Caddy Vs BMW

  • Thread starter Thread starter MattC
  • 83 comments
  • 2,847 views
M

MattC

(Banned)
Messages
56
If you could go back in a time machine to 1975 with the equivalent of 40-50K in today's money, which would you get? Lol!:)

Caddy Seville (206 inches long, 4,300 lbs) $12,479 180 hp, 0-60 mph 11.5 Vs BMW 530i (190 inches long, 3,300 lbs) $9,187 176 hp, 0-60 mph 8.7 seconds.

Seville

79.cadillac.elegante.500.jpg



&


e12 530i

MishaStLorant530i_01.jpg
 
BMW. Faster, cheaper, probably better fuel economy, probably better handling, and it'll fit on British roads. Plus I could buy the 530 here, and I doubt the Seville ever offically made it across the pond.
 
Neither. Since there would be an oil crisis going on, i'd use the money to buy myself a sweet motorbike, challenge the local head hancho, beat him at his own game, and become the leader of the pack...VROOM VROOM! :sly:
 
the bimmer...the caddy aint't no car, its a boat. handling wise as well as regarding its size, thirst and acceleration. ;)
 
Anyone who would even consider buying a Cadillac made before '90 for anything other than a collector's item is an idiot. (By the way, it's not a boat. It's a yacht, get it right.)

I wouldn't own the BMW either, because it sucks as well.
 
I would have to agree with Poverty here... Mercedes kicked both their respective asses back then.
However, strictly between the Bimmer and the Caddy, I would have to take the Bimmer. There would be a major fun-to-drive factor there that the Cadillac doesn't have.
 
Someone would have to hate BMWs to pick the Caddy -- just look at the numbers. That's a rather silly comparison. :p

That said, out of these two, I'd pick the BMW of course. But if I were given a choice to buy whatever I wanted, there are several cars that I'd be looking at...BMW 2002tii or 2002 Turbo, maybe a BMW 3.0CS or CSL, Porsche 930, Datsun 240Z, Toyota Celica, Mercedes 450SL, Volkswagen GTI........
 
Cadillac wassent even a compeditor to BMW back in the 1970's. Back then, BMW was a bit more of a "everyman's" car with much lower prices, poor build quality, and not too great of a repuation as good car brand atleast here in the US.

To put it simply: In 1975, I wouldnt have gone with either.
 
YSSMAN
To put it simply: In 1975, I wouldnt have gone with either.
Click to expand...
👍 Exactly.

In 1975, luxury was this: Buick Electra 255 Hardtop
1272713img7mt.jpg


Torquey 455, longest hardtop GM made.
 
I actually quite like the simplicity of these BMW sedans, it's just a box with an engine in the front and rear wheel drive, and just like nowadays everything else is an option. But with an old one like that I wouldn't mind as much.
 
I'd buy a bicycle and spend the rest of the money on luxury for a week or two.
 
Roo
BMW. Faster, cheaper, probably better fuel economy, probably better handling, and it'll fit on British roads. Plus I could buy the 530 here, and I doubt the Seville ever offically made it across the pond.
Click to expand...

Exactly :) That and i'm not a great fan of the older caddys.
 
I am with skip, that electra is a beauty !
**EDIT**

how about these two coupes ?


VS.

Sitting on a 130" wheelbase, the car is 231" long and 80" wide, longer than most full size trucks and wider than an Hummer H2.

The 500 cubic inch V8 provides adequate power in stock form fed through a TH400 3 speed automatic, stock 1/4 mile times were around 18 which wasn't too bad for a full size in the 70s. Expect about 8-10mpg city, up to 14 cruising at 65 on the highway. The 500 was rated at 190hp and 380 ft.lbs. of torque, however for some reason they were underrated and actually put out 300hp and nearly 500 ft.lbs when rebuilt to stock specs. For a little more oomph to get the 5049 pound sedan moving there are many performance parts available, anywhere up to 600hp can be done for fairly cheap and more for more money.
 
I'd sure pick that Caddy, you can't beat it's presence and the 500 cid Caddy's a beast 👍
 
Roo
BMW. Faster, cheaper, probably better fuel economy, probably better handling, and it'll fit on British roads. Plus I could buy the 530 here, and I doubt the Seville ever offically made it across the pond.
Click to expand...

Same again, but replace 530 with 6-series and Seville with whatever that second car was.
 
You're gettin the crappy seville..
You need to get the slant back seville..
Great..great car..and could manage about 30mpg on the highway
 
the BMWs fuel economy with the "big" sixes wasnt that hot. the 3.0 sedans that predated the seven series had economy in the teens. the E12s obviously had better aero, lighter weight, and so on, but i cant imagine the fuel economy would have been much better.

i would still have taken a BMW. i wouldnt take any caddy car over a bmw competitor. period. yes, that means an E46 M3 over a CTS-v too.

while i looooove the styling and size of the X5 the SRX is a far more practical vehicle. id prefer it.
 
What's this!? An oppinion?
Big deal, Driftster. C A doesn't like Cadillac, or that particular one. Get over it.
I've got nothing against that Caddy, but I simply would prefer a sporting car to it. In fact, I like new Cadillacs much better than new BMW's.
 
I've been to this thread a couple of times now. Some interesting replies..

And I think I'm about to leave my chosen path - But that Caddy, in the picture posted in this thread, looks (IMHO, and each to his own and all that) pretty friggin' badass !.. And I would take that over the same age BMW.. I mean, it just has that "I don't give a rats ass what you think" approach.. I wouldn't mind having one of those - if I had a Garage with a "Strike First" alarm system on it...
 
If were going to talk about 1970's BMWs, the old 2002's and the M1 would get my vote over quite a few American, British, Italian, and Japanese cars... But being that both are pretty rare here in the US, I'd have one helluva good time trying to find either.

...But if were talking about DeTomasso Panteras (by Ford), V8 Vantages, Ferrari Dinos, Celica 1600 GTs (Yeah, they arent that cool, but I'd love to have one), etc. the BMWs arent going to fly, unless its an M1...
 
Hey, if all these guys that say they're not gonna take neither, don't post. The original post was asking you which would you take, not would you take one or pass both. Either answer or don't post.

I'd take the Cadillac. Why bother with fuel economy when you can afford those cars? Its like saying "get a S65 AMG Hybrid cuz the oil prices are way up in the sky!!!" its redundant. Yes, if you bought a Chevy Chevelle then you will care about fuel economy. Either way, if there's a comparison between American cars and others, then I'd take the American, no question. I love their big, bold, massive presence. Who cares if it doesnt fit in British roads, majority of us lives in North America. That car makes me drool just by looking at it (especially the coupe) thats the sort of car I want to be seen driving, not some little 530i that looks like it can be smacked aside by Sevilles.
 
The Caddy is lookin' pretty tough for me. You don't buy sedans for performance anyways. It's all about style and the Caddy gots style.

I have an '84 Caddy Fleetwood by the way.
 
Nice Mr.Mcshake...I've always loved classic Cadillacs, especially from the 60's and the 70's; I love the Coupe DeVille and the Eldorado.
 

Latest Posts

Back