Drew Dowdell

Do you regularly wind it up to 6,000 rpm, or is 3,000 - 4,500 rpm more typical for accelerating? Wouldn't you want power where you can use it most often? I'm a tanqueray 10 man with the occasional Woodford Reserve or Tennessee Honey Well, would you look at that- something I agree with. Personally I will take red wine for every day drinking I love Mark Ryan wines. Sapphire or Hendricks for my Gin. Blue Label Johnny Walker for whiskey Dos Armadillos Extra Anejo Reserva for my Tequila Back on Subject, I still do not see a need for the over heavy over rated DOHC engines period. Gah.... I give the Sapphire to the guests who don't know any better and hide my Tang 10 so they aren't putting it in O.J.

I did.

The cluster was actually supposed to appear different. It was originally designed to be invisible when the car was off and then you would only see the glow of the needles and gauges floating in the dark. It was apparently a neat effect, but Cadillac ran into a snag at the last minute. It was too late to redesign the whole cluster, so they had to just switch out the plastic cover.

Good point(could not make out the vents) but that 7.3 second time is not from a 3.6L V6 CTS though. There is nothing in that video that indicates that it is a 3.6L. It also cements my point that the base model gauge, whether in a CTS or an ATS, is just cheap looking and does not belong in either car, much less a $53K CTS. Yes, you only get the premium TFT screen on the Premium trim CTS 3.6. The Luxury and Performance trim CTS 3.6 come with this base cluster. It's the same car in both runs in that video. I can't explain the reason for the difference in the runs except for user error or perhaps a different terrain (was the first run on flat while the second run on a slight incline? we don't know)

It's more than just that. With these naturally aspirated DOHC V6es, I feel that customers are getting cheated a bit. They are being sold horsepower ratings that they will never see in the real world. Drew, you really need to qualify a remark like this. I know you are mostly referring to cam-cord V6 automobiles for the general masses, and that's fine, but there are many performance oriented vehicles that benefit with DOHC. But that is my whole point as well, in that the benefits of DOHC path for families of engines that automakers CHOSE to follow....are far more than just a marketing gimmick. Engineering is a balance act of trade-offs, and clearly, the scale tipped to the benefits of DOHC to invest in entire families of engines for your products. A few examples here and there of OHV offering benefits, should not and does not dictate where you invest your engineering $$$$. So yeah, marketing is part of that equation, but a small part. Here is a CTS w/ 3.6L accelerating. I don't know what you see, but what I don't see, is a driver waiting for the hp's to kick in that supposedly never do. What I do see, is a DOHC revving freely right out of the whole, and building momentum, well past where an OHV engine would fall flat. Am I really that unclear in my posts? Is it just me or is it the reading comprehension around this place lately....? Do you drive like that all the time? Do you floor it at every light and let the engine wind up to red-line through every gear every time the light turns green? Does the typical Camry or Impala driver drive that way even some of the time? If you're like me, your engine rarely touches the red-line. Even then, probably less than 1% of the time will it ever even exceed 5,000 rpm. So, for "every day" driving, the way that 99.9999% of driving is done... having the horsepower peak at a much lower RPM would be an advantage during that 99.9999% of the time. It would allow engines to turn lower RPM at cruising and better fuel economy. And here's the kicker. If I'm wrong, then Ecoboost has no reason to exist. Ecoboost allows for smaller displacement engines to produce power at a lower RPM. Turbo-DI small displacement engines are the replacement for the bigger, slower spinning, OHV torque engines, not the OHC engines that only produce HP at or near red-line.

It's a CTS. The base levels of CTS come with the same gauge cluster as the ATS. The way you can tell the difference in this case is the location of the air vent. ATS air vent is vertical, CTS air vent is horizontal. It's a CTS.

It's more than just that. With these naturally aspirated DOHC V6es, I feel that customers are getting cheated a bit. They are being sold horsepower ratings that they will never see in the real world.

I posted GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Benz. That easily covers the majority of the market, but since that doesn't satisfy you...Very well, I'll get you the rest. Nissan 3.5 VQ (Maxima) - 300hp @ 6400 RPM - RL 6600 RPM Ford 3.7 (Mustang) - 305hp @ 6500 RPM - RL 6850 RPM (fuel cut off) BMW N52 - 272hp @ 6650 - RL 7000 RPM (Last non-Turbo 6 I could find) the balance advantage of an I-6 over a V6 are pretty clear here though. !!!! Volkswagen 3.6 - 280HP @ 6200 RPM - RL 6000 RPM !!!! So VW is advertising a horsepower rating achieved 200 RPM beyond red-line? Hyundai Lambda 3.8 V6 - 348HP @ 6400 RPM - RL 6750 Why is that even possible/a thing? Post a rating ABOVE what the engine can even rev to?!?!? I spoke to someone yesterday about the VW.... apparently the transmission will hold the gear right up till the 6200 RPM horsepower peak, 200 rpm into the red-line. So you do actually get the 280 hp for all of a 100th of a second before the transmission shifts it away.

I really just want something a bit more up to date for my Toronado (if I had the money). No need for 500+ horsepower. Swift and silent... a mild Turbo-6 would be fine.

Great points. Welcome back Ven, glad to see you.

Only hellcat is dead. The regular hemi lives on.

Yeah, I don't think they could do that. A light turbo and DI should be enough

I'm a tanqueray 10 man with the occasional Woodford Reserve or Tennessee Honey

Sorry guys... I've just been extra aggravated by work this week. So much so that I took tomorrow off in protest and the following weekend is a 4 day weekend... again in protest. I was just handed a huge project for September when I thought I was going to get to stay in Pittsburgh and not travel. Now, I'm basically gone all of September, with basically zero notice. That's on top of the planned project for October that is going to have me living in NJ for most of the month. Still... downvoting is back as long as we can all behave ourselves.

But why? They still reasonably well and generally at the higher end (higher profit) trim lines. Mercury had nothing special over the Ford cars, but Buick does differentiate itself from the platform mates it shares with.

MARKETING It lets them claim best in class V6 Horsepower even though the customer would be better served by the greater torque of the 4.3. They've spent so many year brainwashing people like you who are hooked on the horsepower number that taking it away would be like ripping the needle out of an addict's arm. MARKETING MARKETING MARKETING I'm sure that Colorado buyers are cross shopping with a Veyron.... and they were so into the truck, except it didn't have a suede glove box liner.... BTW, your post has inspired me to give the down voting feature a trial run.

You're only part right. The old ones lost out to the Turbo Inline-4 engines. A new one would be a different story. A 3900 with direct injection in place of the 2.4 in the 'Nox would likely be a welcome improvement in power and off the line torque. It would likely end up somewhere around 95% of the power of the 3.6 with 95% of the fuel economy of the 2.4. A very nice compromise engine for those who like neither existing option. The 4.3 would make a good option in the Terrain as well and a huge improvement in the Lambdas. And no... pushrods do not sound horrible above 5,000 RPM. Z06 Hellcat https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d14y4G4lNNw Something a bit tamer? How about even tamer? Silverado 4.3

LOL glad to help.... I think?

I posted GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Benz. That easily covers the majority of the market, but since that doesn't satisfy you...Very well, I'll get you the rest. Nissan 3.5 VQ (Maxima) - 300hp @ 6400 RPM - RL 6600 RPM Ford 3.7 (Mustang) - 305hp @ 6500 RPM - RL 6850 RPM (fuel cut off) BMW N52 - 272hp @ 6650 - RL 7000 RPM (Last non-Turbo 6 I could find) the balance advantage of an I-6 over a V6 are pretty clear here though. !!!! Volkswagen 3.6 - 280HP @ 6200 RPM - RL 6000 RPM !!!! So VW is advertising a horsepower rating achieved 200 RPM beyond red-line? Hyundai Lambda 3.8 V6 - 348HP @ 6400 RPM - RL 6750 Why is that even possible/a thing? Post a rating ABOVE what the engine can even rev to?!?!? I"m sure the engine won't grenade exactly at 6001 rpm, but that's what the engine is rated to. Keep in mind that this is a VR engine with a 15 degree cylinder bank rather than a V engine with a 54, 60, or 90 degree cylinder bank. So even though it is a 24 valve engine, it is technically SOHC rather than DOHC if you think of it as a V engine, but it is a DOHC rather than SOHC if you think of it as an inline engine. It is kinda both and neither..... but that may be the cause of the relatively low red-line rating. It's a very interesting design from a packaging standpoint.

And it's not like vast swaths of the auto industry hasn't been wrong before. The domestics were wrong about the imports. The domestics were wrong about the oil crisis. The japanese and germans were wrong about the Koreans (I'd say the domestics recognized the threat, but were unable to react rather than unwilling). The whole industry was wrong on the paint process. The japanese were wrong on rust proofing. The entire industry has been wrong about turbos multiple times and has only recently figured it out. BTW... about those turbos. The reason for their popularity today is precisely because of the lack of low end grunt from most engines. In 4-cylinder, it is usually expected, but when you buy a V6, you want some go power when you take off. Turbos + DI have given back what the switch to DOHC taketh away.

Not sure I follow. The Cadillac XTS--which will be 4 years old when the Continental is released--uses HALDEX torque vectoring AWD, a more advanced system than anything Ford currently produces, and has an available 410 hp turbo V6. It also has standard magnetic ride control and a hi-per strut front suspension. Mechanically, the Continental does not impress. It will sell on interior and exterior design and whether it can be better than the sum of its parts. Indeed it does have those options available, but not standard at that $47k price. (except hi per strut and mrc) To get the power level and awd that the continental is supposedly going to have, you'll be into the $60k range. I'll believe the hype when the production Continental is revealed along with pricing and powertrains. 400 HP from a 3.0 V6 doesn't sound like too much of a stretch. Cadillac is doing that in the CT6.

The entire auto industry is a MARKETING industry that builds cars on the side. They've spent the last 7 decades selling horsepower and dogginniut they're going to keep doing just that... Even it if takes fleecing the customer to do it.

Not sure I follow. The Cadillac XTS--which will be 4 years old when the Continental is released--uses HALDEX torque vectoring AWD, a more advanced system than anything Ford currently produces, and has an available 410 hp turbo V6. It also has standard magnetic ride control and a hi-per strut front suspension. Mechanically, the Continental does not impress. It will sell on interior and exterior design and whether it can be better than the sum of its parts. Indeed it does have those options available, but not standard at that $47k price. (except hi per strut and mrc) To get the power level and awd that the continental is supposedly going to have, you'll be into the $60k range.

Even a light turbo would help.

My German designed, Korean built Buick has been basically flawless for the 2 years I've owned it.