Cadillac CTS-V Destroys Them All At N-Ring With A 7:59!

What proof do you have of what you say? You think you see Sparco seats because of the writing, but where are the big f'n holes in the seat? Also, did you happen to notice the back seat head rests? If they took the time to remove a whoppin 50 lbs with the front seats don't you think they'd take out the back seats too? Your logic is seriously flawed and your coming off as a jerk. Go buy a lambo and shut the hell up already.

 

It has different seats and a cage. All cars that run the ring have a cage which the weight easily makes up for to the weight taken away by the different seats. Its not like this car has a modded motor with a pulley and different exhaust.

 

Because changing a seat doesn't compare to changing suspension and adding power now does it?

 

As I said, how can you compare changing a seat to changing suspension settings and adding power?

ANYONE with half a brain can figure out a car with over 100 horsepower less and a few hundred more pounds of weight couldn't run the same time as a CGT now could it?

 

Read one post above and tell me how it runs the same time as a CGT with so much more weight and so much less power, THEN maybe you will have a point.

 

111.6 is HORRIBLE for a 11.6. A stock C6 runs better then that....

 

It's a lost cause with the GTR fanboys....

 

What benefit is a cage if you can't run seatbelts in the car? The CTS-V doesn't have a separate headrest, making the seats a necessity if you're going to wear harnesses.

I'm fine with whatever time they run as long as it's limited to safety modifications.

 

I am surprised the venom thats spewing out of the GTR fans on a thread about a Cadillac.

I never would have thought the cadillac is a threat to the all conquering AWD GTR.

Two very different vehicles.

I have an 08 CTS and its a great vehicle. Had the CTS V been available with its 567 hp supercharged V8 along with AWD I would have bought that instead of the AWD 304hp FE2 CTS I purchased last october.

Really a great vehicle and I am sure the CTS V series will be even more impressive.

The fact that it laps the "ring" under 8 seconds is cool. Owning the car for the street even more so.

For the 60 odd grand that GM will charge for this car....anyone considering a rwd sports sedan in that price range should give the CTS V a look.

Thanks for posting the information.

JB

 

Do I have proof? Yes. All you have to do is look at the picture. Stop being a moron like some others and actually look at the damn picture and the seat I posted. It's the same seat, a Sparco Evo 3. If you can't see it in the larger picture, then that's your fault. I know for a fact I'm right.

Or you can try and prove me wrong, and show me it isn't a Sparco Evo 3 seat. Hell, I can even see the holes in this picture.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/05/ctsv_greenhell1280.jpg

Because as we all know already, the GT-R is underrated. It has much more power than GT-R is claiming. The suspension technology underneath it as well, is just amazing.

 

So you admit they lied? And it must big a big lie, to the tune of at least 150 horsepower. At least on the 'Ring car, the customer cars at least here in the USA are underperforming to say the least on the track so far....

 

not "much" under rated ... if they are only trapping @ 111-116 mph...

that said... it wouldn't surprise me if the GTR has some form of automated "overboost" mode in the lower gears

 

If there was an overboost mode it would trap more then 111. I cannot see the car that trapped 111 being the same car that put down a 7.28. Theres no way you could run an 11.60 with a car that traps 111 unless you are having like a 1.4 60. I just dont see that car hooking anywhere even close to that good maybe high 1.5's oor low 1.6's. Hell a C5Z06 has traped 117.

 

a 7k clutch drop 07 STi will run 1.2 0-30 mph.... granted, it only weighs 3200 lbs.

a c6 Z will 0-30 in 1.7 if i remember right.... with the right driver... the STi's gearbox wont last long with 7k clutch drops

 

A very good friend of me has a 04 STI, very cool car there neat as hell too. A local guy ran a 13.1 with a stock 07 sti and a 1.7 60 time. I cant see this car beating more then a 1.6 60 foot time. But thats just IMO.

 

What, you're actually surprised the car is underrated? FYI bud, the Japanese have been doing that for over a decade. Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Honda, they all lied about the horsepower during the Gentlemen's Agreement. And they still do it til' this day.

And do you have any proof that customer GT-Rs in the US are under performing? You more than likely don't, unless you're talking about a different car because as far as we all know, Nissan hasn't really delivered any GT-Rs to the US for customer use.

 

Nissan added no power. Nissan may or may not have adjusted the settings for their ring times. These things you talk about have no direct evidence to back them up and seem to be simply dreamed up in your brain, half or whole. Most of the magazine tests have used stock customer-owned vehicles. But you make a stink nevertheless.

But the clearly *visibly* altered Cadillac is no big deal whatsoever to you. They have changed at least one, probably two seats in the car and added a cage. It also appears possible that they have lowered the car. But these things don't bring any hint of suspicion out of you. No cause for alarm. No CTS-V "fanboys" making this stuff up.

But hey, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, version of the facts, conspiracy theory, whatever.

The Skyline GTR did a 7:59 back in 1997. "Anyone with half a brain can figure out a car" with a decade's more technology and a couple hundred more horsepower could be vastly improved and come in with the time that they're reporting.

But again, we respect your right to selectively complain and fuss over the legitimacy of the performance results of sports cars. This is America.

 

So how does a 3800lb car with what 550 hp run the same as the 600+ hp 3000lb CGT on a high speed track. How is this possable?

 

I'm not saying he should make a stink about the Cadillac. I personally think the new CTS-V is badass and think their laptime is great.

I'm just pointing out the fact that this fellow "SSINISTR" made a huge fuss over the GTR's time purely out of his own speculation of its being modified, but raises no fuss and defends the Cadillac's time when it was done with a clearly modified car. It's just entertaining to see a guy make two totally different arguments simply because one is a Nissan and one is a Cadillac.

 

How do I know you didn't pshop that picture?

See how senseless this kinda arguing is?

 

Oh yes, I totally photoshopped that picture.

Oh LOOK! I even hacked Autoblog and put it on there!
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/detroit-2008-2009-cadillac-cts-v/797850/

Your replies are getting weaker and weaker. You have nothing to prove me wrong, so stop trying.

 

There have been a few tracked here already. I read about it on another well known board. It was beat by a GT3 and a Viper ACR. Plus it got hammered in the One Lap race....

 

I guess you can't figure out the differences? I said the Caddy had a seat change, maybe....and that CAN NOT be compared to the obvious changes Nissan made to "tie" a way more powerful, lighter, better braked CGT. If you think a "stock" GTR can pull the same time as a CGT you are smoking finer dope then Bob Marley.