: 2014 cts twin turbo v6 has been confirmed... buh bye m3.



Stillborn
08-08-12, 06:45 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYRTiQrBleU&feature=player_embedded


http://www.lsxtv.com/news/video-2014-cadillac-cts-spotted-testing-twin-turbo-v6-confirmed/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=video-2014-cadillac-cts-spotted-testing-twin-turbo-v6-confirmed

jenlain
08-08-12, 07:35 PM
Might be a bit premature to declare the M3 irrelevant.

nsaness
08-08-12, 07:47 PM
Your link to lsxtv says it will most likely slot in between the base v6 and the "V"'s V8. Pretty much impossible to catch an M3 that way... I'm hoping the V8 gets upgraded to over 650 horses to catch up to that pesky 2013 Cobra :)

smackdownCTSV
08-08-12, 07:48 PM
0:30 lol!

smackdownCTSV
08-08-12, 07:50 PM
I'm hoping the V8 gets upgraded to over 650 horses to catch up to that pesky 2013 Cobra :)

Not likely, maybe 580 hp.

Stillborn
08-08-12, 07:59 PM
Your link to lsxtv says it will most likely slot in between the base v6 and the "V"'s V8. Pretty much impossible to catch an M3 that way... I'm hoping the V8 gets upgraded to over 650 horses to catch up to that pesky 2013 Cobra :)

thats an easy upper pulley & tune upgrade for our currant model. ;)

Stillborn
08-08-12, 08:00 PM
Might be a bit premature to declare the M3 irrelevant.

never irrelevant. (i like the m3) but we need a twin turbo v6 in the mix to keep pushing the comp.

neuronbob
08-08-12, 09:52 PM
No thanks. Keeping my current V.

1997BlackETC
08-08-12, 10:10 PM
In my opinion why not just put the same motor the ZR1 has (638 hp) into the CTS-V. That along with a decent AFM cylinder deactivation system for the highway and a different more fuel efficient trans might be able to keep the V off the gas hog tax list and they could pass the savings onto the customer and drop the price a little bit plus have better fuel economy, better trans shifts (maybe go with one of those clutchless autos like the germans use) and more power to compete with the Stang. Either that or just do a twin turbo for the current 6.2 V8, that would improve gas mileage and performance and be more efficient. But please not a twin turbo V6, I'd never buy one of those.

stabie
08-08-12, 10:59 PM
More likely its to compete with the 5 series. A 2014 would not be a V CTS, just a gen III CTS. The ATS-V also probably due in 2014 is the M3 killer.

1997BlackETC
08-09-12, 12:47 AM
Ya, I agree, why would GM downgrade the HP of the current V?

CTSV21
08-09-12, 12:59 AM
0:30 lol!

lol saw that too

SoCal_V
08-09-12, 01:25 AM
But please not a twin turbo V6, I'd never buy one of those.


Just curious...why not? If it made similar or more power, more usable low-end torque, and had improved gas mileage, wouldn't you buy one?

BTW those traits are the exact reason why the M5 and E63 use a twin turbo set up. I don't care if an inline-3 cylinder was in there, if it makes more usable power with less fuel consumption, I'm buying.

thebigjimsho
08-09-12, 02:07 AM
More likely its to compete with the 5 series. A 2014 would not be a V CTS, just a gen III CTS. The ATS-V also probably due in 2014 is the M3 killer.Yeah, the ATS exists to take on the 3. A larger than ours CTS isn't going against a 3...

GM-4-LIFE
08-09-12, 11:49 AM
So, GM is going to make the new V-Series line up equipped with twin turbo V6s instead of blown LSx engines? The ATS-V is supposed to have the twin turbo V6, but I hope the next gen CTS-V will have a high powered V8 to run with the M5s and E63s. Let's hope CAFE isn't going to make the current gen CTS-V the last with a V8.

thebigjimsho
08-09-12, 12:01 PM
I don't see a TTV6 in a large CTS as a V engine. A premium one, but under a V variant.

The TTV6 could be a V engine for the ATS...

Xaqtly
08-09-12, 12:44 PM
That's what I was thinking. The TTV6 sounds like a no-brainer for an ATS-V. The normal ATS is only 3370 lbs, so I can't imagine the V model will be much heavier, if it's even heavier at all. If the TTV6 makes anywhere close to 400 HP it'll have a better power to weight ratio than the M3, perfect 50/50 weight distribution and the gen 2 MRC. Cadillac is really not screwing around, they are aiming to humiliate the 3 series with the ATS, not just beat it.

Even with the 320 HP V6 in the ATS it's faster than the 335i because it has a bit more power and about 200 lbs less weight. In fact the relatively low weight of the ATS is making me pretty confident that the next gen CTS really will weigh a lot less than the current one.

M5eater
08-09-12, 12:53 PM
In my opinion why not just put the same motor the ZR1 has (638 hp) into the CTS-V. That along with a decent AFM cylinder deactivation system for the highway and a different more fuel efficient trans might be able to keep the V off the gas hog tax list and they could pass the savings onto the customer and drop the price a little bit plus have better fuel economy, better trans shifts (maybe go with one of those clutchless autos like the germans use) and more power to compete with the Stang. Either that or just do a twin turbo for the current 6.2 V8, that would improve gas mileage and performance and be more efficient. But please not a twin turbo V6, I'd never buy one of those.

a ZR1 with AFM would not make 638HP. It would not be able to rev anywhere near as high as it does. the Gen V's are right around the corner. I expect the next CTS-V to have a F/I Gen V D/I V8.

I don't see a TTV6 in a large CTS as a V engine. A premium one, but under a V variant.

The TTV6 could be a V engine for the ATS...

agreed. I can't see any reality where a CTS-V doesn't still get a V8 of some sorts. Everyone still uses V8's in mid-sized super sedans, they're just turbocharged.


Even with the 320 HP V6 in the ATS it's faster than the 335i because it has a bit more power and about 200 lbs less weight.
I have yet to see head-to-head comparisons of the 3.6 ATS to the 335i or B8 S4. Both the F/I powertrains in the latter cars are documented to be anywhere from 50-80hp under-rated. The LFX is an adequate stock engine for it's class, but ultimately is an inferior(overall) powertrain compared to those two. It's better suited to be compared to the C350, which no one that's looking for a hot-rod super sedan really cares about.

I would also mention that a lot of people look @ the 335i or S4 to acutally tinker with. You can't even swap headers in the LFX. I like the idea of a 3xx HP ATS, but saddly, because it has the LFX, it's off the table as far as I'm concerned.

GM-4-LIFE
08-09-12, 01:50 PM
Why doesn't GM twin turbo the next gen direct injection V8 small block for the next gen CTS-V and ZL1 and call it a day? They would get monster power out of it and beat BMW, Ford and Mercedes. Easy 650 to 700 HP levels with equal torque.

Stillborn
08-09-12, 01:51 PM
I don't see a TTV6 in a large CTS as a V engine. A premium one, but under a V variant.

The TTV6 could be a V engine for the ATS...

i assumed the same thing, i hope thats the way it goes, awd tt v6 would be a sweet addition to the v line-up.

M5eater
08-09-12, 02:08 PM
Why doesn't GM twin turbo the next gen direct injection V8 small block for the next gen CTS-V and ZL1 and call it a day? They would get monster power out of it and beat BMW, Ford and Mercedes. Easy 650 to 700 HP levels with equal torque.
I would bet $$$ it's S/C.

Why?

because the only way to turbocharge a SBC and clear a hood that isn't the size of the chysler building is to put them on the banks, and there's not enough room to do that in without major pipework.

SC2150
08-09-12, 05:21 PM
We twin turbo these now with 500-600 hp......so it will be interesting to see how it turns out when released.

The motors do well on boost with DI up to mid 500 hp....600 is pushing it.

:thumbsup:

JimmyH
08-10-12, 07:03 PM
current rumours are:

3rd gen CTS-V will continue on with the LSA (or equivalent) with the performance boost coming from mass reduction

the top CTS engine will be a twin-turbo 3.0L V6

the ATS-V engine will be a twin-turbo 3.6L V6 (much more power than the CTS TT 3.0)

again these are just rumours based on posts here and around the internet. But I bet the above is pretty accurate.

M5eater
08-10-12, 09:52 PM
3rd gen CTS-V will continue on with the LSA (or equivalent) with the performance boost coming from mass reduction
If by equivalent you mean a supercharged V8 of some sorts--inferring a D/I V8, then I would agree. If you mean something like a tweaked Gen IV LSA, then I would dis-agree.

Aurora40
08-12-12, 04:22 PM
Those stills look a lot like the ATS that was running the 'ring a year or so back. The rear door looks fairly small, the distance from the hinge to the rear wheel well.

M5eater
08-12-12, 04:42 PM
Those stills look a lot like the ATS that was running the 'ring a year or so back. The rear door looks fairly small, the distance from the hinge to the rear wheel well.

Well, it *is* a stretched Alpha platform.

JFJr
08-12-12, 06:35 PM
I could live with a TT V-6 in a "V" as long as it sounds as good as as an LSx V-8. I hate the insect sound of the current Porsche.


Jud

thebigjimsho
08-14-12, 10:50 AM
Those stills look a lot like the ATS that was running the 'ring a year or so back. The rear door looks fairly small, the distance from the hinge to the rear wheel well.It's definitely bigger than the ATS.

larry arizona
08-14-12, 10:57 AM
Fact. The Alpha A1LL (aka CTS)is just a stretched A1SL (ATS). Not a mm wider.

SC2150
08-14-12, 05:26 PM
I could live with a TT V-6 in a "V" as long as it sounds as good as as an LSx V-8. I hate the insect sound of the current Porsche.


Jud

Here is a video of a 3.6 TT....sound pretty dang tough for a v6:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsgFJPC-d3A

larry arizona
08-14-12, 06:24 PM
I would put money on it that GM will not twin turbo both the 3.0L and the 3.6L. They already have the 2.8L T so adding 2 TT makes little sense if they are roughly 50HP different from each other. They would more likely put out two different HP outputs (similar to the 2.0T variants) on the same displacement TT.

JimmyH
08-14-12, 07:04 PM
The push is on for forced induction. I would expect to see a whole range of turbo 4s and 6s.

M5eater
08-14-12, 07:43 PM
The push is on for forced induction. I would expect to see a whole range of turbo 4s and 6s.

Turbo's are good for Tuners anyway.

larry arizona
08-14-12, 08:15 PM
Turbos are horrible for lag. I wouldnt trade a SC for Turbo.

Trapspeed
08-14-12, 08:56 PM
I don't know, brother. That EcoBoost has almost no lag. Hits pretty hard.

RippyPartsDept
08-14-12, 09:44 PM
This is a funny thread at the beginning. Too informative at the end tho.

CIWS
08-14-12, 09:54 PM
Might be a bit premature to declare the M3 irrelevant.

Aww come on, don't you know that early speculative articles posted in forums showing zebra camo'd cars running around the ring always spells the death knell for any of the competitors out there . . .

CIWS
08-14-12, 09:56 PM
Turbos are horrible for lag. I wouldnt trade a SC for Turbo.

Not in my twin turbo, or the Buick Regal GS I drove the other day. In fact the one for the new ATS isn't supposed to really show it either according to some of the reviewers who have driven it. I get worse "lag" from electronic throttles.

larry arizona
08-14-12, 10:16 PM
no thanks, I will the SC

larry arizona
08-14-12, 10:17 PM
I will KEEP the SC HA:bonkers:

thebigjimsho
08-15-12, 10:14 AM
I'd prefer turbos...

SC2150
08-15-12, 01:49 PM
JimmyH is correct. Every manufacturer foriegn and domestic has numerous FI offerings now and were going to see more in the years to come. Very reliable and the efficiency of the DI motors makes it all fit.

As for turbo lag, the Borg Warner EFR's have near zero lag and with their internal bypas the wheel retains its speed between shifts so no recovery time needed as far as boost.

Traditional turbos are still laggy but matching the right combo to the application reduces it.

On our centri super charged 3.6 V6 it takes a bit to spool up as well but were doing a top mount twin screw (TVS 1900) for these as well that will give instant torqye but hood clearance will be an issue and were still a good 90 days from having a running version to share.

:thumbsup:

Stillborn
08-15-12, 01:56 PM
turbo's make more power 22-25 rwhp per psi vs supercharged 15-17 rwhp per psi. and with all the new variable vein technology lag is non existent for the most part. turbos take the heat and make power with it, superchargers create added heat (heat soak) and die from it. the choice is easy. give me turbos, the more the better. just ask Bugatti. (king of the hill)

JimmyH
08-15-12, 02:53 PM
Turbos are horrible for lag. I wouldnt trade a SC for Turbo.

not all of them. the GTI has absolutely no turbo lag at all. otoh, it starts running out of breath above 5k rpm.

I think that is where two-stage turbos are being put to good use. using a pair of small/big turbos, or altering the plumbing to give quick boost or big boost, depending on what is needed.

Xaqtly
08-15-12, 06:47 PM
Yeah there's a lot of technology out there to reduce turbo lag. How you size the compressor to the exhaust side is a huge part of it, and so is the size of the compressor vs. the size of the engine. After that there are things like dual stage turbos, twin turbos, or properly sized single turbos with full ball bearing wheels. IF it's done properly it's very easy these days to build a turbo system with minimal to almost zero lag. Couldn't say that 10 years ago, but that's technology for you.

The downside of turbos is that the plumbing is, by necessity, vastly more bulky and complicated than supercharger setups. Check this picture out - this is my old Nissan Sentra SE-R with a meticulously sized and speced turbo kit on it. Big tubular manifold, and a turbo as big as your head but speced out with full ball bearings on both sides for minimal lag. That turbo spun so freely that you could hear it spinning for a good 20 full seconds after you shut the engine off. There was still some lag, but that turbo was VASTLY bigger than almost any stock turbo setup. Despite being on a 2 liter 4 cylinder engine, it still started making boost around 2500 RPM and then it was just massive power all the way to redline at about 7700 RPM.

http://xaqtly.com/car/pictures/image/engine.jpg

The downside of superchargers is that it takes engine power to drive them, instead of being spun by exhaust gas. In this day and age, I don't think it matters much which type of FI is used though. If it's done correctly it will make huge, smooth power and no noticeable lag. The new M5 is a good example of that, and I suspect this new TT 3600 V6 will be too. If the LSA gets direct injection, that will help a lot too, I think.

SC2150
08-15-12, 07:59 PM
Thats pure sex right there!!! Nice work on that Nissan....and I bet it surprises a few muscle cars also. :thumbsup:

Xaqtly
08-16-12, 03:50 PM
Thats pure sex right there!!! Nice work on that Nissan....and I bet it surprises a few muscle cars also. :thumbsup:

Yeah, it did. It was a featherweight at 2400 lbs, and when the boost was at a medium -ish 14 psi it was making over 300 HP at the wheels. But it looked pretty stock, I think it was a real sleeper. And I did it right, it had a fully custom suspension with more shock travel than stock, it had a (relatively) huge Wilwood big brake kit, it drove like it was on rails. No riceboy body kits or anything stupid like that, that car was 100% performance. :cool2:

http://xaqtly.com/car/pictures/image/side.jpg

http://xaqtly.com/car/pictures/image/ic.jpg