Talk:Cadillac de Ville series

Commentary
I was under the impression that the Cadillac Fleetwood was converted to actual limosuine use as well. --Thomas Veil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.107.253.41 (talk) 08:41, 6 September 2004


 * To my knowledge it was; but the Fleetwood is no longer part of the current Cadillac range. &mdash;Morven 09:08, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)

Name
Who or what was the DeVille named after? 205.188.116.68 23:15, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

DeVille is not the name of a person but is french for "of the town". The original name of the car was Sedan DeVille, french for "car of the town" or town car. Gerdbrendel 08:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Table
Please make sure the table with Deville Info is the same as on other pages picture on the top w/ same categories. Thank you very much Gerdbrendel 02:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

DeVille or Deville
I'm Sorry, when I wrote DeVille I was thinking of the past De Ville (two words). Gerdbrendel 02:59, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Generations
I see little validity in separating some of the 'generations' of deVille; such as '71-73 from '74-76, or '77-79 from '80-84. Differences are not great enough to warrant it, IMO. --WQ59B —Preceding unsigned comment added by WQ59B (talk • contribs) 06:16, 6 November 2006
 * I removed the alleged break from '79 to '80, as this was only a facelift on all GM fullsize lines. I don't know about from '73 to '74. They changed the front end quite a bit, that much I can tell from the pictures. --Sable232 04:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. The rectangular headlights came in '75 anyway. '74 and '69 were not new generations from what I find. --Olds 403 (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I would suggest keeping these de Ville Generations in synch with those on the Cadillac Coupe de Ville page. Also note there are some attempts at Generations on the Cadillac Fleetwood page and the Cadillac Sixty Special and the Cadillac Series 70 page and even the Cadillac Eldorado page (unfortunately, this one combines 2 Generations across the years 1959 to 1966 into one Generation!!).  Also note there is a Cadillac Brougham page which focuses on the modern Brougham but has sadly little about the very exclusive and special Brougham from the 1950s.  Ideally, all these pages should be consistent.


 * It can be a dilemma as to what constitutes a new "generation", but usually it has to do with the platform--i.e. the underpinnings of the car. Based on my knowledge of Cadillac over the years, I would suggest the following
 * Generation 1=1949 to 1953 Generation 2=1954 to 1958 Generation 3=1959 to 1964 Generation 4=1965 to 1970 Generation 5=1971 to 1976 Generation 6=1977 to 1984 Generation 7=1985 to 1988;  Generation 8=1989 to 1993  Generation 9=1994 to 1999;  Generation 10=2000 to 2005.  In all honesty, I think a strong argument could be made to combine Generation 7 and 8 as I believe these are basically the same platform.  Likewise I believe that Generation 9 and 10 are also very similar platforms and are candidates to be combined.  But I will defer to others, particularly on these newer platforms as I haven't kept up as well on these.  Are there any Cadillac employees or retirees who have thoughts on any of this?  Given Cadillac's history, these pages deserve our best!  --70.23.80.194 (talk) 07:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Please expand
This article really needs to be expanded. Considering that over half the infoboxes only correspond to a three-paragraph section, we are in dire need of more information. I especially would like to know if there really are as many generations as the article suggests, and then be able to put in a heading for each one. --Sable232 04:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Page is confusing
The boxes on this page are all over and kind of confusing the page needs to be cleaned up.Camryluvr 16:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Prose
The excessive wordiness and POV is one of the things that made this article one of the more frustrating auto-related articles here.

Things like "With bigger changes coming in '80" and "A technological marvel developed by the Eaton Corporation" make this look like some review out of Edmunds, and most other editors here shred that kind of writing with extreme prejudice.

It is also unnecessary to have all kinds of pricing information here, in my opinion (and, no doubt, that of the rest of WP:CARS).

Fortunately for the IP editor(s) involved I long ago quit caring. I don't argue with the enthusiasts anymore, it's not worth the time or the harassment. I don't care about making the article a GA or FA - it's been shown to be a useless endeavor in most cases anyway.

Anyone else wants to fix this, go ahead and try. --Sable232 (talk) 21:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Pop Culture
This is the type of page that desperately needs an "In Popular Culture" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.242.211 (talk) 05:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * See WikiProject Automobiles/Conventions for information on "Popular culture" or trivia sections. --Leivick (talk) 05:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

For anyone watching this page
I was patroling this morning and did a revert to an IP for POV, OR and other issues with the edit. You can see that and another editor who reverted the prose here in the history section. I got a note on my talk page from the IP who reverted my edited with comments to me.  I don't really know too much about cars in the manner needed for this article so I would appreciate it if any active editors would look at this matter and maybe get a consensus one way or the other about this. Also, there are so many info boxds and white spaces. Do all those boxes need to be in the article? Why not take the information and put it into the article instead of all the white spaces it is causing? Just a suggestion, thanks to anyone who can help in this matter. Thank you in advance, -- Crohnie Gal Talk  17:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Name from 1994 on
In case anyone wants verification, I found this image on Auto Trader which shows "DeVille," with the capitalized V. --Sable232 (talk) 17:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

1977-1984 Did Not Have a Roomier Interior Than 1971-1976
Here are the usual facts for four door models (which can easily be found in sales brochures and data books):

1971-1976

Headroom f/r 39.2/38.2

Legroom f/r 41.9/40.1

Shoulder room f/r 62.1/64.0

Luggage cap. (cu. ft.) 15.9

1977-1984

Headroom f/r 39.0/38.1

Legroom f/r 42.0/41.2

Shoulder room f/r 59.4/59.4

Luggage cap. (cu. ft.) 19.5

The EPA has published annual fuel economy guides since 1978. These guides categorize cars based on "interior space" which is defined as the sum of passenger volume and trunk or cargo volume. For example a midsize car has 110 to 119 cubic feet of interior space and a full size has 120 or more. Passenger volume is computed by finding the product of headroom, legroom, and shoulder room for both front and rear, converting each to cubic feet, rounding to the nearest cubic foot and then summing them.

For example the 1977-1984 Cadillac Sedan de Ville has 39.3x42.0x59.4 = 97,297.2 cubic inches of passenger room in front. Dividing this by 1728 cubic inches per cubic feet yields 56.3 cubic feet of front passenger room. It has 38.1x41.2x59.4 = 93,241.4 cubic inches of passenger room in rear. Dividing this by 1728 cubic inches per cubic feet yields 54.0 cubic feet of passenger room. Rounding to the nearest foot and adding them yields 110 cubic feet of passenger volume.

Now turn to any 1978-1984 EPA fuel economy guide and what you'll usually find is this for a Cadillac Sedan de Ville:

BODY TYPE/INTERIOR SPACE PASSENGER/TRUNK OR CARGO(CU.FT.) 4DR-110/20

EPA fuel economy guides obviously did not exist in 1971-1976 but repeating this calculation for a 1971-1976 Cadillac Sedan de Ville yields 116 cubic feet of passenger volume. Thus the interior space of a four door 1977-1984 Cadillac Sedan de Ville is 110 + 20 = 130 cubic feet whereas the interior space of a four door 1971-1976 Cadillac Sedan de Ville is 116 + 16 = 132 cubic feet. Thus clearly the 1971-1976 has more interior space than the 1977-1984.

The main reason for the difference is of course shoulder room and the difference between 62.1 inches of shoulder room and 59.4 inches is dramatically obvious to anyone who has seen both cars. It's also why it's width that makes a roomy car roomy and not length.

This also underscores the fact you cannot shorten a car by nearly ten inches, make it narrower by over 3 inches, lose over 900 pounds and not lose interior room.

I know that the GM ads of the time pushed the idea that the 1977 full size cars were just as roomy despite the drastic downsizing. This usually involved mentioning (trivial) increases in headroom or legroom from the previous year. (Interestingly, by odd coincidence, most full size GM models experienced correspondingly small decreases in headroom or legroom in the two years before the downsized models were unveiled.) However, nobody took it seriously then because anyone could see that there was a substantial decrease in room. And besides all of the interior dimensions were published in the sales brochures and data books for anyone to see.

I can only guess that someone has an agenda and is bent on promoting 33 year old sales propaganda. It is a vain hope of mine that wikipedia will someday be a source of factual historical automotive information.

Sadowski (talk) 03:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:SOFIXIT (No need in this case, I already did). No need for a explanation like this unless someone challenges the removal, see WP:BRD.  There also is no reason to accuse anyone of a ridiculous agenda.  --Leivick (talk) 01:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Jargon
What does "trim level" in the first lead sentence mean? What does "marque" mean? Is it possible to give some context and say the it was an "automobile" in the first sentence? --Bejnar (talk) 18:19, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Designer
Yours truly: John Franklin Mason created the designs and first drew the images used on the downsized full size rear wheel drive Cadillac's developed produced and sold by General Motors for the 1977 to 1990 model years, Cadillac Eldorado for the 1979 to 1985 model years and Seville for the 1980 to 1985 model years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Franklin Mason (talk • contribs) 10:02, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

General Motors and Bill Mitchell plagiarized the designs from drawings submitted by yours truly in an art portfolio to the personage of Dr. David H. Harry at General Motors Institute in Flint Michigan between 1972 and 1975. Before his death Dr. Harry acknowledged in a phone call from his sick bed that General Motors used my designs and Dr. Harry was surprised to hear General Motors had not paid me.

I conceived and first drew the images at issue while I was incarcerated in various county jails and state penal institutions. Prison staff and inmates at Jackson and Marquette Michigan Penitentiaries among the first to witness and critique those designs at issue. Any original hand drawing has my fingerprints on it from the pencil and ink. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Franklin Mason (talk • contribs) 05:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Anyone having knowledge of location of any original drawings of designs images used on "Project 77" programs please contact me: John Franklin Mason — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Franklin Mason (talk • contribs) 10:12, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

No you didn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.217.127 (talk) 00:16, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Note the tires and wheels @ 00.59 into this video: http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Jun/0613_design.html The image depicted in the video is an altered reproduction of one of my original drawings I drew while incarcerated. I used two pencils and a piece of cardboard to make a compass to draw the tires with whitewalls and wheels (not shown). I drew small half circle "threads" freehand where the rubber meets the road inside the tire circumference, plus whitewalls and wire wheels on most of my renderings (not all) of the designs used on Cadillac's, Buicks, Oldsmobile's and Chevrolet's/Pontiac's. The markings in the center of the wheels were made by 1) crosses marking the center for my crude compass 2)a small freehand drawn circle and 3) lines depicting wire spokes converging on the circle. The drawings were all sketched in pencil and most (not all) traced in pen (pens were not always available). — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Franklin Mason (talk • contribs) 06:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Cadillac de Ville series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051125041219/http://www.edmunds.com:80/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=44088/pageNumber=3 to http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=44088/pageNumber=3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

The name


I haven't been able to find the spelling currently used in this article right now in any of these images of the writing on the actual cars. Eddaido (talk) 04:09, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Ostrich leather interior
Regular car explains at the 7th minute of its video on Youtube about the 1969 Coupe that the leather is from ostrich because it's stronger (but slipper too). Fafnir (talk) 03:58, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1993-Caddy-Deville-Dwight-1.jpg

Servicing power steering pulley
I need some help with a 2003 Cadillac DeVille power steering pulley replacement,my pulleys shredded and the belts damaged,I have no idea how this happened so I'm at a Loss 2600:100A:B106:41F3:D83F:A977:B5A1:D1BF (talk) 09:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOTFORUM. The talk page is for discussing the content of the Wikipedia page itself. I'd suggest searching for a Cadillac or DeVille-specific forum, but if you can't find anyplace else with information, you could at least try asking at Reference desk. --Vossanova o&lt; 18:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)