Cadillac Owners Forum banner

Cadillac ATS-V is probably getting a twin turbo 3.6 liter V6

73K views 318 replies 40 participants last post by  iVwishing 
#1 ·
The ATS-V might not be getting a V8 or TT 3.0 after all. Now it looks like GM is favoring a twin turbo 3.6 liter V6. More displacement (over the 3.0) certainly doesn't bother me. What I wonder now is if it'll be a true twin turbo or a twin "scroll" turbo...

The CTS and XTS will still be getting the 3.0 liter twin turbo V6 engine...
 
#2 ·
I was under the impression twin scroll turbos were more efficient. I would prefer to see a biturbo; a small turbo to prevent lag, and a big honkin turbo for that boost.

If it's not a biturbo system, they better incorporate no-lift-shift with the manual, otherwise there will be no way to maintain boost.

All things considered, I would still rather have an NA V8. But I would also like 30 mpg. Perhaps the ATS-V is not my next car.
 
#5 ·
the twin K03 APB in the S4 had plenty of power everywhere. You don't need a sequential turbo engine these days. I would prefer a twin parallel style myself. Maybe even a scorpion sytle.

personally, since I grew up with a TTV6, I wouldn't mind going back to one, espically if we're talking about 20+mpg combined or so. I have a feeling $5 Gas this summer will be pretty painful in the 15mpg V.
 
#3 ·
Since I'm much less of a fan of BMW's twin turbo rather than their single turbo, I hope Cadillac uses the twin turbo method. Then again, the Grand National was a good example of what can be done from a production single turbo. I just still have the twin turbo Supra, RX7 and 300ZX in my head... Oh, and the 335i.
 
#4 ·
Sure hope you're correct about the 3.6. That extra 600 cc will be felt and appreciated.

So, the discussion above is centered around the type of twin-turbo setup it would have. Personally, I think of a biturbo setup as being more complicated, and my money is on GM shying away from something like that for that very reason.

A TT3.6. Interesting. 425 hp would be even more interesting.
 
#6 ·
The only turbo I have driven in the last 10 years is a GTI. It has one small turbo. It suffers from no lag that I could tell. But it also runs out of breath as it approaches redline. I understand these modern twin turbo systems are much better than the last one I drove (an old 90s Talon) But I will still need to drive one to set my mind at ease.
 
#8 ·
exactly, I really hate to admit it too, but fuel economy is going to start to play a bigger role in sports sedans espically(since heavy cars+ big engines is always a bad recipie), and when people start to pay $100(which is only a few years away at this rate) to fill-up their LSA every 220 miles, people will get over a V8 real quick.
 
#9 ·
Personally, I like getting good fuel economy, but there's lot of oil ... TONS of it. Any scarcity is artificial. But, artificial or not, it's "real" if you can't pipe it in and you can't drill for and those that have it want to raise the price. Getting 30 MPG highway effortlessly and do 0-60 in under 5 sec plus pull in excess of 0.9 Gs around corners is a decent future all considered.
 
#12 ·
It'll have a pretty decent drag coefficient with a slightly smaller frontal area compared to a Gen 1 CTS (good for highway MPG), and the low weight will help with city MPG. With DI, VVT, and a small (vs a V8) displacement, 30 MPG hwy while not flogging would seem a cinch.
 
#18 ·
There are high and lows to every EPA estimated figure if you read the fine print. I would bet most people will fall between 25-27 highway in a turbo ATS, it's all just guesses at this point anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if the EPA's high-end estimate for the ATS turbo is nearly 30mpg, just like the SS you drive actually *can* get better than 24.
 
#19 ·
Most of the guys I know are getting 20 on the highway. Of course, I am sure it's because they can't keep their foot out of it. After filling up and resetting, I usually get 28 from the gas station to my office. But, by the time I complete my round trip it's usually down to 24. Been more like the 22-23 lately with extreme cold.
 
#21 ·
Drove my wife's '12 SRX (3.6L 6AT) to Sandusky, OH and back this past week. This was my first opportunity to see what it could get. Got 24.2 MPG at a steady 68 MPH over about 200 miles. Though we consisted of two adults and two kids plus all the luggage that would fit, I realize weight is not a big factor at constant speeds, but I had hoped for it to do better. Not sure what the Cd is on it, but it's gotta be > 0.30.

So, now that I think about it, maybe 30 MPG in a TT3.6 ATS-V is a bit optimistic afterall.
 
#23 ·
M5eater said:
30 is probably a pipe dream stock, but 25-27 is realistic, I could see 30 with big turbos.
Well, with 3400-3500lbs, a more aerodynamic body and more advanced technology, I would think 30mpg would be doable.

My V1 with 3850lbs, an unaerodynamic body and a V8 would get 26mpg all day long on the highway...
 
#27 ·
I still question the longevity of these highly boosted motors. Randy, aren't you worried what the maggie will do to your internals over the long run?

----------

Your LS6's internals, I mean :D
My personal internals are doing just fine.

There's no question that if average cylinder pressures run high due to high throttle openings and times of boost over the life of the motor, it would put increased stress on wrist pin bearings, on rod bearings, on piston skirts and rings, and probably on main bearings. In my case, I really don't spend a lot of time at boost conditions, so I don't really feel my motor is detrimentally affected especially with good oil pressure and fresh Mobil 1 in it all the time.

In another example, if you look at guys like ronr who has 70k maggied miles on his LS6 and drives more frequently while under boost conditions (i.e. "spirited") than I do, that might be something to look at. But, I'd bet his motor goes close to 200k miles before he needs a rebuild, but that's because it's a proven LS motor design. We're talking here about a 3.6L V6 that's almost exclusively found in passenger cars, and I'd be concerned that there is less known about this design under severe operating conditions than LS motors in general. I would hope that GM has flogged the piss out of this motor and has addressed any weak points in it before sending it out into the public with a couple of turbos slapped on it to be flogged by all of us.

Anybody follow common issues with the 3.6 motor? I have not myself, so I'm all ears.
 
#29 ·
JimmyH said:
Looking in the 2nd gen CTS forums, there are not many complaints about the engine, other than the premature timing chain wear problem.
Not to change the subject but speaking of the timing chain/belt (whatever is in there) situation. My brother in law has 10,000 miles on his 2008 or 2009 CTS sedan and at a recent service noticed that Cadillac adjusted something to do with, I believe timing, and mentioned something about the belt/chain on the invoice - and the car had been noticeably slower since. Has GM "fixed" this potential issue by making the car weaker? Is there already a discussion going on in reference to this?
 
#35 ·
Got my Car & Driver issue today. Page 49 predicts an ATS-V with a twin-turbo V6 rated at 380-420 hp weighing in the neighborhood of 3,600 lbs. They have cost pegged at $55k to start.

I'd love to see it come in at, say, 435 hp (or more) and weigh a shade under 3,500 lbs just to rub C&D's nose into their bowl of sauerkraut.



Oh, btw, their rendition looks just Jimmy's photoshop slightly rotated. :D
 
#44 ·
Got my Car & Driver issue today. Page 49 predicts an ATS-V with a twin-turbo V6 rated at 380-420 hp weighing in the neighborhood of 3,600 lbs.
Randy - My cousin told me last month the 3.6TT was making 412hp on the dyno and testing wasn't done. Around 400 is what they were looking to get. Also he's been told that the ATS-V will get a V8 option...It may be a long shot in the end but I sure hope so.
 
#38 ·
Doing a search, I found this thread on gminsidenews: http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f53/3-6l-timing-chain-failures-due-redesign-98426/index4.html

Here's another post from XXSS on 2/27/11:
"... I can speak from first hand experience that over 90% of the vehicles that land in my shop with P0008 current and require chains, also have low oil level (Most with none on the dipstick) and have traveled anywhere from 9000-20000kms between oil changes. The Camshaft actuators do require
oil pressure to function properly."


Apparently, GM went to a different timing chain/sprocket with smaller spacing in order to reduce noise, and that's what caused a problem. These chains may have been more susceptible to low oil/low oil pressure conditions.



Another search showed this link:
http://gmpowertrain.ca/Product/3.6 LLT/LLT Camaro Summary.pdf

Talks about the 3.6, but no mention of a change. It DOES, however, speak to the problem design (see bold print):
"
2010 GM 3.6L V-6 VVT DI (LLT) 3.6L V-6 VVT DI (LLT) CAR and TRUCK ENGINE
− Base engine in the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, Chevrolet Traverse, Chevrolet Camaro,
and Cadillac STS.
− Optional engine for the Cadillac CTS, CTS Wagon, and Buick LaCrosse
− Advanced multi-outlet high pressure fuel injectors that inject fuel directly into
the combustion chamber
− Variable, high-pressure engine-driven fuel pump for multiple injection events
− Stainless steel fuel rail
− Advanced engine control module (ECM) for direct injection control
− RWD applications matched to 6L50 six-speed automatic transmission
− FWD applications matched to 6T75 six speed automatic transmission. It is an advanced
transmission with clutch-to-clutch shift operation for front- and all-wheel drive vehicles.
The transmission's six-gear configuration allows for a "steep" 4.48:1 first gear, which
helps deliver exceptional launch feel, and a 0.74:1 overdrive sixth gear. Sixth
gear lowers rpm at highway speeds, reducing noise and vibration while improving fuel
economy. Also, the 6T75 offers automatic grade braking, shift stabilization and precise
shift control.
− New direct injection engine keeps oil life monitoring system
− Cam phasing coupled with direct injection further reduces cold start exhaust emissions
− Cast aluminum cylinder block and heads
− Double overhead cams with four valves per cylinder
− Cams driven by small-pitch, inverted tooth chain
− Variable valve timing with four-cam phasing for precise intake and exhaust tuning and
control
− High-power and high efficiency 11.3:1 compression ratio
− Cast aluminum polymer coated oil cooled pistons, with a fully floating wristpin
− Oil jets cool the pistons, while polymer-coated skirts reduce noise and friction
− Durable forged crankshaft, and precision sinter-forged connecting rods
− Cast aluminum structural oil pan stiffens the cylinder block structure and reduces noise
− Electronic throttle control with advanced integrated cruise control
− Reliable coil-on-spark-plug ignition
− Optimally tuned exhaust manifolds with close-coupled catalytic converters
− Composite camshaft covers are fully isolated and reduce noise
− Numerous other noise, vibration and harshness controls
− Exclusive durability enhancements and minimal maintenance requirements
− Manufacturing techniques refined for exceptional quality and manufacturing efficiency

Full Description of New and Updated Features
Base engine in Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, Chevrolet Traverse, Cadillac STS, and Chevrolet
Camaro. Optional engine in Cadillac CTS, CTS Wagon, and Buick LaCrosse."



Here's a little bit more about a 3.6 redesign:
http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_chevrolet.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Apr/0413_camaro_engine

S
pecifically: "Compared to the 3.6L V-6 in 2011 models, the new LFX engine features:
  • New cylinder head design with integrated exhaust manifold
  • Improved intake port design and larger intake valves within the cylinder heads
  • Longer-duration intake camshafts
  • Composite intake manifold
  • New fuel pump and isolated fuel rail
  • New, optimized-flow fuel injectors
  • Structural front cover and cylinder block enhancements
  • Stronger and lighter-weight connecting rods
  • Camshaft cap and throttle body design enhancements."
No mention here of a timing chain redesign, but this is 2012 compared to 2011 (supposedly after the 2010 redesign).



Okay, I'm done.
 
#45 ·
also note that 2007 V6 Cadillac, Acadia and Outlook engines have a warranty extension on them ('special coverage' is the terminology - i think it is 10yr 120,000miles)
it will reimburse you if you had to pay out of pocket for a timing chain repair - so i'm told

...

as far as I'm concerned the low oil levels due to longer intervals between oil changes are the biggest factor
(blame here lies both with owners for not checking and with GM for not having a low oil light/message)
i'd really like to know why a certain percentage of these engines seem to consume oil while the rest don't or barely do

on top of that there was a bad batch of timing chains - at least that's the 'rumor' i heard
(sht happens - not sure if this was ever proven or admitted to)

on top of that the sprockets/actuators have short teeth that allow a timing jump a lot easier
(i guess this was part of that engineering design to make them quiet - apparently a double edged sword)


...

anywho... back to our regularly scheduled thread topic
 
#49 ·
If they can squeeze 400 hp from the TTV6, itll still be down on the present M3, but it would be a step up from the 335. Is it possible to have a near 400 hp TTV6 non-V? Call it a platinum...offer model specific upgrades aimed at a little more comfort and luxury comparatively to the V, maybe even some subtle styling changes interior and exterior that differentiate it from the regular ATS, but also from the V. Then offer the V, with all the usual V upgrades, including the V8, maybe even an LS7. :) The platinum could run same width/diameter tires all around to ease in changeovers, have a quiet exhaust, a softer ride, optional awd, offer gearing that aims at better mileage, optional brightwork, with optional body colored lighting for the V. All of this is relative to the V, not to the regular ATS. Also, Id love to see Cadillac offer a new high end interior fabric that isnt leather or fo-swade.
Sorry, guys, trying to hammer out a response when your busy and tired leads to a post like that...all sorts of messy. :)
 
#50 ·
Is it possible to have a near 400 hp TTV6 non-V? Call it a platinum...offer model specific upgrades aimed at a little more comfort and luxury comparatively to the V, maybe even some subtle styling changes interior and exterior that differentiate it from the regular ATS, but also from the V. Then offer the V, with all the usual V upgrades, including the V8, maybe even an LS7. :)
Its funny you say this because my source said the same thing...The 3.6TT was not going to be in the V model. Possibly a different trim level ATS with the TT option. Most likely end up in other GM cars too. Still hoping that ATS-V get the V8.
 
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