Just think about this,

if you asked a bunch of people, 

would they pick the CT5, or

the KIA STINGER

if the answer is 'Stinger', then right there that tells you how much Cadillac botched this.......

Just now, regfootball said:

Just think about this,

if you asked a bunch of people, 

would they pick the CT5, or

the KIA STINGER

if the answer is 'Stinger', then right there that tells you how much Cadillac botched this.......

CT5. I've driven a Stinger. I don't need to drive an Alpha based CT5 to know the Cadillac will drive and ride better than the Stinger.

And if the answer is 'CT6' over '740i' - does that tell you how badly BMW botched that?

21 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

CT5. I've driven a Stinger. I don't need to drive an Alpha based CT5 to know the Cadillac will drive and ride better than the Stinger.

i am actually not a Stinger fan, but it gets so much press in the buff books, and it seems to have so many fanbois.  On social media anyways.  But i think my question was as much about style as anything.  Again, not a Stinger fan myself, but I don't think the CT5 will trump the Stinger  on the style question for most folks.......

 

and, if cadillac truly did put a small trunk in the CT5 then that's another something unforgivable that Cadillac keeps doing on the CTS / ATS etcc....

Edited April 27, 20196 yr by regfootball

20 minutes ago, balthazar said:

And if the answer is 'CT6' over '740i' - does that tell you how badly BMW botched that?

In that one, the Cadillac drives you.

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/04/26/cadillac-ct5-vs-bmw-3-series-comparison/

 

 

CT5 trunk sucks, why is the 3.0 tuned down so much on horsepower???

base 2.0 has less power and CT5 is heavier.

 

On 4/26/2019 at 12:52 PM, ccap41 said:

This is how you do the coupe styling on a sedan. 

It is, but they botched the 2019 model, I think that is the worst looking car they make now.  Gen 1 and 2 were spot on though.

On 4/27/2019 at 8:12 PM, smk4565 said:

It is, but they botched the 2019 model, I think that is the worst looking car they make now.  Gen 1 and 2 were spot on though.

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the newest one.. Pretty sad because they truly created this segment and now it looks worse than the Audi 7 and BMW 6.

8 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the newest one.. Pretty sad because they truly created this segment and now it looks worse than the Audi 7 and BMW 6.

The idea of 4-door coupe is so played out now, Mercedes should drop the CLS after this generation.  They have an E-class sedan and E-class 2 door coupe, as a coupe should be.  That is enough, and the AMG GT 4-door is there is you want something else and that has actual performance, where as the CLS is like an oversized, overweight E-class at this point.

A third grader needs to cobble together a photoshop of a CT5 with an actual trunk and send it to Cadillac.  Maybe they'll get a clue.

Now you know why there is no trunk!  Look at the size of that hood!

the gray luxury one looks like an accord a little bit

c pillar still sucks  these were fresh off caddy’s web site  

Edited May 10, 20196 yr by regfootball

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/2020-cadillac-ct5-design-engineering-info/

 

 

 

Edited May 10, 20196 yr by regfootball

Cadillac was being late to everything and slowly destroyed as Johan was just a German wanna be executive and clearly only cared about Germany and not the US.

While I am sure the CT5 will drive nice, Cadillac should have made sure to be tops in all departments and this is where they screwed the Pooch!

Turbo I4 should have been at least 285HP / 300 lb-ft of torque with the Turbo V6 at the 400 / 400 level and then give the CT6 a  retune to push it to at least 450/450 or close to 500 level. The cars would move and people would be on notice that you had luxury sedans that could drive and move their solid feeling weight!

As @ocnblu has stated, someone needs to photoshop a CT5 with a real trunk. While it is nice that it has more rear leg room, a luxury auto still is supposed to have a trunk. Adding a few more inches in the rear would have given a better sized trunk and they could have increased the pathetic headroom in the rear.

Thanks to @regfootball for the links to the interesting reads. I like the Engineering story, but I still say they cut corners on the rear C pillar. I do love the camera in the shark fin and the whole auto is Cadillac / GMs first to allow over the air updates on all electronic modules in the auto. This is the future that Tesla has shown every OEM should embrace. Why GM did not think of this from the beginning of On-Star is beyond me.

CT5 Trunk is Pathetic for a Luxury Car.

Side Profile for comparison.

V-Edition of the CT5?

2 hours ago, dfelt said:

As @ocnblu has stated, someone needs to photoshop a CT5 with a real trunk. While it is nice that it has more rear leg room, a luxury auto still is supposed to have a trunk. Adding a few more inches in the rear would have given a better sized trunk and they could have increased the pathetic headroom in the rear.

At that point you just move up to the next car. You can't have all the open space in a smaller car and expect it to be as roomy as their next vehicle up the ladder. 

Have to get something large like a Mustang, Yaris or Accent to get more cargo space.

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

At that point you just move up to the next car. You can't have all the open space in a smaller car and expect it to be as roomy as their next vehicle up the ladder. 

I understand moving up, but we have shrunk cars and what is full size today is anything but full size when looking at real size cars of the 70's and early 80's before the shrink it all down happened. CT6 could stand to grow in size too.

far too much length in the hood, wasted, that could be returned to trunk overhang.  RWD chassis does not have to mean the cabin is so far rearward that there is no trunk.  CT5 has increased WB that was returned entirely to rear seat leg room, which is good.  So the end equation is remove some length between the front axle and firewall and tack it on to the rear overhang.  And then put a hatch on it.  BS from Cadillac on that.

56 minutes ago, regfootball said:

far too much length in the hood, wasted, that could be returned to trunk overhang.  RWD chassis does not have to mean the cabin is so far rearward that there is no trunk.  CT5 has increased WB that was returned entirely to rear seat leg room, which is good.  So the end equation is remove some length between the front axle and firewall and tack it on to the rear overhang.  And then put a hatch on it.  BS from Cadillac on that.

So one question that has not been brought up, when we move to solid state denser power holding batteries that reduces the over all size of battery packs and sedans from Cadillac, MB, BMW, etc. go electric, could we like Tesla move to having a Frunk and Trunk that make up this size issue?

If so, would people want a bigger trunk of a big Frunk pr a balance between the two?

I truly believe that we can have bigger interior room and trunk / frunk size with EVs. Bolt does show this as I can fit in it and behind the seat in front that is set for me.

???

7 hours ago, dfelt said:

@ocnblu

@regfootball

CT5 Trunk is Pathetic for a Luxury Car.

 

That's a CT6 2.0E.

 

 

 

 

LOST IN TRANSLATION, NOT A LOT OF ESCALA ON THAT CT5

 

 

 

Edited May 10, 20196 yr by regfootball

1 hour ago, KevinW said:

That's a CT6 2.0E.

Really? OK, it was listed on the Google search as a CT5 trunk. Thank you

Front end is 90% Escala. I would not expect a lower series sedan to bring 100% of the concept to market as is- it's not the spot for what is more clearly a upper tier model :
 

Cadillac needs to start comparing that CT5 to the ES350, MKZ, and Q50, hell maybe a Kia Stinger or Acura TLX.  Change the narrative, they look bad in any comparison they do with BMW and Mercedes.  And plastic on the C-pillar a la the Cruze is just terrible and shouldn't have black plastic on a pillar of a luxury car.  

Edited May 10, 20196 yr by smk4565

On April 27, 2019 at 7:53 PM, regfootball said:

...why is the 3.0 tuned down so much on horsepower???

base 2.0 has less power and CT5 is heavier.

Question is; will BMW upgrade the torque on their 3.0 ???
And when will they get on the 10-spd train???
And the 2 cars basically weigh the same- 78 lbs is nothing???

???

 

?

Edited May 10, 20196 yr by balthazar

12 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac needs to start comparing that CT5 to the ES350, MKZ, and Q50, hell maybe a Kia Stinger or Acura TLX.  Change the narrative, they look bad in any comparison they do with BMW and Mercedes.  And plastic on the C-pillar a la the Cruze is just terrible and shouldn't have black plastic on a pillar of a luxury car.  

So then you agree that all MB products need to be compared to the same products from Chevy and Toyota since they use allot of cheap materials, hard plastics and over all have gone from a Luxury product line to a Toyolet product line with the cheap cars and vans, etc.

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Question is; will BMW upgrade the torque on their 3.0 ???
And when will they get on the 10-spd train???
And the 2 cars basically weigh the same- 78 lbs is nothing???

???

 

?

Since BMW doesn't make their own transmission and they buy ZF units, I guess they will get 10 speeds when ZF makes it.  

Mercedes ran 81 billion simulations in 2015 and found that a 10 speed has no benefit over a 9-speed however.  So they have already done ZF's work for them, no reason to make a 10-speed.

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

So then you agree that all MB products need to be compared to the same products from Chevy and Toyota since they use allot of cheap materials, hard plastics and over all have gone from a Luxury product line to a Toyolet product line with the cheap cars and vans, etc.

I don't know where all the hard plastics are on a Mercedes unless you are talking about a Sprinter or the wheel cladding on some SUVs, which isn't even on all of them, because most SUVs have body color fender guards.  But the E-class does compare very well to a Camry, just as the GLS compares very well to a Tahoe, so compare away, Mercedes wins those all day.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Since BMW doesn't make their own transmission and they buy ZF units, I guess they will get 10 speeds when ZF makes it.

Oooo, a shame BMW just gave up on being class leading there. Tho to be accurate, toyota had an 8-speed before BMW did, so maybe they never were in this category. 
Consumers are like totally driven by numbers, totally, and more numbers are more betterer. Maybe, as a full-line mainstream mass production brand, BMW should invest a little money into building their own units. Ooops, that ship has sailed with the budget crunch in Munich.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

But the E-class does compare very well to a Camry, just as the GLS compares very well to a Tahoe, so compare away, Mercedes wins those all day.

Actually, those other competitors far outsell the MB's models (at least the cam-cam does), so mercedes loses here. 
Consumers are like totally driven by numbers, totally, and more numbers are more betterer.

19 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Oooo, a shame BMW just gave up on being class leading there.

BMW was never class leading, they have been in 2nd place (or worse) for the past 100 years and were almost bought out by the leader.

2002 / 3-series started it's segment up. MB was all about tinny, underpowered old-world sleds, and they followed BMW into that segment. Last year, the 3/4 series crushed the C-class in sales.  

Edited May 11, 20196 yr by balthazar

14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Cadillac needs to start comparing that CT5 to the ES350, MKZ, and Q50, hell maybe a Kia Stinger or Acura TLX.  Change the narrative, they look bad in any comparison they do with BMW and Mercedes.  And plastic on the C-pillar a la the Cruze is just terrible and shouldn't have black plastic on a pillar of a luxury car.  

As I hinted at above I think stinger gets talked about more these days. Tlx is fair comparison. 

Cadillac has to frame the CT5 as a ‘desirable sedan option’ and give up trying position itself in ads as some competitor for just about anything. They need to keep prices low on units that show up on lots and put nice lease offers on the table. Get some good press on the base model although that will be hard to do with the motor specs being barely adequate. The v6 will be an awesome performer but they will price any v6 into the stratosphere; so they won’t sell enough. That’s what GM does. If they seriously can get the power and toque numbers of the 4 up closer to 300 than 250 they could make waves in the market even with the less attractive shell and near useless trunk because it should still drive well. There is something bad about how this vehicle platform is for packaging. Gm cant get comfortable package with hardly any vehicles on this platform so that’s why on the CT5 they invested so much in the weird shape to get the backseat and headroom better. Too much room in the hood makes it tough to package the rest of the car.  

Edited May 11, 20196 yr by regfootball

4 hours ago, regfootball said:

Tlx is fair comparison.

If your saying 'to the CT5', I have to respond by saying 'pump the brakes'.

CT5 has 'power issues' vs. the 3-series, but can be pitched 'fairly' against the TLX?
Numbers, please:
CT5 ~ 2.0: 237/258, 3.0: 335/400
3-ser ~ 2.0: 255/295, 3.0: 382/369
TLX ~ 2.4: 206/182, 3.5: 290/267

BMW 2.0 has 18 more HP & 37 more TRQ than the CT5 2.0. Meaningless.
TLX 2.4 has 31 less HP & 76 less TRQ than the CT5. That's a lot, esp with more displacement.

BMW 3.0 has 47 more HP & 31 less TRQ than the CT5 3.0.
TLX 3.5 has 45 less HP & 133 less TRQ than the CT5.

Power numbers for the CT5 are right in the thick of the game.
 

I think the styling will impact sales more than the engine in this case.  And the interior and the price.

Yeah- so the numbers should be good. The potential problem is any upcoming CT4- just not a necessary component of the Cadillac portfolio and should be shelved immediately. 

Saw a new Mercedes a class in the wild today. It’s a nice rig. And yet small. Ct4 May have a tough time as any sort of credible competition

A-class comes with a paltry 188 HP 2.0T. That's more comparable to a 1.4T Cruze with 153 HP.

...why is the a-class 2.0 tuned down so much on horsepower???

11 minutes ago, balthazar said:

A-class comes with a paltry 188 HP 2.0T. That's more comparable to a 1.4T Cruze with 153 HP.

...why is the a-class 2.0 tuned down so much on horsepower???

Very legit critique there 

After seeing the hotrod version of the CT5 in camo with the daylight opening unwrapped, I think I'd like to see a rendering, photoshop of the car in profile without the c-pillar trim applique, and with a longer trunk.

Meh- it's not doing it for me. And now the rear axle needs to move rearward also. 

Not much of a dogleg intrusion with this one: 

Funny people mention the Kia Stinger.....car is sadly way better than what we are looking at right now.

For one, people enjoy driving it.......

On 5/10/2019 at 5:52 PM, smk4565 said:

I don't know where all the hard plastics are on a Mercedes unless you are talking about a Sprinter or the wheel cladding on some SUVs, which isn't even on all of them, because most SUVs have body color fender guards.  But the E-class does compare very well to a Camry, just as the GLS compares very well to a Tahoe, so compare away, Mercedes wins those all day.

Then you don’t look very hard. One quick search on “Mercedes Benz C Class cheap plastics” yields plenty of results. 

 

 

Typical modern junk.

Edited May 12, 20196 yr by balthazar

 

Well I guess we'll see how the CT5 sells against the "low quality" C-class.  

We already know how the low quality C-class sells against the leader 3/4-Series from BMW.

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Well I guess we'll see how the CT5 sells against the "low quality" C-class.  

 

I’m not worried about that anyways, as I’m betting the CT5 will be an epic failure as a car with no direction, like the division that it is in.

I’ll simply say it over and over again- Caddy needs to stop trying to benchmark the other boys and do it’s own thing.

Whether it be floaters, hot rods, or designs of artwork on wheels, let it be something. Heck, even Lincoln got their stuff together......

• How do you specifically define 'epic failure' tho?

• The term 'benchmark' has been pushed toward being a 'bad thing' when ALL brands do it. A better term is called 'being competitive with market trends'. I guess I could also ask here; how do you define "benchmarking"?

8 hours ago, daves87rs said:

Caddy needs to stop trying to benchmark the other boys and do it’s own thing

Absolutely! 

I think that is where Lincoln is kind of carving out their own little niche in just trying to be Lincoln instead of trying to directly compete with other vehicles. 

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Well I guess we'll see how the CT5 sells against the "low quality" C-class.  

Even the E-Class is squeaky plastic mercedes. Where is the World Class Quality or nothing at all?