hnic91

So I have a few friends who are huge BMW fans. They both contacted me today to say the new M5 lapped the Nurburgring 4 sec faster than the CTS-V. I call BS 1st because the website they quoted I can add lap times up myself. 2nd its all a he said she said game. 3rd I heard that the car did not have a stock tune and was on R compound tires. Look for your self.


http://f10.5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=549428

wmskateteam

iTrader: (8)

whatever, if they can't prove it was stock it doesn't count. i have recently seen a few articles on this, don't know if you guys saw this one on the zr1 but check it out http://wot.motortrend.com/video-find...nds-90303.html they posted the run videos, but it all comes down to proving it's stock which seems to be the big argument

AAIIIC

iTrader: (19)

Huh?

hnic91

The website that has the times up for the Nurburgring there is a box where I can add a time myself. So any Harry, can add a lap time.

The BMW forums are so happy they are talking about the CTS-V so much, they were mad it still is the fastest sedan lol.

We've moved up in the world they are scared of us.

big reg

iTrader: (28)

Why is it so hard to believe? The V1 was created to best the E39 M5 performance wise which it did. The E60 came out and annihilated the V1. The V2 came out 3 yrs later and beat the E60. 3 yrs later the F10 was created and voila.

Cadillac can simply lose the baby cam in the LSA and go with the LS9 cam to keep pulling from the factory parts bin and make an additional 30 or so Hp with a more aggressive tune to keep stock driveability. Add in a factory suspension option and they are back on top. Its called HP wars bud just in a different segment.

hnic91

I'm definitely not saying that the new M5 wont beat the V2. 4 second though is a lot for a car that has minimal hp difference over the V2.

big reg

iTrader: (28)

Quarter mile times and Road Course times are 2 different things though. An Evo has the same HP as a Volvo S60R but the Evo will annihilate it on any course, any time with, any driver behind the wheel.

Vehicle dynamics, stability control advances, etc... all play a part.

hnic91

I know, but your talking about an Evo vs. a Volvo huge difference. Now put the same stock Evo against a stock STi and the times won't be that much different.

big reg

iTrader: (28)

The STI is trash, see my sig. The STi will be a few secs slower though. It usually was. My cousin had an Evo at the same time as my STI. The STI seemed to have more torque and be a tad faster if at all but the Evo handled so much sharper and had better steering response as well as slightly more grip. i am willing to be the M team worked a lot on vehicle dynamics and advancing the stability control setup to achieve what they did.

siggyfreud

iTrader: (1)

4 seconds faster, when you're taking about sub eight minute times, is quite a bit IMO.

AAIIIC

iTrader: (19)

4sec over nearly 13 miles and 150+ corners isn't all that much.

You're not doing a very good job of proving your point...

Car and Driver Lightning Lap times from Feb 2011 issue:
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution SE - 3:10.6
Subaru Impreza WRX STI - 3:13.8

That's a 3.2sec difference in two very similar cars over a course that's ~4.2mi and has about 25 turns (depending on how you count them). Makes 4sec over 13mi and 150+ turns seem pretty inconsequential.

siggyfreud

iTrader: (1)

I agree to an extent, but when you consider how much these cars are pushing the limits at this point, 4 seconds is a lot more significant than it used to be. A 4 second jump in the 2009 CTS-V track time gets you to a Ferrari F430.

Big Bu Bu

iTrader: (4)

There are so many variables at play in these "ring" records. Drivers, weather, cheaters, etc. The only value I believe one can get from the results are what cars are competitive with each other in general terms.