Cadillac Owners Forum banner

IF the Cadillac ATS-V gets a V8...

46K views 180 replies 29 participants last post by  JimmyH 
#1 ·
...it'll be naturally aspirated - no supercharger or turbo (unless plans change). It still appears as if the ATS-V will get the twin turbo 3.0 liter direct injected V6. Either way, I'm thinking this doesn't sound too good for people who want a small Cadillac to compete with the new BMW M3 and cars like it. The ATS-V is probably not going to be a whole lot lighter than the CTS-V - but it'll have probably 100 less horsepower. GM may surprise us, though...
 
#135 ·
lunarx said:
There really is no such thing as overkill when it comes to performance.
Who here wants cheap easy HP taken off the table?

Honestly, I'm not surprized that GM is hoping to con us into accepting a lesser engine, instead of the real thing.
They probably hope it will tank, as I bet most insiders at GM don't even want a V Series.
Also, aftermarket tuning potential would not be one of their concerns either.
Aren't fast cars adolescent and irresponsible?

It's just sad they are going back to their practice of aiming low instead of going for the kill.
There is no excuse when they have the star engine sitting on the shelf screaming to be put in the game.
I have a problem buying into a half hearted ATS-V effort.
Sorry, but I've seen turbo SHOs put a whuppin' on Z06s in standing miles. And that's with FWD and traction issues. Half hearted nothing if it's done right...
 
#136 ·
What was the drivability and lifespan of that SHO?
Put a V8 in that same chassis and it will drive better, go faster and live longer.
After a fun experiment Ford conceeded that.

I like the SHO also, but it was made obsolete by advances in engine management that put the V8 back on top.
I think it was a V8 car that won the Pirelli Challenge this year, wish I could remember the make....

You know you don't wish you had a Turbo 4 or 6 under your hood, instead of an LSA.
The LS engine is in the upper leauge of performance engines, so why kick it to the curb?
The LS is the best chance we have to get epic performance from the ATS-V.

Do you think it would be bad for GM's image if the Cadillac ATS-V was too fast?
GM might be thinking that, which would be the only reason they would use a V6-TT instead of a V8.
 
#137 ·
lunarx said:
What was the drivability and lifespan of that SHO?
Put a V8 in that same chassis and it will drive better, go faster and live longer.
After a fun experiment Ford conceeded that.

I like the SHO also, but it was made obsolete by advances in engine management that put the V8 back on top.
I think it was a V8 car that won the Pirelli Challenge this year, wish I could remember the make....

You know you don't wish you had a Turbo 4 or 6 under your hood, instead of an LSA.
The LS engine is in the upper leauge of performance engines, so why kick it to the curb?
The LS is the best chance we have to get epic performance from the ATS-V.

Do you think it would be bad for GM's image if the Cadillac ATS-V was too fast?
GM might be thinking that, which would be the only reason they would use a V6-TT instead of a V8.
Honestly, I'd have more fun with an LS6 in an ATS sized car than my LSA in the V. And the Yamaha V6 was more fun to rip and rev than the LS6.

If there was a turbo V6 that was as fun to throttle as that SHO motor, I'd take it every time over an LS6 or LSA...
 
#139 ·
Good idea Jim, resurect the LS6 for the ATS-V.
A high reving V8 is what the ATS-V needs.
I did not want or expect an LSA, just looking for a revised LS making 450+HP NA.
That would show everyone what GM does best.

Hopefully it revs as well as the Yamaha SHO.
That was a great engine that made as much power as V8's of its day.
Now days V8s make 400-518HP NA and the only NA 6 near the low end of that is from Porsche.
The performance market is getting more serious every year, so manufacturers cant hold back if they expect to earn sales and respect from this crowd.
 
#140 ·
Nuieve said:
It needs to have good fuel economy. 11-15mpg city just not gonna cut it these days. No v8 please, twin turbo v6 would be just fine. I don't want to hear a rustle of dollar bills flying out an exhaust pipe whenever i floor it.
My openness for a turbo6 being said, the LS6 powered V1 could easily get 26-28 mpg highway. In a 3850 lb car. Use some modern touches like direct injection and electric powered steering on a proven LS motor in the light ATS-V and 30mpg could easily be done. And I'm sure city would be in the upper teens...
 
#141 ·
It does not need good fuel economy, it needs competitive fuel economy for THIS SEGMENT. Folks (enthusiasts) in the market for luxury sport sedans usually have the extra coin for insurance and gas as well. That's the trade off. Performance versus fuel economy.

Like Jim said all the new tech in the C7 powerplant could very well have MPG highway in the high 20s-30. Fine by me.
 
#148 ·
IIRC, before the ZR1 was formally introduced, GM was saying it would have more than 600hp. It ended up with 638hp.

I hope they're holding back.

Still, if C7 drops a hundred pounds or more, 450hp with that big fat torque curve and a seven-speed will be awfully quick.

.Jinx
 
#149 ·
Got to figure it has a mild cam and is capable of more top end.
Also, like the LS3 and LS7, headers and a tune should yeild more power.
There is always a SC Kit, for those wanting even more.

The gas mileage is what you guys should be all excited about. :banana:
 
#155 ·
^Exactly. Plus Cadillac is not simply trying to build another performance car (there are already plenty of those) They are trying to build a performance brand. And for that, image is everything. Even though image means nothing to those of use who are just interested in performance, we are a small minority.

Besides, if you want an LT1 powered alpha, I almost promise you it is going to be available as a sixth gen Camaro. Which is fine by me. I don't need (or want) cushy leather seats and a bunch of electro-console-gadgets.
 
#156 ·
Image is winning.
I don't see a SC V8 being necessary, a NA V8 will be fine.
That LT1 would be perfect and would beat a stock boost Turbo I6 M3.

I think you guys are kidding yourselves if you think people in this segment would have faith in an unproven TT V6 from GM.
I can't see anybody in their right mind buying a GM TT V6 over the upcomming Turbo I6 M3 or TT V8 C63?

GM knows V8's (and wins racing series with them) so that is what they need to go with in order to properly compete.
Anything less and they may as well stay home.
Should I dare to use Fords current TT V6 SHO as an example of underachievement?
I could not bear to see GM go there.

People trust GM V8's, because they have a proven track record and are economical to maintain/repair and have a long service life.
If you like massive depreciation then a TT V6 is for you.
An LT1 V8 however would continue the history of conquest that the V1 and V2 started.
 
#159 ·
Look. If the ATS-V has a V8, we'll all be happy. If the ATS-V has a TT V6, some of us will be unhappy. Let's see what happens. All I'm saying is that, right now, a V8 is not in the plans for the ATS-V. That could change. And if enough people voice their concern, maybe it will. Good luck...
 
#164 ·
I implied nothing of the sort. If you are having an inferiority complex, that's on you.

You are the one who implied the Camaro is less of a car than the ATS. I simply supplied evidence that you are wrong. What you want in a car is not what I want in a car. If you want luxury niceties, that's great. I don't need them, and I don't feel I should have to pay for them to get a great chassis.

The whole point of this argument is why the ATS-V probably won't have a V8, and that's because most of the buyers who will be able to afford one are not interested in pushrod V8s. While the guys most likely to be intersted in a Camaro certainly will be.

I think it's too early to tell if the ATS-V will have a V8 or turbo V6. GM is targeting the 328i with the ATS. If they succeed in taking BMW buyers away from the holy 3-series, then they are certainly going to target the M3 with the ATS-V. And will likely give it all the specifications (including a turbo6) to compete with it.

If the ATS doesn't stack up well against the 328 and 335, then I think there will be little point in having the ATS-V chase the M3, and in that case, the V will be more likely to get the LT1.

This is my theory, and I am sticking to it. If you guys want an LT1 powered ATS-V, then pray the ATS doesn't compete well with the 3-series.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top