Peter Wilding wrote a thoughtful comment about our 1971-78 Cadillac Eldorado story that I don’t want to get buried in the comment thread:
Late to the party here. Design analysis first. As an Aussie, I have trouble seeing a car as large as this Eldorado as being sporty. Perhaps sportier than regular Cadillacs in relative terms, but to my eyes it looks like just another large American coupe/convertible. Yes, I’ll admit I’m not accustomed to seeing cars this size around here, so I can’t immediately see that the Eldorado is shorter. At the time I hated it; I felt it had crossed the line from “interesting looking but a bit on the large side” to “just another big Caddy. Ignore it.”
The problem is the almost-flat, unrelieved sides. There is no horizontal “through line” for the eye to follow as on the previous generation, which causes a visual massiveness, a ponderousness, and what you do see is interrupted by the visual gash of the vertical trim behind the doors. Yes, I guess the look could be symbolic of a prestige car, but it lacks the fleet trimness of the previous model. Rather than accenting the wheels to look “light on its feet,” this one just sits there, solid as an Egyptian pyramid – and just as fleet.
Also see ‘Did Wayne Kady screw up the 1974-76 Buick Riviera?’
And as with the early Riviera, GM just didn’t seem to understand that part of the allure of these cars was not only that the style was so right, but that they were a different, handier size. The size difference added to their distinctiveness.
For this Eldorado, in order to look different and “prestigious” they became laden down with creases and gewgaws like that vertical rear fender chrome – a nod to Cadillacs past, true, but serving no function on this body other than to look like an unnecessary encrustation. And a rear fender hop up – really? On a new Cadillac body? In 1971? Wasn’t that a bit dated?
Now let’s look at the Toronado and Continental Mark IV
And yet . . . that Oldsmobile Toronado! It looks far better. Much cleaner, lighter, everything the Cadillac should be but isn’t. I’m tempted to say Oldsmobile had more talented stylists than Cadillac. Or a studio boss with a better eye.
While I’m not a fan of the Mark’s “baroquishness” (if there’s such a word), and I especially dislike the cliched Rolls-inspired grille, the overall design is far superior. Not only is it visually distinct from other Lincolns, but the overall design is much cleaner than the Eldorado. A low profile and straight lines with full wheel arches gives a leaner, lighter look compared with the Eldorado’s “puffiness,” which just looks heavy and bloated. The Mark’s roofline, however, is too thick; there is too much crown for a seventies design. But judging on design alone I’d choose the Toronado over the Mark.
Also see ‘Knudsen’s favored 1972 Mark IV design borrowed from the Eldorado’
Regarding Collectible Automobile, I’ve been reading it since the eighties. I slightly disagree with you. I find their treatment of cars isn’t uniform, or formulaic as you say; some articles are more in-depth than others. Maybe it’s certain writers? I’ve never checked. Some articles are quite an interesting read, with plenty of background information, interviews, and useful photography, but sometimes I do feel like I’m reading a manufacturer’s fact sheet. Once or twice I’ve wondered why they bothered with a certain story – not on account of the subject, but the treatment. But then occasionally they really surprise me. While not as good as the old Automobile Quarterly (which I could rarely afford back in the day), what else is there?
— Peter Wilding
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcarbrochures.org: Cadillac Eldorado (1971); Lincoln Continental Mark IV (1972); Oldsmobile Toronado (1971)
Indie Auto invites your comments (see below) or letters to the editor (go here). Letters may be lightly edited for style.
I’m not familiar with the Australian market, but probably anywhere on earth besides the US the Eldo would look bloated. However, that’s how we roll here in the US. Now we have Ram Silverado super F350 4×4 four door super king cabs with tires that belong on road graders and a bed so high you need a forklift to load it. They’re sold for the same reason the Eldo was 50 years ago. The profit margin is enormous. Remember, this is the country that considered Duesenbergs and the 50s Eldorados and Chrysler 300s sports cars.
KIm, our standard cars were much the size of US compacts. We did get some US full-sizers, but they sold in very small numbers. However I tried to divorce my analysis from the size issue. During this period US car styling diverged from what the rest of the world was doing, and became much more formal. Now ‘Formal’ can look good, don’t get me wrong, but all too often throughout the ‘malaise era’ American car styling was not particularly well done, and I’m aware of the regulatory issues. It could have, and should have, been better.
I always liked the styling of the 1971-72 Eldorado, especially the convertible, however, I completely understand where Peter is coming from in his analysis. 1973 Eldorados suffered from oddly truncated rear fenders, which were ‘corrected’ the following year but it was downhill from there. The 1975-78 Eldorados were, to put it nicely, overwrought (perhaps the Biarritz should have been called the Baroque). They did not have a quality look about them, either inside or out, IMO. Perhaps the ghost of Harley Earl visited the Cadillac studios back then as they just piled on the paint, the vinyl and stainless trim until the Eldorado looked like a bloated dowager. GM could, and perhaps should have, used the downsized B-body coupes as the basis for all-new 1977 Eldorados, Toronados and Rivieras, albeit with distinct sheetmetal as opposed to the cosmetic makeover that turned a LeSabre into a Riviera back then. The FWD versions could have waited till late 1980 for introduction as MY 1981 models. Unfortunately, this most probably would not have solved the next problem, that of the shrunken 1986 Eldorado that looked too much like a Buick Skylark/Somerset.
Y’know, it’s funny CJ, I just had a friend on FB castigating me for what I said about the Eldorado. I won’t mention your ‘bloated dowager’ comment to him! 🙂 But it’s interesting for me to hear Americans saying they were just too big, too much, too….
Very good analysis.
The 1971 GM personal luxury coupes looked too big and bulky – a problem exacerbated when the large chrome bumpers were hung on each end to meet federal bumper standards.
The Lincoln Continental Mark IV and V were the full-size personal luxury coupes that looked the best, although I still prefer the Mark III.
The 1972-76 Thunderbirds were also too big and bulky, and came across as a restyled LTD coupe. Not only was the styling dull, but they completely abandoned what had been one of the Thunderbird’s main attractions. The appeal of the four-seat Thunderbirds had been that they were smaller and more compact, and thus more “personal,” than other luxury cars. The 1972 models completely lost that part of the plot.
Thanks Geeber. I never thought my comment, though a bit lengthy, would end up as a feature article!
When I wrote, I was wary I might be stepping in a minefield. These cars seemed to have been pretty popular in their day, but popular does not necessarily mean good. To me the styling just came across as second-best, lacking the assurance and ‘clarity’ of the previous model. It might not have been what you wanted, but you could look at it and appreciate what it was. This generation, not so much.
I totally agree with you on those Thunderbirds. What was it with all the formerly-interesting cars getting too big and bulky back around ’70-’72? It’s like the companies didn’t understand the trimmer size was part of the attraction , it made the car stand out. But then they did a Cougar station wagon…