Cadillac Owners Forum banner

161 - 174 of 174 Posts

·
Registered
'16 ATS-V MT6 Sedan, Alfas: '67 Duetto, '84 GTV6 3.5L 24v/Vette C5 project
Joined
·
508 Posts
The investment that Caddy/GM put in to the LF4 engine was not recovered with the mere ~4500 ATS-V sales for the ~3 years of production. Given that the CT4 is basically the same ATS dimensions, it makes sense that Caddy would put the LF4 in the hotter version of the CT4-V-Blackwing-whatever. And with the handbuilt nature of the Blackwing TT4.2 V8 and production problems of the CT6-V and Platinums (lower # of engines able to be produced) I can see how Caddy may soldier on with the 2valve Supercharged 6.2L V8 for the hotter CT5-V-Blackwing. Again, return on investment, tweek a few body dimensions on the base platform, add new face, rear-end, and interior (plus new 10sp auto tranny) and call it a day.
 

·
Registered
2014 ATS 3.6L AWD Performance
Joined
·
429 Posts
The investment that Caddy/GM put in to the LF4 engine was not recovered with the mere ~4500 ATS-V sales for the ~3 years of production. Given that the CT4 is basically the same ATS dimensions, it makes sense that Caddy would put the LF4 in the hotter version of the CT4-V-Blackwing-whatever. And with the handbuilt nature of the Blackwing TT4.2 V8 and production problems of the CT6-V and Platinums (lower # of engines able to be produced) I can see how Caddy may soldier on with the 2valve Supercharged 6.2L V8 for the hotter CT5-V-Blackwing. Again, return on investment, tweek a few body dimensions on the base platform, add new face, rear-end, and interior (plus new 10sp auto tranny) and call it a day.
That's a perfectly reasonable and logical (and predictable...lol) strategy. ;) Considering all the circumstantial evidence we have, it's looking like Cadillac agrees! Of course, I suspect they made their engine choices long before they announced the 'Blackwing' V8, and probably even longer before they decided to dilute the V-series branding.

It may be very telling that in Google's text preview of the GM Pressroom media page for the CT6-V announcement, it mentions, "The CT6-V sedan features the Blackwing 4.2L twin-turbocharged V-8", however all references to Blackwing have been purged from the actual announcement.
571110

The CT6 V-Sport is still referenced on the CT6-V Specifications tab on that page, so you know the page has been modified from the original. Any Blackwing references have also been removed from the page with the official announcement of the engine, but are still in place on some image descriptions. Attempts at revisionist history?

So, when the 'intimidating' versions of the CT4, CT5, and Escalade (?) are introduced as 'Blackwing' editions, but without the engine Cadillac went out of their way to introduce as "the Blackwing 4.2L twin-turbocharged V-8 engine", be prepared to be told that everyone 'misunderstood'. "We never said that the 4.2L V8 was the only part of the Blackwing series/family." FFS, tell us nothing, or lay out a product roadmap that you can keep to, but don't pretend that new decisions and announcements don't at least appear to contradict previous ones. This cannot be good brand management...
 

·
Registered
2014 ATS 3.6L AWD Performance
Joined
·
429 Posts
Does anyone have renewed hope in the actual V series after seeing the C8 Corvette?
Hope that GM would somehow bestow some serious 'WOW!' factor on anything with a V-series badge? That costs money! ...:giggle:

I suppose there could be a mid-engined V flagship model in the future, but otherwise I don't think those two projects have much to do with each other, and they fall at nearly polar opposite ends of the priority spectrum at GM. Corvette is GM's international halo car, while the commitment to Cadillac sedans for North America is...ummm...currently questionable.

The CT4/5-V projects appear to have leveraged a LOT of existing Alpha R&D - minimal effort, minimal cost, and minimal financial risk. The C8 is evidence of the engineering prowess that GM can bring to bear on a project, but the direction that Cadillac's taking the V-series in does not say to me, "We spared no expense..." but rather, "We stand a better chance when you compare us with lower-hanging fruit!" I fear that if Cadillac brings out V versions of the CUVs, the hp numbers (and some other subjective qualities) will still be shamed by Lincoln's. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
2014 ATS 3.6L AWD Performance
Joined
·
429 Posts
So, when the 'intimidating' versions of the CT4, CT5, and Escalade (?) are introduced as 'Blackwing' editions, but without the engine Cadillac went out of their way to introduce as "the Blackwing 4.2L twin-turbocharged V-8 engine", be prepared to be told that everyone 'misunderstood'. "We never said that the 4.2L V8 was the only part of the Blackwing series/family."
As a follow-up, R&T posted an article today, talking with Steve Carlisle about the mixed reception to the new V cars.

Cadillac's President Wasn't Surprised By Lukewarm Reaction to New V Cars

When asked about the Cadillac-exclusive 4.2L TT engine, Carlisle responded...
"The engine is one question, but the idea of Blackwing is another question. You can literally equate it with the engine, or you can equate it with the concept high-performance track-capable. So then what can we do with the Blackwing?"
Cadillogic: the Blackwing name that Cadillac 'literally equate[d] ... with the engine' will be associated with 'high-performance track-capable', but the CT6-V with a Blackwing engine is just a 'V' car and not 'high-performance track-capable'. o_O I wonder if everyone at GM has simply known for months that the CT6's demise after January is a foregone conclusion, so they're enduring this controversy because, 'this too, shall pass.'

Also interesting was this:
And if the CT6 dies in America, that doesn't spell an immediate end for the [Blackwing] V-8. "There's lots of things we could do with it," Carlisle said, though he had no specific plans to announce.
...but how many of those will make it past the proposal stage at the corporate level? "Lots of things...", like in concept cars that are drooled on but never get to production? It's not going to be transversely mounted in any of the CUVs...:LOL: Current and imminent models (Escalade, CT5, CT4) eligible for Blackwing applications appear to have other big-power engines (e.g. LT4) tagged. The other theoretical options (CT* coupe, Escala flagship, mid-engined V-car?) would be years away, and probable platform changes under the CT4/5 could be scheduled soon enough that a dramatic powertrain change may not be given the green light (Camaro development is already on hold, so...). And not to mention the hinted shift to electrification...how does that schedule mesh with the ICE choices?

I have to chuckle when I remind myself that all this consternation is about an engine that, for all intents and purposes, is bordering on mythical but only exists on paper. Nobody outside of GM has even ridden shotgun in a CT6-V, and it's sounding like the CT6-V deliveries are being delayed again, past mid-August. GM had better have one heck of a hand to play when they lay their cards on the table...all these delays almost make it look like they're bluffing.
 

·
Registered
Cadillac ATS
Joined
·
231 Posts
Thanks for the post, I have to say that interview was just as muddled as the launch of the new Vs. Doesn't seem like they have a clue at what they are doing with this brand, and aren't taking their consumers seriously given the backlash is seen in such an odd way
"The visceral reaction to that—maybe not in a good way—before you tell the whole story, it's pretty amazing," Carlisle said. "It just tells you how much emotion that there is around these performance sedans."
.

Wow, I'm really hoping they find a good use for the blackwing name/engine and the new Vs deliver big time.
 

·
Registered
2016 ATS-V
Joined
·
584 Posts
Discussion Starter #167
From a parts perspective I guess I should be happy the LF4 will continue. It's just that IMO the "new" LT2 or "Blackwing" 4.2TT would be a true differentiator within the class. Seriously, many manufactures have twin-turbo 6 cylinder motors in their performance sedans - its takes real stones to use a V8 in todays climate alarmist hysteria.
 

·
Registered
2014 ATS 3.6L AWD Performance
Joined
·
429 Posts
From a parts perspective I guess I should be happy the LF4 will continue. It's just that IMO the "new" LT2 or "Blackwing" 4.2TT would be a true differentiator within the class. Seriously, many manufactures have twin-turbo 6 cylinder motors in their performance sedans - its takes real stones to use a V8 in todays climate alarmist hysteria.
Exactly...using an engine like that would make people sit up and take notice. Where would the ATS-V be now if they had fitted an LT1 and a digital gauge pack? If Bwing turns out to be 'really that good', prospective buyers might look past other perceived weaknesses (looking at you, exterior styling!...lol) in the car. Continuing with LF4 looks fine on paper: competitive specs, cost-effective to produce, integrate, & warrantee - but it also leaves Cadillac open to criticism for failing to innovate.

Since we already know that the exterior styling hasn't been widely well-received, and the interior is nice but 'just OK', where is the compelling argument vs. the competition if the performance sticks have barely moved? If the performance chops are basically carried over from the comparably-handsome ATS/CTS-V, and those sales numbers weren't satisfactory, where is the WOW-factor for the replacements? It could be price, but GM's not known for being aggressive with their MSRP strategies. These cars will be highly-regarded for their driving dynamics, but I don't know if they'll be lusted after. Cadillac needed a touchdown, but maybe has only put themselves into field goal territory.
 

·
Registered
'16 ATS-V MT6 Sedan, Alfas: '67 Duetto, '84 GTV6 3.5L 24v/Vette C5 project
Joined
·
508 Posts
Exactly...using an engine like that would make people sit up and take notice. Where would the ATS-V be now if they had fitted an LT1 and a digital gauge pack? If Bwing turns out to be 'really that good', prospective buyers might look past other perceived weaknesses (looking at you, exterior styling!...lol) in the car. Continuing with LF4 looks fine on paper: competitive specs, cost-effective to produce, integrate, & warrantee - but it also leaves Cadillac open to criticism for failing to innovate.

Since we already know that the exterior styling hasn't been widely well-received, and the interior is nice but 'just OK', where is the compelling argument vs. the competition if the performance sticks have barely moved? If the performance chops are basically carried over from the comparably-handsome ATS/CTS-V, and those sales numbers weren't satisfactory, where is the WOW-factor for the replacements? It could be price, but GM's not known for being aggressive with their MSRP strategies. These cars will be highly-regarded for their driving dynamics, but I don't know if they'll be lusted after. Cadillac needed a touchdown, but maybe has only put themselves into field goal territory.
Agree with some aspects of this post... failure to innovate... but does that mean dropping in a honking V8 is 'innovating?' MB has their AMG V8, and Bimmer did have a V8 M3 there for a bit, but then went back to a turbo 6. While styling is questionable (still waiting to see one in the flesh) things like an all digital gauge cluster would have been nice. Granted,Caddy did 'upgrade' the interior of these new cars (both CT4/5) to address some of the quality/perceived shortcomings of the previous alpha chassis offerings.

I will postulate that throwing the 6.2L OHC supercharged V8 into the CT4-V+ wouldn't win over many if any euro converts. Maybe the 4.2TT Blackwing 'might' but then pricing and availability of that 'hand built' engine would come in to play. Along with performance specs (that not only include 0-60, 1/4 mile times) and styling, and sadly 'brand cache' ' a lot of euro (and japanese sports car drivers as well) look towards efficiencies of the whole package. What's the weight, the weight distro, and doing more with 'less.' Gas mileage plays in to that as well (to a much smaller degree). The alpha chassis already has handling and braking (thanks to the Brembo/2piece rotor setup) in spades. Had the ATS-V been offered with a big ol' supercharged V8 when I was looking to upgrade from my 2L Turbo ATS, I would have definitely passed, and probably waited on a used Giulia QV (insert laughter & derogatory reliability comments here).

I recently went on a two day road trip with a local sports car club (non-marque related). Quite a diversity of sports cars, and out of 40, there was 7-8 Mustangs (mostly Shelby GT350's). And they could be heard complaining about all the gas they had to purchase... compared to the Audis, Bimmers, Lotus, and me. Great sounding cars, brutal acceleration... but I don't think my car is that far off that mark. My thought is that 'most' people in this segment aren't looking for a V8 monster... there's other qualities/specs - both tangible and non that preclude the need of this engine in this car class.
 

·
Registered
'16 ATS-V MT6 Sedan, Alfas: '67 Duetto, '84 GTV6 3.5L 24v/Vette C5 project
Joined
·
508 Posts

·
Registered
2014 ATS 3.6L AWD Performance
Joined
·
429 Posts
I recently went on a two day road trip with a local sports car club...
That sounds like fun! :cool:

... but does that mean dropping in a honking V8 is 'innovating?'
I'll expand on my thought. It's not a perfectly direct correlation, however I think that the failure to differentiate with some strong 'gee-whiz' factors covers a lot of the same ground as a perceived failure to innovate. Granted, yes there's all sorts of 'innovation' going on with regards to infotainment, cameras, and other tech, but a lot of those things go right over the heads of average consumers, or GM fails to market them properly.

The original engine planned for the ATS-V was the LT1 (would you take that over a Guilia QV?🤔), however someone decided (<good read>) that ATS-V would get a TT-6 because the top-selling M3/4 had a TT-6. The power output was fine, but in the context of the direct competitors, the exhaust note was often derided as generic or forgettable. There were no other real weight or fuel economy advantages for the LF4, and in fact the LT1 is more compact with a lower center of gravity. The ATS-V could have had an all-American V8 exhaust note (and tremendous aftermarket support), which would have nicely differentiated it in the market. Yes, AMG has a V8, but not the Baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie and Chevrolet Corvette V8!

Dropping the Blackwing V8 into the CT4 wouldn't be innovative, per se, but having a somewhat 'exotic' powerplant in the car would be a major differentiating factor. The innovation would lie in the notion that GM thought outside the box to use an engine that you wouldn't expect them to use...know what I mean? In any case, it was never meant to be - CT4-V powertrain was signed off on loooooong before anyone thought about reshuffling the V-deck, or involving a new name. A new engine was never part of the equation.

To be clear, it's not a fundamentally bad idea to carry over the previous engines...nothing wrong with them at all! All of the frustration lies with GM's/Cadillac's lack of direction and PR misdirection. They brought the Blackwing-named engine into this conversation, but they're quietly trying to disavow the link between the two things: they like the Blackwing name and the branding potential, but the engine is on the verge of being homeless. They've admitted that they aren't even sure where they'll end up on this...no vision to lead them, no plan to follow. o_O
 

·
Registered
2016 ATS-V
Joined
·
584 Posts
Discussion Starter #172
Latest from GM Authority on the CT-V 'Blackwing'
Thanks for the video. I agree with their analysis about the manual tranny but the engine note being that of the LF4 is pure speculation. For example, who's actually heard the Blackwing 4.2TT in the wild? If the answer is no then how could anyone possibly discern between the two? Having said that its probably the LF4.
 

·
Registered
'16 ATS-V MT6 Sedan, Alfas: '67 Duetto, '84 GTV6 3.5L 24v/Vette C5 project
Joined
·
508 Posts
DCPattie... there was an ATS-V in the run group (benchmarking models) so probably audible comparisons were made between the CT4-V+'s and this car.
 
161 - 174 of 174 Posts
Top