As expected, Cadillac announced the addition of a plug-in hybrid (PHEV) powertrain for its range-topping CT6 sedan at the Shanghai Auto Show.

The powertrain combines a 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder gasoline engine with an all-new rear wheel electric variable transmission (EVT) that incorporates two electric motors and draws energy from an 18.4 kWh lithium-ion battery pack positioned between the rear seat and the trunk. 

GM estimates the system is capable of producing a combined output of 335 hp (250 kW) and 432 lb-ft (586 Nm) of peak torque, stating that fuel economy will be "more than double that of the car’s conventional engine offerings, as measured by miles per gallon equivalent".

 

More at Link:http://www.carscoops.com/2015/04/cadillac-confirms-335hp-four-cylinder.html
 

1) Normal: Everyday commuting. Provides ideal balance of comfort, performance and maximized EV range and fuel economy.

2) Sport: Aggressive off-the-line feel and a stiffer steering response.

3) Hold: Allows owners to select when car uses its engine, reserving the remaining battery charge for later use, specifically in urban setting where EVs are most efficiently used.


Gotta wonder if the 3.6L is now the entry or we are going to see a 2.0L without  the PHEV. Is the 2.0L the only application of the engine in this car. It is RWD as stated before pertaining to the 2.0L 
 

What sucks is the Camaro will probably have better engines than this car.  The Camaro will no doubt have more power than an ATS, on which it is based.  If you go back 20 years, the Northstar put out 300 hp and a Camaro SS or Trans Am made 275-305 depending on the year, but that was a top end Camaro.   And all the Cadillac sedans had 300 hp in an age when a Corvette had 330, a 300ZX twin turbo had 300, and S-class had 389, etc.  300 hp was a lot in the 90s.  Now most Cadillacs have 270-330 hp, basically 90s level power and the rest of the market has increased so much.

Cadillac had 300 HP in a V8 20 yrs ago, now it's 335 HP in a I4 hybrid! There's your advancement.

 

What sucks is, mercedes HAD a hybrid 4-cyl but when they refreshed the S, they didn't have a new version hybrid ready at launch, so those looking for that power train in the s-class were left out in the cold for like 2 years. 

S-class sold 103,000 cars in 2014, its best sales year ever.  I guess buyers didn't miss it.  S-class hybrid has 436 hp now, much better than 335.

 

My point was that Cadillac in the 90s had good power.  An Aston Martin DB7 had 335 hp, a Corvette had 330, even the Ferrari 348 of the early 90s had 312 hp.   Most sports cars were in the 300s.  Pretty much every Cadillac was putting out power not far from the GT cars and serious sports cars.  Only the high end exotics like the Viper or Ferrari 512TR could really blow it away.

Nobody cares how many sold except MB accountants, and who wants to park next to yourself at Walmart anyway?

 

Problem with the s-class hybrid is it's incredibly heavy. Edmunds isn't yet listing an s-class hybrid as being available, but the S470 weighs 4630 lbs. so of course it needs more HP to account for the bloat. Let's see how the road tests shake out.

 

Your point hinges completely on the smallest motor the CT6 is yet known to offer. In other words, there is no point yet.

If Cadillac grew horsepower at the same rate as the Corvette, then in 1995 a Seville/Eldorado had about 10% less power than the Corvette base model. 10% less power than a 2015 Corvette is about 400 HP. So the average Cadillac should have 400 HP. The 3.6 V6 could be base engine on CTS, the 400 hp 3.0 twin turbo the mid-level engine and the v-series the top.

And they should have put that hybrid system on the twin turbo V6, why does Cadillac love 4-cylinder engines so much, put those in a Chevy. If the Corvette had a hybrid 4-banger giving up 100 HP to a GT-R or 911 and GM said the Corvette will make up the horsepower shortage by having less weight, people would be in outrage.

What sucks is the Camaro will probably have better engines than this car.  The Camaro will no doubt have more power than an ATS, on which it is based.  If you go back 20 years, the Northstar put out 300 hp and a Camaro SS or Trans Am made 275-305 depending on the year, but that was a top end Camaro.   And all the Cadillac sedans had 300 hp in an age when a Corvette had 330, a 300ZX twin turbo had 300, and S-class had 389, etc.  300 hp was a lot in the 90s.  Now most Cadillacs have 270-330 hp, basically 90s level power and the rest of the market has increased so much.

While many academics say to NOT Quote Wikipedia, you are again comparing apples to oranges.

 

You talk v8 HP numbers and how S Class was 389, yet that was only in their high end V12 according to this site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_S-Class

 

Their standard V8 engine only put out 275hp.

 

The amount of power out of the engine for this Hybrid compared to past engines is amazing and the CT6 is a lean machine compared to the bloated S Class.

 

I agree with Balthazar, let the magazine tests show who is better.

 

I do Love that Cadillac is having a Hybrid at launch with the new CT6. Do not see MB doing this yet.

If Cadillac grew horsepower at the same rate as the Corvette, then in 1995 a Seville/Eldorado had about 10% less power than the Corvette base model. 10% less power than a 2015 Corvette is about 400 HP. So the average Cadillac should have 400 HP. The 3.6 V6 could be base engine on CTS, the 400 hp 3.0 twin turbo the mid-level engine and the v-series the top.

And they should have put that hybrid system on the twin turbo V6, why does Cadillac love 4-cylinder engines so much, put those in a Chevy. If the Corvette had a hybrid 4-banger giving up 100 HP to a GT-R or 911 and GM said the Corvette will make up the horsepower shortage by having less weight, people would be in outrage.

 

 

 

completely irrelevant in today's climate of CAFE looming, and attempts to circumvent any upticks of resurgence in oil prices. The race is on for not only big HP.. but also BIG HP with Fuel Economy coupled to it. Out of all the manufacturers the most scrutinized on the planet has been GM.. and because of that I would dare to say that they are one of the only ones that actually hit their EPA numbers or better concerning HP.. and at the same time have engines that are among the most powerful in their segments

 

As Balthazar points out.. the 2.0L is kicking out 335HP/ and 432 ft-lbs of torque in this config... versus 300HP/295 ft-lbs from the V8 Northstar. And before U bring up anything else to lather Mercedes nuts in saliva.. I will remind U that altho they have a 2.0L with 355hp/332 ft-lbs.. GM's LNF 2.0L engine from 6 years ago was easily tuned from 260hp/260 ft-lb to those HP levels.. so it's not such a feat as U will most likely make it

 

Furthermore, comparing apples to apples as opposed to apples to raisins, the L37 NS has been dead so long..   the BMW i8 uses a turbo 1.5L and has a pair of Electric engines mated to it. with 357hp and 420 lb-ft and a 15 miles EV range.  versus this one having an est 37 mile range with 335hp/432 lb-ft. Whats interesting is that the BMW has 12 more HP... while the Cadillac has 12 more lb-ft of torque.

 

 

What sucks is the Camaro will probably have better engines than this car.  The Camaro will no doubt have more power than an ATS, on which it is based.  If you go back 20 years, the Northstar put out 300 hp and a Camaro SS or Trans Am made 275-305 depending on the year, but that was a top end Camaro.   And all the Cadillac sedans had 300 hp in an age when a Corvette had 330, a 300ZX twin turbo had 300, and S-class had 389, etc.  300 hp was a lot in the 90s.  Now most Cadillacs have 270-330 hp, basically 90s level power and the rest of the market has increased so much.

While many academics say to NOT Quote Wikipedia, you are again comparing apples to oranges.

 

You talk v8 HP numbers and how S Class was 389, yet that was only in their high end V12 according to this site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_S-Class

 

Their standard V8 engine only put out 275hp.

 

The amount of power out of the engine for this Hybrid compared to past engines is amazing and the CT6 is a lean machine compared to the bloated S Class.

 

I agree with Balthazar, let the magazine tests show who is better.

 

I do Love that Cadillac is having a Hybrid at launch with the new CT6. Do not see MB doing this yet.

 

 

I agree.

 

The idea that the CT6 is not an S-Class competitor is literally under-promising, and over-delivering by Cadillac.

 

Compare:

 

From Benz site:

 

 

1) The S-Class Plug-In Hybrid also offers multiple drive modes so you can customize how you want to spend and recover energy.

 

The CT6- Plug-In Hybrid will allow driver to choose among three operating modes named Normal, Sport and Hold:

 

 

2) The S-Class Plug-In Hybrid will drive solely on electric power up to 20 miles

 

    The CT6 Plug-In Hybrid will drive solely on electric power up to 37 miles

 

3) S-Class Plug-in Hybrid Combined power output of 436 hp, 479 lb-ft of torque (3.0-liter V6 gasoline engine + electric motor)

Acceleration: 0-to-60 mph in 5.2 seconds 

 

  CT6 Plug-in Hybrid combined power output of 335hp, 432 lb-ft of torque (2.0L Turbo+ Electric motor)

Acceleration: TBA.. but I'm betting it is lower than that 5.2 seconds

 

 

4) S-Class Plug-In is est city/highway: 21/26 mpg

    CT6 Plug-in is est to be more than double that of the conventional CT6 (which we kno is similar in many respects, due to weigh savings, to that of the CTS (2.0L Turbo with 6speed gets 20/30MPG).. so a CT6 Plug in coming in at 40/60mpg??? 

 

Keep in mind that the S-Class Plug-In Hybrid is est (by C&D) to come in at an almost "Tahoe like" 5100lbs. I gonna throw the cash down on "Black" and say that this CT6 Plug-in will still not cross the 4000 mark.

Edited April 20, 201510 yr by Cmicasa the Great

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders

Cadillac is only claiming the market moved away from V8s towards V6 and even some I4s...

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

 

Again.. irrelevant and wrong. Cadillac has a 420HP, 460 ft lb V8 in their most recognizable vehicle, the Escalade. They also will have V8 in the CTS-V and CT6. That still completely ignores the fact that their TTv6s from 3.0L to 3.6L encompass ground from 400hp to 464hp. 

 

Also in the 2007 Cadillac had a S/C V8 with 469HP and a N/A one with 403HP. U are ignoring all of that for the simpleton sake of your argument...again.. against anything positive from Cadillac

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

Heh... Cadillac is right there in 2015, but they are producing it with 2 fewer cylinders.  They have two V6es that put out similar numbers and when put into vehicles that are lighter, roughly equal the power to weight ratio of the Germans.  Note that in the E/CLS/M Classes, Mercedes detunes the 4.7 liter to 402hp and 443 lb-ft, so compared to a CTS-VSport, the E-Class has less power, one less gear, and more weight.

 

 

 

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

 

Again.. irrelevant and wrong. Cadillac has a 420HP, 460 ft lb V8 in their most recognizable vehicle, the Escalade. They also will have V8 in the CTS-V and CT6. That still completely ignores the fact that their TTv6s from 3.0L to 3.6L encompass ground from 400hp to 464hp. 

 

Also in the 2007 Cadillac had a S/C V8 with 469HP and a N/A one with 403HP. U are ignoring all of that for the simpleton sake of your argument...again.. against anything positive from Cadillac

 

I was only using base V8s to make the comparison easy.  Because this is also about the mainstream engines, as the Northstar was main Cadillac engine of the 90s.  Mercedes had a 622 hp supercharged V8 in the SLR in 2007, I guess I could compare that to the 469 hp Cadillac supercharged V8.  But that wouldn't really seem fair.

 

Heh... Cadillac is right there in 2015, but they are producing it with 2 fewer cylinders.  They have two V6es that put out similar numbers and when put into vehicles that are lighter, roughly equal the power to weight ratio of the Germans.  Note that in the E/CLS/M Classes, Mercedes detunes the 4.7 liter to 402hp and 443 lb-ft, so compared to a CTS-VSport, the E-Class has less power, one less gear, and more weight.

 

By that thinking, the Corvette should lose the V8 in favor of turbo 4 and turbo V6 engines, because the Corvette is lighter than a GT-R or Mercedes SL, and the Corvette can do with less power.  A 300 hp Turbo 4 would give the Corvette the same power as in 1996, and a 400 hp turbo V6 would give the same power as 2005, so that should be adequate, since the imports weight more.

 

 

Heh... Cadillac is right there in 2015, but they are producing it with 2 fewer cylinders.  They have two V6es that put out similar numbers and when put into vehicles that are lighter, roughly equal the power to weight ratio of the Germans.  Note that in the E/CLS/M Classes, Mercedes detunes the 4.7 liter to 402hp and 443 lb-ft, so compared to a CTS-VSport, the E-Class has less power, one less gear, and more weight.

 

By that thinking, the Corvette should lose the V8 in favor of turbo 4 and turbo V6 engines, because the Corvette is lighter than a GT-R or Mercedes SL, and the Corvette can do with less power.  A 300 hp Turbo 4 would give the Corvette the same power as in 1996, and a 400 hp turbo V6 would give the same power as 2005, so that should be adequate, since the imports weight more.

 

 

Sure... if my thinking was so narrow minded like yours in that there is only one way to skin a cat..... but there are multiple paths to the same performance goal.  Lately, the German's have been taking a 1960s domestics approach ... their vehicle weights keep creeping up and up so their response is to just throw more power at the car to keep up with acceleration expectations.

 

Cadillac is taking a different path. They are going on an extreme weight loss plan while still increasing power though not quite as much. The CT6 is larger than the short wheel base 7 series but weighs about the same as a 335xi. It is a few inches shorter than an S-Class but weighs the same as a C350.

 

The ability to do that kind of weight cutting is going to put the Germans at a huge disadvantage as Cadillac rolls this technology out to other vehicles.

 

 

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

 

Again.. irrelevant and wrong. Cadillac has a 420HP, 460 ft lb V8 in their most recognizable vehicle, the Escalade. They also will have V8 in the CTS-V and CT6. That still completely ignores the fact that their TTv6s from 3.0L to 3.6L encompass ground from 400hp to 464hp. 

 

Also in the 2007 Cadillac had a S/C V8 with 469HP and a N/A one with 403HP. U are ignoring all of that for the simpleton sake of your argument...again.. against anything positive from Cadillac

 

I was only using base V8s to make the comparison easy.  Because this is also about the mainstream engines, as the Northstar was main Cadillac engine of the 90s.  Mercedes had a 622 hp supercharged V8 in the SLR in 2007, I guess I could compare that to the 469 hp Cadillac supercharged V8.  But that wouldn't really seem fair.

 

 

 

 

Bud get it thru your SKULL.. if GM wanted to produce a 622HP V8 in 2007 they would have. Furthermore if my memory serves me right the SLR's engine was actually more developed by Mclaren, cost about $500K and never met the goals of sales that Mercedes set for it

 

 

 

Heh... Cadillac is right there in 2015, but they are producing it with 2 fewer cylinders.  They have two V6es that put out similar numbers and when put into vehicles that are lighter, roughly equal the power to weight ratio of the Germans.  Note that in the E/CLS/M Classes, Mercedes detunes the 4.7 liter to 402hp and 443 lb-ft, so compared to a CTS-VSport, the E-Class has less power, one less gear, and more weight.

 

By that thinking, the Corvette should lose the V8 in favor of turbo 4 and turbo V6 engines, because the Corvette is lighter than a GT-R or Mercedes SL, and the Corvette can do with less power.  A 300 hp Turbo 4 would give the Corvette the same power as in 1996, and a 400 hp turbo V6 would give the same power as 2005, so that should be adequate, since the imports weight more.

 

 

Sure... if my thinking was so narrow minded like yours in that there is only one way to skin a cat..... but there are multiple paths to the same performance goal.  Lately, the German's have been taking a 1960s domestics approach ... their vehicle weights keep creeping up and up so their response is to just throw more power at the car to keep up with acceleration expectations.

 

Cadillac is taking a different path. They are going on an extreme weight loss plan while still increasing power though not quite as much. The CT6 is larger than the short wheel base 7 series but weighs about the same as a 335xi. It is a few inches shorter than an S-Class but weighs the same as a C350.

 

The ability to do that kind of weight cutting is going to put the Germans at a huge disadvantage as Cadillac rolls this technology out to other vehicles.

 

 

 

How many minutes til he brings up the Jag XJ to bring negativity on anything U just posted about the CT6??? He will fail in that one as well

 

 

 

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

 

Again.. irrelevant and wrong. Cadillac has a 420HP, 460 ft lb V8 in their most recognizable vehicle, the Escalade. They also will have V8 in the CTS-V and CT6. That still completely ignores the fact that their TTv6s from 3.0L to 3.6L encompass ground from 400hp to 464hp. 

 

Also in the 2007 Cadillac had a S/C V8 with 469HP and a N/A one with 403HP. U are ignoring all of that for the simpleton sake of your argument...again.. against anything positive from Cadillac

 

I was only using base V8s to make the comparison easy.  Because this is also about the mainstream engines, as the Northstar was main Cadillac engine of the 90s.  Mercedes had a 622 hp supercharged V8 in the SLR in 2007, I guess I could compare that to the 469 hp Cadillac supercharged V8.  But that wouldn't really seem fair.

 

 

 

 

Bud get it thru your SKULL.. if GM wanted to produce a 622HP V8 in 2007 they would have. Furthermore if my memory serves me right the SLR's engine was actually more developed by Mclaren, cost about $500K and never met the goals of sales that Mercedes set for it

 

 

Oh, well if 3rd party tuners count, Lingenfelter offers a 670 hp / 600 lb-ft tune for the 2007 Z-06

 

 

 

 

Heh... Cadillac is right there in 2015, but they are producing it with 2 fewer cylinders.  They have two V6es that put out similar numbers and when put into vehicles that are lighter, roughly equal the power to weight ratio of the Germans.  Note that in the E/CLS/M Classes, Mercedes detunes the 4.7 liter to 402hp and 443 lb-ft, so compared to a CTS-VSport, the E-Class has less power, one less gear, and more weight.

 

By that thinking, the Corvette should lose the V8 in favor of turbo 4 and turbo V6 engines, because the Corvette is lighter than a GT-R or Mercedes SL, and the Corvette can do with less power.  A 300 hp Turbo 4 would give the Corvette the same power as in 1996, and a 400 hp turbo V6 would give the same power as 2005, so that should be adequate, since the imports weight more.

 

 

Sure... if my thinking was so narrow minded like yours in that there is only one way to skin a cat..... but there are multiple paths to the same performance goal.  Lately, the German's have been taking a 1960s domestics approach ... their vehicle weights keep creeping up and up so their response is to just throw more power at the car to keep up with acceleration expectations.

 

Cadillac is taking a different path. They are going on an extreme weight loss plan while still increasing power though not quite as much. The CT6 is larger than the short wheel base 7 series but weighs about the same as a 335xi. It is a few inches shorter than an S-Class but weighs the same as a C350.

 

The ability to do that kind of weight cutting is going to put the Germans at a huge disadvantage as Cadillac rolls this technology out to other vehicles.

 

 

 

How many minutes til he brings up the Jag XJ to bring negativity on anything U just posted about the CT6??? He will fail in that one as well

 

 

The XJ was still heavier than the CT6 and with smaller packaging inside as well. 

 

As much as I liked those 2004-2009 XJs, the interior simply wasn't up to the standards of the class. 

Weight savings are great, but imagine a CT6 with 400 HP base, and 500 in a V8 and 600 in a V-series, rather than 270 HP base, and 335 HP v6 optional and 400 HP V-sport or whatever. And I bet the coming V8 is V-series, because that will be the 5th engine choice in a low volume car.

The new 7-series is losing 450 lbs and the E-class is losing 220, that starts to solve the Germans weight problem. The BMW i3 is light, only 2800 lbs, it must have the best handling and performance ever, it is 600 lbs less than an ATS!

Weight savings are great, but imagine a CT6 with 400 HP base, and 500 in a V8 and 600 in a V-series, rather than 270 HP base, and 335 HP v6 optional and 400 HP V-sport or whatever. And I bet the coming V8 is V-series, because that will be the 5th engine choice in a low volume car.

The new 7-series is losing 450 lbs and the E-class is losing 220, that starts to solve the Germans weight problem. The BMW i3 is light, only 2800 lbs, it must have the best handling and performance ever, it is 600 lbs less than an ATS!

 

The CT6 with 400hp is not the V-Sport.

 

The E250 BlueTEC weighs 4,200lbs and the E350 weighs 4,012..... So at best the E-Class will still be 350lbs heavier than the larger CT6.

 

The BMW 740i porks in at 4,310, so when it loses 450lbs it will still weigh 200lbs more than the larger CT6.

 

You're nit-picking about perceived deficiencies in Cadillac power output and we are pointing out that Cadillac is picking a different path by cutting weight instead of just throwing more power at the car.

 

Even in base form, the CT6 has more power than the 5-series base engine, while weighing 200lbs less AND offering more passenger room.

 

Why are the Germans so far behind in the weight loss game?

Weight savings are great, but imagine a CT6 with 400 HP base, and 500 in a V8 and 600 in a V-series, rather than 270 HP base, and 335 HP v6 optional and 400 HP V-sport or whatever. And I bet the coming V8 is V-series, because that will be the 5th engine choice in a low volume car.

The new 7-series is losing 450 lbs and the E-class is losing 220, that starts to solve the Germans weight problem. The BMW i3 is light, only 2800 lbs, it must have the best handling and performance ever, it is 600 lbs less than an ATS!

 

In trying to compare a Pure EV to a Petrol auto is this not an Apples to Oranges comparison? I know the ELR is  a much closer fit since both ELR and i3 are electric motor driven but 2800 versus 4000 lbs.

From it seems there will be no V-Series CT6.. and the TT V8 will be the VSport.

 

What I'm trying to ascertain is whether or not we will be seeing the 2.0L only in this Hybrid iteration here in the U.S.? 

From it seems there will be no V-Series CT6.. and the TT V8 will be the VSport.

 

What I'm trying to ascertain is whether or not we will be seeing the 2.0L only in this Hybrid iteration here in the U.S.? 

 

According to De nysshen, every Cadillac will get a plug-in version and most will get diesels.  I expect there will only be one plug-in power train as it will likely be super low volume.

When is the Escalade moving to Omega platform to save weight?  They can drop that gas hog V8 and put a 2.0 Turbo hybrid in the Escalade and really stick it to the over weight Mercedes GL once and for all! 

When is the Escalade moving to Omega platform to save weight?  They can drop that gas hog V8 and put a 2.0 Turbo hybrid in the Escalade and really stick it to the over weight Mercedes GL once and for all! 

 

Really? You're going to try and troll the site owner?  

 

Who wants to take bets on who will win this?

My main points are that Cadillac has lacked consistency over the years, and they haven't progressed as they should have.   The Northstar was a great engine for the early to mid-90s, but then they didn't keep updating it, and moved to the corporate V6 because it was easy to do.  Marketing has been inconsistent, naming schemes inconsistent, and even now, the Cadillac company line is how every gram matters, cut weight, and CT and XT names are the way to go.  But their most noticeable and most successful vehicle is super heavy and has a word name, and is not an XT8.  It doesn't make sense, you can't have one strategy for half the line up and a different strategy for the other half.

 

I still think Johan is over-confident and thinks a light weight platform and some turbo fours and sixes will defeat the Germans, but they tried that on the ATS and CTS, against old German products and it didn't work.  Now the A6, E-class and 5-series are all getting replaced in the next year with a new model.  Cadillac needs to go back to its Eldorado and Fleetwood V8 roots and be the American luxury car again.  And I don't mean build land barges, but modern luxury with bold styling and big power, the way they used to do it.

What "didn't work" ??

 

If you -yet again- bleating on about sales volume, again I state; no one cares outside of corporate accountants. It's not an issue for enthusiasts. In fact, the most sought-after & valuable vehicles of the past are almost always the rarest. With mercedes heading up an article I just saw on the worst- depreciating vehicles you can buy, having toyota-level sales volume is a detriment, not an asset.

My main points are that Cadillac has lacked consistency over the years, and they haven't progressed as they should have.   The Northstar was a great engine for the early to mid-90s, but then they didn't keep updating it, and moved to the corporate V6 because it was easy to do.  Marketing has been inconsistent, naming schemes inconsistent, and even now, the Cadillac company line is how every gram matters, cut weight, and CT and XT names are the way to go.  But their most noticeable and most successful vehicle is super heavy and has a word name, and is not an XT8.  It doesn't make sense, you can't have one strategy for half the line up and a different strategy for the other half.

 

I still think Johan is over-confident and thinks a light weight platform and some turbo fours and sixes will defeat the Germans, but they tried that on the ATS and CTS, against old German products and it didn't work.  Now the A6, E-class and 5-series are all getting replaced in the next year with a new model.  Cadillac needs to go back to its Eldorado and Fleetwood V8 roots and be the American luxury car again.  And I don't mean build land barges, but modern luxury with bold styling and big power, the way they used to do it.

And our point is that Cadillac is getting the power to weight ratio better by working on the denominator AND the numurator both at the same time. Cadillac is putting out V6es with the same power output as your bloody Benzes AND making their cars weigh a lot less. The V8 is coming and I suspect another iteration of the 3.6TT. On top of that, Cadillac is getting their own Turbo 4s.

... and Cadillac is way ahead of the Germans on the weight loss thing and you simply can't stand to see Cadillac pull ahead of the Germans on something.

What "didn't work" ??

 

If you -yet again- bleating on about sales volume, again I state; no one cares outside of corporate accountants. It's not an issue for enthusiasts. In fact, the most sought-after & valuable vehicles of the past are almost always the rarest. With mercedes heading up an article I just saw on the worst- depreciating vehicles you can buy, having toyota-level sales volume is a detriment, not an asset.

 

 

I think his idea of success in a luxury brand is this weird, awkward, fish-like structure, which I see as less of a testament of success than pulling up in a Hyundai Elantra. At least in the Hyundai, people kno U aren't try to pose.

 

Edited April 22, 201510 yr by Cmicasa the Great

Off topic, or maybe not, but... Interestingly the black chinese CT6 had a 4.0T badge in the trunk................ WTF?

Off topic, or maybe not, but... Interestingly the black chinese CT6 had a 4.0T badge in the trunk................ WTF?

 

 

 

I thought the same thing. Maybe that's a tease of the upcoming V8 Turbo. In my opinion, and based on Cadillac's recent showing of Power/liter... they will most likely come with a 4.0L TT bearing minimum 580HP

 

Off topic, or maybe not, but... Interestingly the black chinese CT6 had a 4.0T badge in the trunk................ WTF?

 

 

 

I thought the same thing. Maybe that's a tease of the upcoming V8 Turbo. In my opinion, and based on Cadillac's recent showing of Power/liter... they will most likely come with a 4.0L TT bearing minimum 580HP

 

Maybe... We'll see

What to Think, What to Think? 

 

 

Much clearer image of the 4.0T

I posed your question to my friend at Cadillac PR, so consider this the official word on the 4.0T.

 

Me - "heya.  What's with the 4.0T badge on the back of the CT6 in Shanghai?"

Him - "We have different badging in China for the various powertrains. 4.0T = phev ... 2.0T engine + more power. This is for China market only"

Me - "kinda like how an S550 is actually a 4.7l?

Him - "You got it"

 

What "didn't work" ??

 

If you -yet again- bleating on about sales volume, again I state; no one cares outside of corporate accountants. It's not an issue for enthusiasts. In fact, the most sought-after & valuable vehicles of the past are almost always the rarest. With mercedes heading up an article I just saw on the worst- depreciating vehicles you can buy, having toyota-level sales volume is a detriment, not an asset.

 

 

I think his idea of success in a luxury brand is this weird, awkward, fish-like structure, which I see as less of a testament of success than pulling up in a Hyundai Elantra. At least in the Hyundai, people kno U aren't try to pose.

 

 

 

the name I coined for the CLA and GLA are Mercedes-Pretendz

LOS ANGELES — Cadillac has just unveiled the all-new CT6 Plug-in Hybrid — a full-size luxury sedan that aims to be as sporty as it is eco-friendly.

 

Under the hood of the CT6 is a turbocharged 2.0-liter, four-cylinder gasoline engine. Combined with two electric motors and a new electric variable transmission that routes power to the rear wheels, the CT6 Plug-in makes 335 horsepower and 432 pound-feet of torque.

 

And it's that transmission that makes all the difference. Until now, plug-in hybrids routed their power straight down to the front wheels. Although this is the most efficient way to put the power to the pavement, it shot any fun-to-drive characteristics in the foot.

 

 

 

CT6 Plug-in can do 0 to 60 mph in 5.3 seconds and a top speed of 150 mph.

 

Capable of doing 30 miles of driving on battery power alone, the car has been rated at 65 miles per gallon equivalent (mpge).

http://mashable.com/2015/11/18/2017-cadillac-ct6-plug-in-hybrid/#qO_1yUwWQqqh

 

 

 

 

Well. Wow.. the Mercedes beast it by a tenth of a sec, but absolutely FAILS on range

I'm still betting that independent test will out it below 5.2 tho

 

I posed your question to my friend at Cadillac PR, so consider this the official word on the 4.0T.

 

Me - "heya.  What's with the 4.0T badge on the back of the CT6 in Shanghai?"

Him - "We have different badging in China for the various powertrains. 4.0T = phev ... 2.0T engine + more power. This is for China market only"

Me - "kinda like how an S550 is actually a 4.7l?

Him - "You got it"

 

 

You beat me to it. Chinese badging is really nonsensical. They do the same thing with Buick models.

S-class sold 103,000 cars in 2014, its best sales year ever.  I guess buyers didn't miss it.  S-class hybrid has 436 hp now, much better than 335.

 

My point was that Cadillac in the 90s had good power.  An Aston Martin DB7 had 335 hp, a Corvette had 330, even the Ferrari 348 of the early 90s had 312 hp.   Most sports cars were in the 300s.  Pretty much every Cadillac was putting out power not far from the GT cars and serious sports cars.  Only the high end exotics like the Viper or Ferrari 512TR could really blow it away.

What planet are you from seriously? Yes, the S class has more power but it also weighs much more (about a half ton more). Love how you like to pick and choose what numbers to apply and when but leave out crucial things like a half ton weight difference against a car it doesn't even compete with.

 

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

 

Again.. irrelevant and wrong. Cadillac has a 420HP, 460 ft lb V8 in their most recognizable vehicle, the Escalade. They also will have V8 in the CTS-V and CT6. That still completely ignores the fact that their TTv6s from 3.0L to 3.6L encompass ground from 400hp to 464hp. 

 

Also in the 2007 Cadillac had a S/C V8 with 469HP and a N/A one with 403HP. U are ignoring all of that for the simpleton sake of your argument...again.. against anything positive from Cadillac

 

What I really love here is that he leaves out the 640HP CTS-V with a V8, that is cheaper (most of the time) than the Germans STANDARD package V8s. Again, he likes to pick and choose when and where to use the numbers game. It hasn't really panned out for him yet, by the looks of it

The S550 plug in is all wheel drive, so that adds weight which will slow it down but you can sell it in the snow belt.  The CT6 plug-in is rear drive so that will scare a lot of buyers away in the snow belt.  I drive a rear drive car, but most won't consider one.  The Mercedes 9-speed will help the S550 0-60 time, is looks like it is good for a .3 second gain as the S550 coupe does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds vs 4.8 for the sedan of equal weight.  

 

Mercedes did announce today that they are increasing V12 production to meet demand and there are plans to add electrification to the V12 engine.  

If the CT6 plug-in is well priced, it is the model to buy though.  It will be faster than the base car or the 3.6 V6 obviously.  If the plug in is priced equal or below the 3.0TT that is a  pretty good value because they will probably be similar in performance.

If they took the V8 out of the Corvette in favor of a 2.0T base and 3.0 TT V6 optional, and made a V8 available only in the Corvette Z06, with claims of how the Corvette is low weight so it only needs 4 or 6 cylinders and not 8, there would be outrage.  That is what they have done to Cadillac, ripped away the V8 and are claiming we have 90s V8 power just out of fewer cylinders.  But the other luxury brands aren't making 90s horsepower.

 

To my original point of how Cadillac has lagged in horsepower, let's look at BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette V8s.

 

1988 BMW (no V8, only a 182 hp straight six or 300 hp V12)

1988 Cadillac 4.5 liter:   155 hp, 245 lb-ft

1988 Corvette 5.7 liter:   245 hp, 345 lb-ft

1988 Mercedes 5.6 liter:  238 hp, 287 lb-ft

 

1996 BMW 4.4 liter:        282 hp, 310 lb-ft

1996 Corvette 5.7 liter:   300 hp, 335 lb-ft

1996 Cadillac 4.6 liter:    300 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 4.2 liter: 275 hp, 295 lb-ft

1996 Mercedes 5.0 liter:  302 hp, 339 lb-ft

 

2007 BMW 4.8 liter:        360 hp, 360 lb-ft

2007 Corvette 6.0 liter:  400 hp, 400 lb-ft

2007 Cadillac 4.6 liter:   320 hp, 315 lb-ft

2007 Mercedes 5.5 liter: 382 hp, 391 lb-ft

 

2015 BMW 4.4 liter:     455 hp, 480 lb-ft

2015 Corvette 6.2 liter: 455 hp, 460 lb-ft

2015 Cadillac:  (no V8)

2015 Mercedes 4.7 liter: 449 hp, 516 lb-ft

 

Cadillac lagged in the late 80s, but in 1996 BMW, Mercedes, Cadillac and Corvette were all about the same.    By 2007 Cadillac was falling behind, then the just gave up on the V8.  20 years ago, 300 hp was a powerful engine, with inflation in today's numbers it is 450 hp. 

 

This has got to be the most misleading, cherrypicked, biased horsesh*t argument I've seen in a long time. This tunnel vision around the 4.6L Northstar is a total logic failure. Cadillac lacked a proper midlevel performance engine for 5 years. That's the only thing your stats point out.

The S550 plug in is all wheel drive, so that adds weight which will slow it down but you can sell it in the snow belt.  The CT6 plug-in is rear drive so that will scare a lot of buyers away in the snow belt.  I drive a rear drive car, but most won't consider one.  The Mercedes 9-speed will help the S550 0-60 time, is looks like it is good for a .3 second gain as the S550 coupe does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds vs 4.8 for the sedan of equal weight.  

 

Mercedes did announce today that they are increasing V12 production to meet demand and there are plans to add electrification to the V12 engine.  

No AWD system weighs 1000lbs. and that weight difference I quoted was for the RWD S Class, so let this sink in for you one more time. The car you want to compare to the CT6 (which is does not compete with for the thousandth time) is a half ton heavier ton heavier, so it having 100 more HP is worthless when it carries a half ton more.

 

S-class sold 103,000 cars in 2014, its best sales year ever.  I guess buyers didn't miss it.  S-class hybrid has 436 hp now, much better than 335.

 

My point was that Cadillac in the 90s had good power.  An Aston Martin DB7 had 335 hp, a Corvette had 330, even the Ferrari 348 of the early 90s had 312 hp.   Most sports cars were in the 300s.  Pretty much every Cadillac was putting out power not far from the GT cars and serious sports cars.  Only the high end exotics like the Viper or Ferrari 512TR could really blow it away.

What planet are you from seriously? Yes, the S class has more power but it also weighs much more (about a half ton more). Love how you like to pick and choose what numbers to apply and when but leave out crucial things like a half ton weight difference against a car it doesn't even compete with.

 

Down vote all you want. Facts are facts and you chose to leave out certain facts.

I don't think the CT6 competes with the S-class.  There was speculation as to what the CT6 would compete with before it was released, but now that we have seen the car and have the specs and pricing, clearly it is not an S-class competitor.   Cadillac fans seem to want to compare it to an S-class, I am sure Hyundai/Kia fans want to call the Equus and K900 S-class competitors but they are not.

 

 

The comparison was made of the CT6 plug in to the S-class plug in and the 0-60 time.  So first off, not the same price point or segment, second the S-class is AWD.  If you add AWD to the CT6 plug in you are adding more weight which will slow down that 5.3 second 0-60 time and cut into range.   That was my only point.  with AWD, the CT6 is probably 5.5 seconds 0-60 and loses 5 miles of range.  Which are still good numbers if priced around $65k.

it would be nice to see the plug in range to equal the new volt, and maybe go beyond.  30 miles is quite meh.

 

this is a good california car though.  hybrid, and RWD only..  i don't see this initially selling much outside of cali

I don't know man, I mean, Cadillac went from an $80K PHEV that nobody noticed to what will probably be an over $100K PHEV.  I fear similar.  But I applaud the tech approach.

 

Hey GM, how about just an affordable hybrid that is netting about 50mpg?  Actually, the industry is moving to 60mpg real soon, so start there.