ATS-V caught in Winter Testing

[dwightlooi]

http://blogs.automotive.com/spied-2015-cadillac-ats-v-caught-testing-on-winter-roads-130545.html#axzz2N07Jrykt

Four exhaust outlets distinguishes the test mule from a "run of the mill" ATS. V8 sounds reported from the vehicle.

Edited March 9, 2013 by dwightlooi

[smk4565]

Engine choice will be interesting.

We'll have to see if this can run with the M3 in the corners.

[dwightlooi]

Engine choice will be interesting.

We'll have to see if this can run with the M3 in the corners.

The ATS 2.0 and 3.6 does not suffer a handling deficit against the 3-series. In a way they are better -- more like the E46 than the E90 -- which means they are more connected to the road feel and more direct (before the active steering rubbish isolated the bimmers like they traditionally weren't). That is a good thing.

The problem with the current ATS variants is that they are slower than BMWs of lesser engine power and weight. Not by a tad but about a full second. This suggest that the power train is not being employed efficiently. Either the gearing is sub-optimal, the transient response of the engines are lacking or (most probably) the trannies just suck compared to BMW's ZF supplied mill. The LT1 will go a long way towards addressing the performance deficit, but hopefully the 6L80 or TR6070 transmissions will keep up!

One thing I didn't see on the test mull -- which disappoints me -- is significantly flared fenders and/or much wider tires (ala Audi RS4). RWD cars in this power and weigh class are typically very traction limited. The C55 was, th C63 is. The M3 not so much because of the low torque 4.0 V8. But they can all use the widest rear tires you can mount on the car. Judging from the photos the tires are between 245 and 265 in width. I would have very much preferred 275 or 285s in the back with 245 or 255 fronts.

Edited March 9, 2013 by dwightlooi

[hyperv6]

The tires are larger and the fact is larger is not always better if the car is tuned properly. Note the ATS and even the Vette went to smaller tires and have top handling. I went through this with the Goodyear engineers a while ago where they showed me the tip over point that each car has. Once you reach that level larger does not always give you better results. Regardless of the tire it will handle properly.

Besides who is to say it is RWD. It may also have a curve ball thrown here with AWD. Having driven this car in AWD it has a very good system. I am not sure what the limits of the AWD system are but a V having it to put the power down would be at an advantage

Even my HHR SS can take wider 18" tires but most who have fitted them found no advantage and just added weight. With many cars today they are paying a price in un sprung weight in the name of styling.

Who knows it may have the Cheap Corvette 5.3 truck engine. LOL! Just kidding!

Edited March 9, 2013 by hyperv6

[hyperv6]

I see in another story that GM was testing a V8 and TTV6 and will go with the TTV6 first in the V. They may still be using the V8 car or they may be doing some work for the V8 in the CTSV.

Who know this also could have some Camaro parts under this body. I expect much of the Camaro work will be done with ATS bodies on them at some point. That may be why we have seen nothing of the new Camaro at this point.

The Other story in Car and Driver said that this car did have larger fenders.

The lower opening Is perfect for a large intercooler.

[number7]

There was also some articles going around stating that the ATS-V will be the Twin-Turbo 6 and the V8 will actually be something in the sorts of a "ATS-V+."

[dwightlooi]

There was also some articles going around stating that the ATS-V will be the Twin-Turbo 6 and the V8 will actually be something in the sorts of a "ATS-V+."

I'll take any bet that this will not happen. They'll go one way or the other, but not one then the other. If the ATS-V end up being a bi-turbo V6, it'll stay that way until the next model generation at least (5 years from now). There will not be a ATS-V+ or whatever with a different engine, even if the ATS-V ends up being an inferior car to its competition because of bi-turbo power.

If they are smart, they play the ace up their sleeve which is the pushrod small block V8 and have a superior powerplant to anything BMW and Mercedes can or will field. If they are dumb trend followers chasing after non-existent presumptions a fuel economy from reduced displacement, alphabet soup or simply trying to make the same mistakes BMW makes, they'll pick the the heavier, more expensive and less powerful V6 with two turbos. But whatever it is that they do, that is the ATS-V and that will remain the ATS-V for this cycle.

[dwightlooi]

Even my HHR SS can take wider 18" tires but most who have fitted them found no advantage and just added weight. With many cars today they are paying a price in un sprung weight in the name of styling.

I have never been a big fan of big wheels, just wide tires. 18, 19, 20" wheels really don't do much for handling or traction. In fact they can hurt these qualities by being excessively heavy. Some of my favorite tire sizes are the 255/40 R17 and the 275/35 R18. Generally, I prefer to go to the widest available width for a given wheel size before going to the next wheel size. And I prefer to go with the smallest wheel size that still has the width and rolling diameter I am looking for.

For a rear drive car with over 400 hp, there is never enough tire width. If there is a tipping point beyond which no additional practical traction benefits exists, its beyond 400mm width and no such production tire exist. The problem is that you need to increase the front width as you make the rears wider to maintain proper balance in cornering traction. And you can only go so far... when you go from say 245 in the back and 225 in front to say 275 in the back, you need to also make the front 245 or 255. The problem is that if you go too wide in the back -- say 335, you cannot proportionately increase the front width because those wheels need to turn and pretty soon they start to rub unless you complete change the suspension geometry and widen the effective tracks.

[hyperv6]

With the traction aids today and the modern compounding bigger is better does not always apply in many cars anymore.

Also with todays cars balance is more important than anything so the electronics can do their work.

The new C7 is a good case in point. With the electronic and the addition of better tuning to the car it has improved or equal grip with the C6 but with smaller tires. The smaller tires also come into play in the case of increasing MPG with many cars in not just weight but rolling resistance.

Times have changes and tire compounding and construction along with auto technology is starting to render some your thinking obsolete. The days of GM just clapping on stiff springs, big tires and big sway bars are over. We will still see some cases where larger tires are used but they will be to compensate for something lacking in the engineering in many cases.

Even in racing F1 is a good example where they are running much smaller tires and technology has taken the cars to the next level in performance.

The ATS is also a good example where they are now designing cars from the wheel size up vs. the car down and finding a tire to make it work.

[smk4565]

Next-gen C-class is getting a twin turbo V8 of 4.0 liters. But the 3-series wins on balance, steering, suspension, brake feel and handling. Others have put more power in cars, M3 is still the king. ATS-V can have loads of power, better bring then handling and smoke and mirrors intangibles that BMW uses to win people over.

[hyperv6]

BMW wins mostly of late because of the badge. People have badge envy and they are more worried about being seen in the car than how it fully performs.

The key to the ATS V is to offer a performance car that will compete and beat a M3 but will leave enough room to make people still want to pay more for the CTS V. This is where marketing is in play and you have to give appeal to each car where the lower one does the job but the more expensive one will still draw buyers to pay $15K more for this model.

Also if you can give different appeal to each model to not only retain the present buyers but also attract those from other brands. To grow the Cadillac brand you must offer some of what these owners like. It is not always rational or logical but it is what they are willing to pay more for.

We can play numbers all night long but the key is what will attract buyer and more importantly conquest buyers. What will it take to steal away present customers from BMW and not alienate the present Cadillac customers.

[smk4565]

--> What will it take to steal away present customers from BMW and not alienate the present Cadillac customers.

Build quality is a good place to start. Though improved, Cadillacs just don't seem as well made as German cars.

[hyperv6]

--> What will it take to steal away present customers from BMW and not alienate the present Cadillac customers.

Build quality is a good place to start. Though improved, Cadillacs just don't seem as well made as German cars.

The Germans fool a lot of people too.

Americans have this thing about German cars where they see perceived quality.

Cadillac is on part with the Germans. In some areas they lead in other Caddy leads.

Too many people have this thing about Germany that they think just because the over anal Germans made it that it has to be better. Good case in point. Years ago a Ford Engineer spoke at our school. He pointed out that in surveys of done here in the states that many people were convinced that the orange peel in the paint on many German cars like Benz, BMW and even VW were because they put the paint on thicker and that was because it was better quality. The fact was it was out orange peel from poor quality paint system.

Too often because a group of people do get something right they also get undue credit even when they mess up with the ignorant public.

The only thing holding Cadillac back at this point is perceived quality and as far as I am concerned special engines or tunes to set them apart. They really need to give the 2.0 and 3.6 some more HP to make them appear more premium vs. just a shared engine with a Camaro or HHR SS. It is kind of like the steering wheel in the ZR1. It was the same wheel with a different center cap than my HHR SS. All the better for me but a bit of a disappointment if you just shelled out $120.000. At least it looks like they finally have addressed this simple perceived quality item in the C7.

Too often it is the little things that make a difference and the public can focus on some of the dumbest things but they matter all the same in their eyes. Cadillac looks to be fast reacting short comings of late and it will pay off. Perceived quality must be earned fairly or unfairly it takes time.

[smk4565]

It isn't just the engines it is how they hold up over time. My mom has a 136,000 mile Audi that has had hardly any mechanical problems, zero electrical problems, there are no squeaks or rattles in the interior, the trim pieces all still fit together tight and the car drives like it did when new. That car will blow by 200,000 miles easily. Compared to my GM car with 145,000 miles that has loose interior trim pieces, the carpet on the side of the footwell is loose, check engine light always on, etc. I've put about $4,000 in unscheduled maintenance into my car since 100,000 miles. It isn't perceived quality, it is reality, my car routinely has problems and isn't as durable as her German built car. Cadillac needs to build a car that holds up over time, any car looks good the first year, but how will it hold up over 10-20 years or 200,000 miles.

[hyperv6]

My SSEI had no rattles just one water pump and no loose trim or carpet out of place in over 100,000 miles. same for my trucks too. The GTP was noisy from the time I bought it but the noise was not from the trim.

The fact is they all make good and bad cars.

I have never had to put $4,000 in any of my GM cars. My most expensive cost was tires. In the 30 plus GM car my family has had only the one 78 Buick lost a cam. Other wise repairs have been minimum.

Oh and my carpets have all stayed in place.

[Drew Dowdell]

It isn't just the engines it is how they hold up over time. My mom has a 136,000 mile Audi that has had hardly any mechanical problems, zero electrical problems, there are no squeaks or rattles in the interior, the trim pieces all still fit together tight and the car drives like it did when new. That car will blow by 200,000 miles easily. Compared to my GM car with 145,000 miles that has loose interior trim pieces, the carpet on the side of the footwell is loose, check engine light always on, etc. I've put about $4,000 in unscheduled maintenance into my car since 100,000 miles. It isn't perceived quality, it is reality, my car routinely has problems and isn't as durable as her German built car. Cadillac needs to build a car that holds up over time, any car looks good the first year, but how will it hold up over 10-20 years or 200,000 miles.

Your mom better call Audi and have them examine the car.... it is likely the only Audi over 100k miles.... or even over 60k miles that has no squeaks or rattles. You're driving an orphan that was an orphan when it was sold and it was sold by a company that, in the strictest of legal terms, no longer exists today. My mother beat the hell out of her Aurora of the same generation, it survived 2 accidents with the 3rd one being terminal.. yet it put in over 200k miles even with her poor care of the vehicle. She sold it to her employee who ran it a few more months before running it without oil and blowing the motor.

[G. David Felt]

I will put up my 1994 suburban to anything Germans build. 225000 miles and like new. If you do the scheduled maintenance and wash, wax and take care of it, any auto can last and be rattle free.

To many americans have gotten into a disposable mind set and I just want to buy and drive and not do anything and then they complain about the car not being well made.

Yes American made auto's were last to building auto's that had 100K mile tune ups and other maintenance at 100K, 200K, etc.

I have seen many BMW/MB/Audi auto's that have trim falling off, clear coat paint is peeling off and it smokes oil out the tail pipe and the auto is only a few years old.

Every Auto maker has their good years and bad years and one cannot just assume the Germans build the best.

[hyperv6]

The more I think about it this is what GM really lacks.

GM needs to emotionally connect with their customers again. Look at of even with the problems a BMW has and the high cost of upkeep the car still sells. Why? Because of an emotional bond.

We still see here a emotional bond to the past here with many members. Look at Camino while he is frustrated that GM has yet resurrected the UTE here he will still by one. Other here the same. The fact is there are no perfect cars but the more emotionally attached people become the greater the product in the eye of the consumer.

The emotional attachment of BMW has been the performance and the ego. They have built some good performing cars over the years but they also have generated an image that people feels that it reflects back on them. you just do not own a BMW but you are seen in their eyes as a BMW owner.

Audi has been working hard on building this image too but it had a set back with 6o minutes with the shame unintended acceleration and it still takes time to build this image. BMW started in the mid 70's starting with the Ultimate Driving machine program and built it from there.

Cadillac had that image but the market changed and Cadillac did not. Back when they were still trying to reinvent the Deville as a floaty sedan the others were tuning suspensions and drawing younger customers.

I feel the ground work has been set with the CTS and ATS. The next thing is to build on it with the new CTS and the Coming LTS. The key is to continue to build. Once they start to earn the trust of the people they will earn the emotional attachment and image they need.

I really think they should take the CTS and ATS to Collages and universities to build a image that we are no longer a car for the old blue hairs and let these younger kids see that these cars are the real deal. They may not have the money now but plant the seed and they will remember taking the CTS V on the auto cross track they ran.

[hyperv6]

By the way guys stay creditable. German cars are still pretty good. While they are not perfect they are not the second coming of AMC some like to make them out to be. I think that The Germans, Japanese and Cadillac are all on equal footing today quality wise. They all have their good points and they all have their recalls. The one area I think Cadillac has a real leg up is the less need for routine maintenance. Often the other require service and it is not cheap.
My uncle just had the valves adjusted on a 911 Carrera for near $200 and that was a deal.

Edited March 12, 2013 by hyperv6

[dwightlooi]

To be honest, the ATS's interior beats the 3-series and/or the 5-series. The stitched dash and overall perceived material quality is superior. BMW is also notorious for being cheap on really basic stuff... the entry 3-series and 5-series don't even have leather -- they have vinyl leatherette. Seat heaters are optional. Even the arm rest is optional! BMWs are also notorious for electrics and switch gear failures. In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find a BMW owner who -- new or used -- have owned a BMW for a total period of 5~6 years without something electronic or electrical failure.

[hyperv6]

The interior was never a German strong area.

[smk4565]

A lot of the German cars have free scheduled maintenance and free loaner cars for the first 50k miles, and the certified pre-owned take it to 6 year 100k miles. So the cost of maintenance isn't too much of an issue there. But my earlier point wasn't cost of scheduled maintenance, it is that German cars tend to hold up well over over time. If the Germans didn't know what they were doing they won't each be selling about 1.3 million cars a year while the rest struggle.

[dwightlooi]

Actually, it depends... Germans are not very good with some of their high performance models. For instance, nobody dares to own an E60 M5 without an extended warranty. The SMG replacement or failed V10 means a $20K repair bill. This severely affected the resale value of the E60 M5. The E63 AMG is another car whose resale value is in the dumps because of unreliable hardware. All E63s come with Airmatic shocks -- air springs basically which allow dynamic ride height adjustments. Every single owner of E500, E55s and E63s I know have had an Airmatic issue -- either the bags leaked, the fittings leaked or the pump goes kaput. For this reason the E63s sell for less than the C63s of the same vintage -- sometimes by as much as 5~8K less even though this was a $20K more expensive car when new. The Germans have a habit of putting stuff into production -- especially their high end models -- which hasn't been perfected. That hurts them really.

GM has an ACE up their sleeve for the ATS-V. It's called the pushrod small block V8. More compact, lighter, cheaper and generally more reliable than DOHC V8s and Bi-turbo sixes of a similar output, it allows the ATS-V to be a lighter, faster, more balanced, better handling car, while at the same time permit a price tag advantage over the more expensive to build engines the competition relies on. That it is also probably have better fuel economy compared to Bi-turbo sixes and smaller displace DOHC V8s comes as a bonus. The question is... will they play the card or will they be dumb enough to try to simply do what BMW does and put a V6 with a pair of turbos in the car.

[Drew Dowdell]

... it's also called "magnetic ride control" dwight.

[hyperv6]

You can twist the push rods anyway you want but the key to all this is what engine will people pay more for and buy more cars with. Also with driveline would attract more people to Cadillac and buy the cars leaving other brands?

It again is more about marketing vs just numbers on paper.

That is the one key area that hurts the ATS. While it has a sweet engine in a Turbo 4 and V6 the issue is they ate the same engines I can buy in a GMC and Malibu.

If Cadillac wants to continue using these engines and the push rod V8 they need to set them apart more with their own tunes and with better trim than just a plastic cover over it to make it look as sophisticated as the DOHC engine.

I have not issue with the numbers on the push rods but if it will not draw in new fresh buyers then it will be of no help no matter how light, small and powerful they are. This is about selling the most cars at a profit and building a new customer base not of present Cadillac or GM buyers. What are their expectations, wants and needs to get them to make the jump. Most of these people are not engineers and only believe what they are told and that often more is better. You can not treat this completely rationally.

[G. David Felt]

A proper review of what is current in the market from a marketing standpoint needs to be done so that GM can best understand how to put a twist on having a superior V8 beat the Marketing Fluff of a twin turbo v6.

GM has always done a terrible job of market research and market understanding to build a proper story that drives people into the show room.

[dwightlooi]

You can twist the push rods anyway you want but the key to all this is what engine will people pay more for and buy more cars with. Also with driveline would attract more people to Cadillac and buy the cars leaving other brands?

It again is more about marketing vs just numbers on paper.

That is the one key area that hurts the ATS. While it has a sweet engine in a Turbo 4 and V6 the issue is they ate the same engines I can buy in a GMC and Malibu.

If Cadillac wants to continue using these engines and the push rod V8 they need to set them apart more with their own tunes and with better trim than just a plastic cover over it to make it look as sophisticated as the DOHC engine.

I have not issue with the numbers on the push rods but if it will not draw in new fresh buyers then it will be of no help no matter how light, small and powerful they are. This is about selling the most cars at a profit and building a new customer base not of present Cadillac or GM buyers. What are their expectations, wants and needs to get them to make the jump. Most of these people are not engineers and only believe what they are told and that often more is better. You can not treat this completely rationally.

Cadillac had the Northstar... that didn't help either. Fact is that the valve train layout and alphabet soup is not important to the overwhelming majority of buyers. Performance, apparent refinement, etc. does.

Advertising is simple when you have the facts on your side... "0-60 in 4.0 secs -- 27 mpg -- faster around Nurburgring than an M3" All you have to do is say it.

[hyperv6]

Well you left out the part of the N star was mostly FWD and in cars that were not even close to being on par with the present cars. Also the part about issues with blown head gaskets and carboned up oil rings. When you use an example like this use all the facts not just the ones that work for you. And now you can not count the XLR and STS RWD since they were so few in numbers. Most people did not even know what engine was in them let alone much about the models till they were gone.

Now they have already pushed the record lap time at the Ring, 0-60 time and the MPG already. Brother you need to refill the tank with some more gas. All of this is good but you need to do more to get that emotional edge. This is where logic is out the door and you sell on emotion. If logic ruled here why in the hell would anyone pay near $80K for a car that you can get a cheaper car to do nearly the same thing.

You have to stoke the ego here and make a major appeal to the emotional side.

The way I see it GM likes to call the new engines a Small Block and try to make everyone think the new LT1 is just a better version of what they built in 1955 for the trucks and Vette. On the other hand the engine really only shares some simple measurements and is a totally new advanced engine. Where that halo of the old engine my help a pick up it hurts the Cadillac as it is seen nearly as platform sharing.

Nothing wrong with platform sharing if you do it right. I would have no issue with the engine sharing here but they need to stop calling this engine a Small Block and market it as the advanced engine that it is. Also they need to do verision for Cadillac and only Cadillac with more power and better looks than just a plastic cover. Same goes for the Eco and the 3.6.

You may not like the 3.6 and 3.0 turbo but if they follow the plan where only Cadillac has it that is what needs to be done. GM will have to share engines but they need to make these shared engines tailored more to each division.

[ZL-1]

Well you left out the part of the N star was mostly FWD and in cars that were not even close to being on par with the present cars. Also the part about issues with blown head gaskets and carboned up oil rings. When you use an example like this use all the facts not just the ones that work for you. And now you can not count the XLR and STS RWD since they were so few in numbers. Most people did not even know what engine was in them let alone much about the models till they were gone.

Now they have already pushed the record lap time at the Ring, 0-60 time and the MPG already. Brother you need to refill the tank with some more gas. All of this is good but you need to do more to get that emotional edge. This is where logic is out the door and you sell on emotion. If logic ruled here why in the hell would anyone pay near $80K for a car that you can get a cheaper car to do nearly the same thing.

You have to stoke the ego here and make a major appeal to the emotional side.

The way I see it GM likes to call the new engines a Small Block and try to make everyone think the new LT1 is just a better version of what they built in 1955 for the trucks and Vette. On the other hand the engine really only shares some simple measurements and is a totally new advanced engine. Where that halo of the old engine my help a pick up it hurts the Cadillac as it is seen nearly as platform sharing.

Nothing wrong with platform sharing if you do it right. I would have no issue with the engine sharing here but they need to stop calling this engine a Small Block and market it as the advanced engine that it is. Also they need to do verision for Cadillac and only Cadillac with more power and better looks than just a plastic cover. Same goes for the Eco and the 3.6.

You may not like the 3.6 and 3.0 turbo but if they follow the plan where only Cadillac has it that is what needs to be done. GM will have to share engines but they need to make these shared engines tailored more to each division.

Agreed. And to your point, that brand-specific approach will have to start at Cadillac where the top notch ratings should appear.

[smk4565]

The Germans have a habit of putting stuff into production -- especially their high end models -- which hasn't been perfected. That hurts them really.

Hold on, how are the Germans hurting. The 3 most successful (mainstream) luxury brands in the world are BMW, Mercedes and Audi. The 2 ultra high luxury brands Bentley and Rolls-Royce are owned by Germans, and the 3 ultra high performance sports car brands are Ferrari, Lamborghini, and Bugatti, and 2 of those 3 are owned by Germans too. The Germans have the high end car market cornered.

[Drew Dowdell]

It hurt them when people won't own one of the high end models outside of warranty and when they know the service department people by name. My grandmother had 3 Buick Park Aves in a row that pushed well over 100k miles each, then she went to a 7-series which was lemoned out to be replaced with another 7-series which was nearly as troublesome but not eligible for lemon law. Once that lease was up, she ended up back in a Lacrosse.

They have the perception market cornered for people who care about the badge on the trunk.

[balthazar]

The 'hurt' is also ongoing- the push downmarket & FWD by the mainstream brands, all in the insatiable thirst for higher production.

[G. David Felt]

The 'hurt' is also ongoing- the push downmarket & FWD by the mainstream brands, all in the insatiable thirst for higher production.

Agreed, the FWD/downmarket mass production will hurt not help BMW/Audi/MB.

[smk4565]

The Germans are still not hurting, in fact BMW, Audi and Mercedes have had record years in terms of sales and profit the past 3 years while many others have struggled. And where else are people that spend over $80k on a car going to go? Suppose you have $100k to spend on a sedan or $150k to spend on a sports car. There are the Germans or Aston Martin and that's it. The Americans and Japanese don't make cars in that price range, save for things like the ZR-1 or LS600 hybrid. Same with Jaguar, they go above $100k, but only the top trim of a car starting around $75k.

The German owned brands: Rolls-Royce, BMW, Bentley, Porsche, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Audi, Mercedes, are all doing well globally, and all have more sales now than they did 10 years ago.

Compared to Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, Lincoln, and Cadillac which are mostly in decline or treading water. Cadillac at least is starting to fight back in the USA, but Cadillac globally is weak. Jaguar depends on how much money Tata wants to put into them.

[hyperv6]

The reality is that most of the high end cars are seldom owned after the warranty is out. These folks buy cars every 3 years most often. They have the money to buy big and buy often and could care less about much after 100,000 miles.
I had a co worker just by a 5 series used and he will pay the price of the higher miles that the original owner who has moved on to a newer BMW will not have to worry about.

Buying habits count for much here as where someone who buys a Buick may not be a yearly car buyer let alone one who buys a new car once every 10 years like my Buick owning parents were in the last 15 years.

You need to consider the demographics of the buyers in America as while there are some poverty buyers who hawk everything to buy a car that is worth more than their house most buyers are wealthy enough to now have to worry long term on these cars. This issue falls to those who finally can afford one on the used market and end up finding often they can afford the used BMW but not the maintenance.

The new buyers often want to be seen in the latest and best and would not want to be seen at the club in a 5 year old car.

You have to really look at who the buyers are and why they buy. Lexus is the one who gets most of the new buyers who can not afford a car often. Many turn to them since the cost of maintaining them is less than many of the German brands.

The Automakers could care less about the used market as they do not have to maintain it and ego drives those who want to be seen as one of their owners often gets fooled into paying the cheaper buy in only to pay later.

People are dumb and often are driven by ego and vanity. If the product does not feed the ego and their vanity they will see all the bumps and issued of the product. As of now GM has improved the Cadillac Image but they still have more ground to gain till they get to the point many of these buyers will forgive them for nearly anything.

Once GM finds a way to get people under 50 to buy in larger numbers and people 25 and under to want to own a Cadillac then GM will be where they need to be. Get it to where Buffy from Orange County tells Dad I want a ATS convertible for my birthday and Cadillac will see greater future growth.

The FWD will be a wild car here as the Imports will have to yield to these cars to make it in this market and meet the future regs. Just how well they will do is to be determined. To be honest GM has a great leg up in this segment as they have much better technology already in the FWD area. GM has a opening to meet and beat them in this area but it also is an area that the consumers may reject too? Caddy may win here but if the segment bombs it would be a hollow victory.

[hyperv6]

It hurt them when people won't own one of the high end models outside of warranty and when they know the service department people by name. My grandmother had 3 Buick Park Aves in a row that pushed well over 100k miles each, then she went to a 7-series which was lemoned out to be replaced with another 7-series which was nearly as troublesome but not eligible for lemon law. Once that lease was up, she ended up back in a Lacrosse.

They have the perception market cornered for people who care about the badge on the trunk.

And the real issue is that in this segment 75% of the sales are just because of that badge. People who buy on emotion and ego and seldom rational. If they have an issue with a 3-4 year old car they often just buy a new one. These buyers often also have more money than a Buick buyer.

[hyperv6]

Well you left out the part of the N star was mostly FWD and in cars that were not even close to being on par with the present cars. Also the part about issues with blown head gaskets and carboned up oil rings. When you use an example like this use all the facts not just the ones that work for you. And now you can not count the XLR and STS RWD since they were so few in numbers. Most people did not even know what engine was in them let alone much about the models till they were gone.

Now they have already pushed the record lap time at the Ring, 0-60 time and the MPG already. Brother you need to refill the tank with some more gas. All of this is good but you need to do more to get that emotional edge. This is where logic is out the door and you sell on emotion. If logic ruled here why in the hell would anyone pay near $80K for a car that you can get a cheaper car to do nearly the same thing.

You have to stoke the ego here and make a major appeal to the emotional side.

The way I see it GM likes to call the new engines a Small Block and try to make everyone think the new LT1 is just a better version of what they built in 1955 for the trucks and Vette. On the other hand the engine really only shares some simple measurements and is a totally new advanced engine. Where that halo of the old engine my help a pick up it hurts the Cadillac as it is seen nearly as platform sharing.

Nothing wrong with platform sharing if you do it right. I would have no issue with the engine sharing here but they need to stop calling this engine a Small Block and market it as the advanced engine that it is. Also they need to do verision for Cadillac and only Cadillac with more power and better looks than just a plastic cover. Same goes for the Eco and the 3.6.

You may not like the 3.6 and 3.0 turbo but if they follow the plan where only Cadillac has it that is what needs to be done. GM will have to share engines but they need to make these shared engines tailored more to each division.

Agreed. And to your point, that brand-specific approach will have to start at Cadillac where the top notch ratings should appear.

Yes If they have to use the corporate engines they need to do better on making them a Cadillac engine to set them apart. Just look at the Verano and Cruze and how they share the same base Buick has made the Verano it's own. The same should be done with the engines.

Even Pontiac in my Fiero made a 2.8 HO that was higher HP than even the Chevy version by a few HP. Also they dressed the engine in Aluminum and Red Powder coat with stainless manifolds not available at Chevy. The intake and V cover are bolted down with polished 12 point stainless fasteners that look as if they came from ARP. Pontiac even did their own fuel injection system vs. the Chevy. If Pontiac could do this on a lowly Fiero Cadillac could put more effort into the engines to give them just a leg up.

Badge engineering is not just platforms but it also can apply to engines too.

One area I do see Cadillac making more of a difference is AWD. I expect the CTSV may apply AWD and at some point the ATS may also. I think we may not see them till a they have a transmission that can handle it. they should have that soon.

Edited March 14, 2013 by hyperv6

[dwightlooi]

Well, I think most of you are missing the point...

If the ATS-V gets the LT1, it is not an engine you find in a Malibu or Sierra. You ONLY find the LT1 in the C7 Corvette. And, that, even if the engine is adopted as is, is not a bad association. Yes, it's a Chevy engine. But it'll be like an Infiniti G-series performance model getting the VR38DETT GT-R engine.

[smk4565]

They can put a ZR-1 engine in the ATS-V, the Wreath and Crest still doesn't carry the weight of the 3-point star or a blue/white circle. That's the problem, the people in Beverly Hills that Hyper spoke of are still going to be a 3-series just because it is a 3-series.

[hyperv6]

Well, I think most of you are missing the point...

If the ATS-V gets the LT1, it is not an engine you find in a Malibu or Sierra. You ONLY find the LT1 in the C7 Corvette. And, that, even if the engine is adopted as is, is not a bad association. Yes, it's a Chevy engine. But it'll be like an Infiniti G-series performance model getting the VR38DETT GT-R engine.

You missed the point that the Turbo 4 is the same as the Malibu and the basic engine is the same in the Sierra.

You have to have the full package too attract the small segment of the market these cars attract. The profits are high so it is important to gain each and every one.

Even a advanced engine in the lower car is not better as VW has found with the Phaeton W12.

Like it or not technology and HP sell in this segment. They may not always know what it means but they often want the latest and greatest in their eyes.

Even the track record at the Ring did not knock the 3 series out of the lead. This whole deal is multidimensional and needs to be addressed as a package not just with a truck based engine with a big plastic cover on it or just trying to copy BMW in other ways.

Edited March 14, 2013 by hyperv6

[ZL-1]

Agreed with hyperb6.

If it HAS to be the same engine for some reason, why not introduce it as the Cadillac engine and then have it trickle down?... Perception-wise it is a totally different thing and GM has to address the perception issue as well as the nuts-and-bolts side of things...

[G. David Felt]

Blocks are Blocks, I do not see this costing much, but I would think building the heads with cadillac logo's on them and the valve covers as a start and giving the rest a personalization so it really reads Cadillac would go a long way with peoples perception.

I agree GM needs to start engines with Cadillac and build their luxury image as special for the brand and then allow use of the blocks in other lines.

Starting off with saying this is a chevy engine we will use in Cadillac does not come across very well.

Example is how many lemmings buy Accura and pay the premium for a honda engine. When honda was sponsoring F1, they would introduce engine elements into the accura line up as their Formula F1 proven technology and yes it would also show up in Honda products, but not with the fan fair Accura got to put on it.

[balthazar]

^ There ARE no "Chevy engines", they've all been corporate since the early '80s.

[dwightlooi]

What they can do -- without much cost -- is to use slightly higher compression pistons and a slightly different cam grind on the Caddy versions. Being a luxury marque you can get away with a disregard for 87 octane compatibility and make the engine Premium Fuel only Let's call it the LT2 for humor sake. With 12.5:1 compression vs 11.5:1 you get about 20 additional lb-ft across the board. This translates to about 23 hp @ 6000 rpm. Move the torque & power peaks slightly higher by 200~300 rpm with a cam grind with slightly more lift and overlap to (ala LS7) and you get about 30~40 extra hp. Nothing earth shattering but enough to make the engine somewhat more desirable. Total actual extra production cost to GM is ZERO.

[Drew Dowdell]

They can put a ZR-1 engine in the ATS-V, the Wreath and Crest still doesn't carry the weight of the 3-point star or a blue/white circle. That's the problem, the people in Beverly Hills that Hyper spoke of are still going to be a 3-series just because it is a 3-series.

As you say.. it doesn't matter which engine goes in it, it won't sell to those people anyway.... so let Cadillac rule the day with the LT-1 V8.

[Drew Dowdell]

^ There ARE no "Chevy engines", they've all been corporate since the early '80s.

Well no... the Olds 307 lasted into the early 90s. Then Northstar was a Cadillac engine for 95% of its life and is still though of in that manner. The 90's LT-1 was thought of as a Chevy/Corvette engine (and still is if you look at ebay ads for Roadmasters or Fleetwoods).

[hyperv6]

What they can do -- without much cost -- is to use slightly higher compression pistons and a slightly different cam grind on the Caddy versions. Being a luxury marque you can get away with a disregard for 87 octane compatibility and make the engine Premium Fuel only Let's call it the LT2 for humor sake. With 12.5:1 compression vs 11.5:1 you get about 20 additional lb-ft across the board. This translates to about 23 hp @ 6000 rpm. Move the torque & power peaks slightly higher by 200~300 rpm with a cam grind with slightly more lift and overlap to (ala LS7) and you get about 30~40 extra hp. Nothing earth shattering but enough to make the engine somewhat more desirable. Total actual extra production cost to GM is ZERO.

Stop just Stop! Enough tech talk that means little to 90% of the people unless you make it a value you can market too.

They can do this engine 6 ways to Sunday if they like. They can also keep it easily Premium recommended just based on the computer alone and still yield high numbers. If they need or want to use cheaper fuel it will just cost them some power. VVT and the other electronics can do wonders today and has kept nearly all the GM engine with this option.

Like it or not people of all classes like the fuel option and it will never limit sales no matter the price of the car. Some of the richest people I know can cheap out often and something like fuel is one thing.

Second they should not intro the engine as a Cadillac first. It is a GM engine and will remain a GM engine just as the Delta II or Alpha is a GM Platform. They do need to make the engine more divisional when installing it in the cars. At Cadillac people are paying more so they generally expect more. Just tune the engines to the point that they have more HP across the board than the equal platform Chevy. In other words the 3.6 in the ATS should have more power than the Camaro 3.6 same for the 2.0 Turbo. Also the CTSV should not have the same power as the ZL1 like they are already doing.

Now as for dress they can do a hell of a lot with these engines. I would spec for Cadillac at least powder coated Valve Covers with polished centers with the Cadillac script on them. Also polished stainless fasteners on them. A V series could use a Carbon Fiber etc. Also do something with the Intake to set it apart. Also give Cadillac their own engine names and drop the L number and leave them to Chevy and Buick.

The key is to present the engine as added value as right now there is no more added value to the engine than any other GM product in most cases.

Cadillac want to be seen as a global premium car they need to present added value everywhere they can. They are now just getting it right in the interior after years of failure they also need to reach other areas of the car. In cases like suspension no cheap OE tires on any level only new up to date tires. To often GM will give you a top line car and dump a set of cheap Hankooks or out dated Pilots on them. You may get away with this on a Chevy but not on a Cadillac.

In the past we looked at cars like Packard, Cadillac, Rolls Royce as cars that were no compromise and held the best that each company offered. Cadillac is moving to this but has yet to achieve it in the ATS and CTS. If they want the LTS to do so they need to achieve there also.

It is time to unleash The engineers, stylist and marketing people and let them do their jobs. GM has some of the best people in the world and setting them free to build this car as it should be can be done. We can see under Bob Lutz what their people could do when enabled and he had their backs. Body gaps shrank, engines improved with more power and quality and styling improved much. The key here is you fix Cadillac and it will reflect on all of GM.

Like it or not Twin Turbo's, DOHV engines, more gears in the tranny, better door handles, real wood trim etc are all seen as added value and what you get for the premium price. Now I know Cadillac will offer the TT V6 and expand it's use in the future. I also know they are pretty much going to use the GM V8 which is not bad but they need to do a better job of making it their own and making it a big deal it is in the car and market it as being better in a Cadillac because Cadillac made it better.

I have already heard that the Cadillac people have already lost in a fight over higher quality door handles on one of their new cars. GM cut them back to something like $5 door handles. What is the first thing people touch on a car? The door handle and it makes the first tactual impression. If GM wants Cadillac to grow into the premium brand they want they need to start letting them be the premium brand they should be and not short cut anywhere. Cadillac was lost when it just became another variation of the rest of the GM line sharing many parts with them other then the name plate and grill.

If Buick gets the Riviera like shown in the most recent Automobile Cadillac may lose the younger buyers to Buick. I am not sure how accurate their drawing was but the Riviera on the Omega platform with that styling looks like a very expensive car in a Maserati kind of way. It looked like a Buick built in Italy. Styling like that is Added Value!

[smk4565]

It is the whole package that matters. Look at how the E350 with a 268 hp V6 for all those years dominated the sales chart. It outsold the 5-series, A6, Lexus GS, Infiniti M, Volvos, CTS, Jaguar XF, you name it. Yes Mercedes had the V8 option but most are V6 sales. The steering, suspension, build quality, NVH, etc are just as important as the engine.

[hyperv6]

Things that are killing Cadillac are small detail things like the shifters in the manual cars. Why can they never seem to get it right. Todays transmissions are internal shifted so getting it right is not like fixing an old Saginaw shifter.

They are so close I hope GM lets the engineers and stylist close the deal with out trying to trim the investments in the cars before they hit the market..

This is where Mark needs to hold his ground and Dan should back him up on what Mark feels is the right thing to do.

Edited March 16, 2013 by hyperv6