AJT123

A Caddy was about the best you could get way back when other than a Rolls.

At least until Mercedes entered the game/US market.

Margate330

My neighbor has a Caddy but I have no idea what year but thought it was a newer model sedan,
However it may be older than I thought so I will walk over and take a pic tomorrow and let ya'll check it out and let me know.
Now ya'll got me curious.

SW17LS

Thats true, but that doesn't mean that "the best you could get" was that great compared to today.

AJT123

Oh, for sure. My Grandpa used to tell me cars would only last about 50,000 miles or so way back in the day in the 50s and 60s.

mmarshall

Most of the cars themselves would typically last longer than that.....the engines were the main culprit. The main cause of failure was that the piston rings and valves would wear out and start burning oil because of the increased clearances. In those days, lubricating oil was not the quality or effectiveness it is today, and production-tolerances in the engines were much looser.

There were some exceptions. The Chrysler Slant-Six engine of the 1960s, by the standards of the time, was exceptionally durable, as were some small Chrysler V8s, the Ford 390 V8, the Chevy Stovebolt Six, and the Chevy small block V8. Slant-sixes, with even minimal care, were good for 100K, 150K, even 200K miles in some instances. One reason for that is because it was originally designed and built to military standards. But the average engine of the 1960s was markedly using oil, due to worn rings, at 70-80,000 miles.... that meant either an overhaul or a new engine/vehicle.

AJT123

He also always would tell me about convertible tops stuck halfway up, just how cars weren’t built for the long haul way back then. Plenty of examples.

Hes been in heaven for ten years now this year. I hate that he never got to see my LS430 which I picked up right before he got sick, but that’s the crappy part of life. He knew all about Lexus and knew I was obsessed. Hell would freeze over before he would have bought non-American (and I totally get why—he lived through WW2) but he appreciated nice foreign cars. But the nicest he ever drove were nice Chrysler and Fords. He had a Firebird at one point. He could have afforded virtually anything, but he along with most of the rest of that generation was frugal.

He wrote me a letter in the 90s because he rode in his partner’s LS400, said it was the smoothest and quietest and nicest car he had ever been in hands down. I still have the letter.

He also would tell me about road trips before the interstates, whew!!

Felix

These fwd Conti's sold pretty good at the time. Working at a L/M dealership, did alot of head gaskets on the 3.8 powered fwd motors. Ford had a chance to use the fox platform= v/8 rwd for this gen Conti, as the prior gen ('82-'87Conti) vs using the Taurus/Sable platform. Compared to the 3rd gen ('86-'91) Seville's it took awhile for GM try to fix, where Ford took the time to get it right the first time & didn't do much more, wheres GM kept updating/fixing vehicles thru the life cycle. My wife had a '90 sts yrs ago, which Cadillac added port injection on the 4.5 for 180hp, which I found it really handled great in poor cruddy weather. All I added was 235/55-16 tires vs the oem 215's.....Never had a issue w/ it, ran great. She replaced it w/ the new at the time '98 sts. Put over 100k on them & did the basic maintenance, including flushing the coolant, brake fluid, trans fluid. The '95-'02 Conti's didn't sell that great even w/ a dohc 4.6. How times change....I'd roll a '52-'55 Lincoln designed for modern living, for my Eichler home.........