(first posted 11/16/2016) Yesterday I happened to visit the Opel service center I wrote about here, as I needed to clarify things in regards to upgrading my Astra’s multimedia system with Android Auto. I stumbled upon this bulbous-shaped Nineties luxury. I asked and received permission to photograph it.
By the early Nineties, people in Israel had enough money- and far less Holocaust issues- to skip the big Cadillacs and choose German made offerings, so they were becoming scarce. Acres of low quality plastic and fake wood inside the cabin didn’t help matters either. This is why I was surprised to find this very rare mid Nineties car, which looked to be not in bad condition:
Opening the door to photograph inside, I heard the distinct “ding ding” we all know.
This angle shows some dust on the car- maybe it was stored somewhere and now about to be awaken?
The emblems don’t lie, it is indeed a Northstar V8, I’m guessing a 4.6 liter LD8 unit.
Personally I never liked the style of these. They always seemed too fat, too heavy, especially at the rear, as this photo clearly shows. It’s as if they tried to restyle the previous generation with an “updated” 1990’s touch, but failed (oddly enough, styling the same era Seville was much better). I think big Cadillacs seemed to have lost their way at the time, and besides image, I honestly can’t see why would anyone buy it over a, say, Buick Roadmaster.
I may be harsh with the “deadly sin” headline but that’s why the question mark. Feel free to comment, of course.
I have mixed feelings on these. As you suggest, the styling is fat and heavy, and a bit awkward from some angles. The 1989 – 1993 DeVille was the only FWD DeVille that I ever felt truly worked.
A few rides in these as rentals produced mixed feelings as well. It was a business situation, and we had five bigger guys stuffed in – it wasn’t exactly luxury, but it sure beat trying to stuff into a FWD Ford or Toyota of this era. It was a testimony that soon the renter of a large Cadillac sedan would probably try and get a Tahoe on the next go around. Quality on these was always a bit suspect, the chrome window sill trim on the rear doors was notorious for bowing up in the middle. Styling was unique and American, but the American prestige market was still pretty focused on BMW and Mercedes (and RWD), and generally wasn’t digging this.
As fat as they may be, these generally look astonishingly small when parked in mixed traffic in the American Midwest. Some intersections today are simply sedan free zones, and these are quite small, if short and fat.
I don’t know if it’s a deadly sin, but it certainly looks like a casket
Comment of the day! (said as I clean off the bits of lunchtime sandwich I just laughed over my computer screen) 😀
Would fit right into my 1989 Sedan dé Ville.
This hearse looks very European. I wonder if it’s made from a regular DeVille or coachbuilder package.
It is made from a regular deVille by a coachbuilder in Denmark.
It has 190K miles on the meter and is still in business.
Friends had a ’94 Deville (not a higher-trim variant) and without the Northstar engine. One of them had always wanted a Cadillac, and in his early 70s, finally got to have one. My impressions? Well, first of all, I was put off by all the plastic and leather creaking against itself in the cabin. Second, I couldn’t get past how incredibly loud and rumbly the A/C blower was at its highest speed. (However, at least the climate control did work well.) The car was certainly spacious, with lots of stretch-out room. The seats, though, were unremarkable in both comfort and support. I got to drive it occasionally; I wasn’t impressed by the reluctance of the car to stay firmly centered on the road. And I thought more noise of all sorts intruded into the cabin of what was supposed to be a luxury car. Fit and finish? Ho-hum. Lots of seams everywhere, and generally it looked just a bit slapdash. Our 2003 Civic Hybrid was actually fitted together far better.
The problem I had with this generation is that it was built on the Seville platform. That was definitely not designed to give a traditional Deville ride. Allowing the Northstar to creep in was also done for expediency, not that it’s power curves were appropriate to the mission.
So here you had a car that was still the volume model but the mission had been diluted. Critics won’t have noticed but the owners did.
The wood was real though.
Actually the 1992 Seville used the Deville platform, but updated it, as the FWD G platform was not ready. Then the 1994 Devilles were updated to the Seville improvements.
I owned a 1996 Deville, with the same color as the interior of this example. I inherited it from my pap, who gave me his 1984 Sedan deVille as my first car.
For a high school kid, it was great – I could stuff all my buddies in it with room to spare, and the trunk allowed me to move myself in and out of my college dorm.
The bad part? Needed a transmission rebuild before 100k miles, went thru two blower motors in two years, and it needed all new coil packs and a ignition control module by the time it hit 75k in 2007.
The interior of the 84 felt better in almost every way – the plastic on the sides of the seat broke, the tone/balance/fader knobs on the radio were cheap plastic, and the landau top was nowhere near as padded as the 84.
Only saving grace was the N* engine – it just hauled ass and never ran out of breath. I sold the car at 118k and got into a 95 Regal to save gas since I wad going between home, college and work.
Still miss the car, but not the plastic interior. I did buy the dash parts of a Concours to get the Zebrano wood trim.
I have enjoyed my 1994 Concours for years. It does look like a delightfully bloated swine, but it is not ostentatious and it is as reliable as anything.
I too think these look fat and ungainly. Don’t get me wrong, I’d still gladly cruise in one but the 89-93 and the 2000-05 look much better, imo. The big RWD Fleetwoods wore this design language much better.
My impression of driving these Northstar Caddies was that they were pretty ho-hum quality wise. Not terrible but not “Standard of the World” either. The Northstar (if it was behaving) propelled these sleds at a pretty decent clip though.
We’re I in the market for a nicer big sedan back in the late 90s early 2000’s I would have went with a Lincoln Town Car or even a Chrysler Concorde Limited.
Probably because they knew old B/D-Body wasn’t going to last long, design studio made the smaller DeVille as close as possible to the Fleetwood and tried to make a smooth transaction from RWD to FWD. Of course the difference still shows.
Just imagine a C-Body Park Avenue and DeVille to Roadmaster to Fleetwood.
I’m the opposite, dominic. I find the 2000-2005 completely without character, the trademark Cadillac taillight mere blobs with no definition and the grille as imposing as a Chevy Malibu’s [as in not… no presence, identity, bereft of any gravitas].
At least the tail lights on these are recognizable as being a Cadillac and the grille is not so anonymous.
I love the almost cowboy hat in the back. Are there cattle ranches in Israel, Yohai71 ?
I think the 2000-05 DeVille looks like a graceful big sedan and rides nicely for a FWD unibody car but yes, it is too anonymous. If you de-badged it and said it was a Chevy, most people probably wouldn’t blink.
The 89-93 DeVille/Fleetwoods look unabashedly good to me, and now the CT6 looks pretty good to me as well. They drive nicely to boot, I think the new 8 sp. tranny is better than the older 6 sp. one.
The XTS is homely from most angles but at certain angles it looks ok. I don’t much care how it drives either. The 3.6 feels kind of gutless or strangled and the ride just isn’t all that great without the stabilitrak which is troublesome.
That is one thing, the FWD Devilles and DTS’ rode very nicely and made for great road cars regardless of their looks.
Agreed. I just couldn’t get enthused about the 00-05. No Cadillac there, that always distressed me, sort of like “what happened?” .
The DTS seemed to add something to the design, especially the tail lights.
But take my opinion with a pound of salt. I always thought the 86-88 Cadillacs were good looking.
My parents had a cranberry red metallic Coupe DeVille with white leather and half vinyl top that probably has made me biased. It was sensational looking to my mind. I liked how it drove and the quiet.
You do realize that the gutless 3.6 XTS will out accelerate any Northstar 00-11 Deville/DTS right? There is nothing gutless about a properly broken in 3.6 LFX motor in any XTS/Impala or any other application I have driven.
I’m well aware of the stats, it’s a totally subjective sense. It just feels like it doesn’t have good get up and go or throttle response.
The 3.6 does not have the torque that the RWD Northstar did, and is noticeable. But opening the throttle will drop the CTS into a lower gear giving better performance. My SRX had the 6 speed automatic though…
I had an STS 3.6 DI for a month in 2013. Waiting for the downshift to get the revs above 1200 rpm and accelerate drove me bananas. I don’t know why people want all these gears nowadays–bragging rights?
I think the reason for new cars and trucks with so many gears is so engines can more finely tuned for maximum efficiency at a specific RPM. Semi Trucks have been using that idea for years.
Yes, cattle is being raised mostly up north, in the Golan Heights. However, I doubt this car belongs to a cowboy of any sort. Here they drive Hiluxes and the like.
LOL. Thanks, yohai. I love your reports from Israel.
The biggest DEADLY SIN of the Concours is that you got the “pleasure” of the Northstar while the regular Deville still had the 4.9 ltr V8 which made much less power but was significantly more reliable.
I know which one I’d like to find at an estate sale.
Yup, the Northstar is really the only egregious aspect of the Concours. I’ve mentioned my 2 neighbors here before, both driving ’95 DeVilles with the 4.9’s. Both cars have over 150k on the clocks, and both are long-term “keepers” as far as their owners are concerned. They’re not my cup of tea, but if you’re into that kind of a car the 4.9 powered DeVilles are not bad. The interior material quality and fit & finish is no worse than any 90’s car, the electronics may have quirks here & there, but neither of my neighbors have had any significant problems with theirs and they won’t part with them. The only real cosmetic defects on either of theirs have to do with aftermarket roof treatments and cracked dashpads from the Florida sun, but overall they keep on truckin’.
A visit to Israel is on my bucket list, but I noticed a layer of dust on any car in the pictures that sits idle for more than a few days. Same thing in the referenced article. I’ve been out west to El Paso and Palm Springs, but I didn’t notice that much dust unless a storm comes to town. Wouldn’t the humidity of the Mediterranean control some of the dust??
Maybe there’s a kibbutz somewhere nearby; farms are dust generators.
It’s dusty alright in Israel (after all, it’s part of the middle east), but you can tell if it’s a common every day’s dust by looking at the windshield. Specifically this Deville’s wipers have not been working for some time.
Humidity is a dog; all it does is cement the dust to the cars, houses, people… In the summer you get 35c degrees and 75% humidity. Fun (not)…
One mysterious thing about those ’94-’96 DeVille. Half of those look gorgeous and another half look dorky, right from the factory brochure to the street. I never figure out exactly why. Hood ornament, tire/rims, color, ride height may make a difference but I never trace down which one plays a role. This one looks much better, and equally good ones still show up on the street. ( also those as bad as the one you saw )
the aftermarket vinyl roofs don’t help the looks either.
The rear fender skirts ruin the look for me. By the mid 1990’s that look was so out of favor. Thankfully they fixed this in 1997
I had a ’98 DeVille Concours with the 300hp Northstar
Never had any problems, it was deceivingly fast & agile, but the biggest deadly sin about it was that it was FWD. (Albeit the FWD burnouts I did with it were quite amusing)
Had a factory 6 CD changer, wide-ass leather buckets up front & a monstrous bench seat in the back. All doors had a cigar lighter. Was a great car for the 4 years I had it.
I was never fond of these, in either this form or, the later ones with the more open rear wheel wells. They look like a Samosonite suitcase. Just like the 1991 Caprice and its later variants with more open rear wheels, neither looks right. Both the Later Cadillac and the later Caprice and Impala SS look as though a teenaged kid got hold of a sawzall and hogged out the rear wheel openings.
I give it a deadly sin. Northstar was unreliable oil leaker, burner that ate head gaskets. It was small and stubby though not as hideous as the 2000 up cars. Compared to Fleetwood or a town car Its an abomination. Its small and stubby with front wheel drive and a plastic interior. I can imagine anyone choosing one over a town car. I rode in one once. Its like a really nice olds ciera. Deadly sin? Well the 85 deserves it more, but I consider every fwd full sized compact luxury car a deadly.sin. and gm is still sinning.
…small and stubby? Compared to a ’75 maybe, but there’s nothing small about this, dimensionally or aesthetically.
So is Lincoln considering both of it’s current sedans are smaller sized FWD based on Ford sedans.
Sheesh! So many Deadly Sins! Can’t GM do anything right?!
Using the value of hindsight to second -guess 30 year old GM marketing decisions is what keeps us coming back here 😉
Flawed as they were, they rode like butter. Really nice riding cars. Went to my aunt’s funeral in one. From Philly to West Haven Connecticut. My cousin’s partner owned the car. That back seat. Real leather – not this cheesy leatherette BS. Yeah, the door panels were a bit flimsy, but the ride quality left such an impression on me. Riding in a XTS via Uber years later, made me appreciate that ride even more. You don’t always have to chase the Germans.
I’ve never been quite sure about these Devilles. Everything aft of the windscreen reminds me of the D-body Fleetwood (which I like). But the front end proportions don’t look quite right – they don’t match the ‘fullness’ of the doors/rear guards. Mind you, the Deville reminds me more of the ’88 Voyage concept car than the Fleetwood.
Given that New Zealand didn’t get the Deville new and I’ve never seen one in the metal-plastic-fakewood (we didn’t get the Fleetwood either, but I’ve seen a number of private imports), I couldn’t really comment on whether they’re a GM Deadly Sin or not.
I’d like to point out some misinformation presented by this article. I understand GM=bad, but if you’re going to go GM bashing, at least be truthful about it. There are plenty of things that you can criticize GM for without having to misrepresent facts.
This generation of Deville did not have fake wood or acres of plastic. The Deville had real Zebrano wood trim and the shifter and steering wheel was leather covered. Most of the dash surfaces were padded vinyl, not plastic. Personally I would have preferred plastic because it is more durable, but people often prefer style over practicality.
A more honest criticism of the 90s Deville would be its low quality leather and curling vinyl dashboards.
Don, I’m not quite sure why you’re picking on my comment. As I said, we didn’t get those Devilles here and I’ve never seen one, so I can only form my impressions through reading magazine articles (C/D, R&T) and reading articles and photos like the one here. It’s great that it had real wood and a padded-vinyl dash, but if a casual viewer can’t tell at a glance, then there’s something wrong. Having said that, I love my plastic-fantastic Ford Sierra, which doesn’t pretend to be anything else, so each to their own!
I honestly think it was. I mean, yeah, Northstar. I love the Northstar, but that thing is a time bomb. But, it was honestly just pointless. I mean, when this generation came out, this was when the new Seville and Eldorado came out, indicators that Cadillac was going into a new direction and wished to be taken seriously again. Fine, bold and noble effort, but then you have this rolling retirement home on wheels in the showroom, and it just creates a disconnect. Granted the Fleetwood had the same sort of mission, but the Fleetwood was RWD, had a more reliable engine under the hood, and was an all around better car, so why keep the Deville around? Granted, when 97 came around and GM retooled Arlington to pump out SUVs, the Deville would take the Fleetwood’s place…..But, then the rolling monument to low standards known as the Escalade came out, and considering the market was going where the Escalade would end up being profitable, what was the point of keeping the Deville name around?
Now, even though I think this car was a deadly sin, it was nowhere near the DS status of the 2000-2005 model. That thing was pointless AND ugly.
DeVille was engineered as a front wheel drive car, besides lifting up MPG, is catering to the customers in snow belt. FWD was a big advantage and technology innovation on a larger sedan, and for that reason Lincoln made Continental FWD in 1988 mainly to compete with GM FWD premium sedans. Also, some reviews in the late ’80s compare Chrysler New Yorker to Toyota Cressida and advantage of New Yorker is FWD. Not only some tires are seasonal in snow belt, entire community, roads, business and cars are all seasonal too, and before AWD is common on passenger cars, pickups are common for passenger vehicles, those larger FWD vehicles are the best comfortable passenger vehicles in winter without yearly trip to tire shop in November ( LeSabre, Olds 88 )
The later versions of this body (1997 onwards? not sure…..) got a more contemporary front clip and wheel designs which helped a lot. “Contemporary” is a relative term of course, but these are the cars Detroit in general, and GM especially, did well. Big, comfy, silent, and generally pretty tolerant of deferred maintenance. Not the best materials, workmanship, or panache, but good enough. And a one or two year old retired rental Cadillac has always been and still is a steal.
Yes, there are cattle in Israel. My sister in law managed 200 dairy cows on a kibbutz in northern Israel.
As a counter point to this Cadillac bashing, imagine being a teenager in the 1930’s Depression, then getting married and going off to war in the 1940’s. You finally get home and there’s a serious housing and auto shortage. The Korean War starts up. Finally you begin to make a life, buy a house, a car, etc. Before you know it, it’s 1990, you’ve retired to Boca Raton, so what are you going to drive? A Caddy, no question, because who cares about the handling, did you see that luxe interior and the Caddilac crest? And, did I mention, it’s a Caddy.
I have driven from Dallas to Phoenix and back in a 1999 dé Ville.
I have no complaints about the handling. On the contrary.
I rather drive a Cadillac …
Absolutely. Any of these American late luxoboats handle totally fine for anything most drivers will ever need them to do.
I get the giggles when people talk about handling as if hair pin turns down mountain passes are standard everyday driving. Even ze Germans make cushier cars these days because they recognize most people aren’t “enthusiasts” while keeping those sorts of cars in the lineup to cover all the bases.
On your roads they are fine, hairpin turns down mountain passes are just highways round here and its hard to get excited about German handling precision on them too..
But I’m talking about America for where these cars were designed and marketed, they handle fine for anything here even mountain roads. They won’t be the ideal, but they will manage with aplomb.
Getting precision handling at the expense of ride comfort doesn’t seem like a good trade to me regardless, as well.
Try a current Cadillac – I understand from tests by the Austrian car mags it can do the Alpine stuff very well indeed.
Yep, a CTS is basically an American Bimmer.
My parents had one of these. Dad bought it used from a doctor, his first ever Cadillac. He could never admit to making any mistakes in his entire life and this lousy Cadillac , was a big one (mistake). Everything on the car seemed to scream cheap, but it was big , had the Cadillac crests all over it , and dad drove it around town with pride. I drove it once. Once was enough.
I don’t feel the 94-99 Deville was a deadly sin. In fact it sold very well during its years. It looks much better to me then the previous generation. What is interesting is that the back doors are longer then the front doors and it is a phone/ laptop user’s dream as there is a charging port/ Ciggy lighter in the ash tray on each of the rear doors.
I have had my 1995 Deville with the 4.9l V8 for almost 3 years now and the only issue it has is that it loves premium gas and gets 16mpg but then who buys a caddy for gas pump savings?
It is actually my snow/winter car and is very comfy to drive. Best $1200 I have spend on a car.
Here is a pic of it when I bought it.
I have a pearl white ’96 with a black interior. I got it with low milage, everything works, the ride is nice and with the Northstar motor it has plenty of power. The Town Car that it replaced got better milage but I enjoy driving this car a lot more. As for styling I like the looks. Bottom line, I really like this car.
Here’s the thing for me– say you have a time machine and you can go back to 1969 – you offer a Caddy buyer his choice – a 1969 Deville or a 1994 Deville – which is the better car? Is the1994 25 years of progress or 25 years of decline?
Depends on how you want define progress. Style wise, was 1969 progress compared with say 1964?
I am not sure about 1969, but I will pick a 1973 over a 1994 any time.
In 1969, the ’94 would have been a wonder of technology and safety.
Now, what you really meant is which one looks better. I’d say the ’69 but the old school cars designs aren’t really possible today with all the safety features and aerodynamics expected.
If it was me, I would chose the 1994 Deville.
Not counting safety features like ABS and airbags (I am not ashamed to admit that several times ABS has saved life and limb for me)
The 1994 Deville has fuel injection, the 1969 does not. I did not get my first fuel injection car until I was in my mid 20’s, before I had a series of cars with carburetors and I will honestly say, while I will own a car with a carburetor as a spare or fun car, I will never never never own a car with a carb as a primary car. So much easier to own a FI car(turn the key and vroom, no pedal pump, crank ,pray and wait until it warms up like a car with a carb)
As far as I’m concerned, ALL of these 90’s B-bodies are hideous. Cadillac, Chevy, Buick, all ugly. And no amount of horsepower can outshine ugly. However, like the writer, I find the same year Sevilles to be very nice looking. Shame they’re loaded with electrical faults, because I could have had a clean 1992 Seville for $1800 last year, but I was scared of the little niggling faults that always seem to plague these. Real nickel and dimers. But it sure was a good looking car.
This wasn’t a B-Body. It was on the FWD K platform.
Thanks. My car knowledge becomes fuzzy after 88 or so.
I’m an idiot. It just dawned on me, I looked at a 92 Eldorado, not Seville, because it was a 2dr. My above comments still apply though.
Isn’t it a question about finding the right person to service it?
I know of a German GM garage, which had an owner of a 1988 Sedan de Ville pay for having a new engine installed, when the real trouble was a chip in the computer box. It was detected by genious guy here, who isn’t officially a car mechanic.
I myself have my cars serviced at either of two places 60 miles away in each direction, rather than ending up in a mess at the local GM or Ford dealer.
They hardly know what is front and rear on these cars. – But a local guy with the right mind does.
When I bought a 80 Electra in 01 that a mechanic had deliberately put a 7/16th socket between the oil filter and it’s pad to block the oil flow so the engine would burn out because the lady I bought it from wouldn’t sell HIM the car, I lost all faith in ’em. But of course I’ve always worked on my own cars because I hate giving my hard earned money to someone else.
I change oil, filters and things like that and have gone as far as replacing a power steering gearbox on a 1973 Cadillac (with 210K miles it got an interesting steering), but I stepped down from replacing the alternator on the Mark IV. Why on earth did they have to put it down there.
I know what you mean. On six cylinder Mavericks with AC, the alternator is under the big AC compressor mount. It is a pain. You do have to do it lying under the car. As a owner of a 76 Grand Marquis and 79 Lincoln Continental, tell us more about your Mark IV. Those and the earlier Mark III are my favorite ones.
Guy
Funny, because I have had a 1976 Mercury Grand Marquis also.
Funny indeed. I’ve owned and enjoyed a Mk V for many years, and just bought a ’77 Marquis just last month. Must be the influence of this site. 😉
The Mark V i’m not really interested in, but tell us more about your 77 Marquis.
I fell in love with Continental Mark IV back in the 1970’s, when they started having William Conrad as Frank Cannon on German television. We were not so furtunate to get him on Danish television (we have subtitles on Danish television, why we hear the original language, whereas Germany dub everything into German. I am fluent in German, but at a certain point you get tired of this – I have the whole box set of Frank Cannon now). Continental Mark IV cars were very rare here. A certain person had imported a silver 1973 model, a secretary at the US Embassy in Copenhagen drove a wine red 1974 model, and a business owner not too far from here, had imported a 1975/76 model. We know this from an old brochure of his, where it is in the background. Other than that, we cannot track down any throughout the 1970’s. FoMoCo in Copenhagen is a major factor in this, as they were extraordinary ignorant towards US cars. We did get a considerable number of Ford Gran Trorinos and Ford Rancheros along with of cause Ford Mustangs, and a few Ford Thunderbirds, but who imported these, I don’t know.
I finally got to the point of buying one in 2002. I found it on Autotrader Online in Florida. I wanted a 1975 because of the catalyc converter, the four wheel disc brakes, along with I wanted two outside mirrors and leather interior. I found it with a sweet elderly couple i Florida. They had had the car since 1977, whilst living im Pennsylvania, before moving to Florida. It was shipped by roll-on roll-off ferry from Jacksonville to Bremerhaven, which was easy, and driven home from there.
We have stayed in touch with the previsous owner since. He died shortly after I picked it up, but she is still going strong and we will go and see her this Christmas. It had 97K miles on the meter when I bought it. Today it has 115K. I had the C6 transmission renovated two years ago and had a new carburator installed this year.
My prime issue is to reinforce the armrests on the doors, because the plastic armrests gets fragile with age. Other than that, the cabin is spotless, so to speak. The previous owner had kept the leather soft with mink oil. I use the cream we use for our leather furniture in the living room as well.
You can check out rides under Continental Mark IV uploads on https://www.youtube.com/user/KoldingDenmark
Three blocks from us there is a couple who drive a 1971 Continental Mark III in the same color. But they not drive it nearly as much as I do. (It is not me in the picture.) 🙂
Those are lovely cars. Very nice.
Those are indeed beautiful cars.
The small lights under the front bumper are daytime driving lights. This is how you manage to keep the headlight doors closed during the daytime. Because of EU regulations, these lights work when the ignition is on and turn off, once you turn the parking light on. They also work without the tail lights, but it is optional. Since 2008 EU regulations have permitted cars over 35 years to drive with red (original) turn signals. The only country which still ignores this change and demands yellow turn signals is England.
I’ve got a set of those deep dish aluminum wheels that I plan to put on my Marquis when I get new tires next year. I like their looks and they were optional on the Marquis when it was new. Here’s the Marti Report on my Marquis.
This is one of the instances though when Kevin Marti made a mistake. My interior is Gold Cloth and Leather. No red anywhere on it. The factory interior manuals ( which I have) show trim code “JY” as Gold Cloth and Leather. And mine indeed is.
I am very well familiar with the Peoria area 🙂
@MarkIV75 Your car is beautiful! Can you tell me about the driving experience of your 76 Grand Marquis and your 75 Mk IV? Which one has a more isolated ride. Which one is quieter? Which one steers better?
Uh, that is a difficult question to answer. The Grand Marquis was quiet – as expected and rode smoothly down the road. I had the power steering gearbox replaced and after that the steering was perfect.
The Mark IV is quiet. Once you get passed 01:24 in this – my most recent clip from September – you get the true noice level at crusing speed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqlktkWI3b4
The microphone tends to pick up noice you don’t hear, when the camera is sitting in the clip on the windshield.
The major difference between the Grand Marquis and the Mark IV is that the suspension on the Mark IV is soft – I really mean super soft.
To the extend that you have to know how to handle speed bumps.
You don’t keep the foot on the brake while driving over a speed bump,
it will cause a “double nose dive”, you release the brake right when you reach the bump.
That way the raising of the front will “help” you cross the speed bump with a modest move, and without loosing your dignity (and exhaust tail pipe 🙂 ) when you “land” again.
As for steering, I also had the power steering gearbox replaced in the Mark IV, so that is all the same.
Thank you for the information. That is a beautiful video! How fast were you going over those bridges?
Around 70 miles/h / 110 km/h
This is my 76 Grand Marquis. Bought in 02 for $700. Mechanically it is fine, body is in great shape but the interior has a missing chunk of carpet and the dash pad is discolored and cracked. But for 700 bucks, I can’t complain.
2nd.
3rd
Last one,
This is my $750 79 Lincoln Continental
I’ll have 2 more of it a little later.
Here they are.
No. 2
Nice car. Really. The cabin is the same as mine. These seats look good and are really comfortable to sit in.
I still have a weak spot for the late 1970’s Town Cars.
I used to request sales brochures from Lincoln Mercury, when I was going to high school – and they even mailed them to me here.
This 76 Marquis Brougham just showed up for sale today. 124,000 miles and $3500. It is cherry though.
Next one.
Interior.
Nice looking on the outside.
Never liked the “small car trying to look big by putting on a fatsuit” look.
However, in 1995 I was shopping for a new car and lusted after the still-new and untitled 1993 Allante at the Caddy dealer. The dealer wouldn’t sell it – at least not to me. The senior salesperson, however, said he had a client who had an Allante they were looking to part with. He drove me to said clients house to test drive the Allante. We took his Deville Concours demo there. He offered to let me drive it back and he told me to floor it. For a boat, that car was damn fast. Not my cup of tea, but impressively quick.
I have a ’97 Deville in my personal fleet. Generally was happy with it. I jad some electrical problems related to a lack of proper weather protection for electrical components under the hood. Flimsy covers were used to cover all manner of relays and fuse boxes. Throw in some winter salt spray and some dampness and one gets sporadic failure.
The N* engine is a wonder, lots more power than the typical buyer would ever use, and decent fuel economy, I think due to high compression and an efficient combustion chamber shape.
I found the steering disappointingly numb. The engineers worked hard to make a rack and pinion set up as numb and uncommunicative as a mid-70s steering box.
I dont mind the FWD. With snow tires its a good winter machine.
The ride is reassuringly firm. I deliberately bought a base suspension model because the dampers are much cheaper to replace than the electronic-ride Concours model.
The fit finish and quality is quite good, better than my 81 Fleetwood. The leather is hard ans a bit slippery but long wearing. Some interior fittings are standard GM mediocre but most are quite nice, an odd mix.
Speaking of odd mixes, the sound insulation is very good, until one gets in a rainstorm. Raindrop nioses reverberate inside like a hailstorm on a tin shack, but the rest or the drive is pretty silent.
The paintwork is very good, the only GM car I’ve ever driven with no orange peel or flaws at all. Perfect. And it looks perfect after 19 years I even like its fat look..
Generally its roomy, works well, nicely laid out and reliable for me for 200,000 km…… until those bloody headbolts pulled loose, as happens with all N* engines eventually. Now its in my shop waiting for me to find the time to yank the engine and repair the block threads.
I dont think the car is a Deadly Sin, but that engine sure is. GM knew of the headbolt problem but never engineered a proper fix in all those years of production. Maybe they thought they don’t have to because the typical buyer won’t keep the car long enough to experience the flaw. But they still had 20 years of this time bomb engine wrecking Cadillac’s reputation in the marketplace. Too bad, I’ve seen plenty of perfect Caddys in the wrecking yard dumped by frustrated owners who won’t pay the repair bill. And these owners probably wont buy another Caddy, new or used.
The 2003-2011 Northstars are much better and we routinely see examples with 200K all the time still running very well.
In 2004 the Northstar received longer headbolts with a coarser pitch and this has greatly reduced the headbolt issue. In 2000 the casting process for the block was changed which helped as well. At cadillacowners.com they did a survey and the 97-99 Northstars had the highest incidence of problems.
First, tell me what GM’s products weren’t a deadly sin according to you? Now, your deadly sins look like the addition for the addition.
Unlike other deadly sins, I think the Deville was pretty successful in its goal in marketing a traditional American style luxury car to the traditional (elderly) buyer, without much calamity.
I don’t think it attracted many new, younger converts to the brand, but I thought that was the Seville’s job, what with its smaller dimensions, and somewhat more contemporary style.
My Dad had a few ’90s Cadillacs until he passed-a ’93 4.9 SDV, a ’97 N* SDV and finally an ’04 N* SDV. The ’93 was by far the best and the 4.9 was pretty torquey and didn’t have any problems by the time he traded it in, when it probably had 80 or 90K on it. The interior was falling apart though with switches falling off here and there and a general used-up look. The ’97 was Ok for a couple of years before it turned into a steaming pile, and he only had the ’04 for 2 years before his passing but it felt like a much better built car than the previous ones and I think they had all the Northstar issues wiped out by then.
Anyway, when I look at those generation Cadillacs, all I see are nose-heavy, torque-steer-driven cars that are just a blown head gasket or transmission failure away from the boneyard.
I just saw one yesterday smoking on the street next to me. I bet it’s Northstar.
I think the season for those nice ones are over though. It’s too old for good rust resistance.
This is one off the best cadillacs off the time.
I’m amazed the Northstar has not exploded long ago under Israeli conditions. Once they go, it’s usually a death sentence for the car, because the 3rd owner would most likely not have the funds to repair them, what with parts’ availability at reasonable price, or the dearth of know-how on them in Israel. My neighbor here in Austria has 3 STSs: one as the everyday car and two for spares. And he is a mechanic by trade.
Given enough mileage most engines will eventually fail. Not every Northstar will fail at low mileage. I think that the earlier (1993 through 1999) engines were highly dependent on the casting for the block. If by chance you got an exceptionally good block, it may run for 100’s of thousands of miles.
That’s what the guy was saying but of course we are in Europe where finding bits is not going to be as quick, easy or cheap as in the US…
A former client of our office drives an ’89 Coupe De Ville. It is triple purple and lovely. The elderly lady owner said that the local Cadillac dealer is going to buy it back. She is currently 91. I’m not really sure about the MY of the car.
I remember at my grandmother’s funeral in 1996, my family rented one of these from National at Newark Airport. My dad and my brother flew separately from my mom and I, apparently they originally chose a LeSabre but there was an issue so they upgraded them to a Red Tintcoat Deville with Georgia license plates. At the time (age 11), I thought it was absolutely amazing from the color to the smell of the leather. It was a huge contrast from the base 2-door Tercel that my mom had rented before they got there. The funeral home used their new Fleetwood limo and Hearse for my Grandmother and I remember asking the limo driver what they were going to eventually buy after the Fleetwood went out of production, he pointed to our rental Deville and didn’t seem impressed. I’ve always felt that the 94-96 with the skirts looked better than the 97-99. It’s hard to believe, this is now the same company making the ATS now.
But also making the XTS as well, even if they are a little embarrassed by a gussied up Lacrosse. 🙂 At least the 1994 Deville “K-platform” was unique to Cadillac until the Buick Lucerne debuted.
You’re right, I forgot about the XTS. I guess in my mind a “big” Cadillac should have a V8… 🙂
I have always liked the skirts on the 94-96 Deville. That is one of the reasons I bought mine. However those skirts make it a pain in the @$$ to align the car due to the back wheels being partially hidden.
I knew I recognized that door panel on the passenger side – the buttons, switches, everything – just the same as my 1995 Impala SS!
I had rented one of these Caddies a couple of times. They were big and boxy but drove okay. I had a ’94 Seville STS that was a few years old that I bought with 27,000 miles, kept it till it had 130,000 miles. It was my dream car at the time. The interior was very spacious, nice seats lots of legroom in back, which was important because we had two kids. The dash was very nicely shaped. real Zembrano wood all around. Really a beautiful car inside and out. It was pretty reliable until it passed 100,000 miles. Then it started leaking oil, went through a few starters ( a 700 dollar repair!) A/C , automatic leveling , and more. The experience has soured me on Caddies since then, though I would consider some pre 1980 models, especially from the 60s and 50’s.
I’d forgotten the size of the rear clips on these. I’m guessing they were still using the 1985 body – the position of the trunk would certainly suggest that.
The Northstar engine is a deadly sin. Not enough low-end torque, hooked to a fossil of a transaxle (the 4T80 is based on the Citation’s TH125, and cost nearly twice as much as the 4L60) with too-wide ratio splits, the final drive is too tall (3.11) in all but the STS models (3.71), styling looked like they tried to mimic the Fleetwood…but forgot their glasses. Punching the pedal at certain speeds resulted in the transaxle kicking out of OD…but the wide ratios meant it was unable to drop to second gear, resulting in the engine being totally out of its powerband and struggling to move the heavy, under-geared car.
The car comes off as a bad attempt to imitate an LT1 Fleetwood…which, of course, it was.
There are a lot of things to criticize about the Northstar, but it never “struggled” to move the car. A Northstar feels husky in traffic, without needing revs to do so. It could pull hills at highway speed in third and didn’t feel strained to do so. It certainly comes on strong above 3,000, but it’s building with gusto up to that point. The Northstar feels similar to the 4.9 below 3,000, then adds more but it never felt deficient. The 4T80e was a serious upgrade over the 60 and was strong. They should’ve used it more, that would have made it cost less, but it’s not a TH125.
Gawd, has the earth tilted on it’s axis? Twice in a week now I’m defending GM and Caddy, neither of which I have any love for.
But I disagree with the DS status. Now I’d probably be happier driving an aircooled VW Bug than the Caddy, they didn’t make it for me. They made it for a certain market segment of people, not me, and they were mostly ok with it. They, for the most part, didn’t drive them to 200K so what happened out of warranty wasn’t their problem. They had a cushy (spelled wallowly) drive and handling which is just what the buyers wanted. I haven’t heard they were so fragile they spent most of their time at the dealer, they may not have been perfect, but they were at least OK to those who were the market target.
I’ll add this too. While I’ve lived in 3 corners of the country and more, I’m mostly a California kid, albeit on SS. I did have a minor epiphany when working briefly in Michigan, upstate, not Detroit or the auto industry, back in the 70’s. Domestic cars worked better back there! It was flat, they had rises, not 7,000 foot passes. They had gradual curves, not sharp bends on canyon roads. Cold winters, but no 115F scorching hot summer days so they didn’t need a cooling system for them. Now, in a large country such as ours I’m not convinced of the wisdom of designing a car for a small part of it, but they did work better in it. Even the conservative styling was much more suited to the upper midwest, not either coast where far more people lived.
As I recall, fender skirts and real wood were only on the Concours, not the base Deville, which had velour seats standard until 2000. Much better than vinyl–or uncooled leather. I believe the speed-sensitive struts/shocks (pre-Magnetic Ride) on some 90s models are no longer available.
No, despite what this article claims, all Devilles of this generation had real wood. The fender skirts went away for all trim levels after the 1997 refresh. Some did have cloth seats, but finding one is rare. I do agree cloth seats are preferable to leather, easier to maintain and cool better.
To me, in the past they didn’t quite signify full luxury due to their transverse motor front drive stance. The Panther Town Car did despite its ancient/cheap underpinnings. Now these Caddies have grown on me, pretty dang timeless with great presence for being smallish.
They are beyond abundant here in Fort Myers. It seems GM snagged many elderly buyers with this design. Few purchased the Seville. At least the ones who didn’t get an ES or LS Lexus. I guess the demographic tended to either take very good care of the Northstar and/or pony up for the repairs on the rewards card. Seen a few over 150k with Northstar amazingly.
When I think of Concours, I usually associate the name to Chevrolets like the 1968-72 Chevelle Concours models including the Concours Estate Wagon which really was nothing more but a “Malibu Estate” Wagon and the 1976-77 Nova Concours which was nothing more but a fully loaded Nova with garnishes or in polite terms Nova “Custom” both were of course faux luxury and no body was really fooled about. I never associate the Concours name on a Cadillac.
Cadillac began using the d’Elegance name for their fancy interior trims in the mid 70s, so using the other half of Concours d’Elegance was a no-brainer. Plus, it separates the elite from the rubes who pronounce the “s.” Certainly better than their more recent CTScan and Fredriq monikers.