(first posted 6/9/2011) My absolute favorite Cadillac of all time are the 1962 models. Turning on the television, it seems I’m not the only one. These particular Cadillacs pop up in pop culture more often than others, save the 1959 models.
Whether it’s My Cousin Vinny,
Or Mad Men.
Pop Culture seems obsessed with the skeg-finned Cadillacs of 1962. They stand in the middle of the transition period between the height of the fins in 1959, and the somewhat homely restraint of the 1965 Models. In modern Hollywood portrayals of the early 1960s, these particular Cadillacs still hold the status of having “Made It.” The concurrent Lincolns that had more design influence on American Automotive design don’t appear as often as equal status symbols. They may appear for historical accuracy, but they less often seem the object of desire.
Maybe the Camelot Continental inspired too many imitators? It started out as a Thunderbird proposal. By the time both reached production in 1961, the Continental and Thunderbird shared many design details. Maybe a consequence of sharing a factory and Robert McNamara’s cost saving ways. Then the theme became diluted when Elwood Engel went to Chrysler and made variations on the theme first with the 1964 Imperial, then with the 1965 Chryslers. Or, as the 1962 GT Hawk posted during Studebaker week shows, imitation began almost immediately.
Precious little about the 1961-62 Cadillacs seem to have trickled down to other General Motors cars (or any other 1960s production car). It is more a car of the Kennedy Era than the Lincoln Continental could ever hope to be. The 1961 Continental rode out the whole decade, for better or worse, in the same basic shape. It’s harder for a causal eye to know all the details that make, say, a 1963 Continental, a 1963.
And it turns out this is a 1964 Conti… kinda proves my point…Whoops.
Details on the Cadillac like the white covered tail lights that glow red when the brakes are applied replace and make it different from the two circular lenses on 1961 models. Or those Skeg fins running that Henkle Knife sharp visual line from the front wheel well all the way to the rear of the car, which would disappear for 1963.
Little planned obsolescence styling changes, along with engineering refinement kept Cadillac high in resale value and appeal during this time. Even in ads for their 1965 models show the previous seasons offerings as being a desirable way to step into the excellence that was the Standard of the World. That’s a far better option than settling for that Ninety Eight Luxury sedan or Electra 225, isn’t it?
Seeing one of these Cadillacs on the street today, they seem reminiscent of an era long gone. An era in which women donned white gloves, nylons and pearls for shopping trips to I. Magnin department store for pillbox hats. Or to Kroger for the fixings of Steak Diane.
An era where men wore suits, ties and hats on a daily basis, even in the sweltering heat. The time that you actually went to the dry cleaners, and had clothing pressed in crisp creases, not unlike the sharp lines of this Cadillac.
When the creases in slacks started to relax, it also seemed that Cadillac also relaxed its design philosophy. By 1967, the standard line Cadillacs had embraced the hips that sprouted at Pontiac in 1963. Sexual liberation in car design? It might be a stretch, but I wouldn’t doubt it put off a number of stoic buyers. The more Caddies became rolling bordellos (ironically, playing catch up to cheaper cars), the more buyers looked overseas for import luxury from Mercedes, and to a lesser extent, Jaguar.
Now you might wonder why I latch onto the 1962 models more than others. When I was in Catholic School, my best friend’s grandparents had a 1962 Coupe DeVille.
Black with the most glove soft white leather I had ever seen. I had seen my fair share of Brougham-y pillow button loose cover “Regency” leather interiors in the Oldsmobiles I had grown up in. They were comfortable, but seemed to come with this ungodly slippery sheen that made me wonder if the interiors were sprayed with a lifetime supply of Lemon Pledge.
But the leather of this Cadillac was of this elegant sheen that seemed so subdued, refined. Close the heavy doors, an echo of a distant AC Delco Starter, and then silence. Not tomb like silence, but a white noise silence of serenity. And then silent, effortless motoring. The only noise really was the clicking of the Hydra Matic column shifter from all the way to the bottom “R” back up to drive. None of the jet like whine I associated with every Turbo Hydra Matic car I had encountered (and sometimes crave to hear) in “modern” GM products. You were coddled in a silky, swift, Paradise. It’s almost as this was the ultimate white space.
From the sea of middling at best GM products I was familiar with, that 25 year old magic carpet ride made me understand why so many of my relatives talked, almost in rhapsody about how magnificent these particular cars were. There wasn’t the hoarse lumpiness of the HT4100 V8 disturbing anything. There wasn’t any sagging headliners or finicky electroluminescent gauges interrupting the white space. There wasn’t a repair bill waiting for the 440-T4 Hydra Matic waiting down the road. These Cadillacs were products of when GM was at the top of their game, and very close to the end of the era when Cadillacs could be considered standards of the world.
Their 390 V8s were smaller than both their C-Body brethren. By 1962, Oldsmobile checked in with the 394 Sky Rocket for Ninety Eights to make up for the doddering Roto-Hydramatic’s slow shifts. Buick was up to 401 cubic inches for the Deuce and a Quarter. Lincoln was still running a massive, detuned 430, Imperial a slightly less ridiculous 413. Through brilliant engineering, or more likely the aid of the four-speed Fluid Coupling Hydra Matic, these Cadillacs were still capable of hustling to 60 in under 10 seconds and would top out at a genuine 125 mph, all the while returning gas mileage in the low teens. 11-15 miles to the gallon might not (ever) be anything to brag about, but one assumes at least the Lincoln did worse. And the high strung big inline sixes from a Heckflosse 300 SE weren’t all that much better.
It’s easy to see why most luxury car buyers voted with their pocketbooks in 1962 and purchased nearly 161,000 of these cars. There’s enough of the subtle balance between quiet elegance, brash style, exceptional performance and brand Cachet that would soon be squandered. Even today, if anyone gave me the choice of *any* Cadillac, I’d pick the 1962s over any model, just based on a few rides in that Black Coupe DeVille 20 years ago. I bought into the media propaganda. These were the Best Cadillacs ever.
Outstanding article. You really captured why a Cadillac was a Cadillac circa 1962, and why anything else just wouldn’t do.
Great article. Ironically, Ford in my opinion had really taken over a decade later when they seemed to have grasped the concept of “exclusive, status car” with the Mark IV, definitely with the V (oh the designer editions) and once more although never quite to the same extent with the VII. Ditto for the Town Car whose top trim levels still screamed “status” in the 80s. The 2nd gen was never that, and the 3rd gen was a dinosaur, albeit a great one (much like the closing years of the Mark VII and the entire run of the Mark VIII were dinosaurs). By then Cadillac had long become a joke. But in the 60s they definitely still did “get it.” As evidenced by this and the 4th gen Eldos. Wonderful write-up on a great car. Cue Springsteen, “Pink Cadillac.”
Now honey it ain’t your money
Cos baby I got plenty of that
I love you for your pink Cadillac, crushed velvet seats…
The pertinent question is what it was that stole first Cadillac’s and then Lincoln’s thunder, which they never quite recaptured (Lincoln definitely not, Cadillac is making some strides)? It’s not just the performance, although the Germans had it so that’s definitely a part of it. And it’s definitely not being “smarter” than luxury, lol (there is really nothing smart about an obnoxiously expensive automobile). So what is it? 🙂
I would say Paul’s series on the “Brougham” phenom, plus his previous posts about the decontenting and downward price march of Cadillacs (even though that had started faintly in the 1950s) explain far too well why Cadillac eventually faltered. When the basic concept of what was “luxurious” could be had by optioning out any full size car from any brand, why go for the Cadillac? Especially by the early 80s when a luxed out Caprice Classic or Gas Olds Ninety Eight was far less troublesome than a variety of Cadillac efforts like the V-8-6-4, the HT4100 V8, or well, those diesels.
Also, Paul’s post on the 1971 Cadillacs brings up the point that by that point a basic Cadillac Calais was only 25-30% more expensive than a Loaded out Caprice, and with more expanded financing (if I’m quoting his piece correctly) put Cadillac within the reach of more buyers, buyers that back in 1960 would have stretched to be in an Olds Eighty Eight. And that’s how Cadillac (if I remember correctly) was able to move 350K cars in 1973 before the Gas Crunch came along). Add that in that they weren’t all that better built than a host of other GM cars, when 10 years before they were so well crafted for a mass production car…. and…
I’d also add in the Social factors: Cadillac was the first Luxury brand that did openly sell and cater to African American Buyers. For African Americans wanting to flaunt their financial success nothing would do (and for some, nothing still does) like a Cadillac (for those less showy there was the Buick Deuce and a Quarter, oddly my great grandmother preferred a succession of New Yorkers and Imperials starting with a 1956). But I’ll be blunt to say to more moneyed, Caucasian buyers having Cadillac become a minority status symbol, rolled into it’s attainability to middle class buyers (or even working class if they saved) made them hunt for something more “exclusive,” even if that meant putting up with no power seats, automatic climate control (Cadillac introduced that in 1964 if I remember correctly), and a rather stiff 4 speed automatic in W108/109 Mercedes for those who perhaps bought Fleetwoods, and W114/115 cars for people that bought ordinary Calais/Series 62/DeVilles. They might have been light on options but at least they were Built as solid as Packards used to be 20 years prior
And once the winds changed, in popular taste it never really shifts back, only moves forward. It’s remarkable that Cadillac and Buick survived all of that. Out of Buick and Oldsmobile in the last 20 years, I always though Oldsmobile had a more distinct from traditional Cadillac image than Buick…Oh well.
I’m glad Laurence went there first, because I’m convinced that Caddy’s success in marketing to African-Americans did a lot to destroy Cadillac’s value as an aspirational brand (and also created the enduring myth of the Welfare Cadillac).
Lincoln was done in by the Nasser-era decision that Jaguar and Land Rover were the luxury brands for Ford, and Lincoln was to be near-luxury (well, that and the inability of L-M dealers to comprehend the idea of selling anything that wasn’t traditional American BOF RWD). Once Jaguar and LR were unloaded, Lincoln was left hanging there as more of a Buick competitor.
Ever hear of the acronym for PONTIAC? Aside from that, I personally think it was the slow-motion degradation of the Sloan model plus the brand’s addiction to volume sales that did Cadillac in, not to mention the attendant drop in perceived quality.
Perhaps seeing more and more African-Americans embrace the Cadillac as a vaunted status symbol did push some into finding a suitable replacement, even if that meant crossing the water for one. But I feel as though it was a relatively minor sentiment that paled in comparison to the General’s internal bungling.
Actually, it has been argued that Cadillac’s willingness to reach out to African-American buyers kept it from going the way of Packard. Long before the de-contenting of the 1970’s, Cadillac blew Lincoln and Imperial away in volume while maintaining its status and quality.
The big money went to Mercedes because it maintained the quality Cadillac allowed to lapse. And the high-end pricing spurred on by the devaluation of the dollar with respect to the mark ensured added exclusivity.
Cadillac certainly chased volume and market share to a fault, but it wasn’t the buyers who took the lustre off the brand.
Two more articles to read about the same phenomenon:
1) The percolation of Cadillac-originated or popularised luxury features into the entire GM lineup, even so far down as Chevrolet—provided you ticked the right options. Quote: “Can you believe it? Even the man from Chevy managed to build himself a Cadillac! The Caprice Classic even had its own badge – which looked kind of like a Cadillac badge redrawn by a fellow high on LSD and limited to one color of paint. And thus the tableau was complete; denied their own Cadillacs, each division had managed to create a Fakeillac to serve in place of the Standard of the World.” http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/02/avoidable-contact-how-fake-luxury-conquered-the-world/
2) Cadillac Division’s relentless volume-chasing was highly ill-advised. Even if you include the marquee sales to rich black people in the USA, that would constitute a small percentage of total Cadillac sales. There were a lot of middle-class and even working class people able to afford a new Cadillac, and even more with used ones, regardless of race. However, German imports were ridiculously overpriced due to a lot of factors, so they were a natural fit to the “exclusivity” crowd—the kind that George Orwell described as willing “to live in a mews in Mayfair for the sake of the ‘W.1’ on his notepaper.” Quote: “The initial virtue of the Mercedes-Benz was simply that it cost more and everybody knew it. By putting a Benzo in one’s driveway, one was declaring that one had not only forgotten the vagaries of the now-discredited American luxury ladder, one had soared well above it on a refreshing wave of cold cash.” http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/02/avoidable-contact-rich-corinthian-swaybars/
You really nailed the era with this, as the 1962 Caddys (as well as the Impalas) had that long, linear design form that speaks well of that time before things started going crazy in America. It was still the land of “American Graffiti”, turquoise color schemes, space, classy air and passenger train travel and well-dressed people!
One word: CLASS! Something sadly lacking today.
But CLASS is the reason why the 6- and 7-series exist in BMW’s lineup. I find it sad that what was traditionally a US forte is now done to perfection by the Germans while the most Detroit seems to be able do is put out pimped up Fusions and Tauri, and that one luxohatchback. Sad.
A friend owns a 3-series, and recently received in the mail a personalized hand signed letter advertizing the new 6-series, beautifully, almost poetically written. That’s… class.
I mean, I look at those cars and I see what used to be Detroit’s bread and butter in the glory years. It’s not like it’s not selling anymore, those cars do sell. What’s more, in BMW’s case they’ve propelled the Bavarians’ entire lineup to the “status” high end of the market, including the 3-series which was never intended as a status automobile (but it is now!!!). And all that the 6- and 7-series (and the respective Mercedes, and Audis) are is what Detroit used to be, only done in a modern way. They’re beautiful boats, for lack of a better term. They refuse to compromise comfort and expensive materials and beautiful lines realized in the framework of imposing, uncompromising, in-your-face dimensions. And people of status love it, just as they always have. Because alphas, those who “have arrived” that is, love to impose, and they love to rub it in. And that’s what those cars are for, and there will always be a market for it. So why can’t they make them like that here?
One other thing that stands out to me with Detroit today is that both Ford and GM are trying to build their lineups from the bottom up. GM less so, because somebody there is smart enough to learn a few things from Audi and BMW. Both of those German companies have spent so much time advertizing their high end cars (and continuously stressing that their competition was Mercedes) that buying a 3-series became almost a Buick-like experiense of yesterday, where you couldn’t afford a Caddy but you wanted some degree of status so then you bought a Buick which basically basked in Cadillac’s glory, and this way you had sorta arrived, even though you didn’t have the Ultimate Toy. As I see it, both Audi and BMW are built from the top down, the emphasis is on the status of their high end automobiles, and then it’s only a matter of time and styling until the lesser entry level models get to bask in that same glory (and sell in record numbers, because people want status).
Ford is doing the opposite by making Lincoln a tarted-up Ford. That’s not the way to do it, IMO. Ford should be a smaller Lincoln. GM seems to get this part, but then the Cadillacs are still not bold enough and the Chevys are too mundane and poorly styled, so then that drags them down.
Funnily, these German luxury cars now feature nearly as much chrome as those old Cadillacs!
I agree than while the CTS is great, Cadillac sorely needed something that would compete in the top tier, as a ‘halo’ vehicle that would help raise the brand’s prestige as a whole. Too bad the next big caddy will merely be an also-ran (just like the current DTS/STS), from the mouth of the boss himself.
Right now, FoMoCo seems intent on letting Lincoln play the role that Mercury once played – a slightly-upscale complement to the mainline Fords, with the Titanium trims closing in on yanking that rug from under them. Bad idea.
GM is busy restructuring Cadillac, but by adopting Germanic sensibilities wrapped in American swagger. A commendable effort, but a lot of people who still remember what the brand once represented aren’t pleased and the people who are attracted to the upscale German automotive experience are going for the real thing, not an American imitation.
The lack of a bonafide flagship among those two speaks to the problems at hand. Cadillac has the XTS, a full-size FWD luxury sedan based on a cheaper stablemate, the Chevy Impala. Lincoln’s full-size luxury offering is the MKS, a tarted-up Taurus. Both vehicles loudly communicate to the world that both companies have thrown in the towel and given up on offering flagship luxury, preferring instead to promote the Navigator and Escalade as their top-of-the-line offerings – the path of least resistance taken under the grip of spreadsheet politics.
Audi shares platforms with other VAG brands, but it’s done in a way that it never devalues the vehicles they underpin. BMW and Mercedes Benz both understand that being a premium luxury brand means maintaining the premium mystique. Hence both maintaining their flagship luxury sedans while carefully and cautiously dangling the tiny branch (1-Series/3-Series and CLA/C-Class) for up-and-comers to grasp and, if they’re lucky, ride all the way to the big boys (7-Series and S-Class).
GM and Ford, on the other hand, have devalued Cadillac and Lincoln in the relentless pursuit of quick and easy profits from volume sales and the arrogant assumption that no red-blooded American would dream of buying foreign luxury. GM and Ford thought they could serve up just about anything to a hungry audience who’d lick the plate clean and ask for thirds. It didn’t turn out like that and both companies are still paying dearly for it.
I think that part of the difference is that the Cadillac, Lincoln, and Imperial, while luxurious and high-priced, were not obnoxiously high priced as are luxury cars today.
We were looking at a new silver CTS sedan in Costco last night, and were surprised at how it looks to be about the same general size as our silver current-generation Accord. It’s hard to imagine what about the CTS makes it worth 44 grand as opposed to high 20’s for the Accord. Panel fit isn’t any better, the side windows are actually smaller, the grille and front clip has the weird Z-lines. I’m not saying that the Accord’s that great-looking, just that the Caddy doesn’t beat it.
Anyway, back to the ’62…these were indeed great looking cars, part of the transition from the wild 59-60’s to the relatively restrained 65 and 66 models. Incidentally the Lincoln shown with its flat side glass is a 64-or-later car.
Ha. I guess that proves my point. It is a 1964 Continental. Oops. I’ll update the piece with a slice of humble pie shortly.
Now days a Caddy is built on a Holden platform using a Holden engine V6 so it holds little alure GM NA seems to have lost the ability to build cars especially performance orientated RWD cars luckily one of it subsidiaries knows how. Back in 62 when this Cad was cmade it was the best effort GM had and all its other offerings aspired to be as good as a Cadillac and took styling cues from it. The new CTS while very different looking is not a good looking car to me for some odd reason it was a big seller in NZ, GM decided to release its CTS in the OZ/NZ market and prepared 180 cars for release slotting them into the local Holden lineup at the very top above the Statesman $90k+ but then got cold feet fearing that in a recession it wouldnt sell GM then put the shipment up for tender, one NZ dealer bid and got them on the condition no cars were to be sold outside New Zealand a tiny market they sold out in 2 weeks and have since bought another shipment of UK spec cars and sold them too Kiwis do like yankee cars when they are sold at real prices there is no way in hell that a CTS is a better car than a Holden or worth more these sold at Holden money and were well recieved another marketing disaster for GM The Ozzies would buy Caddys too but not for a premium price any more. I got given a book as a child cars cars cars this was the model Cadillac featured I looked as wonderful then as it does now
What everyone seems to forget is how can you build and design anything worth mega-buck luxo-cruser cash and cachet when the whole board of directors are carving out a multi-million dollar bonus for themselves every year good or bad.
I totally agree, these are quintessentially Kennedy-era cars. It’s ironic, given that, that they were designed in the Eisenhower era…if I’m recalling correctly, I think the ’62 designs would have been locked by spring ’59, and they were a later outgrowth of a movement within GM that began when someone saw a lot full of ’57 Chryslers in the summer of 1956.
The ’62s owe a lot to the rare, Pinin Farina-built 1960 Eldorado Brougham, which introduced the skegs and the revamped taillight shapes. I don’t know how aware the average buyer was of the final Brougham, but it wouldn’t have hurt, since the Brougham was a $13,000 car, more than twice the asking of a basic Series 62.
I think part the problem with the ’61-’63 Continental was that it doesn’t have a lot of continuity with anything else. It doesn’t look like previous Lincolns (given the oddities of the ’58-’60 cars, probably just as well), and it generally doesn’t have a lot of connection to other designs (although several subsequent designs, notably the ’64 Imperial, lunched off it). Also, while it’s eminently tasteful, it’s always struck me as a little bland. I honestly don’t know how well it would have gone over as a Thunderbird, because T-bird buyers of that era really seemed to relish gimmicks. The Continental was very clean, but also almost antiseptic.
Were there even enough of either the 1959 or 1960 Eldorado Brougham produced for a show model to be in every metropolitan area of the United States? I feel like it would have been marketed as a Special Order model to the really discriminating Cadillac Buyer that had to have the absolute best of the best, even if that meant buying it sight unseen.
There was another element that seriously hurt the Continental for years: Lack of body styles. There was no Hardtop Coupe til what? 1966-67? and then there was no 4 Door Hardtop ever. Even Imperial gave you a full cross section of then popular body styles. Although the Convertible was somewhat glamorous, there’s something always sober and a bit too stoic about the Sedans, especially since I’ve only seen them in rather basic colors (Black, Navy, Silver, White).
There was a grand total of 200 Broughams in 1959-1960, so most Cadillac fanciers probably never saw one, much less got to sit in one at a dealer. But it was in the catalog, although with the standard Eldorado (which wasn’t cheap, either — something like $7,800), and it was a nice talking point for salesmen. Cadillac almost certainly lost money on all the Broughams, but they generated buzz and floor traffic at auto shows, and added a certain “glamma” (to quote a Cadillac vanity plate I used to see around town) to the line. Probably more than Chrysler or Ford got from their not-very-successful attempts to establish Imperial and Continental as separate brands, but I digress.
The lack of a two-door hardtop probably didn’t help the Continental, it’s true. That appears to have been a cost-saving measure. When the ’61 Continental was developed, Lincoln’s future was very much in doubt, and if Robert McNamara hadn’t liked the alternate Thunderbird design, Lincoln probably wouldn’t have survived to the Kennedy inauguration. McNamara asked if they could make the design into a practical four-door, which they did, but M-E-L management was apparently afraid that if they ran up the tooling costs any higher, McNamara might change his mind — that’s why the convertible ended up being a four-door. (The sedan had the suicide doors because even with a wheelbase stretch, it was the only way to provide decent entry/exit without making major packaging changes, and it had B-posts for structural reasons.)
According to Tom Bonsall, Lincoln continued to lose money until the mid-sixties, which is why they didn’t add the two-door hardtop until MY1966. As much as the critics liked it, I don’t think the public was terribly moved by the 1961 design…as you say, too sober for its own good.
I’d love to see a movie or TV series about 1950’s & 60’s Detroit.
One of the most memorable episodes would undoubtedly be that apocryphal first sighting of 1957 Chrysler products that sent GM into such a panic!
The city or the auto business? I would love to see a movie or show set in Detroit in its hay day in the 50’s or so and the auto industry would be a good backdrop. I’m not from there, but I’ve been fascinated with how great that city was and how incredibly far it fell.
I’m thinking primarily auto business, although it’s hard not to imagine episodes in which the city plays a part – 1967 being an obvious one. The significant public buildings would have their cameos throughout.
Check out this pre-riots promotional video of Detroit:
http://youtu.be/aBZ6hgA-Cc4
Me too. A quality production of Arthur Hailey’s “Wheels” would be a start.
As long as it had the attention to detail that “Madman” offers.
Any script writers out there?
This has always been my favorite Cadillac as well. I think the contemporary Continental has become an icon in the decades since (see “Entourage”, for example), but at the time, driving a Cadillac was a sign, if not the sign, for having made it–which is why with Don Draper’s choice of a car, “Mad Men” was pitch-perfect as usual. (Even with Jon Hamm currently serving as the voice of Mercedes-Benz advertising, I don’t think you’ll see Don driving a Mercedes anytime soon–well, if the series goes into the early ’70s, a W107 for the new wife.) The ’59’s were too over-the-top and subject to caricature (I’m sure more pink ’59s exist now than rolled off the line), and the later cars had started to lose their identity. A ’62 Cadillac just looks clean and spare and…just like 1962, in my mind.
When I was a kid in 1962, our family doctor had a charcoal-blue ’62 Sedan DeVille and he used to make house calls.
Whenever he made a house call for my brother or one of my parents, I was out in the driveway scrutinizing every inch of it and reveling in it’s glory as long as he was in the house.
The 1960 is my favorite, but the ’62 is a close second. I didn’t like Cadillacs again until the gorgeous ’67 Eldorado. The 1965-1968 Calais, DeVille, and Fleetwood looked so old-fashioned compared to Olds and Buick. Hated them.
Thanks for the memories.
The 1962 was subtle in it’s premium status. I liked the 1970 as a perfect Cadillac year, very bold Styling. In 1971, The styling looked Cheaper, More like a Chevrolet, While at the same time, the 1971 Chevrolet looked Like a 70 Cadillac. More serious, less like a Funeral car in the front. The Next Cheapening blunder came with the piggish 1974,5,6 Model years… So much so, that the restyled downsized 77s were a big improvement.
But to my knowledge Cadillac has never regained it’s status as Standard of the World, in Automotive Stying, nor anything else. Or am I wrong?
1962… is very Subtle in it’s status level. The skeg sides look cheaply crisp to me. What is a Skeg anyway?
A skeg is that finny thing on the bottom of the fenders. it always seemed like a funny word to me, but apparently it comes from yachting; there it refers to this kind of a finny thing, but on the keel.
too funny, catbert430…the way you describe “..scrutinizing every inch of it and reveling in it’s glory…”
Reminds me so very well of the afternoon when one of Dad’s friends stopped by with his brand new 1965 Olds Starfire…which I considered to be one of the most beautiful monsters of its time -especially with the exhausts outlets in the lower rear fender chrome trim! Anyway they were standing on the front lawn talking so I wandered down to the curb to inspect the Starfire’s awesomeness…only to get yelled at by Dad to “get away from there” ended with some derogatory nickname. I was so embarrassed because to me I was giving nothing but admiration. Dad, rest your soul but sometimes you just didn’t get me!
Laurence, I applaud your choice of Cadillac. The 62 has always been my favorite too, although I have a soft spot for the 63-64 as well.
I think that my love of the 62 is partly because my grandfather had one of these when I was a kid. It was a virtual twin to your feature car, except that Granddad’s had black and white interior. He bought it new and drove it well into the 70s, and was the last new car he ever bought.
That car felt like a bank vault when you got in and pulled that solid metal door-pull to shut the door. Everything about that car felt tight and solid and real compared to the increasingly plasticky cars we saw as the 60s turned into the 70s. I loved the fender mounted turn signal lights and the white taillight lenses that lit up red. Wow, Laurence. You are a magician, because all of a sudden I am about 8 years old again. Great piece.
Actually, the post was inspired by the 1966 DeVille that’s in the cohort that I found a few days before this 1962 model. My Uncle had a 1966 Coupe DeVille (powder blue with a white vinyl top and white leather) that he bought brand new as a “Sunday” car that due to life, after 1984, got garaged (although driven up and down the block and the oil changed regularly).
When he retired in 1997, I was nearing drivers permit age. Guess which car I wanted? But my Aunt Ethel gave him an ultimatum: either buy a retirement gift car to himself, or restore the Cadillac, not both. Seeing the ease (and discount) of getting a fully loaded Yukon SLT versus having too many memories of being a grease monkey (He’d spent 35 years as the parts manager for an Oldsmobile Dealership) he sold the Caddy, and took the Yukon.
And, relative to my best friends Grandparents, they also have a 1941 Buick Century (and for the “fun” of it, their daily drivers are a 1982 Volkswagen Jetta and a 1987 Cadillac Cimarron). But, they sold the 1962 Coupe DeVille to a nephew who promised to nuture and care for it in a way they, on limited social security incomes couldn’t afford with the 3 other cars (and the Buick holds more sentimental value for them). I got one last ride in it for a family wedding about 4 years ago. Oh the magic.
Like the owner of the 1966 I found a month ago “A Cadillac will pass anything, but a Gas Station.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeg You could say the Skeg fin had snob appeal to Cadillac buyers that were also yacht club members. Make all the boat jokes you like.
I guess if you compare the 1962 Cadillac to some of it’s rivals it’s still a little bit more flamboyant than anything save an Imperial from that year, which really looked like a pruned Dinosaur ( then you could also say that a 1962 Chrysler New Yorker, which was within price/prestige reach of the cheapest Series 62 Cadillac looked like a crosseyed pruned Dinosaur).
Other rather expensive full sized cars fro 1962 were less interesting to look at. I’ve always found the 1962 Electra 225 positively dull compared to the 1961 model that preceded it, yet needlessly fussy compared to the 1963 model that followed it. I feel similar, but less firm about the Oldsmobile Ninety Eights of that year (I’ve been always conflicted about the their tail lamps: I like the detail/shape of the lens, but I thought the hierarchy between the One lens Eighty Eight and the two lens Ninety Eights and Starfires). Actually the Buick had perhaps the biggest drop off of flamboyance to dullness in the same time period, even more so than our subject Cadillac.
I guess I didn’t add this to the article, but especially by 1964 a lot of Continental Details showed up in Mercury cars (not the absolute shape, but if you look at any 1964 Comet grille next to a 1964 Conti Grille you see the influence). But I don’t think you see any Cadillac influence on any other GM cars (save the Olds Ninety Eight) until the 1970s.
Loved this article! Call me a girl but thanks for taking me back to the world in which I.Magnin and their blissful stocking (and other) departments still existed. Sigh……
The 62 ranks up that as one of my favorite Caddys of all time too. Some of it is certainly due to the fact that my Uncle owned one and I have fond memories of me and my cousins setting 4 across in that back seat covered in the oh so popular, back in the day, clear vinyl embossed seat covers.
I wonder if the Lincoln Continentals of the 1960s are simply too timeless to be associated with that particular era. Critics have long loved the design, and it was extremely influential, but I would imagine that, if you showed people a photo of 1962 Lincoln and a 1962 Cadillac and asked them when each was built, they would be more likely to correctly “place” the Cadillac.
It’s probably the same with the 1953-54 Studebaker Starliner and Starlight coupes versus 1950s Cadillacs or 1955-57 Chevrolets. The first is a timeless design, while the other two are clearly from the 1950s. Therefore, everyone strongly associates the Chevrolets and the Cadillacs with that time period. This is reinforced as directors of movies and television shows seek them out to easily suggest that time period in various productions.
Cadillac hit a peak in the 1961-64 era, after the excess of the late 1950s. The cars were greatly cleaned up in the styling department compared to 1958-60, and, if you believe various road tests and the results of the Popular Mechanics Owners’ Reports, quality was improved, too.
In 1965, GM began cutting corners, while the garden-variety Chevrolets, Fords and Pontiacs could be optioned to the point where they were cut-rate Cadillacs.
I have similar feelings about the Caddy and Conti. The Caddy was the epitome of popular design; it was a much more accessible and familiar design. The Conti was clearly out of the mainstream in 1961, almost startlingly so. Eventually, its design language became more familiar, and its influence was much more lasting: I see the recent Chrysler 300 as an example of the Conti’s influence. The Caddy’s are long gone.
Anybody fortunate enough can be rich, however, it requires an education to have class and taste. According to the theory of superstimulus, those that are more fortunate than others wants to show off their richness to prospective mates, simply to gain an advantage. If you got it, flaunt it. However, there’s a dilemma concerning the superrich and truly influental. How do they differentiate? With knowledge that are only obtained in their circles.
Therefore, bling-bling will always appeal to the noveau riche, while the people with appeciation for lifes finer things will always prefer understated elegance. I’m sure those in the know during the kennedy era knew what went where, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the population of Continental owners where the wealthiest and most educated of any car buying population. An equivalent of today would be the difference between an Escalade and a Lexus LS600h. Which one of those two owners would you think had the highest education?
Those “that got it” in the late 60’s made the transition from Caddillacs to Mercedes, like those that are in the know these days are all driving Lexi. Simply because it spreads in those circles what particular kind of car is the car to have for the moment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstimulus
I think even by the early 1960s the super wealthy/Old Money in the United States had already moved on to the exclusivity of Bentley, Rolls Royce and the Adenauer 300 Mercedes Benz (There’s a reason that one appears in Butterfield 8 from 1960). Lincolns, and to a lesser extent Imperials appealed to the more conservative luxury buyer, but not necessarily the Super Rich, I think a lot of traditional luxury buyers were confused and jolted out of Lincolns by the 1958-60 models and slowly adjusted back into the brand. The biggest question is where did all the Packard buyers go after 1956? Part of me thinks since Studebaker-Packard held the dealer franchise deal for Mercedes Benz at the time a lot of disappointed Packard owners looked across the showroom at the quirky, well executed German cars and didn’t look back. At least those in areas that wouldn’t face backlash for owning a German car only 10+ years after WWII ended.
I think Cadillacs still, in the early 60s were aspirational for loads of buyers, but still retained enough of their brand cachet that they didn’t exclusively appeal to the Noveau Riche. But it’s remarkable how quickly that changed by the late 1960s. Ironically I think a lot of Super Rich GM customers during these years also would have put the first Gen Buick Riviera on their shopping list, given it’s excellent craftmanship (for a mass market car) pretty stellar reviews, and remarkably well executed interior and exterior design. It was also more exclusive than any Cadillac, since (at least for 1963) the artificially stimulated demand by limiting production to 40K units.
Interesting observation…
There is no ls600h.
Last of the Standard Of The World. These cars were as good, or better, than any car on the planet.
Power, Space, Ride, Amenities, Reliability. Nobody could touch these cars.
By the ’65 models, GM had started their slow slide into mediocrity.
Thanks for a beautiful car.
I’d have to argue that the downhill slide didn’t start until around 69 or 70.
I had a 66 Coupe DeVille that was an excellent car. My friend “Bubba” and I bought it to do an Illinois Rt66 Rally. We may have been the 5th owners for that car and we put her through her paces. This was back in the late 90s and that thing didn’t have a squeak or rattle anywhere. And that car moved, for such a monstrous beast it was suprising as it actually handled too!
A lot depends on what is meant by “downhill slide”. I would say that the beginning was probably when the low priced series 60 models were introduced (1936). But the luxury makes that did not follow Lincoln, Cadillac and Packard all died.
I think Don is driving a new Coupe de Ville in season 5:Episode 1 when he drops off his 3 kids at their mother’s house (the house of “Morticia and Lurch” as he says). It was a quick shot, and I don’t know my interiors that well, but I think I saw it as a 1966 model (no true separate fin, vertical chrome divider on each rear light … the 1965 didn’t divide the rear lights). Anyone else get a better look or know better ?
I first drove a new one of these 62 cad coupes in 1963. (Had to clean tar and wax car for a rich guy) Took 4 more years of college before I bought one right out of college. Had to sell, but still had the bug that these are just beautiful, and in 1990 bought a burgundy convert. Still I loved best the look of the roofline design of the coupe so I have bought one of those too.
Both cars are probably only #3 cars but still the basic shapes and styling still thrills me. I like everything about these except the hard to find rare parts, and trans overflow if left stored for weeks. Trans guy says they need to start and run to keep converter form draining down thru relief valve. But the great styling still thrills like my newer cars don’t.
God that’s a beautiful car. I never really looked too much at these early Caddies but your car really captures the excellent styling. I love the flowing yet bold lines and airy greenhouse. Really a great pic.
Gorgeous Coupe! What color is that, black? I have one in Yorkshire Blue irradescent. It looks dark Navy at times almost dark purple in certain light. Fantastic cars!
frank a- that is one very beautiful Cadillac,you are a lucky man to own such a fine motor car.
Great car, it was so good that those evil commie “Russkies” copied it. Nice Zil!
A beautiful car, and one that would never be mistaken for anything else. I think that 1961-1964 represented the zenith of Cadillac, and while I never cared much for the later models, I’d take one of these home in a heartbeat. Black or dark blue for me.
I love the 1962 and its classmate the 1961; those are among my favorites.
If Cadillac could build one now with modern suspensions, brakes, and amenities I’d own one in a New York second.
You’d be surprised how good the brakes, suspension and ride are on these cars. 1962, was the first year for the dual braking system. Even with drum brakes these cars stop on a dime. And acceleration and cornering are amazing for a car of this size. I own a 1962 Coupe DeVille, among 4 other vintage Cadillacs, I enjoy all of them, but that 62 just has a feel about it, once you get behind the wheel, it really feels much smaller and more nimble than you would think. And everybody is amazed at how good it rides and how comfortable the seats are.
It has a hitch! Remember when you could tow with a passenger car?
To quote the work of The Rip Chords:
“I took my Cobra down to the track,
Hitched to the back of my Cadillac.
Everyone there was a-waitin’ for me,
There were plenty of Stingrays and XK-Es…”
These caddilacs just are and seem from another time a time long gone from an america long vanished a past that seems like some kind of construct did that time actually exist like looking at a picture of elvis ,Marilyn or the early Beatles did they realy exist .thease cars remind me of the long vanished car makers here in the uk like alvis or armstrongesiddley or the then wonderfull rolls Royce ..a real treat to see one in the flesh that’s for sure ..have a look on youtube and type in driveing thru la in the 60s there’s some great films street scenes from that era of the early 60s frozen in time ….forever
The Continental may have been the choice of the more rational side of the brain – people KNEW it had elements of ‘good design’, and that made it the only choice for some. But was it more of a cerebral pleasure? The Cadillacs however were targeting us at some other, more unconscious, level. How skillful and laser focussed – and very American – is that!
As it happens I’ve been binge-watching the entire Mad Men series (again) over the past month or so. There’s something about the style and atmosphere of the early Sixties in particular that is still entrancing, albeit a little terrifying in its self certainty. As an aside I’ve also been noticing on this go-round how rough some of the interiors of the ‘Draper cars’ are (stained headliners, sagging window trim, upside-down steering wheels, etc.). Strikes me as odd for such a period piece.
I sometimes notice the interior, trim, doorseals and and various other worn small items contrasting with the new shiny paint often see in cars in period movies. I was watching “Good Fellows” yesterday and yellowed, detaching headliners, drooping wrinkled sunvisors can be seen in the interior scenes. There is a scene that states 1963 and you see a black 65 Impala behind the actors. One scene shows a view out the windshield and you see a pair of gloves positioned to cover a damaged dash, and you can still see smaller cracks below them. And when the doors are open you often see dried out and missing pieces on the door seals. But I guess the budget doesn’t allow for these repairs that most people pay little attention to. Of the 60-64 era, the 62 is my least favorite, although still a good looking car. A lot of US cars in 1962 were a little less appealing then the 63-64 versions. Good article, almost forgot about the first read and well worth running again.
The one that stuck out immediately to me was in Dazed and Confused, made in the mid ’90s and set in 1976, there’s a ’71-2 Chevy pickup with an early GMT400 (88+) steering wheel.
Probably the best movie I’ve seen that puts the early 60s Cadillac in context is ‘Tin Men’ with Richard Dreyfus. Great movie, great cars and great dialogue about Cadillacs.
In the 60’s my Dad sold and later even owned an aluminum siding company. That movie is as correct as it gets in that time frame. He even had the same years of Cadillac’s progressing through those times up to his 67 Conti when he decided no more Caddie’s, too many problems. Just the right car for informing a homeowner that his house was personally selected as a aluminum siding model home for the neighborhood. The womanizing and shady stunts in pulled in the movie were real. I bought the DVD for Dad. Busted!
hehehe. Yep, its a really good movie. Barry Levinson has a good eye for detail and a great ear for dialogue. My favourite part is the look on Dreyfus’s face when he sees the Beetle. ‘Diner’ is another good one from Levinson.
I think that the market place really pushes the automakers in the direction that they end up moving. Ford thought that they needed the Edsel, and while it did OK the first year, the second year was ominously down.
The point is Cadillac brought out the series 60 in 1936 as a much lower priced Cadillac. I think this was a response to Packard. This model nearly sold as well as all Cadillacs did for the previous two years. But I think 1936 was a good year anyway. Most of the higher end Cadillac’s are probably chauffeur driven. This state of affairs is changing during the depression and during the war years.
After the war the Cadillac’s that are left is an assortment of series 75’s, probably all chauffeur driven and the low priced series 60s. The series 75’s degenerate into two basic models in a few years. In the prewar time, there were coupe and convertible series 75’s that were not chauffeur driven.
The market has changed and Cadillac changed with it. When the Eldorado convertible was first introduced (as a series 62 instead of a series 65+{say 67 or 70}) they charged a high price, with few sales. If it had been a higher series they might have kept a higher price on it.
The primary problem though is whether GM is willing to sell every Cadillac produced at a loss. Profit depends on sales numbers that are high enough. Lincoln lost 60 million on the 58 through 60 model years. Ford probably thought that they needed to compete with GM or Lincoln would have been dumped.
My opinion is that the Big Three moved in the general direction that the market place pushed them. Reading the “tea leaves” is an uncertain process and what the market wanted and what we got were not always in sync.
I had the great pleasure of driving a 1963 Sedan DeVille four door hardtop that belonged to a client. As recently as 1995 he was road-tripping all over the place and we serviced it. Cadillac cars were a cut above any other GM car at the time and had all different parts in them. Everything was of high quality and the cars were straight forward. The drove well and had an excellent, controlled ride. The later cars, in my opinion, weren’t nearly as good.
The ’62 has long been a favorite. I’m fairly certain my first (and one of very few) rides in a Cadillac was a ’62. My folks moved into a new to them house in ’69. The family behind us was led by an up-and-coming attorney. The Mrs. drove a cream colored Sedan DeVille with a red interior. She took myself, mom and sister ice skating with her kids.
The Mr. drove a Goat, probably a ’69 or ’70.
By ’73, the family had moved to a much more upscale nearby neighborhood and they had a ’72 Ninety-Eight and a ’73 Cutlass Salon sedan – loaded.
My favourite model year Cadillacs are the 1959, the 1962, and 1964.
Great article, but no mention the subject car is a Town Sedan and not a standard Series 62 or Deville? The Town Sedan was a rare model, only produced in ’61 and ’62 with a total production of around 4,900 units. What made the Town Sedan unique was the ‘bobbed’ rear quarter panels and short trunk lid, which made the car noticeably shorter than a Sedan DeVille though having the same wheelbase. This model was supposedly a response to customer comments that the regular Cadillacs had become too long for many suburban garages.
I’ll have the Don Draper Special (white over blue with blue interior)!!
I live near Brenham, TX and while driving through a nearby town I saw what I thought to be a ’61 or ’62 Cadillac at a dealer who specializes in restored cars. Beautiful car in blue with a white top. I went to the dealers web site which said that it is a ’62 and was the car used in a “Mad Men” episode. I didn’t stop as I have other home projects that will eat up some of the $25K they want for it. Also, it won’ fit in my garage.
i spilled cereal in this car in 1962. My father General c. mills never let me live it down. Or up. I Made captain but general? Neverett
I agree on the article because I own a 1962 Cadillac 62 series and he couldn’t of said it no better then what he did In This article