Hello all :D. I am back. I am psyched on the pre-release info. 550 HP is a big increase. I have a feeling this may be a monster on the track. The magnetic ride control sounds great too. Technology is a cool thing to add to a Cadillac. Is anyone definetely going to buy as soon as they hit the lots? I remember having an early 04 and I think I want to bite again. I hope the option list isn't too ridiculous($$$). I liked the one option only on 04 and 05's.Anyway, just curious if you anyone is 100%. If my finances are right, I am 90%. This is all assuming road tests go as predicted.

yes, I am second in line at my dealership- - deposit already in. No mark up, and I get to order their second allocated vehicle.

I'm 1st at my delaership. It depends on the deal they give me.

I have the first allocation spot at my dealer. As soon as they can order, I'm in.

I am taking orders on the car and I will discount to all.

If I win the lottery, fvck yeah

I will be waiting, not too worried about where i am in line with allocations, i want to see how they perform for a couple months...

i'll be talking to one of the forum dealers to work on pricing and whatnot once the options structure is worked out.

I told my dealership in Scottsdale that in a year from now, when a SUPER CLEAN one comes in on trade, call me and I'll take it. I'm gonna' let someone else take the 20 grand "hit".....

I'm thinking I'll wait til the spring. I already have a V I can't drive. It is now -25F here with a wind. My truck fishtails just driving along. Having the new V would be a big temptation to drive when I shouldn't.

Hate to say it but anyone with a brain should be waiting. GM (like many other OEMs) has certainly proved over the years that buying early production of any new car is only rewarded with the lion's share of unresolved issues.

Hate to say it but anyone with a brain should be waiting. GM (like many other OEMs) has certainly proved over the years that buying early production of any new car is only rewarded with the lion's share of unresolved issues.
My '04 is perfect. I'm still on my original diff.

Congratulations! :woohoo:
What's that got to do with my post?

Congratulations! :woohoo:
What's that got to do with my post?
'04 was the first year of the Vs... Mine didn't have a "lion's share of unresolved issues."

My '04 was built in March and I haven't had a huge amount of issues. Most have been common with newer years as well. And I love having a classic. Can't wait until my stable has an '04 and '10....

Hate to say it but anyone with a brain should be waiting. GM (like many other OEMs) has certainly proved over the years that buying early production of any new car is only rewarded with the lion's share of unresolved issues.

I guess I'm just brainless. Need a car because the lease is up in August though.

Im waiting for the V coupe.


F

My two local Caddy dealers told me they'd be happy to honor GMS pricing in 2011. By then I'll have flown out to Cleveland to buy one. :yup:

Hate to say it but anyone with a brain should be waiting. GM (like many other OEMs) has certainly proved over the years that buying early production of any new car is only rewarded with the lion's share of unresolved issues.

My '04 is perfect. I'm still on my original diff.

Congratulations! :woohoo:
What's that got to do with my post?

I think Jon was pointing out that very few of us regret buying the first year of a hot model. The few small teething pains my 04 V had have been far outweighed by the pleasure of driving it every day during the time when no one knew what a V was yet. The same goes for the '08 owners- I'll bet they really enjoy pulling up in the Motor Trend Car of the Year and having people recognize it from the commercials.

I suppose you can count me, all my happy '04 owners and a large number of people here on the forum brainless. :D

My two local Caddy dealers told me they'd be happy to honor GMS pricing in 2011. By then I'll have flown out to Cleveland to buy one. :yup:

I will only pay GMS for one. I have until Jan before my lease is up neway.

I had an early March 04 delivery as well. Worth every penny to be one of the first with that car. No problems at all. I really like this what I am hearing about the new V. I hope the first road tests come soon. I am pumped on the MRC. It seems pretty wild. I can't wait to see how the mod boys tinker with that. Also, the engine compartment looks really covered up. Its gonna get real interesting around here again.

'04 was the first year of the Vs... Mine didn't have a "lion's share of unresolved issues."

"THE" lion's share of issues. Meaning if there are any, early production cars will have the lion's share of them. For this reason, it's often regarded as a no-brainer that first year production is the most problematic and therefore wise to avoid. OBVIOUSLY, there exceptions to this, so please don't take the comment to extremes.
And as for wanting to be "the first on your block".....well, let's just say I don't generally associate that need with anything positive.
But, you DO bring up one good point. GM does tend to let issues go unresolved so second and third year production isn't ALWAYS any better. Still, from my experience, the first year is usually the one with the most problems. At least that's when I got the most engineering change notifications when I was in the field.

I love how you always have positive things to add, Katshot. :lol:

Seriously man, we're talking about a souped up version of the MT Car of the Year that has received rave reviews since launch. No major recalls on the 2008 CTS and almost all the owners are super happy with it. The 2009 CTS-V designers have already stated that the CTS was designed with the intention of being made a V, unlike the first gen which was just a regular CTS with a baked on layer of performance.

Other than the diff (which has obviously been improved for the 09) what major issues were there with the first gen? I don't see any reason to be afraid of this car in the first year.

Sarcasm followed by a nice gentle breeze of smoke up the butt. Nice.:bigroll:

The little "laughing" smiley was intended to let you know that I was just giving you a hard time. The "smoke up the butt" comment was a little uncalled for, but it doesn't surprise me.

The fact remains that the CTS-V has been a generally reliable car outside the well known diff issue, and that has been addressed in the 2009. If the 2008 has been trouble free, and the 09 is using even beefier materials, there's no reason to draw the conclusion that it will have problems. What you consider smoke, I consider the facts, which they are.

There's no point in ripping a car that you haven't even driven yet, so why don't you just relax and watch what happens? A lot of things have changed at GM since you were in the field, and it's not fair to assume that the car will have problems the first year, not to mention making snide comments to me for pointing that out.

Tony -

I'm getting the idea that Kat is not on your early order list. Probably should go ahead and scratch his name off it.

Im sure there are plenty of first year cars that are just fine but overall the first year is typically going to be more problematic than later years. Anyone could go to Alldata.com and see the service bulletins are almost always more plentiful in the first year of a model.

Tony I appreaciate your enthusiasm but MT COTY doesnt have anything to do with reliability. All the entrants are NEW or redesigned cars.

If you took even a little time to read my posts, you'd notice that I HAVE pointed out multiple times that there's an awful lot of guessing and benchracing going here, let alone ripping the car for quality when all you've seen are a few pictures. So it should be rather easy to glean from my statements that I too, think it's a good idea to "wait and see", but that goes for BOTH positive and negative comments. I'm neither saying it's a POS or the greatest thing since sliced lunch meat.
I've also been VERY supportive of this new car. I've said numerous times that I not only think it's a much improved car from a styling standpoint, but also seems to have what it should take to compete head to head with the best out there.
And as far as my comments about the first year of production generally having the lion's share of problems, how do you possibly get that I'm saying that it is going to have problems? I'm merely stating a well-known FACT that "generally" early production cars show the highest degree of problems. Do you deny this to be true?
As far as the "smoke up the butt" comment, I was referring to statements you made that specifically sounded MUCH more like a salesman than an owner or enthusiast. More precisely, the statement where you name-drop "MT Car of the Year" etc. Think REAL hard about trying to make a statement that ties being named MT Car of the Year and anything even remotely associated with build quality or being any kind of great car overall. A quick look at past winners of that award easily proves that point.
Sorry but sarcasm and being talked down to tends to ruffle my feathers.

MT COTY takes build quality into account, otherwise they wouldn't have raved about the interior quality and exterior panel gaps. I know the tinfoil hatters all think that the award is bought, but for a traditionally import biased mag like MT or C&D to rave about the car is HUGE.

All I'm pointing out is that the 2008 CTS has been out for over 6 months now with no major recalls or common complaints on the forums (like peeling nav buttons, headlights burning out, XM radios crashing.....whatever). J.D. Power & Associates judges cars by problems per 100 in the first 90 days, and judging by my customer base I think that number is going to be awfully low.

You're backing down off your earlier statement now, but what prompted me to post was your assertion that you'd have to be "brainless" to buy a first year car. Since I bought a first year CTS-V and consider myself "brainful" (?), I just wanted to disagree.

As far as sounding like a Salesman, well.....I am a Salesman, so I guess it's a good thing I don't sound like a roofer. ;)

Im sure there are plenty of first year cars that are just fine but overall the first year is typically going to be more problematic than later years. Anyone could go to Alldata.com and see the service bulletins are almost always more plentiful in the first year of a model.

Tony I appreaciate your enthusiasm but MT COTY doesnt have anything to do with reliability. All the entrants are NEW or redesigned cars.

My enthusiasm is honest love for and faith in the product- I can't tell you how many people I talked out of a Catera back in the 90's, so if you knew me then you'd have more appreciation for my integrity.

Of course they're going to find a few more things to change on the first year-that's only logic, and I'm not debating that. To say that you're "brainless" for buying a first year car is hysterical and ridiculous, not to mention insulting to the people on this forum that have or are going to buy a first year car.

Oh for God sake, would you take a pill? Let me apologize and say that anyone who buys first year is not brainless. IMO, it's not the "best" one to buy (unless you're a collector or something) due to the reasons I've stated, but if you do, I'm not saying you're guaranteed to have problems. You just have a substantially better chance of having problems, and being the victim of sometimes substantial changes, which can leave you and your early production car in the hole.
But again, this doesn't mean that you're brainless. Sorry, I guess I used too strong of a word.

Oh for God sake, would you take a pill? Let me apologize and say that anyone who buys first year is not brainless. IMO, it's not the "best" one to buy (unless you're a collector or something) due to the reasons I've stated, but if you do, I'm not saying you're guaranteed to have problems. You just have a substantially better chance of having problems, and being the victim of sometimes substantial changes, which can leave you and your early production car in the hole.
But again, this doesn't mean that you're brainless. Sorry, I guess I used too strong of a word.

IMO, Buying one of the first 04 V's was the BEST thing I have ever done as far as cars go. It was the first manual Caddy made in over 50 or so years. 400 hp sleeper. People giving me the thumbs up all of the time. Street racing a Ferrari and being asked at the light,"what is that car"?!? Every problem that I ever had, Cadillac took care of(except the license plate bumber holes on my 05). I could go on and on...All for 50K!
This next one has 150 more HP, and the MRC, and the paddle options, and the wider rubber, and the POP UP NAV. I could go on and on.......all for 62K! I hope I can get 20K to put down.
I can't wait for the track tests.

There are a few times in life when a person can, and should, make a decision based on input other than strictly logic. And this can apply to anyone from any profession including an engineer - as I've been for the past 35 years. I had no intention of buying my V when I heard one of the first in Denver had just been delivered to a local dealer in early Feb 04. I, of course, had read all of the car magazine test reports well in advance and knew the specs, limitations, and problem areas. One of the problems as I recall was the coolant temperature warning alarm going off incestantly during testing and cutting short a track test. So I approached this first year car cautiously never planning to buy after the test drive.

However, I was no more than 2 or 3 minutes into the test drive and I knew I had to have this car. As it turned out I didn't buy THIS care but ordered one that day and had mine in 5 weeks. And I've never second guessed my spur of the moment decision to this day. Has it had problems - sure. Could I have saved money by buying a used 2004 or 2005 - sure. Could I have waited a year or 2 for them to iron out the few bugs they eventually did - HELL NO. I don't consider the 06 differential I have had put in under warranty that much better than the original. And yes I've had a few recalls like everyone else including the pinion seal, fuel rail, air bag deployment sensor, etc.

I will need to drive this car before I consider buying - but based on what I've seen and heard so far my first test drive will be deja vu.

Congratulations! :woohoo:
What's that got to do with my post?
My 04V has had more than its fair share of issues, but the dealer has always worked with me and appropriately resolved them.

Personally, I am waiting to purchase until I can pay at or below invoice.

BTW - Katshot, is it just me or is almost every one of your posts negative and whiney? Quit acting like a little bitch. I'm sure its pissing off more people than just myself.

BTW - Katshot, is it just me or is almost every one of your posts negative and whiney? Quit acting like a little bitch. I'm sure its pissing off more people than just myself.

I wanted to say it but didn't want to piss urby off!

i am second in line only to the owner of the dealership in hawaii. they are only expecting five out here so i had to get my name in now. we have already started talking about trading my 05' cts-v for the 09'. only hold up will be if the interior gets any smaller. i am 6'8" and hardly fit in mine now. so i am very excited to see one in person.

There are a few times in life when a person can, and should, make a decision based on input other than strictly logic. And this can apply to anyone from any profession including an engineer - as I've been for the past 35 years. I had no intention of buying my V when I heard one of the first in Denver had just been delivered to a local dealer in early Feb 04. I, of course, had read all of the car magazine test reports well in advance and knew the specs, limitations, and problem areas. One of the problems as I recall was the coolant temperature warning alarm going off incestantly during testing and cutting short a track test. So I approached this first year car cautiously never planning to buy after the test drive.

However, I was no more than 2 or 3 minutes into the test drive and I knew I had to have this car. As it turned out I didn't buy THIS care but ordered one that day and had mine in 5 weeks. And I've never second guessed my spur of the moment decision to this day. Has it had problems - sure. Could I have saved money by buying a used 2004 or 2005 - sure. Could I have waited a year or 2 for them to iron out the few bugs they eventually did - HELL NO. I don't consider the 06 differential I have had put in under warranty that much better than the original. And yes I've had a few recalls like everyone else including the pinion seal, fuel rail, air bag deployment sensor, etc.

I will need to drive this car before I consider buying - but based on what I've seen and heard so far my first test drive will be deja vu.

Ya know Rich, I had a similar view of the car after driving it for the first time. And as I recall, I posted my feelings right here on this forum back then. Quite probably the finest handling car I'd ever driven. Overall "feel" was simply amazing. If I could have gotten by the cheap, ugly interior, and so-so exterior styling, I might have gone for it as you did. That's probably why I have mixed feelings about driving this new car. Unlike the Gen. 1 car, this one has me won over in the interior/exterior styling already, so I'm afraid that if it drives anything like the Gen. 1, I'm going to get obsessed with owning one. But then the sticker price will have me looking for a 2nd job too. :(

My 04V has had more than its fair share of issues, but the dealer has always worked with me and appropriately resolved them.

Personally, I am waiting to purchase until I can pay at or below invoice.

BTW - Katshot, is it just me or is almost every one of your posts negative and whiney? Quit acting like a little bitch. I'm sure its pissing off more people than just myself.

I wanted to say it but didn't want to piss urby off!

Oh no. And I'm SO concerned about pissing some of you off. Get over it ladies.
Try reading ALL my posts on this car and you'd see that for the most part, I really like it and have been very supportive of it. But I know you guys like to zero in on anything that's not 100% glowing and condemn it. That's okay.

Ya know Rich, I had a similar view of the car after driving it for the first time. And as I recall, I posted my feelings right here on this forum back then. Quite probably the finest handling car I'd ever driven. Overall "feel" was simply amazing. If I could have gotten by the cheap, ugly interior, and so-so exterior styling, I might have gone for it as you did. That's probably why I have mixed feelings about driving this new car. Unlike the Gen. 1 car, this one has me won over in the interior/exterior styling already, so I'm afraid that if it drives anything like the Gen. 1, I'm going to get obsessed with owning one. But then the sticker price will have me looking for a 2nd job too. :(

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I can look past a few things in the interior styling and I think the exterior styling of the Gen 1 was an eye opener - maybe too stand-out for some but fine with me. The more important thing is how the car feels and you can only determine that with a test drive. My 04 fits me like a glove and I feel completely connected with it when I'm in the cockpit. Probably a little like you should feel when you operate any piece of machinery to be totally comfortable and in control. And that's why I can look past the few faults I've had to live with in this car although I hope the next gen has some improvements in design execution - which only time will tell.

I loved the Gen 1 version because it was a unique car, exterior and interior.

But I would never buy one when they first come out. For one thing it is almost winter here in Utah when they come out. 8 months later or so the price will probably drop by $5k or so. All Cadillacs have a pretty dismal depreciation. That doesn't mean that I don't love their cars. If I buy a V, I'll wait until the demand goes down. With a car that costs close to $65-70k, the demand will decrease soon. The I hate American buyers will run over to their Mercedes dealer and buy a C63 for a few $k more. Others that love the performance (and a better depreciation value) will just go to Chevy and pick up a loaded Vette for about $10k less. I really think they priced the V too high. $62k est for base + options + GGT.

Heck my 05 V had more then its share of issues. The CTS seemed to improve since then. I got tired of going to my dealer all the time. Since then I have owned 3 other GM cars with barely any problems. Definitely not ones that showed up in my almost $50k V.

I'm not 100% but i will consider the V next year. Wow, what a beast.

I'll be looking when my STS-V lease is up a little over a year from now. By then the car should be on the road for a good 4 or 5 months and the vibes from owners will be all over this site.

Kadonny,
Just noticed you went from a '06 CTS-V to a '07 STS-V. I'm curious as to why?

So, fkn.fst.cdy.808, srt/8bmw(name change please), cbloveday, and ylwjacket are in. You will be the new guinea pigs and you should be proud. I don't know any of you but I admire your commitment. I am officially 85%. Every time I read a new article I want it more!!!

I confirmed with the dealer again last week that I'm still number 1. They are probably getting tired of that weekly phone call. :-)

It may have its new car problems, who knows. But, I'm willing to see. By summer, I will have had my current car 4 years and about 75k miles, so I'm ready for something new.

I figure that the cars I have/am cross-shopping this one with cost 30k more than this one will, so I have a little room for some add-ons or fixes, so I'm not toooooooo awfully worried about it.

I was going to get a new car in January, but I waited to see the specs on the new V. After I saw the specs on the V, I figured it was worth waiting a few more months.

Kadonny,
Just noticed you went from a '06 CTS-V to a '07 STS-V. I'm curious as to why?

Why many of us jumped. Hassles and problems. My main problem was oil consumption. I had the LS2 in my 06 and got it replaced by GM after 6000 miles because it was eating 1-2 quarts of oil every 750 miles. After the swap, my new LS2 was eating 1 qt every 1000 miles. Couple that with a blown clutch master cyl. and a few other things and the car was in the shop for about 45 days in the first 9 months of ownership.

I got my dealer to buy it back and moved into the STS-V. I have been a happy Caddy owner ever since.

With all that, I still would glady go back to the CTS-V only because GM has totally redisgned the car. I also found out I like not rowing the gears anymore, so the new V with a paddle auto would fit my bill perfeclty. How can you not love 550 hp with the car designed from ground up to handle it.

Why many of us jumped.
I got my dealer to buy it back and moved into the STS-V. I have been a happy Caddy owner ever since.

With all that, I still would glady go back to the CTS-V only because GM has totally redisgned the car. I also found out I like not rowing the gears anymore, so the new V with a paddle auto would fit my bill perfeclty. How can you not love 550 hp with the car designed from ground up to handle it.


Im gonna sit on the sidelines for at least a year...let the bugs work out. My 04CTSv was a grenade waiting to explode. From what the dealer tells me its on its 4th owner in as many years....the STSv has been a blessing. No issues, nice and smooth, but its a barge. I will be back in the CTSv after some of the tweaks are ironed out.

F

I originally thought I'd be in the first group of buyers. I may still make that decision. I will likely wait a few months to see what the reaction here is.

The decision to buy a car like this, with its cost of purchase and cost to operate, is purely based on want rather than need. I definitely want this.

Prior to my considering this car, I had been considering buying a Corvette (always been a personal dream to own one) and keeping my RL as a daily and winter driver. The CTS-V allows me to have both in one car payment.

I wanted to say it but didn't want to piss urby off!

calling it as you see it is fine

Im gonna sit on the sidelines for at least a year...let the bugs work out. the STSv has been a blessing. No issues, nice and smooth, but its a barge. I will be back in the CTSv after some of the tweaks are ironed out.

F

:yeah:

Im gonna sit on the sidelines for at least a year...let the bugs work out. My 04CTSv was a grenade waiting to explode. From what the dealer tells me its on its 4th owner in as many years....the STSv has been a blessing. No issues, nice and smooth, but its a barge. I will be back in the CTSv after some of the tweaks are ironed out.

F

Personally, I liked the STS-V better myself, purely from a mainly "looks" point of view. I wonder why you say the car is a "barge" though? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the CTS and STS virtually the same size?

No, not really.

No, not really.

How so?
Exterior dimensions are pretty damn close. Length is 6" different but width is only 2" different, and height is <1" different. Weight is the biggest difference, Approx. 350# different. Interior dimensions are all within 1-2" too.
So as I said, I'm wondering how one sees the STS as a "barge"?

It's a barge. Go drive one. Then drive a CTS-V. There are many who've crossed over and they'll all tell you the same. The CTS-V's handling is definitely crisper than the STS-V. The STS-V is over 360 lbs heavier. It's a barge.

Oh, and it's actually 7.5 inches longer. Don't know bout you, but that's a good amount of extra size, if ya ask me. :yup:

Softer suspension tuning, slower steering ratio, more front biased weight distribution and a 3 inch longer wheelbase make a big difference in the handling feel of the STS-V compared to the Gen 1 CTS-V.

I many times have wondered this myself. The STS is not all that bigger than the CTS (as Katshot pointed out), but having driven both (never driven a STS-V) many times, the driving dynamics are just two worlds apart. The CTS, to me, always feels smaller than it is, and the STS feels, well, like a big heavy car, aka "a barge".

Tony just summed it up best!

Softer suspension tuning, slower steering ratio, more front biased weight distribution and a 3 inch longer wheelbase make a big difference in the handling feel of the STS-V compared to the Gen 1 CTS-V.

I can see that the car might be a slightly softer version of virtually the same car (dimensionally) but found it odd to call it a "barge". Also, I can't find weight distribution figures for the two car but wonder why the STS would be more front end heavy since has a lighter engine. The supercharger adds a lot of weight I guess. Shades of why the '09 CTS-V is so heavy? Maybe. But on top of all that, don't forget the STS-V has a good deal more power than the CTS-V (Gen. 1 of course).
Personally, the thing that kills to car for me is the price. Talk about sticker-shock.:eek:

How is the STS-V even viable as a model after the CTS-V comes out? That being said how is the STS viable at all?

STS is a barge, a nice one but it is still one. The CTS is designed to get first time Cadillac owners, STS is decided for those that want an "upgrade" in size. I would probably go with the AWD version of the STS but now the CTS has one also.

Also, I can't find weight distribution figures for the two car but wonder why the STS would be more front end heavy since has a lighter engine.


I don't know how you figure it has a lighter engine, because the Northstar VVT is one heavy sucker. Quad cam, cam phasers, intercooler, supercharger, pullies, 4 valves per cylinder....it all adds up to a lot more than a 2 valve per cylinder, cam in block motor like the LS6.

I don't know how you figure it has a lighter engine, because the Northstar VVT is one heavy sucker. Quad cam, cam phasers, intercooler, supercharger, pullies, 4 valves per cylinder....it all adds up to a lot more than a 2 valve per cylinder, cam in block motor like the LS6.

From what I can find, the Northstar is lighter than the LS2 but not much I'll give you. Your quote lets up a little early though since you'll notice I DID mention that admittedly, the supercharger etc. probably DOES add a good deal of weight.

STS is a barge, a nice one but it is still one. The CTS is designed to get first time Cadillac owners, STS is decided for those that want an "upgrade" in size. I would probably go with the AWD version of the STS but now the CTS has one also.

Think we've already pointed out that the cars are NOT "dimensionally" significantly different. This is EXACTLY why you prove the point I was making. People obviously "think" the STS is bigger but it's really not.

How is the STS-V even viable as a model after the CTS-V comes out? That being said how is the STS viable at all?

I've asked that same question many times myself.

From what I can find, the Northstar is lighter than the LS2 but not much I'll give you. Your quote lets up a little early though since you'll notice I DID mention that admittedly, the supercharger etc. probably DOES add a good deal of weight.


Huh- did a quick check, and the Northstar's not as much of a porker as I remember.


LS2 (6.0L Pushrod) = 412 pounds

LH2 (4.6L Northstar VVT) = 417 pounds

LC3 (4.6L Supercharged Northstar VVT) = 467 pounds


It looks like the SC and related hardware adds 50lbs to the engine assembly. That doesn't include the intercooler, plumbing and extra fluid weight.

Think we've already pointed out that the cars are NOT "dimensionally" significantly different. This is EXACTLY why you prove the point I was making. People obviously "think" the STS is bigger but it's really not.The STS is bigger. But the interior dimensions are not. But since the STS-V is a Superporker, it's a barge. For those of us in the know, it's easy to comprehend...

Huh- did a quick check, and the Northstar's not as much of a porker as I remember.


LS2 (6.0L Pushrod) = 412 pounds

LH2 (4.6L Northstar VVT) = 417 pounds

LC3 (4.6L Supercharged Northstar VVT) = 467 pounds


It looks like the SC and related hardware adds 50lbs to the engine assembly. That doesn't include the intercooler, plumbing and extra fluid weight.Isn't the S/C Poon* 4.4 litres?

Personally, I liked the STS-V better myself, purely from a mainly "looks" point of view. I wonder why you say the car is a "barge" though? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the CTS and STS virtually the same size?No offense to C or Florian or any other STS owner here, but the STS and STS-V were redesigned at the last minute per Lutz. And to me, it looks like it. The CTS looks like a complete theme from front to back. The lines work and the whole car looks congruent. I think the CTS-V looks worlds better than the STS-V.

Huh- did a quick check, and the Northstar's not as much of a porker as I remember.


LS2 (6.0L Pushrod) = 412 pounds

LH2 (4.6L Northstar VVT) = 417 pounds

LC3 (4.6L Supercharged Northstar VVT) = 467 pounds


It looks like the SC and related hardware adds 50lbs to the engine assembly. That doesn't include the intercooler, plumbing and extra fluid weight.

Now see, I came up with about 450lb. for the LS2.

The STS is bigger. But the interior dimensions are not. But since the STS-V is a Superporker, it's a barge. For those of us in the know, it's easy to comprehend...

Dude, the car's are only 6" different in length, and 2" or less in any interior dimension. Hardly enough of a difference for anyone to be moving from one to the other because of size.

Isn't the S/C Poon* 4.4 litres?

Yeah but I wasn't going to get picky. But as long as YOU are...

superporker lol

No offense to C or Florian or any other STS owner here, but the STS and STS-V were redesigned at the last minute per Lutz. And to me, it looks like it. The CTS looks like a complete theme from front to back. The lines work and the whole car looks congruent. I think the CTS-V looks worlds better than the STS-V.

Obviously a subjective call, and I'm assuming you're referring to the '09 CTS-V. Hardly a fair comparison. How about we wait and compare the next Gen. STS-V.

Personally, I liked the STS-V better myself, purely from a mainly "looks" point of view. I wonder why you say the car is a "barge" though? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the CTS and STS virtually the same size?

Kat,

They are indeed built on the same Sigma platform, BUT, the STSv isnt nearly as solid in the corners as the CTSv. Ive had both, I can compare objectively. The STSv just doesnt have the same 'feel' as the CTSv did....but I kind of like my Luxo-barge.


F

Obviously a subjective call, and I'm assuming you're referring to the '09 CTS-V. Hardly a fair comparison. How about we wait and compare the next Gen. STS-V.

no new STS-v, that style is over.

F

I can also tell you from owning both, the STS-V feels much bigger when sitting in it. 6 inches or not, I have more legroom in the STS-V and way more shoulder room.

Kat,

They are indeed built on the same Sigma platform, BUT, the STSv isnt nearly as solid in the corners as the CTSv. Ive had both, I can compare objectively. The STSv just doesnt have the same 'feel' as the CTSv did....but I kind of like my Luxo-barge.


F

no new STS-v, that style is over.

F

I can also tell you from owning both, the STS-V feels much bigger when sitting in it. 6 inches or not, I have more legroom in the STS-V and way more shoulder room.

:yeah: :yeah: :yeah:

F-16 vs an F-14 The CTS-V is more nimble, but the STS-V is more plush and a little bit fatter in the ass, but it will also haul ass while playing MP3s in Dolby 5.1. :D

I can also tell you from owning both, the STS-V feels much bigger when sitting in it. 6 inches or not, I have more legroom in the STS-V and way more shoulder room.

Isnt the Gen2 CTS bigger than Gen1? Im just trying to figure out how someone standing on a showroom floor looking at the CTS-V and STS-V picks the STS-V. Especially when it appears that it will be more expensive. I hoped to pick up a used STS-V in afew years now I gotta figure a Gen2 CTS-V would be a better deal

Isnt the Gen2 CTS bigger than Gen1? Im just trying to figure out how someone standing on a showroom floor looking at the CTS-V and STS-V picks the STS-V. Especially when it appears that it will be more expensive. I hoped to pick up a used STS-V in afew years now I gotta figure a Gen2 CTS-V would be a better deal

Gen2 CTS-V is slightly larger than Gen1. Weight of the Gen2 CTS-V will be very close to that of the current STS-V if not the same. The STS-V has features and luxuries the Gen1 CTS-V does not, plus it doesn't carry a rear end that tends to blow apart(s) with excessive wheel hop because it's pretty much nannied, so off the line it goes. Gen2 CTS-V is supposed to remedy this. Although we don't yet know for sure, a Gen2 CTS-V may not be too far off in price from a current STS-V, although you can pick up a slightly used and Cadillac Certified STS-V now for about the same as a new Gen1 CTS-V.

the way this is playing out, the STS-V is going to be a rare breed, which is pretty cool in some ways. annoying in a few others.

Isn't the S/C Poon* 4.4 litres?

Yeah, it is. That's what I get for typing too fast. :doh:

Now see, I came up with about 450lb. for the LS2.

http://www.gmperformanceparts.com/_res/pdf/CrateEngineQRC2008.pdf

Obviously a subjective call, and I'm assuming you're referring to the '09 CTS-V. Hardly a fair comparison. How about we wait and compare the next Gen. STS-V.
Nope, I was talking about the current CTS-V.

Next Gen STS-V???

:hmm:


I wouldn't hold your breath too long for that to show up in the showroom anytime too soon..... more like never.

IMO (please notice I said that), I really liked the "looks" of the Gen. 1 STS better than the CTS. Unfortunately, the STS-V ended up with a super-charged, revised version of the Northstar (not good IMO). Honestly, that put me in a VERY hard place when trying to pick one over the other. Deciding factor was driven home when I saw the MSRP of the STS-V :eek:
Nice car but the price invoked instant MEGA-sticker-shock. Damn shame.
Now comes the new CTS. Hmmm...really liked it as soon as I saw it. Then comes the '09 CTS-V. My reaction? WOW!!!!! SUPER WOW!!!!!!!
But....then I start thinking about the price, the power, the insurance.....Hmmm.
Then, I see the review of the CTS w/DI V6 engine. My brain starts wondering wehther the "V" is really worth my time. Yeah it's more powerful but.....with RWD the power is mostly kept away from me due to lack of traction (damn computer). But realistically, even if I defeat the T/C the power is unusable. So do I really want/need it? Is the standard CTS w/DI engine a better idea? Hmmm
Just not sure.

I have owned both the CTS-V and the STS-V. The CTS-V has a smaller interrior because people used to complain about getting in and out of it. CTS-V interior is cheap looking. Like many have specified I switched because of all the problems I had with the CTS-V. It handles great though but that is about it.

I drive in heavy traffic and I need an auto. Only time I race is on the freeway. STS-V is a far superior car in my opinion because I like all the technology bells and whistles. The interior is far superior to the CTS-V as well.

They have fixed my complaints in the new CTS-V so I will eventualy get one when they allow GMS.

STS was not designed at the last minute by Lutz.
He was not a fan of Art and Science and when he saw the design of the STS he rounded off some of the sharp edges and LOWERED the roof 1".
My feeling is he messed the car up.
I didn't feel that the STS offered any more usable room than the CTS, but I heard that for the second year the front seat travel was increased.
I am comfortable in newer STSs, but also feel that the new CTS offers more legroom than the previous gen.

And for those that argue that the STS is not that much bigger in each dimension, a few inches here and there, especially in wheelbase can totally change the feel of the car. Add in a couple 100lbs of extra weight + softer supension and the change can be huge.
Barge might be an overstatement but I got his point.

STS was not designed at the last minute by Lutz.
He was not a fan of Art and Science and when he saw the design of the STS he rounded off some of the sharp edges and LOWERED the roof 1".
My feeling is he messed the car up.
I didn't feel that the STS offered any more usable room than the CTS, but I heard that for the second year the front seat travel was increased.
I am comfortable in newer STSs, but also feel that the new CTS offers more legroom than the previous gen.

And for those that argue that the STS is not that much bigger in each dimension, a few inches here and there, especially in wheelbase can totally change the feel of the car. Add in a couple 100lbs of extra weight + softer supension and the change can be huge.
Barge might be an overstatement but I got his point.

I have not driven a STS V but I have driven an 08 STS as a warranty rental. Maybe it is not a fair comparison to a CTS V but the term luxurious "barge" is not an overstatement based upon the feeling I got after a few days. And I'm not talking just they way it responds in handling. It just feels too big inside and outside. It accelerates reasonably well (better than a standard barge no doubt) but the proportions are not conducive to a responsive vehicle in the corners. It kind of ... well ... floats. The bigger the proportions the more the mass unless a tremendous amount of up-front thinking (and cost) goes into the materials of construction. I'm hoping that the 2" width gain combined with the 300+ lb weight gain in the 09 CTS V doesn't affect its current nimbleness - which only a test drive will tell.

Comparing an STS to an STS-V is like comparing a CTS (Gen I) to a CTS-V. Might as well compare the V's to a Park Avenue, it's about as valid.

I'm hoping that the 2" width gain combined with the 300+ lb weight gain in the 09 CTS V doesn't affect its current nimbleness - which only a test drive will tell.

Because we all know that wider track width is bad for handling, right? Look what a wide track did to the handling of the Corvette and Viper....just terrible, I say.

:suspect:

Because we all know that wider track width is bad for handling, right? Look what a wide track did to the handling of the Corvette and Viper....just terrible, I say.

:suspect:

I would say that the 2" gain in overall width contributed a significant amount to the weight gain. If the associated increase in track width helps the handling and skidpad cornering, as it apparently has on the base 2008 CTS, I'm all for it. If not, I can do without the increased width AND weight. The wider, lower profile tires on the new V should help as much as the track width at a much lower weight penalty.

STS was not designed at the last minute by Lutz.
He was not a fan of Art and Science and when he saw the design of the STS he rounded off some of the sharp edges and LOWERED the roof 1".
My feeling is he messed the car up.
I didn't feel that the STS offered any more usable room than the CTS, but I heard that for the second year the front seat travel was increased.
I am comfortable in newer STSs, but also feel that the new CTS offers more legroom than the previous gen.

And for those that argue that the STS is not that much bigger in each dimension, a few inches here and there, especially in wheelbase can totally change the feel of the car. Add in a couple 100lbs of extra weight + softer supension and the change can be huge.
Barge might be an overstatement but I got his point.I said it was REdesigned per Lutz at the last minute. And then you go on to prove my point. Whether you like it or hate it is no matter. But it was done...

IMO (please notice I said that), I really liked the "looks" of the Gen. 1 STS better than the CTS. Unfortunately, the STS-V ended up with a super-charged, revised version of the Northstar (not good IMO). Honestly, that put me in a VERY hard place when trying to pick one over the other. Deciding factor was driven home when I saw the MSRP of the STS-V :eek:
Nice car but the price invoked instant MEGA-sticker-shock. Damn shame.
Now comes the new CTS. Hmmm...really liked it as soon as I saw it. Then comes the '09 CTS-V. My reaction? WOW!!!!! SUPER WOW!!!!!!!
But....then I start thinking about the price, the power, the insurance.....Hmmm.
Then, I see the review of the CTS w/DI V6 engine. My brain starts wondering wehther the "V" is really worth my time. Yeah it's more powerful but.....with RWD the power is mostly kept away from me due to lack of traction (damn computer). But realistically, even if I defeat the T/C the power is unusable. So do I really want/need it? Is the standard CTS w/DI engine a better idea? Hmmm
Just not sure.

I read it twice just to be sure. You should follow your gut and get the V-6. Then, you can argue everything in the CTS forum. If your thinking about insurance costs, well, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha cough, cough, ha, yeahh. This is gonna be too big and bad. Gas is gonna be expensive too.
I am now 86% comitted to first day ownership.

I would say that the 2" gain in overall width contributed a significant amount to the weight gain. If the associated increase in track width helps the handling and skidpad cornering, as it apparently has on the base 2008 CTS, I'm all for it. If not, I can do without the increased width AND weight. The wider, lower profile tires on the new V should help as much as the track width at a much lower weight penalty.

Not so sure about that. Look at the weights of the base car verses the V. This is why I said the DI car might actually be a better choice. It benefits from the wider track and at the same time doesn't have to pay as much of a penalty from increased weight. I wouldn't be surprised to see magazines pointing out things like, "...although the V is certainly higher powered, it takes more effort to drive fast, and "feels" slower in some ways due to it's increased weight..."
Bottom line, the DI car might feel "lighter on it's feet" even though it's performance is ultimately down a notch overall.

thebigjimsho,

My apology. I read thru all 8 pages quickly then responded to what I thought(or assumed) you posted. My internet reading comprehension is not what it used to be.

Not so sure about that. Look at the weights of the base car verses the V. This is why I said the DI car might actually be a better choice. It benefits from the wider track and at the same time doesn't have to pay as much of a penalty from increased weight. I wouldn't be surprised to see magazines pointing out things like, "...although the V is certainly higher powered, it takes more effort to drive fast, and "feels" slower in some ways due to it's increased weight..."
Bottom line, the DI car might feel "lighter on it's feet" even though it's performance is ultimately down a notch overall.

The DI V6 is a fine car but down a notch overall thats :cookoo: Try about 3-4 notches. The new CTS line is a world class car no doubt but the 09V will be a world class beater. New territory for a American sedan... Can't wait:lildevil:

Not so sure about that. Look at the weights of the base car verses the V. This is why I said the DI car might actually be a better choice. It benefits from the wider track and at the same time doesn't have to pay as much of a penalty from increased weight. I wouldn't be surprised to see magazines pointing out things like, "...although the V is certainly higher powered, it takes more effort to drive fast, and "feels" slower in some ways due to it's increased weight..."
Bottom line, the DI car might feel "lighter on it's feet" even though it's performance is ultimately down a notch overall.

I followed an 08 CTS today for a few miles - by choice, of course. I must say that from the rear the proportions look good. An aggressive wide stance coupled with what seems to be moderately flared wheel wells makes it look a lot more like a cornering machine than the gen 1 CTS so I don't doubt the skid pad test numbers reported in another thread. I'm sure the V will do even better at the skid pad - but, I agree that any mass set in motion tends to stay in the same directional motion; ie, conservation of momentum. So the real test will be the slalom course where the mass in motion is constantly required to change direction. Then we will see if the suspension, tire grip, and hp can overcome the increased mass.

I think it's already been agreed upon that the gen 2 V is not going to be an autocross machine. Besides, who the hell cares about a slalom test? I don't plan on driving serpentine between the stripes in the road on my way home- I'm interested in the steady state cornering, initial turn in response and how much speed I can carry through a corner (aka lateral grip). Unless your daily commute involves a windy road with each corner spaced 10 feet apart, a slalom test doesn't mean squat.

A multi cone slalom is yet another example of a driving situation that will NEVER occur in the real world, and is a useless magazine number used by Internet racers. BigJim has passed a ton of cars at Gingerman and VIR that are "supposedly" better handlers than the Gen 1 V- I've seen the pictures and heard the tales.

Good handling is a lot more than doing well in some contrived tests in a magazine that have very little reflection on how a car performs in the real world.

thebigjimsho,

My apology. I read thru all 8 pages quickly then responded to what I thought(or assumed) you posted. My internet reading comprehension is not what it used to be.No prob, my man. Sometimes we agree to disagree even when we agree...

I think it's already been agreed upon that the gen 2 V is not going to be an autocross machine. Besides, who the hell cares about a slalom test? I don't plan on driving serpentine between the stripes in the road on my way home- I'm interested in the steady state cornering, initial turn in response and how much speed I can carry through a corner (aka lateral grip). Unless your daily commute involves a windy road with each corner spaced 10 feet apart, a slalom test doesn't mean squat.

A multi cone slalom is yet another example of a driving situation that will NEVER occur in the real world, and is a useless magazine number used by Internet racers. BigJim has passed a ton of cars at Gingerman and VIR that are "supposedly" better handlers than the Gen 1 V- I've seen the pictures and heard the tales.

Good handling is a lot more than doing well in some contrived tests in a magazine that have very little reflection on how a car performs in the real world.

Hell it occurs every day when I have to weave around traffic on the interstate at 70+ mph. Don't be too quick to judge the demands of your customers - your are a purported dealer I take it.

A "purported" Dealer? :lol:

No, that's just my personal opinion as a V owner. Even weaving through traffic, off center steering response and initial turn in is more more important than slalom speed (unless the cars you're weaving between are parked). :D

A "purported" Dealer? :lol:

No, that's just my personal opinion as a V owner. Even weaving through traffic, off center steering response and initial turn in is more more important than slalom speed (unless the cars you're weaving between are parked). :D

Evidently I have you confused with the other "Tony" that frequently posts here.

By the way, I have come across a few "parked cars" on the shoulders of blind curves on mountain roads where a quick maneuver was required for accident avoidance - both to avoid the vehicle and to turn back into the lane to avoid oncoming traffic. Whether you consider that slalom or not is purely subjective.

Seriously, let's face it - how much do the car magazine tests relate to real life driving for any situation? Do we drive in circles or figure eights? Maybe the full out 1/4 mile test can test how quickly we can merge into traffic if the rest of the traffic is doing 110+ MPH - but unlikely.

You're not confused, it just wasn't my opinion as a Dealer or about customers- it was my personal feelings on the issue at hand.

I agree that the magazine tests aren't representative of real world driving, but you have to admit that 0-60 acceleration, braking and skidpad type driving comes into play in the real world a lot more frequently than a slalom.

A skid pad demonstrates the car's handling at its limits in a steady state. A slalom is very telling of how a vehicle handles dynamically. On the street, very rarely are you gonna be in a constant steady state turn. Never mind, at the limits of adhesion in a steady state turn. On a track, yes. On the street, not as likely. It is much more likely that you will test a vehicle's transitioning behavior - and often at its limits - such as in an erratic lane change maneuver, as mentioned above. On top of that, most drivers tend to be erratic. Smooth, not so much.

But yeah, overall, each of the tests are but a piecemeal view of the car's performance as a whole. Nevertheless, it gives us some insight into the vehicle's capabilities, short of plopping our asses into the seat and taking it for a real drive.

On the street, very rarely are you gonna be in a constant steady state turn. Never mind, at the limits of adhesion in a steady state turn. On a track, yes. On the street, not as likely. It is much more likely that you will test a vehicle's transitioning behavior - and often at its limits - such as in an erratic lane change maneuver, as mentioned above. On top of that, most drivers tend to be erratic. Smooth, not so much.



Sorry, but have to disagree here. I'd say MOST of the time is "steady state turn". Think of all the turns you do onto cross streets. Those are steady state turns. Very seldom do I do an erratic lane change type maneuver (can't think of the last time I've had to do it).

Sorry, but have to disagree here. I'd say MOST of the time is "steady state turn". Think of all the turns you do onto cross streets. Those are steady state turns. Very seldom do I do an erratic lane change type maneuver (can't think of the last time I've had to do it).Sorry, but I have to disagree here. Since when do you reach the limit of adhesion turning onto cross streets? There may be a FEW ramps that aren't decreasing or increasing radius turns where steady state stability comes into play. Much more often you need to make a quick correction to avoid a pothole, obstacle or another car. Even on a track, you need to modulate throttle and brake, so steady state even then doesn't come into play that often.

Because there is no real standard gauge to reflect real world events, you go with these numbers in the hopes of translating to the streets...

Sorry, but have to disagree here. I'd say MOST of the time is "steady state turn". Think of all the turns you do onto cross streets. Those are steady state turns. Very seldom do I do an erratic lane change type maneuver (can't think of the last time I've had to do it).

You're kinda misconstruing what I said. I said skid pad testing is a steady state maneuver. However, just because steady state maneuvers are the major type of street driving, that does not translate into the fact that skid pad type maneuvers are the major type of street driving. Don't get it twisted. And try out some logic exercises. They're muy fun!

Turns on cross street are nothing near the nature of skid pad type behavior. Nothing. Skid pad testing is at the very limits of vehicle adhesion. You actually have to go over it and then nudge back to get to the very limits of that type of steady state, at the limits testing. Sorry hombre, you're just not gonna be doing that kinda driving. I never said that erratic lane changes were common. It's just more common (on average; maybe not for you, cuz you're a super duper driver that never places yourself in such a situation where such manuevers would be required) than a skip pad maneuver - i.e. a constant, steady state, at-the-limits turn.

You see, the problem is that, for a skid pad type maneuver, all of those conditions - constant, steady state, at-the-limits - have to be satisifed. Very rarely will that occur on the streets. Unless, you pride yourself in your driving skills and are confident enough to demonstrate that kinda driving, without racking up enough points to lose your license.

On the other hand, due to our overall lack of skill as a driving population, we will often be met with a dicey situation where we will have to demonstrate the car's dynamic transitioning capabilities, and very often, at the limits, as an emergency situation would often demand. Hmmm. Dynamic transitions, at the limits. Those conditons would aptly satisfy a slalom, would they not? Indeed, they would. :yup:

Edit: Looks like you got 'splained to 'ready.

Sarcastic much? Sheesh....:lol:

I can't recall ever putting myself in a situation where I'd have to slalom left and right to avoid danger. Driving a safe distance behind and paying attention all these years has paid off, I suppose. On the other hand, I constantly find myself driving hard through windy roads or accelerating while turning at a pretty sharp angle up a cloverleaf onto the Interstate, so I'm more interested in the initial turn in characteristics and and lateral grip.

If your commute frequently requires slalom maneuvers to avoid a crash, I'd recommend either changing jobs or buying a Miata.

Sarcastic much? Sheesh....:lol:

I can't recall ever putting myself in a situation where I'd have to slalom left and right to avoid danger. Driving a safe distance behind and paying attention all these years has paid off, I suppose. On the other hand, I constantly find myself driving hard through windy roads or accelerating while turning at a pretty sharp angle up a cloverleaf onto the Interstate, so I'm more interested in the initial turn in characteristics and and lateral grip.

If your commute frequently requires slalom maneuvers to avoid a crash, I'd recommend either changing jobs or buying a Miata.

That's my point exactly. I do most of my hard turns from the feeder road onto another 4 or 6 lane road and get it going pretty good when there aren't many cars. When there's traffic or smaller roads, just take it easy.

Gentleman, I wasn't necessarily speaking on behalf of myself. No, I don't find myself swerving everywhere to avoid sudden onslaughts of unforeseen obstacles. So, although I sincerely appreciate the advice on job changes, vehicle choices, and driving behavior, that is not exactly the issue. What I'm saying is that, on average, slalom type maneuvers are more applicable to the driving population as a whole, rather than a skid pad.

Regardless, if I had to assess a vehicle's performance off of one test, either the skid pad or the slalom, I would readily go with the slalom. Each and every time. Due to its dynamic nature, the slalom is a multi-variable test that incorporates many factors - vehicle transition, lateral loads, turn-in characteristics, throttle control, steering feel/preciseness. The skid pad incorporates but one - maximum lateral grip.

You yourselves describe such situations in which you would use all of those variables incorporated into a slalom test and yet you guys still seem to argue otherwise. A slalom gives you more information about a vehicle's performance capabilities than a skid pad. Period. Das eet. No mas. Si? Si. Muy bien. :thumbsup:

Yeah, I know, I'm a sarcastic bastard. Not exactly the most endearing quality. Or so my mommy tells me. Hehe.

Does it really matter anyway since 90% of the drivers that buy the new V will never reach the car's full limits.

Why don't we let the general V population who post here decide.

Could somebody please initiate a poll that asks the question:
What is the most important performance characteristic for the 09 CTS V that can be measured in a commonly available test ?

Possible answers:

straight line acceleration time
braking distance
skid pad g force
slalom time
lap timeFeel free to add other tests but I think these are the basics. Let's settle this once and for all! :D

Why don't we let the general V population who post here decide.

Could somebody please initiate a poll that asks the question:
What is the most important performance characteristic for the 09 CTS V that can be measured in a commonly available test ?

Possible answers:
straight line acceleration time
braking distance
skid pad g force
slalom time
lap timeFeel free to add other tests but I think these are the basics. Let's settle this once and for all! :Dlap time. period.

Why don't we let the general V population who post here decide.

Could somebody please initiate a poll that asks the question:
What is the most important performance characteristic for the 09 CTS V that can be measured in a commonly available test ?

Possible answers:

straight line acceleration time
braking distance
skid pad g force
slalom time
lap timeFeel free to add other tests but I think these are the basics. Let's settle this once and for all! :D

Should chick magnet be on the list? I was told it would be a chick magnet, so I put a deposit down right away. Is it fast also?

Should chick magnet be on the list? I was told it would be a chick magnet, so I put a deposit down right away. Is it fast also?

As long as it can be easily measured and reported in some fashion. How many chicks have you had in (or on) you car at one time? :sneaky:

Does it really matter anyway since 90% of the drivers that buy the new V will never reach the car's full limits.

Thats why every V owner must hit the track at least once. Lap time is the best test.

Why don't we let the general V population who post here decide.

Could somebody please initiate a poll that asks the question:
What is the most important performance characteristic for the 09 CTS V that can be measured in a commonly available test ?

Possible answers:

straight line acceleration time
braking distance
skid pad g force
slalom time
lap timeFeel free to add other tests but I think these are the basics. Let's settle this once and for all! :D

From reading everyone's posts, I think that straight line acceleration is #1. My reason is that everyone seems fixated on the car's power more than anything, and that translates most directly into faster acceleration.

From reading everyone's posts, I think that straight line acceleration is #1. My reason is that everyone seems fixated on the car's power more than anything, and that translates most directly into faster acceleration.Are you serious? That's a lie and unless you really are crazy, you know it...

Dude, look at the posts. There's WAY more concerning the V2's power than anything else. People seem mostly concerned with the power of the car.

The people posting about power are only doing it to point out the flaws in your ridiculous complaining about the car's weight.

The people posting about power are only doing it to point out the flaws in your ridiculous complaining about the car's weight.

Wow! Had no idea I wielded such power. Also didn't realize I was the only one concerned about the weight of the car. Hmmm....:suspect:

Wow! Had no idea I wielded such power. Also didn't realize I was the only one concerned about the weight of the car. Hmmm....:suspect:

Only the power to annoy.....

Only the power to annoy.....

And that means so much coming from you.:rolleyes:

Thanks! :)

Wasn't this thread about buying a 2009 CTS-V before it got turned into an argument about "brainless people" buying first year "porkers" by someone?

Thanks! :)

Wasn't this thread about buying a 2009 CTS-V before it got turned into an argument about "brainless people" buying first year "porkers" by someone?

Hard to tell, been too busy deflecting personal attacks lately. Don't you just hate it when people make personal attacks on other members? Makes you wonder why they don't get banned or something. Hmmm...

Pfffffffffffft. :lol:

You're like the guy who pokes a beehive with a stick and then cries "poor me" when he gets stung. We're all here to get excited about the new CTS-V and discuss the car. Constant streams of negativity like those that pour from your keyboard grow tiresome, and I just happen to be the person who says it bluntly instead of hinting at it like the others on the forum.

I'm not attacking you personally- I'm attacking your constant criticism of the car and ASSumptions about the weight and effectiveness of the MRC- they haven't even tested the car yet, so why don't you realize that you know NOTHING about how it handles yet?

Also, how can you expect people to take your opinions about handling seriously when you don't even know that a Corvette has leaf springs??

Yeah but notice when they gave up the transverse leaf, the car ascended to a whole new level of handling etc. I understood what you were saying, was just surprised you brought up something so old. Thought maybe you thought they still used leafsprings.

Should chick magnet be on the list? I was told it would be a chick magnet, so I put a deposit down right away. Is it fast also?

Weeeeell. Helllllo there. :RightTurn:



ROFL!!! :lol:

Hard to tell, been too busy deflecting personal attacks lately. Don't you just hate it when people make personal attacks on other members? Makes you wonder why they don't get banned or something. Hmmm...OMG, you've got to be kidding me. About the most personal thing said to you was when I called you Katshot the Magnificent.

Pfffffffffffft. :lol:

You're like the guy who pokes a beehive with a stick and then cries "poor me" when he gets stung. We're all here to get excited about the new CTS-V and discuss the car. Constant streams of negativity like those that pour from your keyboard grow tiresome, and I just happen to be the person who says it bluntly instead of hinting at it like the others on the forum.

I'm not attacking you personally- I'm attacking your constant criticism of the car and ASSumptions about the weight and effectiveness of the MRC- they haven't even tested the car yet, so why don't you realize that you know NOTHING about how it handles yet?

Also, how can you expect people to take your opinions about handling seriously when you don't even know that a Corvette has leaf springs??

I could make 1 negative post in 100 and you and guys like you will dwell on it , and hold it against me forever. As I've said many times, if you look back on my posts concerning the V2, you'd see that the vast majority are positive. And the posts that you and some others call negative are usually just trying to look at things from all sides. Unfortunately, you and guys like you are so afraid of anything but high-five, me too, glowing endorsements of your views, that you simply can't stand it, and feel the need to lash out against it. Grow up and try to have an open mind, will you?
And what the heck does knowing about a Corvette's rear suspension have to do with one's knowledge of handling? Like I said, you just can't stand for someone to have a different opinion than you, and just have to try to attack and discredit that person.

OMG, you've got to be kidding me. About the most personal thing said to you was when I called you Katshot the Magnificent.

Dude, I almost got banned simply because I asked why he was being a jerk. Nothing compared to what I've been called in this thread alone.

There is a difference between being hopeful and ignorant. Stop painting us with a broad brush like you always do. As for the "poor me" attitude, skip it. I've seen a select few positive posts from you on the V2. Add to that the ever constant caveat. You suffer from the "Yeah buts". "I really like the look BUT it can never, ever, ever, ever handle like the V1 did. It's humanly impossible and you guys are too ignorant to know what I know."

If you think that's an exaggeration, I can guarantee that almost everyone here thinks you sound like that...

Not doing anything like a "poor me", just stating a fact. Too often here, anyone with anything less than a 100% pro Cadillac or pro CTS-V comment is labeled a trouble maker, troll, whatever. I try to make sure that I limit my comments to the car or the subject at hand but quite often, that's too much to ask of the rest of you. Actually, only a few. The vast majority seem to be able to have an open conversation, and actually accept that there's more than one side to an issue.
To summarize my thoughts on the car:
I really like the '09 and have said so many times. I have expressed concern about the weight but admit that until it's actually driven we won't know specifically how well the OEM has dealt with it. My concern is not specifically about this exact car though. Other OEMs are doing similar things. I pointed out that although you can (to a point) make up for added weight, I don't think it's the best way to go.
I pointed out that perhaps the car is over-powered, and as evidence of this I point to the fact that without the many electronic systems installed and turned on, the car would be very hard to drive at anything near the limits in most situations. Again, this is not so much to criticize THIS car but to bring attention to the idea that the horsepower war is starting to get out of control on these cars.
I mentioned that the car is rather expensive but mainly that discussion was driven by another member's comments about it (the V2) finally being available to the common man. My following comments were made trying to point out that a $70,000 car is hardly anything the "common man" can afford.
I pointed out (actually posed the question) about how GM might have bitten into V2 sales with the DI-powered CTS since it might possess a more well-rounded package (power and weight wise) but certainly found that was NOT a popular thing to say.
So how this gets turned into me mainly criticizing the car etc., etc., etc., is beyond me. I get criticized as being a troll, a whiner, anti-Cadillac, anti-GM, ignorant (there's more but I can't think of them right now) and for pissing on everyone's parade, and I'm the bad guy here?

:nothing2add:

Not doing anything like a "poor me", just stating a fact. Too often here, anyone with anything less than a 100% pro Cadillac or pro CTS-V comment is labeled a trouble maker, troll, whatever. I try to make sure that I limit my comments to the car or the subject at hand but quite often, that's too much to ask of the rest of you. Actually, only a few. The vast majority seem to be able to have an open conversation, and actually accept that there's more than one side to an issue.
To summarize my thoughts on the car:
I really like the '09 and have said so many times. I have expressed concern about the weight but admit that until it's actually driven we won't know specifically how well the OEM has dealt with it. My concern is not specifically about this exact car though. Other OEMs are doing similar things. I pointed out that although you can (to a point) make up for added weight, I don't think it's the best way to go.
I pointed out that perhaps the car is over-powered, and as evidence of this I point to the fact that without the many electronic systems installed and turned on, the car would be very hard to drive at anything near the limits in most situations. Again, this is not so much to criticize THIS car but to bring attention to the idea that the horsepower war is starting to get out of control on these cars.
I mentioned that the car is rather expensive but mainly that discussion was driven by another member's comments about it (the V2) finally being available to the common man. My following comments were made trying to point out that a $70,000 car is hardly anything the "common man" can afford.
I pointed out (actually posed the question) about how GM might have bitten into V2 sales with the DI-powered CTS since it might possess a more well-rounded package (power and weight wise) but certainly found that was NOT a popular thing to say.
So how this gets turned into me mainly criticizing the car etc., etc., etc., is beyond me. I get criticized as being a troll, a whiner, anti-Cadillac, anti-GM, ignorant (there's more but I can't think of them right now) and for pissing on everyone's parade, and I'm the bad guy here?

It's more acceptable for someone that actually owns the car to criticize it. No one owns an 09 V right now
Most of us are pro-V, pro-cadillac, pro-whatever, who cares-we're just hoping V2 improves on V1
Some trolls do disguise their intentions by saying "I like the car but this, but that....
Some trolls just plainly bash the vehicle in question straight up and then we bash back until they give up and leave
A lot of us wishes GM does well and that we get cars that can compete with the best in the world
550/550 is not too much power, if it is buy something slower-it's your money
So what if the car is heavier than you want it to be, There's lighter cars out there
There's nothing wrong with the 08 CTS and the people that want a V will buy one sooner or later

It's more acceptable for someone that actually owns the car to criticize it. No one owns an 09 V right now
Most of us are pro-V, pro-cadillac, pro-whatever, who cares-we're just hoping V2 improves on V1
Some trolls do disguise their intentions by saying "I like the car but this, but that....
Some trolls just plainly bash the vehicle in question straight up and then we bash back until they give up and leave
A lot of us wishes GM does well and that we get cars that can compete with the best in the world
550/550 is not too much power, if it is buy something slower-it's your money
So what if the car is heavier than you want it to be, There's lighter cars out there
There's nothing wrong with the 08 CTS and the people that want a V will buy one sooner or later

Well put.
...and don't worry about the naysayers. The same "people" were saying similar things before the V1 came out too. :yawn:

The CTSv is supposed to have the same specs as the new GTO. That should keep it well below 400hp. I think it's 345hp.

Talk about getting carried away by the press guys!!!
Come on, the CTSv is nothing more than a "carrot" hanging out there somewhere in front of all Cadillac enthusiasts. The M5 has been out there proving itself for years.
Once the CTSv actually hits the market, THEN compare it to the M5. You're comparing a few year old model to a future model.
You're letting the press get you all stirred up.

The speculation is OVER guys!!!
Next gen. M5 to have 500HP V10
That shoots the CTSv in the ass. Sorry Cadillac.

:zing:

haha

lgIB9XRaj0E&feature

kittens?

Too much power huh? I was hoping for 600.

Delta wing airplanes are conditionally stable. Without the electronics they would not be hard to control, they'd be impossible.

Very high power cars can be handled by a much wider population with the advent of ever better electronics. By intependently controlling the behaviours of the 4 contact patches of the car they are able to do things no driver could, no matter how skillfull. High power automatics are easier for the average Joe to control than a manual because the system can add clutch engagement, torque management and upshifting to its array of stratigies.

The day will soon come if it is not here already where an 800 hp car can be controlled more easily than a 400 hp car of a few years ago, yet still yield the performance advantages of the higher power.

Hard to tell, been too busy deflecting personal attacks lately. Don't you just hate it when people make personal attacks on other members? Makes you wonder why they don't get banned or something. Hmmm...

You complain a lot and always take the negative side of things.

I am still at 86% for 1st day off the lot purchase. I am pumped for first tests. When will Caddy let them go for a test ride? What are the chances of one showing up for the track day on May 9th. If there are 40 V owners there, you think they might have a guy run a few laps just to toy with us. They would probably sell a new V to everyone there!

I am torn between a M3, V2, or a nice new Camaro SS(Z28) vert. But the V2 is leading right now by a huge margin.

I am torn between a M3, V2, or a nice new Camaro SS(Z28) vert. But the V2 is leading right now by a huge margin.

Well it's certainly the most expensive car on that list.

Well it's certainly the most expensive car on that list.Probably...

Maybe...

Fooooooo Sho