You guys. Really, you guys. Cadillac is coming out with a three-row crossover… just like every other relevant mainstream luxury brand. Are we turned on? Are we excited? Are you not entertained? Hell, we first reported on this happening since 2011, and then in 2012, and then again in 2012, and twice in 2013 thus far, not counting now.
It’s no secret that crossovers are huge volume players, and that they’re quite profitable. So it should be no surprise that it’s coming. Expect it as early as late 2015, expect it to be a primped up family member of the next-generation Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse and GMC Acadia — much like the Cadillac XTS is to the Chevrolet Impala, or the 2015 Escalade to the 2015 Tahoe —  and look for it to be priced competitively to the Audi Q7. But will it be badged as an Escalade variant? That’s really the bigger mystery here./.rant
Comments
but there hasn’t been any mules yet
I think lambda is the wrong platform for this vehicle. Cadillac needs to go all RWD/AWD to pursue the performance luxury market. I think a cadillac 3 row crossover should go on the upcoming omega platform. Give it the N/A 3.6 and a Vsport 3.6TT and you have a great vehicle. Also move the next SRX to the extended alpha platform from the new CTS and offer the 2.0T and a Vsport 3.6TT. That would be ideal for Cadillac and would definitely go head to head with the competition.
I would love to see a 2 row based on the Alpha and a 3 row based on the Omega both is a very sporting nature to compete with BMW and Porsche. As for any others you can make them the fancy trucksters that some want.
I must be the rare one that could care less about a 3rd row but I do know they need something like this to pick up this segment.
As for the duplication of the name let it go GM as you already help kill the Cutlass name by using it as a marketing tool that did not fit or work on the other models.
My ’08 SRX will be definitely showing its age by late 2015, and I never buy a new car until the summer/fall of the following year, so I’m looking at late 2016.
So, yes, I’m quite interested in any news on this front. And I keep getting more and more depressed because the date keeps slipping farther and farther into the future.
So, no, DON’T STOP with the reports.
Stupid idia Lambda Based crossover with only only V6, it wood be great the Alpha Based BMW X5 Fighter ! ! !
Who deeply believes a CUV is luxury?
Is it luxurious to waste gas when you seriously have no need to?
Look at a 7 seat Tesla model S. It’s not some boring soccer mom machine. It’s
Baffling how Americans believe it’s luxury to waste and pollute.
CUVs are taller than sedans , hatchbacks or station wagons. Taller means more
aero drag which is wasteful and dumb. CUVs have more mass which means more
to push around.
I love hearing the bold justifications behind folk’s buying Lexus, BMW, Infinity, Cadillac or Mercedes CUVs. “I need AWD”,the say. Yet how many times last year did
you use AWD? “Well, yes, zero, but it’s there if I happen to need it!”, they reply.
Really?
Next comes, “I feel safer in a great big high machine because of all the other great big high machines out there”. This is my sister’s particular rationale for driving a beast, that with V-6 gets 22 mpg which she feels is “good mileage”. Are we really truly that stupid?
Lastly is cargo capability. “I need a CUV because I have a big family with need to haul baby strollers and handle trips to Costco. Well if you sat at Costco for 1/2 hour
and looked at the body weight of half the customers, you see literally tons of evidence of conspicuous consumption, American style. Is excessive consumption
luxury? Just burn all that gas ’cause we can? Are we the Roman Empire? Truth be told a mid-sized station wagon or hatchback has more length of storage floor than even some larger 3 row SUVs. Fold down the rear seat back of many small or
mid sized hatches and you can haul enough groceries for your neighborhood!
So what’s the deal, America? Why do you believe buying a CUV is even remotely smart? Could it be ignorance, or is it like what Jon Stewart quipped during a clever but sad bit he did highlighting how the last eight U.S. presidents gave many speeches about our addiction to oil and hope his plan would solve this malady, when he remarked, “Boy! That thing could really tow that boat I don’t have up that
hill I don’t live by!”
By the way, my sister’s “luxury” CUV that gets 22 MPG? That’s HWY. Her true
COMBINED MPG is closer to 15-16. Most of us spend half or less than half of or driving time on the freeway.
A Chevy Volt is an intelligently designed vehicle…ELR for $75k? Not so much.
Why hail automakers like Cadillac for building a CUV that’s playing catch up
to pathetic $45-70,000 German and Japanese machines? Instead tell your car dealer you want GM to produce a PHEV or EREV family hauler with luxury
amenities if that’s your thing.
They can do it and they will…if you refuse to buy these high-profit’ low return
junkers they tell you that you need, and demand more.
Hey, Check this irony –
Those same uber consumers at Costco with the bulging waistlines and
on meds for high chloresterol driving that CUV will sit in line at the Costco
gas pump for twenty minutes to save 13 cents per gallon!
How messed up is THAT?!
Yes stop asking when they will add the third row. There are more important things. Like when will they add the seventh and eighth cylinder.
Whenever I read diatribes like this, knocking down people he does not know and how they want to live, I always wonder what went wrong when they grew up. So much hatred.
Maybe he should get some kids and see what life can be like with a 5 seater car. It can be done but only as a second vehicle. At least with my lifestyle.
Now when I retire and the kids are gone our plan is to hopefully have a Volt type compact (well, maybe a Cadillac version) and an Enclave but right now we need two Enclaves to meet our needs.
I may be the odd man out here but , I like to hear details concerning the new 3-row Caddy . I live in Michigan and have friends and family that work at the Delta Plant where the Traverse , Enclave and Acadia are built . Plus GM is investing (aprox.) 250 million dollars for a Logistis center for the plant . ” Rumor ” has it that the center is being built for a possible run of the new Cadillac . The plant is currently running 3 shifts now to fullfill demand of the current product line . So . having the new 3-row Caddy would be exciting for not only the community but the employees at the plant . Seems to make sense to us here in Michigan . JMOP .
I don’t mind a legitimate, full-size crossover from Cadillac. But seeing as to how high the bar is raised in this segment, I hope Cadillac can build a crossover that is lightyears beyond the Lambada-based siblings. In fact, it should be built off of its current vehicle architectures underpinning the ATS, CTS and upcoming flagship sedans, to better compete with the competition. How would building another Lambada-based crossover not be considered badge-engineering?
OK, like always – and like talking to people with addictions, my comments are called
a diatribe.Personal attacks on me don’t change the facts. I shop at Costco, and
perhaps I struck a nerve out there about your habits. That was for illustration AND IT’S TRUE.
There’s no anger here – folks are negging my comments but absolutely nobody
has answered my questions or supported why a CUV is a good choice to meet a person or family’s needs. This fellow with a family of 5 can find any number of
cars that will meet his needs and save him tons of cash in gas mileage.
Why are dozens of folks brainwashed by marketing and peer pressure not
able to give rational reasons and not just click thumbs -down? The food-
forethought points I make are completely valid.
In the 1980s a guy named Lee Iacocca invented an entirely new vehicle
to bail out his sinking company. As CEO of Chrysler he was hailed a genius
for inventing the minivan. You may be too young to remember how he
was stuck with one of history’s biggest failures – the K car. When former
heads of Chrysler had decided to take platform engineering to new highs
and put everything they made from faux-luxe Chryslers to basic
Dodge sedans on one chassis-the K chassis, the result was disastrous,
the company in a tailspin. Iacocca says- “Americans have big families and
often want to ferry other kids, supplies, groceries and retail items –
they would buy a van-like car that could carry out these chores”. It
was brilliant, they put a squared steel box on the K platform, added
a row of seats and sliding side door, WALA!, Chrysler was saved.
They sold like hamburgers at McDonalds!
Move to the mid nineties and every carmaker made minivans. They
went from boxy grocery-getters to sleeker, practical people movers.
Sales plummeted though because car buyers in America often
make emotional decisions over practical. Sure, that minivan took
care of shopping and kid’s sports – but to many they also
represented a driver who was a mom in sweatpants who no
longer had sex. Stupid, yes, but to those for whom image
trumped logic, minivans equalled boring.
Nobody knows who was first to jump off the minivan bandwagon
and turn their truck factories into big offroad station wagon
factories, but to companies like GM and Ford who couldn’t figure out
the formula to compete with Honda, Chrysler and Nissan in minivans
seemingly invented a way to capture these married folks who believed
a minivan purchase indicated to the world that your youth and
virility were over. The SUV was born. Gas was relatively cheap so….
so what?
Carmakers found a fantastic moneymaker. Put a station wagon on
a truck frame and tell them they could climb mountains, cross rivers and
do all the exciting things they truly will never ever do, and the masses
will buy the schpeil. It worked FANTASTICALLY. Suddenly marrieds
would dish out thousands more than a minivan to appear “sporty”!
It’s that word sport that turned you on. Suddenly, your soccer mom
wife believed she was sexy driving a truck that could also take her
kids to baseball practice!
“So What?!”, You all say, let here drive what she wants, if it makes her
feel good. Well, then we all realized these things were grossly
wasteful, and gasoline companies all rejoiced with us hooked on trucks
to get our groceries. Each hiccup in the Mid East, and each price-gouge
by oil companies made SUV drivers look less than smart. Thus the
CUV was born. Pelople with more money than brains could continue
to buy Escalades and Tahoe trucks, and the everyman had a new
choice – a wagon that still looked like a truck, but lost it’s frame
and was built on the same unibody platform as mid sized and
compact models…A fake truck that still ain’t no minivan, if you will.
It worked! And this cash cow for automakers goes on to this day.
Problem is, they’re still mostly AWD and expensive yet they do
not equal minivan utility at all. Adding more rows of seats in
CUVs just makes that tiny cargo space behind those seats smaller.
Anybody can see that – yet they call this a diatribe? Seriously?
You can step outside your home in middle class America and
count these silly vehicles as far as the eye can see. It’s a bad
joke on all Americans and big money for car companies. Why
build efficient cars and trucks with new technology which
requires expensive R&D and lithium batteries when you can
tell folks CUVs is what they want and….the best they can expect.
Data shows us 87% of all SUVs and CUVs never leave paved
roads and mainly they do the same duty as a station wagon
or sedan.
If you’re still not convinced, why not add some fancy leather,
better infotainment with the same nasty gas sucking drivetrains,
and advertise a HWY mpg that your family will never see?
Then add insult to injury and luxury car branding and tell you
to pay $15-30,000 more?
Fool me once…..
@proud American So pretty much your point is we only should have cars and trucks and no SUVs and CUVs?
“but absolutely nobody has answered my questions or supported why a CUV is a good choice to meet a person or family’s needs. ”
Ultimately, no one. But then again, I’m not sure if you’re aware what a CUV is.
Whereas SUV’s had dedicated platforms, CUV’s generally share their platforms with what are known as contemporary car platforms. The versatility of such car platforms all it to be lengthened, widened, and as is the case for CUV’s, raised. I certainly hope you aren’t coming here thinking the a CUV is a 5 meter long, 3 row. AWD gas-guzzler, because you might be only getting half the picture.
But before I get to the CUV’s….
I think your beef may be with American consumer habits; an unsavoury mix of greedy and instant gratification paired with an extreme version of ‘keeping up with the Jones’ and unhealthy status seeking. In many cases, you can’t fault automakers for merching off of the unchecked greed of consumers in the same way you can’t fault Burger King for making a Double Whopper. The demanding consumer wants it now and costs (environmental, social, economic, financial, health, etc.) aren’t considered. Everyone thinking short when they should be thinking long. It’s a problem you American’s are going to have to work out for yourselves.
But back to the CUV. Consider that a CUV need not be a hulking 3-row beast of a vehicle. A CUV, be it sub-compact, compact, mid-size, large, or full-size, are what has replaced the SUV. From the smallest to the largest, they can all be traced back to a more common car platform. For instance, the Toyota Rav4 can be sourced from Toyota MC platform. That same platform can be scaled up or down to fill the needs of CUV’s and cars in Toyota’s range. It can be a Scion tC, or a Toyota Venza; the latter being what you would classify as a CUV.
Anyway, it’s nice to know a yank is aware of the unrestrained consumer problems that exist in their society. Better to see and address the problem now rather than in hindsight. A pity I can’t help you with it, we have enough of it here.
Also, despite your fragmented understanding of automotive history, the SUV was not born in the 90’s. It’s much, much older than that, and it wasn’t a product of GM and Chrysler being shunned out of the Minivan segment, or having cheap (relative) gas.
I hope you’re not just cutting and pasting something verbatim about automotive history without actually doing any fact checking.
Also, you stated that someone in your family is getting 16 mpg on their CUV, it really just depends on how they actually drive. If you drive like a maniac (or an ass in the most explicit way) then your mpg will suffer. As a lot of car commercial will say “Your mileage may vary”. That goes for any vehicle in any category. You can get something like a Honda Fit and you can still have 16-17 mpg if you drive like an ass. Just sayin…
Here is what is at hand.
The wagon was replaced by a Minivan in the 80’s. People liked the utility and versatility as styling has fallen way with most consumers.
Next came the 90’s SUV era where they became more comfortable than many cars. Women loved them as they were useful and versatile and men loved them as they were truck like. Both liked sitting up high and being able to see much better.
Spin to today where you have a segment GM help found with the CUV. They took the best ideas of the minivan and the SUV and combined them into a more efficient and cost effective package. Most get decent MPG and are cheaper to buy than a full size SUV. They still feel like a truck and sit high. Men still have no issue being seen on one like a Minivan.
The fact is most cars today including the few wagons they are not usable to haul much. Trunks are large but the opening will not take a large box even if it would fit inside. Many SUV models today get very good MPG.
Case in point here. Cavalier wagon and see how few were sold. They were limited in appeal and hauling. Now Segway to the HHR where it look liked a truck but was for intents a Cobalt wagon. It has more capacity to haul and sold over or near 100,000 units per year. Since when has a wagon sold that well.
The reality is the automakers need to sell what people want. Generally these vehicles are getting twice the MPG of the 70’s car wagon. These models are making good profits. Most makers are still refining the segment like with vehicles like the Buick Encore and others.
Anyways my HHR Turbo gets 25 City and 32 highway and my Terrain gets 19 city and 26 highway with a V6. Both out perform my last 3 cars in utility and MPG.
And yes my wife likes her GMC. She wanted it and I have grown to appreciate it. It has been a very good vehicle and has hauled everything from a Soapbox Derby car to a back yard porch swing and the heavy wood stand that it swings from. Can’t do that with any car.
Excellent take on this, Scott. I still believe this SUV thing(craze) has gotten a bit out of hand and they’re not quite my cup of tea so to speak but there is money to be made there. If the buying public is willing, why not.
Perfect! I think Cadillac should put the SRX on the Alpha platform and the 3rd row on the upcoming Omega platform. This would really help Cadillac compete even more with BMW and MB! I’d say put a 2.0L Turbo I4 (VVT and iVLC) 250HP and 275lb-ft and a 4.3L Ecotec3 (H/O VVT, SIDI and AFM) V6 350HP and 320lb-ft in them. Cadillac should fix the problems with CUE and they will for sure have a liable competitor!
SUV’s gained popularity in the mid 80’s. Why? Because the government decided that high gas prices was not enough to entice the American people to buy fuel efficient vehicles. So they came up with CAFE requirements in the late 70’s to force the auto companies to increase their vehicles MPG and therefore the public would have to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.
However it did not really go over that well. Most of the public did not like the tiny K and X cars in 1980 that did not meet their needs. Though at the time I had a citation hatch and loved it. I could really fill it up. But my next vehicle was a small blazer which I used to pull my Hobie Cat was much better for my needs.
The auto companies saw this and tried to meet the customer needs. I remember working on station wagon design to get it reclassified as a truck. Why? Because trucks had a higher CAFE MPG requirement than cars and the auto makers could achieve these truck requirements. If we could get make it a truck we could continue to offer it to the public. The wagon project I was working on did not go through because it was decided to redo the SUV’s into more car like vehicles that the public would buy.
And it worked. Hence the SUV “craze”. The auto companies met a need. They did not “PR” or “market” it, the public bought the SUV’s that were already in the dealer lots.
Later some smart company decided that they could get a bit more MPG and a lot more car like truck if they went frameless and used a car platform as a basis for their “CUV”.
“CAFE has separate standards for “passenger cars” and “light trucks”, despite the majority of “light trucks” actually being used as passenger cars. The market share of “light trucks” grew steadily from 9.7% in 1979 to 47% in 2001 and remained in 50% numbers up to 2011.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy
GM already tried to force people into the cars they thought needed not wanted in the 80’s with the great FWD and down size wave they did in the 80’s and we know where that all lead.
Today GM saw an opportunity to down size the SUV at a time people would be interested. Instead of losing profits from slowing larger SUV sales they have increased market share with vehicles like the Encore, Nox and Terrain. The Nox and Terrain are selling more and more every year. It is sad they tossed away the number of sales they lost with no HHR replacement but at the time GM had many other issues going on.
The fact the new SUV’s can cost over $50K or more and gas is only going to continue to go up these smaller CUV models will only get more efficient and more popular.
The truth is the mini van is slowly going to a small segment of the market. There are those who still want one but no where like it was. Just go to the mall and see the lines of CUV models vs. what’s left of the Mini Van.
GM like’s it because they never mastered the Mini Van and are seeing growth with the new segment. Also it will help them on the CAFE for the larger vehicles.
Look for them to really try to sell the Colorado with the same intentions of better MPG and better price over the full size as the half ton truck is going to hit the CAFE wall here in the next ten years. Also look for the Ford Ranger to come in play too for Ford as they have the same dilemma.
One only has to look at the market to see what is going on and do the math.
That is the key they make money and provide what the consumer wants.
I like our Terrain but it is the wife’s car and not mine to daily drive. I really would not want to drive it daily. I like my HHR as it is small fast and handles like on rails but lets me still haul a load of things with ease.
I replaced a Sonoma and it is as close as I could come with out buying a Colorado that bring myself to buy due to the cheap interior and feel of the entire vehicle.
We had a GTP and while it would carry a 8 foot ladder I could not get any kind of a square box inside the trunk. She hauls large objects for work and it really has helped here in her job. Also she grew up driving her dads truck so she like sitting up high again like she was used to.
who is this proud american guy who feels the need to write a blog on a blog? no one wants to read a page comment dude
There are no limits to get your point across no matter if it is right or wrong.
Someday you may need to express a point too.
I do not agree with him but have no issue with his long comments.
There are times we get detailed comments we all can learn from when they are informative. The ones that are less so you can just skip.
I honestly have about the same mileage with my Terrain if not better than my old car the Buick Lucerne.