: 97 STS vs. The drag strip



stngh8r
01-04-08, 09:53 PM
Well, took the STS out to the track and I was not thrilled with the results, nor was I crushed. Track conditions were nice and cool at ~50*, but a little on the moist side. All runs where made with Traction control ON and with a progressive throttle off the line. Looking back, I think I could have went 100% throttle much faster, but I guess I will just have to see next time.

Run 1: 2.3 60ft./15.5 @ 88MPH
Baseline. A cool down period between driving in and racing, but thats it.

Run 2: 2.2 60ft./15.3 @ 89MPH
Removed air filter. Trans seemed to be a little lazy, especially the last shift.

Run 3: 2.3 60ft./15.2 @ 90MPH
Removed air filter. Poorer 60ft. Ran in Drive for whatever reason. Tranny was happier and shifted more promptly. Must have gotten a little cooler in between runs?


I was wondering though, why the Monte Carlo SS that was present was running low 14s @ 99? The Monte and Impala SS are rated 303 and the STS N* is rated at 300? I know the Caddy may be a bit heavier, but its not that much heavier is it!? I assume that the Caddy transmission has softer and longer shifting traits too, which is not helping the situation in terms of 1/4 mile times.

So I go to Dragtimes.com and check out the seville's listed on there and what do you know, everybody is running higher MPH than me? What gives? I did a fresh synthetic oil change right before the track, made sure I had a good healthy dose of 93 and everything seemed to be running properly? I noticed a comment on Dragtimes.com from one of the owners, noting that he ran with the Traction control off and simply floored it off the line, will the Traction control being off help? I know on the C5 vettes, if traction control is activated, it pulls timing, so I assume that could have been happening to me since I left it on?? Has anyone compared times with Traction on/off?

Thank you for your time and sorry it was so long

Eric <><


www.dragtimes.com (http://www.dragtimes.com)



Fast Cadillac Seville 1/4 mile Drag Racing Timeslips</SPAN>

Click on the 1/4 mile ET to display the DragTime in detail.
* = Picture Available
+ = Video Available
^ = Dyno Sheet Available
# = Stock Vehicle
Click HERE (http://www.dragtimes.com/add2.php?carmake=7&carmodel=142) to add your Cadillac Seville to the database.
.1/4 Mile
ET1/4 Mile
MPH1/8 Mile
ET1/8 Mile
MPH0-60 Foot
ETCarYearDriver1)14.515 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-3445.html)*95.600 9.387 77.010 2.221 Cadillac Seville STS (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-3445.html)1996 Agustin J. Cruz 2)14.800 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-612.html)96.700 Cadillac Seville STS (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-612.html)1995 Paul Huening 3)14.808 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-443.html)92.000 Cadillac Seville STS (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-443.html)1994 Matt Ruedisueli 4)14.888 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-651.html)94.510 9.730 75.760 2.385 Cadillac Seville STS (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-651.html)2000 STS 5)14.890 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-2677.html)96.300 Cadillac Seville (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-2677.html)1998 Ed 6)15.100 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-123.html)93.200 Cadillac Seville STS (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-123.html)1998 7)15.110 (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-13123.html)#94.000 Cadillac Seville STS (http://www.dragtimes.com/Cadillac-Seville-Timeslip-13123.html)1995 Paul

Submariner409
01-04-08, 11:25 PM
As a non-participating bystander, I'll be waiting for our resident tuners to post their slip times.

You're one of the very, very few that have the balls to put your STS work in black and white.

This could prove interesting as our post whores chime in.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-04-08, 11:30 PM
I was wondering though, why the Monte Carlo SS that was present was running low 14s @ 99? The Monte and Impala SS are rated 303 and the STS N* is rated at 300?

The reason the Monte's and Impalas are so quicker is because the LS4 in those cars makes so much low end torque, which means those cars are a lot quicker out of the hole, and in the lower speeds. They'll do 0-60 in the mid to high five second range, whereas the STS will do it in the mid-high six second range.

CadillacSTS42005
01-05-08, 12:22 AM
that and for a 97 STS a 15.5 1/4 is just plain SLOW that car is capable of high 14s in stock trim, my ETC stock ran 14.7 and now modified runs a 14.2 best....

heck the 98+ Sevilles which packed on an additional 500 pound are faster than a 15.5...

as for a New MC SS, they are quite capable of eating you up and spiting you out, my ETC cant win off the line but by the end of the 1/4 im usually past them, a stock FWD wouldnt win.

Zorb750
01-05-08, 09:02 PM
ETC/STS will win 60-100 (or to 120 or 130 or whatever) any day of the week.

MM STS
01-05-08, 10:13 PM
ETC/STS will win 60-100 (or to 120 or 130 or whatever) any day of the week.

The whole reason I bought the car. They are a sweet highway cruiser. They stay stuck to the road at those speeds too. Mike

stngh8r
01-08-08, 10:45 AM
that and for a 97 STS a 15.5 1/4 is just plain SLOW that car is capable of high 14s in stock trim, my ETC stock ran 14.7 and now modified runs a 14.2 best....

heck the 98+ Sevilles which packed on an additional 500 pound are faster than a 15.5...

as for a New MC SS, they are quite capable of eating you up and spiting you out, my ETC cant win off the line but by the end of the 1/4 im usually past them, a stock FWD wouldnt win.

:rant2:
Thank you mister 10k post smarty pants. Now before you start calling names and pointing out that my equipment is far too "SLOW" for what it is, I would like you to take a look at my post. Lets see, have I in any shape or form given the impression that I think my car is on par with others of similar make/model? Have I in any shape or form made mention of how blistering fast this car is? NO, I have pointed out that my car seems to be below par. I have come here to post up the facts and ask why? I have come here humbly to ask some questions. AND FOR WHAT? SO you can start pointing your high and mighty finger at my equipment and not answer a blasted thing.

GROW UP AND GET SOME MANNERS.

Eric

AMGoff
01-08-08, 05:48 PM
:rant2:
Thank you mister 10k post smarty pants. Now before you start calling names and pointing out that my equipment is far too "SLOW" for what it is, I would like you to take a look at my post. Lets see, have I in any shape or form given the impression that I think my car is on par with others of similar make/model? Have I in any shape or form made mention of how blistering fast this car is? NO, I have pointed out that my car seems to be below par. I have come here to post up the facts and ask why? I have come here humbly to ask some questions. AND FOR WHAT? SO you can start pointing your high and mighty finger at my equipment and not answer a blasted thing.

GROW UP AND GET SOME MANNERS.

Eric

First of all... pay STS03 no mind whatsoever, because somehow he's come to know everything there is in a mere 21 years and whatever he doesn't know isn't really worth knowing in the first place. In his defense, he can be genuinely helpful at times as he does know some things fairly well... however, he has less tact than Marge Schott. While intelligence may have nothing to do with age - modesty sure does.

Anyway... back to your original post... I'll have somewhat disagree with Chad on this one... both engines develop their peak torque at 4400rpms and their peak hp are both as close as makes no difference - 6000rpm.

It really comes down to two things - age and the car's power-to-weight ratios. First, that Monte is pretty much brand new while your Seville is over 10 years old now - that makes a difference... While it might not be much, I'd be willing to bet that a few of your 300 ponies have escaped from under the hood over the last decade - and your overall power delivery may not be as sharp and spiffy as it once was.

More importantly though that Monte weighs just shy of 3400lbs while your Seville is pushing two-tons... that's not just a "bit" heavier, that's a substantial amount. Beyond that... while when both were fresh from the factory, there may have only been a difference of 3hp between them, that Monte makes almost 30 more lb-ft of torque - combine that with being about a quarter of a ton lighter than the Seville and it's easy to see where the difference comes from.

Also, just another thing I'd like to point out... while I've never been to that dragtimes website, I'd assume that all of the entries are nothing more than user submissions? Being such, I'd find it highly doubtful that some people would never "shave" a little bit of time off here and there - so like everything else on the internet - take it with a grain of salt.

CadillacSTS42005
01-08-08, 09:19 PM
:rant2:
Thank you mister 10k post smarty pants. Now before you start calling names and pointing out that my equipment is far too "SLOW" for what it is, I would like you to take a look at my post. Lets see, have I in any shape or form given the impression that I think my car is on par with others of similar make/model? Have I in any shape or form made mention of how blistering fast this car is? NO, I have pointed out that my car seems to be below par. I have come here to post up the facts and ask why? I have come here humbly to ask some questions. AND FOR WHAT? SO you can start pointing your high and mighty finger at my equipment and not answer a blasted thing.

GROW UP AND GET SOME MANNERS.

Eric

Ok at no point did i make this into a personal attack however if you want to step it up to that level then fine.
fact of the matter is over 15 second in a Touring model Seville is SLOW idk how you want to chalk it up, its just plain slow, i didnt blame the car since its a machine obviously it cant control what it does, usually when a car runs that far away from pace its the DRIVERS skill or should i say LACK THERE OF. You took your car to the track, you wanted to test it out, and im letting you know those times are way off stock. So either you did some ebay mods and killed power, or you simply dont understand how to drive. With that im done with this thread.

Now if you would of taken what i said and not acted like called you and your car a pos then i would of said two things to help improvement is
1 turn off and bypass the t/c via the brake switch
2 roll through the gears aka start off in 1 then upshift to 2 at redline then 3 etc...
3 romp up, start at half throttle as soon as reach 5mph NAIL IT
4 start off by power braking, hold the brake and gas it up to about 2-2500 rpm and hold until the light goes green

CadillacSTS42005
01-08-08, 09:25 PM
First of all... pay STS03 no mind whatsoever, because somehow he's come to know everything there is in a mere 21 years and whatever he doesn't know isn't really worth knowing in the first place. In his defense, he can be genuinely helpful at times as he does know some things fairly well... however, he has less tact than Marge Schott. While intelligence may have nothing to do with age - modesty sure does.

Its called tact, i lack it, im very much straight to the point, i dont kiss a$$ and i dont sugar coat, if you havent realize that by now Goff and you dont like it, use the block button its severed me quite well on a few members.
And to imply i know something yet nothing about this is just blatantly ignorant. Ive pioneered ALOT of development and improvements on the N* engine and have ponied up the $ to fund it. My mods have proven their worth, while speed is obviously not a primary interest of yours it was for me and before your attack on then go buy a Honda if i wanted a speed, no thanks i like my STS i pay for my STS and ill continue to buy Cadillac. Ive had TAs Z/28s and GTS and they dont compare in style.

And if age is your only attack you seem to use to justify with your disagreeableness with me on NUMEROUS subjects perhaps its not my age but your arrogance...

HITMONEY
01-08-08, 10:30 PM
Who'd-a thunk this would happen.!?.. :hmm:

I'm so :shocked2:



submariner409, aka "The Great Karnack"

:cool2:

CadillacSTS42005
01-08-08, 10:38 PM
rofl!
i love Hitmoney

Jesda
01-09-08, 12:24 AM
This thread gives great head!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-09-08, 12:30 AM
In the words of Rodney King....


Can't we all just get along?! :grouphug:

AMGoff
01-09-08, 01:18 AM
In the words of Rodney King....


Can't we all just get along?! :grouphug:

Agreed for the most part... however, I'm very much to the point, I don't sugar-coat, and I don't kiss behind... I can't help it if someone who comes across as offensive to quite a few people, especially new members, gets offended quite so easily.

stngh8r
01-10-08, 03:45 PM
AMGoff: Thank you for the information. I was pretty sure there would be a 3-500 pound difference which would account for about .5 sec. But your insight has confirmed that. I still believe that the transmission characteristics probably have a little to do with it and likely ALOT to do with it in my particular car, being as it have just over 100k miles. Drag times is user submitted, but I feel that the information is more often that not completely accurate. Some times users also submit a scan of the timeslip and/or picture.


STS03: Thank you for your insight. I suspected that you would have some good tips due to your track experience with the caddies. I would like to mention that I am sorry for any offense towards you. I encourage you to be "to the point", my point is, you missed it. I came here humbly for answers and helpful hints, not to discuss whether or not my car is slow, but why. FYI I do have a good amount of racing experience and 3 trophies*. In this case, I feel that my launch technique suffered from this experience. I'm frankly not accustomed to driving a car this slow** and having never raced a FWD car, presumed taking it easy would be best, to avoid an embarrassing spin fest, until I got used to the car.

In reference to your 4 points:
1. TC: Makes sense it would need to be OFF and I will run it OFF from now on. Just wasn't sure being my first time to WOT the car at the track. I am not aware of the "brake control switch", but will search it out.
2. Shifting: I was unaware that the electronically controlled 4T60 would benefit from being manually shifted. In previous experience with my Z28 and also from others testimonies, the 4L60 did a perfect job that would be difficult to best. My STS does go just a little past the redline before shifting, which is why I assumed no intervention was necessary.
3. Launch: Half throttle, quickly into 100%. Yes, I concur. This was similar to my technique, which was stated in other words in the original post. I also mentioned that I feel I could have improved my times by going 100% sooner.
4. Pre-Launch: Power braking on the line. Done.





* 1. 1st place "True Street", Edinburg, TX 2. Runner up "Trophy Street", Paris, TX 3. Runner up "True Street Shootout", Paris, TX.

** 1. 99 Corvette LS1/6spd. w/cam & boltons 400rwhp/11.9 at 117 (http://www.geocities.com/stngh8r)
2. 98 Z28 LS1/A4 11.22 NA & 10.7 on bottle (http://www.geocities.com/stngh8r/perch.html)
3. 96 Mustang built 4.6/PI heads/VT Stg. 3 cams/Vortech T trim/yadda yadda yadda... 460rwhp/490rwtq Dyno Queen

CadillacSTS42005
01-10-08, 10:51 PM
STS03: Thank you for your insight. I suspected that you would have some good tips due to your track experience with the caddies. I would like to mention that I am sorry for any offense towards you. I encourage you to be "to the point", my point is, you missed it. I came here humbly for answers and helpful hints, not to discuss whether or not my car is slow, but why. FYI I do have a good amount of racing experience and 3 trophies*. In this case, I feel that my launch technique suffered from this experience. I'm frankly not accustomed to driving a car this slow** and having never raced a FWD car, presumed taking it easy would be best, to avoid an embarrassing spin fest, until I got used to the car.

In reference to your 4 points:
1. TC: Makes sense it would need to be OFF and I will run it OFF from now on. Just wasn't sure being my first time to WOT the car at the track. I am not aware of the "brake control switch", but will search it out.
2. Shifting: I was unaware that the electronically controlled 4T60 would benefit from being manually shifted. In previous experience with my Z28 and also from others testimonies, the 4L60 did a perfect job that would be difficult to best. My STS does go just a little past the redline before shifting, which is why I assumed no intervention was necessary.
3. Launch: Half throttle, quickly into 100%. Yes, I concur. This was similar to my technique, which was stated in other words in the original post. I also mentioned that I feel I could have improved my times by going 100% sooner.
4. Pre-Launch: Power braking on the line. Done.


1. turning off the t.c on a stock car will decrease times, theres a bypass for this it lies in the brake switch which is mounted on the brake pedal, when the switch is depressed it turned off tc and keeps 1st gear, by hacking into this and making your own switch you can turn off t.c and keep 1st gear this is what ive done on my ETC
2. when the tranny is in lower gears 1 and 2 it increases tranny pressure, if you actually catch it right youll chirp the tires on 1-2 upshifts
3. you got that pretty much down pad
4. same as 3

as for slow, yea in stock trim coming from a trans am as well i can get where you say that
but if you know how to drive it and know how to mod it
they can be quite fast

0hlNKuCxQzU
avUqcOchtBA&feature=related
NyW5ddViW_g&feature=related
4OxTwMgKkbM

and yes those are of my ETC

BlackCaddy87
01-11-08, 12:20 PM
Its a camera phone so the quality isn't great.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSWIPrD7_ZI

CadillacSTS42005
01-11-08, 12:27 PM
may wanna take care of the SES light Black

I~LUV~Caddys8792
01-11-08, 12:31 PM
God that's quick, especially for that mileage!

BlackCaddy87
01-11-08, 12:37 PM
I have a wheel speed sensor issue

CadillacSTS42005
01-11-08, 12:38 PM
and thats throwing the SES?!?!??!
SES is emissions not abs or t/c

BlackCaddy87
01-11-08, 12:42 PM
code is po33
obd1

BlackCaddy87
01-11-08, 01:26 PM
That Z06 needed a better driver...no traction but still keeping up with you. Looks like he left pretty good once he hooked up. I've seen a NEW Z06 run a 14.8 at 102 just because he can't drive the damn thing, I've also seen a SRT-10 run a 15.2.

BlackCaddy87
01-11-08, 01:39 PM
I was watching some of the imports and a few of them have little rubber blocks between the coils on the rear. One of the guys had a modified srt-4 and he was getting some very impressive 60 ft times. The back of the car had no squat allowing for less weight transfer to the back. I was wondering if anybody has every done anything like this to their Cadillac. The back of my car drops like crazy during a launch.

AlBundy
01-11-08, 03:09 PM
Maybe you should disable the rear suspension compressor. The car will sit on its ass. I need to replace mine this weekend.

CadillacSTS42005
01-11-08, 03:34 PM
doing that would cause the car to squat more...
wouldnt i want to fill the shocks up as much as possible to keep the front end down?

AlBundy
01-11-08, 05:10 PM
Well yes if were talking aerodynamic but I thought he was concerned about the recoil of the rear bouncing up and down. If the rear is on the axle that problems solved.:D