KG6PSK Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 As far as I can tell, the Northstar Cadillacs are the most powerful front-wheel drive cars ever made. How bad is the torque steer? How does the FWD N* compare to other rear wheel drive cars in the same market segment (BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, etc.)? Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 Torque steer can catch you by surprise. Hold on tight. I have the 270hp/300lbs torque. It's impressive. I'm sure I can smoke an STS in the first 100 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmac-etc Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 In my case (95 etc) torque steer is not noticible, and i do push the limits. FWD vs RWD? Well the handling is very different. If I were driving curvy country roads every day, I would prefer RWD (or maybe a kick a-ss AWD wrx?). For long legged, mile eating comfort and velocity, the NStar can't be beat 'cept for way more money! How 'bout snow and ice? The conventional wisdom is that FWD is better. hmmm, I have often driven curvy hilly roads, covered with snow and ice, in FWD cars (not the caddy) and would have prefered that the steering and the driving were not being done with the same wheels. Why? When on a non level slippery surface such as pulling a hill on a curvy country road, and traction is marginal, when the wheel(s) driving the car are spinning even a little, you do not want them also steering. If they are steering, your front end will go what ever direction gravity deems is 'down', which is generally off the road. For that reason I prefer a well balanced RWD. I have had great experiences in such situations with volvo's and peugot's, for instance. Good tires, good suspensions and good balance have worked well for me. That was prior to my ETC and its traction control. I haven't had opportunity to drive those particular roads in the years since i have had the ETC, but I did drive from rural south west Virginia to Baltimore during a blizzard and it was flawless. I was the 'idiot' passing the snow plow on the 4-lane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDK Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 Torque-steer? Sorry, I have yet to experience any such problems. And the experiences include full throttle from stand still and rolling on snow, ice, gravel, dirt and pavement around corners etc. Sure the "traction active" message lights up, but its so subtle that you really don't notice the the car is "sav'in yer bacon". The winter traction is simply outstanding compared with ANY RWD. I've had the BRD at 111 in a hard rain passing on 2-lane and it went active in deep puddles, but no problems (it simply is that good at what it does so well) The oddest "tractive active " message was when I was passing a bus on the Interstate and the fast lane was coated with a heavy, icy slush. As the BRD got into it, it went active to maintain control - and since it slowed down, I could not get any faster than about 45-50mph. This went on for about three tries - until the slush was tracked enough to get up to speed and pass. However, I think that around 300hp or so is a bit of a performance limit on FWD even with a world-class traction control system. In particular, with hard driving where some wheelspin is typical (the traction system would of course brake and limit power). This performance limit coupled with the typical understeer of FWD makes the RWD or balanced AWD - a requirement with ever-increasing power and performance. Caddy is probably one of the most successful applications of FWD - ever, but even so, it has its limitations. Then again, certain technologies are market/fad-driven, FWD will probably be back to some degree (but not until AWD has run its course [literally and figuratively] over RWD). Add power to leave problems behind. Most braking is just - poor planning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmac-etc Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 braking can be attributed to poor planning My wife keeps noticing that I rarely need to brake, smart woman! .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danbuc Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 The Northstar's got nothin' on the 500ci engine in the 1970 Eldarado..hehe. That engine was a monster! The handeling characteristics of a FWD car, compared to a RWD car are quite different. While my STS is the best handling FWD car I've ever personally driven, I feel it's still a little lacking in the handling area, just becuase of it's weight distribution. It's still handles better than most other stuff on the road anyway, so that doesn't bother me. I hardly notice any torque steer, unless I'm on uneven ground, or one tire doesn't have any grip liek from water or loose soil or something on the road. I think that the torque steer is much less noticable in the later model caddy's too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonA Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 In the winter, a FWD offers much better pure traction. As far as dynamics goes, I agree with RMAC-ETC, that a well-balanced RWD car is hard to beat for general driving. But coming from the mountains of southwest Virginia, where what little ice/snow we did have played havoc with the hilly terrain, the FWD Seville would crawl up hills my old RWD Cutlass couldn't dream of doing. I prefer the FWD's traction, overall, to a RWD car for general driving. I don't autocross the Seville, so ultimate handling isn't a priority for me, but these Sevilles do just fine on the back roads. Torque steer on mine is moderate, if you're not careful. It's especially bad if you pass on a heavily-crowned 2-lane. Once you crest the center "ridge", the car wants to fly over to the left (if you're nailing it). It's certainly not "bad", but obviously more than what you'd get from a RWD car (read: none). The Northstar engine is such a smooth and capable powerplant. It never leaves me wanting for a different engine or more power. Get an SLS and you'll enjoy 28-30 mpg on the highway (STS a bit lower, like in the 22-26 mpg range). Jason(2001 STS, White Diamond) "When you turn your car on...does it return the favor?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy_W Posted March 21, 2005 Report Share Posted March 21, 2005 In 1970 the Eldorado was front drive with 400 h.p. and 565 ft lbs of torque. The Hurst Toronado was rated at 400 h.p. with it's 455 and had over 500 ft lbs of torque! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KG6PSK Posted March 22, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 In 1970 the Eldorado was front drive with 400 h.p. and 565 ft lbs of torque. The Hurst Toronado was rated at 400 h.p. with it's 455 and had over 500 ft lbs of torque! I stand corrected. IIRC, that was 400 hp gross and not SAE net like engines are rated today. Nonetheless, torque is torque, and I bet that 500 ft lbs of torque made for a very interesting front drive car! Has anyone on this board ever driven one of these beasts? Are there any websites that tell more of these cars? Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy_W Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 In 1970 the Eldorado was front drive with 400 h.p. and 565 ft lbs of torque. The Hurst Toronado was rated at 400 h.p. with it's 455 and had over 500 ft lbs of torque! I stand corrected. IIRC, that was 400 hp gross and not SAE net like engines are rated today. Nonetheless, torque is torque, and I bet that 500 ft lbs of torque made for a very interesting front drive car! Has anyone on this board ever driven one of these beasts? Are there any websites that tell more of these cars? Mark I've driven both, I worked in a Cadillac body shop in the mid-'70's. Actually I didn't drive a Hurst Toro, but did drive several others including a GT which is extremely rare. Torque steer was well contained, believe it or not, but not tire spin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 I used to have a '73 with the 501. I swear it used sewer pipes for venturies and fire hoses for fuel supply but it sure would fly. Surprised more than one youngster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 When I was a kid my father had a 67' Oldsmobile Toronado. It had a 425 with 385hp. However, the Northstar can blow that Olds away in a 0-60. It is considered a musclecar, however, it’s mostly a whole lot of show. Anyway, if I remember correctly the FWD transmission was a breakthrough in engineering. It was not transverse mounted and was quite reliable. It did have a pretty good top end though. I remember my father driving through the desert of New Mexico at about 130mph (the spedo was the rolling type with a max of 130). Not only is it a heavy car, but it had six people and a trunk full of personal belongings (a/k/a Sh_ _) and still had enough to muscle us well above 100mph. Come to think of it, what a bleeping idiot. http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/ol...o-history.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
an01sts Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 Torque steer is nothing compared to holding a car with its @$$ end swinging all over the place. The torque steer increased dramatically, to a fairly agressive level, after I modified my air box, a modification that, supposedly, "doesn't do much" for the car. I don't see what the big deal is with keeping control of the car when it walks sideways a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dadillac Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 I love torque steer. My SLS, and my wife's I35, exhibit some torque steer. Not alot, just enough to make me happy. Don "Modern warriors saddle iron horses of chrome." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted March 22, 2005 Report Share Posted March 22, 2005 I'll second Dadillac's thoughts about torque steer, it puts the YEE-HA in your WOT! Happiness is owning a Cadillac with no codes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuickLeSabre1960 Posted March 23, 2005 Report Share Posted March 23, 2005 every once in a while our Caddy will show torque steer. The problem with front wheel drive is they can only take so much power, the car shifts back taking weight off the drive wheels. My personal opinion is I'd rather drive a rear wheel drive but I've never driven in heavy snow. I like the "turn assist" that our rear wheel drive cars give when it's wet but you have to be expecting it or that's when you have your problems. The other day I was driving the Caddy in the rain through a turn and the front wheels broke loose and about made me go into the medien, I have never had a problem like that with my LeSabre or my brothers Catalina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjtjwdad Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 Torque steer ... Try one of those Ford SHO's 1989-1995 vintage with a manual transmission ... the steering wheel would literely jump out of your grasp. My 2001 STS is not bad ... except when doing WOT's ... and I do mine in 2nd gear from 50-80 (or so), then the torque steer is quite noticable but still nothing like the SHO I once owned. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 The handeling characteristics of a FWD car, compared to a RWD car are quite different. While my STS is the best handling FWD car I've ever personally driven, I feel it's still a little lacking in the handling area, just becuase of it's weight distribution. It's still handles better than most other stuff on the road anyway, so that doesn't bother me. I would agree, that as far as an "ultimate handling sedan" a well balanced front engine /rear drive chassis would be the most ideal setup. however that doesn't mean that a front driver cannot be a great handling car. As far as snow driving I believe good tires and a sensible driver go farther than anything else. I'd head out in the STS where few would tread no problem, of course I'd do the same in my '83 Olds Nintey-Eight Brougham, no problem. To me the front drive layout is only a small concession given up to drive such an amazing car. To the best of my recollection nothing being pushed down the road has ever given my STS any grief! That said, I can't wait to get my hands on one of the new RWD N*s! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CadiKing Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 ...To me the front drive layout is only a small concession given up to drive such an amazing car. To the best of my recollection nothing being pushed down the road has ever given my STS any grief! That said, I can't wait to get my hands on one of the new RWD N*s! Hey Jay! I second that EMOTION! RWD is Finally Back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.