• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    Rumorpile: Cadillac ATS-V Could Pack A 3.2L Twin-Turbo V6


    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    November 13, 2013

    We know that Cadillac is hard at work on an ATS-V, but no one has been able to nail down what will be under the hood of it. Reports say it could either be a twin-turbo V6, possibly the new TT 3.6 found in the CTS and XTS VSport, or a V8 engine. According to a new report from Automobile, the ATS-V will likely have a twin-turbo V6, but not the 3.6. The report says the twin-turbo V6 will be a 3.2L and will be capable of producing of more than 500 horsepower.

    This TT 3.2 V6 has a bit of interesting story to it. The engine is based on GMs’ High Feature V6 engine architecture which was supplied to Alfa Romeo in the later half of the 2000's. Alfa Romeo fitted its own set of twin turbos and direct-injection system, thus creating the 3.2 JTS engine which was available on the 159, Brera, and Spider.

    Source: Automobile

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback




    Sounds Like if they go with the 3.2 TT V6 it would be due to tax from the stupid Euro Zone rather than a solid TT engine. Euro zone auto rules will kill off auto companies at the rate they are going.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I doubt this would be a direct lift from the Alfa Romeo.... more likely, it is just the current 3.6TT with a slightly shorter stroke and the boost turned way up.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I doubt this would be a direct lift from the Alfa Romeo.... more likely, it is just the current 3.6TT with a slightly shorter stroke and the boost turned way up.

    Yeah. My guess is that, if the rumour has some truth in it, it'll be a variant of the 3.6L block but I guess with a smaller bore. I think the rationale is that a smaller displacement engine using the 3.6L block would have thicker cylinder walls and it would withstand higher boost pressures.

    Edited by ZL-1
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I doubt this would be a direct lift from the Alfa Romeo.... more likely, it is just the current 3.6TT with a slightly shorter stroke and the boost turned way up.

    Yeah. My guess is that, if the rumour has some truth in it, it'll be a variant of the 3.6L block but I guess with a smaller bore. I think the rationale is that a smaller displacement engine using the 3.6L block would have thicker cylinder walls and it would withstand higher boost pressures.

    Smaller bore would make sense too. I seem to remember that the HF engines were capable of taking cylinder sleeves to adjust bore size, so the block itself would actually be the same but then they could sleeve it down to the displacement they wanted it to be. With no sleeve, the displacement would be 4.0 liters, but it would have to be a relatively slow, all torque/no rev, engine.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    IIRC Dwight had given the max displacement for the HF engines somewhere around 4 litres. The 3.2L would make perfect sense as it would be less engineering involved and yet be a unique Caddy engine.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I hope they also do a lower boost turbo version of the 3.0L V6 to replace the NA 3.6L in the regular ATS,CTS and even XTS models! Then they could also build that 4.5L DOHC 4VPC Turbo V8 to use in the upcoming large Cadillac and the next CTS V in different stages of tune! An all DOHC 4VPC Turbo Cadillac engine lineup would be properly competitive in todays premium market!

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Still Think Cadillac should have a family of V4, V6 and V8 engines based on Corvette V8 DNA engines for their lineup.

    These engines could all be Twin Turbo'd and maxed out and then use detuned versions for the other departments.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    the HF 3.0 was never a particularly compelling engine... if they did do a 3.0, it would/should be a new design.

    The only issue the HF 3.0L V6 had was it was competing with larger more torquey 3.5L/3.7 V6s from other beands! With twin turbocharging it could become something special for Cadillac replacing todays NA 3.6L V6! And remember it was putting out 260HP using a unique from the 3.6L high compression ratio but with a lower compression ratio its economy would improve significantly as well as its power with turbocharging!

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My guess is if Caddy rolls with a 3.2 turbo, that it also might become a replacement for the 3.6 in some cars. For example, as the step up motor in the CTS and XTS. CTS motor lost them the C/D comparo in the recent issue. A 3.2 turbo 6 would upgrade over the 3.6 and then they could spread it around the lineup and to the ATS. It could even end up in say the Impala or LaCrosse.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The pressures in this engine will be greater than the 3.6 TT so we will see the bore shrink just as we did in the ZR1.

    We saw hints of this engine coming over a year ago and it is no surprise.

    Even on the Ecotec they went to 2.0 liters to add more pressure for durability so it s very simple to see what they are doing. Now while I do not have the boost numbers I am speaking of numbers that would bury a T type.

    My GM tune on my 2.0 eco puts out 23 PSI of warranty coverage. With the TT it may not be a high but it will spool up low down and hold it for a long time when called upon.

    We deal with many Supercharger companies and Turbo companies at work and our customers. Bock damage and blown head gaskets are very common in adapted engines. Ford Small Block suffer the most with only 4 head bolts around each cylinder. With out O ring head gaskets they almost always fail.

    Block strength, head strength and head bold or studs are also a factor. Just look at the failure alone of the Ford Diesels and their head bolts from a couple years ago.

    I expect that the 3.2 may show up else where as the High Performance Option. The 3.6 Turbo may not be the performance engine as we though it may just be the normal TT engine and the heavy grunt work will go to the 3.2 TT.

    The real question is will the TT set up on the V6 and V8 be held as the Cadillac trademark engine to set them apart. The non Turbo and Supercharged V8 may be left to Chevy.

    While GM may not be able to make a Cadillac engine the TT hallmark could make the engine that GM makes special just to Cadillac. In this segment technology sells and if they want to sell in Europe and Germany they need to address this over there. It is like Americans love NASCAR and Indy car but Euro people love F1 for the technology and not so much for on track passing. Just see how BMW and Benz sell their cars over there as they detail the technology no matter if it is performance of safety over there before anything else. They buy things not for what image they depict but for the technology they demonstrate.

    Cadillac is going to be global in 10 years and you need to start building a global image now to do that later.

    Edited by hyperv6
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The pressures in this engine will be greater than the 3.6 TT so we will see the bore shrink just as we did in the ZR1.

    We saw hints of this engine coming over a year ago and it is no surprise.

    Even on the Ecotec they went to 2.0 liters to add more pressure for durability so it s very simple to see what they are doing. Now while I do not have the boost numbers I am speaking of numbers that would bury a T type.

    My GM tune on my 2.0 eco puts out 23 PSI of warranty coverage. With the TT it may not be a high but it will spool up low down and hold it for a long time when called upon.

    We deal with many Supercharger companies and Turbo companies at work and our customers. Bock damage and blown head gaskets are very common in adapted engines. Ford Small Block suffer the most with only 4 head bolts around each cylinder. With out O ring head gaskets they almost always fail.

    Block strength, head strength and head bold or studs are also a factor. Just look at the failure alone of the Ford Diesels and their head bolts from a couple years ago.

    I expect that the 3.2 may show up else where as the High Performance Option. The 3.6 Turbo may not be the performance engine as we though it may just be the normal TT engine and the heavy grunt work will go to the 3.2 TT.

    The real question is will the TT set up on the V6 and V8 be held as the Cadillac trademark engine to set them apart. The non Turbo and Supercharged V8 may be left to Chevy.

    While GM may not be able to make a Cadillac engine the TT hallmark could make the engine that GM makes special just to Cadillac. In this segment technology sells and if they want to sell in Europe and Germany they need to address this over there. It is like Americans love NASCAR and Indy car but Euro people love F1 for the technology and not so much for on track passing. Just see how BMW and Benz sell their cars over there as they detail the technology no matter if it is performance of safety over there before anything else. They buy things not for what image they depict but for the technology they demonstrate.

    Cadillac is going to be global in 10 years and you need to start building a global image now to do that later.

    So then TT would be the Trademark of Cadillac and leave the same 3.2 T for chevy?

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Honestly, rumors are just that, rumors... I wouldn't put too much faith in rumors.

    But, just on the technicalities. I doubt they will use the Alfa engine -- it's OLD! If it's the GM HF block the logical thing will be a reduction in bore, not a shortening of the stroke. Reducing the bore has two disirable effects. Firstly, it strengthens the cylinder walls allowing it to better withstand increased working pressures. Secondly, it makes the engine more resistant to detonation because it shortens the distance from the spark plug to the furthest corner of the combustion chamber. Reducing the stroke does not do any of the above. The only thing it does is reduce the piston speed which permits a higher redline. With turbocharged engines it's easier to crank up the boost to get more power than it is to have a turbo system able to keep up with the airflow at very high rpms (say 7000~8000 rpm) while also being responsive at low rpms off idle.

    Edited by dwightlooi
    -1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    could they get about 350hp with a 3.2t v6? That would be to me where a mid level CTS would spec out nicely.

    Edited by regfootball
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    could they get about 350hp with a 3.2t v6? That would be to me where a mid level CTS would spec out nicely.

    Hell that would be the entry level engine.

    The 3.2 TT will do so much better than that. My 2.0 is at 300 HP and has no issues on pump gas and holds the full GM warranty.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The pressures in this engine will be greater than the 3.6 TT so we will see the bore shrink just as we did in the ZR1.

    We saw hints of this engine coming over a year ago and it is no surprise.

    Even on the Ecotec they went to 2.0 liters to add more pressure for durability so it s very simple to see what they are doing. Now while I do not have the boost numbers I am speaking of numbers that would bury a T type.

    My GM tune on my 2.0 eco puts out 23 PSI of warranty coverage. With the TT it may not be a high but it will spool up low down and hold it for a long time when called upon.

    We deal with many Supercharger companies and Turbo companies at work and our customers. Bock damage and blown head gaskets are very common in adapted engines. Ford Small Block suffer the most with only 4 head bolts around each cylinder. With out O ring head gaskets they almost always fail.

    Block strength, head strength and head bold or studs are also a factor. Just look at the failure alone of the Ford Diesels and their head bolts from a couple years ago.

    I expect that the 3.2 may show up else where as the High Performance Option. The 3.6 Turbo may not be the performance engine as we though it may just be the normal TT engine and the heavy grunt work will go to the 3.2 TT.

    The real question is will the TT set up on the V6 and V8 be held as the Cadillac trademark engine to set them apart. The non Turbo and Supercharged V8 may be left to Chevy.

    While GM may not be able to make a Cadillac engine the TT hallmark could make the engine that GM makes special just to Cadillac. In this segment technology sells and if they want to sell in Europe and Germany they need to address this over there. It is like Americans love NASCAR and Indy car but Euro people love F1 for the technology and not so much for on track passing. Just see how BMW and Benz sell their cars over there as they detail the technology no matter if it is performance of safety over there before anything else. They buy things not for what image they depict but for the technology they demonstrate.

    Cadillac is going to be global in 10 years and you need to start building a global image now to do that later.

    So then TT would be the Trademark of Cadillac and leave the same 3.2 T for chevy?

    You miss the point of the TT set up. They use two turbo's not for power but more so for less lag as the two turbo's will hold the volume of one large turbo but they will spool much faster for much less lag. The TT has none of that GN lag you used to get and with the VVT adjusting for low end torque what lag you have is not any where as detectable.

    A single turbo would not move much volume and would have a lot more lag. If you want a detuned Caddy engine you put two smaller Turbo's on it or you just hold down on the boost. In the Cadillac you can afford to make the engine Premium required and run a 3 bar T Map but on the Chevy GM likes to run a Premium Recommended rating that give the owner the option but a little less power.

    Turbo charging is one of the greatly misunderstood things today with all the changes we have seen in the last 5-10 years. DI and VVT along with the better turbo units and computers have totally changed this game. I was as anti turbo as you could get years ago and now that I have learned the new ways I really can appreciate the changed and how well they can make these smaller engines perform. The new engine with the torque curves that are flat as a table from 1800-5300 RPM in my engine are amazing. I have not seen torque like that since a 428 Pontiac.

    GM will not use an Alfa engine in a Alpha. Though the T maps in my HHR are from a Alfa LOL!

    Edited by hyperv6
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I did forget to also mention that two smaller duels are at times easier to package in some V6 compartments.

    I believe it is Honeywell that is working on a new Duel Boost Turbo that is a single housing. It is smaller and more efficient with many advantages. Check it out as you will see this as the next step for most gas powered engines.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As far as the concerns with lag, I wonder why GM doesn't try supercharging.

    Simple it take power to make power with a supercharger. Also packaging can be difficult or expensive in some cased.

    Turbo engines do not have any drag on them to run a turbo where as a SC engine has to use power to make power. In a larger V8 this is not as much an issue as it would be in a smaller engine where you are working to make power but not take on any power loss with drag or loss in MPG that you are trying to gain.

    Also packaging can be difficult with a SC where as you have to have a drive system where a Turbo can take power from anywhere in an exhaust system. You can mount a turbo high, low, in front, back or even at the rear axle as one system does today.

    Also todays Direct Injection engines love turbo charging and react to it very well. Add to it Variable valve timing and the new improved turbo units and drag is pretty much reduced to a point that many do not notice it.

    With my own turbo the lag is small and the torque is instant so you really do not miss it and if anything it make it more drivable as with 315 FT LBS of torque available at 1800-1900 RPM it can be tricky on in the snow. To be honest most automatic transmissions have more lag in the down shift than most modern turbo engines.

    Having owned several 3800 SC versions including the last Gen III and a Eco Turbo with the GM upgrade kit I would take the Eco Turbo hands down every time over the 3800 SC. I liked the SC engines but they just do not have the pull or acceleration the Eco has. I can kick it down and spin the tires at 50 MPH and I never could do that with any of my FWD 3800 SC engines. The first time it happened I thought something broke as the power cut, the waste gate popped and I had dash lights that I finally noticed they were for the traction control.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So I guess my question is this... if, say, GM were to built a 3.2L V6S with 350 or so HP, how much power would be lost in running a normal-sized (whatever "normal" may be) blower? And would it really be that consequential in an compact sport sedan?

    Also, how do Audi, Jaguar, and Porsche make the supercharged V6/V8 worth the effort? (and I know I'm forgetting a brand or two)

    Edited by Lamar
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So I guess my question is this... if, say, GM were to built a 3.2L V6S with 350 or so HP, how much power would be lost in running a normal-sized (whatever "normal" may be) blower? And would it really be that consequential in an compact sport sedan?

    Also, how do Audi, Jaguar, and Porsche make the supercharged V6/V8 worth the effort? (and I know I'm forgetting a brand or two)

    With the 6th Generation (TVS 4-lobe) Eaton Superchargers, the rough rule of thumb is 0.1hp per horsepower. In otherwords, it takes about 0.1 horsepower in parasitic drag to drive the blower for every horsepower the engine puts out. We are assuming modest boost levels of about 9~11 psi. A 3.2L engine will probably run the 0.9L or 1.05L blower. A 350 hp 3.2L application will actually burn enough fuel to make about 385 hp, 35 of which is consumed by the supercharger itself.

    The upsides to supercharging are that:-

    1. There is no turbolag at all and the throttle gives the driver a direct connection to the output of the engine, which is preferred in spirited driving. Supercharged engines typically feel and drive like a larger displacement normally aspirated engine.
    2. The Supercharger is actually better for emissions because there is no turbine between the exhaust ports and the catalyst to soak up heat and slow catalyst light off in cold starts
    3. The supercharger typically packages neatly into the engine Vee and costs less, whereas a turbo setup will typically require two turbos and a bunch of piping to take air to them, from them to IC(s) and finally to the engine.
    4. Superchargers also have better reliability and/or require less hardware to make reliable because they do not subject oil to thousands of degrees of heat in the turbine bearing section -- heat which in modern applications typically calls for an electric water circulation pump to keep the turbo cooled after the engine shuts off, mandate more frequent oil change intervals or high temperature synthetics

    #3 is predorminantly why Audi and Jaguar went with the TVS R1050 blower on the 3.0V6 even while they prefer turbochargers for their inline-4 applications.

    Onw problem with GM's HF V6es is that they are 60 degree engines. In general, a supercharger is easier to package with a 90 degree engine with a wider valley for the blower to fit in. With 60 deg engines the blower sits high

    Edited by dwightlooi
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The pressures in this engine will be greater than the 3.6 TT so we will see the bore shrink just as we did in the ZR1.

    We saw hints of this engine coming over a year ago and it is no surprise.

    Even on the Ecotec they went to 2.0 liters to add more pressure for durability so it s very simple to see what they are doing. Now while I do not have the boost numbers I am speaking of numbers that would bury a T type.

    My GM tune on my 2.0 eco puts out 23 PSI of warranty coverage. With the TT it may not be a high but it will spool up low down and hold it for a long time when called upon.

    We deal with many Supercharger companies and Turbo companies at work and our customers. Bock damage and blown head gaskets are very common in adapted engines. Ford Small Block suffer the most with only 4 head bolts around each cylinder. With out O ring head gaskets they almost always fail.

    Block strength, head strength and head bold or studs are also a factor. Just look at the failure alone of the Ford Diesels and their head bolts from a couple years ago.

    I expect that the 3.2 may show up else where as the High Performance Option. The 3.6 Turbo may not be the performance engine as we though it may just be the normal TT engine and the heavy grunt work will go to the 3.2 TT.

    The real question is will the TT set up on the V6 and V8 be held as the Cadillac trademark engine to set them apart. The non Turbo and Supercharged V8 may be left to Chevy.

    While GM may not be able to make a Cadillac engine the TT hallmark could make the engine that GM makes special just to Cadillac. In this segment technology sells and if they want to sell in Europe and Germany they need to address this over there. It is like Americans love NASCAR and Indy car but Euro people love F1 for the technology and not so much for on track passing. Just see how BMW and Benz sell their cars over there as they detail the technology no matter if it is performance of safety over there before anything else. They buy things not for what image they depict but for the technology they demonstrate.

    Cadillac is going to be global in 10 years and you need to start building a global image now to do that later.

    So then TT would be the Trademark of Cadillac and leave the same 3.2 T for chevy?

    You miss the point of the TT set up. They use two turbo's not for power but more so for less lag as the two turbo's will hold the volume of one large turbo but they will spool much faster for much less lag. The TT has none of that GN lag you used to get and with the VVT adjusting for low end torque what lag you have is not any where as detectable.

    A single turbo would not move much volume and would have a lot more lag. If you want a detuned Caddy engine you put two smaller Turbo's on it or you just hold down on the boost. In the Cadillac you can afford to make the engine Premium required and run a 3 bar T Map but on the Chevy GM likes to run a Premium Recommended rating that give the owner the option but a little less power.

    That is one of the widely propagated myths... Vee engines do not employ twin turbos for less lag. In fact, using one turbo would have produced less lag. One larger turbine with twice the flow capacity being fed twice the exhaust volume would spool at the same rate if all else are equal. In reality though, a larger centrifugal turbine or impeller is ALWAYS more efficient than a smaller one. This is immediately apparent when you look at the turbine and compressor graphs of smaller turbos vs larger ones. Hence, a single turbo engine will have better response and better efficiency.

    Vee type engines use two turbos in a parallel arrangement because it is highly inconvenient and lossy to pipe exhaust from one bank of cylinders to the other. They accept the slight loss in efficiency and response from the twin turbos as necessary compromise. The only alternative is to have reverse flow heads which exhausts into the Vee instead of the flanks. The problem with that is that most turbo engines are derivatives of naturally aspirated counterparts which are not reverse flow. Also, with a reverse flow engine the turbo will be right on top of the engine under the hood. This is sometimes deemed unsightly and has the very practical need for extra shielding to prevent the hood paint from cooking, In 60 degree Vees, the turbo also necessarily ride very high requiring a hood bulge in most cars. Still, certain engines which are designed from the ground up to be turbocharged powerplants (only) have reverse flow heads. BMW's 4.4 Bi-turbo V8 and the GM Duramax 6.6 Diesel comes to mind.

    The only time two turbos reduce lag is when they are in a sequential arrangement with two unequal size turbos. All the exhasut goes to one initially allowing to spool faster, once the capacity of that turbo is maxed out, the wastegate opens to dump all the flow to a second larger turbo which supports the engine to higher rpms and maximum power. This however is never the case in convential V6 or V8 turbos. You'll need a reverse flow Vee engine or an inline engine to implement a sequential turbo setup, because you need all the exhaust to converge on one turbo first. Even then, it is highly debatable whether the complication and costs are worth it. BMW's Inline-6 3.0 turbo used to use a sequential twin turbo setup, but they went to a single dual scroll turbo and ended up with better response and (more importantly) better emissions. The only other sequential twins in historically had been the Toyota Supra 3rd Gen (2JZ-GTE engine) and the FD RX-7.

    Edited by dwightlooi
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

      Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. FireStorm
      FireStorm
      (35 years old)
    2. MGZ06
      MGZ06
      (35 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Cadillac has been trying to position itself being as an alternative to German brands with models that offer exemplary handling characteristics and sharp designs. But the brand has the issue of models that don’t quite fit the image being presented. The SRX is the poster child for this. Yes, it had the sharp looks the brand was getting known for. But you wouldn’t call it sporty. It was more along the lines of a Lexus RX where luxury and comfort were the main priorities. Enthusiasts and critics were not pleased with this, but consumers gobbled them up. The SRX for a time was Cadillac’s best-selling model.
      Now we come to the successor of the SRX, the 2017 XT5. Those who were hoping for a change in the priorities will be disappointed as the XT5 doesn’t mess with the SRX’s recipe. But is that bad thing?
      Evolution is the impression you get when walking around the XT5. Cadillac’s designers didn’t make any drastic changes to the design profile aside from softening the Art & Science design language. The front now features a comically-large grille and headlights with a strand of LEDs that run into the bumper. Towards the back is an integrated spoiler that extends the roofline, a set of large taillights, and a rear bumper that comes with chrome exhaust ports and a faux skid plate. The XT5 does lose some of the polarizing details that made the SRX stand out, but it still stands out slightly in what is becoming a crowded class.
      Cadillac has been stepping up its game in terms of their interiors with their new models. Case in point is the XT5. Our top-line Platinum tester featured faux suede, leather, and wood trim on a number of surfaces that make it look and feel quite luxurious. We’re glad to see the removal of the Piano Black panel for the center stack as it looked out of place and was a magnet for fingerprints. One design idea we’re not so keen on is the gear selector. Instead of a lever, Cadillac went with a joystick controller to engage the various gears. The controller isn’t intuitive as you’ll find yourself going into the wrong gear or not going into one at all on a somewhat regular basis. You will get the hang of it after a bit, but you can’t help but wonder why Cadillac decided to change this in the first place.
      The leather used for the seats feel quite supple and help fix the issue of uncomfortable seats in the SRX. Interior space has grown, thanks to a two-inch increase in the wheelbase. Rear legroom has grown 3.2 inches and it allows anyone sitting back there to stretch out. Headroom is still slightly tight thanks in part to our tester coming with the optional panoramic sunroof. But this can be alleviated by recalling the rear seat slightly. Cargo space in smack dab in the middle - 30 cubic feet with the rear seats up and 63 cubic feet when folded.
      Cadillac User Interface (CUE) has been one of our least favorite infotainment systems to use since it was introduced a few years ago. The litany of problems ranging from a touch sensitive buttons not responding to inputs to the system crashing have dragged Cadillac down. But the system has been getting a number of changes and updates over the past few years. For starters, Cadillac has removed most of the touch-sensitive buttons from the system. Being able to press an actual button to turn on the heated/ventilated seats or adjust the temperature is really nice. It is a shame Cadillac didn’t bring back an actual volume knob for CUE - the touch-sensitive strip is still there. But at least there are volume controls on the steering wheel that allow you to avoid it. The system itself has been overhauled with a faster processor and a slightly improved interface. The changes make a difference as the system is snappier and a little bit easier to understand. If you still find CUE a bit overwhelming, you’ll be happy to know that CUE now features Apple CarPlay and Android Auto integration.
      Cadillac bucks the trend in the midsize luxury crossover class by only offering one engine - a 3.6L V6 producing 310 horsepower and 271 pound-feet of torque (@ 5,000 rpm). This comes paired with an eight-speed automatic and the choice of front or all-wheel drive. The V6 is the weak link in the XT5. When leaving a stop, it takes a moment for the engine to realize the accelerator pedal has been pressed before it starts working. This is even worse when you’re trying to make a pass as it seems the engine was busy taking a nap before it was hastily woken up. Once the engine is awake, it takes its time to get up to speed. There is a positive to the V6 engine and that is the stop-start system. Unlike some previous systems that are slow to restart the engine or do so in a very rough fashion, Cadillac’s system is quick and smooth when you let off the brake. The eight-speed automatic seems reluctant to downshift at times. We’re guessing this transmission was calibrated for fuel economy. At least the eight-speed automatic delivers smooth shifts.
      Fuel economy figures for the 2017 Cadillac XT5 all-wheel drive stand at 18 City/26 Highway/21 Combined. Our average fuel economy for the week landed around 22.3 mpg in mostly city driving. 
      One characteristic we liked about the SRX was its comfortable ride. Yes, it flies in the face of Cadillac’s message of beating the German’s at their own handling game. But buyers loved the smoothness on offer. Sadly, the XT5 loses a bit of the smoothness. Despite our tester featuring an adaptive suspension system, the XT5 wasn’t able to fully iron out bumps. Some of this can be attributed to 20-inch wheels fitted to our tester. At least the XT5 keeps road and wind noise out of the interior. Like the SRX, the XT5 isn’t sporty. Body motions are kept in check, but the light weight and nonexistent feel from the steering puts a halt to that idea. 
      An item Cadillac has been touting on the XT5 is the Rear Camera Mirror. Available only on the top-line Platinum, the mirror can stream the view from the rear camera by flicking a switch. We found this to be really helpful when backing out of parking lots as it gave a view that isn’t hindered by the thick rear pillars. Hopefully, Cadillac spreads this feature down to other trims of the XT5. 
      In some respects, the 2017 Cadillac XT5 is a step forward. The model improves on certain parts of the SRX such as a more luxurious and spacious interior, improved CUE system, and sharper looks. But in other respects, Cadillac messed up with the XT5. The 3.6L V6 needs to be shown the door and a new engine that offers better low-end performance to take its place. The loss of the smooth ride that the SRX was known for hurts the XT5 as well. Finally, there is the price. Our XT5 Platinum tester came with an as-tested price of $69,985. It is a nice crossover. But if we’re dropping close $70,000 on a luxury crossover, we can think of a few models that would be ahead of the XT5.
      It should be noted that the Cadillac XT5 has taken the place of the SRX of being the brand’s best selling model. At the end of 2016, Cadillac moved 39,485 XT5s. But unlike the SRX which we could recommend without hesitation, the XT5 comes with a number of caveats that we cannot do the same.
      Disclaimer: Cadillac Provided the XT5, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2017
      Make: Cadillac
      Model: SRX
      Trim: Platinum
      Engine: 3.6L V6 VVT DI
      Driveline: Nine-Speed Automatic, All-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 310 @ 6,700
      Torque @ RPM: 271 @ 5,000
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 18/26/21
      Curb Weight: N/A
      Location of Manufacture: Spring Hill, TN
      Base Price: $62,500
      As Tested Price: $69,985 (Includes $995.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Driver Assist Package - $2,340.00
      20-inch Wheels - $2,095.00
      Trailering Equipment - $575.00
      Black Ice Body Side Moldings - $355.00
      Compact Spare Tire - $350.00
      Black Ice License Plate Bar - $310.00
      Black Roof Rails - $295.00
      Black Splash Guards - $170.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Cadillac has been trying to position itself being as an alternative to German brands with models that offer exemplary handling characteristics and sharp designs. But the brand has the issue of models that don’t quite fit the image being presented. The SRX is the poster child for this. Yes, it had the sharp looks the brand was getting known for. But you wouldn’t call it sporty. It was more along the lines of a Lexus RX where luxury and comfort were the main priorities. Enthusiasts and critics were not pleased with this, but consumers gobbled them up. The SRX for a time was Cadillac’s best-selling model.
      Now we come to the successor of the SRX, the 2017 XT5. Those who were hoping for a change in the priorities will be disappointed as the XT5 doesn’t mess with the SRX’s recipe. But is that bad thing?
      Evolution is the impression you get when walking around the XT5. Cadillac’s designers didn’t make any drastic changes to the design profile aside from softening the Art & Science design language. The front now features a comically-large grille and headlights with a strand of LEDs that run into the bumper. Towards the back is an integrated spoiler that extends the roofline, a set of large taillights, and a rear bumper that comes with chrome exhaust ports and a faux skid plate. The XT5 does lose some of the polarizing details that made the SRX stand out, but it still stands out slightly in what is becoming a crowded class.
      Cadillac has been stepping up its game in terms of their interiors with their new models. Case in point is the XT5. Our top-line Platinum tester featured faux suede, leather, and wood trim on a number of surfaces that make it look and feel quite luxurious. We’re glad to see the removal of the Piano Black panel for the center stack as it looked out of place and was a magnet for fingerprints. One design idea we’re not so keen on is the gear selector. Instead of a lever, Cadillac went with a joystick controller to engage the various gears. The controller isn’t intuitive as you’ll find yourself going into the wrong gear or not going into one at all on a somewhat regular basis. You will get the hang of it after a bit, but you can’t help but wonder why Cadillac decided to change this in the first place.
      The leather used for the seats feel quite supple and help fix the issue of uncomfortable seats in the SRX. Interior space has grown, thanks to a two-inch increase in the wheelbase. Rear legroom has grown 3.2 inches and it allows anyone sitting back there to stretch out. Headroom is still slightly tight thanks in part to our tester coming with the optional panoramic sunroof. But this can be alleviated by recalling the rear seat slightly. Cargo space in smack dab in the middle - 30 cubic feet with the rear seats up and 63 cubic feet when folded.
      Cadillac User Interface (CUE) has been one of our least favorite infotainment systems to use since it was introduced a few years ago. The litany of problems ranging from a touch sensitive buttons not responding to inputs to the system crashing have dragged Cadillac down. But the system has been getting a number of changes and updates over the past few years. For starters, Cadillac has removed most of the touch-sensitive buttons from the system. Being able to press an actual button to turn on the heated/ventilated seats or adjust the temperature is really nice. It is a shame Cadillac didn’t bring back an actual volume knob for CUE - the touch-sensitive strip is still there. But at least there are volume controls on the steering wheel that allow you to avoid it. The system itself has been overhauled with a faster processor and a slightly improved interface. The changes make a difference as the system is snappier and a little bit easier to understand. If you still find CUE a bit overwhelming, you’ll be happy to know that CUE now features Apple CarPlay and Android Auto integration.
      Cadillac bucks the trend in the midsize luxury crossover class by only offering one engine - a 3.6L V6 producing 310 horsepower and 271 pound-feet of torque (@ 5,000 rpm). This comes paired with an eight-speed automatic and the choice of front or all-wheel drive. The V6 is the weak link in the XT5. When leaving a stop, it takes a moment for the engine to realize the accelerator pedal has been pressed before it starts working. This is even worse when you’re trying to make a pass as it seems the engine was busy taking a nap before it was hastily woken up. Once the engine is awake, it takes its time to get up to speed. There is a positive to the V6 engine and that is the stop-start system. Unlike some previous systems that are slow to restart the engine or do so in a very rough fashion, Cadillac’s system is quick and smooth when you let off the brake. The eight-speed automatic seems reluctant to downshift at times. We’re guessing this transmission was calibrated for fuel economy. At least the eight-speed automatic delivers smooth shifts.
      Fuel economy figures for the 2017 Cadillac XT5 all-wheel drive stand at 18 City/26 Highway/21 Combined. Our average fuel economy for the week landed around 22.3 mpg in mostly city driving. 
      One characteristic we liked about the SRX was its comfortable ride. Yes, it flies in the face of Cadillac’s message of beating the German’s at their own handling game. But buyers loved the smoothness on offer. Sadly, the XT5 loses a bit of the smoothness. Despite our tester featuring an adaptive suspension system, the XT5 wasn’t able to fully iron out bumps. Some of this can be attributed to 20-inch wheels fitted to our tester. At least the XT5 keeps road and wind noise out of the interior. Like the SRX, the XT5 isn’t sporty. Body motions are kept in check, but the light weight and nonexistent feel from the steering puts a halt to that idea. 
      An item Cadillac has been touting on the XT5 is the Rear Camera Mirror. Available only on the top-line Platinum, the mirror can stream the view from the rear camera by flicking a switch. We found this to be really helpful when backing out of parking lots as it gave a view that isn’t hindered by the thick rear pillars. Hopefully, Cadillac spreads this feature down to other trims of the XT5. 
      In some respects, the 2017 Cadillac XT5 is a step forward. The model improves on certain parts of the SRX such as a more luxurious and spacious interior, improved CUE system, and sharper looks. But in other respects, Cadillac messed up with the XT5. The 3.6L V6 needs to be shown the door and a new engine that offers better low-end performance to take its place. The loss of the smooth ride that the SRX was known for hurts the XT5 as well. Finally, there is the price. Our XT5 Platinum tester came with an as-tested price of $69,985. It is a nice crossover. But if we’re dropping close $70,000 on a luxury crossover, we can think of a few models that would be ahead of the XT5.
      It should be noted that the Cadillac XT5 has taken the place of the SRX of being the brand’s best selling model. At the end of 2016, Cadillac moved 39,485 XT5s. But unlike the SRX which we could recommend without hesitation, the XT5 comes with a number of caveats that we cannot do the same.
      Disclaimer: Cadillac Provided the XT5, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2017
      Make: Cadillac
      Model: SRX
      Trim: Platinum
      Engine: 3.6L V6 VVT DI
      Driveline: Nine-Speed Automatic, All-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 310 @ 6,700
      Torque @ RPM: 271 @ 5,000
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 18/26/21
      Curb Weight: N/A
      Location of Manufacture: Spring Hill, TN
      Base Price: $62,500
      As Tested Price: $69,985 (Includes $995.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Driver Assist Package - $2,340.00
      20-inch Wheels - $2,095.00
      Trailering Equipment - $575.00
      Black Ice Body Side Moldings - $355.00
      Compact Spare Tire - $350.00
      Black Ice License Plate Bar - $310.00
      Black Roof Rails - $295.00
      Black Splash Guards - $170.00
    • By William Maley
      Back in November, we first learned about Mercedes-AMG's next standalone model possibly known as the GT4, a four-door coupe. The new model would be previewed by a concept before going on sale in 2019. We now have some new details on this model.
      Autocar reports the GT4 concept will be shown next month at the Geneva Motor Show to celebrate the 50th anniversary of AMG. A production model will soon follow a year later for European markets.
      The GT4 will serve as the replacement for the CLS Shooting Brake and use a modified version of Mercedes' modular rear architecture (MRA). According to sources at AMG, the GT4's variant of MRA will come with 'unique' wheelbase and track width measurements. The GT4 will also utilize aluminum and hot-formed high-strength steel in an effort to help cut weight.
      Power will come from a 4.0L V8 biturbo engine that will be offered in two states of tune - the highest one offering 600-plus horsepower. A performance-oriented version of Mercedes' 4Matic all-wheel drive will come standard. There is also talk about adding integrated starter generator (ISG) that would add a brief boost of power along with improving fuel economy.
      A 3.0L turbocharged V6 is possibly in the cards as well.
      Source: Autocar

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Back in November, we first learned about Mercedes-AMG's next standalone model possibly known as the GT4, a four-door coupe. The new model would be previewed by a concept before going on sale in 2019. We now have some new details on this model.
      Autocar reports the GT4 concept will be shown next month at the Geneva Motor Show to celebrate the 50th anniversary of AMG. A production model will soon follow a year later for European markets.
      The GT4 will serve as the replacement for the CLS Shooting Brake and use a modified version of Mercedes' modular rear architecture (MRA). According to sources at AMG, the GT4's variant of MRA will come with 'unique' wheelbase and track width measurements. The GT4 will also utilize aluminum and hot-formed high-strength steel in an effort to help cut weight.
      Power will come from a 4.0L V8 biturbo engine that will be offered in two states of tune - the highest one offering 600-plus horsepower. A performance-oriented version of Mercedes' 4Matic all-wheel drive will come standard. There is also talk about adding integrated starter generator (ISG) that would add a brief boost of power along with improving fuel economy.
      A 3.0L turbocharged V6 is possibly in the cards as well.
      Source: Autocar
  • Recent Status Updates

    • Drew Dowdell

      So help me.... One of these days these Miami drivers are going to make me test the loss damage waiver on my rental car. Worst drivers in the US.
      · 1 reply
    • Drew Dowdell

      I have one co-worker who has been a thorn in my side for the past 6 months.... but I have to admit that when I need something done that is in his area of expertise, he goes after it like an angry rabid chihuahua and gets it done.
      · 0 replies
    • Drew Dowdell

      Me: I'll take "Shopping" for $800.
      Alex:"This shopping location is popular on Sundays for groups of gay couples, families with small children, and college kids with parents in tow to gather."
      · 3 replies
  • Who's Online (See full list)