Last post on Dec 04, 2013 at 1:04 PM
You are in the Cadillac DeVille
What is this discussion about?
Cadillac DeVille, Sedan
#1444 of 2635 2000 Cadillac Deville Tires
Jun 05, 2004 (6:38 pm)
Has anyone heard of this problem?
I came in to local dealer for a state car inspection.I was told first that the car was too heavy for the tires that came with the car and I would need to replace all 4 tires.I had 19,000 miles on the car.When I questioned this, he changed the story to that the tires were not properly maintained.After questioning THIS STORY he decided that only 2 of the 4 tires needed replacing but he would have to keep an eye on the remaining 2 tires.
Has anyone else that is OLDER had a similar experience?
#1445 of 2635 Re: 2000 Cadillac Deville Tires [caddy4 #1444]
Jun 06, 2004 (5:33 am)
I think that the person at the dealership is in need of professional mental health care.
#1446 of 2635 RE: fuel/octane
Jun 06, 2004 (10:13 am)
My 2002 SLS owners manual says to use at least 87 octane. Here (high altitude) regular is 85. My owners manual goes on to say that for "best performance" one might wish to use a higer octane fuel.
I have been using premium (91 octane here).
#1447 of 2635 RE: fuel/octane [sls002 #1446]
Jun 06, 2004 (11:13 am)
The "Regular" here is 86 octane (4600'). I've used it in my 2003 Deville
and it runs just fine. I don't see spending the money on high test when regular is what the car was designed for. Performance is fine as well.
#1448 of 2635 dispencer1
Jun 06, 2004 (1:35 pm)
My interpretation of what the owners manual is saying is this: the engine was designed to degrade performance when low octane fuel is used, but if you want the performance that you paid dearly for, premium fuel is required. I do know that I can get 32 MPG on the highway with premium.
#1449 of 2635 Re: dispencer1 [sls002 #1448]
Jun 06, 2004 (1:45 pm)
I'm getting 30-31 on the highway but I'll take your advice and the next time I do a trip I'll try premium. It can't hurt. I was always of the opinion that if it didn't knock on regular, regular was ok. I stick with Chevron anyway and never use off brands. My other cars are a 2001 Malibu and a 1998 Silhouette so performance wise even with regular, the Cadillac is a vast improvement! I wonder if premium will improve city mileage which is terrible.
#1450 of 2635 dispencer1
Jun 07, 2004 (6:42 am)
You should understand that the engine has knock sensors and the engine control computer is able to adjust the ingnition timing to reduce knock. So, reading what my owners manual says, implies that the engine needs a minimum of 87 octane fuel, but that the computer can make use of higher octane fuel to improve power and performance. I am not sure how much difference you will see in gas mileage. My highway mileage is based on a couple of short highway trips at this point in time. I was cruising at about 65-70.
I know that a lot of people think buying premium fuel is a waste, even if their engine requires premium. From my point of view, 600 gallons of fuel per year at 20 cents more per gallon is $120. So I think you should buy what makes sense for the cadillac. But pre-2000 model year cadillacs were supposed to get premium fuel only.
#1451 of 2635 Re: dispencer1 [sls002 #1450]
Jun 07, 2004 (2:09 pm)
I'll at least move up to the mid-level gasoline. I think that is 88. I know regular here is 86. I think premium is 91. I've heard a lot of stories about using premium in a car that is supposed to run on regular. Most "experts" say that it is a waste of money but I can always put in a tank of mid-level once in a while.
#1452 of 2635 dispencer1
Jun 07, 2004 (2:37 pm)
Well, the way I read my owner manual, my 275 horsepower engine will only produce 275 horsepower when it is burning premium gas. If it gets regular the computer will retard the timeing and reduce the horsepower. This is really all that I am saying. The owners manual does say that you can use 87 octane fuel without damaging the engine. It also says that you won't get full power on regular.
#1453 of 2635 Re: dispencer1 [sls002 #1452]
Jun 07, 2004 (5:56 pm)
Good - I may even try premium when I'm in the chips and see how much difference it actually makes performance-wise. If I don't notice much of a difference as I assume I won't I'll stick with regular. Has anybody else done a comparison? This discussion reminds me of the advocates of the 0-60 comparison. Car A is much faster than Car B because it goes from 0-60 in 7.3 seconds instead of 7.8 seconds or even (God forbid) - 8.1 seconds. These folks need to get a life. The only value of "performance" as far as I'm concerned is the ability to pass some slowpoke who is going 60 on a 70 MPH road and get back in the right lane before being impacted. Just my opinion, however.