Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • G. David Felt
    G. David Felt

    1,200-hp Hennessey Cadillac CTS-V Coupe offered

    G. David Felt

    Staff Writer Alternative Energy - CheersandGears.com

    We all love GM and how Cadillac has been on a roll lately. Yet even then we know that GM will never give you everything you have wanted or fullfill the niche area of ultimate performance. Now with Hennessey stepping up, it looks like Cadillac will truly have a monster that will put everyone in it's place, even Bugatti.

    Review the story and sound off on what you think of this Hennessey Built Monster!

    John Hennessey's tuning shop in Texas operates on a simple principle that denies the existence of "too much horsepower." Here's his latest offering to the angry gods of speed -- a dozen Hennessey V1200 Cadillac CTS-V coupes, all of which offer more than double the power of their everyday lookalikes with a Bugatti-challenging 1,226 hp and a top speed of 242 mph.

    http://autos.yahoo.c...-190832135.html

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I usually use a simple "rule of thumb" formula for determining if a car has too much power -- at least for 0-60, 0-100 and 1/4 mile runs. This formula is:-

    0.7 x Tire Width (mm) x Number of Driven Front Wheels x Vehicle Weight (lbs) / 3500 + Tire Width (mm) x Number of Driven Rear Wheels x Vehicle Weight (lbs) / 3500*

    Eg. A Corvette would benefit from extra HP up to about 0 + 275 x 2 x 3200 / 3500 = 503 hp

    Eg. A FWD Cobalt would benefit fro up to about 0.7 x 235 x 2 x 2900 / 3500 + 0 = 273 hp

    Eg. A Nissan GT-R would benefit from up to about 0.7 x 255 x 2 x 3830 / 3500 + 285 x 2 x 3830 / 3500 = 390 + 627 = 1017 hp

    Based on this rule of thumb, the Hennesy CTS-V Coupe mounting 345/30 R20 rear tires has a power handling limit of 0 + 345 * 2 * 4200 / 3500 = 0 + 828 = 828 hp. Anything more really just produces additional wheel spin, and really does not have a tangible yield in acceleration times and can in fact make the car harder to launch and control.

    Also, you'll noitce that FWD cars have about 30% less power handling than RWD due to weight transfer away from the front wheels during acceleration and AWD cars have essentially unlimited traction for "sane", mass produced, engines. Also, heavier cars actually handle more power simply because they have more mass pressing down on the same tires.

    * The formula is really an over simplification as it is really torque to the wheels not power at the crank, contact patch, coefficient of friction and weight applied rather than just the width of the tire. But using a 3500 lbs correction constant, assuming the typical grip of summer compound tires and correcting for FWD lift, this rule of thumb is within +- ~10% of actual values and is easier to apply.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Very interesting info on assessing power/torque.

    But what do you think of this Hennessey production car? The look, your impression/feeling?

    We know you think it is over powered based on your formula, but what about their interruption of this Cadillac and their top performance version?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have always liked the CTS coupe. And the overall look of the Hennessy car is not rodiculously over the top which helps preserve the car's clean looks. Personally, I'll skip the hood louvers because I don't like the clutter from the slats. If I have to do a hood vent I'll prefer a cleaner implement like that on the C6-R race cars or the Shelby Series-1.

    One thing I'll really like to see on mechanically supercharged engines is a hydraulic supercharger coupling. Basically, it is a fluidic drive as opposed to a belt-n-pulley. The fluidic drive allows a variable bleed valve which can reduce the supercharger drive ratio in response to rpm, throttle position and/or altitude. This is actually a very neat arrangement as it is actually more compact than the fat belt drive.

    This is actually a 75 year old concept. As far back as 1941, the Messerschimitt BF109's Daimler-Benz DB601 (later DB605) inverted V12 SOHC-48v engine has a fluidic supercharger drive for automatic alttitude compensation by continuously varying the super charger ratio. That engine, believe it or not, also has a Bosch Direct Petrol Injection system instead of carburettion typically on allied engines like the Merlin. Unfortunately, due to the low quality of German Gasoline in WWII they had to resort to larger displacements, lower compression and lower boost to generate the same amount of power.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Sheesh! That coupe sounds like a jet...! I would be completely happy with a stock V6 coupe, I've never been one to run a car hard or race around all the time. IMHO this Caddy Coupe is the best looking car to come out in a long time. Really miss all the coupes from days gone by. It is great to see the Camaro & Caddy Coupes on the road, very, very good-looking cars.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It's an over-the-top car, I think the over-the-top hood is fitting. I wouldn't be surprised if it's mostly functional, providing more space for extra bits on the top of the engine, and providing venting for the heat produced by 1,200hp. I hate hoods, scoops, and vents like that when they're not functional, but when a car is just flat out that extreme to need it, I like it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • AI is a pill.   Too bad, that could have been a beauty with a real car. I remember that AI Cutlass Supreme with that split grille of larger Oldsmobiles. There's some weird stuff going on in the opera window and at the rear, but I can't say that the grille is all that bad. I wonder how many of our members drew or sketched cars when they were kids or teens. *raises hand* Now, above is a real '82 Cutlass Calais with a 260 c.i. (4.3 L) V8. They saved the more elaborate egg crate grille for the Brougham and the Calais.
    • That's an AI image...looks like a mix of a Plymouth Duster and a Chevy Nova. 
    • Good morning This is what I really wanted to share. That's what Californians do ... share. Maybe not museum grade, but it works well. I don't know if that's a Ford, an AMC, or an old Buick Skylark!
    • Maybe I didn't use the right words.  It's overly supple and overly assisted in parking lots and when driving slowly on smaller streets.  It does not communicate much when there are lots of thick walls next to small roads and farms right beside me! After renting it, I read a review and it said that it doesn't corner or track very well, and that started getting annoying last night.   I drove a Citroen C3 here somewhere between 2019 and 2021. I believe I reviewed it.  First, I couldn't believe how smooth it was. It handled well in parking lots and was surprisingly smooth and agile on the highway, too.  It's not like you get two times the smoothness because the car costs two times as much. I have a friend who went for civil engineering at ASU.  He said that they used the same textbooks, for the most part, that they did at Berkeley.  So, with Berkeley being so much more prestigious, and with a much lower acceptance rate, it's not like you get two times a better civil engineering education there.  So my point is that for twice the money, the increase in drivability is not a ratable or linear relationship. I've come to see that the extra money in this BYD is all about the many bells and whistles that take about a week to learn. It's not that impressive on the highway and on rougher roads. I sort of like it on nicely asphalted urban streets at lower speeds and it has been getting respectable fuel mileage. I liked zooming around in that Citroen C3 with the side "Air Bump."  I had asked them for a smaller car instead and they told me that if it had to be automatic, it had to be this one.
    • The part that is now bolded, Italicized and underlined, I am totally confused by. How can it be velvety and yet not as smooth as a C3? I get the disconnected road to cabin and no steering wheel communication at low speeds as it is a hybrid system so not a true drive by wire but also not a true traditional steering wheel system. Hydraulic with electric assist so that is a downside being very vague road feedback via the steering wheel.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search