Who is Michael Cooper? M3 driver in CTS-V Challenge!

[330CIZHP]

After reading all the views including Michael Cooper's views, it is very easy to sum it up:

CTS-V is a beast especially in acceleration on the back straights. Despite being crippled by huge weight disadvantage of 4300 lbs vs 3600 lbs, the CTS-V carries its weight well through the turns. Just goes to show suspension is tuned very well to handle so much inertia pulling outwards in hard and fast turns.

M3 has a 130 HP deficit that cannot be made up even with 600 lbs lighter weight, it shows in the difference of their straight line acceleration. However as Michael Cooper has posted in #188 that the M3 carries more speed especially in the corner entries, through long corners and corner exits, which basically means M3 has better balance and has overall superior handling to tackle tight and challenging turns.

At the end of the day, it only shows how good the M3 handling is and substantially superior to the CTS-V, which closes the gap despite M3 having an enormous 130 HP deficit to the point of making it extremely close. M3 has a very substantially power deficit, unlike the M5, which is neck-and-neck with CTS-V in drag races. If M3 was tuned to make around 470 - 480 HP or conversely lost 200 lbs of additional weight, I am sure it would not even be a question as to whether the M3 can beat the CTS-V or not in the right hands. It would have been iron clad.

/Thread

[foosh]

Isn't that kind of like saying, if BMW had built a better car, it would have been no contest? Isn't that a rather obvious point when it comes to all performance contests between cars?

[330CIZHP]

Originally Posted by foosh

Isn't that kind of like saying, if BMW had built a better car, it would have been no contest? Isn't that a rather obvious point when it comes to all performance contests between cars?

All its saying is, it is clear from all results and Michael Cooper's posts, stock M3 lacks the comparative power needed for M3 to walk the CTS-V in capable hands, but closes the gap to the point of making it a close race especially in tight circuits with much superior suspension dynamics (600 lbs less unsprung weight makes a huge difference as well).

[foosh]

No, I don't think that is the case, but everyone has different opinions. I don't think the "hero of the day" in this thread felt that way either.

EDIT: Oh, I see you changed your post entirely. I was responding to what you wrote before you deleted and rewrote your post. I don't disagree with your last iteration, but again, I think it is a completely obvious point. The same is true of any comparison between any two cars, if you're talking about track performance.

[Koroush]

Good to hear that the CTS-V got owned.


But

If anybody actually believes that since a professional driver beat a normal guy with CTS-V on a track he has practiced on for probably weeks makes the CTS-V a better car... They deserve to go and buy one.

[foosh]

Originally Posted by Koroush

Good to hear that the CTS-V got owned.


But

If anybody actually believes that since a professional driver beat a normal guy with CTS-V on a track he has practiced on for probably weeks makes the CTS-V a better car... They deserve to go and buy one.

LMAO . . . you go fan boy! I guess you forgot to read the comments of the actual M3 driver in the contest.

It's always been about the driver. Most pros could also lap most M3 drivers in a 98 Camaro.

[the///Mthree]

Originally Posted by 330CIZHP

After reading all the views including Michael Cooper's views, it is very easy to sum it up:

CTS-V is a beast especially in acceleration on the back straights. Despite being crippled by huge weight disadvantage of 4300 lbs vs 3600 lbs, the CTS-V carries its weight well through the turns. Just goes to show suspension is tuned very well to handle so much inertia pulling outwards in hard and fast turns.

M3 has a 130 HP deficit that cannot be made up even with 600 lbs lighter weight, it shows in the difference of their straight line acceleration. However as Michael Cooper has posted in #188 that the M3 carries more speed especially in the corner entries, through long corners and corner exits, which basically means M3 has better balance and has overall superior handling to tackle tight and challenging turns.

At the end of the day, it only shows how good the M3 handling is and substantially superior to the CTS-V, which closes the gap despite M3 having an enormous 130 HP deficit to the point of making it extremely close. M3 has a very substantially power deficit, unlike the M5, which is neck-and-neck with CTS-V in drag races. If M3 was tuned to make around 470 - 480 HP or conversely lost 200 lbs of additional weight, I am sure it would not even be a question as to whether the M3 can beat the CTS-V or not in the right hands. It would have been iron clad.

/Thread

Just want to point out that you got a little confused where I bolded, The CTSV no doubt gets off the corner better. As for overall balance, I dont have enough time in both cars to say. But I can tell you that they are both pretty dam good.

[Koroush]

Originally Posted by foosh

LMAO . . . you go fan boy! I guess you forgot to read the comments of the actual M3 driver in the contest.

It's always been about the driver. Most pros could also lap most M3 drivers in a 98 Camaro.

Right, lets see bob lutzs beat a normal guy in a 911, with bob in a prius.

[foosh]

Alrighty then . . .

[Jaypod]

Originally Posted by Koroush

Right, lets see bob lutzs beat a normal guy in a 911, with bob in a prius.

Um - first of all the M3 didnt own the CTSV - read Michaels comments on how good a car he felt the CTSV is...


And he said Pro Driver, not Bob Lutz - prius vs. 911 get real.

[foosh]

Originally Posted by Cabinetman

One thing Michael showed us is the importance of the driver mod that so often gets overlooked. People will spend thousands on wheels, exhausts, BBKs , etc... and never take a single driving course. I know that I have been guilty of this myself. Michael has shown that with a little training, and a healthy dose of God given talent it appears, a less capable car can run with the big dogs.

Well said.

One of the few things you can conclude from this much-ballyhooed challenge is how important the driver is. Nothing makes that more clear than the fact that there is a 28 second difference in laps between the fastest and the slowest CTS-V on a very short track--same car, different drivers. That should tell you something about the importance of a driver.

The second thing you can conclude is that Michael Cooper may be young, and he may not be a professional driver, but he is no average driver. He has some serious talent. His times would likely have been very similar in either car.

[cjfairman]

I just found on Wiki that Lutz was at BMW from 71 to 74 and helped develop the 3 series. He's been everywhere. A true car guy. He's led quite a life.

[shchow]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

As mentioned, only Michael would know if he was holding back - but he thinks the CTS-V is faster.

Personally, I have driven manufacturer's cars on track, and have held back compared to driving my own. For me, it would be personally embarrassing if I were to assume a sickly grin while returning the car in the form of a smoking shift lever and pointing in the direction of the rest of the steaming pile.

Bruce

You are obviously the exception to the rule
If someone gave me the keys to a >500hp car at a track and said "go to town" and not have to worry about any repair/maintenance costs, you better believe I would drive it ALOT harder than my own car, which I will have to replace the tires, brakes, fluids, and possible body work at the end of a hard session.
Unless you are independently wealthy and don't care about the cost of maintenance, I would guarantee that the majority of drivers here would think twice on entering a fast sweeper next to a wall at the limit of their OWN car's traction...

[Cdnrockies]

Congrats Michael Cooper.

Seems like you had an incredible time. You are obviously an excellent driver with the car to match. It's also good to see that you have maturity and humility.

Very cool to see an objective opinion coming from you!

[foosh]

Originally Posted by the///Mthree

Not the case at all. If I'm driving it, IM DRIVING IT!!!!!!

Here's another interesting exception.

[shchow]

Originally Posted by foosh

Here's another interesting exception.

LOL,
People will say alot of things, but when actually placed in the situation...

[foosh]

Originally Posted by shchow

LOL,
People will say alot of things, but when actually placed in the situation...

LOL, that was posted by Michael Cooper (THE M3, get it?) in response to your earlier post asserting same. I guess you could say he WAS "placed in the situation."

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by cjfairman

Our government is legislating themselves out of competition. BMW, Merc, Audi etc all have the advantage so to speak of not selling enough units; therefore, the CAFE standards do not apply and they can make and sell whatever they want in America. On the other hand since GM, Ford and Chrysler sell so many more units overall, the government ties their hands on fuel economy standards and it makes it difficult to compete.

I'm not sure how literal you were being here, but strictly speaking, AFAIK, no car is immune to CAFE unless the manufacturer is granted a special waver. It is a well-known fact that BMW (and probably others) figure CAFE fines into the business plan from the start. That is to say that they build the car as the customers want and factor any fines it will generate from not meeting CAFE requirements into the cost of the car. And, yes, that means we all pay more for our cars than we otherwise would.

This will probably change now that BMW is pushing the Efficient Dynamics line. There's nothing wrong with that, of course - greener cars are needed. But its a shame that it will come at the cost of naturally aspirated BMWs.

[bobbyd1961]

the ctsv is obviously a super car. i just question its durability and reliability since its a caddilac. they should have had a vette there too.

[quackbury]

Originally Posted by foosh

I don't think you want to go here. You might check various GM model vs. BMW model reliability ratings.

And remember Mike only got in 2 hot laps before he lost his brakes. Sounds like the CTS-V's were still hot lapping at the end of the day - with passengers on board.

FWIW remember that Lutz is a Marine aviator and still flies a Cold War era Eastern Bloc warbird - twin seat attack trainer. Like Paul Newman, he is not your average 78-year-old!

[the///Mthree]

Originally Posted by quackbury

And remember Mike only got in 2 hot laps before he lost his brakes. Sounds like the CTS-V's were still hot lapping at the end of the day - with passengers on board.

The brembo brakes on the CTSV are definitely bullet proof compared to our M brakes. But my brakes were not gone at the end of a warmup and 2 hot laps BUT I felt the 3rd hot lap would no way be quicker so their was no point to try another.

[jml]

Props to GM, this was a great idea. If I were buying now, I would be seriously considering the CTSV as a DD/Track car. The E90 fits that bill well as I expected, but I never guessed that the V would be even more capable out of the box (talking brakes here).