Cadillac Owners Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
13K views 75 replies 10 participants last post by  HotRodSaint 
#1 ·
Can someone tell me something about this car? Some opinions? is the car too floaty? (I really dont mind it being a land yacht. I kinda like not feeling the potholes and think it would be kinda cool to be tipping from side to side as if in a boat lol) I dont want the center console, and I want the Hood ornamant and column shifter, so bye bye 300 hp. Is the 275 hp enough accelaration? I mean I dont want any speed demon, I mostly want a big luxurious hog if I buy a car like this. I like the FWD cause its better in the snow and theres no lump. I like the 1999 model because 1)its cheaper 2)its the last year model for that generation 3)its more traditional than the current one (floaty suspension and real fins) 4)people might get mad at us for having two new Cadillacs. :rolleyes: (They'll think we're 80 years old) I dont plan on getting any 20s though, just stock. Maybe some engine work. I heard its good in a straight line, but not in the curves. Screw it! The curves by our house our extremely sharp and very bumpy with potholes, so it would be kinda fun going 50 mph on a sharp turn, at a 45 degree angle. I wouldnt feel a single pothole. So the point is dont convince me on a newer STS because I'll take the land yacht. Will I have any regrets?:
 
#27 ·
Katshot said:

Everything else you mentioned is generally the truth although most guys here (being FWD owners) would rather overlook them.
Kevin, We all know YOU'RE obsessed with it...But honestly, MOST guys ( Myself included ) Couldn't care less! It does the job.
 
#28 ·
03EscaladeAWD said:
Well, why is front drive better in the snow? I have heard it is because of the engines weight. (Course ricer engines weigh about as much as a wheel so FWD on Hondas dont help much if this true) Well, the whole car weighs 4500ish lbs right? Theres enough weight on the back wheels, so it wouldnt be THAT bad, right? And what about BMWs with their 50/50 weight distribution. Would it matter if it was FWD or RWD? Another thing I heard was that FWD is better because it is easier to pull a car than it is to push one.
5 months of the year we have snow and ice (and lots of corrosive salt!) And you are correct, FWD is only good in the stuff if you have enough weight over the drive wheels. My better half had a Chevy Sprint and got stuck in about 3 inches of snow! I had to get my FWD V6 to push her out. My friend who has a new Civic 4 door said it was very terrifying going down the University bridge every day during the winter, the light cars just drift all over where you don't point them. Another funny thing was all of the Civic bumpers on the bridge when it was -35 because of the cold they just cracked right off the cars! (with impact from other cars of course) But I did have traction issues with my 4000 lb. Grand Marquis. I'll take a V6 (at least) and FWD where I live anyday. Another issue was the fact that I NEVER had to rotate the tires on the RWD Merc, whereas the FWD tires wore faster on the front! (sorry KC)
 
#29 ·
kcnewell said:
Kevin, We all know YOU'RE obsessed with it...But honestly, MOST guys ( Myself included ) Couldn't care less! It does the job.
It's not a matter of being "obsessed" KC. The guy asked the question about the two drivetrains, somebody made an "off-cuff" remark about FWD vs. RWD performance, and I posted some accurate facts about the two platforms. I invited you to elaborate on the comment you made about how both platforms "have their strong points" and you came up with the old "FWD is better in snow". I was hoping for a little more than that. You and some others here tend to passively (and sometimes actively) support FWD as a "superior" platform when the facts just don't support that as truth.
And I'm sorry that I don't accept the statement that you "couldn't care less", or "it does the job". The fact is that you and most others would in fact choose a RWD platform if you HAD a choice. But since Cadillac forced FWD on you, you choose to accept it.

I made the comment kind of tongue in cheek earlier about how Cadillacs are "supposed" to be BIG and RWD but I think it really is true. I'll always believe that Cadillac's downfall started when they embraced FWD, and they will not rise again until it's eliminated (or at least relegated to a very minor status in the model line).
 
#30 ·
I don't support it as superior nor do I particularly think it's inferior. I just think that under MOST driving conditions, It doesn't matter at all. I know that 99.999% of the time that I don't notice the difference or even care! I've had my Seville a long time and if I could go back tomorrow to the day I bought it I'd buy the same car again. If I were buying a new car tomorrow I'd MOST likely buy a Deville DTS (FWD) Because I like the car not because it's either FWD/RWD or whatever....

I made the accurate point that MOST people don't care at all whether the thing is FWD or RWD ( Myself included ) It's just the way it is. Most people don't even know the differences between the two platforms and I don't think it has had as much to do with the marketing problems as say the HT 4100 or the fabulous V 8-6-4 engines that were well known failures and easy for the average guy to see the problems with. If I had a choice today of FWD/RWD platforms in an American made luxury car I'd still choose the car that I liked with NO regard to whether it was a pusher or a puller.
 
#31 ·
kc makes good points. 90% of the drivers out there probably couldn't tell the difference. 40% probably don't even KNOW whether their own car is FWD or RWD.

Here's my take. GM RWD cars from the 80's had the softest, smoothest, EASIEST steering. I LOVED them. One finger could do the job. Since the 90's steering has become tighter, more responsive, and it's harder to turn the wheel. Some of it probably has to do with a departure from the "circulating ball" but I'm not an expert in these matters so I won't try to speculate.

I notice "plowing" with FWD cars. I don't drive "hard" but it was very noticable on my '97 Acura RL. Mom's '79 and '82 Eldorados were pathetic when it came to handling, but the ride was so smooth, who cared?

My Prelude doesn't have any of these problems, but a lot of extra engineering went into it. Honda even designed what they call "ATTS" (automatic torque transfer system) for the "Type SH" Preludes to throw more power to the outside wheel in a turn to help pull you through it.

My driveway has a steep 75-foot hill. Maybe one day out of the year it gets icy and I have a tough time climbing it. I owned two Acura Legends, a '87 and a '90. Neither had any trouble with it. My '97 RL had a weight distribution of about 54/46 and couldn't even handle slush or snow. My '00 Prelude beats them all, and it has weight distribution of 61/39.

The downside on ice is that with very little weight in the back, the rear-ends of these cars are more likely to "float" when cornering too fast on ice. Fortunately, since there's no power to those back wheels they usually come back in line relatively quickly.

Still, I'll always prefer RWD.
 
#32 ·
kcnewell said:
......I made the accurate point that MOST people don't care at all whether the thing is FWD or RWD ( Myself included ) It's just the way it is. Most people don't even know the differences between the two platforms and I don't think it has had as much to do with the marketing problems as say the HT 4100 or the fabulous V 8-6-4 engines that were well known failures and easy for the average guy to see the problems with. If I had a choice today of FWD/RWD platforms in an American made luxury car I'd still choose the car that I liked with NO regard to whether it was a pusher or a puller.
If that's true (and I don't believe it is), then GM has, is, and is about to spend a HELL OF A LOT OF MONEY shifting Cadillac's product line back to RWD for nothing.
 
#35 ·
Stock vs. stock? Probably not. But just the addition of some extra weight in the trunk of the Fleetwood will come close to evening up the difference, and the addition of snow radials will more than make up the difference.
To be honest, in the hands of even a mediocre driver, the Fleetwood will do just fine in the snow.
If you want to see some interesting stuff, go look at the body shops after a good snow and see what's there. A few years ago when there were just about even numbers of FWD and RWD cars on the road, you'd see far more FWD cars in the body shops after a snow because once they start to slide, most people can't recover the car, and the FWD cars tend to "under-steer" which is what causes a large number to "drift" off of turns and/or tight corners. The other problem has always been that if you even slide a FWD car into a curb, you can do some rather severe damage to them as compared to a RWD car in the same situation.
 
#36 ·
FWD/RWD makes no difference when the guy behind the wheel can't drive!
 
#39 ·
Katshot said:
I think overall FWD is a "simpler" car to drive in various road conditions. Between it and ABS the car companies have damn near made driving idiot-proof.

Sad, actually :(
Well then, there must still be a lot of idiots out there then. You can put all the safety and handling devices and technology in cars to make them safer and idiot-proof and there are still more accidents every year. There is no substitute for experience. IMO. When I learned to drive it was with RWD. Then I had a FWD for 14 years and you do have to "re-adjust" to the different handling quirks, especially on snow or ice. But in the end, if everyone would just slowdown and grow some logic and brains there will be fewer accidents.:mad:
 

Attachments

#40 ·
I've driven RWD's and FWD's and never felt a difference and never cared. I think it's safe to say that most people who buy Cadillac's don't notice either.. To the few who do (in comparison), then RWD is important.

I have a Corvette and I can't do a hell of a lot with it. Too many cops, too many cars.. Why have it? When I get my next Caddy, it probably wont even be a performance version. All I care about is a nice soft ride (impresses cleints) in a nice automobile... I'm not going to be swerving around corners or flying up and down ramps at 80mph... I want a car that people look at and say, "Hey. He's a successful man". Why? Because I design websites and I want potential clients to be confident that I can do a good job. If I pull up in an '89 Dodge Shadow, I'll lose their business (and respect).

I think most people drive Cadillacs as either a reward for all their hard work - and for the same reason I do. To show that they're successful - rather than speeding around turns and having the best handling, fastest car. If that's really what they want, they can easily have it elsewhere - in most cases, for half the price.

This whole FWD/RWD nonsense is getting very old. Those performance-minded like RWD - those not - don't... They just don't give a rats ass..
 
#43 ·
Sal Collaziano said:
I've driven RWD's and FWD's and never felt a difference and never cared. I think it's safe to say that most people who buy Cadillac's don't notice either.. To the few who do (in comparison), then RWD is important.......

This whole FWD/RWD nonsense is getting very old. Those performance-minded like RWD - those not - don't... They just don't give a rats ass..

I think that sums it up perfectly!

Somebody oughta close this thread....
 
#44 ·
kcnewell said:
Somebody oughta close this thread....
Not so fast Sparky. No one metioned the superior towing capacity of the RWD Fleetwood.

I didn't buy a '96 Fleetwood for it's prowess on the road circuits. Frankly, a large land yacht isn't the platform to start with to build a road racer (although my car handles well now).

One of the important factors that entered into my purchase decision, was it's standard 5000lb towing capacity. That's more than sufficient for towing a few toys around. And it's so much classier to arrive at the river in a Cadillac than in a pickem up truck.
 
#45 ·
03EscaladeAWD said:
So? Which will I be happiest with? The 91 Fleetwoood, the 96 Fleetwood, or the 99 Deville? Japan is a leader of ship building for water but America is the leader of ship building for land!
For design, it'd be a toss-up between the '99 and the '96 ('95).

For aftermarket parts support, the '96.

For daily drivability, probably the '99.

Check the trunks. Surprisingly, this is one of the few weak spots I feel the Fleetwood has. It has a high lift over and the spare tire isn't mounted under the floor.

If you want respect from your elders though, get the Fleetwood. Nothing is more Cadillac than a BIG Fleetwood. There will likely never be another Cadillac like it.
 
#47 ·
Sal Collaziano said:
Jeez, I hope that's not true... Cadillacs are supposed to be big... Aren't they?
I hope it's not true either, but it's been 7 years since the last BIG RWD Fleetwood and there's no signs of a proper heir yet.

Besides, the '99 Deville was the last Cadillac that had an sense of evolutionary design. So even if the make a big Caddy again, I'm not sure it will translate very well in the new 'Art and Science' design.
 
#48 ·
Sal Collaziano said:
I've driven RWD's and FWD's and never felt a difference and never cared. I think it's safe to say that most people who buy Cadillac's don't notice either.. To the few who do (in comparison), then RWD is important.

I have a Corvette and I can't do a hell of a lot with it. Too many cops, too many cars.. Why have it? When I get my next Caddy, it probably wont even be a performance version. All I care about is a nice soft ride (impresses cleints) in a nice automobile... I'm not going to be swerving around corners or flying up and down ramps at 80mph... I want a car that people look at and say, "Hey. He's a successful man". Why? Because I design websites and I want potential clients to be confident that I can do a good job. If I pull up in an '89 Dodge Shadow, I'll lose their business (and respect).

I think most people drive Cadillacs as either a reward for all their hard work - and for the same reason I do. To show that they're successful - rather than speeding around turns and having the best handling, fastest car. If that's really what they want, they can easily have it elsewhere - in most cases, for half the price.

This whole FWD/RWD nonsense is getting very old. Those performance-minded like RWD - those not - don't... They just don't give a rats ass..
OMG!!!! He's a FRIGGIN' YUPPIE!!!!
You just enphisized the difference between "old" money, and "new" money. Young guys are so insecure that they need to drive around in a car that screams "I'm successful". Take it from me, anybody with a brain knows that a guys car means NOTHING about how "successful" he is. Hell, half the Lexus's, and Cadillac's around where I work are owned by punks that live at home in or in the projects. Older mature people will look at your car and say "this guy charges too much" and that's why he's driving that car. $500-$700/month can put anybody in a new high-profile car and that's NOTHING.
 
#49 ·
When I pull up in an expensive car, I get respect right off the bat. Regardless of whether or not punks have expensive cars too. It's not just my imagination. If I'm driving a $50,000.00 car - how does that relate to me charging too much? Maybe a high-end Mercedes will give that impression.. Otherwise, not...

I can read people very well and I always feel more confidence from a person (when speaking about business) when I'm driving something that shows success. Like I said, if I had an Iroc-Z, or a Passat - people would tend to take me less seriously.

Believe me - I've been in situations where a couple of people and myself are talking about something I happen to be an expert at - I can answer all the questions quickly and accurately - I can explode with confidence and whatever - but if I walk into the parking lot with a crappy car - they blow it off. That's just the way it is. Regardless of whether or not punks have expensive cars too.
 
#50 ·
It is definately a status symbol, that's what DIFFERENT cars are all about KAT. That's what the thread "jealous Stares" is all about. I actually see a lot more OLD people driving Caddies, I am about the youngest that I've seen in one. Personally when I see someone "younger" in a Caddy, I just figure it's their dad's car. I think that at this Forum, there are more younger people with Caddies that GO HERE. My Grandpa is 87 and doesn't even know what a computer is! Now I am stereotyping only younger people having computers, and I know that is wrong. So I will stop now!
 
#51 ·
Leave him be Ralph.....He just can't let go of it! He has a hard time accepting that someone could be happy in a FWD car. It's totally unrealistic to think that no one is impressed by a luxury car. Mine is 12 years old, in perfect condition and always clean inside and out! I get comments all the time about what a nice car it is and how it must be nice to be able to afford one of those! The FACT of the matter is, Most people don't know a new one from a well kept ten year old ( No Micheal Jackson jokes please ) So I must agree with Sal here...People take you more seriously when the perception is that you drive a serious car. When I say serious car I don't mean from a pure performance standpoint either......One thing that Mercedes Benz says that I know to be true is..." Perception is not always reality " And a well kept luxury automobile is still impressive to most people when it's a few years old!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top