V For Velocity: 2006 Cadillac CTS-V
The first generation Cadillac CTS-V was built in two distinct versions, first the 2004-2005 LS6 powered version and then the later 2006-2007 LS2 version which wasn’t just a new engine, but also featured upgraded interior and beefier axles out back. Naturally, the later cars are worth a few more bucks on the used market, but today’s example looks well priced for what you get. Find this 2006 Cadillac CTS-V offered for $10,000 in South Amboy, NJ via craigslist. Tip from Cory.
The first generation Cadillac CTS-V might look a bit on a garish side,
but it is pure American muscle, with the moves and speed of an E39 M5.
It isn’t the fastest sedan ever built, but it comes close and was
available
Powering the CTS-V is version of the GM small block V8 that originally appeared in the C5 generation Corvette that was known as the LS2. It is a 6.0 liter pushrod actuated overhead valve V8 that pumps out 400 horsepower and 395 ft-lbs of torque.
See a better way to get into a 400 horsepower late model sedan without breaking the bank? tips@dailyturismo.com
What was it about these again? Axle hop or some such tendency to rip the diff housing apart with drop clutch drag starts? I didn't realize how short and stubby the stick was in these things. I love this iteration of Americana but was any other color available besides black? I don't believe I've ever seen a gen 1 in a different color…
Yes, it was axle hop. There were all kinds of aftermarket fixes but most were worse than the problem if you didn't care about sidestepping the clutch on launch. The real fix was to make the axle shafts' torsional response different, make one just a little stiffer than the other.
Oddly, Ford had done this with no fanfare on the MN12 Thunderbird Super Coupes with 5-speeds, one axle shaft is fat and tubular, the other is a solid bar.
GM adopted this on both the Vettes and the next-gen CTS-V.
Jaguar/Lincoln made the axle shafts unequal-length on the '03-up S-type and LS, not sure why they didn't take the easy way out and just change one axle shaft but, hey, they're Jaguar.
I will note that the MN12 'fat shaft' preceded the CTS-V by over a decade, there's really no reason that GM should not have had a quick and cheap fix for the V's wheel hop, nor that the aftermarket should not have been able to take a CTS-V axle shaft, cut nine inches out of the middle, and TIGged a piece of 1.75OD tubing over the stubs.
I will note that the MN12 'fat shaft' preceded the CTS-V by over a decade, there's really no reason that GM should not have had a quick and cheap fix for the V's wheel hop, nor that the aftermarket should not have been able to take a CTS-V axle shaft, cut nine inches out of the middle, and TIGged a piece of 1.75OD tubing over the stubs.
Ah, yes: lowering the river Coventry, so to speak.
These things are every bit as good, maybe better, a driver than the E39 M5. I've owned an E39 M5 since new and have driven a number of these.
Engine roughly equal.
Steering, chassis, and brakes better.
Transmission, clutch, shift quality not quite as good.
Material quality nowhere near as good.
Electronics, both infotainment and chassis/ABS/stability, much better.
These cars were not big sellers in Joisey. The trunk space put a kink in seein' that the dead weight, as it were, got to the Meadowlands in a timely fashion.
Has anyone seen the 2015 (or is it 2016?) CTS-V? Ugliest car since the Pontiac Aztek..
Has anyone seen the 2015 (or is it 2016?) CTS-V? Ugliest car since the Pontiac Aztek..
Has anyone seen the 2015 (or is it 2016?) CTS-V? Ugliest car since the Pontiac Aztek..
I dunno….I kinda like it in the camo paint scheme…
[img] media.caranddriver.com/images/14q1/574965/2016-cadillac-cts-v-spy-photo-photo-574968-s-986×603.jpg[/img]
Sorry about the image size.