This Is A 2001 Cadillac Deville Limousine, Purl White Black Interior Clean!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

If Cadillac’s smart, the CT5 will be a CTS without baggage

Cadillac is, mercifully, about to rationalize its lineup, something that's been a long time coming. The CTS is one of those cars that gets admiration from reviewers, like us, for a concerted effort from GM to engineer an underlying platform that matches the Germans in terms of raw dynamics. From buyers, it gets not even a shrug as they, oblivious to its existence, walk right into BMW and Mercedes dealerships. The reasons for this have a lot to do with the sheer brand recognition, and the image, of the German competitors. You can't really lay that all at GM's feet, but what you can do is critique the uninspired drivetrain selection. The 3.6-liter V6 is a crude implement, making its 335 horsepower roughly. The BMW's equivalent inline six makes its power smoothly, with modern forced induction. There's no directly comparable E-Class sedan until you get into the V-Sport versus E43 situation, but the turbo four is smooth. And the interior? No question. The Mercedes is jaw-slacking. The story for the CTS's turbo four is largely the same. Some blame also has to be leveled at the first- and second-generation CTS sedans, which adopted an odd strategy: sell a slightly larger sedan to folks looking at 3-Series, A4, and C-Class, but at about the same price. Folks weren't interested in a larger car for the same money. Despite the third-gen CTS's growth into the 5-Series size class, the CTS still seems like an odd in-betweener in the sport luxury segment – psychologically, if not physically. CTS sales are in the toilet in 2017, and GM is smart to shake things up. So with the announcement that Cadillac head honcho Johan de Nysschen has finally been allowed to kill off underperforming models, the CTS is toast. (As is the ATS, and much more importantly, the XTS – a shambling dinosaur of a sedan.) What's next is the CT5, and that's what we're interested in now. Cadillac has until 2019 to figure out what the CT5 actually is. That isn't a lot of time, so our money is on it being a repositioned, rationalized CTS. The platform's not bad; it's heavier than the larger CT6, but it's fairly modern. Sadly, it's unlikely that any of the standard powertrain options will get a revamp, but maybe some additional sound deadening or an active engine mount system to reduce NVH will quell the V6's bad habits. View 32 Photos More importantly, Cadillac will get a chance to work on the interior look, almost certainly aligning it more closely with the much improved CT6. That'll help a lot.

Frustrated GM investors ask what more Mary Barra can do

DETROIT — General Motors Co Chief Executive Mary Barra has transformed the No. 1 U.S. automaker in her almost five years in charge, but that is still not enough to satisfy investors. Ahead of third-quarter results due on Oct. 31, GM shares are trading about 6 percent below the $33 per share price at which they launched in 2010 in a post-bankruptcy initial public offering. The Detroit carmaker's stock is down 22 percent since Barra took over in January 2014. After hitting an all-time high of $46.48 on Oct. 24, 2017, the shares have declined 33 percent. In the same period, the Standard & Poor's 500 index has climbed 7.8 percent. Several shareholders contacted by Reuters said GM could face a third major action by activist shareholders in less than four years if the share price does not improve. "I've been expecting it," said John Levin, chairman of Levin Capital Strategies. "It just seems a tempting morsel to somebody." Levin's firm owns more than seven million GM shares. Barra has guided the company through the settlement of a federal criminal probe of a mishandled safety recall, sold off money-losing European operations, and returned $25 billion to shareholders through dividends and stock buybacks from 2012 through 2017. GM declined to comment for this story, but the company's executives privately express frustration with the market's reluctance to see it as anything more than a manufacturer tied mainly to auto market sales cycles. GM's profitable North American truck and SUV business and its money-making China operations are valued at just $14 billion, excluding the value of GM's stake in its $14.6 billion Cruise automated vehicle business and its cash reserves from its $44 billion market capitalization. The recent slump in the Chinese market, GM's largest, and plateauing U.S. demand are ratcheting up the pressure. GM is one of the few global automakers without a founding family or a government to serve as a bulwark against corporate raiders. In 2015, a group led by investor Harry Wilson pressed GM to launch a $5 billion share buyback, and commit to what is now an $18 billion ceiling on the level of cash the company would hold. In 2017, GM fended off a call by hedge fund manager David Einhorn to split its common stock shares into two classes. Einhorn, whose firm still owned more than 21 million shares at the end of June, declined to comment about GM's stock price. Other investors said there were no clear alternatives to Barra's approach.

Why an independent rear suspension for GM's new, full-sized SUVs wasn't easy

A Motor Trend report last month laid out how Cadillac's 4.2-lier twin-turbo Blackwing V8 could be an orphan due to cost concerns in the GM empire. Last-minute chassis changes to Cadillac's new sedans and XT6 crossover led to engine bays that couldn't fit the Blackwing. On the SUV side, according to the report, the new independent rear suspension for big people haulers cost so much to implement that GM ruled out reworking the Escalade to accept the Blackwing. At least one commenter rightly asked how could a suspension swallow that much money. A new piece in Motor Trend has the answer. The excellent Alissa Priddle spoke to Tim Herrick, GM's executive chief engineer for full-size trucks, about why the clean-sheet IRS cost "multimillions of dollars."  First, GM would need to build a new body shop at the Arlington, Texas plant that assembles the automaker's big SUVs to stamp the numerous wholly new parts and panels accommodating an IRS. Then GM would need to design and pay for a new assembly process. On top of those up-front costs, there was the incremental cost of the four-link IRS components being more expensive than those in the trucks' former leaf-sprung solid axles. Herrick endured so many rejections for so long that he remembers the date and time when he got approval for the new unit. He said it came down to a meeting where he told a higher-up, "I'll make you a deal: If we get to the reveal, or if we launch this and you think this was a dumb idea, I'll hand you my badge and let you walk me out." Head to Motor Trend to read the full story. Based on Herrick being on stage to help present the new SUVs to the press, and on our First Ride in the new Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban at GM's Milford Proving Grounds, it appears this will have a happy ending for all involved. Furthermore, since Herrick worked on the T1 platform that supports the big SUVs as well as the light- and heavy-duty pickups, he understood the demands on the commercial side, too. That could be why when Roadshow asked Tim Asoklis, chief engineer of the Tahoe and Suburban, if the new IRS could endure life in the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, Asoklis answered, "Oh, absolutely." Related Video: