DETROIT — While Cadillac representatives say the company has not yet submitted its supercharged 6.2-liter LSA V8 to the Society of Automotive Engineers for a certified output figure, the CTS-V motor will make 567 horsepower.
It will, that is, if GM Powertrain and Cadillac are underestimating the engine's output as much as GM and Chevrolet underestimated the output of the related LS9 motor that powers the 2009 Corvette ZR1. At its launch at the Detroit auto show this past January, Chevrolet was careful to note that the LS9 would make "at least 620 horsepower." The final figure, announced last night is 638 hp. That's a 3 percent increase. How could Chevrolet be so wrong? Willfully, that's how.
One powertrain development engineer we spoke with acknowledged what you probably already suspected: "Certainly, we knew it would make somewhere right around the final 638 number," he said. "It's a product of under-promising and over-delivering."
If Cadillac is working the same promising/delivering ratio, then the initial estimate of 550 hp will balloon to 567. But Cadillac spokesman David Caldwell says, "We're not trying to hold back part of the story so we can spring a really big number for the final product. But the worst thing we could do is overstate it."
A couple of well-publicized cases in years past, wherein products from Ford SVT and Mazda were found to produce less hp than advertised, have made the General cautious of such things. The 505-hp Corvette Z06 was estimated to make 500 hp (a 1 percent increase).
What we do not expect is for the final CTS-V horsepower figure to deviate from the estimate as much as it did for the STS-V. Initially, the company said the supercharged Northstar in that vehicle would make 440 hp. By the time the engineers were done with the engine and the SAE put its stamp of approval on it, the motor was pumping out 469 hp — a whopping 6 percent increase. This, reckoned Cadillac, was too much under-promising for its own good.
What this means to you: General Motors is playing the automotive equivalent of The Price Is Right — arriving at a nice round hp estimate close to the actual figure, without going over. — Daniel Pund, Senior Editor, Detroit
It will, that is, if GM Powertrain and Cadillac are underestimating the engine's output as much as GM and Chevrolet underestimated the output of the related LS9 motor that powers the 2009 Corvette ZR1. At its launch at the Detroit auto show this past January, Chevrolet was careful to note that the LS9 would make "at least 620 horsepower." The final figure, announced last night is 638 hp. That's a 3 percent increase. How could Chevrolet be so wrong? Willfully, that's how.
One powertrain development engineer we spoke with acknowledged what you probably already suspected: "Certainly, we knew it would make somewhere right around the final 638 number," he said. "It's a product of under-promising and over-delivering."
If Cadillac is working the same promising/delivering ratio, then the initial estimate of 550 hp will balloon to 567. But Cadillac spokesman David Caldwell says, "We're not trying to hold back part of the story so we can spring a really big number for the final product. But the worst thing we could do is overstate it."
A couple of well-publicized cases in years past, wherein products from Ford SVT and Mazda were found to produce less hp than advertised, have made the General cautious of such things. The 505-hp Corvette Z06 was estimated to make 500 hp (a 1 percent increase).
What we do not expect is for the final CTS-V horsepower figure to deviate from the estimate as much as it did for the STS-V. Initially, the company said the supercharged Northstar in that vehicle would make 440 hp. By the time the engineers were done with the engine and the SAE put its stamp of approval on it, the motor was pumping out 469 hp — a whopping 6 percent increase. This, reckoned Cadillac, was too much under-promising for its own good.
What this means to you: General Motors is playing the automotive equivalent of The Price Is Right — arriving at a nice round hp estimate close to the actual figure, without going over. — Daniel Pund, Senior Editor, Detroit
Add A Comment »