According to the Cadillac website, the 3.0 and 3.6 engines get identical mileage (18/26) in AWD and RWD configurations (I find that slightly suspect), but offer slightly different power outputs. Can someone please enlighten me on what meaningful differences exist between these two engines? If fuel economy is the same, why would one choose one engine over the other?

Choosing the 3.6 over the 3.0 is about power. The 3.0 is really a mediocre engine in all levels of performance.

Cadillac only seems to offer it so people will pay more for the 3.6. Both engines cost the same to manufacture.

However, the 3.0 does put out more power than the 3.0 in the base BMWs. BMW pulls the same trick in the 528 and 328. The BMWs get more gears in the box to help make up the deficit.

So they can charge more for the big engine while still offering an inexpensive base model. The 3.0L is a probably a bit smoother, too, by virtue of having less displacement.

OK. Honestly, I was hoping there'd be some kind of mpg trade-off involved, because both engines get pretty bad mileage...worse than my Shortstar.

Choosing the 3.6 over the 3.0 is about power. The 3.0 is really a mediocre engine in all levels of performance.

Cadillac only seems to offer it so people will pay more for the 3.6. Both engines cost the same to manufacture.

However, the 3.0 does put out more power than the 3.0 in the base BMWs. BMW pulls the same trick in the 528 and 328. The BMWs get more gears in the box to help make up the deficit.

BMW's inline-sixes tend to be underrated, and they have more torque. 230 lb-ft @ 2600 rpm vs. 223 lb-ft @ 5700 rpm for the CTS 3.0. Those two factors could be why the 240-hp 528i accelerates to 60 mph as quickly as the 304-hp CTS 3.6 does (in addition to having two extra gears).

Edited August 24, 201114 yr by pow

Choosing the 3.6 over the 3.0 is about power. The 3.0 is really a mediocre engine in all levels of performance.

Cadillac only seems to offer it so people will pay more for the 3.6. Both engines cost the same to manufacture.

However, the 3.0 does put out more power than the 3.0 in the base BMWs. BMW pulls the same trick in the 528 and 328. The BMWs get more gears in the box to help make up the deficit.

BMW's inline-sixes tend to be underrated, and they have more torque. 230 lb-ft @ 2600 rpm vs. 223 lb-ft @ 5700 rpm for the CTS 3.0. Those two factors could be why the 240-hp 528i accelerates to 60 mph as quickly as the 304-hp CTS 3.6 does (in addition to having two extra gears).

And actually for 2012 the 528i will have a 4 cylinder turbo that makes 240 hp @ 5,000 rpm, and 260 lb-ft. 30% more torque than the 3.0 I6, and north of 32 mpg, so that is a pretty appealing base engine.

If GM put the 2.0T Ecotec from the Solstice GXP into the CTS, you guys would be screaming bloody murder instead of calling it a "pretty appealing base engine"

If GM put the 2.0T Ecotec from the Solstice GXP into the CTS, you guys would be screaming bloody murder instead of calling it a "pretty appealing base engine"

That engine drinks fuel. If the CTS turbo 4 was 0-60 in 6.2 seconds and 24/34 mpg, it would be appealing as a base engine, because the average buyer doesn't care that much about robust acceleration. Even a 3.6 liter CTS is barely quicker than a 528i, and at a loss of 6-7 mpg, poor trade off.

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

So why doesn't Cadillac replace the transmission? I don't think they are unable to produce an 8-speed, but I do think the cost cutter culture still reigns supreme, and I'm sure they believe that a 6-speed is "good enough." And here in lies what holds Cadillac back. That "it's good enough" mentality of GM that works for Chevy doesn't work for Cadillac.

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

So why doesn't Cadillac replace the transmission? I don't think they are unable to produce an 8-speed, but I do think the cost cutter culture still reigns supreme, and I'm sure they believe that a 6-speed is "good enough." And here in lies what holds Cadillac back. That "it's good enough" mentality of GM that works for Chevy doesn't work for Cadillac.

Agreed. Cadillac really needs to up its mpg game.

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

So why doesn't Cadillac replace the transmission? I don't think they are unable to produce an 8-speed, but I do think the cost cutter culture still reigns supreme, and I'm sure they believe that a 6-speed is "good enough." And here in lies what holds Cadillac back. That "it's good enough" mentality of GM that works for Chevy doesn't work for Cadillac.

they are. The 8-speed will be debuting with the next round of refreshes and replacements.

Luxury car makes top mpg:

Acura 22/31 mpg

Audi 30/42 mpg

BMW 24/34 mpg (528i estimated, EPA figure not available)

Infiniti 27/32 mpg

Lexus 43/40 mpg (also have 35/34 and 32/28)

Lincoln 41/36 mpg

Mercedes 22/33 mpg

Cadillac 18/27 mpg. Their 7 closest competitors have a 30 mpg car, three of them have a 40 mpg car.

Luxury car makes top mpg:

Acura 22/31 mpg

Audi 30/42 mpg

BMW 24/34 mpg (528i estimated, EPA figure not available)

Infiniti 27/32 mpg

Lexus 43/40 mpg (also have 35/34 and 32/28)

Lincoln 41/36 mpg

Mercedes 22/33 mpg

Cadillac 18/27 mpg. Their 7 closest competitors have a 30 mpg car, three of them have a 40 mpg car.

That's gotta sting.

And which other maker offers a few versions of the Escalade in their mix? Hell Caddy is a 3 car make at this moment and only CTS is a true car. Caddys MPG looks damn good in this light.

And which other maker offers a few versions of the Escalade in their mix? Hell Caddy is a 3 car make at this moment and only CTS is a true car. Caddys MPG looks damn good in this light.

By making one sedan with average fuel economy and 2 thirsty SUV's, Cadillac's mileage looks good?

Evaluate what they have. Mercedes offers 8 cars and 6 SUVs and the best they can offer is one sedan with average economy.

You go down the list at Edmunds and there's a bunch rated below 16. Even Lincoln is blowing up mercedees in MPG in the above list.

In comparison, Cadillac isn't that bad. But yes- acura, infiniti, mercedees and Cadillac need to up the numbers going forward.

Cadillac does not have a 30 mpg vehicle. Their 7 closest competitors do. That is a problem for Cadillac. Mercedes has a lot of guzzlers, but they also operate at a higher end of the market, where the consumer doesn't care as much. Plus they have a lot of high power engines. But Mercedes has high mileage cars in Europe, they can import those here to have high milage offerings, and it looks like they will over the next couple years.

Mercedes also doesn't have a sales problem, they are having a huge year in the US and globally. Mercedes sales have grown in recent decades, where as Cadillac's best year was 1976. It's been 35 years of decline. The $35-50k luxury market has a lot of hybrids and diesels, and turbo 4's. BMW has a 36 mpg 3-series, a 32-34 mpg (depending on EPA rating) 5-series. Cadillac is missing an opportunity for sales by not making anything that gets better than 27 mpg. If they want to survive here and go global, they need a 35 mpg ATS and CTS, maybe even a 40 mpg CTS.

BTW SMK why is it that you troll this forum? I'd think you'd fit in better on a Benz site

Maybe Cadillac will come out by mid-decade w/ Spark- and Aveo-based entry lux models below the ATS that will get high gas mileage.

Edited August 26, 201114 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

Its really a weight issue more than anything. The CTS is a porky car for its size.

The same transmission (6L50) and engine (3.6 DI LFX V6) gets 30mpg in the Camaro. The Camaro of course is about 300 lbs lighter than the CTS.

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

Its really a weight issue more than anything. The CTS is a porky car for its size.

The same transmission (6L50) and engine (3.6 DI LFX V6) gets 30mpg in the Camaro. The Camaro of course is about 300 lbs lighter than the CTS.

It's both. A 2011 528i (inline-six) weighs the same as the CTS 3.6L and gets to 60 MPG in the same 6.4 seconds. But it gets 22/32 MPG vs. 18/27 MPG.

entirely a gearing and transmission issue.

Its really a weight issue more than anything. The CTS is a porky car for its size.

The same transmission (6L50) and engine (3.6 DI LFX V6) gets 30mpg in the Camaro. The Camaro of course is about 300 lbs lighter than the CTS.

We were talking about putting the LNF into a CTS size and weight car like BMW is putting a turbo 4 into the 528. The 528 will also have an 8 speed transmission to help overcome the weight.

If GM put the 2.0T Ecotec from the Solstice GXP into the CTS, you guys would be screaming bloody murder instead of calling it a "pretty appealing base engine"

Sounds like a NVH disaster. Just look at all the complaints the Fisker Karma is getting from the LNF "range extender". It's a five year old engine.

Edited August 26, 201114 yr by pow

I"m not sure what that would be. The LNF was tame enough in a Cobalt or Solstice it seems. Perhaps the way it runs?

The Solstice GXP engine is a bit 2007, I think GM should come up with a new turbo 4 for Cadillac. Adding eAssist to that and an 8-speed transmission gets the ATS and CTS above the 35 mpg mark. Then Cadillac can match up to the hybrids and diesels. Speaking of which, the CTS should get a diesel also.

Just how the fuel economy race happened with compacts, and everyone wanting 40 mpg, that is going to start happening with luxury cars. Already 3 luxury brands have 40+ mpg, I'd imagine come 2015, that 7 brands have a 40 mpg car, Cadillac should be trying to be a leader in this, not a follower.

I'm not disagreeing that the next fuel economy race is in entry to mid lux. It's already on in family midsize now.

I just don't have a problem with a revamped LNF being part of GM's solution.

I'm not disagreeing that the next fuel economy race is in entry to mid lux. It's already on in family midsize now.

I just don't have a problem with a revamped LNF being part of GM's solution.

Revamped LNF could work. But the engine as it is now isn't fuel efficient enough. I don't know how the NVH is since I haven't driven one, but obviously that engine was designed with Pontiac, Saturn and Chevy Cobalt/HHR in mind. So I'd imagine that it wasn't designed to Cadillac specification.

The fuel economy race will go all the way to the top. Audi just revealed an A8 hybrid that gets 37 mpg. And there are plug-ins and electric cars at high dollar amounts coming. I think for a luxury brand to make it they have to cover both ends. Some will want performance, some will want economy, and many will want both. So if Cadillac can do a CTS-V, but also a 40 mpg CTS, they are hitting both ends of the market.

*ahem*

Actually not an LNF. I don't know what they did between the LNF and the LHU (The Regal Turbo), but whatever it was it didn't improve NHV.