: Petition to keep a Cadillac V8



CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:17 AM
So everyone knows by now that Cadillac is killing the V8 due to comparable V6 power.
Thats the dumbest reason EVER, dont they realize if they would provide some performance mod for the figgen Northstar then people would be able to boost it up?!?!?!?
I for one have NEVER owed a V6 and the way I go through cars, thats about 20 Cadillac in my lifetime I WONT buy as there is no V8 model!
Also we all know that GM and Cadillac monitors this site, so maybe with enough fight they will realize the error they are making and the HUGE market share they WILL lose and keep the V8.

GM displacements everything boys and a 5.6 L Northstar would def put some space between the 3.6 DI and the V8....

Signature #1 Jason Zytnick

Blackout
02-01-08, 11:26 AM
So everyone knows by now that Cadillac is killing the V8 due to comparable V6 power.
Thats the dumbest reason EVER, dont they realize if they would provide some performance mod for the figgen Northstar then people would be able to boost it up?!?!?!?
I for one have NEVER owed a V6 and the way I go through cars, thats about 20 Cadillac in my lifetime I WONT buy as there is no V8 model!
Also we all know that GM and Cadillac monitors this site, so maybe with enough fight they will realize the error they are making and the HUGE market share they WILL lose and keep the V8.

GM displacements everything boys and a 5.6 L Northstar would def put some space between the 3.6 DI and the V8....

Signature #1 Jason Zytnick

Have you seen the sales figures between the V8 models versus the V6 models? I can see as to why Cadillac would dump developing a new V8 because it's not worth it to them. As much as I like V8's as well I'm more then happy with going with a direct injection V6 because the motor weighs less so that will translate into better handling, braking, and gas mileage. And with the new CAFE standards starting in the not to distant future it wouldn't be in the companies best interests to do so seeing what kinda gas mileage their SUV's get

Blackout
02-01-08, 11:29 AM
Here's some info about the CAFE rules and how it's affecting GM


GM’s RWD future was looking rosy until the U.S. government decided to vote in favor of new CAFE rules, forcing carmakers to improve the average fuel economy of their fleets to 35mpg by 2020. We were teased with all manner of RWD, V8 powered muscle cars, including sedans, coupes, and even a sports wagon but now many of these cars have fallen off the radar.

Some of the cars will still arrive, such as the Pontiac G8 range, Chevrolet Camaro, and possibly a G8 Ute, however, others such as a new RWD Impala and a next-generation Holden Monaro/Pontiac GTO are unlikely to see the light of day anytime soon. “I think (the Monaro/Pontiac GTO) is gone for now,” GM product czar Bob Lutz told GoAuto at the recent Detroit Auto Show. “We’ve got nothing in the product plan right now like that. We’d like to have, but you can’t do everything.”

Lutz revealed that the plans were dropped because of GM’s need to downsize its range in order for it to meet the upcoming CAFE regulations. “In terms of fuel economy, that’s not the end of the market where we want to stimulate demand,” Lutz explained. “We have to find ways to stimulate demand and desirability in cars that will get us closer to the 35 MPG average.

Instead the future lies in the new ‘Alpha’ midsized platform as well as SUVs derived from car platforms rather than a truck-base chassis. However, Lutz was quick to point out that Alpha still hasn’t been given the green light and that officials are first waiting to see how the entire CAFE deal pans out. If given the go ahead, GM will once again call upon its Holden division in Australia to develop the new Alpha range.

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:32 AM
a 6 cyl will never have the torque and sound of a v8 PERIOD
DI a friggen Norhstar if you wanna talk about DI power...
end result theyll lose me and im sure alot of the V boys too

Blackout
02-01-08, 11:35 AM
a 6 cyl will never have the torque and sound of a v8 PERIOD
DI a friggen Norhstar if you wanna talk about DI power...
end result theyll lose me and im sure alot of the V boys too

Unfortunately Cadillac really has no say in the matter. Cadillac won't be the only automaker doing this either, you will be seeing everybody doing this as well. Ford has been preparing for this for awhile now and that's why they've been developing the twin force engines, still have performance but still have good gas mileage as well. But DI is supposed to help out with performance and gas mileage as well.

nickc50310
02-01-08, 11:36 AM
Jason does it make you sad to know that my V6 CTS will beat your V8 STS?? AHAHAHA! Just messin with ya buddy!

You got my signature for sure. Heres how the lineup should be (Ill use CTS as an example):
Base CTS: 255hp 3.6 or 305 hp DI3.6
Sport CTS: 360 to 400 hp Next gen northstar or SCed 3.6
CTS-V: Current 09 SCed 550+ LS setup

I also discuss it in depth in this thread: http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-news-concepts-future-models-rumors/127483-no-new-northstar-6.html#post1377227


Nick Carter

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 11:37 AM
the LSA will be in the V

they won't lose their V8 engine in the lineup maybe just in their basemodel cars

if you want to see what you can do with a V6 engine read up about ford's new eco-boost technology

the V8 is a reliable old dog, that may have just reached its time to be shot in the head for the average consumer.

if you can get the same power and the same type of specs with 25% higher gas milage who the hell cares how many cylinders you ahve

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:43 AM
Unfortunately Cadillac really has no say in the matter. Cadillac won't be the only automaker doing this either, you will be seeing everybody doing this as well. Ford has been preparing for this for awhile now and that's why they've been developing the twin force engines, still have performance but still have good gas mileage as well. But DI is supposed to help out with performance and gas mileage as well.

how did i know this was gonna take some pro Ford movement...

end result where theres a will theres a way

GM did it to the N* once they can do it again

Compressors lighten emissions

By Charles J. Murray, Senior Regional Technical Editor

Livonia, MI-General Motors engineers have developed a unique way to meet the auto industry's Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) standard. Using scroll compressors to blow air through the exhaust ports of Cadillac's Northstar engine, they quickly raise the temperature of the catalytic converter, thereby burning off most of the pollutants that would ordinarily leave the engine immediately after ignition.
The development is important for the industry because automakers must comply with new LEV standards nationwide by the 2001 model year. And the new standards are strict--calling for dramatic reductions, particularly of hydrocarbon emissions.

http://a330.g.akamai.net/7/330/2540/20011119191737/www.manufacturing.net/articles/images/DN/19991101/21n852a.gif Cadillac DeVille’s Northstar engine uses a Reaction Heated Catalyst that enables it to meet Low Emission Vehicle standards.

To meet the EPA requirements, GM engine designers concentrated on reducing emissions immediately after the car starts. "Virtually all hydrocarbons are emitted during startup," notes Al, resident product engineer for the Northstar and Aurora V8 engines. "Most conventional cars will fail the LEV test in the first 30 seconds."
GM engineers solved that problem, however, by installing two Bosch SLP2.2 scroll air compressors near the engine. The two scroll compressors--one for each of the V8 engine's cylinder banks--blow air through tubing that's connected to the engine's exhaust ports. "The two pumps blow about five times the amount of air you'd expect to see in a normal engine," Al says. Their purpose: To speed the flow of hot air through the exhaust manifold and across the three-foot distance to the catalytic converter.
The influx of hot air quickly "lights" the catalytic converter. "We see operating temperatures in about ten seconds that used to take us 90 seconds to achieve," Al says. The higher temperatures enable the catalyst to more effectively burn off pollutants.
The new EPA standard calls for vehicles to cut their hydrocarbon emissions from 0.25 grams/mile to 0.075 grams/mile--a reduction of about 70%. The standards are the same for all cars, large and small. Using the new technique, General Motors engineers say they easily meet the new standard on the 2000 Cadillac DeVille.

http://a330.g.akamai.net/7/330/2540/20011119191737/www.manufacturing.net/articles/images/DN/19991101/21n852.gif By blowing air from the engine’s exhaust port to the catalytic converter, engineers were able to ‘light’ the converter much faster, thereby reducing emissions.


GM engineers considered a number of alternatives before settling on the new system, which they call the Reaction Heated Catalyst. But other techniques were not as successful, they say. Moving the catalysts closer to the engine, which has been successful on a number of other automotive engines, caused a packaging problem. And electrically heated catalysts potentially added too much cost, weight, and complexity. Electrically heated catalysts, they say, would have been too great a drain on the battery and alternator. "The key is to pre-heat the catalyst," Al says. "But you want to do it in a way that's best for the overall vehicle."

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:48 AM
to EMT lets be serious
if i gave 2 shyts about fuel economy i wouldnt of bought 2 Northstars, id of bought a Civic
the N* in touring model are what led to the Vs
Cadillac keeps the Vs as a halo group there are not massive sales of them enough to support lac
if the base V8 goes you can bet your ass they Vs could be next on the chop block
and not everyone can afford a V, i can understand a mergeing of the STS and DTS however much i hate the idea, but they havent even tried offering a N* in a CTS, they are basing their view to kill the V8 based on LACK of sales between the N* and the 3.6 on the STS, which hasnt been selling in EITHER form much

Blackout
02-01-08, 11:53 AM
how did i know this was gonna take some pro Ford movement...lol I give up, it's called an example, if you've done any research on the next gen engines Ford has been working on the twin force engines for a couple of years now and the new Lincoln MKS is going to be the first vehicle to use a twin force engine in the 3.5 V6 which is supposed to have 350+ hp supposedly. The use of F/I has shown that it is the easiest way to improve gas mileage and I really haven't heard of any other company doing this. By the looks of it the new CAFE regulations could spell the end of the horsepower wars but who knows what the auto makers have up their sleeves.

Blackout
02-01-08, 11:55 AM
to EMT lets be serious
if i gave 2 shyts about fuel economy i wouldnt of bought 2 Northstars, id of bought a Civic
the N* in touring model are what led to the Vs
Cadillac keeps the Vs as a halo group there are not massive sales of them enough to support lac
if the base V8 goes you can bet your ass they Vs could be next on the chop block
and not everyone can afford a V, i can understand a mergeing of the STS and DTS however much i hate the idea, but they havent even tried offering a N* in a CTS, they are basing their view to kill the V8 based on LACK of sales between the N* and the 3.6 on the STS, which hasnt been selling in EITHER form much
OMG! EMT is pro Ford! Dude, you can whine and moan all you want but the fact of the matter is what you want to happen and what is going to happen are two different things. You can scream and yell at GM and Cadillac until your blue in the face but they can't bypass the gov't.

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 11:56 AM
I'm not pro anybody, i talked about a v6 engine that ford happened to be working on ... whooooopdee doooooo

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:57 AM
it happened in the 70s and 80s
sure itll happen again
but thats why we mod

i still wont own a V6 and this is a petition to keep this market segment alive in lac...
sign it if you agree dont if not, but to argue the benefits of a v6 over a v8 is pointless all the things you point out are reason that if i cared for, id buy a eco car...

Blackout
02-01-08, 11:59 AM
it happened in the 70s and 80s
sure itll happen again
but thats why we mod

i still wont own a V6 and this is a petition to keep this market segment alive in lac...
sign it if you agree dont if not, but to argue the benefits of a v6 over a v8 is pointless all the things you point out are reason that if i cared for, id buy a eco car...What don't you get about the CAFE regulations? Cadillac by 2020 the Cadillac lineup has to average of 35 mpg. A 5.6 liter N/A V8 would be the worst idea possible.

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 11:59 AM
they'll never kill the V series completely, they have a market segment to compete in.

M, AMG, and V if thats the market you want to run with you have to stay competative

the N* is ancient technology just like the LS blocks, things progress and move on. If they were able to give me 550hp in a turbo'd 6cyl in a V you can bet i'd buy it just as fast as a V8....i STILL want a supra

nickc50310
02-01-08, 11:59 AM
it happened in the 70s and 80s
sure itll happen again
but thats why we mod

i still wont own a V6 and this is a petition to keep this market segment alive in lac...
sign it if you agree dont if not, but to argue the benefits of a v6 over a v8 is pointless all the things you point out are reason that if i cared for, id buy a eco car...


Seriously man, your anti V6 garb is getting old. Cylinders is not the only thing that matters dude.

YOU ALMOST BOUGHT A 3.2L CTS!

Blackout
02-01-08, 12:00 PM
I'm not pro anybody, i talked about a v6 engine that ford happened to be working on ... whooooopdee doooooo

I know your not pro anybody either, it's just funny that I bring up the twin force series and I get flamed and you bring up Ford and nada.

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 12:00 PM
OMG! EMT is pro Ford! Dude, you can whine and moan all you want but the fact of the matter is what you want to happen and what is going to happen are two different things. You can scream and yell at GM and Cadillac until your blue in the face but they can't bypass the gov't.

last time i checked im not whining and im not moaning
i would be expressing an opinion
one that is much more valid than saying a Cobra is faster than a V
zing

that said im done arguing with you Blackout stop being abnacious and spew this banter somewhere else. all makers have pushed beyond what the govnt has set in the past and managed to keep a v8 and then come back with high powered v8s. the way you speak, lambo and ferrari can forget making cars anymore since their v12s will NEVER pass if a v8 cant....

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 12:02 PM
Seriously man, your anti V6 garb is getting old. Cylinders is not the only thing that matters dude.

YOU ALMOST BOUGHT A 3.2L CTS!

almost
and then why didnt i?
oh yea the fact it was slower than a N* and had even less of an aftermarket

im not totally anti v6, i love the Buick GN, but i am against slaughtering a v8 as an optional motor in a car...

Blackout
02-01-08, 12:02 PM
they'll never kill the V series completely, they have a market segment to compete in.

M, AMG, and V if thats the market you want to run with you have to stay competative

the N* is ancient technology just like the LS blocks, things progress and move on. If they were able to give me 550hp in a turbo'd 6cyl in a V you can bet i'd buy it just as fast as a V8....i STILL want a supra

If anything, if getting the whole lineup minus the V models and getting them to have great gas mileage would be in Cadillac's best interest. Then they could keep the V lineup with their V8's that get so-so gas mileage, as long as in the end it makes the average of the whole Cadillac lineup at 35 mpg. And the 2JZ is ftw!

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 12:06 PM
last time i checked im not whining and im not moaning
i would be expressing an opinion
one that is much more valid than saying a Cobra is faster than a V
zing

that said im done arguing with you Blackout stop being abnacious and spew this banter somewhere else. all makers have pushed beyond what the govnt has set in the past and managed to keep a v8 and then come back with high powered v8s. the way you speak, lambo and ferrari can forget making cars anymore since their v12s will NEVER pass if a v8 cant....

they don't have to meet CAFE....and you'll just have to pay a gas guzzler tax like you do now

nickc50310
02-01-08, 12:07 PM
almost
and then why didnt i?
oh yea the fact it was slower than a N* and had even less of an aftermarket

im not totally anti v6, i love the Buick GN, but i am against slaughtering a v8 as an optional motor in a car...

Agreed!

I am with you on this one, I dont want to see the N* go. As I said before I want a N* option to be in the 360 to 400hp range.

Blackout
02-01-08, 12:07 PM
last time i checked im not whining and im not moaninghave you read some of your posts in this thread?

i would be expressing an opinion
one that is much more valid than saying a Cobra is faster than a V
zingWell we can see as to how well you can back up your stance on this subject :rolleyes:


that said im done arguing with you Blackout stop being abnacious and spew this banter somewhere else.wtf dude. I'm posting up factual information that the gov't is making the auto industry do and now that is considered "banter". Sorry it doesn't agree with what you want it to be but the facts are the facts.

all makers have pushed beyond what the govnt has set in the past and managed to keep a v8 and then come back with high powered v8s. the way you speak, lambo and ferrari can forget making cars anymore since their v12s will NEVER pass if a v8 cant....They have done it in the past but there comes a point where you can only do so much with a V8. When it comes to emissions and gas mileage the more cylinders you have the worse off those numbers are going to be. If your going to argue that point then I can't wait to see as to what your going to say. As for the Lambo's and Ferrari's, I have no idea as to what is going to happen with them. I really haven't heard much from either one of those companies about this but as soon as I do you will be the first one to know

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 12:08 PM
did blackout say something?
i iggyed him anyone car to elaborate what he said?

i can argue with you guys back and forth all day but end result if you dont agree dont sign, if you do which MANY of us do then SIGN IT

i never even said it had to be a Northstar i said this is a petition to get a Cadillac V8 i didnt say keep the Cadillac Northstar...

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 12:15 PM
Agreed!

I am with you on this one, I dont want to see the N* go. As I said before I want a N* option to be in the 360 to 400hp range.

like i told him before the N* is old news, it was hot shit in the early 90's but now its just tired technology...

if it made power like a pushrod it would be awesome, but 300hp out of a motor that gets that type of gase milage, cmon!

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 12:16 PM
did blackout say something?
i iggyed him anyone car to elaborate what he said?

i can argue with you guys back and forth all day but end result if you dont agree dont sign, if you do which MANY of us do then SIGN IT

i never even said it had to be a Northstar i said this is a petition to get a Cadillac V8 i didnt say keep the Cadillac Northstar...

if i knew what the hell iggy'ed meant i might be able to answer because right now i'm laughing my ass off imagining you doing something "dirty" to him

Blackout
02-01-08, 12:19 PM
if i knew what the hell iggy'ed meant i might be able to answer because right now i'm laughing my ass off imagining you doing something "dirty" to him
:hmm:
http://www.louielouie.net/pix-2006/iggy-peanutbutter.png

nickc50310
02-01-08, 12:31 PM
like i told him before the N* is old news, it was hot shit in the early 90's but now its just tired technology...

if it made power like a pushrod it would be awesome, but 300hp out of a motor that gets that type of gase milage, cmon!


So a pushrod engine makes more power? Please excuse my noobishness.

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 12:35 PM
So a pushrod engine makes more power? Please excuse my noobishness.

well the LS series pushrod motors that are in the V and the vette, and the extinct F-bodies do

the LT motors were about on par

just to eliminate your noobishness the LS/LT series motors are basically smallblock 350's in fancy dress clothes, same technology used in the 60's and 70's

dkozloski
02-01-08, 12:45 PM
The CAFE standards don't mean that each and every model has to get 35MPG, just the average of the fleet. If Cadillac will make some crapbox scooters to offset the gas guzzlers the V8 will remain in the offerings. They're going to do what it takes to stay in business, first and foremost. Nothing says that they can't make a 2 liter DOHC V8.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-01-08, 12:48 PM
So a pushrod engine makes more power? Please excuse my noobishness.

Generally speaking, no. Most pushrod motors only have two valves per cylinder, most OHC engines have three or four, or in Audi/VW's case, five. More airflow means more power, which is why DOHC engines generally make more power (maybe not so much torque) as their OHV counterparts.


like i told him before the N* is old news, it was hot shit in the early 90's but now its just tired technology...

if it made power like a pushrod it would be awesome, but 300hp out of a motor that gets that type of gase milage, cmon!

Actually, when you think about it, the Northstar was way ahead of it's time in the '90s, especially in a luxury car, but development pretty much stopped right after it came out, and it was stuck at 300hp until ~05 or whenever they started putting them in RWD cars and upping the HP to 320. The SBC has been greatly updated since 1993. Hell, back then it was a "measly" 185 hp in TBI form, and 245hp in TPI form, then in '94 with the introduction of the LT-1, it was 260-300hp, then in '98 when the LS1 was introduced, it was 310-350 depending on application. By the time the LS6 was introduced in '03-04(?) it was up to 395-405 and was arguably the fastest american naturally aspirated engine. Now just think if the Northstar was updated as often and as thoroughly as the SBC was....then we'd be looking at some insane numbers!




the way you speak, lambo and ferrari can forget making cars anymore since their v12s will NEVER pass if a v8 cant....

Since you mentioned Ferrari/Lamborghini, I thought I'd throw this interesting tidbit in. Back during the fuel crisis days of the mid '70s, many of the cars Ferrari and Lamborghini made either weren't certified for sale in the US per the Government, or their importation amounts were strictly limited. I think mainly for fuel economy reasons.


What I think will happen in the future will be like what happened in the '70s and early '80s, but much more strict. People are more aware of the earth's limited resources, and the current dire straights were in, so they'll be more apt to help, and the governments will enforce much stricter regulations. We're already starting to see this, especially in the form of the EPA regulations for avg corporate MPG. The automakers will resort to high technologies to make cars that will pass regulations, and still offer stunning performance. Forced induction, less cylinders and much smaller displacements are a few technologies that come to mind.

Blackout
02-01-08, 12:49 PM
The CAFE standards don't mean that each and every model has to get 35MPG, just the average of the fleet. If Cadillac will make some crapbox scooters to offset the gas guzzlers the V8 will remain in the offerings. They're going to do what it takes to stay in business, first and foremost. Nothing says that they can't make a 2 liter DOHC V8.

See post #20. But a 2 liter V8 would be interesting to see in a production car, 14,000 rpm redline anyone? lol

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-01-08, 12:51 PM
Ferrari offered a 2.0L DOHC V8 in the european spec 308 in the late '70s and early '80s. In Naturally aspirated spec, it offered 170 hp, and in turbocharged form, it was up to 211.

Blackout
02-01-08, 12:53 PM
Ferrari offered a 2.0L DOHC V8 in the european spec 308 in the late '70s and early '80s. In Naturally aspirated spec, it offered 170 hp, and in turbocharged form, it was up to 211.
The problem was it didn't have VTEC. if they put some VTEC stickers on it it would have had 600 hp. Everybody knows VTEC stickers add 100 hp per sticker!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-01-08, 12:57 PM
Anyone remember that T-shirt that circulated around the internet and it said "wanna race from a roll?" and it had a picture of a 2JZ Supra's powerband on it? Yeah, that probably pretty much describes a DOHC 2.0L V8's powerband.

:histeric:

Blackout
02-01-08, 01:00 PM
Anyone remember that T-shirt that circulated around the internet and it said "wanna race from a roll?" and it had a picture of a 2JZ Supra's powerband on it? Yeah, that probably pretty much describes a DOHC 2.0L V8's powerband.

:histeric:

I remember seeing that shirt also. That was some funny ish

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 01:14 PM
Im all for Cadillac keeping a V8, but please start from scratch, not another Northstar.

dkozloski
02-01-08, 01:14 PM
This engine is 1.5L and produces 550HP. It was built in 1949.
http://www.billzilla.org/BRM-pushstart.mp3

dkozloski
02-01-08, 01:22 PM
Im all for Cadillac keeping a V8, but please start from scratch, not another Northstar.
To back up that statement you have to specifically point out the shortcomings and what needs to be changed to correct the problems. Change for the sake of change is BS. The adoption of VVT makes the Northstar one of the most technically advanced engines in the world. What would you do that would make it even better? The Northstar puts out phenominal power and there are many on the road with 300,000 miles or more. What more is there to get? Spending millions on developement to get a few percent more here and there doesn't make sense.

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 01:25 PM
To back up that statement you have to specifically point out the shortcomings and what needs to be changed to correct the problems. Change for the sake of change is BS.

You can't be serious...

I will give you this, the RWD Northstar was a vast improvement over the old one, but the design as a whole was very experimental in the beginning, and now that experiment is 15 years old. Its a powerful and great driving motor don't get me wrong (among the best 300HP V8s ever produced in terms of PERFORMANCE), but it is no LSx motor and its prior track record does not provide the basis to justify re-engineering it AGAIN for another X number of years. It was the first V8 casualty of CAFE standards for GM because there was nothing more that could be done with it reliably. Even the V's displacement was bumped down a notch to ensure reliability with supercharging. There are no current plans to phase out any LS V8 so in that sense your change argument is absolutely correct, there is no reason to change those, only improve them to meet regulations.

2002+ were the best years for the Northstar, but their longevity remains to be seen. We used to say the same about 2000+ and alot of 2000s are beginning to surface with problems similar to their older counterparts.

I agree with Jason 100 percent. Not having a V8 bread and butter Cadillac is a BAD move in my eyes, but a new design would probably provide more flexibility than the old one.

Blackout
02-01-08, 01:25 PM
To back up that statement you have to specifically point out the shortcomings and what needs to be changed to correct the problems. Change for the sake of change is BS. The adoption of VVT makes the Northstar one of the most technically advanced engines in the world. What would you do that would make it even better.

I agree, but you know how people are just never happy. People complain when platforms get too old or when an engine setup is too old, etc. But why fix it if it's not broken, but the N* does need to be replaced. It's had it's time but everybody else has caught up

dkozloski
02-01-08, 01:32 PM
You can't be serious...
Tell me what you would do to specifically improve the design. I'm serious. The bottom end is bulletproof. The lubrication system is troublefree. The cooling system will cool the engine at 100MPH with a 100MPH following wind on a 100deg.F day It produces over 100BHP/L in the STS-V. They last over 300,000 miles. What's left on the table to pick up? Nobody on the forum with a RWD V8 Northstar is reporting engine problems of any kind.

dkozloski
02-01-08, 01:46 PM
Good engine designs are forever. Look at the '55 small block Chevy. The 90deg V6 buicks have been around since the '60s. Engineers know what makes a good design and when you hit the sweet spot you stick with it. The only people pushing for change are the ignorant magazine writers that need a story line.

gothicaleigh
02-01-08, 01:46 PM
...but if they could provide a V6 with equal hp/tq numbers, equal or better fuel economy, and a smaller, lighter package, you would be against it simply because it was down 2 cylinders?

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 01:51 PM
I agree, but you know how people are just never happy. People complain when platforms get too old or when an engine setup is too old, etc. But why fix it if it's not broken, but the N* does need to be replaced. It's had it's time but everybody else has caught up

I'm not complaining, nor do I feel the need to replace something just because it's not the newest shiniest thing around, but in this case I would like to see GM engineer a new small block, small displacement V8 to combat the need to use V6's in EVERYTHING outside of the performance models.

BMW had a 3.0L V8 in the mid-90s that was spectacular outside of problems with Nikasil bores. I think with the "NEW" GM, the motivation is there to start over and produce something similar.

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 01:57 PM
...but if they could provide a V6 with equal hp/tq numbers, equal or better fuel economy, and a smaller, lighter package, you would be against it simply because it was down 2 cylinders?

There seems to be an inherent smoothness AND sound to a small block V8 that you can't quite get with a V6 or an inline 6. NOW dont get me wrong, the BMW inline sixes are probably in the 5 top motors EVER produced as far as Im concerned... but they blend nicely with a vehicle the size of the 3 Series, not the 7 Series.

Same goes for Cadillac, I think in the larger models you need to maintain a V8, even if only a small displacement one to maintain the experience of a large luxury sedan.

I'll give you a great example. Mercedes, BMW and Audi ALL market their flagship sedans in OTHER parts of the world with six cylinder powerplants, but EVERY SINGLE time they try to release one here to us ignorant yanks, it fails... EVEN when it has SIMILAR power to the V8!

In 2006 Mercedes attempted to put the 3.7L V6 into the W220 and market it as the S350. It sold SO poorly (so poorly in-fact most people have no idea such a car exists), the plan was abandoned for the W221, even though elsewhere it has it.

dkozloski
02-01-08, 02:04 PM
...but if they could provide a V6 with equal hp/tq numbers, equal or better fuel economy, and a smaller, lighter package, you would be against it simply because it was down 2 cylinders?
The amount of power that an engine of a given displacement can develope is directly dependent on the surface area of the tops of the pistons. The only way this can be increased in a practical manner is by increasing the number of cylinders. Otherwise you would have one huge piston and the stroke would be little more than a vibration. The choice of the number of cylinders in an engine is not the arbitrary result of a committee meeting but is careful balancing of engineering principles.

gothicaleigh
02-01-08, 02:29 PM
...but if they could provide a V6 with equal hp/tq numbers, equal or better fuel economy, and a smaller, lighter package, you would be against it simply because it was down 2 cylinders?


The amount of power that an engine of a given displacement can develope is directly dependent on the surface area of the tops of the pistons. The only way this can be increased in a practical manner is by increasing the number of cylinders. Otherwise you would have one huge piston and the stroke would be little more than a vibration. The choice of the number of cylinders in an engine is not the arbitrary result of a committee meeting but is careful balancing of engineering principles.

That really does not answer the question I posed, unless you are claiming that it can not be done.

All other things being in the 6 cylinder's favor, you would still choose the V8 simply because it carries 2 more cylinders?

urbanski
02-01-08, 02:35 PM
...but if they could provide a V6 with equal hp/tq numbers, equal or better fuel economy, and a smaller, lighter package, you would be against it simply because it was down 2 cylinders?

porsche 997 C2S :cloud9:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-01-08, 02:44 PM
All other things being in the 6 cylinder's favor, you would still choose the V8 simply because it carries 2 more cylinders?

For me, no. There are many six cylinders that create comperable power to a V8, while having better fuel economy and still having good enough performance. Two great examples of these are the Supercharged 3800, and the Twin Turbo BMW Straight Six. In a car that's roughly the same size as an STS, if not a big lighter (Regal GS/GTP), the Supercharged 3800 creates it so the car is almost as quick as the Northstar, while it's able to get 20mpg in city, and around 28-30 on the highway....very good!

The new 3.0 TT I-6 makes 300hp, and 300 lb/ft....numbers that beat the BMW 4.4L V8 from 5-10 years ago, atleast in HP. But those are rated at 20/30, and they can rush the 335i from 0-60 in 4.8 seconds.


I dunno, I'm just a big fan of good quality six cylinders. V8's are nice and all, but after owning two cars with big pushrod V8's, I wanted something a little smaller and more fuel efficent. I used to be a V-8 diehard though, so I can understand how a lot of you feel.

dkozloski
02-01-08, 02:44 PM
That really does not answer the question I posed, unless you are claiming that it can not be done.

All other things being in the 6 cylinder's favor, you would still choose the V8 simply because it carries 2 more cylinders?
Science says that the V8 will win out over the V6 and it can never be resolved in the V6's favor except on the matter of cost. The more cylinders the more power. It's as simple as that. If you find some secret to pep up the V6 it will work even better in a V8. It boils down to parts count and complexity.

illumina
02-01-08, 03:19 PM
For me, I will probably never go back to an 8 cylinder as a daily driver. The cost to fuel a V8 for everyday use is prohibitive and I don't have the need to use 8 cylinder power everyday. My 6 cylinder Buick gets me around just fine, and like Chad has stated, the GM 3800 is more than enough for daily use.

That said, I still own a few 8 cylinder cars, one which has enough power to satisfy my speed-demon cravings, just not for everyday use.

dkozloski
02-01-08, 03:45 PM
For me, I will probably never go back to an 8 cylinder as a daily driver. The cost to fuel a V8 for everyday use is prohibitive and I don't have the need to use 8 cylinder power everyday. My 6 cylinder Buick gets me around just fine, and like Chad has stated, the GM 3800 is more than enough for daily use.

That said, I still own a few 8 cylinder cars, one which has enough power to satisfy my speed-demon cravings, just not for everyday use.
The V6 Buick was a magnificent achievement. Buick pulled out of NASCAR racing when the were denied the ability to race against V8s with it. The fastest lap turned on a superspeedway in the restrictor plate era was turned by a Busch series V6 Buick. This is a kind of skewed case because a V8 trying to breathe through a restrictor plate is not as efficient as a smaller v6 doing the same thing because of reduced pumping losses.

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 04:13 PM
That really does not answer the question I posed, unless you are claiming that it can not be done.

All other things being in the 6 cylinder's favor, you would still choose the V8 simply because it carries 2 more cylinders?

anything with 6 cyls could then be done to an 8 cyls and produce more power

on a side note iggy means IGNORE
ie blocked viewing his responses...

as for 3800 GTP vs a N*, lets be realistic here, stick a S/C on a N* (ie 443 HP in the XLR-V or 469 HP in the STS-V) and theres just no competition, i think thats more of a fair comparison (given the fact the N* does have 2 additional cyls) than comparing an S/C to an N/A

and finally i never said the engine had to be a high tech DOHC or a true N* variant, a simple V8 period would be nice, they have alot better response, better torque and hp curves and don't need an expensive part as an S/C (which is a VERY expensive and a somewhat common problem on the GTP and SSEI).

Blackout
02-01-08, 04:55 PM
For me, no. There are many six cylinders that create comperable power to a V8, while having better fuel economy and still having good enough performance. Two great examples of these are the Supercharged 3800, and the Twin Turbo BMW Straight Six. In a car that's roughly the same size as an STS, if not a big lighter (Regal GS/GTP), the Supercharged 3800 creates it so the car is almost as quick as the Northstar, while it's able to get 20mpg in city, and around 28-30 on the highway....very good!

The new 3.0 TT I-6 makes 300hp, and 300 lb/ft....numbers that beat the BMW 4.4L V8 from 5-10 years ago, atleast in HP. But those are rated at 20/30, and they can rush the 335i from 0-60 in 4.8 seconds.


I dunno, I'm just a big fan of good quality six cylinders. V8's are nice and all, but after owning two cars with big pushrod V8's, I wanted something a little smaller and more fuel efficent. I used to be a V-8 diehard though, so I can understand how a lot of you feel.

Speaking of the 335i I can't wait to see the 135i. That's going to be a friggin rocket!

Blackout
02-01-08, 05:01 PM
on a side note iggy means IGNORE
ie blocked viewing his responses...http://www.bbc.co.uk/parenting/images/300/baby_crying_closeup.jpg


as for 3800 GTP vs a N*, lets be realistic here, stick a S/C on a N* (ie 443 HP in the XLR-V or 469 HP in the STS-V) and theres just no competition, i think thats more of a fair comparison (given the fact the N* does have 2 additional cyls) than comparing an S/C to an N/AIn the words of Dr. Evil, rrrrrrrrrrrright


and finally i never said the engine had to be a high tech DOHC or a true N* variant, a simple V8 period would be nice, they have alot better response, better torque and hp curves and don't need an expensive part as an S/C (which is a VERY expensive and a somewhat common problem on the GTP and SSEI).GM doesn't have any other V8's other then the LS series unless you wanna throw a truck engine in there. Once the N* goes thats all they have left for V8's. Like I said many times in this thread, it's not in Cadillac's best interest to make a V8 when the sales figures for the V8's wasn't anything amazing to begin with compared to the V6 models

Destroyer
02-01-08, 05:27 PM
Tell me what you would do to specifically improve the design. I'm serious. The bottom end is bulletproof. The lubrication system is troublefree. The cooling system will cool the engine at 100MPH with a 100MPH following wind on a 100deg.F day It produces over 100BHP/L in the STS-V. They last over 300,000 miles. What's left on the table to pick up? Nobody on the forum with a RWD V8 Northstar is reporting engine problems of any kind.They last over 300k miles?........you mean the car after like 3-5 engine changes or "timeserts" right?. C'mon, there are reliable cars out there but the N* Caddies aint it. Oh I'm sure the stars lined up just right for a few and there may be a few out there that made it to 300k (very few) but to call this a common occurence is just WRONG!. Who gives a rats behind if the bottom end is bulletproof or that the cooling system will cool the engine at blah blah blah when your stuck on the road at 260 degrees overheated staring at a $4k repair?.

Blackout
02-01-08, 05:30 PM
They last over 300k miles?........you mean the car after like 3-5 engine changes or "timeserts" right?. C'mon, there are reliable cars out there but the N* Caddies aint it. Oh I'm sure the stars lined up just right for a few and there may be a few out there that made it to 300k (very few) but to call this a common occurence is just WRONG!. Who gives a rats behind if the bottom end is bulletproof or that the cooling system will cool the engine at blah blah blah when your stuck on the road at 260 degrees overheated staring at a $4k repair?.
Blown head gaskets ftl

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 05:37 PM
They last over 300k miles?........you mean the car after like 3-5 engine changes or "timeserts" right?. C'mon, there are reliable cars out there but the N* Caddies aint it. Oh I'm sure the stars lined up just right for a few and there may be a few out there that made it to 300k (very few) but to call this a common occurence is just WRONG!. Who gives a rats behind if the bottom end is bulletproof or that the cooling system will cool the engine at blah blah blah when your stuck on the road at 260 degrees overheated staring at a $4k repair?.

I was about to say, it's not the bottom end of those motors that anyone ever had a problem with, it's everything on top, INCLUDING the cooling system that is revolutionary when it's working, but costs as much as some OTHER ENTIRE motors to fix when it breaks.

Because I like DK though, I will say fair is fair, and I did read that the cooling system in the RWD Northstar is 80 percent new. However there is no 2004 Northstar out there with 300k miles and with so many problems in the past, I simply see no reason to keep plodding along with the same old basic architecture. The 4.6L Ford is just as old if not older and I'd never recommend dumping that one. If there is one thing Ford actually got RIGHT in the past 20 years, it was their corporate V8.

I'm sure Jason will eat me alive for my opinion, but at least me and Jason do agree that a V8 should stay :)

RunningOnEMT
02-01-08, 05:54 PM
The CAFE standards don't mean that each and every model has to get 35MPG, just the average of the fleet. If Cadillac will make some crapbox scooters to offset the gas guzzlers the V8 will remain in the offerings. They're going to do what it takes to stay in business, first and foremost. Nothing says that they can't make a 2 liter DOHC V8.

the way i wrote that it sounds like i was saying each model had to be 35mpg

but what i meant was that when they take the fuel economy for say the CTS, they'd average all the drivetrains together

dkozloski
02-01-08, 07:14 PM
The head gasket issue was fixed seven years ago. The Northstar forum poll shows no failures at all for 2003 and newer cars.

Some good stories here. http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/northstar-performance-technical-discussion/3521-high-mileage-northstar-thread-who-can.html?highlight=high+milage

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 07:29 PM
the 02 failure ironically was Play

DopeStar 156
02-01-08, 08:45 PM
I don't wanna see a V6 Escalade......

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 09:13 PM
the 02 failure ironically was Play

No, it was a 2001. Some as$hole got in there and started posting failures for every year when that thread started in the Seville forum. However, a couple of years ago we did have a guy with a Crimson pearl 2002 STS who had a failure at just 40k. That's the only '02 I know anything about.

And for the 2000-03 cars I would say a more correct term would be "alleviated" than "fixed", because not a whole hell of alot changed. Now we're starting to see more of the 2000 cars, especially Devilles. This falls just about in line with the time we started seeing failures for each year before that.

The RWD cars can probably be called "fixed".

ANYWAY, Im not here to argue the reliability history of the Northstar. My original point was that I would like to see what GM can do TODAY for a new generation V8, preferrably another DOHC design in a small displacement, fuel efficient package. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like there are any plans for any V8 development right now.

tomm
02-01-08, 09:19 PM
What can you do... Its all on the consumer not Cadillac... If the sales were there they would never stop it. For the STS.. 2005--->2007 there was a difference of around $10k for the V6 to V8.. There was a difference in HP of around 65HP... Look at 2008 and the new V6... V6 is 302 HP, V8 320... Who would pay so much more for 18HP... Apparently not many.

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 09:22 PM
HP sells cars
Torque wins races
-Shelby

the 3.6 may almost= the N* in power
it cant touch it in torque though

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 09:23 PM
that right
was an 01 SLS correct?
devilles are going to be more common for failures just because there are more of them around


No, it was a 2001. Some as$hole got in there and started posting failures for every year when that thread started in the Seville forum. However, a couple of years ago we did have a guy with a Crimson pearl 2002 STS who had a failure at just 40k. That's the only '02 I know anything about.

And for the 2000-03 cars I would say a more correct term would be "alleviated" than "fixed", because not a whole hell of alot changed. Now we're starting to see more of the 2000 cars, especially Devilles. This falls just about in line with the time we started seeing failures for each year before that.

The RWD cars can probably be called "fixed".

ANYWAY, Im not here to argue the reliability history of the Northstar. My original point was that I would like to see what GM can do TODAY for a new generation V8, preferrably another DOHC design in a small displacement, fuel efficient package. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like there are any plans for any V8 development right now.

AJxtcman
02-01-08, 09:24 PM
So everyone knows by now that Cadillac is killing the V8 due to comparable V6 power.
Thats the dumbest reason EVER, dont they realize if they would provide some performance mod for the figgen Northstar then people would be able to boost it up?!?!?!?
I for one have NEVER owed a V6 and the way I go through cars, thats about 20 Cadillac in my lifetime I WONT buy as there is no V8 model!
Also we all know that GM and Cadillac monitors this site, so maybe with enough fight they will realize the error they are making and the HUGE market share they WILL lose and keep the V8.

GM displacements everything boys and a 5.6 L Northstar would def put some space between the 3.6 DI and the V8....

Signature #1 Jason Zytnick

First off shame on all of you ignorate bastured!
I started a thread about CAFE.
http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-forums-lounge-member-introductions/112935-cafe.html?highlight=cafe

Next Please kill off the V8. We are in a horse power war currently. Think about that.
We have a 300 hp V6.
Hyundai have a new v8 coming out that has more hp than a Northstar.

Please kill of the V8 for a V10, V12, v14 and active fuel management:D

Playdrv4me
02-01-08, 09:25 PM
that right
was an 01 SLS correct?
devilles are going to be more common for failures just because there are more of them around

Correct, 2001 SLS. It got fixed and every so often I still see her driving around Tampa today. It's been a year or two since I saw it last.

AJxtcman
02-01-08, 09:39 PM
OK GM suprised the world with the Northstar. Well kind of. What will be the next suprise?




I posted this on another forum, but this is a good time to post it here.

GM is making and selling big HP engines and very sa-wheat inovations.
Take a look
“"Smart" Surrogates” segment #2 (http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1121/2?play)

“"Smart" Surrogates” segment #3 (http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1121/3?play)

so now think about the V12. If you did not watch that tuff keep your V8 Bro Ham.

AJxtcman
02-01-08, 09:50 PM
OMG did you see that spring?

OMG did you see that spring a second time?


OMG was that plastic or paper?

What did Dr. Alan Taub mean about 2nd generation?

WOW low cost. hmmmmmmmmm:histeric:

that rear spoiler is sick.:bonkers: WOW is that fast.

how do we open and close valve today?
Yeah kill tha V8 and give me a V20.

tomm
02-01-08, 09:54 PM
HP sells cars
Torque wins races
-Shelby

the 3.6 may almost= the N* in power
it cant touch it in torque though

Even so is it worth $10,000 difference?

AMGoff
02-01-08, 10:02 PM
Too funny, I was just in the middle of writing an article about this very same nonsense. Since when has it been said that Cadillac is dropping V8s... oh wait, they haven't. Since this has already been covered elsewhere in the forums, I'll just say what I said there...

There's absolutely no reason to jump to the conclusion that this spells out the death of V8s in Cadillacs, only the end of an unnecessarily complicated, expensive to manufacture, DOHC V8... and it won't be the end of the world either. GM isn't so obtuse as to drop V8+ engines from their luxury car division... they've come too far with what can be described as the nothing less than stellar renaissance that has swept through the brand. They've still got their eye on the ball, they're still gunning for the Germans, and they know that if they're going to be taken seriously as a word-class luxury carmaker, they need to have V8 and/or bigger engines in their offerings.

With that said... just like any of the competition, the vast majority of buyers are going to opt for a V6. So it makes sense that they should focus a good deal of their resources on making world-class six-cylinder engines, which is exactly what they've been doing. Does anyone honestly think it would make any sense for the company to dump millions upon millions of dollars on a new "advanced" DOHC engine that will only see use in a small number of vehicles? It would be a complete waste - something GM has been trying desperately to cut down on.

With that aside, GM knows how to make fantastic V8 engines.. they've been doing so for 94 years, and their current crop are the lightest, most potent, most efficient ones in the company's fabled history - the current LS line. I just don't see why some people find pushrods to be so offensive, they do their job and they do them well. It makes much more sense, from a financial standpoint, from production standpoint, and most importantly from a power stand point for GM to further adapt and further utilize the exceptional LS V8s they already have at their disposal. I know that I at least will feel no less special nor will I feel the car is no less luxurious simply because it has a pushrod motor under the hood. The fact remains, the Northstar is long in the tooth and is more of liability for Cadillac than an asset. The sooner they put it out to pasture the better... there's a GenIV LS suited for every need and I'd love for Cadillac to fully utilize the entire range - from the 5.3 all the way up to the monster 7.0. If done, Cadillac could very well have the most comprehensive lineup of V8 powerplants out of the entire luxury market.

However, the biggest reason why it makes the most sense for GM to stop putzing around with a Northstar replacement might very well come down to their much rumored and much needed flagship DTS/STS replacement. A subsequent product of focusing such effort on their high-feature V6s is the very real possibility of finally getting a V12. By taking the time to develop a truly world-class V6, they've laid the foundation for making a truly world-class V12. It will be much easier for GM to slap two of those puppies together then it will to develop a new V8, and they'll be able to skirt around Mr. Bush's new CAFE standards by using their already developed technologies - cylinder deactivation, direct injection, vvt, etc...

They already have perfectly good V8s at their disposal, so why reinvent the wheel? I truly believe that Cadillac is bent on recapturing their place as "the Standard of the World," and because of which I think they're finally starting to think outside the box. So while many of you may see the somehow-unfortunate demise of what is a largely unnecessary engine, I see number of possibilities, fantastic opportunities, and a really bright future for America's greatest automotive brand.

There was a Cadillac before the Northstar and there will be a Cadillac after the Northstar - and all signs point to an arguably better one.

AJxtcman
02-01-08, 10:08 PM
Too funny

There was a Cadillac before the Northstar and there will be a Cadillac after the Northstar - and all signs point to an arguably better one.

Yeah they called it the 4100. we have it back now. It is called the 3.6L:histeric: aka the 4100. I hope it grows also:histeric:

dkozloski
02-01-08, 10:18 PM
As far as engine designs go, the Northstar is barely middle aged. A 20 year or more lifespan for an engine series is pretty common. Current Ford pushrod engines date to the middle 60s. The GM V6 3800 appeared about the same time. GM gave it to Willys and bought it back. It's still very popular and is the most prolific marine engine in the world. I ask again; what is there to be changed in a Northstar? It is a solid trouble free engine. It took some developement to get the bugs out and now GM can sit back and reap the benefits of their persistance. Change for the sake of change in engine design is nonsense. Classic efforts like the small block Chevy go on forever.

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 10:22 PM
Goff imho your opinion doesnt matter
your the one who says 25 hp doesnt matter between the Y and 9 so an 18 HP difference obviously means nothing to you even though in this case the N* which your dogging actually has the greater torque which your "wanted" from your SLS...


AJ sry didnt see you started this already but a V10 or even a V12 will be priced WAY to high for me

V8 is where they need to stay imho

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 10:25 PM
Even so is it worth $10,000 difference?

to me yes, id rather pay 10K more for a V8 your missing one thing though that 10K upgrade gets you ALOT more features than that base model V6 that your comparing it to, its not 10K alone for an engine upgrade...

dkozloski
02-01-08, 10:34 PM
Changing basic engine design is no simple deal. Designing and building the tooling and production facilities cost 100s of millions of dollars. You have to start at the foundry, through all the machine tools, sub suppliers, nuts and bolts plus all the fuel systems and electronics. All this stuff has to be tested and validated. Somebody has to pay for all this. It'll be years before Cadilac has the Northstar fully amortized. The engine would already have to have been running for years. The tooling would have to have been being delivered years ago as well. There'd be factories being built. Hell it's still just a dream.

AMGoff
02-01-08, 10:34 PM
Your opinions are neither humble and matter just as little as everyone elses.

There will always be V8s offered in Cadillacs and no one, especially GM really cares if you dislike the kind of V8 they'll choose to put in it.

Arguing that point is about as useful as questioning why the sky is blue.

If the idea is that horrendous then I'd suggest you start compiling a list of your local car dealers... because in a couple years that's the only place you'll find a Northstar.


Goff imho your opinion doesnt matter
your the one who says 25 hp doesnt matter between the Y and 9 so an 18 HP difference obviously means nothing to you even though in this case the N* which your dogging actually has the greater torque which your "wanted" from your SLS...


AJ sry didnt see you started this already but a V10 or even a V12 will be priced WAY to high for me

V8 is where they need to stay imho

AJxtcman
02-01-08, 10:52 PM
can yo name any year that F.O.R.D did not ofer a V8 in a Muskrat?

Oh yeah they didn't offer it one year and you thought that would never have happened.:sneaky:

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:29 PM
and didnt it tank during that year?
didnt they also make a smaller 6 and 4 cyl variant that tanked as well?

CadillacSTS42005
02-01-08, 11:32 PM
"Your opinions are neither humble and matter just as little as everyone elses.

There will always be V8s offered in Cadillacs and no one, especially GM really cares if you dislike the kind of V8 they'll choose to put in it.

Arguing that point is about as useful as questioning why the sky is blue.

If the idea is that horrendous then I'd suggest you start compiling a list of your local car dealers... because in a couple years that's the only place you'll find a Northstar"





did you read ANY of this thread before you spewed your complete nonsense?
when did i ever state in what form i wanted the V8 in, i said i just want one to be

Goff do me a favor if you see a thread by me, please dont the vastless internet by posting in it..
thanks!

illumina
02-01-08, 11:43 PM
Alright, my personal feelings on this matter is that yes, Cadillac should retain the V8 in their lineup, especially with the V models. But truth be told, like many have said including myself, a mass produced 8 cylinder car isn't fitting with the times that are coming up. Haven't you people heard the phrase "green is universal"? As sick as I am of hearing crap like that, this has become the generally accepted idea of society, and guess what? People are buying into it, and one way or another, it will and has affected the auto industry. This is something that we have to deal with.

As for the usual displacement argument, I agree with the hotrodders in that there is no real replacement for displacement. Any technology that can be applied to a 6 cylinder can, will, and has been applied to an 8 cylinder. But back to who wants what for everyday use, with fuel economy and emissions, an 8 cylinder isn't the most practical application for the everyday auto buyer.

That said, I agree with those who said that Cadillac hasn't stated that they're ditching the V8 all together. But for their everyday lineup for the average consumer, well, business is business, and if they have to go for the V6 in their lineup to sell cars quickly and in high numbers, then please tell me how that is stupid business...

AMGoff
02-02-08, 12:00 AM
Then you might want to do the tiniest bit of research before you start nonsense threads to begin with.

When and where has it been said that Cadillac was dropping V8s from their lineup?

All that has been said is that development of their new DOHC V8 has been cancelled... that's all... nothing more nothing less. So I really can't understand where this is coming from.

You really need to get that attitude of yours in check pal... because the "young punk with a chip on his shoulder" thing is wearing pretty thin... and if you can't, may I suggest starting your own site.

I'm allowed to comment wherever I like on here... especially when I see things that make no sense whatsoever. So unless you can prove that Cadillac is indeed dropping V8s from their lineup, you should be very careful of who you tell to keep their facts straight.... especially when the only person you've done so with is me. Because again, by your own logic - this thread should have never been started since the entire premise of it is moot.

The new DOHC is has been cancelled, the Northstar is slated to be dropped... that's it. Those two things in and of themselves do not mean, by any stretch of the imagination that Cadillac is dropping V8s all together, just twin-cam V8s.

I'm getting really tired of ill-mannered children with bad dispositions.

gary88
02-02-08, 12:12 AM
Ferrari has already started addressing this issue

http://www.stuff.co.nz/images/695328.jpg

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-02-08, 12:53 AM
You know the times are tough when you see Ferrari making hybrids. LOL!

eldorado99
02-02-08, 01:58 AM
I don't think we will see Cadillac totally eliminating all V8s. They may simply become less common, because there isn't the demand that there used to be for a 4-door sedan with a V8. If there are people who want V8s in their Cadillacs and are willing to pay for them (which there are, however few in number) then Cadillac will sell a car with a V8 in it. It really is that simple.

BigJon
02-02-08, 02:34 AM
i am with jason on this V8 sorry u cant make a v6 sound or drive like a v8 no matter what you do v8 is like a history for the lac why just not make it any more they should still offer it not just give up all togather

joee5
02-02-08, 06:10 AM
Keep The 8's.

urbanski
02-02-08, 06:55 AM
Muskrat?



:worship:

urbanski
02-02-08, 06:56 AM
Then you might want to do the tiniest bit of research before you start nonsense threads to begin with.

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-news-concepts-future-models-rumors/127483-no-new-northstar.html

Florian
02-02-08, 02:21 PM
stop being abnacious

whut>? :nono:


F

Submariner409
02-02-08, 02:31 PM
:alchi:That's exhaustpipese for supercalafragilisticexpialidocious.

(or absolutely namely pugnacious)(obnoxious)

thebigjimsho
02-02-08, 02:32 PM
So everyone knows by now that Cadillac is killing the V8 due to comparable V6 power.
Thats the dumbest reason EVER, dont they realize if they would provide some performance mod for the figgen Northstar then people would be able to boost it up?!?!?!?
I for one have NEVER owed a V6 and the way I go through cars, thats about 20 Cadillac in my lifetime I WONT buy as there is no V8 model!
Also we all know that GM and Cadillac monitors this site, so maybe with enough fight they will realize the error they are making and the HUGE market share they WILL lose and keep the V8.

GM displacements everything boys and a 5.6 L Northstar would def put some space between the 3.6 DI and the V8....

Signature #1 Jason ZytnickYour last name is Zytnick?:histeric:

Let's hope Nik keeps here last name...Nik Zytnick???

Submariner409
02-02-08, 02:39 PM
I want the silver puppy in post #85.........don't give a damn if it does run on 3,000 Panasonic AA batteries.

My idea of green is dyed concrete on the burnout pad.

gary88
02-02-08, 02:48 PM
6goBE0gUT6g

hueterm
02-02-08, 03:10 PM
I've never driven one of the LS engines, so I don't know how they compare to a N*. However, I have a N* and a 3800 S/C, and if for nothing else, the sound of the V8 is enough to make me prefer it to the S/C V6... Not to mention how it drives.

thebigjimsho
02-02-08, 03:11 PM
You know the times are tough when you see Ferrari making hybrids. LOL!Not hybrids, alternate fuels...

thebigjimsho
02-02-08, 03:20 PM
Sorry, but this petition thing is the fruit of ignorance.

Cadillac ditched the new V8 for a reason. The current N* isn't selling well next to the DI V6. And bottom line: CAFE makes it a bitch. Balance is SOOOO important. Automakers have huge sellers in large sedans and SUVs. In order to sell those, they MUST sell smaller cars and hybrids as well to meet the new CAFE standards. If they don't, then they can not sell the larger fuel-burners, period.

For anyone who went to NAIAS, you'd see just how much GM is investing in hybrids and different hybrid type charging systems. You'll see a hybrid type system on almost every GM vehicle within the next few years. Such will include much larger alternators and battery packs on conventional engines. Much of the displays were geared to going green.

Why? Because they want to improve their image? To a point, yes. But more importantly, if they can sell these vehicles, then they can sell the G8 GT, the V series, the Vette and the large selection of trucks.

This petition will only tell GM that there are people that don't fully understand the future regulations. They already know there are a select few that want the engine. And they know you won't pay massive gas-guzzler taxes for it.

AMGoff
02-02-08, 04:29 PM
Sorry, but this petition thing is the fruit of ignorance.

Cadillac ditched the new V8 for a reason. The current N* isn't selling well next to the DI V6. And bottom line: CAFE makes it a bitch. Balance is SOOOO important. Automakers have huge sellers in large sedans and SUVs. In order to sell those, they MUST sell smaller cars and hybrids as well to meet the new CAFE standards. If they don't, then they can not sell the larger fuel-burners, period.

For anyone who went to NAIAS, you'd see just how much GM is investing in hybrids and different hybrid type charging systems. You'll see a hybrid type system on almost every GM vehicle within the next few years. Such will include much larger alternators and battery packs on conventional engines. Much of the displays were geared to going green.

Why? Because they want to improve their image? To a point, yes. But more importantly, if they can sell these vehicles, then they can sell the G8 GT, the V series, the Vette and the large selection of trucks.

This petition will only tell GM that there are people that don't fully understand the future regulations. They already know there are a select few that want the engine. And they know you won't pay massive gas-guzzler taxes for it.

Goodness... the only thing scarier than you making sense is when you do so while I'm in agreement with such. :yup:

Goes to show that pigs do fly every now and then!

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-02-08, 04:44 PM
Adam, what happened with the Seville? I, along with others on here, am curious.

AMGoff
02-02-08, 05:30 PM
Adam, what happened with the Seville? I, along with others on here, am curious.

I'll PM you... I'm not even going to bother going into it on the boards - not after the hogwash that happened before, and especially not in this thread.

urbanski
02-02-08, 05:50 PM
I'll PM you... I'm not even going to bother going into it on the boards - not after the hogwash that happened before, and especially not in this thread.

aw come on

dkozloski
02-02-08, 05:56 PM
Don't forget to mention the GEICO squirrels.

gothicaleigh
02-02-08, 06:09 PM
Don't forget to mention the GEICO squirrels.

...if only he had an STS. :(









:duck: I kid, I kid...

Destroyer
02-02-08, 10:57 PM
This "petition" isn't going as planned is it?. I AM a Cadillac fanatic and I think Cadillacs SHOULD have V8's but NOT the N*. RWD w/LSx motors is key here. Sure I'd like to see Caddy make a real V8 like they used too a long time ago but the general does have a great motor in the LS series, even the 5.3 would suffice. Aside from the fable 472's and 500's Caddy really doesn't have many good V8's.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-02-08, 11:02 PM
Cadillac needs a DOHC V8 to keep up with the imports. An LSx motor is a good motor, but they need DOHC, whether or not it's a Northstar.

93DevilleUSMC
02-02-08, 11:14 PM
Just because a V-8 is traditionally included in Cadillac's base sedans, doesn't mean that it should continue to be. The fact is that the northstar is old and needs to be retired. It's done it's job since 1992. This is 2008. While change for the sake of change is ill-advised, adherence to tradition or tradition's sake is hardly acceptable, especially from a brand with such a history of innovation as possessed by Cadillac.

To echo destroyer's post, the northstar is hardly as reliable as the LS-series V-8, or even the preceeding 4.5 and 4.9 engines. Now, while I have seen almost weekly threads on Northstar head gasket failure, I haven't seen that many failure reports on the 4.5 and 4.9s, and none on the LS V-8s used in the CTS-Vs.

The DI V-6 is the future of Cadillac, and represents the kind of power and fuel economy that cadillac should have been giving it's customers the entire time.

This whole northstar/ head gasket conundrum should have never existed.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-02-08, 11:15 PM
^ The most coherent post in this entire thread.

Destroyer
02-02-08, 11:59 PM
Cadillac needs a DOHC V8 to keep up with the imports. An LSx motor is a good motor, but they need DOHC, whether or not it's a Northstar.I dont agree. The LSx motors not only make more torque but they have better upper range power, DOHC or not. Lets put technology aside, the LSx motors simply work better, are more powerful all across the power range and are more reliable. Years from now there will be classics and there will be cars that nobody remembers or wants to remember. A RWD Caddy with LSx power like the CTS V will be collected, restored and be worth something whereas anything FWD with a Northstar will be forgotten or remembered in a bad way.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 12:12 AM
So far the RWD Northstars are bulletproof. Sixteen years is a short life for an engine series. Flathead Fords went for thirty years. Six Cylinder Chevies for thirty. There are current Ford and Mopar engines that have been around for forty years. When you've got something good and the toolings paid for you keep it.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 02:12 AM
^ The most coherent post in this entire thread.

Thank you.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 02:14 AM
So far the RWD Northstars are bulletproof. Sixteen years is a short life for an engine series. Flathead Fords went for thirty years. Six Cylinder Chevies for thirty. There are current Ford and Mopar engines that have been around for forty years. When you've got something good and the toolings paid for you keep it.

Those Ford and Mopar engines were dependable designs which performed their assigned tasks well, hence their longevity.

When something isn't selling as much as it used to and is going to cost you both sales and ridiculous government fees, you ditch it.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 04:07 AM
Those Ford and Mopar engines were dependable designs which performed their assigned tasks well, hence their longevity.

When something isn't selling as much as it used to and is going to cost you both sales and ridiculous government fees, you ditch it.
A Northstar is fairly small for a V8. Why not put some short timing, torque cams in it, lean it out and make an economy motor out of it? Go from 32OHP to about 250HP. The torque would still be up for drivability.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 04:25 AM
A Northstar is fairly small for a V8. Why not put some short timing, torque cams in it, lean it out and make an economy motor out of it? Go from 32OHP to about 250HP. The torque would still be up for drivability.

Nice idea, but how does it compensate for the head gasket issue?

I'm going to assume that you meant 350HP.

Why spend money to upgrade an existing yet problematic V-8 when a full lineup of fit-for-the-task V-8s exists in the form of the LS series, is already made by Cadillac's parent company, GM, and already generates 600HP in some incarnations? It's counterproductive and inefficient.

lawfive
02-03-08, 08:47 AM
Long thread. Jason, how many sigs do you have so far?

Blackout
02-03-08, 10:44 AM
Long thread. Jason, how many sigs do you have so far?
I think two lol

gothicaleigh
02-03-08, 10:58 AM
A Northstar is fairly small for a V8. Why not put some short timing, torque cams in it, lean it out and make an economy motor out of it? Go from 32OHP to about 250HP. The torque would still be up for drivability.

Or how about trim 2 cylinders off to make it a smaller lighter engine, add direct injection to make it more efficient, and keep it up around 300hp with comparable torque... Oh wait.

Gm has a version of the 3.6L DI engine bored to 4.0L that produces > 400hp naturally aspirated. What is the case for a V8 again?

Better yet, take the above and make an inline six out of it for perfect balance and refinement. The resulting hp/tq would be on par or exceed the N* V8 too (hell, BMW does it in this configuration without utilizing DI, just imagine what could be accomplished with it).

Brett
02-03-08, 11:56 AM
If no HP improvements are going to be made to the N* they might as well dump it. Because its underpowered compared to all of its competitors. Worst in class HP is just not a strong selling point. Its basically an embarrasement.

gary88
02-03-08, 12:03 PM
Gm has a version of the 3.6L DI engine bored to 4.0L that produces > 400hp naturally aspirated. What is the case for a V8 again?


It won't sound like a V8, therefore it is inferior :thepan:

dkozloski
02-03-08, 12:10 PM
Nice idea, but how does it compensate for the head gasket issue?

I'm going to assume that you meant 350HP.

Why spend money to upgrade an existing yet problematic V-8 when a full lineup of fit-for-the-task V-8s exists in the form of the LS series, is already made by Cadillac's parent company, GM, and already generates 600HP in some incarnations? It's counterproductive and inefficient.
I said 250HP as an economy move. The head gasket problem was addressed in the 2000 model year by a redesign of the headbolts and is no longer a issue.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 12:14 PM
Or how about trim 2 cylinders off to make it a smaller lighter engine, add direct injection to make it more efficient, and keep it up around 300hp with comparable torque... Oh wait.

Gm has a version of the 3.6L DI engine bored to 4.0L that produces > 400hp naturally aspirated. What is the case for a V8 again?

Better yet, take the above and make an inline six out of it for perfect balance and refinement. The resulting hp/tq would be on par or exceed the N* V8 too (hell, BMW does it in this configuration without utilizing DI, just imagine what could be accomplished with it).
This is old news. GM made a six cylinder version of the Northstar nicknamed the LX5 Shortstar and it was successfully used in Oldsmobiles.

Brett
02-03-08, 12:25 PM
i rented a v6 aurora for a long road trip one time....what a great car.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 12:26 PM
As far as the LS engines go. They are push rod dinosaurs that are the result of development of engines for use in NASCAR racing that doesn't allow DOHC. What limited Northstar development to 300HP for years was not the engine but the ability of the FWD platform to absorb any more than that and still get useful tire life. Now that the RWDs are back it can continue to increase until economy and drivability become the obstacles.

Brett
02-03-08, 12:38 PM
What limited Northstar development to 300HP for years was not the engine but the ability of the FWD platform to absorb any more than that and still get useful tire life. Now that the RWDs are back it can continue to increase until economy and drivability become the obstacles.


Then they need to get busy. They are last in class. The types of people that buy these cars care about that.

AMGoff
02-03-08, 01:23 PM
I love how some describe OHVs as dinosaurs when in fact OHCs are the older technology.

GM obviously has no desire to continue with DOHC V8s and who can blame them. Why on earth would they spend hundreds of millions of dollars on an engine that will only see use in a very small number of automobiles?

The reason the SBC became what it is today is by using the very same logic that is being used for dropping the DOHC V8. Just as there was no need for there to be a Buick/Olds/Pontiac SB, there is no need for a Cadillac only family V8.

What would I rather have, a lean, efficient, vibrant GM or an expensive to manufacture, overly-complex, largely unnecessary engine that epitomizes the old, wasteful GM... hmmm... well without the former, there won't even be the latter.

I still say there is a method to GM's madness with putting resources into their high-feature V6... it's going to see use in a lot more cars, including Cadillac... it satisfies those who are deathly afraid of OHV engines... AND, most importantly, it lays the foundation for what many, including many on here, feel Cadillac needs to truly compete with the teutonic Germans...

An advanced, thoroughly modern, HF V12.

It will be much more cost-efficient for Cadillac to slap two of those 3.6s together than it will be for them to develop of produce a new DOHC V8.

And we still have the highly viable option of Cadillac using any of the various LS V8s as options for their larger cars. They are efficient, modern engines that have as many different flavors as applications for which they could be used. I'd also be willing to bet a year's salary that says Cadillac's boffins would be able to take an LS and adapt it to be as smooth and quiet as we would like. There is ZERO reason to say that can't be done because the only application we've seen it in has been a rip-snorting V-series.

I wholeheartedly feel that GM and Cadillac have more than enough engineering talent to make it happen... maybe I just give them a lot more credit than a lot of you do.

A DOHC V12 sounds much more tempting than a new DOHC V8, especially when there are plenty of modern V8s already developed and readily available.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-03-08, 02:06 PM
Hey, how cost effective would it be to engineer a DOHC valvetrain setup onto an LSx motor? They already made one DOHC SBC back in the early '90s with the ZR-1 Corvette. It's the best of both worlds, a good starter engine design and a very class competitive engine in the end. Hell, the LSx already makes ~400hp in many variations, even with the OHV setup...just imagine if they doubled the number of valves, creating double the airflow...!! And with that done, maybe the displacement would be a bit different from the standard 4.8, 5.3, 6.0 or 7.0 LS series motors, something specific to Cadillac, just like in the old days.

Destroyer had said that the LSx series motor has better top end power than the Northstar....is this true? Or is it just a wider powerband than the Northstar offers? In a 6.0L GTO, it's gonna probably have more top end power than the Northstar, but mainly because it's got 100hp more!

Adam mentioned a DOHC V-12, which I love the sound of, but I really doubt GM has any desire to build one, considering the new CAFE laws...but maybe if they used D.O.D. to cut down cylinder usage in 1/2 during light/moderate driving? It wouldn't cost them too much to engineer it...just 3.6L's together, 7.2L V-12, ~650 hp, but then, the 6.2L Supercharged V8 used in the CTS-V and ZR-1 makes the same amount of power, and it's already out there, and it gets better mileage.

Gothicaleigh mentioned an inline six, which is a fantastic engine setup, and GM already has that 4.2L I-6 in the mid sized SUV's, but they're kinda hoggish, and they don't get much better mileage than the 5.3L V8's that are optional in the Envoys, T/B's, Rainiers, etc etc. I love how I-6's feel though, so smooth, such a wide powerband, they even sound much better than V6's.....I-6 >>>> V-6. The only problem with I-6's is the packaging...they're much longer than V-6's and V-8's, tougher to put in the hood of a car, without putting the dash way back or having a real long, awkward looking hood.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 02:40 PM
Hey, how cost effective would it be to engineer a DOHC valvetrain setup onto an LSx motor? They already made one DOHC SBC back in the early '90s with the ZR-1 Corvette. It's the best of both worlds, a good starter engine design and a very class competitive engine in the end. Hell, the LSx already makes ~400hp in many variations, even with the OHV setup...just imagine if they doubled the number of valves, creating double the airflow...!! And with that done, maybe the displacement would be a bit different from the standard 4.8, 5.3, 6.0 or 7.0 LS series motors, something specific to Cadillac, just like in the old days.

Destroyer had said that the LSx series motor has better top end power than the Northstar....is this true? Or is it just a wider powerband than the Northstar offers? In a 6.0L GTO, it's gonna probably have more top end power than the Northstar, but mainly because it's got 100hp more!

Adam mentioned a DOHC V-12, which I love the sound of, but I really doubt GM has any desire to build one, considering the new CAFE laws...but maybe if they used D.O.D. to cut down cylinder usage in 1/2 during light/moderate driving? It wouldn't cost them too much to engineer it...just 3.6L's together, 7.2L V-12, ~650 hp, but then, the 6.2L Supercharged V8 used in the CTS-V and ZR-1 makes the same amount of power, and it's already out there, and it gets better mileage.

Gothicaleigh mentioned an inline six, which is a fantastic engine setup, and GM already has that 4.2L I-6 in the mid sized SUV's, but they're kinda hoggish, and they don't get much better mileage than the 5.3L V8's that are optional in the Envoys, T/B's, Rainiers, etc etc. I love how I-6's feel though, so smooth, such a wide powerband, they even sound much better than V6's.....I-6 >>>> V-6. The only problem with I-6's is the packaging...they're much longer than V-6's and V-8's, tougher to put in the hood of a car, without putting the dash way back or having a real long, awkward looking hood.
The ZR1 was never a GM engine. It was designed by Lotus and built by Mercury Outboard Motors.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 03:22 PM
I love how some describe OHVs as dinosaurs when in fact OHCs are the older technology.

GM obviously has no desire to continue with DOHC V8s and who can blame them. Why on earth would they spend hundreds of millions of dollars on an engine that will only see use in a very small number of automobiles?

The reason the SBC became what it is today is by using the very same logic that is being used for dropping the DOHC V8. Just as there was no need for there to be a Buick/Olds/Pontiac SB, there is no need for a Cadillac only family V8.

What would I rather have, a lean, efficient, vibrant GM or an expensive to manufacture, overly-complex, largely unnecessary engine that epitomizes the old, wasteful GM... hmmm... well without the former, there won't even be the latter.

I still say there is a method to GM's madness with putting resources into their high-feature V6... it's going to see use in a lot more cars, including Cadillac... it satisfies those who are deathly afraid of OHV engines... AND, most importantly, it lays the foundation for what many, including many on here, feel Cadillac needs to truly compete with the teutonic Germans...

An advanced, thoroughly modern, HF V12.

It will be much more cost-efficient for Cadillac to slap two of those 3.6s together than it will be for them to develop of produce a new DOHC V8.

And we still have the highly viable option of Cadillac using any of the various LS V8s as options for their larger cars. They are efficient, modern engines that have as many different flavors as applications for which they could be used. I'd also be willing to bet a year's salary that says Cadillac's boffins would be able to take an LS and adapt it to be as smooth and quiet as we would like. There is ZERO reason to say that can't be done because the only application we've seen it in has been a rip-snorting V-series.

I wholeheartedly feel that GM and Cadillac have more than enough engineering talent to make it happen... maybe I just give them a lot more credit than a lot of you do.

A DOHC V12 sounds much more tempting than a new DOHC V8, especially when there are plenty of modern V8s already developed and readily available.
GM spent millions on development of SB's for NASCAR because NASCAR is a multi-billion dollar business far outshadowing any other racing venue in the world and showcases GM performance it a way that no other advertising can. Toyota went so far as to build a separate factory to produce their NASCAR racing engines that they developed from scratch strictly for racing. They are offered in no automobile line. Racing is a huge business. Race on Sunday, sell on Monday. Ever hear that?

DOHC engines weren't used in mainstream production cars until Fiat adopted them universally in the mid 60's. Before that it was reserved for limited production luxury, specialty, novelty, and racing cars. Push rod engines have been around forever because of their much cheaper cost and lower parts count. It was a cheap way to get to OHV. Buick and Chevy were the earliest mainstream OHV users in the 1920s. Ford and Mopar didn't make it until the 1950s.

AMGoff
02-03-08, 03:25 PM
In reality, the LT5 was a GM engine since GM had bought the Lotus Group in '86... while production of the engine was contracted out to Mercury Marine... the development was technically and in-house job.

More to the point, the LT5 was an entirely new engine. GM had originally planned to contract Lotus to design new heads for the SMC... Lotus came back and proposed that the engine would have to be done from the ground up. The only thing the LT5 shared with the L98 was the bore center to center distance.

As far as grafting two 3.6s together to create a V12... the development costs would be minute to developing an entirely new DOHC V8. And you're bang-on with the DOD... a high-feature V12 with cylinder deactivation would not only provide substantially more power... but would return fuel economy and emissions comparable to that of the V8.

Power-wise... of course it would be comparable to the 6.2... and I'd see no problem using it... but then again, I have no problem with pushrods. I fully believe Cadillac could take an LS and make it more than suitable for use in an "ordinary" Cadillac.

Cadillac needs to march to the beat of their own drummer... and not do something just because the rest of the luxury market does so.

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 04:42 PM
OK I give in again.
A skilled technician lowers the supercharger module onto the engine assembly at the Performance Build Center. Each Northstar V-8 SC engine is hand-built by an individual builder ensuring best fit and quality
http://us.tnpv.net/2005/GMC200504/GMC2005040761242_PV.jpg :rant2:
http://us.tnpv.net/2005/GMC200504/GMC2005040761207_PV.jpg

Oh how about this.

2008 Vortec 6000 6.0L V8 (LFA)

http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200802/GMC2008020340779_PV.jpg

2008 GMC Denali XT Concept
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200802/GMC2008020340213_PV.jpg

OK for some excitement

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 04:44 PM
Drum roll please

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
LSA 6.2L V-8 for 2009 Cadillac CTS-V
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/photos/f_actual/09LSA.jpg

2009 LSA 6.2L V-8 SC (LSA) for Cadillac CTS-V - Component Exploded View .
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429805_PV.jpg


2009 LSA 6.2L V-8 SC (LSA) for Cadillac CTS-V - David Kimble Illustration.
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428941_PV.jpg


2009 LSA 6.2L V-8 SC (LSA) for Cadillac
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011434794_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429657_PV.jpg

Supercharger with Intercooler for Cadillac
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428956_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428926_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428736_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428649_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428634_PV.jpg

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 04:47 PM
Block Hone Overtravel Radius for Cadillac
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429790_PV.jpg

Engine Block Bulkhead Window for Cadillac CTS-V.
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429774_PV.jpg

Block Four Cylinder Bores for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429480_PV.jpg



Piston and Connecting Rod for Cadillac CTS-V.
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429302_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429257_PV.jpg

Piston Head Detail of Drain Holes for Cadillac CTS-V.
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429242_PV.jpg

Cylinder Head for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429272_PV.jpg
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429627_PV.jpg

Cylinder Head Gasket detail of 7 layer composition for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429611_PV.jpg

Oil Cooling Jet for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011429419_PV.jpg

Oil Cooler for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428604_PV.jpg

Gerotor Oil Pump Assembly Components for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428589_PV.jpg

Camshaft for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428895_PV.jpg

Acoustic Cover for Cadillac CTS-V
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011428752_PV.jpg

gary88
02-03-08, 04:49 PM
http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/03/cadillacsixteen03.jpg

Please Cadillac? It can operate on 4 cylinders when necessary.

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 04:49 PM
The GM Powertrain design team reviews an early model of the 6.2L supercharged V8 (LSA) for Cadillac CTSV. Engineering enhancements are made and issues are resolved with the engine on an around-the-clock basis. Design work involves all systems and components including, but not limited to, cranktrain, valvetrain, accessory drive, lubrication, cooling and service.
http://us.tnpv.net/2008/GMC200801/GMC2008011443650_PV.jpg

http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/photos/f_actual/09lsa.html


Yeah they will kill all V8 soon. They have no money in them.

BTW it is your state legislation that you need to contact

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 05:12 PM
I said 250HP as an economy move. The head gasket problem was addressed in the 2000 model year by a redesign of the headbolts and is no longer a issue.

Okay, now this makes no sense. Have Cadillac spend money to further decrease power in their standard V-8s, then offer a V-6 with better power and economy?

I must be the only one in this entire thread who remembers Cadillac's fiasco with the diesels and the HT-4100.

The northstar's reliability is only a secondary issue compared to the primary issue of it`s relevance. The fact is that, unless the individuals pushing this petition want Cadillac to go the way of Lincoln, the northstar engine is outdated and irrelevant. The LS engines are here, developed, proven, and would more than fit Cadillac's requirements.

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 05:38 PM
Okay, now this makes no sense. Have Cadillac spend money to further decrease power in their standard V-8s, then offer a V-6 with better power and economy?

I must be the only one in this entire thread who remembers Cadillac's fiasco with the diesels and the HT-4100.

The northstar's reliability is only a secondary issue compared to the primary issue of it`s relevance. The fact is that, unless the individuals pushing this petition want Cadillac to go the way of Lincoln, the northstar engine is outdated and irrelevant. The LS engines are here, developed, proven, and would more than fit Cadillac's requirements.

The LS engine is outdated!!!!!
GM is past the GEN III and now on GEN IV?

The 3.6L VVT is what all of the new V8 to V12 will be based off of. Oh wait that is what the RWD Northstar is based off of.:hmm:

dkozloski
02-03-08, 05:48 PM
What's interesting is that except for the young CTS buyers the majority of Cadillac owners putt-putt down the road rarely exceeding 1/2 throttle. Hence all the complaints about the gray haired grannies slowing traffic and destroying commerce as we know it. There could be almost any kind of engine under the hood and as long as it ran well enough to get to the bridge club it wouldn't matter a damn what it was. Historically, the automobile aficionado bats zero at predicting what the public really wants and needs.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 05:55 PM
The LS engine is outdated!!!!!
GM is past the GEN III and now on GEN IV?

The 3.6L VVT is what all of the new V8 to V12 will be based off of. Oh wait that is what the RWD Northstar is based off of.:hmm:

Yeah, fourth generation and is producing better results than the Northstars. Speaking of this, it is not as if the Northstar is was perfect from day one. The headgasket issues are still happening, and all of these so-called revisions have resulted in a maximum of 290HP for the DTS, 320 for the STS, and 449HP for the STS-V. Compare this to 600HP in the LS6 of the new Corvette.

The Northstar was a powerful, award-winning engine in it's day, and I might like to own one in the future, but it's day is ending. Accept it and move on.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 06:01 PM
What's interesting is that except for the young CTS buyers the majority of Cadillac owners putt-putt down the road rarely exceeding 1/2 throttle. Hence all the complaints about the gray haired grannies slowing traffic and destroying commerce as we know it. There could be almost any kind of engine under the hood and as long as it ran well enough to get to the bridge club it wouldn't matter a damn what it was. Historically, the automobile aficionado bats zero at predicting what the public really wants and needs.

Let's see; those "automobile afficianados" switched to Lincoln during the `80s when Cadillac dramatically decreased their power. The result was a fall in Cadillac sales which did not even begin to correct itself until the mid-1990s.

Another thing to note is that Cadillac is more correctly considered a "wants" car than a "needs" car. For needs, you would purchase something economical, preferrably with four or six cylinders, and a light body.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-03-08, 06:22 PM
Cadillac needs a twin cam V-8 to compete with the Imports. The lack of a technologically amazing engine in Cadillac's line up is the reason the Northstar was ever built. The 4.5 and 4.9 were fantastically reliable motors, but they wouldn't hold a candle to the imports as far as sophistication and engineering brilliance were concerned. People who buy brand new luxury cars want the finest they have to offer. They're not stupid, they know that DOHC engines are much more complicated than the OHV engines, and in their (our) minds, complication is good.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 06:23 PM
Cadillac needs a twin cam V-8 to compete with the Imports. The lack of a technologically amazing engine in Cadillac's line up is the reason the Northstar was ever built. The 4.5 and 4.9 were fantastically reliable motors, but they wouldn't hold a candle to the imports as far as sophistication and engineering brilliance were concerned. People who buy brand new luxury cars want the finest they have to offer. They're not stupid, they know that DOHC engines are much more complicated than the OHV engines, and in their (our) minds, complication is good.

Do you say that a new DOHC should be built, or that the northstar should be retained?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-03-08, 06:28 PM
Well I'm all for a new engine, because it's what the market usually dictates, but it's SO much more cost effective to revamp the N*.

Do to the Northstar what they did 20 years ago when the HT4100 turned into the 4500. :highfive:

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 06:31 PM
Well I'm all for a new engine, because it's what the market usually dictates, but it's SO much more cost effective to revamp the N*.

Do to the Northstar what they did 20 years ago when the HT4100 turned into the 4500. :highfive:

Now, if cadillac could revamp the Northstar the way the 4.1s where turned into 4.5s and 4.9s, I would support it's continued production.

The sad truth is that GM needs to get rid of the Northstar because of the market. I'd rather see V-6 Cadillacs with non-northstar V-8s optional, or revamped northstars optional, than to see my favorite car brand fall away because CAFE shut it down.

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 06:37 PM
Yeah, fourth generation and is producing better results than the Northstars. Speaking of this, it is not as if the Northstar is was perfect from day one. The headgasket issues are still happening, and all of these so-called revisions.


Do you say that a new DOHC should be built, or that the northstar should be retained?

I have seen more LS based engines with blown head gaskets this year than 00+ Northstars or may be all the Northstars.

The RWD Northstar is not the same engine as the FWD.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-03-08, 06:39 PM
I thought I'd heard somewhere that you cannot bore/stroke a Northstar, because of the cylinder liners or something like that, so a slightly larger, more potent N* might be impossible. But imagine though, a 4.9L Northstar! Or a 5.1L Northstar! Hell, I suppose you could even cut down the size a bit and add direct injection or something of that nature....less size, more power, better fuel economy! Hell yeah! If you notice, some of the Northstar's competitors have smaller V8's....4.0L, 4.2L, 4.1L, and they still make power comparable to, or exceeding the Northstar's amount.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 06:39 PM
I have seen more LS based engines with blown head gaskets this year than 00+ Northstars or may be all the Northstars.

The RWD Northstar is not the same engine as the FWD.

What are the differences between the FWD and RWD Northstars?

dkozloski
02-03-08, 07:05 PM
What are the differences between the FWD and RWD Northstars?
FWD is 275 or 292HP and no VVT

RWD is 320HP and VVT. Torque band is wider and pulls harder midrange on up.

Nail the throttle in an AWD STS and it's a brutal launch you can only dream about in an RWD CTS.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 07:06 PM
FWD is 275 or 292HP and no VVT

RWD is 320HP and VVT. Torque band is wider and pulls harder midrange on up.

What about the mechanical differences, not to include the obvious differences between FWD and RWD.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 07:13 PM
What about the mechanical differences, not to include the obvious differences between FWD and RWD.
VVT is a radical mechanical difference. The cams are driven by hydraulically variable cam drive sprockets. This also eliminates the need for a dedicated EGR setup. It's a hi-tech setup that obsoletes all but the most modern engines. It was pioneered by Mercedes in the 1930s.

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 07:13 PM
What are the differences between the FWD and RWD Northstars?

I was posting them and had a malfunction.
I am back on line.

Ok this is a RWD Northstar.
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/LeMans.jpg


I will have more to follow.

93DevilleUSMC
02-03-08, 07:17 PM
I was posting them and had a malfunction.
I am back on line.

Ok this is a RWD Northstar.

I will have more to follow.

Thanks, but the pics didn't load.

dkozloski
02-03-08, 07:18 PM
Advancing cam timing improves low end torque, retarding cam timing improves top end horsepower.

Destroyer
02-03-08, 07:55 PM
OK I give in again.
A skilled technician lowers the supercharger module onto the engine assembly at the Performance Build Center. Each Northstar V-8 SC engine is hand-built by an individual builder ensuring best fit and quality

So you signed the petition?:crybaby:

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 08:14 PM
I am giving in to this thread. I am geting sucked into this thread of nonsense. I posted information on the bill that the goverment was trying to pass and no one listened.

Kill the V8 and give us a V12 that is active fuel management!

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 08:25 PM
on the FWD Northstar the head and block grow. When this happens the head gasket bunches up.

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/111.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/222.jpg

This is the open area that I am talking about
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/Block%20failures/432.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/444.jpg

This is a RWD Northstar deck.
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lupperblock.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lblockassembly.jpg

This is the head Gasket. It is a Multi Layer Metal gasket
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lheadgasket.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/HeadGasket44L.jpg

This is the VVT head
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lhead.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lheadunderside.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lintakeport.jpg

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 08:27 PM
This is the underside of the block
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lupperblockunderside.jpg

This is the oil cooling jets
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Loilcoolingjets.jpg

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 08:29 PM
You can see the quality in the casting of the block!

dkozloski
02-03-08, 09:09 PM
The block looks like a sand casting to me. If that's the case you'll never see pulled threads here. To all the naysayers; This is world class stuff.

AJxtcman
02-03-08, 09:25 PM
As far as grafting two 3.6s together to create a V12... the development costs would be minute to developing an entirely new DOHC V8. And you're bang-on with the DOD... a high-feature V12 with cylinder deactivation would not only provide substantially more power... but would return fuel economy and emissions comparable to that of the V8.


Cadillac needs to march to the beat of their own drummer... and not do something just because the rest of the luxury market does so.

The V12 has been built. I am not sure if the plug was pulled or not. I have not heard, but the current Horse Power war would lead me to believe it is still in the works. It maybe scaled back, but they have to build it. Long story about GM, Chevy, Cadillac.

BTW GM has another brand. It is called the Corvette. Yes the Corvette is a brand now.
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/forum/111.jpg

Some Cadillac guy's say that the Corvette is built at a Cadillac plant:thumbsup:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-03-08, 10:04 PM
VVT is a pretty amazing thing. Does the N* have it on both intake and exhaust cams, and how variable is it?

Destroyer
02-03-08, 11:55 PM
The LS engine is outdated!!!!!
GM is past the GEN III and now on GEN IV?


Yeah its dated!. For crying out loud, it was dated the second it hit the streets but so what?. It works and it makes power, that is all that matters. Are the old Hemi's powering just about every top fuel dragster not dated?. Lets put the 'ole N* out to pasture, you just cant polish a turd!. :want: Tune it till you turn blue in the face and it'll still be a turd.

dkozloski
02-04-08, 12:33 AM
VVT is a pretty amazing thing. Does the N* have it on both intake and exhaust cams, and how variable is it?
The RWD Northstar has VVT on both intake and exhaust cams and they operate separately. They both advance and retard as far as is practical. Any more movement would have things going the wrong way. The exhaust retards so far that it draws exhaust back into the cylinder, eliminating the need for an EGR system.

AJxtcman
02-04-08, 07:22 AM
The Northstar maybe a turd, but it has done a lot for GM. It is still just an engine.

http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/1.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/2.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/3.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/4.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/5.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/6.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/7.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/8.jpg
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/9.jpg

AJxtcman
02-04-08, 07:29 AM
on the FWD Northstar the head and block grow. When this happens the head gasket bunches up.


http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/444.jpg

This is a RWD Northstar deck.
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/44Lupperblock.jpg


This is the head Gasket. It is a Multi Layer Metal gasket
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/HeadGasket44L.jpg

This is the 4.6L RWD Northstar deck. :duck: the deck is open
http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/AJxtcman/Northstar/RWD%20VVT/4.jpg


Three different decks. Hmmmmmm How many will have head gasket problems?
How many use metal gaskets?

Blackout
02-04-08, 11:28 AM
The Northstar maybe a turd, but it has done a lot for GM.How has the N* done a lot for GM? They were only used in Cadillac's and it's not like because of this engine it made sales go through the roof. It was a decent engine with good power out put plagued by many issues and a majority of it's life span was spent as a wrong wheel drive platform. If anything the V6's contributed more to GM then the N* seeing that they are used all across the company instead of just one company.

dkozloski
02-04-08, 12:55 PM
How has the N* done a lot for GM? They were only used in Cadillac's and it's not like because of this engine it made sales go through the roof. It was a decent engine with good power out put plagued by many issues and a majority of it's life span was spent as a wrong wheel drive platform. If anything the V6's contributed more to GM then the N* seeing that they are used all across the company instead of just one company.
The Northstar is also used in Buicks and a 6 cylinder "ShortStar" version in Oldsmobiles. Name an issue beyond head gaskets. The bottom end is bulletproof and cylinder bore wear is non-existant. It requires that it be driven hard because it is a performance engine. Is that a fault?

93DevilleUSMC
02-04-08, 01:24 PM
How has the N* done a lot for GM? They were only used in Cadillac's and it's not like because of this engine it made sales go through the roof. It was a decent engine with good power out put plagued by many issues and a majority of it's life span was spent as a wrong wheel drive platform. If anything the V6's contributed more to GM then the N* seeing that they are used all across the company instead of just one company.

The Northstar, like you say, was a great engine. It still is, but it doesn't fit the times we live in, or the domestic market in which GM and Cadillac have to fight.

We can spew out all of the "Cadillac is the standard of the world" Cadillac groupthink that we want to on this forum, but the fact is that people no longer view Cadillacs as the epitome of luxury, but BMW and Mercedes-Benz. This might be hard to accept, but the above companies have declared war on American automakers, and they are winning by producing hot, fast, sporty premium luxury cars with inline six-cylinders which generate more performance than our V-8s produce in the Northstar.

If anyone thinks I'm wrong on this point, then I may well be, but I am certainly not in the minority by agreeing with GM's decision not to replace the Northstar. I can say this based on the fact that fewer than five people have signed this so-called petition.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-04-08, 01:41 PM
Dont sound so pessimistic USMC, Cadillacs new cars are vastly improving in quality, and will very soon again be a very viable contender in the world market. Look at how far we've come in the last 10 years alone! Actually, for what it's worth, as far as I know BMW is the only German luxury company that produces an inline six anymore.

93DevilleUSMC
02-04-08, 01:49 PM
Dont sound so pessimistic USMC, Cadillacs new cars are vastly improving in quality, and will very soon again be a very viable contender in the world market. Look at how far we've come in the last 10 years alone! Actually, for what it's worth, as far as I know BMW is the only German luxury company that produces an inline six anymore.

I'm not being pessimistic, I'm just saying that there is competition out there, and that Cadillac has to adapt. I think Cadillac is doing that with this new V6 and the new LS6 which is going to be in the `09 CTS-V.

As a matter of fact, I think that the new CTS is more than a rival for it's European equivalents. What I also think is that staying with Cadillac's northstar as a base engine is only likely to give MB and BMW the ability to surge past Cadillac again. Now, if Caddy develops the CTS Coupe, new Escalade, and it's other upcoming marvels, Europe is going to be in a world of competitive hurt.

You're right, Chad, we have come far in the last ten years, and we need to stay moving forward, not backward.

AMGoff
02-04-08, 02:09 PM
The Northstar was the answer to challenges set before Cadillac... 16 years ago. At that time, everyone was in a craze while responding to those "upstart" Japanese... but times are different.

We all somehow have this impression that we represent the mainstream, but the fact is we really don't... we're different, we're auto-enthusiasts. Why else would we spend an inordinate amount of our time on sites like this debating cars?

Mr. and Mrs. Joe-Shmoe couldn't care less about OHV or OHC, single cam or dual cams, VVT or DOD... the average end-user cares more about the end than they do the means. If Cadillac puts out a refined product with a refined engine, a refined chassis, and a refined features set that is comparable to, if not better than the competition for a price that meets or beats the competition, then people will buy it.

If any one of you walked around on the street and asked random people if they knew the difference between OHV and OHC, I'd imagine the vast majority of them would look at you like you were on PCP.

I'm fairly certain that the eggheads over at the RenCen know what they're doing... all we have to do is trust them.

dkozloski
02-04-08, 02:22 PM
The Northstar was the answer to challenges set before Cadillac... 16 years ago. At that time, everyone was in a craze while responding to those "upstart" Japanese... but times are different.

We all somehow have this impression that we represent the mainstream, but the fact is we really don't... we're different, we're auto-enthusiasts. Why else would we spend an inordinate amount of our time on sites like this debating cars?

Mr. and Mrs. Joe-Shmoe couldn't care less about OHV or OHC, single cam or dual cams, VVT or DOD... the average end-user cares more about the end than they do the means. If Cadillac puts out a refined product with a refined engine, a refined chassis, and a refined features set that is comparable to, if not better than the competition for a price that meets or beats the competition, then people will buy it.

If any one of you walked around on the street and asked random people if they knew the difference between OHV and OHC, I'd imagine the vast majority of them would look at you like you were on PCP.

I'm fairly certain that the eggheads over at the RenCen know what they're doing... all we have to do is trust them.
It must be the millenium; I agree with AMGoff. The average bear doesn't know automobile technology from a bale of hay and never drives the car hard enough that suspension design means a thing. If it's a nice sharp looking ride with creature comforts it's in the ball park. If it's got some gimmicks that aren't too hard to figure out it's all the better.

Playdrv4me
02-04-08, 02:38 PM
Just because a V-8 is traditionally included in Cadillac's base sedans, doesn't mean that it should continue to be. The fact is that the northstar is old and needs to be retired. It's done it's job since 1992. This is 2008. While change for the sake of change is ill-advised, adherence to tradition or tradition's sake is hardly acceptable, especially from a brand with such a history of innovation as possessed by Cadillac.

To echo destroyer's post, the northstar is hardly as reliable as the LS-series V-8, or even the preceeding 4.5 and 4.9 engines. Now, while I have seen almost weekly threads on Northstar head gasket failure, I haven't seen that many failure reports on the 4.5 and 4.9s, and none on the LS V-8s used in the CTS-Vs.

The DI V-6 is the future of Cadillac, and represents the kind of power and fuel economy that cadillac should have been giving it's customers the entire time.

This whole northstar/ head gasket conundrum should have never existed.

Ive been away for a few days but this is a very intelligent post.

Playdrv4me
02-04-08, 02:43 PM
In reality, the LT5 was a GM engine since GM had bought the Lotus Group in '86... while production of the engine was contracted out to Mercury Marine... the development was technically and in-house job.

More to the point, the LT5 was an entirely new engine. GM had originally planned to contract Lotus to design new heads for the SMC... Lotus came back and proposed that the engine would have to be done from the ground up. The only thing the LT5 shared with the L98 was the bore center to center distance.

As far as grafting two 3.6s together to create a V12... the development costs would be minute to developing an entirely new DOHC V8. And you're bang-on with the DOD... a high-feature V12 with cylinder deactivation would not only provide substantially more power... but would return fuel economy and emissions comparable to that of the V8.

Power-wise... of course it would be comparable to the 6.2... and I'd see no problem using it... but then again, I have no problem with pushrods. I fully believe Cadillac could take an LS and make it more than suitable for use in an "ordinary" Cadillac.

Cadillac needs to march to the beat of their own drummer... and not do something just because the rest of the luxury market does so.

As usual, some excellent points here as well.

Playdrv4me
02-04-08, 02:48 PM
I have seen more LS based engines with blown head gaskets this year than 00+ Northstars or may be all the Northstars.

The RWD Northstar is not the same engine as the FWD.

You've mentioned this before but I find it extremely hard to believe (particularly the "or maybe ALL the Northstars" part), especially from discussions I've held with other GM service technicians over the years.

Obviously this is your experience and I can't really argue with that, but based on the information that has been given to me the LSx while OLD, are pretty damn resilient.

Another problem with the Northstar that never gets any attention is the fact that it is NOT a user-friendly engine architecture. Because it was OVER-engineered from the beginning to meet an extremely specific purpose, it has NEVER been easy to say, swap out cams, go to the parts depot and pick up a flywheel etc. If anything happens to the bottom of a Northstar, rare or not, it is usually recommended to just junk it and replace, which is terribly wasteful. This is not the kind of architecture that lends itself to a 30 or 40 year run like say a 318 or a LSx motor which can be repaired with spit and bailing wire.

Playdrv4me
02-04-08, 02:50 PM
What about the mechanical differences, not to include the obvious differences between FWD and RWD.

Besides all the ancillary stuff mentioned before, the only important difference to reliability I can recall based on some white-paper I read, is an 80% all-new cooling system in the RWD design.

By the way... It only took ELEVEN YEARS.

dkozloski
02-04-08, 04:25 PM
It may be interesting to note that years ago that many cars farmed out the engines. Duesenberg never built an engine for their own cars. They were made by Lycoming. Some famous engine makers were Continental, Air Cooled Motors, and Red Wing. Currently engine work is farmed out to Toyota and Yamaha by other makers. Toyota bought engine tooling from Chevrolet for Land Cruisers. GM sold the Buick 90deg V6 tooling to Willys and bought it back later. Ford and Chrysler engines showed up in other makes. Simca used a flathead Ford V8-60 for years. Sunbeam Tigers used small block Ford V8s. Saab used an English V4 Ford motor for years. CTS's used an Opel motor in '03. ZR1 Corvettes had a Lotus designed motor built by Mercury Marine.

Playdrv4me
02-04-08, 04:31 PM
It may be interesting to note that years ago that many cars farmed out the engines. Duesenberg never built an engine for their own cars. They were made by Lycoming. Some famous engine makers were Continental, Air Cooled Motors, and Red Wing. Currently engine work is farmed out to Toyota and Yamaha by other makers. Toyota bought engine tooling from Chevrolet for Land Cruisers. GM sold the Buick 90deg V6 tooling to Willys and bought it back later. Ford and Chrysler engines showed up in other makes. Simca used a flathead Ford V8-60 for years. Sunbeam Tigers used small block Ford V8s. Saab used an English V4 Ford motor for years. CTS's used an Opel motor in '03. ZR1 Corvettes had a Lotus designed motor built by Mercury Marine.

I don't know why but for some vague reason I remember Yamaha having their hands in some part of the ZR1 as well.

In recent times, Yamaha's most famous (or infamous depending on who you ask and what year) involvement was in the Ford Taurus SHO. Now they are producing short-engine for the Volvo XC90 V8 as well as a few other projects here and there.

AJxtcman
02-04-08, 07:41 PM
I think Cadillac is doing that with this new V6 and the new LS6 which is going to be in the `09 CTS-V.

As a matter of fact, I think that the new CTS is more than a rival for it's European equivalents.

The 09 CTS-V does not have a LS6 in it!
I have already posted that it is a LSA




We all somehow have this impression that we represent the mainstream, but the fact is we really don't... we're different, we're auto-enthusiasts. Why else would we spend an inordinate amount of our time on sites like this debating cars?

Mr. and Mrs. Joe-Shmoe couldn't care less about OHV or OHC, single cam or dual cams, VVT or DOD... the average end-user cares more about the end than they do the means. If Cadillac puts out a refined product with a refined engine, a refined chassis, and a refined features set that is comparable to, if not better than the competition for a price that meets or beats the competition, then people will buy it.

If any one of you walked around on the street and asked random people if they knew the difference between OHV and OHC, I'd imagine the vast majority of them would look at you like you were on PCP.

I'm fairly certain that the eggheads over at the RenCen know what they're doing... all we have to do is trust them.

Does any one Know what the NORTHSTAR SYSTEM is?

You know the the system that allows you to drive 50 miles with NO coolant!:histeric:
Is that ever a joke.

It might make it 50 miles, but then it is JUNK!

Clout That is what the Northstar did for GM.
Yes the Illusion of the Northstar!
It is an engine. it has moving parts.

This is a quick time line of some major improvements in GM

GM building crappy 4100, 4500, 4900.
GM then building a car on a truck frame at a TRUCK PLANT!!!! With a SBC



In 1993 GM came out with the Northstar. This may have been the start or not.
In 1998 the Seville came out. Big improvement over the 97 and it is almost the same as the 2004
In 1999 the Silverado came out. Big improvement over the last
In 2002 the Trailblazer came out. Huge improvement over the Blazer
In 2003 the CTS came out. Huge improvement over the Craptera or the RWD Bro Ham.
In 2004 the XLR came out with a New RWD VVT Northstar on a Vette platform
In 2004 the SRX came out and we went back 5 steps
In 2004 we got the CTS-V
Then the STS RWD came out in 2005.

The Domino's are falling one after the next.
So what was the first Domino? the Northstar or the 1998 Seville?

If you look at it as the Northstar then it did a lot for GM:hide:

AJxtcman
02-04-08, 07:44 PM
CTS's used an Opel motor in '03.

I can prove that it is not an OPEL engine. Opel used the English and German built engine, but it is not an Opel:cookoo:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-04-08, 08:59 PM
GM building crappy 4100, 4500, 4900.

Hey, the 4.5 and 4.9L were awesome motors. Not the technological masterpiece the N* is, but they left many customers very happy.



GM then building a car on a truck frame at a TRUCK PLANT!!!! With a SBC


And that's a problem why? The Fleetwoods are an awesome car, loved by many.



In 2003 the CTS came out. Huge improvement over the Craptera or the RWD Bro Ham.


Comparing apples to oranges. How is the CTS in any way even close to a Brougham?

AJxtcman
02-04-08, 10:55 PM
Hey, the 4.5 and 4.9L were awesome motors. Not the technological masterpiece the N* is, but they left many customers very happy.



And that's a problem why? The Fleetwoods are an awesome car, loved by many.



Comparing apples to oranges. How is the CTS in any way even close to a Brougham?

The 4100 left many customers with that feeling.

I worked at a chevy store when the Imp's were popular. I loved to see them come in the door. I would get 15 to 20 hrs per car. They have soooooo many know problems.

What was the RWD car that took the place of the Bro Ham? I will give you a hint. It Ziggs. You know the one from Germany.
That turned into a CTS.:stirpot:

The Bro Ham may have been the Flag ship in some peoples minds while the STS was in others. :thumbsup:
Yes that goes back to the 93 STS Northstar

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-05-08, 12:15 AM
The 4100 left many customers with that feeling.

I worked at a chevy store when the Imp's were popular. I loved to see them come in the door. I would get 15 to 20 hrs per car. They have soooooo many know problems.

What was the RWD car that took the place of the Bro Ham? I will give you a hint. It Ziggs. You know the one from Germany.
That turned into a CTS.:stirpot:

The Bro Ham may have been the Flag ship in some peoples minds while the STS was in others. :thumbsup:
Yes that goes back to the 93 STS Northstar

The HT4100 was junk, I'll give you that. But the B/D bodies are probably the most reliable automobile GM produced in the '90s, mainly because they were so simple and time tested. The Fleetwood Brougham and Catera have absolutly nothing in common, aside from being RWD. The Brougham is a traditional Cadillac, big in size, floaty in ride, loved by old people. The Catera was introduced to be the opposite of that. Small, tight, fun to drive, for the younger generation. The total opposite of the Brougham.

AJxtcman
02-05-08, 07:41 AM
The HT4100 was junk, I'll give you that. But the B/D bodies are probably the most reliable automobile GM produced in the '90s, mainly because they were so simple and time tested. The Fleetwood Brougham and Catera have absolutly nothing in common, aside from being RWD. The Brougham is a traditional Cadillac, big in size, floaty in ride, loved by old people. The Catera was introduced to be the opposite of that. Small, tight, fun to drive, for the younger generation. The total opposite of the Brougham.

What was the RWD car that took the place of the Bro Ham in 1997?
I am just saying
Was the Fleetwood the flagship or not?
If so what replaced it?
If it was the all new 1993 STS that some state instead of the all new 1993 Fleetwood then GM never lost is flagship.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-05-08, 10:38 AM
Fleetwood and STS were both flagships, one of a dying breed, the other of the rebirth of Cadillac.

AMGoff
02-05-08, 02:35 PM
The 09 CTS-V does not have a LS6 in it!
I have already posted that it is a LSA



Does any one Know what the NORTHSTAR SYSTEM is?

You know the the system that allows you to drive 50 miles with NO coolant!:histeric:
Is that ever a joke.

It might make it 50 miles, but then it is JUNK!

Clout That is what the Northstar did for GM.
Yes the Illusion of the Northstar!
It is an engine. it has moving parts.

This is a quick time line of some major improvements in GM

GM building crappy 4100, 4500, 4900.
GM then building a car on a truck frame at a TRUCK PLANT!!!! With a SBC



In 1993 GM came out with the Northstar. This may have been the start or not.
In 1998 the Seville came out. Big improvement over the 97 and it is almost the same as the 2004
In 1999 the Silverado came out. Big improvement over the last
In 2002 the Trailblazer came out. Huge improvement over the Blazer
In 2003 the CTS came out. Huge improvement over the Craptera or the RWD Bro Ham.
In 2004 the XLR came out with a New RWD VVT Northstar on a Vette platform
In 2004 the SRX came out and we went back 5 steps
In 2004 we got the CTS-V
Then the STS RWD came out in 2005.

The Domino's are falling one after the next.
So what was the first Domino? the Northstar or the 1998 Seville?

If you look at it as the Northstar then it did a lot for GM:hide:

You proved my point further as being a Cadillac mechanic, you're on an even different level than most of us on here. As far as the Northstar System... I know the basic components and get the gist of what they do.. but only because I was interested enough to actually look into the subject - but that makes me in the vast minority of people.

Working the job you do, you of all people should know how much the population at large doesn't give a rat's behind with regard to the way their car works.

What is the extent of most people's understanding of how their car operates?

They press a button to unlock the door, open the door, get in, close the door, put the key in/press the ignition button, put the car into gear, use the pedal on the right to make it go, and the pedal on the left to make it stop.

That's about it... they don't need to know how it works so they don't care to learn how it works... and when it doesn't work, they take it to people like you.

We are a consumer-oriented society and all the consumer cares about it the end product. As long as it works, they have no desire to know how it works. By extension - as long as the car feels refined, comfortable, and well made... then they really don't care whether or not the engine under the hood has a pushrod or not?

People generally tend to not care about things they have no clue even exist.

It's all about the end product... if GM can build a refined, upscale product without using an expensive to manufacture engine that only sees use in a small number of vehicles that even smaller numbers of people even know about and with out spending millions to develop a new, expensive to manufacture engine that will only see use in a small number of vehicles that even fewer people even know was being developed and subsequently cancelled, then why would they?

With the way things are going for the brand, for every customer Cadillac will lose by dropping the Northstar and it's equivalent replacement, they will probably pick up two new ones who don't give two poops about it.

AJxtcman
02-05-08, 06:07 PM
You proved my point further as being a Cadillac mechanic, you're on an even different level than most of us on here. As far as the Northstar System... I know the basic components and get the gist of what they do.. but only because I was interested enough to actually look into the subject - but that makes me in the vast minority of people.


The Northstar system is a made up name for nothing. :histeric:

It is the same thing that most other cars had. If we go back to the beginning (1993) it was nothing special. It did not even use a protocol that was exclusive. They used UART.

It was all marketing. Smoke and Mirrors. Creating BUZZ
BUZZ sells cars.

GM has learned some buzz techniques. They have been using it on the 2008 CTS. It was the car to talk about. Then the rumors about the other CTS's. Now we have seen the CTS coupe and the CTS-V. Soon will be the wagon. We will get the new V12 car at next years Detroit auto show and keep the Buzz on GM.

AMGoff
02-05-08, 06:52 PM
The same could be said about the Northstar itself....

Blackout
02-05-08, 07:12 PM
For awhile car makers would give their engines stupid names to make it sounds more upscale or make it seem that it's a "better" engine then the competition. Cadillac had the Northstar and Lincoln had the Intech V8

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-05-08, 07:14 PM
But I must say, Northstar sounds a lot better than, and is easier to remember than something like L98, or L05, or M104, etc etc.

AJxtcman
02-05-08, 08:23 PM
6500 RPM's IN PARK (http://youtube.com/watch?v=S59Z6nMiZLg) Can you do that? No rev limiter and a 1999 Cadillac PCM :D

03 DHS (http://youtube.com/watch?v=9MxiWTukDfg)

Blackout
02-05-08, 09:20 PM
6500 RPM's IN PARK (http://youtube.com/watch?v=S59Z6nMiZLg) Can you do that? No rev limiter and a 1999 Cadillac PCM :D

03 DHS (http://youtube.com/watch?v=9MxiWTukDfg)

Pppppplease!!! lol those sound good but check this out
Many a day spent in that garage
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zl_NoGMVR1c

Blackout
02-05-08, 09:21 PM
But I must say, Northstar sounds a lot better than, and is easier to remember than something like L98, or L05, or M104, etc etc.
You trying to tell me that HT4100 just doesn't role off the tongue for you?

I~LUV~Caddys8792
02-05-08, 09:40 PM
Not so much no.

93DevilleUSMC
02-06-08, 04:54 AM
Ive been away for a few days but this is a very intelligent post.

Thank you.

dkozloski
02-06-08, 01:58 PM
Pppppplease!!! lol those sound good but check this out
Many a day spent in that garage
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zl_NoGMVR1c



Lincoln hasn't built a winning performance car since the Mexican roadrace days of the '50s.

dkozloski
02-06-08, 02:07 PM
I can prove that it is not an OPEL engine. Opel used the English and German built engine, but it is not an Opel:cookoo:
Name a car with more of those motors than Opel.

Playdrv4me
02-06-08, 05:45 PM
For awhile car makers would give their engines stupid names to make it sounds more upscale or make it seem that it's a "better" engine then the competition. Cadillac had the Northstar and Lincoln had the Intech V8

Intech was the dumbest sounding thing I ever heard too. Lincoln only came up with it as a copycat measure to combat the Northstar.

In fact, I remember when I bought my 96 Continental back in 2001, my salesman at Rusty Eck Ford actually said "That one's got that thar Intech motor, it's like Cadillac's Northstar"

I'm partial to just using displacement when it isn't redundant to multiple motors.

Blackout
02-06-08, 06:37 PM
Intech was the dumbest sounding thing I ever heard too. Lincoln only came up with it as a copycat measure to combat the Northstar.

In fact, I remember when I bought my 96 Continental back in 2001, my salesman at Rusty Eck Ford actually said "That one's got that thar Intech motor, it's like Cadillac's Northstar"

I'm partial to just using displacement when it isn't redundant to multiple motors.Yeah I was never a fan of the Intech name either. But hey if it helped sell a couple extra cars because of it then I guess it makes sense

AJxtcman
02-06-08, 11:05 PM
Name a car with more of those motors than Opel.

Grumble

How about GM or Saturn?

All 54° engines are assembled at Ellesmere Port in England. Not in kraut land

The X30XE is a 54 degree v6 built by GM at Elsmere Port. It gets used in Chryslers, Cadilacs, Opels and Vauxhalls.

I think Vauxhall is in England correct?

Can we call it a Vauxhall engine?

dkozloski
02-07-08, 12:18 AM
Opel is still the biggest user of the motor by far. A Vauxhall is essentially a RH drive Opel.

AJxtcman
02-07-08, 07:52 AM
Opel is still the biggest user of the motor by far. A Vauxhall is essentially a RH drive Opel.

GRRRRRRRRR! again

I know, but hmmmmm
Well how about is a Northstar a Caddy engine. See I am losig now matter what, so I am wrong.
Now don't call that 3.6L an opel engine either.

I did some research a year ago or so on the 54° V6 that is in the Craptera and found out it was not a Opel engine. I guess I have no Idea what I had read.

BTW why the Flock a 54° engine anyway?

dkozloski
02-07-08, 02:32 PM
GRRRRRRRRR! again

I know, but hmmmmm
Well how about is a Northstar a Caddy engine. See I am losig now matter what, so I am wrong.
Now don't call that 3.6L an opel engine either.

I did some research a year ago or so on the 54° V6 that is in the Craptera and found out it was not a Opel engine. I guess I have no Idea what I had read.

BTW why the Flock a 54° engine anyway?
It ain't an Opel motor but it's more identified with Opel than anybody else. 54deg. helps coping with harmonic vibration issues. It was either that or dynamic counterweights. A three cylinder engine won't dynamically balance and two stuck together is even worse. 54deg narrows it up as well.

Po Pimp
02-07-08, 08:50 PM
In 79' GM deemed Vauxhall to be "Opelisatin", meaning that Vauxhall would only sell rebadged Opel cars. In later years they did rebadge one car from Lotus (Lotus Carlton/Vauxhall Carlton, a bad SOB) and some from Holden.

It is an Opel motor. It was developed by Opel with some input from Vauxhall and thrown over to the english for manufacturing to "swing them some business" so to speak.

Chevrolet actually used this motor as well. Known in North America as the Cadillac Catera but in South America it was called the Chevrolet Omega. The Chevy version came with a couple of inline 4 cylinder options, the V6 in question and some 4.1L (I am very unsure of this engines origin or where it came from, no other information about the 4.1L on the net).

Dkozloski, you may be right about the harmonic vibration part. I always assumed (no proof other then looking) that they went with the 54* because of the existing room in the, then current engine compartment. They had been using inline 4s and inline 6s up to the point of this engines introduction. It is quite a tight engine compartment. Kind of like what VW did with the VR6s.


I guess I am not sad to see the Northstar go. I guess what does make me sad is that Cadillac is not going to make another V8. They have the most generations of V8s (8 different versions)....basically they have the most experience of any car company in designing them. For them to actually drop it just shows where cars are heading. In twenty years form now I can picture myself cramped up in some little weak car talking about "they don't build them like they use to."

I meant no offense by the above information, was not trying to be a smart alec or anything just sharing since this had went on for a little bit.

AJxtcman
02-07-08, 09:50 PM
In 79' GM deemed Vauxhall to be "Opelisatin", meaning that Vauxhall would only sell rebadged Opel cars.
I meant no offense by the above information, was not trying to be a smart alec or anything just sharing since this had went on for a little bit.

What is the car line that a Craptera was?

Now can you name all of them?

You know J cars are Cavaliers and Sunfires.

Come on they all have the same crappy sospension and the same crappy over weight feel.

They tried to make it happen over her in the US, but the cars are just turds.

Come one list them all for us.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The V platform, or V-body, automobile platform name was used twice by General Motors.

All V-bodied cars are rear-wheel drive, and have been ever since the platform's introduction in 1967. The fourth character in the Vehicle Identification Number for a V-body car is "V".

The GM Zeta platform has replaced the V-body, and will replace the W-body, K-Body & G-body after 2010.

Many vehicles used this platform including the following nameplates:

1967–1982 Opel Commodore
1967–1982 Chevrolet Commodore (South Africa - rebadged as Opel in 1982, continued until 1986)
1978–1986 Opel Monza (Europe)
1978–1994 Opel Senator (Europe) / Vauxhall Royale/Senator (Chevrolet Senator in South Africa until 1982)
1978–2006 Holden Commodore (Australia - VB, VC, VH, VK, VL, VN, VP, VR, VS, VT, VX, VY, VZ)
1979–1982 Vauxhall Viceroy (UK)
1986–2003 Opel Omega (Europe)
1987–1994 Vauxhall Carlton (United Kingdom)
1990–1992 Lotus Carlton (UK)
1990–2006 Holden Statesman / Caprice (Australia)
1992–1998 Chevrolet Omega (Brazil)
1997–2001 Cadillac Catera (built in Germany for the US)
2000–2007 Chevrolet Caprice (Middle East export built in Australia)
2000–2007 Chevrolet Lumina / Chevrolet Omega (built in Australia for export to Middle East, South Africa, Southeast Asia, South America)
2001–2006 Holden Monaro (Australia)
2004–2006 Pontiac GTO (built in Australia for the US, unavailable in Canada)
2005–2006 Buick Royaum (built in Australia for General Motors China)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_V_platform_%28RWD%29"

AMGoff
02-08-08, 12:48 PM
Just to clarify a few things.... the GM 54-degree was designed and developed by Opel... it may have been built in England... but it is still an Opel engine. Which means that while having been reworked, the 3.2 in the original CTS was also essentially an Opel engine at heart.

As far as the intermingling of brands go... the two brands that make up the core of GM Europe are Opel and Vauxhall... they are essentially the same brand - Opel is marketed to continental Europe while Vauxhall is only in the UK. Their lineups are virtually identical.

Enter Saturn... while it was originally established as a wholly owned subsidiary with its own platform, own engine, and own distribution network, by the beginning of this decade, old Lutzy-boy decided it would be best to fully integrate the company into the GM infrastructure, ie - no more unique Saturns.

Instead of simply badge-engineering with what was already available in the US, they decided to essentially tie the company with their GM Europe operations. With the exception of the Outlook.. any Saturn on sale here can be bought in Europe/UK with an Opel/Vauxhall badge on it.

As far as the HF 3.6 goes.. of course it was a completely new from the ground up... and its development can be accredited solely to GM as a truly international effort... although it is only fair to point out that big chunk of the development team was comprised of the same Opel engineers who designed the 54 degree V6.

Either way... I'm still very interested in seeing the first non-northstar, V8 Cadillacs roll off the line...

dkozloski
02-08-08, 03:25 PM
Just to clarify a few things.... the GM 54-degree was designed and developed by Opel... it may have been built in England... but it is still an Opel engine. Which means that while having been reworked, the 3.2 in the original CTS was also essentially an Opel engine at heart.

As far as the intermingling of brands go... the two brands that make up the core of GM Europe are Opel and Vauxhall... they are essentially the same brand - Opel is marketed to continental Europe while Vauxhall is only in the UK. Their lineups are virtually identical.

Enter Saturn... while it was originally established as a wholly owned subsidiary with its own platform, own engine, and own distribution network, by the beginning of this decade, old Lutzy-boy decided it would be best to fully integrate the company into the GM infrastructure, ie - no more unique Saturns.

Instead of simply badge-engineering with what was already available in the US, they decided to essentially tie the company with their GM Europe operations. With the exception of the Outlook.. any Saturn on sale here can be bought in Europe/UK with an Opel/Vauxhall badge on it.

As far as the HF 3.6 goes.. of course it was a completely new from the ground up... and its development can be accredited solely to GM as a truly international effort... although it is only fair to point out that big chunk of the development team was comprised of the same Opel engineers who designed the 54 degree V6.

Either way... I'm still very interested in seeing the first non-northstar, V8 Cadillacs roll off the line...
You're a little late. I used to own a 1939 LaSalle ambulance that had a flathead Cadillac V8. A guy a couple of streets over had a 1930 LaSalle with a flathead V8 also. I don't think either one were Northstars.

93DevilleUSMC
02-08-08, 09:06 PM
You're a little late. I used to own a 1939 LaSalle ambulance that had a flathead Cadillac V8. A guy a couple of streets over had a 1930 LaSalle with a flathead V8 also. I don't think either one were Northstars.

I think he means new, current-generation ones.

dkozloski
02-08-08, 10:12 PM
All Cadillac has to do is roll out one of the old motors and dust it off.

asrapid
02-09-08, 12:07 PM
maybe engine from GMC denali concept (4.9 l v8 with DI) will come instead of northstar..it could probably develop more then 350 hp with DI , vvt etc.

Caddy2004
02-23-10, 12:56 PM
The fact is that with a 4 cycle engine the V8 is the perfect engine for smooth operation and low end power which is where most of us drive the car. I have no intention of driving it on winding mountian roads at 100+ MPH.
I do want it to take off from a light smoothly and quickly and confidently. I also want to be able to pass easily.
I love my Northstar, but it does not have to be a Northstar. I'd rather have a small V8, than a large 6. My feelings were reinforced when I rented a V6 Camero last Summer. It was fast and powerful. The best 6 I had ever driven.That being said, when I hit the gas to start from a light, it was definitly a 6. There was no doubt about that. Also I must mention the growl and the ambiance of a V8 that no 6 can provide, period. At least none so far.
I really encourage Cadillac to make a V8 available into the future. Most people who have to ask what gas cost, are not buying Cadillacs.