Howdy, Stranger!

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





Cadillac STS/STS-V: What's New for 2007?

1111214161763

Comments

  • bretaabretaa Posts: 130
    Eaton53: I know this isn't the forum for it, but doesn't the SVT Contour rock? If you ever want to trade stories, e-mail me at garrisiari@hotmail.com. I'm trying to sell mine right now. The Lincoln LS just wasn't a substitute, especially not having a manual.

    Regarding the CTS, I'm glad you like the interior. It's all relative. Right now, I'm waiting for the CTS-V to fall into my price range preowned, maybe 2007 or 8.

    Cadillac interiors are really getting impressive, though. I love the XLR interior, especially the center console. The SRX interior is also impressive and if the STS spy shots of the interior are anything to go by, it'll be a beauty!

    - Bret
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I think Ford is doing better on the interiors, look at the F150 next to the Sierra and the GMC looks like a relic of the 80s.

    Even newer cars, like the Ford 500 look better than the Pontiac G6 or Malibu.

    GM needs new interior stylists. I like the CTS outside, but inside it could improve a lot.

    -juice
  • I respect everyone's opinion and I don't want to fight with anyone. I'm just saying that instead of new innovative engineering like we've been seeing with Ford in the last year or two, GM sticks with reliable yet old technology. The 3.8L engine may be a good powerplant, but it's a very old design. The only reason it performs so well is that it has nearly a liter of displacement with most of the 3.0 v6s or smaller that it competes with. The Vortec engines are also good engines, but GM continues using a pushrod design because it's more cost effective. The new 5.4 outperforms the standard 5.3 in every way. The 6.0 has comparable specs, but with over a half a liter in displacement greater and less efficiency. They don't have the low end torque and responsiveness that overhead cams can give. Cornellpremed, I don't know where you heard that Ford is borrowing a 6 sp. automatic from GM (if you have a link to a site, please give it to me. I'd love to read it), but if this is true, how comes we don't see this being used in any GM vehicles? I mean, the best we're seeing from them are some 5 speeds used in the Cadillac division. And most of GM's new vehicle debuts are still using some form of a large displacement pushrod with a 4 speed auto. If Ford built a 3.8 dohc, it would destroy the GM ohv 3.8L. The new Duratec 35 will be a much more powerful engine than the new 3.5 from GM. I guess it bothers me that GM isn't taking any risks by coming up with more clean slate desings. In regard to plasticky interiors, it's main seller the Silverado has a less than glamorous interior. I've been in them before and you can find many hard, hollow sufaces. And the dashboard design really hasn't changed for quite some time. GM just builds upon already proven technology that gets the job done, but I think GM will need to reinvent it's thinking with it's mainstream sellers as it is with the Cadillac division. Most of the vehicles in the Ford division that have been around for a few years are less than impressive. I'm just making more of a comparison between the new vehicles and powertrains we're seeing come out from the Ford Motor Co. vs. new vehicles we're seeing come out from the GM Motor Co. I'm sorry, I really should have been more thoughtful. GM can make great vehicles, but I just think that if they don't come up with fresh ideas they will fall behind Ford. I didn't mean to rip on any GM fans. I just love debating this kind of stuff becasue I'm a huge car fan and I just learn more and more by doing this.
  • The STS should eventually be Caddy's volume car. For now, loyalists to FWD want a Deville. But eventually it should be phased out and GM buyers wanting FWD big cars should go to Buick/Pontiac.
  • "GM's new products have good interiors, on par with or better than Ford's offerings."

    Wait, you're saying the Malibu, TrailBlazer, and G6 have a better interior than any of FoMoCo's offerings!?! Check out the new 500, Freestyle, Explorer, Expedition, F150, Volvos, MAZDA6, 3, RX8, Lincolns, and the rest of their group. I wouldn't say they're as good as you think they are.
  • theo2709theo2709 Posts: 476
    You can read all about the new Ford/GM FWD 6-speed auto here.

    In reality, Ford is essentially paying GM to develop the transmission, and both will use it. It works out for both companies in the end.
  • Asian car companies collabarate on transmisions and other components all the time, so what?
  • Thanks, theo2709. That was a cool article. Maybe this will help us take back a share of the market from the Japanese. But, the six speeds that Ford is coming out with in the next year or two aren't from this argreement, are they? The 500's tranny comes from ZF.
  • Show me an Engine that is more advanced than the LS6 Covertte & CTS V Pushrod engine. Its the most advanced engine on the market place. more advanced than the Northstar or any engine BMW or Ford can put on the market.

    "outdated 4 sp. auto transmissions,"

    BMW uses GM transmissions. In all vehicles other than 7 Series. That is how outdated GM transmissions are
  • First of all, I think Germans make more sophisticated engines than the LS6. And if you're not convinced, I think that Ferrari's 6.0L V12 quad cam deserves a little more recognition than a high tech GM pushrod.I'm not debating the fact that GM can do great things. They really can make great vehicles if they want to. However, what bothers me is the effort they put into the cars that most of us Americans are able to buy, like an Impala or a Silverado. Where's that sophisticated LS6 engine or used-by-BMW transmission? I'm impressed how Ford is making advanced technology available to middle class people. A new Ford Five Hundred SE base model has a 3.0L DOHC, 6 sp. auto transmission, a beautiful interior, and a great host of power options, for just over $22k. That's something that a lot of people can get their hands on. And, this whole time I've been saying how I'm impressed with Cadillac so don't think I totally despise GM. I don't want this to turn into some kind of flame war, but I still want to hear other people's opinions.
  • theo2709theo2709 Posts: 476
    The 5-speed automatic is for RWD only, and the first GM vehicle that was able to use it was the CTS. It has been used in BMWs for a while. It's growing a bit long in the tooth, but it is worlds better than the old-school 4-speed Hydramatics GM uses in most other things. The Nomad had the same 5-speed auto, BTW.

    The 6-speed automatic Ford is using on the 500 et al. was purchased from an independant supplier, as Ford had the gumption to make the 500 as competitive as possible out of the gate. GM is stuck with its 4-speed autos until the Ford/GM 6-speeds come out in ~MY06. That is also the time period when GM's 6-speed RWD automatic transmissions will begin to show up, most likely first in the XLR and Corvette. It will probably be used more extensively on the new RWD Zeta cars coming out later in the decade.

    Was that confusing to anyone?
  • b4zb4z Posts: 3,372
    I don't think there is any auto manufacturer that knows how to do something better than another at a significantly lower cost.

    Hondas have better, smoother engines than the GM, but they also have thinner sheetmetal.

    Volkswagons have better quality interiors than GM, but their engines and maintenance are worse than GM's.

    I am sure GM could build a car the equal of a BMW, but it would cost the same as a BMW.
    And there are only a certain portion of the population that is willing to go to that price point for a car.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    GM's LS6 engine is more sophisticated than BMW's 4.4L V8 and direct-injection V12? Yeah right!

    4-Speed transmissions are outdated, and no BMW uses a 4-speed GM transmission, so that statement is incorrect also. Most BMW's use ZF transmissions. Only the 3-Series cars use a (5sp) GM trans now. A 4-speed on the new Corvette is beyond outdated, it's ridiculous.

    M
  • chavis10chavis10 Posts: 166
    This is getting outrageous. I just finished reading your posts and it's time to wake up and smell the Starbucks. I can't believe we have to go over the basics of valvetrain and how it relates to specific output. Actually, this should be discussed in the "i don't like pushrods, why do you" forum. People are here to talk about the STS, not hear you rant about why you don't like GMs engines. It's funny because most GM bashers at least like good products. Ford engines not only are inferior to GM but almost every other good engine builder as well.

    1) A two valve/cylinder engine will never produce as much power per litre as a four valve. That's why a 3.8L competes with a 3.0-3.5L 4 valve. It's funny because the 3800 has better gas mileage than the 3.0 Duratrash and is the ONLY V-6 that is SULEV rated. The 3800 would not compete with this engine anyway, the 3.6L VVT would. But hey, it's outdated.

    3) Ford 500/Mercury Montego will be 3800+ lbs vehicles with only 200hp/200lbs-ft. If that's not a recipe for slow, please tell me what is?

    2) 5.4 24 valve Triton outperforms 5.3 Vortec in every way? Do you have anything to support this? Or is this another opinion turned fact?

    3) What does low end torque and responsiveness have to do with OHC versus in block cam? Nothing

    4) 6.0l Vortec comes in 300, 325 and 345 hp config. I think that's a little more than "comparable" with Fords new Triton which accelerates not much faster than the old 260 hp unit.

    5) A good 4 speed is better than crappy 5 speed. Think about the shifting issues the Lincoln LS experienced when introduced. Edmunds had a long term LS and had to get the tranny serviced numerous times to no avail. I think it took them about two model years to get the software right.

    6) Ford doesn't even make their own 6 speed. Aisin makes it. And as someone else stated, the new FWD 6 speed will be built by GM who will then let Ford use them.

    7) With regards to the Truck interiors, think, GMs are based on a 1999 design while the F150 is a 2004 design. It obviously should be better.

    8) Northstar continues to be a superior engine to any of the "Modular V-8" variants.

    Lincoln has consistently been behind the eight ball. The Town Car hasn't been able to touch the DeVille in years. The LS while nice, was a flawed design to begin with. The back seat is tiny and there is no storage. The new interior is nice but it now costs as much as the current (1998-2003) STS did. It may handle a little better because of the balanced chassis, but the STS was a superior car in every other respect.

    Merc1, just because GMs 4 speeds lack ratios compared to newer models, they are not "outdated' as you put it. The electronics and shifting algorithms are as up to date as anyone else's. A lot of six speeds have trouble shifting smoothly and transparently(think VW). You won't have that in a GM auto. While most jumped to 6 speeds before they even got four or fives speeds right (i'm talking about in cars less the say $50k), GM has perfected the 4 speed and the new 6 speed will surely raise the bar. The 4 speed being installed in the C6 vette will be the most advanced 4 speed ever installed in a car. It'll only be there for a year. It'll incorporate PAS and PAL from the 5L50 E.

    Back on topic, I think the STS will be hot. It definitely will offend less people than the new 5. Everyone has the E class. The S type is overpriced and so 2002. The new A6 look exactly like the old one. I think it should stack up well and it's interior looks better than that of the new 5 series.
  • I'm afraid this would happen. First of all, let me say what I said first of all that the STS will be a beautiful car. Also let me say that I respect the Cadillac divison and think they make great cars. I know the Northstar is a better engine than than Ford's Modular V8's. But how many cars use it? Do any of the cars made for ordinary people have this? Do any of the cars made for everyday people have this sophisticated Cadillac technology? No. I'm not debating the fact that GM can make good cars and powertrains. If you would have taken the liberty to read all of my previous posts, you would have seen that I defended the Cadillac divison and also seen that I said I know GM is a very capable company. What I am trying to say is that the everyday cars they make aren't up to today's standards. In regard to your previous statements:
    1) I don't care about the 3.6. It's a fine engine. However, I don't see it being put into an Impala or Malibu anytime soon. As for fuel economy, the current Duratec (I do have the respect to not come up with insulting labels for GM powertrains) is rated at 20/29 and the 3800 at 20/30 so I call that a somewhat hollow claim for superior fuel economy. Anyway, my focus is on the new vehicles coming out from Ford, specifically the Futura and the 500, which use the same engine with a better transmission. I'm sure the fuel economy will be better than that of the 3800. If you claim that's not fair due to two extra gears, tell GM to take an initiative like Ford and use a better transmission too. As for your claim that the 3800 is a SULEV, I could find no information to back it up. If you have a link to prove that, I would love to see it. Ford is making hybrid engines to meet these standards, so I doubt a large displacement V6 can do it.
    2) Well, I gues being "better in every way" is more of an opinion-based statement. For that I apologize. However, the 5.4 Triton produces 300hp @ 5000 rpm and 365 lb.ft of torque @ 3750rpm, with over 80% of this being produced below 1000 rpm. The 5.3 Vortec achieves only 295 hp at a higher 5200 rpm and only 330 lb.-ft at a also higher 4000rpm. EPA estimates on the Triton are 15/19 and 16/19 on the Vortec, which are very comparable. I've heard both engines run, and I prefer the smoothness of the new Triton (yes, I have heard more than a few 5.3's operate and I'm less than impressed). I guess that if I was looking for a capable truck, I would want a torquey Triton. It also has variable cam timing, which gets more low end torque and high end power, offering the best of both worlds.
    3)Low end torque and responsiveness has a lot to do with ohc vs. block cam. With a pushrod, you have only one camshaft that operates the intake and outake valves via pushrods. The longer distance an exerted force is spread out, the more that will be lost, reducing efficiency. Overhead cams operate directly above the intake and exhaust valves, which means that the input force from the camshafts have less of a distance to be lost over. Also, any input from a camshaft that is working directly on the valves will provide a more instant response. With a block cam, those pushrods, no matter how good the design, still create a greater distance and unfortuantely with the physics in our world, the greater the distance that anything takes place over, the more forces it will encounter. This basically reduces the response from the camshaft.
    4)Sure, the 6.0L Vortec has more power depending on the configuration. However, it's not used in the 1500 except as a performance engine in the 345 hp configuration. If we're talking performance engines in half tons, then don't forget to look at the 500hp supercharged 5.4. The 300hp configuration is for the 2500/3500. Sure it might be a better base engine than the 5.4, but most of these trucks are sold with diesel engines. When it comes to diesel peformance, the Powerstroke has the specs to beat out the Duramax (but maybe not the reliability to back it up). Any other use of the 6.0L is in Cadillac. Once again, my concern is regarding the majority of vehicles sold that anyone can afford. In this area, the 5.4 3v is a more powerful, smoother engine than the standard 5.3 Vortec.
    5)Well, that transmission has been vastly improved for 2004. Anyway, it shows an initiative by Ford to build better technology. Nothing new is perfect. It takes time to perfect. GM is near that point with many of their 4 speeds, but they're not going to last forever. Ford is beating GM to the use of better transmissions by using independent suppliers like ZF. And once again, I don't care about what Cadillac does. I respect them and they make good cars. I care about primarily the Chevrolet, Pontiac, and Buick linse, which account for the majority of sales. I've seen no innovative engineering here except maybe for Quadrasteer.
    6)Who cares if Ford doesn't use their own transmission? They're going the extra lengths to make sure that their finished products are quality. And GM doesn't deserve all the credit for the upcoming 6-speed transmissions. This is a collaboration and Ford is entitled to as much recognition as GM.
    7)The '97-'03 F-150 even had a more stylish interior than the current GM trucks. And the new interiors like the Colorado and the Malibu are nothing to wrtie home about. Ford didn't make the best interiors a few years ago, but now they're really starting to get it right.
    8)As I said before, you're right here. However, the majority of GM vehicles don't get this superb engine. Sure, Ford could develop a quad-cam V8 and only put it in a few hundred vehicles and no one would care. GM best sellers use commonplace powertrains.

    I'm getting tired of this. Obviously, a "good car" is a matter of opinion and we Americans are too stubborn to let each other tell us what our opinions should be. GM can make good cars, and I love the new STS. I hope it can make foreign competition start to sweat, because I'd love to see the phrase "American car" actually be a positive thing once again.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    All the "electronics and shifting algorithms" in the world won't compensate for that lack of gears. Period. That's the same (outdated) thinking behind Cadillac trying to send 300hp to the front wheels all this time, terminally flawed. They "perfected" that too per the GM faithful only to be behind the rwd cars in the segment and to ultimately abandon such a practice. If Chevy wants 911 buyers to look at a Corvette they could at least offer a 5sp automatic to match the tips in the 911s. All that shifting through those algorithms wouldn't be necessary if you had the right amount of gears to begin with. Even with all those algorithms it won't be as flexible as a modern 6speed, or even a 5speed auto. The Corvette's automatic transmission is outdated and really ridiculous on an all-new car.

    Uh...a lot of 6-speeds have trouble shifting....right. I see no such problems with BMW's, Lexus' or Jaguar's 6speed autos....only one the VW has a problem (per you) doesn't mean a "lot of them" have a problem.

    M
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    "That's the same (outdated) thinking behind Cadillac trying to send 300hp to the front wheels all this time, terminally flawed. They "perfected" that too per the GM faithful only to be behind the rwd cars in the segment and to ultimately abandon such a practice."

    Actually, Merc, I don't see them abandoning the practice, just trickling it down to other divisions and not putting it in Cadillacs anymore.

    The FWD Northstar works much too well to abandon it. If one wants a FWD luxury car (there's obviously a market for them) there's no better powertrain.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    FWIW the V6 in the RX400H is SULEV.

    I'm not sure if that's only when mated to the hybrid, or if all 3.3l V6s qualify for that.

    Isn't PZEV even cleaner? The Focus has a PZEV 2.3l engine, Subaru sells a PZEV Outback 2.5l.

    -juice
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    They are indeed abandoing that practice with the Seville replacement. The DeVille may sail on with the current layout because it's not a performance car, so there you're correct. But on the Seville Cadillac wasted years and years and untold amounts of money trying to convince mid-size luxury car buyers that 300hp through the front wheels was competitive with cars like the 5-Series, an utter waste of time.

    M
  • chavis10chavis10 Posts: 166
    Most five or six speeds don't even use first gear unless the driver requests WOT. As we know, most don't. No Cadillac drivetrain is "flawed." GM is the only manufacturere that was able to send more than 275 hp through the front without torque steer. How many owners actually drive their cars hard enough to enjoy the benefits of RWD. I'd say about 10%. For the average driver the current STS/DTS drive as well and as smooth as any of the competition. I'll respond to the other guy and you in depth when I get some more time.
This discussion has been closed.