: The largest Cadillac...



Cadillac Giovanni
03-13-07, 09:17 PM
I've always been curious what the largest Cadillac ever produced was. Not counting limos or anything, a regular chassis from a Cadillac dealership, which year and model had the most size for your dollar?

Searching the internet yielded a car review written by a poor unfortunate soul who thought that the largest Cadillac ever was the 2003 Escalade ESV. Hardly. Any pre-1986 Cadillac beats that out, as well as the Broughams and Fleetwoods we in the forum love so much.

I know that the 1974-1976 Fleetwood boasted an amazing length of 234 inches a weight of about 5300 pounds, and I've heard it called the largest "Post-war" Cadillac, also being the bearer of the Cadillac 500 cubic inch engine. Dig this awesome photograph!

http://www.cadillacforums.com/cadillac-models/175fleet13.jpg


I heard Johnny Cash drove one just like that, they auctioned it off not long ago, as i remember...

So actually, this post was nothing more than an excuse to bring up the totally awesome 1975 Cadillac Fleetwood in all of it's humongous glory.

Old Fleetwood
03-13-07, 09:32 PM
Gawd -
Brings back memories. I was working for a company which had a fleet of 6 of these beasties and occasionally rode from the office I worked in to Boston or NYC.
The drivers were amazing and matched those unobtrusive gray cars. Those Cadillacs whipped through traffic like sports cars yet you were never tossed around as a passenger, thanks to both the driver and the car.
When three heavyweights were in the back seat, however, they did occasionally bottom out over a big dip at 80 or 85.
Those were the days when Cadillacs RULED!

Cadillac Giovanni
03-13-07, 09:44 PM
Really, I'd kill just to ride in one of them. To me, it really is one of the high points of Cadillac history. Unadulterated size and comfort.

There's one on eBay for 12,000 smackers. I would buy it if i had the money.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1975-CADILLAC-FLEETWOOD-BROUGHAM-SEDAN_W0QQitemZ120096059438QQcategoryZ6149QQrdZ1QQ cmdZViewItem

Benzilla
03-13-07, 09:48 PM
I think that's the only car ever that looks like a limo when it's stock.

90Brougham350
03-13-07, 10:41 PM
That Fleetwood has been on eBay forever! You'd think for 12,000 they could have put a new hood ornament on and cleaned up the engine a little.

Phantom&RedGoat2004
03-13-07, 11:01 PM
I had one very much like the Fleetwood in that photo (man I loved that car) - weighed out at like 5,400lbs! The series 75 was the biggest factory monster I can think of. We used to say things like, "...bigger (or fatter) than a '75 -75!" :D

Cadillac Giovanni
03-13-07, 11:11 PM
That Fleetwood has been on eBay forever! You'd think for 12,000 they could have put a new hood ornament on and cleaned up the engine a little.

I'd still pay that much for it. I'm not a total fanatic about under the hood aesthetics, and i like the fact that that's probably the hood ornament it rolled off the assembly line with. Overall the car seems in great shape, although I've never been a fan of buying a car without seeing it in person.

It is just a bit much, but they do consider offers. I'd make them an offer, but i don't think they'd go for it...

The weird thing about those cars is the double hood ornaments. I'd say that it wasn't factory, but I've seen a number of those cars with that setup. Was it some sort of gaudy factory option? In all honesty, i would pluck one of those bastards off. Two emblems within that proximity of each other is overkill, even for Cadillac.

lochenjons
03-13-07, 11:12 PM
i want one

Phantom&RedGoat2004
03-13-07, 11:27 PM
...Was it some sort of gaudy factory option? In all honesty, i would pluck one of those bastards off. Two emblems within that proximity of each other is overkill, even for Cadillac.

You can't appreciate how much chrome is on the front of these cars from a picture. Those things may be gaudy, but so are wide white-walls, and that looks really clean in person, but doesn't photograph very well. All a matter of personal taste I guess, but bottom-line: We agree it truely is a beautiful car. :D

sizanjdf
03-14-07, 12:54 AM
the only thing bigger would be the fleetwood 75s. I believe they are 251 inches long and are still factory built. When people see my 74 fleetwood 75 they are like jesus are you kidding, That has got to be the biggest car on the road. I remind them its the same length as a 1 ton crew cab long bed pickup

suiside
03-14-07, 03:23 AM
that car indeed is very long but i think that my 70 sdv will put some comp to it!!
http://myspace-720.vo.llnwd.net/01432/02/75/1432845720_l.jpg

chuckwagon009
03-14-07, 05:15 PM
Yes the 74-76's were awsomely large cars, in the factory handbook for my 76 sixty special it lists 5800 somthing pounds. I'll take a pic when i get home. Now that's a lot of caddilac. I parked beside my bosses yukon yesterday at work in my 91 FWB, the 91 is +/- 5 inches longer than his full sized yukon. Didn't have a measuring tape at that time, next time i will measure. Made a comment to him about it and he got little man disease (he's only 5'5") and told me eveything about his yukon, blah blah, bet you cant tow this, and bet you can't fit 8 people in it. I replyed i can fit 10, 6 in the front, 4 in the trunk, on a good night. ahahaha, got him a little weirded out.

codewize
03-14-07, 06:27 PM
Johnny Cash had one of those, yes, I think it was a 74 and Barrett-Jackson sold it for $21k I was pissed.

being a lover of both Cadi and Cash I would have bought that in a minute.

Cadillac Giovanni
03-14-07, 07:45 PM
You can't appreciate how much chrome is on the front of these cars from a picture. Those things may be gaudy, but so are wide white-walls, and that looks really clean in person, but doesn't photograph very well. All a matter of personal taste I guess, but bottom-line: We agree it truely is a beautiful car. :D

Oh no, I think the car photographs great, and whitewalls aren't gaudy at all, it's just...2 emblems like that, one above the other. It's a little much. A little repetitive, perhaps.

The 1970 deville is a gorgeous car as well. One of my all time favorites. According to my sources, it measures in at a respectable 225 inches long, and 4690 pounds. It cost $6,118, brand spanking new, with a production total of 7,230.

The 1975 Fleetwood Brougham was 234 inches long and 5242 pounds. Costing $10,414 from the factory, 18,755 were built.

chuckwagon009
03-14-07, 10:20 PM
OK i was mistaken, the curb weight of the 1976 FWB sixty special is 5213lbs. Got home and pulled my factory owners manual for it out. The 75 limo is 5889lbs. Got some pics of it for the crowd. The length of the 60 is 233.7in and the 75 is 255.2in. The escalade is 6800 so their is a lot of difference in weight, but the escalade is only 198.9 in long. Making the 60 over 30in. longer and 75 over 50in longer. I think that is what makes these cars so special, low and long. I'd rather own a brand new 76 FWB over a 06 escalade.

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s27/chuckwagon009/MVC-002F-12.jpg

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s27/chuckwagon009/MVC-004F-10.jpg

Cadillac Giovanni
03-14-07, 10:50 PM
I'd rather own a brand new 76 FWB over a 06 escalade.

Understatement of the year. You would have to GIVE me a brand new 76 fleetwood as consolation for having to own an 06 escelade. I've said it before, but the escalade is a disgrace to the Cadillac name. Cadillac has pissed me off in recent years by dropping the fleetwood back in 96, downsizing and making their cars sporty to appeal to a "younger" crowd, and worst of all, these abominations known as "SUVs". I love their older cars to death, but you'd be hard pressed to find me browsing a cadillac dealership nowadays.

The SUV is cheating anyways. It's easy for an SUV to weigh a lot because it can be tall and ugly, and doesn't have to conform to any kind of body line that may be associated with a good looking automobile. You can stack shit and bricks a mile high and call it art, but that doesn't make it so.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-14-07, 11:19 PM
Understatement of the year. You would have to GIVE me a brand new 76 fleetwood as consolation for having to own an 06 escelade. I've said it before, but the escalade is a disgrace to the Cadillac name. Cadillac has pissed me off in recent years by dropping the fleetwood back in 96, downsizing and making their cars sporty to appeal to a "younger" crowd, and worst of all, these abominations known as "SUVs". I love their older cars to death, but you'd be hard pressed to find me browsing a cadillac dealership nowadays.

The SUV is cheating anyways. It's easy for an SUV to weigh a lot because it can be tall and ugly, and doesn't have to conform to any kind of body line that may be associated with a good looking automobile. You can stack shit and bricks a mile high and call it art, but that doesn't make it so.

Totally agree.


I'm not sure what specific year is the longest, but I know it's either '74, '75 or '76, all were either 233-234 inches, but I know the heaviest was the '75 at 5242 lbs, and the 76 was 5213 and I can't remember what the '74 was, but I think it was like 51xx. I do believe the 73-75 Imperials were the longest regular american production autos ever at 235".

Cadboy425
03-14-07, 11:46 PM
A friend of mine had a 76 Fleetwood Brougham triple black. At the time I had a 75 Ford Country Squire (yellow/ wood siding) as my hobby car. The Fleetwood had sports car handling in comparison to the Country Squire. For such a large car that Fleetwood really handled and was soo effortless to drive. His didn't have the double hood ornaments though just the stand up hood ornament.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
03-14-07, 11:49 PM
Hah, yeah, I always heard that (and experienced in a '77 Town Car) the big Fords handled much worse than the comparable Cadillacs.

lochenjons
03-15-07, 12:42 PM
I replyed i can fit 10, 6 in the front, 4 in the trunk, on a good night. ahahaha, got him a little weirded out. :lol:

Cadillacboy
03-15-07, 05:22 PM
Anyone know what's 74-76 Fleetwood turning ratio/circle ?
:D

Bro-Ham
03-15-07, 06:31 PM
Hi,

The 1975 Fleetwood up for auction appears to be a standard Fleetwood Brougham model which did not have a stand up hood ornament standard - just the wreath and crest at the end of the hood. The Fleetwood Brougham d'Elegance and Talisman models in 1975 had the stand up hood ornament. Over the years I've seen plenty of deVille and Fleetwood models where owners have put on the stand up hood ornament on in addition to wreath or "V" at the end of the hood which gives it the over done look of two ornaments in the same area. In 1976 the stand up hood ornament was standard on all Fleetwood Brougham models.

Dave

Fleet
03-17-07, 01:18 AM
OK i was mistaken, the curb weight of the 1976 FWB sixty special is 5213lbs. Got home and pulled my factory owners manual for it out. The 75 limo is 5889lbs. Got some pics of it for the crowd. The length of the 60 is 233.7in and the 75 is 255.2in. The escalade is 6800 so their is a lot of difference in weight, but the escalade is only 198.9 in long. Making the 60 over 30in. longer and 75 over 50in longer. I think that is what makes these cars so special, low and long. I'd rather own a brand new 76 FWB over a 06 escalade.

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s27/chuckwagon009/MVC-002F-12.jpg

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s27/chuckwagon009/MVC-004F-10.jpg
255.2 is for the commercial chassis... the Seventy-Fives (9-passenger sedan and limo) are 252.2".

Fleet
03-17-07, 01:20 AM
Totally agree.


I'm not sure what specific year is the longest, but I know it's either '74, '75 or '76, all were either 233-234 inches, but I know the heaviest was the '75 at 5242 lbs, and the 76 was 5213 and I can't remember what the '74 was, but I think it was like 51xx. I do believe the 73-75 Imperials were the longest regular american production autos ever at 235".
You're right... the '73 Imperial is 235.3" long, with a 127" wheelbase (they had a very long front and rear overhang).
The '74-'76 Fleetwoods were all 233.7".

ReagansRollsRoyce
03-17-07, 01:56 PM
You're right... the '73 Imperial is 235.3" long, with a 127" wheelbase (they had a very long front and rear overhang).
The '74-'76 Fleetwoods were all 233.7".


This has been posted before, but it's a review of the 3 big ones from that biggest year, '75

http://www.imperialclub.com/Articles/75SilkenGiants/index.htm

Fleet
03-17-07, 04:13 PM
This has been posted before, but it's a review of the 3 big ones from that biggest year, '75

http://www.imperialclub.com/Articles/75SilkenGiants/index.htm

Yes, I have that magazine. A good road test, even though they were a little harsh on the Cadillac, I think.

I also have Motor Trend tests of the '69 Cadillac CDV, '71 SDV, '73 FB, '74 FB, '75 CDV plus others.

ReagansRollsRoyce
03-17-07, 08:14 PM
Yes, I have that magazine. A good road test, even though they were a little harsh on the Cadillac, I think.

I also have Motor Trend tests of the '69 Cadillac CDV, '71 SDV, '73 FB, '74 FB, '75 CDV plus others.

It's my opinion they've been harsh on Cadillac forever. My college had Consumer reports back to the 40s, and even in the 50s they were critical about the size, the appearance, the "unnecessary horsepower" etc etc, although a lot less so than 15-20 years later. This continued through these Motor Trend articles, and again in CR's test of the 1982 SDV. Warren Brown of the Washington Post also frequently criticized later Broughams. Sometimes I wonder if envy was a reason auto writers had such contempt for Cadillacs.

Imperials on the other hand, seem to have gotten a lot more love...run through that Imperial sight and watch McCahill lavish praise on everything Chrysler until cerca 1967.

Fleet
03-18-07, 02:10 AM
Yeah, McCahill was one of the few who praised (some) Cadillacs... like the '64 Sedan de Ville and '68 Fleetwood Brougham he tested. Yes, he did seem to like the '50s and '60s Imperials (and he loved the Chrysler 300).
Motor Trend seemed to like the '64 SDV they tested, but from around 1970 and later, they usually criticized them.
And, of course, Consumer Reports never praised Cadillacs! They referred to a '55 Fleetwood Sixty-Special as a "locomotive."