Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello everyone! I thought some of you might enjoy this video I made which is all about the quirks and features of this 1996 Cadillac Fleetwood Limousine. It is a six door Fleetwood which was stretched by Superior Coach in Lima Ohio. My dad and I are huge Cadillac fans (especially Fleetwoods) and we thought this in-depth review would be fitting for a fabulous car. I hope you all will enjoy it!

Link:
 

·
Registered
68 DVC, 96 FLTWD Brgm, 11 CTS Premium (two)
Joined
·
1,626 Posts
Needs a set of White Wall tires!

The video shows the cornering lights lit but the presenter does not know what they are.

He covers the car pretty well, but it has a Massive overuse of the word "quirk". They are Features or design / engineering elements. He actually does say feature occasionally.

I'm pretty sure the door panels are not leather, but they are nice.

That middle seat does not have an armrest - it really should but I saw another Superior Limo and its middle seat also lacked an armrest.

I'd like to get one of these, but it won't fit in my garage.

A 1997-99 Fleetwood Limited - DeVille based would be better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Needs a set of White Wall tires!

The video shows the cornering lights lit but the presenter does not know what they are.

He covers the car pretty well, but it has a Massive overuse of the word "quirk". They are Features or design / engineering elements. He actually does say feature occasionally.

I'm pretty sure the door panels are not leather, but they are nice.

That middle seat does not have an armrest - it really should but I saw another Superior Limo and its middle seat also lacked an armrest.

I'd like to get one of these, but it won't fit in my garage.

A 1997-99 Fleetwood Limited - DeVille based would be better.
Yes, my dad and I really wish that we had white wall tires for this car and our other Cadillacs but we are biased towards Michelin tires (which we don't think have whitewalls).

I sure do wish that there was an armrest for the center row as well, it would make it much more comfortable. They probably saved money by choosing not to include one.

We own a 1999 Cadillac Fleetwood Limited and it fits perfectly in the garage (much better than the limousine). I'm not sure if you noticed the video on my channel or not but I actually uploaded a similar review about the Fleetwood Limited. Be sure to check it out if you haven't, I'm sure you would like it!

Thank you very much for your feedback, I'll try my best to make improvements in the future
 

·
Registered
68 DVC, 96 FLTWD Brgm, 11 CTS Premium (two)
Joined
·
1,626 Posts
OK, so it is your car not just an overview.

We have a 1996 Fleetwood Brougham and had a 1995 Fleetwood Brougham, both with the chrome brougham wheels. I had a 1970 Fleetwood Brougham way back as well

There is a company called Diamondback that can vulcanize a whitewall of just about any width on any tire, so you can have them do up a set of Michelins for your car. The only issue is price. I have Hankooks on the 1996, but they are starting to get worn so I'm not sure what to do. The Hankooks have lasted for a while, but I don't think they make them in 235-70-15 in whitewall anymore.

I read about the Fleetwood Limited and have a brochure from that time. It's a 97-99 DeVille stretched in the back seat with foot rests & reading lights like the 1965-1976 Fleetwood Broughams and a lot of added amenities that Superior put in the car. Not too many around, so you have an uncommon car. It's still not as big as the 1993-1996 Fleetwood Broughams but is very nice.

Cornering lights, which your 99 also have is a FEATURE where if the lights are on and you signal a turn, there is a white light that illuminates the corner that you are turning towards. The 2000-2005 DeVilles had them and I think the 2006-2012 DTSs had them, but not the CTS STS, etc.

What's also missing from the newer cars is the power trunk pull-down, a nice feature that doesn't make you slam down the trunk. The CTS and STS trunks are so heavy they slam down by themselves.

You also have an auto pull-off parking brake, where if the car is running and you put in gear the parking brake will automatically pull via a vacuum diaphragm. Your 99 should have this as well. Again it's missing in the CTS STS,etc.

Just remember they are Features, not quirks. The only real quirk I would say is that when it is dark out AND you have the Twilight Sentinel ON, the headlights won't come on until you put the car in gear.

Remember that 1996 and later GM cars have daytime running lights. This might have something to do with it, because I don't remember the 1995 Fleetwood doing that. I do know that the DRLs will only come on when the car is in gear. Again that might be why.

No armrest in the middle row might be because it would be too difficult to incorporate without making the seat too thick.

A better option would be a rear facing middle row. What do you think?


Enjoy the two cars, both are examples of Cadillac engineering excellence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
OK, so it is your car not just an overview.

We have a 1996 Fleetwood Brougham and had a 1995 Fleetwood Brougham, both with the chrome brougham wheels. I had a 1970 Fleetwood Brougham way back as well

There is a company called Diamondback that can vulcanize a whitewall of just about any width on any tire, so you can have them do up a set of Michelins for your car. The only issue is price. I have Hankooks on the 1996, but they are starting to get worn so I'm not sure what to do. The Hankooks have lasted for a while, but I don't think they make them in 235-70-15 in whitewall anymore.

I read about the Fleetwood Limited and have a brochure from that time. It's a 97-99 DeVille stretched in the back seat with foot rests & reading lights like the 1965-1976 Fleetwood Broughams and a lot of added amenities that Superior put in the car. Not too many around, so you have an uncommon car. It's still not as big as the 1993-1996 Fleetwood Broughams but is very nice.

Cornering lights, which your 99 also have is a FEATURE where if the lights are on and you signal a turn, there is a white light that illuminates the corner that you are turning towards. The 2000-2005 DeVilles had them and I think the 2006-2012 DTSs had them, but not the CTS STS, etc.

What's also missing from the newer cars is the power trunk pull-down, a nice feature that doesn't make you slam down the trunk. The CTS and STS trunks are so heavy they slam down by themselves.

You also have an auto pull-off parking brake, where if the car is running and you put in gear the parking brake will automatically pull via a vacuum diaphragm. Your 99 should have this as well. Again it's missing in the CTS STS,etc.

Just remember they are Features, not quirks. The only real quirk I would say is that when it is dark out AND you have the Twilight Sentinel ON, the headlights won't come on until you put the car in gear.

Remember that 1996 and later GM cars have daytime running lights. This might have something to do with it, because I don't remember the 1995 Fleetwood doing that. I do know that the DRLs will only come on when the car is in gear. Again that might be why.

No armrest in the middle row might be because it would be too difficult to incorporate without making the seat too thick.

A better option would be a rear facing middle row. What do you think?


Enjoy the two cars, both are examples of Cadillac engineering excellence.
Wow! I think Fleetwood Broughams are some of the best cars Cadillac ever made, I'd love to own one of those someday. They are beautiful cars.

Interesting, I'll have to look into Diamondback. We don't want to spend too much on tires but we may have to spend more than usual just because of how much we like whitewalls.

Yes, the Fleetwood Limited certainly is unique. Ours has most of the options except for the cellular phone, DVD/VCR player, and the rear writing tables. I've been trying to find at least one writing table for the car because of how nice they are but they are so rare that it'll be incredibly hard to find... maybe someday.

We actually owned another 1995 Fleetwood limousine with a rear facing middle row before we had this one. We didn't use it too often facing rearwards because some riders became nauseous and were uncomfortable. We were also worried about safety and if the car was in a crash that the middle row would not stay in place. But luckily my dad and his friend Kenny Lay, who has since passed away, found the one we have now and bought it for an astounding price. We fixed it up and use it on most of our road trips. Both the limousine and the Fleetwood Limited are superb road trip cars with plenty of space and surprisingly good fuel economy. I'm hoping to have the Fleetwood Limited for many years to come
 

·
Registered
68 DVC, 96 FLTWD Brgm, 11 CTS Premium (two)
Joined
·
1,626 Posts
Actually a rear facing middle row would be safe because the entire seat will hold the occupants steady. There would be no danger of the seat collapsing, etc.

However any un-belted third row passengers will end up on top of the middle row passengers!

We just finished a 1300 mile road trip in a 2011 CTS premiumed sedan. Dual zone AC, ventilated seats, XM satellite radio, etc. The car ran great but the Fleetwood, which would not start because of a fuel pump issue, would have been a smoother ride. Even so the CTS ran just fine and I put 5 hours straight in it without tiring on one leg.

Enjoy the cars and post your u tube link up if you don't mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Actually a rear facing middle row would be safe because the entire seat will hold the occupants steady. There would be no danger of the seat collapsing, etc.

However any un-belted third row passengers will end up on top of the middle row passengers!

We just finished a 1300 mile road trip in a 2011 CTS premiumed sedan. Dual zone AC, ventilated seats, XM satellite radio, etc. The car ran great but the Fleetwood, which would not start because of a fuel pump issue, would have been a smoother ride. Even so the CTS ran just fine and I put 5 hours straight in it without tiring on one leg.

Enjoy the cars and post your u tube link up if you don't mind.
That's a good point! Hadn't thought about that haha.

Very nice! I've looked a little into the second generation CTS but I wasn't sure if it would be too sporty and small for me, however it would work as a good daily driver too! And those are some very nice features, I would love to have ventilated seats in my car for hot, muggy days.

Thank you and enjoy yours as well!

This link should lead directly to my page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCR1HBZQjG-eX_03dsyKwRxQ

(Let me know if it doesn't work)
 

·
Registered
1996 Federal Heritage Hearse
Joined
·
229 Posts
Something to consider is that this is a Funeral limo and therefore has a Cadillac Commercial chassis. Where other limos willnot. As far as I have been told only 5 coach builders were allowed to get Cadillac Commercial chassis in the 93-96 years. While not the same as the 1984 and prior Commercial Chassis and not as extensive the 93-96 did get lots of goodies yoy could not get on a Fleetwood.
 

·
Registered
68 DVC, 96 FLTWD Brgm, 11 CTS Premium (two)
Joined
·
1,626 Posts
OK, but the Cadillac RWD commercial chassis was still based on the D body Fleetwood. The CC is already a lengthened chassis from Cadillac, no cutting and stretching needed, wheres other coach builders would have to get a Fleetwood car, cut and then stretch the chassis.

The major difference is that the CC was a fixed length but a Fleetwood cut and stretched could be any length. In addition the CC would already have strengthened frame, heavy duty brakes, etc all built in, while a stretched Fleetwood would need to have it all done after the fact - or not done with any safety problems that might entail.
 

·
Registered
1996 Federal Heritage Hearse
Joined
·
229 Posts
OK, but the Cadillac RWD commercial chassis was still based on the D body Fleetwood. The CC is already a lengthened chassis from Cadillac, no cutting and stretching needed, wheres other coach builders would have to get a Fleetwood car, cut and then stretch the chassis.

The major difference is that the CC was a fixed length but a Fleetwood cut and stretched could be any length. In addition the CC would already have strengthened frame, heavy duty brakes, etc all built in, while a stretched Fleetwood would need to have it all done after the fact - or not done with any safety problems that might entail.
Only the 1984 and before commercial chassis are already pre lenghtened. And no Commercial chassis from 1985-1992.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top