HEAL-A-SEAL

[MrEldo97]

I must agree, there is absolutely no excuse for the kind of manufacturing and engineering errors exhibited by the Northstar head gasket/bolt problem. No excuse.

[MadeInAmerica]

I must agree, there is absolutely no excuse for the kind of manufacturing and engineering errors exhibited by the Northstar head gasket/bolt problem. No excuse.

You mean, you're not an, "enthusiast", who actually enjoys having their Northstar Cadillac break down with catastrophic engine failure, i.e. blown cylinder head gaskets costing you thousands of dollars in repair costs? Oh come on, get with the program and be an, "enthusiast", and, "enjoy", your Northstar....as it's temperature gauge gets pegged, steam bellows from under the hood and antifreeze pukes on the ground! Hey, it's fun you know! lol After all, it's a, "great engine", except for these minor little inconveniences! It's a wonderful car to be proud of you know!

In my opinion, what a piece of CRAP this engine has turned out to be and in my opinion, what a piece of CRAP company that sticks their customers with this problem, while in my opinion darned well KNOWING the engine has cylinder head gasket issues! What a great way to treat your customers! NOT.

General Motors needs to step up to the plate and take care of the problem that in my opinion THEY are responsible for, that are costing their customers thousands of dollars in repairs, or in my opinion they DESERVE to go out of business!

GM's, "best", car, their FLAGSHIP DIVISION, manufacturing cars that in my opnion are like throw-away economy cars that don't last past about 100,000 miles? In my opinion, absolutely DISGRACEFUL!

[MrEldo97]

No argument with your pos. I've been in manufacturing all of my working life and there is no excuse for the very basic manufacturing errors GM made with the Northsatr. None. And then, given the fact, that they were too g*****n cheep or insentive or both to correct their error is just beyond the pale. And yet I still like my Eldorado...

[KHE]

Regarding the Northstar design changes in 2000 and newer models, I don't believe the headbolt issue was

completely cured

A few of the GM tech's on the other mb have started to see more of the post 2000 engines experiencing HG issues.

It seems that these models are starting to show up as the age and mileage accumulates.

The 1997-99 failures seem more common simply because they have been on the road longer, accumulating more

mileage, IMHO.

Ted,

I was thinking the same thing. It would be interesting to review the 2004 cars when they are 10+ years old and see what the failure rate of the head gaskets is.

[adallak]

Regarding the Northstar design changes in 2000 and newer models, I don't believe the headbolt issue was

completely cured

A few of the GM tech's on the other mb have started to see more of the post 2000 engines experiencing HG issues.

It seems that these models are starting to show up as the age and mileage accumulates.

The 1997-99 failures seem more common simply because they have been on the road longer, accumulating more

mileage, IMHO.

Ted,

I was thinking the same thing. It would be interesting to review the 2004 cars when they are 10+ years old and see what the failure rate of the head gaskets is.

Yep, that could be just a matter of time, unfortunately. We have already seen failed 2000 Northstars.

[Cadillac Jim]

Considering what happened to me and my car at 91,459 miles; I've always felt like I'd gotten hosed by GM. A catastrophic engine failaure at NINETY ONE THOUSAND MILES!!!!!!!!! Are you kigging!? I like the car, that's why I still own it. That's why I'm getting ready to sink a lot of money into it to bring it back. But let's face it; I've had far more problems with a $43,000.00 Cadillac than I ever should have had. And more so for a car than was maintained by the book and then some. At 115,000 miles it's a s**tbox. Everything leaks, everything rattles, the interior panels are all coming apart. It's worse than any of the Alfas I ever owned. It's far more trouble than my 1995 Jaguar (I know that's hard to believe but it's true). I really like the car, I like two door cars and I'm not all jazzed up about spending significant loot on a newer Cadillac so I'm going to throw more money into that money hole known as 1997 Cadillac Eldorado.

I talked to you on the phone when your HG went bad and you told me at the time that you had maintained your coolant by the book, etc. Since then you have maintained that *every* Northstar will have HG problems sooner or later no matter what. This reminds me of a quote form Mark Twain -- "All Chinamen walk single file, or at least the one I saw did." Like all Cadillac enthusiasts, I am sorry that you had this problem.

But, you had the problem after I did with the same model year. My HG went about January, 2006 at 110,000 miles when your car and mine were nine years old. Your car apparently averaged 10,000 miles a year, which is a little low for a good road car like a Cadillac, indicating that most of its driving time was spent on urban or suburban roads in or near Boston, where you live -- where the salt crusts on the roads on dry days in march, the potholes require 4X4's to drive over 35 mph in the spring, just about everything except Cadillacs and Mercedes rust out in less than 10 years, and the roads beat the suspension out of everything in less than that. You can't fool me, I lived there myself for several years. You said on the phone in 2007 or so when your HG gave trouble that you were absolutely sure that your coolant was always changed in less than 5 years, i.e. before 2002 and again before the HG problem, and I have no reason not to believe you, HG problem notwithstanding. I haven't seen another case of this, but in any engine with aluminum parts (read -- all of them for the last 20 years or so) needs to have the coolant watched carefully to avoid corrosion.

Hey, "... ever should have had?" Nobody guarantees that any 10-year-old car will be perfect and trouble-free. Rattles? fix the suspension. Interior rattles? If your kids are out of high school (if not, wait!), have your car detailed including the interior. In particular make sure that the hidden screws in the door panels are replaced or tightened as appropriate. If you want your 1997 Eldorado to ride quietly and smoothly, change the shocks, struts, and stabilizer links, and check the suspension bushings and ball joints front and rear and change as necessary.

Your 1995 Jaguar? I'll bet you didn't drive it at 45 mph on Boston area roads in the spring, because you can't do that in a Jaguar without going into the noisy flat-bottom-boat mode and/or beating out the suspension in minutes, but you can drive any speed you want on those roads in a Cadillac with its RSS without noticing. And, how many miles did you put on your Jaguar? Jaguar is a fine car and always has been, particularly since Ford's inputs took hold some years ago. But, everyone I have ever seen in a Jaguar babies it. Why? You tell me.

Worse than an Alpha Romeo? Words fail me here.

When you post on Caddyinfo, remember that most regulars are people who have long experience that contradict some of your assertions.

[MrEldo97]

I expect contradictions, my experiences are unique to me; perhaps with some similarities to others’ experiences. I honestly describe what happens to me, I may give an opinion and let the chips fall where they may. I’m not out to p**s anyone off. And I won’t sugar coat how I feel.

Massachusetts roads and weather are just hell on a car. The road salt, and acid rain eat cars up and the horrible roads themselves just beat ‘em to pieces. So we moved to Sunny Tampa Bay in the fall of ’05. Life is good and the Sunshine State is a great state for Cadillacs…and Jaguar convertibles…

I take care of my cars. I’m anal about maintenance hell I change my Dex Cool every two years even. My wife and I rely on our cars daily and I can’t afford to have them break down so I maintain them to a level where they don’t break down.

My head gasket experience really bummed me out and especially so because of all the love I give my Eldorado. And I really like that car. I found no evidence of corrosion or leaking on my HGs. I’m no expert and so on and so forth. IMO the head bolt issue with these cars is a manufacturing defect. Minor or major…who knows… I had no evidence of head gaskets leaking in my car, everything had been in top condition – I blew my headbolts out going better than 90 miles an hour over the Howard Frankland Bridge across Tampa Bay (I was pretty close to 100 if I recall). They blew out suddenly and catastrophically. Bang! The bolts in my front head were fine – absolutely no compromise to any of the integrity of the front head. The rear head was different. All 10 head bolts blew out; the six center ones I was able to pull out of the block with my fingers. No BS. Puzzling…the failure in my car may be attributed to a unique set of circumstances with my car, perhaps including reduced air flow and increased temperature around that rear head because of its position in the engine bay. An interesting study perhaps…?

I’m getting ready to spend mucho dinero on my Eldorado fixing up all of the leaks and other issues that have arisen. I like it more than Cadillac’s new models (except the XLR), my wife loves riding in it so why replace it?

Ford cleaned up the mess that Jaguars were. I had an ’83 V12 XJ-S when I was in Mass.. A nice car in many respects but a real s**tbox in terms of build quality. My ’95 is head and shoulders above that. And the other thing is that the block and head set-up on the AJ16 is identical to the N* with none of the head gasket/bolt issues. Reliable and durable.

I am an enthusiast and I can be critical and I won’t roll over for GM or …

[OynxSTS]

The whole "its the coolant" thing has been pretty much put to bed.. There are several members who I know personally that have changed their coolant every other year, since new, only to have this problem.... And there are just as many who have never replaced there coolant and the engine is just fine... Go figure...

There is something else definately at play here... Will they all fail? Heck no.

But the fact that GM and Cadillac first went to the parts bin and selected "Quad 4" bolts (an infamous GM engine that is lucky to go 80,000 miles before the head gasket blow) and then took over 7 years to "almost fix this problem" and then another 4 to "finally fix it" speaks volumes.

I love my Cadillac and I will drive it till the next major thing on it dies (head gaskets, tranmssion etc), but honestly, even though my car has not suffered from the head gasket problem, the fact that so many have, and the fact that GM's responce on its flagship cars was "its your problem" or even worse "its your fault" has left a really bad taste in my mouth.

Do I replace my coolant every other year? YES... Do I think it will prevent a headgasket failure? Nope... I do it mostly becuase to replace the heater core you need to re&re the entire dash assemble...

[BodybyFisher]

I blew my bolts/headgaskets doing a high speed run with 4 adults in the car, hitting 90 with a WOT because we were late... Its affecting my #1 and #3 cylinders, where I am getting misfires that I can see in history from Autotap... I am getting slight misfires on #2 and #4 also. I am not surprised to have blown the end of the head, as that would be the place were it would be least supported.

Its possible that over time, the relatively soft aluminum alloy just gives out against the trememdous pressure from this high compression engine under hard acceleration

I think I am going to use the studs instead of the time serts, I might as well be the first STUDDER on the board. They are expensive however

[MrEldo97]

Could be, that's what happened to me - high speed run and bang blew the head bolts out of the rear head.

[OynxSTS]

I've had mine over 90 mph too many times to count, and I have had her over 130 mph twice... No issues yet...

There probably is more strain on the engine accelerating from 0-60 then there is WOT from 60-90

There have seemingly been just as many people who have "babied the car" and have the head bolts fail as those who, like me, drive it like they just stole it.

[winterset]

I blew my bolts/headgaskets doing a high speed run with 4 adults in the car, hitting 90 with a WOT because we were late... Its affecting my #1 and #3 cylinders, where I am getting misfires that I can see in history from Autotap... I am getting slight misfires on #2 and #4 also. I am not surprised to have blown the end of the head, as that would be the place were it would be least supported.

Its possible that over time, the relatively soft aluminum alloy just gives out against the trememdous pressure from this high compression engine under hard acceleration

I think I am going to use the studs instead of the time serts, I might as well be the first STUDDER on the board. They are expensive however

BBF I didn't know this is how it happened to you. I will now think twice about WOTs, and my top speed will be 70. I want to get another 13 years out of mine. has anyone considered it to be an electrical reaction that causes the weakness at the bolts. - or is it because of 2 metals reacting - namely aluminum heads & iron bolts? - just a thought.

[Texas Jim]

I have been known to run mine pretty hard also...a "FEW" times.

There are places out west where you can run 100+ for miles and miles and miles.

It now has 66,000 on it and I bought it just before Christmas of '06.

Actually it was built in March of '06 so it soon be 3.5 years old.

It had been at the Dealer for 9 months...it had got "LOST" on the back lot.

.....Long story.....

I will be changing the Dexcool this fall.

By then it will be 3.5 years old and have about 70,000 or maybe a little more on it.

I plan on keeping it at least another year and a half. Probably to around 125,000.

I could get by with "NOT" changing the Dexcool, no one would know but me, but I will feel better when I sell it, knowing it has been changed.

I am pretty fanatical about keeping one up in good shape.

I never know when I might have to jump in it and go 1000 or 2000 miles...almost non stop...at a high rate of noise level.

To ONYXSTS...the fastest I have had mine (so far) is 143.

It was still pulling, but I was coming up on some traffic, so I backed off of it.

[Cadillac Jim]

Actually GM didn't "go to the parts box" for Quad 4 parts. The Northstar stared development as the Quad 8 and much was learned from the Quad 4. For one thing, the excellent timing chain that actually solved the OHC cam drive issues for high RPM and long life was carried over to the Northstar, as was the distributorless waste-spark ignition and many other things. The Northstar was built a lot better than the Quad 4 as well, but still weighs just 355 pounds, a figure I got from the trucking invoice from my Jasper engine. The Quad 4 had an iron block, as I recall, probably for cost reasons as I do recall that early prototypes had an aluminum block with dry inserts, which the Northstar has. I would expect that the guru's posts on the matter show that more than sufficient prudence was put into the head bolt design to prevent spurious problems, i.e. there was no design flaw that could have been prevented. Also, typically 7+ years elapsed between the car being driven and the first head gasket issues, which means that 1999 was the first that significant numbers of 1993 model year head gasket failures would be reported. I suspect that the changes for the 2000 model year were the result.

I am not impressed by obscene rants about GM over HG failures. I think that 7+ years and 100,00 miles is enough so that the car "doesn't owe you a dime" as some here have quoted about some parts in older cars like the struts. Would I have preferred that my Northstar had been perfect into the mists of time, like some 850-pound 454's have been in Chevrolet trucks? Sure, but I probably wouldn't be driving my Cadillac with no end in sight after 12 years if it weighted 500 pounds more, all in the nose. I write it off to a common longevity problem for engines with aluminum heads. Early big block Chevrolet engines had valve train wear issues, as you recall, and the lifters wouldn't last 100,000 miles without wearing holes in their bottoms. And, pushrods would wear into the rocker arms until the pushrods touched the rockers near the fulcrum, then bend. If I had one, I wold replace the valvetrain every 100,000 miles and not complain, unless it was one of the later models with roller lifters that didn't have the problems. I love my 2nd gen Northstar, but I was looking for improvements in the head gasket when I talked to Jasper about their products in 2003. If the HG goes on the engine I have now in after 10 years and I'm still driving the car, I'll probably buy another engine and not look back. I would hope that the Jasper improvements will make that unlikely.

Hindsight is marvelous. Endless warranties and rants about mechanical failures in old cars are less than thoughtful in my view, particularly high-end innovative cars. Saying that GM does stupid things in design is less than... uh... thoughtful.

[OynxSTS]

Actually GM didn't "go to the parts box" for Quad 4 parts. The Northstar stared development as the Quad 8 and much was learned from the Quad 4. For one thing, the excellent timing chain that actually solved the OHC cam drive issues for high RPM and long life was carried over to the Northstar, as was the distributorless waste-spark ignition and many other things. The Northstar was built a lot better than the Quad 4 as well, but still weighs just 355 pounds, a figure I got from the trucking invoice from my Jasper engine. The Quad 4 had an iron block, as I recall, probably for cost reasons as I do recall that early prototypes had an aluminum block with dry inserts, which the Northstar has. I would expect that the guru's posts on the matter show that more than sufficient prudence was put into the head bolt design to prevent spurious problems, i.e. there was no design flaw that could have been prevented. Also, typically 7+ years elapsed between the car being driven and the first head gasket issues, which means that 1999 was the first that significant numbers of 1993 model year head gasket failures would be reported. I suspect that the changes for the 2000 model year were the result.

Yes the Guru posted over and over the detailed engineering spec's and clamping force of the bolts in an aluminum block and there was PLENTY of room for engineering error.. In fact there were orders of magnitude of "safety" on the bolts... And you are right that there are lots of things to point to on the NorthStar with a big thumbs up... The timing chain , ignition, and ECM are all front and center.

It is not true on the other hand that GM did not know of the head bolt problem for years. I was and am a big fan of the Allante Roadster and even owned a 1990 Red on Black one... The 1993 car was the first that came with the NorthStar and the Allante Club of America was reporting head gasket failures 3 years after the cars were sold... Many were mystified with this problem... many pointed to the front dog bones that bolted to a housing near the water pump... Good guess... but wrong.

When I was about to replace my Allante in 1996 with a new STS... A mechanic at work, said to me "Get an extended warranty... Head gaskets" I got married and bought a house instead. If GM didn't know, they weren't paying attention.

I suspect that it took until 2000 and then again in 2004 to fix this problem because engineers continued to calculate the clamping force of the headbolts and "stuck to their guns" that something else was wrong. It is now pretty much a given that there was something wrong with fine pitch headbolts in aluminum blocks... The LS1/2/3/x guys have always had coarse bolts and they all tilt there head and say "Time Sert" what the heck is that?

As for fixing a 7 year old engine... Ya that would be over the top, and not to be expected... My point was GM should have fixed this in 1996... at the latest.

I agree I love my car and the head-gasket goes I will send it to car heaven with a smile on my face...The car owes me nothing. But if it does go, GM will lose me as a customer. I also suspect that Cadillac sales of late (which are in the crapper) are because of the hundreds (thousands) of customers "bit" by a NorthStar head bolt.

The HT4100 put us on life support and the pre 2000 NorthStar pulled the plug.

My 83 305 SBC has over 300,000 miles on her all driven 1/4 of a mile at a time and she still starts like she was new and she uses way less oil then my 90,000 mile Northstar... My 307 SBO is also almost 200,000 miles drives like new. You would expect that modern engine technology would make the engines last longer... not blow apart a 100,000 miles.

[Cadillac Jim]

Again, I don't think that it was a problem that could have been foreseen. At the risk of saying something I shouldn't, I had my car to 120+ a few times before 2003 without issues. I will say that I have a lead foot, and that I red-lined my engine a few times a day for many years, what with L.A. on-ramps and such. One can grow to love that 3rd gear lunge that blows away just about anything else on the road, even most motorcycles. On the East Coast, reasonable scenarios for such things are essentially nonexistent because the roads don't support any semblance of safety above traffic speed, and traffic is ubiquitous. But, I keep my car Autobahn-ready anyway.

When I had my engine exchange done in July, 2006, my mechanic found a coolant stain on the rear head on the corner back by the firewall, and I took a photo and uploaded it on my "Members' Cars'" board. I did recall at that time that when my car hit 5 years on the coolant, a naysayer told me that the gaskets would blow, but this guy did *not* tell me to change the coolant. My car is a definite case of head bolt pulling, probably due to bad coolant in the head bolt well.

There was a delay of a few months between the first major sign of head gasket leakage, and coolant had been going away without explanation for a few months longer. My theory is that once conductive coolant is there, minute seepage into the head gaskets causes galvanic corrosion and any seepage into the head bolt wells creates more, much more, galvanic corrosion. Reports of spongy head bolt threads that sometimes require BigSerts bears out that galvanic corrosion is at work in the head bolt wells -- on some cars, and certainly mine, and a head bolt pulled on mine some time before I fixed it. My head leakage was still slight, and my mechanic recommended that I drive it another year; I was doing daily commutes on the freeway and had to have it fixed, so I fixed it.

Weak head bolts? Check out Cadillac Hot Rod Fabricators:

http://www.chrfab.com

These guys use 1993-1999 Northstars and put double turbos and such on them for sand cars and hotrods, pull upwards of 500 hp with them without problems, and they have a link to a Corvette that has been racing with a Northstar and winning in Europe for years. They don't like the 2000+ engines.

Bottom line: Don't baby your Northstar. It's probably the worst thing for it.

[coolnesss]

I've owned several Eldorados and, when my 98 ETC got stolen, I spent a year looking for another "modern" car that would satisfy me - and I couldn't - and then I spent another 6 months looking and found a 2002 ETC with 28K miles on the clock, which was almost like buying a new car. Then I found the BlueStar to create Bluetooth from the Onstar hardware, and it's now "modern" enough for me.

Engineering is almost always a process of weighing reality factors and compromising. Using aluminum is a compromise in strength and durability, but, the lesser weight and other positive aluminum atributes may or may not outweigh that consideration in the long run. The same goes for front wheel drive - although I've never accepted that compromise - I really can't figure it out.

I'd be surprised if the people who designed the Northstar didn't consider the possibility of head bolt problems, and "engineered" around it. We don't know what the balancing process was in that endeavor, but, someone screwed up. I started automotive life with a 1960 Renault Caravelle that had aluminum heads, and merely selecting the wrong spark plugs caused the threads to come out with the plug when you took out the plug. Helicoils to the rescue, and then the problem was solved. We have time-serts.

A headbolt problem is the kind of thing I'd expect from a maker other than GM because of GM's long-standing reputation for great and durable motors. But then, prior to the Northstar, their motors were largely V8 pushrod behemoths, which were wonderful power plants, but, have no place in the modern car world.

But then, the Cadillac doesn't have a self-destructing transmission like alot of modern Fords, or arcane electronic problems like Beemers or Mercedes or Audis - and the cost of repairing a Beemer or Mercedes over time is most likely alot greater than fixing the Northstar. And, even though the Cadillac costs alot less than one of those marques, according to the motor magazine gurus, it performs, in many cases, darn near as well.

The world changed awhile ago. While I loved my '67 Riviera GS with its 365 horses and spaceship styling, it has no place in the changed world except as a sculpture with wings. So, my 2002 ETC combines the modern world and still has some "sculpture". I try to embrace these changes and learn to love them because if I whine about the new world, I'll get old in my head fast, and no one except other old whiners will spend time with me.

The point here - I agree thoroughly with 97ETC's rant about his headbolts and share his angst, but, we can't expect perfection in stuff anymore. Things seem to break more now than they did 30 years ago. There's more people in the world, more anonymity, less individual responsibility, less accountability. And the beancounters control alot more than they used to. So, stuff breaks more now. Period. I've come to accept it.

But, there are positives that come from the changed world - the internet, for instance. Astounding special visual effects in movies and home audio systems that almost rival paying 10 bux and being in a theatre. Cars that get 40mpg. And on and on. And although stuff breaks more, these same machines, when they do run correctly, do so much more than they used to and, in many cases, for much less capital outlay.

So, GM makes mistakes, the same as Mercedes and Audi (remember the differential-mounted rear brakes???) As we all do.

The engineering that goes into our modern cars is more complicated because of the amazing things cars now do - and more limited because of ecological and beancounter concerns. So, if we want to keep breathing and drinking, we have to go with this flow. Trade-offs are a *smurf*.

My basic rule these days is: Fret not, and accept the unpleasant just as I love the amazing stuff that comes from the changed world.

[OynxSTS]

I've owned several Eldorados and, when my 98 ETC got stolen, I spent a year looking for another "modern" car that would satisfy me - and I couldn't - and then I spent another 6 months looking and found a 2002 ETC with 28K miles on the clock, which was almost like buying a new car. Then I found the BlueStar to create Bluetooth from the Onstar hardware, and it's now "modern" enough for me.

Engineering is almost always a process of weighing reality factors and compromising. Using aluminum is a compromise in strength and durability, but, the lesser weight and other positive aluminum atributes may or may not outweigh that consideration in the long run. The same goes for front wheel drive - although I've never accepted that compromise - I really can't figure it out.

I'd be surprised if the people who designed the Northstar didn't consider the possibility of head bolt problems, and "engineered" around it. We don't know what the balancing process was in that endeavor, but, someone screwed up. I started automotive life with a 1960 Renault Caravelle that had aluminum heads, and merely selecting the wrong spark plugs caused the threads to come out with the plug when you took out the plug. Helicoils to the rescue, and then the problem was solved. We have time-serts.

A headbolt problem is the kind of thing I'd expect from a maker other than GM because of GM's long-standing reputation for great and durable motors. But then, prior to the Northstar, their motors were largely V8 pushrod behemoths, which were wonderful power plants, but, have no place in the modern car world.

But then, the Cadillac doesn't have a self-destructing transmission like alot of modern Fords, or arcane electronic problems like Beemers or Mercedes or Audis - and the cost of repairing a Beemer or Mercedes over time is most likely alot greater than fixing the Northstar. And, even though the Cadillac costs alot less than one of those marques, according to the motor magazine gurus, it performs, in many cases, darn near as well.

The world changed awhile ago. While I loved my '67 Riviera GS with its 365 horses and spaceship styling, it has no place in the changed world except as a sculpture with wings. So, my 2002 ETC combines the modern world and still has some "sculpture". I try to embrace these changes and learn to love them because if I whine about the new world, I'll get old in my head fast, and no one except other old whiners will spend time with me.

The point here - I agree thoroughly with 97ETC's rant about his headbolts and share his angst, but, we can't expect perfection in stuff anymore. Things seem to break more now than they did 30 years ago. There's more people in the world, more anonymity, less individual responsibility, less accountability. And the beancounters control alot more than they used to. So, stuff breaks more now. Period. I've come to accept it.

But, there are positives that come from the changed world - the internet, for instance. Astounding special visual effects in movies and home audio systems that almost rival paying 10 bux and being in a theatre. Cars that get 40mpg. And on and on. And although stuff breaks more, these same machines, when they do run correctly, do so much more than they used to and, in many cases, for much less capital outlay.

So, GM makes mistakes, the same as Mercedes and Audi (remember the differential-mounted rear brakes???) As we all do.

The engineering that goes into our modern cars is more complicated because of the amazing things cars now do - and more limited because of ecological and beancounter concerns. So, if we want to keep breathing and drinking, we have to go with this flow. Trade-offs are a *smurf*.

My basic rule these days is: Fret not, and accept the unpleasant just as I love the amazing stuff that comes from the changed world.

Not to argue with your POV, because it is valid, but the predecessor to the NorthStar, the HT4100 family of engines was also know for blowing headgaskets around 50,000 miles and as for GM transmissions... My 2002 STS is on its second.. The first one "self destructed" at 60,000 miles.

[Cadillac Jim]

I have my transmission fluid changed every 30,000 miles and at 140,000+ miles it's just like new. I expect that it will go at least a couple more years. Then, it's clutches and seals.

[OynxSTS]

I have my transmission fluid changed every 30,000 miles and at 140,000+ miles it's just like new. I expect that it will go at least a couple more years. Then, it's clutches and seals.

Fluid is not the problem with this transmission, and while it was one of the strongest and best FWD transmission ever made, it is barely strong enough for the 300 HP VIN 9 Northstars... Transmission failure was shared by one Cadillac insider as THE main reason that the FWD Northstar got "detuned" after 2004... (290 down 10 HP)

The problem with this tranny is that the bearing that supports the driver's side output shaft shatters (aka self destructs) after a certain amount of hard 1-2 shifts, accelerating over train crossings, or anything like that... Once the bearing goes three things happen, it showers the inside of the tranny with bits of sharp hardened steel, it contaminates the 3-4 clutch (you will get delayed 3-4 shifts) and a small leak begins while you back up and/or make right turns (kinda like a dog lifting its leg to mark territory)

If you get yourself IMMEDIATELY to a tranny shop you can save the unit... if you think, like most would, that the output seal is cracked and you will replace it later... you will replace that seal when it comes attached to the rebuilt transmission.

[KHE]

Not to argue with your POV, because it is valid, but the predecessor to the NorthStar, the HT4100 family of engines was also know for blowing headgaskets around 50,000 miles and as for GM transmissions... My 2002 STS is on its second.. The first one "self destructed" at 60,000 miles.

The 4100 engines were a wet sleeve design and it was mandatory to use the coolant sealer pellets. A lot of them developed intake manifold gasket leaks which was FAR cheaper to replace than headgaskets. The 4.5 engine was vastly improved (gasket technology improved) and the 4.9 was improved on the 4.5 engine. The 4.5 V8 was rated as one of the most reliable engine after 10 years of use - I think JD Powers rated it in 1988.

Fluid is not the problem with this transmission, and while it was one of the strongest and best FWD transmission ever made, it is barely strong enough for the 300 HP VIN 9 Northstars... Transmission failure was shared by one Cadillac insider as THE main reason that the FWD Northstar got "detuned" after 2004... (290 down 10 HP)

I think the reason the HP was lowered was the rules/method of HP rating changed.

[Jan Olsson]

It was the Guru's view that the "weak link" is the head gasket, not pulled head bolts. Although the Guru did not totally discount the possibility of head bolt problems, he made it clear that head bolts were not his concern. Rather, again, he maintained that the head gasket is the "weak link". Regarding the head bolt holes, the Guru said that chances of infiltration of coolant is very remote since each bolt is in its own sealed cavity.

Also, when a Northstar head gasket is replaced and Time-Serts installed, many believe that deteriorated threads upon removal of the head are a sign that the head bolts pulled. However, this is not necessarily the case since simply unscrewing head bolts can damage the aluminum threads thereby giving a false impression that the particular head bolt pulled.

A couple of things here.. yes the guru said that, but the statistical evidence is mounting against that POV... every time that GM improved the head bolts the rate of head gasket failure decreased... dramatically in 2000 and down to next to nothing in 2004... hmm...

Second there is now lots of evidence where on some 96-99 blocks the bolt holes were so far gone that the could not be timeserted... sometime the block was so FUBAR'ed that even Bigserts didn't work... there is mounting evidence that both the bolts and block casting issues might be at play here.

Almost all of the head gasket/head bolt failures occure from 1995-1999... the number of gasket failures dramatically decrease from 2000-2003 and then the numbers drop to almost none 2004 and on.

The only changes that match these changes in the engine are the head bolts... the 2000 and 2004 blocks even use the same head gaskets and yet the 2004 version is WAY stronger then the 2000 engine.. hmm...

I was thinking the same thing today Greg, that the head bolt change from 2000 on, improved the situation greatly, to me that would mean that the head bolts are the culprit before 2000

I din't bother to read this post again until recently..because of you all know who..but a post from you is ALWAYS worth answering Mike

I can agree to the above statement but once again I belive that the bolts itself is not the problem. When designing any connection with a bolt/stud, gaket and flanges/cylinder heads etc. the relation between diameter and lengt of the bolt and the stiffness of the gasket plays the most important roles when looking at clamping safety factors (from leaks) and dynamical loads.

What I am saying is that changes of the bolt lengts are propably done in order to change the clamping safety factor and/or decrease the dynamical load on the bolts..not to make the joint itself stronger.

[OynxSTS]

I din't bother to read this post again until recently..because of you all know who..but a post from you is ALWAYS worth answering Mike

I can agree to the above statement but once again I belive that the bolts itself is not the problem. When designing any connection with a bolt/stud, gaket and flanges/cylinder heads etc. the relation between diameter and lengt of the bolt and the stiffness of the gasket plays the most important roles when looking at clamping safety factors (from leaks) and dynamical loads.

What I am saying is that changes of the bolt lengts are propably done in order to change the clamping safety factor and/or decrease the dynamical load on the bolts..not to make the joint itself stronger.

OK, I'm not sure I understand your point, are you saying that the original bolts are fine, but the newer bolts are better?

Are you saying that the joint design is sound... right up and until the bolts pull out of the block?

What we now know, and there is lots of statistical evidence to support this, is that lots of 1999 and earlier engines fail, that WAY fewer 2000-2003 engine fail (less then 1/10th the frequency) and that after 2004 the failure rate drops to next to nothing. (I have only heard of a single 2004-present Northstar head gasket fail and that was one that those hot rod fabricator guys had bolted a supercharger to).

The bolts might be fine, it could be something wrong with the aluminum casting of the block. However you want to look at it, something is causing the head bolts to "let go" and to take the "threads" out of the block when they do.

Again, spend some time on any LS1/LS2/LS4/LS7 site and ask how many have needed to have their engine timeserted?

They always respond the same way... "Timesert, whats that?" Timeserting on the LS family of aluminum block engines is almost unheard of...

Try this... Google "NorthStar Timesert" over 2300 hits... now Google "LS1 Timesert -Northstar" 154 hits... And yet the number of LSx engines out number Northstars by atleast 100-1... (probably 1000:1)

Now take a gander at some of those sites and they are usually vendors who are selling tools... The number of people who have had to 'sert the "Chevy" motor is next to none... Just the odd "good old boy" who messed up a head swap and then most times they are only fixing one bolt hole... on our engines we all know that if you do one, you MUST do them all... In fact, any time you remove the heads, for any reason if you don't 'sert your block you are just asking for trouble... LS1 guys love to swap heads.. they do it all of the time without 'serts or issues... hmmmm...

Here is a nice "marketing/how to" video from the company that brings us the timesert system...

He mentions two engines by name that have issues and that need his system

1) Ford Triton V8 Sparkplugs and

2) Cadillac Northstars...

[BodybyFisher]

I spoke to Jake from Northstar Performance to get a feeling about him and the stud kit.

We spoke for about 15 minutes and he was very patient.

The studs have two inches of threads that screw into the block. I asked Jake if it were possible for me to drill the holes off center and have a problem putting the head on, he didnt think that there was much of a potential for that, although he had it happen once. He said that his drilling jigg minimized the possibility of drilling the stud holes crooked.

He did tell me that he regularly puts heads on over the studs and 2 people are not needed.

If the main bearings are not scored he re-uses them. I am going to use plasti-gage to check the clearances of my main and rod bearings as I have a deep knock that is annoying.

One thing that did not make me feel too good is that Jake has not timeserted any NSs, i would have liked he to have done that, as he would have direct experience with both methods.

To our timeserters, how much thread is on a timesert?, I have been told its about an inch, is that correct?

I like the idea that the studs are threaded into the block, and when the nuts are torqued, the studs are just PULLED and not twisted galling the threads to attain torque.

[Texas Jim]

I spoke to Jake from Northstar Performance to get a feeling about him and the stud kit.

The studs have two inches of threads that screw into the block.

If the main bearings are not scored he re-uses them. I am going to use plasti-gage to check the clearances of my main and rod bearings as I have a deep knock that is annoying.

I like the idea that the studs are threaded into the block, and when the nuts are torqued, the studs are just PULLED and not twisted galling the threads to attain torque.

Mike,

No more than a set of main bearings cost, If I had the engine tore down THAT FAR...I would mic the crank, and if that was ok, I would put NEW MAINS in it.

But thats just "ME"...I just couldn't see putting "MY" engine back together with the old mains... especially if I had what I thought was a main bearing knock.

The last paragraph...The studs being threaded into the block...and then just tightening the nuts on top.

That seems like a "MOST EXCELLENT" idea.