By on March 21, 2018

In ages past, more than one nameplate could lay claim to having its own engine. Olds manufactured its own V8s for over 40 years, for example. More recently, Cadillac had its own engine too, by way of the Northstar. Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and the engine did have its challenges, but it certainly set the brand apart from its proletariat brothers.

Now, the General’s crown jewel is once again introducing its own engine, a clean-sheet design called the Cadillac Twin Turbo V8. This time, it’ll be hand-assembled and signed by the builder, just like an AMG. Ich wundere mich!

The company says this engine is the first twin-turbo V8 to be installed at the factory between the fenders of a Cadillac. Perhaps the most technically complex production engine ever to emerge from GM, this 4.2-liter is a 32-valve, quad-cam, direct-injected aluminum motor.

“Cadillac V-Sport is the embodiment of our passion to deliver an exhilarating driving experience without compromises,” said nomenclature enthusiast and Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen. “The all-new CT6 V-Sport provides the perfect balance of performance and luxurious refinement.”

The CT6 V-Sport is the first recipient of the all-new Cadillac 4.2L Twin Turbo V8. It makes an estimated 550 horsepower and retina-detaching 627 lb-ft of torque. That’ll certainly juice the CT6, a car hardly known for being a slowpoke with its current power offerings. The engine  introduces unique design elements that Cadillac says were developed to balance performance and efficiency with compact, mass-efficient packaging.

At the center of the Cadillac Twin Turbo V8 is a “hot V” configuration that rearranges the conventional layout of the cylinder heads’ intake and exhaust systems in order to mount the turbochargers near the intake ports. This places them in the valley between the heads, which GM officially calls the Valley of Power. Okay, maybe not.

Here are some preliminary specs for you engine nerds, as reported by Automotive News:

Block: 90-degree V8 with five cross-bolted main bearing caps; sand-cast aluminum with pressed-in iron cylinder liners; provisions for jet-spray oil cooling

Bore/stroke: 3.39 in. x 3.35 in. (86 mm x 90.2 mm in logical Metric)

Pistons: High-strength hypereutectic aluminum with friction-reducing polymer skirt coating; forged aluminum connecting rods with floating wrist pins

Compression ratio: 9.8:1

Valvetrain: Dual overhead camshafts; four valves per cylinder

Max Boost: 20 psi

In other applications, this setup helps reduce turbo lag and decrease the engine’s overall packaging size. It also creates a tremendous amount of heat, something The General will have to manage with this new mill. The Cadillac Twin Turbo V8 is teamed with a 10-speed automatic transmission and power is routed to all four wheels.

The CT6 itself gets some styling tweaks in the vein of Cadillac’s excellent Escala concept car, a vehicle on which we reported just the other day. V-Sport models will get a host of model specific equipment, from summer tires to a mechanical limited-slip rear diff. Brembo brakes are on duty when the constabulary calls a halt to the fun. An active-valve exhaust system stands ready to annoy your neighbors on cold mornings.

Cutting through the marketing chaff, it appears that Super Cruise will not be offered to V-Sport customers. The CT6 will continue to be built at GM’s Detroit-Hamtramck facility, while the snazzy new engine will be hand assembled and signed by the builder at the GM Performance Build Center in Bowling Green.

[Images: General Motors]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

165 Comments on “All Ate Up With Motor: Cadillac Announces a New Engine It’s Keeping for Itself...”


  • avatar

    *Puts on 28CL hat*

    “Do not trust a brand new Cadillac V8 for at least three model years.”

    Bravo on creating a new V8, Cadillac. 4.2 liters is a good size for a V8 (just like the Audi 40 valve).

    I hope it will exceed reliability found within the Brotherhood of 4.9.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Behold, the Son of Northstar.

    • 0 avatar
      dukeisduke

      “At the center of the Cadillac Twin Turbo V8 is a “hot V” configuration that rearranges the conventional layout of the cylinder heads’ intake and exhaust systems in order to mount the turbochargers near the intake ports.”

      Okay, that wording is a little tortured – do you mean that they swapped the intake and exhaust side, so that the exhaust ports are in the valley, and the intake ports are on the outside, like on Ford’s 6.7 Scorpion PowerStroke?

  • avatar
    ajla

    V8 everything.
    Everything.
    EVERYTHING!

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    A good next step forward. Apparently there’s also a naturally aspirated version as well.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Now THAT is an engine even I would be interested in, a Twin-Turbo V8.

      Better yet if the displacement was at 5.0 or 5.7 liters.

      Ohhhhh, the possibilities!

  • avatar
    IBx1

    It’s a crying shame Cadillac is abandoning their vertical light housings and losing its visual identity. These headlight and taillight assemblies look like they don’t know what they’re doing right now or what direction they want to go in as a company, but oh gee I wonder why.

    Can’t wait to get that CTV8-6 T-Sport V

    Congrats on beating Ford to having a TT V8 though, like the Ford GT was supposed to have.

    • 0 avatar

      The virtual lights were a bit awkward looking. There was just too much space between the lights and the grill. I think the designers at Cadillac agreed with this opinion and moved the headlights closer to the grill. I am not the first to make this observation.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    I thought hand-assembling was Bad. Is it OK now?

    https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/01/whistleblowing-tesla-engineers-say-model-3-batteries-made-hand-slowing-production-creating-potential-fire-hazard/

    http://fortune.com/2017/10/07/tesla-model-3-bottlenecks-built-by-hand/

    • 0 avatar
      civicjohn

      SCE, it’s only bad when the production line that is supposed to be running into air-friction issues (otherwise it would be going faster) according to EM results into hands-on help for hanging quarter panels. Kinda different “hand-assembling”.

      Kudos to Caddy for at least trying to bring something unique to the table, I wonder how that decision got green-lighted? That guy/ gal should get a promotion after the motor has been in the wild for a while…one never knows.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        civicjohn,
        Small capacity turbo V8s are not new. Hence Trump wonders why US export vehicles are not high.

        Its good to see a US prestige manufacturer matching the Germans.

        But have a look at the up and coming Euro EVs. I’m surprised TTAC has little on these Tesla killers.

        • 0 avatar
          civicjohn

          Oz, I’m aware of small displacement V-8s, but thanks for the heads up.

          How in the hell Trump got mentioned is above my pay grade, I’ll only say that the US has struggled with overseas sales before the orange guy became President, but feel free to raise the topic anytime you want.

          I am following the European EVs. I think it will be quite interesting and Tesla needs to push hard on the gas pedal (er, I mean the EV pedal).

          Interesting times and may the biggest battery pack win!

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            My logic is the idea of a TTV8 4.2 in a prestige car is not uncommon. Also, Caddy’s performance as an export earner and this simple lag.

            Combine this with Caddy’s lacklustre performance and Trump’s remark on countries not buying US cars highlights this lag is present in many US vehicles.

            So, Caddy really needs to start looking at EVs to challenge the EU prestige cars of the future and have this backslapping on a V8 with twin turbocharged engines.

            Whilst I like the engine, it doesn’t mean all else I don’t take into consideration.

            I hope Caddy isn’t to late with this engine.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Oh my god your fanboism is shameless. Shame on you.

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        Gimme a break; I cancelled my TSLA reservation last week. I’ve never been a fanboy, except maybe for Kia.

        I’m just calling out TTAC’s double standard on the virtues of hand assembly.

        Having worked in production environments for many years, hand assembly is best suited for artwork and spacecraft, not cars. But here, it’s reported without question when the product is a twin-turbo V8.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Interesting, SCE…you’re going to have to let us know if there’s an issue getting your deposit back.

          FYI, I just saw my first Model 3 on the street the other day.

          • 0 avatar
            SCE to AUX

            Cancelled late on the 15th, refunded on the 19th.

            Given my bank’s current interest rate, that means I gave about $14 in interest to TSLA over 2 years’ time – big deal.

            I wish the company well, still.

        • 0 avatar
          civicjohn

          SCE, you do realize that your request for your deposit money back may have impacted “forward-looking statements” for the shrinking TSLA accounting department.

          The “virtue” of a hand-built Model 3 is curious indeed, probably in the hands of those who could care less if their stereo is blaring at full volume in the garage.

          Sorry in advance, couldn’t help but take the bait.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          SCE, Was there a ‘nail in the coffin’ moment or was it death by a thousand cuts?

          To your credit, you kept dibs on what was happening, hence my interest.

          • 0 avatar
            SCE to AUX

            @jkross22:

            Yes, actually. The final ‘nail in the coffin’ was Ronnie’s well-written story about the ongoing quality problems with the Model 3:

            https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/03/tesla-workers-say-almost-half-model-3-parts-need-rework/

            That story corroborated those of new Model 3 owners who have encountered bad displays, creaks and groans in the chassis, obvious misalignment of panels and trim, and so on. Tesla’s BS response was something like “we only ship top-notch cars”, which is demonstrably untrue.

            As an engineer who’s worked in design and mfg for years, I’m convinced the Model 3 is suffering from serious problems front-to-back. Their designs have not been fully vetted, mfg processes are undeveloped and unrefined, vendors are scrambling, and margins are still upside down – as evidenced by the pricing. But Tesla keeps telling us it’s all OK.

            I have never liked the center display and the safety hazard it presents by forcing drivers to take their eyes off the road to adjust mundane items like wiper speed and cruise control. The center-high speedometer of my xB1 was fine; this is not.

            I didn’t like being forced to buy a $50k car out of the gate. Two years ago, I stated in these pages that I would not do that. Those who wait for the mythical $35k Model 3 may find that the Federal subsidy has expired. I would have been happy with a 250-mile car for $40k, but that’s not what Tesla is offering.

            Since I’m not enamored with badges, I also didn’t want to be labeled with some “Tesla” stereotype. I only reserved the car because Tesla happened to be first to offer such a complete package. The Bolt is too much like my old Leaf, but with worse seats.

            I was looking for drama-free ownership, but Tesla seems unable to provide that right now.

            They don’t realize that the Model 3 will be many buyers’ first EV, but these buyers don’t have first adopter patience. They’ll expect reliability and quick service, and I’m concerned that Tesla isn’t scaling its service organization in keeping with its installed base. The production woes will eventually give way to service woes, and that could go on for years.

            Finally, I had no illusions about a quick delivery (fully expecting a 2-year wait), but my latest delivery window was April – June 2018. I don’t believe that was truthful, and it speaks to the same self-delusional messaging by the company that they’ve done for years.

            I’d call myself a fan of Tesla, but not a blind fanboy. Tesla’s greatest asset and liability is Mr Musk. I suspect he’s micromanaged the entire Model 3 team for several years, creating the mess they’re experiencing today. He should simply paint the vision, and then let the experts carry it out.

            It all just became too much to bear. Maybe I’ll own a Tesla someday, but now is not the time.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            SCE to AUX,
            Good story full of objectiveness in managing expectations.

        • 0 avatar
          Peter Gazis

          SCE to AUX

          When 400,000 people preorder CT6-Vs. Cadillac will have to move away from hand assembly also.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          There’s no double standard. Choosing to assemble by hand from the get go = OK. Being forced to assemble by hand because you overpromised and underestimated on your automated machine assembly process = fail. Choosing to ignore the clear and obvious difference between the two = fanboism.

          Any questions?

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          “hand assembly is best suited for artwork and spacecraft”

          QA/QC on O-rings notwithstanding!

      • 0 avatar
        civicjohn

        sporty, I try to spread my disdain equally, if I’ve strayed over the line please rein me back in.

    • 0 avatar
      Middle-Aged Miata Man

      Of course you know this, SCE, but no doubt Cadillac’s aiming for the cachet seen with similarly hand-assembled engines from AMG and Z06/ZR1 ‘Vettes.

      As for Tesla, well… it’s quite different when workers manually assemble components in the shadow of the broken/incomplete/missing machinery intended for that same task.

  • avatar

    Escalade Twin Turbo?

  • avatar
    el scotto

    -deep sigh- The GM brain trust at its best. The Corvette has arguably one of the best engines in the world. But noooooo, Cadillac has to have its own very special, super, duper Cadillac-exclusive engine. The engine is made in the Bowling Green Corvette plant. Just put the superb Corvette engine in the Cadillac. Wait, that’s a deep, dark GM taboo; can’t do that at all. No Sir. Mercedes/AMG is laughing at them.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Cadillacs shouldn’t have Corvette engines, even if they’re great (and they are).

      • 0 avatar
        saturnotaku

        Remember the Cadillac XLR? It was made in the same factory as the Corvette, but it only came with Northstar engines.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Actually they should, at least then you would be getting a world-class award winning powerplant for your money. Spinning up entirely new motors with lots of lab only tested shiny with exotic materials for limited production? Fail, fail, fail.

        If say the “brand” motor were better, I’d see the argument… but it NEVER is due to the before mentioned reasons of: lab only testing/nothing in real world, limited production/repair exposure/parts, features which are not designed or intended for the long haul, and use of exotic materials. Future Fords may have great success with Al bodies because of F-150, despite teething endured by the first owners. But, if Ford had done this with a more limited model, Ford/their dealer techs would learn little and those customers would be completely boned from the TCO perspective. In other words, if this 4.2 were to be a corporate wide new architecture, it should not be only offered in one or two limited production Cadillac models but instead gradually phased in on volume models. Otherwise, it was doomed from the moment it was drawn in AutoCAD. Another “learning experience” on the Cadillac customer’s dime.

        LS derivative > Son of Northstar all day long and twice on Sunday. More dumb brought to you by Grandpa Johann’s old fashioned coffee and cake. Checkout our Soho location!

        • 0 avatar
          ttiguy

          @28 Cars Later

          Its funny to read the line “Otherwise, it was doomed from the moment it was drawn in AutoCAD”

          Yeah it was “drawn in AutoCAD”… clearly you’re plugged in to how things get done. LOL

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @ttiguy

            Engineers still have pen devices to draw in AutoCAD or MicroStation, although most use the mouse. Source: I worked in CAD.

            @Freed

            *They* lab tested the Northstar, how did that work out again? Real world use trumps integration testing in a controlled environment or even limited field testing. On paper, in the 1990 period, the Northstar was a winner. Yet… you know how that movie ended. Ignoring the proven real world use and lower production costs of LS is foolish and yet again Cadillac customers will pay for the lessons learned of the engineering team. But that seems to be what’s happening, luxury is purposely disposable.

            “Cadillacs aren’t loud and rowdy.”

            Escalade is loud and rowdy in the metaphorical sense, yet is acceptable to its buyers. Many tricks can be utilized to mitigate noise or vibration.

            “But if you’re in the business of selling top flight cars, pushrods won’t do”

            All respect to Brother Freed, but I find this particular statement ridiculous. Again somehow this is acceptable in an Escalade vs Navigator and mod motor descendant? I argue 80% of your buyers don’t know or care on pushrod vs ohc.

            Btw, the VAG W12 is OHC.

            http://wikicars.org/en/W12_engine

            He’s thinking of the old Bentley 6.75L which was finally phased out around 2011.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_–_Bentley_L_Series_V8_engine

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Well, you have an argument if they didn’t thoroughly test the new engine, 28.

          But otherwise, I disagree. Corvette engines are great for Corvettes – they’re loud and rowdy. Cadillacs aren’t loud and rowdy.

          • 0 avatar
            jkross22

            Mike, So there’s no way to retune the exhaust and where power is delivered? Other companies do this. Why not GM?

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I’m sure there is a way.

            But if you’re in the business of selling top flight cars, pushrods won’t do.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “pushrods won’t do”

            Don’t let Bentley customers know that.

            Personally, I’d prefer GM to only do 5.0L+ pushrod V8s from now and until the end of time. But, it’s 2018 and I’m not going to complain about any new V8 no matter how it is configured.

          • 0 avatar
            el scotto

            @FreedMike With most car companies, the best car gets the best engine. oH wait, mom’s Continental doesn’t have the Mustang V-8. Then again the big T-Birds had Ford truck engines. -sly grin- awaiting to be lectured on the differences in 460s.

          • 0 avatar
            Sub-600

            My ‘72 Mark IV had a 460 c.i. engine. 212 net hp, I don’t know the difference between that and bhp.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I thought the W12 was an OHC unit.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @ttiguy

            Engineers still have pen devices to draw in AutoCAD or MicroStation, although most use the mouse. Source: I worked in CAD.

            @Freed

            *They* lab tested the Northstar, how did that work out again? Real world use trumps integration testing in a controlled environment or even limited field testing. On paper, in the 1990 period, the Northstar was a winner. Yet… you know how that movie ended. Ignoring the proven real world use and lower production costs of LS is foolish and yet again Cadillac customers will pay for the lessons learned of the engineering team. But that seems to be what’s happening, luxury is purposely disposable.

            “Cadillacs aren’t loud and rowdy.”

            Escalade is loud and rowdy in the metaphorical sense, yet is acceptable to its buyers. Many tricks can be utilized to mitigate noise or vibration.

            “But if you’re in the business of selling top flight cars, pushrods won’t do”

            All respect to Brother Freed, but I find this particular statement ridiculous. Again somehow this is acceptable in an Escalade vs Navigator and mod motor descendant? I argue 80% of your buyers don’t know or care on pushrod vs ohc.

            Btw, the VAG W12 is OHC.

            http://wikicars.org/en/W12_engine

            He’s thinking of the old Bentley 6.75L which was finally phased out around 2011.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_–_Bentley_L_Series_V8_engine

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            The 2018 Bentley Mulsanne still uses the pushrod 6.75L V8. It won’t be around much longer, but it’s going away due to environmental regulations, not because customers don’t like it.

            The other Bentleys use an OHC V8 or W12.

            Rolls-Royce uses a 6.6L and 6.75L OHC V12s.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “All respect to Brother Freed, but I find this particular statement ridiculous.”

            Disagree, 28. Truck based engines are great in Escalades because they’re trucks. Folks who buy them don’t care.

            In a performance sedan, sophistication counts. Mercedes, BMW and Lexus have traded on that for years.

            But, as you say, if the engine turns out to be unreliable, then all bets are off.

      • 0 avatar
        Tele Vision

        11 years ago my CTS-V came with the then-Corvette engine et al and it’s still sublime.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      AMG can go frig themselves.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      What V8’s have you spent time in el scotto?

      • 0 avatar
        el scotto

        About the whole gamut of Ford V-8 from 289s to 460s. 67 & 87 ragtop Mustangs. Yeah, our farm & construction company ran ford trucks; I drove most of them. Pontiac-wise a 389 tri-power in my Lemans and a 400 in my Trans-Am. 327/350/427 for dad’s Corvettes, a 400 for his baby blue Grandville ragtop and he had a 454 Suburban. Throw in a couple of Eldorados too and mom had big T-Birds or Lincoln Marks. Next question?

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    Seems completely pointless.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Naw, man. Engines such as the modern V8, V10 and V12 are all about uniqueness and exclusivity.

      Most owners of such rareties never use all the power that is available to them but there is that sense of pride of ownership.

      Take any of Fiatslers “V8 Monsters”. They sell every single one they make and there is still more demand for them.

      Instant collectors item.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        For the sorts of people who ACTUALLY buy Cadillacs (as opposed to the ones they WANT to buy Cadillacs and don’t), they would be better off just putting the Corvette motor in the thing. Which is why an all-new, hand-built, costs a fortune twin-turbo V8 is utterly pointless. They will sell dozens of them, because nobody who buys Cadillacs cares.

        Spend the money on sorting out the real issues, which are the somewhat subpar detailing and the God-awful mess that is CUE.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          That would be the logical approach to problem solving but maybe GM is going for exclusivity. A “Caddy” thang….

          Or maybe the Bowling Green plant is already maxed out.

          I bet that Caddy will sell every twin-turbo V8 they produce, and there will be people clamoring for moah, moah, moah!

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            Technically they sell every CTS-V they make, but there are hardly lines for them.

            As I said, they need to get the small stuff right before they farf around with new pointless motors. Heck, dare I say it the money would have been better spent on an electric car these days? Preferably looking like one of their WAY sexier than Tesla ever dreamed of show cars of the past 15 years or so that never saw the light of day?

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            If I remember correctly, when the Northstar V8 first came out it was a great source of pride for Cadillac.

            The owner of our local GM/Caddy dealership went to great lengths to show me that engine while he was doing a tent sale at the fair grounds.

            We all know how the Northstar developed and evolved.

            So, I think the concept of this new Caddy V8 is very interesting, twin-turbos and all.

            Sounds potent in a small package at 258 cubic inches, in the same class as the wildly popular Chev 283ci and 265ci V8s.

            How it plays out is, of course, yet to be seen.

            I hope it works out. I like the tech and the 8 cyls.

    • 0 avatar
      Truckducken

      Must disagree, krhodes. Without exclusive technology, one would rightly be mocked for buying today’s version of a Cimarron or such – a lazily badge engineered product. This is Cadillac’s rep today, and only efforts of this nature can change it. I hope this is the start of a new way of doing business at Cadillac. It’s much more important than the whole coffee shop thing.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    The only way this makes any sense is if there is going to be a RWD crossover that can share it. If they keep it for sedans and coupes only, they will be building literally a couple hundred copies a year. It doesn’t seem like the right kind of engine for an Escalade.

  • avatar
    npaladin2000

    Let’s see here…

    Hellcat
    Demon
    Boss
    Scorpion
    Voodoo
    Triton

    and finally

    “Cadillac Twin Turbo V8”

    One of these names does not inspire speed, power, and danger. Take a wild guess which one.

  • avatar

    At least Cadillac and Tesla try. This is why they are to two best US car makers. The Northstar was probably the greatest of all Cadillac engines. It was released at a time when Cadillac was still the leading luxury car maker in the US. I put 210,000 trouble-free miles on that engine.

    This is great news. The CTS’s front end is vastly improved.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      You just triggered 28.

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        “The Northstar was probably the greatest of all Cadillac engines”

        That comment triggered *me*.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Well, it was a great engine…as long as you were trading every two years.

          • 0 avatar
            bunkie

            Or if you bought one after they fixed the head-bolt issue.

            I *loved* mine. Fabulous engine. Smooth and powerful, a fine engine for a premium car.

            Interestingly, the block design is one of the best ever. It’s two-piece and the lower portion locates the lower halves of the main bearings. It’s incredibly stiff and Northstars, as a result, suffer very few main bearing or crankshaft issues.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Forget /sarc?

      “It was released at a time when Cadillac was still the leading luxury car maker in the US. I put 210,000 trouble-free miles on that engine.”

      Cadillac went from 2.8% USDM market share in 1990, or then 258K units to 170K units USDM in 2016. This despite the overall vehicle market increasing since 1990. Success!

      “Cadillac sold 258,168 automobiles during the 1990 calendar year, its share of the automotive market moved up to 2.8 percent”

      http://www.100megsfree4.com/cadillac/cad1990/cad90.htm

      “US YTD: 170,006
      Global YTD: 308,692”

      http://media.cadillac.com/media/us/en/cadillac/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2017/jan/0105-cadillac-sales.html

      https://www.statista.com/statistics/184171/us-passenger-car-production-since-1994/

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      Other than you, who else bought one that had no problems? I’d say you’re the luckiest Cadillac customer ever.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    By the way, it also appears they dumped the awful center-console trackpad.

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Why didn’t they twin turbo the LT-1? Guys I’m not going to lie, GM DOHC V8 = I’m triggered. What next, a diesel V8-6-4?

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Why do I think a version of this engine will land in the upcoming mid-engined ‘Vette?

      • 0 avatar

        Yes, but history will repeat, and you’ll get a luxury Vette with an engine that is a handicap, not a benefit. I spent some time looking at XLR, but the biggest problems aren’t the Northstar, although it is pointless complication….getting a set of headlights or tail lights is the problem, along with a few other parts…pass.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Floating wrist pins. So, floating in both the piston and the rod (held in with snap rings), or, floating in the piston and pressed in to the rod, or floating in the rod and pressed into the piston, or what?

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    The other thing that I notice is the water inlet and outlet right next to each other. Don’t accidentally switch the hoses!

    Also, the blue AC oil filter.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    This will be about as mythical as an ATS-V or current-gen CTS-V. I still haven’t seen one of these in the wild, and I’m seeing at least one Model 3 per week.

    • 0 avatar

      I saw an ATS-V at a car show once…Bear Mtn, NY. I’ve seen two at dealers, but they are priced like the C43 I’d otherwise buy…and that’s not a choice, no matter how fanboy you are with GM….

  • avatar
    cdotson

    “Bore/stroke: 3.39 in. x 3.35 in. (86 mm x 90.2 mm in logical Metric)”

    Something’s wrong. 3.39″ is 86.1mm. 3.35″ is 85.1mm. 90.2mm is 3.55 in.

    Trouble copy/pasting press releases today, or is the release wrong?

  • avatar
    NeilM

    “At the center of the Cadillac Twin Turbo V8 is a “hot V” configuration that rearranges the conventional layout of the cylinder heads’ intake and exhaust systems in order to mount the turbochargers near the intake ports.”

    Don’t you mean near the exhaust ports, which are now inside the V?

    Getting the turbo(s) as close as possible to the head, by minimizing or even eliminating the traditional exhaust headers or manifold, is current practice. This both reduces turbo lag and improves the exhaust turbine’s thermodynamic efficiency.

    Putting the turbo close to the intake doesn’t help, since the compressed intake air has to make a trip to the intercooler and back anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      dukeisduke

      That’s what I was asking when referring to the Scorpion. I see what look like plastic intake manifolds on the sides, which would make this logical. The only thing that has me wondering is the plastic vanity cover on top – why would you want to put that on top of the exhaust and the turbos? Seems like it would trap a lot of heat under there.

  • avatar
    lon888

    Knowing GM, I bet this “valley of power” will generate so much heat, it’ll boil their cheap paint off the hood.

  • avatar

    At least with Maserati you get ” hey look at that honey” badging lacking in the caddy

  • avatar
    conundrum

    The BMW twin-turbo 4.4l N64 V8 has had the turbos in the vee since, what 2008?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_N63

    Audi has done it since 2011 on V8s, and Mercedes since 2014. Porsche since 2016, including the 2.9l V6. Bentley has the Audi V8. Audi V6 S4 engine is hot vee.

    So Johan just had to have one for Cadillac. Beginning and end of story. Hand assembled. Woo hoo. Shiver me timbers.

    It’s the standard configuration these days for turbo V8s, so hardly a revelation. At least there is a chance of some decent thermal efficiency, which GM’s 2 valve pushrod engines inherently cannot equal. Since this site has become so truck oriented, I’m not surprised another soul hasn’t mentioned that hot vee turbo engines are hardly new.

  • avatar
    Sub-600

    This thing’s going to run at about 800 degrees Kelvin, it’ll probably need special oil.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Everyone I know with a Turbo, regardless of automaker, uses Mobil 1 10W-30.

      • 0 avatar
        iNeon

        If they’re driving Chrysler cars they’re voiding their warranties running that swill.

        Chrysler specifies Pennzoil Platinum Euro 5w40 on their turbo.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          iNeon, I don’t know anyone driving a Turbo Fiatsler product.

          And even though I myself do not use Mobil 1 for anything, Mobil 1 is closest in molecular structure to the synthetic used in Jet engines to lube the hi-temp bearings. And……. they never change Jet engine oil between tear-downs.

          I use Castrol 5W-30 in all my vehicles and have done so since the ’70’s when I was stationed in Germany.

          For my 1989 Camry V6 with well over 150K on the clock I use Castrol Hi-Mileage which is half and half, with seal-softening additives.

          But the people I know with Turbos like Ecobust, Porsche Carrera and Banks TurboDiesel use Mobil 1, although the diesel guys use Mobil 1 20W-50.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            But what oil does your Japan-built Toyota Highlander use?

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            iNeon, my grand daughter in El Paso, TX uses that 2008 Highlander and I changed the oil and filter last week with Castrol Hi-Mileage 5W-30.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            Are you still on the fence about the reliability of the Jeep Grand Cherokee that your other Grand Daughter uses?

            We know it isn’t Toyota good, but we haven’t heard about that yet today.

            I’m also very interested in your investment properties. Tell us about those.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            iNeon, in another comment elsewhere I wrote that I must be the luckiest guy alive because our Grand Cherokees that she owns these days are doing stellar DD duties between Surprise, AZ and Luke AFB.

            Even Big Al From OZ agreed with me.

            No problems with those two Grand Cherokees so far.

            I was worried at one time because of all the negative press from the B&B on ttac. But since Daimler designed the WK2 I have not experienced any problem like those with my old Grand Wagoneer.

            There were some recalls but I checked out the components myself. Never could explain the disappearing EHPS fluid disappearance but topped up with genuine Mopar fluid and all is well.

            Investment properties. That’s why we’re still “home”.

            Our German tenants are returning to Germany by next year and we’re selling off or transferring most of our rentals to the office in WY.

            Once that is done, we’ll be off again. An old AF buddy, an aircrew mate from Viet Nam married a Filipino girl and lives in the Philippines now and wants us to come visit.

            Still haven’t decided. Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico is a lot closer so we may shoot for family reunion there.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            Jesus Christ, man.

            You know what you’re doing. Cut it out.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            highdesertcat,
            My sister here in Australia has the only VM diesel Grand Cherokee (Limited) that has only had the usual recalls and none of the normal and mandatory Chrysler/Jeep unscheduled breakdowns.

            So, it makes two of you. I always ensure I have my phone on me when travelling in a FCA product to ring roadside assistance.

        • 0 avatar
          Booick

          Everyone I know runs 5w40 as well, including myself.

          No reason at all to run a 10w anymore.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Booick,
            I would use the Owners Manual on what oil to use in relation to climatic region of the world you live in.

            I have a turbo diesel and live in Brisbane and use a heavier oil due to the warm climate.

            We had this discussion at work to other day when we went to lunch.

            Don’t rely on friends advice, companies spend lots on testing.

            We also have people at work who spend ridiculous amounts on oil because it “protects” better. And I state to them so five hundred thousand kilometres isn’t enough?

            Manufacturers sell bullsh!t about oils.

            Oils ain’t Oils.

      • 0 avatar
        tjh8402

        I have a Fiat 500 Abarth, and I run the OEM Pennzoil 5W-40. Have had it tested by Blackstone Labs and they said the car is doing great on it.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      Toyota is send a large check to Bowling Green to buy 3 or 4 of these engines. They’re seeking GM goodness and quality. If they only knew how.

  • avatar
    TW5

    Well, it has finally arrived. Hopefully a naturally-aspirated version is incoming. I prefer my American V8s to run a half-million miles.

    This announcement seems to signify that GM understands they have to compete with the German luxury brands. Good luck. Don’t second guess yourselves.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      From 1959 to about 1979, GM’s V-8 engines didn’t change that much. They would go 500k miles with some basic, but mandatory repairs. Fast forward to 2018. Germany luxury owners will be fisted in an orifice, you choose which one, over maintenance and brag about their “superior” cars. Sadly, any American luxury car that doesn’t meet “the exacting standards” of German luxury buyers gets lambasted and “should be burned with fire”. Hey, for that much long green, a luxury car should be “Murrrrrrrican” pick-truck reliable. Oh, Lexus.

      • 0 avatar
        ToddAtlasF1

        Sorry, but the world would have been dazzled if GM V8s could have routinely gone a third of that distance without a comprehensive rebuild. There may have been a few exceptions, but a quarter million miles was the stuff legends were made of until the ’90s. Nobody was surprised when the GM V8s of the two decades you specified suffered cam lobes too round to open valves, combustion chambers that let in too much oil or let out too much compression, rods that broke, or valves that spun at anything over 100K miles. It still constituted durability that nobody expected from any foreign automaker short of Mercedes-Benz.

  • avatar
    Lightspeed

    This will have so many spectacularly expensive failure points it will be quite astonishing.

    • 0 avatar

      Lightspeed nails it. Out of warranty, past the 120k that Cadillacs appear engineered to do, and GM will still sort of remember your name,

      D’oH !!!!

    • 0 avatar
      Hydromatic

      Funny how no one says this about AMG engines. Or maybe it’s just that some people see anything other than a traditional OHV pickup truck motor as a disaster waiting to happen.

      • 0 avatar
        Lightspeed

        They’re playing in different sandboxes. No-one expects to own an AMG off warranty, those guys are rich enough to just get a new one. Caddys are cars that make their way down the food-chain a lot faster. I’m sure there are long-lived AMGs and that’s great. But, I just don’t see GM making something like this that can make 300,000KM. By comparison, I have a Lexus V8 with nearly 300K-KM, never had any issue with it, and these 1UZFEs are known to go 500-600K-KM. Yes, it’s a measly 300hp, so it’s not exactly stressed like this Caddy. No way will the GM will not be utter grief a few KM down the road.

        • 0 avatar
          W210Driver

          There is a 400,000 mile E55 AMG W211 on Youtube, and it works.

          When it comes to performance cars I think it is somewhat silly to expect ridiculously high mileage out of them. These are overstressed engines, and they are often driven hard. The wear and tear has got to be extreme, no matter how well they are built.

  • avatar
    derekson

    Apparently Cadillac will offer a 500 HP version of this engine in Non V-Sport CT6 models, so they’re actually offering a V8 luxury sedan (instead of sports sedan) like people here have been demanding for years.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Honestly, they need to just sh*tcan the lagmaster 3.0T, make the NA 3.6L a fleet-only offering and then have a 400hp 3.6T as the CT6 base engine with the step ups being the 4.2T.

  • avatar
    stuart

    I’m intrigued there are so few comments about the “hot V”.

    Guessing from the pictures, it looks like the triangular boxes on the top are the turbochargers. The one on the right is labelled “4.9L”.

    The black castings with the mesh-look labelled CADILLAC would be … the catalysts (?). It *looks* like the exhaust pipes attach to these.

    The obvious small-diameter piping that runs around the front of the engine might be … a cooling water supply for … the turbochargers?

    I see no provision for an intercooler. The lack of such plumbing (and its compressible interior volume) might improve throttle response, assuming the turbos are kept spinning. Maybe there are small-ish heat exchangers somewhere in there to cool the compressed intake air. (Lotus called this a “charge cooler”.)

    Another guess: the exhaust rises from the “V” at the front, where it is directed into the turbochargers. This plumbing will probably be very hot.

    I may be wrong about all of this, but it looks to me like all the hottest exhaust gases pass across the top of the engine before exiting at the back. Think of a the headers on a typical V8: those very hot headers have been relocated to the top.

    If one was obligated to work on one of these while hot, you’d learn to keep your hands away from everything black. Rather different than most V8s.

    • 0 avatar
      geozinger

      Yes, I saw the words “Hot V”, but after reading further, I realized they were talking about an engine.

    • 0 avatar
      tjh8402

      Hot V configurations are nothing new. As noted by other commenters above, BMW, Audi, and Mercedes have been doing them for years now, and Ferrari did the same with their F1 engines back in the 80s.

  • avatar
    darex

    I’d be more impressed if this time they actually aim their LED lamps so as not to blind everyone, and if they tame the cabins, so that they aren’t such a disaster of disarray.

  • avatar

    I remember lot a iPhone killers (personally worked on them prototypes) from Moto, Toshiba, Sharp etc. Where are all those iPhone killers?

  • avatar
    Booick

    This is a terrible idea. It REEKS of GM failure. This is the kind of thing that will make GM go bankrupt AGAIN. Nobody is going to buy these in enough volume to justify the costs. GM has plenty of amazing v8s to choose from, they should have spent $0 on this insanity.

    What GM should have done was use one of the existing LT motors and focused on out-Telsa-ing, Tesla. This v8 is 10 years behind the times.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Not to worry. The US Gov’t will simply save GM AGAIN with bailouts, handouts and nationalization.

      Precedence set, 2008/2009, by two different administrations.

      You just can’t beat the backing of the full faith and credit of the US Treasury.

      GM cannot fail!

      • 0 avatar
        Bazza

        They *may* need this engine, but they *definitely* need to avoid a Northstar repeat. The omission of port injection is worrisome and smacks of bean-counting, as well as expensive baked-in maintenance costs.

    • 0 avatar

      Cadillac needs this engine. They cannot survive with the mediocrity they have now.

      • 0 avatar
        Bazza

        They *may* need this engine, but they *definitely* need to avoid a Northstar repeat. The omission of port injection is worrisome and smacks of bean-counting, as well as expensive baked-in maintenance costs.

  • avatar
    ernest

    Gee, a 550HP, four cam twin turbo V8. American V8. What will they think of next?
    *Maybe a 700 HP overhead valve V8? Wait… Dodge got there first.

  • avatar

    Once the problems were ironed out it was probably Detroit’s best engine effort. It made wards ten best engine list. So far it is the best engine Cadillac has ever produced.

    • 0 avatar
      derekson

      I had a DeVille with a Northstar. It was a great engine until it blew a head gasket. But I had the same thing happen with my previous DeVille with the 4.9L, though I think the 4.9 made it to around 120k while the Northstar bit it at around 105k.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    What we need now is Caddy to build a 4.2 V8 diesel with 400hp and 700ftlb of torque for the Escalade and the Escalade design other than a Silverado station wagon.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    Cue leaking gaskets and self removing head bolts in 3, 2, 1 ….

    95% of buyers could care less how exclusive the engine under the hood is. But they do care about reliability, durability and cost of maintenance. Otherwise they are shopping at the Maserati dealer.

    • 0 avatar
      Bazza

      Forgot where I saw it, but supposedly there’s no supplemental port injection on this engine. That means Cadillac has no interest in the long-term health of the engine and certainly doesn’t mind saddling owners with expensive valve jobs down the line.

      Northstar 2.0, indeed.

  • avatar
    pb35

    Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but wake me up when they announce the TT V8-6-4.

    Until then, I’ll be busy driving my LS3 into the ground.

  • avatar
    skor

    With all due respect to the author, the Northstar was not exclusive to Cadillac. The 4.6 started off as a Cadillac exclusive, but was eventually used by other GM divisions. The last V-8 which was exclusive to Cadillac was the 4.9 HT.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • FreedMike: If not for the Escalade and Navigator, Cadillac and Lincoln would have died LONG ago.
  • Hydromatic: Did anyone else see the entire overhead console flex when that OnStar was pushed in the second video?...
  • Lie2me: In 2000 I looked at the Escalade it was $10,000 more then the Jeep Grand Cherokee I settled on for $36,000,...
  • jmo: “Still, the Yukon and Suburban were more or less the same truck as the far costlier Cadillac...
  • Lie2me: I remember when this and the Lincoln Navigator first came out we referred to them as Truck DeVilles and...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber