Omega Likely To Be Approved For Cadillac Flagship, More Hybrids

[Lamar]

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.

Except that in a large luxury car, the V12 provides that cruising character that a higher(?)-revving V8 doesn't. Hence why Audi still offers the A8 W12 that's more powerful than the more sporty S8.

Now, if they want to offer two different engines in that same vein, that's ok too. Both would be rather low volume anyway, so screw CAFE.

[ZL-1]

successful CEOs, drug dealers, ballers, rappers, etc...

That grouping of professions/occupations =

[Lamar]

successful CEOs, drug dealers, ballers, rappers, etc...

That grouping of professions/occupations =

I lol'ed too.

Yet I lamented the omission of doctors, lawyers, and politicians.

[dwightlooi]

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.

Actually, the segment has been relatively stable. It has never been a huge segment and it will never be, but it is a stable segment. Economic downturn or not, the clientele for V12s are not impacted as much as the middle and upper middle class. The middle and upper middle class do not buy V12s. The more over the top the flagship is, the better it will fulfill its mission of bringing prestige and recognition to the brand. Of course, grabbing a few big spenders along the way doesn't hurt. But, selling itself is secondary to helping sell the Bi-turbo V6 or V8 Omegas, not to mention CTS, XTS, SRX and ATS cars. If you want middle class business, lower the entry price of ATS or simply show them the way to the Buick dealership.

In fact, a 14-liter V16 made using the equivalent of two pushrod LS7 V8s mated with a new block making about 1010hp / 940 lb-ft will be even better from a prestige standpoint. The problem of course is that there is no transmission for it and rear drive is no longer viable for putting all that power down.

Edited September 7, 2011 by dwightlooi

[67impss]

In that your stating that it takes AWD correct? Otherwise I'd like to direct you to NHRA.com

[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.

Actually, the segment has been relatively stable. It has never been a huge segment and it will never be, but it is a stable segment. Economic downturn or not, the clientele for V12s are not impacted as much as the middle and upper middle class. The middle and upper middle class do not buy V12s. The more over the top the flagship is, the better it will fulfill its mission of bringing prestige and recognition to the brand. Of course, grabbing a few big spenders along the way doesn't hurt. But, selling itself is secondary to helping sell the Bi-turbo V6 or V8 Omegas, not to mention CTS, XTS, SRX and ATS cars. If you want middle class business, lower the entry price of ATS or simply show them the way to the Buick dealership.

In fact, a 14-liter V16 made using the equivalent of two pushrod LS7 V8s mated with a new block making about 1010hp / 940 lb-ft will be even better from a prestige standpoint. The problem of course is that there is no transmission for it and rear drive is no longer viable for putting all that power down.

I don't know, I just find it ludicrous that the bigger the engine the more prestigious Mr. 70-year-old-CEO finds his car. Rich business people, at least those in the US and Europe, don't want something outrageous and over the top. That's why the S600 does well among its buyers -- it's a business jet on wheels, and you can't get it with a douchey body kit like with the pointless S63 AMG or Taio Cruz's 760Li M-Sport. V12 luxo sedans are a stable segment only for Mercedes, and they've got the right formula down.

A huge ass 14-liter engine certainly won't bring respectability to the brand, unless you count the drooling of twelve year olds and others who can't afford such a car anyway.

[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.

Actually, the segment has been relatively stable. It has never been a huge segment and it will never be, but it is a stable segment. Economic downturn or not, the clientele for V12s are not impacted as much as the middle and upper middle class. The middle and upper middle class do not buy V12s. The more over the top the flagship is, the better it will fulfill its mission of bringing prestige and recognition to the brand. Of course, grabbing a few big spenders along the way doesn't hurt. But, selling itself is secondary to helping sell the Bi-turbo V6 or V8 Omegas, not to mention CTS, XTS, SRX and ATS cars. If you want middle class business, lower the entry price of ATS or simply show them the way to the Buick dealership.

In fact, a 14-liter V16 made using the equivalent of two pushrod LS7 V8s mated with a new block making about 1010hp / 940 lb-ft will be even better from a prestige standpoint. The problem of course is that there is no transmission for it and rear drive is no longer viable for putting all that power down.

I don't know, I just find it ludicrous that the bigger the engine the more prestigious Mr. 70-year-old-CEO finds his car.

Ironically, the only individual I've personally known that had a V12 car was a 50-something yr old tech company CEO/chairman of the board--a BMW 750iL. Sweet car, rode in it a few times back in '02. The company's 30yr old founder and CTO drove an Audi TT roadster. The other 2 tech company CEOs (40-somethings) that I've known drove Priuses.

Anyway, I'd be really surprised if GM developed an exclusive DOHC V8 or V12 for a Cadillac flagship...if it can't be shared with the trucks, it isn't happening seems to be the MO at GM as far as larger engines, unfortunately.

Edited September 7, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Lamar]

All this talk about 12-year-olds... incidentally, the age group which probably pays more attention to Fast and the Furious. Those kids get amped up over turbo-4s like they're the best thing EVAR.

[dwightlooi]

I don't know, I just find it ludicrous that the bigger the engine the more prestigious Mr. 70-year-old-CEO finds his car. Rich business people, at least those in the US and Europe, don't want something outrageous and over the top. That's why the S600 does well among its buyers -- it's a business jet on wheels, and you can't get it with a douchey body kit like with the pointless S63 AMG or Taio Cruz's 760Li M-Sport. V12 luxo sedans are a stable segment only for Mercedes, and they've got the right formula down.

A huge ass 14-liter engine certainly won't bring respectability to the brand, unless you count the drooling of twelve year olds and others who can't afford such a car anyway.

Actually it does. It just does not necessarily appeal to the same exact customer as the S600. If the S600 is a business jet on wheels, it may be akin to a Boeing 737 Business Jet. A 14 liter V16 on the other hand can be looked at as Air Force One. An over the top car for over the top personalities. If not anything, it is a more differentiated product than an S600 wanna be packing a 6.0 DOHC V12 and a pair of turbos vying for the same customers who in the end will probably buy the S600 anyway because of brand and perception loyalty.

As far as huge ass goes, 14 liter is not exactly "huge ass" it is merely the equivalent of two corvette motors. Huge ass will be something along the lines of the Daimler-Benz DB603 44.5 liter Supercharged Inverted V12 packing 4-valves per cylinder and Bosch Direct Gasoline Injection.

Edited September 7, 2011 by dwightlooi

[Robert Hall]

All this talk about 12-year-olds... incidentally, the age group which probably pays more attention to Fast and the Furious. Those kids get amped up over turbo-4s like they're the best thing EVAR.

Yeah, the little video gaming twerps probably only know about FWD 4cyl kiddie cars...

Edited September 7, 2011 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[smk4565]

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.

I could not find a torque rating for the 9G-tronic, but the 7AT can now handle up to 664 lb-ft so that transmission could work on the S600. Rumor is the S65 AMG will rise in power though, so the transmission will be interesting. 650 hp and 800+ lb-ft are capable from the V12.

Regardless the V12 is a small part of the S-class line up. The rest will have 9-speeds, Audi, BMW, and Lexus have 8-speed. So even if Cadillac needs a new tranny anyway. Really, even the ATS-class is going toward 7-8 speed transmissions.

[dwightlooi]

I could not find a torque rating for the 9G-tronic, but the 7AT can now handle up to 664 lb-ft so that transmission could work on the S600. Rumor is the S65 AMG will rise in power though, so the transmission will be interesting. 650 hp and 800+ lb-ft are capable from the V12.

Regardless the V12 is a small part of the S-class line up. The rest will have 9-speeds, Audi, BMW, and Lexus have 8-speed. So even if Cadillac needs a new tranny anyway. Really, even the ATS-class is going toward 7-8 speed transmissions.

Well, for a given transmission design and case volume, there is generally an inverse relationship between torque rating and the number of speeds. The reason is simple, high torque ratings require fewer wider gears and more speeds require more skinnier gears. To get both you enlarge the transmission.

Also, it is important to note that BOTH increase the parasitic loss of a transmission all else being constant. Wider gears or more skinnier gears increase frictional drag -- even when they are free spinning and unengaged. The most efficient transmission at ONE any given ratio is one with the fewest and narrowest gears. If you start at 60mph and crusie at 60mph, a 1-speed transmission with just enough torque loading to handle the engine's output at 20% throttle will beat any 8-speed tranny capable of monster torque inputs hands down. The challenge of course is striking a compromise between getting enough torque capacity to handle the output of a given engine and having enough gears such that you get good acceleration performance on the way to your ideal crusing gear (which is usually quite tall).

The thing here is that lots of speeds are not necessarily necessary to maximize performance or economy. You see, when you have 550 lb-ft and two road going tires, there is only so much torque you can put down in 1st before you create zero improvement in acceleration just a lot of burnt rubber. In otherwords, with enough torque you can simply select an axle ratio that gives you 1200 rpms at 65mph and simply live with the fact that 1st gear will be quite tall as well. In fact, this may not actually hurt acceleration at all given the traction limits of two tires of reasonable widths.

What I am trying to say is not that 8-speed transmission are useless. What I am saying is that they are much more useful in lower torque powerplants with narrow power bands than they are for a monster V12 or even a big Supercharged V8. Engines like the 2.5 liter 4-cylinder in the Malibu or the 3.6 V6 will benefit from 2 extra gears much more so than the CTS-V or V12 Omega.

[Lamar]

I could not find a torque rating for the 9G-tronic, but the 7AT can now handle up to 664 lb-ft so that transmission could work on the S600. Rumor is the S65 AMG will rise in power though, so the transmission will be interesting. 650 hp and 800+ lb-ft are capable from the V12.

Regardless the V12 is a small part of the S-class line up. The rest will have 9-speeds, Audi, BMW, and Lexus have 8-speed. So even if Cadillac needs a new tranny anyway. Really, even the ATS-class is going toward 7-8 speed transmissions.

That's the AMG Speedshift. Different transmission than, and won't be mass-produced like, the 7G-TRONIC.

I'd love to see the actual returns on such a transmission in such a powerful car. If Dwight is to be believed, they'll be questionable.

[dwightlooi]

That's the AMG Speedshift. Different transmission than, and won't be mass-produced like, the 7G-TRONIC.

I'd love to see the actual returns on such a transmission in such a powerful car. If Dwight is to be believed, they'll be questionable.

The AMG speedshift is actuallu a derivative of the 7G-tronic. What they did was ditch the torque converter for a electro-hydraulically controlled clutch. In otherwords, its a planetary automatic with a computer controlled clutch instead of a torque converter. There was some degradation in smoothness, but the torque rating was higher and the shifts are much faster and sharper.

This "clutched" 7-speed is used with the 6.3 NA V8, but the V12 Bi-turbo continues to be paired with the 5-speed traditional automatic because of torque rating issues.

[CanadianBacon94]

Dwight are there steps in the difficulty of designing transmissions like say:

is a seven more difficult to design/expensive than a six?

compared to say the difference between 7-8

I don't really see the need in more than six gears unless you have an 80 pound foot three cylinder engine

Edited September 9, 2011 by CanadianBacon94

[Lamar]

The AMG speedshift is actuallu a derivative of the 7G-tronic. What they did was ditch the torque converter for a electro-hydraulically controlled clutch. In otherwords, its a planetary automatic with a computer controlled clutch instead of a torque converter. There was some degradation in smoothness, but the torque rating was higher and the shifts are much faster and sharper.

This "clutched" 7-speed is used with the 6.3 NA V8, but the V12 Bi-turbo continues to be paired with the 5-speed traditional automatic because of torque rating issues.

True that it's an AMG derivative. They use it with the 5.5 Biturbo also. I haven't seen anything that says that when you get the AMG Performance Pack (and 664 lb-ft), you have to take the 5G-TRONIC with it.

I guess my point was that even though they have this transmission that could at least handle the torque produced by the V12 in the S600/CL600, it's more than likely not a mass-producible unit.

Back to Cadillac... if they indeed build a V12 by mating two V6s end-to-end, what are the prospects of them somehow finding a way for the Omega car to mate the V12 with AWD? BMW and Mercedes haven't yet, and Audi got around it by building the W12. It would be huge, I think, if Cadillac could engineer that in.

[dwightlooi]

The AMG speedshift is actuallu a derivative of the 7G-tronic. What they did was ditch the torque converter for a electro-hydraulically controlled clutch. In otherwords, its a planetary automatic with a computer controlled clutch instead of a torque converter. There was some degradation in smoothness, but the torque rating was higher and the shifts are much faster and sharper.

This "clutched" 7-speed is used with the 6.3 NA V8, but the V12 Bi-turbo continues to be paired with the 5-speed traditional automatic because of torque rating issues.

True that it's an AMG derivative. They use it with the 5.5 Biturbo also. I haven't seen anything that says that when you get the AMG Performance Pack (and 664 lb-ft), you have to take the 5G-TRONIC with it.

I guess my point was that even though they have this transmission that could at least handle the torque produced by the V12 in the S600/CL600, it's more than likely not a mass-producible unit.

Back to Cadillac... if they indeed build a V12 by mating two V6s end-to-end, what are the prospects of them somehow finding a way for the Omega car to mate the V12 with AWD? BMW and Mercedes haven't yet, and Audi got around it by building the W12. It would be huge, I think, if Cadillac could engineer that in.

It's really more of a height issue. You need to have the front differential fit under the engine. You can do this by raising the engine higher (which has hoodline and Cg impacts) or trying to fit that front diff through the oil pan. Some designs will use an oil pan with a front and rear reservoir and raised center section in the middle. More integrated will be a customized front differential casting that is also the oil pan itself.

That, plus a little foot well space encroachment from the transfer case and shaft. Also, about 150~200 lbs more weight to the vehicle. BMW actually uses GM Hydramatic 6-spd autos for their AWD cars.

Edited September 9, 2011 by dwightlooi