2025 CT4V Blackwing?

[Grainofsand]

Having owned a few V8's including a coyote 5.0 and a LT1 engine, I don't see anything more special about having a V8. The LF4 makes a lot of torque down low.

 

[Grainofsand]

NA V8 I feel would be a step back for the 4BW. Unless it's the new Z06 engine lol

 

[dinkman]

Don't take this personally. I never made any personal attacks at you. Your opinion is valid and so is mine. They are just that - opinions.


My point still stands. The GM engineers claimed the V6 is better than the V8 for weight distribution. Of course they know what they are saying. But I'm guessing it's better for weight distribution becasue its axial length is less - which puts less weight in front of the front axle line, vs a V8 which is longer and has more of it's weight out front. In my mind, 4 cams made of steel instead of 1, plus 2 turbos made of cast iron, an intercooler, plus intercooler piping, plus maybe coolant and a coolant pump for the intercooler (not sure if the 4 has these, but the 5 does) seems like a lot of extra crap that probably adds up to about the same weigt as an NA V8. Sure the weight is farther back, but is it ligher? I'd love to know.


I've driven several 4s - in auto and stick. In fact, I did the Spring Mountain class in a 5 and then again in a 4 a few weeks apart (instructor asked "weren't you just here"). As I stated several times in this (and other threads) I love the 4. I think it is the better car. It is a much better fit for my size preference. The gearing and power is more usable on the street. They both have more power than I want. I encourage everyone (and have on this forum) considering a 5, to test drive a 4 before buying - you may fall in love with the 4 - it's fantastic. However, at the end of the day, after multiple test drives in both, I wasn't going to buy a twin turbo V6. As I stated above, this may very well be irrational, but that is how I feel. I suspect there are others who agree (like the Youtube commenters you seem to hate).

Clearly we disagree, and that's ok. If no one posted their opinions in this forum, there'd be very little here to read. If reading my opinion makes you upset, I suggest you avail yourself of the ignore function - that's what it is there for.

im def in your camp. while i love everything about the 4, the v6tt is a big part of whats holding me back. i owned an f80 m3 which is many aspects is very similar car in terms of performance, handling, styling, driver oriented focus (not trying to start a debate on that!) and it just wasnt for me because of that drivetrain. part of it was the shifter is very rubbery on those which isnt true in the caddy but the motors have very similar characteristics.

 

[raptor5244]

I'm happy with the V6 in the 4 BW...performs very well and sounds good (though i wish it were a bit louder/more growl).

Would I have rather had the small block...maybe...emotionally sure...but if in fact the weight - while perhaps being about the same - is less forward - if this improves handling over the V8 - well - they probably made the right choice (and I'm happy for that). Besides its certainly tunable for more oomph and more easily than if it was normally aspirated.

I loved my Audi S4....but my that weight over the front was certainly a drawback (that AWD somewhat saved it...but not at/over the limit - where it wanted to plow). After some spirited driving in the 4 BW I can greatly see the benefit of the balanced chassis and how - even without AWD - it inspires great confidence in high speed cornering that I think would be compromised by more weight forward the front axle. So maybe this is a big reason why the turbo 6 over the 8. Of course I've also heard that since its a Cadillac unique engine vs the Chevy small black that this was the determining factor.

Based on my findings the LF4 fully dressed is somewhere around 450lbs and the LT1 is 465lbs so not a huge difference but if you listen to the discussion with the chief engineer starting at 4:50 below you will see the made a conscious choice with TT V6 over the V8 back during ATS-V development for many of the reasons you listed.

That said, the V8 may be less refined but it would add some character that would differentiate it in the segment rather than just following the rest of the sports sedan crowd. Furthermore, you would think it would cost less to use a V8 that was used in Camaros, Corvettes, Silverados vs. a specific engine only this trim.

LF4 is great but as you see in the thread there are a fair amount of folks that would choose a NA V8 in a Blackwing trim. Refinement is fine and all but some want a more raw sports sedan. The 5BW has a monster LT4 V8 and it is refined...

 

[Grainofsand]

im def in your camp. while i love everything about the 4, the v6tt is a big part of whats holding me back. i owned an f80 m3 which is many aspects is very similar car in terms of performance, handling, styling, driver oriented focus (not trying to start a debate on that!) and it just wasnt for me because of that drivetrain. part of it was the shifter is very rubbery on those which isnt true in the caddy but the motors have very similar characteristics.

It sounds more like you didn't like the manual gearbox in the f80. Most people end up selling their manual f80s. Those cars were made to be automatic.

 

[Jameson's Viggen]

We'll see how the Charger sells when they replace the hemi V8 with a turbo straight 6 (and straight 6 >> than V6) - my guess is hellcat buyers won't be interested - the same way I'm not interested in an EV - no matter how fast they are.

My first car was a V8 and my second. Since then I've had straight 4s, 6, 3, and 5. If I was going to spend big money I wanted a V8. My mom's Camry is a V6. Maybe it's irrational, but I don’t care. Car purchases aren't rational or we'd all be driving a Prius or minivan.

The 4BW engine makes more power than I want, but I find the sound unpleasant. The 5's sound makes me feel like I'm going to have an accident in my pants (the good kind). I'm paying for an experience, and the V6, while plenty fast, doesn't deliver the experience I want.



(My guess is the MBA types forbid the V8 in the 4 because it would have canabalized the higher profit 5 sales - which is 100% true)

I'm going to clarify this again.

The under hood of the 5 is the same as the Camaro and both accommodate the V8. The underhood space of the 4 is smaller. No V8.

Could you make a business case to modify the 4 in such a way to make a V8 fit? You know that would drive the price as high or higher than a 5, right? So yes, the business case has to be there too, but the physical differences between 4-5 and Camaro are always glossed over.

Yes, a shop could do a Sema build for a 1 off LT2 CT4. That's not the same as tooling up for mass production.

 

[Roadhawk]

Thanks raptor5244!

 

[shbox]

I'm going to clarify this again.

The under hood of the 5 is the same as the Camaro and both accommodate the V8. The underhood space of the 4 is smaller. No V8.

Could you make a business case to modify the 4 in such a way to make a V8 fit? You know that would drive the price as high or higher than a 5, right? So yes, the business case has to be there too, but the physical differences between 4-5 and Camaro are always glossed over.

Yes, a shop could do a Sema build for a 1 off LT2 CT4. That's not the same as tooling up for mass production.

Sorry this has to be repeated over and over. The myriad of choices car manufacturers have to make to bring a car to market are not universally understood.

 

[Jameson's Viggen]

Yeah, we've heard the "it earned it's place" and the V8 wont fit. And it's better for weight distribution. (But is a 4 cam, twin turbo V6 really any lighter than an NA pushrod V8?) And I'm sure when the Blackwing team had to turn the 4 into the BW the die was already cast and a V8 was never going to fit.

However, when the ATS was turned into the CT4, they could have easily left room for the V8. The product planners gave the engineers a list of requirements and in my imagination the exchange went like this

1) not just weight of V6 vs V8. You always want the engine set as far back as possible, V8 would altar the handling of the 4 as you have more engine past the "axle". Having driven both cars at Spring Mountain, I'd never want to lose the sharpness of the front response by even a few percent over "better" V8 noises

2) Easily have left room for the V8? Say that out loud. The 4 is a large refresh of the ATS unibody. Much of the hard points like windows are nearly identical. That's how the 4 BlackWing made it into production in the first place, especially with a manual. It wasn't a ground up $$$$ program. So the ATS which couldn't get the V8 fit, that meant the 4 inherited the same issue. So you're idea that could have easily been changed from the ATS is incorrect.

 

[G.Newt]

Id

1) not just weight of V6 vs V8. You always want the engine set as far back as possible, V8 would altar the handling of the 4 as you have more engine past the "axle". Having driven both cars at Spring Mountain, I'd never want to lose the sharpness of the front response by even a few percent over "better" V8 noises

2) Easily have left room for the V8? Say that out loud. The 4 is a large refresh of the ATS unibody. Much of the hard points like windows are nearly identical. That's how the 4 BlackWing made it into production in the first place, especially with a manual. It wasn't a ground up $$$$ program. So the ATS which couldn't get the V8 fit, that meant the 4 inherited the same issue. So you're idea that could have easily been changed from the ATS is incorrect.

Your first point is valid, as the chief engineer did mention weight and weight distribution, but the interview posted with him said that a V8 would fit. There's no way a Camaro and ATS that share a platform wouldn't be able to fit the same motors. I don't believe that for 1 second.

The 2 things I took away: "Segment appropriate" and "refinement" is what he said in the interview.
The M3 was the target for the ATS. M3 moved from NA V8 to TT 6. As did the RS4/5. Also, the main thing I was really surprised with coming from a BMW with a B58 to this LF4 is how smooth it is. Nothing beats a straight 6, but this LF4 is doing its best job to imitate it. Looks like GM achieved the 3 things it wanted. Weight, segment appropriate, and refinement.

 

[savethemanual]

There's no way a Camaro and ATS that share a platform wouldn't be able to fit the same motors. I don't believe that for 1 second.

Sigh.

 

[Jameson's Viggen]

Id

Your first point is valid, as the chief engineer did mention weight and weight distribution, but the interview posted with him said that a V8 would fit. There's no way a Camaro and ATS that share a platform wouldn't be able to fit the same motors. I don't believe that for 1 second.

The 2 things I took away: "Segment appropriate" and "refinement" is what he said in the interview.
The M3 was the target for the ATS. M3 moved from NA V8 to TT 6. As did the RS4/5. Also, the main thing I was really surprised with coming from a BMW with a B58 to this LF4 is how smooth it is. Nothing beats a straight 6, but this LF4 is doing its best job to imitate it. Looks like GM achieved the 3 things it wanted. Weight, segment appropriate, and refinement.

My statement is per Mirza. It's not an opinion.

 

[G.Newt]

My statement is per Mirza. It's not an opinion.

So who's lying? David Leone or Mirza? One says a V8 would fit, one says it wouldn't.

 

[99sport]

My statement is per Mirza. It's not an opinion.

Do you have a link? Dave Leone stated in the video above that it would. Referring to the V8 in an ATS: "Would one fit? Yes" See video above at 6:14. Link below for your convenience.

I imagine the discrepancy is how much engineering is needed. Would it fit with zero engineering? Probably not. Could it be done? Unequivocally yes, but it would take dollars being spent on a model that sells in incredibly small numbers for GM (less than 1% of GM annual production).

 

[Jameson's Viggen]

Do you have a link? Dave Leone stated in the video above that it would. Referring to the V8 in an ATS: "Would one fit? Yes" See video above at 6:14. Link below for your convenience.

I imagine the discrepancy is how much engineering is needed. Would it fit with zero engineering? Probably not. Could it be done? Unequivocally yes, but it would take dollars being spent on a model that sells in incredibly small numbers for GM (less than 1% of GM annual production).

It doesn't have to be a matter of lying. Someone was put on the spot in an interview. They gave the answer they gave.

Mirza is on this forum and has answered in depth this same question. I give credence to Mirza. He's also not the only person I've interacted with first hand who has said the same thing.

Otherwise you are saying the same thing I said. GM could make a few mules with a V8. Sure. To tool up and engineer it would make for a $80-100k CT4. They'd sell less than the 5, the 5 is selling well I might add.

I'm just exhausted about the could've should've with this car. A V8 would not have made the 4 BETTER aside from sound and I have no issues with how it sounds stock. If there was no 5, I could see the appeal. If there was never an Chevy SS, I could see the appeal. Been there, done that. I love the LF4 and how if it's not enough, 100whp is 2-3 bolt ons away.

 

[raptor5244]

FWIW, some perspective as someone who was coming from a C7 Grand Sport and Camaro ZL1, I was hesitant at first about purchasing the 4BW with the LF4 TT V6. The 4BW had all the things I was looking for including improved driving position, visibility, more practical, improved interior, etc. but I was not overly excited about the powertrain, especially since I was coming from a ZL1. I traded the ZL1 anyway for it and so far it has been great and I will say it does sound pretty good for a V6, especially outside the car.

It is well rounded and checks the most boxes for me. Sure, I would like it if were a bit more raw and visceral with added vibration and soundtrack of a V8 or maybe if it could rev a bit higher but the experience is still very good with the Tremec M6.

That said, if there was no Tremec M6 option I would have passed. IMO, the Tremec M6 is a huge part of the driving enjoyment of this car. The M6, great clutch and quick throttle response married to this nimble chassis keeps me satisfied with the purchase.

 

[Aaron4BW]

Coming from a 6th gen 1LE, the LF4 is very appropriate for the 4BW. Do I miss the rumble & immediate NA torque of the LT1... hell yea! Especially rolling around in a cadillac V that nobody has ever even heard of & thinks has a V8. But that all goes out the window when im in full boost with my DP & tuned 500+whp sedan gapping any NA v8 I run into
I'm a long time JDM (especially nismo) fanboy, so the turbo spool with down pipes is so epic & beautiful to me! It just confuses people coming from a Cadillac V

 

[MookdocOE]

Well, all I know is I am eyeballing the CT4 BW and I don't want a V-8 that's why I got the CT5 BW
GM nailed that car with the V-6 and it's proportions, nimbleness etc. GM put a blown V-8 in a slightly bigger footprint for a reason and if you want that it's 40k more! Pick your poison folks I want a copy of both!

 

[MookdocOE]

FWIW, some perspective as someone who was coming from a C7 Grand Sport and Camaro ZL1, I was hesitant at first about purchasing the 4BW with the LF4 TT V6. The 4BW had all the things I was looking for including improved driving position, visibility, more practical, improved interior, etc. but I was not overly excited about the powertrain, especially since I was coming from a ZL1. I traded the ZL1 anyway for it and so far it has been great and I will say it does sound pretty good for a V6, especially outside the car.

It is well rounded and checks the most boxes for me. Sure, I would like it if were a bit more raw and visceral with added vibration and soundtrack of a V8 or maybe if it could rev a bit higher but the experience is still very good with the Tremec M6.

That said, if there was no Tremec M6 option I would have passed. IMO, the Tremec M6 is a huge part of the driving enjoyment of this car. The M6, great clutch and quick throttle response married to this nimble chassis keeps me satisfied with the purchase.

Nice post! I need to stop thinking about perfect the setup with Tremec M6 and TT V6 on the alpha II chassis is...

 

[Roadhawk]

FWIW, some perspective as someone who was coming from a C7 Grand Sport and Camaro ZL1, I was hesitant at first about purchasing the 4BW with the LF4 TT V6. The 4BW had all the things I was looking for including improved driving position, visibility, more practical, improved interior, etc. but I was not overly excited about the powertrain, especially since I was coming from a ZL1. I traded the ZL1 anyway for it and so far it has been great and I will say it does sound pretty good for a V6, especially outside the car.

It is well rounded and checks the most boxes for me. Sure, I would like it if were a bit more raw and visceral with added vibration and soundtrack of a V8 or maybe if it could rev a bit higher but the experience is still very good with the Tremec M6.

That said, if there was no Tremec M6 option I would have passed. IMO, the Tremec M6 is a huge part of the driving enjoyment of this car. The M6, great clutch and quick throttle response married to this nimble chassis keeps me satisfied with the purchase.

You nailed it.

Funny - a few weeks ago I pulled over and talked to a cop about a parking situation and the first thing he said was "your car sounds great" followed by "nice car....looks great too"