Plug-In Cadillac CT6 Has Arrived In The US, Complete With 31 Miles Electric Range


The All-New Cadillac CT6 PHV Arrived In The US In March. Can It Ultimately Outsell The ELR?

The Cadillac CT6 PHV arrived on dealer lots in very late March (like this example at Suburban Cadillac of Costa Mesa)

We can count the number of built-in-China, sold-in-the-US vehicles offered today on one hand…but when one of them is a plug-in, we take notice.

Such is the case for the all-new Cadillac CT6 PHV that arrived in America in March (albeit in some very thin inventory numbers at month’s end), replacing the Cadillac ELR as the luxury brand’s only plug-in offering.

We touched base with Donny Nordlicht, who handles Product & Technology Communications at Cadillac to talk about the new plug-in Caddy, and he confirmed the vehicle’s arrival in very late March, “we have begun shipments of the CT6 Plug-In to dealers”, but that none were physically delivered to consumers before the April selling month got underway.

At time of press, about ~100 Cadillac CT6 Plug-In Hybrids have made their way to US dealers.

And while the previous ELR was mostly a badge-engineered, performance-tweaked copy of the 1st generation Chevrolet Volt (that was ultimately priced ~$30,000 too high @$75,999 and fell under the production ax about this time last year), the new CT6 Plug-In Hybrid utilizes the Volt’s basic battery set-up (18.4 kWh LG Chem battery) but that is about it.

Inside the new Cadillac CT6 PHV

There are hardly any shared components with other Voltec offerings, no fancy utilization of the transmission tunnel, no modified Delta II architecture, and no “T” shaped battery under the seats to hide the battery.

A look at the 18.4 kWh battery’s location in the trunk

Instead, the CT6 PHV rides on its own huge platform, and GM found there was plenty of room in its spacious trunk to stuff all those battery cells inside, a big cost savings.

However, the most important aspect of the CT6 PHV – besides the 31 miles (50 km) worth of EPA range, is its price.

At $75,095 (+ $995 DST) the plug-in version of the Cadillac CT6 flagship is only about ~$15,000 more than the petrol CT6 Luxury edition (slightly faster, but no AWD).

After factoring in the US EV federal credit ($7,500), that brings the spread down to about $7,500 (meaning that inside a lease, the CT6 Plug-In Hybrid carries a very similar monthly payment to the comparable petrol model)…which is a lot better than the $40,000 more the ELR originally MSRP’d for over the Chevrolet Volt.

Included with CT6 PHV purchases is a 220V charger with free installation, as well as an eight-year unlimited-mileage warranty for the vehicle’s battery pack, electric motors and electronic control system.

The Cadillac CT6 PHV Zips To 60 MPH In Just 5.2 Seconds

Will the new CT6 PHV outsell the 2,879 copies of the ELR that were moved over that vehicle’s 3 year run in the US? Maybe, maybe not. But then again, as its country of origin demonstrated, the new plug-in Caddy has an international focus in mind.  How it performs in China is perhaps the yardstick to which success will be measured.

We should mention that the CT6 PHV is entering a fairly crowded field in the luxury plug-in hybrid segment in the US, and immediately finds itself in competition with the Mercedes S 550e, BMW 740e, BMW 530e, and Porsche Panamera S E-Hybrid (and soon, the 4 E-Hybrid).

Our expectation for the plug-in CT6 is that, when stocked, it should sell between 50 and 100 units per month.

The Cadillac CT6 Plug-In

We spotted the Cadillac CT6 earlier in New York (InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

Obligatory badging

And some more badging

Cadillac CT6 PHV Cutaway In China

Cadillac CT6 18.4 KWh Trunk Configuration

Cadillac CT6 PHEV Cutaway

CT6 PHV Dash Cluster

Category: Cadillac

Tags: ,

68 responses to "Plug-In Cadillac CT6 Has Arrived In The US, Complete With 31 Miles Electric Range"
  1. georgeS says:

    Once again GM invents a decent power train but stuffs it into the wrong body.

    This power train would be perfect in a silverado pick up truck. The batteries would fit neatly under the bed.

    1. David Murray says:

      I disagree… While the powertrain gives my Volt a very peppy ride.. I can’t imagine using the same powertrain in a Silverado. It would be so slow. and probably get 15 miles of range. They would need to totally redesign everything to power the larger vehicle.

      1. georgeS says:

        The car being discussed in the article has a whole different power train in it than the Volt and would plug nicely into a Silverado. It might need a bigger battery but there is plenty of room for it.

      2. lewl says:

        335HP (combined), 432lb-ft

        Mid-power Silverado (5.3L V8):
        355HP, 383lb-ft

        Seems like a perfect 1:1 match to me.

        If strictly driving EV-only, 200HP, which is plenty for driving around town or light duty. Need more power, switch on the engine and max power available.

        1. Bill Howland says:

          Yeah, Jay COle must be working long hours or something because he’s usually more careful than this: the CT6 PHEV is much different than the GEN 2 Volt – it has an additional planetary gear set and also a Turbo charged 4 cyl engine. The ELR was a much closer relative of the GEN 1 volts, although the performance of the ELR is greatly improved.

          Besides the price (what caddy dealers ultimately let it go for remains to be seen), to me the thing is much too complicated, and efficiency seems to suffer a bit. The one thing that *IS* very similiar is the 18.4 kwh battery and 16 amp charger,albeit in a different form factor.

          1. Jay Cole says:

            “Yeah, Jay COle must be working long hours or something because he’s usually more careful than this: the CT6 PHEV is much different than the GEN 2 Volt…

            Hrm, I confess, I don’t understand? The article goes out of its why to say they are very different. We didn’t reference any similarities outside the battery sizing itself on the new CT6 PHV:

            “…the new CT6 Plug-In Hybrid utilizes the Volt’s basic battery set-up (18.4 kWh LG Chem battery) but that is about it.

            There are hardly any shared components with other Voltec offerings, no fancy utilization of the transmission tunnel, no modified Delta II architecture, and no “T” shaped battery under the seats to hide the battery.”

            1. Bill Howland says:

              WHile this car is somewhat more different than the GEN 2 volts, the ELR was also a completely different body as well as a completely different more pricey passive suspension – not just a badge engineered GEN1 Volt.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                “…ELR was mostly a badge-engineered, performance-tweaked copy of the 1st generation Chevrolet Volt.”

                Not true. Anyone who has driven both products will sense the difference. That is why Car & Driver gave the ELR such a great review.

                GM’s claim to fame is with their ‘great’ magnetic suspension offered on several models, but I like the ELR’s since it performs its road hugging ability ‘passively’ as the great cars of old did, and in that sense, although a bit of a boat due to its size, drives much better than any of the other Cadillacs and is responsive not only in acceleration (C&D said the car ‘seems’ faster than it really is), but also in handling roads, as a good roadster coupe should.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  The Excellence in Design of the ELR shows the Idiocy of DeNyschen cancelling the 2016 ELR prematurely – it was the ONLY car Cadillac had that was FUN TO DRIVE.

                  The Dealers themselves didn’t realize what a great car the ELR was, I don’t mean a great EV, I mean a GREAT CAR thst just happens to also be a great EV.

                  They gave me an XTS loaner when I was having a trivial problem with the seat belt alarm, and said to me upon returning it “How about that expensive XTS ??!!!!”.

                  I said, “Compared to the ELR, the XTS may have a much bigger engine, but the car while expensive is extremely sluggish, and is mushy around the corners. I’ll be happy to have my far superior ELR back.”

    2. BenG says:

      Great idea.

  2. bro1999 says:

    So with the same basic guts, the CT-6 plugin gets 31 miles of range while the Gen 2 Volt gets 53.

    I’m curious how much range an Equinox-sized vehicle outfitted with the same powertrain setup would fair rangewise? More or less AER than the CT-6?

    1. Loboc says:

      Range is diminished by performance as well as mass. <6sec 0-60 in this size car takes power.

    2. Neromanceres says:

      Equinox will probably get mid-upper 40’s EV range.

      The new equinox uses the same vehicle architecture as the Gen II Volt and would weigh a few hundred pounds more.

    3. Bill Howland says:

      Bro1999 that bothered me too – only 31 miles when essentially the same as 53 mile volts.

      My ELR is extremely conservatively rated. 37-38 (if anything I have the smaller battery, it being a 2014), while in the spring and fall on country roads it will do 60 miles prior to engine start. Whereas in my BOLT it is somewhat more challenging to get rated mileage – but as BJORN just proved, he made a roadtrip where the car actually went 292 miles and probably would have stalled at an amazing 300.

      If the 31 mile rating turns out to not be overly conservative, I’d chauk it up to the mechanical inefficiency of the THIRD planetary gearbox and clutch arrangement. Since the car is ‘tuned’ for high-performance, they may be counting on only “LEAD FOOT” drivers to buy the thing.

      Myself, I’m reserving judgement on the car. I saw the gas only CT6 several times, and, its not the head-turner that the ELR is. Since many (myself included) actually got the car for $50,000 – the car was a STEAL.

      If the PHEV CT6 is eventually released at a far lower price, and the mileage rating turns out to be conservative, I might just get one someday, especially if they finally shoehorn in a larger battery as an option.

  3. CdnE90 says:

    If priced higher than the BMW 530e, they have failed already.

    1. pjwood1 says:

      I agree on pricing, but as far as the two cars go:

      The CT6 stands a good chance of getting around entirely in electric mode. The BMW, almost zero.

      Anyone near this price range getting 10KWh of storage, or less, is being cheated. Maybe for a track car, but passenger luxury is no longer about engine performance, unless you’re into compromising. You just haven’t felt what can be had, if you think otherwise.

      Evolution for the CT6 would be a dedicated body, to accommodate maybe 30-40Kwh instead of 18, while keeping the engine. Unless GM leans on fast charging, better electric performance and range are probably around the corner for Cadillac.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        …better electric performance and range are probably around the corner for (the EREV) Cadillac.

    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

      CT6 is a larger class of vehicle than BMW 5 series…

  4. CVVH says:

    It’s not clear what trim level it would be. The CT6 looks like it goes up to $87 starting price for the high end trim package.

    Also, looks like the hp is a little more than the base trim, and the hybrid would have a little better 0-60.

    Is the hybrid AWD? That’s an option for at least one of the trims.

    1. Loboc says:

      AWD is not available in the PHEV version.

    2. DonC says:

      The pricing is WYSIWYG. It’s a separate trim level and, unlike the other trim levels, there are no options. All the safety tech like infra red night vision and ACC and the camera mirrors are standard, as are the back seat separate infotainment screens.

      The pricing is interesting. My question is why anyone would buy the luxury version. If you take the base luxury version and add the options which come standard on the PHEV version, after credits the luxury version would be more expensive.

      1. SJC says:

        $76,000 with 4600 pounds curb weight, too big, too heavy. made in China…fail.

        1. DonC says:

          Since it’s faster, cheaper, and with better tech than a Model S, I guess you’re not a Tesla fan.

          1. SJC says:

            I would much rather have a Tesla, this does not compare.

            1. BenG says:

              Yep, no question the Model S is more desirable than this cludge.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            “Since it’s faster, cheaper, and with better tech than a Model S, I guess you’re not a Tesla fan.”

            Shoehorning a small battery pack into the trunk of a gasmobile to give the car a mere 31 miles of electric range makes it “better” than a Tesla car in what way?

            I guess you’re a Tesla basher. In fact, I’m sure of it.

            But hey, it does have a top speed of 150 MPH. I’m sure that will make it very attractive to everyone who buys a 2.265 ton, four-door Cadillac to drive it on the racetrack. 😉

            1. Bill Howland says:

              The only one who is a “Tesla Basher” here is you, certainly not the thoughtful DonC.

              YOU stated Tesla tried to ‘pass off’ a “FLAW” of the Roadster on the customer, and with one exception, refused to honor the warranty.

              The facts are: Tesla was totally blameless – It IS NOT and never was a warranty item – which the customer had to sign a document stating that he understood this at the car’s purchase. Of course, you would have no way of knowing THAT since you are so mis-informed, and When pressed, you couldn’t name this supposed “FLAW”; nor certainly what you’d do to ‘FIX’ something that obviously is not a flaw to begin with.

              You also refused to appologize to other readers here for making defamatory, uncalled for remarks regarding Tesla, certainly a substantial corporation since its market share is priced currently above ford and gm.

          3. Stimpy says:

            Well except it’s none of these things.

  5. Someone out there says:

    So they want a $15000 premium for 31 miles of electric range? What a joke!

    1. DonC says:

      The article is misleading on this point. As pointed out by other web sited, if you add the options which come standard on the PHEV version to the base luxury version, the PHEV version is cheaper. It’s also faster. The dollar delta per second of acceleration is likely less than the delta per dollar second on a Tesla Model S.

      And while you are “only” getting 31 miles of pure EV range, from the article yesterday on the EV miles traveled by various PHeVs and BEVs, that will likely get you 90% of the EV miles you’d get on most BEVs.

      Just sayin …

        1. Jay Cole says:


          Would make sense, with the assumption being that everyone would want all those pre-selected, extra high-margin options of course (like 10 speakers)….and that everyone wants to lose some high value options at the same time – like All Wheel Drive, 19″ wheels and half the cargo area in the trunk.

          The point being that we often see OEMs price their plug-ins very high in the pricing structure, and that after they do…they tend to sit back and say, “we have to justify that more”, and that is accomplished by throwing on a pile of options (like $3k tech packages) that have really high margins and no additional R&D costs to the OEM.

          You note performance for the PHV version over the base…which is true, but one can move to AWD and the turbo 6 in the luxury edition at no extra cost – from $65k) … which moves the petrol trim up from 265 hp to 400hp, and then is quicker (0-60 in 5.0).

          If if you want AWD in the plug-in? Forget it, because GM doesn’t have that system already paired to the 4 cyl turbo. I’d say the AWD is as important to plug-in buyers as saving .9 seconds on the 0-60 time (6.1 seconds in standard $54k CT6). So its easy to play games with numbers if you want to.

          The point is, the failing of the ELR was the ~$40,000 worth of forced options. If someone really wanted all that…it was worth it; but almost no one did, and it need ultimately needed 10s of thousands worth of price reductions to move them out.

          As the story points out, GM seems to have learned something from the ELR with the CT6 PHV, and the comparable is much better on the new car, we believe it will be better received in the market place…but it is not cost neutral to petrol when considering real value. $15,000+ of forced, “free” high-margin options are never akin (not even close) to the real value of a dollar (or $15,000) in a person’s pocket.

          Again, we didn’t make the comps on the CT6 to the base 4cyl Turbo $54k CT6, that didn’t seem right, but if you look over the value-proposition of the lineup, the $15,000 premium paid for plug-in just feels like the proper trade-off number.

          Ultimately, and as always, the market will decide. GM has averaged about ~1,000 sales per month of the CT6, if the plug-in is a even/near-even value in customer’s eyes, then CT6 PHV will sell 200-300 copies a month…if it isn’t, then it’ll likely mostly live in the double digits like the ELR.

          1. DonC says:

            I think you’re mistaken on the pricing. Moving from the V6 to the turbo costs $6K, and that still gives you a car which is marginally slower not faster (albeit not by much).

            The big problem is that to get the basic options anyone would want in a car like this, meaning ACC and LKA and infrared vision, you have to go with Luxury Premium. You can say this is loading the car with unnecessary tech, but if you don’t want those packages then you’re looking at the wrong car. For a luxury car these options are table stakes.

            Now if you don’t get the basic tech packages you can get a version of the CT6 which is cheaper, but then it’s not a valid comparison. That’s apples to oranges. Apples to apples, meaning similar performance and tech, the PHEV version is less expensive.

            I’m perfectly willing to concede you have a point with respect to the backseat infotainment system. That’s hardly a must have. But every other option included with the PHEV variant is. In fact we know this is ture because the most desirable variants of the ELR were precisely those that had all the tech packages. (Not surprising given who would be interested in buying a car like this). Getting back to the price, even if you don’t add the back seat infotainment package to the Premium Luxury trim level, the PHEV is still cheaper by several thousand dollars.

            1. Jay Cole says:

              Fair disclaimer: I had a reply here, but decided it was best to remove…so as to not “nuke” the point of the story.

              Basic nutshell is (for those interested):

              I would suggest looking at how the entire rest of the premium/performance OEMs prices their higher performance, extra value added, plug-in versions over the absolute base models: BMW 530e, Mercedes S550H, BMW 740e, Porsche Panamera 4, BMW X5 xDrive40e, etc.

              Hint: In most cases the pricing (before fed credit) between the base pricing and the PHV option is similar, and almost always less after the credit is accounted for…and they still aren’t strong seller relatively speaking.

              So to argue the options make up the difference, or the notion that the consumer sees any value in $10s of thousands of forced options (outside of AWD) in the real world on a luxury phev, I think is proven to be a fallacy, and will be evident in CT6 PHV sales compared to the petrol models moving forward.

    2. SJC says:

      31 miles for 18.4 kWh?

  6. Jeff N says:

    Article sez:
    “And while the previous ELR was mostly a badge-engineered, performance-tweaked copy of the 1st generation Chevrolet Volt.”

    I thought “badge engineering” was when you took the same car and made minor cosmetic changes and sold it under a different brand. In other words, selling an Opel Ampera-e and a Chevrolet Bolt EV is an example of badge engineering. Or selling a Chevrolet Volt and a Holden Volt in Australia.

    The Cadillac ELR was a completely different car body with radically different cosmetic interior and exterior design that happened to share the same powertrain. I don’t think that qualifies.

    Wikipedia sez:
    “The term originated with the practice of replacing an automobile’s emblems to create an ostensibly new model sold by a different maker. Changes may be confined to swapping badges and emblems, or may encompass minor styling differences, as with cosmetic differences to headlights, tail lights, front and rear fascias and outer body skins. More extreme examples involve differing engines and drivetrains. The term badge engineered does not apply to vehicles that share a common platform architecture but are uniquely designed so that they may look completely different from each other. This is achieved by not sharing visible parts, and maintaining a host of underlying parts specific to their respective applications.”

    1. Neromanceres says:

      Agreed, I have a few issues with this article with the wrongly stated back handed comments.

      The ELR while on a related architecture to the Gen I Volt is about as far from badge engineering as you can get.

      Also the article implies that LG Chem is building the battery which is also incorrect. As GM is building the battery out of their Brownstown facility in Michigan. The battery cells are manufactured by LG Chem (to GM’s specifications).

      1. Jay Cole says:

        Hey Nero,

        The article only has the most brief/innocent reference to the battery: “…CT6 Plug-In Hybrid utilizes the Volt’s basic power train/battery set-up (18.4 kWh LG Chem battery)“. I think to have said “GM’s own 18.4 kWh battery” would have been disingenuous. GM is building the pack/housing for the battery, but not the batteries themselves, that is LG Chem.

        Again, just to be clear, there was no ‘angle’ in the statement, just giving out info. (does it even matter about LG Chem making batteries for someone anymore?) Apologies if it came off that way.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Indeed, Jay Cole is usually much more careful in what he writes. As you point out, it’s factually incorrect to call the Cadillac ELR a “badge-engineered” Volt.

      Now, if Jay had said the ELR’s powertrain is (or was) a badge-engineered version of the Voltec powertrain, then he would have been correct. But that’s not what he said, and the powertrain is a long distance from being the entire car.

      On the other hand, Bill Howland’s criticism of Jay in this thread is even more wrong than Bill’s (often rather out of touch with reality) posts generally are; Jay certainly didn’t state or suggest the CT6 Plug-in is similar to the Volt 2.0.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        Hey, I’ve always liked Jay, and consider him an Adult, not someone who still hangs around in Mommie’s Basement at 62 years old.

        I’ve brought facts explaining (as many others here also have, why I think he just happens to be incorrect here).

        Now run along and find some other kiddies to play with – my response was a high-brow one that went over your head, again.

  7. Chris O says:

    Mercedes sells literally dozens of its S550PHEV a month, of course GM would want to tap into that bounty. Much more clever than a high end all electric car as demonstrated by the miserable 1000-3500 units a month Tesla manages to shift of its Model S.

  8. BenG says:

    Sweet car that would be one of the best highway cruisers among plug-ins.

    But the price is high and you lose a lot of trunk space, which takes away from the family vacation practicality of it, making it a niche product.

  9. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

    GM moves jobs to China to build this car, then imports it back to the US to sell to US customers.

    No thanks!

    Buying this car, the Volt or Bolt finances the GM lawyers to fight with the Alliance against CARB/EPA and the Tesla sales model to make sure they can keep selling OPEC swallowers and pollute our air.

    Vote with your wallet!

    1. Bonaire says:

      It may be that they build/sell in China and then transition to a local build at Hamtramck once it proves-out.

      I think GM will realize that it probably should be made in the USA for those in the USA buying it. I doubt it sells well, either if imported from China or if made in the USA – this customer is looking for “more” than a big Volt. I’m sure it will be nice but we have to guess a price tag of well over the base-model Tesla Model S sticker (for a 75 RWD).

      1. SJC says:

        At $76,000 they have margin to build in the U.S.

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          Why build it in the US since you and Troll above here don’t want to buy anything from GM anyway regardless where it is built.

          You and Troll are just here to troll because your frequent past history of hating anything that GM does.

          1. SJC says:

            You are ranting, get a life or get off this page.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              Most of your and Troll’s posts are mostly ranting.

              So, you should take your advice for once.

  10. SparkEV says:

    18.4 kWh is the same as SparkEV. What did they do, discontinue SparkEV so they can use the batteries in new Volt and CT6?

    It’s a good news for SparkEV, though; that means there will be lot more used batteries available.

    1. Bonaire says:

      Maybe the same pack structure. SparkEV makes no sense if the Bolt is on the road. So, if LG Chem makes the pack in numbers good enough for more vehicles, keep on using it.

      1. SparkEV says:

        SparkEV makes no sense compared to Bolt if they are the same price. At almost $12K cheaper and less than 1/4 the lease price, SparkEV makes plenty of sense for people who already have a SUV/van/truck for long distance / family / cargo.

        We shall see how well CT6 will do. Given the high price and limited AER and limited trunk space (like FFE), I’m not too hopeful it’ll do well.

  11. Fool Cells says:

    Cars built in the USA and exported to China face a 25% tariff. GM builds this in China and only gets hit with a 2.5% tariff for importing. How is that fair?

    1. SparkEV says:

      Not fair at all that Chinese must pay huge extra while US buyers get to enjoy much lower priced product. I’d be pissed if I live in China, but fortunately I live in US.

      But if PrezDump has his way, US will get to pay lot higher price with the extra cash going to build more bombs and bullets to drop in other countries.

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        Why is that fair?

        Because the Chinese labors are making less than 1/3 of what US labors get.

        That is why? They are “poor” so they get the “Protection” as agreed with WTO rules.

        It is setup so the “poor” nation economy doesn’t get “robbed” by the advanced technology of the modern societies.

        Well, we can make the arguement that China is no longer poor. But facts remain that they are on per capita scale.

  12. agzand says:

    This configuration makes more sense in a hatch/SUV body, where the battery can be packaged more efficiently with less impact on cargo capacity. I am not sure a lot of buyers are willing to take such a compromised trunk in their $80k car.

  13. Kdawg says:

    I assume this car is not sold on Hong Kong due to them being LHD.

  14. cab says:

    Agree with BenG on the trunk space issue. Saw one of these at the Dallas auto show – nice car, but man that trunk is really eaten up by battery – that alone will make it a non-starter for folks interested in a vehicle in this size class.

  15. hpver says:

    Way too expensive for what it is. Tesla territory price with none of the attraction of a Tesla. And did they really just stuff the battery in the trunk? Ugh.

    1. DonC says:

      You might want to check out the CT6. Having driven a few RWD Model S and the CT6, starting with the seats the CT6 is better on just about every metric. It falls short by a considerable margin on cargo space, but other than that it’s a step up.

      1. BenG says:

        How many high end Caddy buyers will go for this car with it’s cramped trunk space?

        I’m sure it’s a very sweet car to drive …

    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Part of this is aimed at those people who doesn’t believe in Superchargers for long distance.

      The reason that it is imported in small quantity from China is because GM agrees with you and don’t believe there is much demand for it.

  16. Bill Howland says:

    Yeah its too bad the Cadillac Division doesn’t make a higher-value EV product. A cheap car with high LG content is one thing (my BOLT for instance), but I still appreciate the Union-Made (with STICKER!) quality of my ELR. I’m not saying I’m never buying one, but it was not long ago that almost everything from China was junk. Obviously things would have to improve, but what I said is accurate.

    Having an EV Hater as head of the Cadillac Division can only mean trouble. I hate that he only got 3-4 months production out of the 2016 ELR model, I would have liked to buy a refreshed model after a few years – the car was refined enough that I would feel deprived if someone took my 2014 away from me. To each his own, but I took 3 test drives in an “S”, and while nice, it wasn’t for me. To me, my plain-jane BOLT has all the essential features that way that I feel a large battery BEV needs, and at effectively less than 1/2 the price when credits are factored in.

  17. pjwood1 says:

    Only part I’d differ a bit with, Jay: “no one is saying yeah I’ll pay an extra $14k for an extra dozen miles…in a Cadillac”

    Isn’t it more than a dozen against every one of the others? Nearly double the battery is a lot more current/torque, where per KWh German models (accepting for i3) are poor efficiency, and therefore range (~14mi ~8KWh Cayenne E?=~1.5mpkwh). New upcoming Panamera does better, for what, $100k+? The Germans really aren’t seeing the light of extended range engines, as a bail-out for a premium electric performance envelope. GM does that much better than they do.

    I don’t get Cadillac pricing, in general, and bet shoppers see their retail prices as more of a lofty ask. Who pays full price on these?

    Lastly, is weight. CT6 is, what, 3,800lbs before ~450 in battery? The Panamera scratches at 5,000lbs. People don’t buy cars as much on dynamics (thanks to Musk), but I’d rather toss around 4,300lbs quietly, than 5,000 with the engine on.

  18. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    I can’t get excited about yet another PHEV with less than 35 miles of all-electric range. When, oh when, will other auto makers offer a PHEV with a range to challenge the Volt? Even the Volt 1.0, let alone the Volt 2.0.

    BEVs are rapidly increasing their electric range with each new release. Too bad PHEVs aren’t doing the same! 🙁

  19. Koenigsegg says:

    Used Tesla’s in the $50,000 range. This is no consideration whatsoever

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      Using used car price to compare against new car price is just silly logic.

      The older S60 isn’t quicker than this CT6 and CERTAINLY DON’T HANDLE BETTER.

      I thought you cared about performance, guess not.

  20. Raymond Ramirez says:

    Although it is assembled in China, due to the larger market, it is assembled ata GM plant with GM designed parts, most manufactured in the U.S., and some parts manufactured in South Korea. So it isn’t “Chinese” just as the Nissan Leaf assembled in Tennessee isn’t “American”. BTW, this CT6 will have “Super Cruise” in the 2018 model year:
    Here is Cadillac’s news:

    I trust GM’s autonomous system because GM has more years of experience in building and testing these systems than what TM has in building cars.

  21. Bill Howland says:

    Just a follow up – This car from where I sit is looking like more of a JOKE.

    The nearest dealership handling the Caddy Ct6 PHEV is in Clinton Township, Michigan which is 386 miles away – (its 250 through Canada, but warranty issues cause the car never to be able to leave the country for service).

    From places like midstate, ny it would be even further. Also, no one at Cadillac knows anything about a complementary home docking station. I’m going to call the michigan dealership to find out any more info they have.