Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Why is LvC so onesided?

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: n8bachelor

So where are all the Cadillac guys (and gals)? This site is heavily sided toward Lincoln. How come?

Looking at the posts I see over 21,000 threads in the Lincoln side and only about 1,400 threads on the Cadillac side.

I love my Lincoln but I know there are some great cars made by Cadillac! So where are all the Cadillac enthusiasts? If I had purchased a CTS instead of an LS I would still be here.

I have even considered making the trade.... I mean have you seen the 2008 CTS? And the CTS-V is going to be amazing!!

check this out.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/08/d...d-with-550-hp/

Posted by: ground_zero298

I think it's because cadillacs don't break.

Posted by: 02V8Sport

Quote:

Originally Posted by ground_zero298

I think it's because cadillacs don't break.

Posted by: Quik LS

keep with the simple truths:
- no one really would buy a caddy
- the two people that bought one really do not want anyone else to know
- most caddy owners love big soft comfy couches – therefore do not own a computer, and are hoping this ‘thing’ called the internet is a trend and will pass

Posted by: 02V8Sport

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

keep with the simple truths:
- no one really would buy a caddy
- the two people that bought one really do not want anyone else to know
- most caddy owners love big soft comfy couches – therefore do not own a computer, and are hoping this ‘thing’ called the internet is a trend and will pass

LOL!!! That is hilarious!!

Posted by: mespock

They just don't like to have as much fun with their caddys...

I guess maybe when you turn on your Lincoln the Lincoln repays the favor!! LOL...

Actually they are on the board but just not as active...

Posted by: Quik LS

oh - they are coming to post on this thread....

it just takes them some extra time to get off the big soft comfy couch and get to the keyboard.

give them some extra time - remember - they are slow.

Posted by: mespock

Or... Old.. LOL...

Posted by: Tricky-Dick

When you get old your "plumbing" usually goes bad!

But now those who own a Caddy can stay close to the "Throne" and be online at the same time so the number of Caddy Owners on the site should rise!

I gotta go to the bathroom! BRB

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by n8bachelor

So where are all the Cadillac guys (and gals)? This site is heavily sided toward Lincoln. How come?

Looking at the posts I see over 21,000 threads in the Lincoln side and only about 1,400 threads on the Cadillac side.

The name of the site says it all, Lincoln VS Cadillac. They all think that it is a site where the Lincoln Elitists only want to beat up on Cadillac owners. It has a confrontational name.

Posted by: n8bachelor

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

The name of the site says it all, Lincoln VS Cadillac. They all think that it is a site where the Lincoln Elitists only want to beat up on Cadillac owners. It has a confrontational name.

That is an excellent point.

I guess the cadillac guys would (if they ever made it to the internet) go here: http://www.cadillacforums.com

Posted by: pepperman

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

Or... Old.. LOL...

Rich said OLD.

Posted by: Dadillac

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

They just don't like to have as much fun with their caddys...
I guess maybe when you turn on your Lincoln the Lincoln repays the favor!! LOL...

Actually they are on the board but just not as active...

That isn't actually true. Those of us who do own Caddy's, have found out that we have absolutely "NO" aftermarket support. Add to the equation that Cadillac PCM's seem to be uncrackable. Basically we have one exhaust option (unless we get a custom job) and some appearance add ons. There is zippo in performance mods for the Northstar engine.

Don

Posted by: Quik LS

more similar to the LS than you can imagine...

Posted by: ground_zero298

Or it could be when you bye a cadillac with a V on the side it already runs a 13 sec quarter? When I drive by the licoln dealer it's nothing but lincolns on the lot, when I drive by the caddy dealer it's nothing but lincolns on thier lot.

Posted by: xarruda89x

well when i got my lincoln LS, i went to google, and searched Lincoln LS Forums, and i found this one.

Caddy are good cars, but Lincoln is just a better car

Posted by: ground_zero298

I've installed stereo systems on both brands and mutiple models. I can say without a doubt, cadillacs are built alot better then lincolns. I took apart my friends DTS, Escalade, and his new STS (he get a new one about once a year. It makes my car look like it was enginered in the 80's. Maybe google shows some other forums for caddy's?

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

when I drive by the caddy dealer it's nothing but lincolns on thier lot

can't blame the caddy dealers for switching to sell good looking cars.

Posted by: ground_zero298

Lmfao

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by xarruda89x

well when i got my lincoln LS, i went to google, and searched Lincoln LS Forums, and i found this one.

Caddy are good cars, but Lincoln is just a better car

Like I stated earlier, a lot of Lincoln owners are very elitist. Especially the LS owners. And they really have no reason to be that way. There are many cars out there, Luxury cars, that will smoke them off the show room floor. That do not have near the issues, and that look and drive as good or better than Lincoln LS. LS just stands for Luxury SH1#.

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

and his new STS (he get a new one about once a year. It makes my car look like it was enginered in the 80's

honestly - the LS was as class leading car when it came out - and won the 'car of the year' for it.

your's is a 2002 - meaning it has the design of the 2000 - 8years old. That is a lifetime of difference when comparing to new vechiles. I had the pleasure of working on a 2008 Navigator - very different quality (IMHO) than the last one I worked on (2001).

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

LS just stands for Luxury SH1#.

You know this how?

Posted by: ground_zero298

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

His escalade and dts were right around the year of my car, maybe lincoln did catch up with quality in the years after. Their was no comparison between the build quality of his sts and my conti.

As far as quality goes (GM vs Ford) I think you either get a good one or a bad one. It just depends what day it came off the line.

Posted by: xarruda89x

I think he should google it.

LOL

Posted by: ground_zero298

I googled it, it stands for Lick Shaft.

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

oh - they are coming to post on this thread....

it just takes them some extra time to get off the big soft comfy couch and get to the keyboard.

give them some extra time - remember - they are slow.

I agree, Caddillac owners are lazy, since we can go out and buy a low 13 second car for the price and time of making a supercharged LS.

I call what you Lincoln owners have, "The Fast and the Furious Syndrome" since no matter how much time and money and parts you put in your LS, it just won't be a Caddy!

You guys have fun with your FWD V6's and hoping and praying for a better engine called the TwinForce since the V8 Lincolns are a bygone era.

I'll sit at the Caddy dealership in awe of the Northstars and Vortech and Supercharged 5.2 and 4.6L's

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Actually in Linux it is the list command. In Lincoln speak it stands of List of SHIOT that went wrong with my over priced car that should never go wrong with and over priced car.

Posted by: ground_zero298

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

You guys have fun with your FWD V6's and hoping and praying for a better engine called the TwinForce.

Ummmm, i got the only front wheel drive on here, and it's a v8. And know ones trying to build a caddy, just a faster car.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

I agree, Caddillac owners are lazy, since we can go out and buy a low 13 second car for the price and time of making a supercharged LS.

I call what you Lincoln owners have, "The Fast and the Furious Syndrome" since no matter how much time and money and parts you put in your LS, it just won't be a Caddy!

You guys have fun with your FWD V6's and hoping and praying for a better engine called the TwinForce.

I'll sit at the Caddy dealership in awe of the Northstars and Vortech and Supercharged 5.2 and 4.6L's

And ohhhh so true.

Posted by: andrew99eldorado

I am always on cadillacowners.com. And like stated earlier in the thread the aftermarket for performance modifications sucks. I have a 99 eldorado and i cant even get an exhaust system in less i fab something up. I know they made one for the STS so i call on it and they said sorry we never made one for the eldorado.

Anyways here is my car, not exactly an old person cadillac.

Posted by: 02V8Sport

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrew99eldorado

Sharp Caddy!

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

I agree, Caddillac owners are lazy

see - there's one. Are you their Ambassador?

Your leader pick a great grill design - wonder where he got it from...

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

my over priced car

You sound very bitter.
Do you own a car newer than 1996?

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

see - there's one. Are you their Ambassador?

Your leader pick a great grill design - wonder where he got it from...

All I know Is my massive chrome mesh grille lets in plenty of air to cool my 5.7L and the intakes under the fogs lights also let in plenty of air to cool my massive Brembos.

Now did your LS come with those brake cooling intakes? Or did you have to make them? I forgot? Maybe I'm too lazy to look.

I really wish I had a new Lincoln grille design, I would love my Cadillac to look like the braces in the mouth of a 13 year old.

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

I forgot and I'm too lazy to look.

Correct / correct.

No worries - you own (or owned) an LS - so deep down you're ok.

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

Correct / correct.

No worries - you own (or owned) an LS - so deep down you're ok.

And I regretted every minute of it. It was an ok car, except for the lack of.....everything.

If only I had bought another Cadillac.

Posted by: Quik LS

that is a classic relapse, get your refund from rehab - the treatments aren't working....

it's good to put a little 'v' back in LvC.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

You sound very bitter.
Do you own a car newer than 1996?

I have a 2004 Dodge Ram. I am not bitter. I have owned a few newer cars.

Posted by: glanga

Attachment 31395

Couldn't resist.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

Attachment 31395

Couldn't resist.

Hope you don't mind if I use it a few times.

Posted by: mespock

Well I wish they'd make a RWD CTS or STS with 2 doors..

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

Well I wish they'd make a RWD CTS or STS with 2 doors..

They're going to. I think Joeychgo made that one of the headline articles, a 2 door CTS. And I'm pretty sure they are all moving to RWD or AWD

Posted by: slowmkviii

I am a Lincoln person but Lincoln is going the way of Cadillac in the 80’s and 90’s
FWD and crap. The only car they make at Lincoln is the Town car and It has the HP of the 80’s and an interior that still has a lack of center counsel and real bucket seats how about a v8 w/manual. you can get that from Lincoln have to get a beter job so I can keep upgrading the mark maby it will be as fast as a CTSV stock

Posted by: mespock

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

They're going to. I think Joeychgo made that one of the headline articles, a 2 door CTS. And I'm pretty sure they are all moving to RWD or AWD

Well if they make them RWD that's a move in the right direction... AWD don't really care... 2 doors would be just a interest... I like the idea of a coupe it's just my preference...

Posted by: shagdrum

Why is this forum so one sided? taste.

IMO, cadillacs haven't made a car as good looking as the Lincolns in since the 1980's. Not to say that cadillacs have a bad design (though the new "artsy" design is decidedly NOT luxurious in ANY way), but the Lincolns are just better looking cars.

Buying a car is an emotional decision, and looks are a big part of that. Cadillac has had decent designs, at best from the 1990's on, while Lincolns, while not abitious in design, have had reliably good looking cars. In fact, most of the GM cars of the 1990's through today have been rather mediocre designs, while Ford has had very successful designs (Mustangs, T-birds, Mark VIII, Marauder, etc...). GM's design department has let their ego get in the way; "we are going to design 'modern' cars and not go retro". Ford went retro, and it sells. People want retro. It is that simple. Why else did the Mustang succeed while the camero, firebird, and GTO have failed?

If GM brought back a GTO with modern tech and engineering that looked like the old Judge, they would sell through the roof. Instead the trend has been to bastardize great names (Impala, Malibu/Chevelle, GTO, etc...)

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrew99eldorado

I am always on cadillacowners.com. And like stated earlier in the thread the aftermarket for performance modifications sucks. I have a 99 eldorado and i cant even get an exhaust system in less i fab something up. I know they made one for the STS so i call on it and they said sorry we never made one for the eldorado.

Anyways here is my car, not exactly an old person cadillac.

That is a sharp lookin car. Love the wheels.

IMO, this is the best design cadillac did in the past 20 years.

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Why is this forum so one sided? taste.

You are kidding right? You are saying that on this website, Lincoln VS Cadillac, it is biased more towards Lincolns because of taste? Maybe you mean overall ownership, but I fail to see where taste comes in to play in what automotive forum you decide to join. I think the new Lincolns are some of the ugliest cars I've ever seen, inside and out, and I think the new Caddies while not the sharpest cars, are pretty damn sharp and definentely have Lincoln beat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Ford went retro, and it sells. People want retro. It is that simple. Why else did the Mustang succeed while the camero, firebird, and GTO have failed?

CoughThunderbirdCough.....

But if you'd like to get into Ford vs GM....Sorry but GM is smacking Ford around right now. GM is restructuring and rightly so while Ford is still left in turmoil.

If anything, Cadillac owners have more taste, which is why they don't come here in the first place.

Posted by: ground_zero298

50.00 for the first one to find glanga and put the fear of lincoln back into him or torch his caddy.

Posted by: Quik LS

....trying to resist......

it's like we lost one of the flock.
I blame myself.

no wait.
I blame his caddy.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Why is this forum so one sided? taste.

IMO, cadillacs haven't made a car as good looking as the Lincolns in since the 1980's. Not to say that cadillacs have a bad design (though the new "artsy" design is decidedly NOT luxurious in ANY way), but the Lincolns are just better looking cars.

Buying a car is an emotional decision, and looks are a big part of that. Cadillac has had decent designs, at best from the 1990's on, while Lincolns, while not abitious in design, have had reliably good looking cars. In fact, most of the GM cars of the 1990's through today have been rather mediocre designs, while Ford has had very successful designs (Mustangs, T-birds, Mark VIII, Marauder, etc...). GM's design department has let their ego get in the way; "we are going to design 'modern' cars and not go retro". Ford went retro, and it sells. People want retro. It is that simple. Why else did the Mustang succeed while the camero, firebird, and GTO have failed?

If GM brought back a GTO with modern tech and engineering that looked like the old Judge, they would sell through the roof. Instead the trend has been to bastardize great names (Impala, Malibu/Chevelle, GTO, etc...)

Ford only went retro because they saw that the Dodges were selling. Lincoln has always been lopsided with the exception of the Mark VIII. They never could get a car that had looks, performance, and handling. Maybe two of the three, but never all three. And we are talking about Lincoln here, not Ford. At least in the Mustang, they got all three. I grew up in Cadillacs, my grandfather would not buy anything else. And we always got better performance and more attention than the Lincolns.

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

I grew up in Cadillacs.

Now I understand your posts - damaged.

Posted by: glanga

My grandfather and uncle always had Towncars, from the Jack Nicklaus to the newer Cartier. Then my Grandfather bought an 00 Escalade (The "YukoTahoBurbAlade") Then my uncle bought an Escalade, My uncle is on his 3rd Escalade and grandfather now in an SRX V8.

The LS was a great car, I did love it but it caused too many problems. The V is an awesome car and has never let me down once, not even a flat tire with the Goodyear EMT's. The only thing ever wrong was a bad power program from the previous owner. The STS has 150,000mi and the worst problem it's ever had is it's ability to drink oil which is common.

I do like Lincolns a lot, but they really need to get their act together. It seems a lot of Lincoln owners are buying Caddys and Caddy owners buying Lincolns for the simple reason of FWD V6 or RWD V8. Sadly I think Cadillac is winning because Ford just doesn't have their act together right now. Both were going down the tubes but GM is restructuring and very rightly so. I think the new Cadillac designs are very sharp too and the new Lincoln designs just aren't. Thats a matter of personal preference and it's all my opinion but I think the MKZs interior is one of the worst I've ever seen and the CTS' is one of the nicest I've seen, same goes for the Escalade and Navigator. Also the fact that Caddy has the V series says a lot too, that they are gunning for the Germans while Lincoln is just trying to stay alive and keep its head above water even with Ford selling off some of it's brands. The LS' interior was simple and ergonomic with nice little bells and whistles but the fit and finish just didn't hack it for me either. I like American cars either way, but until Lincoln comes out with another RWD V8 that can even compare to the V series or even an STS V8, then I'd possibly consider, but until then I'm boycotting Ford. I'd even take a Tundra over an F150 right now which depresses even me. Sorry for the rant but that is why I feel the way I do. It's just my opinion but surely someone levelheaded can agree with me. I really think it has nothing to do with taste.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ground_zero298

50.00 for the first one to find glanga and put the fear of lincoln back into him or torch his caddy.

That might take a while for that to happen since you'd have to wait for Lincoln to come out with a car that can actually catch my V.

Posted by: Quik LS

Rant all you need to. Apparently, Caddy owners have a lot of issues with denial.

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

Rant all you need to. Apparently, Caddy owners have a lot of issues with denial.

Substitute the word "denial" with "reality"

There is no denying the very last sentence in my previous post.

Posted by: Quik LS

I'm already there.... no problem running past a V.

Here is why Caddy owners have to buy it already done - if they pick up a wrench this happens.....

http://uniquepeek.com/viewpage.php?page_id=1492

*warning* - the site this is hosted on has some 'non-family' friendly content surrounding the video

Posted by: ground_zero298

That gut said it all at the end of the video.

that cts thing.

Posted by: glanga

I'm not trying to do battle with you, this is an interesting conversation we are having, but according to your LLSOC site your top speed was 153? With a Quarter mile time of 13.9 at 109mph? The V's top speed is over 155mph, I believe 163 or 167, and the quarter time is around low to mid 13's given the driver at around 107 to maybe 110 again given the driver. I'm not saying I don't beleive you have, but I would like to see some evidence of this. You might be beating a V but your doing it and running the risk of blowing your engine through the hood of your car, while the V is just doing its normal routine. Also, have you dyno'ed it yet? I'm very interested in seeing what your car puts down.

And plenty of LVC'rs have tried to wrench on their cars with less than fantastic results. I've seen that video, the guy is an idiot. I think it's funny the title is "tuning gone wrong" when there was no tuning done anyway. You screw with your A/F mixture that much, then that's bound to happen. That happened to my LS and I didn't touch a thing to cause it. It blew so many coils that the unspent fuel destroyed the cats. So, in contrast, Cadillac owners might do that out of stupidity to their car, but what about when the car does it to itself i.e. a 2003 Lincoln LS? Of course you'll see many more CTS-Vs destroyed over the internet it's a great and popular platform to work from with the LS2 or LS6 engine as opposed to the LS. Of course out of the group that mods, there is a handful that do it wrong just like any other car, even the LS but to a lesser extent.

Posted by: glanga

And in response to your comment on the Cadillac grille being inspired by an Alien looking creature which I assume is to be Ambassador GLanga....here is what I beleive inspires the new Lincoln grille design....

Attachment 31403

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

I'm not trying to do battle with you, this is an interesting conversation we are having, but according to your LLSOC site your top speed was 153? With a Quarter mile time of 13.9 at 109mph? The V's top speed is over 155mph, I believe 163 or 167, and the quarter time is around low to mid 13's given the driver at around 107 to maybe 110 again given the driver. Also, have you dyno'ed it yet? I'm very interested in seeing what your car puts down.

Those numbers are from 4yrs ago - before we could tune - no SCT yet and 100shot of NOS.

I posted the new numbers on the SC - 352.12rwhp/371.73lbs/ft (the 1/4 time is stout but a secret for now...)

Posted by: glanga

Impressive....very. I have an idea of how to make a grand showing of your 1/4 time. Race a CTS-V and post the video. Or if you feel like waiting, race the 09 CTS-V then it will be S/C against S/C! Just don't blow your engine before then :-)

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

You are kidding right? You are saying that on this website, Lincoln VS Cadillac, it is biased more towards Lincolns because of taste?Maybe you mean overall ownership...

I was talking about overall ownership; specfically by people with a passion for cars that like american luxury; namely the type of people who would join this car forum

Quote:

but I fail to see where taste comes in to play in what automotive forum you decide to join.

really? People who are passionate about american luxury don't care about a tasteful design? I think you know better...

Quote:

I think the new Lincolns are some of the ugliest cars I've ever seen, inside and out, and I think the new Caddies while not the sharpest cars, are pretty damn sharp and definentely have Lincoln beat.

Opinion on design is subject. But many would agree that the new "artsy" cadillac design them isn't very "luxurious".

Also, you can't argue that retro sells; that is what americans want. That is why the mustang is so successful and the camaro, firebird and GTO have all failed miserably.

Quote:

CoughThunderbirdCough.....

Yeah, what about it?

Quote:

But if you'd like to get into Ford vs GM....Sorry but GM is smacking Ford around right now. GM is restructuring and rightly so while Ford is still left in turmoil.

And I was talking about car design, not sales. Don't put words in my mouth, or read beyond what has been said. There are many other factors that go into sales, not the least of which is management (or a lack thereof on Ford's part), and advertising (GM has capitalized on the whole enviro-friendly craze pretty well there).

Quote:

If anything, Cadillac owners have more taste, which is why they don't come here in the first place.

You have yet to prove this. Just an absurd claim

Also, you must consider the fact that, for someone passionate about cars, who likes american luxury, modifying the car is probably a priority. Lincoln cars have been much more mod friendly, as well as being rear wheel drive, while cadillac was no mod-friendly and all front wheel drive. Ironic that the whole caddy FWD/Lincoln RWD is switching now.

in addition, Lincoln is named after one of the two greatest presidents of all time. caddy isn't.

Posted by: Quik LS

so your 04 CTS-V has a 400hp 5.7L LS6 - and about 3800lbs - right? That would be about 328rwhp. 0-60 in 5sec, 1/4 in 13.3

my 01 LS has 352rwhp and about 3800lbs.

My gearing, auto-trans and non-LSD makes it a handfull on a launch - but I am better than those numbers for the V.

Running against a 09 CTS-V - no joy there - but not many cars can stand up 8yrs later.

Posted by: misery

Just buy a BMW.

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

really? People who are passionate about american luxury don't care about a tasteful design? I think you know better...

What does tasteful design have to do with what forum people join? You join a forum because of the car you drive, you don't decide what car you get based on the forum you want to join.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Opinion on design is subject. But many would agree that the new "artsy" cadillac design them isn't very "luxurious".

Sorry but I think Lincoln and Cadillac sales numbers would prove you wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Also, you can't argue that retro sells; that is what americans want. That is why the mustang is so successful and the camaro, firebird and GTO have all failed miserably.

I can argue that easily. One half of the classic retro style Ford itself, not Lincoln, but Ford (since your naming Ford brand cars, not Lincolns) failed more miserably than the Camaro, Firebird, and GTO....the Thunderbird. And I hardly think 35 years of Camaros and Firebirds is failing miserably. The GTO was a joke that I'll give you, and that's all I'll give you. And I'm pretty sure the Corvette has been around much longer than the Mustang and hasn't needed to revert to retro styling. Sorry but the only the car that has had a touch of "retro" styling by Ford/Lincoln and sold better than a Chevy/Cadillac is the Mustang, and thats the only one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Well people must like Cadillacs designs. I mean, would you buy an ugly car just because that company has good management and advertising? Again, sales numbers clearly prove that point

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

You have yet to prove this. Just an absurd claim

I joined this site mostly for the LS, to see the underground and aftermarket support for it. Not for the Cadillac.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Also, you must consider the fact that, for someone passionate about cars, who likes american luxury, modifying the car is probably a priority. Lincoln cars have been much more mod friendly, as well as being rear wheel drive, while cadillac was no mod-friendly and all front wheel drive. Ironic that the whole caddy FWD/Lincoln RWD is switching now.

Keyword...was. Yes it is ironic that a company with a fan base for it's RWD platform is suddenly switching when it's obviously going to lose them customers. And I don't get why they would do it. That's a clear sign they need someone with half a brain to get their butts in gear. We can disagree all we want on styling. But can you honestly say if you had $40,000 you'd go buy an 08' FWD 263HP MKZ over an 08' 305hp RWD CTS? I mean since your so into RWD cars?

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

in addition, Lincoln is named after one of the two greatest presidents of all time. caddy isn't.

Ok, then I'll go start a car company called God. Then would you buy my brand of car because it has a powerful, invoking name? Cadillac was named after the man who founded Detroit where our beloved Lincolns and Cadillacs are from....or used to be.

Posted by: glanga

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quik LS

so your 04 CTS-V has a 400hp 5.7L LS6 - and about 3800lbs - right? That would be about 328rwhp. 0-60 in 5sec, 1/4 in 13.3

my 01 LS has 352rwhp and about 3800lbs.

My gearing, auto-trans and non-LSD makes it a handfull on a launch - but I am better than those numbers for the V.

Running against a 09 CTS-V - no joy there - but not many cars can stand up 8yrs later.

So your running over 400hp on that car? And who says mine isn't modded a tad? And I've heard of stock Vs getting around 340-350 down to the rear wheels. What tires do you run?

Posted by: ground_zero298

I like to see glanga and roadboss run em'

Posted by: LI LSC 98

In my opinion, since Lincoln killed the LS I think they have fell off in terms of the sedans they are building. I can't think of a Lincoln right now that can compare to the 2008 CTS in terms of styling, performance, and luxury. I feel since the late 90's the interior styling and luxury in Lincolns have declined. You cant even compare the interior of a 97/98 Mark VIII to the new MKZ. The interior in the MKZ seems too futuristic and just looks weird. And I am a Lincoln guy, I'm not knocking Lincoln. I just feel that Cadillac makes a more appealing vehicle in the CTS, and If I had the money (im in college) I would definitely buy the 2008 CTS over the MKZ any day. The MKZ to me just looks like a glorified new Taurus. I even prefer the interior of a 2000 Navi over the newer Navi's...

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

You join a forum because of the car you drive, you don't decide what car you get based on the forum you want to join.

Your logic is extremely flawed. My sister owns a 2004 Saturn Ion Red Line (fast car). She isn't on any forum. My dad owns a Ford Explorer and he isn't on any forum. They aren't that interested in cars. Just because you own a car doesn't mean you join a forum dedicated to that car. There is a niche of people who are passionate about cars that join these type of forums. In the case of this forum, that niche is more specific, namely american luxury.

You are making an absurdly broad claim here.

I also never suggested that you choose a car based on a forum you want to join. You are twisting my words there.

Quote:

Sorry but I think Lincoln and Cadillac sales numbers would prove you wrong.

And you would be wrong. Draw the connections. How is it the

Quote:

design

that is causing the difference in sales number? To prove your point you have to prove that the design is the only factor in the saies difference, something that is impossible to do.

Quote:

One half of the classic retro style Ford itself, not Lincoln, but Ford (since your naming Ford brand cars, not Lincolns) failed more miserably than the Camaro, Firebird, and GTO....the Thunderbird.

Tryin to make sense of that sentence. You are saying that the 2002-2005 T-bird failed and that proves that retro doesn't sell. Correct?

The '02-'05 T-bird was named 2002 MotorTrend "car of the year", so the critics loved it. The car was selling great, at first. Well above MSRP (kinda like the GT500 has been selling). The $40,000 price tag was consider rather steep, for the time though. Many, including Forbes magazine writer Jerry Flint attributed significant blame of the latest generation Thunderbird's demise to a lack of proper sales and marketing.

"Ford dealers have been successful selling 35,000-45,000 USD trucks but have little experience selling automobiles in the near-luxury price range. If there was a marketing effort by Ford Motor, I wasn't aware of it. Naturally, sales didn't meet expectations."

The T-bird was also ment as a limited production model. Ford Division president Steve Lyons:

We promised all along that this Thunderbird would have a limited production run, and we're being true to our word.

So you are trying to say that because an overpriced car lacking sales and marketing support with a limited production run didn't sell like Camaros, Firebirds and GTO's it proves retro is a failure? Can you say "comparing apples to oranges"? You prove nothing here.

Also consider that the Camaro, Firebird and GTO were sold to a different market then the '02-'05 T-bird.

Really the only "apples to apples" comparison is the Mustang to the Camaro/Firebird or GTO. In fact the Mustang vs. Camaro/Firebird is probably the best example of retro selling better the GM" new age" arrogance. The Camaro/Firebird performed better in about every measure then the Mustang. It was a much more modern chassis, and was arguably much more reliable. Really, all the mustang had going for it was that it looked like a mustang. You put a '60's mustang next to a '94-'04 mustang beside each other and you could see that they were the same care (even without the badging). Do the same with a Camaro or Firebird, and they look like two completely different cars. no heritage there.

Quote:

And I hardly think 35 years of Camaros and Firebirds is failing miserably.

We are talking about design here and design philosophies. The focus in on the more recent generations. This point is irrelevant to this discussion.

Quote:

And I'm pretty sure the Corvette has been around much longer than the Mustang and hasn't needed to revert to retro styling.

The corvette is kinda the "bastard child" of GM design, IMO (and that is a good thing). That car has always had a sweet design. But even it has retro elements. It is still based on the stingray design. Especially the third gen corvette on (second stingray design).

Quote:

Sorry but the only the car that has had a touch of "retro" styling by Ford/Lincoln and sold better than a Chevy/Cadillac is the Mustang, and thats the only one.

Do you just hate Ford, or not wanna conceed that retro sells? Besides the Mustang, we have the Chrysler PT cruiser and 300m (and to a lesser degree, the Charger).

People who read the market far better then you or I also agree that retro sells. Why else would the new Challenger look practically like the old ones? Even GM has gotten on the bandwagon; the new Camaro is basically an evolved 1st gen camaro.

Basically, when ever retro is brought to the market correctly (without other signifigant problems), it succeeds.

Quote:

Well people must like Cadillacs designs. I mean, would you buy an ugly car just because that company has good management and advertising? Again, sales numbers clearly prove that point

Sales numbers don't prove anything of the sort. You are making a huge generalization there. It is logical to conclude that some like the design (the new design trend at Cadillac is basically a love it or hate it design, IMO), but not everyone who buys one. The average buyer is going to take the car as a whole, not just one element.

If I only viewed cars as a means from point "A" to point "B", I would look at things like gas mileage, reliability, warranty, comfort, resale value, etc...

Quote:

can you honestly say if you had $40,000 you'd go buy an 08' FWD 263HP MKZ over an 08' 305hp RWD CTS? I mean since your so into RWD cars?

Depends what I want the car for. If I had $40,000 to throw around for a daily driver, I might consider the Lincoln. But if I was looking to buy an american luxury car for the same reasons I bought my Mark VIII, I would look at the CTS-V, despite it's styling. Though I might also look at a town car; RWD, great ride, and a decent aftermarket for the tech in the car, as well as the room to work on it. I love big american cars. 1st car was an '85 Grand Marquis, then a '92 Town Car, then my Mark VIII. My dream car would still be the '03-'04 Marauder, sue me.

Posted by: Joeychgo

Quote:

Originally Posted by n8bachelor

I guess the cadillac guys would (if they ever made it to the internet) go here: http://www.cadillacforums.com

This is the real reason. CF has been around alot longer then we have. People go there and tend to never get involved here. Its one of the things I have never been able to overcome.

Posted by: 93' Blue on blue

''Buying a car is an emotional decision and looks are a big part of that''

''The average buyer is going to take the car as a whole, not just one element''

So, do looks matter or not with regard to sales? I think they do.

Your point A to point B statement is moot here, as we are discussing Lincolns Vs Cadillacs. Do luxury car buyers look for all those practical things when purchasing? Maybe to a minor extent, although i would tend to think that STYLE would be a big part of a luxury buyer's decision. Lets face it, if the CTS looked like a turd, people wouldn't buy it.

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by 93' Blue on blue

Lets face it, if the CTS looked like a turd, people wouldn't buy it.

I'm not so sure of that....

And did you just call Cadillac owners - 'turd lovers'?

thant was a pretty low blow.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

That might take a while for that to happen since you'd have to wait for Lincoln to come out with a car that can actually catch my V.

Lincoln proved with the Mark VIII that they could do it. After that it has been all down hill. The newer Lincolns look like they dusted off the old Fairmont drawings, filed the corners and said here, this is the best we got. I started out as a Chrysler person. Coronet 440, Duster, Road Runner. Went to GM, Trans AM, 442, Skylark GS, Then to Ford, Mustang, Capri, Mark VIII. I have even done a stint with BMW. But I have to say, it is time to go home. Back to Chrysler. I have my Ram now, and I am waiting for the Charger RT to come into it's own or for a 300 that really catches my eye, but it will not be a GM or a Ford. And the Mark VIII is going to a member here on LVC. Trading for a Dakota.

Posted by: Quik LS

We were making a point right up to

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Back to Chrysler.

then it all just doesn't make any bit of sense now....

Posted by: glanga

Here you go Shagdrum, since you directly said I was wrong about the sales numbers.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/03/by-the-numbers-2007/

Cadillac dropped 5.7% but somehow still manage to sell twice as many cars as Lincoln. So I guess only 5.7% had some reason to leave Cadillac, maybe the styling?? Like you said who knows...there is no way to link them...but fact of the matter is, Cadillac sells twice as many cars and I doubt it's solely because of good management and advertising. (Actually it could be advertising since Lincoln did that gay commercial with the mom pulling surfboards out of the egg shaped monstrousity of a car with her kids). Hey your "retro" might sell, but not nearly as well as new age styling, which is my point. People obviously want more new age than old and the only exception to that being the Corvette and Mustang. Ford/Lincoln designs seem to be living in the past, as well as their guys in upper management which is unfortunate. I don't agree with a lot of what you said, so we can agree to disagree then I guess. I do like the cars you named in your last paragraph, but....Ford with their heads up their asses, stopped production on all of those, right? Maybe I'm wrong I'm trying to remember.

Ford as a whole dropped 12% GM as a whole dropped 6.5% but still sold 1million more cars...even more than Toyota which surprised me.

To 93BlueonBlue, Ill give you that, I would never ever buy a Gen 1 CTS. The CTS-V had plenty of redeeming features...The wheels, grilles, exhaust, dash guages, suede inserts. The Gen 1 CTS center stack looks like a desktop computer but having a navigation screen right there was its reedeming feature. Nonetheless they still sold very well. And the Gen 2 is an extremely different and nice car.

I can't stick up for Chrysler at all right now. Benz bastardized the brand, thank god they bought themselves out and are hopefully restructuring. I just picked up an 00' Wrangler and the only reason I ever considered a Chrysler product was because Wranglers are tried and true and the engine isn't made by Chrysler. They do have sharp cars, but in all honesty, they are some of the biggest pieces of American

right now....Unfortunately

Posted by: bufordtpisser

You can't make sense out of any thread that is based solely on the opinions of the person making the post. We all have our likes and dislikes. We can make sales and or performance numbers say anything that we want them to because we all interpret them in our own way. What I am saying is that we will never agree on which Marque is the best. That is why sites like this one are in existence. So that a little bit of old fashioned rivalry between Ford and GM can be used to ignite our passions about what we drive so that in at least our own minds we can justify the exorbitant amounts that we spend to purchase and modify our cars. We even have disagreement within our own ranks. There are those that just love slammed cars, and others that say there should be an 11th commandment that says "Though shall not drag frame in a Lincoln". This is what keep our aftermarket industry alive and kicking.

Quik, I just read a study by SEMA that showed results stating that the most widely modified vehicles based on aftermarket products was the Dodge Ram pickup. 67% of these pickup owners had purchased upgrades to modify their trucks. Even Lincoln was on the list, but it was way down. Most Luxury car buyers do not buy their vehicles to extensively modify like you did. You are the exception, not the rule. And there is some speculation that you setup will not maintain it's longevity if pushed. The CTS on the other hand can and will do your performance levels day in and day out without as much as a hiccup. There are many other platforms that lend themselves to performance at levels much higher than the LS at costs much lower. Your heated and cooled seats only allow you to say that your ass was cool while you were getting it handed to you by an Acura. But that is OK, because it is what you like. I love this rivalry. I wish more caddy guys would come on here and show what their rides can do. I know that your LS would smoke my Ram in the quarter mile. Hands down. But lets put some dirt on that track and I will hand you your azz. I love all performance cars. Ford, GM, Ricers, Dodge, Euros. There is not one really clear winner that sticks up out of the bunch as a be all do all car.

Posted by: mespock

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Most Luxury car buyers do not buy their vehicles to extensively modify like you did. You are the exception, not the rule.

This is so true... Most people who buy a $40,000+ car are not looking to put a wrench to it... Most are afraid or have no clue.. So why make a car that you can modify when more people who buy it will only own it until it's 3 years old if that. Then go buy another one.

They don't make cars for those of us who wait 10 years to buy a $40,000+ car for $5,000 then want to play with it to make it a real car or make it special to ones self...(This said by an old rookie gear head want to be LOL).

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

The CTS on the other hand can and will do your performance levels day in and day out without as much as a hiccup.

I would like to see that... and like to see as I stated before these cars in a 2d RWD. Give this old fart a classy go cart... I know they make them for the Family Guy who needs the extra doors for the kids when he's not at work.

If you don't like crawling into my back seat don't ride with me...

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

I love this rivalry. I wish more caddy guys would come on here and show what their rides can do.

Exaclty L v C... Friendly fun trash talk without the bashing of the kid sites.. Like on F v C or C v F ei...

I'd love for the Caddy owners to come to meets... I'd love to see up close what they have done whether it's engine modified or just bling..bling..

Would also like to see the LS guys come to the meets.. but I guess they are too busy with their wives and kids to take the family car to a meet LOL..

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

Would also like to see the LS guys come to the meets.. but I guess they are too busy with their wives and kids to take the family car to a meet LOL..

Yes he did. He called you LS guys old. And it was funny.

Posted by: mespock

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Yes he did. He called you LS guys old. And it was funny.

LOL

Just want to keep the flame burning..

And maybe get one of these guys to come to a Meet to punch me in the face. LOL.. Personally I think they are embarrassed to so up.. and Jason doesn't count.. 02LSE96LSC...etc... as he owns a Mark VIII, Mark VII, TC and 100's of other cars... LOL..

Oh I forgot to call the Caddy Guys old too.... Driving that Old Grandpa's car LOL...

Do we love to hear that...

Oh Dang I forgot you might think I'm old LOL...

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

LOL

Just want to keep the flame burning..

And maybe get one of these guys to come to a Meet to punch me in the face. LOL.. Personally I think they are embarrassed to so up..

And if the Geritol konks out half way there or if they need to stop to change depends, they will not have enough strength to throw the punch. You are very safe.

Posted by: Quik LS

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Quik, I just read a study by SEMA that showed results stating that the most widely modified vehicles based on aftermarket products was the Dodge Ram pickup. 67% of these pickup owners had purchased upgrades to modify their trucks.

right - but a a bail of hay and a hail dent in the hood should really not count as 'modifications'

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

I love this rivalry. I wish more caddy guys would come on here and show what their rides can do.

True that.

wait - maybe they CAN'T.

Posted by: xarruda89x

Quote:

Originally Posted by bufordtpisser

Yes he did. He called you LS guys old. And it was funny.

lmfao, all caddy drivers are 60 and up, i never see a young person driving one, yet again, everyone i see driving an LS is young.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

Here you go Shagdrum, since you directly said I was wrong about the sales numbers.

When did I say that?
I said your interpretation of those numbers is irrational, and you still haven't proven me wrong.

Quote:

Cadillac dropped 5.7% but somehow still manage to sell twice as many cars as Lincoln. So I guess only 5.7% had some reason to leave Cadillac, maybe the styling??

There are many factors, possibly styling, but not by itself. You still haven't made your point.

Quote:

Like you said who knows...there is no way to link them...but fact of the matter is, Cadillac sells twice as many cars and I doubt it's solely because of good management and advertising.

You ignored the other factors i mentions, reliability and quality, gas mileage, warrenty, comfort...

To prove that retro doesn't sell as much as new age you have to be able to isolate that variable away from all the others I have mentions. Between the two cars being compared. Very hard to do (and you haven't even tried).

About the only example of that is the last gen camaro/firebird vs. the 94-04 Mustang. Both were designed for the same market, had the same basic layout, too (front engine, RWD, 2-door). In most every aspect, the Camaro was arguably the better car (engine power, reliablity, etc...). The biggest difference was the design philosophy. The Mustang succeeded while the Camaro/Firebird failed.

Quote:

Hey your "retro" might sell, but not nearly as well as new age styling, which is my point.

Which you haven't made. A simple claim mixed with stubornly ignoring opposing claims (and the evidence to back them up) doesn't prove your point.

You can't isolate new age vs. retro in a positive light. all you have done is compare apples to oranges.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by 93' Blue on blue

''Buying a car is an emotional decision and looks are a big part of that''

''The average buyer is going to take the car as a whole, not just one element''

So, do looks matter or not with regard to sales? I think they do.

Nothing inconsistent there (as you are trying to imply)Looks do play a big part, at least on the emotional side. People still try inject rationality into the decision, looking at reliablilty, gas mileage, warranty, comfort, safty and many other issues. For the more passionate car owner (as are the people on this forum) the emotion plays a much larger part then for the person who just needs transportation.

Quote:

Your point A to point B statement is moot here, as we are discussing Lincolns Vs Cadillacs

.

Not when discussing the market as a whole, as the discussion had led to.

Quote:

Do luxury car buyers look for all those practical things when purchasing?

Maybe not the every day price figures (gas, cost of matinence, etc.) but they still look at many other practical figures (safety, reliability, comfort, etc.)

Quote:

Lets face it, if the CTS looked like a turd, people wouldn't buy it.

Not true. If the car was damn fun to drive (as is the CTS-V) looks take a back seat. Also, it depends on the image the person buying the car wants the car to project about them. Maybe if is smelled like a turd...

The newer cadillacs (including the CTS) can come across as "new" and "hip", especially the styling. To me, the styling comes across as superfluous, and lacking in substance. It screams "I'm trying too hard to be young and hip". No subtlty in the design. Lincolns still have that subtlty,IMO, as well as still having a "classic" and "classy" look that the cadillac's lack. Of course, this is all a matter of interpretation.

Posted by: 93' Blue on blue

Would it not be fair to say that one of the reasons why the Mustang was so successful was because it was the first of its type? i.e. the first pony car? Then, GM, seeing the success of the Ford, jumped on the 'band wagon' so to speak. Also, wasn't the Mustang aimed primarily at women? whereas the Camaro, and then the Firebird were aimed more at young men wanting something with a little more performance?

Posted by: glanga

Shagdrum, you originally said people join Lincoln vs Cadillac because of "taste" That somehow Lincoln owners have more taste. Then you said "many would agree that the new artsy design Caddys are sporting isn't very luxorious." My point is that the sales numbers prove you wrong. Sure reliability, warranty, and so on play a factor, but would you buy a car that literally looks like a pile of dog

just because its reliable and has a good warranty? I doubt it, so people obviously do like the design of the new Cadillacs over Lincolns. That is not a broad statement at all because as I've seen, a lot of people do buy a car just for the looks so Cadillac must be doing something right. And yes, you did directly say I was wrong about sales numbers.... I said "Sorry but I think Lincoln and Cadillac sales numbers would prove you wrong." then you replied with... "And you would be wrong. Draw the connections."

And yeah you were right when you said "If I only viewed cars as a means from point "A" to point "B", I would look at things like gas mileage, reliability, warranty, comfort, resale value, etc..."

But...it's too bad people don't always look at all those things you mentioned, sometimes none of them. Most look at how a car looks or how they look in the car.

You can't isolate something anymore than I can. All I'm saying is, Cadillac is far outselling Lincoln, and one of the reasons why, one of the main reasons in my opinion is because of Cadillacs new age styling and RWD platform. Reliability, warranty, all that other stuff is a side factor people think about when signing on the dotted line to buy the car. Maybe you and I think about them more, but unfortunately most don't.

Sorry but comparing Lincolns retro styling to Cadillacs new age styling is not comparing apples to oranges. Also, please back up your claim that retro outsells new age since, yes, I have proved my point with those sales figures. All those people might not buy because of styling, but, like I said it's a huge factor.

Posted by: 93' Blue on blue

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

The newer cadillacs (including the CTS) can come across as "new" and "hip", especially the styling. To me, the styling comes across as superfluous, and lacking in substance. It screams "I'm trying too hard to be young and hip". No subtlty in the design. Lincolns still have that subtlty,IMO, as well as still having a "classic" and "classy" look that the cadillac's lack. Of course, this is all a matter of interpretation.

Of course, styling is a very subjective matter. You say that Lincolns still have subtlety. So, is the Mark LT subtle then? What about the MKR concept? Having looked at the interior of a new MKZ, i think it looks very contrived. When i think classy styling, i think Jag XJ or Aston Martin DBS, not Lincoln. Old Lincolns, yes, but the modern ones? With the exception of the Town Car, i would have to say no.

Posted by: glanga

Cadillacs say Im trying to hard to be hip and young and Lincolns say our management is too stupid to get with the times so we are just going to appeal to a dying crowd of baby boomers until we're run into the ground.

Cadillacs might be trying to hard to look hip and young but putting a grille on the Navi and MKZ that looks like it was designed by an orthodontist doesn't say much either and an interior adorned with some pretty cheap wood and plastic and a few old looking guages. The newer Lincolns interior looks like they You say Cadillacs lack that....I say thank god they do. The only smart move Ford has made in the past few years was renaming the Five Hundred to the Taurus

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

My point is that the sales numbers prove you wrong.

All sales numbers prove is that one company is selling more cars then another company. Doesn't say anything as to why, which you are arguing.

Quote:

...would you buy a car that literally looks like a pile of dog

just because its reliable and has a good warranty? I doubt it, so people obviously do like the design of the new Cadillacs over Lincolns.

Some would, and to phrase the argument as you did (would someone buy a car that looks like dog crap) is to try an mischaracterize the issue as all or nothing, which is illogical. That is the only way you can claim that because a company sells more cars, the design is better.

It is basically to say that if a company sells more cars then its cars are superior in every way to the competition. A claim that is highly illogical and a gross exageration.

Quote:

That is not a broad statement at all because as I've seen, a lot of people do buy a car just for the looks so Cadillac must be doing something right

.

Yes, but you still need to prove that "something" is design. To bring it back to the original topic, you then need to prove that the niche market that subscribes to this forum also only buys cars on looks and that they buy cadillacs more then lincolns.

I doubt that people bought the cars only because of looks (as you imply). If they did that, with that large of a purchase, then they are fools. The looks may have been the deciding factor, the reason they chose the caddy over another vehicle. But for every person you can find who likes the caddy designs, i can find one who hates it. This proves nothing. The Caddy designs are really a loveit or hate it design.

You would need to show that the vast majority of caddy buyers purchase the car soley based on looks. You can't, so the sales numbers say nothing about the design, except that it is adequete. Nothing more.

Quote:

And yes, you did directly say I was wrong about sales numbers.... I said "Sorry but I think Lincoln and Cadillac sales numbers would prove you wrong." then you replied with... "And you would be wrong. Draw the connections."

Then you misunderstood me (maybe I should have been more specific, sorry). I wasn't arguing the sales numbers, I was stating your claim that they "prove me wrong" was false.

Quote:

But...it's too bad people don't always look at all those things you mentioned, sometimes none of them. Most look at how a car looks or how they look in the car.

People always look at some combination of those factors. They never look at one single element, as you state. I take it you are a "V" owner. If the car had a 150hp four cylinder engine and was unreliable and overpriced, but had the exact same sheet metal and exterior styling, you would still have bought it?

Quote:

You can't isolate something anymore than I can.

Actually, the mustang v. camaro thing does isolate that rather well. It is rare, but there are some instances where you can isolate to a reasonable extent.

Quote:

All I'm saying is, Cadillac is far outselling Lincoln

That is unquestionable...

Quote:

and one of the reasons why, one of the main reasons in my opinion is because of Cadillacs new age styling and RWD platform.

Yes, but the market has shown (as well as the experts who read the market) that retro sells, and that is what people want. While lincoln for the most part, hasn't had out and out retro designs, that have included many retro cues (less as of late). Back in the hay-day of the american automobile (1950's through the mid- '70's) Cadillac had some of the most beautiful designs and some iconic characteristics in the look of their automobiles. They have thrown all that out for the new age design theme. People like the old cars, why not capitalize on that in the design?

Quote:

Reliability, warranty, all that other stuff is a side factor people think about when signing on the dotted line to buy the car. Maybe you and I think about them more, but unfortunately most don't.

I really don't think you can make that broad of a claim. Everyone has different priorities when purchasing an automobile. Certian niches in the market prioritize some factors over others (that is what makes them a "niche"), but taken as a whole, that is an overly broad claim.

Quote:

Sorry but comparing Lincolns retro styling to Cadillacs new age styling is not comparing apples to oranges.

It isn't apples to apples, but they have traditionally competed for the same niche market; middle age to senior citizen buyers. Cadillac has expanded there market, in part because of the "new age" styling given Cadillac a "younger and hipper" appeal, But I think they have done so at the expense of losing some of the older market.

Quote:

Also, please back up your claim that retro outsells new age

I have, a number of times. You just don't wanna accept it. My points on that still stand as, at best, you have provided examples that are irrelevant to the issue, at worst, you have been comparing apples to oranges.

Quote:

I have proved my point with those sales figures.

A claim that you have proven your point doesn't mean you have. Your argument is a gross exageration. Since Cadillac is more successful with sales then their car is superior in every way to the competition. That is like saying that since a few black men are criminals, all black men are criminals. Not at all logical, but that is the type of argument you are using. Both arguements are based, in large part, on bias (in different ways).

Your argument is based on two logical fallacies; affirming the consequent, and Appeal to probability.

Affirming the consequent ("P"=Cadillacs have a superior design to Lincolns; "Q"=Cadillacs sell more then Lincolns):

If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

Appeal to Probablity ("P"=Cadillacs sell better then Lincolns because they have a better design):

Possibly P.
Therefore, P

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by 93' Blue on blue

Of course, styling is a very subjective matter. You say that Lincolns still have subtlety. So, is the Mark LT subtle then?

I was mainly talking about cars. The Mark LT is just a rebadged, blinged up F-150, and it looks like it. Still, the F-150 and Mark LT are more classy and subtle then the Caddy trucks, IMO. those escalade grills are too much.

Quote:

What about the MKR concept? Having looked at the interior of a new MKZ, i think it looks very contrived.

When I am talking about styling, I am refering to the exterior look of the car, body lines etc...

Cadillacs have sharp lines and harsh, agressive angles, and that is about it, IMO. Lincoln has more subtle curves and body angles. Even if you don't like the designs of linocln, it still is a luxurious look (maybe a bad luxurious look, but still luxurious).

Quote:

When i think classy styling, i think Jag XJ or Aston Martin DBS, not Lincoln. Old Lincolns, yes, but the modern ones? With the exception of the Town Car, i would have to say no

I was mainly talking between Lincoln and Cadillac

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by glanga

Cadillacs say Im trying to hard to be hip and young and Lincolns say our management is too stupid to get with the times so we are just going to appeal to a dying crowd of baby boomers until we're run into the ground.

Was there any substance there?? we get it, you don't like Lincoln's.

Posted by: glanga

Alright I'm done, I'm not arguing this anymore because we obviously don't see each other's points. You say you've provided claims that retro outsells new age styling....maybe I should've been more specific and not strayed because I was specifically talking about Lincolns and Cadillacs since this is Lincoln Vs Cadillac. A good family freind of ours owns both a Lincoln dealership and just bought a Cadillac dealership, so I will try and get his unbiased (hopefully) take on this. I'm not getting into logic and fallacies over who buys what car and for why. I'll leave that to the execs. But I really do think Cadillac is far outselling Lincoln right now due to styling, whether you think it's bad styling or not.

Posted by: ground_zero298

Maybe it's one sided because you guys keep runnin the cadillac owners off. This site should be called LSvsMarkVIII.com

Posted by: pepperman

Quote:

Originally Posted by ground_zero298

Maybe it's one sided because you guys keep runnin the cadillac owners off. This site should be called LSvsMarkVIII.com

Nah i like it just the way it is, besides us TC owners ROCK anyway.

Posted by: Dawkins

"Might as well rename the site to "girlontheleftvsgirlontheright.com""
+1....

Posted by: MonsterMark

I'll take some suggestions as to what to rename the site.

Let 'em rip!!!!

As far as the current argument, Lincoln has failed to attract as large an audience as Cadillac to this point over the last 10 years. Even the advertising is unbalanced. The new 'front end' of the Lincolns is distinctive but all I see is the 'me too' factor in the styling.

I wish the executives would get away from the 'aerodynamic' argument and give us something interesting.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by pepperman

Nah i like it just the way it is, besides us TC owners ROCK anyway.

I did love my Town Car. Just wanted more power, so I traded it for the Mark VIII. Now I miss the Town Car ride.

Posted by: shagdrum