Vellum Venom Vignette: The Emperor Has No Clothes

by Sajeev Mehta

Published: July 16th, 2013

vellum venom vignette the emperor has no clothes

Like Dizzy Gillespie’s cheeks playing trumpet vs. at rest, cars are bigger in every direction compared to their predecessors. Perhaps you’ve seen a 1980s Honda Accord in front of the latest platform. Or perhaps an old/new Chevy Silverado. But what about a copiously large Cadillac, like the one made (somewhat) famous in a Moby music video?

What happens when you put that machine, an unrivaled King of The 1970s, against a pair of modern land barges? You already know, but go ahead and click to see anyway.

Our good friend with the former LeMons Station Wagon, Brian Pollock, snapped this 1969-1970 Cadillac Sedan DeVille (not a Fleetwood, considering the wheelbase?) sandwiched between a late-model Ford F-150 and Acura MDX. I assure you that neither Brian nor myself have the photochopping skills to shrink the Caddy: this actually happened.

Unfortunately there wasn’t a modern-day family sedan in the mix, too: that’d show the generational changes far better than a CUV and a truck. But note how the Caddy’s fenders works proportionally well with its 15″ (14″?) wheels, and how the Acura and Ford do the same with 17″ rolling stock. The Caddy looks even smaller because of a lower ride height, lower belt line and massive overhangs at both axles. The extra overhang means the Caddy’s nose and butt tapers more elegantly, giving a (dare I say it) sleeker appearance compared to the other two.

Losing overhang isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it just kills the ability to shape and taper a form. Everything must have a flat nose and a (modern-day family sedan) buffalo butt! Can you imagine if this Caddy had the bullet-like face of today’s ATS, but with the same elongated snout? It would be a seriously wind cheating land barge, slicing the air with less frontal area than modern machines. I suggest that it’d be a modest aerodynamic victory, even if European regulations have (probably) killed this design language forever. Or at least for a long time.

So what’s the key takeaway here? ~~We need more cars proportioned after tennis courts.~~ What was big before isn’t so big these days.

Thanks for reading, have a lovely week.

#1969 #1970 #Cadillac #Cuv #DeVille #Modern #Overhang #Proportioning #Sedan #Styling #SUV #Truck

Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments

Join the conversation

12 of 29 comments

Siorus on Jul 16, 2013

Sorry Sajeev, I think you've got a little bit of a logical fallacy going on in this article, although perhaps you're looking at it differently than I am. Cars have indeed gotten smaller. Family sedans and luxury cars, at least. The absolute upper limit is still about the same-Lorenzo already mentioned that the Cadillac in the picture is 225" long; that puts it in between a Yukon XL/Escalade ESV/Suburban and an Excursion-but compared to a modern luxury car like the S, the A8 or the 7, the Cadillac is considerably larger. Similarly, the family sedans of the '60s like the Buick LeSabre are much longer than their modern equivalents-a 2013 Camry is 189" long, a 1960 LeSabre (which stickered, inflation-adjusted, for about $20-25k, so it's the same basic market segment) is 218". The angle and perspective of the picture that Mr. Pollock sent you makes it difficult, if not impossible, to judge the relative sizes of the cars in the photograph; I'll see if I can get a picture of my '69 Sedan DeVille next to either a Yukon XL or a W221 S65. That'll give you a better idea of the relative size of the car.

Like Reply
- See 7 previous
- Kenzter on Jul 16, 2013
  
  Another '69 SDV owner on TTAC? I think these are gaining in popularity. Don't know if you follow Curbside Classics, but here is the story of mine... http://www.curbsideclassic.com/my-curbside-classic/my-new-curbside-classic-1969-cadillac-sedan-deville-38¢-per-pound/
  
  Like
- Lorenzo on Jul 16, 2013
  
  But Sajeev is right, if you consider the majority of cars on America's roads today - the Japanese makers. I had a 1983 Accord hatchback, with a peppy 75 HP engine. That'll barely move a 2013 Accord out of its shadow. Likewise, my sister had a 1993 Sentra, and I had a much bigger compact 1995 Altima. Today the Sentra is the same size as the '95 Altima, while the 2013 Altima is much bigger, the same size as the '95 Maxima (and 2013 Maxima!). It's only when you compare older American makes with their modern counterparts that you see considerable shrinkage from the late '60s, and as afflo pointed out, that period was an anomaly. Compare older Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans to their current models and they've gotten huge.
  
  Like
- Sajeev Mehta on Jul 16, 2013
  
  While you have good points to my flawed posting, why are you only including lengths? Cars are growing in width/height/wheelbase/interior dimensions, and while they might not dwarf the Caddy like this picture, these modern machines are larger than most (all?) of their nameplate's previous designs in the 1990s-1980s. And yes, send over that photo of your Caddy next to an SUV when you can. Much appreciated.
  
  Like
- Lorenzo on Jul 16, 2013
  
  @Sajeev Mehta Well, that's another problem with American makes. Remember the downsized 1980s Cadillacs? After the smog rules of the '70s strangled the big V8s of the '60s, Detroit downsized a bit too far. They've grown their cars since, as drive train technology advanced, turning our cars from wrenchable machines into computers.
  
  Like
- Siorus on Jul 16, 2013
  
  @Sajeev Mehta Oh, I only posted the lengths simply because I knew most of them off the top of my head and I didn't really want to run around wikipedia and manufacturer's websites and stuff looking up wheelbases, widths, etc. for a casual comparison. :) Both you and Lorenzo are absolutely correct about the '80s and '90s cars vs. now. That's a discussion that I have with one of my BMW fanatic friends from time to time. The F30 3 series is a marginally bigger car than the E28 5 series was (182in long, 67in wide, 55.7in tall for the 5 vs. 182.0in long, 71.3in wide, 56.3in tall for the 3 [I even went to wikipedia and looked those up! :P]), and the SWB E32 7 series is juuuuust slightly smaller than the F10 5 series. This lineup of the various E-Classes that was posted on Jalopnik I-don't-remember-when is pretty impressive, too: http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/12/2010/06/seven_generations_e-clas.jpg So yeah, I suppose it depends on how you look at it. The longest post-war production car sold in the US (and next on my list of cars to buy, specifically for that reason) is the '73 Imperial, which is something like 9" longer than an Excursion and a full foot longer than the Cadillac. Nothing anyone makes now really measures up (pardon the pun) to the size of that thing. But compared to what they were in the '80s (or even earlier), cars like the Camry, the Accord, the E class and the 5 series have become absolutely enormous.
  
  Like
- Siorus on Jul 16, 2013
  
  @kenzter i follow CC sporadically, but I hadn't seen that post. Clean car. I had a '70 CDV for about 9 hours a few years ago; bought it in LA, was told the brakes had been completely gone through, started driving back to the bay area, lost the brakes at the top of the grapevine. I was not pleased. Took the car back, got my check back, called it done. I've thought about buying another one on and off since then, but never got around to it. I decided some time ago that I like the SDV more than the coupe, and that I prefer the '69 to the '70 (the little medallions on the front fenders on the '70s bug me. A lot.), and I've been idly looking through ebay and stuff when I remember to for the past couple of years. I happened to find a '69 sedan back in Illinois a few months ago that looked like it was in decent shape, had an indicated 40k on it that seemed to be accurate based on the condition of the interior, and-most importantly-was painted that metallic green color they had in '69 and didn't have a vinyl roof. I know better than to buy a car out of the midwest, but I like that color and I detest vinyl roofs, so I figured I'd risk it. I'd rather have a rusty (within reason) car that was optioned the way I want from the factory than a car that's clean but the wrong color. It's not as clean as a CA or AZ car of its age would be, but the rust that I can find under the car will come off with a wire brush, and the paint bubbling is pretty minimal and localized. And judging by how the car drives relative to other GM cars of the same era that I've owned and driven, I suspect that 40k number is, in fact, correct. I'm pretty happy with it.
  
  Like
- Occam on Jul 16, 2013
  
  @Lorenzo I would guess that the ages of the majority of posters' ages here range mainly from 30's to 50's. The "huge sedan/wagon" phase of the 1970's would be fairly formative memories. For all the complaining, cars have never been better. We're in a golden age of horsepower, and even the worst handling crapcans are better drivers cars than many "performance cars" of yesteryear. And that caddy - at least the modern SUV's and crossovers DO something with their mass - an enclosed trunk is the worst possible design on a car. Wagons though - I have a weird thing for old wagons. I think it's a mix of my parents Buick station wagon and the hearse from The Ghostbusters. The 190-200 inch car seems to be a sweet spot that the industry hits again and again. Big enough to hold a family of 4, small enough to fit in the garage or a cramped parking space.
  
  Like
- SoCalMikester on Jul 17, 2013
  
  @Lorenzo theyre still wrenchable, and OBD2 scanners are cheap and more helpful that random guessing. pull the codes, get to googling. if you have a particular problem with a particular mak/model of car, google, web forums and youtube are always there to help point you in the right direction. what im saying is if YOU have a particular problem, thousands of others have probably had the same problem too, and posted about it... and the fix.
  
  Like
Maintainer on Jul 16, 2013

If you want a Land Barge with the nose like an XTS check out the 1975/76 Laguna. It's not quite as large as the Cad but it's close.

Like Reply
- See 1 previous
- Firestorm 500 on Jul 17, 2013
  
  I had a 1974 Chevelle Laguna Type S-3 that I bought new. With a 454. It was not a land barge. The Colonnade cars back then were considered a mid-size car. The Caprices, LTDs, and Cadillac/98 Regencys were much bigger.
  
  Like
- Corey Lewis on Jul 17, 2013
  
  @Firestorm 500 I love that version of the 98. I believe it was around that time the 98 was longer than the Deville?
  
  Like

Recent Comments

GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
Wjtinfwb Not proud of what Stellantis is rolling out?
Wjtinfwb Absolutely. But not incredibly high-tech, AWD, mega performance sedans with amazing styling and outrageous price tags. GM needs a new Impala and LeSabre. 6 passenger, comfortable, conservative, dead nuts reliable and inexpensive enough for a family guy making 70k a year or less to be able to afford. Ford should bring back the Fusion, modernized, maybe a bit bigger and give us that Hybrid option again. An updated Taurus, harkening back to the Gen 1 and updated version that easily hold 6, offer a huge trunk, elevated handling and ride and modest power that offers great fuel economy. Like the GM have a version that a working mom can afford. The last decade car makers have focused on building cars that American's want, but eliminated what they need. When a Ford Escape of Chevy Blazer can be optioned up to 50k, you've lost the plot.