Going for broke with the ATS

[dwightlooi]

The ATS is probably GM Luxury's most important car of the decade. If GM is to go for broke it'll probably be with this vehicle.

Here are a number of things that can happen...

Mild Electric Hybridization being standard on all 4-cylinder models

• 15~20hp Belt-Alternator-Starter (BAS) or Flywheel-Integrated-Generator/motor (FIG)
  
• 0.5 kWh / 115.2 Volt air cooled Lithium Ion Battery Pack
  
• Idle Stop control
  
• Regenerative braking
  
• Mild power assist
  

Gen III Ecotec Engine (ATS 2.4 & 2.0T)

• 200~220 hp 2.4 liter Direct Injection Naturally Aspirated Inline-4
  
• 270~300 hp 2.0 liter Direct Injection Turbo Inline-4
  
• Intake Port Mounted Throttle Butterflies
  
• Intake Cam Switching system affording part time Miller & Atkinson Cycle operation
  
• 0W20 Low Friction Synthetic Lubricants
  

Gen V Small Block Engine (ATS-V)

• 420~470 hp 5.5~6.2 liter Direct Injection Pushrod V8
  
• Cam-in-cam Dual Independent VVT
  
• Cylinder Deactivation
  

Clutched Automatic Transmissions

• 6-speed Planetary Automatic with electro-hydraulic clutch pack instead of torque converter
  

Advanced Refinement and Amenities

• Double Glazed Acoustic Glass on front and rear windows
  
• Electrochromic glass all round (Real Time Auto and Manual tint control)
  
• 99.9% UV A/B proof glass (Asian Markets)
  
• Sound Absorbing Perforated Honeycomb Sandwich engine cover and skirts
  
• Noise Cancelling Audio System
  
• Magnetorologic Shocks
  

Advanced Unibody Structure

• High Strength Steel Unibody
  
• Aluminum hood and Selected Panels
  
• Cast Magnesium Firewall Cross member
  
• Laser seam welding
  
• Quiet Steel Elastomeric Sandwich firewall and underbody pan
  

[SoCalCTS]

I hope so! That sounds great.

[Robert Hall]

1. What about a V6?

2. A 6spd auto seems a bit old by 2013 or whenever this comes out..needs an 8-10 spd auto.

[regfootball]

8 speed auto

standard 2.4 is a waste

anything with a 'belt' scares me on reliability

v6 is needed

[smk4565]

8-speed auto on the base model is a must for this car at launch. BMW has 8-speeds on everything above a 3-series right now, Merc has had 7-speed for years and is working on 9. Hyundai is going to offer 8-speeds in 2011. Cadillac can't be behind them right out of the gate.

Car needs a V6. I'd wish for a straight six, but I know that isn't happening, so V6 I'll take. But a V6 is an absolute must, the whole segment has one. The ATS can have one turbo-4 with hybrid system to get the greenies, after that leave the 4-bangers to Chevy and Buick.

I do hope Cadillac goes for broke on this one, but Cadillac never has on any vehicle in the past, at least not in my lifetime. So I remain cautiously optimistic. Remember also, for this car to be a "3-series killer" it has to be a "CTS killer" as well. Will Cadillac really make a car good enough to make the current CTS irrelevant and obsolete?

[smk4565]

It needs one other thing to be successful:

That right there lets you charge $5,000 more for the car.

[Robert Hall]

It needs one other thing to be successful:

That right there lets you charge $5,000 more for the car.

A Caddy hood ornament on the ATS would be nice..the badge in the center of the grille is too predictable.

[smk4565]

A Caddy hood ornament on the ATS would be nice..the badge in the center of the grille is too predictable.

Badge in the grille for ATS and CTS, raised hood ornament on the big car. S-class has the raised hood ornament so you can line up poor people in the crosshairs before running them down. Gives the car that 3rd world dictator feel.

[dwightlooi]

8-speed auto on the base model is a must for this car at launch. BMW has 8-speeds on everything above a 3-series right now, Merc has had 7-speed for years and is working on 9. Hyundai is going to offer 8-speeds in 2011. Cadillac can't be behind them right out of the gate.

Car needs a V6. I'd wish for a straight six, but I know that isn't happening, so V6 I'll take. But a V6 is an absolute must, the whole segment has one. The ATS can have one turbo-4 with hybrid system to get the greenies, after that leave the 4-bangers to Chevy and Buick.

I do hope Cadillac goes for broke on this one, but Cadillac never has on any vehicle in the past, at least not in my lifetime. So I remain cautiously optimistic. Remember also, for this car to be a "3-series killer" it has to be a "CTS killer" as well. Will Cadillac really make a car good enough to make the current CTS irrelevant and obsolete?

Actually, I disagree on this one... on the question of how many speeds you need, more is not always merrier.

Let's take it to the extreme and consider a 24-speed transmission. It'll actually make the car slower due to all the shifting that's taking place. In fact, most of the 7 and 8 speed trannies do not go through all its speeds from stop to freeway cruising speeds. Instead, many start in 2nd and only goes to first in sport mode or when you floor the gas at a stop or at creeping speeds. Heck, even the M-B 5-speed starts in 2nd. Some skips 4th and/or 6th on upshifts, and use those gears only during part throttle downshifts at certain speeds where they go down one gear instead of two.

When it comes down to it, I think what is "enough" is enough ratios and spread to do three things:-

• Get to 60 mph in 2nd with a low enough 1st to optimize performance.
  
• Have a high enough top ratio such that the 65 mph cruising rpm is at or under 2000 rpm.
  
• Have enough ratios such that each upshift puts the rpm at or near the torque peak.
  

We can already do all of those things with 6 ratios and a 6~6.1 ratio spread. More ratios really do not do much for performance or economy although it may make gear changes less perceptible under some situations or offer an alternative starting gear for sport and comfort modes. All it all it doesn't help a lot.

But, surely it can't hurt can it? Well, actually it can... in two ways. Firstly, 6-speeds is practically the limit you can do with two planetaries. More speeds require three planetaries. More planetaries in the same case size means higher parasitic losses from free spinning gears. It also means narrower and weaker gears. In short, a weaker transmission that is less efficient at any given constant speed. Secondly, it is a matter of money and where is goes. If you spend $1000 on an extra 2 or 3 gears, thats money you cannot put into a flywheel integrated motor. Overall, the economy gains from 3 additional speeds is probably less than you'll get from mild electrification. So, this becomes an opportunity cost and a bad trade off.

For me, I'll rather see a 15hp electric assist system than 3 additional speeds.

[pow]

Badge in the grille for ATS and CTS, raised hood ornament on the big car. S-class has the raised hood ornament so you can line up poor people in the crosshairs before running them down. Gives the car that 3rd world dictator feel.

Win.

[pow]

It's as much about execution as it is about technical specs. Get steering feel, brake feel, ergonomics, throttle tip-in and response, suspension tuning, and NVH right, and you'd still have an awesome car even with just 230 hp and only six speeds (BMW 328i).

[smk4565]

It's as much about execution as it is about technical specs. Get steering feel, brake feel, ergonomics, throttle tip-in and response, suspension tuning, and NVH right, and you'd still have an awesome car even with just 230 hp and only six speeds (BMW 328i).

I'd agree on execution, that is what BMW does so well. But even the X3 now has an 8-speed, my guess is the next 3-series will as well. The 5-series because of its 8-speed gets 32 mpg. Cadillac has 2 more years to work on the ATS, a 32 mpg V6 should be there.

[Drew Dowdell]

I'd agree on execution, that is what BMW does so well. But even the X3 now has an 8-speed, my guess is the next 3-series will as well. The 5-series because of its 8-speed gets 32 mpg. Cadillac has 2 more years to work on the ATS, a 32 mpg V6 should be there.

The 528i doesn't get 32 mpg because it has an 8-speed. The 528i gets 32mpg because it has great low end torque (230 ft/lbs at 2600 rpm) and a very tall 8th gear ratio (1:0.67) It could have a 3 speed with that same top ratio and still get 32mpg.

The 535i only gets 29mpg with an 8-speed and 300hp. The Camaro can do 29mpg with a 6speed auto, 312hp V6, and no turbo..... so clearly the 8-speed isn't helping fuel economy.

GM has the powertrains to be able to hit your fuel economy standards.

[smk4565]

The 528i doesn't get 32 mpg because it has an 8-speed. The 528i gets 32mpg because it has great low end torque (230 ft/lbs at 2600 rpm) and a very tall 8th gear ratio (1:0.67) It could have a 3 speed with that same top ratio and still get 32mpg.

The 535i only gets 29mpg with an 8-speed and 300hp. The Camaro can do 29mpg with a 6speed auto, 312hp V6, and no turbo..... so clearly the 8-speed isn't helping fuel economy.

GM has the powertrains to be able to hit your fuel economy standards.

The 528i has had great low end torque forever, the engine is the same as the old car, but they are getting 4 mpg more now.

5-10 years ago when Toyota and Honda had 5-speeds, and GM was rolling out the 3800/4-speed combo, GM defenders said that was good enough, it had good fuel economy, etc. That didn't work out, the DOHC/5-speed Japanese cars continually racked up more market share. Cadillac can use a 6-speed, but when Mercedes, Infiniti, BMW, Lexus and Hyundai are using 7 or 8 gears, consumer perception will be that Cadillac is behind the curve.

[balthazar]

That's where educating the consumer to be more intelligent than just 'morer gears = betterer' is the job of a successful PR department. Get beyond the superficial; get technical.

[Robert Hall]

That's where educating the consumer to be more intelligent than just 'morer gears = betterer' is the job of a successful PR department. Get beyond the superficial; get technical.

The general consumer is too dumb to comprehend that.

[Drew Dowdell]

The 528i has had great low end torque forever, the engine is the same as the old car, but they are getting 4 mpg more now.

5-10 years ago when Toyota and Honda had 5-speeds, and GM was rolling out the 3800/4-speed combo, GM defenders said that was good enough, it had good fuel economy, etc. That didn't work out, the DOHC/5-speed Japanese cars continually racked up more market share. Cadillac can use a 6-speed, but when Mercedes, Infiniti, BMW, Lexus and Hyundai are using 7 or 8 gears, consumer perception will be that Cadillac is behind the curve.

Again, it's the final gear ratio that matters for highway cruising, not the number of gears. BMW could have left it as a 6-speed but changed the final two gears to be taller and the result would have been the same.

Oldsmobile at it's death was nearly all DOHC, and look how that turned out. The consumer doesn't know what DOHC means. They only know that Car and Driver says it's betterer.

[dwightlooi]

Again, it's the final gear ratio that matters for highway cruising, not the number of gears. BMW could have left it as a 6-speed but changed the final two gears to be taller and the result would have been the same.

Oldsmobile at it's death was nearly all DOHC, and look how that turned out. The consumer doesn't know what DOHC means. They only know that Car and Driver says it's betterer.

Well, let's compare the facts surrounding the two transmissions shall we? Facts, after all, are not subjective...

GM Hydramatic 6L50 (6-speed Automatic)

• Max Input Torque Rating: 332 lb-ft (450 nm)
  
• 1st: 4.06
  
• 2nd: 2.37
  
• 3rd: 1.55
  
• 4th: 1.16
  
• 5th: 0.85
  
• 6th: 0.67
  
• Rev: 3.20 (-)
  

ZF 8HP45 (8-speed Automatic)

• Max Input Torque Rating: 332 lb-ft (450 nm)
  
• 1st: 4.70
  
• 2nd: 3.13
  
• 3rd: 2.10
  
• 4th: 1.67
  
• 5th: 1.29
  
• 6th: 1.00
  
• 7th: 0.84
  
• 8th: 0.67
  
• Rev: 3.30 (-)
  

As you can see -- using the same final drive ratio -- both transmission will wind up having the same cruising rpm. The difference here is that the 8HP45 has a 4.7:1 1st gear compared to a 4.06:1 1st gear on the 6L50, hence it'll put 15% more torque to the wheels off the line resulting in slightly better acceleration. This also actually result in slightly worse fuel economy in the city, which is why the transmission typically starts in 2nd gear downshifting to 1st only if the driver aggressive stomps the pedal at a stoplight or at very low speeds (0~15 mph). It can afford to do so because the additional speed steps enables it to have a 2nd that is not too tall (between the 6-spd box's 1st and 2nd). On the flipside, the 8-spd does not hit 60mph in 2nd and the additional shift may actually cost it 0.1~0.2 sec in the "revered" 0-60 mph tests.

You typically see rapidly diminishing returns in performance and economy as you ratchet up the number of speeds a transmission has. Huge difference between 3 and 4. Big difference between 4 and 5 speeds. Small difference between 5 and 6. Tiny between 6 and 7. Anything over 7 speeds may not even register any tangible fuel savings -- at least not with MPG measured only to 2 significant figures on the window sticker. That's based on the benefits of ratios alone. If we consider the fact that 7 to 9 speed boxes probably need to add one additional planetary gear set which increases parasitic losses in any given speed, the rate of diminishing returns may be greater.

Point to ponder: What gives you more tangible fuel economy and performance gains? Replacing the torque converter with an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch (ala M-B AMG) or adding two speeds to the 6-speed Automatic?

Edited December 12, 2010 by dwightlooi

[Drew Dowdell]

Thank you Dwight. That really backs up my statement that the equivilantly powered Camaro matches the 535i in fuel economy, yet has two fewer gears.

[hyperv6]

It is too soon to tell what we will get with this package. But this will be the most important Cadillac to be made. They need to make the ATS the car that people get excited about and able to be easily sold in volume. If you can't sell a excellent cheaper Cadillac you will never push a 6 figure flagship even in low volume for a very long time.

If GM wants to show that Cadillac is world class they need to do it in their cheapest car and make it best in class. Not as good or almost as good but best.

BMW started to build on the 3 series and grew it into the othe lines of the more expensive cars.

The Alpha will touch so many cars they need to get it right. The Zeta was good but in cost cutting and other issues they left a little on the table. Weight and cost will be the main issues they can not mess up on. They need to bring it in so they can built a proper priced Chevy Coupe but they also need to keep the weght down so this platform will perform well with the Ecotec and stay relevant well into the future.

[pow]

Multi-speed transmissions are also large and complex. Compare the planetary gearbox in a Prius or Volt to a conventional automatic...

For cars with no electric assist, double-clutch gearboxes are the way to go. AMG's system apparently combines the refinement of a slushbox with the responsiveness of a DSG-type system.

[balthazar]

The general consumer is too dumb to comprehend that.

Gee- that's why you EDUCATE them.

And I don't think it's stupidity as much as the fact that the information isn't presented to them.

[dwightlooi]

Thank you Dwight. That really backs up my statement that the equivilantly powered Camaro matches the 535i in fuel economy, yet has two fewer gears.

It's more than that...

Let's consider the GM 3.6 DI V6 (LLT) in RWD applications.

It makes 302~312hp @ 6300~6500 rpm and 270~278 lb-ft @ 5200, with a maximum engine speed of 6700 rpm.

The GM 6L50 has the following ratios 4.06 - 2.37 - 1.55 - 1.16 - 0.85 - 0.67

If the TCU shifts at 6700 rpm in each gear the rpms after each shift is as follows:-

1st - 2nd: 3911

2nd - 3rd: 4382

3rd - 4th: 5014

4th - 5th: 4909

5th - 6th: 5281

Basically, the engine speed is already where is ought with six speeds.

Now, lets consider the same engine fitted with a ZF 8HP45 (4.7 - 3.13 - 2.10 - 1.67 - 1.29 - 1.00 - 0.84 - 0.67)

1st - 2nd: 4462

2nd - 3rd: 4495

3rd - 4th: 5328

4th - 5th: 5175

5th - 6th: 5194

6th - 7th: 5628

7th - 8th: 5344

8-speeds may not even be of value in terms of performance. As you can see, in three of the gears the after shift rpm is actually above the 5200 rpm torque peak. That is not ideal because an engine pulls the hardest in ANY gear at the torque peak. You want to shift to where the torque peak is or a few hundred rpms before it arrives. You don't want to shift to a point after it and waste the meatiest areas under the torque curve. Performance aside it is also detrimental to seat of the pants feel. After each shift, will you rather have the driver feel an increase in the rate of acceleration as the needle climbs towards the torque peak? Or do you want him to feel the acceleration forces immediately start fading since you have landed just past the peak and it's all downhill from there?

That is why some 8-speed trannies sometimes skip gears during upshifts.

Edited December 13, 2010 by dwightlooi

[smk4565]

Thank you Dwight. That really backs up my statement that the equivilantly powered Camaro matches the 535i in fuel economy, yet has two fewer gears.

The 535i gets 20/30 mpg. No GM 6-cylinder hits 20 city or 30 highway. Even the 2.4 liter (184 hp) Regal is 19/30 mpg. And according to former GM management, RWD got bad fuel economy. So why is a 300 hp rear driver edging a 184 hp front driver in fuel economy? It isn't weight, the 535i is heavier, it's the ZF transmission.

I see 300 hp and 30 mpg as the minimum for the ATS and next-gen CTS. Hyundai has a 270 hp, 34 mpg car now, Cadillac has to one-up all these cars. Maybe 300 hp and 35 mpg is their target, no one has done that yet, but Ford already did 310 hp/31 mpg with the Mustang. Cadillac in 2013 should be better than a 2010 Mustang.

[balthazar]

BMW 6 should be better than a Mustang too, right? It isn't.

[hyperv6]

The general consumer is too dumb to comprehend that.

This is true in our more is better thinking society. And don't think companies are not marketing to this way of thinking. They have been doing it for years. Just look at all the people here that still think you have to have 8 or 12 cylinders to be fast or important.

[balthazar]

Facts are facts. If some people chose to delude themselves, it is they that are acting 'dumb'.

[Drew Dowdell]

Dwight, is "Cam in Cam" something GM has on the shelf now?

[dwightlooi]

Dwight, is "Cam in Cam" something GM has on the shelf now?

Cam-in-cam was used in the Viper 8.3 V10 by (then) Daimler-Chrysler.

A company called Mechadyne out of the UK holds the patents and has functioning systems. GM can readily license it if they want.

Mechadyne

Cam-in-cam (aka Concentric Cams) is the most straight forward and efficient way to get independent intake & exhaust VVT onto a pushrod engine like the Gen V small block. It also opens the door to replacing the current DOHC heads with SOHC heads while preserving Dual-VVT. Except for the lack of independent VVT, SOHC designs are superior in fuel economy, compactness and is equivalent to DOHC in performance up to about 7000~7500 rpms. Cam-in-cam removes that and makes SOHC superior in every way.

GM has reportedly tested the system in the Small Block V8. It is unclear at this point if they will incorporate it or simply stick to synchronous VVT. What is clear is that Cylinder Deactivation and Direct Injection will make it onto the next generation of Pushrod engines.

[pow]

BMW 6 should be better than a Mustang too, right? It isn't.

No, the BMW's inline-six is definitely better than the 3.7 Duratec in the Mustang. Direct injection, variable-scroll turbo, inherent balance of inline-six, magnesium block, way more torque, etc.

[dwightlooi]

No, the BMW's inline-six is definitely better than the 3.7 Duratec in the Mustang. Direct injection, variable-scroll turbo, inherent balance of inline-six, magnesium block, way more torque, etc.

Here's one big problem for GM to solve. The current 3.6 and 3.0 DI V6es have pretty good specfic output...

But, they are also:-

• Some of the roughest sounding V6 in service with anyone -- worse than the Pushrod 3.5 (REALLY!)
  
• Below average in fuel economy ratings
  

Possible Solutions?

• Precision crankshaft balancing
  
• Piston & Rod weight matching
  
• Add a balance shaft in valley of engine block
  
• Switch from plastic to aluminum valve covers and intake tracts
  
• Add external ribs and webs to stiffen block
  
• Improve engine mounts
  
• Add sound absorbing / canceling devices (Helmholtz's, perforated honeycombs, mastic sandwiches, etc)
  
• Use active noise cancellation in cabin (through stereo system)
  
• Replace DOHC valvetrain with SOHC or Cam-in-cam valve train
  
• Use a single cam lobe for two valves to reduce friction
  
• Implement a cam switching system to switch between Otto t& Atkinson cycles (ala Honda)
  
• Add mild hybrid system
  
• Go from chain to belt drive (detrimental to service intervals though)
  

Edited December 13, 2010 by dwightlooi

[Drew Dowdell]

Dwight, the HF's smoothness really seems to depend on the application. The Acadia I just had was super smooth and quiet.

[hyperv6]

Dwight, the HF's smoothness really seems to depend on the application. The Acadia I just had was super smooth and quiet.

The 3.6 in the Bu with the 6 speed is very smooth. It makes my 3800 Series III SC feel like it is missing on two cylinders.

[dwightlooi]

Dwight, the HF's smoothness really seems to depend on the application. The Acadia I just had was super smooth and quiet.

My experience with the HF V6 seems to indicate the following:-

• So far I have sampled the HF V6 in the Malibu, Lacrosse, CTS, SRX and Camaro. All were rentals.
  
• None of them are particularly refined -- acoustically they have a grainy, gritty, groan.
  
• None of them are particularly fast revving -- revs are lethargic compared to similar V6es others (especially Honda).
  
• The DI versions seems to be coarser and less refined than the port injected versions.
  
• Independently of the engine, some applications have more insulation than others make the V6es less obtrusive.
  
• Others like the Camaro is down right crude sounding. By that I mean, the engine sounds and feels less refined than the 2.4 Inline-4 in Malibu.
  
• Even in a pretty well insulated vehicle (SRX 3.0) the engine comes across as coarse, groanny and not particularly eager.
  
• If the Toyota 2GR-FE (Lexus ES350) is a 10 and the Honda J32A (Acura TL) is a 9; I'll give the LF1 (3.0) and LLT (3.6) engines a 5 in refinement.
  
• In fact, the 3.5 Pushrod V6 in the last generation Malibu & G6 seemed to be a bit better. Not more of a revver, but somewhat quieter and smoother.
  

[Drew Dowdell]

I haven't driven a 3.5 lately, but the 3.9 is super smooth and quiet. I felt it was very similar to the 3.6 in the Acadia.

[Carguy]

I would like to see a base 2.0L DI Turbo I4 in the base ATS making no less then 300HP! That would one up BMW by having a 300HP base engine! Then do a 3.0L DI Turbo V6 with 360+HP and up from there. They could use the 3.0T in the next base CTS with a 3.6T as an opt being there is no non V model V8's it seems. I wish they could do DOHC DI heads for the SB V8 to replace the Northstar but nothing seems to be happening in that direction. Dont just compete GM but BLOW THEM AWAY in every segment with a turbo I4 with the same HP as their I6 and so on!

[dwightlooi]

I would like to see a base 2.0L DI Turbo I4 in the base ATS making no less then 300HP! That would one up BMW by having a 300HP base engine! Then do a 3.0L DI Turbo V6 with 360+HP and up from there. They could use the 3.0T in the next base CTS with a 3.6T as an opt being there is no non V model V8's it seems. I wish they could do DOHC DI heads for the SB V8 to replace the Northstar but nothing seems to be happening in that direction. Dont just compete GM but BLOW THEM AWAY in every segment with a turbo I4 with the same HP as their I6 and so on!

Here are the practical realities given the intent to introduce the ATS in 2012 as a 2013 model

• It is unlikely that GM can, or will, do a new family of transmissions in time. This leaves us with the 6L45, 6L50, 6L80 and 6L90.
  
• You can easily bring the 2.0T to 300hp. But, if you do so, expect somee degree of turbo lag and reduction in fuel economy.
  
• A low boost 3.0T will be roughly the same output as a high boost 2.0T. A high boost 3.0T will be about 400hp.
  
• If GM does a low boost 3.0T they'll probably keep it at or under 315hp / 332 lb-ft to be compatible with the 6L50 transmission.
  
• If they do a low boost 3.0T they'll probably NOT do a high boost 2.0T and use the 220hp or 255hp versions in the Regal instead.
  
• If they do a high boost 3.0T @ ~400 hp that'll probably be the V engine in lieu of a 420~470hp Pushrod V8.
  
• If GM is to revamp its transmissions to either a hybridized drive or a 7~8 speed unit, it'll probably be a mid-life ATS update.
  

[dwightlooi]

I haven't driven a 3.5 lately, but the 3.9 is super smooth and quiet. I felt it was very similar to the 3.6 in the Acadia.

I have never sampled the 3.9, so I cannot pass judgement on it. The 3.5 liter wasn't bad though... it was smooth and quiet. At 221 hp / 220 lb-ft with 22 (city) / 32 (fwy) mpg (pre-2008 EPA standard) it was also reasonably competitive with the 2.8 ~ 3.2 DOHC V6es of the period. Not class leading for sure, but good enough to be mid-pack.

[Drew Dowdell]

Here are the practical realities given the intent to introduce the ATS in 2012 as a 2013 model

• It is unlikely that GM can, or will, do a new family of transmissions in time. This leaves us with the 6L45, 6L50, 6L80 and 6L90.
• You can easily bring the 2.0T to 300hp. But, if you do so, expect somee degree of turbo lag and reduction in fuel economy.

Wasn't the 2.0T over 300 in the Cobalt if you bought the upgrade from Chevy? Apparently there was also a boost in fuel economy too.

[z28luvr01]

Hyperv6 can confirm or deny, but I believe the only major difference is that premium is required as opposed to recommended.

[hyperv6]

Hyperv6 can confirm or deny, but I believe the only major difference is that premium is required as opposed to recommended.

Here is the true facts on the LNF turbo with the GM performance upgrade.

Stage 1 Vehicle:

Stage 1 Horsepower:

Stage 1 Torque:

Cobalt SS

280 HP @ 4700 RPM

320 lb.-ft @ 4300

HHR SS

290 HP @ 5200 RPM

315 lb.-ft @ 4800

Solstice/Sky Auto Trans

290 HP @ 5200 RPM

325 lb.-ft @ 3600

Solstice/Sky Manual Trans

290 HP @ 5200 RPM

340 lb.-ft @ 3600

The FWD transaxles limit things a bit and the new 6 speeds should make it possible to make more power. The RWD in the Solstice as you can see will take much more torque so the new RWD cars also should be able to handle thing even better.

The changes are

The engine goes from Premium Recomended to Required.

The Boost in most parts of the country depending on alt and temp will see 21 - 23 PSI. These numbers can vary 1-2 PSI depending on the variables.

The Boost lag is no different from the stock setting and if anything goes less noticed as the power comes on so hard, fast and at such a low RPM and keeps it throught the range. The best Turbo car I ever drove was the twin turbo Calaway and it has much more lag than the LNF. The Fact is you would not want it all to come at the crack of the pedal as it is because you would never keep traction. I can spin the tires at will on dry pavment rolling at 30+ MPH and on wet over 50 MPH with a Auto.

Even under normal driving the boost will hit a fast 13-15 PSI with only a easy hit of part throttle.

Contrary to what some say the MPG goes up 1-2 MPG. Everyone at the HHR site has noticed this. I have gotten to know Bill Duncan the Drivetrain Engineer at GMPD who developed this kit. He has confirmed the 1-2 MPG gain. He told me that GM saw the same results in development.

Bill said it was a unintended result. He attributes it to the fact the car has much more torque and gets to speed faster resulting in more off gas time. The DI engines shut the gas off to the engine when you cost or off the throttle.

If anything the kit make the engine realy come to life. You can ask any Solstice or SS owner and none have found any negitive to this set up. In fact the only real complaints I have heard are that some dealers who do not have properly trained techs have issues witht he install. Poor crimp connection by techs have lead to drivability issues. A tech using the proper tool to crimp the connections are not an issue.

The other complaint is the need to replace the tires if you drive it hard. The Pilots will wear fast if you drive it hard.

The LNF as it is can go to 400 HP with not need to replace any internal parts. At 400 HP GM recomends to upgrade the pistons and rods. Then the engine can make a even larger jump with few needs parts.

This engine with a proper tranny and rear axle would be amazing. So many people really do not know what this thing could really do. The 500 HP Solstice Pontiac had in the Drifitng series as not a fluke. It could be built very easy by anyone.

The Ecotec could be the Small Block Chevy of the Future. GM is going to use it in so many car and they need to make sure the aftermarket keeps up and makes performance parts for this engine.

[hyperv6]

Here is a good interview with Bill Duncan.

It give insite on the Cobalt kit and the ideas behind the kit.

http://gmtunersource.com/blog/news/item/923-cobalt-lnf-turbo-upgrade-update-8/5-%E2%80%93-qa

Bill is a very good guy and a excellent engineer. I wish he would visit this site and help set the story straight on many things GM has done.

I know Bill keeps involved at many performance web sites and gets involved. Nice to know GM is watching and willing to jump in and help.

Edited December 14, 2010 by hyperv6

[daves87rs]

Why dwight is nor working for GM is beyond me....

[Z-06]

Wasn't the 2.0T over 300 in the Cobalt if you bought the upgrade from Chevy? Apparently there was also a boost in fuel economy too.

Yes as hyper stated the power came close to 290 hp. Apparently there was a plan for Stage 2 kit that was supposed to push the envelope even further, did that ever materialize?

The LN-F with the plumbings is capable of getting 340 hp without break in sweat prior to making any more changes.

As for the fuel efficiency there has been a good 2 mpg bump in the numbers because of the Stage 1 upgrade. LNF is a very capable engine. The Cobalt drag racers were pushing over 450 hp of course with plumbing modifications.

[hyperv6]

Yes as hyper stated the power came close to 290 hp. Apparently there was a plan for Stage 2 kit that was supposed to push the envelope even further, did that ever materialize?

The LN-F with the plumbings is capable of getting 340 hp without break in sweat prior to making any more changes.

As for the fuel efficiency there has been a good 2 mpg bump in the numbers because of the Stage 1 upgrade. LNF is a very capable engine. The Cobalt drag racers were pushing over 450 hp of course with plumbing modifications.

Note at this time there is no so called stage II set as the cars that this kit was for are all out of production. Now with new cars coming production cars with more power or a new Turbo kit for say the GS could very well be offered for some of these vehicles. The kit is a great money maker and a safe mod as it does not hurt the warranty.

My work was involved with several Sonoma and Cobalt Turbo Race cars at work. John Lingenfelter was working with the Eco as early as anyone. He told me that he was taking the stock heads [saab casting] and block to 1,500 HP before they were cracking. He then was getting close to 2,000 HP with the race head when Chevy wanted them to move to the HF Turbo V6. This was the engine he was running when he had his accident that lead to his passing. It has been a while but I think he was right at 7 sec and 200 MPH back in 02.

Either way the Eco is a very capable and solid engine that GM has yet to really tap into what all it can and will do. Right now MPG is the greatest need so that is what we are seeing. We will get some future perfromace versions that will pass the LNF in due time.

[hyperv6]

Why dwight is nor working for GM is beyond me....

See that is why GM has such a hard time getting good help these days. All the good people like us with the answers are to busy on the web.

[Drew Dowdell]

Here is a good interview with Bill Duncan.

It give insite on the Cobalt kit and the ideas behind the kit.

http://gmtunersource.../5-%E2%80%93-qa

Bill is a very good guy and a excellent engineer. I wish he would visit this site and help set the story straight on many things GM has done.

I know Bill keeps involved at many performance web sites and gets involved. Nice to know GM is watching and willing to jump in and help.

If you talk to him, extend a personal invitation from me.

[smk4565]

The way to beat the 3-series is not with horsepower, it is with steering and suspension. Any one can put 300 hp in a car, but no one has been able to beat BMW's ride and handling. IS350 for example.

[balthazar]

BMWs are bought for the badge, not for riding & handling. Only the magazines & the magazine readers get off on those subjectives.

Most people react far quicker to simple numbers, like '10-spd transmission' and such.

That said, I would definitely like to see the ATS being on par with the 3-series, which is certainly within reach.

Edited December 15, 2010 by balthazar

[hyperv6]

If you talk to him, extend a personal invitation from me.

He normally does not ID himself or what his job is. I noticed him on the HHR site and Solstice and Sky site helping people with info that few have. I took a stab and guessed who he was.

Check you messages.