: CTS owner looking into STS



jran0823
09-14-12, 08:08 PM
Hey everyone I have been a member on this forum in the CTS section for a couple years. I love my CTS but due to the growing family my wife and myself are looking into STS's. We do NOT want a 3.6, I have been a Tech for many years and have encountered a fair share of issues with the 3.6 over the years so we are leaning towards a Northstar or a V. As of right now we are currently looking at a Sunset Blue 07 STS-4 1SG with a Northstar. Is there any know issues with the newer Northstar? I have dealt with the older Northstar's, but I know they did a block redesign in 05. Are the head gasket issues resolved? Is there anything serious I need to know about these before I pull the trigger on one.

Charles Warren
09-15-12, 12:43 AM
no oil consumption on the newer n* either :) just the front differential bushing and engine mount is what ive encountered but im not complaining

truckinman
09-15-12, 02:02 AM
I don't really see how an 05 or so STS is really justifiably bigger than a CTS if it's for a growing family. Not THAT much more room inside an STS really. Most people when they have a growing family they go from a sport sedan to like a small SUV or mini van. I wouldn't buy mini van if my life depended on it. Merely speculating.

jran0823
09-15-12, 08:05 AM
I won't do a mini van. I'm 6'5" and felt like the back seat is bigger and the car is wider. But my other option is a 07+ Tahoe LTZ

C&C
09-15-12, 08:23 AM
The STS is markedly wider though rear seat legroom is a little short with front seats all the way back, but would be fine for most children (I would think). The trunk is also larger (wider) and hold quite a lot of luggage. I real like the space of the STS (and haven driven the CTS), and compared, I felt a little more cramped, but that was due to knowing the difference. The CTS is a fine car but my preference is STS. JMO

truckinman
09-15-12, 03:01 PM
The STS is markedly wider though rear seat legroom is a little short with front seats all the way back, but would be fine for most children (I would think). The trunk is also larger (wider) and hold quite a lot of luggage. I real like the space of the STS (and haven driven the CTS), and compared, I felt a little more cramped, but that was due to knowing the difference. The CTS is a fine car but my preference is STS. JMO

Oh I prefer the STS hands down as well. I just don't consider it enough of a change in size to buy it because of a growing family. But just my .02. It is larger, however, don't get me wrong. And do wish the OP the best of luck finding a good one to his liking. Wasn't trying to rain on his parade so to speak. Lol. I've just got the 3.6 in mine but still love it way more than a CTS from same time period.

curtc
09-15-12, 03:12 PM
I traded in my 04 CTS for my STS and don't regret it one bit, main reason was the size factor, well, and to ditch my 3.6 before the timing chain snapped. I enjoy the STS much more, drives similar but you definitely feel the size difference. It isn't a whole lot bigger inside but it is, wider and a tad more leg room in back. If you get one get a Northstar, V8's are fun :)

truckinman
09-15-12, 03:31 PM
I traded in my 04 CTS for my STS and don't regret it one bit, main reason was the size factor, well, and to ditch my 3.6 before the timing chain snapped. I enjoy the STS much more, drives similar but you definitely feel the size difference. It isn't a whole lot bigger inside but it is, wider and a tad more leg room in back. If you get one get a Northstar, V8's are fun :)

I keep hearing bout that timing chain. Just praying mine holds on a while. In my 98 Lexus ES300, the timing belt was am issue with that car I heard from many people but that car had been in the family since it was nearly new. I sold it with 240k miles and we never had to fix the timing belt. So there are exceptions. Long as I can get another 20k mile outa my STS b4 I gotta fix it, I'd be good with that. That'd put her at 110k miles.

malatu
09-15-12, 09:43 PM
Check your oil regularly and keep it topped off. Just had to change mine at 93k.

jran0823
09-15-12, 10:13 PM
Check your oil regularly and keep it topped off. Just had to change mine at 93k.

With the N*? That is the reason I avoid the 3.6. My CTS has the 3.2 with 107,000 miles on it now with zero oil consumption or leaks. I do my oil changes every 9,000 miles and get every drop of 5 qts back out of it without adding in between changes and I'm wanting the same with my next car.

The Sunset Blue 07 is out of the picture for sure. I took it for a test drive and it had a wrist pin knock and the air ride sacked out as you drove it. The engine was very tired for 65,000 miles. My 3.2 had more get up and go, so my search will continue.

EChas3
09-15-12, 10:23 PM
In my 98 Lexus ES300, the timing belt was am issue with that car I heard from many people but that car had been in the family since it was nearly new. I sold it with 240k miles and we never had to fix the timing belt. So there are exceptions.

I'm not familiar with the maintenance intrvals on that ES, but for most cars with timing belts it's a foolish one to ignore. Timing belts aren't usually that expensive (or hard) to replace.

jran0823
09-15-12, 10:53 PM
Maintenance intervals for Lexus is every 90,000 miles for timing belt. Back to the OP I'm getting mixed feelings about the STS. I would like to stick to a sedan. I know I'm going loose economy because there is no way the N* will get 35mpg, but I can live with it. Considering my Camaro got 7mpg, I just got spoiled with my GTP getting 38-40mpg and my CTS getting 32-35mpg and occasionally getting 37mpg highway.

Charles Warren
09-16-12, 04:26 PM
With the N*? That is the reason I avoid the 3.6. My CTS has the 3.2 with 107,000 miles on it now with zero oil consumption or leaks. I do my oil changes every 9,000 miles and get every drop of 5 qts back out of it without adding in between changes and I'm wanting the same with my next car.

The Sunset Blue 07 is out of the picture for sure. I took it for a test drive and it had a wrist pin knock and the air ride sacked out as you drove it. The engine was very tired for 65,000 miles. My 3.2 had more get up and go, so my search will continue. 5qts i always put 6 in. And its 210k on the odometer :) no problems besides the cps went out and the bolts aren't hex heads which sucks, but i do perfer driving sts but when i hop in the cts and it reminds me of why i bought sts but feels much lighter than sts. Both cars are nice just wish cts had n*

jran0823
09-17-12, 01:40 PM
Overfilling an engine can be dangerous because to much oil can cause the oil to foam. In which the engine doesn't receive proper lubrication. I know your CTS has 210k but it might be just slowly damaging it. A quarter of a quart wouldn't be a big deal, but a whole quart?

EChas3
09-17-12, 09:23 PM
Where did that idea come from?

truckinman
09-17-12, 09:39 PM
Where did that idea come from?

I've heard that too from numerous people who know what they're talking about

EChas3
09-17-12, 10:45 PM
I've never heard anyone claim it's a good idea to over-fill a crankcase. In fact, it costs horsepower even if it causes no other harm. A bad idea all around.

Racers run dry sump systems to reduce friction. If your oil is too hot, run an oil cooler.

Oil does 4 things. Job one is forming a thin layer of lubrication between moving parts. It also cools, cleans & seals. If it foams at all, even a little, it can't do any of them as well.

jran0823
09-18-12, 06:55 PM
That is one of they things the imprint on you in automotive school. In the older v8's it wasn't bad to add half a quart for severe duty, but those days are long gone.

truckinman
09-19-12, 01:08 AM
Yea ever since the first time my dad taught me to change oil, he let me know how important just the right amount of oil is.

DG2
09-20-12, 09:45 PM
Maintenance intervals for Lexus is every 90,000 miles for timing belt. Back to the OP I'm getting mixed feelings about the STS. I would like to stick to a sedan. I know I'm going loose economy because there is no way the N* will get 35mpg, but I can live with it. Considering my Camaro got 7mpg, I just got spoiled with my GTP getting 38-40mpg and my CTS getting 32-35mpg and occasionally getting 37mpg highway.

I am the original owner of my 05 STS V8 AWD and it has been a awesome ! 179,000 miles. Last year I needed motor mounts and some tranny work last week. Never a timing chain But after nearly 8 years , 180k miles not so bad.

Ludacrisvp
09-20-12, 10:59 PM
I am the original owner of my 05 STS V8 AWD and it has been a awesome ! 179,000 miles. Last year I needed motor mounts and some tranny work last week. Never a timing chain But after nearly 8 years , 180k miles not so bad.
I hope that all of the v8 owners can be this lucky

curtc
09-20-12, 11:20 PM
I hope that all of the v8 owners can be this lucky

I hope to get at least that out of mine. Sold my 2001 STS with 233k on the clock, still running strong, mind you that was after A LOT of TLC :)

Hope this STS doesn't requires quite so much effort to keep on the road.

DG2
09-21-12, 08:12 AM
It really has been a very impressive car. I live in metro NYC and the STS is in the worst traffic and worst roads in the Nation and has held up beautifully. When I take clients out they still ask "is that a new Cadillac?".

It's the car that made me a Cadillac fan for life. Hoping to get a XTS within next year and the STS will stay in family fur my kids.

curtc
09-22-12, 02:03 PM
It really has been a very impressive car. I live in metro NYC and the STS is in the worst traffic and worst roads in the Nation and has held up beautifully. When I take clients out they still ask "is that a new Cadillac?".

It's the car that made me a Cadillac fan for life. Hoping to get a XTS within next year and the STS will stay in family fur my kids.

My 95 Seville hooked me for life, 4/4 when it comes to Caddy's, never owned anything but...Definitely won't be stepping into an XTS ever...too Buick looking for me besides the front and the interior...Not a fan, but to each their own :)

DarkMingBlueSTS
09-22-12, 04:44 PM
My 95 Seville hooked me for life, 4/4 when it comes to Caddy's, never owned anything but...Definitely won't be stepping into an XTS ever...too Buick looking for me besides the front and the interior...Not a fan, but to each their own :)

I agree

DG2
09-22-12, 09:03 PM
What I really admire about the XTS is the amazing interior. It is nicer then anything on the market today and comfort factor is off the charts. Yes, it is "Buick" like on the outside but I always thought the new Lacross was a beautiful car.

curtc
09-22-12, 09:49 PM
What I really admire about the XTS is the amazing interior. It is nicer then anything on the market today and comfort factor is off the charts. Yes, it is "Buick" like on the outside but I always thought the new Lacross was a beautiful car.

The Lacross is a nice car, but it's NOT a Cadillac...Why GM decided to make the XTS look like every other sedan out there is beyond me...The STS/CTS has style specific to Cadillac and its Art & Science design...The XTS falls short IMO, still awaiting their true flagship.

DG2
09-22-12, 10:34 PM
I hear you and I am looking forward to that new flagship as well. The way I look at it, no different then the Escalade to Tahoe.

EChas3
09-23-12, 01:02 PM
I think almost all cars appearance is converging because all designers are chasing the common goals of aerodynamics, efficient use of space, safety, etc.

curtc
09-23-12, 01:22 PM
I think almost all cars appearance is converging because all designers are chasing the common goals of aerodynamics, efficient use of space, safety, etc.

They don't have to look the same though, GM is really good at recycling from other lines unfortunately.

EChas3
09-23-12, 06:11 PM
They don't have to look the same though, GM is really good at recycling from other lines unfortunately.

I agree.

curtc
09-23-12, 06:35 PM
Probably a big part of why they needed to be bailed out..

Chevrolet Uplander
Buick Terraza
Saturn Relay

SAME DAMN VEHICLE!

DG2
09-23-12, 06:48 PM
Probably a big part of why they needed to be bailed out..

Chevrolet Uplander
Buick Terraza
Saturn Relay

SAME DAMN VEHICLE!

All discontinued. Platform sharing is OK. All brands do it even the uber expensive Bentley , it's a $250,000 car built off a VW !! Ditto Porsche Cayanne and Panaromma. Both built off shared VW platforms. We do not want to see a rebadge. that's different.

truckinman
09-23-12, 07:03 PM
All discontinued. Platform sharing is OK. All brands do it even the uber expensive Bentley , it's a $250,000 car built off a VW !! Ditto Porsche Cayanne and Panaromma. Both built off shared VW platforms. We do not want to see a rebadge. that's different.

Yea but the Bentley doesn't look like any VW. And the panaromma doesn't look like a VW. But the Cayanne does look just like the VW tourag. At least the first generations looked alike. They've sorta split off now. But 4 other GMs that are identical pretty much are the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, chevy traverse, and Saturn Outlook.

curtc
09-23-12, 08:01 PM
All discontinued. Platform sharing is OK. All brands do it even the uber expensive Bentley , it's a $250,000 car built off a VW !! Ditto Porsche Cayanne and Panaromma. Both built off shared VW platforms. We do not want to see a rebadge. that's different.

The vehicles I mentioned are definitely rebadged, not just the platform is shared, the whole damn body is identical.

DG2
09-23-12, 10:31 PM
The vehicles I mentioned are definitely rebadged, not just the platform is shared, the whole damn body is identical.

Yes but they are all dead . I hear you and have been very criticle in this forum about GM going back on their original pledge (2003) that future Cadillacs would be stand alone product. Original SRX,CTS and STS were in fact exclusive Caddy. As GM continues to do amazing and make the big profits I hope the next gen SRX is on Caddy only and Made in USA. And I think the current XTS is going to "morph" into the new Cadillac Flagship. Otherwise there modeling is off.

jran0823
09-26-12, 12:34 AM
All I know is if Cadillac doesn't make a serious redesign, bring a RWD sedan back I won't be buying anything newer than a 2012 besides an Escalade.

carter's_sts
09-26-12, 10:09 AM
That's why I went ahead and got a V recently. I have been looking at the XTS and I think it's a nice car, but it's not enough (or maybe any) better than the STS. And it does seem like a Buick. Front drive platform and under powered are not good. STS is awesome.

Hoping they come up with a better replacement for the STS some day. Or improve the XTS alot.

turnne
09-28-12, 05:40 PM
All I know is if Cadillac doesn't make a serious redesign, bring a RWD sedan back I won't be buying anything newer than a 2012 besides an Escalade.

you better call the dealer and ask him what color Escalades on on his lot then

I dont see them building a RWD flagship or a V8 Sedan anytime soon

I think they are going the way of Lincoln....FWD( or AWD based on FWD platforms) with 6 cylinders on shared platforms

IMO...they brand would have been really in the tank,.....sedan wise....if it hadn't been for the CTS

STS selling at low volumes( or on heavilly subsidized leases) or DTS rental cars( or heavilly subsidized leases) could not have been serving them

Both coming back 3 years old worth fractions of their original value

Meanwhile the CTS held value

So which direction do you think they are going to go?

jran0823
09-28-12, 11:59 PM
IMO I think Cadillac should stick more to it's root than go with the crowd. I know many people that have gone to European cars now because of their American luxury cars that they have bought for years went to FWD and AWD instead of offering a RWD platform. I don't have a problem with Cadillac sharing engines like they used to, as long as they are reliable. I would like to see something with a more original design than just minor cosmetic changes from the Buicks. I like my first gen CTS better than the second gens. The way I'm leaning right now is more towards a STS-V just since they are easier to find than a RWD STS N* with all of the options my wife and I want around here.

cadillacmike68
09-29-12, 07:57 AM
Back to the OP. STSs are noticabely more romier than CTSs, even my wife noticed the difference.

But it really isn't going to make that much difference. If you need a really large car, find a 1994-1996 Fleetwood. Can't go wrong with one of those.

EChas3
09-29-12, 02:35 PM
ACC is not available on the STS-V.

jran0823
10-01-12, 08:58 PM
I'm not a fan of the Caddy's built from 1961-2002, so a Fleetwood is definitely out of the question. ACC is the adaptive cruise control right. If so I can live without, the 469hp makes up for it.

truckinman
10-02-12, 05:48 AM
ACC is not available on the STS-V.

No ventilated seats either. Just heated

EChas3
10-02-12, 09:01 PM
^ The V seats are ventilated... by speed!

turnne
10-02-12, 09:46 PM
^ The V seats are ventilated... by speed!

I was thinking the same thing

But correct me if I am wrong


The STS-V was really not that big of a deal..performance wise

The CTS-V was a much more serious car

On another note....are 5-6 year old CTS's more valuable than an equivalent mileage STS?

The CTS was less to buy new...but they seem to actually be worth more after they are 5 years old or so

so value wise....if you buy the CTS early in its life..its actually a better value..right?


Warren

turnne
10-02-12, 09:46 PM
deleted

truckinman
10-02-12, 10:36 PM
I was thinking the same thing

But correct me if I am wrong

The STS-V was really not that big of a deal..performance wise

The CTS-V was a much more serious car

On another note....are 5-6 year old CTS's more valuable than an equivalent mileage STS?

The CTS was less to buy new...but they seem to actually be worth more after they are 5 years old or so

so value wise....if you buy the CTS early in its life..its actually a better value..right?

Warren

The CTS-V was a 6 speed manual so it was more of a "drivers" car than the STS-V. The STS was only available as an automatic. But any car with 469 hp can't be labeled as not an exciting car to drive. It was just a bit more cumbersome in the corners on a twisty rd bc of it's size.

EChas3
10-02-12, 10:40 PM
To me, the STS ought to be bigger. The comparable CTS doesn't have the features I want, either.

truckinman
10-02-12, 10:51 PM
To me, the STS ought to be bigger. The comparable CTS doesn't have the features I want, either.

Yea. I like my keyless entry/start on mine. The first gen CTS didn't offer that. Yet it's standard on all 05 and up STS's.

carter's_sts
10-02-12, 11:35 PM
I've now had both the STS and STS-V and trust me the V is very much a performance car. It's amazing. Not just faster (very fast), but the way it drives is great. Better transmission, better breaks, better wheels, better suspension, better steering.

I still love my regular STS, but the way they drive is almost like night and day.

To be fair, I am comparing a V6 to a V.

jran0823
10-03-12, 02:10 PM
The STS V-6 was never in the picture, I have seen way to many issues with that engine personally. I had a 07 Aura with it an it had burnt valves by the time it hit 40k miles, and my mother-in-law's STS with it burns 1-2qts every 1,000 miles.

carter's_sts
10-04-12, 02:07 AM
Got 52k on mine and no issues and burns no oil. Seems like some are fine and some are a drag.

jran0823
10-04-12, 07:38 PM
Not a chance I'm willing to take. Plus I like the v8 idea

ben.gators
10-08-12, 07:27 AM
I've now had both the STS and STS-V and trust me the V is very much a performance car. It's amazing. Not just faster (very fast), but the way it drives is great. Better transmission, better breaks, better wheels, better suspension, better steering.

I still love my regular STS, but the way they drive is almost like night and day.

To be fair, I am comparing a V6 to a V.

Your regular STS is not equipped with MRC suspension system, right?
How do you describe the suspension system and the ride quality of your V compared to your STS? I hope V is not harsh on rough roads....
I am wondering why STS-V didn't come with MRC!?

And by the way, since you own both V and regular STS, I think you can answer one of my main questions and concerns. Is V very expensive to maintain in comparison to a regular STS? How about availability of parts for V?

carter's_sts
10-08-12, 11:47 AM
Right, no MRC on either one. The V seems much less harsh on rough roads. I'm not exactly sure why because it's supposed to have a stiffer suspension, but I can tell you that in my regular STS it seems like I have to baby it a little bit on bumpy roads and much less so with the V. It rides really nice and is really comfortable for me.

I've only had the V for a short time so far, so I can't comment on the reliability too much. I checked on the history of it before I bought it though and the only things it had done were: battery, rear diff seal, and water pump. It has low miles and I'm lucky because it's covered under a CPO for now. I also got the GMPP.

I agree with others on here who recommend a warranty. These are good cars, but can be expensive to fix and like all the modern luxury cars have a lot that can break.



Your regular STS is not equipped with MRC suspension system, right?
How do you describe the suspension system and the ride quality of your V compared to your STS? I hope V is not harsh on rough roads....
I am wondering why STS-V didn't come with MRC!?

And by the way, since you own both V and regular STS, I think you can answer one of my main questions and concerns. Is V very expensive to maintain in comparison to a regular STS? How about availability of parts for V?

carter's_sts
10-11-12, 04:33 PM
As far as the ride difference, it might be somewhat from AWD vs. RWD. Someone told me the AWD suspension is a little harsher. I've never driven a RWD regular STS.