2012 CTS-V or an AMG?
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
Fastest time I've ever seen for a bone stock CTS-V Sedan is 11.9@118+ (with a DA right around sea level). The Coupe is ~70 pounds lighter, so maybe an 11.8 in good air on a decent track? ![nix](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/nixweiss.gif)
The quickest Dragtimes listing I see for a "stock" C63 is 12.1x ("MThis" from this forum). However, if you look at the specs he mentions this was actually done on 265 drag radials AND -1500 foot DA. I suspect I could have run an 11.5 @ 122+ with DR's and a DA that good when my "V" was stock. Of course that is pure speculation.
![nix](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/nixweiss.gif)
The quickest Dragtimes listing I see for a "stock" C63 is 12.1x ("MThis" from this forum). However, if you look at the specs he mentions this was actually done on 265 drag radials AND -1500 foot DA. I suspect I could have run an 11.5 @ 122+ with DR's and a DA that good when my "V" was stock. Of course that is pure speculation.
![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
Wanna come up to Oklahoma I'll show how fast mine is
![naughty](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/naughty.gif)
#52
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Naples FL
Posts: 2,925
Received 167 Likes
on
133 Posts
2021 Porsche TTS
Stock vs stock, it is a driver's race since it is within a few tenths on the quarter (11.9X versus 12.1X)
mod vs mod, it is cheaper to mod the CTS but both cars will achieve 10.X times so it is still a driver's race so it comes down to look and preferences.
The MB is better built overall and the new model seem to be on par with the CTS interior.
The stock exhaust on the MB is heaven, the one on the CTS is uneventful.
mod vs mod, it is cheaper to mod the CTS but both cars will achieve 10.X times so it is still a driver's race so it comes down to look and preferences.
The MB is better built overall and the new model seem to be on par with the CTS interior.
The stock exhaust on the MB is heaven, the one on the CTS is uneventful.
#53
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW Suburbs
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SVT Cobra
Ok so we are talking about 2 tenths of a second faster straight up on the quarter mile (taking into account that the CTS-V wasn't on drag radials either we don't know that) with a car that has over 100 more stock horsepower and almost equal amount of gain in torque.... Wonder how fast that car would be with its 6.2 liter engine and without the supercharger. That's why you have to love respect AMG. Same size engine (without a supercharger to help it) with nearly identical performance figures. Oh and by the way near identical weight. ![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
Everything I've ever seen about the C63 shows curb weights of under 4,000 pounds. The CTS-V Sedan is nearly 4300.
![nix](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/nixweiss.gif)
The 11.9 run was NOT done on DR's. I was there and have run with the guy since then. His car is still bone stock to this day. He's only been to the track 2-3 times in his life.
His 11.99 pass:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6F-7...layer_embedded
If you can't appreciate what DRs and 1500+ feet difference in DA means in terms of ET/MPH, then I really don't know what to tell you.
Last edited by gnxs; 02-16-2011 at 05:13 PM.
#54
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW Suburbs
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SVT Cobra
Stock vs stock, it is a driver's race since it is within a few tenths on the quarter (11.9X versus 12.1X)
mod vs mod, it is cheaper to mod the CTS but both cars will achieve 10.X times so it is still a driver's race so it comes down to look and preferences.
The MB is better built overall and the new model seem to be on par with the CTS interior.
The stock exhaust on the MB is heaven, the one on the CTS is uneventful.
mod vs mod, it is cheaper to mod the CTS but both cars will achieve 10.X times so it is still a driver's race so it comes down to look and preferences.
The MB is better built overall and the new model seem to be on par with the CTS interior.
The stock exhaust on the MB is heaven, the one on the CTS is uneventful.
![crazy](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/crazy.gif)
BTW, a CTS-V has been modded into the 9's, with a few more I know of knocking on the door.
Last edited by gnxs; 02-16-2011 at 05:12 PM.
#55
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Naples FL
Posts: 2,925
Received 167 Likes
on
133 Posts
2021 Porsche TTS
Well, on paper, I could show you the bone stock 3.9 sec 0-60 of car and driver and ask you to provide me back up of a CTS-V doing this number. I will not because different day, different car, different driver kinda thing.
Bottom line is 2 to 3 tenths on the quarter is still a driver's race on the streets and the outcome will be different every time.
Both cars are very close to each other and it comes down to personal preferences.
Please provide links to your 9 second CTS please.
Bottom line is 2 to 3 tenths on the quarter is still a driver's race on the streets and the outcome will be different every time.
Both cars are very close to each other and it comes down to personal preferences.
Please provide links to your 9 second CTS please.
#57
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW Suburbs
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SVT Cobra
Well, on paper, I could show you the bone stock 3.9 sec 0-60 of car and driver and ask you to provide me back up of a CTS-V doing this number. I will not because different day, different car, different driver kinda thing.
Bottom line is 2 to 3 tenths on the quarter is still a driver's race on the streets and the outcome will be different every time.
Both cars are very close to each other and it comes down to personal preferences.
Please provide links to your 9 second CTS please.
Bottom line is 2 to 3 tenths on the quarter is still a driver's race on the streets and the outcome will be different every time.
Both cars are very close to each other and it comes down to personal preferences.
Please provide links to your 9 second CTS please.
![Stick Out Tongue](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
I hope none of my comments would lead one to assume that I espouse that anybody should drive one over the other. We all have a unique set of needs in a car and for each person one might fit better than the other depending on that criteria. All I'm hoping to do is provide some data and comment on a few items I would disagree with in some of the statements I've seen made that I don't believe are accurate.
9 second CTS-V (there is an older thread about it on this site already including YouTube video of the pass).
HERE:
https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/...ts-v-sick.html
Last edited by gnxs; 02-16-2011 at 07:55 PM.
#58
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: denver,CO
Posts: 905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2009 c63, 2011 GT500
I don't think i'll buy any CTS after i read this.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...?csp=obnetwork
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...?csp=obnetwork
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
In equal conditions on the same tires, I'd say more like .5 seconds and 5+ mph.
Everything I've ever seen about the C63 shows curb weights of under 4,000 pounds.
![](http://i54.tinypic.com/ka5p34.jpg)
it is cheaper to mod the CTS
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
#61
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Relocated
Posts: 4,418
Received 381 Likes
on
237 Posts
2010 Irridium Silver MB C63 AMG Sedan
I don't think i'll buy any CTS after i read this.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...?csp=obnetwork
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...?csp=obnetwork
OOOH MAN
![EEK!](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/eek.gif)
#62
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
coupe
I guess my point is that with a 100 more in horsepower and torque this is all the gain you get? Where is the engineering and development in that. They NEED the supercharger just to keep up. And so I go back to the original thread topic. CTS-V or C63. The CTS-V has to make up for the **** poor development and engineering by increasing the horsepower of the car to make it perform (and doing it the cheap way at that). Forget about developing a transmission that is up to the performance of the engine (that's to much work). Slop in a piece of s!@# transmission and hey why not add a supercharger to make the 1/4 mile number look good. It's funny watching people try to compare the "number" in an attempt to prove that the CTS-V is a "world class" vehicle. IMHO You cannot compare these two cars. They are made by two different car companies that have very little in common in how they approach making a car.
![](http://i54.tinypic.com/ka5p34.jpg)
Of course it is brother....it's also cheaper to mod a Subaru Sti and get it under 4 seconds. I don't understand why this is a big point for some people. If it's all about cheap horsepower then you're not looking for either one of these cars. Go find a piece of S!@# Ford Mustang and mod it out![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![](http://i54.tinypic.com/ka5p34.jpg)
Of course it is brother....it's also cheaper to mod a Subaru Sti and get it under 4 seconds. I don't understand why this is a big point for some people. If it's all about cheap horsepower then you're not looking for either one of these cars. Go find a piece of S!@# Ford Mustang and mod it out
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
Its really sad to have a view such as yours, instead of praising a company for being able to make hp and mpg out of a simplistic engine, you trash it. Give props for where its due, the c and cts-v are different vehicles anyways. The V is compared to the e63 and I believe the E63 actually beat it out in most the comparisons I have read.
#63
MBWorld Fanatic!
#64
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW Suburbs
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SVT Cobra
I guess my point is that with a 100 more in horsepower and torque this is all the gain you get? Where is the engineering and development in that. They NEED the supercharger just to keep up. And so I go back to the original thread topic. CTS-V or C63. The CTS-V has to make up for the **** poor development and engineering by increasing the horsepower of the car to make it perform (and doing it the cheap way at that). Forget about developing a transmission that is up to the performance of the engine (that's to much work). Slop in a piece of s!@# transmission and hey why not add a supercharger to make the 1/4 mile number look good. It's funny watching people try to compare the "number" in an attempt to prove that the CTS-V is a "world class" vehicle. IMHO You cannot compare these two cars. They are made by two different car companies that have very little in common in how they approach making a car.
![](http://i54.tinypic.com/ka5p34.jpg)
Of course it is brother....it's also cheaper to mod a Subaru Sti and get it under 4 seconds. I don't understand why this is a big point for some people. If it's all about cheap horsepower then you're not looking for either one of these cars. Go find a piece of S!@# Ford Mustang and mod it out![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![](http://i54.tinypic.com/ka5p34.jpg)
Of course it is brother....it's also cheaper to mod a Subaru Sti and get it under 4 seconds. I don't understand why this is a big point for some people. If it's all about cheap horsepower then you're not looking for either one of these cars. Go find a piece of S!@# Ford Mustang and mod it out
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
I honestly don't know where to start about picking apart half the BS in your post.
First off, let's go to MB website and see what they say the car weighs:
http://www.mercedes-amg.com/?lang=usa#/c63-specs
I also love the GM needs a SC argument...LOL. Man I haven't heard that since the Vette and GTO guys were whining about that with my.....how did you classify it in your last sentence.....S&*% Mustang (Cobra in my case). Sorry, I can't afford a Ferrari or Porsche as my "fun" car so I've got to live within my limitations. It's also lived at the 600+ rwhp level since late 2004 (300+ 1/4 mile passes and 111,000 miles) so it's not too much of a POS.
![nix](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/nixweiss.gif)
The CTS-V's engineering goes WAY beyond "slapping a SC" on the motor and hoping for the best. If you're not aware of all the various advancements present in a CTS-V, then you likely don't venture outside this forum much. Hell, even inside this forum you should know more than you do as there are a multitude of knowledgeable and objective enthusiasts of this forum. Handling, braking, acceleration are all at or near the top of the class it competes in. If you think it's just a straight line bullet, you've just kept your head in the sand as to some of the accomplishments of the car.
Transmission holding up to the performance of the engine? While the automatic trans. has been singled out my magazines in tests as a weak link compared to the SMG type transmissions of some of it's competitors (criticism that is justified), both the automatic and manual transmissions have proven as bulletproof as you can expect. Mid 10 second runs on DRs have not hurt the stock trans, no failures from any of the guys that spend their time on road courses.
If you don't think (for whatever reason) that the two cars are comparable, that's fine. While I suppose the E63 is the more natural competitor to a CTS-V, you're understanding of the basic underpinnings, specifications and capabilities of the car are woefully inadequate. I'd get into the power-to-weight and gearing difference and hp/tq. disparities, etc. in relation to the performance of both the CTS-V and C63, but I'm not sure you'd be able to assimilate it.
I'm not trying to convince anybody the "V" is a better car, just bringing a little factual information to the table. I know this is a MB forum and that people here obviously love the MB and AMG's (and rightly so). Your posts are proof that information on competitor's vehicles is desperately needed in some cases.
There is nothing bad I can say about a C63. Understanding and expressing the capabilities of one car doesn't require me to bash a competing mfr. to prove a point. While I didn't choose a C63, I'd have no trouble spending a lot of time behind the wheel of one.
Last edited by gnxs; 02-17-2011 at 11:04 AM.
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C55 AMG, BMW 535i, Mazda Cx-7, Nissan 240sx
Get the V, if you want to Mod, its cheaper then modding a mercedes, stock vs stock its faster.
A v8 supercharged for the same as a v8...
As for the NAV, its total crap.
It breaks down to ur lifestyle, if your using it as a daily dont get the V, the amg is better, but if you just want to have fun and mod and have it as a luxury sports car for the weekends or fun times, the V is for you.
A v8 supercharged for the same as a v8...
As for the NAV, its total crap.
It breaks down to ur lifestyle, if your using it as a daily dont get the V, the amg is better, but if you just want to have fun and mod and have it as a luxury sports car for the weekends or fun times, the V is for you.
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
S&*% Mustang (Cobra in my case). Sorry, I can't afford a Ferrari or Porsche as my "fun" car so I've got to live within my limitations.
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
The CTS-V's engineering goes WAY beyond "slapping a SC" on the motor and hoping for the best. If you're not aware of all the various advancements present in a CTS-V, then you likely don't venture outside this forum much. Hell, even inside this forum you should know more than you do as there are a multitude of knowledgeable and objective enthusiasts of this forum. Handling, braking, acceleration are all at or near the top of the class it competes in. If you think it's just a straight line bullet, you've just kept your head in the sand as to some of the accomplishments of the car.
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Or he is just pissed off because the CTS-V is faster then a C63 (both in stock form)
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
Last edited by melmanc55; 02-17-2011 at 11:27 AM. Reason: none
#68
I put that in there just for you
I love to see Ford oweners on Mercedes forums (AMG at that) trying to make a case for another American car.
Not at all just trying to make a positive case on a "Mercedes AMG" forum about the car MOST of us own on here. Oh i'm sorry you were expecting me to say the Caddie is better than the car i chose....I get you![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Not at all just trying to make a positive case on a "Mercedes AMG" forum about the car MOST of us own on here. Oh i'm sorry you were expecting me to say the Caddie is better than the car i chose....I get you
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
#69
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
coupe
#70
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW Suburbs
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SVT Cobra
I've admired AMG automobiles since I learned about them. A used E55 was almost put in my garage before I realized I could swing a new CTS-V. This forum is one of the reasons I was considering an E55. The performance arms of any mfr. is where my heart typically lies (AMG, "M" division, SRT Mopars, SVT Fords, etc.) When an American mfr. (or anybody) puts out a quality piece, I have no trouble touting it and when they put out a POS, I have no problem criticizing it.
I already know your preference when it comes to other mfrs:
![](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vWrx43Kdj4U/S8VVCyMj4DI/AAAAAAAAAH0/Tffuc96arP4/s1600/ostrich_head_in_ground_full.jpg)
P.S. - I hope none of my posts have offended any of the true enthusiasts on this forum, but sometimes you have to post (as I have in this thread) with the least common denominator in mind.
Last edited by gnxs; 02-17-2011 at 12:01 PM.
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
Everything you have brought to the table at this point is null, pertaining to the lack of spelling and punctuation you seem to exercise.
I guess you haven't read my signature I still own an "AMG" sorry I have good taste in cars. But in reality my Caddie is faster then my modded E63 was.
True car enthusiasts have a love for performance and/or interesting cars no matter what mfr. makes them. I'm a forum member on MANY forums where I've never owned their brand. If they make a cool car, I typically want to learn about it from the guys that own one. I also like to learn about what to potentially expect if I cross paths with one on the street.
I've admired AMG automobiles since I learned about them. A used E55 was almost put in my garage before I realized I could swing a new CTS-V. The performance arms of any mfr. is where my heart typically lies (AMG, "M" division, SRT Mopars, SVT Fords, etc.) When an American mfr. (or anybody) puts out a quality piece, I have no trouble touting it and when they put out a POS, I have no problem criticizing it.
I already know your preference when it comes to other mfrs
I've admired AMG automobiles since I learned about them. A used E55 was almost put in my garage before I realized I could swing a new CTS-V. The performance arms of any mfr. is where my heart typically lies (AMG, "M" division, SRT Mopars, SVT Fords, etc.) When an American mfr. (or anybody) puts out a quality piece, I have no trouble touting it and when they put out a POS, I have no problem criticizing it.
I already know your preference when it comes to other mfrs
However ignorant you think my comments are they are mine (for good or bad). I know I have not offended anyone on here. Hey I like your picture...but why one of your mother....I would have posted one of your Mustang.
Last edited by melmanc55; 02-17-2011 at 12:23 PM.
#72
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: So Cal
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
'15 E63S wagon
Ok so we are talking about 2 tenths of a second faster straight up on the quarter mile (taking into account that the CTS-V wasn't on drag radials either we don't know that) with a car that has over 100 more stock horsepower and almost equal amount of gain in torque.... Wonder how fast that car would be with its 6.2 liter engine and without the supercharger. That's why you have to love respect AMG. Same size engine (without a supercharger to help it) with nearly identical performance figures. Oh and by the way near identical weight. ![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
Last edited by VCA_AMG; 02-17-2011 at 12:23 PM.
#73
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW Suburbs
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SVT Cobra
![Shakehead](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/shakehead.gif)
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 AMG
I'm an AMG guy, but we aren't talking about 0.2sec difference between these two cars. The CTS-V spanks the C63 in virtually every performance category. A 0.5 difference at these speeds is huge. The C being on drag radials w/1800DA makes a huge difference. The V has turned in 3.9 0-60s in almost every test it has competed in. The quarter mile is the same. Let's call a spade a spade, the Caddy's LS SC engine is a more powerful engine AND easier to mod to huge HP for tiny amounts of $$$ compared to the AMG 6.3. That doesn't make either car "better," it's just reality and depends on what you want.
Ahhh I just got it.....you're referring to my ostrich pic. I'll be the bigger man here and just let this one slide. Calling somebody's mother names......lol, didn't quite expect that from somebody that can afford to put a C63 in their garage.
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Calling somebody's mother names
Last edited by melmanc55; 02-17-2011 at 12:53 PM.