The Tony Show· See you in the funny papers
04 CTS-V, 05 STS, 07 SRX- All sold :(
Well thank you. I guess this means a disagreement actually *ended* in an internet forum???
Alert the media!
Alert the media!
I mostly stick to the V forums don't have much in common with the other makes/models.davesdeville said:1. I don't have a Seville, read my name. I run my ETC at the track once in awhille. Like I said, going fast in a curvy line, "driving" as you call it, is fun. I autocrossed my ETC last Friday. I'll post the video of it tomorrow in the Kills/Racing video section. You can harass me there if you wish to talk about what I drive, rather than in the STS-V forum which neither of us drive.
Stock for stock yes. Dollar for dollar not in my opinion.davesdeville said:2. The STS-V, stock for stock, is a better car than the CTS-V in my eyes. And I'm sure a few thousand people who have the cash will agree with me.
Your words not mine.davesdeville said:The CTS was the first car with the new art&science styling. The SRX, DTS, Escalade, STS, hell even BLS have similar styling. So you're saying they're all CTS clones?
Big Jim is our resident bully. If you can get past the delivery most times he's got pretty good information.davesdeville said:Yeah, I live in NM so I must be stupid. Right I haven't seen a production STS-V run the 1/4 but I would bet money it will beat a CTS-V. Especially when you blow your rear all over the track. Maybe try some tact next time you post in here.
Most likely you're correct. CTS-V wins the road, STS-V wins the track it will never see.davesdeville said:Let me try this one.
1. For a big luxury car it is indeed a road course warrior. And like I said, the STS-V will finish the 1/4 quicker than the CTS-V stock for stock.
Great comparison. Much better than the Cobalt SS analogy. Except it's a two door coupe. But you're getting closer.davesdeville said:2. Is the CTS-V really worth the price when you could pick up a GTO and save yourself damn near $20k? Yeah? Well for similar reasons plenty of people should think the STS-V is worth the extra.
Nothing to reply to here. Maybe one of the CTS guys can chime in.davesdeville said:3. But I thought you CTS guys were arguing that we hadn't seen any real performance numbers from the STS-V? Jim was. Oh, I get it, it only matters if the STS-V is slower than an E55 and M5 but not if it's faster than your precious CTS.
I believe Car and Driver called the STS a less edgy CTS. And said "that's not a bad thing". They do look alike. That's a fact.davesdeville said:4. The driver sure as hell can tell the difference. That's what counts because that's who pays. I learned to tell them apart the first week the STS was out. Not my fault you can't see.
So your answer to this would be yes. The goal of the STS-V is to be slower than it's competitors. Now you do understand that the CTS-V is not a competitor of the STS-V, right?davesdeville said:5. See #1.
Interesting comment. Please post the non-factual comments that I made. I will be glad to explain them. I will gladly post the inaccuracies of your posts.davesdeville said:You're not just "not towing the line," you're talking shit about the car because you can't see past your CTS-V.
Again your words here not mine. Never called the STS-V crap. Never said it needed a chevy motor or a manual. Just trying to understand why someone would want the car finishing third in it's class. Who know's maybe once the magazines can do a test of performance (unsubjective) and styling/luxury (subjective) the STS-V will beat out the quicker E55 and M5's. If it does it will be a performance bargain. If it doesn't, well than we still have unanswered questions.davesdeville said:You don't understand the fact that the STS-V isn't designed to be an enthusiast car like the CTS-V is. If it were, it would have a Chevy motor and a manual. You're an enthusiast so you think it's a piece of crap. I'm an enthusiast but I think it's more practical to have a stock daily and a fast weekend car so I can appreciate the refinement of the STS-V.
paste from the XLR-V forum...CVP33 said:Quick let's all go argue about the XLR-V. That's over priced too. And at 440 hp will simply NOT perform.
Even some of your fellow CTS-V owners recognize the STS-V is gonna be quicker on acceleration. Which, btw, is why I see the need to pick up an STS-V over a STS V8 - the CTS-V crowd are the enthusiasts who will take their car to the road course and dragstrip, the STS-V owners are less likely to do that but everybody pulls up at a stoplight now and then.VELOSE said:How could we, we're faster and still have luxury implemented in our cars. It's because there's some ignorance coming from the STS-V fans on identifying the cars real purpose.
Yup, I answered there about interiors, etc.CVP33 said:Pasted from my reply in the XLR-V thread.
It's not enough to move the price up. GM must move the content up. I have no issue right now with the features GM is offering. Magnetic Selective Ride suspension, Night Vision, Adaptive Cruise, GM has some very robust technology in our cars. But right now our packaging just sucks. Paint work, body seams, plastic quality and overall fit and finish needs to move up with the price.
Look at my post on the STS-V thread regarding the interior. My god the STS-V's interior looks positively austere when compared to Audi, Mercedes, Infiniti and Lexus. The radio portion of the center stack would be at home in the Cobalt or Malibu. Hardly the stuff of $77,000 and $100,000 dollar luxury automobiles. The GM faithful deserve better.
The STS-V had better be faster than the CTS-V or more than a few buyers will cry foul. And I predict the STS-V will be by a few tics.davesdeville said:Even some of your fellow CTS-V owners recognize the STS-V is gonna be quicker on acceleration. Which, btw, is why I see the need to pick up an STS-V over a STS V8 - the CTS-V crowd are the enthusiasts who will take their car to the road course and dragstrip, the STS-V owners are less likely to do that but everybody pulls up at a stoplight now and then.
Keep thinking that the STS-V is going to be faster than a stock CTS-V at the light. When a stock CTS-V smokes you tell us all about how you got killed. However, if the CTS-V gets smoked, we'll make the playing field even. Meaning, a supercharged CTS-V against your supercharged STS-V. Obviously STS-V will be no contest. So in the long run, CTS-V has more potential if you want to get into a stoplight contest.davesdeville said:Even some of your fellow CTS-V owners recognize the STS-V is gonna be quicker on acceleration. Which, btw, is why I see the need to pick up an STS-V over a STS V8 - the CTS-V crowd are the enthusiasts who will take their car to the road course and dragstrip, the STS-V owners are less likely to do that but everybody pulls up at a stoplight now and then.