Cadillac Owners Forum banner
5K views 60 replies 16 participants last post by  Twitch 
#1 ·
So we all are stuck on these certain key performance indicators. 0-60, 1/4 mile, stop from 60 or 100mph, slalom speed, skid pad Gs, blah, blah blah. So.....has anyone been able to measure 0-60 accurately in a Maggied V? Just wondered if the real limiter is the rear end and a certain threshold for 0-60 is out there no matter what RWHP you have. How close does it come to a V2? BTW it's amazing that a turbo Porsche Panamera which weighs 4800 lbs according to R&T can turn in 0-60 times under 4 seconds. I'm thinking the magazine has a misprint.
 
#2 ·
I would be interested to know a 0-60 time as well. I would imagine that the rear end is going to create a problem if you want to keep it one piece. My uncle who has a Z06 told me that he wants to race so he can "blow my doors off." Sounds like I need to get a maggie soon so I can keep up, hopefully. Not sure if that would be enough though with our sh*tty rear ends. :banghead:
 
#3 ·
A 1st gen maggied V would be bumper to bumper with the new V, if not passing V2. The V1 has a pretty big weight advantage over V2. Maybe the V1 wouldn't have much of a chance in the 1/8th mile, because of the rear end, but by the end of the 1/4, i'd be willing to bet the V1 would edge it out by a bumper or two. Cadillac advertises the V2 running 3.9 to 60mph. Every independant test i've seen has had the V2 running no better than 4.2. Even though the new V is FAST, it's not quite as fast as advertised.
 
#6 ·
I HIGHLY doubt everything you just said. Irregardless of the launch, and let's use Twitch's dyno numbers (no headers) and Texas Speeds most recent numbers as a reference. The V2 is EXTREMLY close and that is before you factor in the suspension differences, tires, etc. Once you get a tune in the V2 to take full advantage of that boost it's no contest.

Maggie'd V1 (Tuned w/meth) : Weight 3849lbs, WHP 436, WTQ 412, Power-Weight 8.83:1

Stock V2 (bone stock): Weight: 4,222lbs, WHP 502, WTQ 499, Power-Weight 8.42:1
 
#8 ·
It's an issue of traction for sure. With our fairly skinny tires I lose traction in 3rd easily. Mind you once you have it we should be running neck and neck. Again lots of factors, tune, amount of work you've done to your V1.

Problem is even if you get a V1 past a V2s power output which is quite achievable you still have to go big on tires and some suspension elements to keep the power down without grenading your rear.

V2 with pulleys, intake, exhaust and a tune would walk over any V1 without heavy mods.
 
#9 ·
I just want to see a good 40-50mph roll between a stock V2 vs. Maggied V1/headers up to 150.
 
#13 ·
Anybody in OK with a V2 that wants to go?
 
#16 ·
Randy - Good thing I'm mechanically challenged otherwise it would be on...But your not helping anything :thepan:
 
#19 · (Edited)
Wow....that motor is way under rated. 520 at the wheels can be a tad over 650 hp at the crank with a 17% power loss. Maybe like the old muscle car days when the motors were purposely under rated for insurance reasons. We need some V2 cousins to weigh in on this one. You tube has a dyno run on a stock 2009 automatic and it puts up 470 (556hp minus 15% power loss to the wheels makes sense). Randy has that beat on a mustang dyno. I'm gonna stick my neck out here and say a maggied V1 is very competitive with a V2. Not as polished mind you, not as refined, not quite engineered as well, but competitive speed and handling wise.
 
#26 ·
Unfortunatly, like mine, Randy's numbers are high. Like we have all said before, dyno is a tuning tool, not a bragging right.
I may try again on this next summer if I get a chance to install the 90 mm TB and MAYBE an over-drive crank pulley. The place I got my original dyno numbers from bellied up, but the main guys reformed a new business doing the same thing, but on a smaller scale.

One thing, though ... they bought the Mustang dyno so it'll be the same dyno! :shhh:

Midwest dynos rule, FTW!
 
#22 ·
I'd agree with you 100% Ted if it weren't a stingy Mustang dyno. My numbers are probably high as well. Look as some of the sigs from the forum users with Maggies. They're pretty impressive.
 
#24 ·
Twitch is correct the 520 rwhp by the V2 did have the pre-filter air box removed (the filter was taped on). The same V2 however, made a final run of 511.6 with the air box reinstalled. Therefore, I think an essentially stock V2 can get to 520 rwhp without much effort.
 
#28 ·
So now I get it. It seems what everyone is saying is that GM is full of sh*t when thay say the V2 is 556 hp. It's really 610 hp. I did see this from Hennessy. Now I'm confused.

 
#25 ·
I always wanted to run one. At least from a roll. I know I am way past stock, but wouldnt it be fun to beat a V2 in a V1!
 
#34 ·
That's what I'm trying to get at. It is not a drivers race. A V1 needs a maggie, headers, tune, intake, cat-back to be where a V2 is with a stock Cadillac intake, exhaust, and PCM calibration. A maggie only V can not keep up even if it can keep its rear end under it.
 
#35 ·
SkullV - Im trying to understand your logic but are saying:

1. Stock V2 vs V1 Maggie only = V2 Win
2. Stock V2 vs V1 Maggie w/headers, tune, intake, cat-back = Not a drivers race because the rear won't hold up?

I want to see #2 from a roll because it is a drivers race. We could talk about this all day but it doesn't matter. Proof is in the video and it will happen in due time.
 
#36 ·
No, what I'm saying is that it's going to take a lot more then a "maggied" V to keep up with a V2. Maybe after the headers, cat-back, intake, and tune the V1 with the Maggie could keep up in a roll race, but all it would take for the V2 to be back on top would be a simple tune.
 
#41 ·
I bet a 418ls3 with a maggie would kill a V2, airbox or no airbox

Hell put some headers and catback on there as well

I will still walk a V2
 
#42 ·
Well, the original point was whether or not the V1 could match the V2 in a 0-60 or if there was just a RWHP/RWTQ threshold that the rear end could not take. Then 04Vman made the comment that a Maggied V1 would be faster then a V2. That was the point I was making.
 
#43 ·
:food-snacking:

See the first sentence in my previous post.

In response to the "unregardless" post,,,,,,,,,,:rofl:


Yes, it's 6:30 and I just got home :thumbsup:
 
#44 ·
K, imma have some fun with this. And try to prove my piont (see post number 23, page 2, of this thread).

V2 is advertised to have 556bhp. Can we all agree that these numbers are under optimal conditions????
Moving in....
V1 is advertised to have 400bhp. 156bhp less than a V2.
My V got 436rwhp. So I guess this puts me at 510bhp. 46bhp less than a V2, and 2-300lbs lighter. But these were not-so-good conditions for a Maggie.
^^^hmmm^^^

Not gonna look through the posts, and I'm not calling anyone out,,,just sayin :)
Couple people posted some "good" dyno numbers for the V2s. Another person seems to have focused on a "low" V2 dyno number vs a quite high (IMHO :want:) V1 dyno number. Just watched the video of the V2 at 470rwhp. But did you notice the torque?
^^^also Hmmm^^^

I assumed my car can't take a stock V2,,,,but it would be nice to find out I'm wrong :rolleyes:

We can play with the numbers all day. But it don't mean doodoo till it's done on the road. Forget 0-60,,,not happening. It would have to be a rolling start. Then we'll see who's car is faster,,,,,,,,at which point, we can start arguing about the mods :alchi::alchi:

Tony
 
#46 ·
Tony
Yes, we can play the numbers all day. We're all lip racing right now. It's fun to test theory.

Anyway, the low V2 dyno results (472 rwhp) are completely consistent with the 556 bhp rating from the factory when you consider normal power train loss. I'm trying to get someone to convince me that the V2 really comes stock from the factory at 600 + bhp because in order to put up those dyno numbers that everybody likes, it has to be way more than 556. It wouldn't be the first time a car manufacturer did that, but I wonder if thats true with the V2. If it was over 600 bhp from the factory then a Maggied V1 would have a lot of catching up to do.
PS I bet your car would do better than you think against a V2.
 
#52 ·
I think Tony got lucky last night.









Or was it this morning. :rolleyes:
:smilewide:

I've created a monster!
Think about it. I already have a better power to weight ratio than a V2. If I dyno now, I bet I'd picK up at least 20rwhp. And if that's not enough, I can go visit Randy. On his ego-friendly dyno, and with the Meth, I can really up my timing to get near that magical 472rwhp and much better torque. At this point I'd blow the doors off BigJims stock ass V2!
As for the Hennessy V2, I might have to visit Skulls seasalt dyno. But with the kind of numbers I'll be making there, I'd be afraid of blowing my motor.

We've been doing this all wrong. The hell with spending money on mods. Just travel to a better Dyno. Theoretically, I just picked up about 75RWHP and 90ishRWTQ. All this without turning a single wrench.

BADASSSSSSSS
 
#56 ·
i had no idea this has become hondatech.com whrer bench racing and hp/lb runs wild.

what happened to having a v8 and actually racing people and making these posts. if you have a maggie and you think you can take on then go lay down some track times, or go find a v2 who would race you. I see v2's racing everything with wheels on it on and off the track in their short 2yr run. v1's have been out for 5yrs and nothing as it pertains to racing ( maybe like 5-7 people on this forum actually race people with their cars).


go find a v2 and race it on a track with turns, a track with a pro tree or even on the street. just stop all this useless i hav more hp/lb talk. its sad.
 
#58 ·
Switch to decaf dude! We're just having some fun with this. If you think it's pointless then back off.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top