2009 CTS-V tune only mod 470RWHP
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
2009 CTS-V tune only mod 470RWHP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVR1A_B0p2Y
I have to admit.. I wish we could just tune our 55 cars and get 40 to 50 RWHP.. (without a pulley)
The tune is under $400... Wow! Just imagine with a pulley swap...
I feel for GM. This car is truly great but with current market conditions, not many takers on a high performance super sedans, specially a brand new one.
The used market should be great in about 12 months from now...
I better start saving for headers..
I have to admit.. I wish we could just tune our 55 cars and get 40 to 50 RWHP.. (without a pulley)
The tune is under $400... Wow! Just imagine with a pulley swap...
I feel for GM. This car is truly great but with current market conditions, not many takers on a high performance super sedans, specially a brand new one.
The used market should be great in about 12 months from now...
I better start saving for headers..
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 701
Likes: 2
From: San Diego
04 E55, 12 GL 450(wife)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVR1A_B0p2Y
I have to admit.. I wish we could just tune our 55 cars and get 40 to 50 RWHP.. (without a pulley)
The tune is under $400... Wow! Just imagine with a pulley swap...
I feel for GM. This car is truly great but with current market conditions, not many takers on a high performance super sedans, specially a brand new one.
The used market should be great in about 12 months from now...
I better start saving for headers..
I have to admit.. I wish we could just tune our 55 cars and get 40 to 50 RWHP.. (without a pulley)
The tune is under $400... Wow! Just imagine with a pulley swap...
I feel for GM. This car is truly great but with current market conditions, not many takers on a high performance super sedans, specially a brand new one.
The used market should be great in about 12 months from now...
I better start saving for headers..
I plan on picking up a used one in the next 6-12 months. I hope the prices drop like the M3 has when it was initially being sold.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 4
From: California, USA
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
The CTS-V is rated at 550 hp, which is about 451 whp (assuming 18% drivetrain loss). Making 470 whp is a gain of approximately 20 hp, and to me that is normal unless I missed something 
. E55s and E63 gain 20 to 25 hp easily from just a tune.
. E55s and E63 gain 20 to 25 hp easily from just a tune.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
The video is pretty lame..
so the delta was around 45 to 50 RWHP with tune only..
Was not sure if this was a manual or 6sp auto
Last edited by TopGun32; Dec 17, 2008 at 07:20 PM.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 4
From: California, USA
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 582
Likes: 1
From: Chandler, AZ
Dodge Challenger Hellcat Widebody, Porsche Cayenne, International Scout
The initial numbers that I saw on the new CTS-V are pretty impressive. 0-60 in 3.9 seconds and just under 8 minutes on the Nurburgring. I don't claim to be an engineer or an expert in physics, but I know that's fast....
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Likes: 3
From: Toronto
2011 Black C63 Eurocharged V5
The numbers dont look great to me either---I mean theyre great generally---but relatively they are right what you would expect.
The LSA block is a 6.2 liters......the E55 engine is 5.5L...Thats a 13% greater size. Our cars put out ~420rwhp stock. 13% above that is aproxamately 470rwhp. Right what Id expect. Without knowing a thing about the car---I would bet the boost is very similar on both cars. With the CTS running 2-3 lbs less because of its better flowing heads.
570-590rwhp is exactly what I'd expect from a pulley/header/TB/tune car. And just like us, their biggest problem will be cooling. They dont have the zr1 cooler from what i understand.......even that one is at near its limit at stock zr1 levels(according to GM engineers).
At 4200-4300lbs.....Gm basically RE-BUILT the AMG E55 6 years later. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. Thats why we all like it.
The LSA block is a 6.2 liters......the E55 engine is 5.5L...Thats a 13% greater size. Our cars put out ~420rwhp stock. 13% above that is aproxamately 470rwhp. Right what Id expect. Without knowing a thing about the car---I would bet the boost is very similar on both cars. With the CTS running 2-3 lbs less because of its better flowing heads.
570-590rwhp is exactly what I'd expect from a pulley/header/TB/tune car. And just like us, their biggest problem will be cooling. They dont have the zr1 cooler from what i understand.......even that one is at near its limit at stock zr1 levels(according to GM engineers).
At 4200-4300lbs.....Gm basically RE-BUILT the AMG E55 6 years later. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. Thats why we all like it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 44
From: San Diego
2004 E55
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
997.2 GT3
The road test data from various magazines and websites doesn't show the CTS-V to be significantly quicker than the E55. Trap speeds at the end of the 1/4 mile are coming in at around 115-117mph. Where the CTS-V moves the game on is handling. It seems to combine the grunt of the E55 with handling at least the equal of the M5.
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Likes: 3
From: Toronto
2011 Black C63 Eurocharged V5
As far as handling---it weighs 4200-4300lbs......alot of how a car handles is determined my its weight and balance. At 4300lbs, I cant expect it to be much better than the E55. M5's are like sub 4000lbs right? But real shocks and springs trumps air suspension for sure. I guess they are trying to combine the best of the E55 and the M5.
Too bad their reign will only last about a year until the 2010 E55 Twin Turbo shows up.....550whp,600lbs/ft, DCT 8speed tranny......Lord knows what else.
The thing with the CTS is that its ACTUAL competitor is the M3 and The C63. Both of which are much lighter and more compact. In basketball we call those guys "Tweeners" ....
You guys think the people that shop for E55/63 or M5 are cross shopping cts-v's?? Where does that leave the STS-V?? Is it trying to get S65's buyers? I just dont get their strategy. Ive never understood what GM's marketing strat is for a given segment.
What works for the vette is the "BEST" performance at the cheapest cost. They need to adopt this at every segment.
I just babelling now...
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 701
Likes: 2
From: San Diego
04 E55, 12 GL 450(wife)
I meant that GM probably chose the E55 as their target vehicle. Like the GTR guys with the 911TT.
You guys think the people that shop for E55/63 or M5 are cross shopping cts-v's?? Where does that leave the STS-V?? Is it trying to get S65's buyers? I just dont get their strategy. Ive never understood what GM's marketing strat is for a given segment.
I just babelling now...
You guys think the people that shop for E55/63 or M5 are cross shopping cts-v's?? Where does that leave the STS-V?? Is it trying to get S65's buyers? I just dont get their strategy. Ive never understood what GM's marketing strat is for a given segment.
I just babelling now...
I think that GM really went all out to update the CTS-V and the STS-V has been around for a few years so it no longer makes a statement. If they do update the STS-V it would make sense to put the ZR-1 motor in that car with all the suspension mods to go with it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,172
Likes: 3
From: Philly
997TT, C192 GT63, W464 G550, MS Plaid
The road test data from various magazines and websites doesn't show the CTS-V to be significantly quicker than the E55. Trap speeds at the end of the 1/4 mile are coming in at around 115-117mph. Where the CTS-V moves the game on is handling. It seems to combine the grunt of the E55 with handling at least the equal of the M5.
Last edited by prodigymb; Dec 18, 2008 at 02:49 PM.
Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 246
Likes: 3
From: Toronto
2011 Black C63 Eurocharged V5
How about 12.3 @ 120mph stock 09 CTS-V 6SPD
The one great thing the CTSV has going for it; is that its GM---> which means perf parts are gonna be like $4 or something. Headers.. $500..... pulley..$200 .....Tune $400
I would bet most of the ones that are driven on the street will have a minimum of Headers/pulley/exhaust/tune and 580-600rwhp. They will trap 128-132mph easily.
Any way you slice it---You'll have a VERY fast car that traps 128-132mph for $1500 invested. Put on some coilovers and HRE's ...and you'll have a VERY fast, reliable car.
man...I just talked myself into one....
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,172
Likes: 3
From: Philly
997TT, C192 GT63, W464 G550, MS Plaid
since they weigh the same and have similar driveline I would expect CTS-V to be equal to a E55 with Pulley and tune....120-122mph.
The one great thing the CTSV has going for it; is that its GM---> which means perf parts are gonna be like $4 or something. Headers.. $500..... pulley..$200 .....Tune $400
I would bet most of the ones that are driven on the street will have a minimum of Headers/pulley/exhaust/tune and 580-600rwhp. They will trap 128-132mph easily.
Any way you slice it---You'll have a VERY fast car that traps 128-132mph for $1500 invested. Put on some coilovers and HRE's ...and you'll have a VERY fast, reliable car.
man...I just talked myself into one....
The one great thing the CTSV has going for it; is that its GM---> which means perf parts are gonna be like $4 or something. Headers.. $500..... pulley..$200 .....Tune $400
I would bet most of the ones that are driven on the street will have a minimum of Headers/pulley/exhaust/tune and 580-600rwhp. They will trap 128-132mph easily.
Any way you slice it---You'll have a VERY fast car that traps 128-132mph for $1500 invested. Put on some coilovers and HRE's ...and you'll have a VERY fast, reliable car.
man...I just talked myself into one....
have you guys seen the top gear episode with the new CTS-V, ZR1 and the SRT8 Challeneger? It was great, they did the salt flats, nice zr1 drift. Good episode
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
997.2 GT3
Here's a good read:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=136636
The Caddie managed 12.4@114.7mph. Inside Line loved it.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=136636
The Caddie managed 12.4@114.7mph. Inside Line loved it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 44
From: San Diego
2004 E55
I don't think this car will need too many suspension mods... its the only production sedan to go sub 8 at the ring. the power plant was designed to stay in its power-band longer thus helping it maintain speed around a track. like the z06 and the zr1, the v was designed with a track (not 1/4) in mind, the fact that it also happens to go very fast in a straight line is just a bonus.
I wouldn't be so quick to quote edmunds, as they're notoriously awful drivers. expect real-world numbers to have the new v besting the e amg's in the 1/4, and as already proven, besting the m's around a track.
I wouldn't be so quick to quote edmunds, as they're notoriously awful drivers. expect real-world numbers to have the new v besting the e amg's in the 1/4, and as already proven, besting the m's around a track.
Last edited by bobgodd; Dec 18, 2008 at 10:37 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
997.2 GT3
They may be bad drivers, but if they're consistently bad the relative data is still useful. In that test, the V had a quicker ET than the M but didn't trap as high.
