(first posted 10/15/2013) I’m not really a brand specific guy, but when it comes to American brands, I’m more Ford than GM. However, Cadillac is my favorite GM brand, if only because at one point it was known as the Henry Ford Company. When Henry and his board of directors parted company, Henry took his name with him, and “Cadillac” appeared over the factory door.
While those events may seem like ancient history, they happened about fifty years before this car was built, and this car was built about fifty years before today. In both cases, few people remain who witnessed the events in person.
While it may be fifty years old, I drive by this Cadillac 5 times a week. It may make some trips throughout the week, but between 7:30 and 8:30 AM, it is parked on Arlington Street near the intersection of 230th Avenue.
As you can see, the car is very clean and very original. The body shows just a bit of surface rust, the sheet metal is straight, and the brightwork is complete. If you think spotting a Cadillac of this vintage and condition just sitting on the curb on your drive to work seems a bit surreal, welcome to my world. I’ve been living in LA for ten years, and this sort of thing still seems a bit strange.
The name of this Cadillac is a bit surreal as well- Park Avenue? Isn’t that a Buick? Not in 1963…
I referenced the Cadillac Seville in header of this article, but long time Cadillac watchers know Cadillac used this nameplate on a number of cars. In this case, I refer to the “right sized” Seville introduced in 1975. It turns out that car wasn’t Cadillac’s first shot at downsizing. They also tried it from 1961 to 1963 with the Park Avenue.
The target was a Cadillac that was easier to park and drive. To accomplish this, the Park Avenue uses a shorter rear deck (can we say truncated trunk?), to provide a reduced rear wheel overhang. Fifty years later, this car still seems massive to my eye, but what do I know? Hell, I was barely a year old during the build out of the 1963 Cadillac.
Here’s a close up of that shortened rear deck. This, my younger readers, was the SMALL Cadillac in 1963. That sheet metal cover mounted over the rear wheel on the back fender is one of those “fender skirts” your Grandpa talked about. It is designed to make an already long rear fender look even longer. You might also notice there is no side marker light, Center High Mounted Stop Light (CHMSL), or rear view camera.
I do love the attitude of these Cadillacs. If any rear bumper could be described as “dismissive,” this is it. Between the size, chrome and the fins, this Cadillac tail disses all those lesser cars who follow.
Up front, where the fenders leave the tires and wheels out for the world to see, Cadillac stylists went for the full court press. 1963 pre-dates the factory alloy wheel, so instead they covered up those black steel wheels with bright chromium covers, complete with turbine styling. Low profile tires also remained in the future, so stylists covered part of that ugly black sidewall, creating the illusion of a lower profile sidewall.
Wow- The same labor devoted to assembling this front clip could probably build a complete sub-compact today. Today’s stylists work hand in hand with the body engineers and production line folk to create a car that is as easy to assemble as it is easy on the eyes. But in 1963, the stylists handed their final vision over to the engineers, and said “Build it.”
To better understand this interior, catch some episodes of Mad Men. Between the sofa style seat, and the jukebox style dashboard, we see the triumph of sixties style. I’m sure those who graduated in 1963 will tell us things were a bit different “out on the mean streets,” but Cadillac was selling an idea, not a car.
An idea we can distill down to a single image. For some, this picture says it all. You know who you are.
As a final thought, it occurs to me that this car and I aren’t that far apart in age. I’d like to think I look as good for my age as this Caddy does, but I doubt my wife will agree. However, I think we’ll all agree that this is a great looking Curbside Classic, and a great addition to 1963 day!
These were and remain really rare cars. I believe that the idea was to make a car that buyers who lived in older homes could get into their garages. A lot of Cadillac buyers were still living in houses built in the 1920s and 30s, and the garages were not as large as in newer homes. I remember seeing the ass ends of long cars sticking out of old garages where the doors never closed, or that would close down to where they rested on the car’s trunk lid.
i never liked the look of these, and most Cadillac buyers must not have either. However, I can see where the proportions may be more normal to younger eyes than mine who are used to the short deck look.
I salute you on a rare and cool find.
So rare that I’ve never even heard of it!
Granted, I’m not a huge Cadillac aficionado, but when I read the title of this article I thought for sure that this was gonna be a ’60-something Buick with some Cadillac pieces grafted onto it. Shows what I know…. I realize that may sound extremely dumb, but I’m also viewing this on a 3″ Blackberry screen so cut me some slack!
And maybe it’s just that tiny screen fooling me again, but I really like how this looks – from the rear 3/4 shot especially.
Until recently, we lived in a 100+ yr old house in NY with a 60+ yr old detached garage. Every time I squeezed our Honda Odyssey into the garage, I’d wonder if the previous owner (from ’48-’05) ever squeezed a ’40, ’50, ’60, ’70 automobile into that tight space. Even this compressed Caddy would never have had a chance, let alone a ’74 Impala.
Ha! I live in a house built in 1925 with a detached single-car garage. I like to tell people it was designed for a horse, not a car. I’ve also found myself wondering how people coped in the land-yacht years. I’m right up against the street, so sticking out wasn’t an option. I’m guessing the garage served as a closet, and it was street parking for several decades.
my Grandmother had Cads from the mid 50’d to her last Coupe DeVille in 71, she also lived in a 2 story craftmans style home here in Northern California , and always parked in the garage when it wasn’t under her port de cochere , but it did fit in her pre 1920 Garage, When she decided to make a change and turn in the 71,( it had a whole 32,000 miles on it in 1977) she bought a new downsized 77 Buick Electra Coupe, and I still remember her comment , ” it fits in the garage so nicely” I wound up with the Buick when she stopped driving in 1981, it had 22,000 on it when I got it
She was a Palmer Chiropractor and these cars her big extravagance for herself.
I must tell you, i never knew about his downsized Cads then, but I was also pretty small
I only ever saw two of these (I was a preteen when they came out so dating myself) but one wasn’t the Park Avenue. Instead it was the Town Car which was the same thing but in what was later to become the Calais series while the Park Avenue was in the deVille series.
Hilarious!
So Cadillac, after telling the world that giant finned land rockets were the future, were feeling a little humbled by 1963? Gee, what could have given them that feeling? The popularity of cars half the size of a Sedan de Ville, but still capable of seating six? The Lincoln which showed Cadillac that it was about as classy looking as a Vegas showgirl?
And Cadillac’s solution was to shorten the trunk deck? Keep the gaudy fins, the chrometastic grille, the bulbous dual headlamps hanging over the front fenders – but shorten the trunk deck? Wow. Cadillac’s problem certainly wasn’t the length of it’s trunk, instead Cadillac’s belief that it needed to shorten the trunk deck was a sign that it hadn’t a clue what to do after it’s road rocket years.
The roofline is nice. It just doesn’t belong on the rest of that car.
I am not sure that I agree with your premise that Cadillac had “a problem” in 1963. Cadillac had the opposite of problems, as it outsold every other luxury car by a huge margin. The Lincoln, though it became influential in its style, was a mere blip on the sales charts, as was Chrysler’s Imperial. Mercedes? A grossly overpriced and undersized and underpowered car. I would not at all agree that Cadillac was “humbled.” Instead, Cadillac was living the dream in those years.
This car was an instance where they listened to some customer complaints about the cars becoming too long for their garages. Nobody but Cadillac would have had the resources to offer a second, slightly shorter model, to cater to that demographic. It just turned out to be the 1963 equivalent of modern people on blogs who say they want 5 speed wagons. A lot of people may say they want something, but that doesn’t mean that they will actually buy it.
Yes, this was Cadillac’s best sales period and I am more of a Cadillac enthusiast than a Mercedes enthusiast but Mercedes was far better built and had more power than Cadillac. Overpriced?….No doubt.
Today’s models of both brands hold no attraction for me.
Mercedes had more power than Cadillac in the 1960’s? Where are you getting this from?
Mercedes 600. I own a 63 Fleetwood. I have driven a Mercedes 600 on several occasions. It would drag my car backwards.
Yeah, but the 600 was not an average Mercedes, it would be the equivalent of what a Maybach is today. Very limited in production.
FWIW, the MB 600 was rated at 250 (net) hp. That’s probably very close or slightly less than the 325 gross hp rating of the ’63 Cadillac. But it cost several times more…
Like I said, I am a bigger fan of Cadillac than Mercedes but I have the flagship Cadillac of that era and I can tell you it is no match for the M-100 class nor is it put together as well as any Mercedes from entry level to flagship. Then again, I do not think Cadillac was a world class car but for just two small windows of time; when they were under the leadership of Henry Leland and when they were building the V16. After Leland the objective was simply to out do all other mass produced domestics.
In my opinion both companies made neat cars during the era we are talking about. The sad thing is today I would not even consider a purchase of either company’s product.
The only thing right about your resentful post,is the name “Vanilla Man”. Cadillac is legend. They had personality,and style. It was about dreams,and they fascinated. Cadillac outsold Lincoln 3 to 1! The Lincoln you admire in the 60;s a great car,was an accident,and last chance,as the division was being driven out by Cadillac,and yes Chrysler ! With Cadillac,you could go, “Vegas Show Girl”,with the design ,or Board Room. That was the genius of them. All over the world people were intrigued by their image. It was Lincoln ,who followed them ! Loosing them selves to truly gaudy,land yachts in the 70’s plus. Today,they are barely alive..and no,I am not happy about that.
Lincoln in 1961 came out with that new design much smaller than the old 60 Lincoln and they used it in the adds at the time, saying it was shorter , easier to park, but heavy and rides well, maybe Cadillac was worried some of the old lady buyers would switch, and that Lincoln was a very sharp looking car, personally if I was buying a luxury car, I might have changed.
The Imperial in the early 60 was pretty stogie looking till Elwood Engle , who did the 61 Thunderbird and Lincoln got his design on Imperial and that really took till 1964
I’ve never seen one of those before, love the proportions.
The Cadillac Park Avenue was really marketed as a “Ladies car” they thought it would be easier for them to maneuver. It never really caught on only selling a few thousand total. I saw a ’62 Park Avenue at a Classic car show this summer, for some reason the ’62 doesn’t seem as awkward as the ’63
Maybe it should have been marketed as a city car instead. I’d think this would have been a much better size for dealing with congested major cities. And thinking of that, it made have made a good export Caddy.
I don’t think a 7″ shorter Cadillac would exactly have qualified as a city car — it was still the same width as regular Cadillacs and the shorter deck wouldn’t have made it any easier to thread through traffic congestion, although it might have been slightly easier to parallel park.
I seem to recall, from the magazine ads I read as a kid, that the Park Avenue was marketed both as a lady’s car and as a city car (hence the name). If the ad I’m attempting to attach posts correctly, note the great anthropomorphic language used by the writers to describe the short deck Series 62- the car is “alert and responsive…”
I didn’t realize the short deck version appeared in ’61, always thought it made its debut in ’62. My dad was big on the ’62’s, he looked at them endlessly, came very close to buying a Series 62 coupe, and of course I was always along, so I remember seeing these in showrooms. Apparently they weren’t named Town Sedan or Park Avenue in ’61, just called “short deck,” and did the ’61 come only in the six-window configuration? I think they were only the 4-window version in ’62 and ’63. I agree with some of the other posts here, the ’62, although stubby looking, wasn’t as noticeable as the ’63, that model really looks truncated. Interestingly, my first post to CC a year or two ago was about a ’62 Park Avenue I encountered in a local Ralph’s grocery parking lot, I saw it come steaming in at the same time I was arriving. Couldn’t believe my eyes, the original owner, an elderly lady, was being helped by her caregiver, and I ran over and gushed about what a rare car she had. She was fully aware of that fact, too, and quite proud of her faithful old daily driver. It was a little bedraggled around the edges, but it looked pretty good for its age. Haven’t seen it since, but I keep an eye peeled for it (I hope the lady and her car are both still going strong!).
The Park Avenues are indeed a rarity because they only made a few thousand each of those years. Production numbers as follows 1963 -1575 units , 1962 – 2600 , 1961- 3756. As you can clearly see the sales dropped about 1000 units annually. So production was halted due to lack of sales. The idea was a marketing ploy to sell more cars to middle aged and younger women apparently it did not work. I love the 1955 -1968 Cadillac’s ! My favorite model year is the 1961 do not ask me why , I owned a 1962 Coupe De Ville , a 1966 Coupe De Ville , and currently own a 1964 Fleetwood 60 Special. My particular year favorites are the 1961-1965, 1967-8 model years. I owned a 1966 but did not like the front as much as the 1965’s The 2 year interiors were great , But the 1967-68’s had in my opinion the best interiors . As for the Mercedes I could care less the Cadillac’s were true American luxury and will always be. Other favorite Cadillac models were the 1980-85 Seville’s and the last great Cadillac’s were the 1993-96 Fleetwood’s in particular the 94-96 with the Corvette engines ! Hey its a buyers market for these old symbols of prestige !
the 62 was always one of my favorite Cads, along with the 1965
The 62 after the excesses of the 59 and 60 was very clean and attractive a good redo of the 61
In 1963 Cadillac was still “the Standard of the World” to a lot of people.
So does anybody have the stats for trunk room difference in these cars vs the “regular” size? 20 cubic feet vs 30 cubic ft?
Never seen one of these in person but as many here have stated the proportions do appeal to me. I’ve always come out against GM X-frame cars as less safe but this car is one I’d make an exception for if I could get my hands on it.
A 5-body trunk instead of 6 perhaps. 🙂
In the side profile shot, the trunk looks to short to my eyes.
Good luck in finding one they do occasionally pop up on E-Bay, and other classic car websites. The good luck means that the production of these cars was minimal as I will show you. “Production numbers 1963 -1575 units , 1962 – 2600 , 1961- 3756. As you can clearly see the sales dropped about 1000 units annually. They should be worth much more than the other models yet they are not. 7931 total Park Avenues were ever made . And who knows how many are left. Yes if want less trunk space that is where they shaved the inches off from. I wish I could find a fully optioned 1961 in #2 condition that would be something !
I think the proportions are all wrong on this car.
Incidentally, there was a “Town Sedan” in 1962 which had received the same treatment. In 1958 things went the other way. You could have something called the “Series 62 Sedan extended deck, which added 9 inches.
Hey, if you’re going to go big, go all the way.
Never noticed that before; thanks. Who would have thought, but then it was 1958. It appears that the 62 Extended Deck just used the same longer rear end as the Fleetwood 60 Special.
So Cadillac did not only take the simplest possible route to building a smaller car — they also took the simplest possible route to naming one, simply translating “Sedan de Ville” back into English.
The Town Sedan was the cheaper Series 62 version, and the Park Avenue was the DeVille version. They were both sold in 1962, but only the Park Avenue in 1963.
I’ve seen the 61 and 62 versions of this, and they looked pretty awkward (I think due to that strange re-angling of the fin), but this looks more natural, so I really like it.
I suspect that the Park Avenue was partly a response to the 1961 Continental, which was an unusually “compact” luxury car. Its length was 212 inches — 10 shorter than the regular 1961 Cadillac. The Park Avenue (called the Town Sedan in 1961-62) was 215 inches long.
Park Avenue seems to have been a popular name,didn’t Mercury have something to say about it?
Mercury looked across the Atlantic and called their range topper the Park Lane.
My mistake,I used to drive a bus down Park Lane.
Park Lane was the street Henry Ford lived on !
Great stuff, never knew this model existed!
Nor me,I learn something new on this site all the time.
I’m another one who didn’t notice this car either. Considering where I was in my life in the early 1960’s that’s not too surprising, I think. Except for my first car which was a 1947 Chevy, I hadn’t had too much to do with GM cars. Well, there was a 1953 black Caddy sedan that I owned for a couple of weeks. I traded a ratty 1955 stick-shift V8 Dodge sedan for it, and traded the Cadillac on the new 1965 Barracuda in November 1964.
I read about this model about 10 years ago in a book but never saw a photo of one, let alone a photo of a real one on the street.
I also find the proportions to be wrong for a 1960s Cadillac but quite good looking in their own right. I believe that it is because a visibly shorter trunk than hood became normal on luxury cars by the 1980s/1990s (e.g. Mercedes W126 S-Class/BMW E32 7-Series/aero Town Car), and then really short trunks became the norm during the late 1990s. To me, a child of the 1980s, late 1990s proportions went too far in truncating the trunk, while 1980s proportions look good.
Well, around the time this car was introduced, stylists were rediscovering the long-hood/short-deck look, although this car was much more a reflection of customer/dealer requests than any stylistic inspiration, which is why it looks sort of awkwardly proportioned.
That Cadillac looks really nice.
I knew of the Town Sedan but not sure if I was aware of the Park Avenue.
Wonder why they changed the name…
Was the Town Sedan/Park Avenue cheaper than the normal model or did they try to charge a premium for less sheet metal?
The profile of the windows on the 63 remind me of the profile on the 2nd gen CTS windows, specially the rear door.
Same price for all three sedan models; 4 window, 6 window and Park Avenue.
Bingo, and I have to think that made the smaller car a hard sell. As for the trunk space, the sedans already had a problem versus the coupes — in a coupe, there is sufficient room in the front of the trunk, over the axle, to stash the spare — but there isn’t in the sedan, so the spare lies flat on the right side of the trunk floor. It’s bad enough on a deVille, but on the shorter Park Avenue it looks like the spare is taking up half the trunk space.
Aint never seen the short Caddy we got very few anyway but plenty have arrived here since 63 I’ll pay more attention next time I see one, its still huge compared to everything else driving about, love the club lock on the steering my cars all have 3 pedals which are also an anti theft device.
Hey is that a white Camry across the street?
Just kidding.
Love this.
The proportions are unfortunate… but at least this one would fit in my 1940’s-era garage!
Dave, you need some correct period whitewalls for that beautiful car.
I was all of nine years old when the ’63 Caddies came out. Funny–I don’t think I’ve ever seen one of the Town Sedans or Park Avenues in the flesh.
To my eyes, that shortened rear deck on the ’63 looks just plain weird and unbalanced, especially in the side view. No wonder they didn’t sell many!
The proportions of some Cadillac sedan models from the early 60s to the 1970 models can look a little off to me. Usually it’s the more basic models, in which the greenhouse just looks too small for the length of the body. But this just goes a bit too far the other way – the trunk is just TOO short. I know I had never seen one of these or heard of them until not too long ago. I don’t think even this model would fit in my 1920s garage.
This reminds me of an old article from Mad Magazine. This not-so-subtle parody was about various cheap ways to impress your neighbors. Among the options presented were fake Cadillac fins to tack onto your garage, making it look like you had a brand-new car that was so big, you couldn’t fit it in your garage. Perhaps the Park Avenue didn’t sell very well partly because people wanted their neighbors to see those fins sticking out of the garage.
I agree- it’s called humble boasting! “Look at my damn new Caddy, too long to fit in the garage”, while the neighbour has a three year old Pontiac completely housed in their garage. Nowadays, the same sort of people complain about how much tax they pay to people who earn much less than themselves.
Love the original black license plate!
Probably the car Dorf would have driven had he become a famous Golf pro. 😛
How about a couple of inches out of the front to balance the shortened rear overhang? I don’t think I’ve quite gone far enough with this 5 second change but you get the idea.
Didn’t Cadillacs have a slightly lengthened version of the standard GM frame in this area, so that they could have had 2/3/4″ reduction in wheelbase mostly using existing parts?
There is most definitely a market for a small/compact luxury car – BMC sold burl walnut & leather versions of the Austin 1100 for example.
Well, in those days there was still a strong distinction in the American mind between a luxurious compact and a compact luxury car. By this time, Ford and Chevrolet were making good money selling dressed-up Falcon Futuras and Corvair Monzas, but Cadillac wasn’t yet in the “small car” business and didn’t see any particular need to be. Even when they started working on what became the K-body Seville in the early ’70s, it was again more a response to customers wanting something easier to park than anything else; it wasn’t until the OPEC embargo that Cadillac saw any pressing need for it.
Of course, in the States, even the compacts were enormous by the standards of most anywhere else. Even a Jaguar Mark X, which the British thought was colossal, was about the size of a U.S. intermediate.
I’ve just stumbled upon Curbside Classics over the long weekend. Needless to say, I haven’t looked up from the computer in 3 days. Awesome site. Awesome comments. This car is like Sasquatch to me. I’ve heard about it, but never believed it existed.
I live in Southern California- I’m tempted to do a drive-by of this Park Avenue to see one up close. I have to disagree with some comments that this was a ‘simple’ change. The designers must have worked overtime to resolve all the fins and skegs and sloping decks in a much shorter amount of space.
Maurader- Welcome to CC!
As an LA resident I think you’ll find tomorrow’s streetscape article very interesting, so check it out.
I was thinking the same thing – getting all those long sloping lines to come together properly at the rear bumper must have been difficult and required a whole new set of dies. Not a small job at all.
One other note from the article: alloy wheels first appeared on Cadillacs as early as 1955 I believe. Eldorado got them first, known as “Sabre” wheels. They continued through ‘58, I think. Meanwhile, another design appeared on the ’57 Eldorado Brougham and continued up though the ‘60 Fleetwoods and Eldorados – an unusual design that included a highly decorative hub cap. Then they disappeared until sometime in the ‘80s, when alloy wheels had become more common.
These were the earliest alloy wheels I know of, save racing mags and the gorgeous alloy wheels used on some astronomically expensive Bugattis in the ‘30s. Another Cadillac first!
I have been aware of the Park Avenue Caddies for some time. I had generally picked up that the logic was to give city dwellers in New York City and some others an easier parking experience.
There is certainly some logic to the garage issue. My first home was a 1921 bungalow, and it had a very rare period TWO CAR garage that was long enough to house my ’72 Grandville for a while. That garage was the reason I bought the house. The original and long time owner was a salesman with a trailer that needed someplace to house his wares. It still had a dirt floor at the time I bought it, and I paved it. I never did replace the tri-fold sliding garage doors. They were rickety, and quite unique. But, they sat outside the door frame, and provided the margin of error while I owned the Grandville.
The neighboring homes generally made due with a one car, and several had odd extensions to the front or the back of the garage to accommodate the ’57 – ’79 cars that were too long. By the early ’90s, most of my neighbors had cars that fit properly in the footprint of the original garage.
My first house was also from the 20s, and also had a 2 car garage (though it may have been a bit newer). Mine had a little doghouse extension that pushed out the back side a bit. It would accommodate my 66 Fury and my 64 Imperial, but both of them needed to be backed in, as the hood ornaments stood too tall to go under the extension. My garage had a brick floor. The fact that it sat sideways on a 40 foot wide lot made for some tight maneuvering to get a big car in or out.
I owned a ’64 Fleetwood for quite awhile and when I saw the first pic I -HAD- to click on the article because just a glance told me something was ‘wrong’ about the car. Interesting article, I’d never heard of these before. I agree, the proportions (and performance/handling) would be benefitted to a shortening of the front end. The thing that makes these cars look so elegant is that the hood & trunk deck are visualy equal.
And speaking of garages, when I was in high school we lived up the street from a dentist who lived in a beautiful architect-designed house from the 1920s. He always drove a Buick Electra 225 and it was a familiar sight to drive by and see the hind end of his car sticking out. He was finally able to completely close the door when Buick downsized the Electra in 1984!
The 1964 Fleetwood 60 is my favorite and I also own one. The production numbers were so low you would think they would command a premium in the classic car world. Production numbers 1963 -1575 units , 1962 – 2600 , 1961- 3756. As you can clearly see the sales dropped about 1000 units annually. The American luxury car market in the fifties right up until 1996 was one of a kind and late to reinvent itself. Cadillac during the 1986 -1992 model years should be called Sadillac’s because they were so uninspiring and with no clear styling direction, the forerunner of this period was the Cimarron how that ever got manufactured is beyond me, and how anyone would ever plunk down almost twice as much money for a rebadged Chevy Cavalier is beyond my scope of understanding.
Lady in our neighborhood used to get a new black\white top Caddy saures every two,three years from early 60’s to late 70’s.
The garage was an old shed style building behind the house. Thinking back, seems the cars always fit.Never thought about it till today.
I now own one of the rare 63′ Park Avenues thanks to my son the Caddy man of Mass. .. It to me is all Cadillac, as a kid in the fifties and later, Caddys were the top of the line no matter which model.. Big, brazen, bold, and bragging. Now its my turn to turn a few heads and maybe make some new kids heads fill with thoughts of how it used to be on the highways. Mine is original, cept’ for the generator / alternator swap, , and after a little winter massage and hopefully some much needed paint, this one too will strut its stuff and enjoy the glory they were built to express..With just a bit over 100k I think we still got a good run ahead of us. . Thank you Cadillac and be looking for you on the street… ‘Cadillac Jack, , up here in the Northeast, Maine.. Be safe fellow motorheads….
surprised myself coming up on my remarks from 2016 , my Park Ave’ is still going , still original and still turning heads . Cadillacs never die or go out of style , they just flow down the family trees …lol ,,Be safe my fellows ..
I owned a 73 Cadillac Fleetwood and for two years lived in a very small house built in the 30s with a detached garage and like stories earlier the tail of my Fleetwood always stuck out.
My uncle was a Cadillac Service Manager from 1955-75, while I was in the Navy, stationed in Norfolk, VA, in 1970 he called me and asked if I wanted a Cadillac. I said ” I’m making $115 a Month, I can’t afford a Cadillac” He said he just got a 1963 Cadillac Park Avenue as a trade in, I’ll give it to you for what we paid for it $300. So I was now the proud owner of a 7 year old Caddy with 83,000 miles, 19 years old and because of it my 1st Class Petty Officer in charge was pissed that a Seaman had a car that looked better than his ’65 Caddy that he was still making payments on. It was Black with Red Leather interior
I’m a proud owner of a 1963 Park Avenue. It was passed down from my Grandpa to my Dad and then I had the car given to me when my Dad passed. I look forward to restoring this car and it will never be for sale. I didn’t realize that they were as rare as they are. My Dad always said if it was a two door it’d be worth some money. However I still liked the car being a sedan anyway. My car looks the same color and condition as the one in this article and also from Southern California!
Kraig, They only made 1575 in 1963 and it was only available in 4dr hardtop. It id a rare model. I wish I could find one now. I have 3 Classic Cars now a ’57 Olds like I had in 1967-69, a ’62 Olds Dynamic 88 Convertible and a ’64 Imperial Convertible ( like I owned in 1971-72. My ’63 Park Avenue was Black with red leather interior
Bill I own this 1963 Cadillac park avenue if you are still looking
Ok Jerry which Park Avenue do you own, Where are you located and what are you asking for a 1963 Cadillac Park Avenue? Do you have a location to view photos? I have room for 1 more Classic
I had a 61 Caddy Park Avenue. It even had bucket seats!
I saw one ” in the wild” in Vancouver today. Excellent condition, but oddly no rear door handles.
Wondering if I ever saw one without realizing what I was seeing. First I’ve heard of the shorter Caddy in the sixties.
The “short deck” still looks huge by modern standards. Yet somehow it does look a bit out of proportion to the rest of the car from some angles, many from the side view.
No, but there is an unfortunate bit of cooking and melting of the taillight lens where it passes close to the bulb—see the third picture. The configuration of this taillamp is such that it provides good, clear side-on visibility. Probably good enough to qualify as an actual, real side marker light if not for that blob of plastic cooked to opacity.
They shoulda used LEDs 🙂
The short deck looks better on the ’61 6 window that someone posted (perhaps due to the well-chosen angle of the photo). Did they offer a 6 window short deck in ’62 or 3?
Soon after my grandmother replaced my late grandfather’s ’56 Roadmaster with a ’64 Series 62, she had the open-sided chicken house they used for parking extended 4 feet so the fins wouldn’t get wet. I guess the Buick didn’t rate the expense. The chicken house is now at least 100 years old, had a 100 y.o. tree fall on it, and a few termites, but it’s still standing somehow and in use, just not by us.
There was a time when many 60 Special series cars had a three inch longer wheelbase. I think in the mid ’50’s Cadillac extended the deck without extending the wheelbase to make the car longer. I have always thought that the 1960s 60 Specials were very handsome cars, but I preferred the “sportier” image projected by the Coupe de Ville.
You’ve got me sold. I have always felt that the trunks on full size cars of the fifties through the seventies were just too much length. Some of the cars could have used that overall length for interior legroom instead of luggage. Nice driver! Enjoy it for many years!
Goodness, I did not realize this was only posted two months before I read it! So in real time, it must be around that area still provided this article has not drawn significant attention to it, and a vandal dismantles the club!
I agree with the poster who mentions that the truncated trunk of the Park Avenue seems a bit abrupt to the old Cadillac connoissseur. I knew about these from one of the Richard Langworth books that I poured over as a kid long before the Internet provided comprehensive information (and other nonsense). When I look at the last photo of the Park Avenue in profile, somehow I see a hint of a ’65 model to it….something about the more squared off corners of the car as the model years progressed. Honestly, I think what may have improved the car visually was somehow changing the look of the tailfins….it’s not something that Cadillac would have done just for this one model as that shocking change would draw attention away from the othe models. Although it seems that entirely from an aesthetic perspective (and marketing be damned), some styling modification to the rear would have significantly improved the look. Kind of like Pinninfarina eliminated the tailfins on the Cadillac Jacqueline show car, or Raymond Loewy’s personal Cadillac that had done the same. Or even the Imperial limousines that President Sukarno of Indonesia favored excepted for those damned tailfins!!!
I knew an owner of a Park Avenue, he had many old Cadillacs. We called him “Cadillac John” I never knew his last name. He lived in Clinton Twp. Mi on 14 Mile Rd, he was a retired Holley Carburetor Employee. The P/A was one of his favorites, I rode in it with him a few times, very cool car. He passed away many years ago and his son sold off all of his cars. A gentleman came to his funeral wanting to speak with his son, turns out this man had been storing many more caddies which no one knew about. He wanted to collect his storage fees, LOL! That began the liquidation of his collection. RIP Cadillac John
My buddy Cadillac John told me the idea was a car easier to maneuver in urban areas such as New York.
The short deck looks good on this car. I also like the ’62 Park Avenue even better.
In my eyes, it actually makes the old 61′ look a bit more “leaned back” which I like. Moreover, on the 61′ in particular, the large fins themselves exude length, so the difference is not as noticeable, then lets say, the 62-64 years. All models of the 61 were beautiful. Some of these comments trash-talking a caddy with a slightly different trunk, which was silly to me.
Still a highly desirable car, and If you look other places, there’s not this type of negativity, on the Cadillac Lasalle forums, people appreciate it just the same as a regular 61 Deville. A Fully furbished Short deck sold for $30,000, on collectingcars . com so their “resale value” is not “awful” by any means! As have several other short decks, for just as high prices. People still want them just as much as any good quality 61 Cadillac.