DescentBB

Was putzing around the Cadillac site, when I came across this concept. Looks pretty mean(although the rims are complete ass). Of course as soon as you notice the V16 you realize that about 1% of the populace will be able to afford the thing...

That is one fugly car.

I thought the V12 quad turbo for a Cadillac was insane. Me Four 12 I think they called it but damn a V16. That is one car I will not see any time soon.

Mr. Perfect wrote:about 1% of the populace will be able to afford the thing...

Bruce Wayne looks like a perfect candidate to me.

1000 horsepower? What does someone need with a 1000 hp car? Someone could get injured in that thing. I think we should ban it.

At least it's undeniably American - and it's not as ugly as THE VAST MAJORITY of US-made cars.

However, if you want 16 cylinders, you don't want a V16, you want a W16. 2 x narrow-angle V8s built together as appears in the Bugatti Veyron.

1000 Nm of Torque. Over 1000 HP. Top speed 400+ Kmh.

I have my doubts about the durability of this engine. It has the length of 8 cylinders, therefore a very long crank, which is not good in terms of regidity and end-to-end vibrations (an inline eight is not completely naturally balanced).

The idea to throw in a ridicule amount of cylinders en then disabling them most of the time anyway is typical american.

I have more faith in that quad-turbo V12 engine. It has the displacement on demand feature inherently, because if you don't accelerate, the turbo's won't spool and will push less air in the engine, thereby reducing the displacement. Under full load, the turbo's will force more air into the cylinders by making it more dense, so the displacement increases. Naturally aspirated engines cannot suck in more air than their total displacement, engines with forced induction can.

Anyone remember the fictional El-Nino from the Need for Speed series? Well, this car KINDA reminds me of it.

Kinda.

[NuB] Dedman wrote:1000 horsepower? What does someone need with a 1000 hp car? Someone could get injured in that thing. I think we should ban it.

not to mention the US Already has HP Limits on just abvout every road in the CONUS, Hawaii and Alaska. IIRC its ~ 500-550 HP

What's the weight of that car?
The bigger the car, the heavier it is, the bigger the engine you need, the heavier the car becomes, etc...

Why not keep it small for once?

Tricord wrote:What's the weight of that car?

http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/mod ... el=sixteen

The bigger the car, the heavier it is, the bigger the engine you need, the heavier the car becomes, etc...

Why not keep it small for once?

Because it's a "big heavy Caddy with a big engine" concept. Keeping it small just doesn't make sense. If you want a small car, don't buy a Caddy.

Guys, you do realize that this car was just a concept, right? As far as I know, Cadillac has no plans whatsoever for putting it into production. That being said, though, could you even imagine driving one?

P.S. That XLR looks pretty hot, too .

It was a concept in the 2003 autoshows, it's old news now.

horsepower doesnt mean sh!t, its the horsepower to weight ratios that mean something, and then again, torque is more important than hp

It has the displacement on demand feature inherently, because if you don't accelerate, the turbo's won't spool and will push less air in the engine, thereby reducing the displacement. Under full load, the turbo's will force more air into the cylinders by making it more dense, so the displacement increases. Naturally aspirated engines cannot suck in more air than their total displacement, engines with forced induction can.

A turbo/blower does not increase displacement.

CCB is right on.

B-

I was under the impression that a turbo would increase displacement based on the fact that the gas/oxygen is compressed in the cylinders before igniting, therefore there would be more mass in the cylinders, more mass would mean more displacement, right?

no, displacement is the physical dimensions of the cylinder itself. when you use a turbo/blower you make the fuel/air ratio "think" its in a bigger displaced cylinder, but its really not, its just squeezed into the same cylinder.


besides if they do roll that caddy out, DMV wont allow it to have the full HP it can pack. a new Bugatti rolled out from europe packing a whooping 1800 HP in a "W" 16, a engine comprised of dual "V" Banks, with quad turbos ( 1 turbo per 4 cylinders ) but when Bugatti marketed the car over here in the US the DMV restricted its HP down to ~ 500HP or so

[NuB] Dedman wrote:1000 horsepower? What does someone need with a 1000 hp car? Someone could get injured in that thing. I think we should ban it.

Well, you could always take that engine and drop it into a Delorian. You'd hit 88mph with no problem.

CCB, Ace is correct(pretty much)
Really all you're doing is raising cyl. pressure/compression.

B-

Wrong. There is STILL the same amount of physical SPACE displaced by the pistons... Regardless the compressin ratio.

You can pack 75 cubic inches of air in to a 75CID engine, but you can also compress 150 cubic inches of air into that same 75 cubic inch cylinder. The displacement referrs to how much physical space is inside the combustion chambers. The compression ratio is the number that should have been used. The higher pressure and volume of air going in to the cylinder will cause the the piston to compress an already compressed air charge... therefore a higher theoretical compression ratio. Say you're running a 7 PSI boost to an already 8:1 engine. You will theoretically get a 9:1 compression ratio at max boost/volume (compressor overhead, A/R, and engine inefficencies aside).

I use the term THEORETICAL, because that's only a small portion (and a REALLY watered down explanation)of what happens with a turbo/supercharger set up. Most of the power gains are due to a larger and colder fuel/air charge. Actual compression ratios and displacent can't be adjusted on the fly with today's technology.

And yeah... caddie's have ALWAYS been ridiculously large, with even more ridiculously large engines. It's just the nature of the beast. If a caddy connoseur wanted a small sporty car, he would buy a small sporty car.

[EDIT] Thanks to my slow typing skillz, 3 more posts came before I finished this. This was referring to CCB's question [/EDIT]

or you could put a flux capacitor in a delorean and go back to the future

or get a Lotus Elise and you'd wipe the floor with the Caddy

Dude, the elise is a piece of crap.

It's a girls car.

0 to 60 in under 5 seconds with a stock 4 banger no turbo is not crap

But it just SCREAMS "homosexual"

If you want a lotus... get an Esprit.

Jaguar-XKR 0wnz all

Escudo Pikes Peak version.

Sting_Ray wrote:But it just SCREAMS "homosexual"

If you want a lotus... get an Esprit.

And has a girls name.