Change is the one constant in life. Some of it is good, some if it not. Cadillac made a change that turned out not to be good in 1986 when they drastically downsized the Eldorado, a car that had once was the paramount of the American formula: big = good. Well, that formula had stopped working so well a while earlier, and Cadillac had no choice but to start building smaller cars starting with the 1976 Seville. Given that I gave that car a very controversial Deadly Sin Status, certainly this has earned one too. But there are always extenuating circumstances.
In this case, it’s the fact that long-time CC Contributor Tom Klockau was such a fan of anything that carried the wreath and crest, even if he acknowledged that it had some shortcomings. In another instance of change, Tom has moved on from CC for one reason or another, and is now running a Facebook page, The Brougham Society, along with former CC’er Richard Bennett. I’m sorry to see Tom go, but the reality is that in this business…well, change is a constant. We’ve had dozens of contributors come and go; it seem to be the natural ebb and flow of blogging. That of course applies to readers too.
It’s a little hard to get used to at first, but CC is a bit like an open house; some guests linger longer than others. Or maybe that’s the wrong analogy; I don’t want to make anyone feel like they’ve worn out their welcome! It’s an open-ended party, so no need to rush. But everyone needs to feel like they’re free to come and go. No hard feelings. Interests evolve, or priorities change.
And thinking about all of Tom’s enthusiastic Cadillac write-ups, I just can’t muster any serious bile tonight for this Biarritz, no matter how it undershot its market niche, and essentially destroyed a franchise that had been Cadillac’s for decades, and a very profitable one at that.
For what it’s worth, my very first GM Deadly Sin was on the failings of the 1986 GM E-Body, the Riviera in this case, which looked so much like the Buick Somerset, despite costing more than twice as much. That seems to be a recurring sin of GM’s eh?
Actually, Tom’s CC of a 1986 Eldorado was about as scathing as he was capable of being; it was titled “A Swing And A Miss“. Well, who could ignore the utter collapse of Eldorado sales in 1986; from 76k in 1985 to 19k in 1986, and a further drop to 17k in 1987. Rarely has a new version of an established model ever been so brutally punished by the market.
The 1988s received a quickie face lift which extended the overall length by three inches, rounded the front end a bit, and added vestigial finlets in the form of new rear taillights. That, and the much improved 4.5 liter version of the aluminum V8 pushed sales up to 33k. But from then on, sales bounced around between the teens and high twenties for the rest of the Eldorado’s days, until they withered along with the Eldorado, in 2002.
Both the market for luxury coupes changed, as did the Eldorado. The market became smaller, and clearly favored import brands. The Eldorado had no hope of capturing that segment, and in its latter days was very closely associated with certain demographic segments, one that gravitated to white shoes and white hair.
The Eldorado was dealt a mortal blow in 1986, but it wasn’t really just its size. I hate to sound like a broken record, but its boxy styling, poor proportions and classic Cadillac cliché design elements all conspired against it at a time when a new generation of young-ish premium car buyers (‘Yuppies’, in other words) had arrived, and were ready for something other than what Dad had always aspired to, or actually even drove. And that something other in 1986 and later years was most likely from Germany, and soon from Japan too.
But of course there were still buyers of Eldorados, and Toronados, and Rivieras, and all the other luxury models from a dying GM. And nobody was better able to describe the love they had for their cars than Tom, in his distinctive voice. It’s a demographic that has been overlooked, snubbed and even denigrated. Including by folks like me, who rag on about these cars as if nobody could possibly have loved them then, and now.
Well, my perspective has been widened, dramatically. Every car is lovable, just like every child, no matter their flaws, pimples, or lack of popularity. And of course, they’re getting easier to love as time goes on, given how distinctive they are in today’s car scenery.
I’d like to give Tom a big 1977 Eldorado-sized thanks for all of the tremendous energy and passion he put into his hundreds of posts here at CC. As well as for expanding my horizons; we all have our prejudices and preferences, but Tom was able to substantially stretch mine. I can’t see a yellow Cadillac now without thinking of how buttery its yellow interior must be, and how sharp its crisply tailored lines are.
Rightfully, I’d have picked another Cadillac than this one to commemorate Tom’s many contributions here, but the fact that I can look at this one and smile instead of gag is perhaps Tom’s greatest contribution of all. Thank you, and all the best in your Brougham travels, Tom.
The complete Tom Klockau Cadillac bibliography:
1986 Eldorado CC: A Swing And A Miss
1986 Sedan DeVille: Resplendent In Sunbursts Yellow!
1976 Coupe DeVille: The Last 1959 Cadillac
1991 Coupe DeVille: Triple White Birthday Cake
2014 XTS: How To Say Fleetwood In The 21st Century
2000 ESC: Press Escape To Return To The Main Menu
1977 Coupe DeVille: More Butter, Please
1985 Fleetwood Brougham Coupe: The Mayor Of Broughamville Welcomes You
1988 Coupe DeVille: How Not To Downsize A Luxury Car
1963 Series 62 Convertible: What’s a Caddy Like You Doing In A Place Like This?
1991 Eldorado Biarritz: Finest Triple-Yellow One In The World
Cimarron D’Oro Convertible: No, Really
1980 Eldorado Diesel: At Least One’s Left
1978 Seville: No, Nothing Wrong Here
1978 Fleetwood Eldorado: The Biggest, Baddest Brougham Of Them All
1984 Coupe DeVille: Nice Car; Shame About The Engine
1970 Fleetwood Brougham: Last Of The True Cadillacs
1992 Brougham: The Only Way To Travel Is Cadillac Style
1987 Cimarron: Could This Be The Nicest One Left?
1975 Fleetwood Brougham: The Brougham’s Brougham
The styling is awkward and having seen one live recently its worse close up, the squared off roofline looks ridiculous on that wheelbase it should have been a fastback.
I think they were so frightened by reaction to the fastback design in earlier SeVille/Imperial that both Cadillac and Chrysler stuck with vertical roof to feel better.
Although I disliked it, the “fastback” or more accurately described bustleback Seville was pretty successful…Now the “aero” A body Cutlass and Century introduced in 1978 were overwhelmingly market failures
It’s a mystery where the personal luxury car market went. Definitely not to imports, as the worst sales year ( 13,625 in 1996 ) for Lincoln Mark VIII is better than most years of Lexus SC, while Eldorado fared slightly better in sales overall. Other alternatives could include Infiniti M30 but it is really rare. ( I only spotted it once, I saw more Citroens than that )
Mercedes C124 was marketed more as a coupe version of the sedan rather than a stand-alone model, and the distant equivalent from Detroit could be either Cadillac Coupe DeVille or Mercury Grand Marquis coupe. On the other hand, I don’t believe they moved that many units neither ( for a longer lasting 124 coupe, there are 4 for sale on cars.com, and despite either mysterious electricity stuff or Northstar V8, there are 8 times more Eldorado for sale from the similar model years ) Apart from C124, probably Jaguar XJS is closer to the competition and they sold around 100,000 units around the world from ’80 to ’96.
When Eldorado, Riviera, Mark VIII were discontinued, I just didn’t see where the market went. A good size of probably 50,000-unit market just vanished ( more if counting on Tbird/Cougar ) and I don’t believe Monte Carlo benefits too much from it. I don’t see any candidates having the chance to take a good size of it neither, probably just leaving us coupe wanna be but afraid of poor sales Oldsmobile Aurora, Mercedes CLS and VW CC.
I think child seat laws have largely done in two-door personal luxury coupes — coupes are now really only practical for the child-free, empty-nesters, or the really loaded who can afford a second or third car. That’s probably why a lot of the non-sporty coupes that remain are either on the more modest end of the scale (cars like the Honda Accord coupe, which I mostly see being driven by older women) or high-roller stuff like the Mercedes-Benz S-Class coupe. The FWD Eldorado was initially in the latter category, but wasn’t able to maintain it.
The population of upper middle class childless adults in increasing, I’m suprised they haven’t brought about a resurgence in the popularity of personal luxury type coupes.
They’ve come back…sorta. The lower end Challenger/Mustang/Camaro fill that need. Theyre comfy enough to take trips, have the whole ‘grand tourer’ feel inside yet have a purposeful performance look. Gingerbready floaty coupes really don’t make a lot of sense if you think about it.
FWD Eldorado was initially in the later category, probably at 50% too. I don’t like how a personal luxury shares the front end or styling with corresponding sedans, as it takes away the uniqueness and it is a big part of their attractiveness. And it’s the same reason I feel they offer only half a personal luxury on CTS coupe.
Probably for the nature of personal coupes, they show up far more frequently in universities. Monte Carlo is the most common student car here after Impala/Taurus, and despite deep in snow belt, Thunderbird is quite common in campus too ( and even Probe ), there are a handful of Riviera hanging around, and ’70s Eldorado occasionally.
The problem with the luxury coupe is that as cars got generally smaller, getting into the back seat went from slightly awkward, to nearly impossible.
At the same time, the buyers of them were aging (and getting less agile) and/or having kids, so four doors became more necessary.
Finally, I suspect, as cars have gotten more aerodynamic, the basic sedan has gotten a lot sleeker and less formal/boxy.
In regards to needing 4 doors, I think that had less to do with kids themselves and more to do with dads having to actually haul the kids around on a regular basis due to the decline of single-income families. Child seat requirements as well.
If I’m allowed my 2c, I think nowadays people – the equivalents of those who bought such cars back then – have different expactations. Particualrly when most upscale (and some lower scale) cars offer all the “luxury” fetures of yesteryear. So to me the class still exists but much modified in the sports/luxury coupe of today. What I would ask myself is how many ATS coupes Cadillac shifts per year (or, for that matter, Audi with the A5). I do not think you’d have a market for a modern version of an 80s Brougham, people’s tastes have changed. The empty nesters and older Gen Xs would not be inetersted; an ATS or an A5 would represent the kind of car they can relate to, having grown up desiring sporty European and Japanese cars – they would rather be dead than spend their money on anything remotely Brougham-ish. Us nerds are the exception, not the rule… Speaking only of myself (an older Gen Xer), I have to confess the only cars of that ilk which – assuming money is no object (I live in the EU…) – might appeal are perahps the 69 Ford Thunderbird or the Lincoln Mark III, and even then they will not stay standard for long, not with that rolly-poly suspension and hopelessly inadequate brakes.
Probably it has connection with different driving habit too. Audi A5, ATS coupe are significantly performance/handling oriented, rather than typical boulevard cruisers with better comfort. And probably a buyer of Mercedes S Coupe nowadays wouldn’t drive it for 200 miles on a weekly basis in that car, unlike the buyers of Coupe DeVille.
When I read those who decry the loss of coupes, I have to wonder, “Do you own one, or are you planning to buy one?” Coupes are kind of like manual transmissions: plenty talk about them, but few buy them. If anyone really wants coupes to stay, then GO BUY ONE. A NEW one. Same for manuals.
Four doors on a car make it much more utilitarian, and that is where the world has gone with most cars: efficient, safe and cheap. Style is not a big drawing point like it once was.
I just leased a Kia Rio 5 to bomb around in and styling was not the first factor in my buying decision. The overall drive and features at price point were my primary criteria.
It seems like I’ve seen you state this same line in a million other posts here. Problem is even if every single person in here reading this post did follow your advice, bought a 2 door, manual transmission, station wagon, ect. you’d still decry two years later “No one’s buying them, you people are all talk”.
What exactly is the purpose of the dozen or so car companies if all they build, and are applauded for building, are the same exact vehicular equivalents of a hammer? Maybe we should all just stop beating around the bush and encourage all automakers to merge together and sell us our universal appliances because every single person on earth has given up on enjoying personal interests life.
then we can get a bigger British Leyland in the same business mode as Union Pacific!
( It only took me 2 second to recognize the commercial of Union Pacific as no other active company sounds as senior as them just like Ronald Reagan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z9T_HBlyWg )
The relative utility of four-door vs two-door depends on what your cargo is. Four doors is more utilitarian than two doors when it comes to access to the backseat by people. And also in tight parking spaces. However, the larger doors of a two door make loading bulky objects into the interior easier. Just wanted to point out that a two door can be more utilitarian than a four door under certain circumstances.
Hadn’t thought of that.
I have a Lincoln Mark VIII as my daily car from April to early November. Apart from the styling ( like it or hate it, but it’s definitely different ), it is very comfortable/roomy ( front row only ) and handles nicely at the same time with good MPG.
During winter, my LeSabre is fine at 55-70mph but the handling is way too sloppy, and higher mpg is from 1) it’s rather fuel efficient itself 2) I drive slow. In summer, traffic is significantly more demanding, as average cruising speed is above 75 from Detroit to Bay City, and cruising is fast as 90-100 around Flint in some situations, it’s not rare to drive at 130mph around Ypsilanti to pass ( so I quit driving on interstate around that area, and I drive Plymouth Volare on gravel road through Ann Arbor Trail these days, with occasional gravel road though ) Lincoln Mark VIII is one of the few cars capable of maintaining good handling at higher speed like that ( other candidates includes an Oldsmobile Aurora passed me that day, and an MN12 Tbird faster than both. I never drove on I-94 since then )
Being utilitarian and efficient isn’t always good, otherwise we will get plenty of Chrysler K-cars. But it could be fun if I show up in a pristine Plymouth Reliant woody wagon as an engineering student.
In a word: YES. If all falls into place, my next car will be a Challenger R/T….manual trans will be mandatory, since its offered.
I agree 4 doors make a car ‘more’ utilitarian, to a degree. A sedan with the same dinky trunk as an equivalent coupe and yet smaller doors for me to stuff my 6’1 250 chassis through gives me nothing in trade for the (to my eye) hideous looking body style. Style is a matter of taste, but the 300 is the only one on the market that doesn’t make me want to vomit. And have you driven/ridden in a Challenger? The rear seat is actually useable. The fronts are well suited to my ‘quarterback frame’, and the trunk is huge. Practicality isn’t the focus obviously…but it would be very easy to live with.
If that utility becomes a determining factor, then Ill hunt down a used Magnum R/T. Which by the way, Im sort of on the fence with as it is. Id have to give up the manual trans, but the usefulness of the car combined with the fact that its an absolute badass in the looks department mean its an equally appealing choice. For stroking my muscle car lust, the Magnum stands its ground against the Challenger, Mustang and Camaro. To me it makes the Charger and 300 invisible.
Again as I stated….a lot of this boils down to personal taste.
I feel the Challenger today has some character of Mirada, as it is more touring than older ones. I just hope they can have a nice interior like Mirada too but then it would be too Mirada. ( the only part I dislike Challenger today is the interior, or maybe I am too used to older cars with plenty of faux wood panels. )
Charger today nearly occupies the same place where Diplomat did decades ago, but looks significantly cooler. Magnum is almost like the Diplomat wagon. I think I will consider them 30yrs later.
I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion that if I were to replace my hot rodded Cougar I’d get a R/T or a used SRT Challenger with the manual in either case. It’s the only one of the three ponycars that has a useable back seat(not that I care, but still) and I love that it’s the most faithful looking retro ponycar, even if it is huge. I don’t particularly like the dash on the 09-14s though, I think it looks very plain and truck like, so I’d have to hold out for a 2015+.
Oh, lighten up.
I’m sure you didn’t buy your Rio 5 for styling, they look bland just like most appliances.
As far as coupes, they were bought more on a styling point of view, not how many grocery bags fit in them, go get a minivan for that.
As far as safety goes, I’d bet on my 85 Buick Regal coupe, with real steel chrome bumpers, over your Kia Rio, airbags, any day. Lol
“…and were ready for something other than what Dad had always aspired to, or actually even drove. ”
I honestly think this is one of the biggest problems GM faced in those days. A significant portion of the boomer generation would not have been interested in anything that had the Cadillac name on it, let alone these too small Broughams.
That’s a big question: Was there anything Cadillac could have done in the ’80s that would have moved the needle as far as the bulk of Boomer yuppies was concerned? While I’m sometimes tempted to speculate that it would have helped if Cadillac had been able to bring out something like the 1992 Seville about five years earlier, I’m honestly not sure how much difference it would have made. Hard to say.
The problem is, how do you decide when to completely abandon your fiercely loyal but rapidly shrinking customer base, to try to capture the next wave?
I wonder what the average age of the current Caddilac buyer is? Have they simply skipped a generation?
I think that’s about right. I’d say brought out the Allante and ’92 Seville for 1985, with at least the 4.9V8.
Kept two traditional cars for the parents and traditionalists: the Sedan DeVille on the RWD chassis and 79-85 Eldorado. With the 305 instead of the 307 for a bit better acceleration, and the L05 once it became available in ’87 or ’88 as the option w the gas guzzler tax. Keep the Fleetwood Brougham also as an uptrim DeVille option but really class it up with real wood and the most powerful V8 available. Limit production yet save on some tooling since still using the SDV body. Introduce something closer to the whale version about ’88. Keep the interior quality of the prior generation.
2 new, exciting models. 2 traditional, but not dog slow 4.1 powered models. Cut out the FWD C and E cars of ’85 and ’86 entirely.It would’ve helped.
But would’ve required a crystal ball no one had in 1980.
Aka, hindsight is cheap. And very, very accurate.
Even at this point, GM was absolutely stymied why anyone wouldn’t rush to their showrooms and snap up anything they sold. This had been GM’s experience for a very long time and old habits die hard. It’s only recently improved, and I for one would still never buy a GM vehicle.
We all know GM’s mistakes, but the most obvious one was hubris.
That hubris was fairly earned. I can remember discussions over the dinner table during my early teens, when there was serious consideration of the federal government breaking GM up into two parts (probably Chevrolet and Buick for one, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Cadillac for the other) because they were too big and nobody else could compete.
It’s hard to change your thinking from those days.
Well, I think Paul had a “what if” regarding the possibility of Cadillac adopting a big Opel as a sort of a sportier, Europeanized Cadillac. But he referred to the 60s Opel Admiral, and it would have had to be a long term startegy and not an awful bodge like the Catera. There is another point which I believe is no less important: I trully believe GM would not have been in its predicament (ugly cars and aging buyer base notwithstanding) had it made quality job one – this was what caused the problem on a far more fundamental level. In the 60s, a Cadillac was as, or more reliable than any M-B, Jaguar or whatever Japan was trowing at the USA. In the 80s….
I’d be willing to bet that if Cadillac had brought out the 4.5 V8 instead of the stupid HT4100 and not made these cars so small sales would have been much better. The 4100 and massive shrinkage did much damage to the brand.
One basic problem with the 4100 were the engineering mistakes that led to engine failures. The 4.5 was the same engine, so starting out at 4.5 liters would still have left all the mistakes and everyone would now be calling it one of Cadillac worst engines of all time.
In regard to performance, the 4100, the 4.5 and the 4.9 were all throttle body fuel injected and horsepower was limited as a result. The Allante’s 4100 and 4.5 were tuned port injected and much better.
The grenading, overheating 32 valve Northstar, after the venerable 4.5 liter, definitely didn’t help Cadillac either. Sort of Cadillac’s proverbial cyanide tablet.
“And of course, they’re getting easier to love as time goes on,”
That’s actually a deep and large truth. True of cars, houses, other objects. If it has survived “longer than it should”, it probably has some observable qualities that made it worth storing or preserving or using carefully. Somebody thought it was special. And it also has the internal quality needed to hold up for a while, instead of instantly rusting or falling apart.
Raised ranches, broughams., 70s fashion. Popularn then laughed at, forgotten, then renewed interest due to rarity and the passage of time.
As John Huston’s Noah Cross famously said in Chinatown. “Respectible? Of course I’m respectible. I’m old. Ugly buidlings, polititicans and whores all become respectible if they last long enough.”
I think it’s not just that the design begins to wear on you, but you associate it with other positive aspects of the era it represents, as a kind of complementary nostaligia.
I like Broughams a lot but can’t muster much love for these; throwback land yacht appointments just don’t fit with the body; like a homely 18 year old girl dressing in grandma’s fox furs and dyeing her hair blue.
Like the others here, even if I don’t like the car, it does put a smile on my face to see this and any older car out and about, though!
A nice tribute to Tom. Sorry to hear we won’t be hearing from him (and apparently Carmine), in the future. I like TBS but it has a way of taking over ones facebook newsfeed; as a result I think I’m still a member but had to unfollow it because my newsfeed was only about cars.
Thanks to Tom for so many interesting contributions! Like Paul, I was no big fan of Cadillacs from these years but have been able to gain an appreciation of them. The amazing part is that Tom’s background is mainly Volvo, although his V50 does carry a Brougham badge. I hope we haven’t completely seen the last of Tom, surely there will be a spare sighting of a triple yellow Caddy that can be tossed this way. In any case it has been a great run and his words left a mark, it was great to meet the man last year as well.
Tom’s transition from Volvo fan to Brougham-aholic has been steady yet certain. Like Jim, I’ve not been a fan of these petite Cadillac’s, but Tom has cultivated my begrudging respect for them.
Jim, you will be seeing his name here again. He sent me some Cadillac pictures last night that I hope to use at some point. How Tom is able to find so many Cadillac’s is beyond me.
Despite Tom’s affinity for all things Brougham, his letting me drive his V50 wagon last year did sorely tempt me to search for a Scandinavian sweetie of my own. Perhaps he showed me the path to Frau VW.
He set you on the path to righteousness as happiness is a turbo spinning at 100,000+rpm. 🙂
Glad to hear that we can still expect to hear from (or in regard to) him occasionally, Cadillacs appear to last longer and be thicker on the ground than I had given them credit for.
When a GM luxury car has lost Orrin, it has no chance. 🙂 Actually, I agree with pretty much all of his points. And because GM stuff tends to rank lower on my interest-meter, I just can’t really take them seriously.
One of the reasons I miss Tom here is that he provided a license for me to ignore these when I found them out on the street. Like last week when I saw one and could not muster the enthusiasm to photograph it. What’s amazing is that at least for this morning, I think PN likes this car better than I do.
I don’t think we appreciate enough how hard Cadillac had to work to run off one of the most loyal frigging customer bases in the history of consumer products. But they managed.
I just looked again at that lead picture: this Eldo, a Ford Probe and that blue Pontiac sedan – is this a late 80s rogues gallery or what?
The Ford Probes were good cars – the name was just unfortunate. They were not total disasters like this Eldorado.
The Pontiac sedan looks like an early 1990s Grand Prix. Not necessarily a terrible car, just one that was destined to become rental-car fodder.
That’s because the Probe was a reskinned Mazda.
And the Probe was supposed to be the replacement for the Mustang. They already had Mustang imprinted in the bumpers before changing their mind.
As with the Chrysler Imperial, the Eldorado should have been let to die with dignity. Once proud flagships reduced to trimmed up econo boxes.
I kinda liked the 88 restyle and was actively looking for one when they were late models, never did get one though. I know these cars have ZERO collector interest. Last year I looked at a gorgeous one owner 89 for sale for $2500.00 and It sat on a busy street for about a month. I saw it a few weeks ago and it was already a beat-up dirty old used car. Somebody just bought a cheap car to use up.
Tom, if you are reading this, you deserve a lot of credit for being a champion of the downtrodden. The amount of genuine enthusiasm you are able to demonstrate for some cars is truly incredible. You are like the Mother Theresa to the puny Cadillac’s – you are able to show them affection when absolutely nobody else can do so.
You have been a good influence on this site and will be missed.
Well said. We all have our automotive happy places, but Tom’s was with the cars that have few champions. It is good for all of us to see someone wax enthusiastic about a car that most overlook.
When I think of Tom, the term Brougham Epoch comes to mind.
Fully agree with you, Jason.
This is the thing I enjoy most about reading Curbside Classic — I have come to appreciate so many cars I did not before. That’s not to say I’ve come to love them — just appreciate them. And it’s because contributors here love them, and extol their virtues, and thus open my eyes.
Yep, well said, same here. I sadly don’t have the time to comment on everything anymore, but rest assured that I still pretty much read everything and appreciate them all.
+1
Seconded – every car really does have a story. I once stumbled into this website reading about the Omnirizon, as a young European with no particular affinity for American cars. I won’t pretend I like those Cadillacs but I did learn a lot about them, and the American auto industry in general. I don’t post much but read CC pretty much every day for the sheer variety, the more, the merrier, there’s always a story to be told and another view to be held!
Tom Klockau. The Standard of the Brougham&Volvo&Toy-Loving Writer World. So long and hopefully see you soon.
The letdown of those downsized Eldorados was inevitable. For a generation fed big, luxurious, extravagant, aspirational automobiles to be now handed shrunken, over-decorated econo-boxes……how could their expectations be anything but disappointed.
For the ‘yuppies’ Eldorados et al became vulgar totems of an out-of-date ethic just at the time the European luxury makers presented a sophisticated alternative.
Put me in the category of, “I don’t care what Cadillac did, there’s no way a boomer was going to be caught dead in one” believer.
Cadillac was my father’s generation luxury car. The same generation that was half of the Generation Gap (and to those of you under 30, back in the late 1960’s my bunch wanted absolutely nothing to do with whatever our parents liked). And that attitude, although muted by age and maturity, still existed in a muted sense 20 years later.
I think Cadillac could have rebadged BMW E30 325i’s and they would have bombed. Just like the Chevy/Geo Nova/Prizm couldn’t sell nearly as well as the Toyota Corolla. The brand you were driving made a statement (even to the ‘I couldn’t care less about cars’ crowd). And if you considered yourself any version of hip (aka, more in style than the average Midwesterner) you wouldn’t be caught dead in an American nameplate.
Kinda of a frightening thought, isn’t it? Even if GM hadn’t done all those Deadly Sins, they would have still been fighting an uphill battle for the desirable generation of customers. To have turned out all the crap they did, only made it worse.
This marketing problem (too successful marketing for a certain generation) continues today. I’m watching Harley-Davidson, THE desirable motorcycle of my generation, bring out the new water-cooled 500’s and 750’s in an effort to appeal to somebody under the age of 35. Because no motorcycle riding Millenial has the slightest interest in a Road King or any version of a Glide. And the tricked out, streetfightered Sportsters don’t see to be appealing to anyone under their thirties.
Harley-Davidson could be the Cadillac of the 2020’s and 2030’s. Will it survive?
Interesting call on Harley. I’m not a bike person in the slightest, but HD is on my radar because it has what we marketing wankeurs call great brand equity. Your comments put a fresh spin on a brand i just assume will keep on keeping on. Maybe not. Are the millennials going here instead?
http://deuscustoms.com/bikes/models/
Speaking of Harley’s, we are expecting a million of them to invade this summer during the rally. The news this morning is that they want to reduce the speed limit by 15 MPH to hopefully reduce the usual number of fatalities.
Very interesting web page, thanks for the link. Hadn’t heard of them before.
Right now, the cafe racer is the hot bike with millenials. Which I find hilarious, because right now is the first time I don’t own a cafe racer since 1976 – and I miss ’em. And those cafe racers are 70’s Japanese vertical twins for the most part, rebuilt into nice little simple customs. The new bike market is in flux. Cruiser sales are down (the fad is over), the leading edge sportbikes (600’s and 1000’s) are improving technologically to where very few people can afford them, even before the insurance costs.
Hottest selling street bikes at our shop are 500-900cc variants on the ‘naked sport bike’ theme. They’re still priced in four figures, which is critical.
Harley has too much brand equity. It’s totally locked in with the generation that got all sorts of dreams out of those AIP biker flicks we saw at the drive-in back in the 60’s, and then twenty years later decided they had to have one and become a biker. (Bad joke, if you’ve ever been around real 1%er’s and those who play in that world. Trust me on this.) And the boomers brought Harley-Davidson from a company who’d been struggling from one crisis to another (if AMF hadn’t bought them in ’69, there would have been no company left to exploit Harley Mania by the 80’s and 90’s) to a very healthy organization. Harley’s became the dream bike of almost everyone who wanted to ride a motorcycle thirty years ago, just like Cadillac was the dream of car buyers back in the 50’s and 60’s.
I haven’t seen many of the new water cooled Harley’s on the road, and the reviews haven’t been spectacular. Decent bike, but nothing special. And there’s so many used Harley’s with under 20k on the clock out there just sitting in the garage gathering dust now that the fad’s over – just waiting for wifey to yell, “Put that damned thing up for sale, dammit!” that it is going to have some kind of chilling effect on the sale of new models.
I know I can’t afford the new Harley that I’d want. A Street Glide (slightly stripped version of the full-blown dresser) clocks in at over $23k. And its evolved into a V-twin, belt-drive BMW; not the visceral, stompin’ bike it was twenty years ago. I’ll probably be looking for another used on in the near future.
As much as I’ve argued above for what might have been, you’re probably right. It’s hard for me to think of a single boomer who doesn’t have some level of disdain not just for Cadillac but ALL American cars. Trucks and Jeep for whatever reason get a pass, otherwise it’s still often taken in the same light as a Yugo.
My sister and brother in law, prime examples. DINK’s, yuppies, professional (she’s an MD, he’s an engineer contracted to PennDOT), living in Buck’s County, PA (PA’s answer to Marin County, CA).
The only American branded cars you see up there is the hired help going to clean houses, do yard work, work in shops. They’re a prime example of the wall Cadillac’s beating its heading against right now. Up there, BMW could rebadge a Chevy Cruze and it’d lease like hotcakes.
I was stunned this year when Don traded his Toyota Highlander in for a Jeep Cherokee. That’s the first time in over twenty years that I suggested an American brand, and they actually bought one.
Possibly because the Cherokee is the most European of all the current American 4X4 SUVs – it does not look out of place here in Vienna. Here, too, it is acceptable for the local equivalents of your relatives; a Cadillac Escalade on the other hand, is a non-no (unless you want people to think you’re a pimp).
… and in its wisdom, Harley a few years ago got rid of the only thing it had to avoid that slide, the Buell…
Yep. All done in a mad panic over fiscal problems because they over financed customers like my president and vice president of the Deranged Few M/C. Good brothers, but I’d never loan them anything over $25.00. And kiss that money good-bye when I did.
The company pulled itself back (and in all fairness, I don’t really know just how bad a shape they were in, as they were still selling bikes very well), but they definitely killed one possible future by falling back on their core.
Precisely when the brand was starting to be accepted here (Europe). Innovative and the bike mags liked it, and not TOO expensive when compared with the usual German, Italian and Japanese suspects.
Between the economy being in the toilet and their rapidly aging customer base HD will not be around in the next 30 years.
The riders today go through bikes like disposable lighters. Why spend 20k on a HD when you can just keep spending 3-5k on used Japanese bikes when you inevitably drop and or break them?
HD today is about selling an ‘image’ not a motorcycle. Which explains why most HD riders rock the HD branded boots, gloves, vest, jacket, helmet, t shirts, window stickers, baby onesies ….etc
Yep, pretty much. Speaking of selling a brand, not a vehicle, isn’t that what the CEO of Cadillac wants to do now?
I suppose it is a generational thing. I can’t speak for “my generation” (I’m 30, where ever that puts me) but I rather like Broughamy Cadillacs, even the front wheel drive versions. I work for a funeral home and tool around town every chance I get in the company’s 2004 Deville and really enjoy it. It rides smooth and looks dignified. I hate when I have to share the road with Harley’s because I can’t hear my harpsichord music and V-8 burble over their gawdawful noise. Plus, I’ve seen my share of what happens when they get into crashes that would just be fender benders for a car. Just the other day I actually saw a guy on a Harley barely scuff the bumper of a Honda CR-V and end up on the side of the road bleeding like a stuck hog. Thank God he didn’t end up on my table, at least.
Good point about HD.I’ve owned and ridden a lot of them in the past. Back in the 60’s they still had a performance image and reality. The 70’s came and they became pretty much irrelevant as a performance vehicle. They became a “lifestyle” choice. Not really bad bikes, they could be ridden anywhere and enjoyed but you paid a huge premium for cachet, There were lots of other choices that were a much better return on the dollar. They are now so expensive that most 20 something bike riders, like my son, can’t hope to afford a new big twin so they aren’t even a consideration. Besides they are old man’s bikes or a young poseur’s choice. I’ve seen the new twins and I think they are nice but can they convey the “Harley Mystique” to the new owner? If you don’t get to bask in the mystique then there is no reason to own one. You are just settling for something less.
Really that is what occurred with these little Eldos. I worked with a guy who had bought a new 80 Eldo then replaced it with one of these downsized versions. He said it was great car, handled great, comfortable easy to park etc. But it just wasn’t the same. Something was missing. Something hard to define, but something essential to the satisfaction of ownership. He made the jump to MBZ for his next car. He felt he was again getting something worthwhile with his purchase. I think the next gen of the Eldorado/Seville made up a lot of ground but just couldn’t recapture the magic. I had one of those Northstar Sevilles and I thought it was a pretty good American car. Now I don’t think I would even buy any new Cadillac, even if I could afford it easily. There’s just not anything there.
So long, Mr. Klockau. You’re a decent man.
His ultimate ride, I assume, would be this:
His ultimate ride might also be a Saab 99 SSE (Brougham) 🙂
Yes…yes, but does the Saab also have some sort of Brougham-atmosphere inside ?
And a big, fat C-pillar with a little crown ? I wonder if a Great Dane came with the package…
Tom may use a Volvo for a daily driver and like the old Caddys but he is a Lincoln Man at heart and when the time came for a weekend/sunny day driver he stayed true to his hear. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/my-first-curbside-classic-2000-lincoln-town-car-cartier-edition-of-mccarthy-my-grandparents-and-other-things/
The more I look at the pictures of this Eldo, the more I like it. Of course, I’m the crazy European who loves American cars 🙂
I actually got to drive an Eldorado of this generation (a 1986); I responded to an online ad and was really considering buying it. In the end, I did not buy it; the HT4100 with coolant leak, some minor other issues and above all, much too high asking price kept me from making the purchase – but I sure enjoyed the test drive. Let me tell you, this is definitely no econo-box. Maybe it depends on what kind of cars one is used to (I admit, I’m not overly spoiled, but I’m used to decent cars), but there was no doubt that this was a luxury car in 1986 – and still is today.
As to why the yuppies weren’t buying cars like these and instead turned to imports (mostly German), let me have a wild guess here:
this probably wasn’t so much the fault of the cars themselves. It was perhaps more due to the fact that yuppies/grown up boomers wanted something different than their parents drove, just for sake of being different. Add to that several movies where BMWs, Porsches and Benzes were portrayed as cool cars, and the myth of ‘German reliabilty’, the myth of ‘European sophistication’, and the concept of conspicuous consumption (you’ve made it in life, and now show the world by purchasing and flaunting expensive homes and luxury cars, and an import will always be more cool if it’s more expensive) – suddenly, US offerings don’t stand much chance. And then on top of that, they shoot themselves in the proverbial foot with blunders like HT4100, Olds diesel etc..
EDIT: while I was typing, Syke already mentioned why boomers wanted imports ‘just because’.
I am a so-called boomer. As I got older the idea of a two door was less interesting than the ease of getting into the rear seat area that 4 door offer. Also sport sedans had the ride and handling built in that I like. My first sports sedan was the Electra T-type, although my Skyhawk did have the optional suspension.
Carry on, Tom! Thanks for your Quad Cities contributions to CC!
That picture of Paulie Walnuts with his gold Eldorado says it all.
Paul, did you photograph the gen 2 Ford Probe or GM10 Grand Prix in the background? 🙂
IMHO, the 1986 Caddy’s spelled the death of Cadillac as a brand. I was a young exec in 1986 with my first headquarters assignment serving as flunky for a VP. He was devastated by the new Cadillacs. His plan was to retire and buy an new Eldorado “with everything” and cruise around the country. He very much viewed these things as economy cars being dragged around by a Cadillac styled hood and fenders. The formal roof and short trunk made the cars very misproportioned, and worse, exactly the same shape as the Chevy’s. That vinyl roof wasn’t fooling anybody. He felt betrayed by GM, and it was fascinating how bitter he was. He ended up buying a custom van “to get something with some room inside”. He never really liked it though.
For me, these cars demonstrated the cynicism of GM. They had no standards any more. There was no pretending that the Vega, Citation, and Cimmaron had been aberrations… This kind of s*** was the norm now. The company of Z/28’s, Delta 88’s, Impala’s, and DeVilles had sold out…. They were selling the names and the financing packages, and didn’t give a damn about the cars. Cadillac was no longer aspirational for me. Before these, I could have imagined myself at 60 driving a leather-lined DeVille, but these were simply cheap cars with fancy badges. I could get a lot better cheap car (with no fany badge in those days) from the Japanese. Then came Acura… And I bought an Integra in 1987. Under the old rules, a junior exec would have bought a sporty Olds – dignified but powerful (Pontiac too blue-collar; Buick too old) but those days were done.
So, the old generation was lost, and the new generation was lost.
You sort of raise an interesting point which has been bubbling in the back of my little head this morning. I can’t decide which is worse: the overt cynical badge-engineering jobs like the Cimmaron or the Catera, or cars like this where Cadillac was actually trying.
GM, at one time, was the automotive representation of The Best America Had To Offer.
There were no KT Kellers sticking their nose into the styling studio. No Henry Fords demanding engineers of 1935 stick to what worked in 1915.
GM was a coalition of car companies turned loose to do what they do best…but it was also a beacon of optimism in its traveling Futurliner shows and Parades of Progress. At home a Frigidaire was, for many, their first modern refrigerator, and the end of hauling ice. Their planes helped win WWII. And from the self starter to automatic transmissions and power steering…most all the modern conveniences we demand on our cars today, were developed in whole or part, by…General Motors.
And America showed its appreciation by giving the company a 50% market share, with half of those sales going to Chevrolet. And in those days, GM delivered, and in so doing, forced everybody else in the US car business to up their game.
To quote Henry Potter in “It’s A Wonderful Life”…do I paint an accurate picture or do I exaggerate?
Yeah, people were starting to question things in the fifties – as well they needed to – and GM was starting to become a target as much as it was an icon. But when Chairman Alfred Sloan, a car guy, was succeeded by Frederic Donner, a money guy, in 1958, the road to Deadly Sins was truly opened, beginning with the decontenting of the 1960 Corvair…and finally – hopefully – coming to an end with those half-baked Uplander/Montana SV6/Relay/Terazza crossovers. I can’t think of a more cynical effort to build a vehicle.
Only twenty years before your VP’s 1986 devastation with GM, Cadillacs were road-tested alongside Rolls-Royces – and often won. But the division started chasing market share as they simultaneously cheapened their products. The “cache” was handed to the Germans on a silver platter as GM grew increasingly cynical and threw away the standards that helped America and its allies win WWII.
As for the entire company, Japan won the quality war. Big Time.
So I totally get how bitter and betrayed your VP felt.
Because when he was a kid, GM was more than just a car company. It was a beacon of America.
My wife and I are back in a current-generation Equinox after two Subarus and their head-gasket issues. We’ve driven enough current-gen GM products to be hopeful for the company’s future. But it’s going to be a long road until the perception catches up with the product.
I agree with a lot of what has been said here, both pro and con. Myself? I’ve never been a fan of these smaller Cadillacs, neither the Eldorado nor the Seville. Looking at the pictures makes me think of someone who has been making wedding cakes for most of their lives and has recently had their huge cake pans stolen and replaced with much smaller ones. Instead of seeing it as an opportunity to come up with a new/smaller TYPE of wedding cake…..the simply “cut down” the recipe for the smaller pans.
Almost all of Cadillac’s competition continued building credible coupes while Cadillac (temporarily) gave up.
The market for these cars always existed, the competition got better and the best Cadillac could do was get small (er).
The 1986 Cadillacs did kill the brand. Riding in them was in no way the same as my dad’s 1975 Cadillac.
But I do wonder about the inter-generational change. My dad wore a brand of sports shirt – the one with the penguin I think. I put one on one day and freaked out. I just couldn’t bring myself to buy it. It made me feel weird.
Does the same thing happen to car brands?
In regards to the death of the two door coupe:
When I was in high school in 1980, you just weren’t caught dead driving a 4 door car. You just had to have a two door car. Kids today? Don’t really care.
Also, my favorite car as a kid was the broughamed out GT – a real grand tourer. I wasn’t really into the true sports car without power steering or a/c.
But now, every car is a Grand Tourer – from the lowliest to the Rolls – its hard to find a car that doesn’t come with leather, electric windows, doors, mirrors, power everything, smooth ride. That was the real appeal of the coupe years, but now every car has it.
I still like a coupe, but I have hit my empty nester years.
I was in H.S. in the early 90s…for the most part the ‘4 doors aren’t cool’ thing was in full swing. Here I am at 41…Ive embraced wagons and hatches but a 4 door sedan is like the kiss of death for any kind of desireablity in a car. As I mentioned above replying to Canucklehead, the 300C is about the only 4 door that I would even remotely consider. The lines of that car are so powerful and bold, its hard not to have a soft spot. Besides, if I were to shave the rear door handles and install poppers on the rears, it sure would LOOK like a coupe!
I recently decided to give Ma Mopar a try a bought a 2014 300c. I went for one on the Brougham side of style rather than sheer performance (no SRT-8 for me). So far I’m really enjoying it, and I’m looking forward to trouble free years and thousands of miles. 🙂
Hey me too, same car but AWD with the V8. Enjoying it as well…
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/uncategorized/wdjb-what-did-jim-buy/
Cool! I don’t know how I could have possibly missed that write up. Mine is AWD as well but a v6. I would have preferred the v8 but the mpg numbers make the wife happier and the v6 is, honestly, plenty punchy for whatever I’m going to do with the car. Its also the jazz blue pearlcoat with the light brown/beige (whatever they call it) interior, which I wasn’t terribly impressed with by looking at the dealer’s pictures but really pops in person.
In High School some 4 doors were rapidly becoming accepted, particularly the STI and EVO. I think though that the EVO/STIs were desirable for their potential, rather than their 4 door “practicality”. I grew up when there were a lot of late model coupes in the used car market and the vast majority of the car people in high school did seem to seek them out over the sedan equivalents. Flash forward 10 years to now and there’s simply fewer 2 doors on the market comparatively, it’s nearly impossible to find a cheap 2 door now a days that doesn’t fetch ridiculous insurance premiums, or get the approval of helicopter parents who blanket all cars older than 10 years, no matter the brand or reputation, too dangerous and unreliable for their precious college bound babies. It’s practically impossible to be caught alive in a 2 door for kids these days.
*I posit this as a very large and never talked about(or at least acknowledged) reason younger people supposedly dislike cars.
There really aren’t many 2 door cars left at all; very true. If you discount things like the Camaro/Mustang/Challenger/BRZ on grounds of pricey premiums, and get rid of the luxury brands on account of cost, what are you left with? Accord, Civic, Elantra, Forte, tC, Altima. Not bad cars, but not exciting (and the Elantra and Altima coupes are quite uncommon.) Maybe a used Genesis coupe, but that might trip the insurance-o-meter or be hard to find one in a high school budget. A case could be made for considering the MINI, 500, or Golf/GTi in this category but I consider them 3-door hatches, as opposed to something like the tC which is a 2-door that happens to have a hatch instead of a trunk.
tC is a big embarrassment for a mechanical engineering student, because it simply arouses too many doubts about the vision in cars.
More students simply chose anonymous W-Body cars, which is more of an also runner.
Something that is important to consider is that sales of the 2 door Deville’s also declined. The coupe Deville during the 70’s out sold the sedan Deville. by the mid 80’s the coupe Deville is selling about half the rate of the sedan Deville, before and after the transition to FWD. So the market for coupes has changed in the early 80’s.
Tom I hope your Town Car is treating you well. Would be nice to see updates on that car from time to time. It was a real beauty.
The Town Car is well. It had its 100K service last month, and this week is going in to Strieter to get the cruise control fixed. It recently turned 97K miles and ferried my folks and I to brunch on Easter!
I too miss Tom’s enthusiasm for all things Brougham, as well as some of his more diverse writings.
Tom may have been more accepting of cars like the ’88 Eldorado as I think he is young enough to not have realized first hand the horror of even the Cadillac faithful at the ’86 – ’91 Eldorado and Seville. Part of the issue was that the ’85 and earlier cars, especially the Eldorado, were still very good in some ways – the drivetrains had become famously iffy – but the public still wanted to believe in Cadillac – until 1986. Without the direct context of the mid ’80s auto market, today this car looks like another chromey two-tone Brougham from times gone by, not so bad in its own way.
But, for the times, Cadillac completely whiffed this one. Ford saw the writing on the wall, change or die, and the ’83 Thunderbird moved Ford into the future. GM simply didn’t realize how much major change was needed. Which is a shame, the ’85 Eldorado with the vinyl top omitted and fitted with the stylish but rarely ordered wheels was a perfectly acceptable transition to the 1992 Eldorado. And, I’m not talking about the ’85 Eldorado Touring Coupe, which seemed a little forced. I’m talking about the standard coupe, in black, with wheels – a very logical look parked between a ’67 Eldorado and the ’92.
If Cadillac’s drive trains had remained reliable during the ’80s and the ’85 Eldorado had transitioned directly to the 1992, history would likely have been quite different.
I will miss Tom’s posts greatly. And whatever happened to Carmine?
Ditto, and true, I haven’t seen Carmine around these parts lately…
I was wondering the same thing.
He left in a bit of huff, IIRC. Carmine’s comments fell into two categories: 1. very informative, and 2: confrontational. He was always eager to start or get into a fight, and he particularly loved getting into it with me. Many of his more confrontational comments were never see, because I had to delete them. They were not confrontational about the subject matter, but on a personal level, which is inappropriate, and gets very tedious to deal with.
I wrote him repeated e-mails to please knock off the confrontational attitude, and stick to what he was good at. But he could never do that for long.
Some commenters assume that the First Amendment applies to web sites. It doesn’t; CC expects the subject matter and tone of the comments here to stay above the common internet level of personal attacks and confrontations.
Carmine was simply unwilling to accept that some of his comments were unacceptable, due to their derogatory or offensive nature. When I deleted too many of them, he eventually got fed up. He just couldn’t see or accept that his attacks on issues or me personally or on the site’s policies or philosophy was not going to repeatedly tolerated.
The same happened to one or two other commenters, but the difference was is that Carmine was a fount of knowledge. I literally begged him to drop the attitude and offensiveness, but in the end, Carmine couldn’t be anything other than Carmine. So he left.
He’s welcome back, like anyone else, but offensive comments will not be tolerated.
There’s simply two choices: allow folks free rein, and the resultant likelihood that the general atmosphere will deteriorate like at so many other web sites that have commenting, or insist on certain rules and limits to the commenting, in which case the likelihood that some will not be able to rein themselves in is almost inevitable.
I simply don’t have the time, energy or inclination to engage in endless debates about the site’s philosophy, content decisions, and policies with a small handful of rogue commenters. It becomes a black hole of wasted time and energy. Commenters either get how CC works, or they don’t.
Carmine endlessly chafed at our approach; anytime there was a post here that was negative about GM he accused me of that being the result of some anti-GM jihad that required all writers here to adhere to that, etc. He just couldn’t accept the facts of GM’s decline and our coverage of it. And we certainly have plenty of pro-GM material, as Tom’s posts made all too clear. But he couldn’t see that.
The reality is that I don’t impose any kind of content editorial slant or take on the work that Contributors create, as long as it’s of a decent overall quality. I’m always happy to have other points of view. And I invited Carmine and the other GM-fanbois to contribute, and write their perspective. But that almost never happened.
I have found that some personalities just prefer to chafe and accuse you of being biased rather than actually get up and present the other point of view. It’s easier, and maybe they have too much time on their hands. But I don’t anymore. Back to work…
I hear you Paul. I really enjoyed Carmine’s wittiness, and his automobile knowledge was incredible. But you are right, no one should be personally attacked, and I’m sure you want the CC website to be a carefree, open forum for everyone to be able to share their knowledge, experiences, opinions and overall love of cars.
I personally love this website and hope to enjoy it for many years to come. Keep up the good work, Paul!
I liked him, but know he liked a fight. Sometimes I think he correctly called people on their anti-GM prejudices. Other times I think he should have let petty, or minor, stuff go without wading in swinging. And he did get a bit too personal at times, sometimes I feel the same but step back and say hey, they’re just old cars, this is supposed to be fun! Hopefully he’ll simmer down and come back, a bit less intemperate. I for one would welcome his return.
This is your house, Paul. You have to run it how you see fit. I know I can be a problem child at times, and we’ve had our differences too. But I cant say you’ve ever treated me unfairly in unprofessionally. Sometimes people have to agree to disagree…some passions run deep. In the end, no one is forcing anyone else to browse this site.
I hope Carmine does simmer down. Ive learned a thing or two from his posts.
I miss Carmine, too. I loved his posts. He loved GM products. Even I felt at times Carmine would come down on me and that it really was a misinterpretation of what I meant to say.
I was a big GM fanboy in the 1970s when i was a kid. I really thought they made way superior automobiles. But I realized about 20 years later that they just made showier vehicles that appealed to a younger audience.
I mean – to a kid in the 1970s, what did Ford make that I would like? The only sports car Ford made was the Mustang, which turned into a real secretaries car in the Mustang II. The Thunderbird and Cougar seemed to be huge compared to a Cutlass.
Meanwhile, GM had (or recently had) GTOs and Stage 1 Buicks and Chevelle SS and Grand Prixs and you name it. They had wraparound dashes, etc. Lots of chrome and fake wood. The 350, the 400 and the 455.
I just didn’t see many Chryslers as a kid, outside of stale government cars and a single vinyl Plymouth Satellite with a 318.
But, both sets of grandparents drove Fords. I asked why and my grandmother who lived close to the gulf coast and she said that they GM cars would rust out the back windshield and then the car was toast – you couldn’t fix it. The other thought Ford made a better product.
I still think that GM did a better dash and interior design from 1970 to 1980 than Ford.
Living in Texas, I still have the burn marks from my grandmothers LTD – Ford put little metal logos in the seats and in the Texas heat they would be about 220 degrees when I set foot in the car.
I guess I’m a classic Boomer in that I went 30 years without buying an American car. You can go down the list of expensive European sedans and SUVs and I’ve owned them all. Right now? I own a black 2015 Caddy SRX and I love it. I’m bored with the countless leased anonymously styled 328s and A4’s I see ramming around my neighborhood. I think it’s cool to be my age now and drive a Caddy. I’m also glad that it’s a great vehicle. I will also continue to boycott the Europeans until they stop charging extra for features that are now standard on Hyundais.
The styling of this Eldo doesn’t bother me so much as the feeling if I’d owned it, I’d either be working on it or have it in the shop every other month.
Caddies like this have become the 800-lb gorilla standing between today’s Cadillac and respectability on par with the Germans. I hope Johan DeNysschen in NYC and the powers that be up in the tubes can keep up the determination to fight that battle.
If you have the 4.5 litre V-8 then I would imagine it would be a very good if not trouble free car, otherwise I would stand clear of the 4.1 all day long.
The 4.5 was the same engine as the 4100, but with whatever the problems were fixed. The last 4100’s in production should have been OK, but this may have been model year 1987.
These cars were pathetic compared to Cadillac’s built from the glory years of the 1930s-60s. I really want to like this generation of Eldo, but can’t. Too shrunken, and too mis-shaped proportion wise. The rear quarter panel is too short, and the C-pillar is too far forward. Seriously, didn’t any of the designers who worked on this car take a step back and say “No, that just doesn’t look right”?
GM and esp. Cadillac, was totally lost back then, and they’re really not much better off today.
I didn’t like these Eldorados and Sevilles at all when they were in showrooms. I was just a kid (born in ’80) but to me, a Cadillac was supposed to be a big, square, RWD, car with a healthy V8 and a distinctive style. These cars, along with the downsized Devilles, lost the thread for me. (Not that anyone cares about an 8 year old’s opinion!) The ’92 Seville brought the good feeling back though, and today I’m one of the perhaps rare 30somethings who aspires to a Cadillac (though they irritated me by dropping the CTS Sportwagon). In the light of nostalgia, these mid 80’s Caddys are starting to look not so bad at all, but at the time they were the wrong car for a whole host of reasons.
I also do miss Tom Klockau’s writing and comments here, and I wish him all the best!
I won’t speak to badge engineering, but rather to badge placement on the subject Eldorado. Nothing screams “crappy body shop” louder than incorrectly applied badging and scripts, and this car has plenty.
I was guilty of buying an 85 Sedan de Ville and even guiltier of loving it, with the exception of the lousy 4.1 engine. That car was a dream to drive and a perfect road trip car. During that era I never looked twice at the Eldo or Seville, although a 77-78 Seville was something I would have loved.
My grandmother had a 1987 FWD Fleetwood d’Elegance that she loved. I drove that car on many road trips and yes, aside from the crappy 4.1, that car was a joy to drive. It was roomy, comfortable, and easy to handle.
I think it’s beautiful, but the shop that repainted it put all the badges in the wrong place. I’m thinking “One Day Paint And Body” which did the same thing to my 86 Oldsmobile Calais [which looks even more like the Eldorado than the Somerset looked like the Riviera, if that’s even possible].
Is there one of these franchises in Eugene, Mr. N ?
From what I can see, we Boomers became even bigger conspicuous consumers than our parents could have ever imagined. So much for dropping out, tuning in and Fighting The Establishment.
WOW,
re the long comment about Carmine:
Thanks for the clarification. Once or twice I was “corrected” by Carmine and it left me feeling I was back dealing with one of the nuns in my Catholic elementary school days….I almost expected to somehow hear the “whack” of a pointer on the desk beside me. I thought I might be the only one who felt that way.
I sort of thought (or still think) that Carmine went over to the Brougham Society. Since I am not on Facebook I can’t see what they are doing.
Carmine corrected me a few times and I think that I corrected him at least once (over what I don’t remember). One thing I do remember is pointing out that even though the Eldorado Brougham of 1957 may have a plate saying body by Fleetwood, Fleetwood body ceased to exist when Fisher Body took them over about 1925. Then GM took over Fisher Body soon after that, although the Fisher Brothers continued with GM till the end of World War Two. GM does own the trademarks “Fisher Body” and “Fleetwood Body”, but GM can put them anywhere they want and what does it mean?
If Mr. Carmine joined my ranks over at TBS, he is using a different name, and has yet to tell me!
Tom, thank you so much for sharing so many great articles over the years. You were writing for CC long before I was, and your articles were among those that inspired me to become a contributor. Good luck with future endeavors!
At the time it was obvious that the car was the result of many bad decisions. Today, in the sea of blob-cars in which we swim around , it’s easier to appreciate the things that make this car distinctive.
Hi Everyone!
I have to say, I do miss being a part of CC…between my work at The Brougham Society, and my actual job, my time gets stretched rather thin.
Paul, this was a nice piece you shared, and I know Tom saw it.
Speaking for me personally, CC helped open my eyes to many different kinds cars. My current car choice was influenced by several people here, though they never really knew it. (And no, it’s not a Brougham!)
I made mention of this to Paul personally last Fall when we were all in Indiana, but I would like to express publicly my thanks to him. Much of how I run The Brougham Society I learned from him, and because of that, I have found much success. CC will always be a special place, after all, I got my start here.
All the best to all of you,
-Richard
Richard, I joined you guys but wish I could stop the group from taking over my facebook wall other than unfollowing it. I find I don’t look at it as often, but if I follow, it’s to the exclusion of anything else on my wall, including the posts and such from people in my everyday life! But I hope you and Tom will contribute here again as well.
I too miss the Brougham influence that Tom and Richard provided, as well as their superb writing abilities. I stood out from the crowd in high school during the early to mid seventies. It seems like all the other car guys wanted the muscle and ponycars, while I lusted after the American luxury cars. It is nice to know that a few younger guys also carry that affliction. In today’s world I don’t lust for them as much. As has been said, they are not as distinct as they once were, and most of the luxury features are standard equipment on all cars above the base models. But when I see an older one… The featured car would be much more attractive if it retained the standard wire wheel covers, in my opinion.
I am not a Facebooker, and have no plans to become one. So I hope y’all will come visit once in a while, and bring one of those Brougham’s with you.
You too? My dad had a 1975 Cadillac Coupe De Ville and I fell in love with luxury cars at that point. I was 10.
When I was 12 to 14, I would mention I wanted a luxury coupe at 16 and got made fun of so much that I learned to shut up and fib a little.
Funny, as a 50 year old, I have learned to love sports cars. But even then – I still want a GT car with a nice seat and electronic controls.
Thanks Paul. We have had our differences, but I really enjoyed being a part of this site, and made some great friends. Be well, everyone!
This is the perfect tribute to Tom. I saw a mid 80s DeVille the other day and it made me think Tom hasn’t posted in a while. Apparently he’s alive and well, which is good to hear. As was stated above, his passion for all things Brougham is hard to deny…Im stubbornly anti-gingerbread myself and yet his articles always had me reading about cars I never thought Id glance at. It takes all kinds for sure. Hope all’s well, buddy.
It’s not goodbye, Tommy K, it’s see you around! I sure will miss your contributions though.
Tom’s superb articles always reminded me of my childhood years growing up well into high school. Most of my ilk lusted after some sort of muscle car or pony car and many even liked the personal luxury cars, even the Broughamed out versions. They always seemed like simpler better times to me and it was always exciting to read about yearly changes coming down the pike to each entry. My enthusiasm for the modern auto has diminished greatly with the killing off of personal luxury coupes, wagons and now the full size sedan among many others. Interior colors, Brougham interiors, smooth rides and the roar of a V8 are also greatly missed as the government in it’s ever meddlesome interfering ways is slowly forcing everybody into hybrids and tiny turbo 4 cylinders with all the charm of a Dyson vacuum cleaner.
Yes Tom’s articles always were uplifting to me of a time era that I greatly miss even as flawed as many found it. It was for this reason that I purchased a 1990 Brougham Cadillac 5 years back and enjoyed it immensely and now am driving a 1996 Caprice in mint shape as a Summer daily driver. The next car on my must have list is a 1980’s era Cutlass Supreme coupe with a nice burbling Olds V8 underhood but that is still a few years out. It is so fun to drive into a local car cruise and have so many folks checking out your ride reminiscing about times past. I sure hope that we haven’t seen the end of the cool Brougham articles from Mr klockau.
I miss the yearly changes. I taught myself to recognize a car by its headlights. Today, no way you could do that. Everything is so bland and the same. And ugly – I know we have to wind tunnel these cars, but come on can you not make them look the least bit attractive?
This Eldorado is strange in that if photographs much better than it really is. In person, this car is awful. In these photos, it looks nice.
Tom’s informative articles have allowed me to appreciate cars that I otherwise could have cared less about. I don’t do facebook. I am grateful for all his contributions to this site over the years. Thanks, Tom. You have expanded my horizons.
Tom,
We do miss you here, but I still contend you’re a Lincoln man!
You would be correct!
Seeing through the eyes of my 31 year old self, I love my 88 Biarritz for a whole bunch of reasons. I had a 86 Seville for 6 years prior. I own a small dealership and it would easy for me to switch to a different type of car within reason, I don’t though. There is another dealer with a 90 Eldorado that he daily drives and has a “make me sell it price” on it. Another dealer has a pristine 88 Eldorado that he’s not actively trying to sell either and drives it to the auction sometimes and leaves in his garage when the weather is bad. Strange world we live in huh?
Back when I was working a GM Fremont I remember when the new 1981 Buick Regal was being built. (This was the model that developed into the Grand National.) I thought that this was a great looking RWD car that would make a great Cadillac coupe replacement. Plenty of luxury, space and the potential for real performance. There was no reason for any Cadillac to be smaller than this. Although there were real fears that gas prices were going to sky rocket, I’ve read that even a four cylinder Eldo was under consideration.
I’ve also often wondered why Cadillac didn’t ever use the A/G platform–but looking at the specs, the answer is that it was too close in size. The 1980-85 E/K-body Eldorado and Seville were 204″ long cars on a 114″ wheelbase, whereas the A/G-body cars were about 200″ long on a 108″ wheelbase. Not really an appreciable size difference there. And by the time they were ready to refresh the cars for ’86, the G-body was getting long in the tooth and was itself due for replacement.
Another variation was to wonder why they didn’t use the A-body platform for the ’80 Eldo/Seville, since the ’75-’79 Seville was on a stretched version of the Nova’s X platform, but I’m guessing they wanted to keep the Eldorado FWD since that had become associated with the car. And if you’re going to build an entirely new large FWD platform for the Eldorado, might as well move the Seville to it also..
The ATS coupe is the spiritual successor to the Eldorado. Base engine? Turbo 4, albeit one with 272 HP.