HAZ-Matt

Ok so people are getting to try out the ATS, and unless I missed it nobody posted a thread about them so here is a little compilation.

First, Autoblog - 2013 Cadillac ATS: Hitting the right notes, while missing the beat.

They seemed to hate the 2.5 and thought that engine shouldn't be powering any Cadillac at all. They liked the 2.0t, and the 3.6L, although the V6 pricing is too close to the CTS in their opinion. Also gave praise to the chassis. The Sport Mode for the automatic was a sore point though.

Car and Driver - 2013 Cadillac ATS: Cadillac charges head-on at the Germans

They also didn't care for the base engine or the Sport Mode on the automatic. But otherwise liked the car.

Road & Track - 2013 ATS: Is this new Cadillac as good as a BMW 3-series?

Overall positive. Said they would have to flip a coin to pick which one to drive on Highway 1 or in the Texas Hill Country.

Top Gear - 2013 ATS: The miniature CTS is here...

Overall positive again. Liked the chassis and thought the sweet spot was the 2.0t with the automatic.

Edmunds - 2013 ATS Premium Full Test
Don't think with the current powertrain lineup that it is quite as good as the 3 series. The chassis and brakes they liked.

Acceleration for the 3.6L was 5.6s to 60mph, and 1/4 mi in 13.9s @ 101.9mph.

JasonD

Nice compilation, thanks!

99SilverSS

To me the combo to have is the 2.0L Turbo 6M. Mileage, power and price seem to be right for this car.

That is until the ATS-V comes out.

The BMW 3 Series is a moving target but it looks like Caddy finally has put one right in line with the newest 3 Series and not on par with the previous generation.

Tokuzumi

I like how Motor Trend tested the safety of the vehicle, by flipping one in the back roads of north Atlanta. Probably near Road Atlanta.

Journalist Flips Cadillac ATS In Crash 17 Miles From Race Track

King Moose SS

2.0T seems to be the most logical choice for anyone. I'm not even sure why the 2.5 needs to be made. It's only $1.5k less than the 2.0T, and it has the same economy.

King Moose SS

I also don't understand the 2.0T manual transmission conundrum. Some of praised it, others have said it's poorly done? What gives?

Guess I'm going to have to test drive it myself.

Z28Wilson

Chassis sounds like it will be a winner for the 6th Gen. The 2.0t would make a nice base motor too.

Z28x

The ATS is also the lightest car in its class = https://rumors.automobilemag.com/201...ar-158165.html

This is going to make one awesome platform for the next Camaro.

jg95z28

The 2.5's EPA fuel ratings are based on regular fuel. Based on GM's track record with turbo engines, the 2.0T will probably "premium fuel recommended."

Sure, if you'd be happy with a 2.5 4cly for the "base" model, 2.0T 4cly for the RS and 3.6 V6 for the SS...

I'm still wondering of the Alpha platform has been developed for a 400-500hp V8, or if it would take a "modified" version of Alpha, which might add a couple hundred pounds (combined) to the engine cradle and rear suspension.

96_Camaro_B4C

I believe I read in Car and Driver's tech review (by Csaba Csere, IIRC) that the small block fits. He made a specific point of mentioning it, so I assume the GM engineers either explicitly said it, or he asked, and they replied in the affirmative (presumably knowing exactly why he was asking)...

Z28x

I'd be happy with those engines, the 3.6L does a 13.9 and the 2.0T would be a great mix of fuel economy and fun to drive. Based on the popularity of the current SS though, not offering a V8 is not an option.

jg95z28

Just because "it fits" doesn't mean that it can live with a small block in the production world. It has to live for 200K+ miles and be economical as well as it performs.

Don't forget about the article where GM engineers confirmed that the small block also "fit" into the Pontiac Solstice on the Kappa platform. How many V8 powered Kappa cars made it into production? Zero, zip, nada, zilch, none.

96_Camaro_B4C

If there will be an ATS-V, as is generally accepted, it will likely offer something over 400 hp / 400 lb-ft. Whether that comes from a twin turbo V6 or a small block V8 is of little matter to the chassis. 400 lb-ft of torque is 400 lb-ft of torque.

The ATS may or may not get a V8, but if Camaro goes on the platform, my money is on it having a V8 at some level. Maybe no 600 hp ZL1, but it'll have a V8.

EDIT: And yes, I'm sure there will be at least a bit of a weight increase between a 33xx lb 4 cyl ATS and an ATS-V (or Camaro).

Z28Wilson

If we are to assume that a V8 ATS-V is inevitable (and I do), it means that this chassis, as it sits now, was designed to handle the power of a Gen V V8.

Now, if you DON'T believe they had planned for an ATS-V from the start, then that obviously alters the conversation. But does anyone truly believe that Cadillac won't give the V treatment to its new small sports sedan? Even if it's a turbo V6, you can assume those power levels would approach a V8 anyway and have similar (if not even larger) packaging dimensions.

EDIT: Darn you Joe, you stole my thunder!

King Moose SS

That's because it would of been faster than a corvette and would of had a much cheaper price tag. GM wouldn't allow that to happen. We all knew that car was begging for a V8.