Cadillac or competing brand model ? Why ? Discussion, STS vs M5 in Item Specific Cadillac Discussion; well i was comparing the northstar engine to the cobra engine.
not to much of a difference there...1's a all ...
well i was comparing the northstar engine to the cobra engine.
not to much of a difference there...1's a all out sports car, and it makes.....20more hp?? ha! you know there's dyno tests proving that the corsa exhaust adds 20+wheel hp. and you KNOW that a cobra has free-er flowing exhaust, and probably a little better intake. so you put that same exhaust on the STS, and now the cars output is the same, comparing engine to engine, the STS matches a COBRA, fords "premier" sports car. so how isn't the northstar a performance engine? same displacement, both were released in 93, so all is fair, there equal, but the northstar still isn't a performance engine?
and a supercharged shelby is faster than the current cobra is what i meant, you can't compare the fastest cobra time to the slowest shelby time.
Once again your comparing a $100,000+ limited edition sports car to that of a $30,000 production car. So I would hope with speding over $100k you would be able to beat up on a $30k car. But if a regualr Northstar engine puts out about the same as a 1999 Cobra then why is the Cobra faster then a STS, DTS, and Eldorado?
I've read your other posts on this forum, so I now you're not that ignorant. You're comparing a true sports car against a luxury-sport car.
Weight and the rest of the Cobra's drivetrain is where it outperforms the STS.
The STS wasn't built to be a track car(no matter how much some of it's owners want it to be). It's a very respectable touring car. The Northstar however, was designed as a performance engine, has been used as a performance engine, and is slated to appear in future GM performance cars.
It seems that you made a bad comment and now you don't want to admit to your mistake. It's okay to admit it, we won't make fun of you. Much.
like gothicaleigh said, id didn't say the cadillacs where sports cars, i said it has a performance ENGINE. if the sts lost a few hundred lbs, its transmission was a manaul, lost only 16% instead of 24-25% (which is 27hp/tq) and it had a extra gear, the sts would give that cobra a REAL run for its money, probably beating it (it is still a ford :P ).
comparing engines, not cars, im not such a blind cadillac lover that i think a sts can take a cobra. but the two engines are very equal in performance.
but the new sts will close that gap some.
also, the price's of the shelby and cobra arn't releavant, your getting a very special limited production car, not a mass produced pos like a cobra (j/k). of course it costs more, engine vs engine, northstar vs 99corbra, equal. blown northstar vs blown cobra = blown northstar is smaller and makes more power
btw the northstars are being put in the 2004 bonneville gxp, and there's alot of talk of them in the monte carlo/impalla, park ave, possibly more. i think its a good idea gm will focus on just a few engines.
I don't see the Northstar as a performance engine. Your comparing cars that are limited edition cars like the Shelby Series 1 and based off of that your saying that its a performance engine. Well the Lotus Elise uses the Celica GT-S's engine in it and the car does 12-13 sec. 1/4 so does that make the Celica's engine a performance engine? Of course not. Its all in power to weight ratio. The northstar for what it is produces pretty good numbers. But anything more then that is pushing it for that engine. But if the Northstar is such a good performance engine then were is the aftermarket support for it? There is next to nothing for it. And if the Northstar is a great performance engine then why didn't they modify one up and throw it into the CTS-V?
ok you claim that the Northstar is a performance engine. Reason's why you say that is because they use them for the IRL and what not but those are million dollar+ engines which are not even close to being what they are when you start up your Caddy. So far the only car to have any chance to break out of the 14's with the Northstar is the XLR, but your looking at a $70k price tag to do so. Then you mentioned that the Shelby Series 1 uses a Northstar and is a fast car and all and the only reason why it is fast is because its a 2300 lb. car. So you stick 300 hp into any car that weighs that much and it will run those times and for that car your looking at a starting price tag of $100k. So what I am saying is that you think the Northstar is a great performance engine because what it can do with the Shelby Series 1 light weight frame and they did the same thing with the Lotus Elise and stuck the Celica GT-S's engine in there and the thing is running 12-13's in the 1/4 for a $70k price tag. So to you guys saying that the Shelby Series 1 is such an awesome car due to the fact that the Northstar is in there and it puts out the numbers it does for performance then I guess the Celica's engine is in the same realm of that of the Northstar?
blackout, you completly contridicted yourself. first you say a northstar cadillac doesn't have a performance ENGINE because its so big and heavy limiting it to mid-high 14's. then you say a shelby series 1 isn't a fair comparison because its lighter and runs 12's?
OK, think of it like this. the northstar is 4.6L, which if i remember right is 279cu in, but it produces 300hp, which is 1.08hp per cu in. what other gm engines put out that much hp per ci? umm, the BRAND NEW Ls2, 12 years newer puts out 1.09, the Ls1 puts out .99hp per cu in, Ls6. also has about the same power/size ratio as a 99 cobra.
dude, it IS a performance engine, we never said it was a performance car, its a luxury sport sedan. aftermarket support doesn't make it a or not a performance engine, but you want aftermarket support?http://www.mechtech-ms.com/html/nspix_big/pic157.html make yourself a 1200hp northstar......
[QUOTE=(it is still a ford :P ).[/QUOTE]
My son has a '98 Continental http://myride.smokeys.org/wildnoob/ that I sold him so I could purchase my 2000 Deville. Now mind you, I would not trade back because I like the Caddy a lot, just wish it had the 300hp N* and no top speed limiter. My wife was driving my son's Conti and I was in my Deville. we're sitting at a stop light and when the light turns, we both punch it. The Conti pulled me about a fender at first, then shifted to 2nd. I gained some ground back then mine hit 2nd and they continued to accellerate about the same. The Conti still had about a fender on the Deville. When the Conti hit 3rd, it started pulling very slowly away. The Deville hit 3rd and the Conti continued to pull the Deville very slowly. I shut off around 100mph as I knew my Deville was going to puke it's speed limiter any minute. My wife ran the Conti up to around 125 and backed off. The Conti had no sign of slowing down at 125 though. Both cars are stone stock. The Conti has 120,000 miles on it and my Deville has 92,000. Oh yeah, my wife is a police officer on our local PD assigned to the patrol division. I am a retired (22 yr) Sheriff's Lieutenant.
A race between those two cars usually depends on the driver. The regular DeVille wins some; the Continental wins some. The DTS wins all...
Funny you should mention the DTS. I ran a DTS right after getting my Deville and I pulled him about like the Conti pulled me. I did however, quit around 110 when my limiter kicked in. The DTS then went by me. I was not impressed with the DTS, at least the one I ran against. It made me wonder if mine did not have that blasted limiter what would have happened since the DTS has a lower final drive ratio than my Deville. Also ever since getting the Conti I wondered why Lincoln never hyped the performance of the engine like Cadillac did the N*. The 32V DOHC in the Conti is no slouch. If fact, According to the specs, I had a 15hp advantage on the '98 Conti which is only 260@5750 vs my 275@5600 . The later Contis had the 275hp engine. If you have never driven a 98+ Continental, you are in for a suprise at the performance. This is defintely a sleeper car.