Which is faster - Seville/Eldorado STS or Mark VIII?

Status
Not open for further replies.

John Hubertz

Well-Known LVC Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
248
Reaction score
0
Location
Fort Wayne
I swiped that thread title from a very hot debate on the Cadillac side... and here was my reply:

I am afraid that I'll have the final word on this....
In 1991, 1992 and 1993, I was part of the introduction and reliability team for the Mark VIII product launch. At the time I was senior Lincoln Engineer for the Ford Motor Company's Parts and Service Division, and was based in our Florida office (Orlando).

Four times during that time period, we leased the Sebring International Raceway, and once we leased the Daytona Speedway, to perform performance testing and dealer ride-and-drive demonstrations of the Mark VIII.

We also purchased two new Cadillacs - an Eldorado and a Seville - (both were top performance models but I can't remember if they were the full STS that year or not...but they had the fat tire option for that year, whatever it was) along with a new Lexus Coupe to use as comparison vehicles.

Lynn St. James (an experienced road racer and one of Ford's factory drivers in the early 90s) drove all three cars back-to-back at Sebring, and if memory serves, was consistently lapping the track between 3 and 4 seconds faster in the Mark VIII. That is a HUGE difference on a racetrack.

In fact, even my personal company car, which was a Town Car with the high output interceptor 4.6 and heavy duty "limousine prep" package, was marginally faster around the road course then the Cadillacs (with four mad-dog half drunk car dealers on board...but that's another story).

We could not get the Cadillacs up to full speed at Daytona, as the suspensions bottomed on the banked turns at about 110 MPH and we broke a front A-Arm on the Eldorado, and suspended testing after 3 laps. They were simply too dangerous to drive under those conditions.

We also boiled the brake fluid out of both Cadillacs several times at Sebring - a problem we did not experience using the same testing protocols and number of laps with the Mark.

Sorry guys....but the truth is, real men don't SPIN their FRONT wheels! :p
 
2006 Cadillac STS-V
0-60 4.6
1/4 mile 13.2 (January 2006 C&D)


The STS is faster.
 
brentalan said:
2006 Cadillac STS-V
0-60 4.6
1/4 mile 13.2 (January 2006 C&D)
The STS is faster.

Yes indeedy... a 2006 Cadillac IS faster. I was talking the cars that were apples-to-apples competing with our Marks.... Have any 1993 through 1998 data?
 
John Hubertz said:
I swiped that thread title from a very hot debate on the Cadillac side... and here was my reply:

I am afraid that I'll have the final word on this....
In 1991, 1992 and 1993, I was part of the introduction and reliability team for the Mark VIII product launch. At the time I was senior Lincoln Engineer for the Ford Motor Company's Parts and Service Division, and was based in our Florida office (Orlando).

You should be afraid... Why do you think You'd have the "Final" word on this?
"Can't remember if you had an STS or not"... Hmmm sounds strange... You can remember the details of suspension issues, but couldn't remember the car badging...? Pahhlleeez... All I know is I've owned both generation Mark VIII's a 95 and 98 Mark, and now a 2003 STS - Z package. (There is a difference with an STS Z pack)... Anyway... I've not had the pleasure of driving the car on a real recetrack. Lets be honest, not many do... But I do know that in the street... Straight up Stock... The STS is quicker... I've owned em and drove them as my daily driver... Shlt, I know Mark VIII owners who have driven my car and for sure feel its quicker... So, last word...? I think not... You ain't smokin that stuff you gave the dog... Is ya???? LOL
 
I know, I was mostly kidding.

You can do a 2006 apples to apples, Lincoln, sadly, has nothing close.

**********************************************************

John Hubertz said:
Yes indeedy... a 2006 Cadillac IS faster. I was talking the cars that were apples-to-apples competing with our Marks.... Have any 1993 through 1998 data?
 
Jamler3 said:
You should be afraid... Why do you think You'd have the "Final" word on this?
"Can't remember if you had an STS or not"... Hmmm sounds strange... You can remember the details of suspension issues, but couldn't remember the car badging...? Pahhlleeez... All I know is I've owned both generation Mark VIII's a 95 and 98 Mark, and now a 2003 STS - Z package. (There is a difference with an STS Z pack)... Anyway... I've not had the pleasure of driving the car on a real recetrack. Lets be honest, not many do... But I do know that in the street... Straight up Stock... The STS is quicker... I've owned em and drove them as my daily driver... Shlt, I know Mark VIII owners who have driven my car and for sure feel its quicker... So, last word...? I think not... You ain't smokin that stuff you gave the dog... Is ya???? LOL

2003 versus 98?
 
Jamler3 said:
You should be afraid... Why do you think You'd have the "Final" word on this?
"Can't remember if you had an STS or not"... Hmmm sounds strange... You can remember the details of suspension issues, but couldn't remember the car badging...? Pahhlleeez... All I know is I've owned both generation Mark VIII's a 95 and 98 Mark, and now a 2003 STS - Z package. (There is a difference with an STS Z pack)... Anyway... I've not had the pleasure of driving the car on a real recetrack. Lets be honest, not many do... But I do know that in the street... Straight up Stock... The STS is quicker... I've owned em and drove them as my daily driver... Shlt, I know Mark VIII owners who have driven my car and for sure feel its quicker... So, last word...? I think not... You ain't smokin that stuff you gave the dog... Is ya???? LOL

hell a 2002 town car is faster than 75 cadi

he was speaking about 93 mark to 93 cadi

don't get so upset just cuz this guy was part of some testing back in early 90's
 
Most of those FWD caddies have 3.73 gears stock compared to 3.08/3.27 in the Mark VIII's... something to consider.
 
Jamler3 said:
You should be afraid... Why do you think You'd have the "Final" word on this?
"Can't remember if you had an STS or not"... Hmmm sounds strange... You can remember the details of suspension issues, but couldn't remember the car badging...? Pahhlleeez... All I know is I've owned both generation Mark VIII's a 95 and 98 Mark, and now a 2003 STS - Z package. (There is a difference with an STS Z pack)... Anyway... I've not had the pleasure of driving the car on a real recetrack. Lets be honest, not many do... But I do know that in the street... Straight up Stock... The STS is quicker... I've owned em and drove them as my daily driver... Shlt, I know Mark VIII owners who have driven my car and for sure feel its quicker... So, last word...? I think not... You ain't smokin that stuff you gave the dog... Is ya???? LOL



lol go back to your caddy forum.He was comparing same year vehicles.GM would be proud you bought more of there Junk :cool:
 
Hmmmm.... A member involved with the actual testing of the Mark VIII vs people reading Motor Trend or Car and Driver.

2003 - 2006 vs 93 - 98, That's not Apple to Apples! I do believe there was technological advances between 98 to 03.

Lincoln 99 - 06 nothing to compare to Cadillac I would agree.

But I would think John has the Royal Flush in this hand 93 - 95 he was there.

It would be like Present Day Astronauts telling Neil Armstrong what the moon is like.
 
brentalan said:
2006 Cadillac STS-V
0-60 4.6
1/4 mile 13.2 (January 2006 C&D)


The STS is faster.

Thats the STS-V...I have found that almost none of the info on the internet about 0-60/¼ mile times is correct so I wouldn't believe that time anyway... And who cares whos faster stock why does it matter? My car is faster stock vs. stock then a Ford Escort but that doesn't mean i'm gonna go onto an Escort forum and tell them...
 
Year on Year, they were all within a couple tenths of each other. Driver, and who floors it first.
 
Didn't realize the were supercharging a Caddy, but here are the numbers I found. FROM THE NET (and I am not impressed with 12 lbs boost and $75,000!!!!):

I just got my February '05 Car & Driver issue

p.92... (and probably on the C&D website in a matter of days...)

estimated base price $75k (I think the STS needs to lose $5k-$8k in its MSRP to undercut the foreigners, but maybe that's just me)

supercharged and intercooled 32 valve DOHC 4.4 liter V8

267ci, 4371cc (bore got reduced from 93mm to 91mm)

six-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

440hb at 6400rpm
430lb-ft of torque at 3500rpm

wheelbase 116.4 inches

length/width/height 197.6/72.6/58.2

4300 pounds!

C&D estimates that 0-60 is 4.9, quarter mile in 13.8 at 101mph, 165mph top-end "drag limited", 16/25mpg

"same large Brembos" as the CTS-V

12.0psi of Roots-type supercharger boost

0.33cd (vs. 0.32cd of standard STS)
 
13.8 at 101? I can add 4.10's and a t-lok and get damn near that.
 
Stock for stock, and with comparable drivers the STS is faster. I own 3 marks, and my buddy has a 97, and an 01 STS. If you can keep them on the road, the caddies will pull on the mark.


Keep in mind, it's ALOT easier to mod the mark. :D
 
Chaoticbastard said:
lol go back to your caddy forum.He was comparing same year vehicles.GM would be proud you bought more of there Junk :cool:


Geeezzz... Excuse me for buying a car that was actually made in the 21st Century...
AND your user name seems to fit your response perfectly!!!
How long you been a member here... A month? This is/was a Lincoln and
Caddy forum genius...

I know he was talking about same year vehicles, I was just passing along
the fact that I've owned and driven (daily) all the cars that are in question.
AND The STS is faster... I know its hard to swallow... But I've owned a both!
Have You?? You probably just bought your Mark, and have found solace in
the fact that you found some people to talk to you about your car.

Your GM Junk comment is really funny too... Junk? Hmmm, what am I driving?
I don't see Ford doing anything other than shutting down plants... Why?

Brent got it right... Lincoln guys would like to compare something to Caddy...
But, without going back 10 years, you can't.
:slap: :slap: :slap: :slap: :slap:
 
Hey, I knew it was an apples to oranges comparison, like I said before I was mostly kidding. I just wanted to stick up for Caddy and say they make great cars too.
 
Stock for stock, and with comparable drivers the STS is faster. I own 3 marks, and my buddy has a 97, and an 01 STS. If you can keep them on the road, the caddies will pull on the mark.


I thought The sts will win from a dead stop but on a roll mark VIIIs would have the STS and the Eldo
 
Jamler3 said:
Geeezzz... Excuse me for buying a car that was actually made in the 21st Century...
AND your user name seems to fit your response perfectly!!!
How long you been a member here... A month? This is/was a Lincoln and
Caddy forum genius...

I know he was talking about same year vehicles, I was just passing along
the fact that I've owned and driven (daily) all the cars that are in question.
AND The STS is faster... I know its hard to swallow... But I've owned a both!
Have You?? You probably just bought your Mark, and have found solace in
the fact that you found some people to talk to you about your car.

Your GM Junk comment is really funny too... Junk? Hmmm, what am I driving?
I don't see Ford doing anything other than shutting down plants... Why?

Brent got it right... Lincoln guys would like to compare something to Caddy...
But, without going back 10 years, you can't.
:slap: :slap: :slap: :slap: :slap:

have you actually owned a 93 to 98 STS?

Why would John lie? what would the point of his post be? Have you actually ever tracked a 93-98 sts versus a 93-98 mark?
 
John Hubertz said:
Yes indeedy... a 2006 Cadillac IS faster. I was talking the cars that were apples-to-apples competing with our Marks.... Have any 1993 through 1998 data?
wow and my moms van is faster than a modle T . Isn't this stuff crazy and a lambo is faster then my mark who gives a $hit the driver wins not the car.
 
The 93-94 Mark's are faster than the 93-94 caddies. The 95-98 Mark's are generally slower than the Caddies and the earlier Marks.
 
well my father has a cadillac sts 2003 model and i have a 1997 mark viii. i have a g-tech and we have both used it.... i beat him by 3/10ths of a second in the quarter and about the same in 0-60.... we are both about the same weight and we are stock for stock. now with the g-tech it doesnt matter who takes off first b/c if you move it starts the timer. i have rode in his car and they arent very appealing for anyone of 6'2 he is that and im 6'4 and its too small for me, my head hits the headliner... given that the car is very nice and has alot more components then ours i still prefer my car over his for that reason... now i do believe they handle about the same.. we pull about the same g's on the skidpad... but i do have to say on the interstate i believe it would pull our mark viii's they are pretty quick. lot more technology in the caddy and i would love to have one but i would have to put seat extensions in or something... so my conclusion is that they are pretty close and driver error would determine the win... oh also... it would be close from a roll b/c our trannys shift alot slower then the caddy's... thats one of the smoother but quicker shifting performance trannys i have experienced. well thats my data
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top