[OBI_agent]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6963


http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=131106

Oh man........I didnt read the whole article and I posted it....Ughh....the article is disappointing.....no details no nothing...I'm sorry guys!

Edit: Found Edmunds article with CTS-V numbers.....it's faster then a E63 AMG and an M5

[OBI_agent]

Spoiler alert.....!


CTS-V wins by 0.5 second to the M5 in a track which is unfamiliar for both. And the article also says that if more time would have been given, an M5 SMG could have beaten it.

Anyway, I thought that the article would have recorded 0-60,1/4 mile, Lateral grip, braking, etc. But apparently.....it only reviews lap times and top speed

Edit: Edmunds did it

[lvwirelessguy]

Just goes to show.

Horsepower is not everything

[Spec 1]

Actually looks like the M5 got beaten by .5 seconds and they DID use the SMG M5. Looks like the Cadi IS king!!!!!! ...at least for now. I'm sure when the new M5 comes outit will wallop once again, but it's amazing that a Cadillac is beating an M5 around a track!!!!!

[down4it]

these are nice cars for when i get old and want to go fast...

[Bimmer Nerd]

Originally Posted by down4it

these are nice cars for when i get old and want to go fast...

lol

[sflgator]

Hmmmm...not exactly 'Vette ZR1 numbers. For all the hype the new CTS-V with a slightly detuned version of the 'Vette ZR1 6.2L S/C engine has received lately, I would've expected to see better numbers than 12.5 sec. @ 115mph and 4.6sec. 0-60mph.

Well, it was Edmunds.com; maybe C&D and other car mags might get some better times, but how much better are they really going to get?

btw -- I thought I read somewhere that the new CTS-V would be delayed until MY 2010...no?

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by sflgator

Hmmmm...not exactly 'Vette ZR1 numbers. For all the hype the new CTS-V with a slightly detuned version of the 'Vette ZR1 6.2L S/C engine has received lately, I would've expected to see better numbers than 12.5 sec. @ 115mph and 4.6sec. 0-60mph.

Well, it was Edmunds.com; maybe C&D and other car mags might get some better times, but how much better are they really going to get?

btw -- I thought I read somewhere that the new CTS-V would be delayed until MY 2010...no?

The 4200 lb weight is a killer.......

[vAnt826]

You're comparing a pure-bred sports car to a 5 seater luxury sedan. You expect it to have ZR-1 numbers? LOL.

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by vAnt826

You're comparing a pure-bred sports car to a 5 seater luxury sedan. You expect it to have ZR-1 numbers? LOL.

No, but "closer to" ZR1 numbers; at least faster than what they got anyhow. I was thinking it would be ~ 12.0 sec. @ 119mph.

[94JZA80]

Originally Posted by sflgator

No, but "closer to" ZR1 numbers; at least faster than what they got anyhow. I was thinking it would be ~ 12.0 sec. @ 119mph.

i think its more than just a detuned LS9 - it uses a different S/Cer than the ZR1.

[simp0man]

Domestic, pssh. Please. No thanks. Sorry not a buyer here.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by sflgator

No, but "closer to" ZR1 numbers; at least faster than what they got anyhow. I was thinking it would be ~ 12.0 sec. @ 119mph.

Actual results I have found are 12.01 @ 118mph \ 3.9 0-60. Power 556/551 \ .9 g's. Several articles.
From a Cadillac employee. "The car is getting a few bugs worked out." "Release will be delayed until December 08 or January 09." Right at 70K with no mark up from his store.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by down4it

these are nice cars for when i get old and want to go fast...

That would be me.
It did beat the M5 and M3 around the Nurburing. I can put three of my walker wielding buddies in it too.

[Taittinger]

So in essence, the as-of-yet unreleased Cadillac edged out a three year old car on a track. GM targeted the performance of a three year old car. Way to look forward.

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Actual results I have found are 12.01 @ 118mph \ 3.9 0-60. Power 556/551 \ .9 g's. Several articles.
From a Cadillac employee. "The car is getting a few bugs worked out." "Release will be delayed until December 08 or January 09." Right at 70K with no mark up from his store.

Well, that would be more like it.

[gonzo]

Out of the box power is OK with me. Mods are fun and all but I just don't have the time. BUT, a change of pulley and a tune this car should creep at 600hp.

[JOe335i]

Originally Posted by sflgator

Hmmmm...not exactly 'Vette ZR1 numbers. For all the hype the new CTS-V with a slightly detuned version of the 'Vette ZR1 6.2L S/C engine has received lately, I would've expected to see better numbers than 12.5 sec. @ 115mph and 4.6sec. 0-60mph.

Well, it was Edmunds.com; maybe C&D and other car mags might get some better times, but how much better are they really going to get?

btw -- I thought I read somewhere that the new CTS-V would be delayed until MY 2010...no?

edmunds is only a few of the magazines or internet sites that actually uses real world numbers, other magazines use number based on 1 foot roll out or 5mph start, sorry but its true, FWIW edmunds gives both, and im sure car and drivers time and other would be something close to the 1 ft rollout given by edmunds.

[gonzo]

^ True, true. Either way, for such a heavy car it hauls enough ass for me to want a test drive. And I have a weakness for big torque.

[keanu1]

that car is so ugly that even if it beats m5 with 1 minute i would never buy!!!
if they give me one for free i would sell it and buy an m3 or an m5 or an m6 pr an audi rs4 or rs6 or merc c63 amg ....or 10 dacia logan!!

[UltimateBMW]

I don't think such a heavy car would be that fun to drive. 4200 lbs. !!!

I drove a regular CTS and thought it was very boat-ish. Body rolled like none other in a hair-pin. Plus lets face it none of us are pro racers, even though some of us think we are.
0.5 seconds faster around a track just isn't enough to make me want to give up the great feel BMW's have. Its purely a bragging rights result, and if I ever see a CTS owner bagging an M5 I'd promptly tell him to go drive one.

[OBI_agent]

Originally Posted by sflgator

No, but "closer to" ZR1 numbers; at least faster than what they got anyhow. I was thinking it would be ~ 12.0 sec. @ 119mph.

Originally Posted by JOe335i

edmunds is only a few of the magazines or internet sites that actually uses real world numbers, other magazines use number based on 1 foot roll out or 5mph start, sorry but its true, FWIW edmunds gives both, and im sure car and drivers time and other would be something close to the 1 ft rollout given by edmunds.

+1 on the slow time but as JOE335i said, other magazines will most likely get better times then the 12.5 sec recorded by edmunds.

Anyway, did you guys check out the slalom and braking numbers.....very very impressive for the heavy P|G....!