Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Cadillac DeVille

1454648505183

Comments

  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    The "Regular" here is 86 octane (4600'). I've used it in my 2003 Deville
    and it runs just fine. I don't see spending the money on high test when regular is what the car was designed for. Performance is fine as well.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    My interpretation of what the owners manual is saying is this: the engine was designed to degrade performance when low octane fuel is used, but if you want the performance that you paid dearly for, premium fuel is required. I do know that I can get 32 MPG on the highway with premium.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    I'm getting 30-31 on the highway but I'll take your advice and the next time I do a trip I'll try premium. It can't hurt. I was always of the opinion that if it didn't knock on regular, regular was ok. I stick with Chevron anyway and never use off brands. My other cars are a 2001 Malibu and a 1998 Silhouette so performance wise even with regular, the Cadillac is a vast improvement! I wonder if premium will improve city mileage which is terrible.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    You should understand that the engine has knock sensors and the engine control computer is able to adjust the ingnition timing to reduce knock. So, reading what my owners manual says, implies that the engine needs a minimum of 87 octane fuel, but that the computer can make use of higher octane fuel to improve power and performance. I am not sure how much difference you will see in gas mileage. My highway mileage is based on a couple of short highway trips at this point in time. I was cruising at about 65-70.

    I know that a lot of people think buying premium fuel is a waste, even if their engine requires premium. From my point of view, 600 gallons of fuel per year at 20 cents more per gallon is $120. So I think you should buy what makes sense for the cadillac. But pre-2000 model year cadillacs were supposed to get premium fuel only.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    I'll at least move up to the mid-level gasoline. I think that is 88. I know regular here is 86. I think premium is 91. I've heard a lot of stories about using premium in a car that is supposed to run on regular. Most "experts" say that it is a waste of money but I can always put in a tank of mid-level once in a while.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Well, the way I read my owner manual, my 275 horsepower engine will only produce 275 horsepower when it is burning premium gas. If it gets regular the computer will retard the timeing and reduce the horsepower. This is really all that I am saying. The owners manual does say that you can use 87 octane fuel without damaging the engine. It also says that you won't get full power on regular.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Good - I may even try premium when I'm in the chips and see how much difference it actually makes performance-wise. If I don't notice much of a difference as I assume I won't I'll stick with regular. Has anybody else done a comparison? This discussion reminds me of the advocates of the 0-60 comparison. Car A is much faster than Car B because it goes from 0-60 in 7.3 seconds instead of 7.8 seconds or even (God forbid) - 8.1 seconds. These folks need to get a life. The only value of "performance" as far as I'm concerned is the ability to pass some slowpoke who is going 60 on a 70 MPH road and get back in the right lane before being impacted. Just my opinion, however.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    That's what I call folks who want to drive a Premium car, but are too cheap to buy Premium fuel for their high performance power plant. Those who fall into that category are really Buick people, pretending in their DeVilles, IMO.

    You'll likely not save any money afterall, my engineer friends tell me. Your mileage will also be degraded along with your performance, generally.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Perhaps your engineer friends as well as some of the people on this list can tell me exactly what the difference is in gas mileage on regular vice premium gas. When you are paying $2.00 a gallon the difference in cost between regular and premium is not significant especially when you are doing a road trip but the discussion about degraded "performance" or "power" or "mileage" is not specific enough for me. I don't have any problem with the way the car runs and the highway gas mileage I'm getting on regular but if your friends can provide something other than generalities I'd be all ears.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Well, you know, dispencer, they'd have to test your car. YMMV. So generalities is all they have to offer. Not sure I believe it myself in ALL cases....

    I still don't get the cheapskate logic though. I have friends who do it, my business partner does it in his Volvo, and I call him names too. I even have a friend with a 00 DeVille who does it. But, he proves my point. He's not a Cadillac man, he's really a Ford/Toyota guy, who happened to get a great deal on a used DeVille, and just can't bear to pay the extra .20 a gallon to feed it premium. Cheapskate. He should go back to his Toyota, he'd be more comfortable.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    That's OK - When you have to resort to name calling during what should be a discussion on cars, not perceptions of whether in your opinion one is a "cheapskate" because he puts regular gas in a car (since 2000) that is supposed to run on regular, then I'll bow out of this list. Adios.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Didn't mean to offend - just having a discussion.
  • bolivarbolivar Posts: 2,316
    Are you aware that Cadillacs starting in model year 2000 (maybe 2001?) are designed to run on regular gasoline?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,394
    What does this abbreviation mean please?
  • patpat Posts: 10,421
    Your Mileage May Vary

    :)
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    My owners manual states the following (2002 SLS):
    minimum octane should be 87. For full performance, higher octane fuel may be used. For towing, higher octane is recomended.

    So, yes one can used 87 octane (regular is 85 octane here). But to get the full 275 horsepower and 300 lb-ft of torque, premium fuel is probably needed. However, if you all are getting plenty of power from regular, why spend more? I am averaging about 24-26 in local driving, which is a mix of highway and city. Later this summer I plan to make a long trip to the west coast.

    Anyone planning to experiment with regular and premium for fuel consumption differences probably should fill alternatly with each type several times keeping track of the mileage. If you used the on board computer (DIC), you should reset for each tankfull. Or else use the fuel used to compute the mileage.

    Then one can use a statistical program to compute the statistical significance of the differences (if any). MRPP is a useful set of programs to do this (MultResponse Permutation Procedures for the uninitiated).
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    as my friends 2000 specifies Premium fuel.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    The northstar was re-engineered for model year 2000. But I don't really know when they reduced the recommended octane to 87 (not regular but 87). The current northstar web site lists 87 for the FWD's but the VVT recommends premium (10.5:1 compression).
  • lemkolemko Posts: 15,196
    ...in all my Cadillacs all the way back to my 1975 Sedan DeVille. I currently own a 2002 Seville STS. You can use 87 octane, but I prefer Sunoco 94 Ultra. It's like you can eat at McDonald's but prefer to dine at a far more upscale establishment.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I have experimented with a tank of regular (85 octane). There should have been enough premium left to give a mix that was between 86 and 87 octane. I did not see a significant difference in MPG. However, I did notice a slight difference in performance. The difference was, with A/C on and under hard acceleration, during upshifts, there was a slight hesitation with regular that is not there with premium.
  • Hey. I normally post on the Olds, Aurora forum and have always gotten great responce over there as an Aurora owner.

    My wife wants a Deville and we have been looking at 2000 and 2001's. We can get them pretty cheap out here on the west coast and with some pretty low mileage.

    I would appreciate your input on these cars. The good and the ugly. What kind of long term mileage you can expect that kind of thing. Major repair issues.

    Thanks,
    Patrick
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    I don't like FWD cars generally, and so have stayed away from this very powerful car because of the exaggerated torque steer. But, if you need FWD, or it doesn't bother you, these are good cars, IMO. No reason they shouldn't give you 150,000 miles of fairly trouble free service. Issues of note are oil leaks, fairly common at around 60,000 miles. Fairly expensive to fix too. Also, if your starter goes out, it's in the engine valley and the intake manifold has to be removed to get at it. Also, in that vintage, the Northstar engine tends to carbonize after a while, requiring a "decarbonization" treatment that the dealer gets too much for. I've been told, but don't like this solution, that if you don't burn premium gas in them, they won't carbon up. I wouldn't take that to the bank though.

    The best part of these sleds is that they depreciate like a rock in the first 3 years, so finding a great car for a song is very possible.

    Good luck!
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    Try and get one under 4 years old and 50k mileage so you will get a break on an extended warranty. I wouldn't dream of having any car without a 100,000 miles 0 deductible 6 year warranty especially a Cadillac. When the warranty is gone so is the car. The 2001 model had leather standard and the 2002 had the most standard equipment including an electrochromatic (self dimming) outside side mirror and power adjustable seat belts. These were gone by 2003. Each year something standard seems to disappear. Expect great highway mileage (30-31) and terrible city mileage (14-16). This car is a road car. The dreaded torque steering problem with FWD means very little to someone like me who is used to driving FWD cars. I just drive them normally and they seem to drive normally. Perhaps if I drove a Lincoln and then my Cadillac I would know what these people are talking about. Good luck on the Cadillac purchase. These are great cars - ride well and get as good mileage on the road as a Camry (probably better). Plenty of power to keep from constantly downshifting on cruise everytime you go up a hill (like my '98 Silhouette). I have a base model 2003 Deville (ex-Alamo rental car) and like it very much. I'd get the extended warranty though. I made sure mine was 'certified" with the protection plan for 100k miles.
  • dispencer1dispencer1 Posts: 489
    What did you finally buy?
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    I have not found that GM's full size FWD cars have much torque steer. My 83 Buick Skyhawk did have a lot of torque steer.

    As far as fuel consumpution goes, I get over 20 MPG in local driving (around 25 actually), but most of my driving is part highway. How bad your gas mileage gets will depend on how short your local trips are with a cold start up. Even in winter (temperature around 15 F), when I still lived in town, I got 18 MPG.

    The big thing to watch for is coolant leaks. A leak in the wrong place will cause corrosion which may require an engine replacement if it goes on too long.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    THAT's encouraging! I don't want to have to worry about that all the time.

    I guess torque steer is what you're used to. My Infiniti doesn't have severe torque steer, but you can sure tell it's FWD just with the differences in road surfaces as you accelerate, which is what I'm objecting to, given the choice. The DeVilles/Sevilles I've driven in recent years are smooth enough, but when you goose it, particularly making a turn in an intersection, you sure feel it.
  • sls002sls002 Posts: 2,788
    Well, one does get some indication that the power is moving through the wheels that also steer. But my Skyhawk (4 cylinders) would spin the steering wheel if you did not grip it hard, when on wheel was on slippery surface and the other had plenty of traction. I have never noticed any tendency like this with the full size FWD's.

    The new STS with RWD should be a much more satisfactory car for handling.
  • frmofrmo Posts: 4
    We have a 1990 DeVille. We are experiencing problems with the door locks and recently have had trouble turning the car off.
    Doors - key fits but is extremely difficult to turn. We have tried to replace the cylinders and locks - no luck. This happens in both doors.
    Ignition - Intermittantly, you have to jiggle, push, pull, stand on, wait 20 minutes and try again - response varies before you can turn the key to turn the ignition off. Have never had trouble turning it on. Can these problems be related?
    The car was given to us by my in-laws. One person owner. He had problems with the locks and no one was able to find the solution for him either. My son will start driving this soon and I want him to be able to lock the car - or I fear it will be stolen.
    Any suggestions are appreciated.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Your key is worn down. Hopefully you have another less worn key around that you can use and copy. If not, perhaps an old, experienced, and skilled locksmith can fashion one for you. That's all it is, and it's pretty common with GM keys. Don't know why. My niece has an 01 Saturn that this has happened to already! Fortunately, she had an unused key put away. Solved all the problems.
  • frmofrmo Posts: 4
    Hadn't though of that. We will check this out. We do have several sets but they may have all been made from the same worn out key. Why would it be easy to start the car but hard to turn it off? Also, you have to hand unlock each door, power system doesn't work and replacing parts has not changed that.
    I was fearing electrical, but will explore the key fit first.
Sign In or Register to comment.