What is the 98-04 STS like?

[I-Love-Pontiac]

As far as overall quality, reliability, ride and handling.

I've never driven one, but they always seemed like nice cars. I didn't really question it's goodness untill I saw a Top Gear episode that had nothing but bad things to say about the old STS.

So is it really a bad car, or just not in their taste?

Also how reliable are the Northstar engines? When I was looking at Sevilles and Eldorados on autotrader, I noticed their value sharpy drops after they hit ~100k. It's a little unsettling.

[TaHoE]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

As far as overall quality, reliability, ride and handling.

I've never driven one, but they always seemed like nice cars. I didn't really question it's goodness untill I saw a Top Gear episode that had nothing but bad things to say about the old STS.

So is it really a bad car, or just not in their taste?

Also how reliable are the Northstar engines? When I was looking at Sevilles and Eldorados on autotrader, I noticed their value sharpy drops after they hit ~100k. It's a little unsettling.

Most cars' values drop after they hit the 100K mark, it's a bad psychological number. The overall build quality for the STS aren't really that great, but they are safe and have bulletproof powertrains. The Northstar is an awardwinning engine. Top Gear is overly critical of Cadillacs in general, not just the STS, if only because they are not British.

[SuchANiceGirl06]

I'd stay away from any GM vehicle that was built at the Hamtramck, MI plant. This includes the Pontiac Bonneville, Cadillac Seville, Buick LeSabre, Cadillac Deville & Eldorado. From my experience, vehicles assembled there have had the worst build quality of any other General Motors vehicle produced (aside from late model N-bodies {Aleros, Grand Ams, etc**). Tolerances may have gotton more strict at this assembly plant as of late, but my experience with late model Bonnevilles and Sevilles have been equally disappointing. I would definitely stay away. Older Northstar engines are also known to be very problematic as they age and should definitely be ruled out if you favor long-term dependability.

[GMCSonoma]

Originally Posted by SuchANiceGirl06

I'd stay away from any GM vehicle that was built at the Hamtramck, MI plant. This includes the Pontiac Bonneville, Cadillac Seville, Buick LeSabre, Cadillac Deville & Eldorado. From my experience, vehicles assembled there have had the worst build quality of any other General Motors vehicle produced. Tolerances may have gotton more strict at this assembly plant as of late, but my experience with late model Bonnevilles and Sevilles have been equally disappointing. I would definitely stay away. Older Northstar engines are also known to be very problematic as they age and should definitely be ruled out if you favor long-term dependability.

HUH??? Since when? Is that why all the program LeSabres, Bonnevilles & Devilles fly off the lots?



As for the question....Northstars do have their quirks...

Waterpump housing leaks,
lower cranckcase leaks
oil consumption/carboned up

Sevilles also have some level ride concerns...

[YngGuyInaBuick]

I have heard good and bad in regards to the Northstar engines. Supposedly, they are very durable internally, but suffer from seal/gasket failures and electrical gremlins as they get older.

The 4.5 and 4.9 Cadillac V8s from the late 80s- early 90s were very, very dependable and a lot of them are still on the road.

[GMCSonoma]

Originally Posted by YngGuyInaBuick

I have heard good and bad in regards to the Northstar engines. Supposedly, they are very durable internally, but suffer from seal/gasket failures and electrical gremlins as they get older.

The 4.5 and 4.9 V8s from the late 80s- early 90s were very, very dependable and a lot of them are still on the road.

THe HT's did get "reliable" when they got the roller cam...

They did have loads of timing cover, oil pan & intake leaks....

[YngGuyInaBuick]

THe HT's did get "reliable" when they got the roller cam>>>

Our 90 Deville had the 4.5 (HT4500?) which replaced an 84 Deville that had the 4.1. Correct me if I am wrong, the HT4100s apparently suffered from major engine failures as a result of block fatigue (??) due to being one of GM's first attempts at an aluminum block. This never happened to our 4.1 which was actually a pretty dependable engine all the way up until about 120,000 miles when the car just rapidly began falling apart. We evacuated in it for hurricane Andrew which turned out to be the last long haul the car would ever make. It got us out safely and returned us home without skipping a beat, but it just wasn't the same car shortly afterwards. Various parts started going out, the interior panels were falling off, wood trim was coming unglued, headlinder fell down, transmission failed and the last straw was the timing chain failure at 136,000 miles in 1994. The car was ten years old and was a complete dinosaur compared to what was available by that time, so it was replaced by the 1990 model which was MUCH improved to say the least. There was almost no comparison between the two vehicles. I was quite surprised to learn that the 4.5 was a mere re-work of the HT4100.

The headliner, interior panels, wood trim, etc. all remained in tact in the 90... hehe.

[Old Dood]

Originally Posted by YngGuyInaBuick

I have heard good and bad in regards to the Northstar engines. Supposedly, they are very durable internally, but suffer from seal/gasket failures and electrical gremlins as they get older.

The 4.5 and 4.9 Cadillac V8s from the late 80s- early 90s were very, very dependable and a lot of them are still on the road.

Yep...the guy I work for just shelled out $2600.00 to have his Northstar fixed due to that. It is in a 2002 Deville with around 120K on it.

I told him to take it to my guys at Denny's Auto Dianosis instead of the dealer. They would have been hundreds of dollars cheaper. But, he wouldn't listen to me...Oh well..

[YngGuyInaBuick]

I've overheard various stories at the the dealership service waiting rooms about pricey repairs on newer Cadillacs, but Cadillac dealerships aren't exactly value centers either. Customer service is impeccable at the local Cadillac dealership here, but I'd imagine you can get the same repairs done at other GM facilities for a lot less. The Oldsmobile Aurora had a very similar 4.0 (?) version of the Northstar, so they had compatible parts in stock. Even with Oldsmobile gone, the Buick Lucerne still has the same/similar engine, so any Buick dealership should be able to repair a Cadillac. Of course, you won't get a continental breakfast and a couple rounds of put-put.

[bhoppes]

I own a 2003 Cadillac Seville SLS and I absolutely love it. I bought the car under factory warranty back in March 2006. I still have the car and while the car was under warranty I had the passenger side power mirror fixed, a water pump seal, and a Stabilitrak sensor fixed. Other than that the car has had no issues. The warranty expired in March 2007. A few people pressured me to get the extended warranty and others said by the time you spend the money for the warranty you might have that money in one or two problem fixes anyway. To get the warranty would have cost around $2500 to add 15,000 miles and another year, which is rediculous. I now have 46,000 miles on the car and no issues yet. I usually visit www.cadillacforums.com and read up on my car to see what problems people say they have and what they do to prevent the head gasket and water pump problems. Then again, on the same website, you will read stories of Northstars making 300,000 miles without any problems, due to regularly changing coolant and performing regulars WOTs, to get the carbon out and setting the piston rings.
As far as the ride and handling, I love the car. The car floats down the road with no squeaks, rattles, or shaking. I think the car is extremely solid and well built.
The car has many features, which may or may not be a good thing for electrical purposes. The car is front wheel drive (great for Michigan winters) and doesn't require premium fuel like more other luxury cars. I love my memory seats, tilt/telescoping wheel, up/down express windows, and most of all the looks of the car. There is not many around my area, and I always get compliments. I plan on keeping this car a long time.

[emh]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

I've never driven one, but they always seemed like nice cars. I didn't really question it's goodness untill I saw a Top Gear episode that had nothing but bad things to say about the old STS.

I haven't watched Top Gear in a decade or so, but I did see a 1992 or 1993 review of the first gen STS where Jeremy Clarkson was all praise for that car except for the design. He seemed especially impressed by the engine. The segment ended with him saying something like "if I were an American, I could make a strong claim that this [STS] is the best car in the world" (but of course, he's not, so he points that out and drives off in a Jag).

Fast forward to the early 2000's, and the STS and the Northstar are hardly improved during the preceding decade while the rest of the luxury brands have improved in leaps and bounds. So it's not hard to see why the 98-04 STS would get panned...

[megeebee]

I was the happy owner of a 1998 SLS. I leased it new in June of '98, and my folks bought it in 2001 when the lease expired. That particular generation had the best interiors done by GM until then. They were even superior to many other rivals efforts. The SLS was, of course, geared to more luxurious ends, while the STS was the flagship ( I had the SLS because that was what I could afford).

If you are thinking of purchasing one of these then I say do it. If you can find an STS of model year 2000 or newer, the engine runs happily on regular. The STS interior is just that much better, with a little more walnut on the doors and perforated leather. The Northstar in the STS was a little more powerful than the SLS, giving 300 HP.

[I-Love-Pontiac]

I was looking at the car survey reviews, and it seems like oil loss is a common problem. Is that something that can be fixed?

And where is it going? I don't understand how you can just lose oil.

[GMCSonoma]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

I was looking at the car survey reviews, and it seems like oil loss is a common problem. Is that something that can be fixed?

And where is it going? I don't understand how you can just lose oil.

There is an induction cleaning procedure that will clean the carbon off the piston rings...which "freeze" up and let oil pass.

There is a well known TSB for this, IMO it might have been posted either by me or one of the other tech staffers & contributors as to the service bulletin.


My store has 2 GM Master-World class technicians...once they do the cleaning procedure, they recommend a switch to Mobil 1...

Originally Posted by YngGuyInaBuick

THe HT's did get "reliable" when they got the roller cam>>>

Our 90 Deville had the 4.5 (HT4500?) which replaced an 84 Deville that had the 4.1. Correct me if I am wrong, the HT4100s apparently suffered from major engine failures as a result of block fatigue (??) due to being one of GM's first attempts at an aluminum block. This never happened to our 4.1 which was actually a pretty dependable engine all the way up until about 120,000 miles when the car just rapidly began falling apart. We evacuated in it for hurricane Andrew which turned out to be the last long haul the car would ever make. It got us out safely and returned us home without skipping a beat, but it just wasn't the same car shortly afterwards. Various parts started going out, the interior panels were falling off, wood trim was coming unglued, headlinder fell down, transmission failed and the last straw was the timing chain failure at 136,000 miles in 1994. The car was ten years old and was a complete dinosaur compared to what was available by that time, so it was replaced by the 1990 model which was MUCH improved to say the least. There was almost no comparison between the two vehicles. I was quite surprised to learn that the 4.5 was a mere re-work of the HT4100.

The headliner, interior panels, wood trim, etc. all remained in tact in the 90... hehe.

Block fatigue is correct...when they went ot roller cams, they "skirted"(?) the block if I said that correct?

The worse case was intake gasket failure which would go unchecked and then coolant would wash the oil out taking out the engine main & rod bearings and even the cam/lifters in or worse...

[PAULSTS1]

I am the owner of a '99 STS, and a 2006. The '99 is my favorite of them for a the reason that the car has "stage presence." People always complement me on the car wherever we go. It has the best interior I have experienced in a GM car since by 6000 STE in 1984. I am a driver, and a word of note: if you are interested in a Northstar powered Cadillac, drive it hard. This engine was designed to be really driven. Also maintain it right, get the oil changes (I love the semi-synthetic oils blends). Also watch the cooling system, make sure you keep the proper coolant in it.

Most of the failures I have heard about occurred with the Northstar I engine originally introduced, mostly by people that didn't maintain the overhead cam engine to Factory Specs. I hear this also happens to 6 cylinder BMW's, and Mercedes as well. Maintenance, Maintenance, Maintenance....this has been my motto and I haven't had any major issues. The '99 has 122K, and is a beast....it eats Mercedes everyday!

While I believe the '06 is probably going to last longer, due to the RWD architecture, and it has some driving smarts because of it, I'll be trading out of it within the next few months. My '99 is here to stay!