Can We Please Stop With The Three-Row Cadillac Reports Already?

View Comments

• 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.