Agent001 I like to go top shelf, where Mama hides the cookies
	View My AgentSpace

60

The new Cadillac CTS-V is hot, but can it really compete against the M3, IS-F, RS4, etc.?

Agent001 submitted on 01/09/2008 Official AutoSpies Timestamp: 11:22 AM
from: www.autospies.com

[104] user comments | category: Report Cards

Print this Page | Digg It | del.icio.us

Tags: 2008 Detroit uto Show, 2009 Cadillac CTS-V, BMW M3, Lexus IS-F, Audi RS4

Tag Links: 2008 Detroit uto Show, 2009 Cadillac CTS-V, BMW M3, Lexus IS-F, Audi RS4

The new Cadillac CTS-V is hot, but can it really compete against the M3, IS-F, RS4, etc.?

Comments:

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters):
[img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent004.myautospies.com/users/150/Sample-Gallery/sample1.JPG[/img]

r15mohd - 1/9/2008 11:29:28 AM

+13 Boost

i think we are underestimating it's potential...i see this as an m5/rs6/e-amg fighter


my opinion is that this will be comparable with the vehicles i mentioned above)rs6/e-amg/m5) and ahead of the vehciles you've mentioned (m3/isf/rs4/c-amg)

reply to this comment

Autoegr525 - 1/9/2008 12:52:58 PM

+6 Boost

Agreed. The CTS-V leapfrogs that whole category and competes directly with the big boys.

KillBot - 1/9/2008 2:02:06 PM

+8 Boost

I'm with you. The cars in mention maybe in the same price range as the CTS-V but not the same physical category. For the size and power, under the hood, the CTS-V must be compared to the M5, E63, and the RS6. And if the CTS-V can come even close to these car, never mind beating them(which I hope it does) it will be the best luxury sports sedan, for you money, on the entire planet. And that alone will deserve a standing ovation. But right now this is all speculations, we have to wait, like children in December, for out comparison presents.

pacotacolol - 1/9/2008 3:34:33 PMView My AgentSpace

+3 Boost

I'm pretty sure with what GM has been churing out [malibu, g8, ect.] this car will be more than successful.

DaHarder - 1/9/2008 3:36:10 PM

+7 Boost

Of course it (successfully) comptete's in a different size/performance class than those vehicles listed in the topic, but there are those who would argue to the contrary...

IN VAIN!

MrGunFun - 1/9/2008 11:47:10 AMView My AgentSpace

Show Comment -28 Boost

The simple answer is No.

its rubbish, its american, its too plain.

reply to this comment

EL34 - 1/9/2008 11:51:03 AM

-3 Boost

I remember during WWII when it was the USA that had to pick up all our gear up and move it to North Africa, France and Italy to get rid of Hitler.

You Euros didn't stand a chance.

Of course we had to do the same for Asia to defeat the Imperial Japanese.

Hwany - 1/9/2008 11:57:27 AM

+6 Boost

WOW EL34.... nice history lesson.haha..

RealitySmack - 1/9/2008 12:27:18 PM

+6 Boost

@EL34. If that is your reason for not liking certain automakers than why do you support the German 3 all the time and bash the Asians? We fought both of them. Now, you're bad mouthing both of them and praising American.

TheSailor - 1/9/2008 12:27:46 PMView My AgentSpace

-6 Boost

But EL, you are forgetting the most important part:

During WWII, you only succeeded with the help of "Stalin and the commies" over there in Russia

M35MT - 1/9/2008 1:24:31 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

We got rid of them afterwards, Sailor.

EL34 - 1/9/2008 4:26:42 PM

-1 Boost

TheSailor, if I recall the Soviets did not liberate a single country during WWII other than fight for the Soviet Union.

In fact, when the war was over they got half of Germany and turned it into a craphole, while West Germany whet on to total success.

1995e34 - 1/9/2008 4:33:52 PM

+1 Boost

i don't think Sailor was necessarily promoting Russia as much as taking a swipe at the misconception that America solely won ww2. you guys are taking his comments way too far.

EL34 - 1/9/2008 5:07:54 PM

-2 Boost

1995e34, I'm just saying the Soviets lost 23 million people during WWII just fighting on their front lines and the USA lost 418,500 liberating countries all over the world.

The people of the world should get down and shine our shoes and buy our cars for what we did.

1995e34 - 1/9/2008 6:01:14 PM

+1 Boost

23 million is huge.

EL34 - 1/9/2008 9:23:40 PM

-1 Boost

GoObama08, the Democrats during WWII decided to drop two atomic bombs and they killed 200 thousand people.

Did you know 20 million Chinese people died during WWII because of the Imperial Japanese?

And many of those Soviets died because of that free communist healthcare that didn't work.

EL34 - 1/9/2008 9:30:32 PM

-1 Boost

GoObama08, America killed more than any country since WWII!

I guess you don't remember what happend after the Vietnam war and the Pol Pot Massacre in Cambodia.

How about that war the Soviets had with Afghanistan or the Iran vs. Iraq war.

Let us not forget Rwanda and Darfur.

EL34 - 1/9/2008 10:02:52 PM

-1 Boost

GoObama08, if we get free healthcare in the USA, where will all the rich Canadians go to get their healthcare?

EL34 - 1/9/2008 10:05:56 PM

-1 Boost

Another thing GoObama08, how about that Vladimir Putin, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez? They're all multi-billionaires!

Those are great "social" programs those countries have ;-)

Hwany - 1/9/2008 11:59:37 AM

+9 Boost

lol this car will just put IS-F to shame.

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 1/9/2008 2:57:05 PM

0 Boost

gm is on track to retake the global sales lead as well as have some of the most desirable vehicles world wide. NOBODY else is doing both.

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 1/9/2008 5:32:31 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

1995e34... they still ARE #1 on a global scale. Toyota only had it for about a quarter of 2007.

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 1/10/2008 6:05:23 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/26/toyota-hopes-for-top-worldwide-sales-again/

reply to this comment

no1listensanyway - 1/9/2008 10:38:04 PMView My AgentSpace

-1 Boost

Yeah I think this V will help out.

reply to this comment

Hwany - 1/9/2008 11:58:52 AM

+4 Boost

For the price of RS4/M3/C63 amg, this car has a performance that could beat/even with RS6/M5/E63AMG.

For the first time, I really like how this car loooks inside and out. With that performance, this is another bargain!

reply to this comment

BMW995 - 1/9/2008 12:05:20 PM

+6 Boost

Do the math. 550 bhp with the weight of this car, will have explosive acceleration. It probably will handle well too. Will beat the M5 and RS4 to 60 and 100 mph.
Unfortunately, the last generation CTS-V had some horrendous quality issues. I hope Cadillac fixes them this time around.

reply to this comment

SilverAero - 1/9/2008 5:51:07 PM

0 Boost

I'm sure they've addressed the quality issues, GM knows how much is banking on this car.

JRobUSC - 1/9/2008 12:13:56 PM

-1 Boost

Interior is great, power is great, but why why why did Cadillac do that to the front bumper? Now it looks just like the previous generation CTS. The exterior of the new CTS was one of its strongest features, why would you purposely make your more expensive new version look just like the old one?

reply to this comment

courtstone - 1/9/2008 1:42:55 PM

+5 Boost

are you serious?

reply to this comment

SilverAero - 1/9/2008 2:07:27 PM

+1 Boost

I dare you to logically justify that statement

reply to this comment

mmmpowr - 1/9/2008 3:05:04 PM

0 Boost

LOL, nothing? How about 550hp CTS-V vs. only 420hp for the IS-F!

reply to this comment

RealitySmack - 1/9/2008 8:59:08 PM

0 Boost

^^^LMAO!!


reply to this comment

OBAMAtheIDIOT - 1/10/2008 8:14:07 PM

0 Boost

I bet GoObama08 is really Oprah!

reply to this comment

Whelan - 1/9/2008 12:52:05 PM

+1 Boost

Let's not forget that this car has something the others don't. MRC (Magnetic Ride Control), which gives handling abilities that are typically reserved for ultra luxo, exotics. Therefore we can expect handling to be quite adequate to compete or even beat these cars. And with the numbers it has up in the hp community, the M3, RS4, IS-F are all nice cars, but are under the 450hp mark. So that would put this in competition with the M5 and the like. Even though Caddy kinda created its own class with the CTS.

reply to this comment

SilverAero - 1/9/2008 2:10:43 PM

+2 Boost

Ferrari has MRC right?

chuck717 - 1/9/2008 1:03:12 PM

+1 Boost

Sailor> No question Russia fought like tigers to protect their homeland they suffered great losses, but just one question Sailor, if America needed vital help anywhere in the world something tells me we could count on several of our friends in a flash and Russia would have to think about it, but if Russia needed our help we would be there in a NY sec, that is the difference?

reply to this comment

M35MT - 1/9/2008 1:26:03 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

I see the photo...but what the stats? The corvette's powerplant?

reply to this comment

Bmw8ter - 1/9/2008 2:31:56 PM

0 Boost

With respect to price, it will compete with the M3, RS4, and the IS-F(I'd say the C63, but I think that goes for around $85k).

With Respect to weight and performance, it will compete with the M5, E63, and RS6 Avant.

It pretty much competes across the board; there really isn't specific line-up that it goes against. But, as powerful as it will be, this beast is an absolute porker; it's gained 250lbs-350lbs from the previous CTS-V. Hopefully the magnetic suspension and wide tires will offset it's heftiness.

reply to this comment

jasaero - 1/9/2008 3:01:16 PM

0 Boost

Thinks it's still going to have a lb/hp advantage on every car available when it hits the street. Only real problem is it will mostly be added to the front of the car! The RS6 is the only car that might have a similar lb/hp number, but is also even MORE of a porker and probably even more front weighted!! The AWD on the RS6 might help it, but the CTS-V is going to have the MRC and launch management to help it. In the end I think the CTS will for sure have a less of a comfort to performance trade off than any of it's competition based mostly on being the only MRC extreme performance Lux sedan.

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 1/9/2008 5:34:52 PMView My AgentSpace

-1 Boost

"(I'd say the C63, but I think that goes for around $85k)."

Huh? The much larger, more powerful E63 AMG is $85K! The C63 probably won't be any more than $65,000! The C55 was under 60!

reply to this comment

Bmw8ter - 1/9/2008 5:54:18 PM

+1 Boost

The C63AMG starts at $68k. Maybe $85k was a little high, but once they hit dealers, they'll probably be going for around $75k-$80k, with options already equipped.

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 1/9/2008 8:10:32 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

No way. It will probably come with about 2 options. I am stunned that it's $14,000 more than the C55 AMG... if that's true. Because that's not on the MBUSA website.

reply to this comment

Bmw8ter - 1/9/2008 11:51:09 PM

+1 Boost

This is how I came up with the figure(I actually went back and it was a little lower). I compared UK pounds to U.S. dollars. I reviewed previous AMG model pricing in the UK to the same model in the U.S. and averaged about a 25% difference between the 2 figures; it ranged from about 21% to 28%. I tacked 25% onto the UK pricing for the C63 of 51,300 pounds. That's $64,125.00.

Give or take, I'd say the C63 pricing in the U.S. will range from $64k-$68k. The % difference in the lesser models wasn't relative to the higher performance models. The methodology makes sense, but you'd have to spend a little more time than I did, researching.

reply to this comment

M_Coupe_MonacoBlue - 1/9/2008 1:57:50 PM

-3 Boost

They should put 4 tailpipe.

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 1/9/2008 3:03:32 PM

+1 Boost

what for? there's only 2 banks of cylinders.

Bmw8ter - 1/9/2008 7:11:03 PM

0 Boost

wow....if that logic isn't flawed, SEVERELY.

SilverAero - 1/9/2008 2:21:00 PM

+2 Boost

Can't wait to see this on Top Gear, Clarkson will praise it the entire time, say how its miles better than the first one then in the end he'll trash it despite it all. Should be good tv

reply to this comment

vonbeeler - 1/9/2008 3:51:22 PM

+2 Boost

Where do you see Top Gear? It used to be on Time Warner in San Diego. Loved it but can't find anymore.

Yes Ferrari 599 has MRC licensed from GM. I'm not sure if on other products.

pushrod27 - 1/9/2008 4:01:11 PM

+2 Boost

Does your cable/satellite operator carry the BBC America channel? That's where you can see Top Gear. Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares is pretty good too.

vonbeeler - 1/9/2008 4:16:18 PM

+2 Boost

Yes I'm sure I've got BBC America. Will check it out.
Thanks a lot. I've been barely surviving with Motorweek magazine on Speed channnel. Doesn't come close to Top Gear Except I like Jessica Chotski.
Thanks

SilverAero - 1/9/2008 5:46:25 PM

0 Boost

I just watch them as they come up on youtube

Porschinator - 1/9/2008 2:38:02 PM

0 Boost

As R15 stated. The V is looking at the M5, E-AMG, RS6 and not what is mentioned above. Not a good comparison. Top Gear will tear it apart when everyone else will love it...lol.

It will pack the same power plant as the ZR1 but with a smaller Supercharger and a single brick intercooler. NICE for a Luxury sedan!

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 1/9/2008 3:04:28 PM

0 Boost

i have a feeling clarkson will like this one.

SevorbeupstryIsBack - 1/9/2008 4:34:23 PM

+1 Boost

holy shit this is insane

i suppose this is a M5/E63 competitor?

reply to this comment

cdoke - 1/9/2008 4:37:34 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

Well, since I am bored and have little to do, I calculated power-to-weight ratios as a sort of cursory analysis. These figures are for the manual transmission where available.

CTS-V (2009)
550 hp/4200 lbs = .13095 hp/lb => 7.6363 lb/hp
*Weight from leftlanenews

M3 (new body style)
420 hp/ 3700 lbs(est.)= .12353 hp/lb => 8.0952 lb/hp
*Weight from Autoweek

IS-F
416 hp/ 3780 lbs =.11005 hp/lb => 9.0865 lb/hp
Edmunds Inside Line Full Test

RS4 (2008)
420 hp/ 3957 lbs =.10614 hp/lb => 9.4214 lb/hp
*Audi USA website

C-AMG (2008)
450 hp/ 3800 lbs= .11053 hp/lb => 9.0476 lb/hp
*Motor Trend Review

For the heck of it:

M5 (2008)
500 hp/ 4012 lbs=.12462 hp/lb => 8.0240 lb/hp
*BMW website

E-AMG(2008)
507 hp/ 4035 lbs= .12565 hp/lb => 7.9586 lb/hp
*Mercedes website

So, yes given this information the CTS-V has the best power-to-weight ratio

reply to this comment

cdoke - 1/9/2008 4:40:31 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

Oh hell,

The M3 figure was for an outdated 3400 lb. figure from a year ago. The number is right, but the math is wrong. So it should be as follows:

M3 (new body style)
420 hp/ 3700 lbs(est.)= .11351 hp/lb => 8.8095 lb/hp
*Weight from Autoweek

S4cabriofoxone - 1/9/2008 5:52:11 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

The C63 AMG weighs more than 3800lbs. It also weighs more than the RS4... I clearly remember the C/D article comparing it, the M3 and the RS4, in which they were extremely surprised by its high weight:

"However, resorting to 55-percent-more engine displacement and 50-percent-more torque than the M3 to make the two-ton C63 outrun the BMW, which is lighter by 463 pounds, may indeed generate grins, but not admiration as an engineering marvel. How can the Benz weigh 220 more pounds than an Audi burdened by its heavy all-wheel drive?"

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/14279/2008-mercedes-benz-c63-amg.html

cdoke - 1/9/2008 6:01:42 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

All I know is that it came from here:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0709_2008_mercedes_benz_c63_amg/driving_dynamics.html

cdoke - 1/9/2008 6:02:18 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

Uh...here:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/
112_0709_2008_mercedes_benz_c63_amg/driving_dynamics.html

cdoke - 1/9/2008 6:26:43 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

The Car and Driver Comparison says 4034lbs

or .11155 hp/lb or 8.9644 lb/hp.

S4cabriofoxone - 1/9/2008 8:11:29 PMView My AgentSpace

0 Boost

It also says a different weight for the RS4--a lower one.

Could Audi's spec be wrong? I guess.

jasaero - 1/9/2008 8:42:16 PM

+1 Boost

Lets not forget also that the 550hp number and weight is an estimate and not SAE numbers or actual final config weight. It could be conservative or maybe not. If conservative things could be lighter and more powerful come april when they announce final numbers. My guess though is weight is close or a bit wishful and power is conservative as they don't want to look like they over promised. With the new SAE power spec you really can't say a power and then mess to get it. This I think has most being conservative if they haven't got final SAE cert on the power. I am guessing it will be between 555 and 565 final SAE numbers or something like that.

SevorbeupstryIsBack - 1/10/2008 11:07:21 AM

0 Boost

they're all overweight

garrafa - 1/9/2008 5:09:35 PM

-4 Boost

Impressive for GM, but it's supercharged!

Remember the M5 or M3 or just naturally aspirated (N/A) therefore, if we supercharged an M3 or M5, that cadi would be left in the dust.
I can easily see an M3 supercharged pushing 550 bhp or more.
A supercharged M5 could be pushing 650 easily, so lets compare apples to apples please!!

Nice effort GM, but the Germans still rule.

Second thought: Cadi does not have the prestige that Benz or BMW have, and that can't be designed or engineered in.... it is earned, and it will take GM decades or maybe never to get the same prestige....

3rd thought: Interior design has many parts I recognize from cheap GM cars like G6 or Malibu, they still have that bean counter mentality, if they are really serious, they should share parts (parts that are visible at least) with their bread and butter people movers for the masses....

my three very heavy cents, cheers!

reply to this comment

Bmw8ter - 1/9/2008 8:04:57 PM

+2 Boost

Who the hell would supercharge a V10 car? If by chance you were able to fit one in there, the heat generated from the tight area, would destroy the engine.

Discplacement

kablaam - 1/10/2008 11:15:04 AM

+2 Boost

They slap twin turbos on a V12, why not?

garrafa - 1/9/2008 5:11:09 PM

-1 Boost

i mean NOT share visible parts with cheaper GM models.... i.e. window switches, tahoe steering wheel! etc....

reply to this comment

vonbeeler - 1/9/2008 5:56:19 PM

+2 Boost

I noticed my 07 S600 shares visible parts with the new C class and even some Chrysler product. I'm impressed with what GM is doing. Especially in light of the crap they used to make. So much so I bought a Vette. Today I rented a Z06. I don't think anybody logically can discount that its a monster. I like the CTS especially with 550 blown or not. Hell my v-12 has twin turbos and its 510hp. And all the new BMW's are coming turbo.

Porschinator - 1/9/2008 8:38:04 PM

+3 Boost

hey garrafa do you have an article regarding parts sharing with Cadillac CTS and Chevy Tahoe? Liek to see that. Show me links on the Cadi's sterring wheel pic and the Tahoe's steering wheels pic. I do not see a comparison. Please show us =)

Oh wait, you were just being lame...sorry never mind...

Need4Speed - 1/9/2008 5:44:01 PM

0 Boost

Great...raw meet for the hungry fanboys!

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 1/9/2008 5:53:41 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

Great car!

reply to this comment

KillBot - 1/9/2008 6:43:02 PM

+1 Boost

Why is it, that when we start talking about cars, do we get into these racial debates? As apposed to looking at the vehicle in question "as is"? I like cars from all over the world because they're all different. They drive differently, feel differently but there's something to like about them. Yes, I have my favorites. But, I don't base them to where they're made. THAT'S JUST STUPID!!! Most of you would call yourselves "car enthusiasts", well start acting like it. And stop acting like a bunch of squabling children. Can't we stay focused and talk about the car in question without going out on tangents that have nothing to do with the vehicle in question. In short "ACTED LIKE YOU GOT SOME DAMN SENSE!!!"

Killbot out

reply to this comment

AMGC55 - 1/9/2008 9:12:01 PM

+3 Boost

this car is pretty sick for the price... and all... plus remember you cant get a 6 speed manual with a E63... this car is gunna be hella fun to drive mad in

reply to this comment

1995e34 - 1/9/2008 10:52:44 PM

+1 Boost

oh, we remember.

keyzi747 - 1/9/2008 9:13:21 PM

+4 Boost

To those who are bashing this car, give the credit where it is due. Caddy and GM have delivered a very pleasant surprise with this new CTSV. As much as we would like to argue otherwise we really can't! So much for that M5 I was going to purchase. I will wait for this instead.

reply to this comment

utahnkid - 1/9/2008 9:14:56 PM

+2 Boost

I'm with everyone else. I think it competes with the M5's and such. The suspension alone is (correct me if I'm wrong) the only one in it's class with anything that advanced.

reply to this comment

no1listensanyway - 1/9/2008 10:47:34 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

I love how ppl compare the CTS to different classes when its convenient to them. When its a regular comparo its always compared to the C, G and 3. When it comes to the CTS-V, everyone compares it to the E63, M5 and whatever Audi makes in that class.

reply to this comment

jasaero - 1/10/2008 6:55:17 AM

+1 Boost

It's all in the fact the car is priced a segment down from the size of car it's gunning for. I think eventually Cadillac will creep the price upto that of the 5 series and others as people realize car's like the 5, E, GS, M, and A/S/RS6 really have nothing on this car other than a higher price a few more available features. I think it will eventually match them feature for feature also. I actually wouldn't be surprise if Adaptive cruise and lane departure warning weren't added one or two models years from now.

phantom330 - 1/10/2008 11:50:02 AM

+1 Boost

how does discussing a car spawn into a history of world wars?

Anywho, I hate to admit it but I actually kind of like the CTS-V. Can't say I would ever buy one, but I think it's a great effort by GM to bring something exciting into this segment.

reply to this comment

OBAMAtheIDIOT - 1/10/2008 8:10:35 PM

-1 Boost

nice car - I'd stick to cloning the C6's motor tho.

reply to this comment

OBAMAtheIDIOT - 1/10/2008 8:11:47 PM

0 Boost

.....but they need to keep the price REASONABLE!!!!

reply to this comment

FerrarisR4me - 1/12/2008 3:10:32 AM

0 Boost

This thing is bad ass. It looks awesome and its powerful as hell. Wish I could afford one.

reply to this comment

racedogs - 1/12/2008 2:13:49 PM

+3 Boost