Jon2007E63P30

I can find a hill 5 miles away with a 500W CO2 pulse laser and punch holes in the Caddy's tires!

jimand7

All someone needs to do is show up with a damn good driver in a panemera Turbo. I have read this whole thread but still think that the Panemera turbo which has clearly made it around the 'ring a ton faster...

Yacht Master

Jag just backed out.

https://mbworld.org/forums/off-topic...h-pussies.html

Fast55

It is substantially improved and the power to weight isn't bad against the Caddy. I've had some professional instruction but I'm not a pro driver by any means and I would put a good chunk of money on me driving a W212 against the CTS-V, but they want W211's to run them, not a W212.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

Of course they do. Why run an updated chassis when you can run an 6 year old one? This competition is an exercise in spin.

Fast55

Actually, it's closer to an 8 year old design, but you get the point.

eliteamg

Good Luck wish I could make it but got to work

bobgodd

I'm not trying to start any drama here but I'm definitely curious; what makes you think that the W212 E63 even with it's improvements is capable of out gunning the new V on a track? The new V has handily dispatched the current M5/6 and I don't think even the new E63 is quite on par with the M5 just yet.

bobgodd

Well in fairness, they are running 09's against 09's. Throwing in a 2010 model wouldn't seem fair

Zod

yes but the life cycle of the car is not the same.
The E has been replaced!!

all the new E's are 2010 models

Fast55

If you look at the stats, the W212 is on par with the Caddy. The difference will be the driver, and I am familar with the track. So, any advantage they think they have would have been nullified. No matter, it's not what they would have accepted even if it weren't too late.

bobgodd

Lol true but they're not testing life cycles.

Mikesamg

It's sad I'm an American but wish MB would call out the CTS-V with the new E63!

VCA_AMG

The new E63 still isn't a match for the CTS-V on a track.

Whether we like it or not, that CTS-V has a monster engine, with a badass suspension package. AMGs have the monster engine.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

+1

The new E63 isn't some magical creature that has overcome 10+ years of other manufacturers building better sporting suspensions. GM knows how to build cars that own tracks, so does BMW. Mercedes is learning, but the E63 is still focused in a very different place. Mercedes could do it if they wanted to, but their loyal customer base isn't about these d!ck swinging contests.

bobgodd

This.

TopGun32

read edmunds.com Inside the line

The kid with m3 won if you discount the GM engineer and N-ring veteran experience.

Btw: the privately owned CTS-V were not as fast but goes to show that in this event, Driver experiece was the key.

So.. if the 2010 E63 would of probably been able to keep up with the "private owners" of the CTS-V.

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...rers/Cadillac/

VCA_AMG

Cadillac clearly set out to make a statement w/the CTS-V, and they did. Kudos to GM for getting SOMETHING right in the last 15 years. It's still not a car I'd buy but for what it's intended to be, GM nailed it.

I feel that it's apples to oranges comparing the CTS-V w/an AMG E63. The MBZ 63 doesn't try to be a track terror. It's a high powered, luxo cruiser of ultra high quality and cost. 2 different cars for 2 different purposes. Which one is "better" for you is a personal decision. But again, kudos to Cadillac for building a supremely fast car, both in a straight line and on a track.

That magneto suspension is pretty tempting.

splinter

Congratulations to the Bimmer guys for at least giving ‘em an honest go.
No shame at all for a privateer running his M3 as close as he did competing against the likes of Messrs. O’Connell and Redman.

Although not typically a Cadillac fan, their CTS-V’s performance and roadworthiness best not be discounted during impromptu encounters.
It’s fair to say they’ve made some progress.

Marcus Frost

Wow what a bunch of cry baby nonsense. Great way to complain about finishing in 4th. I wonder if the "better driver" excuse works in any form of motor racing? Oh wait, no, it doesn't. Good drivers win races. This is how it works. If we are going to speculate on what was the result of the driver versus the car you could easily undermine any competitive driving series in the world.

The BMW got smoked. If the guy wasn't as good of a driver s the CTS-V drivers, TOUGH ****. Go take the time to become a better driver.

This is the most assinine logic I've ever heard. If it was an obvious publicity stunt why did you "humor" them by competing and getting smoked? You beat the privately owned CTS-Vs, good for you, but you still got smoked by better drivers. You lose. Last I checked racing is about winning, not about finishing 4th and complaining that the other drivers were "too good"



Sorry for the rant.

-m

TMC M5

I agree 100%...

Tom

TopGun32

you clearly missed the point.

Every racing event has different classes, you start from the bottom to the top drivers. Since you seem to know lots about motor racing. Look at Nascar or F1 or SCCA or any other form of racing.

My point again..

IF they were bracketed according to their driving experience & level or professional drivers.. the M3 won the event for the "entry level or enthusiast" class.


nobody is crying about an M3 loosing.. just pointing out the facts that "pros: vs "joes" took place in this event and the "joe" almost won.

the rest of your rant was just plain useless arguments.

TopGun32

Yup.. thank you!

You got my drift.

TopGun32

read more about the regular joe that almost beat the "pros"

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=316798

bobgodd

Yet they referred to the winning V's as "ringers"..... I guarantee you each one of those cars were showroom stock!