1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado / Mecum Auctions
In my recent post on the last RWD Cadillac Eldorado, I said that the Eldorado had grown less and less distinctive through the early 1960s. There was one exception I didn’t mention: For 1964, Cadillac removed the Eldorado’s rear fender skirts, creating a sportier-looking Eldorado that could even be ordered with bucket seats and a center console. Let’s take a closer look at the Eldorado and what differentiated it from the less-expensive De Ville.
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine / Mecum Auctions
From 1961 to 1966, the Cadillac Eldorado was not yet the FWD specialty car it would eventually become, but rather a specially trimmed version of the standard-size Cadillac convertible. There had previously been a hardtop called Eldorado Seville, but it was dropped after the 1960 model year. From 1956 through 1963, the convertible had been called Eldorado Biarritz, but for 1964, Cadillac reclassified it as part of the senior Fleetwood series, along with the Sixty Special and Series 75 formal cars.
In the late ’50s, one of the ways the Eldorado had distinguished itself from lesser Cadillac models was with open (or at least more open) rear wheels, with no fender skirts. Compare the rear wheelhouse of this 1957 Series 62 convertible …
1957 Cadillac Series 62 convertible in Tuxedo Black / Mecum Auctions
… with the 1957 Eldorado Biarritz:
1957 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz in Dakota Red / Gooding & Company
However, that Eldorado design cue had been discarded with the rocketship 1959 Cadillac redesign:
1959 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz in Ebony / Gabor Mayer — RM Sotheby’s
As a result, by the early ’60s, distinguishing a RWD Eldorado from a Series 62 or De Ville convertible of the same model year often required a practiced eye, which was not ideal given that the Eldorado cost about $1,000 more.
1963 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz in Matador Red / Barrett-Jackson
1963 Cadillac de Ville convertible in Basildon Green Metallic / Bring a Trailer
Cadillac dealt with this for 1964 with what the dealer Data Book describes as “chrome framed, rear wheel openings without fender skirts.”
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine / Mecum Auctions
According to Cadillac designers Jerry Brochstein and Chuck Jordan (who was head of the Cadillac studio when these cars were designed), the 1963 and 1964 Cadillacs were influenced by the 1961 Lincoln Continental, which made Jordan want to simplify the side trim (discarding the “skegs” of the 1961–1962 cars) and create what Jordan termed “a leaner-looking Cadillac.” The 1964 Eldorado was arguably the ultimate expression of that shift, and its array of metallic “Firemist” paint options accentuated its clean flanks. The deletion of the rear fender skirts gave the Eldorado a sportier air, and it visually lightened the rear fenders enough that I wonder how the Eldorado would have looked with the shorter tail of the departed Park Avenue Sedan de Ville:
1963 Cadillac Park Avenue Sedan de Ville in Turino Turquoise / Bring a Trailer
Given the slow sales of the Park Avenue and Town Sedan, the prospect of a shorter Eldorado might have drawn some resistance from buyers and dealers, but even in standard form, the open rear wheel arches made it much easier to distinguish an Eldorado from a De Ville at a glance:
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine / Mecum Auctions
1964 Cadillac de Ville convertible in Sierra Gold / Mecum Auctions
This was an important consideration because their exterior dimensions remained exactly the same: 223.5 inches long on a 129.5-inch wheelbase, and 79.7 inches wide.
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine / Mecum Auctions
1964 Cadillac de Ville convertible in Sierra Gold / Mecum Auctions
They were mechanically identical as well. For 1964, Cadillac had expanded the displacement of its standard engine from 390 to 429 cu. in., increasing gross output from 325 hp and 430 lb-ft of torque to 340 hp and 480 lb-ft. In earlier years, the Eldorado had used more powerful engines than lesser models, but Cadillac had long since given up on that in favor of a single engine in a single state of tune.
1964 Cadillac 429 engine / Mecum Auctions
The De Ville and Eldorado models also shared the new Turbo Hydra-Matic transmission, which was smoother than the old four-speed Controlled Coupling Hydra-Matic still used on Series 62 and 75 in 1964 and provided more snap off the line. Since the Eldorado weighed only about 30 lb more than a comparably equipped De Ville, their performance was identical.
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine / Mecum Auctions
1964 Cadillac de Ville convertible in Sierra Gold / Mecum Auctions
Fender skirts notwithstanding, most of the extra cost of the Eldorado — it started at $6,608 in 1964, $1,018 more than a De Ville convertible — was in the cabin.The upholstery was perforated leather, but with much less supplementary vinyl than the leather trim on the De Ville convertible and other cheaper models. Doors, dash, and rear quarter panels were trimmed in Baku wood, like the four-door Sixty Special.
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine with Aquamarine leather upholstery and Baku wood trim / Mecum Auctions
A six-way power bench seat with a folding center armrest was standard on the 1964 Eldorado, but front buckets with driver’s side four-way power adjustment were a no-cost option. This wasn’t new: The Eldorado convertible had offered bucket seats since 1959, although they seemed a little incongruous in such a big car with no console to fill the space between them.
1959 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz with white leather upholstery and bucket seats / Gabor Mayer — RM Sotheby’s
For 1963, Cadillac had addressed this vacancy by adding a center console with lockable storage bin to models with bucket seats. Unlike many consoles, this didn’t extend forward beyond the seat cushions and didn’t incorporate a floor shifter, so you were unlikely to bump your knee on it.
1963 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz with black leather bucket seats and center console / Ideal Classic Cars
Although the bucket seats were a no-cost substitution for Eldorado buyers, they were also available on the De Ville (even the Sedan de Ville) for $187.85, plus an extra $53.65 if you wanted four-way power adjustment for the driver’s seat. However, the De Ville didn’t have the wood trim of the Eldorado, so the console was color-keyed instead.
1964 Cadillac de Ville convertible with Sandalwood leather bucket seats / Mecum Auctions
1964 Cadillac Eldorado with Aquamarine Antique Finish leather upholstery and bucket seats / Mecum Auctions
1964 Cadillac de Ville convertible with Sandalwood leather bucket seats / Mecum Auctions
1964 Cadillac Eldorado with Aquamarine Antique Finish leather upholstery and bucket seats / Mecum Auctions
I’ve yet to see a specific explanation for why Cadillac abandoned the Eldorado’s open rear wheel theme again after only one year. Maybe dealers didn’t like it; maybe the Cadillac studio thought it would undermine the squared-off rear fenders of the redesigned 1965 model, which discarded the tail fins in favor of peaked but level rear fenders; maybe the division felt that emphasizing the relationship between the Fleetwood Eldorado and Fleetwood Sixty Special was more important than differentiating the Eldorado from the De Ville.
1965 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Sheffield Firemist / Mecum Auctions
Given how profitable high-end personal luxury cars became not too many years later, Cadillac’s reluctance to do anything very unique with the RWD Eldorado may seem odd, but in the early ’60s, the division really had little interest in specialty cars. They passed on the design that became the 1963 Buick Riviera, and while there were some engineering and styling exercises along similar lines, Cadillac management’s enthusiasm seems to have been low. Until the summer of 1964, when the division completed a major plant expansion and modernization, the division could barely keep up with demand for the models it already had, much less add new variations that would tie up the already-crowded assembly lines.
1965 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado with white leather bucket seats / Mecum Auctions
At the same time, judging by the contemporary dealer literature, Cadillac was surprisingly accommodating when it came to special trim and color requests. Except for the wood trim, most Eldorado interior features could be ordered on other models if a buyer was willing to pay the fare. This didn’t help the Eldorado establish or maintain a cohesive identity, but it probably made some De Ville buyers happy, and I assume the margins on such special orders were high.
1964 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado in Firemist Aquamarine / Mecum Auctions
So, while it’s not hard to envision how Cadillac might have developed the skirtless 1964 Eldorado into a new line of trimmer, sportier RWD models, with bucket seats and perhaps a revival of the old Tri-Power Q-code engine, it’s also easy to see why they didn’t go that way.
Related Reading
1960 Cadillac Eldorado Seville: An Artifact Of The Tomorrow That Never Was (by me)
CC Global: 1963 Cadillac Eldorado – Fabled City of Gold Discovered (by Robert Kim)
General Motors Greatest Hit #13: Were The 1963-64 Cadillacs the Greatest Postwar Cadillacs? (Laurence Jones)
Vintage Autocar Road Test: 1964 Cadillac Coupe De Ville – “Somewhat Costly Motoring One-Upmanship” (by me)
Vintage MT Road Test: 1964 Cadillac Sedan DeVille – The Fastest And Best Classic Cadillac (by Paul N)
Cohort Pic(k) of the Day: 1964 Cadillac Eldorado Convertible – Cadillac Tosses The Fender Skirts Once Again, To Good Effect (by Paul N)
1966 Cadillac Fleetwood Eldorado Convertible – The Last Fading Ember of the Rear-Drive Eldorado (by me)
The Eldorado’s open wheel treatment only highlights for me how the 1964 restyle botched the clean 1963 design. The downward sweeping character line below the fin loses most of its definition on the 64 and takes on a vestigial character. The rear quarters remind me of a Buick Wildcat in the overall look.
I cannot imagine how Cadillac recouped the cost of the different quarter panels and trim pieces over such a small production run. Perhaps they were expecting higher demand?
I can’t see why they would, as the Eldorado convertible’s sales were really pretty consistent in its final years. I think the stampings that are actually different from a tooling standpoint are probably few, and the fancier trim and minor interior variations were probably well accounted for by the $1,000 higher list price. It’s possible, of course, that they were disappointed that the different look didn’t get a good enough response, and decided whatever the extra tooling costs had been weren’t worth the candle.
Probably the bigger problem than tooling cost was labor. Through 1964, Cadillac was really straining what their assembly plant could turn out, and so even if the tooling costs were negligible, anything that complicated or slowed the speed of the line was likely to be a a problem.
I happen to like the Wildcattishness of the ’64, but the rear fenders of the 1965–66 cars are definitely cleaner and more confident.
I cannot imagine how Cadillac recouped the cost of the different quarter panels and trim pieces over such a small production run.
Body panels often go through more than one step in pressing and cutting. I could well see how this rear quarter panel was first pressed without the wheel opening and then had a second step that either pressed and cut the two versions, one for the skirted cars and one for the Eldo.
I can’t say for certain this was the case here, but I’ve watched a lot of vintage videos and commonly there was a second step to cut and press the smaller elements after the basic panel was pressed.
Such gorgeous automobiles, and the Aquamarine color is stunning and absolutely perfect.
IMO the ’61-’66 period was the last in which Cadillac was truly The Standard of the World. It was a pleasure to be able to see and be driven in Cadillacs of this era at the time, one felt quite special. Neighbors of ours had ’52, ’56, ’59, ’64, ’66 and ’68 models that I was very familiar with. The decline started slowly in ’67-68 and only accelerated after that. Our own mint condition ’75 De Ville suffered greatly in comparison, as I’d had extensive experience with the really great ones. even if the ’75’s ride was incomparable. I’d take a ’61-64 any day of the week.
I do like the unique bit of added “sportiness” of the ’64, if one could say that of any full size rwd Caddy of the era. Luckily the “sporty” corpulent ’53 Eldo didn’t foreshadow the stunning fwd ’67!
One of my first TV MEMORIES was seeing President Eisenhower riding in an open Eldorado (1953) convertible in his Inaugural Parade. I believe this was the first year for Eldorado
This year’s Eldorado’s rear fenders were certainly unusual. Cadillac invested fully in the skirted rear wheel look since 1941, with I believe the only exceptions being the 57-58 Eldorados. Even those still had kind of a skirted look with the rear wheel openings cutting noticeably lower than the fronts.
To me, I’ve felt the 64 Eldorado looks kind of odd. Probably because this era of Caddy is so associated with rear fender skirts that showing any rear wheel at all seems immodest and embarrassing. Also, it feels like the rear openings don’t match well with the fronts and they are almost from two different cars. Like a regular 64 was in an accident and they put the wrong replacement fenders on.
The first postwar Cadillac to fully expose the rear wheels without even a suggestion of the skirted look was the 67 Eldorado. They briefly put full skirts on the 71-74 Eldo and it doesn’t look good to me. I’m not sure why it doesn’t work, since all other models were still skirted and looked good with them. When they opened up the rear again on the 75, it improved the looks of that generation SO much, IMO.
Tangent question: Is the grass in the lead photos fake?
That house is the perfect backdrop for the car. Very expensive looking house with the perfectly manicured landscaping, it might be a bit newer than the car but still matches it superbly.
I very much doubt it. The lead Mecum photos have something slightly wrong with them, so if you look at them full-size, they’re somewhat smeary in detail — I think that’s probably what you’re perceiving. The more saturated photos (which are of a different car) also suffered from someone, perhaps at Mecum, trying to upscale them from 1280 to 1920 px wide, which didn’t do them any favors.
The second and third Eldorado interior photos are from a DIFFERENT Mecum listing of a different car, and while the exterior shots were much clearer, that car had been fitted with replica Kelsey-Hayes wire wheels and wide whitewalls that were obviously incorrect for 1964, and I decided I was not in the mood to be scolded about that.
Ironically, each of the listings for the Aquamarine cars trumpets that it’s a super-rare color combination, but I found four different ones in reasonably good nick.
I’ve noticed auction pictures can take all forms. Some really nice cars can suffer from sparse and/or shoddy photographs. Some not so nice cars are attempted to inflate the condition or significance by fancy photos. And a few are photoshopped to the point of fraud.
The background looks like Palm Springs or some such desert place, where fake grass is not unheard of.
Yeah, for every set of quality photos taken with a DSLR camera, there are many taken by people who seem to have had a very rudimentary idea of how a camera works, with no idea how to block a photo even to the extent of “It would be nice if the whole car were actually visible in at least one photo.”
The Mecum listing from which the lead photos was in Las Vegas in 2018, but if you click on the full-size images, it becomes clear that there wasn’t quite enough light for the pictures to be completely in focus. I think the digital camera (probably not a DSLR, or not one used competently) tried to compensate for the low light with a high ISO speed and some digital image stabilization, which means the details aren’t crisp. That’s what’s happening with the lawn in the background: The grass and the surface of the lawn aren’t uniform the way I assume they would be if the grass were fake, but the digital artifacting makes the texture look weird and blotchy.
The best are BaT listings with 100+ photos and every one single one in portrait orientation. This is one of the many reasons I want Mark Zuckerberg dead. Thanks to him, I expect to live long enough to see a feature film released shot entirely in portrait.
This is my favorite Caddy of the era; the rear wheel openings and lack of side trim really gives it a unique bit of flair worthy of the car.
For that matter, 1964 is the end of an era for me regarding Cadillacs. I just lost interest after that year; the ’65 restyle just didn’t quite work for me, and within two years the decline in materials quality and other aspects took their toll.
Peak Cadillac.
Same. When I was a kid I thought the 1970 models were Peak Cadillac, somehow well above and beyond the brand new Electras I was carted around in, but now everything after ’64 looks like a lump to me.
I much prefer the skirted cars. I also find the cars with the stunning wood grain inside (real or not) is so much nicer than the cars without it.
Among the well-off, there are some people who want to buy the most expensive thing, just so they can say they bought the most expensive thing.
That “turino trqse”, color is awesome. The “65-67”, versions look better (imo) without the skirts.
In 1965, a neighbor bought an identical 1964 turquoise Fleetwood Eldorado convertible. At the time, I considered the open rear wheels to be heresy, in light of Cadillac design history. At present, I believe they were a stroke of genius, along with the bright lower moldings, which hid the lower body crease extending from the front wheel well to the rear bumper.
One of my all time favorite cars in one of my all time favorite colors. Just spectacular!!! Wow!!
I would be hard-pressed to chose between a ’64 Coupe DeVille convertible or an Eldorado. Both are just gorgeous, and 1964 was one of Cadillac’s best years, particularly because of the new 429 and Turbo-Hydramatic 400. The Eldorado does have a distinctive and somewhat unexpected look to it. I believe Paul is correct, the quarter panels for both the DeVille and Eldorado likely stated as the same blank and initial pressings. A complex panel like a fender or quarter may be struck multiple times. GM to this day is one of the best auto manufacturers at sheet metal forming, you don’t see wrinkles and unintended darts in their metal. GM maintained their presses better than a lot of other manufacturers did too.
That’s what I suspect as well, although I assume that having variations (even ones that don’t involve significant different tooling) incurs an additional logistical and labor cost: If you’re building 10,000 of variation A and 200 of variation B on the same lines, variation B is probably going to be something of a hassle.
Talking about making sure that the more expensive model is easy to identify brings to mind the lyrics from the Lyle Lovett song “What Do You Do”:
If you make all that money man
Make damn sure it shows