Hammer Down

It was entertaining, and even though they are no longer made it would have been nice to see the CTS-V run against a E55!

Yuille36

Did you see how PT jump the start for the 0-100-0 drag race. I have to say this, although I'm not a fan of Cadillac. The New CTS-V is nice inside and out, and with a monster powerplant. The 556 hp just killed the the E63, and it was an unfair advantage. The car had 40 more hp, then the E63. Besides being Supercharged versus NA. I wished that the E63 had a AMG Performance Package on it, for a power increase. Sometimes, it's not up to the skill of the driver, put up to the hp and torque of the car.
And Cadillac definitely has that going on in the New CTS-V. But I was rooting for the E63 the whole time, even though it was dis-advanteged. They should have put the Corvette ZR-1 up against the SLS AMG, now that would have been a test.

Vic55

I saw that jump too- PT got a solid bump... The AMG performance package doesnt give the W212 anymore power unfortunately. I was watching it in a bar and just kept drinking.

Jakpro1

Would have been a whole different story, til the 55 hit a corner of course.

citylightva

For an over $30K less, mass produced pony car I was very impressed with that comparo....

tasho3

ahh the caddy jumped the start and the 0-100-0 you could tell Foust was not braking really hard as the tires didnt squeal at all. rubbish but entertaining

TMC M5

Guys, I hate to break this to you...but the jump that PT got has nothing to do with how the run is timed with the vbox GPS timing equipment. The timing doesn't get started until the car takes off. So Tanner's time didn't start until his car started moving. They could have left 15 minutes apart and the times would have been the same. Kind of how at the track, the ET doesn't take into account the reaction time. It is a TV show....the more made up controversy and back and forth banter are entertaining...but not accurate.

Jackpro...not sure posting the absolute worst ET by a new CTS-V's pitted against an E55 with drag radials (did you notice the rear wheels in the video) is representative of anything.

Tom

MB_Forever

+1 I was about to post the same point about the GPS timing. The GPS will start timing only when the car starts to move so it doesn't really matter who gets the jump.

I was hoping the E63 would do a little better than it did, but ah well.... there is always the new TT version coming out next year

nardeezy@yahoo.

Based on that show, it's either driver dependency or Mercedes AMG will need to go back to the drawing board. By far, the CTS-V outperformed the AMG! If I had to choose between those two cars (brand new), I would definitely pick the CTS-V because it's a way better value.

mikey33

I think the driver has an influence on who wins especially when we are talking tenths of a second. I seen a few episodes yesterday for the first time and Foust got beat on almost all tests. I do concede though you get a lot of power for money from the Cadillac, but who wants to drive a Cadi???

W211 BEAST

I will admit, the CTS-V, the Corvette and the Camaro are all looking very appealing for the price.

cahiil55k

I've seen worse times from a CTS-V in person due to traction issues but the trap speed always stays consistent around 115, which says alot about power. I don't want to start magazine racing but here are some similar traps:

Edmunds: 12.4 at 114.7
Insideline: 12.4 at 115
Car and Driver: 12.6 at 116
Motorweek: 12.7 at 115
Motor Trend: 12.3 at 117

This is just to show that not everyone will be running 12 flat and trapping 119's in their CTS-V, nor would we expect everyone here with a 55 to run high 11's just because a few stock 55s have done so.

Hammer Down

High 11's? I'm shooting for 11.6x@122 that's almost mid 11's

TMC M5

I didn't dispute the trap speed...just the ET. On one of my first times out, I ran a 13 second ET in my CL65 on stock tires...thank God I wasn't running against a rival car on that run (say an M6) and being video taped. Otherwise I would have been "proof" that M6's are faster than CL65's.

My point was also the E55 is running on drag radials...a huge advantage. Is that the only mod on the E55? The CTS-V driver also looked to be having problems with shifting...which unlike traction issues will slow down the trap speed. I think since CTS-V's are offered with a manual there is also greater chance for bigger variances in 1/4 mile performance. True most stock CTS-V's average around 115mph trap speed (they range from 112 to 121mph), but stock E55's also range from 110 to 121mph on dragtimes:

http://www.dragtimes.com/compare2.ph...onName=Compare!

Tom

cahiil55k

Haha...your car is beastly stock. If I made that kind of power in stock form I'd be hesitant to modify it.

TMC M5, your point is well taken. I think we are probably thinking along the same lines though. These 500hp+ saloons perform similarly, in the straights anyway.

Hammer Down

The 121mph is not normal for 99.9% for the stock E55's out there. THe range is more like 112-118. I also need to update drag times and post up the 11.701@121.8 that Alan mustard up in my car

Believe me I gone back and forth many times on whether to mod or not to mod I've learn a ton over the last 3yrs and I have a few mods in mind that I think may help my the car most. I may not run 10's once I'm done but that's ok, that's what friends are for

TMC M5

Absolutely!

Probably the biggest difference is the cost of mods....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yIXf...layer_embedded

The mods (no-Nitrous) of the CTS-V in that video probably cost around $10K (including labor a wheels/drag radials).

Tom

Hammer Down

CTS-V 10.5's