The eighth-generation Cadillac Eldorado is the car I picture when I hear the word “Eldorado,” often shouted at the top of someone’s lungs in a tone that wavers between mournful and reverential. To me, this Eldorado, the one built between 1967 and 1970, is the archetypal Eldorado — the platonic ideal. This was the first front-wheel-drive Cadillac, based on the amazing Oldsmobile Toronado platform, and was a car with real presence. It also had rear quarter windows that opened like no other car I can think of.
The Eldorado was a personal luxury coupé, but not a small two-door — we’re talking a two-door with doors the size of kitchen islands and the ability to comfortably seat six non-waifish people. The flat floor helped, because, remember, this was a FWD car with no need for a driveshaft and its associated hump, but also because the whole car was, you know, huge.
Maybe “huge” isn’t the right word, because that just implies some sort of all-over bulk. The Eldorado carried its size and mass in places designed to maximize drama, more than anything else. Just look at the initial clay models for the car that would become the Eldorado, then known just as XP825:
(photos: GM)
Dear lord, look at that thing! It looks like someone swabbed the inside of Syd Mead‘s cheek with a Q-Tip, then shoved it into a pile of clay, and this thing grew out of that, after a month of carefully tending and soaking in gin.
The production car wasn’t quite that dramatic, but it was pretty damn close:
(image: Cadillac)
That wildly long hood, big enough to let a kids’ soccer team practice on it, housed the amazing Toronado-derived FWD drivetrain, but with a longitudinally-mounted engine specific to Cadillac, a 429 cubic-inch V8 (that’s over 7 liters!) making 340 horsepower and sending its power in a sort of U-shape to the transaxle mounted next to it:
(image: Cadillac)
It’s a pretty incredible layout; transverse FWD setups would soon make this sort of thing pretty much extinct, but let’s just take a moment to appreciate the madness of it all…
OK, with that out of the way, let’s try to get back to my main point here, which has to do with the design of the car. As you know, this was a coupé, and as such just had two doors. Oh, and since we’re talking about those massive doors, I have to point out something incredible: If you were in the back seat, and needed to get out, you weren’t dependent on the whims of whoever was sitting up front to open those massive doors. That’s because each door had two door opening handles, one for the front seat passengers and en extra one for the rear:
(screenshot: YouTube)
Look at that! I love it. You may also notice in that picture there is a little window switch on the armrest, or in the 1967 Eldo (the one up there is a ’69), a cute little crank:
(screenshot: YouTube)
The point of these switches and cranks is, of course, to open and close that tiny sliver of window near the rear. It’s so small you wouldn’t think it’d do much for ventilation – and, besides, this is a Caddy, it damn well better have A/C – but it’s more about this:
See that beautiful, pillar-less opening of the windows? You cant have that if there’s a little chunk of glass messing up the look. So that bit needs to go away. And that’s where we get to the unique bit.
Because look at where that window is; it’s right above where the door meets the body. If it rolls down like a conventional window, where the hell are you going to put the glass in there? It doesn’t look like there’s room!
And there really isn’t! Unless you do this:
(screenshot: YouTube)
See that? The glass retracts rearward, into the C-pillar! Amazing! Here it is again, this time powered, courtesy of YouTube channel Rare Classic Cars & Automotive History:
While there are plenty of other cars that open their windows by sliding sideways – I’m thinking like early Minis and Renault 4s and early Microbuses – but this may be the only example I can think of where a window retracts rearwards into a body panel? Maybe there is another – the automotive universe is so vast there likely is – but I can’t find one so far.
There is a sort of precedent, though, from Cadillac themselves, and while the goal was slightly different, the action of a bit of rear quarter glass sliding rearward is the same. In that case, on the 1960 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham (of which only 107 were made) there was a little pointy window pane that retracted a bit into the C-pillar when you’d open the door or lower the window, mostly so it wouldn’t stab you when you got into the car. The owner’s manual describes it:
(image: Cadillac)
It’s not exactly an opening window, but it does show Cadillac had some experience with rearward-sliding windows.
But back to the 8th-gen Eldo’s windows: it’s just such an incredible little detail, and somehow it fits with the whole tone and feel of the car – elegant and powerful and unexpected, somehow. In case you weren’t aware of this before, I hope your life is a little improved for knowing about it now.
That black ’67 with the red interior is what I will roll up to Autopian Towers in every morning from now on.
Magnificent. Simply magnificent.
This is the type of Autopian content we live for.
Story idea for Torch: a dive into cars with those bonus door handles for rear-seat passengers. This Caddy had ’em, so did some variants of the early ’90s 4Runner.
Lincoln Mark 3 quarter windows went into the C-Pillar
Oh, that’s nothing, in 1954 Kaiser made the entire door disappear.
I know that these days lots of cars have trunks that you can open from the inside, but gosh letting your kids in the backseat open the doors in front seems just a little bit too tempting to the average five-year-old.
I’d love to restomod a Kaiser Darrin just to electrify those slick doors. I’d make sure some kind of “hsssss” sound was played when they opened/closed as if the car was built to 1950’s future-spaceship specs.
To quote the Cadillac salesman talking to Don Draper:
“Pontiac’s a fine car for going places. The Cadillac is for when you have arrived.”
… in this case, a few minutes after the front bumper.
The initial design looks like they eventually reused it backwards for the Buick Riviera, right down to the creased glass.
Designs used to have enough variety and exploration that even the pieces that didn’t make it very far were fun. Designing wasn’t just an exercise to make everything the cheapest it could possibly be.
Of the many reasons that interest in cars has largely waned, car designs just aren’t any fun. The Tesla Model Y (Tesla in general, really) perfectly showcases the current cynical nature of design. (and I don’t have issues with EVs in general) Tesla’s designs are pure, cheap, and unadulterated garbage that is being sold as innovation.
Tesla is the poster child for what happens when people give up.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people that “minimalism” wasn’t just cost-cutting in disguise…
You have no idea how wrong you are. For example, in a house they’re all sorts of details that are there to cover up where things connect to each other. Getting rid of those details cost really big money.
Most of the “styling” on cars seems to exist to cover up shoddy workmanship. Vinyl roofs, plastic cladding, and chrome trim to cover up seams are my least favorite examples.
The Porsche 356 for example would have been much cheaper if it didn’t have that seamless minimalist design.
I don’t understand all the hate for Tesla‘s styling. At least it doesn’t look like a half open bag of potato chips driving down the road like a Lexus.
Take a look at the frunk area of a Model 3. It’s really clean and there are no visible fasteners. They put a lot of effort into that.
A fastenerless “frunk” isn’t in the same ballpark of importance as the objectively dangerous ergonomics resulting from the delusion that is Tesla minimalism.
Lots of design is to cover up junk, whether styled as “minimalism” or as added “features.” The question is which is which. Tesla minimalism is 100% a fraud. Every bit as the worst tacked-on vinyl roof and wide “chrome” trim pieces were for late 80s GM.
So, was this chain drive reliable?
The UPP was, and produced virtually no torque steer despite the massive engines coupled to it. Aside from the Eldorado, the arrangement was also used for the Oldsmobile Toronado and GMC Motorhome
Also, it allows the rear passengers to throw their cigarette out the window, as was the style at the time.
I have thought from time to time of owning a Toronado or, if needs must, an Eldo. And that window might just be enough to put me over the edge. Do I need a colossus of Detroit hubris? Hell no. But as a man committed to the glory that is the vent window, its lesser known cousin that is the sidelight, especially a crank-operated sidelight, must get some acknowledgment as well.
Also: if we’re paying any homage to the unabashed weirdness of a U-shaped drivetrain, let’s pause for a moment for the SAAB 900, with its slant-4 taking power through a big chain, like the Eldo-Toro twins, into a tranny mounted under/beside the engine and sending it to the front wheels. But to mix in that ineffable SAAB weirdness, the engine is backwards – the power takeoff is at the front of the car. Because SAAB.
I love weird cars. Gargantuan torque monster driving the front wheels? Hell yeah. Swedish bonkers drivetrain? Bring it.
And the Saab 4 cylinder is Triumph derived
If Cadillac built that concept into production today, I’d buy it. No haggling. Just LOOK at that thing. Dear lord……
Anyway, when I was a kid delivering papers in my hometown, an old steel town (it sound cliche, but its true…) a retired steel exec on my route had an Eldorado that looked something like the blue one above.
I don’t know what it was like to ride in one, but it looked cool as hell.
When I was a kid, my oldest sister took piano lessons from an old Russian lady that had been near Royalty back when. She had three things that she had to have. A Caddy and two Steinway full Grands. The rest she claimed to not care about.
She hardly ever drove but will would trade in her Caddy every couple years for a new one. My dad found out how bad the dealership was hosing her and told her that he would pay $100 more than what she was going to trade the car in for to buy it.
As a result, he got a 3 year old Coupe DeVille that had 300 miles for less than the price of a new Chevy in 1971. That was our family car for most of my childhood. I spent a TON of time sleeping in the back seat on long drives. He totaled it in 1979 with about 130k miles and hadn’t spent a dime other than tires and batteries.
The best part of this story is how he totaled it. Dad was driving around an Army Base. If you ever been to an Army base, the buildings all look the same and are numbered using a random number generator. Dad was looking for a building he had never been to before and not paying attention. He was almost stopped, but not completely and he rolled slowly into the back of a Pinto.
The Pinto had 5 mph bumpers which were on giant spring loaded shocks. As the Caddy rolled forward, these springs compressed until finally it had enough push to kick back. When the spring kicked back, the bumper brackets under the Caddy let go and the bumper rotated and this put the grill through the radiator and into the fan.
Didn’t put a scratch on the Pinto.
I was young when this happened so I don’t remember much about that car other than it being all gold (and rust) and that the backseat had enough room for me to sleep on our basset hound. But it must have rode well, because me and the dog slept well (until the other dog started barfing. Something about that car made her barf constantly).
He later got her 71 Caddy, which she had kept for years. It was NOT in good shape. Too much sitting, use of 87 instead of 91 and even a fire. I got to drive it and it would make you laugh until you about puked.
The problem was the Pants. This mean that you couldn’t put a wider tire on the back. That 472 would ignite one of them (open differential) at half throttle. When it eventually got traffic, it would teleport to 35 and then spend about 15 seconds shifting into 2nd gear. When it finally did, it would teleport to around 80. It was WAY too much torque for those skinny tires and the transmission was tuned for super slow shifting (plus bad vacuum leaks). But on the highway, it would eat miles like nobody’s business. 90-100 mph was easy cruising.
I have been on Army bases. My wife ended her Naval career in the Ramstein area, so the RAB is there, as LARMC, Panzer Kaserne,and the Kaiserslautern Army Depot.
The building numbering system was random and/or drug induced on every single one of them, even RAB.
Meanwhile, Navy bases are like street addresses.
My grandparents had one of these when I was a kid. When you’re five that is the absolute coolest thing ever. My granddad was an overly cautious man though and he was always afraid that they would break and be a nightmare to fix. They never broke though.
Such a great detail. Those little rollers had a nice feel to them as well – my ’67 deVille used them for opening/closing the vent/wing/smokers-windows in the front. Very precise.
This is one of my dream-list bucket-cars. Thankfully they still seem attainable, although I really want the ’68 Eldorado. Having the hideaway headlights and the 472 is a grail of a combination.
That concept car is pure Batmobile vibe
I just watched a Junkyard Gold about Cadillacs and Steve Magnante specifically called out the rear interior door latches, and how they went away on the next generation.
Kind of like the rubber oil caps?
that was such a great show
It’s incredibly relaxing, just Steve wandering around talking about cars. I wish they could make more.
The 1967- 1971 Thunderbird coupes had the same bitchin’ rear window drama going on,Jason.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d have assumed they were on some good drugs.
Alcohol is a drug. So is nicotine. This thing reeks of Glenfiddich Single Malt and Cuban cigars, even through a computer screen.
Bill Mitchell, who was GM VP of Design at the time, liked a lunchtime martini or three. There’s a story about him having to be rescued from a tree one morning….
Saab 96 and Saab 95 windows in the doors rotate rather than going straight up and down. It’s pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpHnBys9JPk
Stratos did it even weirder/cheaper.
https://youtu.be/47sjRyCj6pA?si=W9v4yOV1SXHLmSwK&t=372
The first generation Legacy rear windows rotated at the end of travel so the front end could lower a little bit more than the rear, which was limited in its travel by the door having to conform to the rear wheel arch. It was an unnecessary bit of engineering, but that’s the kind of thing I like (and I never had an issue from it or any of their robust scissor regulators as opposed to the POS nylon-pulley-and-bike-shifter-cable setup used by so many others).
Nifty!
If I’m not mistaken, I seem to recall that the 71-74 Toronados did the same.