Correct Ride Height For '06 DTS Performance Sedan

[Texas Jim]

Anyone know what the specs are and how to measure the ride height? Where do I measure and what should the measusement be ?

My new one seems to ride quite a bit higher then the one that got burned. It seems to be too high in the rear especially.

Took it to the dealer, they said it was within specs, but it don't look like the other one did, looking at it from the side. The rear is higher than the front. Looks like it is going downhill.

[Cadillac Jim]

I don't have a FSM appropriate to the 2006 Deville, so someone who does, please chime in. I'll give what I have from the 1997 FSM, page 3-11, because it may give some idea of what to expect.

The SLS and STS have slightly different trim height specifications. There is no difference between the ESC and ETC.

The Deville has these height specifications:

Suspension

Z, 2.01 inches

D, 1.46 inches

Rocker Panel

J, 7.56 inches

K, 7.95 inches

Wheel opening

P, 27.83 inches

R, 21.38 inches

Measurements are taken on a level surface with a full tank of gas, proper tire inflation, and no passengers or additional weight in the car. The level control system must be OK. Bounce the vehicle three times at front and rear to normalize the suspension. All measurements have a tolerance of 0.4 inches. Variation side-to-side tolerance is 0.5 inches.

Legend for measurement points from figure on page 3-14:

Z: Centerline of bushing bolt on inside of lower front control arm, above lowest point on ball joint housing.

D: Centerline of front inner busing bolt on rear lower control arm, above centerline of outer busing bolt.

J: Bottom of rocker panel below rearview mirror, 22.84 inches behind front wheel centerline.

K: Bottom of rocker panel 22.17 inches in front of rear wheel centerline.

P: Top of front fender well.

R: Top of rear fender well.

The Z measurement ignores any grease fitting on the ball joint fitting.

[Texas Jim]

I don't have a FSM appriate to the 2006 Deville, so someone who does, please chime in. I'll give what I have from the 1997 FSM, page 3-11, because it may give some idea of what to expect.

Thanks,

Really 'preciate it. Gives me something to go on. It just don't LOOK like the other one did. Seems to be too much space above the wheels/tires in the fenderwell. The other one seemed to be kind of hunkered down .... if that makes any sense at all.

[Cadillac Jim]

From the 1997 numbers, it looks like the rear rocker panel measureing point is 0.39 inches higher than the front measuring point. That isn't much but it does indicate that the car is raked just a little bit, probably for high speed stability. The top of the rear fender well is 6.45 lower, showing that they more than compensated for this in the styling to make the car look more, as you say, hunkered down. When you get the 2006 numbers you can see what is really up. The one thing I would do is check and see if the rocker panel is about 0.4 inches higher at the center of the rear door than at the center of the front door, and that the left and right sides are within 0.5 inches of each other.