CTS-V review on "Motor Week" - Page 2
Cadillac
 

Cadillac Forums | Help Us Help You | Advertise | Cadillac Parts | Cadillac News | Cadillac Classifieds / (Old System)

Cadillac Technical Archive | Cadillac Dealers | Cadillac Reviews | Cadillac Dealer Reviews | Cadillac Vendors

CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 22 of 22
2004-2007 Cadillac CTS-V General Discussion Discussion, CTS-V review on "Motor Week" in Cadillac CTS-V Series Forum - 2004 - 2007; Originally Posted by CVP33 The magazine tests show the CTS-V to be a capable performer. C&D with their self imposed ...
  1. #16
    JEM
    JEM is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    655

    Re: CTS-V review on "Motor Week"

    Quote Originally Posted by CVP33
    The magazine tests show the CTS-V to be a capable performer. C&D with their self imposed short shifting "limped" around Putnam Park and still bested the M5.
    I'm betting that the oil-temp sender calibration they're referring to has to do with the PCM's safe-mode that should dial back power output to save the engine in case of high oil, coolant, etc. temps. Many if not most modern vehicles have this functionality including the M5, Mustang Cobras, etc. Looks to me like the PCM didn't get the message, accounting for the high oil consumption and 300degF oil temps. That being the case, their caution appears well justified. Flogging the car harder under the circumstances might well have resulted in bits of bottom end bouncing off the pavement, and a properly-calibrated car might not have been quite as quick.

    Why the M3 was used is beyond me. A two door compact vs. a mid-sized 4 door? Pahleeeeeease.
    Because GM's been using the M3 as one of their benchmarks? It's what they're using in their dealer ride-and-drive comparisons...

    I was however surprised with R&T's 1/4 speed, 13.4 secs @ 109 mph. That is some serious top end. Additionally their 0-100 was just north of 11.4 secs. Incredible. I'm struggling to see a downside to this car.
    The C/D comment that the CTS-V did not make up the ground that it lost to the M5 off-the-line wasn't exactly correct. They didn't publish 0-60 numbers for the M5, but the V-car's 0-60 was maybe half a second slower than typical M5 numbers. But by the end of the quarter it'd pulled back a lot of that and posted a higher trap speed. So one can reasonably say that if one ignores the off-the-line stuff and just measures acceleration through the gears the car's at least as quick as an M5.

    Have fun!

  2. #17
    CVP33's Avatar
    CVP33 is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): '04V, '05V, '06SRT8, '10V sedan, '13ZL1 vert, '12 V coupe
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    mockingbigjimsville, NC
    Age
    48
    Posts
    5,860

    Re: CTS-V review on "Motor Week"

    I still don't get the M3 being used. A two door compact weighing 555 lbs. vs. a four door mid-size? I'm just glad the Caddy kicked its bavarian a$$. Ever sit in the back of a 3 series? Great place to stack luggage. And as far as the M5 goes I'll keep my V and my $30,000+.

  3. #18
    2004_SRX_ is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    57

    Re: CTS-V review on "Motor Week"

    Quote Originally Posted by CVP33
    I still don't get the M3 being used. A two door compact weighing 555 lbs. vs. a four door mid-size? I'm just glad the Caddy kicked its bavarian a$$. Ever sit in the back of a 3 series? Great place to stack luggage. And as far as the M5 goes I'll keep my V and my $30,000+.
    Good points. I think that statement alone should end the comparisons of these cars. The CTS-V is simply the best bang for the buck, even if it is $50,000 bucks.

    CVP33, I assume you are the same cvp33 of newagegto.com. I'm 1966_GTO_, good to see you on another forum.

  4. #19
    CVP33's Avatar
    CVP33 is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): '04V, '05V, '06SRT8, '10V sedan, '13ZL1 vert, '12 V coupe
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    mockingbigjimsville, NC
    Age
    48
    Posts
    5,860

    Re: CTS-V review on "Motor Week"

    2004 SRX,

    Yes, one in the same. I used to laugh when people said C&D was biased but this review was positively the worst exhibit I've ever seen. There are no excuses for the problems they experienced with the car so I don't fault them for reporting them. Shame on GM for sending them a car with problems.

    However for the comparisons they used the M3, S4 and C32. Are they really that inept that they used compact 2 doors to compare against a 4 door mid-sized car? This Caddy bests 0-60, 0-100 and 1/4 miles times posted by C32's, Porsche 911 Carreras, 911 Targas, S-Type R's and is the equal of any M3 or M5. Anyone who reads and believes the C&D babble will miss experiencing one of the best performance car bargains of this model year. R&T's article is more even handed and actually bested all the numbers turned by C&D. What a surprise.:rolleyes2

  5. #20
    b4z
    b4z is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2014 Standard SrX grey/black
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Chas. SC
    Age
    51
    Posts
    1,715

    The BMW Equation

    Jem and others,

    You are right about the mags giving props to GM. It happened a lot several years ago but happens less and less now. I think they have been burned too many times by promises unfulfilled.

    I was 17 when the X cars came out and they were touted as the best cars ever built. I remember the big "X" on the cover of Car and Driver with the Citation.

    Last week I saw my first Citation on the road in a couple of years. I had almost forgotten about them.

    One thing I think Motorweek and Car and Driver need to think about is that BMW is not capable of building a car with the CTS-Vs performance for $50,000. So if the CTS-V falls short of the M5 it is because it is clearly not possible for ANY manufacturer to make up a $20,000 price difference and not have it show up in some aspect of the car's performance or quality

  6. #21
    Ralph's Avatar
    Ralph is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): Cadillac
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    16,033

    Re: The BMW Equation

    Quote Originally Posted by b4z
    Jem and others,

    You are right about the mags giving props to GM. It happened a lot several years ago but happens less and less now. I think they have been burned too many times by promises unfulfilled.

    I was 17 when the X cars came out and they were touted as the best cars ever built. I remember the big "X" on the cover of Car and Driver with the Citation.

    Last week I saw my first Citation on the road in a couple of years. I had almost forgotten about them.

    One thing I think Motorweek and Car and Driver need to think about is that BMW is not capable of building a car with the CTS-Vs performance for $50,000. So if the CTS-V falls short of the M5 it is because it is clearly not possible for ANY manufacturer to make up a $20,000 price difference and not have it show up in some aspect of the car's performance or quality
    I was 13 in 1980 when my Mom bought a new Phoenix coupe, that I gave to my Fiance. V6, silver, red interior, Cordova roof, still the nicest one you'll see because people just never cared for them! Even 10 or 14 years ago they were all rusted. My point being is that I also see quite a few of them so how bad could they be!? I read somewhere that the only real bad ones were built from Sept. 1979-Jan 1980. Mine was built on March 7, 1980. Mom bought it on May 1. Many people don't know that the GM X-car was the first FWD vehicle since the Toronado of 1966. Many cars took styling cues from this one, Grand Am, Sunbird, Cavalier, etc. Shame they were referred to as lemons because of the first ones, but it's fun to drive. When people see ours, like teenie-boppers, they can't figure out what it is.

  7. #22
    JEM
    JEM is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    655

    Re: The BMW Equation

    Quote Originally Posted by b4z
    One thing I think Motorweek and Car and Driver need to think about is that BMW is not capable of building a car with the CTS-Vs performance for $50,000. So if the CTS-V falls short of the M5 it is because it is clearly not possible for ANY manufacturer to make up a $20,000 price difference and not have it show up in some aspect of the car's performance or quality
    Yes but no.

    Cadillac hasn't tried to match BMW's quality level in areas like the interior. The CTS interior is good, and stylish, but it's not up to the top-drawer Euro makes in material quality. And then there's the little detail-design gotchas like the parking brake, and skip-shift. BMW's always a generation behind everyone else on nav/stereo stuff, though (until they try to leapfrog everyone with iDrive and land in the quicksand instead.)

    On the other hand, I really don't see that GM cut any corners on the dynamics. It costs us M5 owners $5K in the aftermarket to get brakes about as good as what the CTS-V gets off-the-rack (and the rear brakes won't fit under the stock wheels, so you're in for a couple grand in aftermarket wheels to make it work, too...)

    The LS6 engine really saves GM's bacon, a large part of why they're able to get the car out the door with what it's got in it, for the price they're able to sell it at, is that the LS6 is just so cheap to make.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Bookmarks

Cadillac Posting Rules

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Read about Lincoln | Buick | Kia Forte Forum
Need products for your Cadillac? Check out your options at the links below:

custom floor mats | Cadillac Chrome and Black Chrome Wheels | window tinting