Early 70s Cadilacs

pismoe

Platinum Member
May 17, 2014
37,168
3,773
1,130
I don't know much about them , was impressed when I got to ride in one but I think I like the earlier ones better . Still , pretty nice !! --- ---
 
I think all Cadillacs in the 70s were the same

They kept the same lines for 20 years
 
could be , I saw some earlier beauties at the Peterson Museum when I was in LA a few years back . The ones I liked were more rounded in their style , very nice and exuded quality .
 
I like their absolute disregard for things like noxious emissions and gas mileage. They're sacred cows on Top Gear, needless to say. I like the esthetics of American cars from 1941 - 1950. They weren't as huge as the land yachts of the 70's, but they were rounder and more aerodynamic and their lines were just prettier all around. The Cadillacs, Buicks, and Oldsmobiles were hand assembled carefully, and accents like lacquered wooden trim and and woolen upholstery were givens. Those were the days when America knew how to make things, and a lot of the things we made were the best in the world.
 
Bullshit. Off the top of my head, a 1976 and a 1977 are TOTALLY different cars!
The Caddy made huge changes in '77. 1976 and 1977 were totally different cars. I had a '76 and drove it for 15 years. Almost all of that time I also had other vehicles. The Caddy was for special occasions, including numerous cross country road trips and vacations.
The biggest differences were size and the '76 was the last year for rear wheel drive. '77 began the era of front wheel drive. Size wise, the '76 was longer in length and wider. The '77 came with a 425 cu engine and the '76 had the huge 500 cu. '76 wanted to go faster at 120 mph. The '77 top ended out at about 110-115.
 
Bullshit. Off the top of my head, a 1976 and a 1977 are TOTALLY different cars!
The Caddy made huge changes in '77. 1976 and 1977 were totally different cars. I had a '76 and drove it for 15 years. Almost all of that time I also had other vehicles. The Caddy was for special occasions, including numerous cross country road trips and vacations.
The biggest differences were size and the '76 was the last year for rear wheel drive. '77 began the era of front wheel drive. Size wise, the '76 was longer in length and wider. The '77 came with a 425 cu engine and the '76 had the huge 500 cu. '76 wanted to go faster at 120 mph. The '77 top ended out at about 110-115.

BULLSHIT! I OWN a 1979 de Ville...it's RWD, which ran until 1996!

The 1976 500 had only 190HP. The 1977 425 had, IIRC, 185 (carb) or 200 (EFI) horsepower. (Kalifornia may have been down a bit from that.)
 
Bullshit. Off the top of my head, a 1976 and a 1977 are TOTALLY different cars!
The Caddy made huge changes in '77. 1976 and 1977 were totally different cars. I had a '76 and drove it for 15 years. Almost all of that time I also had other vehicles. The Caddy was for special occasions, including numerous cross country road trips and vacations.
The biggest differences were size and the '76 was the last year for rear wheel drive. '77 began the era of front wheel drive. Size wise, the '76 was longer in length and wider. The '77 came with a 425 cu engine and the '76 had the huge 500 cu. '76 wanted to go faster at 120 mph. The '77 top ended out at about 110-115.
I presently own a 1995 Sedan DeVille which is in 98 percent mint condition. 76k miles, hunter green, ivory interior, drives and rides like new. There are no new cars that compare with it!

I once owned a '76 Eldorado convertible. Red with ivory top & interior. Rode like a sailboat on calm water. It was stolen and the insurance paid me about five percent of its real value to me.

Cadillacs are great cars.
 
Bullshit. Off the top of my head, a 1976 and a 1977 are TOTALLY different cars!
The Caddy made huge changes in '77. 1976 and 1977 were totally different cars. I had a '76 and drove it for 15 years. Almost all of that time I also had other vehicles. The Caddy was for special occasions, including numerous cross country road trips and vacations.
The biggest differences were size and the '76 was the last year for rear wheel drive. '77 began the era of front wheel drive. Size wise, the '76 was longer in length and wider. The '77 came with a 425 cu engine and the '76 had the huge 500 cu. '76 wanted to go faster at 120 mph. The '77 top ended out at about 110-115.

BULLSHIT! I OWN a 1979 de Ville...it's RWD, which ran until 1996!

The 1976 500 had only 190HP. The 1977 425 had, IIRC, 185 (carb) or 200 (EFI) horsepower. (Kalifornia may have been down a bit from that.)
Ya, I'm wrong about the fwd. Those were still only the el dorado's and some experimental Sevilles. De Villes didn't go fwd for years later, but the size of the 77 was way smaller and the 425 couldn't keep up with the 500.
 
The Eldo was FWD from the first in 1968. The Seville was RWD (a rebodied Nova) from 1975-79, FWD from 1980.

A 1977 will handily dust a 1976, simply because the 1977 lost almost half a ton!
 
The Eldo was FWD from the first in 1968. The Seville was RWD (a rebodied Nova) from 1975-79, FWD from 1980.

A 1977 will handily dust a 1976, simply because the 1977 lost almost half a ton!

They were trying to make them more fuel efficient to avoid the gas guzzler tax...
 
The Eldo was FWD from the first in 1968. The Seville was RWD (a rebodied Nova) from 1975-79, FWD from 1980.

A 1977 will handily dust a 1976, simply because the 1977 lost almost half a ton!
Well none of the ones I ever pulled up next to dusted me, but that doesn't really prove anything. I never raced it off the line. Only open road random contest. Maybe I was just willing to go faster than the other guy.
 
Gearing played a large part...1977-79 de Villes had 2.28 gears standard. 3.08's were optional (standard in Service Chassis), some may have gotten 2.73's.
 
I had a '76 Seville. Great car, but didn't really make any sense conceptually. It was smaller than the big ones but just as heavy and no more economical.
 
One of the finest cars every built - the true forerunner of the Caddy

images
 
I had a '76 Seville. Great car, but didn't really make any sense conceptually. It was smaller than the big ones but just as heavy and no more economical.

No, that's pablum...a Seville was a foot and a half shorter (on a 16" shorter wheelbase), eight inches narrower, and close to 1500lbs lighter!
 

Forum List

Back
Top