2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013 - Page 4
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 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 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 M5eater Yup, you're right. 5.7 is for the LTG. My mole-steak. Tuned LTG 5.0.0-60 But downpipe intake ...
  1. #46
    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 M5eater View Post
    Yup, you're right.
    5.7 is for the LTG.
    My mole-steak.
    Tuned LTG 5.0.0-60
    But downpipe intake and intercooler upgrades with a protune when HP TUNERS releases very soon I would say mid 4s knot-60

  2. #47
    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
    Tuned LTG 5.0.0-60
    But downpipe intake and intercooler upgrades with a protune when HP TUNERS releases very soon I would say mid 4s knot-60
    If you're running a 5 second 0-60, I want to race you. It'd be close!

    Also, do you plan to do anything else to the car?

  3. #48
    ATSwannabe is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): none
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    82

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    EnvoyBu you say you have a tune.If you discount the tune manufacturers claims you will find that a tune on a NA car is a waste of money.If you do some research from actual results by creditable testers you will find that there is little or no improvement in power or acceleration from a tune on a NA car.In some cases the tune actually gave poorer results.I would be surprised if your 0-60 time is any better with a tune.A tune on a turbocharged car is a different story.By increasing the boost pressure you can gain 100 HP or more,but you have to make other changes in order to prevent engine damage.

  4. #49
    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 ATSwannabe View Post
    EnvoyBu you say you have a tune.If you discount the tune manufacturers claims you will find that a tune on a NA car is a waste of money.If you do some research from actual results by creditable testers you will find that there is little or no improvement in power or acceleration from a tune on a NA car.In some cases the tune actually gave poorer results.I would be surprised if your 0-60 time is any better with a tune.A tune on a turbocharged car is a different story.By increasing the boost pressure you can gain 100 HP or more,but you have to make other changes in order to prevent engine damage.
    Sure.

    I bought the tune for my 3.6 so I can gain better overall driveability, not to gain 100+ HP and 100+ TQ. I'm well aware that a tune won't gain anything over 30 HP or 30 TQ on a N/A car.

    Like I said, I was sick of the car being neutered to protect the transmission, so I bought a tune to increase response, downshift faster, etc. Of course, gaining about 30 HP and 30 TQ in the process isn't a bad thing either.

    Believe me, if I wanted more power, I'd twin turbo the car and, well, yeah.

  5. #50
    gohawks63's Avatar
    gohawks63 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2012 Black Diamond CTS-V Coupe, 2011 BMW X5 Premium
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,929
    Quote Originally Posted by ATSwannabe
    EnvoyBu you say you have a tune.If you discount the tune manufacturers claims you will find that a tune on a NA car is a waste of money.If you do some research from actual results by creditable testers you will find that there is little or no improvement in power or acceleration from a tune on a NA car.In some cases the tune actually gave poorer results.I would be surprised if your 0-60 time is any better with a tune.A tune on a turbocharged car is a different story.By increasing the boost pressure you can gain 100 HP or more,but you have to make other changes in order to prevent engine damage.
    I disagree. We bought a 2006 Mustang convertible back in 2009 (mint, only had 26K miles). We bought it more because we wanted a convertible as a third summer fun car than really wanting a muscle car, otherwise I would have bought a GT. Well it didn't take long to get the mod bug. I put a cold air intake on it which really didn't do much if anything to the performance. Same with the axle back exhaust, although it did sound better. The car did transform once I installed a tune. The car is markedly quicker. Whereas before I couldn't break the tires loose no matter how hard I tried. Now I will lay a decent patch if I'm not careful pulling away from a light and it pulls much harder.

    Now mind you I'm not getting V8 performance, but it definitely woke the car up. The only driveability issues is that the throttle response is much more sensitive now and the shifts are much firmer (not necessarily a bad thing). It's also a 93 octane tune so I have to burn premium now.

    Now I agree that you get more out of a tune with a FI engine as there are other parameters that can be adjusted, boost being the most obvious, but with NA cars you can still work with timing and throttle response along with shift points to improve acceleration. You just have to be realistic on what those improvements are. At best it's a few tenths of a second.

    It also depends on the engines. In the Mustang case, specifically the 2005 - 2010 era, the 4.6L V8 had more untapped power than the 4.0L V6. While you could get marginal at best improvements like I experienced with my V6, you could unleash relatively more power in the 4.6L V8 with just the tune.

  6. #51
    ATSwannabe is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): none
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    82

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by EnvoyBu View Post
    Sure.

    I bought the tune for my 3.6 so I can gain better overall driveability, not to gain 100+ HP and 100+ TQ. I'm well aware that a tune won't gain anything over 30 HP or 30 TQ on a N/A car.

    Like I said, I was sick of the car being neutered to protect the transmission, so I bought a tune to increase response, downshift faster, etc. Of course, gaining about 30 HP and 30 TQ in the process isn't a bad thing either.

    Believe me, if I wanted more power, I'd twin turbo the car and, well, yeah.
    I agree with most of what you say about why you get a tune.Better throttle response & better drivability & better mileage I agree with.It's the 30 hp gain I don't agree with.A well know tuner for BMW advertises 8 hp increase for their tune and even that is dubious.Better throttle response does not mean more hp and quicker acceleration.

  7. #52
    gohawks63's Avatar
    gohawks63 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2012 Black Diamond CTS-V Coupe, 2011 BMW X5 Premium
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,929

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by ATSwannabe View Post
    I agree with most of what you say about why you get a tune.Better throttle response & better drivability & better mileage I agree with.It's the 30 hp gain I don't agree with.A well know tuner for BMW advertises 8 hp increase for their tune and even that is dubious.Better throttle response does not mean more hp and quicker acceleration.
    I agree that 30 seems ridiculous. Even the 12 HP increase claimed by the tuner that I used for my Mustang seems like a stretch. I dyno'd it.

  8. #53
    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
    3,922

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Do you guys go around telling kids there ain't no Santa Claus? If someone believes their NA tune gave them 30 HP, why ruin it for them?
    ben.gators likes this.

  9. #54
    angelbones is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2012 CTS Coupe (formerly)
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    47
    Posts
    419

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    I can respond to the OP from personal experience. I own a 3.6 CTS. When I took it in for maintenance, I was actually able to keep the loaner car ATS 2.0T for about a week. My take is that the ATS definitely feels more nimble than my CTS coupe. However, I was able to notice a difference in power. The 3.6 was faster, not by a lot, but noticeable enough to me. If power is your ONLY consideration if you're considering the two, then you're either going to have go for the 3.6 CTS, or pay more for an ATS with the 3.6. One comment on the CUE system. I found it extremely annoying at first to use, but after a week, I did adjust. That said, NO car should force you to take your eyes off the road as long as all of these infotainment systems are on cars like this. It would be a helluva lot easier if I could look ahead and feel a BUTTON to change whatever it is want to change. Instead with CUE, and all systems like it, you are forced to look down for 2-4 seconds to figure out what you want to change. If you didn't know 2 seconds is an eternity in a potential crash situation. I understand why carmakers are doing this because people are used to touchscreen technology. It just doesn't belong in cars. Florida just passed an anti-texting law (like a lot of states) and to me these consoles are just as distracting, even after I got used to it. Sorry to ramble about that but hopefully the first part of my answer, assisted in answering your original question.
    huna and 73JPS like this.

  10. #55
    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

    IDK the exact number, I just threw 30 HP and TQ out there to be honest. It drives like it gained that much more power.

    If someone has a 2.0T with a tune and is happy with it, good for them. I personally would never buy a car with an engine that sounds like a blender. But again, that's just me.

    Yes, Santa is real, isn't he?
    Hoosier Daddy likes this.

  11. #56
    CTSCHICK's Avatar
    CTSCHICK is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS 2.0 Rwd Performance Radiant Silver
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,897

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Having a 2011 3.6 CTS and after having 2 loaner ATS turbos and a 3.6
    My b.f. data logged them because him and his friend who just got the Hp software for the turbo wanted to use my loaners as the test mules for tuning.
    He said the ATS was consistently a few 10th's faster than my CTS and the 3.6 well over a 1/2 a second faster.

    He lost me on the technical stuff like the CTS having lower gears than the ATS and stuff.

    And No I did not let them use the loaners as test mules on the dyno lol

    I also laugh at the NA engines being a waste tuning every one of my NA GM's always gained double digits on the dyno including my last car gained 27hp & 17ft lbs from 1st pull to the 4th pull after tuning.
    And that doesn't include the gains from eliminating the torue management, correcting the shift timing, rpms & ect.
    I will keep on getting my cars tuned when there is software that supports them.
    EnvoyBu likes this.

  12. #57
    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 CTSCHICK View Post
    Having a 2011 3.6 CTS and after having 2 loaner ATS turbos and a 3.6
    My b.f. data logged them because him and his friend who just got the Hp software for the turbo wanted to use my loaners as the test mules for tuning.
    He said the ATS was consistently a few 10th's faster than my CTS and the 3.6 well over a 1/2 a second faster.

    He lost me on the technical stuff like the CTS having lower gears than the ATS and stuff.

    And No I did not let them use the loaners as test mules on the dyno lol

    I also laugh at the NA engines being a waste tuning every one of my NA GM's always gained double digits on the dyno including my last car gained 27hp & 17ft lbs from 1st pull to the 4th pull after tuning.
    And that doesn't include the gains from eliminating the torue management, correcting the shift timing, rpms & ect.
    I will keep on getting my cars tuned when there is software that supports them.

    Lol. 27 hp and 17lbtq. ..good one..LOL

    IT MADE ME LMAO

  13. #58
    CTSCHICK's Avatar
    CTSCHICK is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS 2.0 Rwd Performance Radiant Silver
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,897

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Siren05 View Post
    Lol. 27 hp and 17lbtq. ..good one..LOL

    IT MADE ME LMAO
    What ever you say 2.4 Ecotec with madmabb header & zzp 2.5" catted downpipe

  14. #59
    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 CTSCHICK View Post
    What ever you say 2.4 Ecotec with madmabb header & zzp 2.5" catted downpipe
    Ecotec2.4??? Please explain

  15. #60
    CTSCHICK's Avatar
    CTSCHICK is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2013 ATS 2.0 Rwd Performance Radiant Silver
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,897

    Re: 2.0T Ats Vs Cts 3.6 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Siren05 View Post
    Ecotec2.4??? Please explain
    Explain what? The ecotec 2.4 is an NA engine that GM used in the Cobalts, G5GT, HHR, Sky,Solstice, Malibu and whatever else.

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