: Possible new CTS-V, M5 killer?



Blackout
02-20-06, 07:50 AM
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/il/features/future/07.cadillac.cts.v/07.cadillac.ctsv.f34.500.jpg
This wide-body CTS-V has the look of a Cadillac racecar, but judging by the fit and finish of the bodywork this could be a preproduction prototype headed for the showroom. (Photo courtesy of KGP Photography)


Cadillac's M5 killer spied (http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/02/17/cadillacs-m5-killer-spied/)



The Cadillac CTS-V is plenty fast. It has no problem hanging with the E39 BMW M5 the vehicle that was on the market when the CTS-V was unveiled. But there's one problem BMW replaced the old M5 this year with a new 500 horsepower V10 version. That leaves Cadillac pretty far behind in the horsepower race. But if new spy shots (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/PhotoFlipper/articleId=109332?pictureId=25559&pageId=68700&pageCode=featuresarticle&make=cadillac&model=cts) from KGP Photography are any indication, that could be about to change. According to the report, the car pictured will get a new wide bodykit and a the 505-horsepower, 7.0-liter LS7 V8 from the Corvette Z06

LeftLaneNews/Edmunds

Jesda
02-20-06, 08:02 AM
I -love- those wheels! If the wheel arches were a tiny bit smaller they'd be perfect. Thats a hot car.

ShadowLvr400
02-20-06, 09:04 AM
NormallyI nt care for the CTS stylees, but that looks nice. And with a 7.0L 505 V8 under the hood.... *drool*

90Brougham350
02-20-06, 11:19 AM
First-generation CTS-V's were awesome, and they got Caddy's foot in the door. If the next generation really has the LS7 in it, it will absolutely prove Cadillac's place in the performance luxury world. As long as it has a solid rear-end, that is. I like the design. Jesda, right on about the wheels!

gary88
02-20-06, 11:27 AM
I knew they would eventually put the LS7 in the CTS-V :dance:

Katshot
02-20-06, 02:37 PM
That photo's already been de-bunked in this thread:

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum/65864-spy-photos-2007-cadillac-cts-v.html

DopeStar 156
02-20-06, 02:59 PM
Haha a new 425 Caddy.

Florian
02-20-06, 03:42 PM
thats the 04CTSV with the Specter flare kit on it...dont get your hopes up. Look for the LS3 in the new V.


F

lonestranger
02-21-06, 06:02 PM
Just remember, with our forum sponsors Katech and Lingenfelter (GMPD, for that matter) a LS-7 V is just a checkbook away!!:rolleyes: . You don't have to wait for the General!:) Of course, maybe not MY checkbook!!

Kadonny
02-21-06, 06:32 PM
Why the heck is this pic of the 04 with a body kit circulating as the 07? This is old news.

We need the real pic that was floating around. Anyone.......Buehler, Buehler.

lasstss
02-21-06, 10:03 PM
??

CVP33
02-21-06, 10:13 PM
Marty,

I thought that was the BLS. Europe only model. I thought the new direction for the CTS was a softened look vs. the very edgy look of today.

Staxxin
02-21-06, 11:19 PM
Let's all just pray for the LS7 :-)

ahahnu
02-21-06, 11:23 PM
I do believe that IS the BLS. I thought it was BTS?

Devil_concours
02-21-06, 11:24 PM
Let's all just pray for the LS7 :-)
either that or the supercharged ls2 that was found in STS SAE100 concept

MacOSR
02-21-06, 11:27 PM
It will take more then the LS7 to make the CTS-V an M5 "killer"

Devil_concours
02-21-06, 11:34 PM
It will take more then the LS7 to make the CTS-V an M5 "killer"
why not? If it has LS7 and its gobs of torque, it seems like it will be plenty to fight against the m5

dannystang
02-22-06, 12:31 AM
New z06 is dynoing close to 500 rwhp...

Prolly like 470 on a V though :(

Man those z06's are nice...Once they sell below msrp...

verbs
02-22-06, 01:08 AM
why not? If it has LS7 and its gobs of torque, it seems like it will be plenty to fight against the m5The M5 has a huge gearing advantage....not to mention the CTS-V can't get traction with 400hp, how do you think it's going to fare with 505hp?

An LS7 will not make it an M5 killer. An M5 equal (acceleration wise) at best

verbs
02-22-06, 01:09 AM
New z06 is dynoing close to 500 rwhp...

Not even close to 500rwhp. ZO6s are hitting the tune of 44x-45x stock.

Devil_concours
02-22-06, 02:44 AM
The M5 has a huge gearing advantage....not to mention the CTS-V can't get traction with 400hp, how do you think it's going to fare with 505hp?

An LS7 will not make it an M5 killer. An M5 equal (acceleration wise) at best
if that picture is somewhat close to the production model, it looks like there is whole lot more meat in the rear. What is there to stop from speculating that suspension hasn't been tweaked further.

M5 may have the gearing advantage with its 7spd sequential gearbox but it's heavier and lacks a lot of torque.

Look at the z06 for an example. In a normal car, pepole will think you're crazy if you had gear ratios like the new z06 does. How many cars do 0-60 in 1st gear?

This thread is somewhat pointless since it will be filled with speculations and opinion. I will just hold until an actual LS7/LS2 powered V is released.

Devil_concours
02-22-06, 02:45 AM
Not even close to 500rwhp. ZO6s are hitting the tune of 44x-45x stock.
that's correct. New z06 are hitting 440+rwhp. However, even with a simple mod, it responds like none other i've ever seen.

trukk
02-23-06, 07:37 PM
The M5 has a huge gearing advantage....not to mention the CTS-V can't get traction with 400hp, how do you think it's going to fare with 505hp?

An LS7 will not make it an M5 killer. An M5 equal (acceleration wise) at best

M5 has what though 13 Ftlbs Tourque? Seriously what is it 350ish? I would think a pro could beat an M5 with an LS7 V, but us mortals, would have a HELL of time launching/running it efficiently as it is now designed. It's my understanding that the M5 is basically point and mash.

I'd love to see an LS7 CTS-V. I'd much rather see a 'finished' current model. Fix the Rear Diff, the Clunk, and the Hop. It's a shame that they gave it 95% effort. Fix those three things, and the CTS-V would truely be an icon (IMHO)

My $ .02, YMMV, blah blah, etc.

-Chris

MacOSR
02-23-06, 08:07 PM
why not? If it has LS7 and its gobs of torque, it seems like it will be plenty to fight against the m5

At this level there is more to the package then just the motor. Part of the elegance of the M5 is the high-revving engine, the 7sp SMG, the handling, the luxury interior and the dealer service.

MacOSR
02-23-06, 08:12 PM
M5 has what though 13 Ftlbs Tourque? Seriously what is it 350ish? I would think a pro could beat an M5 with an LS7 V, but us mortals, would have a HELL of time launching/running it efficiently as it is now designed. It's my understanding that the M5 is basically point and mash.

The M5 can be driven that way but with DSC disabled it takes some driving skills...it still has 500hp. The engine is VERY different. It does not have the torque but it pulls like hell over 5500rpm all the way up to redline.


I'd love to see an LS7 CTS-V. I'd much rather see a 'finished' current model. Fix the Rear Diff, the Clunk, and the Hop. It's a shame that they gave it 95% effort. Fix those three things, and the CTS-V would truely be an icon (IMHO)

I second what trukk said ;)

Devil_concours
02-23-06, 08:56 PM
At this level there is more to the package then just the motor. Part of the elegance of the M5 is the high-revving engine, the 7sp SMG, the handling, the luxury interior and the dealer service.
i would say ls7 is almost exotic as the v10 from m5. It revs to 7000, based on raced motor, hand built, torque, sound...
Also depending on location, you get great dealer service, same could be said about bmw. Handling on cts-v is pretty spot on for a car of its size/weight.

MacOSR
02-23-06, 09:15 PM
i would say ls7 is almost exotic as the v10 from m5. It revs to 7000, based on raced motor, hand built, torque, sound...
Also depending on location, you get great dealer service, same could be said about bmw. Handling on cts-v is pretty spot on for a car of its size/weight.

The LS7 is a nice motor...it should be in the XLR. Not sure about the handling of the CTS-V though. It does handle nice but not hearly as nice as the M5 IMHO.

In Re to dealer service. I think the problem isn't with the dealer service but the denials from GM itself for warranty work. Numberous times I have taken my CTS-V in for service and the dealer agrees there is a problem but GM won't let them do anything about it. Personally I think my dealer does a great job...my dissapointment is with GM.

trukk
02-23-06, 09:41 PM
The M5 can be driven that way but with DSC disabled it takes some driving skills.

If you really wanted to race someone off the line, and you had the option of having nearly 100% best accel with the DSC on, or having a near 100% chance of not fully utilizing the cars potential with it off, why would you turn it off in that case? I see the argument for the challenge of it, but if an E55 pull up next to you, and the driver gives you that smarmy look, what DSC mode are you gonna jump to? @$$ kicjer on please :D


..it still has 500hp. The engine is VERY different. It does not have the torque but it pulls like hell over 5500rpm all the way up to redline.

tastes great .. less filling. Two very different engines. Very different characteristics. Both kick @$$. I'd love to have your driving dilema!


I second what trukk said ;)

Werd ;D

-Chris

verbs
02-23-06, 09:43 PM
if that picture is somewhat close to the production model, it looks like there is whole lot more meat in the rear. What is there to stop from speculating that suspension hasn't been tweaked further..1st off that picture is just a regular CTS-V with a Specter body kit.....but I'm sure an LS7 V would get more meat. Who cares how wide the tires are if they're just going to bounce up and down because the suspension is crap. :mad:


M5 may have the gearing advantage with its 7spd sequential gearbox but it's heavier and lacks a lot of torque...Again, lack of torque can be overcome somewhat by gearing.....Besides, torque isn't everything....too many factors. I guarantee you if an LS7 V comes out, it will weigh a lot closer to 4000lbs than 3850.....don't forget to add on all the extra weight from heavier wheels/tires, beefier suspension and drivetrain, etc...




This thread is somewhat pointless since it will be filled with speculations and opinion. I will just hold until an actual LS7/LS2 powered V is released.Well, there is already a LS2 CTS-V so you can continue on with this conversation ;)

verbs
02-23-06, 09:54 PM
M5 has what though 13 Ftlbs Tourque? Seriously what is it 350ish?

-ChrisMan, some of you guys are so hung up on torque. You sound like the Viper guys trying to justify their cars over C6ZO6s. Ferrari F430s are in the same torque boat as the M5 and yeah they're slow too. The M5 has 383tq, only 12 less torque than our CTS-Vs....so in essence you're calling our cars torqueless too.

:stirpot:

blown65
02-23-06, 11:13 PM
Id prob buy another CTS-V if it got the LS7. I hope they dont do it like that first pic, that really doesnt do much for me. Reminds me of the Saleen Mustangs with all the plasticy crap on them.

rand49er
02-23-06, 11:57 PM
I admit, I haven't really been following this thread as well as the rest of you, but the GTO got the ax in the news for the 2007 model year. That should free up some LS2 mfg capacity for the V, if they decided to continue to go that route for 2007 and beyond as opposed to the LS7. If indeed they did, wouldn't a supercharged LS2 look like a viable option for the V? (assuming wheel hop and suspension issues were handled) That's gotta put it at about 500+ hp and well within the competitive arena with the M5, don't ya think?:stirpot:

Devil_concours
02-24-06, 02:39 PM
Well, there is already a LS2 CTS-V so you can continue on with this conversation ;)
I meant to say supercharged LS2/LS7 (Supercharged LS2 was supposed to be released at one point)

04CTSVFLA
02-24-06, 03:01 PM
point is are we willing to spend almost 100k on a V thats m5 equivalent - that will completely change the V's target market and price group (50k) - and they will sell less. Gm is discontuining cars left and right, obviously there mainb concern as of late is QUANTITY being produced and sold versus QUALITY which as a manufacturer they have always LACKED.

trukk
02-24-06, 05:56 PM
Man, some of you guys are so hung up on torque. You sound like the Viper guys trying to justify their cars over C6ZO6s. Ferrari F430s are in the same torque boat as the M5 and yeah they're slow too. The M5 has 383tq, only 12 less torque than our CTS-Vs....so in essence you're calling our cars torqueless too.

:stirpot:


Tourque is very important for big-bix lux-sports like ours, and the M5. It takes a lot of force to get 4K lbs moving.

I don't think I'm trying to justify anything. I think the new M5's kick major @ss. I was just trying to compare a hypothetical LS7 V to the new M5. The tourque difference would be important, as the HP is the same.

An F430 Coupe wieghs 3200 Lbs. 20% lighter that the cars we are talking about. I'm not sure how it fits into this conversation.

M5 has 25% less Tq than Hp. Remember I was talking about an LS7 V, not our current ones. But since you brought it up, it would be like out 400 HP V's only having 300 lbf of TQ (come to think of it, this may be out Diff solution :D ).

Bottom line, is I'm not saying i'm right and your wrong. The LS7 and the M5 engine are both wonderful pieces of engineering. They are just very different. Some like to have a very high reving, peaky power band, others like the lower reving OHV, with the very large TQ band. POtato PAHtato.

-Chris

shivak
02-24-06, 08:43 PM
The LS7 and the M5 engine are both wonderful pieces of engineering. They are just very different. Some like to have a very high reving, peaky power band, others like the lower reving OHV, with the very large TQ band. POtato PAHtato.

LS7 versus S65: http://www.my350z.com/forum/showthread.php?t=124068

MacOSR
02-24-06, 09:45 PM
If you really wanted to race someone off the line, and you had the option of having nearly 100% best accel with the DSC on, or having a near 100% chance of not fully utilizing the cars potential with it off, why would you turn it off in that case? I see the argument for the challenge of it, but if an E55 pull up next to you, and the driver gives you that smarmy look, what DSC mode are you gonna jump to? @$$ kicjer on please :D

I have an aquantance that just got an E55. We are going to get together sometime in the next couple weeks. He was a previous M5 owner and wanted to do something different. Both cars are very nice.

The M5 also has another mode...I think it is called MDM (M-Dynamic Mode) that will allow some wheelspin. Having driven standard shift cars for the past 15 years (camaro's, vetts, etc) I don't have that hard of a time launching. The problem is 2nd gear. I had the M5 sideways tonight doing 80 ;) Besides, I can't use S6 shift mode unless DSC is completely off. S6 shifts are brutal.

There is no question the E55 will pull hard from the M5 from a standstill. 40 and up is another story!

Devil_concours
02-25-06, 09:11 PM
Man, some of you guys are so hung up on torque. You sound like the Viper guys trying to justify their cars over C6ZO6s. Ferrari F430s are in the same torque boat as the M5 and yeah they're slow too. The M5 has 383tq, only 12 less torque than our CTS-Vs....so in essence you're calling our cars torqueless too.

:stirpot:
I only brought up the torque thing because that's what's wonderful about the ls7. When you have that much torque (i think it's close to 400lbft already at under 2k rpm), you can have any type of gearing. M5 needs such 7 speed SMG with gearing focused towards higher end of the power band because it lacks torque. I've driven many wonderful torqueless machines (FD3s...93~95 RX7, s2k)

Devil_concours
02-25-06, 09:14 PM
Again, lack of torque can be overcome somewhat by gearing.....Besides, torque isn't everything....too many factors. I guarantee you if an LS7 V comes out, it will weigh a lot closer to 4000lbs than 3850.....don't forget to add on all the extra weight from heavier wheels/tires, beefier suspension and drivetrain, etc...


I'm not sure if LS7 will add much weight if any at all.
Seeing how LS7's external dimensions are similar to current small block and it has many titanium parts. It may be a lighter engine.

verbs
02-26-06, 12:49 AM
I'm not sure if LS7 will add much weight if any at all.
Seeing how LS7's external dimensions are similar to current small block and it has many titanium parts. It may be a lighter engine.I'm not saying the LS7 motor will add more weight, which it won't really, but everything else on the car has to be beefed up to handle the extra power. Just off the top of my heads you'll have a lot of added weight from:

Heavier wheels
Wider tires
thicker driveshaft
beefier rear end
beefier suspension
bigger exhaust manifolds
bigger xpipe and catback exhaust
beefier chassis
maybe bigger brakes (doubt it though)
bigger fuel cell maybe due to reduced gas mileage?

verbs
02-26-06, 12:54 AM
I only brought up the torque thing because that's what's wonderful about the ls7. When you have that much torque (i think it's close to 400lbft already at under 2k rpm), you can have any type of gearing. M5 needs such 7 speed SMG with gearing focused towards higher end of the power band because it lacks torque. I've driven many wonderful torqueless machines (FD3s...93~95 RX7, s2k)

It's not fair to compare the RX7s and S2ks to the M5, the M5 makes twice the torque, but I see what you're saying.

We're talking about racing here, hense the title "M5 killer" on the thread, so I'm really only referring to racing situations, and therefore how much torque you're making at 2000 rpm is really irrelvant in racing. The 7 speed tranny will keep the BMW in it's powerband better than the C6ZO6, but it's not just that.....I guarantee you the paddle shifts are going to be a lot quicker than someone shifting. That will make a difference too.

Devil_concours
02-26-06, 12:01 PM
I'm not saying the LS7 motor will add more weight, which it won't really, but everything else on the car has to be beefed up to handle the extra power. Just off the top of my heads you'll have a lot of added weight from:

Heavier wheels
Wider tires
thicker driveshaft
beefier rear end
beefier suspension
bigger exhaust manifolds
bigger xpipe and catback exhaust
beefier chassis
maybe bigger brakes (doubt it though)
bigger fuel cell maybe due to reduced gas mileage?
a lot of the exahust compenents and powertrain components on the current cts-v are extremely heavy. (I think all performance version of a car should be lighter than their regular version). Maybe they can use titanium/cf components to reduce weight and add strength.

Devil_concours
02-26-06, 12:07 PM
It's not fair to compare the RX7s and S2ks to the M5, the M5 makes twice the torque, but I see what you're saying.

We're talking about racing here, hense the title "M5 killer" on the thread, so I'm really only referring to racing situations, and therefore how much torque you're making at 2000 rpm is really irrelvant in racing. The 7 speed tranny will keep the BMW in it's powerband better than the C6ZO6, but it's not just that.....I guarantee you the paddle shifts are going to be a lot quicker than someone shifting. That will make a difference too.

BMW's SMG is not only quicker but it also makes it impossible to miss a gear. I'm well aware of that but what i was saying was that with the powerband like LS7, it's hard not to be in a good powerband with so much torque everywhere. How many cars do you see that allows driver get to 60 in 1st gear. IIRC, gallardo lets the driver get to 1st in 60 and all the reviewers complained about it but in the z06, not a single complaint about gearing so far. (Difference in torque makes up for the gearing)

Also rx7 above had a lot of work done (race port, wideband, big single turbo).

I love the fact that this conversation hasn't turned into some sort of flamefest without any facts to back it up.

verbs
02-26-06, 01:14 PM
a lot of the exahust compenents and powertrain components on the current cts-v are extremely heavy. (I think all performance version of a car should be lighter than their regular version). Maybe they can use titanium/cf components to reduce weight and add strength.Yeah but now you're talking pricey.....titanium cat back and carbon fiber floor and panels could easily raise the price $3-4000, and would maybe only offset 30lbs or so of weight gains tops. I doubt GM could justify this for $3-4000 or so.

If you think of the C6ZO6, the majority of their weight savings came from an aluminum frame. I doubt we'd see that in our cars, as I don't think the frame would be strong enough to handle the extra 700-800lbs or so of weight an LS7 CTS-V would have.

verbs
02-26-06, 01:17 PM
BMW's SMG is not only quicker but it also makes it impossible to miss a gear. I'm well aware of that but what i was saying was that with the powerband like LS7, it's hard not to be in a good powerband with so much torque everywhere. How many cars do you see that allows driver get to 60 in 1st gear. IIRC, gallardo lets the driver get to 1st in 60 and all the reviewers complained about it but in the z06, not a single complaint about gearing so far. (Difference in torque makes up for the gearing)

Also rx7 above had a lot of work done (race port, wideband, big single turbo).

I love the fact that this conversation hasn't turned into some sort of flamefest without any facts to back it up.

Part of the reason the Vette goes a bit above 60 in 1st gear is for marketing purposes IMO.....without having to shift before 60 it drops your 0-60 time which for the average car buyer is the most important performance statistic.

Blackout
02-26-06, 01:27 PM
Well I just realized that this thread got moved over here. But I don't think the M5 needs to torque. Road & Track tested the M5 and M6 and the M5 stats were as follows:

0-10 mph: .3 seconds
0-20: 1.0
0-30: 1.7
0-40: 2.4
0-50: 3.3
0-60: 4.1
0-70: 5.2
0-80: 6.5
0-90: 7.8
0-100: 9.5
0-110: 11.3
0-120: 13.3

1/4: 12.4 @ 115.8 mph

MCaesar
02-26-06, 02:21 PM
Tourque is very important for big-bix lux-sports like ours, and the M5. It takes a lot of force to get 4K lbs moving.

I don't think I'm trying to justify anything. I think the new M5's kick major @ss. I was just trying to compare a hypothetical LS7 V to the new M5. The tourque difference would be important, as the HP is the same.

An F430 Coupe wieghs 3200 Lbs. 20% lighter that the cars we are talking about. I'm not sure how it fits into this conversation.

M5 has 25% less Tq than Hp. Remember I was talking about an LS7 V, not our current ones. But since you brought it up, it would be like out 400 HP V's only having 300 lbf of TQ (come to think of it, this may be out Diff solution :D ).

Bottom line, is I'm not saying i'm right and your wrong. The LS7 and the M5 engine are both wonderful pieces of engineering. They are just very different. Some like to have a very high reving, peaky power band, others like the lower reving OHV, with the very large TQ band. POtato PAHtato.

-Chris

I agree

Torque is very important. Who wants to have to rev to 5000 to get good power?

Plus, more important than the peak torque figure of 383 is what does it develop down low? What does the whole cruve look like?

Those screamer engines like the S2000 are fun on the track and when racing but in regular city driving they often leave you behind less powerful cars that have good low end torque.

MCaesar
02-26-06, 02:23 PM
Well I just realized that this thread got moved over here. But I don't think the M5 needs to torque. Road & Track tested the M5 and M6 and the M5 stats were as follows:

0-10 mph: .3 seconds
0-20: 1.0
0-30: 1.7
0-40: 2.4
0-50: 3.3
0-60: 4.1
0-70: 5.2
0-80: 6.5
0-90: 7.8
0-100: 9.5
0-110: 11.3
0-120: 13.3

1/4: 12.4 @ 115.8 mph

Obviously it doesn't need any more torque for flat out acceleration. But every day driving is a completely different animal. And I am not saying the M5 is down on torque as I haven't driven the new one yet - but many high winding cars are

Devil_concours
02-26-06, 04:50 PM
Yeah but now you're talking pricey.....titanium cat back and carbon fiber floor and panels could easily raise the price $3-4000, and would maybe only offset 30lbs or so of weight gains tops. I doubt GM could justify this for $3-4000 or so.

If you think of the C6ZO6, the majority of their weight savings came from an aluminum frame. I doubt we'd see that in our cars, as I don't think the frame would be strong enough to handle the extra 700-800lbs or so of weight an LS7 CTS-V would have.
they do have the heavier version of our car with more power in forms sts-v/sts. These cars are not only heavier but they sit on a stretched chassis

Devil_concours
02-26-06, 04:51 PM
Well I just realized that this thread got moved over here. But I don't think the M5 needs to torque. Road & Track tested the M5 and M6 and the M5 stats were as follows:

0-10 mph: .3 seconds
0-20: 1.0
0-30: 1.7
0-40: 2.4
0-50: 3.3
0-60: 4.1
0-70: 5.2
0-80: 6.5
0-90: 7.8
0-100: 9.5
0-110: 11.3
0-120: 13.3

1/4: 12.4 @ 115.8 mph
i'm not exactly saying m5 is slow but rather cts-v with ls7 might produce better results than m5.

MacOSR
02-26-06, 06:15 PM
Obviously it doesn't need any more torque for flat out acceleration. But every day driving is a completely different animal. And I am not saying the M5 is down on torque as I haven't driven the new one yet - but many high winding cars are

The M5 is in no way short on torque for every day driving. Even with its size and weight it does very well. I prefer it over the CTS-V now for daily driving.

IF the CTS-V had the LS7 and IF the CTS-V had a more reliable drivetrain and IF the CTS-V did not have the extreme wheel hop and IF the CTS-V had better hanlding then it might keep up with the M5.

verbs
02-26-06, 11:25 PM
Obviously it doesn't need any more torque for flat out acceleration. But every day driving is a completely different animal. And I am not saying the M5 is down on torque as I haven't driven the new one yet - but many high winding cars areWho cares about daily driving in a thread about a CTS-V with an LS7 being an M5 "killer." :want: Torque for daily driving has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

verbs
02-26-06, 11:26 PM
i'm not exactly saying m5 is slow but rather cts-v with ls7 might produce better results than m5.if the CTS-V didn't have such bad wheel hop, then it could be barely faster at best, certainly not an M5 killer by any means.