Anyone 100% buying the day they arrive?

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by Cadillac Tony

I don't know how you figure it has a lighter engine, because the Northstar VVT is one heavy sucker. Quad cam, cam phasers, intercooler, supercharger, pullies, 4 valves per cylinder....it all adds up to a lot more than a 2 valve per cylinder, cam in block motor like the LS6.

From what I can find, the Northstar is lighter than the LS2 but not much I'll give you. Your quote lets up a little early though since you'll notice I DID mention that admittedly, the supercharger etc. probably DOES add a good deal of weight.

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by Dave's V

STS is a barge, a nice one but it is still one. The CTS is designed to get first time Cadillac owners, STS is decided for those that want an "upgrade" in size. I would probably go with the AWD version of the STS but now the CTS has one also.

Think we've already pointed out that the cars are NOT "dimensionally" significantly different. This is EXACTLY why you prove the point I was making. People obviously "think" the STS is bigger but it's really not.

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by Brett

How is the STS-V even viable as a model after the CTS-V comes out? That being said how is the STS viable at all?

I've asked that same question many times myself.

[Cadillac Tony]

Originally Posted by Katshot

From what I can find, the Northstar is lighter than the LS2 but not much I'll give you. Your quote lets up a little early though since you'll notice I DID mention that admittedly, the supercharger etc. probably DOES add a good deal of weight.

Huh- did a quick check, and the Northstar's not as much of a porker as I remember.


LS2 (6.0L Pushrod) = 412 pounds

LH2 (4.6L Northstar VVT) = 417 pounds

LC3 (4.6L Supercharged Northstar VVT) = 467 pounds


It looks like the SC and related hardware adds 50lbs to the engine assembly. That doesn't include the intercooler, plumbing and extra fluid weight.

[thebigjimsho]

Originally Posted by Katshot

Think we've already pointed out that the cars are NOT "dimensionally" significantly different. This is EXACTLY why you prove the point I was making. People obviously "think" the STS is bigger but it's really not.

The STS is bigger. But the interior dimensions are not. But since the STS-V is a Superporker, it's a barge. For those of us in the know, it's easy to comprehend...

[thebigjimsho]

Originally Posted by Cadillac Tony

Huh- did a quick check, and the Northstar's not as much of a porker as I remember.


LS2 (6.0L Pushrod) = 412 pounds

LH2 (4.6L Northstar VVT) = 417 pounds

LC3 (4.6L Supercharged Northstar VVT) = 467 pounds


It looks like the SC and related hardware adds 50lbs to the engine assembly. That doesn't include the intercooler, plumbing and extra fluid weight.

Isn't the S/C Poon* 4.4 litres?

[thebigjimsho]

Originally Posted by Katshot

Personally, I liked the STS-V better myself, purely from a mainly "looks" point of view. I wonder why you say the car is a "barge" though? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the CTS and STS virtually the same size?

No offense to C or Florian or any other STS owner here, but the STS and STS-V were redesigned at the last minute per Lutz. And to me, it looks like it. The CTS looks like a complete theme from front to back. The lines work and the whole car looks congruent. I think the CTS-V looks worlds better than the STS-V.

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by Cadillac Tony

Huh- did a quick check, and the Northstar's not as much of a porker as I remember.


LS2 (6.0L Pushrod) = 412 pounds

LH2 (4.6L Northstar VVT) = 417 pounds

LC3 (4.6L Supercharged Northstar VVT) = 467 pounds


It looks like the SC and related hardware adds 50lbs to the engine assembly. That doesn't include the intercooler, plumbing and extra fluid weight.

Now see, I came up with about 450lb. for the LS2.

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by thebigjimsho

The STS is bigger. But the interior dimensions are not. But since the STS-V is a Superporker, it's a barge. For those of us in the know, it's easy to comprehend...

Dude, the car's are only 6" different in length, and 2" or less in any interior dimension. Hardly enough of a difference for anyone to be moving from one to the other because of size.

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by thebigjimsho

Isn't the S/C Poon* 4.4 litres?

Yeah but I wasn't going to get picky. But as long as YOU are...

[urbanski]

superporker lol

[Katshot]

Originally Posted by thebigjimsho

No offense to C or Florian or any other STS owner here, but the STS and STS-V were redesigned at the last minute per Lutz. And to me, it looks like it. The CTS looks like a complete theme from front to back. The lines work and the whole car looks congruent. I think the CTS-V looks worlds better than the STS-V.

Obviously a subjective call, and I'm assuming you're referring to the '09 CTS-V. Hardly a fair comparison. How about we wait and compare the next Gen. STS-V.

[Florian]

Originally Posted by Katshot

Personally, I liked the STS-V better myself, purely from a mainly "looks" point of view. I wonder why you say the car is a "barge" though? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the CTS and STS virtually the same size?

Kat,

They are indeed built on the same Sigma platform, BUT, the STSv isnt nearly as solid in the corners as the CTSv. Ive had both, I can compare objectively. The STSv just doesnt have the same 'feel' as the CTSv did....but I kind of like my Luxo-barge.


F

[Florian]

Originally Posted by Katshot

Obviously a subjective call, and I'm assuming you're referring to the '09 CTS-V. Hardly a fair comparison. How about we wait and compare the next Gen. STS-V.

no new STS-v, that style is over.

F

[Kadonny]

I can also tell you from owning both, the STS-V feels much bigger when sitting in it. 6 inches or not, I have more legroom in the STS-V and way more shoulder room.