AutoZeitung - Cadillac CTS-V SW vs. Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG T Performance Pack

[EKaru]

1st place - Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG T Performance Package

• Engine: V8, 487 hp, 600 Nm
• Gearbox: 7-speed-multi-clutch automatic
• Tyres: Continental SportContact 5P M0
• Weight: 1832 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,4 s
• 0-160 km/h: 9,2 s
• 0-200 km/h: 13,9 s
• Handling: 1:42,2 min
• 18 m slalom: 65,8 km/h
• Braking 100-0 km/h, warm: 33,9 m
• Noise at 130 km/h: 70 dB(A)
• Average fuel consumption: 14,2 l/100 km

2nd place - Cadillac CTS-V Sport Wagon Automatic

• Engine: V8 kompressor, 564 hp, 747 Nm
• Gearbox: 6-speed-automatic
• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Sport 2
• Weight: 2025 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,5 s
• 0-160 km/h: 9,6 s
• 0-200 km/h: 14,6 s
• Handling: 1:46,2 min
• 18 m slalom: 65,2 km/h
• Braking 100-0 km/h, warm: 34,2 m
• Noise at 130 km/h: 71 dB(A)
• Average fuel consumption: 17,8 l/100 km

Verdict:
The C63 AMG won because of its great balance between everyday usability and track-performance. It accelerates, brakes better, it is 4 seconds quicker around their track, drinks less fuel and it's cheaper.
The Cadillac is roomier and its suspension is more comfortable.

http://www.germancarforum.com/intern...ance-pack.html

[Assle]

I don't speak German, but did they gain a mere 8hp on the CTS-V over stock?

[EKaru]

I don't speak German, but did they gain a mere 8hp on the CTS-V over stock?

Edit:
That is a stock CTS-V... PS to HP

[BRZ]

Why did they use the automatic CTS-V?

With the stick, the wagon does 0-60 in less than 4 seconds. I'm sure it is a much better performer than the auto.

[EKaru]

Why did they use the automatic CTS-V?

Probably so that they both had automatics... Also the CTS-V auto I think is marginally quicker than the manual

[Shomegrown]

Wow, surprised the CTS got its ass kicked that bad.

[Preppy]

Performance differences between the two seem academic.

I'd take the MB because it looks better and costs less to boot.

[EKaru]

Performance differences between the two seem academic.

I'd take the MB because it looks better and costs less to boot.

and weighs 425 lbs less...

[2 doors]

Is the Benz cheaper than the Caddy in the US?

As a current wagon owner, I abstain.

[Shomegrown]

and weighs 425 lbs less...

And uses a lot less fuel...

(which does count when fuel is $8+ per gallon...)

[brickfrenzy]

A German car beat an American car in a German car magazine? I'm stunned.

This isn't a fair comparison anyway because the C63 AMG Wagon isn't available in the US. And even if it were, it would be more expensive than the Caddy. Import fees kill the Caddy's value in Germany. According to the article, the V Wagon is 82, 530 Euros, which is $109k in US moneys. A totally fully loaded V Wagon stickers for less than $75k stateside.

So in Germany? By the Benz. In the US? The Caddy, 10 times out of 10 because you have to compare it to the E63 for size and available, and THAT car is $115k when similarly featured.

[GahannaKid]

A German car beat an American car in a German car magazine? I'm stunned.

This isn't a fair comparison anyway because the C63 AMG Wagon isn't available in the US. And even if it were, it would be more expensive than the Caddy. Import fees kill the Caddy's value in Germany. According to the article, the V Wagon is 82, 530 Euros, which is $109k in US moneys. A totally fully loaded V Wagon stickers for less than $75k stateside.

So in Germany? By the Benz. In the US? The Caddy, 10 times out of 10 because you have to compare it to the E63 for size and available, and THAT car is $115k when similarly featured.

None of that invalidates their results though. In Germany the better car won, it's not an embarrassment for the Caddy. Hell, a couple of years ago most Germans would have laughed at the idea of a Caddy (a station wagon nonetheless) being compared to a top tier Mercedes. The results might be different stateside, but that's OK as well.

[EKaru]

A German car beat an American car in a German car magazine? I'm stunned.

This isn't a fair comparison anyway because the C63 AMG Wagon isn't available in the US. And even if it were, it would be more expensive than the Caddy. Import fees kill the Caddy's value in Germany. According to the article, the V Wagon is 82, 530 Euros, which is $109k in US moneys. A totally fully loaded V Wagon stickers for less than $75k stateside.

So in Germany? By the Benz. In the US? The Caddy, 10 times out of 10 because you have to compare it to the E63 for size and available, and THAT car is $115k when similarly featured.

You can't take the conversions so literally... It costs much more to buy european cars in europe than in the US


http://www.bmw.fr/fr/fr/

[brickfrenzy]

Point taken on the car pricing. Wow.

Is the Benz cheaper than the Caddy in the US?

As a current wagon owner, I abstain.

If it were available, probably not. The C63 AMG sedan and the CTS-V Sedan sticker at roughly the same amount. A fully loaded V is just under $74k. This includes the additional gas guzzler tax that the automatic imposes. A C63 AMG, with enough options to be comparable (including park assist and nav, for example) is just over $75k MSRP.

However, the V is 2 inches wider, 2 inches taller and 6 inches longer than the C63, and as has been noted, weighs 400 pounds more. The V is roomier on the inside in all passenger dimensions that Edmunds lists. So it's not surprising in the least that the Merc won the performance test. It's smaller, lighter and nimbler.

It's like comparing an M3 to an M5 competitor. The right size comparison is to the E63 (which others have done), which is much closer in size to the V. But the E63 is wildly more expensive.

It's a real a real shame that the V doesn't have a 7 speed transmission. Highway mpg would be helped immensely with another gear.