I like this, makes better sense to move to Newton Meters and have a global understood standard. I wish the US would get on with modernizing and drop the stupid standard system and move to metric overall. The US would find it so much simpler to do math on everything if we went metric.

I wonder how long before we drop Horsepower and go with kW as a global standard for rating of auto's.

8 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Not going to happen...the American public is too fucking stupid to comprehend newton meters..

While baby boomers and those that hate change will fight this, the global world is changing, EVs will happen and moving to kilowatts rather than Horsepower and Newton Meters rather than lb-ft of torque makes sense.

Sadly some will get left behind in the 21st century workplace.

As you know Robert working in tech like me, the only thing that is constant is inevitable change and obsolescence. 

This is stupid. Not quite as stupid as Audi's new naming scheme but it's pretty terrible.

If they'd just ditch the n/a 3.6 they could stick to the old school displacement number. 

1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

This is stupid. Not quite as stupid as Audi's new naming scheme but it's pretty terrible.

If they'd just ditch the n/a 3.6 they could stick to the old school displacement number. 

How do you figure on that last bit?

Also, 271 ft-lb = 367 Nm. 

I think rounding up by that much is also ridiculous.. 

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

How do you figure on that last bit?

Everything else has forced induction, right? 

Oh I forgot about the N/A 6.2 in the 'Slade. 

1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

Also, 271 ft-lb = 367 Nm. 

I think rounding up by that much is also ridiculous.. 

It also makes things confusing because in the CTS for example, the 2.0T and the 3.6 are both 400.  But the 2.0T gets a T at the end.... so is it the better/more expensive engine?  No, the buy up engine is the 3.6.

4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Also, 271 ft-lb = 367 Nm. 

I think rounding up by that much is also ridiculous.. 

Everything else has forced induction, right? 

Oh I forgot about the N/A 6.2 in the 'Slade. 

But different 2.0Ts have different torque numbers.  The XT4 is a 350 and the ATS is a 400.

"To further complicate things, V-Series will have V badging but will not bear a torque figure. Why? In part because the number is too large. The CT6-V, for example, with the 4.2-liter twin-turbo Blackwing V-8 engine generates 550 hp and 627 lb-ft of torque or 850 Nm." 

Just now, ccap41 said:

"To further complicate things, V-Series will have V badging but will not bear a torque figure. Why? In part because the number is too large. The CT6-V, for example, with the 4.2-liter twin-turbo Blackwing V-8 engine generates 550 hp and 627 lb-ft of torque or 850 Nm." 

Yeah, that's dumb..... I'd love a CT6 850.... totally pwn the Germans.

The United States has, as a people, been largely rejecting the metric system going all the way back to its birth in 1792 in France.  I highly doubt that even millennials will fully adopt the metric system,  As for this new naming scheme, I am not sure why this is necessary.

Just now, riviera74 said:

The United States has, as a people, been largely rejecting the metric system going all the way back to its birth in 1792 in France.  I highly doubt that even millennials will fully adopt the metric system,  As for this new naming scheme, I am not sure why this is necessary.

I've actually been contemplating an article about how Cadillacs have too much clutter on their trunk panels already. 

4 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It also makes things confusing because in the CTS for example, the 2.0T and the 3.6 are both 400.  But the 2.0T gets a T at the end.... so is it the better/more expensive engine?  No, the buy up engine is the 3.6.

But different 2.0Ts have different torque numbers.  The XT4 is a 350 and the ATS is a 400.

Yeah, that's a very good point. 

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

I've actually been contemplating an article about how Cadillacs have too much clutter on their trunk panels already. 

While Lincoln has done a lot wrong in the past decade..or three.. Eliminating some of the badging on the back of the MKC is nice. They got rid of the "ecoboost"badge and I believe that was done across their lineup, I just haven't looked. 

6 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Yeah, that's dumb..... I'd love a CT6 850.... totally pwn the Germans.

That's one badass car. Looks, performance, it's just great. 

Already sold out... GOT DERN IT! 

40 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Yeah, that's dumb..... I'd love a CT6 850.... totally pwn the Germans.

The S65 makes 1,000 newton meters.

This naming system is just plain stupid, and the fact that they spent time thinking it up is even more stupid.  Instead of solving the problem, i.e. product and marketing, Cadillac is on to its 3rd naming scheme in 10 years.

9 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The S65 makes 1,000 newton meters.

This naming system is just plain stupid, and the fact that they spent time thinking it up is even more stupid.  Instead of solving the problem, i.e. product and marketing, Cadillac is on to its 3rd naming scheme in 10 years.

850 > 65

Why? Just why?

Good grief Cadillac.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

The S65 makes 1,000 newton meters.

This naming system is just plain stupid, and the fact that they spent time thinking it up is even more stupid.  Instead of solving the problem, i.e. product and marketing, Cadillac is on to its 3rd naming scheme in 10 years.

2 hours ago, riviera74 said:

The United States has, as a people, been largely rejecting the metric system going all the way back to its birth in 1792 in France.  I highly doubt that even millennials will fully adopt the metric system,  As for this new naming scheme, I am not sure why this is necessary.

I understand your point but then once the internet came around and the ease of moving data across the globe, standards that everyone can understand makes infinitely more sense. Just like daylight saving time where many places outside of the U.S. have stopped using it, now many states are wanting to do the same thing which I support. Just like Metric, it makes products equal on the same footing for global consumption. 

My only beef here is the Rounding BS. Leave it as it really is. Let the actual numbers speak for themselves.

@Drew Dowdell Love the idea of a write-up about the need to remove excessive badging on an auto. Add the IDIOT dealerships that think they can add their own big sticker or stick on badge to the back of your auto. The dealerships are NOT paying me for free advertising.

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

850 > 65

I think Kia should make a new K-1,000,000 and claim it a million times better than any thing else.   Maybe Ford can bring back the Five Hundred as the 500.

47 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

 

Maybe 1,000 newton meters isn’t enough anymore?  They had that engine for 15 years, it is dinosaur albeit a powerful one.

All AMG’s will be hybrids post 2020, don’t need 12 cylinders anymore for better or for worse.

Why does Cadillac even need this when most of their products have one engine option?  XT4, XT5, XT6, Escalde are 1 engine only.  I imagine the future sedans will have 2 engine options so why even bother with this?

10 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Why does Cadillac even need this when most of their products have one engine option?  XT4, XT5, XT6, Escalde are 1 engine only.  I imagine the future sedans will have 2 engine options so why even bother with this?

You're thinking of the American market only.  In China, the XT5,6 and XTS all get the 2.0T. 

Also, with electrification coming, there are bound to be some vehicles like the CT6 PEV that will have a 2.0T but have a 600(E?) badge.  The Escalade is also likely to have more than one engine option next go around. Then, as mentioned in the article, there are the EVs coming.  The CT6 has 5 engines options, the CTS has 4 engine options, the ATS has 3 engine options.... and the V-series isn't going away. 

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Why does Cadillac even need this when most of their products have one engine option?  XT4, XT5, XT6, Escalde are 1 engine only.  I imagine the future sedans will have 2 engine options so why even bother with this?

EV motors can be built to have a wide range of power based on the software programming. As such, going to kW and nM makes total sense as the software profile will allow you to offer a 300, 400 and 500 or more nM of torque with complimentary kW or HP.

One electric motor to rule them all based on the profile loaded to it's controller board.  

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

EV motors can be built to have a wide range of power based on the software programming. As such, going to kW and nM makes total sense as the software profile will allow you to offer a 300, 400 and 500 or more nM of torque with complimentary kW or HP.

One electric motor to rule them all based on the profile loaded to it's controller board.  

True..look at all the variety of outputs Tesla has had with the Model S. 

9 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

the American public is too fucking stupid to comprehend newton meters..

Aren't you an American?

10 hours ago, dfelt said:

I like this, makes better sense to move to Newton Meters and have a global[ly] understood standard. I wish the US would get on with modernizing and drop the stupid standard system and move to metric overall.

Same goes for Europe! I was in the UK last week, getting new tyres for my British Leyland P76, and they still have rim sizes in INCHES there! Probably too fucking stupid to comprehend how to go full metric - wonder when they're going to do that.

- - - - -
There IS NO math or computations involving an engine displacement call-out on a motor vehicle. It's not part of a formula, you don't have to involve it in any conversions, dissection of it's meaning is not required for legal operation... you don't do ANYTHING with it. No one is required or even asked to convert CI to soda bottles. The designation literally just sits there like a cartoon outline drawing of a ladybug. Just like when VW was selling the original Beetle in the US 50 for decades with "1600" on the decklid; if you own a Challenger 392, EVEN IF you're continually shipping all around the world and driving it in various counties, it literally doesn't make a goddamn difference what units the size is called out it.

Saying all engine displacements should be done in one size "cause math" is even more fucking stupid than saying everyone in the world should speak one language. THAT at least involves interaction/ communication, commerce, understanding, etc... but try and push that idea.

this whole thing reeks of 'trying too hard' but God bless em if it catches on.

Thanks for shutting down the metric boys in this thread, Balthazar.  Oh and yes, this latest badging scheme is stupid, even more so with the rounding up business.