Walmart is always a good place to spot old iron, and these two green luxo-boats from about 1993 caught my eye. They’re pretty much on opposite ends of the US luxury car market that year; the Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue is the boxy K Car’s last gasp, while the Seville STS was Cadillac’s first serious shot at the imports with a handsome new body and a quad-cam 32 valve V8.
It’s hard to believe that the roots of this car go back to the 1980 Reliant and Aries. How many ways did Lee Iaccoca fold, spindle and mutilate the K car to keep the money rolling in? Well, that game had thoroughly played out by this time, and falling sales made it easier for Bob Lutz and the Chrysler board to shove poor old Lee out the door. By 1994, the radically different and aerodynamic LH cars would be Chrysler’s salvation, even though they were chasing Ford’s aerodynamic “potato” cars, as Lee called them. Oh well, you can’t be right forever.
Chuck Jordan’s 1992 Seville was a radical departure from the crappy little boxes that had been wearing that name for way too long. It was an ambitious effort at playing catch-up, and one that Cadillac never really pulled off. But the STS version was a credible effort, except for the new Northstar V8 in 1993, which once again turned out to be not quite ready for prime time. But this one is still making music from its quad exhaust outlets.
These two may be the color of money, but the Seville’s is a decided deeper shade of green. Like $20k deeper, at it listed for $42k compared to the Chrysler’s $22k. Forty-two big ones; that’s $70k in today’s money. Meanwhile the Lexus LS was selling for some $35k; no wonder Cadillac was screwed. They waited too long to build a Mercedes-fighter, and Lexus comes along and pulls the rug out from under both of them.
Hard to believe these two both rolled off the assembly line around the same time. Nice comparison shots! If only my local Walmarts were as prosperous with CCs.
Try the outer third of the parking lot. Many if not most malls amd big box stores require employees to park there. Plenty of 90s and early 00s beaters…..especially at The Beast of Bentonville!
Note that both are parked in the “compact” parking spots (top photo). Typical nearly well attitude.
Anyway, I rather the red Mazda Tribute in the rear of the top picture.
I’d take the New Yorker for a spin at least, given how I’m already familiar with the Tribute.
New Yorkers are a really comfortable car- we used to have a 1989.
They had one really big fault, though: Ultradrive
When I think of a proper luxury car, “comfortable” is still what comes to mind. They don’t seem to exist anymore though. Today’s luxury cars cater more to boy-racers.
I’m not saying all luxury cars should be mushy marshmellows, but they have gone too far the other way IMO.
Those are the biggest compact car spaces I have ever seen. Look at the New Yorker in the first shot. Seems like there is at least 3 extra feet for it.
My thoughts exactly. Those are only compact spaces compared to a 70’s land yacht or a full-size pickup/SUV. Maybe it’s a relative compact, considering that Wal-Mart lots do usually feature a lot of trucks?
The only thing compact about the spaces is that they have COMPACT painted on them. Wal-Mart has no need for making spaces smaller–their parking lots can be 40 acres in some cases.
Compared to a 76 New Yorker, this is a compact car.
IKR, But then again, compared to a ’76 NYer, My ’89 Cadillac Brougham was “compact!” LOL!
IKR, But then again, compared to a ’76 NYer, My ’89 Cadillac Brougham was “compact!” LOL!
no- pretty sure they are similar in size presence
Compared to SUV’s and big pickups, these are compacts.
My first thought was that they fit remarkably well in the “compact” spots with a lot of length left over. Then I saw the front shots, with their overhangs…overhanging, well onto the sidewalk.
I wouldn’t mind having either one or both of them, but I have a wildly eclectic taste in cars.
I think I’d prefer the Chrysler. I remember seeing them in a Daily Express World Cars annual and assumed from the style it was a bigger, more “traditional” car. It also seemed so American and so old fashioned to have a car called “New Yorker”.
I’m intrigued by the parking spaces. I too thought “They’re not supposed to be compacts, but look at all the space – makes a change from being unable to squeeze my 2 yr old kid into our Mazda 2 without scratching the car next to me”. I suppose as a K car the New Yorker is a lot narrower than some of its peers.
But I’m also intrigued by the idea of spaces for specific types of car. How do they define “compact”? Is it a benefit for drivers of compacts, or are they saying “Don’t sully the proper spaces reserved for Real Men”? Who gets the spaces closest to the store (after the disabled)? Do they assume people who drive small cars are fitter and can park further away?
Usually compact-car spaces are created where there isn’t *quite* enough space for a full-size parking spot. I mostly see them in downtown multi-story garages where the the ramp between floors won’t have enough room for turning if a long car is parked in the end space.
In a suburban big-box lot like this, I’m assuming either the building itself or the handicapped spaces were expanded at some point but the parking lot couldn’t be (maybe it already extended to the property line), so the leftovers were made into compact spaces.
How do they define “compact”?
You define it by pulling into the spot and seeing if you fit. I first encountered COMPACT ONLY spaces in a San Francisco indoor lot with my ’71 Cougar, which was a rusty version of the attached pic. My thinking was, “Well, it’s not a full-size six-seater like an LTD, maybe a Cougar qualifies as a compact.” Nope, sorry, a Cougar DOES NOT qualify as a compact. I could barely get those long doors open without hitting the (actual) compact beside me — so I reversed and found a non-compact spot. The ’71 Cougar was 16-1/2″ long, which was about 2′ too long for comfort in a parking space that small.
Homer: Ooh, there’s a good one!
Marge: That spot says compact only!
Homer: Marge, that’s just a suggested car size.
I don’t hate the New Yorker, but I always wondered why Chrysler even bothered to round the corners for that slight ’92 restyle. It ended up looking like a brick that had been sanded at all eight corners.
I hadn’t noticed that, but now that you mention it, I think the one I saw as a kid was more angular – I thought there was something strange about the rear end, but now that I take a closer look at the front it doesn’t look right either.
It does seem strange to make the effort to make such a slight change to modernize a car whose raison d’etre seems to be “looking traditional”. The older one looked better IMHO.
The older ones were boxier. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1991-chrysler-new-yorker-paging-bill-blass/
Honestly, with the new style of New Yorker coming in 1994, this makes no sense. the LH New Yorkers were a huge change, but I have to wonder if most buyers would have even noticed these subtle changes.
The rounded corners at the rear prepared buyers for a very similar look (save for wider taillamps) on the LHS-based model that followed. The front change just echoed what in back, and unfortunately (IIRC) also resulted in the previous standard-size quad sealed beams being replaced by those smaller Guide bulbs also used in some GM cars of the era like the mini-me ’86 Toro and Riv. I like the old ones better just because they’re far more common, as for that reason they can be replaced by superior Euro-spec separate-bulb halogen lamps, and there is (or was) even some true HID replacements available (entire lamp assemblies meeting ECE or DOT regulations, not a conversion using a HID bulb stuck in a housing made for a halogen bulb which yields a dangerously uncontrolled light pattern).
I once got a ticket for parking my 78 Ford. Ltd. Landau. Coupe in a compact space. I challenged it and said are 2 door cars compact??? They agreed and dismissed the ticket.
Ha! If they only knew. Hell, the 1990 Cadillac Fleetwood coupe that my ex owned was bigger than the pickup I daily drive. Neither one compares to that lovely wheelbase.
If I can get out of the car, I am parking my 05 Park Avenue in any empty space I see.
If I can see the word “COMPACT” behind my rear wheels, then my car is compact. (My largest vehicle is a 2003 Outback wagon, which seems large but is smaller than most modern “compact” cars and is plenty narrow to allow the doors to open in such a space.)
It is interesting to see these cars together. The Seville generation where the soul was sold and it was off chasing the Germans with the internationally acceptable bland shape. Wonder how many import buyers came running back to the Cadillac dealer for it.
And the Chrysler, with no platforms left to properly display American style, a compact has to be stretched to the limit. How dare it offer chrome and wire wheels and a vinyl top. Nobody in the know still likes that. Get with the program. There now is only one style. Get that old fart Lido out of here, he only saved Chrysler and sheparded the Mustang. Eaton and Lutz are the answer, they have worked in Germany. That really led to a good place.
You seem to have forgotten that Chrysler had a serious crisis in 1991-1992, in large part because the boxy new cars like this NYer and the Dodge Dynasty did poorly in the market against the Taurus and such. The market was ready to be done with boxy X Cars, and Lee had held onto then for too long.
I am not sure the cash crunch would have been from the New Yorker. A New Yorker listed for over $20,000 and was essentially a ten year old K car most of which were designed to sell for $7500 or so. This was not an uncommon car so must have been very profitable The cash crisis was mainly from Lido spending cash on Gulfsteam, Maserati, Lambo, and long lead items for the next gen of autos, which were in the works. When has Chrysler ever had enough money for the next generation of cars. I can only think of 98 when the large cash horde was traded for DB stock, thanks to Eaton.
But also, Chrysler bought AMC and had to sell some left-over Renault designs, for losses. Like the Eagle Premier, they certainly were money losers.
But getting Jeep and the LH cars, ended up worth it, I think.
The left over Alliances/Encores, my memory is that they were immediately taken out of production, were probably written down as part of the transaction. The Premier is a little more complicated. There were expensive V6’s required to be bought from France, and the VW/Renault auto in the 4 is the Satan from which Ultradrive derived. However the Bramlea plant was just modernized and had bequeathed a modern full size platform to work with. Lido didn’t mess with the Gugiaro shape of the Premier, but had he lasted a few more years, I bet the unsuccessful LHS would have been more traditional and given Buick more of a run.
Imagine today an American traditional styled New Yorker Fifth Avenue taking on an American traditional Buick Park Avenue. It could have happened. and gotten a few of you out of your four door trucks.
I love the variety of voices on this site and the civil, intelligent discussions we have. John C, you are one of the many civil, intelligent voices here. But man, I don’t think there’s anybody I disagree with more consistently than you! 🙂 I mean no disrespect. We just have very different views on almost everything.
I don’t find the Seville derivative in appearance at all, and find it crisp, clean and elegant. Its looks have aged better than the Lexus LS. And it was an excellent course correction for the Seville nameplate and probably the most effective of all the generations at the nameplate’s intended mission.
I think Lexus LS’s two tone is really tacky, after the fashioned fades away. And their two tone is tacky mainly from the plastic.
William, I enjoy reading you as well as so many others here. So when we disagree, it is with respect. My problem with the 92 Seville isn’t fwd or northstar troubles, it is just that it went out of it[s way to appeal as a Euro model. That was different from any of the previous three generations. Each previous generation was American designed, more specificly the way GM thought a high line smaller model should be. The first did not do what Ford did with the Granada, look how much it looks like MB, they instead brought a new design language that was a big hit. The second, with FWD and IRS in a lux only platform, still went it’s own road in style. The third, with the advanced dash interface and transverse V8, was perhaps designed for a more austere future than the eighties turned out, but I think it’s charms are being more and more respected. These 92s were Bruno Saco’s favorite car at an auto show near the cars debut, because he won, he now set the standard, the only standard. The home of Harly Earl and Bill Mitchel, followed him, slavishly, and off the cliff. The Seville, excuse me STS 4.6, is gone now. If someone wants a Euro car they will get it from Europe not the USA.
I’ve always thought it was a more interesting automotive landscape when American cars were “American” European cars were “European” and Japanese Cars were…..You get the idea, I don’t mean as far a quality in build, but in styling, “feel” ETC… Globalization is effective from a manufacturing standpoint, but not nearly as interesting. I don’t really want a “Euro” American car anymore than I want an “Americanized” European car.
If those earlier Sevilles were so great, then how did Bruno Sacco ever manage to “win”? How did Mercedes-Benz become the actual “Standard of the World” on their watch?
He designed great looking cars. At the feet of Paul Braq, he learned what a Mercedes was and was able to translate that through changing times. Even in the nineties when the quality declined, the style was still great. Think of the big round fun headlights on the 96 E class. Only a stylists with great confidence would have done that on the bread and butter model.
This did not mean everyone had to follow him. They had other jobs to do, and other traditions to honor.
If you have visited your local rent-a-car counter lately, cars this size are usually referred to as “compacts”. I think they do that so the uninformed will think they are getting a bargain….when they aren’t.
As far as parking spaces go, I wish Wal-Mart and all other retail locations would segregate parking by size with SUV spaces the FURTHEST from the door of the store. You want to use an Escalade or Expedition to pump up your self image? Fine, just quit trying to squeeze that behemoth in among the Civics and Corollas.
Being no fan of Cadillacs, I’d be more interested in the New Yorker, if for no other reason than I haven’t driven any “modern” (FWD) Chrysler product.
Quite the opposite. I rent cars quite often and Fusions are listed as the “full-size” choice while a Taurus is considered a “premium” offering. The featured cars would no doubt be in the “luxury” class if offered for rent today.
I realized I had the rental car “thing” backwards, but just didn’t bother to edit myself.
I hadn’t rented a car in years but thought I might need one over Thanksgiving. It’s amazing how car rental companies have so many classes/sizes of cars, they could probably teach Starbucks a thing or two.
Out west, saying that would get you shot. 😉
It’s pretty easy to park a truck in a space- I can even squeeze our crew cab into a single parking space. When you get people that aren’t used to driving a truck, you have problems.
Escalades aren’t that long. I could get one into a parking space without an issue.
Thank you.
As the proud owner of a four-wheel drive crew-cab pickup, I can park it wherever I like and have no trouble doing so. Inability to park properly is more often a reflection of the operator.
I have more occasion to consider the height of parking garages than I do with parking stall widths – but only when driving the wife’s E-150 van. It’s seven inches taller than my pickup but roughly the same overall length.
The people in the bigger, more expensive vehicles are far more likely to be buying more than some hippie who shohorns themself into a crapbox because they think they are saving the planet. Who would you cater to as a business?
See, I can stereotype too.
Hippies trying to save the planet are not likely to be found at Wal-Mart though…
Exactly! So why cater to them? They don’t buy anything anyway. 🙂
Did anybody else notice the 1991-1995 Chrysler Town& Country van watching over the New Yorker from the top left corner?
True these cars were a bit long in the tooth for the 1990’s but they still did make a butt ton of money for Lido and Company. The minivan in particular changed how American families were transported about and ended the wagon’s reign as family runabout.
Good catch!
Looking at the windows, I’m not sure that isn’t an Aerostar.
The one next to the Kia, only the nose is visible, no windows(I think what you see is an econoline FWIW)
Haha. I had to zoom in to see it on my phone but it does look like it’s looking towards the New Yorker. I believe the white van that is parked further back is a Chevy Express.
I was also wondering how someone could mistake a Chevy Express LWB for a Town & Country. It wasn’t until I read the follow-up comments that I realized what the arrow was actually pointing at!
If the Northstar was really as bad as everyone here thinks it is, this car should be in a junkyard. The color was polo green I think.
My dad had this exact same STS, a 1993 with the N*. He bought it used in 1999 with 21K miles on it, and sold it about ten years later with 125K miles on it. A lot of other stuff failed, but the head gaskets held for that time. It was a great road trip car (my dad’s first FWD car in his entire life), got good fuel mileage, and oh wow, that exhaust note when you punched it was the siren song!
He offered it to me before he sold it, but I didn’t want to deal with all of the stuff that was about ready to break on it. To keep one of these cars on the road, you drop the front subframe and rebuild everything sitting on it, and then hope and pray for another 100K miles. I don’t have that kind of free time but if I did, I would have one of these in my “Jay Leno” daily-driver collection for sure. The styling of this car (not to mention the entire interior) is better than anything Cadillac offers today IMO.
I know that to get at the transmission the engine and transmission have to be removed. My 2002 Seville’s torque converter lockup solenoid failed and they needed the car for a full day to fix it. Unfortunately they put the wrong gasket in somewhere and had to do it all over again. It was still under warranty. I never had anything else go wrong.
Great juxtaposition.
The Chrysler should have been a 1983 model, not a 1993. By then it looked woefully dated.
Of course, I’ve always wished the ’92 generation Seville had been introduced for ’86, when it would have legitimately been much more class leading. It too was relatively old news by ’93, given the FWD platform in the age of the LS400.
See now if I was walking back to my Cadillac and observed that Chrysler parked next to me like that i’d think “What an ahole parking job”
🙂 Yeah, that’s another thing that makes the space look so big.
“Meanwhile the Lexus LS was selling for some $35k…”
Not quite – the ’93 LS400 started at $47,030 with destination.
Source: Consumer Guide Auto ’93 pricing book
I wonder which one of the two was more profitable? The K car ended its production as an America, standardised and heavily discounted version, to around $6990, from what I recall. So the tooling costs for the original Ks was written off long ago, and the refresh into the New Yorker/Fifth Avenue cannot have cost that much. My bet is that even with all vinyl roofs and power options Lido could goop on these cars, they were hugely profitable. They were . . . if not hot sellers in the ’90’s, not a failure either.
When we went to buy my Dad’s ’89 Sundance new, I was 13 and my favourite car in the showroom was the Fifth Avenue. All of the toys and button tufted seats and leather felt very luxurious. My granddad bought one of these after my grandmother passed. Lido hit the target market right on the head. Those guys had money and wanted to look like it for less than what a Cadillac Brougham/Town Car cost and also thought they were being up to date with a FWD car. This offered space, toys, and a luxurious feeling, even if it was narrow, handled like a K car, rattled like a K car, and drove like a K car. I remember my granddad crowing he had gotten it up well past 90.
The front wheel drive Fifth Avenue is very roomy and comfortable. Despite the obvious mechanic limits, the comfort itself is superior, or far superior to more expensive luxury cars ( especially Audi, Infiniti or even many Lexus ) and the legroom is very generous.
At the time being a kinda younger man ( or just a boy ), my ’93 New Yorker Fifth Avenue was so comfortable with soft seats and I couldn’t ask for anything better ( and indeed, many ’10s Mercedes I took ride in were far less comfortable though ) and I was so satisfied with it. Mechanically though, not so.
My folks had a New Yorker, but the Seville was the car we really wanted. The Chrysler was a burgundy ’88, bought mostly because it came heavily discounted. It was eventually replaced by a very different Saab 9000, and mum and dad have bought Swedish or German ever since.
Those New Yorkers and Dynastys were all over here back in the day. A friend at the time had a burgundy Dynasty with matching Asian Massage Parlor Red velour bench seats/interior. It rode nice and was reasonably peppy. The down side? The dreaded LIMP MODE….!!
The New Yorker fits squarely within the 1993 vintage, though not necessarily a bad thing. I always thought the New Yorker was classy. My grandparents had a 1990-vintage New Yorker in pearl white with a dark blue velour interior. I looked forward to road trips in that car as a kid as it glided along the highways very smoothly and was quite comfortable.
The STS looks ‘newer’ than 1993. I’ve always assumed that these were of late-90s (maybe up to early-00s vintage). Looks nice, although I was never fond of Cadillac in general.
You just made an important point… it’s been many years since cars designs became (mostly) ugly, overstyled and boring.
I praise these nice elegant Caddillacs
That 90’s generation of Seville is still a personal favorite of mine. It’s aged well, in my opinion. And while some castigate it for attempting to be “too European” I’ve never seen it that way. To me it’s a fresh take on the Cadillac brand identity, but one that is still recognizably a Cadillac.
Those Northstar engines are a real shame. Such a great reputation early on…until, in typical GM fashion, they started failing in droves. The later ones were improved, were they not?
Those New Yorkers were actually pretty decent cars with the exception of the ultradrive failures. There were 2 in my extended family, and I put more than a few miles on them between ’89 and the late 90’s when the last was traded off. Despite the stodgy traditional styling they were a revelation to drive. Roomy, softly spring, quiet and ridiculously comfortable, but also surprisingly responsive with decent road feel for a traditional American luxury car. Ironically, that crappy transmission was a true pleasure in those cars…before it failed. My brother worked as a tech at a Chrysler dealership in the early ’00’s, where the Ultradrive was commonly referred to as the “Slip-O-Matic”.
My folks had two Sevilles of that generation. Lovely cars.
The first was a ’92 that was just a Seville, no three-letter acronym (but comparable to the later SLS), they bought in ’94 with about 68k miles. Power came from the 4.9L 200 HP pushrod V8, it was blue with a blue dash/carpet & white(!) seats, full digital dash. I took my drivers license test at age 14 (because South Dakota) in that car. It was always fun to switch the instruments to metric and see how long till someone objected to the preposterously-large (km/h) number on the speedometer. It was the main family hauler for a few years and was just past 100,000 miles when it was totalled in an accident; the occupants at the time, my sister (driving) and mom (passenger) walked away with just scrapes & bruises.
Safety record established, my parents bought the 2nd one: a ’93 STS with the Northstar. Acceleration was great (except the torque steer), and it handled surprisingly well for what it was. It was the family car through my high school years, then my sister’s car once she earned the right to have a car at her college; it survived through those years but eventually was totalled by an inattentive Honda Ridgeline driver.