At some point, every one of us has been or will be in a leadership position of some type. Having such a role is challenging and rewarding as well as frustrating and ripe for ridicule. Building the trust of those you are leading can be a huge task while losing that trust can happen instantaneously.
Whether it is realized or not, the leader sets the tone. The slightest misstep can haunt the leader for years; a wise and shrewd move can long pay dividends. Leading is neither easy nor for the faint of heart but the personal rewards defy easy articulation.
This all leads us to Cadillac, specifically this 1977 Eldorado.
The January 2, 1915, issue of the Saturday Evening Post was like most others yet with one exception. It contained a 400-plus word advertisement that, while only printed once, created quite the stir. In fact, the advertisement was so atypical, and so inspirational, the advertising agency received regular requests for the verbiage for the next thirty years.
It has been claimed Elvis Presley even had a framed copy of this advertisement hanging on the wall of his office at Graceland. Perhaps he obtained it subsequent to purchasing one of his many Cadillacs, as General Motors issued handouts with this verbiage in the late 1960s.
Despite this Eldorado having been produced some sixty-two years after this advertisement appeared, the message was still remarkably relevant – and still is to this day.
Let’s look at the ad in its entirety.
In every field of human endeavour, he that is first must perpetually live in the white light of publicity.
Whether the leadership be vested in a man or in a manufactured product, emulation and envy are ever at work. In art, in literature, in music, in industry, the reward and the punishment are always the same. The reward is widespread recognition; the punishment, fierce denial and detraction.
When a man’s work becomes a standard for the whole world, it also becomes a target for the shafts of the envious few. If his work be mediocre, he will be left severely alone – if he achieves a masterpiece, it will set a million tongues a-wagging. Jealousy does not protrude its forked tongue at the artist who produces a commonplace painting. Whatsoever you write, or paint, or play, or sing, or build, no one will strive to surpass or to slander you unless your work be stamped with the seal of genius.
Long, long after a great work or a good work has been done, those who are disappointed or envious, continue to cry out that it cannot be done. Spiteful little voices in the domain of art were raised against our own Whistler as a mountback, long after the big world had acclaimed him its greatest artistic genius. Multitudes flocked to Bayreuth to worship at the musical shrine of Wagner, while the little group of those whom he had dethroned and displaced argued angrily that he was no musician at all. The little world continued to protest that Fulton could never build a steamboat, while the big world flocked to the river banks to see his boat steam by.
The leader is assailed because he is a leader, and the effort to equal him is merely added proof of that leadership. Failing to equal or to excel, the follower seeks to depreciate and to destroy – but only confirms once more the superiority of that which he strives to supplant.
There is nothing new in this. It is as old as the world and as old as human passions – envy, fear, greed, ambition, and the desire to surpass. And it all avails nothing. If the leader truly leads, he remains – the leader. Master-poet, master-painter, master-workman, each in his turn is assailed, and each holds his laurels through the ages. That which is good or great makes itself known, no matter how loud the clamor of denial. That which deserves to live – lives.”
Theodore MacManus, January 2, 1915
As one reads this, many examples of leaders having various talents and accomplishments come to mind.
One is Sir Roger Bannister. He was the first human to run a mile in under four minutes, a feat in which the detractors said would only serve the kill anyone who could accomplish it. Yet this singular event has overshadowed the rest of his life to a degree. Many fail to realize he was a neurologist at the time he broke this speed barrier in 1954. Also generally forgotten is this record was soon broken and a sub-four minute mile has been repeated over 1,000 times since. Bannister was an expert in the field of autonomic failure but this is overshadowed by his earlier achievements.
Let us also consider Charles Lindbergh. He led a very full life and was a true pioneer in aviation history. Yet how many people can readily name his accomplishments subsequent to having the first transatlantic solo flight?
Missouri native Samuel Clemens, under the name of Mark Twain, is another person worthy of consideration. Twain was roundly criticized for his work after Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn because his later works such as A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court or Pudd’nhead Wilson didn’t truly measure up to his earlier works. The expectations placed upon a leader are simply on a higher level than those placed upon others. Twain, as a leader in American literature, was no longer demonstrating the same degree of leadership as he had been.
This loss of leadership brings us to Cadillac.
In 1915 Cadillac sales were not at admirable levels, a situation not unlike their predicament 105 years later; the “Penalty of Leadership” ad, which mentions neither Cadillac nor automobiles, helped reverse their fortunes. Cadillac actively positioned itself to be in the spotlight, to be the premiere American luxury car, as they touted themselves as being the “Standard of the World”, while having also been the winner of the Dewar Trophy in 1908 for parts interchangeability and again in 1912 for the electric starter.
There is a fundamental truth about Cadillac having had a multitude of admirable accomplishments over the years, having demonstrated a true leadership among luxury cars.
Leadership requires diligence in looking toward and planning for the future, whether it be anticipating future events or the needs of those who follow you. There should be zero tolerance for complacency or a “good enough” attitude. Yet like a viral pestilence, complacency has quietly and quickly overtaken many leaders, with Cadillac having slowly succumbed to it. The real problem with the complacency that diminishes leadership is the incubation time between infection and the onset of symptoms.
In 1967, the front-drive Eldorado was introduced to the world. Based upon the Oldsmobile Toronado, this new Eldorado was a sight to behold. Having sharp, creased lines and a distinct sense of purpose, this Eldorado was quite unlike any Cadillac that came before it.
Yet by 1967, the incubation period of complacency was underway at Cadillac. The standard drum brakes of the Eldorado were woefully inadequate. Better front disc brakes were available, for a premium, but were viewed by Cadillac as being intended more for the performance enthusiast. Showing disregard for the needs and desires of your followers is not an ingredient of successful and sustained leadership.
By the early 1970s, Cadillac would show another symptom of its eroding leadership by chasing sales numbers. For 1972, sales of the Eldorado’s cousin DeVille jumped substantially and it would maintain healthy sales numbers for the rest of the decade.
The 1960s had been a time of many great societal changes; this naturally spilled over into the early 1970s. When Cadillac restyled the Eldorado for 1971, it was still within the idiom for the time – a little bigger, a bit heavier and having slightly more ornamental presence than before. But its leadership among the personal luxury cars was waning; the Eldorado was on a sales parity with the Lincoln Mark III for 1971 and was simply behind the Mark IV for its life cycle of 1972 to 1976, and trailed the Mark V in similar fashion.
Some have called the Mark V, such as this 1977 model, one of the most beautiful post-war Lincolns. Saying it is the best looking Lincoln of the 1970s is certainly less controversial. A person cross-shopping American personal luxury cars would have compared this Mark V to our featured Eldorado.
By 1977 this Eldorado was out of form for the times, with this same body having competed against three generations of Lincoln’s Mark Series. It was just ten years prior that Cadillac had displayed true leadership with the original front-drive Eldorado, a true leader for those times. Those days were over.
The cynic could argue this generation of Eldorado is perhaps the first caricature of Cadillac produced by Cadillac. As the 1970s unfolded the Eldorado was continually the leader of gaining more chrome based ornamentation and other assorted gingerbread with a frequency that seemed to be annual. There are some realms in which a leadership position is not desirable. While the Cadillac Eldorado led the Lincoln Mark Series in some limited territory, primarily with the availability of fuel injection and a convertible, the old Eldorado was little more than a dead car driving.
The fanboy could make a case the many pejoratives that have been aimed at this Eldorado over the years are simply a reflection of the hurlers envy of the leader. Perhaps that has some merit. One can likely think of many situations in life in which the detractors are continually ankle-biting the leader.
One could also argue Cadillac regained its Eldorado leadership mojo for 1979.
If one compares the 1979 and 1980 Cadillac Eldorado to the 1980 Lincoln Mark VI, there is no comparison. The Eldorado outsold the Lincoln quite handily. Yet that is a snapshot in time.
Since 1980 the automotive market has changed immensely. Lexus came into being, as did Infiniti and, more recently, Tesla. Mercedes and BMW have realized even stronger acceptance throughout the entirety of North America. Audi is a distinct player, also, and Cadillac’s current competition isn’t limited to just these makes.
The non-leader’s perpetual efforts to equal the leader is simply proof of the leader’s abilities. Since our featured Cadillac was built in 1977 there have been phenomenal changes at Cadillac and Cadillac’s ongoing mode of operation is to chase the others in the hopes of being seen as an equal. Perhaps it is an equal; perhaps it isn’t.
Cadillac is not unlike another leader of the 20th Century, King Edward VIII. Their choices led to the same outcome; voluntarily or not, both long ago abdicated their thrones.
Found May 2015, Hannibal, Missouri
That you found this Eldorado parked in front of a Weight Watchers building is nothing short of amazing.
While the Penalty of Leadership ad starkly broke down humanity into leaders and followers, there is a third quality that you touched on: The Complacent. In 1915, in the infancy of automobiles, there were no complacent carmakers. But by the 1970s that’s exactly what Cadillac had become. Cadillac was very proud of selling a record-high 358,000 cars for 1978, but no one evidently cared to peek through the facade.
And regarding the ad itself, I’m not entirely sure which version is the original (since there’s been many reprints), but the version below does reference Cadillac – not in the text but with the “Standard of the World” medallion at the top of the page, and also “Cadillac Motor Car” at the bottom. But regardless, this must be one of the most impactful ads ever created.
Your version was almost used – and it has the Post’s name at the top. Finding so many different versions of this I opted to use what was found at oldcarbrochures.com.
MacManus received a lot of grief over this ad, being told it was all manner of unsavory things along with negligent as he didn’t even mention the company for which he had written it.
Two other facts about MacManus – he was 42 when this was published and he never learned how to drive.
That reminds me….I saw this Cadillac all over Hannibal when I lived there. My first sighting was when it was for sale at a used car lot in the little town of New London, south of Hannibal. Later I saw it parked at a house near where I worked, with it later being for sale again. I would see it all over town at various times. The last I saw it was when these pictures were taken in 2015.
Complacency is a good description of these cars. It is hard to remain lean and hungry after decades of success.
I think part of it is that in 1915 founder Henry Leland was still part of the company. He stayed after selling to GM in 1912 and didn’t leave until a spat with Durant in 1917. It is also really interesting that the only long-term domestic competitor to Leland’s Cadillac was the second company Leland founded – Lincoln.
Henry Leland was a pioneer in precision manufacturing, something that undoubtedly gave Cadillac a leg-up at an important time of growth and development in the industry. It is hard to pin down just when Cadillac stopped really innovating. Was it after the 1949 V8?
JPC, your knowledge of history is probably better than mine. Yes, Ford acquired Leland’s Lincoln. But to some degree, it was part of an ironic flip-flop of ownership… wherein decades earlier, today’s Cadillac started from Henry Ford’s first auto company… a divorce from the bankers Ford so disdained. Specifically, in 1902, the Henry Ford Company became the Leland’s Cadillac Motor Company.
An excellent point.
As a kid (decades ago) I took out all the books about old cars in the library.
It’s when I first read The Penalty of Leadership, and for good measure, Somewhere West of Laramie (also covered in this space IIRC).
That’s why I come here. Great stuff.
This ’77 Eldo looks not much more like an up styled Monte Carlo to me. The down-swoop from the front fenders, complemented by the up tick at the hips, and the opera windows. Perhaps a bit stretched in length and some sharper creases, but wow, Cadillac should have been ashamed of themselves. Cross shopping against a Lincoln – sure I guess so. A discriminating buyer who figured out they could have gotten a Monte for thousands less and fit those same golf clubs in the back, maybe even a new set, would have done quite well for themselves.
In 1977-78 it had the additional problem of looking the lesser compared to the Coupe de Ville, which the Eldo was more expensive than. The ’77 B/C bodies have been much-lauded on these pages, and they offered a fresh, crisp interpretation of the traditional (but not yet overly fogeyish as it would become) Cadillac look while the Eldo was still styled in the old fat idiom.
Perhaps if it had made better use of the space efficiencies allowed by the UPP things might have been different, but as a “personal” coupe whose hard points were laid down at the height of the long-hood-short-deck-all-the-things era it did not.
With the typical bumper fillers rotted away, this Eldo looks like it has James Bond Aston Martin inspired battering rams.
I have no idea, but just assumed those fillers would have been made out of fiberglass, or some kind of plastic?
History is slowly repeating itself, though now the three pointed star is following in Cadillac’s footsteps. In their quest for sales, Mercedes quality is slipping with each year. And when there are five Mercedes at every street corner, the exclusivity factor certainly has waned. Two different friends bought new Mercedes-models within the last three years and both are German car snobs who never miss an opportunity to point out my “poor choices” in buying Chevrolet’s. I’m typically not one to rain on someone’s new car parade but these two had it coming. The first bought a Mercedes SUV that is so poorly screwed together it looks like something that came from a Chrysler factory in the 80’s. All four doors do not line up with each other or the panels surrounding them. The dash has misaligned gaps and the exterior paint has more orange peel than any Chevrolet I’ve ever owned. The squeaks and rattles coming from the cargo area are just unacceptable in a car of this class. I told that friend to ride in the back seat and listen. He was quite upset with how his star had suddenly burned out. The second friend bought a sedan that she was just so proud of until I pointed out the exact same flaws in her Mercedes as the first friend’s SUV had. In all I found nothing in her car that couldn’t be had in an Accord or Camry, other than the three pointed star. And both an Accord or Camry would be far better put together
You beat me to it. MB definitely has gone down the same path. The W116 S-class in my mind clearly took over from Cadillac luxury car leadership in the 1970’s.
So much fun rehashing this issue. Sorry this is so long but I don’t have anywhere to go!
Yes, Cadillac did have some early engineering successes, the Dewar’s Trophy, the introduction of the electric starter, integrated power steering and air conditioning. But other premium car makers could also boast of mechanical and engineering leadership.
There were many fine American marques with legendary names; Duesenberg, Marmon, Rolls Royce ( manufactured at the time in America also) Locomobile, Lincoln,and Auburn, Leadership among the luxury makes was shared by the three P’s. Pierce, Peerless, and Packard. Not to mention the fine and very exclusive European Manufacturers. Cadillac was a player at this time, respected but not considered the best. They concentrated on quality and reliability. Many of these high line companies did not survive the First World War, and most of the rest did not survive the era of the second World War.
Cadillac and Lincoln, both parts of a major manufacturer, survived along with Packard. As we all know, Packard and the rest of the Independents were ill equipped to survive in this Brave New World.
Unfortunately, the American concept of Luxury at the time, was married to size. The bigger the better, American luxury cars were big. ( I guess we haven’t outgrown that concept, look at the popularity of all those big trucks and SUVs) The regular American cars grew in size to try to emulate that look and garner sales. Therefore the luxury makes had to grow a bit bigger to stay ahead. This pushed them over the edge and 1976 was apex of overly large cars.
I have owned and driven many of these American luxury cars over the years. Some were already older hobby cars, some only a couple of years old at the time. Cadillacs starting with 1956, 57, 64, 70, 77, and my Seville STS 1994. Lincolns, 1952, 63, 66,and 1969. They were all pretty good highway cars and I’m sure they delivered what their original owners desired.
Most of the import makes didn’t catch up to Cadillac in luxury and comfort until the mid 70s. In my opinion Mercedes didn’t catch up to Cadillac until around 1974 when they introduced their integrated air conditioning systems. Jaguar took even longer to catch up. ( If ever) Americans like and demand good a/c systems.
When Mercedes introduced their game changing 450 SEL in the mid 1970s, it captured the fancy of the buyers with the real money. BMW introduced models that became the darlings of the up and comers. This left Cadillac trying to satisfy their traditional market which was shrinking. In trying to satisfy their traditional buyers they began to lose their appeal as an aspirational object. Just who is hoping to, or dreaming, to buy a new Cadillac? I don’t know. Unfortunately neither does Cadillac.
On a final note. I think that more 60’s and 70’s Cadillacs and Lincolns would be kept as collectible cars if they weren’t so big. They don’t fit in many garages and car ports and you don’t want to keep your vintage hobby car parked out in the harsh elements. Yes they do get poor fuel mileage but they’re not going to be driven that much, and they don’t burn any gas when they’re parked.! I also think that many find their size to be an embarrassment. Which I think is kind of funny when the popular Crew cab pick ups with the 6 1/2 ft. bed are 243 inches in length. About 10 inches longer than a 76 Cadillac DeVille. (231 in.) And nobody’s embarrassed about driving that truck!
“Unfortunately, the American concept of Luxury at the time, was married to size. The bigger the better, American luxury cars were big. ( I guess we haven’t outgrown that concept, look at the popularity of all those big trucks and SUVs).”
At the risk of overgeneralizing and/or offending some folks here, this paragraph made me think also of Harley-Davidson’s current dilemma, something I’ve been reading about a lot lately: a rapidly aging audience, sketchy plans to court new buyers, and few new products to sell them.
Am I off base here?
Interesting you should say that. A friend at long last got herself a well deserved MB GLE. Nice driving and great power, but overall I wasn’t that impressed with her $70k car’s build integrity. I assume the German-built sedans are built better.
Excellent find and biography Jason. Thank you. I find it so ironic that for most car makers having one of their premium cars from more than 40 years ago still on the road would normally be a source of pride in their history. Rather, this is a rolling billboard for everything that was wrong with Cadillac.
Of course, major credit to the owner(s) who have maintained it so well in this time.
Imagine a world in which GM continued to design and build with the same passion they had when that “Penalty of Leadership” ad ran…
Bean counters kept in their place. Cadillac would be Standard of the World and nothing less.
I believe it would be a different and perhaps better world.
But complacency and hubris are part and parcel of the human condition.
Seen this way, what’s happened to Cadillac and GM since the 1960s was – at least on some level – inevitable.
And now, as noted in other posts, we’re seeing that same complacency and hubris eat away at certain Brands Who Should Know Better, giving their competitors new opportunities. This shall be interesting.
Chas, it was an ad. Don’t take ads quite so seriously. 🙂
Cadillac was just one of a number of premium car makers back then. By 1915, they had settled into a pretty comfortable groove making flathead V8s while other manufacturers were being a bit more adventurous.
No dog in this fight, but being bored in home quarantine, what the heck.
Was Cadillac ever the actual “standard of the world?” Or was it so much marketing hype? I think more of the latter, frankly. GM always led the industry in it marketing prowess, and this was a prime example of how it was done. So what was it exactly that made Caddy the world’s standard for several decades?
One can’t deny that Cadillac built some excellent, even superb, cars during its heyday, until everything headed downhill as typified by this ’77 Eldo. But, really, there were plenty of other marques back in the day that easily challenged or bettered Caddy for its self-proclaimed “Standard of the World” status. Marques like Duesenberg, Rolls Royce, Bentley, Mercedes Benz come to mind, as do (at various times) Packard, Pierce Arrow, Bugatti, Hispano Suiza, or Delahaye.
Cadillacs were nice, aspirational cars. Even spectacular cars in a few cases. But did Mercedes engineers ever wring their hands over what Cadillac engineers were cooking up next? Doubtful.
Okay, back to binge watching Netflix…
Was Cadillac ever the actual “standard of the world?” Or was it so much marketing hype?
No. Yes.
Marketing hype was every bit as much a thing then as now, if not more so. Cadillac pioneered precision standardization in 1908, which is where the “Standard of the World” phrase comes from. That was one important step in the evolution of automobile manufacturing, although I suspect that Ford’s 1908 Model T was likely just as standardized.
Cadillac was a high quality manufacturer, as were quite a few others, both in the US and in Europe. And they were recognized for that. But that’s hardly being “the standard of the world”. Many other innovations were being made by other manufacturers too.
I don’t think the standard of the world could be claimed by anyone for as long as the next company came up with a technology that would become standard, and consequently that’s not something that can be judged in real time, there needs to be a good amount of hindsight to see what was truly setting long-term standards.
I think it’s a case of the advertisement overshadowing the product.
The writer was undoubtedly a top-notch wordsmith, and the ad has long been remembered for the excellence of his work. Surely it broke some rules. Understated, not bombastic. No appeal to social position, neither explicit nor implied. No mention of the product as product. No specifications. No photograph, not even an illustration.
You might advertise soap with a wall of text, but a car? The ad itself is ‘standard of the world’ for its sheer brilliance and difference – but who can remember what the Cadillac of the time even looked like?
Cadillac was the “Standard of the World” as much as BMW built the “Ultimate Driving Machine.”
Marketing taglines which might be true depending on what you’re looking at or what you expect out of it.
I believe that one of the meanings of Standard of the World was indeed true: I think Cadillac pioneered the standard layout of electric starter (with key I think) and modern, three pedal layout in 1916 if I’m not mistaken.
My understanding is that the Austin 7 copied the same layout in England, and that BMW then copied the Austin 7 and that Nissan built Austin 7’s in Japan, and so the layout that became standard for cars eventually was begun by Cadillac.
I believe that Bentley’s had the clutch between the gas pedal and brake pedal for years afterwards, and that the Model T had a hand lever for throttle for years later as well, but eventually the Cadillac layout became the “Standard of the World.”
Cadillac’s claim to the “Standard of the World” has to do with their winning the 1908 Dewar Trophy for standardization administered by the Royal Automobile Club. No European automobile maker entered the contest. An english car salesman entered three Cadillacs (required by the rules) which were disassembled, the parts mixed up and then three new cars were reassembled.
It’s amazing no one here got the joke.
The Eldo is parked under a Weight Watchers sign.
First comment beat you and me to that note!
This business about great accomplishments defining a person for the rest of their life reminds me of another author, Harper Lee, who wrote one of the most classic and enduring American novels, To Kill a Mockingbird, first published in 1960, and who then refused to write or release anything else for almost the entirety of the rest of her life because it would never equal that success. Then, shortly before she died, when she ‘did’ release another novel, Go Set a Watchman, as anticipated, it was a resounding failure (although much of that may have been due to the way it was released).
Nevertheless, the sentiment still stands: once someone achieves greatness, it’s quite difficult to maintain (or even repeat) that same greatness.
Maybe it’s that I’m more a slacker than a leader, but I think the need to repeat and exceed a success is not the measurement of achievement. People have read to kill a mockingbird for generations, it was required reading for me when I was in high school, that’s as maintained greatness as it gets. The automobile industry had a nasty habit of fixing what wasn’t broken, would sales have dropped off for the Mustang in its “bloat” years if it were never restyled from its original and most successful 65-66 generation? We’ll never know, but numerous consumer products don’t go through changes and remain a certain “standard” despite their old fashioned roots.
In 1975 when Cadillac introduced the new restyled version of the Eldorado, it was nowhere near as elegant or attractive as any of the previous models from 1967-1974! GM took away the rear tire skirts which really gave it distinction from it’s #1 competitor the Lincoln Continental Mark IV and the rest of the car really had nothing dynamic or exciting about it to woo car buyers in this segment. Still overall it was a good luxury coupe, but GM finally figured something out when they came out with the totally restyled 1979 Eldorado which styled harked back to the early 1967-1970 models. Biggest strike against the 75-78 Eldo was the body style was too dated and GM should have restyled in sooner, like in 1977 when they restyled all the other Cadillac models.
Actually, the first-generation stand-alone Eldorado was produced from 1967-70. While quite large, it had very crisp lines and elegant proportions. None however, had fender skirts and the early years had hidden headlamps. The Eldorado you speak of was the second-generation, made from 1971 – 78. This car was outsized – even bloated, then downright huge after Federal bumper requirements were added. It was facelifted in 1975, whereupon the fender skirts from 1971 – 74 were deleted. By 1978, the car had become a living dinosaur, long overdue for the svelte, “right-sized” ’79.
The trouble with Cadillac as “the standard of the world” is they for a period became a leader in a segment, rather than the entire industry, as was the case in 1915. There were no sports cars, sedans, crossovers, pickup trucks or muscle cars in a definable sense back in 1915, cars were cars. Might have a crude pickup bed on the back, might have a different passenger compartment selection, but they were all about the same. Coming out with something like an electric starter would be as appealing to the banker and his Cadillac as the farmer and his Ford.
That distinction blurred considerably after WWII when distinct segments emerged and Luxury began to be more about interior material quality, gimmicks and gadgets, not making the automobile as a concept “better”. Really the Automobile, like any technology, hit a point of diminishing returns, and while there have been numerous improvements in safety, performance, efficiency, pollution control, longevity, all the bones were patented and/or in production 60-70 years ago, and all strives that has occurred since have merely been improvements or figuring out more economic implementations of those technologies in lower cost cars. Cadillac may not have innovated in what defines the automobile much since the 50s, but in reality, neither did any of the brands that “dethroned” Cadillac. They simply refined their long existing bones while Cadillac(and all American brands) would fuss about with styling details. Nobody is the “Standard of the world”, and nobody including Cadillac, Mercedes, Tesla, etc. has been for most of our lifetimes. That was a fleeting proclamation for a period during the automobile’s infancy.
I was “lucky” enough to have driven a ’74 Eldo when it was new. Dear Old Dad bought the car of his dreams at a point where the dealerships were deeply discounting after the Arab Oil Embargo.
What a gigantic heap of crap. I had no idea they could pile that much sh!t in one place, and put wheels under it. The dash didn’t fit together properly, the rear self-levelling system failed multiple times, and it seemed like the gas tank had a hole in it; but of course that’s just a matter of 500 cubic inches making 300 cubic inches worth of power.
He was “moving up” from a ’66 Chevy Biscayne Wagon, 283 2bbl, 3-on-the-tree, so auto trans, A/C, Cruise Control, automatic lights that turned on way too early in the evening, and Six Sitting Ducks on the hood ornament were big features.
My biggest single complaint was what GM did to the suspension tuning. The control arm bushings were enormously too soft. All cars experience some amount of front-end dive under braking. It’s totally normal for the front of the car to dip–and recover–when braked to a stop. The Eldo has so much suspension compliance that the thing not only dips and recovers, but it shakes >forward and backward< a time or three, on it's suspension after a medium-hard stop.
On the other hand, stabbing the gas pedal from a stop would drag the trailer hitch on the ground while the front tires went up in smoke. The smoke show was fun. Seeing the gouge in the blacktop from the stud of the hitch-ball was also impressive in a very juvenile sort of way.
Stiffer springs, in addition to the stiffer suspension bushings, would have been very welcome, too. I could induce actual sea-sickness in a friend of mine by swinging the steering wheel from side to side rapidly. GM was well-known for having adequate chassis undermined by horrible choices for suspension tuning. True of the first-and-second generation FWD E-body more than most. Re-tuning the suspension makes such an enormous improvement on the '66–'78 FWD "E-Body" chassis.
“At some point, every one of us has been or will be in a leadership position of some type.”
speak for yourself.
What do you have to gain by making such a comment? Other than it making you look rather juvenile, I’m quite curious. Please enlighten us.
For what it’s worth, you just made yourself a leader by being the first person of the 3,300 who have viewed this post to make such a snide comment. So you are indeed a leader.
And there, the penalty of leadership. LoL
Those absent filler panels are a reminder that GM liked to punish the American people for failing to protect them from regulation. Clean air act? We’ll remind you every time your car stumbles while its running, diesels on when you shut it off, and accelerates like half the spark plug wires are loose. CAFE? We’ll give you cars that perform like its 1940 so you have to drive with your foot flat on the floor to keep up with traffic and use more fuel! 5 mph impact bumpers? We’ll build the ugliest ones we can that require paint work even if you don’t hit anything! Oh well. It seems only a matter of time before their stock is as worthless as Ford’s.
Sad. Punish the customer for the Government’s ‘misdeeds’? That attitude would have been totally alien to Cadillac management back in the days when this ad ran. Or for many decades thereafter. I’m not sure it was that so much as ‘this is all we can do for now’.
But I guess it’s a commentary on how society had become conditioned to accept The Annual Model Change. As a non-American reading reports of the excitement surrounding the new model with all the hype the dealers used to get up to – it just seems unreal, and so alien to my experience. As a car nut I would have loved it! But at the same time, I abhor social conditioning, and my mind rebels against the idea of a people trained to think they had to buy a new car every year. To my freedom-loving self, that smacks of brainwashing.
And management didn’t seem to consider that buyers might just decide to sit this season out and see what came next. But then there are all those tales of shoddy workmanship, early rust-out, short-lived transmissions, engines with failure points that should have been obvious. Was it deliberate to force the customer into a new car? It certainly fostered the idea that they didn’t build them like they used to.
And Brand Loyalty: management didn’t consider that a buyer might look to another brand for their new car. They seemed to have no sense of history, not realising that as their brand had risen from nowhere, it could just as easily return. Unless they did their job right. Rather than pursuing excellence, and producing the best automobile possible for the price point, they seemed content just to make do.
And ultimately what price patriotism? History has surely shown the answer to that. A reader’s letter to Car and Driver back in the early eighties put it well. Something along the lines of ‘being American means not having to buy an inferior product just because it is American.’
The times they were a-changing. Have changed. Will change some more
This Caddy looks so strange without the filler panels. I’ve noticed this with some other old GM cars on here, How odd that neither Ford nor Chrysler found it necessary to use flexible (and as it turns out, biodegradable) bodywork inserts in such prominent locations to meet the bumper regulations. It almost makes me wonder about the ‘punish the customer’ idea. How alien that should be to a Cadillac.
I think you’re describing planned obsolescence and brand management without intentional irony. The ephemeral nature of GM cars was about selling you another GM car. The reason they had Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac was so you’d buy another GM car after your last GM car was a disappointment. Ford was reduced to doing the same thing less effectively after Henry gave up on the Model T. How long can you get away with not equaling your early merit? In Ford Motor Company’s case, close to a century so far!
As to biodegradable fillers…
Other manufacturers used flexible fillers too, but their formulas were more stable.
Interior door trim too. GM seemed to have a proprietary formula that would revert to chalk dust.
Ironic, because wasn’t it GM that used to run a full-page advertisement showcasing thousands of materials out in the sun, undergoing GM’s long-term testing?
And the quality of their famed Fisher bodies.
Nice piece Jason and the feature car is a prime example of why Europe does not “get” American cars. Any car that has pieces added front and rear (that can be removed) purely to make it longer is going have difficulty getting accepted in Europe due the size and the easy, if lazy, criticism and caricaturing that permits.
My hunch of the state of Cadillac and Lincoln, (and by all means correct me) – while they were bigger than a Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Audi or Jaguar, Cadillac and Lincoln could occupy a different spot. Remove the size difference and the competitive focus zooms in, value and quality become the key differentiating factors, and the American cars have not been able to achieve on those, except on the SUVs and light trucks maybe. Hence the decline and the derivative looking cars from both.
Roger, I think you’ve nailed it about Lincoln and Cadillac occupying a different spot. For the typical Cadillac buyer, luxury was defined differently than it was for the other makes you listed. It was more a matter of size, quietness, smooth ride, and a visual impact. The understatement of a Jaguar or Mercedes wasn’t appealing to Cadillac clientele.
At least that’s my take on it all.