Dilbert and restoring old cars.

[Walter Youshock]

So, houses are getting bigger; PEOPLE are getting bigger; but cars are still shrinking...  Never in my life did I ever think I'd see Cadillac trucks and station wagons.  Nor do I think we'll be seeing them (or too many) on the field at Hershey or other large shows 25 years from now. 

[gmurph]

I think the problem started when the accountants forced out the car guys. The car guys (and even the engineers) knew that style was the great differentiator. The bean counters thought they coukld make more money by making all of the widgets the same. Why would I pay +20K for a ykon with a Cadillac badge?

[mgbeda]

First, thanks so much to Dave Smith for posting that Shoe cartoon; I've remembered that for years and now I have my own copy.

I was born in the mid 60's and I think cars in general started heading downhill in the late 70's and even worse in the late 80's.  Then around 2000 they started coming back.  In some ways we are in a new golden age of automobiles, or were until recently.  A Camry with a V6 can keep up with a tri-power GTO, and get high 20's for MPG.  Also I note than when I was young you were very lucky to get 100,000 miles from a car before it was junked, but now 100,000 miles is what I'd consider a clean used car.  So horsepower, MPG, and reliability is way up.  Oh, and so is safety. The downsides of modern cars are 1) With a few exceptions, some of which are "retro" cars (Mustang, Charger) styling really does seem to me very boring and generic, which may have to do with converging on the perfect aerodynamic shape 2) They don't break often, but when they do break you can't fix it and you'll pay many hundreds or thousands to the people that can.

Let's face it, if I liked new cars that much I woudn't be on this  forum.

-mB

[Big Apple Caddy]

Ah the infamous "Real Estate Bubble"!  Not sure, but I think currently prospective buyers have to qualify themselves before they can purchase cars or homes.  I think this is especially true, when leasing cars, as it seems more and more manufacturers are offering deals, with no money down and very reasonable monthly payments.

One would hope banks and other lending institutions have learned their lessons but I am not yet convinced it will stick long-term, at least not for things like car loans.  I keep hearing and reading about subprime loans being back on the rise again.

[Big Apple Caddy]

I think the problem started when the accountants forced out the car guys. The car guys (and even the engineers) knew that style was the great differentiator. The bean counters thought they coukld make more money by making all of the widgets the same. Why would I pay +20K for a ykon with a Cadillac badge?

Enough people did to make the Escalade (including Escalade ESV and Escalade EXT) Cadillac's best seller in 2006 and 2007.

Actually, the price difference between comparably equipped GMC Yukons and Cadillac Escalades really isn't quite that great.  Even AWD Yukon Denalis start at over $60,000.

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

When I arrived on US Soil for a visit in 2002, I couldn't believe my own eyes when I saw a Chevrolet 4WD Wagon with a Cadillac Badge on it.   I thought someone had customised their Chev, but, no, it was true.

From then on, I thought that Cadillac had lost their way.

Bruce.

[Big Apple Caddy]

When I arrived on US Soil for a visit in 2002, I couldn't believe my own eyes when I saw a Chevrolet 4WD Wagon with a Cadillac Badge on it.   I thought someone had customised their Chev, but, no, it was true.

From then on, I thought that Cadillac had lost their way.

"Texas Cadillac" had been the name used to refer to Chevrolet/GMC Suburbans even before Cadillac created it themselves with the Escalade.

I personally wish Cadillac never got into the SUV game but I guess they felt it was necessary to help deal with CAFE standards.  They also wanted to experience some of the success Lexus was seeing with its Land Cruiser-based SUV and Infiniti with its Pathfinder-based SUV.

[bcroe]

I was born in the mid 60's and I think cars in general started heading downhill in the late 70's and even worse in the late 80's.  Then around 2000 they started coming back.  In some ways we are in a new golden age of automobiles, or were until recently.  A Camry with a V6 can keep up with a tri-power GTO, and get high 20's for MPG.  Also I note than when I was young you were very lucky to get 100,000 miles from a car before it was junked, but now 100,000 miles is what I'd consider a clean used car.  So horsepower, MPG, and reliability is way up.  Oh, and so is safety. The downsides of modern cars are 1) With a few exceptions, some of which are "retro" cars (Mustang, Charger) styling really does seem to me very boring and generic, which may have to do with converging on the perfect aerodynamic shape 2) They don't break often, but when they do break you can't fix it and you'll pay many hundreds or thousands to the people that can.

Let's face it, if I liked new cars that much I woudn't be on this  forum.  -mB 

My feeling is cars got a bit smaller, to a more practical size in the
late 70s.  But you could still buy 350, 403, and 425 powered cars
that moved them quite well.  And they still could be equipped
with the rugged TH400 transmission.  These cars had greatly
reduced maintenance with electronic alternators & ignition forced
by emissions requirements.  And with valve rotators & hardened
valve seats, valve jobs became a thing of the past.  After the better
part of a million miles daily experience, I have found these engines
to be more durable (if somewhat less powerful) than anything proceeding
them.  And unlike my 60s cars, they are happy with todays crap 87 octane. 

Starting in 1980 the big engines & transmissions went away.  They
fumbled around with cars that ran OK but were pretty gutless.  Then
they got into much smaller cars and started improving engine
performance.  The performance of todays engines is amazing in
view of their size.  But they started putting them in plastic midgets
that I have no desire to own.  The maintenance was reduced even
more; good thing, because any significant repair is at staggering
cost.  More and more complicated, more computers.  Bugs are
popping up that even the mfgrs are having difficulty solving.  The
operators seem to be more incompetent & less responsible, so
stuff is put in to compensate.  I guess they are fine for those with
unlimited funds & no desire to fix anything on their own.  Thats part
of why we are so in debt (I'm not).  These cars will all be dead when
70s & earlier are still operable.  Bruce Roe

[Louis Smith]

"Texas Cadillac" had been the name used to refer to Chevrolet/GMC Suburbans even before Cadillac created it themselves with the Escalade.

I personally wish Cadillac never got into the SUV game but I guess they felt it was necessary to help deal with CAFE standards.  They also wanted to experience some of the success Lexus was seeing with its Land Cruiser-based SUV and Infiniti with its Pathfinder-based SUV.

Not only should have Cadillac entered the SUV "game", but they came to the table late.  It was obvious early on, that SUV's were the wave of future.  Even when they did produce one, it was just a warmed over Chevy Suburban.  While Cadillac does have a decent crossover with its SRX, I think they once again dropped the ball.  The SRX, while being a impressive looking vehicle, is not what you would expect from Cadillac, in terms of size.  They should have made the Buick Enclave the Cadillac, and the SRX the Buick.

[Big Apple Caddy]

Not only should have Cadillac entered the SUV "game", but they came to the table late.  It was obvious early on, that SUV's were the wave of future.  Even when they did produce one, it was just a warmed over Chevy Suburban.  While Cadillac does have a decent crossover with its SRX, I think they once again dropped the ball.  The SRX, while being a impressive looking vehicle, is not what you would expect from Cadillac, in terms of size.  They should have made the Buick Enclave the Cadillac, and the SRX the Buick.

Crossovers and SUVs are clearly a very important segment of the market, I just personally see Cadillac as a luxury car maker not a luxury CUV/SUV maker...for nostalgic reasons.

The SRX has been Cadillac's best seller for the last three years, it's just not my thing...for the brand.  I'm more of a car person than a CUV/SUV/pickup person but would also be disappointed if GMC started selling coupes and sedans.

In my little world, I'd rather see Cadillac and even Buick be cars only and let GMC and perhaps Chevrolet take the luxury CUV/SUV role for General Motors but recognize and appreciate that it's a different marketplace today.

[cadillacmike68]

I'm a car guy as well, no trucks or Suburban Uhttack Vehicles for me!    I even tow the boat with the Fleetwood.

Of course I'm running around in a ford F150 out here, but it's the desert, and it's not mine...

[Louis Smith]

Crossovers and SUVs are clearly a very important segment of the market, I just personally see Cadillac as a luxury car maker not a luxury CUV/SUV maker...for nostalgic reasons.

The SRX has been Cadillac's best seller for the last three years, it's just not my thing...for the brand.  I'm more of a car person than a CUV/SUV/pickup person but would also be disappointed if GMC started selling coupes and sedans.

In my little world, I'd rather see Cadillac and even Buick be cars only and let GMC and perhaps Chevrolet take the luxury CUV/SUV role for General Motors but recognize and appreciate that it's a different marketplace today.

Nostalgia doesn't sell cars or mostly any other product in the market price.  I think that the facts bear out that "cars" are in the majority, with "trucks" being the bigger sellers.  At best Cadillac might try to produce a "retro" model.

[Louis Smith]

I'm a car guy as well, no trucks or Suburban Uhttack Vehicles for me!    I even tow the boat with the Fleetwood.

Of course I'm running around in a ford F150 out here, but it's the desert, and it's not mine...

What happens when the Fleetwood, has gone to its final reward?  What's wrong with having the best of both worlds.  A Cadillac truck pulling your boat!

[waterzap]

The measure is, how many months does it take a middle class wage earner to make the price
of a mid range car?  Its way up.  Part of that is because they are far more complicated.  They
do OK until repairs are needed.  A broken headlight for my 77 is $10; new molded in can be hundreds. 
Overhaul kit for my alternator $25, install the alt in 10 minutes.  A Honda alt is $500 and you have
to remove part of the suspension to install it.  ON and ON.  Once the wiring starts to go, the new cars
are doomed; no problem on mine.  Warranties are OK initially, but they are irrelevant when cars are
well past 200,000 miles (like everything here, including the Honda).  See my 77 bumper sticker. 
Bruce

I agree with Bruce on this one. Seems mid to late 70s were overall very strong, reliable cars. The only thing is parts. If I could get parts for those cars, including trim as easily as for new cars, I would see no reason to buy anything newer. They can get you from A to B in comfort, style, safety, and on some of the smaller cars, mileage wasnt too bad. Just my opinion.

If they would make the 79 Eldorado today, improve the FI a bit. Add a few air bags and ABS, maybe a few other small improvements. What a great ride that would be.

I was a passenger in a new Ford Focus the other day. Because of the big dash and part between the seats, the car has surprisingly little room for the passenger. My Seville isnt much bigger than a modern Focus, but I can see all round better, and the car has somewhat more space inside. My 87, though not a 70s car has a LOT of interior space. My biggest qualm with modern cars are the big dashes, the lack of bench seats, and the terrible visibility.

Now on top of that are the loud low profile tires, and the direct injection engines that sound like tractors. Drove an Elantra a while ago, and I was not impressed by the noise at highway speed. Not much wind noise, though maybe the engine and road noise drowned that out. And that car does not get 40 mpg. Not in your dreams. Never. My 87 gets 26 mpg highway. If the elantra gets 35 mpg, on 1000 miles, I would pay around $146 in gasoline. The Elantra around $110. For $ 30 I have to put up with a lot more noise, I can barely see out the car, and the car is smaller inside. That is what we get with 25 years worth of technology ?

I will admit that modern cars have a lot more toys. But really. Outside of auto transmission, power steering, power windows, a good stereo, AC and maybe cruise control,  everything else is just a gimmick.

[Louis Smith]

Ah Gimmicks.  Wasn't it gimmicks that put Cadillac on the top of luxury car heap, in years gone by?  Wasn't it Cadillac, that first introduced gimmicks, then the rest of the car manufacturers followed?  I for one like the safety and convenience of gimmicks.  I like it that my car automatically locks it doors when I start off.  I like that my headlights automatically turn on and off.  I like the TV camera in my rear showing me what is behind me.  I like the radar system, that warns me when a car is in the lane that I want to move to.  The list goes on and on.

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

The trouble with these new cars is that you NEED all the "so-called" safety bits.   The automatic locks it doors when you start off, because of the problems with modern society "read Car-jackers".    The headlights automatically turn on and off, because people are too lazy to read the Manuals to find where the switches are.   The TV camera in the rear showing what is behind, because the cars have virtually no windows that can be seen through, because the head rests are blocking the view.   The radar system, that warns when a car is in the adjacent lane, because the side rear-vision mirrors are too small, and because the sides ate so high that one cannot see what is next to you.

When Cadillac made all, these options, the purchaser paid extra for them.   Now, the modern purchaser io forced to buy them in the base price, because one cannot get them at a basic price.

Plus, the Makers "con" the buyers into paying more for cars which they buy with all the options, because the Dealers  order their Floor Stock fully optioned.

Most buyers are not prepared to order a car, then wait for it to be built.   They go to a dealer, and want it now.   If the Dealer doesn't have one in stock, they go to the next door dealer.   That is why they have the Dealers in one street, or very close together.   A bit like the Fast Food industry where they will have a different brand on each opposite corner.   If one has a long line, they will go to the next, and so on, till they get served.   But, at least they are getting exercise walking to different ones.     Oh, that's right, they use the Drive-through.

Bruce.

[cadillacmike68]

What happens when the Fleetwood, has gone to its final reward?  What's wrong with having the best of both worlds.  A Cadillac truck pulling your boat!

A properly equipped Fleetwood can tow 7,000 lbs.  No need for a beast.

[Big Apple Caddy]

"Gimmicks" (not necessarily a term I would use) are what Cadillac and other brands have long used to try to separate themselves from each other.

You can talk about today’s "gimmicks" but some people had the same kind of reaction to things like power windows many decades ago.   People are too lazy to crank windows?  Why do you need such an expensive ($1,000+ in today's dollars back in the 1950s) device that is just going to break down?, etc.

Every "older" generation seems to have something to complain about regarding modern cars vs. cars of their past.

[Louis Smith]

The trouble with these new cars is that you NEED all the "so-called" safety bits.   The automatic locks it doors when you start off, because of the problems with modern society "read Car-jackers".    The headlights automatically turn on and off, because people are too lazy to read the Manuals to find where the switches are.   The TV camera in the rear showing what is behind, because the cars have virtually no windows that can be seen through, because the head rests are blocking the view.   The radar system, that warns when a car is in the adjacent lane, because the side rear-vision mirrors are too small, and because the sides ate so high that one cannot see what is next to you.

When Cadillac made all, these options, the purchaser paid extra for them.   Now, the modern purchaser io forced to buy them in the base price, because one cannot get them at a basic price.

Plus, the Makers "con" the buyers into paying more for cars which they buy with all the options, because the Dealers  order their Floor Stock fully optioned.

Most buyers are not prepared to order a car, then wait for it to be built.   They go to a dealer, and want it now.   If the Dealer doesn't have one in stock, they go to the next door dealer.   That is why they have the Dealers in one street, or very close together.   A bit like the Fast Food industry where they will have a different brand on each opposite corner.   If one has a long line, they will go to the next, and so on, till they get served.   But, at least they are getting exercise walking to different ones.     Oh, that's right, they use the Drive-through.

Bruce.

With all due respect, none of your statements apply to the modern Crossover vehicles.

"So called safety bits"  Surely you jest.

You seem to contradict yourself with the self locking doors.  Since you acknowledge the presence of car jackers today, aren't the self locking doors a good idea?

I believe was Cadillac that introduced the "sentinel lights" more then 45 years ago.  Why?  It gave the driver an added feeling of security when they left their car at night, by giving him/her a lighted path to their front door.


The best feature of the TV cameras, is the ability to see what is directly behind a vehicle that wouldn't normally be able to be seen, such as bicycle on the ground or a small child playing in ones driveway.

Today's modern Crossover vehicles, have greatly eliminated blind spots of the past.  Not to mention the over sized rear view mirrors.  I might add that I have installed those small mirrors on my rear view mirrors just to give me added vision safety.

I have had SUV's, trucks, vans and crossovers for over 20 years and never felt safer.

The only reason a buyer gets "conned" is because they allow themselves.  This is not in defense of dealers both legitimate and unscrupulous.  Sure many times a buyer will drive home in more car then they set out to buy, but rarely do they have buyers remorse.

Oh yes, a buyer doesn't have to go to different dealers to get the car they want.  Using the Internet, they can "build" the car they want, and the website, will tell them which dealer has the vehicle they want.  If the vehicle is at a dealer that is some distance from where the buyer lives, they can simply go to the nearest dealer, the dealer will search out the vehicle on their data base, and have the car shipped to them, at no added cost to the customer.  It really is, especially now, a buyers market.

[Louis Smith]

A properly equipped Fleetwood can tow 7,000 lbs.  No need for a beast.

....but Fleetwoods are no longer produced.