Cadillac CTS-V Challenge: The (GM) Empire Strikes Back

Just a question is any of the guys in the other cars decently track worthy? cause i can already assume CTS-V is gonna win with that Red guy.

142 more bhp, 256 more ft-lb of torque, and (at least) a decade more of driving experience.
And the CTS-V only beat the M3, driven by a kid, for less than 2 seconds?
PFFT

That's what I'm saying...pretty narrow gap between the ringer-equipped CTS-V and the M3 driven by the kid with presumably little experience.

Not to mention track familiarity....

Not really a whole lot faster than that privately-owned/driven BMW M3, I'd say. It'll be interesting to see how the rest of the CTS-V factory team's times also compare to an M3's time.

Let the kid drive around the track for 10 more laps to get familiar, and do you think he can close that 1.5 second gap with the M3?

Better yet, let Mr. Ringer drive the M3, and do you think Mr. Ringer can cut down the CTS-V's time by about ... say, 5 seconds?

Second this comment: "142 more bhp, 256 more ft-lb of torque, and (at least) a decade more of driving experience. And the CTS-V only beat the M3, driven by a kid, for less than 2 seconds?"

amazing how so many are knowledgable about the M3 driver's experience.

"142 more bhp, 256 more ft-lb of torque, and (at least) a decade more of driving experience.
And the CTS-V only beat the M3, driven by a kid, for less than 2 seconds?
PFFT"

Its about power to weight ratio, not hp. The M3 is about 500lbs less than the Cadillac which partially explains why the two are so close. The M3 is about a foot shorter than the Cadillac and much lighter. Since the car's have roughly the same cost its not as if you are getting more for your money in the M3. The M3 makes the M5 a rip off and BMW makes both.

First of all, props to Cooper from LI. Well done!
I wish I were half as good as you. I'd probably break the 4 minute barrier (and be the laughinstock of all internet journalists) had I brought my E90 there. OK, perhaps I could do 3:30.
Anyway, the argument is that GM needs a massive advantage in power and torque to better the M3. The fact that it is 500lb heavier only highlights GM's inability or unwillingness to save weight. There is no reason why a midsize car can be within 200lbs of a compact car--see 135 vs 335, or 335 vs 535.
If you factor in the power or torque to weight ratios, the Caddy beats the bimmer in both departments, by 18% and 64% (!!!) respectively.
2 seconds a lap? pfffttt

^ can't be*

I think the car that impressed me most today was the M3. A kid from Long Island can get within 2 seconds a lap of a much more powerful car, driven by the guys who helped set it up? Nice.

That being said, the M3 IS modified. Right in the photo, I can see:
--blackened kidney grilles
--painted side reflectors
Just so you know :)

Hey pffft boy (that's you e90_m3): The M3 lost. Get over it. This was an open contest. Anyone and any car brand was invited to compete. BMW could have shown up with their own ringer drivers driving an M3 or M5, but they didn't. Actually it's been done before at Monticello, and the M5 lost (I think it was either Car & Driver or R&T).

Cooper is a great driver in that M3. No question. I would be interested in seeing what kind of times he could get driving the CTS-V. I would also like to see Heinricy drive the M3 and see what times he could get. Takes the driver out of the equation somewhat. As seen today, the driver is a HUGE variable.

Oh, and 21 isn't THAT young. There are better drivers far younger than him. Some kids start their racing careers at 8 years old or even younger. I don't know if he did, but you get the point.

"Anyway, the argument is that GM needs a massive advantage in power and torque to better the M3. The fact that it is 500lb heavier only highlights GM's inability or unwillingness to save weight."

Please give it a rest. The M5 is about the same size at the CTS-V and it weighs just under 4000lbs. The E63 is even heavier and the Xf is about 4300lbs. The M3's weight is in line with the C63 which is also a RWD compact car with a V8. The CTS is in a different size and weight class but its costs the same. Why are you bragging about the M3 being slower when it costs the same as the CTS-V? Its not like it's thousands cheaper. I think most of us have known for a while the the M3 can get CLOSE to the V- just can't beat it.

All those making excuses about driver experience need to note the M3 and V have been driven by experienced drivers at the Ring and the Cadillac was faster.

Get over it? No need to. GM already ran itself into the ground. My 5-year-old can run his lemonade stand better than Government Motors. At least my 5-year-old did not wipe out his investors.
The truth of the matter is, assuming Cooper is not a pro racer (and insofar there is no indication that he is), Lutz is his competition and Cooper beat Lutz fair and square. Props to the old man though.
Lewis Hamilton almost won the World Champ in his debut season, and Seb Vettel won at Monza in his debut season, with a POS car. I suspect if Cooper is a young pro we would have known.
And for the M5? You do know that the E60 platform had been around since 2002 don't ya?

"The fact that it is 500lb heavier only highlights GM's inability or unwillingness to save weight"

Are you willing to say the same about the M5?

@brn:
Oh yes. Absolutely. All of them are porkers to varying degrees.
M3 Sedan: 3726 lbs
M5: 4012 lbs
CTSV: 4222 lbs
Huge as the new Accord may be it's only 3300 lbs. Throw in 400 lbs for the bigger engine and RWD drivetrain and it's still lighter than the M3.

"I think most of us have known for a while the the M3 can get CLOSE to the V- just can't beat it. "

This test doesn't prove either way, unfortunately. I would have loved for one of the professional drivers to take the M3 around for a few laps.

"Huge as the new Accord may be it's only 3300 lbs. Throw in 400 lbs for the bigger engine and RWD drivetrain and it's still lighter than the M3."

The Accord is over 3600lbs with the V6. Check your facts.

"This test doesn't prove either way, unfortunately. I would have loved for one of the professional drivers to take the M3 around for a few laps."

Both cars lapped the Ring with professional drivers and the Cadillac was faster. Like I said, its time to get over it and stop making excuses about how this marketing stunt wasn't "fair". I'm pretty sure the V beat the M3 at Lighting Lap as well at VIR. The evidence is clear, you can take it or leave it. BTW, one of the magazines had experienced drivers battle it out at Monticello with the M5 and CTS-V and the Cadillac won.

RE: 1487
The I4 Accord is 3300 lbs. That leaves another 100 lbs for the RWD system's overburden. The V6 engine itself could not have weighted 300lbs more than the I4--heck the V8 engine in the M3 weighs only 445 lbs. Other equipment on the V6 Accord is adding on the weight.
It still comes out ahead of the M3--although an M3 sedan without the sunroof is about 3650 lbs.
Check your facts.