Historically they have not been the fastest but the new RS6 with the TT V10 is fast!

I think I have to disagree with this assessment. The CTS-V was obviously aimed at the M5, heck it even says so on Cadillac's website. I don't think you can say that the normal CTS is the equivalent of the C-Class just because their prices are similar; we all know that on average a Cadillac will cost less than a Benz. The CTS is much more of a mid-sized sedan than it is a economy sized sedan, and the STS would be the "competitor" (used loosely of course) to the S-Class. The DTS is just confused lol.

I would choose a tuned C63 over both.......

I like the fact that CTS-V is faster and also handle better than E63.
But I am happy with E63. It looks great and fast enough for me.
E63, E55, M5, M3, CTS-V and Rs6 are all great and fast cars.
All these cars are fast enough for most of us.

I would figure the CTS-V would be compared more to the C63 then E63 because the E is way more expensive. I love performance and I really like what they did with the CTS-V but I would get a E63 over the CTS-V. Now if I had a choice of CTS-V or C63 knowing they cost just about the same I would get the CTS-V. I actually went to look at the CTS-V but they told me you can only purchase the vehicle and not lease it. If they do have lease programs for it I will be leasing one and beating the living hell out of it.

I'm not a brand ***** I've traded german cars for american cars a few times in my life one of them was an E class for a GC jeep and I'm def. not gay but I insist on chosing an E63 over a CTS-V for a very good reason ... Merc has a history that backs its fans enthusiasm, what does Caddilac have ? when you give me 50 years of crappy cars you need a bit more than just "pre-production-ads" claims to change my mind ... I still think the CTS-V is a great performance car but I wont fall in love with it only 3 years after GM hired a couple of germans to design it for them ... and that doesn't make me a brad ***** or gay sir.

not the RS6 Avant, though.

Wow, if there really is no lease option, then I wouldn't consider it; considering that GMAC is close to getting its hands on the TARP funds, I guess it's not surprising they would stay out of the lease business.

I think I agree that a CTS-V may be more relevant to the C63 because of the size. I like the W211 E-class size in terms of the compromise between exterior size and interior utility - so the CTS-V would probably be too small for my needs. The C63 is an awesome car, drove one at the AMG tour and fell in love with the new transmission - not quite as good as the MCT on the updated SL63 but an ideal evolution of the 7G-tronic box found on the E63.

Wish Audi would bring the RS6 in saloon or Avant format here...that would be an interesting car to consider.

Again, the CTS-V is compaired to the M5 and E63 b/c of Performance #s, but its in the C and M3/S4 class. The STS is the same size as the E and the DTS goes up to the S Class.

The Article reads http://www.newcartestdrive.com/sneak...m?ReviewID=183


....... More significantly, it will deliver at least 99 horsepower more than any of the CTS-V 's competitors, including the Audi RS4, BMW M3, Lexus IS F and Mercedes C63 AMG.

So we're comparing a 2009 model, to a 2003 model E class... (63 or 55 are equivalent and not much has really changed since). So it took a while for V, M and the like to catch up to AMG. Then the W212 will come out and totally eclipse without a doubt the CTS-V. And it'll be another 5 yrs or so until they come out with something that can compete... then again as previously mentioned, CTS=W204.

It only took the current "M" 3yrs to catch & pass us in a straight line but the old as well as the new M5 are still better handling cars than the W211. As far as eclipsing the CTS-V I believe MB will do so in a straight line but I dont see them addressing the handling in the W212 to the point where it is as fast as the CTS-V around the ring.

Its tough to really compare the w211 chassis can the new CTS.

I still love the look of the E63 and who knows what resale value on the V-series are going to be long term.

I'd go either E63 or CLS63 I guess.

I'm sorry but did you say "resale value" I don't mean to laugh but have you seen the resale value on our cars lately There are MB's out there dropping anywhere from 30-60K on 07-08 models.

LOL good point. My thing is that drop is due to the economy, whereas some of these specialty domestic cars just DROP on their own, with no external factors.

Your right though, point taken!

You are right about the economy, it's killing everyone's resale value. I'm seeing 06 M5's with 30k on the ticker in the 40's!

honestly? no

honestly on paper i may. but i would have to drive it first, hard to substitute for a supercharger.

That would be a very tough choice, I mean fastest sedan around the Nurburgring that's hard to argue with.

They both should have great build quality but in the end I think the e63 will take it because it would just be more defined. With the engine in the CTS-V mod potential is through the roof. This would be one hell of a hard choice to make though.

Regardless of the intended model that they are going after, the CTS-V is closer in size to a W211. You can compare the '09 E63 to the '09 CTS-V and if they were the same money, yes the MB gets the nod. This is a valid comparison, both are substantially changed over the first models. Don't even begin to try to use build quality as a plus over the Caddy, jeez! I have been inside a new CTS-V and without even driving it, I can say without reservation that, for 30K MORE than the Caddy, you need to get the MB bull***** cleaned out of your ears and eyes if you'd pick a E 63 over one of these, sorry.

but if I was in the market for a new E63 I sure as hell would take a look at the CTS-V.

E63 > CTS-V...

FWIW- this M5 member just dumped his BMW for the V... a small excerpt:

Traded 06 M5 (took a bath but didn't feel like selling locally) for one of the first delivered CTS-Vs on east coast. I will wait till new M (what year?) and get that but until then, the following obversations:

--I got the 6 speed auto with paddles. This thing is crazy fast off the line. Don't notice much difference in it and M after that

--Interior not as nice as M but it is a $65K car MSRP

--Exhaust note is unreal and better than my Vipers/Vettes out of the factory. It sounds like it already has a Corsa on it which is what I usually get

--stereo good, IPOD adaptor good , screen great. controls are easy even though IDrive never bothered me

--interior quiet and better than my XLR-V. suspension great settings nice

--really, really miss HUD having had it on Vettes XLR and M. Stupid to leave it off this car

Bottom line--neat car with brute force and wonderful sound. The hot ticket till new M arrives.

CTS-V = ugly...end of story.

Its so funny that this thread was posted last night. I went out to the grocery store today and when I came out there was a black CTS-V right in front.

Its a really sharp looking (and sounding) car!

No need to be sorry...because am not sure what part of my quoted post in your response imparted a discussion on build quality so am lost on what you're specifically responding to regarding the MB bull**** that needed to be cleaned out my ears and eyes.

However, since quality and, more specially, the workmanship and material used, is the issue mentioned in your reply, the Cadillac would be a concern if I used my last couple of personal experience with Cadillac products as a guide.

First off, on business trip to LA about a year ago, I got an STS as a rental from Hertz, so it was an '07 model. While the goods looked up to par from afar, the actual experience left much to be desired on a luxury vehicle. The plastic surfaces felt cheap and chintzy and the fit and finish of the product was poor in general in the 48 hours I had it in my possession.

Second time, I was a participant in what was ostensibly a Road & Track test drive event but was really a poorly disguised Cadillac marketing show. The products tested were an SRX against a Lexus RX and a STS4 versus the BMW 530xi - both Cadillac specimen present showed horrible panel gap fit inside and out, and the trims were already showing signs of wear on surfaces that should not such as door panels as these are not the usual wear and tear surfaces. And again, against the competitors' products present for evaluation, the Cadillac's interiors were poor comparisons in terms of both trim quality and fit and finish.

So yes, if I was paying a lower MSRP for the CTS-V compared to an E63 or M5 I would expect a 'cheaper' product - but would not even accept this type of quality inside and out on a non-luxury marque such as a Honda or Toyota costing MUCH less; and my wife just got an '08 Honda Odyssey Touring so it is a first hand account of the quality of the vehicle. While I HATE having a minivan which is an appliance in my books, I so far cannot argue with the basic parameters such as the fit and finish and the quality of the material previous discussed - they are top notch!