Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,630 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
05 PLATINUM CTS-V
Joined
·
2,985 Posts
wow..

i want my 5 minutes back after reading that.
 

·
Registered
'06 Z06, '05 CTS-V 453rwhp/434rwtq (sold)
Joined
·
4,455 Posts
:histeric:
 

·
Registered
2005 Platinum CTS V-Headers+3in pipes
Joined
·
3,012 Posts
tell that to all the guys who have been to a V-day
 

·
Registered
2005 CTS-V, Black
Joined
·
2,165 Posts
Troll.
 

·
Registered
2009 CTS-V
Joined
·
931 Posts
With more than 50 track days on the V, I can't count the number of BMWs that I've blown by. As for Lexuses and Volvos--I've never seen a Lexus at the track and only one Volvo (a station wagon) that I can remember. One of the greatest things about the V at the track is that most people don't know the car and are greatly surprised at its performance. For example, I was at a track event for Rousch Mustang--sponsored by Rousch--at Pocono. It got kind of boring lapping all those 427 Rousch Mustangs. While Jack Rousch wasn't there, his head of PR was. When he saw I was leaving early, he said, "Thank God I don't have to look for you in my mirrors anymore."
 

·
Registered
05 PLATINUM CTS-V
Joined
·
2,985 Posts
"Thank God I don't have to look for you in my mirrors anymore."

:yup:

the few times i have been i always have people looking at my V like :hmm:
 

·
Registered
'05 CTS 3.6L
Joined
·
102 Posts
Hey concorso ... so what was the point of posting it here when I was talking about a Base model CTS? Regarding the V ... yes, it understeers but IT has the power to compensate with throttle UNLIKE the 3.6L! It also has better shocks and a higher spring rate, heavier swaybars, etc. Totally different car and handling all together!

As far as a drag down on the CTS forum ... compared to what? A bunch of teenagers talking about rims and V grilles? LMFAO!!! At least we were attempting to have an intelligent conversation about engine swaps and the electrical communication side effects ...
 

·
Registered
2004 CTS-V
Joined
·
2,061 Posts
I wouldn't drive a base cts for free.

one dude mentioned how his uniqueness would suffer moving from base to V.

I think 1 in 2500 is unique...

hmmm...
 

·
Registered
1992 Dodge Dakota DD, 2005 CTS-V Black on Black
Joined
·
573 Posts
Hey concorso ... so what was the point of posting it here when I was talking about a Base model CTS? Regarding the V ... yes, it understeers but IT has the power to compensate with throttle UNLIKE the 3.6L! It also has better shocks and a higher spring rate, heavier swaybars, etc. Totally different car and handling all together!

As far as a drag down on the CTS forum ... compared to what? A bunch of teenagers talking about rims and V grilles? LMFAO!!! At least we were attempting to have an intelligent conversation about engine swaps and the electrical communication side effects ...
its not all that hard to inprove a stock CTS. its alot cheaper than a V series. Ive seen 3.2s with turbos under the hood and just a lowering kit keep up with a V. (Not my V. She was sitting home on jackstands.:stirpot:) :thehand: And as far as the teenagers comment, ha look at most ages in this V section. Im prob one of maybe MAYBE 5 teens. And besides why would you engine swap? You can make plenty of power with a CTS 3.2 or 3.6 just look at Lund Cadillacs 2004 Boniville car. Sure they have the finacial backing of a dealer but still it proves you dont need to swap for two more cylinders. Make due with what you have.
 

·
Registered
2006 Blacked Out CTS-V
Joined
·
176 Posts
Well unless it's raining, my V is either in comp mode or stability off LOL!!! I always have done this in my porsche and lightning!!! I have no problem stepping out the rear and absolutely no problem gathering it all back with precision its VERY balanced for the amount of power that it has!!!
 

·
Registered
05 PLATINUM CTS-V
Joined
·
2,985 Posts
:yeah:

i always drive in comp mode (unless its raining) this car is very easy to control while out of control if that makes sense :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,114 Posts
I wouldn't drive a base cts for free.

one dude mentioned how his uniqueness would suffer moving from base to V.

I think 1 in 2500 is unique...


hmmm...
He was referring to the relative uniqueness as compared to dropping in a 3.6 in place of a 3.2. If that's your thing, I guess...

its not all that hard to inprove a stock CTS. its alot cheaper than a V series. Ive seen 3.2s with turbos under the hood and just a lowering kit keep up with a V. (Not my V. She was sitting home on jackstands.:stirpot:) :thehand: And as far as the teenagers comment, ha look at most ages in this V section. Im prob one of maybe MAYBE 5 teens. And besides why would you engine swap? You can make plenty of power with a CTS 3.2 or 3.6 just look at Lund Cadillacs 2004 Boniville car. Sure they have the finacial backing of a dealer but still it proves you dont need to swap for two more cylinders. Make due with what you have.
He was referring to the CTS crowd.

Hey concorso ... so what was the point of posting it here when I was talking about a Base model CTS? Regarding the V ... yes, it understeers but IT has the power to compensate with throttle UNLIKE the 3.6L! It also has better shocks and a higher spring rate, heavier swaybars, etc. Totally different car and handling all together!

As far as a drag down on the CTS forum ... compared to what? A bunch of teenagers talking about rims and V grilles? LMFAO!!! At least we were attempting to have an intelligent conversation about engine swaps and the electrical communication side effects ...
And since I'm already answering for other people...

Because he thought we would get a kick out of the assinine comments you made in that other thread, where, perhaps, you felt safe that no one would call you out. And now that people have, you seem to have found yourself in a position where you feel it necessary to try and recede from your initial statements.

It would work but my point was it is dangerous! Ever drive this car w/o TC and Stability? It is a very unstable chassis IMHO and not predictable AT ALL! One slip of the skinny pedal and it'll spin right around.
About the only thing you got right was the snow performance! Horrendous understeer, not enough power to compensate by swinging the rear, terrible weight ratio so when it does break over, it spins around, I could go on and on.

Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Audi will run circles around it at the track! Even compare base model to base model and they will smoke the Caddy in handling and performance any day of the week. If you don't believe that, look at ANY car magazine that EVER did a luxury comparison! Or spend a little time at a road track and I guarantee you won't see a CTS at an autocross event ... there is a reason for that! They DO have the edge in performance models with the V but that is simply because of the sheer power and the superior traction/stability control system ... which I might add you think is OK to disable.

Just because you drove it in the snow without a problem, please don't suggest others risk their safety. If it wasn't necessary, it wouldn't be there! Seriously ... if GM thought they could save $5 without it they'd cut it in the Heartbeat of America ... LMFAO!!! :histeric:
Your initial statements indicated that the CTS's chassis was unstable and unpredictable. The underpinnings of that chassis are no different from that of the CTS-V.

You also stated that the only reason that the CTS-V has an edge in performance is due to the superior power and traction/stability control system. This, in conjunction with your previous assertion, suggests the notion that, without the traction/stability system engaged, the CTS-V would be in shambles against its rivals, as far as performance is concerned, particularly in the handling department.

It is quite a quandary then how so many Vs are run on the track with all the computer nannies turned off and being remarkably well-mannered in the process.

Basically, your statements are utter rubbish.

Sure, the chassis isn't the ultimate track tool. Could it be stiffer? Yes. Could it be lighter? Sure. Could it have a bit more finesse? Okay. But, run it against any of it's contemporary competitors around a track and it will regularly come out on top. And none of the competitors chassis' had any gains in appreciable stiffness, lightness, or finesse, with the exception of the M5, in regards to a bit more finesse in its footwork - not to be mistaken as better ultimate handling, but, perhaps, just a bit more polished.

Actually, the only bonified competitor at the time was really just the E39 M5. And although, the M5 was, perhaps, more refined in it's feedback and easier to drive to the limits, it still wouldn't post as good a lap time as the CTS-V. Spend some good seat time behind the wheel of the V and that time gap begins to widen, encroaching into the territory of the nimbler M3. So, something must be okay with that chassis.

And what car in this class (or even in the class of dedicated sports cars) does not understeer from the factory? Even the closest rival and, perhaps, the original pinnacle of this class, the M5, will, just like the V, mildly understeer at steady state thresholds of adhesion. The handling of the V is, for all intents and purposes, predictably neutral and readily controllable.

The AMGs were far from the delicate track dancer. The Audis were understeer-city. And the Lexus? What Lexus? Lexus didn't have a dog in the fight until a couple years afer the 1st generation V's introduction. And even then, the V would still put up a fight on the track. But then again, that's what the M5 would say for the Vs ... in both 1st and 2nd generations. Hmmm...
 

·
Registered
'05 CTS 3.6L
Joined
·
102 Posts
I totally agree with you regarding the V! However, drop a sub-par 3.6L in the same chassis without Limited Slip and 1/2 of the computer assistance that you "professional drivers" disable and you are stuck with a speedbump of a car!

My original comments were focused around concorso's reckless suggestion that TC is NOT necessary for Joe Blow driver which in fact is a very dangerous assumption!

Now regarding track handling, I dunno ... I still wouldn't take a V if I could choose from the many options out there today. Maybe a Cayman or even an Exige would top my list.
 

·
Registered
04 CTS-V with a little hp persuasion device
Joined
·
3,824 Posts
I totally agree with you regarding the V! However, drop a sub-par 3.6L in the same chassis without Limited Slip and 1/2 of the computer assistance that you "professional drivers" disable and you are stuck with a speedbump of a car!

My original comments were focused around concorso's reckless suggestion that TC is NOT necessary for Joe Blow driver which in fact is a very dangerous assumption!

Now regarding track handling, I dunno ... I still wouldn't take a V if I could choose from the many options out there today. Maybe a Cayman or even an Exige would top my list.

I dont recall anybody calling themselves professional drivers but the computer assistance in this car sucks! Its a safety feature, not a high speed driving aid. If you want to go fast in the V or a CTS for that matter, you turn the computer assistance off because its crap!
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top