: CTS-V versus 300C SRT-8



waldoaz
02-10-06, 03:30 PM
Yes the CTS-V is fast, but the SRT-8 is faster! Id take the 6.1 Hemi with 425 horspower any day! Did I mention the SRT-8 Magnum will also beat it and its a station wgaon! LOL
The CTS-V looks sexier though!

GOTTSPD
02-10-06, 03:52 PM
Why are you here? Please move on to another board...

waldoaz
02-10-06, 03:58 PM
Just discussing cars. nice, you have an NSX

Katshot
02-10-06, 06:57 PM
Just discussing cars. nice, you have an NSX

NSX = over-priced, slugs. Nice looking though. The guy probably got the CTS-V so he'd have something with some power. :D
I agree, the SRT-8 IS faster but the CTS-V is a much nicer car for anyone who really wants a "driver's car".

gothicaleigh
02-10-06, 07:41 PM
Yes the CTS-V is fast, but the SRT-8 is faster! Id take the 6.1 Hemi with 425 horspower any day! Did I mention the SRT-8 Magnum will also beat it and its a station wgaon! LOL


You sure about that?
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/index.html





Since that test, the CTS-V has also received the LS2 with a more usable powerband which would widen the gap.

GOTTSPD
02-10-06, 10:06 PM
NSX = over-priced, slugs. Nice looking though. The guy probably got the CTS-V so he'd have something with some power. :D


Actually, I have both. The NSX is actually very, very fast. Ever driven one? Just like an Elise, it doesn't need a lot of HP to be quick and fast. Anyway, both are great cars. The SRT8 Chryslers are great cars. I have been trying to talk my wife into getting a Magnum or SRT8 Grand Cherokee for her next car, but that's still up in the air.... :burn:

Katshot
02-11-06, 07:57 AM
The Lotus Elise costs less than half of what a NSX does and has virtually the exact same performance. Okay, I understand that both cars exploit good power to weight ratios for their performance but the Elise is not pretending to be a super-car. My son loves the NSX and has ever since they came out but even he is getting tired of waiting for Honda to make it a true player in it's originally intended market.

As for the SRT-8's performance, I can tell you that stock vs. stock, the SRT-8 will outrun the CTS-V. I personally watched as two SRT-8's ran 12.8 and 12.9 1/4 miles "bone stock". I have never even HEARD of any CTS-V's doing that.

Zorb750
02-20-06, 08:51 AM
Honda NSX? That overpriced thing that handles very well but has the straight line performance of a slightly modded MUSTANG? Unimpressive! Unimpressive!

GOTTSPD
02-20-06, 09:43 AM
NSX = 0-60 in 4.8 and 1/4 in the high 12s = not slow. With all due respect, ever driven one? I'm guessing you haven't. If so, then so be it, but if not, if you happen to know someone, have them take you for a ride. I think your opinion will change.

Katshot
02-20-06, 09:49 AM
I had the opportunity a few years ago. Wasn't bad back then but these days, a car in that price range needs more power. Obviously, I'm not the only one who feels that way. When was the last time you saw a NSX included in any kind of supercar shoot-out or sportscar comparison? It's just not a contender anymore IMO.

GOTTSPD
02-20-06, 10:38 AM
It is what it is... This is one of those couch racing discussions and its really somewhat meaningless. The truth is most of us couldn't drive as fast as the manufacturers claim their cars can go anyway and since I'm not a drag racer guy, I don't care that much about 1/4 mile times. I enjoy my time in my NSX, both on the street and my road course track time. Anyway, this post was about a troll trying to "ruffle feathers" on a Cadillac message board. Not sure why we're talking about Acuras.

So let's go back to the original post...

The CTS-V is better than the SRT8...

hee hee hee ha ha ha hee hee hee ha ha ha.

To the original poster, if you have the money, go buy yourself a SRT8 and have fun with it. They are very cool cars. I love that both DC and GM have cool cars for us to be talking about.

thebigjimsho
02-20-06, 03:55 PM
Last time I checked, you didn't do standing starts at track days. Advantage CTS-V.

Blackout
02-20-06, 04:06 PM
Last time I checked, you didn't do standing starts at track days. Advantage CTS-V.huh?:confused:

thebigjimsho
02-21-06, 05:15 PM
When I say track days, I mean road course, not the simpleton's way of bragging rights.

Blackout
02-21-06, 05:24 PM
When I say track days, I mean road course, not the simpleton's way of bragging rights.oh ok. Because the way you worded it kinda threw me off there

davesdeville
02-23-06, 02:27 AM
When I say track days, I mean road course, not the simpleton's way of bragging rights.

Someone's a bit egotistical...

CadillacSTS42005
02-23-06, 01:36 PM
i drive a Cadillac
i drive a Honda
i drive a Chrysler

...

no offence id rather say the 1st ty very much

Zorb750
02-25-06, 01:17 PM
NSX = 0-60 in 4.8 and 1/4 in the high 12s = not slow. With all due respect, ever driven one? I'm guessing you haven't. If so, then so be it, but if not, if you happen to know someone, have them take you for a ride. I think your opinion will change.

Best friend had a 1998. 13.6 comes to mind at the strip. 0-60 in mid 5s.

thebigjimsho
02-25-06, 04:03 PM
Someone's a bit egotistical...Maybe I am. I just don't understand the obsession with a 1/4 mile straight line. To me, it's always been about the turns and the way a car performs in all its aspects.

davesdeville
02-26-06, 07:01 PM
The 1/4 mile is a performance standard. You can compare to your buddys time even though he lives in Phoenix. There's no standard road course.

DaveBlk
02-26-06, 07:26 PM
The srt is a boat! DRove both and bought the CTSV bacause it could handle and was a caddy!!!:worship:

Blackout
02-26-06, 08:19 PM
The srt is a boat! DRove both and bought the CTSV bacause it could handle and was a caddy!!!:worship:I'd rather have a boat then a car that has an unreliable drivetrain, wheel hop issues, and a vague gear box. BTW how do you like your Spec V?

thebigjimsho
02-28-06, 12:04 AM
The 1/4 mile is a performance standard. You can compare to your buddys time even though he lives in Phoenix. There's no standard road course.Again, don't care about a 1/4 mile time all that much. To me , it tells me very little of a car's capabilities.

Blackout
02-28-06, 06:27 AM
Again, don't care about a 1/4 mile time all that much. To me , it tells me very little of a car's capabilities.So I guess acceleration has little to do with road courses?

davesdeville
02-28-06, 09:47 PM
Again, don't care about a 1/4 mile time all that much. To me , it tells me very little of a car's capabilities.

That has nothing to do with my point. My point is that you have no way of comparing autocross times with anyone other than people who run at the same track you do. A car magazine can't test a car at a 41 second lap time on the standard autox track, and you can't go to your local standard autox track and run a similar time. That CAN be done with 1/4 mile runs.

Running a 11 second 1/4 mile time is very respectable. Running a 41 second lap time means absolutely nothing to just about everybody on earth.

And although it had nothing to do with my original point, it tells you how fast the car can accelrate on the low end where most driving is done. It tells you if you'd beat the car next to you at a stoplight, which is where the vast majority of racing is done. So it's quite a useful statistic IMO.

94ETC
02-28-06, 10:23 PM
I'd rather have a boat then a car that has an unreliable drivetrain, wheel hop issues, and a vague gear box...

You drive a Lincoln...

davesdeville
02-28-06, 11:42 PM
Correction, he used to drive a Lincoln.

And it's pretty silly to complain about a vague gearbox when the car we're comparing it to has an auto...

I dunno what exactly is so unreliable about the drivetrain either other than the rear diff. Care to enlighten me anyone?

Katshot
03-01-06, 09:57 AM
Jeez! I can't believe this thread is still going. How much more can be said about these two cars that hasn't already been beaten into the ground?
They're BOTH great cars that appeal to similar buyers, yet have quite different characters.

Zorb750
03-01-06, 11:29 AM
:tsucks:

CVP33
03-13-06, 06:37 PM
:tsucks:

Zorby,

So does you ability to convey a solid point in a way the lends credibility to your opinion. Please work on it.

Zorb750
03-14-06, 02:15 AM
Sorry, but I think it's like the beating of the dead horse. We've been over this too much. STR8 and CTS V are different cars for different people. It's been overexamined from every angle, now you're re-examining it from the same angles, backward this time. It's stupid. Both cars are junk or both cars are great. Live with it.

:horse:

CVP33
03-14-06, 02:08 PM
:histeric: :histeric: :histeric:

marnepup
03-21-06, 10:46 AM
Maybe I am. I just don't understand the obsession with a 1/4 mile straight line. To me, it's always been about the turns and the way a car performs in all its aspects.

So skidpad numbers, 600m slalom numbers, and 100-0 braking numbers would impress you more? I'm only asking because the numbers for the 8 and the V are nearly identical...:thumbsup:

urbanski
03-21-06, 11:34 AM
Jeez! I can't believe this thread is still going. How much more can be said about these two cars that hasn't already been beaten into the ground?
They're BOTH great cars that appeal to similar buyers, yet have quite different characters.
:werd: