1999 Cadillac Deville-nice on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Cadillac will kill the plug-in ELR

Johan de Nysschen, president of General Motors' Cadillac division, says Caddy's ELR extended-range plug-in won't have any future generations, Automotive News (subs. req.) says. The publication previously reported that the car would be around for another couple of years, but even that's questionable, and the model could be yanked even sooner. Cadillac spokesman David Caldwell confirmed that there won't be a second-generation ELR. "Subsequent generations of the car will not be developed," he wrote in an e-mail to Autoblog. "It's available currently as a 2016 model, and there's no change to that status." The model debuted in late 2013 and used a version of the powertrain in the Chevrolet Volt. The main problem, of course, was that the car had a $76,000 price tag that proved too much for most automobile buyers to stomach. Last year, GM sold 1,024 ELRs, down 22 percent from 2014's totals. By comparison, the Chevy Volt moved more than 15,000 units, and that itself was still down 18 percent from year-earlier figures. The merciful end to the ELR shouldn't be much of a surprise, as Cadillac Chief Marketing Officer Uwe Ellinghaus went on the record in December of essentially calling the model a dud. It's a far cry from the excitement, though, that the concept model of what was then called the Converj was unveiled to the public at the Detroit Auto Show in 2009. For those feeling misty-eyed or nostalgic, though, check here for Autoblog's First Drive impressions of the extended-range plug-in. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2014 Cadillac ELR Review View 48 Photos News Source: Automotive News-sub.req. Green Cadillac GM Hybrid elr extended-range plug-in

Cadillac CT4 Luggage Test | How much fits in the trunk?

If you go by exterior specs, the Cadillac CT4 is more similar to a BMW 3 Series or Mercedes C-Class. However, if you go by interior space (or price), it's more like a Mercedes A-Class or BMW 2 Series Gran Coupe. That's definitely true of the trunk, which measures a rinky-dink 10.9 cubic feet, according to GM's specs. That number is what you'd expect in a small luxury coupe rather than a sedan. Indeed, the old ATS Coupe had 10.4 cubic feet.  Nevertheless, the CT4 is somehow not the smallest in the segment. That would be the A-Class and its 8.9-cubic-foot trunk. Good grief. Now, Mercedes has been known to shortchange its cargo capacity numbers so we'll have to luggage test that at some point to know for sure. Today, let's see if the CT4 is in keeping with that 10.9 number. Also, how much worse is it than the also rinky-dink CT5 trunk or the overly optimistic 2 Series Gran Coupe? Yep, that looks pretty small. Also, note the weird rail-like things that hampered the CT5 (below right) are also present here in the CT4 (below left). There's also a similar lip to clear for the folding back seat, but the CT4's opening seems bigger.  As in every luggage test I do, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). All but the biggest bag fit, which is exactly the same number that could fit in the CT5. As the below photo shows, the bigger car has just a bit more space left over. Maybe for a pair of grocery bags. That would be consistent with the difference in cubic feet: 11.9 cubic feet versus 10.9. What about the BMW 2 Series Gran Coupe? BMW says it has 15.1 cubic feet of space, but it doesn't. At least not using the same measurement criteria that the vast majority of other manufacturers use. It can carry the biggest bag, but it would still need to leave the fancy bag behind. That's also while utilizing the 2 GC's ample under-floor storage compartment.  As such, the CT4 does indeed have a small trunk, but it's at least in keeping with its competitors. The CT5 cannot say that, regardless of which segment you compare it to.  Unfortunately for the CT4, though, the story does not stop here.

2016 Cadillac CTS-V First Drive [w/video]

A million insects lost their lives today. Boxelder bugs and mayflies making the ultimate sacrifice in Elkhart Lake, their carapaces no buffer against a rocketing rectangle of safety glass. Their bodies gorily streaking into spangles along the diamond-faceted face of the Cadillac CTS-V. Road America is a four-mile ribbon of pavement snaking its way through the emerald center of the country's northern heartland. Since the 1950s it's seen uncountable fields of diverse racing machinery rocket over its hills and around its 14 corners. I would imagine that on those occasions the tramping of onlookers and hubbub of vehicles, both competitive and commonplace, would dissuade a great number of our six-legged friends from making their way onto the track. But today it's just me turning laps. Inconceivably just one journalist, driving the baddest roadgoing Cadillac ever made, on one of the loveliest circuits America has ever carved out. So big-winged bugs made it out to me in a vast array and a tragic sum, and I drilled through them oblivious to anything but one of the greatest days of driving I've ever had. Cadillac has turned its CTS-V from a performance sedan to a monster. For 2016 Cadillac has turned its CTS-V from a performance sedan to a monster worthy of the carnage described above. The words "epic" and "awesome" are hilariously overused on the Internet, but in the case of the CTS-V's 6.2-liter supercharged V8, their literal meanings are fitting. The capacity to produce 640 horsepower and 630 pound-feet of torque is astounding. Feeling those outputs come to growling life under my foot arch, uncorks different reactions in my brain as the day wears on: first trepidation, next cautious optimism, finally red-eyed bloodlust. A glance at the power and torque curves will show you that the charged V8 behaves more like a naturally aspirated thing than a turbo'd on/off switch. Peak torque arrives at 3,600 rpm, horsepower at 6,400, giving the engine lovely, linear power delivery. Even with top torque happening near the middle of the tach, there's no small amount of the stuff when the engine first spins up, so launching all 4,145 pounds of Detroit iron still feels exotic. Launching all 4,145 pounds of Detroit iron still feels exotic. On the roads around Wisconsin, using all of the available power is hardly advisable, but I have no trouble driving this fast car slowly (sort of).