Spying: Enough About The Cadillac ATS-V, Here's The CTS-V

Proportions look nice, I do like the quad exhuast and interesting from vertical bars. I can see the Vertical LED daytime lights in the front lower facia as well as it looks like LED's around the headlights. Traditional bulge in the hood for the supercharger. Very exciting to see this model out and about.

Not digging the grille, it looks too Lincoln. Hope that's part of the camo job.

I'd prefer the mesh grillework of past Vs.

1. The CTS-V is making a comeback.

2. It will have a V8 engine (supercharged or otherwise).

3. Will it have the 7-speed manual like the Corvette?

1. The CTS-V is making a comeback.

2. It will have a V8 engine (supercharged or otherwise).

3. Will it have the 7-speed manual like the Corvette?

No one knows if the CTS-V will have a Seven-Speed or not. Likely we'll hear more about that in the coming months.

2016 seems far off, you'd think they could have it out by this fall to be a 2015 model. I doubt that grille is what they will use, it is probably just on there to throw people off, it doesn't fit Cadillac at all. I wonder if it will have AWD with launch control since that is what a lot of others are doing.

2016 seems far off, you'd think they could have it out by this fall to be a 2015 model. I doubt that grille is what they will use, it is probably just on there to throw people off, it doesn't fit Cadillac at all. I wonder if it will have AWD with launch control since that is what a lot of others are doing.

I'm thinking that want to give the ATS-V some breathing room before the CTS-V comes out. Just speculating here.

I agree with Bill, I think the ATS-V will be RWD only, CTS-V will be AWD and the date is for giving breathing room to the ATS-V sales.

Ever notice that BMW doesn't have to give the M3 breathing room and hold back an M5, or Mercedes doesn't have to limit power on a E63 because they are afraid people won't pay more for an S63? They are different products targeting different buyers. I never understood why GM gets worried about competition from within. It is like the old "it can't be faster than a Corvette" logic, but what if Mercedes, BMW and Audi had a car faster than a Corvette? Should Cadillac not try to match their competition, or should they make the CTS-V slower than a Corvette because they are afraid of making the Corvette look bad. The E63 does 0-60 in 3.4 seconds, that is what Cadillac should shoot for and if they make the Corvette look bad, then too bad for the guys that designed the Corvette, plus they aren't really comparable vehicles anyway.

Ever notice that BMW doesn't have to give the M3 breathing room and hold back an M5, or Mercedes doesn't have to limit power on a E63 because they are afraid people won't pay more for an S63? They are different products targeting different buyers. I never understood why GM gets worried about competition from within. It is like the old "it can't be faster than a Corvette" logic, but what if Mercedes, BMW and Audi had a car faster than a Corvette? Should Cadillac not try to match their competition, or should they make the CTS-V slower than a Corvette because they are afraid of making the Corvette look bad. The E63 does 0-60 in 3.4 seconds, that is what Cadillac should shoot for and if they make the Corvette look bad, then too bad for the guys that designed the Corvette, plus they aren't really comparable vehicles anyway.

Agreed.

Ever notice that BMW doesn't have to give the M3 breathing room and hold back an M5, or Mercedes doesn't have to limit power on a E63 because they are afraid people won't pay more for an S63? They are different products targeting different buyers. I never understood why GM gets worried about competition from within. It is like the old "it can't be faster than a Corvette" logic, but what if Mercedes, BMW and Audi had a car faster than a Corvette? Should Cadillac not try to match their competition, or should they make the CTS-V slower than a Corvette because they are afraid of making the Corvette look bad. The E63 does 0-60 in 3.4 seconds, that is what Cadillac should shoot for and if they make the Corvette look bad, then too bad for the guys that designed the Corvette, plus they aren't really comparable vehicles anyway.

He said timing-wise not power-wise. You do not want two performance sedans released within a year of each other in the same dealership. Show me when C63, E63 and S63 were released within's gnat's rear of each other. BMW took three years to bring its M3 after the regular 3, CTS is taking a year off. This is not WW2 with "just in time no money issue" manufacturing.

And AMG sedans are possibly worst to prove your point of "not cannibalizing" because yes MB does give those cars breathing room.

HP C63 < E63 ~50hp even when it was a 6.2 sitting in the E.The excuse was air intake and exhaust, yet the C63AMG 507 sits merrily on the same HP number as E63 when it had the 6.2. And compare the torque ratings on the S63 and E63 and post them here please.

C63 AMG was 2008, E63 and SLS AMG were 2010, CLS63, SLK55 and SL63 were 2012, S63 was 2014, C63 will repeat in 2015. They have done 6 new AMG cars in a 5 year span, and the nice thing is the AMG model is available the same year as the normal car. Plus they did a new ML and GL in that time span also and they have AMG models. The new S-class is out, the S63 is already available, and the S600 and S65 will follow this spring which is only about 6 months later. But they don't release the S-class, then make you wait 2 years to get an AMG S-class.

C63 AMG was 2008, E63 and SLS AMG were 2010, CLS63, SLK55 and SL63 were 2012, S63 was 2014, C63 will repeat in 2015. They have done 6 new AMG cars in a 5 year span, and the nice thing is the AMG model is available the same year as the normal car. Plus they did a new ML and GL in that time span also and they have AMG models. The new S-class is out, the S63 is already available, and the S600 and S65 will follow this spring which is only about 6 months later. But they don't release the S-class, then make you wait 2 years to get an AMG S-class.

Again you supported (William's) my argument and refuted yours by telling me MB introduced its C63, E63 and S63 sedans with a gap of at least 2 years, not in the same MY.

And why do we care for what is the time frame for the S class or how AMG releases its vehicles? This is a Cadillac thread, stop hijacking it and get back on the topic.

SMK... are you able to ever make a post that doesn't contain some reference to the S-Class?

"Sure, that Elantra is a nice car.. but for just 10 times the price, you could get yourself an S-Class AMG!"

If GM is using the ZO6 powertrain for the CTS-V, then it would help to have the ZO6 on the market first before the CTS-V.

I do not think that this has anything to do with the ATS-V.

I also do not think that we will have to wait for the 2016 model year to get a CTS-V.

I think 2015 model year should be doable for the CTS-V. It shouldn't take 2 years after the initial car comes out to drop a bigger engine in and add some trim. Model year 2 of the body style is reasonable, many cars are done like that, the base sedan comes out, in year 2 the coupe and sport version arrive, a couple years later a mid-cylce refresh.

My guess is 6.2 liter supercharged V8 again, GM sticks with what they know, and it is what they have in the parts bin. I doubt they go with the 625 hp of the Z06, and who knows if air intakes and exhaust are factors, but I think they'd like to have at least 580 to improve on the old car, and my guess is it will come in at 600 hp. But if it is rear wheel drive they won't be able to get that power down and a 420 hp Audi S6 might beat it 0-60. You need grip, just look at the S65 and S63 for example, the S63 is faster 0-60 because of all wheel drive.

SMK... are you able to ever make a post that doesn't contain some reference to the S-Class?

I guess not.

I think 2015 model year should be doable for the CTS-V. It shouldn't take 2 years after the initial car comes out to drop a bigger engine in and add some trim. Model year 2 of the body style is reasonable, many cars are done like that, the base sedan comes out, in year 2 the coupe and sport version arrive, a couple years later a mid-cylce refresh.

SMK... are you able to ever make a post that doesn't contain some reference to the S-Class?

I guess not.

Unlike AMG studio, which just dumps a specialty vanilla engine in all the hi-performance cars while giving some nose job, carbon fiber lipstick and little botox in the suspension, M, RS, V and even F studios actually do more to aerodynamics, handling, and suspension tuning. Many times engines come unique to the car. CTS-V had its own engine when introduced. These things need time. A staggered launch helps the lineup fresh rather than dumping all models in one go. It also helps to improve any initial niggles to have a smooth launch for a model that is considered top of the line.

Per your Cadillac theory (Other luxury manufacturers do it so should Cadillac) - to the contrary - everyone else does it so should MB.

AMG does a lot, AMG was once it's own company, it isn't just a trim level. AMG designed the SLS, there isn't a V-series or M team designing a whole car. The E63 has a different engine, transmission, and the awd system is unique to AMG, it isn't the same 4Matic on an E550, so a lot goes on there, they just co-develop so the product gets out faster. M-B is winning in almost every segment look at the sales charts, the CLA beats the Audi and BMW competition, in midsize and full size sedans and full size SUV Mercedes has the sales champ. Mercedes doesn't need to copy Audi by making fancy versions of a VW or copy Lexus by making the Camry or now Avalon into their #1 luxury car. Mercedes knows what they are doing, they are fine.

Back to Cadillac. We are not here for AMG history lesson. We get that you love MB and AMG and data will be twisted to distort your pony to win the race.

There is ONE vanilla engine from AMG which is put in all appliances MB manufactures to tart them up. AMG introduces one engine in a mid-cycle while phasing out the other, enough to give the perception of it has two engines. From 5.5 N/A and Kompressor to 6.2 to now the TT and now the desire to go to a smaller TT and hybrid! AMG should be ashamed of putting the same engine in a $276,000 car as it puts in a $60,000 car.

Mclaren did the SLR and because it decided to show middle finger to MB and have its own supercar, AMG was selected to design the next vehicle. Just because the R&D operating structure of MB/AMG is different does not mean it is the best and the people working there are with God status.

The fact that you constantly bring your storied brand to compare lowly Cadillac is a victory for Cadillac itself. In less than 10 years since the first CTS-V rolled out from a ragtag team of GMPP division rednecks who did not have a bluechip of AMG tattooed on their shoulders to a formidable sedan enough to twirl around the Nurnburgring faster than many of AMG's so called sports cars.

Is Caddy perfect? Heck no. But it is not as miserable as every drivel you save and spend on any topic remotely related to Cadillac. Cadillac needs its own identity not a carbon copy of that of the German high end generic appliance manufacturer.

Ouchie...

AMG haters are just jealous. They have more than one engine too, the 2.0 turbo, the 5.5 N/A in the SLK, the 6.2 N/A which is soon to be phased out, but a 4.0 bi-turbo is replacing it, 5.5 bi-turbo V8, and the V12 bi-turbo. So that is 5 engines, and they'd still have 4 if the 4.0 replaces both the 5.5 and 6.2.

I don't think Cadillac should copy AMG, just like they shouldn't copy BMW and BMW doesn't try to copy Mercedes/AMG. Each brand has to have something unique, because people don't want to buy the copy when they can get the original version. What Cadillac should strive towards is a broader lineup of V-series cars. The problem is Cadillac doesn't have many body styles of cars, or no true sports car in the line up and their SUVs aren't conducive to turning into a V-series. Making coupe and convertibles out of the ATS and CTS is a start, but they still need a roadster of some kind, whether that be like the Z4 or the F-type or the SL, they need a sports car.

As far as the CTS-V goes, I am predicting Z06 engine tuned down a little to 580-600 hp, rear drive, 6 speed auto or 7 speed manual. But I think it should have an 8 speed auto, and an all wheel drive option. I prefer rear wheel drive, but with that kind of power the back end is going to be wild if you are putting all the power on 2 wheels. I am going to guess $89,795 for price.

580 would only be a 24-HP bump. The 2G CTS-V surprised most when it's official numbers were released, I expect the same on the 3G V. I'm going to guess a minimum of 610.

If the CTS-V has the same drivetrain as the ZO6, then there should be an 8-speed automatic and a 7-speed manual transmission.

As far as output goes, it should be less than the Corvette ZO6 but not less than 600 hp.

I don't think it should be less than the Z06 just for the sake of being less so the Corvette can have the highest number, but I could see GM doing that. If the engine has less just because of the way the intake and exhaust work or for vibration or noise reasons, that makes sense. I do think they'll want 600 hp for advertising purposes.

I don't think Cadillac should copy AMG, just like they shouldn't copy BMW and BMW doesn't try to copy Mercedes/AMG. Each brand has to have something unique, because people don't want to buy the copy when they can get the original version.

"Mercedes/BMW has X, so Cadillac also needs X in order to compete."

You do say that quite a bit... implicitly, if not explicitly.

Cadillac needs entrants into all the luxury segments, but they can't just try to copy what everyone else already did, they need to innovate on some level. What they do need to copy are things like diesels and 8-speed transmissions and come up with some technology and new engines to set them apart. Digging into the Chevy parts bin or making a half-ass attempt like the STS or XLR were won't get it done. The do need a sports car, either something like the Audi TT, Z4 or SLK or else something more expensive like a Jag F-type or XK. Cadillac needs a more diverse product line than 3 sedans and a couple 4 door SUVs, you can't compete with 5 products when some of these German brands have 15-20.

Some (all?) of the German brands have too many models and it shows in their sales. Cadillac is in the business of making money, not catering to the whims of some guy who insists that Cadillac *must* have a 327idx GT CrossCoupe BluFictioncy e-tron (2013 sales figures - 129)....or else they just aren't as good as the Germans.

Some (all?) of the German brands have too many models and it shows in their sales. Cadillac is in the business of making money,

But GM only made $3.8 billion in profit in 2013, while Daimler made $12 billion. Mercedes-Benz cars division alone made $1.9 billion in profit in 4th quarter 2013, while all of GM made $913 million. If GMC is such a profit machine, and Cadillac is about making money and Buick is so hot in China, where is the money going that Mercedes car division alone can out earn all of them plus Chevy.

Cadillac's problem is similar to Acura's and Infiniti's, they have no halo cars. At least Cadillac and Infiniti have rear drive platforms and try to break away from the corporate FWD platform (something Acura and Lincoln don't do), but there is still some lower end parts bin in both brands. Infiniti and Cadillac are a lot alike, the cars are good, but the SUVs are just based off a Nissan or Chevy. Neither have a big flagship sedan or a sports car or super car, neither have mass global appeal and they lack that upper echelon prestige. Cadillac needs to fill out the lineup, otherwise they'll always be like Infiniti.

In all honesty, Benz and BMW would have been more profitable if they quit wasting money on the weirdo models.

Taxi market pays pretty good it seems.

Edit: Also, chevy models are naturally lower margin by nature.

Some (all?) of the German brands have too many models and it shows in their sales. Cadillac is in the business of making money,

But GM only made $3.8 billion in profit in 2013, while Daimler made $12 billion. Mercedes-Benz cars division alone made $1.9 billion in profit in 4th quarter 2013, while all of GM made $913 million. If GMC is such a profit machine, and Cadillac is about making money and Buick is so hot in China, where is the money going that Mercedes car division alone can out earn all of them plus Chevy.

Price out the least expensive GM vehicle. Price out the least expensive Mercedes vehicle. Report back on your findings.

Cadillac's problem is similar to Acura's and Infiniti's, they have no halo cars. At least Cadillac and Infiniti have rear drive platforms and try to break away from the corporate FWD platform (something Acura and Lincoln don't do), but there is still some lower end parts bin in both brands. Infiniti and Cadillac are a lot alike, the cars are good, but the SUVs are just based off a Nissan or Chevy. Neither have a big flagship sedan or a sports car or super car, neither have mass global appeal and they lack that upper echelon prestige. Cadillac needs to fill out the lineup, otherwise they'll always be like Infiniti.

Again, "Cadillac needs to do what X brand is doing so that they can be like X in order to fully compete with X." Maybe Cadillac should also offer their base models with cloth interiors and 16" wheels in some markets so that the really kitted-up models they sell can be pure profit generators.

So anyway, the CTS-V... AWD was also mentioned here. How many supersedans offer AWD in this segment? (Audi doesn't count)

I wasn't talking profit margin, on that GM gets killed by the luxury brands. I stated total dollars, so price of the vehicle doesn't really matter when GM sold nearly 10 million cars in 2013. But if you divide it up they sell about 2.4 million cars per quarter, if they made $913 million, last quarter that is about $380 per car. So if Cadillac, GMC and pickups are really such big profit centers why only a $380 per car average? They would have to be losing money on every Chevy and Buick sedan sold, and maybe they are.

To Lamar's question the E63 has AWD, but is is default 67% rear bias. Audi of course does, the M5 and XF-R are rear drive only and Lexus has no performance sedan, unless you call the GS F-sport with yesterday's 305 hp V6 and 6-speed auto sporty.

I think the big question is the V-series going to be worth the price premium over the V-sport? The car magazines and tv shows all love how the V-sport drives and the handling and driving dynamics, and it does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds which is pretty quick. The knocks are on CUE and interior, which will be the same on the V-series. The CTS-V has to do something more than just take .5 seconds off the 0-60 time.

That will be interesting. I figure the CTS will be in the mid 3s 0-60 (the older, ostensibly heavier model was clocked at 3.9s). Also, don't count on the exact same interior.

Also, LOL @ the GS F Sport trim level. Lexus should be ashamed of themselves. (The GS350 F Sport has an 8AT in RWD guise and 6AT when AWD)

Actually you did state profit.

I think the GS F-sport should be $75,000, if people are foolish enough to pay $60,000 for it, they'll pay $75,000 because it says "Lexus" and "F" on it. That F should stand for "Fail." It can be the sedan version of the Acura NSX, $75,000 and you get a 300 hp V6.

The CTS-V will need awd to get the 0-60 time down, they can put all the power in the world under the hood, unless you can get it to the ground it doesn't matter. Look at the Nissan GT-R as an example, it gets the power down and grips like no other.

75 grand for a trim package? That would actually outdo the Germans and their M Sport, AMG Design, and S line. :-P

The GT-R is a purpose-built computer on wheels, not a supersedan. I could probably get great timeslips with it.

I think once we see the grill in chrome with the new (repulsive) emblem on the front it's going to look alright. But the vertical bars really do remind me of Buick's waterfall grills. Maybe now Buick can get the mesh grills like I've been dying to see them with, though.

Actually, I don't think the CTS-V needs anymore power than the outgoing car. The new (LWB Alpha) CTS is about 350 lbs lighter, so 556 hp would have been just fine. 600+ hp will be incidental to switching to a 5th Gen Supercharged small block V8, and that's all good. But it is not strictly speaking necessary and probably wouldn't make the car significantly faster. So as far as whether the engine makes the same power as the Corvette version or a few tens of horsepower less, I think htat's immaterial.

As far as RWD goes, it's actually easier for the CTS to put power down vs the Corvette. Traction is generally a function of contact patch, friction co-efficient of the tire/road interface and WEIGHT. Being about 700 lbs heavier actually helps with traction. The car will ultimately be slower because you have more mass to accelerate. But you are going to be melting less rubber. If the car is 70,000 lbs heavier you wouldn't be melting any rubber (of course you wouldnt be going any where in a hurry as well).

If the CTS-V has the same drivetrain as the ZO6, then there should be an 8-speed automatic and a 7-speed manual transmission.

If GM puts a manual in this generation CTS-V for sure it will be the 7-speed.