Cmicasa the Great

Pretty Sweet if it includes all of that.. plus the option to swap at will. Imagine had I put down just $28K and financed the rest at 1.99% for 60 months.. instead of buying outright.. that would have been like $1700 on the V. plus insurance etc

Come on Dude.. The Cavalier reference is not only old, but ridiculous. The Corvette is in no way a car that is beneath Cadillac.. outside of the dealerships that it's sold out of daily. Hell.. at this point same argument could be made for the Camaro.. Properly executed a new XLR using C7 bones let alone C8 would be perfect as well as necessary. Cadillac literally has just two less Cuvs than Lexus. Easily remedied.

For a first generation it wouldn't matter one bit. The Cadillac "Z06" would still be a performance winner in C7 form. The C7 is as advanced as almost anything going. Your statement makes even less sense considering I was talking about the C8. Regardless.. I will now defend the C7.. and say that even if they went to the C7 as a basis.... they would have no issue at all maintaining a great deal of the performance of the donor even after adding luxurious items. Even with a few ticks less in times.. it would still be a car that would run easily with current Benz Sports Verts not to mention the FType from Jag and upcoming Lexus SC. That's their market. The Corvette is the brawler with a bunch of finesse.. the Caddy would be the Finesse with a bunch of brawl Also.. the C7 chassis is much more advanced than the C6s.. different in a great many ways. There was no compromise

Here is a legit question... if Acura sold 276 NSXs.. why wouldn't Cadillac be able to sell 500 rebodied Z06s?

Then Doggy Doo Doo must look pretty damn great cause this SOB is damn nice looking.. especially when compared to the Continental. Again.. not opinion.. just fact

The slightly higher priced, similarly equipped, same configuration but better looking XTS continues to take it to the Continental, despite being 5 years old. Again.. with December ATPs at $57,000 the CT6 is certainly doing its job. Gotta wonder what Cadillac would be posting if it had larger vehicles in the same categories as Benz. Anyone else catch the fact that Cadillac's lone XT5 outsold the MKX, MKT, and MKC combined. Cadillac's YOY sales drop is completely to due with the CTS and ATS losing ground due to the demand up on the CUV segment. GM really is stupid for not having or rebadging something for the time being. I still say that the SRX.. restyled and updated smaller would have been an easy hold-over. Camaro obviously lost the yearly sales run, but came within 64 units of the Mustang in Dec., with the Vette getting a nice bump probably from the GS being on the lots. GM moved 942K Pick-Ups. WOW. And again... I will continue to point out that the GM strategy of Malibu-Impala vs Fusion-Taurus is a win for GM

Its not far fetched. My LT1 with no internal changes is putting out 500 at the fly at a flash and some "on the top" mods. I could easily see GM engineers capable of doing the same thing that the race builders did to get to 600HP for street specs. Point was that the DOHC design coming will probably be in the 700-800HP range if a forced induction is employed.. still allowing for a low maintenance engine and a cost not in the hemisphere of needing to win the Mega Millions to afford

Found it interesting upon reading about the Cadillac’s Prototype DPi-V.R. It is said to have 600HP Naturally Aspirated from a 6.2L

Was it a dream.. or do I remember at one time cars coming with a trash can inside the vehicle so I didn't have to use my cupholders as such?

Since it would seem these days that your Holier than Thou Benz is moving down market.. fighting for clientele in the "Nissan Sentra" (literally) segment.. are U planning on buying from the soon-to-be more prestigious brand (once again) of Cadillac ??? Brand new cars tho.. not the used hand me downs U currently get from Benz? Oh damn.. U made my point before I read the last post

Yes. Its a ridiculous argument. C/D TEST RESULTS: Laferarri Zero to 60 mph: 2.5 sec Zero to 100 mph: 4.8 sec Zero to 130 mph: 7.5 sec Zero to 150 mph: 9.8 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 3.0 sec Top gear, 30-50 mph: 1.5 sec Top gear, 50-70 mph: 1.6 sec Standing ¼-mile: 9.8 sec @ 150 mph Top speed (mfr's est): 218 mph Braking, 70-0 mph: 136 ft Roadholding, 300-ft-dia C/D TEST RESULTS: Z06 Zero to 60 mph: 3.0 sec Zero to 100 mph: 6.8 sec Zero to 160 mph: 22.9 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 3.2 sec Top gear, 30-50 mph: 1.7 sec Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.2 sec Standing ¼-mile: 11.1 sec @ 127 mph Top speed (C/D est): 185 mph Braking, 70-0 mph: 128 ft Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.19 g The very idea that I'm making this comparison is absolutely ridiculous... Yes.. I just compared a $1.4 million drive once, maybe twice a year car... to a vehicle that starts at $79K and can be driven every damn day and twice on Sunday... and the comparison.. wasn't that far fetched as one may think

Corvette and Caddy have 8.. And in many cases.. Will F$#@ both of them up

Whoooooah whoooooooah Whoooooah.. but the C63 has. supposedly, a better User Interface and entertainment system.. of course my motto remains... FUCK Mercedes

Its his way of putting GM down... That is the way of his world

Perhaps... But I still have more faith in the weight and drag argument.

Camaro 17/28 and ATS-V 17/24.. again the ATS probably has more drag due to styling and the Camaro is about 100lbs lighter

I get what Drew is saying.. in current technological terms I really didn't see much of a difference in the power output from the LT1 versus the LF4. Performance-wise the ATS-V is 464HP and 445lb while the Camaro is 455/455. In tests that I've seen the ATS 0-60 is 3.8 sec and the SS 4.0 to 60. Even if one discounts this either direction.. they are extremely similar, almost interchangeable. The need for the smaller displacement in the Caddy was because of international markets.

Different situations. As much as the VSeries is about performance.. even in the CTS.. the ATS still has to be geared towards some bit of civility for fuel economy.. the Vette has a little more lee way. I believe that E-Throttle mapping has to do with this.. I'm betting that a quick tune involving the throttle would give the LF4 a nice bit of wake up. I always find it interesting the plethora of overlap that GM has in the powertrain category. I have ZERO understanding of why the LGW is not the replacement engine for the LF3 and the LFX thru basic tuning.

Cadillac/GM

Always. I love GM.. but the management of then was a bit on the clueless side. The CT6 has a lot of things right about it. A few upgrades inside would make it quite possibly a better all around car than some of the 7 and S imo.

Yes. Similar to the NIGHT VISION. Can't for the life of me figure why that was originally dropped. So options.. shouldn't be options at all. they should be standard.

Automatic Highbeams.. In all cars. I remember Cadillac had them in the 70s and 80s, then that seemed to dissappear. I now have then in the Yukon and V. They would seriously be a help to a great deal of inconsiderate sobs out there

Hell Yeah. I actually learned to drive stick in my dad's 69 Chevy Pick-up DONE. #3

Expect the new DOHC to easily exceed 750HP. There is ZERO reason to push one out that doesn't considering the cost. The current LT4 can hit 700 with changes made by a shade tree mechanic. The Caddy DOHC engine will probably be in the 550HP

Again I am not a fan of the car's design either. Also I have no desire to contribute to any Asian or European bank account if I can help it