Yesterday, I got an email from David with a link to a car from our very own S.W. Gossin, from over in his neck of the woods. I took one look at the car in the ad and knew immediately what I had to do: make it a Cadillac day. I found a comparable car, not here in Portland but in California, for us to check out. First, however, let’s put the ’90s to bed and see who took home yesterday’s prize:
Yep, that is what I expected. It’s hard to beat the utility of a simple little truck. And yes, thank you all for pointing out that I’m a idiot and the Saturn is in fact the SC2 model. I trusted the listing instead of my own eyes, and I should know better by now. Doesn’t matter, I guess, since it lost anyway.
Moving on: Today, it’s an East Coast vs West Coast battle, courtesy of Cadillac’s dinosaur of a personal luxury coupe: the Eldorado. The two cars we have today are only a year apart, but that year spans a generational change. And similar as they may have once been, three thousand miles of open road isn’t the only thing separating them now. Let’s check them out.
1991 Cadillac Eldorado – $2,000
Engine/drivetrain: 4.9 liter V8, 4 speed automatic, FWD
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Odometer reading: 83,000 miles
Runs/drives? Drives well, according to the ad
Our East Coast contender is the final year of the eleventh (!) generation Eldorado, downsized from the already-downsized 1979-85 model. It has the final evolution of Cadillac’s HT V8 engine, here displacing 4.9 liters and putting out a nice round 200 horsepower. This engine had troubles early on, but by the mid-late 1980s, GM had ironed out most of the kinks and it became a reliable, pleasant beast (as long as you didn’t need to change the rear four spark plugs).
This Eldorado is the Touring Coupe model, with larger wheels and a little bit firmer suspension than the standard car. It isn’t quite “The Caddy That Zigs,” but it doesn’t quite lumber around like a drunken rhinoceros either.
The seller says they bought this car “to restore,” but it looks to me like it doesn’t need much. New tires, freshly-serviced air conditioning, and “a bunch of other fixes” sounds like a pretty damn nice $2000 car to me. The windshield is cracked, but if that’s all that’s wrong with it, it’s a good deal.
It is too bad we don’t get any photos of the interior, because that might be the make-or-break factor. If it’s trashed inside, that could turn off a lot of buyers. But I’d say for $2000, it’s worth going to take a look to find out.
[Editor’s Note: I’d like to point out that whomever had this car took the trouble to replace the all-red-with-a-fussy-little-Caddy-crest US-spec taillights with these Europe/global-spec units with amber rear indicators. Or, as I look into this a bit more, it could be that this one was one of the Eldorado Touring Coupe edition ones that used the amber/red taillights to give it a more sporty look. Either way, I think they work in the car’s favor. – JT]
1992 Cadillac Eldorado – $1,950
Engine/drivetrain: 4.9 liter V8, 4 speed automatic, FWD
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Odometer reading: 154,000 miles
Runs/drives? Doesn’t explicitly state, but I think we can assume
When I first saw the lead image of this car, I assumed it was just faded red. But then I looked at the other photos, and I am convinced that it is, in fact, painted in a color somewhere in the magenta/fuchsia/hot pink neighborhood.
That’s right, folks; history is being made. For the first and possibly last time on Shitbox Showdown, we are looking at a pink Cadillac.
The twelfth generation Eldorado grew a bit, and lost a little bit of the old-man stodginess of the previous generation’s styling. Gone are the bolt-upright rear window and optional landau top (though the aftermarket was happy to oblige, if you really wanted one). This being a 1992 model, it still uses the 4.9 liter HT engine, which would be replaced in 1994 by the notorious powerful-but-fragile Northstar V8.
Again, we aren’t given any interior photos, and there’s precious little else to go on about this car’s condition in the ad. But if the tags are current, one can assume it’s being driven at least now and then. Like too many Cadillacs, it appears to have some additional chrome stuck on it; I don’t think the bumpers were originally that shiny. And the wire wheels are aftermarket as well. They’re nowhere near deep enough to do Houston proud, and don’t fit the sleek style of this car at all. But when you start out by painting a car hot pink, I guess you stop worrying about what “goes with” the rest of the car.
Well, there they are: one survivor from North Carolina and one modified California special. Both run and drive well, and the price difference is only $50. I guess if you can’t decide, you can flip a coin. (Yes, in fact, I can work a music reference into just about anything.)
Obviously the ’91 is a better deal on paper: half the mileage, better color, better condition overall.
But at the age and price of these cars, the buyer will likely be the last owner, so might as well loosen up and have some silly fun with them. Since the 92 is already a terrible color, how about turning into a chalk board car? Or using the pink in some half-baked livery scheme? Or cover it in bubblegum wrappers? The wheels could benefit from spoke decorations like a schwin, or just do the “lift a regular car” thing and put steelies and fat tires on it. That $50 can go right into the silly mods fund.
I used to have a 1991 STS. 200 hp/275 lb-ft. Easy win for this ETC.
https://imgur.io/a/NG8dSsp
The 1992 model is a much better design all around so that’s where my vote goes.
The 92 is a better car than the 91. The 4.9 is probably the best motor they made in the last 50 years, doesn’t feel any different around town than the Northstar but more reliable. I used to work at the Cadillac dealership in high school when both of these cars came out. I also own an ’89 Allante and I did own a 92 Eldorado touring Coupe in polo green on beechwood. They’re both really cool cars. You don’t see many of the old style 91s and they will fly because they’re a little bit lighter than the 92s. But the 92 was Leaps and Bounds above the 91 in styling, and without showing the interior pictures most of the readers wouldn’t care about the difference so much. But the interior is is so much better on the 92. European pretty much. But if I had to pick between both of these particular examples, I would probably pick the 91 just because it’s lower mileage and a better color combination. But if they were both white on tan cars with similar miles, of course you would pick the 92. Also, this is absolutely not Mary Kay pink and must have been repainted. They did sell these in bright red, both 91s and 92s but that color on the 92 is not Factory. Neither is the grill which is a touring Coupe Grill but clearly it’s not a touring Coupe per the wreath and Crest on the c pillar. As long as you don’t run ethanol gasoline these motors will run forever. Otherwise you need to replace the injectors and run non-ethanol.
I pick the ’91. If it survived any time in “Fayette-nam” (Home of the Green Berets, if you didn’t know, whom I have great respect for) then it can survive anywhere.
Dad always got mom a Cadilac at new car time. Starred with 4 door Broughms down to Sedan Deville then coupe Devilles took forever to wash these bitches
The European taillights were not added! That is not a correct statement. Red/Orange rears are standard equipment on the Eldorado Touring Coupe (ETC) in US Spec. Red only taillights are only standard Eldorado’s. I’ve seen several of these ETC’s, and they are all Red/Orange.
To the editors of this site blinking on about tail lights: STOP IT ALREADY!*
*pun intended.
As for the pink one. No it’s not pink, it’s lipstick. As in ‘lipstick on a Cadillac’. I think we have heard that phrase somewhere and it’s not a compliment.
Those taillights are NOT a swap, they are factory! Both the Eldorado Touring Coupe and its fraternal twin, the Seville Touring sedan, got the amber turn signals. It was supposed to make them seem more like ‘Continental Touring Cars’, or some crap like that. And, it’s the one I voted for – the ’92 is probably ‘fine’, but, the ’91 looks like it’s been a little better cared for. The 4.9s are a great engine, but, they’re paired with a 4T60E, which – it’s not unheard of to get 250k miles out of one, but, they are kinda known for not doing that. Lower mileage, better paint, better suspension – the ’91 is the easy choice here.
Give me the pink one because it’s pink and how can I say no to those wire wheels
Cadillac Day – I like it! This was kind of tough at first, but the ’91 wins out. I’ve owned a ’98 Eldorado and prefer that body style, but after looking closely at the pics, the ’91 seems to be the better of the two.
It looks like the ’92 is suffering from some clear-coat peeling on the quarter panel and possibly the entire trunk-lid. Another thing evident in the pictures is that the rear pull-down truck mechanism is broke (that’s why the gap is weird-looking). That means the trunk isn’t sealed, and who knows how much moisture has gotten in there in the meantime. Of course, there are no interior pics in either, but looking close at the ’91, I can’t see any dash cracks, and even the rear deck appears to be in decent shape. The ’92 is a complete mystery, but I can’t imagine it’s too good based on the peeling clear-coat and in-op trunk pull-down.
Of course the miles also play a factor, and the last thing is simply drivability. The newer body style certainly looks better imho, but after driving one for awhile, those giant rear-quarter blind spots do start to get a little old. That ’91 is likely easier to park as well.
Winner: the slightly older Eldorado, although I do kind of like those baby-swangas on the newer one!
Regardless of color I prefer the looks of the 91, though neither one of them is particularly attractive. The 91 does seem to still have a bit of DNA shared with what I think of as the defining Cadillac look from the 60s cars.
For the first part of my life My Pop Pop Owned Cadillacs. Mainly Eldorado’s the last one he owned was a 96 which looked like the 92. He owned cars after that but GM’s anti coupe approach killed off his favorite. Im going with that but the 91 looks close to what my mom had for the coupe deville when I was 2-3 years old. She traded it in for an 89 Bonneville SSEi with the supercharger
Neither, I’m Cadillac-tose intolerant.
I just recently found an interesting conversation with Cadillac designer John Manoogian on YouTube. The topic was the early-mid-90s DeVille, but the Eldorado is also briefly mentioned. Enjoy!
https://youtu.be/gro2OmH3N10
There’s a house I pass often that has this pair in the driveway. The boxy one is white like this one, but the newer one is steel blue-but with peeling clear coat. Given how nicely the house & lawn are kept, I’m assuming is a couple in their 70s, but I’ve never seen them outside.
Am I the only one who builds stories in my head based on peoples’ driveways?
‘Myrtle..MYRTLE! Have you seen my keys?’
‘Did you check your sock drawer, Fred? That’s where you put them last time, remember?’
Yes, especially when you know them or are familiar with them and have the question of “What would compel you to buy that?”
Like the hoarders down the street from me who managed to kill a 2005 4Runner that they’d bought brand new, within four years, and then decided that what they really needed was a used 745Li.
I’m sure people thought that about my grandmother too, when she managed to convince the dealership to let her test-drive a new Camaro 1LE 6MT for a night, even though she could barely get in and out of it, with her disabilities.
I have to go with the ’91. My dad inherited a silver on gray ’91 Eldorado Bairritz when his dad passed mid-90s. Was a comfortable cruiser and smaller than a lot of other vehicles, even then. Did seem to have more than its share of computer issues requiring dealer visits, but maybe that’s just my “memory.”
Trunk could fit 2 mountain bikes with front wheels removed and back seats could hold enough camp gear for a weekend.
Fun fact, the digital speedometer topped out at 125 and would flash “125” after that even with RPM still climbing. Side-fact; teenage me was even dumber than adult me.
I would have to guess the pink one was a MaryKay give-away car. that alone might make it more appealing to some. the biggest issue with the 4.9 was using low octane gas. the low miles of the white one suggests Sunday driven Grandma last car. The east coast gas being usually better grade than anything in Cali would also make it seem like the better choice. but man the style is not as good to me. I like the bigger one and the fact that it is not yet saddled with the Northstar makes it way more interesting.
Both of these are 1,000% Not For Me. That said, amber indicators, especially since if someone went to the trouble of adding them aftermarket, are impossible to vote against.
Magenta is an excellent, if rarely seen, color for a go-fast car, and this is certainly not that. Much better than more common yellow or acid green.
Wanted to vote for the ’92 because of your link to the Houston slabs, but I had to go with the ’91.
RIP Lamont
I’m guessing both interiors aren’t exactly strong selling points, so call it a draw and assume they have a hole in the driver’s seat.
Someone bothered to paint the ’92 pink, and put those wire wheels on there, and there appears to be something wonky about trunk. My crystal ball says the ’92 has lived a harder life, even though I prefer the look of that body.
So ’91 it is. One of my neighborhood friend’s Dad always drove Cadillacs, and pretty sure had one of those. In the early 90’s he traded it at some point for the 1994-ish DeVille.