General Motors is no longer offering the 2.0L LSY turbo four-cylinder engine in the 2019 Cadillac CT6 sedan, according to an exclusive report from our sister site, Cadillac Society.
The loss of the LSY engine from the Cadillac CT6 powertrain lineup means the sedan is no longer available to order with rear-wheel drive. The remaining three CT6 engines are mated to all-wheel drive as standard. These engines are:
- Naturally-aspirated 3.6L LGX V6 making 335 horsepower and 284 pound-feet of torque
- 3.0L LGW V6 Twin-Turbo making 404 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque
- 4.2L LTA V8 Twin-Turbo Blackwing making:
- 500 horsepower and 574 pound-feet of torque in the Platinum model
- 550 horsepower and 640 pound-feet of torque in the CT6-V
All three engines are paired with the new GM 10-speed automatic transmission.
Cadillac Society discovered the powertrain change via information provided to it by dealers. The documents state the LSY engine is “built out” and “no longer available” for the 2019 Cadillac CT6. The online configurator for the CT6 confirms the development, no longer showing the 2.0L Turbo engine – which made 237 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of torque – as an option.
There has been no official announcement from Cadillac about the engine’s rather sudden disappearance. We reached out to Cadillac for clarification but, after a week of waiting, have not received a response. As of this writing, two unofficial theories explain the engine’s sudden disappearance.
First, Cadillac could have simply decided to move the CT6 upmarket, though dropping the 2.0L Turbo engine when its (somewhat) direct rivals – like the Mercedes-Benz E-Class and BMW 5 Series – offer such engines is certainly a head scratcher. The other possibility is that production of the 2.0L LSY, an all-new engine that’s rolling out across a myriad of new GM vehicles, is currently constrained. Hence, GM could have simply decided to stop offering it on the CT6 for the time being, and could offer the engine on the CT6 at a later time, when production of the motor is not constrained… though there’s no indication that this will happen.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Cadillac CT6 news, Cadillac news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Source: Cadillac Society
Comments
I am personally so confused by Cadillac right now. If the CT5 is allegedly a direct competitor to the 3 Series but much bigger and with a joke of a Trunk somehow when compared to the 3 Series, then wouldn’t the CT6 be the competitor to the 5 Series?
And if that is the case, why rid the 2.0T instead of the dreaded for Cadillac 3.6 V6?
GM is confusing everyone with Cadillac. It simply makes Zero Sense.
Cadillac engine lineup should be…
2.0T
3.0TT
4.2TT
Based on the CT5 engine options, I agree. Simplify and improve. The 3.6 is a fine engine but lacks the refinement of the others you list. Cadillac needs to be out of the GM corporate engine pool.
That was my point. Well said.
My car has the 3.6 and I love it but Cadillac shouldn’t be using it.
3.6 L engine is a joke. BMW has 3.0 inline 6 Twin scroll turbo that makes 380 hp and gets 30+ mpg on the 3 series. They have been utilizing and evolving this engine since 2007. Cadillac in 2019 still uses this crappy “redesigned” 3.6L V6. NA engines are dead in this segment.
The 3.6 is not a joke. It is actually a great engine.
It only shows its weakness when you compare it to the inline engines from Mercedes and especially BMW and the 3.0 from Audi.
This is why in my opinion Cadillac needs to rid themselves of the 3.6. Let that be the Corporate engine. Cadillac has its very own 3.0TT which is phenomenal in my opinion even though I too am partial to the BMW inline Six.
Actually having driven in both a 3.0TT and the 3.6 I found the 3.6 more refined and higher revving in the CT6 so your refinement statement is incorrect.
I feel the opposite. My friends father has a CT6 3.0TT (which I helped him Purchase) and that engine is at another level compared to the 3.6 V6. Like I said I like the 3.6 a lot it should just not be in a Cadillac Engine Bay in my opinion.
Isn’t the 3.0 just a downsized 3.6 to meet some kind of euro standard? And I’m not sold on turbos yet. Too much heat under the hood. Then put the 3.6 turbo in the CT6. It’s good enough for the XTS, right? Why sell out to the euros?
CT5 is direct competitor to 3 series. CT5 bigger on the outside dimensions but only slightly bigger or even smaller on the inside . Trunk space is significantly smaller than 3 series, 17ft³ vs 11ft³.
Yeah the Trunk is an utter joke in the CT5 unfortunately. I honestly have no clue how GM accomplished this. It’s insane.
Your engine lineup should be standard for ALL Cadillac sedans, including the CT4/CT5. It’s absurd to use a coarse and unrefined 2.7T in lieu of the proven 3.0TT.
The bean counters continue to gimp Cadillacs and it seems nobody in GM’s top management has the will to do anything about it.
Meh, not a big loss tbh. The other engines are better
Since they dropped it and made all wheel drive standard on the base trim (well all trims), I wonder if this is to create a bigger price gap between the CT5 and CT6. CT6 now starts at 55k, my guess is that they can now price the CT5 in the mid 40s not too much lower than the current CTS and not worry to much about it competing with the bigger car. Also price the CT5 in the Mid 40s would make it a the perfect tweener when it comes to price.
Agree also I think the standard awd CT6 is for buyers trading in their old DTS and XTS.
The BMW 3 begins at $40k. If the CT5 is intended for that segment, it’s starting price needs to be very close to that.
Sure it’s meant to “compete” with the 3 series at 40, but it’s also sized like the 5 at 50. I think it would be better if they priced it in the mid 40’s because it would keep it competitive with cars like the GS while attacking upper trims of the 3. Same could be said about the CT4 and CT6.
The new 237 HP 2.0 LSY is a lackluster performer in this large car and much slower than the previous 265 HP/295 torque 2.0t engine in tests. The 3.6 is a far better std choice here. But going to only AWD is a mistake as many parts of the world have no need for it, it adds weight and complexity and reduces mileage. It also means yet another bump in price for this car just as Cadillac finally lowered it to a little over 50K for 2019. Not good and yet another product hole in GM’s ever dwindling lineup.
It was only a tenth slower in a straight line. Your are not losing much in the performance category. But you are gaining in fuel economy, by a wider margin than a tenth of second.
Motor Trend test says otherwise. 1.1 seconds slower to 60 and 1 second slower through the quarter. Barely able to move CT6 according to MT.
I am ok with the Engine line up. Its the 4 wheel drive only choice that I have a problem with. I am very much in agreement with JOT YOMAN with the four wheel drive only choice.
First GM gets rid of the AWD Equinox with the diesel, now the 2.0 is gone from the CT6…….. Whats next? Is the Silverado losing the 4.3??
GM needs more options (engines, colors, interior colors, the option for less tech if desired, sedans) not fewer!
When Cadillac first introduced the CT6, the LTG 275 hp 2.0L DOHC-4v 4-cyl engine was a great idea; but American buyers weren’t crazy about spending all the money for a CT6 and getting just a 4-cylinder engine and with the family of V6 engines available as well as the Blackwing twin-turbo V8 the LSY just doesn’t fit the image that Cadillac is trying to project with the CT6.
Keep in mind this was a car slated to be axed anyhow. So it’s not THAT big of a loss.
I am curious, though, I forget exactly when JDN was hired now and am too lazy to look, but I wonder how he feels about the treatment this car has received from GM’s brass. I don’t know that he would give a straight answer at this point… but I’m still curious.
I think the coming Escalade will sell with just styling and interior tweaks , even if the Navigator continues to outclass it but, judging what I’ve seen from Cadillac lately, I’m not at all sure they’re headed for any kind of turn around, at least in this country. Certainly not when they treat their cream of the crop like a Big Lots closeout.
I’d drop the 3.6 as well and make the detuned 3.0TT the standard option. This is supposed to be a technology and engineering flagship – it should have the latest and greatest.
3.0TT with 335hp
3.0TT with 400hp
4.2TT with 500-550hp
100%
100%
Same in the CT5
I feel they should have replaced the 2.0t for the 2.7t from the Silverado. The power should differentiate itself from the the 3.0tt. So that it doesn’t feel that you are getting shortchanged. Maybe if there was one less turbo in the 3.0tt maybe you wouldnt feel such thing beings it will have different performance characteristics.
This is great news to me.
If GM is going to use the 2.0T in a Chevy, then get it out of a Cadillac.
Alex, what does this mean for the CT5 ?
Will GM get rid of the 2.0T there also ? I hope so !!
Maybe the CT5 just 3 engines—- 3.0TT — lesser Blackwing ——– Greater Blackwing, Winner to me !!
As far as you guys going back and forth about the refinement of the 3.6 or the 3.0TT, there the SAME ENGINE, different boar.
I think the new 2.0T is Cadillac Specific only.
Ha, Ha, Ha, but you are correct the LSY is only for Cadillac ( so far ) – XT4 Cheapest Cadillac and was CT6 Highest price Cadillac.
Am I the only one who thought that was funny !!!
Guess not as GM took it out of the highest price Cadillac. Good move by the way !!!!
Just so I don’t get jumped on, I do know with options you can get an Escalade higher priced than a CT6.
We could hardly wait for the XT4 until it was released and would have seriously considered it if it was RWD and NOT a 2.0T but O-well. AND yes we have driven one, and yes we think it is under powered, especially for a Cadillac.
Also don’t you think its funny that the newest GM 2.0T, for GM’s TOP brand Cadillac is the LOWER, HP, and Torque, with active cylinder stuff, and start stop, ALL of which most Cadillac owners do not want !!!.
The LSY is the result of refining the LTG. Apparently GMPS couldn’t engineer a smoother four banger with same output as the LTG.
Having driven the LTG in numerous GM offerings I find it to be a coarse and unrefined engine that shudders the entire vehicle when pushed. The fact is that GM cannot engineer good four bangers. Even the cheapest Toyota I4 is smoother than GM’s very best four banger.
I think David has hit closest to the mark. The original 2.0t was fun in my 1st yr ATS but lost its appeal as they detuned and stuck it in my 14 cts. Now in my 17 it does not play nice with the 8speed and no way in hell would I consider the pathetic new version with nearly 50 hp less than my 2013. I’ve owned the 3.6 and it was a proper upgrade for various fwd cars of a decade ago. However, the lack of torque and nearly guaranteed timing system failures around 100k miles killed any interest in ever owning another. Now I’m ready to replace the 17 and, horrible design aside, the ct5 powertrains leave me stone cold. That damn 3.0 was supposed to be 400 hp and was the ONLY reason I would even try to stomach the remainder of the craptastic exterior. A ct6 was my real desire anyway but again I’m not willing to discuss 4 cylinders in a flagship size car unless those cylinders are 1000cc each with a stroke about 20mm long so it can wind to 10000rpm. A 6 cylinder is a compromise inlieu of the proper 8 but it needs to be a damn impressive 6 to get me in the mood. The 3.6 doesn’t work unless it was the 3.6tt from the vsport.
I agree with David 330hp base 400 or 500 as the upgrades. All with gobs of torque but not at the expense of hp. I cant stand a wheezy engine that dies above 3500 rpm . That goes for ct5 and ct6 both. My only additional request would be a reasonably priced 4 to 5 liter NA motor making 375+hp. So much nicer to drive and maintain the NA motors. Will be interesting to see where ct6 options go. I’ll either have one soon or hello 7 series!
Hell, mount that new straight 6 diesel from the truck into a ct6, dial the boost to make 390hp and I’ll take it for a test drive
Could it be that someone at Cadillac is actually starting to think? A 4 cylinder CT6 never made any sense to me. While I do think the entry level CT6 out to be rear wheel drive, not if it means a 4 cylinder engine.
Again I just don’t see why, if Cadillac is the TOP of GM why can’t you get the option of RWD.
Maybe the V series will have this option for those who want it, but then you would only get the Blackwing.
That’s probably also ok I guess, but wasn’t this to be Cadillac.
Where I live RWD is not good but we made our 2004 CTS last 10 years ok and still own it.
But I could see some wanting a CT6, large RWD, with the simpleness of RWD.
Probably to much in validation costs BILLIONS I here !! I bet GM wished they had those BILLIONS back they spent on validating the 2.0T RWD !!
YELLING from the top of my lungs!!! ‘The CT6 IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO THE E CLASS OR 5 SERIES’.
Quit spinning and sharing this misleading, inaccurate and confusing information. At just over 2 inches shy of the S Class, this vehicle hardly competes in the E Class vehicle segment.
And the upcoming CT5 is only 1.2 inches shorter than a 5 series yet at least 4 inches longer than a 3 series. I suppose save for the price, I don’t see how the CT5 is squarely a 3 series or MB C Class competitor.
We are only stating what Cadillac is saying. CT5 is 3 Series competitor soooooooo that would mak ethe Ct6 a 5 Series competitor. This is not on us but on GM for once again making Tweener cars and confusing the buying public once again.
CT6 is a good car. I own one and am pleased with it although there are several things I would suggest to make it a much better car. First, a V8 engine. Not a hot rod racing engine like the V series, but a simple, quiet, high-torque V8. Our V6 has plenty of power but works awfully hard to use it. It almost feels overworked on interstate merging and passing. Second, more leg room. I’m a big, tall guy. I wish there were an option that would get rid of the center console. I suppose there’s too much technology to cram into the dashboard without the center console, but it greatly restricts leg room. Third, raise the car 2 inches. Regular wheels and tires help, but they don’t solve the low entry height problem. Of course, I could easily solve all three problems by trading the CT6 on an Escalade, but I’d much rather have Escalade level comfort in a full-size car.