A Little-V Blog: The ATS-V purchase and ownership experience

[Hib Halverson]

ATS-Vs have great brakes. They stop the car in short distances. They have great pedal feel and the OE pads do not exhibit significant fade when driven properly in a performance street duty cycle.

In a brilliant use of "parts barrel engineering", GM introduced the 2016 ATS-V with the brakes off the previous generation of CTS-V and that made for a car with plenty of braking capacity. On the front are Brembo six-piston fixed calipers and 14.5-in rotors. At the rear are four-piston Brembo fixed calipers and 13.3-in rotors. In conjunction with this hardware, the ATS-V's brake hydraulics provide excellent pedal feel. The master cylinder and brake booster are a system that results in a firm pedal with little hysteresis, ie: pedal movement results in a corresponding increase in braking. It’s a “goldilocks” system in that the pedal is not rock hard with no travel nor is the pedal stroke too long making it feel soft. It’s just right such that the driver has the expected amount of braking from a given pedal movement and, thus, enhances driver confidence in maximum performance breaking situations. That confidence is one of the reasons that the little V is just a ball to drive hard.



For track use GM recommends using a brake fluid with a higher boiling point. I flushed my brakes and refilled the system with Red Line RL600, a DOT4-rated fluid with a 604° dry boiling point and a 400° wet boiling point. RL600 maintains viscosity and lubricity and resists compressibility at extreme temperatures to help safeguard against brake fade and vapor lock in racing, performance and street applications.

Another mod I’m going to make to my six-speed coupe, the Blue BMW Buster, is a brake pad change from OE to a set of Porterfield R4-S pads. During the late-‘00s and early ‘10s, I had experience with the R4-S material in building a street/track 2001 Chevy Camaro project car for magazines and the Internet. Based on that, I think the R4-S pads, which are characterized by Porterfield Enterprises as a hi-po street, autocross and street/track pad, may offer an improvement in braking in a track duty-cycle and they will create less brake dust on the wheels in long-term street driving situations. I plan to install the Porterfields fairly soon.

Lastly, on the subject of brakes, our other ATS-V, “Pearl,” the four-door which is my Wife, the Fairest Sandra the Red, drives every day is 3 ½ years old and has gone 45,000 miles. It was time to flush and bleed the brakes as well as checking pads and rotor thicknesses. Two weeks ago, I got the car up in the air, pulled the wheels then got out my mic and measured the rotors. All of them had .030-In wear. Allowable reduction in thickness before discard is .080-in so there is plenty of life left in those rotors. Brake pads are 60-65% used. My Wife is easy on brakes so I think we have another 20-25,000 miles to go before we need new pads and then we’ll likely be able to put a second set of pads on the car before those rotors are used up. Not only has rotor and pad wear been acceptable but there have been zero problems with rotor warpage, hard-spots or pad material transfer.


Brakes on Pearl after 45,000 miles.
Cheers to Brembo for building a great set of brakes for ATS-Vs.chug:

 

[Hib Halverson]

I'm still trying to get GM to fix the Blue BMW Buster's problem with oil smoke on cold starts. This morning I reorganized all the video footage I have of the problem and that got me thinking I need to summarize my "adventure" with cold start oil smoke because I've been dealing with this for two years.

I've been PM'ing with "JTS97Z28", a member of the CadillacOwners.com's ATS-V forum about his oil smoke on cold start problem. In fact, he and I PM'ed this morning. Here is an excerpt of what I told him about how I view the problem:

Here's my belief about how the problem occurs...

The turbocharger shaft is pressure lubricated by the engine's oil pump. There are two oil seals, one on each side of the cavity in which the shaft bearings and the oil under pressure reside. These seals are supposed to prevent oil from flowing past them. The problem seems to be more with the turbine wheel seal rather than the compressor wheel seal.

When the engine is running, exhaust pressure in the turbocharger turbine housing, keeps oil from leaking past the seal, however, once the engine is shut down, oil left inside the bearing cavity under the force of gravity, begins to migrate past the seal, down the shaft, onto the turbine wheel and then drips into the compressor housing. The longer the engine is not running, the more oil leaks.

The next time the engine starts, exhaust pressure stops the leakage and it takes only a second or so for exhaust heat to start burning the oil which has accumulated on the turbine wheel and in the compressor housing. Once that oil burns away, the smoke stops.

As to why JTS97Z28's problem began after a turbo replacement...I think GM has some defective turbos on the shelf as replacement parts and JTS97Z28 got one or two of them.

My Wife and I own two ATS-Vs, both 2016s, one early (a 4-dr "Pearl" delivered in SEP2015) and one late (a 2-dr, "Blue BMW Buster", delivered in JUL2016). We experienced the problem, first, with my Wife's car and then–because mine was built nine months later and accumulated mileage at a slower rate–a year and a half later, with our second ATS-V. With my Wife's car, which developed the problem early in 2017, GM, at first, had no idea what was wrong. They replaced both heads. Problem continued. They replaced both turbos. Problem stopped for a while then returned. They replaced the whole engine and the oil smoke finally stopped.

With my ATS-V coupe, the oil smoke problem started late last year and has continued. So far, GM has been reluctant to repair the car. The problem is not my dealer, Bunnin Cadillac in Santa Barbara CA. They've done a great job but their hands have been tied by GM's Technical Assistance Center (TAC). So far TAC won't take action in spite of my forwarding copies of my video footage to TAC though my dealer and in spite of my requests for replacement of the two turbochargers.

I have posted a ton of video footage documenting this problem. You can view the various YouTube postings at these links:
Oil Smoke Footage
Oil Smoke Footage#2
Oil Smoke Footage#3
Oil Smoke Footage#4
Oil Smoke Footage#5

The most recent video footage, #5, was posted yesterday.

My belief is GM has a problem with the turbos used in LF3 and LF4 engines and the problem is likely with the design of or materials used in the turbocharger shaft seals. Making the problem more frustrating is not every engine using those turbochargers develops the problem and the engines which have it, develop the issue at varying times during the life of the turbos.

As I stated earlier, I think GM not only has bad turbos in customer vehicles but it also has some turbos with bad sealing systems in the replacement parts stock.

 

[Unclevito]

"Synthetic oils"

Actually, when I spent some time in Atascadero for a while, they told me that they'd let me out if I'd stop beating myself up.:
If that were true...GM "keeping up with the competition"...the Ford F150 and the Ram 1500 would not be outselling the Chevy Silverado so...are those TV ads during football games really helping?

100% synthetic vs fully synthetic? Interesting blog here. I remember when the oil industry was fighting synthetic oil tooth and nail, then suddenly, all was OK. Now I know why. Comments? http://www.synlube.com/synthetic.html Interesting opinions of Mobil 1 (Of course this is a marketing blog for Synlube/Lube-4life.)

 

[Hib Halverson]

Now, I get to eat some major crow...

Thursday 30May, I spent several hours at my dealer Bunnin Chevrolet in Santa Barbara, California observing and photographing the top service tech there, Luis Rios, while he worked on my '16 six-speed. The problem with oil smoke after cold starts has been slowly progressing through the warranty process such that it had finally reached the attention of a GM Brand Quality Engineer and that person had given Luis instructions to: 1) pull the catalytic converters and inspect the exhaust side of the turbos and the front of the cats, 2) remove and inspect the spark plugs and 3) borescope the two front cylinders.

The results of that inspection totally refute my belief that the oil smoke on cold starts is caused by leaking turbo charger shaft seals.

Upon removal of the two cats, we found oil residue in the driver-side turbo on either the turbine wheel or the cavity behind the turbine wheel. We found no oil residue on the turbine wheel of the passenger-side turbo. We did find oil in the cavity behind that turbine wheel, but that the turbine wheel was dry, tended to discount the idea that the shaft seal leaks.

Upon removal of all six spark plugs we found that the plugs from #1 and #2 cylinders, the two front holes, showed evidence of oil consumption. The other four did not.

The real bad news came when we borescoped the engine with Luis' Snap-On BK5600. Keep in mind that the HFV6 breaks with tradition in that Bank 1 is on the passenger side of a rear drive application and Bank 2 is on the driver side. First we look at the bore walls of #1. We could see inconsistent wear, ie: some places you could still see crosshatch and in other places the bore was more worn such that cross hatch was either difficult to discern or not visible and there were some pretty significant scoring. Then we looked at the bore walls of #2. The situation was worse. In fact, we could see "splotches" of the wall which were worn and other parts that were not. That strange wear pattern may be evidence of inconsistent oil control.

At this point, information I have is that some LF4s have a problem with cylinders 1 and 2 which causes high oil consumption right after cold starts. Oil is on the walls of 1 and 2 when the engine starts and is immediately combusted which one sees as smoke. If the problem occurs, it's likely to be more noticeable on cars which are not driven daily, ie: there might be one or more days when the car is not driven and then, at the next start-up, they smoke. I told Luis and my Service Representative, Diego, at Bunnin that my experience with this problem was that it usually occurred when the car sat for at least a day and was worse the longer the car sat unused between start-ups. They've had the car for three weeks and confirmed this manifestation of the problem by running the engine until warm, then shutting it off and leaving it parked for several days. Luis told me that when he started it after a few days, it smoked after start-up, sometimes as long as 30-seconds.

I've learned that there are other 2016s which have experienced this problem. Apparently, GM has been investigating this for a while and it seems that the problem has only developed in a few '16s and shows itself in engines which may see more than one day of non-use.

That the problem is an internal engine issue and not leaking turbos is likely why with my Wife's early '16 Sedan, GM finally replaced the engine after the car had the same trouble with oil smoke. At that point in time, GM didn't have as much information about the problem as they do now, so they first tried a cylinder head replacement. When that didn't stop the smoke, it replaced the turbos. That worked for a while, but within a few months, it was back. Believing that it wasn't a turbo problem, they put a motor in the car and it's been fine ever since. At that time time, my belief was that the original turbos leaked and then, the second set began leaking after a couple of months. Back then, still focused on turbo shaft seals, I couldn't understand why they'd put a whole motor in the car, but now I totally get it.

As to what GM plans to do with my late '16 Coupe? An Field Service Engineer visited Bunnin Cadillac yesterday and one of the reasons he was there could have been to meet with my pal, Luis and the dealership's Fixed-Ops director. My guess is GM is going to change the engine in that car, too.

So again, I have been wrong about my suspicions about leaking turbocharger shaft seals. The oil smoke on start-up problems my two ATS-Vs have is being caused by an internal engine problem, likely with bore walls, which causes poor oil control during cold starts.

Finally, let me say that my dealer Bunnin Cadillac has done an outstanding job on helping me get these problems solved. I'm not so happy that it's taken so long but that's on GM not my dealer. I am lucky that Bunnin has guys like Luis Rios in their Service Department. https://www.**************.com/forums/images/smilies/cheers.gif I am glad Bunnin continued to work this problem such that it was finally kicked upstairs by TAC to the Brand Quality Team and I appreciate the effort that Team is investing in solving the problem.https://www.**************.com/forums/images/smilies/2_thumbs_up_-_animated.gif

Open issues?
One big one is how the oil use during cold starts takes place. I'm going to attempt to find out more about that. Another is how soon they can get a new engine.

Time will tell.

 

[Unclevito]

POS Cadillac

Now, I get to eat some major crow...

Thursday 30May, I spent several hours at my dealer Bunnin Chevrolet in Santa Barbara, California observing and photographing the top service tech there, Luis Rios, while he worked on my '16 six-speed. The problem with oil smoke after cold starts has been slowly progressing through the warranty process such that it had finally reached the attention of a GM Brand Quality Engineer and that person had given Luis instructions to: 1) pull the catalytic converters and inspect the exhaust side of the turbos and the front of the cats, 2) remove and inspect the spark plugs and 3) borescope the two front cylinders.

The results of that inspection totally refute my belief that the oil smoke on cold starts is caused by leaking turbo charger shaft seals.

Upon removal of the two cats, we found oil residue in the driver-side turbo on either the turbine wheel or the cavity behind the turbine wheel. We found no oil residue on the turbine wheel of the passenger-side turbo. We did find oil in the cavity behind that turbine wheel, but that the turbine wheel was dry, tended to discount the idea that the shaft seal leaks.

Upon removal of all six spark plugs we found that the plugs from #1 and #2 cylinders, the two front holes, showed evidence of oil consumption. The other four did not.

The real bad news came when we borescoped the engine with Luis' Snap-On BK5600. Keep in mind that the HFV6 breaks with tradition in that Bank 1 is on the passenger side of a rear drive application and Bank 2 is on the driver side. First we look at the bore walls of #1. We could see inconsistent wear, ie: some places you could still see crosshatch and in other places the bore was more worn such that cross hatch was either difficult to discern or not visible and there were some pretty significant scoring. Then we looked at the bore walls of #2. The situation was worse. In fact, we could see "splotches" of the wall which were worn and other parts that were not. That strange wear pattern may be evidence of inconsistent oil control.

At this point, information I have is that some LF4s have a problem with cylinders 1 and 2 which causes high oil consumption right after cold starts. Oil is on the walls of 1 and 2 when the engine starts and is immediately combusted which one sees as smoke. If the problem occurs, it's likely to be more noticeable on cars which are not driven daily, ie: there might be one or more days when the car is not driven and then, at the next start-up, they smoke. I told Luis and my Service Representative, Diego, at Bunnin that my experience with this problem was that it usually occurred when the car sat for at least a day and was worse the longer the car sat unused between start-ups. They've had the car for three weeks and confirmed this manifestation of the problem by running the engine until warm, then shutting it off and leaving it parked for several days. Luis told me that when he started it after a few days, it smoked after start-up, sometimes as long as 30-seconds.

I've learned that there are other 2016s which have experienced this problem. Apparently, GM has been investigating this for a while and it seems that the problem has only developed in a few '16s and shows itself in engines which may see more than one day of non-use.

That the problem is an internal engine issue and not leaking turbos is likely why with my Wife's early '16 Sedan, GM finally replaced the engine after the car had the same trouble with oil smoke. At that point in time, GM didn't have as much information about the problem as they do now, so they first tried a cylinder head replacement. When that didn't stop the smoke, it replaced the turbos. That worked for a while, but within a few months, it was back. Believing that it wasn't a turbo problem, they put a motor in the car and it's been fine ever since. At that time time, my belief was that the original turbos leaked and then, the second set began leaking after a couple of months. Back then, still focused on turbo shaft seals, I couldn't understand why they'd put a whole motor in the car, but now I totally get it.

As to what GM plans to do with my late '16 Coupe? An Field Service Engineer visited Bunnin Cadillac yesterday and one of the reasons he was there could have been to meet with my pal, Luis and the dealership's Fixed-Ops director. My guess is GM is going to change the engine in that car, too.

So again, I have been wrong about my suspicions about leaking turbocharger shaft seals. The oil smoke on start-up problems my two ATS-Vs have is being caused by an internal engine problem, likely with bore walls, which causes poor oil control during cold starts.

Finally, let me say that my dealer Bunnin Cadillac has done an outstanding job on helping me get these problems solved. I'm not so happy that it's taken so long but that's on GM not my dealer. I am lucky that Bunnin has guys like Luis Rios in their Service Department. https://www.**************.com/forums/images/smilies/cheers.gif I am glad Bunnin continued to work this problem such that it was finally kicked upstairs by TAC to the Brand Quality Team and I appreciate the effort that Team is investing in solving the problem.https://www.**************.com/forums/images/smilies/2_thumbs_up_-_animated.gif

Open issues?
One big one is how the oil use during cold starts takes place. I'm going to attempt to find out more about that. Another is how soon they can get a new engine.

Time will tell.

Just think of all the time wasted in your life over this stupid problem. Cadillac likely saved $1.00 per engine for this crappy engineering. Glad the US does not make satellites and space stations this way. Why you spend your money on these crooks is beyond me. I do not think I will ever spend another penny on a crappy GM car.

BTW, back to my oil thread. You know that 100% synthetic and fully synthetic are totally different things. Fully synthetic use grade III base oils and 100% synthetic use grade IV. Mobil 1 is only fully synthetic. The fact that GM uses Mobil 1 as factory fill means nothing more than it is saving a few pennies on the price of the oil. You can buy Euro Grade Synthetic oils and get ester based base stock. You can also get Polyolefin base stock. These are much better than the grade III stock you get in fully synthetic such as Mobil 1. What are your comments, Hib. You need to do an article on fully synthetic vs 100% synthetic. Seems 100% synthetic would be better with turbos due to the hot spots during shutdown. Fully synthetic would be of no help here. Why not just save your money and buy quality dino oil rather than waste it on fully synthetic which uses dino base oils.

 

[Tuna]

It's no wonder it took so long to diagnose!
So this is a 2016 issue only?

 

[Hib Halverson]

Just think of all the time wasted in your life over this stupid problem. Cadillac likely saved $1.00 per engine for this crappy engineering. Glad the US does not make satellites and space stations this way. Why you spend your money on these crooks is beyond me. I do not think I will ever spend another penny on a crappy GM car.

Well...I guess maybe I'm just not as pissed off as you are about GM. Yes, it's been frustrating to deal with and, yes, Cadillac ATS-Vs lack quality, but there is nothing else on the market that gives me what the ATS-V does. Sure, there are other powerful compact coupes and sedans available from Mercedes, BMW and Alfa Romeo but all of those have various downsides such as reliability, costly maintenance or questionable long-term dealer support. With the ATS-V I have a car which really suits my needs/wants as far as a very high-performance compact coupe. I get maintenance for reasonable (ie: non-warranty) cost and I don't have to worry about a brand like Alfa disappearing from the U.S. market.

BTW, back to my oil thread. You know that 100% synthetic and fully synthetic are totally different things. Fully synthetic use grade III base oils and 100% synthetic use grade IV.

In short, Grade III base stocks are synthesized hydrocarbons aka highly-refined petroleum base.

Mobil 1 is only fully synthetic.

The the higher volume M1 engine oils sold in N.A. use a Grade III base stock.

The fact that GM uses Mobil 1 as factory fill means nothing more than it is saving a few pennies on the price of the oil.

Actually, they're saving a lot more than a "few pennies."Exxon-Mobil pays a large sum to GM to market M1 engine oils as factory-filled by GM.

You can buy Euro Grade Synthetic oils and get ester based base stock. You can also get Polyolefin base stock.

You don't have to buy "Euro Grade" synthetics. Engine oils made from Grade IV and V base stocks are blended right here in the U.S. buy Driven Racing Oil (mPAO base stocks) and Red Line Oil.(ester base stocks)

These are much better than the grade III stock you get in fully synthetic such as Mobil 1.

I agree.

You need to do an article on fully synthetic vs 100% synthetic. Seems 100% synthetic would be better with turbos due to the hot spots during shutdown. Fully synthetic would be of no help here. Why not just save your money and buy quality dino oil rather than waste it on fully synthetic which uses dino base oils.

I did a whole bunch of writing about engine oils back in the mid-'00s. Maybe it's time to revisit the subject.

 

[Hib Halverson]

It's no wonder it took so long to diagnose!

I think GM was stumped back when the first engine had to be replaced, but I think they knew there was a problem by the time I began complaining about the second cold-start-smoke problem. Because of that, I was kinda pissed that they made me jump though all the same hoops....sending them a shit-load of video footage and waiting for months...before agreeing to replace the engine in the Coupe.

So this is a 2016 issue only?

That's the best information I have so far, however, my Coupe was a late '16, so my personal opinion is that some '17s might also have the problem.

I think anyone with a '16 or an early '17 who has these symptoms:

1) Oil smoke within a few seconds after a cold start which occurs after at least 24-hrs of non-use.
2) The smoke will last five seconds or more then stops with no more smoke until the next cold start
3) An oil use test shows low oil consumption over the period of the test
4) The length of time the engine smokes is somewhat related to how long the car sits between cycles, ie: a car which sits for a week smokes a lot more than a car which sits over night.
5) Two front spark plugs show oil residue.
6) In a borescope inspection, the bore walls in the two front cylinders show scoring and/or scuffing.

 

[Unclevito]

Well...I guess maybe I'm just not as pissed off as you are about GM. Yes, it's been frustrating to deal with and, yes, Cadillac ATS-Vs lack quality, but there is nothing else on the market that gives me what the ATS-V does. Sure, there are other powerful compact coupes and sedans available from Mercedes, BMW and Alfa Romeo but all of those have various downsides such as reliability, costly maintenance or questionable long-term dealer support. With the ATS-V I have a car which really suits my needs/wants as far as a very high-performance compact coupe. I get maintenance for reasonable (ie: non-warranty) cost and I don't have to worry about a brand like Alfa disappearing from the U.S. market.



In short, Grade III base stocks are synthesized hydrocarbons aka highly-refined petroleum base.



The the higher volume M1 engine oils sold in N.A. use a Grade III base stock.



Actually, they're saving a lot more than a "few pennies."Exxon-Mobil pays a large sum to GM to market M1 engine oils as factory-filled by GM.


You don't have to buy "Euro Grade" synthetics. Engine oils made from Grade IV and V base stocks are blended right here in the U.S. buy Driven Racing Oil (mPAO base stocks) and Red Line Oil.(ester base stocks)



I agree.



I did a whole bunch of writing about engine oils back in the mid-'00s. Maybe it's time to revisit the subject.

Would like to see you do a new review on synthetic oils. I do searches on the top oils in the US and they will NEVER quote their base stocks as grade III or IV. So much marketing bullshit. Pennzoil says their oil is made from natural gas. WHAT IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN??? Grade IV???

BTW, when it comes to Cadillac I take a lot of your input with a grain of salt since your wife works for Bunnin. You bought your cars with a discount and your service is special. Back when you used to do Corvette custom parts reviews, you got free parts. It was easy to see through that bullshit. I do not think you are into that anymore. Likely because the parts folks can no longer afford to give away free stuff.

Anyway, I am now going with Pennzoil synthetic Euro L grade for my wife's BMW oil changes. Bought on the internet. I THINK it is has grade IV base stock but at least I know it is made with natural gas (WOW and WHOOPIE). That just means it is extra refined. Still dino oil.

I would LOVE to see you ditch GM and get a REAL car for a change. GM takes you guys for chumps. Carry on....

 

[Hib Halverson]

Would like to see you do a new review on synthetic oils. I do searches on the top oils in the US and they will NEVER quote their base stocks as grade III or IV. So much marketing bullshit. Pennzoil says their oil is made from natural gas. WHAT IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN??? Grade IV???

I with you on that...what is it with the natural gas thing. I can only guess that Royal Dutch Shell, which owns the Penzoil brand, is using natural gas as the start of that product. As whether it's a group III or group IV base stock...I have no idea.

BTW, when it comes to Cadillac I take a lot of your input with a grain of salt since your wife works for Bunnin. You bought your cars with a discount and your service is special. Back when you used to do Corvette custom parts reviews, you got free parts. It was easy to see through that bullshit. I do not think you are into that anymore. Likely because the parts folks can no longer afford to give away free stuff.

It is true that we got an employee discount price on both those ATS-Vs but then...GM periodically offers the employee discount price to everyone during sales incentive promotions. Yes, I get a discount on service work, but that's not amounted to much as, with the two Cadillacs, most of the expensive stuff has been under warranty. Some of the normal maintenance I do myself rather than using Cadillac's "free" maintenance. I still do a lot of product review writing for the Corvette Action Center and some of what I write is about products which are supplied by vendors which want to see their products reviewed by journalists rather than social media "influencers". Sometimes these products are supplied at no cost and sometimes they are not. I don't get paid by the CAC for writing and photographing the review articles.

Anyway, I am now going with Pennzoil synthetic Euro L grade for my wife's BMW oil changes. Bought on the internet. I THINK it is has grade IV base stock but at least I know it is made with natural gas (WOW and WHOOPIE). That just means it is extra refined. Still dino oil.

This "question" comes down to who is defining "synthetic". If you're a marketing guy, then synthesized hydrocarbon base stocks are "synthetic". If you are a chemist, synthesized hydrocarbon base stocks are highly-refined petroleum.

I would LOVE to see you ditch GM and get a REAL car for a change. GM takes you guys for chumps. Carry on....

If I was to decided to buy a "REAL car", what should I consider?

 

[Unclevito]

"Real" cars,

I with you on that...what is it with the natural gas thing. I can only guess that Royal Dutch Shell, which owns the Penzoil brand, is using natural gas as the start of that product. As whether it's a group III or group IV base stock...I have no idea.



It is true that we got an employee discount price on both those ATS-Vs but then...GM periodically offers the employee discount price to everyone during sales incentive promotions. Yes, I get a discount on service work, but that's not amounted to much as, with the two Cadillacs, most of the expensive stuff has been under warranty. Some of the normal maintenance I do myself rather than using Cadillac's "free" maintenance. I still do a lot of product review writing for the Corvette Action Center and some of what I write is about products which are supplied by vendors which want to see their products reviewed by journalists rather than social media "influencers". Sometimes these products are supplied at no cost. I don't get paid by the CAC for writing and photographing the review articles.



This "question" comes down to who is defining "synthetic". If you're a marketing guy, then synthesized hydrocarbon base stocks are "synthetic". If you are a chemist, synthesized hydrocarbon base stocks are highly-refined petroleum.



If I was to decided to buy a "REAL car", what should I consider?

A real car would be a Japanese performance car such as the 2020 Supra 2020 Toyota Supra

Nissan 370Z or GT-R. 2020 Nissan 370Z Coupe Sports Car | Nissan USA or Discover the 2019 Nissan GT-R | Nissan USA

Also Land Rover, hybrid SUV: Range Rover Sport. Range Rover Sport Plug-In Hybrid – PHEV SUV – Land Rover

Nothing with a GM badge. Notice there is not even a Chevy bow tie on the Chevy Corvette?

Notice no BMWs, MBs or Porsches. These cars are reliability and repair nightmares.

Take care. I enjoy reading your posts.

 

[Hib Halverson]

A real car would be a Japanese performance car such as the 2020 Supra 2020 Toyota Supra

Nissan 370Z or GT-R. 2020 Nissan 370Z Coupe Sports Car | Nissan USA or Discover the 2019 Nissan GT-R | Nissan USA

Why would I want any of those?
A Corvette can run circles around around the Supra and the Z. As for the GT-R, which is a fairly good sports coupe, but I'm not gonna get passed.

Also Land Rover, hybrid SUV: Range Rover Sport. Range Rover Sport Plug-In Hybrid – PHEV SUV – Land Rover

I'm just not in the market for any SUV, hybrid or otherwise.

 

[Unclevito]

Real cars

Nissan 370Z or GT-R. 2020 Nissan 370Z Coupe Sports Car | Nissan USA or Discover the 2019 Nissan GT-R | Nissan USA

Why would I want any of those?
A Corvette can run circles around around the Supra and the Z. As for the GT-R, which is a fairly good sports coupe, but I'm not gonna get passed.



I'm just not in the market for any SUV, hybrid or otherwise.

At least the cars I mentioned are reliable and you won't spend your time in a dealership that is always trying to oversell repairs. Also at a certain level, you grow out of always trying to be the fastest. I went from that with my 79 Trans Am to trying to have the biggest house and the biggest bank account and the happiest kids. Now I am trying to fund my grandkids' college.

Another oil/filter question that you could write about at a later time. I am convinced that the oil filter bypass valve opens much more often than people suspect. Like at every cold start and as the engine suddenly revs up. It is partially the result of smaller oil filters that are restrictive. Seems manufacturers do not specify this valve opening pressure. They likely know that circulating unfiltered oil through the engine is not a big deal if you maintain oil change intervals. Thoughts?

 

[Hib Halverson]

At least the cars I mentioned are reliable and you won't spend your time in a dealership that is always trying to oversell repairs.

How did you get reliability data for those cars? I find it hard to get that kind of info, other than the JD Power studies which do not break down the data by model.

Also at a certain level, you grow out of always trying to be the fastest.

I'm not gown up yet.

I went from that with my 79 Trans Am to trying to have the biggest house and the biggest bank account and the happiest kids. Now I am trying to fund my grandkids' college.

I don't have grandkids and my Stepson is out of college. My neighbor's kids are the closest I have to grandkids and I've been helping put two of them through Christian middle school.

Another oil/filter question that you could write about at a later time. I am convinced that the oil filter bypass valve opens much more often than people suspect. Like at every cold start and as the engine suddenly revs up. It is partially the result of smaller oil filters that are restrictive. Seems manufacturers do not specify this valve opening pressure. They likely know that circulating unfiltered oil through the engine is not a big deal if you maintain oil change intervals. Thoughts?

You're spot-on with you comment about oil filters. Bypass valves are not discrete devices. They do not just suddenly pop full open at a given pressure. I'm not sure how oil filter manufacturers define valve opening but I've always assumed the number given is the point at which the valve is fully open. My feeling is one should change the filter a lot sooner than you change the oil because as soon as the bypass opens just a little bit, there is some volume of oil which does not get filtered. My feeling is that any unfiltered oil can be a bad thing, so I change filters at half the drain interval or a third of it if the engine is on an extended drain interval.

 

[Hib Halverson]

I finally have the imagery from the diagnostic session on the engine in my '16 Coupe which was done three weeks ago at Bunning Cadillac. Keep in mind that HFV6es uses a cylinder numbering system that is different from most other GM engines. The driver side bank is "Bank 2" which is cylinders 2, 4 and 6. The passenger side is "Bank 1" which is cylinders 1, 3 and 5.

The new engine is on order.


The cat inlet from Bank 1.


Bank 1 turbo outlet cavity.











So far, GM has indicated that some other '16 LF4 engines have had similar problems but it has yet to suggest what causes the problem much less why only #1 and #2 show the wear, however, in a discussion I had with the R&D Director at Driven Racing Oil, he suggested that if the bore walls are finished with torque plates, it could be that, during engine assembly when the front cover bolts are tightened, that pulls the #1 and #2 bores out of round causing uneven bore wear, but again, that's speculation and not a confirmed cause.

Last week, the replacement engine–actually, this time it's a "long block" and two new turbochargers rather than a complete engine–arrived at Bunnin Cadillac. Technician, Luis Rios pulled the old motor and was transferring the induction system and accessories to the new long-block when I visited last Thursday.


Old motor out. Service Technician, Luis Rios, at left


New LF4 long block, ready to be dressed and installed.

I suspect the new engine installation will be complete early this coming week.

 

[Unclevito]

How did you get reliability data for those cars? I find it hard to get that kind of info, other than the JD Power studies which do not break down the data by model.
Consumer Report Magazine, but I also read Car & Driver



I'm not gown up yet.

Ha!





I don't have grandkids and my Stepson is out of college. My neighbor's kids are the closest I have to grandkids and I've been helping put two of them through Christian middle school.

Great. My comment was somewhat out of line. Drunk posting.



You're spot-on with you comment about oil filters. Bypass valves are not discrete devices. They do not just suddenly pop full open at a given pressure. I'm not sure how oil filter manufacturers define valve opening but I've always assumed the number given is the point at which the valve is fully open. My feeling is one should change the filter a lot sooner than you change the oil because as soon as the bypass opens just a little bit, there is some volume of oil which does not get filtered. My feeling is that any unfiltered oil can be a bad thing, so I change filters at half the drain interval or a third of it if the engine is on an extended drain interval.

Great to hear your opinion

 

[Unclevito]

I finally have the imagery from the diagnostic session on the engine in my '16 Coupe which was done three weeks ago at Bunning Cadillac. Keep in mind that HFV6es uses a cylinder numbering system that is different from most other GM engines. The driver side bank is "Bank 2" which is cylinders 2, 4 and 6. The passenger side is "Bank 1" which is cylinders 1, 3 and 5.

The new engine is on order.

View attachment 990
The cat inlet from Bank 1.

View attachment 991
Bank 1 turbo outlet cavity.

View attachment 992

View attachment 993

View attachment 994

View attachment 995

View attachment 996

So far, GM has indicated that some other '16 LF4 engines have had similar problems but it has yet to suggest what causes the problem much less why only #1 and #2 show the wear, however, in a discussion I had with the R&D Director at Driven Racing Oil, he suggested that if the bore walls are finished with torque plates, it could be that, during engine assembly when the front cover bolts are tightened, that pulls the #1 and #2 bores out of round causing uneven bore wear, but again, that's speculation and not a confirmed cause.

Last week, the replacement engine–actually, this time it's a "long block" and two new turbochargers rather than a complete engine–arrived at Bunnin Cadillac. Technician, Luis Rios pulled the old motor and was transferring the induction system and accessories to the new long-block when I visited last Thursday.

View attachment 997
Old motor out. Service Technician, Luis Rios, at left

View attachment 998
New LF4 long block, ready to be dressed and installed.

I suspect the new engine installation will be complete early this coming week.

very interesting!

 

[Hib Halverson]

Consumer Report Magazine, but I also read Car & Driver

I'm too cheap to subscribe to Consumer Reports but I do read CD.

Great. My comment was somewhat out of line. Drunk posting.

I stay off forums when I'm drinking.

 

[CTspeedFReaK]

I have read this entire post and am wondering if you would suggest a ATS-V to a prospective buyer or advise them to steer clear? I am a prospective buyer. I am looking for a used sedan so as to let someone else eat the depreciation.

My background is this: I am a 50 yr old car guy who gravitates toward "sleepers". I had a 2011 Subaru WRX STI hatchback which was pro tuned and I upgraded most of the suspension components. I loved that car but it was a little rough around the edges and wasn't a lot of fun in heavy traffic. When it showed signs of potential engine trouble on the horizon, I decided to trade it in and get something more comfortable and yet still practical. I opted for a 2016 Ford Edge Sport. I immediately realized I had gone too soft and started looking for a track car or weekend car. I purchased a 2011 Corvette Grand Sport with 14k miles and upgraded the brake fluid and pads. Amazing track car! but I just didn't drive it enough. I just sold that car and am now searching for a really fun daily driver (I will trade or sell the Edge Sport) that is sufficiently comfortable.

I am not particularly tied to any particular brand but I do want four doors and a hatch or decent trunk with folding rear seats. I will probably buy a very low mileage used car, preferably a one owner personal lease vehicle. I would like to spend in the $35-45k range.I am not looking for 0-60 times but a car with great suspension that feels like a drivers car in the twisty roads I am considering a ATS V, Genesis G70 3.3T Sport, Alfa Romeo Guilia Ti Sport, VW Golf R (which I would modify immediately to reach my performance goals) or a Chevy SS. While there are many other from the German stable which interest me, I don't want to drive the same brand as many of the more snobby/obnoxious people around me tend to drive. I am undecided. I was just about to pull the trigger on 10k mile 2016 ATS V which was loaded with every option. I went so far as to have a 3rd party mechanic inspect the car for me. After reading your experiences, I hit the brakes.

Honest opinion? Would you suggest a 2018 or should I scratch it off my list? This will be my only vehicle. I want some degree of reliability. I don't mind replacing a touch screen panel and would probably add a downpipe and spark plugs when tuning the car. Transmission problems or turbo seal leakage and cylinder or head damage is a different story. While I am a adult capable of making his own decisions, I would greatly appreciate any advice you might have. Thank you in advance for your consideration

 

[CTspeedFReaK]

Anyone have any thoughts? Doesn't seem to be much traffic on this forum