- #4657 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by xhe518
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:18 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 7:04 am)
The downsized A-body Malibu didn't appear until 1978.
Yep, and it didn't get the thicker Seville-like "C" pillars until it was "freshened" in 1980 or 1981.
The original Seville was based on the old Nova.
|
- #4658 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [fintail]
by lemko
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:22 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: fintail (Feb 28, 2008 12:07 pm)
"Uncle Tom" McCahill described the 1955 Chevrolet described as a "junior Oldsmobile with a Cadillac rear and a Ferrari grille." You can also see a lot of 1948 Oldsmobile influence in the design of the 1949-51 Chevrolets.
I'd say the 1976 Cadillac Seville influenced a lot of late 1970s/early 1980s GM vehicles. Take a look at the rather upright Seville-esque rear roofline on a 1980 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight for instance or the very Seville-like front end of an early 1980s Chevrolet Caprice. I, for one, believe the first-generation Seville is a classic design. It was exponentially better than Lincoln's feeble effort the Versailles.
|
- #4659 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [xhe518]
by lemko
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:25 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: xhe518 (Feb 28, 2008 12:18 pm)
And those who don't know would hardly recognize that fact looking at the car. You could immediately see a Granada lurking under all the Lincoln-esque cliches of the Versailles. Cadillac messed-up in 1982 trying to pull another rabbit out of the hat with the mediocre J-car platform resulting in the awful Cimmaron. Well, there was no rabbit that time, rather something the rabbit left in the hat after a delicious carrot and celery dinner.
|
- #4660 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by fintail
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:27 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 12:22 pm)
I can agree with your views on that Seville. Compared to the rest of the brand in 1975, it appears to be from a different planet. Easily the most tolerable Caddy of that period, not a bad car as far as I know, either A Fleetwood Talisman with the airbag option might be the most over the top and luxurious, but a Seville would be better to actually live with.
|
- #4661 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by xhe518
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:30 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 12:25 pm)
I think the second-gen Seville for 1980-81 was a disaster too - styling wise. I guess some people liked it - I always thought that hunchback look was terrible. Although, I liked the looks of the 1979 Eldorado
The mid-70's to mid-80's were pretty much dark times for the domestics - not too many great or memorable cars really.
|
- #4662 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [xhe518]
by lemko
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:38 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: xhe518 (Feb 28, 2008 12:30 pm)
I'd say the very worst years for Cadillac had to be 1981 through 1988. I wouldn't touch a 1981 Cadillac with a 39 1/2 foot pole. All they had was the V-8-6-4, (which I hear is actually a pretty good engine if you disconnect the prehistoric DOD controls) and the dismal diesel. It got worse in 1982-83 with the advent of the Cimmaron and the HT4100 engine. I drove a 1983 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham with that engine. It went from 0-60 in February to April.
|
- #4663 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by circlew
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:46 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 12:38 pm)
Yeah, my dad's '84 FWB beat you by a week!
Regards,
OW
|
- #4664 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by xhe518
-
Feb 28, 2008 (12:58 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 12:38 pm)
I'd say the very worst years for Cadillac had to be 1981 through 1988. I wouldn't touch a 1981 Cadillac with a 39 1/2 foot pole. All they had was the V-8-6-4, (which I hear is actually a pretty good engine if you disconnect the prehistoric DOD controls) and the dismal diesel. It got worse in 1982-83 with the advent of the Cimmaron and the HT4100 engine. I drove a 1983 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham with that engine. It went from 0-60 in February to April.
Yep- and it didn't get any better with the 1985 downsized Deville and the 1986 Eldorado/Seville....
|
- #4665 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by sls002
-
Feb 28, 2008 (3:25 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 12:22 pm)
The 1976 Seville started out as a Chevy Nova, but after Cadillac got done revising the body, it was a very classy looking car and a separate body. The second generation was moved onto the E-body. While this saved money, the car was no longer a "small" Cadillac.
|
- #4666 of 6098
-
Re: The Only Luxury Car... [pmc4]
by jimbres
-
Feb 28, 2008 (4:11 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: pmc4 (Feb 28, 2008 6:26 am)
Jimbres, you said that the 80's Cadillacs were in your own words "pathetic". Why you said this I don't know. But anyway, the reason why I asked you what your opinion of the 80's BMW's was because you said Cadillacs were "pathetic" yet you also own a BMW.
OK, now I understand the question. Style wise, the E30 generation of the 3-series, which was sold in the US between '82 & '91, struck me as handsome, understated & overpriced. Although I admired it, I didn't fall in love with it & never considered buying one.
Overall, German cars were overpriced in the US market in the 1980s. I saw this clearly when I popped into a Mercedes showroom in Munich in the mid-1980s & saw a new 190E with sticker price of about $8K. That was just over half of the MSRP of a comparable car in the US at that time. Seeing that pretty much killed any desire I might have had to buy a German car. (Actually, we already had one: a 1980 Audi 5000, which was a both a wonderful car to drive & a maintenance nightmare.)
I agree with you: the 1st generation Seville was a classy, handsome car. I forgot about this car when I said earlier that Cadillac had lost its way after 1973. The 1976-79 Seville might've been the best looking sedan on the US market, irrespective of country of origin, at that time.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views 
