Dealer order guides have revealed to us that the 2013 Cadillac ATS is going to be more powerful than previously thought. And while things like acceleration times, braking distances, fuel economy and Nürburgring lap times remain shrouded for now, we at least have the scoop on the sport sedan’s horsepower ratings.
With the all-new 2.5L Ecotec four pot in the base ATS, the compact Caddy will be sending 202 horsepower and 190 lb-ft of torque to the transmission, while the all-new 2.0L turbocharged mill will send 272 hp and 260 lb-ft of torque. These figures are a couple steps higher from what was previously announced at the 2012 North American International Auto Show in January. The base 2.5L can get away with plain Jane regular fuel, but GM recommends premium-grade fuel for the turbo. Even juicier is the 321 horse, 274 lb-ft estimate for the ATS’ 3.6L LFX V6 engine. And that’s on regular-grade fuel, or E85 gasoline.
Frustratingly, one source mentioned to us that if GM were to get serious, the 3.6L V6 engine could easily produce as much as 350 horsepower or more out of the factory by tuning the engine it to run on premium fuel. And that’s without a pair of turbochargers. We should point out that the base 2.5L version will come in RWD flavor only, while the more potent engine variants offer the AWD option. And no, a manual transmission will not be offered for AWD versions. If you want to row your own gears, it’s rear-wheel-drive only, which isn’t exactly a bad thing.
Comments
Where can I place my order for the AWD V6??
That’s what I want a high compression V-6 because 11.5 to 1 compression ratio is so 2012
Sounds like the base will have plenty of power for normal drivng…..2.5 sounds like very good and quiet engine…when will see the build-your-own option????
I must admit, I wonder why GM did the engine tiering the way it did. We all know the 2.5 and the v6 will be the top sellers. Although I prefer the turbo 4, it does not seem in step with Cadillac. An why go for a perimuim only highstrung turbo 4, when u can have a comparetivly lazy relaxed 6 that gets MORE pwr on regular gas.
I’m also sure that you’ ll never be a able to find hardly any of the high-po engines in manual. And within a year or so GM will stop selling the turbo 4 as an option.
I agree with you. In real world driving the turbo will cost you about the same as the 6 to drive when you factor in the cost of premium vs. regular gas. That and the lower noise and smoothness of a V6 over a 4 and you’ve got a winner.
If the V-6 gets 30 mpg highway and the 2.0T gets 33 highway then the 2.0T will get 10% better mpg on the highway but the premium doesn’t cost 10% more.
Cost of Premium is around 7% more than regular here so if the mileage is better than 7% for the 2.0T then it wins.
In addition, the 2.0T will be able to go further on a tank of gas and weigh less, improving handling and braking.
The real world mpg of turbo cars is about the same as larger V6 engined cars, and it’s been proven many times in the last few years with all the new turbo offerings from different manufacturers. I know that in several Car and Driver comparison tests where there were V6 and turbo 4 bangers invovled, the mpg’s were pretty level across the board. Then factor in the sweeter sound of a V6 and smoother operation, it’s a no brainer for me.
Very true. People forget that “on the boost” a tubo car is ingesting and burning as much fuel as larger motor. That negates all the supposed fuel Economy that was supposed to be saved. Also if a smaller motor is using FI to make power like a bigger motor, then it stand to reason that the owner will dip into the boost more often. Because it is after all a pipsqueak motor masquerading as a bigger motor. This adds up to less time driving off boost and more on boost.
To date the most fuel efficient modern cars i’ved owned have all been relatively big displacement cars with good gear spreads. Currently the most efficient car I own is my heavily modded 400+hp 2005 GTO. It’s 26-28mpg highway/ 15-19mpg city trump both my wife’s PT cruiser AND my Ecoboost Ford Flex with ease. (it’s a manual)
I cruise at 70mph in 6th gear and the engine doesn’t even turn past 1700 rpm. I loaf around in the city never revving past 2500rpm thanks to the torque and skipping gears ( I only ever need to use 2,4,5 and sometimes 6th if I’m not hustling)
The economy benefits of FI is false. For the record I also owned a 2 l turbo and 2.5l turbo as well. Both awesome to drive, but good on gas? No.
The v6 will get better mpg than the turbo4 and have more power. Look at the regal gs 26 mpg auto 27 mpg manual vs. impala v6 30 mpg both cars weight about 3750 lbs and 0 to 60 impala 6.1 regal gs 6.2 with a manual. The only reason to buy a turbo 4 is if you can not get the LFX. Like a Malibu or regal. When you lower the compressIon ratio on a turbo engine you will lose efficiency.
Car companies are going to smaller engines with turbo’s for better mpg. I don’t see this being any different.
Even if they were equal, how many thousands of $$ would I be out to go with the V-6?
Guys, you’re missing one important point here: torque delivery. with the turbo setup, that 260 lb feet from the new 2.0T is going to feel a lot more punchy and immediate than the 274 lb ft from the naturally aspirated LFX. It should make for an impressive drive. Additionally, everyone would complain that there wasn’t some sort of middle ground engine between the 201 hp 2.5 and the 321 hp 3.6.
Manoli I get the point. I’m just predicting how ” non enthusiast joe” will affect the demographics for this car on overall sales. Like I said I prefer the turbo 4-with manual please!- but I know that just like with the SRX the sportier enthusiast orientated, turbo 4 is not long for this world. Especially in a Caddy.
BMW gets away with turbo 4s and 6s because they aren’t options and because a core aspect of their appeal is an enthusiastic driving experience. Cardillac? Not even. Yes the V series’s cars are awesome, but even now except for gear heads and “I always buy the top of the line no matter what” types it’s not even on the radar of you average luxury Consumer.
I’m not saying its not a good option choice or idea, just that there is no need for the 2.5. When it comes to luxury there is NO bottom feeding. If u are hard up about gas prices, go buy a Chevy. You have no business buying a 30-40 thousand dollar car anyway. And it dilutes the brand image. That’s why Infinity is always struggling. Trying to be all things to all people. That’s not the realm of a luxury maker. They produce SPECIAL things for special people.
Cadillac and Lincoln used to do that. Now they don’t and that’s why they are forever struggling.
The brand snobs will warm up to Cadillac sooner or later. And while I assumed that the ATS would originally come with a base 2.0T engine and not the 2.5, it speaks more towards a volume strategy. And if more people have Cadillacs, more people will talk about Cadillacs. Secondly, most BMW buyers are hardly enthusiasts and could care less about power ratings. Therefore I don’t see the 2.5 in the ATS as a problem. And engineering proficiency speaks as loudly with mpg numbers as it does performance… and that element is another selling point.
Just like the 2.0T in the regal GS was suppossed to promise the same thing? A 3.6 regal would walk over a Turbo GS, no problem. When a 4100lb CTS can put up the same acceleration numbers as a 3700lb Regal, then we have a problem.
True, but then the 4100 cts gets worse mpg, but yea the regal gs is a dud, by trying to be really good at mpg and power, it ended up being really good at nothing. Theres no magic solution to mpg AND power, one sacrifices the other, Cadillac, as a performance brand, should focus on being extremely good on power, and being moderately decent on mpg, and after all, no one is going to buy a Caddy because they cant afford gas.
My sentiments exactly! Infect I’ll go a step forward; no one buying alucry car is concerned about mpg economy. This who are are polders. And will sinner or later own a Caddy that makes all of us wish thy never bought it. U know the type, the caddy with cosmetics and machani al issues in spades, yet it’s only 2-3 years old. The caddy siiting broken down in the drIveway or an apartment complex, because the owner can’t afford maintenance. This is VERY common with Cadillacs and Lincolns as well as many “entry level” Japanese and German luxury nameplates.
This hurts the brand and no luxury car with a dam concerns it self with volume. Volume is just another word for market saturation. For Chevy or ford, or Honda Thad cool. For a luxury mark? No. U can’t claim true luxury and your cars are hardly exclusive or so common that there is nothing to aspire to.
Even now Cadillac easily out sells BMW and Mercedes. But that is also why they have such a public perception gap to overcome. They are perceive as common and nothing more. Unless GM ponies up for a uber Caddy in the vein of the Sixteen concept, they might as well give up. Because generally no one takes Cadillac seriously as a LUXURY automaker.
My bad on the spelling, typing on a IPhone!
You’re talking about a car that’s probably going to launch around $33,000. Last time I checked, the average price transaction on a vehicle was just over $30,000 in America. More people are going to be concerned about mpg numbers than you think. And we honestly have no idea why the 2.5 or 2.0T are going to offer in the ATS fuel economy wise.
Secondly, you’re WAY off base in terms of sales numbers of Caddy compared to BMW and Merc, who each more than doubled Cadillac in sales last month in the USA. This is mostly due to the barren lineup Cadillac is currently offering ( just 3 vehicle families at the moment), but broken down, the 3 and the 5 series both outsold the CTS by a significant margin. The 3 practically doubled the CTS in sales.
The point: Cadillac NEEDS volume.
Manoli saying that since the average transaction price is 30k and the ATS starts at 33k so the average person will be able to buy the ATS doesnt make sense, becuase the average transaction of the ATS is probably going to be 40k. And if you take out trucks and luxury cars out of the equation, the average transaction price is probably going to be 25k. And its not just that the people who buy Cadillac can afford as much gas as they want, its that the people Cadillac is trying to appeal to dont have mpg factor, its not even in the top three as I think the top three in the luxury market are as follows:
1. Performance
2. Looks
3. Reputation
For people buying BMW and CTS / ATS mpg is not really considered in their purchase decision. I dont want see Cadillac sacrifice ANYTHING for mpg, even if its just for the base trim. Mpg is treated like an afterthought among BMW buyers, Cadillac should treat mpg the same. The only reason BMW is concerned about mpg with their 3 series is federal requirements, GM has the advantage of not having to worry about that.
If performance mattered so much, why does Lexus continue to hit it out of the park with the nonathletic ES and RX? There are two tiers to the luxury market. And reputation is probably the first draw when it comes to a selection. Not performance. See: brand snobs.
The top selling vehicle in America is the F-150. Its MSRP gets into the $30,000’s very quickly. Go ahead, omit the entire luxury segment from the stats (I’m not even sure if they’re even included), the number will hardly change.
What is the main demographic for the BMW 3 Series? Especially a 328i?
First of all, I was referring to the Performance Luxury market not the Luxury market which does not include Lincoln, Buick, Acura, Lexus, and Volvo.
I said :
“And if you take out trucks and luxury cars out of the equation, the average transaction price is probably going to be 25k”
Keyword in the above quote is TRUCKS, which, last I checked, do not include vehicles that get over 30mpg hwy.
I wasnt listing the reasons in order of priority, if I was, I would put reputation first as well.
Which brings me to another point, Cadillac’s reputation is not going to improve by making cars that are the most fuel efficient, its going to improve by making cars that drive the best. Once it has an excellant reputation on that front, like BMW does today, it can worry about mpg.
It doesnt matter what the main demographic for the 3 series is because people arent buying the 3 for its mpg, thats just an added plus.
Ah. I missed the “trucks”. Regardless, it shows people are willing to spend a lot of money on a vehicle. And how much time does Ford spend cramming “most fuel efficient pickup” into our ears? People care.
There is a lot of hype that the ATS will be able to school a comparative 3 Series in performance. The MRC will probably end up being the X factor. Of course, we’re speaking an awful lot about how it stacks up to the Bimmer on paper, without even driving both.
You’re missing the point on the 3 Series demographics, because most aren’t buying for performance/horsepower either! It’s that logo.
Ok people do care about mpg and Cadillac should care as well, just not so much that it sacrifices any of the more important attributes of a car.
The reason Ford can focus on mpg with its F150 is because the F150 already has a solid reputation for power and durability so it doesnt need to worry about that as much.
Since Cadillac has faded so long from consumers mind, it has a golden opportunity to define what it mean, few brands ever get this kind of opportunity and I think Cadillac should take advantage of it. They should define themselves as a brand with the best performance and driving cars on the road. I think their is little to be gained for Cadillac by defining itself as a mpg brand.
On the 3, most people arent buying for performance but everyone who buys it knows it has performance because thats what its reputation says so that why they can be concerned with mpg.
Manoli, what is MRC?
Ok, I stand corrected. Not to long ago C adlai at least had volume. Now they don’t even have that. I wonder why? Oh because as you said; a barren line-up. Except for the CTS and Escalade Cadillac doesn’t have jack.
I’m not sold on volume as a luxury makers goal. Last I looked BMW nor Marcedes US sales were anything to be excited about when it came to raw volume. I believe they out sell the US comparison purely because of better, more focused product.
Either way GM needs to ID what made and makes Cadillac great and manifest that into a product that reflects those virtues. Personally the only thing Cadillac is doing right across the board is the Escalade. It’s pure American luxury along with the proud brashness US luxury used to be known for. It hits well across all demographics and it has stupid high profit margins. I like the CTS, but honestly it’s too small and aside from the styling, it comes off more as a wanna be euro competitor than a proud focused GM take on midsize luxury.
I can’t help but notice that somewhere along the line, true luxury has been replaced with badge snobbery and a relentless pursuit of gadgets and tech. That in and of itself was ok in the past when regular cars barely came with radios and AC. But now Kia’s have heated seats and voice operated nav/data systems. Tech is no more a mark of luxury now than having power windows.
Yea I dont think volume should be a goal, BMW and MB volume is high compared to Caddys but is dwarfed by any mainstream manufacturers volume. BMW has like over 10 models, Caddy has 3. So its not a fair comparision.
Make the best cars, and volume will follow, no need to worry about it before hand unless youre a volume brand, which Caddy is not.
@MW Magnetic Ride Control 🙂
No, not like the fwd-only, underpowered Regal GS. That’s related to the point I’m trying to make at all.
@ jz yeah I had a 98 Z/28 With a 50 mile commute into Denver everyday at 75 miles an hour and got 28 miles per gallon at 65 I could get 29 miles per gallon but I could never go slow enough to get 30 Miles per gallon
@Babersher where do you draw up that Cadillac is going to define itself as an mpg brand? It can’t be from the brand itself, which as smattered its Facebook page with CTS-V photography and videos of the ATS testing at the ‘Ring.
Bimmer’s rep is attributed to a lot of things outside performance, though it agreeably plays a role. Sometimes people buy them so they can “fit in”. Ever ask some randoms about what makes BMW sexy? I just did, and they simply replied “because it’s BMW, no need to explain”.
I dont think it is defining itself as a mpg brand,but I feel like it inadvertently will if it focus too much on mpg and starts putting V4s in all their lineup!
On BMW, thats the think, BMW has built itself around performance, so when you ask randoms there is no need to explain. Cadillac should be there as well before it starts worrying about mpg. If you ask people why they think Cadillac is what they think it is. You get a big fat UHHH? I want people to be able to say because its a Cadillac. Cadillacs not going to get there by worrying about mpg, there going to get there by building the most powerful and best driving cars on the road.
Agreed.
As to BMW reputation, it’s based almost solely on performance! Even their tag line ” the ultimate driving machine” has pushed enthusiast and performance driving for over 30 years. Nobody will tell u BMWs are reliable, certianly not cheap to maintain or own. BMW has fostered its whole reputation in the shadow of its racing success and loyal following of enthusiast owners.
Cadillac is a big blank right now. The CTS is a looker and good value for the money. The Escalade brash expensive and old school American luxury at its best. Somebody need to distill best traits of those two into a future line up of cars that not only drive and perform well, but say F-you to the foreign Competition as they bring about a new era of American class leading Luxury.
For an idea of where I’m going with this, think about this. 40 years ago a Cadillac was as good or superior to a Rolls Royce. But it had the advantage of high quality mass production and economies of sale on its side. This allowed any reasonably successful American to afford a car that was easily the equal of the worlds best but with American sensibilities.
GM needs to return Cadillac to that position again. But I don’t believe aping your competition is the way to do that. All that will do is continue to flood the market with cars that are “euro like” with American badges on the grill. Cars that are forever asking to be compared to BMW and Mercedes. GM need to make a Caddy that forces the competition to be compared to what Cadillac is doing.
They don’t make V4s. And so what if they put in fours? I’m not going to complain if they’re powerful enough. 201 hp in a sub 3,400 lb car should be sufficient for many buyers. And back to my original point, Cadillac NEEDS volume. The 2.5 doesn’t really water the ATS down considering the other engine offerings, and that’s not counting the V. The ATS is already breaking the “big fat” stereotype. And we know the power figures from the turbo four and LFX outclass what the new 3 Series has. And it’s lighter. And it has MRC. All that’s left is for us tor drive it for us to truly know if its the best driving car in the segment.
But let’s take a step in the overall direction of BMW and Benz again: I’d wager that many (probably about 50 percent) of BMW buyers will absolutely not know the difference between driving their 3er or a Cruze. They buy BMW because it’s known, it’s prestigious, it’s trusted (as a name). That’s not to say that people don’t care about driving dynamics… but many people just don’t know what and where to look for in a good driving car. Enthusiasts like us will know; but not some of the traditional buyers.
Either way, Caddy needs to make an image, name, and brand for itself… and it can do what BMW/Audi have done in establishing a performance-oriented reputation but with better styling and interiors. They can’t simply ignore the competition.
Ignoring the competition is fool hardy, but simply aping them is even worse. And currently that’s all Cadillac is doing. Cadillac need to get to a position where they can release a new car and everyone says “wow what will BMW, Lexus, Mecedes do now. They have nothing like that.” make the competition play by YOUR rules. Studying their playbook and simply reacting to their moves just proves you don’t know how to play the game.
I really like the ATS, but really there is no reason For such a car in America. Fuel is relatively cheap, our roads are big, wide and straight, most of our drivers can barely handle a brisk curve, nevermind sprited driving.
All I’m saying is make an American Luxury car for American road and sensabilities. The ATS should be an export car. There’s nothing wrong with it being available for sale here. But the reality is it’s a Euro “me too” car. It’s a Caddy wishing it was a BMW. That means Cadillac and GM are following, not leading. And spin it all you want, but that equals FAIL.
50%? Id say more like 70%
I dont care too much about putting a v4 in the ATS as long as it makes the power and its only for the base trim, but I definitely dont want too see a v4 in the cts, even if it makes the power.
I just dont want GM to focus so much on mpg so that their sacrificing things like power and driving dynamics.
Driving dynamics and power don’t matter to anyone except for those that are in the market for the V-series or M-series; a few slim number of people that don’t care about mpg.
Everyone else who want a luxury car DOES care about mpg.
The CTS is not a sports car and shouldn’t be treated as one or be belived to perform as one. Therefore ‘driving dynamics’ do not matter in the CTS as they would in a CTS-V.
The volume sales of the CTS matter more than what the CTS-V repersents. If public demand dictates a 4-cyl engine in the CTS, then it behooves GM to offer it as such; after all, that’s where the money is.
GM should put more effort into and care into developing the CTS into being the best it can be to serve the greatest number of people in it’s segment. Without it, the nature of the CTS would indullable stain the CTS-V from ever being taken seriosuly.
Fuel economy matters. If the CTS or ATS can’t meet the expectaions of fuel economy in their respective segments, then their inabillity to do so will be a strike against them both and a strike agaisnt Cadillac. Right now, Cadillac does not need to be seen cutting corners in it’s volume cars.
Fuel economy matters. Automakers who ignore it do so at their own peril. Just ask Detroit from the 70’s and 80’s.
You guys are missing the point, I am not saying that mpg doesnt matter or that Cadillac should not worry about mpg.
Most people who buy the 3 series or CTS dont know or care about driving dynamics, but those are not the people who will built the 3 or the cts reputation.
Cadillacs reputation right now is in flux, neither good or bad, the ATS and next gen CTS will be considered as Cadillacs real attempts to compete with BMW, they will be given lots of attention, so they will develop what Cadillacs reputation will be from here on. And I believe that reputation should be firmly and solely about performance, if the ATS v4 is the best in class mpg but is short on power or driving dynamics compared to the 3, then thats what it will be remembered for, people will say, when comparing the cars, yea the ATS performs ALMOST as good as the 3 but gets better mpg.
Better mpg will result in more volume in the short term, but a reputation based on mpg, not performance, like BMW, will result in long term situation of Cadillac never being the leader of anything, not sales nor reputation, besides maybe mpg.
People buying any car care about mpg, but I think we would all agree that people buying a 40-50k luxury performance care much less about mpg than someone buying a 20k budget no frills cruze.
I still say that Cadillac should focus completely on making Cadillac an icon of performance and driving dynamics, like BMW is today, then, once that is established, worry about mpg.
I absolutely agree. Caddy needs to have one thing it’s known for. One thing for which people love the brand — which should be performance. I, however, an looking forward to driving the ATS with all of its engines… and don’t think the 2.5 will be as much a dog as some make it out to be.
I bet the 2.5 will be perfect for this car….I just read on cars.com that ATS base will not come with leather standard….just as I figured….either leatherette or some type of luxury cloth….sounds very, very basic so price must be barely over $30k…..that is OK to start out to match BMW….but I bet it is a lot nicer than the BMW!!
“but I think we would all agree that people buying a 40-50k luxury performance care much less about mpg than someone buying a 20k budget no frills cruze.”
No argument there.
It’s just there would be many 30K to 40K lux cars that aren’t performance oriented are sold in contrast to the 50K or 60K hi-po versions.
If the ratio of garden variety to hi-po versions is 5:1, then of those 5 their demands should be as important as the 1 who wants 550hp and a 6 speed.