Total Motors is an old memory for old friends

2016 Cadillac CTS-V: In-Depth with the Four-Door Corvette

A 640-hp Nürburgring-eating CTS-V isn’t a natural descendant of the house of Cadillac. The king of

cush and the caesar of geezers was once none too concerned with steering fidelity, roll gradients, lateral grip, and the like. These were figuratively and literally foreign concepts, as the modern luxury car—as sharp at clipping an apex as it is comfortable on the highway—is largely a European conceit.

Cadillac finally turned a corner (without hideous squealing) in 2003 with its first CTS. Ever since then, the brand has been hellbent on topping its German rivals. The 2016 CTS-V, which made its debut at this year’s Detroit auto show, is Cadillac’s best chance yet to do so.

We’ve already witnessed the third-generation CTS top the Mercedes-Benz E-class and the BMW 5-series (albeit while taking second place to the Audi A6). Starting from the same cornerstone, the new CTS-V should have Germany’s three big gunslingers—Audi RS, BMW M, and Mercedes-AMG—reaching nervously for their lederhosen.

The CTS-V has always been a kind of four-door Chevy Corvette. The new V ties the Vette connection even tighter with an engine lifted from the ballistic Corvette Z06. The engine is so lightly altered for Cadillac duty that the company could have called this car the CTS-V06.

The 6.2-liter supercharged V-8 retains the LT4 moniker and packs the Z06’s forged aluminum pistons, powder-metal forged connecting rods, titanium intake valves, and an Eaton blower pushing 1.7 liters of air per rotation. Aside from the intake and exhaust arrangements, the major difference between the Corvette and CTS-V engines is the lubrication system. In the Corvette, the low hood and the height of the supercharger dictate a dry sump and remote oil reservoir. The relatively tall Cadillac doesn’t have the same hood-height issues, so oil starvation is kept at bay in high-g corners by a deep sump, reducing complexity and weight.

Given the differences in their cooling systems and how the two cars breathe (plus the always-lurking horsepower hierarchy dictated by brand management), all of the Z06’s 650 horsepower and 650 pound-feet of torque won't materialize in the Cadillac. Instead, the CTS-V is rated at 640 horsepower and 630 pound-feet. We project a zero-to-60 blitz of 3.7 seconds en route to a 12.0-second quarter-mile ET. Those figures would essentially match the BMW M5’s, but lag behind those of the four-wheel-drive Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG and Audi RS7 by a quarter to half of a second.

The V’s top speed stands to be even more impressive. CTS chief engineer Tony Roma was coy at first, saying only that his team aims for “a big number,” but he eventually let on that they’re hoping the car will exceed 200 mph. At our interview, the closest we got to a CTS-V in motion was firing the small-block V-8 engine. Its eight cylinders came to life with a rabid bark that ricocheted off the coved walls of our photo studio before the 6.2-liter settled into a gravelly idle, fast and loud. The sound is as awesome as it is assertive, though your neighbors may think otherwise when you leave the driveway at 6 a.m. For those occasions, you’ll want to start the car in tour mode, which keeps the muffler-bypass valves closed to quiet the snarl.

GM’s own 8L90 eight-speed automatic is the sole transmission, a move that ­disappoints but in no way ­surprises us. Roma offers a conciliatory maybe: “If there’s enough fervor from the enthusiast community, we’ll consider doing a manual.” Don’t hold your breath. With the forthcoming ATS-V to go toe-to-toe with the BMW M3, the CTS-V now assumes a narrower role. There will be no coupe or wagon, and the price swells from $65,825 for the 2014 CTS-V sedan to roughly $85,000.

The chassis follows the usual formula for making sedans sportier, including stiffer springs, larger anti-roll bars, and firmer bushings. In the front suspension, using two lower links instead of one ­control arm quickens steering response. Magnetorheological dampers are stand­ard, as is an electronically controlled limited-slip differential borrowed from the CTS Vsport and modified with a heat exchanger connected to the transmission’s cooling circuit.

Iron brake discs mounted on aluminum hats measure 15.4 inches up front and 14.4 in the rear. They’re squeezed by six- and four-piston calipers, respectively, borrowed from the Camaro Z/28’s carbon-ceramic brake package. The rear discs are so large, they’d be verboten in the World Challenge series where the current CTS-V coupe competes. The brakes surely won’t shed heat quite like carbon discs, but the added surface area of the massive rotors means the front discs run 200 degrees Fahrenheit cooler while working than those of the outgoing car.

Michelin tailored the Pilot Super Sport tires—265/35-19 front and 295/30-19 rear—specifically for the car, and the tires come out of their own bespoke mold. Two different tread rubber compounds balance the contradictory goals of extending tire life and maximizing cornering grip.

The CTS-V is one car with one suspension. There are no upgrades, no optional big wheels, and no add-on carbon-ceramic brakes. The only chassis-related choice comes down to wheel finish. “These cars are meant to be the boutique offering,” Roma explains. “We feel like good is good, so we’ve tuned the chassis and you get the good stuff. You don’t have to check the track-package box. This is the track package.”

Those who do venture onto road circuits will benefit from the CTS-V’s first use of the Performance Traction Management (PTM) system. First demonstrated on the 2010 Corvette ZR1 and now offered on all Corvettes, PTM’s five modes—from wet to race—progressively loosen the stability-control system’s oversight. Track rats also can record their exploits on the optional Performance Data Recorder, which overlays vehicle data on a video captured by a camera mounted ahead of the rearview mirror.

If the CTS Vsport is any indication, the full-blown V should deliver some of the purest steering feel out there—not just among the competition, but in all of luxuryland. For the Cadillac team, it’s a product of philosophy more than an engineering challenge. “If you look at the fundamental parts that a lot of our competitors have in their cars, you’ll find architectural components that you would put in a car to get what I call good steering feel,” Roma says. “So when we go drive the resulting car, a lot of times we go, ‘Whoa, this is so isolated.’ Clearly a lot of our competitors favor ride and isolation because there is a trade-off to be made.”

The CTS lineup benefits from an electric power-steering motor that connects to the rack via a belt rather than a gear or a recirculating-ball system. When the car passes over a pavement imperfection, there’s enough compliance in the belt for the jostle at the tires to reach the steering wheel without being damped out by the assist motor’s inertia. In the V, the steering supposedly becomes even more direct when the PTM system is set to its highest levels, switching off the electric power steering’s damping and self-centering functions.

The V series looks the part of a factory-tuned street racer with a louvered hole punched in the carbon-fiber hood, wider front fenders, and a slightly lower stance. The fender vents, originally requested by the design team, were only approved on the condition that they be functional. While they aren’t critically important, the vents do connect to the engine bay, providing an escape for underhood heat. The car we photographed wears the optional carbon-fiber package with a longer front splitter, a taller spoiler, a carbon rear diffuser, and Gurney flaps ahead of the front wheel wells. The package doesn’t reduce weight by any quantifiable measure, but it does reduce aerodynamic lift, aiding the CTS-V’s high-speed handling balance. Unfortunately, the additional downforce imposes higher drag, so cars equipped with this option aren’t likely to reach 200 mph. While the exposed weave gives this $85,000 Cadillac a we-made-it-for-SEMA vibe, the quality at least lives up to the price. Look closely and you’ll see that the carbon fiber is laid at an angle and book-matched so that the weave creates a “V” at the center of the car. Whether you order the carbon package or not, the CTS-V comes with a new curb-view video system that uses two downward-facing cameras mounted along the upper edge of the lower grille to help drivers nestle up to a curb without scrunching the lower fascia. It’s a useful feature that should be shared with the Corvette team in exchange for its LT4 V-8.

The V-specific weight-saving measures are few and limited, but the Alpha platform on which the CTS is based has a lean bone structure to start with. Cadillac claims a weight of 4145 pounds for the CTS-V, a drop of roughly 100 pounds from the previous car. And while 4150 pounds isn’t light, it is less than the 4300-pound M5, the 4400-pound E63 AMG, and the 4500-pound RS7.

Less weight is one advantage Cadillac has never held in previous comparisons. We’ll soon know if the claim holds up, and more importantly, if Cadillac’s long-running pursuit of Germany’s ultimate sports sedans has finally paid off.

The Spectacle of Rally

What makes Rally one of the greatest motorsports in the world is the wide range of terrain on which the races are run. For a competitor to be successful in rally, he or she must not only be a jack of all trades, but a master of it all. It’s this element of the sport that makes it one of the most enjoyable to watch. For the hardcore fans willing to forgo the the convenience of grandstands and brave the elements, it only enhances the experience.

In rally, you’ll never grow weary of cars circling around for hours on end, and red flags won’t be thrown because of a plastic bag blowing around on track. Even in the harshest of conditions—dirt, gravel, sand, mud, and snow—there’s no crew drying or sweeping the track. Day or night, -30° or 100°, rally does not stop for the faint of heart. Dynamically testing conditions that would normally thwart other motorsports’ delicate cars and manicured tracks, are what rally competitors thrive in. Roads that most people wouldn't dare to venture onto with an SUV, rally cars make easy work of. 

These conditions are just a contributing factor to what makes Rally one of the most visually spectacular motorsports. No two venues are ever the same; from one year to another, the same event may change dramatically. Wherever you point the camera at a rally race, you'll capture something unique and stunning. 

Last season was no exception for SRT USA. From the bitter cold snow that covered northern Michigan, to the ribbon of tarmac atop Mt. Washington, and to the dusty roads of the Pacific Northwest, there was no lack of visually stunning scenes.

For your viewing pleasure, we've put together a gallery of our favorite and most dramatic photos from the 2014 Rally America Championship. Be sure to check out the downloads tab in the menue to the right, where you can get some of these SRT USA images as your wallpaper.

Watch a 207-mph, Jet-Powered Bicycle Decimate a Ferrari in a Drag Race

Which is the more amazing feat: Switzerland’s Francois Gissy leaving a Ferrari 430 Scuderia sitting still at the dragstrip as he recorded 3.1 g’s of accelerative force on his way to a top speed of 207 mph, or that he did this on a BICYCLE? That bicycle, incidentally, was equipped with a rocket engine supplying 4.2 kN (944 pounds) of thrust. Gissy hit that 207-mph mark in just 4.8 seconds, at the 300-meter mark of the run. His quarter-mile time was a scant 6.8 seconds. If he has his way, Gissy could turn the 23-day Tour de France into a friendly afternoon of rocket-propelled insanity. Note that the actual record run was solo. The face-off against the Ferrari appeared to be for giggles. It was still the most comprehensive ass-kicking ever.

Porsche Recalls 13,500 Panameras and Cayennes for Fuel-Tank Seal Issue

It seems GT3s aren’t the only modern Porsches capable of self-immolating. According to Bloomberg, a Chinese regulation authority has determined that some Cayennes and Panameras built between 2011 and 2012 have a faulty seal that can let fuel evaporate and potentially catch fire. Porsche has taken the preemptive step of recalling 13,500 vehicles globally on its own accord. No fires have been reported and very few of those cars are in the U.S.

Why 0.5-Liter Cylinders Will Soon Dominate Automotive-Engine Design

A decade or so ago, a team of German university scientists settled on 500 cubic centimeters as the

ideal per-cylinder displacement for internal-combustion engines. A 500-cc cylinder with a stroke length larger than its bore diameter, these forgotten pioneers concluded, benefits the combustion process by minimizing the engine’s internal surface-to-volume ratio as the piston nears top dead center. Seeking to optimize power and fuel efficiency while reducing emissions, the three local powerhouses—BMW Group, Mercedes-Benz, and Volks­wagen Group—promptly joined the 500 club with boosted, direct-injected, long-stroke engines. Fiat Chrysler, Jaguar Land Rover, and Volvo are also applying for membership. Additional brands will surely follow, in part because 500-cc-displacement intervals align nicely with existing global taxation statutes. While hybrids and electrics will assist the move to better mileage with lower emissions, updated versions of Nikolaus Otto’s 139-year-old engine—many with 500-cc cylinders—will continue to do the heavy lifting.

Thus far, BMW is the most enthusiastic proponent of the 500-cc cylinder, with half-liter-based three-, four-, and six-pot gas and diesel engines either in production or about to be introduced. BMW’s newest family of TwinPower Turbo gas engines, which launched in the 2015 Mini Cooper Hardtop, shares its 82-mm (3.23-inch) bore and 94.6-mm (3.72-inch) stroke dimensions, plus direct fuel injection, variable intake- and exhaust-valve timing, and variable intake-valve lift systems. This modular approach enables 60-percent commonality of the component parts across three gas engines and 30 to 40 percent with the corresponding two diesel engines.

It’s not just the 500-cc displacement that matters, but also the dimensions that yield such volume. While a cylinder with a smaller bore than stroke (a so-called under-square design) contradicts the classic approach to maximum power at stratospheric rpm [see “Different Strokes”], there are compelling reasons for this move. A small bore shortens the flame travel needed to consume the fuel-air mix and diminishes quenching of the flame at the bore’s periphery. With smaller piston crowns and a more compact combustion chamber, there’s less heat lost to the cooling system. Smaller bores trade shorter overall block length for a modest increase in height, handy for jamming potent engines into tight confines.

One hardship enthusiasts must bear is slightly lower redlines. In exchange, we get better mileage (when we can resist the urge to pin the throttle) and enhanced flexibility attributable to the broader spread between torque and power peaks. Considering the global statutes in place mandating higher efficiency, we’re happy that Otto’s engine has more life left in it.

Different Strokes

Here’s a look at two different approaches to making power. Mercedes-Benz’s 6.2-liter AMG V-8 is the last gasp of the old way, but it’s unlikely to survive until 2025. Its replacement is the twin-turbo 4.0-liter new-wave V-8 spreading throughout AMG’s lineup.

2018 Mazdaspeed 3: Zoom-Zoom, Please Come Soon-Soon

COMPETITION

Ford Fiesta ST and Focus ST, Mini Cooper S, Subaru WRX, Volkswagen GTI.

WHAT MIGHT GO WRONG

A high sticker price and buzz-killing insurance rates may put off young buyers who most want it. And Mazda must sell enough regular 3s in the U.S. to justify a low-volume hard-core model for those who have worn out their 2007–2013 Mazdaspeed 3s.

ESTIMATED ARRIVAL AND PRICE

Don’t expect a Speed 3 before the 2018 model year, but do expect Mazda to work hard to keep the price below $30,000.

Two Metals Enter, One Leaves: The Miracle of Friction Stir Welding

The typical images of welding—a robotic arm burping sparks or a masked Jesse James hovering over

a glowing metal puddle—don’t apply to friction stir welding (FSW). The metal-joining technique was developed in 1991 by The Welding Institute, an industrial research center near Cambridge, England. In the mid-1990s, two Scandinavian aluminum-extrusion companies became the first to use the technique commercially. Since then, it has been widely adopted by the aerospace industry and has slowly trickled into the automotive realm.

Sparks and eye shields are part of fusion welding, where an electric current heats two pieces of metal to a molten state. When the metal pool cools, a single, solid joint results. In contrast, FSW is a solid-state weld involving no molten metal. Heat generated by pressure and friction is all that’s needed to ensure a strong metal bond.

The benefits are numerous. Most notably, FSW works with dissimilar ­metals. Not only can it weld different aluminum alloys, but it can also weld steel to aluminum. Before FSW, this was time consuming, costly, and often resulted in brittle bonds not suitable for load-bearing applications.

A Tale of Two Porsche Seven-Speeds: Manual and PDK

Rummaging through the parts bin to build several cars out of the same basic bits is nothing new and, in rare cases, can even result in cars with distinct personalities. Porsche’s Boxster, Cayman, and 911 don’t suffer from sharing a multitude of body, chassis, and powertrain components. Now Porsche’s transmission engineers have moved parts-sharing down to the micro level to reap two transaxles from one blueprint. The world’s first seven-speed manual gearbox is an offshoot of the seven-speed PDK dual-clutch automatic introduced three years ago for the 997-series 911. Both are available in the 2012 991-series 911 Carrera and Carrera S.

Porsche and ZF have been collaborating on the design and development of these transaxles—code-named the DT11 (PDK) and the MT11 (manual)—since 2003. From the start, the two companies planned on sharing the maximum number of parts and manufacturing tools. Credit ZF engineer Dr. Michael Ebenhoch with inventing the twofer shift kinematics.

Each gearbox is comprised of three aluminum castings—a front section, a rear section, and one removable cover. While those castings are different to suit each transaxle’s functional distinctions, roughly one-third of the internal parts are common [see above]. The main shaft, output shaft, differential, some of the gears, and the ­synchronizer mechanisms are shared. The PDK ’box has two input shafts versus the manual transaxle’s single shaft. A drive flange added to the output shaft sends torque to the front axle in four-wheel-drive models.

While the manual transaxle is lubricated with 3.5 quarts of hypoid-gear oil, the PDK requires two types of lubricant. Gears and shafts run in 3.7 quarts of hypoid-gear oil. Another 5.7 quarts of  hydraulic oil keep the PDK’s wet clutches and control circuit happy. Naturally, the PDK trans is the heavier unit. Including its lubricants and oil cooler, it weighs 256 pounds. The manual transaxle weighs 189 pounds, not counting its clutch components.

Breaking a long-standing tradition, the new 911’s top speed (ranging between 178 and 189 mph) occurs in sixth, not top, gear. The overdrive seventh-gear ratios—0.617:1 (PDK), 0.711:1 (manual)—help maximize highway mileage while minimizing driveline commotion. Third- and seventh-gear ratios are specific to each gearbox; the rest are shared between the two transaxles.

One minor hitch is the manual’s five-gate shift pattern. According to Porsche, this is a necessity. First and reverse gears had to be in close proximity for convenience, and moving first from its traditional 911 upper-left location was not an option. That leaves seventh all by its lonesome in the extra gate.

Our hats are off to Porsche for both ­saving a manual and for improving the 911’s functionality by adding a seventh gear ratio.

Canadian Manufacturing Sales - January 20, 2015

BCREA ECONOMICS NOW

Canadian manufacturing sales declined for the third time in four months in November, falling 1.4 per cent to $51.5 billion. Lower sales reflected weakness in motor vehicle, chemicals and food manufacturing.

In BC, where manufacturing employs over 160,000 people,  manufacturing sales fell 1.2 cent on a monthly basis, but were 2.6 per cent higher year-over-year.  Through the first 11 months of the year, manufacturing sales are 6.5 per cent higher than 2013.