dado

There is supercharger whine heard in cts-v. And that is a lsa engine. Nobody said it is loud. But you can hear it.

Right and if you try really hard you can hear the turbocharger whistle in ANY turbocharged car. So, you point is?

There is a reason why the LSA (14/19 MPG -- Camaro ZL1) has notably worse fuel economy numbers compared to the LS3 (16/24 -- Camaro SS). I am citing Camaro numbers for a fairer and more accurate comparison since we are comparing engines not chassis weight and aerodynamics.

Point is you don't have to try really hard on CTS-V. In most articles i've read about CTS-v there was observations made about supercharger noise(i assume that is only when you are accelerating with pedal to he floor).Now this is all good and welcome for type of car CTS-V is...but for premium product like something that will go against new s class, audi s8, new maserati quattoporte,porsche panamera or BMW 7. I'm not sure it is acceptable..yes you can hear an engine roaring when you put pedal to the medal..but i'm not sure you can also hear turbochargers spinning. Maybe tested cts-V had problems with superchargers.I've read some CTS-V owners did have some noise problems with their CTS-V and GM change supercharger on their cars. I must admit i'm not big fan of german's product and i don't read test about them as much as i read about Cadillac cars so maybe you can hear turbochargers whine..but i doubt it.

And if you want to compare engines..well there are certain criterias that are only specific to an engines..power (power curve) torque (torque curve) weight, size, specific fuel consumption, price, complexity...etc.etc. I am curious to see how would your LT1 "premium" engine compared to engine from mercedes audi, and bmw. As i see it is already falling behind in criteria of power, torque, weight if you take M157 engine for comparison.

The CTS-V and Top engine for the SLS will probably need to be a supercharged version of the LT engine pulling in 600~700 hp, probably retaining the 6.2 liter displacement for the cylinder wall thickness. Supercharging is easier than turbocharging from a packaging standpoint -- less intake piping and less exhaust plumbing. It will be less efficient, but in that price and performance bracket nobody is actually concerned about fuel costs and "green fashion" buyers would be shopping at Tesla anyway.

Don't forget what top engine does the S class has.It is a twin turbo v12. So this supercharged v8 (if cadilac flagship will go against s class) must not be noisier (no supercharger whine in cabin) than the engine in the S class,Or at least is must not be heard in a cabin .Actually NVH should be on same level.

Even on the ZL-1 there is nearly zero supercharger whine... so I'm not sure what tree you think you're barking up here...

There is supercharger whine heard in cts-v. And that is a lsa engine. Nobody said it is loud. But you can hear it.

Why do you and so many others think everything has to go against and be equal to the S class. I have not been that impressed myself with the over all quality of Mercedes. I think right now both MB and BMW have over bloated images. It proves in the JD quality reports and so many times in the real world, not the auto motive blind journalism.

I would be more focused on what high end customers really want than to say MB or BMW is our check list. Are we equal to or better than them?

Use a customer input list and build to what the customer wants, if it really ends up being equal to MB or BMW, then so be it, but at least then GM is building to the customer. Once built, then compare and see how you stack up.

And what do you think high end customer wants? Cars that are worse than s class, A8,7 or better than S class, A8, 7?

Few days ago GM announce that it will rise price and prestige of Cadillac cars to be better align with german cars. Why do you think they will do that? Why does GM wants Cadillac to go against Germans cars in luxury class if there are better cars out there? If Cadillac wants to be taken seriously in luxury car market they will have to be better than other cars in that market..And that cars are coming from Mercedes, BMW, Audi. Not Volvo, Lincoln, Acura.

Also Cadillac is way behind on image in Europe. And it seems that it lack in image in USA too. Does Mercedes and BMW have over bloated image..Yes. But this is something Cadillac will go against on most markets in the world. So maybe if they build cars that are better than S class or A8 (but i think S class is still being considered king in its class...not to mention there is new one coming soon..but maybe i'm wrong), their image will go up. And maybe after time Cadillac will be considered Standard of the world again.

Regarding J.D quality report...there is also J.D. Power 2012 Vehicle Ownership Satisfaction Study and according to this study Mercedes-Benz drivers are the most satisfied. I found this by just typing mercedes benz and J.D. Power.

I'm curious is there any category where Cadillac has taken first place in J.D power regarding their cars(best premium cars, most reliable or anything regarding their cars)?

The CTS-V and Top engine for the SLS will probably need to be a supercharged version of the LT engine pulling in 600~700 hp, probably retaining the 6.2 liter displacement for the cylinder wall thickness. Supercharging is easier than turbocharging from a packaging standpoint -- less intake piping and less exhaust plumbing. It will be less efficient, but in that price and performance bracket nobody is actually concerned about fuel costs and "green fashion" buyers would be shopping at Tesla anyway.

Don't forget what top engine does the S class has.It is a twin turbo v12. So this supercharged v8 (if cadilac flagship will go against s class) must not be noisier (no supercharger whine in cabin) than the engine in the S class,Or at least is must not be heard in a cabin .Actually NVH should be on same level.

Would this premium V8 LT1 be top engine for Cadillac?

Even if we are looking at a present V8 engines this "premium" version of LT1 is behind in torque,HP and weight. Just take a look at 5.5 l v8 TT (m157) from Mercedes. This type of a engine is what will future engine in Cadillac compete against. And not just in flagships. GM can make a DOHC v8,v12,v10 etc. but if it isn't better or equal to a engines from competition GM would be wasting time and money for nothing.

I also think LT1 version like 6.2 l v8 with turbochargers (maybe even a different displacement) would be a better choise for premium Cadillac. Also more important question is will GM be able to show this premium v8 as genuine Cadillac engine and not something which is shared with cheaper cars and trucks.

Interesting idea! But if you are to change out all those parts who not just develope some DOHC 4VPC DI heads? Or even better yet just take the Altra V8 off the shelf and Turbo Charge it for modern Cadillac use! Cadillac truly needs and deserves its own DOHC V8!

The LT1, for all it's merits, is already over weight. 211 kg vs 183 kg for the LS3 (15% gain in mass). If you switch to DOHC heads the engine gets even heavier (possibly around 240 kg). DOHC heads also make the engine taller and wider. Most importantly though, DOHC heads make the engine less fuel efficient by increasing the internal friction -- four times as many camshafts, twice as many lobes and much greater bearing surfaces in the valve train.

As far as the new autos go, they won't arrive for another 2~3 years.

Twin turbo 5.5 l,560+ hp, v8 DI DOHC v8 from Mercedes (m 157)- 204 kg

6.2 l v8 DOHC v8 from Mercedes , 570 hp (M159)- around 200 kg.

BMW 4.4 v8 DOHC twin turbo DI ,from 400- 550+ hp- around 220 kg

Viper v10 8,4 l 640 hp, ohv-around 220 kg

Coyote v8, 440 hp, DOHC -around 200 kg

Now put a supercharger on the LT1 (i doubt GM will increase displacement on this one) to have competitive HP&torque rating and you have an engine with over 220 kg and more. Now when small block has lost advantage on weight and if i have read correctly it is getting bigger in dimensions too (but still not as big as DOHC competition) ,i think GM should think about special engine for Cadillac premium vehicles.

I can see even a coyote v8 with supercharger or twin turbocharger having less weight than a LT1 (LT4).

If GM doesn't offer DOHC v8 (or maybe 3 valve heads on LT version for Cadillac) than this is a least they should offer in premium cadillac model. But i doubt we will see a 7.0 LT version. A 6.2 l supercharger is probably the best and biggest LT GM will have in their LT portfolio.

Now that it's out in the sun, here's summary of what made it and what didn't...

What Made it

• Direct Injection
  
• Synchronous Variable Valve Timing
  
• Cylinder Deactivation
  

What didn't make it

• Cam-in-cam independent Variable Valve Timing
  
• Dual In-bloc Cam
  
• Hemispherical Combustion Chamber w/ 3-valves
  
• Raised Camshaft location (lighter valvetrain mass / higher rpm capability) -- AFM lifters can't cope anyway so it's moot
  
• Variable Ratio Rocker assembly
  
• Variable Volume Intake manifold
  
• Variable Length Intake Runner Assembly
  
• Non-Acoustic Knock Sensing (Ionic Knock detection via sparking plugs)
  

In retrospect I can say the following:-

• Power came in 20 hp less than my previous expectations (450 vs 470)*
  
• Torque cam in 12 lb-ft higher than my previous expectations (450 vs 438**)
  
• Compression came in 0.7 points lower than my expectations (11.5 vs 12.2)
  
• Cam-in-Cam didn't make it (I expected it to)
  
• We can finally put the 5.5 liter mythology to bed I guess.
  

* This may indicate a relatively low red line (perhaps 6000~6100 rpm) perhaps imposed by the the cylinder deactivation system.

** 438 lb-ft was based on the limit of the 6L80 transmission.

Regardless, this engine is in the ballpark of expectations and will serve the C7 very well. It will also serve Cadillac very well should they elect to adopt it for the ATS-V. It is, afterall, a lighter, smaller, more powerful and more torque engine than the Ford DOHC 5.0. It is also lighter, simpler and less expensive than Bi-turbo V6es of a similar output.

This LT1 engine weights 465 lbs. Coyote v8 weights 430 lbs. it is also heavier than M156 or M159 engine from Mercedes.

Pushrod Versus OHC/DOHC - Winner Pushrod!

Now why do I state the above? I base this on spending half a day at the store locally that sells this new amazing v4 engine and a technical write up in the October 2012 Car & Driver Page 28 Story titled:

"Pushrods in Perpetuity - Technology in use since 1886 is still kicking."

Since the magazine does not seem to have this great write up on their web site and I do not wish to get Cheers and Gears in trouble, I will only quote sections of this article,

In the second paragraph after talking about all the trash talk blame the pushrod v engines get as the favorite fall guy for OHC/DOHC engine makers to use when those engines fail to out perform the OHC/DOHC engines they ask a very important question.

Quote: "How can pushrods persist when dual overhead cams and multivalve combustion chanbers offer so many compelling advantages - better breathing, higher efficiency, and lower emissions to name three?"

The answer seems to be from Motus Motorcycles and their new MST Sport Touring Bike!

http://www.motusmoto...s.com/kmv4.html

This new American Motocycle Startup built from scratch a New Pushrod V4 Engine that is already being used in a VW based Dune Buggy as well as their own line of hot American Made Motocycles. The company hired Katech to create a Fuel efficient, powerful small foot print light weight engine and Katech drew upon their years of experiance in powering corvettes to six class victories at Le Mans. According to the web site and the Car and Drive story, Katech sat down and reviewed old and new technologies using the most efficient parts from what the world has engineered to create a 1.6 liter Motus Baby Block V4. This intriging water cooled 90 degree aluminum engine with cast iron liners and billet crankshaft yields a 345-90-195-90 degree firing intervals.

Katech tried the following and dumped them due to the added friction and weight gained nothing. sump mounted balance shafts, direct injection with electronic controls and throttle operation and Motus did not see any payoff, do DI was dumped. There were many things tried which failed and in the end Katech and Motus tapped the wealth of small block Chevy v8 knowledge to produce a valvetrain consisting of one block mounted camshaft opening two valves per cylinder through hydraulic lifters, pushrods and rocker arms. Reinventing the combustion chamver and valvtrain seemed a waste of time when a low friction, efficient solution was already in front of them.

The result is a 165HP 100 cubic inch Baby Block 130lb V4 that revs to 8000rpm. This engine has a 11.5 to 1 compression ratio and runs on 87 octane. This engine allows Motus to undercut competitors by 100 to 150lbs. It is more compact and easier to work on and its center of gravity is lower than that of competing OHC/DOHC engines. Motus also has a hotter 185hp version for the MST-R bike. Credit for creating a 2nd motor cycle company that falls between the archaic Harley Davidson and the tech compulsive imports.

The Dune Buggy seems to get even more power and with taking up 1/3 less space than straight 4 bangers it would appear that car companies need to revisit the benefits and efficient nature of a pushrod v engine.

http://www.motusmoto....com/index.html

End result is after spending a day reviewing this information and making a trip down to Hinshaws Motorcycle Store in Auburn washington this bike rocks, is extremely compact and is nothing short of but amazing.

Pushrod Wins again!!!

Your Thoughts????

Pushrod Versus OHC/DOHC - Winner Pushrod!

Now why do I state the above? I base this on spending half a day at the store locally that sells this new amazing v4 engine and a technical write up in the October 2012 Car & Driver Page 28 Story titled:

"Pushrods in Perpetuity - Technology in use since 1886 is still kicking."

Since the magazine does not seem to have this great write up on their web site and I do not wish to get Cheers and Gears in trouble, I will only quote sections of this article,

In the second paragraph after talking about all the trash talk blame the pushrod v engines get as the favorite fall guy for OHC/DOHC engine makers to use when those engines fail to out perform the OHC/DOHC engines they ask a very important question.

Quote: "How can pushrods persist when dual overhead cams and multivalve combustion chanbers offer so many compelling advantages - better breathing, higher efficiency, and lower emissions to name three?"

The answer seems to be from Motus Motorcycles and their new MST Sport Touring Bike!

http://www.motusmoto...s.com/kmv4.html

This new American Motocycle Startup built from scratch a New Pushrod V4 Engine that is already being used in a VW based Dune Buggy as well as their own line of hot American Made Motocycles. The company hired Katech to create a Fuel efficient, powerful small foot print light weight engine and Katech drew upon their years of experiance in powering corvettes to six class victories at Le Mans. According to the web site and the Car and Drive story, Katech sat down and reviewed old and new technologies using the most efficient parts from what the world has engineered to create a 1.6 liter Motus Baby Block V4. This intriging water cooled 90 degree aluminum engine with cast iron liners and billet crankshaft yields a 345-90-195-90 degree firing intervals.

Katech tried the following and dumped them due to the added friction and weight gained nothing. sump mounted balance shafts, direct injection with electronic controls and throttle operation and Motus did not see any payoff, do DI was dumped. There were many things tried which failed and in the end Katech and Motus tapped the wealth of small block Chevy v8 knowledge to produce a valvetrain consisting of one block mounted camshaft opening two valves per cylinder through hydraulic lifters, pushrods and rocker arms. Reinventing the combustion chamver and valvtrain seemed a waste of time when a low friction, efficient solution was already in front of them.

The result is a 165HP 100 cubic inch Baby Block 130lb V4 that revs to 8000rpm. This engine has a 11.5 to 1 compression ratio and runs on 87 octane. This engine allows Motus to undercut competitors by 100 to 150lbs. It is more compact and easier to work on and its center of gravity is lower than that of competing OHC/DOHC engines. Motus also has a hotter 185hp version for the MST-R bike. Credit for creating a 2nd motor cycle company that falls between the archaic Harley Davidson and the tech compulsive imports.

The Dune Buggy seems to get even more power and with taking up 1/3 less space than straight 4 bangers it would appear that car companies need to revisit the benefits and efficient nature of a pushrod v engine.

http://www.motusmoto....com/index.html

End result is after spending a day reviewing this information and making a trip down to Hinshaws Motorcycle Store in Auburn washington this bike rocks, is extremely compact and is nothing short of but amazing.

Pushrod Wins again!!!

Your Thoughts????

Actually Katech sells even more powerful versions of this engine

One with 280 hp and one with 426 hp(this one seems to have direct injection)

Katech V4

Koenigsegg has the best engine, it makes 1,000 hp end of story.

The McLaren V8 is impressive for the amount of power it makes from a small displacement, but the AMG M157 wins there. The AMG engine has almost as much horsepower but way more torque and is more efficient. The Ferrari Italia V8 sounds good, but I'd probably rather have the McLaren or Mercedes V8 instead.

So your criteria is power and torque.Am i right? To you by default most powerful engine wins (than the engine from SSC ultimate Aero should be better than all of this engine) ? Or is HP per liter also calculated here?

Now LS9 has 638 hp and 820 Nm of torque.That is 103,5 hp/l

Mclaren 838 has 617 hp( that is 162 hp/l) and 600 Nm of torque

M157 from Mercedes -AMG makes 571 (103,8 hp/l) hp and torque of 900 Nm.

Now according to yours criterias LS9 engine is better than M838TT (2 wins) and on pair with M157(LS9 has higher HP raiting but lower torque and preety much same Hp/l rating)?

Am i getting this right?

Did you not want to state why you think these DOHC engines are better than Pushrod? I do not see any of them being better, unless Google is not showing me the right info, I do not see any of them with better HP/Torque ratio or fuel consumption than what is already being attained out of a Pushrod engine. In most cases, the Pushrod beats these engines.

I want to see criteria which smk4565 use to determine which engine is better? Fuel consumption doesn't depend only on engine but also on car, transmission etc. Specific fuel consumption is one of the criteria which is in relation to engine only. Just like Weight of the engine/ Hp of the engine. Or physical size of the engine. All this (and much more) can be used as criteria (by individual) to determine why is one engine better than the other. I don't have that much (and more) information to determine which engine is "better". i don't considere type of valvetrain to be criteria..but i know some people who does.

I did read the rest, SOHC is worse than DOHC but no one really makes them any more either. But either way, OHC is better than pushrod, the example of the Crown Vic is because the engine was left the same basically form the early 90s. Comparing a bad SOHC V8 to the best pushrod on the market isn't really making any sense. That is like comparing the GM 3900 V6 to the Nissan GT-R V6.

Well i can see DOHC V8 having better image...but ..what else?

What is there i can use in real live that DOHC v8 does better than OHV v8?

Is coyote v8 better than LS3?

Yes, best DOHC v8 engine is maybe better than best V8 OHv (but i'm still interested to know which are criterias) but how much does best DOHC v8 cost? Does GM has car in which they could put that engine and price it accordingly?

Also,just to see which criteria do you consider important (i don't mean to be offensive just curious) here is a list of some DOHC engines..which one do you think is(just the engine not the car) better? And why?

5.0 l v8 TT from koenigsegg agera

4.5 l v8 from Ferrari italia 458

M838 TT from Mclaren

6.5 l v12 (L539) from Lamborghini aventador

Synergy V8

AMG M159

AMG M157

Without going into the details of 30~40 V8 engines, I can make the following general statements with confidence:-

• At the same displacement, a Pushrod Design is almost always more Fuel Efficient than a DOHC design, although it will make less power
  
• At the same power output, a Pushrod Design needs 15~20% greater displacement and delivers comparable fuel economy
  
• At the same displacement or the same output, a Pushrod Design is almost always smaller, lighter and cheaper than a DOHC engine
  

Without cluttering this post with over a 100 V6 and V8 data points, I can also make the following statements with confidence:-

• A Pushrod V8 design can deliver higher output at a lower weight, size and cost than a DOHC V6 Bi-turbo design
  
• At a comparable output, a Pushrod V8 design can also deliver Fuel Economy comparable to a DOHC V6 Bi-turbo design if it has similar technological content (eg. DI, VVT, etc)
  
• A DOHC V8 does not enjoy the same advantageous because of its increased frictional losses, weight, size and costs.
  

Finally, I will like to say that the common objections to American Pushrod engines in terms of refinement, performance and/or fuel economy is generally true in the 80s and 90s. However, these have nothing to do with the valvetrain configuration but rather the reluctance of American automakers to incorporate the technological content into their Pushrod designs. This is no longer true, but perceptions linger.

Do you maybe have any specific data on V8 twin turbo from Mclaren (M838T)? Or Ferrari engine from Italia 458? Graphs for specific fuel consumption, size (for mclaren turbochargers should be included), Co2 emission, price of the engine, etc.? just curious since i can't found those data .

I think small block is excellent engine...for corvette...or tucks..or some "cheaper" cars. But if GM ever tries to go in price range of 200 000$+ they will have to offer DOHC..or something totally different with ohv .Like it or not small block doesn't have anywhere near the image of the engine like the uberrev,small displacement engines from competition .

Not to mention GM has been experimeting with v8+ size ohc engine in cars (concepts) for couple of decades.

There was v12 sohc from sixties

then

v12 from 1989 concept cadillac solitaire

V12 from cien

Of course there are V8 DOHC too in this mix. (northstar, LT-5, almost finished ultra V8). In this high price range which i just mentioned (200 000+$),advantages likes price of the engine, weight of the engine, fuel consumption...isn't soo much important .O.K weight is...and image...

But you can use expensive but light materials to get weight of the car down (and we are not talking here about big differences..what 10-20 kg in engine weight between LS3 and other more expensive v8).Size ..well i don't have dimensions of Mclaren's or italia's engine but i think GM could make something similar in size with their DOHC v8 if they would want to. Fuel consumption..c'mon we are talking here about 150-200 000+ cars.

But...if GM doesn't develope a car in that high price range i don't think they will ever offer or develope any v8 dohc for their lower priced cars..for them (and not just for them) it isn't worth it. But who knows.

Benz has built pushrod engines before, in fact one of their engines was used to win the Indy 500 back in the 90's before it was promptly banned, so it isn't a lack of ability for them to build CIB engines. In the end however, marketing muscle will overpower mere technical ability, from the 1930's to today (just look at Marmon, Duesenburg or Doble for example).

Well mercedes 500l(actually it was designed by Ilmor and penske before mercedes took over) was build only so they can use some loophole in the engine rules. There were also one engine which was planned for racing .Brayton V8 LINK

And i agree on marketing muscle overpowering mere technicall ability.

Dwightlooi do you really think Mercedes, Porsche, BMW etc can't make engine with cam in block if they want to?

I bet they can. Same way GM could make very good DOHC V8, V10, V12 or any other configuration if they want to. To my understanding cam in block engine is cheaper to make, cost less so GM can put engine in cheaper cars (chevrolet ) and can be shared with less expensive trucks etc.

Yes both design have their advantages and disadvantages .

Also why haven't you put M159 engine instead of M156...or McLaren M838T engine..or V8 engine from ferrari italia? Yes a cam in block V8 engine is more simple design, more compact design, cheaper, etc etc. But it is still loosing battle against DOHC V8 in market around world. Not because one is better or worse. Was bentley 6.75 OHV v8 bad engine? Not to my knowledge.

But rumors are GM is still considering special V8 for cadillac flagship..something in the line of engines not being shared with truck .Maybe even DOHC. Also why did GM build Northstar engine if they could use chevrolet small block engine instead, in STS, XLR.? And Ultra V8 DOHC was in plans until crisis hit GM. I don't hear any rumors about Mercedes, Jaguar, BMW, Lexus etc. trying to build cam in block V8, V10 engine? And i also don't think buyers would be to happy if Ferrari put CIB v8 in their cars.

And i am betting that you will sooner see Cadillac having DOHC v8 engine in future cars than Mercedes,BMW, Audi having CIB V8 engine in theirs. Yes, let GM built CIB engine for chevrolet, truck etc. But for expensive, luxurie cars... I'm not so sure it is a best choice. Not because it is a bad engine or anything like that. It is more of a image small block from GM have.

I do appreciate GM small block engine design..but this is turning in threads like the ones you can read on BMW forums: "My car (engine in this case) is best car (engine) in world. All others don't know how to build proper car (engine).They all suck" etc.

Let's see what those other European supercars have

Low weight..check

Excellent handling ...check

they all participate in some sort or racing (GT, lemans, etc),,,well.. most of them do...

Big price..check

Image....check

High revving engine with ridiculous high HP/l rating made just for that model or some other overpriced type of vehicle..check..

Now propouse Cadillac's competitor

Low weight ..check

Excellent handling..check

Participation in some sort of racing..well i assume it would compete in racing

Big price...check (not as big as competition but in this league i don't think price is priority)

High revving engine with high HP/l rating etc.etc...no..

Now this is the car that will cost about what...150 000$ and will offer same engine as the one in corvette. Yes we all know small block is small in size, it is light...but.. engine from Mclaren is also small and light. New engine from lamborghini weight about 230 kg. Heavier than LS based engine but it is a v12 engine. Engines from 458 italia and LFA 1LR-GUE V10 are probably very light . And i don't think that engine for Cadillac's top model (supersedan or sports car) should be engine which is found in much lower priced cars (chevrolet) or maybe even in a truck (or some version of that engine).

I think we just have to agree to disagree on this.

I believe that GM needs a stellar 3.0~3.6 liter class DOHC V6 and DOHC I4. For the V8 realm, however, pushrod engines provide more power, more torque and lower fuel consumption at a lower cost for any given external dimension or engine weight. This makes it technically the superior design choice. A Pushrod arrangement also makes the cars it powers more differentiated, more uniquely American, in a market place crowded with DOHC V8s.

The downside is that it will sport a larger displacement, and that does not endear it to various racing class rules or displacement tax brackets. This downside is not, however, particularly relevant for a V8 engine given that buyers who elect to buy a V8 model probably does not care about the displacement tax as much as the performance of the vehicle. Otherwise, they can and would have picked the V6 variant of the car instead.

I don't mean that GM should drop CIB design. It would be excellent engine for Corvette, Camaro, pickup trucks etc. If we look only from techical viewpoint it would be good for Cadillac too.

You said people who buys v8 cars don't care about displacement tax etc. I agree. But i know for certain they also don't care about engine size (dimensions of the engine), weight of the engine, or cost of the engine. Most of the buyers thinks the more complicated the engine is the better it is. And DOHC is more "complicated" engine than CIB (in my line of work the simpler the better but that is me).

Now what do you think-how many people know how much LS7 weight? Or what outside dimension of that engines are. Hell here people still think Corvette with that kind of engine consume at least 30 liters of gasoline per 100 km. Yesterday i had a car talk with guy from a work (he is engineer too). He started talking about american big displacement, low hp bla bla...usual stuff. Now i showed him LS7 engine (he didn't believe some stuff i told him) on the internet...and you know what. He still thinks 4.0 l v8 from BMW is better. Why... because is has DOHc which every journalist thinks it is must for an uber engine, it has high Hp/l ratio and it can spin to over 8000 rpm. Now i didn't have time to ask him (or the will cause i saw he refuses to understand some stuff even if i had evidences) what he thinks about 6.3 l v8 from AMG.

People wants DOHC engines here in Europe (and i see in USA too). Now is it for a right reasons ..i don't know.

I also suspect we will see a small DOHC V8 to fill market needs in global markets. You can play with numbers all you like but most buyers expect these engines. Even with the Pushrod engine they really need to market the advantages and give the Cadillac their own tunes and trim. I would love to see the engines dressed in Aluminum covers and even billet parts with stainless trim. At the very least powder coated vs the plastic covers. The owner of a Cadillac should be proud to open the hood, trunk and interior to show of his car and its quality. It was details like this that made it a standard others were judged by.

Even my Fiero came powder coated red covers and intake with Stainless 12 point fasteners. Cadillac should get no less.

I would love to see new DOHC v8 (gasoline in case diesel 4.5 l v8 is still on the table) but i doubt GM will offer DOHC v8 anytime soon. Maybe in 5-6 years if they decided to build Cadillac flagship on omega platform but i doubt even then.

And about Viper engine. I don't know if this is true (from Wiki)

Sjoberg selected 85 engineers to be "Team Viper," with development beginning in March 1989. The team asked the then-Chrysler subsidiary Lamborghini to cast some prototype aluminum blocks based on Dodge's V10 truck engine[citation needed] for sports car use in May. The production body was completed in the fall, with a chassis prototype running in December. Though a V8 was first used in the test mule, the V10, which the production car was meant to use, was ready in February 1990.

Chrysler engineers revamped Dodge's cast-iron block V10 for the Viper[citation needed] by recasting the block and heads in aluminium alloy. Prototype blocks were cast by Lamborghini, at the time a Chrysler division. Some felt that the pushrod two-valve design, while adequate for the truck application for which the engine was originally created, was unsuitable for a performance car. However, Chrysler was uncertain about the Viper's production costs and sales potential[who?] and so declined to provide the budget for the modification[citation needed].

Originally conceived in the 1980s[citation needed] as a truck engine for the larger Rams[citation needed], the Magnum V10 was re-engineered as the engine of the Dodge Viper[citation needed] in 1990 by Chrysler Engineering, and used in the Ram 2500 starting in the 1994 redesign of the Ram line. When the 8 L 488ci V10 Magnum debuted for the Dodge Ram 2500 & 3500 in 1994, it was the most powerful gasoline engine available for consumer pick-ups. It provided far less power than the V10 in the Viper and used a cast-iron cylinder block. Output was 310 hp (230 kW) and 450 lb·ft (610 N·m). It was discontinued after the 2003 model year.

To say that they are the same engine is like saying that the Toyota Tundra's 5.7 liter DOHC V8 (3UR-FSE) and the Lexus LS's 5.0 V8 (2UR-FSE) or IS-F's 5.0 DOHC V8 (2UR-GSE) is the same engine... they are, after all, the same Toyota UR-series V8 architecture and shares a similar block casting (albiet with different bore and stroke dimensions).

And if they would use same displacement you think most people wouldn't say it is the same engine?? I bet they would. And rumors are there will be only two displacemet available fot LT1(gen V). 6.2 and 5.3 engine. 6.2 l for truck and cars and 5.3 for truck only. If you think that people won't say it is same engine from truck put in a car...well i'm hoping for the best but it seems car journalist and magazines doesn't like american cars here that much.

Let's chop this up a bit, as Dwight just did before I could post:

• Only Cadillac that has truck engines is, well, a truck itself (Escalade). The engine in the CTS-V is only in that car and the upcoming Camaro ZL-1, itself a model commanding a higher price. No recent Cadillac V8 has ever been found, as is, in a Chevy truck.
  
• Viper's V10 originated there and then was put in a limited-edition Ram truck, not the other way around.
  
• For what it's worth, the engine in the M5 was in the X5 and X6 first, themselves trucks (er, I mean SAVs).
  
• The diesel in the diesel E, S, ML, and GL Classes? Also in the Sprinter (another truck, basically).
  

Some of the statements in your post are unfounded and can very well be turned around to the European cars. And as far as the points you were making about engines being shared between cheap cars and luxury marques, I'd just like to point out that Audi and SEAT share a few engines...

Seems you guys don't understand what i've said. Let me try to explain. 7.0 l v8 LS7 engine is considered to be a truck engine around here like it or not.Is it really..no it isn't. Not even close. I know it isn't and i've said many time befores you don't need to explain that to me, but i am fan of american cars so..but general public here isn't. And that is what GM have to fight against. Public opinion is very important like it or not especially in luxury class.Do you think buyers here (and outside of car enthusiast circles) will know the differences between ls3 and vortec. They will see same displacement, same number of valve and conclude it is the same engine. Same goes for car magazines.Don't believe it? I am mechanical engineer and when Z06 came out (with ls7) engine i've had hard time explaining others engineers on college (in some car disscusions) it is not a truck engine. They wouldn't listen. Not to mention what people here thinks about handling of american cars. Even if you shown them results from nurburgring they still think they don't handle. But it seems people is starting to like Ford mustangs.I've seen couple of them here.but thath is a pony car..not luxury car.

And about sharing..i've said top engine..does seat use any v8 from audi..no.. And about mercedes diesels etc...like i said before..no top engine or engine based on top engine from Mercedes can be found in cheap truck.

I'm seeing AMG 6.3 l v8 becoming somewhat famous engine here in Europe. At least in some car magazines. But if you look at it isn't anything special in terms of what some people here on forum call high technology.. I mean it is great engine..but it can rev to only 7200 rpm,doesn't have 100 hp/l, doesn't have direct injection..even worse it has very big displacement..and despite all that i didn't read or hear people complaining about it. It is something like small block.

But the differences is Mercedes doesn't put their top engine in cars that cost 30 000$ , share it with cheaper car models (like Cadillac->Chevrolet), make version of it to put it in a cheaper pickup truck and end up with journalist calling their top car (Corvette) sports car with truck based engine (same goes for Dodge Viper). Now we can argue here that people doesn't belive in that crap (truck engine,old tech bla bla) and they are smart and understand advantages (and disadvantages)of CIB engine. But most of the people who i've met doesn't have clue about this things and they trust only what they read in car magazines.

Would DOHC in Cadillac help..well here in Europe, as i see it ..if they put it in cheap chevrolet pickup truck, cheaper cars etc...no it won't..People will still be stuck to their believes that it is a truck engine in a car.

And if it is engine only for Cadillac? Well they can offer CIB the same way. Make special version just for Cadillac.

But they won't . GM wouldn't build v8 if they don't have trucks and pickups to put it in. Maybe "truck based engine in sports car" frase isn't far away from truth as some people would like to think.And in luxury car department truck and engine doesn't go well together here.

To big gap between CTS V series and non V series.

Would like to see different displacement engine (at least that ) in Cadillac's cars rather than the same engine from cheaper trucks or cars(from chevrolet,holden etc.). Also no diesel (or is this only for USA market lineup because if not there should be also lower than 270 HP engine in ATS and CTS)

This again..heh.

Pushrod V8 for trucks,big cheap cars (future big chevy rwd sedan etc) and DOHC V8 (but bigger displacement than this one) for Cadillac models.

Also weight of 220 kg would be too much. Coyote v8 has less than 200 kg. I think GM should be able to come lower..

There are couple of problem which i think GM should considered if they want to even be considered as competition to German prmium car class.

First is the image. Image od Cadillac's cars here are something like "big, thirsty, slow, old technology, handling like a brick etc". Cadillac Cts and Ats could help but some good roadster or sports car could make it better. Put Cadillac to race in lemans, DTM etc..

Second..many people here doesn't even know that Cadillac even makes cars..they've only heard about Escalade which falls under description above.

DIESEL engines is a must here. And i'm not talking about one diesel engine.

XTS based on epsilon platform which also underpins opel insignia (car that doesn't compete in luxurie segment). Car magazines, journalist will have a field day about that. Remember Cadillac BLS.

European market is very hard for foreign carmakers in premium department.