2014 Cadillac ATS - Powertrain Predictions

[dwightlooi]

Edit: Due to the high influx of visitors, I must add this disclaimer: Contrary to what some media outlets have reported, this is not a leaked GM document. This is scientific speculation based on what we know about GM engines and other technologies GM has been working on. Simply put we are hypothesizing about what the power output of a 6.2 liter would be if direct injection was added for example. - DD

[Paolino]

I love it but I must be out of the loop on a few details: I wasn't aware that there was an 8-speed coming and also I could have sworn the ATS was due before 2014?!

[dwightlooi]

Well... 2014 model year = introduction in August 2013. Somehow I doubt they are far along enough to introduce it August of next year or we'll be seeing spy shots of the real thing running around by now.

GM was working on the 8-speed when the whole bankruptcy business unfolded. It got put on ice. Not sure if it got restarted. But if it does, the 2014 model year is right where we may see the first ones. They'll probably introduce the 8-speed boxes over a period of 2~3 years rather than all at once. The logical thing to do will be to introduce it for the 220~300 lb-ft applications (that of the mainstream V6es) first -- the big V8s can make do with 6-gears and taller gearing for fuel economy, the econoboxes segment is probaby too price sensitive to splurge on 2 additional gears for another grand. This is why I kept the V-ship as a 6-speed.

[Robert Hall]

I would hope they would have an 8 speed by then..the competition is moving to them now...I assume the next 3- and C-class will have them.

[ZL-1]

2.0L I4 engine would be about 280hp. At least that's my expectation for the Astra OPC engine.

[regfootball]

i think as crucial as the powertrain data is on these engines, its all pretty tough to digest unless you got some curb weights to go with it.

GM needs to cut the fat.

for market reasons too, we need to know that this car will have AWD on the option sheet or its pretty much DOA in the market.

[Carguy]

Nice lineup!! With no seeming DOHC V8 coming for Cadillac as a mid range CTS V8 this would be a good way to introduce the OHV V8 into future non V Cadillac models!---Nice going!

[loki]

while it's not much, it is odd the v6 rpm @60 is less than the v8. i'm guessing you did that with higher drive ratio # so it'd be even more sporty than a v8 and 6 speed would be otherwise?

curious if the 4 Turbo is the base or the midlevel?

[dado]

Nice lineup!! With no seeming DOHC V8 coming for Cadillac as a mid range CTS V8 this would be a good way to introduce the OHV V8 into future non V Cadillac models!---Nice going!

Nice lineup for USA,but for Europe it would need more engines..

Like something to fall between 150 and 200 hp, 200-250 hp, diesel engines are must.

Also,since there is no plans for DOHCv8 (there are rumors but nothing concrete), I think 5.5 l v8(or even 5.3 l v8) with or without SC maybe would be a better option than 6.2 l v8 in top V version. On European ground. It seems here people are obsessed with Hp/l, high rpm etc. They don't care much about outside dimensions of the engine or weight of the engine. Weight of the car is another thing.

Question is if Cadillac ATS is meant to be global product or for USA only? And does GM want to blend in BMW M, Mercedes AMG, Audi S, Jaguar R crowd or offer car with engines for american market, specific american flavor, which i think, at present time, many people here doesn't like or care for.

[smk4565]

I think that is the engine lineup GM will use, although I think the turbo 4 will have 230-250 hp. Especially since the Regal has 225 and many of the base German engines are in that range. I don't think they'll have the 8-speed ready at launch, but I'm sure they'll get one in there eventually. They should have it at launch, but GM likes to delay stuff until year 2 or 3 many times. But I've heard even Chrysler will have 9-speed transmissions in their front drive rental sedans by 2014.

I think the V-series should have DOHC, but I know it won't, so I think the pushrod V8 will be in there.

[smk4565]

Nice lineup for USA,but for Europe it would need more engines..

Like something to fall between 150 and 200 hp, 200-250 hp, diesel engines are must.

Also,since there is no plans for DOHCv8 (there are rumors but nothing concrete), I think 5.5 l v8(or even 5.3 l v8) with or without SC maybe would be a better option than 6.2 l v8 in top V version. On European ground. It seems here people are obsessed with Hp/l, high rpm etc. They don't care much about outside dimensions of the engine or weight of the engine. Weight of the car is another thing.

Question is if Cadillac ATS is meant to be global product or for USA only? And does GM want to blend in BMW M, Mercedes AMG, Audi S, Jaguar R crowd or offer car with engines for american market, specific american flavor, which i think, at present time, many people here doesn't like or care for.

Good points, you are right it will need a diesel engine. If the ATS doesn't get 40 mpg, it is dead in Europe for sure. Lexus (evne Lincoln) is pushing hybrids, the Germans are going to bring more and more diesels, Cadillac has to do one or the other, so their car isn't at 28 mpg, while everyone else has 35-40.

[dwightlooi]

while it's not much, it is odd the v6 rpm @60 is less than the v8. i'm guessing you did that with higher drive ratio # so it'd be even more sporty than a v8 and 6 speed would be otherwise?

curious if the 4 Turbo is the base or the midlevel?

There are two reasons:-

(1) The V6 has higher specific consumption, so it needs a lower cruising speed more than the Turbo-4. Also, it can probably tolerate a taller cruising ratio than the the 2.0 liter four while crusing along off boost on the freeway.

(2) The final drives ratios are selected to "game" the system and provide the best 0-60 mph and 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph) numbers for the magazines... I wanted either one shift or two shifts to 60 mph. The V6 gets to 62 mph in 2nd. With the turbo-4 it gets there in 3rd. In either case, they reach 0-60 right before the next shift.

[dwightlooi]

Nice lineup for USA,but for Europe it would need more engines..

Like something to fall between 150 and 200 hp, 200-250 hp, diesel engines are must.

Also,since there is no plans for DOHCv8 (there are rumors but nothing concrete), I think 5.5 l v8(or even 5.3 l v8) with or without SC maybe would be a better option than 6.2 l v8 in top V version. On European ground. It seems here people are obsessed with Hp/l, high rpm etc. They don't care much about outside dimensions of the engine or weight of the engine. Weight of the car is another thing.

Question is if Cadillac ATS is meant to be global product or for USA only? And does GM want to blend in BMW M, Mercedes AMG, Audi S, Jaguar R crowd or offer car with engines for american market, specific american flavor, which i think, at present time, many people here doesn't like or care for.

(1) A 5.5 does not offer substantially better fuel economy than a 6.2. With the same amount of valvetrain friction and a mere 11% reduction in swept volume efficiency gains are in the 1~3% range. This may not even get you to the next 1 MPG. A 5.5 is about 420hp at the same specific output. The engine will be no smaller and no lighter. Hence, it is probably best to maximize the advantage of the pushrod engine -- which is the ability to deliver the highest power density from the smallest engine dimensions and weight.

(2) GM will probably add a diesel or two for Europe. It'll be something taken from the Open portfoilio. Probably a 4-potter at 180~220 hp and a V6 at 250~270hp.

[dado]

(1) A 5.5 does not offer substantially better fuel economy than a 6.2. With the same amount of valvetrain friction and a mere 11% reduction in swept volume efficiency gains are in the 1~3% range. This may not even get you to the next 1 MPG. A 5.5 is about 420hp at the same specific output. The engine will be no smaller and no lighter. Hence, it is probably best to maximize the advantage of the pushrod engine -- which is the ability to deliver the highest power density from the smallest engine dimensions and weight.

I know in USA cars like CTS-V, M3 are relatively cheap compared to same cars in European countries.So maybe buyers of that kind of cars watch more at fuel consumption in USA. Here that kind of cars are very pricey.And believe me this. In my country people who drives that kind of car don't care about fuel consumption. I haven't met one person who drive that kind of car (with more than 350+ HP) who cares about fuel consumption. And here fuel isn't cheap either.

So here it is not about fuel consumption for that kind of car. It is bragging rights. Buyer come and see DOHC V8, 4 valves 4 cams, DI turbocharger, 120 hp/l (or something like that)...and more thing means better (not complicated, heavier, harder to work at, bigger chance to something go wrongs) because some paid journalist wrought that down in some crazy magazine. And then they will see 6.2 l v8 with 470 + hp 2 valves, readline at 6500 rpm (even though most of the time most drivers don't past even 4000 rpm). It is so low tech for them. I know people who would rather have 4.0 l v8 with 420 hp than 6.2 l with 480 hp, if 6.2 l v8 can't spin over 7200 rpm (not to mention if it has only 2 valves per cylinder). Because 6.2 l v8 is heavy, big engine. And DOHC, Hp/l is only things that matters to them. I've tried couple of time to explain some things to some people but i just waisted my time. Small block doesn't have such history here as in USA. When GM will try to sell 6.2 l in small ATS (maybe CTS can get away with it) most people will just say: "Oh..they need such a big engine to get to such HP rating. So low tech"

So maybe..just maybe.. 5.5 l v8 wouldn't be such a bad idea..with forced induction("high tech"),DI (also "high tech") it could go to 500+ hp.. and it would have good HP/l(ultimate uberalles, warp core level high tech criteria)

I hope they also put that new 2.9 l v6 diesel in use.

Edited January 17, 2011 by dado

[hyperv6]

I will wait to see what we really get.

The Caddy will need a diesel in Europe or not even bother to go. I supect that GM for the most will tune the line over there more to their market less the V series. Unless they adapt the entire car to Europes needs or wants it will be another fail. As Oil continues to rise it will become even more important.

You have to give Europe what they want and not expect them to fall all over American cars.

Edited January 17, 2011 by hyperv6

[dwightlooi]

... Because 6.2 l v8 is heavy, big engine. And DOHC, Hp/l is only things that matters to them.

Actually, the converse is true. A pushrod engine is significantly lighter and smaller than a DOHC engine. If you take a DOHC V8, throw away three of the four camshafts, their sprockets, their bearings, halve the number of valves and make the cylinder heads about 1/3 the size... you'll arrive roughly where a Pushrod V8 is in terms of size and weight. In fact, the difference is so pronounced that a 6.2 liter Pushrod V8 is typically lighter than a 4.0 liter DOHC V8. Eg. The BMW S65 4.0 V8 engine in the M3 is 202 kg, whereas LS3 6.2 V8 in the Corvette is 183 kg.

[Lamar]

dado, it's the same here in the US as it is in Europe. If you're buying an M, AMG, RS, V-Series, or SRT, chances are that fuel economy isn't top priority for you.

[dwightlooi]

dado, it's the same here in the US as it is in Europe. If you're buying an M, AMG, RS, V-Series, or SRT, chances are that fuel economy isn't top priority for you.

The reality is that despite the fact that people moan and bitch about it, fuel expenditures really aren't that big of a deal despite gasoline prices having tripled in the last 15 years.

I drive about 12500 miles a year. I get ~18.5 miles a gallon in the C55. That's $2,365 a year at $3.50 a gallon. If I have a Camry or Accord V6 and pull in an average of about 24 mpg in combined driving -- a good 30% improvement in fuel economy -- the same driving habits will cost $1,823 a year. That's a difference of $542 a year or $45 a month. $45 is not even enough for a dinner for two.

In the 90s, it's $70 vs $52. Today, it's $200 vs $150. That's three times, but it's also not a big deal either way. In general, people who explicitly sink $60~80K on a performance car is not going to care very much about whether they are out $200 or $150 on gas every month. On the same token, if a $5000 Hybrid system can get me from 18.5 to 24 mpg in with the same performance, they probably don't care for it if they can do the math because it'll take them over 9 years just to break even on the investment -- just in time for a $2000 battery replacement! Unless... they believe in the fraud of the century called Global Warming.

[dado]

"Actually, the converse is true. A pushrod engine is significantly lighter and smaller than a DOHC engine. If you take a DOHC V8, throw away three of the four camshafts, their sprockets, their bearings, halve the number of valves and make the cylinder heads about 1/3 the size... you'll arrive roughly where a Pushrod V8 is in terms of size and weight. In fact, the difference is so pronounced that a 6.2 liter Pushrod V8 is typically lighter than a 4.0 liter DOHC V8. Eg. The BMW S65 4.0 V8 engine in the M3 is 202 kg, whereas LS3 6.2 V8 in the Corvette is 183 kg."

I know that you know that (i forgot to write that my colleauge thinks it is big and heavy engine not me-i'm from Europe but i know advantages and disadvantage of engines with cam in block valvetrain )but for most buyers here they judge by displacement of the engine. To them-big displacement=big engine, heavy ..of course if you look at only DOHC type of engine with same cylindar configuration it could be partially true but not general rule (actually 6.2 l v8 from mercedes is lighter then 4.0 l v8 from BMW). To them 4.0 l v8 is smaller, lighter,rev higher, have higher HP/L rating than 6.2 l v8. They don't know much about advantages of pushrod engines (and why would they need to know that) since big pushrod V8 is not in use here for long time (accept Bentley but that is different story). This is perception GM must be ready to deal with if they are coming here.

Edited January 18, 2011 by dado

[hyperv6]

"Actually, the converse is true. A pushrod engine is significantly lighter and smaller than a DOHC engine. If you take a DOHC V8, throw away three of the four camshafts, their sprockets, their bearings, halve the number of valves and make the cylinder heads about 1/3 the size... you'll arrive roughly where a Pushrod V8 is in terms of size and weight. In fact, the difference is so pronounced that a 6.2 liter Pushrod V8 is typically lighter than a 4.0 liter DOHC V8. Eg. The BMW S65 4.0 V8 engine in the M3 is 202 kg, whereas LS3 6.2 V8 in the Corvette is 183 kg."

I know that you know that (i forgot to write that my colleauge thinks it is big and heavy engine not me-i'm from Europe but i know advantages and disadvantage of engines with cam in block valvetrain )but for most buyers here they judge by displacement of the engine. To them-big displacement=big engine, heavy ..of course if you look at only DOHC type of engine with same cylindar configuration it could be partially true but not general rule (actually 6.2 l v8 from mercedes is lighter then 4.0 l v8 from BMW). To them 4.0 l v8 is smaller, lighter,rev higher, have higher HP/L rating than 6.2 l v8. They don't know much about advantages of pushrod engines (and why would they need to know that) since big pushrod V8 is not in use here for long time (accept Bentley but that is different story). This is perception GM must be ready to deal with if they are coming here.

This is the main issue. GM needs to sell what people want and expect. GM for years has tried to sell the less is better concept with while true in many cased is still not accepted by the general public no matter how much they are coached. You can toss around all the numbers in the world but people still often think more is better. We even see it here as today we have some very good, powerful and efficent 4 and 6 cylinders but many will not buy them because they have less than 8 cylinders.

People in the general public for the most are idiots when it comes to cars and you need to give them what they want as you can not change their preception. Sometimes the best path is not always the most profitable.

Edited January 18, 2011 by hyperv6

[regfootball]

it wasn't so much the performance of GM's v8's that ruined the rep for the pushrod motors, it was the GM v6's that were left out in the cold for so long while the other maker's passed them by leaps and bounds. Then, GM refused to play catch up.

By the time GM got around to making the first 3.6, it took them ten years to get to the point where a lot of the competition had been with that sort of engine.

[Drew Dowdell]

it wasn't so much the performance of GM's v8's that ruined the rep for the pushrod motors, it was the GM v6's that were left out in the cold for so long while the other maker's passed them by leaps and bounds. Then, GM refused to play catch up.

By the time GM got around to making the first 3.6, it took them ten years to get to the point where a lot of the competition had been with that sort of engine.

This is so laughably wrong.

[dwightlooi]

This is the main issue. GM needs to sell what people want and expect. GM for years has tried to sell the less is better concept with while true in many cased is still not accepted by the general public no matter how much they are coached. You can toss around all the numbers in the world but people still often think more is better. We even see it here as today we have some very good, powerful and efficent 4 and 6 cylinders but many will not buy them because they have less than 8 cylinders.

People in the general public for the most are idiots when it comes to cars and you need to give them what they want as you can not change their preception. Sometimes the best path is not always the most profitable.

Actually, I don't think that's the root of the problem. The root of the problem was that for decades GM -- and most US automakers for that matter -- did not realize one fundamental fact:

"The USA is a high cost country. You don't succeed as a business operating in a high cost country by trying to be the value leader."

GM had always tried to sell their cars for a few hundred to a few tens of thousands less than the competition. This means that they need to cut quality, cut material grades, cut technology and cut all kinds of things to get to the price point. This created a perception -- much of it grounded in fact -- that GM equals low quality and low tech. Designs associated with GM such as the Pushrod small block garnered the same kind of associations, justly on unjustly. At the end of the day it's a no win situation. Despite all the bean counting and discounting, the difference between US labor costs and, first, Japanese, then Korean and now Chinese, cannot be overcome. GM gets stuck with inferior products compared to the European "prestige & quality" leaders. They are also no cheaper and often still worse off in technology, quality and features compared to Asian imports.

I think they realize that now... or at least I hope they do.

[Dsuupr]

I hope they consider putting eAssist on the vehicle as standard equipment. It isn't supposed to degrade performance but can make huge strides in mileage for little cost increase.

[dado]

Actually, I don't think that's the root of the problem. The root of the problem was that for decades GM -- and most US automakers for that matter -- did not realize one fundamental fact:

"The USA is a high cost country. You don't succeed as a business operating in a high cost country by trying to be the value leader."

GM had always tried to sell their cars for a few hundred to a few tens of thousands less than the competition. This means that they need to cut quality, cut material grades, cut technology and cut all kinds of things to get to the price point. This created a perception -- much of it grounded in fact -- that GM equals low quality and low tech. Designs associated with GM such as the Pushrod small block garnered the same kind of associations, justly on unjustly. At the end of the day it's a no win situation. Despite all the bean counting and discounting, the difference between US labor costs and, first, Japanese, then Korean and now Chinese, cannot be overcome. GM gets stuck with inferior products compared to the European "prestige & quality" leaders. They are also no cheaper and often still worse off in technology, quality and features compared to Asian imports.

I think they realize that now... or at least I hope they do.

And if they offer 6.2 l v8 in Europe most people will just say: "Same old GM..stuffing big truck engine in car. They probably haven't change a thing in other areas too". Couple years ago when new gen. 2 cadillac CTS was introduced there was autoshow in my country. There was new Cadillac CTS on that show (and escalade and corvette). I was sitting and admiring new CTS when i overheard older man commenting about engine-something like-"it must have about 7.0 l and 200hp".I've sad to him it was a v6 engine with 300 hp.Since all dealers was at corvette, hummer and escalade, showing kids how big this cars are (and they are big) he asked me,who came at show to watch cars not to explaing type of engines in american cars, if i know maybe if it is V6 diesel.Of course it wasn't. He said too bad..and yes similar comment was said at corvette stand (red z06)..7.0 l v8 with only 505 hp (it seems 505 hp is not enough power to move corvette???).And stupid dealer wouldn't want to open engine hood.

So here are couple of problems (i think) what GM should solve before they try to sell Cadillac in Europe(in USA some of those probably aren't problems)...

-More diesel engines

-try to fight opinions (or educate people which is close to impossible) that gen V is 50 year old engine and show them it is new technologically advanced engine.That will be a challenge here (maybe it would be easier just to make DOHC v8 but then again..how much of this top V models does Cadillac plan to sell)

-decide if Cadillac is luxury companie or something like citroen, opel etc.

-it would help if engine in top cadillac model wouldn't be same engine as in chevrolet truck.

Now i'm not sure if sharing engines with Opel is a good or bad thing from image point of view. I mean Opel is in class with Ford , Citroen, Peugeot, VW...which is not excatly luxurie class like Mercedes, jaguar, BMW..but then again there is VW and audi, and now something about Mercedes and Nissan....i don't know. For me if it is an exellent engine it shouldn't be important who made it.

And CTS isn't cheap here in Europe so i don't think that ATS will be cheap here. Here, if people will have money for ATS, CTS they probably have money for something from Mercedes or BMW. Both of this company have much higher reputation here. Cadillac probably has lower reputation than Ford or opel.

I hope that Cadillac will have success with ATS (all around the world) but i'm afraid that there are maybe too much expectations.

Edited January 18, 2011 by dado

[smk4565]

This is the main issue. GM needs to sell what people want and expect.

Agreed. GM likes to sell what they have on the shelf, even it the expiration date on it is well past due. Chevy Impala for example. They should build what people and want in the class, not some discounted model, then try to convince people why they should get it.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Where's the diesel?

[regfootball]

This is so laughably wrong.

lol, um no, how do you figure not.

the twin dual cam was a good performer but gained no market traction. didn't help that it was a half assed approach to coming up with a 'new engine'....

the shortstar was in like 3 cars.

GM never rolled out decent v6's enmasse until the high feature v6. up until then you were stuck with pushrod motors, or hackjobs like the twin dual cam, or engines that would only put in a couple cars in limited quantity, like the shortstar.

by then, Nissan and Honda had spit out hundreds of thousands of highly refined v6's....

Edited January 19, 2011 by regfootball

[Drew Dowdell]

GM offered DOHCs first that vastly out powered the imports and no one bought them. None of the issues with the Twincam would have been evident until they started hitting 80,000 miles and people neglected the timing belts, so it's only with hindsight that you even would have known an issue with the Twincam existed. Put them in a Chevy, and people bought the 3.1 pushrod. Put them in the the Cutlass and people bought the 4-cylinder or the 2.8 V6. Off the showroom floor Oldsmobile was selling a V6 that would perform with the SHO of the day without all the hype... and no one bought them.

GM offered DOHC in the Saturn LS series... it was roughly equal to the Camry and Accord outputs of the day... the cars even had dent resistant panels... and no one bought them. Most LS series Saturns are 4-cylinders

GM offered the 3.5 V6 in the Intrigue, still to this day one of the best W-bodies ever built, that Camry and Accord didn't exceed in power till nearly 6 years later..... and no one bought them.

People actively chose the 3800 or the 3400 over all these engines. Lesabre and 88 were the best selling full size family cars for years and years... even after Ford and Chrysler moved their full size offerings over to OHC or DOHC.

When given the choice, people chose the 3800 over any DOHC entry from GM. When they wanted a performer, they chose the S/C 3800.

It wasn't that GM wasn't offering DOHC... it's that the customers were picking the pushrods.... can you blame GM for keeping them in service so long? If the Lumina or Cutlass engine sales had been flipped to 80% DOHC v 20% Pushrod, as opposed to what happened in reality, we'd not be having this discussion today and the 3.6HF would be in it's 4th or 5th generation.

As far as getting there first, GM usually has... and then was ignored by the market.

[William Maley]

Where's the diesel?

We'll get back to you on that

[Lamar]

And if they offer 6.2 l v8 in Europe most people will just say: "Same old GM..stuffing big truck engine in car. They probably haven't change a thing in other areas too".

What do Europeans say about the engine in the Bentley Mulsanne? I'm curious.

[dado]

What do Europeans say about the engine in the Bentley Mulsanne? I'm curious.

Funny you ask. I often in my disscussion with colleagues mention fact that bentley has ohv 6.75 l v8 with TT. 95 % don't know that. First they try to assure me that can't be through (after all this is uberluxury car...it can't have pushrod right??). Then when they realize that maybe i know more about this than they do, they somehow try to prove this engine is something like a dohc but with pushrod?!?! (they try to make it something it isn't). And one of the favourite "Bentley is a behemoth so it needs such a large engine "

In magazine they will call that heritage and what not(in case of bentley)..but if you have pushrod in Cadillac sedan they will call it a truck engine. And funny things is..,.there are other companies which put their top engine in their SUV etc..but since they are DOHC it is OK .It is like:"American cars are old tech, fuel consumptions are bad, doesn't handle good etc" over here.

Perception is the name of the game. Will DOHC v8 make ATS a hit in europe..probably not but it will help. GM must change perception of the crowd if they want to successed here. That is why i'm for different displacement engine between Cadillac and other GM brands. Make a 5,5l or 5,7 l v8 just for cadillac. Put supercharger on it if you want. Why displacement... because that is amongst first thing buyers will notice and if they see same displacement in SUV or any other truck they will think they are the same engine (doesn't matter if one is aluminium other is iron..they don't care). Or maybe GM shouldn't sell Cadillac in Europe if they think it is too much problem. I wouldn't want that because to me present luxurie cars here except Jaguar XF and xj are kind of boring to watch.

Or maybe they should offer TT v6(yes it is v6 but it also have DI, twin turbo, high Hp/l...all the things that are "in" now) with around 400-420 hp and then later on..a v8 supercharger.

Edited January 19, 2011 by dado

[Drew Dowdell]

The ATS-V could be powered by Jesus on a pogo stick and it still wouldn't sell in Europe.

[regfootball]

GM offered DOHCs first that vastly out powered the imports and no one bought them. None of the issues with the Twincam would have been evident until they started hitting 80,000 miles and people neglected the timing belts, so it's only with hindsight that you even would have known an issue with the Twincam existed. Put them in a Chevy, and people bought the 3.1 pushrod. Put them in the the Cutlass and people bought the 4-cylinder or the 2.8 V6. Off the showroom floor Oldsmobile was selling a V6 that would perform with the SHO of the day without all the hype... and no one bought them.

GM offered DOHC in the Saturn LS series... it was roughly equal to the Camry and Accord outputs of the day... the cars even had dent resistant panels... and no one bought them. Most LS series Saturns are 4-cylinders

GM offered the 3.5 V6 in the Intrigue, still to this day one of the best W-bodies ever built, that Camry and Accord didn't exceed in power till nearly 6 years later..... and no one bought them.

People actively chose the 3800 or the 3400 over all these engines. Lesabre and 88 were the best selling full size family cars for years and years... even after Ford and Chrysler moved their full size offerings over to OHC or DOHC.

When given the choice, people chose the 3800 over any DOHC entry from GM. When they wanted a performer, they chose the S/C 3800.

It wasn't that GM wasn't offering DOHC... it's that the customers were picking the pushrods.... can you blame GM for keeping them in service so long? If the Lumina or Cutlass engine sales had been flipped to 80% DOHC v 20% Pushrod, as opposed to what happened in reality, we'd not be having this discussion today and the 3.6HF would be in it's 4th or 5th generation.

As far as getting there first, GM usually has... and then was ignored by the market.

which Buick, Grand Prix, Grand Am, Bonneville, Monte Carlo, Impala, Malibu, etc. was ever offered with a 24 valve DOHC v6?

Its very much a lie to say people were choosing the 3100/3400/3800 when in GM's biggest volume sellers the DOHC was never even offered. In the GP it was maybe offered back in the nineties. What I am referring to mostly is in the late nineties through when the HF was introduced in the CTS to replace the unloved opel 54 degree motor, which was not competitive.

Edited January 19, 2011 by regfootball

[Lamar]

Funny you ask. I often in my disscussion with colleagues mention fact that bentley has ohv 6.75 l v8 with TT. 95 % don't know that. First they try to assure me that can't be through (after all this is uberluxury car...it can't have pushrod right??). Then when they realize that maybe i know more about this than they do, they somehow try to prove this engine is something like a dohc but with pushrod?!?! (they try to make it something it isn't). And one of the favourite "Bentley is a behemoth so it needs such a large engine "

In magazine they will call that heritage and what not(in case of bentley)..but if you have pushrod in Cadillac sedan they will call it a truck engine. And funny things is..,.there are other companies which put their top engine in their SUV etc..but since they are DOHC it is OK .It is like:"American cars are old tech, fuel consumptions are bad, doesn't handle good etc" over here.

That was what I thought. It's funny that the Bentley V8 has a larger displacement than any conventional truck engine sold in the US, yet the LS engines are called the "truck engines." Bias at its finest.

Perception is the name of the game. Will DOHC v8 make ATS a hit in europe..probably not but it will help. GM must change perception of the crowd if they want to successed here. That is why i'm for different displacement engine between Cadillac and other GM brands. Make a 5,5l or 5,7 l v8 just for cadillac. Put supercharger on it if you want. Why displacement... because that is amongst first thing buyers will notice and if they see same displacement in SUV or any other truck they will think they are the same engine (doesn't matter if one is aluminium other is iron..they don't care). Or maybe GM shouldn't sell Cadillac in Europe if they think it is too much problem. I wouldn't want that because to me present luxurie cars here except Jaguar XF and xj are kind of boring to watch.

Or maybe they should offer TT v6(yes it is v6 but it also have DI, twin turbo, high Hp/l...all the things that are "in" now) with around 400-420 hp and then later on..a v8 supercharger.

It would take more than one moderately successful generation of Cadillacs to change any perception in anti-foreign-car Europe. Even if the ATS handles better than the 3 Series, is more comfortable than the C-Class, and has a better interior than the A4/A5, it will still be perceived as completely inferior simply because it's not European.

I wish the USA were that patriotic, although the Big Three did play a major part in screwing that up... but that's another discussion for another day.

[Drew Dowdell]

which Buick, Grand Prix, Grand Am, Bonneville, Monte Carlo, Impala, Malibu, etc. was ever offered with a 24 valve DOHC v6?

Its very much a lie to say people were choosing the 3100/3400/3800 when in GM's biggest volume sellers the DOHC was never even offered. In the GP it was maybe offered back in the nineties. What I am referring to mostly is in the late nineties through when the HF was introduced in the CTS to replace the unloved opel 54 degree motor, which was not competitive.

Do you get much more "GM volume seller" than the Lumina in 1991? It had the TwinCam. The Lumina 2-door, which was also the predecessor to the last Monte Carlo came with the TwinCam option. The W-body Cutlass Supreme sold in droves... almost all with pushrods despite a DOHC option being available. The GP was available with the TC for just a few years and in limited numbers.

You want to compare Le Sabre? The V6 Aurora is a superior vehicle in nearly every measurable way, yet the Le Sabre handily out sold it many times over. Even the pricier S/C 3800 Park Ave at $37k easily outsold the Northstar powered Aurora at $34k....and that's a DOHC V8 v. a Pushrod V6. So one of the most famous (by name) of DOHC V8s gets outsold by the engine GM is most harangued for despite being $3k cheaper and in a superior vehicle. The LeSabre outsold Concords, it out sold Avalons, it outsold Grand Marquis... and all had OHC or DOHC.

The Intrigue was a superior vehicle to the Regal and Grand Prix in just about every measurable way also... definitely on interior. The "Wide Track" Grand Prix's track is actually about half an inch narrower than the Intrigue's. DOHC and all, the Intrigue $22k base was outsold by the Regal with the same base price, and Grand Prix GT $21k and the Impala $18k.

People liked GM's 3800. And for most of the 90s, they preferred it over DOHC options from the same company. In some cases they even preferred it over DOHC options from other companies.

[67impss]

In looking for an Intrigue for my daughter we still want a 3800 but are limited to the 1st & 2nd year production the reason being the durability and fuel considerations. The 3800 is plenty strong performer and sips fuel, the purchase is to replace the '98 Intrigue she has now it for some unknown reason has a R R strut tower rotted out maybe only 40% of the structure left(thinking it was in a flood)

If we cant find an Intrigue we will look for a LSS w/o supercharger or a hi end 88 though the 88's have soft handling and she likes the Intrigue 88's have the 3800 in newer models and she said she wouldn't be caught in a Buick.

[dado]

Is this authorized use of cheersandgears poll

Cadillac will have v8 with 470 hp

[Drew Dowdell]

I replied to their comment section, but they have yet to approve my post.

[dado]

I replied to their comment section, but they have yet to approve my post.

Another one

LINK

"A new document that surfaced on Cheers & Gears ...." whaaaat?? . Dwightlooi are you not telling us something here

[dwightlooi]

I hope they consider putting eAssist on the vehicle as standard equipment. It isn't supposed to degrade performance but can make huge strides in mileage for little cost increase.

It does add about 100 lbs of weight and take a whack out of trunk space.

[William Maley]

Olds, I have a question..

How reliable were the DOHC engines for the Lumina and the rest of the W-Body family?

And yes, I liked the 3800 Series II in my old 2001 Grand Prix.. Still running strong with 206,000 miles the last I heard about it..

[Drew Dowdell]

Olds, I have a question..

How reliable were the DOHC engines for the Lumina and the rest of the W-Body family?

And yes, I liked the 3800 Series II in my old 2001 Grand Prix.. Still running strong with 206,000 miles the last I heard about it..

Early ones had issues with the timing chain idler pulleys. The pulleys were originally plastic and could split from stress. In typical GM fashion, the engine was killed about 2 years after they got it right and switched the pulleys to steel.

After that, change the timing belt at the proper interval and they'd run just as long as any other GM V6.

[dwightlooi]

Perception is the name of the game. Will DOHC v8 make ATS a hit in europe..probably not but it will help. GM must change perception of the crowd if they want to successed here. That is why i'm for different displacement engine between Cadillac and other GM brands. Make a 5,5l or 5,7 l v8 just for cadillac. Put supercharger on it if you want. Why displacement... because that is amongst first thing buyers will notice and if they see same displacement in SUV or any other truck they will think they are the same engine (doesn't matter if one is aluminium other is iron..they don't care). Or maybe GM shouldn't sell Cadillac in Europe if they think it is too much problem. I wouldn't want that because to me present luxurie cars here except Jaguar XF and xj are kind of boring to watch.

Or maybe they should offer TT v6(yes it is v6 but it also have DI, twin turbo, high Hp/l...all the things that are "in" now) with around 400-420 hp and then later on..a v8 supercharger.

That's why you put a DOHC Direct Injection Variable Timing Twin Scroll Turbo 2.0T as the base engine and a 92 bhp / liter V6 as the mainstream upgrade. The ATS-V is always going to be a niche product. GM will be lucky if 5~10% of ATSes sold is a V. As far as niche products go, being alone in the crowd with a 6.2 badge is not necessarily a bad thing. It's differentiation even if it is not inline with the majority perception. Even if it appeals to just 20% of the potential buyers and turns off 80%, that's 20% you don't have to share with Alfa, Audi, BMW, Lexus, Mercedes, Volvo or anyone else.

[NOS2006]

A new report, although we cannot absolutely confirm it, states a very convincingly feasible powertrain for the ATS-V: Jesus on a pogo stick. Cadillac's brilliant marketing group will be able to sell this while convincing all of America to burn calories by bouncing on a pogo stick because, "That's what Jesus would do!"

Sources also state that Europeans still won't buy it.

[Drew Dowdell]

LOL @ NOS

[dwightlooi]

Another one

LINK

"A new document that surfaced on Cheers & Gears ...." whaaaat?? . Dwightlooi are you not telling us something here

Well, the predictions are just that... predictions. You can come back in 3 years and say I am right on target or I am shooting in the wrong direction. But that's all its worth. I wish people won't misrepresent fictional predictions as fact.

Having said that, the numbers -- IMHO -- ought be pretty good guesses.

FACT: In 2007 GM modified the L92 (Vortec 6200) 6.2 V8 to operate using direct injection. The engine was running smoothly in an Escalade. That engine had 11.5:1 compression (a 1 point bump over the L92) and was making "well north of 450hp" as opposed to 403 hp in the original port injected configuration.

PREDICTION: A 6.2 V8 designed from the ground up to use DI, uses slightly higher compression, benefits from airflow optimizations at least equivalent to the LS3 and with variable timing added will also make "more than 450hp". How much more? 20hp is not an unreasonable guess.

Edited January 19, 2011 by dwightlooi

[pow]

LOL this is on Jalopnik now, too

[regfootball]

Do you get much more "GM volume seller" than the Lumina in 1991? It had the TwinCam. The Lumina 2-door, which was also the predecessor to the last Monte Carlo came with the TwinCam option. The W-body Cutlass Supreme sold in droves... almost all with pushrods despite a DOHC option being available. The GP was available with the TC for just a few years and in limited numbers.

You want to compare Le Sabre? The V6 Aurora is a superior vehicle in nearly every measurable way, yet the Le Sabre handily out sold it many times over. Even the pricier S/C 3800 Park Ave at $37k easily outsold the Northstar powered Aurora at $34k....and that's a DOHC V8 v. a Pushrod V6. So one of the most famous (by name) of DOHC V8s gets outsold by the engine GM is most harangued for despite being $3k cheaper and in a superior vehicle. The LeSabre outsold Concords, it out sold Avalons, it outsold Grand Marquis... and all had OHC or DOHC.

The Intrigue was a superior vehicle to the Regal and Grand Prix in just about every measurable way also... definitely on interior. The "Wide Track" Grand Prix's track is actually about half an inch narrower than the Intrigue's. DOHC and all, the Intrigue $22k base was outsold by the Regal with the same base price, and Grand Prix GT $21k and the Impala $18k.

People liked GM's 3800. And for most of the 90s, they preferred it over DOHC options from the same company. In some cases they even preferred it over DOHC options from other companies.

that still does not address the decade of 2000 on where altimas, accords, maximas, etc. cleaned GM's clock while the models that GM most badly needed to have comparable powertrains, the Impala, the Grand Prix, etc. GM refused to put a real motor under the hood as an option to compete. Whether it was cheapness, ineptness, or plain the desire to see their bread and butter products fail (to move people up to higher priced stuff), GM took a huge hit in customer equity. Brands like Pontiac which once had several cars in the top 20 died because GM did not put a motor in that made it attractive. Aside from to fleets. GM only had 4 speed trannies too. How many Altimas did Nissan gain in share because people even preferred their four cylinders to GM's v6 'stalwarts' (emphasis on wart). People chose to drive Camry's and Accords because their 4's were better than GM's 6's.

Is that koolaid in an IV there plugged into you? You flat out deny that cars like the Impala and Grand Prix and such were not horrendously damaged and basically ruined GM? GM refused to build what people would have rather had (the REST of the market) and sold it at a competitive price.

Part of the reason Pontiac died is because they refused to give it powertrains people wanted.

You cite a 91 Lumina but its so ridiculous to use that because a-- it was only on the Z34, and it was rare and expensive. That's like saying people don't want turbos because the Ford Focus ST will only sell few because of its insane price.

Edited January 19, 2011 by regfootball

[regfootball]

Early ones had issues with the timing chain idler pulleys. The pulleys were originally plastic and could split from stress. In typical GM fashion, the engine was killed about 2 years after they got it right and switched the pulleys to steel.

After that, change the timing belt at the proper interval and they'd run just as long as any other GM V6.

plastic.....and then word gets around and they wonder why it didn't sell. perhaps they should have engineered it right before on sale date.