1973 De Ville Convertible

[Eldorado James]

@76Eldo      I agree that the Scissors mechanism is complex and needs competent hands to line it all up right.  When working, the Scissor top system is quite amazing, considering it's simplicity (one motor, 2 drive gear) setup and the complexity of the component alignment.  But any other conventional (1960's) frame would stick up too high...unless (in theory) you cut into the upper wheel wells, etc.  See pic of Scissor top assy out of an Eldorado.   The Deville might be slightly wider at the rear upper seat, and the fabricator would have to create the mounts inward a bit.....I'd cut out a set of the Eldo conv mounts and just use those as a template or weld them in.  I don't think it's miles off though...but it has to be accurate.   I'd do the windshield first and then open the frame fully while locking the header onto the windshield...and then find your appx strike lines for the rear bolts....It would take some doing but in the right hands it could be done well.  This is the fun part...the idea challenge!

[chrisntam]

If you do it, please start with a '69. 

A '70 is a lot nicer looking that a '69.  (no offense)

[73 DropTop]

I guess I don’t have a trained eye, 69 & 70 CDV Convertible look identical to me, Enlighten me please.

[Eldorado James]

From a base cost perspective...buying a really decent 1969-70 convertible and then adding on 1973 sheetmetal is probably going to be a lot higher than finding a 1973 CDV and buying the parts to convert.   1970 CDV conv price vs 1973 CDV coupe....big price jump.

[73 DropTop]

@ James, I agree I been hunting, a decent running 73 CDV are very cheap compared to beater 69-70 Convertible. A couple junk lots out west in TX, NV etc dont sell the whole convertible just the parts. Im looking at a 73 CDV in my state. Lets see.

[D.Smith]

I guess I don’t have a trained eye, 69 & 70 CDV Convertible look identical to me, Enlighten me please.

69 front had wider grille. Headlamps set in grille.  No emblems on fender ends.    Had V under crest on hood.
70 front has smaller grille.  Headlamps have body color surround.   Emblems on fender ends.   No V under crest on hood.

69 Rear had wrap around rear lamps.   V under crest on trunk.
70 rear lamps are hooded, reverse lamps in bumper.   No V under crest.

[73 DropTop]

@ D Smith, Got it Thanks!!

[73 DropTop]

I asked this question over 9 Hours ago, not including PM, I got no feedback. "OK SO........ How's this one?, 73 CDV front clip ( Front end) on a 1973-74 El Dorado? Seems the cheapest, I know there's " traditionalist" out there, but "customizing" has been around since before the Roman Chariots, now THAT is antique! I have restored an antique Harley (1940's) and a Classic Mustang (1960's). Restoring is minor leagues,  Customizing is Major Leagues!

[Eldorado James]

Let's take that last post a step further....I have a rust free 1973 Eldorado convertible body shell....from the windshield all the way back.  How about putting that onto the CDV frame and leaving it rear wheel drive?  That require a minor floor pan stretch and driveshaft/trans modifications (all hidden later) ......revising the body mount locations....maybe a few other small things......but hey, that eliminates 100% of the convertible top conversion....and you can use the 1973 Eldorado bumper.  With some ingenuity you could maybe use the 1973 Deville bumper  (has rubber filler extensions) or maybe 1974-76 Deville/Fleetwood Bumpers if you like those.  Given the clean front end look of the 1973 DeVille, that 1973 Eldo bumper would blend.

[Scot Minesinger]

There is already a 1973 Eldorado conversion to RWD, and it is major surgery costing many thousands of hours worth of time.  You should go on the modified Cadillac site to see what people go thru. 

Yes, you can remove a fender from the 1973 Eldorado and replace it with a 1973 CDV fender in a day or two, but it will look like s**t.  It will take weeks of refabricating brackets and implementing small minor modifications to the fender to make this look good, not to mention a repaint after completion, which is 10k for a decent one.

Custom automotive body work that looks good and functions perfectly is very expensive and difficult to accomplish.  This is a tall order you ask for, not for the faint of heart or low resource guy.  Given that you can get a 1973 CDV for maybe 5k, and a 1969 DVC for maybe 15k that would be the basis for the foundation of the work and I read a complaint about the price difference (BTW the 69 DVC comes with a top mechanism already installed, weather seals for window and top are available, and etc.) tells me that the job complexity and price are greatly underestimated.

The only reason for this is for looks, as otherwise the 70 DVC would suffice.  I frankly think the 71-73 CDV is a great style, and if offered in a convertible from the factory it would be in my garage right now.  This is just too impractical for me though in so many ways.  Please keep us posted, as this will be a wonderful looking car after it is completed.

[Eldorado James]

I agree with Scott and mentioned this in a PM.....putting a 73 front end on the Eldorado...the frames are not the same in the front, especially due to the FWD.  All of the bolt points for bumpers, body panels, inner fenders, etc...would likely not match and be challenging. Time consuming to alter....The curve at the front of the door might match though.  You could weld the entire front clip together and then secure it with several anchor points to the frame....then put on the bumper last (direct to the revised location of the bumper shocks, if needed).  It seems like a very hard route to go though.  The firewalls and hood hinges are essentially the same but the differences start the moment you move forward.

EJ

[cadillacmike68]

Have fun, but I'd just get a 1968-0 convertible. What's so special about 1973? more emissions controls low compression combine to significantly rob power. There were no major advances in refinement between 1970-1973 (really even between 1968-73) , so Idon't know why, but have fun doing it.

I mean what did 1973s have that 1968-70 didn't have

Climate control - already there except that 1973 had bi-level
Tile-tele wheel - back from 1964
Dual outside mirrors - back to 1968 although the right side might be remote control in 1973
Power trunk - from the 60
Power locks - from theb60s
Power seats - from the 60s
Power windows - from the 50s
Radio  - 8-tracks from 69 on
Twilight Sentinel & Guidematic - from the mid 60s
Level Control - from the 60s
Rear Defogger - from the mid 60s but probably a no-go on convertibles
Cruise Control - from the mid 60s

For pretty much everything, If you could get it in a 1973, you could get it in a 1968-70. Plus you got MORE POWER, a nice metal grille, Vent windows on a 68, no isolated bumpers with fillers to disintegrate as time goes on, less plastic trim, etc.....

[cadillacmike68]

I guess I don’t have a trained eye, 69 & 70 CDV Convertible look identical to me, Enlighten me please.

69 has a better looking front end because of the grille and the better looking blinkers. 7 has a better looking back end because of the tail lights. 70s (and 71) DeVilles and Calias have NO "V" ?!?!? They had larger crests than 69 -earlier or 72-later as well.

68s look better than either . 

70s (and 71 i think) have that stooopid in the windshield antenna, while 69-earlier and 72-later etc have regular power antennas.

Interiors are almost the same - just different patterns.

Cruise is different except on ElDorados 69 has the 68 and earlier dial-a-speed while 70 - up has the later more compact unit.

[Eldorado James]

I think 73DropTop has a crush on 1973 Devilles, that is why he is considering this project. Agreed that there isn't a ton of change between 1969-73...or even 1976 for that matter, but we all gravitate towards certain years..for looks, features, maybe childhood memories, etc.  My personal preference in that range (for a coupe or custom convertible) would be a 1972-73 Deville as well.  There is still plenty of power in the engine (same as 1971, but they changed how HP was measured for 1972) and I like the dashboard better than '69-'70...the dual curve on the quarter panels....also the 1973 interior upper door and quarter panels in full woodgrain look, the design of the front and rear ends/bumpers, etc.  It's a little more polished and elegant to my eyes, especially with dual rocker moldings, the shinier grille, hood ornament, bumper guards, etc. 

EJ

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

I still think using a '73 other GM Convertible (Large size) would work best and fitting ALL the '73 DeVille parts to it, including all the interior, and drive train from the Cadillac.

I know that the Cadillac wheels would be a bolt-on, as would the seats and upholstery, and probably the dash would fit, as the windscreens for the Convertibles are the same.   Plus, probably the front fender mountings at the firewall would be the same.

The funny thing about GM is that underneath the outer skins, the basic constructions for all fisher body structures are very close to being the same.   If they weren't, then the profits made wouldn't be as high.

Bruce.

[Scot Minesinger]

Mike,

Do you like 1968 Cadillacs?

The front end of the 1970 cornering/marker lights with horizontal grille looks so cool at night when lighted up.  For me the 70 is better looking than the 69 because of that - plus the 1970 tail lights are cooler.  The  RWD 1970 Cadillac is the only year for factory stock 472 with no air pump.

All,

the 1973 CDV crush to make it a DVC is very expensive.

[Eldorado James]

@Bruce,

I don't think that would work well....the sheet metal transfer.  The Deville is a "C" body platform car, and the generic Chevy Caprice/Impala/Delta 88/ LeSabre/Grandville are B-Body.  Why is that significant?  The wheelbases on C body cars is longer by over 8 inches.....your rear axles (in theory) won't line up with the rear wheel wells unless you stretch the body/frame.  Specs below....am I on the right track?

1969-70 information also posted.....the wheelbase is almost exactly the same....however the body width grew...somehow, somewhere...by over 3 inches.


1973 Cadillac Coupe de Ville

Dimensions: outside length: 5804 mm / 228.5 in, width: 2027 mm / 79.8 in, wheelbase: 3302 mm / 130 in

*************

1973 Chevrolet Impala 2-Door Coupe, 350-2 V-8 Turbo-Fire Hydra-Matic

Dimensions: outside length: 5636 mm / 221.9 in, width: 2019 mm / 79.5 in, wheelbase: 3086 mm / 121.5 in


*****************************

And for the sake of conversation....the 1969-70 Deville

1970 Cadillac Coupe de Ville

Dimensions: outside length: 5715 mm / 225 in, width: 2027 mm / 79.8 in, wheelbase: 3289 mm / 129.5 in

[76eldo]

Like I said, he should buy a nice 70 convertible and a mint 73 Coupe.
Have one of each instead of a bastardized 73 that he will never get any money back on.
Or buy a 73 Pontiac, Olds, or Buick convertible.

If anyone thinks that these projects are anything like the phony stuff you see on TV that get done in a week you have never taken anything on like this.

A complete set of measurements on a 73 Coupe and a 70 convert plus a 71-76 Eldo needs to be looked at. Can't eyeball this or be an arm chair coachbuilder.

Brian

[73 DropTop]

Alot of great info and advice from you guys, I appreciate it, Thank you! yes I’m aware that it may be a pipe dream.

[cadillacmike68]

I think 73DropTop has a crush on 1973 Devilles, that is why he is considering this project. Agreed that there isn't a ton of change between 1969-73...or even 1976 for that matter, but we all gravitate towards certain years..for looks, features, maybe childhood memories, etc.  My personal preference in that range (for a coupe or custom convertible) would be a 1972-73 Deville as well.  There is still plenty of power in the engine (same as 1971, but they changed how HP was measured for 1972) and I like the dashboard better than '69-'70...the dual curve on the quarter panels....also the 1973 interior upper door and quarter panels in full woodgrain look, the design of the front and rear ends/bumpers, etc.  It's a little more polished and elegant to my eyes, especially with dual rocker moldings, the shinier grille, hood ornament, bumper guards, etc. 

EJ

EJ, the rocker moldings and bullet tail curve on the rear quarter yes, everything else NO. Fugly rubber bumper moldings that cause the bumpers to rust from the holes punched in the bumper - No, Plastic grille - No, Hood ornament - I put one on my 1968!

The 73s did have nice interiors though; I remember my SDV was very elegant inside.

Mike,

Do you like 1968 Cadillacs?

The front end of the 1970 cornering/marker lights with horizontal grille looks so cool at night when lighted up.  For me the 70 is better looking than the 69 because of that - plus the 1970 tail lights are cooler.  The  RWD 1970 Cadillac is the only year for factory stock 472 with no air pump.

All,

the 1973 CDV crush to make it a DVC is very expensive. 

Scot,

No I hate the 68s - too many one off parts. Like the rear bumper with full length chrome encased taillights with the reverse lights that "come out of" the lower half of the tail lights...

OK, kidding aside, the 1970 does have a better looking tail light than the 69 - but not 68. But the 69 front blinker has a crest at the back art of it which they removed for the 1970 mandated reflectors that had to be everywhere. The 68 also has a crest in the front blinker though plus the stacked & slanted headlights. I never had a 1970 deVille but I did have a Fleetwood Brougham and those  cars had regular size crests with wreaths. I don't know what was going on in the GM style pinheads when they came  up with the "V-less" 1970-71 looks...

Anyway all three of those years (plus 67 except for its engine, but its interior was very nice) are about the best years for Cadillac ever.

As for a CDV to convertible, Scot, son't you have a 1970 4 door convertible? How was that made?

As for using a different GM B body convertible chassis and putting DeVille body and interior in it, that could work with an 8.5 inch frame stretch like the limo companies do nowadays. But then you would have a Buick or Olds with a Cadillac body on it, but it could be done.

As for getting a 68-70 convertible and a 73 CDV, well, that would be up to Mr Reid.