mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

Multiple Sources Indicate Twin-Turbo V6 Inbound For Cadillac ATS-V

While it’s still not officially announced, there’s a high-performance Cadillac ATS coming. Mmm, we can envision it now, enjoying the luxuries of a high-end cabin, while revving the LT1 V8 engine to the limiter, filling our ears with an unmistakably American howl…

… what’s that, Alex? We’re not getting an ATS-V with a V8? It’s a what?

Ahem. Ladies and gentlemen, according to our own intel, the inbound Cadillac ATS-V will pack a twin-turbocharged 3.6L V6 under the hood. The addition of a pair of snail shells should bring the power of the boosted LFX V6 north of 420 horsepower or so, rivaling the output of the outgoing LS3 V8. Keep in mind that BMW is ditching its V8 setup seen in the current E92 M3 for a boosted inline six in the upcoming F80 M3 sport sedan. A sign of the times, or is Cadillac simply jumping on the turbocharging bandwagon? In any case, a seven-speed manual and eight-speed automatic should be the transmissions responsible for managing the power.

We’re still keeping in mind that the ATS can cradle an engine as large as a 7.0L V8 under the hood, and we therefore maintain hope that the such a powerplant will find its way into the engine bay of a variant of some sorts — perhaps something exceeding the capabilities of an ATS-V.

The GM Authority Take

Cadillac needs to have a good reason for this. To short the ATS-V of a free-breathing V8 sledgehammer that’s relatively light in weight and packed with enough power to shame any other compact sports sedan on the market is nothing short of vexatious. We hope it wasn’t just to copy BMW — a brand that has begun to alienate the enthusiast audience that propelled it to greatness. While we still understand the appeal and cool-factor to some audiences of a force-inducted V6 motor, it’s hard to understand what makes the engine a superior choice to the LT1 as it currently stands.

Former staff.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. With the lightweight body, why is a V8 really needed in a Cadillac? It will already be plenty light on it’s feet. Someone worried about how their ATS-V is going to fare at the dragstrip? Worried about a few more tenths?

    GM has already shown how it can engineer “around” an on-paper thrust-to-weight ratio “deficiency” with a total-vehicle performance package (i.e. ZL1 Camaro)

    Maybe they’ll throw an 8 in the next-gen Camaro. Meanwhile, I doubt the Alpha Caddies will suffer sales if customers can get “only” a twin-turbo V6.

    Needless hand-wringing, if you ask me.

    Reply
  2. Yes. As much as I’d like a small block 8, the car will at some point go head to head with a Twin Inline-6 Beamer beast.

    I currently have a 3.6L AWD in Performance trim and it freakin’ screams at 5500+, so I can only imagine what 100 more horses and goodies will do to it.

    Win.

    Reply
  3. A Twin-Turbo 6 is ok, as long as its better on fuel than the LT1, which I have my doubts about. Cadillac better make this new Twin-Turbo willing and able to rev and net around 25-26 MPG. If the V6 is worse on fuel consumption, I would reject the proposal and make them stick with the less complex V8. Caddy has to have a reason to stick with the Twin-Turbo, and Im betting that reason is the fact that BMW is playing the same card. That scares me because Ive read that the next M3 powertrain will have two turbos and electric boost as well which equals more torque and better fuel economy. My fingers are crossed for the ATS though. Id make AWD OPTIONAL as well. Some folks will not even consider a new vehicle unless it is AWD. OPTIONAL is all I am saying. Id still stick with RWD for myself though 🙂

    Reply
  4. I agree with authority take. With twin turbos and overhead cams there won’t be much of a weight savings compared to an LT1, and I think fuel economy savings would be negligible. You would have more cost and complexity with the TT v6, however I could see this market having more interest in a “high tech” V6 vs an “old school” V8. There’s nothing wrong copying other manufacture’s ideas assuming they are the best. As far as BMW I’m not sure that’s the case.

    Reply
  5. Guys we are talking here about the ATS, the CTS can have the V8. The ATSV will be perfect with a twin turbo V6… Could a V8 even fit into an ATS… I doubt it… Not sure though…

    Reply
    1. The Alpha platform can definitely fit a V8, even a force inducted V8. The ATS was testing with a small block under the hood, but turns out it didn’t make the final cut. The CTS should get a V8 in some form or another. The CTS-V will definitely have a boosted V8.

      Reply
    2. It’s already well known that the engine bay for the ATS can fit a 7.0L V8. The next gen CTS is on the same platform (Alpha) and will have an LT1 V8 in the CTS-V.

      Reply
  6. Having the ATS continue as the challanger to BMW’s finest is a good thing. I also think development in all powertrain departments needs to continue as well, !

    Reply
  7. I couldn’t care less, as long as it’s an M3 fighter.

    Reply
  8. Who says the V8 is not in the works for the ATS in comming years anyway? gen5 LS7 AWD anyone?

    Reply
  9. I think if this is true, it’s purely a marketing move on behalf of GM. Except for perception and the appearance of getting a premium offering if you step up to a CTS-V, there is no real reason to go TTV6 over a LS or LT V8.

    Its funny how everyone keeps talking about Caddy following BMW, when it’s pretty evident that BMW was playing catchup with Cadillac, Mercedes, and even Audi. EVERYONE except BMW had V8s in the class.

    Besides, the E46’s 3.2 L S54 inline 6 was pretty weak in practice. Yes it’s a jewel of a motor, but unless it was wound up next to it’s 8000rpm redline. it wasn’t doing much. BMW HAD to go with a V8. The E46 M3 was simply outclassed.

    Reply
  10. If the ATS-V had a good exhaust note for the biturbo V6 then it’s fine by me, I have no problem with that. Though if you asked me which motor I’d prefer, I’d always say a V8. I’d say take a naturally aspirated 6.2L LT1 V8 and destroke it to a 5.7L, or use a small 5.0L V8. You could even take a 5.0L V8 and destroke that to 4.5L and ad a supercharger. The ATS-V and CTS-V shouldn’t have the same displacement motor anyway. I already know that the ATS-V is going to run circles around around the M3.

    Reply
  11. I seen this coming although a LT1 V8 does make sense. The new LT motor may seem like an old set up but they are high tech just as much as a heavier lower displacement engine. I believe it has already been stated that it is actually lighter than a 3.6TT, and we haven’t seen the fuel economy numbers for the 6.2L but I think it will be around 26 mpg highway so fuel economy might not be much different. Also the power is up more on the 6.2 and is cheaper than a TT. I still like the turbo v6 don’t get me wrong. I guess I just prefer v8’s..

    Reply
  12. LT1, 8-speed, awd optional. It’s an american Luxury-Performance sedan. It should have American type power, and that’s a large displacement naturally aspirated V8 that’s put out mega torque at low rpms, not some high-revving, high-strung, force-inducted V6. But it’s already too late. The ATS-V is gonna come with the LF3, hopefully with awd optional (but I doubt it). Also, no v8 in the upcoming CTS below the V, but at least the CTS with the LF3 will be available with awd.

    Reply
  13. If the LT1 is as efficient and out performing the twin turbo V6, which I think it can, it should go in there, otherwise the twin turbo V6 would be perfect for the car.

    Reply
  14. My vote is for a V8 and I was pretty sad when I read that because the small block is the greatest engine ever. Then I took a step back and remembered something very similar happened during the initial development of the LS1.

    In may of 1992, the executives were brought out to the Milford proving grounds for a among several different vehicles to see how each of them felt. Two of the cars there were a pair of black Corvettes with two different V8s in them. One had a ZR1 with the LT5 DOHC V8 and the other was equipped with an early LT4 Gen2 pushrod V8. It turns out that everyone that drove those two Corvettes liked the the LT4 equipped Corvette because the like how the power was instantaneous while the LT5, even though it made more peak power, felt like it took a little bit wind up before anyone could feel the thrust and that it took some skill to keep the LT5 in its power band. The experience really threw mud in the face everyone in the industry that thought that overhead cams were simply better and is the reason why C7 still has pushrods.

    The point is the engineers probably found that for the ATS-V, the Twin-Turbo V6 better met their goals. Like I said, I’d rather see the LT1 but it wont really be a disappointment as long as it takes down an M3.

    Reply
  15. I probably should be a little more clear: one of those goals could be something cant be measured by a number, hence the decisions on pushrod vs overhead cams and the TTV6 or LT1.

    Reply
  16. I do not necessarily believe that a TT Six is really emulating BMW, it’s simply keeping up with the times. I believe that for model year 2015, Mercedes will be dropping the E Class V-8 AMG in favor of a turbo six. And the E is a segment up. I think this is modern thinking by Cadillac…….and I can always pray for the 427 🙂

    Reply
    1. That’s the thing. Having a TT3.6 would be just another weapon for GM to use.

      And if that’s not enough, it’s not like GM doesn’t have the LT block they can throw in ATS.

      A hi-po V6 won’t hurt GM or the V-series.

      Reply
  17. Hopefully the engineers put the HUD from the C7 in this as well as the CTSV.

    Reply
  18. 4.5l DOHC V8 Twin Turbo??? Uhm that’s definitely going into the new 2015 CTS V

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel