1981 CDV Fleetwood De'elagance/ moonroof (REMOVED FROM SALE)

[6caddy2]

Not mine,  just saw it listed thought I would list it, don't see to many of these.
https://seattle.craigslist.org/see/cto/d/seattle-rare-1981-fleetwood-brougham/7054248388.html

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Rare model for sure. Misplaced fender plaques a dead giveaway for paint work. Why this is so hard to get right is beyond me.    Dash chrome edging - major turnoff on these and of course disintegrated front fillers - all  with an ambitious asking price.

BJ/Mecum giving the condition-uninformed too many bright ideas. On the plus side it is the final year for a "real" old school Cadillac with a real Cadillac driveline. Olds/Chevy 5.0 & 5.7 don't cut it for me anymore. When I turn the key, I want to hear a Cadillac motor sing - not a '94 Silverado.

[67 Cadillac]

Hi,

I live in Vancouver, BC where this car is from and spent most of it's winters. If you are going to lie then tell us the old "never winter driven" dry storage blah blah. It is snowing right now and we usually get a cold snap or two that produces snow each year. The municipalities here use tons of salt on the roads as soon as there is a slight sniff of snow and have done for as far back as I can remember. Whenever you see an older car for sale that has spent it's life in Vancouver, BC then it is more than likely that the car has been driven on salty roads. It also rains about 50 inches a year here. I found my car in Southern Idaho and there is no rust.

Sorry for the rant!

J

[Mike Josephic CLC #3877]

Yes, I've spent some time in the Seattle area and
laughed at the "dry, no salt" claim too.  I hardly ever
had a week there when it wasn't raining, snowing or
both.

Also, if he spent all that he claims on repairs, why leave
those unsightly front fillers on the car?  Price adjustment
is in order if he really wants to sell.

Mike

[SixDucks]

 A beautiful and well optioned car indeed. This one has all the right equipment and it's hard to argue with the owners claims based on the provided images. I was not aware this model was produced prior to '82. The misplaced fender badges does warrant some questions concerning a repaint. If this one were not 2000 miles from me, and a more reasonable asking price, I would strongly consider purchasing this car. I've seen only one other example with the D'elegance option and passed it up because of the 4100 engine.

Terry

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Fleetwood Brougham Coupe was made from 1980 to 1985.

[rwchatham CLC 21892]

I do like the color .

[wrefakis]

funny I drove all these junks looking for 59 and 69/70 back then can not imagine that anyone would want one, 

[D.Smith]

I was a teenager when these cars were new so I remember them well.    I can't imagine someone NOT wanting one. 

Love the color and options.   Agreed that for his asking price he should have replaced that center dash bezel or had it re-plastic chromed.  Yes there are places that do that.    Or just buy a chrome paint touch up pen at least.

Definitely should have replaced those front fillers.

I know what you mean about emblem placement after a repaint.   A small detail but it matters.

This one is interesting.   Too bad it wasn't a low mileage, original example.

[wrefakis]

ever own one as a driver when they were new?

[INTMD8]

ever own one as a driver when they were new?

Though not directed at my I will answer I did not and have never owned one but always thought it would be a good vehicle to buy.

Maybe you have stated why you dislike these but if you don't mind I'm curious why you dislike them?

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Aside of 59-62, 77-81 (w/standard gas V8) are my favorite Cadillacs. Although they have their criticisms but what's right overwhelms the wrong as far as I'm concerned.

Never owned an '80 or '81 new but got to drive one of each when they were one year old - in 1981 and 1982 -  '80 CdV and '81 SdV - both were 3x burgundy w/cloth. The new car aroma of the '81 is something I never forgot. I had driven a number of 70-76 models by that time but the '80 and '81 took luxury to a whole different level and I also liked the contemporary styling which was thought was a great blend of the old and the new.

Had I been born 10 years earlier it's possible I might have the same regard for 69-70...

[wrefakis]

I wanted a new 69 or 70 never had one, by the time I had new ones it was 75 and I just did not like them.
I just remember having all these other ones from 71 and up as new cars and then used cars and 100% in 70 a Cadillac was way above an impala in every way
In 84 I owned as a driver a new 84 coupe, and sold a bunch of 83 caprice, and delta 88 that rode and drove rings around my coupe

In 70 Cadiilac, had a Cadillac power train not shared with any other line brougham 86 and up were rebadged Chevrolet
tri 7 cars in my opinion do not drive better than olds ,buick or caprice of same years owned and drove them all

at the end of the day who cares anyway, like what you like and enjoy them

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Interesting. Over the years I had multiples of every 80s full size RWD GM car and none came close to feeling like a Cadillac to me. They didn't seem as quiet, interiors and trim weren't as good what was especially noticeable was the steering which had a "cheaper" feel in the non Cadillacs.  Different story after '86 in the Brougham however - then I would agree.

It's all what we like and that's fine.

[gkhashem]

I got to agree with Bill on this one.

I own a 1978 Cadillac Coupe Deville and do I like it? Yes, but at end of the day is it drastically better than a Oldsmobile 98 coupe or  Buick Electra Coupe? I say not really, to me especially the 1977-79s with the 350 or 403 V8 are just as nice to me. The interiors are a lot cheaper?  I do not see it. They are very similar quality to me. I can see and feel the difference in the 1960s cars.

Actually I would argue I would rather have the Oldsmobile or Buick from 1982 to 1985 with the Olds 307 V8 over the garbage HT4100. You can trash the Oldsmobile 307 V8 all day but I think you are in denial trying to defend the HT4100.

[6caddy2]

Would agree with George and Eric on all statements, I am a current owner/care taker of a 1981 CDV, I've have driven a lot of caddy's since my exposure to automobiles at the tender age of 4, I'm now 55, does this make me an expert NO!! But I've worked on a lot of cars in the past 35 yrs and still doing it, the closet I have ever gotten to driving a caddy that was new was my mothers 1979 Fleetwood brougham in 1980 for my driving test, IMPO what a car, solid like a tank and rode like a Cadillac. Fast forward 39 years later, and what a car the 81 CDV is, 44,000 miles on the clock, original, 1 owner Cadillac, the smell, the feel, the ride, and of course the look of it. I saw these cars at that time when new and thought, boy I'd like to have one, now I do! I'm also currently the care taker of a 1978 sedan deVille, 1962 convertible, all of which in there own rights are great and of course have there own little gremlins to deal with! This question has plagued  man since the dawn of time, what makes you tick inside, well for me its these cars, all of them!!! Good or bad, pick one and run with it, if you have the funds, get a lot of them!! Hence the reason we are all here on this site?! And what a forum to belong to!! Respectfully, Joe

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

I'm sorry but I couldn't disagree more about the comparison between full size C-Body Buick/Olds and Cadillac. I've owned them all - tons of them - and while certain similarities do exist, the Cadillac is a more refined car.

The chrome on the Cadillac bumpers is higher quality and better finished as well as the bumpers themselves being more elaborate and more expensive to manufacture, same goes for the exterior door handles which are just levers on the other GM models. Special underhood bracing exclusive to Cadillac and more generous use of sound deadening materials not shared on any other GM cars and were used Cadillac. Both of these items were in fact noted in Car & Driver magazine in April 1981 test report of SdV.

Turning to the interior, there are other small items of refinement- for example, the seat bolster side trim panels which on Cadillacs are finished in a thick vinyl padding matched to interior color, on Buick/Olds they are just metal or metal with a simulated wood decal. The switches and controls are heavy metal - not plastic in other GM cars.  The foot pedals are heavier with bright metal accents. Ever pull out an accelerator pedal out or a radio knob off a Cadillac and notice how heavy they are? On Buick/Olds the accelerator is just cheap thin plastic pedal connected to the linkage - not heavy rubber as in a Cadillac and all the knobs and controls are plastic as well. 

And finally, ride quality, comfort and overall feel are noticeably superior. This is immediately apparent after spending a week or two behind the wheel of a big RWD Buick/Olds then suddenly switch to a 425 or 368 powered Cadillac - the difference is night & day - at least it is to me. That said, I do have a big soft spot for the Olds 98/88 from 77-84 (and 1985 88). 

I could go on ad infinitium... The bottom line is these Cadillacs are far better than some give them credit for being- no disrespect intended to anyone who feels otherwise. Anyone who doesn't see the differences isn't looking closely enough.

[gkhashem]

 As I said above I did not say no difference, I just feel not as drastic a difference as I can tell in my cars from the 1960s. The Cadillac in the 1960 is more substantial. While as time went on the gap was not as large. 

Yes on the chrome for sure, but the interior differences are not as significant. Heck I have seen no Oldsmobile steering wheels from 1978 cracked as the Cadillac ones. Dashes made from plastic that different? My 1984 Delta 88 has nice seats just as comfortable as the Cadillac. The ride is not all that different either. I just feel the difference does not feel as wide as the earlier cars.

No solving this here. I have both Oldsmobile and Cadillacs and well you got a lot of car for the money when you bought an Oldsmobile. As I stated before research the X-frame on the 1959 cars. Which one was better? Anyone know the difference?  I do look it up.

Also my 1959 Oldsmobile 394 V8 (also in my 1964) run more smoothly than the Cadillacs IMO.  All of my cars are between 40-50000 miles and are well maintained. While not a scientific sample I think not a coincidence.

Much of this is just opinion, again I did not say no difference but I think for the time frame we are talking the gap was getting smaller. Heck the 425 V8 loves to quiver slightly on idle (on a 28,000 mile car) and my mechanic who is 70 years old  said they always did that.

As I have been told , I guess you get the intake machined to eliminate the quiver. So why did the factory not do that?

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

As I said above I did not say no difference, I just feel not as drastic a difference as I can tell in my cars from the 1960s. The Cadillac in the 1960 is more substantial. While as time went on the gap was not as large. 

Yes on the chrome for sure, but the interior differences are not as significant. Heck I have seen no Oldsmobile steering wheels from 1978 cracked as the Cadillac ones. Dashes made from plastic that different? My 1984 Delta 88 has nice seats just as comfortable as the Cadillac. The ride is not all that different either. I just feel the difference does not feel as wide as the earlier cars.

No disagreement on any of this whatsoever- just technology at work.

As I have been told , I guess you get the intake machined to eliminate the quiver. So why did the factory not do that?

I once heard there was a Service Bulletin addressing this issue. As I was told the problem was due to soot deposits in the intake ports restricting air/fuel flow to the rearmost cylinders. When ground out to slightly oversize, the flow is back to where it should be and the problem is cured. Years and years back a longtime Cadillac dealer mechanic told me he did many 425s including on his own '79.