I want to know what kind of miles you all have on your fleetwoods, and what kind of problems there are. I just got to thinking about this last night when I was driving the fleetwood with 36k. It has never missed a service interval, and they are usually done early. I have heard these are really reliable powertrains.

I could never picture the FW with something wrong with it!!

I've been involved with Cadillac's for over 22 years and when it came time for me to buy one of my own, I had NO CHOICE which Caddy to buy. IMO, the final iteration of the Fleetwood was (and is) the best. The LT1 did great in our fleet. Absolutely the most reliable engine we ever had (with the exception of the Olds 307).
There is absolutely nothing needed for this engine other than a timing chain and gears at about 140K miles to get it to well beyond 200K miles. We had literally hundreds of these engines between '94 and '96 and I can tell you that most were never replaced during our ownership (which usually lasted 250K miles).
The only issue we encountered routinely was cracked right side exhaust manifolds, broken exhaust manifold bolts, and oil fouled #8 plugs that were caused by a leaking intake manifold seal. There were the occassional distributor failures, coil failures, etc. but overall, the engine was a reliable, powerful beast.

how reliable do you think they are in comparison to other cars, ie lexuii (pl lexus), the northstar, and other V8s in that time frame.

The 4.9 Caddy motor is a great motor, the 4.6 Northstar gave us more trouble than I would've thought it should. During my time in the business, we ran the following:
Cad 472
Cad 425
Cad 368
Cad 4.1
Cad 4.6
Olds 307
Chevy 5.7
During my time there, the Olds motor was the best, followed by the LT1.
Comparing it to other engines outside GM would be tough.

My 1994 Fleetwood has 87Ks on it.

The engine has never betrayed me. It runs just fine. My car let me down only twice: batteries and fuel pump sending unit. Nothing to do specifically with engine itself.
The down side of them is, according to my mechanic, that you have to tune them every 60-70K miles, which is extremely laborious and wallet-thinnig procedure. Same with starters, water pumps, and cap and rotor.

So, on the final note, given the proper maintenance, the LT1 is great.

P.S. By the way, I believe what my mechanic says because he drives the car with the same engine as mine (not a Cadillac, though).

I have a few LT1 cars.

96 9C1 Caprice 113k

96 Impala SS (WX3) 182k

95 Fleetwood R1P 118k

94 9C1 Caprice 276k


Going strong


Click here to see them in action... (http://www.deanstud.com/videos/)


Click here just to see them................ (http://community.webshots.com/user/mrmaj)

Thats great information. It basically sounds like the wear and tear items are the ones that go out. I didnt know that the LT1 still uses a distributor (most use coils over the plugs right?)

The LT1 has what is called "Opti-Spark". It's a distributor mounted right on the front end of the camshaft. It is under the waterpump. You can get a cap/rotor kit for it but you'll need "special" tools to take it apart.

Now what is the use of doing that?? Making it so normal people with normal tools cant get to it??

You can get TO it, you just can't take it apart. The tools are cheap and simple, although I've never seen them in a store.

The LT1 is cool as long as you don't go the route I did. then reliabilty is shot the hell out the window. I can't say I've had serious engine problems but more accessory problems. Alternators, water pumps, starters, ignition... oh, and multiple tranny failures. My car has around 110K miles on her. There's 2 times she's left me stranded, once was when I completly demolished the tranny. The other was when the water pump went. Otherwise I've always been able to at least limp her home. As long as you don't crack the motor open it'll run for ever. Hell, mine still sorta runs, it just argues a lot :D.

What about when you start messin' with the suspension Shaun?

Sorry I just had to bring that up;)

Do you thinkt the LT1 or the 4.9 is better??

Originally posted by elwesso
Do you thinkt the LT1 or the 4.9 is better??

Do you think a Lear is better than a Cessena?

Originally posted by kcnewell
Do you think a Lear is better than a Cessena?

I'd go with the Lear. Cessna's and ALL those other little pieces of flying tin are just plain dangerous.

Oh wait, you weren't being serious? Sorry dude ;)

As for the LT1 vs. 4.9 question, even though the 4.9 was a great motor, I still think Cadillac has a REAL POOR track record when it comes to aluminum engines. They can't build one worth a damn! I'll take my iron-block LT1 any day ;)

Yeah, Kev's right, they can't build an aluminum engine to save their butts! Oh wait...mine's aluminum...Mine's got 115k miles and hasn't even had a valve cover off it...Mine even runs circles around stock Impala SSes (and stock Fleetwoods). Damn aluminum engines. ;)

Don't get me wrong here...I like my 4.9 and it runs really good and has taken to the mods I've done on it really well. But it was never intended to be modified and there is virtually NO aftermarket for it! The LT1 is a different story entirely and it's kind of like comparing apples and oranges...Traditionally (Last 30 years or so) Cadillacs have been out of the hotrod limelight and were considered to be for a more sedate crowd. That is changing, What remains to be seen is whether there will be enough of a market to support aftermarket goodies for these engines.
As to which one is better? They're to different in fact to be compared they were designed for different uses and believe me when I say that Cadillac had NO IDEA that anyone would ever hotrod a 4.9 when they introduced it.

Originally posted by jadcock
Yeah, Kev's right, they can't build an aluminum engine to save their butts! Oh wait...mine's aluminum...Mine's got 115k miles and hasn't even had a valve cover off it...Mine even runs circles around stock Impala SSes (and stock Fleetwoods). Damn aluminum engines. ;)

I KNEW I'd get an answer like that! And I was pretty sure it would come from you Jason.
Like it or not, Cadillac's track record speaks for itself. They have yet to build an aluminum engine that didn't have major problems. The 4.9 is the only one they did that was actually pretty good, but that was just the final itteration of the HT4100. As is so often the case, just when they get something right, they discontinue it. You can bet the final year or so of Northstar production will fianlly be a great, trouble-free engine. But it will most likely NOT be in a car you'd want. The latest/greatest car will have an ALL-NEW engine with ALL-NEW issues.

Unfortunately.....That's probably true! Let's hope they break the trend...

Only time will tell. It sure would be nice to have a REAL nice Cadillac engine.

Originally posted by Katshot
I KNEW I'd get an answer like that! And I was pretty sure it would come from you Jason.

That's what I'm here for!

Like it or not, Cadillac's track record speaks for itself. They have yet to build an aluminum engine that didn't have major problems.

Well, how 'bout some numbers? Like...Cadillac has had to warranty 500,000 head bolt thread problems out of 1,000,000 engines produced. Now THAT would be a bad track record! I'd wager that the ratio is something closer to 5,000 repairs on 1,000,000 engines, which is about .5%. Do you have any hard numbers?

Because bad rep or not, lots of older folks, including many I know, keep coming back for more. There's a lot of people I know who have had good experiences with their modern Cadillacs, including ones with aluminum engines. Everyone says, "ah, all those Northstars are junk", when in reality, the major repair rate is probably in the fraction of a percent. Again, I think some hard numbers would validate this discussion much better.

You're absolutely right BUT....I don't really care that much to go digging for numbers. You're guessing and have very little ACTUAL experience with this issue. I on the other hand am drawing on over 20 years of first hand experience in the field, a minimum of approx. 80 Northstar equipped cars per year between '96 and 2000 in my fleet, and first hand knowledge (from within Cadillac) of engine related issues during those years. Hell, I partied with Cadillac engineers and two in particular were from the engine division.
So I'm sorry if my ACTUAL experience doesn't jive with what you WANT to be the facts about the engine in your car but as they say, the facts are the facts. I'm not just pulling this stuff out my ass you know. I'm not some guy with a totally unrelated career and education to this field and topic coming here to air his views. This has been my life for the last 20+ years, and I come to places like this to help out where I can and hangout with others like myself. Not to constantly defend myself through data gathering. Sorry dude, nothing personal, I respect you. You're a smart guy but if you REALLY knew anything about this, you'd know I'm right.

Besides if people actually start digging up facts on this board, then somebody will be proved wrong. and we can't have that :)

Kat what line of work were you in? the only company i can imagine having 80 northstars would be livery or rental, just curious?

I was the Fleet Manager at A-1 Limousine in Princeton, NJ. from 1980-2000. We had over 250 vehicles in our fleet at any given time. I usually bought between 50 and 80 sedans per year, and 20 to 30 limousines per year, some years even more. We usually rotated the cars every 2-3 years. So that would mean that at any given time from '96 till when I left in 2000, I had at least 80-90 Northstar cars, and as many as 230 or so. During my time there, we were the largest "all Cadillac Fleet" in the country, and the 3rd largest livery fleet in the country. Doing those numbers with Cadillac gave me a large number of "special" privileges with not only our local dealer but Cadillac and GM in general.

Originally posted by Brett
Besides if people actually start digging up facts on this board, then somebody will be proved wrong. and we can't have that :)

Oh, that was to the heart, you really got me with that one. :rolleyes:

I know what you're getting at and believe it or not, I agree with you. Feel free to look it up, you'll only waste your time and probably NOT post what you find because the numbers will only prove me right. Hey, just because I've been in the business for so long it doesn't mean I can't be wrong. I know it. Hell my son proves me wrong quite regularly in debates about cars. That's life. This just happens to be one of those times that I know I'm right. So believe me or don't, it's no hair off my butt either way.

I know numbers do exist for this....I just don't know where to get them. I'm usually not a doubting guy, but I'd like more to go on than "if you really knew about it, you'd know I was right". That doesn't tell me anything. Problems with a particular engine are always brought into the light in every forum you come across, and the actual track record gets forgotten about. I'm a numbers guy -- I try to be as objective as possible. You say they have a bad overall track record, so I think to myself, hmm...I wonder what the numbers show. That's all.

Fleet manager from 1980-2000? That's an impressive run, and you certainly have a lot of knowledge about the vehicles. Let me ask...if the Northstars gave a lot of problems, what kinds of problems were you experiencing, and what was your incentive to keep purchasing them, if they gave you a lot of trouble? Was it steep discounts from Cadillac? I guess I'm asking what was the reason for not going with Lincoln?

Thanks.

Actually during the big labor strike at GM in '99 I think it was, I did actually have a sales order all written up for 50 Town Cars. The following day the strike was settled and we backed out of the deal.
The discounts from Cadillac were a big incentive for sure (as I recall, I was paying about 30K for my 2000 Devilles). But to be honest, we had a lot invested in Cadillac. First of all, we were one of the few fleets that did all our own service, so I had all my guys trained from GM Training School in Moorestown, NJ and I had hired ex-dealer guys with extensive GM experience too. At any given time I only had ONE guy with any Ford experience. Then I had to consider my inventory costs. I was inventorying over a million dollars worth of GM-specific parts and supplies. So I'd have to figure out how to fit a group of Ford stuff in the building.
And of course it would throw a monkey-wrench into our being the largest ALL- Cadillac fleet. There was a lot that went into the decision. If you take it down to basics, either car would've worked for us, it was just certainly more "convenient" for us to continue staying with Cadillac.
As for problems with the Northstar engines, our biggest issues were head gaskets for sure but one BIG issue was the fact that the Northstar "system" was a very labor intensive system to maintain. Virtually nothing was easy or cheap to fix, and dealing with FWD meant that you used up a lot of shop space when you needed to drop an engine cradle (which happened a lot). There were several items on the Deville that were very costly to repair and very costly from a "down-time" aspect as well (remember I said it was labor-intensive). The local dealers were generally useless to us as was Cadillac itself at times as far as helping us get the cars back up and on the road ASAP since because of our "accelerated mileage" and subsequent wear, not to mention our geographic location (midway between Phila. and NYC.) we saw component failures that the factory had NEVER seen and the dealer wouldn't see for years if ever.
So you can see that if I'm less than "glowing" over the Northstar, it's because I've done my time in Cadillac hell and came out Less than impressed by the experience.

Well, if you're right, you're right. :p

Originally posted by Katshot
Oh, that was to the heart, you really got me with that one. :rolleyes:

I know what you're getting at and believe it or not, I agree with you. Feel free to look it up, you'll only waste your time and probably NOT post what you find because the numbers will only prove me right. Hey, just because I've been in the business for so long it doesn't mean I can't be wrong. I know it. Hell my son proves me wrong quite regularly in debates about cars. That's life. This just happens to be one of those times that I know I'm right. So believe me or don't, it's no hair off my butt either way.

Actually I wasnt talking about you in particular Kev, just people on the internet in general. However, i did find it funny and interesting that you assumed it was directed towards you. ;)

Yeah, yeah, sure. Just a Freudian slip right? ;)

Actually during the big labor strike at GM in '99 I think it was, I did actually have a sales order all written up for 50 Town Cars. The following day the strike was settled and we backed out of the deal.
The discounts from Cadillac were a big incentive for sure (as I recall, I was paying about 30K for my 2000 Devilles). But to be honest, we had a lot invested in Cadillac. First of all, we were one of the few fleets that did all our own service, so I had all my guys trained from GM Training School in Moorestown, NJ and I had hired ex-dealer guys with extensive GM experience too. At any given time I only had ONE guy with any Ford experience. Then I had to consider my inventory costs. I was inventorying over a million dollars worth of GM-specific parts and supplies. So I'd have to figure out how to fit a group of Ford stuff in the building.
And of course it would throw a monkey-wrench into our being the largest ALL- Cadillac fleet. There was a lot that went into the decision. If you take it down to basics, either car would've worked for us, it was just certainly more "convenient" for us to continue staying with Cadillac.
As for problems with the Northstar engines, our biggest issues were head gaskets for sure but one BIG issue was the fact that the Northstar "system" was a very labor intensive system to maintain. Virtually nothing was easy or cheap to fix, and dealing with FWD meant that you used up a lot of shop space when you needed to drop an engine cradle (which happened a lot). There were several items on the Deville that were very costly to repair and very costly from a "down-time" aspect as well (remember I said it was labor-intensive). The local dealers were generally useless to us as was Cadillac itself at times as far as helping us get the cars back up and on the road ASAP since because of our "accelerated mileage" and subsequent wear, not to mention our geographic location (midway between Phila. and NYC.) we saw component failures that the factory had NEVER seen and the dealer wouldn't see for years if ever.
So you can see that if I'm less than "glowing" over the Northstar, it's because I've done my time in Cadillac hell and came out Less than impressed by the experience.


So,Katshot, your LT-! is still giving you no troulble.

Or have you sold it already?

And if so, are you ever going to get another one? :drinker

yet ANOTHER thread brought back from the dead :)

Thanks for the personal experience input, Katshot.

I have a 96 Seville and a 95 Fleetwood. Neither one has had any engine problems at all, but I bet I'm not the only one who would rather take a long trip in the LT1 instead of the Northstar; just the thought of any repair in the Northstar while on the road is frightening (relative to the LT1 same situation). Just my weakness, I guess.

I had an Avanti II with the 350 Vette engine for similar reasons; a distinctive look with common parts.

My dream car would be the beautiful Seville body with the simple reliability of the Fleetwood drive train.

Still have my LT1 and it's still running strong. And yes, I'd still buy another one without hesitation. Still believe it to be one of the best engines GM has ever made.