Late last year, Cadillac rival, Lexus, launched an entry-level subcompact luxury crossover that juxtaposes performance agility and urban styling cues. Called Lexus UX, it is the brand’s smallest and most affordable crossover SUV to date. It slots below the compact NX, midsize RX, and “midsize-plus” RX-L. And that leads us to wonder whether GM will find a way to offer a future Cadillac crossover of subcompact proportions. In other words, a B-segment Cadillac CUV to slot under the XT4.
Here’s a comprehensive look at the competitive environment, and potential positioning of the hypothetical model.
| Subcompact CUV | Compact CUV | Midsize CUV | Midsize Plus CUV | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lexus | UX – $32,000 | NX – $36,385 | RX – $43,570 | RX-L – $47,770 | |
| Cadillac | Potential XT3 – $30,000? | XT4 – $34,795 | XT5 – $41,695 | XT6 – $TBA | |
| Acura | - | RDX | MDX | - | |
| Infiniti | QX30 – $30,150 | QX50 – $36,550 | - | QX60 – $44,250 | |
| Volvo | XC40 – $33,700 | XC60 – $39,800 | - | XC90 – $47,700 |
Should GM/Cadillac choose to produce a subcompact crossover to directly rival the Lexus UX, it will be interesting to see such a model comes to fruition. Such a model would most most definitely ride on a GM Vehicle Set, with VSS-F being the most likely candidate.
The potential subcompact Caddy would likely be called XT3, clearly indicating its place below the compact XT4, midsize XT5, and the recently-revealed XT6 “midsize plus” crossover. Other plays in its segment including the Infiniti QX30 and Volvo XC40, as Acura doesn’t have a subcompact CUV offering… yet.
Things get a little more interesting when it comes to pricing. Cadillac‘s current positioning strategy involves offering a slightly lower base price when compared to direct rivals from Lexus in order to capture purchase consideration and, ultimately, sales volume. If Cadillac continues with this strategy for the hypothetical XT3, then it will likely end up pricing the model right at the $30,000 mark.
Compact Cadillac XT4 seats 5 passengers
Midsize Cadillac XT5 seats 5 passengers
Midsize-plus XT6 seats 6 or 7 passengers, depending on configuration
If the hypothetical vehicle is based on the VSS-F architecture, then a small-displacement four-cylinder engine would sit transversely under the hood driving the front wheels by default. A front-biased all-wheel-drive system would be optional.
B-Segment Luxury Crossover - United States
| MODEL | Q4 18 / Q4 17 | Q4 18 | Q4 17 | YTD 18 / YTD 17 | YTD 18 | YTD 17 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UX | * | 453 | * | * | 453 | * |
| QX30 | -30.78% | 1,462 | 2,112 | -42.52% | 8,101 | 14,093 |
| GLA-CLASS | -2.62% | 6,901 | 7,087 | +0.13% | 24,136 | 24,104 |
| X1 | -30.80% | 6,774 | 9,789 | -5.73% | 29,060 | 30,826 |
| Q3 | -63.24% | 2,198 | 5,980 | -18.44% | 16,828 | 20,633 |
| TOTAL | -28.76% | 17,788 | 24,968 | -12.36% | 78,578 | 89,656 |
In all, a subcompact Cadillac crossover to slot under the XT4 seems like an interesting proposition, one that will undoubtedly add a good chunk to the brand’s sales volume, albeit not in an entirely exciting fashion. Whether such a model will actually make it to market is anyone’s guess at this point.
Subscribe (entirely for free) to GM Authority for more Cadillac news and XT3 news coverage.
Comments
Stick the Blackwing in a Buick Encore and call it a day.
Seriously, a higher roof CT4 wagon would be the most interesting and fun to drive, but they’d probably have to charge a lot more. More upright seats would solve much of the ATS’s rear seat room problems.
Hey, I thought car enthusiasts wanted a crossover with a sporty driving experience. Or does the word “wagon” freak you out? I realize it’ll never happen and that the wheelbase would have to be much shorter than the CT4’s to make it smaller than the XT4. Our best hope for a small RWD/AWD crossover is the EV architecture.
I would love to have a crossover with something close to a sedan-height floor to save my knees and hips (wait ’til you’re my age). I’m never going off-roading or hauling or towing, I don’t drive in snow, and I don’t need it to look like I do (wait ’til you’re my age).
If GM is already going to produce a Trax/Encore/Granite, they could just easily turn on the re-badging and ship a XT3 also. Maybe toss in XT4’s 2.0L.
The point of the GM VSS project is to end badge engineering, while still reducing costs and decreasing time to market (development). So while a hypothetical XT3 might share components with other models, it doesn’t need to look anything like the Trax, Encore, Granite, etc.
Alex, can you elaborate on how the new architecture will end badge engineering?
You might not understand the distinction between badge engineering and platform sharing. Most of the GMC and Pontiac models for decades were badge-engineered Chevrolets: same structure and most sheetmetal, different fascias. The original J cars in the 80’s were the worst manifestation. They were sold by all 5 of their US car divisions (GMC was then truck-only) and many, if not all, of their overseas brands.
But the ATS and CTS share a platform (with Camaro). Different size and sheetmetal, but most of the innards are the same, so engineering is greatly reduced and parts supply and manufacturing easier. Many of the original Crossovers shared their platform with a sedan.
Am I the only one thinks the XT4 is the best looking Caddy CUV when compared to the XT5 and XT6?
The XT5 looks good, but compared to the newer models it looks outdated. Not really a fan of the XT6, just a bit too bland for me.
Agreed 100%, although I think there may have been some “borrowing” from Volvo’s design cues…
A blinged-out Trax with big lights, leather, and chrome called Escargo…
I love my XT4! The downside is the price jumps up fast. While I can only complain about the rain sense wipers that just suck…everything else is great.
GM really should strive for more in the end.
1. a 50/50 AWD system.
2. The sport model should have a bigger engine for the price.
3. This simply would have made an awesome electric CUV!