2004 Cadillac Cts Sedan 4-door 3.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Cadillac back on track with 600-hp ATS-V.R racer in FIA GT3 spec [w/video]

There was already a rumor brewing that Cadillac might eschew the CTS as its racecar next season in favor of the ATS Coupe. It turns out that is absolutely the case, and now we know just what this 600-horsepower, future racer looks like. The coupe might not be limited to competing in just the US, though, because it's built to FIA GT3-specifications, meaning that this Caddy is also eligible to race in over 30 series worldwide against the likes of Bentley, McLaren, Audi and other premium brands.
The heart of this massively winged Cadillac is an engine dubbed the LF4.R. It's based around the unit in the production ATS-V and CTS Vsport but with larger turbos, bigger intercoolers, side exhausts and other tricks. Cadillac claims it makes a monstrous 600 hp and 520 pound-feet of torque in unrestricted form.
As the photo above shows, the ATS-V.R also wears an aggressive aero kit with a carbon fiber front splitter, and a wing at the back that could probably double as a picnic table in a pinch. The dry weight of the whole package is quoted at about 2,900 pounds, which is around 700 pounds less than the street version.

Cadillac explains origins of Lyriq EV name

We feel for Cadillac, a brand we're inclined to dub the Alex Rodriguez of the automotive world — so much obvious talent, its gifts warped by repeated questionable moves and an inability to conclusively close the deal on The Big Stage. And as with Rodriguez, the expectations are so high at the same time the disappointment is so entrenched that Cadillac gets no benefits of any doubts, the commentariat ruthless with criticism for anything less than an out-of-the-park home run. This latest news, like the Newton-meter torque-based naming scheme initiated earlier this year, likely won't help. GM Authority asked Cadillac about the origin of the Lyriq name for the coming battery-electric crossover. Global head of brand strategy Phil Dauchy explained three threads that went into the new moniker. In no particular order, one thread is that "Cadillac," according to Dauchy, gets more mentions in song lyrics than any other brand, including non-automotive brands. The Music Lyrics Database, while not exhaustive, supports the case: Cadillac has 31 pages of lyric mentions among bands from Rancid to Weird Al Yankovic, beating every other brand we could think of. So ... lyrics into Lyriq. The second thread is rolled up with Cadillac's move to proper names instead of alphanumerics for the sedan and crossover lines, all of those names to end in "iq," as well as the push into electric vehicles. Dauchy told GMA the nomenclature overhaul and the two-letter suffix "[signal] that Cadillac is bringing a different type of vehicle to market, one that works in concert with man, nature, and machine." He's bullish on swaying the public with the product, adding, "When you see [the Cadillac Celestiq], its size, presence and scale all connote the emotion associated with the name." The final thread that went into the Lyriq name the alliteration of brand and model names. As GMA phrased it, perhaps unsettlingly, "With Cadillac and the model name both ending in an 'ick' sound, these names roll off the tongue quite well." This brings up a question raised in a number of comments about the Lyriq, which asks whether the last syllable is pronounced "ick" or "eek." Until now, I've pronounced the coming crossover with an "eek" at the end. "Lyr-eek" strikes me as more luxurious, and "Celest-eek" sounds better to me than "Celest-ick," that latter model being the flagship EV that follows the Lyriq. Of course, it also makes me wonder if I've been pronouncing "Cadillac" correctly.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.