A Replacement for Displacement - Cadillac to Adopt New Engine Numbering Scheme

Here's my take on the Cadillac proposal. I actually can see a case for going to torque (vs. HP)- it's what an engine develops. And I also can see a case for using it so electric and IC can be compared somewhat to each other.

What I am NOT on board with is incorporating it into the model name- that just seems like 'following the herd' and I never understood having the literal same car called a 'abc100' and 'abc200' and 'abc350' - it's schizophrenic at best. It's not a different model vehicle- ti's the SAME vehicle with a different powerplant. 'abc100AWDSunroof' is the same thing.
Use nM for torque if you want- either as a discrete badge somewhere or on the engine cover. No problem with that. Buick used to use torque call-outs on their air cleaner lids.

It's also stupid IMO to do it to be 'global' or because nM incorporates metric. F that.

There is still a place for Imperial measurements in today's world. Even for the rest of the world that uses the Metric system.

Although I find some Americans refusing to learn the Metric system as stupid...I also find Metric users stupid  when they make fun of Americans for using the Imperial system. 

feet and inches is still ideal for someone to describe height because feet is the perfect size.One Meter is too big to visualize. Centimeters too small to bunch them all up. Nobody uses the decimeter...

1.87 meters?  187 centimeters?  18.7 decimeters???

Sure, one could adapt...

6 feet 1 inches is simpler isnt it than all three metric measurements?!

Fahrenheit, although I personally get confused with it, I ould deal with it as I work with  Fahrenheit in my restaurant kitchen. Well, the Quebec health department makes us work with both Celsius and Fahrenheit, but I think its because Fahrenheit is more precise?

So, Americans shouldnt be forced to change, but Americans should learn the Metric system.

Actually, the world over shouldnt have dropped the Imperial system all together because it has its merits too!

As far as Cadillac goes:

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

What I am NOT on board with is incorporating it into the model name- that just seems like 'following the herd' and I never understood having the literal same car called a 'abc100' and 'abc200' and 'abc350' - it's schizophrenic at best. It's not a different model vehicle- ti's the SAME vehicle with a different powerplant. 'abc100AWDSunroof' is the same thing.
Use nM for torque if you want- either as a discrete badge somewhere or on the engine cover. No problem with that. Buick used to use torque call-outs on their air cleaner lids.

It's also stupid IMO to do it to be 'global' or because nM incorporates metric. F that.

 ^^^  THIS!!!

I know when I was in high school, college and grad school, all my science/etc classes were taught in metric..that was 25-30+ years ago.   But the US isn't alone in non-metric systems--the UK is odd in they have a mix of metric and traditional measurements--speed limits in MPH yet fuel in litres, metric for most things, but people weight in stone. 

As far as Cadillac's badging, no problem as long as it's not part of the model name...i.e. something like CT5 400 or CT5 500 and not CT400 and CT500...

I can just imagine....

introducing the Cadillac CT6900  CTSixety-Nine....Thousand) with Quad Drive all wheel steer Platinum BlackWing Brougham D’Elegance Fleetwood Denali High Country Grand Sport SS LS..

the best name by GM ever. 

On 3/14/2019 at 11:18 AM, Drew Dowdell said:

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

Now that would be cool... 🙂 

On 3/14/2019 at 6:10 PM, balthazar said:

Aren't you an American?

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.

You can resist all you want, but we already speak one language of 1's and 0's. After all this whole forum is how it is done, humanity can expand faster if we all used a consistent standard. Metric is superior to the standard system of the US. Just like Europe has embraced our coding that the US created as the programming is superior. 

Change is inevitable and Metric is a better system just as it is time to move forward with kW (Kilowatts) and nM (Newtmeters) for a fair replacement to Torque and Horsepower. We be the 21st century not the 19th.

In all fairness I will still not feel any hostility towards you as you are the keeper of all things OLD and I seriously respect that. History is what we learn from to make the future better.

Your "01100001 01110111 01100101 01110011 01101111 01101101 01100101"

For everyone else, what is wrong with knowing both metric and standard systems. Our education system fails all Americans by not teaching what is used globally and still thinking America leads the world in everything.

We need better education!

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

humanity can expand faster if we all used a consistent standard.

Actually, American manufacturing and engineering of aircraft and automobiles HAVE adapted to the Metric system. 

No choice as both industries for manufacturing different parts are made world wide for Boeing, Ford, GM, Chrysler, etc...

So there is that. 

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

Metric is superior to the standard system of the US

Not necessarily.

Its easier to scale up and down the different sizes in terms of calculations are concerned especially for engineering purposes,  and in a nano technology world that we are living, Metric is the way to go, but not necessarily superior. 

A 9mm bullet is a good sized bullet to cause damage in someone.  But an almost equivalent .357 in magnum form is so much better for stopping power. 

I know that there is a 10mm bullet nowadays but Im assuming that a .44 is a tad larger, but I also know that a .44 magnum makes huuuuge holes in people. 

Maybe in today's world, Dirty Harry's pistol aint sexy as its only got 6 shots and an automatic has 15 or so, maybe more with today's crazy magazine technology, but I also know that all the rage of 9mm Glocks of the 1990s has worn down too, and that is why a 10mm bullet is now offered, but again, nothing beats the stop them dead in their tracks .44 magnum style! 

Im sorry that I went all guns on you in the automotive forum, but no, not everything Metric is superior. 

Feet and inches, still have merit. Horsepower and torque seem to be best suited for ICE.  ICE is not dead yet...

1 horsepower is what work 1 average Clydesdale horse can do. And the Imperial system did a fine job in creating a very good calculating system that works just fine. And its easy to visualize. A  300 horsepower car is calcualted damned close to what 300 Clydesdale horses can do...and we could actually visualize that kind of power even if we dont know how much power that really is...

But  seriously...can a Metric user honestly say that he knows what 223.71 kilowatts looks like? (that would be 300 mechanical horsepower)

Can a metric user honestly say that he could actually visualize how tall is 1.87 meters? 187 centimeters?  1.92 meters?  1.76 meters?  One could get used to it, sure.  But...

Like I said, meters and even decimeters, those units are to big for humans to visualize in space, and centimeters are too small to bunch up together. 

Shyte...metric users dont even use the decimeter when describing the height of individuals. Shyte...on my drivers license, Im listed as 1.7 meters tall, not 17 decimeters, but 1.7 meters...because Canada uses the metric system, duh...and  its been 50 years or more that we use the metric system, yet when a criminal is described on the news, feet and inches are used to identify the perp. Maybe, sometimes meters is used ALONG SIDE feet and inches...

I know Europeans actually do know how tall 1.76 meters is (visually in their heads)...but I still challenge them to tell me how many meters 1 person is standing from another, with great precision as 1.76 or 1.89...

An imperial user actually CAN be precise using feet though...(visually in their heads)

The Imperial system has its merits...it would be stupid to let the Imperial system disappear all together...

CT5 WTF

Looks pretty good- looking forward to more pics.

8 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Actually, American manufacturing and engineering of aircraft and automobiles HAVE adapted to the Metric system. 

No choice as both industries for manufacturing different parts are made world wide for Boeing, Ford, GM, Chrysler, etc...

So there is that. 

Not necessarily.

Its easier to scale up and down the different sizes in terms of calculations are concerned especially for engineering purposes,  and in a nano technology world that we are living, Metric is the way to go, but not necessarily superior. 

A 9mm bullet is a good sized bullet to cause damage in someone.  But an almost equivalent .357 in magnum form is so much better for stopping power. 

I know that there is a 10mm bullet nowadays but Im assuming that a .44 is a tad larger, but I also know that a .44 magnum makes huuuuge holes in people. 

Maybe in today's world, Dirty Harry's pistol aint sexy as its only got 6 shots and an automatic has 15 or so, maybe more with today's crazy magazine technology, but I also know that all the rage of 9mm Glocks of the 1990s has worn down too, and that is why a 10mm bullet is now offered, but again, nothing beats the stop them dead in their tracks .44 magnum style! 

Im sorry that I went all guns on you in the automotive forum, but no, not everything Metric is superior. 

Feet and inches, still have merit. Horsepower and torque seem to be best suited for ICE.  ICE is not dead yet...

1 horsepower is what work 1 average Clydesdale horse can do. And the Imperial system did a fine job in creating a very good calculating system that works just fine. And its easy to visualize. A  300 horsepower car is calcualted damned close to what 300 Clydesdale horses can do...and we could actually visualize that kind of power even if we dont know how much power that really is...

But  seriously...can a Metric user honestly say that he knows what 223.71 kilowatts looks like? (that would be 300 mechanical horsepower)

Can a metric user honestly say that he could actually visualize how tall is 1.87 meters? 187 centimeters?  1.92 meters?  1.76 meters?  One could get used to it, sure.  But...

Like I said, meters and even decimeters, those units are to big for humans to visualize in space, and centimeters are too small to bunch up together. 

Shyte...metric users dont even use the decimeter when describing the height of individuals. Shyte...on my drivers license, Im listed as 1.7 meters tall, not 17 decimeters, but 1.7 meters...because Canada uses the metric system, duh...and  its been 50 years or more that we use the metric system, yet when a criminal is described on the news, feet and inches are used to identify the perp. Maybe, sometimes meters is used ALONG SIDE feet and inches...

I know Europeans actually do know how tall 1.76 meters is (visually in their heads)...but I still challenge them to tell me how many meters 1 person is standing from another, with great precision as 1.76 or 1.89...

An imperial user actually CAN be precise using feet though...(visually in their heads)

The Imperial system has its merits...it would be stupid to let the Imperial system disappear all together...

 

 

9mm versus 9.1 mm or .357 which has twice the gunpowder of a 9mm as to why it causes more damage. It is all about choices yet if you spent any time in a country that teaches all things metric, it is very easy for a person to visualize a 187 centimeter person. I know after 3 1/2yrs in college in Japan, that is all they see as is pretty much any asian country and it really is not hard to visualize a person size based on the math used predominantly by people. If canada was not next to the US but say Europe, you might be able to better visualize meters rather than feet. Pro's and Con's to both systems

Your right most auto's have gone metric, but then you still find weird standard parts on the auto's too, so this is why learning both is important I feel. 

In regards to Kilowatts versus horsepower, In north America we use horses to visualize power, but in many other places they use energy to visualize the same thing. If we showed a large tesla storage yard to represent power of an auto over showing a range with 300 horses on it running, I think people could understand Kilowatts versus Horsepower.

It is all about how and what we use to learn.

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

9mm versus 9.1 mm or .357 which has twice the gunpowder of a 9mm as to why it causes more damage. It is all about choices yet if you spent any time in a country that teaches all things metric, it is very easy for a person to visualize a 187 centimeter person. I know after 3 1/2yrs in college in Japan, that is all they see as is pretty much any asian country and it really is not hard to visualize a person size based on the math used predominantly by people. If canada was not next to the US but say Europe, you might be able to better visualize meters rather than feet. Pro's and Con's to both systems

Your right most auto's have gone metric, but then you still find weird standard parts on the auto's too, so this is why learning both is important I feel. 

In regards to Kilowatts versus horsepower, In north America we use horses to visualize power, but in many other places they use energy to visualize the same thing. If we showed a large tesla storage yard to represent power of an auto over showing a range with 300 horses on it running, I think people could understand Kilowatts versus Horsepower.

It is all about how and what we use to learn.

I guess, it all comes down to that statement.

I agree with your post 100%, BTW!