According to a report from Automobile Magazine, the upcoming Cadillac ATS-V will not be powered by the same 3.6L twin turbocharged V6 found in Cadillac CTS and XTS Vsport models as previously thought.
A twin turbo 3.2 liter V6 derived from General Motors High Feature engine architecture, like the larger LF3 V6, is expected to find its way into the ATS-V. A normally aspirated version of this engine was developed by Holden in Australia for use on the Captiva line of crossovers. Interestingly, the basic architecture was also used by Alfa Romeo for its twin turbo JTS engine found in the Alfa Romeo Brera, 159, and Spider between 2005-2010.
However Automobile says the 3.2 to be found In the ATS-V will feature several unique attributes, such as its forced induction layout and direct injection system that are developed within GM, and won’t be a reproduction of Alfa’s JTS engine. GM is reportedly opting for the smaller displacement mill as it provides a better platform for tuning the car above 500 horsepower (because of thicker cylinder walls?), a figure GM engineers are adamant on achieving for the ATS-V. That’s 70 horsepower more than what’s expected from the all-new F80 BMW M3, launching next year.
If 500 hp is what they want, they should have just dropped an LS7 in there, and called it a day.
Comments
I love the LS7, but a V6 twin turbo would be:
-Lighter, even with two turbos, intercooler, and piping
-More fuel efficient
-Easier to manipulate the torque delivery and curve throughout revs
-Might offer lower CoF and mounted further back so weight distribution is more balanced
-Better for marketing
-Easy to tune, cheap option to get more power without bolt ons
Downside: no V8 grunt of the 7.0L
Are you sure a TTV6 would be lighter than the LS7? The LF3 and LT1 weigh exactly the same, and considering the fuel efficiency numbers of the Stingray, I wouldn’t bet that a TTV6 would be more fuel efficient. It might be marginal, and in either case, fuel efficiency isn’t exactly a priority in this class.
An NA V8 like the LS7 or LT1 doesn’t need to worry about torque manipulation. There’s torque everywhere. And unlike a turbocharged engine that peaks in the middle of the rev limiter, the V8s continue to generate power up until the red line.
There’s a universe of tuning options for GM V8 engines, as a flip side to not being able to simply dial up boost pressure. And as for marketing, I point towards the current CTS-V and its supercharged V8. People bought it because it kicked ass, even though it didn’t feature turbos. People also didn’t buy it not because it didn’t feature a more market driven engine, but because “it’s a Cadillac and not a BMW.”
What would perhaps be a complete wildcard, would be if they offered the 4.5L V8 concept engine featured on the Elmiraj, without the turbos.
***CoF should be CoG… center of gravity.
Although I love to see them use the N/A V8’s. Knowing where they are taking Cadillac I don’t see that coming. Them already using the 7.0L in the Z/28, that might not go well by just dropping another 7.0L in another car and call it a day. Also, I was quiet surprised how well the 3.6TT did on the dyno. It only lost 8% of its power to the wheels and had +5 lbs. ft. of torque compared to its SAE rating.. and 0-60 4.4 seconds in the CTS being almost 4,000 lbs is pretty good.
Besides we don’t know what the next Z07 will offer, some say the 4.5 TT others a 6.2 SC (LT5) and the faithful waiting on the return of the 427.. I don’t know what route they will go with the ATS-V I’m assuming a turbocharged V-6, but offering a 3.2 TT just for one car I don’t see GM doing that, won’t go well with the bean counters. I guess we can wait and see.
@Travis
I just want to build on what you said, and nit-pic on one thing.
Nit-pic: They didn’t just drop the LS7 in the Z/28 and call it a day. Though I’m sure that isn’t actully what you meant by that comment.
I think GM was conservative with the LF3. That little power loss is hard to believe. BMW has under valued their car’s power figures for a long time.
The next Mustang GT is said to offer 500hp, so this 3.2TT could find it’s way into the 6th gen Camaro SS (or maybe the 1LE will become more than just a track pack and turn into a standalone model). Same goes for the SS Sedan and if Buick does in fact get a GN and GNX.
Hell maybe this engine is even their thinking for a Colorado SS
I know they didn’t just dropped the LS7 in the Camaro.. They tuned the whole car around it and 80% other things that were added.. I was just saying from what people might think. Especially non gm fans.
I think GMauthority offered a link to Edmunds.com about the 14′ CTS V-Sport dyno..
And I wouldn’t mind at all if they offered a 3.2TT. I remember they were testing two turbos earlier this year.. It was rumored a 3.0TT and a 3.6TT so maybe they could use the 3.2TT.. It be great to see if they can get 500hp with that engine..
Yea that’s why I figured you didn’t mean it like that.
The dyno doesn’t mean much (or at least the drivetrain power loss) if GM undershot the actual engine numbers. Put it on an engine dyno and I’m sure the numbers will be higher than 420hp and certainly higher than 430lb-ft. And, I didn’t read the Edmunds article on the dyno results, only the GMA summary, but I bet the dyno they used was of a different calibration
Actually, it might not be lighter. In fact I would think the V6 with a turbo charger would be faster.
I know GM has a arsenal of V8 firepower that can adapted to meet damn near any HP figure, if only HP numbers were all the mattered.
The V-series can’t be just limited to V8’s though. GM needs to show that they are flexible to adapt to whatever demands the market asks of it. A V8 won’t be the silver bullet it might have been 10 years ago with the first CTS-V. GM must prove to the world that they can engineer visceral, non-V8 powertrains.
We know they can do it (the LF3), but the world doesn’t.
The LS7 is 454lbs. The LF3 is 485 lbs. I think a 3.2L twin turbo will be heaver than the LS7. And have a higher center of gravity. With the same horsepower An OHV engine will give you the lowest weight lowest cost and smallest external dimensions.
I think the decision to use a V6 instead of a V8 has to do with packaging. A V8 may very well be too long to fit under the bonnet of the ATS. I don’t know how long the LF3 is, but I figure it is a similar length as the 4300 Vortec V6 which measures about 645mm long. The LSA V8 from the CTS-V is 740mm long. This means that we could be requiring an extra 100mm of space to fit a V8 instead of a V6. Of course we would need to see the exact figures to be sure, but I would be willing to be that this is the case.
Oh, it fits.
Well turbos always have a better torque curve than NA Engines. I think you need to watch the review on the new TT CTS. There is simply no lag, this isnt the 1990s anymore. People want to go faster, sure the V8 sound would be lovely shame its not equipped, but turbos are the future. Engines will keep downsizing, and the turbo is a perfect marketing strategy. BMW and Merc are using them, they are trying to take their customers only make sense right? Guess we will all have to see again how GM Turbos perform. I think it will do fine if not alot better than a V8
500?! Really? Wow, was NOT expecting that to be the number theyre after. Thought maybe 450…wow…500, that should make for one HELL of an interesting cocktail in that thing. This thing will end up being one HELL of a road/track toy with it being roughly 3400lbs with a 500hp tt 6. If theyre chasing 500 horse for this thing (when i thought they were trying to hit 450-470) then i wonder what theyre chasing for the number in the next ctsv. 640?650?700!?(nah maybe not 7). Damn…got me REAL curious now.
Again with the 7.0 liter? When are some going to learn to look at the big picture.
The 7.0 is a great engine but you have to take in the marketing of this car not just here but for the future global markets.
Outside NA you have tech driven markets. Just as while we may have a large NASCAR base here with lots of passing they love F1 with lots of technology and little passing. Both are great racing series but both markets have different loves in automotive racing and road cars.
The key for Cadillac here is to appeal to a more tech driven segment with an engine with a different look and feel from a Camaro.
Marketing of Cadillac has had to change as what they have tried just does not work globally. While we all here have no issue with the LS engines the fact is many globally think of them as just truck engines.
Also you want Cadillac to be different with their own engines. Then offer only the 3.2 TT in a Cadillac. Same with the 3.6 TT. This will set Cadillac apart from all Chevy and give them an engine to built their own image upon. Let Chevy keep their own heritage and let Cadillac redevelop their own.
Sure putting in a V8 is easy but that does not always mean it is the right thing to do if you want to command a premium price or image.
Also we need a way to set the ATS apart from the V8 powered CTS V and the coming LTS. I am thinking the hints of the TT V8 may be for Cadillac only as the TT may be their new thing to be all their own V6 or V8.
A TTV6 ATS will be around 3500 pounds and should eat the rest of this segment.
Now my thinking is the ATS V and CTS V will both be traction limited. At the price points they will be at could GM finally be offering AWD to put the power down and compete with Audi as much as the rest of the segment?
I think 500 HP or close to it is a real number as I expect the CTSV to be 600-650 HP.
But in the end I just wish people would let go the V8 in the ATS as GM is building for the future in a global market and they need to offer in these markets cars they want not just what Americans want.
Check out advertising in Asia and Germany and most of the BMW and Benz ads promote technology on all levels. The more advanced the better.
Lutz gas also pointed this out recently on how technology sells in Europe. American will just buy it no matter what as long as it goes like hell. If it will run 0-60 in 3.7 seconds it will sell in the USA no matter if it is 6-8 cylinders.
So Europe likes smaller engines with turbos and lots of tech, and a lot of customers here in America want a V8. Since that’s the case, have the TT V6 as the standard engine, and the V8 for those who want to order it. Honestly, IMO this doesn’t sound like a bad idea at all. One powertrain for marketing and another for more market share and traditional customers.
I agree with you scott. GM should set the ATS-V apart from the CTS-V. Also, it is true that the CTS-V should use and LT1 TT instead of the supercharge (SC) LT1. Hence, this would set Cadillac apart from the rest of the GM line, an up there with the rest of the world.
GM should also put an automated 7-Speed in the ATS-V and CTS-V to maximise there performances, and better compete with the likes of Audi, Benz and BMW. Afterall, look at the stats which have shown that these cars with less power than say a Z06, can run wheel with Vette through the used of advance transmissions.
Evan it is like my 2.0 Liter Turbo vs. the 2.5 Liter NA.
The smaller engine is built more rugged with a thicker block and modified head to take more cylinder pressure.
The same was even done on the ZR1 Vette.
On my 2.0 I can Run all say up to 23 PSI of boost and not have to worry about block and head damage vs. if you had put this on the 2.5 and it would blow gaskets and even damage the block since it was made for more power with CID vs. Boost.
Also the smaller engine will prove to be more efficient often due to the fact when you are not on the boost the engine will be a smaller displacement.
Let’s put this in perspective. The boost is compressed air and it really equals a variable displacement of an engine. The higher the boost the mover volume of air and the more fuel you can use. This makes more power. You also can make a 7.0 liter engine to take in more volume of air and fuel to make power but it is a constant.
This is why my 2.0 Turbo is right at 300 HP and still will get 25 around town all day and 32 highway with out hypermiling it. Yes the Vette will get 30 plus MPG highway but around town it will see around 18 MPG in normal driving. While good the smaller engines do see better around town driving in the real world.
The one thing the Turbo engines have is a torque curve that few V8 engines can match. I can hit 315 FT LBS at 1800 RPM and it will remain there till around 5300-5400 RPM. I have
The TT V6 should prove to be a very good engine in this car. Just look how a lower powered version does in a heavier CTS and how much It is loved. Just wait to see what it will do here.
What many here need to also do is look at the post on this site on the marketing guy they picked up from BMW.
They did not get him from BMW just because here worked there but also because he understands the segment and how to sell cars in Europe and Asia.
The key for Cadillac’s future is to appeal to these other markets as America is very open to Euro tuned cars. But on the other hand Germany is not keen on American cars on a whole in these segments. Yes they have some fans but not many.
If you can build a car and sell it decent in Germany then you can sell it nearly anywhere in this market.
GM may never be number one in Germany but they can gain and grow market share with the right cars and that is the goal. BMW was not the darling of America for a long time but they did earn their way up.
Unlike Lincoln GM has the tools now and they can now do more to market and promote and improve their products to be the best there is in class. Lord knows BMW has changed and is now going to where Cadillac was. Soft and just not fun anymore.
Manny I’m guessing that they would put that engine so that they can stick a 8 speed auto since putting 8 speed auto on a V8 hasn’t been tested yet
I think the TT6 is inevitable. The original ATS was spec’d against the 3 series so the V will be against the new M3/4 is my thinking.
But that’s too bad. I think there are a lot of M buyers who are mourning the 8 cylinder demise. I am one of them. If its an 8 then I will get one for sure. If its a TT6, I will be less likely to go this direction unless its also priced considerably better even if the reviews are good as I think the M3/M4 will still reign kings for at least one more cycle.
But what transmissions are we going to see? That’s where GM has to pick up their game with the V IMHO.
I’m told that an M lover’s wet dream is an E46 with the V8 engine of the E92. Cadillac should, at the very least, offer a V8 as a limited make, as an answer to the C63 AMG Black.
The reality is the day is coming where the V8 will be eliminated. Even the V6 will see more limited use with the CAFE.
I know everyone touts the LT highway fuel MPG but the fact is the city is still not where it needs to be and as time goes on even the good numbers are not going to be enough. This is why product planners are all pulling their hair out right now.
I think one thing that will ease much of the pain is once people have driven the new DI Turbo engines. I had never been a fan and never wanted a Turbo 4 in any way. Today I am so very happy with mine and it even best the numbers GM gave for MPG my a lot.
I can get out of a 93 Corvette and jump in the Eco Turbo and the only thing I miss is the RWD. My eco can keep right with the Corvette with no issue with only 2.0 liters. The Torque curve is even better in my 4 than many V8 engines.
The TT V6 in the Cadillac I have not driven yet but knowing what I know of the new Turbo engines many will be surprised and very happy with what they find.
While I once was a never give up my V8 kind of guy I have learned to be more open minded and found there is a lot of good things coming in these new smaller engines. The only thing they have failed to address is sound but you can’t have it all.
Note so many of the worlds greatest engines were only 4 and 6 cylinder. For example look the Offy at Indy or in sprint cars and how many years it won with only 4 cylinders.
GM is building for the future and much will be based on the TT V6 and T 4.
Well, once Obummer is gone we won’t have to worry about the CAFE (as much). I don’t think the V8 will go away for awhile, if it does. My grandma has a 4 cylinder in her Terrain and it is a really peppy engine. It’s not a potent 3.8L Supercharged V6, but it still is pretty responsive. My dad thinks it’s super slow (but he’s used to driving V8’s in his 02 & 04 Silverado 2500HD’s) I like 4 bangers, the 2.0L Turbo in my old Saab 9-3 was awesome! I want a new Malibu 2LZ with one so bad, but I can’t afford on right now (well I could, but I don’t want to trade in any of my babies haha). . . .
No more V8 engines . I have heard that for 30+ years.
The reality is the V8 is going to be limited and get even more expensive so the CTS V will cover this well.
About the time GM would enter this segment they would have to find a exit plan in a few years anyways.
This is not about the short term it is about the long term.
Benz right now is investing heavily in the new inline 6 as it will be taking much of the work load in all their cars. BMW has already started the down size.
I would like to see the 4.5L TT V8 going under the hood of the ATS-V. I know Mercedes is offering the C63 AMG with the 4.0L TT V8, which would seriously blow the doors off of the M3/M4. Don’t see why the ATS-V can’t be like the C63 AMG.