How is the STS-V against the current speed champs..

[Dr. Design]

Hello,
I think it really comes down to the fact that this is a specialized motor. Not too many people are familiar on these motors. GM put a lot of time and money into the development of this engine. We have stated in the past that there is certainly more in it, from a tune standpoint. Development costs a lot for this vehicle. Not to mention there are so few of these vehicles, it makes it tough to invest heavily in this type of application.

Custom tunes work great. Just be sure you don’t run them on the ragged edge as they are also VERY sensitive.

Good luck!

Thanks,

Dr. Design
D3 Cadillac

Originally Posted by LITTLEELVISDAN

If I was driving a Camaro or mustang I might be satisfied with going a canned tune. But there is so much potential in our motors on an individual basis I am happy to get mine custome tuned.

[LITTLEELVISDAN]

I was directing my reply more to the mass produced handheld flash and go solutions not yours.

[austin]

I know alot of follks don't favor box tunes, and that's just fine... But i favor them, and i know alot of other folks do as well.. The plug n' play module D3 offers can't get any simpler than that. They also custom tune it to there mods. If it only did torque management, made for crisper/solid shifts of say 3rd-4th etc, and also removed the top speed limiter.... It would be just perfect.

[adamhw]

I am still between the "box tune" vs custom for the V, although I am aiming for the custom. Vector seemed to be a good reliable tuner, that offered safe good gains with nanny removal etc,. Down side is mailing ecu and not being able to drive while shipping. Custom is ideal, just have to find someone trustworthy with experience and close enough to drive to. I live in South Florida, and the best sounding person to me was 2-3 hours away. So most likely I'll have to spend an entire day to get my tune done, but I imagine it will be well worth it.

[Surfer-Dude]

Stock, E60 M5/ E55/63 etc will destroy it. Our 03' E55 we had, I ran low 12's at around 116-118, I saw a few STS-V's and XLR-V run there and all trapped around mid 100 range. Thats a massive difference. Not sure why the V's are so slow for the power output? I drove one and was suprised at how slow it felt even compared to a CTS-V? Still quick but not what I was expecting. Motor is going to need a lot of mods to make up that mph difference.

[CIWS]

Feel isn't everything. I've already outrun stock CTS-Vs.

[Slo-Mo-Shun]

Originally Posted by Surfer-Dude

Stock, E60 M5/ E55/63 etc will destroy it. Our 03' E55 we had, I ran low 12's at around 116-118, I saw a few STS-V's and XLR-V run there and all trapped around mid 100 range. Thats a massive difference. Not sure why the V's are so slow for the power output? I drove one and was suprised at how slow it felt even compared to a CTS-V? Still quick but not what I was expecting. Motor is going to need a lot of mods to make up that mph difference.

Car & Driver got 0-60 in 4.6, which was a couple tenths off the M5 and E63. 1/4 mile was similar IIRC.

I think the bottom line, however, is this car is not set up for impressive standing starts. The engine management system is designed to relieve strain on the drivetrain by limiting torque at low speeds. I've noticed it, as have others.

Personally, I could care less. IMHO drag racing is a poor way to measure vehicle performance, as it has such a low correlation to real world situations. I would expect and M5 to lap the Nurburgring faster. Most of that would be from the F1-style sequential manual transmission and the stiffer suspsension. Neither of these features make the M5 a particularly friendly car to drive on city streets. I'd expect the E63 to be very close to the STS-V, as AMG Mercedes are not know for great handling and road course times. [its kind of weird when the German car is the better drag racer and the American car might be in the hunt on a road course.]

[Surfer-Dude]

Originally Posted by Slo-Mo-Shun

Car & Driver got 0-60 in 4.6, which was a couple tenths off the M5 and E63. 1/4 mile was similar IIRC.

I think the bottom line, however, is this car is not set up for impressive standing starts. The engine management system is designed to relieve strain on the drivetrain by limiting torque at low speeds. I've noticed it, as have others.

Personally, I could care less. IMHO drag racing is a poor way to measure vehicle performance, as it has such a low correlation to real world situations. I would expect and M5 to lap the Nurburgring faster. Most of that would be from the F1-style sequential manual transmission and the stiffer suspsension. Neither of these features make the M5 a particularly friendly car to drive on city streets. I'd expect the E63 to be very close to the STS-V, as AMG Mercedes are not know for great handling and road course times. [its kind of weird when the German car is the better drag racer and the American car might be in the hunt on a road course.]

We owned the E55 and I drove the STS-V for a day, not even a chance from a roll, the STS-V will get absolutely stomped on. There are a few I've seen in some car groups as one guy I knew traded his Lexus in on one. I know he ran an E63 on I-95 lost badly. Actually the E55 handled damn good, I took it on Sebring Speedway, though I still think the CTS-V was the sharpest handling sedan around even moreso then the E39 M5.

E60 M5 is definitely fast, but I personally don't care for it, the manual trans is so poorly matched and geared for the motor (basically a transplant of the 39 M5 trans), and I hate SMG or really any flappy paddle box. I would take an E39 M5 over it any day, and take an CTS-V over either anyway which I'm looking at right now as a daily driver.

0-60 and 1/4 mile times don't really matter, you can gear an 5.0 Stang on slicks to match those times but the trap speed won't even be close which shows the potential of the car, I ran the 1/4 at 12.1 at around 116-118 stock in the E55, some others have gotten in the 11's with stock tires but thats in perfect conditions, that was the best I could manage as the low-mid range grunt was massive and liked to shred tires even before we did a few mods lol. As much as I loved it, was always in the shop though, was new in 03' and seems that year had quite a few electrical gremlins running around. I'm not trying to put down the STS-V at all, was just disappointed in how it drove, even highway passing power it was plenty quick just not what I was expecting given the power output.

[Slo-Mo-Shun]

It's not that surprising. The STS-V is down about 80ft lbs to the E55, and because the V also is 70 cubic inches short, you'd expect the torque peak in the V to be higher in the rev range as well. This is exactly how it feels to me. The CTS-V also will have a lower rpm torque peak and has a 3.73 rear end, so its effective rear wheel torque might be more in a given situation.

Not a big deal to me, because with cars like this we're really talking different levels of stupid fast (stupid in the new, good way) on the street, with no serious real-world applications. This is the first time I've owned one of these "super car" type street machines, and it's my wife's car (which might make it stupid in the bad old way). The bottom line for me is that any serious race car will eat any of these cars for lunch without breaking a sweat, so the ultimate point of these cars is a bit vague. I'm impressed, of course, but a bit confused as to why people throw big $$ into performance that is excessive for the street but not fast for the track. I guess ultimately these cars are "toys" masquerading as transportation? Never pass up an excuse to tinker.

[SRT8/BMW]

well I will throw in my two cents. I own an sts-v, a charger srt8 and a heavily modded 300c. They are all sedans obviously--and obviously I am into relatively fast sedans. The simple reason..they are fun to drive.

I have run my v at the track and it is a consistent 13.1-13.2 car..the key word being consistent. It is the easiest to launch..a hard roll into the throttle, minimal spin, and off. Clearly, the torque nanny is holding her back though. My srt8 and even modded C will take my v if you run them out. That shouldn't happen, with 469 hp...but it does. The V shines off the line. Seriousluy, a luxury sedan that can run a 4.6 0-60 and 1/4 in 13.1. True...there are much faster track cars, and much faster road course cars, but a sedan that can do that is absolutley what I like. There is a market for a cart like that..some are faster than others but they all have the same general purpose.

That said, I have a deposit down on the new CTS-V. That should compete quite well with the M5 and AMG cars.