GTP Cool Wall: 1998-2004 Cadillac Seville

  • Thread starter Wiegert
  • 46 comments
  • 3,346 views

1998-2004 Cadillac Seville

  • Total voters
    101
  • Poll closed .
Wiegert

Wiegert

Premium
13,377
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
1998-2004 Cadillac Seville nominated by @FerrariF1GT

2002-cadillac-seville-2.jpg


Body Style: 4-door sedan
Engine: 4.6L V8
Power: 275 hp (SLS), 300 hp (STS)
Torque: 300 ft-lbs (SLS), 295 ft-lbs (STS)
Weight: 1800 kg (SLS), 1815 kg (STS)
Transmission: 4-speed automatic
Drivetrain: Front-engine, front-wheel drive
Additional Information: General Motors introduced the fifth-generation Seville in 1998. Now, the Seville is based on GM's G-Body platform. The STS had one of the highest horsepower ratings of any front-wheel drive car on the market at the time. This Seville was also available in right-hand drive and was the first Cadillac to be imported and sold in left-hand driving countries.​

1998-cadillac-seville-1.jpg

DSC_0182.jpg
cadillac_seville_sts_uk-spec_1.jpg
2001-cadillac-seville-4.jpg
autowp.ru_cadillac_seville_sts_uk-spec_5.jpg

2001-Cadillac-Seville-STS-int-270099.JPG

 
Heavy, only available with 4-speed auto and power is sent to the wrong wheels. Only saved from SU by the fact it held a record based on its power output.

*looks at 5th Additional image*

Wait, this was officially sold in the UK with right hand drive? That's got to be the only one to ever exist on British shores...
 
Cool. Only because I got invited to a Potampkin Cadillac "track day" at Giants Stadium. Got to sample the Eldorado as well, before the cars were in showrooms.
Didn't matter the cars were fwd. The instructors just said mash the throttle and listen to the V8.
 
Compared to the same era Lincoln Continental it looks appealing. The car has good proportions, it almost looks like a larger version of a certain Renault 1980s effort from a few angles to me.

Uncool, but not seriously so.
 
enthusia.avi

It looks fabulous and I'd love to have one but it is a GM rolling coffin.

Uncool
 
This generation of the Seville was definitely one of the best looking Americans sedans of the 90s and early 00s, let alone one of the best looking GM products. The exterior styling was on the orthodox end of the spectrum, but was also very sleek and crisp. For its price, it had a lot to offer. The '98-'04 Seville was said to be the best Seville by many, and I agree.

But unfortunately, even though this Seville had much more technology features than the previous generation, it was still behind pretty much any European or Japanese luxury sedan (sold in the USA). European rivals had significantly better build quality, they handled more responsively, and had more up-to-date technology features. Also, the Seville had numerous reliability issues, which shouldn't occur in a luxury sedan.

Cadillac, as a brand, was going through some rough times by the late '90s. Their cars may have been comfortable and luxurious, but they weren't competitive enough. Despite the fact that this Seville was a much better car than its predecessor in many ways, it only proved how Cadillac was uncompetitive compared to other brands. It didn't help Cadillac's image or boost market share in any way, shape, or form. And while cars like the E39 5-Series were favored by "yuppies", the Seville (especially the luxury-appointed SLS) was almost exclusively bought by seniors. Seville was too conservative as a whole to be a desirable car to people younger than 50-ish.

The STS did not prove any more successful than the regular Seville. Contrary to Cadillac's marketing pitches, the STS was a faux sports car. Though it did crank out a decent amount of power, more than any other GM sedan at the time, there were other setbacks. STS simply did not have the proper drivetrain to be a true sports sedan, therefore it was outclassed by European rivals (540i, E55 AMG). Because of the drivetrain issue, the STS made many buyers think that Cadillac, as well as other GM brands, were incapable at crafting a genuine sports sedan.

Don't get me wrong, the Seville wasn't one of the worst cars ever. But a car that's instantly outclassed, and is a "faux sports car", will never be cool.
 
Last edited:
Turbo
Grand-tourer maybe?
Click to expand...

That'd make a lot more sense, yes.

For clarification, when I said "yes" earlier, I was referring to the two modern hot hatches (since the SM doesn't fall into "FWD and lots of horsepower" bucket). It seems I didn't actually cast a vote on the Citroen when it was up, but if I had, it would've been an SZ.
 
-Fred-
Is that post ownership or did you walk into that knowing this? :P
Click to expand...
I knew it was a terrible idea going in.


But oh the things I've learned since, even though mine has been amazingly well sorted machine that I would happily buy again.









The question is, do I go over this car in this thread or the thread that is going to immediately follow this one in a couple days. Even if the E39 had not come out and set the benchmark well out of Cadillac's grasp, GM had already doomed this car; but then again this car wasn't the one that suffered the most. The next "generation" STS was. Nor was this car the one that had set most of the problems in motion. The Greyhound Seville was. I already touched on the biggest one a bit here, but this car was the one where GM made it worse. So I'm not sure yet.
 
Last edited:
I would like to add that big engines, lots of power and FWD equal SU. That's why let's say those don't fit those categories
 

Latest Posts

Back