I am glad GM went bankrupt. Why? Because it seemed to be the only thing that enabled them to get their act together after stumbling around since about 1985. I like GM cars. I mean, come on, I even did a post defending the shrunken 1986 Toronado! But they seemed to lose their way–misjudging the market, letting their car lines atrophy while concentrating on short-term SUV profits in the early ’90s, designing fuel efficient engines that were efficient, if sometimes less than robust (I’m looking at you, Cadillac HT4100!)–take your pick. But today’s Cadillacs are nice. The XTS is drool-worthy to me, the ATS is a nice mini-CTS (don’t call it Cimarron II, please!) and the new ’14 CTS is another worthy luxury car. But it took a while for Cadillac to re-find its mojo, and the 2000-05 Deville/DHS/DTS came about during a time of confusion for the mammoth U.S. automaker.
1991 Sedan de Ville
I like Cadillacs. I like Lincolns too, as well as Chrysler New Yorkers, Electras, Ninety-Eight Regencys and other big, plush, silent cruisers. Always have, always will. My recent purchase of a 2000 Town Car Cartier was the fulfillment of a long-term desire to have an American luxury car. Back in the late ’90s, I test drove quite a few Caddys and Lincolns, thinking about getting one. I was particularly enamored of the 1989-93 Sedan de Ville. The neighbors had a new one when I was 11 or so–a ’91 SDV in Academy Gray with silver lower section and dove gray leather.
1993 Coupe de Ville
True, they were front-wheel drive, but they still were clearly Cadillacs. From the imposing grille, to the vertical taillights and finlets, they oozed luxury.
1991 Sedan de Ville interior
Especially inside. The seating was first rate, especially in the leather-bound edition. Much detailing was evident, from the seat sew style, to the plush carpet, to the digital dash and power assists–even the chrome window and door lock buttons were well done.
1991 Coupe de Ville
I drove at least two Academy Gray ’93 SDVs, one of which had dark red leather. The gray over red one I drove at Bob Eriksen Chevrolet was the best! I also drove a light beige ’93 SDV with a dark brown fake convertible top that croaked two blocks from the dealership. I locked it, walked back to the showroom, gave the embarrassed salesman the key, told him where it was, and left.
1991 Coupe de Ville front seat
But I still liked these cars; I drove probably six or eight of them, and all were comfy cruisers. I also drove a Garnet Red ’89 Eldo and Polo Green ’91 Seville that were also nice–if lacking in the presence the Coupe and Sedan de Villes had.
1991 Coupe de Ville back seat
Just look at all the nice details, like the lavaliere strap and mini-wreath and crest on the courtesy light. There were even Cadillac emblems on the seat belt buckles. From the seats, to the dash, to that wonderful chrome-plated wreath and crest on the hood leading the way, you knew you were in a Cadillac, the pride of the GM fleet. Was it a 1953 Sixty Special? Of course not, but what 1990-93 model automobile was?
1999 Deville
In 1994 the Coupe de Ville was gone, and the Sedan de Ville simply became the Deville. The 1994-96 model looked a bit zaftig with its enclosed rear wheels, but I liked them–they reminded me of the 1993-96 Fleetwoods, which were right up there with a new Town Car in my dream garage. In 1997 the rear wheels were opened up and a nose job was done, improving the looks.
And then, after a long line of chrome-bedecked, true blue (albeit FWD) Caddys, in the fall of 1999 traditional Cadillac buyers were greeted with this. Now I know up to this point I seem to have been building up to a Niedermeyeresque GM Deadly Sin explosion, but you may be somewhat disappointed. For as a then-college student I was very interested in this new Cadillac. I remember seeking out the literature and keeping in touch with a salesman at McLaughlin Cadillac-Olds, wanting to see the first one that came in.
The first one was a black DTS, and I was greeted with this nose upon pulling my 1991 Volvo into the dealer lot. Well, it certainly looked like a Cadillac from the front! DTSs (replacing the Deville Concours) and DHSs (replacing the 1997-99 Deville D’Elegance) got a grille-mounted wreath and crest, but standard Devilles got the good old stand-up version.
Those slick, oh-so-slim taillights of the 1989-99 model were replaced with less sharp (literally and figuratively) units, reminding me more of the Town Car. The CHMSL built into the trunk lid looked pretty cool, however.
Up until this point the Deville had been the sole holdout for traditional Cadillac looks, with the beautiful Seville “greyhound” model of 1992 being much more international in flavor–but still every inch a Cadillac. The 1992-and-up Eldorado was also quite fresh and modern, though perhaps more formal than the Seville and sportier STS. Catera? Bah, let us not speak of that. The 2000 Deville finally came into the modern era, quite appropriate for the new decade. Indeed, they still look contemporary today, fourteen years after they first appeared in Cadillac showrooms.
But were they still a Cadillac? I recently pondered that question when I test drove a 2005 Deville with 74K for my sister’s in-laws. Vicki saw my Town Car on Thanksgiving Day and went nuts: “Oh wow what a beautiful car! It’s so nice! If you ever find something this nice in a Cadillac, let me know!” Apparently their bright red 1992-97 vintage Seville was getting on in years, and she was looking to perhaps surprise Kenny with a nicer, more recent model.
So I went down to McLaughlin to look at this promising 2005 model, in Cashmere with Neutral Shale leather. It was in great shape, with only a door ding by the driver’s door handle and a couple of chips on the passenger-side rear quarter panel marring its finish. Now keep in mind I have been driving this car’s main competitor, a Town Car, for a month and a half. And I had not driven a Cadillac newer than a 1993, with the exception of a 2003 CTS about five years ago.
Driving impressions? Well, it was nice. It was comfortable, and I kind of liked the digital dash, though it’s not to everyone’s taste. I REALLY liked that hood ornament out in front! It felt much narrower than my Lincoln (the TC is 78.2″, the Deville 74.5″ but it felt much more pronounced to me), but at the same time more European in handling and acceleration–almost as if you’d combined my Volvo V50 and my Town Car into one vehicle! Of course it is FWD unit-construction and the Lincoln is RWD body-on-frame, which probably accounts for the differences in driving dynamics. The Deville and DHS version of the Northstar had 275-hp, with the DTS getting 300. Even with 74K, this car was no slouch.
My reaction to the interior was a bit mixed. The window controls and many of the dash controls looked like they came off an Impala, but the wood was pretty, and I loved the chrome door handles; their shape looked like something you’d see in an art exhibition. And this car had heated and cooled seats, and–get this–a heated steering wheel. I did not try out the cooled seats (it was 30 degrees out), but the heated steering wheel was very nice.
So, the car looked good, drove nice, and the price was very reasonable. A shoe-in, right? But I couldn’t recommend it to Vicki, as the original owner was a smoker, and despite the car being fully detailed and vacuumed, it still smelled like an ashtray inside. It wasn’t that bad, but was impossible to ignore, and a deal breaker. Pity, it was a really nice car otherwise.
Guess I’ll just have to keep looking for her; oh darn, I’ll have to drive several more Cadillacs, what a shame!
Nope, these weren’t bad cars, but I think the XTS is more Cadillac-like, inside and out. I still miss the little Cadillac crests on the seatbacks that used to be on the ’80s models, though…
A long-time secret desire of mine has been a Cadillac Deville of this generation.
Sometime back in 2010 or 2011, I test drove one of these (I think an ’04) back to back with a ’98 Deville.
The ’98 seemed much more Cadillac-y on the inside and was sprung a bit more softly whereas the ’04 was a bit more taut in its suspension. I preferred the ’04.
You are correct that some of the interior bits do have an unmistakable kinship with other GM products, but, for me at least, these switches didn’t feel Impala-esque.
There is no deadly sin here as I feel Cadillac definitely had a hit on their hands.
Jason seems like you know a lot about cadillacs I have a 2005 deville that I actually brought used crazy part is I know nothing about these cars what I wanted to know is does my car come with air shocks and struts and where are they cause though my car sounds smooth when driving its when I come across a bumpy road that I feel and here every bump someone said that when I start the car it should rise cause the car does sit low but again I don’t know anything about this car or Cadillac’s in that matter so I ran across this page while searching and thought to asked the question
Were all of these column shift? How many Cadillacs would ever carry 6 passengers, that is not exactly what I would call a luxury experience especially being that narrow.
Looks wise it is not bad apart from the super bland, blobby front end styling that could wear a Kia badge. The inteior is nicely updated even if the switchgear lets it down, the 1991 interiors could come from a 1970s car.
I wonder how it would compare to a 2000 Holden Caprice. That was also a soft-edged style but consistent front to back and very elegant (ironically the grille on the cheaper Statesman looked better IMO).
The base models had the gear selector on the steering column whereas the higher end units, such as the DTS, had the selector on the floor.
You have me curious on the comparison to the Holden. Isn’t it rear-drive?
Yes, with LS1 & 4sp auto, IRS (basic semi trailing arm only that was really inadequately located to handle the torque hence an update in the next model). The dimensions seem similar, ironically the equivalent Commodore dropped the bench seat option despite a significant increase in width.
Actually that prompts the safety question which was probably the reason Holden dropped the bench – was there a lap-sash belt or airbag for the centre passenger? The 1994 Falcon had the passenger airbag extended to cater for a centre passenger although lap belt only. Lap sash came in 2000(I hink), when the bench seat was ute only.
The bench seat cars still had a center front lap belt, though 3 across shoulder belts were added to the rear seat around this time.
The front bench probably never carried many in the center, but it is comfortable to some because of the stretch out knee and thigh room. I like the feeling of bench.
I thought so and am aware of the room opinion – I would rather have a small console and some storage in a sedan (but a 3rd seat in a ute)
Brendan I’d hope the needs of trickle down high school owners were not driving Cadillacs decisions!
I think, from what I recall, that the bench DeVilles still have a storage compartment and cup holders in the seat cushion, it folds out, so you get the benefits of both.
There’s storage under the center seat cushion and in the armrest, plus an umbrella shelf under the passenger seat. The door pockets are twice the size of the DTS’s.
Here is the Caprice. By 2005 the facelift had introduced rectangular lights and grille that didn’t sit well with the swoopy centre body section.
Carmine, a reasonable approach but makes the leather-clad perch even less of a seat!
While certainly not comfortable, that 6th seat up front can be very convenient in a pinch. Especially when these cars trickle down to high school students as first cars.
When I was in high school several people I knew owned 90s Town Cars, DeVilles, and Grand Marquis’. That 6th seat came in handy many times when people needed rides.
Tom you are obviously related to someone who has owned a few Cadillacs, what has their ownership experience been like? How long do they keep the cars? (I realize it’s anecdotal but still…)
I usually only see Kenny and Vicki at Thanksgiving, so would have to ask about their Seville. My neighbor Jim, however, is Mr. Cadillac. Since I moved in in 2002, he has had a ’97 STS, ’04 Deville, ’06-’08 DTS, and now a 2010 or 2011 DTS. There may have been one other Deville in between the STS and DTS. Absolutely swears by them, but he freely admits to trading them in before they get too old. I don’t think he’s kept one more than four or five years. He gets late-model CPO versions.
I have some other friends and acquaintances with Cadillacs, but they are recent models (SRXs, for the most part).
I remember when these cars came out (it’s hard to imagine that was 14 years ago!). I really liked them, but I couldn’t believe it was a Cadillac DeVille. As you said, I agree that they do still look quite contemporary today.
There were many parts about this car that I do like. Like its sheetmetal, proportions, taillights, and interior comforts (those were really nice leather seats). But other things were subpar, such as interior materials and console design.
As for the taillights, when illuminated at night, they did have a slim lighted section, reminiscent of older Caddys. They were also the first production LED taillights.
I’ve had a lot of first hand experience with these cars. My great aunt and uncle have both owned DeVilles of this generation that I’ve ridden in (but sadly haven’t driven) on various occasions. My great uncle Joe, a long time Cadillac man, owned an earlier model (’00 or ’01) DeVille in a the exact same color as the featured car. His wife Mary traded in her Park Avenue for a 2005 DeVille in light green, which she still drives. Uncle Joe now drives a 2006 DTS.
The shame is that Uncle Joe, who’s 86 years young, badly wants to purchase a new car. He really liked the XTS, but the touchscreen controls and additional technology are overly complex. He’s afraid it will cause too much distraction, leading to an accident, and having his license taken away (as does happen with many elderly folks). It’s too bad, because he’s really into cars, but he’s accepted that the best thing is just to continue driving the car he’s used to.
Everything on the XTS though can be done by voice control, there is almost no need to use the touch screen once you have it set up. Its a little more complicated, but once you have it down, you hardly have to do anything.
Though I’ve noticed that beyond a certain age, some people feel awkward “talking” to inanimate objects. Mt friend recently leased a Buick Verano and Regal, both with the Buick Intellilink system, and I was amazed at the things you could do with the voice commands, he said you practically don’t have to touch a button for a single thing.
I should probably add that I do like many of the current Cadillacs. I really like the new CTS and the ATS. I may have eluded otherwise when commenting on Paul’s Seville Deadly Sin yesterday. I don’t hate Cadillacs, but I still think they fall behind in some areas.
Hmmm, this is another “if only it had come out years earlier” GM car for me. By the time this car arrived, it just didn’t seem that new or special. Some Cadillac styling flourishes remained, but packed into a pretty generic big sedan body with questionable “parts-bin” interior pieces as you point out. I’ve never driven one, but have been in many that were used as livery cars. I remember being struck by how firm the rear seats felt, certainly compared to older Cadillacs. Almost Germanic. Loved the interior door handles and thought they were really well done–arguably the best part inside the car. Keep in mind 1999 was also the year that Mercedes rolled out its redesigned 2000 S-Class, which seemed light years more contemporary and highly desirable (even though it suffered from wicked cost cutting compared to traditional MB standards). I know they competed in different price classes, so the comparison is unfair, but for that I say “shame on Cadillac.” The S-Class should ALWAYS have been in Cadillac’s target range, as it was for so many luxury car customers. So, while the car didn’t seem new enough or special enough for 2000, I do think that had it appeared for model year 1994, it would have seemed desirably fresh. It would have predated the E38 7 Series, been out at the same time as the over-sized, slab-sided S class, held its own against the Gen 1 LS400 and would have seemed more contemporary than the Town Car. So what about the actual 1994 Generation DeVille you ask? Well, I would have pegged that for model year 1989, when it would have seemed far fresher. The 1989 generation? Well, that should have hit for 1983, when the GM biggies were originally targeted to be redone. And I would simply skip the awkward ’85-’88 design entirely. To me, that would have preserved Cadillac’s mojo far better than what actually came to pass.
Speaking of the 1989 car, I have really mixed feelings about that one. It was my Pop’s one and only Cadillac, a fulfillment of a lifelong dream for him. He had just retired and felt the time was right to treat himself, and he really liked the return to the more Cadillac-like styling and better proportions that the ’89 restyle brought. So he took the plunge and got a Sedan DeVille in Black Sapphire (no vinyl top thankfully) with contrasting Academy Gray lower body paint and dark blue leather inside. He came out of a 1987 Bonneville SE, which was a very nice car and fun-to-drive for its size and purpose. The Cadillac was far more stately–very comfortable, reasonably quick but not at all fun. However, the real problem was that this particular car was simply a lemon. He had an inordinate amount of trouble with it. The digital gauges failed. The electrics repeatedly went berserk. It occasionally wouldn’t start, or would stall in traffic. Kept going back to the dealer over and over and over. The straw that broke the camel’s back was one day when he was driving across the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway (the longest bridge over water in the world). It was during a torrential downpour, he was mid-span, and the car started to fog up because the climate control wasn’t doing its job. He wanted to crack his window to let in some fresh air to help clear the fogging, but it went all the way down instead. And then it wouldn’t go back up. The car started sputtering. Then died. Driver’s window down in the pouring rain, right in the middle of a huge bridge. Some dream car. He had it towed to the dealer and told them to take it. He was done, and never drove the car again. Just got his things out of it and took the check from the dealer. Pop then asked me and my brother what he should get next. We both had Hondas at the time, and told him to get one (never thinking he would in a million years). Well, he went down and got a 1991 Accord SE in Silver with Gray leather.It was one of his favorite cars ever, right up there with the ’65 Mustang and ’68 Cougar he’d once had.
That’s a horror story. The sad thing is that it’s all too familiar, though not as bad as your father’s. In spring of 1999, my mom purchased her second brand new Jeep Grand Cherokee. Her experience with her ’94 was good enough, so how bad could a second one be?
That ended up being the most problematic car she ever had. Brake rotors warped and had to be replaced 4 times. Had to have the battery replaced 3 times. Interior pieces and screws literally fell off. The fuel gage needle had a mind of its own. The rear door sealers kept coming loose around the corners, causing loud road noise and water to come through in the carwash and heavy rain.
After 4 years (which was less time than she usually kept a new car), she ran back to Toyota, cursing Chrysler all the way.
As for your father’s Accord, the 1990-93 is my favorite generation of the Accord. Very nice cars, especially with leather.
Unfortunately, I saw the same thing with my father’s only Cadillac.
Once he’d left the Chevy dealership, he’d always dreamed about owning a Cadillac. However, putting two kids thru college (and one thru medical school) – no student loans here – and the other realities of life kept him incredibly sensible. Even though he was well-off enough to buy one anyhow, the closest he would come was a Buick LeSabre, whatever the expensive variant was called.
Finally with little sister married off and thru her residency, mom finally prevailed, and he bought an ’86 Fleetwood (I think – I remember it was still rear drive). Dream reached.
Six months later, mom was dead. And that entire time was a period of niggling little problems. None bad enough to strand him on the road, but annoying, and more problems than he’d ever had in the line of Chevrolets and Buicks. I drove that car once – Christmas Eve ’86 dinner with my wife – and was completely underwhelmed with the door panel popping loose from its mounts and various other minor maladies. As well as being totally turned off by the good old American brougham that it was.
The car was gone by the spring of ’87 – the shortest amount of time dad ever owned a car. His ’77 Vega was around about four months longer than that Caddy.
Yeah, it was still a Cadillac. And a prime example of how GM was screwing the brand over six ways from Sunday.
In the 80s I worked for a lawyer who was of the age between WWII and Korean war vets. He had always dreamed of owning a Cadillac. He finally got one – a 1981 Sedan DeVille with the V864. He didn’t really have trouble with it (at least not that he shared) but after he had it for a few years, his reaction was “is that all there is to owning a Cadillac?”
His next car was an 86 Accord (bought with cash) followed by a couple more Accords. In my view, Cadillac just went too far downmarket (at least in materials and in component sharing) and killed the magic.
My grandfather had a V-864 too, he didn’t have a lot of problems either that I recall, I think that was his first brand new Caddy too. But he drove Cadillacs until he passed away, his last one was like that ’99 Deville above.
“I know they competed in different price classes, so the comparison is unfair, but for that I say “shame on Cadillac.” The S-Class should ALWAYS have been in Cadillac’s target range,”
Depending on the day, I agree, and sometimes don’t.
With some of the practical differences between a loaded Camry V-6 and the new Cadillac XTS being minimal, it does seem like a true luxury car needs to be a bit “over the top” in order to provide a truly unique experience.
Then again, it is probably the world of income disparity that has created the market for the S Class and its primary competitors. A Cadillac used to be reachable by most industrious people if they really wanted one. The S Class featuring some options that would buy you a nice used car seems to be more a money flaunting device then anything else. I’m not sure I like this trend.
“A Cadillac used to be reachable by most industrious people if they really wanted one”
This was probably true after WWII, but certainly not before. True American luxury cars (Senior Packards, Model K Lincolns and Cadillacs with 12 and 16 cylinders) barely made it out of the depression and did not come back after the war. Postwar luxury was a whole different animal, geared to a new, more democratic (small d) demographic. Unfortunately, that trend seemed to re-start itself in the second half of the 1960s with American luxury cars slotting themselves ever closer to downmarket products. Of course, the downmarket products were improving at the same time. By the time the American market was ready to absorb a super-premium car again, nobody here was building one.
Agreed. Cadillac, Lincoln, Packard and Imperial all went down market from their golden age cars which were arguably the leftover by product of the prior greatest period of income disparity in the 1920’s.
Interestingly, GM survived 1959, probably the greatest year of body shell sharing in their history. All five divisions using the same basic greenhouses with only the Corvette being truly on it’s own.
I think it was more than a lessening of income disparities. What we forget today is that those prewar custom-bodied cars we now revere as classics quickly became white elephants. They guzzled gas like crazy, were cumbersome to drive and depreciated rather quickly. Many disappeared during the World War II drives for scrap metal, and those that survived the war could be bought for a song into the early 1950s.
Car design and engineering were advancing so fast prior to the war that a 1937 Packard 120 or Cadillac Series 60 was more modern looking and reliable, along with being easier to drive, than a Cadillac V-16 or Packard V-12 of five years earlier. Why pay the extra money for a custom-body car that was going to depreciate like crazy once it left the showroom floor?
It helped, of course, that cars like the Cadillac 60 Special seemed to be more stylish and youthful than the huge multi-cylinder cars, which had a stuffy air about them. You also didn’t have to employ a chauffeur to drive one of those cars, unlike the big, multi-cylinder, custom-bodied cars. In the era before widespread power steering and automatic transmissions, those cars were so huge and cumbersome that employment of a relatively young male chauffeur just to drive the car was a necessity, especially for many women and the elderly. Which further cemented their reputation as “old fashioned.”
Don’t forget the ’57 – ’60 Eldorado Brougham. Super expensive, super rare, but a real brand flagship and distinct from other Cadillacs. It allowed them to still have a halo car (and a leading indicator for future styling trends) which I think enhanced brand equity and was therefore worth it for GM, even if each unit lost money. I believe the new retail price for the Eldo Brougham when it came out was around $13K ($107K adjusted for inflation), so right there in super premium territory where the S-Class plays today. While never the core of the line, the Eldorado Brougham was an interesting lure for the super-rich and showed that Cadillac was prepared to compete at the highest levels, thereby making its more attainable models that much more desirable.
The DeVille and the S-class though were never competitors, the DeVille was always, for many years, the lowest priced and most popular Cadillac, excluding cars like the Calais and Cimarron.
Eldorado, Seville, Fleetwood were all priced above the DeVille, the real car that was pegged against the S-class was the Seville, in 1976 it was more expensive than all the other Cadillacs except for the Fleetwood limousines.
Is it just me, or do all ’89-’93 Devilles look like they’ve been in a few accidents? Yes, I know this was 20-25 years ago, but even a Taurus/Sable of that era looks better finished to my untrained eye.
Was it just bad fit and finish, or did trim parts literally peel off with time?
To that Deville’s credit, I do see a surprising number of them still around, especially the last ones with the 4.9.
Utterly ludicrous question.
It was made in the Cadillac, plant under the auspices of General Motors, was designed to be a Cadillac, and badged a Cadillac.
Therefore it’s a Cadillac.
I do not get the attitude that a car’s characteristics were set 50, 60, 70, 80, take your pick, years ago and any variation from that standard means its not a ‘true’ example anymore.
Given that argument, I could easily say that no Cadillac since WWI was a ‘true’ Cadillac, because the Cadillac marque did not start out as being the ultimate American luxury car. It was a mid-priced single cylinder automobile. It was a few years before they ‘lost their way’ trying to go up against Packard, Peerless and Pierce-Arrow.
Which, of course is a ridiculous argument. But no more so than the one that the 50’s and 60’s Cadillacs were the only ‘true’ Cadillacs.
Times change. Markets change. The product must change to try and match the market. Sometime they do it successfully. Sometimes . . . . . .
But as long as its called a Cadillac, built in a Cadillac plant by the legal owner of the Cadillac name . . . . its a Cadillac.
You are being disingenuous. Tom is asking if the car lives up to what you think the name “Cadillac” represents NOW, not 90 years ago. Obviously, the person that Tom is shopping for has a perception in their mind of what a Cadillac should be, ie: “Oh wow what a beautiful car! It’s so nice! If you ever find something this nice in a Cadillac, let me know!”
Also, comparing Cadillac to the likes of Rolls and Bentley is not an apt comparison either. Whether you like it or not, Cadillac is trying target the same market as the likes of Lincoln, Mercedes, BMW, Lexus. If you’re trying to say that this Caddy has gone too down-market in search of sales volume, just say so. That ground has all been covered before, of course. Luxury brands cheapening themselves and selling their cars on credit is a large part of what killed the Sloan brand heirarchy.
So tell me about the Cadillac Cimarron. It has a Caddy badge and was billed as a Caddy but is it really a Caddy?
No, it was a POS
I drove one of these for a few days in Florida when our rental company was out of full size cars and upgraded us. I was not impressed. Of course, I haven’t been impressed with a luxury car since I was a kid in the 80’s who was easily wowed by digital dashes and voices. Cars like this just aren’t much of an upgrade from more mundane choices. With cars like the ATS and CLA now in the grocery-getter mid-size sedan price range, I wonder how long all these “luxury” brands can last.
Anymore, if you actually want a true “luxury” car, you’ve got two choices.
Bentley and Rolls-Royce.
Anything else is a mass-market pretender.
Or a Toyota Century. I prefer my ultra-luxury sedan without bling.
YOU dont choose a Toyota Century, Toyota chooses the customers for them its a true luxury car not some mass market pretender like Cadillac Lincoln or Mercedes
I have always considered this a handsome car. Cadillac finally learned its lesson and styled the car with modern proportions. It looks substantial and attractive, which is the way a modern high-end car has to look to have any chance at all.
Otherwise, I have no firsthand experience with these. They did seem to be pretty popular here in the midwest.
As for those taillights, were those early LEDs or something else? I thought that they were some kind of flourescent. I recall some Lincolns (Mark VIII at least) around that time using similar lights (the flash on is instant, rather than slower like a traditional bulb). Thought I recall reading that these used some very expensive and not all that reliable equipment to do the job, and have been replaced by much cheaper and more reliable LEDs. Maybe someone here knows more about these.
This would’ve been a nice Chevy.
It did, a lot of it’s remnants can be found in the last generation Impala
All these stories detailing problems with this Caddy is disappointing to say the least. They have always caught my eye – especially the later models with the updated front end.
Too bad.
Nice write-up on recent Cadillac standard bearer history. I want to like every Caddy, but sometimes it is hard.
I really liked the ’89-’93 car. Such a huge improvement over the ’85-’88, and the first slowing of the massive sales slide. Too bad that problems with them likely tainted the brand again after gaining some new buyers.
The ’94-’96 car was a bit odd. The enclosed rear wheels – enhanced with skirts on the sportier models – a total reverse of the norm were fine be me. But, I’d have stuck with skirts on the standard models and omitted them from the Concours. The view from the rear was the oddest, the rear quarters tapered in fast, giving the final rear view a narrow look, but the side bulges you could see…… ugh. Big booty in orange polyester comes to mind. They should have just let the car be big. The last generation Riviera had the odd tapered booty as well.
The ’97 refresh took away it’s interesting rear wheel openings, and the bulging butt problem remained.
“Looks wise it is not bad apart from the super bland, blobby front end styling that could wear a Kia badge.” John H nails the 1999 and up car with this point. The Kia mini-van in particular. This car always seemed kind of small, and the rear seat wasn’t terribly roomy. The 3/4 view at the rear works, and looks like a Cadillac. But, the car does seem at best a bit generic and inoffensive. Probably not what a luxury car buyer is looking for.
I have always liked these too, they are more modern looking that a Town Car, but still a “classic” luxury car. My grandfather always drove Cadillacs and loved them, so I guess I inherited a little of that. Typically I like sporty cars, but I can see the appeal of a nice smooth riding highway cruiser. Another big part of the appeal is how cheap used versions are, combined with typical previous owners that really take care of them it seems like a good bargain in the used market. What keeps me away from getting one? Fear of the Northstar and a wife who basically wouldn’t be caught dead in one. 🙂
I’d black it out completely too, Sopranos style.
I think these look great in black, especially the DTS model with the limited chrome and the larger wheels, they do have a Paulie Walnuts look to them, especially with some nice dark tinted windows, low key, but still imposing.
I have a 1/18-scale 2000 DTS by Maisto, silver with off-white interior. It’s very sharp.
Yes, they actually made a model of one! And I wasted no time beating feet down to the KB Toys to snag one.
“I think these look great in black”
I agree
^ These last ones looked great in black. I still think the rear deck is too short, but that’s the barely-concealed desire for the existence of an “FTS” coming through.
Is this the last car made with infinite driver knee room?
I know they must be derided in the auto styling department as ‘old-timey,’ or maybe they violate some new Federal safety standard, but I’ll always say column shifting an auto is the superior design.
I would say that push-button shifting an auto is the superior design, and should be easier than ever to implement now that automatic transmissions have 100% electronically controlled valvebodies. The 8-speed automatic in the new Dodge pickups has a rotary knob gear selector on the dashboard. I’m interested to see who else follows suit with that.
I agree. Floors are for manuals. Columns are for automatics. Everything else is for pretenders who value style over practicality.
Of course, that’s just my opinion. I suppose you could make a case that if you spend a lot of time driving down hills in lower gears a floor shifting automatic can be more precise than a column shift. But most aren’t much if any better.
EDIT: OK yeah pushbuttons/Dials are OK and functional if done right. Unlike floor shifting automatics, they don’t reduce practicality and comfort.
Especially ones with extra-pretentious gated shifters.
They are almost all like that now, aren’t they? I drove my mom’s T&C minivan last summer and found the gated manumatic dash-mounted shifter odd and annoying. At least it wasn’t on the floor though.
I was intrigued by this when they were new, if only because i thought maybe the optional infrared night vision could allow one to see the naked silhouette of a gal haha. i see several around my town with lots of bad emitters in the tailights. i bet its not fun restoring those all LED units.
I would enquire about an overnight test drive for the ashtray car, then close it up with an ozone generator inside for a few hours… it works miracles on smoke damage smell.
…or tell the dealer that the deal-breaker was the smoke smell and tell them you may reconsider if they can get rid of the smell permanently, then let them worry about it.
I remember thinking the night vision camera was the coolest thing, though I was only in third grade, so I probably thought of it in a very different “light” than you!
Aren’t these incorrect wheels? Aren’t they from the earlier years, not the later 2005?
I won’t begin to address the Northstar problems….for fear of being called names by a certain somebody. I will say one word, however, DISASTROUS.
Its ok, you can talk ill about the North-Crap engine. It was junk. Designed to be an engine that could survive driving for 50-100 miles without coolant in it by way of deactivating cylinders and limiting speed to keep the engine cool but in reality it seemed like it could not hold oil or coolant in it to save its life.
That POS was finally dumped in 2010 in favor of a engine with simpler and more robust design and guess what that new engine combined with the current Cadillac models good looks has made Cadillac a winner.
Huh? The northstar ended production in 2011, and was never “replaced” by anything.
It was a pretty nice engine and state of the art at the time. Yes, some had head gasket issues, but it is hardly the only engine family on the planet that had a problem with headgaskets…
There are many out there that will do 300K plus miles.
cue the “I knew someone with…” and the “my mechanic told me…” and the “I worked at a dealership and…” in 3, 2, 1
Ask em about the heated seats…….
Go ahead….
I agree, they are complicated, they require maintenance and care, do you think other complicated engines in comparable cars are completely trouble fee? Are 12 cylinder Mercedes and BMW models all over ebay for $4000 because they are sooooo trouble free, reliable and durable?
But they are awesome for smooth power delivery, they were a revelation coming out of the old OHV 4.1-4.9 generation, I remember driving a black Northstar STS back when they were new, and feeling the massive surge of power as the tach spun smoothly to the 7grand mark and the just went right into the next gear without hardly any loss of power and it began to climb to the redline again, like a turbine. It was really impressive, we take 295hp for granted today, that power out of a 4.6 litre V8 was extremely impressive at the time.
Northstars are an exotic engine, they require upkeep, if you want to drive a car into the ground without any maintenance, buy and old LeSabre with a 3800.
Don’t forget how sweet they sound. Just about the best sounding V8 I’ve ever heard from both the engine compartment and the exhaust.
+1 on that Northstar sound – my dad owned a 1993 STS for 13 years (engine never had any problems and it was the first year of production too).
“Northstars are an exotic engine, they require upkeep, if you want to drive a car into the ground without any maintenance”
The Modular V8 used in Lincoln Mark VIIIs and Continentals in the 90s/early 00s was just as exotic(4V DOHC), just as powerful, and even had the same displacement as the Northstar. Yet they can go 300k+ in a lifetime only ever needing oil changes…. That is if the Continental’s transverse transmission survives that long of course.
The Ford Mod-motor was not without faults either. Intake manifolds cracking, porous blocks leaking, valve seal issues, cyl heads blowing out spark plugs, spark plugs breaking off in heads… want more?
I’ve personally owned/own 2 Northstar powered cars and had family who have owned others. Never had a problem with any of them (including the current one).
Those who throw stones should not live in a glass house
1. Intake manifolds cracking are a 96-02 SOHC only problem with the full composite intakes. All DOHCs used dry aluminum manifolds with a separate steel water crossover.
2. Porous blocks leaking? That’s a new one for me. And which blocks would that be? The Cast Iron ones, the Teksid aluminum ones? The Windsor aluminum plant ones? What? (might want to heed your glass house phrase on this one 😉 )
3. Valve seal issues, again, mostly a 2V problem and was largely rectified with the updated 96 heads.
4. Spark plug blow out, yet again, common on some 2Vs (particularly early Romeo PIs), mostly 5.4 trucks but pretty uncommon on 4Vs, maybe excluding supercharged Cobras.
5. I’m not throwing stones. I never owned a Northstar. I’ve had three mod motors (two 2Vs and a 4V), worked on dozens of other mod motors of the 2V, 3V and 4V variety and frequent several forums that also deal in them. I know their ins and outs well, particularly their flaws and limititations. The Northstar? Not so much, hence why I’m not repeating anything about their stated issues, because I freely admit I don’t know how many are true or false based on any direct experience. I’m just retorting to Carmine’s point that that there was indeed an engine directly comparable to a Northstar that didn’t need V12 Mercedes style pampering and upkeep to go a lot of miles, trouble free.
.” Yet they can go 300k+ in a lifetime only ever needing oil changes…. ”
My response was to this phrase XR7 Matt. If you want to dance around particulars that is fine, but like I said, that family of engines is not without fault.
They 2V did indeed have issues with porous blocks in the 98-2000 time frame in at least the panther platform. You may not have worked on one since they were generally replaced under warranty early in their lifespan. Had and Aunt with a 2000 GM that had the engine replaced at 5k miles because of this. Later had that engine replaced after the intake manifold cracked and hydro-locked it. After that it has been completely trouble free and is still on the road.
I’ve always tried to steer clear of Caddies with Northstar engines (and their Oldsmobile cousins) for fear of the seemingly inevitable head gasket issues… not just because of the gaskets themselves, but because of the horror stories about blocks with threads that won’t hold for the second time around, making DIY repair mostly impossible. Seems like up through ’01 in particular, the gasket issues seem to always get them in the end.
It’s a shame. Outside of that, those engines seem rather appealing from a driving standpoint. I did briefly own a very nice ’97 Aurora (looked and drove like it was fresh out of the showroom), and even at 175K it had plenty of guts and no sign of the dreaded head gasket issue. Even so, I didn’t keep it for fear of losing in the Northstar game of hot potato.
Does anyone know at what point this issue was supposedly corrected from the factory? I’ve heard 2002+ were supposed to be better, but yet I still see plenty of non-runners from those years in the junkyards.
2006+ seem (emphasis ‘seem’) to be better, but could be due to fewer sold and lower mileage as they are newer than the 2000s. 2005 and down I would not purchase. I have seen so many blown, it’s a shame. The sticker price at the dealership for a fix is $7000-$9000. That’s a damn shame, no matter what Defender says. And FYI, I love Cadillac but I don’t defend JUNK! (The transmissions usually go around the same time as the engines also 😉 ).
Considering the price you can get these today they aren’t too bad. Still, I think I’d go for the Town Car.
Bench seat and treechange dont spell luxury to me bargain basement fittings like that do not belong in a premium car
Funny, I always associated a bench seat and column shift with premium and luxury (Fleetwoods, Park Avenues, Ninety-Eights, New Yorkers, Towncars…). Floor shifters were for economy cars (Chevette, Cavalier, Escorts, etc.) and as a kid, I believed that manuals were only for people that couldn’t “afford an automatic”. But then, I grew up in the 80s, when pretty much only base model cars has manuals. I still remember the first time I saw a floor shift automatic, was in a ’90 Dodge Monaco that we had as a rental. I asked my dad if it was a manual, and he said it was an automatic. I then asked why it was there wasting space, and he said it looked sportier. My response: “that’s stupid”.
One thing that does stand out about the early 2000s DTS/DHS cars is that my mother-in-laws boss had one. Last sedan he owned, afterward everything has been Denali, Escalade, and King Ranch Expedition. He’s very free with the keys when anyone wants to run an errand and when he and the Caddy my MIL had a late 90s Buick LeSabre.
Her take after driving the Caddy several times? “My LeSabre was nicer than that.”
No credit for being right?
Blanket statements about the Northstar are not accurate, they made several improvements to the engine as time went on and by this vintage, they really don’t have any problem. But I don’t want to get into arguments with 12 year olds. At least its got heated seats, amirite…rite…right….right. Heyoooooooo.
The loss of some of the more “fogey” interior touches was probably as a result of a combination of cost cutting and wanting to lower the DeVilles average buyer age from 130. Though the interiors are a little blander, though the same could be said of the Town Cars from this same vintage, which I always regarded as way to Crown Victoria, I mean if were going to pan some of the switchgear on this car, I don’t want to point out how “Fordey” the interior of the same vintage Town Car is.
If you mean the CC Clue, we usually ID the winning guesser with the next Clue.
And yes, you got it.
I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that the period of 1998-2008 (roughly coinciding with the end of the B-body line and the Daimler takeover of ChryCo) amounts to a second Malaise period…while many cars were indeed quick, GM and Ford were making money hand over fist with their full-size trucks, and decontented nearly everything else on higher-up cars in their lines…witness the Ford Mondeo’s switchgear in Jaguars, the Impala-esque gear in this Caddy…Daimler did the same thing with Mercedes and Chrysler products…even Toyota was now resting on its laurels with Lexus and decontented the Camry, their bread and butter, to increase their bottom line. While you can certainly get a good, reliable car from this period (and certainly the mechanicals are pretty good, but then again, with the exception of the THM-200, most Malaise-era cars were generally solid mechanically speaking), most pale at the fit and finish; injected plastics on cheaper cars (or even mid-level cars, like the Mustang) are generally terrible, back to Colonnade-era levels of craptasticness. (I’m currently being lent a 1998 Ford Escort wagon and this has been on my mind all week…how a ’98 Ford drives WORSE than the ’87 Tracer I once used as an appliance is beyond me.) Similar to the economics of the early to mid seventies, cheap credit, fast inflation and an American buying public who would buy nearly anything that came off the line (and companies who didn’t much care about certain levels of quality) led to this happening. Cars got bigger, quickly; heavier cars lead to decreased gas mileage, all that’s being really added to cars is bling but no real engineering…all it needed was a Ricardo Montalban ad. Speaking of ads, there’s a c. 2006-2008 ad for the Hummer H2 that actually illustrates this perfectly…the pre-facelift dash is on one side, compared with the new dash. If anything, it was GM indicting themselves for trying to get crap out the door…I’d post the ad but I can’t find it online…
Rant done, back to your daily grind.
To be fair, that Escort wagon is a 15-year-old car whose body design lends itself to overloading.
That being said, it’s a shame Honda didn’t offer a Civic wagon of the ’96-00 generation in America (they made two – one for Europe and one for Japan, with different body designs)
My 83YO father recently traded in his DTS for a dark blue XTS. It’s his third Cadillac after years of Subarus and Toyotas, and frankly, since he still owns a VHS but not a computer, they are ALL Cadillacs to him.
While I haven’t gotten the keys to the XTS out of his cold, dead hands yet, IMHO it is easily on a par with riding in anything Teutonic (except possibly a Maybach, which is pure speculation, or Porsche). If I had the urge or the scratch, I could willingly replicate the choice without too much hesitation, though Mrs. F would prefer something schmaller und kleiner und kurtzer, mit vier-wegel-driven naturlisch fur der schmutzen-bahn wier auflieben am.
I got to drive one of these accidentally…when you are a frequent renter from Hertz, sometimes they will slip you a complimentary upgrade. So it was when I’d find that instead of the usual Taurus, something else (not necessarily better, once it was a Volvo 240) was in the designated parking stall. The time it was a white Ford Crown Victoria that screamed, “COP CAR,” everybody got out of my way on the highway. A mid-2000s deVille showed up once, and it surprised me with its un-Caddylike agility. Big cars that handle well aren’t strange to me, starting with a 1995 Dodge Intrepid I bought (and still have), but the deVille was so smooth and quiet that I didn’t expect it to HANDLE, too.
Tom, could you tell us more about how the 05 Deville’s ride compares to your Town Car? How about seat comfort and audio sysytem sound quality differences?
I prefer the Town Car’s ride, and the seats seemed more “traditionally” comfortable, if you know what I mean. The Alpine stereo in the Town Car is excellent! But to be fair, I didn’t really mess with the radio on the Caddy, I was more concerned with ride and handling and NVH. The Deville is more poised, the Town Car more plush.
Overall I prefer the Town Car, but the Cadillac is quite nice.
In a nutshell:
Caddy wins on performance and handling, Town Car wins on comfort and styling.
Thankyou.
Which one would you say was the quietest?
In my head a BOF-design will have some advantages when it comes to isolation and quietness. But you’ll never know.
Back in the day we owned a 79 Seville and then an 82 Fleetwood. These were the days when most of the cars were paid for when they were driven off the lot yet the company seemed to care little about quality control or customer service. Their last ditch effort was the livery market. Now Cadillac does not know who it is; it makes trucks, station wagons, SUV’s and all their back seats look like any Chevrolet. They are no longer the brand of rear wheel drive luxury cars and they do not even offer a limousine in their line up. Their advertisements mention nothing about resale value as in the old days because their new cars depreciate like rocks even on the lots. Now their commercials only talk about monthly lease payments. Cadillac is an insignificant brand today because of all the reasons I just mentioned and then some.
They don’t even offer a proper golf club door or an Opera Coupe, and let me tell you about the loss of rumble seats and flower vases too, it makes me want to throw my monocle on the floor. I tried to order a custom body but Derham and Murphy body works wouldn’t return any of my telegrams.
Jeeves, fetch me a brandy and my stock ticker…I am displeased…….
A brandy guy? Well that explains your satisfaction with today’s Cadillac:)
I’m out of fresh virgin Panda milk, can I offer you anything else? Angel tears perhaps?
Are you offering me your tears??
A few thoughts…
The Town Car and the Deville/DTS both died at roughly the same time. The Cadillac kept up with the times (unibody, fwd, modern V8), while the Town Car languished. Lord knows GM must have spent a lot more money on the Deville. And though I think Devilles sold better among civilians, my impression is that the Town Car’s dominance for livery service combined with amortized production cost might mean that Ford’s approach was more successful.
I do like this design, and would seriously consider one as our 2nd car if it weren’t for the Northstar issues. Can someone convince me that the later ones are a safe buy???
The DTS redesign was a real success in my eyes. It returned to the pseudo-tailfins and added headlights that referenced the old stacked design. And I always appreciate controls that are color-coordinated with the upholstery. (Try to find that in an Impala, Tom!)
Town Car had the livery sedan service locked up, but Cadillac kept a solid hold on the hearse and family limo market, even though Lincoln did make some in roads, its still rare to see a Lincoln hearse.
I know they aren’t really Impala switches, but I miss the old chrome-plated window, mirror and door lock buttons–long a feature on Caddys, Lincolns and Chrysler New Yorkers. My 2000 Town Car has them.
I think they went away on the TC with the 2003 refresh–plain black plastic, though I think they had silver surrounds.
I preferred the Deville/DTS with the low headlamps like in your article Tom. When they added the stacked lamps, to give it more of a CTS look, it came off as forced.
I considered one of these but did not buy after doing some research on the Northstar. As someone pointed out the ’92 Seville, which looked a lot like the ’98 and the related DTS, was the last that could be had without the Northstar. The NS was a deal breaker on the STS too. It was like the HT4100 + RWD debacle all over again.
Ugg, the dealer put the plate on the trunk lid with magnets! The risk of paint scratching is high.
They usually have a thin rubbery coating on the magnet to prevent scratching, we used these back when I sold cars and we never scratched any.
My goodness, are you sure you didn’t shoot an Impala? The saving grace of that interior is the seats…
The previous gen Deville looked classy, this is just a generic bland mobile.
I’m siding with Niedermeyer Sr here, I rather have the stark German taxicab than this.
Carmine,
Could you get the dark red or dark blue leather in this generation? If not, my preferred combo would be Dark Adriatic Blue with Oatmeal leather.
Around the time these came out, I remember seeing a black 2000 LeSabre Limited in black with red pinstripes and burgundy leather in the showroom. I haven’t seen one like that since.
I am glad that you can get red leather in the ATS. And in the ’14 CTS, you can actually get Twilight Blue leather. Love it!
Blue for sure, there was a light green too believe it or not, not sure about red, maybe early in the 2000’s, I would have to consult “the archives”. I believe this also was the last Cadillac available with a cloth interior too, I’ve only seen one ever.
I walked past one of these today. Without the Cadillac badging I might have mistaken it for a badge engineered Lincoln Grand Marquis/Crown Vic.
A 2005 Sedan DeVille was my father’s last car -it’s still in the family -and although I love 98s, Lincolns, Imperials and own a ’75 Fleetwood and a ’76 Seville, I had no desire for this Cadprice. It just does not represent the quality, luxury, technology, design or attention to detail I expect in a Cadillac. The seating areas (leather) are misshapen and the car has 50,000.
The picture, below, of the radio-HVAC is a prime example of what one would expect in a Pontiac Grand Am. And the following picture shows how the alloys have deteriorated…
This is one Cadillac that deserves a Deadly Sin designation.
Here’s what the alloy looks like at 50,000
In it’s defense I’ve noticed just about any wheel with brushed or machine turned finishes like that end up looking similar in the salt belt. Doesn’t really matter the maker. My Mom’s 2001 Quest had wheels that looked to be about the same condition as that by 2006.
Another older relative of mine, an attorney like me, switched to Cadillac in 1975 and has been buying them ever since. He keeps a number of them around and I’ve had the chance to ride in and drive his ’93 Fleetwood, ’95 Sedan DeVille, and ’04 DeVille.
I’m not at the “throwing my monocle on the floor in disgust” stage of fogeyism, but my general reaction to driving the ’04 was lukewarm. Coming from my ’87 Brougham the decontenting was widely evident in all of the ’90s and ’00s models I’ve driven. Also, I felt that the car had a distinctly more anonymous presence to it than in the past. It blends in. Too much for a Cadillac, but then, my idea of “Cadillac” is not “attempt to compete with discrete Teutonic sporting machine”. I think, for example, the Chrysler stands out as an American design more now.
I liked the pickup of that engine. When I first pulled out of the driveway (keep in mind I was driving a car with an Olds 307 as my daily), I chirped the tires. It was smooth and solid. It was comfortable too.
There was a certain something missing from the ride in both this and the ’95 as compared to my old RWD gunboat. I don’t mean that the ride was overly controlled or not soft enough. It was soft. It pitched and yawed over bumps. The best way I can put it it is that where the older, bigger car floated and bounced over those bumps, this float was more rapid and slightly nauseating on the FWD models. It seemed less gradual.
The very last ones were something of an improvement in looks. The first Art and Science generation struck me as bland and very under the radar.
It always comes back to this with me: I’m not a total fogey. I’m not unmoved by the technological advances of these newer Cadillacs. I do appreciate their safety features and cool gadgets. Cadillac has always been about cool gadgets, from the autronic eye to electronic climate control to Vigi-Lite. It’s just that somehow, it isn’t all the way there for me. And so I end by giving the same answer I always give: I do wish that the ’93-’96 RWD Fleetwood could have continued to be refined, redesigned, and produced in limited numbers so that we could, today, have a full-frame, rear drive, V8 powered, 6 speed column shifter Cadillac, maybe with some real wood inserts, top quality leather, bring back the old footrests from the Talisman days, the new only car with real bumpers that don’t need one of those protective mats people use in Manhattan. Something that would really be upmarket and compete with Rolls. A Cadillac to aspire to. This, and the XTS, they’re not that hard to like, but for me, they’re hard to aspire to. Hard to convince myself that I’m working 14 hour days in litigation so I can someday afford to ride in one. (that also applies to all the German sedans). I know that old Brougham with a 140HP V8 wasn’t what a Cadillac could be. But it had one thing going for it. When a parking attendant pulled it out of a garage and rolled up in it, sculpted hood and chrome, for a split second I felt like I was ALREADY making it, like the work that I was putting in was really paying off. I really do sense that is missing from these models.
I will never, ever, EVER get the appeal of big broughammy cars like this. Styling only a senior citizen can love, gushy, flobbery handling, and just enough under the hood to move such a big sled. That said, Im addicted to reading EVERY post on CC. Those who have seen my comments know that my taste in cars is pretty specific as well: preferably Mopars, but any 2- door muscle car, Jeeps and open top 4x4s, custom pickups, or stylish Euro sports coupes tend to be my flavors. And yet seeing the perspectives from people who love cadillacs lincolns, etc is still an interesting read for me. ’69 Chargers, Jeep CJs, and Audi RS5’s and their ilk are all Id like to own….but Ill learn about anything!
Keep the CC’s coming!
Let me add some perspective from my experience owning a ’91 Sedan de Ville and an ’01 Seville SLS.
The DeVille was a cheap cash car I bought for $999 when going through my divorce. It had 200,000 miles on it, and needed some neglected maintenance items taken care of in the first few months, after which it proved to be quite reliable, and I took it on several road trips without a hitch. I gave it to my niece after 60,000 miles, and she got another 12,000 or so out of it before there was some burning smell coming from the steering column, and my sister decided not to put any more money into it. I would have preferred to fix it, and as far as I know, the 4.9 was still running strong.
Despite a number of dated and cheap GM parts bins elements to the interior, it still felt somewhat special. I counted 11 wreath and crest emblems and four Cadillac scripts inside the car, plus another eight emblems and two scripts outside. This car never let you forget you were driving a Cadillac. The old girl just oozed character.
While 200 hp is not uncommon in 4-cylinders today, in 1991, the 4.9 V8 was one of the most powerful cars you could buy, and that DeVille could scoot, even with such high mileage. It was also mostly rattle free, although there was some shudder when closing the driver’s door. Still, that car lived well past it’s expiration date served me well. I still miss it.
It seems every other car in Oregon is either a Prius or Subaru Outback, but I still see a number of 89-93 DeVilles on the road. Some are clearly worn out and junky looking, but most still look really good, certainly not 20+ years old. Mine didn’t.
I bought my Seville because I had always admired these cars and had such a good experience with Cadillac. I paid $7,750 for it (thank you, depreciation) with 72,000 miles on it, and the car looked like it was a couple of years old at most. I’m at 156,000 miles now, and the car still looks nowhere near 13 years old. It helps that I take care of it, of course.
I’ve mostly had routine maintenance; other than replacing the cam sensors repeatedly, which is a known issue with these cars. The last set were OEM, and they’ve lasted. It has a small oil leak, and as the mileage has increased, the Northstar’s known tendency to drink oil has increased to where I usually add a couple of quarts in between oil changes. I don’t like it, but I can live with it. The car is paid for and runs beautifully. I can echo Carmine’s comments on how smooth, powerful and mellefluous the Northstar is. I give it the ole Italian tuneup regularly because it’s so much fun.
I’m an active member of CadillacOwners.com and have several friends there who have both good and not-so-good experiences with these cars. I know the Northstar can sometimes be a crapshoot, and recognize I got lucky with a good one. But so have others. A few of my friends there have also had Mercedes and BMWs, some with awful reliability and ridiculous maintenance and repair costs.
I also love the interior of my Seville. The earlier picture of the audio and HVAC panel is, I think, a definite failing of the interior. Otherwise, the interior is elegant and understated, particularly when the abundant real wood trim is polished. The seats are very comfortable, and the leather feels soft and of good quality. At the last Chicago Auto Show, I couldn’t believe how hard and coarse the leather felt in the BMWs. Even in the 5 Series, you have to pay extra for soft leather.
I always liked Cadillacs, and hated to see how badly Cadillac lost its way in the 80s. I know many wrote them off years ago and ignore them today, but I’m happy they started making good cars again, and I’ll buy another.
Handsome car. The final update of this generation had the Art & Science headlamps that I prefer. Not having anything other than a 4spd-auto hurt it IMO.
This car is awful. Buy ugly and bland
Good article. I had a similar experience in that I was fond of the 2000 Deville at its introduction. Make no mistake, this design raised the bar on what Cadillac should be. The Seville was such a modern luxury car, but left traditional Cadillac buyers cold. The Deville was postmodern, or neoclassic, in that it was a large, premium sedan and yet reinterpreted classic Cadillac design cues in a uniquely modern way. Eggcrate grille, vertical headlights, saber taillights (in neon, no less!) and boxy yet wedge shape. Rather than cladding and applied trim, the body is minimalist sculpture- see how the bodyside moulding is scooped into the body line and painted. The interior was tastefully wrapped horizontally in 2-tone with a real wood strip front to back, and a bench seat broken up into plush power buckets. The 32 valve Northstar was a big deal then- not so much now- and front drive packaging allowed a roomy interior and better winter performance. Cadillac probably would not have survived without this car.
I recently picked up a 2000 Deville and it’s still so premium, even after 15 years. It has the “Cadillac Thing,” that specialness above the ordinary car. Caddys should always have the Thing.
Perfectly stated. Cadillacs should always have that thing!
Wonderful article! I love the history of many cars, and Cadillac sure has had it rough trying to find their way in a changing automotive world. I have one minor correction to add: Cadillac still used the model name “Sedan DeVille” from 1994-1996. They shortened it to simply “DeVille” in 1997. DeVille? That’s French for “big city”. That reminds me of Pontiac’s top-line series “Grand Ville” from 1971-1975. Later on, just “DTS’… “Ditz”? Oh well.
I forgot to add an image of the 1994-1996 Sedan DeVille nameplate on the sides of the car. By then, “Sedan de Ville” became contracted to “Sedan DeVille.” Here is a closeup.