Cadillac Owners Forum banner
11K views 61 replies 18 participants last post by  thebigjimsho 
#1 ·
I have searched and searched and cannot find anything on the CTSV vs the E39 M5 (not the new new one). Has anyone here raced an E39 M5 or seen a video?

These cars are so well matched in terms of power and weight. The M5 has 3.15s and runs 13.1s stock and sub 5 sec 0-60, low 11s to 100 which is right on par with the V which has 3.73s. The V makes torque sooner and has lower gears. What gives?

Here is an M5 with exhaust and reflash racing an RS4 ( 12.7s ) .....
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/08840e9b-f93b-4d38-b8ad-984f010d4330.htm Not sure how he pulls that hard....

So what do you guys think? Looks like a drivers race in the 1/4 but what about real world say 20mph-120mph? Someone here must have run into one at some point. I want to know who won! Lets here your thoughts! M5 or V?
 
#4 ·
I've only raced one at the wknd drags...but I wasn't stock. I think I beat him by no less than 10 car lengths. The guy was such a tool.
 
#7 ·
stock for stock I would think it would be a drivers race. Once you get past the 1/4 mile though I would think the CTS-V would be able to take it pretty easily. The M series was never about being the fastest in a straight line. They cared more about it's handling then it's acceleration performance
 
#8 ·
Moderators... is it really necessary to move these threads to the versus? Once they are moved no one see them as not many V owners visit that area IMHO! I have an idea, how about all versus that have to do with a CTSV stay in the CTSV department!? :stirpot:

You guys could at least give them a few days of internet traffic.... :mad:
 
#10 ·
I thought the M5 trapped 106mph in the 1/4 and the RS4 about 110mph. Can't see how the M5 would pull anything if these numbers are true...unless the RS4 forgot to downshift.
 
#13 ·
Yeah the 3.15s on the M5 make me worry a little for 100+. Given the lower gearing of the V and similar power to weight ratios its surprising that they both go 13.1 or so through the quarter. What did the V do 0-150?

My buddy just bought an M5 and it will arrive here in San Diego on Wed. We are going to race them from every which way. Neither of us want to lose. Probably going to start 50-120.... wish me luck! I will post results...
 
#15 ·
Ok guys well I finally found my race. My buddy has had his E39 M5 for a few weeks now and we ran them yesterday four times. First was from 50-140 and then from 20-70 and 30-70 and then off the line. The V pulled everytime. On the 50-140 I had about 2 car lengths and was still pulling away.

Anways thought I would share this. I have been pondering this race for a while now. I figured I would win but didnt realize I would keep pulling even at 130 so Im pretty happy. Ive driven the M5 and its real fast. Anyways...
 
#16 ·
Ok guys well I finally found my race. My buddy has had his E39 M5 for a few weeks now and we ran them yesterday four times. First was from 50-140 and then from 20-70 and 30-70 and then off the line. The V pulled everytime. On the 50-140 I had about 2 car lengths and was still pulling away.

Anways thought I would share this. I have been pondering this race for a while now. I figured I would win but didnt realize I would keep pulling even at 130 so Im pretty happy. Ive driven the M5 and its real fast. Anyways...
Does he have any track experience? With 108-110mph trap speeds, I'm surprised you pulled every time, consistently.

Especially the run to 140mph. What speed do you shift to 4th? He should have walked you after that.
 
#29 ·
What can you not understand? Yes the M5 has quicker gearing in 4th. But you totally ignore a simple fact. The V has a 3.73 final drive ratio. What does the M5 have? Guess what? It's much taller. The V walks the M5 in 4th. Deal with it.

I'VE DONE IT PERSONALLY. Stock for stock. Game over.
Gears don't determine the outcome, hence similar trap speeds. What speed is the top of 4th? Game over in 5th, too.
 
#30 ·
Gears don't determine the outcome, hence similar trap speeds. What speed is the top of 4th? Game over in 5th, too.
You have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not going to waste any more time because you can't understand the simplest of things. If you can't understand that the transmission's gearing is coupled with the final drive ratio then applied with power to give you speed, then you have no hope. None.
 
#24 ·
I got spanked by one in my CTS-V last summer on a long winding ride home from work. E39 M5 with a BMW driving instructor behind the wheel. Not too shabby I guess, I had him in the straights, he spanked me in the corners. His car turned like on rails.
 
#32 ·
Why doesn't this guy just buy an M5 then go to their forum? He is just trying to convince himself that's the car he wants and will not listen to simple logic and real experiences.

Buy the M5, Get spanked by a Stock V, go and get your intake cleaned then get beat by a V again.

The funny part is if he does get one and he loses a race, that's how he will justify it. "The V must be modified, their is no way he could have beat me!"

Too Fun:histeric:
 
#33 ·
deuuuce your starting to look and smell like a deuuuce.....I guess you are what you eat....lol....

Ill will race any stock e39 m5 from a 20 mph roll for pink slips any day of the week.....Ive driven them, Ive raced them. They just arent as quick, plain and simple

I found out some very interesting e39 info. They changed the cards liters/hp/weight almost every year. So it really matters what year you run into. I got this info all from the same site. But someone might want to double check, bc that last #'s seem really weak.

4.7 seconds.
1/4 Mile 13.2 @ 107.4 MPH seconds.
Top Speed 155 mph
4.4 L.
400.00 HP
395.00 Ft-Lbs
5 speed

99 e39
3450 lbs
4.9 seconds.
1/4 mile - ??
top speed 157
4.9 L.
400
369
5 speed

00 e39
4000 lbs
4.9 seconds
1/4 ??
top seed 155
4.9 L
394
368
6 speed

what happened here????
01 e39
3484
?
?
4.0 liters
282
295
5 speed

V
400/395 - 5.7 liter
3847 lbs
0-60 4.6 seconds
1/4 miles 13.1
 
#34 ·
Gents -

I have many, many hours when my V was stock against my buddy's 2000 M5 (mostlty twisty, but plenty of straight stuff too) and now modified as I am against his new (1 year old) M5.

In both cases, the V wins everytime, even when we swap cars.

Internet bench race all day if want, deucche, but facts are facts.

WW
 
#35 ·
a buddy of mine has a 2002 we used to race quite a bit because we ran into eachother all the time, He didnt win once( I have an 06 V)
 
#36 ·
So I must amend my statement to say once in 5th, it's definitely over. But it within the variance of both. 3.73 gears also mean reaching 5th sooner. I was simply surprised by the outcome. Shifting can easily make that much difference alone.

If any of you actually watched the repeated runs of an M5 vs. an SRT-8 on the boards it was close, very close. And I'm sure you don't all pull on SRT-8s, either. Your top end is in the low 160s, isn't it?

As far as internet bench racing, I've raced on 7 dragstrips in 5 states in over 22 years and the internet just enhances it all.
 
#38 ·
I think you might be confused as to what exactly you are trying to prove. If both cars were limited to staying in 4th gear, then the the M5 would have more RPM overhead, couple with lower gearing, thus could attain a higher top speed in that specific gear. But you know what magically occurs in a CTS-V when you hit top RPM in 4th>>>>? You shift to 5th and keep accelerating! Transmission ratio is multiplied by the final drive, so the V is still pulling hard in 5th, and decently in 6th. I have raced an M5 from 80 to about 200KM and I pulled 2 cars hard, and stayed that way untill 200km. I also molested both an M5 and S4 from a 5 KM roll. 4+ cars on the S4 in about 10 seconds and 3 on the M5.
 
#44 ·
Don't bother. 4th is 1:1, 5th is .84 which IS an OD gear. 6th is .56.

The M5 is a 1:00 5th, 6th is .83.

The advantage of the 3:73 rear isn't so definitive when 1st for the M5 has a 4.23 1st gear ratio, the CTS-V a 2.97. Top gear 30-50 and 50-70mph roll-on has the M5 quicker by 2 and 3 seconds respectively.

4th gear redline is 135mph, 5th at redline is the top speed, 161.

Both have to shift into 5th at 134-135mph. Thats where the gearing and aerodynamics come into play, the M5 is in a 1:1 gear.

Interestingly, also from C&D, the CSRT-8 hit 120mph in 15.9 seconds, the CTS-V at 16.0. Definitely a drivers race and possible edge to the CTS-V if powershifted.

Very close competitors.
 
#46 ·
Interestingly, also from C&D, the CSRT-8 hit 120mph in 15.9 seconds, the CTS-V at 16.0. Definitely a drivers race and possible edge to the CTS-V if powershifted.
and BTW, stop taking what C&D, R&T and MT report as fact. All of those magazines have a formula to compensate for weather conditions and location. Most of their "test results" look nothing like what they actually run

Again, you can't prove anything on paper ... but you can easily prove something an asphalt. Get out of your chair and into the driver's seat
 
#45 ·
At which point are you going to accept that looking at a bunch of numbers will not determine the race

There have been 4 different posts in this thread have have disputed your theories and you still persist

If all anyone cared about were some stupid numbers, there would be no point in racing. The difference here is that a bunch of people have actually left their desk, started the car and PROVED that they could do it. You sit at your desk, crunch numbers and prove NOTHING

See the difference?
 
#47 · (Edited)
Nice rant.

I wrote I surprised by the outcome when it's obviously a driver's race. How many are going to post they lost to an M5 once they hit 135mph anyway? It's obviously a drivers race.

I posted the facts, if you can't understand the numbers, than go race one yourself at from a roll at 120mph and see what happens.

The formula is used for quarter mile results only but we're not debating that now, are we?

And your absolutely wrong about the test results. It's what 95% of the owners can expect without drag prep, a decent launch, practice not speedshifting. Real world results prove that. If they were so wrong, how come stock CTS-Vs are not running 12s or hitting 110mph traps? Huh?

Take 2 identical Vs, change the gearing on one of them to the M5s ratios. Once in the OD gear, the race is over. No one hear posted results of racing past 135mph after I amended my statement, now did they?
 
#48 ·
If they were so wrong, how come stock CTS-Vs are not running 12s or hitting 110mph traps? Huh?

Take 2 identical Vs, change the gearing on one of them to the M5s ratios. Once in the OD gear, the race is over. No one hear posted results of racing past 135mph after I amended my statement, now did they?
Some Vs have hit 12s. The reason it's rare is blamed on one thing: vicious wheel hop. It certainly has the ability to hit high 12s at well over 110mph.

The V has the torque to hit 150 before the M5 does. As for noone posting results of racing past 135, maybe noone has actually done it. If you're going to use your hypothetical as saving face, that's pretty pathetic.

"Uh, yeah, like the V may totally take the M5 to like 135 but from like 135 to 150, the M5 like totally comes back, man. Totally. Like, yeah."

Funny.
 
#49 ·
And now, since the M5 is limited to 155mph, you've got 20mph to makeup a few carlengths. And the V's 3.73 final drive ratio is going to keep the M5 from doing that. Again, a transmission's gear depend on the differential's final drive ratio to get power to the ground.

One's gear may change from 1-6, but the final drive is always there to influence the outcome. And the V has more useable torque.
 
#52 ·
And now, since the M5 is limited to 155mph, you've got 20mph to makeup a few carlengths. And the V's 3.73 final drive ratio is going to keep the M5 from doing that. Again, a transmission's gear depend on the differential's final drive ratio to get power to the ground.

One's gear may change from 1-6, but the final drive is always there to influence the outcome. And the V has more useable torque.
You're right, absolutely right. Transmission ratios and aerodynamics make no play, I never did amend my statement to 5th, an OD gear, torque makes all the difference at high speed and 6600rpm power peak can't possibly have an influence. My bad. Thank you for being so understanding. :worship:
 
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