1st Mar 2004, 18:50

I agree with the first comment. It seemed fishy. I like the cimarron's looks, but I wouldn't consider it a collector's item. I feel that the CTS is a much better concept as for the price that you pay, you get the power. But that's probably why GM decided to chuck it. The guy who wrote the review must have liked it too much.

11th Mar 2004, 01:03

I would like to comment on the first two comments. You both say it's unusual because the cimmaron is not a collectors car, BUT he did say that it was his first car as well as the "year owned" says 1988 so he obviously collects cars now, but at the time wasn't after the cimmaron for "collecting" purposes. So that really has no significance to the matter. ALSO he bought it brand new with zero km used and has obviously taken care of it making it a good car. Was the one you own bought new or used? Maybe that could be the difference.

26th Mar 2004, 16:56

I too, owned a Cimarron, a 1986 model, which brought on the only real exterior restyling. Bought it in 1996 with 60,000 on it and drove it for 2 years, trading it in with 97,000. I was fortunate and had a car with a near perfect interior and exterior. I did have trouble with the electric system on board and a rough idle. I did routine maintenance on the car and only had to do a few repairs, however, when having them to do, since this was a Cadillac, the repairs were far more expensive than if this was a Cavalier. I was also always replacing brake and turn signal light bulbs.

I enjoyed my Cimarron experience, like the looks I got when people took a double glance.

If the guy says he collects this car, then more power to him. I am sure that some day in the future we will take a look back at car companies who took huge gambles on ventures into car lines (Mazda Millenia, Oldsmobile Aurora, etc.) and will need to locate a mint condition Cimarron. They will have to call this man.

29th Mar 2004, 14:25

"Huge gamble"?

The Cimarron was Cadillac's version of the J-car. All the divisions got one, so Cadillac's version hardly qualifies as a "huge gamble".

Now the Allante, however...

14th Oct 2004, 13:37

I am seeking to find info on 1986 2.8L Cimmarron. It is a "Florida ca"r with only 45,ooo original miles on it. It does have a rough idle and a catalytic converter was installed last year. Can someone explain to me why that is important for emissions? Also, I would like to know how many miles per gallon this car gets. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Cimmarron have a heavier, more sturdy body than the Chevy Cavelier that it is often compared to? Seems to me like it does. If so it must have a better ride? Are there any major problems or great things about the Cimmarron that I should know about? How well does it handle in the snow? Thanks in advance for any information you can provide.

19th Oct 2004, 19:23

As others have already commented, the Cimarron used the same J-car chassis as the Cavalier, Sunbird, Firenza and Skyhawk. Cadillac may have made the suspension softer and used more soundproofing, but it was still a J-car.

The only reason you would buy one is you can find them super cheap. If the one you are looking at is not...well, it's your money. The car should not have needed a new catalytic converter at only 45K miles unless the old one was plugged with carbon due to improper air-fuel mixture or from never being driven over 35 mph.

22nd Oct 2004, 17:25

We bought a one-owner 86 Cadillac Cimarron a few years ago and are selling it only because I bought a newer car and it is therefore an extra.

It has fans and detractors, but having been made only a few years will probably be collectible. The 6 cylinder engine is peppy and reliable. Starts without delay.

It gets about 20 miles/gallon; has nice leather interior; chromed rack on back; easy handling; cute style and I enjoyed it.

I like that you can have the lights delay going off after turning off engine and go on automatically when dark out. They can call it a Cavalier; it's still a baby Cadillac.

23rd Oct 2004, 16:21

I bought a 1986 Cadillac Cimarron in April 2004, I love the car even though the only reason I bought was because I crashed my 94 Mazda 626. I only started having a problem with it in August. The problem is weird though, I would go to start it and it turns over, but never starts. I pop the hood wiggle the spark plugs attached to the distributor cap and most times it will start right up. I took it to my mechanic and he says there's nothing wrong with it, and he doesn't know why it won't start every now and then. I don't get it, does anyone have any ideas??

1st Nov 2004, 18:27

I bought a 85 Cimarron last November and it had only 58,000 miles on it. Since then I've put on 12,000 miles mostly highway miles. From the current performance of the car, it seems that the previous owner took good care of it. She too did interstate most of the time, keeping the engine in good shape.

I get about 20 MPG on the highway and around 14 in the city. I've seen lovers and haters of this car, but this little master of mine has been a reliable means of transport for me. All said and done, for older cars, you can best ascertain it's value and performance based on how well the previous owners have cared for it; On-time oil Changes, regular check up, Proper tires, Alignment etc.

If anyone can recommend a good reason why I'm getting only 14 MPG in the city and any ways to improve that Id really appreciate it.



5th Apr 2005, 14:44

Just wanted to drop a line about my 1985 Cimarron. It has the 2.8/Auto with 64,000 original miles. It really is a great running car. I am normally a big-block Chevy guy, but with the Price of gas here pushing $2.25 for 87 octane, I needed an economical car.

In response to Al, this thing gets 20-21 IN TOWN with the A/C on, regardless of how I drive it. It gets 28-29 on the highway at 65-70mph.This is about the same as my girlfriends 2001 Hyundai Elantra with a 2.0 4-banger, and the Caddy is a little faster, to boot.

Al, I'm not sure why you're only pulling 14 in town, maybe mass-airflow sensor or 02 sensor?

The other strange thing is that when I took it through emissions it registered 1 ppm on HC (120 max allowable) and 0.01 on CO (1.20 max allowable)!!! I was shocked! The guy at the emissions stationed joked that next time I should have the car RUNNING when I take it through. He didn't remember seeing a car post that low.

I know these cars have a bad rap, but really they are just gussied-up Cavaliers, and Cavs were one the all time best selling cars in the 80's and early 90's. So what's all the fuss about?

Just my two cents. My other toys...

65 Caprice 396,68 Chevy shortbed,81 Z28-427