I love American cars. Really. I’ve been reading CC pretty religiously for over six years now. Before that, I was already pretty well-versed in the subject (well, more so than the average European), having lived Stateside for a spell and occasionally taking the paternal Pontiac for joyrides. Even at age 15, I knew my DeSotos from my Studebakers. But even I have my limits, and this Caddy is testing them.
This generation of FWD C-Body Cadillacs, introduced in 1985, has had its fair share of well-deserved criticism on CC (see incomplete list at the end of this post), though the deadliness of the sin is not necessarily incontrovertible (or rather incontrosedan?), but still. “You done shrunk ‘em too much, Irv!” America’s senior citizenry seemed to mutter, shaking its collective head in equal parts despair and dandruff. The DeVille should have been rechristened the DeVillage, or even the De Hamlet. Not to mention that HT4100 boat anchor — and transversely mounted, if you please. What a DeSgrace! So GM did what they do worst: they tried piling on the lipstick on that pig so that some of the Cadillac would shine through the mediocrity. From the get-go, they debased the prestigious Fleetwood nameplate by making it a fancy trim level of the reviled DeVille in DeSguise.
The Fleetwood Seventy-Five limo also made the jump to FWD. Never mind that the nameplate was still used on the RWD D-Body at the same exact time as the Fleetwood Brougham. The usual GM fustercluck. They then added further insult to injury by resurrecting the gingerbread-basket “Sixty Special” as a LWB sedan in 1987 (above), even as the Fleetwood Seventy-Five died. Stretching a generic-looking car and slathering it in chrome and leather only went so far, though.
In 1989, a set of tall and vertical sticky-out taillamps or, as we might have called them back in the ‘50s, “fins” helped fix the hind quarters a bit, by way of more overhang. Fender skirts were also added, I guess to increase the Fleetwood’s buoyancy. Overall, since 1985, the sedan had grown by 10 inches. And with status symbols like Cadillac, size matters a lot.
They then turned their attention to the front end. There was change afoot in the mouth, as the ’89 refresh had only resulted in a modest evolution on that front. But in 1991, the dreaded “High Technology” V8 grew to 4.9 litres and 200hp, so in celebration of this impotent mill-stone, the grille was made much bigger.
The chromium-botox treatment helped the DeVille / Fleetwood last a couple extra years, though the Fleetwood name bravely retreated to the big new RWD chassis, leaving the higher trim ‘93s as plain Sixty Specials.
The whole naming thing for ’93 became moot when the 1994 model year arrived, for a new DeVille came on the scene. As always, it’s a case of better the DeVille you know, and I really don’t know that one, though there is some fine CC literature on that subject as well. But I digress.
The whole point of the front-drive Fleetwood Sixty Specials, as far as I can tell, is inside. Cadillac’s sales literature made sure you knew where that extra US$3500 went. Externally, only the “Sixty Special” plaque on the rear end was exclusive. The vinyl padding was standard on these, but optional on lesser DeVilles / Fleetwoods, so it was fairly common.
But that interior, with that heated leather couch “designed by Giugiaro,” complete with sweet, sweet lumbar support and more positions than the Kama Sutra – that’s what folks were buying here. The rest of the car is incidental, really.
Nigh on 30 years after it was stitched together, the precious Giugiaro twin recliner still looks eminently serviceable. In this case, it seems you do get what you pay for, although I cannot ascertain anything as to the durability of this sofa’s electronic party tricks.
The rear lounge area looks just as comfy, but I gather it’s much less heated and adjustable. It’s a completely different mentality to, say, a Nissan President. In a Japanese luxury car, the rear compartment gets all the goodies. In a Cadillac, the front seats are the best in the house.
And it is a house. Or rather, a living room with wheels, cupholders, a sound system and A/C. The object of the whole thing is to transport a maximum of four occupants in complete comfort and utter isolation. And don’t you give me any of that “six passenger” salesperson BS. Look at how those seats were designed, and look at the average USDA-fed middle-aged taxpayer, even back in 1992. Only four will fit comfortably – emphasis on that last word. Six adults is probably doable, but for a short while only: the strain on the unibody, the seat frames and the engine would make any attempt at a trip lasting more than a few miles rather ill-advised.
After all, we’re talking about an early ‘90s Cadillac here. Workmanship and reliability were not what they once were. It takes Japanese levels of OCD to keep a thing like this in this condition. And it took more space than I could find to actually make Big Bertha here fit my lens in profile. Impossible, it was…
For what it’s worth, it seems like the 1992 Sixty Special is a relatively rare couch set: only 554 comfort-conscious customers parted with US$39,860 (at a minimum) to get the support their lumbar regions so desperately required. That’s down from 1817 units in 1990 and 879 for model year ’91. The trim package was called Sixty Special Ultra for 1993; prices came down slightly and 686 Ultras were made. The Coupé never made it to the ’93 name change.
The last Sixty Special was put together on 18 June 1993, putting an end to a name that had been on Cadillac catalogues since 1938. No good deed goes unpunished and no slow-selling sub-nameplate overstays its welcome for more than a few seasons. Maybe they could have asked Giugiaro’s input about the exterior, while they were at it. Not that it mattered, or would have changed much of anything.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: 1989 Cadillac Fleetwood – Deadly Sin or Greatest Hit?, by Jason Shafer
Curbside Classic: 1991 Cadillac Fleetwood Coupe – Turning The Clock Back, by Eric703
Curbside Classic: 1991 Cadillac Sedan DeVille – Almost Doesn’t Count, by Laurence Jones
Mi Curbside Classico: 1991 Cadillac DeVille – Bought New For 154 Million Pesos, by Juan Agustin Romero Melchor
Curbside Classic: 1991 Cadillac Sedan de Ville – Save Me!, by Tom Klockau
Curbside Classic: 1991 Cadillac Coupe de Ville: Triple White Birthday Cake, by Tom Klockau
Curbside Classics: 1989 Cadillac Coupe de Ville & 1990 Sedan de Ville – Better As Time Goes By?, by Brendan Saur
COAL: 1991 Cadillac Sedan de Ville – I Can’t Help Myself, by BigTomBrougham
CC Outtake: 1992 Cadillac Coupe de Ville – The Real Jackpot, by Brendan Saur
I don’t think I had ever known about the Sixty Special version on these. But then I had completely quit paying attention to Cadillac by the time they were made.
I will say that using my 1989 Cad Brougham as my primary data point, Cadillac was using leather of very nice quality during this period of time – the seats in my 15 year old car were in far nicer condition than the leather seats in so many newer cars owned by family and friends.
Two things…
Years ago I drove a ’91 DeVille, so not as fancy-shmancy as this one. It was very comfortable, very quiet, and rode like a dream. It ran like crap, likely due to some electrical problem. Hard pass.
And, the Cadillac I wrote about (and linked above) is still running around town. The new owner has ditched the fender skirts (good call) and a few other exterior appendages. Even when these were bondo’d over, it did give off a cleaner vibe.
If I were a betting man, I’d say there is another Sixty Special floating around Tokyo. Don’t ask why, but I just suspect there is.
When one knew what the Cadillac Fleetwood Sixty Special had once represented, these cynical marketing ploys were both sad and disgusting…
The 1989–1993 Sixty-Special that Cadillac should have done in the first place when introducing the FWD C-body in 1985.
The bizarre thing was that the 1987–1988 Sixty-Special had an exclusive longer wheelbase (115 inches) but shorter length (201 inches) than 1989–1993 Sixty-Special (113 and 205 respectively)! For 1993, Fleetwood nameplate was assigned to the new D-body, leaving Sixty-Special as plushier version of DeVille. No wonder the Cadillac buyers were confused…
This car doesn’t have rear amber turn signal indicators and has the side turn signal indicators (sourced from Saab) installed wrong way. I think this Cadillac might be personal or grey import.
GM factory-installed a lot of those repeaters backwards like that, with the thick part toward the front. They put them on all “Chevrolet” (export) Aleros that way, and—puzzlingly, seeingly at random—on some domestic Oldsmobile Aleros, too.
I noticed the U.S. lights on the feature car of this post, too. It’s bizarre; Japan often lets U.S. headlamps skate, but they are usually quite strict about the tail lights. These recessed all-red U.S. tail lights don’t meet Japanese angle-of-visibility requirements (they flunk the 80° outboard requirement), nor the requirement for amber rear turn signals on vehicles made since 1973.
Perhaps the owner of this car swaps the export tails on for the yearly inspection, then puts the American-spec items back in afterward…?
You are right. I just looked at my neighbour’s Cadillac DeVille outside my home and noticed the incorrectly installed side turn signal indicators.
GM did have T85 export headlamps for DeVille…
Oh, you’re right—I saw the aim pads on the front face of the headlight lens and forgot they left those on the export lamps as well (where they’re useless, but also harmless, so might as well just use the same mould). No matter how closely I look at the pics of the black car and compare pics of the T85 and US-spec lamps, I can’t quite make out which ones are on the car.
It’s odd that this has red rear indicators but folding mirrors.
The side repeaters on my three Saabs (’86, ’88, and ’00) were all installed with the thicker part toward the front.
C.f. this one, which appears to have a sticker from official importer Yanase in the rear window:
https://www.goo-net-exchange.com/usedcars/CADILLAC/CADILLAC_FLEETWOOD/700900002430190531001/index.html
The side repeaters on my three Saabs (’86, ’88, and ’00) were all installed with the thicker part toward the front.
The repeaters on Saab models have thicker part toward the rear (not front), and looking through the Google images shows that.
I admit that those seats “designed by Giugiaro,” look pretty comfortable. Now if only the rest of the car had been designed by him.
Love any link to Laurence’s photography!
And an excuse to listen to Jimmy Buffett:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rlvtjjqd–Y&feature=share
Dave
Great article, thank you. These cars make excellent retro classic daily drivers. A Cadillac of this vintage as a beater is just sad, but as a cared -for daily, they’re attractive.
I own a 89 Deville, with thick, soft leather and fabric interior. It still looks and feels like new. Much of the shiny trim inside and out is actually metal. The switches and controls have a stout, quality feel. The body proportions may look odd, with an unfashionable low belt line and relatively compact dimensions, but they make an excellent, livable package. The interior is roomy, light and airy with excellent visibility. Ride and handling is decent, with no complaints. The 4.5 V8 is smooth, with excellent low end torque that allows the car to move out with authority. But there’s little point to winding the engine out as power quickly drops off at higher revs.
The only problem with mine is the terrible factory Cabriolet roof treatment and dealer installed pimp grille, two inexcusable warts that mar an otherwise decent car. These features made an already inexpensive old car utterly repellent and unsellable. I bought the car for pennies as a cool retro thing for the collection, but no matter how I try, I cannot find anything redeemable about that roof.
When I moved to Canada almost 24 years ago, my great uncle had a 1991 Fleetwood that looked exactly like the featured car, but with a wire spoke wheels. I got to ride in it in the rear seat a lot. That car was replaced by a DHS. Late on he went with a first generation of Genesis sedan and his las car was a 2012 Sonata hybrid.
Many years ago I’ve seen a Fleetwood Sixty Special.
From where I am sitting in N. Europe that looks like a big, comfortable car ideal for low speed touring in Scandinavia where the speed limits are low. The biggest problem is the shocking fuel economy.
The European focus on high speed driving is now irrelevant in many counties here so why has nobody tried to market a comforable car? Is it really the case that comfort can not be disentangled from seniority? I don´t need 180 kmph hour speed, I need a spacious car with a big boot and decent economy when running at a steady 100 kmph. And I don´t want a family people mover and I don´t want an SUV.
Volvo?
What a way to start the morning, with Prof. Tatra DeStroying one of the most reviled Cadillacs ever. And all those puns – how appropriate for what seemed to be a joke of a luxury car when it first came out. No longer a Cadillump at all, more of a Cadipebble, and having lived in a tiny settlement, I was quite taken by DeHamlet. “You done shrunk ‘em too much, Irv!” – love that line!
I was horrified to see the square blue GM Mark of Mediocrity on the door next to the misaligned (compare the two Es) Fleetwood letters – why on earth would they want to DeBase the Fleetwood name by putting that thing next to it? Did some kind of repulsive magnetic field play havoc with the Fleetwood lettering? And the spacing: Fle Etwood. Was that factory? I’d hope not.
I may have cataracts, but I’ve never had a Cadillac.
But seriously, folks, it certainly looks a much more coherent design than the somewhat caricaturish original. That interior though – while I don’t normally have much time for broughammy affectations, those seats almost make the appearance worthwhile.
What a shame they didn’t let Giugiaro loose on the exterior…..
“Impotent mill stone!”
“Big Bertha!”
“No good deed goes unpunished.”
I laughed out loud at these! Excellent writing!
A colleague had a Cad of this vintage, I never bothered finding out if it was a deVille or a deHamptons. A Fleetliner or a Barge. It was all white, inside and out. They were afraid to get it dirty, so it made only rare appearances.
These were handsome cars, even if poorly executed.
My favorite was “..shaking its collective head in equal parts despair and dandruff.”
In fact, I briefly threw my head back there, and now there’s some dandruff on the back of the couch.
Got a build sheet from Cadillac for the 92cadilac Fleetwood 60 s special coupe I own .the original owner ordered every option possible in 92 .I’m adding it all up to get idea of just how much he spent .I know it’s a DeVille conversion car with every option they offered and even more .. unbelievable? Holy grail car for sure .1g6cb13bxn4203295. . probably need to keep it .had no idea ..we lucked out in a huge way .I had no idea . always thoroughly research your cars .and get a build sheet from Cadillac also