Why the PATHETIC rwhp ?? - 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 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 95
2004-2007 Cadillac CTS-V Performance Mods Discussion, Why the PATHETIC rwhp ?? in Cadillac CTS-V Series Forum - 2004 - 2007; Devils -- Your right if someone here has run it on the engine dyno we could put this to bed ...
  1. #16
    DgtalPimp's Avatar
    DgtalPimp is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS-V CAI, CAM, BB X-pipe, Baer Extreme Plus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Phx, Arizona
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,129

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Devils -- Your right if someone here has run it on the engine dyno we could put this to bed pretty quickly. Has anyone?

  2. #17
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil_concours
    well i'm sure by running it on an engine dyno they can easily get 400hp out of the ls6 so i'm not too sure how effective cts-v class action lawsuit is going to end up.
    There is already a court precedent set by the 1999 Ford Mustang Cobra Case (see my link to LS1Tech above), that a Chassis dyno can be used to acuratly determine crank HP. In order for the CTS-V to achieve 400 Crank HP you should see RWHP in the 340 range, which is 20 shy of what is listed below.

    ALSO as I've said before, the CTS-V has a more efficient driveline than the Corvette Z06. The Torque tube rear transmission used in the corvete typically shows a 18% parasitic loss compared to a 15% parastic loss in none torque tube set-ups. Since the LS6 is rated at 400hp in the CTS-V it should dyno similar if not better dynos than the Corvette Z06.

    320 RWHP is closer to an LS1 F-Body. While my TA dynoed 300 at the wheels stock, I know half a dozen people that bone stock dynoed 310-320 RWHP in their F-Bodies. The CTS-V should be putting down more power, and I fear this could be indicitive of a greater problem, and/or an overrated motor.

    -Adam

  3. #18
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Just to further clarify the next question that is likely to arise, "if the Corvette Driveline is less efficient why did GM design it that way?"

    Mounting the Transmission directly to the motor is ideal, however, in the C5 and C6, GM moved the transmission to the back of the car and connected it to the motor via a torque turb that spends at engine speed. This creates a large amount of inertia to overcome as the motor tacs up and down. However, the benifit that drove this design was a 50/50 weight distribution plus a larger passenger footwell. This design was to insure maximum handling efficiency rather than RWHP. This has annoyed quite a few vette owners when they discovered their LS1 Camaro buddies averaging 5-10RWHP higher than their same year LS1.

    The CTS-V should shwo a similar gain but instead is shwoing a loss which is not good.

  4. #19
    Vedder is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    144

    Exclamation GENERAL MOTORS this sounds bad!

    GENERAL MOTORS this sounds bad!

    C"mon.. I want this car, but what is R&D doing over there at G.M., did you guys not test this?!?!? I know you are reading this and everything else. You have a very organized group of V owners here, I think it's time to start answering some questions are giving us some solutions.


    Wheel hop, way off 0-60 adrvertisement, shakes and noises, and now overstating horsepower!..... what's next?

  5. #20
    wildwhl's Avatar
    wildwhl is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    5,496

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    I don't think the V is down on power. In fact I really doubt it. The LS6 is a proven performer and there would be no reason for GM to "detune" the motor any more than necessary for drivability. The transmission is proven as well, so I doubt it is suddenly creating more inefficiency in this application. The rear end - well - maybe.

    We all know that different dynos report different #'s, and no car is alike. Seems I recall some stock dynos in the 330 hp range which would validate the hp stated. Also, if I am not mistaken (and feel free to flame, er, correct me if I'm wrong) doesn't the recorded trap speed by clintonmills and others indicate the hp to be in the correct range?

    Personally, I don't care. I'm betting at least half of the V owners will mod their cars to well beyond 450 crank hp as time goes by. 500 rwhp will be my ultimate goal over the next couple of years. Hell, to me, one of the BEST reasons to own this car is the fact that the LS6 has been beat upon, tuned, broken and perfected already by the Corvette crowd. More horsepower is just a stack of Franklin's away, assuming the rearend can withstand the abuse. Get your knuckles bloody and grease on your elbows and it can be done by yourself, in a weekend, to your own standards. Big bonus over the Vanos variety autos, to name one.

    There are some great articles on the web about variations in chassis dyno numbers that might help here. Being someone that has already owned a car that was down on HP and purchased back (RX8/Mazda) I've been down that road already. The reality was that I didn't care that the car was down, it felt good driving it and was a kick in the ass, though it turned out to be defective. I missed that car as soon as I sold it back. Now, relatively inexpensive addons bring the 8 back to what it was advertised and beyond. Go figure.

    Were I to send the V back for some similar reason I'd have to shoot myself. I am and always have been a car nut. I am glad to have an american badge on my beloved ride once again. Judicious torque and horsepower at the twitch of my toe, 26 mpg on trips at 75-80 mph, handling that is second to none, reasonable comfort, and I didn't have to sell my soul.

    I have no reason to doubt that the car is putting out the HP claimed. I even called around today to find out if there is a chassis dyno in this town. Couldn't find one, so I won't be able to test mine for comparison. Thought I'd get a baseline before I start any mods...but looks like I'll have to drive 45 minutes south to get a dyno around here.

    Of course, I'm not defending false advertising by ANY manufacturer. I am just of the opinion that this isn't the case with the V.

    To quote one of my employees who I allowed a test drive yesterday, "...damn, that thing is like driving a cloud, with lightning bolts under your right foot..."

    Just my .02 (actually a little less than that)

  6. #21
    DgtalPimp's Avatar
    DgtalPimp is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS-V CAI, CAM, BB X-pipe, Baer Extreme Plus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Phx, Arizona
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,129

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    I wouldn’t say the horse power is over rated (yet). We have to have real world numbers with real world tests to determine if the horse power is what they say it is. If any other V owners are going to run by their local dyno shop and get a pull done, please try and record as much info as you can and post on here with the results. On any other runs I’ll post what I can for information as well plus any mods done along the way.



    I agree wildwhl on the topic of “would you give the car back” Yes I would along with many hollow tipped metal friends.



    The car (down or not on horse power) is the most fun car I have ever driven. I get a big stupid grin EVERY time I drive.



    Dgtal

  7. #22
    Cal
    Cal is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    NJ Shore
    Posts
    763

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    At 515 miles my car did 332 with nothing more than a small shop fan, nowhere near what Dinan and others claim is needed to simulate 100+ mph. Every LS6 tuner I have spoken to said you can pick up 10-20hp between 1-5k miles as the engine breaks in. That puts me smack dab where it should be.

    My car is no longer stock so I guess it's irrelevant but I have the slips posted in another thread with fuel/air mixture, etc.

    This is a 1st year car so things like axle hop are a problem, as I am told they are on the GTO also. The engine is solid, the driveline, etc appear to need some work. For me, I'll pay the $ extra just so I can have the car when it first hits the streets and do the modifications to my own specs. I would never think to go after GM when at best I have slips showing 8-10hp off what is promised at only 500 miles on a chassis dyno without 100% proper testing conditions. But that's just me.

  8. #23
    msubleda13 is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    11

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    without the benefit of a true chasis dyno, rhp cannot be realized by the mom and pop bedroom fan dynos that 95% of the tuner shops use.

    If the V has claimed on a chasis dyno a 330 hp range that is a very accurate indication that the engine itself is producing 400 hp. no bones about it....

  9. #24
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Cal
    At 515 miles my car did 332 with nothing more than a small shop fan, nowhere near what Dinan and others claim is needed to simulate 100+ mph. Every LS6 tuner I have spoken to said you can pick up 10-20hp between 1-5k miles as the engine breaks in. That puts me smack dab where it should be.
    332 is close, but it still should be higher, here is why:

    Some dynos of the new New Pontiac GTO (Manual)
    298 RWHP
    http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthr...highlight=dyno
    298.6 RWHP
    http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthr...highlight=dyno
    297.5 RWHP
    http://www.highperformancepontiac.co...407pon_engine/

    The Goat is rated at 350hp. 298RWHP at 15% drivetrain loss is 350.58 HP.

    The GTO driveline is almost identicle to the CTS-V, and they should see almost identicle drivetrain losses. On those dynos on those days with the same 15% drivetrain loss as experienced by the GTOs, a CTS-V should have made 340RWHP. I haven't seen anyone close to that number yet?

    -Adam

  10. #25
    msubleda13 is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    11

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    336 hp on my buddies at 1400 with a crap fan....@ 2500 to 5000 miles I see no problem with 345 to 352...Once again, the dynos are just like taste, everyones is different...

  11. #26
    6104696 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,924

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    class action lawsuits over measured vs advertised hp? c'mon guys, I would hope that you have better things to do. Just about everyone on this site has bought the car because it totally rocked. Nobody has complained that the car is not powerful enough. Yes, it is not a perfect car and not a perfect rollout, but no matter what the dyno says this motor cooks.

    Save the class action suit talk for something that really matters. Courts have enough bs to deal with. Everybody always blames the lawyers for this kind of silliness.....but apparently it's not always the case.

    If you don't like the car then sell it, get something else, and be more careful next time in your research and what you buy. I intend to continue to have fun with mine....I don't care if it dynos at 50 hp; it still kicks me back into the seat.

    dhg

  12. #27
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Quote Originally Posted by 6104696
    class action lawsuits over measured vs advertised hp? c'mon guys, I would hope that you have better things to do. Just about everyone on this site has bought the car because it totally rocked. Nobody has complained that the car is not powerful enough. Yes, it is not a perfect car and not a perfect rollout, but no matter what the dyno says this motor cooks.
    Again, you didn't read my post. in 1998 the Mustang Cobra was rated at 305hp, in 1999 Ford revised the intake and heads and raised the rating to 320hp. Dyno tests of the 1999 Mustang showed it dynoed the same or lower than the 1998 Mustang Cobra. More power for 99 was part of the marketing used to get people to buy the 99 car. Ford lied about the rating, and lost in court. They were forced to pay owners of 1999 Mustangs a few thousand dollar refund on their purchase and fix the motors to bring them back to 320hp.

    Now here we are in 2003 and the CTS-V is dynoing 315-330 RWHP on an advertised 400hp. That means the actual HP rating of the CTS-V is 370-388hp. that's a far cry from 400, and Ford had to settle over a 10-15hp overrating, this is a 30-15hp overrating.
    If you don't like the car then sell it, get something else, and be more careful next time in your research and what you buy. I intend to continue to have fun with mine....I don't care if it dynos at 50 hp; it still kicks me back into the seat.

    dhg
    And if you had bought what you paid for then it would be that much more fun, but Caddy sold you less than you thought you were buying. Here is the thing, truth in advertising legally demands that GM honor the advertised capability of their car. It's your right as a consumer to ask GM to either compensate you for this performance shortcoming, fix it so your car is back in spec, or do nothing and be happy with a car that is 80% what it is supposed to be.

    As a point of fact I do not have a CTS-V, but I was strongly considering one for this Fall. This situation has bumped the car to the bottom of the list for me. Heck If I get an M5 at least I KNOW I'm getting the advertised HP.

    -Adam

  13. #28
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Maybe a better way to sum this up is this. Your shifter shows a 6 speed pattern.


    How would you feel if you went to shift into 6th and found it wasn't there? I mean the car is just as fun with a 5 speed as a six speed right? Never mind you paid for a 6 speed car and were told it was a 6-speed car, and it even shows 6th gear on the shifter...but oddly enough, not there.

    I would be pissed, not sure why you all are not pissed off too.

  14. #29
    DgtalPimp's Avatar
    DgtalPimp is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS-V CAI, CAM, BB X-pipe, Baer Extreme Plus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Phx, Arizona
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,129

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    There is a sixthg gear!!! Holy Shinkaze


    Shinkaze you make a good point. I am not saying we should band together and sue everyone. I am saying we should investigate together and share our results. If a person feels the need to get litigious then they have the right. If you feel the court system doesn't merit your 15% lose of power, then that is your choice.

    I know if I find out that Caddy has falsely advertised the horse power and knowingly sold me a car that can not perform to what they are saying, I will not be happy. I expect to get what I pay for.





    Now where is the sixth gear Shinkaze talked about?


  15. #30
    Dreamin is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2004 V
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Calif.
    Age
    46
    Posts
    2,212

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Good points raised above!

    (1) I believe I am comparing apples with apples... as I am trying to compare *averages*...
    For the Z06 numbers, there are 123 dyno runs in the 350-359 range, and 162 runs in the 350-364 range. That's a lot of data. While a 1000 data points would be better... that's not possible. It's a classic bell curve graph centered ~356rwhp. That should account for dyno variances, temps, <1K miles, etc.
    Here is the whole thread: http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38736
    The author is very specific about posting *stock* numbers and no cheating.

    I concede that more CTS-V data is needed... but the trend is looking bad... the average of the dyno's is: 320.6rwhp

    (2) Cal, imho, using your data would be comparing apples to oranges... i cant use your numbers, as you are the highest pull - and only one data point. Averages: 321 vs. 356 => 35hp are missing!

    (3) crank hp vs. wheel hp: I have read that 12-15% is a good number for newer (manual) cars... the 20-25% numbers are old. The logic is that in an effort to increase fuel efficiency, car mfg's are minimizing tranny losses, drivetrain losses, friction losses, etc. This raises the crank to wheel hp ratio. Dont know if that's true, but both Z06 and V have IRS, similar tranny, same engine... drivetrain losses cannot account for the missing hp. Some data: The Z06 is at 12-13% (405hp / 355whp), Dinan uses 12% - the Dinan M5-S2 is rated at 470hp and dyno's at ~415hp, Vipers have 10-11% loss (See Viper forum), the Ford Lightning auto tranny (4R100) loses 11.2%! (see Lightning forum).

    Dont know what's going on.... maybe GM had to detune the engine to reduce wheel hop and/or prevent broken rear ends.

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