: Rate your V against your other favorite cars



Mallet-V
05-28-11, 09:37 AM
Curious to where you would rate your V against other beloved cars. I've wanted the new V since they came out and my plan to get one has been extended. I haven't yet driven one because I know I'll dig a financial hole to get one sooner. But sitting in one a few times at car shows they seemed a bit cramped. So how do you rate it, and what cars are you comparing it to? Strengths, weaknesses........

Domsz06
05-28-11, 10:08 AM
i have my v and my c6z, and I really enjoy my v, it's refined, quite and great to drive n e where. Only time I get into the z is the weekend or when I just want the brute raw power. That being said after my mods come back for the v..... yeah I may never leave it lol. Plus I can drive it with my wife and 2 friends in the back and it's like they are not even there ha ha ha. It's probably my favorite sedan I have ever owned. Oh wait, I have never owned another sedan unless you count a 92 toyota corolla lol ;)

Ross L
05-28-11, 10:41 AM
More squeaky.;)

thebigjimsho
05-28-11, 12:41 PM
I love my '09V. But I still don't have that connection that I had with my '04V. I miss the rawness of that first V. But it's a time thing. I'm sure I'll love my '09 even more as I take it on trips like I did the '04...

baabootoo
05-28-11, 02:00 PM
I liked the G8 a lot! It was the only car that I had in many, many years, that could hide a full-sized spare in the trunk. It was lighter, and maybe a tad roomier than the V also. It stuck like glue on the tracks also. Unfortunately, I would have had to modify the heck out of it to get to the power levels I have now, which would have cancelled out the warranty. Secondly, they're not made any more which is also a big downside (considering the host of propblems that they had).

JFJr
05-28-11, 02:40 PM
My "V" is not as "tossable" as my Z51 Corvettes were, but they were about 1,000#'s lighter, and had a lower center of gravity, so that's not a fair comparison. However, I've been told that the current "V" can stay with a standard Corvette on a curvy track. What's not to like about that?


Jud
(Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk)

Mallet-V
05-28-11, 02:42 PM
I liked the G8 a lot! It was the only car that I had in many, many years, that could hide a full-sized spare in the trunk. It was lighter, and maybe a tad roomier than the V also. It stuck like glue on the tracks also. Unfortunately, I would have had to modify the heck out of it to get to the power levels I have now, which would have cancelled out the warranty. Secondly, they're not made any more which is also a big downside (considering the host of propblems that they had).
How would you compare the performance between the two? Much difference in ride?

My current toy sedan is a G8 and I've put too much into it to ever sell, so the V will eventually sit next to it. I blew my warranty after 2k miles and plan on doing the same whenever I get back into a V.

Luna.
05-28-11, 03:09 PM
I love my '09V. But I still don't have that connection that I had with my '04V. I miss the rawness of that first V. But it's a time thing. I'm sure I'll love my '09 even more as I take it on trips like I did the '04...

I share this sentiment almost to the T. I'm not sure why though. The 2nd gen V is so superior in most ways, there's little comparison

Trapspeed
05-28-11, 03:28 PM
Over the years, the only other sedan I've had was a 300C SRT-8. It was an outstanding vehicle with great performance but the two cars are completely different. In addition to more power, the V is more solid and better overall. The two are not competitors and never will be but the V is so much better than I ever thought. Quite a machine for sure. My last three cars before the 300 were Camaros. Started with an '89 IROC, then a new '93 Z28, then a '99 SS. The SS was a good runner when I got rid of it and I loved it. None of them compare to the V. It's a tad narrower and shorter than the 300 but I'm 6'3" and 285 and fit great in it.

neverl8
05-28-11, 03:48 PM
I've had a few cars over the years from a F-body TA, 2 supercharged Mustang Cobras, a couple of Vettes to include a C5Z, the SRT8 Charger and Challenger. The two favorite rides of mine were the C5Z and the SRT8 Charger. The V does the same thing both cars did separately! Brute force and room for the family as well. Not to mention the easy ability to make even more safe power with the V. I sold my C5Z because my son couldn't enjoy the ride with me and the wife. I bought a Mustang Cobra convertible because of the rear seat and supercharger. Still wanted more room and usability. So I bought a SRT8 Charger. Loved that ride, just got tired of all the V6 Chargers runnin around with the 24" wheels and neon lights. So I traded it for a SRT8 Challenger. That thing was a tank! Worst car mistake I ever made! So now I'm in the V and it's awesome! Can't think of another car that would be in my budget that I would want.

jojipoji
05-28-11, 04:17 PM
I currently own a Honda s2000 vortech supercharged and I drive that as much as the caddy. Believe it or not in many ways it is more fun to drive than tha caddy especiallynwhen it's 75 degrees out and sunny.

My old Mitsubishi evo with bigger turbo was almost as fast as the caddy and prob faster from zero to sixty. That was fun also but lacked the torque and ability to lay strips down whenever I want for fear of breaking the transfer case and differentials.

PhxTriode
05-28-11, 09:47 PM
Car before the V was a E39 M5. The v is more powerful and a blast to drive... But I do miss how well the M5 turned into a corner and the superior steering feel. I will say that lowering the V got me closer but it's still not the M5. I feel the same as Luna put it I'm just not as connected to the car. yet!

I am fortunate though that I sold it to a dear friend and have the opportunity to drive it anytime I would want.

thebigjimsho
05-29-11, 12:09 AM
I share this sentiment almost to the T. I'm not sure why though. The 2nd gen V is so superior in most ways, there's little comparison
It's a tribute to the awesomeness of that original V!

TMC CL65
05-29-11, 01:01 AM
I have had the good fortune of owning some very nice high performance cars in the past 10 years. Here is how my V compares:

'02 E39 M5 (UUC short shifter and Roque weighted shift-rod, K&N drop-in filters, Powerchip ECU software). The M5 was probably the best feeling steering I have ever felt. It was perfectly weighted and the chassis never felt over matched. I had the "sport" interior, which came with terrible "metaloid" (some sort of fake veneered metal-like material) trim and the "Batman suit" rubber dashboard. That is what makes me laugh when CTS-V critics bash the quality of the interior...when a BMW M5 which cost more in '02 ($72K+) had questionable materials (although the Alcantara headliner and Nappa leather seat and door surfaces wear of a greater quality than the V). I absolutely loved the M5. A great and balanced car (I miss that smooth short shifter). I only wished it had another 150hp/150lbs-ft of torque. The CTS-V obviously checks those boxes, but as Phx Triode mentions, the M5 has superior handling feel. Otherwise, the CTS-V either matches or exceeds the E39 M5, which isn't shocking given the strides in a car developed nearly 10 years later. I will say, I have the Recaro seats in my V and they are 1,000 times better than the M5's seats on a long trip. I can remember my lower back killing me after my many 250 miles jaunts between NY and DC.

'03 Audi RS6 (no mods): In retrospect, I think this was a mistake going from the M5 to the RS6. The appeal of the RS6 was the 50hp/45lbs-ft of torque increase mated to AWD. The downsides were prehistoric Nav system, and loss of road feel. The CTS-V is better than the RS6 in every way (handling capabilities and feel, straight line speed, looks, amentities) except the obvious lack of AWD and the interior materials (real carbon fiber trim and better quality leather).

'06 Jeep SRT8 (Mopar CAI): I really liked the Jeep for what it is, a high performance sport-ute which is geared for epic acceleration (to about 60mph) at a very reasonable price. The interior (hard plastic dash) was so cheap it was actually comical. I really liked its sinister look, 6.1L V8 and all weather performance. My main gripes were the the tiny gas tank and terrible fuel economy. I would probably gripe about the same thing about CTS-V. The CTS-V's ride is so much more comfortable and sportier than the SRT8 (which should be expected when comparing to a 4,800lbs SUV). Once again, the only thing the Jeep had over the CTS-V was AWD.

'05 Mercedes CL65 AMG (Kleemann ECU Tune and BMC drop-in filters): The CL65 was a $180+K car when brand new (I was the second owner and paid a fraction of that figure). I mention that because it isn't necessarily a fair comparison to a $70K car. However, the CTS-V stand toe-to-toe with the CL65 and IMHO, gets the TKO. The most noticeable difference once again is the interior. MB went out of their way to lavish the occupants in the highest quality materials in the interior. The Nappa leather was so soft ...even on the dash, alcantatra headliner, quality wood (mine had chestnut ...a lighter wood with charcoal interior which was rare contrast)... it was sooo nice. My CTS-V has the optional suede steering wheel/shift knob, so it does have its own more sporty appeal (with the Recaro seats). Stock-to-stock, the CL65 was faster than the CTS-V. Even in the humid summer heat, the CL65 never trapped below 118mph in the 1/4 mile...my CTS-V with only a cat-back exhaust at the time, barely cracked 115mph. However, the CTS-V's wider stock rubber (285s vs the puny 275's on the CL65) and stock LSD (no LSD on the CL65...kind of crazy considering the AMG performance image and price) made the CTS-V easier to launch (also the CL65's STOCK 738lbs-ft of torque was a bit tricky to harness). although all that torque from the CL65's V12 biturbo engine also necessitated an antiquated...but bulletproof 5 speed automatic to handle the load. Now modified to modified, the CTS-V will be faster if you put the same $'s into each car. The CL65's problem was its weight. Without driver and with everything left in its trunk (full sized spare), it weighed about 4,650lbs. That weight is hard to hide when throwing it into turns. The ABC (Active Body Control) is a hydraulic suspension (you could raise and lower the car at a push of a button...pretty cool) that was over matched. It did a good job of stopping body roll, but its settings in the CL65 was not good at dampening bumps, nor providing any sort of connection to the road. The CTS-V's MRC is light years better than the ABC suspension. One last gripe about the CL65, I cracked two rims. This shouldn't be a big deal, but I was not alone. Most 65 owners using the same wheels had this problem because the cars are heavy....but the wheels they used were CAST aluminum...in a nearly $200K car....unbelievable! So I would definitely rate the CTS-V as a much more satisfying performance car.

'09 Nissan GT-R (Cobb A/P 93 octane tune, AAM mid-pipe, HKS drop-in filters): A completely different car from the CTS-V...but kindred spirits in a way. I say that for a number of reasons. They both have people that either love the aggressive looks....or hate them. They are both renegades produced to take on the traditional powers in each of their market segments....and do it at a much discounted price in comparison to those traditional powers. As far as a direct comparison, the straight line speed stock-to-stock goes to the GT-R from a dig (obviously with Launch Control and AWD, the GT-R is unbeatable) but from a roll, it would have been a much closer race. Modified to modified, it is a matter of how much you want to spend on the GT-R. In my current state of mods, the GT-R is slower from a roll than my modded CTS-V. Handling, the GT-R has the advantage when looking at maximum capabilities. However, the CTS-V is a much...much better daily driver. The GT-R's suspension can be harsh at times...making you wise to avoid rougher patches. The interiors are comparable in that they both take hits from critics for the sometimes questionable use of lower quality materials. I personally like the CTS-V's center stack...more symmetrical layout. The adjustable display screen on the GT-R is pretty cool....as well as its race car like steering wheel (although prefer the CTS-V's suede material to the leather wrapping on the GT-R). The GT-R's dual-clutch transmission is amazingly fast and smooth...I wish the CTS-V was mated to it. I won't try to choose between my two "kids"....but I find them to be great complimentary cars to each other.

Overall, the CTS-V is an amazing value and has so much going for it. Yes, there are some niggling "squeaky" issues here and there. If the CTS-V had the M5's steering feel, the Audi's Quattro AWD (best out of all the AWD cars), CL65's interior materials, and GT-R transmission.... it would be the PERFECT car. As it sits, it is an excellent high performance sedan.

Tom

laynrockers
05-29-11, 01:34 AM
Tom

Well said.. I enjoyed that inside perspective. My previous car to my 09 CTS-V was a 06 BMW 760LI V-12. I loved this car for its over the top luxury features. For instance having a "cool box" pretty sililar to a refrigerator in a luxury 4 door was awsome especially because I live in Las Vegas and it can get very hot. The ability to pick between sport or cruise mode. heated steering wheel, I-Drive, And as you mention the leather the complete finish. The sound quality of the denoting. That car never made a noise and felt very solid and was built like a tank. My V on the other hand sometimes reminds me of a cheap piece of plastic (roof noises, pillar noises, squeaky navigation ect. ) My 06 760LI was like a comfy couch rocket.

Enter the V, This car is world more fun. I drive aggressively 90% time. Personally I look forward to putting in seat time every day. So once i got used to the V I find it hard to own another car that isn't "performance built". Bang for the buck while wanting some luxury you CAN'T beat it.

I looked at the E63AMG, GTR, Z06, M5, M6, porsche cayenne turbo. Test drove each and did my research and I ended up with the V

PhxTriode
05-29-11, 11:51 AM
Tom,

Impressive list of ex-cars. It reads like a list of the worlds most beautiful women.

Mallet-V
05-29-11, 02:34 PM
Great writeup Tom, quite an impressive list of cars. Thanks for all the opinions, keep them coming.

CodyLX450
05-29-11, 09:04 PM
My 2 Favorite (and current) cars are my 10 'V auto Sedan and my 08 supercharged S2000.

Obviously different beasts - but both ridiculously fun to drive. The S2000 is obviously much lighter and nimbler and no slouch at 400whp, but its only a 2 seater, and can be quite rough at times with bumpy roads or really long drives. The V is massively more comfortable and has room for 5, so its definately the long trip commuter.

Both cars do quite well in surprising random souped up cars that don't know what they're messing with.

mpouls1
05-29-11, 09:29 PM
I had a '07 CSRT8. I really loved that WOT throaty sound. Interior was somewhat generic but I didn't buy it for that. Blast to drive and like my V didn't see too many of them either.

TMC CL65
05-30-11, 11:51 PM
Thanks guys!

The CTS-V is an amazing car for the money. It is a car meant for enthusiasts...and not for those who care about status symbols.

Tom

oxymoron
06-04-11, 01:20 PM
I like my V best for its all-around balance of comfort and speed and quickness. I have managed to find positives is all my other cars, whether POS or not, though. I had a 72 Renault R-12 that went only forward, so that one had to be careful about parking. Head-in to park only on an incline, etc., BUT, it had the most comfortable seats of any car I have owned. I had a 52 Chevy 4-door (my first car) that would go from zero to sixty in the time it took to listen to the organ solo in the Doors' Light My Fire. Stopping from 60 was about the same, BUT, if you sat up straight in the back seat and strectched your legs out, your feet wouldn't touch the back of the front bench seat and the floor was flat with no transmission hump. This was an invaluable feature for "watching movies" at the drive-in theatre. It had 4 vent windows! So even with no AC in Midland, Texas in the summers, it was.... well it was still hot. It pre-dated auto shut-off gas pumps and there was a whistle in the tank filler neck that would whistle until yiou were within 1 or 2 gallons of being full. So the gas station attendant could clean your windows and check your oil and tire pressures and run back to the pump at the right time before an overflow.
I had a 1971 280 SE 3.5 MB Coupe that was the prettiest car I ever owned. What wasn't Zebrano or triple chrome was leather on the interior. It was Mercedes' first V-8 coupe and it was quick and fast too. It was a pillarless coupe with 2 vent windows. Astral Silver paint over red leather. I still kick myself for letting that one go. The Behr AC would chill a six pack in the front seat.

I stiil have what was my daily driver before the V, a 1978 MB 450 SEL 6.9, the one with the big old engine and oleopneumatic suspension. No conventional springs but hydraulic rams at the 4 corners along with nitrogen filled spheres with rubber diaphragms that acted as the springing medium. Similar suspension to Citroens. When operating correctly, it is like riding on a cloud. Not floaty, either. It is a heavy car and not too easy to toss around, but that is not its purpose. Vacuum operates the door locks, AC flaps and controls. This auto climate control was from mid-sixties Chysler Imperials and when it is working right, it is pretty good considering the era. It cost $50,000 in 1978. It was more than the Jag V-12 Sedans and a Rolls Royce. Keeping this car in shape to be a DD has been a full-time job for the myriad plastic and rubber bits that fail with age. It was sort of the be-all end-all car of the time when I first got out of school and it took me 20 years to be able to afford it, when I bought it used in 1994. It has a lot of character and there is no better car for a road trip. I have taken it to work from Texas to San Francisco and to North Dakota more than a couple of times.
But, for overall performance and comfort, the V still wins big time.