• Sep 17th 2007 at 12:31AM
  • 27
The rumor that the Cadillac DTS and STS will be nixed has officially been confirmed in an interview with the brand's general manager, Jim Taylor. Sales of both models are down for the year, and Taylor admits that one premium-luxury sedan will be developed to compete in the segment.

In the Automotive News interview, Taylor and his superior, Troy Clarke, GM's president of North America, also confirmed that a new entry-level model, designed to slot in below the CTS, is a distinct possibility. Both execs feel that Cadillac's brand image could sustain such a vehicle, likely to be priced in the $28,00 to $32,000 range.

No time frame was given for either new model, but Mr. Taylor also mentioned that a high-end, ultra-luxury flagship is still alive and well.

[Source: Automotive News – Sub. Req.]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 3 Years Ago
      I have owned several DTS and DeVille Cadillacs and love them. I will buy used ones ,since new ones won`t be available after 2012. They are comfortable,reliable,and economical to run.ie 24 mpg on the highway ,17mpg in town. GM might regret this move. Lincoln may fill the void.
      • 8 Years Ago
      What about an S class/7 series/LS competitor? These are the top of line cars in the luxury segment, Cadillac should be developing one of these cars. It really helps for brand image to have a 100 grand all luxury car.
        • 8 Years Ago
        Did you read the last line?

        Also LS2/LS7...the R-Class and the Pacifica are NOT the same car. Somewhat same class but totally different.
      • 8 Years Ago
      A wise move that should have been implemented a year ago, but at least it is getting done.
      • 8 Years Ago
      This is awesome!
      Please bring back the Cimarron. It was such a high quality masterpiece with great memories with a lot of Americans.

      Please GM. Please define your brands. Send SAAB back to Sweden and give Hummer back to AM General and sell it off to make military vehicles. We dont need Hummers based off of Silverados and Colorados. Kill off GMC as well since its nothing but rebadged Chevy's costing 2% more.

      Then prioritize your brands from Cheapo like Saturn to Luxury like Cadillac and no overlap. A cheap Cadillac should be called a Buick not a Cadillac. Spruce up the suspension on all Buicks and make it a Acura Infiniti Audi Fighter. Lux up Cadillac and take it to the old glory days of 40 years ago and fight against BMW and Mercedes. Chevy against Honda and Toyota. Pontiac against Mazda and other sporty cars. And saturn as a funky Scion fighter.
        • 8 Years Ago
        totally agreed except 2 points:

        1. Hummer is way too profitable for GM to relegate back to military use. They're crap cars, but they're profitable crap cars.

        2. Saturn is moving upmarket and is growing in sales and reputation. I don't think neutering it to be cheapo or funky would be a good move.

        Otherwise, tons of good ideas.
        • 8 Years Ago
        Bobby, this is largely what Lutz laid out already.

        As to the no overlap, it's not completely necessary. You don't want too much overlap, but companies typically have some.

        The Maybach 58 doesn't overlap with the S600? Before the split, the ML overlapped with the Grand Cherokee, the R Class and the Pacifica are the same car!

        How about the VW Golf, SEAT Leon, Skoda Octavia and Audi A3?

        Toyota Avalon and Lexus ES330?

        I think Saturn's recent rise and spate of good cars makes it too valueable to turn to a funky (Scion-style) division. Give it a few years of the current "sell cars that are just like European cars" idea. If that flunks out, then try the weird car thing.
        • 8 Years Ago
        "Saturn for wiered experiments and designs and concept cars and technologies. Then advertise them as cars from another planet!!! HAHA (Saturn = another planet)" .... Oh, you mean Oldsmobile?
        • 8 Years Ago
        I agree with Bobby as well.
        Even though Hummer is usually profitable it has wild swings in sales and not really worth much if it is going to be modified GM platforms. The H2 sold like hotcakes in 2002 and 2003 but has tanked since. The H3 started off great then tanked. Now it will do better again with the 5.3 engine but will drop of again soon. This rollercoaster ride is not good to have.
        Either make Hummer distinct with platforms all its own (engine tranny sharing ok) or get rid of it.

        Otherwise agree.
        Cadillac = Mercedes
        Buick = Lexus
        Chevrolet = Toyota
        Pontiac = Sporty RWD and FWD cars with power AND HANDLING.

        Saturn for wiered experiments and designs and concept cars and technologies. Then advertise them as cars from another planet!!! HAHA (Saturn = another planet)
        • 8 Years Ago

        You are my new favorite person.
        • 8 Years Ago
        Figures. Bobby says something completely stupid, based on 1996 information, and the morons on this site cheer for him.

        Hummer is hugely profitable, even in its low volume, because style-conscious people will pay extra for something that looks tough, even if its a beefed up Chevy underneath.

        Saturn is reemerging as a brand for style-conscious and import-minded buyers that GM could never before win over. Why make it another downmarket high-volume brand when Chevrolet serves that role so well? Saturn position is far above Scion in the marketplace right now.

        Lexus customers are after a particular flavor of luxury. I own one, and the Lexus brand, image, and experience is NOTHING like Acura or Infiniti. Buick is best suited to pursue people who want beautiful but understated elegance in a cushy package. Acura and Infiniti are targetting BMW and MB now, as is Cadillac.

        On the subject of snow, some FWD cars are terrible, but FWD Cadillacs will plow through anything and everything. Cowboy Bob does make some very excellent points.
      • 8 Years Ago
      At least now there's official confirmation that the STS and DTS are being merged. It's a good idea, as is a (hopefully RWD/AWD) successor to the BLS.
      • 8 Years Ago
      GM and the world does not need a Cadillac below the CTS. Buick and other GM brands already occupy that space. It would be a big mistake and going "downmarket" didn't work well for Cadillac in the past, and hasn't worked well for other luxury brands now.
      The BLS is a joke of a car and exists purely to give Trollhatten something to manufacture, we don't want it or need it here degrading the brand.

      • 8 Years Ago
      The FWD is good for the snowbelt. And the DTS is good if you have several bodies to dispose of, for that Mafia feel.
        • 8 Years Ago
        Well Nick, FWD does get you better traction in deep snow vs. RWD. BUT I have driven in the snow/ice belt of upstate NY. for over 50 years, and I can tell you fron experience that FWD can be treacherous on slippery surfaces. The engine backpressure causes the front wheels to turn slower than the friction of the tire on the highway under deceleration, and since the drive wheels are also your steering wheels, you loose steering control. Yes people will argue with this accessment, but not those who have experienced the spin-out of FWD cars on icey roads. Loss of control is almost instantanious and no amount of "steering into the skid" will do anything to help control, as the front wheels are not in direct rotational contact with the speed of the car. With RWD you may get stuck easier, or spin tires when starting from a stop, but driver control is maintained better under icey conditions. Most of the people who argue this is wrong, will have never had the experience of skidding sideways at 50 MPH on black ice. I have, and will take RWD for control in these conditions every time. The effect of FWD is to feel secure, right up to the point where control is lost. With RWD the sensation of sliding on ice is more gradual, with the potential to regain control reached before the point where you become a passenger, not a driver. Now, all you naysayers climb on board my back, but how many of YOU have regained directional control of a vehicle under the conditions I have described AFTER the vehicle has gone into a yaw condition of more than a few inches. Of course most of you will have no idea what the hell I'm talking about, let alone know how to handle the experience. Traction control will be your best friend, especially if you can't drive.
        • 8 Years Ago
        Sorry bob, I cannot agree. I grew up driving RWD and FWD cars in the snow in Michigan (and now in Tahoe), and FWD is far better.

        First of all, RWD does break loose sooner and as soon as it does, you have to hope to be able to tweak the front wheels to get them back in front of the rear. Whereas with FWD, you are applying a steerable force vector and can drive the front wheels back in front of the rears (if you care, the rears really don't do much on an FWD car).

        Also, if you get in and out of the ruts (anyone who drives in deep snow knows how driving into and out of the ruts works) much easier in a FWD car, because you can just turn the wheels, and the wheels are powered up out of the ruts. With a RWD car, the front wheels have no force carrying them up out of the ruts, you have to hope to push them up from the back. Once big reason to get out of the ruts is to take an exit on a snowy expressway. Off ramps are often uphill and snowy (even with the expressway is kept clear) in Michigan, and there are plenty of times that RWD cars (even with TC) can't get up them.

        Finally, another big advantage is that if you are coming from a non-plowed road to a plowed road (used to happen to me all the time), in an FWD car, you get traction when the front wheels get on the plowed road, whereas in an RWD car you move slowly and gingerly until the rear wheels get out onto the plowed road. I can't say how apprehensive I would get driving out of the unplowed access road to my subdivision into a 4 lane plowed and salted road with people coming by at 50 mph. You'd press the gas and inch out, hoping to get all the way out before you got sideswiped by the fast moving cars.

        Perhaps the biggest endorsement of FWD was that in 1980, people WANTED to drive the awful Citation (first FWD car other than the Toronado from the big 3), simply because it was so much better to drive in winters.
      • 8 Years Ago
      I think Cadillac is in worse trouble today, in terms of sales, than it was in the early to mid 1980's with their terrible engines (V8-6-4, diesel, V-6, HT4100).
      I think the difference is people still wanted the cars back then. Cadillac knew who it was. The company seems to be going through an identity crisis. They don't know who they are or who they want to be. Sadly it's certainly not a world class car.
      • 8 Years Ago
      By having Cadillac's "entry" level car so far above the German's entry cars (A3, 1 series, C class), Cadillac can continue to establish itself as a true premium brand. Even Lexus makes most of its sales from the Camry based RX and ES.

      The day when someone says "I bought a Cadillac" and it means a stylish, high powered V6/V8 and rear/4 wheel drive and nothing else, is not only the day GM's plan has succeeded, but it goes back to the history of the brand at its high point. Why go backwards?
      • 8 Years Ago
      I own a Cadillac Brougham (a real Cadillac) and I love every minute of driving it. My question is why doesn't GM go back to building these full size models? I can't tell you how many times people ask me if I want to sell it to them.
      With the DTS discontinued Cadillac will be redused to just two sedans. While its competition will have three or four models. Pluss those competitors have coupes as well
      • 8 Years Ago
      Offer it with a M/T and we'll talk.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Here's what GM should do:

      Move the CTS upmarket into 5-Series/E-Class/A6 territory.

      Replace the STS and DTS with a 7-Series/S-Class/A8 fighter. Hell, you can even re-use the STS name.

      Bring the next-gen BLS to the us as a 3-Series/C-Class/A4 fighter. Move it upmarket (and to an RWD platform) to take over the old CTS's price range, but keep it the same size.

      Then, to top off the line, introduce a new $100k+ flagship, equipped with a Northstar-based V12. Perhaps call it FTS.
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X