pass those other two up. They just have to start with the small things. Start by making the most reliable vehicle, hands down. Do what Toyota and Honda have done and build a reputation for being indestructible. They can then go from there. They know how to make a car handle with the best, if not THE best. They have engines to hang with the best, albeit their middle tier isn't really the greatest in comparison but they're getting there with the 3.0TT. 

They have the money and resources to make the best interiors, they just haven't yet. If they're going to price their stuff along side the Germans they better do everything at the very least, as good as the Germans. 

Get rid of the old man XTS also. That rental car doesn't help their image at all. 

15 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The CT6 is a larger, roomier E-class competitor.   E-Class comes base with a 4-cylinder turbo. Case Closed.

I get what he's saying tho.. and actually agree. The CT6 should not have been considered a "larger, roomier EClass" while the CTS and XTS were around. The engine line-up really was a clear determinate of that.. not to mention the entry price.  The CT6, for what its worth.. is dropping that 2.0L for a reason. From what I get from two dealers is that the 2.0L is not even ordered unless someone brings a deposit for one. The only advantage it has is RWD only.. which is not really an advantage when one can get the rest of the line as AWD

IMO.. the 3.0L should have been the sole engine till the V8 arrived or the entry engine while an LT1 at 500HP or LT4 at 600 was an optional VSport or VSeries. It gives more credit to the car.. to have higher performing variants even if they are selling slower . (Keep in mind that 10% of all CTS sales were VSeries in 2016.. yet still that allowed them to sell more than the M5, E63AMG or RS7)

The XTS is focused at a very different customer... the ones who still long for the old DTS... and it is still one of the better selling Cadillacs.  There is no guarantee that those customers would move over to the more expensive CT6.

11 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The XTS is focused at a very different customer... the ones who still long for the old DTS... and it is still one of the better selling Cadillacs.  There is no guarantee that those customers would move over to the more expensive CT6.

Sometimes.. that's what proper marketing is for. There is nothing about the XTS that is superior to the CT6. Nothing except that it has a more powerful Turbo V6 in the Vsport 

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The XTS is focused at a very different customer... the ones who still long for the old DTS... and it is still one of the better selling Cadillacs.  There is no guarantee that those customers would move over to the more expensive CT6.

Offer a CT6 Brougham w/ white wall tires, chrome wheels, extra chrome and gold trim, padded top, bench seat and column shift and that may bring in the older customers...

5 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I agree with the timing thing but in truth.. the Infiniti compact is more of a tweener.. ironically pulling a page from Cadillac's book when the introduced the successful first and second gen CTS. The ATS again.. should have taken the CTS moniker.. and been a few inches larger in the interior to accommodate FAT ASS Americans. The CTS??? Should have been STS. Simple as that.

Those calling for names have to realize that the company is now Global.. and Globally there is an idea that names are not desirable or always viable for luxury car brands. I disagree. I think if the effort is put into coming up with proper names there will be no issue. Going back to previous names would be a mistake tho. It rings old. Names LIKE.. El Miraj, Ciel, Cien, Provoq, Solitaire.. would be a strong marketing component. In fact.. I take back my comment about previous names.. as I would grab Catera and put it on a entry car no issue. 

Agreed.  The names aren't the problem the cars are, or were in case of the 2000 Catera.  I actually think if you had 2 identical cars, one named CT4 and one named Catera, the Catera would sell better.

Look around global luxury, Phantom, Ghost, Aventador, Hurcan, Panamera, Cayenne, Bentayga, Urus, Vantage, Rapide, Ghibli, Stelvio, just to name a few.  Loads of names on global luxury cars.

5 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I get what he's saying tho.. and actually agree. The CT6 should not have been considered a "larger, roomier EClass" while the CTS and XTS were around. The engine line-up really was a clear determinate of that.. not to mention the entry price.  The CT6, for what its worth.. is dropping that 2.0L for a reason. From what I get from two dealers is that the 2.0L is not even ordered unless someone brings a deposit for one. The only advantage it has is RWD only.. which is not really an advantage when one can get the rest of the line as AWD

IMO.. the 3.0L should have been the sole engine till the V8 arrived or the entry engine while an LT1 at 500HP or LT4 at 600 was an optional VSport or VSeries. It gives more credit to the car.. to have higher performing variants even if they are selling slower . (Keep in mind that 10% of all CTS sales were VSeries in 2016.. yet still that allowed them to sell more than the M5, E63AMG or RS7)

Yes, the problem with CT6 to E-class comparison is there is no 600 hp CT6, and why is Cadillac trying to build a full size car at E-class prices when the CTS isn't a mid-size car for 3-series prices at $36k.   The CT6 coming out at $56k immediately was Cadillac admitting that their full size car wasn't as good as a Lexus LS, 7-series, A8 or S-class.   And then they got 3 sedans within $10k price of each other which is pointless.

On 12/19/2017 at 8:55 AM, ccap41 said:

No waaaaaay none of those offer chrome wheels from the factory, chrome door handles, chrome mirror covers... 

The Escalade is definitely blingy. 

I saw a bone stock blinged out Escalade today. Chrome wheels, chrome grille, chrome door handles.. all stock. 

25 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I saw a bone stock blinged out Escalade today. Chrome wheels, chrome grille, chrome door handles.. all stock. 

Yes, that's the standard config.  The Yukon Denali is similar, maybe a bit less chrome.   I think they aren't bad in stock form--like the stock chrome w/ dark brown or dark red paint, for example... but so many get tastelessly tricked out with oversized ugly aftermarket wheels, additional chrome added, etc.    

5 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Yes, that's the standard config.  The Yukon Denali is similar, maybe a bit less chrome.   I think they aren't bad in stock form--like the stock chrome w/ dark brown or dark red paint, for example... but so many get tastelessly tricked out with oversized ugly aftermarket wheels, additional chrome added, etc.    

The door handles throw it way over the top. The grille and wheels isn't terrible.

Oh, I also cannot stand the mirror covers that come stock on some of those GMs. 

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

The door handles throw it way over the top. The grille and wheels isn't terrible.

Oh, I also cannot stand the mirror covers that come stock on some of those GMs. 

My Jeep has the chrome door handles and mirror covers, I like the contrast with the black metallic paint.  I like when there are lots of choices available in vehicles, some models have trim levels where everything is body color or blacked out for those who like that look. 

Edited December 20, 20178 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

12 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Yes, that's the standard config.  The Yukon Denali is similar, maybe a bit less chrome.   I think they aren't bad in stock form--like the stock chrome w/ dark brown or dark red paint, for example... but so many get tastelessly tricked out with oversized ugly aftermarket wheels, additional chrome added, etc.    

While I agree.  U can't hold Cadillac responsible for aftermarket stuff that customer want. Same thing goes on Range Rover. That thing that Infiniti puts out is a whole nother kind of Stock monstrosity 

Just now, ccap41 said:

The door handles throw it way over the top. The grille and wheels isn't terrible.

Oh, I also cannot stand the mirror covers that come stock on some of those GMs. 

Chrome mirror covers aren't stock... and in all likelihood neither are chrome door handles if it was a current model.  The Escalade comes with illuminated door handles with satin metal surround.

 

The GLS merely has glued in chrome inserts though...

This is a base 2017 GLS450

Just now, Cmicasa the Great said:

While I agree.  U can't hold Cadillac responsible for aftermarket stuff that customer want. Same thing goes on Range Rover. That thing that Infiniti puts out is a whole nother kind of Stock monstrosity 

The QX56/QX80 is an odd looking beastie.. my next door neighbor in Phoenix from '11-15 had a maroon QX56, then briefly an Escalade, then a black QX80 the last two years..

The Infiniti QX80 got substantially more handsome for the 2018 refresh.

11 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Chrome mirror covers aren't stock... and in all likelihood neither are chrome door handles if it was a current model.  The Escalade comes with illuminated door handles with satin metal surround.

 

The GLS merely has glued in chrome inserts though...

This is a base 2017 GLS450

This is close enough to call it a chrome mirror.. This was what I saw the other day. It wasn't the ESV but chrome pieces everywhere. 

I dig the new illuminated handles! And, that GLS handle doesn't look like chrome but satin like the new Escalade handle. 

 

12 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The Infiniti QX80 got substantially more handsome for the 2018 refresh.

F*****G chrome mirrors. 

21 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

My Jeep has the chrome door handles and mirror covers, I like the contrast with the black metallic paint.  I like when there are lots of choices available in vehicles, some models have trim levels where everything is body color or blacked out for those who like that look. 

Personally, I hate those. Body color all day, every day. 

Black is good as long as it is painted black and not just unpainted plastic. 

Chrome just looks so cheap to me. Granted, when they're kept minty clean they don't look terrible but more often than not they just look like dirty mirrors. 

Edited December 20, 20178 yr by ccap41

12 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

This is close enough to call it a chrome mirror.. This was what I saw the other day. It wasn't the ESV but chrome pieces everywhere. 

I dig the new illuminated handles! And, that GLS handle doesn't look like chrome but satin like the new Escalade handle. 

 

 

F*****G chrome mirrors. 

Personally, I hate those. Body color all day, every day. 

Black is good as long as it is painted black and not just unpainted plastic. 

Chrome just looks so cheap to me. Granted, when they're kept minty clean they don't look terrible but more often than not they just look like dirty mirrors. 

Black trim screams cheap to me.. like something on a basic work truck trim.   Body color trim is too much of an '80s-90s cliche to me, back when monochrome trim was a trendy look.   For me, chrome (in limited amounts) is classic and tasteful.  I prefer polished aluminum look wheels over chrome wheels.   And I find the appearance of carbon fibre the ultimate in hideousness...

Edited December 20, 20178 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

Well that's the old Escalade, but yea, when that came out, bling was in, as were fender vents.  Keep in mind that Escalade is rather restrained compared to the prior one.

You weren't here at the time but when this Navigator came out, we and a few other sites made such a stink about the nose that it ended up being released with the ability to delete the chrome upper lip.

That Navigator front was pretty ghastly.. there is one Lincoln CUV/SUV front I liked from around 2010, but can't recall which model it was.

Edit: 2009ish MKX...I like that front end. 

Edited December 20, 20178 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

2 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

That Navigator front was pretty ghastly.. there is one Lincoln CUV/SUV front I liked from around 2010, but can't recall which model it was.

MKX?  That's the one I liked from that era.

36 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Well that's the old Escalade, but yea, when that came out, bling was in, as were fender vents.  Keep in mind that Escalade is rather restrained compared to the prior one.

You weren't here at the time but when this Navigator came out, we and a few other sites made such a stink about the nose that it ended up being released with the ability to delete the chrome upper lip.

Yeah, I'm not saying this is any better. That looks like sh!t too. 

The Escalade just screams blingy to me though. 

8 hours ago, ccap41 said:

This is close enough to call it a chrome mirror.. This was what I saw the other day. It wasn't the ESV but chrome pieces everywhere. 

I dig the new illuminated handles! And, that GLS handle doesn't look like chrome but satin like the new Escalade handle. 

 

Just so you know that was last generation not current and I agree, I was not a fan of this generation of Escalade.

Today's current 2018 Escalade is way better: