Category Archives: CTS

Cadillac CTS Coupe, then XTS, then ATS?

Posted on by
Reply

No Cadillac ATS at the NY Auto Show.   The CTS-V Sport Wagon was there instead.

The CTS Coupe and CTS-V Coupe will be in showrooms this summer.  Lots of excitement about these two, and hopefully “a rising tide lifts all boats” and increased showroom traffic will result in more CTS Sedan sales as well.

Next model year, in 2011, we are likely to see the new Cadillac XTS sedan rolling down the line at Lansing Grand River as a 2012 model.  At that point we will have the CTS Family in Sedan, Coupe, or Sport Wagon, including CTS-V Sedan, Coupe or Sport Wagon.  Escalade Family in regular, extended, or pickup bed, and SRX.  The STS will bow out after the 2011 model probably.  Cadillac said that the DTS will continue in 2011, but it does not appear in the order book, so that seems limiting.

The ATS will likely arrive in 2012 as a 2013 model; the rumors still don’t correlate.  I expect we will see a concept soon, and then it will arrive in 2012 as a 2013 model.  The XTS arriving in 2011 as a 2012 model suggests that the ATS won’t arrive in 2011.

The ATS will take over from the CTS as the sedan sales leader for Cadillac.  This is a crucial launch for Cadillac, as the ATS will largely become the new Cadillac, and everything depends on how good this new model is. The CTS refresh will make it a bit larger and a bit more upmarket.  The ATS and the refreshed CTS will both be on the Alpha platform.

Competition improves the breed Send more LLT V6 HP

Posted on by
Reply

Motor Trend did an early test drive and acceleration test on the 2011 Mustang with 3.7L V6 engine, managing a surprising 0-60 time of 5.1 seconds from the base Mustang.  Why does this matter on a Cadillac blog?

The base Mustang competes directly and aggressively with the V6 Chevrolet Camaro.  The current 304 hp V6 Camaro outsells the current Mustang, partially because it out-accelerates the 2010 Mustang V6, which got the old 210 hp 4L engine.  The new hotter base Mustang with the new 3.7L DOHC V6 makes 305 hp, and will ‘put the hurt’ on the current V6 Camaro, if the Mustang consistently manages 0-60 times of around 5.1 sec and the Camaro does the deed in around 6 sec.  Similar hp, but the Camaro is heavier.

To respond, Chevrolet will need to pump up the volume on the LLT DOHC DI V6, perhaps by 40-50 hp to overcome the Camaro’s weight disadvantage.  Generally in this weight class, 10 hp = 0.2 sec difference in 0-60 time.  BTW, another thumb rule in this class is that 100 lbs = 0.1 sec difference.  So the Camaro needs a minimum of another 30 hp, but another 50 hp would be safer.  So that means getting the LLT V6 up to 350 hp.

This is an exciting development for Cadillac because the CTS family shares the LLT V6 with the Chevrolet Camaro.  So hopefully any ponies that GM Powertrain prepares for the Camaro will go right in to the CTS as well.  Doesn’t always work that way, but the current CTS is also coming in high in its class for the acceleration tests, so that makes a good case for sharing.

What can GM do to increase the V6 output?  Tuning the LLT to run up to 7,000 rpm should get it to 325 hp.  Since it is a variable valve timing engine, there is no disadvantage to tuning at the top end.  Work on a more header-like exhaust manifold, and improve the exhaust port flow on the LLT should yield 20-30 hp, which would put the engine at 345-355 hp, with almost no recurring increase in cost for the power train.

Oh sure Bruce — if it is that simple why doesn’t GM do that already?  Because the LLT was meeting the design spec already — a great high value V6 that puts out more than 300 hp smoothly and with great MPG.  But now we need the more, and GM Powertrain needs to turn up the wick and send us a 350 hp LLT.

Yeah, but that one’s FWD

Posted on by
Reply

The last time my Wife was shopping for a car she was looking at a lot of different brands and models trying to size up exactly what she wanted.   She was thinking one possibility was a red convertible with leather interior, and so we went and test drove a variety of models that offered this combination, or as close to it as we could find.

As we waiting for the Sales Person to grab the keys for one test drive I explained that the vehicle we were about to drive was Front Wheel Drive (FWD).  My Wife asked, “Why are you telling me that; Do I care?”

This gave me pause.

To me, the fact that this car was FWD meant that it would not corner or accelerate as well as a similar Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) car.  Further, it also meant that the car was not intended for a ‘serious’ car enthusiast / driver, but was being marketed or targeted for the features offered and not as a driver’s car.  On the other hand, a FWD vehicle can be very good in the snow or weather.  So one might choose a FWD performance car if one lived in parts of the country that get a lot of snow or harsh weather.

However, my Wife never plans to drive the car on the track.  If the wheels are screeching around a corner she will likely just slow down.  She probably prefers understeer to oversteer, for the same reason many manufacturers tune their cars to understeer — it gives the driver time to react and slow down, even if at the same time it tends to give up a bit of speed through the corner.  The fact that the car does 0-60 in 0.5 seconds less or more is immaterial in her weighing of the virtues of a car.  A very detailed argument on weight transfer under heavy acceleration being advantageous to a RWD car and disadvantageous to a FWD car would bore her.  And I paused in my response because it occurred to me, weighing these fact, that perhaps she did not care.

I think that BMW and I were very surprised recently to find that 80% of buyers of the rear-wheel drive 1-Series BMW think that the 1-Series incorrectly believe the 1-Series is FWD.  This reminded me of my Wife’s question.  Many buyers may not care that a car is FWD or RWD, only that it has the nameplate and features for the price range they are shopping.  I would have guessed that all BMW drivers were technically oriented, and were buying their BMW because of its driving and handling characteristics, and because it was a RWD performance sedan.  Not so apparently.

I am very glad that Cadillac went to RWD cars for the CTS family.  There is something re-assuring to me about the dynamics of a RWD car when cornering, and about the packaging of the engine longitudinally under the hood, with better associated engine access.  I am interested in how the new XTS does, and I am willing to believe that AWD can be a viable approach given tuning that allows a high percentage of torque to be vectored to the rear wheels when needed.  But I continue to believe that the best performance in acceleration and cornering will be available from a RWD configuration, and I am glad that Cadillac continues to offer RWD luxury performance sedans.