2017 Panamera Turbo Thinks It Can Outrun A CTS-V

While there’s not much between these two in an off-the-line drag race to 100 km/h (62 mph), this particular event featured a rolling start and a long runway.

It’s true that more power and torque generally means a faster car (unless it’s too heavy), but never is that more true than when you’re doing a rolling start and you need to rely more on power as opposed to how quickly can your car’s electronic brain can “think it” off the line.

For the 2017 Panamera Turbo, such a sprint to 100 km/h (62 mph) would take 3.8 seconds (3.6 if you’ve got the Sport Chrono Pack), whereas the Cadillac CTS-V can do it in 3.7 sec.

The latter does indeed have more muscle at 650 PS (640 HP) and 855 Nm (630 lb-ft) of torque. The Panamera Turbo on the other hand makes do with 550 PS (540 HP) and 770 Nm (568 lb-ft) – it will also top out at 306 km/h (190 mph), which is less than what the Caddy will do (320 km/h / 198 mph).

That being said, is this a blowout? Yes and no. Check it out and you’ll see what we mean.

VIDEO

  • Dennis James

    Doesn’t look like a 100hp difference.

    • seriously

      it does look like a difference in traction………and an AWD vehicle in acceleration runs is going to have an edge

      • Dennis James

        Actually this is exactly the kind of race where an AWD is going to have a disadvantage due to drivetrain power losses.

        • seriously

          RWD or FWD cars also have drivetrain power loss thats far from being a profound statement…..in this particular race the AWD Panamera has far great traction with all 4 of its wheels working than the CTS-V any straight line race has proven that AWD on a performance car aids acceleration………

          • nellydesign

            Probably but not nearly as much in a rolling start. AWD is vastly superior off the line from a standing start, but the advantage lessens considerably once both cars are already moving.

          • seriously

            to fan”boy” number 2 your car lost the race to a car with far less traction and power loss to the wheels as a result of its RWD drivetrain…..these tests from a rolling start to standing still have all proven what I said I think I’ll believe science, actual REAL professional testers over butt hurt fan boys making excuses why a Porsche lost a race to a Cadillac…you could have literally when on youtube, google, any magazine, any enthusiast site and proven countless examples of what i said…get over it the Porsche didnt win.

          • Dennis James

            Sorry, but you don’t know what you are talking about. It is well-known that AWD cars have 25%+ power losses between the engine and the ground, increasing with vehicle speed, while RWD cars only have 12%+ power losses. It’s logical, since there is a lot more friction due to transfer boxes and front driveshaft. In a straight line, an AWD car will only have an advantage on a standing start (which is not the case here), after which it will be at an increasingly large disadvantage as speed increases.

            This is not an apology for the Panamera, by the way. It’s only logical that a 650hp car beats a 550hp car if the weight is similar. But I’m sure that no Panamera owner wants a CTS-V 🙂

          • seriously

            Yeah thanks for proving my point WITH NO SUPPORTING INFORMATION EXCEPT MORE FAN BOY BS AND TEENAGE GIRL SMILEY FACE. lol so pathetic. Again I’ll believe science and the Pros oversome obvious butt hurt cry baby thats spouting nonsense backed by bs. Youre right a 911 owner would have a CTSV the Panamera is for the wannabe crowd like the Cayenne the type LIKE YOU that carefar more about brand names and lease deals than actual performance and know nothing about cars except when their discount lease ends …..finally something we can agree on…..

          • Adam Coats

            Quite a lot of vitriol in your responses there buddy. I see no evidence claiming either of them are Porsche fanboys. You are making a lot of assumptions about what they know and what their motivations are. I love how some people watch a drag race video or see a lap time video and it automatically becomes a “owned, whooped, car that lost is a pile of crap!” style argument. Both are amazing machines. Both justify their price tags. The Cadillac is the winner here. That is all. Nothing more to conclude.

          • europeon

            Your numbers are a little bit low. We’re talking more about to close to 20% for a RWD one and depending on the AWD system to a lot for an AWD car.

          • Stratos

            That’s because they are afflicted with “import envy syndrome” A little difficult to cure

      • europeon

        Not at those speeds, and most certainly not in a rolling start situation.

    • europeon

      Because the gains are not liniar.

  • AstonMartin

    Love the Panamera T however there is no replacement for displacement. I hope Cadillac can move more swiftly to add unique and powerful autos to their line-up in addition to their extensive SUV plans.

    • wins_lord

      Sure there is LOL. The C63 S 4.0L Biturbo V8 runs neck to neck with a Black Series’ 6.2L N.A V8. The 488 runs faster with its 3.9L twin turbo V8 than the F12 Berlinetta with its N.A V12.

      • willhaven

        There literally isn’t a replacement for displacement. If the C63 had a 6.2L twin turbo V8, it would make a shitload more power (and torque) than the 4.0. There’s a reason why the most powerful internal combustion engines have massive displacement.

        • wins_lord

          Now the turbochargers are the replacement for the displacement right?

          • willhaven

            Nope. They just help make an engine more efficient (by increasing the air at the cost of increased pressures), but as soon as you add displacement to that same engine – you’ll make more power and torque. So all things being equal, a high displacement turbocharged engine will make more power than a low displacement turbocharged engine.

            More displacement = more air = more opportunity to make power

          • wins_lord

            True, but in reality not a lot of manufactures want to do that anymore for the reasons of fuel efficiency and emissions. So in this case, I think turbo is indeed a replacement for the displacement. It’s about what’s available, after all. If you’re saying: “No replacement for displacement”, a lot of people mistakenly get the impression that no smaller engines will be able to beat the ones with higher displacement.

          • Stratos

            There’s a lot more to it. Turbo Motors don’t nessesarely get better milege specially when you drive them hard and certainly not on the highway. I think manufactures make them partially for size(packaging in increasingly smaller cars) lighter weight and in a lot of European countries displacement gets taxed

          • Stratos

            That’s only partially true, and it applies to torque only. As far as HP is concerned, you get more power by raising RPM and a small motor can do that

          • StinkWink69

            If you take a high displacement engine and a low displacement engine and put turbos on it and make the same performance the turbos have replaced the displacement. You could take a v8 cut two cylinders off slap on some turbos and have the same performance, how is that not replacing the displacement? Of course more displacement with the turbos will still have more power, but without them that engine too would need more displacement to make the same power, so the turbos are replacing displacement.

          • willhaven

            If all things were equal including the boost pressure of the same twin turbos – the smaller displacement engine will not make as much power as the higher displacement engine.

            Can’t really escape physics here.

          • StinkWink69

            Agreed. And one without turbos will make less as well. Turbos still replace displacement. The opposite can be said as well, displacement replaces turbos.

          • willhaven

            In this case, it would be a supplement to displacement, not a replacement since the smaller the displacement, the more you have to make up for the lost volumetric effectiveness of the engine. This is what Volvo is doing, requiring complex forced induction to make a much smaller engine act as a larger displacement engine.

          • willhaven

            Electric motors are the literal replacement for displacement lol

        • Dennis James

          This is an interesting read, how a BMW 1500cc engine produced between 650 and 1100hp:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M12

          If there is sufficient air pressure, you can make all the power you want from any displacement – with tradeoffs, of course.

          • willhaven

            You should read into this further as it will show the 1500hp is a technicality since the engines only ran at such high boost for qualifiers and were so unreliable that they had to be rebuilt due to the stress. So for a few laps, you may be able to “replace the higher displacement”, but again – the argument stands: you can just as easily apply the same technology to a higher displacement engine and make more power/torque than the comparable smaller displacement engine.

  • ctk4949

    The new Panamera looks 100000x times better than the CTS-V!!

    • seriously

      no it looks like a generic Tesla Model S…….which means the CTSV looks 10000000000 times better than the Panamera which has always been a good performer but GROTESQUE in the styling department.

      • StinkWink69

        The cts-v looks like a 10 year old built it out of Lego’s. All caddys are ugly.

    • Belthronding Tinuviel

      ctsv is looking waaaaaay better than fugly panamera.

    • willhaven

      I know it’s subjective, but the new CTS-V looks amazing. The Panamera looks like a Panamera.

      • Stratos

        More like an egg

    • Robert

      The Panamera is a capable performance machine.. and that’s where my appreciation for it stops. The CTS-V is the winner in both categories IMO.

    • Stratos

      And you counted each time!

  • Stigasawuswrecks

    Makes me feel even more proud that I got a CTS-V. 😊

  • BobV12

    Is it algae green or turd brown on the Porsche ?

  • Squeaky_1

    This is the type of drag I like. 0-100kph means little when traction and take off means so much. It is the muscle of the car that decideds in this drag shown here. The crucial overtaking increment of 80kph (50mph) to 120kph (75mph) should be the benchmark – not 0-100kph (62mph). Entrenched drag culture though so sadly this will never happen mainstream. Great vid!

  • Kash

    It’ll be interesting to see the CTS-V and Panamera Turbo S E-Hybrid go head to head now.

  • Stratos

    American iron kicking overpriced “beetle” but

    • Matthew Daraei

      And the Cadillac is overpriced GM! What’s your point?

      And you expect that 100 more HP Cadillac with almost 70 more torque be beaten by less powered Porsche?? Moreover Porsche is a bit heavier that the Cadillac.

      • Stratos

        Do you make your living in America or Germany…

        • Da Taper

          Lets race both cars from a Dig it,will be a diffrent story,Nothing is better then Porsche lunch control,

          • Stratos

            Yeah, maybe for hundred yards the beetle may edge ahead. If that!

          • Da Taper

            Maybe but the new E Hybrid will walk away, oh yea the new 911 Turbo s Beetle is faster to 40MPH then anyother production car on eart.

          • Stratos

            I don’t get you! Finally we build an American car that kicks eurotrash ass, good looking, decently priced and instead of feeling proud of it , you rave and praise Hitler cars.

    • StinkWink69

      That iron is already oxidizing under that cheap paint.

      • Stratos

        I urge you to take s second look at American cars in general. They match and exceed European ones. The eighties are over for some time now

  • StinkWink69

    While Porsche’s ugliest car, still way better looking than any caddy. Plus it won’t rust 5 years from now. 100hp is a small price to pay.

  • JBsC6

    100 grand price differential. Cts v is I,pressive and the Porsche is cool too. Decide which you prefer

  • brn

    Is it just me or does it look like the Panamera had the jump on the Caddy? Without that, the difference would have been greater.

    • Stratos

      I too saw the jump on the caddy. All the more impressive caddy’s win

  • An Existing Person

    With a difference of 100hp, 60 lb-tq, and a RWD favoring roll race, the CTS-V had better win lol. I would like to have seen a race from a standstill just to see the outcome.

    • Da Taper

      From a dig the Panamera will just walk away, The CTS-V is amazing car but with porsche lunch control and PDK it won’t stand a chance, especially with the Panamera E Hybrid

  • Six Thousand Times

    Quality video, there.

  • Bill

    Rolling start in straight line doesn’t say much. Lap times on the ‘ring put it behind. Not even a full second ahead the Porsche Cayenne SUV. Well, that was for the previous model, so that’s hardly fair. The current one crashed attempting it. So, yeah, gotta wonder if it can’t at least be driven better than an SUV that outweighs it by a fair bit.

    Still, it’s a pretty decent bang for the buck if that’s the kind of vehicle you want. Personally I really don’t like the angular design language, or GM’s lack of consistent quality in the vehicle. Oh, it’s light years better than years prior, but it’s still playing catch up. But to spend nearly double for the Panamera isn’t going to make much sense to most folks. Which is fine, for those that can afford it there’s really quite a difference in the driving experience you get from a Porsche.