# Goat Vs. CTS-V (Gears)



## WanaMonster (Mar 10, 2006)

I am researching/considering an 05 GOAT and in my research I've found that GM didn't put the same gears in the rear of the GOAT's that they did in the CTS-V (something like caddy 2:83 and GTO 2:21). I am astounded at the difference's in acceleration that most magazines are siting between the two. I would think that the 6.0 in the o5 and up would make it almost a tie. I've also seen that the almost anything european that comes close in HP,weight and tourque seems to get both of them by a bit at the end of a quarter. being a car guy I know that the european's tend to select superior gear's inside the trans while it seems detroit adjusts the rear to get the stats where they want them. So, I'm trying to find out if anyone has upgraded the rear to meet or beat the caddy. It seems to me even matching the caddy would put the Goat's a few click's off the C6 and way beyond the heavier smaller engined caddy......Gear head's preach to me!


----------



## rolo06 (Feb 22, 2006)

Not sure what your talking about? 3.46 Dana in the rear of the new Goat, several guys here running high 12s with a stock 05/06. What European cars are you referring too? You will not touch those 1/4 times in anything European for under $80K (stock that is).

C&D lists the the Caddy: 4.6/13.2 and the GTO: 4.8/13.3


----------



## CrabhartLSX (Feb 12, 2006)

I know 05/06's have 3.46's in the rear regardless of transmission, not sure about 04 autos but i know the manuals have that gear ratio as well. 

So what are we talking about exactly?


----------



## GTO_Gregory (Aug 5, 2005)

*Rear Gears*

The CTS-V has 3.73 rear gear while the GTO has a 3.46. Thus, CTS-V is a little quicker in the short run with similar weight and power.


----------



## b_a_betterperson (Feb 16, 2005)

GTO_Gregory said:


> The CTS-V has 3.73 rear gear while the GTO has a 3.46. Thus, CTS-V is a litter quicker in the short run with similar weight and power.


That's if you can get the power to ground at all. Launching a GTO hard only takes about 1700 to 2000 rpm. Anything more just blows the tires off and starts wheel hop. 

I've checked the CTS-V forums a few times -- and they've had guys hauling their news cars off flat beds because they broke the drive train via wheel hop.

I think what the author is asking about is the gearing within the transmission versus the rear end. All I can say is that it's fine in my '04. Yeah, 5 and 6 are ODs -- but it's a street car not a race car.


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

I've raced 2 CTS-V's with the GTO and beat both. First one was real close, a car at most by 100. I don't exactly remember the second one, but think i got the guy by about 3 cars to 80-90. From talking to CTS-V owners, the car is a great touring car, but a real lousy drag racer due to the previously mentioned wheel hop. 

To answer the original question, the Caddy is slightly heavier than the GTO, but has 3.73 rear gears compared to the 3.46 in the GTO. I always wondered why there wasn't a performance axle option with the 3.73's for the GTO. Theoretically the V should take the GTO out of the hole, but the suspension shortcomings don't allow the V to get all it's power to the ground. 

European that is close in HP weight and torque????? There is nothing that has the GTO's torque and a similar hp rating. There also isn't anything in the GTO's price range that is close to competitive.


----------



## WanaMonster (Mar 10, 2006)

*sorry*

sorry too many stats in my head and not all are correct. I thought I had read that the BMW 545 had a slower 0-60 but by the end of a 1/4 had come within a few 10th's and had a higher trap speed w/ a 75hp defecite. I've since reveiwed the stats and looks like my euro theory doesn't hold water. guess I was a bit erked at GM for giving the caddy an edge in the stat's. I've been a long time goat fan and don't think it should be second to a caddy. love the caddy's but the GTO badge to me is a true legend and shouldn't be put at any disadvantage (even a simple gear change). a few of you guys mentioned wheel hop, is this a problem with the goats at all or just less of a problem than the wheel hop in the CTS-V? also, I've read a few articles that refer to the goats rear suspension as archaic or antiquated. I tend to associate this with the solid rear axel of the pony boys. I hate solid rear axel as my last car an 03 marauder left this world early in part because of it. please tell me the GTO's are not solid. Thanks


----------



## Clueless (Mar 2, 2006)

WanaMonster said:


> I've read a few articles that refer to the goats rear suspension as archaic or antiquated. I tend to associate this with the solid rear axel of the pony boys. I hate solid rear axel as my last car an 03 marauder left this world early in part because of it. please tell me the GTO's are not solid. Thanks


http://www.pontiac.com/gto/specs_viewall.jsp

"Suspension, Sport, independent rear suspension"


----------



## MeanGoat (Jan 4, 2006)

fergyflyer said:


> ...European that is close in HP weight and torque????? There is nothing that has the GTO's torque and a similar hp rating. There also isn't anything in the GTO's price range that is close to competitive...


Sorry fergy, but the M5 is rated at 500 hp and 383 torque. Supposed to do the quarter in something like 4.2 or .3 seconds. 5.0 litre V10 N/A

But, I agree. I certainly did not pay 85 grand for the goat in order to pull nearly the same numbers so I'm very happy with my GTO. And it's definitely more muscular sounding which I love


----------



## putergod (Jan 12, 2006)

You mean 0-60... Unless its a top fuel dragster... lol


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

MeanGoat said:


> Sorry fergy, but the M5 is rated at 500 hp and 383 torque. Supposed to do the quarter in something like 4.2 or .3 seconds. 5.0 litre V10 N/A
> 
> But, I agree. I certainly did not pay 85 grand for the goat in order to pull nearly the same numbers so I'm very happy with my GTO. And it's definitely more muscular sounding which I love


I'll stand by what I said, there is nothing European that has similar HP and Torque numbers. The torque of the M5 might be similar, but the HP isn't. Also if the Guy in the BMW forgets to play around and get it into the high performance mode he's going to get beat by a GTO. Better yet, if the light turns green while he's messing with the car he toasted by a stock WRX. 

I'd still take an AMG E55 Mercedes over the BMW any day of the week. A guy I know has one and when it was stock with DR's it went 12.2 at 115. He changed the pulley and got it tuned for about 1500. He has gotten kicked off every track around here for running in the high 10's. The best part is the mod was a Benz AMG mod and the warranty is still intact. 

I think everyone would agree that there isn't a car in the GTO's price range that competes with it. To come close you need to spend 60k plus.


----------



## DaGreightOne (Mar 10, 2006)

putergod said:


> You mean 0-60... Unless its a top fuel dragster... lol



:lol: :agree :rofl:


----------



## DaGreightOne (Mar 10, 2006)

fergyflyer said:


> I'll stand by what I said, there is nothing European that has similar HP and Torque numbers. The torque of the M5 might be similar, but the HP isn't. Also if the Guy in the BMW forgets to play around and get it into the high performance mode he's going to get beat by a GTO. Better yet, if the light turns green while he's messing with the car he toasted by a stock WRX.
> 
> I'd still take an AMG E55 Mercedes over the BMW any day of the week. A guy I know has one and when it was stock with DR's it went 12.2 at 115. He changed the pulley and got it tuned for about 1500. He has gotten kicked off every track around here for running in the high 10's. The best part is the mod was a Benz AMG mod and the warranty is still intact.
> 
> I think everyone would agree that there isn't a car in the GTO's price range that competes with it. To come close you need to spend 60k plus.



And for that price I can buy to gto's...


----------



## MeanGoat (Jan 4, 2006)

fergyflyer said:


> I'll stand by what I said, there is nothing European that has similar HP and Torque numbers. The torque of the M5 might be similar, but the HP isn't. Also if the Guy in the BMW forgets to play around and get it into the high performance mode he's going to get beat by a GTO. Better yet, if the light turns green while he's messing with the car he toasted by a stock WRX.
> 
> I'd still take an AMG E55 Mercedes over the BMW any day of the week. A guy I know has one and when it was stock with DR's it went 12.2 at 115. He changed the pulley and got it tuned for about 1500. He has gotten kicked off every track around here for running in the high 10's. The best part is the mod was a Benz AMG mod and the warranty is still intact.
> 
> I think everyone would agree that there isn't a car in the GTO's price range that competes with it. To come close you need to spend 60k plus.


:agree What, something like 90+ mode settings for the iDrive system in the M5? Too much tom-gadgetry I tell you.


----------



## GibsonUSA (Jan 8, 2006)

I don't mean to hijack this thread but I didnt want to waste space on a new one.

Newbie question. How does an automatic 05 GTO compare to an 06 manual Mazda RX-8 (the standard one not the Shinku)?


----------



## fergyflyer (Apr 18, 2005)

GibsonUSA said:


> I don't mean to hijack this thread but I didnt want to waste space on a new one.
> 
> Newbie question. How does an automatic 05 GTO compare to an 06 manual Mazda RX-8 (the standard one not the Shinku)?


The RX8 is better in the corners. It's a little easier to get into the back (ok a lot easier) of the RX. The ride is similar, but from my test drive the RX is not as good on larger bumps or on crowned pavement. Gas mileage should be just about equal. 

In 0-60 times, if you really want to beat the RX it's a mid 5 second 0-60, while the GTO needs to be finnessed to a 4.7-4.8. The RX8 has the worst street start difference Car and Driver has ever recorded. Regular 0-60 was around 5.8 and the street start 5-60 is around 7.8. The 1/4 mile is won by the GTO by about 12-15 car lengths. GTO is 13.2 versus 14.4-14.6 for the RX. 

I'm not familiar with the Shinku version of the RX so I couldn't compare them.


----------

