Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
ADM PERFORMANCE
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion

General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion Come chat about other cars.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-25-2008, 10:52 PM   #1
Caliman93230

 
Caliman93230's Avatar
 
Drives: LS3S/C
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: CALI
Posts: 1,347
2009 Cadillac CTS-V Runs 12.5-Second Quarter-Mile

Performance Tested: 2009 Cadillac CTS-V Runs 12.5-Second Quarter-Mile

Date posted: 08-25-2008
STORY TOOLS

MILFORD, Michigan — When Inside Line learned it would have access to a 2009 Cadillac CTS-V at GM's Michigan proving grounds, we packed up our portable Racelogic VBOX III testing gear and booked our staff hot-shoe on the next flight to Detroit.

After spending time behind the wheel of Cadillac's powerful new sport sedan, we weren't disappointed. The 2009 Cadillac CTS-V, equipped with a supercharged 556-horsepower 6.2-liter V8 and a six-speed manual transmission, accelerated from zero to 60 mph in 4.6 seconds (4.3 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and crossed the quarter-mile in 12.5 seconds at 115.3 mph.

That's a faster quarter-mile sprint than either the 500-hp 5.0-liter V10-equipped 2007 BMW M5 or the 507-hp 6.2-liter all-aluminum V8-equipped 2007 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG achieved. The two German super sedans both took 12.7 seconds to cross the quarter-mile marker and did so with trap speeds of roughly 113 mph.

The Caddy's braking distances and slalom speed were even more impressive. The CTS-V stopped from 60-0 mph in just 109 feet, bettering the M5 by 5 feet and the E63 AMG by 6 feet. The CTS-V also managed to break the 70 mph barrier in the slalom with a best run of 71.1 mph. The BMW M5 ran 68.5 mph, while the E63 only managed 65 mph.

Acceleration:
0-30 mph — 2.1 seconds
0-45 mph —3.2 seconds
0-60 mph — 4.6 seconds
0-75 mph — 6.3 seconds
1/4-mile — 12.5 seconds at 115.3 mph
0-60 mph with 1 foot of rollout — 4.3 seconds

Braking:
30-0 mph — 27 feet
60-0 mph —109 feet

Slalom (600 feet)— 71.1 mph

Skid pad lateral acceleration (200 feet) — 0.92g

What this means to you: GM product head Bob Lutz promised that this CTS-V would put the M5 on the trailer. According to our test numbers, he's right. — Kelly Toepke, News Editor

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...topanel..1.*#6
Attached Images
  
Caliman93230 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 11:04 PM   #2
Kyle2k
LVL 50 Troll Stomper
 
Kyle2k's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 3,257
The left picture seems so out of character for a Cadillac, but so right at the same time.
__________________
Kyle2k is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 11:16 PM   #3
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,775
OMG

I love this car for one very simple reason... LSA

Please, Please, Please GM. The Camaro just BEGS for a blown motor.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 11:17 PM   #4
storm79
 
storm79's Avatar
 
Drives: 2007 GMC Sierra
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 284
hmmmm i was expecting a little bit faster times from this car but still thats sweet
__________________
storm79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 11:28 PM   #5
headpunter
Not That sad..considering
 
headpunter's Avatar
 
Drives: Man
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: the part of washington the capital forgot about.
Posts: 3,784
Send a message via AIM to headpunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm79 View Post
hmmmm i was expecting a little bit faster times from this car but still thats sweet
ditto
headpunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 11:55 PM   #6
Camaro_Corvette
36.833283,-76.021958
 
Camaro_Corvette's Avatar
 
Drives: Team 1LE
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 23,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle2k View Post
The left picture seems so out of character for a Cadillac, but so right at the same time.
I can second that.
__________________
I hate parking threads...
Camaro_Corvette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 01:01 AM   #7
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
I was expecting faster acceleration and speed, but those handling and braking numbers more than make up for it. Woohoo!
__________________
"It's kind of fun to do the impossible" - Walt Disney

There's a great big beautiful tomorrow
shining at the end of every day
There's a great big beautiful tomorrow
Just a dream away
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 07:03 AM   #8
ihc95
 
ihc95's Avatar
 
Drives: BMW 335i E92
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 649
I was honestly expecting a sub-4 second 0-60 time. But I'll wait until a magazine tests it. Damn, 71.4 mph in the slalom! Thats as quick as a Murcielago.
ihc95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 07:38 AM   #9
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,775
I'm sorry guys, This car is a heavy a$$ 4 door luxury sedan. Those numbers are astounding.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 07:59 AM   #10
Hassena91
 
Hassena91's Avatar
 
Drives: 1993 Vw Golf Mk.III xD
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Gøbenhavn. Denmark
Posts: 23
Im not sure, but that car looks heavier than the camaro
__________________
Turns out that the new camaro lost her virginity
Hassena91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 08:23 AM   #11
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassena91 View Post
Im not sure, but that car looks heavier than the camaro
Of course it is, it's a Cadillac.

now all of you who think "it should be better" or "it's too heavy", read my sig, but apply it to ANY EFFING CAR ON THE MARKET. Why are people so damn retarded these days?
MerF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 08:37 AM   #12
Mblock66
 
Mblock66's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 Subaru Legacy GT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 313
Considering the Z06 can run 10.9 in completely stock form (ok maybe it was a freak but someone on the corvette forum did it with proof) with only 505 HP I am a little dissapointd with these figures as well. I know this car is WAY heavier then a Z06 but it gets 50 HP more which should eat a little of that difference up.

I would have thought at least 12.0. I guess that is nothing a tune and a pulley can't fix
Mblock66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 09:15 AM   #13
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mblock66 View Post
Considering the Z06 can run 10.9 in completely stock form (ok maybe it was a freak but someone on the corvette forum did it with proof) with only 505 HP I am a little dissapointd with these figures as well. I know this car is WAY heavier then a Z06 but it gets 50 HP more which should eat a little of that difference up.

I would have thought at least 12.0. I guess that is nothing a tune and a pulley can't fix
It is Much heavier than the z06,

And there is no way you can compare this car to a Z06. The Z06 is borderline super car. built to go fast, with comfort and luxury on a as needed basis.

The CTSV is a luxury car first with the performance stuff second. And it out performs many sports coupes... Compare it to a BMW or a Benz, not a vette.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 09:39 AM   #14
Ex-Cobra Guy
 
Drives: 2013 CTS-V Wagon & 2010 SS (hers)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
I'm sorry guys, This car is a heavy a$$ 4 door luxury sedan. Those numbers are astounding.
Although I like the new CTS-V, the Germans are just (almost) as quick while staying naturally aspirated. I too expected better numbers, but we'll have to wait for a "real" magazine test.
Ex-Cobra Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 10:04 AM   #15
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
OMG

I love this car for one very simple reason... LSA

Please, Please, Please GM. The Camaro just BEGS for a blown motor.
LSA LSA LSA!!!

I know that car can go faster in people who know how to drive in a straight line, or that aren't try to test on a gravel-topped street. I bet, we'll see tests where it goes top-11s, bone stock, on a good strip. Grr...
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 10:27 AM   #16
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex-Cobra Guy View Post
Although I like the new CTS-V, the Germans are just (almost) as quick while staying naturally aspirated. I too expected better numbers, but we'll have to wait for a "real" magazine test.
NA yes, But the compression ratios are so high that there is little room for added power with out making big and spensive changes to the motor.


Now if you aren't an aftermarket upgrade kinda person then the high CR makes little difference.

But being Blown with a lower CR leaves the door open for ZR1 LS9 power numbers with low cost mods. For me that's part of the appeal.
GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 10:30 AM   #17
JEFF2010SSMANUAL
JEFF2010SSMANUAL
 
JEFF2010SSMANUAL's Avatar
 
Drives: IOM 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 1,953
This article NEEDS to be POSTED on the 1ADDICTS BMW FORUM. They ALL think GM can't make a car that handles as good as a BMW. A bunch of JackA$$es.

The Camaro SS should handle awesome!!!


Watch out BMW, HAHA
JEFF2010SSMANUAL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 10:33 AM   #18
Sizzox
Most Known Unknown
 
Sizzox's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Vette
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salem, Ohio
Posts: 820
Send a message via AIM to Sizzox
Quote:
Originally Posted by JEFF2010SSMANUAL View Post
This article NEEDS to be POSTED on the 1ADDICTS BMW FORUM. They ALL think GM can't make a car that handles as good as a BMW. A bunch of JackA$$es.

The Camaro SS should handle awesome!!!


Watch out BMW, HAHA
have they not heard of a vette yet alone a zr-1
Sizzox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 10:40 AM   #19
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
NA yes, But the compression ratios are so high that there is little room for added power with out making big and spensive changes to the motor.


Now if you aren't an aftermarket upgrade kinda person then the high CR makes little difference.

But being Blown with a lower CR leaves the door open for ZR1 LS9 power numbers with low cost mods. For me that's part of the appeal.


ZR1 power, at the tires
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 10:54 AM   #20
AirGoya

 
AirGoya's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 Camaro SS
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago/Carbondale
Posts: 815
If you told someone 10 years ago that a cadillac sedan in the future will be faster than a m5 or AMG and do the 1/4 mile in 12.5, they would laugh at you.

THIS IS AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
-Tim

AirGoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 12:17 PM   #21
nfamous209
 
Drives: 2002 Camaro z28
Join Date: May 2008
Location: patterson, ca
Posts: 413
Send a message via AIM to nfamous209 Send a message via Yahoo to nfamous209
the trap speed calls for faster then 12.5 imo. i see this car hitting high 11's stock form.
nfamous209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 02:29 PM   #22
Mblock66
 
Mblock66's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 Subaru Legacy GT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
It is Much heavier than the z06,

And there is no way you can compare this car to a Z06. The Z06 is borderline super car. built to go fast, with comfort and luxury on a as needed basis.

The CTSV is a luxury car first with the performance stuff second. And it out performs many sports coupes... Compare it to a BMW or a Benz, not a vette.
You can absolutely compare it to the Z06. The Z06 is the "detuned" version of this car, or in other words the CTS is a Detuned version of the ZR1.

When you are talking straight line performance only and you are comparing two vehicles with the same engine and trans it basically comes down to weight and suspension.

Now with 50 extra horses over the N/A Z06 but probably 1000 lbs more I still wouldn't have guessed this car to be over 1.5 seconds slower through the traps. With the Zr1 projected to go low 10's I would have thought more of this but I won't give up on it yet. Wait until a real magazine can abuse one.

As I predicted above at least 12.0 if not 11.6-11.7
Mblock66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 02:44 PM   #23
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,775
CTS-V curb weight. 4300
Z06 curb weight. 3180

So, a 30% increase in weight vs, only a 10% increase in power. Plus the added benefits of all the HiPo suspension gearing and drive train of the Z06 makes for a fair comparison?

And the Z06 is A LS7 normally aspirated motor

While the CTS V is a LSA supercharged motor, Yes they are both Gen 4 motors, but that's about where the similarities end.

So, really when you lay it all out if they can get the numbers you predict then I certainly won't complain. All I'm saying is for what the CTSV is, to even be as close as it is to the Z06 is incredible.

GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 03:10 PM   #24
Mblock66
 
Mblock66's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 Subaru Legacy GT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
CTS-V curb weight. 4300
Z06 curb weight. 3180

So, a 30% increase in weight vs, only a 10% increase in power. Plus the added benefits of all the HiPo suspension gearing and drive train of the Z06 makes for a fair comparison?

And the Z06 is A LS7 normally aspirated motor

While the CTS V is a LSA supercharged motor, Yes they are both Gen 4 motors, but that's about where the similarities end.

So, really when you lay it all out if they can get the numbers you predict then I certainly won't complain. All I'm saying is for what the CTSV is, to even be as close as it is to the Z06 is incredible.


Well if you don't think that is fair then even comparing it to a regular LS3 with 430 HP. Both are 6.2's one is supercharged to make 120 more HP.

Yet the LS3 has run 11.7 showroom stock.

Now the coupe is about 3300 lbs which makes it 7.67 lbs per HP
The CTS V is 4300 lbs which makes it 7.73 lbs per HP

Basically identical from that aspect. Yet it shouldn't be almost 8 tenths slower. Compare what you will, these engines don't have that much not in common. There are may similarities between the LSX engines
Mblock66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2008, 03:40 PM   #25
GTAHVIT
One Lucky Guy.
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: #22 Tom Henry Racing 2010 2SS/RS
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,775
Hey fair enough,

CTSV 550hp / 4300lbs = 0.127906976744 Power to Weight Ratio

Z06 505hp / 3180lbs = 0.158805031447 Power to Weight Ratio

LS3 Vette 430 / 3300 = 0.130303030303

Edit:
I just realized you meant the LS3 not the LS7 in your last post. added above

That is a huge difference.

No biggie. And I think you are forgetting to account for the vastly improved suspension on a corvette.

But, I'm in no way trying to pick a fight. I'd love to see the V hit the numbers you suggest.

GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Press Release: GM to Bolster Liquidity by $15 Billion through 2009 Mr. Wyndham General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 6 07-17-2008 12:42 PM
CADILLAC IS BACK... Scotsman General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 17 06-01-2008 12:36 AM
The new CTS V for 2009!!! LSA GMHTP...READ THIS. TAG UR IT General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 15 04-01-2008 09:21 PM
Cadillac CTS-V!!!! (oh, and the 6.2L LSA...) Mr. Wyndham General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 11 03-11-2008 12:18 PM
2008 Cadillac CTS KILLER74Z28 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 4 01-13-2007 04:21 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.