YouTube - WORLD'S QUICKEST 2009 CTS-V: 11.45 @ 124 mph!

There is more in the car. We did not run it in sport mode and the motor was a bit heat soaked. I think its got an 11.3 @ 126 mph in it with no changes, just more testing.

FYI, we tested a stock ZR1 on the same day and it ran 11.7 @ 126 mph.

Enjoy.

www.HennesseyPerformanceStore.com

^ nice John, How much power do you think the block will be able to handle reliably ?

YouTube - WORLD'S QUICKEST 2009 CTS-V: 11.45 @ 124 mph! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd5lx0PUkGY)

There is more in the car. We did not run it in sport mode and the motor was a bit heat soaked. I think its got an 11.3 @ 126 mph in it with no changes, just more testing.

FYI, we tested a stock ZR1 on the same day and it ran 11.7 @ 126 mph.

Enjoy.

www.HennesseyPerformanceStore.com


Great to see these cars go faster! :thumbsup:

What unsprung weight savings if any were gained with the HRE light weight wheels?

ZR1s time seems slow. Giving a huge benefit of the doubt that the ZR1 ran as fast as it could that day due to conditions and not lack of driver seat time, are you suggesting that on any given day this CTS-V is faster, or was this a rarity?

Mike

heat soak. that's what I worry about...

I'm sure the zr1 has traction issues. Now if you put some dr's on it you'll see some nice times.

hmm...

Nice to see the Video....


Where are all the MODS posted at? I'd like to know what was done to the car...

Nice to see the Video....


Where are all the MODS posted at? I'd like to know what was done to the car...

At 1 minute 1 second into the video, the mods are listed on the screen

Got it.. I have been missing a lot of these things lately.. Thanks

anyone got a connection at Lenscrafters for this guy??

It seems strange to me that the front wheels are stock and the back wheels are the HREs (custom) in the clip. What's the reason for this? I know in the original 11.85 run, the HREs were mounted all the way around. No idea why that would change. Was there an issue with some of the wheels that needed fixing? or fitment issues? I'm looking at custom wheels and possibly changing sizes and just want to ensure that I don't make the wrong decision.

It seems strange to me that the front wheels are stock and the back wheels are the HREs (custom) in the clip. What's the reason for this? I know in the original 11.85 run, the HREs were mounted all the way around. No idea why that would change. Was there an issue with some of the wheels that needed fixing? or fitment issues? I'm looking at custom wheels and possibly changing sizes and just want to ensure that I don't make the wrong decision.

We had drag radials on the back.

so far the direct competitor I see as being the c63, with a tune and a cai the c63 is running like 11.5x's. Thats them being on STREET tires as I guess the dr's for that size were on national backorder at the times of the run. Although the v could easily outhandle the c63 as merc's can't handle for sh*t.

We had drag radials on the back.

of course! Thanks

the last E63 i drove was slower than an E55. and my stock Lexus ISF can beat them both. so i do not see any C, S, CL or SL 63 running mid 11's on street tires. not even with nitrous.

there was a CL65 with drag radials that ran 11.4 @ 124 mph at our track a few weeks back. but its making 700 hp and 850 lb-ft thru its modified V12 twin turbo. and it costs $190k new.

the last E63 i drove was slower than an E55. and my stock Lexus ISF can beat them both. so i do not see any C, S, CL or SL 63 running mid 11's on street tires. not even with nitrous.

there was a CL65 with drag radials that ran 11.4 @ 124 mph at our track a few weeks back. but its making 700 hp and 850 lb-ft thru its modified V12 twin turbo. and it costs $190k new.

http://renntechmercedes.blogspot.com/2009/02/renntech-c63-11654.html

^ 11.6 w/ new rennetech tune on street invo tires. There is no way a stock is-f will take an E55....or even an e63.

12.2-.3 on stock rubber for the C63.

http://www.mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w204/271899-c63-atco-dragstrip.html



The Renn tech for the 11.65 is $3500!


Norm


P. A. I've seen stock MB. Run circles around AMG ves. Just depends who's driving. :)

BJ, your just frothing over John's next hot project!

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/16/hennessey-ready-to-tap-2010-ford-taurus-shos-potential/


Norm

heat soak. that's what I worry about...

12.2-.3 on stock rubber for the C63.

http://www.mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w204/271899-c63-atco-dragstrip.html



The Renn tech for the 11.65 is $3500!


Norm


P. A. I've seen stock MB. Run circles around AMG ves. Just depends who's driving. :)

For the faster time its actually worth it in comparison to the cost of headers,tune,pulley's, & install etc.

FYI, we tested a stock ZR1 on the same day and it ran 11.7 @ 126 mph.



We had drag radials on the back.

Did the ZR-1 have drag radials on the back too?

It seems my previous questions may have been overlooked:

Great to see these cars go faster! :thumbsup:

What unsprung weight savings if any were gained with the HRE light weight wheels?

ZR1s time seems slow. Giving a huge benefit of the doubt that the ZR1 ran as fast as it could that day due to conditions and not lack of driver seat time, are you suggesting that on any given day this CTS-V is faster, or was this a rarity?

Mike

http://renntechmercedes.blogspot.com/2009/02/renntech-c63-11654.html

^ 11.6 w/ new rennetech tune on street invo tires. There is no way a stock is-f will take an E55....or even an e63.

sorry my isf beat an e55 by 3-4 car lengths from a roll.

Did the ZR-1 have drag radials on the back too?

It seems my previous questions may have been overlooked:

no the zr1 had stock tires.

sorry my isf beat an e55 by 3-4 car lengths from a roll.

k, gotcha. That would be more understandable in comparison of 8gears to 5gears.

sorry my isf beat an e55 by 3-4 car lengths from a roll.
C&D didn't get great lap times with the IS-F at VIR...

C&D didn't get great lap times with the IS-F at VIR...

lap times on a road course dont really have a lot to do with roll on acceleration. my point is simply that i have driven several 6.3 AMG's and thought they felt slow. My seat of the pants is that a stock 6.3 would get destroyed by a stock V. and i dont see a computer upgrade making a 6.3 that much faster. now if you are talking about the 65 V12 twin turbo that is a whole different story. but again, those cars are 2-3 times as expensive as the V.

back to the topic at hand. if you would like to start your own thread about vir lap times, modded e63's, etc. please do so. thanks.

Great time John, although I'd really like to see a run without drag radials... I want to know how it would perform in a real life situation. I'm sure the drag radials play a big roll in that time you got. Just saying a slightly more realistic setup rather than going straight for the record breaking.
Thanks

so far the direct competitor I see as being the c63, with a tune and a cai the c63 is running like 11.5x's. Thats them being on STREET tires as I guess the dr's for that size were on national backorder at the times of the run. Although the v could easily outhandle the c63 as merc's can't handle for sh*t.


I'm a frequent poster on MBWorld and follow the C63 crowd. Some are indeed hitting mid-11's but that is NOT with stock tires. Absolutely on drag radials. They are typically running custom tunes, intakes, headers and exhaust (like MHP's or Renntech's setup) and trapping 118-121mph depending on tuner. The C63 is no slouch on the track either. It was about 10 sec behind the '09 V on the 'Ring.

12.2-.3 on stock rubber for the C63.

http://www.mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w204/271899-c63-atco-dragstrip.html



The Renn tech for the 11.65 is $3500!


Norm


P. A. I've seen stock MB. Run circles around AMG ves. Just depends who's driving. :)


Read the mods list for the Renntech car. The headers alone will probably run you over $3k.

http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Benz-C63-AMG-Timeslip-17690.html

there was a CL65 with drag radials that ran 11.4 @ 124 mph at our track a few weeks back. but its making 700 hp and 850 lb-ft thru its modified V12 twin turbo. and it costs $190k new.


You can get used 2005 CL65's now for $55k. Talk about depreciation!

lap times on a road course dont really have a lot to do with roll on acceleration. my point is simply that i have driven several 6.3 AMG's and thought they felt slow. My seat of the pants is that a stock 6.3 would get destroyed by a stock V. and i dont see a computer upgrade making a 6.3 that much faster. now if you are talking about the 65 V12 twin turbo that is a whole different story. but again, those cars are 2-3 times as expensive as the V.

back to the topic at hand. if you would like to start your own thread about vir lap times, modded e63's, etc. please do so. thanks.
wow, bitchslapped by the famous John Hennessey! :duck:

So John, my previous question...how much do you think the lsa can handle ??