Cadillac Owners Forum banner

ATS-V wishlist??

87K views 372 replies 45 participants last post by  yatman60 
#1 ·
Since there isn't an ATS-V thread group yet, it made sense to ask here... And I know it'll eventually focus on the powertrain... :) So what would you like? Let's try to discuss everything.

----------

Rand49er brought up a few good points which should very well make it to production. Wider wheels/tires, mesh grille and an overall MORE agressive appearance. Personally, I would welcome functional fender vents or a tasteful vented hood. 19" wheels with sticky summer rubber and six piston front/four piston rear Brembos.
 
#237 ·
We think that this car would offer more of a balanced approach rather than brute power and straight line acceleration. Dont get me wrong, having a burly V8 in a lightweight chassis will go a long way. But having plenty of power on hand with a dialed in chassis would please the masses one would think.

We have enough LS's and LS Race Engines sitting around our warehouse, I wouldn't put it out of the question that you might see a D3 ATS powered by something with at least 8 cylinders.... After looking in the engine bay, we have a few ideas of what can and cannot be done.

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac
 
#238 ·
America has always been about speed.

Hot raw nasty speed.


That's not to say I disagree with you, clearly Alpha is designed to be a drivers car, but I don't believe GM will opt for that over winning in straight-line acceleration. Half of car rags dedicate 1/4-1/2 of the car's specifications list to straight line figures.
 
#240 ·
I am sure there will be plenty hot raw nasty speed when they roll this car out. They seemed to be VERY focused on what they were trying to accomplish with the ATS platform. Personally, I think that as long as the car beats the target market car in all categories, then they should have some satisfaction.

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac
 
#241 ·
Well reading between the lines and speaking to one of the drivers from the Indy series. The TTV6 that they are using in INDY is VERY balanced. If we were to do a built V6, we can make just as much power as we could with a built V8. Although I would say a V8 would be a kick in the pants given this vehicles weight.

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac
 
#242 ·
ATS-V= ~3300lbs vehicle weight....~450hp+ V-8, naturally aspirated with ~375+lb-ft torque>>trying for around 7 lbs. per hp....choice of manual or auto.....choice of rear or all-wheel drive (get the power to the pavement ala Porsche Carerra4)... ATS-V specific performance exhaust...ATS-V specific gauges with tachometer oriented design...How about some new colors such as a real red, a dark red, dark blue and maybe a non tint white.......Kiss principle in play here with the engine choice>>>current LSA V-8's have proven it, ask the bimmer/merc guys with their "On the tech edge" motors as they are watching the taillights of a CTS-V getting smaller(usually).....And as a final wish>>>Tinman are you with me?>>>ATS-V Shooting Brake
 
#243 ·
ATS-V= ~3300lbs vehicle weight....~450hp+ V-8, naturally aspirated with ~375+lb-ft torque>>trying for around 7 lbs. per hp....choice of manual or auto.....choice of rear or all-wheel drive (get the power to the pavement ala Porsche Carerra4)... ATS-V specific performance exhaust...ATS-V specific gauges with tachometer oriented design...How about some new colors such as a real red, a dark red, dark blue and maybe a non tint white.......Kiss principle in play here with the engine choice>>>current LSA V-8's have proven it, ask the bimmer/merc guys with their "On the tech edge" motors as they are watching the taillights of a CTS-V getting smaller(usually).....And as a final wish>>>Tinman are you with me?>>>ATS-V Shooting Brake
Audi Does AWD 4 doors, they have for nearly 30 years. They loose to the M3. Every. Time.

You know why the panamera turbo S does well? (I'm assuming you meant panamera, since the Carerra is a coupe)
because it starts @ $175K.
 
#244 ·
Didn't mean to give the impression I am a big Porsche fan>>> just using carerra4 as an example of a 400+hp all-wheel drive system and not the body style>>>could have used Bentley or Bugatti as examples I suppose....... not sure the drive system is what makes the WhaleAmera cost $175K>>>maybe$75K for a name and a left hand key and $100K for the engineering/car?....

Remember we are wishing so we can wish for a 4wheel drive system that provides the fastest off the line times coupled with handling in the rarified league dominated by the CTS-V ....Good statement with the "Hot Raw Nasty Speed" M5eater >>>I like that<<<It will be fun to see what Cadillac comes up with >>>CTS-V proves they are more than capable.
 
#251 ·
Ok, I got carried away with 3300lbs.>>>>>would you go for 3825lbs.? Puts this weight car with 450hp at 8.5lbs per hp>>>> should allow ATS-V to run with the Audi's, the M3/M5 and the AMG's >>AWD would be nice to get the hp to the pavement but JimmyH is probably correct and Cadillac won't do an AWD Vcar
 
#247 ·
The base ATS is about 3300lbs. If they make even more extensive use of lightweight materials, they could feasibly offset the additional 300lbs or so that the V would add to that. At least some of it. I would say somewhere between 3400-3500 lbs if they throw some more magnesium and carbon fiber around.

I am betting folks would line up to buy a 3400 lbs, 450 hp, $60k ATS-V.
 
#248 ·
The base ATS is about 3300lbs. If they make even more extensive use of lightweight materials, they could feasibly offset the additional 300lbs or so that the V would add to that. At least some of it. I would say somewhere between 3400-3500 lbs if they throw some more magnesium and carbon fiber around.

I am betting folks would line up to buy a 3400 lbs, 450 hp, $60k ATS-V.
 
#249 ·
AWD??
I doubt that is under consideration.
They said they were targeting the M3 not the RS4.
Besides AWD completely squashes the lightweight intent.

For the engine, they just need to decide if they want to beat the M3 on Gas Mileage or Acceleration.

Yes, a 3400lb 450HP $60K V8 Manual ATS-V would get me in line.
 
#252 ·
I would not accept 3800lb.
That's V1 weight.
Its reverse progress for a smaller newer car to weigh as much as a bigger older car.

The ATS is a tiny sedan, its weight target should be a max of 3600lb.
It should not weigh more than the V6.

Imagine some nice weight saving items;

Lightweight Racing Seats
Lightened Rear Seat Back
Titanium Exhaust
Forged Wheels
2 Piece Brake Rotors
Carbon Fiber Driveshaft

Those things could trim an easy 100lb and save us the trouble of having to buy them aftermarket.

To take it down another notch,

Sunroof Delete
 
#253 ·
The biggest weight savings will be lightweight wheels, and replacing steel chassis parts with magnesium, aluminum, and carbon fiber. This will all mean a much higher price. My only point is that if they can make a 3400 lbs, 450 hp sedan, people WILL pay the higher sticker price. I don't think ATS buyers would, but ATS-V buyers will.
 
#254 ·
I certianly would pay extra for the lightening.
However, I would not want to see lightening used as an excuse for a substandard engine.

Suposedly they already designed the car to be lightweignt, so I wasn't expecting any chassis or suspension components to need changing.
I'm sure the V drivetrain will be heavier and add weight.
Even so, that can (and should be) be offset, as you pointed out.

I still think all they "need" to do (over the ATS) is put a V8, V2 Brembos, V2 LSD, Performance Suspension, offset some of the weight gain and they would have one hell of an ATS-V.
Any less is pathetic.
Any more is icing on the cake.
 
#258 ·
V2 brakes are way out of proportion for a 3400-3600lb vehicle.

They're practically race-ready in the 4300lb vehicle.

Same goes for everything else.
I never thought I would hear such talk on a V forum.

If you cant race hard enough to want V2 brakes, don't spoil it for the rest of us.
Also, don't tell me that at $375 a caliper, for V2 brakes, is too expensive for a V buyer.

3000lb is not all that light to think you don't need the best brakes you can get.
The 911S uses 13.4" rotors and its a 3100lb 2 passenger vehicle.
The ATS-V is going to weight 500lb more and has the capability to carry 4 passengers and cargo.
If 14.6" V2 brakes are sitting on a parts bin shelf, they should go on this car, its a no-brainier.

Cheap V2 brakes would be an extremely cost effective way to drop lap times and run more laps, without overheating your brakes.
The car could be a real killer at the track for very little extra cost.

I thought that was the whole idea for this car.
Am I wrong?
 
#259 ·
Assuming we are talking about my theoretical 3400 lbs ATS-V, I doubt the 6 pots would offer any performance increase over the 4 pots. Ford and GM feel rear Brembos aren't even needed. Which I think is wrong, if only for aesthetic reasons.

The 6 pots look awesome, but they are heavier. And the whole mission of the ATS in general, is reduce weight. And the V should be even more so. Especially when it comes to unsprung weight. I think that's the whole idea of the car.
 
#260 ·
Have you compared pad sizes from V1 4-Pot to V2 6-Pot?
The increase in pad area is in the range of double.
That extra pad area is extra heat capacity for high performance driving.

Brakes are one area where it's not wise to skimp to save a few pounds.
The increased braking performance will lower lap times far more than saving a few pounds will.

No, you won't see much drop in initial braking performance, but with sustained, fade-free laps you would not give up those V2 brakes for anything.
For drivers who like to late brake, V2 brakes are even more essential.

I really don't want the ATS-V to be a mediocere "good enough" car.
I want it to be as bad-ass as it can, within its target price range.
I'm not asking for anything GM cant easily do with current in house technology.
 
#261 ·
JimmyH said:
Assuming we are talking about my theoretical 3400 lbs ATS-V, I doubt the 6 pots would offer any performance increase over the 4 pots. Ford and GM feel rear Brembos aren't even needed. Which I think is wrong, if only for aesthetic reasons.

The 6 pots look awesome, but they are heavier. And the whole mission of the ATS in general, is reduce weight. And the V should be even more so. Especially when it comes to unsprung weight. I think that's the whole idea of the car.
They're heavier? You sure?
 
#263 ·
I am assuming. Bigger caliper made of the same material=heavier. Simple physics. Unless the 6 pot calipers are made from steel with a lower specific density.

As for the increased swept area; there comes a point when more braking force does NOT equal better braking. If you were to put big brembos on a car that weighs, say, 2000 lbs, what do you think would happen? You would constantly be locking up the wheels, or overworking the braking system.
 
#262 ·
Bicycle racers know '1 lb. off the wheel is worth 2 off the body'....I wonder whether the slightly increased weight of the 6 pot Brembo's isn't overshadowed by the increased braking performance? At some point the 2 curves, braking performance....weight savings(# of pots), will intersect>>>maybe Cadillac should just make their own ATS_V brakes with better or comparable specs...We know they can....
 
#265 ·
I have a V2, and it has great brakes, but an ATS-V that weighs 20% less will stop equally well with 20% smaller brakes, and the reduction in brake weight will help keep the total weight of the car down, and will also improve ride AND handling. It will also improve acceleration, and aid fuel efficiency. Reducing unsprung weight is always beneficial, except that sometimes it costs more. Ask any racer about the benefits of reducing unsprung weight. It's not subtle.
 
#266 ·
I think people are afraid the ATS-V will be "too good", if it gets V2 brakes.
It will be "too good" if it gets a V8.
Worried that it will beat the V2?
That is exactly what I want it to do.

Reducing unsprung weight is not going to improve laptimes as much as fade free dependable brakes will.
You need to take it in context, shaving a few pounds of unsprung weight, when the sprung weight is 3600+ pounds is not going to yeild any significant improvement.
Brakes are stoping that massive sprung weight, not the unsprung weight.
You can gain car lengths in the braking zone with brakes that can survive the abuse.
Trust me, if you had the improved braking power of V2 brakes on a light car you would love it.
I don't hear Z06/911/GTR owners complaining that their brakes are too powerfull and that they want to fit smaller brakes to reduce unsprung weight.

Now even the ZR1/AMG/Porsche guys lucky enough to get the Carbon Composite Brakes opt to go back to steel rotors (and increase unsprung weight) when they get serious about tracking their cars.

Why?
Because they get better pad options for steel rotors allowing them to brake even harder than before, which results in even faster lap times.
Also the cost of carbon rotors is insane and the benifits are not there unless they step up to an even higher price point of carbon construction reserved for very high end racing efforts.

It seems like too many of you are determined to be slow.
If that is what the Cadillac demographic is about now, so be it.
 
#267 ·
lunarx, I understand all your points. They are all valid. For someone who tracks his car. You are in a very, very small percentage of people. Almost all ATS-V sold will never, ever see a racetrack.

It doesn't matter how good GM makes the ATS-V; face it, guys like you are going to mod it anyway. It's in your nature. You HAVE to.
You don't even have the stock engine in your V, so I am not sure why you are so concerned. If you so desire, you will be able to drop an LS7 in an ATS-V. GM designed the Alpha to hold a big V8. You will be able to mount whatever Brembo or Baers you want.

If GM makes the ATS-V perfect, what is going to be left to mod?
 
#268 ·
It's time for Cadillac/GM to part ways with Bose for their stereo. I have owned a Cadillac CTS-V and while i loved the car the stereo system was really pathetic by comparison to other premium vehicles. My wife and I recently test drove a new SRX and again the Bose stereo sounded very anemic. By contrast a friend of mine has a BMW 550i and the sound system in his car is phenomenal. Come on GM ditch Bose - anyone who knows anything about serious stereo will tell you that Bose is all hype/marketing. Put a decent stereo system in the ATS and I may buy the V version of this car - otherwise I'll probably consider a BMW 550 or M3.
 
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