: CTS V -hp and Mileage vs JAG S type R



rickp
01-04-09, 06:33 PM
I like my S type R and it's 400 hp but its getting old. This new V is darned enticing, however I am a little concerned about the HP and mpg. Please don't jump all over me on this!

I thought 400 (I beleive thats at the wheels) in the Jag was just about perfect. I can average about 19 or 20 mpg and get 25 doing 75-80 on the highway. And it moves really well.

At first I thought the V's 560 is just way too much but now I understand that's before losses. I read here that it's more like 470 at the wheels which isn't as far off what I am used to as I originally thought.

So I'd like to know if I have understood the HP numbers right for the two cars and what sort of mpg penalty do you figure the V's extra HP is going to take?

I've always liked cars that had more to give than the normal road horsepower and typical slushy repsonse to the pedal. I'm trying to get a better handle on this new little monster from Cadillac.

Thanks for any help.

darjae
01-04-09, 07:29 PM
I like my S type R and it's 400 hp but its getting old. This new V is darned enticing, however I am a little concerned about the HP and mpg. Please don't jump all over me on this!

I thought 400 (I beleive thats at the wheels) in the Jag was just about perfect. I can average about 19 or 20 mpg and get 25 doing 75-80 on the highway. And it moves really well.

At first I thought the V's 560 is just way too much but now I understand that's before losses. I read here that it's more like 470 at the wheels which isn't as far off what I am used to as I originally thought.

So I'd like to know if I have understood the HP numbers right for the two cars and what sort of mpg penalty do you figure the V's extra HP is going to take?

I've always liked cars that had more to give than the normal road horsepower and typical slushy repsonse to the pedal. I'm trying to get a better handle on this new little monster from Cadillac.

Thanks for any help.

That Jag's engine produces 400 HP at the crank, not at the rear wheels, so the 556hp V2 has significantly more power. I stepped up from a 400hp GTO (modded to around 430) and the difference is night and day. Power on demand at all RPMs and gears.

I've had my V for a few weeks and am averaging around 13mpg currently. I would take that with a grain of salt as I've not really been driving it "normally" yet. I'll know in the next month or so what mileage I can expect.

I'm also keeping an eye on those in the forums who've had the PCM tuned. I'm anxious to determine if the MPG increases that've been reported are real and to see if there are any other issues with the tunes.

LV_V
01-04-09, 07:31 PM
Your Jag's 400hp is at the crank, not at the wheels. I think you'll notice a little a big difference to the 556hp quoted by Cadillac for the CTS-V.

CadV
01-04-09, 07:34 PM
This thread is funny!

CIWS
01-04-09, 08:37 PM
You'll need to get the 6 speed to have anything close to what you're used to in a car approx 150 less HP. This is a 6.2 ltr engine w/ a supercharger.

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/157347-real-world-mpg.html

edsuski
01-04-09, 08:40 PM
I like my S type R and it's 400 hp but its getting old. This new V is darned enticing, however I am a little concerned about the HP and mpg. Please don't jump all over me on this!

I thought 400 (I beleive thats at the wheels) in the Jag was just about perfect. I can average about 19 or 20 mpg and get 25 doing 75-80 on the highway. And it moves really well.

At first I thought the V's 560 is just way too much but now I understand that's before losses. I read here that it's more like 470 at the wheels which isn't as far off what I am used to as I originally thought.

So I'd like to know if I have understood the HP numbers right for the two cars and what sort of mpg penalty do you figure the V's extra HP is going to take?

I've always liked cars that had more to give than the normal road horsepower and typical slushy repsonse to the pedal. I'm trying to get a better handle on this new little monster from Cadillac.

Thanks for any help.

As others have already mentioned - the V2 is about 40% more powerful than your Jag. Should easily be NIGHT AND DAY different. As for millage - you can't ask that right now. I imagine that few if any are driving their cars "normally" right now. I am burning through gas quickly - but it is definitely my own fault. While driving on the freeway the other day - at 70 miles per hour and on level ground I was registering about 20 - 24 miles per gallon. Climbing an incline would reduce the mileage to 16-18 mpg depending on how steep the incline was.

For 556 hp - I think the car will get reasonable mileage - but if you want great mileage, there is always a Chevrolet Volt jut around the corner that will use ZERO gas for 78% of the peoples daily commutes (up to 40 miles) and over 40 miles is going to be "rated" at 100 mpg.......

I already have requested the first slot for a Cadillac variant of the Volt but I'm not sure I could surrender the V to drive it.
.

rickp
01-04-09, 09:22 PM
My post was not about debating if the V has more output than my car, but I was (am ) trying to find out apples to apples comparisons. If the Jag is 400 at the crank, then what is it at the wheels, or what is the V at the crank?

I am very interested in the PCM tuning mod mentioned by parjae, can anyone point me to those threads? I didn't run across them yet.

Thanks.

caddiedrummer
01-04-09, 09:34 PM
Not trying to be a smart alec, but if you are considering a 556 HP supercharged car gas mileage should not enter the equation. I knew going in the gas milage would suck on the V and it has not let me down. I just wish the tank was larger. It is about the same as my M5 and better than my Viper.

CIWS
01-04-09, 09:34 PM
My post was not about debating if the V has more output than my car, but I was (am ) trying to find out apples to apples comparisons. If the Jag is 400 at the crank, then what is it at the wheels, or what is the V at the crank?

I am very interested in the PCM tuning mod mentioned by parjae, can anyone point me to those threads? I didn't run across them yet.

Thanks.

Your Jag 400HP and the 04-07 CTS-V = 400HP -- 09 CTS-V = 556HP

concorso
01-04-09, 09:57 PM
Judging by the 1/4 mile times, the Jags 400 hp is fairly accurate for crank. Mid 13's at about 105. That puts it in the V1's ballpark. The CTS-V is very luxurious, you should love it. Theres always the Jag XF Supercharged (and the coming R) if you like the Jag brand. Test drive the V2 tho...the suspension is incredible.

darjae
01-04-09, 10:14 PM
I am very interested in the PCM tuning mod mentioned by darjae, can anyone point me to those threads? I didn't run across them yet.

There isn't a thread specifically about tunes, but here are a few where it is mentioned (with links within)

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/158032-wait4me-tune-installation.html

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/157347-real-world-mpg.html

There are some other threads with mentions of tuning performance/mileage with links, but I didn't want to have to re-read all the threads :)

330toSRT8
01-04-09, 11:38 PM
Not trying to be a smart alec, but if you are considering a 556 HP supercharged car gas mileage should not enter the equation. I knew going in the gas milage would suck on the V and it has not let me down. I just wish the tank was larger. It is about the same as my M5 and better than my Viper.
Fuel efficiency is important in any vehicle that will be a daily driver. I don't care if gas costs $8/gallon, but I don't want to be gassing up every 150 miles:)

hound dawg
01-04-09, 11:49 PM
I received my CTS-V on the 23rd of December. With 2400 miles on it I have averaged 17 mpg. I just can not say enough about the fantastic ride!!!
It responds so quickly and soundly that I am finding that I have been making up excuses just to be in it..

darjae
01-05-09, 12:48 AM
I received my CTS-V on the 23rd of December. With 2400 miles on it I have avIt responds so quickly and soundly that I am finding that I have been making up excuses just to be in it..


The joke around my house is that if I went to the store for milk and eggs, I would forget the eggs....."oops, I guess I have to drive some more"

JEM
01-05-09, 02:24 AM
The Jag's 390HP ought to be worth about 320 at the wheels - you can customarily assume 13-15% losses through a manual transmission, a bit more through a conventional hydraulically-operated automatic.

Your gas mileage numbers are quite good, far better than anything I've ever seen with our comparable household fleet ('98 540iA averages 17mpg, '00 M5 averages 17mpg, '02 Audi S6 Avant averages fractionally under 17mpg, those numbers are based on 50/50 highway/local and on oxygenated 91AKI California crap gasoline, if you're somewhere fortunate enough to get real gas you might do a bit better, on its Euro Delivery trip way-back-when the M5 averaged 21mpg on German and French 98RON non-adulterated real gasoline despite cruising at 130-150 every moment I could manage it.)

rickp
01-06-09, 12:07 AM
JEM, yes the mileage I get is nice considering the performance stand out as my daily driver. I really like the total physical package of the V but the uber HP and the much lower mileage estimates are a concern. Something in between my mileage and the V is my goal.

Per previous suggestions I have looked into wait4me mods which sound almost too good. I asked for less gas (for less power) and they promise you more power for less gas!

Gotta sleep on that.

jvp
01-06-09, 08:49 AM
Per previous suggestions I have looked into wait4me mods which sound almost too good. I asked for less gas (for less power) and they promise you more power for less gas!

My suspicion is that the tuners are leaning out the A:F mixture a bit to get you the increased mileage and power. Whether that's safe for the (supercharged!) engine or not remains to be seen...

jas

CIWS
01-06-09, 12:05 PM
My suspicion is that the tuners are leaning out the A:F mixture a bit to get you the increased mileage and power. Whether that's safe for the (supercharged!) engine or not remains to be seen...

jas

On the STS-V's factory tune they were set Pig Rich for WOT. The A/Fs would drop off something below 10 and stay there.

jvp
01-06-09, 12:14 PM
On the STS-V's factory tune they were set Pig Rich for WOT. The A/Fs would drop off something below 10 and stay there.

I'm sure. "Pig Rich" as you call it is safe for the engine though, specially when a supercharger is involved.

Just sayin'....

jas

CIWS
01-06-09, 12:19 PM
I'm sure. "Pig Rich" as you call it is safe for the engine though, specially when a supercharger is involved.

Just sayin'....

jas

Sure, up to a point where you start fouling plugs. ;) But we kinda recognize Cadillac tunes the cars to be able to go anywhere they're shipped and function without concern for air density, humidity,etc. However I think an owner can safely have the car leaned out a bit without sacrificing engine safety as long as they understand it needs to stay safe and not go for the edge.

GMX322V S/C
01-07-09, 01:31 AM
My suspicion is that the tuners are leaning out the A:F mixture a bit to get you the increased mileage and power. Whether that's safe for the (supercharged!) engine or not remains to be seen...

jasI think it's probably safe--with margins even, but NoX probably goes through the roof.

rickp
01-07-09, 09:10 PM
Are you fellows saying that the claims by tuners of mileage and HP improvement are within the realm of believability "to those in the technical know" without necessarily destroying the engine or the auto transmission?

MrEr1c
01-07-09, 09:42 PM
On the STS-V's factory tune they were set Pig Rich for WOT. The A/Fs would drop off something below 10 and stay there.
to put this into perspective, many people in the cobra mustang world have their supercharged cars tuned to an A/F ratio of 12.5 which is about the max you should go while keeping it relatively safe. All of this is relative to the conditions at where you live though.