Cadillac prices 2009 CTS-V from $59,995:

[Herms]

Originally Posted by UltimateBMW

Don't beleive he ever claimed it was cheaper, only similar in price. $54,500 (e90) vs $59,995. And the CTS-V out performs an M5, let alone the M3.
Knowing this, would I buy one? Absolutely not.

it will definitely outperform an M3 in a straight line, but not sure about the track. new C&D has a comparo with the C63, M5 and CTS-V, with the CTS-V putting up a lap time .29s faster than the C63 (w/o amg perf pkg) and 1.1s faster than the M5. Based on the M3 beating the C63 around a track in every test I've seen, and with only a .29s gap b/t the C63, I think the M3 wins, at least on this particular test track.

[spearfisher]

I think it's a good deal for the $$, just still don't like the styling eventhough better, should be compared more to the M5 not M3, I prefer the M3 as a track car, over the CTS, CTS over the M5, any track where there is a lot of straights advantage CTS, track with twisties I say M3.

[440hpe46]

Killer car for the money...great styling as well...

If the M division is going the F/I route from now on, I'll take the dynamics of a supercharged V8 over a turbo six anyday...

[Irb Digital]

Originally Posted by 440hpe46

Killer car for the money...great styling as well...

If the M division is going the F/I route from now on, I'll take the dynamics of a supercharged V8 over a turbo six anyday...

Man I don't know, that is a great statement though. Since I was a kid the turbo 6 was the choice of every Japanese supercar. I still love the Supras, 300ZX TT, Skyline GTR, Porsche Turbo, etc...... But as I got older the fastest street cars were always supercharged v8's. Occasionally there be some heavily modded(bored/stroked) NA v8's, and the rare turbo'd v8. But I still can't tell you for sure what my ideal setup would be. It seems easier to make power out of a big v8 with little boost coming from a supercharger. So I guess that would be the ideal setup, because in the end, if both are running forced induction there really is no replacement for displacement.

[E90RWC]

RAW AS FUG

I don't know about the GM brand.

[shchow]

Last week, my local Caddy dealer called me to let me know he had 2 CTS-Vs to look at.
I must say, I like the car. The exhaust note was very nice and I think the interior is more plush than the M5. The biggest draw is the fact that it is 30k less expensive than my M5, for similar/better performance. Will seriously consider getting it once my lease is up.

[DakarE36]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

even so, there is a reason it is used as a benchmark for automotive track ability.

+ 1 million, performance wise, CTS-V > M3, as much as it pains me to say so, the ring is the benchmark for fast cars. Power is a big part of (performance) track cars.

Odds are Usain Bolt would beat Ladanian Tomlinson around a track too.

Its a pretty tough call for me as a prospective buyer, the CTS-V is a beast. But so is the M3 DCT.

I think the M/// prevails in my book though... i think....

[dkhm3]

This is the car to get used, let the first owner take that hit.

As far as car mag reviews go:

I had both the e46 m3 and the b6 s4... c & d gave nods to the s4 as the better car, as well as Top Gear- personally, I missed my M everyday I sat in my S.

I think for these cars CTS-V,M3,M5,IS-F, etc.. the difference is so small it is all Driver skill and preference.

[stevehifi]

I drove the new CTS-V.

Here are my impressions:

- Big car, can't seem to feel its corners (spatial orientation)
- Excellent Recaro seats (wouldn't buy the car without it)
- nice interior (is this a GM product?)
- massive torque (I drove an automatic)
- not impressed with the tranny (didn't shift very well- wouldn't allow some downshifts)
- superb suspension (those shocks are awesome)
- handling is impressive for a 4200lbs car

the problem is.. however as impressive as it is, it just lacks a feeling or soul. I don't feel
excited driving the car, unless you consider burnouts exciting.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by stevehifi

I drove the new CTS-V.

the problem is.. however as impressive as it is, it just lacks a feeling or soul. I don't feel excited driving the car, unless you consider burnouts exciting.

Compared to what, just interested if you are comparing it to the M3. If you are, I agree it wouldn't have the feeling or precision of the M3.

I think it is more of a M5 competitor, in which it has taken down the M5 in comparos.

[stevehifi]

Originally Posted by JetBlack5OC

Compared to what, just interested if you are comparing it to the M3. If you are, I agree it wouldn't have the feeling or precision of the M3.

I think it is more of a M5 competitor, in which it has taken down the M5 in comparos.

I have an M3, and I've driven the M5.

Even compared to the M5, it lacks the balance and athleticism of a track machine.

The CTS-V is no slouch, but its roots come from more in the muscle car
domain. Of course that is my opinion.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by stevehifi

I have an M3, and I've driven the M5.

Even compared to the M5, it lacks the balance and athleticism of a track machine.

The CTS-V is no slouch, but its roots come from more in the muscle car
domain. Of course that is my opinion.

Thats the thing, I don't think the M5 is a track machine. I still am looking to get a drive in the CTS-V, but from what I have heard from friends it handles very well. It has been getting better lap times than the M5, which is a great achievement for GM. Yes it has more power, but the CTS-V is also heavier.

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by JetBlack5OC

Thats the thing, I don't think the M5 is a track machine. I still am looking to get a drive in the CTS-V, but from what I have heard from friends it handles very well. It has been getting better lap times than the M5, which is a great achievement for GM. Yes it has more power, but the CTS-V is also heavier.

Actually the CTS-V got better times in the 'Ring beating both the M3 and the M5. Google it.

C and D also tracked it in the VIR and it beat most other cars in its competition category, including M3...

That being said, I don't know if I would pull the trigger on a Cadillac.. They still have a lot to prove- i.e. reliability, resale value, etc.

I think the only car that has it all is the GTR. Fastest, Handles the best. It kicks everyone's butt in the 70k category.

[UltimateBMW]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

Actually the CTS-V got better times in the 'Ring beating both the M3 and the M5. Google it.

C and D also tracked it in the VIR and it beat most other cars in its competition category, including M3...

That being said, I don't know if I would pull the trigger on a Cadillac.. They still have a lot to prove- i.e. reliability, resale value, etc.

I think the only car that has it all is the GTR. Fastest, Handles the best. It kicks everyone's butt in the 70k category.

Unfortunately, the world isn't so clean cut. The GTR has had it's fair share of issues. Their solution was to just completely drop their launch program from the car for all models post 2008. Not to mention, the price went up ~$8,000.

So, your left with a summation of compromises. Which car is the best compromise for you? Thats the question.

[DakarE36]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

Actually the CTS-V got better times in the 'Ring beating both the M3 and the M5. Google it.

C and D also tracked it in the VIR and it beat most other cars in its competition category, including M3...

That being said, I don't know if I would pull the trigger on a Cadillac.. They still have a lot to prove- i.e. reliability, resale value, etc.

I think the only car that has it all is the GTR. Fastest, Handles the best. It kicks everyone's butt in the 70k category.

Well first of all from what i have heard, the GTR still is the car with alot to prove, sure it blisters around the 'ring, but from what ive heard isnt the most rewarding (or liveable) street car around + with the tranny/LC problems i was just turned off that car. Needless to say its almost impossible to find these days for a price that fits the car.

Ive been thinking alot recently (and will finnally decide this weekend after my test drives of the CTS-V and M3) but the car that seems to make the most sense for me right now happens to be the CTS-V, because whatever the car i get is gonna be my car through college and into adulthood, and i cant see driving my family around in a m3 coupe.

I may be thinking to far ahead though, i could probably just buy a beater SUV for that kinda family thing.

The test drive will be the deciding factor.

[Irb Digital]

CTS-V as your car for "college and into adulthood", wow, must be nice.

[DakarE36]

Originally Posted by Irb Digital

CTS-V as your car for "college and into adulthood", wow, must be nice.

Ya, i suppose it is.
I bet alot of kids would turn that sort of thing down.

all i was trying to say is that i may as well get a versatile car if im gonna have it for a very long time.
Theres alot of kids my age on the website who own brand new e9x m3's, good for them, good for me.

Why is there a need to make a sarcastic moronic remark about my fortunate ability to own a nice first car.

I apologize in advance if that was sincere, but i dont believe that it was.

[Heat00]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

Actually the CTS-V got better times in the 'Ring beating both the M3 and the M5. Google it.

C and D also tracked it in the VIR and it beat most other cars in its competition category, including M3...

That being said, I don't know if I would pull the trigger on a Cadillac.. They still have a lot to prove- i.e. reliability, resale value, etc.

I think the only car that has it all is the GTR. Fastest, Handles the best. It kicks everyone's butt in the 70k category.

If you keep reading they also had an M3 with a faulty transmission. with a manual or a working DCT M3, its takes GM to school in the VIR

[Heat00]

oh yea, interior still looks very GM and plasticy..... like a chevy malibu or something...
wonder how that thing will hold up after 50,000 miles?? rattle city....
and, it's funny that they need a gigantic, gas guzzling v8 with a supercharger to get all this 5 million horsepower and the M still is very, very close in the 1/4 mile and it does beat the caddy on the track!!

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Heat00

oh yea, interior still looks very GM and plasticy..... like a chevy malibu or something...
wonder how that thing will hold up after 50,000 miles?? rattle city....
and, it's funny that they need a gigantic, gas guzzling v8 with a supercharger to get all this 5 million horsepower and the M still is very, very close in the 1/4 mile and it does beat the caddy on the track!!

A. Interior is at least one step up on the M3 - maybe two.
B. Malibu interior is the best in its class.
C. If everyday CTS experience is something to go by, it'll be dead quiet at 50K miles.
D. Last I checked, the larger, heavier, more powerful, quicker and more luxurious Cadillac was withn one mpg of the bimmer, city and highway.
E. Can you give me a single instance of where the M3 was quicker than the CTS-V on track? I personally know of only a single comparison other than where the lack of proper DCT engineering hampered the bimmer in the C & D test. That was at the Nurburgring where the Cadillac was six seconds quicker. Have there been other comparisons where the M3 won?

[alpineweissM3]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Have there been other comparisons where the M3 won?

Nope.

[Heat00]

so why didn't all of you buy caddys?