Does anyone think that the STS-V engine will fit into the CTS-V? Do you think that the Transmissions in both cars can be changed into the other one like the CTS-V Tranny into the STS-V and the STS-V Tranny into the CTS-V? Not saying that the CTS-V needs a automatic tranny I just feel that if the STS-V is going to have all the power it needs to have a 6-Speed Manual tranny like the CTS-V or does the STS-V tranny have a manual mode.
Pictures:
CTS-V 5 (attachment.php?attachmentid=6920&stc=1)
STS-V 8.jpg (attachment.php?attachmentid=6919&stc=1)
STS-V 7.jpg (attachment.php?attachmentid=6917&stc=1)
STS-V 6.jpg (attachment.php?attachmentid=6918&stc=1)
STS-V 5.jpg (attachment.php?attachmentid=6916&stc=1)

depends what you mean by "fit". They've put big V8's into the Ford Focus, but they changed everything else too. The northstar engine and tranny will definitely NOT "drop-in" to the CTS-V...and even if it did you'd have quite the retrofitting mess on your hands. It's one thing on a 68 camaro or a 57 belair.....


But.......why bother?

I thought that the reason they never put the northstar in the CTS was because it would not fit (too wide). Maybe they adjusted something on the STS to make it fit. I know it is the same platform, but maybe some things are different.

I would rather have 400 horses naturally asperated.. ALA saab, GM does not have the best supercharger/turbo reputation regarding reliability (although the buick was a SWEET car and was reliable).

Reed
http://www.cadillacfaq.com

Interesting, the rear yoke looks like the 6 speed yoke.. Its a middle trans between the 4L 60 and 4L80? Hope it doesent weight like a 4l80, that trans is a tank! Guess the number stands for speeds?

Heck, at least the STS-V gets an interesting looking engine cover - not the large plastic plate look that our V's came with...

I thought that the reason they never put the northstar in the CTS was because it would not fit (too wide). Maybe they adjusted something on the STS to make it fit. I know it is the same platform, but maybe some things are different.

I would rather have 400 horses naturally asperated.. ALA saab, GM does not have the best supercharger/turbo reputation regarding reliability (although the buick was a SWEET car and was reliable).

Reed
http://www.cadillacfaq.com

Indeed. I agree with you I also prefer naturally aspirated horsepower over forced induction. Once I posted in the Escalade forums if it would be easy to change the stock Vortec 6000 engine in the H2 for the Vortec 6000 H.O. of the Escalade. Everyone start asking why not supercharge the H2, it was inexpensive and easy compared to what I was thinking. But once again I prefer naturally aspirated engines and horsepower.

? it says the displacement is 4.4L as opposed to 4.6L... :cookoo:

The displacment is 4.4L....It was debored for stronger castings.

The displacment is 4.4L....It was debored for stronger castings.
Is this a recent move?

I believe that the V-8 in the STS and the SRX is still 4.6. I believe that they reduced the size for the STS-V as part of the engineering for the supercharger.

? it says the displacement is 4.4L as opposed to 4.6L... :cookoo:

Do a search in this forum, BBob went into a lot of detail regarding the engineering and building of the new 4.4L N* for the STS-V. I thought it was an interesting read.

The normally aspirated Northstar engines will remain at 4.6 liters of displacement.

The supercharged engine is a 4.4 liter engine. The bore of the supercharged engine was reduced from 93 mm to 91 mm to provide more space between the cylinder bores for a more robust head gasket seal necessary with the increased cylinder pressures of the supercharged engine at 440 HP.

The supercharged Northstar engine uses a sand cast aluminum block as opposed to the diecast aluminum block on the NA engines. The sand cast block is also heat treated post casting to achieve better material properties to withstand the stress of 440 HP. The sand cast block for the SC engine also has provisions cast in for the piston oil squirters. It also incorporates a closed deck design as opposed to the open deck of the NA engines. The sand casting process also allows the windage holes in the main bulkheads to be cast in place and radiused for improved windage flow for more HP/less parasitic loss. The SC block utilizes special machining operations on the deck surface to provide the microseal characteristics necessary with the multilayer steel headgasket design used on the SC engine.

Otherwise, the blocks are very similar which is a testament to the strength of the diecast block used since 1993 model year. The lower end design of the Northstar engine (with the two piece crankcase which splits at the crank centerline) proved to be totally capable of handling the increased output of the supercharged engine. This correlates well with the robust performance of the Northstar lower end in the field as lower end problems are all but non-existant.

400+ hp sounds cool but does it also mean this engine will consume oil or even worse, consume oil worse than the other NS engines?:banghead:

FYI - I just bought a certified 02 STS with 27k miles on her (black on charcoal beauty w/300hp) and now I'm sick because now I'm finding out its a very common (if not normal) problem for NS engines to consume oil. In fact, this one is consuming about a quart in <1500 miles and that's based on 2 months of ownership and 6k miles. Was utterly shocked to find this out by listening to the service dude and internet threads. I could tell this car was very well maintained and certified to boot. Guess I trusted the Caddy nameplate too much. Was my first one and now probably my last unless I learn something at this place about the NS engine that convinces me she's still real cool and the point is I really thought I was getting something special. Now, I feel totally decieved by the CADDY folks with regard to the NS engine oil consumption and I'm dumbfounded as to why this problem exist considering todays close tolerance machining/casting capability. I'm open to any inputs as to why this is so, and why Caddy doesn't just fix them and/or make the dealer tell you this information so you can at least be informed instead of shocked.

OH WELL LIVE AND LEARN AND KEEP OIL IN THE TRUNK.

P.S. I use to have to do this with my 63SS. Come to think of it I didn't think much of it at that either but at least I expected it.:rolleyes:

P.S. Just venting because I've owned about 20 cars/trucks all amercian made and I can "honestly" say none of UM have used a whole quart of oil in between changes even when I had to go a 1000 or so over the 3k mile normal change.

Go CADDY Go :madtalkin

One more thing. I can't figure out how to post a new thread otherwise I would have posted the above there.

Just looking for some advise on this. Don't want a ovehaul job but that's what the service department is talking right now...

Just an FYI Inglegw, I moved your post into the "Eldorado/Seville" section. Since you don't own a Cadillac STS - you own a Cadillac "Seville" STS. It's a totally different car...

400+ hp sounds cool but does it also mean this engine will consume oil or even worse, consume oil worse than the other NS engines?:banghead:

FYI - I just bought a certified 02 STS with 27k miles on her (black on charcoal beauty w/300hp) and now I'm sick because now I'm finding out its a very common (if not normal) problem for NS engines to consume oil. In fact, this one is consuming about a quart in <1500 miles and that's based on 2 months of ownership and 6k miles. Was utterly shocked to find this out by listening to the service dude and internet threads. I could tell this car was very well maintained and certified to boot. Guess I trusted the Caddy nameplate too much. Was my first one and now probably my last unless I learn something at this place about the NS engine that convinces me she's still real cool and the point is I really thought I was getting something special. Now, I feel totally decieved by the CADDY folks with regard to the NS engine oil consumption and I'm dumbfounded as to why this problem exist considering todays close tolerance machining/casting capability. I'm open to any inputs as to why this is so, and why Caddy doesn't just fix them and/or make the dealer tell you this information so you can at least be informed instead of shocked.

OH WELL LIVE AND LEARN AND KEEP OIL IN THE TRUNK.

P.S. I use to have to do this with my 63SS. Come to think of it I didn't think much of it at that either but at least I expected it.:rolleyes:

P.S. Just venting because I've owned about 20 cars/trucks all amercian made and I can "honestly" say none of UM have used a whole quart of oil in between changes even when I had to go a 1000 or so over the 3k mile normal change.

Go CADDY Go :madtalkin
I feel for you.
Especially since I know that the Northstar motor has another "open" secret - the top intake gasket "goes" - leaking oil onto the spark plugs, filling the wells, necessitating an expensive "repair" - usually around 50K miles.
Not earth-shattering, but damned irksome.
(Searching this website for: oil+leak+northstar I also found out that Northstar headgaskets regularly go as well - usual cost of repair? $3500)
This info from a man who loves Cadillac and is seriously routing for GM to consolidate its divisions further and produce world-class vehicles in every market segment.
Go GM go!

.
Especially since I know that the Northstar motor has another "open" secret - the top intake gasket "goes" - leaking oil onto the spark plugs, filling the wells, necessitating an expensive "repair" - usually around 50K miles.
Not earth-shattering, but damned irksome.




I have no idea where you are getting this info from but it is completely baseless, wrong and not even technically possible....

The intake gasket on the engine has no connection whatsoever with the spark plug wells....where did this piece of misinformation come from...???

The cam cover seals the spark plug wells from oil in the upper part of the cylinder head. Each cam cover has 4 separate round o-ring style seals....one each for the 4 spark plug wells on each side that the cam cover encircles. If one of those o-rings leaks it can allow oil to seep into the spark plug well.

This is far far from a expensive repair, it does NOT happen frequently at ALL and if it does it is not a 50K miles issue. There are WAY too many people on this forum that have changed plugs on the engine at well over 100K with no reports of oil in the spark plug well for this to be an issue as you report. It just doesn't happen except in rare, isolated cases.

If it does happen it is a completely benign "failure"...more an observation than a problem. The oil in the head that the o-ring seals is not pressurized oil...just casual oil splashing around so very little oil will seep into the spark plug well. It will only seep in as deep as the well in the head is below the seal joint...not something that will fill up the well and run out and cause a leak to the ground.

If you did have this issue (and few few people do) it is an inexpensive fix to R&R the cam cover and replace the round 0-ring seal. Hardly an expensive or even irksome as it is something that really does not need to be "fixed" even if it happens as the oil in the spark plug well will cause no problems....

You need to look at the engine and understand the "information" you are publishing.

I have no idea where you are getting this info from but it is completely baseless, wrong and not even technically possible....

The intake gasket on the engine has no connection whatsoever with the spark plug wells....where did this piece of misinformation come from...???

The cam cover seals the spark plug wells from oil in the upper part of the cylinder head. Each cam cover has 4 separate round o-ring style seals....one each for the 4 spark plug wells on each side that the cam cover encircles. If one of those o-rings leaks it can allow oil to seep into the spark plug well.

This is far far from a expensive repair, it does NOT happen frequently at ALL and if it does it is not a 50K miles issue. There are WAY too many people on this forum that have changed plugs on the engine at well over 100K with no reports of oil in the spark plug well for this to be an issue as you report. It just doesn't happen except in rare, isolated cases.

If it does happen it is a completely benign "failure"...more an observation than a problem. The oil in the head that the o-ring seals is not pressurized oil...just casual oil splashing around so very little oil will seep into the spark plug well. It will only seep in as deep as the well in the head is below the seal joint...not something that will fill up the well and run out and cause a leak to the ground.

If you did have this issue (and few few people do) it is an inexpensive fix to R&R the cam cover and replace the round 0-ring seal. Hardly an expensive or even irksome as it is something that really does not need to be "fixed" even if it happens as the oil in the spark plug well will cause no problems....

You need to look at the engine and understand the "information" you are publishing.

Good point and thanx for writing in.
That was "exactly" what I meant to say.
My information was from a local mechanic who warned me about the sparkplug well/oil seepage problem in Northstars when I mentioned the fact that I wanted to buy an '98 STS. Now according to him, it is not all that rare or inexpensive.
But, I'm thinking your insight/experience is probably more accurate.
Can you tell us about the headgasket "problem" with Northstars? Another Cadillac Owners website/ internet "myth"?

So, you have a Northstar motor that consumes oil at ~I quart per 1500 miles…So What?? It’s a 4 cam, high revving world class high performance motor! It’s not uncommon at all for engines in this class to consume a little oil, especially one like this making well over 1hp per cubic inch. If you read the owners manual in some of the BMW ‘M’ series they will tell you to check the oil WITH EVREY TANK OF GAS!! No kidding.

Just think of it like a fresh drink every 1500 mils, and drive it like you stole it!



>FYI - I just bought a certified 02 STS with 27k miles on her (black on charcoal beauty w/300hp) and now I'm sick because now I'm finding out its a very common (if not normal) problem for NS engines to consume oil. In fact, this one is consuming about a quart in <1500 miles and that's based on 2 months of ownership and 6k miles. Was utterly shocked to find this out by listening to the service dude and internet threads. I could tell this car was very well maintained and certified to boot. Guess I trusted the Caddy nameplate too much. Was my first one and now probably my last unless I learn something at this place about the NS engine that convinces me she's still real cool and the point is I really thought I was getting something special. Now, I feel totally decieved by the CADDY folks with regard to the NS engine oil consumption and I'm dumbfounded as to why this problem exist considering todays close tolerance machining/casting capability. I'm open to any inputs as to why this is so, and why Caddy doesn't just fix them and/or make the dealer tell you this information so you can at least be informed instead of shocked. <

400+ hp sounds cool but does it also mean this engine will consume oil or even worse, consume oil worse than the other NS engines?:banghead:

FYI - I just bought a certified 02 STS with 27k miles on her (black on charcoal beauty w/300hp) and now I'm sick because now I'm finding out its a very common (if not normal) problem for NS engines to consume oil. In fact, this one is consuming about a quart in <1500 miles and that's based on 2 months of ownership and 6k miles. Was utterly shocked to find this out by listening to the service dude and internet threads. I could tell this car was very well maintained and certified to boot. Guess I trusted the Caddy nameplate too much. Was my first one and now probably my last unless I learn something at this place about the NS engine that convinces me she's still real cool and the point is I really thought I was getting something special. Now, I feel totally decieved by the CADDY folks with regard to the NS engine oil consumption and I'm dumbfounded as to why this problem exist considering todays close tolerance machining/casting capability. I'm open to any inputs as to why this is so, and why Caddy doesn't just fix them and/or make the dealer tell you this information so you can at least be informed instead of shocked.

OH WELL LIVE AND LEARN AND KEEP OIL IN THE TRUNK.

P.S. I use to have to do this with my 63SS. Come to think of it I didn't think much of it at that either but at least I expected it.:rolleyes:

P.S. Just venting because I've owned about 20 cars/trucks all amercian made and I can "honestly" say none of UM have used a whole quart of oil in between changes even when I had to go a 1000 or so over the 3k mile normal change.

Go CADDY Go :madtalkin


How many of those 20 cars made the specific power of the Northstar engine and would routinely shift at 6500 RPM..??? Get over the fact that modern engines tend to use a little more oil than some of the older, slower turning varieties. A little oil consumption is fine and not to be construed with a "bad" engine or anything faulty. All those valve guides and pistons have to be lubricated somehow at high speed....total loss lubrication is a fact of life for 32 valve guides and valvestems and top rings on high performance engines.

If you do a little research you will find a lot more about this on the forum...you will also find on other forums that Mercedes/Toyota/BMW?etc... ALL have owners manual notes about oil consumption and "allow" as much as 1 quart per thousand miles or more oil consumption on some engines. BMW goes so far on their "M" performance engines to recommend checking the oil level at every fillup because the oil consumption rate can be great enough to lower the sump in one tank full in stressful driving.