Sign in to follow this  
NINETY EIGHT REGENCY

1976 Cadillac Coupe Deville

16 posts in this topic

Nice! Who's car?

It's not the last REAL Caddy... it's just the last of the BIIIIIIIG, LOOOONG ones.

The last true Cadillac was the 1996 Fleetwood. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest flowmotion

A Chevrolet Imposter! Just check the engine.

Actually, I take that back -- the 1978 Eldorado was the last of the real Cadillacs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, at least it was V8 powered, RWD & BOF.

The current Deville lacks 2/3 of those. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually want one of those. I currently have a '76 Eldo convertible but other than the ragtop it's useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's STS fits what I think of as a modern interpretation of a traditional Cadillac--V8, RWD, crisp lines, vertical taillights...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a ten year caddy tech - eldorados from back in the day sucked , devilles were much better cars

What year Eldo's are you referring to by "back in the day"?

What were the issues that the Eldo's had?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Chevrolet Imposter! Just check the engine.

I did not check the link, but if the Cadillac is indeed a '76 CdV, it's all Cadillac. 500 cubes worth under the hood.

Nothing "chevy" about a '76 CdV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct. The 1976 CdV had the 500 CI engine. (Same engine in my '76 Eldo.) The poster was referring to the '96 Fleetwood mentioned previously.

A Chevrolet Imposter! Just check the engine.

I did not check the link, but if the Cadillac is indeed a '76 CdV, it's all Cadillac. 500 cubes worth under the hood.

Nothing "chevy" about a '76 CdV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect he's referring to the RWD DeVille's vs. the FWD Eldo's of 1970's vintage. In order to accomplish the FWD design, the approach was to simply use a modified version of the TurboHydromatic 400 transmission used in the RWD models. The modification was to add "chain drive" to the TH400. (Yuck.)

This caused the complexity under the hood to go way up to the extent that many service procedures to the drive train begin as follows: "Step 1: Remove engine."

Typically not a sign of a good design.

What year Eldo's are you referring to by "back in the day"?

What were the issues that the Eldo's had?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest flowmotion

Just to clarify for people who can't read posts in order -- the imposter Caddy is the 1996 Fleetwood. The 76 is still the real thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I clarified this in post #11 (two posts prior to this one.) <_<

Just to clarify for people who can't read posts in order -- the imposter Caddy is the 1996 Fleetwood. The 76 is still the real thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In order to accomplish the FWD design, the approach was to simply use a modified version of the TurboHydromatic 400 transmission used in the RWD models. The modification was to add "chain drive" to the TH400. (Yuck.)

This caused the complexity under the hood to go way up to the extent that many service procedures to the drive train begin as follows: "Step 1: Remove engine." Typically not a sign of a good design.

One has to remove the rear wheel and inner fender of a porsche 911 just to change the oil. Instead of providing a remote oil filter set-up, porsche merely put an 8-qrt pan on the 911 to lengthen service intervals. Now we have a band-aid solution to poor (& cheap) design.

What you might have also mentioned is that the THM400 and THM425 (FWD T400) are so over-engineered and bulletproof, removing the transaxle is an extreme rarity. As opposed to -say- oil changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I was always perplexed with the need and value of FWD back then anyway. The battle raged on from many years of course and presumably will continue although it seems safe to say that the preferred design for performance autombiles design today is back to the old RWD.

In order to accomplish the FWD design, the approach was to simply use a modified version of the TurboHydromatic 400 transmission used in the RWD models. The modification was to add "chain drive" to the TH400. (Yuck.)

This caused the complexity under the hood to go way up to the extent that many service procedures to the drive train begin as follows: "Step 1: Remove engine." Typically not a sign of a good design.

One has to remove the rear wheel and inner fender of a porsche 911 just to change the oil. Instead of providing a remote oil filter set-up, porsche merely put an 8-qrt pan on the 911 to lengthen service intervals. Now we have a band-aid solution to poor (& cheap) design.

What you might have also mentioned is that the THM400 and THM425 (FWD T400) are so over-engineered and bulletproof, removing the transaxle is an extreme rarity. As opposed to -say- oil changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this