Project Cars--You Get to Vote on "Hold 'em or Fold 'em"

fintail

I like the GM flat tops, they are cool in that height of 50s flamboyance way before things quickly simmered down in 1961. I remember when I was a young teen, a friend of my dad's had a 60 Cadillac flat top sitting in his yard (PNW, so not rusty, just needed TLC). It was a factory darkish pink car, with a black and white interior, I think. It seemed easily reclaimable, at least to my eyes then. I thought it was pretty cool.

And then there was that sorta-flat top 61 Caddy, a Vista?

berri

I don't recall seeing many of those flat top Caddy's (or Electra's or 98's). Most buyers seemed to prefer the more traditional 6 window model. I think a few things came in play - 1) as Andre noted the bigger C bodies didn't pull the flat top off as well, 2) 6 window models were kind of a Cadillac tradition and buyers tended to be conservative (and the Electra and 98 buyers probably wanted it to look similar to a Cadillac), 3) probably made the Caddy look too close to the Impala. I always thought the flat top was fitting for the rather unconventional 59/60 Impala styling though.

berri

Fin, I'm not familiar with a 61 Cadillac Vista. Maybe Andre knows? Could you perhaps be referring to the rather formal looking Fleetwood sedan that had a traditional 4 door look with a ventipane window on the rear doors in addition to their traditional roll down one?

berri

PS - I think it was called a Fleetwood 60 Special?

fintail

I am thinking of ones like this, pretty uncommon:

andre1969

berri said:

Fin, I'm not familiar with a 61 Cadillac Vista. Maybe Andre knows? Could you perhaps be referring to the rather formal looking Fleetwood sedan that had a traditional 4 door look with a ventipane window on the rear doors in addition to their traditional roll down one?

I think "Vista" was GM marketing speak for 4-door hardtop roofline like what Fintail posted above, also known as the 4-Window or 4W. It wasn't popular at all. According to my old car book, for '61, they only sold 4700 4Ws in the Series 62 and 4847 in the DeVille range. In contrast, the Series 62 sold 26,216 of the 6W and 26,415 of the DeVille 6W.

The 4W model was a lot more popular for 1962, when they got rid of the wraparound window and made the C-pillar thicker.

uplanderguy

For some reason, I'm fascinated by the '61-63 short deck Caddies, mostly I guess because one never sees them. I'm sure they were done in response to the '61 Lincoln being so much shorter than the '60. A coupe would have been interesting to see, I think. As a kid I can remember a "Park Avenue" in our town. I'm not sure that name was used at first. I couldn't tell you when I last saw one in person--decades and decades I'm sure.

andre1969

I keep forgetting there was a short-deck Caddy for '63. That one must have been really rare. I seem to recall a short-deck '61 or '62 showing up at Hershey, PA a few years ago. IIRC, the short-deck version was called "Town Sedan" in 1961, and "Park Avenue" for 1962.

uplanderguy

They seem stubby when you're used to seeing the 'normal' cars, but I like the unusual-ness.

andre1969

Here's a '63 Park Avenue...


And yep, they do seem a bit out of proportion, when viewed from the side like this. I think I'd prefer a full-length model, but they're still good looking cars.

uplanderguy

That's a great color too IMHO.

I like the oddball stuff. A couple years ago I started a separate thread about 1968 Chevelle Concours coupes. I can remember seeing exactly one in person, decades ago. They're not in any brochure or coffee-table book I've ever seen. They were like the 'Cutlass Supreme' or 'Skylark Custom' of Chevelles. That thread pulled some photos up, as did the 'net. So weird I haven't been able to find a shred of factory evidence of them. Other '68 Chevelles don't do a thing for me. LOL

My Dad bought a new '67 Chevelle on March 20, 1967. I can remember going with him to look at the '68's when they came out. Even at age nine, I remember saying, "Dad, they're smaller than ours". The coupes were shorter, and the sedans, although on a one-inch-longer wheelbase, seemed narrower than our '67. Not that that's bad, just an observation.

Mr_Shiftright

'60 Cadillac---easy resto: http://sacramento.craigslist.org/cto/5030217610.html

andre1969

That's actually a '61. IIRC, they used the same body shell for the Fleetwood 75 from 1959-65, but would apply that-year's sheetmetal to it to make it look as up to date as possible.

For 1965, even though the rest of the Cadillac line was all-new and went to a perimeter frame, the Fleetwood 75 was a carry-over from '64. In fact, I think the Fleetwood 75 even used the old 4-speed Hydramatic that year, as opposed to the new THM400.

xwesx

andre1969 said:

The 4W model was a lot more popular for 1962, when they got rid of the wraparound window and made the C-pillar thicker.

One thing that struck me immediately when reading the Impala article and looking at the photo Fin posted, is that the pillars on these cars are TINY! There's barely anything holding up the roof other than the glass. I would hate to be in a roll-over in one of those; I suspect they would quickly become sardine cans.

bhill2

xwesx said:

andre1969 said:

The 4W model was a lot more popular for 1962, when they got rid of the wraparound window and made the C-pillar thicker.

One thing that struck me immediately when reading the Impala article and looking at the photo Fin posted, is that the pillars on these cars are TINY! There's barely anything holding up the roof other than the glass. I would hate to be in a roll-over in one of those; I suspect they would quickly become sardine cans.

Yes, IIRC (I was young and didn't really care) those hardtops were VERY bad news in rollovers.

isellhondas

Tom Mc Cahill! I loved the way he used to write!

That 59 Chevy he tested was a bit of an oddball with that troublesome air bag suspension and the even more troublesome dog of a Turboglide transmission.

I'm sure it wasn't too many years before the air suspension got yanked out and converted to conventional springs and that Turboglide most likely got converted to a Turboglide.

348's weren't "bad" engines my any means but a healthy 283 with Power Pack could certainly keep up with one if not whip it in a quarter mile.

409's were incredible. I had a 64 Impala SS with the 400 HP and a four speed. I loved throwing my passengers back in their seats!

Mr_Shiftright

The Turboglide was definitely a WOOF WOOF transmission. Nobody I know even bothers to rebuild them---I suppose if you are being judged in a show and some judge is crazy enough to crawl under, well then....

andre1969

Does the 348/409 have the same transmission bolt pattern as the Chevy smallblock engines, I wonder? IIRC, the later 396/427/402/454 big-blocks used the same bolt pattern as the smallblocks, but I dunno about the earlier 348/409.

I wonder how feasible it would be to swap in a more modern transmission like a THM350/400, or the later 700R4? I've heard that another problem with some of the modern transmissions, especially the 4-speed and up models, is that they can sometimes be physically large, so they won't always fit in the same spot that the older units did. As a result, you have to do some cutting and welding, and modify the transmission hump. At least, I've heard that's the case with old Chrysler products, when people would try to put the more modern 4-speed Torqueflite in where the old 3-speed Torqueflites used to be.

isellhondas

Mr_Shiftright said:

The Turboglide was definitely a WOOF WOOF transmission. Nobody I know even bothers to rebuild them---I suppose if you are being judged in a show and some judge is crazy enough to crawl under, well then....

Most shops wouldn't rebuild Turboglides but they would stick in a Powerglide instead. Some mods were required to do this. I remember the starters weren't the same.

Those 58-64 full sized Chevies had that two piece driveshaft with the center mount. The center mount had a bearing and a big rubber bushing or grommet. When that rubber wore out that driveshaft would bang around pretty badly.

andre1969

I vaguely remember Consumer Guide doing two different tests of the V-8 low-priced cars in 1957. First, they did a test of low-end V-8/2-speed automatic Chevies, Fords, and Plymouths. Then, they did a test of higher-end models with larger/more powerful V-8's and 3-speed automatics. I don't remember much about the details, except that the Chevy was the quickest in both tests. And, for some reason, the 301/Torqueflite Plymouth wasn't much quicker than the 277/PowerFlite!

isellhondas

andre1969 said:

That's actually a '61. IIRC, they used the same body shell for the Fleetwood 75 from 1959-65, but would apply that-year's sheetmetal to it to make it look as up to date as possible.

For 1965, even though the rest of the Cadillac line was all-new and went to a perimeter frame, the Fleetwood 75 was a carry-over from '64. In fact, I think the Fleetwood 75 even used the old 4-speed Hydramatic that year, as opposed to the new THM400.

My mother had a friend who bought a new 1965 Cadillac Calais.

It was basically a Sedan De Ville but a stripped down model. I remember it didn't have A/C and the seat fabric had a downgraded look to it. I don't recall if it had power windows or seats.

I don't think many people wanted these. I mean, why buy a wannabee Cadillac?

andre1969

The Calais was essentially a renaming of the old Series 62. In the earlier years, the 62 was the mainstream Caddy, I think, while the DeVille was seen a something special, and stuff like the 60 Special, Fleetwood 75, and the various cars they stuck the Eldorado nameplate on were viewed as truly rare jewels.

But, over time, the DeVille started to become the breadwinner, and I wonder if over time, it might have been cheapened a bit? That might have forced them to push the 62/Calais downscale a bit?

Car prices in those days could be surprisingly deceptive. For instance, a '61 DeSoto 4-door hardtop had a base price of around $3267. But, I knew someone who had one and its original MSRP was around $5,000! That's pushing into Cadillac territory! Why was it so pricey? Well, it had an automatic transmission, power windows, locks, AM radio, heater, etc, and most important of all...air conditioning!

Surprisingly, the Calais made it through 1976, and wasn't jettisoned until GM started downsizing. Cadillac saw fit, for whatever reason to keep it around that long, but I wonder if it was worth it? In 1976, they sold 4500 of the coupe, and only 1700 hardtop sedans. The Deville sold 114,482 coupes and 67,677 hardtop sedans. By that time there wasn't a *huge* difference in price. A Calais coupe started at $8629, while a Coupe DeVille started at $9,067. By that time I think a/c, power windows/locks etc were standard in a Calais. That's a $438 difference which doesn't sound like much, but adjust for inflation and it's around $1800. Still, when you get into luxury cars, I don't know that people are shopping for the best deal! They want the snob appeal.

uplanderguy

A friend of mine's late Dad had '56, '60, '65, '67, '70, '73, '76, and '78 Caddies (the last two, Sevilles). The first three were Series 62, then Calais models (the '67, '70, and '73 were Hardtop Sedan deVilles). I can see the appeal of the Calais, sort-of. DeVilles seemed almost as common as Impalas (well, OK, maybe not), and you really had to squint to tell a Calais from a deVille. They were still a Cadillac and still had pretty nice interiors. I could see the argument that you can see LeSabre pieces in an Electra, but a Cadillac is a Cadillac! They always bought theirs at Central Cadillac in Cleveland.

In hindsight, I rather like the '75 and '76 Calais with the bright plaid interior....looks kind-of "young" to me now. The optional vinyl used in '70's Calais models seemed like good quality and didn't get the cracks and aging that leather in deVilles and Fleetwoods got. I did not like that the last Calais models lacked the rocker moldings though.

I saw a new black '72 Calais sedan at our local dealer (which was also the Chevy dealer). It had blackwalls, full wheelcovers, PW, no air, and no radio. I remember it as plain as yesterday. The bottom of the window sticker was $6,480. I remember that plainly too. It had zero options on the window sticker. I never saw it again at the dealership and never saw it around town.

There was a very clean black '65 Calais sedan at a restoration shop maybe fifteen miles away, a few years back. It had crank windows. By '72, power windows were even standard on a Calais and probably were even earlier.

This all reminds me that up until '70, you could get a Sedan deVille (pillared hardtop) and a 'Hardtop Sedan deVille' as the brochure called it. In earlier years you could also get a pillared Calais Hardtop Sedan, although by '70 the only four-door Calais was a hardtop.

berri

the pillars on these cars are TINY! There's barely anything holding up the roof other than the glass. I would hate to be in a roll-over in one of those;

Funny. Certainly true, but I don't ever recall people talking about rollovers or roof strength, except in some demo derbies or other racing arenas. I don't think rollovers became that big of a deal to most people until the ill-fated Ford Explorer and Firestone Wilderness tires fiasco. What I do remember about the flat tops was a reputation for chassis and body shimmy.

As for the Cadillac Calais, I don't recall seeing many of them around. You could get a fairly nicely equipped Electra or 98 for that money back then.

ab348

uplanderguy said:

In hindsight, I rather like the '75 and '76 Calais with the bright plaid interior....looks kind-of "young" to me now. The optional vinyl used in '70's Calais models seemed like good quality and didn't get the cracks and aging that leather in deVilles and Fleetwoods got. I did not like that the last Calais models lacked the rocker moldings though.

I never paid much attention to Cadillacs of that era, so I went back just now and looked at the '76 brochure. I have to say I am not a fan of that plaid cloth upholstery in a Cadillac Calais. But in '76, even the DeVille came with (different) plaid cloth! Holy '70s, Batman! Admittedly the DeVille also had a bunch of other upholstery choices too, in both cloth and leather. But wow, plaid in a Cad!

The equipment level in a Calais was just enough to make you question your choice. It had automatic A/C, but no 6-way power seats, for instance.

berri

Hey, it was the 70's baby - plaids and browns ruled the fashion world. Many of those period Caddy buyers probably wore leisure suits, fake silk shirts with big pointed collars and neck jewelry

uplanderguy

Berri, that reminds me. An eye-and-ear doctor in my little hometown bought a firethorn red '76 Eldorado convertible new. He traded in a nicer (IMHO) ice-blue '71 Eldo convert on it. I used to always see the '76 parked in the garage when you drove by his (large) house. Probably seven or eight years ago, I was back in town at a red light and I spotted a firethorn Eldo convert go through the intersection. It was worse-for-wear, but I looked up and it was the Doctor! He still had it all those years later.

He was a white-shoe and white-belt kind of guy back then. His daughter was in my high-school class although we were of two very different social stratas (LOL), but I've since found out she only lives about six miles from us now. Our hometown is an hour-and-a-half drive away.

berri

Ah yes, white bucks, Sansabelt pants with white belt - should have that Caddy in light yellow or pale blue to go with it!

I know GM was huge back then and probably wanted to cover all possible buyers, but I never understood the Calais. I thought it cheapened the brand. But then I think the same about MB and BMW bringing out those small cheapies as well these days. I can see Audi doing it, but the other two are supposed to be premier nameplates. Of course, many people can get those premier vehicles today by leasing, so owning one doesn't necessarily reflect their real wealth status anymore anyway I suppose (but they better dump it before they have to pay for maintenance and repairs or the next one may be a used Ford!).

stever

Yeah, and MB is famous for trucks and taxis too.

fintail

MB's highline image was something not cultivated so much until the late 70s onward, and pretty much only on this continent. Before then, most weren't too expensive, just an offbeat choice. Today, in many markets, it is still an "everything" brand, where little A-class hatchbacks don't impact the prestige of a new S-class coupe.

As long as the big luxury brand names keep making fantastic top of the line models - as they are today - the cheapies won't hurt things too much, Even if many are leased, you still need above average cash flow and credit to qualify - so it's not anarchy just yet. That's maybe just one way the old American luxobarge makers went astray - they introduced cheaper models, but most of the higher models weren't very good either.

Mr_Shiftright

Oh maybe a bit earlier Fin. The MB280 V-8s were pretty deluxe cars. (early 70s)

andre1969

1974 was the year that finally put BMW on the map in the United States. That year, thanks to the fuel crisis, they managed to sell about 40,000 cars. That was also the year the domestics started to wake up...well, GM, at least. I remember reading that they were concerned that suddenly BMW was selling at about 25% of Cadillac volume (Caddy moved ~160K units that year), and it got GM to start thinking. I'd imagine that 1974 helped Mercedes Benz out, as well.

Even though BMW had some really nice cars, like the Bavaria, I think the bulk of their sales were the 2002, which was good for what it was, but most people would NOT call it a luxury car.

Considering that the Cadillac Seville came out late in the 1975 model year, and was inspired by Mercedes Benz, I'm sure GM had their eye on Benz for awhile. The fuel crisis didn't until the tail-end of 1973, actually into the 1974 model year, so I'd imagine the Seville had been in the works before the fuel crisis. And, all of GM's X-bodies, which got a heavy revision for 1975, were often known as the "European" Nova et al. The Granada was also Mercedes inspired...they even go after it, almost comedically, in their advertising. Considering these cars would have come out in the 1974 calendar year, they had to have been in the works since what? 1972, 1973 at the latest. And, while it was a very modest effort, Dodge and Plymouth had body-color hubcaps on their Dart S/E and Valiant Brougham starting in 1974, and I'm sure they got that from Mercedes.

fintail

I've always thought the W116 (70s era) S-class and the SLs from that era are what made MB go to the top end in the US - cars from model year 1973 or so onward. The V8 108s (280SE) were very nice cars, but still kind of spartan and not very big - still kind of an offbeat choice for the affluent unless on the coasts. I don't think they could even be fitted with factory air until around 1970.

ab348

Finally got the Cutlass out of the garage and cleaned up today. I used the winter layup to pull the seat and have it recovered with a kit from Legendary Interiors, and replaced the carpet, which was surprisingly time consuming. Don't know how they did that on the assembly line. It all turned out great though.

isellhondas

Hard to look at upside down BUT...Wow, what a nice Cutlass!

ab348

Aw geez. Not upside down on the iPad. Damn Apple (insert Apple bashing stuff here).

stever

Upside down in Chrome too, but if I click on a pic, they rotate nicely. Go figure.

What year is this? Had a friend with a Cutlass Supreme back in the late 60s and I remember lots of fuel pump issues. Said friend always used the cheapest mechanic in town too though.

ab348

It's a '68. --------------\/

stever

Oh yeah, it's right in your sig file. Keep forgetting to read the fine print.

Much nicer looking than my friend's ride (it was a green shade, and I'm really foggy trying to remember the year).

qbrozen

very cool!

uplanderguy

Very nice Cutlass! I went to the big annual Mayfield Hts., OH cruise last night and saw an Hurst Olds of that vintage, very nice.

This cruise is nice as you sit and the car show comes to you! Crusing back and forth down the street, cars dropping in and being added; it's just great. On display near where I was sitting was a '59 fuel-injected Corvette, a light metallic blue (not that creamy non-metallic light blue I'm used to seeing on that era 'Vette) with white cove and bone-stock, and gorgeous under the hood. My favorite car at the show. And although I'm typically not a fan of Sting Rays, there was a maroon '66 fastback with the knockoff wheels and 425 hp 427 that was probably my second-favorite car in the show.

sda

ab348 said:

Finally got the Cutlass out of the garage and cleaned up today. I used the winter layup to pull the seat and have it recovered with a kit from Legendary Interiors, and replaced the carpet, which was surprisingly time consuming. Don't know how they did that on the assembly line. It all turned out great though.

Very nice! Do I spy a factory Am/Fm radio and separate Olds 8 track? 350 2bbl and Jetaway tranny!

ab348

sda said:

Very nice! Do I spy a factory Am/Fm radio and separate Olds 8 track? 350 2bbl and Jetaway tranny!

I added the factory AM/FM and 8-track many years ago before such things became crazy expensive.

It was originally a 350 Rocket 2-bbl but back in the mid-90s I was able to source the factory parts to make it into a 4-bbl. Early use of the internet in fact - the intake, air cleaner and assorted bits came from Ohio, and the carb from Illinois. The transmission is the original Jetaway, though I do have a TH350 sitting in the garage awaiting a rebuild, and I may decide to upgrade to that for the sake of a lower 1st gear and a bit more jump off the line. Cars like this are never "done".

sda

You will probably get better gas mileage too with the THM 350. I seem to remember my grandmother's 68 Cutlass S with the 350 2bbl Jetaway getting around 10-12 mpg around town, 15ish on the road. One thing though, that was a smooth transmission.

uplanderguy

Was a 'Jetway' a Powerglide, or was it really different other than in name? I wasn't aware or had forgotten that Olds had a two-speed automatic that late. I think I knew that Pontiac did, in their Tempest/LeMans series.

Speaking earlier as some guys were about a '64 Olds Jetstar, there was a dark green, driver-quality '64 Jetstar 88 convertible in the Mayfield Hts. cruise last night. Going from memory here only, but I think the Jetstar 88 was only '64; entry-level Olds. The Jetstar I, in my mind, was sort-of like Pontiac's 2+2--a lower-price version of the Starfire (Grand Prix in Pontiac-land). The Jetstar I lasted into '65 I believe even though I don't think the Jetstar 88 did. I'll have to look at the Old Car Manuals project online.

EDIT: There was a '65 Jetstar 88. I thought there might have been, but just wasn't sure.

andre1969

I had to look it up on Wikipedia. "Jetaway" was a 2-speed automatic used in the midsized B-O-P cars from 1964-69, and completely different from the Chevy Powerglide. It was also used for a couple years in some of the various Olds 88's, as well as the LeSabre. And it made it into the Pontiac Firebird as well. It used a bell housing that could mate to both the B-O-P engines and the Chevy inline-6, which the Pontiac OHC-6 used as its basis.

I don't think it actually went into any Chevrolets though, even though it would mate up to the 6-cyl. It was also known as the Super Turbine 300 in the Buicks, but Pontiac didn't give it a special name...just called it "automatic".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Turbine_300

explorerx4

@AB348,
That's my favorite GM design of that era, although I like the 70 Chevelle, too(it would have to be an SS).

ab348

I have had it drilled into me that the Jetaway/Super Turbine 300 is not a Powerglide, having owned 2 cars equipped with them, and I accept that as true. However I can tell you they have the exact same whine when running while in the Park position as a Powerglide. It works well enough and with a decent sized V8 moves a car like mine reasonably well. But more speeds would be better. It is cool though that it kicks down into "first" gear (ratio is actually closer to a 3-speed's second gear) when the throttle is mashed at any speed under 55mph.

explorerx4

Had an opportunity this weekend to take my Mustang to a couple of shows and put a For Sale sign on it, but I just couldn't do it.

bhill2

uplanderguy said:

Was a 'Jetway' a Powerglide, or was it really different other than in name? I wasn't aware or had forgotten that Olds had a two-speed automatic that late. I think I knew that Pontiac did, in their Tempest/LeMans series.

My understanding is that, unlike the Powerglide, the Jetaway had a variable pitch torque converter.