Hey you? Yes You! Do you want a Cadillac that looks as though someone sawed most of the trunk and awkwardly welded the rest back in? Boy do I have the car for you!
What was in the water in 1980-1982 that made Cadillac, Chrysler and Lincoln to come out with bustlebacks? Was it something passed around at a party in 1978 or so? Since GM had been showing some concepts with bustlebacks since the late 60s, and we all know how enamored Bill Mitchell was with European coach work, we’ll give the credit to Bill and GM. But Lee Iaccoca jumped on it as soon as he heard about it for his 1981 Imperial, and Lincoln rushed to get theirs out by 1982. By which time the bustle back was as good as dead, as far as a styling trend/gag.
Nobody who was shopping for a luxury car in the early eighties ever cross-shopped this Seville with a 300D, 300SD or BMW 5-Series. The people who bought them probably still saw the Germans the same way the late General Patton did. Paul’s rant on the many ways in which this Seville was a failure and a perfect representation of GM’s downfall is here. But if you’re in the “love” camp of love it or hate it, here’s an example that will suit you just fine.
The ad blurb is interesting. Apparently the reason that very few bustleback Sevilles were preserved is, and I quote, “because of the popularity of the midsized coupes of this era” and that “The demand for this body amongst collectors have more than doubled in the last 5 years as many Cadillac aficionados are snapping up the best examples for their collections.” Right…I’ll play along. This particular Seville has been kept in incredible condition. Polished to a shine, without a single blemish or faded piece of chrome. It’s a 1984 Seville finished in Silver Frost Metallic with a lovely Sandstone leather interior. There’s no rust, no dents and the whitewall tires are included in the price.
The odometer is (apparently) showing 57,888 miles.
That interior really is the only reason why someone who isn’t completely seduced by the styling would purchase one. Yes, I know it’s not as logical and probably not as high-quality as the Germans but I just look at those tan seats that wood(ish) applique and those chromed switches and I’m filled with an irrational desire to climb aboard and drive anywhere.
But will I get there? The engine under the hood is our old friend the HT4100 V8. Better than the Olds Diesel but not quite as good as a V8-6-4 with its clever tech disabled. The gasket-killing powerplant remains present, correct and mated to the 4-speed automatic that was the only option on the Seville.
I have to admit that’s going to be a bet. The car has been obviously pampered throughout its life so we can hardly say “well, if it was going to fail it would’ve by now.” And prices to get it fixed won’t be any lower now than they were back when it was in production.
The other problem of course is how much it’s actually going to cost. It’s sitting at $2000 with no reserve at the time of writing. Is the fact that it’s absolutely mint enough to defuse a possible ticking time bomb? How much would you pay for it? The listing is here.
I don’t mind the very old fashioned luxury look that this generation Seville tries to emulate. I may be a bit biased towards “Cadillac love”, just to preface that last statement. However, if I ever find the want and have the resources for a second fun Caddy, it will be a 77-81 Coupe de Ville.
When it comes to luxury cars, I think I am more of a Chrysler Imperial guy, but I have never owned one. However, I do like these “sawed off trunks” on this style caddy.
I believe this is what they were trying to emulate
’57 Rolls
I would take a chance on it. I think the whole HT4100 issue is/was overblown. I think the first year or two there were a lot of defective HT4100 engines but each year it was improved so by 1987 the engine was reasonably reliable. The engine spawned the 4.5l and 4.9l engines which were very reliable(the 4.9l V8 was especially reliable and sought after for use in Fiero V8 conversions)
Once the intake gasket was replaced with a revised version and the oil puump updated then the engine was a reliable engine. Intake gaskets are not GM’s forte. The 2.8,3.1,3100,3400,3800 V6 engines all had intake issues also.
Also you are correct, this car would have been bought by a lot of folks that still saw the Germans though the prism of the WWII era. Those folks that lived through that time and fought in the war.
I saw intake gaskets fail on my Z28, as well as on the 350 V8 Chevy pickup at work. Come to think of it, even on the 4.3 V6 in my dad’s Astro as well. At least GM’s consistent.
Isn’t that the same case for production cars for their first years. Engineers have to work out the bugs the first couple years then (hopefully) they get all the bugs worked out. Wasn’t that the case with the iron duke the first years with thrown rods and cracked heads, in the end it was a very good motor. Besides what were the HT4100 problems anyway?
$5,600 with 4 days left.
That car looks like it was timewarped to the present–that engine bay looks way too clean and shiny for 57K miles unrestored. Doesn’t show the underside among all those really professional pictures. How big (or small) is the trunk? No open shots. It should be a museum exhibit. I keep thinking that my late grandmother in FL drove one of these (she also had a Cimarron which was a curse on my dad). The front clip looks like a Cadillac, but not one of their best efforts (compare: CP’s 1987 jewel screams “Caddy coming, get out of my way!”); the back end … GS’ introduction couldn’t have been more succinct to this styling FUBAR.
Wrong year for me, I’ll take the V 4-6-8 or the 350 diesel converted to gas before the HT4100.
Hopefully the auto makers learned their lesson, and never hustle to bring the bustle back back. But it really is a nicely preserved example.
I’d never pick this over a similar vintage S-Class, but I’ll admit this bodystyle has always captivated me, especially with all the chrome, whitewalls, wire wheels, and either multi-colored paint stripes or two-tone. Not a car to drive but definitely one to be driven in.
“Not a car to drive but definitely one to be driven in”
Depends on the drive. This kind of luxury is perfect IMO for a cross country trip via the Interstates. So few modern cars make nice long-distance cruisers with their cramped cockpits and sport-tuned suspensions.
How many of these survived? I saw one at the Cadillac meet at the Gilmore last Sunday, vs 5 Allentes.
I just can’t bring myself to like these. From the front at a glance I think they look kind of good, until you notice how truncated the rear is. And from the rear they just look awful. When I was a kid I thought they looked strange and wrong, and time hasn’t really softened that opinion.
I do love that interior though. Looks as inviting as a La-Z-Boy.
Look at those flat floors! As much as I hate FWD this was unique in that it offered the classic UPP layout, in it’s full packaging and proportional goodness for the first and only time in 4 door sedan form.
The styling has grown on me a tad over the years, in that when you look at the General’s later styling efforts in the decade you can distinctly tell the difference between a polarizing design and a BAD design. The Seville’s designers, under the helm of Bill Mitchell, you could tell was a passionate effort on their parts, it isn’t for me but it was a real substantial looking car with a real no compromise design, one who if you were into those classic Hooper body Rolls Royces you’d probably love. Far more than I can say about just about every transverse design GM put out in the 80s, including it’s successor. I can easily accept these Seville’s as a big blowout for the end of the Bill Mitchell era… As an appealing for 1980 production car, not so much
The Rolls Royce’s look good and I think that what makes the Rolls styling work is the front fenders and hood, which are quite distinct from each other.
Even with my reputation as The Anti-Brougham, I love this generation of Cadillac. As long as there’s no vinyl roof, and the fake wire wheels are replaced with something properly period and alloy.
We will have to watch how high it goes on ebay, now $5700. Quite a bit more than the originally much more expensive 380SE at Eugene’s charity lot. Both have reputations for poor engines but at least in the individual have stood the test of time. Bet the Seville has a better chance to go to Europe for it’s twilight years.
Sold for $8850. Over 30 bids, some people like it when designers go off the plantation, I know I do.
I can tell you looking on Ebay, Craigslist and attending car shows etc there are way more 1980-85 Sevilles preserved in mint shape than Lincoln Marks and Chrysler Imperials combined of the same time era. I personally know at least 5 different Cadillac owners with HT 4100 engines of 1984-87 vintage and none has had any issues with there cars. But then these guys know to keep the coolant serviced, use the stop leak pellets and keep a vigilant eye on the coolant levels so that probably explains there longevity. The worst Ht 4100’s were the 1982/83 versions with the 84/85’s better and the 86/87 versions being better still with beefier blocks. Good service is vital on these motors and will extend there lives considerably.
Nice example, but it still looks like 2 very separate cars joined together
What makes this car look good is how bad later Caddy’s got just a couple of short years later. In comparison, it doesn’t look so bad, but that’s not really saying much. GM made so many mistakes in the ’80s it’s a wonder they even survived as a company. They did, but it’s a shrunken shell of what it used to be, and this car had a hand in that. I was 16 when it debuted, and I didn’t like it much then, and don’t much like it now.
I would look so good in a Seville like that. I even like the color combination. The pillow-tufted leather looks amazing.
When these first appeared I kind of liked them, but as time went on not so much. Paul’s article, linked above, has a real bustle back Rolls pictured. If one checks that out you can see that the basic problem with the Seville’s front end is the lack of fenders that sweep back to the rear of the car. The rear fenders should also be more pronounced and sweep back too. Modern cars don’t really have fenders anymore.
If it weren’t for the engine, I’d be tempted. The styling is distinctive (and these look much better painted one color, like this one), and you can’t get that type of interior in a new vehicle, for better or worse.
But even if the engine doesn’t give trouble, it is overwhelmed by the sheer mass of the car. A Cadillac should move with at least some authority when you step on the gas pedal. There is simply too much car for this engine.
I’d take either a gasoline-engine 1980 model, or a 1981 model with the computer controlling the variable-displacement feature disabled.
The ’86 went back to square/sheer look, but way too small. The ’92 did a bustle back look much better, imagine if the 80-85 looked like the 92’s?
Or, better yet, if they just added the ’79 Eldo’s rear to the ’80 Seville instead?
The 92 Seville is not a bustle back in my opinion. Nor was the Imperial or Continental for that matter. Look at the Rolls Royce in Paul’s article linked at the beginning of this article. (2nd paragraph)
why why why did Cadillac think that fake wire hubcaps are acceptable on their TOTL sedan…..real wires wheels would be my only change
awesome looking ride
I wonder if the true wire wheels from an early 90s Fleetwood will bolt on?
They may bolt on but they probably won’t fit, as I recall all these UPP cars had quite a lot of positive offset compared to the traditional C’s zero offset
still pleasantly surprised from yesterday about Buick offering real wheels in 1979
I am not the greatest fan of these bustlebacks, but I will concede to (almost) loving this one – so clean! The color combination really works. No hideous vinyl roofs or continental kit, either.
I prefer the finer mesh grill of the later years, gives it a more quality look, instead of the more tacky Rolls Royce style slats.
Its styling is, uh, controversial; however, the car is a comfortable place in which to roll off the miles. But I had a 1979 Eldorado, built on the same chassis, for a few years, and in its later years it aged badly. The headliner fell down, the extra-cost Firemist paint developed terminal dandruff (starting with a spot on the deck lid in the shape of a human hand), the Landau vinyl roof shrank to where I glued on a wide band of aluminum roof flashing to cover up and “trim” the gap at its front edge. The shoe-type parking brakes on the rear seized up. The car’s allegedly worst feature, the 350-cid. Diesel engine, was a slow, smoke-blowing slug but at least it kept running, with the help of a water separator and a new fuel filter every 4,000 miles. Maybe mine was the opposite end of the “luck-of-the-draw” GM quality sweepstakes from the subject eBay find.
I have wire wheel covers on my 1986 Oldsmobile 98 and i like it. That Seville looks amazing. Bring back wire wheel covers GM.
I do like these hubcap wires better then most….as a owner of a 1990 Electra with wire hubcaps (looking for rims)…..I just cant agree with you the GM C bodies hubcaps are horridly tacky…..the ones on this caddy do look nice
Red with white vinyl roof back in 2004.
I love the shape of these – unique and distinctive. I prefer them with the two-tone paint, but even in silver, this one looks elegant to me.
A college friend had one and we all loved it. Compared to the tiny Tercels and Geos everyone else had, the Caddy was a real treat.
I would pass not so much because of the reliability rep of the HT4100 but because of the incredibly low power of the thing; these put out between 125-135 hp. That’s less than the Olds 307…and it’s less torquey, too. I’ve tried to merge a 307 powered car off a short exit ramp into 70 mph on the Merritt Parkway. It’s 0-60 time is between 13-14 seconds, making that a dicey proposition. CR tested an ’82 Sedan DeVille and clocked it at close to 20 seconds. The Seville might be 100 lbs lighter? Can you imagine trying to merge into traffic? It would give new meaning to “living on a prayer”.
LOL 0-60 in 20 seconds. Maybe if the motor was shot internally. Most reports of any HT 4100 equipped E-body have them in the 12-13 second brackets which is slow by today’s standard but was actually within acceptable limits for the time. There is a youtube video on a 1983 Eldorado Touring coupe with the 4100 that did the run in 13 seconds flat and there times are know to be a bit slow because these are usually pre-production green cars being tested.
would take a Cimarron for the rest of my life first!
anymore questions on how much I hate these cars??
i love it i want one so cool and stylish yes its kitchi but thats the whole appeal i want this and a 1990 chrysler imperial see to my european eyes cars like this look so out there,so kinda kitchi futuristic esp the 1990 imperials shovel nose and hidden headlights ….love it bonkers styling,but to american eyes cars like the austin 1800,citroen ds,2 cv must look just as bonkers lol
its funny cars like this caddy and the 1990 imperial were mocked and riddiculed but years latter to my generation they realy have an appeal were bored and uniterested with modern cars there like to us a new microwave or washing machien in fact any dissposable white goods …….but thrase cats and older cats just have dispite all there flaws a real charisma.
Everything about this car is lightyears away from a S-series or a 5-series. It doesn’t make sense. I love it! What a headturner it’d be here in Europe.
One currently on Ebay Motors UK for £7500. An ex Swiss car too.
Nope, I will take a pass. It doesn’t have the fake leather straps on the truck lid and that’s a deal breaker.
No apologies, I unabashedly love this era of Seville and I don’t care what folks think. 🙂
I’d drive it. I liked them when they were new and I was a 5 year old, and I still like them now. I’d yank the 4100 and swap in a fuel injected 368/425 with modern EFI controls.
Still occasionally see these in traffic here in Albuquerque. Most of the time they look sad.
These arent one of my favourite Cadillacs but this one is a really beautiful example and well worth the asking price. There was one for sale out here a while back for NZ $7000 out in West Auckland, got snapped up even though it was rough compared to this one. A cheap Caddy by New Zealand standards
A guy I know bought one of these and swapped a 429 engine into it. That’s the one I should have test-driven when he sold it, but I didn’t have time or money then.
The seller of this shiny silver-on-tan beast must be five feet tall – look how far forward the seat is in the interior shot.
There was a particularly sad-looking example that parked in a handicap space where I worked. Two-tone brown with the headliner totally falling down so that any rear vision must have been through the mirrors only.
I was certainly surprised by the way these looked when they came out in 1980. After the first Seville, I expected a more European flavored car, but that’s obviously not what GM served up. It was, and is, polarizing, and I think I even loved and hated it at the same time. I objected to the style for style’s sake in the rear, but somehow, I couldn’t help but secretly like it. As much as I was into the subtle styling of European cars, I still really liked the good looks and flash of so many American cars of the 60s and 70s, when I was growing up. I knew Cadillac was heading in the wrong direction, but they still had it in the looks department.
I thought this Seville had great presence, and for the most part, the clean and crisp styling was fantastic. The bustle back might have been ridiculous, but I loved the crisp edges, the shape of the C-pillar and the shear trunk, even with the odd-for-Cadillac horizontal taillights. And the interior, as cheap as some of the parts actually were, looked and felt luxurious. They certainly knew how to make a plush seat, and I liked the dash on these, even if the wood trim was fake.
I don’t see these too often; it would be nice to see one in such great shape.
OK, when I think Cadillac, I think of distinctive style, luxurious interiors, smooth ride, and lots of chrome, faux wood, and soft leather. Today’s Cadillac’s are a far cry from being what a Cadillac should be. They are all too small, too sporty, too trying to be European sport sedan want to be’s, and most of all boring. They all share the same dated look (that forward dropping body line which is being abundant by even Hyundai), really bizarre looking headlights, and way too many LED lights, Plus… you can’t even remember the model names cause they are all letters… well now they are going to be letter and a number. Go figure !
GM needs to make changes to this division.. First of all, bring back the classic Cadillac names.. De Ville, Fleetwood, Eldorado, Seville.. heck even bring back Calais, Sixty Special, Talisman. Then, stop trying to be European sport sedans and style them like they should be – classic American luxury cars! Bring back the beautiful luxurious interiors in colors!! Add lots of chrome trim. Just don’t bring back the cabriolet roofs and opera lamps (unless they can somehow make them more modern looking).
The other day I was parked next to a new Caddy. The only way I knew it was new was due to the new large emblem sans wreath. From the side, I couldn’t tell if it was an ATS or a CTS. I had to walk around to the truck to see it was a CTS. It was so non-descript and boring. Not at all luxurious, classic, or cool.
Come on GM.. make it right. Please !!
Well the front led running lights on the CTS are quite different from either the XTS or the ATS. Saying you can’t tell the difference is like saying you can’t tell the difference between a 1965 Buick Electra, Olds 98 or DeVille.
Thursday night – it sits at $6300 – if I hadn’t just bought a car, I would consider it.
My mom had one and when she sold it out from under me I got very upset. I like this generation of Seville.
I have to say that now I love this body style Seville. It is so unique and classy looking, and I truly love the interior. I thought they were weird when they first came out in 1980, but 35 years later I truly appreciate them and would love owning one – especially the beautiful silver E-Bay find!
I had an uncle that had a black 1980 diesel Seville. He drove that car for many years and raved about it. At the same time his wife drove an Electra Estate wagon, also a diesel. They thought they were the greatest thing since sliced bread. My questions is, I wonder how many families had multiple GM diesels back then?
Little late, but I love these. Love, love, love them, ever since I was a little kid (when they were new). I had a Hot Wheels version of one that was one of my favorite toy cars. And this one looks absolutely mint, and the single-tone silver is a great color choice. If it were mine (and if money were no object), though, I’d replace the wire hubcaps with real wire wheels, and pull that 4100 (and crate it up in case the urge to do a numbers-matching restoration ever hit) and replace it with something more appropriate. A 1980-vintage 368 would be the correct-for-the-car choice, but… The 368 is based on the 472 architecture, so it should be the same external dimensions as a 472 or 500, should it not? I’m sure it’s heavier, but these are not crisp-handling cars anyway, so bring on the 1970 500! A 400 (gross) horsepower bustleback Seville? Sign me up!
It sold at $8,850. So, nice price or crack pipe?
It is easy to criticize styling trends from decades removed.
Some styling trends work…. some don’t.
I find the bustleback era to be no less revolting that the trend of today of thick bodies and high beltlines and gunslit window visibility – when you sit inside it is like looking through a mail slot. The worst offender of this is the company formerly known as GM and now known as Total Recall Motors. It seems they can’t build anything but thick bodied, low roofed, cramped and ugly products.