Why the PATHETIC rwhp ?? - Page 3
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 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 95
2004-2007 Cadillac CTS-V Performance Mods Discussion, Why the PATHETIC rwhp ?? in Cadillac CTS-V Series Forum - 2004 - 2007; Interestingly, I saw a 2005 CTS V on ebay today and the dealer, at least, advertised it at 390 horsepower. ...
  1. #31
    VCONVERT is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): 2005 CTS-V
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Age
    63
    Posts
    97

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Interestingly, I saw a 2005 CTS V on ebay today and the dealer, at least, advertised it at 390 horsepower. Does anyone know if Cadillac "officially" reduced the hp rating in 05. As far as the M5 is concerned - the new M5 is reputed to deliver 500 horsepower but look at the torque rating - not even at the same level as the V and the intitial 0 - 60 times are not any better than the "old" M5. Top end is better but it will be speed limited at 155 anyway. And for that privilege, plus the Bangle design blunder, your going to have to pay another $10K. No thanks. I'll stick with the V.

  2. #32
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamin
    both Z06 and V have IRS, similar tranny, same engine... drivetrain losses cannot account for the missing hp.
    A more apt comparison is the GTO to CTS-V. The CTS-V is the next Gen (sigma platform) version of the platform (omega) that underpins the GTO. They have pretty much identicle drivlelines with the exception of the motor. (LS1 to LS6).

    Now looking at LS1 Corvettes to Z06 Corvettes, off the top of my head I recall they tend to range from 300-310 Rwhp for the LS1 and 356-ish for the Z06 LS6. On the exact same car exact same platform.

    So why do we not see that same spread (45-55 RWHP) between the GTO(ls1) and CTS-V(ls6)?

    -Adam

  3. #33
    Shinkaze is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    331

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Quote Originally Posted by VCONVERT
    Interestingly, I saw a 2005 CTS V on ebay today and the dealer, at least, advertised it at 390 horsepower. Does anyone know if Cadillac "officially" reduced the hp rating in 05. As far as the M5 is concerned - the new M5 is reputed to deliver 500 horsepower but look at the torque rating - not even at the same level as the V and the intitial 0 - 60 times are not any better than the "old" M5. Top end is better but it will be speed limited at 155 anyway. And for that privilege, plus the Bangle design blunder, your going to have to pay another $10K. No thanks. I'll stick with the V.
    I was actually talking about a used e39, not the new e60. The V10 is cool, but I like the e39 styling better.

  4. #34
    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 ??

    And as Adam is trying to point out... there are two related, but different issues here (1) the car is not making the power it should (still to be proven, of course), but (2) if it isn't making the rated power...that's ok, it's still a solid, great car which is a blast a drive... just give me the real power rating... tell me it's a 365 or 380 hp car... and then i'll decide if I want a used M5 or an S4, or the V...

  5. #35
    Cal
    Cal is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    NJ Shore
    Posts
    763

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    But your entire argument stems from what everyone on here can admit is a often-flawed number. Read the Dinan article and many others...when I put my car on the dyno the first time it did 323 (or something), let it sit ~45 min and cool down and it did 332. There's 10hp from letting it sit and letting the engine cool. Another 10 once I crack into the 1-5k mile region.

    If you don't like the car and don't plan on buying one, no offense but please stop posting inflammatory threads like this. Look around this board and you will see few people who have major horsepower complaints about the V. So far the major issue is wheel hop preventing clean acceleration - not a hp problem.

    I understand that HP may be a number that helps you decide on a car, but a real driver judges the power and performance of a car from the seat of the pants. Go test drive one if you are still deciding and THEN see what you think.

  6. #36
    Rob Ketcham is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eastern shore of MD
    Posts
    81

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    The last post from Nevada makes a lot of sense. We are driving a very special performance sedan with characteristics most of us (at least I) thought were just not going to be coming out of GM.
    My V feels very strong, although the dyno numbers aren't staggering and I would be happier with more than the 317 rwhp that was recorded. My concern is that the graphs that depict my runs indicate that the motor was not running flat out because the lines are squiggley. More Performance,where the dyno work was being done, would dial in more fuel, less fuel, more timing, less timing, each time trying different variables, and the changes were not making any discernible difference. It seemed that the knock sensors were limiting its performance. And, in point of fact, I believe I can hear pre-ignition when I use full throttle in second gear and stay on it above 5000 rpm.
    In sum, we have a great car that will run and handle with the best in the world.
    However, because of my own issues I plan to pursue a solution to my squggley dyno runs and pre-ignition with Cadillac, starting tomorrow. Stay tuned. I would appreciate any relevant experiences or thoughtful comments as I attempt to tackle this.
    Rob Ketcham

  7. #37
    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
    If you don't like the car and don't plan on buying one, no offense but please stop posting inflammatory threads like this. Look around this board and you will see few people who have major horsepower complaints about the V. So far the major issue is wheel hop preventing clean acceleration - not a hp problem.
    Cal, I actually really do like the CTS-V and really want it to make good power. I've owned 3 GM V8s (L81, L98 & LS1) over the past 15 years, but am now finding that Vettes & Trans Ams just doesn't fit my lifestyle anymore. The V is a serious consideration for me and so I put it into the running with the M3, S4, C55 and an e39 M5 (used not much for the e60).

    Maybe my outrage is because I am shopping for a car, and it's taken a lot for me to overcome my "bling bling" impression of Cadillac. The CTS-V is the only car in the Caddy range I would ever consider so I think GM has a potential custoemr in me, however I was sold on the LS6. I've been scratching my head wondering why the CTS-V doesn't perform better at the track, and this dyno scares me as it points to other problems (either mechnical or in the marketing department). Eitherway if the CTS-V is a 365hp car then they need to say it so I have accurate facts with which to base my purcahase.

  8. #38
    Cal
    Cal is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    NJ Shore
    Posts
    763

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    I have not had the car dyno tuned yet but my shop has the software and as soon as the parts I am waiting for come in (Corsa, cats, shift kit) I will have it done for the heck of it. You can see air/fuel mixture in my other post:


    http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums...ad.php?t=11476

    it's hard to see but it goes from low to high in a pretty smooth line. I will dig up the original slips to tell you exactly what to make of it. That was bone stock at 515 miles.

    It is to be noted that after my biz partner's Z06 was dyno tuned his fuel/air was different-looking, but I will compare to the two and report back.

    Thanks Rob for adding a little technical and scientific expertise into the mix, will be very interesting to see what you come up with.

  9. #39
    Devil_concours is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Age
    31
    Posts
    3,684

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    does any of you have one of those g-tech units? what do they say? someone should try them out on an empty road sometime

  10. #40
    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 ??

    I just thought of something... the ECU reduces engine power with high oil temps... there is a nice table in the Z06 service manual (which I cant find right now) that shows the reduction (pulling timing, making A/F richer) starting at, i think, 280F maxing out at 320F.

    So the question is: were the above dyno's done w/o the oil temp bug fix?

    Rob: This affected the LS1 and LS6... might be useful when working with your dealer... http://corvetteforum.com/kb/q....php?qstId=261
    With that said, as i'm sure you know, the LS6 is almost a race motor... as such it make a lot of noises... the Z06 forums are full of reports of "pinging" noises that are not pinging, but lifter noise, injector noise, etc. My Z06 has a "pinging" noise that sounds exactly like pre-ignition, but i'm sure it's not...
    http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20835

  11. #41
    DgtalPimp's Avatar
    DgtalPimp is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS-V bl/bl CAGS!, BB X-pipe, Baer Extreme Plus Brakes
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Phx, Arizona
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,129

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Dreamin - you might be on to something here. My V has the Bug in the ECm that gives false oli temps readings. I have not fixed it yet cause I am on the road. Any other pulls will have oil temps notedDgtal.

  12. #42
    wildwhl's Avatar
    wildwhl is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    5,496

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil_concours
    does any of you have one of those g-tech units? what do they say? someone should try them out on an empty road sometime

    I have one, a G-tech Pro, but have yet to run it. I will and post results this weekend.

    I know, you're thinking I'm lazy. I'm thinking I have 2 biz, 2 kids, and for all intensive purposes, 2 wives...

    I'll get to it, I promise.

    Wildwhl

  13. #43
    Cal
    Cal is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    NJ Shore
    Posts
    763

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Wild rules, go read his g-tech posting. Anyhoo...

    Air/fuel could also DEFINITELY be accounting for the crappy dyno numbers. I just realized that myself. I will dig out my old dyno slips and compare to my partner's recent Z06 pulls on the same dyno at the same shop (I was standing right there for both) and will report back whenever I have findings - probably tomorrow.

    Maybe that will help. I don't want to come across as being on GM's side, I am just saying RELAX people. It is a big investment don't get me wrong, but the sheer fun factor of this car should help lessen the pain of some of the GM f-ups in their initial design run.

  14. #44
    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
    Wild rules, go read his g-tech posting. Anyhoo...

    Air/fuel could also DEFINITELY be accounting for the crappy dyno numbers. I just realized that myself. I will dig out my old dyno slips and compare to my partner's recent Z06 pulls on the same dyno at the same shop (I was standing right there for both) and will report back whenever I have findings - probably tomorrow.

    Maybe that will help. I don't want to come across as being on GM's side, I am just saying RELAX people. It is a big investment don't get me wrong, but the sheer fun factor of this car should help lessen the pain of some of the GM f-ups in their initial design run.
    Good point, my impression is there is something wrong here, maybe some sensor is getting tripped or something. That 317 RWHP is just plain bad (no offense)....Maybe GM put a more "cadillac-esque" cam in teh car last second... I don't know but theres about ~35 missing ponies here.

  15. #45
    Rob Ketcham is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eastern shore of MD
    Posts
    81

    Re: Why the PATHETIC rwhp ??

    Thanks, I'll factor that into the mix. Since I wasn't personally doing the pulls I do not know what the oil temperature was during those runs. The day was relatively mild, although the oil temp readings I get with a fully warmed up motor and temperatures in the 80's are around 240-250 at highway speeds. Something was causing the ECU to want to shut things down, and so far I am not clear what that something was (or is).

    The pre-ignition sounds could be something else, no doubt. However, after looking at the graphs and observng the frustration of the More Performance personnel on that day, I am inclined to believe that the ECU was deciding, for better or worse, that its role was to temporarily shut down the engine (we are truly talking nanoseconds here) based on readings that looked to it like pre-ignition.
    As an aside, my 98 Camero SS LS1 did not make the sound I am getting with my V. I appreciate your comment that the LS6 is almost a race motor, which is one of the reasons I like it so much. When I was at the Bondurant school last year I experienced the C5s and my V is every bit as much car in my mind at least.
    I seem to be on my own on this one, and will see what it takes for someone to pay attention to my concern.
    Thanks again for your response.

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