3rd Mar 2015, 08:55
I have ample experience driving a 1988 Cadillac Brougham. How different would the early-1980s RWD C-body Oldsmobile 98 be in terms of driving dynamics? Would the steering be tighter or looser, the braking be the same, the handling, the ride, etc.?
4th Mar 2015, 19:31
It is pretty much the same car, other than the decorations, so it should drive quite similarly. I've had several Delta 88s and one 98, and they drove great.
19th Oct 2016, 15:25
He said this Brougham has a 5.0, either the Chevy 305 or Oldsmobile 307, so it should be just about as reliable as the Oldsmobile. If it was an older model with the HT-4100, then get the Oldsmobile, no question.
I'd get whichever one is in better condition, less rust etc. And if they're the same, well if the 98 has the pillowtop seats that might be the way to go, although the standard seats (leather or cloth) in the Brougham were comfortable enough too.
28th Jun 2018, 00:51
I worked for GM for 15 years from 1969 to 1985, and GM used the Oldsmobile as the test car for Cadillac. They would try everything in the Oldsmobile first, then what doesn't work out in the Olds, they would improve it for the Caddy. But basically they are the same car, and GM made sure both cars had the best they could offer. The Oldsmobile 350 engine saved GM in 1975 to 1979 remember.
.VLBJ
28th Jun 2018, 07:18
Hey there, as a former GM worker, can you tell us what was the best years in terms of quality for Cadillacs in your opinion?
And what years did you notice that GM was seriously starting to get cheap and cost cut, basically started to go down hill?
Thanks.
28th Jun 2018, 15:27
So in other words, Oldsmobile tested the horrible HT 4100 before it went under Cadillac hoods? That's news to me.
28th Jun 2018, 20:24
Why don’t you guys fast forward to the present on your Cadillac engine discussions? It seems naysayers often get stuck in a specific bygone era as if it’s still commonplace today. I too miss the large sedans, but as far as engines which seems to be the hot topic, this is very impressive for today. The latest from Cadillac is news on a Twin Turbo V8 in 2018. This is not your father's Oldsmobile.
I get griping over darker, specific early development snapshot moments in automotive history. But temper it with current day advances that are pretty incredible and exist today. This also goes with many other new automobiles. What I like on here is really what to avoid used.
30th Jun 2018, 20:00
Great, glad it sparked your interest. Let’s eagerly await a stack of new Cadillac reviews on this new $88k Twin Turbo V8. It sure beats rehashing pre disco era anemic engine technology. And definitely this engine isn’t coming from Oldsmobile. There have been some really hot Cadillacs prior to 2018, including the wagon. I just saw an amazing one at Horsepower Addicts in Wilmington De.
2nd Jul 2018, 13:16
I didn’t know it was required to buy every car on CarSurvey to express a simple interest or have a free exchange of ideas. I did not see this site titled “Actual Owner Car Survey Only”. Even a test drive with your interpretation would be discriminated upon. I enjoy reading both simple opinions as well as actual ownership. I have owned older Cadillacs myself, but am interested in new developments as well.
2nd Jul 2018, 15:54
The CTS wagon was so "hot", it only lasted 3 years and sold a whopping 8,600 units worldwide.
2nd Jul 2018, 17:33
Topic is engines, not body style. Cadillac still made a stellar mark in history. Imagine a street legal luxury domestic wagon being the fastest street legal domestic. It's likely the wheelbase. A car that can go 180 mph plus on a long track. 0-60 in under 4 seconds. Not an Olds engine, but a ZL-1 supercharged Corvette engine. And if a wagon is not to your liking, then there is a sedan available. I think Cadillac more than redeemed themselves. And if that isn't enough with 638 HP, a customer can take one to an aftermarket performance shop for up to 1000 HP. So anyway, back to the 8-6-4 or Northstar or the diesel era sigh.
2nd Jul 2018, 17:45
It's just you seemed so excited about the new Caddy's non-corporate V8, I thought you were interested in buying one, sorry about that. I've owned older Cadillacs too, and wouldn't consider anything they offer today.
3rd Jul 2018, 01:39
You're right, I never saw the point in that model either.
The problem with Cadillac today is they are trying to hard to be the upscale performance division that they never were, which isn't working for them. Sales are poor on all their sedan models. The CTS did OK for a while, but is now (along with the ATS & XTS) on the road to extinction. The best selling vehicle is the Escalade, probably because of its large size. Remember Cadillac used to represent traditional American luxury; big, plush, comfortable and cloud-like ride. The current offerings have none of that. I remember not too long ago you would see a DeVille on just about every street corner. If GM didn't screw up so bad in the past, maybe Pontiac would still be here to build performance cars, and Cadillac would still be a luxury car with traditional elegance.
My favorite Cadillacs were from the '70s. The worst decade was the '80s; good looking cars, but horrible engineering execution. The Brougham was good after 1986 when they borrowed the Olds 307. Personally I feel they had it right in the early '90s. There was something for everyone. If you wanted full size luxury, you had the rear drive Brougham or front drive DeVille; luxury performance was the Seville or Eldorado. The only problem there was the early edition Northstar engines were a nightmare.
3rd Feb 2015, 09:50
This a very good post that I wholeheartedly agree with. Modern cars have one shape (Blob), and that hasn't really changed since 1990. The old classics from way back (50s-70s) all had distinction, sharp curvy lines, and character that was easily noticeable a mile away. The days when a Cadillac looked nothing like a Lincoln, even the way the interiors smelled, was totally different to each car brand. While today, they all feel, smell and look the same on the inside and out.
Regardless if they had mechanical issues, the point being is that the vintage Cadillac's turn heads, especially the ones that are in nice shape. The class, the soul, the styling said it all! The new Cads have none of that. Sure they look kinda nice, but they also have this very cheap plastic look on from an exterior standpoint. The chrome is sadly plastic and probably won't hold up in 30 years, unlike the old school cads that used chrome metal everywhere.
The build quality on the 50s-60s Cads was top notch. Everything felt solid and was meant to last forever. No sacrifices were spent trying to save a buck in those days. You wonder if anybody will ever care about these modern Cads in 50 years. That's if they can manage to hold up for that long, which I don't think they will.