[free_energy0]

If Kia tried to do a Jaguar competitor, it would look like the XF. The cars styling just isn't up to what's expected of Jaguar. And in regard to the LS3 in a CTS; if the 3.6 DI is already getting dinged for uncompetitive NVH, imagine how the shivering pushrod motor will fare up against, say, BMW's DOHC V8s.

 

[AndrewGS]

I wouldn't mind a properly-tuned smallblock in a Cadillac. Bentley's big cars use an OHV V8 (heavily revised in 2001, updated again last year) and they command quite a bit of respect.

 

[goblue]

I wouldn't mind a properly-tuned smallblock in a Cadillac. Bentley's big cars use an OHV V8 (heavily revised in 2001, updated again last year) and they command quite a bit of respect.

Bentley doesn't really have a competitor. Lets say Bentley competed with the Grandeur Motor Company, and Sigma Motors - who also offered cars in the 200K category - and used DOHC V8s and V12s with 8 speed transmissions. You can bet Bentley would be dinged heavily for it in the Robb Report and would be sourcing DOHC engines from Mercedes within 2 years.

Lets say GM took a 4.8L smallblock, added DI, found an innovative way to quell NVH to Ultra levels, and it got better fuel economy than say, BMWs V8s - then I'd say, sure - why not. Provided they branded it something uplevel as well - it would work fine, but I don't see GM doing that anytime soon.

Cadillac doesn't need exclusive engines per say, but they do need exclusive versions tailored to the application with separate branding, better features: ie more expensive versions. I like DI turbos and V6s better than V8s (smallblock or DOHC) in the CTS class because they win the fuel econ game - and thats an important game going forward to lead in.

Don't confuse the raucous LSA in the CTS-V as something your average CTS buyer wants anything to do with. Thats a special situation. The type of person who would put up with that punishing suspension is the same type that will put up with the LSA in a luxury car, and may view it as a plus. Not so with an uplevel CTS. The LS3's exhuast note will not be welcome to the average CTS Cadillac buyer.

 

[AndrewGS]

Bentley doesn't really have a competitor. Lets say Bentley competed with the Grandeur Motor Company, and Sigma Motors - who also offered cars in the 200K category - and used DOHC V8s and V12s with 8 speed transmissions. You can bet Bentley would be dinged heavily for it in the Robb Report and would be sourcing DOHC engines from Mercedes within 2 years.

Still, you never hear anyone complain about their refinement, etc. If it's good enough for the best it's good enough for Cadillac.

Bentley actually reverted back to the OHV RR engine after using the BMW DOHC V8 for a few years. They could use the W12 as they do in the Continental but the 'ol V8 is a better engine. Meanwhile, RR uses the BMW V12.

 

[Xenon]

Bentley doesn't really have a competitor

They do. Its called Maybach and Rolls Royce.

 

[mgescuro]

Still, you never hear anyone complain about their refinement, etc. If it's good enough for the best it's good enough for Cadillac.

Bentley actually reverted back to the OHV RR engine after using the BMW DOHC V8 for a few years. They could use the W12 as they do in the Continental but the 'ol V8 is a better engine. Meanwhile, RR uses the BMW V12.

Bentley will move onto the Audi W12 and Bugatti W16 engines.
OHV Bentleys are all but gone.

They do. Its called Maybach and Rolls Royce.

Yes and no. Maybach and Rolls compete with Azure and the traditional Bentley. Flying Spur and ConGT compete with the highest of the S-class and CL-class. And even then, they're still higher end.

 

[Gm786]

The interior of the new Cadillac CTS looks much better designed than the interior of the new Jaguar XF for sure. The XF's interior looks too plain and doesn't have that edgy sharp look the interior of the CTS has. And it cost a little too much. Overall, the CTS is a much better value and it looks better inside and out in my opinion. :yup:

 

[sigma]

I really like the new CTS both on the outside and the inside. It is the statement car that Cadillac needed to show the world that it is once again serious about building true luxury cars that are competitive with the best in the world.

I don't really like the production XF's exterior, I was probably way to fond of the concepts exterior and hoped that it would survive into production. Everything back of the B-pillar did but the front looks way to Lexus-ie for me. However, the innovation that Jaguar has managed for the interior is just amazing. The circular gear selector is just too cool for words, and the whole console has a futuristic Star Trek feel to it starting with the push button start up to the gear selector. The quality look of the wood and the aluminum is just impeccible. I hope that GM puts as much attention to detail on the interiors of forthcoming Cadillacs as Jaguar put into the XF's interior.

 

[red_rider]

I personally don't see what's wrong with a small block ls# cts. There's nothing unrefined about it from my experience and the sound is great imo. It's not very expensive or massive for its output. Of course it doesn't have that "omgz hp/L!!" benefit, but then again a few "DOHC" decals would fix that

 

[eaton53]

Re: A Proper Comparo: Jag XF vs Caddy CTS

No - its better than a V8.

Before the days of DI and $4.00 gas I'd agree with you, but:

1) Today's best V6s are as smooth as last decade's V8s - which were plenty smooth.
2) Turbos offer the same power as more displacement with better economy.
3) DI eliminates turbo lag.
4) GM isn't going to do DOHC V8s - so its a turbo DI 6 or an LS3 - which do you think is going to look more "advanced"

So, I'll take the slight NVH hit relative to a clean sheet V8 design to get better fuel economy for equal power. And I bet most Americans will too. 40K (the starting point for this type of CTS) is still within the market for people who care about a 20% fuel economy difference.

Now, when you get to the S class level - then I'd take the V8. Gas mileage becomes less of an issue when you are dropping 80K on a car.

Where are you getting this 20% fuel economy difference? I've yet to see the LS get beat in a fuel econ matchup.

And turbos do not have an NVH advantage. You can hear them doing their little whirry thing, where all you need is some exhaust tuning on a small block. See some of the G8 reviews for an example... several reviewers have been surprised by the the unexpected lack of rumble.

I'd rather have a V8 any day.... especially once they DI it, which is surely coming.

 

[tgagneguam]

A well-presented, well-written, balanced review of two nice cars. It's so refreshing that GM is finally fielding cars-including the new CTS-that don't have to make excuses really in any arena. And it's nice to see reviewers preferring some of the engineering/technology that Caddy's bringing to market. It confirms what I mostly believe to be true: when GM fields credible cars, reviewers will appropriately heap praise.

I still think GM needs to up the performance of this car. 6.5 seconds to 60 mph, despite having AWD, seems a bit leisurely to me. I'm confident that Tom Stephens and his crew are capable of more. Get to it, boys!

 

[stick076]

Re: A Proper Comparo: Jag XF vs Caddy CTS

I'd rather have a V8 any day.... especially once they DI it, which is surely coming.

Yes but what car will be your next purchase?

If the V8 didn't do anything for the Impala, Lacrosse, and Grand Prix, why on earth would it help the CTS?

If GM wants to compete with the big boys, they will need a V8. The smartest move would be to outsource one from another company. The LSA even cheapens the CTS-V. A supercharged 6.2L motor at 600+ hp is nothing groundbreaking. A BMW 5.0L naturally aspirated putting out 500 hp is. Even if a custom built motor for the V series cars cost $10,000 or more, it would be worth it in the long run. Look what it did for the Z06.

 

[Ytriox]

If the two cars are really that close, then the Caddy is the clear, hands-down winner. A loaded CTS costs less than a base XF.

It amazes me that so many here and elsewhere have taken to not just ignoring that fact, but attacking anyone who event suggests that price is a factor in car-buying decisions.

 

[goblue]

Re: A Proper Comparo: Jag XF vs Caddy CTS

Where are you getting this 20% fuel economy difference? I've yet to see the LS get beat in a fuel econ matchup.

And turbos do not have an NVH advantage. You can hear them doing their little whirry thing, where all you need is some exhaust tuning on a small block. See some of the G8 reviews for an example... several reviewers have been surprised by the the unexpected lack of rumble.

I'd rather have a V8 any day.... especially once they DI it, which is surely coming.

I never said they did. However, drive BMW's turbo 6, its plenty smooth - more than the current LS engines.

Your second point just shows how bad the perception of that engine is - and GM has enough of a perception fight on its hands.

 

[ViperDVMan]

I'm all for using even the detuned LS3 in the CTS as an upper-level non-V series engine. The 400+hp that the G8 GXP is pumping out is nothing to sneeze at, and the car weighs about the same as the CTS, if not a bit more. If absolute power is needed, then use the 430hp version. Either way, neither the 5-series, E-class, nor the S6 are pushing those kind of power numbers. Only 380hp's the highest I see a V8 pumping out from this segment (from Mercedes' 5.5L V8). So in either tune, the LS3 trumps the other motors, both in power, torque, and fuel efficiency. Refer to my posts about the '09 XLR for my take on using the LS3 in Caddies.

However, the 400hp 3.6L DI twin-turbo V6 found in the Velite concept would work out nicely too, if it's more fuel efficient than the LS3. Either way, when competing with the 5-series and E-class, an upper-level engine is needed. Either the LS3 or a turbocharged V6 pumpung out 400hp or close to it will work great.

 

[68CoupeDeVille]

I think MG is right... again.

GM still positions Cadillac as a "value". Luxury buyers don't look for value. More often than not, they look for the exact opposite. Is the performance gap between a V12 SL and a V8 SL so significant as to warrant a $30k base price differential? Probably not.

But it buys you the little V12 badge for the side of the car and the bragging rights that come with it.

More than anything, a luxury car is a status symbol. And "Value" does not signify status.

 

[Ambalanche]

That's a trip! I really never thought of the CTS as an XF competitor and I owned one. Seeing them back to back, yeah, I can see it now. The CTS is truely a world class car.

 

[BigAls87Z28]

I wouldnt say that GM wont make another DOHC V8.

Caddy needs a V8. Not a turbo 6, not supercharged 4, it needs a V8. Being it Gen V powerd or otherwise, V8 is a must for a luxury brand.

 

[oachalon]

There is no need for gm to design a new dohc v8. They have the small block. Take the ls3 detune it to 400hp even 380hp and do some tweaks to quiet it down. Then put light weight materials in it like the ls7. Titanium connecting rods all of that fun stuff. You then have a small block v8 that is still cheaper than a dohc v8, is just as smooth, and will rev like a son of a bitch. The ls series engines are tuned right now for performance vehicles and or trucks. Both situations people sometimes want to hear that engine revving so thats why gm did it. I guarantee they can make the ls3 as quiet, smooth and definately as powerful as anything out there.

Think about it say a 400hp ls3 thats quiet and smooth and will rev to 7000rpms like the ls7. Why should a company be a standard like everybody else when you can just blow the standard away. Just because everyone does it doesnt mean you need to do it also. We can even put a sticker on the side that says DOHV. Dual Overhead Valve meaning 2 valves per cylinder. People wont know the difference.


If gm wants to go a different route like stated above punch the 3.6L out to 4.0L and give it 400hp.

 

[jasaero]

On the V8 vs TT V6 arguement, I must say that a TT V6 would be fine if GM can for sure solve the NVH issues with the DI V6 before they turbo a version of that engine. I really hope part of the CTS MCE is actually a rebalancing of the DI to get rid of it's horrible sounding upper rev problem that many reviewers point out. It seems to be a very smooth and nice engine until pushed into the upper end. I am sure that can be fixed. Also, I am only in favor of the TT V6 if it not only plenty smooth, but also actually achieve better fuel consumption numbers for CAFE than a similar powered OHV V8. I'm not convinced it could do that if you downsized the LS design to like 5L and added DI to get around 400-420hp. I am really ok with either direction though so long as the resulting vehicle matches or exceeds the best competitors on most any criteria you pick.