Comparison of 1977-79 Fleetwood Brougham vs. 1991-2 Brougham 5.7 liter?

[jdemerson]

I'd be interested in members' thoughts about this comparison of two models that are 12-14 years apart, yet in terms of the body and structure are the same car.

Forum members have made a convincing case (at least convincing to me) that the RWD Cadillacs of 1977-79 with the 425 c.i. engine are attractive and outstanding models even though 1100 pounds lighter than their predecessors. I especially like the 1979 Fleetwood Brougham.

At a recent car show I looked over a very beautiful award-winning early 90s Brougham. The body is much the same as the 1977-79 and the styling is updated but recognizably the same car.  Very attractive in my view.

What IS different are the drivetrains. The 1991-92 models came with either the Chevy 5.0 or Chevy 5.7, both with throttle body injection. Though not Cadillac-produced engines, these are well-regarded and it's easy to find parts for them and find people who can work on them.

I checked out this web source:
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/
and used its comparison capability. The results are fascinating although perhaps not surprising.

The 5.0 and 5.7 versions are better performers, at least in acceleration, especially the 5.7. The maximum speed is essentially the same. Objective evidence seems to suggest that even the 5.0-equipped Brougham is at least the equal of the earlier models with the 425. The Chevy V8s are 100 pounds lighter. They get 4 to 5 better mpg. I would presume that the newer models ride about the same as the 1977-79s. Some on this message board have said that the 1977-79 models were the best riding Cadillacs ever -- though I'm sure that claim would lead to some arguments.

Of course it's no secret that cars advance over the years. But is this case, we are comparing the same model but with different engines. Yes, I'm aware that there were engines in between 1979 and 1990 that were not nearly as good as the ones I'm discussing!

Question: Why should someone who wants to join the hobby, and have a Cadillac they can actually drive and enjoy, prefer a 1979 Fleetwood 425 to a 1991 Brougham 5.7? Or is the newer model a better choice?

John Emerson

[TJ Hopland]

I had a 78 CDV and a 93 Roadmaster at the same time and would say the performance was pretty similar.    The 4L60 transmission has a very low first gear that really helps the 'off the line' performance.   The 78 has really good torque to do the same thing.   I'm a big fan of EFI especially the TBI's since they are really simple and reliable.  If you were just basing things on overall ride experience alone I would have to give it to the 78 but the early 90's was a nice car too that I often miss. 

In a 78 if everything is original you are going to need to replace / refresh most of it.  Even if there are not a ton of external leaks things like internal seals in the transmission are not going to be working like they should anymore.   If you find one that has been regularly driven recently chances are decent much of that stuff has already been done.   The 92 is 20 some years old now so could also be needing some things but chances are good nothing has been done so there could be more work and expense there.

The repair aspect is a good point to consider.   The driveline in the 91-92 was pretty much just pulled from a truck.   There were a ton of trucks built from 87-95 with that driveline and many of them are still on the road so finding parts and someone to work on them is not a problem.   Parts and people for a 77-78 are still around but getting harder to find.  Lots of stuff from the 90's is still very commonly available and pretty cheap.   Take something like a water pump for the 425, if you live in a big city the store won't likely stock it but there is probably 1 on the shelf at the warehouse, may be rebuilt, may be new (likely imported) you have to take what you can get if you need it.   Now go look for a Chev water pump.   There will probably be a couple options both new and rebuilt in stock at your local store plus more options at the warehouse and then if you go online probably page after page of options.   Same thing with something like spark plugs.   Recently I went looking for my 73 and no one had regular old copper plugs in stock, any brand.  A couple places had funky and or fancy plugs in stock but no 'regular' plugs.   Yesterday went to get plugs for a friends 94 pickup and every level of every brand was in stock, so many it was hard to choose.       

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Personally, the earlier RWD Cadillac models have more of an overall traditional Cadillac "feel" than the later Chevrolet-powered models. Also, the 350 option was part of the Heavy Duty Trailering Package which came with stiffer suspension which I never really took to in Broughams equipped with 350.

Small things like the quality of knobs and controls were plastic rather than metal in the earlier cars, the door latches, door hardware, radios - all cheapened over the years. Plastic lower body cladding from 90-92 looked cool to me back in the day; today I think it clutters up the car plus the stuff really holds a lot of dirt/moisture against the body often developing into rust.

I also never cared much for the 4-speed transmissions used after 1981. The car just can never make up its mind what gear to be in on the highway. The 3 speed THM400 is a far better performer in my view - albeit at some cost to fuel economy. Then again, RWD Cadillacs were never gas misers to begin so it's a tradeoff I just assume to live with if it makes the car that much more enjoyable which in my opinion, it does.

There's a lot more minutia that I'll not bore the forum with. Suffice to say -all other things equal - I would take a 1977 - 1981 Brougham any day over a Chevrolet powered 1990 - 1992.

[Scot Minesinger]

I agree with TJ Hopland.

The condition (including mechanical work completed that you don't have to do such as timing chain in 425)probably is going to be the deciding factor.  Both the 77-79 RWD Cadillacs and the 1990-92 Cadillac Broughams (and earlier years possibly).  The 77-79 Fleetwoods were a fancier SDV, and not a longer chassis as they were from 1965 thru 1976.  Accordingly, a SDV of 1977-79 may be compared in this group too, and so of course would the Coupe DeVille 1977-79, so if had to have a Coupe 1977-79 would be the choice.

Provided you buy a good one, you can't go wrong with either group.  Mechanical parts are easier to get for a 1990's model Caddy w/Chevy Engine, but on cosmetics they may be on equal footing for parts availability.  The 5.7 engine would be the way to go if you can get it in the 1990's Cadillac.  Understand the 3.07 (performance axle) in 1979 is great to have as well.  Not sure I would want fuel injection on a 1977-79 Cadillac as there are fewer who understand them well.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

All RWD 1977 - 1992 (exc RWD Seville) essentially the same car, this side of driveline.

Forgot to mention valve guide seals failure not uncommon on 350 - leading to oil burning -especially at idle/low speeds. Never heard of that malady occurring on a 425 ever.

Never had a timing chain issue on any 425.

472/500/425/368 family one of the best ever made - Cadillac or otherwise.

[V63]

1977-79 would be my choice! 77 i think is the best because the better overall quality,  cadillac was really going out on a limb with this concept. Ive had them all, 77-9.  I actually like the small styling changes to the 79...but they also suffered in most quality. Fast forward to 1987 brougham and it just was blahhh to drive, lost that magic. 1996 same, great AC, great performer...but not the traditional cadillac feel.

EFI 425 is VERY Very nice, hard to find...challange to service at most locations. I've had them too and would seek one out if it were my choice. Not for everyone.

[Scot Minesinger]

Eric,

In the 472 and 500 engines the timing chain sprocket on cam was nylon coated and should be replaced along with the timing chain and crank shaft gear too really at any mileage.  It was my understanding that the use of the nylon coated sprocket on cam continued in the 425 and 368 engines.  I know the Chevy engines of the 1990's did not use a nylon covered sprocket and the LT1 engine used a double timing chain, that was as durable as the remainder of the engine.  Am I wrong about the timing chain on a 425 Cadillac engine?

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Eric,

In the 472 and 500 engines the timing chain sprocket on cam was nylon coated and should be replaced along with the timing chain and crank shaft gear too really at any mileage.  It was my understanding that the use of the nylon coated sprocket on cam continued in the 425 and 368 engines.  I know the Chevy engines of the 1990's did not use a nylon covered sprocket and the LT1 engine used a double timing chain, that was as durable as the remainder of the engine.  Am I wrong about the timing chain on a 425 Cadillac engine?

Scot,

The sprocket is not nylon, but nylon-coated which was done to reduce engine noise. Mechanics I've spoken with over the years are in general agreement that failure as a result of the nylon coating is extremely rare Cadillac engines their collective experience.  I believe other GM engines used coated sprockets as well, including some 350s but you would know better on that score than me.

I'm not sure whether the 425 is an interference engine, but if not, the matter is all the less critical. 

In any case, I respectfully submit that you would have to look long and hard before you find a dissatisfied 425 Cadillac owner and I've known & spoken with MANY. A large number of those were professionally associated with Cadillac in one way or another. After personally having logged a good 200,000 miles behind the wheel of one 425 powered Cadillac or another, I have yet for one to let me down, whether derelict or show queen.

It often takes ownership of many different examples over long periods of time in order to fully appreciate the differences between one car and another which are not always readily apparent otherwise. And as fine of a workhorse a Chevrolet 350 is, it is by no means the caliber of the Cadillac 472 engine series - including  500, 425 & 368 - IMHO and having owned a good 15 1990 - 1992 Chevy-powered Broughams, it is also my view that model is not the car of a 1977 - 1981 RWD either.

One man's opinion.

[Scot Minesinger]

Eric,

The nylon coated sprockets should be replaced.  I know it was done for noise and that was a coating, not what the sprocket was made of (aluminum on ones I changed).  Also, many GM cars with this sprocket made it over 200k mile easy it is agreed.  It is my understanding Ford and other GM divisions did the same thing.  Age is not always kind to plastics.  The timing set generally costs only $60 and a weekend of your time, so it is not a huge deal.  If the timing chain and other precautionary items are already completed properly, it just makes the 77-79 Cadillac a stronger consideration during buying process.  I think the 425 engine is great.  Agree that the 472/500/425/368 Cadillac engine is super nice and very durable.

The Chevy engine is really nice too.  My 1985 Caprice with 305 V-8 and my 1995 Cadillac RWD w/350 LT1 both Chevy engines were wonderful and ran over a quarter million miles with no work other than tune up parts.

I just have a tougher time picking between the two, they are both super nice.  Given both vehicles in great condition I guess I too would pick the 77-79 over the early 90's RWD Caddys, but it is like 51/49.  Consequently, all things are unlikely to be equal and so condition would probably be my deciding factor.  Use may also play into it, as if planned to really drive the car we deciding upon, gas mileage and easy of maintenance tip the scales slightly to the early 1990's Caddys.  The 77-79 may have more appeal at car shows since they are past the 25 year mark.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

I think I can say we are in substantial agreement on all points.

All that remains for you to drive a 1992 Brougham for a week and a mint 1979 Fleetwood the following week and you tell me which has more magic. 

Eric.

[g27g28]

I have owned 2 1990 broughams and 1 1991.  Both 90s had the 350 and the 91 had 305.  Eric the trailer towing package requirement was dropped for 91 and a 350 could be ordered alone on 91 and 92 cars.  The ride quality was stiffer with the trailer towing package but not that bad just more controlled.  The 91 ride quality was all Cadillac.  All three of mine were d'elegance optioned and I am a little biased toward the later cars because of that option.  I know the earlier cars offered it but the button tufted just looks nicer in my opinion.  I drive an 80 fleetwood everyday and barring the trailer towing package you couldn't tell any of them apart with your eyes closed while moving.  The 350 on both of mine blew a puff of smoke on start up but used no oil between changes.  Valve guides should have been higher quality before being put in a Cadillac.  I agree with Eric and have never really liked all the plastic around the outside along the bottom and judging by the ones you still see driving around it's not going to hold up.  Both the early and later are very reliable cars so I guess it all depends on which styling you like better.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

It's a matter of personal taste but to my eyes, the 1979 regular Brougham interior (non-d'Elegance) with leather was the most beautiful of them all from 1977-1992. It was also a one-year only interior. Second place I would give to the biscuit style Fleetwood Brougham of 1980 - 1986 (non-d'Elegance).

The most comfortable seat I've ever sat in is 1979 & 1980 DeVille with leather.

Never overly fond of the d'Elegance seats from 1980 - 1992 - always thought they looked a bit too puffy, but I'd never turn my nose up at any one of these cars in the right colors in the right condition - except a 4100 and maybe the 5.0 307 Olds. Truly a miserable performer.

[JerRita]

Rita's daily driver is a 91 5.7 over 300k now gets 16mpg all day and 21 on the road I bought it many years ago for 850 on ebay w/ 178k all we have done is maintenance It still turns heads and she gets comments almost daily We have another clean 91 w/ only 120k as a replacement when the first one rusts away but i'll keep it for parts The only bad thing I can say there are a few 90-92 specific parts that can be hard to find I love my Broughams JeRita 

[bcroe]

The 4 speed trans with lockup clutch improves both the economy and performance
of the 350.  That it does by doing a lot more shifting, and it certainly isn't the
durable trans the TH400 is.  I use a switch pitch TH400 which comes closer
to the 4 speed, without the roughness, and is MUCH stronger than the 4 speed. 

The official word may be that the nylon teeth on the OEM cam sprocket are for
noise suppression.  All of mine have been changed out for decades, and I have
never been able to hear any sound from the chain.  I am convinced the real
reason was to save money, and perhaps to cause older cars to degrade or fail
so you would buy a new one. 

An old cam sprocket may still run the engine.  If you don't drive much, you
may not notice the degradation of erratic timing, or may not get to the point
where the chain falls off. 

Some people will just drive a car until it strands them somewhere.  NONE of
that applies here, and in fact I HATE FAILURES.  I have seen chains completely
off at the junk yard, and sprockets with some or all the plastic gone, but the
engine will go a few more miles in that impaired state before complete failure. 

I helped someone find another (79) bad timing set THIS WEEK.  The chain was
working, but the nylon was so bad it wouldn't idle properly.  The problem could
have been completely avoided with proper maintenance: replacement. 

Oh and I haven't had any problem getting parts for the older drive train, which is so simple I can easily fix it myself.  Bruce Roe

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Here's an example of the sprocket used in the 500, 425 and 368 for anyone interested. I don't know whether it was ever used in any 472 engines.

[bcroe]

Here is another picture sent to me by a big block Cad owner.  The chain is
sort of working, but will finish off the aluminum teeth soon.  There are
sprockets on my wall with half the nylon missing.  I have seen every
variation from just a lot of cracks to the chain completely off.  You won't
find one of these in my cars; I don't care to be driving a time bomb. 

Bruce Roe

[TJ Hopland]

One other factor that pushes people to the earlier cars is lack of a 2 door for the later ones.   If you want or at least don't mind a 4 door you may be able to get a little more car for the money in the early ones since many looking at that era are looking for the 2 doors.   To me it looks like many of the 4 doors from that era are gone but many 2 doors got saved so the number of survivors seems to be about even. 


On the timing chain front....

That is more or less what every cam sprocket I ever saw looked like from just about any 70's or early 80's car.   I have only seen one that was in that good of shape tho, most are a lot worse than that by the time I saw them even back when they were not that old.   In the 80's when all the 70's cars were getting old timing sets were kinda like belts are today, its one of those things you just replaced if it had not been done when you bought a 'high mileage' car.  High mileage then was 100-125k and almost 10 years which was when my friends and I could afford them so that is when we bought them.   Transmissions and timing sets were either done at that point or needed to be done.  Rest of the cars didn't tend to be too bad. 

I don't see why the 425's would be any different than any other engine.  My thought as to why Eric's mechanic friends had not seen issues with Cadillacs is just luck, they last a little longer under certain conditions and his people must be around more if the ideal conditions than many of the rest of us.  Cadillacs didn't tend to get as high of mileage and certainly didn't tend to get the abuse other models did so I'm sure that helps the Cads appear to be better.

I think it was my 78 that when I bought it and was going through stuff to get it back on the road, it had been sitting for 10+ years.  I think it had around 80k on it when I got it.   I pulled the distributor and looked at the sprocket, it was dirty so hard to tell for sure what I was looking with limited angles through the hole but it appeared to be in tact so I figured someone had replaced it.    I think it was a year and about 5k miles later it just didn't seem right.  One thing that bothered me was the oil light would flicker at stoplights sometimes.  When after the oil pump and found bits of plastic in it.  Pulled the dizzy again and no signs of any plastic left on the sprocket.   Proof at this age they can go really quick.    Not sure how plastic got past the screen in the pickup tube.   I ended up selling the car for $250.   Not sure the guy fixed it or not,  I had seen it a few times, looked like he was living in the car.     

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Slight clarification - the experiences reported instances of hard failure extremely rare in 425 as a result of timing gear issues - not that nobody ever touched timing chain parts on a 425. But in 200,000 miles I personally never needed to (logged over many different cars over many years). I fully agree that replacement is a good preventative maintenance item generally speaking, especially if the car is going to be driven regularly with mileage nearing 100K. 

Speaking for my own 18,000 mile 425 car that sees limited gentle (& local) use, I just assume leave untouched for the time being as all engine parts still sporting their original factory-applied GM blue which I intend to leave undisturbed as long as possible. 

[TJ Hopland]

I would tend to agree on a 'hard' failure,  Cadillac was less prone to that but it was likely more due to the type of drivers than the design or materials. 

My Cad didn't just quit like my Buick did.   The big difference between those two was I was 18 when I had the Buick and much older when I had the 78 Cad.   The Cadillac's tending to lower rpms even in spite of the driver probably helps too.  If my Buick had a tach I'm sure it would have been in the red fairly often partly because it was a smaller higher revving engine and partly because I was 18.  Those are 2 problems a Cadillac typically does not have.

[64\/54Cadillacking]

I think 77-79 Fleetwood Bro and the 90-92 Fleetwoods and Broughams are lovely cars that still carry on the traditional Cadillac styling The interiors are especially nice and have a sense a quality feel that even the newest Cadillacs lack. The padded and thick cushy door panels with all that chrome trim was like jewelry in the car. The seats were very comfortable and the leather seemed of high quality.

I've sat in many of them at car shows, and Cadillac did a good job on them considering how terrible the 80's were for many cars all around. I find the interiors to be nicer and flashier in the 77-79 than in the previous 76 models. The biggest issues with the later models is that the cracking and mostly disintegrated filler panels, that was just cheap on GM's part.

I love my 94 Fleetwood for it's performance, and smoothness, once you guys experience the 5.7 LT1 in the 94-96 Fleetwoods, you probably won't ever like going back to the older 5.0 and the 5.7 TBI Chevy based engine Cads. The LT1 has a lot more get up and go compared to any Cad before it besides for the 472 powered Cadillacs which were monsters!

But if we are strictly basing this debate on looks and typical Cadillac feel alone, then yes the 92 on down RWD Cads, feel and look more like a "Real" Cadillac. Every time I get in my 94 Fleet, I don't get that feeling like I am driving a Cadillac, but more so, a Chevy or a Buick mainly because the interior is so gawd awfully boring and lacks chrome.. It drives like a Cadillac well kinda, it's not super floaty or all that soft like the cushy Cads of the past, but the ride is supple and planted for the most part.

The car feels substantial, and is BIG, the heft of the doors and weight of the car while driving feels solid like a Cadillac is supposed to, buy overall the car doesn't scream Cadillac to me, nor does it feel like one on the inside.

The 77-79 are probably the last of the "quality" RWD Cadillacs and the 425 was a good engine even if power was lacking on the high end. The 80's one feel a little less nice inside like the steering wheel, and plasticky chrome trim instead of stainless, and exterior panels that used more plastic.

But I would def go for a 92 Brougham D'elegance package 5.7 TBI, because the interiors in those are amazing! The tufted pillow top seats were super nice, and quality was better. So that is one exception for the 90-92 Broughams, the D'elegance models were the nicest.