: Possible Opponents (playmates)



Silver Baron
07-31-08, 08:57 AM
The thread "Bone Stock" and the comment in from Jpjr:
"...at 550hp you are now so far removed from 99% of cars on the road ..."
made me think. Who are those 1% anyways that are our playmates?
Maybe two criteria: Sheer HP and Power-to-Weight ratio (any others?)
This list should grow over time. so please add liberally. Let's start:

CTS V2 - 556HP, 4200 lbs = 0.132

CTS V1 - 400HP, 3850 lbs = 0.103
911 Turbo (07) - 480HP, 3494 lbs = 0.137
Corvette Z06 - 505HP, 3132 lbs = 0.161
BMW M5 (08) - 507HP, 4010lbs = 0.126

CIWS
07-31-08, 10:16 AM
08 Corvette

09 Audi RS6

08 MB C63 - tuned

08 G8 GXP (slightly mod'd)

09 Camaro SS / man xmission (slightly mod'd)

Slightly slower

Lexus IS-F

08 BMW M3

Silver Baron
07-31-08, 10:22 AM
CIWS Thanks - if you give me the exact specs I add them to the list

concorso
07-31-08, 12:42 PM
Most of the AMG 4 doors should be close

atdeneve
07-31-08, 02:24 PM
You should throw up the torque ratings, as well.

And put the power-to-weight ratio in pounds per horsepower. That's usually the standard way and just makes for an easier comparison. Those minute fractions don't mean much of anything to me (and, I would think, most other people) as it's not at all familiar, whereas, 7.55 lbs per horsepower for the 09 CTS-V actually gives me a better idea of how it stacks up against other cars.

Good idea, by the way. Looks like this is gonna end up being an interesting list.

gothicaleigh
07-31-08, 02:32 PM
'Ring times would give a better idea of each car's all around performance. After all, there is so much more to this car than stoplight racing.

Silver Baron
07-31-08, 02:45 PM
atdeneve
gothicaleigh

All good ideas. :thumbsup:
I cannot get back to my first post to edit it anymore?
Is there a simple way where anybody can edit a post? This way everybody can contribute some information?

thebigjimsho
07-31-08, 03:27 PM
So Silver Baron, when are you going to convert a V2 into a rally machine? I'd love to see some Targa Newfoundland in a V2 next year...

Silver Baron
07-31-08, 03:48 PM
Just a quick reply thebigjimsho.

I am waiting as desperately for the release of the car as all of you. :banghead:
Have to go now, we have a long weekend coming up and I want to get out of here early.:lesley:
See to you again next week.

buf05CTSV
07-31-08, 04:12 PM
08 Audi RS4 - 420hp AWD

...a good deal behind... but close enough to consider competition.

austin
07-31-08, 06:33 PM
IMO.. The new "2007+ Shelby Mustang GT500"!! This car has alot of un-tapped potential, and comes seriously de-tuned.. It is Very Fast.

concorso
07-31-08, 06:44 PM
'Ring times would give a better idea of each car's all around performance.Come on, at least give the Germans a chance! :)

WA 2 FST
07-31-08, 09:11 PM
Are you looking for _any_ street-driven car, or primarily figuring the entire "package"... e.g.: 4-door "luxury" sedan.

I think there will be very few cars in its class that are remotely close. The guys above have listed some good ones.

As far as everything else, there are plenty of quality tuner cars (Lingenfelter, etc) out there with warranties that will outrun a new CTS-V... 1/4 mile, top-end, or around a road course. But these aren't 4-door, luxury sedans, either. :)

There are also plenty of home-garage built hot-rods too, but 99% of those are also not in the same class as the CTS-V.

Dr. Design
07-31-08, 09:30 PM
Hmm a list like this, one must certainly consider the CTS-V's big brother the STS-V stage 2 by D3. At roughly the same weight and 575HP & 530ft lbs., it makes it a formidable challenger... Cant wait to line them up once we get our 09's in. Obviously this is assuming the 09MYCTSV remains at factory HP & TQ outputs. That wont last too long!!!:lildevil:

Jpjr
07-31-08, 11:21 PM
IMO.. The new "2007+ Shelby Mustang GT500"!! This car has alot of un-tapped potential, and comes seriously de-tuned.. It is Very Fast.

I have to agree with this... even more HP bang for the buck upside potential than the V... but leagues behind in technology, NVH, and overall appeal.

Bluhair
08-01-08, 10:49 AM
"Ring times would give a better idea of each car's all around performance."

Ring times, have recently become the standard in which to compare cars, which is a horrible comparison. Ring times are usually completed by that auto maker's test team. For example, the CTS-V that ran the ring, had racing seats and a cage. Both items reduce weight and improve rigidity, and both are not part of the retail package. The ring conditions vary greatly from day to day, and they are all completed by various drivers. IMO the Ring is a new marketing tool, started by Nissan and the GT-R.

Back on topic. As far as sedans go, stock for stock (which is all that matters), there is nothing out there that can beat the CTS-V. Especially at the 60K price point. However, do not expect Merc and BMW to sit idly by. I would expect a E63BS or maybe even a E65.

As far as all competition, the CTS-V will fall behind most. The Z06, SRT10, GT-R, GT2, 997TT, all will beat the CTS-V in a line and on the track.

One needs to remember what the CTS-V is, it's a luxury sedan. The performance and options offered by the CTS-V will be hard to beat at 60K.

concorso
08-01-08, 12:18 PM
"Ring times would give a better idea of each car's all around performance."

Ring times, have recently become the standard in which to compare cars, which is a horrible comparison. Ring times are usually completed by that auto maker's test team. For example, the CTS-V that ran the ring, had racing seats and a cage. Both items reduce weight and improve rigidity, and both are not part of the retail package. The ring conditions vary greatly from day to day, and they are all completed by various drivers. IMO the Ring is a new marketing tool, started by Nissan and the GT-R.
I know you plan to get a V, but some of that is GT-R fanboy cracktalk...

The seats used were the optional Recaro's. The 'roll cage' was actually a harness bar. Harness bars CAN aid in chassis strength, but nowhere near what a proper roll cage can do. The harness bar was used so that GM could attach the 6 point racing harness for safety purposes. The tires used were the optional PS2's. AND they had installed a fire supression system for safety, as well, which added weight and nothing else.

Bluhair
08-01-08, 08:12 PM
"The seats used were the optional Recaro's."

Oh Really?

http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll145/2010GTRVspec/cts-v-preview-1280-35.jpg
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll145/2010GTRVspec/112_0805_01z2009_cadillac_CTS-Vnurb.jpg

Listen. I am not here to argue which car is better. The GTR is going to be my track toy, and the CTS-V my DD. I will have the best of both worlds IMO, and for less than what a 997TT costs.:thumbsup:

However, as far as Ring times go, they should not be used as a yard stick. "GT-R fanboy cracktalk" or not, "ring times" have just become a popular way for enticing customers. They mean nothing, due to the extreme amounts of variables. That is just track experience, not "GT-R Fanboy cracktalk". With out LC, the GTR and CTS-V will hang right next to each other, with the eventual creeping away of the CTS-V. I don't understand how lumping the GTR in with cars it was recently tested with, is "fanboy cracktalk". I am a fan, because I paid for the car. Same with the CTS-V. You seem to have me mistaken, for one of those people that care too much about cars.

There is also a cage in this black one, for some reason. Probably for the harness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mto1vqWmhf8&feature=related

concorso
08-01-08, 09:34 PM
Notice I didnt comment on your claims about the 'Ring. Thats because I dont disagree with you. 'Ring times are merely for bragging rights, even tho GM seems to play the times more fairly then some of the other manufacturers.

You read wayy too much into my post. If I thought you were a fanboy, I would have said it, point blank. I don't have you mistaken. Ive read your posts on www.fast-autos.net and I realize you're planning to get both. Im saying that some of what you posted is the same regurgitated GT-R talk that Ive seen posted randomly on numerous sites ANYTIME someone mentions a fast car, generally being american and more specifically, the ZR1 or V. Ive even seen it on Nissan forums (who don't have a V competitor, by the way) Again, didn't call you a fanboy.

Im willing to admit I was wrong about the seats. But, as the Cadillac drivers log said, the fire supression system added more weight to the car. And the harness bar added very little structual integrity, especially not enough to counteract the additional weight. There is a video on that blog of Heinricy talking about the tires and cage. He explains it well.

Bluhair
08-02-08, 09:38 AM
I really think the only reason they use Sparco seats, is due to safety regulations. Maybe the factory Recaros, did not fit with the harness bar in place. Who knows? Just pointing out how the Ring can be a bit deceiving.

As for the GT-R. Nissan has done a great job with the engineering, but a horrible job with the delivery.

I can only hope Cadillac does a better job. This is my first time with either company. Had a E55 before my E350.

Jpjr
08-02-08, 03:06 PM
I really think the only reason they use Sparco seats, is due to safety regulations. Maybe the factory Recaros, did not fit with the harness bar in place. Who knows? Just pointing out how the Ring can be a bit deceiving.

As for the GT-R. Nissan has done a great job with the engineering, but a horrible job with the delivery.

I can only hope Cadillac does a better job. This is my first time with either company. Had a E55 before my E350.

I agree...They use racing seats for extra bolstering and safety. They are attempting to drive the car as fast as possible and for that even leather wrapped Ricaros won't do the job. It has nothing to do with saving weight, so what they should do is ballast the car with any weight difference. I would be totally for that... changing seats for safety and bolstering is not the same as ripping out the radio and AC.

As for the cage, well in my opinion the performance benefits of an extra rigid frame do not outweight the performance costs of all that extra weight... until you flip. The cage is there to protect the driver in a rollover accident (often track rules for fast Verts and really fast non-Verts). If you don't flip, today's frames are generally solid enough that you don't get over the extra weight detriment IMO.

As far as the GTR- I have to agree that the engineering is top notch but the product is grossly unappealing at even the agressive price point. That car might turn a few more heads on the street than the Infiniti version, but I would expect more than that. Plus the car is a pig, even more so than the V2 in relative speak.

Bluhair
08-02-08, 04:49 PM
I think the two will be perfect stable mates. Shown in the colors I have chosen, the big question is which will get here first?!?!

http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll145/2010GTRVspec/cts-v-preview-1280-15.jpg
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll145/2010GTRVspec/GTR2.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbdZn3-Zq9g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6dRuleTIiM&eurl=http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=23817
AWESOME!

0luke1
08-02-08, 06:38 PM
Jaguar xf-r

gothicaleigh
08-03-08, 04:04 PM
The Nordschleife has been used and considered as one of the most telling automotive benchmark tests since loooong before the GT-R or V made an appearance there.

I also don't believe that the few changes made to the V for safety's sake helped it's performance any, which is in contrast to what I've been reading about the times being reported for the GT-R.

Bluhair
08-03-08, 05:14 PM
I have to disagree. The Nring is horrible for comparing cars.

I have already heard about all the ringers, hopefully the one I ordered is a ringer.:gun2::gun:

atdeneve
08-04-08, 05:31 PM
The Nordschleife has been used and considered as one of the most telling automotive benchmark tests since loooong before the GT-R or V made an appearance there.

I also don't believe that the few changes made to the V for safety's sake helped it's performance any, which is in contrast to what I've been reading about the times being reported for the GT-R.

Yup.

It's only recently that American manufacturers have actually taken use of it as an instrument for testing and fine-tuning of the suspension, but the Ring has always been there. And it's always been a benchmark.

Yeah, there's always a huge amount of variables, but that's with any test, be it 0-60 acceleration, slalom speed, skidpad, or braking distance. Being that each of those specific tests measure a much narrower scope, yes, it's easier to attempt to minimize the different factors. But, nevertheless, the narrower scope is precisely what limits their use in assessing a vehicle's performance, as a whole. The Ring does that well.


I have to disagree. The Nring is horrible for comparing cars.

I have already heard about all the ringers, hopefully the one I ordered is a ringer.:gun2::gun:

The fact that a given company decides to use a ringer or a spec that is not comparable to what it intends to offer for public consumption has no bearing on whether or not the Ring is a good performance benchmark.

Bluhair
08-05-08, 05:01 PM
Varying drivers, temperatures, wet or dry track, flying starts, rolling starts, etc. Each car company uses a different method. How is that a good comparison? Who knows if the car tested is anything like the production model (ringer)?

Road and Track, Car and Driver, etc. Conduct tests with the same driver, on the same day. These car magazines are also not inclined to stretch the truth or give an unfair advantage. If they did that they would lose credibility, which would equal lower sales.

I realize the Nring has been there, but just recently has it been used a marketing tool. Which is all it is good for. IMO.

NormV
08-05-08, 06:30 PM
Yup, same group tests, no "MFG" license plates! :)


Norm



Varying drivers, temperatures, wet or dry track, flying starts, rolling starts, etc. Each car company uses a different method. How is that a good comparison? Who knows if the car tested is anything like the production model (ringer)?

Road and Track, Car and Driver, etc. Conduct tests with the same driver, on the same day. These car magazines are also not inclined to stretch the truth or give an unfair advantage. If they did that they would lose credibility, which would equal lower sales.

I realize the Nring has been there, but just recently has it been used a marketing tool. Which is all it is good for. IMO.

P-Funk
08-05-08, 11:07 PM
Road and Track, Car and Driver, etc. ...These car magazines are also not inclined to stretch the truth or give an unfair advantage.

:histeric::histeric::histeric:







:histeric::histeric::histeric:

buf05CTSV
08-05-08, 11:42 PM
Road and Track, Car and Driver, etc. Conduct tests with the same driver, on the same day. These car magazines are also not inclined to stretch the truth or give an unfair advantage. If they did that they would lose credibility, which would equal lower sales.


C&D loves BMW, but for the most part they are fair... with the exception of Consumer Reports, which is like reading a magazine for Japanese only buyers.

thebigjimsho
08-06-08, 12:25 AM
C&D loves BMW, but for the most part they are fair... with the exception of Consumer Reports, which is like reading a magazine for Japanese only buyers.C&D loves the 3 series. And I can't say I blame 'em...

concorso
08-09-08, 04:45 PM
C&D loves the 3 series. And I can't say I blame 'em...

Its a great car! Just a little too small for my needs tho... Such a good driver tho...and that 3.0TT 6 is a nice engine. BMW really did a great job with that engine...