I commute from Windsor, On. Canada to Detroit 5 days a week. I generally do most of my racing/challenging on the Canadian side because the cops never seem to be on the road (they're probably busy helping people instead of writing tickets - but that's another discussion). I have a 96 STS with exhaust upgrades and a K&N (+-320hp I figure). I pull onto the freeway and I notice this silver beemer making tracks in the fast lane. He looks like a player, so I start closing in on him :coolgleam . I thought it was just a 540 until I got close enough to see the "M" cladding. OK, now I'm behind him and he's behind a tractor trailer. He swerves into the right lane to try to get around the truck, but that lane is also blocked a few cars up ahead by another smaller truck. By this time, I had a good idea he knew I wanted to test his skill (the way he swerved into the right lane said it all). My lane starts to move ahead of his and ultimately the truck ahead of me changes lanes. I don't just want to leave this guy behind, so I pull in front of the truck. Ok, so we're both in the right lane separated by two trucks and a car. I check my side view and see him swerve to the left lane and start to punch it past the trucks. I think he's just gonna roll right past me (I planned on chasing him down :sneaky: ), but he pulls up next to me, slows to match my speed (+-70mph), downshifts and immediately starts to pull on me :eek: . I put the pedal to the floor and followed him to about 110, but the faster I got, the more car lengths he put on me. He nearly effortlessly walked away from me. I'm a good sport, so I gave him a friendly wave when he exited off the freeway, but that's the first time I ever felt decidedly whooped in my STS. It didn't feel as bad when I found out the newer M5's have just under 400hp stock, but dammit WE NEED SUPERCHARGERS!!! :xevileye:

Those M5's are hard to beat, no shame there... I watch them consistantly kick the pants off of new corvettes all the time... Less the Zo6.... You should see the 370HP euro version of the 91 (older) M5... Those are faster than the new ones as they are so light.


I commute from Windsor, On. Canada to Detroit 5 days a week. I generally do most of my racing/challenging on the Canadian side because the cops never seem to be on the road (they're probably busy helping people instead of writing tickets - but that's another discussion). I have a 96 STS with exhaust upgrades and a K&N (+-320hp I figure). I pull onto the freeway and I notice this silver beemer making tracks in the fast lane. He looks like a player, so I start closing in on him :coolgleam . I thought it was just a 540 until I got close enough to see the "M" cladding. OK, now I'm behind him and he's behind a tractor trailer. He swerves into the right lane to try to get around the truck, but that lane is also blocked a few cars up ahead by another smaller truck. By this time, I had a good idea he knew I wanted to test his skill (the way he swerved into the right lane said it all). My lane starts to move ahead of his and ultimately the truck ahead of me changes lanes. I don't just want to leave this guy behind, so I pull in front of the truck. Ok, so we're both in the right lane separated by two trucks and a car. I check my side view and see him swerve to the left lane and start to punch it past the trucks. I think he's just gonna roll right past me (I planned on chasing him down :sneaky: ), but he pulls up next to me, slows to match my speed (+-70mph), downshifts and immediately starts to pull on me :eek: . I put the pedal to the floor and followed him to about 110, but the faster I got, the more car lengths he put on me. He nearly effortlessly walked away from me. I'm a good sport, so I gave him a friendly wave when he exited off the freeway, but that's the first time I ever felt decidedly whooped in my STS. It didn't feel as bad when I found out the newer M5's have just under 400hp stock, but dammit WE NEED SUPERCHARGERS!!! :xevileye:

No shame in losing to an M5. It is one of the best cars in the world imo

My question is did you really think you had a chance? But yeah the M5 is god's gift to the sedan world :worship:

m5......to much car for me! lol

id "settle" for a 6 speed 540

funny thing is, there rated for less hp than a STS, somthing like 282hp, 300tq, but will walk on a stock STS. high 13's/14.0 flat, or low 14's for the auto.

was it a really new one? if it was the brand new one, not sure what year, 2001 maybe? it would have walked all over you like you're in a caviler. must have been the 1996-2000 style? if been doing a little research on them over the last week, since i beat one (most likely a 96-2000 530/528 auto, it was night so i never saw the badging - from 45-105mph) and there IMO alot nicer than caddies (the 540's).

maybe it was a fake m5, actually a 540 6 speed? those too would constantly pull on a sts, a m5 should be able to pull on you like a ls1 6speed vette would

i wonder what the new m5 is going to do with 500hp v10 and smg under the skin

My question is did you really think you had a chance? But yeah the M5 is god's gift to the sedan world :worship:
:burn: What can I say. I've beaten the snot out of so many people in my STS, I guess I've gotten a little over confident - but at least you can't say I only hunt the small game.

WE NEED SUPERCHARGERS!!! :xevileye:


We need STSv in the new rwd platform

m5......to much car for me! lol

id "settle" for a 6 speed 540

funny thing is, there rated for less hp than a STS, somthing like 282hp, 300tq, but will walk on a stock STS. high 13's/14.0 flat, or low 14's for the auto.

was it a really new one? if it was the brand new one, not sure what year, 2001 maybe? it would have walked all over you like you're in a caviler. must have been the 1996-2000 style? if been doing a little research on them over the last week, since i beat one (most likely a 96-2000 530/528 auto, it was night so i never saw the badging - from 45-105mph) and there IMO alot nicer than caddies (the 540's).

maybe it was a fake m5, actually a 540 6 speed? those too would constantly pull on a sts, a m5 should be able to pull on you like a ls1 6speed vette would
YES, DAMN YOU, YES!!! I did feel like a Cavalier for a few seconds! :crying: But every day I forget a little more :spin:

since mercedes went crazy with power, bmw is doing the same, fords also started. gm is kinda doin it, but not as much as everyone else, we need more than a 4.6 w/vvt, whats that, low 14's??? that competes with the 540, what do they have for the m5? i guess the ctsv, but thats a little smaller, are they making a STSv?

i got whooped real bad by a v8 firebird a while back, but i stomped a 626 tonight. you should have seen him when that thing kicked down, his front end droped then picked up really high, im sure it FELT fast LOL, musta been a stick?? gotta beat up the little guys to make yourself feel better!

you do have the "fastest" year sts, ever run it at a track? probably see about 14.4

we'll have our performance parts, bonneville gxp is getting a northstar, that should help the aftermarket

Haven't had it to the track yet. Maybe when the weather breaks in the spring before it gets too warm. Is the Bonne gonna get a 4.6 or the 4.0 they put in the Riviera?

the riviera had a 3.8, most were supercharged, some wern't

aurora had the 4.0

the bonneville se, sle will keep the 3.8
bonneville GXP will get the 275hp 4.6 (sls motor) but......with the 3.71 gearing (STS gearing) probably the best combo, i think they ship this year too

Don't Feel Bad The M5 Has 400 Horses However If You Really Didn't Like The Fact He Walked All Over You Salvation Is Coming. Take 1 Cadillac Cts-v Series Add Equal Parts Turbos Or Superchargers Stir And You Have A Tonic No Bmw Can Live With! But Even If Not The V Series Cts Will Be Faster Than A M5 Even Stock. And To Whoever Thinks 540i's Are Faster They Are Only Faster If They Have A Stick In Auto They Are Almost Dead Even Less Hp More Torque

Don't Feel Bad The M5 Has 400 Horses However If You Really Didn't Like The Fact He Walked All Over You Salvation Is Coming. Take 1 Cadillac Cts-v Series Add Equal Parts Turbos Or Superchargers What do you men by add equal parts turbos or s/c's? The M5 is N/A so wtf you talking about? :confused:

The M5 is fast, but the new Mercedes make it look pretty slow now. You get the CL/SL/S 55 AMG, then you have a high 12 car, and 115MPH..... You get the CL/SL/S 600, you get the twin turbo 12 cyl, you have a mid 12 car at 118MPH, and a screemer part the short 1320 ft race. If that aint enough, there will be a CL/SL/S 65 AMG..... This will be 580HP and 700FT LBS. It will run high 11's and hit 200MPH...... This is the car to have if you want a fast sedan..... Aint no Vseries whatever going to keep up with this, and neither does the Viper. Also, they will have a Renntech upgrade for all these cars... The latter is supposed to be over 800HP with just an ECU upgrade.... These guys have killed everyone....

You know what i think the problem is with any front wheel drive car? Its the powertrain design.. its soo in-effecient compared to rear wheel drive cars. Yes BMW is planning for a V10 in its (correction!) M6 series. But reguardless, cadillacs decision to make a front wheel drive V8 was terrible! You've probably seen rice rockets that have so much technology into them, that bolster about 300+ hp if your lucky.. but the way it gets transmitted to the ground makes it molasses slow! Having a V8 coupled to a front wheel drive system is even worse, because not only do you have butt loads of power but lots of tourqe makes the tyres do even more work then they already are trying to steer and support the car.

And for Cadillacs sake, the cars just too heavy and elegant to compete with a BMW M5 in the first place! :tongue2: Want to race an M5? Dont do it in a STS or Deville, but a CTS-V... the only car truely made to compete with the German rocket.

Nice try though, sounds like it was a good fight till the M5 beat you in aerodynamics, horsepower, power transmission, weight and top end (lol) bouncer: .

Front wheel drive is AWFUL, but it actually does one positive thing for the case here. Being that the STS is 300HP, more of that power actually gets to the ground VS a RWD car. If you compare a 300HP corvette of 1995 and a 300HP STS of 1995 on a dyno, the average STS will be about 15% higher in a case by case deal. For racing, this is good as it actually gives the STS the advantage over the LT1 automatic corvette in many cases, even though the car is 800-900LBS heavier. But on the same note, I would MUCH rather have a RWD STS, but in order to run like it does now, it needs to be about 330HP..... Funny how that is just the magic number the XLR is getting.

As far as the M5, that is a strong motor with a 6 speed, but the car has no weight advantage over the STS, it just has a ton more power. The M5 is a heavy car. BMWs just keep getting bigger. I find it funny that the new "3" series is actually heavier and bulkier than my daily driver BMW... 1986 735.... Cars are getting large again!




You know what i think the problem is with any front wheel drive car? Its the powertrain design.. its soo in-effecient compared to rear wheel drive cars. Yes BMW is planning for a V10 in its (correction!) M6 series. But reguardless, cadillacs decision to make a front wheel drive V8 was terrible! You've probably seen rice rockets that have so much technology into them, that bolster about 300+ hp if your lucky.. but the way it gets transmitted to the ground makes it molasses slow! Having a V8 coupled to a front wheel drive system is even worse, because not only do you have butt loads of power but lots of tourqe makes the tyres do even more work then they already are trying to steer and support the car.

And for Cadillacs sake, the cars just too heavy and elegant to compete with a BMW M5 in the first place! :tongue2: Want to race an M5? Dont do it in a STS or Deville, but a CTS-V... the only car truely made to compete with the German rocket.

Nice try though, sounds like it was a good fight till the M5 beat you in aerodynamics, horsepower, power transmission, weight and top end (lol) bouncer: .

a sts gets 15% more power down???......NO. the 4t80e is proven to have about 23-24% drivetrain loss, which is huge even for a fwd transmission. so your saying a corvette's trans has about 38-39% loss???? i don't know anything about corvette transmissions but id guess high teens, no way are they even close to the 30's. the 4t65ehd (L67's transmission) is in the range of 18-20% for comparison, the northstars suck for getting there power to the road. sure they make 300hp, but they only put down 225/230 tops.

only advantage for racing is the engine is on top of the driving wheels, easier to launch on the same tires, but a vette can have some huge meat back there, not so much for a cadillac.

don't mean to be a jerk, but where are you getting this info from? XLR is a low 14 second car too, more power---faster, not needs more power to be equal. maybe the same place that told you a impalla ss has 300hp?

What do you men by add equal parts turbos or s/c's? The M5 is N/A so wtf you talking about? :confused:
I mean if you want a car that will be one of the fastest cars on the planet get a cts-v and start modifying the easiest choice would be turbo's in which case you would be looking at 550-700 hp and at 3800 lbs (less than the current M5) it would not even be close!

I mean if you want a car that will be one of the fastest cars on the planet get a cts-v :histeric:

The M5 is fast, but the new Mercedes make it look pretty slow now. You get the CL/SL/S 55 AMG, then you have a high 12 car, and 115MPH..... You get the CL/SL/S 600, you get the twin turbo 12 cyl, you have a mid 12 car at 118MPH, and a screemer part the short 1320 ft race. If that aint enough, there will be a CL/SL/S 65 AMG..... This will be 580HP and 700FT LBS. It will run high 11's and hit 200MPH...... This is the car to have if you want a fast sedan..... Aint no Vseries whatever going to keep up with this, and neither does the Viper. Also, they will have a Renntech upgrade for all these cars... The latter is supposed to be over 800HP with just an ECU upgrade.... These guys have killed everyone....
I don't mean to be rude but you have no idea not even close to what you are talking about and I also thought this was a pro cadillac website. The CL65 AMG runs 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and does the quarter mile 12.6 @ 118 mph. A Viper and Corvette Z06 are faster. And as for your stupid numbers where did they come from a Mclaren F1 the fastest car ever does 11.1 in the quarter. And I know they will have 604 hp and 738 lb ft sounds like a lot? Another sobering fact they weigh 4800 lbs.....so before you start spouting off at the mouth at least know what you are talking about.

You are right the 4T80E has a 24-28% loss through the transmission it is the most inefficient tranny GM makes. In comparison the 4T65E used in the Gran Prix for instance only has a 16-20% loss through the tranny. The reason why is because the Northstar is really too much engine. If it was not for the torque management software they would not be able to handle the power without really hard and rough shifts. To be competitive the next STS will have to run 0-60 in 6.2 seconds or less regardless of hp.

I don't mean to be rude but you have no idea not even close to what you are talking about and I also thought this was a pro cadillac website. The CL65 AMG runs 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and does the quarter mile 12.6 @ 118 mph. A Viper and Corvette Z06 are faster. And as for your stupid numbers where did they come from a Mclaren F1 the fastest car ever does 11.1 in the quarter. And I know they will have 604 hp and 738 lb ft sounds like a lot? Another sobering fact they weigh 4800 lbs.....so before you start spouting off at the mouth at least know what you are talking about.Well what about a linginfelter Corvette runing 9 sec. 1/4's? yeah this is a Cadillac website but we respect all cars no matter what company they are from. If I had to choose between a $14k Kia and a $36k BMW and both have identical performance numbers but the only difference was the name then I would be all over the Kia in a heartbeat. But why bother getting a Viper or Z06 to run low 12's? I'll go out and get a low $30k Cobra and be running mid-high 12's stock for $20k-$50k less *and yes a stock Cobra does run those numbers since I've seen them numerous times run those times at Atco Raceway* But if anything it sounds like your a wanna be troll and trying to start some stuff up here.

You are right the 4T80E has a 24-28% loss through the transmission it is the most inefficient tranny GM makes. In comparison the 4T65E used in the Gran Prix for instance only has a 16-20% loss through the tranny. The reason why is because the Northstar is really too much engine. If it was not for the torque management software they would not be able to handle the power without really hard and rough shifts. To be competitive the next STS will have to run 0-60 in 6.2 seconds or less regardless of hp.Taking a page out of your book here....."Do you have idea as to what you are talking about?" The Northstar is by no means a performance engine. Its the last thing it is. The only real performance engine caddy has had in the past few years was the LT1 out of the Fleetwood's.

I don't see what's so funny. Okay, I admit 'fastest on the planet' is a bit of a stretch, but the V already outperforms the current M5 and M3. A Lingenfeller[sp?] mod. like what Germeezy is talking about would make it quite the formidable street car.

You don't have to outrun Enzos, just the other day to day guys on the street. The V will put you there.

Well what about a linginfelter Corvette runing 9 sec. 1/4's? yeah this is a Cadillac website but we respect all cars no matter what company they are from. If I had to choose between a $14k Kia and a $36k BMW and both have identical performance numbers but the only difference was the name then I would be all over the Kia in a heartbeat.

The rest of the money goes towards class. Remember some people have taste when choosing a car. If all that mattered was speed, the cars you listed are excellent choices. Personally, I want to be showing up whoever is next to me, be it launching off a stoplight or parked in a lot.

Taking a page out of your book here....."Do you have idea as to what you are talking about?" The Northstar is by no means a performance engine. Its the last thing it is. The only real performance engine caddy has had in the past few years was the LT1 out of the Fleetwood's.
:annoyed: Argumentative... and it depends on your definition of "performance engine". Are you talking weight to hp ratio, overall hp and tq, ease of modification, or what? 300hp/295tq vs 260hp/330tq. 6 of one, half dozen of the other. The chassis is what makes the difference. I would argue that the STS/ETCs are more performance oriented cars because they average 3-400lbs lighter than the Fleetwoods. That makes the STS/ETC faster. To say the 4.6 N* isn't a performance engine is, at best, an ill conceived statement. If you take a Honda S2000 engine out of it's chassis and put it in a dump truck is it still a performance engine? What if I dropped a 4.6 in a Fiero (God forbid), would it be a performance engine then? On it's slowest days my 96 STS consistently outperforms Impala SSs.

You must have manure for brains but of course driving an old ass caddy like the one you have would be the reason for your comments. Could you please call GM and tell them their northstar wich they used for IRL and Lemans and also the German Opel Astra DTM team is not a performance engine. If you could also give cadillac hotrod fabricators a call and ask them how in the hell are they able to get 800 + hp from a non performance engine. Let us not confuse the 260 hp boat anchor detuned LT-1 for a real performance engine either because I would crush any stock Fleetwood or Impala SS. The real truth is the LS-1 put in the CTS-V is a real performance engine. But the north star could easily make 400 hp but the fwd transaxle would not be able to handle it. Let us not forget that the STS/DTS are the highest horsepower Fwd cars in the world. And many engineers say 250 hp is the max for Fwd.

If that thumbnail is of your car, i think you have a DTS not an STS. Either way. lets relax a bit here.......

I mean if you want a car that will be one of the fastest cars on the planet get a cts-v and start modifying the easiest choice would be turbo's in which case you would be looking at 550-700 hp and at 3800 lbs (less than the current M5) it would not even be close!
...or you could get a 90 deville, chip tune it, and race it downhill. :tongue2:

There sure are alot of people that "dont mean to be rude, or Jerks" here..... I have come to the determination that some of this group is just what they dont mean to be....... Tired of wasting my time and sharing my experiences with you types....... You got it all figured out.......

This Kill section needs to go "Bye Bye", at least for me, it no longer exists......

My Site (http://www.mcsmk8.com/cadillacs/mycads.htm)

I
I don't mean to be rude but you have no idea not even close to what you are talking about and I also thought this was a pro cadillac website. The CL65 AMG runs 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and does the quarter mile 12.6 @ 118 mph. A Viper and Corvette Z06 are faster. And as for your stupid numbers where did they come from a Mclaren F1 the fastest car ever does 11.1 in the quarter. And I know they will have 604 hp and 738 lb ft sounds like a lot? Another sobering fact they weigh 4800 lbs.....so before you start spouting off at the mouth at least know what you are talking about.My Site (http://www.mcsmk8.com/cadillacs/mycads.htm)

Im not gonna go back and re-read this whole thread to figure out where this crap started, but guys lets try to be civil here, if you have a point to make, MAKE IT. Saying that you dont mean to be rude, when you clearly are being rude is not an excuse. if i run over your dog but do it with a smile does that make it any better? Lets be adults.........starting...................NOW

You must have manure for brains but of course driving an old ass caddy like the one you have would be the reason for your comments. Could you please call GM and tell them their northstar wich they used for IRL and Lemans and also the German Opel Astra DTM team is not a performance engine. If you could also give cadillac hotrod fabricators a call and ask them how in the hell are they able to get 800 + hp from a non performance engine. Let us not confuse the 260 hp boat anchor detuned LT-1 for a real performance engine either because I would crush any stock Fleetwood or Impala SS. The real truth is the LS-1 put in the CTS-V is a real performance engine. But the north star could easily make 400 hp but the fwd transaxle would not be able to handle it. Let us not forget that the STS/DTS are the highest horsepower Fwd cars in the world. And many engineers say 250 hp is the max for Fwd.Where to start, where to start....ok.....Well first off find me a CTS-V with a LS1 in it and I will be quite surprised. I was always under the impression that they had LS6's in them. Moving along now, your comparing a million dollar engine to one found in a STS? So I guess the engine thats in a Oldsmobile Aurora is the same engine that is found in the Indy cars? And as for them using it in the Lemans series....oh yeah what place did they come in again? rrrrrrrright. Their race team was a joke at best then. So if the Northstar is such a hot rod of an engine then why aren't they didn't put it in the Vette and Camaro? How come there is 0 aftermarket for the northstar engines as comapred to the LT1? How come for the CTS-V their not using a hopped up Northstar? Please dude, your a tool that know's nothing about the Northstar. Throw a supercharger on a LT1 and throw one on a Northstar and set them both to equal boost and see which engine lasts longer. Oh and plus the fact that the Fleetwood is built off of the Impala SS's chasis which means even more aftermarket for it as well as a lot more parts available for the car to that of any STS, CTS, or DTS. BTW.....20" wheels, PHAT YO!!! :nono:

So if the Northstar is such a hot rod of an engine then why aren't they didn't put it in the Vette and Camaro? How come there is 0 aftermarket for the northstar engines as comapred to the LT1? How come for the CTS-V their not using a hopped up Northstar?

...

BTW.....20" wheels, PHAT YO!!! :nono:

Well they didn't put it in the vette or camaro at least partly because a potential buyer would've thought "eww a Cadillac engine that's only 279cid" and might not have bought it. There is no aftermarket for it because it's a Cadillac engine, and maybe .5% of Cadillac owners want more performance (probably less). Now that there is the 4.0 version of the northstar in some Oldsmobiles we might be seeing a little more aftermarket, same with whichever version of the northstar goes in the Bonneville. I'm not saying the northstar is a performance engine by any means though.

Don't dis the 20" wheels either, cause that isnt nice.

Where to start, where to start....ok.....Well first off find me a CTS-V with a LS1 in it and I will be quite surprised. I was always under the impression that they had LS6's in them. Moving along now, your comparing a million dollar engine to one found in a STS? So I guess the engine thats in a Oldsmobile Aurora is the same engine that is found in the Indy cars? And as for them using it in the Lemans series....oh yeah what place did they come in again? rrrrrrrright. Their race team was a joke at best then. So if the Northstar is such a hot rod of an engine then why aren't they didn't put it in the Vette and Camaro? How come there is 0 aftermarket for the northstar engines as comapred to the LT1? How come for the CTS-V their not using a hopped up Northstar? Please dude, your a tool that know's nothing about the Northstar. Throw a supercharger on a LT1 and throw one on a Northstar and set them both to equal boost and see which engine lasts longer. Oh and plus the fact that the Fleetwood is built off of the Impala SS's chasis which means even more aftermarket for it as well as a lot more parts available for the car to that of any STS, CTS, or DTS. BTW.....20" wheels, PHAT YO!!! :nono: So, if I have this right, you are basing the term "performance engine" on aftermarket support (which is a cop out) and how it places at Le mans (in which everyone including Corvette gets whooped by Audi). By your rationale Audi makes performance engines and Corvette, Caddilac and BMW just try. Bro, if you prefer the more conventional GM powerplants instead of N* power, that's fine. Just state your preference and be done with it. But don't try to prove one engine is more performance oriented by speculating what would or would not happen if you strapped on a supercharger. Somewhere along the line your "Northstars are by no means a performance engine" comment turned into "LT1s are better than Northstars" arguement. It's like saying an apple isn't a real fruit because oranges have more seeds and are easier to pick. It's ridiculous. :nono:

So, if I have this right, you are basing the term "performance engine" on aftermarket support (which is a cop out) and how it places at Le mans (in which everyone including Corvette gets whooped by Audi). By your rationale Audi makes performance engines and Corvette, Caddilac and BMW just try. Bro, if you prefer the more conventional GM powerplants instead of N* power, that's fine. Just state your preference and be done with it. But don't try to prove one engine is more performance oriented by speculating what would or would not happen if you strapped on a supercharger. Somewhere along the line your "Northstars are by no means a performance engine" comment turned into "LT1s are better than Northstars" arguement. It's like saying an apple isn't a real fruit because oranges have more seeds and are easier to pick. It's ridiculous. :nono:If you actually read the whole thread you would have seen that I didn't bring up the whole IRL, Leman's stuff.
And the whole superchargers thing was brought up in this post from Germeezy
Don't Feel Bad The M5 Has 400 Horses However If You Really Didn't Like The Fact He Walked All Over You Salvation Is Coming. Take 1 Cadillac Cts-v Series Add Equal Parts Turbos Or Superchargers Stir And You Have A Tonic No Bmw Can Live With! But Even If Not The V Series Cts Will Be Faster Than A M5 Even Stock. And To Whoever Thinks 540i's Are Faster They Are Only Faster If They Have A Stick In Auto They Are Almost Dead Even Less Hp More Torque
and then another post from Germeezy started the whole IRL, Lemans discussion
You must have manure for brains but of course driving an old ass caddy like the one you have would be the reason for your comments. Could you please call GM and tell them their northstar wich they used for IRL and Lemans and also the German Opel Astra DTM team is not a performance engine. If you could also give cadillac hotrod fabricators a call and ask them how in the hell are they able to get 800 + hp from a non performance engine. Let us not confuse the 260 hp boat anchor detuned LT-1 for a real performance engine either because I would crush any stock Fleetwood or Impala SS. The real truth is the LS-1 put in the CTS-V is a real performance engine. But the north star could easily make 400 hp but the fwd transaxle would not be able to handle it. Let us not forget that the STS/DTS are the highest horsepower Fwd cars in the world. And many engineers say 250 hp is the max for Fwd. So to answer your question I don't go trying to compare these engines by how they placed in Lemans. If I wanted to go with that I wouldn't even consider GM as performance engines ever since they needed Cosworth's support to help them make a decent engine for the IRL *Cosworth is a Ford division. So they needed help from the enemy* But either way this topic is getting way off the topic now. So now its just getting pointless.

Dude, Dont feel bad about being beat by a M5, I had a 1997 bmw 540i and I tell you I love my 2000 Catera better. I think anyone would agree that drove a bmw they truly pick up quick and have so much power but they have two things i dont like, One being if you hammer it, your afrade of braking the poor thing, also you can feel every bump in the road, it isnt a very comfie ride. On my Catera I love the ride, and the car seems to have so much power behind that little 6 cyl. If I had the money to go out and buy either a BMW or another Cadillac, I wouls defanatly stick with Cadillac. Think about it, Where in america are you going to be able to do 100 plus? The designers for Cadillac know we have no autobauhn, so they design a car that works for us. Thank you Cadie

Very true.. When I go to Edmunds and look around at BMW reviews, everyone raves about their cars like there's no tomorrow. But most of them complain about it being atleast $1000.00 every time they bring it in for something. I considered a BMW 5 series at one point (used) and completely dropped that idea when I looked into what maintenance costed. It's unreal...

Blackout:

if all you care about is performance and a crappy ride get a neon srt4. the cobra and z06 are similiar in performance, the z06 does have a slight advantage. but your getting ALOT more than just strait line performance.

and how is the northstar not a performance engine??? its the exact same engine as in the aurora, but bigger. the aurora v8 DOMINTATED IRL for like 8 years, NOTHING touched them, the 'northstar' v8 owned all other indy race cars. no its not the same engine, but its based off of it.

then take the shelby series 1, if im not mistaken it was at one time the fastest american production car. powerred by a superchaged 4.0 northstar v8. the northstar IS a performance engineered engine. there are plenty of 600-1200hp northstar powered sandrails. i don't see them using the all so wonderful supercharged 5.4 from a cobra.

there was alot of talk about the northstar going in corvette's. but the old people that buy vette's want big pushrod v8's. they tried dohc once, and it didn't turn out so well.

whoops, just saw all of the other responses saying most of the stuff i said.

:(

and how is the northstar not a performance engine??? its the exact same engine as in the aurora, but bigger. the aurora v8 DOMINTATED IRL for like 8 years, NOTHING touched them, the 'northstar' v8 owned all other indy race cars. no its not the same engine, but its based off of it.Your comparing a million dollar engine to that of a stock engine.

im saying the northstar is a performace engineered engine, you really have no arguement saying its not. look at the 4.6dohc for used in the cobra's/markviii, very similiar output when they where both introduced. but the cobra has a performance engine, but not the cadillac. its the weight and transmission killing the performance of cadillacs.

also, what about the shelby series 1? it to has a 4.0 northstar, and will take a cobra.

Well the Shelby Series 1 sold for crap and almost made Shelby go bankrupt once again. And with those things running 12.9's thats kinda sad considering the $107,000. And the only reasons why the car is as fast as it is, is because it only weighs 2300 lbs. The Cobra weighs 3664 lbs. So take off 1364 lbs. from the Cobra and you have a $30k car stomping on a $107,000 car. And stock Cobra's have broken into the 12's already, just an FYI.

But after reading your post again which Cobra are you reffering too? With my mentioning the Cobra above that was for the new Cobra. But for a more fair power to power comparison the 1999 SVT Cobra was rated at 320 hp and 317 lb./tq. While the Shelby Series 1 is at 320 hp and 290 lb./tq. And the 1999 is a 13 sec. 1/4 car and weighs in at 3285 lbs. So cut off 985 off the Cobra and once again it will be beating up on the Shelby Series 1.

Best of all worlds: take a new CTS-V to Ligenfelter performance and whether they twin turbo it or just modify it as a naturally aspirated engine you will have one bad Cad. Remember, Ligenfelter built a twin turbo Corvette a few years back that not only drove to and from the track but posted a tru 256 mph speed. His cars have won the tuner shoot-outs that car magazines conduct. Front wheel drive is ok and they do have some serious fwd cars now at the strip running 8 seconds, but, Cadillac and GM in general has decided that rwd with traction control is better. Think about it, no half shafts to fool with.

Cadillac was THE standard of the world for decades until the penny pichers messed it all up. Chain the accountants (Mercedes, BMW and Porsche does), slap the engineers in the head so that they build an engine that can easily be worked on and let the fun begin.

Once again the Corvette saves the day to help Cadillac have a powerful car a la early to mid 90's with the Fleetwood

well i was comparing the northstar engine to the cobra engine.

not to much of a difference there...1's a all out sports car, and it makes.....20more hp?? ha! you know there's dyno tests proving that the corsa exhaust adds 20+wheel hp. and you KNOW that a cobra has free-er flowing exhaust, and probably a little better intake. so you put that same exhaust on the STS, and now the cars output is the same, comparing engine to engine, the STS matches a COBRA, fords "premier" sports car. so how isn't the northstar a performance engine? same displacement, both were released in 93, so all is fair, there equal, but the northstar still isn't a performance engine?

and a supercharged shelby is faster than the current cobra is what i meant, you can't compare the fastest cobra time to the slowest shelby time.

Once again your comparing a $100,000+ limited edition sports car to that of a $30,000 production car. So I would hope with speding over $100k you would be able to beat up on a $30k car. But if a regualr Northstar engine puts out about the same as a 1999 Cobra then why is the Cobra faster then a STS, DTS, and Eldorado?

I've read your other posts on this forum, so I now you're not that ignorant. You're comparing a true sports car against a luxury-sport car.
Weight and the rest of the Cobra's drivetrain is where it outperforms the STS.

The STS wasn't built to be a track car(no matter how much some of it's owners want it to be). It's a very respectable touring car. The Northstar however, was designed as a performance engine, has been used as a performance engine, and is slated to appear in future GM performance cars.

It seems that you made a bad comment and now you don't want to admit to your mistake. It's okay to admit it, we won't make fun of you. Much.

like gothicaleigh said, id didn't say the cadillacs where sports cars, i said it has a performance ENGINE. if the sts lost a few hundred lbs, its transmission was a manaul, lost only 16% instead of 24-25% (which is 27hp/tq) and it had a extra gear, the sts would give that cobra a REAL run for its money, probably beating it (it is still a ford :P ).

comparing engines, not cars, im not such a blind cadillac lover that i think a sts can take a cobra. but the two engines are very equal in performance.

but the new sts will close that gap some.

also, the price's of the shelby and cobra arn't releavant, your getting a very special limited production car, not a mass produced pos like a cobra (j/k). of course it costs more, engine vs engine, northstar vs 99corbra, equal. blown northstar vs blown cobra = blown northstar is smaller and makes more power

btw the northstars are being put in the 2004 bonneville gxp, and there's alot of talk of them in the monte carlo/impalla, park ave, possibly more. i think its a good idea gm will focus on just a few engines.

I don't see the Northstar as a performance engine. Your comparing cars that are limited edition cars like the Shelby Series 1 and based off of that your saying that its a performance engine. Well the Lotus Elise uses the Celica GT-S's engine in it and the car does 12-13 sec. 1/4 so does that make the Celica's engine a performance engine? Of course not. Its all in power to weight ratio. The northstar for what it is produces pretty good numbers. But anything more then that is pushing it for that engine. But if the Northstar is such a good performance engine then were is the aftermarket support for it? There is next to nothing for it. And if the Northstar is a great performance engine then why didn't they modify one up and throw it into the CTS-V?

Welcome to the never-ending circle of "Maybe one day we'll just agree to disagree"... But don't hold your breath...

Where's the fun in that Sal? :lildevil:

Okay, but first I want to know what Blackout's definition of a performance engine is then...

Care to enlighten us misguided Caddy fans? Don't just list engines or cars either. Give us a guideline so we don't make this mistake again. ;)

ok you claim that the Northstar is a performance engine. Reason's why you say that is because they use them for the IRL and what not but those are million dollar+ engines which are not even close to being what they are when you start up your Caddy. So far the only car to have any chance to break out of the 14's with the Northstar is the XLR, but your looking at a $70k price tag to do so. Then you mentioned that the Shelby Series 1 uses a Northstar and is a fast car and all and the only reason why it is fast is because its a 2300 lb. car. So you stick 300 hp into any car that weighs that much and it will run those times and for that car your looking at a starting price tag of $100k. So what I am saying is that you think the Northstar is a great performance engine because what it can do with the Shelby Series 1 light weight frame and they did the same thing with the Lotus Elise and stuck the Celica GT-S's engine in there and the thing is running 12-13's in the 1/4 for a $70k price tag. So to you guys saying that the Shelby Series 1 is such an awesome car due to the fact that the Northstar is in there and it puts out the numbers it does for performance then I guess the Celica's engine is in the same realm of that of the Northstar?

That's not a definition.
Answer the question please.
What is the line in the sand between a performance and 'normal' engine?

blackout, you completly contridicted yourself. first you say a northstar cadillac doesn't have a performance ENGINE because its so big and heavy limiting it to mid-high 14's. then you say a shelby series 1 isn't a fair comparison because its lighter and runs 12's?

OK, think of it like this. the northstar is 4.6L, which if i remember right is 279cu in, but it produces 300hp, which is 1.08hp per cu in. what other gm engines put out that much hp per ci? umm, the BRAND NEW Ls2, 12 years newer puts out 1.09, the Ls1 puts out .99hp per cu in, Ls6. also has about the same power/size ratio as a 99 cobra.

dude, it IS a performance engine, we never said it was a performance car, its a luxury sport sedan. aftermarket support doesn't make it a or not a performance engine, but you want aftermarket support?http://www.mechtech-ms.com/html/nspix_big/pic157.html make yourself a 1200hp northstar......

http://www.chrfab.com/

im well aware this stuff won't go in a cadillac, but it will go onto a cadillac powered sandrail, afterall, we are saying its a performance engine, not a performance car.

[QUOTE=(it is still a ford :P ).[/QUOTE]
My son has a '98 Continental http://myride.smokeys.org/wildnoob/ that I sold him so I could purchase my 2000 Deville. Now mind you, I would not trade back because I like the Caddy a lot, just wish it had the 300hp N* and no top speed limiter. My wife was driving my son's Conti and I was in my Deville. we're sitting at a stop light and when the light turns, we both punch it. The Conti pulled me about a fender at first, then shifted to 2nd. I gained some ground back then mine hit 2nd and they continued to accellerate about the same. The Conti still had about a fender on the Deville. When the Conti hit 3rd, it started pulling very slowly away. The Deville hit 3rd and the Conti continued to pull the Deville very slowly. I shut off around 100mph as I knew my Deville was going to puke it's speed limiter any minute. My wife ran the Conti up to around 125 and backed off. The Conti had no sign of slowing down at 125 though. Both cars are stone stock. The Conti has 120,000 miles on it and my Deville has 92,000. Oh yeah, my wife is a police officer on our local PD assigned to the patrol division. I am a retired (22 yr) Sheriff's Lieutenant.

A race between those two cars usually depends on the driver. The regular DeVille wins some; the Continental wins some. The DTS wins all...

Oh well i am done arguing about this. If you think the Northstar is some sorta performance engine then have fun thinking it.

A race between those two cars usually depends on the driver. The regular DeVille wins some; the Continental wins some. The DTS wins all...Funny you should mention the DTS. I ran a DTS right after getting my Deville and I pulled him about like the Conti pulled me. I did however, quit around 110 when my limiter kicked in. The DTS then went by me. I was not impressed with the DTS, at least the one I ran against. It made me wonder if mine did not have that blasted limiter what would have happened since the DTS has a lower final drive ratio than my Deville. Also ever since getting the Conti I wondered why Lincoln never hyped the performance of the engine like Cadillac did the N*. The 32V DOHC in the Conti is no slouch. If fact, According to the specs, I had a 15hp advantage on the '98 Conti which is only 260@5750 vs my 275@5600 . The later Contis had the 275hp engine. If you have never driven a 98+ Continental, you are in for a suprise at the performance. This is defintely a sleeper car.

Wierd...

Oh well i am done arguing about this. If you think the Northstar is some sorta performance engine then have fun thinking it.


lmao, i will

it is hard to admit when your wrong.

Well when you guys want Katshot to come back since he has oh so much more knowledge then anybody else on here and he even agree's with me then i guess your right. But hey I'll have him come on and explain to you as to why it isn't a performance engine. besides he already had this discussion before but if you want he will be more then happy to refresh your memory

Sure. I'll accept his definition in place of yours.
You shouldn't make bold statements without giving some guidelines or reasoning to your thinking. All that I've heard so far is everyone throwing out car names. We're not discussing the car, but the engine. I honestly want to know what separates a 'performance engine' from the rest. Ask your father to bail you out and give us an answer.

Sure. I'll accept his definition in place of yours.
You shouldn't make bold statements without giving some guidelines or reasoning to your thinking. All that I've heard so far is everyone throwing out car names. We're not discussing the car, but the engine. I honestly want to know what separates a 'performance engine' from the rest. Ask your father to bail you out and give us an answer.Please.......all you have managed to say this whole time is, "Its a performance engine, its a performance engine!" you didn't give any stats or any factual proof to a damn thing. This was the closets you came to proving any thing out of all of your posts
Weight and the rest of the Cobra's drivetrain is where it outperforms the STS.

Then you said its not a track car, and its going to be used on other GM performance cars. So you consider the Boneville a performance car? If it is such a performance engine that you claim it to be then why didn't they use it in the CTS-V? Hell its not even in the CTS. The only car that its in that would be considered sporty is the XLR. So is your definition of a performance engine is one that has 300 hp? So I guess the Hemi Dodge Ram is a performance truck? As well as the Hemi Dodge Durango?

The manufacturer considers it a performance engine, you're the one disputing what has already been established. Don't try side-stepping around it. Go ask daddy to explain it to you and you can post his answer.

The Northstar won't fit in a CTS without major modifications. Also, GM had a perfectly usable engine that did fit without massive re-engineering. Not to mention the pre-production time and money they would have spent to fine tune the N* to 400hp. So they used Occam's Razor and went the path of least resistance. It's good business.

The manufacturer considers it a performance engineIf the manufacturer said it could make you a ham sandwich would you believe that also? Well then I guess Nissan's 1.8 I4 from the Sentra is a performance engine i mean look what they had to say about it
1.8-liter Engine

What does the day hold for you? In a Sentra, plenty. As in, plenty of power (126 hp) and plenty of low-end torque (129 lb-ft). Sentra 1.8's 4-cylinder engine is designed with four valves per cylinder for greater efficiency and quicker power delivery.

Here's one from Dodge on the neon

Neon features a standard 5-speed manual transmission with an electronically controlled 4-speed automatic available on SE and SXT. Combined with the choice of engines, Neon offers plenty of punch.
WOW! It must do like 17 sec. 1/4's! ZOOM-ZOOM!

And here's one for the Mazda Protege5

It's not just smart styling that puts the "sport" in sport wagon. It's performance. And with a peppy 2.0-liter 4-cylinder dual overhead cam engine, the Protegé5 is all about performance. So in other words don't believe everything you hear.

Okay, Let's ask it this way: How does your definition of 'performance' make the engine in the Protegé not a 'performance engine'?
Your logic is flawed and you're grasping at straws. Come back when you can post with reason.

This has been an amusing thread although it is way off the original topic. I would like to see if Blackout ever defines a "performance engine". I've tried searching the web for some kind of standard definition but I haven't found one yet. It's pretty subjective.

My personal opinion is that any engine that can move a 4000+ pound boat to 60 in under 7 seconds and the quarter in the 14's is a performance engine.

Perry

BLACKOUT!!! lol, didn't you read my posts???

the northstar engine puts out OVER 1hp PER CU IN, that was NOT TO LONG ago, the magic number for a performance engine, it has as much hp per liter as a mustang COBRA! or a CORVETTE. the engine was designed to run at much higher rpm's than it does, (transmission limited). i can not believe you don't think a 279cu in engine that puts out 300hp, easily revs to 6500rpm is not a "performance engine". you say that a cobra is a performance car, its engine is basically the exact same as a northstar (in output) but it has a performance engine ONLY because the CAR is lighter??? so drop that engine in a cadillac, its no longer a perfromance engine? jeez.

then you say its not a performance engine because it has no aftermarket, so i show you a website where you can turn it into a 1200hp monster, you don't comment

finally you say......"but but but katshot said it wasn't........don't don't make me tell him"


ok, i think we've proved our point, no matter what we say you'll have a comment,.

yes a performance engine is a subjective term. But to you guys what is your definition of a performance engine? The Northstar is a good performing engine but thats about the extent of it. If we could have a good database on here and could go back a little while so we could find the Northstar vs. LT1 thread therre would be a lot of info on there to help support my statements. But Goth and PerryT weren't even around when that thread was active. Try modifying a Northstar with a power adder such as nitrous or a blower and see how long it lasts to that of an LT1. But to have a definition of a performance engine is in the eyes of the beholder. You think the northstar is a performance engine, then so be it. I myself as well as many other don't believe it is one. We have the Northstar with 4.6 liters making 300 hp and 295 lb/tq *according to the 2002 STS model* and in the same year there's the Infiniti Q45 with a 4.5 liter V8 making 340 hp and 333 lb/tq and we have the Lexus LS430 with a 4.3 liter V8 making 290 hp and 320 lb/tq. So with less displacement they are making better numbers then that of a larger displacement engine. I would think of these two as better "performance" engines as you guys put it then that of the Northstar. And not to mention the only Northstar car that is RWD is the XLR but thats a $70k+ car. FWD's are not sports cars and are no performance cars. Atleast Lincoln hasn't gone that route thank god

the northstar engine puts out OVER 1hp PER CU IN, that was NOT TO LONG ago So does the Q45 and LS430

then you say its not a performance engine because it has no aftermarket, so i show you a website where you can turn it into a 1200hp monster, you don't commentAnd i could give you a website that turn's a 2.6 I6 into a 1400hp engine so I guess that is a better engine then?

finally you say......"but but but katshot said it wasn't........don't don't make me tell him"
1. You probably don't even know who Katshot is.
2. You probably don't even have a 1/12 of his knowledge so he could tell you stuff about the engine that you have no idea as to what he is talking about.
3. I never said I'm going to tell, I'm going to tell. I mentioned to him about this thread and he smirked and said "here we go again" so since you've been around all of 3-4 months or so you wouldn't have known about the Northstar vs. LT1 thread i mentioned in the other post



ok, i think we've proved our point, no matter what we say you'll have a comment,.Looks who's talking

http://www.mechtech-ms.com/html/nspix_big/pic157.html
Well according to this picture you said its a 1200 hp engine. Well look at the top and it says 650 bhp TT Northstar. So your 550 hp short. The highest hp engine I saw on the website was 800 hp. So where your getting 1200 hp from i'm still trying to figure out. For the 600 hp engine your looking at $18k not including all the labor, custom hood, axles, transmission, clutch, flywheel, pressure plate, etc. And not to mention why the hell would you want a 600 hp FWD? :suspect:

Is this the LT1 vs. N* thread being refered to?

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1816&page=3&pp=20&highlight=lt1+northstar

It is an interesting read. It is mostly a comparison of the two engines with a few pot shots thrown at the N*. I would fully agree that the LT1 is the better engine choice for a hotrodder that wants to modify his engine from stock. It also has a big displacement advantage and is easier to maintain. Important criteria for the hobbyist or racer.

I would still argue the N* is a performance engine. The vast majority of current production automobiles do not have 300 hp. Mainly the high end performance and luxury cars do. The N* produced 295hp from 4.6L when it came out over ten years ago. That was huge back then. The new N*’s are pushing 320hp naturally aspirated. You won’t get much better from 4.6L without using forced induction or accepting performance tradoff’s such as loss of low end or streetability. When an engine is pushing the limits of its displacement and induction then it is most certainly designed for performance.

Perry

I think this quite from what my dad had to say sum's it up pretty good

There's actually very little aftermarket stuff geared toward the Northstar. The reasons are as follows:

1. Majority of Northstar owners are NOT liable to favor performance upgrades to their cars.
2. In factory trim, the Northstar engine is NOT by any means ready for any "bolt-on" performance upgrades, especially forced induction.
3. Cost of the Northstar engine is rather high and for that reason it does not easily lend itself to the DIY'r.
4. The engine compartment of all Northstar equipped cars is too cramped and hot for doing most performance upgrades that would include addition of componentry.

This is not to say that it CAN'T be done, there are a few people that have in fact, modified the Northstar engine for applications both in and out of Cadillac cars. The point is that the engine and the platforms it is found in, do not lend themselves to such modifications.

And another quote as to why I'm not to fond of the Northstar

And to answer Mikes questions:
Northstars blow head gaskets because they suck.
You have to use the coolant additive in Cadillac Aluminum engines because they suck. And Northstars burn oil because they suck.

Ok...that was just to be funny.

Northstar engines blow head gaskets because:
1. Some engines were manufactured with improper size head bolts.
2. Some engines were manufactured with improperly machined headbolt holes.
3. Some engines were manufactured with improperly torqued heads.
4. Some engines were manufactured with defective head gaskets.
Take your pick.
The coolant tabs are to help maintain the integrity of the cooling system, lubricate the pump, and help seal minor leaks. Without them, cylinder liner seals breakdown and leak allowing oil and water to mix (that's a bad thing), and eventually causing engine failure.
Why do Northstar engines burn oil? Damn good question. Not all of them do. I've read the reports about aggressive cylinder cross-hatching and personally don't believe it. If that were the case, ALL the engines would use oil at virtually the same rate. This is NOT the case though. on this question, I'm likely to rely on my ORIGINAL comment above, they SUCK.

And I think this would be the last one

And I know I mentioned it here before but just in case anybody missed it, there are Northstar failures under investigation right now that you guys have not even HEARD of yet. One I mentioned before was a block cracking problem that is being seen in an aweful lot of engines and there's supposedly NO EXPLANATION for it yet. Yes these are in higher mileage engines (approx. 150K miles) but there are a lot of Caddys out there with that kind of miles on them too.
I will continue to say that even though the Northstar is an awesome engine when it's running properly, I DO NOT trust it's long-term reliability.
And bearing that in mind, I have to point out that Cadillac has a very poor track record with its aluminum engines and it is probably the one largest reason for their having such a poor reputation in the marketplace.
That, and their going to FWD has been a HUGE weight around their neck.
Hopefully, their moving back to RWD signals their desire to get serious in their supposed target market. Now all they have to do is put a better engine in their cars.

This goes back to the famous HRS vs. Scourge "Is this a race car" thread.

Can we agree on this:

Depending on platform, the N* can be a performance engine. However, it is certainly not the first choice when it comes time to increase performance, and is definitely outclassed by many competitors aftermarket-wise.

Thank you, Brett.
So Katshot is scripture to you? I like this one then: ;)

In "stock" trim, the Northstar equipped cars WILL dog the Fleetwood for sure. They should either beat, or equal the SS. BUT.........it is VERY easy to boost the performance of the RWD Fleetwood and Impala SS compared to the FWD Northstar cars. So if you intend to leave the cars TOTALLY STOCK, an ETC or STS would be the hot ticket for performance. The Deville Concours will be a few ticks slower due to weight and tuning.

Thank you, Brett.
So Katshot is scripture to you? I like this one then: ;)I agree with Brett, But Katshot isn't a scripture to me, he's my father. :D

how old is the northstar? 11 years, comparing that to newer lexus technology is not releavant.

the northstar came out in 93, 295 hp. lexus had a 4.0 i believe, with 250hp/260tq . lincoln had a 280hp/290tq (later upped to 290hp on the lsc's) 4.6v8. Corvette had a 300hp 5.7, ford used a what, 235hp in there COBRA mustang? what was the camaro at at that time? 275hp? wow, its numbers are right on track with REAL sports cars, if only it was lighter....oh wait, there's the series 1, fastest production american car at its time, sure it has a blower, but ford strapped a blower on top of its 5.4 and only came out with less power than the lil ol 4.0

but what now? i guess you'll say its no longer a performance engine? because i guess a car can have a performance engine, and loose its status?

and the 320hp northstar is also available in the SRX, 25,000 less than the xlr, and will be in the 2005 sts which is a few months away.

and loose its status?

I think you mean "lose"



As "packaged" it is not a performance engine.

That seems like a reasonable solution, lets try and leave it at that

I think you mean "lose"



As "packaged" it is not a performance engine.

That seems like a reasonable solution, lets try and leave it at thatDubya its done and over with. Once again Brett comes in with some good words :yup:

as packaged its not a performance car

take the extreme, put a porsche engine in a tank, is it not a performance engine anymore? order a porsche crate engine, so it isnt a performance engnine untill its in the car?

it is done

as packaged its not a performance car

take the extreme, put a porsche engine in a tank, is it not a performance engine anymore? order a porsche crate engine, so it isnt a performance engnine untill its in the car?

it is done :cookoo:

Good Posts my 96 STS recently whipped a Saleen by a few feet. That car was running 13.7 in the quarter mile. I took him to 90 before we stopped, but he seemed shocked when I turned the interior lights on and padded my dash board with love:). I will be doing the 1/4 this friday and will post a video and my times on this forum. Email cruzajc1@aol.com only mod is a Dynomax Turbo exhaust. Trying to get a duct ran from the fog light area of my car to the intake duct for a little colder air, we will see.

Gus in Valdosta

11-0 in kills to date.

4 Mustang GT's (various, but at least car length, 2 in some cases
1 70 Lemans with a 4 barrel carb (4 car lenghts)
1 Saleen (8 feet)
1 Eagle Talon Turbo from a role (a half a car length)
1 GT Supercharged Gran Prix i beleive the car was.
a couple of ricers... I hate eating junk food, but I can't resist sometimes:)

Gus in Valdosta
cruzajc1@aol.com

Good Posts my 96 STS recently whipped a Saleen by a few feet. That car was running 13.7 in the quarter mile. I took him to 90 before we stopped, but he seemed shocked when I turned the interior lights on and padded my dash board with love:). I will be doing the 1/4 this friday and will post a video and my times on this forum. Email cruzajc1@aol.com only mod is a Dynomax Turbo exhaust. Trying to get a duct ran from the fog light area of my car to the intake duct for a little colder air, we will see.

Gus in Valdosta

11-0 in kills to date.

4 Mustang GT's (various, but at least car length, 2 in some cases
1 70 Lemans with a 4 barrel carb (4 car lenghts)
1 Saleen (8 feet)
1 Eagle Talon Turbo from a role (a half a car length)
1 GT Supercharged Gran Prix i beleive the car was.
a couple of ricers... I hate eating junk food, but I can't resist sometimes:)

Gus in Valdosta
cruzajc1@aol.com


where are you from? and are you BSing! what car do you have?

also im planning on buying dynomax mufflers for my STS soon

super turbos to be exact... what case size did you buy?

I like the "scorecard" . I dont do ricers anymore unless they look impressive. I had raced numerous "redneck" pickups....why do they think if they put LOUD pipes on a dodge ram they think its fast?

I like the "scorecard" . I dont do ricers anymore unless they look impressive. I had raced numerous "redneck" pickups....why do they think if they put LOUD pipes on a dodge ram they think its fast?


you race..but your a cop... :hide: whats this world coming too!!!!!

:D :D :D :D :D

...Katshot [sic] has oh so much more knowledge then anybody else on here and he even agree's with me ... I'll have him come on and explain to you as to why it [Northstar] isn't a performance engine. besides he already had this discussion before but if you want he will be more then happy to refresh your memory

I'm sorry but I disagree that Katshot has that "much more knowledge" or that he really knows what he's talking about most of the time...

My opinion is that, on most ocasions, you and Katshot throw in your unsolicited $0.02 and that usually it's a blanket disagreement regardless of whatever facts may be presented.

On the post below, you may find out some answers to your own questions about engines and about performance and modifications. Very informative, and revealing as to who doesn't really know what they speak.

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/northstar-performance-technical-discussion/68040-k-n-intake-i-want-one.html

Here's a fact:

The last post in this thread before today was on April 26th, 2004. It is now March 24th, 2006; almost exactly two years to the day...:D

Here's a fact:

The last post in this thread before today was on April 26th, 2004. It is now March 24th, 2006; almost exactly two years to the day...:D

I know. I just had to comment on the statement I quoted. Maybe it was uncalled for and possibly forgotten but what the heck. :stirpot:

Beemer did you see this thread?? Sign!!

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-seville-cadillac-eldorado-forum/69077-hypertech-will-hack-n-if-we.html

I'm sorry but I disagree that Katshot has that "much more knowledge" or that he really knows what he's talking about most of the time...

My opinion is that, on most ocasions, you and Katshot throw in your unsolicited $0.02 and that usually it's a blanket disagreement regardless of whatever facts may be presented.

On the post below, you may find out some answers to your own questions about engines and about performance and modifications. Very informative, and revealing as to who doesn't really know what they speak.

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/northstar-performance-technical-discussion/68040-k-n-intake-i-want-one.htmlthe fact is you have no life if your going back 2 years to try and talk shit on me

the fact is you have no life if your going back 2 years to try and talk shit on me

LOL. I didn't know this post even existed, and u had nothing to do with it when I found it, except for the fact you and your dad know little about Cadillacs, yet claim to know everything. Your subjective response, proves it.

Cheers. :thumbsup:

LOL. I didn't know this post even existed, and u had nothing to do with it when I found it, except for the fact you and your dad know little about Cadillacs, yet claim to know everything. Your subjective response, proves it.

Cheers. :thumbsup:lol.....your joking right? Yeah umm......my dad knows little about Cadillac. Thats why Cadillac was wanting him to work for them in their fleet department because he knows oh so little about them. All you know is how the N* IS THE BESTEST ENGINE EVER AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!!! When you get a clue about oh i dunno.....anything. Then I guess you can say something. But the fact still remains that you brougth a thread that is 2 years old to try and make yourself feel better because you try to belittle me and my dad when actuality your the tool for going back this far to try and make yourself look good.

lol.....your joking right? Yeah umm......my dad knows little about Cadillac. Thats why Cadillac was wanting him to work for them in their fleet department because he knows oh so little about them. All you know is how the N* IS THE BESTEST ENGINE EVER AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS!!! When you get a clue about oh i dunno.....anything. Then I guess you can say something. But the fact still remains that you brougth a thread that is 2 years old to try and make yourself feel better because you try to belittle me and my dad when actuality your the tool for going back this far to try and make yourself look good.

Hmm... I really don't have time to argue with you because we both lose. I lose my time, and you lose the argument.

I could care less about making myself look good. What would the benefit be in a forum? Quite a ridiculous statement--and guess who made it? Not I.

I've been on the forum for well over a year and I keep seeing a wall that people slam into. That wall would be the bubble bursting Blackout and Katshot. You guys have very few positive things to say about anything on the forum. Any opportunity that you guys have to put something down--you guys do not hesitate to jump to the ocasion.

There are hundreds of thousands of Northstars out there that make their owners happy (possibly well over a million). It seems your self-appointed position is to put folks down, with what kind of backup? What motive?

Some people get a kick of putting others down--but just hanging around the forum waiting to jump on it, is a little much.

I had never read the statements you made on this two year old thread and lo and behold I come across your statements which are not different in your modus operandi today.

Big deal. It's not like I'm pointing out something you never said or something that never happened. It's here for anyone to read and make up their own mind.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. I'll try not to do so again.

Take care.

Everybody's wrong. Get over it.

Who dug up this thread anwyay? The very topic is stupid, the cars aren't even in the same class. And you can't say you're talking about the STS-V because it didn't even exist when this thread was started.

Hmm... I really don't have time to argue with you because we both lose.You odn't really have the time but yet you make this long drawn out post:bigroll:

I lose my time, and you lose the argument.What argument? This thread was made before you were even a member. So i guess I was trying to pick an argument with you before you were even here? Yeah ummm.....thats some good logic your using:thumbsup:

I could care less about making myself look good. What would the benefit be in a forum? Quite a ridiculous statement--and guess who made it? Not I.Exactly because you weren't even around when this thread was going on. But for some reason or another you decided to bring this back from the dead and proceed to knock on my dad and I. The only reason for doing this would be to make yourself look good or to try and stir up some shit:stirpot:

I've been on the forum for well over a year and I keep seeing a wall that people slam into. That wall would be the bubble bursting Blackout and Katshot.Congrats on being on here for over a year. I've been here for about 3 years now. I've seen many gusy like you come and go and think you have all this knowledge about this and that but you have little knowledge on much of anything let alone what has happened on these forums for the past few years. You've pretty much brought back a topic that has been discussed a few times now and I have already stated my position on the N* numerous times. If you didn't read it then oh well I'm not going to go back and explain myself for some guy that is a forum lurker.
You guys have very few positive things to say about anything on the forum.Oh ok. Thats why I have helped many people out with any questions that I can answer and I just got a PM from illumina the other day asking me a question and I was more then happy to help him out as best as I could. And also at the sametime anytime I see anything Cadillac related I post it up on here. I mean a thread I started is now a link on the front page of the forum as well as the top of the forum main page.
Any opportunity that you guys have to put something down--you guys do not hesitate to jump to the ocasion.Well if someone is claiming that the N* is the best enegine ever and this and that well then yes you need to say something. If I put something down it is off of either first hand experience that I know and that is why I am putting it down or stuff I have learned/read over the years. Unlike you I have no brand loyalty. Just because this is a Cadillac forum doesn't mean that it should be proclaiming Cadillac to be the best in every fascate of the automotive world. Believe it or not there are other luxury car companies and there are better products out there.

There are hundreds of thousands of Northstars out there that make their owners happy (possibly well over a million). It seems your self-appointed position is to put folks down, with what kind of backup? What motive?When there is a sticky about reporting any and all problems about an engine to make a case against the company i think that speaks volumes. I am on many other car forums and I have never seen stuff like I have seen on this forum about N* problems.

Mtflight,
What possible reason would you have for digging this old thread up? And is there any particular reason why I'm getting bashed here? I didn't even post here, although I was certainly talked about enough throughout the 5 pages. I'm seeing this thread for the first time as a matter of fact. Not that I'm dying to comment on this but what the hell..
From what I see, my son was being a jerk and making some ridiculous posts. Some people called him on them and a typical forum argument ensued. blah, blah, blah.. He's a big boy and can take care of himself. The mere fact that I didn't post in this thread to "set everyone straight about the Northstar" should speak volumes to even the most casual observer.
I think Gothicaleigh pretty much summed up my feelings on the Northstar vs. LT1 subject so I'll just leave it at that.
Now if anybody should want me, I'll be off spreading my ignorance around the forum. :thumbsup:

From what I see, my son was being a jerk and making some ridiculous posts. Some people called him on them and a typical forum argument ensued. blah, blah, blah.. He's a big boy and can take care of himself. The mere fact that I didn't post in this thread to "set everyone straight about the Northstar" should speak volumes to even the most casual observer.

I found the post through an innocent search and obviously didn't like the opinionated rant (usual song and dance). From reading any posts where Blakshot contributes, it would appear that his mission in life is to bash the N*. One would hope he is more productive in real life.

My interest was to point out that if someone gets their bubble popped because someone on the sideline is looking for bubbles to pop, they should take it with a grain of salt--understanding that:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion; albeit not to their own facts.

And Katshot, you're right. I guess he should've owned up to what he said, and that would've been the end of that. I certainly didn't put any words in his mouth; merely pointed out what he posted.

Apologies for stirring the pot! Case closed.

You odn't really have the time but yet you make this long drawn out post:bigroll:

What argument? This thread was made before you were even a member. So i guess I was trying to pick an argument with you before you were even here? Yeah ummm.....thats some good logic your using:thumbsup:

Exactly because you weren't even around when this thread was going on. But for some reason or another you decided to bring this back from the dead and proceed to knock on my dad and I. The only reason for doing this would be to make yourself look good or to try and stir up some shit:stirpot:

Congrats on being on here for over a year. I've been here for about 3 years now. I've seen many gusy like you come and go and think you have all this knowledge about this and that but you have little knowledge on much of anything let alone what has happened on these forums for the past few years. You've pretty much brought back a topic that has been discussed a few times now and I have already stated my position on the N* numerous times. If you didn't read it then oh well I'm not going to go back and explain myself for some guy that is a forum lurker.
Oh ok. Thats why I have helped many people out with any questions that I can answer and I just got a PM from illumina the other day asking me a question and I was more then happy to help him out as best as I could. And also at the sametime anytime I see anything Cadillac related I post it up on here. I mean a thread I started is now a link on the front page of the forum as well as the top of the forum main page.
Well if someone is claiming that the N* is the best enegine ever and this and that well then yes you need to say something. If I put something down it is off of either first hand experience that I know and that is why I am putting it down or stuff I have learned/read over the years. Unlike you I have no brand loyalty. Just because this is a Cadillac forum doesn't mean that it should be proclaiming Cadillac to be the best in every fascate of the automotive world. Believe it or not there are other luxury car companies and there are better products out there.

When there is a sticky about reporting any and all problems about an engine to make a case against the company i think that speaks volumes. I am on many other car forums and I have never seen stuff like I have seen on this forum about N* problems.

Maybe when I have some time I'll come back and read all this B.S. you typed up :confused:

Apologies for stirring the pot! Case closed.
Maybe when I have some time I'll come back and read all this B.S. you typed up :confused: Which is it?

Which is it?
The former. My response to you was that out of courtesy I'd read your post later. I'm done, thanx.