The only bad thing I can find in this car is that it is FWD, instead of RWD, like it must be, I mean it is a big 4.6 liter V8 with 300 hp, that needs RWD but it is very well equipped, maybe less than a 5 series but the STS was cheaper, I think. I would stillo go for the bimmer, if I had the chance
@MrThestig8 Considering the Aurora's weigh similarly to the Seville STS and is down 50hp, it's safe to say the Seville would easily beat the Aurora. Both nice cars though.
i am totally a gm guy, but i don't know about the new cadillacs. they don't have names, just letters jumbled together. they need to go back to the standard of the world and have cars like Coupe Deville, nothing more elegant than that.
lmao i own a 98 black on black STS. that thing is fast as fuck. i beat a 2000 lexus ls400 AND a 2005 mercedes benz ml350 special edition soo ya. it does compare. i never raced an old 5 series or E class. but im sure if it didnt beat it. itd keep up at minimum
The '99 STS was a better performing car, but the engine was more prone to headgakset problems than the 2000+ Seville's. My 2000 STS isn't nearly as good a performer as the '99 STS I drove.
sure buddy, it depends on what you want to drive. Did you know you have to prepare youself to hit a bump in a euro car? douchbag. I like it when they ride soft and quiet, it nothing to do with the worst car.
Its the barns and nobles book of the worlds worst cars. It was considered a bad car because it was in the market of sports sedans and was advertised to be a sports sedan just like in this commercial. It was not a sports sedan because it was soft and it was not a cruiser because cadillac already had one, the deville.
Amazon reviews say that your book's author is a crackhead and the book is nothing more than ridiculous claims and contradictions seemingly about random vehicles.
well the author was right. Cadillac aimed for a high performance sedan and they came up with a bouncy, softy grandma car. There was no point for that cause they already the deville which was a great car for the soft category. the sts was not as good as the 540i, e430, or even the lincoln ls. plus it had poor interoir quality, front wheel drive, 4 speed gearbox and bad reliability
While I agree the car was no competition against the 540i and E430, the car was more stylish than both and had a better ride. The interior quality isn't great, neither is the reliability, but I wouldn't trade mine for anything short of an '09 V8 STS.
wtf u cant compare any of those cars to the seville i had a 99 sts that was clearly better then an 5 or e series and u cant compare a lincoln ls thats a fuckin cts comparison. gimme the seville instead of your shitty plastic interior wood cars
Uhhh, the seville was infact a much more shitty plastic car than all the other cars i mentioned. infact it was know for having cheap interior. u cant compare a bmw or a mercedes to the sts because they were so much better built and engineered. plus they got much better reviews. now cadillac is coming out of their cheap stage and incase u havent noticed, they dont make a cheap interiored so called front wheel drive sports car with a soggy ride. the fast cars they make now are actually sports cars
the seville was plastic compared 2 a 5 series? LOL go write an article for car and driver you sweatervest queer. It was also a MUCH more expensive looking interior. Sure the BMW might b able to corner at 60 mph but who ever does that? You have a typical arguement that the reviews were better but u yourself prolly know nothing about cars. and i think my 99 sts was nicer then a new 1... now the sts look 2 much like BMW and that has brought them down a noch in my mind
i also had a 94 deville and my friend had a 99 7 series and that shit wasn't even close my inteior was so much more classy looking even my friend with the 7 series admitted it. and to say cadillac is coming out of a cheap stage when an STS in 99 cost the same as an STS now is ludacris. and my STS beat an 03 5 series in a race...bad. my 4.6L northstar V8 300 hp wood kick the shit outta your wannabe race car... then after that i would more comfotably fit ppl in my car... that book is bullshi.
I agree with you that Cadillac was not competing with BMW or Mercedes at this time, however if you're going to bitch about the interior of the Seville, then you shouldn't be mentioning BMW or Mercedes because their interiors of the time may have been better laid out, but just looked like fancier Pontiacs of the late 80s.
It depends. The MB W210 was a shoddy joke of a floaty sedan, an example of when MB began resting on its laurels. The W124 was a GREAT car, overengineered.
The W210 on the market at the time was an inferior vehicle to the high-tech Cadillac Sevlle.
BMW's E39 was excellent inside and out, other than a few VANOS and cooling system issues.
You need to know more about the auto industry. I've had over two dozen cars from Japan, Germany, the US, and the UK.
Driven by the Stig
CanuckaLocomia 5 months ago
@carmania62, do you still have it? Curious...
shred5 8 months ago
the 1998-2003 Cadillac SeVille was assembled in
Hamtramck, Michigan, United States
Annihilator1111 10 months ago
MY SRT8 IS BETTER
rurmundo 11 months ago
i love my 1994 sts
realgutta 11 months ago
The only bad thing I can find in this car is that it is FWD, instead of RWD, like it must be, I mean it is a big 4.6 liter V8 with 300 hp, that needs RWD but it is very well equipped, maybe less than a 5 series but the STS was cheaper, I think. I would stillo go for the bimmer, if I had the chance
diego750il 1 year ago
i want, no i need to see this thing go head to head against a 2001 aurora. SLEEPER CARS ROCK!
MrThestig8 1 year ago
@MrThestig8, the Seville (SLS or STS) would ABUSE an Aurora v8. Let's not talk about a v6...
shred5 8 months ago
@MrThestig8 Considering the Aurora's weigh similarly to the Seville STS and is down 50hp, it's safe to say the Seville would easily beat the Aurora. Both nice cars though.
cadillacseville00 1 week ago
na i live in queens
queensguido 1 year ago
i am totally a gm guy, but i don't know about the new cadillacs. they don't have names, just letters jumbled together. they need to go back to the standard of the world and have cars like Coupe Deville, nothing more elegant than that.
presidentbren 2 years ago
I think I agree.
JesdaG 2 years ago
lmao i own a 98 black on black STS. that thing is fast as fuck. i beat a 2000 lexus ls400 AND a 2005 mercedes benz ml350 special edition soo ya. it does compare. i never raced an old 5 series or E class. but im sure if it didnt beat it. itd keep up at minimum
marfra3 2 years ago 3
youd beat the eclass and basically tie with an automatic 540 altho u would loose against a stick 540 in a close race
queensguido 1 year ago
YO I JUST BOUGHT A 96 STS 4.6 northsar busll shiit v8 or whatever!~!
anyways...
that mathafuckin temperature gauge is always above normal but never get on the red!!! fortunately!!!
so what do u guys think i should do?
i know its not the head gasket!!
so thats out the reasons!!
any bright ideas why u guys think its kinda overheating!!????
the car runs well!!
x96player 3 years ago
i have a '99 seville and for a car i bought for 1,300
with 224,000 on the clock, it's a good car
except for today when the battery died
bountyCXVII 3 years ago
I owe a blk on blk sts 2000. Still the nicest looking car on the road after 8 years. Still get complements on it.
jd3147 3 years ago
The '99 STS was a better performing car, but the engine was more prone to headgakset problems than the 2000+ Seville's. My 2000 STS isn't nearly as good a performer as the '99 STS I drove.
cadillacseville00 3 years ago
i herd that the 2000 sts had a lot of overheating problems and other major problems .and ever person who had one said the 99 sts is better...
dipndashonuass 3 years ago
hey its the Stigs american cousin
deloreanfan81 3 years ago 2
Its a FWD car, good car but a FWD
mark0101 3 years ago 3
u know. there is a book that considers this one of the worst cars of the world. They said it was too soft and bouncy. They are right u know
minischec1 4 years ago
sure buddy, it depends on what you want to drive. Did you know you have to prepare youself to hit a bump in a euro car? douchbag. I like it when they ride soft and quiet, it nothing to do with the worst car.
camarosam 4 years ago
And what book is that? You don't know what you're talking about. The STS' ride is quite firm. I think you have it confused with the SLS.
MCarll 4 years ago
Its the barns and nobles book of the worlds worst cars. It was considered a bad car because it was in the market of sports sedans and was advertised to be a sports sedan just like in this commercial. It was not a sports sedan because it was soft and it was not a cruiser because cadillac already had one, the deville.
minischec1 3 years ago
They're full of shit. The Lexus LS is softer and less precise.
JesdaG 3 years ago
Amazon reviews say that your book's author is a crackhead and the book is nothing more than ridiculous claims and contradictions seemingly about random vehicles.
ZAXXON777 3 years ago
well the author was right. Cadillac aimed for a high performance sedan and they came up with a bouncy, softy grandma car. There was no point for that cause they already the deville which was a great car for the soft category. the sts was not as good as the 540i, e430, or even the lincoln ls. plus it had poor interoir quality, front wheel drive, 4 speed gearbox and bad reliability
minischec1 3 years ago
While I agree the car was no competition against the 540i and E430, the car was more stylish than both and had a better ride. The interior quality isn't great, neither is the reliability, but I wouldn't trade mine for anything short of an '09 V8 STS.
cadillacseville00 3 years ago 3
The interior IMO is what really killed these cars. The interior was about the same as Buick was using but IMO was an insult to Chevrolet.
shred5 2 years ago
wtf u cant compare any of those cars to the seville i had a 99 sts that was clearly better then an 5 or e series and u cant compare a lincoln ls thats a fuckin cts comparison. gimme the seville instead of your shitty plastic interior wood cars
queensguido 3 years ago
Uhhh, the seville was infact a much more shitty plastic car than all the other cars i mentioned. infact it was know for having cheap interior. u cant compare a bmw or a mercedes to the sts because they were so much better built and engineered. plus they got much better reviews. now cadillac is coming out of their cheap stage and incase u havent noticed, they dont make a cheap interiored so called front wheel drive sports car with a soggy ride. the fast cars they make now are actually sports cars
minischec1 3 years ago
the seville was plastic compared 2 a 5 series? LOL go write an article for car and driver you sweatervest queer. It was also a MUCH more expensive looking interior. Sure the BMW might b able to corner at 60 mph but who ever does that? You have a typical arguement that the reviews were better but u yourself prolly know nothing about cars. and i think my 99 sts was nicer then a new 1... now the sts look 2 much like BMW and that has brought them down a noch in my mind
queensguido 3 years ago 3
i also had a 94 deville and my friend had a 99 7 series and that shit wasn't even close my inteior was so much more classy looking even my friend with the 7 series admitted it. and to say cadillac is coming out of a cheap stage when an STS in 99 cost the same as an STS now is ludacris. and my STS beat an 03 5 series in a race...bad. my 4.6L northstar V8 300 hp wood kick the shit outta your wannabe race car... then after that i would more comfotably fit ppl in my car... that book is bullshi.
queensguido 3 years ago
I agree with you that Cadillac was not competing with BMW or Mercedes at this time, however if you're going to bitch about the interior of the Seville, then you shouldn't be mentioning BMW or Mercedes because their interiors of the time may have been better laid out, but just looked like fancier Pontiacs of the late 80s.
shred5 2 years ago
It depends. The MB W210 was a shoddy joke of a floaty sedan, an example of when MB began resting on its laurels. The W124 was a GREAT car, overengineered.
The W210 on the market at the time was an inferior vehicle to the high-tech Cadillac Sevlle.
BMW's E39 was excellent inside and out, other than a few VANOS and cooling system issues.
You need to know more about the auto industry. I've had over two dozen cars from Japan, Germany, the US, and the UK.
JesdaG 2 years ago
"POWER OF &" was the worst campaign ever. Stunning car.
JesdaG 4 years ago