I had to go downtown this morning.
Just north of the core there are many splendid examples of heritage buildings:
As well as many dreary examples of the 1960s and 1970s apartment blocks that replaced whole swaths of them:
Back to the topic at hand, this Cadillac parked under one of said dreary buildings caught my eye. It looks like it hasn’t moved in quite a while.
Not in ten years according to the license renewal sticker. Speaking of stickers, the CAA stickers on the GM warp-o-matic plastic panel are an indicator of an elderly owner.
In addition to the GM break-o-matic key hole cover shown above, this example also has the GM break-o-matic plastic bits behind the tail lights.
Maybe I’m being too harsh here, this poor Caddy’s location would make it an easy target for vandals.
A padded vinyl roof, a lot of dust, and a Sedan de Ville logo. This type was built from 1977-1984, it seems the changes are easier to spot from the front so I have no idea what year this is. Any ideas? I couldn’t get an interior shot due to the dust.
Now there’s an old school snow tire. All four tires held air, which I can’t imagine happening on it’s own over ten years so I’d guess that someone has been pumping them up occasionally.
I’m not much of a Cadillac person, but with a good wash this wouldn’t be completely terrible because it’s mostly been out of the elements. This car is definately unused, but not totally abandoned.
This Cadillac is either a 78 or a 79. Someone who knows these better might school me, but I think the 79 got the little emblems on the taillights. So I will go with 1979 for $100, Alex.
My Aunt Norma and Uncle John bought a new Cadillac Sedan deVille in 1978 and I found its full length vertical taillights an improvement over the small lights of the 77. Uncle John died young and she kept that Cadillac for a long time.
There are two possible ways to tell a ’78 from a ’79. The first is any external removable light lenses or headlight trim pieces or bezels on a ’78 were retained by phillips head screws while a ’79 used Torx screws (a T-15 or T-20?). The second is the passenger side outside rear view mirror. “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear” debuted on 1979 GM vehicles.
It’s a 1979, because of the extra reflectors on the sides of the chrome rear tail-lights.
There’s another quick way, the ’78 had the winged Cadillac crest embossed in the center of the taillight, sort of an elongated version, and highlighted in white. The ’79 had the metal winged crest mounted on the taillight surface, somewhat smaller in size. Easy ID from the rear, this is a ’79.
That’s how I tell ’78 from ’79 Cadillacs from the rear; wow, I never would have thought to look at Torx screws replacing Philips….
I should have included a photo earlier, here is the ’78 Cadillac embossed version of the winged crest on the taillight.
Pay the man, Alex, this is indeed a 1979. I bought a new 1978 Cadillac Sedan de Ville, and kept it for eight years. I agree with J P that it was an improvement over the 1977. Not only were the taillights and rear bumper ends bolder and cleaner looking, the standard wheel discs had embossed concentric rings and deep red center caps, instead of black. The hood ornament, still lacking the wreath on non-Fleetwood models, was a cloisonné design, not the filigree of the 1977. The parking light lenses were dyed amber (not clear), the egg crate grille was a bolder design, and the Sedan de Ville now had a padded elk-grain vinyl roof covering with a recessed rear window identical to the Fleetwood Sixty Special. For all these reasons, the 1978 was a vast improvement over the 1977 which, being the first downsized large Cadillac (and lacking fender skirts for the first time since 1958) had taken a sales beating from the Lincoln Town Car, which had yet to be downsized. This was a time when Cadillacs still had a front prow that identified them immediately, even at a distance. I can’t remember the last time I saw a 1977-1979 full-size Cadillac here in the land of rock salt and snow banks.
Magnificent find. I’d be trying to track down the owner, although the presence of a snow tire is not a good sign. Winter use combined with a parking garage suggests there’s no frame left, a problem of GM’s downsized cars with which many of us are familiar.
About 6 years ago a buddy told me of an old Cadillac in his parking garage in a downtown Toronto apartment building. I looked and found a 1954 Cadillac Eldorado convertible. Last licenced in 1963 it had sat in the same spot since then. Covered in dust, bias ply tires flat, suspension flattened and sitting on the bump stops. Normal surface rust underneath, and dusty cracked red leather interior.
I was amazed. This was an expensive and rare car. How did this escape some barn find collector after 50 years? The building superintendent said people have tried to buy it, but the elderly owner (who lived in the same apartment all that time) refused to sell. For whatever reason he stopped driving it in ’63 and never bought another car.
The owner was in his nineties and soon passed. We considered approaching the executor of the estate, but shortly thereafter the car disappeared. The superintendent said the late owners son took it away. Just as well a 50 year barn find would be a fascinating time capsule, but would need a total rebuild of virtually every component, a massive and expensive undertaking. If it had been available, I would have bought it then probably been bankrupted by the restoration.
If it is as old as some think it would have one of the last great Cadillac V8s. If the frame is in good condition it might make it a good candidate for a little love.
Although Ontario uses “plate to owner” (as opposed to “plate to vehicle”) the license plate is likely original to the car since the “O” series plates were issued in 1979.
’77 to ’79 were the last reasonably well built Cads imo. Although a far cry from, say, the jewel-like ’61 to ’64s, all still had the Cad built 425 or 368s, which were their last decent engines, durable and still fairly powerful. My last new-ish Cad was a ’75 Seden de Ville in that odd pea-green from that era, but that car,/boat, despite it’s monster 500 V8, was considerably less sprightly than a friend’s ’79 with the 368, and no roomier inside. After that Caddie build quality declined, imo, and we all know about the engine issues, that is, until the solid, but anemic, Olds 307 was employed.
I thought the 368 didn’t go under the hood until 1980 and that the 425 remained the engine for 1979. But I have no firsthand experience with a 79.
If I am right, it occurs to me that the small Cadillac had a bigger engine than the huge 79 Continental, which offered only the 400 that year.
Going on my 40 yr old memories is iffy at best. I know it was a ’79 so it probably was a 425. I’m any event it would blow past my 500 cu in boat anchor, and was much nicer to drive in most respects. One time GM truly got it right, well, except for those dumb self-destructing plastic extensions, though my ’75 had those too, however it sure was a comfortable riding car, the one area in which it was unsurpassed.
I believe the 368 was used in the downsized ’79 Eldorado (as well as the Olds 350 both gas and diesel), but not in the full-sized cars until 1980.
Is that Cadillac for sale and how much are they asking for it?
I know why it hasn’t been driven – it’s gots s’no tires…
That’s terrible..
1977-79 Caddy V8’s were 425 ci, downsized version of the previous 472/500. 1980 got the 368, which was used for 1981’s V8-6-4.
There’s an ’86 downsized Sedan de Ville I pass at a house near me every day. It hasn’t moved for a few years now and the grass in front of the house, which is not cut very often, is slowly reclaiming it.
I love classics and do have my collection ! 2 years ago I bought very original 78 Coupe Deville with 16K miles jusr beautiful machine from the past ! Its mostly garage queen I drive it maybe once a month here is original description of it by seller before I bought it its Not for sale just sharing passion !
https://www.connorsmotorcar.com/vehicles/314/1978-cadillac-coupe-deville
Having not lived in the north since childhood, my wonder years were in Buffalo and my first memories are of living in Toronto; my question is doesn’t anyone use dedicated snow tires anymore? I had called the NY state police about requirements prior to a scuttled winter visit a couple years ago, and they said M+S rated tires were all that was required. Heck, I use them here in Florida; seems to me it would be asking for trouble to not ride on real snow tires. I did read a comparison article in one of the car mags about winter tires, but if I remember correctly it was focused on pickup trucks plowing snow. I remember dad always getting recap snow tires because he said they had a softer compound, and of course they were cheaper.
It’s interesting how the treads on snow tires have completely changed in recent decades, from the mud-and-dirt knobby style seen here to very smooth treads with lots of sipes on modern ones. I recall the Bridgestone Blizzak being the first of the new breed, but i’m not a winter-tire historian.