GM Reveals 2015 Cadillac ATS Coupe

[KMPrenger]

I think its an attractive looking coupe, and I'm guessing as usual, video and real photos will look even better than these renderings. I just haven't seen them yet.

Honestly though, I think I might like the sedan version better. I really like it a lot. This one at first glance didn't give me that same vibe. I can't say for sure just yet though.

They keep talking about weight...I really want to know what the weight is!! A very base ATS sedan (non turbo 4) weighs in the mid to high 3,300 lb range. Could this car be low 3,300 or even high 3,200 range? Maybe not, if the driveline is beefed up in this coupe.

But If so, that is a complete win for the 6th gen Camaro (again, assuming they don't use a bigger heavier version of the Alpha chassis). If they use this one, that means we could see a base 6th gen Camaro in the high 3,200 / low 3,300 lb area. How sweet would that be?? (not putting all my eggs in that basket though)

I'm also a bit confused with their 0 - 60 time of 5.6 seconds. I would guess that was with the 2wd 4 cylinder turbo?? But I know for a fact GM's claimed 0 - 60 time for the 2013 ATS V6 is 5.4 seconds (as stated HERE). But with more low end torque on tap (than the V6 and the old turbo), and a supposedly lighter car, shouldn't the turbo be even faster? Maybe the V6 version of this car does 0 - 60 even quicker, but again you'd think the turbo with its higher torque would be quicker to 60.

I don't know...like I said its just confusing to me.

Overall, good stuff. Now bring on the ATS-V

[FenwickHockey65]

Curb weight is 3418 lbs.

[FenwickHockey65]

[Angrybird 12]

I like it better than the CTS coupe, but the emblem in the grille throws things off, I think it would look better a little lower centered in the grille.

[shine2013]

Originally Posted by Silver85IrocZ

Nice looking coupe... ! !


How bout some more Coupes GM.
And I dont mean Camaro Or Corvette !

Agree. Build another Chevelle?

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by shine2013

Agree. Build another Chevelle?

I used to want the Chevelle to return but I don't think GM can make it happen. Not enough engines and it would end up being slower than the Camaro if using the same engines.

[FenwickHockey65]

[shaffe]

thank goodness they didnt butcher it like they did the CTS Coupe.

I think it looks killer, very clean and sporty looking. Another winner for Cadillac

[King T]

[SS 376]

I like it. The roofline reminds me of the A5. Could be a good seller if it's priced right.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Curb weight is 3418 lbs.

Guess that answers that!


I don't know...I guess I just like vehicles with more interesting stuff going on on the sides. Front and rear profiles look good but the sides look a bit plain to me. I like it, but I think the I like the 13 sedan even more.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

They keep talking about weight...I really want to know what the weight is!! A very base ATS sedan (non turbo 4) weighs in the mid to high 3,300 lb range. Could this car be low 3,300 or even high 3,200 range? Maybe not, if the driveline is beefed up in this coupe.

Coupes tend to weigh about the same as their sedan counterparts. The larger doors require more reinforcement (and are simply heavier to start with) thus negating most of the 'savings' from losing the rear doors. Plus, if you don't take any wheelbase out, then the overall car is going to need just as much steel, glass, and other stuff to build the car. The pieces will just be in a slightly different shape.

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

But If so, that is a complete win for the 6th gen Camaro (again, assuming they don't use a bigger heavier version of the Alpha chassis). If they use this one, that means we could see a base 6th gen Camaro in the high 3,200 / low 3,300 lb area. How sweet would that be?? (not putting all my eggs in that basket though)

It would be even sweeter if it weighed 2900 lbs, or 2450 ... but liking the idea isn't going to make it any more plausible.

Chances are slim to nil that the Camaro will be lighter than the ATS. Its going to need to be both bigger & beefier. If you want a starting point for the 6th Gen, I'd look at the CTS instead of the ATS.

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

I'm also a bit confused with their 0 - 60 time of 5.6 seconds. I would guess that was with the 2wd 4 cylinder turbo?? But I know for a fact GM's claimed 0 - 60 time for the 2013 ATS V6 is 5.4 seconds (as stated HERE). But with more low end torque on tap (than the V6 and the old turbo), and a supposedly lighter car, shouldn't the turbo be even faster? Maybe the V6 version of this car does 0 - 60 even quicker, but again you'd think the turbo with its higher torque would be quicker to 60.

I don't know...like I said its just confusing to me.

Overall, good stuff. Now bring on the ATS-V

You seem to be forgetting that the V6 has about 50 more horsepower than the turbo4. That means an awful lot more than a small advantage in low end torque.

[Jims Mongoose]

I really love the new Cadillac cars, I love that they are trying to make the Cadillac name the standard of the world again. A tough job with all the great cars from Japan and Germany. They are actually accomplishing this in many ways and I know you guys know what they are.

I love the looks of this new flock of cars and I can say, they finally look atleast as well made as any German or Japanese car. I drove the New CTS and I can tell you it feels like a vault inside. I think more solid than my sons BMW 550. I mean the tightness and feel of everything awesome.

My only objection to this ATS is that the back wheels/tires seem small. If you look at it the front tires look great, but the back a little small.

What do you think? Maybe the Vsports and V's will be different, but those back wheels kind of turn me off. I'm sure its and engineering thing.

Jim

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Coupes tend to weigh about the same as their sedan counterparts. The larger doors require more reinforcement (and are simply heavier to start with) thus negating most of the 'savings' from losing the rear doors. Plus, if you don't take any wheelbase out, then the overall car is going to need just as much steel, glass, and other stuff to build the car. The pieces will just be in a slightly different shape.
It would be even sweeter if it weighed 2900 lbs, or 2450 ... but liking the idea isn't going to make it any more plausible.

I know this, but with Cadillac talking up the "lighter" weight like they did in press release, can you "wrong" me for thinking it could be lighter?? It was just speculation on my part.

Chances are slim to nil that the Camaro will be lighter than the ATS. Its going to need to be both bigger & beefier. If you want a starting point for the 6th Gen, I'd look at the CTS instead of the ATS.

If the 6th gen goes on the Alpha LWB version, then I'd agree with you here, but I really hope it doesn't start in the 3,600 lb range like the CTS does b/c then we could still be looking at the SS weighing 3,800 lbs. Sure, thats a little weight lost, but GM needs to be shooting for more than that

You seem to be forgetting that the V6 has about 50 more horsepower than the turbo4. That means an awful lot more than a small advantage in low end torque.

Hey...your talking to a V6 fan...lol. Not rooting for the turbo 4 over the V6, but when you compare the low to midrange torque advantage of the turbo over the V6 its pretty substaintial until rpms get higher.

That said, you are right about the HP advantage, and I have no doubt that from a roll and as speeds climb the V6 would be faster. I just fully expected the turbo 4 with that much torque to be similarly as quick in the short sprint to 60 mph. I guess not. So I suspect, the 0 - 60 with the V6 is roughly the same as the sedan, at 5.4.

Replys in red.