Car and Driver tests the CTS-V Auto: 0-60 in 3.9s, 12.2@119 mph

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

So, you forgot to cancel your turn signal, the car reminded you, and that's a "stigma that GM brands currently have due to their backwards thinking."?

I don't get this at all.

Bruce

+1

I think that is a very well thought-out feature, let's face it, on 99.9% of the time the system will never be in use as the stalks automatically cancel themselves after turning but on those rare occasions it doesn't this will remind you.

I found the repeater noise on the M3 to be extremely quiet so it's one car that could possibly benefit from such a system.

P.S.
How did this thread move from discussing the 1/4 mile times and speeds of the CTS-V to indicator reminders, boggles the mind.

[MikeG_C63_AMG]

Originally Posted by footie

+1

I think that is a very well thought-out feature, let's face it, on 99.9% of the time the system will never be in use as the stalks automatically cancel themselves after turning but on those rare occasions it doesn't this will remind you.

I found the repeater noise on the M3 to be extremely quiet so it's one car that could possibly benefit from such a system.

P.S.
How did this thread move from discussing the 1/4 mile times and speeds of the CTS-V to indicator reminders, boggles the mind.

It’s because every thread in the "M3 Vs" section turns into a public forum for bashing that particular car being discussed. However sometimes you get a few people who chime in and add valuable unbiased feedback on the particular car being discussed who actually driven the car and not "magazine raced it." Of course its perfectly acceptable not to like a CTS-V,RS4, IS-F, S5 and C63 but some of the opinions and comments I read on here makes me very skeptical about people's creditability.

[ihyln]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

So, you forgot to cancel your turn signal, the car reminded you, and that's a "stigma that GM brands currently have due to their backwards thinking."?

I don't get this at all.

Bruce

Then you aren't old enough to "get" this feature. Ok, let's expand what I said. What age range did Cadillac associate themselves only a few years back? Big floaty boats driven by gray hairs with nowhere to go really. Don't lie and say you haven't seen old folks just sitting in their lane with the turn signal on (and yes not just Cadillac but other brands like Buick for example).

My point is, if GM is trying to make Cadillac young and hip again then there is no reason to keep this feature. Anyone with even the slightest bit of foresight will understand why the feature is in the first place because it is NOT a safety feature.

[ihyln]

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

The car was reminding you that you forgot something, and GM has backwards thinking?


If anything, id say you were the backwards thinker in that scenario. I hate morons who leave their turn signal on.

Again, read my post above. What age group is generally known for leaving turn signals on? What car brands are associated with old people driving them? Isn't GM currently trying to sell to the 20s/30s crowd? I don't refute that it is a nice feature but when you take into account their target demographic I find the feature silly. Why not also program the car to remind you to avoid farmers markets (south park reference with a hint of sarcasm).

Bottom line is that it is an "old people feature" not a meaningful safety feature. That's all I can say about that. The CTS-V is a blast to drive but the console is a bit busy for my tastes. For the price though I'd probably take it.

PS. Sorry for stereotyping to any older folks here, was just trying to make my point.

[footie]

So you are basically saying that so a feature that is benefical to the elderly. Well let's get rid of ABS, DSP, TC and servo assisted brakes and steering while we're at it because all of these are benefical to the elderly too.

Your logic is boggling me completely. Jaguar like Caddy are trying to appeal to younger drivers but I don't see them getting rid of useful features.

[ihyln]

My logic is faulty? You just described ESSENTIAL safety features that help in a myriad of situations that actively do something. A chime that tells you that the turn signal is on is NOT AN ESSENTIAL SAFETY FEATURE AT ALL. In fact it didn't even TURN OFF THE SIGNAL.

[ihyln]

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

lol...


Didn't you forget to turn the signal off?

No, because I was still merging from the on ramp then to the left lane so I had left it on.

[ihyln]

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

lol...


Didn't you forget to turn the signal off?


The thing helped you. And you took it way too far. If bmw had this, it would be, OHHH they think of everything!

Right because I'm such a BMW fanboy. I like the brand but your assumptions are faulty. And taking it too far? Can you explain that to us because I merely commented on ONE feature of the car I found to be funny and useless.

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

You cant drive without those features?

Do you?

I know you are trolling because your post history seems to say a lot. So tell us what do you drive?

[ihyln]

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

The moral of the story is, its a helpful feature. Non essential, but it helps. And you ripping GM for putting it in the car makes you look stupid.

Yet again you fail to describe how it is a helpful feature within my "story". Also, if you are either trolling or arguing it helps to counterpoint in order to reinforce your position. Even though my story may be incomplete I included details of why it chimed and I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings about pointing out such a geriatric feature on an obviously hip and cool car. If you re-read I didn't bash the car, I bashed GM. I know, what was I thinking trying to post an honest opinion these days? Seriously, God bless Florida.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by ihyln

Then you aren't old enough to "get" this feature. Ok, let's expand what I said. What age range did Cadillac associate themselves only a few years back? Big floaty boats driven by gray hairs with nowhere to go really. Don't lie and say you haven't seen old folks just sitting in their lane with the turn signal on (and yes not just Cadillac but other brands like Buick for example).

My point is, if GM is trying to make Cadillac young and hip again then there is no reason to keep this feature. Anyone with even the slightest bit of foresight will understand why the feature is in the first place because it is NOT a safety feature.

Of course it's a safety feature.

And by the way, I see people of any and all age groups leave their signals on. Nowadays it seems there are tons of teenagers and people in their 20s who are texting who do things like this, or damn near anyone who's busy on the damned cell phone.

Older folks tend to not use cell phones for any purpose while they drive.

"Stigma" indeed. You ought to back off this amazingly nonsensical position.

Or keep defending and look like an idiot.

Bruce

PS - And by the way, you might want to put on a marketing hat and understand that with a 1.8 birthrate, our population continues to age, so anything that might be useful to older folks is probably a Good Thing. I don't actually include the signal warning in that area (because it's clearly useful for anyone), but I notice that a number of vendors (Cadillac included) are using larger, more legible numbers and letters on their instruments and controls, which clearly is a benefit to old folks.

Edit: That's another safety feature, by the way. It's more useful to older folks than younger folks in general, because as you age, your ability to rapidly change focus degrades, but it's useful for anyone.

And if we're talking Europe, where the average birthrate is down near 1.2 or so, there are even more pronounced marketing opportunities.

[mPlasticDesign]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

So, you forgot to cancel your turn signal, the car reminded you, and that's a "stigma that GM brands currently have due to their backwards thinking."?

I don't get this at all.

Bruce

My wifes hummer had this. It would remind you but I think it took a while before it would beep at you. Certainly not while merging on an on ramp... at any rate, I don't think it's that cheasy.

[McLuVan]

uh
4300lbs....0-60 under 4 seconds
lol
I wonder how that feels....

[footie]

Autocar

CTS-V vs M5

[DakarE36]

Originally Posted by ihyln

No, because I was still merging from the on ramp then to the left lane so I had left it on.

OK, let me try to clear things up, since i own a new CTS-V. There is no f-ing way that the chime would go off while merging onto a highway, the one time ive heard the thing was when i accidentally left my signal on for a few miles and it started beeping at me which, despite my young age was a fairly useful feature, i cant see any reason why it would be a negative thing.

Anyway man, just realize that everyone on the BMW forum is disagreeing with you, you seem to have the losing argument.

I rest my case.

P.S. GM really stepped it up with this car, and its a crying shame that their performance division went down under shortly after completing the V. Who knows how many other world beaters they could have made.
Im excited to see how BMW's gonna retaliate with the new m5, i might have to invest in some mods if its blazin fast.

[footie]

If the X6M acceleration figures are anything to go be then those mods will definitely be in need and even then some.

X6M

Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 1.7
0 - 45 (sec): 2.9
0 - 60 (sec): 4.3
0 - 75 (sec): 6.4
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 12.6
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec): 4.1
30 - 0 (ft): 28
60 - 0 (ft): 107
Braking Rating: Excellent
Slalom (mph): 68.6
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.91

I keep reading those figures and still they blow my mind.

[jaiman]

Originally Posted by footie

If the X6M acceleration figures are anything to go be then those mods will definitely be in need and even then some.

X6M

Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 1.7
0 - 45 (sec): 2.9
0 - 60 (sec): 4.3
0 - 75 (sec): 6.4
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 12.6
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec): 4.1
30 - 0 (ft): 28
60 - 0 (ft): 107
Braking Rating: Excellent
Slalom (mph): 68.6
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.91

I keep reading those figures and still they blow my mind.

The X6M number that i heard, that blew me away, was that it lapped the n-ring faster than the e46 M3.

[Garissimo]

Originally Posted by footie

X6M
I keep reading those figures and still they blow my mind.

I think RS6 Avant vs. X6M would be an interesting matchup. The two are actually not that far apart in curb weight. I'd expect the RS6 to be faster in a straight line, but think the X6M might be the better handler. That's based on a hunch more than first hand experience.

[footie]

Originally Posted by jaiman

The X6M number that i heard, that blew me away, was that it lapped the n-ring faster than the e46 M3.

That means 8:22 which for something weighing 5000lbs is incredible, and after pushing the brother's X6 down a back road I have only praise for those test drivers because the ring is one hell of a bumpy place at times.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Garissimo

I think RS6 Avant vs. X6M would be an interesting matchup. The two are actually not that far apart in curb weight. I'd expect the RS6 to be faster in a straight line, but think the X6M might be the better handler. That's based on a hunch more than first hand experience.

Don't know, I think stock to stock it would be very close for the first 100 possibly 115 mph after which point aerodynamics would kick in and hurt the X6M's progress. As for lap times, again it's a bit of the unknown, I don't believe the X6M would at it's best around the ring, preferring a smoother track like the old Z4M did, but whether it would beat the RS6 at that I seriously doubt it. Even the current M5 isn't as quick around a track and it's lighter with a much better centre of gravity than the X6M.

A more interesting race would be Cayenne Turbo S vs X6M. The figures show the X6M to be quicker but what will the outcome be on up the speed and after experiencing a Cayenne around Porsche's Silverstone centre I can only reckon that lap times would be mighty close.

[graider]

Originally Posted by footie

Don't know, I think stock to stock it would be very close for the first 100 possibly 115 mph after which point aerodynamics would kick in and hurt the X6M's progress. As for lap times, again it's a bit of the unknown, I don't believe the X6M would at it's best around the ring, preferring a smoother track like the old Z4M did, but whether it would beat the RS6 at that I seriously doubt it. Even the current M5 isn't as quick around a track and it's lighter with a much better centre of gravity than the X6M.

A more interesting race would be Cayenne Turbo S vs X6M. The figures show the X6M to be quicker but what will the outcome be on up the speed and after experiencing a Cayenne around Porsche's Silverstone centre I can only reckon that lap times would be mighty close.

after a couple lap, I think the cayenne turbo will edge it due to better braking system.

[graider]

Originally Posted by jaiman

The X6M number that i heard, that blew me away, was that it lapped the n-ring faster than the e46 M3.

I think with a simple suspension with coil for 2k and zcp brake upgrade for 700 bucks, the e46 m3 will outlap the x6m on the nur. those are the two huge weakness of the e46 m3 in stock form.

[footie]

Originally Posted by graider

I think with a simple suspension with coil for 2k and zcp brake upgrade for 700 bucks, the e46 m3 will outlap the x6m on the nur. those are the two huge weakness of the e46 m3 in stock form.

Brakes aren't the issue you think they are on the ring, sure for something weighing 5000lbs it's a big concern but for something like the E46 M3 a decent set of comp pads and better fluid should do the trick.