Re: New "What Ifs?"

Posted by Tim Cole On 2014/6/28 15:29:12

The point I make by only showing Cadillac production rather than Cadillac-LaSalle is to debunk the assertion that the 110 and 120 drove luxury sales away to Cadillac. The Cadillac figures don't bear that out. They are abysmal.

That dropping the LaSalle boosted Cadillac sales doesn't pan out either because the increase in sales far outstrips the LaSalle. Bolt for bolt the Cadillac seemed sturdier than the Packard. However, when new those Packard Super 8's were an absolute dream on the road. Although Hydramatic put Cadillac firmly in front of Packard in terms of engineering, for a luxury car should it mean that much? Who cares if the chauffer doesn't have to shift gears? What Hydramatic did achieve was to make the V-8 as smooth as the V-16.

Sometimes a product becomes a hit. In 1941 Cadillac became a star product. Those things happen sometimes and they are not always anticipated. Today pickup trucks are the profit center. I don't understand why. I was looking at some of the latest output coming from one of the plants and not a single truck was a work truck. People just decided they like pickup trucks. The same is true of Harley-Davidson. What rational explanation is there for that one?

What GM did right was keep putting money into the new Cadillac business. Of course today Cadillac is a worthless sinkhole.