(first posted 10/1/2012) This, friends, is my dream car. If I ever have enough space and spare time for a Curbside Classic of my own, it will be one of these. The Brougham. The last true Cadillac. Many 1990-92 “facelift” Broughams have been blinged out or otherwise modified, but I think these classic Cadillacs look beautiful just as they came from the factory. And this particular Brougham is just the ticket: a rare, final-year 1992 model. There’s something special under the hood, too, and if you’re a Broughamaholic like me, you probably know what it is.
I am grateful to GM for recognizing the beauty of the 1977 C-body Cadillacs. This basic body was in continuous production from 1977 to 1992, receiving only one major restyle in 1980. By the end of its long, long life, the Brougham was surrounded by front-wheel drive, unibody Cadillacs in the showroom. It might have lacked a driver’s side airbag and more modern interiors and amenities, but it stood alone, and in a good way. This car was, and is, a modern classic.
When full-size Cadillacs were shrunk in 1985, the Fleetwood series became confusing. There was a newly-arrived FWD Fleetwood that shared a body with the Coupe and Sedan de Villes, but also the Fleetwood Brougham, which reprised the big 1984 model. It was a wise decision by GM to retain at least one true, full-size C-body Cadillac. If they hadn’t, even more ex-Cadillac buyers might have gone across the street to Town Car Land. While the Town Car was indeed full-sized, it didn’t quite match the C-body Brougham for looks. The Cadillac was just more attractive.
The big sedan remained as the Fleetwood Brougham through 1986. By then, GM had finally recognized the confusion caused by two very different Fleetwoods–a monocoque FWD version and a traditional body-on-frame, RWD model–sharing space in Cadillac showrooms. What’s more, the upcoming long-wheelbase Fleetwood Sixty Special would make three Fleetwood models–each with a different wheelbase, overall length and price. Thus, the RWD 1987 model was simply called Brougham. It would keep that name plus all its Fleetwood-specific trim, including a padded top, smaller “privacy” rear window, and a chrome spear that encircled the greenhouse and ended at the leading edge of the hood, until the end of production.
I told you this car was special: Yes, it has the 5.7-liter, 350 cu. in. V8 instead of the far more common 5.0-liter, 307 cu. in. Olds V8. The 307 was not necessarily a bad engine, but the pace at which it motivated a car of this size and curb weight was, shall we say, leisurely? Fitted with a four-barrel carburetor, it produced only 140 horsepower in the ’87 Brougham. You can also see the new-for-1990 white lens taillights and revised bumper trim. The 1990 facelift also added side cladding, Euro-style headlamps (instead of the quad rectangular sealed-beams used from 1980-89) and a mildly redone instrument panel.
The standard 5.0-liter V8 (a Chevrolet version had replaced the Olds 5.0 in 1991, after the Rocket V8 ended production in 1990) had been improved by swan-song 1992: Throttle-body fuel injection had bumped horsepower up to 170, and torque to 255 lb-ft. This helped get the 221″ long, 4276.7 lb. Brougham up to speed more quickly than in years past, but to really add to your driving pleasure, you needed the optional 5.7-liter, 350 cu in V8, available either as part of the trailer towing package or as a stand-alone option.
On paper, the 5.7-liter didn’t promise a huge difference, offering 185 horsepower and 300 lb-ft of torque. In actuality, it was a much better engine for everyday driving, regardless of whether or not you were towing anything. In acceleration and highway cruising, it was far superior to the smaller engine. Broughams with the 5.7 are quite rare, however, because the engine triggered a hefty gas-guzzler tax. Today, 5.7 Broughams are prized for their superior driving dynamics and beefed-up suspension.
Which brings me to the d’Elegance. The Brougham had always been a very complete car; by 1992, its standard features included dual six-way power seats with power recliners, AM/FM/cassette stereo, a leather-wrapped tilt/telescope steering wheel, automatic climate control, power steering and brakes, Soft-Ray tinted glass and Bosch II anti-lock brakes–but for those wanting even more, there was the d’Elegance package.
The signature feature of the d’Elegance was floating-pillow, button-tufted seat upholstery. Prima Vera cloth was standard, and leather was optional. Among other d’Elegance features were illuminated dual visor vanity mirrors, overhead assist straps for front- and rear-seat passengers, power trunk pull-down, Twilight Sentinel, and d’Elegance script on the rear quarter panels, door panels and glove compartment lid.
Our featured Brougham has the standard interior, which was nearly as plush. Although FWD Cadillacs got a standard driver’s- side airbag in 1990, the Brougham carried on with basically the same steering wheel from the early ’80s.
As expected from a car riding a 121.5″ wheelbase, the Brougham offered limo-like rear seat legroom. Here you can see the standard adjustable reading lamp in the C-pillar. These cars also had what might be the most elaborate door pull/door handle trim ever. This one has it all: chrome and woodgrain-trimmed door pull, a built-in, illuminated ashtray with lighter, a heavy chrome-plated door handle and a courtesy lamp/reflector. Nice!
There is one thing I can’t figure out about this car: Although it’s a standard Brougham, “d’Elegance” is embroidered into the door panels; those on standard Brougham door panels simply read “Brougham.” Odd.
All 1990-92 Broughams were built in Arlington, Texas, hence this “Built in Texas by Texans” decal. Really, now, could there have been a better place to build such an unabashedly all-American car? For example, just look at the amount of chrome trim lavished on it inside and out. The redesigned 1993 Fleetwood, a nice enough car in its own right, lacked much of the RWD model’s lavish, chrome-plated jewelry–not to mention its classic proportions.
Brougham badging was displayed prominently on the rear quarter panels; as noted previously, d’Elegance models featured a specific Brougham d’Elegance script. “Brougham d’Elegance”: How could any other name sound more luxurious?
Yes, the Brougham was a thing of beauty, with its Chris Craft-like prow and chrome jewelry, and that unmistakable wreath-and-crest rising above it all.
In my Brougham Outtake (yes, this is the very same car), I mentioned that a friend’s dad, who worked at the local Cadillac dealership in Rock Island, got hold of several of the lush deluxe Cadillac brochures. We both loved the Brougham and Brougham d’Elegance. Forget the Allante–and forget Porsches, Ferraris and Lamborghinis, too. I wanted one of these!
I close with this excerpt from the 1992 brochure:
“It is easy to understand why America is so comfortable with the classic Cadillac Brougham. Because as America’s longest regular-production automobile, it affords you uncompromising, six-passenger luxury with all the amenities.”
Truly, in 1992 the only way to travel was Cadillac Brougham-style. Make mine either burgundy or navy blue, thank you.
I have always had mixed emotions over these final Broughams. I like some of the touches – the white lenses in the bumper lights and even (gasp) the lower body cladding, which gives the car a longer look. Also, I can see where the 5.7 would be a huge improvement.
The thing I cannot get past, however, is why they raised the ride height on these. These simply sit too high on their suspensions. She second picture shows it quite clearly with a fully exposed rear wheel whitewall. My 89 sat lower, as seen below.
My other problem with these cars was the dash. I didn’t like this dash when it came out in 1977. It seemed to me to be the cheapest-looking part of the entire car. Then GM refused to invest even 7 cents into revising it for the next 15 years, other than a new steering wheel for 1979.
Really? I love that dash, although I grew up with one of those and learned to drive in that car. It was a 78 DeVille D’Elegance in Autumn Haze Firemist (aka same color as the one pictured
It was 10x better than the Ford LTD dash used in Lincoln’s. I was always glad that, starting in 74 -on, Cad ad the brains to install their own dashboards. Much better than Buick and Olds.
I could be wrong about this, but every 1990-92 Brougham I’ve seen seems to have a digital dash, so I’m thinking that it was standard equipment beginning in 1990. While the analog dash might’ve been in dire need of a refresh, I’d still rather have it than the troublesome digital dash.
“…Ford LTD dash used in the Lincolns..”
EXCUSE ME???
Your Lincoln knowledge is sadly inaccurate, S.S. !
1977+ Lincolns used the Ford LTD dash…..guess they got their own again 1980+??
1978 Ford LTD dash:
1978 Lincoln Continental dash:
Slight correction (from a Lincolnphile): the ’78-79 Lincoln Continental dash was borrowed from the Marquis, but refaced slightly each year to make it look different. The ’78s had a combination silver/wood look, while the ’79s had a full wood look fascia trim.
And…loved the article!
It seems like this topic pops up here periodically.
The ’75 – ’79 big Lincoln used a unique dash.
The ’75 – ’78 Big Fords and Mercurys used mostly the same dash. The Mercury version was gussied up with extra AC vents, different fake wood, and a few other different flourishes.
The same steering wheel with slightly different trim was used on all three cars. That may be where the confusion comes from.
I’ll chime in on the mixed too. There’s a certain rightness about the basic lines of these C-Body Cadillacs, and then all the details are such a let down. For one I would have loved a vinyl roof delete option, and a handling package.
And Like JP, There’s something to be said about the simple elegance of all Cadillac Dashboards up until 1966. Plus this feature car has an all too obvious Delco Radio that you could probably get in a Bonneville. There’s just too many ways they could have made a halfway decent Q-ship out of these instead of settling for cheap Brougham dreck.
Haha, looking at Matt’s brougham in the link I definitely remarked on the fact that I have almost the same Delco unit in my lowly ’90 Bonnie.
OK, JP; I accept your criticism of the later-ones right height.
But, if you think that this Cad’s dash is.. less than desirable, look at the dash in a ’74 – ’78 Chrysler New Yorker: utterly CHEAP-LOOKING… so cheap-looking that it would (and did) look poor in a Plymouth!
“These simply sit too high on their suspensions.”
Shockingly, JPC and I disagree on something about old boats! I always thought this generation of Caddies seemed to sag in the back. I like that the feature car doesn’t.
Check out this ’77 brochure shot; just what exactly is in the trunk of the silver one?
Jimmy Hoffa?
>>Check out this ’77 brochure shot; just what exactly is in the trunk of the silver one?<<
"A friend will help you move. A real friend will help you move a body."
Ha! Definitely Joe Pesci behind the wheel.
Lotta holes in the desert…..
Cornfields in Indiana.
Holes in the Desert was an embellishment for the movie.
These were the signature transport for the “Organized Legitimate Businessmen” in the Melrose Park, Schiller Park and Rosemont area. Not to mention the UAW and Teamster “Business Agents”.
I have a 79 sedan deville, what you call a “sag” in the back is what I love soo much about my car, It sits Nose High! if you ride down the highway with one of these things infront of you, especially the 79 with its larger grill, it looks like its going to eat you. I love it! Nose high attitude for sporting maneuvers… I can tell you from experience that these things CAN handle like a 4400 lb sports car. its great! Gotta love a big block!
My father had an ’85 Sedan de Ville, which believe was the same basic car. I drove it once. I was appalled at the handling (please god, not another corner); ride (dramamine anyone?), and general build quality. This was American luxury? Thank you for explaining the rise of Mercedes-Benz.
I’m going to take a shot at the d’Elegance confusion here: maybe this was o e of the last cars off the line and they ran out of non-d’Elegance door panels?
Or, there was a door defect remedied by an over zealous dealer?
Or, this does look like a high mileage car based at least on the steering wheel wrap. The interior door vinyl never really held up all that well…although the problems typically occur on the drivers door.
Maybe Matt Garrett, the God of Everything Fleetwood, knows. That guy knows Cadilac trivia like nobody else’s business.
I want to like this car, but would never consider any car with door mounted seat belts or motorized ones.
+1. Nothing like a seat belt that will actually hasten your exit from the vehicle if the doors come open.
I agree the door belts are horrible and less safe. I wonder if the mounting points for conventional belts, as were used through ’89, are still there behind the B-pillar trim and under the carpet. Given how GM was doing everything on the cheap, I think it’s quite likely. If so, it would be simple to get a set of belts and hardware from a 1980-89 model and retrofit them. You would have a telltale empty slot in the door panel, but there are a lot worse things in life than that.
It is pretty likely those SAE standard weld nuts are still there. I’m betting export models like those destined for the Gulf Council States were equipped with standard belts. The shell would likely be put together w/o knowing exactly where its final destination would be.
Maybe…. but at least starting in ’90, they mostly used Chevy engines. I had a number of those awful Olds 307s in 80s Buick wagons.. which were terrible, and at least a third of them self-destructed!
The Olds 307’s were indestructible. What are you talking about? The computer controlled carbs gave trouble though.
When these cars first came out, I liked the new styling. With time, I think the 1980-89 models are somewhat more timeless in their styling. I worked at a GM dealership in the 1990’s and I really liked the early 90’s Broughams for one main reason, the improved driveline. The early 80’s models mostly had the horrible HT4100, which was underpowered and problematic (yes there were 368 powered ones in the very early 80’s, but I mostly saw 4.1L’s). Then they switched to the 307 Olds, which wasn’t much of an improvement in power, but at least it was fairly reliable. I have owned several 307’s, and they were slow engines, even in lighter smaller b-bodies. The Chevrolet powered TBI engines were a VAST improvement in power, much peppier. Even the 305 TBI cars were fine for the time, and didn’t feel slow like a 307. The torquier 350’s were even better, but like the poster said were pretty rare.
These were the last of the great old Caddies. If GM hadn’t had put such poor (underpowered) powertrains in these cars until the Chevy TBI engines, I think they would have faired better than the Town Cars. But by the late 80’s the Town Car was defintiely becoming the market favourite, and the new 1990 Town Car definitely set the course as the new leader. The 1991 Town Car’s advanced 4.6L engine was a step above even the Chevy TBI engines, when GM did too little too late. Town Car had the superiour 5.0L MPFI Ford from 1986, that was generally much less finicky and certainly offered far better performance than the Olds 307 4bbl. Even though on paper there wasn’t much of a power difference, the Town Car was the clear powertrain winner if driven back to back.
GM really invested no time or money into the B-body/C/D-body cars, and only seemed to keep them around for easy profits (due to so much failure in their FWD lines). Ford on the otherhand seemed to improve the Panther cars throughout the 1980’s.
The other point to remember is that these were REALLY expensive cars. IIRC, Cadillac was pricing these north of $40k which was a lot of money for that time. In my opinion, this was purely in response to CAFE – they had to be priced high enough to squeeze every dollar of profit out and to restrict demand. Had these been priced at or below the DeVille, Cadillac would have been in CAFE trouble and this car would have outsold the Deville by a lot. This was the one Cadillac that people really wanted in the 1980s.
I don’t remember what the pricing was on these cars, (I worked in service, not sales so prices weren’t my thing). So I checked the Std Catalog of American cars and from 1985-1992, the RWD Fleetwood Brougham/Brougham was priced almost on par with the FWD Fleetwood (usually less than $500 price difference). The Town Car was on par in pricing as well.
Compare the sales of Town Car vs Brougham and it’s a massive difference. 1989 Cadillac: 28,926, Lincoln: 123,669; 1990 Cadillac: 21,529 Lincoln: 147,160. I don’t have the post 1990 numbers for Lincoln, but you get the idea.
I liked the Caddy better, espeically style wise, but GM did nothing to make these cars competitive (and it only really had ONE car to compete against). Don’t forget under Roger Smith, GM had a massive push to downsize and swtich everything to FWD by 1985 (other than the Y and F car). Things changed by 1985 though, with the FWD cars having poor profits and fuel prices dropping. The only reasons GM kept the big RWD cars around were because they were still selling well once fuel prices dropped, and they were very profitable since all the development was long paid for (and they certainly invested very little in updating the line).
CAFE was a factor, but remember these cars had decent EPA numbers. This was accomplised through the tiny 4.1L early on. Later on the 307 got decent numbers through steep rear differential gears and detuning for emissions and fuel economy. At least the FI on the Chevy’s finally allowed for adequate performance and fuel economy. The Town Car still outperformed it though.
I stand-by that GM’s laziness to improve these cars was a big downfall. GM trucks had fuel injection by 1987 with Chevy small blocks. Why did it take Cadillac until 1990 (for 5.7L) and 1991 (for 5.0L) to get FI? And Caddy is supposed to be a tech leader? This is especially more true when GM had FI in the late 1970’s Fleetwoods as an option and all FWD Caddy’s had MPFI in this era. I have owned a late 80’s Ford Panther with a 5.0L MPFI and several GM’s powered by Olds 307’s. Drive them back to back and you’ll seem why I think a lot of traditional luxury buyers swtiched to Ford. I prefered the GM handling, and styling, but Ford was a step ahead on drivetrain.
I was going by memory. I got the original sticker from the owner when I bought my 1989, and I recall it being well into the $30s even then. I thought I had remembered them being jacked up even more in the later versions, but perhaps not. I suspect that these were selling for pretty close to sticker, though.
Even if they were selling for close to the current Fleetwood, it had to be mostly pure profit as the tooling had been paid off for a decade. Cadillac probably could have made a nice profit on these at a $20K MSRP. Instead, they kept them high and made a fortune.
With my 89, there was this maddening zigzag between quality and cheap. The dash was cheap feeling plastic, and look at that “Brougham” plastic nameplate on the rear quarter. But the leather in the seats in my car was absolutely first rate. It still looked beautiful at nearly 20 years old and over 100K miles by the time I was done with the car. Also, the outside door handles were the same Cadillac-only units that had been on my 63 Fleetwood, and just oozed of quality. These cars felt much heavier and more solid than the box Town Cars.
This was the kind of car that nobody could build like GM. With a decent engine and some trim upgrades (and airbags), I would imagine that a “Fleetwood Classic” would have continued to sell in profitable numbers.
Your absolutely right, the leather was fantastic in these and everything else was plastic. I suggest that these were designed with the mentality (that has no longer been in vogue for a while) that synthetic materials need not hide the fact that they are artificial, the novelty of new technologies allowed for a “pass” on matching texture so long as look is maintained, etc. For the same reason you could still get wood cased TV’s when these cars were first designed. “You can have the warmth of a dashboard that looks like wood paneling from a an english manor house but it will never fade or crack!” But there were so many neat details even if they were done in plastics, little crests everywhere(I still remember these seat surrounds that were chrome and plastic with tiny crests on the back of the front seats), those door lights that lit up the car like the fourth of july. “Body by Fisher” rocker panels. Lighters in the back seats, rich leather and thick carpetting. My Mom bought her DeVille in 1988, it was an 84 but what did we know it looked EXACTLY like the Brougham sitting across the lot. We didnt really understand the whole HT 4100 thing at the time, we just were stunned by the shear beauty of the thing. We had stopped at the dealer on a lark, just to window shop. We were in our secondary family car a 1962 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88 Hardtop sedan. Mom’s regular car was a 1974 Mercury Cogar XR-7, so we were used to much older cars. Dad liked a white 80’s Eldorado, he was a real die hard coupe man at the time, but Mom liked the De Ville, and I egged her on, If you are going to buy a Caddie get the longest one you can find was my rationale, plus I wanted my own door and cavernous back seat over climbing into what I was just sure was the “tiny” rear seat of that Eldorado. So we bought it, and since my folks came of age in the 50’s & 60’s they just though they’d arrived, having been able to buy a Caddy! I’ll always love that car.
The “Brougham” badges on the rear quarter panels were metal. How do I know? I got one off of a ’92 at a junkyard and it now is on my wagon!
“Compare the sales of Town Car vs Brougham and it’s a massive difference. 1989 Cadillac: 28,926, Lincoln: 123,669; 1990 Cadillac: 21,529 Lincoln: 147,160. I don’t have the post 1990 numbers for Lincoln, but you get the idea.”
To be fair, in this era the Cadillac and Lincoln model ranges did not line up cleanly against each other. I think Cadillac saw its FWD full-size models as also competing to some extent against the Town Car. The point that there was still a sizable market for a large RWD luxury sedan, and that market was being much better served by Lincoln, is well taken. But in this era it’s hard to compare a single Caddy sedan against a single Lincoln sedan. You’d really have to compare the Seville, DeVille, Fleetwood and Brougham combined against the Continental and Town Car combined.
The Lincoln advantage got wider in 1991 with the introduction of the 4.6 modular V8. We all know now that the modular is short on torque compared to a GM 5.7 liter (it’s why the Impala SS outruns the Marauder), but it was smooth, quiet and gave better acceleration than the wheezy 307.
Also, the 1990 Town Car redesign managed to give the car a modern look without taking away its elegance or a millimeter of its cavernous interior space. I thought at the time it was strange that the 1990 tweaks to the Brougham’s styling made it look more like the previous year’s Town Car, thus empahsizing it was an obsolete design.
Ford pulled out all the stops on the early 90’s Town Car in features and quality of interior materials. I owned a ’92 Executive, which was the base model, and the leather was better quality than Cadillac, and there were more standard features than on any Brougham. If you moved up to a Cartier you were in an absolute pleasure dome. Exterior fit and finish also beat the Brougham. Ford wanted to make the 1990’s TC a world class car and they succeeded. GM was playing out the string with the Brougham (something Ford eventually did with the TC as well).
Of course, Ford was going for volume sales of the TC, which GM was not with the Brougham. A good chunk of those TC sales went to livery and rental fleets.
You’re right, Bill. I get 22.5 mpg IN TOWN with my ’89 Caprice (w/ 305), which was the first Chevy with fuel injection, albeit the throttle-body type.
Big RWD Fords got that way back in 1983—six years earlier!
Wow, that brochure picture with the Brougham towing the Airstream. Be still my heart! I’ll convince the wife someday that this will be the way to go. (She likes Airstreams already, so I’m half way there).
I’m definitely more of a small car person but I do love these. The naming gets confusing on them over the years though. I have to say I like the looks of the pre-facelift with the dual sealed beam front end. Something about that one big headlight looks odd.
I would be happier with a pizza d’Elegance.
Linguicia topping, please.
GM still had the residual advantage in coach building that was exemplified here. In that vein, I prefer the 77-89 models as the 90-92s hide too much of the fine bodywork. Of course, you’d be crazy not to prefer the 350FI available with the latter, so it’s a coin toss. I think GM deliberately tried to confound their traditional customers hoping they’d buy weak-sauce DeVilles.
One explanation I’ve read for the higher suspension on the 90-92 was to accommodate the extra torque provided by the 350FI, although how they got by with the standard suspension on the 425 and 368 from 1977-81 is beyond me.
Like many of the recent CCs (land yacht Continental and Electra), I had a chance to buy one of these as well! A ’91, in a rather unpalatable charcoal on bright red leather. 350FI, pillow-tufted seats as illustrated above. I still have the option of buying a ’94 Brougham, but Tom makes the solid point that the coach work on these earlier ones is far superior.
I spent some time in 1977-78 models with the 425. Not only were they fast, but the suspensions were very isolated and a bit roly-poly. Driveline isolation was also excellent. Around 1980-81 I drove another one, and thought that the ride quality had gone to hell, although the car seemed a better handler. The driveline isolation was also not as good, but maybe they had gone to a lockup converter by then. My 89 Brougham drove like the early 80s model I had driven.
I’ve read in many places that GM desperately tried to make their vehicles more aerodynamic and take weight out of them in 1980.
That’s why the full-size trucks and full-size cars (almost?) all had redesigned noses that year.
That could explain perhaps a bit of the ride quality issue you experienced. I know from driving a few yacht Continentals from the late 70s that if weight is of little import, then you can feel quite isolated from the road. Just look at the 6000 pound half-tons driving around now! Boy they ride nice, even unloaded.
I was smitten with a well-maintained, Burgundy Brougham from 1980 while living in Cleveland in 1989. Seriously thought about taking that one home (it was a North Carolina car) – the a/c was the only thing that wasn’t working.
Instead, with smaller kids at the time, I ended up getting a 2000 Chevy Venture van, which, served me better.
The ’80 Brougham had the 368 (destroked 425 and for a 49-state smogger went pretty good) and the seats were a deep burgundy velour. Beautiful car and it had the standard stainless steel wheel covers, not the wire ones, which I had on my ’86 Olds Cutlass Suprmeme Brougham LS . . . that required a toothbrush scrub with every cleaning.
My dream car. I’ll take mine in triple white.
Gosh, I feel better now. I got up and trudged through the Monday morning rain to work, feeling like the north end of a southbound mule. Then I came to CC and saw this beauty, and it was as if the sun came out. Thanks, Tom.
“This basic body was in continuous production from 1977 to 1992, receiving only one major restyle in 1980. By the end of its long, long life, the Brougham was surrounded by front-wheel drive, unibody Cadillacs in the showroom…”
Umm, do you not know about the 1993-96 Fleetwood, with RWD, BOF, and V8?
The Whales were an all new body shell, though they were sitting on the exact same frame.
Sure I know, I even mentioned it in the post. But I was talking about the body. The ’93-’96s were nice, but were quite a bit different from the ’77-’92s save the chassis and drivetrain.
The whale Caddy Broughams, with the carry over frame, had this ridiculous overhang. Looked strange . . . much like ’59-’64 Canadian Pontiacs . . . wide U.S. style body . . . narrow frame. . . short front clip. Slightly odd. In this case, the overhang on the 1992.5-’96 Caddy Broughams hangs over the rear wheels equivalent to the size of a Toyota Yaris!
In my family we had an 81 Grand Marquis, an 84 deville, and an 87 Town Car. The Grand Ma had tan velour, the Caddie had Chocalate leather, and the Town Car had tan leather. The Cadillac had an very elegant interior but the wood trim was very obviously fake(arguably from a time when that was ok in an expensive american car) and applied with the restraint of someone who has discovered contact paper for the first time. The Grand Ma & the Town Car DID NOT have the same dashboard, I will concede that they both had that quality where Ford goes through the trouble of designing two different designs that look the same as each other but they were not actually the same dashboard. The Town Car had a very upright dash, while the Grand Ma was recessed at an angle, and the dashpad was almost like an eyebrow. The Town Car had interesting simulated jewel cut bezels for the gauges that gave it a distinctive look in contrast to the LTD/Grand Ma’s horizontal speedo. I loved all three cars and have a hard time picking between the Lincoln & the Caddie, I only drove the Caddie once up the driveway…shortly after(but not while I was driving it) the aluminum ht 4100 crapped out on us and broke our hearts. The Town Car on the other hand got me through 3 years of college with tons of abuse, until it was replaced with a 96 Town Car. These Brougham’s are stunners though and their shear length is a bit more impressive than the Town Car’s short deck riff, but then I love the blades, and the faux rolls grille… what to do?
Granny had an ’86 Grand Marquis and truly was “in the Lincoln tradition” with it’s black on silver gauges and it’s faux-walnut did look very elegant indeed. 5.0L EFI V-8 went well too (highway speeds and kick down into passing gear) and driving it a long distance (Lake of the Ozarks back to Audrain County, Missouri – fall of 1989) it got 25mpg.
Tom, thanks for that great writeup and the wealth of information in it. I too am a sucker for these beasts. The more Broughamesque the better (there! I said it). I have a 1976 De Ville myself but I would definitely pick up a final-year d’Elegance too if I had a chance. They will never happen again.
A couple of years ago I rode in a d’Elegance that was actually used as a taxi in downtown Brussels. Not a limo service or such thing – just a regular, normally-priced taxi among Diesel-powered Opels and Peugeots. My wife and I asked the driver to take us anywhere he wanted and then back to the taxi station. He was a great elderly Turkish gentleman who told us he only ever drove Cadillacs because it was “less tiring” (I loved that line). I wonder if he is still around. The car was in mint condition and the red leather interior felt like new. A memorable experience for a handful of euros.
Hello Olivier,
I rode that white Cadillac taxi a couple of times in Brussels as well. So much more worth for your money than a Mercedes taxi! I live in Belgium and drive a 1991 Brougham, which I love a lot, needless to say.
In 98 rode back to Vancouver Airport in a Fleetwood. Thank you Cadillac Taxis.
I am a huge Cadillac fan. I became one the minute my dad got a 1975 Cadillac Coupe De Ville d’Elegance.
But I have to disagree here – I think the town car was a better car. I drove both and I thought the early 80s Town Car just felt so much better than the Fleetwood Brougham.
I never knew this had a tow package that had a 7K rating. I wonder how many were actually equipped that way and of those how many were bought because the owner wanted it and how many were sold just because that was what the dealer had because it added some profit to the bottom line. I’m betting very few actually went on to get a hitch worthy of that 7K rating installed and then used. I just don’t see many owners of these using them for other than a boat. I suspect that if the owner wanted to tow a horse trailer or travel trailer that a Suburban or Crew Cab pickup was also likely to be found in their driveway.
Oh the memories this pamphlet brings back. When I was about 8 and living in a small town in SW Oklahoma a Cadillac was the nicest car I could ever hope to see. The first car show I ever went to, my folks drove me all the way to Oklahoma City and spent the night in a motel so I could go to the new car show. Besides blowing my mind with the first two Alfa Romeo’s I had ever seen, I also took home quite a collection of pamphlets. This Brougham one was the absolute best and I carried it everywhere for weeks. I have distinct memories of sitting in my third grade class dreaming of the Brougham d’Elegance drooling over these photos. Weird kid, I know…
Not that weird…..trust me.
I was the same way as a kid! I loved the big Caddies and Lincolns.
Some kids really liked Magnums Ferrari 308 GTS(which was cool dont get me wrong)while I was always enthralled by the bad guys Cadillacs and Lincolns.
Ditto, as a kid growing up through the 80s, Magnum’s 308=cool, but baddies’ luxo-cruisers=waaaay cool. Of course being in NZ, the few Caddies/Lincolns we had were private imports, but at least the early 80s Aussie Ford LTD and Holden Statesman looked suitably limo-ish! Made it hard when I was buying my first car in the early 90s: “Mk 1 Ford Escort?…that’s very lovely, but I was kinda hankering for a 351 LTD?…oh, right, gas is expensive here, ok then…” My feet would be firmly in the TC camp for 1990 on, but these Broughams have a certain regal style that I like.
At 8 years old I loved watching Cannon – seeing Biil Conrad driving the hell out of those Mark IV’s was something I couldn’t wait for every Wednesday night!!
Hey, at least you were rooting for a team that still existed! By the late 80s no teen thought a Chrysler was anything but a K car or minivan.
Or Police Diplomat/Grand Fury’s……
Though there was that red Laser from Hunter, or was it a Daytona?
Haven’t seen one in years, though they are more handsome than I recall…….
I came of age when an Imperial was still an Imperial. Then in ’76 it became a Chrysler New Yorker Brougham and sales almost tripled (also helped by a $3K price reduction on basically the same car). Chrysler made money as the volume increase kept it profitable. However . . . . the Aspen/Volare debacle and the car bank/inflated production on cars that were not sold/ordered (nor would be for sometimes up to a year) took any profits Mopar made on cars like the N.Y. Brougham to plug up the hemmorages elsewhere prior to the 1980 bailout . . .
Count me in as a fan of the 80-89 bodystyle. I find the 90-92 is trying too hard to look like a Town Car and the headlights make the front end look too wide.
I hate the padded rear quarter windows on the 90 because they take away from the beautiful shape of the side window area. That is supposed to be outlined in chrome so that the proportion of the glass to the body is played up in proper Bill Mitchell fashion. You can tell he had a lot to do with the 80 but not the 90.
I’d love to have one of these and have been looking. It’s sad 81-85 can’t be part of the pool as most of those were junked due to GM’s unreliable engine selections (V864 and HT4100). That leaves the 86-89 with the Olds 307 V8 or the 90-92 with the Chevy 305 or 350.
While production numbers of the Chevy engined models are lower than for the Olds, a quick look at eBay will show far more for sale with the Chevy. I think this speaks more to desirability of the earlier car than survival rates of the later.
It’s true the 86-89 with the 307 is slow but it was gorgeous, reliable and got excellent fuel economy, I believe around 18 city and 24 highway. With some relatively low cost modifications to the steering system and suspension the car can be made to handle really, really well.
The 368 that the V864 was based on was quite reliable and the bulk of those had the cylinder deactivation deactivated by the dealer pretty early in their life and GM quickly stopped making them that way. So I highly doubt that many were junked due to the V864 having reliability issues. The HT4100 is of course a whole different story.
I don’t think Cadillac stopped making the V864 version of the 368, after the V864 they went right to the HT4100.
The survival rates of the 368 in 81 would have been higher without the cylinder deactivation, there is no doubt about that.
I have seen a rash of really nice 1980 models for sale around here over the last year. Then the action starts to pick up around the 1987s. Everything between is few and far between.
I’ve never seen a V864 that didn’t have the cylinder deactivation deactivated very early in it’s life. Growing up a neighbor had one of the first and after a few trips to the dealer in a few months the dealer clipped the wire and made it into a standard V8 w/o any long term effects on the engine.
My dad had one. I remember there was a way using the trip computer and radio buttons to deactivate the 8-6-4 – and not just deactivate, but you could lock it to any of the configurations. I remember Dad locked his to 6 cylinder. Why, I’ll never figure it out.
Interesting. I remember that if you hit the Off and Warmer buttons on the climate control of any 80s Cad you could access the system diagnostics. I did that once with my dads 85 SDV and thn I moved on with the rest of my life
If you knew what buttons to push you could get and reset all the power train and body computer codes as well as cycle through all the PIDs and get real time data, something that became commonly accessible with a scan tool and then mandated with the OBD-II law in 1996. Of course you could only access one PID at a time and had to know what the code for a particular PID was. All in all the Caddilac Digital EFI was the forerunner of the modern EFI system.
The interesting thing is that many 4100 equipped examples show still up on Ebay, Craigslist and Autotrader. But I suspect many of these were upgraded/improved factory replacements. From what I hear those replacement 4100 engines built after 1985 were far better than the 82-84 motors. Following the rigid maintenance schedule also kept them going much longer as evidenced by various car collecting friends with 84-85 versions and no problems to date.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBGCsn5ZfL4
I prefer “Cadillac Style” with Sammy Kershaw in it.
Or perhaps the Devil drives a Coupe De Ville?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJtA-KqK_Lo
If GM had been able to install a good fuel injection system as early as Lincoln did (1985) they would have sold many thousands more of these beasts. And if they had fuel injected the 307 I would have loved my Cutlass even more.
The funny thing is they did have fuel injection dating back to 1974 as an option on these cars. By 1981 digital FI was std on the 8-6-4 motor along with the new HT4100 up to 1985. 1986 went backwards to a computer controlled Quadrajet right up to 1990 with the Olds 307 on this car. The optional 350 for 1990 of course also used TBI but by then Ford was using Sequential FI. So GM was well ahead of Ford on this during the 70’s but dropped behind during the mid 80’s.
Love these. Just love them. I wish the 425 engine and transmission made it into the updated style–I know the 350 is nice, but it sits too high.
Anybody know why are these called “C-body” while the next gen (93-96) is called “D-body”?
The big Cad/Buick Electra/Olds 98 had always been the C body. When the fwd Cadillac/Electra/98 came out in 1985, that became the new C body, and GM changed the name of this car to the D body for 1985.
Thanks. Hard to believe that GM thought that the little fwd replacements could be given the same platform name. Though I guess that terms like “B-body” and “C-body” don’t have the same specificity as “e39” or “w124.”
In that era, when GM introduced a new design that was a direct replacement for an old one, the new one got the existing letter designation, and if any models from the old design remained in production, they had to find a new letter. So when the FWD replacements for the 1977 C-body were introduced in 1985, the FWD cars became the C-body, and the RWD cars using the 1977-style C-body that remained in production became the D-body. Similarly, when the FWD replacements for the 1978 A-body were introduced in 1982, the FWD cars became the A-body, and the RWD cars using the 1978-style A-body that remained in production became the G-body.
This had been abandoned by 1986, when the FWD replacements for the B-body were introduced. The new car was called the H-body, and those B-bodies that stayed in production were still called the B-body.
…then they abandoned the easy to remember platform lettering altogether. That’s when I pretty much gave up.
I now know there’s an alpha and a zeta and maybe a lambda SUV. That’s pretty much it
They did the same things with their trucks. When they introduced the new body style in 88 on the pickups only they inherited the C/K designation and the old body style still used for the Suburban got the R/V designation.
The last time I shopped these a decent 307 example had a nearly 5-figure asking price and 350-powered ones were in collector car territory.
I like these Cadillacs, but at those prices there are vehicles I’d rather own.
For those looking to buy one of these, a ’90 Brougham with the 5.7 in Tacoma, WA listed at $2500 on Craigslist. Only one photo, though, which doesn’t reveal much.
http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/cto/3267238217.html
Looks like it was originally white. I don’t believe the classic “Cadillac yellow” was available on the Broughams in the ’90s. The last year for the butter yellow color was in ’91 on the Coupe and Sedan de Ville.
For you Midwesterners, there’s a pretty nice one in the Chicago area. $3500 and a d’Elegance to boot! White with blue interior and the 5.7.
http://quadcities.craigslist.org/cto/3281903950.html
I worked for a guy who had a butter yellow 84 Sedan DeVille – same body, just the crappy 4100. Another guy in the same office had a brown 81 Sedan DeVille with the V864. Last Cadillac for both of them. One went to Town Cars, the other to Honda Accords.
Waxberry yellow…
I have very mixed feelings about these. Not a luxury-car fan, it pained me back when the Colonnades came out that there was a de-emphasis on “sport”, however shallow, into faux-“luxury”. Perhaps it was my age, growing up in the glorious era of beautiful sport coupes and sports sedans of all sizes and colors.
“Super Sport”, “500”, “GS”, “SS”, “RS” et al, were things I related to. When things changed in the early ’70’s, it pained me to see what had and was happening in the automotive world. I wanted no part of it and went to trucks and jeeps and compact, basic, stripped, stick shift economy cars.
Now, after saying all that, I never refused a ride in someone else’s luxury ride, after all, I wasn’t buying the gas!
Now? well…I will admit my new ride is the most luxurious car I have ever owned…but I’m no longer young, either.
Tom, I think you and I are going to be the best of friends here!
I’m sorry Paul, but this car makes my heart go pitter-patter!
Let’s face it, this is not a drivers car, this is a car to be driven in. Sometimes a person really does need a rolling isolation chamber to serve their automotive needs.
I have all those brochures that you showed here. I have been collecting showroom brochures since 1984. It’s always fun to look back, because let’s face it, this kind of automotive craftsmanship, for better or worse, is not coming back.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’ve tasted what it’s like to have a good handling car. This time a year ago my garage held a Buick LeSabre Limited, a poor-man’s Cadillac if ever there was one, and a Mercury Mystique, which was a thinly-disguised Euro sedan. To me it was the best of both worlds, and I loved them both for what they were.
Thanks for sharing this today, I could read and discuss these for hours!
I really loved the new 1977’s, but was less enthusiastic about the styling changes for 1980. While sleeker in some ways, they seemed stodgier. But they grew on me, and I preferred the twin headlight, no-clad, no landau roof models. Looking at them now, it seems as though maybe during these later years, the base Brougham was really more deVille like, and the d’Elegance brought the car up to “Fleetwood” levels.
There’s a really ratty looking one I see around town all the time, just fading away.
What I love about these cars, and I miss about cars since then, even Cadillacs, is the “jewlery”. There are at least 30 plus places on one of these where either the Cadillac script or a wreath and crest, or combination of both appear on this car. Everywhere there are little Cadillac touches, it marks the last time you see the traditional 1974 style Cadillac dash, with the cool strip of warning lights across the top, on these later ones they illuminate through the woodgrain, which is pretty cool, “level ride” anyone? The last time they used the big chromed out Cadillac pedals too.
Cars and people go together, and certain cars you just seem to associate with certain people, I always associated the 1980-1992 full size Cadillac with Ronald Regan, not in a negative way, they just sort of go together, Regan’s Presidential Limo was a version of these, the 1980-1992 cycle kinda runs concurrent with the Gippers “Morning in America” 1980 period to the “off into the sunset period” from the early 90’s. And just look at the Brougham, its so crisp and conservative, tailored well dressed and sharp, much like Regan himself, plus many of Broughams average buyers were about Regans age too.
Maybe that’s part of my problem with these. I had a really clueless, suspicious, unprincipled jerk of a boss who drove a Brougham, after the previous boss died unexpectedly. It ended very ugly.
And in West LA/Santa Monica in the eighties, if you drove one of these, it undoubtedly was eventually traded in on a Mercedes. Just a fact of life, regardless of the cars’ respective merits. FWIW, many of the folks who bought Mercedes then might have been better served by a big Caddy: plusher ride, at the slow speeds they drove at.
For some reason I always loved those strips of lights on top of the dash too, set apart from everything else, making it impossible to miss if anything lit up (unlike tiny lights buried in the gauges). My dad’s ’95 Park Avenue had them – the LeSabre which had the same dash may have been the last car with this feature. I guess now with small LED screens flashing out any message, there’s no need for a strip of separate incandescent-lit lights, each with a different warning.
Well put, Carmine. I was a kid in the 80s and I associated big GMs with aunts and uncles who were a little behind the times, but great warm folks nonetheless. Funny that I remember telling Uncle Frank that I liked his 88 Park Avenue, and he gushed about my Dad’s 88 Sable. Very different-looking cars, but neither was an insult to the consumer, which so many 80s cars were.
A car with a 7000 lb Tow rating? Inconcievable!
I too have a soft spot for the Brougham. Too bad you couldn’t set that White one up with a Burgundy and White interior.
Like this?
Some comments on the comments:
1. Yes, I loved collecting car brochures as a kid, too. Today it’s wallpaper images for the PC. Not quite the same but…
2. This Matt guy who sells older Cadillacs on ebay. Personally, I think he asks way too much for his cars. I know his cars usually have very low miles but I think his asking prices are ludicrous. Although I have to wonder if he ever gets them or how close to them. Does he not sell if he doesn’t get his (ridiculous-as-hell) asking price?
3. I like the comments on the interior door panel. Yes, it is very nice in detail and it harkens back to a more luxurious era in car manufacturing that I wonder if we shall ever see agian…?
4. I, too, was more of a luxury car guy than a sports car guy. I could never understand why some dudes wanted to go so freakin’ fast!! Slow down and enjoy the luxury!!
5. As far as the 1990 “re-trim” is concerned, I like it due to the fact that I was crazy about the “Premiere Roof” option available on the ’88/’89 models (an $895 option). So when the ’90 re-trim had the look of the Premiere Roof, I really appreciated it. This and the digital dash, too.
6. Lastly, as someone else said, please make mine a 1992 Brougham d’Elegance leather, black/black, moonroof, etc., and I’ll be on my way.
Does anyone know why they changed the front seatbelts to reside in the doors? It seems it was just for a couple years, maybe 90-92, because when the new “round” 93 Fleetwood came out the seatbelts were back to the proper position on the B pillar.
The law at the time was you either needed “automatic” seat belts or airbags.
GM’s way of following this law was to put the seatbelts in the door. You were supposed to latch the belt and then leave it latched FOREVER. This meant you had to squeeze in between the door and seat when entering/exiting. My Electra’s owner’s manual has a few pages dedicated to this “safety feature.”
Watch a dealer training video from the era to see what I mean.
Passive restraint legislation. Starting in 1989, federal law required all cars to have some sort of passive restraint for the driver. Some manufacturers (namely Chrysler) quickly adopted airbags, even on the lame-duck ’89 M-body, but others relied on automatic seatbelts as a stopgap workaround; they were cheaper.
The automatic belts were typically motorized, but GM’s solution was the door-mounted belts. The idea was that you would leave them buckled all the time, and when the door was opened, the mounts swung out of the way so you could enter/exit the vehicle without ever having to think about buckling up. In practice, nobody did this and just used them like regular belts (if they used them at all). Moreover, the belts were inherently less safe because they were worthless if the door flew open in an accident.
Honda also briefly used this style of belt on two doors during this era.
Automatic belts of all types were pretty much universally hated and were abandoned as soon as an airbag was made standard on any given car.
Yes, I was LOLing at those brochure interior pics that for legal reasons had to show the belts buckled even though nobody is sitting in them. As you said, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY kept them buckled. Though technically they could be used as legally-required “passive restraints” by carefully slipping under the belt as you entered or left the car, doing this was very difficult, plus the belt being spooled required lots of pressure whilst pulling or pushing the door open. It was so much easier to just unbuckle them and use them as regular belts. Besides the fact that they wouldn’t keep you secure if the door opened in a collision, they had another safety disadvantage – the shoulder belt blocked the view out the window, effectively almost doubling the width blocked by the B-pillar.
I liked the door mounted belts because they didn’t cut into my collarbone like most pillar mounted or seat mounted ones do. Reduced their effectiveness, of course.
Paul, can we rename this website Curbside Cadillacs now???
These were my favorite cars as a kid. I could always pick them out of traffic (who couldn’t) and the just said “Cadillac” to me. I never thought of the FWD cars as Cadillacs, no matter how nice they were. The last real Cadillacs, at least to me, were the 93-96 Brougham. I think the CTS is kind of a Cadillac, just because it is RWD.
I do think these are one of the best looking Cadillacs ever. They look better than a contemporary Town Car for sure. The Lincolns did have a better powertrain though as the SEFI 302 was much better at moving 5000 lbs than the 4bbl 307 olds.
I LOVE these cars. Always have. Even though, at the time, you could’ve had the same car in many aspects for way less (I’m talking about the formal roofed 1989-90 Chevy Caprice Brougham), the Cadillac still look very stately. The 350 was a bonus. For those that don’t have to answer to the smog man (Hawaii is one of those states!), I’d love to take this series Brougham and drop the 290hp crate SBC . . . or at least a late 70’s Caddy V-8 (sans the power sapping bolt on smog gear) . . . and away we go!
Interesting note – since these C-bodies were originally designed to accept the Cadillac V-8, and the late 70’s 425 was a de-stroked 472/500 cube block, wouldn’t the latter fit? Can you imagine the freight train RIGHT NOW torque of the 472 or 500 in one of these?
Here is mine it is a 1991 Cadillac brougham d’elegance with the 5.7L. It is the navy blue that you said you would want
I AM LOOKING FOR THE 1993-1996 FLEETWOOD BROUGHAM CADDILAC WITH THE CONTINENTAL REAR TIRE ATTACHED ON THE REAR OF THE CAR. PREFERBABLY WHITE OR YELLOW OR BEIGE. PLEASE SHOW PICTURE AND PRICE
here you go: http://www.jimsmintcars.com/94CadWhtTp5thAdWeb.htm
Dear friends, I am a long time Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham afficionado in the Netherlands. I’m a member of the Cadillac Club Nederlands. I am also a member of the Cadillac LaSalle Club of America. I own a 1980 (see picture). It has 67k miles on it. It looks, drives, feels like a new car. Has never let me down. It has the 6L engine, the bullit proof one! The car came from New Yersey but was and still is 100% rustfree. I bought it on Ebay and had it shipped to the Netherlands.This is my third 1980-1992 Fleetwood. I had 3 from 1981 . One was a coupe d’Elegance and the others were sedans. But sold them because the engines had the 8-6-4 system and I didn’t trust those. The one I have at present is just awsome!
Regards,
Rudy
Congratulations on your fine Cadillac, Rudy. I always enjoy the turnabout of someone from the Netherlands who loves big old American sleds, since there seem to be so many here in the U.S. who are in love with old Volvos and Saabs. As a former owner of both an 89 Brougham (which I wrote about here http://www.curbsideclassic.com/stories/the-many-cars-of-my-life-1989-cadillac-brougham-hello-old-friend/ )
and a 63 Fleetwood, I would urge you to take a plunge into a pre-1967 model next time.
Hello Rudy,
Greetings from Belgium where I drive a 1991 Brougham. I’m a longtime Cadillac fan, this is only my second one after having had a 1984 De Ville.
One of the first things I did when I moved over to Cadillac from Oldsmobile in 1993 was to buy a Brougham. By then I was old enough to drive one and still be taken seriously (as opposed to “driving dad’s/granddad’s car or are you trouble…” It was 1994 and I was able to obtain one of the last 1992s that was driven by an exec so technically I was the first civilian owner even though it had only 15,xxx miles on it. Back then the deal was you got the car for 1/2 price after 2 years regardless of mileage. I ended up paying about $18,000 for the car. It was a regular Brougham not a d’Elegance in white paint red vinyl top and white and red interior. Most 90-92 Broughams had silver lower accent body cladding but white, black, and gold were available for those colors. Mine was white.
It had the 5.7 V8. Part of the reason for the relatively rarity of the 5.7 was that for the first two years it was only available with the Coachbuilder Package while in 1992 it was available stand alone. My car had the package so it helped significantly on handling.
I absolutely loved the car and wholeheartedly agree that that is the last “classic” Cadillac. Yes the 93-96 Broughams were basically of the same ilk with a refreshed body but they were bubbly like the contemporary Caprice and did not evoke the same lines as the old style – but were very very nice cars to drive especially with the LT1.
An interesting fact that is not particularly known but the Broughams were built in Arlington Texas but at the time all the RWD full size cars were built between Arlington, TX and Willow Run, MI. GM decided to close one of the plants and held a ‘contest’ to see which one would close. Many felt that Arlington would close because of the fact that Willow Run was located in Michigan and close to most suppliers and could be easily transferred to other production. Turns out they chose Arlington because, in an interesting way, the UAW stepped up to the plate put some skin in the game and offered a package to GM management that sealed the deal. It was an unprecedented turn of events in management-labor relations. Suffice to say, for about 18 months, the build quality of the cars out of both plants was impressive. I mean everyone was on their game. Willow Run eventually sued GM over the matter but that is another story.
The 1990 Broughams refreshed a few things including the aero front and revised taillights, roof treatment (which was actually available as an option in 1988 but made standard in 1990), the interior was revised slightly the fake wood was revised from an American Walnut look to a Butterfly Walnut. Digital instrumentation was made standard as well as revised HVAC and radio controls. One of the neatest features of the new dash was the translucent upper indicator bar that looked just like wood but when a light lit up it shown through.
Cadillac did not limit production of the Broughams because of CAFE, some of them were subject to the gas-guzzler tax but it had little impact on actual sales. Broughams only represented about 5-8% of Cadillac production so it was only a minor factor. They were huge old fashioned cars and full size RWD cars of any kind were beginning to dwindle in the marketplace. Given the trend to FWD by then a lot of people just simply did not want to drive such a big car, even old timers. Part of the reason that the car lingered was its popularity with the funeral and professional car business which was good for about 40% of the sales by the end of the line.
The true wire wheels garner a lot of attention and are popular and make the car look good but were notorious for giving trouble balancing. There was a return rate of about 20% for a while from owners who complained of vibrations and such after driving for a while. During the late 1990s there was a bit of a glut of these wheels around used so much you could have got a set for $500 but now they are $1800.
As far as the sagging in the rear, GM did not alter the ride height in the rear on purpose, some of it had to do with the fact that often times people would replace the rear air lift shock absorbers with aftermarket ones (like Monroe Max-Air) who natural equilibrium was slightly higher than Delco units. Also, some people complained that even at factory specs the rear looked low so mechanics would shift the height sensor and the car would raise slightly. Also, the springs were slightly softer on air lift equipped cars (for some years on the C/D cars air lift was optional) they would be replaced with standard duty coils which would naturally ride higher. I am not certain, but the Trailer Package may have specified stiffer springs as well. So there is some confusion as to that but I do not believe Cadillac altered the height per se.
When I sold my Brougham in 2005, it really did feel like the passing of an era. I sold mine for $7500 (it only had 34K on the clock) but choice examples are getting mad money especially the 90-92. One of these days I would love to have one again as it really was the best of both worlds an efficient reliable drivetrain with classic appointments, like having your cake and eating it too. I love my 2008 CTS, but that car was like Hollywood back when legends like Greer Garson, Bette Davis, and Marlene Dietrich rode around in such cars.
Before 9/11 cut in, partly as favors for people and partly for the h*ll of it I would do unofficial livery service pick people up at the airport even did two weddings in the car. Sure, Lexus, Mercedes, BMW 7 series might have been more competent cars but nothing I mean nothing available new at the time could make a statement like the Brougham.
I am the 2nd owner of a 1992 d’elegance with the 5.7 engine. I have owned and driven if daily for almost 8 years. I love my car, only wish it had leather seats. But it drives and rides like nothing else. 117k. I feel like she’s just getting warmed up at 21 years old. She does have a bit of a drinking problem in the city but on the highway she still pulls down 25-27 mpg. So why would I ever consider driving a tin can that only promise is higher mpg than Gert? Gertie is fawn color in and out. I have the original sticker and I believe it was around $29,000. Glad to see others appreciate the beauty of an old Cadillac, as I do.
These could have been LS400 fighters actually.
Interesting story: When the LS400 came out, GM engineers said they had no way to even build a car with their resources that would compete with the LS400. The Fleetwood Brougham with a 350 TBI or later, Vortec, would have been able to compete with an LS400 if it tightened up quality and handling (which were still way better than the Seville and DeVille).
This is a better matchup than the mini-me FWD Seville of the same year against the Q45 and LS400. Even the ’93 Seville with its powerplant was still FWD.
In an unrelated note I read a ’98 Ford CV test from C/D and they were saying, “if Ford tightened up the handling it would be America’s answer to the Q45 in this issue…”
GM’s Bs and Ford’s Panthers were the best response to the S-Class, 7-Series, LS400-series luxury cars…with a little bit more effort and engineering $.
My son passed away last December and I inherited his 1992 Cadillac d’elegance. It is in a garage as we speak being assessed as to restoring it. He loved that car, owned it for 7 years, I will never part with it. Unfortunately I was never too interested in the car until now, it is white with white vinyl top lt blue on the bottom cladded with silver. He had wire rims in the trunk and had bought a gold grill for it so I am not sure what he was planning, but I read in a eulogy from one of his friends that some day they would be riding in his pearl white caddy in the sky so I would like to Repaint the whole thing in pearl white. It has white leather seats and blue carpet.
When I see the car I see him.
Ivana
Ok in case anyone is interested IM writing an update on Brians car 7 mos later. Number one thing was lic & reg of course and his lic is MR BR 77 which was his email address. The first visit to the “doctor” inc new interstate battery, Cooper whitewalls, and replacing brake shoes and leaking rear axle seal. Four months later I had new wipers put on and an oil change. A month later the pass side seat belt was unstuck fr inside the door and the window also got a new motor. This month he got a new idler arm and center link. It was soo loose, now Is tight and I must say is a joy to drive and ride in even on a dirt road. He has an appointment with a “specialist” Wed of next week for a new hardtop and headliner, window tint strip on the windshield and fixing the overhead lights over rear view mirror. After these new restorations I will have $2700 invested in the Caddy. He has 135K miles on him and is becoming my main method of transportation; I’m happy (happier)
Hi, Ivana, your story made my day. I’m sure your son is beaming with pride over what you’ve done with his Cadillac. I’m especially glad that you are enjoying the car as you continue to make the efforts to keep it on the road. I’m looking forward to any updates you may have. Bless your big heart!
Alex
Thank you Alex for your very kind message; since that post I have had a new hardtop, headliner and ALL the windows tinted. It is now back at the garage having the dome light put back in, a missing hardtop clip put on , the side mirrors reinstalled & tightened & the lic plate light fixed ; I know it needed a lot and still does but the fact that Brian was able to hang on to the car despite his many issues is a testament to me how much he loved the car. I wish I had taken more of an interest while he was still here.
I’m looking for a 1988-1992 Cadillac Brougham d’Elegance to buy. Please send me an e-mail at bassam[at]mns-online.net
Somehow I suspect that more than a few Lincoln Town Car owners will disagree with the author’s remarks.
Cadillacs of this vintage always struck me as too flashy, as vulgar and common.
Lincolns always had quiet, “old money” conservative good taste.
Well, since this was originally written, I have accumulated two of these…
You’re amassing a fleet, Tom? I like!
Well, I’m still at two cars. The Volvo was traded in on the red one last summer. 2004 Ultimate Series, Autumn red with Light Parchment leather. Only 54,000 miles. It still had the window sticker with the paperwork. The 2000 Cartier is now the daily driver. I love the ’04, it is exactly what I would have ordered new, right down to the color combo.
I can’t say I’m too fond of the exterior revisions these 90-92s brought, it reminds me of a modernist church. I bet Jimmy Swaggart had one like this.
It’s a beautiful car, one of Cadillac’s best. But, no airbags and door-mounted front shoulder belts? In 1992? Seriously?
There was no point in redesigning the Brougham for airbags in 1992 as it was on its way out at the end of that model year and replaced with the airbag equipped Fleetwood. GM was in no big rush to install them as the Feds mandated that cars ether needed airbags or mechanized seat belts. GM chose the latter as it was much cheaper to install those. Here is an article that talks about GM making all of its cars with airbags by 1995.
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/28/us/gm-says-it-will-put-air-bags-in-all-of-its-us-autos-by-1995.html
I’m not really a fan of Cadillacs, BUT, if I was going to buy a vintage Cadillac this is probably the model I would buy. HOWEVER, as much as I like cars with vinyl roofs, I don’t care for cars where the vinyl roof is the same color as the body of the car.
BTW, the emblem on that rear fender….needs to be quite a bit bigger. And when I lived in Texas (during the time this car was built there), I don’t remember seeing all that many Cadillacs. I do remember seeing A LOT of Ford and Chevy pickups.
Irregardless of what Cadillac called the big RWD Cadillac, all of the RWD post WWII Cadillac’s are decedents of the series 60 Cadillac that began in the mid 30’s. Prior to that Cadillac’s number scheme was quite different. The series 60 was not a Fleetwood class. But to understand what Fleetwood means, you need to know that Fleetwood Body used to build custom bodies for high end luxury cars including Cadillac, but not only Cadillac. Fisher Body bought them in the mid-20’s and then GM bought out Fisher Body. However, Fleetwood bodies were used in the higher end Cadillacs till the early 30’s, when the depression made them too expensive. So Fisher bodies were used at Cadillac, but were trimmed by Fleetwood craftmen (persons?).
A Fleetwood 60 Special was put into production for the 1938 model year and the basic series 60 models were renamed series 61 for the 1939 model year. Then the 61 were 62’s so that the LaSalle could be dropped for a lower end series 61.
After WWII the 60 Special becomes the top model (except for Limo’s). What is important to understand is that Cadillac’s lineup was quite extensive in the 1930, and after the war is really quite limited. The bodies are all much the same size. Also the Fisher Brothers left GM, so I am not sure if many Fleetwood craft-people are really left by the mid to late 1950’s. The “full size” Cadillac’s of the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s are clearly based on the first series 60, including the downsized 1977’s.
So I always consider the Fleetwood Brougham’s (aka just Brougham) to really be the successors to the original Fleetwood Sixty Special. But I think Cadillac’s were not quite what they might have been in the 1971-1976 time frame, and the 1977’s were better in some ways, but not great either. Once the FWD’s came out, the RWD was expected to be discontinued soon, so little improvements were made before the 1993 restyle (which many do not like, but the engine is probably the best Cadillac had since the 1964 429).
What I am getting at (finally) is that I think if you want a vintage Cadillac (but not too vintage {prewar}) then I think the best is a mid 60’s (63-67).
For the post 1977 years I think the 94-96 is best with the 260 HP engine, but no vinyl roof.
I’d pull in the 1968s too, the mighty new 472 cu. in. V8 more than compensating for the cheap-looking moulded plastic door panels installed ostensibly for safety reasons, but also to defray the cost of the Federally-mandated emissions and safety equipment.
When these came out I liked the new taillights but have never warmed to the composite headlights. That said, the larger wheelbase, classic shape, retention of more metal trim, and the 5.7/4L60 combo give it the nod over the Town Car. And other than the possible advantage of the LT1 (though…OptiSpark…meh) I like these better than the bubble Fleetwoods that followed in every way.
A lady in my hometown has a pristine grey on grey version that is simply breathtaking, especially when it pulls up near you after it has been raining and it is covered in little droplets.
Most importantly, these Cadillacs LOOKED like
Cadillacs – unlike most post-2000 offerings
to date. You knew, out of the corner of your
eye, when a Caddy was going down the street.
Today, so-called Cadillacs just blend in with
all the other four-wheeled tylenol capsules.
I’d love to get my hands on a 77-80 or a 90-92 Brougham ( the ones without the awful 4100 ) and install the 9C1 chassis bits on it.
Am I the only one bemused and confused by all these name changes? I’ve read this article three times and still am not sure what is what.
May I suggest a three word alternative that will register an instant, firm identity in almost everyone’s mind’s eye?
“LINCOLN TOWN CAR”
I am posting a pic of my son Brian’s 1992 d’elegance because today is the two year anniversary of his death; he had this car seven years and would not part with it. This is a pic with new hardtop, tires, headliner,mirrors, battery,etc. I have about halfway restored as I get funds a labor of love
Hi, Ivana. I was so happy to see the progress you’ve made with your son’s Cadillac. Thanks for posting the picture of the car on his two-year death anniversary. The car looks grand. I know it isn’t easy to keep things moving along in this true labor of love. You help inspire me to keep my cars on the road, especially when I just want to give up during rough times.
Alex
Thank you Alex
Fantastic to hear you’re still working on this car as a tribute to your son’s memory. The progress is excellent and it will look wonderful when you’re finished!
Thank you Chris
Ivana, Beautiful way to Remember Your Son and the Car He Loved,
Sounds like He was very Proud of his Cadillac, and lookn down from the Heavens ,,,Proud of His Mother! . Great Tribute to a Mother and Sons Love!
Blessings and Take Care!
Barry
Thank you Barry
These may have looked the older Caddy’s, but they turned off younger buyers. I.E. people born after 1946. Sure, younger some car hobbyists like them, but as project cars they buy when cars are 10-20 y/o.
I’m a lot more charitable toward the looks of this car now then I was when it came out. I thought the ’90-’92 “restyle” with a bunch of rediculous trim and 90 proof Broughamtastic touches was hideous. The previous trim was classic.
This C body was doomed for its entire production run – and it probably did more to drag the Cadillac name through the mud than any other bad Cadillac – if only because it had an appropriate 13 years to do it. There’s a little numerology irony for you.
What a shame that it took 11 years to get the drivetrain right. But, still fatally flawed with door mounted seatbelts. From the manufacturer that pioneered airbags? Come on, get real.
This car could have been GM’s Toyota Century, but was arguably one of its Deadly Sins (TM).
Orrin I have to say the composite headlights on my 1992 Caddy are like new, very clear and bright while much newer cars here in Florida are cloudy and ugly ; I guess they are made to last
Maybe it’s just a product of my growing up in the era of this car (I was 10 in 1990 when the updated Brougham debuted) but I’ve always loved these. If I could have any C/D-body Cadillac, it would be a ’92 Brougham with the 350, no question. I think the composite headlamps and white-detailed taillamps work perfectly with the design of the car, freshening the look without detracting from the classic elegance of the car. Just beautiful.
What a dreadfully poor choice of advertising slogan… compared to the excellent, timeless “Standard of the World”.
And, another truly dreadful decision on the part of the Cadillac Division.. was naming ANY FWD Cadillac.. as a “Fleetwood”. Sacrilege!!
The first FWD Eldorado was a Fleetwood, and deservedly.
I have a 1991 de elegance that has the 5.0 liter name plate on the trunk, however the sticker under the hood says 5.7. Anybody have an explanation?
Bruce
Damaged trunk replaced by one from the scrap yard.
Run the vin through a decoder and see what engine the vin says it has.
My caddy too; It’s A
1992 and I just replaced the trunk; the
fins I replaced with fiberglass
Pic didn’t go thru the first time
Thanks a lot for this site, the perfect fan club. I live in Paris France and have had for the last 6 years a 1990 5.7 d’Elegance as a daily driver. 40 000 miles added since I bought it. Must be one of the rare Broughams on the road in Europe, with Tom Roel’s one! I drove this car all around France and nearby countries. I even drive it on narrow and twisted mountains roads and the car handles surprisingly well the road. I ‘ll tell you more on this mint car soon!
I had the worlds nicest 1990 brougham and lost it 8 years or so ago. I have desperately searched…have you seen Livinia? She has an ultra rare trunk lid luggage rack, CC Cadillac Grill, Gold Package, Has painted mural on ceiling (Red and Gold abstract sun), imitation convertible roof, wire wheels with uniroyal tires, car phoneand 5.7 v8. It does not have the de elegance seats, I think they may have originally paid the extra $562 to delete them and add striped seats. Originally a lottery winners car (Charlie) followed by untimely passing shortly after. Im 90% sure the vin is 1G6DW5473LR707620 if that helps you help me (or helps you find the real #1 brougham for yourself). I’m sure I’m forgetting something. See photos. Please help. [email protected]. I currently have a 90 with Astroroof, 5.7 and white leather that I hope to replicate my original with if all else fails. It has 298k miles tho (runs stupid solid tho).
If Cadillac still produced this car (though with airbags and other safety updates and the 5.3L V8 from the Silverado), I think it would outsell the CT4 and CT5 even now.
I can but just tolerate the cladding and giant bumper pads in some colors, but the vinyl-wrapped side window is too much. It might look less awful than Chrysler’s version. The tiny backlight is a major safety hazard, considering the vision and neck flexibility of most buyers.
Can either 5.7 engine be put in a 4.1 model, or do they have too many sensors and electronics?
Interestingly, the 2006+ DTS is also an inch taller than the 2000-5 Deville with the same body shell. Half of that is larger wheels. I wonder if the same people complained about both cars being too low.
The ’77 Fleetwood had convenient reading light strips under each door pull, but no later year did.
I didn’t remember any “reading light strips” on the door so I looked on line and indeed they are there. I can’t figure out why though, since there’s also a reading light in the usual place on the C pillar (and I assume the roof for front seat passengers) as well as a large white puddle lamp on the armrest.
.
Forget this 92. What you want is my (former) 90, which was a d’Elegance with 5.7L trailering option. It had every possible option, including real wire wheels and moonroof. No expense spared! I used it regularly to trailer my Airstream, which is exactly what it was intended for! The color combination is perfect, as the red leather complimented the all-white exterior.
I love this particular Cadillac. I recall seeing one around 8:00pm along US 5, possibly Kettleman City when eating at In & Out Burger. One pulled into the lot in a medium blue ploy I’d say with those chrome bumpers. Gorgeous car and the owner, an elderly African-American walked in to order and I walked over to ask about the car. We talked for 15 minutes before it was time for both of us to leave. Me to LA and him to Phoenix.
Yet this morning a 1965 Lincoln Continental convertible, pale yellow and white top, pass me on my morning commute. They always do that when I am driving and catch me by surprise. He was cruising at 70 mph in an absolutely beautiful example of that car. So little time, so many cars…
Cadillac largely dechromed the dashes of the ’84-5 Eldo and Seville. I wish they’d done that to these, and reduced the gloss of the plastic wood a little. Has any other American car had the same dash for 16 years?
Checker?
Not a car, but Dodge full-size vans used the same dash for 20 years (1978-1997). Incredibly, there were also two previous dashboards and one subsequent one in that generation of van.
Even though I love my 88 Brougham….I still lust after a 90-92. My Dad had a white 90 Brougham limo with the 5.7 and dark blue leather – and those acres of plastic wood struck me as the height of luxury.
There was a 91 available north of Pittsburgh a few weeks ago, but I was a day late and a dollar short…so I got a 94 FWB instead.
But I’ll start saving for a 90-92….that mix of cladding, chrome, fake wood, and Formal Look styling is addicting!