CTSV05

Well applying your logic, then the rpms would have increased, not decreased.

30thWS6

2005V,

Welcome to the forum and by the way I was not calling your post BS, I was calling CTSV05's post BS. I agree with the subsequent posts that a motor cannot "loosen up" and drop RPM all of sudden at a given speed. I do not mean to offend you, CTSV05, but please check your facts. I'm surprised that assface Hot Rod didn't put in his two worthless cents about it too.

However, judging from your overly defensive response 2005V, it would seem that you may have self-esteem issues. But then again who wouldn't after finding out that their car is dynoing 30 HP below expectations.

2005V

Fair enough. I will be less defensive if you will use quotes so I know exactly who you are calling a liar . No self-esteem issues here, just a veteran of some other forums that were all attack and no substance. Kinda like the digital version of a Springer show. I'm glad to see that I was way off base!

Shinkaze

CTS-V owners mulling a Calss Action Lawsuit against GM
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums...hlight=lawsuit

More on the Dyno Numbers
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums...highlight=dyno

I think the resolution was an over-active oil temperature sensor that was pulling timing.... not sure if this was ever fully resolved though.

ctsvett

Theoil temp sensor issue was completely resolved for all those who had their panels flashed. (05 guys dont worry about this... its not you)

Reed

CTSV05

Well, 30th, I'm not gonna argue with you, and you may have your opinion this is truly the beauty of what is left of our American freedoms.

All I will say, is the first couple of times my wife and I drove on the freeway, I commented that at 70 mph, the tach was reading 2000 rpm, because the Mini at 70 would read 3000, and we were glad to see a 1000 rpm drop at the same speed.

And now at 70 it reads 17-1800, this is all I can say, I understand your desire to be correct, and I even see why you may not believe me, but I can only relate what occured.

cvp33

I know my V is north of 1,800 rpms at 70mph because the BB drone is from 55-65 and goes away north of 2,000 rpms. There is definitely no drone at 70mph so I know I'm north of 2,000 rpms. You have an anomaly to be sure.

CTSV05

CVP,

I'll double check, but have been aware of this for some reason.

As I said, I will do a confirmation on the rpms at 70, just so I'm not talkin out my butt.

eeiii

I say if you are getting this kind of numbers on the CTS-V, we should all get together and sue GM for false advertising. Same thing happened to Mazda when they put out the HP rating for their RX-8 and then found out that the car was putting out less HP, Mazda offer to buy the cars back from new owners.



It dynoed 318 - 319 rwhp. No, that is not a typo. We were just as disappointed. I checked the programming and it is virtually the same as the Z06 Vette. Exhaust is not too bad but there is a huge resonator in the middle of the car that merges both pipes together. Must costs some power there. Dropped the air box and put a K&N cone on the end of the MAF and only picked up another 6 rwhp.

MTI Stage II heads/cam are next...[/QUOTE]

StealthV

Replacing the resonator with a x-pipe is worth about 3 hp if my memory is correct.

B&B x-pipe 3" exhaust is the secret to power.

CTSV05

Actually, the res. is an x-pipe, but it has slots for the air to escape and mingle with the fiberglass inside. I just placed a piece of sheetmetal over the slots to make the air flow thru instead of into the res.

CTSV05

O.K., I did a test today, and with the cruise set at 70, on a flat road, the tach was right at the 1800 mark.

Now, its possible that I was doing 72 when I first noticed the cruise rpm, but pretty sure I was at 70.

But I just wanted to be sure I was correct at least in the current state of things.

StealthV

TTopJohn

Wow, y'all are still beating this year old dead horse? The lower dyno numbers v. a Z06 are because of the dual mass flywheel. It's much heavier, and it's reciprocating mass, the kind of weight that has the greatest detrimental impact on power. The CTS-V has one, the Z06 doesn't. That's it.

CTSV05

Well, I'm not sure, TPIS did a dyno test after installing his lightweight flywheel, and only picked up 8 or 9 peak horsepower.

CTS-VPaco

My V, with 8000 miles, dynoed on a DynoJet at 342rwhp. The first run, after 3 hours of driving, right onto the dyno, put down 336rwhp. Now to start mod'ing.

SlowImport

I could deffinitly see 109 trap speeds. I saw CTS-VPaco's car dyno 342rwhp and 336ftlbs. and that was bone stock.

I have a friend that ran his bone stock Z06 to a 12.4@116. So I could see has a little less rwhp and a little more weight could slow you down. But remember with a badass driver, badass conditions(i.e. weather/track/etc) I could believe that.

Hell I have a friend that took an 01 Z28 M6 with just a drop in K&N and he ran a 12.9@108. So this can be down just need to get some badass drivers with the powerful CTS-V's out there.

Then again if the car still had paper tags, maybe it wasent broken in just yet. I would like to agree with CTSV05 on that one. But who knows maybe it was just a slower car from the factory.

,
Josh

SSMOKE-U

I drove one bone stock from a dealer a few weeks ago and let me tell you, I was extremely disappointed. Did not have the punch I expected it to have and once you are up at speed, you don't have great pulling power. I was surprised at how slack the car performed. I guess now I know why.

CTSV05

I've driven 3 other Vs other than ours, and I'll tell you, our car will smoke all I drove!

Found out we have one of the cars slated for magazine use, so its been blueprinted, thankfully it only went to a show instead.

Anyway, my point is, there are decided differences from car to car.

30thWS6

Smoke u is the first person I have ever seen that said the car was underpowered. The horsepower rating may be overrated, but in no way is the car underpowered unless your daily driver is an Enzo with a 300 shot of nitrous.