(first posted 2/20/2013) There has been much talk at CC about Cadillac’s multiple problems in the early ’80s–things like the V8-6-4, HT4100, the ’86 Eldo (hmmm…haven’t done one of those yet) and the shrunken 1985 C-body de Ville and Fleetwood. But today, I am here to talk about Caddy’s successes, and how in 1989 they made lemonade out of lemons by deftly restyling a 1985-vintage body. Finally: a Cadillac that didn’t look like a Volvo 740 Brougham!
At first, the 1985 Coupe de Ville and Sedan de Ville had a rough time. They sold respectably, but their ticking time-bomb HT4100 engine and less-than-prestigious styling (some Caddy buyers may have decided on a RWD Fleetwood Brougham or FWD Park Avenue or Ninety-Eight instead) left a bit to be desired.
The 1985 de Ville/Fleetwood, Electra and Ninety-Eight were a mix of modern, aerodynamic “new luxury” exterior styling and traditional, Broughamy “old luxury” interiors. Some people were not so sure about this mix–least of all Cadillac buyers, who tended to be more traditional than most others.
Still, you have to give Cadillac credit as they slowly but surely kept improving the de Ville. In its second year of production, the wide rocker moldings from the FWD Fleetwood were added, since the thin chrome trim on the ’85 (see the Coupe two photos up) looked awfully cheap, like a 1985 Calais or Series 62.
In 1987, composite headlights, an attractive eggcrate grille, and 1.5-inch-longer rear fenders with wraparound tail lamps updated the lines and made them a bit less compact-looking. The best news of all came in 1988, when an honest-to-goodness-reliable 4.5-liter V8 replaced the unloved and unreliable HT4100.
Then came the 1989 model. Finally, here was a Cadillac that truly looked like a Cadillac! Almost all of the sheetmetal, save the front doors, was new. Period car magazines proclaimed “The fin is back!”, as both the Fleetwood and de Ville got new sheetmetal with a very slight “finlet”, in a nod to the past. Interiors were mostly carryover, although the stitching style of the lush bench seating was a bit more Broughamy. Length increased from the ’88’s 196.5″ to 205.3″, and the wheelbase was stretched by three inches.
Now these cars, in your author’s humble opinion, had it all, the same great glass area and scads of room (even more now, due to the longer wheelbase) as the 1985-88 models, but with more chrome and better lines. Cadillac owners apparently thought the same, as the new SdV and CdV sold quite well, permanently relegating to the background the RWD Brougham, which remained popular among older Cadillac customers and limousine companies.
I had an experience with one of these when they were new. My Grandma Ruby got into a minor fender-bender with her ’87 Continental around 1990, and while it was being fixed she was given a new 1990 Sedan de Ville to drive. During my summer vacations in my elementary- and middle-school years, we frequently went to lunch at Bishop’s, followed by a visit to Toys ‘R’ Us for a model car. Then, we would visit Sexton Ford and South Park Lincoln-Mercury, where I would load up on brochures and try to talk Grammy into getting a new Mark VII or Continental (which she never did). I was excited when I heard she was getting a Caddy as a loaner, so of course we had to do lunch while she had it.
It was a beautiful shade of red, with silver-grey lower cladding, wire wheel covers and dove-gray leather–except for the color, it was very much like the one above. I was very impressed, and Grammy seemed to like it too. It may have been the first GM car she’d driven in about 25 years, her last GM car being a ’59 Catalina convertible that was traded in on a new ’65 T-Bird drop-top. My Grandfather had driven Lincoln Continentals and Marks exclusively since his first Mark III. The ’87 Connie, his last car, became my grandmother’s when he passed away in 1989, so it was not likely that she was going to get a Cadillac, no matter how much she might have she liked it!
She surprised all of us, however, when she bought my Dad’s black-over-tan 1991 Volvo 940SE Turbo when he got a new 850GLT in 1993. I don’t think anyone was expecting that!
Changes to the Sedan de Ville and its Coupe sibling were gradual. A driver’s-side airbag was added in 1990, and the 155-hp 4.5-liter V8 was replaced in 1991 with an updated 4.9-liter engine with 200 hp–a healthy bump, to be sure. The ’91s also got redesigned alloy wheels and a domed hood with a larger, more imposing grille to go with the new engine. The nose job ever so slightly increased overall length, to 205.6″ on sedans and 202.6″ on coupes.
The 1992 and 1993 models were largely unchanged, though the grille inserts on ’93s were changed from chrome to black. These cars were the last of the “real” Sedan de Villes; the redesigned 1994 model would be based largely on the 1992 Seville, although with more appropriate and sedate styling than the “greyhound” 1992-97 Sevilles. The Coupe de Ville (and perhaps the coolest-ever car name) also disappeared after ’93, never to return.
Our featured navy blue example is in fine shape, and obviously has been well-tended-to for many years. Even the driver’s side armrest, a notorious wear point on these cars, was unblemished. The leather was as new, and even the leather steering wheel wrap was not bad. My only concern was whether the digital dash still worked. Even if it didn’t, I imagine swapping the cluster for an analog version would not be too tough.
I spotted this clean example in front of a local auto recycling company in Milan. Occasionally, they get cars too nice to part out and they’ll try to sell them complete. Several years ago there was a clean, navy blue 1990 Buick Electra (yes, an Electra–not a Park Avenue) with factory alloys out front. It would have made a nice car, but there were no takers. I saw it about six months later in the yard. That was a shame, so I hope someone buys this Caddy. It’s way too nice for parts fodder, and it even has a rare factory Astroroof!
What I really appreciate on this one is the lack of, uh, traditional Cadillac dealer-installed items. You know, the fake landau tops, fake convertible tops, “classic” grilles and the like. The only slight demerit was the gold emblems, which seem to tarnish at ten times the speed of the factory chrome emblems. Actually, these don’t look too bad.
I must confess to taking a page from Laurence Jones’s photography manual by shooting this car in the late afternoon. He’s right, you can really get a nice color range with the sun lower in the sky! I really, really wanted to get this car for myself. Save for the gold package, it is exactly what I would have ordered new in 1991 if I had 1) won the lottery, and 2) not been eleven years old.
I have been trying to find a nice SdV and CdV of this era for a long time, as I have a real appreciation for them. There are plenty running around, but most have had the bark beat off them. Back in the late ’90s, when I feared my folks were going to put me into a dorm at school, I looked at several of these cars and even test-drove a couple, because there was no way I was going to put my pristine ’91 Volvo 940SE in a campus parking lot to be dinged, dented, vomited on, etc.
Fortunately, that did not come to pass; the Volvo stayed in the garage, and I stayed at home. No cracker-box dorm room for me! But at least I got to drive several of these cars when they were still relatively new. With one exception, they were torquey, comfortable cars. Everything about them said “I am a luxury car.” My favorite one was a gunmetal-gray ’93 with the lacy-spoke alloys, steel top and lovely burgundy leather interior.
The exception to which I alluded is a ’93 SdV, in metallic beige Light Driftwood with light tan leather and dark brown “carriage roof.” It was absolutely mint, and it drove great on my solo five-minute test drive. But two blocks shy of the dealership, it stalled and wouldn’t restart.
I actually attempted to push it, but the Caddy did NOT want to be pushed. Fortunately, I was in a residential area where it was not blocking traffic, so I locked it, walked back to the showroom, gave the salesman the key and bid him good day. I never heard from him again.
This one was beautiful in Black Sapphire with navy leather. And look, it even has a trailer hitch, though I’m not sure if you should pull a ’78 Malibu with it. If I had a full-time job, I’d have made a serious bid for this one: Classic Cadillac styling, reliable powertrain (no Northstar for me, thanks) and a luxy interior that only a vintage Caddy, Lincoln or Chrysler New Yorker can provide. Hope someone saves this guy!
My wife’s late grandfather had this exact car, in white. A few years back, I was tasked with ferrying it from my in-laws’ then-home, on the California coast, back to his, in the Sierra foothills.
I took some pretty circuitous routes on that journey, and was amazed what that old FWD Caddy was capable of. My daily driver at the time was a 740 Turbo, and this post’s comparison is apt. Both had a panoramic view out, good torque, great seats, and a railroad-trestle unibody–and that little bit more agility than you’d expect on a mountain byway.
I remember his daily driver, a boaty ’96 DeVille, feeling much more flimsy and plasticky to drive. These compact Cadillacs catch a lot of heat for being downsized–and I never understood why the steering wheel had to look just like a Dodge Caravan’s–but they had some good things going in trying to imitate the Euros.
About three years ago, an old man about four blocks away had a ’91 SdV almost identical to the one in the picture 4th from the bottom. He had purchased it new in Atlanta and had babied it since, despite it having around 150k on it. His asking price was quite reasonable, about $1600, yet I soon figured out why. It ran horribly – rough, coughing, wheezing and at all speeds. I offered him $800 and he was mortally offended. I bid him good luck and left.
Despite the running issues, I loved how it drove.
I had a next door neighbor who had one of these. He was well up into his 90s, but drove the Caddy every day. He walked over one day to let me know that he was driving himself, his wife and a friend to Tennessee (from Indiana). “I’ve just got to get away”, he said. They made it there and back just fine. The car went away after he died, as his wife did not drive. He once told me that he was less than completely happy with it, as it had given him more trouble than any of his prior Cadillacs, which went back to the early 70s.
I did not like these when new, being an avowed Town Car guy in those years. However, I have warmed to them a bit. I would still prefer a Townie, but if the right one of these plunked itself into my path for the right price, I would certainly consider it (with the other side of my brain telling me to run, not walk, from an old Cadillac 🙂 )
I haven’t warmed to these at all. I see one on the road and I pretend not to notice it.
From Caro, MI?
Indianapolis.
A few interesting points about this generation C bodies in particular:
1) The 89-93 models used fiber-plastic resin front fenders.
2) With the additional rear seating space (which is where all of the extra length went) Cadillac dropped the 87-88 Sixty Special extended sedan.
3) The grille on the 89-90 models did not open with the hood while on 91-93 models it did.
4) The 89-92 FWD Fleetwood models reintroduced the rear wheel opening skirt since 1976.
5) 1991 models introduced active suspension technology using electrically adjustable struts but of course GM eventually offered standard versions as a replacement.
6) 89-90 models used Teves Mark II integrated ABS which was a bear but 91-on models used Delco IV units that were much better.
7) The rear “fin lets” were one piece cast molded pieces around the taillights.
8) Standard deVille models used faux wood appliqué in the interior but Fleetwood models used real walnut.
9) The 89 models returned Cadillac to using 15″ wheels which was a complaint on the 85-88 models that made the car look smaller.
10) As was mentioned, the Coupe deVille disappeared after 1993. What is interesting is while the sedan was lengthened the coupe was not and simply benefitted from the revised front and rear fascias.
11) The 85 redesign introduced the “retained power accessory” feature where certain features like the radio and power windows remain available for a short period of time after the ignition is shut off.
I wonder where that picture was taken with the tan Sedan deVille. I ask because there is a white 1964 Cadillac peeking out on the bottom left of the picture.
On a personal note, I like the 89-93 C-bodies which I feel should have been the ones introduced before. The 85 Cs and the 86 E/Ks probably did more damage to the Cadillac brand than all of the mechanical problems of the early 80s.
IIRC, as far as airbags were concerned, in the beginning, there were only two major airbag suppliers and steering wheel design was dictated by the equipment. It wasn’t until the mid 1990s that technology advanced that allowed more an integrated look that we have today.
OK, I’m wierd. While this generation of Cadillac was a very nice automobile, I still like the ’85’s better. I was very impressed back then at the chance GM took in the redesign. I’ve never understood it – we worship Volvo’s of that vintage, and pan the Cadillac. Oh well, the public reaction to the ’85’s and a couple of years later only proved Mencken right. Broughams suck.
I am sure there is a double standard in there somewhere but one thing I will say is that historically, and still may be present in lesser forms today, that American brand car buyers expected their Cadillacs to look like Cadillacs, Lincolns Lincolns, etc with regular design changes and the automotive press tends to be more critical on domestic brands on design. Until the 1990s, remember Volvo only had two basic designs, the 240 and the 740 which never changed for a legendary amount of time.
GM was originally slated to come out with the downsized C-bodies in the spring of 1983 but instead they came out for the spring of 1984 as early 1985s. They, of course, were a response to the energy crises and the expectation that fuel would continue to be expensive. It was bold, but even given the expectations at the time in the early 80s, was probably too drastic a departure from the traditional Cadillac mold. I remember when people would drive them, they drove well, handled as well as any Cadillac ever had up to that time, rode almost as well as the big cars, but just did not feel substantial. Part of the reason why the Japanese started doing well with their premium sedans was because they looked and felt bigger. The 85-88 deVilles seemed to be more on par with the E Class Mercedes and the 5 series BMWs than the S & 7 series respectively. We saw the resell value of the 85-88s drop rapidly after the 89s came out.
It might be because most of the ’85-’88 run had the 4.1 V8. The ’88 was the only year that did not have the self-destruct feature built into the engine, as it got the 4.5.
Plus, the styling of the ’85 Electra and Ninety-Eight was much more cohesive.
“It might be because most of the ’85-’88 run had the 4.1 V8. The ’88 was the only year that did not have the self-destruct feature built into the engine, as it got the 4.5.”
You write like you have some type of phobia with the 4100. Hey I write like I have a timing belt phobia so I guess I shouldn’t criticize anybody. But I do have a problem with your statement. And whoever said the 85-88 C-Body and 86 E/K-Body were “Coffin Nails” as far as sales went. OK I frequent the self service boneyards just about every week end. I see more 4100 powered cars than the 4.5/4.9 variety. Well almost more. Now this is almost 25 years after the last examples left the lot. They say the average car on the road is 13 years old. Now when you see a car that is almost twice that age just starting to hit its stride as a parts donor that says something about how durable it really was. You could say that most of these late bloomers were lower than normal mileage examples which explains why they end up in the boneyard but the ones I usually see are on the second revolution of their five digit odometers. How the heck can you claim “self destruct” with those facts?
As far as the 85 C-Body and 86 E/K-Body coffin nail comment. Has anybody really looked up the sales figures from the “me” decade? Sorry I dont have a copy of Standard Catalog of Ameican Cars handy. But I’d bet that if one was to put those figures into percentages, you would see that it wasn’t a dramatic decline in sales when those models were introduced. Plus Cadillac still sold the old model so if the Fleetwood Brougham out sold the DeVille than that might be true.
OK Now I have to ask WTF was the self destruct feature anyway? The correct answer would be the driver. These cars(even with a digital dash) had an excellent gauge and warning light package. If you were too stupid to stop when the oil light or temp light came on than that was you fault. Same with any other mechanical invention in todays society.
Hey Paul. Still have those DTC/DTS pics and commentary I sent you?
Bruno,
I just go by what I have heard about these engines, both online and from the CC Commentariat at large. I have never heard anything good about them, but I was only in grade school when they were new. They certainly did seem to have a head-gasket problem.
So yes, I guess I do have a phobia about the HT4100, but I never had any direct experience with them, either. I have heard that the ’85 and newer versions were more robust. A friend had an ’85 Eldo Biarritz that ran great, well into the mid-’90s.
But what was the appeal of the Cad 4.1 over the Buick V6, Chevy V8, or Olds V8 in the first place?
Plus, why is the oil light or temp light coming on at all in your fancy luxury car? It’s 1986 not 1946. Pulling over to keep your dainty engine from killing itself must be a blast.
Sounds like another one of those special Cadillac ownership features that most BOP owners won’t have to deal with.
Chrome valve covers?
Cadillac got mileage out of the fact that they offered their own V8 with their cars while other makes used corporate engines.
I don’t really understand this. I’m keen to what rolls in the scrapyards and few if any 4100 cars roll in anymore… most bit the dust a long time ago and I have not seen any on the streets in a long time.
I do see plenty of 4.5 & 4.9 cars though and sadly, LOTS of them are being scrapped now– about half of them are still running when they cross the scales which is such a waste.
Sorry, but most 4100s are junk, period. I was given a very well-cared-for 100K mile 1985 DeVille on its 2nd HT4100 (which has exhaust coming out the radiator like its first engine). Air pockets in the cooling system are not going to trigger the coolant temp light and by the time the STOP ENGINE TEMP light comes on, the metal temperature is hellish and by that time it’s too late.
I’m about as big a GM humper as anyone but can’t acknowledge the HT4100 as a decent powerplant and wonder how anyone else can.
Actually the downsized C-body DeVilles sold pretty well, the real disaster was the 1986 E-K body cars, those were down 75% from 1984-1985 figures.
The tally from what I found from a quick look up, the 1984 full size Cadillacs rounded up to about 191,000 units, the 1985’s totalled up to a pretty amazing 230,000 units. So they actually were accepted by most of the Cadillac buying public, the 1985 Eldorado sold 76K, in 1986……21K. Ugh…..
I always thought the 85-88 Coupe Devilles (without the multiple available vinyl top options) was a sharp looking car and had a nice clean look. That opinion flipped with the 89 redesign. The Sedan Deville became the looker and the coupe had weird proportions at that point in my eye. I’d like to find a clean 93 Touring Sedan. Seems like the best combo of parts and styling tweeks for that body style before they went to the G-body platform.
Just thinkin’ the same thing. Mighty handsome. I’ll take a ’88 Coupe, no vinyl top please.
Let’s Go!
Let’s Live!
Let’s Show ‘Em Every Mile!
The Only Way To Travel Is Cadillac Style… Cadillac, Cadillac, Cadillac Style!
You might like this post we did last year: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-tv-cadillac-style-more-goodness-from-the-early-90s/
Hey Brendan; I remember that awful commercial, and even lousier jingle! Who would ever hear that song and connect it with a luxury car?
The ’89 and up cars certainly looked a lot better than the older ones, but I still don’t think these were very good cars and suffered from the typical GM quality of the era. My grandmother bought a ’91 new, and was unhappy enough with the quality of that car and the ’86 Seville that came before it that after several decades of driving Cadillacs she switched to Lexuses and never went back.
I have read that the 89 was closer to what GM designers had originally planned for the 85 model; but, somewhere along the line, it was decreed that the new car was to be under 195″ to comply with the European size limitations, thus the front and rear of the car were sliced resulting in the ungainly proportions of the production model.
Wow, tricky. I saw the -reflection- of the door handle and thought Touring model. Slick.
Many of these in my family in the 90s. Fast off the line!
“Cadillac, Cadillac, Cadillac Style” also comes to my mind frequently. Had a cassette with that jingle with the owner’s manual and Gold Keys.
These boats went for hundreds of thousands of miles. Northstar? Fuggedaboutit.
It was funny to read of your devotion/affinity for this series of Cadillacs.
Wouldn’t you rather have the Sixty Special from this period? Don’t forget about the 22-way Giorgio Giugiaro power seats for the driver and passenger!! (Yes, “twenty-two way” seats)
Early nineties (’91?) Cadillac Sixty Special:
And of course, the 22-way power seat control, because NO ONE IN THE WORLD can live without 22 different ways to control a car seat!!!
What’s that? Your seats have only 6 or 8-way power adjustment? Well then, I’m sorry, but I can no longer associate with you. Goodbye!!
Love those seat controllers! But in my opinion, the Olds 98 Touring Sedan did it better: Can’t seem to find a pic, but I think that all 22 adjustments were on a flip-out center console.
I thought the Olds only came with 6 way power seats
The Touring Sedan did indeed have a center-console-full of power seat controls – I cross-shopped one before I ended up buying my 1988 Electra T-Type (essentially the same underpinnings, with about a $5K lower selling price at the time).
Buick joined in on the “hey look how many ways my seats move” party with the Park Avenue Ultra in 1989, it had a Star Wars quality panel that flipped out of the center armrest, the Oldsmobile Touring Sedan had a console with floor shift with the controls there, and on the side of the seat…and on the door…..
don’t forget the Bonneville SSE and 6000 STE with their 14 way power seats…and the Grand Prix SE with the 16 way power seats
so many special ‘luxury’ editions to choose from in the early 1990s….I thought that was primarily a 1970s thing
GM had some nice stuff in the late 1980s-early 1990s – beats the chrysler TC’s/imperial
or a Lincoln Continental/town car
I gotta buy one!
“Carmine” is right. The Olds TS and Buick Park Avenue Ultra also had multi-control seat adjustments. The Ultra had only 20-way controls; don’t know exactly what Olds had.
1992 Pontiac Bonneville SSE multi-way power seat controls (located on console):
Twenty-two ways to adjust the seat?
Did one of the buttons change the color or upholstery fabric or something?
My father has one of these, a ’93 or ’95 model. Great ride and woderful seats.
About the “woderful seats” – is this some torturous combination of woeful and wonderful? 🙂 This term sums up my relationship with a 77 New Yorker Brougham.
Quick question, jpcavanaugh.
Did your New Yorker have a radio station seek button on the floor next to the dimmer switch? My folks had a ’76 New Yorker and it had this “mystery switch” on the floor. My dad would push it as we went down the road, wondering aloud what the hell it did. He never listened to the radio. When I got the car to drive, I always had the radio going and when I pushed the “mystery switch”, lo! and behold! the radio station changed. The knob on the in-dash unit even turned by itself. Kind of creepy, like the ghost that was haunting the engine with various maladies was taking the afternoon off and visiting the radio.
While 22-way power seats may be the ultimate in comfort, a seek button the floor is the ultimate in laziness.
Mine did not have the signal-seeking radio, but it did have the 8 track. I used one of those converters that someone else described a few days ago which held a cassette in a bigger piece that shoved into the slot for the 8 track tape. My 63 Fleetwood is the only car I ever owned with a signal seeking radio, but that one did not work.
It was sort of a cool idea in the old days, because with the mechanical tuners, the only way to find a station was either the preset buttons or to slowly turn the knob. In unfamiliar territory, and with the width of many of those old tanks, you would find yourself splayed across 2/3 of the front seat trying to drive and slowly turning the tuning knob until you found something you wanted to listen to.
Up, down, fore, aft, angle, bolsters, lumbar………what else is there?
Too many adjustments can be a bad thing. When I finally get a seat where I like it, then someone messes with it, I get all OCD and start fretting that every position I find is inferior to the setting of pure bliss and perfection I had before some interloper got into my car. I can’t imagine I am alone here. I suppose I should stop being so cheap and pop for a car with a memory power seat. Like maybe a 57 Turnpike Cruiser?
Headrest!
Mr. Cranium, allow me. My namesake vessel has this option. Tapping the floor switch makes the radio seek a station with a decent signal. The orange plastic indicator slides left-right across the dial until it reaches the end with a wonderfully electro-mechanical KA-CHICK. That indicator then disappears while ANOTHER orange plastic doodad appears on the left. The hidden one then slides along “backstage.” The tuning knob doesn’t turn.
As for laziest option on the car, my vote goes to the rim-blow horn. Because you might strain something reaching for the center of the wheel?
Maybe the knob in the ’73 doesn’t turn, but the one in the ’76 did.
It was especially good for convincing young cousins who had seen Star Wars too many times that you had “The Force”.
My idea of the laziest option was always Cadillac’s power trunk pull-down. If you are capable of getting the lid down to near the latch, surely you have the strength to finish the job. Jeeze, it’s a lot easier to close the trunk than to close one of the passenger doors, and they never offered a power passenger door closer. Any effort you save on closing the lid is traded off by perpetually having to tell people “don’t slam the trunk lid.”
JPC, I’ve got that on my current car, and I have to agree its one of the most worthless car accessories ever. Plus, people unfamiliar with my car close the hatch by hand instinctively, and it makes some gawdawful noises when they do that.
If we’re talking about lazy person features…
1. Power trunklid. Most upper series Mercedes and BMWs have this now.
2. Power tilt-and-telescoping steering wheel. Really?
3. Power vent windows on 1960’s models Cadillacs. Because those huge vents are just too difficult to turn by hand.
Remote control still used mean that you would actually see something move, my parents bedroom TV used to do the same thing when you used the remote, the knob on the TV would turn “all by itself” oooooohhhhooooo.
You could always get “The Clapper” which was all over the TV in the late 1980s and 1990s.
We had an 2007 (whichever the first year of the pushbutton starting) that developed a short in the push button on the dash. Whenever the owner got near the car with the key, even if they were just walking by the car, it would sometimes start spontaneously.
He had the Fleetwood Brougham model (nothing less for this man).
I may have gotten mixed up with all the different models mentioned, but it was a really nice car. The last time I was in a car that nice, it was big RWD Korean sedan with a bunch of dead cows covering the seats.
These have lovely proportions–a wonderful way to blend classic American luxury cues with modern limitations on total size. Just a bit too much front overhang for my taste, but otherwise really elegant. I’d love to find a Sedan de Ville Touring Sedan some day.
Actually, I’d love to put together a collection of the oddball high-trim Cadillacs: the original Seville Touring Sedan, Fleetwood Talisman, an early-80’s Eldos with the aluminum roof, the whale-like DeVille Concours, and maybe a Fleetwood Limited.
Don’t forget the spring edition they offered on this gen deville!
What was the gold badge on the grille for?
The badge was supposed to represent how many Cadillacs you purchased. It announced to the world, and most importantly the dealer service personnel, that you were a repeat customer.
One of my most cherished possessions from my deceased grandfather is the grille medallion his dealer ordered for him when he bought his last Cadillac, a 1992 Sedan deVille. He never installed it.
XXXIV.
I think it was a dealer award for getting 50K miles out of an automatic temp control module. 🙂
This is funny!
Each one has a Roman numeral in the center that corresponds to the number of Cadillacs you’ve owned in your lifetime.
My grandfather had a ’93 in black. That was the 7th Cadillac he owned in my lifetime, but his did not have the badge. I believe he always bought from the same dealer. Was this a dealer-specific thing or did you have to know to request it? As for the car, he had it for 16 years until driving was no longer an option. By the end, the paint on all horizontal surfaces was very UV damaged, and, as someone mentioned, the driver’s door armrest was disintegrating. Mechanically, the engine (Northstar!) and transmission were still smooth as could be, and the Caddy could get up and go when pushed. The digital dash still worked, but I think the radio had lost a couple of buttons along the way. I don’t recall how many miles it had on it when it was sold to someone looking for a parts car, but it ran a lot better than it looked and must have been low mileage as it rarely left the 5 mile radius around my grandparents’ condo.
I think you had to request one from Cadillac, though I’ve seen plenty of them down here in the Sunshine State, I think you can still get them from Cadillac.
It might be like the 100K badges you can get from Volvo. I had to fill out a form at the dealer when my ’91 940 hit 100K.
I switched the grilles before I sold it, so I still have it!
Did he buy them new? I know it was the number of how many new Cadillacs you purchased, not used. If he did buy them new, then I’m not sure why he didn’t get it.
Also, my own question: how long did they do this? It seems I only see Cadillacs from the early 90s with this badge.
You can still get them. There have been several recent discussions about this on the Cadillac forums I frequent.
Not a Caddy expert by any measure. So I have to ask, was the 4100 V8 self destructive and did the Northstar have overheating issues? But the earlier 5.7 and 4.5/4.9 were good? Need a scorecard to keep track.
This one looks nice:
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/cto/3614601529.html
It was the late 90s when Lincoln finally beat Cadillac in sales. The reliable 5.0 and 4.6 probably had a lot to do with it. (I was never fond of the V6 Continentals). Then Lincoln got “PAG”ed by Jack Nasser to it’s detriment. Only now are they are attempting a new renaissance.
Had no interest in the 1985 deVille when it was new and did not follow it. But as the car got older and I got busier a strange thing happened — I started to notice it more and more. Cadillac was making it better looking!
First the elongated tail fins, which I thought was funny since they did the same thing in 1980 with equally good results. Why didn’t they learn to just start that way? When they stretched the wheelbase the long overhang look went away and the whole thing just worked. I loved how they kept the square wheel openings.
The chrome moldings around the side windows (CC Clue) were so distinctive and went well with the old fashioned chrome door handles. I hated the plastic door mirrors; the metal ones on the Fleetwood Broughams looked much classier.
I drove a 1984 Park Avenue once and found it roomy, comfortable and pleasant, albeit in a FWD sort of way. Though I had never driven one I assumed the 92-93 deVille would make a nice daily driver. When I saw the new 2000 deVille DTS, the one with the low headlights, that became my new favorite late-model Caddy. It looked just as roomy and comfortable as the earlier deVille but now had this great stance.
My daydreaming to own one didn’t last long. I learned about the Northstar engine and had to cross it off the list. Another thing that reminds me of Cadillac in the 1980s.
I believe the mid-90s deVille was the last you could get with a 4.9L but that generation looked too fat and bubbly. The rear end though was one of the best ever for Cadillac.
I bought a 93 Sedan DeVille in 1995. Certified, supposedly had 23K. $ 22,000 no trade drive out. White with the blue carriage roof, blue leather to match, and the gold package. The dealer touted the car as a local trade, when I got the title, it came from a neighboring state.
All kind of stuff went wrong within the first year I owned it. Transmission rebuild, struts, and minor stuff, even missing trim. The car had numerous dings and minor scratches I didn’t see until I already owned it. It really hadn’t been taken care of by its original owner. I recall the many trips for warranty service; Cadillacs lined up around the block, waiting to be written up. I actually think my car might have been a theft recovery, or had the mileage turned back. When I voiced my displeasure about the car, the sales manager stated curtly, that I had bought a used car.
All in all, I had the car 10 years, and traded it with 72K for a 02 Deville from a different dealer. I carefully examined the 02 before buying it, and it was pristine. The other dealer actually volunteered to call the previous owner for me to talk to. I venture to say the 02 is the best car I’ve ever owned. I had it back to the dealer one time for warranty service, a sensor problem.
Two different Cadillac dealers and two different cars. Although my 93 ended up giving decent service, there was no comparison. The 02 is a better car in all ways.
I’ve probably told this story before, since I’ve seen other stories on these early 90s DeVilles on CC.
In 2005, I was going through an expensive divorce and needed a cheap cash car. Having just sold my 99 Honda Accord coupe, I was looking for a late 80s Honda. Only anything in the sub-$2,000 range was utterly trashed. On one ’87 Accord sedan, the entire bottom of the dash had been ripped off and there were lots of dangling wires. And the hood looked like it had been painted with Liquid Paper. Using the brush. They still wanted $1,895 for it.
After test driving an ’89 Acura Legend ($1,495) with broken A/C, a power seat stuck in the far forward position (I’m 6′ 0″, 225 lbs.) and shocks so shot it felt like I was driving a 1970s Continental, I spotted a ’90 Sedan de Ville on the lot for $1,995. Other than faded paint on the roof, it looked to be in far better shape than anything else I had seen.
So I started shopping AutoTrader for late 80s, early 90s Cadillacs (along with Buick LeSabres and Park Avenues) and came across a ’91 DeVille for $999. OK, it had 200,000 miles on it and the rear bumper was dented, but it was clean, drove nicely, and everything worked, including all the power toys, and the A/C blowed cold. I paid for it with my debit card.
The first few months were a bit rough as I had to take care of neglected maintenance and parts that had simply worn out after going far past their expected expiration dates. I would bet the stalling issues mentioned were caused by a failed ignition control module. I, too, had intermittent stalling that would call for a tow on more than one occasion. Replacing that $35 piece solved the problem. The car also went through hall effect switches. By the fourth one, I could replace the part (under the rotor on the distributor) in 30 minutes, and I’m about as good a mechanic as Elmer Fudd is a hunter.
I drove that car for 60,000 miles, including a 3,600-mile cross-country trip from Oregon to Iowa where it performed flawlessly. After buying a 2001 Seville in 2009, I drove the DeVille to North Dakota (another flawless performance) and gave it to my niece. The car has since passed 270,000 miles. My niece recently reported smelling what seemed like burnt wiring in the steering column, so I’m not sure if the car will be going much longer. Still, it’s lasted far longer than most.
I still have great affection for Cruella DeVille. The old girl had tons of character and with 19 wreath and crest emblems and six Cadillac scripts (I counted), the car never let you forget you were driving a Cadillac. The 4.9 had plenty of scoot, and it handled better than you would expect. It was even good on gas (albeit premium), getting in the low 20s on the highway.
This picture was taken about 18 months ago. After losing its place in my garage and sitting outside, the paint was fading in spots and shedding some of the clear coat. But the old girl still cleaned up decently for 20+ years and 270,000 miles.
What a beauty. Nice color. I too had the stalling problem on one of my Cadillacs; pretty dangerous on the highway. Premium wasn’t required even though it said so (that “Premium Fuel Required” sticker got my grandma to never buy a Cadillac again).
Love that blue Cadillac!
I agree with Midwest Corn: that is a fine looking Cadillac. That’s probably the nicest color I’ve ever seen on one of these.
A comparison video I shot shortly after buying the Seville:
Judging from the time codes in the video, the Seville did it in 7 second flat; the DeVille is just over 9 seconds.
Interestingly, both cars shift from 1st to 2nd at 45 MPH, and both hold 2nd gear all the way up to ~80 MPH. Without a tach in the DeVille, I have no idea how high it was revving, but it probably went close to redline. The 4.9 definitely doesn’t have the top end of the Northstar, but it has plenty of torque to get you going.
I had the camera on a tripod held down between my legs in the Seville; in the DeVille, it’s just handheld, so it’s shakier.
cool video. The torque curve on the 4.9 is almost identical to the Northstar. The horsepower curve is similar, except the Northstart obviously keeps going stronger as the rev’s climb.
the Seville would have had the 3:11 final drive ratio while the Deville would have probably had the 2:73 ratio…I think the 4.9 redline was 4500 or 5000 rpm rev limit vs the Northstar 6500ish…makes sense they both get to approximately the same speed in each gear.
I think that there is a trick to get a tach out of the “Fuel Data Center” if you press the buttons in the right order, you can also get other self diagnostic functions out of it.
Hitting OFF and WARMER simultaneously on a pre 1996 models would activate the on board diagnostics. On earlier cars, the codes were fairly straight forward. On later models, codes were divided between Emissions Fuel Body and Suspension. AirBags and AntiLock brakes used separate systems. It was a neat feature that many owners learned to do to self diagnose car problems. 1996+ Cadillacs just use the standardized OBDII controls although some functionality is available from the information cluster. One thing I will say about the much maligned 86-91 Eldorado/Seville is that their Information Display took things even a step further and was easier use.
I think you can make it into a digital speedo that reads to true top speed, not 85 like the in dash ones do.
Thanks for posting those videos. I have spent hours on YouTube watching WOT runs of older stock domestic vehicles. Too bad most of these videos are of foreign, exotic, new, & racecars.
The PO of one of my ’73 Bonnevilles posted this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clX0S1oz2Sc
I need to get a camera so I can do this although I’ll probably kill myself in the process.
how many miles on this one, nice price. where is it again? seriously
It’s in Milan, Illinois, near the Quad City Airport and just off I-80.
Well, I’ve got a fat and bubbly, flimsy and plasticky 1994 Sedan DeVille with a 4.9, so I guess I’ll write a review for Curbside to get us to 1999.
Please do! My parents had a white ’94 Deville that I learned how to drive on. Lots of good memories of that car, including the “MONITORED SYSTEMS OK” start-up notification. And the time I catastrophically blew out the transmission on the way to Target.
A fun fact about this car is that it has something like 10 cubic feet more interior room than the current XTS.
That’s because this is a -real- Cadillac.
Indeed!
That doesn’t surprise me; it was designed to meet or beat the interior volume of the 1977-84 RWD DeVilles, which in turn were supposed to be comparable, in terms of interior space, to the 1971-76 beasts. That doesn’t quite work out in real life, but they are spacious cars, and the squared-off open greenhouse is quite a contrast to the XTS with its narrow windows and steeply raked pillars.
When you try to max out the interior space while trying to keep a short wheelbase, you end up with the “Popemobile” roof that C-bodies ended up with.
It has the Astroroof. I must have.
When I was looking to replace my 280E, this was the only other modern car I considered, as there was 1992 in the neighborhood for sale for $2,000 and it was a garaged, babied 90K mile example with acres of lush midnight blue leather.
I have to say I’m a sucker for sunroofs, and I think that was standard equipment for W124s sent to the US, so off the Sedan DeVille went off my list. But to me these are as close as Cadillac got to their early 1960’s offerings: Quick, Silent, reasonably luxurious without being overtly Brougham-y and “friendly” to drive. The 4900 gets reasonable highway mileage too.
I heard the only serious mechanical problems they develop as they age surround the fuel pump, and you have to keep at least a 1/3rd of a tank in them at all times. Well, beyond the AC Delco switchgear that can be hit or miss as it ages.
If we’re ranking Cadillacs, this one, sorry brougham traditionalists, blows everything out of the water that Cadillac produced in the 20 preceding years.
I wonder how much shipping would be…..
Very true the thing with the fuel tank! When the gauge of my Cadillac marks 14 liters or 3 gallons, I know I have to go to the gas station immediately.This has been more common the last 7-8 years, It began at 12 liters and suddenly, one night I was stranded at the periférco (loop) with no gas and 14 liters in the gauge. At 2:30 am it was hard to get a ride to the nearest gas station, so I called the insurance and they kindly sent me an agent who brought the gasoline for me, but still I had to pay for it, not bad service.
Yep on the fuel gauge issues. I had an ’89 Fleetwood Coupe whose fuel gauge went bonkers at some point around maybe 80K miles (but the car was 13-14 years old; it was a very low mileage special when I bought it in 2001). Curiously, the “gallons used” function was still very accurate, so if you remembered to reset that at each fillup, you had in effect a fuel gauge that counted UP. I spent something like $900 at two dealers and could not fix it. The dealers’ first impulse was to replace the tank sender. However, the shop manual revealed that after the sender the signal went through TWO electronic modules under the dash and then to the gauge unit itself.
If you decide to come down to the QC Laurence, I’d be happy to show you around and buy you lunch.
I really, really wanted this one, but finances do not permit it right now…
From my prespective, these cars were absolutely nice. I like the shape of the C pillar and how it blends nicely with the rear door. Also, it is impressive the rear seat space! Many years ago while in a party, I had the chance to drive a Town Car, and I found its ride was very similar to the Sedan deVille, but the topic in that time was which was the better, and many of the guys and girls in the party were in complete accord that only the sound of the name CADILLAC was enough just to pull a string within your brain to say it was the better, a memory not easyly forgotten by youngsters like me and for the seniors who remember them as a pricey possession. But now, they have become a spacecraft with no personality at all, at least, again in my humble opinion.
I thought you would like this one Juan. I am looking forward to hearing about your Caddy sometime.
My friend Tom, I already sent it to Paul. He’s going to do the grammar and spelling corrections as needed, and maybe in one or two weeks will be uploaded .Regards!
I’d like to add that these full-sized DeVilles are very safe cars. Very good car!
I think the fact that there are still quite a number of these running around up here in my neck of the woods speaks well of them. Many of them still look fairly good, though they are beginning to fall into the the hands of those that obviously will not take care of them.
As for today’s subject car, the gold trim was actually a factory option, it’s listed in the showroom brochure. Tacky, yes, but I guess (much like canvas coach roofs) there is no accounting for taste.
It’s too bad it has that tacky-looking aftermarket radio sticking out of the dash. If this car was mine that would be the first thing to go, and a factory Delco UX1 would go back in it’s place.
Of course, a factory CD player was available that year…
I test drove at least 3 of these this past fall when I was looking for a car. I came extremely close to buying one( a ’93), but a mechanic I brought it to told me that it needed a head gasket. I was surprised, as I didn’t think that was an issue on the 4.9 motor, but I wasn’t going to take a chance and I backed away. It was a Spring Edition too, with the gorgeous 6 spoke rims.
I also looked at a mint 49k black ’93 being sold at a cadillac dealership, but they wanted 6 grand, and it had something wrong with its ABS. In the end, I ended up buying a 1990 brougham. Funny how had no trouble finding a nice brougham, but looked at least 3 much more common devilles, all with issues.
I can say that these devilles drive very smoothly and quietly, like a Cadillac should. Personally, I feel that the interior is not as opulent as a cadillac should be, especially compared to my Brougham. Same goes for the exterior. However, the brougham doesn’t drive as smoothly as these devilles. The 5.7 doesn’t hide it’s more humble roots.
Anyways, great write up!
As much as I knock Cadillac’s ’80s follies, this car is one of my guilty pleasures. Not sure if I’d rather have one of these or a ’91-’96 Park Avenue Ultra.
what are the special features of the 91-96 park avenue ultras? I can find lots of info on the 1989-1990 versions but not much for the 91-96 versions (other then that they came with a supercharged 3.8)
There really wasn’t many beyond the supercharged motor, dual zone climate control, and various trim bits that denoted it as an Ultra. All the way until the Park Avenue was discontinued in 2005, the base used the naturally aspirated 3.8 while the Ultra used the supercharged version.
What is ironic is that, despite Buick’s conservative nature, they sold more factory supercharged cars than any marque in history.
My daily driver is a 2002 Ultra white with navy interior and navy canvas roof. Man what a car extremely comfortable, fairly tight suspension for a large car, powerful with the supercharger yet very reasonable on gas for a car that size regularly returning between 28 and 29 on the highway.
The Ultras also had a much plusher interior.
Previous posters have nailed exactly the reason for the collapse of Cadillac as a luxury brand — Relatives traded from Cadillac to Volvo 760/940s, and posters made a lot of comparisons with Volvo bricks. Fine … I looooove Volvo bricks; I have three of them. BUT they are not upper-class cars, they are distinctly middle-class. Volvo is a near-luxury brand that only barely competes with the lesser BMLexubenzdis; that’s why they were sold to the Chinese and why they’re on the brink. Looks like Cadillac has fallen to that level and that’s NOT a good place to be.
These were good cars. I have seen a few go over 300k miles. They didn’t seem to rust out too bad. The ones with the 4.9 were peppy, and delivered good highway economy.
I wish I could find more info on the Sixty Special
The only way this could be better was if it was a Deville Touring Sedan but searching the last year only turned up a couple…missed a mint, low mile one by a week and the other was a beater.
I was 19 at the time when I “requested” my parents stop off and drive a ’92 TS back in ’94. “Carmine Red” metallic with the beechwood interior…sharp car. They were just starting to look at replacing the ’87 Taurus LX and I thought, “hey, at least I’ll probably get to drive it!” It surpassed my expectations. With the 2.97 final drive, it was VERY snappy; comfortable ride around town but controlled at highway speeds…it was awesome. “We don’t need something this big…blah blah blah.” They ended up buying a new ’95 Maxima GLE the following year.
So I ended up buying a ’92 Fleetwood two months ago. Of what was in the price range locally, this beat all of them in terms of overall condition and lowest mileage (108K; 111K now). I still own a ’91 STS and ’87 Maxima wagon and the experience with the 4.9L solidified my choice in the Fleetwood (and of course getting it checked out). It’s only seven inches longer than the ’06 Grand Prix it replaced but feels a foot or more longer, mainly in part to the comparatively HUGE backseat and square quarters. Trunks are close to the same though elbow room in the engine bay is indeed tight. This car rides like a couch on wheels though…sometimes a bit of isolation is just what the doctor ordered. For a car that’s old enough to go out and buy its own booze, repairs haven’t been too bad, even for a used car…muffler, egr valve, tranny service and cooler lines and I’m about to have the (original?) upper and lower rad hoses replaced at the upcoming oil change. It’s not great on gas around town now that it’s getting chilly (14-16) but highway ranges from 26-29 (55-60 mph) to 23-26 (70 mph) to 18-22 (80 mph+). The 4.9L has plenty of torque around town (2.77 final drive in SDVs and Fleetwoods) and has enough reserve to pass on a two-lane safely. The wood is still in great shape (not cloudy and still dark and rich) and the button-tufted leather is generally good as well (driver’s seat starting to show some wear) after a couple treatments of Leatherique. In typical GM fashion, the headliner is just starting to pull away at the sun visor recesses so if I have time this winter, I may replace that myself if I find the correct match.
But in the end, this car is all about how it goes down the road. It knows it’s not a BMW and doesn’t even try to be. It’s all about seeing the hood ornament guiding the way; the suspension soaking up whatever the road throws at it and gently echoing its motions. The dash, while as horizontal as Frank Lloyd Wright’s best, still manages to look classy and expensive, despite less than optimal ergonomics. It’s about taking the dude next to me in his fart-piped Civic and thinking “b*tch please” as he sees my taillights get dimmer and smaller. This car is 21 years old but it is NOT obsolete. OK, maybe on on ramps it is. But cars were different then and it’s an experience that can only be appreciated after you’ve been behind the wheel. If you haven’t, take one for a spin just you so you can feel it. It’s not like anything else.
Funny you mention the black sapphire paint and a ’78 Malibu in the last paragraph. My family owned a ’79 Malibu, and when it needed a repaint in ’94, I was allowed to choose the color since the car would be mine two years later when I turned 16. I knew precisely what color I wanted–black sapphire. I’d seen and loved the color on cadillacs around town, and having a couple of dealer brochures from the early 90’s picked up at auto shows, I knew exactly what it was called.
While it lost a bit of depth in the transition from factory-applied basecoat/clearcoat to an integrated “Maaco special” job, it still looked quite nice on the old Malibu. Maybe whenever I finally get it back on the road I’ll spring for the proper base/clear application!
On the *actual* subject here, I fully agree that Caddy did a world of good with the ’89 restyle. I was one of those who never warmed to the ’85-’88 models, and while I was all of nine at the time, I knew the ’89 looked better to me though I might not have been able to explain why. An older relative had an ’86 SdV in that odd pinkish beige that they offered at the time, and while it was certainly a nice car to ride in, I never cared for the looks with the abruptly truncated tail and the sealed-beam lamps. The ’87 tweaks helped but the wheelbase stretch and, more imporantly, extended rear fenders on the ’89 really did the job. By the way, whiie I’ve heard as many horror stories about the HT4100 as the next guy, that ’86 survived its original owner and was driven by her daughter until probably 2007 or 2008 when it was finally retired. While the mileage wasn’t all that high, given its gentle mostly around-town driving of a retired couple when new, 20+ years isn’t bad for a motor most consider a time bomb. The car was far from trouble-free in its old age but, as far as I knew, the 4100 was never replaced.
I know this article is a few years old but thought I’d chime in with my experience with these cars. Back in 1995 my parents bought a 1990 Cadillac Coupe DeVille with 75k after their 84 Coupe DeVille was hauled off to the junk yard after just 11 years. I was surprised that they considered another Cadillac after the major problems with the 84, but my mom fell in love with the white on white leather and red trim interior. It was a beautiful car, but I just assumed it would be another POS. Boy was I ever wrong. Turned out to be the best car we ever had and it was passed on to me as a first car. I drove it to just over 180,000 miles and sadly traded it in thinking I wanted something modern. I soon regretted that decision as I hadn’t realized just how much I loved the look of that car. I would occasionally see one and I would get a little sick feeling knowing that I had such a nice example and let it go. I also missed all of the great memories that were made in it. It was reliable enough that we took many long distance family vacations in it and it always performed flawlessly. It was clear to me that was something special about them, I kept seeing them on the road cruising along year after year after a lot of other cars from that era just seemed to fall off the map. Eventually I couldn’t take it anymore, I had to find another one. I sold my late model car to Carmax and hit the internet for an 89-93 Deville (I was even open to an 88-91 Seville/Eldorado). After many tire kicks and test drives, I finally found my car… a white 1993 Sedan DeVille with a blue top, blue pinstripe and leather interior and gold emblem package. I could’ve done without the top, but thats the way it came. It only had 59,000 miles and was a local 1 owner car. As I drove it, I just knew it was the right one. It just gave me good vibes that cannot be explained. I bought the car and haven’t looked back. Just like the 90, it has been a rock solid car that runs and drives amazingly good. Can’t beat the seats and AC. I have done some basic maintenance on it and replaced a water pump but otherwise the mechanicals and electronics have been trouble free. IMO, there is no doubt these were some of the best Cadillacs that, as the original article states, was no other than the result of lemonade out of lemons. I’ll be drinking this lemonade for many more years.
Looks like a Spring Edition! Perforated seat centers?
Yes, the seats are perforated. The only option it doesn’t have is the digital speedometer cluster, but I hear those have a tendency to go out these days. The 90 Coupe I had was digital (and also had the perforated seats). As for the trim, I’ve been told it is the Liberty Edition?
For my taste, from 1991 to 1993, these were the most beautiful Cadillac Sedan DeVille!
Beautiful !, Beautiful!
In 2010 I bought one of these jewels
This is my Cadillac Sedan DeVille 1991
Doesn’t it seem strange that throughout the ’30s and ’40s Cadillac was pretty much at the forefront of changing style (thank you Mr. Earl) went a bit extreme in the late fifties, then pretty much seemed to find a look and just sat on it with relatively minor changes? They went from progressive-looking to inward-looking. So many of the same old design cues we’d been seeing since the mid-sixties.
I was wondering whether this reflected a change in American society – were the rich becoming more conservative than their parents had been? Or was it just Cadillac management? But then there was the famous misstep of the second-generation Seville.
CC-in-scale doesn’t have one of these, but here’s the CdV. Pink pearl isn’t intended to be a factory shade! 🙂
Interesting model. Is this 1/24, 1/43 or 1/64?
1/25, a Revell kit. Currently out as a lowrider version.
I remember these very well because we had many rental fleets of these in 1991. We couldn’t keep up with Town Car rentals when the new TC debuted, so we were desperate for more luxury cars and they sent to us at O’Hare.
These were pretty nice, but they didn’t seem to be as solid as the Lincolns. There were pretty touches and they seem to sit lower too. Renters like them and we didn’t get any complaints, that I know of.
However, these were not as nice as the new Town Cars at the time.
Excellent timing with this repeat feature…tomorrow, in Warsaw, Indiana, I will be taking delivery of a ’91 Sedan deVille. It has 58,000 miles and a few cosmetic issues, but I’m really looking forward to getting my hands on it. Wish me well!
How did it turn out?
Pretty well…I haven’t discovered any real issues yet (apart from cosmetic ones). Lots of bells and whistles, though, which always worries me with older luxury cars.
I loved my ’91. Ample power, loads of comfort and I could still work on it! Every 18 months I would have to replace a doohickey with the driver side window and had enough practice to do in minutes! I had to park on the street and Cotillion White was lacquer still and I didn’t have any fading issues. Lost it in an accident, but she drove onto the wrecker. Someone saved it and I see it around occasionally
A fine and fitting example of why Lincoln sold so many Town Cars in this time period.
These longer, larger FWD Caddy’s are much nicer than the initial FWD models they came out with. Why couldn’t GM have started with these instead of those shorter, skimpier models? GM would have done much better if they had. Still like the leather GM used in their 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s cars. Good quality, good looking and comfortable.
Ten years after, I wonder if she ‘s been saved !
The downsized FWD Cadillacs to me were the beginning of the end of TRADITIONAL Cadillac OTT image. Downsized 77s were a compromise! Badging these FWD with Fabled FLEETWOOD name was an insult to those who loved TRADITIONAL BIG RWD OTT Cadillac elegance and luxury. Had 89 Fleetwood Brougham deElegance and loved it. Also had 93 Brougham which had some issues 🤔. Then went to Town Cars! Currently have beautiful low mileage Town Car Signature Limited and won’t let this one get away! OLD dog doesn’t like New tricks 😕! Sad NO American manufacturer now makes a traditional full size luxury sedan!
Had to resurrect this as I was just looking at a 93 Sedan de Ville on line locally. Then started my search on information about the car. The typical good and bad and thought I should check to see if Tom had anything to say on the car. Sure enough he did and everyone did. Very helpful.
However, the car is in competition with a really nice 66 Bonnie 4dr hdtp. Gorgeous everywhere except the rear window channel. Then there is a Park Avenue Ultra. Last I saw a gorgeous 1979 Newport 4dr. hdtp which equals the other two in dollars and then some. What does one do when you like all of them. Which ever way it turns out no one will know except me.
Nah, Ultra is out. I have a great 04 LeSabre so really pointless. With the engine and transmission updates I did makes it even more so.