Cadillac may offer a 4-cylinder car (again)

Is the BLS really a bad car, or just a car from a brand with little recognition (or image?) in Europe. I'd rather it be RWD, as the proposed future smaller-than-CTS car will supposedly be, but otherwise what I've seen of images and descriptions doesn't really sound bad. Maybe better as a Buick with the FWD, but otherwise..

I think a 4 cylinder Cadillac can be great, so long as they don't just rebadge something from one of the other GM houses. And it should continue the styling, content, and performance themes its bigger brother (CTS) has introduced.

4 cylinder is fine for Cadillac "if" the car is equal or better in quality and styling to CTS.
BLS is European platform, quality, handling and high level of features that are expected in premium-luxury small vehicle.
Cimarron was a Cavalier with a crest.

If it's just about fuel economy, Cadillac should offer a small diesel 6-cylinder, preferably I-6. Better fuel economy than an SI 4-banger, more refined, and Caddy buyers can afford it.

Who cares if it has an I4 or a V6? How many consumers actually know what the difference is, much less can tell the difference from driving it? Mercedes uses four-cylinders in their cars and they do just fine. People are whipping themselves into a frenzy over nothing. So long as they use a good four cylinder with a good platform, what does it matter? You ought to be more concerned with the Escalade, STS, and DTS dragging Cadillac down.

new car will be RWD on a platform that doesnt even exist yet. It has nothing to do with the BLS or Cimmaron. What is the Cimarron anyway? I keep hearing about it like it's a recent model. I was barely out of diapers when that car was for sale. It's old news. Time to move on.

It would be cool if Cadillac could get into the luxury small car segment. Shrink down the CTS, give it a hatch (not like the fugly stationwagen though) and I think you'd have a pretty cool concept.

I could see Cadillac offering a car under the current CTS but I really dont think the BLS is the car to base it off of. The car SHOULD be pure Cadillac not Saab based. Of course it would be smaller, lighter, sportier and more youthful than the CTS.

Why not take a note from BMW and make a car similar in exeuction to the 1 Series?

- Base "BTS" 275hp 2.0T EcoTech 4cyl with a 6AT and a 6MT.

- "BTS 3.6" with 304hp V6 6AT or 6MT.

- RWD chassis

- Sedan and coupe configurations

- Solid driving dynamics and a super refined drivetrain.

- Good material quality.

- Current Cadillac styling theme (CTS type execution).

- Keep the weight around the 33-3500lb range if possible.

- Offer the impressive infotainment and performance packages the CTS offers.

Im not sure if GM has a current RWD chassis that will support a car of this type or if they could somehow shrink the CTS platform to make it work but its a great idea to get younger buyers into the Cadillac fold. It would also expand Cadillacs model line.

The comparison is ridiculous. The Cimarron was bad because it was a rebadged Cavalier, not because it had 4 cylinders.

What HA4 mentioned is pretty much exactly what the "Alpha" platform cars will be. From what I hear it is supposed to be something like a cross between the Kappa and Zeta platforms.

So saying an Alpha platform Caddy is a "Neo-Cimarron" because it will offer 4 cylinder power is like saying that Toyota sports-hybrid concept is a "Neo-MR2" because they both were RWD.

The reason for mentioning the Cimarron is because (A) Cadillac did make it, so there is historical relevence in bringing up this "4-cylinder" Cadillac. (B) it was an awful car, and there are many of us around who still remember it. Finally (C), sweeping the Cimarron under the rug, won't make it or the comparison go away. If I didn't bring it up, someone else would. ...Oh wait—AutoObserver (see link) did just that!

I wasn't really a bad car, it was just a bad Cadillac.

I had a friend who bought one slightly used dirt cheap (great depreciation) with a 2.8 V6 and a manual trans. It didn't look or feel like a Caddy but as a loaded Cavalier it was pretty good(for it's day).

After all, it was the fastest, best handling, best mpg car Cadillac sold back then.

I can really see cadillac selling an "ATS" (Alpha Sports Sedan"! About the same size as a Mercedes Cclass with 3 engine choices.

2.8l v6 210hp 20/29mpg or 2.0T I4 22/32mpg
3.6l v6 300hp 17/25mpg
3.0l v6 225hp 26/40mpg(diesel)

Then we have a small sedan, hardtop convertible option, and possibly a hatch. Cadillac would have a real winner with this if it costs $26k for base sedan up to $39k for top of line convertible! Its still $5k less than a 328i sedan and $10k less than bmw 335i Convertible!

-Cj

A 4-cylinder Caddy will do fine. But I wonder about having a "cheap" Caddy. Entry-level Caddies have never done well. Look at the Catera and the meagre 95K sales it had over a 5 year span.

"A 4-cylinder Caddy will do fine. But I wonder about having a "cheap" Caddy. Entry-level Caddies have never done well. Look at the Catera and the meagre 95K sales it had over a 5 year span."

Estreka, product execution plays and will play a large roll here. The Catera as we all know wasnt really a Cadillac nor was it exciting or interesting.

If Cadillac can execute all their future products like they did with the current CTS then I dont see a problem. A car in this segment would give Cadillac the opportunity to cater to a younger audience which is a good thing as if they are satisfied they will eventually move up the scale while staying with the brand. Nothing like a good loyal customer base.