95-97

[Jason15036]

Which car is faster and is at a better perforamance stand point a 1995 sts or 1997 sts

[Bruce Nunnally]

They are enough the same in acceleration that driver and condition of the vehicle will matter more than anything else.

Year to year changes from

http://www.caddyinfo.com/sevilleyearbyyear.htm

1996 Redesigned interior. Center console better integrated. OBD II electronics -- more things are checked, but aftermarket 'chips' not longer available. Rain Sense wipers are added, which automatically alter wiper speed. Slight weight reduction as some sensors are replaced. Steering-wheel mounted controls for entertainment and environmental controls. Continuously Variable Road Sensing Suspension alters suspension firmness settings based on vehicle dynamics and speed. Coolant fill switches to Dexcool long-life coolant.

1997 StabiliTrak™added which prevents the STS from spinning. CV-RSS added to SLS as standard equipment. All models benefit from increased front brake size (from 11.0" to 11.9"), aluminum steering knuckles (to reduce weight), redesigned front control arm and bushing (to soften road impact harshness), and extensive chassis stiffening and gussetting (to improve Noise/Vibration/Harshness NVH). HVAC and radio VF lighting increased in intensity to aid in viewing in direct sunlight. French seams added to all leather stitching on interior seating surfaces.

[JasonA]

Here is a graph showing published performance numbers for 1990s Cadillac Sevilles:

http://jadcock.oldsgmail.com/cadsls/northstar.html

The average for the 93-97 STSes there (6 tests) is 6.7 seconds to 60.

The average for the 93-97 SLSes there (3 tests) is 7.0 seconds to 60.

Any particular car you run into should be in the range anywhere from the low-6 second range to the low-7s.

[rsrxc700]

I have owned a 97 STS, a 94 STS, and now a 95 SLS.

In my experience, the 94 was the fastest and handled the best. They really softened them up in the later years.

I have read on this board that the 95's are supposed to be the fastest.

BTW, I can really feel added torque of the SLS engine off the line, although it does not rev as much. Seems better for most driving.

[Cadillac Eldorado]

The 1995 cars are the fastest. I have 96 and 97 and they are both slow.

[JasonA]

The 1995 cars are the fastest. I have 96 and 97 and they are both slow.

This is really due to production tolerances and can't be pinned on a particular model or model year. The rated horsepower and torque were the same, and although the 1995 and earlier engines didn't have a MAF sensor, it's been discussed here before that there can't be much more than a 2-3 hp difference in the real world.

As you can see from the chart (click the link above), 0-60 and 1/4 mile times will vary somewhat. Notice the '93 STS with the Northstar. It's the slowest one of the bunch there. But by many accounts, the early cars were some of the quickest. It just depends on your particular car. In fact, your 1997 STS has aluminum components where your '95 didn't, any may actually be lighter than your 1995 car, which would more than take up for that 2-3 hp difference with the MAF sensor.