Cadillac Owners Forum banner
11K views 81 replies 31 participants last post by  97EldoCoupe 
#1 ·
I am on my third STS and I can't fathom owning the SLS mostly because of the lower horsepower Northstar in it. But can some of you SLS drivers out there tell me why you chose the SLS and not the STS ?
 
#10 ·
Hey Jay my car isn't faster than Nick's I get spanked every time especially now that he has done all the crap to it.
If I wanted to be faster I should have got an Eldo but then I can't haul my friends around with me.
 
#14 ·
And I beg to differ on the whole STS will spank an Eldo mine sure as hell wouldn't I think you are thinking 93-97 because the 98-04 is a pooch compared to the good years I just like the technology in mine I would trade to get back my 94 that northstar was a freaking beast !
 
#15 ·
I'm most familiar with the ride of the Deville, but I really like the body styling of the '98+ SLS/STS. hence my choosing the SLS after reading posts on this forum, the better fuel economy was a plus. We're looking at retiring my Chrysler in about 5 years and by that time I'll be looking at the 07'+ DTS/DHS.

I also really like the non-painted bottom trim of the SLS, while the painted STS trim is pretty, the dirt roads I have to drive on don't make lower painted trim look good!
 
#17 · (Edited)
The SLS has lower horsepower AT PEAK. But more horsepower through must of the RPM range, and TORQUE. The STS definitely lacks torque. I'm sure my '01 STS would beat my old '97 SLS down a 1/4 mile, but the SLS would have it off the line. I've even thought about swapping the 300 hp cams out of my STS and installing the 275 hp cams. There's really that much difference.

If I had to do it all over again, I'd buy an SLS AJ to hook me up witand install the 3.71 transaxle and get h a PCM to accept the change in ratio.
 
#19 ·
TarQ! Holy crap man... I haven't seen you in forever... well I guess it has been forever since I've posted in the Sebring forums... how funny is that that we consistently buy the same vehicles!

Anyway.. I was just about to post my first post when I saw this one and felt it specifically applied to me. I purposely chose the SLS. It is cheaper to insure, has more torque at a lower rpm, and has more of a "Cadillac" ride. I don't care what any of you have been smoking but a normal person will not be able to feel an extra 25hp. Plus if you get one like mine that's fully optioned out you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two if it weren't for the "SLS" on the back.

All of that aside, there is no need to be snobbish amongst ourselves... regardless of an SLS or an STS it is still a Seville.. it is still a Cadillac. Just look at it this way if given a choice between a SLS or say a Lexus, MB, etc... which would you choose?
 
#20 ·
All of that aside, there is no need to be snobbish amongst ourselves... regardless of an SLS or an STS it is still a Seville.. it is still a Cadillac.
I'm glad you posted that. It needs to be a constant reminder on this board. There are a lot of folks who look down on others for not having a particular TRIM of Seville or Eldorado. It's all Cadillac...and we're all here for the betterment of the brand and of the Cadillac community! :thumbsup:
 
#21 ·
I couldn't agree more but I was wondering if I should have given the sls a chance since all I have had has been the STS and I am 27 so I do like to drive a little to fast if you know what I mean lol.
 
#22 ·
I do agree they are the same car I always thought the 25 less came from the different transmission but it's the cams ?
And I kind of wish i would have checked into the SLS now because I deffinetely notice the lack of torque in the STS my brother practically blows my doors off in a street race but I am confident I could catch him down the road. he is driving an 04 CTS with alot of mods he is probably over 300 hp now too.
 
#23 ·
The SLS has 275 hp peak, and the STS has 300 hp peak. The difference is in the profile of the intake cams. That is it. Otherwise, identical. Through most of the RPM range, the dyno sheets (from GM) show that the 275 hp version outperforms the 300 hp version. The other main performance difference is in favor of the STS -- it has a 3.71 final drive vs. 3.11 of the SLS. The 3.71 final drive is necessary in the STS because of the lack of low-end torque. 3.11 is doable in the SLS (and it works well) because of the better torque characteristics of that engine. Having driven both, I prefer the SLS's 275 hp engine, but I also like the STS's 3.71 final drive.

The best combination (in my opinion) is the 275 hp engine with the 3.71 final drive. The only car that was available in, from the factory, was the now-extinct Pontiac Bonneville GXP. I'm pretty sure the current Buick Lucerne uses the 3.11 final drive...or at least one that is numerically lower than 3.71. It also uses the 275 hp engine.

AJ has successfully swapped a 3.71 transaxle into Bert's DHS, which originally came with the 3.11 final drive. The improvement has apparently been very good. The 3.11 final drive is what really restrains the DeVille/DHS/SLS/ESC. The 275 hp engine is at least as potent in most situations as the 300 hp engine.
 
#24 ·
I kind of figured that to be the case so the cams are also different ?
I kind of wish I would have went out and drove the sls and given it a shot.
 
#26 ·
Hmmm... I've been in a Bonney GXP and it's not as fast as my STS OR some SLSs I test drove. Think the 18's might have hurt, but then, I have them on my STS (same GXP rims). It seemed to have just a smige more then STS's down low though, just didn't quite the same hustle through the revs.
 
#29 ·
yeah the eldo is pretty fast but I am thinking on my 94 there was no difference with the sls and sts and maybe that is why I am thinking the 94 is so much better than my current 2000 if that's the case I would have taken an sls hands down.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top