CT4-V Blackwing...kind of slow

[Grainofsand]

Anybody else feel like these cars are kind of slow? On youtube it gets smoked by everything comparable to it (Camaro SS, BMW M-cars and even the M340i). When I give it gas on the streets it feels heavy and I can't really feel the power. I feel like there needs to be some sort of factory revision to the tune if anybody is going to give a shit about these cars. Thanks for reading.

 

[PL69]

 

[dinkman]

lol
merry christmas to you too pal!

 

[Jim2000]

Slow? Not mine. I could see that an all wheel drive BMW M340 would be slightly faster due to the all wheel drive. But our cars out handle the BMW and have much better steering. Also, our maintenance is much less expensive and ours is more reliable. To me, it's not just about acceleration.

 

[BimmerFan]

I think part of the problem is that those cars are all quite fast, so it's a tough comparison.

But it's more than just raw acceleration numbers, right? The whole package, the feel, the handling and the ride...

 

[WONT TAP]

How much more power would you like?

Performance Packages B Archives - Tapout Tuning

500 TO 750 WHP CT4-V BLACKWING PERFORMANCE PACKAGES Our team has worked tirelessly to create and develop the best possible performance parts, tuning and complete performance packages for the CT4-V Blackwing cars. We’ve made some incredible progress for a car that was originally thought to be...

www.tapouttuning.com

 

[Roadhawk]

I totally get what the OP is saying. Sure all those cars are very fast...sad to see the 4 BW falling a bit behind...particularly with the 472 HP rating. But as Carol Shelby once said HP sells cars torque wins races. And while the BW is rated for 455 or such torque its deceptive as its whats under the curve. 4 BW is very linear (small turbos) and does not have that mid range slam you back in your seat punch. Sure its fast but you really have to get on it. But 1/4 mile isn't everything. Its fast enough (but sure we all want more) and what really makes a car special and a drivers car is the complete package and the 4 BW excels there.

 

[Champale]

This is funny - I test drove a 4BW 6sp on Saturday morning and thought the power level was perfect and it felt so much lighter and sharper than my new 5BW 6sp. Since driving the 4BW, I have been wondering if I made a mistake going with the 5 over the 4. To me, for a street car, something that has a 1/4 mile trap speed in the 115-120mph range is just about perfect to have fun without being completely stupid. The 5BW, which apparently traps 125ish, feels completely stupid, which I both hate and love at the same time! I'm not collecting pink slips on a Friday night - I just want to have cars that are engaging and fun to drive.

It reminds me of my old sportbike days when the literbikes went compeletly crazy with power (150+hp at the wheel) about 20 years ago and you simply could not use even half the throttle most of the time, especially during canyon strafing runs, and it made them decidedly less fun than something with 100-120hp.

OP - I am not trying to be a smart a$$ but maybe you should buy one of the super fast EVs? Those are next level speed if thats what you care about.

 

[Deneed4spd]

This is funny - I test drove a 4BW 6sp on Saturday morning and thought the power level was perfect and it felt so much lighter and sharper than my new 5BW 6sp. Since driving the 4BW, I have been wondering if I made a mistake going with the 5 over the 4. To me, for a street car, something that has a 1/4 mile trap speed in the 115-120mph range is just about perfect to have fun without being completely stupid. The 5BW, which apparently traps 125ish, feels completely stupid, which I both hate and love at the same time! I'm not collecting pink slips on a Friday night - I just want to have cars that are engaging and fun to drive.

It reminds me of my old sportbike days when the literbikes went compeletly crazy with power (150+hp at the wheel) about 20 years ago and you simply could not use even half the throttle most of the time, especially during canyon strafing runs, and it made them decidedly less fun than something with 100-120hp.

OP - I am not trying to be a smart a$$ but maybe you should buy one of the super fast EVs? Those are next level speed if thats what you care about.

I wonder the same thing if I should have gone with a type r or 4BW. 5 is crazy bonkers when I drove it on track but on road it’s $100k that u get to use 25 percent of its potential. But fomo might have got me and now depreciation hit might have me just keep it forever. Oh the 1st world problems.

 

[rubberduck]

I wonder the same thing if I should have gone with a type r or 4BW. 5 is crazy bonkers when I drove it on track but on road it’s $100k that u get to use 25 percent of its potential. But fomo might have got me and now depreciation hit might have me just keep it forever. Oh the 1st world problems.

You never know, being prepared is not a bad thing in this case. Maybe one day you’ll be in a police chase and need 100%.

 

[Champale]

I wonder the same thing if I should have gone with a type r or 4BW. 5 is crazy bonkers when I drove it on track but on road it’s $100k that u get to use 25 percent of its potential. But fomo might have got me and now depreciation hit might have me just keep it forever. Oh the 1st world problems.

Yeah I'm glad I got the 5 for many reasons (especially the back seat useability) and the value retention. But man, that 4BW blew me away. And FYI I replaced a 2021 Type R with the 5BW. I think the 4 is way closer in driving ethos than the bruiser 5.

Don't get me wrong - I already love the 5BW but I like extra sharp, great handling cars (like my 2020 GT350R, the Type R, etc) and the 4BW definitely is closer to that ideal.

Sorry for the threadjack!

 

[BKC1]

I agree with the slow statement.

When car companies send out customer satisfaction surveys, customers always respond that they'd like more legroom and trunk space. The problem is, the context of the question isn't, are you willing to buy a new car that weighs 10-15% more and costs 30-50% more to get that additional space while retaining the handling characteristics?

You only have to look at BMW, Audi, or Mini to see this problem is endemic. The BMW M3 grew from 2568 lbs (1st gen, E30) to 3131 lbs (E36) to 3461 lbs (E46) in only 9 years. Today's 6th gen (G80/G81) weighs 4112 lbs, more than a 4th gen M5, and instead of disciplining themselves, BMW introduced new models (M2 and M4) to fill the performance niche. With so many models to design, engineering gets stretched thin, objectives become unclear, and marketing gets involved, insisting that lower-priced cars can't outcompete higher-priced cars. Companies start making bad decisions to "stratify" the lineup.

GM is no different. The reason why the ATS-V and CT4-V BW exist is because the CTS-V grew out of control in cost, size, and weight. The ATS-V and the CT4-V BW are inherently faster than the CTS-V and CT5-V BW. The fact that GM needed to tune the ATS-V and CT4-V BW to be slower (see track times below) and downscale the interior to feel cheaper speaks to the problem the car industry has in controlling their own worst tendencies and interpreting customer feedback.

Compared to a FBO CTS-V1 (2004-2007), the stock M6 ATS-V and CT4-V BW are slower both in acceleration and lap times. A 20 year old car should not be competitive with a new car. And it's not, once you remove the artificial handicap. The ATS-V and CT4-V require almost no work (fuel mods) to get up to power levels where the CTS-V1 and CTS-V2 need forged bottom ends (and a bunch of other stuff) to compete.

People can debate the exact numbers, but in 2005-2010 you weren't even interesting unless you were making 700 RWHP. It used to be an achievement to crack 1000 RWHP. Now people don't blink at 1500 RWHP--they're only interested in whether you can handle and sustain that power. Unless you're buying a $250k car, OEM numbers are just what you get from the factory. You should be buying into this platform for its growth capability.

Laguna Seca Laptimes (stock):

• CTS-V1: 1:53.00
• CTS-V2: 1:43.90
• CTS-V3: 1:38.52
• ATS-V: 1:39.65
• CT4-V BW: N/A
• CT5-V BW: N/A

Willow Springs (stock):

• CTS-V1: 1:29.20*
• CTS-V2: 1:30.32 (Randy Pobst)
• CTS-V3: 1:29.69
• ATS-V: 1:31.43 (Randy Pobst)
• CT4-V BW: N/A
• CT5-V BW: 1:28.07 (Randy Pobst)

Virginia International Raceway (VIR) Grand East Course (stock):

• CTS-V1: N/A
• CTS-V2: 3:04.00 (C&D)
• CTS-V3: 2:56.80 (C&D)
• ATS-V: 2:59.20 (C&D)
• CT4-V BW: 2:54.60 (C&D)
• CT5-V BW: 2:49.40 (C&D)

Nurburgring (stock):

• CTS-V1: 8:19.XX (John Heinricy)
• CTS-V2: 7:59.32 (John Heinricy)
• CTS-V3: tested, not published by GM**
• ATS-V: tested, not published by GM
• CT4-V BW: tested, not published by GM***
• CT5-V BW: tested, not published by GM

*I question this number. It was added 16 years ago by Hagerty, but it doesn't seem possible or in alignment with the other delta lap times.

**From Slamking18 on CF: "I asked Tony Roma this when I was at the COTA V-Lab and he said that they were asked not to release any times since the Nurburgring recently got all that press about the accidents that occurred and were doing a lot of repairs to the course. He mentioned that he was hoping they could release the times in the next couple of months but did tell us that the ATS-V did considerably better than the 2nd gen CTS-V and the 3rd gen CTS-V did even better than that..."

***If GM didn't publish it, it's not a competitive time and GM feels defensive about it. The 2020 M5 CS did 7:29. The 2022 M4 CSL did 7:18. That indicates that all four cars landed between 7:30-7:50.

Would be interesting to see a max-effort V1, V2, V3, Blackwing time attack at VIR to see how far we've come.

 

[Lpe385]

I do understand where the OP is coming from that’s why I bought the 5BW 6spd and that’s not fast enough but Tapout is helping with that.

For me once you’ve had 600+RWHP in a 3,200lb car everything else feels a little sluggish. Again like it’s been said first world problems.

 

[Roadhawk]

All great thoughts...particularly BKC1 - thanks for sharing...

 

[jbawden]

On the <subjective> subject of which motorcycle displacement, I've ridden them all on track and find 200hp liter bike way more fun than the perceived chaos of wringing the piss out of a Ninja 400. Neither rider is necessarily better because they both take skill to turn a good lap time, just a different skillset.

I was crystal clear going into the BW purchase and decided that the 4 would just be an incrementally better and more powerful version of several previous cars I had (1st gen V, V-sport, and Chevy SS). In the context of an uncertain ICE future, the 5BW 6M is too compelling an offering to split hairs on which is sharper handling and more sensible power levels, in my opinion of course.

 

[Roadhawk]

I was crystal clear going into the BW purchase and decided that the 4 would just be an incrementally better and more powerful version of several previous cars I had (1st gen V, V-sport, and Chevy SS). In the context of an uncertain ICE future, the 5BW 6M is too compelling an offering to split hairs on which is sharper handling and more sensible power levels, in my opinion of course.

Many compelling reasons for the 5 to be sure...

 

[Seth]

Where do I start with go-faster stuff, tune?

 

[Super Saloon]

How fast a car "feels" is very subjective and relative, and only you can answer if it "feels" slow to you. To me, the 4BW is plenty fast for the street, and felt every bit as fast as my CLA 45 AMG.

Objectively, the car is competitive in straight line speed with its competitors. I wouldn't trust YouTube videos as driver skill and mods may vary. Using Car and Driver data from a few cars the 4 competes with (all most recent gens):

CT4V BW (Manual)
0-60: 4.0 sec
1/4 mile: 12.4 sec
Trap: 116mph

BMW M3 (Manual)
0-60: 3.9 sec
1/4 mile: 12.2 sec
Trap: 117mph

BMW M2 (Manual)
0-60: 3.9 sec
1/4 mile: 12.2 sec
Trap: 118mph

CLA 45 AMG (Auto & AWD)
0-60: 3.7 sec
1/4 mile: 12.2 sec
Trap: 114mph

BMW M340i (Auto & AWD)
0-60: 3.7 sec
1/4 mile: 12.2 sec
Trap: 112mph

 

[savethemanual]

Ummm, what Camaro ss is smoking a ct4 v blackwing?

 

[Lithoss]

Call me delusional but 4 sec being called slow is silly. I guess it's all relative