Cadillac CTS First Generation Forum - 2003 - 2007 Discussion, New V6 in Cadillac CTS Coupe, Sport Sedan and Sport Wagon Forums; Am I the only one that is LESS than impressed with the specs of the "new" CTS V6? They're making ...
yeah, i guess the big deal is that it is an improvement over the current v-6. But they keep touting how "refined" it is. Thats like some BS remark someone makes when you say theres nothing special about it. i did read that the engine is able to put out 370hp in turbo trim, that would be a big deal.
Yeah, Like I said....BIG DEAL! The 300 M is a dog as far as I'm concerned. I looked at them because I liked the look of the car and I was NOT impressed by the power. Typical V-6 aniemic at best! Someone who's used to driving a Camry might think it was powerful but I thought it was a dog. If they don't put a V-8 in the CTS I.M.O. it will have NO redeeming qualitys other than looking kind of cool. That's not enough!
i guess, in comparison to the CTS competition it compares very favorably. In fact i think it has more horsepower and torque than pretty much any v-6 in its class...3-series,LS,C-Class,etc... That being said i wouldnt buy one without a v-8, or a turbo/supercharged v-6
The 300M was impressive in its market segment when it was introduced a few years ago, but it ain't all that now. If I had only thirty thousand and change to spend I'd probably buy one because it's bigger than anything else with luxury pretentions at that price, but it's no rocketship.
From the Detroit News Auto Insider article posted elsewhere on this forum (and thus faithfully paraphrased from a GM Press Release no doubt):
"One key to the new engine family's success, maintains GM, is that it will be competitive with the best in the V-6 class, yet be built at a lower cost. "
This is not GM's "beat all comers with superior technology" engine. This is GM's "let's check off the same boxes on the spec sheet as those imports as cheaply as possible" engine.
Honda and Toyota et al have had at least a decade of production to refine their V6s. Heck, look at Nissan -- an entire company raised from the ashes on the strength of their V6. GM, on the other hand, has been hoping against hope that its family sedan engines wouldn't have to adopt all this costly stuff -- how come people don't want an iron-block big-displacement pushrod 90-degree V6 cut from a dead V8 some thirty-five years ago? Who told buyers they needed aluminum blocks and dual overhead cams and variable valve timing? Don't they know that stuff is expensive?
Indeed, GM is still hedging its bets, because they have two new V6 families -- the "high-feature" V6 (this one) and the "high-value" V6, the latter engine intended no doubt for Chevy Malibus and Pontiac Grand Ams and Buick Centurys, because the rubes who buy those cars clearly don't know how to pronounce DOHC. ;-)
I understand GM's conservative approach -- they can't see increasing cost in their high-volume product, and don't want to escalate a feature war that eats everyone's profits -- but I wish they would try to be the best more often. Cadillacs should inspire lust and envy, engines included.
This engine -- which merely brings parity with a five-year-old Chrysler -- inspires adequacy, at best.
Your last sentence is all I was trying to say. The engine's broad powerband is only due to another "high-tech" feature, variable valve timing. Something the Chrysler does without.
As for the 300M being a dog, I had mine right when they came out and I loved it. It COULD have been more powerful but it was certainly no DOG. I think the next generation 300 "N" will prove to be a worthy opponent with it's new chassis and a Hemi V8. DC is actually coming out with some pretty hot cars these days. Hell, the Neon SRT-4 will SMOKE a CTS and a lot of other much more expensive cars. There is definately a HP and 0-60 war going on and it shows little signs of slowing.
While the "new" V6 will bring some much needed extra punch to the entry level CTS, I too think that since it is a Cadillac, it should not need it. It should ALREADY be a leader.
Heck, my Camaro will smoke a CTS.
SRt4 are fast as hell and actually have about 30 more hp than Chrysler says it does.
But I would never cross shop one.
When I want to leave black marks on the road and be a redneck i drive the Camaro.
The CTS is an entirely different ride. Solid body structure, a great handler and refined.
As great as the SRT4 is it's still a Neon.
I used to own a Olds Intrigue with the DOHC motor and that car's midrange power was unbelievable.
It is interesting that the Intrigue posted identical 0-60 times to the 300M even though it has 38 less hp.
The 300M's transmission saps a lot of power from that motor.
I actually agree with you Kat, I testdrove a new 300 a couple years ago, the v-6 seemed more than adequate, and it made a nice growl also. Isn't the HP around 250? IMO Jinx, the styling is what saved Nissan. Weren't they in debt for about 18 billion a couple of years ago? The Altima had the styling that turned the profits, as well as the potent V6. The 04 Malibu, to me, looks much like the current Altima.