Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
'02 ETC 34,000 miles 2002 F55 STS 83,000 miles, 2016 Challenger SRT 392, 6 Sp.
Joined
·
264 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Check out this 1998 ETC on E-Bay

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cadillac-Eldorado-ETC-1998-cadillac-eldorado-etc-stuning-colors-low-miles-this-car-is-beautiful-/351319204725?forcerrptr=true&hash=item51cc41a375&item=351319204725&pt=US_Cars_Truck

Pretty nice. If it had the light interior with the white top, I might have to buy it. My wife would kill me of course. :mad2:

Is it just me, or does it look like it's riding too high in both the front and the back?

Could have aftermarket struts/shocks.............I'd be checking for passive replacements.
Or, maybe ride height sensors just need adjusting.

I have noticed that it seems that the mid to late '90's Eldos seem to ride higher than the 2000-2002 models.
At least they always seem to have more distance between the top of the tire and body wheel arch.

They should have a little bit of forward rake but not too much.
 

·
Registered
2001 Seville STS, 1990 Seville (RIP), 1972 Sedan Deville
Joined
·
26,323 Posts
I think that may be an optical illusion. Black car, black (shiny) tires, black gap between the two. ?
 

·
Registered
97, 97, RIP 98, 99 STS with Jakes studs
Joined
·
718 Posts
pretty crazy how much difference you can see between 225s and 235s when you look at the gap in the wheel well.
 

·
Registered
2001 Seville STS, 1990 Seville (RIP), 1972 Sedan Deville
Joined
·
26,323 Posts
That's section width, not height.

225/60/16 is the correct size for this car.
 

·
Administrator
2002.5 F55 CORSA STS, 2014 Explorer XLT FWD
Joined
·
68,520 Posts
Looks OK to me.

225 = section width in mm
60 = tread-to-bead height as a % of section width
16 = wheel rim diameter in inches
 

·
Registered
'02 ETC 34,000 miles 2002 F55 STS 83,000 miles, 2016 Challenger SRT 392, 6 Sp.
Joined
·
264 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
So, a 235 will have a slightly higher profile. and 235/65 will be even higher.
That might explain it a little.

Still think this car sits a little higher than it should and definitely higher than my '01 which is wearing 235's.
 

·
Registered
2001 Seville STS, 1990 Seville (RIP), 1972 Sedan Deville
Joined
·
26,323 Posts
No, a 235 isn't necessarily taller than a 225. It depends on the aspect ratio.

And as far as riding higher, the difference is next to nothing.

A 235/60/16 is 10mm wider than a 225/60/16. Only 6mm taller overall, and there's only a 3mm difference from the centerline of the wheel to the tread. A 3mm ride height difference is not going to be visible to the naked eye.
 

·
Registered
'02 ETC 34,000 miles 2002 F55 STS 83,000 miles, 2016 Challenger SRT 392, 6 Sp.
Joined
·
264 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Good point, MC.
Overall, there seems to be some inconsistencies with the ride height on Eldos depending on year, condition of suspension components of course, and perhaps even
between ETC and ESC.
For instance, look at this one on Autotrader.
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=57702&endYear=2002&modelCode1=ELDO&sortBy=mileageASC&showcaseOwnerId=0&startYear=1994&makeCode1=CAD&maxMileage=75000&searchRadius=0&showcaseListingId=0&mmt=[CAD[ELDO[]][]]&listingId=377718286&Log=0

Clearly riding lower than the black '98 on E-Bay
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top