Cadillac CT6 PHEV Debuts In Shanghai, Gets 37 Miles Of Range

APR 19 2015 BY JAY COLE 79

The Cadillac CT6 PHEV And CT6 Prestige Sedan Debuted Today In Shanghai

The Cadillac CT6 PHEV And CT6 Prestige Sedan Debuted Today In Shanghai

At the Shanghai Auto Show, Cadillac has debuted its RWD CT6 flagship with available plug-in option, or CT6 PHEV if you will.

Cadillac CT6 In New York (Image: InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

Cadillac CT6 In New York (Image: InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

GM says that with the assistance of the PHEV system, the fuel economy of the car will “more than double”,  while the total output of the car moves to 335 hp and 432 lb-ft of torque.  The standard CT6 has a 22 mpg rating.

Somewhat unexpectedly, the CT6 plug-in option is found to be no slouch, and features the same sized 18.4 kWh battery as found in the next generation Chevrolet Volt, but in this case coupled to a 2.0L turbo 4-cylinder engine, and housed between the rear seats and the trunk.

“The first-ever CT6 is a technological showcase throughout, making it an ideal platform for Cadillac to offer its first plug-in hybrid.  (Cadillac ELR anyone?)

In the CT6, Cadillac presents a new formula for prestige luxury. The advanced Plug-In Hybrid system is a key addition providing a combination of exceptional fuel economy, crisp acceleration and strong electric driving range.” – Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen

Naturally, one wonders how much all-electric range the plug-in Caddy will get.  Unfortunately, the media department at Cadillac USA is not saying yet.

“Range estimates will be provided closer to U.S. launch of the PHEV option.”

However, apparently no one told product reps, or Mr. De Nysschen in China this weekend to not throw around some numbers:

“The CT6 PHEV leverages GM’s proven battery technology to provide greater than 60 km (37 miles) of all-electric range depending on speed and driver behavior.”

Cadillac CT6 Plug-In - Complete With 18.4 kWh Battery And 37 Miles Of Range

Cadillac CT6 Plug-In – Complete With 18.4 kWh Battery And 37 Miles Of Range

Cadillac also says that this plug-in vehicle will be the best driver in its field, thanks to EVT technology – which GM describes as an all-new rear wheel electric variable transmission “with exclusively designed motors to provide smooth, spirited acceleration.”

The two-motor EVT also uses three planetary gears mated to the 2.0L turbo 4-cylinder engine.  Cadillac says this use of a two-motor system “provides smooth and seamless power through the entire driving range.”

“The CT6 PHEV will deliver exceptional smooth, responsive acceleration that Cadillac and luxury sedan owners demand,” said Travis Hester, Cadillac CT6 executive chief engineer. “We have managed to achieve superior drive quality when compared to our PHEV competitors due to our exclusively designed EVT.”

The petrol Cadillac CT6 arrives in December, with the plug-in option to be available first in China (then later in the US), quite likely as an option on the 2017 model year CT6s in the fall.  The plug-in is not expected in the US until early 2017.

The Cadillac CT6 is built at GM’s Hamtramck, Michigan facility, but the plug-in will only be made in China. No pricing has yet been released on the plug-in variant.

Prelim CT6 PHEV Specs

Prelim CT6 PHEV Specs

Another Look At The Cadillac CT6 - Not Short On Sizing

Another Look At The Cadillac CT6 – Not Short On Sizing

Full GM Press Release below:

Cadillac CT6 to Offer Plug-In Hybrid Electric Technology

PHEV system expected to achieve fuel economy more than double that of conventional engine

  • Total system power estimated 335 hp and 432 lb-ft of torque
  • Includes Regen-on-Demand system

 

Cadillac CT6 In New York (Image: InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

Cadillac CT6 In New York (Image: InsideEVs/Tom Moloughney)

SHANGHAI – Cadillac announced today at the Shanghai Auto Show that it will add an available Plug-In Hybrid Electric (PHEV) propulsion system to its upcoming range-topping CT6 sedan. The new PHEV system is expected to more than double the fuel economy of the conventional powertrain offerings.

The CT6 PHEV takes advantage of the car’s advanced lightweight structure to create a unique formula for the prestige sedan.

“The first-ever CT6 is a technological showcase throughout, making it an ideal platform for Cadillac to offer its first plug-in hybrid,” said Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen. “In the CT6, Cadillac presents a new formula for prestige luxury. The advanced Plug-In Hybrid system is a key addition, providing a combination of exceptional fuel economy, crisp acceleration and strong electric-driving range.”

The CT6 Plug-In Hybrid system is designed to provide all-electric driving for most daily commutes, while maximizing fuel efficiency by providing blended power from the engine and battery at higher speeds and higher loads, even when energy is stored in the battery.

2016 Cadillac CT6 Uses Same 18.4 kWh Battery As Found In The 2016 Chevrolet Volt

2016 Cadillac CT6 Uses Same Sized 18.4 kWh Battery As Found In The 2016 Chevrolet Volt – But In A Different Configuration

Battery Technology

The CT6 PHEV leverages General Motors’ proven battery technology.  An 18.4 kWh lithium-ion battery pack is located between the rear seat and the trunk. The battery system is comprised of 192 prismatic pouch cells, which use the latest generation cell chemistry found in other GM plug-in vehicles.

With industry-leading quality levels of fewer than two problems per million battery cells produced, more than 20 million battery cells have been made for more than 73,000 GM plug-ins on the road today. The CT6 PHEV battery system will use the company’s proven active thermal control system that maintains electric range over the battery system’s life.

The battery system can be charged using a 120V or 240V charger.  Range estimates will be provided closer to U.S. launch of the PHEV option.

Electric Variable Transmission Delivers Exceptional Performance

Inside The Cadillac CT6

Inside The Cadillac CT6

All-electric launch performance is one of the key purchase considerations for PHEV and EV owners. The Cadillac CT6 PHEV combines an all-new rear wheel electric variable transmission (EVT) with exclusively designed motors to provide smooth, spirited acceleration.

The two-motor EVT also uses three planetary gears and is mated to a 2.0L turbo 4-cylinder engine with spark-ignited direct injection and variable valve technology. The use of a two-motor system provides smooth and seamless power through the entire driving range.

The combined system is capable of producing total system power of 335 hp (250 kW) and 432 lb-ft (586 Nm) of torque.

“The CT6 PHEV will deliver exceptional smooth, responsive acceleration that Cadillac and luxury sedan owners demand,” said Travis Hester, Cadillac CT6 executive chief engineer. “We have managed to achieve superior drive quality when compared to our PHEV competitors due to our exclusively designed EVT.”

Cadillac expects the fuel economy of the CT6 PHEV to be more than double that of the car’s conventional engine offerings, as measured by miles per gallon equivalent. Standards for measuring vehicle fuel economy differ between China and other global regions.  Full details on the CT6 PHEV efficiency in the U.S. and other markets outside China will be released closer to the car’s introduction in those markets.

Regenerative Braking

The CT6 PHEV will feature iBooster and Electronic Stability Program tailored for hybrid electric vehicle regenerative blended braking to provide maximum energy recovery combined with reduced stopping distance and improved fuel economy over traditional regenerative braking systems.

The iBooster and ESP-hev technology balance the use of the CT6 electric motors to act as generators to slow the vehicle and capture as much kinetic energy as possible during low-demand scenarios, while blending the traditional hydraulic brakes with the motors in high-demand scenarios.

As expected from a driver’s car like the CT6, the system provides improved brake pedal feel and enables increased opportunity for engine stop-start operation.

Operating Modes and Regen on Demand

CT6 PHEV drivers will be able to select among three distinct operating modes: Normal, Sport and Hold.

  • Normal: Designed for everyday commuting.  Provides ideal balance of comfort, performance and maximized EV range and fuel economy.
  • Sport:  Provides more aggressive pedal mapping for improved off-the-line feel and a stiffer steering response.
  • Hold: Allows owners to select when the CT6 PHEV uses its engine, reserving the remaining battery charge for later use. This feature helps enhance efficiency because owners who mix city and highway driving can save the battery charge for city travel, where the CT6 EV mode operates most efficiently.

The CT6 PHEV will also feature Regen on Demand, which allows the driver to temporarily regenerate energy from vehicle momentum into electricity and store in the battery pack for later use.

Regen on Demand supports a more-engaging driving experience by slowing the vehicle when entering a turn to better position it on the exit, much like downshifting with a manual transmission. Regen on Demand is engaged via steering-wheel paddles adapted from traditional performance cars.

Categories: Cadillac

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

79 Comments on "Cadillac CT6 PHEV Debuts In Shanghai, Gets 37 Miles Of Range"

newest oldest most voted

i think that this is a really good idea, and with the more powerful ICE, the engine in CS mode will probably be quite smooth. there may not even be any need for a mountain mode if the ICE can provide sufficient torque while in CS mode. i wonder if the ct6 phev will have a 2.5 seat rear bench as does the chevrolet volt?

i suspect that as the number of phev’s exceeds the number of bev’s the public will be better able to distinguish the two.

I noticed mountain mode was not listed. Also, I wonder if in sport mode, if it turns the ICE on for more HP? This is what GM did with the ELR. It is not described that way in the text though. Just pedal remapping.

hmm, that’s interesting, i didn’t know that. i would not be surprised if the ct6 did not operate in the same manner as the elr. after all, if you want to do “sport” driving, you are probably not so concerned about efficiency. engaging the ICE saves the battery charge and allows for more range during the period where you are concerned with more efficient driving.

The CT6 will have a full three seat rear as in the gas vesion. It is a luxury vehicle, and Cadillac will offer all the same features in the interior.

Ah, so they are not ending the ELR, they are just renaming it and giving it a new body! 🙂

Seriously, this looks like what the ELR should have been.

No, Ambulator, The MY 2016 Stunning Cadillac ELR Extended Range Electric Luxury Coupe is on the way! (See GM US News release below) …And Now, Great news coming from the Shanghai Motor Show! This is amazing! “CT6 PHEV drivers will be able to select among three distinct operating modes: Normal, Sport and Hold. ◾Normal: Designed for everyday commuting. Provides ideal balance of comfort, performance and maximized EV range and fuel economy. ◾Sport: Provides more aggressive pedal mapping for improved off-the-line feel and a stiffer steering response. ◾Hold: Allows owners to select when the CT6 PHEV uses its engine, reserving the remaining battery charge for later use. This feature helps enhance efficiency because owners who mix city and highway driving can save the battery charge for city travel, where the CT6 EV mode operates most efficiently.” Link Goes To Gm-Us News- 04.19.2015 http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2015/apr/0419-ct6.html Wait a minute, sounds familiar to me, you? #EREVHeavy – 2016 Cadillac ELR ERELC DETROIT – Cadillac today announced the ELR electrified luxury coupe will offer a host of upgrades for the 2016 model year, including boosts in acceleration, driving performance and connectivity. Major product upgrades include a more than 25 percent boost in power and torque, faster… Read more »

I am glad to see this. So GM is using Voltec 2.0 in many platforms, with different engines. This is great, I hope we see a Voltec SUV soon!

I think GM cutting the base price of this car by $9000 was the best thing they did in that they got it out of Tesla’s fish tank while growing the pool of new buyers.

I still think GM could rock Tesla’s world if they made a fully electric ELR with 300 miles range in that it would rock the Tesla Model S down to it’s underwere.

Another land-barge from Cadillac. This one will bomb like the ELR but not quite as bad. At least this one has 4-doors and seats 5.

GM, if you want to sell upscale PHEVs then you’ll need to create a new brand and stop building land-barges.

And build a damn SUV, FFS! This is not that complicated.

This is one large yank tank, length of 5187mm to the Tesla Model S at 4970mm

Its 1000 lbs lighter than the Tesla, but never mind competition. We are at a watershed moment when electric drive is actively promoted as the best, most luxurious, way to go, by a major OEM. I think we can celebrate on that.

Agreed!!!

“Another land barge from Cadillac”… “And build a damned SUV FFS!”

My irony meter just exploded. Hahaha!

“The first-ever CT6 is a technological showcase throughout, making it an ideal platform for Cadillac to offer its first plug-in hybrid.” – Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen

FIRST plug-in hybrid? I guess the ELR went down the memory-hole? Let’s just pretend that it never existed and call this one our ‘first’ PHEV. Wow.

Does new Cadillac President Johan de Nysschen think he can pull a Jedi mind-trick or something?

This guy’s admittedly the Andy Palmer of the GM World but even here, jeez give the guy a break. In GM-Speak, the volt and elr are EREV’s or, in other words, are electrically propelled until the juice runs out.

This, acording to their Lexicon, is a PHEV, which I’m assuming to mean if you floor it the engine will come on and help out the motors, rather like a Plug-in-Prius.

Perhaps also like the Prius the car has no heat pump nor resistance heater and the engine runs to make the heater work. I’m somewhat used to this in my 2011 Volt since in January and February I don’t have an electric car anymore since the engine insists on running.

I can’t fault what he said.

Really? Is that the spin? I’m not up on GM marketing-speak but I figured this was no different than the other cars. And the article indicates that it is based at least partially off the new Volt.

If that is their new division then so be it.

“EREV” is merely GM’s invented label for the Volt, which is a PHEV. If they have decided to “go with the flow” and not use that label for the CT6 PHEV, that doesn’t mean it belongs in a different category from the Volt.

Cadillac used Voltec, the Volt’s powertrain, for the ELR. I don’t see anything in the above ad copy for the CT6 specifying Voltec, but certainly the description including “planetary gears” sounds similar. If they didn’t just take the straight Voltec powertrain and drop it into a much heavier car, like the ELR, then that’s good. Compelling EVs are designed from the ground up. But it seems unlikely that Cadillac has strayed far from Voltec engineering here.

There is a difference between EREV and PHEV. If you floor it in a PHEV, the engine comes on. Or if you go over a certain speed, the engine comes on. In an EREV, this does not happen. It’s an EV first, no matter the acceleration, and up to top speed. Once the battery is depleted, then it turns into a PHEV.

this is news to me. i think that the difference between erev and phev is one of marketing terminology. i suspect that the vast majority of people (including me) would not be aware of the distinction that you state. for example, i don’t assume that the ct6 is not an erev because it is being marketed as a phev. indeed, the volt is generally referred to as being a phev.

The term EREV is more frequently used to distinguish cars like the Volt, ELR, and i3 REx (which can drive at full power on battery until the battery is depleted) from cars like the Fusion Energi and Plug-In Prius (which turn on the engine at full acceleration).

He is talking to a Chinese audience that I believe did not get the ELR

I think this is excellent. Now, if they did an SUV I’d buy the stock.

With this news, GM now has FIVE plug ins on the market or introduced shortly: Volt, ELR, Bolt, Spark EV, CT6 PHEV.

This far exceeds any other automaker, yet I’m sure people will still claim GM is not serious about plug ins.

And none of them sell very well. 🙁

(And the Bolt is not coming ‘shortly’.)

at present, there is *no* *EV that “sells well” in the context of the overall automobile market.

True . . . but some do sell better than others. The Model S sells well . . . especially for that high price! The Leaf sells reasonably well. The Volt sell OK. The Mitz Outlander PHEV has sold well.

The ELR bombed. The i-MiEV bombed. The Spark EV seems to have bombed (but I don’t know if that is due to limited availability or limited interest . . . probably the latter.) The Smart ED has not sold well.

So there are lessons to be learned from this. And to be fair, the car makers may be learning but it takes years for the results of new decisions to come out in the form of new cars. But some people seem to know what to build (Tesla) and others don’t (Cadillac).

The Leaf only recently passed Volt sales after the Volt was in the lead for three years, in part due to the Gen 2 Volt known to be coming out soon.

To look at the Leaf and Volt and claim one sells well and the other doesn’t seems a bit biased IMHO, at least from total US sales standpoint.

Ok, interesting that I speculated on other blogs that they could easily do this, since they were offering a 2000 cc turbo both here, and they used very similar items in the Malibu, that in the CT6 it seemed like a ‘natural’. Easy and cheap way to get a PHEV without much additional work. Ok so assuming except the engine, mostly 2016 VOlt hardware, that would mean 37 mile range instead of 50 for the smaller volt, 3600 watt charger, 4 hour recharge time, at least from home (I would imagine they are sticking to a 16 amp limitation but hard to say until someone says so definitively or someone actually measures it), so that means 225 volts (assuming pf ~~ 1) is required for the full charge rate, or 3200 watts from your typical 200 volt public charger station, and possibly 4 hours, 24 minutes charge time from that, unless they allow full charging speed to the end since its been proven that the battery can ‘take it’. Spec you disparage GM sales, but, I’ll say one thing, if the price is right, they’ve got another sale right here. The ELR was just too wrong. But this looks like… Read more »
Hey, I want the best for GM’s plug-in cars. But I just don’t think they are doing the right things. I hope the CT6 fulfills your desires. You’ve said that you didn’t like the ELR because of its 2-doors & two tiny rear seats. So it sounds like this car might be just what you are looking for. But I live in Silicon Valley and I just can’t see this CT6 selling many here. People like the sleek BMWs, Maseratis, Porsches, Audis, Mercedes, Lexuses, etc. And the Tesla Model S nailed it and became a big success. I can’t go out without seeing 3 or 4 of them. And the Model X will do well too. But if GM wants to sell a good number of PHEVs, then need to deliver what the market wants. I think a sleek luxury SUV PHEV with the Voltec drivetrain would be a big hit. Green for commuting and dropping the kids off at school . . . but also able to easily drive up to Tahoe for skiing. And DON’T use the Escalade. Use the SRX . . . but try to make it a bit less gaudy.

tesla cannot maintain itself as a going concern by relying on model s sales: the sales volume is far too low for the price charged. for example, i live in the chicago area where i rarely see a tesla model s. that’s why tesla is trying to expand into what it hopes will be higher volume segments.

Oh, I fully agree. But Tesla wants to stick with 200+ mile range EVs and that is not currently technologically feasible right now. So for now, the Model S and the upcoming Model X will have to tide them over until the Gigafactory comes on line and pushes down battery costs. But for now, Tesla’s only viable business model is to keep pushing their awesome EV among the high-end buyers. And since they are delivering a GREAT car with almost no range limitations that plague low-cost EVs, they can continue making money in that market. (Yes, they do require a less than 1 hour supercharge when doing long distance travel but people are learning that this is not at all a significant issue since you rarely drive long distances and you save so much time during the rest of the year that the hour spend having a nice meal during a long trip is just payback for all the 5-second refills during the rest of the year.) Tesla is currently flying high . . . but they need to succeed at bringing battery costs down with the Gigafactory if they want to take the company to the next level.

I find the looks of the Model S and most BMWs boring/dated. However I don’t see very many anyway. I do see at a ton of Cadillacs every day though. Disclaimer, I live in Michigan.

i too find the designs of these cars to be rather pedestrian. one thing that i will say about gm is that they are making well designed cars, although maybe i’m a bit of an outlier because i thought that the gen1 volt and the elr were really well designed cars.

Yeah, the regional preferences do show that different cars sell better in different places. However, I live where plug-ins sell in big numbers and that is something they really need to consider.

“…The CT6 PHEV will deliver exceptional smooth, responsive acceleration that Cadillac and luxury sedan owners demand,” said Travis Hester, Cadillac CT6 executive chief engineer. “We have managed to achieve superior drive quality when compared to our PHEV competitors due to our exclusively designed EVT….”.

I guess Travis is from the South. Although he did say ‘exclusively’. Or maybe its just a regional issue. Around my part of the USA, we’d say this was an adverb modifying ‘smooth’ (exceptionally), but then he might counter he was modifying ‘acceleration’, whereas around here we take it he was modifying an adjective. Interesting. Probably is naturally sounding where he comes from, but its odd to my ears in this part of the country.

I know its not quite their job, but I wish these guys would be a bit more succinct and mention a few more details, specifically if there is an option to disable the performance part of the vehicle and make the car run on battery only should that be the driver’s wish.

So GM’s marketing sucks. Not exactly news. Great product can’t make up for bad marketing. If it could, Cadillac would sell more units of the ATS than BMW sells of the Model 3. Ain’t remotely close to happening.

Well, if having the best selling EV in America until last month is “not selling very well,” I imagine you must consider Tesla a dismal failure.

ClarksonCote said: “With this news, GM now has FIVE plug ins on the market or introduced shortly: Volt, ELR, Bolt, Spark EV, CT6 PHEV. “This far exceeds any other automaker, yet I’m sure people will still claim GM is not serious about plug ins.” GM gets high points for building what has proven to be far and away the best PHEV on the market, the Volt. But it gets a lot of those points taken away for dragging its feet on upgrading the tech, and for not significantly increasing the all-electric range. Of the other cars you mention, none are selling in more than compliance car numbers, so certainly aren’t worthy of any claim for serious commitment. (And the ELR is scheduled for end of life soon.) Now, the Bolt has the -potential- to be a compelling EV. But (a) it hasn’t debuted yet, and (b) GM will be dependent on LG Chem for the batteries when it does. LG Chem is supplying numerous EV makers with batteries, not just GM. GM will have to split a “pie” of battery supply with other EV makers; a pie which in 2020 will be very nearly the same size as the pie… Read more »

the purpose of a PHEV is not to maximize EV range; the purpose is to replace gasoline for most day to day driving. anything more than that is a waste because you are paying extra money (and carrying extra weight) for battery capacity that you rarely use. for the rare cases, you have the gasoline generator.

I honestly have to wonder where this crazy idea that “Any more batteries than you need for daily average range are a waste” comes from. It makes no sense from any direction you look at it. 1. In general, people don’t buy a car that will barely meet daily needs. They buy a car that will serve close to all the needs they think they will ever have for a car. 2. Bigger battery packs have advantages other than mere range. They can be recharged faster (on the basis of miles added per minute of recharge), and they lose capacity slower over the years… in other words, they last longer. 3. The idea that PHEV owners don’t care about driving beyond their electric range is simply false. At least one survey showed that Volt drivers were more likely than Leaf drivers to stop for a recharge en route to a destination: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1079936_forget-range-anxiety-chevy-volt-owners-have-gas-anxiety Bottom line: Buyers of PHEVs, just like buyers of BEVs, choose their car with the intention of using as little gas as possible. Certainly a PHEV can get away with having a smaller battery pack than a BEV, but that doesn’t at all mean that PHEVs with longer… Read more »

Range needs are always subjective. Because I work 4 miles from home and have L2 available at work, I can get by with just about an PHEV and still have a gas-free commute. But yes, I prefer to have more range and I think 40 miles is really the sweet spot for a PHEV. I think anyone who seriously needs more EV range than that may want to be considering a full blown EV.

let’s be clear here: the “need” is transportation. a PHEV does not “barely” meet your needs any more than does an ICE “barely meet” your needs.

i would state that, even in the *EV segment, a PHEV better meets driver’s needs for everyday transportation better than does an BEV because with the PHEV, you don’t have to worry about whether you are using up more charge per day than you can recover by recharging. by contrast, in a BEV, when you are using more charge per day than you can recover by recharging each day, then you have to hope that you have enough reserve so that you have enough range for the next day’s driving. such reserve capacity is far from cost free.

I see a lot of BEV-vs-PHEV arguments in comments on articles about EVs. Frankly, when the modern EV revolution started, I thought I’d rather have a PHEV, so I wouldn’t have to worry about getting stranded by running the battery dry. That was fine in theory, but in practice that’s not how it’s worked out. The PHEVs on the market today have -such- limited range that I wouldn’t seriously consider buying any of them. The sad thing is that the Volt has the longest range of them all! The other best seller, the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, has a range that’s estimate to be only 20-25 miles under the EPA rating system! If I were still driving a car, I’d much rather spend a few hours recharging en route in a BEV during the few times a year I need to make a long trip, rather than have a gas generator kick in every time I exceeded 40 miles of driving in one day. One size does -not- fit all. We’re not all going to need, let alone want, the same kind of car (or light truck) as our daily driver. Soccer moms need a minivan or SUV to transport the… Read more »

“The PHEVs on the market today have -such- limited range that I wouldn’t seriously consider buying any of them.”

Having plotted PHEV battery sizes for presentations since the beginning, I used to agree. The fat 4-9kwh cluster of cars is seeing some breakouts. Personally, I think its awesome Cadillac is putting all 18.4kwh in the CT6. It’s awesome Audi is putting 17.3kwh in the Q7. PHEV sales have barely started, and some recognize this won’t just be about compliance in some city, in some country, you could care less about.

I’m with David Murray on this. I think around 40 miles (or around there) is a good number for a PHEV. With less, you won’t cover many round-trip commutes. With more, you are adding battery capacity that might rarely be needed for commutes or adding an engine that will rarely be used except for LONG trips thus making the car very expensive.

I think there is a market for both PHEVs and pure EVs. But building a PHEV with a really big battery is like wearing a belt and suspenders wherein both are made of gold. It is overkill and very expensive.

Let’s look at the actual numbers for how far Volt drivers drive every day, here presented on a graph:

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19529&d=1365046566

When I said 40 miles was a barely adequate range for a PHEV for the average driver, I wasn’t expressing an opinion. I was stating a fact.

Clearly, from the graph, Volt drivers as a group would be better served by a battery pack large enough to let the car go about 60 miles, and 70 miles would be even better.

Now, that’s not to say that nobody can get by with less. Certainly there are people who drive less than the average miles per day; see David Murry’s post, above. But while there is a place for niche market vehicles, in general auto makers want to appeal to as broad a market segment as possible. Limiting PHEVs to a 40 mile range is one of the reasons why GM hasn’t been able to sell as many Volts as it can make every year. Perhaps it’s the biggest reason.

One thing is certain: When compelling, well designed PHEVs appear on the market with a range longer than 37-40 miles, people will buy more of those PHEVs than they’re buying the shorter-range PHEVs sold today.

The graph you linked to is of Volt EV miles in a day, a function of current battery size. You can’t use that to conclude what the battery size should be; the chart itself is a function of existing size.

if you look at the chart carefully, i suspect that it will support what gm has been saying: that the gen1 volt allowed 80% of drivers to drive without using gasoline. gm never said that the volt would allow 100% of drivers to drive without using gasoline. what you are doing is looking at the tail of the histogram and wondering why the volt doesn’t provide enough range to allow people in the tail to drive without using gasoline.

basically, what you are suggesting is that the volt should have had enough EV range to support the driving of 99% of drivers. that would have meant that all potential volt customers would have had to pay extra to satisfy the hard-core EV enthusiasts who just don’t like the idea of running a gasoline engine. chevrolet had a hard enough time trying to sell a $40,000 car, if they had made the price $50,000 to provide the range that you suggest, they would have sold *fewer* cars (and probably by a large margin) and not more as you suggest.

The 2016 Volt will have an EV range of 50 miles. That will make 90% of trips gas free. Why put a bunch more battery in the car, making it heavier, use up more space, and cost more. Look at the i3. It has an 80 mile range, but cost $10k more. The idea is to make a car that’s affordable, and still allows people to drive gas free almost all the time. That is the formula. Arguing that GM isn’t doing it right doesn’t make any sense because in actuality they are following their formula. You need to just say you don’t like their formula for EREV. Or you don’t like the EREV concept period.

“GM gets high points for building what has proven to be far and away the best PHEV on the market, the Volt. But it gets a lot of those points taken away for dragging its feet on upgrading the tech, and for not significantly increasing the all-electric range.”

Can you explain how they are dragging their feet on upgrading tech? They are the first Gen 2 Plug in to market with the Volt, and they have consistently delivered incrementally better range increases/battery size every 2 years, while also decreasing MSRP. I have seen no other plug in vehicle manufacturers do that to date.

37 miles? I’m impressed. I expect it will be less than that on the USA version (it always is) but as long as it is above 30 miles EPA then I’ll consider it a win. My person view on range is that 20 miles is bare minimum acceptable, 30+ is considered a win. Anything less than 20 is just boneheaded design. Personally, I think the car is an ugly boat. But I also realize there will be a market for ugly boats with PHEV drive trains. So I want to see more of them.

Oh, I think you could count on the 37 mile range battery… As other posts have noted, there are no longer many options with GM products… SO that means, one battery, and one 50/60 hz 100-125/190-250 volt 16 amp single phase charger (so called 3.6 kw) worldwide.

That kind of thing is allowable in my view. Now lets get a closer look at the car to see if it is as good-looking and practical in the flesh as it appears.

People call it a ‘land-boat’. But if it has comfortable seating and head room for 5, a decently sized trunk, and not too many silly gadgets, then I’m ‘IN’.

I’m glad GM went big on the battery. I had some worry it was going to be something like an Energi or PIP battery.

Well, it’s nice to see something from Cadillac which apparently is better designed than the ELR; perhaps -much- better designed. However, claiming that the same battery pack as the tiny Volt will give this large, heavy luxury car the same electric -range- as the Volt… is obviously purest hype.

Bottom line: This is the car which Cadillac -should- have marketed two years ago, instead of the ELR. As is, it’s going to become obsolete pretty quickly, as longer-range EVs come on the market in another two years.

there is NO way that the ct6 is “better designed than the ELR”. personally, i don’t find the ct6 to be an attractive car, but the ELR was a really well designed car. part of the problem was marketing: as an *EV it was a mistake to sell the ELR at a premium price because an important attribute for an *EV is electric range.

by contrast, it appears that the CT6 is being positioned as a hybrid EV version of the conventional CT6. this is more in line with the conventional way that hybrids have been marketed, but the problem with the conventional hybrid is that there wasn’t enough difference between the ICE version and the hybrid ICE version to justify the price difference. i suspect that the attempt here is to see whether people will be able to distinguish between an ICE version and a hybrid EV version.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I’m not talking about the exterior styling, which certainly looks great. I’m talking about the practical considerations of actually using a car. For example: a car which has a back seat is expected, by most people, to be able to seat adults in the back. Not so with the ELR.

Heck, the Edsel had people who loved it too. But I think the consensus of reviews is pretty clear: Styling aside, the ELR is a very badly designed car, and vastly overpriced. Furthermore, the changes with the new model year are only prettying up the lipstick on this pig.

I don’t see how you can call the ELR a “pig”. It’s probably one of the best looking cars out there, even won awards. The only problem with it was the initial price. It should have been $65K from the start, and the $85k price left a bad taste in people’s mouth, along with providing chum for the haters. Not everyone want’s a big back seat BTW.

i tend to agree, $65,000 would have been a good price for the elr; it would have been more than i would have been willing to pay, but for $85,000, they should have offered 100 miles of EV range with a range extender.

Considering the technology that went into the CT6, it can easily be concluded that it is a more advanced design than the ELR.

I believe it is the gen II 18.4 kWh battery giving the Volt 50 AER and the CT6 37 AER. It just happens to line up with MY2012 gen I Volt range.

It’s a boat for sure, but IMO fits the Caddy crowd better than the ELR. The Volt/ELR is just too small for some, and the CT6 definitely fixes that.

It weighs less than a BMW 5 series and the stiffness means it probably handles better. The electric drive train will add some pounds, but at least 500 pounds less than a Model S it definitely will not be a “boat”. Except for the turning radius!

Thank you, Don. I don’t understand these “boat” comments, coming in a day late on this news. It’s big in the way many want, but everyone is forgetting the CT6 starts at 3,700lb. The announcement this will use the Volt’s T-battery means more weight between the axles, and lower too. A “boat”? NOT.

That’s the rules. If GM makes a smaller car, “it’s too small”. If GM makes a bigger car, “it’s too big”. GM is not allowed to have a Goldilocks zone or cater to the market.

The Cadillac CT6 has rear wheel turning. Look it up. The turn radius is less than for physically smaller (and more expensive) imports.

Tiny? The Volt is mammoth compared to my Roadster.

Didn’t you read the article? 37 miles is *NOT* the range of the VOlt. It is 50. This car is larger, but not THAT much larger than the 2016 volt. 37 miles seems to be expected, or 13 miles less than the smaller Volt.

I’m talking about the real-world expected electric driving range, not the range claimed by the auto maker. -All- EV makers exaggerate the range of their electric vehicles. Even Tesla.

That’s not correct. GM actually under estimated the range of the Volt. Most people exceed the EPA #’s. Even when GM increased the battery size, they didn’t bother getting the EPA range updated.

when it comes to EV range (and just EV technology in general), gm has been very conservative in its claims. that said, i think that the epa estimate is a fair estimate: during the warmer months i get about 10-12 miles more than the epa estimate and during the colder months i get about 10-12 miles less than the epa estimate.

GM is an exception. Look at Voltstats, which is taken from OnStar data (not faked by the owners). Many owners pass 50 miles of range. And for the Spark EV, whic has an EPA 80-mile rating, one owner reached 139 miles.

You are obviously unaware both of the new Volt’s specs, and of the new CT6’s specs. – The 2015 (Gen 1) Volt has a curb weight of 3,794 pounds. – The regular 2016 CT6 will have a curb weight under 3,700 pounds, with the basic 3.0L turbocharged engine. (The CT6 has a lot of lightweighting so weighs considerably less than other cars in its class.) – The 2016 Volt, will weigh 3,5nn pounds and be EPA rated for 50 miles of range. So yes, they are saying that the CT6 will have about as range as the Gen 1 Volt, but they’re saying it will have about 3/4 of the EPA range of the Gen 2 Volt. This makes sense because it will probably weigh a bit less than 4/3 of the Gen 2 Volt, but is less aerodynamic. The EPA tests are low average speed, with only one test having a proportion of driving at higher speed, so the effects of aerodynamics are understated. The real-world highway AER will naturally be lower than the EPA AER. GM will have the Gen 2 Volt, the CT6 PHEV and the new Malibu HEV all using the same basic transmission design, and… Read more »

Thank you for the info regarding the CT6’s size and weight. I find it difficult to judge size without seeing a car in person. I was shocked when I first saw a Volt up close and personal; I had no idea it was so tiny from pictures! The CT6 is described as a “luxury car”; my bad for assuming it is significantly larger than a Volt.

So okay, the CT6 should get something close to the Volt’s electric range, then.

However, so far as I know, the EPA has not yet rated the Volt 2.0’s electric range. 50 miles claimed by the auto maker absolutely guarantees the EPA rating will be somewhat less; auto makers -always- exaggerate an EV’s range. All of them, even Tesla.

The CT6 is larger than any other car in GM’s line-up including the Impala. It’s bigger than a 7 series BMW. But they did very impressive things to get the weight down.

As another note the CT6 has quad steering. The rear wheels move to shorten the turning radius.

I think the information about the Bolt using mixed materials is equally interesting. Could be a pretty high performance vehicle for a very reasonable price.

First RWD voltec. Soon to be joined by Cadillac CUVs

I have a 2011 Volt. Best car I’ve ever owned. I will buy another one. Caveat, I want more all electric range. It was noted above by a couple people that 40 miles of range is enough. It is not. Yes the range extender kicks in but there are so many instances where this happens when I’m only five to seven miles from home. I want to drive on battery power only almost all the time except for long distance trips. I want a pack that takes me 60-75 miles. If that were available to me I would only use the gas generator 3 or 4 times a year when doing long distance vacations. The range extender is fantastic in as much as the car can be my only car, allowing me to drive where ever I want, whenever I want. GM did it right. I will get a Gen 2 Volt but want to wait until the 2017 or 2018 model year.

No such car exists at the moment. I would almost mention the i3 Rex.. But you said you’d use the range extender for long trips. Obviously the i3 Rex wouldn’t be ideal for long trips.

The only solution to this issue is to offer multiple battery sizes for the Volt. However that doesn’t solve the packaging problem. Shoppers would pay more if they wanted more battery. If there is a market for a ~100 mile EREV, then the option would be there.

What does the back seat look like in this thing? Does it have the same restrictions as the Gen 2 Volt, or were they able to position the battery in a way that allows for 3 to fit comfortably in the back?