Author Topic: Question for 1982 owners (Read 993 times)

6caddy2 · « **on:** July 18, 2018, 01:20:37 AM »

Im looking at buying a Fleetwood, I love this body style, I would like to know what I would most likely expect to run into as far as engine, tranny, electrical problems? The caddy is a 1 owner, was always garage keep, very,very, very well cared for, documented as far as the ownership goes, I own a 1962 caddy vert and have enjoyed every pain staking, bloody knuckle, late nights in the garage to bring it back to its beautiful stance that it was in 1962, with that said, after 5yrs in CLC, 3 GN and countless shows I love Cadillacs, the people we have meet in this club ,and being able to show this great car as part of our Americn heritage and history of these great cars, but it is hard to maintain her at her age, and hard on myself and drive to shows.
So having been bit by the very BIG caddy bug, I want to buy one I feel that would:
1)represent the Cadillac as it was when new
2) be able to drive it to shows( long distance)
3) easyer on the wallet as far as up keep.
4) easyer on us as far as travel goes.
We are proud and honored to have been awarded twice in 3yrs with the 62, we would love to do it again with another caddy. With that said, I do know of the engine concerns with the 82's or do I look 8 years ahead and find a 90 or 91 w/ the 5.7?
All opinions and info will be greatly appreciated! Thank you, Joe

V63 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 18, 2018, 03:23:25 AM »

You mention you are aware of the HT4100. You are satisfied with the condition as mentioned.

I would focus then on the price...really CHEAP you need to be comfortable that a catastrophic loss could happen.

The worst part of these 4100 cars is in the very best case you ALWAYS have an under performing vehicle.

Best advise would be to exclude 4100 and diesel models.

86-90 5.0 v8 brougham models are pretty prevelant and down right cheap. The wood grain finish is much more attractive too.

5.7 models are going to cost more as demand is higher for those.

1977-81 models are excellent options as well. 1981 (V864) being the least desirable there. But acceptable

Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 18, 2018, 07:37:33 AM »

Strongly recommend avoiding HT4100.

Strongly recommend 1977 - 1981 (w/standard V8 engine). Also Brougham 1990 - 1992 w/ optional 350 FI or 305 FI (1991 & 1992 only).

1986 - 1990 with 307 Olds 4 bbl reliable but underpowered.

acedriale · « **Reply #3 on:** July 18, 2018, 09:27:39 AM »

Hi 6caddy2,
In case you have interest I am willing to part with an '81 Fleetwood Brougham d'Elegance (one owner) that meets all of your criteria. Modulated displacement still operational. Or if you prefer a '91 Brougham 5.0L (Senior Wreath). Just PM if you have interest, cars are located in Indiana.

Alex

Scot Minesinger · « **Reply #4 on:** July 18, 2018, 09:52:35 AM »

I repaired the ac on a 1982 4.1 powered Fleetwood. Strongly recommend avoiding it. Not only does it suffer mechanical issues, the zero to 60 mph is timed with a calendar. At every red light on an open road (speed limit 50 mph) drivers tailgated me. Yes, the throttle is linked so that at 1/3 travel down, it is full throttle to provide the illusion of power. Drive the car on the open road with stop lights, hills and etc. where normal driving is 50 mph. Your 1962 Cadillac would run rings around a 1982 4.1 RWD Cadillac. My grandmother owned a 1982 4.1 powered RWD SDV and back in 1982 it drove like crap back when it was new.

I would never buy a 4.1 powered Cadillac under any circumstances, unless as another member already did at great expense replace it with a 1978 425 engine (1981 ac brackets and other complications for example).

This is the worst engine Cadillac ever made and it ushered in MB, Lexus and the like as the premier luxury cars in the late 1980's and yielded considerable market share to Lincoln. Don't buy this car.

Scot Minesinger · « **Reply #5 on:** July 18, 2018, 09:53:34 AM »

Buy on of Alex's Cadillacs instead.

gkhashem · « **Reply #6 on:** July 18, 2018, 12:06:19 PM »

Run don't walk, even if the car is cheap. It won't be cheap when you get done.

sding · « **Reply #7 on:** July 18, 2018, 01:25:00 PM »

If you can get the car at a good price (I payed $3200.00 for my car) BUY IT! my 1985 eldo 4100 has 100.000 miles on it and runs strong!
its NO HOT ROD. if you like to go fast buy a Hemi Cuda!!

Scot Minesinger · « **Reply #8 on:** July 18, 2018, 02:09:53 PM »

sding,

Define strong. Our definitions are likely different.

Anyway, certainly have read on the forum that the smaller FWD Cadillacs that are lighter than the 1982-1985 RWD 4.1 powered Cadillacs are OK.

This is not a lighter FWD Cadillac, and plus it was the first year of the 4.1. Run.

If you do buy it prepare for a lot of misery. Think about what you like about your 1962 Cadillac. Is it that it can accelerate to 50mph in less than a minute? Seriously if power and reliability are your very lowest priorities, then drive the car on an extended test drive to see if you could tolerate it. The owner will not object, no one else is interested.

Again, while some write that the 4.1 is not that bad, no one ever chimes in with a story about an engine after WWII that was worse. That is because the 4.1 is the worst engine Cadillac ever made. Whenever a CLC member talks about their Cadillac (1982 thru 1986) I know it probably has the 4.1 and like many others, I feel sorry for them - so there there is that aspect to consider too.

Run!

Good luck on your decision,

Scot

cadillacmike68 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 18, 2018, 02:25:56 PM »

Joe,

If you really want it, then be prepared to drop another engine in it eventually. These guys are not kidding.

What's wrong with the 1962? It has power steering, auto trans, etc. If it is a DeVille it should have power windows as well. Is it that the 1962 does not have air conditioning? That is definitely a detriment. It can be fitted though. Classic Auto Air probably has the components needed.

Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 18, 2018, 02:32:55 PM »

4100 lasted until 1988 (Allante'); 1987 for standard models.

I agree it is a powerplant to be avoided at all costs. Circumstances would have to be rather extraordinary to do otherwise.

My advice is to stay away unless we're talking as-new, in-wrapper time capsule at giveaway price - not going to happen.

sding · « **Reply #11 on:** July 18, 2018, 06:25:28 PM »

Quote from: Scot Minesinger on July 18, 2018, 02:09:53 PM

sding,

Define strong. Our definitions are likely different.

Anyway, certainly have read on the forum that the smaller FWD Cadillacs that are lighter than the 1982-1985 RWD 4.1 powered Cadillacs are OK.

This is not a lighter FWD Cadillac, and plus it was the first year of the 4.1. Run.

If you do buy it prepare for a lot of misery. Think about what you like about your 1962 Cadillac. Is it that it can accelerate to 50mph in less than a minute? Seriously if power and reliability are your very lowest priorities, then drive the car on an extended test drive to see if you could tolerate it. The owner will not object, no one else is interested.

Again, while some write that the 4.1 is not that bad, no one ever chimes in with a story about an engine after WWII that was worse. That is because the 4.1 is the worst engine Cadillac ever made. Whenever a CLC member talks about their Cadillac (1982 thru 1986) I know it probably has the 4.1 and like many others, I feel sorry for them - so there there is that aspect to consider too.

Run!

Good luck on your decision,

Scot

Scot thank you for your sympathy, but it my case it is NOT needed. I love my 85 eldo! I know guys like you all ways burning rubber!! just buy Z28 Camaro and you can HOT ROD all you like LOL
SCOTT

6caddy2 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 18, 2018, 08:19:42 PM »

WOW!!!!! Thanks guys for the responses!!! This what I love about this club, thank you for the straight shooters, right from the hip, that's what I was needing, as much as it pains some, there all caddys we love, it's what we as individuals want to own, or afford, or have room for etc... I'm lucky to have room for one more right next to the "62" in the garage.
Cadillacmike68, to answer your question, the 62 has everything on her I would have ordered for it back then, including a/c factory installed( I was only 2 months old when she rolled off the factory line. It is my 1st caddy, she's not going anywhere as long as I'm alive, I waited 25 yrs to find her and it was worth it!!! Plus 5yrs to get her back in shape and road worthy. (See photo) I'm very happy how she has turned out, now it's time to keep the long miles off her and look for one that is already there, one that's been well cared for etc... one that just needs a new home for whatever reason, just needs little things done to it, to be able to drive to GN, some of our driving tours etc..
Scott thank you for your advice I will pay heed to it! After I post this I will pm Alex about his caddys! Thanks again for everyone's advice, and opinions! It is greatly appreciated and respected!!!!

Scot Minesinger · « **Reply #13 on:** July 18, 2018, 08:22:34 PM »

I maybe burn rubber once a year if even that. A sense of awesome power is a requirement for me, especially in a nice car.

Barry M Wheeler #2189 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 18, 2018, 11:21:11 PM »

If you are wanting a turn-key "big" Cadillac go buy Alex's. The '81 is deep burgundy and well kept. The '91 Brougham was taken on a trip out west about five years ago. It was in the S/S. Either one will serve you well. His dad was a very well loved member of the Indiana Region and ALL of his cars were great. I had a 4.1 V-8 go out on me, and it does it with a snap of your fingers. FUGEDDABOUT it!

D.Smith · « **Reply #15 on:** July 19, 2018, 08:55:20 AM »

Quote from: 6caddy2 on July 18, 2018, 01:20:37 AM

1)represent the Cadillac as it was when new
2) be able to drive it to shows( long distance)
3) easyer on the wallet as far as up keep.
4) easyer on us as far as travel goes.
All opinions and info will be greatly appreciated! Thank you, Joe

1) No problem. They are gorgeous cars.

2) Long distance? That is when these get hot and the HT4100s fail. So no, I would NOT buy an HT4100 car for road trips to shows.

3) Um, no. the HT4100 will be a huge expense when it fails. I always tell people pay no more for an HT4100 equipped car than you are willing to walk away from.

4) Very comfortable. A pleasure to ride in. Performance is very poor though with the HT4100 only producing 125 horsepower. YES only 125 !!

If you love the look of it and only expect to use it around town and never run the engine hot, go for it. Otherwise find a 1986 or newer Brougham with the 5.0 or 5.7 liter motor.

6caddy2 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 19, 2018, 09:08:45 PM »

Alex I sent you a pm plus email, Joe

'92 Allante · « **Reply #17 on:** July 20, 2018, 12:45:46 PM »

Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on July 18, 2018, 02:32:55 PM

4100 lasted until 1988 (Allante'); 1987 for standard models.

I agree it is a powerplant to be avoided at all costs. Circumstances would have to be rather extraordinary to do otherwise.

My advice is to stay away unless we're talking as-new, in-wrapper time capsule at giveaway price - not going to happen.

At least when they put it in the AllantÃ© it produced more horsepower and the car was much lighter. I can't imagine a big Fleetwood with the early AllantÃ© motor, let alone the standard 4100. Not nearly enough power for such a large car.

Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 · « **Reply #18 on:** July 20, 2018, 01:07:35 PM »

Allante' used a specially tuned version of HT4100. Not quite the same plant in regular production models.

'92 Allante · « **Reply #19 on:** July 20, 2018, 01:15:23 PM »

Quote from: Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621 on July 20, 2018, 01:07:35 PM

Allante' used a specially tuned version of HT4100. Not quite the same plant in regular production models.

Right. I forget all the changes, but I know the Allante's version had multiport fuel injection, whereas the standard 4100 did not.