hyperv6

And there is competition on bringing the price of battery cells down - LG Chem: http://www.autonews.com/article/20151214/OEM06/312149992/lg-chem-quietly-surges-in-battery-race The above article is dated because I have read that Audi and Nissan plan on using LG Chem. They have plants going up in Poland and China to augment what they already have in the USA (Holland, Michigan) and China. What Musk did was to destroy the stupid misconception that an EV must be weak and lack performance. For that alone, he should be given a statue. The good news, IMO, is that battery cost per kWh is approaching $100 much faster than I DOE report published around 2010. Aftermarket battery packs to retrofit cars could lead to more of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie7qvo-aC5k Musk proved you could sell an expensive EV car that did not look like a Science experiment. It was a risk in that would people buy it but it also lowered the risk of a start up lower volume model as the high price covered the cost. While large MFG were not willing to take the risk it was his only choice as he was not going to make it by selling a smaller volume of cheap cars. He is a businessman and just took the only path he had. Also his PT Barnum like marketing of overselling and turning the car into a quasi like religion has given the EV a higher profile. On the other hand he has also over promised and under delivered often. The three will also be the same. But that is the risk of business. I would give him credit where credit is due but not over do it with a statue. He has gotten much right but also made many mistakes to and will again, he is just a man like any other. Elon does not walk on water. But many successful people failed more than they succeeded. But that is tough to do in this market wit shareholders. He has a limited amount of time to meet goals that are still pretty lofty. Add in the increased competition etc. His best bet may be to remain in the high priced luxury market and leave the car for the average guy to the companies that can absorb the cost.

Here is your problem both Left and right will not back off CAFE. There are too many voters today that believe in Global Warming and other Eviro concerns for many to step out of line on this. While one side will go extreme the other will at least hold the line. Even the Automakers are not fighting it anymore because of consumer perceived impact. While they are not the majority they are a growing group of younger buyers that tend to think about this. The lack of defeat switch to me is not good but it could make it easier to deal with now than when they are forced into it to meet government standards. As for my Turbo 2.0 vs a Bu the gearing would also be different as well a better tranny. As it is the 08 Bu V6 I have is around 3600 pounds and gets 23-25 MPG on the same drive. It lacks the torque and acceleration the HHR does. It is not bad just not the same. Torque is the trick as it not only helps in performance but feel of a car as this is what pushes you back in the seat not the HP alone. But weight loss has other benefits. It makes for faster stopping cars. Better Handling along with the performance and MPG. GM's move to make the cars lighter is going to be a boon to them as so many others are not light and are in some cases getting heavier like the Mustang. Next the Trucks will see more cuts in weight and I suspect it will not be all Aluminum as they will use the mixed approach like they did on the CT6. They are not far off the Fords now with steel so GM I feel has an edge yet here as they did it the hard way with engineering first.

Where here is the Tesla conundrum. They need money because they have yet to make a profit on the S model and spent a ton of money on the X that also has yet to turn a profit. Like any other automaker the development cost are staggering and the presales of the 3 were needed for the money to continue to work to get it into production. Reports hold them at nearling only 1 Billion left after the X model with slow production and continued issued in the already sold models. The three was clear at into that it was not complete and that they would need more time to finish it and even get it into production. It is also clear that the price will go up and many still question with added incoming compitition from other companies how many people will remain on the list if other MFG get into the game. The average price of a 3 is expected to be much more by the time the cars are optioned out. I do expect the 3 will be out but late and more expensive. How quality is TBD as Tesla has been suffering more in this area of late. Part of the reason Tesla has done well is they are not our grandfathers automaker but on the other hand where they will struggle is they are resisting to do things the way our Grandfathers automakers have learned to do it over 100 years, As for Henry with a Y The comparison is tough as times were much different but the area that is similar is his early cars were expensive. Where he really made out is when he brought production cost way down and lowered the prices to where even a low income family could afford a car. The Tesla 3 has not reached the level of a lower income buyer or even average buyer yet. To be fair GM is working on that too yet but they still have not reached that price but are going to be closer. Tesla will lose the tax rebate soon too so that too will effect sales as others will still have it to offer. Tesla or not all other automakers still need to work the EV area as the Zero Emissions mandate is still there and will be growing globally. Now is the time to work to bring down the cost of these cars as the gas cars sales will still support them comfortably. What Tesla has done is amazing but in full disclosure it is not as amazing as some would like to make you think. One must separate the truth from the hype with Elon and then you can only get a real snap shot of what is going on.

Yes it is the whole package as they are going into all areas of Engine efficiency, Aero, Stop Start, Weight etc. GM and most other MFG are not leaving any stone un turned as the numbers they will have to meet are way out of reach. The government is forcing them to turn to Hybrid as a standard feature and even more electrics. That is why they are willing to build them at a loss now to help spur grow of suppliers and development to drive cost down for later. Now one thing I think we will see more of in the Turbo engines is more torque. GM learned on the 2.0 with the performance upgrade that increasing the torque brought them 1-2 MPG more even with an additional 55 HP with it. I experienced this and saw others see it too.. I asked Bill Duncan of the Performance Drive train at GM and he said yes it was a real increase. They did not expect it but said it was a true gain. Now at 3200 LBS i see 25-26 in mostly city driving. This is even with full boost launches from time to time. From what Bill told me the reason I see good MPG is that the torque gets me up to speed and then I am off throttle. The DI engine cut the fuel off if you coast. I played with this some when I have driven and I see major gains by lifting off the throttle going down hills and coming up to lights. I do not see the same gains in a normal injection car. Note too the added torque take more boost and does require premium only so this is a major issue for the regular cars as people tend to be afraid to spend the extra couple bucks for gas.

The 300 was originally floated as being the next step to take Chrysler up scale and do what Cadillac is doing. But under FCA they have little interest in the 300 and have changed it's mission as being the new cheap luxury car. They have really discounted the car to the point you can get one for the price of a Malibu now. Good value for the customer between recalls but not good for Chrysler's image. I expect that the 300 will take the path of the 200 hand be more of a mid size AWD FWD car shared with who ever they work with. The Dodge is a wild cars. I would say there is a large group inside Dodge fighting for a new car but I can see many at FCA also showing no interest. They want Truck and Jeep profits to float the rest of FCA and just do not make enough from the RWD cars to make them of value to them. I think the Hell Cat was a cry for help from the Dodge staff as they brought back this older program to keep the car viable in the public eye as FCA drains them of profits and presents them with a lack of funding. At one time they said that they would get the Alfa platform but with the issue that car has had and the set backs at Alfa that could be a problem now. Sergio really has no clue what he is doing and at the rate he is going he will damage Ferrari to the point it may be in trouble before he is done. He is good at money but needs a real product staff to do the work on the divisions. Right now all he has is Jeep and Ram and nothing else. The Google deal is not a big deal as Google is not going to replace any major MFG as they can't even replace Apple or Samsung in the pad market. They do have a lot of money and I could see them buying FCA and going it on their own as they will tire of the FCA money drain.

Had to say what all we will see. A new NA higher HP engine would not be hard to do. The only question anymore is where to use it with less and less cars using the Chevy V8. Cadillac may not be using them in 5 years? Who knows Buick could be picking them up?

There will be a Z/28 as you are looking at it. Who has said we have seen all the engines? We also will see a Mid Engine Vette much sooner or later. Reports are now that a dealer has said it is coming. Which most of us already understand. The price is still about what I had heard last summer under $180K but they said TT V6. I am not sure about that but seeing how the IMSA rules are now that could be a possibility. Also the one thing that also fit is the new mid engine car is still using much of the C7 platform. Word was during the C7 development that they wanted to make a platform that could do both front and mid engine at the same time. It sounds like this still may be what they did. To learn much about the C8 you need to go back to around the Bail out as this is when much of the work was started till it was set aside for the C7 we have today. This is not a new program and has been worked on while the C7 was going on.

Well I suspect that they may have been working on brake bias and may have got it wrong. There were three people in the car and generally one drives, one read the telemetry and one can make adjustments on the fly. Today's cars use electronic proportioning systems and can be adjusted on the fly. The car did take a hard wack but in the shots it did hold up really well. Even the door still opened enough so they could get out. Not long a go a crash like that would have left the side really chewed up and undrivable even as far as they went. I bet they could have finished the lap if it were not for fears of hidden damage on the front suspension. This crash is nothing new. We have seen GM crash a CTSV and Corvette in the last couple years at the ring. This is a good indicator that they are taking it to the limit in their testing. Generally it does not happen on the corner with the spy photographer but S*% happens. If you don't crash some you aren't trying hard enough.

Oh I completely understand it is functional and will make for one bad-ass car I just don't think it looks the greatest, mostly just the wing. I'm pretty sure the whole "race car bits" are stylish. You don't see as many people taking tings off their cars as much as people adding things to make them look more like race cars. I liked what GM did with the last Z/28 and the Z06 when it comes to the aero-bits. They kept the spoiler attached to the trunk lids and there weren't the "as gaudy" winglets on the front fascia. The more I look at it the more It doesn't look bad but just a tad over done, even though it is all clearly functional. Spoiler is just too big, and same w/ the front fascia..just too much. If it was all toned back a little it would look better, imo. If they are for styling they are too much. If they are for real balance and function then they are just right. Also if the wing retracts then it is a non issue. I think you will find this car will be a step above the last Z as it has taken the gloves off. We do not need the car to be like the Z06 where it has so much more to offer but lacks the down force of what the competitor cars have. The last test of the 911 and Viper track cars vs. the Z06 were not as good as they could have been as the lack of down force on the Z06 hurt it.

The Buick was a tough fit with the Chevy premium line and much similar offerings. I would like to see Buick offer more and more Euro influenced Opel like cars. Move them up in price but give you things you will not get in a high end Chevy. Make better use of the white space. If you are not going to sell large volumes go for more of a OPC like car. GM has a chance here to make Buick the Euro like car Pontiac always wanted to be but was never permitted to make.

Well you have your choice you want lower lap times or you want smaller wings? While not stylish they serve a purpose and are functional. Most real down force aides are not very stylish. Just look at the Daytona as in the day everyone though it was horrible and it too 3 years to clear them out of the dealers at discounts. Today they are appreciated because they served a function. They may also make these options so you can have them if you want down force or you can opt for a smaller spoiler that is not functional. Might also look close at the wing stands and bases. I just have a wild hair idea that wing may be movable up and down. It may rise up with a switch or with speed.

They took the old design and cleaned it up. Small details like cast in exhaust manifolds to make it more quiet and lighter are some of the details. The architecture is pretty much similar. Engineering details on these engines are just to clean up the present designs to make them lighter, more efficient and quiet but they did not blow up the entire design. It is still based on the work that was started on the LNF by GM, Saab and Lotus. It was no different than the 2.2 vs the 2.0. While there was a slew of changed to the 2.0 it was still based on the 2.2. You can argue the glass half full and half empty all you like but the heritage of these engines show a direct path.

The 2.0T in the Cadillac ATS and Chevy Malibu is not an improved LNF, it's a brand new engine. In the same sense that the 3.6L LGX in the Camaro and various Cadillacs is not a revised 3.6L LFX. It's rebuilt from the ground up. As far as the OP's question, I would avoid any 2013 models. The new 2.0T had some teething issues, so you have a much higher probability of finding a lemon with the first model year. Dealers that encounter the problem generally wind up dicking around for weeks or attempting to make cheap band-aid repairs that fail instead of just replacing the engine. Well it has much in common with the older engine. Yes it is not but it is not a totally different engine as the basics are still the same. Even the 3.6 while different still has much in common with the original 3.6 too. It is fair to call it an improved version of the original. To call it a totally new engine is really misleading. It's not misleading to call them new engines. They ARE new engines, they are not revisions. It is still a 2.0 eco based on the same technology using much of the same design. They just cleaned it up to be lighter and quieter. It is not that radically different. Better to term it as a more updated advanced version.

The 2.0T in the Cadillac ATS and Chevy Malibu is not an improved LNF, it's a brand new engine. In the same sense that the 3.6L LGX in the Camaro and various Cadillacs is not a revised 3.6L LFX. It's rebuilt from the ground up. As far as the OP's question, I would avoid any 2013 models. The new 2.0T had some teething issues, so you have a much higher probability of finding a lemon with the first model year. Dealers that encounter the problem generally wind up dicking around for weeks or attempting to make cheap band-aid repairs that fail instead of just replacing the engine. Well it has much in common with the older engine. Yes it is not but it is not a totally different engine as the basics are still the same. Even the 3.6 while different still has much in common with the original 3.6 too. It is fair to call it an improved version of the original. To call it a totally new engine is really misleading.

I have driven the 6 and 4 and loved them both. I have not seen any major issues with the 2.0 turbo. The new engine is an improved version of the LNF i have in my HHR SS. They made some improvements and made it lighter. The only issue I have had on my HHR is the Turbo upgrade Map is pointed the wrong direction and it needed to be clearance. Some early cars had hoses blow off with the upgrade but just needed tightened down. There were some Turbo control valve issues on early models but most have been resolved. I have considered one for my next purchase. Either engine is good. The V6 needs RPM to move but it goes and the Turbo has a ton of low end torque with very little lag. A tuner can easily add 55 HP with a change of maps and a tune. I have 5 co workers who have purchased these models recently they are all 55 and younger. They are all non Cadillac guys too. To this point they are very happy customers. Note two bought low mile lease turn in models and got one hell of a deal on them. Low miles one had only 19K. There is little risk on these models other than what you like. Also if you buy new expect to take a hit resale unless you keep it 8 years. That is the biggest issue. I would drive them and really get to know the car and decide if you really like it. Then if you do then work the best deal you can. Sales are down so they should be dealing. Work em hard and you will be rewarded. The more options the better trade value later. Note a revamped model is due around 2018 so the deals may get even better next year.

Well lets put this story into better perspective. #10 ATS. GM has had trouble this year with some decline in sales as this car ages. It is only now getting some changes and late next year may be replaced with a updated Alpha with a CT name. Lease deals are down and they should have pulled back on production. Keep in mind declines in their segment a 10% decline can be a small number of cars per month. It is not like this is a Camry where 10% drops can be tens of thousands of cars. #9 Kia is the lost soul. They are trying to take them more up market but people already buy Hyundai. They have more work to do to find their place. As of now it is a car lost in a very competitive segment. #8 For one it is a Volvo and this one is at the end of it’s life. Sale will drop. Also keep in mind Volvo is now Chinese. This may affect Cult status with some of their followers? #7 Ok you take a already slow selling and under performing Fiat and make it longer. Do I need to say more? FCA is facing a revolt with dealers as they are not happy with the slow sales of their cars. Many dealers are bailing out if they can. Fiat has more issues than just the 500L. #6 XTS. Oldest Cadillac and basically left for service and fleet sales. What more do you need to know? The CT6 has replaced this car. The only reason the XTS was done was the CT6 was a ways out and the XTS was already done long back in the banruptcy era. The design was shelved till they had money and it was only used to buy time. #5 The Verano. This was a car Buick tried to see how it would work. It did ok but did not set the world on fire. But that is ok as sales in China have paid for all the tooling and any other cost here so there really was little to lose in risk. It is an old car and again one soon to be replaced. drop off sales are expected anyways. No suprise here to those who know what the hell is going on at Buick. #4 Two things one it is a Coupe and Two it is a Infinity. Also the overseas sales will carry this one so it was worth their risk. #3 ELR What the Hell? It was a question no one asked and just was one of the few bad decisions GM has made post bankruptcy. I expect we will not see a repeat of this again. #2 GT-R. For one they do not sell many. Two they are replacing this car soon with more power and more updated styling. What else do I need to add. Just look at the last year of sales for any sports car and there is a drop off. #1 This one is a real problem as it should see big volumes as it is a cheap affordable car and it is a Honda. It just give proof that even Honda can miss it on models. To sell under 4,000 unit here is a really big issue for this car and Honda. I expect to see them make changes soon as they do not rest long if they do make a mistake. Gas prices did not help but it has not hit other small cars as bad with worse reps than the Honda. Cadillac still has to earn it’s image and reputation back. They have started on that and will continue to grow that. But it take time and continued investment. We are far from hitting the panic button at this point as we have a lot of things coming. To be honest to sell as many old ATS as they have is pretty amazing in this SUV, CUV market. The segment is stagnate for all. Also the media appears to like to be misleading on this story head line and kind of hedge a bit in the story. They for years have loved to pile on GM. At time it was fair but many times it is not fair as they are just looking for click bate on the web. They also try to mix in CR reviews here but that often is based on readers reviews. Most people will not review a product unless they are mad for one. and two just because you subscribe to CR does not make you a automotive expert qualified to understand let alone review a car. As for CR they are a experts in everything but master of none. Car reviews for them are like going to a a steak house and ordering a vegan platter and then complaining about the quality.

I originally hated the Terrain but now I own one and come to love it. While I know it is the same thing as the Nox it just does not have that feminine look. Hey I don't highlight my hair and I still got a pair, what can I say? I have always preferred the GMC styling even if it was just the grills. It always appeared less cluttered and more refined. Though the new Chevy truck nose is damn good looking in mono chrome. LOL, I know you still have a Pair. But I have to disagree with you on the chevy truck, I still think the full size GMC is way better looking. I totally agree on the fem look of the Chevy CUV product line. Looks are subjective and you have yours and I have mine. My point is the GMC was a slam dunk before now I would at least have to think about it. Even my GMC buddies have said the same thing. Two of them have bought GMC full sized trucks in the last 2 years and both said they may have gone over to Chevy if they had this model out. As for the fem look 50% of buyers today are women so it makes sense. But with that said women like trucks too. That is why my wife wanted the Terrain. She grew up driving her dads truck often. I love it when she wants to opt for the largest wheel packages too as she said they look better. This takes the pressure off of me when I want that option. LOL! We got the 19" on the Terrain because that is what she wanted and and it is was I was going to push for if she had not wanted them. Powerful engines are also something we are both in agreement with. She has never turned down a V6 option or Supercharged option. If there was a V8 she would want it too. Now keep in mind she is not into cars like I am but we have the same wants when we buy. She also hates minivans and can shoot a gun with a high degree of accuracy. I was lucky to find her.

I originally hated the Terrain but now I own one and come to love it. While I know it is the same thing as the Nox it just does not have that feminine look. Hey I don't highlight my hair and I still got a pair, what can I say? I have always preferred the GMC styling even if it was just the grills. It always appeared less cluttered and more refined. Though the new Chevy truck nose is damn good looking in mono chrome.

And we can all assume you will purchase one of these cars? How about just having a car that dominates BMW, Audi and Benz in all areas at a price that is competitive with the others. You do that it will amount to a hell of a lot more than a car that few will buy. You have to earn trust first before you dream super car. I am not in a position to buy a $250,000 exotic car, nor will I ever be unless I hit the Powerball. From a practice sense, I was thinking Cadillac should build an Omega crossover with turbo V6 and turbo V8 power. People like the crossovers. But my wish, or in this case dare would be more of a moon shot product, just so they can say they did it. It isn't a car that makes financial sense, but I am sure VW loses money on every Bugatti sold, but they made it just to prove they could. And right now with them leveraging Lamborghini and Bentley to garner loans to deal with the diesel issues I bet they had that money back now. The reality is to challenge Cadillac to continue to make a profit, continue to improve their image and make their cars be the standard others are measured by. Wild ass ideas of super-cars and Bentley coupe challengers are just not smart moves till they fix the foundation of what supports the company and make these models the ones that are the best in their segments. I would dare to take a CT6 and a Crossover that is profitable and best in class over the others before anything else Large expensive coupes with V12 engines names Eldorado are not going to fix what needs fixed nor provide the profits. It may do some image work but it is a high price and a lot of risk as if it turns out to be another XLR then it would be a waste of money.

And we can all assume you will purchase one of these cars? How about just having a car that dominates BMW, Audi and Benz in all areas at a price that is competitive with the others. You do that it will amount to a hell of a lot more than a car that few will buy. You have to earn trust first before you dream super car.

To prove all these Online CEO's that big engines, old names and bench seats matter little anymore.

Yes they all will have a 2.0 turbo. Yes they will be all getting a more tall car look but still CUV styling. The look will impact the GMC more as it has more of a Truck look than the NOX.

Time to stop living in the past. The public is looking at them as asking what have you done lately? You promote what you are doing today. Few relevant people give a F about a Eldorado as the last one they had was really a crappy car. Audi has a long history called Auto Union and it means nothing yet people love their present cars. The Japanese gain trusting owners as they move up from their Toyota from their Lexus and the fact they are cheaper than most German cars. The fact is why would you try real hard to sell a ATS now when it will see a name change in a year and a decent revamp when it moved to a CT name. Same with the CTS. You have the CT6 and XT5 just now coming online and you will see the focus start here. This deal is not a sprint race as it is a Marathon. It take time to build a auto company image and with Cadillac being profitable at this point there is no rush to spend money that will be negated soon with a new product. There is absolutely no sense in spending millions on a marketing a car that is about to be transformed. It is a waste of money and it makes it less than creditable that you have to re explain to the customer to forget what we just told you as this is the best car now. You do not put money into an old horse.

You really think they care if Cadillac had the first 3 pedal, interchangeable parts or even one that matters like the Electric Starter. Give me a break. Todays buyers are all about what can you do for me now. They want to know. How fast can you make me? How powerful will it make me look owning your car? How much advanced technology will I get for my money? How well will my car work with my Cell Phone? Does the car look cool? Todays market is all about what can you do for me and look at me. Yes it is self centered. The fact is no one needs a high end luxury or performance car you have to make them want it for what it is and what it can do for your image. We all could easily get by with a Spark if it was just about getting there. It is what the product will do for your experience getting there and what it will do for your image. A business person going to say Firestone Country club for 18 holes and to make a deal will want to make a good impression. Will his potential business partner be more believing in his pitch if he is in a Honda Civic or a Bentley? When you go down the street many people like it when other see them and wonder what they did to succeed. This is what Cadillac needs to represent. Cadillac needs to be the symbol of achievement. These buyers can give a turkey about what you did in 1911. Many don't know and most don't care. Just worldly crusty old men who have fond memories of models of the past that often if they were in the last 40 years were no where near as good as they remember them. By the way they steel the Benz hood ornament's because of the image not what they have done. Funny how Benz leaves out the great cars they built for Hitler? They were some of their best cars. Selective history? "Cadillac" we never built cars for people that killed millions. That could catch on.

Yes, Cadillac has to market to the people that aren't buying the car now. This is what they are awful at. They aren't conquesting from the Japanese and Germans. If they don't conquest, they have to get huge numbers of first time luxury buyers, I don't think they are doing that either. They have to market to people that can afford the car though. If they make a car that 30 years think is cool, but they can't afford more than a $25,000 car, it doesn't do Cadillac any good. How about the Corvette? Median buyer age of 61, and they don't build it with VTEC for the younger buyers, they build it to suit the fan base, and the fan base buys it. They aren't trying to sell it to 30 year olds that can't afford it. Yawn!!!! I work with three 30-45 year old ATS owners that love their cars. They all had never considered an ATS let alone a Cadillac till they drove one. The point is the 61 year olds are going to buy and may get one or two more sales out of them.. The smart move is to market to they young and as they become more affluent you become an option. BMW, and Audi took years to build their rep here as they were not always the ultimate driving machines here. They were seen as the old mans quirky cars that they drove with their plaid caps. This is like building a Football team through the draft. you take the time to get young and new players and taken the time to build them into a team. Then you continue to build this way and retain your advantage. Unlike teams that pick up a few free agents that are older and may have lost a step and then have to try to replace them in a year or two.