The bemusement of authorities was not lessened when large, shiny and expensive cars, most of them 1957 Cadillacs, began pouring into the area on Wednesday – and kept coming yesterday – from all parts of the country. The oldest car in the group was a ’56 Caddy.
Interesting. I would have thought the wise guys would stick with the impressive ’56 instead of trading down to the delicate Chevy-like ’57. Apparently they were judging status solely by cost, not by appearance.
This is a terrific book about the meeting and its long-term consequences in beginning the destruction of the mob:
Mafia Summit: J. Edgar Hoover, The Kennedy Brothers, and the Meeting that Unmasked the Mob
Gil Reavill
New York: Thomas Dunne Books: St. Martin’s Press, 2013
My Dad’s first Cadillac…he had aspired to owning a Cadillac for years…was a 1963, a four-window sedan, which meant a four door hardtop with wide C-pillar (six window sedans were much less common and had a narrow C-pillar with a fixed window pane). It was light beige, called “Bahama Sand,” and we all remember it fondly. He traded it toward a 1966 Cadillac.
Looking back, his later Cadillacs became more plebeian, more “Big Chevies” as GM chased the mass market with their “prestige” product. The Seville did not interest him but in 1979, with the family nest empty, he opted for an all-new-that-year Eldorado which did restore some of Cadillac’s glory. If only he hadn’t gotten that accursed Oldsmobile Diesel, though his would wind up having far fewer problems than most, in part due to the water separator that he installed from the outset. The omission of a water separator was a prIme example of GM cheapness. Many an injector pump costing a hundred times more than a water separator was destroyed by water in the diesel fuel. The diesel was still running when traded in after thirteen years on a Taurus wagon.
If I didn’t already have an old car and not enough garage, I could be looking at 1963 Cadillacs.
Interesting that the two-door hardtop (far left) had a different windshield with squared corners vs. the rounded corners of the sedan and even the convertible. The illustrations in the ’63 brochure show this difference as well. The ’64s are the same.
One of my less favorite Cadillac model years. I’m not sure why they got rid of the full-width grilles of the 1961 and 1962 models. The 1963 and 1964 front ends seem like a step back, and look like the 59-60 models.
Well, the little bitty sections that surround the parking lights and curve around over the cornering lights on the front fenders are kind of like grille extensions, but I see what you mean. I like to think of this design as kind of hitting the happy medium between the simple full-width grille of the Lincoln and the narrow grille with the complex freestanding headlights of the Imperial.
It’s true that the front end of these hark back to the ’59-’60. I suspect that the ’61-’62 styling was considered a bit too “light”, not distinctive enough, and that this front end was brought back for that reason. It has more gravitas.
But then that was where things were heading with luxury cars, towards the Brougham Era, and away from the Googie/Century Moderne era.
I don’t doubt that you read what you quote but it sounds like revisionist history to me. The only Chevrolet that the 61 Cadillac resembles is the 63, two years into the future. The 62 Cadillac reminds me of a 66 Buick or a 70 Chevrolet, also well into the future. They didn’t resemble any current or past Chevrolets.
“Jordan’s staff touched up the 1962 Cadillac to bring it more in character with previous models. By the time this face-lift was begun, Mitchell had replaced Earl as General Motors’ design vice president, bringing with him a new design sensibility.
“Bill thought we were heading down the wrong path with Cadillac,” comments Dave Holls. “He didn’t like the 1961 front end. He said it would make a great front for a Chevrolet, and when I was transferred to Chevrolet, we did the 1963 Chevrolet grille like the 1961 Cadillac. But Bill wanted to get back to a more traditional Cadillac front end.
“We used to have photographs up on the board with all the Cadillac fronts from 1941 on, and Bill felt that the 1961 grille didn’t say Cadillac. It was a beautiful front, but it was like the 1939, which wasn’t a very good Cadillac, either. Nothing wrong except it just wasn’t Cadillac. So part of our assignment was to change that.” https://auto.howstuffworks.com/1961-1964-cadillac.htm
back to “regal snooty front”
“”The 1963 Cadillac had more of the substance, the solidity, and presence of the 1959-1960 production models,” contends Jordan. “We never wanted to make it as heavy in appearance as those earlier cars. We were after a leaner-looking Cadillac; lighter. You’ll notice that in 1963 and 1964, we went back to that smoother, more solid shape, and the more regal, snooty front. I think the 1963 was the best of those cars.” https://auto.howstuffworks.com/1961-1964-cadillac.htm
Wow, we have been on a 63 Cadillac binge lately. I am loving this high-calorie buffet. We all identify with a particular Cadillac that involuntarily springs to mind when someone says “Cadillac” – and the 63 is mine.
My first thought when I saw the photo was “impressive”…but these are classic Cadillacs. No words are needed. I consider the Sixties to be the last decade when a Cadillac had that kind of aura, and the 1963 and ‘64 models are my favourites of the decade. Mark me down for the black hardtop coupe.
I imagine myself owning a ’62 Cadillac and having the means to trade annually, I would have kept it, skipped the ’63 model year and bought a ’64.
Ahh, who am I trying to kid. . . I could barely scrape together 125 bucks for the 62 Caddy I bought in 1975. I found and fixed a short in the electric system that drained the battery overnight. Only drove it for 2 months, then sold it for a modest profit.
Really? I have always thought of the ’64 as a rather unfortunate “update” of the ’63.
Don’t like its rudimentary fins (makes the rear end look fat) and the grille treatment with the body colored center bar looks cheap to my eyes. Also the parking/cornering lights are too big. My overal impression of the ’64 is that of a much heavier car that has lost the elegance and freshness the ’63 had.
posted by MG
Shades of the “1957 Apalachin Meeting”
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/62-mafia-members-seized-upstate-ny-1957-article-1.2428519
The bemusement of authorities was not lessened when large, shiny and expensive cars, most of them 1957 Cadillacs, began pouring into the area on Wednesday – and kept coming yesterday – from all parts of the country. The oldest car in the group was a ’56 Caddy.
Interesting. I would have thought the wise guys would stick with the impressive ’56 instead of trading down to the delicate Chevy-like ’57. Apparently they were judging status solely by cost, not by appearance.
Mob Town is a movie made in 2019 about that 1957 meeting. Average movie with lots of great 1950s cars.
I agree. A so-so movie, but I did enjoy all the old classic cars.
Nah, no mobsters, just businessmen.
This is a terrific book about the meeting and its long-term consequences in beginning the destruction of the mob:
Mafia Summit: J. Edgar Hoover, The Kennedy Brothers, and the Meeting that Unmasked the Mob
Gil Reavill
New York: Thomas Dunne Books: St. Martin’s Press, 2013
Fun to google the addresses in the “Appalachin Meeting” article.
Fancy cars. But modest homes?
Wow! Very impressive!
My Dad’s first Cadillac…he had aspired to owning a Cadillac for years…was a 1963, a four-window sedan, which meant a four door hardtop with wide C-pillar (six window sedans were much less common and had a narrow C-pillar with a fixed window pane). It was light beige, called “Bahama Sand,” and we all remember it fondly. He traded it toward a 1966 Cadillac.
Looking back, his later Cadillacs became more plebeian, more “Big Chevies” as GM chased the mass market with their “prestige” product. The Seville did not interest him but in 1979, with the family nest empty, he opted for an all-new-that-year Eldorado which did restore some of Cadillac’s glory. If only he hadn’t gotten that accursed Oldsmobile Diesel, though his would wind up having far fewer problems than most, in part due to the water separator that he installed from the outset. The omission of a water separator was a prIme example of GM cheapness. Many an injector pump costing a hundred times more than a water separator was destroyed by water in the diesel fuel. The diesel was still running when traded in after thirteen years on a Taurus wagon.
If I didn’t already have an old car and not enough garage, I could be looking at 1963 Cadillacs.
Interesting that the two-door hardtop (far left) had a different windshield with squared corners vs. the rounded corners of the sedan and even the convertible. The illustrations in the ’63 brochure show this difference as well. The ’64s are the same.
The 2-door hardtop used the same roof pressing as the B-body 4-door hardtops. Maybe that meant using a B-body windshield as well? Looks like it to me.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bd/22/92/bd2292c9c663fbcc3e6d16b1d3c775e4.jpg
The other oddity was the Series 75 which used the 1959-60 panoramic windshield well into the mid-60s.
One of my less favorite Cadillac model years. I’m not sure why they got rid of the full-width grilles of the 1961 and 1962 models. The 1963 and 1964 front ends seem like a step back, and look like the 59-60 models.
Well, the little bitty sections that surround the parking lights and curve around over the cornering lights on the front fenders are kind of like grille extensions, but I see what you mean. I like to think of this design as kind of hitting the happy medium between the simple full-width grille of the Lincoln and the narrow grille with the complex freestanding headlights of the Imperial.
It’s true that the front end of these hark back to the ’59-’60. I suspect that the ’61-’62 styling was considered a bit too “light”, not distinctive enough, and that this front end was brought back for that reason. It has more gravitas.
But then that was where things were heading with luxury cars, towards the Brougham Era, and away from the Googie/Century Moderne era.
I read that upper crust of GM said the models you cite looked too much like Chevrolets from the front, not top drawer enough
i.e., they needed to look like Cadillacs again
I don’t doubt that you read what you quote but it sounds like revisionist history to me. The only Chevrolet that the 61 Cadillac resembles is the 63, two years into the future. The 62 Cadillac reminds me of a 66 Buick or a 70 Chevrolet, also well into the future. They didn’t resemble any current or past Chevrolets.
one of the articles:
“Jordan’s staff touched up the 1962 Cadillac to bring it more in character with previous models. By the time this face-lift was begun, Mitchell had replaced Earl as General Motors’ design vice president, bringing with him a new design sensibility.
“Bill thought we were heading down the wrong path with Cadillac,” comments Dave Holls. “He didn’t like the 1961 front end. He said it would make a great front for a Chevrolet, and when I was transferred to Chevrolet, we did the 1963 Chevrolet grille like the 1961 Cadillac. But Bill wanted to get back to a more traditional Cadillac front end.
“We used to have photographs up on the board with all the Cadillac fronts from 1941 on, and Bill felt that the 1961 grille didn’t say Cadillac. It was a beautiful front, but it was like the 1939, which wasn’t a very good Cadillac, either. Nothing wrong except it just wasn’t Cadillac. So part of our assignment was to change that.”
https://auto.howstuffworks.com/1961-1964-cadillac.htm
back to “regal snooty front”
“”The 1963 Cadillac had more of the substance, the solidity, and presence of the 1959-1960 production models,” contends Jordan. “We never wanted to make it as heavy in appearance as those earlier cars. We were after a leaner-looking Cadillac; lighter. You’ll notice that in 1963 and 1964, we went back to that smoother, more solid shape, and the more regal, snooty front. I think the 1963 was the best of those cars.”
https://auto.howstuffworks.com/1961-1964-cadillac.htm
Well, that clears that one up.
It makes sense to me now. Thanks!
Wow, we have been on a 63 Cadillac binge lately. I am loving this high-calorie buffet. We all identify with a particular Cadillac that involuntarily springs to mind when someone says “Cadillac” – and the 63 is mine.
Is there a collective noun for Cadillacs? I propose chrome. A chrome of Cadillacs.
My first thought when I saw the photo was “impressive”…but these are classic Cadillacs. No words are needed. I consider the Sixties to be the last decade when a Cadillac had that kind of aura, and the 1963 and ‘64 models are my favourites of the decade. Mark me down for the black hardtop coupe.
I imagine myself owning a ’62 Cadillac and having the means to trade annually, I would have kept it, skipped the ’63 model year and bought a ’64.
Ahh, who am I trying to kid. . . I could barely scrape together 125 bucks for the 62 Caddy I bought in 1975. I found and fixed a short in the electric system that drained the battery overnight. Only drove it for 2 months, then sold it for a modest profit.
Really? I have always thought of the ’64 as a rather unfortunate “update” of the ’63.
Don’t like its rudimentary fins (makes the rear end look fat) and the grille treatment with the body colored center bar looks cheap to my eyes. Also the parking/cornering lights are too big. My overal impression of the ’64 is that of a much heavier car that has lost the elegance and freshness the ’63 had.