While there’s a chasm of difference between a 668-horsepower 2026 Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing and a 1985 Cadillac Cimarron, they do have one thing in common: an available manual transmission. Both are rarely seen on the streets, but how rare is a five-speed Cimarron, such as the one shown above that Hyperpack posted in the CC Cohort? Pretty rare, as it turns out.
According to Automotive News, only 398 of 19,890 1985 Cimarrons were equipped with the standard five-speed manual, a mere two percent of total production. That’s rare by almost any standard: If we apply even a generous ten-percent rule to an old car’s survival rates, that’s fewer than 40 1985 Cimarrons still running around with a five-speed. If you’re not a Cimarron loyalist, you may wonder how to tell that this one is a 1985 model; as it happens, it’s one of the easiest model years to narrow down. In 1985, the front end was, according to Consumer Guide, lengthened by 4.8 inches to make room for the new Chevy 2.8-liter V6 option, and this “Cotillion White” car clearly has the updated nose.
(A couple things: a cotillion is an old-timey ball, the kind where you’re unlikely to see a Cimarron, and “Keep on Truckin'” has undeservedly fallen out of favor in conversation. I’m not sure the Cimarron needs to make a comeback, but “Keep On Truckin'” definitely should.)
For comparison, this is a 1983 Cimarron with the original nose, which was a little too close to the Cavalier for comfort. One must admit that the 1985 upgrade was a step in the right direction.
The 1985 nose, however, also appeared on later models, so the real test is the rear end. The 1985 model didn’t have wraparound taillights or a high-mounted brake light; ergo, we have a 1985 model. A quick search reveals that finding plastic bumper filler replacements is going to be tough sledding, just in case you’re looking to restore your J-Car.
Here’s a picture of the 1986 rear end restyling with its new taillamps and third brake light mounted on the package tray. When I was a kid, that was always an easy tell when the ’86s came out. You can also see the “2.8-Liter V6” badge on the trunklid, which tells us that our 1985 model has the standard 2.0-liter, 88-horsepower pushrod four cylinder. Anyone who’s driven one will tell you that the engine doesn’t exhibit Cadillac levels of noise, vibration, and harshness, so the V6, with its 129 horsepower and growly exhaust, would have been a worthwhile upgrade.
The five-speed, whose pattern you can see if you zoom in on the shift knob, is another piece of evidence that this is a four-cylinder car. The optional V6 was unavailable with the five-speed, but those buyers got a standard FOUR-speed manual, of which only 259 were sold, making it even rarer than this five-speed car.
My intention is not to start a Cimarron bashing session, but if the car were worth the extra bucks at all, it was because of its interior and standard features. The Cadillac brochure says that 1985 Cimarron offered “seven new standard features, formerly available at extra cost,” including:
- Power antenna
- Cruise control
- Power door locks
- Six-way power driver’s seat
- Tilt steering wheel
- Power decklid release
- Power windows
When combined with the already standard air conditioning, full instrumentation, and “Sierra Grain leather seating areas” (the same leather offered in other Cadillacs, according to the Cimarron brochure), those features did give passengers a pretty cozy place to watch the world go by. As has often been said, however, there was no forgetting the car’s origins; the controls were simply too similar to your neighbor’s Firenza, Skyhawk, Sunbird, or Cavalier.
As a side note, if this car ever comes up for sale, the power steering fluid sitting squarely on the console to the driver’s right tells you that you’ll be immediately using your Rock Auto discount for a pump or a rack. Luckily, either one is J-Car cheap: $54.79 for the pump, but uh-oh, the rack is out of stock at most places. (O’Reilly shows a couple options for about $140, if they’re actually available.)
And although Cadillac did try to wrap its big arm around the Cimarron and invite it to family dinner (hence the comment about its seating surfaces), there were other clues that perhaps it was the odd man out. The 1985 Cadillac full-line brochure (and other model years, too) didn’t include the Cimarron at all; it had its own brochure, poor little car. At least it was no longer a “Cimarron by Cadillac.”
OK, we all know that the Cimarron was a miss; Consumer Guide gave it no quarter in saying that it was “one of the low points in the history of Cadillac.” But time heals most wounds. Today, many of us think the Edsel is cool, the Pacer is kitschy, and the Yugo is kind of rad in an ’80s way. Let’s say you’re able to pick up this one-of-398 Cimarrons for something under a grand (there’s no evidence it’s for sale, by the way). It would be a neat, quirky, fuel-efficient car with a manual transmission for commuting and taking to cruise-ins (where you’ll be the only one, and you’ll probably have to have a thick skin).
If you forget it’s a Cadillac, it’s just a highly-optioned Cavalier with a stick, and those things ran forever. Let’s just hope it’s not the steering rack that’s leaking.
Related Reading
1988 Cadillac Cimarron: The Nicest Surviving Example Of Cadillac’s Most Embarrassing Car (by Aaron Severson)
Curbside Recycling Challenge: 1983 Cadillac Cimarron VS 1987 Cadillac Cimarron – Can Two Cimarrons Make A Right? (by Jim Klein)
Curbside Classic: Cimarron by Cadillac – GM’s Deadly Sin #10 by Cadillac (by Paul N)
sorry, could help myself
Poco blended country and rock in a way that seemed to alienate fans of both genres, sounding like rock to country fans and country to rock-and-rollers, and consequently their records were rarely more than modestly popular. Still, they were a great, great band. Search “A Good Feelin’ to Know” and “Heart of the Night”.
But for me the Cadillac Cimarron evokes not Poco but rather the Kohler Cimarron. Or shall we say Cimarron, by Kohler?
Big fan of the genre but don’t listen to Poco so much. Just pulled this track out for a listen when this article popped up. I think your analogy a bit more apt hehehehe
So that’s what the rest of the song sounds like. Back in the early to mid ’80s, there was a country & western bar on the Southside of Killeen, Texas, that was on Elms Road. It replaced a disco and later a rock bar. The radio ads for Cimarron used a part of the chorus from that song.
Also, I remember something from Car and Driver . July ’83. One page feature on something called the “b+b Cimarron”…wait, wasn’t b+b was known more for their custom Porsche conversions? C/D even referred to a Cimarron project car in that piece, but nothing happened or saw print. Perhaps I should look online to see if b+b did a Caddy…
I’ll never understand why Cadillac allowed the Cimarron to continue for so many model years. They realized early on it was a huge miss and a drag on the brand, yet it continued all the way up until 1988.
The Roger Smith era did a lot of things that didn’t make any sense as well as keep too many models around for too long.
The 4 speed manual came standard with the V6 beginning in `86, with the automatic optional.
The 5 speed manual remained standard with the 2.0 4 cylinder.
In `87 the 2.8 V6 became standard with the 5 speed, and the 3 speed automatic optional, as the 4 cylinder engine was eliminated.
I ordered as many `87 5 speed V6 Cimarrons as I could.
Because other local dealers would not order them, so they were good dealer trade bait when they needed one or if we needed something in return.
I was told by several other dealerships at the time that their ownership did not want any stick shift Cimarrons in stock.
David, this was something I was trying to figure out as I wrote this. The ’85 brochure mentioned that the four-speed was standard with the V6, but Consumer Guide said that it was a $75 credit “option.” However, the automatic was still a fairly expensive option either way.
It seemed like one of those situations where nobody was sure what the standard transmission (no pun intended) was.
I can’t think of what Consumer Guide was referring to, as manuals were standard with both options.
We know the brochures are printed in advance of the cars, but even if any changes occurred, I can’t see a credit regarding the transmission, unless one of them was later not available at all, which I do not recall.
I ordered all our 4 cylinders with the automatic, unless they where ordered as sold cars,
I did not order the manuals until it was with the V6.
My opinion:
Like all too many General Motors cars of this time period; the Cimarron started off terrible and gradually evolved into a decent car the last few model years.
Having said this, I still believe that the Cimarron would had made a better Buick than a Cadillac pretender.
Let’s give this a 3rd try. This site has become so frustrating as it jumps around and often the comments won’t post.
Anyhow, in response to mark r: I would consider myself a self proclaimed expert in the Cimarron. I sold Cadillac’s in 1988 where I did training on that last year. Before that, I was collecting anything I could on the Cimarron. Over the years, I’ve collected quite a lot of materials from training to consumer info on them.
You are correct in how GM seems to be great at bringing out something too early and then perfecting it before killing it. The 1982 Cimarron, although the most pathetic of them all, would probably be the most desirable not just due to it’s rarity. The 1983 had just rims and grille change outside, but the rest of the car was much improved. The 1984 was basically identical to the 1983. The 1985 is where it gets interesting because (from my understanding), the extended front didn’t happen till shortly after the 85 models started? But they still had the quad headlights. So it’s nearly impossible to find one with the quad headlights AND the extended front. The 1986 then went to the composite lights with a few more changes. I most recently owned one of the last 1988’s and it was a fantastic car.
Yes. It would have been a decent Buick Special. It was a terrible Cadillac.
I’m surprised the “Quad OHC” Sunbird engine.
Power steering was definitely a weak spot on these early J cars. I had an 84 Cavalier whose power steering only worked when turning to the right, but not to the left. Very confusing car to drive.
The sort-of CC Effect: I saw a Cavalier sedan driving down the street as I was doing my early-morning conditioning hike. Just a beater Cavalier looking like to was taking its owner to work. No photo, sadly; it all happened too quickly.
The 4.8 inch stretch was done for looks, not to fit the V6 engine. Evidence: the Cavalier and Firenza also got the V6 in some models yet didn’t get stretched fronts to accommodate them, and were the same length (or even slightly shorter) than the four-cylinder-only ’82 Cimarron.
I wonder if the manual transmission was offered mainly signal to potential buyers that this was a sporty car similar to a BMW 3 series or Audi 4000, more than an expectations of selling many so equipped.
Notable is that the Cimarron was the only Cadillac between the early 1950s and 2003 to offer manual transmissions.
Ia673: That is totally correct. To be factual, I owned two (1986 and then a new 1987) Cavalier Z24’s back in the day. They both had the shorter designed front end with that v6. And yes, you could get the Cavalier sedan and wagon with the v6 too.
In the 1988 Cimarron I had, if you opened the hood you would see a very large amount of “space” in the front between the bumper and engine. Makes the old saying “you coulda had a V8” seem like it was true.
Indeed, there was no stretching done structurally. What I did read at one point, was that changes were made to the 2.8 V6 to fit it under the lower and more sloped hood of the J cars. Compared to the X cars that used it originally.
Of the many baffling and cynically cost-cutting decisions involved in developing the Cimarron, the dashboard has to be one of the most glaring. They clearly sprung for a unique molding, adding faux-stitching along the edges, an embossed panel between the vents above the glovebox, and (possibly?) even a nicer grain to the surface texture, yet they still chose to base it on the shape and structure of the downmarket and higher-volume Chevy and Pontiac J-cars.
The Olds and Buick J-cars had a completely different dash variant, at least somewhat classier and less common, with more of a horizontal theme closer to other Caddy dashes around the era, so why didn’t they derive the Cimarron dash from that?
Or perhaps better yet, the Opel J-car (Ascona C) had a completely different dash not shared with any American variant, with more of a Saab/BMW-esque, driver-oriented, Euro-rational style more befitting the supposed target buyer for the Cimarron, and its development was already a sunk cost, so why not use that for the Cimarron?
Cadillac couldn’t use the Olds/Buick dash (at least initially) because it wasn’t in production yet. The Cavalier, J2000, and Cimarron were launched in the spring of 1981 as early ’82 models, whereas the Firenza and Skyhawk launched around December ’82 as late ’82 models. Pontiac also had a distinct dash pad that accommodated two stacked square air vents where Chevy and Cadillac used a single tall rectangular vent, giving the Pontiac a look that mirrored the eight small round vents used in many of their larger cars. There were subtle differences in the three brands’ dashboards beyond that. The Cavalier CL (in 1982 only) had chrome rings around the gauges the J2000 and Cimarron didn’t have, and the Caddy had different gauge graphics that labelled MPH in 10, 20, 30 etc. where Chevy & Pontiac had 5, 15, 25 etc.
Didn’t Cimmarons (and later Cavalier Z24s?) offer a full digital dash?
The Cimarron offered only analog gauges in the first years, adding (optional?) digital gauges later in the run. I recall the Z24 having digital gauges (maybe just the speedometer) from the start but it used a different dashboard than the base Cavaliers or the Cimarron (the last few years of this generation of Cavaliers used a third dash design, whereas the Cimarron stuck with the basic 1982 dash through the entire run.
Another great GAP trail find in western PA. I was not able to crawl under it to see if the Power Rack is leaking, but If I had to put money on it I would say yes. We had so many cavaliers, jayhwayks, omegas, and citations come through the used-car lot when I was a kid that needed a new rack. Many times, Dad would try to put some thick schmoo into the Power steering reservoir to keep the dripping at bay until the car sold. I am doubtful that
I was quite hopeful when the Cimarron debuted. I was a huge Cadillac fan, and my brother had bought a new BMW 320i in 1980. That BMW had a five speed and nothing power assisted except the brakes. Even the sun roof was manually cranked. The 320i was a very simple and plain car that was obviously built to a high standard of quality. It had a cachet because it was a BMW, which enjoyed a high status, so I realized that a simple car could be a quality car.
Car and Driver did a pretty good write up on the first Cimarron, and I believed that it had potential. It was the right size, a compact premium/luxury car could have a huge market, and it would fit in with what many of the buying public wanted. The initial Cadillac Seville was quite convincing and successful, unfortunately GM didn’t continue in the original car’s direction. The styling of the Cimarron was just too similar to the cheaper platform mates, GM also had this problem with other lines of cars within the other divisions. As Dan Berning stated, the car was improved over the years before it was axed, If only Cadillac had shown more initial commitment to the car, things might have been different.
There is a small part of me that really wants the even rarer D’Oro with the V6 and 5-speed.
I will never know why, but my father in law pushed hard to get Cindy and I to lease an 86 Cimarron. I already knew of the criticism flying around, and maybe that changed my mind to even taking one for a test drive. However, a lifelong friend did end up with a dark blue over grey 86 Cimarron and they didn’t like it at all. They had traded off a nice black Eldorado Touring coupe, so maybe it was a let down. The one thing I do recall was plastic trim coming off all over that car. It lasted until 1992 when they bought an Explorer.
Now, I would mind having one as a second car with decent fuel economy.
In the early years of the Cimmaron my company had a large contract with a company in Akron and we arranged with Rent-A-Wreck for rental cars. They all seemed to be GM. There was one Cimmaron that was in our “fleet” for a while. For one week I ended up with the Cimmaron, and it so hard tell, how it differed from a Cavalier. Not a bad car, but not special.
I like these, at least a little. The secret to appreciating one is to understand that you are driving the nicest Cavalier possible. Just like the secret to enjoying a 1957-58 Packard is to understand that you are in the optimally trimmed Studebaker.
When my kids were in high school, there was another family with some daughters who drove one of these. I was pretty sure it had come from Grandma or Grandpa, and would have made a pretty good high school kid car.