The Cadillac Cimarron & Its Design: What Designers Wanted vs What They Got
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ต.ค. 2024
- Enjoy a few sketches from then-Cadillac designer John Manoogian and introductory discussion about one of the most controversial Cadillacs, the Cimarron.
The Cimarron wasn't an ugly car, even in the earliest days, it just didn't make a recipe for a good Cadillac. I'd argue John turned out a rather handsome design for the parameters he was given. The Cavalier itself was never an ugly car or a BAD car. No... Looks were never the problem. With the first Seville, engineers completely reworked the X body to create a distinctive vehicle. With the Cimarron, the engineering simply amounted to a few cosmetic changes and a leather interior on an economy car. Corporate laziness was the problem...
Worse than ugly, it was plain.
To me its very ugly
Actually you are right, John made a relatively attractive car from what he had. If you gave someone the funding for a Cavalier LX trim package you would be highly satisfied with what John made. Not his fault that they elected to put Cadillac logos on it.
Ugly is in the eye of the beholder. If Cimarron was a woman it would be Moms Mabley.
Honestly i'm so sick of people bashing the Cimarron. I owned the rarest of all Cimarrons, a 1988 Cadillac Cimarron 5-speed manual car. Only 111 out of 6,000 plus cars had the 5-speed manual in 1988. Even more rare than the D'oro package. Mine was fully loaded minus the digital dash and astroroof. Dark blue over light Grey. Stunning color combination. Out of all the cars i owned, it was my favorite. I loved the styling and good fuel economy. It ran till 285,000 on the original engine and transmission with only 1 clutch rebuild. It never left me stranded and i got compliments all the time when pulling into a gas station. Yes! i got compliments. Maybe the earlier examples weren't that great but the last two years, 1987 & 1988 were excellent cars in my opinion. It's a pleasure to hear John talk about this wonderful car.
I had the 1981-82 model with the 1.8 engine...HORRIBLE! Even though it was used that was the worst car I ever owned...The 1987-88 model w/V6 was a better car..My 81 Cimarron I had to work on it almost everyday.Interior looked decent but it was a HORRIBLE car!
Tne first year had the 1.8 carbureted 4 cyl that was problematic and weak even in the cavalier. In truth, the Pontiac, Olds, and Buick differentiated themselves from the cavalier better than the Cimarron . The latter years were significantly better. But the first year was simply a turd and deserves all the criticism leveled at it. If they'd initially installed the V6, it would had something to differentiate it
John had a lot of constraints put on him when it came to the design of the Cimarron. Cadillac should have offered a V-6 from the start which might not have made it a big success but it would have helped. Having been in numerous situations at work where I had constraints that severely limited me from making a decision that in retrospect would have been better for everyone I can empathize with what John went thru with the Cimarron. As long as what you are being asked to do is not illegal, not immoral, or not jeopardizing safety or health and you want to keep your job then you have to go along with the constraints put upon you.
"A lot of constraints" is an understatement. Wasn't the metal already frozen when Cadillac joined the program? (Yeah, I haven't watched the video yet.)
@@TrueDeltaTV Having to pay a mortgage and wanting to keep your bosses happy to keep your job. GM like many corporations has its own form of bureaucracy. Wayne Kady goes over some of the restraints he had when designing cars for GM and in one of the videos he comments to Adam that he had to pay the mortgage on his house meaning he wanted to keep his job. Most of us can related to that.
David Bowie "Panic In Detroit" 1973...
...Cadillac "Cimarron" 1982...
...Just love it!👊🏼
I had an 87 Cimarron, with the v6 and I loved it...
I have a 1985 V6 Cimarron with 25,000 miles. I love it. Thanks John! I haven't featured it yet but it is a great companion to my 87 and 96 Fleetwood Broughams. Kind of the little cousin that the family doesn’t like to talk about.
Now that’s one I’d like to get my hands on ;)
@@RareClassicCars I know Adam but I can’t adopt it out sorry! I am sure you will find a glamour one soon. Preferably an earlier pre rectangular headlight version 👍
One wonders how much pressure the finance guys were putting on management so that it had an effect on the design. Mr. Manoogian faced the pressures of the time, which were great.
They really tied his hands. This car was a reflection of what he was forced to do, not what he would have WANTED to do.
It was dealer and time pressure…..more than Finance. The use of the same platform clearly Finance…..the rush to market destroyed any chance…..
@@DD-dj4jr Well observed, but it was the use of that identical platform/ body across all divisions that really kicked Cadillac in the crotch. And that was primarily a finance pressure. I feel for Mr. Manoogian. He essentially was told to design a Caddy with his hands tied firmly behind his back. It was a totally stupid management decision. As Mark has observed on several videos, one NEVER designs from the bottom up....never. And that is precisely what GM did.
Imagine being a new car dealer and telling a customer; .......here's our new Chevy this year, BUT.......for only 8 thousand more dollars you can have this beautiful Cadillac which looks identical to the Chevy!!!!! Yeah! That's gonna work out. Mr. Manoogian did his job. GM F-ed up......big!!
@@ellisonhamilton3322 Precisely. I worked at GM Full Size Truck when the original Escalade was launched. Same thing 15 or so years later. Nobody listened. Economics said launch it with new gauges, grill, and better leather to counter Navigator.
I remember seeing them on the road... they seemed to be popular with middle aged/early elderly women.
Probably the true target audience.
I can’t wait to learn more! I always felt the Cimarron was an example of GM management hubris for the reasons you mentioned. They wanted to compete with BMW but clearly, no manager ever honestly asked themselves if America would pay good money for a wheezy compact car with a Cadillac badge. And…so soon after Detroit’s other stupendous marketing failure, the Versailles.
It’s worth mentioning that John, a pillar of automotive design, is proud to mention he watches and honors your videos. Impressive! He’s got charisma in spades, which was desperately needed at GM to dress up the dowdy Cavalier.
Ford had already tried this badge engineering approach with the Lincoln Versailles. Even with all the extra trim and finish, the Versailles never escaped its humble origins.
It was a gussied up Ford Granada, not even a Mercury Monarch. I remember my classmates and I laughing at them.
Sort of like the first Mustang II was nothing but a Ford Pinto without the exploding bumper.
And the Versailles was brought on by Cadillac's stretched and rebodied Nova, the Seville.
John Manoogian is one of the all time greats in GM Design- he has vision and a really unique eye for great design. Considering the constraints of the Cimarron project, he did the best anyone could have done and survived to give us such tremendous future products as the 1992 Grand Am GT and the later Cadillacs.
Thank you!
Man I can't wait! The interview you previously posted with John is one of my favorite interviews you've ever done! He's brilliant, and I look forward to more. Also, I really don't understand the hate for the Cimarron. It's the best J body car in my opinion, and considering the fact there was zero budget, I don't think I or anyone else could have done any better
Spot on Joe
Right!
The perception at that time was the Cimarron was nothing more than a dressed-up Cavalier which cost a whole lot more to buy. There was really no noticeable improvement in ride quality, drivability and performance, interior noise, build quality, etc. It was the best of the breed, but the breed was economy car DNA, not luxury car, and it stood no chance being compared to either market's other offerings.
Completely agree. These interviews are very compelling. I want to know more!
The Cimarron isn’t necessarily a bad car, it’s just not a Cadillac. It would have probably been pretty popular if it wasn’t marketed as one.
Zero budget was also an issue. I don’t think people had an issue with the designers or the car itself, but it was also very clear to everyone that GM corporate hadn’t put any love or effort into the project.
I'm a glass half full kind of a guy. I look at the Cimarron as the best j-body ever
Totally agree 👍
That's like saying dog poop is more attractive than cat poop! 🤡
I remember seeing the '82 for the first time and it struck me as a handsome, refined looking car. At the time, since all the J cars had just come out, there were not weekend-rental Cavaliers swarming out of every airport and the J-cars were being marketed by all the divisions as upscale cars for their size, with more standard equipment than GM was used to offering. In that brief time period, it wasn't such a bad thing to "look like a Cavalier". That said, I have to add that I wasn't thrilled with the styling changes they made later; the smoother frowning-trapezoid grill seemed to clash with the still-boxy body. Though I've never driven one, I've also heard that because of the tight fit in the engine compartment, the V6 needed mounts that were too stiff to keep the noise level in luxury-car territory. It seems that GM was just stuck with a platform that, unless someone dropped a BMW L4 into it, while a perfectly acceptable car, could never be a Cadillac.
It was a fancy looking Cavalier. He did a great job with both hands tied behind his back.
It reminds me the of the old axiom, 'a camel is a horse designed by committee'. The Cadillac Cimarron was GM's camel. These are great videos, because they give a realistic insight to the politics and realities the designers had to contend with back then. Plus I love all the old school design drawings.
My mom had two cimarrons. The first one was underpowered with the four cylinder, but it was incredibly comfortable and rode like a big heavy car. Her second one had the six cylinder and rode much stiffer in that it was a sport model. It too had a very comfortable interior. One major drawback was the 10 gallon gas tank. I drove from Massachusetts to Key West Florida and we had to fill up every 200 miles. The car ran and drove perfectly down and back. I thought it was cool then and I still like them a lot. They were a Chevy dressed up like a Cadillac, but I think it worked.
Maybe an interesting follow up discussion might be ‘how did GM product planning get into a position that required Cadillac to sell warmed-over Cavaliers in order to satisfy dealers’. The Corporation was obviously caught flat-footed. Why?
The second gas crisis began without warning in '79 when the Ayatollah objected to Carter allowing the deposed Shah to come to the US for (hopeless) cancer treatment. The survival rate was 3%, and Carter's father had died of it. Pretty ungrateful of Khomeini, since Carter had pulled US support from the Shah before their revolution. Reagan decontrolled gas prices in '81, which ended the shortages, but prices didn't drop much until '85, when GM came out with more downsized cars.
I think it’s a fantastic thing you’ve done to humanize the history and decisiomaking processes that led to GM’s - and particularly Cadillac’s - ignominious era. Hats off to John for doing the best he could in the time allotted.
I think I would almost buy a Cimarron simply because John worked on it.
The later Cimarrons 85+ were actually nice cars, with V6, new grille, fogs, and nice alloys. Interiors very well done given the constraints they were working with.
John, if you see this I love my 85 Cimarron. I just see it as a really sharp looking well appointed Cavalier. When you look at them that way they are easily enjoyable!
Thank you!
I like the Cadillac Cimarron. Remember when it came out. Always a fan.
People need to remember that management and accountants control what is produced, and in a company like General Motors, they are very powerful. The designers and engineers often want to push the boundaries and create something great, but management and the accountants toss out 85% of what they come out with.
That second sketch has quite a bit of the cab forward design look Chrysler later used on their 90s LH platform sedans. Also a bit of the later STS as well. Really ahead of the curve.
The first sketch would have made for an interesting Eldorado, if they had wanted to drop the classical styling of the time.
Looking forward to hearing more of the behind the scenes story of such an infamous car.
I have two thoughts on the Cimarron. First is that the styling wasn’t terrible in the context of the era and if it wasn’t such a poorly running car and there was no Cavalier to compare it to it would have sold reasonably well.
Second is an interesting comparison to the Escalade. If you think about it the Escalade design program was identical to the Cimarron; slap a new grille, taillights and some interior trim on an existing Chevrolet. Why was one a massive success and the other a failure?
Good points John. See my comment above.
I think the answer for the success/failure question is timing. By the time the Escalade came out, consumers had adapted to this form of marketing/manufacturing. Back in the 1980s, consumers... particularly high end consumers had far more rigid standards and expected their cars to be truly unique. Lincoln learned the same lesson a few years earlier with the Ford Granada/Lincoln Versailles debacle... Cadillac must not have been listening. 😄
@@chriscadillac8448 I was thinking the same re the Lincoln Versailles.
I think the gap in product was wider with the Cimarron. The GMC Yukon in the late 90's was a lot closer to the target buyers of the Escalade than the Cavalier ever was to people who were shopping for a BMW, Saab or Audi in the 1980's
Excellent points.
What an unenviable position for a super talented man like Mr. Manoogian to be put into. Surely he must have thought to himself, "what are they thinking?" Very much looking forward to your in-depth discussion on this!
John had a lot of constraints put on him. But I at that time was a Cadillacs heavy engine Mechanic , ( Retired now) and we laughed at the car because of the design. And for that I apologize because we didn't understand what the designer was up against. but to be fair we had very little problems with the car. Nice Job Mr. Manoogian
Looking forward to this one. In Australia we had the same car, different styling at the front and rear, but essentially the same I think it was GMs attempt to do a ‘ world car’ ( the J car I think they called it )like a Corolla . In Australia the Camira had very good 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 litre engines during its lifetime
I adore your channel Adam! Simply adore it!
I am so excited to see the full video!
His sketches remind me of the last generation of El Dorado in the two door version. The four door version reminded me of the Olds Aurora. This is fascinating and a great look into automotive history
Can't wait to see the cimarron story go full circle!
In Europe we consider this a styled up Opel Ascona.
I was working at a Standard Station back in the 80s when the first one I saw pulled up. This was my first WTF before I knew those three letters would be known as they are today.
Absolutely love this series with John... I could sit and listen to him for hours quite easily! Looking forward to more.
Adam, this series just gets better and BETTER! Fantastic work, as usual, and I can't wait to watch the follow up 👍🖖🙏🇨🇦
The " blue sky " sketch looked pretty cool, a 4 door Beretta. That car with the V6 or a DOHC 4 would have been exciting.
Always wondered what the interior decorator for the Titanic was faced with. John Manoogian is really a very interesting fellow. I would love to see some of the things that he really liked that he had made. GM (almost) always made handsome cars, show us what John could make when he was given the resources he deserved.
I would never blame John for GM’s screw up on this vehicle. It’s is a pleasure Adam to watch these video’s of the designers you interview.
Ooo, looking forward to part 2 with John. Great series!
John is a champion. Seriously I could listen to him for hours!
A friend had a Cimarron in the mid 80's and it wasn't a bad car. It just wasn't convincing as anything but a Cavalier. I never got to drive it but rode in it quite a few times. It was a very nice Cavalier.
A Chevy Cavalier with power windows.
It's a shame, really, because Cadillac should have known better... Lincoln had learned the same lesson a few years earlier with the Ford Granada/Lincoln Versailles debacle.
Can’t wait for the full episode! This is fascinating.
Looking forward to the longer review video.
I think one of the main issues with the Cimarron as a counter to BMW, Audi, et. al. was not so much the design as it was the fit-and-finish and performance.
Just getting into the car, closing the door and starting the engine was enough to know that there was no real comparison between Cimarron and German cars it was expected to compete with. The Audi 5000 or the BMW 3 Series, let alone the Mercedes 190 were in a different class of build that no amount of design/styling could make up for.
The thought that it could be compared to a BMW even at the time was utterly absurd. In every way, engine, transmission, appearance, handling... I remember sitting in one idling, and the whole steering column was vibrating up and down with the engine, as all j cars did.....
I had an 87 Cavalier CL 2.0 in the late 90s. It was a good car for my young family.
Interesting to know the story (even if short). I ALWAYS thought it odd that Cad didn't offer a convertible, given the Cimarron shared the body with the Pontiac Sunbird, which offered a convert. I knew people who bought both new, and I think Cad would have done well with a small convertible.
Too bad GM didn't tell the public the limitations it had placed on the designers when the thing debuted. At the time I thought "WTF, you guys". Now I think John deserves a trophy!
Nice preview here, which more or less confirms what I have read about. When the Cadillac Catera came out, there were comments being made about it and the Cimarron. Once again, Mr. Manoogian proves he is a skilled designer given very limited resources to achieve GM management goals.
I always liked the Catera, even though I know it was generally a hated car in its time. I always thought it was a very handsome and understated car.
My aunt had a Cimmaron company car. She kept it for a week and traded it in for a traditional Deville.
Thanks for having John on the show... I really look forward to a more thorough conversation between the two of you.
New subscriber here and I love your channel! What’s ironic is the Cimarron is actually considered a cool car by more and more people. I wouldn’t be embarrassed driving one at all.
I am so looking forward to that interview!! The Cimarron is still my favorite J-Car and I love the two I still own and drive today!
I look forward to it. This has been very informative and enjoyable.
That sketch is amazing! I'm no designer, but I see the genesis of the general proportions, and the rear quarter section and taillights of the 2003 CTS in that work. And that was 20 years before the CTS was introduced.
I owned a gorgeous Coupe DeVille when the Cimarron first hit the market, and I clearly remember the sales staff (my sales guy in particular) at my Cadillac dealership being absolutely livid and vitriolic when they first saw this car. My guy called it a “tarted-up f*****g Chevy, the beginning of the end” and vowed he wouldn’t waste his time trying to “move this b***h” but instead would try to move prospects upmarket into a DeVille. I wonder if this was a unique reaction or a general feeling among most sales staff. Great video, as always, Adam! Thanks to you and John Manoogian for this insightful look!
Mr. Manoogian's "blue sky" sketch-drawing was jaw-dropping. It really does make you wonder what the possibilities would've been if GM decided to put the Cimarron into a longer pre-release development stage. Honestly, Manoogian's "blue sky" sketch reminded me of the similar controversy surrounding the super-downsized Cadillac Seville and Eldorado in the later half of the 1980s. The bedrock question to start with would be: how do you define what a Cadillac is in an era of downsizing, after generations of the brand capitalizing on largesse and gaudy chrome, tailfins and overall obnoxious conspicuous consumption? Also entwined in that discussion would have to be another question: What did GM think they were trying to accomplish with a multi-billion-dollar downsizing program in the first place?
Mr. Manoogian's "blue sky" sketch brought an idea to my mind that touched on both of these questions. Both the Cimarron and the late-80s Seville were supposed to invent a new breed of Cadillac, far removed from big rear-wheel-drive cars with bigger V8s of the '50s through the '70s. His sketches seemed to suggest this was theoretically possible, but not with the mandatory components and body they were given to work with. I remember a popular car magazine (Car & Driver or maybe Motor Trend) once reviewing a GM J-bodied car in the 80s, maybe the Cavalier Z24, referring to it as the "same, old, inadequate J-car". The popular image of J-bodied vehicles of the time wasn't just "Chevy Cavalier" but that of a car design that was inferior from the wheels up. In the final analysis, the Cimarron wasn't just doomed for being a fancy Cavalier, but for being based on a cheap car whose design was so poor that even Chevrolet should've feared for their reputation. If only GM had taken a more ambitious approach to their downsizing program, and those first X- A- and J-cars of the early 1980s had been based on a higher-quality design (perhaps looking like Manoogian's "blue sky" sketch?), more along the lines of the subsequent releases of the C-cars of the later-half of the 80s, both the Cavalier and the Cimarron would be remembered quite differently.
GM's rather cynical, low-brow approach to downsizing is now clearly evident in the now-obviously forgettable the X- A- and J-cars of the early 80s were. And the worst part about this disaster is that cars like the C-bodied Buick Electra and Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight prooved that GM's downsizing program absolutely did not have to go down that way. In another Rare Classic Cars & Automotive History video on the late-1980s controversial Cadillac Seville, it was suggested that the new super-downsized Seville design looked like the then-N-bodied Pontiac Grand Am. And, in a way, this suggests (to me, at least) what a "great" Cadillac Cimarron (with more development) could have theoretically looked like. Should the Cimarron have been based on an N-body instead of a J? Maybe, but that's not the point. The point is that if GM were serious about merging its downsizing program with a new initiative to give Cadillac a new small car to compete directly with European sport sedans, it would probably need a higher-quality body design that would be closer to what actually became the 1986 Seville. And it would have to offer handling and acceleration characteristics at least on par with the mid-80s Chevrolet Celebrity and Pontiac 6000STE, if not better.
Then there's the question of motors. GM's front-wheel-drive/unibody downsizing revolution of the 1980s nearly wiped out all rear-wheel-drive cars equipped with V8s, and by the late 1980s nearly all car market segments GM catered to were bereft of rear-drive and V8s. So it made no sense for GM to offer these smaller, lighter front-drive unibody cars only to turn around and fit them with optional oversized engines. (Cadillac continuing to offer V8s as an example.) What was the whole point of investing billions in downsizing if GM wound up offering oversize engines in the downsized cars? The whole point of GM engaging in a massive downsizing program in the first place should have been to eliminate all V8s from all passenger cars, including the Corvette and the F-body Camaro/Firebird. In 1985, GM showed a 4.3 "Vortec" V6, fitted with a turbocharger, in the Camaro GTZ concept car. (The 4.3 V6, first introduced in the 1985 Astro minivan, was essentially a 350 cubic-inch V8 with two cylinders chopped off.) And GM should never have introduced the X-, A-, J- or N-bodies until the Oldsmobile 2.3-liter double-overhead-cam Quad4 motor was ready, and transmissions with overdrive gears to go with them. A new-for-1988 Cadillac Cimarron, using an improved N-body chassis and STE-style sport suspension and an Oldsmobile Quad4 engine (with a balance shaft for vibration harshness) would have been a positive addition to the Cadillac brand rather than a negative one. And Cadillac's DeVille and Seville would have been better off with a balance-shafted Buick V6 with tuned headers and roller cam tappets.
In 1990, Oldsmobile showed off a stunning engine concept: the Quad8. The Quad8 was a 90º V8, made simply of two of Oldsmobile's 2.3-liter Quad4's joined at the crankshaft, which should have produced from 300 to 320 horsepower from existing components. The point of bringing up the Quad8 is not to suggest that GM should have ever considered producing another new V8 for a passenger car. No, GM should have eliminated all V8s from new cars in the 80s. Instead, GM should have done what they did with the Astro's V6: make a QuadV6. If the Olds Quad4 made 150 to 160 horsepower, a QuadV6 should have been able to make 225 to 240 horsepower. GM could have also made another Quad4 derivative to provide a superior alternative to their lackluster small V6s: a 2.9-liter DOHC five-cylinder, the Quad5. The Quad5 could have made between 187 and 200 horsepower, vastly superior to GM's 2.8, 3.0 and 3.1-liter V6s of that era. The Quad4 and Quad5 would have made the A- and N-cars much more powerful and memorable and maybe even improved their fuel economy. They also would have made the lower trim levels of the F-body Camaro/Firebird much better. And a Quad5 would have been sweet in Pontiac's anemic Fiero. But a Quad4 or Quad5 in a Cimarron would have made it unrecognizable! And Seville and Eldorado with QuadV6's would have changed everything at Cadillac.
GM's downsizing disaster proves that mismanagement, rushing car lines to market without proper time for development, bad timing and lack of vision can destroy even the best of modernizing initiatives in an industry. And I've been saying crazy things like what I'm posting here since the Quad4 first came out back in the late 80s.
I had no idea of the Cimarron's 9-month gestation period. Intense dealer pressure notwithstanding, it's almost unfathomable the corporation would push such a rushed product into the showrooms of their premier brand. That it looked as good as it did is testament to the talent of this man. Just think what could have been accomplished if it been held back another model year (or two).
I love these interviews with John! John and Adam make a great team! Just from what he has said I would want John to design my next car. The sketches are amazing and Adam when you insert the actual cars in the video that is so helpful and enlightening. You and John have got to monetize this somehow!
John presents as such a gracious gentleman, in short his commentary is a true delight.
Both of you should remember that Success always has many clamoring to declare their fatherhood, while anything considered a failure also always seeks a Scapegoat.
Given what was required from John with the Cimarron, due to upper corporate demands, really a true boneheaded demand to make a Cadillac out of an inexpensive Chevy in mere months, in fact, he did the best that could be expected....not his fault at all, and he did surprisingly well with what he was given in that time frame It must have been a pleasure to work with John who obviously has a great sense of humor, and still has that humor to this day. Thanks to both of you.
Silk purse from a sow's ear.
He did his best with limited money and design choices.
I remember when the Cimarron came out. First thought was, "it's a glorified Cavalier".
Baffling what Cadillac was doing back in those days.
We bought our folks a top-of-the-line Brougham d'Elegance (you're not supposed to put 'Fleetwood' in front of it but if I don't somebody else will say I should have....) brand new in 1989. Worst piece of trash GM every let loose on Caddie owners.
It was the last Caddie our family ever bought. Horrible, unpardonable. And this was their top of the line.
We've had decent Chevys since then and Buicks. When I compare the fit and finish of our '74 Sedan deVille to our friends' Caddies - it's not until the past six, seven years that we're seeing a return to quality.
Maybe, for my 80th birthday it will be time to look at what was once a proud name, again.
I can't wait to see this . I have such a soft spot for these J body cars. Even if not especially the Cimarron by Cadillac.
In 2000 I bought a 1986 Cimarron for $550.00. I drove it 7 years! Had it for 13 years. I'd have another. I Loved it. I saw the first year model Cimarron in the show room. I liked it then!
Adam I enjoy your channel, I am in awe of your completeness, in-depth information of your car reviews and other automotive content.
I would love to own a Cimarron. They are piece of automotive history and extremely interesting 🧐
looking forward to it! I remember being fascinated by it when it came out. A cavalier with leather interior and all the power options. these days any little car has those.
I love these inside contacts you have! I love knowing the why a car was designed a particular way. Great video again!
Looking forward to this. That interview with John will be fun! Those first sketches he did look great by the way. Too bad GM couldn't have built them like that...
Great back story, Adam. I’ve always wondered why GM went this route. Talk about having your hands tied, ankles zipped, and mouth shut.
I owned 6 of them. YES 6 The V6 years 85 and up were much better. Loved every one of them.
Looking forward to the full video. I was always fascinated by the Cimarron.
Seems like he had a rather unenviable task frankly. "Hey gm I have all these great ideas for a small Cadillac" "no here's a cheap economy box, just do what you can with this, oh and you can only change a few things and we want the final design yesterday..." He literally did the best he could with what he had.
For God's sake, GM had a perfect Opel parts bin. Why not use Ascona dashboard and Recaro seats of the Irmscher version? Why not make the restyle in 1985 using composite headlights from Ascona or Camira? GM managers were damn stupid. Small Cadillac should be sporty not "broughamy".
Way too long to revalidate all those components and cars in the US given the timeline
@@RareClassicCars Upper management should have had the foresight to recognize that the only way to compete with European automakers was to bring in some of the excellent (at the time) Opels. This should have been done at project inception of the J-Bodies and not at the last possible minute. It's a shame we never got the Opel Vectra and especially the Wayne Cherry designed Opel Calibra which was in my opinion the most stylish GM car of the 80s-90s. Even with that stupid GM black plastic trim on the door. You have to see one in person to appreciate it, and it had an incredible 0.26 drag coefficient.
@@RareClassicCars This is an excellent series -Thank you for interviewing John. His work (when he was permitted to do it) was always handsome.
His story seems to confirm what I've always thought - GM had excellent designers and engineers who were the automotive equivalent of Michelin Star Chefs.... but when they took their recipes into the kitchen they were only given cans of beans and boxes of macaroni and cheese to work with.
A small point I would like to contribute is that GM management willfully chose the Chevy on which to base this car - Oldsmobile had a nicer version of the J car to use as a basis but GM ignored its existence.... for example it had a much nicer dashboard which would have literally dropped right in to the Cimarron, but in panic mode the first Cimarrons used the unaltered Chevy dash
At first glance the "blue sky" concept drawing looks very much like the later Catera. Interesting interviews.
There's a lot of the later CTS in it as well.
Glad you presented a teaser ahead of the main event. Gives us time to erect the bonfire in the public square
well at least you weren't told to transform s vega!
i drove one for about a year when i was 18….my friends and I had a ball rolling in the "Caddy" lol
I remember growing up in the 80’s and seeing this unique looking car. Even as a kid I knew of badge engineering. Most kids that I knew who were into to cars thought the caddy was pretty cool looking. Only as I got older , I read about so many negative comments. I never understood why there was so much hatred behind this vehicle. The Cavalier was praised as well as the Sunbird / J2000 and the Skyhawks. To me the caddy was the most attractive looking one. I know GM was looking for Caddy to create a compact for the younger market. But you know what Chevy model I believe would have made an excellent Caddy. The Chevy Celebrity sedan. Especially the face lifted model in 1986
I like this little car
The facelifted Cadillac cimarron is the one that they needed to put out. They screwed up by putting the ugly quad headlight one out. If they had to wait till fall of '85 then they should've waited....... However, one little thing here and there could have fixed the entire issue for the introduction model. Ditch the quad headlights later on the facelift for '86. Sure that's fine (everything was like that)
But, make the 1982 taillights unique from cavalier, and add a "caddy style" side marker lamp to accentuate the Cadillac style with the quad beams. And change the interior a bit. THE ENTIRE CAR BUMPER TO BUMPER LOOKED EXACTLY LIKE A CAVALIER. There's no doubt in my mind that they were ALL drinking too much alcohol on the job at GM.
PROBABLY STILL ARE TODAY.
I beg to differ. I much prefer the four rectangular headlights which are distinctly American versus the later Japanese / Euro lights.
@@markbehr88 well that's the reason they didn't sell. Marketing tactics have to seek out more than half the public to make anything profitable. NOBODY LIKED THE 1ST CADILLAC CIMARRON. BY THE TIME THE FACELIFT HAPPENED, NOT ONLY WAS IT TOO LATE BUT, THERE WAS MANY OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE OUT THERE, THAT WERE WAY WAY BETTER!!!! THEY SCREWED UP BY NOT ADDING THOSE "EURO STYLE LENSES" to the introduction model of the Cadillac Cimarron. After all, that was the whole idea of the Cadillac cimarron right, it was to compete with the European imports, right???? WELL, THEY DROPPED THE BALL BIG TIME. AND THE REST IS HISTORY!!
When it was introduced, they were only allowed to use the quad headlights per Govt regulation.
@@manthony225 they came out in 82, everything was sealed beams then, but what about the taillights????? 1986 was the fist year allowed by gov. for non sealed beams. In other words "integrated headlight lenses." They should have done it right the 1st time and made the taillights look cool and add a nice "caddy style" side marker lamp.. General Motors is cheap, always has been cheap. But, they can spin whatever kind of story they want, it's theirs. I mean, it's all about profitability anyway. They could really careless about anything else. They proved it by what they built. Inferior automobiles compared to everything else on the road at the time. As outdated as anything "NEW" could ever be.
Take Care! Stay safe out there! Getn bad 🇺🇸
@@thewiseguy3529 rather than emulate the Euros it would have been better to do a mini first gen Seville. More formal roof, vertical Cadillac tail lights etc. When US manufacturers try to do a Euro car, I am not sure who they are really appealing to? The Euro and Japanese buyers want exactly that - European and Japanese cars. There is also the cultural cringe from those people who will look down their noses at a US car , regardless of how good it is. The Euros and Japanese will always do their versions better than the US ones so my view is make it distinctly American and don’t try copy Euros etc. Look at US trucks. They are distinctly American and not trying to copy another country’s styling cues. Even if the later model was the launch design, it may have sold more but not many more and not to Euro or Japanese buyers. I’ve run Product Planning for GM and Ford and sticking to your unique position in the market and staying true to those core values is what works. Look at the Mustang. It almost ended up becoming extinct because some people thought the Probe was the answer.
My parents bought one of these and I ended up having to drive it in High School John!
Really enjoying the Channel!
I love Adam and John together. Interesting stuff! A friend way back when bought one of the first Cimarrons. You had to get it up to 3k RPMs just to get it to move. It was comfortable and a good-looking car, but it was a Chevy in drag at the end of the day, and for a lot more money. I thought the Buick Skyhawk was the nicest iteration of the five clones.
I always thought the Buick and the Pontiac were the best looking as well; especially the Sunbird with the tri headlight(fog) setup.
I have a soft spot for the Olds Firenza, but more for the later ones.
Adam, thanks again for having John giving his point of view about this small Caddy, wich, to be fair, it is a very honest job to be up to the demands of Cadillac Division Management Staff. Anyway, the car looks good, upscaled version of former J car platform, and all in a rush compressed in only 12 months, man, my hats off for the final result. I`m shure that is the cheapest Caddy model to mantain and preserve, because I think that if you`re going for a tie rod, a ball joint or a simple brake pads front disc, were the same related to a Cavalier or a Firenza J model, if I`m not wrong.
Always thought it was cool to get a Cadillac with a stick shift. The Cimarron was the first Caddy in decades with a manual transmission
1) You do a fabulous job with your channel, simply fabulous.
2) The difference between Cadillac and other premium brands such as BMW and Mercedes is really what is acceptable to the decision makers. BMW & Mercddes both made large and small cars. The difference is that their small cars were NOT considered "down market" cars. They are ultimately just as much as a brand builder as their large cars were. GM considered small cars as cheap cars (with good reason, the American public thought of small cars as down market cheap cars). GM was unwilling to redefine small as a premium car, even though ultimately, the Cimmaron was priced way above the cost of what it took to build it. GM priced the Cimmaron as a Cadillac believing the public believe there is a value in the name Cadillac. Which the Cimmaron proved there wasn't. The base Cimmaron price in 1983 was $12,181 ($5k above the similar Chevy Cavalier!). The 84 BMW 318i was $13,290
GM still made Oldsmobile and Buick versions though.
At first glance, potential buyers "perception of value" discounted these as a thinly disguised, completely uncompetitive econobox, which they were. A veneer of style no longer held court- or sway. Look at the boxes Mercedes sold. The premium market demanded quality engineering, style was secondary.
Furthermore, the "Cadillac" esteemed name value was long gone- it was like Packard, post-war. The Cimarron was a pronounced nail in the coffin.
The insulated entrenched bureaucracy of GM never understood that; still doesn't to this day.
@@loumontcalm3500 I agree with everything you stated with one exception. Cadillac today builds by far the best sedans they have ever built, but sadly, sedans are no longer favored by the general pop. I know I'm in the minority on this, but i am also a big fan of Mary Barra. What she has done and is about to do is fantastic. I just saw the 2024 Chevy Blazer SS. Wow! All electric, 565 hp, 300 mile range. Looks beautiful.
It amazed me at the time, that people who could have bought the BMW, for some inexplicable reason went and got a cimmaron.
I really liked these cars
We had the same looking Cavalier which was the perfect size but lacked the finer appointments
Don't feel bad, other than the hard leather seats, there was literally no difference between the cars. Tell yourself you were driving a Cadillac back then :)
Well done Adam. Can't wait to see Cimmaron part 2.
When this came out, there was not any loaded small cars with leather interior.. everyone I talked to that had one ,liked it.
I actually liked the Cimarron then and now. I've never owned one, but I would!
The civic and integra share almost no sheetmetal and use the same platform, not cost effective but probably a learned lesson from this car
I'm pretty sure that Honda never needed to learn anything from GM.
My grandparents had one of these when i was a kid. They had 3 Cadillac's, a late 80's and a '95 Fleetwood Brougham, and a early 80's Cimarron. My sister ended up with it as her first car and taught me to drive with it, I was maybe 10. She ended up crashing it soon after. My gma still drive the '95.
John was impressively ahead of his time with the second sketch. That would've been fresh a decade after the Cimmaron released, and honestly still could've been selling well into the early 00s. I see some Malibu in there.
Will be waiting
I saw one in the wild about 10 years ago
The easiest project is one with no constraints and no budget. The true badasses in the business are the ones who are able to somehow make chicken salad out of the chicken shit the company gives them. John is truly exceptional at his craft.. so happy that Adam has brought him to our homes to take it all in. Cheers!
Holden's version of the J car suffered similar issues...mainly drivetrain. It had to be released with the largest engine available for it of 1.6l and around 63kw. It had to be revved to get anywhere and didn't match well with an auto. Most competitors from Japan had 2l engines.
2yrs they had to wait for the new 1.8 injected unit that put out 83kw on leaded petrol. Headline was from slug to slingshot. Then unleaded petrol came along and they had to fit the US spec throttle body injected unit. Power dropped to 63kw ...slingshot to slug!
2 more years and the 2L injected unit arrived turning it back into a slingshot but the damage was done and the camira was gone a couple of years later.
Wow, the sketch of the proposed red Cimarron looks like an early 2000s Caddy