Cadillac CTS-V - CTS-V vs. M3 on the Track

I have an opportunity to purchase a new car primarily for fun and track time (HPDE at Highplains Raceway) but it still has to be somewhat useable for daily duties. I owned a 4th gen Camaro for 8 years before going over to the Subaru world and now I am escaping the Subaru world for something better. The e46 M3 is my prime choice but the CTS-V is an option as the price is about the same for a used one. Plus I have this deep passion for GM muscle cars. I know the M3 will perform at the track but are the CTS-V's capable of track duty on the weekend? What suspension options are available for these cars? Does anyone here actually race one of these things on a road course? Thanks for any input!

FWIW The guy I bought my '05 V from bought a '04 M3 to replace the V. I think the V's can get around the track well, maybe as fast (maybe faster) then a M3, but the V lacks the feedback and connected feeling that some "drivers" cars have. Some cars you can feel rolling over a pebble. The V is pretty numb for a sports car, but lots of guys open track them. I'm going to do it but haven't yet.

The V1 is still a very formidable weekend warrior. Prices have come down and the car is really a lot less expensive to operate than a M3. Replacement parts such as rotors and brakes are very robust. Clutches can be had for less than $800. LS engines have tons of performance parts at prices the Germans could never match. The sigma platform on the V1 is world class sports sedan status. As far as the weight is concerned, just look around at the new generation sport sedans and you'll find the V1 is a lightweight. $ for $ the V1 is a great value for weekend track days.

budie of mine from this forum that just went to limerack raceway a few weeks back, he said the V did very well on the track. He pulled a 1.15 on the g meter.

The thread isnt to far back, check it out. talk to him

I have a buddy that has an '04 M3 and he claims to be really fast. I think those cars are something special (as in -- more than the some of their parts). They just handle phenominally. That being said, the V1 is the same story. I have surprised a ton of guys on the roadcourse with my "heavy black beast". Even in stock form, CTS-Vs are formidable in their class (luxury sedans with lots of power), but add some handling and brake mods and you all of the sudden have a car capable of running with cars that are above and beyond the V1's class. Also, the aforementioned mods can be had pretty cheap. You can make this car handle better than any sedan should be able to for about $2000-$2500.

For informational purposes: I have run within less than 1 second difference of the lap times of a moderately/highly modified Subaru WRX (all STI parts, some weight reduction, 302 rwHP, and less than 3100 lbs, is what the owner told me, if I remember correctly). That was at Pueblo Motorsports Park, which if you have been there, is a fairly technical track that favors smaller, lighter cars. During one of my fast laps that day, I pulled a 1.25 and a 1.26 on the G-Meter. My previous outing at PMP was 4 seconds slower per lap and only 1.15/1.21 on the G-Meter, although that was before I was running the R-Compound Toyo R888s.

Also, see video below for me on the track @ Pueblo. I was planning to attend HPR this weekend, but some family obligations popped up instead, so now I am thinking of hitting HPR at the end of May for an open lapping day with FAASST Racing.

http://i723.photobucket.com/albums/ww236/tweeter1981/Pueblo%20Motorsports%20Park%202009/th_949021a2.jpg (http://s723.photobucket.com/albums/ww236/tweeter1981/Pueblo%20Motorsports%20Park%202009/?action=view&current=949021a2.flv)

The V1 is still a very formidable weekend warrior.

This is so true, most people just don't know it.

The sigma platform on the V1 is world class sports sedan status. As far as the weight is concerned, just look around at the new generation sport sedans and you'll find the V1 is a lightweight. $ for $ the V1 is a great value for weekend track days.

I love Bu Bu for posting this (I wish we could spread this information around even more). This is the wildcard as to why the V is so balanced and handles so well -- the Sigma Platform. Only shared by the last gen CTS line and when you pair some nice shocks and a good coilover/spring combo on this car, you have something that is very potent on the track.



I don't know if a V will ever out-track an M3 (although I don't have any firsthand experience with competing against one), but in some cases, I think it could be close enough to depend on the driver.

There are a good number of guys who track their v's on a regular basis. As you are probably aware, the M3 vs V on the track question usually ends up being a drivers issue rather then a vehicular one.

The brakes on the V are excellent. Most of my early HPDE instructors were amazed on how much grip they had, and how repeatable they were over the day.

From my point of view it's the perfect take the kids to school during the week, the wife out to dinner on Friday night, and track warrior on weekend vehicle.

The only thing I do for a track weekend is swap my Goodyears for a set of R comps.

Ron

tweeter, thank you for the valuable information. What kind of lap times were you turning down at Pueblo? I work at SCR Performance in Loveland and we spend a lot of time at autox events and HPR. I will be one of the on site mechanics for the shop during Time Trials events and such so if you see our trailer look for me, my name is Kevin.

Very interesting information for sure. I was expecting to get answers more along the lines of not a chance in hell between the two cars. More research is definitely required on my end. I was in a stock Evo9 with R comps a few weeks ago at HPR and a stock Charger SRT four door pulled on us in the straights, we could catch up in the corners but had a very hard time getting around him. That car was a massive boat too. That really opened my eyes back to american muscle cars.

I ran with this M3 all day last summer at Blackhawk a tight short track. The car was fast. This M3 was also modified. He could never pass me on the straight and never gained on me through the corners. Ofcourse this was not a race and no one was at 10/10s, but the cars appeared to be evenly matched. Probably more of a drivers race.

tweeter, thank you for the valuable information. What kind of lap times were you turning down at Pueblo? I work at SCR Performance in Loveland and we spend a lot of time at autox events and HPR. I will be one of the on site mechanics for the shop during Time Trials events and such so if you see our trailer look for me, my name is Kevin.

Very interesting information for sure. I was expecting to get answers more along the lines of not a chance in hell between the two cars. More research is definitely required on my end. I was in a stock Evo9 with R comps a few weeks ago at HPR and a stock Charger SRT four door pulled on us in the straights, we could catch up in the corners but had a very hard time getting around him. That car was a massive boat too. That really opened my eyes back to american muscle cars.

Glad to be of service to you! When I did a full day HPDE at Pueblo in 2007, I was running 1:55.xx, which I was told was pretty good for a street car.

But last summer with the r-comps, my best time was a 1:51.xx, and the guy in the modded WRX was running 1:50.xx. I was pretty happy about those times, although I don't really know how good they are other than compared to the Subies on the track that day. I think it would be pretty awesome to break into the 1:40's.

Also, it was like 90-95° F that day as well, brakes go really hot, but no fading or soft pedal feel at all. The brakes are the best part about these cars, just super solid and huge stopping power.

What were your times in the Evo?

I ran with this M3 all day last fall at Blackhawk a tight short track. The car was fast. This M3 was also modified. He could never pass me on the straight and never gained on me through the corners. Ofcourse this was not a race and no one was at 10/10s, but the cars appeared to be evenly matched. Probably more of a drivers race.

Awesome, and very cool picture!!! Oh, almost forgot. In my quest to have a track monster V, I am installing some heavy Eibach springs on my car this week. I am upping the spring rate from my existing 600/650 to 750/800. I am going to attempt to live with that high of a spring rate on the street so I don't have to mess with swapping them out when I hit up the track. I hope that the ride is not unbearable.

I think now the problem I am going to have is finding one to take for a drive before I buy. All of the ones I am finding are out of state. I get M3's through the shop fairly often so I have some wheel time in those. hmmmmmmm Tweeter, will you be at the track labor day weekend? Also, does the car feel heavy in the driver's seat?

I can say from personal experience, in a straight line it's not even close. 1st gear, 2nd gear 3rd gear...you name the speed the V smokes the e46.

I've never tried to race one in slow curves.

I think now the problem I am going to have is finding one to take for a drive before I buy. All of the ones I am finding are out of state. I get M3's through the shop fairly often so I have some wheel time in those. hmmmmmmm Tweeter, will you be at the track labor day weekend? Also, does the car feel heavy in the driver's seat?

I have always thought that the car felt tossable and very responsive, even in stock form, but now with my mods it feels pretty damn solid. Bottom line, It goes where I want it to go, and believe it or not, understeer is almost non-existant.

As for the weight feel, I don't think the car feels heavy at all. Although riding in my friends modified e46 M3, it felt a bit crisper and lighter than my V (but in reality it is only about 350-400 lbs lighter, keeping in mind 67 HP and gobs of torque less as well), but not to a huge extent.

One thing that seems to be a crutch for the car in terms of how it feels, is the super heavy (50 lb) dual-mass stock flywheel. I am having a mechanic friend install a Monster Clutch Kit with an 18 lb flywheel this week and should notice a significant change in how heavy the car feels, even though I don't really think it felt heavy to begin with.

I am tentatively planning on heading out to HPR on May 28th, but my plans may change if my girlfriend can't get that day off of work. Whenever I can actually make it down to Colorado for a track day (only once or twice per season) I usually post up on this forum or the Cadillacforum.com to see if any other V owners can make it.

Also, I am still curious about your Pueblo times. Do you know what good street car times are out there? I always like to find out where I stack up against the competition.

I talked to my co-worker that is a nationally ranked autox driver and he has was running 1.48's in an E36 M3. I am not sure what trim the car was in at the time, I would imagine AST coilovers and good tires. The engine has always been near stock so pretty low on power. He said the times weren't bad but weren't good so it sound like you were right around the average. I will be down there that weekend so maybe we can hook up.

The flywheel is really 50lbs? That is absolutely insane! I am shopping around for some choice parts that I would "like" to have and am discovering a few issues with parts. Wheels seem to be the biggest problem as I can't find anything except spendy CCW's and crappy Rota's. KW Variant 3's are available but we have switched all of our cars from KW over to AST's as we can tune and rebuild them in house and they don't offer a coilover yet. I might be able to change that though and need to make a phone call tomorrow. Brakes are good to go with Hawk pads of my liking which is nice. I am going to have to look into some seat brackets for Sparco's too.

Once my V gets back in a few weeks here you're welcome to test drive mine if you want? I know a couple others in CO that have supercharged V's currently mine is bone stock for now but hey if you want to give it a spin let me know, I autocross every now and then when I have the time. As for track I plan to be out there over the summer.

I talked to my co-worker that is a nationally ranked autox driver and he has was running 1.48's in an E36 M3. I am not sure what trim the car was in at the time, I would imagine AST coilovers and good tires. The engine has always been near stock so pretty low on power. He said the times weren't bad but weren't good so it sound like you were right around the average. I will be down there that weekend so maybe we can hook up.

The flywheel is really 50lbs? That is absolutely insane! I am shopping around for some choice parts that I would "like" to have and am discovering a few issues with parts. Wheels seem to be the biggest problem as I can't find anything except spendy CCW's and crappy Rota's. KW Variant 3's are available but we have switched all of our cars from KW over to AST's as we can tune and rebuild them in house and they don't offer a coilover yet. I might be able to change that though and need to make a phone call tomorrow. Brakes are good to go with Hawk pads of my liking which is nice. I am going to have to look into some seat brackets for Sparco's too.

The fw weight is ridiculous. It was designed that way to absorb driveline pulses and be easy to start the car for "older" Cadillac drivers. It needs to go on anyones V. It has a ton of slop in it as well and really makes the transmission clunk and feel somewhat sloppy.

Go with the Team Dynamics wheels (I believe they come in matte black or silver with a multi-spoke design). You can get four wheels shipped for something like $1100 on Ebay or something. They are 18"x9" wide (0.5" wider than stock) and super light from what I have heard. That is the route I would eventually like to go for track only wheels (keep in mind that these wheels don't come with a center cap, nor is there one to fit). My 19" CCWs are also badass light wheels, but 19" r-comp tires are just way too expensive.

The next track-related things I need to save up for is a dedicated car trailer so I don't have to drive my track-prepped car 400 miles to the track and those wheels I mentioned above. A man's gotta dream...

I'll let you know when I know for sure if I am going to HPR on the 28th or not.

I talked to my co-worker that is a nationally ranked autox driver and he has was running 1.48's in an E36 M3. I am not sure what trim the car was in at the time, I would imagine AST coilovers and good tires. The engine has always been near stock so pretty low on power. He said the times weren't bad but weren't good so it sound like you were right around the average. I will be down there that weekend so maybe we can hook up.

The flywheel is really 50lbs? That is absolutely insane! I am shopping around for some choice parts that I would "like" to have and am discovering a few issues with parts. Wheels seem to be the biggest problem as I can't find anything except spendy CCW's and crappy Rota's. KW Variant 3's are available but we have switched all of our cars from KW over to AST's as we can tune and rebuild them in house and they don't offer a coilover yet. I might be able to change that though and need to make a phone call tomorrow. Brakes are good to go with Hawk pads of my liking which is nice. I am going to have to look into some seat brackets for Sparco's too.

I reduced the weight of my clutch assembly by 41lbs by going to a Fidanza twin. The results are remarkable. Team Dynamics are available as a well priced track wheel from Lindsay Cadillac. Eibach or H&R springs are dirt cheap and Hotchkiss bars are very popular.

This one always gets me... hehehe

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSWm1RH0NCI

I track mine quite a bit. Very very capable car. It does provide feedback quite well and very predictable. I run R888s at the track. Can keep up with Vettes through the corners at Mosport, but once we hit the back straight away they leave me for dead. We'll see what happens when my cam goes in though :D

keep in mind its a 4 door vs 2 door

keep in mind its a 4 door vs 2 door

The number of doors a car has tells you nothing about how it can perform on the track. If you do the math, the first gen CTS-V actually has a better power to weight ratio than the e46 M3.

I am going to have to look into some seat brackets for Sparco's too.

You will need more than seat brackets. The seat belt is actually built into the seat so you will need a harness bar and harness also.

I'd say get the best of both worlds. Pick up an E36 M3 and drop an LSx and T56 in it . :)

Although it's not my primary track car, I've done a few track days in the V. It's definitely a very capable car, but there's no escaping that it weighs 4000#+ with driver. It's also hard to put anything close to decent sized rubber under it. Vorshlag runs 18x10.5" wheels all around on their E46 cars. All that extra rubber + a 10%+ weight advantage adds up to a lot. The only way the V stays close is by HP/TQ. (Not that there's anything wrong with that! :p)

Wheels seem to be the biggest problem as I can't find anything except spendy CCW's [sic] and crappy Rota's [sic].
I guess you didn't leave the Rota hatred behind when you left the Subaru community. :rolleyes: I'm curious, what about Rotas makes them crappy?

This one always gets me... hehehe
Is it funny because they think a slalom has cones 250ft apart so that even a monkey could drive through them at WOT the whole way?

Although it's not my primary track car, I've done a few track days in the V. It's definitely a very capable car, but there's no escaping that it weighs 4000#+ with driver.

Say goodbye to 3500 lb sedans. Even the E9 series of the M3 is hefty compared to years gone bye. That being said, these newer heavier models often out perform their predecessors. The new stars on the track like the GTR the V2 are over 4K and they go like stink. The Porsche Panamera turbo is a damn 4800 lb car that gets to 60 in less than 4 seconds and beats the V2 at the ring. WTF is that all about jeeez. Aston Martin DB9 is 3880. Jaguar XFR 4300. BMW M5 4000. The list goes on an on. I stopped worrying about it.

Accelerating all that weight is really the easy part. Slowing and turning all that weight is altogether different.

Low power with low weight will outperform big power and big weight, even though their HP to WT ratios are the same.

Intertia rules ...

Accelerating all that weight is really the easy part. Slowing and turning all that weight is altogether different.

Low power with low weight will outperform big power and big weight, even though their HP to WT ratios are the same.

Intertia rules ...

Exactly! Recently advances in brakes and tire technology along with innovative chassis design have made heavier cars perform better which has narrowed the gap, but in the long run you are 100% correct. Inertia does rule.

[/QUOTE]Is it funny because they think a slalom has cones 250ft apart so that even a monkey could drive through them at WOT the whole way?[/QUOTE]

Geezzzz... way to poop on my perade buddy! Oh well, mind passing over the hateraid?
V's are gay! Who the hell would want to buy a 4k lbs boat anyways? Only way those rust buckets could get down a track is behind a tow truck! Freakin rust buckets! P.s. thanks for the hateraid! Lolz.... jk

Accelerating all that weight is really the easy part. Slowing and turning all that weight is altogether different.
Exactly. And all the modern tire magic in the world can't overcome smaller tires on a heavier car. Moving beyond which car is faster around the track - either way, you're gonna have fun in both - the heavier car is going to use up consumables more quickly because it's working its tires and brakes harder to get around the track. Just another consideration for the OP.

Say goodbye to 3500 lb sedans. Even the E9 series of the M3 is hefty compared to years gone bye.
Hence my suggestion to go for an E36. :) Even without the LSx conversion, it's still a very quick, very capable car on track.

That being said, these newer heavier models often out perform their predecessors. The new stars on the track like the GTR the V2 are over 4K and they go like stink. The Porsche Panamera turbo is a damn 4800 lb car that gets to 60 in less than 4 seconds and beats the V2 at the ring. WTF is that all about jeeez. Aston Martin DB9 is 3880. Jaguar XFR 4300. BMW M5 4000. The list goes on an on. I stopped worrying about it.
All amazing, and all due a lot more to vastly increased HP and plateau-like torque curves rather than some sort of suspension/tire magic (IMO). Put the E36's 240hp straight 6 in the E46 or E90 and I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess the newer cars would be slower than the E36 around a road course.

(On the subject of amazing 'Ring performances, my favorite is the Maybach 57S. The thing weighs like 6000# and matched the Porsche Cayman S around the 'Ring. That's just fucking crazy! :eek:)

Didn't the GTR spank the shiat out of the veyron by like 10sec on the nuringbergering?

And AAIIIC you didn't like my reply to your comment? I thought it was very clever! Also very poorly spelled but still clever...





F-it! I'm in a good mood... ill fail myself for you! Haha... all in good fun...

The number of doors a car has tells you nothing about how it can perform on the track. If you do the math, the first gen CTS-V actually has a better power to weight ratio than the e46 M3.

power to weight ratio is a insight to acceleration, nothing to do with how a car will turn laps around a track.

Just my BS opinion :burn:
A car will be fastest when the steering wheel is not being turned. The faster you get through the turns the more time you spend going the fastest on the straightaways. When you get there you better be able to go fast. If power to weight gets you out of a turn faster it's an advantage. Lighweight cars are not always the fast cars. Cars that can brake short, manage weight transfer well (handle), and can haul the mail down the straights are going to turn in the best times. Lighweight cars have the capability to brake and transfer weight better than heavier cars. But....if they can't get the job done on the fastest parts of the course, the straightaways, lightweight won't help. They don't have to be the fastest car on the straights, just not slow. I read a book by Ross Bentley called Speed Secrets that said races can't be won in the turns but they can be lost there. I like AAIIICs idea of a LS powered E36. The best of both worlds.

I like AAIIICs idea of a LS powered E36. The best of both worlds.
Well, we can go one better - an LS powered E30! (http://vimeo.com/11182766) :D 414whp and all the torque that goes with it in a 2300# car. Thing must be a frickin' rocket.

I have actually considered doing an lsx e36, it would be a great option for track duty but I fear daily driving would be not so fun. I was at the track Friday and Saturday this week for some great racing and learned a few things about weight. I was the engineer for two built e36 cars racing in ITE with a field of about 15 other cars. My cars qualified 2nd and 3rd and finished 2nd and 3rd on Saturday. The car that won was a 4 cylinder e36! The engines in our cars were stock internals and the 4 banger was "built" but the weight savings with the 4 cylinder was what helped it stay in front. Even on the back straight it was nearly the same speed as our cars, so once it got in the twisty sections it would pull away. I was very surprised especially with the elevation changes on the track that our extra displacement should have helped take the edge.

Hopefully I get some more interest in my Forester this week and get it gone so I can go forward with picking a car. The cts-v is cheaper for me in every way from insurance to registration so it's is starting to gain a lead :)

As for the Rota hatred, I actually have had several sets and currently have a set on my Forester. They look good and the price is right but they are heavy and take lots of weight to balance. When I balance a set of new Rota's and they take a butt load of weight that means poor build quality. A good set of wheels like SSR's or CCW's take around .25 to .5 oz's total which is nothing. http://c1.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/151/l_fae5e1593a4640a29411db42839674b8.jpg

power to weight ratio is a insight to acceleration, nothing to do with how a car will turn laps around a track.

I like ya brother, but that comment is some "low-hanging fruit" to be sure. :cheers:

So you're telling me that a high hp/tq car that can accelerate much better than a low hp/tq car (or in the case of an e46 m3, you have to rev that thing to the moon to make any tq, and really how often are you in the 6000-8000 rpm range) will not be faster around a track. Doesn't acceleration matter when coming out of every turn?

So if you have a CTS-V, that has a bit of power/torque that starts at a pretty low rpm (2800-3000), and can use that power on not only any straights that a track has, but also each and every turn, how will it not be faster than a relatively low-powered car that just can't match those acceleration numbers. The low power car would have to be so much faster through the turns and later breaking into the turns to make up the lost time due to lower acceleration. Being that much faster through the turns is much harder than being able to use our V's big power, that is why it quite often would come down to a driver's race between a V and an e46 M3, with the advantage going to a properly-driven V because of the huge power difference (and the fact that the torque starts much lower in the rpm band).

I like ya brother, but that comment is some "low-hanging fruit" to be sure. :cheers:

So you're telling me that a high hp/tq car that can accelerate much better than a low hp/tq car (or in the case of an e46 m3, you have to rev that thing to the moon to make any tq, and really how often are you in the 6000-8000 rpm range) will not be faster around a track. Doesn't acceleration matter when coming out of every turn?

So if you have a CTS-V, that has a bit of power/torque that starts at a pretty low rpm (2800-3000), and can use that power on not only any straights that a track has, but also each and every turn, how will it not be faster than a relatively low-powered car that just can't match those acceleration numbers. The low power car would have to be so much faster through the turns and later breaking into the turns to make up the lost time due to lower acceleration. Being that much faster through the turns is much harder than being able to use our V's big power, that is why it quite often would come down to a driver's race between a V and an e46 M3, with the advantage going to a properly-driven V because of the huge power difference (and the fact that the torque starts much lower in the rpm band).

well you want to be on the throttle as much as possible with the wheels pointed mostly straight. being able to carry speed in the corner and have high exit speeds are key to being fast on a road course. you also need a vehicle which can stretch its legs down the straights. so you need many things to be quick, power to weight is one of them.

There are several tracks that have big, long straight sections ... Road America, Miller, Laguna Seca, super speedway rovals, VIR, to name a few. But most tracks have straights that are no more than a couple hundred yards long and, at the common man's level of track access, most tracks only occasionally see triple digit speeds. And 60-70% of a track is typically in a turn.

So even the torquiest of cars will have maybe a two or three car length advantage at the end of a given straight.

Now ... the other side of that sword is that all that extra speed has to be slowed down. So a faster car will have to begin braking sooner. So, much of the advantage gained is erased in the braking zone.

Another way of looking at it ...

How many feet (distance, not time) does it take for a car to accelerate from 40 to 100 mph? How many feet does it take for the same car to slow from 100 to 40?

A guess is that it would take twice, maybe even three times the distance to accelerate 40-100 as it does to deccelerate from 100 to 40.

Advantage ... braking.

Light vs Heavy ...

A tire can only grip as much as it can grip. It doesn't care about speed or weight, it can only grip at 100%.

So a tire's ability to carry a higher speed through a turn means that reduced weight is necessary. It is eye-opening and jaw-dropping what a HUGE difference 500lbs can make in the amount of speed one can carry through a turn.

So if a lighter car can carry more speed through 60% of a given track and be able to out-brake the heavier, torquier and straight-line faster car, then the advantage the HP car is reduced significantly.

In Grand Am racing, it's why an RX8 can be uber-competitive with a C6.

2009 Porsce Cayman S 3100 lbs. 60-0 mph 111 feet

2010 CTS V 4200 lbs. 60-0 mph 109 feet.

Lower weight does not always equal superior braking. BTW the V2 which is almost 1/2 ton more in weight will destroy a Cayman S on a road course. Road and Track has tested both. It takes more than low weight to win. But......low weight is the first thing you should try to achieve because it pays big dividends. Imagine the V2 if it weighed 3500 lbs. So I agree with you about weight. It's just not everything.

Keep in mind that we're comparing braking from 100-40 while setting up for a turn and doing so multiple times, lap after lap. Not a single straightline braking event. That's not exactly apples to apples ...

The V has HUGE brakes and I love it. I am currently trying to find a way to get my V on track to see how it compares to my old track car and my current race car. It feels great on the street.


So I agree with you about weight. It's just not everything.


It's hard to get your head around, but weight plays more of a role in lap times on a road course than horsepower ... at least that's been my experience.

2009 Porsce Cayman S 3100 lbs. 60-0 mph 111 feet

2010 CTS V 4200 lbs. 60-0 mph 109 feet.

Lower weight does not always equal superior braking. BTW the V2 which is almost 1/2 ton more in weight will destroy a Cayman S on a road course. Road and Track has tested both. It takes more than low weight to win. But......low weight is the first thing you should try to achieve because it pays big dividends. Imagine the V2 if it weighed 3500 lbs. So I agree with you about weight. It's just not everything.

To further this point:

2004 CTS-V (3850 lbs.) 60-0 mph = 116 ft.

e46 M3 (3350 lbs.) 60-0 mph = 115 ft.


Obviously the superior 4-piston Brembo calipers with 14.0"/14.4" rotors make up for the 500 lb weight difference (and the M3's tiny 1-piston calipers and rotors) to some extent. It is time to give credit where credit is due. The V is the real deal for its class of automobiles. I too want a super-light, dedicated sports/track car (i.e. Corvette Z06), but most of us have to "make do" with what we have. And I, for one, am very proud of what I have been able to accomplish with the aftermarket modifications on my 2004 V. I would bet good money that it will surprise a lot of cars on the road course that on paper should be able to run cirlces around it.

On another note, my friend just upgraded his front brakes to Stoptechs on his M3 after completely burning up a caliper at a track day last month, so I have no qualms saying that he will for sure be able to out-brake me now with his aftermarket setup.

There's also tire compound and width as well. V1s don't exactly run the widest tires in the front.

But when you compare Cayman vs 2010 V, put same width tires on the Cayman and see who stops faster then.

Basically there's too many variables.

There's also tire compound and width as well. V1s don't exactly run the widest tires in the front.

But when you compare Cayman vs 2010 V, put same width tires on the Cayman and see who stops faster then.

Basically there's too many variables.

Exactly, and the weight variable of the V2 (1100lbs) negates the wider tire size. Everyone acknowledges that weight can be a disadvantage. Weight problems can be problematic for handling, braking, and accelerating. If the car designers can help overcome some of those inherent problems with better brake systems, state of the art chassis design (GTR AWD for one and GM Sigma with SLA and multi-link), plentiful torque and the right wheel and tire combo, they can help level the playing field. In the end though, if your gonna build a real racecar, it better be a lightweight one.

Has anyone tracked a maggied V? I've been debating taking mine out for a few laps, but heat soaking the heat exchanger worries me.

^^ I would like to know the same.

Matter of fact I'm interested in LS cars that are Magnacharger or Procharged and how do they do at the track reliability wise.

They look good and the price is right but they are heavy and take lots of weight to balance. When I balance a set of new Rota's and they take a butt load of weight that means poor build quality. A good set of wheels like SSR's or CCW's take around .25 to .5 oz's total which is nothing.
My Torques weigh slightly less than the GM Accessory wheels, which are ~3# lighter than the OEM wheels in the exact same size and offset. Are they Volk light? No, but they also didn't cost me $600 per wheel, so I'm OK with that. I don't think mine took a whole lot of weight to balance (for my Subie or the V). I did notice that my rear Linea Corsas took a lot of weight to balance, so I see where you're coming from there.

I track my V1 about 5-7 times a year
I live in the Dallas area and goto Eagles Canyon Raceway about 1hr north of Allen, TX

what's great about the V for the dual use, space and power and brakes
there's alot small upgrades can you do and REALLY make a difference:
...SS brake lines, brake fluid, sway bars, brake pads, TIRES!!!!

the problems with the V as a track car:
6 lug rims -- few choices
seatbelt into the seat -- so can't switch our seats for ther weekend :-(

I planning to race again as soon as temps drop
Sept 11th is a open track day @ ECR:
http://www.eaglescanyon.com/2008/schedule.php?day=01&mon=09&yr=2010

jerrycecco@tx.rr.com

This is one of my favorite threads. I especially like the weight discussions. My V is a big girl, kinda like one of the Williams sisters (Serena I think).
Without those Brembos and the Yoko AD08s and the hi tech pad materials that were not available until the last few years, 3850 lbs. would play out a lot different. Pat says that the notable heavyweights perform well because of the power advances, I agree, but I think it's a combination of both.
The new Camaro and the Shelby Mustang have now joined the ranks of the clinically obese. So instead of hoping for mid 1990s curb weights to return for sedans and coupes, let's look out into the future. and figure that this is what we will be working with unless we all want to drive Subarus and E46s (nice cars BTW).

Good luck on track day Jerry. :)