• Cadillac CTS-V with an intake versus a Eurocharged tuned W204 C63 AMG from a roll

      In stock from the Cadillac CTS-V with its supercharged 6.2 liter LSA V8 is stronger than the standard C63 AMG (one without the P31 package). The difference on a dynojet is about ~100 wheel horsepower. The C63 is slightly lighter but is significantly detuned in stock form to protect the egos of the owners of the other 63 AMG models. With a tune however the C63 wakes up considerably as the video shows with the two cars basically neck and neck.


      The C63 even with a tune still has less power than the CTS-V but the Eurocharged tune makes the cars quite even. The CTS-V has a passenger and a intake. The C63 is running just a tune. Impressive how the C63 keeps up with more powerful competition even though it does not have a supercharger like the CTS does.

      This article was originally published in forum thread: CTS V versus C63 started by Sledgehammer View original post
      Comments 85 Comments
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        ill just stop beating a dead horse....
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        FYI I just found out this is a V forum member on ctsvowners......200lbs passenger....so this weight difference is 600lbs...im impressed the V even hung in this race with the weight disparity...he got rid of the passenger he said and was 1-2 car lengths on the C63

        With a 700lb disadvantage including a passenger, plus his car is only down maybe 30-40hp from the V --- makes for an even race. Switching passenger to his car resulted in a 1-2 carlength win.
      1. Laloosh's Avatar
        Laloosh -
        Sticky showing up on the east coast? Hell some one pm me with the details. I want to see the action first hand.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Aww love you guys too
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by oldgixxer Click here to enlarge
        Comparing a relatively high compression 4v engine to a relatively low compression 2v blow engine is a bit silly no? One isnt better or more impressive then the other,they were both designed for completely different drivetrains;one FI the other NA.
        Disagree, if the LSA was as efficient as the m156 a bit of boost would go much further. Better heads, higher redline, etc.
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        the car was 700 $#@!ing lbs heavier dude....of course its not gonna be as fast.....
      1. LZH's Avatar
        LZH -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        These are no threats....u just run ur mouth all the time
        Only person I see here running his mouth is you.

        I agree with the point Sticky is making - for a NA tune only car to keep up with a blown motor IS impressive. Just shows how good the M156 is. Strap a blower on the 63 and it's game over for the V every time.

        And I think we can all figure out the veiled threat with the "humbling" comment...
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge
        Only person I see here running his mouth is you.

        I agree with the point Sticky is making - for a NA tune only car to keep up with a blown motor IS impressive. Just shows how good the M156 is. Strap a blower on the 63 and it's game over for the V every time.

        And I think we can all figure out the veiled threat with the "humbling" comment...
        the humbling comment was as @Sledgehammer said initially talking about the giant list of cars sticky has to run over here....take it for what you will...dont know you at all so i got nothing to say to you...
      1. LZH's Avatar
        LZH -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        the humbling comment was as @Sledgehammer said initially talking about the giant list of cars sticky has to run over here....take it for what you will...dont know you at all so i got nothing to say to you...

        Attachment 22609
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge

        no idea what your trying to even say here
      1. folgrz's Avatar
        folgrz -
        I don't know if this was answered or not, but was the cts-v auto or manual?
      1. LZH's Avatar
        LZH -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        no idea what your trying to even say here
        ...of course you don't.
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by folgrz Click here to enlarge
        I don't know if this was answered or not, but was the cts-v auto or manual?
        its an auto
      1. Sonny's Avatar
        Sonny -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        the car was 700 $#@!ing lbs heavier dude....of course its not gonna be as fast.....
        I believe a non-P31 C63 weighs 3950 lbs with a 1/4 tank of gas. So, I don't think the weight disparity is as much as people are saying. Plus, doesn't the V have an air intake. That should be good for 30 hp on the LSA.
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
        I believe a non-P31 C63 weighs 3950 lbs with a 1/4 tank of gas. So, I don't think the weight disparity is as much as people are saying. Plus, doesn't the V have an air intake. That should be good for 30 hp on the LSA.


        the V owner is a member of my forum ctsvowners.....the V had a 200lb passenger...the weight in the car with the driver is 4500lbs as i have weighed mine...
      1. Sonny's Avatar
        Sonny -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        the V owner is a member of my forum ctsvowners.....the V had a 200lb passenger...the weight in the car with the driver is 4500lbs as i have weighed mine...
        And assuming a 200 lbs driver in the C63 with a 1/4 tank of gas, the C63 weighed 4150 lbs. No big deal, but definitely not close to 700 lbs difference.
      1. Sledgehammer's Avatar
        Sledgehammer -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        the humbling comment was as @Sledgehammer said initially talking about the giant list of cars sticky has to run over here....take it for what you will...dont know you at all so i got nothing to say to you...
        As I said before bro stop taking the bait... The statement was clear and I dont know any real dudes who would take it other than that. Let it go
      1. Sonny's Avatar
        Sonny -
        I was just going off the 4200 lbs (without driver) figure that was mentioned in the first page of the thread. So, 4200 lbs plus driver and 200 lbs passenger is not a 700 lbs weight difference.

        Plus, do we know how much gas was in the C63. Maybe there was less than a 1/4 tank, but maybe there was more...
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sonny Click here to enlarge
        I was just going off the 4200 lbs (without driver) figure that was mentioned in the first page of the thread. So, 4200 lbs plus driver and 200 lbs passenger is not a 700 lbs weight difference.

        Plus, do we know how much gas was in the C63. Maybe there was less than a 1/4 tank, but maybe there was more...

        understood...according to the owner the V had about a 30-40whp advantage
      1. Sonny's Avatar
        Sonny -
        I would say that hp estimate is too conservative. I would estimate the C63 with tune to be at 425 whp. The V with air intake to be at 480 whp. This is assuming both cars on a DJ. Plus, depending on the DA the day of the race, the higher the DA, the more difficult for the NA car to generate full power vs the F/I car.