F10 M5 compared to the 2016 CTS-V

[Kayani_1]

Well said

Originally Posted by bodonx

As J Clarkson said, BMW needs to start sending the A Team back to M division from i division.

[Action JacksonE92]

Sure would hate to see the Caddy in my rear view mirror or pull up next to me at a stop light.

[N.S.A]

Originally Posted by Bahn360Photo

no performance numbers yet, HP figures are impressive but they don't directly translate to performance.

in the article m5 is shown as 4.2 0-60 where in numerous tests it did 3.6/3.7 so we'll have to wait and see driving comparo

Exactly the m5 does 0-60 in 3.6secs based on my own time and mine is not even a CP M5. I use to have a 2012 CTS V. It was great but they claimed it did 0-60mph i. 3.9 secs when no way in hell it did. Every test got it around 4.2 and 4.4. So I am assuming Cadillac is overrating it's 0-60 times. But I do think the interior is cheap and ugly but the front of the car is sexy.

[N.S.A]

Originally Posted by OverDriven

GM needs to learn a thing or two about class. Just because a car is high performance does not mean it needs to look like a Hot Wheels. This Caddy looks like something a shirtless Jersey Shore guido would drive around. So does the C7 Corvette. How can anyone over the age of 25 think this looks good?

I like the front of this car but the side and specially the rear. It's just ugly and looks like a car straight out of transformers or hot wheels as you said. this car makes Americans look like they do not believe in class. They make us buy non american brands. Which is there fault lol

[N.S.A]

Originally Posted by e92proper

I understand the fan boys here with the ctsv style comments, but I'm sure most of you haven't owned a caddy or ctsv coupe like I have.....the m5 interior is sick, but I will tell you that the nicest interior I ever had in any car was my ctsv coup with the Recaro package. I'm a 6 time bmw owner and love our cars too so I'm trying to be an unbiased as possible.
Performance wise.....09 ctsv sedan crushed v-10 m5 in all comparisons from that time. 2012 ctsv coupe also beat the new tt v8 M5 so what are you guys talking about? this new Ctsv looks decent and will continue crushing the m5 it looks like. price wise, I'll take the caddy and dump the rest of the m5 money in mods! can't go wrong.

What I'm waiting for is the ats-v to drop and see how this thing does against the fugly m3/m4! Caddy pretty much dethroned the 3 series as the standard luxury car with the ATS, should be interesting to see what's next.

I can agree with you on a lot of things based on the fact that I was a CTS V owner as well but I owned the sedan. It did beat the v10 m5 but not handling, that CTS V had no grip. The recaro Seats were the best. But very uncomfortable. The rest was ugly. Alcantara steering wheel was nice though. But the new M5 is faster than it 0-60 and every spec. But it the CTS v takes off a lii ahead it be hard for the m5 to catch up. The new CTS V IS VERY nice from the front end but other than that it's ugly I think and the interior is no different than the last CTS V. But anxious to know the actual 0-60 times because they said it was 3.9 for the last one and I got 4.2 and 4.4 avg best. But I agree definitely! The CTS V is the best bang for the buck

[bmellion]

Originally Posted by Bahn360Photo

no performance numbers yet, HP figures are impressive but they don't directly translate to performance.

in the article m5 is shown as 4.2 0-60 where in numerous tests it did 3.6/3.7 so we'll have to wait and see driving comparo

M5 comp pack. 0-60 in 3.7 sec by Car & Driver. Not that it matters. A Cadillac is a Cadillac and a M5 is an M5. Enough said...

[IS3andME]

Originally Posted by BMWonlyZone

GM is not a COMPETITOR of anything.

GM went out of business because they have an inferior, low quality product. Match that with a business model that is/was absolutely guaranteed to fail, closing up shop was inevitable for them. Let's not forget, they did indeed go out of business.

Now, just because a Marxist (aligned with an equally radical Union), stole the company from the share holders for themselves, doesn't make them a now "successful and competing" company. If not for the billions they also stole from us (the taxpaying members of our society), they would be a distant memory at this point.

We have a thriving automotive industry in this country that informed people cannot deny. The long-coming failure of GM was appropriate and overdue. Moreover, they operate under the same failed business model they always did, with the same inferior product even today. It's just a matter of time until we watch this all play out again. Hopefully next time the climate will be unfriendly and we can put an end to this insanity once and for all.

No, they are not a competitor of BMW, or MB, or anyone else. Competition is the trademark of Capitalism. The "re-org" at GM certainly was not.

WTH? We are talking about the CTS-V. The first gen CTS-V was aimed at the e39 M5, and the second gen CTS-V at the e60 M5. Long before the GM bail out.
Instead of your political and car bias, look at the car for what it is. Remember, Cadillac (And Lincoln) had a certain brand of luxury. And if you want to go there, at a certain time BMW didn't have a car that go against the Continental Mark II. But, I digress. Cadillac was known for it's V12s and V16s long before BMW.
Cadillac has every right to play with the Germans, and it's not because narrow minded folk have said that they don't.

I find it odd that people will complain about the lack of initiative of the domestics--and make fun of the fact that Caddy (and dead in the water Lincoln) main customers are older folk, but as soon as Cadillac gets serious, then it's "they can't compete"...is this about being threatened?
Cadillac is a luxury brand, like Merc, BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc.
The better Cadillac becomes, the better for all of us.
And you can't argue with 640 hp...which begs the question, "what will the next M5 and E Class AMG have?"
As I said, the better for all of us.

[soolman32]

The fanboy attitude never cease to amaze me. Cadillac puts out an impressive product with what seems to be great fit and finish, and some people are still unable to give credit where it's due. I personally think it looks great inside and out and that engine is a beast. I'm sure M, AMG, RS division won't stand idle for long and will respond soon. In the meantime, this is the car to have if the M5 was the only alternative IMHO.

[kunal_d]

"Only" 650 HP from 6.2L ? and it's supercharged to boot?? That's a smidge over 100HP/litre . I thought this was 2014?

[fratz]

that`s just an E63 AMG with a different badge. Am I mistaking or isnt that the AMG engine they used on all 63`s?

[Igor_M5]

This thread is full of bandwidth waste.

In the last 140+ posts, only one reply actually made sense in this whole thread.

Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls

Tell that to all the people who are going to go ape sh-t when they do a comparison - a comparison that the CTS-V should win. The M5 and CTS-V will never be on the same life cycle so they're basically going to trade punches with each other.

The E39 styling came out in... 97, M5 was released in 2000.
Cadillac's response came 7 years later in styling, and 4 years later in performance.

E60's debut was in 2004... with the M5 being released in 2006.
Cadillac was still sleeping. In 2009 they released their "competitor", towards the end of the E60's life cycle.

F10 came out in 2010 ! Followed by the release of F10 M5 in 2012.
It's 2015, and Cadillac is snoozing.

Cool story for the rest trying to compare rotten apples to oranges. It's easy to kick your "competition" in the ass when you debut the competitor 5-6 years later in styling, and 3-4 years later in performance.

The next generation M5 is just around the corner... making this debate completely and utterly useless.

[JOHNBMWM5]

Originally Posted by IS3andME

Cadillac is a luxury brand, like Merc, BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc.
The better Cadillac becomes, the better for all of us.
And you can't argue with 640 hp...which begs the question, "what will the next M5 and E Class AMG have?"
As I said, the better for all of us.

I must say if it was bought here to the Uk, I would be test driving one for sure.

[swanson]

Originally Posted by Igor@ONEighty

This thread is full of bandwidth waste.

In the last 140+ posts, only one reply actually made sense in this whole thread.



The E39 styling came out in... 97, M5 was released in 2000.
Cadillac's response came 7 years later in styling, and 4 years later in performance.

E60's debut was in 2004... with the M5 being released in 2006.
Cadillac was still sleeping. In 2009 they released their "competitor", towards the end of the E60's life cycle.

F10 came out in 2010 ! Followed by the release of F10 M5 in 2012.
It's 2015, and Cadillac is snoozing.

Cool story for the rest trying to compare rotten apples to oranges. It's easy to kick your "competition" in the ass when you debut the competitor 5-6 years later in styling, and 3-4 years later in performance.

The next generation M5 is just around the corner... making this debate completely and utterly useless.

Keep telling yourself that. The next M5 is a long ways away.

[TheBingoBalls]

Originally Posted by swanson

Keep telling yourself that. The next M5 is a long ways away.

I don't think he meant that the GXX M5 was a year away. His point still stands. By the time the 3rd generation CTS-V comes out (2015/2016?), the F10 would already be 4/5 years old, basically EOL (all previous M5's had a 5 year life cycle). The 2nd generation CTS-V thrashed the E60 M5. The F10 M5 was better than the 2nd generation CTS-V. I expect the 3rd generation CTS-V to best the F10 M5.

There really is no argument to be had. The GM fanboys run with the 2nd Generation CTS-V killed the Nurburgring times and was faster than the E60 M5 to argue that an American car was able to beat a German...but they don't consider life cycle of the cars. Ask those GM fanboys about the 1st Generation CTS-V (2004-2007) and I bet you none of them will make a peep.

[MacOSR]

Originally Posted by Adem1534

Its lighter than the current m5, so you definitely can't say that its too heavy.

Sure I can.

The 2016 CTS-V will weight more than my 2006 E60 M5 and far more than my 2015 M3. The primary reason I didn't buy a new M5 or M6 is the weight...they're too heavy.

We're talking about a 2016 model here that will launch in about a year...just wait and see what the new 2016 7 series weighs. I'm expecting dramatic changes in the next couple years from BMW in the area of weight reduction and I expect BMW to be the leader in this segment for a few years.

I equate the announcement of the new 2016 CTS-V to BMW announcing and showing the G11 right now.

I believe Cadillac only announced the new CTS-V right now due to the amazing press that the new M3 and M4 are receiving.

[MacOSR]

Originally Posted by Fraggy

Oh ain't the truth. I grew to hate my ATS more and more over the year I drove it. The dealer was half the hate and gm was the other. Too many problems, no solutions, and a dealership that's not been updated since the 70s.

LOL...I owned a first generation CTS-V while owning the E60 M5...I had both cars at the same time and I can relate to your post!

Obviously I could compare the differences between the two cars but what my experience boiled down to were quality, warranty and maintenance issues with Cadillac and GM. After selling the CTS-V I vowed to never own another GM product. I could go down my list of problems...ugh...just thinking about them brings back bad memories...

[MacOSR]

Originally Posted by Kayani_1

WOW just wow BMW relability.......

This is the first I ever heard of someone trying to point out BMW's great reliability track record as a factor worth pointing out as the deciding factor in any argument.

I have seen fan boys and will call myself one of the biggest ones of BMW. But as a car enthusiast some of you guys are so narrow minded that now it is ridiculous stuff coming out instead of any sense able argument.

With all due respect how is this story...

I owned the first generation CTS-V. I didn't drive it much. I owned an E60 M5 at the same time. within a few thousand miles I started having problems with the rear end in the car. It was found that the differential casing had a crack in it and it was leaking fluid. GM was denying the warranty stating that I had "abused the car."

I've owned high performance cars all my life. This car was babied and never ran hard...let alone abused. So, I did my own research and found the specifications for the differential that was chosen for the CTS-V at the time. What I found was that the specifications for maximum torque were far exceeded by the CTS-V. It wasn't until I presented proof to the dealership, who was working hard to get the car warrantied for me, that GM agreed to warranty the differential "just one time."

I could share other service and warranty problems that I had but that was about sums up my Cadillac experience.

Are the numbers impressive? Yes

Will they sell? Yes

Will I buy one? No way!

[swanson]

Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls

I don't think he meant that the GXX M5 was a year away. His point still stands. By the time the 3rd generation CTS-V comes out (2015/2016?), the F10 would already be 4/5 years old, basically EOL (all previous M5's had a 5 year life cycle). The 2nd generation CTS-V thrashed the E60 M5. The F10 M5 was better than the 2nd generation CTS-V. I expect the 3rd generation CTS-V to best the F10 M5.

There really is no argument to be had. The GM fanboys run with the 2nd Generation CTS-V killed the Nurburgring times and was faster than the E60 M5 to argue that an American car was able to beat a German...but they don't consider life cycle of the cars. Ask those GM fanboys about the 1st Generation CTS-V (2004-2007) and I bet you none of them will make a peep.

The first gen CTS-V was a good first effort. The sec. gen put everyone on notice. This third gen will make everyone run back to the drawing board. If the current M5 was any good, why did BMW scurry to come out with a "competition package" in the 2nd year? That is VERY un-German car like. Its because they know they fked up. I used to like BMW when they made cars for drivers, now they make cars to appeal to the masses regardless of past work. They only care about the bottom line and they milk the M-brand because they know people are sheep and will follow. Its a damn shame what happened to them.

[swanson]

Originally Posted by MacOSR

Sure I can.

The 2016 CTS-V will weight more than my 2006 E60 M5 and far more than my 2015 M3. The primary reason I didn't buy a new M5 or M6 is the weight...they're too heavy.

We're talking about a 2016 model here that will launch in about a year...just wait and see what the new 2016 7 series weighs. I'm expecting dramatic changes in the next couple years from BMW in the area of weight reduction and I expect BMW to be the leader in this segment for a few years.

I equate the announcement of the new 2016 CTS-V to BMW announcing and showing the G11 right now.

I believe Cadillac only announced the new CTS-V right now due to the amazing press that the new M3 and M4 are receiving.

What amazing press?

[TheBingoBalls]

Originally Posted by swanson

The first gen CTS-V was a good first effort. The sec. gen put everyone on notice. This third gen will make everyone run back to the drawing board. If the current M5 was any good, why did BMW scurry to come out with a "competition package" in the 2nd year? That is VERY un-German car like. Its because they know they fked up. I used to like BMW when they made cars for drivers, now they make cars to appeal to the masses regardless of past work. They only care about the bottom line and they milk the M-brand because they know people are sheep and will follow. Its a damn shame what happened to them.

BMW didn't scurry to come out with the competition package. The release of the ZCP falls in line with what BMW did with the ZCP on the E92 M3 - E92 M3 released 2007/2008, ZCP came out 2011 vs. F10 M5 released 2011, ZCP released for 2013/2014. These package add-ons don't mean anything other than it's just a game amongst the Germans (mainly Mercedes and their power packs). As much as people hate it and it seems like I'm biased but the truth is, the German 3 don't compete with anyone but themselves. It's just fact in today's automotive environment. The CTS-V could destroy the RS6, M5 and E63 but if the sales don't follow who cares? It's not like the 3 German cars are junk.

Regardless, we can have endless discussions about 3rd generation CTS-V vs. F10 M5 on this forum but at the end of the day, it's not a completely valid comparison, the only thing it proves is if you want the fastest/best car, buy the newest one. If you want to compare cars, compare the M3/M4 and ATS-V since those cars almost very close on the life cycle.

[Kayani_1]

Who cares the 6.2 liter V8 is more compact, weighs less, and more densely packed than the 4.4 liter BMW V8 all the while achieving great gas mileage. So what is your point.

Originally Posted by kunal_d

"Only" 650 HP from 6.2L ? and it's supercharged to boot?? That's a smidge over 100HP/litre . I thought this was 2014?

[swanson]

The current M5 started its cycle as a 2013 model. The competition pkge came the following year. That is only one year. The typical time frame for german cars to get refreshed is 3-4yrs after initial release. That, to me, is rushing to fix the problem. Even initial reviews for the M5 were not favorable other then its straight line speed.