View Full Version : Why is the Northstar "better" than the Intech?

05-26-06, 04:44 PM
Nearly everyone on here says that the Northstar is a better engine than the Intech. Why is that?

05-26-06, 08:33 PM
Because this is a Cadillac forum. See what people are saying in the Lincoln forums. People will be people. Everybody thinks that what they have is the best, whether it is true or not. To me, both engines are great. Well taken care of examples of both, will last forever. Both make respectable power. Both get respectable mpg. it comes down to personal preference.


05-26-06, 09:04 PM
Well I don't know anything about the Intech but as stated previously I think the Northstar is an engineering wonder in respect to internal combustion engines.

On the same note, everything I've ever owned from Ford had severe design problems to say the least.

Lets go get the stats form each and compare...

05-26-06, 09:10 PM
Do they still offer the Intech? I don't see it anywhere?

05-26-06, 09:57 PM
I have heard that the Intech is the better motor. Not as "high maintenance" as the Northstar and it doesn't seem as fragile. But then again, it never made as much horsepower as the Northstars, atleast in the Lincolns anyways.

05-27-06, 05:01 AM
What do you consider high maintenance? The Northstar campaign was about building an almost maintenance free engine that was extremely durable?

All you should have to do is change the oil every 12k.

05-27-06, 08:21 AM
The coolant leaks that were synomonous with the Northstars, the oil burning (or loss) and all the other problems that people have with their Northstars.

05-27-06, 08:27 AM
I'm not trying to come across as saying that the Northstar sucks or anything. I like it, a lot. But I'm just trying to see what engineering advantages it holds over the Intech. Or visa versa.

05-27-06, 09:32 PM
I see. I will say that from what I understand most of those problems were address in the 2000 and newer Northstars.

Lord Cadillac
05-27-06, 09:42 PM
The engines are probably about even. Both having their highs and lows.. Cadillac marketed the Northstar, Lincoln didn't...

05-27-06, 09:55 PM
I see. I will say that from what I understand most of those problems were address in the 2000 and newer Northstars.

I've heard that too, but nearly all of the Northstar powered cars I want are 1999 or older :p

05-28-06, 09:48 PM
You've driven a car with a Northstar before?

05-29-06, 04:49 AM
I own one of each engine in question.

Performance wise the Northstar has the edge despite what some other Lincoln people claim. That is, of course, until you get into aftermarket modifications. The Northstar and Intech will respond fairly equally to exhaust, an intake isn't worth much on either, you can spray either one just as well. The 4v Ford is the clear winner once you get past basic mods. As for other modifications to the car (I'm talking Mark VIII and ETC/STS here,) you can get a high stall torque convertor for either, LSD for either but it's cheap for the Mark, gears are only available for the Mark, and wheels are much easier to find for the Caddy thanks to Lincoln's damn 5x108 pattern.

As for reliability, I do have to give that one to the Lincoln. If a Northstar has been well maintained it will be very reliable. Same with the 4v. The headgaskets are the weak link in a northstar. Not nearly as big of a problem with the 4v. Everything else is equal. If you have the facilities to fix a headgasket on a northstar, or if you can get a car with a history of coolant changes on time, then either should be perfectly reliable.

05-29-06, 10:27 AM
SL1CK, yes I have driven about 3 cars with the Northstar in both it's 275 and 300hp versions.

DavesdeVille, I was waiting for your input on this one, thanks!

05-29-06, 12:36 PM
I currently have a GXP and an Aurora and both are powered by Northstar engines. My 95 Continental had the 260 HP Intech engine.

In all I could smoke the tires with my continental and cant with the Aurora or GXP.

On the highway though the N* powered cars are much faster imho.

05-29-06, 02:04 PM
I have to get out and drive a '95-'99 Aurora and a Mark VIII again. It's been too long since I've driven either. I didn't get to really open up the VIII I drove last summer, because the sales lady was with me at the time. But I do remember flooring it at 30 on the wet streets, and I got the tires to spin with the traction control on.

When I drove the Aurora, it was just about empty, so I couldn't take it out far or really open it up.

05-30-06, 05:04 AM
Haha yeah, traction assist on a Mark VIII is a joke. Not like traction control on a northstar, where it actively controls the brakes AND can shut down cylinders to prevent you from losing traction (plus that system uses the front brakes which are more powerful than rears.) I did a decent burnout at the strip with traction assist on.

05-30-06, 10:23 AM
There's a dealer nearby with a '96 Aurora and a '95 VIII for sale, I think I'll check them out today.

Dave, the VIII would be a great year rounder for you in NM, but here in MN, it would be a horrendous idea. Intech power + rwd + light weight + snow = SHIT!!!

Night Wolf
05-30-06, 10:43 AM
Cadillac, never really marketed the Northstar...

Perhaps if they did, in the early 90's they could have advertised a full size luxury sedan running the 1/4 in about 14.8 seconds, and still gets 28mpg on the highway.... they would have been better off in the 90's.

05-30-06, 03:18 PM
I wonder why the Northstar received all the media attention back in '93, and the Intech received nothing, even though it came out the same year.

05-30-06, 07:23 PM
I have both...a '93 Mark VIII and a '97 Deville. Both are completely stock. The Mark has 180,000 and the Deville 123,000.

Both engines are reliable and have plenty of power. Neither has any noticable oil leakage. Replaced the oil filter adapter gasket on the Mark once to fix only leak.

Both get decent gas mileage....the Nstar a little better only because I can't keep a light foot no matter what the price of gas is in the Lincoln.

The Caddy has a much smoother ride. Either around town or the highway. I prefer the Caddy for a trip and the Lincoln for around town and work.

Both are very comparable engines but the Intech in the Mark runs circles around the Nstar performance wise. Burnouts in the Mark are just a matter of putting the hammer down and holding it. Burns thru second every time and chirps it half the time just normal driving. It's very difficult to get any rubber at all in the Deville and the traction control must be turned off first.

The Intech doesn't have any headgasket issues. My Nstar is apart in the garage right now for new headgaskets.

There is a huge aftermarket parts market for the Intech....try finding almost anything for the Nstar and if you do the price is outrageous. It is very difficult just to get some new gaskets from any parts house other than the Caddy dealer.

The Deville is a much more comfortable car and it is the one that I will be keeping....however....the Intech will live on in my '84 Mustang coupe whenever I get time to make the swap.

05-30-06, 11:35 PM
Headgaskets and aftermarket performance parts are the two main advantages I see to the Intech. I havent read many stories about headgaskets going on the Intech, and I spend a good amount of time at work reading thru carsurvey.org and edmunds about stuff like this. Also, there are many aftermarket parts for the RWD Intech, like superchargers and stuff like that. Nobody makes that (yet) for the Northstar.

05-30-06, 11:48 PM
I really love both the Intech and Northstar engines and find lots of simularities. I think I like the Intech better because it has rear wheel drive, an aftermarket for parts and no HG issues....

....if we were comparing complete cars and not just the engines I would be leaning Caddy all of the way. I'm not a fan of the suspension on the Mark VIII even after converting to coil springs all around.

05-31-06, 10:31 AM
Yeah, complete cars is something else.

Between the VIII LSC and the Eldorado Touring Coupe, I like the ETC more in almost every aspect except the fact that the VIII is RWD and it doesnt have the headgasket issues that the N* does.

Between the Continental and STS, I like almost everything about the 97 and older STS's more, except the N*'s headgasket issues, but after the redesign in '98, I like the Continental a lot more than the STS/ SLS.

Between a Continental and a DeVille Concours, I like everything about the Concours more except the N*'s headgasket issues.

You can see where I'm going with this. I'd be very leery to buy a N*, because you can't really get it hot enough on the test drive to tell if the cooling system is alright, and the headgasket issues will start because of what the previous owner did (or didn't) do.

06-02-06, 09:30 PM
The only thing that I dislike is the FWD that about it. Maybe oneday I will convert it to RWD. Until then enjoy.

06-03-06, 05:01 PM
Does the Aurora's 4.0 Northstar have the same issues that the 4.6 Northstar has?