Good morning! Today we’re looking at two low-mileage examples of the same car, nine years apart. I make no apologies for the bad pun in the headline; sometimes these things just write themselves. Anyway, before we get to those, we have a twin-carb battle to settle up:
A clear win for the Volvo. As several of you pointed out, there really wasn’t a bad choice here; either one would make a fun classic you could be proud to own. It sounds like a lot of you shied away from the Triumph for worry over the cost and availability of parts, but for you I have two words: Moss Motors.
Today, we’re going newer – and bigger. I have found two examples of Cadillac’s flagship DeVille sedan, both with incredibly low miles, both nice and cheap, and, coincidentally, both pearl white. Which one is the better deal? Let’s take a look and see.
1991 Cadillac Sedan DeVille – $1,750
Engine/drivetrain: 4.9 liter overhead valve V8, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Laguna Hills, CA
Odometer reading: 66,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep
Here we have the sixth generation DeVille, the first front-wheel-drive edition. It features Cadillac’s “High Technology” V8, with an aluminum block and cast-iron heads. In classic GM fashion, this engine was introduced half-baked in 1982, had a buttload of problems, and gained a terrible reputation before it had a chance to earn a good one. But Cadillac stuck to its guns and continued to develop and improve the HT engine. By 1991, when this one was built, it displaced 4.9 liters and was pretty damn reliable – just in time to be replaced by the Northstar, which repeated the same pattern all over again. But we’ll get to that later.
This is a car I have some familiarity with. I drove an ’89 Coupe DeVille for a couple years several years ago, in similar condition to this one. Mine had electrical gremlins, like this one, but it also ran like a top, and absolutely floated down the highway. This one has a few other issues, namely a power steering rack with a pretty substantial leak. It does run and drive, but the seller says the rack should be replaced before the car is put into regular service. It also has a heater core leak, and the air conditioning is currently inoperative.
It is nice and clean, especially inside. And it just passed a smog test, so the engine is clearly in fine shape. I can tell you that you can expect a very comfortable ride, wallowy handling, mediocre brakes, and absolute crap gas mileage. But the mileage will improve if you change the rear bank of spark plugs that no one has ever changed because they’re an absolute pain in the ass to get to.
You won’t impress anyone with it, but you can also be certain it will be right where you left it, because who’s going to steal a scruffy 30 year old DeVille?
2000 Cadillac DeVille – $2,550
Engine/drivetrain: 4.6 liter dual overhead cam V8, four-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Odometer reading: 78,000 miles
Runs/drives? Sure does
Fast-forward nine years, and the “Sedan” part of the name was no more, primarily because the coupe was dropped after 1993. The HT engine was also history, replaced by the more powerful four-cam Northstar engine, which also had teething problems but eventually got better. This car is also packed with electronic doodads and bric-a-brac, but from the sounds of it, it all works. It’s hard to tell for sure; this ad reads like a bad translation from another language, or the product of an AI chatbot.
It also includes quite a lot of “junk in the trunk,” including yoga and pilates DVDs, various tools, and CDs from Agent Orange, Ice-T, Yo Yo Ma, what looks like it might be Journey’s Greatest Hits, and a comedy album from Joe DeRosa. (This trunk is large; it contains multitudes.)
But for all the ad weirdness, this does seem like a decent deal. The interior looks nice, and with the exception of the fake convertible “carriage” top, the outside looks pretty good too. I do question the “new tires” claim, since it appears to have three blackwalls and one white; it makes me wonder if the fourth new tire is in the trunk with a flat, and the whitewall is the twenty-year-old spare. Best to check.
With only 78,000 miles, this car should have quite a bit of life in it, as long as you keep up on the maintenance. Northstar V8s do not tolerate overheating or running low on oil, so get used to popping the hood and checking things out every time you gas it up. (Actually, that’s not bad advice on any older car.)
Old luxury cars, especially American ones, can be great deals as used cars. They hold their value about as well as last week’s lottery tickets, and some of the luxury toys might not work any more, but if the mechanical elements are sound, you can get a nice comfy ride for cheap. Either of these old Caddys would fit the bill; which generation are you going for?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
Voted 2000, not really sure why.
The 91 wins if I was looking for cheap family hauler. My parents had a 2003 with no NorthStar engine issues or fake convertible top.
I could throw 1k at the 91 and still have a reliable car.
Went with the ’91 because I just can’t bring myself to drive a car that has a fake convertible top and gigantic window-framed doors.
It’s like if a bald guy wore a wig that had eyebrow attachments dangling off of it.
It’s like someone who has an artist paint realistic clothing onto their naked body, then wears a tank top with it anyway.
It’s like shooting a movie in front of an expensive green screen set, but there’s a piece of chair rail trim on the back wall that nobody bothered to remove so you just shoot the green screen stuff over it.
It’s like you’re a school lunch lady with enough canned tuna to feed 80 kids, but you have to feed 100 kids so you take a box of saltine crackers and mix it in with the tuna to get an extra 20-kids worth of food and you think that’s totally cool.
It’s like when your kids really want some Dr. Pepper, but you’re at the wrong store and all they have is “Dr. Freshy” so you buy that and serve it to them in a glass that’s missing a chunk so it dribbles all over those ungrateful little bastards when they go to drink it.
It’s like you begged Mom for a pair of Nikes, but she got you flip flops, so you took some leather and stapled it to the top of the flip flops and told your friends you had some kick ass tennis shoes.
It’s an automotive sock stuffed in a pair of tighty whities.
I needed this today! Thanks Sid!
Someone’s gunning for COTD — and I respect the game. Take your star.
This is a masterpiece. It deserves COTD.
2000 all the way. Those earlier (transverse engine) front drive caddy’s just never had the right proportions (to me) to look correct. The later body styles (like the 2000) got it right.
Both engines can have their issues, but I’d rather take the power of the Northstar, better safety, more modern convenicnces, and the stronger transaxle of the 2000.
91 easily. That interior looks pretty damn good, green digital dash is amazing and the cons aren’t that scary. Good thing it’s across the country from me because the price makes this “ask for forgiveness, not permission” territory.
The vibe that ’91 gives off is something I yearn for in life.
I sold my ’94 due to the power steering rack with 200k miles on it.
It had the 4.9. I’d have put the rack in it if it only had 70k miles. That motor put out a ton of torque, but with no knock sensor… always premium fuel.
I’ll take a factory top over a hack job. It’s a tough choice but with similar crash survivability (let’s be real, automotive steel didn’t have a ton of advancements in the 90’s) … I’ll drive the 91 all day long.
The best case against the Northstar is that the LS existed at the same time. GM should have realized that nobody cares about getting a “Cadillac engine” anymore, especially not when you already have a better engine that can power anything from a work van to a Corvette. All that said, I’d still go with the 2000 Deville in this showdown. It’s legitimately a bargain for $2,500 and I’d rather not play leaking component whack-a-mole with the older version.
True that, a Bush-era Caddy with an LS4 swap from a Grand Prix or Impala would be sweeeeeet.
I voted for the ’91, but I don’t see either of these being a bad choice for the money.
Maybe buy both and have a low budget VIP convoy everywhere you go? Get a bunch of friends, and when you pull up in front of Dave And Buster’s, five guys in matching powder blue track suits jump out of the lead Caddy. Four station themselves at the trailing Caddy corners while the 5th opens the back door. You step out in a maroon velour track suit, and you and your entourage sweep in and get the good table. You know, the round booth in the back.
Everyone would wonder who the hell you are.
“If you’re looking for a better steak in an arcade setting, you are shit out of luck!”
I now aspire to this.
I went with the 2000 even though it’s shedding its skin, as I need A/C
My old man lived by the mantra “Nothing says you made it like a big red Cadillac.” Dang nabbitt those old Caddy seats are perfect for a 4 hr drive. Just Perfect.
I wouldn’t take either of these ones, but there has got to be a pretty nice red one floating around at the $10k mark, right?
(Either way, I’m just glad that hopefully everyone has gotten their stance on EVs and why it does or doesn’t work for them out of their systems by this point in the week, so we can get back to talking fun stuff. Enough with the EV hypotheticals already! haha)
Tan interiors are better than gray, so I chose the later car
Northstar over here. Those engines are well known and a lot of bugs were ironed out by then. The 2000 also has half a prayer in a crash compared to the 1991.
The vinyl tops are so gross. So as others have said, I am just going with the 91 based on its top being slightly less gross. Also, the 2000 just feels off for some reason. Probably the AI write up, combined with the junk in the trunk. No one wants that, throw it away and the value goes up!
I would, reluctantly, approach the open trunk of the Northstar model, fan out 15 hundos atop the crap-pile and ask yea or nay?
And the offer would be good for about 7 seconds.
For less than $2 large the interior on the ’91 looks like it’s in better shape than my current living room
The ’91 Caddy picture smells like coconut oil, Ben-Gay and the ol’ farts just did a round of Bocci ball or golf…
“Bocce”
“Ben Wa”
Bustin’
I’m not afraid of the Northstar, but if I’m gonna chose one of those ugly tops, it’s going to be the one that looks less ugly.
Although I don’t know how much I’d trust that ’91 either.
AI generated description sounds right for the second one. 2000 was a redesign for the DeVille, so it should be a 1999 at the newest. The top on it is in rough shape, and how do you spend $600 in new tires and yet they’re still mismatched? Left rear is a whitewall. Are they on the stock wheels that are included? Can’t place what Caddy those pictured are actually from. Also the pics of the sides that are more scenic images of the parking lot.
I’ll take the ’91.
Didn’t think I’d go in this direction, but ’91 for me.
I feel like the ’91 was “old wealthy guy owned” based on the neighborhood it is sitting in. Maybe the owner fell ill and it had a few things spring leaks. The interior looks pristine, the exterior pretty good. Yes, it needs mechanical work, but it is 32 years old.
The ’00 fabric roof has seen better days, and the trunk full of random shit is throwing me off a bit here since it is just strange. Almost seems like it was a tow that no one claimed so they’re selling it “as-is” including CDs and DVDs.
I voted for the ’91 because S Q U A R E
Missed opportunity to title the article: “Lawyer Up!” I’ll take the ‘91 and slap a “LWYRUP” vanity plate on that would make Saul proud.
The hardest choice is between two good things! And both passing Calif emissions! I could see my grandkids rolling proud in either one.
Del Boca Vista baby! I’ll take the one with the fish on the floorboard.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Is the guy selling the one with all the shit in the trunk having a Chinese garage sale, or just too old to carry all that shit to the trash can?
I’ve ridden in a Cadillac hundreds of times…no, THOUSANDS!!!
Good gawd both of these are stupid dirt cheap. And they run. And they are both in good shape. Hell- I don’t need one but if someone down the street from me had one of these that cheap? Hell yeah!