Eldorado Days

"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura) 07/13/2018 at 12:28 • Filed to: None

1

37

‘76 is the pinnacle year. 425 CID V8 rated at 180 horsepower.

Chariotoflove > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:36

1

That is spectacular, right down to the hub caps and whitewalls.

benjrblant > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:36

2

That we’ve gone from 180hp out of a 7-liter V8 to getting 350hp out of a 2.3l I4 is mind boggling.

fintail > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:37

2

No 500 in 76?

These still had a bigly amount of torque to waft them along . And fender extensions.

InFierority Complex > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:38

0

Unfortunately you’re only allowed to listen to this on repeat while diving.

Man, I want to drive a 7 0s American landbarge so bad.

C62030 > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:41

0

There’s a coupe for sale right across from my house for $5k in thoroughly acceptable condition. It’s also literally right next to a ‘77 Town Car and I’m really having trouble restraining myself.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:44

2

TysMagic > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 12:51

0

this is me c ir ca 2007ish driving the pinnacle - my dad owned and restored this 76 Eldorado. He sold it before it reached peak cool however...has it reached peak cool?

WilliamsSW > fintail 07/13/2018 at 13:04

1

76 was the last year for the 500 actually. Made a whopping 190 horsepower.

Most any engine from this era can’t breathe at all in stock form - which means that it won’t rev, either. That 190 HP is at 3,600 RPM - practically diesel territory .   Although let’s face it, your average Cadillac driver wasn’t planning on getting past 3,600 RPM much anyways...

WilliamsSW > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:04

0

What a gorgeous color!!

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > benjrblant 07/13/2018 at 13:14

2

Only surprising in the context of the headwind offered by emissions limits. Consider that the Coventry Climax F1 FWMV engine at 1.5l *naturally aspirated* was turning out 174hp. In 1961. The C osworth DFV at 3.0l (also NA) could get over 400hp in 1965.

Late ‘50s/early ‘60s engines did pretty okay before attempts to shave tiny slivers of economy and emissions in the low to mid range saw compression numbers go in the toilet and venturi sizes strangled so far that no engine could maintain torque through operating range. Small venturis, greater atomization at low RPM permitting the use of less fuel... and HORRIFIC pumping losses at anything over a slow rumble. Drive slow, economy okay, drive fast, economy *worse*.

18 years before this Caddy, Lincoln was offering a 400HP option with an engine the same size - gross hp to be sure, but easily 80% of that as delivered, as modern tuning on that same engine has opened up to much higher than that, net. The amazing thing is how much it cratered in 18 years, not how far it’s come in 40.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 07/13/2018 at 13:16

0

Only surprising in the context of the headwind offered by emissions limits. Consider that the Coventry Climax F1 FWMV engine at 1.5l *naturally aspirated* was turning out 174hp. In 1961. The Cosworth DFV at 3.0l (also NA) could get over 400hp in 1965.

Are these production, domestic market engines?

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > benjrblant 07/13/2018 at 13:16

0

Or that even from a V6, 300 horsepower is commonplace. And getting 25 mpg -- or more -- on the highway at the same time.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > WilliamsSW 07/13/2018 at 13:19

1

Yours ? I am impressed with you more each day.

‘76 is also the first year currently still requiring smog testing in California. The ‘75 wouldn’t, but it’s just not as epic as the ‘76, IMHO.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > InFierority Complex 07/13/2018 at 13:21

0

Music: Ew.

I liked the ‘77 Caprice:

Milky > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:21

1

I disagree.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > C62030 07/13/2018 at 13:22

0

$5k seems CP-ish to me.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > TysMagic 07/13/2018 at 13:23

1

It has in my book, but that’s a pretty thin endorsement. Great pic, though; thanks for posting it.

WilliamsSW > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:26

0

I wish!! I love the color of this thing- and yeah, there is something special about the ‘76 convertible, despite the smog-choked engine.

I’m really a bit partial to cars about 10-15 years older than this one, and saving my pennies for one of GM’s finest from that era.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:28

0

Certainly not, Formula 1 engines in fact, but with the limits of non-computer-aided design, in many respects less far removed from what was possible in a production car. However, my mass-produced example of *1958*, years further back still, was half as powerful per cube and still more than twice the Cadillac. The ability to take that F1 engine and make its level of performance reproducible with modern parts control and ability to dynamically control ignition timing and vary compression (turbo)... a half century later? That’s barely a wonder at all.

What should also be considered is that nearly every engine of that time was fairly far from its peak potential in terms of tune. Claims to the contrary, it is *not* as easy now to spend a week’s salary to wring drastically more power out of one’s car as it was then. A cam job, an intake, and a carb swap to upgrade performance well over 50% today? Unheard of. All that is to say that the fundamentals haven’t changed that much, but the level of refinement making it to market has.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > WilliamsSW 07/13/2018 at 13:32

0

I like the blue one better.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Milky 07/13/2018 at 13:34

0

You are allowed to be incorrect.

I choose the ‘76 and call it the pinnacle because it’s just so utterly ridiculous.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > WilliamsSW 07/13/2018 at 13:36

1

I choose the ‘76 because it’s so utterly, abjectly, obdurately ridiculous. And American.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 07/13/2018 at 13:39

0

Yes, to all that, though you are quantum levels more expert than I am. Still, that 300 hp and 25+ mpg from a V6 nowadays are commonplace, would be your story retold in my terms.

WilliamsSW > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:41

0

Most Cadillacs built between about 1929 and 1976 pretty much fit that description in some form or another.  I tend to prefer Oldsmobile and Pontiac over Cadillac, but the ‘55, ‘60, and mid-60's Caddys are favorites of mine.

fintail > WilliamsSW 07/13/2018 at 13:44

1

What was the torque?  Had to have been 300-350 - just right for cruising at no more than 65 mph, which is as much as most of these have probably ever seen.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > WilliamsSW 07/13/2018 at 13:45

1

My dream car today is a Cadillac CTS-V.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:56

1

The marriage of those two (efficiency and economy) lies a surprisingly great deal in the transmission, in modern tire tech, and in oil chemistry - most people are aware of the modern wind tunnel but it’s just the tip of the iceberg. The peak of engine efficiency also doesn’t count quite so much as how the drive system as a whole copes with operation in suboptimal ranges.

Or to put that another way - advance in specific output is much less impressive than the ability to tame it. As you suggest, although V6 implying small cuts two ways - it’s easier to run a small engine fast (high, but limited use peak numbers) and yesteryear had different ideas about what was appropriate partial load.

I drive a car with ~200hp and ~14mpg on a regular basis, which is monkey-crude in almost every respect of drivetrain - it is also 55 years old. To see a step up from that in the time since is a good thing to see, but perhaps expected.

WilliamsSW > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 13:56

0

They’re nice - and that supercharged V8 is just silly good.

WilliamsSW > fintail 07/13/2018 at 13:59

1

Wikipedia says 360@2000, so yeah.  These things are tremendously wallowy and nose-heavy, so it’s not like they’re fun for much beyond puttering around town or highway cruising at the speed limit.  

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > WilliamsSW 07/13/2018 at 14:03

1

Take your family drifting.

C62030 > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 14:25

0

Yeah, but I reeeeeeally like them.

Kiltedpadre > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 14:40

0

Yet I still want it SO BAD! My fondness for land yachts is strong, and it only gets stronger when the behemoth is a convertible.

I want to float down the road in this car; trilby in place, wearing a gaudy Hawaiian shirt, and smoking a cigar.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > C62030 07/13/2018 at 15:59

0

It’s the strangulated engine that can’t rev base 2,000 rpm that makes it perfect.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Kiltedpadre 07/13/2018 at 16:00

0

And some appropriate slap...

Kiltedpadre > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 16:11

0

I’m thinking my Ray Charles based Spotify station. Oh, and Snoop Dogg with Gin and Juice.

Maybe even this version:

Im hillbilly enough to pull it off. I’m wearing a straw hat and bibs to work as we speak.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Kiltedpadre 07/13/2018 at 16:18

0

I just signed up for Spotify Premium Family and put everyone on it and what a great investment.

C62030 > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 07/13/2018 at 16:56

0

Revs are overrated.