Motortrend: 2017 Cadillac CTS-V vs 2018 Mercedes E63 AMG - Head 2 Head Ep. 97

[RPiM5]

I predict the F90 M5 will edge out the CTS-V in a similar comparison because it's lighter than the AMG, but I still maintain that BMW should have stuck to a traditional RWD setup and developed a superior lightweight and balanced chassis with a more advanced traction management system for the RWD for the F90 M5.

People don't realize that the F90 M5 is actually more unbalanced than the F10 M5 too. With the F90 having a 55/45 distribution while the F10 has a 52/48 weight balance.

This comparison in this new Motor Trend video goes to show how much weight really matters but also how much an AWD system matters.

[URBAN LEGEND]

500 lbs heavier is insane for the AMG. Where is that weight? For 85 grand you can’t go wrong with the CTS V though. A few upgrades and you have a roll run king.

Waiting for the ultimate comparison.

[Vic55]

I posted my thoughts on the benz forum but of course Im biased:

Finally the video--- although biased, the reasons I have the E63S are also sections where it shined. I get why it didnt win (losing by 0.02 seconds) on BW but AWD, Launch, Skidpad, Exhaust Noise, Rolling speed, etc are reasons Im happy. With all that, the Caddy is a worthy competitor and its even more attractive when pricing is rolled in.

And the same two cars at VIR:

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by Vic55

I posted my thoughts on the benz forum but of course Im biased:



And the same two cars at VIR:

One thing I noticed in the Motortrend video is that they had listed as testing a 2016 CTS-V and then a 2017 CTS-V at Buttonwillow with the E63. I wonder what the differences are between the 2016 and 2017 CTS-V? The 2017 CTS-V did post a faster time than the 2016 apparently.

I think for track days, I'd rather take the CTS-V on track (plus less of a loss in case you crashed it, lol), than an E63S, but yeah for every day situations the E63S is a monster, just like how the F90 M5 will be I'm sure. Enjoy yours in good health Vic.

Edit:

Nevermind, I found the differences between the two model years of CTS-V. The new rear camera mirror must make it faster. Lol!

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/04/...s-and-updates/

[Vic55]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

One thing I noticed in the Motortrend video is that they had listed as testing a 2016 CTS-V and then a 2017 CTS-V at Buttonwillow with the E63. I wonder what the differences are between the 2016 and 2017 CTS-V? The 2017 CTS-V did post a faster time than the 2016 apparently.

I think for track days, I'd rather take the CTS-V on track (plus less of a loss in case you crashed it, lol), than an E63S, but yeah for every day situations the E63S is a monster, just like how the F90 M5 will be I'm sure. Enjoy yours in good health Vic.

Edit:

Nevermind, I found the differences between the two model years of CTS-V. The new rear camera mirror must make it faster. Lol!

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/04/...s-and-updates/

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

I think its track dependent on which one is gonna be faster...

And once you bring the interior into the equation I dont think there is much to compare (price withstanding).

[brad850csi]

Timed lap of the same track starts at 19:05. I think the speeds at the start/finish line are interesting, the M6 is virtually the same as the E63s. Also how does something with 50hp less and 500lbs more weight can beat the CTS-V so much in straight line speed?

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by brad850csi

Timed lap of the same track starts at 19:05

Interesting, both the CTS-V and E63S are only about 1 sec faster than the F06 M6 Gran Coupe on that same track.

[Vic55]

Originally Posted by brad850csi

Timed lap of the same track starts at 19:05. I think the speeds at the start/finish line are interesting, the M6 is virtually the same as the E63s. Also how does something with 50hp less and 500lbs more weight can beat the CTS-V so much in straight line speed?

Tranny, Gearing, Parasitic loss (efficiency of hp/tq) to the ground... The E63S, from the dyno's Ive seen, are coming in underrated. Ill bet the dyno curves are favorable to that of the CTS-V.

[Vic55]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

Interesting, both the CTS-V and E63S are only about 1 sec faster than the F06 M6 Gran Coupe on that same track.

No shock, BW suits the GC and its higher speed prowess. Its the track set up. What did it do on the Lightning Lap? Ill bet its nowhere near the E63S...

[brad850csi]

3:04.7 in 2013 lightning lap. That was a non comp pack car. I'm unsure if the track has changed in the last 4 years, i.e. Resurfaced or something but the E63s was heaps faster

[CarlosM4]

The brakes on the E63S in this test were horribly wrong. Not only was there complains about pedal feel from everyone (which is only inherent to this test), but the braking distances, and the braking on track were way off. Maybe the carbon ceramics has not bedded, or worst yet the brake fluid was overcooked.

On Road&Track and CarandDriver the E63S with CCB had 105 feet (vs 101 of the Caddy) for braking at 60mph. The funny is that the higher the speeds, the smaller gap in braking distances between the CTS and the E63S, therefore proving that in this test something was way off about those brakes.

The braking caused the entry speeds to be way off too on track, so the E63S lost a good time to the CTS by that.

Something similar happened on the AutoZeitung track test were the E63 had a very bad case of fading according to the driver, causing a severe lap time loss