1983 Cadillac DeVille Coupe Deville from North America - Comments

25th Nov 2005, 19:42

Hi, I'm the guy that wrote the review. in response to the first comment, as the review says I have had no trouble with the engine what so ever, its slow, but it runs like a top. In response to the second comment, yes, it rides the smoothest of any car I've ever been in, I've driven late '90s Sevilles and I think that my Coupe Deville rides much smoother, granted the Seville handles better, but its not as soft.

28th May 2009, 22:56

I'm about to pick up a 82' Cadillac Deville for a grand, I can't wait. I've read all the poor comments about the ht4100's and am unafraid.

I got a 92 Caddy Deville and love it. The 4.9 is torquey and smooth, man I'm gonna miss owning a powerful vehicle.

But I don't care I saw this 82' Deville and fell in love, I love enormous vehicles, and am looking forward to driving this new old caddy. I'll write a review a few months into owning this car.

29th May 2009, 16:10

Is it difficult to replace the 4100 with the much better Oldsmobile 307 which was in most of the mid-to-late eighties Broughams?

10th Mar 2013, 22:25

I just bought an 83 sedan DeVille, I've taken out the 200 metric trans and put an Oldsmobile 350 turbo in it to match my Olds 403 (6.1L). MAJOR upgrade, and very powerful. Bought it for 800$, and so far have only put in $400. Runs great.

12th Mar 2013, 07:11

Wow, that sounds like a perfect upgrade! I've had many 307s (similar engine, same block anyway), and they're ultra-reliable. However I wonder if the rear-end differential has a much different ratio on those overdrive transmission cars compared to a 350-turbo transmission?

12th Mar 2013, 09:29

To 28th May 2009, 22:56

Try driving a Cadillac with any Northstar V8. The Northstar makes the 4.9 seem like something out of the 1940s!!!

13th Mar 2013, 16:33

I'll take the 4.9; it was much more reliable, much easier to work on and less money to maintain.

14th Mar 2013, 11:49

Yeah, the Northstar, like most 'high performance' multi-valve engines, was a disaster for everyday use by ordinary people. The best V-8s found in Cadillacs were the aforementioned 307s, and of course the classic 472-500-425 series - those could hardly be worn out. All these aluminum and multi-valve motors are just problems waiting to happen.

15th Mar 2013, 18:20

Don't forget the 368 big block V8 used from 1980-1981; it had the same tooling as those other big blocks, and the reliability to go with it.

I know, the 8-6-4 version in '81 was a BIT troublesome at the time, but if you know a thing or two about that set up, the engine will run like a bear.

Here is a link full of info. And answers to many questions.

http://www.mcsmk8.com/8-6-4/8-6-4.HTM

21st Mar 2013, 16:27

The fuel injected 305 and 350 Chevy engines used in the early 90's were also very good motors put in big Caddys at the time. They ran circles around the carbureted Olds 307.

2nd Apr 2013, 21:40

You should be afraid. Those HT-4100s were complete garbage and were incredibly slow off the line. It's a shame Cadillac didn't just invest in a reliable 5.0L V8 engine to match Ford's 302 and Oldsmobile's 307 for the early-1980s big cars.

5th Apr 2013, 17:06

I think the most shameful part was Cadillac had used a Bosch fuel injection system on their own 500 and 425 Cid V8s, and even used it on the Olds 350 for the Seville - yet failed to use their own far superior Digital Fuel Injection System on the Olds 307. Cadillac was the division that pioneered EFI, and had the first successful and reliable EFI system in the entire automotive industry. The ball was in their court, and they failed to score when there was no real competition.

Add another comment

Note: A Comments RSS Feed is available. New comments appear in the Members Area before the main site