: M/T COTY Base CTS Test Data - Interesting



CVP33
02-09-08, 12:35 PM
Did anyone read the Motor Trend Car of the Year test data? Very interesting what the base CTS is able to do. It posted .89g's in the skidpad, 26.40 figure 8 time, which matched the Audi TT and beat the WRX! The .89g's really impressed me with only 235/50/18's. Imagine what more width and less sidewall will do for this. I know this isn't the same, but this IS pretty telling of what the new V may be capable of doing.

BowenCT
02-09-08, 01:07 PM
It's like taking a pretty girl, and jabbing her with Clemens' boy's special cocktail.....

Katshot
02-09-08, 07:16 PM
Did anyone read the Motor Trend Car of the Year test data? Very interesting what the base CTS is able to do. It posted .89g's in the skidpad, 26.40 figure 8 time, which matched the Audi TT and beat the WRX! The .89g's really impressed me with only 235/50/18's. Imagine what more width and less sidewall will do for this. I know this isn't the same, but this IS pretty telling of what the new V may be capable of doing.

But do you think the extra weight the V will carry will temper the increases you might expect?

jasaero
02-09-08, 09:04 PM
But do you think the extra weight the V will carry will temper the increases you might expect?

The extra weight is going to be heavily offset by 250hp, 10% stiffer suspension, MRC shocks, michelin PS2 rubber, and two much nicer transmissions. Not to mention seats that actually hold you in place during that side loading allowing you to concentrate on the test time maxing more. It will make all those numbers look silly and like childs play basically.

jasaero
02-09-08, 09:10 PM
Not to mention the HUGE brake rotors and multipiston Brembo squeezers. I figure it will be .95g or so and probably run that same figure 8 in 24 or more than likely less. Definately under the near 25 of the A6.

Katshot
02-09-08, 09:16 PM
The extra weight is going to be heavily offset by 250hp, 10% stiffer suspension, MRC shocks, michelin PS2 rubber, and two much nicer transmissions. Not to mention seats that actually hold you in place during that side loading allowing you to concentrate on the test time maxing more. It will make all those numbers look silly and like childs play basically.

I was mainly talking about the skidpad numbers. I'm well aware the V will be far superior to the base car in all aspects but weight can play a very important part that all the brakes, and power, and tires, and........will not offset.

HiTechRV
02-09-08, 11:12 PM
I was mainly talking about the skidpad numbers. I'm well aware the V will be far superior to the base car in all aspects but weight can play a very important part that all the brakes, and power, and tires, and........will not offset.

Hmm larger, stickier tires are certainly able to offset weight on a skidpad. That would literally be their function, in fact.

NormV
02-10-08, 12:03 AM
Skid pad numbers are static. Throw in left and rights like a slalom or a figure eight. Look at BMW skid pad then compare them to transision like a slalom wher they really excel in suspension tuning.


Norm

thebigjimsho
02-10-08, 01:17 AM
255 and 285 PS2s with magneato shocks and typically stiffer everything is going to more than push the envelope that much further.

NormV
02-10-08, 01:41 AM
Sdd a couple hundred pounds above center of gravity...we'll see as the Gen 1 V was slightly better the Gen 2 base. The v2 will not be the autocross winner in Super Stock. There is no way that that 4200 lbs will be competive in the tight stuff.

The magnetic stuff works wonders on a bumpy track as I have seen in the C5 but it weighs similar to the Z06 with the Z winning. The V2 weighs 400 lbs more than V1. Can't over come physics.



255 and 285 PS2s with magneato shocks and typically stiffer everything is going to more than push the envelope that much further.

thebigjimsho
02-10-08, 01:47 AM
Sdd a couple hundred pounds above center of gravity...we'll see as the Gen 1 V was slightly better the Gen 2 base. The v2 will not be the autocross winner in Super Stock. There is no way that that 4200 lbs will be competive in the tight stuff.

The magnetic stuff works wonders on a bumpy track as I have seen in the C5 but it weighs similar to the Z06 with the Z winning. The V2 weighs 400 lbs more than V1. Can't over come physics.You most certainly can. The SRTs are actually very competent handlers at 4200lbs. The new V should be that much better.

NormV
02-10-08, 02:15 AM
Slower than the V1 in motor Trend figure eight. Add. A hundred pounds to the top of the engine and we'll see. :)


Norm


You most certainly can. The SRTs are actually very competent handlers at 4200lbs. The new V should be that much better.

SRT8/BMW
02-10-08, 09:48 AM
You most certainly can. The SRTs are actually very competent handlers at 4200lbs. The new V should be that much better.

BINGO! My SRT would SHOCK someone who didn't know..it handles better than you'd ever believe for a car that size. I expect the new V to be even better..maybe substantially.

I did test drive the EDI 3.6 CTS--it was as good as advertised in the twisties. My salesman knew thats what I wanted to do, so thats where he took me with the car, and he encouraged me to "push it" which, being the friendly sort....I obliged.:thumbsup::thumbsup::eek::eek:

jasaero
02-10-08, 10:03 AM
Slower than the V1 in motor Trend figure eight. Add. A hundred pounds to the top of the engine and we'll see. :)


Norm

As much or probably MORE weight is coming from the HUGE brakes. They are about as low as you can get something on the car. The CG could be lower than you are expecting because of this fact.

EDIT: Also forgot the larger wheels required to got around the pizza sized brakes that are not only larger diameter, but also wider than any previous CTS wheel. These better brakes and wheels are overkill compared to the weight increase also and are going to help figure 8 times by allowing them to stay on the throttle longer in each straight.

Katshot
02-10-08, 11:22 AM
Hmm larger, stickier tires are certainly able to offset weight on a skidpad. That would literally be their function, in fact.

In a very basic way, yes but you can't simply say, "damn the mass, give it bigger tires". Just doesn't work that way.

Katshot
02-10-08, 11:26 AM
You most certainly can. The SRTs are actually very competent handlers at 4200lbs. The new V should be that much better.

SRT's "very competent handlers"?????
Sorry but I've driven them all and I'm not sure I'd have them in even my top 20 when choosing an auto-crosser.

Katshot
02-10-08, 11:31 AM
As much or probably MORE weight is coming from the HUGE brakes. They are about as low as you can get something on the car. The CG could be lower than you are expecting because of this fact.

EDIT: Also forgot the larger wheels required to got around the pizza sized brakes that are not only larger diameter, but also wider than any previous CTS wheel. These better brakes and wheels are overkill compared to the weight increase also and are going to help figure 8 times by allowing them to stay on the throttle longer in each straight.

You DO understand that all this extra mass you seem to think is a good thing is actually increased unsprung weight and increasing that is NOT a good thing, right?

HiTechRV
02-10-08, 11:51 AM
In a very basic way, yes but you can't simply say, "damn the mass, give it bigger tires". Just doesn't work that way.


It kinda does. You can get any mass you want to skidpad how you want if you get the cg, track width, tire contact patch and grip right. This car has a wider track and wider rubber. I loved my Gen I but it had absurdly narrow tires for it's mass and engine output, yet still cornered decently. I believe we will see that the wider, further spaced tires on the Gen II more than offset the small percentage mass increase.

CVP33
02-10-08, 12:20 PM
SRT's "very competent handlers"?????
Sorry but I've driven them all and I'm not sure I'd have them in even my top 20 when choosing an auto-crosser.

I don't believe that BigJim called it an autocrosser. I believe he called it a competent handler, which it is. The Miata is a better autocrosser, but I don't believe that adds anything to the discussion here. The question is can a 4,200 lb. vehicle be a competent handler and with proper engineering even outperform a vehicle weighing 3,850. Ala, the V1 vs. the V2. The quick answer is of course, the prudent answer is, we'll find out very soon.

CVP33
02-10-08, 12:21 PM
You most certainly can. The SRTs are actually very competent handlers at 4200lbs. The new V should be that much better.

And BTW, what the hell? What the hell? :eek:

NormV
02-10-08, 02:06 PM
Figure-8 results from MT:

MT fig-eight, sec @ avg g
25.6 @ 0.72(V)
26.1 @ 0.68(GTO)
26.3 @ 0.70(SRT-8)


http://images.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0502_trio15_z.jpg


Don't think the mag shocks(MSRC) are going to make up the almost 400 lbs. difference in V1 and V2. There is a marginal difference on the C5 Corvette when using a stiffer Z51 package compared to MSRC. The V1 will still be the auto cross champ.


MotorTrend – “The Suspension Dimension.” (September 2004)

"The performance mode ensures flat cornering no matter what the speed. In a way, the MSR system inspires a bit more confidence when pushing the car hard around the track — it prevents the body from becoming unsettled when the suspension loads and unloads over undulating surfaces.

"The compromise is the slightly slower turn-in. It just doesn't feel as razor sharp as the Z51 when attacking a corner's apex. The real value however in the MR system is that it nearly eliminates the surprise factor out on the open road when encountering a pothole or other unseen road irregularity.”

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/7004/suspensions-of-disbelief.html

"Bottom line: Magnetic Selective Ride Control strikes us as a bargain, and if you don't plan to go racing, or if you're buying the roadster, this is likely the best choice."

MRSC shocks on a C5. Note the extra hardware along with another computer:

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-sts-forum-2005-beyond/118248-do-magnetic-ride-shock-units-wear.html

Norm

NormV
02-10-08, 02:06 PM
Figure-8 results from MT:

MT fig-eight, sec @ avg g
25.6 @ 0.72(V)
26.1 @ 0.68(GTO)
26.3 @ 0.70(SRT-8)


http://images.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0502_trio15_z.jpg


Don't think the mag shocks(MSRC) are going to make up the almost 400 lbs. difference in V1 and V2. There is a marginal difference on the C5 Corvette when using a stiffer Z51 package compared to MSRC. The V1 will still be the auto cross champ.


MotorTrend – “The Suspension Dimension.” (September 2004)

"The performance mode ensures flat cornering no matter what the speed. In a way, the MSR system inspires a bit more confidence when pushing the car hard around the track — it prevents the body from becoming unsettled when the suspension loads and unloads over undulating surfaces.

"The compromise is the slightly slower turn-in. It just doesn't feel as razor sharp as the Z51 when attacking a corner's apex. The real value however in the MR system is that it nearly eliminates the surprise factor out on the open road when encountering a pothole or other unseen road irregularity.”

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/7004/suspensions-of-disbelief.html

"Bottom line: Magnetic Selective Ride Control strikes us as a bargain, and if you don't plan to go racing, or if you're buying the roadster, this is likely the best choice."

MRSC shocks on a C5. Note the extra hardware along with another computer:

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-sts-forum-2005-beyond/118248-do-magnetic-ride-shock-units-wear.html

Norm

HiTechRV
02-10-08, 03:20 PM
Fair points but don't forget that that 'vette has the version 1 of the magneto suspension system, made for the street and explicitly not the track. This is the version 2 system some exotics run, and designed for combined track and street use.

lawfive
02-10-08, 03:56 PM
Boys, the new V (which I'm in love with) is an overweight cow, period. A souped up overweight cow with sticky hooves, magneto-rheological flanks, and cast iron udders. Centripetal force pushes a heavier cow harder than a skinny cow, full stop. Once the car mags get hold of production V's, it should be interesting to see what, and how well, the engineers have done to keep the cow from sliding sideways. I'll especially interested in seeing the difference on a skidpad between "Computer: everything on!" (e.g. 'happy cow') and "Computer: everything off!" (e.g. 'barbeque').

Until then, it's all just pointless Brokeback cowboy yodeling.

CVP33
02-10-08, 04:18 PM
Interesting to me that the new '08 CTS is only .10 slower in the figure 8 than the SRT-8. Hmmmmmm.

HITMONEY
02-10-08, 07:41 PM
I got the March 08 Car And Driver with the CTS-V on the cover with the words..

"CTS-V Cadillac's 550hp M5 Beater"


In the glowing article which is half as much about the outgoing CTS-V, they say and I quote, "Cadillac expects skidpad performance to be a bit north of 0.90g."

That is awesome all things considered.

HiTechRV
02-10-08, 08:19 PM
Boys, the new V (which I'm in love with) is an overweight cow, period. A souped up overweight cow with sticky hooves, magneto-rheological flanks, and cast iron udders. Centripetal force pushes a heavier cow harder than a skinny cow, full stop. Once the car mags get hold of production V's, it should be interesting to see what, and how well, the engineers have done to keep the cow from sliding sideways. I'll especially interested in seeing the difference on a skidpad between "Computer: everything on!" (e.g. 'happy cow') and "Computer: everything off!" (e.g. 'barbeque').

Until then, it's all just pointless Brokeback cowboy yodeling.

LMAO - well said.

thebigjimsho
02-10-08, 11:29 PM
SRT's "very competent handlers"?????
Sorry but I've driven them all and I'm not sure I'd have them in even my top 20 when choosing an auto-crosser.


I don't believe that BigJim called it an autocrosser. I believe he called it a competent handler, which it is. The Miata is a better autocrosser, but I don't believe that adds anything to the discussion here. The question is can a 4,200 lb. vehicle be a competent handler and with proper engineering even outperform a vehicle weighing 3,850. Ala, the V1 vs. the V2. The quick answer is of course, the prudent answer is, we'll find out very soon.Thanks Chris, you're absolutely right. It's good to see that someone actually reads and can correctly comprehend what I say. I have done my fair share of autocrossing and track days and I understand the difference between the two.

Yes, all out weight will always deter vehicles with decent handling from putting up good times on a tight course. But that also doesn't disqualify a vehicle from having competent handling on a larger road course and on public roads. Autocrossing is a unique bird that the smaller and lighter vehicles do best in. And while I enjoy autocrossing, I much prefer larger road courses and want my vehicles to do better on the latter.

As for the SRT Charger/Magnum/300 trio, they most definitely had excellent handling. Not V handling, but certainly very good.

jasaero
02-11-08, 01:19 PM
You DO understand that all this extra mass you seem to think is a good thing is actually increased unsprung weight and increasing that is NOT a good thing, right?

YES I do, but it add much more than it subtracts many performance characteristics. And adds more than it subtracts OVER ALL. It will hurt acceleration and suspention efficiency a bit, but not in a huge way compared to how it helps stop the extra weight from the charger and the brakes themselves. Basically nothings free in a design trade study. Ceramic rotors like those on the ZR1 would have been preferable, but those brakes alone are probably worth nearly half the cost of this cars final retail price. I was just pointing out this was probably were most of the weight comes from and it's actually pretty low on the car. Not sure what all else they have done to the suspension either other than it has been stated it is reworked some. It's possible they tried to get back some of the lost suspension efficiency in the heavier rolling hardware by messing with the actual linkage designs.

HITMONEY
02-11-08, 02:04 PM
Why all this crap about weight I don't understand..... :cookoo:

You want a track car off the showroom floor, buy a Vette, Viper, Lotus, etc etc..

I am planning on buying this car to go fast and perform while I am listening to my mp3s talking hands free on my cell phone punching in my destination on the NAV while sunning my face through the sunroof and cooling off with the A/C having nice conversation at a reasonable level with my girl sitting next to me... and in the process knowing that not much else is going to fly up the on ramp faster than I.

I'm sure you can take delivery of your CTS-V, rip out all the shat that makes it a Cadillac, soundproofing, radio, nav, headliner,carpet. backseat,.. while you are at it rip out the passenger front seat cause all passengers do is add weight anyway and you will have yourself one fast track car. Not what Cadillac had in mind, but hey.. its your 70k. You are free to throw away the CTS and just keep the V portion. I'll be happily a few 10ths behind you rocking out to Kid Rock. :sneaky:

Kadonny
02-11-08, 04:59 PM
Interesting to me that the new '08 CTS is only .10 slower in the figure 8 than the SRT-8. Hmmmmmm.


CVP, hang a sign on the SRT right now that says "For Sale", then take the next 8 months to decide what color V you'll want :stirpot:

annie
02-11-08, 07:24 PM
Every time I hear how all this added weight is going to make CTS-V and ZR1s slow and lazy handlers I look back at my May 2007 issue of Road & Track.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=5015

Download the data panel of this 4000 lb mag. shocked car and then tell me the CTS-V and ZR1 are going to be fat slow non handlers.

And please do not be like a friend of mine that said "but its a farrari" because that means nothing.

jasaero
02-11-08, 08:22 PM
Every time I hear how all this added weight is going to make CTS-V and ZR1s slow and lazy handlers I look back at my May 2007 issue of Road & Track.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=5015

Download the data panel of this 4000 lb mag. shocked car and then tell me the CTS-V and ZR1 are going to be fat slow non handlers.

And please do not be like a friend of mine that said "but its a farrari" because that means nothing.

Good comparison! A BIT lighter(V1 weight) and good bit more power to weight, but extremely impressive numbers that are surprising for the weight and wheelbase. We'll see numbers soon enough. Still say it took the Ring in under 8 minutes already.

Katshot
02-11-08, 09:58 PM
You guys need to study physics and it's impact on vehicle dynamics if you think mag. shocks are going to do what you think. Sadly mistaken IMO, but time will tell I suppose. I have a funny feeling that although the '09 V will out-power the '07, it will NOT be the choice among those looking for a car for a day at the track. The Gen. 1 was as close as Cadillac is going to get to a dual-purpose car. And that's saying a lot IMO. A CADILLAC that is still a hell-raiser at the track. Amazing.

HiTechRV
02-12-08, 12:14 AM
Kat how do you explain this thing terrorizing the locals at Nurburgring? I'm a degreed engineer and took a physics class or two, albiet long ago. I liked my '07. I'm going to like the '09/'10 more. On the street or on the track. The '07 was severely hampered by the tiny wheels, even with race tires. It did well for such a heavy car (yes, both are heavy for track cars) but I do not think the '07 will be able to keep up with the '09's times at Nurburgring, much less at the drag strip.

NormV
02-12-08, 01:09 AM
New caddy moto:

"It's the shocks"!

Still will not be a cone burner or feel light and nimble in emergency moves to the V1 razor like steering.

Norm

jasaero
02-12-08, 08:29 AM
You guys need to study physics and it's impact on vehicle dynamics if you think mag. shocks are going to do what you think. Sadly mistaken IMO, but time will tell I suppose. I have a funny feeling that although the '09 V will out-power the '07, it will NOT be the choice among those looking for a car for a day at the track. The Gen. 1 was as close as Cadillac is going to get to a dual-purpose car. And that's saying a lot IMO. A CADILLAC that is still a hell-raiser at the track. Amazing.

It's not just the MRC shocks Katshot. This car has the same wheelbase as the V1, but is a good bit wider in track, that helps the physics. It has bigger wheels and tires which help the physics. Another thing you seem to be loosing some understanding on is that added weight doesn't hurt cornering traction in quite the way you seem to think. The car will stay on the corner because of the static friction capability between the tire and the road. That friction capability actually increases with weight because friction is a product of the weight pushing the tires onto the pavement and the friction coefficient for the particular tire compound with a particular pavement. The new PS2 tires are sticker than those on the OEM V1 and the added weight actually helps so long as it doesn't all end up on only 2 tires. The MRC basically helps ensure the weight is divides as equally as possible between all 4 tires by taking lean out in the corners and helping the V2 corner much flatter than the V1 allow for FAR more overall static friction capability in a corner. Really bigger cars are handicaped far more by longer wheelbases and wider tracks making tighter corners harder to find good fast lines through since the car can nearly not even fit though the corner in the first place. They are also handicapped by normally higher CG's which tend to force too much weight onto the wheels on the outside of the corner, which can be helped with extra width AND MRC.

The weight itself is not what normally handicaps them. Just look at the Veyron! You cannot tell me that car can't handle! It is just as heavy as this new V though. Now it has a much lower CG and wider track, but did post sub 25 sec figure 8 times on MT while weighing about the same as the V2. The V2 will easily take the V1 in about EVERY test and track with it's wider track, similar CG height, bigger brakes, higher power, and MRC. The weight really isn't important so long as the tires and wheels are improved to handle the higher loading and th CG doesn't go higher or track go narrower. The track actually got wider and I really don't think think the CG moved up or down much at all. CG actually might be a bit lower. Only thing that didn't improve is the CG went forward on the car a bit which is really probably worse than the extra weight.

thebigjimsho
02-12-08, 10:13 AM
New caddy moto:

"It's the shocks"!

Still will not be a cone burner or feel light and nimble in emergency moves to the V1 razor like steering.

NormNice ASSumption...

NormV
02-12-08, 06:36 PM
Good reference in the 599 sports car/GT annie. I don't think 599 owners will be driving their cars for the 12K lease window. Probably have to buy two sets of tires the first year. Sports car in many case are tuned to do one thing, go as fast as possible. The suspension geometery and settings would not work on a passenger car. So stop comparing the V2 to sports cars, it isn't fair.


Weight or friction?

3900 lbs. V with Michelin Pilot all seasons vs. 2900 lbs. C5 with Dunlop M3 perf. snow tires. I was hoping the V would be comparable since the almost 1000 lbs would put higher psi under each tire and even after I added 70 lbs. of fuel the V could not handle the white stuff. Didn't matter if it was slush or soft powder there was no degree of snow or slush where the V would accel expect for punching it from a stop where the tires would dig in below the snow and the V would scoot. I was even hoping with the 250 lbs more per corner, probably closer to 300 lbs. for the front two, that it would turn and bit quicker. No luck. Real world example just did not work. So I parked it and drove the C5 and had a blast passing 4wd in the snow covered lane.

Friction is important and you will not get friction from just shear weight. dead weight, unsprung weight, or any other weight. Besides you'll have to move that weight some time from a static test like a skid pad and it don't like to be moved quickly.

Faster than 8 seconds for a 4200 4-door passenger car? Sports cars with almost half a ton less have a hard time doing that! 599 with a 4.18 rear and much better gear ratios than any GM car only ran a 7:47 on the 'ring! It is just a weight thing! :)

Nurburgring lap times:

7m43s --- Lamborghini Murcielago
7m50s --- BMW E46 M3 CSL
7m56s --- Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale
7m56s --- Porsche 996 Turbo
7m56s --- Chevrolet Corvette Z06 C5
7m56s --- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (since proven incorrect)
8m09s --- Ferrari 360 Modena
8m12s --- Porsche 993 Turbo
8m13s --- Dodge Viper SRT-10
8m18s --- Chevrolet Corvette C5
8m24s --- Subaru Impreza WRX STi
8m32s --- Porsche Boxster S
8m38s --- Honda NSX 3.2



http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f4/z06-nurenburgring-75950/

Norm



It's not just the MRC shocks Katshot. This car has the same wheelbase as the V1, but is a good bit wider in track, that helps the physics. It has bigger wheels and tires which help the physics. Another thing you seem to be loosing some understanding on is that added weight doesn't hurt cornering traction in quite the way you seem to think. The car will stay on the corner because of the static friction capability between the tire and the road. That friction capability actually increases with weight because friction is a product of the weight pushing the tires onto the pavement and the friction coefficient for the particular tire compound with a particular pavement. The new PS2 tires are sticker than those on the OEM V1 and the added weight actually helps so long as it doesn't all end up on only 2 tires. The MRC basically helps ensure the weight is divides as equally as possible between all 4 tires by taking lean out in the corners and helping the V2 corner much flatter than the V1 allow for FAR more overall static friction capability in a corner. Really bigger cars are handicaped far more by longer wheelbases and wider tracks making tighter corners harder to find good fast lines through since the car can nearly not even fit though the corner in the first place. They are also handicapped by normally higher CG's which tend to force too much weight onto the wheels on the outside of the corner, which can be helped with extra width AND MRC.

The weight itself is not what normally handicaps them. Just look at the Veyron! You cannot tell me that car can't handle! It is just as heavy as this new V though. Now it has a much lower CG and wider track, but did post sub 25 sec figure 8 times on MT while weighing about the same as the V2. The V2 will easily take the V1 in about EVERY test and track with it's wider track, similar CG height, bigger brakes, higher power, and MRC. The weight really isn't important so long as the tires and wheels are improved to handle the higher loading and th CG doesn't go higher or track go narrower. The track actually got wider and I really don't think think the CG moved up or down much at all. CG actually might be a bit lower. Only thing that didn't improve is the CG went forward on the car a bit which is really probably worse than the extra weight.

atdeneve
02-12-08, 07:31 PM
Norm, Annie's post in regards to the 599 Fiorano GTB actually kinda contradicts what you're sayin. She was kinda sayin that all this talk of how the weight is gonna yield "fat slow non handlers" was rubbish.

The 599 had a test weight of over 4000 pounds, over 800 lbs more than the Enzo (curb weight 3865 vs Enzo's 3010), is down on power by 49 hp (611 vs 660), and yet is faster 0-60 by 0.5 sec (3.2 vs 3.7) and only 0.1 sec behind the Enzo in the quarter mile (11.2 sec @ 129.3 mph). Pretty impressive. Even the Ring time you noted of "only 7:47" is damn fast. Hell, anything under 8:00 minutes on the Ring is damn fast. The only car on the list you provided that was faster was the Murcielago. The 599 was faster than an arguably more purpose built Stradale. I don't think there are any stock cars that can dip below high 7:30s.

Bottom line, it's a fast car despite it's weight. I don't know if you wanna use that car to champion your point.

NormV
02-12-08, 08:18 PM
Europe's finest sports cars have a hard time breaking 8 minutes at the 'ring. Don't think 4400 lbs wet manual trans 'merican luxo barge is going to up stage European's finest on their home turf. If so, GM better make plans on price and production levels.


Still don't shocks are going make this a new revolution. Manufactures would have done it long time ago and so would race teams.

It's not the "shocks", it's the "shoes" that make the biggest difference!

It's a friction thing! If you have over a decade of driving you'd understand. :)

I'll pay the first round at Lindsay track day in May if my no faster than "8:07 ring time" holds up. Hopefully we'll have some days by then.

Norm

HiTechRV
02-12-08, 11:04 PM
I predict the new stock CTS-V will beat the old one on the ring.

CVP33
02-12-08, 11:05 PM
Still don't shocks are going make this a new revolution.
Norm

Speaking in tongues? Norm, you frighten me. :eek:

NormV
02-12-08, 11:27 PM
Speaking in tongues? Norm, you frighten me. :eek:

Crackberry Pearl limits my ability to make corrections. Sorry!

Still don't think MRC will will be a new revolution!

Guys out your money where your mouth is! :)

Norm

HITMONEY
02-13-08, 02:29 AM
Crackberry Pearl limits my ability to make corrections. Sorry!

Still don't think MRC will will be a new revolution!

Guys out your money where your mouth is! :)

Norm


I did.



(BTW, I use a Pearl Too. How does it limit your ability to make corrections?)

MacOSR
02-13-08, 09:38 AM
I predict the new stock CTS-V will beat the old one on the ring.

I would second that ;-)

NormV
02-13-08, 11:19 AM
I would second that ;-)

8:09 on the Nurburing for the 580 hp RS6!

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=124536?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..1

Norm

SRT8/BMW
02-13-08, 01:49 PM
so, a 4400 lb. car can do fairly well on the ring..?? :bighead:

The Tony Show
02-13-08, 02:23 PM
8:09 on the Nurburing for the 580 hp RS6!

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=124536?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..1

Norm

How many more threads are you going to post this in?

NormV
02-13-08, 02:57 PM
MRC/DRC(mag shocks) are not the end all some of you have made it to be.

http://forums.audiworld.com/rs4b7/msgs/19080.phtml

The thread shows tuner who also races, caddy does not have one currently, says that once you change the spring rates or sway bars might as we'll throw those magnetic shocks in the trash!

Would be neat since the RS4 is already using them if V2 could use the Ohlins stuff?



so, a 4400 lb. car can do fairly well on the ring..?? :bighead:

Cadillac Tony
02-13-08, 03:04 PM
Cadillac first used Delphi's MRC on the '02 STS- if performance oriented marques like Audi and Ferrari are licensing the technology, you know it's good.

The article you link to is a blatant advertisement for their product, so of course they're going to rave about how great and how much better than stock it is. Also, changing to a traditional valved shock and stiffer spring will remove the drag launch recognition that the MRC provides. Here's a novel idea- why don't we wait to see some performance figures and drive the car before talking about ditching the stock suspension?

NormV
02-13-08, 03:49 PM
If you what Ohlins cost and how they perform you'd be on soap box about them also.

I think we pretty much narrowed the performance measure as in that thread they even mention failures also. So there might be a delay on V2.

The MRC tech was used in the 80's on the Corvette too.

I'd bet that RS6 in previous post is running MRC also and only ran a 8:09 on the 'ring.

The V2 will still be the value leader in it's category, just nothing more and still behind the Vette. :)


Norm

Cadillac Tony
02-13-08, 04:05 PM
Wow- you are really out in left field on this one.

Of course it will be "behind" the Corvette in terms of performance- in case you missed the press release, it's a 4-door Luxury Performance Sedan. It will never compete with the Corvette, nor is it intended to. Why some of you feel the need to compare the two just because of the LSx engine connection is beyond me. Also, MRC was first used in a production vehicle by Cadillac on the 2002 STS- it was never used in a Corvette in the 80's.

The CTS-V will be far more than the "Value Leader" in the class but you'll never admit it, even when the instrumented tests prove you wrong.

thebigjimsho
02-13-08, 04:11 PM
Funny how the vast majority here are hopeful and excited but obviously very dumb, since NormV and katshot KNOW the new CTS-V will handle like cow udder sludge.

Tell you what guys, why not wait until this car is driven before you declare it a land barge...

NormV
02-13-08, 04:15 PM
Does the second Gen base CTS use MRC?

If so, impressive performance!

Norm



Did anyone read the Motor Trend Car of the Year test data? Very interesting what the base CTS is able to do. It posted .89g's in the skidpad, 26.40 figure 8 time, which matched the Audi TT and beat the WRX! The .89g's really impressed me with only 235/50/18's. Imagine what more width and less sidewall will do for this. I know this isn't the same, but this IS pretty telling of what the new V may be capable of doing.

Cadillac Tony
02-13-08, 04:23 PM
From the road test of the 599 GTB Fiorano on Winding Road:


After two hours on the crowded autostradas, with their uncomfortable speed differentials and closing rates, we slipped off onto the two-lanes and struck the mother of all winding roads—a hill-climb course from years gone by that just seemed to go on forever with each perfect turn blending into the next. It was here that we enjoyed the best demonstration of the GM/Delphi/Ferrari MagneRide technology ever. We’ve driven Corvettes with this very advanced electro-magnetic ride control system, as well as a number of demonstrations in a variety of prototypes ranging from sedans to SUVs, but the dash up this Italian mountain in this brand new Ferrari was the clincher. The 599 sat square on its wheels and accommodated every kind of surface imperfection. It responded to steering inputs with micrometer precision. Turn-in was sharp and direct, and the car seemed to know the exact trajectory required to negotiate each turn. Driver and passenger are constantly in touch with the tires. There are moments when you think you can actually read centrifugal force pushing the tires outward, and electro-mechanically managed traction pushing back.

It is curious that so few writers have mentioned the GM/Delphi connection in describing this electro-magnetic suspension control system. Obviously, Chairman Montezemolo felt no such diffidence. As he said, they wanted the best, and they went to General Motors. We have actually seen an American journalist choke on his beer when told that the best Ferrari built (so far) is running around on a Detroit-developed suspension-control system.

atdeneve
02-13-08, 04:37 PM
Oooh, the burn.

NormV
02-13-08, 04:43 PM
Your right Tony!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/automobiles/21CARS.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&position=&oref=slogin

Looks like MRC is used in caddy, corvette, buick, and even in truck driver seats! It was the electronically controlled shocks that were used in the Vette that I was thinking of.

Time will tell but looks like this is nothing new but a better way to control the new porkers! :)

Kat, others, and myself are just realist since the info is already out there.


Norm

HITMONEY
02-13-08, 04:45 PM
If you what Ohlins cost and how they perform you'd be on soap box about them also.

I think we pretty much narrowed the performance measure as in that thread they even mention failures also. So there might be a delay on V2.

The MRC tech was used in the 80's on the Corvette too.

I'd bet that RS6 in previous post is running MRC also and only ran a 8:09 on the 'ring.

The V2 will still be the value leader in it's category, just nothing more and still behind the Vette. :)


Norm



I cringe at the thought of how many more months we are going to have to endure this bullshit.

:banghead:

Cadillac Tony
02-13-08, 05:00 PM
Your right Tony!

Time will tell but looks like this is nothing new but a better way to control the new porkers! :)

Kat, others, and myself are just realist since the info is already out there.


Norm

Not many people would consider a ZR-1 or a 599 GTB a "porker", but whatever you say, man. You're correct that "the info is out there", and all the info on MRC shows that it's an amazing technology that helps ride, handling and launch ability.

Kat, others and yourself aren't realists- you're pessimists. I don't know if it's model year envy or ignorance, but there's no reason to constantly deride a car that no one has driven yet, especially when the specs look so promising.

It absolutely blows my mind that a forum can be so full of negativity before the first official performance spec is even published.

NormV
02-13-08, 05:28 PM
This thread went from objective to subject really quick!

You guys Democrats?!

Chris posts about performance numbers of the CTS and we're trying to find out where the V2 will end up. I think we're getting close! Good discussion!

NormV
02-13-08, 05:42 PM
I cringe at the thought of how many more months we are going to have to endure this bullshit.

:banghead:

Just the facts and allot to read rather buying based on euphoria and being disappointed as some are with V1.


Under promise and over deliver. Hope GM does the same for those buying the V2.


Norm

HITMONEY
02-13-08, 06:51 PM
Just the facts and allot to read rather buying based on euphoria and being disappointed as some are with V1.


Under promise and over deliver. Hope GM does the same for those buying the V2.


Norm

I think you are taking it a weee bit further than that.

"Porker", "Value Leader"

Then bashing a technology you obviously know nothing about, MRC


It is more than apparent that you dislike the car and come off as though you want to see it fail for reasons only you know.

<shrug>

NormV
02-13-08, 09:00 PM
Jasaero, the only thing I could find was. 8:15 for the M5 and 8:09 for the M6. This was right from the M5 Board.

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=70438&highlight=nurburing


Do a search for V2 and most are supporting the home team in their second attempt to challenge the Germans. :)


Norm


Good comparison! A BIT lighter(V1 weight) and good bit more power to weight, but extremely impressive numbers that are surprising for the weight and wheelbase. We'll see numbers soon enough. Still say it took the Ring in under 8 minutes already.

HiTechRV
02-13-08, 10:00 PM
Guys this is the forum about the new CTS-V. If you just want to post about why the old V is better, maybe the 2004-2007 forum would be a better place for that.

jasaero
02-13-08, 10:23 PM
MRC/DRC(mag shocks) are not the end all some of you have made it to be.

http://forums.audiworld.com/rs4b7/msgs/19080.phtml

The thread shows tuner who also races, caddy does not have one currently, says that once you change the spring rates or sway bars might as we'll throw those magnetic shocks in the trash!

Would be neat since the RS4 is already using them if V2 could use the Ohlins stuff?

Obviously, but the whole point of MRC is so you don't have to use RACECAR aggresive stiffness sway bar and springs to get NEAR race car cornering grip!! That's the whole point of MRC on performance oriented vehicles that also need a comfortable everyday ride.

jasaero
02-13-08, 10:40 PM
Jasaero, the only thing I could find was. 8:15 for the M5 and 8:09 for the M6. This was right from the M5 Board.

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=70438&highlight=nurburing


Do a search for V2 and most are supporting the home team in their second attempt to challenge the Germans. :)


Norm

http://forums.e60.net/index.php?showtopic=34760

They have sources for most of the times, but an outdated video link for the 7:52 M5 time. This was probably not an M5 with stock rubber or even street legal rubber for that matter, but pretty sure the V2 will be in this same realm though if given whatever upgrades that M5 might have had. RS6 or better for sure. Has better weight balance than the RS6, but not quite at M5 balance levels. It'll be in the same league no matter how you look at it.

NormV
02-13-08, 10:53 PM
Base 2008 CTS hit 8:40(8:19 for V1) on the ring. :)

Norm

Rolex
02-14-08, 01:11 AM
Play nice please. :lock:

lawfive
02-14-08, 02:57 AM
Aren't they?

Katshot
02-14-08, 09:43 AM
Wow, I've missed a lot on this thread!
I agree the V2 has a decent amount of improvements specifically geared to minimize the penalties of the car's ballooning weight but I think that it's a plan they will not be able to continue for long. You can only make the car so wide, the tires so large, the brakes so big, etc., etc., etc.
I mean, what's next? 600hp w/4800lb. curb weight? Eventually, the damn thing's gonna have to be as wide as a Hummer with tires bigger than a Viper! Increase power, add weight and try to keep compensating for it? I just don't think it's the smart way to go.
And my comments about the shocks were mainly meant to point out that IMO, too many people here seem to think they can accomplish things way beyond reality. It's a friggin' shock, nothing more. Like they could make up for all the other suspension components.:cookoo:
My guess would be that if, and when people start seriously racing these cars, those shocks will be among the first things removed.

The Tony Show
02-14-08, 10:54 AM
Only about 5% of CTS-V owners (and that's being generous) really "race" their cars. The other 95% drive to work and back, and enjoy a twisty road on the weekend. Will those 5% ditch the MRC and go with a standard shock? Maybe, but we won't know until someone tests the damn thing!

As an aside: I find it sad that there's more pissing about and degrading of this car HERE on the Cadillac Forums then there is on the M5 board. About 80% positive over there, if you care to have a look. Just sad, really.

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=110390&highlight=cts-v

ylwjacket
02-14-08, 11:20 AM
As an aside: I find it sad that there's more pissing about and degrading of this car HERE on the Cadillac Forums then there is on the M5 board. About 80% positive over there, if you care to have a look. Just sad, really.



Mostly initiated here by 1-3 people who have no intention of buying it anyways. At least for this person who plans to buy, it just ain't worth arguin' with these folks.

If they intend not to buy, that's fine. But I'm going to fill 15 pages of message board arguing about it with them. They will still be arguing about it on these boards when they get :smack:from the new V.

thebigjimsho
02-14-08, 11:27 AM
Wow, I've missed a lot on this thread!
I agree the V2 has a decent amount of improvements specifically geared to minimize the penalties of the car's ballooning weight but I think that it's a plan they will not be able to continue for long. You can only make the car so wide, the tires so large, the brakes so big, etc., etc., etc.
I mean, what's next? 600hp w/4800lb. curb weight? Eventually, the damn thing's gonna have to be as wide as a Hummer with tires bigger than a Viper! Increase power, add weight and try to keep compensating for it? I just don't think it's the smart way to go.
And my comments about the shocks were mainly meant to point out that IMO, too many people here seem to think they can accomplish things way beyond reality. It's a friggin' shock, nothing more. Like they could make up for all the other suspension components.:cookoo:
My guess would be that if, and when people start seriously racing these cars, those shocks will be among the first things removed.Funny how the whole conversation about shocks is 90% you and NormV telling us how these won't make the V2 a competent handler. All the rest of us are doing is citing these shocks as a help, not a cure for weight.

If you guys stop stating the obvious and acting as though it's a feather in your cap, then maybe the conversation on shocks ends. But I doubt you and Norm can do that...

lusterblade
02-14-08, 11:28 AM
Honestly, I'm getting tired of all the negativity on this board. Anyone know how to add people to your ignore list. All I hear is whining from some people that really isn't adding anything and the car isn't even out yet. :bigroll:

(now I'm whining about people whining):bonkers:

Katshot
02-14-08, 11:38 AM
Funny how the whole conversation about shocks is 90% you and NormV telling us how these won't make the V2 a competent handler. All the rest of us are doing is citing these shocks as a help, not a cure for weight.

If you guys stop stating the obvious and acting as though it's a feather in your cap, then maybe the conversation on shocks ends. But I doubt you and Norm can do that...

Dude, take it easy. I haven't said anything about the shocks until this last post, and that was just to say that I think more is being made of them than should be.

HiTechRV
02-14-08, 11:56 AM
Mostly initiated here by 1-3 people who have no intention of buying it anyways. At least for this person who plans to buy, it just ain't worth arguin' with these folks..

I agree. This forum is for talking about the new V. Always trying to say the old V is better is disruptive, bordering on trolling.

HiTechRV
02-14-08, 12:00 PM
Base 2008 CTS hit 8:40...on the ring. :)

Norm

Wow - that is really fast for a 300 hp sedan! Makes me really excited about the kind of times the V must be pulling already, much less when in production.

urbanski
02-14-08, 12:38 PM
Honestly, I'm getting tired of all the negativity on this board. Anyone know how to add people to your ignore list. All I hear is whining from some people that really isn't adding anything and the car isn't even out yet. :bigroll:

(now I'm whining about people whining):bonkers:

top left blue bar, user CP, toward bottom left, ignore list

ylwjacket
02-14-08, 02:57 PM
I agree. This forum is for talking about the new V. Always trying to say the old V is better is disruptive, bordering on trolling.

Or almost all of the 100 other cars that are referenced here of late.

CVP33
02-14-08, 08:21 PM
:eek: Magnetic Shocks - Act as a male enhancement
:eek: Brembo Brakes - Reverse male pattern baldness
:eek: 19" wheels with Michelin PS2's - Reduce body fat to less than 1%

These are simple and irrefutable facts. I actually feel sorry for you non-believers. In less than 1 year I will be trolling the streets with a full head of hair, rock solid body and a constant erection. You poor bastards! My goal will be to sleep with 19% of the women in the US. Although that's not a significant number.

Rich H
02-14-08, 08:47 PM
:eek: Magnetic Shocks - Act as a male enhancement


We've all heard about male enhancements - but to think you could turn it on or off in milliseconds - revolutionary!

CVP33
02-14-08, 08:51 PM
We've all heard about male enhancements - but to think you could turn it on or off in milliseconds - revolutionary!

It's a burden I'm willing to bear, or bare for that matter.

gothicaleigh
02-14-08, 08:54 PM
Only about 5% of CTS-V owners (and that's being generous) really "race" their cars. The other 95% drive to work and back, and enjoy a twisty road on the weekend. Will those 5% ditch the MRC and go with a standard shock? Maybe, but we won't know until someone tests the damn thing!

I predict that as MRC becomes more widely available, we will see tuners reprogramming it's characteristics as opposed to swapping it for a more conventional system. From what I have read, it can be set to damping rates that rival even the most performance oriented Bilsteins.

The advantage of course is that MRC can imitate full race shocks when you dive into a corner and then switch into "Cadillac float" mode instantly the moment the G's level out for that long straight. I also suspect we will hear many reports stating that it "doesn't feel that fast" alongside impressive performance numbers proving otherwise.

HiTechRV
02-14-08, 10:16 PM
:eek: Magnetic Shocks - Act as a male enhancement
:eek: Brembo Brakes - Reverse male pattern baldness
:eek: 19" wheels with Michelin PS2's - Reduce body fat to less than 1%

These are simple and irrefutable facts. I actually feel sorry for you non-believers. In less than 1 year I will be trolling the streets with a full head of hair, rock solid body and a constant erection. You poor bastards! My goal will be to sleep with 19% of the women in the US. Although that's not a significant number.


You da man!

CVP33
02-14-08, 10:47 PM
You da man!

Sad, but true. :shhh:

NormV
02-14-08, 11:04 PM
Thought we'd see MRC in the racing circles like venues on Sebring and other rough circuits. But if it is not designed for the track with smooth surfaces, then maybe rallycross where they run on anything but normal surfaces and public roads in all conditions. No luck.

Then I realized that many performance shocks have extra capacity and that MRC has metal which conducts and holds heat so they will not be seen in any racing venue unless they have very large capacity to keep them cool.

Norm

I predict that as MRC becomes more widely available, we will see tuners reprogramming it's characteristics as opposed to swapping it for a more conventional system. From what I have read, it can be set to damping rates that rival even the most performance oriented Bilsteins.

The advantage of course is that MRC can imitate full race shocks when you dive into a corner and then switch into "Cadillac float" mode instantly the moment the G's level out for that long straight. I also suspect we will hear many reports stating that it "doesn't feel that fast" alongside impressive performance numbers proving otherwise.

Katshot
02-15-08, 10:38 AM
I predict that as MRC becomes more widely available, we will see tuners reprogramming it's characteristics as opposed to swapping it for a more conventional system. From what I have read, it can be set to damping rates that rival even the most performance oriented Bilsteins.

The advantage of course is that MRC can imitate full race shocks when you dive into a corner and then switch into "Cadillac float" mode instantly the moment the G's level out for that long straight. I also suspect we will hear many reports stating that it "doesn't feel that fast" alongside impressive performance numbers proving otherwise.

I certainly agree the technology has potential. Whether it will make it into racing (beyond well-funded factory teams) remains to be seen.
What's replacement cost on these babies anyway?

jasaero
02-15-08, 12:03 PM
Thought we'd see MRC in the racing circles like venues on Sebring and other rough circuits. But if it is not designed for the track with smooth surfaces, then maybe rallycross where they run on anything but normal surfaces and public roads in all conditions. No luck.

Then I realized that many performance shocks have extra capacity and that MRC has metal which conducts and holds heat so they will not be seen in any racing venue unless they have very large capacity to keep them cool.

Norm

Pretty sure they are already being used for offroad racing like the Baja trucks and such. They would make for an ulitmate racing strut though if they could ever fully address the heating issues. These new versions on the V2, ZR1, and 599 are getting very close or they would never have been used on such serious performance vehicles. Particularly on the ZR1. The 599 is considered a GT so probably won't be raced too often.