balthazar

Ugh is it a gruesome beastie. And why MB insists on plastering the same nose on every car they build is beyond me. BTW, I've completely given up on trying to sort thru the alphabet soup of MB's 342 different model names.

Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. Not a Chevy guy, so; nope. DB5 doesn't do it for me; it's better than most euro 'sports cars' of the era, but I just don't find it lust-worthy. - - - - - '56 Corvette, 283 CI :

Really nothing that comes to mind for me in this displacement range….

^ That's all BMW knows how to do tho (with sedans; the i8 is a disaster). Rolls, on the other hand, blows the Maybach out of the water.

This might be helpful :: 245 CI ~ 305 CI.

'37 Chevy coupe, black, under restoration/modification (had "Corvette engine"), in back bay of equipment repair shop.

They're not "bespoke", they're just the careful product of huge stamping presses. It's not the size as much as it is the contour that gets pricey. Chevy often had 3-piece front bumpers in the early 60s because assembling 3 pieces was cheaper than a single, more complex stamping.

'60 Eldorado Seville. Succulent. So VERY succulent.

In English, plz.

"waterhoarding" ??

You're just wildly making stuff up here. My grandmother was a full-time hair dresser in 1940, and she made $1040 that year. In 1960 money, that was $2196. In 1960 a Coupe deVille started at $5252. In 1964, my grandmother bought a Rambler American 2-dr, which started @ $1907. 1950s & 1960s hair dressers were NOT buying Cadillacs. That's ludicrous.

I can see this is going our traditional route when we fence over a point. But I must correct erroneous information. hyperv6 ~>>Note they did share the X frames of other GM cars.<< Cadillac did not share frames with other GM cars. Divisional X-frames were proprietary; they shared the architecture, just like perimeter frames share the architecture of other perimeter frames, but they were still of Cadillac's design & dimensions. The exception is the FWD Eldorado, there is a slight wheelbase difference and undoubtedly chassis tuning differences with the Toro, but there's likely a degree of sharing there; haven't made a case study here. Still; top shelf stuff, not a "decline". hyperv6 ~>>Platform sharing really came to light in the 50's with frames and suspension.<< Again, conceptually, but not interchangeably. I'm still talking about Cadillac here, you seem to be selectively folding 'GM' into the discussion. There is no interchanging in the '50s. Well, less than 5%. That's not "coming into the light" tho. hyperv6 ~>>215 Engines were shared also in the early 60's. This is where much of the decline started.<< Not at Cadillac. hyperv6 ~>>Chevy marketed the 57 Chevy as having features Cadillac had at much lower prices.<< I have dozens & dozens of '57 Chevy print ads, Cadillac is NEVER mentioned or alluded to/shown. GM did NOT do inter-corporate advertising in this period. Other than superlatives, the only features Chevy mentioned in '57-58 were V8s and automatics. hyperv6 ~>>Cadillac was pretty innovative over the years with leading technology. The 60's offered little other than the FWD Eldo.<< Climate Control, dual-zone HVA/C, heated seats, energy-absorbing steering column, variable-ratio steering, dual master cylinder, tilt & telescopic steering, Twilight Sentinel, self adjusting brakes, fiber optics, cornering lamps, Automatic Level Control… Cadillac was far busier than you realize.

Yes, but those things bolded above didn't happen @ Cadillac in the '60s. The only tangible thing I lament is Cadillac dropping real wood after '66; a mistake, but a very minor one. I cannot whitewash Cadillac as "declining" because of merely that.

Just took a quick look at my Buick file, had an article on the '83. What's the advantage of the '85 over the '83… or why did you pick '85? 4-spd trans?

I never heard anyone say 'their jaw dropped' WRT the CC, but it IS where VW should have gone on their upper cars. Nicely done. Problem is; it's 'out-Audi'ed Audi'.

Oooo; I can stick with one of my actually-owned vehicles : • '40 Ford COE, 239 V8 (3.9L) • '50 Merc coupe, 239 V8 (3.9L) • Cadillac CTS-V Sport 3.6 • '62 Olds Jetfire coupe, 215 CI V8 (3.5L) • I'd like to add a Grand National, but their interiors are NOT to my tolerance. Haven't seen a '80s Riviera in years, but I will plug one of Drew's choice in here: '83 Buick Riviera T-Type Turbo 231 V6 (3.8L) (tho I'd like to do some major power boosts to it). Not a lot pops to my mind in this low of a displacement…. Hey Frisky- how high up in displacement are you going to run these dream garage threads?

I know the history of Cadillac very well. I can see that, but Cadillac of the '40s were not on the level they were in the '30s either, same for the '50s… but no one is going to say they 'started to decline in the '40s. Simply different eras/markets. But from the standpoint of image & perception, Cadillac did not see a measurable degredation in the '60s and it absolutely still 'meant something' to own a Cadillac then. Volume was inching upward, but didn't explode until the '70s. They offered the same position entry-level model in the '50s (Series 61) as in the '60s (Calais), and neither sold well at all vs the deVilles. These are amorphous things to even try and quantify, but I am 100% positive I am accurate on this point. Arguemens can be made RE the '70s, but they are without substance when you dial back to the '60s.

Bah- still blowing fuses. I believe it was more than one source. Backtracing everything, frustrated. Lack of definitive schematic isn't helping. Have internet feelers out there looking for guidance. Some are saying it shouldn't have fuses, but circuit breakers. Discouraged. Truck for sale. EDIT :: • moved the ignition feed off the fuses, so the ignition switch is always hot. I say it here and it makes sense, but that was not what the schematic was saying. Also reconfigured a couple wires on the fuse block. • had to modify the oil pressure gauge- the backing of the gauge was re-ally close to the 2 terminals poking thru. Snip snip, file file, repeated incremental tests and no continuity from the gauge to it's backing, the gauge pod, the dash or anything else. Re-hooked up everything one @ a time, testing hot each stage, no blown fuse! On to the distributor next! Oh; truck no longer for sale.

^ That moment is even better if you can work out placing your foot on their neck while you school them.

Cadillac saw no measurable image degradation in the 1960s. Obviously the Eldorado lost 2 of 3 styles, but the brand continued to expand in innovation, features, trims/colors, engineering, etc. '67 Eldo was a tour de force. In fact, I would only offer a downward tick circa '75, just because the core models had lost some of their leading edge-ness; by '76 they were overdue for the downsize of '77 by about 2 years IMO. The Seville balanced out the full-size cars tho, so IMO; it was a wash. Cadillac's slip was a specific short span of years that made major impacts: the '78 diesels, the '81 V8-6-4, the '82 HT4100 and the '85 downsizing. Once your engineering comes into question, the rest gets rickety.

I like to swipe from the table & stash it under my bed.

Degradation of image takes years. Packard took over a decade.

Glass cleaned, door windows and latches lubed & working well, windshield latches working well, door hinges working well. Condenser replaced, ready to take the coil & distributor apart and install new pieces. Still trying to find time to get the brake drum turned.

American Austin was TINY : about 120" long & 1040 lbs. Here's one next to a period Cadillac : - - - - - I have no actual interest in any of those I chose. Just making Frisky happy.