Being a Cadillac tech at a dealership in the 1990's I can confirm that the 4.5 and 4.9 were lightyears ahead of the 4.1. But I can remember driving Allante's before the Northstar was released. The 4.5 ran really well in those cars. I once had a Seville with a 4.1 that was leaking coolant between the engine and transmission. I assumed it was a freeze plug that couldn't be seen. After removing the transaxle to gain access I realized it wasn't a freeze plug. Turns out the block had rotted through, probably due to electrolysis that was quite common in the early days of aluminum blocks. So the car got a brand new GM engine.
I think they got it almost perfect with the 4.9. As far as I’m concerned, the Northstar was several steps backwards. Yes, it was a lot more powerful. But they took several steps backwards as far as reliability. It was more reliable than the 4100, But not by much in my opinion.
My grandmother had a 1984 Seville that she bought new, that had this problem with not very many miles. it happened on a 300mi road trip. The car had to be towed a long way to the nearest dealer for a new engine. Other than alternator issues later in its life, it ran fine until the day it was sold in 1997-1998. It was a turd though. I agree that the 4.9L was a much nicer running engine. We had other family members who had DeVilles with either the 4.5 or the 4.9 and they were quick, especially the 4.9. At the time, it seemed like there wasn't much on the road that could jump these things off the line.
As a beginning tech in the early 1990's, I appreciated the built in onboard diagnostic system. It was way ahead of it's time. "Off + Warmer" gave you a whole lot of information at no cost.
Definitely! Were same era as I also got in the field around 89. Crazy to think back to how much the ecm stuff was diy.... GMs grounding the ALDL and Ford was a little more work, but could also get the codes without a scan tool! Until I really got going in Smog and driveability in early 90s and bought a Snap on MT 2500! So primitive compared to now, but was a game changer back then (especially with diagnosing imports).
As a teenager, I had the opportunity to buy a 92 Seville STS, but turned my nose up to it when I found out it was "only" the 4.9 and not the Northstar. That thing probably would have been a great car that could have served me for years, but instead I got an unreliable 96 Contour 4 cylinder. I was an idiot.
There's plenty else to go wrong on that cadillac, so you probably wouldn't have exactly come out ahead with that choice. But you probably would have had more fun in between repairs lol.
@@DrewLSsix We'll never know, but that Contour I got instead was one of the least reliable vehicles I've owned. About the only upside was that it got 25MPG regardless of how I drove it... The Caddy would definitely have been in the teens with the lead foot I had.
Easiest way to replace the water pump is to remove the battery, remove the reservoir, remove the upper engine dog bone mounts, and remove the lower fasteners on the lower engine mounts (bottom of the engine cradle). Then use a floor jack with a block of wood on the passenger side of the oil pan and jack the engine up. You will get several inches out of it to where all the water pump fasteners will be above the passenger side frame rail. Now, soak the heck out of all the fasteners with good penetrating oil and carefully use hand tools to remove everything, especially the 10mm nuts. Those nuts are threaded on to studs that are part of the timing cover. If they break, the timing cover and gasket will need to be replaced.
This, this, a million times, this. Unbolt the motor mounts and hoist the motor from the passenger side on these 4.9s. That pump was EZ-PZ once you figure that out.
My Mom is now 90 and to this day of all her Cadillacs her 1988 Deville with the 4.5 is her very favorite. Not my Dads. He’s gone now and loved his 1978 Fleetwood. To Mom the 88 Deville was truly special.
@@kennyclark284I know that color. Antelope was an extra cost exterior color. Had to pay extra for it if i'm not mistaken. Triple Antelope must have looked stunning.
@@JoJoStar22 I like the 1989-1993. They get all the fanfare because they brought back the more pronounced "fins" in the back. They are a nice car and they brought back the Fleetwood coupe during those years which is the most rare of that generation. But i still like the 1988 model year slightly better. The more boxy look says, "Cadillac Traditionalist" to me.
My late Mother had a 1993 polo green Seville with this engine in it, and that car would haul booty 😅. Handled really well too for a car its size. Really miss that Seville; miss my Mom more.
Recently put a '91 Seville STS my father passed down to me in the shop. Would much rather have had him the past 18 years, but I suppose he'd be happy knowing I still got it
Had a 93 Seville with the 4.9!! Great car and engine! Was so much fun to drive and got very good fuel economy for a v8 car. Interstate driving I could get 28 without much work. 22-25 was pretty common!
These days, this motor is often used by customizers of Pontiac Fieros. The mounting points and a lot of the hook ups are the same as the 2.8 V6 so doing a conversion in a Fiero is very easy and it transforms the little car, giving it a lot of extra power.
A bit of extra power, but mostly it's for the noise they make. It's pretty well accepted that the 3800s/c is your best choice for cheap power in a fiero. The smaller V6s will match or exceed the 4.9 in power but will take a significant investment, the other V8s (chevy 5.0/5.7 and LS essentially) will beat it in power both stock and with easy mods but that swap is a significant effort in its own right. The caddy is close to drop in, cheap to buy, and makes a really good sound along with decent power. It also doesn't screw with the handling at all so that's a plus. If there was a top end package that fixed the engines breathing problems it just might be a real performance engine, but it would be a tough sell considering the folks that love these things typically love them for being cheap. They probably won't flock to buy a $3k head/intake package just to break 300hp lol.
By the time the 4.9 came around, Cadillac had alienated so many of their loyal customers and damaged their reputation so bad that few would ever consider buying Cadillac or any other GM mark. My family has not purchased a GM car since the 1983 Cadillac Deville
Have you tried the Cadillac CT5 V series ? They've come a long way since the dark days of the early 1980s.. Of course, they also beg the question of are they really a Cadillac or not? Certainly not in the traditional sense.
When I was a kid working as a car jockey at a Caddy dealer in Toronto back in the 90s, I remember a Deville came through with the hood ornament moved to a grille badge. I learned it was a Touring Sedan, and I thought, who the heck would buy one of those? Then 3 years ago I found one and bought it. Drove back and forth across the country, great cruiser and love the old 4.9 in it. Every time I think about selling it I go and drive it. And watch Adam's videos 🙂
I've owned a '91 Seville with the 4.9 engine in it. Easy to work on and had good power. I remember having to change the water pump on it before I had to make a out of town trip. It wasn't difficult at all to me. The biggest pain was that the pump was held to the block with 10 small bolts (can't remember the size). The serpentine belt was easy to remove also. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Cadillac with the 4.9 in it (as long as it was properly maintained).
I remember these 4.9L motors in the small Seville and it was a very hot car. It would smoke the front tires easily, it would pull hard on the top end and also made very nice sounds. definitely felt like more than 200hp. at the time....
I will say that in my 1997 Seville, I addressed the 4.6L Northstar head gasket issue by installing head studs instead of bolts. It's got 224k on it now and it still runs strong. The only major problem I had is oil leaks from the girdle and pan and also I can't find certain body and suspension bushings because they're not made anymore. I might have to make my own.
Thank you, Adam, I was afraid to tell people that I drove a Pre-Northstar Allante and it ran beautifully... It's also good to see someone mentioning the truly "on-board" diagnostics that Cadillac began in 1980. (Of course, the big question is why no one else did it!)
I drive a 1986 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with the 4.1, I bought it from an older gentleman and it only has 60,000 miles on it. I haven't had a single issue and it's very smooth and quiet. It may not have the 4.5 or 4.9 version of the engine but if well taken care of the 4.1 will last many more years to come!
Thank you Adam. I liked the video. This is the V8 from Cadillac I thought was great and reliable. I liked how they improved the engine and made the changes. Too bad it was not around in the early 1980's. This engine was the era of "Cadillac Style". The engine was not a gas guzzlers. The only thing I did not care for is it required premium fuel. They should have ran this engine a little longer until they perfected the Northstar V8 and then brought the Northstar V8 out. It is nice to know that it is easy to service as well. I had heard a rumor that they were thinking about giving this engine to Oldsmobile and putting it in the Ninety Eight. I do not know how true this rumor is... I rode in Cadillacs that had this engine. It has some really good pickup too. Very excellent video.
I had an 82 Fleetwood Brougham delagance with a goodwrench 4100 replacement engine. It was very reliable and great on gas but very slow. I also had a 93 sedan Deville. It was very easy to service and it moved quite swiftly. I did have a lot of trouble fixing a fast idle problem. My wife is still upset that I sold it and I regret selling it as well.
The 91-93 cars with the 4.9L are really underrated. Screwed together nice, surprisingly competent when pushed and sublime for eating up highway miles. While power is lower than the Northstars, the 4.9 was no slouch with a nice economy and a grunty powerband. Looking at getting another. While the last gen DTS is a great spiritual successor to the 91-93, there's just something special about the old 4.9 cars
As a GM dealer tech in the 90s, I agree mostly with your assessment of this engine. They seemed to be worlds better than the 4.1, however, the 440T4/4T60 transmissions did not live a long life attached to the 4.9.
I had a 1994 sedan DeVille with the 4.9, in the extremely rare medium blue metallic with dark blue leather. It was an absolutely beautiful car, a rocketship on the highway and as comfortable as anything I've driven to this day. I never should have let the ex wife keep it... She killed it within a year through sheer stupidity.
I have a 90 fleetwood with 4.5. You finally explained my unintended acceleration (which a mechanic fixed a few years back). Also spent $$$ on injectors and did water pump. And prob other stuff. But for me it is worth it for a lovely driving car with much better space and driving dynamics than the RWD caddies of the time. Wonderful ride and lots of space.
In 1994, my wife and I married...and we discussed hiring a limo for the evening. We had a bunch of relatives visiting from out of town. We had a Grand Am and a Sentra...so I checked and a rental agency had a weekend special rate on a 1994 Cadillac Deville which was cheaper than renting a limo. We used the Deville to transport relatives to and from the airport, hotels and as our wedding car. As we were driving the car, my brother asked about the engine in the car, after watching commercials about the new Northstar V8s. So we popped the hood and our rental had the 4.9 V8. It had a nice subdued throaty rumble and plenty of power and the car was immensely comfortable. We enjoyed the car and really did a great job as a shuttle.
I bought a used 91 Eldorado with this engine about ten years old, from the original owner. That was a great engine, and a great riding car. The only component I recall replacing was the alternator. The only other issues I really had were with minor accessories and the VATS system.
regarding the Idle Speed Control motor. If you have those surging idle issues, it’s because the tech replaced the unit and didn’t count the turns taking the bolt out of the motor. As long as you do that when you replace the unit there are no issues. Agree 100% about the Coupe DeVille. I own a 93 and it’s such a nice ride. It actually handles pretty well until you hit about 7/10s and it just under steers. You can really rip around with this car and it’s quite fun for its size.
@@br549200 Sure you can. The 3800 with a supercharger.. For that class.. But a Cadillac really needs a V8.. It's iconic for Cadillac and it's their history.. Cadillacs have used V8 (or V12 or V16) exclusively since 1915. At least until the Cimarron came along.
@@MarinCipollina yip, in the late 90’s I worked at the GM plant that built the Grand Prixs. (KC Kansas). We built a bunch of the super charged cars. They were extra peppy.
I got a 93 sedan deville with the 4.9 it’s constructed so good that it’s been in 2 bad wrecks and it still doesn’t leak and I’ve been able to rebuild it both times you wouldn’t even know it was wrecked and it’s fun to drive
@kevinbarry71. I assume the aluminum block was to save weight. Iron heads tend to make more power, and be more efficient because the extra heat in them atomizes fuel better. Just a guess.
@@RichMander1 I doubt it. One of the main reasons cars have aluminum cylinder heads is aluminum transfers heat much better thus allowing hotter temperatures and more efficient and more powerful engines
My very first repair experience on one of these ever was a water pump. What an initiation. Very little space to get a ratchet on the bolts if at all, very hard to remove the bolts once you get them loose, and multiple sizes of bolts requiring multiple tools. Not to mention there were, like 16 bolts to remove in general. I had another with a very strange "stumble" on acceleration that was never repaired correctly after multiple attempts by multiple mechanics. EDIT: Oh, yeah, I forgot. NAPA charged me $145 for the water pump back in 2010(ish). I told them that didn't sound right. They told me it was because it was a Cadillac. I still don't believe them to this day. That was outrageous for a stamped sheetmetal water pump.
That was one of the GOOD things about the Northstar, it had an up-top water pump at the end of one camshaft that you remove with a special socket. So that was one job that wasn't made miserable by stuffing it under a tight hood sideways.
I am rebuilding a 92 Deville with 42k miles now. Currently reupholstering my seats and clicked on your video. Just listening to your information was perfectly what I needed to understand what I have. Very clear and interesting thank you
I remember a friend of mine family bought a brand 1993 Cadillac sedan Deville. It was dark blue with a silver bottom. They previously drove a 1990 Buick Park Avenue. The Cadillac had such a presence. It was so smooth riding and seats were very comfortable. I have to say after owning a couple of Northstar equipped Cadillac I really want one now!
GM's HT series started off as total crap then gradually evolved into a fairly solid engine at which time GM cancelled production. GM's Northstar series started off as crap then evolved into a fairly good engine at which point GM cancelled production. Anyone see a pattern here?
Gm logic 1) have a decent idea. 2) bean counters cheap out. 3) rush production and pass issues to customer instead of solving it during r&r 4) finally get all the bugs worked out(by then the damage to reputation is done) 5) end production of said product.
And we all wondered why the Japanese took over the upscale automotive market in the 90s. They are still making essentially the same engines they did back then.
Yup… by the time GM works out the bugs they cannot overcome the (deserved) bad reputation and have to dump the product. Happened to the Vega which initially was a huge hit with buyers… Fiero, as well.
Good video. I picked up a mint 91 deville with 28000 on it with the 4.9. Runs good and is quite peppy. Glad to hear it was much improved from prior derivatives. My only gripe is the top mointed oil filter which makes changing oil very messy. There has to be a trick im not aware of.
I had a 92 eldorado with that motor. I bought it from the original owner. It had 180k miles but you would never know. Highschool car that took premium fuel. Wasn't to smart
My father had an '85 Eldorado, the 4.1 chucked its cam at about 85k, he traded for a weird looking '90 CDV, his last car b4 his passing in 1995. Now I own 2 5.7 diesel Caddys
Worked at GM dealerships back in the late 90s. Loved it when one of these came in or if we had one on the lot. Great power delivery.. Torque steer FTW!
After all the hits to Cadillac's reputation in the 80s, it's amazing that they didn't discover the Northstar was a timebomb, and when they did, they didn't fix it immediately instead of 12 years after its introduction. It's also amazing no one ratted out whoever was responsible and why, but it's ancient history now.
My personal opinion: the 4.9 was probably the best engine as far as combining power, and reliability. We know the 4100 was junk And the 4.5 was a lot better In reliability and power. But they finally got It almost perfect with the 4.9. Then they made the Northstar. It was admittedly a lot more powerful. But it returned back to the junk status as far as reliability goes.
the reason the 0-60 times were rather high for N* engines was the excessive wheelspin and aggressive traction control system. power was cut in half in first gear at full throttle, for example.
Thank you so much for recognizing this engine! I daily drive a 91 sedan deville with 70k and I love the car. However, it sat for about 10 years before I bought it so I've unfortunately had to do a waterpump, I have every oil leak imaginable, the new mains are going in soon .030 under (closest i i could find to what gms original fix at .032 undersize). The tps broke while i was replacing the injectors so theres that. Then there's the 4t60... overall great cars if maintained tho
man...everything you said about the 4.9 i totally agree with. my father loved his 1991 seville sts. i have to admit it was a little rocket ship off the line. he never had an issue with that engine. i do have to say i think the 4.1 which he had a few of, was a smoother, quieter engine but took about a week to get to 65 mph. it was so bad i remember when he had the cruise on in his '82 fleetwood the car would have to go into passing gear to get up the hill. lol
My old buddy's grandmother had a 91 Seville with the 4.9 L. That thing would do huge burnouts all day, we just got our licenses . The car took it better than a Northstar would have.
When Cadillac came out with the HT4100, why didn't they do things really different and possibly gotten way better results?? Bear with me here. Imagine that Cadillac used aluminum heads and block, actual gaskets and the heads were DOHC/4 Valves Per Cylinder with Port Fuel Injection? It would truly be a "High Technology 4100".
I wouldn't say that an engine making north of 200 HP is only in performance cars, Mercedes had a 3.2 liter straight 6 that churned out power a bit above 200HP on their S320 and E320 cars, and a 5.0 V-8 that made above 300 HP, which was used in the S500.
Had 4 80s Coupe 4100's. 3 of which were lowrider cars, summer only. Just one failed, which I drove in the Minnesota winter a few times out of desperation when my fwd car was in the shop.
I suppose until I die, I will never understand GM screwing up the basics in such profound ways between 1970-ish (Vega) and 1988 (ending the Fiero after FINALLY getting it right), plus the various Cadillac engines and Cimarron. If they had only gotten it RIGHT by keeping things simple and only introducing technology after very, very thorough R&D, the Vega would've been a homerun. All Cadillacs, including the Cimarron, would be looked back upon fondly, same for the Oldsmobile Diesels.
ive had Cadillacs with the 4.1, the 4.5 and the 4.9 engines. the 4.9 was a little rocket ship off the line up to around 45-50 mph. the 4.5 was slightly less robust and the 4.1 took about a week to get up to 65 mph. that being said i really think the 4.1 started, idled and ran the smoothest of the 3 engines.
The only problem with my 4.9 was I had to use a STP oil filter because it had a check valve. With the filter being up high on the engine the oil would drain down over night and the engine would knock when it was first started for a couple of seconds. One morning before starting the engine I removed the ac oil filter and noticed it had very little oil in it. So I did the same thing with the STP filter and it was full of oil an no more knocks. Sold the car with over 280000 miles on it and never had any problems with that engine.
During Cash For Clunkers, I was a porter at a Chevy store. After the clunkers had their oil replaced with sodium silicate, it was my job to take the car out back, and rev the engine until it died. Most engines lasted 30 seconds or less. I got in a '94 Deville one day, real shame that was its fate, was a real pretty, clean car. It set the record, lasting about 3 minutes of the engine bouncing off the rev limiter before seizing up.
I could never do that!!!!! I’m a professional mechanic sinds 1996, and stil a real mechanic fix en build it!!! Not destroying!!! It must be something American to destroy everything even the good stuff!
I really miss my 91 Coupe Deville, that engine was great, but I would like to know why the eat water pumps. Great ride and looked good and was way better than anything my friends had at the time, it was a faster than a lot of "sports' cars at the time too.
I did a water pump replacement job on a 4.9 (1991 Eldorado), not that bad as I remember. I sold the car because I found it uninspiring and also because of the oddity of the engine!
Ya know, the Northstar gets a bad rap because of the head gasket issue. Which is a shame, cause it's actually an extremely well-designed engine. Light, efficient, good power. And the head gasket issue CAN be fixed with an aftermarket head fastener solution. And if you replace the head fasteners, it's an absolutely rock-solid engine that you'll likely never have any major problems from again. I'm pretty sure there's a sandrail company in Cali that builds an 1100HP twin turbo sandrail using Northstars. It's also worth noting that GM did eventually fix the head gasket issue in the N*. Unfortunately, by that point, the damage was already done. It's too bad, really.
My Cadillac tech prefers the 4.9.....no knocks.....as you say.....don't dog any of them. My 88 with its T-440 hydrostatic performs well. I treat her right!
I had a beautiful Silver 1988 Cadillac Sedan Deville with the 4.5-liter V8. Unfortunately, Cadillac used defective or cheap intake manifold seals. So, one night while driving home, the car wasn't running right by the time I got home. The next day I check the oil and I have a gray sludge. I took it to Cadillac and they replace the intake manifold gaskets. No engine damage than God.
I thought these were disastrous engines from GM. If anyone says otherwise, I am not convinced. I can’t think of another bulletproof engine as GM’s 3.8 V6 and 2.8 V6.
Adam, I agree 💯. The 4.9 was excellent and the engine Cadillac desperately needed. It arrived years too late and didn't stay long enough. It also seems to be the engine that established the trend of GM, and especially Cadillac, of finally getting the engine right almost too late. This would be directly replaced by the Northstar V8, another engine that only overcame its failures toward the end of the production run. And then came the 3.6 v6... Can we say timing chains, class?
Um- in between those Caddy V8s and that stupid boat anchor 3.6 was an engine you may have heard of though -the 3800 series I, II, and III. GM does occasionally get them right, if only just🙂 I've driven just about all of them -no one would argue they at least knocked the 3800 out of the park consistantly.
@jeffstonecipher1594 But let's not forget how crappy the original 3.8 V6 was, especially when it was still an odd-fire engine. And let's not forget that GM pretty gave that engine away to Jeep-Kaiser, and then scrambled to buy it back from AMC after the 1st oil embargo shook things up. The 3800 started out as a complete abortion.
All, true. At least Cadillac wasn't the "uterus" for that abortion -at least to my knowledge they didn't have any 3800 powered cars. Honestly maybe they should have -Adams Cimarron would be one hell of a rocket ship with that power plant🙂@@johneckert1365
People rip on me for it. But my 4.5 200hp port injected in my alante (phase 2 car) seems to be treating me well. It drives real well and is very responsive. Between the engine and the lower bearing (lower than the sts) it goes quite well for the time in a small bit not really light car.
I have a 1995 4.9 Sedan Deville with about 121k on it. I don’t daily it of course but It’s been a really nice cruiser car. If there is a mechanic in Charlotte, NC area in the comments that works on these types of Cadillacs please let me know. It’s hard to find good mechanics or shops that are willing to work on these classics.
The water pump is super easy on 94-95 devilles vs the 91-93...there is a lot of subtle changes in each year of 4.9L the video didn't go over.they fixed the main bearing thump by 94... virtually non existent on 94-95... also sail on they called it which the car would accelerate on its own(barely)tho was from a bad idle control motor which works in tandem with throttle position sensor... you can't adjust them separately...simple fix is too replace the icm or spray silicone and clean the icm needle...and if you replace you have to keep the same screw length or else you screw up the tandem parameters of throttle position sensor which is set to the icm.
My best friend in high school had a black Eldorado with this motor, the Flowmaster 40 cross-flow muffler for a 3rd-gen F-body fit it perfectly and sounded AWESOME. I had a pretty hot 327 in a '78 El Camino with a 4-speed, but his car was widely regarded as 'cooler' by most of our friends, haha! They might've been dumbasses, but it was a fun, good-sounding car. We put a water pump on it, it was miserable, haha! The worst part was him totaling the car the next week, haha! It would idle in 'D' as fast as my El Camino would idle in 'R' (idle at 900 rpm). It would idle through 2nd, kinda crazy.
My dad had a fully loaded El Dorado with the gold package it made to 280 000 before sold to grease money who got 110000 before computer and transmission blew up and kill it
At 180k I put new mains rods and oil pump in our 93 Sedan Deville to keep the mains quiet.shes got 220k now,shes been parked awhile but fires right up and is whisper quiet.
@klwthe3rd Not if you do it yourself.The oil pan is easily removed with the starter dropped out of the way. I did it in a couple hours in our driveway.Just do one at a time.
The 4.9 was a pretty solid engine. GM worked the bugs out of the design and they were reliable. The 4.9 was and is much better than the current 3.6 V-6 that's found in so many GM cars. I think the 3.6 might be a worse engine than both the early 4100 and the Northstar.
Every one of these I have seen has had a main bearing issue that causes the motor to tick. The tick steadily gets worse and worse and the car will sound like a diesel. However, my sister's cadillac with the 4.9 ran with this problem for 250,000 miles and was still running when my step dad got rid of it.
A better choice would be the XLR V Series with the supercharged 4.4 Liter Northstar engine, good for 443 HP and 414 ft lbs of torque. Brakes from the Corvette parts bin and weighs in at a rather svelte 3800 lbs. Plus it's rear wheel drive. 0 - 60 in 4.7 seconds, 1/4 mile in 13 seconds flat.
4.9s were pretty good. Suddenly we were seeing a Caddy mill that could eat front motor mounts lol. But like all of this series of engines, it was an oil leaker. I recall my service manager telling owners of leaky Caddys "Oil is cheap, and so is cardboard." LOL Yikes!
That's incorrect on the 4.9 it actually had 275 ft torque power not 270. 200 horse that's correct. I've owned these vehicles for a number of years, I actually have a '91 a '92 and a '93 Cadillac sedan DeVille with the 4.9.. never had a head gasket issues, I've owned my '92 Cadillac sedan DeVille for 20 years these are actually great engines minimal issues just your typical maintenance issues that's it, other than that excellent engine one of the best engines Cadillac ever made..💯👍🏼
Being a Cadillac tech at a dealership in the 1990's I can confirm that the 4.5 and 4.9 were lightyears ahead of the 4.1. But I can remember driving Allante's before the Northstar was released. The 4.5 ran really well in those cars. I once had a Seville with a 4.1 that was leaking coolant between the engine and transmission. I assumed it was a freeze plug that couldn't be seen. After removing the transaxle to gain access I realized it wasn't a freeze plug. Turns out the block had rotted through, probably due to electrolysis that was quite common in the early days of aluminum blocks. So the car got a brand new GM engine.
I think they got it almost perfect with the 4.9. As far as I’m concerned, the Northstar was several steps backwards. Yes, it was a lot more powerful. But they took several steps backwards as far as reliability. It was more reliable than the 4100, But not by much in my opinion.
My grandmother had a 1984 Seville that she bought new, that had this problem with not very many miles. it happened on a 300mi road trip. The car had to be towed a long way to the nearest dealer for a new engine. Other than alternator issues later in its life, it ran fine until the day it was sold in 1997-1998. It was a turd though. I agree that the 4.9L was a much nicer running engine. We had other family members who had DeVilles with either the 4.5 or the 4.9 and they were quick, especially the 4.9. At the time, it seemed like there wasn't much on the road that could jump these things off the line.
Add me to the list who also thinks the 4.5 and 4.9L were decent engines
@@piercehawke8021 Me as well. I had a 4.5 in my '88 SDV. Never let me down.
MANY CADILLAC FAILURES..THERE STILL IS..
As a beginning tech in the early 1990's, I appreciated the built in onboard diagnostic system. It was way ahead of it's time. "Off + Warmer" gave you a whole lot of information at no cost.
Definitely! Were same era as I also got in the field around 89. Crazy to think back to how much the ecm stuff was diy.... GMs grounding the ALDL and Ford was a little more work, but could also get the codes without a scan tool! Until I really got going in Smog and driveability in early 90s and bought a Snap on MT 2500! So primitive compared to now, but was a game changer back then (especially with diagnosing imports).
You mean interrogation mode?
As a teenager, I had the opportunity to buy a 92 Seville STS, but turned my nose up to it when I found out it was "only" the 4.9 and not the Northstar. That thing probably would have been a great car that could have served me for years, but instead I got an unreliable 96 Contour 4 cylinder. I was an idiot.
There's plenty else to go wrong on that cadillac, so you probably wouldn't have exactly come out ahead with that choice. But you probably would have had more fun in between repairs lol.
@@DrewLSsix We'll never know, but that Contour I got instead was one of the least reliable vehicles I've owned. About the only upside was that it got 25MPG regardless of how I drove it... The Caddy would definitely have been in the teens with the lead foot I had.
Oh to be young and dumb again.....lol
I'd still get the Northstar even if it lasted half as long. Had one in high school and we walked 5.0s all Friday night.
Easiest way to replace the water pump is to remove the battery, remove the reservoir, remove the upper engine dog bone mounts, and remove the lower fasteners on the lower engine mounts (bottom of the engine cradle). Then use a floor jack with a block of wood on the passenger side of the oil pan and jack the engine up. You will get several inches out of it to where all the water pump fasteners will be above the passenger side frame rail. Now, soak the heck out of all the fasteners with good penetrating oil and carefully use hand tools to remove everything, especially the 10mm nuts. Those nuts are threaded on to studs that are part of the timing cover. If they break, the timing cover and gasket will need to be replaced.
This, this, a million times, this. Unbolt the motor mounts and hoist the motor from the passenger side on these 4.9s. That pump was EZ-PZ once you figure that out.
My Mom is now 90 and to this day of all her Cadillacs her 1988 Deville with the 4.5 is her very favorite. Not my Dads. He’s gone now and loved his 1978 Fleetwood. To Mom the 88 Deville was truly special.
The 1988 Devilles and Fleetwoods were my favorite too. The last of that body style but got the better 4.5 V8. What color was her Deville?
I believe the color was Antelope with matching interior and vinyl top. All three the same color. She loved that car and never fails to reflect on it.
@@kennyclark284I know that color. Antelope was an extra cost exterior color. Had to pay extra for it if i'm not mistaken. Triple Antelope must have looked stunning.
@@klwthe3rd I agree. Fell in love with that year. What you think of the 89-93 ?!
@@JoJoStar22 I like the 1989-1993. They get all the fanfare because they brought back the more pronounced "fins" in the back. They are a nice car and they brought back the Fleetwood coupe during those years which is the most rare of that generation. But i still like the 1988 model year slightly better. The more boxy look says, "Cadillac Traditionalist" to me.
My late Mother had a 1993 polo green Seville with this engine in it, and that car would haul booty 😅. Handled really well too for a car its size. Really miss that Seville; miss my Mom more.
Recently put a '91 Seville STS my father passed down to me in the shop. Would much rather have had him the past 18 years, but I suppose he'd be happy knowing I still got it
Had a 93 Seville with the 4.9!! Great car and engine! Was so much fun to drive and got very good fuel economy for a v8 car. Interstate driving I could get 28 without much work. 22-25 was pretty common!
These days, this motor is often used by customizers of Pontiac Fieros. The mounting points and a lot of the hook ups are the same as the 2.8 V6 so doing a conversion in a Fiero is very easy and it transforms the little car, giving it a lot of extra power.
A bit of extra power, but mostly it's for the noise they make. It's pretty well accepted that the 3800s/c is your best choice for cheap power in a fiero. The smaller V6s will match or exceed the 4.9 in power but will take a significant investment, the other V8s (chevy 5.0/5.7 and LS essentially) will beat it in power both stock and with easy mods but that swap is a significant effort in its own right.
The caddy is close to drop in, cheap to buy, and makes a really good sound along with decent power. It also doesn't screw with the handling at all so that's a plus. If there was a top end package that fixed the engines breathing problems it just might be a real performance engine, but it would be a tough sell considering the folks that love these things typically love them for being cheap. They probably won't flock to buy a $3k head/intake package just to break 300hp lol.
I'm planning to swap one of those 4.9l's in a 2nd Gen Cavalier
By the time the 4.9 came around, Cadillac had alienated so many of their loyal customers and damaged their reputation so bad that few would ever consider buying Cadillac or any other GM mark. My family has not purchased a GM car since the 1983 Cadillac Deville
I agree, most feel the same way.
what do you buy toyota
Literally almost anything else foreign or domestic@@redlight3932
@@redlight3932I would but a current Lexus over a Cadillac for similar money.
Have you tried the Cadillac CT5 V series ? They've come a long way since the dark days of the early 1980s.. Of course, they also beg the question of are they really a Cadillac or not? Certainly not in the traditional sense.
When I was a kid working as a car jockey at a Caddy dealer in Toronto back in the 90s, I remember a Deville came through with the hood ornament moved to a grille badge. I learned it was a Touring Sedan, and I thought, who the heck would buy one of those? Then 3 years ago I found one and bought it. Drove back and forth across the country, great cruiser and love the old 4.9 in it. Every time I think about selling it I go and drive it. And watch Adam's videos 🙂
I had the 4.9 in my 91 fleetwood. Such a great engine. Smooth, and had enough power to roast the front tires.
I've owned a '91 Seville with the 4.9 engine in it. Easy to work on and had good power. I remember having to change the water pump on it before I had to make a out of town trip. It wasn't difficult at all to me. The biggest pain was that the pump was held to the block with 10 small bolts (can't remember the size). The serpentine belt was easy to remove also. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Cadillac with the 4.9 in it (as long as it was properly maintained).
I remember these 4.9L motors in the small Seville and it was a very hot car. It would smoke the front tires easily, it would pull hard on the top end and also made very nice sounds. definitely felt like more than 200hp. at the time....
I will say that in my 1997 Seville, I addressed the 4.6L Northstar head gasket issue by installing head studs instead of bolts. It's got 224k on it now and it still runs strong. The only major problem I had is oil leaks from the girdle and pan and also I can't find certain body and suspension bushings because they're not made anymore. I might have to make my own.
Now that's taking matters into your own hands. 👍
Thank you, Adam, I was afraid to tell people that I drove a Pre-Northstar Allante and it ran beautifully...
It's also good to see someone mentioning the truly "on-board" diagnostics that Cadillac began in 1980. (Of course, the big question is why no one else did it!)
The Allante is one of the best classic car bargains out there.
I drive a 1986 Cadillac Sedan DeVille with the 4.1, I bought it from an older gentleman and it only has 60,000 miles on it. I haven't had a single issue and it's very smooth and quiet. It may not have the 4.5 or 4.9 version of the engine but if well taken care of the 4.1 will last many more years to come!
Thank you Adam. I liked the video. This is the V8 from Cadillac I thought was great and reliable. I liked how they improved the engine and made the changes. Too bad it was not around in the early 1980's. This engine was the era of "Cadillac Style". The engine was not a gas guzzlers. The only thing I did not care for is it required premium fuel. They should have ran this engine a little longer until they perfected the Northstar V8 and then brought the Northstar V8 out. It is nice to know that it is easy to service as well. I had heard a rumor that they were thinking about giving this engine to Oldsmobile and putting it in the Ninety Eight. I do not know how true this rumor is... I rode in Cadillacs that had this engine. It has some really good pickup too. Very excellent video.
I HAD A 91 ELDORADO BARITZZ WITH THE 4.9 , ONCE DIALED IN AND SERVICED BEAUTIFUL RIDING SHORT WHEELBASE CAR !!! POLO GREEN W / BROWN LEATHER !!!!
I had an 82 Fleetwood Brougham delagance with a goodwrench 4100 replacement engine. It was very reliable and great on gas but very slow. I also had a 93 sedan Deville. It was very easy to service and it moved quite swiftly. I did have a lot of trouble fixing a fast idle problem. My wife is still upset that I sold it and I regret selling it as well.
The 91-93 cars with the 4.9L are really underrated. Screwed together nice, surprisingly competent when pushed and sublime for eating up highway miles. While power is lower than the Northstars, the 4.9 was no slouch with a nice economy and a grunty powerband.
Looking at getting another. While the last gen DTS is a great spiritual successor to the 91-93, there's just something special about the old 4.9 cars
As a GM dealer tech in the 90s, I agree mostly with your assessment of this engine. They seemed to be worlds better than the 4.1, however, the 440T4/4T60 transmissions did not live a long life attached to the 4.9.
I had a 1994 sedan DeVille with the 4.9, in the extremely rare medium blue metallic with dark blue leather.
It was an absolutely beautiful car, a rocketship on the highway and as comfortable as anything I've driven to this day.
I never should have let the ex wife keep it...
She killed it within a year through sheer stupidity.
I still have my 1994 Sedan DeVille, but it's a metallic pink/grey. It's almost a Mystachrome, because the colour varies by light.
Right, the hell with the kids, the cars of the important part of the divorce! 😅
@@HemiChryslerDo you know the actual color? Is it dark amelyst??? That was their dark purple color.
What made that medium blue so rare? Why so little of them offered in that color?
I have a 90 fleetwood with 4.5. You finally explained my unintended acceleration (which a mechanic fixed a few years back). Also spent $$$ on injectors and did water pump. And prob other stuff. But for me it is worth it for a lovely driving car with much better space and driving dynamics than the RWD caddies of the time. Wonderful ride and lots of space.
have a current 93 deville with this engine...is a wonderful engine, and smooth love the sound of a V8!
In 1994, my wife and I married...and we discussed hiring a limo for the evening. We had a bunch of relatives visiting from out of town. We had a Grand Am and a Sentra...so I checked and a rental agency had a weekend special rate on a 1994 Cadillac Deville which was cheaper than renting a limo. We used the Deville to transport relatives to and from the airport, hotels and as our wedding car. As we were driving the car, my brother asked about the engine in the car, after watching commercials about the new Northstar V8s. So we popped the hood and our rental had the 4.9 V8. It had a nice subdued throaty rumble and plenty of power and the car was immensely comfortable. We enjoyed the car and really did a great job as a shuttle.
Happy thirtieth anniversary this year!
Worked in a shop in KC rebuilding 4.1, 4.5 and 4.9 Cads. An engine never meant to be rebuilt. Used to shudder when I’d see one of these on the road.
I had a 94 and miss it daily
I bought a used 91 Eldorado with this engine about ten years old, from the original owner. That was a great engine, and a great riding car. The only component I recall replacing was the alternator. The only other issues I really had were with minor accessories and the VATS system.
regarding the Idle Speed Control motor. If you have those surging idle issues, it’s because the tech replaced the unit and didn’t count the turns taking the bolt out of the motor. As long as you do that when you replace the unit there are no issues. Agree 100% about the Coupe DeVille. I own a 93 and it’s such a nice ride. It actually handles pretty well until you hit about 7/10s and it just under steers. You can really rip around with this car and it’s quite fun for its size.
Dad had a ‘91 Seville Black on Red with the 4.9L. It was a rocket ship and bullet proof.
Thanks Adam, for the review of the 4.9 it's been a Good ride for me, most of the time, 91coupe deville running strong 🏁
My 92 Eldorado had the 4.9, and the engine was amazing. The water pump was a pain, though.
I've said it before and ill say it again. I have owned many Cadillacs. My 1990 Coupe was my favorite.
Watched one of these win a Demolition Derby, made me really respect the engine.
Shopped for new in 91, that engine sent me to a Olds Touring sedan w/3800. Essentially a proper powered Caddy.
Can’t beat a 3800
@@br549200 Sure you can. The 3800 with a supercharger.. For that class.. But a Cadillac really needs a V8.. It's iconic for Cadillac and it's their history.. Cadillacs have used V8 (or V12 or V16) exclusively since 1915. At least until the Cimarron came along.
@@MarinCipollina yip, in the late 90’s I worked at the GM plant that built the Grand Prixs. (KC Kansas). We built a bunch of the super charged cars. They were extra peppy.
Superb presentation of this era! , off to rewatch it again.
I got a 93 sedan deville with the 4.9 it’s constructed so good that it’s been in 2 bad wrecks and it still doesn’t leak and I’ve been able to rebuild it both times you wouldn’t even know it was wrecked and it’s fun to drive
I had a Cadillac deville with the 4.9 it was flawless for me , I did have to change plugs in it 1 time it took me 2 hours
I remember that the 4.9 was a popular swap into the Monte Carlo before the 5.3ss came along.
I never did understand the idea of having an aluminum block with an iron head.
Neither did GM.
@@EvilTwinRC51
LoLs
@kevinbarry71. I assume the aluminum block was to save weight. Iron heads tend to make more power, and be more efficient because the extra heat in them atomizes fuel better. Just a guess.
@@RichMander1 I doubt it. One of the main reasons cars have aluminum cylinder heads is aluminum transfers heat much better thus allowing hotter temperatures and more efficient and more powerful engines
@EvilTwinRC51 Weight Savings. The Gardner diesel also used this approach. In the case of the Gardner, they were supremely reliable.
My very first repair experience on one of these ever was a water pump. What an initiation. Very little space to get a ratchet on the bolts if at all, very hard to remove the bolts once you get them loose, and multiple sizes of bolts requiring multiple tools. Not to mention there were, like 16 bolts to remove in general. I had another with a very strange "stumble" on acceleration that was never repaired correctly after multiple attempts by multiple mechanics. EDIT: Oh, yeah, I forgot. NAPA charged me $145 for the water pump back in 2010(ish). I told them that didn't sound right. They told me it was because it was a Cadillac. I still don't believe them to this day. That was outrageous for a stamped sheetmetal water pump.
That was one of the GOOD things about the Northstar, it had an up-top water pump at the end of one camshaft that you remove with a special socket. So that was one job that wasn't made miserable by stuffing it under a tight hood sideways.
I had to replace the water pump in a 1972 Coupe de Ville not long after purchasing it as a 3 year old used car.. That wasn't a fun job either.
@@marko7843they sure put the starter in a lovely spot though......
I had the same problem with my 4.9s, could never get them to run right, even the dealer couldn’t. Perhaps there were just some duds out there.
I am rebuilding a 92 Deville with 42k miles now. Currently reupholstering my seats and clicked on your video. Just listening to your information was perfectly what I needed to understand what I have. Very clear and interesting thank you
I remember a friend of mine family bought a brand 1993 Cadillac sedan Deville. It was dark blue with a silver bottom. They previously drove a 1990 Buick Park Avenue. The Cadillac had such a presence. It was so smooth riding and seats were very comfortable. I have to say after owning a couple of Northstar equipped Cadillac I really want one now!
I'm so glad the 4.9 ltr finally gets the love it deserves. A powerful work horse motor that was nearly indestructible.
GM's HT series started off as total crap then gradually evolved into a fairly solid engine at which time GM cancelled production. GM's Northstar series started off as crap then evolved into a fairly good engine at which point GM cancelled production. Anyone see a pattern here?
Gm logic
1) have a decent idea.
2) bean counters cheap out.
3) rush production and pass issues to customer instead of solving it during r&r
4) finally get all the bugs worked out(by then the damage to reputation is done)
5) end production of said product.
And we all wondered why the Japanese took over the upscale automotive market in the 90s. They are still making essentially the same engines they did back then.
There is no such thing as a 'good' Northstar. There is such a thing as an owner that gets 'lucky' with a Northstar..
Yup, just like the Pontiac Fiero...
Yup… by the time GM works out the bugs they cannot overcome the (deserved) bad reputation and have to dump the product. Happened to the Vega which initially was a huge hit with buyers… Fiero, as well.
My first car was an 89 sedan deville with the ht4500 and that thing was absolutely bullet proof. Gotta be the most reliable car I ever owned.
Good video. I picked up a mint 91 deville with 28000 on it with the 4.9. Runs good and is quite peppy. Glad to hear it was much improved from prior derivatives.
My only gripe is the top mointed oil filter which makes changing oil very messy. There has to be a trick im not aware of.
Cadillac 4.9's were awesome.
I had a 92 eldorado with that motor. I bought it from the original owner. It had 180k miles but you would never know. Highschool car that took premium fuel. Wasn't to smart
My father had an '85 Eldorado, the 4.1 chucked its cam at about 85k, he traded for a weird looking '90 CDV, his last car b4 his passing in 1995. Now I own 2 5.7 diesel Caddys
Another great video, Adam! I have a 63K mi., triple black 1993 Sixty Special with the "Ultra Luxury seating pkg" for sale, if you're interested....
At a good price ;)? If so, perhaps...and if it's in excellent condition. Email me.
What is the ultra luxury seating package?
Worked at GM dealerships back in the late 90s. Loved it when one of these came in or if we had one on the lot. Great power delivery.. Torque steer FTW!
After all the hits to Cadillac's reputation in the 80s, it's amazing that they didn't discover the Northstar was a timebomb, and when they did, they didn't fix it immediately instead of 12 years after its introduction. It's also amazing no one ratted out whoever was responsible and why, but it's ancient history now.
My personal opinion: the 4.9 was probably the best engine as far as combining power, and reliability. We know the 4100 was junk And the 4.5 was a lot better In reliability and power. But they finally got It almost perfect with the 4.9. Then they made the Northstar. It was admittedly a lot more powerful. But it returned back to the junk status as far as reliability goes.
The 4.5 TBI was the sweet spot for new reliability wise. No pesky injector problems.
the reason the 0-60 times were rather high for N* engines was the excessive wheelspin and aggressive traction control system. power was cut in half in first gear at full throttle, for example.
Northstar had a LOT more pull at higher speed than the 4.9.
Thank you so much for recognizing this engine! I daily drive a 91 sedan deville with 70k and I love the car. However, it sat for about 10 years before I bought it so I've unfortunately had to do a waterpump, I have every oil leak imaginable, the new mains are going in soon .030 under (closest i i could find to what gms original fix at .032 undersize). The tps broke while i was replacing the injectors so theres that. Then there's the 4t60... overall great cars if maintained tho
man...everything you said about the 4.9 i totally agree with. my father loved his 1991 seville sts. i have to admit it was a little rocket ship off the line. he never had an issue with that engine. i do have to say i think the 4.1 which he had a few of, was a smoother, quieter engine but took about a week to get to 65 mph. it was so bad i remember when he had the cruise on in his '82 fleetwood the car would have to go into passing gear to get up the hill. lol
I’ve had a ‘91 STS and a ‘92 STS which is running strong in ‘24! Best American road cars!
My old buddy's grandmother had a 91 Seville with the 4.9 L. That thing would do huge burnouts all day, we just got our licenses . The car took it better than a Northstar would have.
When Cadillac came out with the HT4100, why didn't they do things really different and possibly gotten way better results?? Bear with me here. Imagine that Cadillac used aluminum heads and block, actual gaskets and the heads were DOHC/4 Valves Per Cylinder with Port Fuel Injection? It would truly be a "High Technology 4100".
I wouldn't say that an engine making north of 200 HP is only in performance cars, Mercedes had a 3.2 liter straight 6 that churned out power a bit above 200HP on their S320 and E320 cars, and a 5.0 V-8 that made above 300 HP, which was used in the S500.
Had 4 80s Coupe 4100's. 3 of which were lowrider cars, summer only. Just one failed, which I drove in the Minnesota winter a few times out of desperation when my fwd car was in the shop.
And then came the northstar......
I suppose until I die, I will never understand GM screwing up the basics in such profound ways between 1970-ish (Vega) and 1988 (ending the Fiero after FINALLY getting it right), plus the various Cadillac engines and Cimarron.
If they had only gotten it RIGHT by keeping things simple and only introducing technology after very, very thorough R&D, the Vega would've been a homerun. All Cadillacs, including the Cimarron, would be looked back upon fondly, same for the Oldsmobile Diesels.
Let's not leave out the Chevy Citation.
I didn't forget the Northstar. That was introduced later and was another shining example of GM getting it Generally Mediocre.
@johna.4334 Yeah, between the Vega and Citation, whew. Quality was a word not spoken there.
ive had Cadillacs with the 4.1, the 4.5 and the 4.9 engines. the 4.9 was a little rocket ship off the line up to around 45-50 mph. the 4.5 was slightly less robust and the 4.1 took about a week to get up to 65 mph. that being said i really think the 4.1 started, idled and ran the smoothest of the 3 engines.
The only problem with my 4.9 was I had to use a STP oil filter because it had a check valve. With the filter being up high on the engine the oil would drain down over night and the engine would knock when it was first started for a couple of seconds. One morning before starting the engine I removed the ac oil filter and noticed it had very little oil in it. So I did the same thing with the STP filter and it was full of oil an no more knocks. Sold the car with over 280000 miles on it and never had any problems with that engine.
During Cash For Clunkers, I was a porter at a Chevy store. After the clunkers had their oil replaced with sodium silicate, it was my job to take the car out back, and rev the engine until it died. Most engines lasted 30 seconds or less. I got in a '94 Deville one day, real shame that was its fate, was a real pretty, clean car. It set the record, lasting about 3 minutes of the engine bouncing off the rev limiter before seizing up.
What a disgrace that program was!
Criminal waste and fraud against all of us!
That was an absurd,destroying good cars in name of madness.
Only a demented like Obama could come with something like that
So many classics destroyed for pennies on the he dollar.
I could never do that!!!!!
I’m a professional mechanic sinds 1996, and stil a real mechanic fix en build it!!!
Not destroying!!!
It must be something American to destroy everything even the good stuff!
I really miss my 91 Coupe Deville, that engine was great, but I would like to know why the eat water pumps. Great ride and looked good and was way better than anything my friends had at the time, it was a faster than a lot of "sports' cars at the time too.
I had a 1993 Cadillac deville with that 4.9 and it was so funny to other kids in their loud ass civics and other lil cars
This is the only time I've ever heard anyone praise a throttle body injection engine.
TBI is simple and reliable, though doesn't enable a lot of power.
I did a water pump replacement job on a 4.9 (1991 Eldorado), not that bad as I remember. I sold the car because I found it uninspiring and also because of the oddity of the engine!
Ya know, the Northstar gets a bad rap because of the head gasket issue. Which is a shame, cause it's actually an extremely well-designed engine. Light, efficient, good power. And the head gasket issue CAN be fixed with an aftermarket head fastener solution. And if you replace the head fasteners, it's an absolutely rock-solid engine that you'll likely never have any major problems from again. I'm pretty sure there's a sandrail company in Cali that builds an 1100HP twin turbo sandrail using Northstars. It's also worth noting that GM did eventually fix the head gasket issue in the N*. Unfortunately, by that point, the damage was already done. It's too bad, really.
My Cadillac tech prefers the 4.9.....no knocks.....as you say.....don't dog any of them. My 88 with its T-440 hydrostatic performs well. I treat her right!
Hydromatic
I had a beautiful Silver 1988 Cadillac Sedan Deville with the 4.5-liter V8. Unfortunately, Cadillac used defective or cheap intake manifold seals. So, one night while driving home, the car wasn't running right by the time I got home. The next day I check the oil and I have a gray sludge. I took it to Cadillac and they replace the intake manifold gaskets. No engine damage than God.
The real test would be to have stuck that 4.5 or 4.9 engines in a large rear wheel drive instead of front wheel drive cars.
The Fiero Factory in Alabama had cars with these engines lined up for transplanting.
I thought these were disastrous engines from GM. If anyone says otherwise, I am not convinced. I can’t think of another bulletproof engine as GM’s 3.8 V6 and 2.8 V6.
Had a 92 gold key Seville great car ran like a tank
Adam, I agree 💯. The 4.9 was excellent and the engine Cadillac desperately needed. It arrived years too late and didn't stay long enough. It also seems to be the engine that established the trend of GM, and especially Cadillac, of finally getting the engine right almost too late. This would be directly replaced by the Northstar V8, another engine that only overcame its failures toward the end of the production run. And then came the 3.6 v6... Can we say timing chains, class?
Um- in between those Caddy V8s and that stupid boat anchor 3.6 was an engine you may have heard of though -the 3800 series I, II, and III. GM does occasionally get them right, if only just🙂 I've driven just about all of them -no one would argue they at least knocked the 3800 out of the park consistantly.
@jeffstonecipher1594 But let's not forget how crappy the original 3.8 V6 was, especially when it was still an odd-fire engine.
And let's not forget that GM pretty gave that engine away to Jeep-Kaiser, and then scrambled to buy it back from AMC after the 1st oil embargo shook things up.
The 3800 started out as a complete abortion.
All, true. At least Cadillac wasn't the "uterus" for that abortion -at least to my knowledge they didn't have any 3800 powered cars. Honestly maybe they should have -Adams Cimarron would be one hell of a rocket ship with that power plant🙂@@johneckert1365
People rip on me for it. But my 4.5 200hp port injected in my alante (phase 2 car) seems to be treating me well. It drives real well and is very responsive. Between the engine and the lower bearing (lower than the sts) it goes quite well for the time in a small bit not really light car.
No surging issues on my 4.5.
I have the last of the 4.9 in my '95 Cadillac Deville and it hauls ass.
I have a 1995 4.9 Sedan Deville with about 121k on it. I don’t daily it of course but It’s been a really nice cruiser car. If there is a mechanic in Charlotte, NC area in the comments that works on these types of Cadillacs please let me know. It’s hard to find good mechanics or shops that are willing to work on these classics.
Test drove one new in ‘85 and decided I preferred my ‘73!
I still have my 1993 '60 Special! 144,000mi
The water pump is super easy on 94-95 devilles vs the 91-93...there is a lot of subtle changes in each year of 4.9L the video didn't go over.they fixed the main bearing thump by 94... virtually non existent on 94-95... also sail on they called it which the car would accelerate on its own(barely)tho was from a bad idle control motor which works in tandem with throttle position sensor... you can't adjust them separately...simple fix is too replace the icm or spray silicone and clean the icm needle...and if you replace you have to keep the same screw length or else you screw up the tandem parameters of throttle position sensor which is set to the icm.
My best friend in high school had a black Eldorado with this motor, the Flowmaster 40 cross-flow muffler for a 3rd-gen F-body fit it perfectly and sounded AWESOME. I had a pretty hot 327 in a '78 El Camino with a 4-speed, but his car was widely regarded as 'cooler' by most of our friends, haha! They might've been dumbasses, but it was a fun, good-sounding car. We put a water pump on it, it was miserable, haha! The worst part was him totaling the car the next week, haha! It would idle in 'D' as fast as my El Camino would idle in 'R' (idle at 900 rpm). It would idle through 2nd, kinda crazy.
'70 472 CI before emissions and decompression.
4.9 Achilles heel was fuel injectors going bad and ecu/grounding issues.
My dad had a fully loaded El Dorado with the gold package it made to 280 000 before sold to grease money who got 110000 before computer and transmission blew up and kill it
At 180k I put new mains rods and oil pump in our 93 Sedan Deville to keep the mains quiet.shes got 220k now,shes been parked awhile but fires right up and is whisper quiet.
Was that really expensive to do? Have new main rods put in?
@klwthe3rd Not if you do it yourself.The oil pan is easily removed with the starter dropped out of the way.
I did it in a couple hours in our driveway.Just do one at a time.
@klwthe3rd Can't remember what parts cost but also I did it 15 years ago.
The 4.9 was a pretty solid engine. GM worked the bugs out of the design and they were reliable. The 4.9 was and is much better than the current 3.6 V-6 that's found in so many GM cars. I think the 3.6 might be a worse engine than both the early 4100 and the Northstar.
Agreed. The 3.6 liter in my opinion makes the HT4100 look like a saint.
I rented a Caddy with the 4.9L engine and it was fun to drive. Very punchy.
Don’t forget the oil galley plugs popping out losing oil pressure on the 4.9
Yep Adam, GM made amends with these engines, that's 4 sure. Cheers fm Damo😊🙌
i know someone that has 89-92 4 door deville.
Every one of these I have seen has had a main bearing issue that causes the motor to tick. The tick steadily gets worse and worse and the car will sound like a diesel. However, my sister's cadillac with the 4.9 ran with this problem for 250,000 miles and was still running when my step dad got rid of it.
The Eldorado with the 4.9 would be my choice. The smallest car with the largest engine.
A better choice would be the XLR V Series with the supercharged 4.4 Liter Northstar engine, good for 443 HP and 414 ft lbs of torque. Brakes from the Corvette parts bin and weighs in at a rather svelte 3800 lbs. Plus it's rear wheel drive. 0 - 60 in 4.7 seconds, 1/4 mile in 13 seconds flat.
4.9s were pretty good. Suddenly we were seeing a Caddy mill that could eat front motor mounts lol. But like all of this series of engines, it was an oil leaker. I recall my service manager telling owners of leaky Caddys "Oil is cheap, and so is cardboard." LOL Yikes!
That's incorrect on the 4.9 it actually had 275 ft torque power not 270. 200 horse that's correct. I've owned these vehicles for a number of years, I actually have a '91 a '92 and a '93 Cadillac sedan DeVille with the 4.9.. never had a head gasket issues, I've owned my '92 Cadillac sedan DeVille for 20 years these are actually great engines minimal issues just your typical maintenance issues that's it, other than that excellent engine one of the best engines Cadillac ever made..💯👍🏼