Sears "Toughskins". The scourge of my adolescent wardrobe.
Like those times my mother would return from a Sears shopping spree with fresh, bell bottom, plaid "Toughskins" for me, my heart sank the first time I saw one of Cadillac's new for 1985 deVille's.
Cadillac shared the front-wheel drive GM "C-body" with the Buick Electra and Oldsmobile 98
We, and by ""we" I'm referring to us car nerds, first heard about Cadillac's dramatically downsized deVille in the fall of 1983. The new "big" Caddies were to lose two feet of length, four-inches of width, shed six-hundred pounds, somehow be as roomy inside as ever and feature front-wheel drive. There was some minor consolation in that they'd be powered by a V-8 engine, albeit it was Cadillac's dubious, 4.1-liter V-8 making 125-horsepower and 190 foot-pounds.
Hoping against hope, although considering Cadillac's recent transgressions like the bustle butt 1980 Seville, V8-6-4. the Cimarron and the "HT4100" (engine), it was like holding onto the side of a building with our pinkie finger, maybe Cadillac would pull something out of their hat or smaller trunk akin to a second coming of the 1976 Seville. Spoiler alert. They didn't. They came with these things.
Somewhat remarkably, the Coupe deVille looked dorkier than the Sedan deVille.
It wasn't for a lack of trying but somehow and someway, Cadillac got everything wrong with these cars. Anything that had made Cadillac what it was up until that point, without question much of it bullshit, went out the proverbial moonroof.
Cadillac, like Buick and Oldsmobile, Lincoln too, was at a crossroads in the mid-'80's. Their cars were very dated and affluent buyers, young and old, looked to German makes and models for vehicles that would impress the Joneses. GM's answer, almost inexplicably, was "full-size" front-wheel drivers. "FWD" which had been the bastion of economy boxes prior.
Even my father, born in 1923 and was no "car guy" like his middle son, said these were "no Cadillac".
However, it wasn't that the cars were so much smaller or were front-wheel drive, although it didn't help, but the biggest problem it was their exterior aesthetic. Or lack thereof.
At least the interiors looked "Cadillac". For the most part.
Their interiors were actually very nice, lavish in fact with acres of leg, hip and head room.
There may have been a familial if not vestigial resemblance to what they replaced, and that was important to their core buyers, but these were no "Cadillac's" in the traditional or even neo-traditional sense like the 1976 Seville was or even the 1979 Eldorado.
The damn chrome trunk straps and fake spare tire "kits" often times were installed by dealers
Not only did they not appeal ultimately to their core buyers, but Yuppies also wouldn't be caught dead in them. The after-market "Continental kit" on this car does it not favors either other than to make it harder to park. These sold well at first, but sales declined through 1988.
Better but still not a Cadillac in the traditional or even neo-traditional sense like the 1976 Cadillac Seville was.
For 1989, Cadillac added a whopping 11 inches fore and aft to these things and pushed the wheelbase out three inches to appease traditional buyers. The reboot did nothing for monied younger buyers, though. The dye had been cast. Not that it wasn't before, but the 1980's defined "Cadillac" as an old person's brand.
This 1986, all but identical to an '85, popped up on Facebook Marketplace and the seller, best I can tell, is having a devil of a time selling Grandpa's old sled. Price has been slashed more than $3,000 and yet it still sits out there for sale.
Most likely because it's aged as poorly as those bell bottom, plaid Sears "Toughskins" my mother insisted I wear.