GM Reveals 2011 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe! - Page 6

305pride · 05-22-2010, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I saw that commercial the other day on TV and wondered why the Camaro doesn't have advertising like this...

because the camaro had the transformers movie. speaking of that movie. it wasa huge gm commercial with the gmc truck and solstice and shi lol

*DGthe3* · 05-27-2010, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 305pride

because the camaro had the transformers movie. speaking of that movie. it wasa huge gm commercial with the gmc truck and solstice and shi lol

Yup. In the first movie GM was represented by a GMC Topkick (Ironhide), Pontiac Solstice (Jazz), Chevy Camaro Concept (Bumblebee), and Hummer H2 Ambulance (Ratchet). In TF2 there was also the Corvette Centenial/Stingray Concept (Sideswipe), Chevy Beat Concept (Skids), Chevy Trax Concept (Mudflap) in addition to the ones from the first movie (minus Jazz, the Solstice)

rez333 · 05-27-2010, 01:36 AM

Vertical rear lights are a big no-no. Design wise, thin vertical accents make things look taller. For a sporty car, you want it to look lower and wider, not taller. For example, the new Audis do the rear lights right.

I really don't understand how they can get this 4200lb car to 60mph in 3.9s. I'm guessing that time is with the auto transmission?

FenwickHockey65 · 05-27-2010, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rez333

Vertical rear lights are a big no-no. Design wise, thin vertical accents make things look taller. For a sporty car, you want it to look lower and wider, not taller. For example, the new Audis do the rear lights right.

I really don't understand how they can get this 4200lb car to 60mph in 3.9s. I'm guessing that time is with the auto transmission?

Vertical rear lights are a Cadillac design element since the 1st gen CTS. They aren't going anywhere.

*DGthe3* · 05-27-2010, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

Vertical rear lights are a Cadillac design element since the 1st gen CTS. They aren't going anywhere.

They are the evolution of the large tail fins from the 1950's. And Cadillac has been using vertical tail lights for a looooong time, maybe not as prominent but they've been there. It didn't start with the CTS.

rez333 · 05-27-2010, 03:58 PM

Yes I know the history of them, but just because the history of suspension is the hotchkiss leaf spring, doesn't mean we have to keep using them.

There's a reason why no-one else designs cars with vertical tail lights, especially sports cars. It's the same design science as haircuts, sunglasses, clothes etc. You wear certain designs to accent certain features. Vertical thin lines make you look taller and skinnier (fat people should wear vertical pin stripes for example). These are universal design teachings. Those vertical tail lights make the CTS-V's ass look way fatter than it already is. Horizontal tail lights would have hidden the fatness.

Anyway, my main question was: how is it possible to launch a 4200lb car to 60 in 3.9s? Okay the HP/Torque is large, but not nearly as large (it seems) as would be necessary to propel such a heavy car to 60. Especially if we account for tire width, and comparisons with other cars of similar weight/HP or weight/torque.

TheCaptain · 05-27-2010, 04:32 PM

It's because its a Cadillac. You'll understand once you own one.

05-27-2010, 04:32 PM	#77
TheCaptain N7 Spectre Drives: 14 ATS Performance 3.6L AWD Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Moosomin, Saskatchewan, Canada Posts: 2,732 View My Garage	It's because its a Cadillac. You'll understand once you own one. __________________

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Think about this and the Z28 5th gen	13F20	Camaro ZL1 Forum - ZL1 Specific Topics	41	09-04-2010 01:59 AM
GM Reveals 2011 Cadillac CTS Coupe!	FenwickHockey65	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	47	05-21-2010 12:18 AM
Production Stats and information	sherifdude	USA - Southcentral	0	10-31-2009 04:07 PM
Answeres to questions I have stumbled on	dieseldave24v	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	13	02-23-2009 07:56 PM
CTC-V spied! (CTS Coupe)	radz28	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	11	08-20-2008 01:22 PM

05-27-2010, 01:36 AM	#73
rez333 Drives: 2013 ZL1 Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: St. Joseph Posts: 1,283	Vertical rear lights are a big no-no. Design wise, thin vertical accents make things look taller. For a sporty car, you want it to look lower and wider, not taller. For example, the new Audis do the rear lights right. I really don't understand how they can get this 4200lb car to 60mph in 3.9s. I'm guessing that time is with the auto transmission?

05-27-2010, 03:58 PM	#76
rez333 Drives: 2013 ZL1 Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: St. Joseph Posts: 1,283	Yes I know the history of them, but just because the history of suspension is the hotchkiss leaf spring, doesn't mean we have to keep using them. There's a reason why no-one else designs cars with vertical tail lights, especially sports cars. It's the same design science as haircuts, sunglasses, clothes etc. You wear certain designs to accent certain features. Vertical thin lines make you look taller and skinnier (fat people should wear vertical pin stripes for example). These are universal design teachings. Those vertical tail lights make the CTS-V's ass look way fatter than it already is. Horizontal tail lights would have hidden the fatness. Anyway, my main question was: how is it possible to launch a 4200lb car to 60 in 3.9s? Okay the HP/Torque is large, but not nearly as large (it seems) as would be necessary to propel such a heavy car to 60. Especially if we account for tire width, and comparisons with other cars of similar weight/HP or weight/torque.