wontgoslo Posted April 9, 2006 Report Share Posted April 9, 2006 Hello to all.Well after 3-1/2 faithfull years i traded my 96 sts for an 02 sts. Wow, the creature comforts on this baby are amazing! I think i certainly made the right move. The only bummer is that the 96 felt more powerful. How can this be possible if both have the 300 horse northstar?The 96 was ''h'' rated this 02 is a ''w'',shouldnt the 02 be stronger?I definately will miss the passing power.Dont get me wrong, this 02 is no slouch but there is a big difference.A small tradeoff though the 02 really pampers its driver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wontgoslo Posted April 10, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2006 wrong forum,my bad -sorry [moved from For Sale to Discussion - bruce] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BodybyFisher Posted April 10, 2006 Report Share Posted April 10, 2006 Well you are right, the 1996 STS is in fact faster than the 2002 STS. This chart was prepared by JasonA I believe, its hard to read if you click on it, save it to your hard drive and then view it with Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, Mike Why is this the wrong forum? Where did you think you were? Good Luck with the new car. You sound very excited about it. I can't wait to buy an STS Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1 >> 1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/ Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeal1892 Posted April 10, 2006 Report Share Posted April 10, 2006 I didnt know that ! I went from a 96 Deville to a 98 SLS 2 years ago and the Seville has far more power than my old Deville ever thought of having Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted tcb Posted April 10, 2006 Report Share Posted April 10, 2006 My 95 STS was scary quick ... unrefined, mash the pedal and hang on. My 97 had a better ride, nicer dash, but definitely didn't have the same oomph as my 95. My 99 definitely has the best ride quality, but it too isn't as fast as that '95. Having said all that, the newer 99 style STS is a superior car in every way to my earlier cars. The 97 was the same chassis from 92-97, which means it was designed in the late eighties. NVH levels are much more refined on the newer designed STS. Still, I wouldn't mind having a creampuff '95 as a second ride ... black on black, limo tint, chrome rims ... that's one tough looking car. 1989 FWD Fleetwood, Silver 1995 STS Crimson Pearl on Black leather 1997 STS Diamond White 1999 STS Crimson Pearl 2001 STS Silver 2003 STS, Crimson Pearl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danbuc Posted April 10, 2006 Report Share Posted April 10, 2006 The 1998-2004 chassis is a little bit heavier. Those times on that chart however are not all that accurate. The 1998 STS is just as fast as the 2001. And the time's for the 1997 STS are WAY off. In the 1/4, the 1998-2004 chassis shoudl only be a few 10 thousandths of a second slower, considering the weight difference is somewhat negligable. I have heard also, that the 1995 is a little faster than the later OBDII models, not sure why, maybe it has to do with using the MPA sensor and throttle angle to calulate engine load, although you'd think that might make it slower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMWburner Posted April 10, 2006 Report Share Posted April 10, 2006 I will miss my 95' STS. "Scary quick" pretty well summed that car up. The 02' is much smoother in it's power and response, but booting the 95' put you on your butt. The 02' doesn't quite slam you in the back of your seat as well. The 95' truly was a muscle car in a desinger suit. Snorty at the intake, loud and thumpy out the back, that car shall be missed. I miss being scared of my car The only thing I don't miss is buying gas for it. May she rest in peace --Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wontgoslo Posted April 11, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 I highly recommend going to a car dealer that has a 96 sts for sale for a sneak test-drive! Then you will look like this---- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhinchley Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 I don't know how they decided which went in what..............but I know many of the Northstars...........had more then 1 horsepower output per year per each year ranging from 275-320 hp (I beleive). So, you could have had a higher hp engine in one vs the other.......even if the same year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danbuc Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 I don't know how they decided which went in what..............but I know many of the Northstars...........had more then 1 horsepower output per year per each year ranging from 275-320 hp (I beleive). So, you could have had a higher hp engine in one vs the other.......even if the same year. Alot of that had to do with the machining of the cylinder bores. As the bit's wore out, they would tend to bore bore a little bigger. Some of the engines produced toward the end of the bit's life may produce 1-3 more hp atr most, but at the expense of oil usuage due to slightly larger clearences between the rins and cylinder walls. Of course a difference such as this is negligable and is almost impossible to differentiate between two vehicles. As far as outputting more that 1hp per c.i. (which I assume you are reffering to) the L37 engine (300hp) already does this, and the LD8 engine (275hp) falls about 4hp shy of the 1hp per c.i. mark. As I mentione dbefore slight variances in machining can result in difference tolerances between engine which can aid in producing a few more hp, but not 20 more. Obviously not two engine are the same, but to say that they varied by as much as 20hp on the same assembly line is REALLY stretching it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenJ Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 This chart was prepared by JasonA I believe, its hard to read if you click on it, save it to your hard drive and then view it with Windows Picture & Fax Viewer, Mike Thanks Mike! I've been looking for that chart for dog's years. Oh yeah, *much* thanks to JasonA I didnt know that ! I went from a 96 Deville to a 98 SLS 2 years ago and the Seville has far more power than my old Deville ever thought of having Michael Vehicle weight?? Regards, Warren There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonA Posted April 11, 2006 Report Share Posted April 11, 2006 In addition to the heavier weight of the 98+ G chassis, those cars often had wider and taller tires, which further reduces power (albeit in a very small amount). All those of small eaches, though, adds up to a platform that doesn't quite have the neck-snap of the earlier car, in general, as many report. 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...
caddypete Posted April 13, 2006 Report Share Posted April 13, 2006 The Eldo was made all those years why were they not included? I'm half tempted to file a discrimanation suit.As Don King would say"only in America" LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wontgoslo Posted April 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2006 A few years ago i took a 95 eldo for a test drive.The car drove very smooth and tight.Then my foot accidentally mashed the pedal to the metal, and holy @rap, that caddy took off like a rocket! It had a northstar under the hood,i knew i had to get one bad.Being a family man ,after some investigating,i found the seville had a northstar too. I WAS CADDY HOOKED HAYYYAA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonA Posted April 13, 2006 Report Share Posted April 13, 2006 The Eldo was made all those years why were they not included? I'm half tempted to file a discrimanation suit.As Don King would say"only in America" LOL If your question is in reference to my list, it's because I couldn't find any instrumented testing from a "repeatable" source, like a magazine. All of those times are taken from instrumented tests from rags like Road & Track, Motor Trend, Car & Driver, etc. 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...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.