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...
 
#51 · (Edited)
Whoa! That would be an interesting model setup vis a vis BMW. A TT3.6 to compete with the 335 and a V8 to compete with the M. GM might be wise to do that with each Caddy model just nosing out the BMW counterpart.

I'll take a V8, myself.



EDIT: If that V8 is NA, do you suppose they'll make a Maggie (or an equivalent) for it?
 
#53 ·
The rumors about the F03 M3 suggest 450 hp. What are the rumors saying about the 3.0lTT and the 3.6lTT? If the V8 ends up being lighter then the 3.6lTT, makes 450+ (according to the math that uses the LS3 + DI ), and I think it has a lower centre of gravity, most likely more reliable...I dont see it making sense for the V6TT. Im really hoping for the V8. If no V8, Ill go with the turbo4.

I agree, the ATS-V HAS to be on par with the M3. Not necessarily in hp, but in performance. Im hoping Cadillac challenges BMW to a head to head shootout of the M3 and ATS-V.
 
#55 ·
... If the V8 ends up being lighter then the 3.6lTT, makes 450+ (according to the math that uses the LS3 + DI ), and I think it has a lower centre of gravity, most likely more reliable...I dont see it making sense for the V6TT. ...

... Im hoping Cadillac challenges BMW to a head to head shootout of the M3 and ATS-V.
I agree that if the small block outshines the V6 in those four respects, it indeed doesn't make sense not to make the V8 at least an optional motor. Better yet, both might be offered in different trims (or something) ... the V6 with AT only and the V8 with a choice of AT or MT. I'm guessing.

As far as a head-to-head shootout like maybe a 30-minute video shown on TV, I'd love it.
 
#59 ·
35 would be nice, but I think that would be a bit much to expect. For a daily driver, I would be thrilled with 30 mpg.

Realistically, I am much more likely to keep the Camaro (maybe start modding again :D) and get a Cruze Eco as my DD. 42 mpg and a 6-speed manual :thumbsup:

----------

And there is NO 5.5L under development. That is the C6R racing engine.
 
#60 ·
Latest rumor I heard was that the initial TT V6 powertrain didn't meet the requirements the design folks set for themselves (not sure whether it was a TT3.0 or TT3.6), so they were re-evaluating. No outcome that I know of, just delays.

My initial thought was that if the engine didn't meet their expectations, a) they have goals for the car being competitive with the next M3 (I was told this is their benchmark), which is a good thing, and b) they're willing to re-evaluate rather than produce a car that can't compete, also a good thing.

I've seen some camouflaged ATS test cars up here, in addition to the production versions given to GM employees, but I've not been able to discern anything unique about the test cars that would indicate the V model (but what the hell else could it be?).
 
#65 ·
Has No Left said:
Let's assume the ATS-V is around 3500 lbs and has 400 hp. What does that put it 0-60? 1/4 mile?

Wonder if they will have launch control with the manuals?
Cadillac will need to fix power delivery issues in order for the numbers to be impressive. For instance:
2012/13 Audi S4 with 333 hp will do a 12.9 1/4 (curb weight 3800ish)
2013 3.6 ATS with 321 hp will do. 14.0 1/4 (curb weight 3400ish)

I know it's not all about the 1/4 mile, but the visceral feel of a hard accelerating car is like none other.
 
#69 ·
rand49er said:
The only reason they get these kind of numbers is the AWD. Look at their 5-60 times, and they aren't so inflated.
Ummm, no... How do you explain my 3.6 AWD ATS not having a better 0-60 and 1/4 mile? It's all about power delivery, and there is no denying that Audi has basically written the book on AWD. The first year they entered the a Quattro equipped car in rally they dominated and continued to dominate until finally an AWD category was created to even the playing field.
 
#71 ·
jurzdevil said:
Quattro isn't the entire reason why. The fast times with the S4 are with a dual-clutch automatic. The torque converter in the ATS AWD can't compete with the initial power delivery from a "real" clutch.
Agreed, my original statement is that cadillac needs to fix power delivery. That pretty much sums up everything after the flywheel in my mind.
 
#72 ·
The twin turbo V6 thats coming, even in a 330 hp trim, and a DCT would wake the car up. After finally driving an V6 ATS, I must say that the trans tuning is great, throttle response is fantastic, and that V6 enjoys all its powerband in that car. Saying that the ATS needs to improve its power delivery really shows how competitive this segment is.
 
#73 ·
concorso said:
The twin turbo V6 thats coming, even in a 330 hp trim, and a DCT would wake the car up. After finally driving an V6 ATS, I must say that the trans tuning is great, throttle response is fantastic, and that V6 enjoys all its powerband in that car. Saying that the ATS needs to improve its power delivery really shows how competitive this segment is.
Without a doubt. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy driving my AWD V6 ATS. It's just on the slow side, comparatively of course...
 
#74 ·
Admittedly I'm prejudiced, but I don't think that a V-6, in any trim is appropriate, regardless of what the Germans are doing. I love the sound cranking up my "V" in an underground parking garage; it has a beautiful rumble, shakes the ground and gets everyone's attention. The new LT1 or existing LS7, somewhat "enhanced" and naturally aspirated, is what is needed. That will put a smile on all American car guys and we won't have to be embarrassed driving a V-6 that sounds like a bumblebee. We were successful with the V1 and V2, and should continue as leaders, not "me too" followers.

Jud
 
#75 ·
Don't if this is going to be revealed at the NAIAS later this month, but I was just wondering if GM would ever consider both the LT1 (at ~450 hp) and a 3.6TT (at ~380 hp). The latter would be a V while the former would be like a "Black Series" or something more clever (i.e. marketable).
 
#81 ·
pacoflyer said:
I am all for a V6 TT. Ecoboost SHO owners are making 420 AWHP with meth injection on the stock 3.5L With associated drivetrain loss its 500+ Crank HP and not a single one has broken or transmission failures. It's too bad the turbos are so small!!
Again, ad nauseum, and focusing on a street engine, if the TTV-6 is heavier than a comparable LSx V-8, has more moving parts and doesn't get significantly better gas mileage, and sounds like an insect, why??

Jud
 
This post has been deleted
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