(first posted 10/1/2012) This, friends, is my dream car. If I ever have enough space and spare time for a Curbside Classic of my own, it will be one of these. The Brougham. The last true Cadillac. Many 1990-92 “facelift” Broughams have been blinged out or otherwise modified, but I think these classic Cadillacs look beautiful just as they came from the factory. And this particular Brougham is just the ticket: a rare, final-year 1992 model. There’s something special under the hood, too, and if you’re a Broughamaholic like me, you probably know what it is.
I am grateful to GM for recognizing the beauty of the 1977 C-body Cadillacs. This basic body was in continuous production from 1977 to 1992, receiving only one major restyle in 1980. By the end of its long, long life, the Brougham was surrounded by front-wheel drive, unibody Cadillacs in the showroom. It might have lacked a driver’s side airbag and more modern interiors and amenities, but it stood alone, and in a good way. This car was, and is, a modern classic.
When full-size Cadillacs were shrunk in 1985, the Fleetwood series became confusing. There was a newly-arrived FWD Fleetwood that shared a body with the Coupe and Sedan de Villes, but also the Fleetwood Brougham, which reprised the big 1984 model. It was a wise decision by GM to retain at least one true, full-size C-body Cadillac. If they hadn’t, even more ex-Cadillac buyers might have gone across the street to Town Car Land. While the Town Car was indeed full-sized, it didn’t quite match the C-body Brougham for looks. The Cadillac was just more attractive.
The big sedan remained as the Fleetwood Brougham through 1986. By then, GM had finally recognized the confusion caused by two very different Fleetwoods–a monocoque FWD version and a traditional body-on-frame, RWD model–sharing space in Cadillac showrooms. What’s more, the upcoming long-wheelbase Fleetwood Sixty Special would make three Fleetwood models–each with a different wheelbase, overall length and price. Thus, the RWD 1987 model was simply called Brougham. It would keep that name plus all its Fleetwood-specific trim, including a padded top, smaller “privacy” rear window, and a chrome spear that encircled the greenhouse and ended at the leading edge of the hood, until the end of production.
I told you this car was special: Yes, it has the 5.7-liter, 350 cu. in. V8 instead of the far more common 5.0-liter, 307 cu. in. Olds V8. The 307 was not necessarily a bad engine, but the pace at which it motivated a car of this size and curb weight was, shall we say, leisurely? Fitted with a four-barrel carburetor, it produced only 140 horsepower in the ’87 Brougham. You can also see the new-for-1990 white lens taillights and revised bumper trim. The 1990 facelift also added side cladding, Euro-style headlamps (instead of the quad rectangular sealed-beams used from 1980-89) and a mildly redone instrument panel.
The standard 5.0-liter V8 (a Chevrolet version had replaced the Olds 5.0 in 1991, after the Rocket V8 ended production in 1990) had been improved by swan-song 1992: Throttle-body fuel injection had bumped horsepower up to 170, and torque to 255 lb-ft. This helped get the 221″ long, 4276.7 lb. Brougham up to speed more quickly than in years past, but to really add to your driving pleasure, you needed the optional 5.7-liter, 350 cu in V8, available either as part of the trailer towing package or as a stand-alone option.
On paper, the 5.7-liter didn’t promise a huge difference, offering 185 horsepower and 300 lb-ft of torque. In actuality, it was a much better engine for everyday driving, regardless of whether or not you were towing anything. In acceleration and highway cruising, it was far superior to the smaller engine. Broughams with the 5.7 are quite rare, however, because the engine triggered a hefty gas-guzzler tax. Today, 5.7 Broughams are prized for their superior driving dynamics and beefed-up suspension.
Which brings me to the d’Elegance. The Brougham had always been a very complete car; by 1992, its standard features included dual six-way power seats with power recliners, AM/FM/cassette stereo, a leather-wrapped tilt/telescope steering wheel, automatic climate control, power steering and brakes, Soft-Ray tinted glass and Bosch II anti-lock brakes–but for those wanting even more, there was the d’Elegance package.
The signature feature of the d’Elegance was floating-pillow, button-tufted seat upholstery. Prima Vera cloth was standard, and leather was optional. Among other d’Elegance features were illuminated dual visor vanity mirrors, overhead assist straps for front- and rear-seat passengers, power trunk pull-down, Twilight Sentinel, and d’Elegance script on the rear quarter panels, door panels and glove compartment lid.
Our featured Brougham has the standard interior, which was nearly as plush. Although FWD Cadillacs got a standard driver’s- side airbag in 1990, the Brougham carried on with basically the same steering wheel from the early ’80s.
As expected from a car riding a 121.5″ wheelbase, the Brougham offered limo-like rear seat legroom. Here you can see the standard adjustable reading lamp in the C-pillar. These cars also had what might be the most elaborate door pull/door handle trim ever. This one has it all: chrome and woodgrain-trimmed door pull, a built-in, illuminated ashtray with lighter, a heavy chrome-plated door handle and a courtesy lamp/reflector. Nice!
There is one thing I can’t figure out about this car: Although it’s a standard Brougham, “d’Elegance” is embroidered into the door panels; those on standard Brougham door panels simply read “Brougham.” Odd.
All 1990-92 Broughams were built in Arlington, Texas, hence this “Built in Texas by Texans” decal. Really, now, could there have been a better place to build such an unabashedly all-American car? For example, just look at the amount of chrome trim lavished on it inside and out. The redesigned 1993 Fleetwood, a nice enough car in its own right, lacked much of the RWD model’s lavish, chrome-plated jewelry–not to mention its classic proportions.
Brougham badging was displayed prominently on the rear quarter panels; as noted previously, d’Elegance models featured a specific Brougham d’Elegance script. “Brougham d’Elegance”: How could any other name sound more luxurious?
Yes, the Brougham was a thing of beauty, with its Chris Craft-like prow and chrome jewelry, and that unmistakable wreath-and-crest rising above it all.
In my Brougham Outtake (yes, this is the very same car), I mentioned that a friend’s dad, who worked at the local Cadillac dealership in Rock Island, got hold of several of the lush deluxe Cadillac brochures. We both loved the Brougham and Brougham d’Elegance. Forget the Allante–and forget Porsches, Ferraris and Lamborghinis, too. I wanted one of these!
I close with this excerpt from the 1992 brochure:
“It is easy to understand why America is so comfortable with the classic Cadillac Brougham. Because as America’s longest regular-production automobile, it affords you uncompromising, six-passenger luxury with all the amenities.”
Truly, in 1992 the only way to travel was Cadillac Brougham-style. Make mine either burgundy or navy blue, thank you.
When these came out I liked the new taillights but have never warmed to the composite headlights. That said, the larger wheelbase, classic shape, retention of more metal trim, and the 5.7/4L60 combo give it the nod over the Town Car. And other than the possible advantage of the LT1 (though…OptiSpark…meh) I like these better than the bubble Fleetwoods that followed in every way.
A lady in my hometown has a pristine grey on grey version that is simply breathtaking, especially when it pulls up near you after it has been raining and it is covered in little droplets.
Most importantly, these Cadillacs LOOKED like
Cadillacs – unlike most post-2000 offerings
to date. You knew, out of the corner of your
eye, when a Caddy was going down the street.
Today, so-called Cadillacs just blend in with
all the other four-wheeled tylenol capsules.
I’d love to get my hands on a 77-80 or a 90-92 Brougham ( the ones without the awful 4100 ) and install the 9C1 chassis bits on it.
Am I the only one bemused and confused by all these name changes? I’ve read this article three times and still am not sure what is what.
May I suggest a three word alternative that will register an instant, firm identity in almost everyone’s mind’s eye?
“LINCOLN TOWN CAR”
I am posting a pic of my son Brian’s 1992 d’elegance because today is the two year anniversary of his death; he had this car seven years and would not part with it. This is a pic with new hardtop, tires, headliner,mirrors, battery,etc. I have about halfway restored as I get funds a labor of love
Hi, Ivana. I was so happy to see the progress you’ve made with your son’s Cadillac. Thanks for posting the picture of the car on his two-year death anniversary. The car looks grand. I know it isn’t easy to keep things moving along in this true labor of love. You help inspire me to keep my cars on the road, especially when I just want to give up during rough times.
Alex
Thank you Alex
Fantastic to hear you’re still working on this car as a tribute to your son’s memory. The progress is excellent and it will look wonderful when you’re finished!
Thank you Chris
Ivana, Beautiful way to Remember Your Son and the Car He Loved,
Sounds like He was very Proud of his Cadillac, and lookn down from the Heavens ,,,Proud of His Mother! . Great Tribute to a Mother and Sons Love!
Blessings and Take Care!
Barry
Thank you Barry
These may have looked the older Caddy’s, but they turned off younger buyers. I.E. people born after 1946. Sure, younger some car hobbyists like them, but as project cars they buy when cars are 10-20 y/o.
I’m a lot more charitable toward the looks of this car now then I was when it came out. I thought the ’90-’92 “restyle” with a bunch of rediculous trim and 90 proof Broughamtastic touches was hideous. The previous trim was classic.
This C body was doomed for its entire production run – and it probably did more to drag the Cadillac name through the mud than any other bad Cadillac – if only because it had an appropriate 13 years to do it. There’s a little numerology irony for you.
What a shame that it took 11 years to get the drivetrain right. But, still fatally flawed with door mounted seatbelts. From the manufacturer that pioneered airbags? Come on, get real.
This car could have been GM’s Toyota Century, but was arguably one of its Deadly Sins (TM).
Orrin I have to say the composite headlights on my 1992 Caddy are like new, very clear and bright while much newer cars here in Florida are cloudy and ugly ; I guess they are made to last
Maybe it’s just a product of my growing up in the era of this car (I was 10 in 1990 when the updated Brougham debuted) but I’ve always loved these. If I could have any C/D-body Cadillac, it would be a ’92 Brougham with the 350, no question. I think the composite headlamps and white-detailed taillamps work perfectly with the design of the car, freshening the look without detracting from the classic elegance of the car. Just beautiful.
What a dreadfully poor choice of advertising slogan… compared to the excellent, timeless “Standard of the World”.
And, another truly dreadful decision on the part of the Cadillac Division.. was naming ANY FWD Cadillac.. as a “Fleetwood”. Sacrilege!!
The first FWD Eldorado was a Fleetwood, and deservedly.
I have a 1991 de elegance that has the 5.0 liter name plate on the trunk, however the sticker under the hood says 5.7. Anybody have an explanation?
Bruce
Damaged trunk replaced by one from the scrap yard.
Run the vin through a decoder and see what engine the vin says it has.
My caddy too; It’s A
1992 and I just replaced the trunk; the
fins I replaced with fiberglass
Pic didn’t go thru the first time
Thanks a lot for this site, the perfect fan club. I live in Paris France and have had for the last 6 years a 1990 5.7 d’Elegance as a daily driver. 40 000 miles added since I bought it. Must be one of the rare Broughams on the road in Europe, with Tom Roel’s one! I drove this car all around France and nearby countries. I even drive it on narrow and twisted mountains roads and the car handles surprisingly well the road. I ‘ll tell you more on this mint car soon!
I had the worlds nicest 1990 brougham and lost it 8 years or so ago. I have desperately searched…have you seen Livinia? She has an ultra rare trunk lid luggage rack, CC Cadillac Grill, Gold Package, Has painted mural on ceiling (Red and Gold abstract sun), imitation convertible roof, wire wheels with uniroyal tires, car phoneand 5.7 v8. It does not have the de elegance seats, I think they may have originally paid the extra $562 to delete them and add striped seats. Originally a lottery winners car (Charlie) followed by untimely passing shortly after. Im 90% sure the vin is 1G6DW5473LR707620 if that helps you help me (or helps you find the real #1 brougham for yourself). I’m sure I’m forgetting something. See photos. Please help. Mckeeverpeter@aol.com. I currently have a 90 with Astroroof, 5.7 and white leather that I hope to replicate my original with if all else fails. It has 298k miles tho (runs stupid solid tho).
If Cadillac still produced this car (though with airbags and other safety updates and the 5.3L V8 from the Silverado), I think it would outsell the CT4 and CT5 even now.
I can but just tolerate the cladding and giant bumper pads in some colors, but the vinyl-wrapped side window is too much. It might look less awful than Chrysler’s version. The tiny backlight is a major safety hazard, considering the vision and neck flexibility of most buyers.
Can either 5.7 engine be put in a 4.1 model, or do they have too many sensors and electronics?
Interestingly, the 2006+ DTS is also an inch taller than the 2000-5 Deville with the same body shell. Half of that is larger wheels. I wonder if the same people complained about both cars being too low.
The ’77 Fleetwood had convenient reading light strips under each door pull, but no later year did.
I didn’t remember any “reading light strips” on the door so I looked on line and indeed they are there. I can’t figure out why though, since there’s also a reading light in the usual place on the C pillar (and I assume the roof for front seat passengers) as well as a large white puddle lamp on the armrest.
.
Forget this 92. What you want is my (former) 90, which was a d’Elegance with 5.7L trailering option. It had every possible option, including real wire wheels and moonroof. No expense spared! I used it regularly to trailer my Airstream, which is exactly what it was intended for! The color combination is perfect, as the red leather complimented the all-white exterior.
I love this particular Cadillac. I recall seeing one around 8:00pm along US 5, possibly Kettleman City when eating at In & Out Burger. One pulled into the lot in a medium blue ploy I’d say with those chrome bumpers. Gorgeous car and the owner, an elderly African-American walked in to order and I walked over to ask about the car. We talked for 15 minutes before it was time for both of us to leave. Me to LA and him to Phoenix.
Yet this morning a 1965 Lincoln Continental convertible, pale yellow and white top, pass me on my morning commute. They always do that when I am driving and catch me by surprise. He was cruising at 70 mph in an absolutely beautiful example of that car. So little time, so many cars…
Cadillac largely dechromed the dashes of the ’84-5 Eldo and Seville. I wish they’d done that to these, and reduced the gloss of the plastic wood a little. Has any other American car had the same dash for 16 years?
Checker?
Not a car, but Dodge full-size vans used the same dash for 20 years (1978-1997). Incredibly, there were also two previous dashboards and one subsequent one in that generation of van.
Even though I love my 88 Brougham….I still lust after a 90-92. My Dad had a white 90 Brougham limo with the 5.7 and dark blue leather – and those acres of plastic wood struck me as the height of luxury.
There was a 91 available north of Pittsburgh a few weeks ago, but I was a day late and a dollar short…so I got a 94 FWB instead.
But I’ll start saving for a 90-92….that mix of cladding, chrome, fake wood, and Formal Look styling is addicting!