Official HP/TQ Numbers out for CTS-V: 556 hp/551 tq

[Bunkei]

Originally Posted by T Bone

No, it is waste of time arguing with idiots on the internet.

I didn't insult you or your car BTW....just enjoy....smell the roses....lust for whatever car you want, GM or BMW.

Interesting, I don't see much of an argument. I asked you to submit proof to back up what you said, and you did everything you can to deflect attention from the original issue. So why all of a sudden am I an idiot, just because I ask you to substantiate your case? Can you admit that you had no defense or will you keep up with the insults and irrelevant comments?

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by Bunkei

Interesting, I don't see much of an argument. I asked you to submit proof to back up what you said, and you did everything you can to deflect attention from the original issue. So why all of a sudden am I an idiot, just because I ask you to substantiate your case? Can you admit that you had no defense or will you keep up with the insults and irrelevant comments?

You are a noob and you seem extremely insecure yet looking for conflict. Go to a Honda forum.

You took my comment "Enjoy your car" as an attack on what type of car you can afford and that I was stooping low. A month ago, I would have taken up bandwidth to rip you one.

Have a nice life. Enjoy your car. Congrats on being my first entry into the ignore list, you should reciprocate.

[Bunkei]

Originally Posted by T Bone

You took my comment "Enjoy your car" as an attack on what type of car you can afford and that I was stooping low. A month ago, I would have taken up bandwidth to rip you one.

You brought up my car, not I. And since it had nothing to do with our current conversation, so how should I have interpreted your comments?

But whatever .. it is done.

[Garissimo]

Looks like Car and Driver got their hands on a Production 2009 CTS-V. Data sheet is attached. Very M5-like acceleration numbers. It's a porker, though. Nearly 4300 lbs.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by Garissimo

Looks like Car and Driver got their hands on a Production 2009 CTS-V. Data sheet is attached. Very M5-like acceleration numbers. It's a porker, though. Nearly 4300 lbs.

They are both porkers. No question.

You have to hand to GM. Really think about it, GM built a M5 size car that has better 0-60, 1/4 mile, 60-0 braking, lap times, skid pad, and slalom. Me personally I still have a hard time believing it, but they actually did it.

Now bring on the next gen M5.

[footie]

Originally Posted by JetBlack5OC

They are both porkers. No question.

You have to hand to GM. Really think about it, GM built a M5 size car that has better 0-60, 1/4 mile, 60-0 braking, lap times, skid pad, and slalom. Me personally I still have a hard time believing it, but they actually did it.

Now bring on the next gen M5.

Why are you having such a hard time believing it?

It has more power and torque so that takes care of the accelerations times, the braking of the M5 isn't it's strongest point compared to other rivals and as for lap times and slalom, well this is all to do with grip and nothing else, if the thing does all of the above and still has a better ride, steering feel, etc, then I will be impressed but to me it sounds like a lot of numbers and nothing else.

[Garissimo]

Originally Posted by JetBlack5OC

They are both porkers. No question.

You have to hand to GM. Really think about it, GM built a M5 size car that has better 0-60, 1/4 mile, 60-0 braking, lap times, skid pad, and slalom. Me personally I still have a hard time believing it, but they actually did it.

Now bring on the next gen M5.

Some other notes; C&D said their automatic was faster to 60mph, but they weren't able to do a full 1/4 mile test. It's likely that the automatic CTS-V would be quicker with an equal or better trap speed in the 1/4 mile. Also, the SMG equipped M5 has posted better times than the six speed CTS-V, by just a smidge. Link to story:


2009 CTS-V Road Test

[BMW-videos.com]

they need to drop in a DSG tranny.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by Garissimo

Some other notes; C&D said their automatic was faster to 60mph, but they weren't able to do a full 1/4 mile test. It's likely that the automatic CTS-V would be quicker with an equal or better trap speed in the 1/4 mile. Also, the SMG equipped M5 has posted better times than the six speed CTS-V, by just a smidge. Link to story:

The Road & Track test the CTS-V lapped faster than the SMG M5.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6963

Here is another good read. Edmunds comparo.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=131206

Edmunds Quote:"Let's see. It looks great and it's the fastest production sedan we've ever tested. The bottom line appears to be pretty damn good."