how would our 04 thru 07 V's in stock form do against RX-8's on a auto-x course?
01-15-2010, 07:43 AM
#1
how would our 04 thru 07 V's in stock form do against RX-8's on a auto-x course? I was told by a small group of people that a stock RX-8 would totally destroy us on an auto-x course and that we prolly couldn't even keep up with a cobalt SS on the course too... its not that big of a deal but I would still like to know if its true.... never been on an auto-x course but I do plan on it when I get the chance...
01-15-2010, 08:10 AM
#2
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's really up to the driver. I've taken first place overall before with a Z06 taking 2nd. The V is heavy, but with a good driver it's very capable, even on a very tight course. Trust me, I run with the Miata club sometimes.
01-15-2010, 11:08 AM
#4
The RX8 is VERY slow on an auto-x course. It just does not have the power/tq to accelerate its mass quickly in the short distances needed in auto-x. I have had a worse time then an RX8 in auto-x. Miata's on the other hand with the right driver can destroy a V.
Trending Topics
01-15-2010, 11:23 PM
#9
it would have to depend on how large the autox course is. ive been on some which a v would do great in, but with a rx8 9k rev limit you could stay in 1st gear most of the time which could be a huge help.
on a small autox with nearly no straights..... it would be a tough sell for any large car even a v.
on a small autox with nearly no straights..... it would be a tough sell for any large car even a v.
01-16-2010, 03:55 PM
#12
TECH Addict
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Where the Navy tells me to go
Posts: 2,403
Received 106 Likes
on
88 Posts
Allow me to inject some actual verifiable data into this discussion. I'm sure the people who told you that an RX-8 or Cobalt SS would destroy a V at an auto-x were assuming both cars were driven by high caliber drivers. The previous responses to this thread all seem to be based on the thinking that "Well, I beat an ***-clown who has no idea how to drive an RX-8 at my local auto-x, so RX-8s must suck," which couldn't be further from the truth. Comparing results at a local auto-x is pretty much worthless, since the prep level of the cars (even in a Stock class) varies widely, and the abilities of the drivers varies even more widely. At the local level, any car can beat any other.
If the driver of the RX-8 is competent, the RX-8 will absolutely eat the V for lunch on an auto-x course. Just look at the SCCA classing - the RX-8 is in B Stock, the CTS-V is in F Stock. B Stock is a faster class than F Stock. At Nationals last year the top BS time was 4sec (over 2 days) faster than FS - 117sec vs 121sec. Add in the fact that the RX-8 is the car to beat in BS (14 of the top 15 cars in BS @ the 2009 Nationals were RX-8s), and has been for a couple of years now, while the CTS-V isn't even competitive in FS (not a single one in the 26 car class at Nationals). Yes, the RX-8 will totally destroy a CTS-V in an auto-x event. I've never even driven an RX-8 and I'd be willing to bet that I would beat myself if I were to race an RX-8 back-to-back with my CTS-V.
Wow. You're kidding me, right? See above.
MidOhio is a road course. Were you running the road course, or did you do an auto-x there?
If the driver of the RX-8 is competent, the RX-8 will absolutely eat the V for lunch on an auto-x course. Just look at the SCCA classing - the RX-8 is in B Stock, the CTS-V is in F Stock. B Stock is a faster class than F Stock. At Nationals last year the top BS time was 4sec (over 2 days) faster than FS - 117sec vs 121sec. Add in the fact that the RX-8 is the car to beat in BS (14 of the top 15 cars in BS @ the 2009 Nationals were RX-8s), and has been for a couple of years now, while the CTS-V isn't even competitive in FS (not a single one in the 26 car class at Nationals). Yes, the RX-8 will totally destroy a CTS-V in an auto-x event. I've never even driven an RX-8 and I'd be willing to bet that I would beat myself if I were to race an RX-8 back-to-back with my CTS-V.
Wow. You're kidding me, right? See above.MidOhio is a road course. Were you running the road course, or did you do an auto-x there?
01-16-2010, 04:33 PM
#13
Allow me to inject some actual verifiable data into this discussion. I'm sure the people who told you that an RX-8 or Cobalt SS would destroy a V at an auto-x were assuming both cars were driven by high caliber drivers. The previous responses to this thread all seem to be based on the thinking that "Well, I beat an ***-clown who has no idea how to drive an RX-8 at my local auto-x, so RX-8s must suck," which couldn't be further from the truth. Comparing results at a local auto-x is pretty much worthless, since the prep level of the cars (even in a Stock class) varies widely, and the abilities of the drivers varies even more widely. At the local level, any car can beat any other.
If the driver of the RX-8 is competent, the RX-8 will absolutely eat the V for lunch on an auto-x course. Just look at the SCCA classing - the RX-8 is in B Stock, the CTS-V is in F Stock. B Stock is a faster class than F Stock. At Nationals last year the top BS time was 4sec (over 2 days) faster than FS - 117sec vs 121sec. Add in the fact that the RX-8 is the car to beat in BS (14 of the top 15 cars in BS @ the 2009 Nationals were RX-8s), and has been for a couple of years now, while the CTS-V isn't even competitive in FS (not a single one in the 26 car class at Nationals). Yes, the RX-8 will totally destroy a CTS-V in an auto-x event. I've never even driven an RX-8 and I'd be willing to bet that I would beat myself if I were to race an RX-8 back-to-back with my CTS-V.
Wow. You're kidding me, right? See above.
MidOhio is a road course. Were you running the road course, or did you do an auto-x there?
If the driver of the RX-8 is competent, the RX-8 will absolutely eat the V for lunch on an auto-x course. Just look at the SCCA classing - the RX-8 is in B Stock, the CTS-V is in F Stock. B Stock is a faster class than F Stock. At Nationals last year the top BS time was 4sec (over 2 days) faster than FS - 117sec vs 121sec. Add in the fact that the RX-8 is the car to beat in BS (14 of the top 15 cars in BS @ the 2009 Nationals were RX-8s), and has been for a couple of years now, while the CTS-V isn't even competitive in FS (not a single one in the 26 car class at Nationals). Yes, the RX-8 will totally destroy a CTS-V in an auto-x event. I've never even driven an RX-8 and I'd be willing to bet that I would beat myself if I were to race an RX-8 back-to-back with my CTS-V.
Wow. You're kidding me, right? See above.MidOhio is a road course. Were you running the road course, or did you do an auto-x there?
Last edited by SkullV; 01-16-2010 at 04:40 PM.
01-16-2010, 05:35 PM
#14
Staging Lane
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dallas
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The key is it being an Auto-X course. The RX8 could hardly get out of its own way in stock form. Anything besides and auto-x course the RX will not even come close to standing a chance.
Cts-V - 3650(3850 actual) Curb weight - 405hp
RX8 - 3000(3200 actual) Curb weight - 230hp
Acceleration 0-60:
Cts-V - 4.7sec
RX8 - 6.4sec
Braking 60-0:
Cts-V - 111'
RX8 - 111'
Skidpad:
Cts-V - .90g
RX8 - .88g
Slalom:
Cts-V - 66.8mph
RX8 - 67.1mph
Seeing these numbers I don't really understand how the V is not competing with the RX in an auto-x event. The only thing that I would contribute this to is lack of V's in the SCCA events and less experienced drivers in the V's at said events.
Cts-V - 3650(3850 actual) Curb weight - 405hp
RX8 - 3000(3200 actual) Curb weight - 230hp
Acceleration 0-60:
Cts-V - 4.7sec
RX8 - 6.4sec
Braking 60-0:
Cts-V - 111'
RX8 - 111'
Skidpad:
Cts-V - .90g
RX8 - .88g
Slalom:
Cts-V - 66.8mph
RX8 - 67.1mph
Seeing these numbers I don't really understand how the V is not competing with the RX in an auto-x event. The only thing that I would contribute this to is lack of V's in the SCCA events and less experienced drivers in the V's at said events.
Last edited by 2003RC51; 01-18-2010 at 05:37 PM.
01-16-2010, 10:08 PM
#16
FINALLY something we agree on. This is the only reason that I can pass GT3s and z06s on the track. Their drivers are either to afraid to drive their cars to their true potential or just lack the skill to. My car is definitely NOT faster then them.
01-16-2010, 10:19 PM
#17
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
brother im glad we can agree on it! i am done the non-sense for good! lets all be friends! tired of worring about whats being said on here when im out! lol
01-16-2010, 10:54 PM
#18
TECH Resident
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wouldnt believe me if i told you
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about the second part of the question?
How would it do against the TC/SS cobalts. People underate those at handling all the time.
It doesnt hold the record for fastest production FWD at the nurburgring for no reason....
How would it do against the TC/SS cobalts. People underate those at handling all the time.
It doesnt hold the record for fastest production FWD at the nurburgring for no reason....
01-17-2010, 09:33 AM
#19
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys, an RX8, Miata and Cobalt will all destroy a CTS-V at an autocross. So will Subarus, 350Zs, most Mustangs, Camaros, and many other cars. Maybe at a local event you went to you did well, but go up against national-caliber drivers in well-prepared cars and you'll lose. Period.
I'm probably the only one here who's taken his CTS-V to an SCCA National Tour autocross event, and I campaigned the car for most of last year, so I'm speaking from experience. I ran in the ESP class on Hoosier A6 tires, so I definitely had the right rubber. The numbers posted above about acceleration and handling don't mean anything. Autocrossing isn't a skidpad, so the G-force figures are misleading. What's important at an autocross is the ability to change directions rapidly (ie a slalom) and the V's weight really, really hurts it in that regard. The CTS-V is also much longer and wider than the other cars, and that's a huge disadvantage. The V also has a hard time fitting tires any larger than the other cars you mentioned. And as for power, there just aren't many opportunities to put it down on an autocross course. One big problem I had autocrossing the V was boiling the fluid and losing power assist. The steering inputs at an autocross are so large and so frequent that the stock cooler isn't really adequate, and you can't install a larger cooler without moving up to a class where you'll do even worse.
The CTS-V is NOT an autocross car. You just can't expect a car that's 700-1,000 pounds heavier than the models you mentioned to keep up with them in that environment. Take the same cars to a road course where the V can stretch its legs and things change.
Edit: At the 2009 Dixie National Tour event my 2-day time was 102.439. The B Stock class winning RX8 ran 97.614, and the C-Stock winning Miata ran 98.518. Bear in mind that since I run Street Prepared my car had more mods than the stock-class Mazdas.
I'm probably the only one here who's taken his CTS-V to an SCCA National Tour autocross event, and I campaigned the car for most of last year, so I'm speaking from experience. I ran in the ESP class on Hoosier A6 tires, so I definitely had the right rubber. The numbers posted above about acceleration and handling don't mean anything. Autocrossing isn't a skidpad, so the G-force figures are misleading. What's important at an autocross is the ability to change directions rapidly (ie a slalom) and the V's weight really, really hurts it in that regard. The CTS-V is also much longer and wider than the other cars, and that's a huge disadvantage. The V also has a hard time fitting tires any larger than the other cars you mentioned. And as for power, there just aren't many opportunities to put it down on an autocross course. One big problem I had autocrossing the V was boiling the fluid and losing power assist. The steering inputs at an autocross are so large and so frequent that the stock cooler isn't really adequate, and you can't install a larger cooler without moving up to a class where you'll do even worse.
The CTS-V is NOT an autocross car. You just can't expect a car that's 700-1,000 pounds heavier than the models you mentioned to keep up with them in that environment. Take the same cars to a road course where the V can stretch its legs and things change.
Edit: At the 2009 Dixie National Tour event my 2-day time was 102.439. The B Stock class winning RX8 ran 97.614, and the C-Stock winning Miata ran 98.518. Bear in mind that since I run Street Prepared my car had more mods than the stock-class Mazdas.
Last edited by Mercutio; 01-17-2010 at 09:50 AM. Reason: Adding results
01-17-2010, 01:53 PM
#20
Staging Lane
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dallas
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys, an RX8, Miata and Cobalt will all destroy a CTS-V at an autocross. So will Subarus, 350Zs, most Mustangs, Camaros, and many other cars. Maybe at a local event you went to you did well, but go up against national-caliber drivers in well-prepared cars and you'll lose. Period.
I'm probably the only one here who's taken his CTS-V to an SCCA National Tour autocross event, and I campaigned the car for most of last year, so I'm speaking from experience. I ran in the ESP class on Hoosier A6 tires, so I definitely had the right rubber. The numbers posted above about acceleration and handling don't mean anything. Autocrossing isn't a skidpad, so the G-force figures are misleading. What's important at an autocross is the ability to change directions rapidly (ie a slalom) and the V's weight really, really hurts it in that regard. The CTS-V is also much longer and wider than the other cars, and that's a huge disadvantage. The V also has a hard time fitting tires any larger than the other cars you mentioned. And as for power, there just aren't many opportunities to put it down on an autocross course. One big problem I had autocrossing the V was boiling the fluid and losing power assist. The steering inputs at an autocross are so large and so frequent that the stock cooler isn't really adequate, and you can't install a larger cooler without moving up to a class where you'll do even worse.
The CTS-V is NOT an autocross car. You just can't expect a car that's 700-1,000 pounds heavier than the models you mentioned to keep up with them in that environment. Take the same cars to a road course where the V can stretch its legs and things change.
Edit: At the 2009 Dixie National Tour event my 2-day time was 102.439. The B Stock class winning RX8 ran 97.614, and the C-Stock winning Miata ran 98.518. Bear in mind that since I run Street Prepared my car had more mods than the stock-class Mazdas.
I'm probably the only one here who's taken his CTS-V to an SCCA National Tour autocross event, and I campaigned the car for most of last year, so I'm speaking from experience. I ran in the ESP class on Hoosier A6 tires, so I definitely had the right rubber. The numbers posted above about acceleration and handling don't mean anything. Autocrossing isn't a skidpad, so the G-force figures are misleading. What's important at an autocross is the ability to change directions rapidly (ie a slalom) and the V's weight really, really hurts it in that regard. The CTS-V is also much longer and wider than the other cars, and that's a huge disadvantage. The V also has a hard time fitting tires any larger than the other cars you mentioned. And as for power, there just aren't many opportunities to put it down on an autocross course. One big problem I had autocrossing the V was boiling the fluid and losing power assist. The steering inputs at an autocross are so large and so frequent that the stock cooler isn't really adequate, and you can't install a larger cooler without moving up to a class where you'll do even worse.
The CTS-V is NOT an autocross car. You just can't expect a car that's 700-1,000 pounds heavier than the models you mentioned to keep up with them in that environment. Take the same cars to a road course where the V can stretch its legs and things change.
Edit: At the 2009 Dixie National Tour event my 2-day time was 102.439. The B Stock class winning RX8 ran 97.614, and the C-Stock winning Miata ran 98.518. Bear in mind that since I run Street Prepared my car had more mods than the stock-class Mazdas.
We are down to comparing cars here. Your times vs. the RX8 times in that event don't bear much significance. Put the same driver in both cars stock/stock and then we will know for certain. While I am sure you are a good driver, the RX8 driver could be that much better and that much more familiar with his car if he has been campaigning it for longer.
Most people that run in SCCA are not going to buy a Cadillac to go out and beat the hell out of it at an auto-x event. They are also not going to buy a Cadillac and make it a pure auto-x car which is what I am betting most of the miata's and RX8's are. Most owners are going to drive the V to the event, have some fun on the course and drive home. As for the RX8 and Miata's, I am sure the owners have no problem beating the ever loving crap out of them.
The slalom of the V and RX8 are very close. While the RX8 will definitely switchback slightly faster its not that far superior to the V, and what the V loses in the slalom it will more than pick up in the acceleration times which is also very important in the smaller auto-x events.