STS Vs. CTS
When does it start? When will the fighting begin? Kind of curious how the fine, level headed caddy owners will get in to this one....

Will this be like the great Camaro vs. Firebird battle?

Nah. The CTS-V outperforms the STS-V in all projected performance numbers. Sure, the STS has 40 more horse, but it is a much larger car.

Think of it like the BMW M3 versus the BMW M5. The 3 is a much more trackable car with better numbers than the 5, but it does not detract from how great the 5 is (which for years many had considered the finest sedan in the world). It's not anything like the 'Camaro Vs. Firebird battle' in that the CTS and STS exist in completely different classes where the Camaro and Firebird were more or less the same car packaged differently...

I'm about half way in agreement with you here. The two F-body cars ARE too similar to really compare the two. On the other hand, your statement about the M3 and M5 don't make as much sense. The M5 will usually smoke an M3. And then your comment about the STS being a much larger car than the CTS. Have you looked at the dimensions of the two cars? They are so close they could EASILY compete with each other in many ways. Matter of fact, I'm not the first person to point this issue out. I'd like to see a head to head comparo of a RWD V8 STS-v and a CTS-v. My money's on the CTS-v!

That was my point! The new STS and CTS are very similar, not too much size difference, and with the 40 HP extra with the STS-V, it will be a close match. I'm sure this will be an ongoing arguement about who's V is faster once the STS-V's come out!

Hmmmm..

I've even mistaken them briefly in pictures. I had to restart the article in a magazine when I thought they were comparing the new STS-V. Oops, it was the CTS-V..
I am starting to think they are too close.

For comparison purposes:

Performance:

Cadillac STS-V
440hp SuperCharged DOHC Northstar V8
6 speed automatic
4295 lbs.
0-60: 4.9 (est.)
1/4 mile: 13.0 @ 110mph (est.)
Braking 60-0: 115ft.
SkidPad: 0.88g

Cadillac CTS-V
400hp LS6 OHV V8
6 speed manual
3890 lbs.
0-60: 4.7
1/4 mile: 13.1 @ 109.8mph
Braking 60-0: 111ft.
SkidPad: 0.90g


Price and Size:

Cadillac STS-V
$75,000
Wheelbase (in.): 116.4
Length (in.): 196.3
Height (in.): 57.6
Width (in.): 72.6
Track (front): 61.8
Track (rear): 62.3
Head Room (front) (in.): 38.7
Head Room (rear) (in.): 37.9
Hiproom (front) (in.): 54.6
Hiproom (rear) (in.): 55.6
Leg Room (front) (in.): 42.6
Leg Room (rear) (in.): 38.3
Shoulder Room (front) (in.): 58.6
Shoulder Room (rear) (in.): 57.4
Cargo Volume (mfr.) (cu. ft.): 13.8

Cadillac CTS-V
$51,295
Wheelbase (in.): 113.4
Length (in.): 191.5
Height (in.): 57.3
Width (in.): 70.6
Track (front): 61.1
Track (rear): 61.4
Head Room (front) (in.): 38.9
Head Room (rear) (in.): 36.9
Hiproom (front) (in.): 53.4
Hiproom (rear) (in.): 53.8
Leg Room (front) (in.): 42.4
Leg Room (rear) (in.): 36.2
Shoulder Room (front) (in.): 56.6
Shoulder Room (rear) (in.): 56.2
Cargo Volume (mfr.) (cu. ft.): 12.5

The 3 is a much more trackable car with better numbers than the 5, but it does not detract from how great the 5 is.



On the other hand, your statement about the M3 and M5 don't make as much sense. The M5 will usually smoke an M3.


Perhaps you misread my statement. The M3 is a better track car than the M5. The M5 may post better dragstrip times, but that's not really the focus of these cars, is it?

(numbers from Road&Track)

BMW M3 2001
333hp I6
0-60: 4.7
1/4 mile: 13.3 @ 106.8mph
Braking 60-0: 112ft.
SkidPad: 0.91g
Slalom: 68.3mph

BMW M5 2003
394hp V8
0-60: 4.8
1/4 mile: 13.3 @ 108.5mph
Braking 60-0: 116ft.
SkidPad: 0.85g
Slalom: 66.4mph


Nurburgring Lap Times:
BMW M3: 8.22
BMW M5: 8.28

Don't get me wrong, I've always liked the M5 and would choose one over an M3 if I had to pick. The M3 isn't the street car that the M5 is. But the M5 is not the track performer that the M3 is. They're different catergories (just like the CTS and STS ;) ).

When a CTS-V and an STS-V meet at a stop light the STS-V will win 98% of the time. The STS-V has a BETTER power to weight ratio and the 6spd auto offers very agressive gearing. Plus, the SC N* makes more power down low (take a look at the specs), and it has more rubber on the road (275 vs 245).

From a roll, the race should be close, but the STS-V will win every time.
Since drag is more of a factor than weight at high speeds, the extra 40HP will allow the STS-V to win highway races.

The only area where the CTS-V should outshine the STS-V is on a road course, when both cars are driven by professional drivers.

Isn't there going to be a "launch mode" or something of that nature in the STSv? I think this is also found in the E55 amg?
Wonder if the STSv will have wheel hop??? :hmm:

When a CTS-V and an STS-V meet at a stop light the STS-V will win 98% of the time. The STS-V has a BETTER power to weight ratio and the 6spd auto offers very agressive gearing. Plus, the SC N* makes more power down low (take a look at the specs), and it has more rubber on the road (275 vs 245).


Based on the available data power to weight is dang close:

STS V- 0.10245/#

CTS V- 0.10285/#

I figure the driver's experience will have a lot to do with who'll win. Wheel hop could be a big factor too.

This could just be me, but I prefer a launch over a brakestand anyday. I don't think the STS-V would have a chance if the CTS-V driver got a good launch off the line. But yeah, I'm probably wrong about that...only one way to find out...and I can't wait.

This could just be me, but I prefer a launch over a brakestand anyday. I don't think the STS-V would have a chance if the CTS-V driver got a good launch off the line. But yeah, I'm probably wrong about that...only one way to find out...and I can't wait.


Agreed. The CTS-V putting down a 0-60 time of 4.7 is amazing and I find it hard to believe that the STS-V will hit the 4.9 mark.

I hope I am wrong here since I am leaning towards the STS-V for my next car :bouncy:

I am hoping the STS in it's stretched chassis will have had the rear geometry thing figured out. I read a LOT of bad on the wheel hop on the CTS and agree that it is too much to risk.. Do we think it has been corrected on the STS? Is the STS V8 having any such issues with the 320hp? I think the people buying these HATE the fact they need to worry every time they need to make it go..

I am hoping the STS in it's stretched chassis will have had the rear geometry thing figured out. I read a LOT of bad on the wheel hop on the CTS and agree that it is too much to risk.. Do we think it has been corrected on the STS? Is the STS V8 having any such issues with the 320hp? I think the people buying these HATE the fact they need to worry every time they need to make it go..

I don't hate the hop as much as some of the V owners, I just drive around it. The car can be launched quickly you just have to focus on minimizing the hop. If the STS-V doesn't have a redesigned rear cradle then chances are there will be some hop.

I'll let you guys know which car is faster once the STS-V gets here in August-September...

There should be even more fun when the XLR-V hits the streets. The weight of the XLR is much closer to the CTS than the STS. It would REALLY make things interesting if the XLR-V got the z06's Aluminum frame and/or other lightweight components. (carbon fiber floorboards, wheel wells, etc)
I'd bet it would be looking at 4.5 secs to 60mph. Probably very low 13's as well.

xlr 3607 lbs v ?
cts 3568 lbs v 3847 lbs
sts 4026 lbs v 4296 lbs

When a CTS-V and an STS-V meet at a stop light the STS-V will win 98% of the time. The STS-V has a BETTER power to weight ratio and the 6spd auto offers very agressive gearing. Plus, the SC N* makes more power down low (take a look at the specs), and it has more rubber on the road (275 vs 245).

From a roll, the race should be close, but the STS-V will win every time.
Since drag is more of a factor than weight at high speeds, the extra 40HP will allow the STS-V to win highway races.

The only area where the CTS-V should outshine the STS-V is on a road course, when both cars are driven by professional drivers.


Until the CTS-V gets the wheel hop issue under control, I agree that the STS-V (with AWD) will absolutely own MOST of a drag, but I truely feel that the STS-V will not produce the speed and accelleration that the CTS-V can. I think that in most races the STS-V will be second to the CTS-V, but only by a fraction of a second.

Until the CTS-V gets the wheel hop issue under control, I agree that the STS-V (with AWD) will absolutely own MOST of a drag, but I truely feel that the STS-V will not produce the speed and accelleration that the CTS-V can. I think that in most races the STS-V will be second to the CTS-V, but only by a fraction of a second.

As far as what we've heard about the STS-V, it will not be AWD. It will be RWD.

...I wonder if the magnetic ride control and added weight will help the STS in terms of wheelhop? Does anyone with the 320hp version of the car experience any wheelhop or just a smooth spin when accelerating hard with the TC off?

I don't hate the hop as much as some of the V owners, I just drive around it. The car can be launched quickly you just have to focus on minimizing the hop. If the STS-V doesn't have a redesigned rear cradle then chances are there will be some hop.

I'll let you guys know which car is faster once the STS-V gets here in August-September...

Dont you think the STS-V will have less hop inherently with the 6 speed auto?

What's the debate, the STS-V performance tests already show it will be beating up on the CTS-V:)


Gus

What tests are those? From the numbers I have seen, the only place it outscores the CTS-V is in quarter mile times... The CTS bests it in 0-60, cornering, braking, and grip.

It would be interesting to get ahold of a Nurburgring lap time for the STS-V too...

Dont you think the STS-V will have less hop inherently with the 6 speed auto?

The auto will allow for a smoother more consistent power delivery. However, if the STS-V has the same rear cradle and auto leveling suspension as the CTS-V, it should hop.


---- If I had an STS-V here's what I'd do ----

A great aftermarket mod for the STS-V by someone like LPE would be a 4WD option [No more wheel hop problems], and a smaller pulley. The car would dust any new super sedan, including the 500HP M5.

Maybe Cadillac is testing the AWD with the 440hp someplace???

Couple things.

#1: 80% or so of the population can't drive a stick at all; a higher number can't powershift worth s___. Meanwhile, your momma can mash the STS-V pedal to the floor. One for the S.

#2: None of us who own CTS-V's give a rat's patootie about #1. We all dig the stick or we wouldn't be in this car; plus we're all the best powershifters in the northern hemisphere (as far as we know). We ALSO know that most girlie-man autoshift STS drivers won't have the huevos to keep the right foot down long enough to stick with us as we slam our way to Mach 3 with our hair on fire. ('Scuse me; I just had a moment. ) One for the C. :tease:

#3: You need an Eaton to get to 440; when we're at 400 we're just getting started. We C owners are all busy taking our $25-30K that we saved by not buying an S and putting it into manly bolt-on go-fast parts (actually, now that I think about it, that $25K will buy us a full-blown balanced & blueprinted built 427 nightmare engine, plus a shift light & radar detector & some driving gloves & chewing gum & stuff...). By the time the first STS-V pulls along side, he'll find out that I'm making more like 550HP at the crank. Woe to the Northstar owner who starts looking for the same kind of aftermarket options that we greasy CTS-Vette low-tech LS6 pushrod engine weenies are privvy to. (Sorry, this breaks the 'stock vs. stock' theme of the thread, but all's fair in sibling rivalry. :Poke: ) One for the C.

#4, & most important: When that first STS-V pulls up, I want it to be BEHIND me. In the next lane over, I want to see two (INSERT HERE FROM PICK LIST: e.g. C55 AMG, M3, M5...). So that me & my S-bro can come in 1, 2. :thumbsup:



Jerry "Blood Is Thicker Than Imported Water" Anderson :grouphug:


PS: In case I ever bump into an F1 driver at the track, I apologize in advance for the "girlie-man autoshift" line. But, seriously, paddles are for recalcitrant offspring.

Very nicely said..There is definitely a Huge money difference.. But not everyone can spend beyond the payment books anymore.. So you have to give that one to the CTS and the aftermarket goodies ..

Lawfive just earned my Most Entertaining Post of the Month award. :D
Good stuff. I'm still laughing. :)

:histeric: :thumbsup: Law5

Lawfive just earned my Most Entertaining Post of the Month award. :D
Good stuff. I'm still laughing. :)

My posts improve when I drink while I write...

Where is everybody on this forum? I was expecting a light-hearted argument...

Oh, BTW: over in the hyperactive CTS-V forum we're talking about getting Led Zep to play in the car at appropriate times (e.g. start-up, WOT) like in the commercials. Just so you STS-V folks know my heart's in the right place, I've found an appropriate Led Zep CD for you guys to have loaded up:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00002CF4D/qid=1108432652/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl15/002-4560132-8604805?v=glance&s=classical&n=507846

($13.88 at WalMart...)

-- Jerry

Hahahaha, just listening to the samples gives a whole new meaning to the word eclectic.

Brian

Do not worry about debate.. There are no Owners of the STS yet.. I am sure we can do this Post again. And I am pretty sure Most of the STS-V forum will not be the "how do I get rid of" complaints.. Probably more "Glad I traded my CTS_V"

My posts improve when I drink while I write...

Where is everybody on this forum? I was expecting a light-hearted argument...

Oh, BTW: over in the hyperactive CTS-V forum we're talking about getting Led Zep to play in the car at appropriate times (e.g. start-up, WOT) like in the commercials. Just so you STS-V folks know my heart's in the right place, I've found an appropriate Led Zep CD for you guys to have loaded up:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00002CF4D/qid=1108432652/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl15/002-4560132-8604805?v=glance&s=classical&n=507846

($13.88 at WalMart...)



Now THAT, was a low blow :want: :rant2: :tisk: :gun2:

Light hearted arguements.. that's all..

Do not worry about debate.. There are no Owners of the STS yet.. I am sure we can do this Post again. And I am pretty sure Most of the STS-V forum will not be the "how do I get rid of" complaints.. Probably more "Glad I traded my CTS_V"

UB right, most likely, dammit. Since we won't be able to win THAT argument, it surely is a good thing that we'll be able to drive away from you...

I've still never seen another CTS-V on the road at the same time as me. I'd have to say the possiblilioty of me and an STS-V lining up at a stop light any time soon is less likely than Bush finding some WMD's.

-Chris

I've still never seen another CTS-V on the road at the same time as me. I'd have to say the possiblilioty of me and an STS-V lining up at a stop light any time soon is less likely than Bush finding some WMD's.

-Chris

Or the Democrats finding a victory.

Or the Democrats finding a victory.

heh,

I a registered Republican, so I feel I can jest. He is a a tard.

-Chris

Trukk,

I'm a registered Republican, too, and I have to tell you that all us true tards out here find your last comment demeaning. :helpless:

I don't mean the tard remark; I mean implying that us tards on the same level with :cookoo: Bush!

(I guess one of these days I should go ahead and register Libertarian, which am what I are.)

I think the STS V will have less wheel hop due to the heavier weight and wider tires. But I also believe that unless a CTS-V driver is dead on the STS will win because alot of cars with the 6 speed auto have identical if not faster times than the same car with a manual tranny.

I may get an XJR to tide me over until I can buy a used STS-V series but you can take one of them that starts at 390 hp over 550 hp with bolt ons. Heck you can take them to 500 without even taking the supercharger off. The STS already starts at 440 how much do you think it will take to get to 550 intake/exhaust/pulley and thats about it.

STS-V Vs. CTS-V. IMO, it all depends on the driver at this point...ideally isnt it every loss of 100lbs somewhat equivilant to gaining 10hp... its a damn close race.
lets hope a 250lb guy isnt driving the STS-V when racing a 180lb guy in the CTS-V LOLLOL

btw what transmission does the STS-V have now?

Itz not the CTS-V thatz the problem - itz the Chrysler SRT-8, no?

Dragged from the bottom of the pile....

Interesting read now...

The STS-V is a great car. Anyone who feels otherwise can piss off.

What tests are those? From the numbers I have seen, the only place it outscores the CTS-V is in quarter mile times... The CTS bests it in 0-60, cornering, braking, and grip.

It would be interesting to get ahold of a Nurburgring lap time for the STS-V too...
YEah, only in a straight line does the preliminary tests say the S is faster.
There was a video of it on the Nurburgring a few montsh ago, lapped in 8:30? Not too shabby!

I don't hate the hop as much as some of the V owners, I just drive around it. The car can be launched quickly you just have to focus on minimizing the hop. If the STS-V doesn't have a redesigned rear cradle then chances are there will be some hop.

I'll let you guys know which car is faster once the STS-V gets here in August-September...


This wheel hop you talk about, is it like where the rear axle jumps around and kind of bounces also under accleration? If it is, then my '95 Buick Roadmaster had wheel hop also. Like the CTS-V, the Roadmaster had a limited slip differential.

Perhaps you misread my statement. The M3 is a better track car than the M5. The M5 may post better dragstrip times, but that's not really the focus of these cars, is it?

(numbers from Road&Track)

BMW M3 2001
333hp I6
0-60: 4.7
1/4 mile: 13.3 @ 106.8mph
Braking 60-0: 112ft.
SkidPad: 0.91g
Slalom: 68.3mph

BMW M5 2003
394hp V8
0-60: 4.8
1/4 mile: 13.3 @ 108.5mph
Braking 60-0: 116ft.
SkidPad: 0.85g
Slalom: 66.4mph


Nurburgring Lap Times:
BMW M3: 8.22
BMW M5: 8.28

Don't get me wrong, I've always liked the M5 and would choose one over an M3 if I had to pick. The M3 isn't the street car that the M5 is. But the M5 is not the track performer that the M3 is. They're different catergories (just like the CTS and STS ;) ).

How about some 2006 BMW M5 numbers...might as well compare current vehicles.

0-100km: 4.4s
400M: 12.5s
0-200km-0: under 25s
Nurburgring: 7:52

Throw up some 06 Z06 numbers to compare. Yeah, its not a sedan but chances are you are not going to drive the other cars year round in most parts of the US either. If I'm spending around $80k for a car, I'm not going to worry about it carrying more than 2 people.

Throw up some 06 Z06 numbers to compare. Yeah, its not a sedan but chances are you are not going to drive the other cars year round in most parts of the US either. If I'm spending around $80k for a car, I'm not going to worry about it carrying more than 2 people.

The M5 is not a comparison to a Z06 in any manner. If you want to compare the Z06 to something try the 911S or 911 Turbo.

The M5 is STS-V comp all the way (and E55, RS6).

Throw up some 06 Z06 numbers to compare. Yeah, its not a sedan but chances are you are not going to drive the other cars year round in most parts of the US either. If I'm spending around $80k for a car, I'm not going to worry about it carrying more than 2 people.

I choose the BMW M5 sedan over the STS-V sedan. Someone willing to spend around $80 for a car is typically willing to spend $100.

Hell, if someone's gonna spend $100, they're 'typically' willing to spend $120+ so why not an S65 AMG...

im hearing the STS-V is somewhere around 77k, if im correct. id say thats a damn good bargain. if you compare it to mercedes costs and bmw. the STS-V is only a couple tenths slower. big deal, and a lot will hafta do with the driver anyways!!! i think its a lot hotter looking than any of those over rated german crap boxes everyone raves about so much...why even bother coming other this forum if you all support the german made cars.
shit...id choose a caddy over a lexus, bmw, or mercedes any day!
as far as the sts-v vs. the cts-v..the STS-v should have a more aggressive launch if you can feather the throttle from off the line and hook those tires up, its supercharged. its such even numbers im seeing as far as 1/4mile times. it will have a lot to do with whos driving the car that will make the person win.

News Release for STS-V and XLR-V

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55087

This wheel hop you talk about, is it like where the rear axle jumps around and kind of bounces also under accleration? If it is, then my '95 Buick Roadmaster had wheel hop also. Like the CTS-V, the Roadmaster had a limited slip differential.
The wheel hop only happens when the car is under power.

It's bad enough that it will destroy the rear diff or axles if you don't back out of the power. I've heard that the STS-V doesn't have wheel hop like the V, it might have some but it wont be as bad (although I doubt there's another car in the world that suffers from the severe hop that the CTS-V has).

Hell, if someone's gonna spend $100, they're 'typically' willing to spend $120+ so why not an S65 AMG...
List price for the S65 is $165,000+. Did you mean the S55, which has an MSRP of $111,000?

That's a huge difference over the STS-V and the new M5. There's a $34,000 price difference between the STS-V and an S55, while the S65....
Compared to the M5 which has an MSRP of $81,200 (I actually thought it was more), the S55 is $30,000 more.

The big difference is in how the cars are optioned, the STS-V is loaded at $77,000, while the M5 starts at $81,200, and I'm willing to bet that the $111,000 is the base price for the S55.

List price for the S65 is $165,000+. Did you mean the S55, which has an MSRP of $111,000?

That's a huge difference over the STS-V and the new M5. There's a $34,000 price difference between the STS-V and an S55, while the S65....
Compared to the M5 which has an MSRP of $81,200 (I actually thought it was more), the S55 is $30,000 more.

The big difference is in how the cars are optioned, the STS-V is loaded at $77,000, while the M5 starts at $81,200, and I'm willing to bet that the $111,000 is the base price for the S55.

The Mercedes S Class is not a direct competitor with the STS. It is much roomier and has more prestige. Now the E55 is much closer.

Hell, if someone's gonna spend $100, they're 'typically' willing to spend $120+ so why not an S65 AMG...

I don't like the Mercedes...its just me...I also think you meant the 55 not the 65 ;)

My fully loaded M5 was about $92 or $93 plus taxes.

If someone is willing to pay $80,000 for a car then $1,250,000 is not out of the question. Gentlemen meet the new Bugatti Veyron. 1,001 horsepower and a top speed of 253mph. That ought to shut 'em up.

Yes I meant 55, my bad, I saw an S65 a couple days ago so I had 65 on the brain.