: 275vs300HP Eldo ESC/ETC



CJV
01-03-07, 07:31 PM
What gives the late model Eldorado ETC's motor 300hp while the ESC has 275hp?

Ranger
01-03-07, 08:08 PM
Different intake cam.

CJV
01-03-07, 08:20 PM
i see...so what would be the reasoning behind switching the cam on the two models? i dont think there is any price difference between the two cams. I do know there is a weight difference in the two cars, did this have anything to do with the power assignment difference? Will an ETC out accelerate an ESC of the same year even though it has 25 more hp but weighs (i believe) 400 or so pounds more?

danbuc
01-03-07, 08:32 PM
There shouldn't be any difference in weight between a same year ETC or ESC.

Ranger
01-03-07, 08:39 PM
If you are asking if YOU can swap cams, the answer is no. The two cars also use different final drive ratios in conjuntion with the different engines. Likewise different PCMs.

Theoreticaly in a race the ESC (more low end torque) would lead off the line. Later, as the ETCs higher HP kicked in, it would pull ahead.

CJV
01-03-07, 10:22 PM
interesting...is the gearing in the 4 gears the same in both models or has the differential ratio just changed?

Ranger
01-03-07, 10:37 PM
Not sure about the 4 gears. Probably just the ratio. 300HP engine has 3.71:1 and the 275HP has 3.11:1

1997BlackETC
01-03-07, 10:52 PM
That would make for an interesting quartermile drag race, a etc vs a esc, wonder if anybody has ever done it? Sure think the ETC would win by at least a quarter second or so.

Ranger
01-03-07, 11:00 PM
Oh, I'm sure it has been done and I suspect you are right about the outcome.

mtflight
01-03-07, 11:14 PM
The official Cadillac literature says:

ETC 0-60 7.1 seconds
Eldo (ESC) 0-60 7.4 seconds

The weight is 3856 lbs ETC vs 3825 lbs base Eldo

I think the difference may be attributed to suspension components (Continuously Variable Road Sensing Suspension, Stabilitrak) and possibly the memory kit, rainsense wipers, etc.

Performance-wise, I opine that highway speeds are where it's at. The ETC stands for touring which would coincide with its more responsive performance at 70-80 MPH and higher.

At those speeds the engine works at higher RPMs, closer to the power band upon WOT.

danbuc
01-03-07, 11:39 PM
The internal gearing in the transmission is the same for all forward gears and reverse. The only difference in the the final drive ratio, and programming.

mtflight
01-03-07, 11:49 PM
The internal gearing in the transmission is the same for all forward gears and reverse. The only difference in the the final drive ratio, and programming.

When I pointed out the difference was the CVRSS and Stabilitrak, I was referring to the 29 lb. discrepancy between the weight of both cars.

Hey danbuc, could you please chime-in on my "knock" post? I have some more clues, hopefully. Also have some warranty concerns, that you may have experience with.

clarkz71
01-04-07, 02:30 PM
There shouldn't be any difference in weight between a same year ETC or ESC.


Oh, but there is. From the 1995 FSM

ETC: 3818.4 lbs
(Base) ESC: 3773.8 lbs

Only 44.6 lbs difference though.

danbuc
01-04-07, 09:47 PM
When I pointed out the difference was the CVRSS and Stabilitrak, I was referring to the 29 lb. discrepancy between the weight of both cars.

Hey danbuc, could you please chime-in on my "knock" post? I have some more clues, hopefully. Also have some warranty concerns, that you may have experience with.

Yeah sure...

I didn't take 29lbs of electronic equipment to be a real weight discrepency...but technically it is....touche.

mtflight
01-04-07, 10:12 PM
Yeah sure...

I didn't take 29lbs of electronic equipment to be a real weight discrepency...but technically it is....touche.

LOL. My bad. I agree with you--that amount of weight is not significant. I think you were replying to CJV's post about the tranny difference.

I was answering the other post about the weight difference. I thought you were replying to me.. my bad.

I still appreciate your help on the other post.

danbuc
01-05-07, 08:48 PM
What now?...I forgot who I was replying too. :hmm: