I don't know too much about this stuff, but I don't think there is any sense in trying to find out if the AWD system in the XTS V Sport can handle the power they'll put in the CTS-V3. My reason is that I believe the AWD system on the XTS is different than the one on the CTS-V would be. Reason for that is the X is FWD based and the C is RWD based. I'd think it would be completely different. Please correct me if I'm wrong. For one, XTS is limited as to how much power it can push to the rear wheels while the CTS-V's AWD system would be RWD biased (putting more power to the rears than to the fronts) like it is in the STS and CTS. What I think would be great is if the CTS-V with AWD that doesn't even exist yet, could vary the power going between the wheels so that the rears would get 100% until traction is lost, or about to be lost. At that point, the excess power causing the rears to (almost) lose traction is transferred to the front wheels, just enough to where the rears are at their limit. Power should be shared not only between front and rear tires, but side to side. Taking a left turn for example, the left tires will want to spin. Just before this happens, the car should redirect the torque to the right wheels. This setup would provide optimal performance. This technology exists. I think acura does this with their super handling awd. Classy name.
But AWD setups in general can handle that much power. See lamborghini.
Again, that whole setup would allow for better traction in weather, which will mean much more sales.
It will also outperform the RWD variant on the track, or on the strip. Here we are again with technology adding to sheer performance numbers while possibly taking away from the thrill and driving enjoyment. I'm sure a lot of you have read about the new 911 GT3 and it's lack of a clutch pedal. Porsche talks about track times and how much they'll improve. Sure, but to a degree, at the expense of driving enjoyment.
Anyone can just mash the pedal coming out of a turn and let the computers figure out the traction situation (I'm looking at you, GTR and Audi) but it's much more fun, and entertaining trying to perfect that corner exit with just enough power not to swing the back out and cost precious seconds. Or if you're into it, to be able to swing the back out for the fun of it. How about recording some burnouts before a tire change. Sorry AWD.
I would want AWD in a daily driver, but on a track? RWD manual. Bottom line, they should offer both. Easier said than done.
----------
Oh and in the case of Corvettes vs GTRs on the track, the ZR1 pulls away from the GTR at higher speeds (when traction is no longer an issue) and it far surpasses the GTR in cornering ability which is why the RWD car walks away from the AWD GTR on a track. But run a ZR1 against a non existent AWD ZR1? I'd say the AWD will win around the track.
Again, not interested in being a little faster at the expense of the thrill of mastering a RWD beast around a track. I'll take RWD around the track.
----------
The article at the link that MEDSIN posted says it all. The following is a paragraph straight out of the article talking about the GTR:
"Chuck the GT-R into a corner, any corner, and it sticks through the bend and rockets out the other side. But it never surprises and never actually excites. It's frightening in the same way as commercial air travel. It's the conscious thought of the speed you're traveling and the consequences thereof that raises hairs, not the direct knowledge that you're in control of something special."
This one is on the Vette. The base, C7 Vette which was slower on the drag strip but beat the GTR around the track. Nice:
"And there's the difference: Even with the safety net of PTM, you always feel responsible for the actions of the C7 in a way you don't with the GT-R. Oversteer? Your fault. Understeer? Your fault. A perfectly clipped apex followed by an astonishing corner exit speed? Yep, your fault."