Make America Cadillac Again

[Anti Federalist]

What Cadillac Should Have Done… and Still Could

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2019/01/26/what-cadillac-should-have-done-and-still-could/

By eric - January 26, 2019

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Draper-ad-205x300.jpg

As Cadillac’s market share continues to wilt, it’s worth considering what Cadillac once was – and could be again.

If, that is, it could take off the Me Too blinders it has been wearing for the past 30-plus years and resumed building . . . Cadillacs.

Not BMWs with Cadillac badges.

Certainly not electric BMWs with Cadillac badges.

Batteries are about as sexy as Depends – and Depends at least work.

Cadillac was successful – once upon a time – because Cadillacs were not BMWs. Or Audis or Benzes or any other such foreign thing. They were American things. Boldly – even belligerently so.

It wasn’t so much about finesse as it was about a very particular style – obstreperous, insolent. Not merely the opposite of politically correct but the hairy thing which stomps with both feet on political correctness.

You know – what America used to be and which Cadillac once embodied.

The other thing was size.

Cadillacs were big cars as well as bold cars. The biggest cars – and proud of it. Mile long hoods and trunks that fit three.

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/67-Eldo-300x168.jpg

The idea of a small Cadillac is as silly as the idea of a fuel-efficient drag racer. It’s contrary to the point.

It’s worth noting – especially because Cadillac seems not to have noticed it – that the most successful (and one of the very few successful at all) new Cadillacs is huge – a Leviathan of the roads with no real peer and also the only one that offends exactly the right people. Which is a turn-on for the people who like (or used to like) Cadillacs.

It is the Escalade, the only new Cadillac that resembles the Cadillacs of the glory days – and the thing is a truck, basically. It is massive and intimidating and powerful and unapologetically consumptive of every resource within reach.

It comes with the biggest V8 GM makes, which used to be the standard for every Cadillac. Liners like the Fleetwood and Eldorado – great names; great American names – came with 8 liter engines, unsurpassed in displacement by anything else that wasn’t a locomotive.

The Escalade also has the most room inside – not merely of any GM vehicle, but period.

There is nothing else as titanic – exactly the right word. The thing is awesome, in the original way that word was meant. That is to say, it inspires awe.

Precisely what Cadillac’s cars used to be all about.

Today’s Cadillac cars are about other things. The things every other luxury brand already specializes in – most particularly, “sportiness.”

There is nothing wrong with being “sporty” – but the trend has gotten out of hand because (like tattoos) everyone has one – and that detracts from the difference of having one.

People bought BMWs because they were sporty – and Cadillacs were something else. Two different kinds of buyers, with different preferences. Contra that, people bought Cadillacs because they weren’t sporty BMWs, nor trying to be.

Those buyers had a different preference.

They wanted to make an impression. To be the car that stood out from the herd, not only in terms of physical size but also physical presence. In their heyday, when a Cadillac rolled up to the curb, it was like seeing Hulk Hogan at the airport. You couldn’t help looking, even if you didn’t particularly like the look.

The point was, people looked. Everyone looked.

Todays Caddys – the Escalade excepted – blend in, the afterthought angles and tail-light designs which try to conjure the ghosts of Cadillacs past notwithstanding. You lift the hood and are greeted by the same turbo fours and V6s found in Chevys and Buicks, tweaked perhaps but (echoing Lloyd Bentsen to Dan Quayle) they are no 472s and 511s – the Cadillac specific (and Cadillac huge) V8s you commanded when you held the keys to a Brougham de Elegance.

These were American Bentleys – only better because they were American. Uproariously, defiantly in-your-face American. The car to intimidate a Bentley in.

And did.

What Cadillac succeeded in doing by trying to be another BMW was to alienate its core buyer demographic while failing to attract the one it sought – which continued to prefer (like Coke) the real thing.

This isn’t a slam of Cadillac. It is a reminder that Coke isn’t Pepsi – and Coke buyers don’t want Pepsi (just as Pepsi buyers don’t want Coke).

Cadillac has been trying to be the New Coke of luxury cars by downsizing its cars and Me-Tooing the sportiness of other cars. This has been a huge mistake. No matter how quick a V series Cadillac may be relative to a BMW M or Benz AMG, it will never be a BMW M or a Benz AMG and ought to give up trying because by trying be those cars, it becomes just another one of those kinds of cars.

A Cadillac ought to be unlike all other cars. It ought not to care that other cars are quicker – because they are not Cadillacs and never will be, no matter how fast they lap the Nurburgring or get from zero to 60.

A Cadillac ought to own the curb.

Klieg lights should flash – or seem to be flashing. A movie star just stepped onto the red carpet.

Owning a Cadillac ought to make you feel like one.

They don’t anymore, because they are just another car – with a different badge and not much else. Adding batteries will only make matters worse because it will make them even more homogenous.

If Cadillac wants to make a comeback, it ought to be the one luxury brand to mock batteries – and any other form of virtue signaling. No Cadillac should have less engine than any other GM vehicle.

Fours ought to be out of the question. They are as un-Cadillac as having a Diet Coke with a ribeye steak.

Even V6s are questionable.

Fuel economy? What Cadillac that ever sold well gave a tinker’s damn about that? Do people buy Escalades because of their fuel efficiency – or their demure “carbon footprint”?

These are not verities of political correctness, of course – and thus eschewed by Cadillac’s current management as well as the woman who runs the company, who is surely triggered by the very thought of Don Draper and his de Ville.

But that was Cadillac’s glorious – and successful – past.

And could be its successful again future.

[Suzanimal]

Once I was out of the house (early 1990's), my dad bought my mom a Cadillac Brougham in a metallic bronze/gold color. That thing was a beast. My parents loved Cadillacs and it seemed to be a sign you made it to their generation. I have to admit it was a sweet ride. I drove my parents to Florida in it when my brother moved down there and for 9 hours my dad kept pointing out all the bumps in the road you can't even feel, lol. I think that's all he talked about the whole trip.

[Grandmastersexsay]

I hate GM but the "sporty" Cadillacs brought Cadillac back from the brink of obscurity. They're selling a lot better now than the 80s and 90s. These V6 engines are also making more power than their big block counterparts. Stop living in the past. Low level 4 door sedans are faster and handle better than muscle cars and sports cars did in the late 60s early 70s.

[tod evans]

I hate GM but the "sporty" Cadillacs brought Cadillac back from the brink of obscurity. They're selling a lot better now than the 80s and 90s. These V6 engines are also making more power than their big block counterparts. Stop living in the past. Low level 4 door sedans are faster and handle better than muscle cars and sports cars did in the late 60s early 70s.

What makes you think that modern cars are 'better' in the way the author quoted talks about?

They're not..

Applying modern technology to a land yacht could very well be marketable, nobody is offering such a critter...

How about a blown 572 backed by a Tremek with soft leather bench seats and concert quality audio, Brembo brakes, 4-wheel drive and real burled walnut accents.

[specsaregood]

I hate GM but the "sporty" Cadillacs brought Cadillac back from the brink of obscurity. They're selling a lot better now than the 80s and 90s. These V6 engines are also making more power than their big block counterparts. Stop living in the past. Low level 4 door sedans are faster and handle better than muscle cars and sports cars did in the late 60s early 70s.

Have you ever driven one of the older cadillacs?

[acptulsa]

But that was Cadillac’s glorious – and successful – past.

And could be its successful again future.

No, it couldn't be.

There's a reason the only Cadillac that even comes close to being supremely roomy is a truck. The federal government made it illegal for new cars to be built that hold six of anyone bigger than midgets.

The Escalade is a badge-engineered Suburban. It looks like a truck. It rides like a truck. It can be rolled over on its roof by a strong gust of wind like a truck. It lets you look at your luggage like a truck.

America used to make cars that could seat six. They didn't look like trucks. Grandmom didn't need a stepladder to get in. They rode smoothly. Their centers of gravity were low, and they would skid long before they would roll over. Other drivers could see over the hood when you pulled up next to them at a stop sign. They didn't necessarily get good gas mileage (Cadillacs sure didn't) but they got a little better mileage than tall trucks with similar power-to-weight ratios, and much better mileage than 4WD trucks. You didn't have the luggage audibly sliding around right behind you.

They were cars. They seated six. They had hip room. They towed trailers. They weren't dangerously topheavy. They weren't illegal. They weren't doing any more harm than the light trucks which, at the government's insistence, replaced them. In fact, they did less. Ask a stunt driver how easy it is to roll an SUV over. All you have to do is reach boulevard speed and turn the wheel. Rolling those cars over required a special ramp be built for the wheels on only one side.

No, Cadillac cannot be what it was. It isn't merely politically incorrect. It is against the law. Badge engineering a Suburban is as close as it can legally get.

Why haven't we nuked Washington yet?

As for Cadillac specifically, it can go cry me a river. GM got to the point where their anachronistic cars didn't sell any more, their new designs spent more time in the shop than out, and only their trucks were competitive. So they bribed the government to make large cars illegal, forcing consumers to buy what they could actually design and build. GM didn't just shoot Cadillac in the foot, they shot all of us in the foot. Screw GM.


Stop living in the past.

I'm not living in the past. I'm trying to figure out why so many people are just fine with the whole nation being forced to do stupid, incredibly counterproductive things.

[Origanalist]

No, it couldn't be.

There's a reason the only Cadillac that even comes close to being supremely roomy is a truck. The federal government made it illegal for new cars to be built that hold six of anyone bigger than midgets.

The Escalade is a badge-engineered Suburban. It looks like a truck. It rides like a truck. It can be rolled over on its roof by a strong gust of wind like a truck. It lets you look at your luggage like a truck.

America used to make cars that could seat six. They didn't look like trucks. Grandmom didn't need a stepladder to get in. They rode smoothly. Their centers of gravity were low, and they would skid long before they would roll over. Other drivers could see over the hood when you pulled up next to them at a stop sign. They didn't necessarily get good gas mileage (Cadillacs sure didn't) but they got a little better mileage than tall trucks with similar power-to-weight ratios, and much better mileage than 4WD trucks. You didn't have the luggage audibly sliding around right behind you.

They were cars. They seated six. They had hip room. They towed trailers. They weren't dangerously topheavy. They weren't illegal. They weren't doing any more harm than the light trucks which, at the government's insistence, replaced them. In fact, they did less. Ask a stunt driver how easy it is to roll an SUV over. All you have to do is reach boulevard speed and turn the wheel. Rolling those cars over required a special ramp be built for the wheels on only one side.

No, Cadillac cannot be what it was. It isn't merely politically incorrect. It is against the law. Badge engineering a Suburban is as close as it can legally get.

Why haven't we nuked Washington yet?

As for Cadillac specifically, it can go cry me a river. GM got to the point where their anachronistic cars didn't sell any more, their new designs spent more time in the shop than out, and only their trucks were competitive. So they bribed the government to make large cars illegal, forcing consumers to buy what they could actually design and build. GM didn't just shoot Cadillac in the foot, they shot all of us in the foot. Screw GM.



I'm not living in the past. I'm trying to figure out why so many people are just fine with the whole nation being forced to do stupid, incredibly counterproductive things.

I found this oddity perusing craigslist, try doing that with today's sedans, lol.

https://images.craigslist.org/00M0M_bYaWIO2fV3R_1200x900.jpg

https://images.craigslist.org/00f0f_kjbpXRRoE32_1200x900.jpg

https://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/rvs/d/tacoma-1958-motorhome/6801916927.html

[Krugminator2]

Kind of a random observation I had when I was buying a car last year, almost every sedan looks the same.

To me a Ford Fusion looks the same as Cadillac XTS as a Nissan Maxima as a Lexus ES as a Mercedes. I swear a Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are the same car.

I get there are differences but it seems like everyone makes a similar car with the similar features.

[Origanalist]

Kind of a random observation I had when I was buying a car last year, almost every sedan looks the same.

To me a Ford Fusion looks the same as Cadillac XTS as a Nissan Maxima as a Lexus ES as a Mercedes. I swear a Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are the same car.

I get there are differences but it seems like everyone makes a similar car with the similar features.

I quit trying to tell them apart.

[tod evans]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=IERdq9vIqQ8

[oyarde]

I would look good in a 1955 Cadillac .

[Anti Federalist]

Kind of a random observation I had when I was buying a car last year, almost every sedan looks the same.

To me a Ford Fusion looks the same as Cadillac XTS as a Nissan Maxima as a Lexus ES as a Mercedes. I swear a Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are the same car.

I get there are differences but it seems like everyone makes a similar car with the similar features.

Again, as acptulsa pointed out, you can thank Uncle Sucker for that.

Rollover fatwas, crash bumper fatwas, seating fatwas, and a thousand other decrees from Uncle Sucker and his nagging hordes dictate how a car can built.

Thus, they all look the same.

[Anti Federalist]

I hate GM but the "sporty" Cadillacs brought Cadillac back from the brink of obscurity. They're selling a lot better now than the 80s and 90s. These V6 engines are also making more power than their big block counterparts. Stop living in the past. Low level 4 door sedans are faster and handle better than muscle cars and sports cars did in the late 60s early 70s.

Utterly, totally, completely missed the point.

[specsaregood]

Utterly, totally, completely missed the point.

Indeed, you didn't buy a Cadillac because you wanted something low, level, that was fast and handled well. You drove one because you wanted to ride comfortably in style. As a young man, a friend had an el dorado that I drove frequently, it was more like piloting a ship than it was driving a car. You floated upon the roadway....

[Anti Federalist]

Indeed, you didn't buy a Cadillac because you wanted something low, level, that was fast and handled well. You drove one because you wanted to ride comfortably in style. As a young man, a friend had an el dorado that I drove frequently, it was more like piloting a ship than it was driving a car. You floated upon the roadway....

They sold the big cruisers on that very feature: it was called "ride".

[Anti Federalist]

No, it couldn't be.

There's a reason the only Cadillac that even comes close to being supremely roomy is a truck. The federal government made it illegal for new cars to be built that hold six of anyone bigger than midgets.

The Escalade is a badge-engineered Suburban. It looks like a truck. It rides like a truck. It can be rolled over on its roof by a strong gust of wind like a truck. It lets you look at your luggage like a truck.

America used to make cars that could seat six. They didn't look like trucks. Grandmom didn't need a stepladder to get in. They rode smoothly. Their centers of gravity were low, and they would skid long before they would roll over. Other drivers could see over the hood when you pulled up next to them at a stop sign. They didn't necessarily get good gas mileage (Cadillacs sure didn't) but they got a little better mileage than tall trucks with similar power-to-weight ratios, and much better mileage than 4WD trucks. You didn't have the luggage audibly sliding around right behind you.

They were cars. They seated six. They had hip room. They towed trailers. They weren't dangerously topheavy. They weren't illegal. They weren't doing any more harm than the light trucks which, at the government's insistence, replaced them. In fact, they did less. Ask a stunt driver how easy it is to roll an SUV over. All you have to do is reach boulevard speed and turn the wheel. Rolling those cars over required a special ramp be built for the wheels on only one side.

No, Cadillac cannot be what it was. It isn't merely politically incorrect. It is against the law. Badge engineering a Suburban is as close as it can legally get.

Why haven't we nuked Washington yet?

As for Cadillac specifically, it can go cry me a river. GM got to the point where their anachronistic cars didn't sell any more, their new designs spent more time in the shop than out, and only their trucks were competitive. So they bribed the government to make large cars illegal, forcing consumers to buy what they could actually design and build. GM didn't just shoot Cadillac in the foot, they shot all of us in the foot. Screw GM.

I'm not living in the past. I'm trying to figure out why so many people are just fine with the whole nation being forced to do stupid, incredibly counterproductive things.

I owe ya a rep.

Even with ramps, I don't think you could roll one of those, or a full sized wagon, over at normal highways speeds.

It would take a crane.

[specsaregood]

They sold the big cruisers on that very feature: it was called "ride".

I had a Lincoln Towncar for a couple years (inherited from an inlaw). It was nice, but it was no Cadillac in the "ride" department.

[phill4paul]

Indeed, you didn't buy a Cadillac because you wanted something low, level, that was fast and handled well. You drove one because you wanted to ride comfortably in style. As a young man, a friend had an el dorado that I drove frequently, it was more like piloting a ship than it was driving a car. You floated upon the roadway....

Absolutely. "Floating" is an apt term. Big cars like these were exactly like riding swells in a boat. Never had the pleasure of owning a Cadi, but I had a Buick Park Avenue. That was one smooth ride. Comfortable seating. Riding 30 minutes in the ole ladies Subaru and my ass goes numb.

[acptulsa]

Absolutely. "Floating" is an apt term. Big cars like these were exactly like riding swells in a boat. Never had the pleasure of owning a Cadi, but I had a Buick Park Avenue. That was one smooth ride. Comfortable seating. Riding 30 minutes in the ole ladies Subaru and my ass goes numb.

Careful. You're stereotyping them. The Imperial had long enough springs to be exceedingly smooth, but even one of those kept its tires stuck to the ground under almost all circumstances, and never made you seasick. All other big, rear drive Chryslers, Plymouths and Dodges 1957-1989 were very controlled--no Dramamine required--and handled as well as their tires could possibly manage. And except for the muscle cars, the police cars and the ones with the trailer towing package, the ride was not punishing.

Variable rate springs at all four corners--torsion bars in front--were the reason why.

One time, in Texas to avoid a total moron in a Chevy pickup, I changed lanes at forty in a 1971 Imperial LeBaron in about one and a half times its own length. No fuss, no feathers, no wobbly dance to get squared away in the other lane.

We're talking about a car with eight cylinders, seven courtesy lights, six seat belts, five glove compartments, four cigarette lighters, three center armrests, two air conditioners and a tilting and telescoping steering wheel.

http://imperialclub.com/Articles/64McCahill/index.htm

[phill4paul]

Careful. You're stereotyping them. The Imperial had long enough springs to be exceedingly smooth, but even one of those kept its tires stuck to the ground under almost all circumstances, and never made you seasick. All other big, rear drive Chryslers, Plymouths and Dodges 1957-1989 were very controlled--no Dramamine required--and handled as well as their tires could possibly manage. And except for the muscle cars, the police cars and the ones with the trailer towing package, the ride was not punishing.

Variable rate springs at all four corners--torsion bars in front--were the reason why.

One time, in Texas to avoid a total moron in a Chevy pickup, I changed lanes at forty in a 1971 Imperial LeBaron in about one and a half times its own length. No fuss, no feathers, no wobbly dance to get squared away in the other lane.

We're talking about a car with eight cylinders, seven courtesy lights, six seat belts, five glove compartments, four cigarette lighters, three center armrests, two air conditioners and a tilting and telescoping steering wheel.

http://imperialclub.com/Articles/64McCahill/index.htm

No, didn't mean to imply the need for Dramamine. Just referring to the smoothness of the ride.

I'm actually watching, and considering a used Buick Park Avenue. Wish I'd never traded the old one in. They can be had for around $3-$6k with 100k-150k miles. My old one was one I bought from my dad and at 160-170k when I traded didn't have any issues with it. But, I just don't use my truck as much and I'd like a more comfortable, and fuel efficient, ride.

[angelatc]

They sold the big cruisers on that very feature: it was called "ride".

Heck yeah. Back in the early '90's my friend got a late '70's hand-me-down Cadillac from her mom. That thing was all beat up. But sitting in it was still pure luxury. The seats were so comfortable, leg room, you could probably sleep comfortably on the back seat. And it just glided down the road.

[donnay]

1978 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham is a favorite of mine.

My next favorite car was a 1985 Ninety-Eight Regency Brougham. That car had comfort and was fast.

[Anti Federalist]

No More Horsepower For You!

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2019/03/14/no-more-horsepower-for-you/

By eric - March 14, 2019594799

Well, GM has decided it’s time to stop touting horsepower and displacement – it’s so internal combustion.

Instead, Cadillac will tout Newton meters – the metric version of foot-pounds – to tout torque.

Which is so very EV.

It is a change of verbiage intended to nudge people a bit farther down the electrification highway. Get them to use the new terminology. Hopefully memory begins to fade of the old way of doing things.

The point being to take people’s minds off the bait-and-switch. Like New Coke, for instance – though that didn’t work out so well.

“We’re not talking about displacements anymore,” Cadillac President Steve Carlisle said during a media briefing this week.

Understandable – given Cadillac doesn’t offer much of that anymore. Most of its cars are packing engines in the 2.0 liter range – about the same engine displacement of a mid ‘70s Pinto.

Granted, the Cadillac 2.0 engine is turbo’d and makes three times the power of the Pinto’s about-the-same-displacement engine.

But there’s not much puissance – or romance in “2.0” – or even “3.6” – the displacement of the biggest engine Cadillac puts in any of its current mass-production cars.

When Cadillac was Cadillac – a long time ago – displacement was essentially Cadillac. The division touted GM’s biggest V8s, which were exclusive to Cadillac and not (as today) repackaged “corporate” engines found in everything else GM sells.

Even the one V8 you can still get in a Cadillac is a Chevy V8 and no larger than the same engine sold in Chevys like the division’s repackaged Chevy SUV, the Escalade nee Tahoe.

Part of what made an Eldorado and Eldorado was the 472 or 500 cubic inch (American, not metricsexual) V8 under its mile-long slab of hood. A line from a song comes to mind: What’s a little lady like you, driving all that automobile?

It doesn’t have the same punch when it says “2.0” on the decklid. And “ATS” reads like a line on a tax form.

Eldorado doesn’t.

“What’s the appeal of an electric motor and electric car?” continues Carlisle, making his pitch. “It’s the torque. It’s the early torque. It’s the drivability. It’s the acceleration. We see this as a step toward the future and moving into battery electric vehicles.”

He does not mention the autopsy room silence, the lack of anything resembling passion – of interest to the living.

And this anodyne, androgynous metric stuff.

Gotta remove the last little bit of American verve from the raked husk of what was once the signature American luxury car brand. So that it can be just like every other “global” purveyor of same-same universalist modularity.

Carlisle says so, straight from the mic:

“It’s metric. It’s global. It’s universal. You have to think about all the markets we are doing business in.”

Except, of course, America is a different market. Well, it was – once.

Thanks to homogenizers of Carlisle’s sort, it is no more.

This depressing trend toward vehicular homogenization has been under way for decades. There are precious few distinctive combustion engines anymore, certainly – whether size-wise or otherwise.

The regs and mandates have seen to that.

Note that almost every car brand sells “2.0” engines. This is not coincidental. That displacement is just the right displacement in terms of complying with regs (here and in Europe) pertaining to emissions, including the newly christened one – carbon dioxide “emissions.” It also happens to be a sweet spot for turbocharging/specific output per liter of displacement.

But it makes it very hard to get emotional about Cadillac’s 2.0 vs. BMW’s vs. Audi – and Hyundai’s – 2.0s.

What’s the difference, exactly?

Well, this one makes 220 hp and that ones makes 238 hp.

Contrast with 472 – or 500 – cubic inches. As opposed to a mere 350.

Cadillac once made V16 engine, too.

And the engines – all of them – were highly individual in terms of their power delivery, something electric motors will never be.

Those huge V8s from the days when Cadillacs were Cadillacs weren’t merely huge. They were specifically huge, in order to dish out the massive torque at very low RPM that was needed to get 4,000-plus pounds of Eldorado rolling properly.

An electric motor can, of course, produce, even more torque. It’s why Teslas are so speedy – at least, briefly.

But it’s different, because it’s all the same. A motor is a motor is a motor. DeWalt vs. Black & Decker.

Functional? Certainly.

Emotion? Passion?

Is an elevator exciting?

Do you think about which brand it is?