Any body took a look at April's Car and Driver magazine? There is an "Short Take" article on the CTS. The standard engine comparison to DI engine is really close in performance.

I don't know, but I just got a thing in the mail the other day offering me a 94% off "professional discount" for a two-year subscription to Car and Driver for $7, total!!! Either that magazine really sucks or I've just been offered the subscription deal of a lifetime!

With the internet, every magazine is hurting big time!!

Screw copyright law...paste the whole article.

For days I scoured the Internet for reviews on the CTS. Must have read
nearly 60 reviews. I do remember a specific review (and it may have been
Car and Driver) that said the standard and DI engine were nearly identical
in performance. Now these are not my opinions, but I do remember the
review that may be in question.

this was covered in a short thread the day that issue was delivered. I considered the article filler.
note that the DI *is* faster and quicker than the carryover motor, but it does it on regular gas without a sacrifice in mileage. and GM claims the DI motor pollutes less.
I think the CTS with DI is a test platform. if it works out okay they will expand on it, if not it's back to the drawing board.
rg

that makes me happy because i got standard lol.

.......I think the CTS with DI is a test platform. if it works out okay they will expand on it, if not it's back to the drawing board.
rg


No, it is almost a bleeding enge platform....almost because others have used this technology for a while. It is the future....so enjoy! :)

No, it is almost a bleeding enge platform....almost because others have used this technology for a while. It is the future....so enjoy! :)

yes. after I wrote that I realized I should have said in the U.S.
Europe has DI on the road. GM as usual is overcautious and daring at the same time.

From what I have read, the performance numbers are skewed on the DI due to the stickier tires. The MT article said that the car benefits from a small amount of wheelspin on launch for standing start times. Does that also pertain to the VVT car? Can you get the VVT in FE3?

From what I have read, the performance numbers are skewed on the DI due to the stickier tires. The MT article said that the car benefits from a small amount of wheelspin on launch for standing start times. Does that also pertain to the VVT car? Can you get the VVT in FE3?

both versions of the 3.6L v6 have vvt.
all else being equal the DI version is quicker and faster than the port injected version.
rg

no FE3 in 3.6vvt.

Besides the difference in money is only a $1000 on a 3.6vvt w/AT vs 3.DI AT is standard. base price to base price. so im not sure why anyone would order the 3.6vvt. Its not like a $1000 is a lot of money when your already spending $37k plus....

the DI version of the 3.6L VVT V6 has new technology untried in the U.S.
some folks don't want to be guinea pigs.
also some *claim* the DI motor is noisier due to high pressure fuel injection.
rg

i like the ticking sound ok ******************

no FE3 in 3.6vvt.

Besides the difference in money is only a $1000 on a 3.6 w/AT vs 3.6DI AT is standard. base price to base price. so im not sure why anyone would order the 3.6. Its not like a $1000 is a lot of money when your already spending $37k plus....

So then I believe I am right. Every magazine has been testing the DI with FE3 suspension. The base car performs almost as well (like 1 tenth difference in the quarter), but the FE3 DI suffers from "too much grip" as per MT. The DI car with FE3 destroys the base car with FE1 or 2 in the slalom and on the skidpad. Read edmunds CTS blog from a couple days ago.

The one thing that makes the base motor a slouch in my book is that you can only get a manual on a stripper, whereas the DI allows you to buy the highest performing variant of the car.