Report: Cadillac to offer Duramax V8 diesel in CTS?
10-16-2008, 09:19 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 10,287
Report: Cadillac to offer Duramax V8 diesel in CTS?
http://www.leftlanenews.com/report-c...el-in-cts.html
I like the idea
I like the idea
Originally designed to propel SUVs and pickup trucks, GM’s 4.5-liter Duramax V8 turbodiesel powerplant could find its way under the hood of the Cadillac CTS. The idea is unusual, but perhaps not a controversial as the prospect of a four-cylinder Caddy. If a new report is to believed, GM is strongly considering the possibility.
The Duramax mill delivers 310 horsepower, and, as diesels do, a massive amount of torque — 520 pound-feet to be exact. Critically, GM says the engine meets emissions standards in all 50 states.
The engine might serve to fill the gap between the 304 horsepower V6 and 556 horsepower “V” in the CTS range, according to Motor Trend, but we think it would have to be up-tuned to around 420 horsepower to accomplish that goal.
While shoehorning a diesel into a Cadillac is a bit of a risk from a marketing point of view, the technical feasibility of such a move is very favorable, and the cost to GM would be minimal. The CTS is already capable of fitting the engine without issue, and a suitable transmission is readily available.
The Duramax mill delivers 310 horsepower, and, as diesels do, a massive amount of torque — 520 pound-feet to be exact. Critically, GM says the engine meets emissions standards in all 50 states.
The engine might serve to fill the gap between the 304 horsepower V6 and 556 horsepower “V” in the CTS range, according to Motor Trend, but we think it would have to be up-tuned to around 420 horsepower to accomplish that goal.
While shoehorning a diesel into a Cadillac is a bit of a risk from a marketing point of view, the technical feasibility of such a move is very favorable, and the cost to GM would be minimal. The CTS is already capable of fitting the engine without issue, and a suitable transmission is readily available.
10-16-2008, 10:51 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
What kind of fuel economy figures would we expect to see? If it's not making 30+mpg highway, don't bother.
The E320 diesel gets 32mpg hwy granted it only makes 210hp/400lb-ft tq. Maybe they should detune the 4.5L duramax. I think most people would be willing to sacrifice a bit of hp/tq for an increase in fuel economy. I don't think the CTS diesel needs 310hp and 520lb-ft of tq. 250hp and 440lb-ft of tq would suffice.
The E320 diesel gets 32mpg hwy granted it only makes 210hp/400lb-ft tq. Maybe they should detune the 4.5L duramax. I think most people would be willing to sacrifice a bit of hp/tq for an increase in fuel economy. I don't think the CTS diesel needs 310hp and 520lb-ft of tq. 250hp and 440lb-ft of tq would suffice.
10-16-2008, 11:20 AM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 10,287
I think it would be sick to see a duramax in a CTS . It would be rather simple for the end user to make it faster than a CTS-V 
10-16-2008, 05:05 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
10-16-2008, 06:21 PM
#8
West South Central Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Kilgore TX 75662
Posts: 3,372
The engine might serve to fill the gap between the 304 horsepower V6 and 556 horsepower “V” in the CTS range, according to Motor Trend, but we think it would have to be up-tuned to around 420 horsepower to accomplish that goal.
What kind of fuel economy figures would we expect to see? If it's not making 30+mpg highway, don't bother.
The E320 diesel gets 32mpg hwy granted it only makes 210hp/400lb-ft tq. Maybe they should detune the 4.5L duramax. I think most people would be willing to sacrifice a bit of hp/tq for an increase in fuel economy. I don't think the CTS diesel needs 310hp and 520lb-ft of tq. 250hp and 440lb-ft of tq would suffice.
The E320 diesel gets 32mpg hwy granted it only makes 210hp/400lb-ft tq. Maybe they should detune the 4.5L duramax. I think most people would be willing to sacrifice a bit of hp/tq for an increase in fuel economy. I don't think the CTS diesel needs 310hp and 520lb-ft of tq. 250hp and 440lb-ft of tq would suffice.
V6 = 86.2 hp/L & 140.0 ft-lbs/L
V8 = 68.9 hp/L & 115.6 ft-lbs/L
The V8 tuned to the same specific output as the V6 would make 388hp & 630 ft-lbs!
Last edited by AdioSS; 10-16-2008 at 07:01 PM.
10-16-2008, 07:02 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Jupiter, FL
Posts: 1,647
The engine might serve to fill the gap between the 304 horsepower V6 and 556 horsepower “V” in the CTS range, according to Motor Trend, but we think it would have to be up-tuned to around 420 horsepower to accomplish that goal.
Last edited by ImportedRoomate; 10-16-2008 at 07:10 PM.
10-17-2008, 08:14 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: North of Cincy
Posts: 824
Is it just me or does MT not have a clue about how diesels operate. 520 lb/tq is enough to snap your head clean off in a Caddy package. Mated with a 6 speed this this would crush that V6.
Last edited by soul strife; 10-17-2008 at 10:30 AM.
10-21-2008, 10:35 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Akron, OH.
Posts: 610
As usual for GM, its overkill. The 4.5L motor would probably add 250lbs over the front tires of the car. I know its graphite iron blah blah blah, you still have the weight of the turbo, intercooler, oil cooler, piping etc. The handling would be **** poor and you dont need 520ftlbs, the 2.9L would be perfect in this application and stilll provide 400ftlbs and could manage 35mpg. Contary to that author's thinking you DONT need to fill the gap between 300hp and 550hp. Plus they'll turn around and complain about the NVH of a truck motor in a Cadilliac.
10-21-2008, 11:34 AM
#15
West South Central Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Kilgore TX 75662
Posts: 3,372
As usual for GM, its overkill. The 4.5L motor would probably add 250lbs over the front tires of the car. I know its graphite iron blah blah blah, you still have the weight of the turbo, intercooler, oil cooler, piping etc. The handling would be **** poor and you dont need 520ftlbs, the 2.9L would be perfect in this application and stilll provide 400ftlbs and could manage 35mpg. Contary to that author's thinking you DONT need to fill the gap between 300hp and 550hp. Plus they'll turn around and complain about the NVH of a truck motor in a Cadilliac.
Why do you think the new diesel is a "truck engine"? Because there has been mention of putting it in half-ton trucks? There was also talk of putting it into the full-size RWD Impala.
I think the CTS could use a V6 diesel tuned to the same specific output as the V8. It would make right at 200hp/335tq with the potential for over 35mpg.