Cadillac CTS-V

[///M-Spec]

Slightly, although the V's tires are better and they're both very much in the performance car realm and, as you point out, the skidpad runs are quite comparable, despite the fact that the CTS is heavier and larger.

Well sure.. slightly was the word I originally used, wasn't it?

The Caddy aquits itself pretty damn well for such a heavy car. As I said, the Goodyears are better than either of the M3's original equipment tires and allows it to turn almost as hard as the M.

But put the F1 Supercars on the M or the Contis on the CTS-V and the gap will grow somewhat. Conversely, put 255s or even 265s on the Caddy and it will close the gap on the Bimmer... which was the original reason I stated it was 'slightly undertired'. Of course, this is all steady state performance, which is somewhat narrow in scope.


M

 

[Poverty]

The new C-class is running e-class suspension. Its guaranteed to be the most comfortable in its class with that already. The thing people need to remeber with AMG's is that they are fast and comfortable. Thats not the Case with M cars as much. I was amazed at how the AMG performs and as a everyday car for me Id take an AMG over a M anyday.

 

[1X83Z]

Well sure.. slightly was the word I originally used, wasn't it?

Indeed, and it's a characterization I can agree with.

 

[YSSMAN]

The new C-class is running e-class suspension. Its guaranteed to be the most comfortable in its class with that already.

What, they're running the E-class' AIRMATIC suspension? If I recall, there have been more complaints over body roll than anything with the new E-class because of it. Of course, in AMG-tune the suspension works great, actually allowing for the car to be driven like a madman.

Lets hope the C63 isn't focused only on comfort as compared to sport. I too have high-hopes for the car, however, lets be realistic here for a moment. The CLK received "only" 475 BHP from the 6.2L V8, and while the 7G-Tronic makes the best use of the power, that is going to be at least 30 BHP short of the Sigma II CTS-V... And that extra 75 BHP isn't going to save it from the lighter, presumably more nimble M3 either.

I wouldn't put my eggs in their basket until I see some solid figures. We may not necessarily "know" whats going on with the Sigma II CTS-V, but educated guessing gives you a pretty good idea that the car will be outstandingly fast, however it is tough to call against a well-hidden M3.

What this all leaves me with is what exactly Audi plans to do in response. It is pretty hard to argue against the RS4 in this category right now, but with BMW adding more power, Mercedes getting better at building high-power and sporty cars, and GM going crazy with the CTS-V, Audi may get pushed to the back, again. We'll see eventually I suppose, but as I noted before, this will be a very interesting comparison between the four cars...

 

[Poverty]

Well I read that mercedes wanted to stick with being the luxuries choice even though people bang on about sporty bmw's, but they said that they havent neglacted that side and that the car is more nimble than ever.

As for audi next S4 and S5 should have the 4.2 V8 with about 390hp, and the RS versions stand a good chance of running a porsche engine with 460hp.

The 2.5 5cyl Twin turbo engine for the RS TT has been scrapped though supposedly

 

[Mt. Lynx]

I think the Audi answer lies in an RS5, but I can´t see that happening on this side of ´08.

 

[YSSMAN]

Even with the RS5, I still wouldn't put but the beans in Audi's pocket. Sure, I expect great things with the car, however, that doesn't guarantee it to be a resounding success. It will still have to overcome the presumably high weight, and unless Audi figures out how not to put an engine before the front axle, it probably won't stand much of a chance against the presumably more balanced M3 and CTS-V.

But, you're right. With the only Audi able to represent VAG in this competiton being the RS4, we're going to have to wait a while for the A5/S5/RS5.

The 2.5 5cyl Twin turbo engine for the RS TT has been scrapped though supposedly

Thats too bad. I was waiting to see what our American engine could do with the addition of twin turbos. They were saying 300 BHP, right? That would have been really cool to see in the Jetta with some crazy version of that, but too bad it won't happen.