GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What are the complaints about the LSY engine?

Underpowered —- even in the smallest vehicle applications like the XT4 and CT4.

Noisy, harsh, and too much vibration.

If only GM had a replacement. Well, in China it just replaced the LSY in the XT5 and the XT6. It’s a 2.0T e-assist engine that gets 13 more horsepower and 37 more lb-ft of torque. It’s quieter, smoother, and a lot less harsh. It’s also more fuel efficient. What’s there not to like?

It would immediately improve the performance of the CT5 to the point where it’s base form would be attractive in base form. It would put the CT4’s base performance below 6 seconds and greatly improve its attractiveness.

The XT4‘s exterior has been raved about, and while it’s interior could be more dramatic, it’s attractive and has been noted as comfortable. The LSY is its weak point. How well would a smoother, quieter engine with 13 more horsepower and 37 more lb-ft of torque help? And more fuel efficiency to boot? How is this not ideal?

Why is this engine not being used to solve all three of these cars’ problems? Also, it should replace the LSY as base engines in the XT5 and the XT6.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44,169 Posts
Why is this engine not being used to solve all three of these cars’ problems? Also, it should replace the LSY as base engines in the XT5 and the XT6.

Maybe it is down the road? But why not now? GM's regional mentality is most likely the case.
Plus the Chinese market would benefit more with the mild hybrid system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,391 Posts
Why don't they just make the 3.0TT standard? For the premium price, you should get the premium engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
Why don't they just make the 3.0TT standard? For the premium price, you should get the premium engine.

No one else has an engine like that as standard st the CT5’s base price. Now, since the 3.0TT on the CT5 starts just about $45k, that wouldn’t be a terrible new start price. But 250hp is not far off what the 3 Series has at $41,450. The CT5 starts at about $38k after transport. The 2.0T e-assist engine would be a fine engine at that price.

The CT4 starts about $35k after transport. 250hp with 295lb-ft of torque would be far more potent than the A Class or A3. Power isn’t really CT4’s problem as it is already far more potent than its class competitors. But given that it has much better NVH, and that nobody is going to hold best in class 0-60 base trim against it. Nothing but good can come from there.

As for the 3.0TT and the XT5 and XT6, I think it can be done.

But that would mean GM would have to invest in beefing up their powertrains with a proper torque-vectoring AWD system, making AWD standard with that engine, while simultaneously eliminating FWD mode and just accept the MPG penalty.

They should also configure a transverse version of the 10 Speed. The problem here is torque steer and current chassis limits.

I think about the old Aurora concept car Cadillac put out in the late ‘80s, and it might offer a solution here, but would disrupt the cost efficiency in building the XT5 and XT6, and we know GM would loathe to do that. But if Ford could take on the cost of significantly re-engineering the Ford Taurus into a legit E segment luxury car in the Continental, then GM could do the same.

So what lesson might GM take from the Cadillac Aurora concept (not to be confused with the production Oldsmobile Aurora)?

Well, GM engineers used the Deville’s transverse platform and reengineered it to a longitudinal AWD. By having the drive line go through the oil pan, they maintained the space efficiency of the transverse layout. But a longitudes layout has less torque steer than a transverse layout, and produces better driving dynamics.

You would still be using many of the same components, but the platform could handle much more torque. Remember the Eldorados of the 60s and 70s had over 400hp in a FWD layout. Since it was longitudinal, you had a lot less torque steer.

This particular longitudinal engine layout wouldn’t enhance design proportions much, if at all, but you would have the performance enhancements of a longitudinal layout. Once you beef up the AWD system and reconfigure the 10-Speed for FWD layout duty, the 3.0TT would be a great solution for the XT5 and XT6. But my imagination is much more willing to spend GM’s money than GM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dannyg and mgescuro

·
Registered
2017 Cadillac XT5
Joined
·
2,316 Posts
I continue to try an avoid any of these motors that require premium fuel. Price of premium is crazy high, at least here locally.

Love my 3.6L XT5!
 

·
Registered
Current ride: 2015 Sonic sedan 1.8L/5sp
Joined
·
2,276 Posts
...
It would immediately improve the performance of the CT5 to the point where it’s base form would be attractive in base form. It would put the CT4’s base performance below 6 seconds and greatly improve its attractiveness.
...
I'd love to see this engine in the CT4/CT5, and there's no immediate EV equivalent to these sedans coming out since the upcoming Caddy EVs are all crossovers. (The Celestiq is way way more expensive and not due for a few years.)

My guess is we won't see this engine in the crossovers. But maybe there's a tiny chance for CT4/CT5? Yes I'm aware Caddy is all about EV these days...but they literally have the technology already, it shouldn't cost that much.

I'm assuming they'll want to drive as much crossover sales as possible to the EV Lyriq and future EV crossovers so they can say "see we sold XX thousand EVs." But the sedans might be a different story since, again, they don't have any EV sedans coming out until the uber-expensive Celestiq.

Caddy Society is still predicting refreshes for CT4/CT5 for MY2023 as well as an updated XT5 , not sure if that's accurate.


Maybe a chance for MY2023....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robert1969

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
Ehh, you get the same power basically out of the previous 2.0T, still used in the Camaro. About 270hp and 295tq. Huge mistake putting this new underpowered one in the Caddy sedans. Another dumb move by GM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I'd love to see this engine in the CT4/CT5, and there's no immediate EV equivalent to these sedans coming out since the upcoming Caddy EVs are all crossovers. (The Celestiq is way way more expensive and not due for a few years.)

My guess is we won't see this engine in the crossovers. But maybe there's a tiny chance for CT4/CT5? Yes I'm aware Caddy is all about EV these days...but they literally have the technology already, it shouldn't cost that much.

I'm assuming they'll want to drive as much crossover sales as possible to the EV Lyriq and future EV crossovers so they can say "see we sold XX thousand EVs." But the sedans might be a different story since, again, they don't have any EV sedans coming out until the uber-expensive Celestiq.

Caddy Society is still predicting refreshes for CT4/CT5 for MY2023 as well as an updated XT5 , not sure if that's accurate.


Maybe a chance for MY2023....
I think the XT5 is supposed to be all new next year. But yeah, CT5, XT6, and CT4 are all expected to be refreshed. The XT6 and XT5 will be getting SupreCrusie by then. Basically, the XT5 and XT6 needs a beefed up AWD system and a better engine. I know it can be done, because, after all, the old XTS got a twin turbo with 410hp and 369lb-ft of torque with a similar platform in Epsilon.

Other than a more potent engine, the XT6 and XT5 need more opulent interior design. If it were my decision, since the gas models will go extinct Cadillac should let them both go out with a huge bang and bring the Escalade’s AirRide system to them at least at the top trim level.

The AirRide system has been raved about and, so far, it’s only been applied to BOF vehicles. Imagine how great that is going to be in a unibody vehicle. And don’t tell me AirRide is too expensive. It’s available on the top trim of the Chevy Suburban, which starts at $52k, so there is no financial reason for it not to be made available on the XT5/XT6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dannyg

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Ehh, you get the same power basically out of the previous 2.0T, still used in the Camaro. About 270hp and 295tq. Huge mistake putting this new underpowered one in the Caddy sedans. Another dumb move by GM.
But the old 2.0T had NVH complaints as well. The e-assist version, from what I have read has much better NVH and better MPGs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,918 Posts
Ehh, you get the same power basically out of the previous 2.0T, still used in the Camaro. About 270hp and 295tq. Huge mistake putting this new underpowered one in the Caddy sedans. Another dumb move by GM.
And that old 2.0T put you on par w/ BMW out of their turbo 4 in terms of performance...now Cadillac is damn near a full second behind to 60 and still has NVH problems.
 

·
Registered
2014 BMW 320i; 2015 Chevy Spark EV (wife's car)
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
But the old 2.0T had NVH complaints as well. The e-assist version, from what I have read has much better NVH and better MPGs.
Interestingly, Mark Reuss said in 2019 that GM would completely abandon not only Voltec, but gasoline-electric hybrids of any kind.

I'm not sure if Reuss was speaking of GM globally, or the U.S. market only. If it's the former, there's hope that GM's 48V eAssist technology used in the China domestic market may someday be featured on U.S. market GM vehicles as well.
 

·
Registered
Current ride: 2015 Sonic sedan 1.8L/5sp
Joined
·
2,276 Posts
Interestingly, Mark Reuss said in 2019 that GM would completely abandon not only Voltec, but gasoline-electric hybrids of any kind.

I'm not sure if Reuss was speaking of GM globally, or the U.S. market only. If it's the former, there's hope that GM's 48V eAssist technology used in the China domestic market may someday be featured on U.S. market GM vehicles as well.
Multiple hybrids are offered in China but not here. I'll have to ask Reuss about that the next time I see him. ;););)

Here's the Buick Velite PHEV:

 
  • Like
Reactions: gkr778

·
Registered
Joined
·
44,169 Posts
Interestingly, Mark Reuss said in 2019 that GM would completely abandon not only Voltec, but gasoline-electric hybrids of any kind.

I'm not sure if Reuss was speaking of GM globally, or the U.S. market only. If it's the former, there's hope that GM's 48V eAssist technology used in the China domestic market may someday be featured on U.S. market GM vehicles as well.

I guess it makes sense to "abandon" gas-electric hybrids, if Cadillac was going all EV.
But I think the opportunity was lost to market Cadillac as having a gas-hybrid system across the board. It would be a good selling point too. And Cadillac could really do an upcharge/upsell on it.

I guess the priority wasn't on achieving better mileage or lower emissions in the short term, especially since it wasn't a federal mandate, unlike in other countries.

Does GM not want the added complexity of a hybrid in the US? Do dealerships and/or service centers complain? Or is the hybrid just not reliable, unlike Synergy Drive?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,918 Posts
Interestingly, Mark Reuss said in 2019 that GM would completely abandon not only Voltec, but gasoline-electric hybrids of any kind.

I'm not sure if Reuss was speaking of GM globally, or the U.S. market only. If it's the former, there's hope that GM's 48V eAssist technology used in the China domestic market may someday be featured on U.S. market GM vehicles as well.
Don't bet on it...I really don't see them doing any new ICE development outside the Corvette motors.

Then on top of that...who's to say that adding this mild Hybrid helps NVH? I'm of the opinion that sticking an electric motor between the engine and trans of a rough engine would just make it a rough engine with an electric motor between it and the trans.
 

·
Registered
2014 BMW 320i; 2015 Chevy Spark EV (wife's car)
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
Then on top of that...who's to say that adding this mild Hybrid helps NVH? I'm of the opinion that sticking an electric motor between the engine and trans of a rough engine would just make it a rough engine with an electric motor between it and the trans.
GM itself made the claim in its press release:
General Motors said:
"The combination of the 48V mild hybrid system and GM’s popular 2.0L turbocharged engine is precise and efficient. It provides a smoother, quieter and nimbler driving experience."
I don't know if any third party reviews in China have validated the NVH improvement, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
GM itself made the claim in its press release:

I don't know if any third party reviews in China have validated the NVH improvement, though.
I don’t know either, but from my understanding this is a recent development for 2022 model year. For the record the XT6 is selling very well in China. So far, to my knowledge the engine is not yet in the CT5 in China, and it is also selling well in China.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gkr778

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Multiple hybrids are offered in China but not here. I'll have to ask Reuss about that the next time I see him. ;););)

Here's the Buick Velite PHEV:

Right. GM said it wouldn’t make gas-electric hybrid, but I think they should reconsider or make an exception because it sounds like a great solution to a lot of Cadillac’s frustrations on power/NVH with LSY and the bonus of a bit of an MPG boost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,918 Posts
GM itself made the claim in its press release:

I don't know if any third party reviews in China have validated the NVH improvement, though.
Pretty sure they made that same claim about the 2.0T downgrade motor as well
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top