Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: 1967 Coupe de Ville help
« Last post by G Pennington on Today at 03:58:49 AM »
My '41 Convertible had a factory-style RH mirror when I bought it.  Looks nice, but useless.  I modified it by installing convex glass ... no more blind spots!
And there is no "glancing back" on this car.  Can't see a thing because of the bling quarters and small rear window.
2
On those cars, only the officially exported ones had the VIN stamped at one dome for the suspension. If that car was later imported, you have to let stamp the VIN.
3
Technical / Authenticity / Re: anti freeze flush/thermostat
« Last post by Cape Cod Fleetwood on Today at 02:20:32 AM »
Good grief... just came from the Preston website, the basic green does not have the inhibitors the others have and the 1970 shop manual demands. So, which Preston to get? I know not Dex-Cool. What say you guys?

https://prestone.com/products

Laurie?
4
Technical / Authenticity / Re: anti freeze flush/thermostat
« Last post by Cape Cod Fleetwood on Today at 02:00:52 AM »
Hey guys, thanks for all the follow ups.
As for not removing the block plugs, just a "pucker factor" thing. The risk/reward just not great enough.
The car has been driving, quite a bit, before I got it. And judging by the new hoses and bright green anti freeze, this is again probably a waste of time and money.. but I have no mntx records for the car and need a place to start.

Mike when you're "flushing" do you have the engine running, with a hose putting water into the radiator at the filler and draining out the bottom of the radiator? Or did I miss understand?

I'd buy the pure Preston and mix it myself.

You guys rock! \m/
Laurie!
5
Restoration Corner / Re: 1967 DeVille Convertible - We call it HULK
« Last post by DaddyDeVille on Today at 12:59:40 AM »
Heater core is back in and its now time to pull the vacuum switch under the dash.  The Defrost and Heat hold vacuum, but in the off position; it fails to hold vacuum.  I can only assume this is due to the switch not working correctly.  While I have the dash apart, I pulled the receiver out as well.  I'm sending it to BillTheRadioGuy.com to have it updated with a current stereo module, aux in, Bluetooth, ect.  I want the classic looks, but I also want the modern features and sound.

Below is a picture of the receiver freshly pulled.  I'll post another when i get it back.  Should look the same but cleaner  :)

Also time to clean out the ashtray.....ewww (i'm not a smoker)

6
Restoration Corner / Re: 1969 DeVille Convertible Project
« Last post by DaddyDeVille on Today at 12:47:35 AM »
Welcome Sturner,

What did you pay for it if you don't mind me asking?  I bought my 67 this last fall and though it is further along than yours; I'm sure your going to love it.  Mine isn't a concourse or restore job; but its on its way to being totally road worthy.  I like your comment about being "road worthy and something that you will enjoy driving.  The little bit I can recommend (depending on the direction you want to go) is EFI.  It was expensive, but fairly easy to install and makes the car cold start and drive wonderfully every time.

I really look forward to making this car road worthy and something that I will enjoy driving.
7
General Discussion / Re: 1973 De Ville Convertible
« Last post by 73 DropTop on Yesterday at 11:44:53 PM »
Gorgeous 70 DropTop!!!
8
General Discussion / Re: 1973 De Ville Convertible
« Last post by 76eldo on Yesterday at 11:20:12 PM »
Sorry,

I like the clean look better.  I know the hood ornament doesn't belong but it was already there when I bought the car.  Can't take it off and fill the hole because this is an original paint car.

It had pinstripes, I buffed them off.  It also had bumper guards, I took them off.  Cadillac got it right in 1970.  Nothing else is needed in my opinion.

Brian
9
General Discussion / Re: 1955 Kelsey Hayes Sabre wheels question
« Last post by lexi on Yesterday at 11:10:57 PM »
Hope the following answers some questions, but it also raised some new ones:

Cadillac Data Books for 1955 & 1956 state that tubeless tires were issued, with I believe 1955 being the introductory year for Sabres as well as first year for tubeless tires as standard issue for Cadillac. No differentiation noted for Sabre or regular steel rims, but the Mid-Century Cadillac Forum article on Sabres notes that ’55 Sabres did require an inner tube. The article also explained that '55 & '56 Sabres were manufactured differently. The '55 "split rim" design incorporated 2 half rims riveted together; half aluminum-half steel. The '56 'clad' design used a single steel rim so it was stronger, while it still had the aluminum turbine portion riveted to the steel, but using fewer rivets. So in theory there is less chance of air leaking by way of failing rivets, (because there are less of them),… as well as one less seam to worry about as the rim was one piece steel, (as Mike accurately noted).
 
My observations of actual ‘56 Sabres agree with the above noted, though I am not overly familiar with the ’55 Sabres. That said, I saw a set of rims that were identified as 1955 chrome Sabres, bearing Kelsey Hayes hub #38612. I believe this is a genuine 1955 KH number. What seemed odd is that they appeared to have the same number of rivets as the '56s, (at the time I did not count them). There is a photograph posted on the MCF site which details a 1955 Sabre rim compared to the 1956 unit. The difference in the number of rivets used is quite apparent in their comparison photos. I believe the '56 rim has 12 rivets, not sure about the '55 but in the photo you can see 10 or 11 on ONE SIDE. The apparent "55" I saw which I took a photo of, you can see 5 or 6 on ONE SIDE. More or less consistent with the '56 rim.

Based on what I saw, however, it appears that there were 2 Sabre rims made in 1955. If so, perhaps there was a change early in the model year to incorporate more rivets to solve air leaks that were noted early in production? Perhaps that is why the Data Book doesn’t mention inner tubes for 1955 Sabres as that problem crept up after publication? Just a guess. I don’t have all of the Cadillac Serviceman bulletins for model year 1955, so perhaps there was something in there on this? I stand to be corrected.

If the 1955 'Split rim' design found on the Mid-Century Forum is accurate, and the split rim type I saw did bear a genuine 1955 number, then there appears to be 2 types of '55 Sabres. Not sure which one is the more prevalent. Period Master Parts Lists I searched seem to indicate that there was only one part number for chrome Sabres, (which they called Turbines), in 1955. If there were 2 types made in 1955, that is contrary to what I thought I knew about these rims. Also ran into some apparent Series 75 Sabre oddities but will leave that for now… Clay/Lexi

Attachments: Side view of 55 Sabre, side view of 56 Sabre, side view of "questioned" 55 Sabre & of Hub #
P.S. Never had a problem with rivets leaking on my '56 set.
10
General Discussion / Re: 1967 Coupe de Ville help
« Last post by cadillacmike68 on Yesterday at 10:13:54 PM »
Ralph,

I have the original RH mirror on my 1968 and it is marginally useful at best. All of the flat glass mirrors  of this design are marginal at best. They are too close in to the car body.

The RH mirror on my 1996 Fleetwood on the other hand gives a full view, but it sticks out completely from the side of the car.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10