Just testing the waters. If this turns out alright, I have big plans to continue. For once I would rather see this thread die than off topic to other cars, manufacturers, or leagues of nations. They'll all have their moment in the sun, especially if we can come to some kinda election system for the following weeks competitors once a clear victor is chosen in this thread.

For Gearheads first as of yet unapproved and unofficial installment of Hero versus Hero, the Ferrari California will be pitter against the Cadillac CTS-V. Which car is the victor, and which car would you prefer?

Remember, this is going to be not quite your normal gearheads thread. It's Hero versus Hero, not poster versus poster, and subjectivism is perfectly acceptable.

ferrari california weighs more then I expected, but it is still wayyyy radder then the caddy.

Neither. 430 Scuderia muthafucka. Who needs floor mats anyway? Or a stereo? You've got 510 bhp of roaring engine to listen to! And the exposed weld spots add character! :mad:

I don't know, the CTS-V looks like the Americans finally did make a good sports sedan. It's about a decade late, but good nonetheless.

You know what? I would take the Cadillac. I'm not liking the new Ferrari. Apparently it could be pretty fun to drive, apparently it has near-perfect weight distribution, and it sort of looks okay with the top up. But it seems like it was designed for rich wives rather than enthusiasts. I'm not interested in its new gearbox that still uses paddles, I'm not interested in its fancy folding roof, and I'm not interested how high in the air the italians noses are over this car.

The CTS-V, on the other hand, has a no-nonsense aura about it, which counts for alot for me. And, if they actually managed to make it handle well (and it uses a proper 6-speed! Auto-optional, but they're actually selling a Caddy with a stick and clutch), then I'd say I'm sold. Not sure about the over-done interior or having a whole bunch of yank-tank fans yelling at me to 'light em up!' at every stoplight, but I would honestly not take the new Ferrari over a Cadillac. For once.

Next up: Audi RS5 vs... something? That car is hawt - 450 HP twin-turbo 4.2 FSI V8, current-gen rear-biasing quattro system, active aerodynamics, slightly lighter weight, and looks that would make your mother weep softly. It even has decent weight distribution!

http://www.diablomotor.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/big_audi_rs5_negro-trasero.jpg

Suddenly I don't mind that they stopped making the RS4.

You know what? I would take the Cadillac. I'm not liking the new Ferrari. Apparently it could be pretty fun to drive, apparently it has near-perfect weight distribution, and it sort of looks okay with the top up. But it seems like it was designed for rich wives rather than enthusiasts. I'm not interested in its new gearbox that still uses paddles, I'm not interested in its fancy folding roof, and I'm not interested how high in the air the italians noses are over this car.

The CTS-V, on the other hand, has a no-nonsense aura about it, which counts for alot for me. And, if they actually managed to make it handle well (and it uses a proper 6-speed! Auto-optional, but they're actually selling a Caddy with a stick and clutch), then I'd say I'm sold. Not sure about the over-done interior or having a whole bunch of yank-tank fans yelling at me to 'light em up!' at every stoplight, but I would honestly not take the new Ferrari over a Cadillac. For once.

Next up: Audi RS5 vs... something? That car is hawt - 450 HP twin-turbo 4.2 FSI V8, current-gen rear-biasing quattro system, active aerodynamics, slightly lighter weight, and looks that would make your mother weep softly. It even has decent weight distribution!

http://www.diablomotor.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/big_audi_rs5_negro-trasero.jpg

Suddenly I don't mind that they stopped making the RS4.

Too porky. Next.

Too porky. Next.

wtf? It's a coupe version of the RS4 that has better weight distribution and twin turbos! And it's faster than the E92 M3...

.....oooooooohhh. I get it. :D

wtf? It's a coupe version of the RS4 that has better weight distribution and twin turbos! And it's faster than the E92 M3...

.....oooooooohhh. I get it. :D

3700 lbs. Do not want.

The RS5 is slated to come in at under 3500 ibs. The E92 M3 weighs 3700+ ibs, and that's just the coupe. BMW was going to make a CSL, but apparently they've axed it, for more SUVs of all things.

lulz. Even if it is as heavy as the M3, it's still got more power, all wheel drive, a trick new rear diff - one that will cause the RS5 to favour oversteer. Theoretically it's damn near GT-R territory, performance-wise. Dunno if it'll actually rival the Nissan, though it certainly won't price-wise. I don't mind if it weighs a bit more, it's an Audi, it's meant to be super-high tech. That and I think it's fucking gorgeous.

You poor gearheads regulars, I'll never shut up about this thing unless its proven to be poor. Good thing I'm leaving town by tomorrow and thusly won't have internet access again...

The RS5 is slated to come in at under 3500 ibs. The E92 M3 weighs 3700+ ibs, and that's just the coupe. BMW was going to make a CSL, but apparently they've axed it, for more SUVs of all things.

lulz. Even if it is as heavy as the M3, it's still got more power, all wheel drive, a trick new rear diff - one that will cause the RS5 to favour oversteer. Theoretically it's damn near GT-R territory, performance-wise. Dunno if it'll actually rival the Nissan, though it certainly won't price-wise. I don't mind if it weighs a bit more, it's an Audi, it's meant to be super-high tech. That and I think it's fucking gorgeous.

You poor gearheads regulars, I'll never shut up about this thing unless its proven to be poor. Good thing I'm leaving town by tomorrow and thusly won't have internet access again...

I'd think of the A/S/RS5 as more of BMW M5 competitors rather than M3. Same goes for the CTS-V.

I'd think of the A/S/RS5 as more of BMW M5 competitors rather than M3. Same goes for the CTS-V.

they're way too small to be 5-series competitors, the A/S/RS6 are 5-series competitors, with the rs6 thoroughly kicking the m5's ass, 580 hp twin turbo v-10 FTMFW.

the a5 is on the same platform as the current gen a4. the rs5 is going to get the same fsi v-8 as the rs4, but with more power. cars these days have gotten bigger because of safety regs, but the a4 has actually gotten lighter in the new generation, when it went to the same platform as the a5

the rs5 mule along with the tt-rs mule were by desert audi in vegas a while back, and the rs5 was not turbo'd, the reports saying it was came out before the mule was spotted.


to get back to the op, the cts-v is surely a m5 competitor in size, i saw one at the san fran auto show, and i would take it over a ferrari california, and pocket the difference. i feel the california is way too soft of a ferrrari, it shouldnt have a convertible hard top, the 430 spyder is much better of a ferrari. the california is more of a cruiser, like the maserati gran turismo.

3700 lbs. Do not want.

the caddy weighs 4200.

they're way too small to be 5-series competitors, the A/S/RS6 are 5-series competitors, with the rs6 thoroughly kicking the m5's ass, 580 hp twin turbo v-10 FTMFW.

the a5 is on the same platform as the current gen a4. the rs5 is going to get the same fsi v-8 as the rs4, but with more power. cars these days have gotten bigger because of safety regs, but the a4 has actually gotten lighter in the new generation, when it went to the same platform as the a5

the rs5 mule along with the tt-rs mule were by desert audi in vegas a while back, and the rs5 was not turbo'd, the reports saying it was came out before the mule was spotted.


to get back to the op, the cts-v is surely a m5 competitor in size, i saw one at the san fran auto show, and i would take it over a ferrari california, and pocket the difference. i feel the california is way too soft of a ferrrari, it shouldnt have a convertible hard top, the 430 spyder is much better of a ferrari. the california is more of a cruiser, like the maserati gran turismo.


Rs6 vs M5? M5 easily. The only factor (other than personal tastes) that the Rs6 has on the M5 is a bit of power and AWD.
The M5 has .97~ g of grip and when compared to the 174 mph top speed of the Rs6, is a rocket ship with it's 198 (after you remove that limiter, nothing more). Don't get me wrong, I'm still a VAG fan, but the BMWs are far from slouches in the performance department.

the caddy weighs 4200.

The Caddy masks the weight, from what I hear. The S5 got beat by a 135i and by a Cobalt SS. Please.

Rs6 vs M5? M5 easily. The only factor (other than personal tastes) that the Rs6 has on the M5 is a bit of power and AWD.
The M5 has .97~ g of grip and when compared to the 174 mph top speed of the Rs6, is a rocket ship with it's 198 (after you remove that limiter, nothing more). Don't get me wrong, I'm still a VAG fan, but the BMWs are far from slouches in the performance department.

you must be thinking of the previous gen RS6, the one with the v-8TT and 450 hp, because with the limiter removed, the current one can hit over 200 mph, in station wagon form. with a re-map, it can see over 700 hp. the rs6 makes alot more usable power too, the current gen rs6 is pure beast compared to the M5. hell around a track, the RS6 can keep up with the R8. and also, more that just 80 hp, the RS6 makes loads and loads more torque, with its turbos, rather than the high revving v-10 in the m5, the rs6 has twin turbos on its v-10. peak numbers don't matter too much, when the m5 is dominated all over the powerband.

the a/s 5 is not at all a big car, not much bigger than a 3-series, and definitely smaller than a 6-series. and it has functional rear seats, unlike the 3-series coupe, those get pretty cramped in the back, i've sat in the back of both.


and the S5 is much more of a grand tourer than the cobalt SS and 135i. you actually get a good interior with the s5, and nothing out of a rental car like the cobalt, or cramped like the 135i. and i know by the end of the day, the s5 was the more comfortable, and easier to live with car.

and why do you complain about weight of one car, and say because another hides the weight, its better? being hypocritical much? you haven't driven either so you can't say that one is better than the other because it hides its weight well.. how well do you know the s5 to hide its weight? the new rear-bias diff works wonders, actually gives a hint of oversteer. and its more aluminum construction, along with the motor sitting further back on the front axle gives it a much better weight distribution.

you must be thinking of the previous gen RS6, the one with the v-8TT and 450 hp, because with the limiter removed, the current one can hit over 200 mph, in station wagon form. with a re-map, it can see over 700 hp. the rs6 makes alot more usable power too, the current gen rs6 is pure beast compared to the M5. hell around a track, the RS6 can keep up with the R8. and also, more that just 80 hp, the RS6 makes loads and loads more torque, with its turbos, rather than the high revving v-10 in the m5, the rs6 has twin turbos on its v-10. peak numbers don't matter too much, when the m5 is dominated all over the powerband.

the a/s 5 is not at all a big car, not much bigger than a 3-series, and definitely smaller than a 6-series. and it has functional rear seats, unlike the 3-series coupe, those get pretty cramped in the back, i've sat in the back of both.


and the S5 is much more of a grand tourer than the cobalt SS and 135i. you actually get a good interior with the s5, and nothing out of a rental car like the cobalt, or cramped like the 135i. and i know by the end of the day, the s5 was the more comfortable, and easier to live with car.

and why do you complain about weight of one car, and say because another hides the weight, its better? being hypocritical much? you haven't driven either so you can't say that one is better than the other because it hides its weight well.. how well do you know the s5 to hide its weight? the new rear-bias diff works wonders, actually gives a hint of oversteer. and its more aluminum construction, along with the motor sitting further back on the front axle gives it a much better weight distribution.

From what I've seen, the S5 handles like a pig. Pig being used relatively here, but you get what I mean. All I'm saying is wait till the next M5, which comes with turbos.

From what I've seen, the S5 handles like a pig. Pig being used relatively here, but you get what I mean. All I'm saying is wait till the next M5, which comes with turbos.

they had to step the game up with the m5, because audi stepped the game up.

look at the last m5, 400 hp v-8, then audi had the rs6 with 450 hp and twin turbos, current m5, v-10 500hp, current rs6 580 hp, and twin turbos. these horsepower wars are getting pretty nuts in the top end.

i hope they do the 5 up better than the new 7. i saw the new 750i at the san fran auto show, with twin turbos and 400 hp v8, but the grille is now hideous, wayy too big for the car.

the S5 doesn't handle like a pig, it has an amazing suspension, its a bit nose heavy because of the v-8, and its not made for precise handling, its more of a cruiser than a track machine, and handles as such, silky smooth, but put some coilovers on it, and its hell unleashed. the s5 is also getting the supercharged v-6 of the new S4. that should give it much better balance, and actually more torque than the current 4.2 v-8 (although that v-8 is really smooth, been around for 14-10 years or so in audis, but its heavy)

they had to step the game up with the m5, because audi stepped the game up.

look at the last m5, 400 hp v-8, then audi had the rs6 with 450 hp and twin turbos, current m5, v-10 500hp, current rs6 580 hp, and twin turbos. these horsepower wars are getting pretty nuts in the top end.

i hope they do the 5 up better than the new 7. i saw the new 750i at the san fran auto show, with twin turbos and 400 hp v8, but the grille is now hideous, wayy too big for the car.

the S5 doesn't handle like a pig, it has an amazing suspension, its a bit nose heavy because of the v-8, and its not made for precise handling, its more of a cruiser than a track machine, and handles as such, silky smooth, but put some coilovers on it, and its hell unleashed. the s5 is also getting the supercharged v-6 of the new S4. that should give it much better balance, and actually more torque than the current 4.2 v-8 (although that v-8 is really smooth, been around for 14-10 years or so in audis, but its heavy)

Agreed on the last part. I see the S5 as a competitor to maybe an S class or something, more of an autobahn car.

Agreed on the last part. I see the S5 as a competitor to maybe an S class or something, more of an autobahn car.

yeah, and i think it should keep the v-8, to make it different than the S4. but tightening economy standards were the cause to drop in displacement. the v-6 supercharged makes more torque lower down than the v-8. the s5 isnt that big, its in the middle of the 3-series coupe and 6-series coupe in size, maybe closer to the 6-series, and its about the same size as the benz CLK. i love the headlights, its a sharp car.

This is a dumb comparison. A $60k sports sedan vs a $250k drop top 2 seater? Really? I'll take the V and buy a house with a nice garage to keep it in with the leftover $190k.

The fun thing about the 09 V is that it's probably just a pulley and tune away from the 638hp of the ZR1.

I really like the look of the RS5, but I doubt it's performance will prove comparable to the top of the line sports luxury cars.

(and it uses a proper 6-speed! Auto-optional, but they're actually selling a Caddy with a stick and clutch)

The previous gen CTS-V (04-07) was manual only, no auto available.

cts-v is a pulley, tune, and supercharger away, the cts-v uses a smaller supercharger than the zr-1, but really, its not too much different. i'm really surprised that gm made the current cts-v better than the last, for a while there i would have been happy with just the current gen z06 motor in it.

Along with a smaller supercharger running 1.5psi less, the V also uses hypereutectics instead of forged pistons, as well as forged rods instead of titanium. On the bright side, all of this cool LS9 stuff should go in an LSA block, so upgrades will be easier to find and cheaper than other sports luxury cars...

(Still think a pulley and tune would do 638 crank hp.)

I thought it was the same blower, dialed in for less boost. I thought that's what I read.

I thought it was the same blower, dialed in for less boost. I thought that's what I read.

nope smaller supercharger.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/14/detroit-2008-2009-lsa-6-2l-superchar/print/