03 CTS 3.2L vs. 06 CTS 3.6L.... - Page 4

Adam · #46 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 12:11 PM

i drove a 3.6 the other day and i will be honest, they can flat out fly but it didnt feel all that much faster than mine. i liked it alot though.

HEY ROBERT- you coming to Bristol this year? race is in a few days.

RobertCTS · #47 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 93fleetwoodlowlow

i drove a 3.6 the other day and i will be honest, they can flat out fly but it didnt feel all that much faster than mine. i liked it alot though.

HEY ROBERT- you coming to Bristol this year? race is in a few days.

Yep!! I'll be there Sunday and rooting for the Hendrick boys. ZOOM Zoom.
I think Bristols 1/2 mile track is the best in the circuit. I'm driving the Caddy down this time. We drove my wife's Magnum Hemi last time. Cost a bit in gas. You plan to be there?

Adam · #48 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertCTS

Yep!! I'll be there Sunday and rooting for the Hendrick boys. ZOOM Zoom.
I think Bristols 1/2 mile track is the best in the circuit. I'm driving the Caddy down this time. We drove my wife's Magnum Hemi last time. Cost a bit in gas. You plan to be there?

so you are coming down Sunday? no i wont be there, i am not working the track this spring. i will be working it in August though. what day are you leaving? if you want, we can meet up Monday or something.

RobertCTS · #49 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 93fleetwoodlowlow

so you are coming down Sunday? no i wont be there, i am not working the track this spring. i will be working it in August though. what day are you leaving? if you want, we can meet up Monday or something.

I refuse to do the night race. It's tough getting of there in the day time. It's tough to even find your car in the dark. Very few parking lot lights. I'm staying in downtown Bristol and will be leaving at sunrise Monday back to Ohio.

Adam · #50 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertCTS

I refuse to do the night race. It's tough getting of there in the day time. It's tough to even find your car in the dark. Very few parking lot lights. I'm staying in downtown Bristol and will be leaving at sunrise Monday back to Ohio.

so are you down here now? if so, stop up at the hospital tonight sometime after 3 and holler at me. if you need directions tell me where you are and i'll let you know.

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #51 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #52 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #53 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding it

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #54 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #55 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #56 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding it funny

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #57 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding it funny that people

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #58 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding it funny that

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #59 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding it funny that people think

AznPrydeRegalRyde · #60 (**permalink**) 03-23-06, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skepticman

The 3.2L engine was nearly a full second slower in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times in a bunch of the magazine reviews, even comparing the manual on the 3.2L and the automatic on the 3.6L.

The 3.6L engine with automatic had:

6.4-6.6 second 0-60
14.92-14.99 1/4 mile

The 3.2L engine with manual had:

7.3-7.53 0-60
15.7-15.88 1/4 mile

Then there's this article that describes the negligible gains from intake and exhaust on the 3.2L engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/p..._cadillac_cts/

"The upgrades team to deliver a claimed 20-hp gain and yield a decidedly more aggressive sound. It's still no powerhouse, but the engine mods improve 0-60 acceleration by 0.12 sec and lop 0.14 sec from the quarter mile."

My money is on the stock 3.6L.

Your time are significantly off. If you search hard enough on google, you will find a pink slips of 3.2L manual pulling a 15.2, STOCK. But most pulled around 15.5. The KEY is the MPH, and stock for stock, the 3.6L pulls about 3-5 mph faster in the 1/4 mile. A 3.2L manual will also hit under 7 secs 0-60 with a good driver. Seen it done myself. You combine the 3.2L manual with an exhaust/intake versus a stock 3.6L auto, and you will have a good race, no doubt!

I keep finding it funny that people think this