tuned c63 vs tune & pulley cts-v
 

V wins? I have a few buddies over and they are undecided who would win.

Tuned C63 vs STOCK CTS-V will be very close. Otherwise forget about it!

Think about it like this...it takes them a sc on the same displacement motor to beat our NA beast lol...with just headers/exhaust and a tune we keep up with them and they have a sc, and exhaust and pulley and tune...that is a win for 63 in my book

No and kaz thats the worst logic ever

Dont just leave it with that...explain

Yes the V would win with those mods.

I'm not sure what the other poster has in mind, but here is my thinking.

While the LSA engine in the V does have a super charger, the M156 engine in the C has 3 extra cam shafts and 16 more valves compared to the V. The M156 also has a complicated variable intake set up while the LSA just uses a simple throttle body. Similarly, the M156 has a complicated variable valve timing mechanism while the LSA has fixed timing from a single cam shaft.

Supercharging and multi-valve / variable timing techniques are both methods of solving the same problem, getting more air into the engine so it can burn more fuel. Neither method is inherently superior, each has its advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage of the M156 approach is cost and complexity. The M156 likely costs at least 2x the price of the LSA and has lots more moving parts. The other advantage of the LSA approach is the ease of increasing power. We have seen that getting more power on the M156 is quite expensive once you go past a tune and some exhaust work. By contrast, owners have added 100+ HP on the LSA by swapping pullies and installing better breathing intakes. The cost of such upgrades (including custom tuning) is less than $1,000.

Don't misunderstand, I have both a V and a C and I love them both. The bark of the C when I stomp on the pedal is unmatched. But I can't say that the V is inferior simply because it uses a super charger. Plus with an upgrade budget of $2K, the V will go much faster than the C.

Nice to see someone post with some brains and logic.

It really doesn't matter if it has a 10 liter supercharged engine or a 1 litre naturally aspirated engine.

HP is HP
HP / LB of weight is HP / LB of weight
0-60 is 0-60 is 0-60
1/8 mile is 1/8 mile is 1/8 mile and
1/4 mile is 1/4 mile is 1/4 mile

The questions is which would win.

The answer is with these mods, the CTS-V will rip up the C any day of the week.

+1 V's are very fast after pulley swaps, especially for how little you have to spend. Plus you can keep a stealth stock sounding car until you smash the throttle and hear that screaming supercharger whine.

Guaranteed....CTS-V with some simple mods is an animal. I was "C63 all the way" before when it came to quality and presence, but i sat in a CTS-V at the car show yesterday, and I really liked the interior. The back seat room is a little better than the C63 and the Recaro's in the CTS-V feel amazing.

After being completely disappointed seeing the 2014 E63 in real life, i think i might be trying out a CTS-V next.....plus look at the wagon!

http://images5.fanpop.com/image/phot...86-651-314.jpg

http://carphotos.cardomain.com/story...0001_large.jpg

V is a beast. To answer OP's question no doubt V wins.

Not the car for me personally, but cannot deny its performance.

The new V is insane and I was actually looking at a 2011 before picking up my C. The price of a 2011 V is the same as an 09 C. The problem is the V has absolutely no space inside the front drivers side seat / cockpit. I am 6 foot 4 and my head was pretty much touching the roof and the steering wheel is way too far forward.

My cousin is 6'4 as well...he adjusted the seat and he was perfect in it....you can drop the seat very low...

134MPH in the wagon...and babying it out of the hole

I work out quite a bit as well - am close to 270 lbs and tried everything I could but I just wasn't comfortable in it. Even the C was a little small. I was used to the 300C SRT8 which was like a bus, even for me.