Rare Rides Icons: The Cadillac Eldorado, Distinctly Luxurious (Part III)
We discussed the engineering underneath 1953’s trio of high-end halo convertibles from Buick, Oldsmobile, and Cadillac last week. All three used different wheelbase lengths of the same C-body full-size, rear-drive platform. And though they all wore unique, brand-relevant styling, it was the Eldorado that had the tallest order and needed to make the best impression. The ‘53 Eldorado had a wheelbase and overall length identical to the Series 62 upon which it was based, so its designers didn’t simply add some inches and call it a new design.
(Note: The blue car is the 1953 Eldorado, and the red one is a 1953 Series 62 convertible.)
From a front-end view customers were hard-pressed to tell the difference between the middling Series 62 and the Series 62 Eldorado. Both cars sported the same front clip: A design that featured two large headlamps (like almost all passenger cars of the time) and a big chrome grille and bumper. Everything below the hood shut line on the front clip of both cars was solid chrome.
The grille was a large egg crate design with two distinct rows of cutouts separated by a thick horizontal chrome bar, with more thick chrome above that followed the hood shut line. There was even more chrome below the grille that formed the bumper. Set within the grille were two pointy examples of a very American design theme of the Fifties, Dagmars.
Aside from either of the Dagmars were large indicator lamps, set into a chrome housing with horizontal strakes that wrapped around the front end to the wheel well. The Dagmars themselves were mounted to the bumper via thick chrome bases. The bumper was generally rounded, and wrapped around the front corners to form the lower edge of the wheel well.
The front of both Cadillac models came to a point in the middle, which flowed backward toward the driver before bulging out again to form a resting place for the ample Dagmars. In the middle of the grille was the Cadillac crest and supporting V ornament, both of which were finished in gold plating for all 1953 Cadillacs.
Headlamps were set at the end of rounded fenders, and wore their own chrome awnings. Moving inward the hood rose sharply into a prominent bulge, and was topped with Cadillac’s hood ornament, the Flying Goddess. From there, a chrome strip extended the full length of the hood and concluded at the windshield, which was also encased in chrome on both cars.
It was at the windshield that differences between Series 62 and Eldorado first became apparent. While the Series 62 had the typical upright windshield with a thick band of chrome around it, the Eldorado used a thin band of chrome to decorate its unique and important wraparound design. The windshield necessarily made the vent window a different shape, which was smaller and more rectangular than that of the standard Series 62.
Though the metal of the Series 62 and Eldorado below the beltline was the same, the beltline in particular was edited for Eldorado’s use. The side window and beltline of the Series 62 were almost completely horizontal, but Eldorado was much more stylish in its approach. The window line was pulled downward as it ran from the glassy A-pillar and toward the door shut line. GM called it a “dropped-door design.”
Just aft of the door, the tension of the window line was released, and the sheetmetal kicked back upward. Its curve mirrored the curve of the sweeping rear fender shared by both Series 62 and Eldorado, which extended all the way to the rear and terminated in a tailfin. Because of the windshield and window line treatments, the Eldorado looked sportier and more aggressive than the Series 62.
Aiding in the overall effect was the integrated metal tonneau cover, which looked much sleeker since it had no separate fabric snap-on cover. Such a feature was very unusual in a convertible at the time, and unheard of in an American car. Because everything had to fold up under a smaller metal cover, the Eldorado’s plastic rear window was much smaller than on the Series 62.
Other than the tonneau arrangement, the Series 62 and Eldorado shared a rear end design. A long, bulbous trunk lid concluded above a chromed rear clip. Both cars had the same tail lamps that looked molded into their tailfins, and both featured rear Dagmars just as bold as the ones at the front. Both cars indicated their luxury status to onlookers via integrated exhaust outlets into the corners of the pointed bumper.
Cadillac’s designers created a much more exciting exterior for the Eldorado while editing as few body panels as possible. Cadillac’s advertisements also claimed unique styling for the Eldorado via its lowered height, between three and four inches lower than a standard Series 62 convertible. The new silhouette was certainly sportier looking at a time when passenger cars were generally tall and upright.
The claim of unique styling helped justify the Eldorado as something special for its extremely high price. And its interior helped with that cause, too. GM touted the specially designed instrument panel used only on the Eldorado, but let’s not get carried away.
What was actually different about the Eldorado’s interior was limited to trim materials and a couple of other design changes mandated by the special windshield. Next time we’ll discuss the Eldorado’s interior, and cover the very few options available to the Eldorado buyer of 1953. We’ll also go over pricing for all three specialty convertibles, as well as sales figures.
ecome a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.
Interested in lots of cars and their various historical contexts. Started writing articles for TTAC in late 2016, when my first posts were QOTDs. From there I started a few new series like Rare Rides, Buy/Drive/Burn, Abandoned History, and most recently Rare Rides Icons. Operating from a home base in Cincinnati, Ohio, a relative auto journalist dead zone. Many of my articles are prompted by something I'll see on social media that sparks my interest and causes me to research. Finding articles and information from the early days of the internet and beyond that covers the little details lost to time: trim packages, color and wheel choices, interior fabrics. Beyond those, I'm fascinated by automotive industry experiments, both failures and successes. Lately I've taken an interest in AI, and generating "what if" type images for car models long dead. Reincarnating a modern Toyota Paseo, Lincoln Mark IX, or Isuzu Trooper through a text prompt is fun. Fun to post them on Twitter too, and watch people overreact. To that end, the social media I use most is Twitter, @CoreyLewis86. I also contribute pieces for Forbes Wheels and Forbes Home.
More by Corey Lewis
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- EBFlex Garbage but for less!
- FreedMike I actually had a deal in place for a PHEV - a Mazda CX-90 - but it turned out to be too big to fit comfortably in my garage, thus making too difficult to charge, so I passed. But from that, I learned the Truth About PHEVs - they're a VERY niche product, and probably always be, because their use case is rather nebulous. Yes, you can run on EV power for 25-30 miles, plug it in at home on a slow charger, and the next day, you're ready to go again. Great in theory, but in practice, a) you still need a home charger, b) you paid a LOT more for the car than you would have for a standard hybrid, and c) you discover the nasty secret of PHEVs, which is that when they're on battery power, they're absolute pigs to drive. Meanwhile, to maintain its' piglike battery-only performance, it still needs to be charged, so you're running into all the (overstated) challenges that BEV owners have, with none of the performance that BEV owners like. To quote King George in "Hamilton": " Awesome. Wow." In the Mazda's case, the PHEV tech was used as a performance enhancer - which worked VERY nicely - but it's the only performance-oriented PHEV out there that doesn't have a Mercedes-level pricetag. So who's the ideal owner here? Far as I can tell, it's someone who doesn't mind doing his 25 mile daily commute in a car that's slow as f*ck, but also wants to take the car on long road trips that would be inconvenient in a BEV. Meanwhile, the MPG Uber Alles buyers are VERY cost conscious - thus the MPG Uber Alles thing - and won't be enthusiastic about spending thousands more to get similar mileage to a standard hybrid. That's why the Volt failed. The tech is great for a narrow slice of buyers, but I think the real star of the PHEV revival show is the same tax credits that many BEVs get.
- RHD The speed limit was raised from 62.1 MPH to 68.3 MPH. It's a slight difference which will, more than anything, lower the fines for the guy caught going 140 KPH.
- Msquare The argument for unlimited autobahns has historically been that lane discipline is a life-or-death thing instead of a suggestion. That and marketing cars designed for autobahn speeds gives German automakers an advantage even in places where you can't hope to reach such speeds. Not just because of enforcement, but because of road conditions. An old Honda commercial voiced by Burgess Meredith had an Accord going 110 mph. Burgess said, "At 110 miles per hour, we have found the Accord to be quiet and comfortable. At half that speed, you may find it to be twice as quiet and comfortable." That has sold Mercedes, BMW's and even Volkswagens for decades. The Green Party has been pushing for decades for a 100 km/h blanket limit for environmental reasons, with zero success.
- Varezhka The upcoming mild-hybrid version (aka 500 Ibrida) can't come soon enough. Since the new 500e is based on the old Alfa Mito and Opel Adam platform (now renamed STLA City) you'd have thought they've developed the gas version together.
Comments
Join the conversation
Well - to me the 62 is the more dynamic of the two - straightforward within a gaudy 50s language - if that is possible. (Calling studebaker, please come to the front desk, need to breath.)
Corey, thanks again for this series.