albear972 I don't think anybody seriously considered the Cimmaron to be a sports sedan. I think the Catera was the first one they really pushed as a sports sedan. Fortunately that disappointment led to the CTS which then brought on the V models.
@@texan903 I still see a few of these Cadillacs on the road today, but I don’t see the LS400. Those are long gone, rusted away in the junkyard. Maybe Toyota isn’t so great after all since this GM product is still around.
@@andrewcolsen your observation is the exact opposite of mine. Rarely do I see the older de Villes while I routinely see older Lexus and Toyota models. Maybe maybe your observations are flawed.
These were the throwback to the days of smoking, even drinking, in your car while you cruised down the road. You then picked up your business clients since everything was face to face then, no email, and phone calls were only for setting appointments.
Skyhawk1987Turbo I own a 1993 Cadillac Sedan Deville and it was the last year of the 1985-1993 body style and the fleetwood was 1989-1992. My car still reminds me of the 80's it has chrome bumpers same interior the only difference is a S.I.R. Air Bag, and a 4.9 liter v8. My grandfather had a 1990 Pontiac Lemans and the seatbelts move over top of you
I love these retro reviews, it really makes you appreciate the astoundingly enormous strides the automotive industry has made. Amazing how most of these features - which were top of the range optional extras just 30 years ago - are now standard equipment on almost every car on the lot today.
@@thoughtfinder oh man I forgot about doing plugs! What a pain. Was a time when everybody I knew had the late 80s Cadillac's. Not one of them survived to this day lol
@@zackc.8015 yes both the 4.5 and the 4.9 were good reliable engines. There was only one thing I didn't like about those engines. You ever tried to replace the spark plugs on one of those engines? It's no fun believe me.
Out of all the Caddy's I owned 81 eldo 83 Coupe Deville 90 Coupe Deville 97 Deville Concours 05 STS My 90 Coupe was my favorite. Loved how it looked, it was the perfect size, great ride, great power and great interior
I just got my first car this Friday white 1992 Cadillac sedan deville 4.9 V8 with dark blue leather interior. Same size as this. only no rear fender skirts. It's mint condition and I got her for $2,115
My dad would have loved this car when I was a kid. Unfortunately, the best we could afford was an Oldsmobile Royal 88. That car was actually pretty awesome though. I'm sure the Cadillacs from that era were next level.
It is a massive car that isn't made to handle. It doesn't matter. If the Mustang was FWD people would be angry due to its objective but the buyers of this type of car probably didn't care.
I'm the proud owner of a 1991 Cadillac Fleetwood coupe! It's a very solid and nice car. I've also owned a 1990 Fleetwood that even in its retirement still ran and drove great with 281k miles! I've also owned a 1993 Sedan Deville (was a very reliable car). My first one was a 1990 Sedan Deville that was retired at 220k miles. I love Cadillacs! My baby is my land yacht 1990 Cadillac Brougham D'Elegance! Even though my 1998 Eldorado is sleek and loaded with options, I prefer my 91 Fleetwood Coupe and 1990 Brougham D'Elegance.
I owned a 1993 Sedan de Ville, and it had plenty of power. Whenever I was inside one of those huge parking garages, late at night when they were virtually empty; I would put the windows down and hit the gas going down those straight stretches. The sound of that 4.9 liter V8, amplified inside those empty garages was music to my ears. It sounded like those late 1980's police package Chevy Caprices. That Cadillac was a great car.
I'm with you. The roar and grumble that engine made as you stepped on the pedal was absolute music. People didn't realize you could totally leave them in the dust at a stop light.
This car along with its twin the the Deville in 91' was improved a lot with the then new 200hp 4.9L V-8. It made the car much more lively over the old 4.5!
loaferguy73 I have a 1993 Sedan Deville 4.9 liter which still has the 80's body style. The fleetwood from 1989 to 1992 has the same body style, is the fleetwood better? I know the Brougham looks different.
This was the smaller front wheel drive Fleetwood. In 89 Cadillac was also still making the bigger RWD cars. Cadillac had 2 personalities in the 80s... they knew people still wanted the big cars, but the technology to make a big car get good fuel economy was not quite there yet.
We had a 1991 Chrysler 5th Avenue with the 3.3 V-6...Not the greatest build quality but the back seat was nearly limo like. Road tripping to CO and saw 27 MPG fully loaded...4 adults and only room for a Motor Trend issue in the trunk! This was back in 2006 if I remember....
Early CUE was garbage because it was so slow and unresponsive, but by 2016 they had it figured out and speed it up a ton, and I believe in 2017 they added Carplay/Android Auto, which made CUE not a big factor when driving. But early CUE was awful, it's what made me go from the Caddy dealership down to the BMW dealership and get a 4-series that had, at that time, just been introduced.
I agree. It is very nice looking. The fender skirts make this car. Wish cars today looked like this instead of the jelly bean on wheels cars we see everywhere.
My brother and cousins and friends used to be in a Cadillac club, don't be insulted, but that's when through experience especially the 80's and 90's models I realized they were crap. Horrible handling, I liked the soft ride, but the materials and craftsmanship wasn't there. If you disagree I'll assume you've never driven a comparable German car, a Mercedes for an example. That said I did like certain models, but they didn't age well, BUT I will say Cadillac has come a long way, much better products today, but they still need a S Class fighter to truly be taken seriously.
newlifegroupinc My last car happened to be a mercedes CL55 AMG, it was nice expensive and very fast and luxurious. But After spending more in repairs then I spent on the car itself, the novelty wore off quickly. I now have a 2008 STS which I love, has basically all the same features my mercedes had and then some. I is faster than it's competitor the 535i and the e350. Also the magnetic ride suspension in modern cadillac's gives it some of the best handling and driving dynamics I have ever experienced from a car of that size. I will say the materials were nicer in the mercedes but that is to be expect from a car that cost the original owner $130,000, vs. my $55,000 STS, which I think is still much better value to any of it's German competitors. I had a 2014 XTS for 2 weeks recently and I was amazed at the level of craftsmanship and the materials used. Every surface in that car was covered with leather, the interior was nicer than my old CL I would say. I have a review of it on my channel, along with a 2014 escalade, (which I can't see the hype for this $80,000 luxo-tahoe, but hey it sells good for cadillac).
I don't disagree I actually like Caddy's now, but I was specifically talking about the 80's and 90's Cadillac's. What year was your CL55? late 90's early 2000's any chance? if so those were definably to put it lightly crappy years for Mercedes, the cost cutting was obvious. But even now with Cadillac there something is still missing as evident by their current sales, they need a serious S Class fighter, now is the perfect time, the 7 series, somewhat disappointing the LS 460 is average compared to an S, the A7 is long in the tooth. But for whatever reason Cadillac just cant get a serious foothold in that segment. But you have to admit Mercedes is very serious about their positioning, look at the new C, that's pretty much a mini S, it's interior is head and shoulders above anything in its class, along with the S in its class. The S Coup, the Mercedes-AMG GT, Mercedes is just on another level. I also agree with the 2014 Escalade, the Yukon Denali is 95% an Escalade, its a better buy, but to each his own....
I'm sorry but I have sold several of these and I am looking at that track performance and that car is actually handling well. They are just feeding stereotypes because it is not a bad handling car.
U better know & say it. Here in '20, Cadillac is still my car, even though my health wont allow me to drive anymore & the price is beyond my median, but I enjoyed two in my lifetime, so Im happy.
My dad owns both an '83 and an '84 Cadillac Eldorado and he loves them both. Both of which have held up real well over the past decades and with very little issues. The '83 with 170k and the '84 with 60k. And I love my '04 Cad Seville SLS with the 4.6l Northstar v8
+LocDawgd Same here. I have a 85 Eldorado Biarritz with 105k and 84 Seville with 78k. My parents have a 1995 Seville SLS with over 330k and I drive an 2005 Deville with 120k. Love them all very much but we especially love the Northstar powered Cadillac's!!! These cars hold up very well IF they are maintained and cared for properly. None of our Cadillac's have given us any major problems. This was another great era for Cadillac. The new ones just don't cut it for me.
One of the best cars i've owned was a Seville. Had a 99' STS sterling silver and she was a beast and such a blast to drive, even with 220k miles. I sold her to my friend, bought a 2011 DTS -Livery that I used for ridesharing. Great car but I had my worst accident ever and deployed all the airbags but walked away (got to experience the blessing of OnStar). Plus she had 220K and the ONLY thing that killed her was the wreck on the highway. Replaced her with an insanely loaded 2011 DTS Premium, a one owner and exclusively dealer maintained. Perfect car. Just sold her to my dad and i'm on the hunt for a 16+ Escalade ESV Platinum. Love these cars!
LOVE IT!!! I bought a low mileage '91 Sixty Special several years ago and loved every minute of ownership. Exterior color was white with sunroof (vinyl top delete from factory), and light grey "ultra luxury package" interior. It was a stunning car and its interior appointments looked rich, even though the car was 20 years old! I ended up selling the sixty for a '93 Coupe DeVille
I have a 1992 Cadillac Fleetwood Sixty Special with the Delco Bose music system; ital designed 22-way soft leather seats; astroroof; heated windshield and central locking from trunk. I love it. Wish I had another one.
@@fnulnu6300 wasn't til 4 years later when they started hauling ass. 93' Seville STS with the first Northstar. That motor really changed Caddy (better or for worse) but was still a game changer coming from this slow 4.5
No wonder the '89 Lexus LS stole the show. The review kept comparing how good the car was compared to Cadillacs of 10-20 years prior. Continuous improvement is expected, not a feature! Im glad Cadillac of today is on the right track and I'm not against luxo-boats, but this car is just sad. Thank you MW for giving us a look at what cars used to be!
This 60 special and the DeVille model were a handful of Cadillacs that were somewhat reliable and have stuck around. You still see these all over the place. Wish I had grabbed one when I had the chance. They're a steal now.
Cadillac's were always reliable, that's one of the reason you spent so much money on them. You're probably one of those dolts who goes around saying BMWs are unreliable as well. That's what poor people say to make them feel better about having to buy a Kia.
I just got a 1981 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham d'Elegance with 27451 original miles it's nice. What can I ask for it if I sale it . I can send you pictures. It's a born find.
It almost was at that. My granddad considered buying one to make my grandmother more comfortable on road trips. Sadly she soon got sick and died, then he followed only a few years later.
Still an attractive car. I had a '92 DeVille (similar body style) and loved it; sadly the previous owners hadn't taken care of the car and the transmission gave out catastrophically.... but not before getting me from Little Rock to Portland and back with only a brief patch job in Gallup. I had almost zero driver fatigue for the whole journey, the cabin was quiet and warm in the bitter cold of a Western winter, and in a blizzard in Flagstaff I was able to power out of a skid with the generous low-end torque. I ran low on fuel while lost in L.A., but the car had decent enough mileage that I was able to get to my stop in Fullerton and still had enough gas to get to a filling station. An excellent car in every respect, and I am looking to trade one of my cars for another one in decent condition. If anyone has one, note me and let's talk!
I have a 1993 model Cadillac Sedan DeVille mostly similar to this one..... With the 4.9 litre v-8 I absolutely adore it. For a car that is 27 years old it runs, drives and handles amazingly well and it is gorgeous. These cars were some of the best Cadillac built. Came with 2 sets of keys. Even came with a video... The gold key experience. One owner car I bought it from a an elderly gentleman who took such amazing care of the car. I love this car and would not consider selling it.
I thought those beached whales were some of the most hideous cars ever made. Then I had to take a two week road trip with three co-workers. We had the station wagon version. Absolutely the best highway car I've ever been in.
Uhm... What? Compare this fleetwood to the 60's or 70's cadillacs. It fits right in. Your roadmaster looks nothing like older buicks or cadillacs, and I know for a fact it doesn't drive like one.
Owned and drove a '92 fleetwood for 5-6 years..comfortable with a VERY smooth and composed ride, quiet and roomy interior, huge trunk..VERY difficult to work on though, not for a DIY person..sold it to a neighbor, a shade-tree mechanic, who drove it for several more years - it was already 23 years old 😊
You and me both. Finally, I found and purchased an inherited garaged Cotillion White exterior with the sunroof and a red leather interior 1989 Cadillac Fleetwood Coupe in mint condition. It felt good to be able to afford it and pay cash for it.
This car was insanely comfortable,very well appointed and a delight to drive,but the engine had a bad rep and it looked kinda weird in comparison to previous years,Cadillac buyers back in the day were still longing for the big block monsters of yesteryears and usually don't give a rat's ass to fuel consumption,me personally didn't like the car back in the day for the same reasons but nowadays think it's cool,nothing drives like it anymore,there's comfort nowadays but there's not obscene comfort anymore.....
That's when they made cars where you could enter on the passenger side without banging your knees on the dashboard, or sit in the back seat without lowering your head because the roof cuts into the headroom. Also today's cars you have very little room to get out of the backseat because the wheel well cuts off the amount of space for you to move your leg. Also what manufacturers call a full size car interior used to be call midsized,and midsized were called compact. As Americans get bigger, car interiors are smaller.
@@2006gtobob hardly a high volume model. the rest of the body is voluptuous though and defies your point about squared-off formal styling being a hit. It wouldn't be, as almost all of the customers who enjoyed that boxy styling are long dead.
A 2018 CT6 is one of the best looking cars ever made, and that is what this would be competing again. I've owned two Caddy's, I love 80s cars, and the rest of the Cadillac current lineup is garbage, but you literally picked the worst possible example.
Many of these have been kept by the original owners, in mint condition. Said owners, in many cases, are dying. You might find a deal at an estate sale.
I loved the style of this model year resembling a older model. I worked at Cadillac when these models came out. Very quick and eliminated the problems with the engines. Didn’t like the airbag steering wheel looked like a lunch box that was on 1990 models. I could live without them.
Those 4.5s were beasts even at 155hp before they increased the horsepower. This thing is faster to 60 than the 1990 LS400 I just watched on MW with 95 more hp. My Dad had a 1990 Seville with the 4.5 with 180hp and it would roast the tires if you gave it too much gas accidentally.
@@Austin86646 that’s because they still had high torque numbers for their low hp. modern engines (including the Japanese engines back then) are pretty much 1:1 ratio. Those V8s from GM in those years might have been 130 hp so, but put out 250-260 ft lbs of torque - that’s why they seemed peppy, but would run out of steam at 90 mph.
@@wincrasher2007 I don't disagree, they run out of steam quick at high speeds. But these had 245 ft/lbs of torque and for 1990 that's a lot, 1990 they also brought the 4.5 up to 180 horsepower.
Papaw Mr Wicke had one of these in maroon and astounded us 4 and 6 year old grandkids when he hit his REMOTE and opened and closed the trunk. Oooohhhh!!! Aaaaaa!!!
@@34Packardphaeton Indeed. It took me years to actually notice these tiny Caddys were called "Fleetwoods". I'm a 90's kid so I'm more familiar with the real Fleetwoods 94-96 with the LT1 just like my 96' Impala SS. I always thought they were just little body Devilles until the 93's came around with the fuller size G & K-body along with the Northstars. It was really stupid to name this car the Fleetwood when only the big Brougham deserved that designation. At least they fixed that mistake by 94.
David Weber those skirts were removable so if the idiot putting it on wasn't doing it correctly then it would be misaligned. Tell me, what vehicle gets good gas mileage while idling... NONE!
@@andrewcolsen You do understand that a gas mileage readout is based on the car's driven history, right? And since Motorweek did not state they changed a tire or removed the skirt at all, the skirts came from GM looking that way.
The MPG shown at that current point was instant MPG. Which means the car may have just been started a few minutes before we saw that shot of the screen. So there was no average mpg for the computer to figure out. The same thing happens on new cars too. Once the car is driven a few miles the computer will get the correct average
@@LearnAboutFlow Why explain anything to you? Motorweek already stated what their AVERAGE fuel consumption was for their fuel consumption test loop. Otherwise, this is a test car. That means it spends an abundant amount of time sitting there idling (getting 0 mpg), along with full throttle acceleration tests. These bring the average way down. Its not really a hard concept to understand.
These weren’t bad but I’d still rather have a RWD 90-92 Brougham when Cadillacs finally got back to resembling what a Cadillac should be…big comfortable and powerful.
I believe that this interior option was very rare in it's day I can only imagine finding one now and try to find one in good condition is probably almost a unicorn.
I agree with you. I love the attention, compliments and the conversations and engagement strangers start with me about my 1989 Cadillac Fleetwood Coupe.
Agreed. Back in the day; owning a Cadillac was a way of saying that you have arrived. Nowadays; owning a Cadillac is a means of saying you're a douche.
The 1989 "Sixty Special" was bascially a trim package, as the extended length Sixty Specials as in '87-88 were no longer being built by Hess & Eisenhardt (which also built limited number of FWD Fleetwood 75 limos on a made-to-order basis).
87-88 extended wheelbase 60 special and 85-88 Fleetwood 75 was built in-house by Cadillac Themselves. There were some knock off versions built by 3rd party coach builders that resembled 75's though.
It makes me laugh that they call this car a "boat" when the full sized Fleetwood Brougham is larger than this car. This is nothing more than a Buick LeSabre of the same era.
Well to be fair it's a little more than a LeSabre, It's actually a Buick Park Avenue of the 85-89 era. I have had 3 RWD Cadillac C/D bodies (1982,1986,1989) and 1977 and 83 Buick C bodies (1977 Electra Limited and 1983 Park Avenue), All 5of those RWD GM "C" bodies were basically similar (with the Olds 98). Same with these FWD "C" bodies, (Olds 98,Buick Park Ave., Cadillac DeVille...) My1987 first FWD car was a Buick Electra, and except for drivetrain (ok,really just 6cyl vs 8cyl) was the same as the 89 DeVille.
I loved my `90 Sedan DeVille that I got used. It ran and drove beautifully, and had incredible traction and braking on icy winter roads. But it got wrecked in an accident. The `89 Sedan DeVille I had afterwards was badly worn out when I got it, so it was nowhere near as good, and then everything started going bad on it. Anyway those were great cars in my opinion.
ponchoman49 I own a 1993 Cadillac sedan deville 4.9 liter and it's pretty pepi. 1993 was the last year of the 80's body style, it has 275 ft lbs of torque, and it's still a little quicker than the average family car today, although the average family car today is a 4 cylinder. But cadillac's in 1991 were a lot slower than the ones in the 50's and 60's having 325 to 400 horsepower and 500 ft lbs of torque. and having blocks like a 390, or 500 cui, engine. Also the Cadillac's of the late 70's, 80's and 90's were made to be more economical on gas.
It’s quite amazing that they double the horsepower when they got the Northstar and Jan. Yes it’s at some AC is but also sound very nice home user effect so to speak how old is shit and it does sound too and not only does. It has great acceleration, but it’s just so quiet and Analyze you ask Krohn to see how long do you like no one dB at Orla one or less hell when someone is picking me up in it and there’s not gravel on the road I can hear it on the laziest 1 m or one of yard away it’s just amazing. It’s a V-8 Gasolina, and Jan that’s just as quiet as an electric car and Cadillac that’s luxury it’s not wrong that it’s quiet either extremely amazing and when you. when you push the pedal to the metal is just holy shit for a car lot size and age etc. to move that quick and quiet is + experience
