Automotive swill from the '70s and '80s

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
3,296
Location
The Willow Creek District AVA
This picture always amused me (from Car and Driver magazine). Some of the automotive swill that was produced back then was pretty disgusting. Cadillac is building some seriously good stuff right now (e.g ATS-V, CTS-V, etc.), but boats like this will make it much harder for them to establish their new product direction. There is no reason an ATS-V cannot be M5 worthy, or the CTS-V AMG S-class worthy. I hope they stay with their new direction and focus long enough to re-establish themselves.

Scott

 
It's not the magazine's fault the cadillac leans like that.
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
It's not the magazine's fault the cadillac leans like that.
wink.gif


Not saying it was. The car was junk. I'm surprised it had a rear anti-roll bar. See that in the picture? Haha. Lot of good it did! That left front tire is folded over so far it must have left a whitewall tire mark on the pavement! HAHAHA!
 
Originally Posted By: SLO_Town
but boats like this will make it much harder for them to establish their new product direction.


I can't imagine anyone who thinks there is any correlation to the cars of the 1970s or 1980s and cars being produced today. And on a side note, those cars were never meant to be driven like that-they were highway cruisers, not sports cars, nor did they ever pretend to be sports cars.
 
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
those cars were never meant to be driven like that-they were highway cruisers, not sports cars, nor did they ever pretend to be sports cars.

This.


I like Cadillac's new offerings as well.
 
I drove a 1979 Cadillac Deville for a couple of years back in the early 1990's, my Dad's old car that he bought new. I don't recall anything other than a luxurious ride as good as the Lincoln I currently drive. Since I never put it through a road course I can't comment on emergency handling. A number of people approached me back then to buy the car - seems there were plenty of enthusiasts for that body style and huge V8 back then. I had fun in that car.
 
Those Cadillacs were designed to be ultra comfortable highway cruisers not nimble sports cars.

Watch the Le Mans drive through the gas station! Hilarious.
 
Looks like the front end is about to cave in for that bottom pic.

But it would be silly to compare s BMW or mb of that era to one today, let alone a body on frame caddy to one today.

I'd say that was a bad era because Cadillac lost all of its interesting design/look, so was just a giant cruiser. Older and newer looked better IMO.
 
Those Cadillacs were meant to be cross country interstate cruisers. They were never intended to do anything but go down the road comfortably all day long at highways speeds, and the interstates are not exactly going to tax a suspension system.

The glory days of Caddy were really about 1957 to about 1970 IMHO with the best of them being the 57-62/63 model years.

I had a 1970 Sedan DeVille and a 75 Eldorado and they were very solidly built cars. Now I was driving them in the late 90s when you could grab a nice one for around 1000 bucks still.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I'd say that was a bad era because Cadillac lost all of its interesting design/look, so was just a giant cruiser. Older and newer looked better IMO.

Yes, while I do have an appreciation and a fair bit of experience with GM cars of that era, you're quite right. Cadillac, Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Chevrolet became way, way too interchangeable in those days. You could hop blindfolded into a Caprice/Impala, a Delta 88, and so forth all of the same vintage, and have no idea in which one you were actually sitting, aside from the occasional steering wheel design difference and different upholstery finishing.
 
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
Those Cadillacs were meant to be cross country interstate cruisers. They were never intended to do anything but go down the road comfortably all day long at highways speeds, and the interstates are not exactly going to tax a suspension system. . . .

You ain't driven in Loozyana lately, Daddy-O. There's a stretch of I-10 from Baton Rouge to Lake Charles and beyond which is awful, and so is almost all of I-49. They'll make your car look back over its shoulder and go, "Boss! Do we have to do this?"
 
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
Those Cadillacs were meant to be cross country interstate cruisers. They were never intended to do anything but go down the road comfortably all day long at highways speeds, and the interstates are not exactly going to tax a suspension system. . . .

You ain't driven in Loozyana lately, Daddy-O. There's a stretch of I-10 from Baton Rouge to Lake Charles and beyond which is awful, and so is almost all of I-49. They'll make your car look back over its shoulder and go, "Boss! Do we have to do this?"


Never been down that way, but I have driven cross country on I80 and I35 more times than I care to count. And many trips from here to Toronto. All of which I used a large cruiser car for after doing it in a cramped Celica once. I think you will find your examples the exception to the rule. The interstates were designed from the start to be no frills driving as it was partially for national security reasons(allowing troop transports).
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
I think you will find your [Louisiana] examples the exception to the rule. The interstates were designed from the start to be no frills driving as it was partially for national security reasons(allowing troop transports).

Oh, I know Loozyana is an exception. I cross over into Miss. or (after 3 hours of unpleasant driving) into TX, and I think something's wrong with the car because it's suddenly riding smoothly. Interstates in CO and NM were generally fine as well.
 
Even that wallowing pig could have been tamed with better bars, shocks and wider wheels and tires without much ride trade off.
 
Originally Posted By: Robenstein

Never been down that way, but I have driven cross country on I80 and I35 more times than I care to count. And many trips from here to Toronto. All of which I used a large cruiser car for after doing it in a cramped Celica once. I think you will find your examples the exception to the rule. The interstates were designed from the start to be no frills driving as it was partially for national security reasons(allowing troop transports).


The interstates also had to have straight sections every so often for landing jets in case the military runways were destroyed by nuclear strikes.

Ike was a pretty crafty guy, he knew that emphasizing the national security aspect in the "duck and cover" '50s was going to help push along what was really an economic development project (and a MASSIVE one). There a lot of things I like about Ike, including his military-industrial complex speech and the press release he prepared in case the Normandy landings failed in which he shouldered all the blame attached to the attempt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top