Cadillac V-series challenge..anybody want to bring their AMG/M/RS to challenge?

[e1000]

Originally Posted by Marcus Frost Wow what a bunch of cry baby nonsense. Great way to complain about finishing in 4th. I wonder if the "better driver" excuse works in any form of motor racing? Oh wait, no, it doesn't. Good drivers win races. This is how it works. If we are going to speculate on what was the result of the driver versus the car you could easily undermine any competitive driving series in the world. The BMW got smoked. If the guy wasn't as good of a driver s the CTS-V drivers, TOUGH ****. Go take the time to become a better driver. This is the most assinine logic I've ever heard. If it was an obvious publicity stunt why did you "humor" them by competing and getting smoked? You beat the privately owned CTS-Vs, good for you, but you still got smoked by better drivers. You lose. Last I checked racing is about winning, not about finishing 4th and complaining that the other drivers were "too good" Sorry for the rant. -m Good points but lets keep some things in mind. Bob Lutz was the guy that extended the challege and he did in fact get beat by the M3. The original challenge stated that professional drivers MAY be substituted if other professional drivers competed. The guy in the M3 was by all measures an amateur driver. All of the CTS-V's that beat the M3 were drivers that had racing or testing backgrounds and were paid by Caddilac/GM.

To remove this ad, register today or login if you already are registered!

[Marcus Frost]

Originally Posted by TopGun32

you clearly missed the point.

Every racing event has different classes, you start from the bottom to the top drivers. Since you seem to know lots about motor racing. Look at Nascar or F1 or SCCA or any other form of racing.

My point again..

IF they were bracketed according to their driving experience & level or professional drivers.. the M3 won the event for the "entry level or enthusiast" class.


nobody is crying about an M3 loosing.. just pointing out the facts that "pros: vs "joes" took place in this event and the "joe" almost won.

the rest of your rant was just plain useless arguments.

Your excuse is just as stupid. You are creating brackets in a non-bracket series. F1, NASCAR, and Rally teams have drivers and budgets that vary exponentially. One team can be spending 50 million a year, another 10. Or 300 million a year and 150 in F1's case. So does Basketball. So does every professional sport. This guy signed up for a contest where he was going to race against pro-drivers that was arranged by Cadillac. He got his ass handed to him. If he is going to re-write the rules to his own personal preference he should make a BMW M3 challenge and invite a bunch of drivers who are as equally "disadvantaged" as he was. He can call it "I'm a big whiny baby when it comes to losing" series.

Cry me a river.

He entered a series knowing full well the rules, regulations, and competition. He then got his ass handed to him by better drivers who were in faster cars. I don't see what's left to debate here.

-m

[Marcus Frost]

Originally Posted by e1000

Good points but lets keep some things in mind.

Bob Lutz was the guy that extended the challege and he did in fact get beat by the M3. The original challenge stated that professional drivers MAY be substituted if other professional drivers competed. The guy in the M3 was by all measures an amateur driver. All of the CTS-V's that beat the M3 were drivers that had racing or testing backgrounds and were paid by Caddilac/GM.

DUDE WHO CARES... the scoreboard is the scoreboard! 4 CTS-Vs beat the M3, and if they had better drivers, too f'ing bad? Do you see guys complaining about losing to better drivers in ANY other form of racing? NO **** THEY WERE BETTER, THAT'S WHY THEY WON! The M3 and its driver got SMOKED. If he thought he was going to race ****ty drivers when Cadillac was throwing the event then not only is he a whiny baby but he's an idiot as well.

-m

[e1000]

Originally Posted by Marcus Frost

DUDE WHO CARES... the scoreboard is the scoreboard! 4 CTS-Vs beat the M3, and if they had better drivers, too f'ing bad? Do you see guys complaining about losing to better drivers in ANY other form of racing? NO **** THEY WERE BETTER, THAT'S WHY THEY WON! The M3 and its driver got SMOKED. If he thought he was going to race ****ty drivers when Cadillac was throwing the event then not only is he a whiny baby but he's an idiot as well.

-m

Whoa, damn, chill out. I don't know about these other guys but all I'm saying is that the guy in the M3 performed admirably, and in the spirit of the original challenge, won. Yes he absolutely got beat, I'm not disputing that for a second.

Go get some portillo's or a shake from potbelly or something.

[Marcus Frost]

Originally Posted by e1000

Whoa, damn, chill out. I don't know about these other guys but all I'm saying is that the guy in the M3 performed admirably, and in the spirit of the original challenge, won. Yes he absolutely got beat, I'm not disputing that for a second.

Go get some portillo's or a shake from potbelly or something.

LOL, sorry man. My e-persona tends to come off as brash because of my rhetoric. How about I send you some italian beef in the mail to make up for it/

[mugatu22]

Originally Posted by e1000

all I'm saying is that the guy in the M3 performed admirably, and in the spirit of the original challenge, won.

This is inaccurate---the CTS-V Challenge rules were clear from the beginning, and nowhere ANYWHERE ever did it say "come beat Bob Lutz to win." There is no "spirit of the original challenge" other than to compete against the CTS-V and the fastest car wins. The challenge was to come to a GM event and go up against CTS-Vs, driven by whomever GM wanted (not just Bob Lutz). That was the original spirit, period. GM won, as they knew they would, it was their event.

BTW Mr. Lutz is in his mid-70's. A good driver, but I'd hope a 21yr old with track experience could beat a 70+yr old.

The BMW M3 did well but it was beaten by the CTS-V. When driven by the exact same drivers in every magazine comparison, the CTS-V wins again and is faster, so the argument that the M3 would have been faster in Heinricy's hands is bogus as well.

The brand nobbery on the M3 boards I've visited is stunning. It exists here too, but aren't we ALL "car guys"?? A simple tip of the hat from the BMW M-group would go miles in my book.

The CTS-V is fastest right now. Who knows what the next M5 will do...or the next gen E63 will do. Isn't that the point..to have constantly evolving, faster cars that we can all enjoy.

[K-A]

Oh no, this just gave M3's owners something else to be completely uppity and douchey about.

M3 is a remarkable performance machine, especially considering its "class", but the CTS-V IS the better performer through and through.

[mugatu22]

I don't think there's anything for the M3 guys to be extra douchey about...they lost fair & square. The CTS-V beat it, as it has done in every comparison test in every magazine I've seen to date.

Having said that I'd still prefer an M3!

[e1000]

Originally Posted by Marcus Frost

LOL, sorry man. My e-persona tends to come off as brash because of my rhetoric. How about I send you some italian beef in the mail to make up for it/

HAHHA!! They actually have a Portillo's here in SoCal, haven't been since I just recently moved out here from Phoenix. I do miss some of the food in Chicago though. If I could have anything I'd want a proper deep dish from Gino's East. I really do miss potbelly sandwiches too, I usually get one before I leave the airport when I land in Chicago.

Originally Posted by mugatu22

This is inaccurate---the CTS-V Challenge rules were clear from the beginning, and nowhere ANYWHERE ever did it say "come beat Bob Lutz to win." There is no "spirit of the original challenge" other than to compete against the CTS-V and the fastest car wins. The challenge was to come to a GM event and go up against CTS-Vs, driven by whomever GM wanted (not just Bob Lutz). That was the original spirit, period. GM won, as they knew they would, it was their event.

BTW Mr. Lutz is in his mid-70's. A good driver, but I'd hope a 21yr old with track experience could beat a 70+yr old.

The BMW M3 did well but it was beaten by the CTS-V. When driven by the exact same drivers in every magazine comparison, the CTS-V wins again and is faster, so the argument that the M3 would have been faster in Heinricy's hands is bogus as well.

The brand nobbery on the M3 boards I've visited is stunning. It exists here too, but aren't we ALL "car guys"?? A simple tip of the hat from the BMW M-group would go miles in my book.

The CTS-V is fastest right now. Who knows what the next M5 will do...or the next gen E63 will do. Isn't that the point..to have constantly evolving, faster cars that we can all enjoy.

Here's a quote from InsideLine:

And while this whole event/stunt began with a personal challenge from Bob Lutz in a conference call with media, GM will have professional racer and former GM engineer John Heinricy on-hand. According to Twork, "Heinricy will be used at the discretion of Mr. Lutz." In other words, GM will have its own ringer should any other competitor bring one.

So I really don't know if the above quote is true, but I wouldn't be suprised if it was. If so, I hope you can see where I'm comming from. A guy makes a personal challenge and it morphs into what we saw.


All in all, I think this was a great showcase for the CTS-V and honestly, good for them. They made a good car that can truly hold it's own to world-class performance sedans. Whether or not any of us would buy one is a different story but I'm sure this exposure will turn some heads.

[220S]

The true winner was GM's marketing dept. Or maybe Old Man Lutz if it was actually his original idea (although kinda hard to believe from a guy who sank the ship in the first place.)

"There's enormous attention being paid to this, and if you compare this cost-wise and effectiveness-wise to, say, making a bunch of TV commercials, this is a highly effective way to get the word out about how good the car is," Lutz said. "If we sell 50 or 100 of the CTS-V off this, we'd consider it a success." http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/29/gm-...utos-lutz.html

The CTS-V is an admirable car to have come out of the GM work shed. No doubt about it. But a well designed promotional event like this doesn't necessarily mean it's the ultimate fast sedan.

How about a worldwide mfg's challenge with one pro driver doing all the driving? Now that would be a real showdown event worthwhile of a lot of attention.

But for a GM promo event (that they knew was going to be predictable from the very beginning), it was pure advertising genius.

[Jon2007E63P30]

Originally Posted by 220S

The true winner was GM's marketing dept.

+1

And as for the earlier comment about BMW's M Group "tipping their hat" , I do not understand. They did not compete. They would have preferred the individual with the M3 did not even participate.

Now if the M3 forum "tipped their hat", that would be... well... I guess I am not ready for the end of the world yet.

[Newtone63]

there should have been an RS4 there. not so sure the CTS-v would have done well against that car.

BTW i really like the new CTS-V just not sure if I would ever buy a used one. I think I would have more faith in a C63 or M3 sedan. but if the 100k warranty applied might change my mind

[e1000]

Originally Posted by Newtone63

there should have been an RS4 there. not so sure the CTS-v would have done well against that car.

BTW i really like the new CTS-V just not sure if I would ever buy a used one. I think I would have more faith in a C63 or M3 sedan. but if the 100k warranty applied might change my mind

RS4 would have likely been murdered.

[mugatu22]

Originally Posted by e1000

RS4 would have likely been murdered.

+1

[bobbyfali]

I would of loved to see it against a Audi RS6. Either way the Caddy is a great package.

Thanks

Bobby Ali

[hotrod182]

Originally Posted by mugatu22

The new E63 still isn't a match for the CTS-V on a track.

Whether we like it or not, that CTS-V has a monster engine, with a badass suspension package. AMGs have the monster engine.

In the current Car And Driver issue, they had a 3 way show down and the new E63 was pretty damn close to the acceleration of this particular CTS-V that day. The AMG even beat the CTS-V in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. And to top things off, the AMG won the overall comparo. The new M5 due out in a year and a half or so, will have between 555-600hp. It should beat the CTS-V considering the current 5.0L NA M5 got pretty damn close times in the other comparo.

[K-A]

It seems the E's new tranny is clearly giving it the edge. As the speeds get higher, the other two pull on it (and trap higher), but that thing seems to get to 115MPH very quick and efficiently.

[Cylinder Head]

Originally Posted by hotrod182

In the current Car And Driver issue, they had a 3 way show down and the new E63 was pretty damn close to the acceleration of this particular CTS-V that day. The AMG even beat the CTS-V in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. And to top things off, the AMG won the overall comparo. The new M5 due out in a year and a half or so, will have between 555-600hp. It should beat the CTS-V considering the current 5.0L NA M5 got pretty damn close times in the other comparo.

Straight line does not equal track.

Opinion does not equal actual track times.

The new E63 would get smoked by the CTS-V on the track.

[myntk12]

Originally Posted by Cylinder Head

Straight line does not equal track.

Opinion does not equal actual track times.

The new E63 would get smoked by the CTS-V on the track.

Actually didn't a recent CAR comparison on the TRACK place he Caddi 4th with the AMG first?

[Jon2007E63P30]

Originally Posted by Cylinder Head

Straight line does not equal track.

Opinion does not equal actual track times.

The new E63 would get smoked by the CTS-V on the track.

Uh... wrong. The new suspension and trans are "transforming".
E63 Test by Car Mag UK - PCOTY issue.

Merc E63........................1.36.22
Mitsu EVO FQ400.............1.36.44
Porsche Panamera Turbo...1.36.83
Caddy CTS-V..................1.38.85
Audi S4..........................1.39.07
Jaguar XFR......................1.39.37
Vauxhall Insignia VXR........1.43.53

[Cylinder Head]

Originally Posted by Jon2007E63P30

Uh... wrong. The new suspension and trans are "transforming".
E63 Test by Car Mag UK - PCOTY issue.

Merc E63........................1.36.22
Mitsu EVO FQ400.............1.36.44
Porsche Panamera Turbo...1.36.83
Caddy CTS-V..................1.38.85
Audi S4..........................1.39.07
Jaguar XFR......................1.39.37
Vauxhall Insignia VXR........1.43.53

Those times don't mean much to me. With the Jag and Audi so close to the CTS-V, it's pretty obvious the track they ran these tests on aren't anywhere near the Nurburgring. If the 2010 E63 can run a sub-8 minute Nordschleife time, then it's king. Until then, the CTS-V is.

[myntk12]

Originally Posted by Cylinder Head

Those times don't mean much to me. With the Jag and Audi so close to the CTS-V, it's pretty obvious the track they ran these tests on aren't anywhere near the Nurburgring. If the 2010 E63 can run a sub-8 minute Nordschleife time, then it's king. Until then, the CTS-V is.

that is because you do not want to believe. And to put so much faith on the 'Ring' results really is indicative of your automotive knowledge. The AMGs numbers are far lower yet you chose to ignore that..... Post what you choose, but based on your post above, it will mean nada as your bias is clear.

[Newtone63]

Originally Posted by e1000

RS4 would have likely been murdered.

I would disagree. in the corners the RS4 would make up alot of time. The RS4 just pulls and pulls and will keep up with a e92 M3 so not sure why you think it would get murdered

[Cylinder Head]

Originally Posted by myntk12

that is because you do not want to believe. And to put so much faith on the 'Ring' results really is indicative of your automotive knowledge. The AMGs numbers are far lower yet you chose to ignore that..... Post what you choose, but based on your post above, it will mean nada as your bias is clear.

My "automotive knowledge" is pretty well known here over my 4,000 or so posts. Who are you?

Ring results are what EVERY AUTOMAKER OUT THERE including Mercedes, who torture tested the W212 E63 there extensively (according to their own website), goes by. Why? Because it's a long course with virtually every type of corner/chicane/straight that you can pack into a track. The Nordschleife is, for good reason, the pinnacle of performance testing. No minute-and-a-half long circuit is going to go the same length to DEFINITIVELY prove a car's absolute performance that a sub 8 minute lap on the 'Ring would prove.

And since the E63 has been documented as having been tested at the Nordschleife, and no numbers have been released, you can speculate away. The minute the CTS-V posted a 7:59 it was everywhere.

Yes the AMG's ACCELERATION numbers are better, fantastic. The perspective that the ring gives you can and will mitigate acceleration numbers. That's the place where the M3 CSL beat the CLK DTM AMG.

[e1000]

Originally Posted by Newtone63

I would disagree. in the corners the RS4 would make up alot of time. The RS4 just pulls and pulls and will keep up with a e92 M3 so not sure why you think it would get murdered

You're kidding right??? E92 M3 is quicker around a track than a RS-4.