Talk:Northstar engine series

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled 1

It's downright dishonest to write a Northstar engine article and evade mentioning the head-gasket problem. http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-deville-1985-2005-including-1985/81582-northstar-head-gasket-issue-corrected.html 173.210.125.42 (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Disgruntled Old Coot has read MANY negatives about the Northstar engine at various message boards, pro=written articles; both Web and print-media based.

With so MANY negatives expressed I fear the "main" blurb on the front page does not properly inform readers about the apparently problematic engine.

What about folks considering buying a Northstar-equipped conveyance? Should they not be made aware hereabouts regarding what MAY be a dern' good reason to avoid such a vehicle?

As "it stands," the current main page reads, in my effervescent opinion, akin to a technical article of minimal use to many BUT, admittedly, of great use to those seeking objective facts.

However; in a "real world" situation wouldn't it be more helpful if the main page at least reflected a "reality" that considers the "human element"?

At least include a "note" mentioning the possibility of engine problems that have made this engine one that potential buyers MAY want to avoid.

Think of the children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Obbop (talk) 14:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC) with love from your local neighborhood Obbop[reply]

Untitled 2

The article says production stopped in July, 2010. Did they build a large inventory of engines and parts? I have a 2011 Lucerne Super that seems to have been built in October,2010. When purchasing it there were a list of other Lucerne Supers built more recently than this one. They all, including mine, have the same engine as the DTS Platinum. My understanding is that Buick stopped building Supers in January, 2011. My basic question is when did GM actually stop building that engine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.214.225 (talk) 02:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updates and Corrections?

The tables seem to be accurate but there are numerous errors in the text, most minor but some not so minor, and one that strikes me as armchair speculation, that overheating can crack the block. I have never heard of a cracked Northstar block; I have heard of a shop that roll them around on the floor instead of keeping them on an engine stand and having problems with breaks in the water jacket.

The Northstar is not "prone to head leakage." Nearly all head gasket problems occur at high mileage (occasionally on older cars that spend a lot of time in storage) and pulled head bolts are found on disassembly. Corrosion in the head bolt holes is usually apparent on drilling for installation of inserts. Every case that I have heard of has a coolant maintenance history that is unknown, or of no coolant changes for many years. When coolant goes acid, any aluminum engine will have problems eventually. The huge problem here is with the Northstar, that problem is often a pulled head bolt. Looking at reported cases, there seems to be a seven year spike in cases, and a nine-year spike. Cars seven years old have had their coolant go out-of-date and then have another two years for acid coolant to find its way into the head bolt wells and do the damage; the nine-year spike may be due to lease returns that are reconditioned at two years.

Continuing to drive any car with head leakage is pretty strong abuse.

Perhaps getting information and data from auto help forums is not the best way to provide Wikipedia quality articles. People don't go to online help bulletin boards because they don't have a problem, and those that do are rarely auto techs, and even techs Other sources are available, such as industry trade associations and journals. If you go to any of the forums, you will find that nearly everyone there has an opinion that, under examination, turns out to be anecdote-based armchair engineering. We can do better. -motorfingers- (talk) 20:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The head gasket problem with these engines is very well documented, I don't understand why you're pretending it was anything but what it was, poor design. 47.45.248.150 (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

L37 Rated at 320 hp for 2000-2004 STS, ETC

I believe that the L37 got a horsepower boost with a full redesign in 2000, to 320 for the L37. The LD8 stayed at 275 hp, I believe. The Cadillac STS page mentions the 320 hp rating beginning in 2004. -motorfingers- 08:39, 1 April 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motorfingers (talk • contribs)

The North Star design

The North Star engine was named that way because it was made in the Province of Quebec in Canada. The company that was making the engines was not GMC but a rarely mentionned French company that was making the former GM V6 which came from the famous Renault-Volvo-Peugeot V6 from the 70s. The, GMC wanted a top rated engine to power its Cadillac to match the performance and quality of Europeans models. They wanted to apply overhead camshafts which they did not know. That is why they asked that French company which handled that very well of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.234.110.186 (talk) 01:46, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Northstar Desgined by GM Powertrain Development in Pontiac MI

The direct ancestors of the Cadillac Northstar V8 were the Olds-developed Quad 4 HO, from which the internal two-stage cam chain, the bore (minus 1 mm) and the stroke, and other structural features are very, very similar, and the Chevrolet LT-8, a 32-valve DOHC V8 designed with input and participation from Lotus and used exclusively as an optional engine in 1990-1995 Corvettes. The man most associated with it is Ken Shier; the engine, like all modern engines, was developed by a large team over several years. See http://www.gmpowertrain.com/about-us/pontiac-development-testing-facility.html for a current blog. -- motorfingers : Talk 23:43, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ran Across Blog from Memeber of Original Northstar Design Team

https://history.gmheritagecenter.com/wiki/index.php/Dyno_man_on_the_NorthStar -- motorfingers : Talk 23:46, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fire cause on intake

Why and what causes fire on in side the intake Condmonic (talk) 23:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Short North?

What's the origin of the entry that the GM engineers referred to the PV6 as the Short North? I was part of the Premium V development team from before the start of the V6 program and I have no recollection of that name being used, not even once. Shortstar was used a handful of times by a few people but it was quickly abandoned; we all called it the PV6. Chilehed (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you put the transmission from the 2004 Seville northstar into the 2004 cts 3.6

Need to swap 2600:1005:B191:1A87:400:644A:16E6:AE73 (talk) 20:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]