jinx420hat

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/index.html

Interesting read.

Very evenly matched in performance, but MT gave the subjective nod to the E63 for refinement and better ride (air suspension).

Still, it's impressive to see the V hanging with 90K+ cars.

by CTS_NV on cadillacforums.com

K-A

Saw this yesterday, cool article and great pics.

The E63 is obviously a superb car, and is enjoying its little time in the spotlight as the benchmark for its market (until the F10 M5 comes and next years TT V8 E-Class AMG).

Hats off to the CTS-V though, as it keeps outgunning cars that out-class it, as far as brute power and speed go, it still even has the edge.

emilner

Even though I drive an E, After reading the article and knowing MT's reputation for horrible reporting I would give the nod to the V. 1 1/2 years ago the CTS was lauded by them for its astonishingly good interior and now it is rated as cheap. As far as the E63, and all 212's for that matter I find the interior by far to be the weakest point. The quality is on par, not world class, more like good quality materials but poor design. What they don't mention is how far the V crushed the 63 in the quarter and beyond. By the 1/4 it had 3.4 more mph and that quickly opened up with speed (3.4 mph is a HUGE difference in the 1/4).

The fact that the V is dead even performance wise and costs a real world $35-40,000 LESS is amazing....

mvpjeffmvp

As someone who races cars ranging from 1400hp 8 second 1320's to N/A 800hp 9 second 1320's, I can say that the CTS-V isn't as much of a "better value" as one would think. Having a naturally aspirated engine on a luxury vehicle that is equal in performance to a forced incduction engine (supercharged) SOHC engine. As the CTS is set up at its peak, except for maybe a fuel/air ratio adjustment or pulley change, should one really aspire to turn an E63 into a low 11 second or high 10 second vehicle, the potential is surely available.
As a side note, the 3mph was likely only due to a combination of 60foot time, outside tire diameter and gearing.

emilner

You have that backwards. The E is tuned near it's max potential, that is why the 65/600's get FI. The V has a detuned engine; that powertrain is set up for 80 more HP. A few $'s involving wrenches/parts/mapping and the V will turn low 11's high 10's. To get an E there will cost the price of a V practically....

mvpjeffmvp

It's the age old argument amongst race fans. Forced Induction vs Displacement. I would bet money that the E63 is nowhere near tuned to its potential. To meet the emmissions standards and longevity/warranty issues, you could easily turn the E63 vehicle into a low 10 second car. Spend some money and take an E63 with ported heads, bigger cams, free flowing exhaust, dyno tuned, and you'll have a real beast. Add forced induction to the E63? With a kit to match compression, you'd be hardpressed to beat it. But...being a Mercedes, there's not nearly as much as a vehicle with a much less pricetag (CTS) to torque the **** out of it and drive it down the dragstrip.

jinx420hat

I'm gonna have to side with emilner, 09 CTS-V's are putting down some great numbers with light to medium mods... Throw a couple of different size supercharger pullys, CAI and a new tune and they are making 600hp @ the wheels good for low 11's, one guy added some juice to the mix and was making 825HP @ the wheels and ran a 10.3 and most of this could be had for under $20K for all mods installed and tuned. Trying to do something like that to a E63 would be extreamlly hard and retardly expensive check out some of the prices barbus charges for their cls63 mods and how much power they actually add. I love the E63, but when I get back from Afghanistan I'm still gettin myself a CTS-V because of the ability to mod.

mvpjeffmvp

I will openly admit that I could be 100% wrong here, but with that said time will obviously tell.... I am unfamiliar with the inner workings of the E63 and have not done any in depth technical research on their engines/tuning. If you guys are telling me that they put out a Naturally Aspirated engine that is tuned to the gills, then I stand corrected, and surprised.

jumper4000

No man, you guys are all wrong... I'm pretty sure if you polish the hubcaps with AMG-X74 and install a turbo-V12 booster on the inner three pistons, then add some Mobile1 Synthetic to the left exhaust, you will EASILY gain an additional 10 seconds on the 0 to 60... It'll probably cost around 30 to 40 grands, but you will not regret it... hahaha, I'm just kidding, I have no idea what I'm talking about, but all this mumbo jumbo sounds pretty cool

K-A

My sentiments exactly. I'm not too crazy about the 212's interior myself, and considering the price difference, I think the CTS-V's interior impresses more, it's definitely not on-par with the E's all in all, but close enough, considering the dramatic price decrease.

I thought the same thing about the 1/4, HOW does a Mag with any knowledge of racing consider a 3.4 Trap Speed to be "minor"? In a 1/4 race that literally looks like one car walking the other up top, after the 1/4 the V crushes the E63. Seems MT was batting for the Germans this time around

Actually, I'll agree with Emiliner here too.

You've basically got it backwards. Go to the E63 W211 Forums (same exact motor) and see who's squeezing lots of power out of the 6.2.... You're not really gonna find much. It cost a TON to get any significant increases out of the motor, and frankly, there's not much available.

The CTS-V's motor has tons and tons more potential in it, for far far cheaper than anything on that 6.2 N/A will cost.

emilner

K-A, the reporting reminds me of a comparo I read a little while ago. It had an M5 vs E63 vs S6 (can't remember the mag). The M and the E crushed the S6 in every performance test, so much so that the S6 was nearly identical numbers-wise to the E550 (it certainly was way outgunned vs an M5/E63). It was like comparing a school bus to an Escalade around a track yet the gave the win to the S6. They said even though it was DUSTED around the track it FELT better. Felt better? Maybe they should get better FEELINGS!!

gnxs

+1.

mvpjeffmvp has it backwards. the CTS-V combination is detuned in comparison to the NA motor in the E63 and there an easy 50+ rwhp just waiting to be unlocked in the Caddy. Nevermind the inexpensive cost of the parts/tuning required to get that 50-75 extra rwhp.

The E63 (car/motor) is amazing, but it's not gonna win any "bang for the buck" or "moddability titles against the "V", or any other competitor that uses a factory FI setup (including its blown AMG stablemates).

Quadcammer

factory forced induction cars are always easier to make faster.

examples

Grand national, 03 cobra, toyota supra, etc.

K-A

Woww, yeah that's bias.

Hey we all have our subjective opinions, and I'm down to hear these guys express theirs, but when it comes to "comparo's", they gotta let the objective factors dominate! The S6 beating the M5 and E63 is just a joke.

BTW, isn't the CTS-V a "detuned" ZR1 motor?

The old adage goes "there's no replacement for displacement".... Until Mr. and Ms. Power Adder reared their heads.

On a personal level, I love N/A V8's, and probably prefer them for their impeccable harmonic balance sound-wise, and for the added dependability (in most cases). But F/I's the way to go for moddability without a doubt.