my ss vs cts-v
06-22-2006, 11:55 AM
#24
Teching In
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PERFECT Z28
Not bad for luxury 4 door...wish I had one.
Thats why I got her, I wanted a C5 Z06, but at the time had an S2000 and a G35 coupe, I couldn't justify another 2 door, so when I drove one of the V's I was hooked, I almost have the axel hop gone, but it still shows it ugly head. and the viper has it too...never thought I would say this....but a solid axel sounds nice :-)
06-22-2006, 12:07 PM
#26
Teching In
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 00454sscamaro
look at edited post^ it wouldnt let me post again so i just edited.
I read your post, makes sense, as I said in my first response, I wasnt saying it didnt happen. I was mainly responding to the guy whould so intelligently called it an non aerodynamic turd... what a joke.
06-22-2006, 12:18 PM
#27
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by c5_ls1_6spd
i sure hope you don't tell people you can go 170mph 
06-22-2006, 12:19 PM
#28
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CTSVSL65AMG
I read your post, makes sense, as I said in my first response, I wasnt saying it didnt happen. I was mainly responding to the guy whould so intelligently called it an non aerodynamic turd... what a joke.
06-22-2006, 12:23 PM
#29
Teching In
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 00454sscamaro
hmm well considering i have a tuner capable of rasing my speedo to 170 id say i can, i dont go around telling people i can go 170 but now that you mention it, i could. you saying 5th isnt a 170mph gear (pretty sure 5th would hit it)and i can also raise my rpm limit.... ??? i do have another gear.... saying my car wont do it? my moms turd of a hemi does it with less hp/more weight and auto so yeah id say if i wanted i could do it... yeah the stockers got a govenor at 160 but mines not stock now is it.
What hemi will do 170mph?
06-22-2006, 12:27 PM
#30
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soposedly the 300c... dunno if its factual though. ive only gotten my moms upto 120, then let off due to it feeling like **** in the handling department..
06-22-2006, 12:28 PM
#31
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i heard from some idiot "hemi's are the fastest car's" type person so it very well could be untrue. "does it got a hemi" oh you mean "is it slow" sure.
06-22-2006, 12:37 PM
#33
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmm govenors mess everything up. soposeldy the 170mph one was on some long strech of track.. i could probly find the top speed if i do alil reseach but, the 300c isnt really a car im interested in researching, driven one alot and i dont particularly like it. except in the rain, its alil nicer then a camaro with no traction control.
06-22-2006, 07:09 PM
#34
TECH Resident
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was just kidding.
Originally Posted by CTSVSL65AMG
Haha, Nice! I love it. Funny thing is....you are dead wrong.
Comments like this really hurt the credibility of F-body owners. Actually it’s a more aerodynamic, more powerful, better geared, better suspended, better braked (not a word, I know), better styled and faster turd. With more comfort and features than you can shake a stick at.
and PS, the V will do 167 mph...what will a Z28 do???????
Cadillac Takes on BMW M3 With 400-hp CTS-V Sedan. Wednesday, April 9. 2003 New York Auto Show ... increase in torsional stiffness is cited for the new bodyshell, along with a .30 coefficient of drag.
Comments like this really hurt the credibility of F-body owners. Actually it’s a more aerodynamic, more powerful, better geared, better suspended, better braked (not a word, I know), better styled and faster turd. With more comfort and features than you can shake a stick at.
and PS, the V will do 167 mph...what will a Z28 do???????
Cadillac Takes on BMW M3 With 400-hp CTS-V Sedan. Wednesday, April 9. 2003 New York Auto Show ... increase in torsional stiffness is cited for the new bodyshell, along with a .30 coefficient of drag.
06-22-2006, 09:33 PM
#35
Don't the CTS-Vs dyno a little low for the LS6? I could have sworn I saw several stock dynos only doing 320-330 rwhp. Perhaps I'm mistaken, if not a stronger LS1 w/ a couple bolt ons like the one here could best those numbers...
06-23-2006, 06:49 AM
#36
Originally Posted by CTSVSL65AMG
What hemi will do 170mph?
z28s stock governor is 160.
06-23-2006, 12:10 PM
#37
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah, im sure if its not drag limited or max rpm's in top gear... just like anything that will actually reach there electric gov. if will most likely go past it.
06-30-2006, 01:29 AM
#38
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SW Houston
Posts: 4,192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CTS-V is an awesome car, i love it. But dont think its anymore capable than SS/WS6. Top speed of the V is 163 not 167(not that much a diff i know).
The SS/WS6 is WAY more sleek than the V. Come on the V is a 4 door sedan thats like saying the charger is more aerodynamic than the Fbody.
The SS/WS6 is WAY more sleek than the V. Come on the V is a 4 door sedan thats like saying the charger is more aerodynamic than the Fbody.
Last edited by Shinerbock07; 06-30-2006 at 01:37 AM.
06-30-2006, 10:15 AM
#39
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: south jersey
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i had my top down+windows down. thats why there saying the cts-v had better aerodynamics. if i had the top up it would of probly been a whole different race but at those speeds 60-130 idk how much aerodynamics would hurt or help over just raw hp numbers. cts=v's and ss/ws6's arent far off on performance.i think both being stock would be a drivers race. given my cars a "heavy convertable" and still 100% stock engine. with a few external bolt ons.
06-30-2006, 10:39 AM
#40
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SW Houston
Posts: 4,192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 00454sscamaro
i had my top down+windows down. thats why there saying the cts-v had better aerodynamics. if i had the top up it would of probly been a whole different race but at those speeds 60-130 idk how much aerodynamics would hurt or help over just raw hp numbers. cts=v's and ss/ws6's arent far off on performance.i think both being stock would be a drivers race. given my cars a "heavy convertable" and still 100% stock engine. with a few external bolt ons.
