STYES Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 I hear that the STS-V will only have roughly 425 horse. Not bad for the stock STS of the future. But considering that the new M5 boasts 500 horse, I am not a happy camper. Anybody have any thoughts on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimJ Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 425 HP sounds great to me. That is more than I expected! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaddyChris Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 there are spyshots of the sts-v and xlr-v on the car connection. I dont think it gives specifics about HP. the car connection...the xlr-v looks real tight, the sts-v is all camo'd up so I cant tell. Christopher Petro 94 sts 67 coupe de Ville Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msilva954 Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 I think that we should all be happy that GM is doing this much with caddy. 425 is plenty and think of the aftermarket they will have for a Turbo'd engine. I bet w/ under 2 grand you could have that magic 500hp #. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Nunnally Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Also it's important to wait and see the performance. A supercharged engine can have a huge wide powerband and terrific acceleration. Bruce 2023 Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing Follow me on: Twitter Instagram Youtube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justgreat Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 don't be fooled by the numbers: the only definitive way to measure an engine's performance is with the power graphs for hp and torque...aside from weight gearing and ratios, everything else is meaningless. i believe the bmw will utilize a v10 if what i've read is correct, and definitely for bottom end punch, you're hard pressed to beat a supecharger. jackg 90seville 94k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Not Happy? How can you be dissapointed with 425 horsepower. I wish I owned a car with 425 horsepower. Most stock cars only have up to 200 horses. Thats over twice as much power and torque than your average performance car. Recount your marbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Not Happy? How can you be dissapointed with 425 horsepower? I wish I owned a car with 425 horsepower. Most stock cars only have up to 200 horses. Thats over twice as much power and torque than your average performance car. Recount your marbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CadiKing Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Jogh, Recount your Postings! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marika Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 I hear that the STS-V will only have roughly 425 horse. Not bad for the stock STS of the future. But considering that the new M5 boasts 500 horse, I am not a happy camper. Anybody have any thoughts on this? Get the CTS-V instead. 57.litre, 8 cylinders and plenty of bang for the buck. If you really want to make people safe drivers again then simply remove all the safety features from cars. No more seat belts, ABS brakes, traction control, air bags or stability control. No more anything. You'll see how quickly people will slow down and once again learn to drive like "normal" humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CadiKing Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Marika, I want the 57.litre too. 3500 cubies! Smokin! How does it fit under the hood? couldn't resist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marika Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Marika, I want the 57.litre too. 3500 cubies! Smokin! How does it fit under the hood? couldn't resist... It fits under the hood of the CTS-V.... If you really want to make people safe drivers again then simply remove all the safety features from cars. No more seat belts, ABS brakes, traction control, air bags or stability control. No more anything. You'll see how quickly people will slow down and once again learn to drive like "normal" humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
growe3 Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Marika, I want the 57.litre too. 3500 cubies! Smokin! How does it fit under the hood? couldn't resist... It fits under the hood of the CTS-V.... Lets see...57 cubic liters = 3, 478 cubic inches. I don't think that fits under any hood. Drive'em like you own 'em. - ....................04 DTS............................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
growe3 Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 STS-V is to be supercharged. Lets hope they have done some work on the head bolt hole problem. Timeserts from the factory might be a good way to go. Perhaps not be so aggressive on the cylinder honing. -George Drive'em like you own 'em. - ....................04 DTS............................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazbo Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 And the price difference between this 500 HP M5 and an STS V is ?????? You want that additional peak 75 HP for nothing??? Besides, Bruce is right about the power curves. You can't always (rarely really) go by peak HP numbers - it's only one point on the entire power curve. Can't trust magazine numbers all the time either.................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Im going to take a chance here and possibly upset some members, but I hope not, its not my intention. A friend of mine has an M5 and it sounds ratical, the engine borders on something exotic, IMHO. It does not remind me of the 'type' of feel or package that is cadillac. Now while I realize that I may have just put myself in the geriatric catagory, when you go to the www.cadillac.com website and check out the V-Series Velocity videos, I think that the designers are trying to retain some of that cadillac feel that we all love. Refined but a brute. I mean do we really want side-pipes, headers and a 3/4 race lope on a cadillac? LOL.... That is unless Cadillac wants to built the ULTIMATE driving machine, and in that case, JUST DO IT!!! But then again maybe power is a relative thing to us all.. I myself was MORE than shocked when I made an aggessive pass today to make an exit ramp that was closing in on me and and i hit 97 in a flash, and shocked myself (and slowed down PRONTO given the condition my driverside front XW4).... Do I really need, another 200 horsepower? LOL..... Mike (see the picture, I'm OLD).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marika Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 Lets see...57 cubic liters = 3, 478 cubic inches. I don't think that fits under any hood. OK...you caught the editor in a typo...... LOL!!!!!!!! If you really want to make people safe drivers again then simply remove all the safety features from cars. No more seat belts, ABS brakes, traction control, air bags or stability control. No more anything. You'll see how quickly people will slow down and once again learn to drive like "normal" humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marika Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 The Italian police just got one of these and it was donated to them: http://www.lambocars.com/gallardo/gallardos.htm If you really want to make people safe drivers again then simply remove all the safety features from cars. No more seat belts, ABS brakes, traction control, air bags or stability control. No more anything. You'll see how quickly people will slow down and once again learn to drive like "normal" humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschunke Posted May 22, 2004 Report Share Posted May 22, 2004 Timing couldn't be better for a horsepower pissing contest. Who's gonna buy these monsters with the price of crude going through the roof? When we look back a few years from now it'll be BMW and Mercedes with their 500 HP bad boys that'll epitomize this craze. All manias end badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
95SLS Posted May 22, 2004 Report Share Posted May 22, 2004 Look at the price of gasoline. Any questions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonA Posted May 22, 2004 Report Share Posted May 22, 2004 When we look back a few years from now it'll be BMW and Mercedes with their 500 HP bad boys that'll epitomize this craze. All manias end badly. In the end, I think it'll be the moderates that win out, like the Northstar engine. It makes good power (not "the most", but not "the least" either), and still returns great fuel economy. I think the 3800 engine is another good example, especially when supercharged. And not to forget the LS1 engine, which returns highway economy close to 30 mpg I understand (in the F and Y cars). I chuckle at the Hemi Dodge trucks, whose fuel economy is unpublished from what I've seen, but I wouldn't believe much more than 12 mpg around town. 'Course the same goes for any fullsize truck or SUV. And when looking at the current horsepower war (in the sport/luxury car world), things aren't all that different from three decades ago. The fastest cars out there are loud, proud, and making city fuel economy in the low teens. Jason(2001 STS, White Diamond) "When you turn your car on...does it return the favor?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjtjwdad Posted May 22, 2004 Report Share Posted May 22, 2004 I chuckle at the Hemi Dodge trucks, whose fuel economy is unpublished from what I've seen, but I wouldn't believe much more than 12 mpg around town. I'm with ya'. I was walking around these Dodge trucks when the Hemi came out and as I recall, they were 12 (city) and 16 (highway). That wasn't any better than my Bronco. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHE Posted May 22, 2004 Report Share Posted May 22, 2004 Dodge trucks are notorious for low fuel economy.... I rented a Dodge truck a few of years ago to go to Michigan's upper peninsula snowmobiling and it got 10 MPG.....It had the 360 engine and was a nice truck but it got horrible gas mileage.... In March, we took my Dad's Silverado Z-71 and it got 15 mpg. Not great but a hell of a lot better than the Dodge. Kevin '93 Fleetwood Brougham '05 Deville '04 Deville 2013 Silverado Z71 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STYES Posted May 25, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2004 Thanks for the replys, boys! True, what Caddy is offering these days is awesome. But I don't compare Caddy with the garbage that GM offered in the 80's. I compare it to what Mr Lutz has made me expect. Cheaper, better, and faster. The CTS-V and XLR fit that bill, why not the STS-V? Once again. The CTS-V and XLR are CHEAPER, BETTER, and FASTER than their direct competition! Why should the STS-V, the "FLAGSHIP" and I direct quote here, be anything less!!!??? I have heard about powerbands, and the like, but that is what the imports smoke the domestics on! What makes us think that 75 horse less, is going to match the BMW? It's not, so don't fool yourselves. The biggest car company in the world can only match with a blown version of a 12 year old design?! Lesser resources have been producing V-10's, and V-12's for years! I will NEVER buy imported crap, but until the domestics step it up, my neighboors, friends, and family will continue to be un-American, and buy the imports! I EXPECT the STS to have 425 horse, and the V to be cheaper, better, and faster! I expect the biggest car company in the world to offer me that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STYES Posted May 25, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2004 FUEL ECONOMY? I see what you are thinking! COP OUTS! I am talking PERFORMANCE! When I was 18, I was spending 2.65 a gallon for racing fuel for a car that got 5 MPG! If you can afford a sweet Caddy, you can afford gas! The "pisser" here is this. If you can't afford the gas, you buy a Honda, not a Chevy! The biggest car maker in the world should offer BOTH! I hate the imports, but I hate the complacency of the domestics, even moreso! GM allowed the imports to gouge their once 50 percent market share! WHY? Pure incompetence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.