Ecotec vs Alloytech: the 4 cylinder debate

[Bruce Nunnally]

There was another discussion in the news today about whether Cadillac drivers will be willing to have 4 cylinder engines in future Cadillacs. Smaller displacement 4 cylinder turbocharged or supercharged engines are one route to lower fuel consumption without compromising on power output. The main discussion seems to center around the new BTS, or entry level Cadillac which will slot in below the current CTS. It will be smaller, and based on the alpha RWD architecture, where the CTS is on the Sigma II architecture. The actual discussion is NOT whether to offer it with a 4 cylinder turbo or not. The discussion was whether to offer an optional 3.6L V6 or not along WITH the 4cylinder turbo.

But for those of you not familiar with the ecotec 4 cylinder engines, they are 4 cylinder equivalents of the excellent 3.6L V6s used in current Cadillacs. Actually, the 3.6L is more or less a 6-cylinder version of the ecotec 4, since the 4 came first. In Australia, Holden, who helped engineer the 3.6L engine, calls it the Alloytech to recall the Ecotec 4. The kappa cars (Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky) come with a 2.4L ecotec four cylinder making 177 hp, which is ok. But the jewel is a 2L turbo four making 260 hp, or after a GM-approved software update this summer, 280hp. Yes, turbo engines are also about torque. No, there is no perceptible turbo lag. The engine is direct injection, VVT, DOHC (sound familiar?). The turbo 2L actually gets BETTER gas mileage in the Sky Redline than the 2.4L nonturbo four in the base Sky.

So, should we be outraged that Cadillac would offer a FOUR CYLINDER engine? Nope. I'm all about the technology, and output power. If a four cylinder turbo gives me more power at lower fuel consumption, sign me up. Improved efficiency is good.

[PAUL T]

I might be outraged if they put one in a Deville even though the HP rating is almost equal to my 97 Deville. I would not mind if it came in a CTS. Smaller than a CTS brings back bad memories of the Cimarron though. More weight would take away MPG wouldn't it? What kind of MPG are they looking at.

[Ed Hall]

I hope that improved efficiency is not at the expense of reliability or maintainability.

[Bruce Nunnally]

So far the 2L ecotec turbo has been a very reliable engine. Put a small engine in a big engine compartment and maintainability should go up.

I am unsure what the relative cost to Cadillac of the various power plants is -- 2L turbo, 3.6L HF V6, NS 4.6L. I certainly also would like to see a 2-mode hybrid with the 3.6L.