: How come there arent ever posts concerning.....



04CTSVFLA
06-12-07, 02:50 PM
How we match up on the streets

V's versus

1. Camaro SS
2. Ws-6's
3. Terminator Cobras
4. c5's

I know a bunch of yopu have run into these on the streets, what were your results?? I went from a 30 roll versus a ws6 a couple nights ago (but I started like 4 cars back....and I seemed to close the gap slightly by about 2 lengths by 100)... However Id really like to know your experiences. I cant wait to run into a c5...or a cobra...or an ss for that matter. Lets here it guys.....

TXSilverV
06-12-07, 02:53 PM
I have raced all four types and won all of them, however they were all stock. Raced a modified M-5 last week and we were dead even. That was on motor as my nitrous system is not connected. Wish I had the extra 150 for the M5 but will have it for next time.

urbanski
06-12-07, 02:58 PM
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-kill-stories-race-videos/

Kadonny
06-12-07, 03:28 PM
What's a Terminator Cobra? Never heard of that one. Are you talking the blown versions?

04CTSVFLA
06-12-07, 03:56 PM
your not stock either though right tx
terminator is just the nickname given to the 01?-04 cobras blown.

Blackout
06-12-07, 04:46 PM
your not stock either though right tx
terminator is just the nickname given to the 01?-04 cobras blown.Terminator's are 2003-04 Cobra's and I'm sorry to say that if you were to race one stock for stock they would rape a CTS-V by a decent amount. Guys have hit low 12's in stock trim with those cars. A SS Camaro would eat a CTS-V as well but a WS6 would be a decent race for a CTS-V

1QUICKV
06-12-07, 07:12 PM
I have raced all four types and won all of them, however they were all stock. Raced a modified M-5 last week and we were dead even. That was on motor as my nitrous system is not connected. Wish I had the extra 150 for the M5 but will have it for next time.

the new M-5?! 500HP? YOU WERE DEAD EVEN, WAS HE RACING YOU? HOW MUCH HP YOU GOT? WHAT YOU GOT DONE TO YOUR CAR?

1QUICKV
06-12-07, 07:13 PM
Hey guy you don't kno what your talking about! i raced a SS Carmaro and i eat it =)

Blackout
06-12-07, 09:34 PM
Hey guy you don't kno what your talking about! i raced a SS Carmaro and i eat it =)Then you beat the driver not the car. Big difference. Camaro SS's with a good driver can get into the 12's

I~LUV~Caddys8792
06-12-07, 11:05 PM
Blackout (I can't remember your real name), you say that a Camaro SS is a bit quicker than the WS6 Trans Am. How come? I thought they were basically the exact same car.

Highline Cady
06-12-07, 11:08 PM
Aren't SS Camaro's and WS6 package TA's basically the same thing?

Blackout
06-13-07, 05:08 AM
I always thought they were dam near the same car but over the years of going to the track and talking to owners it seems that the SS seems to be a little bit faster then a WS6. Why that is I dunno

Kadonny
06-13-07, 09:59 AM
Actually, the SS Camaro has a tad more hp than the WS6 when properly equipped.

A closer comparison to the SS would be the Trans Am Firehawk. Both the SS and the Firehawk were altered by SLP to their stock form and both produce the greatest HP output on the last 4th gen F bodies.

The highest stock hp available hp on either an SS or a Firehawk in 2002 was 345, the WS-6 only delivered 325.

Still, even with the numbers I listed make it a drivers race between the SS and the WS6 or the Firehawk. I think Blackout exaggerated in his original comparison. One car is not (from what I have seen) marketably faster than than the other. Check out my name, I am the Firebird Guy ya know.

I would love to see a stock to stock run between the SS/Firehawk/WS6 and a stock V. There is no doubt the F bodies are more aerodynamic and they were always rumored to be underrated. That may equalize the two.

Blackout
06-13-07, 11:38 AM
I think Blackout exaggerated in his original comparison.I'm just going on what I've seen over the years at the track. My ex gf's dad had a 2001 WS6 T/A and we brought it up the Atco and the best he could get was a 13.2 while a guy he raced against which happened to be a 2000 Camaro SS was running 12.9 all night. So either SS drivers are better then WS6 drivers around here or there is a slight difference (whether it's a wight issue or a hp issue) between the two.

Kadonny
06-13-07, 12:37 PM
I'm just basing my comments on this comment by you:


A SS Camaro would eat a CTS-V as well but a WS6 would be a decent race for a CTS-V

In my opinion that is clearly not an accurate statement (or an exaggerated statement). You can base your opinion on one set of vehicles you have seen at Atco, that's fine and that SS could have done a 12.9, there are always car exceptions.

Me owning a 2000 Trans Am Firehawk and being a member of the F body forums for the past 8 years or so I have seen many times for the 4th gen (1998-2002 LS1) cars. Most of the models are almost dead even. Hell, there is only a 10hp difference on most of them. Even though the Trans Am does weigh a bit more (spoiler and ground effects), most stock F body (2000-2002) cars (Trans Am, Formula, SS and even the Z28) are doing the quarter in the mid to low 13's. That puts them dead even with the V. In no way will the average stock SS "eat" a stock V. It's a drivers race.

Highline Cady
06-13-07, 10:36 PM
I think the biggest problem would be finding a stock V, SS, or WS6. Those are all very popular cars to hop up. And why not they all take well to bolt ons.

Kadonny
06-14-07, 07:27 AM
My 00 Firehawk is dead stock with only 6000 miles on her ;)

Highline Cady
06-15-07, 05:43 AM
Cool car!!! But drive her man!!!

CIWS
06-17-07, 07:28 AM
Only thing I got a half chance to run was a WS6 once from about a 15mph roll, but he let off at about 50mph as I was pulling on him a little and about to shift into third. The conditions at the time were not advantageous for us to really be running. So I would still call that unknown.

The Tony Show
07-05-07, 05:46 PM
Without serious mods a CTS-V will get raped by an F-body. Sorry.

I met up with a group in Orlando that calls themselves "Fuel Slut" last weekend: It's a group of GM musclecar owners, mostly modded, that had just left the strip in Bithlo (still had numbers on the windows). These guys are all running mid 12's with minor mods, and the ones with cams are in the 11's. The fastest known CTS-V is Stkshkr's (Maggie, Alky injection, headers and slicks) and his best is an 11.9. They were respectful and somewhat impressed by my car (mostly because of the Kooks / Corsa sound), but since I wasn't holding a timeslip they weren't too interested.

With my mods I could probably pull a high 12's run, provided I don't muff the launch. From a roll on the street, I could probably hang with a mildly modded Camaro or T/A, but I'm not going after one from a dig anytime soon.

I don't want to shatter any V owners' dreams, but you can make an 11 second F-body for the price of the car + $3k. It takes the car + about $10k for a CTS-V, and you'd better figure another $6,500 for Doug's rearend after you annihilate your stock one. We have a really fast car for a luxury sedan, but an F-body has massive advantages in both traction and weight.

The Tony Show
07-09-07, 10:13 AM
Wow, I really killed this thread with a dose of reality, didn't I?

Kadonny
07-11-07, 08:49 AM
Alright, I'll bite Tony ;)

Your first statement is not true if you compare stock to stock. As much as I agree that an F body can be made faster much, much cheaper, stock for stock the F body and the V are neck and neck.

F bodies running 12's with minor mods? What do you consider minor and how deep into the 12's are you talking? A high 12 second F body can be done fairly easily, but a mid to low 12 second car requires quite a bit of work. Can you get high 12's with a V with some headers, exhaust and a tune? I would sure hope so.

The point of this thread is not which car is cheaper to mod.......right?

Blackout
07-11-07, 10:29 AM
Alright, I'll bite Tony ;)

Your first statement is not true if you compare stock to stock. As much as I agree that an F body can be made faster much, much cheaper, stock for stock the F body and the V are neck and neck.

F bodies running 12's with minor mods? What do you consider minor and how deep into the 12's are you talking? A high 12 second F body can be done fairly easily, but a mid to low 12 second car requires quite a bit of work. Can you get high 12's with a V with some headers, exhaust and a tune? I would sure hope so.

The point of this thread is not which car is cheaper to mod.......right?Guys have ran high 12's bone stock in F-bodies. How many V's have done that stock? Hell the F bodies are doing it with LS1's and you guys are running LS6's and LS2's

Kadonny
07-11-07, 12:59 PM
^^^^^^ Show me. As I have said earlier, I have been around F bodies for years (and still own one) and a bone stock car running high 12's is a freak of nature, if at all. I bet if the V had traction from the start those cars would be running high 12's.

I am right now staring at a Car and Driver review of the 2000 Firehawk (was just digging through some of my old stuff for shiats and giggles) and their road test yielded a 13.5 in the quarter and a 0-60 of 5.0.

And what the hell does LS1/LS2/LS6 have to do with anythng? It's all about horespower, torque and weight.

Blackout
07-11-07, 07:08 PM
^^^^^^ Show me. As I have said earlier, I have been around F bodies for years (and still own one) and a bone stock car running high 12's is a freak of nature, if at all. I bet if the V had traction from the start those cars would be running high 12's.GM High-Tech Performance magazine got a 12.89 in a 1999 Z28 you can check it out in the 7/99 magazine. Hell they also got a Collectors Edition Trans Am with a automatic to run a 13.13 in the 10/02 issue.


And what the hell does LS1/LS2/LS6 have to do with anythng? It's all about horespower, torque and weight.

2001 Trans Am Coupe:
3400 lbs
Power to weight ratio of ~10.97

CTS-V:
3850 lbs
Power to weight ratio of 9.625

Kadonny
07-12-07, 10:17 AM
GM High-Tech Performance magazine got a 12.89 in a 1999 Z28 you can check it out in the 7/99 magazine. Hell they also got a Collectors Edition Trans Am with a automatic to run a 13.13 in the 10/02 issue.



2001 Trans Am Coupe:
3400 lbs
Power to weight ratio of ~10.97

CTS-V:
3850 lbs
Power to weight ratio of 9.625

I tried to find that 99 magazine on the net to no luck. As I said, there is always the freak of nature car that may have actually pulled that number off, but it is FAR from the norm. The 13.13 is very believable as I have seen very fast F bodies run those numbers. Still, those low numbers were not the norm as you seem to be claiming.

In fact, here is a link to a GMHTP test of a 2001 Camaro SS. Best time they got in the quarter is 13.579. http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/features/0211gmhtp_2001_chevrolet_camaro_ss_feature/index.html


The bottom line is I have seen a hell of a lot of stock F body cars with times in the mid 13's rather than the low 13's and certainly not the high 12's.

Blackout
07-12-07, 03:03 PM
I tried to find that 99 magazine on the net to no luck. As I said, there is always the freak of nature car that may have actually pulled that number off, but it is FAR from the norm. The 13.13 is very believable as I have seen very fast F bodies run those numbers. Still, those low numbers were not the norm as you seem to be claiming.

In fact, here is a link to a GMHTP test of a 2001 Camaro SS. Best time they got in the quarter is 13.579. http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/features/0211gmhtp_2001_chevrolet_camaro_ss_feature/index.html


The bottom line is I have seen a hell of a lot of stock F body cars with times in the mid 13's rather than the low 13's and certainly not the high 12's.So GM High Tech managed to get 2 factory freaks but the 13.13 was with a automatic. So if an auto was running those kinda numbers then it's quite easily possible that a 6 speed version could hit in the 12's

Jonas McFeely
07-12-07, 05:08 PM
Sometimes an auto works better with big V8s than a stick. Ive seen it a few times in Car and Driver.

Kadonny
07-16-07, 08:29 AM
So GM High Tech managed to get 2 factory freaks but the 13.13 was with a automatic. So if an auto was running those kinda numbers then it's quite easily possible that a 6 speed version could hit in the 12's

What? I'm saying it is possible GMHTP got one freak, yes. How else do you explain that they got a similar car to only run mid 13's? Yes, I know every car is different, but they don't usually differ by over a half second.

And yes, many times the automatics are faster at the track than the sticks, you never saw this?

Blackout
07-16-07, 01:55 PM
And yes, many times the automatics are faster at the track than the sticks, you never saw this?Automatics are more consistent while stick shifts net you the best time (due to less dirvetrain loss). For the best possible numbers drag racers use automatic manuals.

gothicaleigh
07-16-07, 06:42 PM
Wow, I really killed this thread with a dose of reality, didn't I?

We'd take them in the twisties!









:p