Mid '60s? 1970? 1968? Earlier?
In essence when they brought out the Catera.
Greg Surfas
Tough question! I'd say 1980.....They did well in meeting the 1977 downsizing, and the introduction of the 1979 replacement Eldorado - a big sales hit. But 1980 didn't add much new other than sheetmetal (that went another 12 years)..then the awkwardly timed Seville replacement (1980).....and then the 8-6-4 nightmare engine...then the Cimmaron (1982).....then the 4100 nightmare engine V2 (1982)....etc etc.
Why not earlier? I'd say there was a "stumble" in the early 70's but they bounced back -- and huge sales years said that the public was loving them. Take for instance the 1976 Eldorado convertible. Where else could you find an electronic fuel injected V8 in a car with Hydro-Boost 4 wheel disc brakes, with optional Air Bags, Maintenance-free battery, Weather band radio, Illuminated entry systems, Lighted vanity mirror, Automatic door locks, Automatic ride level control, 50/50 seats with recliners, Fuel economy lamp indicators, space saver spare tire, Trackmaster anti-lock brake system, Guidematic and Twilight Sentinel systems, power assist trunk...and a mirror with an outdoor thermometer? Hey, that was all progressive high-tech stuff for the day...things that a "Standard of the World" company would do.
That's my 2 cents!
Hard to say, quality slipped around 67-68 lots of plastic instead of metal and chrome. It Got worse from 71-73, in 74 it got a little better again until 80 when Cadillacs of yore which were grand and marvelous, went away for good.
Performance wise, the 64-71 were the best, even the low power of the 500 CI engine in the mid 70’s was still powerful and very reliable.
Styling is very subjective and I don’t want to offend anyone, but I’ll say the last grandiose cool looking Cadillacs that stood out and actually had a sense of presence is probably 76 model or the 79’s as I really loved the interiors of the downsized Caddies.
Thickly padded soft door panels with chrome trim instead of the cheap injection molded plastic armrests that cracked easily of the early 70’s Cads is what impresses me about them.
You take some good with the bad the newer the Cadillac, but to have the best of both worlds in terms of size, cool factor, importantance, styling, comfort and great quality if you stick to Cadillacs from about the late 40’s through 65-66 MY.
The standard of the world lost it’s charm when Cadillac gave up on being innovative and decided to cost cut materials heavily during the early 70’s.
You can say this with just about every automaker back then. The 70’s is when quality declined mightily for American cars.
I think he was referring to their ad tag line.
They changed "Standard of the world" to "An American Standard for the world" in 1981.
The 1982 slogan was "Best of all it's a Cadillac" but the ad text still mentioned the "American Standard of the world" phrase. That is the last I saw of it mentioned in my archives.
The following is my opinion:
Personally, and I'm a girl, the *ENTIRE* American auto industry died in 1972 and took all the breeds with them. Alleged emissions mandates took over and to this day destroyed one of the things that made America great, our auto industry. Getting unicorn farts to come out of our tailpipes wasn't enough, its never enough when the government gets involved, manufactures were mandated to get 100mpg. Now our cars are made out of recycled soda cans and plastic, are measured in pounds instead of tons, have more computers than the Space Shuttle which simply makes the cars more expensive to own (a backdoor 'car ban' in my mind), 3 billion tax dollars thrown away on 'cash for clunkers' which was another back door tax on the poor, 80 billon thrown away to prop up manufacturers for creating cars no body wanted because they were JUNK, simply to appease a union voting block. I would have let GM and Chrysler fail. If you run a business, either GM or a flower shop, you need to know your customer and cater to them, otherwise you are starving. Hard to learn a lesson when you're rewarded for failure. Ask any one who owns a 'slade with their aluminum foil tranny's if the bail out resulted in a higher quality product.
So, to answer the question, Cadillac stopped being the "Standard of the World" in 1971 - again in my humble opinion. You can put all the wowie, wiz-bang tech you want in a car and all the luxury items as well. The bottom line is that car has to start in the morning and be reliable transportation for YEARS, mntx schedules being well followed is implied. When was the last time 'anyone' made a reliable car.... at any standard....
Laurie?
Quote from: D.Smith on February 07, 2018, 11:32:13 PM
I think he was referring to their ad tag line.
snip...
No, actually was referring to when Cadillac (the manufacturer) was no longer the car it once was.
I suppose you could look at sales and when other manufacturers surpassed Cadillac sales.
Depends on the definition of "Standard of the World"...
Anybody want to have a go at that one? ::)
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on February 08, 2018, 09:10:20 AM
Depends on the definition of "Standard of the World"...
Anybody want to have a go at that one? ::)
Didn't Cadillac start calling themselves the standard, when they became the first manufacturer to "standardize" parts?
Catera, Cimmaron, diesel, and the final and fatal blow --- the HT 4100. IMO.
Quote from: e.mason on February 08, 2018, 09:16:08 AM
Didn't Cadillac start calling themselves the standard, when they became the first manufacturer to "standardize" parts?
Yes, standardization of parts [interchangeability] was the origin of the "Standard" tagline, but I suspect the OP's question is a more loaded one.
I don't think they ever truly were but if I had to pick a year it would be around 1914. One of origins of the "Standard of the World" slogan for Cadillac was related to their Dewar Award Trophy which I believe they last won for a 1914 model. Otherwise, it's largely just been an advertising/marketing slogan not unlike "What a Luxury Car Should Be", "The Ultimate Driving Machine", "The Best or Nothing", etc.
More recently Cadillac referred to itself as "The New Standard of the World"........again, just marketing!
Quote from: Eldorado James on February 07, 2018, 10:49:38 PM
Tough question! I'd say 1980.....They did well in meeting the 1977 downsizing, and the introduction of the 1979 replacement Eldorado - a big sales hit. But 1980 didn't add much new other than sheetmetal (that went another 12 years)..then the awkwardly timed Seville replacement (1980).....and then the 8-6-4 nightmare engine...then the Cimmaron (1982).....then the 4100 nightmare engine V2 (1982)....etc etc.
My vote is with James -- 1980 was the year they began to slip. My definition of "Standard of the World" would be something like this: the car that consumers most aspired to own, whether of not they could afford it; and the car that other manufactures tried to emulate. I think that Cadillac was the standard through 1979, and by 1982 it was not the Standard.
True, the 1977-79 models had more plastic and perhaps less "individualized distinction" than models though the mi-60s. But they were superb cars, sold in spaces, and were emulated by others. So (subjectively) for me, the Standard of the World" extended at least through 1979, but not much farther.
John Emersn
1952 Cadillac Sedan 6219X
Quote from: jdemerson on February 08, 2018, 01:20:20 PM
True, the 1977-79 models had more plastic and perhaps less "individualized distinction" than models though the mi-60s. But they were superb cars, sold in spaces, and were emulated by others. So (subjectively) for me, the Standard of the World" extended at least through 1979, but not much farther.
I was and still am a fan of the 1977-79 models but what about them was really emulated by others?
I would have to agree with John Emerson. It ended in 1979. I don't know about sales numbers, but I remember out here in the Southwest, the Mercedes sedans started getting popular around 1980. The fit and finish on the exteriors and the leather interiors just looked so much better in those cars. And they had a reputation for quality. And that is when Cadillac started to become less relevant.
Quote from: Big Apple Caddy on February 08, 2018, 02:20:05 PM
I was and still am a fan of the 1977-79 models but what about them was really emulated by others?
Mr. Langley, you raise a good question about "emulation" of Cadillac (my word, originally), and I likely cannot respond fully to it. I was thinking more of the domestic makes, Lincoln and Imperial, and not the European makes which did go in a different direction.
I do believe that the 1980 Lincoln Continental and Mark VI, downsized by 14 inches and nearly 1000 pounds, were responding to Cadillac's lead. Same for 1982 Continental. In 1980 they had fuel injection and floating cushion velour seats, perhaps inspired by Cadillac's lead.
Imperial was a second-rate player by this era, but the 1981 - 1983 Imperial two-door resembled, at least a little, the 1979 Eldorado and 1980 Seville. In style, I'm looking at the classic grill and the bustle-back. Of course Imperial wasn't close to Cadillac then, and it died in '83.
Perhaps my saying that others emulated 1979 Cadillacs was somewhat a stretch, but at least for the domestics it appears that way to me, at least to an extent.
John Emerson
1952 Cadillac Sedan 6219X
Despite a reduction in displacement and a modest drop in horsepower, 1980 Cadillac was overall every bit as good of a car as it had been in 1979.
Sales figures were off about about a third in the 1980 model year is no reflection on the car, but rather a number of economic factors, not least of which being record gas prices. Not helpful to the sales of cars with a sterling reputation for thirst.
Still haven't heard any objective criteria for "Standard of the World". The case can be made for any number of model years that may be pointed to in which Cadillac lost "something", depending on what is important to whom.
@Eric - I'd say the Standard of the World criteria for a company would entail leading the way with technology (8-6-4 and the 4100 engines all but killed that idea in the 80's)...and lead the way in design (the 1977 Fleetwood were basically the same til 1992 (the Deville til 1984), the Seville was a (bold) cut against the grain of trends, the Cimarron -- enough said, and the 1985 downsized "full sized" cars were bland as hell. Cadillac lost it's Standard Swag right after introducing the well made, well designed 1979 Eldorado. The next car that had any impact was the 1992 Seville.....13 years later. (Sorry, Allante). Nobody wanted to follow Cadillac during that period. IF they did....woe was them! LOL.....as John pointed out.... The Imperial.
It could be when the next Dewar Trophy was presented, as that organisation could legally carry the words.
And the Trophy wasn't presented to Cadillac, but the organisation, or person submitting the vehicles or parts to the judges to test.
There has been 39 winners since 1913
1908
The Anglo-American Motor Company Limited â€" Standardisation test of three 10hp Cadillac cars
1913
F.S. Bennett Limited â€" 1914 model 32.2hp Cadillac car.
Bruce. >:D
Not sure when it started but notice they lost the "crown" on top of their emblem!!!! It is telling. 1980s sounds right though as that's when Lincoln captured the limousine market from Cadillac with their "stretch-able" town cars chassis.
Quote from: Bentley on February 08, 2018, 03:33:42 PM
I would have to agree with John Emerson. It ended in 1979. I don't know about sales numbers, but I remember out here in the Southwest, the Mercedes sedans started getting popular around 1980. The fit and finish on the exteriors and the leather interiors just looked so much better in those cars. And they had a reputation for quality. And that is when Cadillac started to become less relevant.
I think Cadillac started feeling the heat from luxury imports like Mercedes-Benz in the 1970s, a reason for the introduction of the "internationally sized" Seville in 1975. Lincoln was also starting to gain a lot of traction in the marketplace, more than tripling sales in the U.S. between 1970 and 1978 (1979 was a down year).
Mercedes wouldn't actually beat Cadillac in sales in the U.S. until the late 1990s but for the last few years Mercedes has been selling more vehicles annually in the U.S. than Cadillac was every able to in its entire history. Reasons for this include a strong crossover/SUV portfolio plus lower and lower pricing. In the 1980s, the "cheap" Mercedes (190) started at over $55K inflation adjusted while today Mercedes has several model lines starting less than that including the CLA which has a base price under $33K!
Quote from: jdemerson on February 08, 2018, 04:32:07 PM
I do believe that the 1980 Lincoln Continental and Mark VI, downsized by 14 inches and nearly 1000 pounds, were responding to Cadillac's lead. Same for 1982 Continental. In 1980 they had fuel injection and floating cushion velour seats, perhaps inspired by Cadillac's lead.
Imperial was a second-rate player by this era, but the 1981 - 1983 Imperial two-door resembled, at least a little, the 1979 Eldorado and 1980 Seville. In style, I'm looking at the classic grill and the bustle-back. Of course Imperial wasn't close to Cadillac then, and it died in '83.
I would say downsizing was more of an industry driven than Cadillac driven situation. Cadillac's 1977 downsizing simply followed what GM was doing with all of their various full size models across the board.
I certainly agree that Lincoln and Imperial “emulated†the bustle-back style of the 1980 Seville with their models.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on February 08, 2018, 05:06:29 PM
Still haven't heard any objective criteria for "Standard of the World". The case can be made for any number of model years that may be pointed to in which Cadillac lost "something", depending on what is important to whom.
Yep. Much like trying to pick the "best" year(s) for Cadillac, picking when Cadillac lost its touch can end up being very subjective. There are going to be differing opinions.
The Lincoln Town Car really started to make headwinds staring in the 80’s and early 90’s when the 5.0 and 4.6 engines came out. These cars were very reliable and mostly trouble free compared to the 80’s Caddy/Olds Diesel engine and the terrible V8-6-4.
I guess another reason why I love the 77-79 Cads is because of movies like Goodfellas and Donnie Brasco.
They were official cars of the mob ( including the Town Car). I enjoy being different, having cars hardly anybody owns anymore , and our old Caddies is a reflection of our uniqueness in a world where the majority of car guys would rather own classic muscle cars and hot rods. Those are not for me, no thanks.
Caddies are made to cruise and looking cool. 8)
From the replies. It appears as though the question could have been subtitled "What year did Cadillac stop being the luxury car leader"?
Quote from: D.Smith on February 07, 2018, 11:32:13 PM
I think he was referring to their ad tag line.
They changed "Standard of the world" to "An American Standard for the world" in 1981.
The 1982 slogan was "Best of all it's a Cadillac" but the ad text still mentioned the "American Standard of the world" phrase. That is the last I saw of it mentioned in my archives.
That would also be around the time of the Cimarron and the 4100 engine...
That is a good question, and I guess we agree they are not now.
Looking at the Cadillacs we all admire and like to collect is maybe a good perspective. For me the last year of standard of the world dominance was 1979. The 1930's (V-12 and V-16's established it) thru early 1970's (500 engine) demonstrated that Cadillac was by far the standard of the world.
My friends parents bought a 1979 Lincoln and they hated it and let us teenagers drive it all the time - they could have cared less if we wrecked it, but we did not. So clearly the Caddy was superior in 1979. Then on a limited basis the Broughams from the late 1980's (with 5.7) through 1996 Fleetwood was one model to envy.
Where is that darn full size RWD V-8 powered large sedan by Cadillac? Where is the Cadillac flagship that is not a 4 door sedan promised? The automotive industry has peaked and begun a slight inevitable decline, hope it does not impact Cadillac too badly in near future.
Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on February 08, 2018, 09:10:20 AM
Depends on the definition of "Standard of the World"...
Anybody want to have a go at that one? ::)
That is a good question, I don't know. Saying you are the standard of the world isn't saying you are the best in the world, correct?
Was a V16 Cadillac a "better" car than a supercharged Duesenberg or Marmon V16?
Though others will disagree, and with the knowledge to prove me wrong. I still say Cadillac was and still is the "Standard of the World". One mans opinion.
Tim
having driven Cadillacs from the 50’s to the 2000’s, I would say that in terms of quality, everything deminished over time, not just Cadillacs, that being said, for me I favor full size Cadillacs from 1996-1986, and 1981 to 1930’s. They call have their ups and downs, obviously the diesel, the 8-6-4, the 4100, and even the northstar have hurt cadillac reputation, but I feel downsizing and making economy cars was a big mistake. I understand that it had to be done, but looking back at what cadillacs still have value, I can’t see a Cimarron ever gaining a following like a 92 Brougham. Yes late 80’s and early 90’s cadillac have a lot of plastic and are a bit tacky, but look at any car from that era and you’ll see the same quality
Quote from: Tonyv_73 on February 10, 2018, 12:45:49 PM
having driven Cadillacs from the 50’s to the 2000’s, I would say that in terms of quality, everything deminished over time, not just Cadillacs, that being said, for me I favor full size Cadillacs from 1996-1986, and 1981 to 1930’s. They call have their ups and downs, obviously the diesel, the 8-6-4, the 4100, and even the northstar have hurt cadillac reputation, but I feel downsizing and making economy cars was a big mistake. I understand that it had to be done, but looking back at what cadillacs still have value, I can’t see a Cimarron ever gaining a following like a 92 Brougham. Yes late 80’s and early 90’s cadillac have a lot of plastic and are a bit tacky, but look at any car from that era and you’ll see the same quality
Lets us all not lose site of the fact. That Cadillac is nothing more then a product from GM to produce a product, to make a profit. They are not in the business to make collectibles. Danbury Mint does that.
Quote from: e.mason on February 10, 2018, 01:10:55 PM
Lets us all not lose site of the fact. That Cadillac is nothing more then a product from GM to produce a product, to make a profit. They are not in the business to make collectibles. Danbury Mint does that.
This is true, but I think even executives and even people building the cars at assembly plants would even admit that by the 70’s and 80’s Cadillac cost cutted and heavily cheapend it’s product. This goes for all car lines too, but being a luxury car line, you’d think that GM would have made Cadillac a little more insulated from the $$$ axe.
I’ve spoken with a couple of Caddy guys I know which have rode or own many old Caddies over the years, and they both admit Cadillac lost some of their flair and quality in the 70’s. That doesn’t mean they are bad cars, because they’re weren’t, as they still rode fantastic, we’re reliable and were extremely comfortable to drive.
To this day, I still haven’t rode in anything new that rides as nice and smooth as full size RWD Cadillacs from the past (including my 78 Lincoln). It’s crazy because you hear about automakers coming up with new suspension systems and yet there cars still don’t even coming close to riding as smooth and isolated as big old school Caddies.
You really can’t imitate a big car ride in a small or midsize car it’s not physically possible.
The simplicity of a RWD 4 link rear suspension and front SLA suspension with a massive 130 inch wheelbase, a full frame underneath is still unbeatable in riding comfort. The only thing that is somewhat comparable would be a an extended wheelbase S-Class Benz. But why spend over $100,000 on blandish vanilla looking sedan when you can spend only $20,000 for a clean, stylish massive smooth riding Cadillac from the 60’s and 70’s that will not only get more attention on the road but will probably be even more comfortable to drive and ride in than that fancy complex S-Class. That’s if you could make do without all the tech in your life.
Quote from: 64CaddieLacky on February 10, 2018, 09:33:59 PM
This is true, but I think even executives and even people building the cars at assembly plants would even admit that by the 70’s and 80’s Cadillac cost cutted and heavily cheapend it’s product. This goes for all car lines too, but being a luxury car line, you’d think that GM would have made Cadillac a little more insulated from the $$$ axe.
I’ve spoken with a couple of Caddy guys I know which have rode or own many old Caddies over the years, and they both admit Cadillac lost some of their flair and quality in the 70’s. That doesn’t mean they are bad cars, because they’re weren’t, as they still rode fantastic, we’re reliable and were extremely comfortable to drive.
To this day, I still haven’t rode in anything new that rides as nice and smooth as full size RWD Cadillacs from the past (including my 78 Lincoln). It’s crazy because you hear about automakers coming up with new suspension systems and yet there cars still don’t even coming close to riding as smooth and isolated as big old school Caddies.
You really can’t imitate a big car ride in a small or midsize car it’s not physically possible.
The simplicity of a RWD 4 link rear suspension and front SLA suspension with a massive 130 inch wheelbase, a full frame underneath is still unbeatable in riding comfort. The only thing that is somewhat comparable would be a an extended wheelbase S-Class Benz. But why spend over $100,000 on blandish vanilla looking sedan when you can spend only $20,000 for a clean, stylish massive smooth riding Cadillac from the 60’s and 70’s that will not only get more attention on the road but will probably be even more comfortable to drive and ride in than that fancy complex S-Class. That’s if you could make do without all the tech in your life.
Well thought out and written. While I completely agree. Here's the thing. That soft ride of Cadillacs of the past, is no more the standard by which todays rides are measured by. Blame on McPherson struts and rack and pinion steering, which gave us the rougher European ride which became the new standard.
Quote from: e.mason on February 10, 2018, 09:50:53 PM
Well thought out and written. While I completely agree. Here's the thing. That soft ride of Cadillacs of the past, is no more the standard by which todays rides are measured by. Blame on McPherson struts and rack and pinion steering, which gave us the rougher European ride which became the new standard.
Definitely! A firm, stiff ride with low pro tires is fine if you live in a area where your infrastructure is in great shape, and your streets are as smooth as a babies bottom. But for everyone that lives in CA, NYC, most East Coast cities or anyplace with crumbling roads and bridges that are littered with crater sized potholes and eneven rough pavement, then the soft big Caddies are the perfect car to drive to get you home stress free. Americans somehow forgot what a true smooth ride feels like unfortunately. It doesn’t help matters that the American automakers abandoned tuning their cars for that soft smooth ride that made them world renown for.
As our infrastructure keeps getting worse Americans might yearn for a smoother less jolting ride in the future.
Quote from: 64CaddieLacky on February 10, 2018, 11:37:10 PM
As our infrastructure keeps getting worse Americans might yearn for a smoother less jolting ride in the future.
I am far from being an International Traveler, and like Will Rodgers. I only know what I read in the newspapers. I am under the impression that in the past, foreign roadways weren't as smooth as us Yanks are used to. Hence the imports had to have stiffer suspensions. When the imports started to invade our shores in great numbers. The became the new "standard" as to what a car should be. They could do no wrong. Its called the herd mentality. Mostly the German imports gave us the stiff ride, and the feeling that the driver was part of the road. Along the way, those of us that grew up in the 50's and beyond, were quickly mixed with the younger generations, who grew up with an entirely perception of what a car should feel like.
Quote from: e.mason on February 10, 2018, 09:50:53 PM
Well thought out and written. While I completely agree. Here's the thing. That soft ride of Cadillacs of the past, is no more the standard by which todays rides are measured by. Blame on McPherson struts and rack and pinion steering, which gave us the rougher European ride which became the new standard.
I. for one, are not a fan of the rough euro ride, not to mention what even a medium size pothole will do to your tire / wheel.
That is why I love the Eldorado with the 235 x 75 x 15 tyres.
I purchased a car that some snoozer had fitted 20" wheels, in place of the factory 17", and the rice was that hard, that when a tyre went flat, the only way I knew was the noise of the rim grinding on the road surface.
Put on a set of 17" factory rims, and it was still rough, but not as bad.
Bruce. >:D
Quote from: cadillacmike68 on February 13, 2018, 07:10:48 PM
I. for one, are not a fan of the rough euro ride, not to mention what even a medium size pothole will do to your tire / wheel.
Hear, hear Mike, I am on the same page as you. I grew up and still enjoy the "floating on a cloud" ride of the cars of the past. What is somewhat ironic. Trucks that always rode like, well trucks, have been upgraded for smoother rides, while cars have gone the other way. Its all part of the evolution of what cars and what people want in modern cars. Most younger consumers have a different meaning and standard of what defines "luxury".
Quote from: e.mason on February 13, 2018, 08:52:39 PM
.......What is somewhat ironic. Trucks that always rode like, well trucks, have been upgraded for smoother rides, while cars have gone the other way. .......
Trucks ride a lot better when there is a load on the back.
Their suspension is designed for a load.
I know my Ranchero likes at least a quarter of a ton in the back. A Ton, I have to inflate the tyres to 65 Lbs, and the rear is riding on the suspension rubbers.
Bruce. >:D
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) on February 13, 2018, 09:03:14 PM
Trucks ride a lot better when there is a load on the back.
Their suspension is designed for a load.
I know my Ranchero likes at least a quarter of a ton in the back. A Ton, I have to inflate the tyres to 65 Lbs, and the rear is riding on the suspension rubbers.
Bruce. >:D
...but is the Ranchero Squire really a truck?
The Ford Ranchero is a coupe utility that was produced by Ford between 1957 and 1979. Unlike a pickup truck, the Ranchero was adapted from a two-door station wagon platform that integrated the cab and cargo bed into the body. A total of 508,355 units were produced during the model's production run.[1] It was adapted from full-sized, compact, and intermediate automobiles sold by Ford for the North American market.
During the 1970s, the Ranchero name was used in the South African market on a rebadged Australian Ford Falcon utility. These vehicles were sent to South Africa in complete knock down (CKD) form, and assembled at the Port Elizabeth plant.[2] In Argentina, a utility version of the locally produced Ford Falcon was also called Ranchero.
The Ford Ranchero sold well enough to spawn a competitor from General Motors in 1959, the Chevrolet El Camino.
Quote from: e.mason on February 13, 2018, 09:11:40 PM
...but is the Ranchero Squire really a truck?
No, but the registration plates that were on it when I imported it in 1989 read across the top "Texas Truck".
Bruce. >:D
Did it have this tag?
I have driven Cadillacs since the 1950's and believe the 1976 was the last of the best and there has been a steady decline since. They are fine cars now but not the Standard of the World. chet 445
Quote from: Cape Cod Fleetwood on February 08, 2018, 12:30:51 AM
The following is my opinion:
Personally, and I'm a girl, the *ENTIRE* American auto industry died in 1972 and took all the breeds with them. Alleged emissions mandates took over and to this day destroyed one of the things that made America great, our auto industry. Getting unicorn farts to come out of our tailpipes wasn't enough, its never enough when the government gets involved, manufactures were mandated to get 100mpg. Now our cars are made out of recycled soda cans and plastic, are measured in pounds instead of tons, have more computers than the Space Shuttle which simply makes the cars more expensive to own (a backdoor 'car ban' in my mind), 3 billion tax dollars thrown away on 'cash for clunkers' which was another back door tax on the poor, 80 billon thrown away to prop up manufacturers for creating cars no body wanted because they were JUNK, simply to appease a union voting block. I would have let GM and Chrysler fail. If you run a business, either GM or a flower shop, you need to know your customer and cater to them, otherwise you are starving. Hard to learn a lesson when you're rewarded for failure. Ask any one who owns a 'slade with their aluminum foil tranny's if the bail out resulted in a higher quality product.
So, to answer the question, Cadillac stopped being the "Standard of the World" in 1971 - again in my humble opinion. You can put all the wowie, wiz-bang tech you want in a car and all the luxury items as well. The bottom line is that car has to start in the morning and be reliable transportation for YEARS, mntx schedules being well followed is implied. When was the last time 'anyone' made a reliable car.... at any standard....
Laurie?
I Couldn't agree more Laurie