View Full Version : I drove a '90 Brougham 5.7L (90Brougham350's car)


I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-25-06, 01:24 PM
The 1990 Brougham 5.7L feels like an 11/10's version of my 1992 Sedan deVille.

Exterior Design: 9.75/10.
I love the lines on these 1990-92 Broughams... so very american! They've got those very elegant and formal lines that Cadillac is known for, and when I think Cadillac, these 90-92 Broughams are the first thing that come to mind. To sum it up, the 1990-92 Broughams are some of the best looking Cadillacs ever IMO.

Interior Design: 8.5/10.
The interior design, like the exterior, is very american, in the classic sense of the word. Meaning loads of leather, chrome and faux wood trim. It's like 1979 all over again! It gives this feeling of being very ostentatious and over the top, and that's why I love Cadillacs! Also, I actually really liked the digital dash setup, which is rather odd, but I really liked the tiny digital gas gauge and speedo. There is no other information, no Fuel Data Center like on my deVille, but that's kinda nice though..simpler and less to break.. more peace of mind..

Seating: 8.5/10.
Just like my deVille, the seats are very soft with loads of cushioning and very little support. The Brougham's seats seemed flatter though, with less lateral support. I remember the d'Elegance as having better seats.

Engine: 7.5/10.
Performance wise, the 350 TBI is OK, nothing special stock, but loads of aftermarket. The real attraction to this motor is the loads of low end torque and unbeatable reliability. These things will not die if you take care of them. Also, you don't need to apply much throttle at all to get this 4200 lb tank moving. Just give it a bit of gas and you're gone! You really never need to go past 1/2 throttle at all, unlike the 350LT1 there is no top end to these motors, but then again, it's not designed to...they're designed to pull heavy loads with ease and no drama. That's exactly what this 350 did. But on the negative side, the 1990 350 is rated at like 14/21 MPG, which is exactly what Brian gets in his Brougham...maybe more like 12/21 but close enough. The 91 & 92 models were rated at 16/24 for the 350 and 16/25 for the 305 model. Brian said they revised the camshaft a bit in '91 for slightly more power and better economy.

Tranny: 9/10
Brian has had his tranny redone and when he did it, he didn't leave it stock, so I can't really say what a stock 700R4 (4L60) is like, but this one shifted real firm, real quick and was very decesive. A great tranny as always.

Steering: 8.5/10
This steering was lighter than my '92's but not as vague as the older models. Very nicely done I think! It still gave good road feel yet still felt like a classic Cadillac.

Suspension: 8.5/10
This felt a lot like my '92, not as floaty as a '70s Cadillac or Lincoln, yet comfortable and *kinda* floaty, but in the corners, it was surprisingly good for a Brougham, but then again, Brian put Bilsteins on when he put new shocks on last year, so it wasn't as sloppy or floaty as the typical D-Body.

Electronic Goodies: 7.5/10
The Broughams were never as loaded as any of the other Cadillacs, and that might be a good thing. Simpler, less to go wrong and break. It had all the essentials, the digital speedo and digital fuel gauge, electronic climate control, power windows, power locks, 6 way power front seats, including power recliners! I rather like not having the FDC, it's great that it tells you the range until E, but it can be kind of nagging when you're sitting in traffic watching your AVG MPG dropping fast, or when you go to pass someone and see your AVG MPG drop .7 MPG..it can be annoying. It's nice not having that.

Overall, I'd give it 83/100. It's great mindless driving! Ya don't gotta think about it or worry about it much because it's so simple, just sit back, relax and cruise!

Destroyer
11-25-06, 02:30 PM
Kinda awkward giving a review of another members car no?. Good thing you didn't think it was a POS cause there might have been some trouble. With that said I'd say you are pretty spot on with me in regards to the Brougham and what I think of them. Also one has to remember that the handling/power issues are an easy fix if you are handy with tools and have the time/money to do them. These cars or any D body do have a lot of aftermarket support but when purchasing stuff look under the Impala SS category for supplies cause the Broughams are usually not listed for any performance parts. The downside to modifiying these cars is that it will be money lost when its time to sell them and finding someone to buy your version of what the car should be will be difficult. There is a market for the lowriders in this type car but not much from performance enthusiasts.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-25-06, 03:33 PM
Kinda awkward giving a review of another members car no?. Good thing you didn't think it was a POS cause there might have been some trouble.

Nah, not awkward at all. We went out to dinner last night and I told him if he let me drive it, I'd write a review, he was actually kinda thrilled with me writing a review on his car. But he knew I liked his car so he knew the review would be positive. Now to return the favor, I'll let him drive mine and he can review it if he wants.


Oh and if I ever drive a member's car and don't like it, I just wouldn't write a review, or I'd leave the negative parts out. That would be such a dick move to insult somebody's car over the forums.

Destroyer
11-26-06, 10:35 AM
Oh and if I ever drive a member's car and don't like it, I'd leave the negative parts out. So what did you leave out?:alchi:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-26-06, 10:41 AM
Nothing. :)

96Fleetwood
11-26-06, 01:42 PM
Nice review! If we ever meet up.. I need to let you drive my car.. and then I need to let you ride in the car with me driving. You will see and feel things you never thought possible in a 4800 lb. car :thumbsup: ...

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-26-06, 04:22 PM
Sounds like a plan Elias! I know some 4800lb cars can do amazing things (SL55, CL55, S65 AMG) but I've never seen something of that size and weight do amazing things! Yet...

davesdeville
11-27-06, 12:35 AM
No way a 96 FWB weighs 4800lbs...

Edit: Not 4800 dry anyway.

caddieboy
11-27-06, 12:42 AM
No way a 96 FWB weighs 4800lbs...

According to my book, shipping weight was 4477 lbs. Couple of hefty guys and you'll be at 4800 before you get the key in the ignition.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-27-06, 12:42 AM
Yep, and 23 gallons of gas too!

N0DIH
11-27-06, 01:19 AM
6 lbs per gallon of gas, there is 138 lbs there....

A few dead bodies in the trunk maybe?

caddieboy
11-27-06, 02:52 AM
6 lbs per gallon of gas, there is 138 lbs there....

A few dead bodies in the trunk maybe?

And how much to fuzzy dice weigh? :rolling:

96Fleetwood
11-27-06, 07:45 AM
No way a 96 FWB weighs 4800lbs...

Edit: Not 4800 dry anyway.


ooooohhhh, my bad. . 4477lbs it is. :bigroll: