We may yet see Cadillac's new 2.9L V-6 diesel in the US
Last March at the Geneva Motor Show, General Motors unveiled a new 2.9L turbo-diesel V-6 intended for the European market version of the new Cadillac CTS. The 250 hp oil-burner would make a great addition to the US market CTS as well as numerous GM products. The only problem is that ever since it was introduced, GM has consistently said they have no plans to bring the engine to the US market. It now looks like GM's plans may be changing.
Regardless of what ultimately happens with fuel economy standards, GM is reevaluating all their future plans right now, particularly their higher-end products like Cadillac. With the prospect of ever-increasing fuel prices, Cadillac General Manager Jim Taylor realizes that the brand has to address efficiency aggressively. During a recent lunch preview of what GM will be showing at the Detroit Auto Show next month, Taylor acknowledged that the diesel V-6 is being seriously evaluated for the US market.
[Source: General Motors]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
rgseidl 11:54AM (12/11/2007)
Between the additional cost of this modern engine and the T2B5 aftertreatment systems needed for a 50-state solution, GM's accountants are no doubt fretting that US consumers would balk at the hefty premium such a solution would command.
In the US, prices for regular unleaded gasoline and ULSD roughly reflect the energy content of the fuel. The only savings therefore come from the higher efficiency in part load, especially in freeway and rural highway driving.
Example calculation for 15000 miles per year:
---------------------------------------------
Vehicle with diesel engine: 30MPG real world, ULSD @ ~$3.10/gal
= 500 gal/year
= $1550/year
Vehicle with gasoline option: 21.5MPG real world, reg. unl. @ ~$2.80/gal
= ~700 gal/year
= ~$1950/year
Savings at the pump: $400/year. If the initial purchase were to carry a $4000 premium, it would take fully 10 years/150,000 miles to amortize. This simple calculation ignores net present value considerations, future fuel price developments and, the higher cost of registering, insuring and maintaining the more expensive diesel vehicle.
In other words, while a mid-size diesel does save fuel, the combination of extremely strict emissions regs and agnostic fuel taxation makes the technology substantially less attractive for the US market than it is in Europe.
Of course, you should redo the above calculation based on your personal use pattern, your fuel cost in your neck of the woods and, the anticipated price and fuel economy of the vehicle you are considering. If nothing else, it should give you a bargaining tool when you negotiate a price.
Reply
Grover 12:52PM (12/11/2007)
I have the 2.8 litre 4cyl VM Motori in my '06 Liberty CRD. I would love to see this GM 2.9 ltr. 6 cylinder in a Z-71 Avalanche with the 6 speed Allison. The flexibility of the cab/bed would be a segment leader with 30 mpg possible on the highway. I routinely get over 30 in my Liberty doing 72-73 mph and the 6 spd should approach that even with the additional cylinders. I would buy one right away and feed it Biodiesel. Please build it Detroit!!!
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 2:37PM (12/11/2007)
The Avalanche isn't going to get 30mpg even with this engine. It's a 5,000lb vehicle.
Not even in 2WD and without the Z-71 package.
I personally think most people wouldn't buy the vehicle with as little power as this engine provides.
Reply
Dad 2:56PM (12/11/2007)
"diesel V-6 is being seriously evaluated for the US market."
Wow, what a great status symbol! And oh so "green". Just like 2007 Mercedes-Benz E320 BLUETEC Bring it on! It will sell like hotcakes.
Reply
Grover 3:20PM (12/11/2007)
You may be right, GM may screw up this engine platform yet! But, it is a proven performer in the Chrysler/Jeep line in Europe and in the US for the Liberty. The gasser Avalanche for '08 is rated at 310 hp and 335 ft-lb and I believe has an EPA mpg rating of 12/16. Gassers never really improve without modifications, they just plateau out. The VM Motori engine company that GM bought from Penske for this application is shown to be rated at 260 hp and 406 ft-lbs of Torque. The torque rating is achieved at a much lower RPM and requires a great deal less fuel. That fuel is more dense, it is also a much more efficient power plant. Given the Allison transmission already used on the 6.6 ltr Duramax that can achieve 20 mpg in the Silverado 2500, the weight to power advantage would seemingly yield a much higher mpg rating in the 1500. I would conservatively estimate 24-26 for an EPA rating. After it is broken in I think it could easily get high 20's or into the 30's. I'm not sure if you're familiar with diesels but you might want to at least pay attention, 'cause there are more of them coming in the next few years. A 100% improvement would go a long way toward reaching the 2015 CAFE standards! A '96 VW Passat TDI wagon that weighs 3200 lbs routinely gets over 50 mpg !!! It will easily do over 100mph and is a very comfortable driver. I personally don't think fighting wars over oil makes our country stronger. You may, but Honda, Toyota and Nissan are all going to be putting diesels in half ton pick ups soon. I would love to see a Bow Tie on a true market segment leader. If you need to pull a train - get a 3/4 ton or larger and have at it. Most people don't really need that much truck but don't have a choice if you want to burn diesel. Please build it GM!! IT WILL SELL.
Reply
Bill 4:50PM (12/11/2007)
VW's new diesels will be at a $2000 premium, and they'll likely sell-out next summer.
I don't see where anyone gets a $4000 premium.
As for maintenance, the untested part (new aftertreatment systems for NOx) is all part of emissions controls, and so will have an extended warranty.
There's no significant difference in registering or insuring a diesel vs. a gasoline model passenger vehicle.
Reply
MikeW 6:11PM (12/11/2007)
To get the best mileage, you use the smallest torque capacity transmission as possible.
GM's 6L50 max torque is listed at 332ft-lbs, no go.
GM's 6L80 & 90 can do the job, 439 & 531ft-lbs respectively
So the 6L80 is the smallest possible. Leave the 6L90 for the new 4.5 V8.
The Allison is listed at 660ft-lbs, but only 3300rpm max shift speed, no go.
Reply
Grover 7:52PM (12/11/2007)
Oh well, as usual my "wish list" gets paired down quickly. I would like/hope the development of 6-8 speed transmissions continues as smaller diesels move into use in the near future. My Liberty has the same transmission used in the Hemi's and some of the HD trucks. It has worked well and really likes to run on the highway. My highway speeds are generally mid '70's and 2250 RPM runs out about 73 MPH. I would just like to be able to cruise at real highway speeds and keep the engine in a comfortable 1700-1950 sweet spot for maximum MPG's with the diesel. Thanks for the tranny info.
Reply
Luke 9:01PM (12/11/2007)
rgseidl,
It seems as if you haven't driven a diesel-powered passenger-car yet. I own a Volkswagen Jetta GLS TDI, and I assure you that going back to a gasoline-powered car would be a hard sell. The torque and power of the 98 horsepower machine is astounding. It's a little weak when you want to accelerate while passing uphill, but it'll hold 80mph+ without downshifting on while climbing any hill on any divided highway I've found. My Ranger could keep up, technically, but I've found that passengers tend to get a little nervous when I climb a hill with the engine screaming in 3rd gear... If you want a highway cruising machine, a turbodiesel really is the only way to go -- it climbs hills easily and effortlessly, and just contributes to an overall "crisp" and "ready for some work" vehicle.
I'd gladly pay a $4000 premium for a diesel, if I were in the market for a highway-happy passenger-car. Fortunately, I already have one... And, yes, I did pay a pretty premium over the used gasoline version, too.
If most of your driving is cityfied, then hybrids are quite pleasant and, you don't have to worry about warming up the engine as much before mashing the accelerator at the on-ramp. Also, if you don't drive much (less than 10k miles per year), then it really doesn't matter what you drive -- even a Hummer will burn less fueal than I do in 3 months. I'm working to arrange my life so that I don't need to drive as much, but I've still got a year or so of this kind of travel left. And my diesel is the right machine for the job.
I imagine that this diesel-powered Cadillac will be a huge hit with traveling sales-folk. Also, some of the enterprise-computer service folk that I've met (they perform specialized repairs on $250k+ computer installations) practically live in their cars during the week. Since they're reimbursed for mileage, that means they can pocket a few cents a mile over the gasoline version -- and also have a more pleasant life. Sounds like a winner for these kind of folks.
Reply
Chris Adams 7:32AM (12/12/2007)
Mercedes imposes only a $1000 cost premium for their mid-size diesel SUV (ML320 CDI), so this vehicle should be on everyone's radar. It is basically a 5000 pound 5-passenger hauler with a very sophisticated 4WD.
I have been **averaging** 27MPG, 85% highway miles with **average** speed (from driveway to work parking spot) of 60MPH, including extended stretches on the FL turnpike at 75MPH. I can lope around town and backroads at just shy of 30 MPH. Think of a fantastic morph between a Jeep Grand Cherokee with a new Mercedes E Class. Interior is incredible, seats phenomenal. Prices start at $44K before you negotiate.
Next year they will start loading all the Tier2Bin5 equipment onto the vehicle for a Blutec version, expect a slight drop in HP. Buy an '08 while you can! Enough said.
Reply
Chris Adams 7:34AM (12/12/2007)
I meant to say "I can lope around town and backroads at just shy of 30 MPG" in the above comment.
Reply
ldk 8:42AM (12/12/2007)
Please help me understand why diesels always sell at a premium when i thought they were inherently "simpler" engines to build? Thanks.
Reply
Dutch72 9:21PM (12/13/2007)
The diesel engine uses higher compression, due to this higher compression the internal parts need to made out of higher strength material.
that is where the cost is.
Reply
benzaholic 1:01PM (12/12/2007)
ldk,
Diesels are no longer simpler to build. To meet current requirements and expectations, they need a high pressure, very intelligent, common rail injection system; they need to be strong enough to handle well over twice the compression ratio of gasoline engines, but at a minimal cost in weight.
Given the market share of diesels in Europe, I suppose there's not much difference in expected production units and the corresponding impact on amortizing development costs, but I guess the other issues are enough to make them more expensive to design and build these days.
The loss of simplicity probably will impact longevity, too. An 83 Benz turbodiesel engine is very easy to repair and maintain. I don't expect modern diesels to be as easy to work on, but I still wish they would bring the darned things here to the US.
Reply
Emanuel 3:48PM (12/12/2007)
I noticed VW Jetta TDI and GOLF TDI's both get around 50mpg. If a truck can spew what it spews into the air, and car diesel smells quite a bit cleaner, i'm not sure why it wasn't here any sooner. A school bus in front of you cannot be mistaken due to the strong smell, but they are pefectly legal. Time to get with high MPG's!
Reply
Guenther 9:33PM (12/12/2007)
This engine would be great in the Outlook and Acadia. These already get solid highway mileage, that will only get better. Power numbers are about right, too.
The Germans have a decided upper hand in getting Diesels on the road for smaller premiums, simply because of the huge number of diesels they build. Premiums will continue to come down as volume increases. At the same time, after treatment will become cheaper, just as catalytic converters for gasoline cars have.
WARNING-Conspiracy theory ahead:
The Oil companys stand to lose if large numbers of people can buy less fuel. They will continue to do everything they can to make diesels look less attractive.
Grover- Ironically, GM, Ford and Dodge have all stated that they will offer diesels between 4.4 and 5l in their half ton trucks in the near future. On the other hand, considering the Ridgeline a 1/2-Ton, is a stretch. Nissan recently pulled the plug on sourcing a diesel from International, and they don't really have an engine that would do for the Titan. Toyota has made no statement that they will build a diesel Tundra, although they have a compatible engine/trans going into production in the 200 series Land Cruiser.
Reply
AMcA 9:36PM (12/30/2007)
Wow, I bet an Acadia would be good for 32+ mpg with that engine. And roughly the same horsepower, and way more torque.
That's Cobalt mileage.
Reply
zac 11:03AM (12/12/2008)
BUILD THE ACADIA, OUTLOOK, TRAVERSE, ENCLAVE with a 2.9L! smartest combo out there. with the gas engine by the time you load one of these up with cargo or passengers you will have to rev the snot out of it to get it to move-- much lower mpg than rated. the torque of the 2.9L will be a knockout while keeping the RPMs low! if they launch one i will buy one the first day.