It shouldn't. Lap times are easily a better indicator of performance. No question. That would be my pick.
But even lap times are gonna have qualifications. One car may dominate on a particular course and get handed it's ass to on another. An autocross lap is gonna be very different than a road course lap. Lap times are still only a part of the equation, if you will. But, certainly, the best indicator or benchmark of em all.
Lap times damnit! My SRT-8 is plenty fast in a straight line, but I miss the confidence of entering a turn in the V. I can run 12.9 quarter mile times all day long, but I miss the g's. Even with better tires, better shocks, strut tower brace and bigger sways; when I first enter the turn I always get that feeling in my stomach. The aw-shit moment between she's going to take the turn and nope the ass end's washing out.
My favorite V story was a guy in an AWD Volvo tailgating me on a twisty road in the rain. I had the GSD3's on and knew exactly how fast I could take the next corner, enter at 58mph and let off the throttle. I look in the rear view mirror as the Volvo performs a tail-slapper around the corner and barely regains control on exit. I wouldn't wish that on anybody, but what were you thinking tailgating me?
While I agree that lap times are a good gauge for a vehicle's overall capabilities (probably the best), the most attention seems be paid to the car's power which would point to acceleration being most important to people here. So although you guys might SAY overall performance is most important, your posts tell a different story.
Maybe that's because GM hasn't released any real data yet on the car's actual performance on the track. So all we're left with is specs and guessing at this point. Once we have some REAL information about the car and not just a spec sheet the topics of conversation can shift.
I'm still hoping / waiting for Top Gear to get one of these and run it against the likes of the M3/M5, various AMGs, and Audis. They will test it in the straights and on the lap with The Stig.
After looking the video over again, I guess the only issue was the statement about horsepower being low. I could've sworn there was more to it but the horsepower statement was stupid enough IMO. Still love the show, and LOVED that his car was so low on power. Bet it really pissed him off when he first saw it.
Every dyno test I've seen suggests that the advertised HP is actually under-rated. This was the case in point on the Top Gear story as well. The moron was making a big deal that the car didn't pull 500hp at the wheels, but after figuring the drivetrain loss, the engine was actually making MORE than the advertised figure.
Well, that's it! There's the perfect argument against the V2! Look at what excessive weight, with bad weight distribution, can do. It makes the GT500 a big, fat, understeering pig...
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Cadillac Owners Forum
4.8M posts
369.7K members
Since 2002
Cadillac Forums is the perfect place to go to talk about your favorite Caddys including the ATS, CTS, SRX, Escalade, LYRIQ, Vistiq, concept and future Cadillac models.