3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300 - Page 2
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 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35
Cadillac CTS First Generation Forum - 2003 - 2007 Discussion, 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300 in Cadillac CTS Coupe, Sport Sedan and Sport Wagon Forums; "the 300, for example, is built like a tank" It looks like panzer too (let's hope it's built better, panzers, ...
  1. #16
    Irishtom is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    65
    Posts
    136

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    "the 300, for example, is built like a tank"

    It looks like panzer too (let's hope it's built better, panzers, especially Panthers and Tigers, were notoriously unreliable), or a bunker on the Atlantic Wall. Every 300 owner should be given a Nazi helmet to wear while driving the thing and peering out the pillbox gunport slits that pass for windows.

    I think the performence of the 300C is overstated by the car mags. Maybe they get ringers. Perhaps they simply lie.

    Before I bought my CTS a couple of months ago I owned an 03 Crown Vic Sport with the 239 hp V-8, a nice motor. I raced another 55 year-old fart in a 300C and running up to 90 he only pulled me by a length. I expected him to walk away. And I know he was goosing it, my window was down I could plainly hear the strangled gasping of his chrome-tipped duals.

    Now the Vic was a strong runner but not so strong as to make up a supposed 100hp difference. I suspect the Ford 4.6 is somewhat underrated and the Hemi somewhat overrated.

  2. #17
    joeyblaze's Avatar
    joeyblaze is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 05 Redline CTS
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,007

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    I don't think this Forum is a fair representation or test of CTS differential failures. You only hear about individuals who have had problems. How many have experienced no problems? Seldom do inviduals post things that are working well. That would be like me starting a thread about the excellent performance of my alternator. I would get zero comments.
    very good point

  3. #18
    Smokin' 04 CTS's Avatar
    Smokin' 04 CTS is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): CTS 3.6L 5sp Auto Silver Smoke with Neutral Interior
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    998

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon
    lol it's not even close. The CTS with the 3.6L matted to the 5 speed auto runs 14.9 in the 1/4. The 6 speed will do a bit better.

    the 300 with the 3.5L does 16.1 in the 1/4
    exactly.. but what really seems like a close match would be 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L new Maxima (265 hp) or 3.2L Acura new TL (270 hp).. Anyone have any ideas on how the CTS will hold out against these cars? There both FWD so there's already an advantage for the CTS.

  4. #19
    wait4me6920's Avatar
    wait4me6920 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bama
    Posts
    1,756

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    [QUOTE=Irishtom]"the 300, for example, is built like a tank"

    Before I bought my CTS a couple of months ago I owned an 03 Crown Vic Sport with the 239 hp V-8, a nice motor. I raced another 55 year-old fart in a 300C and running up to 90 he only pulled me by a length. I expected him to walk away. And I know he was goosing it, my window was down I could plainly hear the strangled gasping of his chrome-tipped duals.


    Uh, sure... You must have the proverbial one in a million Crown Vic.

    I can pull one of these with my PT Cruiser (Lite Turbo) without breaking a sweat. Our CTS is a nice little car &, imho a much prettier car, but our 300C cruises away from it at little more than half throttle (we're also on our third rear end assembly with the CTS)

  5. #20
    Irishtom is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    65
    Posts
    136

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    " Anyone have any ideas on how the CTS will hold out against these cars?"

    Race 'em and find out. I don't believe what the car magazines say.

  6. #21
    Irishtom is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    65
    Posts
    136

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    "Uh, sure... You must have the proverbial one in a million Crown Vic.

    I can pull one of these with my PT Cruiser (Lite Turbo) without breaking a sweat. Our CTS is a nice little car &, imho a much prettier car, but our 300C cruises away from it at little more than half throttle (we're also on our third rear end assembly with the CTS) "

    I'm more inclined to think you're the liar.

  7. #22
    Smokin' 04 CTS's Avatar
    Smokin' 04 CTS is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): CTS 3.6L 5sp Auto Silver Smoke with Neutral Interior
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    998

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Quote Originally Posted by Irishtom
    "Uh, sure... You must have the proverbial one in a million Crown Vic.

    I can pull one of these with my PT Cruiser (Lite Turbo) without breaking a sweat. Our CTS is a nice little car &, imho a much prettier car, but our 300C cruises away from it at little more than half throttle (we're also on our third rear end assembly with the CTS) "
    First you say you have a crown vic that you raced against a 300, then you have a pt that could "pull on one of these without breaking a sweat" (i really don't know what car you are talking about).. then you say your 300c could pull on the CTS with only half throttle.

    Sure a hemi could pull away from a 3.6L, but try doing that against a V. But if you think your PT could beat a CTS, I'll just roll it off a cliff and buy something else.

  8. #23
    wait4me6920's Avatar
    wait4me6920 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bama
    Posts
    1,756

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Quote Originally Posted by Irishtom
    "Uh, sure... You must have the proverbial one in a million Crown Vic.

    I can pull one of these with my PT Cruiser (Lite Turbo) without breaking a sweat. Our CTS is a nice little car &, imho a much prettier car, but our 300C cruises away from it at little more than half throttle (we're also on our third rear end assembly with the CTS) "

    I'm more inclined to think you're the liar.

    Ah, believe what u will, my friend... But look out for the "real" 300C

    I think ur most likely opponent was a 300 with the 2.7 v6...maybe the 3.5...

    Whatever They're all good cars, but I sure wish GM would come up with a fix for the rear end...

  9. #24
    wait4me6920's Avatar
    wait4me6920 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): CTS
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bama
    Posts
    1,756

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokin' 04 CTS
    First you say you have a crown vic that you raced against a 300, then you have a pt that could "pull on one of these without breaking a sweat" (i really don't know what car you are talking about).. then you say your 300c could pull on the CTS with only half throttle.

    Sure a hemi could pull away from a 3.6L, but try doing that against a V. But if you think your PT could beat a CTS, I'll just roll it off a cliff and buy something else.

    No, no - I'm saying the Cruiser'll pull the Crown Vic (the turbos are quick!)... Not the CTS - it's a leg up on my Crusier... And the 300C'll easily pull the CTS.

    Granted, the CTSV is faster, but now Chrysler has come out with the SRT8 which hangs with the V...

    Ah, life is good :coolgleam

  10. #25
    Irishtom is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    65
    Posts
    136

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    "I think ur most likely opponent was a 300 with the 2.7 v6...maybe the 3.5..."

    Nope, it was the Hemi, I know how to tell. The sixes my Vic would have beat, like it beat a FWD 300, to my surprise actually.

    You know lots of guys know what should be or what's supposed to be. Less people can tell you what actually happened.

  11. #26
    Irishtom is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    65
    Posts
    136

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    "No, no - I'm saying the Cruiser'll pull the Crown Vic (the turbos are quick!)..."

    As rare as Vics with Sport or H&P packages are I kind'a doubt you ever raced one. A pal has a turbo Cruiser and it failed to impress.

    Maybe the Chrysler was just a poor runner. It happens.

  12. #27
    CTSDreams's Avatar
    CTSDreams is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): CTS-V
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Cameron, NC
    Posts
    159

    Talking Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    I traded my 2000 300 (3.5L) for my CTS when I went in to the Chyrsler dealer to get an air filter. The CTS was on the lot and had been turned in by a guy that bought a 300C Hemi. I like all 3 cars (the wife hates the new 300 front), the FRD 300, RWD 300, and the CTS. I had 100K on my 300 with no problems at all and the engine still looked like new.

    The 300 is a better long trip car than the CTS (the trunk alone is almost 2 times the size of the Caddys), but it was no where near as fun to drive as the CTS. For the size, the 1999-2005 300s with the 3.5 were a good ride and compromise between handling and comfort. Maybe I lucked out and had one that was built right.
    I think Chrysler screwed up with the new 300 model range. When I bought mine, a 300 only had two options (chrome wheels and moonroof). Now with the new ones you can get everything from the 2.8 to the Hemi so it can be $23K to $38k. Takes the prestige factor out of the 300 name to have the base model so stripped down.....

  13. #28
    Irishtom is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    65
    Posts
    136

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Dreams---I think the previous 300 was a much better looking car than the thing they make now. It's as though the current 300 was deliberately designed to appeal to fellas who have issues with their masculinity and penile envy. Very clever of them though.

  14. #29
    SdMarineGuy's Avatar
    SdMarineGuy is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,187

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Quote Originally Posted by Irishtom
    Dreams---I think the previous 300 was a much better looking car than the thing they make now. It's as though the current 300 was deliberately designed to appeal to fellas who have issues with their masculinity and penile envy. Very clever of them though.
    I had a 300m previous to my CTS and I love it. It move very nicely I just put in an intake and dual exhaust from dynomax. I still like my CTS better though. Here are some pictures
    Attached Images

  15. #30
    Smokin' 04 CTS's Avatar
    Smokin' 04 CTS is offline Cadillac Owners Enthusiast
    Automobile(s): CTS 3.6L 5sp Auto Silver Smoke with Neutral Interior
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    998

    Re: 3.6L CTS vs 3.5L Chrysler 300

    Quote Originally Posted by wait4me6920
    No, no - I'm saying the Cruiser'll pull the Crown Vic (the turbos are quick!)... Not the CTS - it's a leg up on my Crusier... And the 300C'll easily pull the CTS.

    Granted, the CTSV is faster, but now Chrysler has come out with the SRT8 which hangs with the V...

    Ah, life is good :coolgleam
    Now I got you!! When reading the post I was like this guy is just trying to get under our skin, but now you make sense. Hemi V8 > 3.6L V6 > 4 cyl turbo.
    Yeah the SRT8 seems like a fun car, 440hp is always a great thing.

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