CTS-v2 vs. M5

NYSpeed Automotive
21

I really dislike the STS-V.
I hate the Northstar engine and boosting it just sounds like a bad idea.

22

My favorite quote from the responses from the bottom of the page:

“are the lawyers from BMW holding things up?”

Results are supposed to be up today.

23

I can’t wait to drive one. So many attractive prospects out there right now.

24

Seriously though back to the curb weight.
How does the CTS weigh so much?(4300)
What am I missing?
My wifes XTERRA has full framed 4x4 and 5 huge ass tires and wheels that about weigh 1000lbs.(curb weight 4170)
The XTERRA is also about 6’ tall with a big rack on top.
How can the CTS be that heavy?

Does the engine weigh 2000lbs?

25

my guess is lots and lots of sound deadening materials along with lots of gadgets.

26

Lead.

27

XTERRA:
Length 178.7
4.0L V6

CTS-V:
length: 191.6 in.
giant blown V8

:gotme:

28

I bet the seats alone are double the weight of the Xterra.

The V is definilty a pig. Mine is 3,850 so I was somewhat suprised when I saw 4,300

29

V > M5

30

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=131106

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.

31

I think it is funny that Caddy has 0-60 at 3.9

They had the V1 at 4.6 and most tester had it at 5.0

32

i would imagine the auto is a little faster to 60, they tested the 6 speed…

33

for sure… hooking up with a standard trans with that much power on street tires would be a handful

34

“the CTS-V is like a modern day beretta gtz… out there with it’s can of value whoopass on the bmw m5.”

  • car and driver
35

^ lol

edit: although, I would take the CTS-V over the M

36

LOL I was thinking the same thing

37

I believe it is. Read soemthing somewhere that would attest to that but i’m too laszy to look for it. Guess you’ll have to take my word for it.

38

same goes for the 11 second 1/4 they are promising

39

lol, i could aviate a plain with the interior of the cts-v. More gadgets doesnt mean better. looks like GM went bling for the flavor of the month while bmw stuck with classy.:tup: cts-v < m5

40

i actually kind of like the interior of the cts. BMW definitely went the clean clasic look that has worked for them for years but I think Gm out did them as far as the interior is concerned. Hell i just might have to become a Cady fan again