- #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.
|
- #4668 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [xhe518]
by lemko
-
Feb 28, 2008 (6:33 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: xhe518 (Feb 28, 2008 12:58 pm)
I was a junior in college when the downsized FWD Cadillac DeVilles and Fleetwoods debuted. I had always loved Cadillacs, but I really feared that I had nothing to which I could look forward to purchasing after I graduated. Thank God, GM was smart enough to keep the big RWD Brougham. If Cadillac kept building cars like the 1985 FWD C-bodies, the Cimmaron, and the radically downsized Eldos and Sevilles, I doubt very much I'd be driving a Cadillac today. In fact, I doubt very much Cadillac would still exist.
|
- #4669 of 6098
-
Re: You got it backwards... [lemko]
by circlew
-
Feb 29, 2008 (3:54 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Feb 28, 2008 6:33 pm)
I am the first one that hopes GM continue with cars like the CTS. My gut tells me don't hold my breath. When history keeps repeating itself ad nauseum, you become sick of being sick! As the dollar bleeds vs. global currencies, it's a perfect time to gain market share. Looking at the timing, GM never seems to get it right!
There should be tons of CTS and Enclaves on the lots to choose from. Instead, I see tons of Lexus, BMW and Mercs. Anyone get the same feeling here?
Regards,
OW
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views 
