When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Road and Track got 3.5 to 60. Also not really sure about the "it won't give a C6 Z06 a problem" statement. You can't really compare the 2 cars since one is 4100 lb luxury sedan and the other is 3200 lb sports car.
St. Jude Donor '08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19
Originally Posted by four0nefive
Road and Track got 3.5 to 60. Also not really sure about the "it won't give a C6 Z06 a problem" statement. You can't really compare the 2 cars since one is 4100 lb luxury sedan and the other is 3200 lb sports car.
I would have to agree with not comparing the two cars. If I had to pick between the CTS-V and the Z06 then I think I would pick the V. That's what happened when I got my 2009 V; my Z06 spent a lot of time in the garage. The V was fast comfortable and more practical for my daily life. It was always fun at the track even when it was stock (stock w/DR's 11.94@117.5MPH); with minimal mods it went 10.84 w/DR's, smaller pulley and a modest tune.
Last edited by 68ragtop69; 07-31-2015 at 04:34 PM.
Road and Track got 3.5 to 60. Also not really sure about the "it won't give a C6 Z06 a problem" statement. You can't really compare the 2 cars since one is 4100 lb luxury sedan and the other is 3200 lb sports car.
People sure like to compare the 707 HP 4100 pound Charger Hellcat sedan to the 650 HP 3500 pound C7 Z06 sports car, so I don't see any difference in comparing the 640 HP CTS-V to the 505 HP C6 Z06 Sports car.
That's one bad *** car! Was hoping for price to stay about what they used to be but the base price jumped from $65k to $85k! Same ballpark now as a Z06 after options!! Well if I ever feel the need of a more practical car, this may be a serious consideration to replace my Z - Here's the road test sheet....
Ummmm just looking at those times seems a C6Z driver will actually have to be worried, unless you meant that sarcastically. Friend and I couldn't get his to trap 126 at PBIR years ago in cooler weather, just a hair under at best in cold air and more like 124-125 which seems to be the norm for C6Zs ran there and about same 1/4 time, actually a little slower then the new V. This is at a normal, nice, sea level track.... not a all moons and planets and stars aligned with the prep gods watching over and negative atmosphere run like at Mir lol.
The ATS-V is also putting some impressive numbers: C&D did a comparo against the C63 and the M3 and from 0-150 mph the numbers are: ATS 19.8 sec, M3 23.3 sec and C63 23.7 sec. That is a huge lead over 3 seconds against the MB or the BMW.
I've owned Corvettes and V's and it's like comparing chocolate vs vanilla. I like both and could never pick a favorite and would prefer them together.
First of all I didn't say the C6 Z06 would "destroy" a 2016 CTS-V. I said the 2016 CTS-V wouldn't give the C6 Z06 any problems.
Compare the numbers to a Car & Driver Sept 20, 2012 review of the 2013 Z06 and 2013 ZR1.
2013 Z06 with 3258 # curb weight and 505 HP = 6.45 lbs/hp.
2016 CTS-V with 4128 # curb weight and 640 HP = 6.45 lbs/HP
2013 Z06
0-60 in 3.5 seconds
1/4 mile in 11.6 @126 MPH
198 MPH top speed
1.09g skid pad.
2016 CTS-V(R&T worksheet posted above)
0-60 in 3.5 seconds
1/4 mile in 11.6 @ 126 MPH
200+ MPH
.98g skid pad.
2013 Z06 also stops quicker than the 2016 CTS-V. 60-0 in 93 feet (Car & Driver 2011) for the 2011 Z06 they tested vs 112 feet for the CTS-V(R&T above).
Looks as if the CTS-V has the same performance as the 2013 Z06 0-60 MPH and the 1/4 mile and then the Z06 pulls ahead by .4 second at 150 MPH(~ 5-6 car lengths).
The CTS-V claims to have a higher top speed of 200+, but they don't post the actual speed. Why? Maybe because they didn't do a top speed run to see what the top speed actually is. GM claims the C6 Z06 has a 198 MPH top speed and actual speed tests shows it capable of 200+.
Of course we know that the Z06 can circle the Ring in 7:22. What does the 2016 CTS-V do at the Ring? I bet the Z06 will eat the CTS-V's lunch.
The only "number" that the CTS-V "destroys" the C6 Z06 is the number of occupants it can haul to the Thursday night Bingo games in the church basement.
Use that "number" that the CTS-V has over the Z07 and load both the C6 Z06 and the CTS-V with their maximum number of occupants and then compare the performance numbers of the two and see which car "destroys" the other..
Oh, and I also own Corvettes(currently have a 56, 64 and a C6 Z06) and my daily driver is a supercharged Mercedes 4 door sedan. I know a little bit about high performance sports cars and sedans also(as if it matters when comparing the performance stats of the C6 Z06 and the CTS-V).
I know a little bit about high performance sports cars and sedans also(as if it matters when comparing the performance stats of the C6 Z06 and the CTS-V).
Then, why are you being a clown in this thread comparing a C6 Z06 to a new CTS-V? The fact the V can run with the C6 Z06 in acceleration just speaks to how impressive the new V is. It weighs over 1,000lbs more and has loads more comfort, ride quality, quietness, interior quality, materials, etc. and the V guy can be sipping his morning coffee running side by side a guy powershifting like crazy to keep up in his C6 Z06.
No one gives a crap and will EVER cross shop a C6 Z06 and a new V.
First of all I didn't say the C6 Z06 would "destroy" a 2016 CTS-V. I said the 2016 CTS-V wouldn't give the C6 Z06 any problems.
Compare the numbers to a Car & Driver Sept 20, 2012 review of the 2013 Z06 and 2013 ZR1.
2013 Z06 with 3258 # curb weight and 505 HP = 6.45 lbs/hp.
2016 CTS-V with 4128 # curb weight and 640 HP = 6.45 lbs/HP
2013 Z06
0-60 in 3.5 seconds
1/4 mile in 11.6 @126 MPH
198 MPH top speed
1.09g skid pad.
2016 CTS-V(R&T worksheet posted above)
0-60 in 3.5 seconds
1/4 mile in 11.6 @ 126 MPH
200+ MPH
.98g skid pad.
2013 Z06 also stops quicker than the 2016 CTS-V. 60-0 in 93 feet (Car & Driver 2011) for the 2011 Z06 they tested vs 112 feet for the CTS-V(R&T above).
Looks as if the CTS-V has the same performance as the 2013 Z06 0-60 MPH and the 1/4 mile and then the Z06 pulls ahead by .4 second at 150 MPH(~ 5-6 car lengths).
The CTS-V claims to have a higher top speed of 200+, but they don't post the actual speed. Why? Maybe because they didn't do a top speed run to see what the top speed actually is. GM claims the C6 Z06 has a 198 MPH top speed and actual speed tests shows it capable of 200+.
Of course we know that the Z06 can circle the Ring in 7:22. What does the 2016 CTS-V do at the Ring? I bet the Z06 will eat the CTS-V's lunch.
The only "number" that the CTS-V "destroys" the C6 Z06 is the number of occupants it can haul to the Thursday night Bingo games in the church basement.
Use that "number" that the CTS-V has over the Z07 and load both the C6 Z06 and the CTS-V with their maximum number of occupants and then compare the performance numbers of the two and see which car "destroys" the other..
Oh, and I also own Corvettes(currently have a 56, 64 and a C6 Z06) and my daily driver is a supercharged Mercedes 4 door sedan. I know a little bit about high performance sports cars and sedans also(as if it matters when comparing the performance stats of the C6 Z06 and the CTS-V).
Clearly I should have littered my response with smiley faces and sarcasm tags.
Still like my wimpy old 6-speed V wagon and the $20K+ delta for the new V is pretty daunting. But the V is a completely different market from any sports car, IMO. It's my "practical" car for carrying passengers, hauling the dog, toting car parts, parking at the airport, etc. I'd never have it instead of a Corvette or any other sports car. I will admit that it seems there are some real V fanatics who have coupes as their go-to car instead of all else. To each their own; the new V is pretty impressive for a 4-door!
Still like my wimpy old 6-speed V wagon and the $20K+ delta for the new V is pretty daunting. But the V is a completely different market from any sports car, IMO. It's my "practical" car for carrying passengers, hauling the dog, toting car parts, parking at the airport, etc. I'd never have it instead of a Corvette or any other sports car. I will admit that it seems there are some real V fanatics who have coupes as their go-to car instead of all else. To each their own; the new V is pretty impressive for a 4-door!
And if you ever decide to sell that wagon, please PM me! :grin:
The LT4 and A8 were designed for the CTS-V solely...the Z06 was just the product of splitting the cost. Far more appropriate drivetrain for a cadillac than the Z06 RPO.
Then, why are you being a clown in this thread comparing a C6 Z06 to a new CTS-V? The fact the V can run with the C6 Z06 in acceleration just speaks to how impressive the new V is. It weighs over 1,000lbs more and has loads more comfort, ride quality, quietness, interior quality, materials, etc. and the V guy can be sipping his morning coffee running side by side a guy powershifting like crazy to keep up in his C6 Z06.
No one gives a crap and will EVER cross shop a C6 Z06 and a new V.
07-31-2015, 12:09 PM
2016 CTS-V numbers
I would have to agree with not comparing the two cars. If I had to pick between the CTS-V and the Z06 then I think I would pick the V. That's what happened when I got my 2009 V; my Z06 spent a lot of time in the garage. The V was fast comfortable and more practical for my daily life. It was always fun at the track even when it was stock (stock w/DR's 11.94@117.5MPH); with minimal mods it went 10.84 w/DR's, smaller pulley and a modest tune.
