Damn Nissan Isn't Messing Around This Year

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Not to bring data into the conversation, but

....................CTS................2011 5 Series..............2010 3 Series

Front Leg.........42.4".................41.4"........... ..............41.5"
Rear Leg..........35.9".................36.1".......... ...............34.6"
Frt Shoulder.....56.7".................58.3".......... ...............55.4"
RR Shoulder......54.7".................56.2"......... ................55.1"

And as the 2011 5 Series is off the same architecture as the 7 Series I would expect it to be a wider car.

Front and rear leg room of the CTS is very close to the same. And if you adjust the Front Seat to match the 5 Series, the CTS would then have almost an inch more Rear Seat leg room.

Sounds great on paper. If I'm not mistaken you work in the auto industry, given my own auto industry background I would expect that you would know better in a couple of instances. I didn't want to go into great detail initially because it didn't seem worth it, but since you insist (and honestly partly because I believe you know better) Check out this quote....

Originally Posted by Motor trend

Dimensionally the rear seat is larger than those of the Acura and Lexus, but its low, short cushion and upright backrest were deemed least comfortable of the group. "A fine choice for an enthusiast driver and co-pilot, but people who frequently ferry more will be disappointed in the Caddy's cabin," says St. Antoine. We concurred, ranking four sport sedans superior in performance, comfort, or both.

The above is like me finding the perfect storm to demonstrate what is wrong with those numbers. When I said Cadillac was obviously 'gaming the system' trying to make their rear seat look bigger on paper than it is in reality, this is what I meant. You see, logically it would be hard to imagine why anybody would want to put an abruptly upright rear seat-back and a ridiculously low cushion in the back of any sedan with decent room since both are going to contribute to a very uncomfortable rear seat if you have to be back there for any length of time. For a company that has been building cars for decades the notion that this was a simple oversight is difficult to believe. Of course, it's difficult to believe because it wasn't an oversight.

So then, why did they do this on purpose? Simple. If rear seat room is underwhelming moving the bottom of the seat back rearward and the bottom cushion further down inflates your rear legroom and headroom numbers and by more than you might assume if done correctly. Combine that with a few other tricks, some of which I mentioned earlier, and it becomes pretty apparent that Caddy went through a lot of trouble to inflate rear seat room numbers here. Ford did exactly the same thing with the Contour and Mystique back in the 90's when those cars were being criticized for a lack of rear seat room. Of course, if the car is already cramped in the back anyway this likely wont be a make it or break it alteration and the numbers might actually sway a few folks who aren't savvy enough to actually spend some time back there during the test drive. And since this car is really in the same Class as the 3 Series, C Class, etc those numbers are nothing to be ashamed of anyway IMO because nothing in this segment has truly good rear seat room. However, that doesn't do anything to diminish the fact that GM apparently was compelled to pull a little shuck and jive here. Again, why?

My guess, GM was trying to position the CTS so as to pull a little double duty fighting cars like the C Class and the E Class at the same time since, CTS aside, they really don't have anything with which to go after cars like the 5 Series. (the STS is a dead product walking) I understand the desire to go after the 5 Series and E Class now rather than wait for a proper rival in the next CTS, but I still think this was and is a bad idea since the CTS competes very well within the smaller class but not so well within the larger one, primarily due to a lack of interior room and a lack of mid range engine options. Give it another four inches of wheelbase and a LS3 V8 as an option and I'll change my tune.

Originally Posted by truth411

Just for the record he is not pro everything foreign. He seems to be anti-gm and almost exclusively pro ford. (nothing wrong with that , we all have preferences)

Thanks for trying to inject some reality back into this even if we aren't always on the same side of the equation truth. The Ford portion I cannot argue with, although I will say that I am not anti-GM, just not very happy with how GM is running things right now.

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great

Cadillac builds more than just the CTS too. It also builds to the top selling Luxo SUV and the second best selling Luxo CUV. Cadillac is literally the second strongest Growth brand on the market, just behind Buick. Hate at wil l The only thing that seems to hold Cadillac back is the fact that it currently only has 3 "live" products to sell. The XTS, and ATS will remedy this.

Be careful what you brag about. A lot of that growth is due to the new SRX which is effectively a Buick in Caddy clothing. Look at the size and then look at the price tag, only the Lexus RX and Lincoln MKX are actually close in terms of size, and the cheaper of those two starts at 4k more than the Caddy. And frankly, the SRX would make for a mediocre Buick it is totally inappropriate as a Cadillac. No, vehicles like the SRX and the XTS aren't going to save Cadillac, and they aren't going to do Buick any favors in the process, but they may help to kill both brands again if handled incorrectly. Cars like the CTs should be where Cadillac is focusing their effort.

As for growth, to be blunt Buick didn't have anywhere else to go. (I notice you conveniently left a lot of the specifics related to that chart out) Buick sold about as many vehicles last year as did Saturn and Mercury, which is terrible to be kind. To really put it into perspective, if the trend continues as is for Buick this year they will sell almost as many vehicles in total as Ford sold Mustangs during the 2005 model year. Improvement yes, but not exactly mind boggling just yet. Does Buick have some good product? Absolutely.....arguably much better than what Chevrolet or Cadillac has mustered thus far albeit a bit overpriced in a couple of instances. That said, numbers to this point are still very conservative overall and they look more impressive than they are because the starting point was so dismal. So again, I would suggest prudence when bragging.

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great

Lastly.. GM is in a much better monetary position than Ford.

Looking at the actual numbers:

GM has $32 Billion CASH
They have $8.2 billion + the $27 billion Underfunded VEBA Debt)
Leaving them with a NEGATIVE -$3.2 billion

Ford has $22 Billion CASH
They have $27 Billion + a KNOWN $17 Billion Underfunded VEBA Debt (and a probable $5.5 Billion more by Dec.)
Leaving them with a NEGATIVE -$17 Billion (-$22.5 Billion if the Analyst is correct)

Ah, you're buying into it. How about some actual numbers.


http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/39...t-s-investment

Gross domestic sales for both companies were about the same through the middle of the year, but Ford's profit margin was meaningfully higher and Ford shows twice as many assets with about the same amount of current liability. Ford does have about twice as much long term debt, but the numbers find that long term debt effectively offset by Ford's higher assets......throw in Ford's higher profits and we end up at a simple fact. Despite the bankruptcy benefits GM has reaped Ford is still worth more, has a much higher actual market cap, and is in a much better near term debt to income situation.

And there is another shoe to drop here. Since GM isn't currently a publicly traded company they can legally manipulate the numbers quite a bit more than they would be able to if they were a publicly traded company. Given that, the numbers within the article I linked to probably represent the rosiest possible financial scenario for GM. In reality GM's situation probably isn't nearly that good and that is absolutely the reason why several financial houses are already whispering that GM may already be getting back into the same kind of trouble they just got out of. I personally don't think the situation is that dire yet, but the upcoming IPO could be the undoing that takes them to that point if they handle it poorly.

Sadly, GM's unattainable IPO dream of an 80 billion dollar market cap is destined to hurt them more, the question simply being by how much. If they don't convince the public that they are worth 80 billion the IPO will be a disaster, and if they do manage to pull that off things may even be worse because eventually those initial investors will figure out that they paid way too much for their stock and that will sour them on future purchased and make future investors gun shy. In a step toward fixing these issues the General may finally have gotten a decent CEO, but I'm not yet convinced that they are smart enough to keep him around and I am even less convinced that he has the resources available to undo some of the damage his predecessors have already manged to wreak post bankruptcy.

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

Riiight.. and just for the record.. if Hitler had of lived to make it to the Nuremberg Trials... his Lawyer's defense would have been that the Fuhrer had the looking for Ann Frank.. because he wanted to adopt her, proving that he actually loved the Jewish people.

Sorry Ford.. he's not your friend. He just say that U are his friend to make it look like he's not biased.

And now I'm no longer a Ford fanboy, but a foreign car fanboy.

Originally Posted by Rayhawk

It sounds like some die hard ford fan is more than a little embarrassed at the success the entire CTS platform has been and the simultaneous failure that lincoln's competing products have been.

Embarrassed? No. Jealous? Yeah, a little....the CTS is a good effort, a fine car when viewed within the class it was actually meant to compete in, and possibly the best car GM has produced in several decades. That said, would I trade the overall situation Lincoln is in right now for the overall situation Cadillac is in if that allowed Lincoln have a 'Lincoln CTS' in the lineup. Not a chance. Think about why that might be.

All that said, none of this makes the earlier comparison with the Infiniti M any less ridiculous.

[Leolee]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

The M56 is a better car because it is ALL NEW compared to a CTS which is now pushing into it's 4th model year, and from the OLD GM no less. It is still one of the best Sport luxos on the market.. and it's true issue stems the fact that the STS was just recently discontinued. A CTS with STS type amenities and an LS3 would absolutely murder the Infinti in more things than performance

i would just stick and compare a cts with a g. i have a 10' g37 and the thing is very nice, luxury and sports at the same time. when gm comes out with the cadillac xts then we'll talk about luxury sedans to the m56, i have read/heard (which isnt always correct) that the future flagship of cadillac xts will be getting a 350 hp 6 banger.... i just dont know about that when comparing luxury sedans of infiniti, lexus, bms, mercedes