You are here: Forums Sedans Cadillac STS/STS-V Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?

Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?

1325 messages,  Last post on Apr 08, 2009 at 7:01 AM

You are in the Cadillac STS/STS-V Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Cadillac STS, Cadillac STS-V, Sedan

Messages Page 32 of 134 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ... 134 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#304 of 1325 Pushrods and other nostalgia by markhampton Feb 16, 2004 (7:21 pm)
b4z:   I agree; pushrods do have limitations with respect to high RPM operations. The physics of moving the mass of a pushrod up and down at a high rate limits the revs in such a design. Evidently, however, GM's engineers have found a way to get the redline up to 6500 RPM. Not bad, eh? Who knows, if some of the ceramic designs prove viable, the mass of a pushrod could become negligible.   The last 350 small block I owned was in an '89 Chevy K1500. It didn't burn any oil at 50,000 miles, which is when I sold it. I know some people who drove '70s vintage 350s 200,000 miles or more without burning any oil, but I also know people who had oil burners. The rest of a '70s vintage Chevy was another matter, however. Most '70s vintage cars rusted to dust before the engines wore out -- that was my experience anyway .   There are undoubtedly many factors at play when it comes to oil burning. I suspect oil burning has less to do with pushrod design, and more to do with valve and valve guide materials, design, tolerances, oil flow, oil technology, etc. I guess I have a hard time seeing how pushrod designs would inherently cause greater valve guide wear, but I don't pretend to be an expert on the subject.   Merc1:   Sounds like you're advocating the notion that complexity for complexity's sake is a good reason to choose a car. That's certainly BMWs view of the world. Take it from me, though, living with this complexity is no fun at all. They need to do a much better job of getting all of this complex technology working reliably before they release it to the public. That goes for both BMW and MB. If they can't do that, they deserve every single slam they get, and there will be plenty of victims/buyers like me to do the slamming.   When the time comes for you to buy your first S-Class/745, please be my guest and use your anecdotal evidence over the scientific statistical methods employed by JD Power. Just don't say you weren't warned.
#305 of 1325 mbukukanyau by merc1 Feb 16, 2004 (9:52 pm)
"So to you DOHC=High tech? Pushrods. = Low Tech? Nothing else counts"   1. Not always. 2. Not always. 3. Yes, other things count, but I'm waiting on your complete technical breakdown as to why the Corvette Z06's V8 is "the most advanced engine in the world", one that "even BMW can't match". Seems like you have nothing at all to back up this tallest of claims.   markhampton,   Mark, Mark, Mark.....I'm talking with someone else about an engine comment and you're trying to tie it into your experience with a BMW 745i. My only point with you was that you harped about all those surveys, extolling BMW's placement on the charts, but you never checked where the 7-Series itself ranked, leading you to buy one on a belief that was never true in the first place. This has nothing to do with the engine conversation going on elsewhere. You simply took the BMW nameplate ranking 5th and ran with an assumption of reliability.   I agree with the complexity remarks made by you and others, especially with the Germans. Mercedes and BMW love it, but that has nothing to do with preaching on surveys only to get burned by them. BMW in particular has made, starting the 7, gear selection, seat adjustment and other basic functions ridiculously complicated in the 7-Series, no denying that. I've never had to have anything "explained" to me until I drove the 760Li.   Most importantly.......the difference between you and I is that I only use the surveys as one reference point, not as the bible. I know people with Audis, BMWs and plenty of Mercedes, and yes overall they aren't the most reliable bunch of cars compared to say Acura, Lexus and Infiniti, but unlike you I'll know this going in. I won't be mislead into to thinking these cars are something they are not. I already know the potential for problems exists. I won't ever let JDP or the truly stick-in-the-mud people at Consumer Reports influence my decision that much, because I know people with the 3 German brands that have had cars to exceed any and everything those surveys have said and I know people who've had just as much trouble as the surveys said they would.   M
#306 of 1325 Surveys by markhampton Feb 16, 2004 (10:24 pm)
Haven't we been here before? I'll say it again in the simplest terms:   1) There were NO surveys when I got my 745. 2002 was the 745's first model year.   2) I never claimed BMW had a good reliability record. I claimed they had a better record than MB, which isn't saying much. I also claimed that both were far below any other luxury make, including Cadillac, in terms of reliability. I stand by all of those claims, and can do better than "my friend says his car is peachy" to back it up.   3) I figured BMW could fix whatever problems might arise. In that, I was sorely mistaken.   4) Throw the anecdotes away my friend, because a sample size of even a dozen "friends" will give you a statistically meaningless result. You may as well use a dart board or a magic eight-ball as a third factor in your decisionmaking process if you're going to go that route. If you don't understand why, then we need go no further. Caveat emptor.
#309 of 1325 by chavis10 Feb 17, 2004 (9:54 am)
Wow, I see I missed a lot. With regards to FWD Caddy's. GM obviously had to create a new rwd sedan because people like merc1 won't by a FWD car because he thinks RWD is better even though he'll only exploit the advantages about 2% of the time that he drives. Sure, you can cry about the "feel" of RWD all day and some of it is justified. However, since you like to talk about facts, the fact remains that a STS without the lastest tech available (MagneRide or CVRSS 2.0/Stabilitrak 2.0) posted better numbers than a 540i. No, the test didn't take "feel" into account, it just produced numbers and the numbers came back in the STS's favor. Weren't you the one always preaching about how Caddy needed "electronic crutches" to compete with the Europeans? Can you say ABC, AirmaticDC, Active Roll Stabilization, Active Steering, CATS, etc? Hmmm. That Audi 3.7 V-8 had only 230hp/235 lbs-ft, check your facts Merc- I guess you forgot that. You say weight distribution is such a big deal, why has the RS6 beaten the E55 in every comparison when it's weight distribution is 60/40 (the same as a Caddy DTS)??? I believe that the RS6 qualifies as a sports car, albeit one with AWD. Nissan and Acura still have trouble sending 230-260 lbs-ft through the front wheels while GM has been sending 295-300 pounds successfully for years, with struts mind you. VW Touareg apparently has some shifting smoothness issues with it's six speed. As does Jag. For cars that have a lot of torque, 6 gears seems like a little overkill- not only that, I haven't seen fuel economy increase in 6 speeds. A lot of cheap four speeds have trouble with gear hunting with their "grade logic" programs. So adding more gear choices will only make it worse. The fact remains that no amount of gears can make a bad automatic better than a good one with less gears. A 4 speed is ridiculous in a $45k sports car? How about a $45k sports car with cloth seats/manual seats(M3)? How about a $45k sports sedan with vinyl(5 series) or ones without CD players? For some reason, a Vette gets better mileage than a Honda S2000 with a 3.7L smaller engine, 110 less HP, and less weight. How does that happen since it's ridiculous two have only 4 gears? With regards to the LS6 being more technically sophisticated than the 6.0 Valvetronic V-12, I'll leave than alone. Most good engines are very technically sophisticated. I will say direct injection is a waste of time in North America until they get more sulfur out of the fuel. The valvetronic throttle-less intake system is trick but does have limitations. It won't be utilized in any M engines unless they decided to lower current redlines. It has an extra cam above two conventional cams to control the valve lift which act like individual throttles. It might be asking a little too much to rev all this hardware to say the 7000+ rpm redline that would be appropriate in an M5. Mechanically, the V-12 is a more complex design than any other engine configuration. However, Benz is kicking BMW's butt in the HP race with conventional means so the "sophisticated" V-12 seems pointless. I did hear that BMW is pumping of the juice for the freshened 7 series coming next fall.   Tennis, I've driven DTSs and STSs around a road course and they torque steered only in extreme situations. You obviously haven't had much seat time so I won't even respond to your nonsense. In fact, the felt no different than the LS430 and S430. Unless a RWD car is set up for serious performance, it won't really handle any better than a good FWD car. I'd buy a current STS (now used I guess) over a A6, 5 series, or E class in a minute. First off, AWD is a waste of time and fuel if you live in an area where you only get snow a couple times a year. However, for those few times it does snow, I'd rather have FWD than RWD. The market now dictates that a luxury car have an AWD option. That's good for folks who live in the extreme climates. However, if you own a good FWD, AWD isn't needed. It only helps you go, not stop which is where trouble can happen. How many accidents were caused by someone trying to accelerate as opposed to someone braking?
#310 of 1325 All good points Chavis by markhampton Feb 17, 2004 (11:51 am)
You hit the nail on the head. The handling advantage one gets with a 745 is a complete waste 95% of the time. And for this, we're forced to live with sub-par noise and comfort characteristics. No thanks. And Merc, please spare us the "I drove an Uber Buggy once and it was wonderful in every way" crap.   Cars that attempt to be all things to all people, almost end up to be a sad compromise that please few people. Next time, if I want no-compromise Corvette-style performance I'll just buy a used Corvette, and drive a DTS the other 95% of the time.
#311 of 1325 PLEASE by blkcadillac Feb 17, 2004 (2:24 pm)
Can we mature people please get back on track about the STS, and not other makes, MB, BMW, etc. So what about the engines, talk about the STSs egines and stop dissing each other. And yeah 4 speeds do sell I dont care if grandma and papa buys them. DeVille has been the number one luxury best seller almost 20 years. HA HA, and I love that car. To all the Caddy/GM engine haters remember GM is #1 so their doing something right. Do hate the SPEEDS. P.S. if one lives in a large city where traffic is hell, who really needs 6,or 7 speeds you probably would even use all of them.
#312 of 1325 by kirstie_h HOST Feb 17, 2004 (2:40 pm)
Enough. Enough challenging each other, enough debate on engine types (there are other discussions about this), enough debating other makes/models. Further posts along this line will be deleted.   This discussion is for members to exchange information about the STS, not to debate the merits of GM. If you're not interested in the STS or Cadillac in general, you're probably in the wrong discussion.
#313 of 1325 On topic(I think) by b4z Feb 17, 2004 (3:14 pm)
While I was test driving a SRX last Friday I sat in a '04 SLS. Correction, I tried to sit in a SLS. One of the few cars built in the World that I couldn't get comfortable in. My legs were in the knee bolsters. I have never sat in a full size car with so little room.   Hoping the new STS has at least as much front legroom as the CTS. Because the G chassis has been a failure. The Bonneville, Aurora, Lesabre, Park Avenue all took a step backward when that new chassis came out 4-5 years ago. The lack of interior room in those cars is appalling. And their sales figures have been appalling too.

Messages Page 32 of 134 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 ... 134 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Cadillac STS/STS-V Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?