: Tuned V2 Makes 475 WHP, 475 WTQ



CtsVrod
12-11-08, 03:18 PM
Thought you guys might be interested in this -

Looks like W4M got his hands on a Redline V2 - and was able to pull off 475 HP to the Wheels, and 475 Ft. Lbs. of Torque!! Not to bad for a stock Car!!

He also up'ed the MPG to 27 :thumbsup:

Here's a link to his thread - http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-2004-2007/1031595-2009-cts-v-dyno-sheets.html

Just a Pulley swap away from 500 WHP!!!! :eek:

rand49er
12-11-08, 05:48 PM
Wow. Nearly 50 rwhp with just a little monkeying around.

Does 429 rwhp stock on a Dynojet seem low, though?

rutiger
12-11-08, 07:12 PM
that's like 23% dt loss. 429 seems low to me. who knows though. it's the first v i've seen dynoed. my is f came in at 12% loss if you just go by the factory numbers (416) vs what i did (365) on a dynojet 424xLC2.

whisler151
12-11-08, 07:20 PM
that's like 23% dt loss. 429 seems low to me. who knows though. it's the first v i've seen dynoed. my is f came in at 12% loss if you just go by the factory numbers (416) vs what i did (365) on a dynojet 424xLC2.

Going by factory numbers my 07 V had a 23% loss too. 324 on a dynojet (stock). But as we all know trying to compare dyno numbers is pointless unless they are on the same dyno.

It will be interesting to see where the other V2s come in on the dyno.

CtsVrod
12-11-08, 07:25 PM
At first I thought those Numbers where kinda low, But it checks out with Current V1's - Im not sure if his is a Stick or Auto either... Im sure an Auto will have a little more DT Loss??

rutiger
12-11-08, 07:35 PM
on the same dyno and same day that i did my is f my stock z06 did 456 which is like 11% loss. again, from dyno to dyno and all other factors thrown in you can't really compare. but once a number of them get dynoed there should at least be a good average baseline number.

CtsVrod
12-11-08, 07:42 PM
on the same dyno and same day that i did my is f my stock z06 did 456 which is like 11% loss. again, from dyno to dyno and all other factors thrown in you can't really compare. but once a number of them get dynoed there should at least be a good average baseline number.

Huh... that is that Non-Corrected?

Z06, and an ISF - You thinkin of switchin to a V2? or just adding another?

CTSV_510
12-11-08, 07:46 PM
Going by factory numbers my 07 V had a 23% loss too. 324 on a dynojet (stock). But as we all know trying to compare dyno numbers is pointless unless they are on the same dyno.

It will be interesting to see where the other V2s come in on the dyno.


A stock V1 at 324 rwhp is 19% loss.

Razorecko
12-11-08, 07:51 PM
the zr-1 also dyno'd low. But i'm sure alot of that % loss in the v is due to the auto trans. I'd like to see a manual vs auto dyno on the same dyno to get a good idea but....whenever that happens.

rutiger
12-11-08, 07:52 PM
ok, why can't i use the quote option? anyway, i probably won't get a new v, at least not right now. already have 3 vehicles. just got the is f and i'm really enjoying it. if i were in the market now then the v would probably be my choice, but i needed something a few months ago and the v wasn't an option. dumped my 08 rs4 for the is f. the other choice was a c63, but that too had a waiting list and i'm not good at waiting.

CtsVrod
12-11-08, 08:03 PM
ok, why can't i use the quote option? anyway, i probably won't get a new v, at least not right now. already have 3 vehicles. just got the is f and i'm really enjoying it. if i were in the market now then the v would probably be my choice, but i needed something a few months ago and the v wasn't an option. dumped my 08 rs4 for the is f. the other choice was a c63, but that too had a waiting list and i'm not good at waiting.

Not too go too far off topic - Why the switch from the RS4 to the ISF?

Razorecko
12-11-08, 08:21 PM
^ yea i was about to say..I'd take the RS4 over the IS-f anyday.

SkullV
12-11-08, 09:40 PM
the zr-1 also dyno'd low. But i'm sure alot of that % loss in the v is due to the auto trans. I'd like to see a manual vs auto dyno on the same dyno to get a good idea but....whenever that happens.

Those 2009 dyno numbers are for a manual.

Razorecko
12-11-08, 09:50 PM
Those 2009 dyno numbers are for a manual.

I'd like to see some dyno #'s from the V after it has a few good thousand miles of break-in on it. I'm sure motors built to the hilt like this oem would benefit greatly from the break in time.

rand49er
12-11-08, 09:52 PM
I'm still puzzled.

My car probably weighs about 3900 lbs, 3-400 lbs less than a V2, and my dyno numbers are real, yet I seriously doubt my V1 as modded could go even low 12s, but a V2 does it without a wimper according to all the rags.

Am I missing something here? I refuse to believe my modded V1 is faster :thehand: ... or is it?

Razorecko
12-11-08, 09:53 PM
^ like i said i think it has to do with break in mileage.

thebigjimsho
12-11-08, 10:31 PM
Not too go too far off topic - Why the switch from the RS4 to the ISF?


^ yea i was about to say..I'd take the RS4 over the IS-f anyday.It's all about the Yamaha, my friends...

rand49er
12-11-08, 10:57 PM
It's all about the Yamaha, my friends...That 3.0L SHO motor was wa-a-ay ahead of its time.

(I assume the ISF has a Yamaha?)

thebigjimsho
12-12-08, 12:30 AM
That 3.0L SHO motor was wa-a-ay ahead of its time.

(I assume the ISF has a Yamaha?)Yes.

MauiV
12-12-08, 12:48 AM
25% loss in a IRS isnt really that odd.

Knuguy
12-12-08, 12:57 AM
I'm still puzzled.

My car probably weighs about 3900 lbs, 3-400 lbs less than a V2, and my dyno numbers are real, yet I seriously doubt my V1 as modded could go even low 12s, but a V2 does it without a wimper according to all the rags.

Am I missing something here? I refuse to believe my modded V1 is faster :thehand: ... or is it?

Traction and pro drivers maybe? not knocking your skills, but the mag guys do this all day and beat the snot out of cars because they do not write the monthly check on them

CadV
12-12-08, 02:28 AM
Thanks for the heads-up CtsVrod. I spoke to Jes today and definately going to get this just waiting on my car so I can give him the VIN.

$320 for a brand new programmed ECM which includes future upgrades etc is a steal of a deal.

UnsafeAtAnySpd
12-12-08, 03:27 AM
You can actually launch an '09. Not so much with the V1, hence the ET difference.

rand49er
12-12-08, 07:21 AM
Traction and pro drivers maybe? not knocking your skills, but the mag guys do this all day and beat the snot out of cars because they do not write the monthly check on them


You can actually launch an '09. Not so much with the V1, hence the ET difference.I'm anything BUT a skilled driver, that's for certain. Knock away!

Guess it goes back to that Dynojet rwhp figure of 429. That's 127 hp loss and even more (150?) had it been on a Mustang! :eek: I'd like to see more cars' numbers to confirm.

CIWS
12-12-08, 08:09 AM
One of the "problems" here is in comparing different cars dyno numbers. All dynos are different and rarely are runs between different cars done under the same conditions, much less on the same dyno. I've tested my car locally on two different dynojets within 45 min of each other (drive time and cool down period) and they were 9whp different from each other.

The important point with his testing so far is seeing the difference that was gained with tuning this car. Obviously GM has it tuned down (probably very rich) from the factory. As with any dyno testing it's important to run it on the same machine under as close to the same conditions as possible (temp/humid) and look for the Delta in numbers. Comparing different cars across different dynos and under different testing conditions is only a rough sense between the two.

rand49er what you would really need to see is how your car dyno'd on that same dyno on the same day either right before or right after the V2s runs. However the ability of the V2's driver to hard launch the car without fear of shattering the rear does add heavily into the final times, as does type of tires, inflation levels,etc.

whisler151
12-12-08, 10:47 AM
A stock V1 at 324 rwhp is 19% loss.

oops...:alchi:

rutiger
12-12-08, 11:12 AM
for the couple that asked about why rs4>is f. is f is lighter, faster, i prefer the handling, and the creature comforts are better imo. i prefer the seats in the is f. it has touchscreen nav and aux in jack. using the audi nav was ridiculous and there's no good ipod solution. one test drive in the is f and i was sold. lastly, pretty much every rs4/6 owner i met thought there was no better car on earth and were generally pricks.

trukk
12-12-08, 12:19 PM
I'm still puzzled.

My car probably weighs about 3900 lbs, 3-400 lbs less than a V2, and my dyno numbers are real, yet I seriously doubt my V1 as modded could go even low 12s, but a V2 does it without a wimper according to all the rags.

Am I missing something here? I refuse to believe my modded V1 is faster :thehand: ... or is it?

Randy, forget ET, since V1 can;t launch for shit. You have to compate trap times. Any idea what trap you are running? 115-120 makes you damned close to a V2.

-Chris

rand49er
12-12-08, 03:47 PM
Chris, I've never taken my car to the strip ... too afraid of the diff letting go. I know you've been there in the past. Was that before or after your KARS kit install?

Also, I guess I feel that tracking the car is much easier on it than several passes at a drag strip, and I'm reluctant to actually do it (drag that is, not track). Suppose this is just an academic exercise with little real-world value other than doing a bit of armchair racing.

Guess I'm particularly interested in comparing a modified V1 (like yours, Chris, or mine) to the stock V2 and wondering if I, in particular, can be satisfied with a modded V1. I'm still marveling at the thought of sitting in a V2 the other day and, having mentioned how much I liked it to my wife again today, hearing her say I could get one. I've got some other financial stuff going right now that makes me pause. Oh, well.

If I did get one, I'd definitely go to Jesse in a heartbeat for his tuned PCM.

MauiV
12-12-08, 04:21 PM
After sitting in a V2 yesterday I have to say I was severely disappointed getting back into the intrerior of my V1.

Im taking "my" V2 for a test drive tomorrow. It is going to be SOOOO hard to tell my saleslady I dont want it.

CtsVrod
12-12-08, 04:38 PM
After sitting in a V2 yesterday I have to say I was severely disappointed getting back into the intrerior of my V1.

Im taking "my" V2 for a test drive tomorrow. It is going to be SOOOO hard to tell my saleslady I dont want it.

LOL - You just Maggied your V1!! Never Satisfied :rant2:

If you swap up to the V2 - I'll take that Maggie off your hands :rolleyes:

verbs
12-12-08, 04:40 PM
Thought you guys might be interested in this -

Looks like W4M got his hands on a Redline V2 - and was able to pull off 475 HP to the Wheels, and 475 Ft. Lbs. of Torque!! Not to bad for a stock Car!!

If the car is tuned, it's no longer stock.

04 Z06
12-12-08, 06:03 PM
pretty impressive numbers.. interested to see what people run on the track..

Seattle CTS-V
12-13-08, 03:38 AM
Randy, forget ET, since V1 can;t launch for shit. You have to compate trap times. Any idea what trap you are running? 115-120 makes you damned close to a V2.

-Chris


12.4 @ 117mph w/ 2.0 60' (best trap that day was 119mph) Dyno'd 480/445. You can do it!

YouTube - Cadillac CTS-V Quarter Mile (In-Car)

Florian
12-13-08, 11:56 AM
what lousy shifting.....^^^^


F

thebigjimsho
12-13-08, 05:50 PM
lastly, pretty much every rs4/6 owner i met thought there was no better car on earth and were generally pricks.Have you met our friend, toysnot??

CVP33
12-13-08, 07:39 PM
what lousy shifting.....^^^^


F

How can you tell you're going from gear to gear if there's no tire squeal? I don't know how you guys do it!

trukk
12-15-08, 11:31 AM
Have you met our friend, toysnot??

I see your Toysnot, and raise you one ZeusTwatty.

-Chris

CIWS
12-15-08, 02:17 PM
I see your Toysnot, and raise you one ZeusTwatty.

-Chris

:histeric:

The Tony Show
12-15-08, 02:29 PM
I was wondering how long it would take for their names to be mentioned in response to that post. I wonder how his exhaust mounted MAF sensor repair is coming along.....

trukk
12-15-08, 03:10 PM
I was wondering how long it would take for their names to be mentioned in response to that post. I wonder how his exhaust mounted MAF sensor repair is coming along.....

Zeus seems to be having a misfire issue in his UberKahr.

http://forums.audiworld.com/42v8/msgs/1632.phtml

-Chris

CTSV_510
12-15-08, 05:10 PM
Zeus seems to be having a misfire issue in his UberKahr.

http://forums.audiworld.com/42v8/msgs/1632.phtml

-Chris

Probably because he tried to install the missing pieces of chef's maggie kit on his UberKahr to make it go as fast as his V did.

GMX322V S/C
12-15-08, 09:07 PM
...http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-2004-2007/1031595-2009-cts-v-dyno-sheets.htmlWhat do you guys make of the "flattened" sections of the exhaust system? Looks like the section shown in the pictures already has some scrape marks, so round tubing might scrape even worse. I would think as long as the total cross section remains the same there wouldn't be any more flow penalty than any of the other mandrel bends in the system (to a point, of course)...

thebigjimsho
12-16-08, 01:13 AM
Zeus seems to be having a misfire issue in his UberKahr.

http://forums.audiworld.com/42v8/msgs/1632.phtml

-ChrisAt least toysnot made it a challenge to find his FAIL. If you're going to be a twat, change your screenname when switching forums...

rand49er
12-16-08, 07:05 AM
Zeus seems to be having a misfire issue in his UberKahr.

http://forums.audiworld.com/42v8/msgs/1632.phtml

-ChrisTHAT is priceless! :highfive:


Last I checked, toysnot faded out of Outtie forum and has not been from since. Somebody should PM Zeustwatty to come back here for some fun ... it's that time of year where we need a bit of frivolity.

NormV
12-16-08, 06:42 PM
Forced in duction is usually less sensitive to back pressure. You'll see a small increase with an X-piped Corsa syle straight through exhaust.


Norm


What do you guys make of the "flattened" sections of the exhaust system? Looks like the section shown in the pictures already has some scrape marks, so round tubing might scrape even worse. I would think as long as the total cross section remains the same there wouldn't be any more flow penalty than any of the other mandrel bends in the system (to a point, of course)...