$60k+ to spend on what vehicle?

[MJinZ]

Lol, I seriously doubt you got much above 100mph. If you'd ever done any sort of time above 100mph you would realize what you just said was bullshit outside of an exotic capable of 200mph.

Also, your camry is not 'limited to 162', its limited to 142mph. It would also take a looong time to get there. It also hits 100mph in 15 seconds, and 60 in 6 seconds. 2 seconds slower to 60, and around 3 to 100mph. And while your camry pulls a very blah .81g on the skidpad, an elise easily pulls 1g.

I know, this class of cars are all complete pigs in the handling.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0802_midsize_sedan_comparison/toyota_camry.html

Of course, I bought the best daily driver I could at the time, which to this day, is still made by Toyota. 🙄

As OEM SEs are fairly tame, one could put on some wider tires and TRD suspension upgrades and it gets a little better.

 

[exdeath]

What the hell are you talking about? The Camry is my daily driver, if I wanted to blow everything on an M3 or god forbid when it comes out, an Evora, I very well could. I don't think I'm quite ready to put all my paltry savings into one sports car yet at my age. 🙄

What am I talking about? You listed off some car brands as POS next to Maserati and continue spewing bile about anything that isn't a half million dollar car. I'm just keeping things relative.

And forget about the M3, you'd have a better shot of keeping my tail lights visible in a 335i; you'd certainly have an easier time with the amount of modding you would need...

But like I said my speedo tops out at 160 so you have me beat in your 162 mph Camry anyway.

 

[MJinZ]

What am I talking about? You listed off some car brands as POS next to Maserati and continue spewing bile about anything that isn't a half million dollar car. I'm just keeping things relative.

And forget about the M3, you'd have a better shot of keeping my tail lights visible in a 335i; you'd certainly have an easier time with the amount of modding you would need...

But like I said my speedo tops out at 160 so you have me beat in your 162 mph Camry anyway.

No, I think they are about the same:

And I would gladly put Toyota and Honda next to Ford and Volva as POS in a Maserati comparison. Can't really do that to Nissan because of the GT-R.

 

[CraigRT]

What am I talking about? You listed off some car brands as POS next to Maserati and continue spewing bile about anything that isn't a half million dollar car. I'm just keeping things relative.

And forget about the M3, you'd have a better shot of keeping my tail lights visible in a 335i; you'd certainly have an easier time with the amount of modding you would need...

But like I said my speedo tops out at 160 so you have me beat in your 162 mph Camry anyway.

I thought Maserati's were POS's... haha
Most supercars aren't exactly reliable DD Honda's.
Where I used to work, the founder of the company had a Quattroporte. He let one of his managers take it for the day and it broke down on the highway. I laughed. So Maserati.

 

[exdeath]

No, I think they are about the same:

Not quite. While they both go up to the same on the dial... how fast does it climb?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDuLPXunHQQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEpSCYi54ok

(note the last two gears 5th and 6th are very tall overdrive gears)

I compared speedos being sarcastic, you weren't supposed to take me seriously...

And I would gladly put Toyota and Honda next to Ford and Volva as POS in a Maserati comparison. Can't really do that to Nissan because of the GT-R.

So anything Lotus makes is also a POS, Toyota and Honda engines? So Honda, Toyota, Ford, Chevy, guess 99% of cars on the road are crap, better off not driving anything until you can afford a Maserati.

 

[MJinZ]

So anything Lotus makes is also a POS, Toyota and Honda engines?

Obviously not, I am talking about the entire vehicle makes.

Toyota makes the Lexus LF-A engines, and Honda makes um... I don't know, VTEC yo.

 

[Arkaign]

First relevant google turned up 162 from: http://www.lasplash.com/publish/cat_index_Vehicles/2007_Toyota_Camry_Review_Road_Test.php

But C&D has it listed as 145mph electronically limited. It's probably 162mph aerodynamically.

http://www.caranddriver.com/feature.../second_place_3a_2007_toyota_camry_v-6_page_5

That first link has some problems, notably right after it says 162mph top speed and talking about the V6, it says "Gas is good at 24/34 town and highway, with a hybrid available and well worth checking out."

Heh. That's the fuel economy for the i4 manual, and the Hybrid is hardly worth checking out as the fuel economy wasn't notably improved from the i4 at all while adding more expense than buying the V6 version, and still being pretty slow.

Looking at the weight and WHP of the Camry V6, it should do about 150mph-155mph with the right gearing. Not that it'd be a great idea. The power/weight doesn't make 162mph sound particularly likely, and the youtube/google video tests of owners seem to bog out and get really peaked well before even the electronic governor kicks in, meaning the time to go from 140mph to 150mph might be 30 seconds or more, and could be adversely affected by slight incline or increase in wind resistance.

This is all academic, or should be, as most Camrys, definitely all stock ones, are not ready for the demands of 150mph+ driving. Hell most roads aren't, and certianly most drivers aren't in a class that I would recommend trying that. The difference between 100mph and 150mph is a helluva lot greater than you'd think in terms of control. In a relative boat like a Camry, you only have a few degrees of latitude in steering before grip disappears, and the chassis/suspension is only holding the most tenuous stance on the road ripping beneath.

This is a silly distraction from the thread though. Apologies to the OP. I repeat my nomination of saving cash and getting a really nice good-as-new CPO 535i or 550i for half the cost of a new one. $30k saved could be used on all kinds of other cool stuff 😉

 

[Zargon]

You have to be kidding me right? The CTS is a fat overweight PIG. It can't even break 6 seconds to 60 in a 300HP direct injected variant.

The fact that it's more like a compact sedan than a midsize really makes it oh so appealing. But you have driven one yes? Been inside one? Felt like a driving in a little fat Civic?

http://www.leftlanenews.com/cadillac-cts.html
http://www.carsdirect.com/research/specs?cat=6&make=BM&modelid=665&acode=USC10BMC061A0&year=2011

base CTS Sedan and a 528 weight just about the same.

I see no data sayings its signifcantly smaller in interior volume.

http://www.insideline.com/bmw/5-series/2011/2011-bmw-5-series-sedan-power-and-performance.html

the 535 doesnt break 6 seconds to 60 either

which makes all of your comments moot, as its not how big it is, but who big compared to its competitor, which is the 5 series BMW or a Mercedes.



also, wtf, why are you talking about the non V CTS, when no one else is?

 

[MJinZ]

http://www.leftlanenews.com/cadillac-cts.html
http://www.carsdirect.com/research/specs?cat=6&make=BM&modelid=665&acode=USC10BMC061A0&year=2011

base CTS Sedan and a 528 weight just about the same.

I see no data sayings its signifcantly smaller in interior volume.

http://www.insideline.com/bmw/5-series/2011/2011-bmw-5-series-sedan-power-and-performance.html

the 535 doesnt break 6 seconds to 60 either

which makes all of your comments moot, as its not how big it is, but who big compared to its competitor, which is the 5 series BMW or a Mercedes.



also, wtf, why are you talking about the non V CTS, when no one else is?

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/26395.shtml

You started talking about the CTS in the context of Sports Sedans. Even its base model is overweight, so I won't get into the heavier V8 V.

535i seems to be under 6 seconds easily.

http://www.luxist.com/2010/01/25/first-drive-2011-bmw-535i-sedan-returning-to-its-design-roots/

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...535i_mercedes_benz_e350_comparison/index.html

 

[jlee]

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/26395.shtml

You started talking about the CTS in the context of Sports Sedans. Even its base model is overweight, so I won't get into the heavier V8 V.

The CTS-V is pretty badass, regardless of how overweight you think it may be.

09 CTS-V 'ring time? 7:59.32.

 

[punjabiplaya]

Anything you'll ever own is a POS next to my Ford. If you ever afford something nicer than my Ford, it will still be much slower. Lose/Lose for you.

Go ahead and keep driving your Camry and dreaming of Maseratis and Veyrons while the rest of us enjoy actually driving cars in the real world.

PS My speedometer only goes to 160, I guess you have me beat in your Camry at 162 🙁

my speedo goes to 180, do I win?

 

[MJinZ]

The CTS-V is pretty badass, regardless of how overweight you think it may be.

It's ugly.

Should have a Corvette instead. <- The only GM car worth buying. :sneaky:

 

[jlee]

It's ugly.

Should have a Corvette instead. <- The only GM car worth buying. :sneaky:

When you find a Corvette sedan, let the OP know.

 

[CraigRT]

It's ugly.

Should have a Corvette instead. <- The only GM car worth buying. :sneaky:

So let me get this straight. You like the Crosstour, but you think the CTS-V is ugly?

Something is wrong with this picture.

The CTS-V is totally badass.

 

[BoberFett]

LOL at another MJinZ thread. This guy never stops looking stupid.

 

[MJinZ]

So let me get this straight. You like the Crosstour, but you think the CTS-V is ugly?

Something is wrong with this picture.

The CTS-V is totally badass.

There is something seriously wrong with this picture:

I absolutely love the front end of the CTS (10/10) but moving to the rear and profile it falls apart into (1/10) for a total score of F (5.5/10).

 

[MJinZ]

When you find a Corvette sedan, let the OP know.

But it's made by Porsche.

 

[MJinZ]

LOL at another MJinZ thread. This guy never stops looking stupid.

I equivocate in the office, there is no need to do so here. Perhaps the internets is too intense for you.

 

[TraumaRN]

I'll throw my hat at the Taurus SHO. Test drove one for kicks pretty nice interior, gobs and gobs of torque, SYNC(best infotainment/handsfree on the market) and a trunk big enough for a few bodies.

 

[Zargon]

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/26395.shtml

You started talking about the CTS in the context of Sports Sedans. Even its base model is overweight, so I won't get into the heavier V8 V.

535i seems to be under 6 seconds easily.

http://www.luxist.com/2010/01/25/first-drive-2011-bmw-535i-sedan-returning-to-its-design-roots/

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...535i_mercedes_benz_e350_comparison/index.html

I was talking about the V in terms of sport sedans, not the base.

and I just showed that its equal in weight to its main competitor anyways, the BMW. SO its overweight compared to what now?

the first link list what BMW says, they didnt test it. I posted a article with an actual tested time. I could only find one time for the CTS and it was with the auto, not the manual, and didnt list if it was the rwd or awd or anything.

I see now the second one does. can you even find a test for the 300hp CTS thats not an AUTO? I can't 🙁 not that it matters, equal weight and HP leads to gearing.

Either put some sort of scale for your overweight claims or drop it, it weights what the BMW does that it competes with and is of similar size

 

[MJinZ]

I was talking about the V in terms of sport sedans, not the base.

and I just showed that its equal in weight to its main competitor anyways, the BMW. SO its overweight compared to what now?

the first link list what BMW says, they didnt test it. I posted a article with an actual tested time. I could only find one time for the CTS and it was with the auto, not the manual, and didnt list if it was the rwd or awd or anything.

I see now the second one does. can you even find a test for the 300hp CTS thats not an AUTO? I can't 🙁 not that it matters, equal weight and HP leads to gearing.

Either put some sort of scale for your overweight claims or drop it, it weights what the BMW does that it competes with and is of similar size

I didn't address the weight, so here it is:

2008 CTS V6 DI:

http://www.insideline.com/cadillac/cts/2008/full-test-2008-cadillac-cts-v6-di.html

3,874 (3,990 as tested)

Compared to 2008 BMW 535i

http://www.insideline.com/bmw/5-series/2008/full-test-2008-bmw-535i.html

3,704 mfr (3,909 as tested)

That's 170 lbs heavier.

Now, I used the 2010 5 series above because it's supposedly slower than the 2009s (and earlier), but you can see it pulled 5.6 seconds to 60. Most magazines peg the 2009 and prior 535s to be in the low 5 seconds.

At 3700 lbs, I even think the old BMW 5 series is a bit overweight. At nearly 3900lbs, I don't think a car like the CTS should weigh nearly that much.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I know, this class of cars are all complete pigs in the handling.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0802_midsize_sedan_comparison/toyota_camry.html

Of course, I bought the best daily driver I could at the time, which to this day, is still made by Toyota. 🙄

As OEM SEs are fairly tame, one could put on some wider tires and TRD suspension upgrades and it gets a little better.

Nice link...you're comparing 4 humdrum boring mainstream sedans (one of which is nothing more than a rental car) to each other and trying to somehow pass that off as evidence to support completely ridiculous points you are failing miserably to make? Congrats, the OP should listen to you for all his car buying advice. 🙄

I'm curious, even though you claim to have driven your camry at 120mph once a number of years ago, what other cars have you driven at that speed? What cars have you driven above that speed? I've driven a few cars at and above 120mph and I can tell you that some of them weren't very confidence inspiring and while your car may be capable of attaining that speed, in a straight line, it isn't capable of sustaining it or of taking high speed corners at that speed.

Oh, and I've never driven any car I've ever owned around the Nurburghring so comparing lap times on that is kind of like telling us how long your penis is. In short, nobody cares, and you probably wouldn't impress any chicks driving around that track in your camry anyway.

You're just another armchair magazine racer who thinks he knows something about sports cars because he has read some reviews and he owns a car. In other words, you know next to nothing.

 

[punjabiplaya]

Nice link...you're comparing 4 humdrum boring mainstream sedans (one of which is nothing more than a rental car) to each other and trying to somehow pass that off as evidence to support completely ridiculous points you are failing miserably to make? Congrats, the OP should listen to you for all his car buying advice. 🙄

I'm curious, even though you claim to have driven your camry at 120mph once a number of years ago, what other cars have you driven at that speed? What cars have you driven above that speed? I've driven a few cars at and above 120mph and I can tell you that some of them weren't very confidence inspiring and while your car may be capable of attaining that speed, in a straight line, it isn't capable of sustaining it or of taking high speed corners at that speed.

Oh, and I've never driven any car I've ever owned around the Nurburghring so comparing lap times on that is kind of like telling us how long your penis is. In short, nobody cares, and you probably wouldn't impress any chicks driving around that track in your camry anyway.

You're just another armchair magazine racer who thinks he knows something about sports cars because he has read some reviews and he owns a car. In other words, you know next to nothing.

Great, why'd you have to tell him what we're all thinking? Now he'll know.

 

[KentState]

I didn't address the weight, so here it is:

2008 CTS V6 DI:

http://www.insideline.com/cadillac/cts/2008/full-test-2008-cadillac-cts-v6-di.html

3,874 (3,990 as tested)

Compared to 2008 BMW 535i

http://www.insideline.com/bmw/5-series/2008/full-test-2008-bmw-535i.html

3,704 mfr (3,909 as tested)

That's 170 lbs heavier.

Now, I used the 2010 5 series above because it's supposedly slower than the 2009s (and earlier), but you can see it pulled 5.6 seconds to 60. Most magazines peg the 2009 and prior 535s to be in the low 5 seconds.

At 3700 lbs, I even think the old BMW 5 series is a bit overweight. At nearly 3900lbs, I don't think a car like the CTS should weigh nearly that much.

I'm going out on a limb here and will agree that the CTS is slower than the 535i, which is mainly because of the difference in torque. However, I don't agree that it's a small car or much heavier. Using the articles you included, the CTS is within an 1" in every dimension of the 5-series and 81lbs heavier. There is also at least a $10k price difference so I would expect the BMW to offer a little more in the way of performance.

CTS:
Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) 3,874 (3,990 as tested)
Length (in.) 191.6
Width (in.) 72.5
Height (in.) 58.0
Wheelbase (in.) 113.4
Legroom, front (in.) 42.4
Legroom, rear (in.) 35.9
Headroom, front (in.) 38.8
Headroom, rear (in.) 37.2
Cargo volume (cu-ft) 13.6

535i:
Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) 3909
Length (in.) 191.1
Width (in.) 72.7
Height (in.) 57.8
Wheelbase (in.) 113.7
Legroom, front (in.) 41.5
Legroom, rear (in.) 36.0
Headroom, front (in.) 39.1
Headroom, rear (in.) 38.1
Cargo volume (cu-ft) 14.0

 

[MJinZ]

Nice link...you're comparing 4 humdrum boring mainstream sedans (one of which is nothing more than a rental car) to each other and trying to somehow pass that off as evidence to support completely ridiculous points you are failing miserably to make? Congrats, the OP should listen to you for all his car buying advice. 🙄

I'm curious, even though you claim to have driven your camry at 120mph once a number of years ago, what other cars have you driven at that speed? What cars have you driven above that speed? I've driven a few cars at and above 120mph and I can tell you that some of them weren't very confidence inspiring and while your car may be capable of attaining that speed, in a straight line, it isn't capable of sustaining it or of taking high speed corners at that speed.

Oh, and I've never driven any car I've ever owned around the Nurburghring so comparing lap times on that is kind of like telling us how long your penis is. In short, nobody cares, and you probably wouldn't impress any chicks driving around that track in your camry anyway.

You're just another armchair magazine racer who thinks he knows something about sports cars because he has read some reviews and he owns a car. In other words, you know next to nothing.

Sustaining it? LOL, how's 1 hour of "sustaining" it? Granted, it varied between 100-125 in a wideopen freeways.

My Z rated MICHELIN tires 🙄 could let it go all day at those speeds.

No, I don't really "know" sports cars aside from what I read. They tend to be too expensive to drive around all day afterall. However, since I happen to drive a million different Rental Cars and Zipcars courtesy of Corporate, I do at least know what a Prius, Volvo, a 328 and a Mini feel like. You know, thousands of miles with them. 🙄 Hell, sometimes I even drive a Truck, and a couple of SUVs.