Omega Likely To Be Approved For Cadillac Flagship, More Hybrids

[William Maley]

Omega Likely To Be Approved For Cadillac Flagship, More Hybrids

William Maley - Editor/Reporter - CheersandGears.com

September 1, 2011

In a report from the The Detroit Bureau, GM is expected to give the green light for the new Omega platform for a new Cadillac flagship. The news comes a few days after GM showed off the Cadillac Ciel concept at Pebble Beach and received much acclaim. The report says a sedan and a hard-top are in the works. No one is saying when the vehicle is expected to come out, but signs are pointing towards 2015.

But that's not all. Cadillac is making it clear they will be offering a range of hybrid vehicles, starting with the new ELR.

Source: The Detroit Bureau

[Camino LS6]

Sounds good.

[G. David Felt]

I be willing to consider buying one if I am not sticking out above the windshield. Being 6'6" tall makes cars like this hard for me to fit into without looking goofy.

[ZL-1]

Good stuff, but "still considering"... Man, I know that's me being impatient but this thing should be here now, ready to go straight after the A8, the 7-Series, and the S-Class...

[SoCalCTS]

I be willing to consider buying one if I am not sticking out above the windshield. Being 6'6" tall makes cars like this hard for me to fit into without looking goofy.

Well they are proceeding with the Omega platform not the Ciel concept. I imagine that the new flagship will be a sedan.

[smk4565]

They should have green-lighted it years ago, I don't get what is taking them so long, but at least it looks like they are doing a flagship car. Hopefully the economy is better then also, because big sedan sales aren't doing so well, and that segment is getting more and more crowded.

[dwightlooi]

They should have green-lighted it years ago, I don't get what is taking them so long, but at least it looks like they are doing a flagship car. Hopefully the economy is better then also, because big sedan sales aren't doing so well, and that segment is getting more and more crowded.

The Omega needs a V-12... let's hope they endeavor to create a stretched version of the 3.6 liter LFX block. Such an engine will displace 7.2 liters and produce about 640 hp @ 6800 rpm / 550 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm. It'll require a "high input speed" 6L90 transmission to fully harness (otherwise it'll have to be capped at 6200 rpm for an approximate loss of about 40 hp; which actually isn't too bad).

A 3.0 or 3.6 liter Bi-turbo V6 -- making 360~430 hp -- will serve it well as an base power plant. If they want to do a hybrid, it can be clobbered together using the Bi-turbo V6 and the same Dual-Mode Hybrid transmission currently in the Escalade Hybrid.

[smk4565]

They should have green-lighted it years ago, I don't get what is taking them so long, but at least it looks like they are doing a flagship car. Hopefully the economy is better then also, because big sedan sales aren't doing so well, and that segment is getting more and more crowded.

The Omega needs a V-12... let's hope they endeavor to create a stretched version of the 3.6 liter LFX block. Such an engine will displace 7.2 liters and produce about 640 hp @ 6800 rpm / 550 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm. It'll require a "high input speed" 6L90 transmission to fully harness (otherwise it'll have to be capped at 6200 rpm for an approximate loss of about 40 hp; which actually isn't too bad).

A 3.0 or 3.6 liter Bi-turbo V6 -- making 360~430 hp -- will serve it well as an base power plant. If they want to do a hybrid, it can be clobbered together using the Bi-turbo V6 and the same Dual-Mode Hybrid transmission currently in the Escalade Hybrid.

7.2 liters is a bit large. Mercedes gets 740 lb-ft of torque from a 6.0 liter, and that engine is 6 years old. I'd rather Cadillac just design a V12 from scratch, and do a V8 derivative of it. And max torque should be no more than 2,000 RPM. The S550 makes 516 lb-ft @ 1,800 RPM and returns 25 mpg hwy. Cadillac has to step their game up for this car.

[dwightlooi]

7.2 liters is a bit large. Mercedes gets 740 lb-ft of torque from a 6.0 liter, and that engine is 6 years old. I'd rather Cadillac just design a V12 from scratch, and do a V8 derivative of it. And max torque should be no more than 2,000 RPM. The S550 makes 516 lb-ft @ 1,800 RPM and returns 25 mpg hwy. Cadillac has to step their game up for this car.

Doing a V12 from a V8 is a non-starter. The optimal bank angle is 60 degrees for a V12 -- same as the V6es. Whereas it is 90 degrees for a V8. The Mercedes V12 is a bi-turbo. It is not that powerful (603 hp) although it does make a 730+ lb-ft of twist. A naturally aspirated V12 of 600~640 hp and 550 lb-ft is plenty competitive. Being NA also means that it is a lighter and less complicated powerplant -- because you'll eliminate the turbocharger's exhaust ducting as well as a spaghetti of intecooler plumbing. As far as torque goes, 550 lb-ft is plenty and a higher peak is actually a good thing. There is no practical way to put 730+ lb-ft at 1800 rpm to the pavement at lower speeds; you'll just melt the tires. What you end up doing is electronically limiting the engine's output in the 1st 2 or 3 gears...

As far as size goes, the a 3.6 is exactly the same size as a 3.0 externally, a 6.0 and 7.2 is similarly equal in dimensions. As far as being a 7.2, this is actually a good badge to have in the realm of over the top engines like a V12. Nobody is looking for marginally lower displacement here. If the customer is looking for frugality that or for practicality, he won't buy a V12 to begin with.

Edited September 4, 2011 by dwightlooi

[smk4565]

I did forget about 60 degree angle for V12s, the V8 would have to be done from scratch.

The Mercedes S65 has 621 hp now. The 760Li is 535 hp, and 550 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm, so Cadillac could better compete with a car like that, or the Audi A8. I think 7.2 liters would be awfully thirsty though, they need at least 20 mpg highway. And I suspect come 2016 or so when this car comes out, the Germans will have raised the bar on power and efficiency. And power won't be the real challenge, fuel economy will be. Aside from getting people to spend serious coin on a Cadillac sedan.

[loki]

external dimensions aside.. would a lightly turboed 6.0L beable to be harnessed better than the 7.2? (no need for a new tranny... (maybe just something to start with, judge demand, bring the big guns 1 or 2 years later if signals show a demand?)

[Drew Dowdell]

Turbo the coming 5.5 as a base engine.

[smk4565]

Turbo the coming 5.5 as a base engine.

Turbo a pushrod for a Cadillac? It works for the last dinosaur that Bentley makes, but in the segment Cadillac is going after I don't think it will. Look at what the competition has, and also consider the move toward fuel efficiency in this class. They could do without the V12, since there are very few of those. But, Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Lexus, Maserati, Mercedes, Porsche all do a DOHC V8, even Hyundai if you want to throw in the Equus at the low end.

[ocnblu]

The GM pushrod V8 is superior to the DOHC V8s in those other cars. The Northstar is gone. The Mercury Marine-built 90's ZR1 powerplant is a distant memory. They just don't provide enough benefit v. their complexity.

[Drew Dowdell]

Turbo the coming 5.5 as a base engine.

Turbo a pushrod for a Cadillac? It works for the last dinosaur that Bentley makes, but in the segment Cadillac is going after I don't think it will. Look at what the competition has, and also consider the move toward fuel efficiency in this class. They could do without the V12, since there are very few of those. But, Audi, BMW, Jaguar, Lexus, Maserati, Mercedes, Porsche all do a DOHC V8, even Hyundai if you want to throw in the Equus at the low end.

I don't want a European car, I want an American car.

The 5.5 V8 is going to be the most advanced pushrod ever. It will have VVT and DI and I have no doubts about its power capability or its smoothness. I am more firm in this than ever after my time behind the wheel of the CTS-V. It can be a tame pussycat when cruising or a while beast when you trash at it. It is very smooth with just a pinch of American muscle car feel. There is no reason to engineer a separate power plant for the Omega Cadillac other than equipping it with a turbo.

Edit: and if fuel economy is a concern, that is just ANOTHER reason to go pushrod over DOHC.

[smk4565]

The GM pushrod V8 is superior to the DOHC V8s in those other cars.

Oh right, because I just read how Maserati is dropping the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of a 6.0 liter V8 from a Chevy Silverado.

[smk4565]

The 5.5 V8 is going to be the most advanced pushrod ever. It will have VVT and DI and I have no doubts about its power capability or its smoothness. I am more firm in this than ever after my time behind the wheel of the CTS-V. It can be a tame pussycat when cruising or a while beast when you trash at it. It is very smooth with just a pinch of American muscle car feel. There is no reason to engineer a separate power plant for the Omega Cadillac other than equipping it with a turbo.

Edit: and if fuel economy is a concern, that is just ANOTHER reason to go pushrod over DOHC.

VVT is from like 10 years ago, and DI was on 2006 model year cars. Everyone else already has that in the segment, Cadillac arriving in 2015 with it isn't going to give them any advantage whatsoever.

And there is a reason to make a unique power plant, so that your $80-100,000 Cadillac doesn't have the same engine as a $30,000 Camaro or Silverado. Cadillac hasn't had success selling a high end car in over 50 years. They have to do something to attract buyers.

[Drew Dowdell]

The GM pushrod V8 is superior to the DOHC V8s in those other cars.

Oh right, because I just read how Maserati is dropping the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of a 6.0 liter V8 from a Chevy Silverado.

You know what would be just HE-LAR-E-US!? If Maserati dropped the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of the 6.3 Hemi from the 300C-SRT8. It would be an upgrade in both power (+25hp and +100 lb-ft) and fuel economy, but it would also be less expensive for them to repair under warranty when it breaks down. It would also make parent company Fiat happy to be getting more ROI out of the 6.3.

[Drew Dowdell]

The 5.5 V8 is going to be the most advanced pushrod ever. It will have VVT and DI and I have no doubts about its power capability or its smoothness. I am more firm in this than ever after my time behind the wheel of the CTS-V. It can be a tame pussycat when cruising or a while beast when you trash at it. It is very smooth with just a pinch of American muscle car feel. There is no reason to engineer a separate power plant for the Omega Cadillac other than equipping it with a turbo.

Edit: and if fuel economy is a concern, that is just ANOTHER reason to go pushrod over DOHC.

VVT is from like 10 years ago, and DI was on 2006 model year cars. Everyone else already has that in the segment, Cadillac arriving in 2015 with it isn't going to give them any advantage whatsoever.

And there is a reason to make a unique power plant, so that your $80-100,000 Cadillac doesn't have the same engine as a $30,000 Camaro or Silverado. Cadillac hasn't had success selling a high end car in over 50 years. They have to do something to attract buyers.

Pushrod V8s are already more than competitive (as in completely out performing) over DOHC engines. The CTS-V V8 out powers the BMW V10 by a LOT and the BMW 550i isn't even close in power. DI and VVT being added to the 5.5 will put it even further in front of the pack.

The very last thing Cadillac needs to do to attract buyers is blend into the crowd. Just "doing what everyone else is doing" won't work because then.... why buy a Cadillac? Cadillac must be both unique and true to itself. There is a lot more to an engine than how the valves are actuated, as long as Cadillac's engine can continue to outperform the imports, that won't be the thing that holds Cadillac back.

[pow]

The GM pushrod V8 is superior to the DOHC V8s in those other cars.

Oh right, because I just read how Maserati is dropping the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of a 6.0 liter V8 from a Chevy Silverado.

You know what would be just HE-LAR-E-US!? If Maserati dropped the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of the 6.3 Hemi from the 300C-SRT8. It would be an upgrade in both power (+25hp and +100 lb-ft) and fuel economy, but it would also be less expensive for them to repair under warranty when it breaks down. It would also make parent company Fiat happy to be getting more ROI out of the 6.3.

But it wouldn't make orgasmic noises any more:

A high-revving, multi-valve V8 is the whole point of a Maserati, not a torquey and grumbly muscle car engine--not that there's anything wrong with that. It just doesn't fit the character of an Italian supercar.

[Drew Dowdell]

The GM pushrod V8 is superior to the DOHC V8s in those other cars.

Oh right, because I just read how Maserati is dropping the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of a 6.0 liter V8 from a Chevy Silverado.

You know what would be just HE-LAR-E-US!? If Maserati dropped the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of the 6.3 Hemi from the 300C-SRT8. It would be an upgrade in both power (+25hp and +100 lb-ft) and fuel economy, but it would also be less expensive for them to repair under warranty when it breaks down. It would also make parent company Fiat happy to be getting more ROI out of the 6.3.

But it wouldn't make orgasmic noises any more:

A high-revving, multi-valve V8 is the whole point of a Maserati, not a torquey and grumbly muscle car engine--not that there's anything wrong with that. It just doesn't fit the character of an Italian supercar.

Exactly right and which is exactly true in opposite for Cadillac. Cadillac, in non-V models, is all about the silent woosh of torque. That said, there doesn't have to be anything grumbly about a pushrod V8, that is just exhaust tuning and nothing more.

[ocnblu]

Maserati should keep the Ferrari engine. Nobody expects a reliable Maserati... they should stay true to character.

[smk4565]

Pushrod V8s are already more than competitive (as in completely out performing) over DOHC engines. The CTS-V V8 out powers the BMW V10 by a LOT and the BMW 550i isn't even close in power. DI and VVT being added to the 5.5 will put it even further in front of the pack.

The very last thing Cadillac needs to do to attract buyers is blend into the crowd. Just "doing what everyone else is doing" won't work because then.... why buy a Cadillac? Cadillac must be both unique and true to itself. There is a lot more to an engine than how the valves are actuated, as long as Cadillac's engine can continue to outperform the imports, that won't be the thing that holds Cadillac back.

The new M5 has like 570hp from a 4.4 liter, so the CTS-V isn't more powerful. The CTS-V also gives up over 100 lb-ft of torque and is less fuel efficient than the AMG 5.5 bi-turbo. GM only uses the pushrod because they were too broke to replace it. Regardless of the power, I have big doubts that they can get the refinement and fuel economy and beat the displacement taxes and gas guzzler taxes with a huge pushrod V8.

Although horsepower is easy, fuel efficiency is harder. This is where I think Cadillac has to really set themselves apart. Audi has a 37 mpg A8 going on sale soon, I think the Cadillac flagship should aim for 40 mpg. No one makes a 40 mpg large luxury car, that would be a first. Unless of course Mercedes keeps the promise of a 70 mpg S-class, in which case it is pretty much game over anyway.

I think suspension is another important criteria, they have to nail that.

[ocnblu]

"GM only uses the pushrod because they were too broke to replace it."

What a load of horse$h! this statement is. They've kept it because it works. Superior performance, economy, ease of service, and lower maintenance costs are HALLMARKS of the smallblock engine.

[smk4565]

The Panamera Turbo S has 550 hp, 590 lb-ft of torque with overboost and gets 23 mpg. Not bad for a 4.8 liter DOHC.

[smk4565]

"GM only uses the pushrod because they were too broke to replace it."

What a load of horse$h! this statement is. They've kept it because it works. Superior performance, economy, ease of service, and lower maintenance costs are HALLMARKS of the smallblock engine.

The high feature V6 sure did kill off the high value 3500 and 3900 V6s pretty fast. Even Buick is mostly 4-cylinder now, rather than pushrod V6 of just 5 years ago. Do the current Regal, Lacrosse, CTS, Malibu lack performance, economy, or ease of service compared to an 04 Lesabre, G6 or Impala?

[ocnblu]

The Buick 3800 was an excellent engine with terrific economy and longevity. The 60-degree pushrod V6s were known for excellent fuel economy in the real world. Their replacement is no better in economy and might be worse in ease of service and maintenance costs over the life of the engine. I say competitive pressure is the reason behind the change, not superior function of the engine. A six-speed Hydramatic likely could have produced better mileage in concert with the old-tech pushrod V6s than the 3.6. They were already at least on par with the 4-speed.

[Drew Dowdell]

I think we need to stop and ask ourselves what Cadillac's mission in this segment will be. Will a Cadillac flagship be competing with a Porsche Whalamera? Maserati anything? Aston Martin? I think the answer there is a quite firm "NO".

I envision the Cadillac as being a 7-series or S-Class competitor but with a distinctly American flare and warmer interior visually. It should of course have sufficient power for the price, but having an outrageous engine note would actually be a detractor.

The best way I can describe my idea is an "American Rolls Royce at an obtainable price". Leave the baddassery to the V-series. If the purchaser of this Cadillac needs to get there in a hurry, they call for their helicopter.

The only thing that held the 3900 back was the 4-speed auto it was always paired with. I would really be interested in driving a G6 with the 3900 and a manual.

[ocnblu]

I love how R-R and Bentley don't go into detail about the greasy bits of their cars, answering questions of engine output with a stiff British pronunciation of the word "adequate". Adequate indeed!

[smk4565]

I would agree that Cadillac isn't going after the Quattroporte, Rapide, or Panamera (which is ugly as can be). Even the Jag XJ is probably a bit sporty for Cadillac. The Lexus LS is for old folks, the Equus is cheaper. So A8/7-series/S-class is the target. Interior of this car will vastly important, they can't pull what they did with the STS-V and XLR. I see this as the primary challenge, because GM never did a really high end interior or a car where even the most minor details matter.

[ZL-1]

A high-revving, multi-valve V8 is the whole point of a Maserati, not a torquey and grumbly muscle car engine--not that there's anything wrong with that. It just doesn't fit the character of an Italian supercar.

Exactly. Glad someone gets the point beyond the (annoying) OHV-vs-DOHC chest beating that goes on in here sometimes.

I don't think GM will move away from OHV designs any time soon, but I agree with smk in one regard. Whatever engine they put on the Cadillac, GM has to make it somehow unique even if it mostly on a marketing basis. Introduce the engines/upgrades in power, tech, whatever on Cadillacs first. Let the Chevrolets have a Cadillac engine, perception-wise, and not the other way around.

Edited September 5, 2011 by ZL-1

[Robert Hall]

Interesting to see talk of a new platform..wonder about the size GM has in mind and possible usage outside Cadillac

[riviera74]

The Buick 3800 was an excellent engine with terrific economy and longevity. The 60-degree pushrod V6s were known for excellent fuel economy in the real world. Their replacement is no better in economy and might be worse in ease of service and maintenance costs over the life of the engine. I say competitive pressure is the reason behind the change, not superior function of the engine. A six-speed Hydramatic likely could have produced better mileage in concert with the old-tech pushrod V6s than the 3.6. They were already at least on par with the 4-speed.

I could not agree more on the Buick 231 (now 3800 series II and III). Most normal people, when they think pushrods, they think truck engines from the '70s, not the surprisingly refined 3800 series III. Now, the new 3.6 v6 can at least compete with (and at times top) anything from the competition. While putting in a six-speed Hydramatic with the 3800 would be great for us, that transmission could not fit most GM platforms since they were designed for 4-speeds from 1985. The hope is is that the 3.6 can become just as good if not better than the 3800. The 3.6 needs more torque though.

As for Omega, make it a Cadillac-exclusive platform and that will be just peachy. Leave Sigma and the other global RWD to Chevy and Buick and Holden.

[dwightlooi]

I did forget about 60 degree angle for V12s, the V8 would have to be done from scratch.

The Mercedes S65 has 621 hp now. The 760Li is 535 hp, and 550 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm, so Cadillac could better compete with a car like that, or the Audi A8. I think 7.2 liters would be awfully thirsty though, they need at least 20 mpg highway. And I suspect come 2016 or so when this car comes out, the Germans will have raised the bar on power and efficiency. And power won't be the real challenge, fuel economy will be. Aside from getting people to spend serious coin on a Cadillac sedan.

Displacement is pretty far down on the list of things that increases fuel consumption. With the same cylinder count, same number of valves and other frictional elements, the difference in fuel consumption between a 7.2 and 6.0 V12 is negligible. It may not even add up to 1 mpg. If you need examples, just look at the 3.6 vs 3.0 V6 -- no difference in mpg numbers at all. Similarly, the 1.4T in the Cruze did not provide better fuel economy numbers than the Ford 2.0 in the Focus, the Hyundai 1.8 in the Elantra or Honda 1.8 in the Civic. Don't assume that reducing displacement always produce fuel economy gains. In fact, when you drop add turbocharging and the consequential reduction in compression ratio, you invariably also reduce thermal and combustion efficiency. A good example is going from 2.4 to 2.0 liters and piling on a turbo. In every contemporary case, from every manufacturer, we see a reduction in fuel economy.

In anycase, fuel economy is not a top priority for a V12 flagship. The CAFE impact is irrelevant given the tiny volumes V12 vehicles generate. It's like asking how much Bentley's MPG numbers impact Volkswagen-Audi group... well it doesn't register at all. A 6.0 turbo will have torque problems -- much more so than a 7.2 NA -- and the 6L90 is rated at 551 lb-ft right where the torque output of a 7.2 NA will be. "Lightly turbocharged" engines make around 100~110 lb-ft per liter. That's about 600~ 660 lb-ft from a 6.0. Go any lower and you make turbocharging not worth effort. Increasing the input shaft speed is not nearly as difficult as increasing the maximum torque rating.

Edited September 5, 2011 by dwightlooi

[smk4565]

Mercedes dropped displacement on the V8 (6.3 to 5.5 liter and 5.5 to 4.7 liter) and added a turbo and fuel economy went up. Power was up too, so it worked for them. Although most automaker gains are from going the ecoboost route when you are dropping cylinder count and displacement.

If the transmission is limited to 551 lb-ft, then GM may have to develop a new transmission. The main challenge of this car is GM powertrains are really made for mass market cars. With the STS dead, the CTS is the top end sedan, and that is really made for the entry-lux class. The Corvette is a sports car, there isn't a lot from that can can translate to a $100k sedan. So almost everything for Omega really needs to be done from scratch. It will be incredibly expensive to do this car right. I think it is worth spending the money because this is a car they have to get right. They can't have another Allante or XLR-V that ends up a joke.

[Drew Dowdell]

That Mercedes engine was also much newer.

[Lamar]

This bears repeating:

That Mercedes engine was also much newer.

These days, if you can't make a new engine outperform an old one on all fronts (power and FE, for our intents and purposes), you're in the wrong business.

[Camino LS6]

[quote name='Oldsmoboi' timestamp='1315168581' You know what would be just HE-LAR-E-US!? If Maserati dropped the Ferrari engine from the Quattroporte in favor of the 6.3 Hemi from the 300C-SRT8. It would be an upgrade in both power (+25hp and +100 lb-ft) and fuel economy, but it would also be less expensive for them to repair under warranty when it breaks down. It would also make parent company Fiat happy to be getting more ROI out of the 6.3.

Beat me to it, Olds.

As Ocn said, the pushrod engine is clearly superior by any meaningful metric.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Camino LS6

[CSpec]

"GM only uses the pushrod because they were too broke to replace it."

What a load of horse$h! this statement is. They've kept it because it works. Superior performance, economy, ease of service, and lower maintenance costs are HALLMARKS of the smallblock engine.

A buyer of a $150,000 car isn't interested in ease of service and low maintenance costs. They want the best and they're willing to pay for it.

[smk4565]

"GM only uses the pushrod because they were too broke to replace it."

What a load of horse$h! this statement is. They've kept it because it works. Superior performance, economy, ease of service, and lower maintenance costs are HALLMARKS of the smallblock engine.

A buyer of a $150,000 car isn't interested in ease of service and low maintenance costs. They want the best and they're willing to pay for it.

True, but this car won't be $150,000. An S-class starts at $94,000, almost all the other competitors are $10,000+ less. I'd expect Cadillac to slot into the $75-95k range. Although buyers at that level still demand a lot.

[dwightlooi]

"GM only uses the pushrod because they were too broke to replace it."

What a load of horse$h! this statement is. They've kept it because it works. Superior performance, economy, ease of service, and lower maintenance costs are HALLMARKS of the smallblock engine.

A buyer of a $150,000 car isn't interested in ease of service and low maintenance costs. They want the best and they're willing to pay for it.

True, but this car won't be $150,000. An S-class starts at $94,000, almost all the other competitors are $10,000+ less. I'd expect Cadillac to slot into the $75-95k range. Although buyers at that level still demand a lot.

I have no problems with a Pushrod V8. It is in many ways a superior configuration than a DOHC V8. It is lighter, more compact, while having comparable or superior fuel economy to DOHC designs of equivalent power (even if these tend to be lower in displacement). I expect the incorporation of VVT, Direct Injection and cylinder deactivation to allow the Pushrod V8 to continue enjoying its superiority over DOHC designs in these regards.

The issue here is the V12 -- because an Omega flagship deserves and can benefit from an over the top V12. A brand new architecture is both profoundly expensive and unnecessary when you already have a 90.6 bhp/liter 3.6 liter V6 in mass production from which to derive the engine. Sharing the pistons, rods, valves, springs, lifters, pumps, bolts and a myraid of components from a mature design made it high volume is a great advantage GM has over the competition. Trust me, nobody is going to ask the "question" does it use the same piston as a Malibu? And even less will care about the answer. I don't see a 7.2 liter displacement as demerit. There will be just as many buyers who will wear that 7.2 badge proudly as there will be those looking for a twin turbo twelve. The NA engine is simpler, lighter and less bulky. I know there are those who disagree here, but IMHO 640hp and 550 lb-ft is "enough". It also doesn't hurt that GM already has a 551 lb-ft 6-speed automatic in the parts bin. All that is needed is to modify the valve body and the shift logic so it readily accepts higher input shaft speeds. This is a lot easier than increasing the maximum torque rating which requires beefier gears and clutch packs.

Edited September 7, 2011 by dwightlooi

[smk4565]

6 speed automatic? Really? The segment has already moved on from that, come 2015, Cadillac will look way behind. A 2007 Lexus LS had an 8-speed auto. Cadillac better aim really high, so they aren't shocked when the next-generation S-class goes on sale, because that car isn't far away.

[Lamar]

6 speed automatic? Really? The segment has already moved on from that, come 2015, Cadillac will look way behind. A 2007 Lexus LS had an 8-speed auto. Cadillac better aim really high, so they aren't shocked when the next-generation S-class goes on sale, because that car isn't far away.

Go back and count the gears in the S600/S65 transmission and see how far away they've gotten from a 6AT.

[smk4565]

6 speed automatic? Really? The segment has already moved on from that, come 2015, Cadillac will look way behind. A 2007 Lexus LS had an 8-speed auto. Cadillac better aim really high, so they aren't shocked when the next-generation S-class goes on sale, because that car isn't far away.

Go back and count the gears in the S600/S65 transmission and see how far away they've gotten from a 6AT.

9 are coming.

[Lamar]

9 are coming.

The 7AT couldn't handle the V12 torque even though it was much newer. I have to wonder if the 9AT will be built to handle more torque or if it's another "pull-it-out-and-see-whose-is-bigger" project.

[CanadianBacon94]

with 600 pound feet of torque there is no reason a car should have to shift nine times.

-Lexus eight speed starts in second and double shifts when possible afaik

six is he most a car needs unless it is incredibly under powered and needs oo gears to keep in the power band ie a CVT

[William Maley]

9 are coming.

When are cars going to have the same number of gears as do semi trucks?

[CanadianBacon94]

9 are coming.

When are cars going to have the same number of gears as do semi trucks?

or bicycles?

[pow]

Eh, wrong engine at the wrong time. Engineering a new V12 might have made sense 10 years ago, but now the only people who want a 600-hp $100K V12 Cadillac are twelve year olds, and they don't have $100K.

The 6.2L supercharged V8 in the CTS-V is fine.

[Robert Hall]

Eh, wrong engine at the wrong time. Engineering a new V12 might have made sense 10 years ago, but now the only people who want a 600-hp $100K V12 Cadillac are twelve year olds, and they don't have $100K.

The 6.2L supercharged V8 in the CTS-V is fine.

Problem is, some of those 12 year olds will eventually be successful CEOs, drug dealers, ballers, rappers, etc...they are going to go to Bentley, BMW, or Mercedes to get their V12 if Cadillac isn't in the game...