View Single Post
      08-24-2008, 10:17 AM   #17
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Colonel
99
Rep
2,000
Posts

Drives: 2017 C63
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
The interior design looks fine but the exterior is awful, what is all this angular look all about.
Beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but in my opinion, these cars look very good indeed in the flesh (coupe seen only at an auto show).

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
Also, whith this amount of power and torque the time isn't that special when taking into context against what BMW have achieved with the M3.
With due respect, this is a little more apples and oranges than if you compared the CTS-V with, say, the M5. The CTS-V is in fact a bit larger than the M5, and heavier as well. Of course, we don't have an M5 'Ring time, but based on the M6 times, we can probably extrapolate to an 8:09 or 8:10. Even against the M6 in a track environment, the Cadillac perhaps shows up even a little better. Impressive indeed.

Bruce

Edit: PS - That 8:05 M3 time was also done with motorsports pads and super-sticky rubber. U.S cars come only with standard pads and PS2s. You and I disagree on the value of gummy rubber, but I think we can agree that a "standard" M3 will be several seconds slower at the 'Ring under the same conditions.
Appreciate 0