[Stealth]

wow you really did your research.  2 weeks ago no one even knew what engine the 2009 CTS-V is going to have.

my car can do 163 mph bone stock before it tops out.

and no, cadillac doesn't lie.  we already know it's got better 1/4 mile times than the E63 AMG and the M5...

[Davros]

its going to have the same engine as the 2009 vettte isnt it
and they are only claiming 200mph for it plus i assume the vette is a lot lighter

ps:
bentley may be releasing a veyron w16 powered arnage

you seriously think the 2009 cts-v is going to top 230 mph!!!
your an optomistic bugger i'll give you that

[Stealth]

no, i doubt the 2009V will top 200mph...

but i guarantee you... 1/4 mile, 1 mile, etc. i've got no doubt it will beat the bentley (which, by the way, doesn't do 230mph either... i have yet to hear of a 4 door car, unmodified, that will top 200...)

as it is, the 04-07 CTS-V, when released, beat 99.999% of 4 door cars... it was only AFTER it was released that the Mercedes S63AMG, Lexus ISF, Audi's A8 and other, Charger SRT-8, BMW'S M5, etc. were released that could beat it.  And even then, there aren't many that can beat it by much.

Now redesign that concept, give it 150HP more, supercharge it, and upgrade its shocks, brakes, etc. and yeah... i have no room to believe it won't beat any and all of the above cars badly.

[Roanoke]

Still, 1800kg is bloody heavy. But then most modern cars are overweight. 

[IceFire]

I think top speed isn't all that important anyways.  Nobody is legally allowed to drive anywhere near the top speed for any car...even a bare bones Honda Civic will easily break the speed limit.  Acceleration is where its at...or at least thats what I think from my experiences.

[Davros]

unless you live in germany

[Roanoke]

For normal driving even acceleration isn't a big deal. 0-60 times are irrelevant in the real world as there's noway somone treat a car like that. Not one they had bought with real money anyway. Just so long as it isn't sluggish (when passing obstructions, for example).

[Stealth]

i dunno man... on the highway, when passing people, etc. i'm glad when i can punch the gas and jump from 45 to 75 in 3 or 4 seconds... so yeah.  it DOES help

[Fineus]

0-60 times may not mean much in themselves, but what they do tell you is how the car performs whilst accelerating in a real world situation (rather than saying 45-130 times or something random and meaningless like that). They're a concrete standard of numbers that you can compare any car against.

And what that means is "do I have time to get past this lorry on this tiny piece of road, or do I have to sit behind it for ages" - or "that car pulled out without looking and is heading straight for me, can I get out of the way in time?". There are plenty of examples where having a car with good 0-60 performance could save your life. It doesn't necessarily have to be about racing performance (though granted, a lot of people - myself included - have thought of it that way and may continue to do so).

[Stealth]

no you're right Thunder; it DOESN'T have to be about racing performance, but a quarter mile and 0-60 are, you're right, pretty good indicators on how a car's going to perform.

i.e. if a car can do a 1/4 mile in 12 seconds at 145 miles/hour, it definately can pass the lorry ahead, etc.

[Roanoke]

You guys have proven my point better than I did. A standing start has little relevance to passing your usual everyday obstacles. That's more to do with mid-range torque and gearing.

Like I said. if I paid my money to buy a car (any car) there's no way inhell I'd let someone do a standing start as required to hit factory 0-60 times. And there's no way you'd let me do it to your car(s). 

[Stealth]

huh?  0-60 is too a good indicator.  if you can do a 0-60 in 4.2 seconds, then if you're cruising at 45mph, and need to accelerate heavily, you can bet money that the car's going to accelerate quick.  If a car has a good 0-60, then it more than likely has a good 45-85 too... that's also why they have 0-100

not understanding your bit about the "not letting you do it to my car" what!?

[IceFire]

You guys have proven my point better than I did. A standing start has little relevance to passing your usual everyday obstacles. That's more to do with mid-range torque and gearing.

Like I said. if I paid my money to buy a car (any car) there's no way inhell I'd let someone do a standing start as required to hit factory 0-60 times. And there's no way you'd let me do it to your car(s). 

Find me a car with good 0-60 specs that doesn't also have good gearing and mid range torque from the last 10 years?  I think it will be hard...not sure if impossible...there's always the chance. But really a performance vehicle is not going to have a problem and will likely easily beat out a more average car.  That said...its once again not the point of such a vehicle and wear and tear isn't likely to be as big of a concern either.  Although I always think that engines and power trains need a good workout now and again regardless of the car.

[Stealth]

yup.  nothing better to clean out carbon deposits than high RPMs at high speed

[Roanoke]

not understanding your bit about the "not letting you do it to my car" what!?

a full bore standing start isn't not exactly kind on the clutch, transmission, tyres, engine etc

[Stealth]

agreed... particularly the heavier the car.  i'm surprised you mentioned everything except the thing that gets hit the hardest in 1/4 miles, or other drag type situations: the differential.

still... why not

[asyikarea51]

Seeing this thread makes me yearn for a license.