GBlansten

You're right.

shchow

Back on topic...
When you come across another high performance vehicle, what is your initial gut reaction?
Is it...Great car!
Or...Hah, what a POS! My car's faster/better!

Those people who have the latter reaction probably have insecurities that have to be soothed by their vehicle.

Morro

Always, my car is better/faster and I'll be happy to prove it!!!

Morro

Was that a good enough post for you?

SebringSilver

LOL

SeattleBum

I went to the MB dealership in Bellevue, WA and they had 3 sitting on the lot. The salesguy called me for 2 weeks. I went to the Caddy dealership and they are all either pre-sold or only last a day or two on the lot b/f someone buys them. Plus, the C63 has been out for over a year longer than the new CTS-Vs. Go figure why you're making these observations.

ericpd

From street light to street light, I bet my C32 would stomp your C63 if it's stock. I remember last summer at a GWS-MBCA meet, I watched a C32 just embarrass a C63 in several autocross match-ups. Never saw a redder face in my life. Better,... yes. Faster,... well that depends.

I drove my C32 to work the other day,.... just for the hell of it. And I didn't want her to feel neglected. While it lacks the punch and nimbleness of my CTS-V, it's still a pleasure to drive. A C32 with a pulley kit and a nice tune (got it) is still a formidable performer. Add some suspension adjustments (ain't got it) to get rid of the under-steer and an Q-LSD (got it) to add some stability to the rear and you're right in the mix with all the new super-kids on the block.

JAYCL600

theres always a bigger and badder Benz on the block, and im in Bethesda which is your block


I hate all of you C63 owners!!!! Just teasing, my neighbor has a sweet C63 and it just sounds incredible, awesome rides guys!!!

Razorecko

The issues with GM are keeping the production #'s of the V's very low. Especially the recaro & 6spd manual orders. One member just did a flat out 12.00 in the quarter in a stock auto V w/ the oem street tires. So that helps too =)

veightkiller

im not hatin i love to have both cars if i can afford both

SebringSilver

Maybe it's a cultural thing then. It's possible Canadian buyers aren't really that into the Cadillac brand, because I actually went a bit further today and asked a Cadillac salesman (albeit over the phone) whether they've been selling any CTS-Vs of late. He seemed a bit embarrassed when he told me they haven't sold a single one as yet. But there have been enquiries. It's just that the absence of a demo for prospects to test drive has made his job next to impossible.

ericpd

Exactly my point,... there's always something bigger and badder. But let some of the C63 owners on this thread tell the story,... there isn't. And yeah, you're right. There's at least two C63's I see in my neighborhood regularly that are just awesome. I gotta admit,... they are some sweet rides.

ericpd

Now that makes a lot of sense to me. Like I said before, had I not got behind the wheel of the CTS-V and spend a day with it, I never would have bought it. Never would have even looked its way. I would have continued to operate off of old and stale data,...

Ludatwix70

hehe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4718vN0kL3M

hooleyboy

+1
Want to race?

I hear you on that, I couldn't have said it any better. I never take it over 80mph on a wide open street if im messing around with another car. At that point the damage has been done so there is no need to push my luck.

ericpd

Thanks Jay!

Razorecko

...I know we as V and c63 owners can both argue about.....WHY in the hell did we not get bigger rear tires ?!? - we need atleast some 305's in the rear, preferably would be some nice 315's

ericpd

I agree with you 100% on that one Razor. But the C63 guys got a worst case of 'skinny rear tire-itist' than us V pilots. When I was shopping these two cars, I notice that the CTS-V's front tires were the same size as the C63's rear tires. They're both 255/40, except the CTS-V is sporting 19 wheels instead of the smaller 18 inchers bolted to the C63. Which means even though both walls are 40's, the 255's on the V's front are actually a tit wider than the 255's on the C's rear. Strange! My rears are 285/35ZRx19, which ain't too bad, but you're right,... would be nice to have some 305's back there. I've always wondered why they put those 255's on the back of the C with all that torque that ride can muster. Hell,... even the rears on my C32 are 245's. Never could understand that. Also,... up to the point where I started my serious shopping I had always thought that the PP included those nice 19's, but found out differently when it was time to choose. I think I read somewhere that the 19's where only included in the Euro and Canadian PP option. Don't understand that either.

yaymitch

It's amazing what the original topic has morphed into. Guess all the haters wanted to chime in...now it's all about the CTS-V. Can we rename the original thread?

c32AMG-DTM

Assuming the same tire make & model, a 255 should be a 255... same width. That said, a 255/40/18 would be a smaller diameter wheel than a 255/40/19 counterpart.

SebringSilver

I wonder what they talk about on the CTS-V discussion forum. All their members are here!

ericpd

Believe it or not, right now they're talking about V's, ZR1's and C63! Honest! Look, some of you must come to grips with the fact that the C63 and the V share a relationship more like a modern U.S./U.K. relationship rather than a colonial U.S./U.K. relationship. There's not a lot of hatin' coming from the V crowd towards AMG. I know this thread is about hatin',... but you'd be surprised at the number of '09 V enthusiasts coming from the AMG stables and still hold close to them their AMG casting. At least I do. The real hate is towards the M5,... go figure. LOL! At least that's my take on it after reading tons of threads and posts. And if you think about it,... the V talk here is about comparisons, not bashing. Well maybe excepting DaGS. He's a hater to the core.

Jae Duk

I'm sorry, I have nothing against CTS-V but...will they survive is what I'm sure half the ppl on the C63 thread is wondering and maybe leaned their decision more towards a merc.

ericpd

Oh oKay,... never could understand how that worked. The way it was explained to me was the the sidewall and width numbers were percentages of the tire height. And the taller the tire the more real estate for the width and/or sidewall. Or something like that. Anyway,... I trust your take. Still my point was that the C63's rear tire is only one step up from the C32's rear tire width, and only as width as the CTS-V's front tire. My opinion stands: you would think the C63 deserves better than that,... at least a minimum of 285's for a car of it's power and expected handling capability. Hell, I believe the M3 even sports a wider rear tire than 255. Not sure, but I think they're fitted with 265's at the rear. Just puzzling why MB didn't commit to leading the class in this category.

ericpd

Yeah,... that's the big mystery question for me as well. Given GM's rep, that's a major leap. But it's an easier leap upon objective inspection and an involved test drive. It's clear that GM and Cadillac have done some homework and given more attention to detail, quality and fit than they have in earlier years and models. It's just as clear that this car's mission is different this time out. For guys like us pick up on this stuff kinda should be easy,... if we're willing to gaze upon the new V with an objective eye. My parents or my sister,... maybe not so much. Now if this change in mission is skin deep, and all of GM's effort went into fooling us into believing that they finally 'get it',... well then shame on me. That would also just about trash their long and slow, but steady crawl out of crap-dom slime and ruin what little reputation theyve started to repair. Tell you what,... I'll know in a year or so. Won't I?