I have had a few people tell me this crap. I said Im pretty sure they share the chassis and maybe the drivetrain to a point. But the Fleetwood is a Roadmaster? WTF is that? Are they just haters or something? I wasnt amused by it.

I have heard the Fleetwood called "The Cadillac of Cadillacs" I would think thats not a Roadmaster, with a different body trim and hood ornament.

What are your thoughts?

P.S. I love my Fleetwood anyway. :D

next time tell them to take their dislexyia pills, the Roadmaster is a rebadged Fleetwood. ok here is the thing, the Fleetwood is LONGER, WIDER (i guess anyway), looks different, has a WREATH AND CREST (something they will probably never have) and the interior is different. other than that the only thing that is the same is the chassis and the engine.

the fleetwood rides a 6" longer wheelbase

We own both, and they definately are not the same car. Yes, all of the mechanical bits underneath the skin, the frame design, suspension, and powertrain is identical between the Roadmaster and Fleetwood.

HOWEVER, as was said above, the Fleetwood is on the longer D-body platform, which is the lengthened version of the B-body under the Caprice/Roadmaster. In truth, the Caprice and Roadmaster are the two that are the most like one another, especially in dimensions and pieces, the Caprice being the cheapest and the Roadmaster in the middle.

All of them, especially the Roadmaster and Fleetwood, drive pretty much identically, too. BUT, the Fleetwood definately has a higher grade of interior materials and finishes (Roadmaster has a lot of rock hard, shiny plastic and stiff leather, while the Fleetwood has mostly soft, low sheen plastic and soft, supple leather), and shares next to nothing on the exterior.

So, TECHNICALLY, they are pretty much the same car, but the Fleetwood was nearly $10k more when new, and that money was clearly well spent on more size, better materials, and the best look of the bunch. I've never been much of a Caprice fan because of the typically low-buck, mass market look, but really like both the Roadmaster and Fleetwood.

Here's a good comparison of the exteriors, at least, of our cars (yep, identical colors inside and out!):
http://www.ihostphotos.com/imgt/170393.jpg (http://www.ihostphotos.com/show.php?id=170393)
http://www.ihostphotos.com/imgt/170394.jpg (http://www.ihostphotos.com/show.php?id=170394)

Actually, I like the Roadmaster. Definately not rebadged though. A Taurus and a Sable are rebadges. A Dodge and a Chrysler are rebadges. This is not a rebadge, it's just multiplatforming. And without the magic of multiplatforming, why our leadfooted Fleetwood drivers couldn't use those Impala SS parts that are great for performance modding! So you see kids, multiplatforming is GM's own little blessing in disguise.

LMAO!!! What did you think your Fleetwood was? A rebadged Rolls?. Not so ritzy when think about all the cabbies driving Caprices and your car is just a rebodied version of the same car. All kidding aside, the Fleetwood is a much nicer car than a Caprice. All car companies do this so dont get your panties in a bind over it. :alchi:

More good points--none of these cars, the Caprice, Roadmaster, or Fleetwood, are "rebadges". Enough is different on each, that they seem completely unique, except for the real guts, the powertrains and suspensions, which is probably still one of the BEST things about them--just being able to bolt on virtually any and every performance mod made for the Impala SS onto any of the others is just great!

That way, you can get the best of both worlds--the luxury and style of the Caddy, mixed with the performance of the Impala SS, for example, one of the most commonly performed "transformations".

cabbies and cops used the caprice (and mourn the death of it) because it was very solid, very reliable, very quick and the 9C1 police package made a regular caprice handle like a BMW. So all in all, the GM B & D bodies are a very solid car. my Roadmaster was very solid, perhaps more solid than my deVille due to it being body on frame.

There were some things I liked on my 91 Deville (FDC), there isn't much I miss, my Fleetwood will smoke it anyday and it far more joy to drive. They share frames (basically same, other than length) and drivetrains, but even in that Cad got better things like traction control and 4 channel ABS.

9C1 and 9C6 cars (Taxi) are some tough cars, as are limo's and other commercial chassis variants, and even evidence of them getting some front suspesion upgrades in 96, shows that Engineering wasn't ready to the B/D cars die, but it seems front office had final say.

I~LUV~Caddys8792, there is a early Mark IV for sale on my way home from work, want me to stop and look? Extreme NW Chicago Suburbs (Fox Lake).

ahhh no thanks man, i can't get one now, but i'm planning on getting one after college (3-5 years) But thanks anyways, what color is it, and whats the interior like? I really want to drive one of these big boys sometime! I sat in one once, and i was amazed at how long the hood seems when ur behind the wheel, its massive!

BTW...when you said your FWB is much more of a joy to drive, what exactly did u mean? I personally prefer my '92 Sedan deVille to the '95 Roadmaster Limited i had. The '92 handles better, rides smoother, and is not as quite as quick, but its got more gadgets. Thanks Again, -Chad

My 1995 Fleetwood Brougham was one of the best cars I've ever driven. I wish I could have afforded one brand new in 1995.. I still intend on getting one to keep forever one day. I just need a garage first...

that statement is pure envy the same could be said about the roadmaster in comparison to the caprices.

there are at least 80 things i can name that are diff on the caddy and much better including the luxurious look of the fleetwood

a roadmaster to me just looks like an old car to me it has a station wagon look which is too 70s for me

the better more accurate statement would be that a roadmaster is a rebadged caprice

I just like the bigger cars, smoother over the road, sure, doesn't handle quite as well, but that can be fixed, and less gadgets (sorta like the simpllicity of it), and then when you park, you realize just how LONG this sucker is! Especially in the parking lot at work when half the cars rear bumper comes the my back tire!

I feel like the Deville was more fragile, like if I dogged on it I would break that fragile trans or pop a head gasket. It ran good, got low to mid 20's for mpg. But my 94 Fleetwood has tons more power and gets high teens for gas mileage. I hope to see how they compare on the highway at the end of the month.

The Mark IV is a lighter color, tan/gold. No idea on interior, but looks in good shape. I always liked the Mark V's. But wouldn't touch one now, just not me. I like the cars, but they seem so lethargic on power to the size/weight. At least they have a 460 and 9in with rear discs (V's were rumored to, some had slug 400's). So power can be dealt with easily. Get a EFI setup from an early 90's truck and go to town with a 5.0L Mustang ECM (easy mods).

My 1995 Fleetwood Brougham was one of the best cars I've ever driven. I wish I could have afforded one brand new in 1995.. I still intend on getting one to keep forever one day. I just need a garage first...

I TOLD YOU!!!! but no you just didnt want to listen to me.

the Fleetwood isnt called the "Cadillac of Cadillacs" for nothing

Fleetwoods are definately more bad ass than any of their RWD cousins. I still remember the test drive I took on a 93. That was a sweet car. I wants me a 95! I want a 95 Fleetwood Brougham as a different daily driver car and retire my 89 to fair weather weekends and the garage life.

Fleetwoods are definately more bad ass than any of their RWD cousins. I still remember the test drive I took on a 93. That was a sweet car. I wants me a 95! I want a 95 Fleetwood Brougham as a different daily driver car and retire my 89 to fair weather weekends and the garage life.

im... so... proud :crying:! you gonna let me juice it :eyebrow:? you'd have so many girls around that car after i did that you'd have to fend them off with a stick!

just out of curiosity, how many miles does your 89 have? them Fleetwoods arent too rare where you are. it seems every Fleetwood i see on ebay is from NJ. good luck and happy hunting, took me two years to find mine.

From the side a Fleetwood looks a lot like a Caprice. But it's not a rebadged Roadmaster. Roadmasters look like they're around the same age as Fleetwoods are they don't look any older. They aren't a rebadged Fleetwood either- Roadmasters were made first.

From the side a Fleetwood looks a lot like a Caprice. But it's not a rebadged Roadmaster. Roadmasters look like they're around the same age as Fleetwoods are they don't look any older. They aren't a rebadged Fleetwood either- Roadmasters were made first.

ONLY because less thought and effort was put into their interior so their production began sooner but not becaue they were made better in the least way.

Good things must be thought out and well designed which I think they succeeded with the fleetwood.

Yup, I agree, I looked at a 93 RM Wagon for sale by work and the interior (seats are the main thing that caught me eye) is so plain and lame. The car has some damage to the fenders down low behind the back tires and he still wants $3300. Dreamer.

The seats looked like a cheap vinyl.

Cadillac upscaled the car a lot. The car isn't the high tech Deville, and interestingly enough never seemed to be against it in sales. Fleetwood buyers are Fleetwood buyers. If you like gadgets and FWD (aka, Wrong Wheel Drive), and a smaller car, the Deville is more up your alley. For me, I like the bigger, wider, less gadgets (I do miss FDC though) car.

My thoughts are the Fleetwood had to be a major profit machine, $40K+ average price or more, and my guess is the car didn't cost GM more than $16K to make. Most high tier high end models are killer money makers in any business. Low end "mass market" stuff is often lower profit margins.

Does it make it a cheap ride? No. The seats are firmer than my 91 SDV, but more supportive, has seat warmers, has more goodies on the seats (power lumbar, power recline), a great sounding stereo stock (many will argue, but the dynamic range is actually very good on mine, decent lows, good highs, able to crank it some). Loud isn't the #1 factor, quality is what I am looking for.

My car is very solid, only rattle is new is from a overhead handle. Else the car is dead silent down the road. Quieter than any car short of a $90K S500 MBenz or $225K Bentley Turbo R. Ok, the Bentley 420 CID Turbo has the best exhaust I have ever heard, but I'm not into paying that much for an exhaust.

I have driven and compared, the Fleetwood isn't too far off from that class of machine. (compare same years, not 2006's vs 1994!) and the Cad Fleetwood has an interesting market.

ONLY because less thought and effort was put into their interior so their production began sooner but not becaue they were made better in the least way.

Good things must be thought out and well designed which I think they succeeded with the fleetwood.

I totally agree with you. Same thing was with 1967 Eldorado - they fixed all drivetrain mistakes, what Oldsmobile had (1966 Toronado) and produced one nicest big luxury coupe in all times.:worship:

Agreed--going between the Roadmaster and the Fleetwood on any given day, the Fleetwood feels like the extra year + of design and engineering that went into it were actually worthwhile. It's smoother, quieter, has much nicer materials, better leather, is faster (though that's just a rear axle ratio and mileage issue), and just feels like the more expensive car.

HOWEVER, on the other hand, the strange thing that has always struck us since we've owned both, is how the Roadmaster actually feels more solid and tougher overall--even with 192k on the clock. The Fleetwood is still a baby at 102k (:cool: ), but feels slightly flimsier overall and that it really couldn't take as much of a beating as the Buick could. Yeah, there are more creaks and occasional rattles inside the Buick, but that's largely due in part to cheap, hard plastic on places like the door panels and lots of mileage and use to loosen it up.

Still prefer the Caddy overall, but if I found a REALLY nice Buick that was the right colors and condition, I'd probably buy it in a heartbeat.

yeah i agree with the statement above, the Buick has TONS of cheap hard shiny plastics in it. I bought my '95 at 138k miles and the doors panels and faux wood grain trim were coming off. very cheap materials, and the leather was not soft and supple as in a Cadillac. It was firm, and tough, but it was heated which was really nice. Overall, it didnt feel like a car that sold for $29,190 new in '95. It felt cheap.

I had a saleman at a chevy dealer tell me the Fleetwoods and Caprices were made in the same factory. My reply to him was: " Where is the closest Cadillac dealer? Hey NoDIH, I love the picture of the Brougham towing the airstream. I have an 87 Brougham with the trailering package. You wouldnt happen to know what that all includes? Also where did you get that picture would love to have it

I had a saleman at a chevy dealer tell me the Fleetwoods and Caprices were made in the same factory. My reply to him was: " Where is the closest Cadillac dealer? Hey NoDIH, I love the picture of the Brougham towing the airstream. I have an 87 Brougham with the trailering package. You wouldnt happen to know what that all includes? Also where did you get that picture would love to have it


The Fleetwoods, Caprices and Roadmasters weren't all built in the Arlington Texas factory?

To sum it up, a Fleetwood is an Impala in a tuxedo.

To sum it up, a Fleetwood is an Impala in a tuxedo.


yeah pretty much, or a Wolf in sheep's clothing

ONLY because less thought and effort was put into their interior so their production began sooner but not becaue they were made better in the least way.

Good things must be thought out and well designed which I think they succeeded with the fleetwood.

I never said they were made better. Someone said that Roadmasters are a rebadged Fleetwood. I only said they weren't.

I posted a detail of it here: http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48424&highlight=V4P+7000%23

I had a saleman at a chevy dealer tell me the Fleetwoods and Caprices were made in the same factory. My reply to him was: " Where is the closest Cadillac dealer? Hey NoDIH, I love the picture of the Brougham towing the airstream. I have an 87 Brougham with the trailering package. You wouldnt happen to know what that all includes? Also where did you get that picture would love to have it

Now, how much is actually different than a non V4P, I don't honestly know. I posted directly out of a Cadillac Brouchure I have that listed that as what was included in the V4P Trailering Package for 1995. Mine is a 1994, and all seemed the same. So I would guess 1996 is the same also.

Thanks, Very interesting information. Like i said mine is an 87 Brougham. I believe it will only tow 5000. I have the 5.0 V-8. I guess i will have to do some reserch on what all the 87 had included in it's towing package.

Thanks, Very interesting information. Like i said mine is an 87 Brougham. I believe it will only tow 5000. I have the 5.0 V-8. I guess i will have to do some reserch on what all the 87 had included in it's towing package.


5000lbs is a pretty impressive towing capacity for the 307 :thumbsup:

Is yours a V4P or the V92? I think the V92 is the 5000# tow package. They are also available on the 94-96's, and probably the Roadmasters and Caprices too.

The Fleetwoods, Caprices and Roadmasters weren't all built in the Arlington Texas factory?

I'm pretty sure they were, and we are forgetting a car!!

Anyone know what it was? :)

Hint, it didin't live long enough to get an LT1 and was never made as a Sedan. :sneaky:

To sum it up, a Fleetwood is an Impala in a tuxedo.

Hey, that's my line!! :ill:

Where's my royalties? :want:

:)

Custom Cruiser.

Custom Cruiser.

We have winner!!

Oldsmobile made the Custom Cruiser in 1991 and 1992!

yeah pretty much, or a Wolf in sheep's clothing

No, that was the '98-'03 STS! At least that's what the billboard ads said! :cool2:

No, that was the '98-'03 STS! At least that's what the billboard ads said! :cool2: haha oh yah i remember those billboards

Hey i believe it is the VP92 I know the car has no hitch on it but was thinking of getting a boat. Any thoughts on using it to tow?