Cadillac News: Spying: Cadillac CTS

[Z-06]

I wonder if the next CTS will have a 4cyl base model (2.0T?).

One cannot deny that posibility, considering how robust and flexible the 2.0T is.

there is usually enough difference in the interiors of all those german cars that they don't look like the same t shaped stuff

This is what you're asking for.

Which is not too far off visually from this:

the new 3 series interiors is actually quite stunning in most trims, the more you dig, you see some really neat details. and the 3 series interior is not duplicated in other BMW's. the new 3 interior is crafted insanely well with many tight gaps and insane textures and finishes and even subtle sweep lines and such in the plastics that you don't really get into until you're in the chair.

Reg, sitting in a pre-production ATS and production F30 at NAIAS, I can say that if 3er interior and details are stunning, then ATS is 10 miles further.

[Drew Dowdell]

I wonder if the next CTS will have a 4cyl base model (2.0T?).

In that over at VW/Audi, you get a 4-banger in the A3, A4, A5, and A6,... And we all 'know' Cadillac has to catch up to Audi, seems a possibility...

+3-series, +5-series

[dwightlooi]

dfelt, on , said:

The one thing left out is the fact that the public is no longer I have to own a V8 mentality anymore.

Ford has proven they could take the strongest market for the V8 in the Half Ton pickup market and slap a TT V6 in it even at a higher price and take 50% of the sales. Too many here think the public has a unending love affair for the V8 and they no longer do.

The fact is people today love technology and the flat torque curves of the new turbo engines.

The V8 will have a place but it is no longer the end all be all of all automotive things to the public. What they want and think is all that matters in the end because if there is that great of a take rate on TT V6 engines in a pick up there is even a greater one in a performance luxury auto. They are the ones paying the money and if that is what the public demands then give it to them.

No, but they do not view the V8 negatively compared to a turbo V6 either, especially when power output is comparable or superior.

If a V8 can be similarly or more powerful, cost less, be less demanding on maintenance, and offer similar fuel economy, there is very little imperative to downsize displacement and go with forced induction. The big misconception is that there is a huge fuel economy difference between a 3.5 TTV6 and a 6.2 Pushrod NA V8. There isn't. An SHO Taurus is at 17/25 mpg, A Camaro SS is at 16/25 mpg -- both automatic. By itself, the V8 6.2 is actually lighter than the TT V6 3.5, with less plumbing under the hood and cost less to build. It makes 35 more hp and 50 more lb-ft of twist. That's without direct injection and closing that 1 mpg gap shouldn't be mission impossible.

[Lamar]

MKS has a 355/350 tune EcoBoost, but is there any reason the 365/420 could not be installed? 420 TRQ is on par with the E550 V8's 443 TRQ.

Exhaust and transmission restrictions most likely.

Correct.

Ford doesn't have a transverse transmission able to handle more torque than 350 lb-ft. No such problem with the F150.

[Lamar]

dfelt, on , said:

The one thing left out is the fact that the public is no longer I have to own a V8 mentality anymore.

Ford has proven they could take the strongest market for the V8 in the Half Ton pickup market and slap a TT V6 in it even at a higher price and take 50% of the sales. Too many here think the public has a unending love affair for the V8 and they no longer do.

The fact is people today love technology and the flat torque curves of the new turbo engines.

The V8 will have a place but it is no longer the end all be all of all automotive things to the public. What they want and think is all that matters in the end because if there is that great of a take rate on TT V6 engines in a pick up there is even a greater one in a performance luxury auto. They are the ones paying the money and if that is what the public demands then give it to them.

No, but they do not view the V8 negatively compared to a turbo V6 either, especially when power output is comparable or superior.

If a V8 can be similarly or more powerful, cost less, be less demanding on maintenance, and offer similar fuel economy, there is very little imperative to downsize displacement and go with forced induction. The big misconception is that there is a huge fuel economy difference between a 3.5 TTV6 and a 6.2 Pushrod NA V8. There isn't. An SHO Taurus is at 17/25 mpg, A Camaro SS is at 16/25 mpg -- both automatic. By itself, the V8 6.2 is actually lighter than the TT V6 3.5, with less plumbing under the hood and cost less to build. It makes 35 more hp and 50 more lb-ft of twist. That's without direct injection and closing that 1 mpg gap shouldn't be mission impossible.

Of course, every 3.5TT Taurus, MKS, Explorer, Flex, and MKT comes saddled with AWD for obvious reasons.

Comparing the two engines in truck applications (I know, but bear with me), the 3.5TT in the F150 dusts off the L92 in the Silverado with regards to fuel economy.

It should be interesting to see what the numbers for GM's new engines (both this and the Gen V engines) look like.

[hyperv6]

dfelt, on , said:

The one thing left out is the fact that the public is no longer I have to own a V8 mentality anymore.

Ford has proven they could take the strongest market for the V8 in the Half Ton pickup market and slap a TT V6 in it even at a higher price and take 50% of the sales. Too many here think the public has a unending love affair for the V8 and they no longer do.

The fact is people today love technology and the flat torque curves of the new turbo engines.

The V8 will have a place but it is no longer the end all be all of all automotive things to the public. What they want and think is all that matters in the end because if there is that great of a take rate on TT V6 engines in a pick up there is even a greater one in a performance luxury auto. They are the ones paying the money and if that is what the public demands then give it to them.

No, but they do not view the V8 negatively compared to a turbo V6 either, especially when power output is comparable or superior.

If a V8 can be similarly or more powerful, cost less, be less demanding on maintenance, and offer similar fuel economy, there is very little imperative to downsize displacement and go with forced induction. The big misconception is that there is a huge fuel economy difference between a 3.5 TTV6 and a 6.2 Pushrod NA V8. There isn't. An SHO Taurus is at 17/25 mpg, A Camaro SS is at 16/25 mpg -- both automatic. By itself, the V8 6.2 is actually lighter than the TT V6 3.5, with less plumbing under the hood and cost less to build. It makes 35 more hp and 50 more lb-ft of twist. That's without direct injection and closing that 1 mpg gap shouldn't be mission impossible.

Cylinder count is becoming more irrelivant. The real factor is even 1 MPG is a major issue for many Full Size Truck buyers and they are willing to pay for it. While they do not view the V8 in a negitive light they do get more and more excited about smaller engines with as good or little better power even if they have to pay for it.

Also for years Torque ment little to the average buyer but today most truck buyers understand and love the low end torque of the turbo engine and how it feels. Most V8 engine have the torque but the it is still on a curve vs the flat and level torque levels of the turbo engines.

Reguardless of the numbers etc the bottom line is what the people want and what they are willing to pay for. So far the TT V6 in the Ford is a money maker and looks to continue this into the future.

Lets face it these people don't need a TT V6 but 90% of them don't need 4 wheel drive either. To be honest most of them don't need a full size truck either. But if it make money for GM or Ford God Bless them and their money.