There’s a weird stigma with automotive journalists: we love wagons. It’s unknown why, but the automotive journalist’s perfect vehicle is a wagon, with a V8 and a proper manual gearbox. Therefore, we previously brought you our interpretation of what a third-generation Cadillac CTS-V sport wagon could have been. This time, we chopped off two additional doors.
Back with help from digital wizard, RM Design, we decided a five-door Cadillac CTS-V was much too normal. We want this three-door Cadillac CTS-V to fill ever single niche in our life. That means coupe-like style lines are present, leaving a gorgeous sweeping motion from the taillamp through the side vent uninterrupted.
Of course, the 6.2-liter LT4 supercharged V8 is under the hood, and our CTS-V shooting brake would ideally feature a seven-speed manual gearbox, plucked from its C7 Corvette Z06 cousin. But this rendering isn’t just about the power, it’s the thought of 640 hp with a usable cargo area.
Last week we dared to dream with a five-door CTS-V. This week we took the dream and really got a little crazy with it.
Comments
That looks really sharp. When i was younger i thought wagons were pretty lame, but as i grow older they have grown on me quite a bit.
I grew up with wagons. My Dad’s first wagon was a 1959 Ford Taunus, then he had a 1963 Rambler American. My first wagon was a 1975 Chevy Vega Kammback. I now have a 2009 Chevy Equinox, a CUV which is bigger than a wagon, but has the a large cargo area.
Oh you…. While you’re at it, you should render it with rumble seats.
It’s a Nomad 60 years later. Add a couple hidden suicide opening rear doors and you’d have more convenience. Unfortunately it will never happen.
Looks nice but totally non-practical. Yea I know it is a V but every once in awhile you will want to use the cargo area and the lack of the back doors would be a major access hassle.
It’s more practical then a coupe though.
Just go ahead and build it already, would You ? Thanks !
wagons or CUV/SUVs have more usable cargo space than coupes and sedans…..that is one of the reasons why sedans are falling out of favor….might as whale build CUV/Wagons.
No Rye, cargo space is not the reason crossovers are hot. The biggest reason for today’s SUV/CUV boom is that today’s drivers (primarily led by women) prefer the “higher” driving position of a crossover over a lower position found in a non-raised sedan, wagon, coupe, convertible, etc. There is tons of research on this already.
Further disproving your theory that people are prioritizing cargo space when making a vehicle purchase decision is that wagons and hatchbacks have been available in the U.S. market for decades, but have accounted for very low overall sales figures compared to sedans. Even less practical two-door coupes have traditionally outsold wagons and hatchbacks in the U.S. If people wanted utility/cargo space, then we would have seen hatches and wagons make up the lion’s share of sales, much like they have and continue to this day in Europe. This is not the case. Clearly, people don’t care about utility, cargo space, or off-roadability. They care about the higher ride height. Everything else is an accidental by-product.
I’m not gonna tell you your job Alex, but you may want to check your tone.
I agree…very condescending.
I disagree. Rye’s constant trolling undermined his credibility to the point that seeing his username is annoying, even when he actually has something. I don’t blame Alex for coming at him like that. That’s why people on GMI outright ignore him.
Rye, you’ve shown that you can contribute to a discussion. If you want to be taken seriously, stop harping on about Art and Science in every Cadillac-related article. We heard you the first time.
?? i love the Internet… the comment Rye made was not out of line or irrelevant to the topic. It seems personal with Alex, if he was just another commenter fine but hes not. Hes held to a higher standard. Its almost as if he was trying to bait rye into an argument just so he can say ” i will ban you, here i am God” like hes done in the past.
Regardless if Alex had a tone which is not a matter of right or wrong in behavior, some trolls need to be silenced with a response. Matter of fact, a permanent ban for continuous abuse of irrelevant comments would be an alternative.
I agree. Many SUVs have very limited cargo space. Especially the 1st gen X5 and all versions of X6 which are basically 2 seaters considering the limited back seat and near non-existant rear cargo space.
Women do seem to feel safer in SUVs which is a fallacy. I tell them they are better off getting a dog. Lol
Alex, Rye is right too. He never said crossovers were only hot because of cargo space he said sedans are falling out of favor because of a lack of space.
While it’s true people buy crossovers for ride height it’s also true people buy it for space.
Think about it, if a person goes to a dealership and asks “I have three kids and a dog, we go on road trips a lot. What car suits me?” The dealer won’t say I have just the car how about a Cruze or Malibu he says how bout a Equinox or traverse. Why because they have more space for a family. That’s why SUVs caught on and that’s why crossovers are catching on because now you can have the space of a suv and fuel economy of a sedan. No one just goes to a dealership and only says ” I want to ride high up give me an Equinox.” They may be looking for that but they are not buying a crossover for that one reason. So it is about ride height but is ALSO about space and other advantages. No one buys a car for one sole purpose.
Remember Alex, just because you own and run an amateur car blog doesn’t mean your opinion is right and you need to respond harshly to a patron who’s comment wasn’t even snarky or hostile 😉
Alex while much of what you say is true on ride height etc cargo space is till a prime factor with many.
Today’s cars just do not have trunks that accommodate much if it is too tall. While I can get a six foot ladder in my Malibu I can not get a 3×3 box in the trunk opening.
After fighting a GTP trunk for work my wife opted for a Terrain and will never go back just for the utility of it alone.
The reason CUV models are doing so well along with what you and I listed is price and economy. The price of a Tahoe has gotten crazy and the random jumps in gas have gotten people to look for an alternative when the prices spike on fuel.
Wagons just have fallen out of favor with many Americans as the like the truck look more. The CUV is somehting a woman like for many reasons and a man does not mind being seen in as it looks like he still has a pair vs a minivan.
We are now seeing CUV models taking off in Europe now. They may be able to coexist with the Hatch and wagons or they could kill the sales of these models and leave Europe much like us.
I love the Shooting brake concept here but the numbers for the price would just never add up. They would not sell enough here or there to make it practical. Even in Europe the shooting brakes have limited sales and only tend to work if they are priced very high to where they have room to work.
If some of these folks think your comment was tough they really should visit some of the real enthusiast sights that are pretty hard core. I have seen some really bloody bickering matches there and what real trolls are. One I saw they were even hacking into others profiles and doing some real damage. One even after getting banned crashed the web site.
If anything Rye has been well over the top on anything Cadillac. If anything I can see how he may have pressed your buttons there to where you gave as well as you have taken.
For those here who may have missed it Alex was not out of line and Rye is far from innocent.
Also if someone says something with authority do not consider it trolling as much as a firm belief or understand of the topic. Some folks if they are confident in their statement they will say like it is. It is not to insult but just said with firm conviction.
Would be a great alternative to a performance SUV with much better handling and lighter weight. The stick might pull me in.
Would be a really practical coupe.
Shut up and take my money!!!
Cargo area in a SUV , utility and off road ability to some consumers are very important . The ride height is a bonus to consumers that tow a trailer or boat with their SUV and are looking for the one that will hold more of their stuff.
If you look at any advertisement for a SUV / CUV cargo capacity is always one of the main selling points . A 7 or 8 passenger vehicle will have terrible cargo capacity until you fold down that third row .
In my old Escalade I always folded down that third row of seats to gain more room when camping . Siting high was a secondary option .
There is alot of proof that how much room you had to haul all of your toys is a big factor in what some consumers will buy .
I like the rendering but believe it would need two more doors though .
In Toronto and Vancouver, the majority of German mid and full size SUVs (which is the bulk of the market) are driven by small, usually Asian women who don’t tow anything and use them as grocery getters. They are perceived as status symbols.
I agree with Alex. Most of the SUVs CUVs will never get off the pavement, tow a boat or trailer on a regular basis or haul more than 4-5 people
If cargo space was so important, why is the new Acadia smaller–GMC must be totally missing the market. The majority of SUVs I see are being drive by a women and most of the time it is alone or 1-2 kids. Let’s be frank, this will all change once gas prices head back up. The biggest driver of their sales are low gas prices!
For the size of this, the 4-door version looks better. This looks too bloated with only two doors. That said, I love blending the practicality of a wagon with the style of a coupe. It would be perfect if they had as choices: 1) this, 2) the four-door version of this, and 3) a two-door hatchback version (only difference being a foot shorter). Not shorter wheelbase though, fyi, just shorter length.
It would make more sense if there was a 3dr ATS and then a 5 door CTS wagon. That would probably be the only way that these two ideas would get the ok from GM brass.
To whichever gm authority staff member does these renderings,
Great job. Have you thought about doing interior renderings to show the direction you guys would like to see Cadillac take with their interior styling. That be cool to see. Being that there isn’t anything interesting from Cadillac to be covered right now these renderings are wonderful and I’d love to see more.
The rendering flows smoothly and improves the aesthetics of the side profile versus the 4-door rendering. As a V-wagon owner we want a wagon. I still think the best chance of that happening is with the ATS replacement; hopefully with an LT4 & 6 or 7 speed manual (plus 10-speed auto). The business model is in Europe with a small diesel or turbocharged 2 litre petrol engine. Ferrari can’t sell 2-door shooting brakes at high enough volumes so a 2-door CTS-V would sell to collectors, auto enthusiasts & the media. As far as ride height goes people in large cities want that plus cargo space. Most average drivers think a car is an appliance & women buy SUV/CUV for status & somehow think putting a child up into those vehicles is easier than loading a sedan. More average rear seat leg room & higher interior dimensions win. They don’t care that they handle poorly since they can’t turn corners & never learned to drive. Keep putting new wagon renderings up & complain to Cadillac. By the time they roll out the new SUV/CUV offerings the buying public will be so enamored with green power that billions will be wasted. The CTS-V used to be the budget luxury performance car; now we the enthusiast have no options. Start rendering ATS wagons with chassis length between the current ATS & CTS (Camaro length) & lets push for a next gen ATS wagon to compete against the ZL-1.
Having a three dour wagon does not make sense but to each his own. There needs to be a coupe version of the CTS-V first, a 5 door wagon-V and perhaps a 3 door version of the V wagon in limited numbers.
I perfure the styling of CUV/Wagons rather than a sedan….sedans has gotten fat in recent years.
Sedans fat? CUVs and SUVs are in the same family tree with minivans!
What might the weight differential between similar sedans and SUVs, CUVs. The porkers are the SUVs CUVs
if you compare a 1970s-80s sedan to a new sedan….the new 2010s sedan will look fat and small next to the old one…..especially in the rear…. I see the rear of utility vehicles look better than sedan rears…. plus rear visibility in a SUV is much better since rear windows of sedans have gone to gun-slits….utility vehicles have more advantages than cars in every way such as.
visibility.
interior and cargo volume such as folding rear seats for more cargo space.
utility vehicles don,t have to be just fat, stubby mini vans….there can be more than one kind of utility vehicles and people wont have to rely on sedans for great driving dynamics and handing.
Evidently you have spent little or no time driving any sport /enthusiast vehicles. It is not possible for a “similar” cuv suv to handle or ride as well as a car. Higher and weighs more can not handle as well stop as well get as decent mileage or accelerate as well…..basic Physics.
A CTS with same drivetrain of a XT5 will spank the XT 5 in acceleration, fuel economy, and handling test you design. Will stop quicker pollute less and drive quieter in the process.
Personal preference I respect but don’t even begin to say the driving dynamics are near being the same. As to cargo room, my CTS is more than satisfactory. I have toted a lawnmower in the trunk, and can fit my bicycle in the trunk with rear seat folded down. And yes the trunk lid is closed!
I’m sure they can find a way the make a sleek and low utility vehicle that is somewhere between a wagon and a CUV that is lightweight and have the same driving dynamics as a car….like I said utility vehicles don,t have to be fat, stubby and heavy….they just need to put more effort into utility vehicles and not just make one kind of…..they need stop putting there special focus and effort into sedans and start putting there effort into utility vehicles because sedans are a dying segment and utility vehicles are growing.
And what have they been doing design wise with CUVs SUVs for the last 5-10 years? Making them more efficient! Sadly will never be as efficient as a car and when they start reducing height one of the key reasons for purchasing disappears.
Nope, can’t be building anything but CUVs and SUVs because fuel prices will eventually go back up and cars can’t even meet future fuel standards let alone SUVs CUVs . Portfolio must be diverse!
lets manifest that fuel prices will never ever go up again….this isn’t the financial claps anymore……things are better now and gas is cheaper than in the 2008 and things will continuously get better in the future…..so stop looking at the future as bad….stop thinking that things will stay the same and not get better.
Fuel prices will go up and SUVs CUVs height will not go down!
why the would people want high fuel prices…it makes no sense…..fuel prices are not going to go up….it looks like Martin Smrek wants to see things get worse instead of better.
Rye I have about as much influence on future gas prices as you do on getting Cadillac to revert to low-fat design!
fat cars and high fuel prices are just crap.
can we all just have a crap free future….I don.t want anymore crap, like high fuel prices….I put up with enough crap in the 2000s when the economy crashed and when I was paying $4.00 a gallon……..please NO MORE CRAP.
Is autism crap?