Cadillac ATS-V is probably getting a twin turbo 3.6 liter V6 - Page 13
Cadillac
 

Cadillac Forums | Help Us Help You | Advertise | Cadillac Parts | Cadillac News | Cadillac Classifieds / (Old System)

Cadillac Technical Archive | Cadillac Dealers | Cadillac Reviews | Cadillac Dealer Reviews | Cadillac Vendors

CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 13 of 22 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 319
Like Tree44Likes
Cadillac ATS-V Series Forum Discussion, Cadillac ATS-V is probably getting a twin turbo 3.6 liter V6 in Cadillac V-Series Forums; Originally Posted by bruff1977 17/29 for the LT1 with a manual folks... http://www.autoblog.com/2013/07/08/2...-up-to-30-mpg/ that's really good, corvette has had great ...
  1. #181
    pissedoffwookiee's Avatar
    pissedoffwookiee is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 14 ATS Premium 2.0T Phantom Gray, 13 SRX Luxury Carbon Black
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,218

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

    Quote Originally Posted by bruff1977 View Post
    17/29 for the LT1 with a manual folks...

    http://www.autoblog.com/2013/07/08/2...-up-to-30-mpg/
    that's really good, corvette has had great fuel economy for a while

  2. #182
    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
    4,521

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

    Once we see full specs for the new CTS, specifically the weight difference between the 3.6 Premium and the Vsport, we'll have a better idea of how much weight to add to the ATS 3.6 Premium RWD. I think 200 lbs is a good place to start, but don't be heartbroken if it ends up being a little more; the ATS was trimmed down so much it may need more beefing up than we're used to. FWIW, the old CTS added 333 pounds to get from 3.6 Premium to V; of course, that's a bigger jump...
    I would be surprised if it needed any 'beefing up'

    Cadillac learned with the V1 that they need to design the platform with a V model in mind. They did that with the V2 and all of the weight from that car came from the upgraded power train, brakes and rear diff. There were no strutural reinforcements that I'm aware of aside from sway bars and the fact that they deleted rear folding seats for a marginally larger gas tank.

  3. #183
    Jinx is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2013 CTS-V estate
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,184

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

    But how much mass was added to the base second-generation CTS to make it strong enough for the V? It's no featherweight.

    They may have learned not to add V strength to the base model. In other words, they may have chosen to add a few pounds of beef to the small-volume high-hp model to save a few pounds on the high-volume every-gram-counts-for-CAFE models.

    I'd expect engineers to lean slightly toward mass savings on the compact and lean slightly toward strength on the midsize. Though we may even find with the next CTS-V that GM leaned toward mass savings on both platforms.

  4. #184
    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
    4,521

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

    But how much mass was added to the base second-generation CTS to make it strong enough for the V? It's no featherweight.
    Your analogy doesn't work.

    The base CTS was heavy for it's size when it launched in 08. Mostly because Simga II was grossly weight inefficient. The 1st generation CTS was not exactly petite either.

    The ATS is not heavy at all for it's size.

    It has a very rigid uni body and a 5 link rear suspension that just needs some tighter bushings to cope with non RFT tires. The standard cars already make use of strut stabilizer bars and ultra high strength steel in critical areas. Any weight increases are going to come from bigger brakes, a bigger engine, and maybe the trans. I say maybe because I would bet money on the new tremec's reuse for the ATS-V, and possibly use of a 6L50E in the automatic version. Otherwise you're talking about outsourcing, a 50E over the 45E that's used in current cars brings about a 10-25lb weight disadvantage.

  5. #185
    Jinx is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2013 CTS-V estate
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,184

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

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    Your analogy doesn't work.
    It was your analogy -- you said they built the second-gen CTS platform with the V model in mind:

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    Cadillac learned with the V1 that they need to design the platform with a V model in mind. They did that with the V2 and all of the weight from that car came from the upgraded power train, brakes and rear diff. There were no strutural reinforcements that I'm aware of aside from sway bars and the fact that they deleted rear folding seats for a marginally larger gas tank.
    That's partly why, as you said

    The base CTS was heavy for it's size when it launched in 08.
    I contend that the CTS 2.0 was heavier than it needed to be as a 300hp luxury sedan in order to be strong enough to be great as a 550hp M-class sport sedan.

    The ATS is not heavy at all for it's size.
    Exactly, it was optimized to be just strong enough. GM made a point of this in their press outings. Is it inconceiveable that they chose to leave the added strength for a 450+hp M version out of the base chassis in order to optimize the 320hp version? That's why I say don't be heartbroken if the math for brakes + drivetrain doesn't quite cover the mass delta from ATS Premium to ATS-V. Of course, they may also subtract mass from the base car with more exotic materials. After all, we can see from the way ATS and CTS 3.0 are priced that Cadillac isn't trying to be the bargain choice anymore.

    .Jinx

  6. #186
    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
    4,521

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

    I contend that the CTS 2.0 was heavier than it needed to be as a 300hp luxury sedan in order to be strong enough to be great as a 550hp M-class sport sedan.
    It was heavy because it used a revised Sigma platform, which, like most GM products before it were grossly weight inefficient. It didn't make use of a lot of high strength steel and the platform itself needed to be cost effective for it's tweener price range. The bits that were introduced for the V were very lightweight.

    IE the aluminum/magnesium front cradle, the front tower brace, the revised points for the rear-end carrier, the folding seat delete..

    The first generation CTS was by comparison, similarly heavy for it's size compared to other vehicles in it's class, most of which were larger. It was not CTS-V optimized I will add.

    Is it inconceivable that they chose to leave the added strength for a 450+hp M version out of the base chassis in order to optimize the 320hp version?
    You can conceive anything you wish. However, if you want to theorize based on what the Germans --and Cadillac-- have said works in the past, then there will be no structural reinforcements to the ATS-V. I might concede to bigger strut tower bars(the spy photos of the F80 has them), but if you're suggesting uni body or sub frame changes, no.

    Exactly, it was optimized to be just strong enough. GM made a point of this in their press outings.
    GM made a point to beat the 3 series first and foremost. Weight savings in design and use of materials was one of the methods used to accomplish this. I never once read their press material and read it as 'we could have done better but decided not to' Your point of 'strong enough' might only be applied in a few quips about how they considered fastener size even in trying to figure out what was the minimum required to keep the bits together. I can assure you, they didn't compromise uni body rigidity, and if you believe they did, I'm not certain you've ever really driven an ATS.

    Remember, this platform is going to be used not just in the Cadillac, but in the Camaro and who knows what else.

    What specific changes do you anticipate they'll make in order to accomplish this vague idea of a stiffer uni body or structure for the ATS-V? I would very much like for you to go in detail.

  7. #187
    pissedoffwookiee's Avatar
    pissedoffwookiee is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 14 ATS Premium 2.0T Phantom Gray, 13 SRX Luxury Carbon Black
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,218

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

    Gentleman,

    to add to this, Cadillac did plan on the CTS-V when designing the CTS unibody, so no structural changes were made, i recall this being said in their press, and in the series of Nurburgring developement videos, and they were representing it as 'if strong enough for V then its good for everybody'.

    further evidence of this was with the V-Wagon, i also recall reading (it was either in autoline or automotive news) they were still on the fence as whether to create one or not for about a year and a half, in the end what convinced cadillac was how easy it was to do since all the pieces were there already and the article stated that because of this they only needed to sell something like 42 of them for the V-Wagon to be profitable.

    that said we are in the 'lightweight euro cap/cafe era' and as i see it, there is the possibility that it needs beefing up, i'm leaning toward the use of high strength steel for weight savings having a double purpose with the v in mind. i'll quote Martin Whitmarsh Team Principal for McLaren F1 when asked if the loss of their trick downforce producing exhaust due to regulation changes would hurt the team, he responded "probably not much, once an engineer has learned a perfomance enhancing trick he cannot unlearn it". I'm thinking the same is going on with the V team on the ATS

  8. #188
    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
    4,521

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

    that said we are in the 'lightweight euro cap/cafe era' and as i see it, there is the possibility that it needs beefing up
    There it is again, vagueness, what specifically, needs beefing up? Are you talking about undercarriage braces? About strut tower bars?

    or are you talking about unibody changes, subframe changes, or something else?

    The former is feasible, the latter is not. Suggesting the car is somehow structurally compromised for the sake of weight savings is far fetched.

    What it might need, is some lateral supports to account for uneven weight distribution to re balance the handling characteristics of the car that people like, which is why I suspect the F80 uses a big fat brace on the front of the spy photos we've seen. It lacks one entirely compared to the ATS which already has 2 a arms jutting from the strut towers (mostly because they're aluminum and need it).

  9. #189
    pissedoffwookiee's Avatar
    pissedoffwookiee is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 14 ATS Premium 2.0T Phantom Gray, 13 SRX Luxury Carbon Black
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,218

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

    unibody,........... but if you keep reading that line i'm talking about the high strengh steel they used which was in the unibody, i'll try to be clearer next time

  10. #190
    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
    4,521

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

    Quote Originally Posted by pissedoffwookiee View Post
    unibody
    I'm just going to have to disagree then. That would be gigantically cost prohibitive, and we already know a 420HP longer wheel base of this car is using the exact same unibody. We also know the Camaro will use a shortened alpha unibody which has the potential to go well over 500Hp. They're going to do a one-off design for a < 3K unit a year car and then run that through all the safety and homoglation required (millions of dollars)? Not buying it.

  11. #191
    Jinx is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2013 CTS-V estate
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,184

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

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    It was heavy because it used a revised Sigma platform, which, like most GM products before it were grossly weight inefficient. It didn't make use of a lot of high strength steel and the platform itself needed to be cost effective for it's tweener price range. The bits that were introduced for the V were very lightweight.

    IE the aluminum/magnesium front cradle, the front tower brace, the revised points for the rear-end carrier, the folding seat delete..

    The first generation CTS was by comparison, similarly heavy for it's size compared to other vehicles in it's class, most of which were larger. It was not CTS-V optimized I will add.
    We all know past GM platforms were overweight. But if you're saying that NONE of the CTS 2.0 mass was there to provide added strength for V duty, then what was the point of your original comment that CTS 1.0 wasn't designed with the V in mind but CTS 2.0 was?

    However, if you want to theorize based on what the Germans --and Cadillac-- have said works in the past, then there will be no structural reinforcements to the ATS-V. I might concede to bigger strut tower bars(the spy photos of the F80 has them), but if you're suggesting uni body or sub frame changes, no.
    What worked in the past didn't necessarily produce the optimally-efficient base car. That's a lot more important today than it used to be. Also, platform engineering and manufacturing are more flexible than ever before -- even the terms "platform" and "architecture" have been stretched quite a bit.

    And I'm not casting aspersions on the engineering of the ATS as you suggest I am -- quite the opposite, I'm saying the ATS was optimized to an extent beyond what GM has done before, nothing there that isn't needed. Watch GM guys' talks about the ATS and you'll pick up what I'm talking about. It will take me a while to dig back through all that and pull some quotes; I'll try to find the time. (Finding that ATS video you saw 18 months ago, not always easy.)

    Remember, this platform is going to be used not just in the Cadillac, but in the Camaro and who knows what else.
    And the Camaro and CTS won't use all the same body stampings. Do we even know how much of the suspension and drivetrain components in the CTS are common to the ATS? Obviously a low-volume ATS-V won't be as different, but it doesn't have to be identical either.

    What specific changes do you anticipate they'll make in order to accomplish this vague idea of a stiffer uni body or structure for the ATS-V? I would very much like for you to go in detail.[/QUOTE] Beyond bigger strut tower bars? Front subframe, crossmember, engine cradle; maybe stiffening where the rear suspension mounts to the body. The flared rear fenders that everybody wants are unique stamping, so I don't discount the possibility of tweaked structure between them. Rear diff and halfshafts too, though that's drivetrain weight -edit- Undercarriage braces? Maybe.

    .Jinx

  12. #192
    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
    4,521

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

    We all know past GM platforms were overweight. But if you're saying that NONE of the CTS 2.0 mass was there to provide added strength for V duty, then what was the point of your original comment that CTS 1.0 wasn't designed with the V in mind but CTS 2.0 was
    I did not say none of the weight was relevant. You stated the CTS 2 weighed so much because it was designed for a V. That has no evidence to support that other than your opinions. I on the other hand explained that Sigma is an overweight platform anyway by evidence of the CTS 1 which was not designed for a V and still weighed too much. The CTS 2 was a larger car and they strengthened some bits to provide for a safer more rigid structure as well.

    And the Camaro and CTS won't use all the same body stampings. Do we even know how much of the suspension and drivetrain components in the CTS are common to the ATS? Obviously a low-volume ATS-V won't be as different, but it doesn't have to be identical either.
    By nature of riding on the same platform, they will have McPherson aluminum front suspension and a steel 5 link rear. I expect they will be stretched versions of these components.

    Beyond bigger strut tower bars? Front subframe, crossmember, engine cradle; maybe stiffening where the rear suspension mounts to the body. The flared rear fenders that everybody wants are unique stamping, so I don't discount the possibility of tweaked structure between them. Rear diff and halfshafts too, though that's drivetrain weight -edit- Undercarriage braces? Maybe.
    I could see front subframe modifications only in the circumstance that they use an LT1, or that the LF3 for some reason doesn't already fit in the LFX's mounting locations. Stiffing though? I couldn't comment.

  13. #193
    pissedoffwookiee's Avatar
    pissedoffwookiee is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 14 ATS Premium 2.0T Phantom Gray, 13 SRX Luxury Carbon Black
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,218

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

    Quote Originally Posted by M5eater View Post
    I'm just going to have to disagree then. That would be gigantically cost prohibitive, and we already know a 420HP longer wheel base of this car is using the exact same unibody. We also know the Camaro will use a shortened alpha unibody which has the potential to go well over 500Hp. They're going to do a one-off design for a < 3K unit a year car and then run that through all the safety and homoglation required (millions of dollars)? Not buying it.
    that said we are in the 'lightweight euro cap/cafe era' and as i see it, there is the possibility that it needs beefing up, i'm leaning toward the use of high strength steel for weight savings having a double purpose with the v in mind.
    if you look at the whole statement, i'm agreeing with you.

    i'm leaning toward the use of high strength steel for weight savings having a double purpose with the v in mind.
    but since no one except GM actually knows I left open the (slight in my opinion) possibility it could be the other way

    we are in the 'lightweight euro cap/cafe era' and as i see it, there is the possibility that it needs beefing up


    ----------

    platform engineering and manufacturing are more flexible than ever before -- even the terms "platform" and "architecture" have been stretched quite a bit.
    very true the theta premium aka theta-epsilon of the SRX is a new platform comprised of the combination of theta (equinox/terrain) and epsilon 2 (lacrosse/malibu) those guys can can be wizards

  14. #194
    BDAdkins is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): ATS 3.6L & ATS 2.5L
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1

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

    Gas mpg with ATS and sports car is a ridiculous conversation.

    I have 2 ATS's my wife's 2.5L 4 cyl at best gets 22 mpg. The advertized mpg for ATS is a complete joke.

    why spend extra money on the V if it is just a 3.6. Get the current 3.6 and add a supercharger kit. No turbo lag and no extra $$ for it being the V model.

    I love my ATS with premium package. 3.6 L with new programming, running premium gas and axle back exhaust dumped the huge muffler.

    it rocks sounds magnificent at the hood and at the tail and immediately responds to a smash of the pedal to the floor.

    I am just waiting for kpe to release supercharger kit. Bet u my 2013 sc 3.6 will smoke the whimpy turbo lag! I don't give a flip bout mpg. The stock engine mpg already sucked, and I don't fill up any more often now.

  15. #195
    JFJr's Avatar
    JFJr is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2009 CTS-V (TR-6060, Black Raven/Ebony, Recaros, Ultraview)
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Age
    70
    Posts
    1,419
    We need a subthread devoted to those that are looking for more mpg out of these high performance cars, so that they can stop cluttering up another forums.

    Jud
    Jud

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