cp-the-nerd

Did you not test drive before you bought it? I can't fathom how someone ends up purchasing a brand new vehicle they don't even like.

I'm just noticing that the 5.3L V8/8-speed combination is actually good for one less MPG highway and combined than the older 5.3L/6-speed. 16/22 mpg versus 16/23 mpg. That makes zero sense to me.

I like the funky avant garde interior, not so much the weird hybrid drivetrain. I'd much rather have the V8 that was already unveiled.

Tests have already shown the standard SS to be neck and neck with the GT350 Track Pack, so the ability of the 1LE to go beyond that was a foregone conclusion. I'm just curious to see how close this car gets to the outgoing Z/28 and GT350R.

I assume this is directed at me..? I'm saying a crossover larger than the XT5 should be omega based, and therefore able to match the europeans blow for blow in performance and top-tier luxury. The XT5 itself should be capable of running the 3.0T with AWD which would really be sufficient performance for what it is.

This reminds me of the 2.0T in the Escape and Fusion. I don't know why the Escape gets the new one in '17 but the Fusion doesn't. I agree with you, but if I had to make a guess, it's because the Escape 2.0T is the top engine and the Fusion gets the new sport model, so they don't care that the old 2.0T is essentially filling the place of the 3.0L duratec. That's just an assumption. In a perfect world, using the best new version of an engine makes the most sense.

Let the high volume crossovers be premium FWD/AWD if that justifies building lower volume RWD cars that are absolute beasts like the ATS, CTS, and CT6. Though I will say any sort of flagship crossover NEEDS to be omega based.

Okay, that makes sense. I wasn't sure if it was a standard feature on the 2SS or a stand alone option. But if we're talking about competing with the Shelby it would probably need the brake package as well bringing it up to 42k(while the Shelby with its track pack is like 55k). Still at 42k it is a "bargain" performer. I suppose the upgraded 6 piston brakes would help longevity at the track, but keep in mind during MT's testing the 4 piston standard brembos on the SS stopped shorter than the 6 piston upgraded brakes on the GT performance pkg during a comparo, and only 2 feet shy of the GT350 track pack they tested at another time. But that's all a moot point (not sure if you were implying this with the end of your comment) because a base GT350 lacks magnetic ride, some handling equipment (under hood bracing, springs), and all the track cooling systems.

How can this truck POSSIBLY be worth the development and production costs for the low volume? What is the marketing justification?

I can't get excited for this while it still uses the old 1.4T.

@ccap - MT ran their test of the Camaro SS with the standard conventional suspension and pulled 1g. However, if you want magnetic ride control, it's a $1,695 option on any SS, for a total of $38,990 to start.

I like the idea of the V6 1LE, but I have a feeling they priced it off most enthusiasts' car shopping lists. The base V6 is already pushing $30k with NO options. Is a track-prepped V6 model really that appealing in the mid-$30k range? The new Camaro pulls over .9g to start with.

The old 1.4T is more or less adequate with an automatic transmission in the Cruze and Sonic. They've both tested more peppy when equipped with a manual transmission, but you can't get a stick shift Trax. So with the extra weight, automatic transmission, and blocky profile, you get prius-worthy acceleration. The near 30 lb-ft advantage of the new engine would go a LONG way in improving them from the seat of the pants.

It's a big mistake that they're using the old 1.4T. They HAVE a new engine for this, and we KNOW it fits in the old platform because it's already optional in the Encore. If GM is worried about brand separation from Buick, they should give the upcoming refreshed Encore the 1.5T standard (which would make a ton more sense anyway). This car was high on my fiance's list of replacements for her old Cobalt, but she didn't like the idea of small fuel economy gains with a big drop in power. Maybe the refreshed Encore will suit her better, she doesn't like the way the current one looks with the plastic cladding and scrunched up Enclave face.

If they wanted controversy, they should have brought in the Camaro SS against the GT350, which is a comparo many are actually clamoring for. Instead they came up with this weird underdog narrative where the cheaper, slower Mustang beat a $70,000 Corvette, and blatantly wrote a script to fit their goal. Chevy actually HAS a car for this, but no, let's use the Corvette, a sports car with nothing to gain by winning (and the article would have been a dud).

Do you realize how contradictory those statements are? The Trax is an Encore with different sheetmetal and interior trimmings. It's functionally the same vehicle. If the Trax is terrible, then the Encore is terrible in a pretty wrapper with a $3,000 higher price tag.

I wasn't a fan of this article. The score sheet REEKS of C&D's classic habit of twisting the numbers to generate controversy. Somehow the Mustang gets 2 points for better interior and exterior styling than the Stingray (seriously..?), 2 points for steering, 2 points for brakes, and 3 points for the "fun to drive" factor. I'm almost surprised they didn't demerit the Corvette for not having rear seats! Maybe the most ridiculous factor in this comparison is that Chevy already makes a pony car that matches this shelby in performance for less than 40 grand. Maybe next time they'll compare a Focus ST to a Regal GS.

Sorry, a 300 isn't getting 25 city/35 highway. Not even in realm of possibility without excessive hypermiling tricks. I rarely even hear about it matching the epa estimates, much less exceeding them by 4-6 miles per gallon. I love dubious claims from people digging up dead threads.

^^^ You're comparing the wrong Volt there. The 2nd gen Volt shares almost nothing with the ELR.

Wow a "4.6L" pentastar that gets 25-35 mpg in a heavy-ass brick of a full-size sedan?? It's crazy because Fiat-Chrysler can barely manage that with their 4-cylinder cars.

The RS5 is still my favorite car in the class after the ATS-V coupe. They really nailed the styling, I hope the next gen doesn't lose that.

Anyone who wants clean, safe, abundant energy should be singing nuclear power from the rooftops. Nothing comes close to the efficiency and power yield. The only obstacle is the irrational fear of radiation and meltdown. Japan's reactor failure after the tsunami was a fluke and not a single casualty or radiation sickness was recorded. Anyway, screw efficiency, I can't wait to hear more about the CT6 V8 model. Cadillac is starting to shape up a solid arsenal of bespoke engines.

I would like to see them offer a good choice of wood in the car so people could tailor their own look. Not everyone likes the same wood trim. Also other options like a Carbon etc would be nice. I hope on the CT8 they make it to where you can get some custome colors and materials done like on some of the higher end cars. Make it an extra cost options and offer it to those who want it. Kind of a variation of the Build your own Z06 engine only you choose your trim and color. Rolls, Bentley, Ferrari and some others offer this. Cadillac already offers alternate wood or CF trim kits that can be installed when you buy the car. It's been in the build and price tool since the ATS and CTS came out, or maybe I'm misunderstanding you. I agree the flagship Caddy should offer "boutique" style ordering. I believe that's the term for it, where you pick the materials and finishes individually.

Massaging front and back seats are already confirmed. I'm pretty sure they're even advertised on the CT6 page of the official website.

Casa, your personal opinion of the CT6 and Continental doesn't negate the fact that the comparisons DID happen and more than a few people shared my sentiment of being underwhelmed. I'm not trying to convince you to change your opinion. The CT6 is a great car, BUT if the luke warm reception of the initial unveiling is any indication, it's not going to solve Cadillac's downward trend of sedan sales in a market dominated by demand for crossovers. A poor reception of this car could actually cancel a true flagship above it.