(first posted 9/24/2018) What’s the best kind of friend to have on a bright summer day? Maybe someone who can fit seven people into her Eldorado convertible. Meandering through Newport, Rhode Island’s tourist district, this Diplomat Blue Cadillac made quite a statement. In some ways, the car seemed very much in its element, since Newport resembles a background scene from a Cadillac brochure – an upscale, decorous tourist haven where life moves at a leisurely stride.
On the other hand, this scene conflicts with decades of genteel Cadillac promotional materials: Friends crammed into a car and smiling? That’s more typical of an MG ad, though with five additional friends. And of course these folks are probably half the age of a typical Eldorado buyer when the car was new. Regardless, this car was a nearly 5,000-lb. dose of summer fun… so let’s take a closer look.
Cadillac billed this generation of Eldorado, introduced for 1971, as a personal luxury car, but there was nothing “personal” about its gargantuan size. Wrapping this heft in an elegant package, though, gave Eldorado a presence worthy of the Cadillac crest, even if it wasn’t quite as graceful as, say, an early-60s DeVille.
1971 also saw the re-introduction of Eldorado’s convertible, which Cadillac correctly proclaimed was “the only luxury convertible now built in America.” Cadillac had this niche all to itself through the Convertible’s 1976 demise. Amusingly, brochures described Eldorado convertibles as combining “tasteful individuality and youthful sportiness.” Youthful? It’s doubtful many original purchasers were under 50, so maybe “youth” implied older, wealthy people trying to appear young(er).
All of which brings us back to our featured car. The youthful lady piloting this Eldorado drove cautiously, as if unaccustomed to diving a car of this size. That may be true, though dimensionally, this car doesn’t quite stick out the way it once would have: in terms of both length and width, it’s narrower than a modern Suburban, for instance. But of course its low height, visually intensified by the retracted top, makes this Cadillac look like the automotive equivalent of a foot-long hot dog.
Source: GM Heritage Center 1973 & 1974 Vehicle Information Kits. Not shown: Garganey Teal, Oceanic Teal, Mirage Taupe, Shadow Taupe, and Saturn Bronze.
When I first saw this car, I found the dark blue color to be striking. And unusual. Fortunately, the GM Heritage Center provides some information on color preferences, and we can gauge popularity for 16 of the 21 colors available on ’73 Eldorado Convertibles. If you seemingly recall mostly white or red examples of this car, your memory is not deceiving you, as roughly half of 1973’s production was painted in one of those two colors. Our featured car’s shade of Diplomat Blue was chosen by only 3.7% of buyers – a pity too, as it complements the car’s lines very well, particularly as contrasted with the white leather interior.
White was usually the most popular exterior color for Eldorado convertibles, and its favorite status for 1973 was further boosted by the Indianapolis 500 Pace Car, 566 examples of which were produced (53 for race/festival duty and 513 replica pace cars sold through dealers). This special edition alone accounted for about 6% of the 9,315 Eldorado convertibles built that year.
Although it wasn’t circling a track in front of the grandstands, this car received considerable attention from passersby. I had to wonder who was enjoying it more – the folks riding inside, or the bystanders smiling and waving as the big Caddy rolled by.
In crowded Newport, it wasn’t hard to follow the 4,700-lb. Cadillac’s trail, which led to a cafe’s parking lot. This angle shows some of the 1973 updates, including smoother-looking flanks (Cadillac eliminated the vertical crease line forward of the rear wheels), the only-for-’73 round side marker lamps, and redesigned tail lights. These changes created a more flowing appearance and a subtly sloping rear end; the ’73 version was arguably the most attractive of this generation’s eight model years.
Up front, new bumpers and a prominent eggcrate grille highlighted the ’73 model year changes. These 5-mph energy-absorbing bumpers were well integrated into the overall design – albeit easier to do on a car of this size, but still a pleasantly unobtrusive bumper design for the mid-1970s.
The plush interior is classically Cadillac, with loads of space and creature comforts, such as automatic climate control, a signal-seeking stereo, and power everything. Perhaps the most captivating interior feature is the gas pedal, connected to Cadillac’s massive 500-cu. in. V-8 powering the front wheels. An enthusiastic tap of that pedal is likely to use up a sizable portion of the world’s fossil fuel reserves.
GM was rightly proud of its “scissor top” convertible top mechanism (power-operated by electric motors, gears and cables – no hydraulics) that folded the roof and the glass rear window into a well behind the rear seat. It folded intricately enough to preserve both trunk space and a full-width rear seat.
Of course, that rear seat was intended to seat 3, not 4… and the (formerly) self-levelling rear suspension is sagging… but those minor quips aside, this convertible is delivering a great deal of enjoyment to its passengers. Incidentally, the Renaissance Revival building in the background contains the Audrain Automobile Museum, a worthy attraction for car enthusiasts visiting the Ocean State. At the time this picture was taken, Audrain’s main exhibit was called Sweet Rides-Summer Fun, highlighting vehicles ranging from roadsters to off-roaders that epitomized summer motoring. It was an excellent exhibit. But just outside of the museum, these seven friends are showing us how summer fun is really done.
Photographed in Newport, Rhode Island in August 2018.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1972 Cadillac Eldorado Convertible – The End Of An Exceptional Era Paul N
In Motion Classic / CC Jukebox: 1973 Cadillac Eldorado – Big Mac Joseph Dennis
What a lovely classic. Now that to me is a Cadillac!
I may be wrong but I believe that the reason the front bumper on this year’s model looks so well integrated was due to an exemption that convertibles and 2 door hardtops had from the 5 mph bumper laws. IIRC, those models were allowed an extra year (or 2?) because of the less rigid body structure of those models.
It seems to my (fading) memory that white, red, and black were the most popular Eldorado convertible colors. While white and gold were the most popular hardtop colors.
The 73 Eldorado front bumper is a full 5 mph design with hydraulics, like all 73 GM A, B, and C bodies.
The federal standard for 73 was applied to a percentage of the manufacturer’s fleet.
For 74, all vehicles were compliant front and rear.
Didn’t Chrysler manage to secure an exception for some ’74 models that were in the last year of production?
Chrysler actually claimed that the giant bumper guards introduced in 1973 were compliant, and no one argued much.
The bumper guards probably were compliant on front/rear impact, but not on corner damage.
They don’t look anymore integrated than any other GM product of 1973…in fact I think Buick’s, especially LeSabres look much better
I don’t know why GM went away from the shallow bars on many 1973 5-mph front bumpers to boxy bumpers like the 1973 Cadillacs. I assume that GM generally decided against the shallow ‘shelf’ effect and in favor of the boxy bumpers after the 73s already were committed for production.
They may not have been doing well on gummint bumper tests.
Although these have not been favorites of mine, I agree that the 73 is the most attractive of the bunch. And I am with you on the delicious color combo.
A fun sighting in what has become this car’s natural element. Although there was always something about an Eldorado convertible that made it a perfect parade car.
Wow, these did come in a color other than white or red!
Seriously, these and the various deVille’s from this time period are my mental picture when somebody says “Cadillac”. No doubt this is a function of when I was born but these certainly have more presence than what Cadillac was building 20 years later. One could argue about their (de)merits all day long, but there is no denying these were unabashedly Cadillacs.
Eric, I’m jealous of your spreadsheet and graphing abilities. You keep outdoing yourself and I think the one you did here is your best yet.
Thanks! I do a lot of data analysis at work, so I’m accustomed to making charts. Plus, for these CC charts, I rely on one of my kids as my graphic arts consultant… she has a much better sense of design & color that I do!
That is a fantastic colour that I haven’t seen before. Mine is the more typical re-sale red, and they make comfy summer cruisers with no torque steer. I’m guessing that the auto-level pump has given up the ghost in this case, and most tend to route an air line to the shocks in some accessible position and give them a fill once or twice in the summer. These cars can be tough on rear springs too, so maybe some sort of combination of the two. Both easy fixes.
I love that white remained the #1 color on Eldorado convertibles because the original ’53 Eldorado pioneered the use of white paint. And a white Eldorado remained an icon.
It’s little appreciated that the ’53 Eldorado’s white paint was a novelty. It wasn’t until then that a non-yellowing white car finish was available, and Cadillac led the way with the Eldorado.
From the picture air ride appears to no function
The ’71 brochure pictured describes the car as a “Fleetwood Eldorado”. I find this confusing. At least by ’76, when mother had a Fleetwood, that name described a fancier (and perhaps slightly larger?) variant of the Sedan de Ville.
Can someone enlighten me on why/how/when the Eldorado was a Fleetwood?
The Fleetwood name was dropped from the Eldorado for 1973. Before that, the car’s “official” name was Fleetwood Eldorado, though the “Fleetwood” part was used only sporadically by Cadillac (for example, the 1971 ad here uses Fleetwood in the text in the lead paragraph, but only Eldorado in the ad’s title and elsewhere in the text).
My guess is that regular people (i.e., not Cadillac ad men) never referred to the cars as Fleetwood Eldorados, so the Fleetwood part was quietly dropped.
That’s the extent of my knowledge of it — someone else may know more details.
I believe it was 1965 when the Eldo became part of the Fleetwood family.
Although the 1963 Eldorado used the same rocker trim and crest on the rear quarter as the Fleetwood Sixty Special and seems to have been generally considered a Fleetwood even though the Fleetwood badge was not on the exterior of the car.
Fleetwood had been a custom coachbuilder of bodies. GM’s Fisher Body bought it in the 1920s and for several decades later Fleetwood-built bodies were reserved for Cadillacs. By the 30s the lower series’ of Cadillacs got Fisher bodies with the Fleetwood bodies reserved for the high-end models. The Fleetwood name sort of came and went as part of an official model name but when you opened the door and looked at the rocker panel molding the Fleetwood cars got a “body by Fleetwood” label instead of the “body by Fisher” that was on most other GM cars. As time went on there became less and less real difference between a Fleetwood-built body and a Fisher-built one.
Why the Fleetwood name was used by Cadillac on some of the Fleetwood bodied cars and not on others would be a good topic for a CC article.
But an even more compelling question is whether Cadillac should revive the Fleetwood name for it’s high-foot trims.
Would it be better than “Platinum”? I say yes, given that Platinum credit cards were cool for a bout a week in the early ’90s, then drifted down to starter cards.
Fleetwood has a rich history that Johnny come latelys like Lexus can never match. Cadillac ought to use it.
The simple answer is that Fleetwood for some time designated Cadillac’s top-trim models, and was reflected in the interior by more expensive upholstery, etc. and better standard equipment. Since the Eldorado was a top-trim model, it used the Fleetwood prefix during some years of its production to make sure buyers realized it was just that, in order to hep justify its top-tier price.
But I suspect that it was dropped for the Eldorado in 1973 because Cadillac already was planning to introduce the Seville, which would be even more expensive, so they decided to use the Fleetwood name more as a model designator than a trim-level designator. Make sense?
Most sense of all. Thank you, Paul!
I saw a similar scene while vacationing in Amsterdam some years ago. A man was piloting a white Eldorado down the narrow street alongside a canal, wearing a cowboy hat, looking like the King of the World.
Thank you Eric for reminding us what a true Cadillac is!!! I had the pleasure of owning a veridian green 72 Eldorado and my fondest memory of it is looking over the air craft carrier hood and seeing that beautiful wreath and crest hood ornament, I felt like the richest guy in the Bronx!!!
There were several of these in my neighborhood during my high school years. At the time I thought they were the ugliest thing on wheels. Since then, the Aztek and BMW X6 have occurred, so there has been some modern competition. Nice colors, though.
I wish I could beam myself up from GA like what was done on ‘Star Trek’. That looks like a whole mess of fun cruising around Newport in that ’73 Eldo.
These summer revelers are taking advantage of my favorite feature of this generation of Eldorado (and Toronado too): the wide, nearly flat floor both front and rear. This would have been a huge advantage for me when I was growing up as the #3 kid in my family (meaning I usually got the middle seat), which corresponded with when these were new. The ’79-’85 generation also had the flat floors, but with their much narrower bodies were less suitable for seating 6, much less 7 people. The ’86 and later Eldos, though still front drive, now had a sizable hump in the center of the floor housing the exhaust system. I’m still unclear why GM was able to prevent the exhaust pipe from intruding on earlier cars but not the later ones. When FWD started taking over around 1980, humps in the floor became the norm.
I too recall most of these being white or red, with a white/red or all-red interior. Those color combinations were codified on the 1980s Eldorado and Riviera convertibles IIRC – no other colors were available.
The rear passengers also are enjoying a full width rear seat thanks to the cantilever top frame that fully retracts behind the seat. Typical convertibles have landau iron type top frames that retract into the side of the passenger compartment.
That too! Now if they’d only had paid as much attention to rear legroom, which contemporaneous reports judged subpar, it would have been a great ride back there. I wonder though if what was considered scant rear legroom in the early-to mid-’70s would still seem that way today, when can’t-stretch-your-legs-out back seats are the norm in cars. In photos the rear seat in these things looks huge, and there seems to be good legroom if the front seats are moved up a bit. I’ve never sat in the back of a pre-downsized huge ’70s personal luxury coupe, including this one.
GM personal-lux coupes often had less rear leg room than comparable sedans. From 1968 to 1977, two-door A-bodies generally were four inches shorter than comparable sedans, and the length came from the rear compartment. (The extra length of the A-body Grand Prix and Monte Carlo was in front of the firewall.)
I don’t know specifically about the development process of the Eldorado, but I suspect that it basically was drawn as a 3-seat coupe and grudingly modified to have a rear seat. In particular, the 1971 Eldorado coupe is prominent in eliminating the rolldown rear side window; it was always sold with a fixed vertical opera window.
When I first saw the lead picture, I lamented the creased left-rear quarter panel. Then as I read through and my morning coffee took hold, I realized it was a reflection of another car!
If you think an Eldorado convertible has a commanding presence in Newport, you can imagine the effect in the old streets of Avignon, France.
There was an arts and theater festival in the city, and the car was being used as an advertisement…
The only other car on the street that day was this, which I think makes for a nice Old World / New World contrast with the Eldorado.
That’s an Aixam 45 km/h “car”, you can drive it without having a driver’s license. Not allowed on the high-/freeway for obvious reasons. It’s most likely powered by a small diesel engine.
Whether it’s the halo effect supplied by the 1959 mile-high-finned Cadillac, homage to the late King of Rock & Roll, or a combination of the two, ’60s and ’70s Cadillac convertibles are all the rage these days. As the Eldorado was the pinnacle of Cadillac convertibles, it is the model of choice for those who want to exhibit the summer automotive high life at its former best. I never cared for the 1971-’78 Eldorados (coupe or convertible) when they were new, and still don’t consider them to be examples of good design or automotive elegance, but I must confess that, anytime I see an Eldo drop-top of this era, in full open-top sailing mode, I have to take a second look. These cars, for better or worse, epitomize the end of an era when the U.S. was the envy of the world for its optimism, economic prosperity and youthful exuberance. The element of kitsch is always lurking just below the surface, as if to confirm the suspicions of the rest of the developed world that America lacks the refinement so prized by its residents.
I bought a red over white ’76 Eldo convert last winter, for just this kind of use during the winter in Florida. With only 37,000 miles and a very clean, preserved appearance, the attention, comments and looks it receives are simply dumbfounding.
I thought it was just a sort of cool, older, irreverent and fun car for that climate and application – how wrong I was. Many, many people see it as something much different and the response we get to it whenever we drive it (which is daily) is so constant that it’s almost a bother at times. I would have never expected this in a million years.
The Eldo probably is every bit as wide as the new Suburban, regardless of stated width. The maximum nominal width of passenger cars and light trucks is 80 inches; wider vehicles are subject to restrictions. For legal purposes, bumpers and/or mirrors may be excluded. The 73 Eldo generally is quoted at exactly the same width as the 71 Eldorado that has flush front bumpers. The various and several states clamped down on the auto manufacturers in the late 50s to limit passenger car width, so this still was a relatively fresh rule in the early 70s; I assume that Cadillac didn’t want to publish an official number larger than 80.0
Having said that, the Suburban probably is wider across the mirrors.
While certainly a gigantic and lengthy car, it is 16″ shorter than my 2011 GMC 2500 Denali truck, so i guess I am used to the size. At an official 79.8″ wide, the ’76 version uses all legally available space by the looks of it. As porcine as these cars are weight wise, mine is also a full 2000 pounds less than the truck, and about the same as my 2018 Mercedes GLE 43. The perception of massive weight compared to new cars is completely illusory.
The hood is so long that it gives the impression of it being even longer. I equate it to driving my truck from the back seat. Driving these old tanks is a totally different experience from anything built in the last 30 years. It took some re-acclimation, no doubt about it.
While these were never my cup of tea, the mania surrounding “the last American convertible” in 1975-1976 utterly ruined it for me. These were very modest sellers in their first few years, and the pre-5 mile bumper ’71-’72 version is quite rare. But after Cadillac announced that the ’76 would be the last ever, it unleashed a huge amount of media frenzy and folks were snapping them up as collectibles.
It all fit into the vibe of the mid-70s vibe anyway, and it was of course the bicentennial too. The Eldo convertible became an icon of America, or an America that was no longer to be, but folks were seemingly desperate to preserve that idea anyway. Without going political, the Eldo convertible became something of a preview of the current political atmosphere: it had become a symbol of “when America was great”.
Agreed. The period you speak of roughly coincides with the switch from Eldos with fender skirts to Eldos with the exposed rear wheels. I kind of like the earlier skirted models but can’t stand the later ones. I have a hard time trying to decide if my dislike was the actual styling of the car or the hype associated with The Last Convertible (along with tedium from the advancing age of the body). Those last Eldo verts turned out to be horrible investments because it seemed like 85% of them got preserved. Sort of like the 1980 Corvette Indy pace car edition.
I’m fine with the “last American convertible” hype and hubbub because it insured there’d be a huge surplus of these cars that were well-preserved. I can’t think of another American car from the mid-’70s except possibly Corvettes where there are so many survivors and so many in almost-new condition. If I ever get the urge to drive a humongous 43-year-old Cadillac convertible I’ll be able to do so at an affordable price. Thanks, “last American convertible” suckers!
Funny – I never thought of them as a symbol of “When America was great” – I always have thought of them as a symbol of “Everything that had gone wrong with Detroit”.
The 60’s Cadillacs were far superior cars – these were just bigger without being better – a gaudier wrapper on a worse candy bar. The engines in these had (comparatively) no power and ran poorly because of the pollution controls but the gas mileage was worse. The styling was sad compared to the 67 Eldorado. The quality of the interior materials was …No better that of a Chevy Caprice… The only real excuse for these was a marketing one as ‘last of the convertibles’ – which turned out not to be true.
Yeah, they’re fun but in the same sort of way having a Beluga Whale as a pet is fun.
In summary, as an exercise in wretched excess, these were indeed wretched.
You missed my point. Because they were the last big Caddy convertibles, they were held up as a final symbol of what had been the image of Cadillac for so long. I’m not talking about their actual qualities. By this time, a lot of folks had moved on to imports, and that just heightened the cultural divide that was well under way, in this case automotively. I’m saying that the people that bought them did so because for them these cars symbolized an era of American greatness, real or (highly) imagined.
“I never thought of them as a symbol of “When America was great” – I always have thought of them as a symbol of “Everything that had gone wrong with Detroit”.”
So unbearably true. No power, no fuel economy, no surplus room in the garage, and not that much room in the car, all things considered.
Dear Old Dad’s ’74 had multiple failures of the “self-levelling” (proprietary air shocks + cheap tubing + “level sensor” + on-board vacuum-powered, spring-loaded air compressor) rear suspension. Air shocks NEVER worked right, for long, on any car they were ever installed on. It was so bad that pretty-much any Eldo of this generation that doesn’t drag it’s ass has been modified–generally with “overload” shocks since the OEM rear springs are completely insufficient, and aftermarket air shocks aren’t plumbed the same as the GM units.
These things deserved every one of the six sitting ducks on the Cadillac Crest.
Bought a ’76 convertible new, drove it for years. We took it on many family vacations, sometimes covering 1,000 miles the first day, helped by a 16 quart cooler resting between the front seats! I will always remember Sunday drives with the top down and my two kids standing in the back talking to us over the front seat. Not today!
In the early ’80s, a friend of mine inherited a pristine ’75 Eldo convertible from a grandmother who passed away. Of course it was white with a red interior. We’d cruise around once in a blue moon, but at 10 mpg, but neither of us was rich and the number and distance of trips was limited. He sold it off when he realized that fixing even minor things – like the electric antenna – could be expensive.
The folks who bought a ‘76 Eldorado Convertible had waged an unsuccessful class action lawsuit against GM when the ‘84 Eldorado Convertible hit the market. Chrysler brought out the LeBaron Convertible in 1982, followed by Riveria a little later in ‘82 and Mustang in ‘83. Yes, the convertible returned.
Newport is a wonderful place to tool around in an Eldorado convertible. While I like the ‘73 model, I prefer the sans fender skirted, rectangular light ‘75-‘78. Those post “last” convertible Eldorados did get pretty long in the tooth however, especially next to the Mark V.
Sometime in the mid to late ‘80s I visited my hometown of Madison. My best friend and his wife had use of a ‘75 Eldorado Convertible, we went on a delightful road trip – took the (still) free Merrimac Car Ferry over the Wisconsin River to the little town of Lodi to see the town’s big attraction Susie the Duck who unfortunately was unavailable.
Back in the 1970s my mother had a friend with a then newish ‘75 or ‘76 Eldorado Convertible, she was the first person I meet who had an indoor swimming pool, sort of the typical Cadillac owner I guess.
There were several companies – ASC was probably the biggest – that did aftermarket convertible conversions during the time factory US convertibles weren’t built. I think all the ’80s cars you mentioned were essentially factory-authorized aftermarket conversions, sold directly by the manufacturer. If I recall correctly, the ’87 Chrysler LeBaron was the first truly factory-built American convertible designed from the outset to be a convertible from the droptop-revival era.
According to Ford, the 1983 Mustang had a factory-built convertible body. Cars & Concepts installed the top off-line, but didn’t cut the body.
Chrysler took the K-car convertible in-house before the 87 Lebaron. Previously, Cars & Concepts cut completed cars.
ASC cut Rivieras and Eldorados.
As usual, there’s somebody here who knows way more about this stuff than me 🙂 Thanks for clearing that up.
ASC did assist Mercury in making 557 1984-1986 Capri convertibles
https://ascmclaren.org/WhatIsAnAscMcLaren.html
I see a rag top 84-86 Capri quite frequently around my area. It is painted brown (or is it chocolate brown?)
The ASC Capris weren’t factory-backed conversions.
With a 46′ turning radius I can see this blue whale having to do some three-point right hand turns in Newport, where a lot of the streets weren’t built wide.
That’s a lovely picture of a group out having fun on a summer day in a classic car, and yes, it is nice to see this car in a different color. Is this Caddy the same year as Boss Hogg’s car in “The Dukes of Hazzard?”
Note the Norwegian license plates.
Boss Hogg 70 DeVille on tv. In movie with Burt Reynolds he had a 75-76 Eldorado.
The real Boss Hogg Sorrell Booke had the 70 Cadillac DeVille
These gargantuan El-D’s always remind me of a “Twilight Zone” encounter, quite literally. Back in this early 70’s era, I was driving along Sunset Blvd. in the Bel Air section of Los Angeles, stopped at a red light, and who should come gliding up next to me but none other than Rod Serling, piloting his all white Eldorado convertible, top down, alone in the driver’s seat. It was quite the “ethereal” moment.
It’s too bad the owner, who seems to have lots and lots of friends, didn’t get a car with the automatic leveling feature. Looks she could put it to good use. (I did a little research: it appears it was standard in ’71 when this chassis was introduced, but optional on the ’73.)
I disagree about the ’73 restyle. The ’71 introduction model rear end had a trunk lid and bumper combination that was faceted like an emerald-cut jewel. Grandly stylish, and impractical because it ate some trunk space. The ’73 restyle flattened out that jewel. I suspect it had something to do with new bumper regulations demanding a flatter bumper. But something was lost in ’73.
CCers, have y’all noticed the featured car’s “cube” located above the rear seat back?
That’s a rear lamp monitor, lets the driver confirm with a glance in the mirror that rear lamps are functional.
Reliable reading via fiber-optic-cable leading to each lamp. Simple tech, if the lamp glows the monitor glows.
Front lamps are monitored through rugged low-profile cast aluminum fender-top-located displays; the more fragile plastic rear monitor all intact in a convertible is not so common.
FWIW I prefer the ’71 and ’72 version, with a slight preference for ’71’s plain bumpers and vented deck lid; meanwhile ’72 gets a nod for “Eldorado” script in the trim.
’73… it’s taken some time to get over the front bumper and the afterthought “slapped on” looking round shaped rear side lamp.
’73-on had some worthwhile mechanical improvements, IE engine mounts and belt drive arrangement.
Looks like the self-leveling rear suspension has failed on that one [lead image]…
So pretty in this glorious color .
I know many love to hate these Caddies, I still find them impressive .
Maybe just add some coil over shocks ? .
-Nate
And of course Tom Selleck drove a white over red as Lance White in Rockford Files.
The occupants don’t look too happy to me.
I went to a kindergarten run by an elderly Englishwoman in an old house in Newport. Aside from the “cottages,” the town itself has gone upmarket in 60 years. The invasion of the hoi polloi had a counter-intuitive effect.
As a young man when these were current I was of two schools of mind on them.
1. They were way too big, way too heavy, way too consumptive overall, and styling was absolutely garish.
2. For all of the above reasons I was sure they would be a revered collectable in a relatively few years.
I was wrong. They have become collectable, but it took much longer and I don’t think they have the value or following I thought they would. Not dead wrong, but wrong. Oh well, not the first time…