News:

Due to a technical issue, some recently uploaded pictures have been lost. We are investigating why this happened but the issue has been resolved so that future uploads should be safe.  You can also Modify your post (MORE...) and re-upload the pictures in your post.

Main Menu

Cadillac Myth or Fact?

Started by D.Yaros, December 31, 2018, 06:13:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

D.Yaros

Ran across this and have to question the assertion set out that GM was considering closing down the Cadillac marque.  Anyone have any insight on this subject?

https://yeahmotor.com/cars/worst-cars/20/?v=2

The Cadillac Cimarron was a full-scale disaster. The kind that automotive engineers relay to their children on dark moonless nights when the forces of evil are exalted amongst the shadows. An attempt by GM to move the Cadillac brand into the small-car market, the awfully-designed and poorly-performing Cimarron made use of the already unpopular J-platform sedan as its base, leading to the perfect storm of a weak form and horrible function.

How bad did things get? The good folks at GM were apparently considering ending the Cadillac brand over the debacle. When it’s serious enough to kill off an American icon, it’s serious.

Dave Yaros
CLC #25195
55 Coupe de Ville
92 Allante
62 Olds  

You will find me on the web @:
http://GDYNets.atwebpages.com  -Dave's Den
http://graylady.atwebpages.com -'55 CDV site
http://www.freewebs.com/jeandaveyaros  -Saved 62 (Oldsmobile) Web Site
The home of Car Collector Chronicles.  A  monthly GDYNets newsletter focusing on classic car collecting.
http://www.scribd.com/D_Yaros/

tozerco

I think we all better get used to it.

I am in Australia, the country that had up to five (5) car builders at some stage and now has none.

GM had the top-selling car in the Holden Commodore and now it sells imported, basically re-badged "versions" of "global" cars. Ford is doing much the same and Toyota just sells straight out imported cars. The number of makes has absolutely exploded in the past five - ten years and the number of models within those makes has exploded itself.

Traditionally, Australia "managed" the fact that this country has a small, but relatively affluent car buying public by making just two "makes" - GM Holden and Ford - by producing one car model each and a couple of variants of that - for example, a "Standard" and a "Special", topped up with a station wagon and a "ute" (pick-up to you). Anything else was essentially imported even if it was assembled here. Mitsubishi, Toyota and, for a while, Nissan tried and failed because we had this concept of a "home-grown" car built, supposedly, for Australian conditions.

Our car industry was never, frankly, as insular and self-focused as the US was but it has gone the way I think your industry will go with "globalisation" and various "free-trade" agreements - in exchange for access to markets, other countries have demanded we allow access to their car manufacturers and this has, in turn, led to the explosion in makes and models. That suits the car-buying public and is called "choice". For a time, we called it "car dumping" in the belief, probably accurate, that the European manufacturers in particular, were "dumping" their surplus manufacturing on our smaller market.

The next step in this process, once demand was created in Australia for the cars, was to move manufacturing to the so-called "third world" or "developing" countries where labour rates are much lower and working conditions are abysmal by our standards.

It was only a matter of time before the local industry, subsidised to the max. by our tax-payers and building larger, rear-wheel-drive vehicles that government, "fleet owners" and car rental companies seemed only to buy, would not be able to compete.

As soon as the subsidies stopped, so did the manufacture of local cars and the "gates" are open to all manner of imports from just about everywhere.

The story has pretty much been the same for appliances, tools, clothing and furniture.

Like I said....Better get used to it.
John Tozer
#7946

'37 7513
'37 7533

V63

The cimmeron was a direct result of federal CAFE fuel economy standards. Not a marketing strategy by GM. we can thank CAFE  for the diesel, v864,  HT4100 and the 4.1 v6. The cimmeron might have been the best of the lot!


D.Smith

#3
Quote from: V63 on January 01, 2019, 04:04:17 AM
The cimmeron was a direct result of federal CAFE fuel economy standards. Not a marketing strategy by GM. we can thank CAFE  for the diesel, v864,  HT4100 and the 4.1 v6. The cimmeron might have been the best of the lot!

Exactly!      The article is pure rubbish.

The Cimarron was forced onto Cadillac with short notice as an emergency fix to the CAFE requirements.   It was never intended as a replacement for a standard model.    Typical of GM, by the time the Cimarron was improved and actually decent it was dropped. 

The Diesels and HT4100 did far more damage to the brand than the Cimarron.    It was due to those engine that drove loyal owners to Lincoln or the imports.     

No way was GM dropping Cadillac due to the Cimarron.  It was just the wrong car for the task.   The 2003 CTS proved a new smaller Cadillac could be a sales success.

V63

It’s impressive  Lincoln’s offerings at the time. The town car utilized a small FI 302 with an overdrive transmission. They were nice cars, I remember renting them as new models. Quality finish and trim overall.

TJ Hopland

Do we know the profitability of the Cadillac division at that time?   Even if their margins were similar to other divisions they would have been the least profitable division due to just due to sales numbers.  Their margin would have had to been close to 4x higher than a Chev to turn in the same profit.   

83 looks like Cadillac was around 300k cars.  Pontiac was similar numbers.   Buick and Olds were each closer to a million and Chev over a million for a total of 3.5 million.   Was Cadillac perhaps selling at a lower margin in hopes of keeping sales up?   If that was the case I could imagine what went on at the stockholders meetings.  I wonder how many stockholders were driving Cadillacs at the time?
StPaul/Mpls, MN USA

73 Eldo convert w/FiTech EFI
80 Eldo Diesel
90 CDV
And other assorted stuff I keep buying for some reason

Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621

I'd like to know the source of the statement regarding the considered elimination of the Cadillac Division being alleged.

And if such an action were on the table, I doubt the Cimarron would have figured into the decision one way or another.

A Cadillac Motorcar is a Possession for which there is no Acceptable Substitute

D.Yaros

I have to say, when I read it I thought it was rubbish.  My reason for posting was to elicit the thoughts of others and to spur discussion.
Dave Yaros
CLC #25195
55 Coupe de Ville
92 Allante
62 Olds  

You will find me on the web @:
http://GDYNets.atwebpages.com  -Dave's Den
http://graylady.atwebpages.com -'55 CDV site
http://www.freewebs.com/jeandaveyaros  -Saved 62 (Oldsmobile) Web Site
The home of Car Collector Chronicles.  A  monthly GDYNets newsletter focusing on classic car collecting.
http://www.scribd.com/D_Yaros/