http://www.leftlanenews.com/cadillac-xts.html

Thanks Chris.

The things in the bumper? Are they some kind of collision sensor?

Based on the engine sound V6?

Thanks Chris.

The things in the bumper? Are they some kind of collision sensor?

Based on the engine sound V6?

The little holes cut in the camo? Yea that's for the radar.

Probably a V6 of some kind. Maybe a turbo or two.

Towards the end, they pulled up next to two ATS prototypes. Really shows the size difference.

That's gotta be an AWD version sitting up high like that.

^ That's the thing I kept coming back to. Maybe it's the angle/POV, but it sits too high IMO. GM tends to do this tho, unfortunately.

I would hope to see the XTS ride about 1.5" lower (2" would be better still), but the wheel-fender gaps aren't agreeing with that.

Ah, the joy of six. So glad to hear it. I'll withdraw my rude "K-car Imperial" comment if it debuts with a nice, strong, understressed V6.

Too staged to be a spy video.

What camera did you shoot with?

Z-06 smells a pay-off...

Too staged to be a spy video.

What camera did you shoot with?

Ha... *rolls eyes*

A Canon Vixia, um...HF30 I think.

Z-06 smells a pay-off...

I wish they made it that easy.

^ That's the thing I kept coming back to. Maybe it's the angle/POV, but it sits too high IMO. GM tends to do this tho, unfortunately.

I would hope to see the XTS ride about 1.5" lower (2" would be better still), but the wheel-fender gaps aren't agreeing with that.

Maybe the production version will be a little bit lower.. But we'll have an answer soon

I like it....

Ah, the joy of six. So glad to hear it. I'll withdraw my rude "K-car Imperial" comment if it debuts with a nice, strong, understressed V6.

but the v6 outpowers the northstar by quite a fai-r- amount

Edited October 24, 201113 yr by regfootball

Better than a buzzy ass turbo 4 in a car like this. Does GM really want to join the ranks of the K-car?

Better than a buzzy ass turbo 4 in a car like this. Does GM really want to join the ranks of the K-car?

Seems you have not driven a Eco Turbo. I expect at least a V5 option here and not just a 4.

As for Ride Hight I suspect it is either the Camo or missing trim here. I think in person on the finished car they will not leave it this high. Even AWD should not look like a 4x4 on a car like this.

I did note the ATS at the end and wondered if you had video on them too or did Cadillac not pay you to shoot them too. Just kidding!

Edited October 24, 201113 yr by hyperv6

Better than a buzzy ass turbo 4 in a car like this. Does GM really want to join the ranks of the K-car?

Seems you have not driven a Eco Turbo. I expect at least a V5 option here and not just a 4.

As for Ride Hight I suspect it is either the Camo or missing trim here. I think in person on the finished car they will not leave it this high. Even AWD should not look like a 4x4 on a car like this.

I did note the ATS at the end and wondered if you had video on them too or did Cadillac not pay you to shoot them too. Just kidding!

Ha, no I have plenty of ATS video. I just figured no one would care about it now since the ATS showed up at the 'Ring with less camo.

Better than a buzzy ass turbo 4 in a car like this. Does GM really want to join the ranks of the K-car?

Is your Cruze buzzy ass? I went from a Cruze Eco to an SRX 3.6 and the Cruze seems quieter and more refined.

My Cruze (with an Eco Turbo, I might add, hyper) is not a Cadillac. A turbo 4 cylinder is not an appropriate engine for a "fullsize" Cadillac sedan.

Never heard of a V5, I bet it needs one hell of a balance shaft.

Edited October 24, 201113 yr by ocnblu

My Cruze (with an Eco Turbo, I might add, hyper) is not a Cadillac. A turbo 4 cylinder is not an appropriate engine for a "fullsize" Cadillac sedan.

This logic is flawed. Engine size, dimension, aspiration, color, creed, etc. are IRRELEVANT as long as the HP and Torque and MPGs are all class competitive or leading.

Your opinion is irrelevant to me on this matter. My opinion might be the same relevance to you. I stand by mine. I have the same opinion with regards to Ford putting the Ecoboost 4 in the Explorer and Edge, for that matter.

Yeah, let's put that ole 4.1 litre 135hp v8 in it cause ANY V8 is better than a V6 I4 or V2 right?

Edit: By the way, the K-car Chrysler Imperial came with a V6 so that analogy makes no sense.

3.0l Mitsu correct?

3.0l Mitsu correct?

3.3 L EGA V6

3.8 L EGH V6

I doubt we'll ever get a V8 Epsilon. You're right about the K-car Imperial, but Chrysler did put their turbo 4s into a lot of vehicles back in the day. I was using my comments for effect. I was there when those cars were new. I know a little about them.

First thing I thought of when I read the XTS rumor was... GM's widespread use of the Epsilon platform in normal and stretched lengths and the possible use of a turbo 4 correlates to Chrysler's wholesale spread of the K-car platform in several ways.

I support a V6 XTS, but not a 4 cylinder one. No way. It would be a joke. And the HT4100 has been out of production for decades, so that analogy makes no sense.

I doubt we'll ever get a V8 Epsilon. You're right about the K-car Imperial, but Chrysler did put their turbo 4s into a lot of vehicles back in the day. I was using my comments for effect. I was there when those cars were new. I know a little about them.

First thing I thought of when I read the XTS rumor was... GM's widespread use of the Epsilon platform in normal and stretched lengths and the possible use of a turbo 4 correlates to Chrysler's wholesale spread of the K-car platform in several ways.

I support a V6 XTS, but not a 4 cylinder one. No way. It would be a joke. And the HT4100 has been out of production for decades, so that analogy makes no sense.

Thanks for clarification.