Beat a c32 in my V
#28
Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 E63
Let just put it this way. Several us AMG owners actually took our cars out on a race track this weekend with some "twisties" and lets just say the Z06's saw first hand what a C32 V6 could do. When you are on a track it not about how heavy you can lay your foot on the gas it is about whether you can . All the owners of the different cars(check the Spring Mountain thread in the E55 forum) were suprised about the perfomance of the different AMG's that were out on the track that day. So I am sure keeping up with your CTS-V in the twisties would be a walk in the park.
Last edited by ShelleE55; 02-19-2007 at 07:47 PM.
#30
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG BLACK
#33
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 AMG BLACK
no lies ..... I just stated I beat a c32.....I then searched and found tons of posts saying "i beat a cts-v in my c32" so I there fore extend a welcoming hand to ANY near stock c32 (just as my V is near stock (exhaust and short shifter) to a race from any MPH, I guarantee not only a win, but a rape.
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: AL,IL, GA, CA
Posts: 1,912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS, SLK, ETC
http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...s-v-page6.html
CTSV
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 107 mph
0-mph: 5.2 sec...
hmm.. I think stock C32 / C55 can handle it..
STock V stock
CTSV
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 107 mph
0-mph: 5.2 sec...
hmm.. I think stock C32 / C55 can handle it..
STock V stock
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...s-v-page6.html
CTSV
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 107 mph
0-mph: 5.2 sec...
hmm.. I think stock C32 / C55 can handle it..
STock V stock
CTSV
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.7 sec @ 107 mph
0-mph: 5.2 sec...
hmm.. I think stock C32 / C55 can handle it..
STock V stock
#36
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: AL,IL, GA, CA
Posts: 1,912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS, SLK, ETC
No prob.. here is a review on M3 Vs RS4 Vs C55
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...ecs-page6.html
C55
0-60 @ 4.7 sec
13.3 @ 108
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...ecs-page6.html
C55
0-60 @ 4.7 sec
13.3 @ 108
#37
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: So Cal
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2006 Weistec 3.0L SC'd C55, 2006 MaxPsi PT6466 Turbo'd M3, 2019 Maserati GTS , 2020Alfa Quadrifoglio
no lies ..... I just stated I beat a c32.....I then searched and found tons of posts saying "i beat a cts-v in my c32" so I there fore extend a welcoming hand to ANY near stock c32 (just as my V is near stock (exhaust and short shifter) to a race from any MPH, I guarantee not only a win, but a rape.
Conclusion: Very delayed throttle response. Takes a while to feel the boost from the SC. It felt extremely heavy and not very nimble around the corners either. Although these cars I tested had less than 2K miles on them and looked brand new they must have been trashed by the general public. They had about 5 of each model in stock and there was a crowd was about 20 people waiting for the Vettes, Cads and Hummbers that day.
I really felt that my car would totally thrash this car. Despite not having a Kleemann my throttle response, acceleration and handling (before PSS9s) were so much better that I was extremely dissapointed with the Cads. I was even considering buying a Vette or Cad for myself and giving the C55 to my son when he turns 17 but changed my mind after the test drive.
#40
Super Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 335i 03 CLK55 AMG
#41
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C32 / 2004 E55 / 2009 C63
FACTS:
Motor Trend Stats 2003 C32 vs. 2005 CTS-V
2003 Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG
Acceleration, sec to MPH
0-30 mph 1.82
0-40 mph 2.60
0-50 mph 3.68
0-60 mph 4.77
0-70 mph 6.19
0-80 mph 8.01
0-90 mph 9.85
0-100 mph 11.80
1/4 mile, sec @ mph 13.24 @ 106.86
2005 Cadillac CTS-v
Acceleration, sec to mph
0-30 2.0
0-40 2.8
0-50 3.8
0-60 4.7
0-70 6.0
0-80 7.5
0-90 9.2
0-100 11.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph 13.1 @ 109.8
Motor Trend Stats 2003 C32 vs. 2005 CTS-V
2003 Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG
Acceleration, sec to MPH
0-30 mph 1.82
0-40 mph 2.60
0-50 mph 3.68
0-60 mph 4.77
0-70 mph 6.19
0-80 mph 8.01
0-90 mph 9.85
0-100 mph 11.80
1/4 mile, sec @ mph 13.24 @ 106.86
2005 Cadillac CTS-v
Acceleration, sec to mph
0-30 2.0
0-40 2.8
0-50 3.8
0-60 4.7
0-70 6.0
0-80 7.5
0-90 9.2
0-100 11.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph 13.1 @ 109.8
#43
MBWorld Fanatic!
#45
MBWorld Fanatic!
#46
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 Silver C55, 2008 Ducati 1098
#47
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,645
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2002 C32 Black/Charcoal
no lies ..... I just stated I beat a c32.....I then searched and found tons of posts saying "i beat a cts-v in my c32" so I there fore extend a welcoming hand to ANY near stock c32 (just as my V is near stock (exhaust and short shifter) to a race from any MPH, I guarantee not only a win, but a rape.
Yours, or someone else's???
#48
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: West Los Angeles
Posts: 988
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cobra/E55
Honey bunny, this is why I had my Cobra...So I could smack guys like you in the mouth with it lol, straight line or in the twisties... CTS-V...laughable Let me know when you break into the 10s...Then it might be a race.
No offense, but you are comparing apples to oranges, just like I am. So what, a couple of guys beat an overpriced cadillac. Go pick on the ricer crowd. They seem more in-line with your mentality...
I agree with Fifth Rings comment completely, "Best part about owning a CTS-V is that when you're in it, you don't have to be looking at it".
Not my cup of tea.
No offense, but you are comparing apples to oranges, just like I am. So what, a couple of guys beat an overpriced cadillac. Go pick on the ricer crowd. They seem more in-line with your mentality...
I agree with Fifth Rings comment completely, "Best part about owning a CTS-V is that when you're in it, you don't have to be looking at it".
Not my cup of tea.
What's up bro! Glad to see you on here.. FYI, the racing seats are still great. Thanks for the hookup!
By the way, how much power is your GT500 putting out?
Take care and I'll talk to ya soon.
#49
Don't forget that the CTS-V is also living with not just a significant weight penalty, but a suspension not up to the task. Here's an excerpt from when C&D reviewed the car:
"The third problem we encountered was axle tramp, also known as wheel hop, during hard acceleration from a standing start, and it's one that can't be explained away so easily. Morris notes that with a judicious combination of clutch slip and wheelspin, GM development engineers have finessed 0-to-60 runs in the 4.5- and 4.6-second realm, which is pretty much what we anticipated with this car's Corvette powertrain. Unfortunately, we hadn't been to the GM school of CTS-V launch technique, so our efforts were rewarded by rear-wheel hop, with severity in direct proportion to the level of aggression employed to get the car out of the blocks. It soon became clear that further runs were likely to bring the test to a premature end, whereupon we left off.
The result was a disappointing 0-to-60 time—5.2 seconds versus the 4.7 seconds we estimated in September. And although we believe Cadillac engineers when they say they've found ways to drive around this phenomenon, we also believe that CTS-V owners attempting to extract the best 0-to-60 times from their cars are likely to become intimately acquainted with differential replacement costs."
http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...s-v-page2.html
I don't know why I feed the troll - guess I can't help it
"The third problem we encountered was axle tramp, also known as wheel hop, during hard acceleration from a standing start, and it's one that can't be explained away so easily. Morris notes that with a judicious combination of clutch slip and wheelspin, GM development engineers have finessed 0-to-60 runs in the 4.5- and 4.6-second realm, which is pretty much what we anticipated with this car's Corvette powertrain. Unfortunately, we hadn't been to the GM school of CTS-V launch technique, so our efforts were rewarded by rear-wheel hop, with severity in direct proportion to the level of aggression employed to get the car out of the blocks. It soon became clear that further runs were likely to bring the test to a premature end, whereupon we left off.
The result was a disappointing 0-to-60 time—5.2 seconds versus the 4.7 seconds we estimated in September. And although we believe Cadillac engineers when they say they've found ways to drive around this phenomenon, we also believe that CTS-V owners attempting to extract the best 0-to-60 times from their cars are likely to become intimately acquainted with differential replacement costs."
http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtest...s-v-page2.html
I don't know why I feed the troll - guess I can't help it
#50
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
03' E39 M5, 10' CLS63 AMG
Hey guys a question,
what car can corner better, on the straight stretch it's been said that a V can beat the C32 but what happens when u hit that first corner????
what car can corner better, on the straight stretch it's been said that a V can beat the C32 but what happens when u hit that first corner????