gavriil

I am reading that the CTS came in 1st out of 7 luxury cars at a Road and Track mag comparo. It beat out the:

Volvo S80, BMW 530i, Audi A6 3.0, Chrysler 300, Jag S-type, and Merc E320.

Who's got the details?

gavriil

Spy Shot: Cadillac CTS-V/STS-V Plus - - Source: 4car.com

Cadillac may not be a big name in the UK, but Stateside, it still aspires to being a player in the luxury sector. These shots show muscled-up Plus versions of the mid-size CTS-V and full-size STS-V saloons testing on the Nurburgring. The current CTS-V, on sale in America, already delivers 400bhp from its V8, but GM has engineered the Plus's V8 to put out nearly 500bhp. Reports suggest the STS-V Plus could develop as much as 700bhp from its tuned version of the Corvette's 6.0-litre V8. 0-60mph shouldn't take much longer than five seconds, for either car. Both ride on versions of GM's rear-wheel-drive Sigma architecture; a 4x4 system is also under development, however.

The saloons' brawny looks are undoubtedly eye-catching, though that big raised hood air-intake won't ultimately feature. Both models should handle well thanks to independent front and multilink rear suspension, and considerable time testing on the Nurburgring.

The CTS is one Cadillac product that's a certainty for Europe, though Cadillac hasn't given a date just yet. The STS - GM's riposte to the S-Class and 7-Series - should arrive by 2006. With other big Yank V8 contenders such as the Chrysler 300C and Ford Mustang crossing the water to Europe, are we seeing a revival of American muscle cars? 4Car can't wait to get our hands on a few...

gavriil

Of couse! AWD! That should make a ton of sense with that much power, even as an option.

"Reports suggest the STS-V Plus could develop as much as 700bhp from its tuned version of the Corvette's 6.0-litre V8..."

Holy Moly!

cusdaddy

700hp STS!!!! HOLY CRAP!!! WOW... I kind of doubt we will see a 700hp STS, but that would be absolutely amazing!

gavriil

Dont forget the rumored 700+HP Blue Devil.

http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/showt...ght=blue+devil

ItalianStallion

500hp is def a safe number, really mostly depends on what you are surrounded by. i drove a CL55 with 496hp, it only felt like 500 at WOT, otherwise it was totally tame. im all for more cars with 500hp.

700hp in a future STS is forseeable, the S65 will be a beast, probably upwards of 625hp, so its def a doable number area.

DISRUPTV

Gav,

i just got the r&t and yes...the CTS did win but it was the 255hp one....it was a test of 6cyl lux sedans.....but imo...it was a very weird test and didnt even make sense 2 me at times....


for example....since when does the 300c and cts compete w/the 5series and eclass? wtf?...i know they are as big as the latter two but they are priced sooo much lower than them....



i dunno...IMO, the test seems a bit of a stretch

Ashburner

I enjoyed reading it... And the CTS is definitely the most sporty and quickest of the bunch.

My friend Lori just bought a 2003 CTS with 14,000 miles on the ODO from her best friend who works for a Cad dealership... 22K... and it is loaded. I really, really like it. I might just have her friend order me a CTS-V.

gavriil

The 220HP version heavily suffered of lack of low end torque when I test drove it.

I heard that the major factor which made the CTS win the comparo was, price. Does it check on your side?

Ashburner

Yep... her's is the 220 V6 but it is more than enough for a pregnant women.

Mainly, the CTS won because it was the quickest and most fun to drive... plus, the looks are growing on the staff.

Maximized

700 hp would be nuts. My friend told me Cadillac has a Escalade with a V12 roaming the streets with nearly 1000hp. Supposedly, this version is going to be detuned and sold soon. Thats what his source told him at Cadillac, so who knows if it is true.

charliemike

Even if the CTS-V doesn't get the "Plus" treatment, I think it's a forgone conclusion that Cadillac has to do something about the wheel/tire combo on the CTS-V.

Gav you make good points. Hopefully at some point the active/passive safety catches up with the performance technology.

gavriil

Most fun to drive?!? A car mag said a Cadillac is more fun to drive than a BMW?!?! Has the world come to an end?!?

About the looks growing on them, I totally believe that. It happened to me starting last year... I saw an SRX the other day on the road and thought, "now that looks sharp", from the front.

gavriil

Source: Autospies

Collective27

WOW...6th for the 530i thats shocking....gav think yuou can put up the whole article so we can read it.

titan

I think the results are great. Caddy's lineup aggravates me, though. I understand that the CTS is supposed to offer 5-series performance at 3-series prices (which it obviously does, telling by this article). But wish an interior upgrade, the 3.6 V6 standard, and just a bit more size, Caddy could charge 15K more and have an eye for eye competitor to the 5-series. Or, make it a tad smaller to make it a clearer comptitor to the 3-series, then the STS would be the clear competitor to the 5. It looks like the STS is sized larger than the largest car in that 5/E/A6 class, which blurs the line for it between and the top of the line cars. I know Caddy is to build a 70K top shelf car (probably to succed the Deville), to compete against the S/7/A8, but the way Caddy does things the car's gonna be a huge boat. I know that's a little to black and white, cut and dry, for GM, but I wish they'd just do it, IMHO.

heyitsme

I'm glad it won without price included, but 43.8k for a loaded cts doesn't seem like a bargain and not comparing it to the g35 and tl sorta let it off the hook for a real comparison.

bkknight369

sounds like a bullshit comparison

cts lost to the g35 in another magazine last month (i forgot which one, but it compared the tl, g35, cts, and saab 9-5).

if price is the only factor then they should have put the g35 in there, and it would have won

titan

Amen. The G35 would kick everyone's ass. Especially the CTS, which is a direct competitor anyway.

ruski_RENAMED

When I test drove a 220HP version of CTS I thought it was very sloppy and too mushy. That was at a GM Roadshow event. I then test drove a Grand Prix GTP Comp G and it was much firmer and handled much better than that CTS.

Is the new 6-cyl CTS improved in terms of handling?

TypeSAddict

Zapata

germans won't loose

Crazy Bimmer

I might have to jump ship
or not

goldmemberer

Oh... I get it... cuz they iz tight!

gavriil

By the way, I looked at the article while at the airport and the CTS was the one with the 255HP, 3.6 liter engine and not the one with 3.2 liter 220HP engine. That's more like it.

gavriil

Unfortunately, I do not have the article. I do not subscribe to R&T currently.

gavriil

I am now reading rumors of the CTSV-Plus wearing a supercharged LS6 motor in the tests at the N-ring.

gavriil

2004 Cadillac CTS-V - - Flying V: Cadillac's CTS-V Simply Shreds - - Source: Autoweek

....

With 400 horses on tap and a torque band that stretches nigh on forever, the CTS-V roars in fine American V8 fashion to 60 mph in 5.35 seconds. That's more than two seconds quicker than the standard CTS (7.53 seconds) and smack in BMW M3 (5.1) and Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG (5.2) territory, courtesy of an overhead valve small-block that tops out at 6600 rpm. "Off the line it just pulls and pulls and pulls," said one owner.

But the CTS-V still lags the E55 (4.78) by a half-second to 60, and getting the Caddy to even run down the drag strip effectively took some work. The tremendous amount of axle hop at launch wasn't easy to control, with one tester calling it the worst he's seen since the Chevrolet Caprice LTZ more than a decade ago.

We also enjoy the fact that the "sport" in this sport sedan has as much to do with finesse as speed. Through our slalom, the CTS-V feels responsive and easily controllable-more like a sports car than a 3800-plus pound sedan-even with all electronic aids switched off. The CTS-V works the cones best under power, which keeps the rears solidly planted. Its 46.2-mph top speed through the 490-foot course bests the E55 (42.9) and the last-gen M5 (44.0), even with a wheelbase that stretches longer than either. Only the M3 and C32-which are at least six inches shorter between the axles-come close, at 46.0 and 45.1 mph, respectively. Through it all, the CTS-V exhibits only the barest hint of body roll.

The Caddy will also power around our 200-foot skidpad with a moderate amount of understeer, staying balanced with the smallest throttle inputs and pulling 0.88 gs in the process.

Bringing the whole show to a stop, its brakes-and a terrific set of Goodyear Eagle F1s-pull the CTS-V down from 60 mph in an M5-matching 112 feet (and besting all other aforementioned competitors). No dive, no drama, just a lot of serious negative gs.

...

STANDING-START ACCELERATION
0-60 mph: 5.35 sec
0-100 km/h (62.1 mph): 5.63 sec
0-quarter-mile: 13.76 sec @ 105.5 mph

ROLLING ACCELERATION
20-40 mph (first gear): 1.7 sec
40-60 mph (second gear): 2.2 sec
60-80 mph (third gear): 3.0 sec

BRAKING
60 mph-0: 112 ft

HANDLING
490-foot slalom: 46.2 mph
Lateral acceleration (200-foot skidpad): 0.88 g

...

titan

They've got to get that damn axle hop taken care of...

gavriil

This is truly a great win for the CTS. I mean the BMW got killed due to its $54K pricetag in the final ratings, but even if you get the pricing factor out, the CTS still wins and the BMW is still not close to the top:

1. Cadillac CTS -- 382.7/400
2. Mercedes E320 -- 376
3. BMW 530i -- 369.1
4. Jaguar S-Type -- 367
5. Volvo S80 -- 357.5
6. Audi A6 -- 355.8
7. Chrysler 300 -- 344.8

Maximized

These guys are blowing wheel hop out of porportion. I drove my friends V and I got zero wheel hop. The car does do it occasionally when you really rip it into second gear. I would write more about how the tranny isnt really smooth and takes a while to get your shifts correct.

heyitsme

How does the cts have "axle" hop when its susposed to have an "Independent Multi-Link Rear Suspension With Coil Springs and Shock Absorbers"?

gavriil

Without that issue, this is a 4.8 sec for the 60 and 13.1 for the 1/4 mile, car.

gavriil

Good question.

gavriil

Here is the article:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....ber=1&preview=

And the data here:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...s_data.pdf.pdf

gavriil

All trannys are auto trannys.

1. Cadillac CTS -- 6.6 and 15.0
2. Mercedes E320 -- 6.7 and 15.1
3. BMW 530i -- 7.2 and 15.5 with a 6 speed auto tranny the dog!
4. Jaguar S-Type -- 7.9 and 16.1 - how slow can I go with 235HP and a 6 speed auto tranny?
5. Volvo S80 -- 6.7 and 15.1 with a 4-speed auto tranny
6. Audi A6 -- 8.5 and 16.4 - 220HP and 5 speed auto tranny
7. Chrysler 300 -- 8.0 and 16.1 with 250HP

The Caddy seems to have done better than anyones else considering its total HP, weight and choice of tranny. I dont get it.

gavriil

Seven to the Power of Six - - Can six cylinders and true luxury live in the same garage space? - - By Peter Egan • Photos by John Lamm - June 2004 - -Source: RoadandTrack.com

1st — Cadillac CTS
569.3 points



The Cadillac CTS's 3.6-liter 255-bhp engine has plenty of torque to propel the car to turn in the best acceleration times.


It's not easy to finish first in this company — there isn't a car in this group any of us wouldn't be happy to have in our own garages — but the Cadillac led the pack on a combination of outstanding performance and relatively reasonable price. In every test there's one car that causes people to grin and say, "This is the sports car of the bunch." In this case, that car was the CTS.
During our days of driving around the hills of California's central coast, it was the subjective favorite in handling, steering and driving excitement. And, lo and behold, when it was tested at the track it was the quickest in the quarter mile, 0-60-mph acceleration and (tying the E320) through the slalom. It finished a close second to the Mercedes on the skidpad. One of our test editors pronounced it, "The most athletic-feeling of the group, with firm springs, direct steering and a sticky tire at each corner of the body. It's what the BMW should feel like."

On the open highway, the Caddy is not the plushest car here — ride is firm — but, like the Mercedes, it has nicely damped suspension with just enough compliance to keep it from feeling harsh or annoying. On canyon roads, it just plain carves, like a good set of shaped skis. The steering is nicely weighted, and the car turns in quickly, holding its line through sweepers with dead flat stability. In steady-state cornering it has the reassuring composure of a Can-Am car with big, blocky tires. Cadillac says this chassis was developed at the Nürburgring, and it's easy to believe.

Our test car came with a sport package that included the StabiliTrak stability-control system, which was quite effective in keeping our car more or less parallel with the road, but some of our hot-shoe drivers liked it better turned off, so the car could be rotated more quickly in tight turns.

Manual shifting of the automatic transmission is done in straight linear fashion, with the lever descending through three gears as it comes rearward from Drive. It works pretty well, but is not as intuitive as, say, the Mercedes slap-shifter. You have to look at it sometimes to see what you're doing. This sport shifter comes with the optional 3.6-liter 24-valve V-6 we had in our test car (a 3.2 V-6 is standard, with a Getrag manual), and it has a sport mode to hold each gear slightly longer and provide more engine braking.

That big 255-bhp 3.6-liter engine, of course, is the main reason our CTS did so well at the drag strip, and why it feels so lively on the road; it gives away horsepower only to the turbocharged Volvo, and has more displacement than all the others. Cheating? Well, people complained that the 220-bhp 3.2 was a little anemic, so Cadillac upgraded this year. The CTS tied the Mercedes and BMW for second-best fuel mileage in the group, so it's hard to complain.

Most of us liked the CTS's edgy and distinctive exterior styling, which is distinctly Cadillac and unlike anything else on the road, but the elders among us found the black plastic interior to be a bit stealth-fighter for our tastes. Younger guys liked it better, which bodes well for Cadillac. Otherwise, the interior is fine. The supportive and highly adjustable seats are superb, most controls are logical and easy to use, and the sound system came with XM radio, which allows the discerning listener to tune in nothing but Blues.

Handling from the Nürburgring and Blues from the Delta, all in one fast American car. Nice combination.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6th — BMW 530i
541.5 points



BMW virtues of handling, steering, braking and driving excitement come as no surprise in our points totals. But other aspects of the new 530i disappoint us. Even those competent with its iDrive don't particularly like it. Some are coming to appreciate the car's exterior shapes; others feel it makes earlier BMWs look that much better.


Here was the surprise of the bunch. Usually we go into these comparisons with half an expectation that the BMW (of whatever series), with its sporting pedigree, will end up somewhere near the top of the heap — if not first — but the 530i didn't engender that level of enthusiasm.
A couple of factors brought it down in points. First was price; as tested, at $54,120, it's the most expensive car here by nearly $4000 (ahead of the Mercedes) and it's nearly $20,000 more expensive than the Chrysler 300. It also finished last in ergonomics and exterior style.

Most of the ergonomic complaints focus, predictably, on the recently simplified but still distracting iDrive accessory control system, about which much has been written already. Our Tech Editor said the system might have been designed for people "who like to study something, then lord it over their pals." In any case, the inability to get what you want, when you want it, out of the sound and climate controls is a constant irritant, and people don't buy cars in this class to be irritated. They have computers at home for that.

Most also found the detent-less turn-signal stalk disconcerting. When you flick it up or down, you are always left wondering if it "took" or shut itself off. Or if it will shut itself off. It's a lost tactile link to a normally simple control, but maybe you get used to it.

And the styling? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course, but these seven staff beholders found the BMW the least appealing of the group. It seemed to be the rear-deck treatment that came in for criticism, along with the dragon's-eye headlight surrounds, which one editor noted had a distinctly Japanese "Samurai-inspired" look. It may be that this car isn't so bad-looking as "un-BMW-like," as one editor put it. Maybe familiarity will gradually breed admiration.

Now, let us turn to the 530i's virtues, which are several. On the dynamic level, it came out very well. In our subjective ratings, it placed second in handling, steering, brakes, gearbox and driving excitement. It was also second in grip on the skidpad, just behind the Mercedes and tied with the Cadillac, Audi and Jaguar. It also tied two other cars for second-best fuel mileage in our driving.

Surprisingly, the BMW also managed third fastest in 0-60 and quarter-mile times, even though its turbine-smooth 3.0-liter inline-6 is rated fifth in horsepower and lowest in torque of the seven cars. The engine doesn't have quite the zap you feel in the lighter 3 Series cars, but it is still a very sweet-running unit, and it loves to rev. It works nicely in concert with the 6-speed Steptronic transmission to keep the power down on a winding road, and the chassis cooperates by providing a confidence-inspiring ability to handle undulations and bumps without losing its footing.

Speed-sensitive, variable-assist power steering allows you to knife through corners with little effort, but it doesn't have quite the direct mechanical feel we are used to in the 3 Series cars. The 530i feels massively competent, but a little more insulated from the road than its smaller brother. In this respect, it almost seems to have switched roles with the Mercedes E320, which is decidedly quick and sporty-feeling for a Benz.

Some found the BMW's interior a bit severe and industrial in design, but it is still beautifully finished and richly detailed, with a pleasant mixture of wood trim and sharply defined shapes. The 530i's seats are also among the best in the group, adjustable to provide glovelike comfort with excellent wing and bolster support to hold you in place for fast driving. It's a comfortable cockpit.

Overall, the BMW is guilty only of giving you, perhaps, more than you want rather than less, its complexity tending to mask the traditional BMW virtues of lightness and sports-car-like feedback to the driver. The emphasis here is on luxury.

gavriil

From the article:

...but the Cadillac led the pack on a combination of outstanding performance and relatively reasonable price. In every test there's one car that causes people to grin and say, "This is the sports car of the bunch." In this case, that car was the CTS.
"The most athletic-feeling of the group, with firm springs, direct steering and a sticky tire at each corner of the body. It's what the BMW should feel like."


----------


I am stunned by these comments....if you told anyone just 3 years ago, you'd be reading this about a Caddy 3 years from then, they'd lock you up

gavriil

Next year, we'll be seeing the new RL participate in this above comparo. It'd for sure be the quickest of the bunch and I wonder what they'd write about steering, ride and handling for it.

ruski_RENAMED

I thought the same thing. What axle? Are they sure they weren't testing a Mustang?