Cadillac Owners Forum banner

21 - 28 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
1995 FTS
Joined
·
4,577 Posts
Katshot said:
So what?
Does the 300C run significantly different than the other Hemi cars like the Charger or Magnum? My guess is they're all comparable.
Look at the newest R&T magazine. They had the SRT-8 Charger running a 13.3. We saw them running 12.8's and 12.9's. 14.1 is the magazine time quoted by I~LUV~Caddys8792. So running high 13's isn't anything impossible
 

·
Registered
'87 Jeep, '10 Thruxton, '00 Duc 748, '01 748R (853cc)
Joined
·
3,703 Posts
Magazine times don't mean a damn thing in the real world though. Just look at what all the magazine times are for my car. Every single one says 15.1 and 6.8 second 0-60 time. Well my timeslips say other wise, especially the last one. If I had the traction, it would have ran a 14.7, so like I said, magazine times simply can't compare to actual times at the track.
 

·
Registered
1992 Town Car Cartier & 2014 Accord LX MTX
Joined
·
34,087 Posts
True, danbuc! It's nearly impossible to get the same time consistently. I think that the magazine articles just give you a ball park number.
For example, in the october 2005 issue of Car and Driver, they test the Pontiac Solstice. Then they did a comparison test of the Solstice V. Miata in the december 05 issue. The numbers they got are different. Both the Solstices they tested had the 5 speed manual, the one in the december issue somehow weighed 11lbs less, but that won't make a big difference.

October 2005:
0-60: 7.2
1/4 mile: 15.8 @ 87mph

December 2005:
0-60: 6.7
1/4 mile: 15.4 @89 mph
 

·
Registered
'87 Jeep, '10 Thruxton, '00 Duc 748, '01 748R (853cc)
Joined
·
3,703 Posts
Some of these magazines don't always use the same conditions to test a vehicle which is also where alot of the differences in times come from. If there was more humidity, or the air was cooler, or the altitude was higher or lower,..ect. They all affect the times that are seen. That's why I don't really trust the magazine times at all anymore. There's no telling whether or not the conducted the test in Seattle Washington, or Pheonix Arizona.


edit:...Blackout, clear your PM box.
 

·
Registered
1995 FTS
Joined
·
4,577 Posts
danbuc said:
Some of these magazines don't always use the same conditions to test a vehicle which is also where alot of the differences in times come from. If there was more humidity, or the air was cooler, or the altitude was higher or lower,..ect. They all affect the times that are seen. That's why I don't really trust the magazine times at all anymore. There's no telling whether or not the conducted the test in Seattle Washington, or Pheonix Arizona.


edit:...Blackout, clear your PM box.
It is now clear. But its hard to tell how these magazine's do their tests. Some do the weather corrections other just publish what they ran at the track
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,471 Posts
Blackout said:
It is now clear. But its hard to tell how these magazine's do their tests. Some do the weather corrections other just publish what they ran at the track
That's true. And R/T already wrote an article in which it said that they do not beat on the cars during acceleration tests at the track. They acnowledge that their posted times are NOT the ultimate times that can be obtained. They do not speed-shift or do anything that might damage the car in any way.
Personally, when I look at performance data from magazines, I compare them and read what they say are the test conditions and if they mention any special circumstances that had an affect on the data they published.
I also feel that only comparo tests where they actually test the cars together at the same time actually net usable data and still that's only good on a relative basis IMO. I think my point was that we saw quite a few Hemi cars run that day and there was a definate pattern that was decernable. Plus, that day was cold and dry so it would present a near perfect day for drag racing. I just doubt that those cars could have done much better than they did on that day.
 

·
Registered
03 escalade
Joined
·
172 Posts
Owning an 02 DTS and test driving an 05 300C, The 300c, hands down, outperforms my DTS. Not even close. Only way I could win a race with the 300C would be for him to not realize we're actually racing.....

I loved the 300C, but too expensive, even used. Thank goodness for the depreciation of GM products:bonkers:
 

·
Registered
1995 FTS
Joined
·
4,577 Posts
No offense but the DTS is the slowest of the Cadillac lineup so I would hope you owuld feel a huge difference in performance between your DTS and a 300C
 
21 - 28 of 28 Posts
Top