2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013 - Page 3
cadillac ats forums cadillac ats forums
CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 75
Like Tree21Likes
Cadillac ATS General Discussion Forum Discussion, 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013 in Cadillac ATS Discussion Forums; Originally Posted by EnvoyBu I guess you win then, lol. It's not about winning. Just stating facts. If you don't ...
  1. #31
    Siren05's Avatar
    Siren05 is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS 2.0T RWD. 2011 STI Hatchback.
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Age
    39
    Posts
    293

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by EnvoyBu View Post
    I guess you win then, lol.
    It's not about winning. Just stating facts. If you don't want to mod 3.6 is a great engine with ample power.

    I just love boooost

  2. #32
    EnvoyBu's Avatar
    EnvoyBu is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2013 Cadillac ATS 3.6L Premium Collection
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Age
    21
    Posts
    306

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Siren05 View Post
    It's not about winning. Just stating facts. If you don't want to mod 3.6 is a great engine with ample power.

    I just love boooost
    I guess...

    I'll be honest with you, I hated the 2.0T in my two test drives with it. I didn't find it powerful or refined. It sounded awful, and it really wasn't all that powerful. The 3.6L IMHO is the way to go if you buy an automatic ATS.

  3. #33
    M5eater's Avatar
    M5eater is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): ATS 2.0T RWD FE3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,514

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    A stock LFX, perhaps, but a tuned LFX would win from what I know.
    I would have to see this to be convinced.
    The power band in the LTG is superior to that in the N/A LFX. Even with a tuned LFX(which again, from what I've seen nets in the 10-15 range) The LTG would have the jump in every gear, and given equal or similar power figures, the LTG will pull by shear hp/lb ratio.

    Seat of pants, and a few quick 0-60 pulls on back roads using my phone (not the greatest way) as a stop watch. I will admit I haven't truly timed it yet, but I have no doubt my tuned 3.6L can keep up with the F30 335i.

    Here's a cool video I found
    There is no credibility to your claims then. Get a Vbox and report back. You're telling me you've picked up almost a second from a (see above)tune? I'm pretty sure a BNR LTG doesn't even do that.

    Seat of pants, and a few quick 0-60 pulls on back roads using my phone (not the greatest way) as a stop watch. I will admit I haven't truly timed it yet, but I have no doubt my tuned 3.6L can keep up with the F30 335i.

    Here's a cool video I found:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhBdohZa6oM

    A stock LFX can apparently hold its own against a lightly modded 335i, which, IMHO, is pretty impressive in and out of itself.
    I would strain to call an 08 with possibly carbon buildup (due to age) and an exhaust lightly modified. I would consider a 'lightly' modified 335i to have at a minimum a tune, given that they cost $500 and increase BHP by between 60-80hp.

    The results of that video are clearly a result of the transmission differences(the poster even mentions this). If you found a manual, stock, F30 335i. You probably will keep up. Anything more than that however, he's going to pull on you.
    Siren05 likes this.

  4. #34
    sonny@bnr is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    38

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    335I with a tune are no joke

  5. #35
    Siren05's Avatar
    Siren05 is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS 2.0T RWD. 2011 STI Hatchback.
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Age
    39
    Posts
    293

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    335 tuned stock 400 rwtq

  6. #36
    ATSwannabe is online now Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): none
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    65

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by EnvoyBu View Post
    I doubt that. Until your 2.0T gains you AT LEAST 80 HP and 80 TQ, you'd lose to my tuned 3.6L.

    My tuned 3.6L is now F30 335i quick. I'd put 0-60 at about 4.8 seconds. The car gained serious straight line performance.



    Maybe if the 3.6L driver wasn't in sport mode and if he was stock.

    I highly doubt a 2.0T, even tuned, can beat a stock 3.6L in a race. At best, you'd probably tie it.
    Pure fantasy,the quickest CTS 3.6 listed in dragtimes is 14.72 sec for the 1/4 mile.A stock 335I could beat that time with 2 cylinders missing.A stock 335I turns the 1/4 in about 13.3 secs at 105 mph.The only way a CTS 3.6 could come close to this is with forced induction,either supercharged or turbo charged.

    ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by EnvoyBu View Post
    Okay...

    I guess if I'm ever in the area, I'll show up?

    Even if your 2.0T is up 100 TQ and 60 HP, you're at 332 HP and 360 TQ, which I doubt a simple BNR tune can gain that much power without any other mods.

    Regardless, figuring my tune added about 30 HP and 30 TQ, I'm at 351 HP and 305 TQ. It'd be a close race, but I think the 3.6L may win.



    BNR's Trifecta tune.



    A stock LFX, perhaps, but a tuned LFX would win from what I know.



    Seat of pants, and a few quick 0-60 pulls on back roads using my phone (not the greatest way) as a stop watch. I will admit I haven't truly timed it yet, but I have no doubt my tuned 3.6L can keep up with the F30 335i.

    Here's a cool video I found:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhBdohZa6oM

    A stock LFX can apparently hold its own against a lightly modded 335i, which, IMHO, is pretty impressive in and out of itself.
    More pure fantasy.I bet that the BMW shown in the video is not a 335I but a pre 2012 328I which is not turbocharged and is rated at about 270 hp.They are capable of low 14 sec times in the 1/4 mile.Probably a good match for a modified CTS 3.6,or a stock 3.6 ATS.There is nothing you can do to a CTS 3.6 short of forced induction to make it perform like a 335I.I would like to hear from the BMW driver in the video for his view on the race

  7. #37
    M5eater's Avatar
    M5eater is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): ATS 2.0T RWD FE3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,514

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Envoy owns and is speaking of an ATS, not a CTS.
    EnvoyBu likes this.

  8. #38
    Siren05's Avatar
    Siren05 is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS 2.0T RWD. 2011 STI Hatchback.
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Age
    39
    Posts
    293

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    I'm pretty sure my tuned ATS is now mid to low 13 second car. Not that I care a ton about 1/4 mile. I like twisties.

  9. #39
    ATSwannabe is online now Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): none
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    65

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    Envoy owns and is speaking of an ATS, not a CTS.
    My mistake but still doesn't change much.An ATS 3.6 is not a match for a 335I.Times for the 3.6 ATS range from a best of 13.8 to 14.1 in all tests I have read.And in any comparison tests with the 335I all magazines give the acceleration tests to the 335I by a wide margin.There is not much you can do to gain hp in a 3.6 without forced induction.I seriously doubt if anyone has installed different cam or any other internal modifications in a ATS.Things like exhaust,intake mods or reprograming the CPU give marginal if any improvements in hp despite the manufacturers claims.

  10. #40
    Hoosier Daddy's Avatar
    Hoosier Daddy is offline Moderator
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS Performance 2.0T M6
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Winchestertonfieldville, AZ
    Age
    65
    Posts
    3,624

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by EnvoyBu View Post
    My tuned 3.6L is now F30 335i quick. I'd put 0-60 at about 4.8 seconds.
    Quote Originally Posted by Siren05 View Post
    I'm pretty sure my tuned ATS is now mid to low 13 second car. Not that I care a ton about 1/4 mile. I like twisties.
    Did you guys forget the smilies or something?

    Pretty funny stuff.

    Why didn't you both save a bunch of money and pay a hypnotist $50 to make you believe your stock motors were good for 3.8 0-60 and high 11 quarter miles. It's not like these are Fords where the simple visit to the hypnotist will void your warranty.

    Seriously, universal law of the internet: Post the timing slip or back to back before and after dyno sheets or it didn't happen.

  11. #41
    thebigjimsho's Avatar
    thebigjimsho is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): ZIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In the barrel of a gun...
    Posts
    49,327
    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    I would have to see this to be convinced.
    The power band in the LTG is superior to that in the N/A LFX. Even with a tuned LFX(which again, from what I've seen nets in the 10-15 range) The LTG would have the jump in every gear, and given equal or similar power figures, the LTG will pull by shear hp/lb ratio.

    There is no credibility to your claims then. Get a Vbox and report back. You're telling me you've picked up almost a second from a (see above)tune? I'm pretty sure a BNR LTG doesn't even do that.

    That's the thing, EnvoyBu is going by the seat of his pants. Yes, the 2.0T doesn't feel all that powerful. Why? Because seat of the pants often doesn't discern flat torque curves. Seat of the pants may feel an engine not broken in, as it seems these turbo cars need to be.

    Seat of the pants does not equal actual performance.

  12. #42
    EnvoyBu's Avatar
    EnvoyBu is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2013 Cadillac ATS 3.6L Premium Collection
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Age
    21
    Posts
    306

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    I would have to see this to be convinced.
    The power band in the LTG is superior to that in the N/A LFX. Even with a tuned LFX(which again, from what I've seen nets in the 10-15 range) The LTG would have the jump in every gear, and given equal or similar power figures, the LTG will pull by shear hp/lb ratio.

    Maybe, but I'd be surprised and impressed at the same time.

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    There is no credibility to your claims then. Get a Vbox and report back. You're telling me you've picked up almost a second from a (see above)tune? I'm pretty sure a BNR LTG doesn't even do that.
    A second on 0-60 or quarter mile?

    Stock 0-60 was around 5.3 seconds right? Gaining more power and getting rid of the torque management that kills the car stock improved the time. I'll have to shoot a video and see.

    Where does one buy a vBox?

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    The results of that video are clearly a result of the transmission differences(the poster even mentions this). If you found a manual, stock, F30 335i. You probably will keep up. Anything more than that however, he's going to pull on you.
    I actually doubt I can keep up with an MT 335i. The auto I probably can, but I'd lose in the long run. The N55 3.0T is no joke.

    Quote Originally Posted by ATSwannabe View Post
    Pure fantasy,the quickest CTS 3.6 listed in dragtimes is 14.72 sec for the 1/4 mile.A stock 335I could beat that time with 2 cylinders missing.A stock 335I turns the 1/4 in about 13.3 secs at 105 mph.The only way a CTS 3.6 could come close to this is with forced induction,either supercharged or turbo charged.

    ----------



    More pure fantasy.I bet that the BMW shown in the video is not a 335I but a pre 2012 328I which is not turbocharged and is rated at about 270 hp.They are capable of low 14 sec times in the 1/4 mile.Probably a good match for a modified CTS 3.6,or a stock 3.6 ATS.There is nothing you can do to a CTS 3.6 short of forced induction to make it perform like a 335I.I would like to hear from the BMW driver in the video for his view on the race
    I have an ATS 3.6L, not a CTS 3.6L

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    Envoy owns and is speaking of an ATS, not a CTS.


    Quote Originally Posted by ATSwannabe View Post
    My mistake but still doesn't change much.An ATS 3.6 is not a match for a 335I.Times for the 3.6 ATS range from a best of 13.8 to 14.1 in all tests I have read.And in any comparison tests with the 335I all magazines give the acceleration tests to the 335I by a wide margin.There is not much you can do to gain hp in a 3.6 without forced induction.I seriously doubt if anyone has installed different cam or any other internal modifications in a ATS.Things like exhaust,intake mods or reprograming the CPU give marginal if any improvements in hp despite the manufacturers claims.
    For convenience, lets say the car ran a 13.9 second quarter mile time. Adding 30 HP and 30 TQ and deleting all of the nannies that limited power delivery when the car was stock should gain a few tenths in the quarter mile, right? I think 13.5 seconds is doable, but then again, I've only ran down the quarter mile one time, and I haven't in the ATS yet.

    I think the tune knocked off a solid half second in the quarter, but like I said, I might be overestimating. Any opinions on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hoosier Daddy View Post
    Seriously, universal law of the internet: Post the timing slip or back to back before and after dyno sheets or it didn't happen.
    What's so difficult to believe? A car that did 0-60 in the low fives without a tune should be able to break into the 4's with a tune right? Am I missing something?

    Quote Originally Posted by thebigjimsho View Post
    That's the thing, EnvoyBu is going by the seat of his pants. Yes, the 2.0T doesn't feel all that powerful. Why? Because seat of the pants often doesn't discern flat torque curves. Seat of the pants may feel an engine not broken in, as it seems these turbo cars need to be.

    Seat of the pants does not equal actual performance.
    That's true, actually.

    I think a good example is that most diesel motors "feel" fast, but in reality, gasoline cars usually blow by them.

    That said, I'd be pleasantly surprised if I lost to a tuned 2.0T in a race. That would seriously impress me, actually.

  13. #43
    M5eater's Avatar
    M5eater is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): ATS 2.0T RWD FE3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,514

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    A second on 0-60 or quarter mile?

    Stock 0-60 was around 5.3 seconds right?
    You were talking about a 4.8 60 time, so 0-60. GM's calculations are 5.7

    I've seen some rags report slower and faster.

    GM's generous calculations are 5.7 for a 3.6 ATS. I've seen C&D report as low as a 5.4, but that's by far the quickest I've seen, and

    Yes, the 2.0T doesn't feel all that powerful. Why? Because seat of the pants often doesn't discern flat torque curves.
    you're crazy, the 2.0T feels just as fast as an LFX, I've driven them back to back.

    Multiple car rags also back this up.

    I actually doubt I can keep up with an MT 335i. The auto I probably can, but I'd lose in the long run. The N55 3.0T is no joke.
    The 8 speed N55 is a sub 5.0s vehicle. A MT is slower than the ZF 8speed N55 just like every other car.

    https://www.bimmerfest.com/news/6924...r-driver-test/

  14. #44
    EnvoyBu's Avatar
    EnvoyBu is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2013 Cadillac ATS 3.6L Premium Collection
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Age
    21
    Posts
    306

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    You were talking about a 4.8 60 time, so 0-60.

    GM's generous calculations are 5.7 for a 3.6 ATS.
    No, it's rated at 5.4 seconds 0-60, straight from GM's media page.

    http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/n.../0626_ats.html

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    you're crazy, the 2.0T feels just as fast as an LFX, I've driven them back to back.

    Multiple car rags also back this up.
    To each his own. The 2.0T had pep for what it is, but the 3.6L just feels better to me in the car.

    Again, to each his own.

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    The 8 speed N55 is faster than a MT N55.
    I didn't know that. Interesting.

  15. #45
    M5eater's Avatar
    M5eater is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): ATS 2.0T RWD FE3
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,514

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Yup, you're right.
    5.7 is for the LTG.
    My mole-steak.
    EnvoyBu likes this.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Bookmarks

Cadillac Posting Rules

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Read about Lincoln | Buick | Kia Forte Forum
Need products for your Cadillac? Check out your options at the links below:

custom floor mats | Cadillac Chrome and Black Chrome Wheels | window tinting