Detroit 2008: The Cadillac Provoq shows its face in the Midwest
click above for more live high-res images of the Cadillac Provoq Concept
We've already covered Cadillac's Provoq E-Flex fuel-cell vehicle during its first public appearance at the Consumer Electronics Show last week, but GM also rolled it across the stage here in Detroit. There were no additional technical details or hints towards production plans (either for the E-Flex powertrain or the BRX crossover that this design represents), but we at least got to spend a few minutes up close and personal with the concept to snap some shots of the whiter-than-the-pure-driven-snow interior. Also note the chromed cowl vent. Oh, and the Provoq wears what has to be the skinniest tires we've seen on a concept car in recent memory.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Alan 1:33PM (1/14/2008)
Oh good. Another car with cowl vents....
Reply
Andrew 1:36PM (1/14/2008)
Some car companies can bank off the same front end on every car (BMW, for example). Cadillac is over-doing this look.
Reply
Typesbad 2:15PM (1/14/2008)
Funny, I was thinking of how the front end actually fits this bodystyle better than the sedans. I agree with the Focus reference to the side. They want the sage line to be a continuation of the bumper body seem, but that puts it too low for the otherwise high beltline. Plus combining it with a embossed vent just gets messy. An opening is OK if you just have too have this thing, but it should be a more subtle duct. Fortunately, there is a good chance it will be cleaned up on the production version.
Mr. Oak 2:31PM (1/14/2008)
Wrong, I think it is a good thing that the front of a Cadillac looks like a Cadillac.
It works for BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Lexus, Volvo, Saab etc. I could go on. I would hate for them to be like Lincoln with three distinctively different grills for the Navi, MKX and MKZ. Rather stupid if you ask me.
Big Dawg 2:53PM (1/14/2008)
@ Andrew
So it's ok for the Beemer's and Benze'sto have basically the same universal grill through their whole line-up but when Caddy sticks to a similar pattern then it's too much? What in god's name are you smoking? Please explain to me the difference when its obvious that most car manufacturers have similar grills to distinguish their brands. You must be an import fan.
3cubed minus 3squared plus1 3:40PM (1/14/2008)
The front end is nice.
Its the side I can do with out.
Car Designer 2:56PM (1/14/2008)
skinny tires are for aero purposes...
Reply
Brendan 1:54PM (1/14/2008)
The bodyside swage line reminds me of the 08 Focus. Not a pretty sight, this feature doesn't work on the Mercedes R, S and SLK's either.
Reply
Rick 3:02PM (1/15/2008)
My ZUES those are some damn skinny tires! So I'd assume the product model would be a few inches wider to allow room for ever average width tires?
As for design, it looks like someone in photoshopped draged the top half of the CTS and stretched it upwards. Not very creative.
Reply
pmiddle5 2:23PM (1/14/2008)
Skinny tires realizing that gas mileage and aqua planeing can be improoved upon? Cheaper tires too/more environmentally friendly from less dependence on oil..
Reply
SteveC 3:41PM (1/14/2008)
Narrow tires are used far more for a drop in frictional forces in contact with the road than any improvements in aerodynamics. The wide tires used today have a dramatic effect on increases in fuel consumption. Some wide tires have almost double the contact patch area with the road than this Cadillac concept and that results in serious frictional drag.
Reply
Eric Bryant 3:46PM (1/14/2008)
I wouldn't be so sure about that, Steve. Widening the tire doesn't increase the size of the contact patch - this is strictly dictated by the tire pressure. Rather, wider tires yield a wider, shorter contact patch, and can result in less distortion of the sidewall as the tire rotates.
I doubt that wide tires bring a significant aerodynamic penalty to passenger cars, but the effect of the tire is rather dramatic when talking about open-tire race cars.
Xcountryflyer 3:50PM (1/14/2008)
Better than the SRX! Reminds me of an Acura MDX.
Reply
SteveC 4:25PM (1/14/2008)
Eric, There has been a lot written in auto journals about this tire issue in the last 25 yrs. You'ld be surprised comparing the size of the tire patch on the modern (wider) tires with tires 25 to 30 yrs ago. They are dramatically larger. The larger the patch, the more grip (friction) in curves. You mention this is dictated more by tire pressure. Well, the lower the pressure the larger the contact patch becomes and even more friction results. The auto manufactures are well aware of this handling vs. fuel economy trade-off but haven't worried too much about it with the increases in engine efficiency (fuel injection, VTEC, etc) and auto aerodynamics that offset this problem. Now it changes with the proposed CAFE stds. which will require them to get mileage any way they can.
Reply
Anthony 5:11PM (1/14/2008)
That's a hot lil' truck! Good going Cadillac, This Provoq is much better looking than the X3 &the GLK. If I was in the market for a small SUV or whatever you call it.......I'd choose this one. I hope it preforms as good as it looks.
What's going on with Cadillac....they're actually designing nice cars that people would actually buy!
Reply
tbss_in_the_D 11:38PM (1/14/2008)
From what I hear is that this is close, but not the same as the production version. It is a concept folks and I like the direction Caddy is going. Unlike Lincoln (until lately) they have a design that works. I personally love the new CTS and I really like this also. If you don't then go buy something else. I could careless. At least GM is making competitive cars now.
Reply
jamie 11:28AM (1/15/2008)
Finally, Cadillac has an SUV that looks like a Cadillac! And it even has a name...Provoq (I like that). Sure glad it isn't another alphabet soup moniker like BLS, CTS, STS, DTS, SRX, XLR, EXT, ESV. Who knows what any of those contraptions look like anyway?
QUESTION: Skinny tires are definitely more viable for fuel efficiency, but what about BRAKING! Braking on ice or rain soaked roadways? That literally scares me to death. Any comments?
Reply