Walter686

Ride quality is far better on the Cts-v. Nothing is better than that magnetic ride control, which even Ferrari pays GM to use.

SL63AMG

The ride is great for a car that can perform so well.

gthal

Now THIS is a great looking CTS-V. The sedans are very nice... coupes not so much IMO.

hhughes1

Agreed 100% . I would still paint the chrome but that is strictly personal preference.

Regarding cars, the old analogy should read " beauty is in the eye of the one who be-holding the cash"

Shame to see so much bashing going on here even in the subtle manner as some have chosen. We should all be grateful that several choices exist in the $70,000 range and what you choose should be respected by other enthusiasts.

Most-Wanted

Thanks and agreed. I think the ctsv coupe definitely doesn't have the presence as the sedan. Not a fan of the coupe lines at all.

Most-Wanted

Thanks. And def painting the chrome trim/ grill.

Agreed on the arguing. I'm a car guy and love em all.

SL63AMG

I'd take the coupe, but I like something different from the ordinary everyday sedan.

http://youtu.be/kaRU_viv1Z0?hd=1


http://youtu.be/zkFseTIKXuU?hd=1

Sincity

Other than the wing, that is Sinister!

melmanc55

^^^^^^^^^ Reminds me of this.....

E55 Bulldog

Without the wing that would be a death trap being that is 1000hp... You need all the downward force you can get!

backroll2blind

test drove both... 2009 c63 p10 vs CTS-V Sedan A6 w/Corsa. I bought the c63...CTS-V SEVERELY dissapointed me after all of the hype. Didn't like fit and finish, ride/steering felt somewhat disconnected (smoother on rough pavement than c63), and the CTS had this weird hitch in it when you floored it, like it was missing a chromosome or something and had to think about what you had done to it and how to respond. Supercharger whine wasn't really pronounced (one thing I did like about my XF supercharged) and it just didn't sound sophisticated. Now, it was an automatic and I didn't push it terribly hard in the corners, but with the exception of the rough ride of the c63 on bad streets, I wouldn't ever trade it for another GM. Yes you can modify it and make it run 9's in the quarter, but that doesn't matter to me. Im willing to bet that after 3 or 4 years the MB fit and finish will still look new, while the CTS-V will be rattling and the seats will DEF. be coming apart at the seams (literally). My 97 Yukon seats did, my 2001 Yukon seats did, my 04 2500HD seats did and my 07 Avalanche seats did and the leather in the CTS-V looks the same.

Snipe656

What year was the CTS-V? Because I started looking in the 2011 year model and you could not get leather seating. It had to have their suede inserts, which we have recently decided is a deal breaker for us.

backroll2blind

The one I drove was an 10'...don't quote me on this but it might have had suede inserts on the seats. The AMG seats sold me. Don't get me wrong, the CTS-V is no Yugo, but for all of the hype, I was pretty dissapointed...so I bought a C63

Snipe656

No biggie. I just knew at one time they could be had with all leather seating but was pretty certain it was before the current engine setup. The suede jumped out to us immediately as a huge potentional problem if/when something ever got on it. My other issues are just pretty typical GM interior layout. I still have a hard time dismissing the car from considering but only because I still can't talk the wife into a C63 so ends up being a comparisons between the Caddy and E63 for us. That comparisons ends up with a huge price difference.

backroll2blind

why no c63? without being too rude?

Snipe656

My wife thinks it is too small. We are looking to replace our 335d because the trunk is too small. But at some point in the shopping process she decided the interior needs to be bigger. The C63 has a sufficient trunk space and the interior for the backseat even seems marginally bigger. This is an ongoing "debate" we have, I am still working on the C63 idea and just having another bigger car for big car needs.

Njovovic1

No offense man, but IMO and if I was in your shoes, I would definitely not listen to my wife what she s got to say about me buying a car, if the situation was as yours.(except if she is paying for it, then thats a different story). I mean if my wife said V was okay and C63 no go, I wouldnt even consider her opinion anymore. I would buy the C63, or the e63amg. The c63 is not smaller then the V and if it is, you certainly wont notice the difference, at least not to the point where it would affect your decision about buying the car. What i m saying is that if you buy V instead of C63 because it has more space, you will regret it for sure.

Strafe1

Who's going to be driving the car...you or your wife? If it's your wife, does she really want a V, or the standard CTS? Obviously she has significant input, so you can't just go get what you want or you burn all your bridges! Now you have to consider E550 or E63, BMW 535 or M5, maybe Audi S5. The caddy isn't significantly bigger inside, so if your looking at measurably more room, you may have to exclude the CTS. The question you have to ask is, are you ready for a caddy in your garage?

Snipe656

The CTS-V has dimensions close is size to the E63 and not the C63. I have looked at all three cars multiple times and at times very close to one another. I have gone as far as taking the things that i normally put in a trunk as well as another adult and used the sales person to all get a real world fit for how things would be in each. Now in real life the V feels like it falls in between the C63 and E63 for size but the actual dimensions of the cars make the V and E rather close to one another. I think a big reason for that is how the front interior of the V is laid out.

But like I said, the inability to not get the suede in the V is the deal breaker for both of us. I just personally rather not get the E after driving a few of them and a few C's. In all honesty though if I could find a way to make an E sound damn near like a C does then I'd be fine. As sad as it might be, the sound of the exhaust means that much to me.

Snipe656

We commute together so could say mixed drivers. Though in all actuality this is to replace "her car". I just happen to be the one who drives "her car" the most.

Audi for some reason has not been a thought in my head even though years ago I had an S4 with zero complaints. After this current BMW, I have a hard time consider another due to their crappy local dealers.

Actually my bigger question and no one would be able to answer it but it is which ends up costing more in the long run(let's say 200k miles). My experience with GM has been far from positive but again the suede interior pieces is a deal breaker anyway.

drop997stop

I am currently driving a 2011 cts-v sedan and am pretty happy with it. Came from 2008 e63 and don't miss much. Fit and quality of the 63 was much better. No rattles and creaks found in my V. I also felt the navi and interior of the 63 was outdated.

The v is a great car for the money. The car has so much power and handles 100 times better than the 63. But It's American, Sounds like a truck and does not have the prestige like the amg. I get attention from a different crowd. Gas mileage is terrible and the tank is really small. I get 180 miles per tank. The gm paint is junk and part is the interior could use improvement.

But the car was 28k less than my 63. Is the amg worth the 28k no! The car is a bargain for the price


I will probably move back into 2012 m5 or e63 but the time being I am overall happy with the V. It was a my first American car and the last. It was a spur of the moment purchase and don't regret it.

backroll2blind

I wish I could have gotten to drive both cars on the track to see the difference because I feel way more connected in the c63 from what I have experienced. I purchased my c63 used with 8K and the CTS-V I looked at had 6500K mi so the CTS-V was actually $2K more than the C63, so both cars were competitively priced in my case.

shchow

To OP,
If you actually decide to get the Caddy, would recommend the manual tranny...
And strongly recommend the Recaro's...

amx1397

I don't have anything to say bad about either car,, but a few months ago, i wanted a faster car,, I was looking at the CTSV and the money it would cost me to make it run in the low 11's. I was informed about a guy "Rudy" that would install a SL or E 55 engine/tranny into my crossfire, and do it for a lot less than i would spent for a CTSV, Now i did some research and found out that 26840 CTS's were made one for each connor in the U.S. and the V8 crossfire would be # 3 in the U S A installed by Rudy. well I went with the V8 into my crossfire, the car runs 11.2 @ 124 I have a tune,and pully. I have run 5 CTSv's at the track and lost to none, one had headers modded heads tune intake and said he was running in the 10's ,but he didn't that night,, I personlly like having one of three instead 1 of twenty six thousand the CTSV may be nice in and out but they are behind me. jim

TMC M5

A couple of things...

The last time I checked a Crossfire was 2 seat coupe. Why in the world were you cross shopping a luxury/sports sedan with a 2 seat coupe?

The only way there are 26,840 CTS-Vs out there is if you include the 1st generation of CTS-Vs produced between 2004 and 2007 which are vastly different than the 2nd generation cars.

You have a pretty fast car... but you act like ALL CTS-Vs are slower than your car...which is just not true. You can see for yourself as there should be a track rental down at PBIR sometime in February with a couple of 9s Vs going at it...and a bunch of other TRUE 10 second cars.

We all value things differently... I really don't give much thought about how rare any of my cars have been. Although now my CTS-V is 1 of only 1 (that I know of) that has this exact combo: KPE CAI, Kooks headers with high flow cats back to stock mufflers, wait4me auxiliary heat exchanger, ATI 9.55" lower crank pulley and wait4me ECM/TCM tunes.

Tom