: Damn those SRT8's are quick....the one and only V vs SRT8 thread



Seattle CTS-V
03-12-06, 07:47 PM
Not really a proper race, per se, but I ran into a gorgeous black SRT8 today on the highway. He was in the 'slow' right lane just cruisin and I gently passed him on the left going the speed of adjacent traffic. About 4 car lengths past him I see him jump out from behind a car into my lane and approach my tail really, really fast. I immediately slammed the whine pedal just to show him I might wanna play given the chance. He switched back to the slow lane and comes up on my right. I rolled down my window and gave him props for having such a gorgeous car. We slowed down to 50ish and I yelled out 1,2,3 out my window and punched it from 3rd gear. We raced up to maybe 90mph or so and I had barely put 1 car on him. The thing that sucked was he immediately got off the exit ramp b/f we could even rematch. I honestly don't know who would have won if we had had more room and time to play.

Now here's the thing that sux...I'm maggied. I'm assuming he was bone stock. I'm not the best shifter in the world but I only had to shift from 3rd to 4th. I feel it shouldn't have been so close from a roll. I think I need to dyno my car to see if it's putting the power to the ground that it should. Maybe the race was just too short to let Maggie show her stuff but I'm a little disappointed right now.

Florian
03-12-06, 07:51 PM
two words.....heat soak.

Just kills the Maggies.


F

GT04CTS-V
03-12-06, 07:55 PM
two words.....heat soak.

Just kills the Maggies.


F



Shouldn't have had any heat soak issues unless you were stuck in traffic.


GT

Seattle CTS-V
03-12-06, 07:56 PM
two words.....heat soak.

Just kills the Maggies.


F

Well, even w/o the Maggie I'd think a stock V could at least be about equal from a roll. If I'm just barely pulling then I'd think my car isn't putting down the power I paid for.

Besides, it's only 50 degrees out right now here in Seattle.

Florian
03-12-06, 08:01 PM
have you had your car tuned on a dyno w/the Maggie and not that crap that maggie sends with the unit?

F

mostoyzwinz
03-12-06, 08:17 PM
considering you stomped it from 3rd @50 the results don't sound too bad...if he was startin' out in a lower gear. a wins a win...no pts for 2nd.

GT04CTS-V
03-12-06, 08:21 PM
Maggie with good tune, step on the whine pedal at 50 mph in third gear, tires will spin and traction control will kick in. Worse if the runcraps are cold.


GT

V-Max
03-12-06, 08:52 PM
He was probably selected 2nd gear and when you hit with an idle torque converter in a modern car they shoot off like a bat out of hell because of the torque spike. I used have a supercharged 3800 Regal GS with a reporgrammed PCM(and smaller pulley) that could be violent if you were cruising at 40 MPH in first as the shift to 2nd was 52 MPH.

Torque spike on the dyno could see 30-50 ft-lbs.


Norm - who needs another V8 car!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/iko...=9;t=261;st=90

ctsvett
03-12-06, 09:10 PM
please dont give CVP any amo... we may all "respect" the SRT8, but pretend like you despise it for CVP's sake please..

Hee hee..

Reed

Seattle CTS-V
03-12-06, 10:43 PM
have you had your car tuned on a dyno w/the Maggie and not that crap that maggie sends with the unit?

F

I still have the stock Maggie tune. I was waiting on getting a CAI first b/f getting StealthV's tune.

Seattle CTS-V
03-12-06, 10:43 PM
Maggie with good tune, step on the whine pedal at 50 mph in third gear, tires will spin and traction control will kick in. Worse if the runcraps are cold.


GT

Hmmm, guess I'm missing some power somewhere then.

V-Max
03-12-06, 10:52 PM
Teehee! LOL! :)

Norm - who needs another V8 car!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/iko...=9;t=261;st=90




please dont give CVP any amo... we may all "respect" the SRT8, but pretend like you despise it for CVP's sake please..

Hee hee..

Reed

Florian
03-12-06, 10:52 PM
stock maggie tune really stinks...you need a StealthV or dyno tune to get the max out of your V.


F

ace996
03-12-06, 11:39 PM
two words.....heat soak.

Just kills the Maggies.


F

Heat Soak Rx = ECS Alky Injection, either alky/water mix or just water...lowers intake temps substantially and makes the heatsoak a non-issue.

V-Max
03-12-06, 11:52 PM
That is just engineering around the problem. The V is not a street tuner car. If heat soak is a problem, then the intercooler needs to be addressed.

Norm-
My other car wants a V8 too with C6 Z06 acceleration!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/iko...=9;t=261;st=90


Heat Soak Rx = ECS Alky Injection, either alky/water mix or just water...lowers intake temps substantially and makes the heatsoak a non-issue.

ace996
03-13-06, 12:33 AM
That is just engineering around the problem. The V is not a street tuner car. If heat soak is a problem, then the intercooler needs to be addressed.

I won't argue with you on that, but it seems to work fine for the WRC cars...they all use water injection. And short of bolting up a radiator-sized intercooler, it's not gonna happen. The location of the heat-exchanger under the maggie is not optimal, not much one can do to keep it isolated from engine heat.

And the GTO kit has an even smaller heat-exchanger under the maggie...one would probably be better off leaving the intercooler off and just install the W/I.

Hey, if W/I can bring intake temps from 180* to under 100* in under a second, its not a bad thing. And it works in traffic, where no intercooler is going to do it's job well. Also, should one mix in meth or alky then octane is bumped-up considerably(a good thing that no intercooler is able to accomplish)...some Vette guys have added 50-75hp with proper tuning....again, not a bad thing.

W/I = Chemical Intercooling


And the V not being a street tuner car? I don't understand that...W/I is street-tuner??? That some sort of "Australian-Iron" closed-minded flame on W/I??? It's not a drag car either, hasn't stopped others from going down that strip...

-ace

Seattle CTS-V
03-13-06, 02:01 AM
The V is not a street tuner car.


Not really sure what you mean by this?? Am I just wasting time and money on modding my LS6-driven luxo-cruiser?

GT04CTS-V
03-13-06, 06:19 AM
Get a decent tune and make sure you check your boost. With the 3.0" pulley I was running 4 lbs boost. With the 2.8" pulley, boost increased to 6 lbs.

GT

V-Max
03-13-06, 08:20 AM
V's don't run for 30 minute segments or for an evening on the street like WRC/Street tuner cars do. They to spend most of the week running it's owner to work or picking up the kids. The owner is not going to spend time topping off the W/I or be keeping an eye on it.

WRC probably uses W/I due to high load where the cooling system does not have time to recover. Something V will not see picking up groceries. My C32 AMG with twin-screw Lyschom blower that had a water cooler intercooler would not see over 150F or the DME(PCM) would start to pull timing on the road course. And it was tied to the main cooling system as an overflow when the main system heated up and expanded.

Does the Predator tune start to pull timing at a certain IAT? What about Stealth's tune? A quick check would be to monitor it or after a spirited run to monitor return I/C hoses or the I/C itself.

Heat soak was not a problem at 50F on the highway, not unless Seatle CTS-V system is not operating properly.

But if a SRT-8 traps @ 109-110 and the V with Maggie @ 115 MPH, your not going to see a big difference in 50-90 MPH race.

Norm - '88 GT - soon to be V8.
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=9;t=261

Blacksport350
03-13-06, 08:30 AM
He was probably selected 2nd gear and when you hit with an idle torque converter in a modern car they shoot off like a bat out of hell because of the torque spike. I used have a supercharged 3800 Regal GS with a reporgrammed PCM(and smaller pulley) that could be violent if you were cruising at 40 MPH in first as the shift to 2nd was 52 MPH.

Torque spike on the dyno could see 30-50 ft-lbs.


Norm - who needs another V8 car!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/iko...=9;t=261;st=90

The SRT-8 is nothing more than a dumbed down AMG Benz. Having owned 3 AMG cars, I can tell you that the AMG Sppedshift tranny gives an unfair advantage from a roll. I have taken many faster cars on the highway when I could just nail it an instantly drop 1 or 2 gears and be gone. Now when running from a dead stop or on the track, things certainly turned out differently. My last 2 AMG cars could drop 1 or 2 gears faster than the latest generation of SMG equipped M3 which is a fast tranny.

10secvette
03-13-06, 08:34 AM
If you're going to race around 50 mph, you NEED to be in second gear, not third. Third gear from around 75-80 mph.

Chris is going to nut his keyboard at this post. A maggied V no less.

GT04CTS-V
03-13-06, 08:41 AM
Good luck with second gear at 50 = zero traction -


GT

10secvette
03-13-06, 09:44 AM
Good luck with second gear at 50 = zero traction -


GT

Try rolling into the throttle.

Seattle CTS-V
03-13-06, 11:39 AM
If you're going to race around 50 mph, you NEED to be in second gear, not third. Third gear from around 75-80 mph.

Chris is going to nut his keyboard at this post. A maggied V no less.

I figured that the time advantage I got from starting in 2nd gear would be negated by the time it takes me to shift from 2nd to 3rd.

CIWS
03-13-06, 11:52 AM
I guess some owner didn't care for their SRT8. When I went to drop the V off at the dealership this morning to get Clear Bra done, they had a SRT8 sitting on the "Pre-Owned" lot. I wonder if I can talk them into letting me take it for a test drive.... ;)

Luna.
03-13-06, 12:27 PM
When observing my car on the dyno, which has a LOT of runs of it, heat soak wasn't THAT much of an issue, so I'd probably pass on that idea.

My first question is the same I ask of all Maggie owners--do you have the 3.0" pulley or the 2.8"? If the 3.0", that is a good place to start.

If you have the 2.8" pulley, also make sure that you have the most recent tune from Magna. As others have stated, you will gain a substantial amount of rwhp/rwtq with a tune (probably in the neighborhood of 30-40 rwhp/tq). A V with a 2.8" pulley and a decent tune pretty much should have it's way with an SRT-8 without even trying hard. As a matter of fact, the driver would have to be woefully pathetic to lose that race.

These cars are extremely close when both are stock (although I think the V is harder to drag race). As such, when either car is modded, it's going to pretty much defeat the other.

And you guys suck--I drove my car for about 400 miles this weekend and couldn't find a SINGLE person driving a car that was "worthy," to say nothing about whether I could find someone to "play." I didn't think it was possible to run into 2,000 mini-vans/grocery-getters and not a single performance-based car, but I was woefully wrong...

And if Chris wants to get his SRT-8 out here in CA, I'll run with him at pretty much any speed. And if he beats me, at any speed, I will buy the round of beers (then again, I don't drink, so it will be for everyone else...) :lildevil:

And let's not spread "rumors" of how great maggie is. I love my maggie as much as the next guy, but, unless there is something else at play (i.e. water), there is pretty much no way that a V with a maggie (and no other substantial mods) is going to spin the tires to the extent that traction control comes on at 50+ mph in 3rd gear. I'm probably putting more rwhp/rwtq than most members on here and I couldn't come close to that...

Seattle CTS-V
03-13-06, 12:48 PM
When observing my car on the dyno, which has a LOT of runs of it, heat soak wasn't THAT much of an issue, so I'd probably pass on that idea.

My first question is the same I ask of all Maggie owners--do you have the 3.0" pulley or the 2.8"? If the 3.0", that is a good place to start.

If you have the 2.8" pulley, also make sure that you have the most recent tune from Magna. As others have stated, you will gain a substantial amount of rwhp/rwtq with a tune (probably in the neighborhood of 30-40 rwhp/tq). A V with a 2.8" pulley and a decent tune pretty much should have it's way with an SRT-8 without even trying hard. As a matter of fact, the driver would have to be woefully pathetic to lose that race.

These cars are extremely close when both are stock (although I think the V is harder to drag race). As such, when either car is modded, it's going to pretty much defeat the other.

And you guys suck--I drove my car for about 400 miles this weekend and couldn't find a SINGLE person driving a car that was "worthy," to say nothing about whether I could find someone to "play."

And if Chris wants to get his SRT-8 out here in CA, I'll run with him at pretty much any speed. And if he beats me, at any speed, I will buy the round of beers (then again, I don't drink, so it will be for everyone else...) :lildevil:

And let's not spread "rumors" of how great maggie is. I love my maggie as much as the next guy, but, unless there is something else at play (i.e. water), there is pretty much no way that a V with a maggie (and no other substantial mods) is going to spin the tires to the extent that traction control comes on at 50+ mph in 3rd gear. I'm probably putting more rwhp/rwtq than most members on here and I couldn't come close to that...

I definitely have the 2.8" pulley, but not sure about the 'updated' tune. As far as spinning the tires, I think we were saying we could spin them in the top of 2nd gear @ 50, not while rolling in 3rd.

GT04CTS-V
03-13-06, 01:02 PM
And let's not spread "rumors" of how great maggie is. I love my maggie as much as the next guy, but, unless there is something else at play (i.e. water), there is pretty much no way that a V with a maggie (and no other substantial mods) is going to spin the tires to the extent that traction control comes on at 50+ mph in 3rd gear. I'm probably putting more rwhp/rwtq than most members on here and I couldn't come close to that...


You gotta remember that cold F1's suck for traction. Here in MD, with cold roads I have no problem spinning the tires when I punch it in Third. Traction control immediately kicks in. Oh yeah, I have witnesses :-}

Currently, here in MD it's 82 degrees, no spinning in third today !

GT

Luna.
03-13-06, 01:02 PM
I was informed directly from Magna that they had a "new" tune for the 2.8" pulley. Now "new" was many months ago, so it might not be "new" anymore, but there was a definite upgrade to their "old" tune. Being that many Maggie units seem to still be sold with the 3.0" pulley, it wouldn't shock me if the "old" tune was still going out the door is why I make that statement. :)

And I will try and spin my tires in 2nd at 50mph today at lunch. That isn't an easy thing to do either...:)

EDIT--lol--okay, very cold weather would be one of those "exceptions" in my mind, but yeah, in that situation, spinning your tires in 3rd gear wouldn't be that hard. I could spin the crap out of them in 4th gear sometimes if the weather/wetness was right :bouncy:

ctsvflorida
03-13-06, 02:31 PM
CIWS: What srt8 was there for sale? Charger? I can tell you that I drove the magnum 8 and it did not impress me! I can say that, a magnum, which may be a bit heavier, could not beat my car...ever with minimal things done! The computer is on it's way to Rick at Stealth V and we will see what it is like after that! I looked into the tuning quite a bit and came up with Rick as the most reputable tuner, from long distance at least, and after chatting with him a few times I would say he is the guy for our cars no matter where you are from! He has done it, been there and back and knows this motor and cars as good as anyone. The people who know the most are people who have been there, hands on for themselves! My guess is that I will be quite impressed with his tuning and I do all things to my car myself as nobody can do it like YOU!

Anyway, I would like to know which car that is for sale there and they will DEFINITELY let you drive it! Give them a story about shifting all the time and rear etc. They will want you to drive more than you want to drive it!

trukk
03-13-06, 02:42 PM
I figured that the time advantage I got from starting in 2nd gear would be negated by the time it takes me to shift from 2nd to 3rd.


Why switch to fourth, when running up to 90? Is it screaming in 3rd at 90? YES, but you don't need to shift if you stopped there.

65-135 our cars are really in their 'happy place'. Work on that shifting :thumbsup:

Sounds like you had some fun though. :D

Enjoy,

Chris

obzidian
03-13-06, 04:59 PM
I dont think you should all that upset. I have raced a few times and was left wondering if my car is as fast as i think it is.

Well, it is!!! Its traps 108-109 stock, so that is quite fast on the street.

Look, two nights ago, i buddy of my had his uncles c6 for some cruising. After dropping of the miss', actually, he's dating my gf sister...

anyways, we were having sme, fun and decided to line them up. With MY BALD runflats, whites showing, we hit it thorugh third gear. Top of first we're almost even, him up by a fender. Top second, him up by half a car. Top of third and he was up to a car. So if the c6 traps a 12.4 stock, i would say that my car would run a 12.6-12.8 compared to what we experienced.

We were both very surprised actually!! I knew i would loose but not like this....really helped me out with the confidence a bit. I think my car would only need a few bolt on's and a good tune and that c6 aint going anywhere!!!!

CVP33
03-13-06, 05:34 PM
please dont give CVP any amo... we may all "respect" the SRT8, but pretend like you despise it for CVP's sake please..

Hee hee..

Reed

:histeric: :histeric: :histeric: :histeric: :histeric: Now that was good. BTW, why'd my thread get locked. I think I know the answer but feel free to PM me. It had obviously run it's course and I was on borrowed time anyhow.

As for the race. The SRT-8 can hold 2nd gear at 50 mph and pulls like a beast from there up. There are some real crappy mph's that the tranny won't downshift from but I'm certainly not going to share that info with the enemy! :highfive:

CIWS
03-13-06, 06:01 PM
CIWS: What srt8 was there for sale? Charger? I can tell you that I drove the magnum 8 and it did not impress me!

Yeah it's a Magnum. I gave it a slow drive by as I left the dealership picking my car up. Cute little wing on the back ;)

CVP33
03-13-06, 06:27 PM
The Magnum is the slowest of the bunch. The Charger and 300C are evenly matched from the 1/4 mile times I've seen. The thing is though, a CTS-V will own any of the SRT-8's on a road course. It's just a fact. ESP doesn't let you get away with near what the CTS-V does in Competition Mode.

ctsvflorida
03-13-06, 07:48 PM
I dont think you should all that upset. I have raced a few times and was left wondering if my car is as fast as i think it is.

Well, it is!!! Its traps 108-109 stock, so that is quite fast on the street.

Look, two nights ago, i buddy of my had his uncles c6 for some cruising. After dropping of the miss', actually, he's dating my gf sister...

anyways, we were having sme, fun and decided to line them up. With MY BALD runflats, whites showing, we hit it thorugh third gear. Top of first we're almost even, him up by a fender. Top second, him up by half a car. Top of third and he was up to a car. So if the c6 traps a 12.4 stock, i would say that my car would run a 12.6-12.8 compared to what we experienced.

We were both very surprised actually!! I knew i would loose but not like this....really helped me out with the confidence a bit. I think my car would only need a few bolt on's and a good tune and that c6 aint going anywhere!!!!

If you are talking about a c6 base car and not a ZO6 then it is not even close to 12.4's! They go like 12.80's with a stick and an auto. goes 13.20's on a good day! Unfortunately I won't be finding many races here in my new boring town of Ocala, but I did have a yellow GTO next to me the other night and I still couldn't get a run!

ctsvflorida
03-13-06, 07:56 PM
One last thing, if I lose to a stock SRT8, of any kind, then my V is for sale! Don't worry, I won't be selling it! No disrespect to those cars as they are impressive but the automatic is sucking the H.P. from those cars. I almost got a charger srt8 and figure I can make the V go faster with minor bolt ons and turn a few screws, as opposed to a few bolt ons for the 8. So, a stock one will not win ever!

CVP33
03-13-06, 08:43 PM
[quote=ctsvflorida]No disrespect to those cars as they are impressive but the automatic is sucking the H.P. from those cars. quote]

You are sadly mistaken. Stock SRT-8's are dyno-ing at 365 to 375 RWHP vs. 315 to 330 for the CTS-V's. Which one do you think is losing more HP? My offer still stands BTW. Any stock CTS-V that wants to run me from a dig please PM me. You will lose and that's a fact. Road course, you'll smoke me. Handily I might add, but 1/4 mile from a dig you are truly screwed.

wildwhl
03-13-06, 10:22 PM
Luna -

You are correct - there is some misinformation floating around here. 2.6" pulley and the only time 3rd gear traction is lost is in extreme cold or a serious powershift 2-3 (dangerous, very dangerous, easy gear to miss). Now, there was this one time in a long sweeper at the top of 3rd gear - but shit... (<---------my pants)

The "updated" tune is - I can verify it as can StealthV. We've compared them. Strangely enough, Magnuson's "updated" tune seems to have some similarities (but not all of them, and they're missing some key pieces) to another, VERY GOOD tune available to each of us. So, I ran it for a couple of days - might flash it back in this week for the 02 police, but will stick with the Stealth option on my V :thumbsup:

mrnextel
03-14-06, 06:00 PM
Not really a proper race, per se, but I ran into a gorgeous black SRT8 today on the highway. He was in the 'slow' right lane just cruisin and I gently passed him on the left going the speed of adjacent traffic. About 4 car lengths past him I see him jump out from behind a car into my lane and approach my tail really, really fast. I immediately slammed the whine pedal just to show him I might wanna play given the chance. He switched back to the slow lane and comes up on my right. I rolled down my window and gave him props for having such a gorgeous car. We slowed down to 50ish and I yelled out 1,2,3 out my window and punched it from 3rd gear. We raced up to maybe 90mph or so and I had barely put 1 car on him. The thing that sucked was he immediately got off the exit ramp b/f we could even rematch. I honestly don't know who would have won if we had had more room and time to play.

Now here's the thing that sux...I'm maggied. I'm assuming he was bone stock. I'm not the best shifter in the world but I only had to shift from 3rd to 4th. I feel it shouldn't have been so close from a roll. I think I need to dyno my car to see if it's putting the power to the ground that it should. Maybe the race was just too short to let Maggie show her stuff but I'm a little disappointed right now.

AMAZING!!!!

AND THE SRT8 IS A CONSIDERABLY LARGER CAR, MY SOLUTION TO YOUR PROBLEM= "BUY AN SRT8!"

Seattle CTS-V
03-14-06, 08:39 PM
AMAZING!!!!

AND THE SRT8 IS A CONSIDERABLY LARGER CAR, MY SOLUTION TO YOUR PROBLEM= "BUY AN SRT8!"

Thanks for posting. Now go somewhere else! :bigroll:

ctsvflorida
03-14-06, 09:12 PM
[quote=ctsvflorida]No disrespect to those cars as they are impressive but the automatic is sucking the H.P. from those cars. quote]

You are sadly mistaken. Stock SRT-8's are dyno-ing at 365 to 375 RWHP vs. 315 to 330 for the CTS-V's. Which one do you think is losing more HP? My offer still stands BTW. Any stock CTS-V that wants to run me from a dig please PM me. You will lose and that's a fact. Road course, you'll smoke me. Handily I might add, but 1/4 mile from a dig you are truly screwed.


If they are dynoing at that HP then that is impressive, very impressive! I am not much into computer racing but have raced on the street way too much, coming from route 231 Deer Park Ave on L.I. and only race from a dig. Unless of course, I just see someone out and we mess around a bit! I have pretty much mastered the dig in the street and I do not need anything more than an F1 as these V's are not breaking any smoke show records. Once they are rolling, there's not much spin! At any rate, my car is not completely stock so there goes that even if the miracle did happen! So, aside from a dig, I am sure they pull well from 50 mph too! No? I will find one sooner or later and see what happens! It is a cool car and I would love to see one go real fast. BTW, what could the gas mileage be for that monster! Well, I will let you know when I find one and you be sure to let me know when you find a V out there!

CVP33
03-14-06, 09:45 PM
Mileage is exactly the same as the V. 13 to 15 when you're driving it properly and about 23 when you're on the highway. The numbers I quoted for RWHP are fact. So either the SRT is under-rated (could be), the V is over-rated (doubt it) or the SRT has a highly efficient automatic transmission derived from the Mercedes parts bin. (highly likely).

Luna.
03-14-06, 09:54 PM
Mileage is exactly the same as the V. 13 to 15 when you're driving it properly and about 23 when you're on the highway. The numbers I quoted for RWHP are fact. So either the SRT is under-rated (could be), the V is over-rated (doubt it) or the SRT has a highly efficient automatic transmission derived from the Mercedes parts bin. (highly likely).

FYI...

I've seen several dyno runs of SRT-8s and they were nowhere near 365-375 rwhp. The ones I saw were around 340-350.

Further, E55 transmissions are estimated to lose about 19%, which is more than what most consider reasonable for a CTS-V (~15%). This appears reasonable, as, unless my understanding is incorrect, a manual pretty much HAS to lose less than an automatic transmission with a torque converter.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:13 PM
Local SRT-8 Magnum dyno'd at 370 rwhp. Added CAI for 381 rwhp and topped that off with a Magna Flow exhaust for 394 rwhp. Dyno shop did not install the parts so nothing to gain there.

Maybe my math is off but CTS-V's are dyno-ing at 320 rwhp with 400 SAE. That's a 20% parasitic loss. The SRT's are dyno-ing at 365 rwhp with 425 SAE. That's a 14% parasitic loss. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from. Please help me understand.

P.S. I'm off to get you some links for the 365-375 rwhp dyno's. I've already searched for the CTS-V's and found plenty in the 313 - 330 range.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:15 PM
http://www.300cforums.com/forums/srt8-general-discussion/12962-magnaflow-3-high-flow-cats-3-cat-back.html?highlight=dyno+results

300C SRT-8 = 377 rwhp. 387 rwhp with exhaust. More to come.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:18 PM
http://www.300cforums.com/forums/attachments/srt8-general-discussion/12012-6-1-hemi-425hp-what-hp-rating-detuned-baseline-stock.jpg?d=1136898465

300C SRT-8 = 369 rwhp. Don't you just hate it when people use facts. Damn it I do!

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:24 PM
http://www.300cforums.com/forums/srt8-general-discussion/12818-latest-dyno-results-post-trani-tsb-flash-fix.html?highlight=dyno+results

300C SRT-8 = 362 rwhp
300C SRT-8 = 386 rwhp

Now I'll go get you some CTS-V dyno's.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:29 PM
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=444720&highlight=dyno

Post #20 - 2004 CTS-V - 305 rwhp.

Luna.
03-14-06, 10:30 PM
300C SRT-8 = 369 rwhp. Don't you just hate it when people use facts. Damn it I do!

I'm not sure why the hell you decided to be an a$$, but whatever...

Ron doesn't have the before and after results of the SRT-8s that he dynoed posted on his website, but I will inquire as to when he will post them. Further, I don't know the name of the gentlemen I ran into at A&A, but he informed me of his SRT-8 that dynoed at exactly within the range that I quoted.

And clearly the dyno results you linked MUST, ABSOLUTELY AND WITHOUT DISCUSSION be correct, yes? Clearly, any other dyno results must be bullsh*t...

I got news for you--your so-called facts AREN'T "facts." Dynoes vary all over the god-damn place.

And the loss% I quoted was obtained from the E55 AMG boards. Would you like me to post that link, as clearly I'm often full of sh*t, or do you trust my veracity?

You have every right to be proud of your new car. That does not, however, give you a license to be an anal cavity though.

One other thing as well...who on earth says that 400 (for the CTS-V) or 425 (for the SRT-8) *IS* accurate 100% of the time? Yeah, clearly automotive manufacturers ALWAYS tell the truth when it comes to a car's actual output, to say nothing of actually achieving that 100% of the time, with NO VARIATIONS...:thepan:

DarkKnight
03-14-06, 10:30 PM
http://www.300cforums.com/forums/attachments/srt8-general-discussion/12012-6-1-hemi-425hp-what-hp-rating-detuned-baseline-stock.jpg?d=1136898465

300C SRT-8 = 369 rwhp. Don't you just hate it when people use facts. Damn it I do!

That's pretty impressive. I am thinking of getting a Magnum SRT, I just like the look of the Magnum

wildwhl
03-14-06, 10:33 PM
Chris -

Play nice. If you're going to post a low V dyno, post a low SRT8 dyno to match. We all know they're a powerhouse (both cars) and that internet racing is a waste of time. How about we try the approach Luna is with the E55 AMG's - anyone with a stock SRT8 want to race a Stock V?

WW

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:35 PM
CTS-V = 335-343 with MOD's!

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:38 PM
CTS-V = 327 rwhp.

I'm tired. Off to bed. You can find some more if you like. :thumbsup:

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:42 PM
Chris -

Play nice. If you're going to post a low V dyno, post a low SRT8 dyno to match. We all know they're a powerhouse (both cars) and that internet racing is a waste of time. How about we try the approach Luna is with the E55 AMG's - anyone with a stock SRT8 want to race a Stock V?

WW

For the record I made it clear that I will not allow anyone to post misinformation regarding either vehicle. I shoot down BS on the 300C forum as well re: the CTS-V. I just like to deal in facts. I took the first 3 dyno's that I could find from the 300C forum and the first 3 CTS-V dyno's that I could find here and on LS1tech. Luna's post was baseless. I decided to prove that to him. The interenet is full of "experts". I just post facts and use common math skills. That doesn't make me anal, it just makes me honest. Everyone is free to post the opposing argument.

Don't take it personal Luna. You were wrong. Plain and simple. Post facts to the contrary and discontinue the personal attacks. You're showing your a$$ and I'm showing dyno graphs. Get over it. Oh, wait, wait, wait, I just did get over it. :thumbsup: It's the freakin' internet, lighten up.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:46 PM
FYI...

I've seen several dyno runs of SRT-8s and they were nowhere near 365-375 rwhp. The ones I saw were around 340-350.

Further, E55 transmissions are estimated to lose about 19%, which is more than what most consider reasonable for a CTS-V (~15%). This appears reasonable, as, unless my understanding is incorrect, a manual pretty much HAS to lose less than an automatic transmission with a torque converter.

Please post the dyno's you've seen. I'd like to see those too. A 15% loss for the CTS-V would have a rwhp of 340. I'm sure there are some, I just couldn't find any "stock" V's hitting those numbers. TXsilverV dyno'd a very disappointing 305 rwhp.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:48 PM
That's pretty impressive. I am thinking of getting a Magnum SRT, I just like the look of the Magnum

The Magnum SRT-8 that came to our Meet and Greet had 394rwhp with a Mopar CAI and Zoomer's exhaust. Dyno sheets showed a very stout torque curve. The sound was incredible.

CVP33
03-14-06, 10:51 PM
I'm not sure why the hell you decided to be an a$$, but whatever...

Ron doesn't have the before and after results of the SRT-8s that he dynoed posted on his website, but I will inquire as to when he will post them. Further, I don't know the name of the gentlemen I ran into at A&A, but he informed me of his SRT-8 that dynoed at exactly within the range that I quoted.

And clearly the dyno results you linked MUST, ABSOLUTELY AND WITHOUT DISCUSSION be correct, yes? Clearly, any other dyno results must be bullsh*t...

I got news for you--your so-called facts AREN'T "facts." Dynoes vary all over the god-damn place.

And the loss% I quoted was obtained from the E55 AMG boards. Would you like me to post that link, as clearly I'm often full of sh*t, or do you trust my veracity?

You have every right to be proud of your new car. That does not, however, give you a license to be an anal cavity though.

One other thing as well...who on earth says that 400 (for the CTS-V) or 425 (for the SRT-8) *IS* accurate 100% of the time? Yeah, clearly automotive manufacturers ALWAYS tell the truth when it comes to a car's actual output, to say nothing of actually achieving that 100% of the time, with NO VARIATIONS...:thepan:

Not pride. Pride cometh before the fall. Just posting facts. I'll be glad to review any that you choose to post. And by the way, "I heard" or "the guys on forum X said" or "a guy I know" is and are not facts. Post a dyno sheet. Post a link to a dyno sheet. Post something but please stop the personal attacks you're embarrassing yourself.

Luna.
03-14-06, 11:00 PM
For the record I made it clear that I will not allow anyone to post misinformation regarding either vehicle. I shoot down BS on the 300C forum as well re: the CTS-V. I just like to deal in facts. I took the first 3 dyno's that I could find from the 300C forum and the first 3 CTS-V dyno's that I could find here and on LS1tech. Luna's post was baseless. I decided to prove that to him. The interenet is full of "experts". I just post facts and use common math skills. That doesn't make me anal, it just makes me honest. Everyone is free to post the opposing argument.

Don't take it personal Luna. You were wrong. Plain and simple. Post facts to the contrary and discontinue the personal attacks. You're showing your a$$ and I'm showing dyno graphs. Get over it. Oh, wait, wait, wait, I just did get over it. :thumbsup: It's the freakin' internet, lighten up.

Dude...there are so many things that need to be said, I'm not sure where to even start.

Firstly, who in the hell made you the grand-daddy of all SRT-8 and CTS-V information? Boy, I'm sure glad that we all elected you to the guardian of "misinformation regarding either vehicle." I guess I must have missed that election...why don't you find THAT link for me...

You should take your own advice that, "it's the freakin' internet, lighten up..."

Also, you proved NOTHING to me. Is that clear? I could care less what you found or what else is out there. I'm telling you what I saw with my own eyes. What, I'm wrong because what I viewed was incorrect? I have no idea if it was accurate or not--I just posted what I saw (& was told). Did you see me state that your numbers WERE INCORRECT?

As a matter of fact, let's review what I said:


FYI...

I've seen several dyno runs of SRT-8s and they were nowhere near 365-375 rwhp. The ones I saw were around 340-350.

Further, E55 transmissions are estimated to lose about 19%, which is more than what most consider reasonable for a CTS-V (~15%). This appears reasonable, as, unless my understanding is incorrect, a manual pretty much HAS to lose less than an automatic transmission with a torque converter.

Gee..there is a lot of misinformation in there, isn't there? Oh, unless, of course, you are going to tell me what I did and did not see. That I would very much like to understand.

WTF are you reading??? I sure as hell don't see anything in my comments that were even remotely egregious, to say nothing about spurring you to be a jerk or anything.

And, while we are on that topic, you were the disrespectful one first, not I. And I'm fairly certain that I'm not the only one that sees it that way either.

Dude..just don't start any more "SH" and there won't be anymore "IT."

CVP33
03-14-06, 11:00 PM
I didn't think to look in the Charger Forums. Here's a Charger SRT-8

365 rwhp
Second run heat soaked (according to the poster) 355 rwhp.

http://www.chargerforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=4858&d=1141266845

377 rwhp

http://www.chargerforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9332&highlight=dyno

Luna.
03-14-06, 11:01 PM
Please post the dyno's you've seen. I'd like to see those too. A 15% loss for the CTS-V would have a rwhp of 340. I'm sure there are some, I just couldn't find any "stock" V's hitting those numbers. TXsilverV dyno'd a very disappointing 305 rwhp.

As stated above, how do you know that 400 crank HP is accurate????????

CVP33
03-14-06, 11:09 PM
Dude...there are so many things that need to be said, I'm not sure where to even start.

Firstly, who in the hell made you the grand-daddy of all SRT-8 and CTS-V information? Boy, I'm sure glad that we all elected you to the guardian of "misinformation regarding either vehicle." I guess I must have missed that election...why don't you find THAT link for me...

You should take your own advice that, "it's the freakin' internet, lighten up..."

Also, you proved NOTHING to me. Is that clear? I could care less what you found or what else is out there. I'm telling you what I saw with my own eyes. What, I'm wrong because what I viewed was incorrect? I have no idea if it was accurate or not--I just posted what I saw (& was told). Did you see me state that your numbers WERE INCORRECT?

As a matter of fact, let's review what I said:



Gee..there is a lot of misinformation in there, isn't there? Oh, unless, of course, you are going to tell me what I did and did not see. That I would very much like to understand.

WTF are you reading??? I sure as hell don't see anything in my comments that were even remotely egregious, to say nothing about spurring you to be a jerk or anything.

And, while we are on that topic, you were the disrespectful one first, not I. And I'm fairly certain that I'm not the only one that sees it that way either.

Dude..just don't start any more "SH" and there won't be anymore "IT."

Luna,

No problem. You've continued with more personal attacks. And as I can see you've still not posted your facts regarding your experience with seeing "several dyno runs of SRT-8's and they were nowhere near 365 to 375." I've just posted 7 confirmed dyno runs at the numbers I quoted earlier. Please feel free to post yours.

I will not address any of your other attempts at baiting me into a personal battle as I've said before it's only the internet. And I'm afraid tonight you've done nothing to improve your reputation here you've only tarnished it. I'm not sure why you've decided to become so insensed by my posting facts to back up what I said earlier but this is the way adults conduct themselves. They start with a premise and then back it up with facts. My posts were not meant to inflame you just merely back up my statements. Again, I invite you to post any facts you have to back up your statements and cease with the personal attacks. Again you're embarrassing yourself.

CVP33
03-14-06, 11:11 PM
As stated above, how do you know that 400 crank HP is accurate????????

Are you suggesting that GM would lie, or am I missing something here? I've tried to find a dyno sheet for a stock CTS-V showing a higher rwhp I just can't find any. Maybe you'll have better luck. Please let me know.

Yer pal,

Chris

:thumbsup:

Luna.
03-14-06, 11:15 PM
I love your attempts at the "holier than thou" routine. There may be some who agree with you. That's fine. I can assure you, however, that many agree with me as well, so, please, spare me that routine.

And this is how you believe "adults" conduct themselves?


Don't you just hate it when people use facts. Damn it I do!

You know, I'm not an English expert, but that seems awfully close to massively disrespectful. Perhaps that is how adults conduct themselves where you come from. Where I come from, however, I can assure you that it isn't.

And I reviewed HARD copies of dyno results that were not mine. Care to share with me exactly how I'm supposed to link that information in a matter of minutes?

Luna.
03-14-06, 11:19 PM
Are you suggesting that GM would lie, or am I missing something here? I've tried to find a dyno sheet for a stock CTS-V showing a higher rwhp I just can't find any. Maybe you'll have better luck. Please let me know.

Yer pal,

Chris

:thumbsup:

Oh heavens no, GM would never lie or exaggerate, would they? :bigroll:

And it matters not that GM is lying. You are assuming that the 400 crankshaft HP is accurate. Why is that? Did any of these people test their crankshaft HP/TQ immediately before and/or after the dyno-at-the-wheel run?

If not, we really don't know what they are actually generating, do we?

Your buddy as well,

:cheers:

V-Max
03-14-06, 11:22 PM
The LS2 are putting out...especially with 245/45-17...

http://www.ls2gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66886&highlight=ls2+dyno

..of course when you do "CAM ONLY LS2" ETs are near C6 Z06. With a few more lbs. shed you could have yourself an impressive ride.

http://www.ls2gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66845&highlight=ls2+dyno

Norm - who's other car wants a V8 too!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=9;t=261;st=90

CVP33
03-14-06, 11:22 PM
I love your attempts at the "holier than thou" routine. There may be some who agree with you. That's fine. I can assure you, however, that many agree with me as well, so, please, spare me that routine.

And this is how you believe "adults" conduct themselves?



You know, I'm not an English expert, but that seems awfully close to massively disrespectful. Perhaps that is how adults conduct themselves where you come from. Where I come from, however, I can assure you that it isn't.

And I reviewed HARD copies of dyno results that were not mine. Care to share with me exactly how I'm supposed to link that information in a matter of minutes?

Luna,

Seriously now, this is getting ridiculous. I'm still waiting for your facts to refute my earlier facts. Until then I will not take the baiting or the personal attacks. You just can't bait me, I've been doing this too long. And the question still stands "Do you in fact hate it when people use facts?". That would explain your behavior here tonight. If you think my tone is condescending I apologize. But honestly, you've backed up nothing you've said here tonight with facts and seem truly infuriated by the fact that I have. I made multiple posts of dyno sheets proving exactly what I said. I just can't understand where you're coming from. Please help me understand. And for the record this is not about taking sides, you truly are embarrassing yourself. Believe it or not I'm trying to help you.

Chris

edited - Because frankly one sentence in there was inflamatory and not necessary. For that I apologize. I'm better than that and you deserve better.

CVP33
03-14-06, 11:26 PM
The LS2 are putting out...especially with 245/45-17...

http://www.ls2gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66886&highlight=ls2+dyno

..of course when you do "CAM ONLY LS2" ETs are near C6 Z06. With a few more lbs. shed you could have yourself an impressive ride.

http://www.ls2gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66845&highlight=ls2+dyno

Norm - who's other car wants a V8 too!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=9;t=261;st=90

Ok, we're getting closer. I know the 2006 CTS-V has the LS2 as does the GTO so we're are getting there. Honestly though a couple of issues. I'd like to see a CTS-V LS2 dyno and I thought we were talking about LS6's which is what I owned. But that's fine. Anyone have any luck yet finding one with a stock dyno in the 340 rwhp range?

Luna.
03-14-06, 11:48 PM
I was busily typing a reply, but then I saw


edited - Because frankly one sentence in there was inflamatory and not necessary. For that I apologize. I'm better than that and you deserve better.

I appreciate that. Thank you

There remains a few things that I do want you to respectfully understand though.

Firstly, my question still stands:


And I reviewed HARD copies of dyno results that were not mine. Care to share with me exactly how I'm supposed to link that information in a matter of minutes?

There isn't anything I can do as quickly as you'd otherwise like me to. If you want to share with me how I can resolve that now, I'm all ears.

Also, you need to re-consider what you define as a "fact." A fact is, "a piece of information about circumstances that exist or events that have occurred."

What does this mean?

Well, it certainly doesn't mean that what I stated is not true. Just because I cannot show you what I saw as quickly as you would otherwise like does NOT make it any more or less "factual" (I suppose it is possible that my memory is failing me, but that isn't likely, as I love the SRT-8 and was shocked at the numbers). All your comments are really doing is doubting my veracity--that's it. All you really had to say was that you would like me to "prove" to you what I saw is accurate. That's it. Basically, what you really did was attempt, in an indirect manner, to call me a liar. Actually, that was exactly your intention (not indirectly) when you stated I was wrong. Well, Chris, you were wrong to make that comment; you called me a liar, basically. Sorry, but that is going to frustrate a great many people, especially people who are passionate about what they are talking about.

I hope you can understand that.

Also, this argument is probably wasting some space on this board. As such, perhaps we should take our conversation privately. Unless, of course, many are getting entertained with this. :)

StealthV
03-15-06, 12:23 AM
Entertaining? This fourm?

Let's review...

The mean rear wheel power of a SRT8 is 368* hp.

*Internet fact.

Thus, the SRT-8's 368 - 25 hp advantage = 343 target for the V.

There are some 340+ cars on this forum but they are the exception.

There was data on the FAQ from a survey and I can't find it, IIRC, the mean was 332-ish for the V.

Did DC underrate the SRT-8 by 10 hp? Maybe.

368 - 10 - 25 = 333.

Look familar in V land? Hmm?

Internet racing using dyno results. Isn't that a double negative?

V-Max
03-15-06, 08:51 AM
I think Chris is used to expelling energy on his dealership when he owned a V. Not anymore I guess...now we get it. :) Christ, Chris! You have almost another half a liter on them! Bully!

Norm - other car want C6 Z06 acceleration!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=9;t=261;st=90

ctsvflorida
03-15-06, 09:08 AM
Well, I think that I started this whole thing and boy OH boy,it is entertaining...to a point anyway! Rick hit it on the head, first there is internet racing and then internet dyno racing! WOW! I think CVP is to tied up in dyno numbers when ALL dyno's are different and can vary incredibly but there is a basic number that can be derived from estimated calculation! At any rate, can we just get a witness to a race with the two cars somewhere, somehow? H.P. is only good if it all works together and I am not saying which is faster, because I do not know,but would like to find out! sure has been entertaining!

Seattle CTS-V
03-15-06, 11:39 AM
Entertaining? This fourm?

Let's review...

The mean rear wheel power of a SRT8 is 368* hp.

*Internet fact.

Thus, the SRT-8's 368 - 25 hp advantage = 343 target for the V.

There are some 340+ cars on this forum but they are the exception.

There was data on the FAQ from a survey and I can't find it, IIRC, the mean was 332-ish for the V.

Did DC underrate the SRT-8 by 10 hp? Maybe.

368 - 10 - 25 = 333.

Look familar in V land? Hmm?

Internet racing using dyno results. Isn't that a double negative?

How much does the 300C SRT8 weigh? Don't 'they' estimate that for every 100lbs you need another 10whp to get you moving down the road?

StealthV
03-15-06, 12:39 PM
A sure way to kill this thread - move it to the "Cadillac Versus..." area.

Weight is definitely the evil of the SRT-8. That's why a street race from a roll should be pretty darn equal eh?

CVP33
03-15-06, 04:39 PM
I think Chris is used to expelling energy on his dealership when he owned a V. Not anymore I guess...now we get it. :) Christ, Chris! You have almost another half a liter on them! Bully!

Norm - other car want C6 Z06 acceleration!
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=9;t=261;st=90

LOL. I know, I know. I was just saying what the SRT's dyno at and commenting that the parasitic loss is awfully low. I think (not fact think), DC has under-rated the SRT's. But hey, who knows and who frankly cares at this point.

CVP33
03-15-06, 04:41 PM
How much does the 300C SRT8 weigh? Don't 'they' estimate that for every 100lbs you need another 10whp to get you moving down the road?

The SRT-8 is a PIG! 4,200 when fully laden with gas and a fat ass driver. :thumbsup:

davesdeville
03-17-06, 05:38 AM
Ran across this today on a local forum:

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/9AE75E83-84F4-4060-9791-44FC74A6AFE3.htm

381rwhp, corrected. The car is supposedly stock. I've met the owner once or twice. Maybe next time he's at a meet I'll see if I can get a ride. (Keep in mind that 14.5 is at 5400ft. track altitude.)

Original topic: http://racingsouthwest.com/forums/showtopic27323.htm

Katshot
03-17-06, 07:41 AM
The SRT-8 is a PIG! 4,200 when fully laden with gas and a fat ass driver. :thumbsup:

You think THAT's a PIG? Naw..my 4500# Fleetwood is a PIG! ;)
IMO, this argument is getting old. I personally agree with Chris (I know, big surprise) but I understand both sides feelings on the subject. About the ONLY thing that could satisfy this argument is a back to back dyno session with both cars and I'm not sure anyone's done that yet. Maybe somebody will and the data will find it's way to this forum.

Vendetta-V-
03-17-06, 05:13 PM
The music ruined the video!!!

MCaesar
03-19-06, 07:50 AM
V's don't run for 30 minute segments or for an evening on the street like WRC/Street tuner cars do. They to spend most of the week running it's owner to work or picking up the kids. The owner is not going to spend time topping off the W/I or be keeping an eye on it.

WRC probably uses W/I due to high load where the cooling system does not have time to recover. Something V will not see picking up groceries. My C32 AMG with twin-screw Lyschom blower that had a water cooler intercooler would not see over 150F or the DME(PCM) would start to pull timing on the road course. And it was tied to the main cooling system as an overflow when the main system heated up and expanded.

Does the Predator tune start to pull timing at a certain IAT? What about Stealth's tune? A quick check would be to monitor it or after a spirited run to monitor return I/C hoses or the I/C itself.

Heat soak was not a problem at 50F on the highway, not unless Seatle CTS-V system is not operating properly.

But if a SRT-8 traps @ 109-110 and the V with Maggie @ 115 MPH, your not going to see a big difference in 50-90 MPH race.

Norm - '88 GT - soon to be V8.
http://www.beretta.net/board/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=9;t=261

Yup, and be thankful that wasn't a blown SRT8 you were running against. They are running the high 11s

MCaesar
03-19-06, 07:58 AM
The Magnum is the slowest of the bunch. The Charger and 300C are evenly matched from the 1/4 mile times I've seen. The thing is though, a CTS-V will own any of the SRT-8's on a road course. It's just a fact. ESP doesn't let you get away with near what the CTS-V does in Competition Mode.
Having driven both I can say that the V has more accurate steering and is better balanced for road courses. The SRT8 is easier to launch and more consistent. The SRT8 is slightly stronger over 130 and has a higher top speed. But if you are an expert at launching the V it should take the 1/4 mile.

A lot of it is taste - do you prefer more of a canyon road carver or an autobahn blaster?

MCaesar
03-19-06, 08:00 AM
One last thing, if I lose to a stock SRT8, of any kind, then my V is for sale! Don't worry, I won't be selling it! No disrespect to those cars as they are impressive but the automatic is sucking the H.P. from those cars. I almost got a charger srt8 and figure I can make the V go faster with minor bolt ons and turn a few screws, as opposed to a few bolt ons for the 8. So, a stock one will not win ever!

If you are stock and you race enough you better be prepared to lose to a SRT8 at some point. And if you come across one with the GSM blowers kiss it goodbye

MCaesar
03-19-06, 08:05 AM
Luna,

No problem. You've continued with more personal attacks. And as I can see you've still not posted your facts regarding your experience with seeing "several dyno runs of SRT-8's and they were nowhere near 365 to 375." I've just posted 7 confirmed dyno runs at the numbers I quoted earlier. Please feel free to post yours.

I will not address any of your other attempts at baiting me into a personal battle as I've said before it's only the internet. And I'm afraid tonight you've done nothing to improve your reputation here you've only tarnished it. I'm not sure why you've decided to become so insensed by my posting facts to back up what I said earlier but this is the way adults conduct themselves. They start with a premise and then back it up with facts. My posts were not meant to inflame you just merely back up my statements. Again, I invite you to post any facts you have to back up your statements and cease with the personal attacks. Again you're embarrassing yourself.

It is real easy to estimate.

The V and the SRT8 (Charger and 300 only) are clocked at within 1 tenth of each other in the 1/4 mile (best time of 13.1 for V and 13.2 for SRT8) and within 1 mph in speed. Now since the V weighs ~400 pounds less and has a stick that should tell you the 6.1 hemi puts out significantly more power than the LS2. GM does not overrate their engines so chances are the 6.1 hemi is slightly underrated. They may have even done that so it could match the legendary 426 hemi's rated output of 425HP. The old hemi itself was underrated also because they rated its HP at 5,000 RPM but true power was at 6,000.

CVP33
03-19-06, 10:11 AM
Having driven both I can say that the V has more accurate steering and is better balanced for road courses. The SRT8 is easier to launch and more consistent. The SRT8 is slightly stronger over 130 and has a higher top speed. But if you are an expert at launching the V it should take the 1/4 mile.

A lot of it is taste - do you prefer more of a canyon road carver or an autobahn blaster?

There are few "experts" at launching the V. That's why we all complained early on about the GM advertised 0-60 times of 4.6 seconds that none of us could match. To hit the advertised 0-60 times of the CTS-V takes a VERY skilled driver. To hit the advertised 0-60 times of the SRT-8 takes an occupant. It's a blessing and a curse. I'll let you figure out which one is which.

CVP33
03-19-06, 10:18 AM
It is real easy to estimate.

The V and the SRT8 (Charger and 300 only) are clocked at within 1 tenth of each other in the 1/4 mile (best time of 13.1 for V and 13.2 for SRT8) and within 1 mph in speed. Now since the V weighs ~400 pounds less and has a stick that should tell you the 6.1 hemi puts out significantly more power than the LS2. GM does not overrate their engines so chances are the 6.1 hemi is slightly underrated. They may have even done that so it could match the legendary 426 hemi's rated output of 425HP. The old hemi itself was underrated also because they rated its HP at 5,000 RPM but true power was at 6,000.

LS6 equipped CTS-V = 305-330 rwhp (multiple dyno's)
LS2 equipped CTS-V = 330 (I've only seen 1 dyno posted)
6.1L Hemi SRT-8's = 355 - 387 rwhp (multiple dyno's)

It would seem that the SRT-8 has an average of 53.5 more rwhp, but needs it do to it's heft.

marnepup
03-20-06, 08:52 AM
To hit the advertised 0-60 times of the CTS-V takes a VERY skilled driver. To hit the advertised 0-60 times of the SRT-8 takes an occupant.
Classic!:thumbsup: And I'll be the first to admit that's one reason I chose the 8 ($$$-I refuse to pay thousands extra for an emblem-and looks-to each his own- are the other two)

But as far as the difference in handling goes...I have to suspect that you're comparing the "half off" (hit the ESP OFF button) mode on the 8 versus the "all the way off" mode on the V. Not everyone knows (and the dealer certainly won't tell you!) that there's a third mode (hold ESP OFF for like 7-8 seconds, you'll hear a chime) that can't be more intrusive than the "Competition mode" or whatever it's called on the V. Perhaps the V will still handle better (dunno, never driven one...anyone offering?), but the margin will be such that only Tony Stewart would notice.

CVP33
03-20-06, 07:07 PM
marnepup,

I recognize you from the 300C forums. I know about the 7 second hold on the ESP system and I've engaged it frequently. The CTS-V's traction and stability control system in "competitive mode" is much more forgiving than ESP. I can tell you I've literally had the V sideways in competition mode but still under control and the electronic nanny doesn't stop any of the fun. Throw the SRT-8 sideways in any of the ESP modes and you will feel the system apply the brakes.

I shouldn't admit this but here goes. I could sustain a 200 foot, zig zagging burnout in the V in competition mode. You can't come anywhere near that in the SRT-8. Why would that tell you anything? It's just an example of where each electronic system decides to step in to correct you. I guess you can always pull FUSE 17 in the SRT-8, but I actually like the idea of a last resort should I get totally out of control and need help pulling the car back in line. Only happened once, but once is enough.

marnepup
03-21-06, 07:42 AM
Okay. Like I said, I've never driven a V. I respect the wisdom you've gained from owning both cars. However, I fail to see how a "less restrictive nanny" translates into "better handling"...zigzag burnouts and being perpendicular to the track don't win races, as fun as they might be. Can we agree that "competitive mode" is less restrictive without calling it better? Unless, of course, "more fun" is your definition of better:eyebrow:

urbanski
03-21-06, 11:36 AM
i think this is the only such thread needed.

Katshot
03-21-06, 01:59 PM
I just hope that none of you are anywhere near any of my friends or family out on the roads when driving like that. I've done plenty stupid stuff over the years on the road and "usually" got away without hurting myself or anyone else but these cars are really allowing guys to push WAY beyond any kind of sane limits on the road. The one drive I had in a CTS-V and SRT-8 confirmed to me that the cars are capable of WAY more than should be done on a public roadway. Try to be safe guys.

marnepup
03-22-06, 08:00 AM
Hear, hear! That's why I don't street race. Take it to the track! Any douchebag can go 90 in a 55.