2008 Cadillac Escalade Esv 2wd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Cool car technology is cool until it breaks

Ah, technology – the beautiful date that impresses all your friends but costs you a fortune to keep happy, up-to-date, and working. Automotive News puts some numbers to the economic toll we're paying to jockey this technological Trojan horse, an analysis it sums up with "Technology is great - until you have to replace it." Back in 2000, for instance, you could replace a Cadillac Escalade taillight lens for $56.08, or replace the entire unit for $220.49. Crack the rear lens on your 2015 Escalade and you have to buy a new unit for $795 - there's no such thing as just replacing a lens anymore. What about headlights? It was $210 for an Escalade headlight in 2000, it's $1,650 for the current unit (pictured). This is nothing we didn't know, these are just hard numbers to demonstrate it. Edmunds recently provided the same with its sledgehammer-bashing of the 2015 Ford F-150, Tesla Model S buyers have been shrieking about repair costs to their electric sedan's all-aluminum bodywork, and used-car sites are full of articles about which expensive-to-repair features to steer clear of if you want to avoid big repair bills. Those expensive bits increase the price of a car - Kelley Blue Book says the average price of a car is now more than $33,000 - and that raises rates for repairs and insurance. This comes in spite of some carmakers that have been collaborating with insurance companies and repair shops at the design stage in order to engineer parts that are easier and less expensive to replace. But the tech can have its cost-saving benefits: a 2011 study by the Highway Loss Data Institute found that Volvos fitted with that company's City Safety feature "filed 27 percent fewer property-damage liability claims" than luxury SUVs without it, and just last month the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety called adaptive headlights one of the top four crash-preventing technologies on cars today (after coming out against them in 2006). So yes, the technology costs a mint when it needs to be fixed - but being able to avoid an accident in the first place might make it worth it. News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Copyright 2015 AOL Cadillac Car Buying Used Car Buying Auto Repair Insurance Maintenance Safety Technology Luxury replacement parts

Weekly Recap: Cadillac's crossover blitz hinges on the 2017 XT5

Cadillac's aggressive new cadence of crossovers begins next spring with the arrival of the 2017 XT5, the first of four new utility vehicles that Cadillac will unleash in a bid to win more customers and revitalize its image. The XT5 replaces the aging SRX, and it's the first SUV to use the brand's new naming scheme (cars will use the corresponding CT prefix). Billed as the cornerstone of Cadillac's remade crossover lineup, the XT5 will join showrooms right after Caddy's new flagship, the CT6 sedan. It will be on display next week at the Los Angeles auto show after first appearing this month at the Dubai motor show. "It's pivotal to our ongoing growth, which is why we've developed XT5 from the inside out to provide customers more space, more technology, more luxury, and more efficiency," Cadillac president Johan de Nysschen said in a statement. "Pivotal" is almost understating the XT5 and the red-hot midsize crossover segment. The SRX is Cadillac's top seller in 2015, posting a 25-percent increase and its 56,732 units (up 25 percent) are more than one third of the brand's 141,090 sales this year. Yes, the totals have been partially incentive-fueled, and Cadillac put an average of $7,225 on the SRX's hood in October, according to TrueCar data. Still, it's an impressive performance for any vehicle, especially one that's had few major changes since the new generation launched as a 2010 model. "The SRX has been selling very well, given how late in the lifecycle it is," AutoPacific product analysis manager Dave Sullivan told Autoblog. It outsold the all-new MKX last month and really only trails the Lexus RX. This is the volume model for Cadillac and dealers need this to be a grand slam, not just a home run." Cadillac is adamant the XT5 isn't an SRX re-skin. It has a new chassis, more interior room, and adds features like Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. Thanks to a new structure, the XT5 sheds 278 pounds compared with its predecessor, which should improve fuel economy and driving character. The crossover uses General Motors' latest 3.6-liter V6 rated at 310 horsepower and 270 pound-feet of torque, and it is fortified with variable-valve timing, cylinder-deactivation, and stop-start features. The V6 will team with an eight-speed automatic transmission and a twin-clutch all-wheel-drive system than can summon all of the torque distribution to the front or rear axles. Cadillac will also sell a 2.0-liter turbo four-cylinder model in China.

Dodge Dart falls short of Consumer Reports Recommended, Caddy XTS and Lincoln MKS, too

The Dodge Dart, Cadillac XTS and Lincoln MKS all failed to earn a "Recommended" rating from Consumer Reports. When it came to the compact Dart, the organization's testers thought the vehicle offered a quiet cabin, solid-feeling chassis and nimble suspension, but the new model ultimately fell short of the coveted rating due to powertrain issues. The institute's reviewers found the base 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine to be underpowered and noted "drivability issues" when the available turbocharged 1.4-liter four was paired with the optional dual-clutch transmission (some of our editors disliked it paired with the six-speed manual). CR also dinged the latter powerplant for sounding "raspy." For what it's worth, we think the forced-induction engine offers an excellent and playful exhaust note, but that's just us.
As for the XTS, CR lauded the car for its luxurious cabin, but the vehicle's experience was dulled by its finicky CUE infotainment interface. Overall, the big Cadillac scored much higher than its cross-town rival from Lincoln. While testers found the American luxury sedan to offer a quiet ride and quality fit and finish, they felt the MKS delivered a "cramped driving position, ungainly handling, uncomposed ride, and limited visibility." Ouch. At the end of the day, both cars fell short of rivals from Japan, Germany and Korea. Check out the full press release below with more details, along with CR's musings on the Chevrolet Spark and Lexus ES.