Pictures of new ATS-V

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

There will NOT be 20s on the ATS-V. They're more likely to be a narrower version (size-wise) of the Z/28's forged 19s. More weight saved.

[WHAMMO]

Those wheels are a copy of 1LE/ ZL1 wheels..which is a good thing because they are totally badass!! This car is mean!!!

[King T]

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl

Edmunds got 388 RWHP out of the CTS-V stock, so it seems the 420 crank HP is actually underrated a bit. We'll need to see some more dyno pulls on stock ones to see if this was an outlier.

Here's the article you were talking about on the CTS VSport, and they go on to comapre it to the LSA equipped CTS-V, power-wise




2014 Cadillac CTS Vsport: Dyno Tested
A Peek at What Puts the "Sport" in Vsport

Normal aspiration, your days are numbered.

The 2014 Cadillac CTS Vsport's twin-turbo, direct-injected 3.6-liter V6 is a power plant with big plans. It is slated to materialize under the hoods of several other GM models in the coming years, and with good reason. It's potent, refined, packaging-friendly and ostensibly fuel-efficient.

It's easy to warm up to the CTS Vsport's stout factory ratings of 420 horsepower and 430 pound-feet of torque. What we wanted to find out is how well this turbocharged mill maintains its output over its rev range, and how heat-sensitive it is. So we headed to Church Automotive Testing in Wilmington, California, and bolted the CTS Vsport up to its Dynapack dyno. For comparison sake, we brought along an XTS Vsport powered by the same engine turned sideways.

First, here's what we measured with the CTS Vsport:

Before we dive into the numbers, note that results from a Dynapack dyno are not directly comparable to the results of other types of dynos (Dynojet, Superflow, et al). Click here for more details. The XTS Vsport's all-wheel-drive layout precluded use of our usual Dynojet chassis dyno.

The CTS Vsport's engine (GM calls it LF3) is certainly doling out a lot of twist at very low revs. Even as low as 2,000 rpm it generates more than 350 lb-ft of torque to the hubs. Once reaching its peak of 435 lb-ft, the LF3's urge rolls off gradually on the way to its maximum 388 hp. This broad spread of power was quite repeatable from run to run, too.

By logging data from the OBD-II port we saw something intriguing: The CTS Vsport's throttle was not fully open in the midrange. This is a strategy to mitigate boost overshoot as well as manage the LF3's torque output. Knock sensor activity was relatively light, too, amounting to about 1 or 2 degrees of learned knock retard on the 91 octane we were running. What this means is that there's easily more output to be had in this twin-turbo V6.

Now, some context. Church Automotive Testing has a huge library of dyno results. The company is also something of a CTS-V specialist, so we were eager to pull up the dyno results of a stock CTS-V with its supercharged 6.2-liter LSA V8 and compare it to the CTS Vsport's boosted six.

GM rated the CTS-V at 556 hp and 551 lb-ft at the flywheel. Here's how the CTS Vsport's LF3 stacks up to a stock auto-equipped 2009 CTS-V:

The Vsport is consistently within about 80 lb-ft of the CTS-V almost everywhere in the rev range. Moreover, our results show the twin-turbo V6 is only 100 hp in arrears of the blown bent eight, rather than the anticipated 136-hp gap suggested by their flywheel ratings.

No matter what flavor of drivetrain loss you deem appropriate to apply, it appears the LF3 in the CTS Vsport is indeed something of an overachiever. Knowing that the Vsport is not a replacement for the CTS-V makes this all the more suggestive.

So the longitudinal layout of the LF3 is more powerful, sure, but also more robust in terms of repeatability and knock resistance. That's good news for the ATS-V and next-gen Camaro, both of which are expected to pack an LF3 that drives the rear wheels only.

Here's another dyno, similar to Edmunds results



The LF3 looks like it responds great to Tunes

TRIFECTA presents: Cadillac CTS V-Sport 3.6TT (Twin Turbo) LF3 MY2014 Powertrain Calibration Reprogramming


This release post is a presentation of the software engineering capabilities of TRIFECTA Performance: You're looking at the "fastest Cadillac CTS V-Sport in North America" (as of January 24th 2014). The TRIFECTA Performance Cadillac CTS V-Sport LF3 MY2014 powertrain calibration is an easy to install software performance recalibration with an included flash loader device that will yield gains of +81 ft-lbs and +74 WHP to a completely stock Cadillac CTS V-Sport LF3 MY2014.

Specifications of the TRIFECTA Performance Cadillac CTS V-Sport 3.6TT MY2014 LF3 ECM software reprogramming:

-Gains of +81 ft-lbs and +74 WHP
-Powertrain calibration has been tested and validated for various environments, such as cold/heat, elevation, and variations in fuel quality
-Power feels linear and immediately responsive
-Retains all GM OE diagnostics and ECM functionality
-Retains all OE error code reporting and functionality
-Emissions readiness checks are present; emissions compliant
-Maintains functionality of ABS and TC systems
-Knock detection mechanisms and OE engine knock detection sensitivity is retained
-Return to stock functionality included with flash loader

Installation Notes:

-Estimated installation time of ~20 minutes
-Premium fuel is strongly recommended, but not required

(Notice stock dyno also)

[King T]

Originally Posted by SEVEN-OH JOE

It's important to note the intended market for the ATS-V. Think Audi and BMW, both of whom have Forced Induction 6s, now, in their top performance versions (S4-5 and M3-4). It's where that market is going (and MB AMG will follow shortly).

The CTS-V will get the LT4 and, for GM, the LT1 will power the Alpha Camaro, initially.

The L A Auto Show reveal for the ATS-V will be an event worth watching.

Very True sir! Here's the competition and what they are equipped with.




BMW M4
Engine: 3.0L Twin Turbo I-6
Power: 425 @ 5500 rpm, 406 @ 1850-5500 rpm
Transmission: 6 Speed Manual, 7 Speed DCT
Curb Weight: 3,585 lbs
MSRP: $64,200




Audi RS5
Engine: 4.2L DOHC V8
Power: 450hp @ 8250 rpm, 317 lb-ft @ 4000-6000 rpm
Transmission: 7-Speed S Tronic DCT
Curb Weight: 4,009 lbs
MSRP: $70,900




Lexus RC F
Engine:5.0L DOHC V8
Power: 467 hp @ 7100 rpm, 389 lb-ft @4800 rpm
Transmission: 8 Speed Automatic
Curb Weight: 3,958 lbs
MSRP: $62,400


Upcoming competition



Mercedes Benz AMG C63 (and C63 S) [Coupe version coming soon]
Engine: 4.0L Twin Turbo V8
Power: 469 hp, 479 lb-ft (503hp, 516 lb-ft for C63 S)
Transmission: 7 Speed Automatic MCT
Curb Weight: ???
MSRP: ???

[shaffe]

IMHO, all those cars that are the ATS-V competition look much cleaner. I think Cadillac may have gone a bit aggressive compared directly to the competition...

[ssrs2lt]

The nose on the caddy is not long enough, the overall body shape on the white coupe is still not portioned right..IMO

[DGthe3]

To all those that are saying those are ZL1/1LE wheels:

these gap between the pairs of spokes does not look to be parallel like it is on the Camaro. It also seems a little less 'chunky' but maybe not.

Originally Posted by ssrs2lt

The nose on the caddy is not long enough, the overall body shape on the white coupe is still not portioned right..IMO

Body proportions aren't going to change with a performance variant

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Not really. Odds are they won't share a single body panel or piece of interior trim. Since they have to be different, it won't really cost them anything extra in the design & engineering.

And it doesn't really matter how many units you sell, it will not change the fact that steel is cheap, aluminum is not, and carbon fibre definitely is not.

For example, lets say a die for a particular part cost $25,000. Over the entire production run of the Camaro, it would crank out something on the order 500,000 units. Thats a tooling cost of $0.05/part. On the ATS, the total volume might only be 100,000 units (assuming its not unique to the -V). But thats still only $0.25/part. Steel costs $0.30 to $0.40 per pound last I checked. Aluminum is about triple that, but an aluminum part of equal strength to steel usually weighs about 60% of the steel part so it works out on a equal component basis to a bit less than twice as expensive. So on all but the smallest, cheapest parts material cost is going to be the driving factor in price -rather than tooling.

Good point, however this is a really neat article about Ford and what they're doing with Aluminium and how they're trying to bring material cost down.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/insid...kup/ar-AA7qWln

[txferrari]

That Lexus.

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

Originally Posted by txferrari

That Lexus.

Toyota cancelled a Japanese press launch for the new Lexus RC supercoupe. Reason? Mass apathy.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/11/07/l...k-of-interest/

[roorback]

ATS-V looks real good. Wish I had the money to play in that ball field.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by WHAMMO

Those wheels are a copy of 1LE/ ZL1 wheels..which is a good thing because they are totally badass!! This car is mean!!!

Originally Posted by DGthe3

To all those that are saying those are ZL1/1LE wheels:

these gap between the pairs of spokes does not look to be parallel like it is on the Camaro. It also seems a little less 'chunky' but maybe not.


Body proportions aren't going to change with a performance variant

They are similar wheels (which is nice cuz they are awesome) but NOT THE SAME.

Its easy to see that the ZL1/1LE wheels have more concave and different offsets than the wheels on this ATS-V

[jcamaro37f]

The ATS is gorgeous in my opinion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hotlap]

[QUOTE=jcamaro37f;8068695]The ATS is gorgeous in my opinion

I'd say you have good taste!