: No more Northstar's for Cadillac's?



curtc
07-22-11, 05:23 PM
Just read an article that said that 2009 was the last model year you could get the Northstar engine in a Cadillac, is this true? Did they finally retire that bad boy? Or are they still using it in the Buick's and such? I'm also shocked to learn that the STS and DTS are being discontinued very soon and being replaced with a single model, what's up with that?

ryannel2003
07-22-11, 06:20 PM
Northstar production ended this year with the DTS; The STS hasn't been available with the Northstar since the 2010 model year, leaving the 2011 model as V6 only. Buick no longer sells the Lucerne so that one is gone as well.

It's the end of a headgasket blowing, oil leaking era. Hurrah.

MoistCabbage
07-22-11, 06:37 PM
I wonder how long it will be before they have a full sized, V8 powered flagship again.

ThumperPup
07-23-11, 08:43 AM
i thout the Hg issues ended in mid 2000s last big being problems with the sevilles and devilles

brandondeleo
07-23-11, 09:53 AM
The HG issues did not end, per se, they just became less common. It's a shame that there isn't a big body Cadillac with a V8 anymore.

vincentm
07-23-11, 11:03 AM
Bring back the fleetwood, gm, damn you!!!!!

SPreston2001
07-23-11, 11:58 AM
A Cadillac without a V8 just doesnt even sound right. No V8, no Caddy, period. What engine are they using now? Are they using the same 3800 GM puts in every other sedan? I think this is also a result from higher fuel cost and more and more people wanting gas sipping pea shooters. Its a shame the Northstar never truly lived up to its potential with the HG failure rate holding it back. It could have became legendary like the ever so common 350...

curtc
07-23-11, 12:43 PM
They are using a direct injection version of the 3.6L VVT they first started using in the 2004 CTS. The only Cadillac's you can get with a V-8 now is the V series CTS's, sedan, coupe, and wagon. It is a 6.2L supercharged LSA V8, same engine that is in the new corvette ZR1, packing a brutal 556HP :thumbsup:

Here's to hoping the "XTS" is LS V8 powered and RWD :cheers:

Lord Cadillac
07-23-11, 12:45 PM
I'm also shocked to learn that the STS and DTS are being discontinued very soon and being replaced with a single model, what's up with that?

The STS "name" is going away but it'll essentially be replaced by the next CTS - which will be the new midsize Cadillac. The XTS will replace the DTS but it's also expected to handle/brake very well - so it'll essentially replace the "Seville" STS as well. More information on the Cadillac XTS can be found HERE (http://cadillacforums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=269).


I wonder how long it will be before they have a full sized, V8 powered flagship again.

Flagship discussions are happening HERE (http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/2015-cadillac-omega-forum/). You guys should venture out into the other forums. There's lots of good information out there.


Bring back the fleetwood, gm, damn you!!!!!

They're planning on it - only it probably won't be named "Fleetwood"... See the link above...


A Cadillac without a V8 just doesnt even sound right. No V8, no Caddy, period. What engine are they using now? Are they using the same 3800 GM puts in every other sedan? I think this is also a result from higher fuel cost and more and more people wanting gas sipping pea shooters. Its a shame the Northstar never truly lived up to its potential with the HG failure rate holding it back. It could have became legendary like the ever so common 350...

The main engine at Cadillac, right not, is the direct injected 3.6 liter V6. It comes back next year updated with a little more power. A twin turbo 3.0 liter V6 is planned for upcoming models. This engine is easily good for over 400 horsepower. The XTS won't be getting it in it's first year - but it'll come after that - along with all wheel drive...

Stingroo
07-23-11, 06:00 PM
LSA =/= LS9.

They're similar, though.

AElayyat
07-23-11, 07:13 PM
Nice to see the Northstar go away!

Cadillac aint what it use to be.

orconn
07-23-11, 07:44 PM
The Northstar was a great engine, just subject to problems that are also to be found with other aluminum alloy engines. For those who appreciate the over all performance of this engine, the potential head gasket problem experienced by some examples was the gamble one took to enjoy an engine that could deliver high performance in a very civilized manner.

In years to come, GM's Northstar V-8 will take it's place among other high performance engines held in high esteem today. The Northstar's faults had more to do with its' front wheel drive application, and the subsequent cost of repair when the head gasket failed than in an intrinsic design flaw. The necessity of dropping the engine from the body involved a cost that could not be justified by many second, third and fourth hand owners. The many other cars from various makers have suffered from just predicament as those who could afford the price of a used luxury car could not afford the cost of maintenance and repairs on a car originally costing many times its' ten year old "used" car price.

Obviously, I don't agree with those who continually badmouth one of the finest V-8 engines I have ever had in a Luxury car, and I have certainly had many cars with V-8's over the years. Some good, others highly overrated , but non as well suited for use in a personal luxury sedan such as the Seville.

cadi509
07-23-11, 09:45 PM
The information is old news guys read more forums beside this one, look outside the box lol, but V6's now are producing more power than any northstar (besides the 4.4 supercharged) so why keep an outdated engine with high maintence costs when a V6 can handle everything, change can often be good.

Rodya234
07-23-11, 09:59 PM
I've heard of several of the new 3.6 V6 engines that have spun rod bearings at low miles (one was at 1500!) and I've heard at least one complaint of oil consumption. We'll see how its reliability plays out, but so far it offers better fuel economy, slightly more power, and only a little less torque. And, addressing one of the complaints of V8 > V6 advocates, it only needs to rev up 400rpm higher than the Northstar to make max power. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Jesda
07-23-11, 10:57 PM
I will miss the Northstar, problems and all.

The cars you miss are the ones that please you, even if they let you down occasionally.



Everyone else can have a Lexus. Doesn't bother me.

hueterm
07-23-11, 11:23 PM
I'll miss the N*, but that's not to say that it wasn't long past time for the N* to be significantly upgraded, which is what the Ultra engine was for. The fact that they dropped the Ultra, whether for being cheap ass and broke, or for some BS green mantra -- is the biggest fail...

Jesda
07-24-11, 12:14 AM
I've been looking seriously at XLRs, finding out what to avoid or look out for, and its funny to think that the Northstar V8 is the one thing that bridges the Allante and XLR despite being more than a decade apart.

Aron9000
07-24-11, 02:41 AM
All I gotta say is good riddance. Junkyards are full of 90's/early 2000's N* cars for a reason.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 03:26 AM
I have had a very hard time finding Northstars in junkyards. In the past year, I have found 1, and it was in an accident.

Aron9000
07-24-11, 03:44 AM
^ I can't find any RWD Caddies in the junkyard around here. My local pick a part had 3 80-92's and 2 93-96's, all of them picked clean last time I was there. They must've had 15 different 90's Devilles/Sevilles and a couple of Eldorados.

Stingroo
07-24-11, 04:35 AM
You have a hard time finding N*'s in the JY?

I could go to the dinky little yard near my house tomorrow morning and find at least a dozen.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 04:38 AM
That is so weird... Like I said, I've only seen 1. Lol

Jesda
07-24-11, 04:42 AM
The late 80s to late 90s dominate the junkyards right now because they're reaching the end of their lifespan. Cars older than 1990 were likely crushed long ago. The average age of a registered car in America is nine years.

I see lots of 3800, Northstar, and 4.9L GM vehicles, as well as Hondas, Toyotas, Mazdas, Fords, Jaguars, and Nissans of the same vintage.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 05:20 AM
All I gotta say is good riddance. Junkyards are full of 90's/early 2000's N* cars for a reason.

I have no idea about your area, but in Arizona, it is really really hard to find a 98+ Seville or 2000+ Deville in a junkyard. Have searched any single junkyard in Phoenix area, and the very few Seville 98+ that I could find were just the totaled cars because of accident... No 98+ seville or 2000+ Deville was sent to a junkyard because of HG problem.....

Jesda
07-24-11, 05:26 AM
Indeed, 98+ Sevilles and Devilles are very rare. People, for now, consider them worth repairing to keep on the road. That will likely change this decade as they age and repair costs exceed their value.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 05:30 AM
I am seeing a correlation between humid parts of the country (MO, FL, TN) and lots of N*s in junkyards. I haven't seen very many at all, (Eastern WA very dry) and apparently it is the same in Arizona. Could this have anything to do with it? Haha

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 05:32 AM
Luckily, my DeVille is completely void of all of the famous N* issues. As a matter of fact, I have a N* issue you rarely ever see. Oil pan seal. Not half case or HG, good suspension, etc. Lol

ben.gators
07-24-11, 05:36 AM
They must've had 15 different 90's Devilles/Sevilles and a couple of Eldorados.

You are speaking about cars with 12-22 years of age! Average car mileage per year is about 12k. So in average those cars had been in roads for about 144k-264k miles. Where do you expect to see a car with this much miles on the clock? In a showroom? Those cars now belong to the junkyard, unless except a few of them which were lucky enough to be owned by collectors/senior people/car guys or some poor people that are stuck with an old rusty car....

You own a 95 fleetwood. Most of these cars should have been sent to junkyard by now. So can I conclude Fleetwood is a junk car?

Jesda
07-24-11, 05:46 AM
Actually, I see very few domestic luxury cars in the northwest. LOTS of pickups, Subarus, standard sedans, and minivans.

People in middle America, the northeast, and the southeast (likely due to retirees and NY/NJ migrants) buy a LOT of Cadillacs compared to the rest of the country and the rest of the world.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 05:50 AM
Actually, I see very few domestic luxury cars in the northwest. LOTS of pickups, Subarus, standard sedans, and minivans.

People in middle America, the northeast, and the southeast (likely due to retirees and NY/NJ migrants) buy a LOT of Cadillacs compared to the rest of the country and the rest of the world.Didn't think about that. Good point. People here LOVE Subaru.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 05:51 AM
Luckily, my DeVille is completely void of all of the famous N* issues. As a matter of fact, I have a N* issue you rarely ever see. Oil pan seal. Not half case or HG, good suspension, etc. Lol

Ironically my 99 powertrain is the most reliable part of the car! During my 3 year ownership I have had ZERO problem with the engine. Suspension system is the one that has been giving me the headache!

I love my 99 N*
http://iruntheinternet.com/lulzdump/images/haters-gonna-hate-monkey-crossed%20legs-1291945299k.jpg

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 05:55 AM
I am very impressed by my '99 DeVille. It runs near perfectly, especially considering its 135k miles and that the previous owner didn't take care of it very well.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 06:04 AM
My powertrain is completely flawless... It surprises me to see after 12 years of duty and 139k miles on the clock the engine runs really perfect. That is why I give 5 stars to N*! Even if someday HG fails, I will consider it as a normal aging problem and will spend money to fix it, not a big deal.

Playdrv4me
07-24-11, 06:04 AM
I do see quite a few 94-99 N* Deville carcasses left for dead on the side of the road, and definitely more of those in junk yards than 98+ Sevilles. I think the Sevilles are generally "saved" more than the Devilles because there's probably more Devilles to begin with, and also because Sevilles seem to have more owners that generally care about the model as a whole and feel the cars are worth saving.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 06:05 AM
The way I figure, the HG repair would be costly, but it is still significantly less than the car is worth, and the HG repair would just make it last a shit ton longer.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 06:10 AM
I do see quite a few 94-99 N* Deville carcasses left for dead on the side of the road, and definitely more of those in junk yards than 98+ Sevilles. I think the Sevilles are generally "saved" more than the Devilles because there's probably more Devilles to begin with, and also because Sevilles seem to have more owners that generally care about the model as a whole and feel the cars are worth saving.I don't know how I feel about this- both the Seville and Deville are similar in production numbers (I actually see many more Sevilles than Devilles on the road). The Seville is just slightly more practical than the Deville. This makes it more attractive to the typical buyer.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 06:17 AM
I do see quite a few 94-99 N* Deville carcasses left for dead on the side of the road, and definitely more of those in junk yards than 98+ Sevilles. I think the Sevilles are generally "saved" more than the Devilles because there's probably more Devilles to begin with, and also because Sevilles seem to have more owners that generally care about the model as a whole and feel the cars are worth saving.

Yes, agreed. The truth is Seville, specially the STS model, is driver's car, and these car are usually owned by car guys. Such owners usually care about their cars and don't mind to spend some money to keep these nice cars on the roads...

Playdrv4me
07-24-11, 06:19 AM
What's interesting, is that even though they're older, and thus you'd expect to see more of them abandoned or broken down... I have seen no more '90-'94 Devilles abandoned or disabled than Toyota Camrys (and I do see those from time to time).

Playdrv4me
07-24-11, 06:20 AM
Yes, agreed. The truth is Seville, specially the STS model, is driver's car, and these car are usually owned by car guys. Such owners usually care about their cars and don't mind to spend some money to keep these nice cars on the roads...

Well yes, basically what I said regarding Seville owners. The owner himself is a different kind of owner that buys the car for different, more specific reasons. Though I see it equally between SLS and STS models.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 06:23 AM
The STS is smaller, better handling, and more of a 'driver's car' than the bigger, plusher Deville.

Stingroo
07-24-11, 08:52 AM
Definitely see more DeVilles than STSs down here.

Also LOLOLOLOL Ben! I'd never expect a post like that from you. :thumbsup:

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 09:18 AM
Florida, Arizona, (specifically) Palm Springs, etc... All they are are big geriatric wards.

This results in lots of DeVilles. Hahaha

Rodya234
07-24-11, 09:23 AM
When comparing my old deVille to my STS, I tell people that the Seville is similar (the pedal placement is exactly the same, which was one of the first things I liked about the car) but is better in almost every way. I even think it's more comfortable, despite the shortage of headroom and rear legroom.

To be honest, I don't like the Devilles built post 1993 that much. The newer cars got fatter and heavier, while the C-body was actually pretty nimble and fast for its power output.

brandondeleo
07-24-11, 09:39 AM
They got fatter and heavier, as well as roomier and more comfortable, and a LOT more powerful.

amunderdog
07-24-11, 10:57 AM
The 90's Sevilles were just about perfection.
Size - performance - comfort - style
They should have refined them and ironed out the few bugs.
But i guess there is a shelf life for style and time marches on.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 03:44 PM
Definitely see more DeVilles than STSs down here.

Also LOLOLOLOL Ben! I'd never expect a post like that from you. :thumbsup:

I know... :D It is all about my beloved STS :D

http://i52.tinypic.com/11l0lqv.jpg

ryannel2003
07-24-11, 03:53 PM
I don't understand all this love for Northstar; i mean sure it was a great motor... 10 years ago. These days it was no match for the more powerful V8's and V6's and even 10 years ago it was starting to get eclipsed by more powerful motors. Just like typical GM, they kept it for nearly 20 years with very little changes with the exception of adapting it to RWD and adding VVT which was only good for 20 horsepower. I surely haven't been impressed with them as a whole. My car was $52k brand new and at 54k miles and 8 years later the original owner got rid of the car only because it had blown headgaskets? What kind of engineering is that? The original owners were extremely anal about the car and brought it in to the dealer if it was making so much as a wrong noise. I'm glad my HG's were done, but overall not to impressed with others. Most of them develop oil leaks at some point in their lives, and not all of them are super smooth. I love my car, but I would have been just as happy with a SBC Chevy like the 2006-2009 Impala SS had. That motor is just as smooth as my Northstar and has a much better powerband.

orconn
07-24-11, 03:57 PM
I don't understand all this love for Northstar; i mean sure it was a great motor... 10 years ago. These days it was no match for the more powerful V8's and V6's and even 10 years ago it was starting to get eclipsed by more powerful motors. Just like typical GM, they kept it for nearly 20 years with very little changes with the exception of adapting it to RWD and adding VVT which was only good for 20 horsepower. I surely haven't been impressed with them as a whole. My car was $52k brand new and at 54k miles and 8 years later the original owner got rid of the car only because it had blown headgaskets? What kind of engineering is that? The original owners were extremely anal about the car and brought it in to the dealer if it was making so much as a wrong noise. I'm glad my HG's were done, but overall not to impressed with others. Most of them develop oil leaks at some point in their lives, and not all of them are super smooth. I love my car, but I would have been just as happy with a SBC Chevy like the 2006-2009 Impala SS had. That motor is just as smooth as my Northstar and has a much better powerband.

Dream on!

ryannel2003
07-24-11, 04:08 PM
Dream on? I'm confused? I just don't understand how everybody is praising the Northstar so highly when GM could have easily fixed all the production problems by the 1994 or 1995 model year and none of these issues would have never happened.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 04:11 PM
I don't understand all this love for Northstar; i mean sure it was a great motor... 10 years ago. These days it was no match for the more powerful V8's and V6's and even 10 years ago it was starting to get eclipsed by more powerful motors. Just like typical GM, they kept it for nearly 20 years with very little changes with the exception of adapting it to RWD and adding VVT which was only good for 20 horsepower. I surely haven't been impressed with them as a whole. My car was $52k brand new and at 54k miles and 8 years later the original owner got rid of the car only because it had blown headgaskets? What kind of engineering is that? The original owners were extremely anal about the car and brought it in to the dealer if it was making so much as a wrong noise. I'm glad my HG's were done, but overall not to impressed with others. Most of them develop oil leaks at some point in their lives, and not all of them are super smooth. I love my car, but I would have been just as happy with a SBC Chevy like the 2006-2009 Impala SS had. That motor is just as smooth as my Northstar and has a much better powerband.

If all the people want to follow your rule, then no man should say his wife "I love you". The reason is there are younger girls out there who are hotter and sexier than man's 40 year old wife..... Right?

Here we are speaking about a 20 year old engine. There is no doubt that newer engines can provide you with higher HP at better gas mileage, however this fact shouldn't prevent us from appreciating a 20-year old engine that was technologically ahead of its time. To be honest, this engine still can compete with modern GM engines.... It is not going to win, but it will be a good opponent....

ryannel2003
07-24-11, 04:13 PM
It's a car... not a person. It's definitely not like that.

If you all like the Northstar that's fine; I just wasn't as impressed.

Jesda
07-24-11, 04:21 PM
Going to disagree on 5.3 vs Northstar. 5.3 has gobs of satisfying power and makes a glorious sound, but it lacks the Northstar's refinement. Northstar, despite being trouble-prone and expensive to maintain, also feels more expensive, especially in 93-97 Cadillacs where you can really feel and hear the difference.

ryannel2003
07-24-11, 04:23 PM
I will give you that, but I'm comparing the 5.3 to my Northstar which has never had a smooth idle at has always felt rough.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 04:24 PM
It's a car... not a person. It's definitely not like that.

If you all like the Northstar that's fine; I just wasn't as impressed.

No, I am not personifying a car. I am just saying everything should be evaluated and appreciated in its own context! That's it!

orconn
07-24-11, 05:02 PM
I will give you that, but I'm comparing the 5.3 to my Northstar which has never had a smooth idle at has always felt rough.

Sorry to hear your Northstar is atypical of the breed. But I agree, with Jesda, that the Northstar's level of sophistication and smoothness of operation throughout a broad range of performance parameters. I have had only two cars with engines that performed as well, my Alfa Romeo with it 4 DOHC V-6 and my Lamborghini DOHC V-12. Both are older designs than the Northstar V-8. Most car aficionados praise the high efficiency of the DOHC engines whether they be European or Japanese, it is just that American companies were late to this design feature. The added cost and complexity of this design, not too mention the cost and problems to be had with alloy blocks and heads (the Europeans certainly went through their tribulations with these designs).

The Northstar* engine and the Northstar* system of suspension, steering and transmission regulation was a major step forward in design and performance for an American company when introduced, and with refinements over its' lifetime still sets a valid benchmark for cars today.

drewsdeville
07-24-11, 07:39 PM
Ah, I just posted somethign similar to Ryan's just a short time ago. I agree, the northstar was wonderful back in the '90's when it really was a standard for passenger cars. They were on their game back then, but rather than taking advantage of that momentum, they just let it ride for 20 years.

The engine debuted with 300 horsepower 20 years ago, and that's what it ended with. No performance or fuel efficiency improvement in 2 whole decades. OHC engines really took off about 10 years ago or so (hell, you can find them in economy cars), and the Northstar quickly fell in standards ever since then. 300hp DOCH engines are what you typically have been able to find in a typical highly trimmed family sedan for a while now, yet GM has been riding it out in their premium luxury lines. They knew it was happening, that's why we saw the Northstars exclusivity fade as it became introduced in GM's other brands, such as the Pontiac Bonneville. The Bonneville is a nice car, don't get me wrong, but if the Northstar was truly the standard of the world, it didn't belong in a lowly Pontiac family sedan. Instead,the Bonneville and it's competition was the perfect class for it to fit into, but left the high end (Cadillac) falling behind.

And, just like the lack of performance updates, GM also failed to update the engines key trouble areas - fluid leaks. Fine, it has problems like any other engine. Where my understanding gets hazy is how 20 years of a single engine has the same problems throughout it's entire life. Half case seals, crossover gaskets, and the much disputed headgaskets really have tainted the Northstars rep, even outside of our online community. 2 decades of the same problems will do that. Word gets around after a while.

IMO, the Northstar was great in the '90's, even with it's maintenance concerns. However, I think the 2000 update was far too conservative for it's usage and didn't allow the engine to maintain the awesome relative performance it had in the '90's. The lack of significant updates over 20 years tells the consumer that GM really wasn't paying attention. If GM wasn't paying attention to the Northstar, why should the consumer?

ltdltc
07-24-11, 08:18 PM
I love my car, but I would have been just as happy with a SBC Chevy like the 2006-2009 Impala SS had. That motor is just as smooth as my Northstar and has a much better powerband.

:histeric: A 323 ft-lb Torque engine attached to a V6 transmission, no thanks. A 4T65-E may be fine behind a LA1/L36/L67 but attach a LS4 to it and your bound for transmission pain at some point. Not only that but it shares the same GM blunder engineering that the N* had bear. Numerous people complain of the Displacement on Demand quirks and increased oil consumption when it is active (theres a TSB out there about this). A look through the W-Body boards and transmission trouble on a LS4 car is synonymous to a reading here of the N* forum in regards to the head gasket issues.

The N* is antiquated for sure but its managed to stay somewhat relevant compared to competition for the most part. My 2006 N* only has 292 HP/288 ft-lb Torque but it feels great and you don't need rev to the moon if you need it to do something. Every GM 3.6L equipped car I've driven feels adequate but I don't like that to get comparable power to say the N* you need to constantly be at higher RPMS just to get the power. I think they need to boost the torque a little bit more on the High Feature V6s if no more V8s are on the horizon.

Jesda
07-24-11, 08:50 PM
Indeed, Drew. There was a lot of untapped potential and neglect on the part of GM.

ryannel2003
07-24-11, 09:23 PM
My grandfather's 06 Impala SS with the 5.3 feels just as refined as my Northstar and has no transmission issues. His DoD has been great as well.

77CDV
07-24-11, 09:31 PM
I'll agree with both orconn and drew. The N* is a very smooth, refined engine that in typical GM fashion was left to wither on the vine. That they couldn't correct known defects over a 20 year life span is just lazy and incompetant. What really frosts me is that they introduce the XTS as FWD (what, they didn't have enough time between 1985 and now to get develop a RWD car?) and with no V8 option. I don't know what GM thinks they're playing at, but it sure isn't sound business practice.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
07-24-11, 09:33 PM
Agreed. Ahead of the time for 1993, but falling behind by about 2003.

ben.gators
07-24-11, 09:59 PM
I am wondering why Destroyer hasn't showed up yet!? :D












P.S: Ladies and gentlemen! This is ben.gators post number 2,000! :D

77CDV
07-24-11, 10:02 PM
The fruit hangs too low here.

Jesda
07-24-11, 10:09 PM
The thread did the job for him :histeric:

Destroyer
07-24-11, 11:35 PM
The thread did the job for him :histeric:Euphoria anyone? :)

Stingroo
07-24-11, 11:43 PM
Damn it! So much for my planned "In before Destoryer" post.


:(

Playdrv4me
07-25-11, 06:13 AM
Definitely on the same page as Ryan and Drew on the N*. It's a "good" engine with several long-standing flaws. But one thing I noticed as I was sitting here, is that unless we are talking a balls to the wall performance vehicle like say, the CTS-V, the engine "model" itself matters to me far less than the car surrounding it and the TOTAL number of cylinders.

A fantastic example of what *should* have been the development schedule for the Northstar is the UZ engine in the 1990-2006 Lexus LS. The motor itself had a production run that *exceeded* that of the much vaunted Northstar by several years (1989-2010), yet managed to stay DEAD NUTS RELIABLE *and* RELEVANT to its time almost until the end. With small updates occurring throughout the entire production run that consistently maintained both reliability, consistency and improved power. Even before the N* existed, the UZ was already producing 256hp, in an era where the only thing Cadillac had to compete with was a meager (though robust) 200hp OHV design. Subsequent updates bumped it to 261, and then matching the N*'s 300hp by 1998. Also much like the N*, it was a motorsport inspired design with a 5.2L version (of the later 3UZ) powering Toyota's Super GT racecar program.

When it finally ended in 2010 at the demise of the SC430, the engine had racked up any number of awards and held steady it's rock solid reputation for reliability and performance during that entire run. Much like the N* however, Toyota finally saw fit to retire it in the interest of the ever increasing race in the HP wars. Unfortunately, the replacement which now powers the LS460 was not quite as sturdy and had some hiccups in the first year or so. Still, development continues and problems are rapidly dealt with.

Likewise, when it comes to Mercedes and BMW's large V8 powered vehicles, I don't, and shouldn't really have to care WHAT V8 is under the hood unless I'm specifically looking for a higher horsepower variant. In most cases, all I know is that a particular BMW, Mercedes or Lexus has that respective company's "corporate V8". The Northstar (and to a less successful extent the Lincoln/Ford "Intech") was a clever attempt to market the combination of the engine and transmission itself, as much as the car. It was a valiant attempt, but also led to it being MUCH more easily recognized when it came to the negatives.

Regardless, had you thrown a N* badge on the 1UZ-FE, dropped in an STS and opened up the exhaust so it could actually be HEARD in the passenger cabin, you'd basically have the finest luxury sport sedan on the planet in my opinion. Not that it isn't already close even WITH the N*'s flaws.

Lord Cadillac
07-25-11, 11:18 AM
A little off topic but I see a lot of love for the FWD Seville in this discussion. The upcoming XTS will be an excellent replacement for that car when the twin turbo V6 arrives in it's second year.

As for the Northstar, I loved it in my 95 ETC and 00 DeVille DTS. It really was a very smooth engine that turned into a monster when you put the pedal to the metal. I really wish the Ultra V8 would make an appearance.. Maybe in the car that site on the upcoming Omega platform...

RippyPartsDept
07-25-11, 11:47 AM
yeah they shelved the Ultra (and any public plans for it's future use) but there's still a chance we might see it yet ... and maybe just maybe they already have super secret plans to use it in the yet-to-be-designed flagship

Jesda
07-25-11, 05:11 PM
Much of the affection for the Seville on this forum is due to its elegant, clean three-box design. It follows Harley Earl's mantra of "longer, lower, wider." The XTS, at least the concept car that was paraded around the continent, is an ungainly tall thing that would look nothing like a Cadillac if not for its grille and tail lights. The Dodge Intrepid-like profile reminds me of a late-model Toyota Avalon or some kind of Buick.

GM said that the XTS concept would be the production car, then went back and said changes were being made (probably after hearing negative feedback). I suspect that's why, in addition to bankruptcy, the production XTS was delayed a bit. We'll see.

I'm sure the interior will be beautiful, but ugly as ugly, and I can't get past that on something that expensive.

orconn
07-25-11, 05:26 PM
Definitely on the same page as Ryan and Drew on the N*. It's a "good" engine with several long-standing flaws. But one thing I noticed as I was sitting here, is that unless we are talking a balls to the wall performance vehicle like say, the CTS-V, the engine "model" itself matters to me far less than the car surrounding it and the TOTAL number of cylinders.

A fantastic example of what *should* have been the development schedule for the Northstar is the UZ engine in the 1990-2006 Lexus LS. The motor itself had a production run that *exceeded* that of the much vaunted Northstar by several years (1989-2010), yet managed to stay DEAD NUTS RELIABLE *and* RELEVANT to its time almost until the end. With small updates occurring throughout the entire production run that consistently maintained both reliability, consistency and improved power. Even before the N* existed, the UZ was already producing 256hp, in an era where the only thing Cadillac had to compete with was a meager (though robust) 200hp OHV design. Subsequent updates bumped it to 261, and then matching the N*'s 300hp by 1998. Also much like the N*, it was a motorsport inspired design with a 5.2L version (of the later 3UZ) powering Toyota's Super GT racecar program.

When it finally ended in 2010 at the demise of the SC430, the engine had racked up any number of awards and held steady it's rock solid reputation for reliability and performance during that entire run. Much like the N* however, Toyota finally saw fit to retire it in the interest of the ever increasing race in the HP wars. Unfortunately, the replacement which now powers the LS460 was not quite as sturdy and had some hiccups in the first year or so. Still, development continues and problems are rapidly dealt with.

Likewise, when it comes to Mercedes and BMW's large V8 powered vehicles, I don't, and shouldn't really have to care WHAT V8 is under the hood unless I'm specifically looking for a higher horsepower variant. In most cases, all I know is that a particular BMW, Mercedes or Lexus has that respective company's "corporate V8". The Northstar (and to a less successful extent the Lincoln/Ford "Intech") was a clever attempt to market the combination of the engine and transmission itself, as much as the car. It was a valiant attempt, but also led to it being MUCH more easily recognized when it came to the negatives.

Regardless, had you thrown a N* badge on the 1UZ-FE, dropped in an STS and opened up the exhaust so it could actually be HEARD in the passenger cabin, you'd basically have the finest luxury sport sedan on the planet in my opinion. Not that it isn't already close even WITH the N*'s flaws.

Interestly, what you describe in your last paragraph above, is the 1993 Seville STS. The first year of Seville STS production with the Northstar engine was, in my experience (having owned a '93, '95 and '02), was the "sportiest" of the 4th generation STS's (and way sportier than the 5th generation STS"s). The handling was quite sharp, the steering very direct, the ride firmer than any of the following renditions, and the exhaust not most audible within the cabin. Starting with the '94 the STS grew progressively more refined. My personal favorite is the 1995 which maintained the performance of the '93 with a more refined ride, better steering and lower decibels of exhaust note!

Lord Cadillac
07-26-11, 10:47 AM
Since we keep seeing the XTS under so many covers, I'm really hoping the exterior is changing. I do believe Cadillac has heard all the negative input - but they also hear all the, "Wow! Oh my God! It's the most BEAUTIFUL Cadillac I've ever laid mine eyes upon!" nonsense from people that will simply like anything with a Cadillac badge on it. I like the back - but I don't like the grill and I'm really not impressed with the sides. It could be ANYTHING from the sides. So I'm with you on the exterior design. I do hope they fix that up because this car does have the potential to replace DTS and Seville sales...


Much of the affection for the Seville on this forum is due to its elegant, clean three-box design. It follows Harley Earl's mantra of "longer, lower, wider." The XTS, at least the concept car that was paraded around the continent, is an ungainly tall thing that would look nothing like a Cadillac if not for its grille and tail lights. The Dodge Intrepid-like profile reminds me of a late-model Toyota Avalon or some kind of Buick.

GM said that the XTS concept would be the production car, then went back and said changes were being made (probably after hearing negative feedback). I suspect that's why, in addition to bankruptcy, the production XTS was delayed a bit. We'll see.

I'm sure the interior will be beautiful, but ugly as ugly, and I can't get past that on something that expensive.