......And came here to share my thoughts. First thing I noticed was that it had less headroom than my deVille, but I tilted the seat so that I was in a better position. Secondly, I was surprised at the stability of the car, and noticed the brace under the hood which probably helps with that. It wasn't as soft as mine but it was smooth and apparently the bushings on the rear knuckles had been replaced. Didn't want to WOT with the guy there though, but even driving it relaxed you could feel the power. I may have to break my original plans of not buying a non-RWD car.......
Test drove a 2000 ETC today....
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
2016 Honda Accord LX. Previous: 2004 Deville, 2000 STS
Joined
·
3,716 Posts
Do yourself a favor and check out the 2000+ Seville STS if you want something sportier. I've driven an '97 Eldo and '02 ETC and both are noticeably softer than a Seville STS, and much smaller as well. If you want something with a softer ride and more room, the Seville SLS is a great candidate as well.
I could be wrong. I don't have time to look at the specifications right now.. But I owned a 1995 ETC and drove in plenty of Seville STS cars.. I always thought they were IDENTICAL in size. The Seville is a TINY bit bigger in some dimensions but hardly "much" bigger.
And unless I'm mistaken, the only Seville STS that was noticeably sportier was later in life when some of them had the liquid magnetic suspension.
And unless I'm mistaken, the only Seville STS that was noticeably sportier was later in life when some of them had the liquid magnetic suspension.
2016 Honda Accord LX. Previous: 2004 Deville, 2000 STS
Joined
·
3,716 Posts
I meant as in interior space in general. I'm not sure of the exact dimensions, but my STS feels quite a bit bigger inside than the '02 ETC and '97 Eldo I've driven before. I was probably a little quick to say the Seville is much bigger, but it definitely feels larger inside than the Eldo. It's low roofline isn't really helping though.
As for sportiness, the Seville STS benefited from it's '98 redesign on the G-body platform and the suspension is much improved over the old K-body the '92-'97 STS and the '92-'02 Eldo rode on. The steering is tighter, the handling is improved, and the overall car feels sporty (though I use "sporty" in the lightest terms since we're talking about FWD cars here). The '02-'03 STS with MagneRide is even better when it comes to handling. The Eldo's cannot compare when it comes to ride quality however. The G-body tends to suffer from the shimmies, whereas the K-body Eldo's and Seville's are noticeably smoother. IMO of course.
As for sportiness, the Seville STS benefited from it's '98 redesign on the G-body platform and the suspension is much improved over the old K-body the '92-'97 STS and the '92-'02 Eldo rode on. The steering is tighter, the handling is improved, and the overall car feels sporty (though I use "sporty" in the lightest terms since we're talking about FWD cars here). The '02-'03 STS with MagneRide is even better when it comes to handling. The Eldo's cannot compare when it comes to ride quality however. The G-body tends to suffer from the shimmies, whereas the K-body Eldo's and Seville's are noticeably smoother. IMO of course.
My late 2002 STS (02/02) is a "K car", as in 1G6KY54992UXXXXXX.
Legend: Service parts sticker, part 2 = 6KY69 (Vehicle division, vehicle line, and body style)
P. 0-8 graph, partial:
..........................Engine and transmission usage.........................
Body type......car line.......Engine size........Fuel system......RPO.....Trans
K car.............Seville........4.6L V8 HO........MFI................L37.....4T80E
Wonder why the K holdover ???
Legend: Service parts sticker, part 2 = 6KY69 (Vehicle division, vehicle line, and body style)
P. 0-8 graph, partial:
..........................Engine and transmission usage.........................
Body type......car line.......Engine size........Fuel system......RPO.....Trans
K car.............Seville........4.6L V8 HO........MFI................L37.....4T80E
Wonder why the K holdover ???
2016 Honda Accord LX. Previous: 2004 Deville, 2000 STS
Joined
·
3,716 Posts
Cadillac carried on the K-body name with the '98 redesign, but the basis of the car was the G-body which was introduced on the '95 Aurora. I usually call it G-body to differentiate the two platforms.
I thought so too, but apparently the STS is a few inches longer.
Yes, with a longer wheelbase as well..
Which year is this?
2016 Honda Accord LX. Previous: 2004 Deville, 2000 STS
Joined
·
3,716 Posts
That seems a little slow. I've gotten my 2000 STS at 6.5 seconds before. I'm sure the ETC is around 6.7-6.9, even though I can't understand why it would be slower?
I still prefer the looks of the Eldorado because I think 2 door cars look better regardless. 2 door cars just look more sporty than a 4 door car in general. These days you just don't see the big american coupes any more. Back in the 60's all of the muscle cars were 2 door coupes. IMHO a 4 door car is just not the same no matter how fast it is.
Yeah, its 300lbs lighter with the same HP so I'm not sure why its not faster. Maybe just some wrong info
QFT
Aerodynamics maybe?:hmm: Seems odd though...
Not sure, but the Eldos I've driven seemed to have a more "tame" tune than my STS.
Dont forget the suspension differences between the 98+ Eldo and STS, it might not make as big of a difference off the line as it will in the twisties, but it may be enough.
Dont forget the suspension differences between the 98+ Eldo and STS, it might not make as big of a difference off the line as it will in the twisties, but it may be enough.
The 1995 Eldorado ETC I owned did 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. If there was ever a faster STS before the new RWD model we have now, I didn't know about it.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Join the discussion
