Jump to content
  • Custom Search


MY93SHO

Cadillac puts "truck engine" in CT4-V

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Trailhiker said:

Is it just me, or has Cadillac lost their way in styling production vehicles?

How do you lose something you never had?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling these V models is odd.  The problem isn't that they're going to offer models above these.  The problem is that they took the existing V name, which was well regarded, and watered it down so that they could add trims above V.

They could have kept V-sport (much like BMW and Mercedes do M-sport, and AMG sport or whatever theirs is called), and badged these models as V-sport.  The "coming" higher performance models would've been the V (proper) models, and if they wanted to go above and beyond that, you do - "Super V" or something.

With the move now, on paper to the average Joe, it looks like Cadillac V is a downgrade from the previous models - regardless of some future higher model that nobody can see right now.  They spent years building the V name, only to water it down themselves.

This move would be akin to BMW taking the M340i (with 385hp) and calling it the new M3, and then saying, but wait!  At a later date, we'll show something else that'll be what the last M3 was, but it's not going to be an M3!

 

D72TDRIXsAEObFY.jpg

Maybe it's just the headlight design, but I keep thinking of this:

chevrolet-cruze-sedan-launched-in-india-

Doesn't help that in the reveal event photos the Caddy badge looks too large and like it was slapped on a generic vehicle from a TV ad.

----

The CT4's interior does look good, though.

I didn't like the rear at first, but I actually like the back end better in the real world shots than the GM photos.

 

Also, supposedly there are higher powered/better performing models coming above this, which makes the use of the V name instead of V-sport trim on these odd.

Edited by rmc523

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cadillac CT4-Vundefinedundefined

Quote

First, let's look at the cars. The CT4-V will be the base of the V brand, and it's our first look at the small luxury sedan. It has a roofline and window treatment more like past Cadillacs, eschewing the C-pillar garnish of the CT5. It also naturally gets dark trim and headlights, a unique spoiler and quad tailpipes to distinguish it as a V. Under the hood is a turbocharged 2.7-liter four-cylinder that is based on the engine in the new Chevy Silverado. It makes 320 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque, a far cry from the ATS-V's 464 horsepower and 445 pound-feet of torque.

Power goes through a 10-speed automatic transmission only. Both rear-wheel drive and all-wheel drive are available. It gets a mechanical limited-slip differential whereas the ATS-V had an electronically controlled limited-slip differential a la Camaro ZL1. The brakes have four-piston calipers at each corner versus six-piston front units and four-piston rear units on the ATS-V, and the rotors are smaller. Magnetic Ride Control remains standard on the rear-drive version, but the all-wheel-driver version sticks with conventional shocks. The new CT4-V is about 200 pounds lighter than the ATS-V, though, and it has 50/50 weight distribution. Additionally, both the CT4-V and the CT5-V have Super Cruise available as an option.

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/05/30/2020-cadillac-ct4-v-ct5-v-revealed/

Edited by rmc523

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J-150 said:

Not sure if this move is to legitimize the 2.7 or to increase volume.

Both. By expanding the V series lineup to include two tiers, Cadillac will increase its customer base. And the 2.7 liter engine is a good choice for CT4-V. The "gotta have a V8" mentality is less likely among people who buy compact performance sedans than with pickup truck buyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they look bad at all and using the 2.7L seems appropriate.   CT5 uses the 3.0L which I think is closer to MKZ size so the smaller CT4 would get the smaller engine.  Ford would do the same going forward.

The problem is it's yet another sedan in a sea full of sedans - nothing stands out.   Probably not a good investment.

I bet in less than 5 years they'll be back to one sedan just like the original CTS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

.... And the 2.7 liter engine is a good choice for CT4-V. 

I can agree with that statement....in the Silverado? head-scratcher for sure...but, good fit here, even if it is "just" a sedan. Next up, I would bet they put it in Camaro as a competitor to Ecoboost Mustang.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

Both. By expanding the V series lineup to include two tiers, Cadillac will increase its customer base. And the 2.7 liter engine is a good choice for CT4-V. The "gotta have a V8" mentality is less likely among people who buy compact performance sedans than with pickup truck buyers.

I disagree. One is an objective and the other a secondary consideration or benefit.

 

I'm curious as to which is the primary objective as that will reveal a lot about how GM views this engine internally.

Edited by J-150

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, papilgee4evaeva said:

What was so wrong with Vsport that they had to get rid of it?
 

This is GM - they don't need a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, akirby said:

This is GM - they don't need a reason.

At this point, we should just start considering "this is GM" a reason in and of itself.  😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

Both. By expanding the V series lineup to include two tiers, Cadillac will increase its customer base. And the 2.7 liter engine is a good choice for CT4-V. The "gotta have a V8" mentality is less likely among people who buy compact performance sedans than with pickup truck buyers.

They already had V and V-Sport. They could have added something above V like AMG S or BMW's Competition Package if that's what they really wanted to do. Instead they downgraded the V to where V-Sport used to be. It's really a bunch of nonsense.

No one will be complaining if CT4-V Sport had 320hp. That's about the ballpark for BMW M240i and Audi S3. But they are calling it CT4-V, which is a significant downgrade from the current ATS-V.

Ditto CTS-V vs. CT5-V. It went from M5 slayer to barely able to keep up with mid trim Audi S4.

Edit: also, CT4 is clearly just a facelift of ATS... talk about mailing it in.

 

 

Edited by bzcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bzcat said:

 

No one will be complaining if CT4-V Sport had 320hp. That's about the ballpark for BMW M240i and Audi S3. But they are calling it CT4-V, which is a significant downgrade from the current ATS-V.

 

I agree...calling this The 'V' instead of 'V-Sport' is like calling the ecoboost Mustang a GT, and saying wait for the GT+ to come out next year!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

Both. By expanding the V series lineup to include two tiers, Cadillac will increase its customer base. And the 2.7 liter engine is a good choice for CT4-V. The "gotta have a V8" mentality is less likely among people who buy compact performance sedans than with pickup truck buyers.

But as has been pointed out, they already had two tiers of V, until they apparently decided to make the old V-Sport into V 'proper'.

I have zero problem with them adding a trim above V.  But to drop V down a notch just because doesn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bzcat said:

Edit: also, CT4 is clearly just a facelift of ATS... talk about mailing it in.

To be fair, the Nautilus is pretty much a facelifted MKX.

That aside, to your point, since the ATS was pretty much just refreshed into the CT4, are consumers supposed to believe that the same car went from a 3/C/A4 competitor to an A/A3 competitor based on an MCE?  GM is really GM'ing themselves into a corner here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, papilgee4evaeva said:

To be fair, the Nautilus is pretty much a facelifted MKX.

That aside, to your point, since the ATS was pretty much just refreshed into the CT4, are consumers supposed to believe that the same car went from a 3/C/A4 competitor to an A/A3 competitor based on an MCE?  GM is really GM'ing themselves into a corner here...

It was a bit more than a refresh - it’s 200 lbs lighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

So you can get an MkZ with more hp than CTS-V.

 

Let that sink in...

Not quite for long...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.autoblog.com/amp/2019/06/01/cadillac-ct4-ct5-v-series-prototypes-teased/

 

Apparently the V cars shown on Thursday were the "lite" V cars and not the real Vs teased in Detroit today.

Another rumor is the 335 HP in the CT5 3.0tt is "335 HP", in other words it's underated or it's probably still making 400 HP as it once did in the CT6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/31/2019 at 5:24 PM, akirby said:

It was a bit more than a refresh - it’s 200 lbs lighter.

185 Lbs if that "diet" was likely due to the engine switch....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Fgts said:

Another rumor is the 335 HP in the CT5 3.0tt is "335 HP", in other words it's underated or it's probably still making 400 HP as it once did in the CT6.

There is no way they underrate hp that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, akirby said:

There is no way they underrate hp that much.

The Benz CLS with it's 4500lbs hit 60 in 4.7 seconds and "362 HP" ;

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a22794077/2019-mercedes-benz-cls-new-engine/

Not going even give the laughable BMW and Audi numbers out of their totally underrated tt6 cly numbers but one is the Supra's 3.8 and 4.4 60 mph run C/D and M/T have with the "335 HP" BMW mill.

 We know the Caddy 3.0tt can hit 400+HP but maybe they aligning hp numbers with the competition so on paper you have to have over 400hp to outgun a German sedan will "320" HP or so.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself how Ford’s 6.7L diesel has 935 lb/ft of torque but only 450 hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×