This article is part of the GM Authority Wish List series for the Cadillac ATS — a collection of changes, updates, and modifications we’d like to see made to the current family of compact luxury vehicles, as well as to its CT# replacement. The purpose of the Wish List is very simple: to create awareness of the issues we have found with the vehicles so that Cadillac can address them in the future, whether via a refresh or a next-generation model, all in an effort to make the best luxury cars on the market, bar none.
The GM Authority staff has collectively spent a significant amount of time with the ATS, both as drivers and as passengers, in both Sedan and Coupe body styles, with all four engines, all five trim levels, and with various degrees of features and equipment. In other words, this wish list is not the result of a knee-jerk reaction after a day or two with the car. It’s the result of living with the cars, sometimes for several months. In fact, our own founder happens to own an ATS (2015 2.0T Premium, six-speed manual).
We should note that at times, the Wish List series might appear like nitpicking, as it will point out the smallest features, characteristics, or components. If it seems that way, it’s for a reason, since we believe that the devil is in the details, especially when it comes to prestige luxury vehicles. As such, we honestly believe that addressing these issues will improve the product, grow the brand, and — ultimately — lead to an uptick in Cadillac sales. And as journalists who also happen to be GM and Cadillac enthusiasts, few things would make us happier. If nothing else, it would result in a Cadillac we’d be proud to buy, to own, and to show off to anyone willing to look and listen.
Keeping in mind that this wish list is by no means in order, here is the eighth item on our list: repositioning of the exhaust pipe on the model with the base 2.5L engine.
If you’ve seen a Cadillac ATS with the base 2.5L I4 LCV engine, you may have noticed a certain awkwardness about its exhaust. To whit, the vehicle has a single, off-center exhaust tip that looks awkward and goofy… like it doesn’t belong there. And that’s being nice.
As we mentioned three years ago, it’s not the exhaust tip that looks bad (the large round tip actually looks nice), but rather its location: it’s off to the (left) side, but not far enough to be on its own. It’s also not centered/ in the middle, either. Instead, the outlet is in no-man’s land.
The circumstance seems to be a result of cost-cutting: to move the tip more to the left, Cadillac would have had to reword the location and/or configuration of the exhaust system — namely the muffler. Doing so would also call for a new lower valance with the cut-out for the exhaust tip further to the left. By contrast, the single tip currently occupies the same spot as the left tip of ATS models with dual exhaust systems — namely the 2.0L Turbo and 3.6L V6. So, while the dual exhaust setup looks good, the single outlet looks terrible due to its strange location, while also reeking of cost-cutting measures.
So, we’re proposing for Cadillac to move the outlet farther to the left — as we have photoshopped below — or that it equips the base ATS with dual exhaust — something that is currently available as an official Cadillac accessory for a mere $950.
Another option, which is somewhat more radical, is to discontinue the 2.5L I4 LCV engine on the ATS altogether, and make the 2.0L Turbo I4 LTG the standard motor across the board, while reconfiguring the pricing and trim level structure. Not only would this address our issue with the exhaust on the ATS 2.5 (since the ATS with the 2.0 Turbo has dual exhaust standard), but it would also give the ATS a more potent engine. That said, this might not be entirely necessary.
In Summary
What we wish for: that on the ATS with the base 2.5L engine, Cadillac either:
- Makes dual exhaust standard (it already offers such a system as an official accessory), or
- Moves the exhaust tip several inches further to the left, or
- Discontinues the base 2.5L I4 in the ATS altogether, making the 2.0L Turbo the standard motor (which has dual exhaust standard)
Why we wish for it: because the position of the single exhaust outlet on the ATS 2.5 looks very awkward, cheap, and unrefined. The current setup has the tip in no-man’s land — not far enough to the left, but also not exactly in the center, while serving as a constant reminder of laziness and cost-cutting that is simply unacceptable on a luxury vehicle such as the ATS. This does not do the vehicle any favors in the eyes of potential cross-shoppers from BMW, Audi, or Mercedes-Benz.
Who to look to for examples:
- To BMW and Audi for how to offset a non-dual exhaust, and
- To Cadillac’s own dual exhaust kit for the 2.5L ATS on how to equip the vehicle with a dual exhaust system
Comments
I think all of the exhaust tips should be move outward a few inches. Get rid of the 2.5 and go with 2 versions of the 2.0 turbo,one with 120 HPPL and one with 150 HPPL. Bump the 3.6 up to 340 hp and offer the twin turbo 3.0 as a engine between the 3.6 twin turbo V.
Good wish but I do not think it is that easy to squeeze an extra 25hp out of the 3.6. It is already at a pretty high state of tune as it stands.
I suspect that the 3.0TT will make an appearance at the NYIAS as a V-Sport model. Well that is my wish list anyway.
The 3.6 is already at 335 in the CT6 so it would need an extra 5 HP not 25.
Point taken. Thanks.
I think that Cadillac has to make a V-Sport version of the ATS. It is losing ground in the ever more competitive compact luxury segment.
I just read on Leftlane that Infiniti is coming out with the Q50 will get a Red Sport 400 model with their version of a 3.0TT V6 engine making 400hp/350lb.ft.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/first-drive-2016-infiniti-q50-red-sport-400-review-91129.html
Cadillac already has a competitive engine in the form of the CT6’s 3.0TT making 404hp/400lb.ft.
That engine would be perfect for the ATS and we already know it can fit.
I will be truly disapointed if that model does not show up at the NYIAS.
I think you’ll be disappointed. Unfortunately. 🙁
I hope the next generation ATS or whatever it’s going to be called will be at the head of its class no matter what areabwebare discussing. It’s time for Cadillac to quit playing catch up and lead.
Agree with post. I’ll go a step further and point out the ugly dash gauge cluster.
Cadillac: suggest you look to Audi A4 for inspiration.
The gauge cluster isn’t exactly ugly…Just plain and pedestrian looking. GM needs to sweat the details regarding such things.
I wouldn’t mind the location for it, but only being for a standard turbo motor. But that 2.5 just plain needs to go! -In a Cadillac?
ATS Wish No 9: ATS-V Hatchback
Need an ATS hatch before an ATS-V hatch.
I can dream, gosh darnit!
ATS Wish list No. 9: A longer wheelbase/more interior space
Next Gen. just wait for it. It’s coming.
It better be.
You do realize that this is very long in the 2nd-gen ATS (erm, sorry, AT4) development cycle. Pretty late to field feedback.
The time to write this stuff up was right after the car shipped.
“The purpose of the Wish List is very simple: to create awareness of the issues we have found with the vehicles so that Cadillac can address them in the future, whether via a refresh or a next-generation model, all in an effort to make the best luxury cars on the market, bar none.”
Refresh or next-generation model. The purpose seems pretty clearcut here.
Christopher, as I state in the opening to the ATS wish list series, its purpose is to improve Cadillac and the ATS breed.
In other words, if the items on the wish list result in a better ATS (via improvements to the first-gen model), great. If they result in improvements to its CT# success, also great. And if they result in improvements to the successor to that model, also great. To say nothing would be the worst we could do here.
The exhaust is relatively straight. In order to move it out, it would need to bend more from its natural engine-exit path. This extra flex would therefore become more restrictive, right?
When Looks > Function & Performance, I must disagree.
It appears to follow the same path as the dual exhaust, therefore keeping costs for mounts/ underbody design in line?
Which takes me to the concept of dual exhaust on an I4. Am I missing something there too? Dual exhaust makes sense on a V6/V8/V10/W10 because exhaust exists the engine on both sides.
On I4s and I6s, the exhaust flows from one side, so why would you want dual exhaust anyway?
1. Whether the proposed (greater offset) setup will result in more restriction or not is an assumption, and not a given. However:
2. Assuming that the proposed setup does result in more restriction, it won’t make a big or even notable difference.. especially in the 2.5L LCV.
3. Assuming that the proposed setup does result in more restriction, engineers can reconfigure the muffler inlet or muffler inlet positioning to assuage the condition.
Now, factor this in:
4. Despite it being an inline-four, dual exhaust will reduce muffler-out restriction. Combine that with engineers potentially reconfiguring the muffler-in setup, and you get the best of both worlds.
5. The more popular Cadillac rivals, including BMW and Audi, have a greater exhaust offset on vehicles with base engines. They make it work, and their engines are rated at competitive figures as those from Cadillac. Not only that, but the stock exhaust systems of these competing vehicles also sound better than those of the ATS. Lexus and Mercedes-Benz, meanwhile, simply have dual exhaust (dual muffler split-out) as standard. They don’t seem to be concerned about engine configuration. They do what looks right. And it also works extremely well.
6. The argument of “keeping costs for mounts/underbody design in-line” is not one you should be making for a Cadillac. Like I already stated, Cadillac’s rivals do this better. It’s time for Cadillac to catch up.
All in all, there are ways to not only do this well from a visual standpoint, but also either maintain or improve the backpressure performance. Outside of that, GM (and now Cadillac) has plenty of very smart, astute, and creative engineers and designers who can work this out… and fans (like you and me) should expect more from Cadillac given its challenger position in the marketplace. The more overarching point, then, is that this should have been done from the conception of the ATS.