why fwd?! - Page 5

VlaDeMaN · #41 (**permalink**) 03-25-03, 09:05 PM

caddy trannies last very long. my friend has a 95 seville and he just blew his head gasket at 150kmiles w/ no major tranny service...and dammn...he really pushed that car sometimes...

Liseckas · #42 (**permalink**) 03-25-03, 09:18 PM

I don't know what to say. I guess my mom got a lemon. My mom had lots of other problems with that car. My folks swear they'll never by another new Caddy, much less another GM, ever again.

jadcock · #43 (**permalink**) 03-26-03, 12:38 PM

Your opinion is certainly your opinion, but your correlation of unreliability has no basis at all! 60k miles is way too soon for any type of transmission to go out, FWD or otherwise. There was obviously a factory defect or lack of maintenance there (maybe low fluid?). My FWD Cadillac has 113k miles and the valve covers haven't even been off, nor has the transmission pan. It's been a very reliable car, much moreso than some RWD cars. We had to have the tranny rebuilt on our RWD '92 Crown Victoria at about 106k miles. Do those circumstances make either FWD or RWD better than the other? Absolutely not.

Katshot · #44 (**permalink**) 03-26-03, 01:35 PM

From 1980 to 2000, I personally experienced the transmission service history of as least 3000 Cadillacs, (mostly RWD) in our fleet. I can tell you that the 200 Metric was the worst followed closely by the T-440 (used in the mid '80's FWD Caddies). In the middle was the Turbo 400, 200-4R and 700R-4. And overall we had the least trouble with the 4L60-E and 4T60-E.
Remember this is an OVERALL view and does not focus on the early failures that were prevelant with the late model electronic transmissions.
Anyone that tries to convince you that a particular car and/or component are good or bad based soley on their personal experience, which usually only accounts for a couple examples, is deluding themselves at best. To make such blanket statements takes many, many examples to establish a reliable profile.

jadcock · #45 (**permalink**) 03-26-03, 02:06 PM

I agree Kevin. Correlations usually don't imply causality.

My '84 Cutlass had that TH-200-C transmission. And like clockwork, right at about 100k miles, I lost reverse gear on it. On the Olds G-body mailing list, I can count probably 20 members who have personally had a 200-C transmission fail in this same manner (lost reverse gear).

What are your experiences with the 4T80-E transmissions? The Northstars have those and I hear they're pretty strong. I've had good service from mine.

Liseckas · #46 (**permalink**) 03-26-03, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liseckas
I don't know what to say. I guess my mom got a lemon. My mom had lots of other problems with that car. My folks swear they'll never by another new Caddy, much less another GM, ever again.

She always had the car serviced by the local Caddy dealer. She always followed the recommended maintenance schedule. She never ever let the fluids run low (my dad made sure of that).
I have a feeling the mekaniks at Penske Cadillac in Downey California had some part in that tranny going out.

Katshot · #47 (**permalink**) 03-26-03, 03:29 PM

Jason,
Sorry dude, I meant the Northstar trans. I mistakenly called it a 60 series.
Overall, we had fairly good service from them. Less trouble than the 440 but still more trouble than the RWD cars. And obviously the repair costs were substantially higher too.

**Night Wolf** · #48 (**permalink**) 09-16-04, 09:20 PM

my '89 Olds 88 has a 440-T4.... 123k miles and it is fine.... read reviews on these cars and people have 200-300k miles on the origanal drivetrain with no problem... fluid and filter changes are all that is needed....

I heard that the Turbo 400 is one of the best automatic trannys ever made.... that is what my '79 has... my father said that they were designed to have excess slippage within them to make the shifts smooth, and that I should put a shift kit in my tranny to prevent it form slipping as much, and therefore allow it to last longer...

4T60E.... in my '93... again, I have heard it is a great tranny, GM still uses them (well, the 65... same thing though) plus, the fact it has an external tranny cooler form the factory helps out...

My fathers '99 GTP has a HD 4T65E.... why should a s/c 3800 have a Heavy Duty tranny, while a 4.9 have a regular tranny? torque output are the same between the 2.... I would think the Caddy would get a HD tranny from the start also...

at the local junkyard with about a dozen Eighty Eights just like mine, they all have between 160k-200k miles on them.... and the reason they are there is becuase of a bad wreck.... why don't you see any of the cars with 200k miles that were not in a wreck there? still being driven around.... something must have been done right.... all the reviews on these cars say they are trouble-free....which they are....

Only thing with the tranny on my Olds (440-T4), would be when I am coasting, and then I hit the gas, some times the car kinda jolts at the same time... my father said it is probably slack in the drive chain... actually, the '93 did that on a few occasions too....

... IIRC the 440T4 and the 4T60E are the same tranny... just that the 440 is vaccum operated while the 60 is electronic...

Caddy Man · #49 (**permalink**) 09-17-04, 12:54 AM

my dts used to handle very well in snow...but after gettin the cts, and driving numerious RWD cars, i have to say as far as handling, cornering, acceleratin out of a corner, NOTHING BEATS A RWD. plus it dosnt give that wierd 'front heavy' feeling.

Ralph · #50 (**permalink**) 09-17-04, 01:05 AM

Merging on sheer ice with Grand Marquis, and fish tailing all over the place and not moving with cars about to hit me=BAD and scary!

fwd Fleetwood= instant traction, straight steering (very little or no torque steer) Where I live I need fwd, the difference is night and day. For summer, I would love a CTS for RWD.