Vintage Cadillac ads

[Bruce Nunnally]

This site in Norway http://www.lov2xlr8.no/cadillac.html has some vintage Cadillac advertisements.

[Cadillac Jim]

I like the one of a Cadillac climbing the stairs of a public plaza entrance for the 1903 Cadillac.

[Bruce Nunnally]

They were very big on reports of how well the early car climbed; I think that this was a show of low rpm torque vs hp. Course, all the engines were low rpm at first, so not sure what the lure of stair climbing was.

[Cadillac Jim]

In the 1903 era cars had a lot of problems in common, not the least of which was stalling on hills and rolling backwards with brakes inadequate to stop, with resulting hilarity -- at best. Stanley Steamer could climb a steep bank easily and those demos brought tears to the eyes of anyone with a car that couldn't climb a hill in their town. Cadillac, with their we-can-do-it-right hard-nosed engineering from day one, solved most problems years before anyone else, at least in production cars, and torque at idle was one of them. The fact that the car could climb stairs meant that it didn't need to run at the slope, for example. In 1903, Cadillac had a 5" X 5" single-cylinder; that's 98 cubic inches or 1.6 liters, probably about 20 hp.

[Bruce Nunnally]

I think you are right on the desirability of hill climbing.

The original one-cylinder Olds engine made 6 hp, and Leland made it more ~60% efficient, probably making 9 hp at that point. The engine was named "Little Hercules" at the time. Cadillac only 'guaranteed' that the engine produced higher than the 'advertised' hp of 6.5 hp; not sure why.

Generally one commenter said that engine efficiency improved each year in a linear fashion.

[Cadillac Jim]

Well, you have to understand that these early engines ran on "cleaning fluid." The 1910 Olds 6, which was 5" by 6" or 707 cid (11.6 liters) had a 4.5:1 compression ratio. The owner's manual said that if you needed fuel in an emergency, you could run your Oldsmobile on an astonishing list of flammables, including "bad whiskey." As fuels allowed, engine designs could be contrived to exploit the fuel's energy.

My first car was a 1941 Chevrolet with a 90 hp 231 cid straight OHV six-cylinder. It was proably designed to run on 70 octane rating fuel. I had it in the middle 1950's when high compression and the horsepower race was on, and I put 100+ octane rated gas in it and timed it by hand, and the result was an old car that had astonishing acceleration up to about 75 mph. I had a firend with a 1956 Ford with a 318 cid Interceptor (high compression four-barrel V8) and a standard shift, and that old Chevrolet would beat it, easy, at any speed below 60 mph or so, as fast as we tried it.

Yes, the Chevrolet had driveabilty problems with its unbelievably advanced spark timing. Only me and my dad could start it; for anyone else the kickback on firing would stall the starter but we would pedal that foot-starter and hit it as it passed TDC and it would spin right up. Decelerating in gear was a jouncy experience, not to be done with passengers. Wheel hop was a problem until my father put extra leaves in the rear springs and changed the shock oil to 30-weight oil, then put twice-recapped slicks cast off from his work pickups on the rear, then it would spin and dig in solid.

[Texas Jim]

Well, you have to understand that these early engines ran on "cleaning fluid." The 1910 Olds 6, which was 5" by 6" or 707 cid (11.6 liters) had a 4.5:1 compression ratio. The owner's manual said that if you needed fuel in an emergency, you could run your Oldsmobile on an astonishing list of flammables, including "bad whiskey." As fuels allowed, engine designs could be contrived to exploit the fuel's energy.

My first car was a 1941 Chevrolet with a 90 hp 231 cid straight OHV six-cylinder. It was proably designed to run on 70 octane rating fuel. I had it in the middle 1950's when high compression and the horsepower race was on, and I put 100+ octane rated gas in it and timed it by hand, and the result was an old car that had astonishing acceleration up to about 75 mph. I had a firend with a 1956 Ford with a 318 cid Interceptor (high compression four-barrel V8) and a standard shift, and that old Chevrolet would beat it, easy, at any speed below 60 mph or so, as fast as we tried it.

Yes, the Chevrolet had driveabilty problems with its unbelievably advanced spark timing. Only me and my dad could start it; for anyone else the kickback on firing would stall the starter but we would pedal that foot-starter and hit it as it passed TDC and it would spin right up. Decelerating in gear was a jouncy experience, not to be done with passengers. Wheel hop was a problem until my father put extra leaves in the rear springs and changed the shock oil to 30-weight oil, then put twice-recapped slicks cast off from his work pickups on the rear, then it would spin and dig in solid.

Just "nit-picking" here.

I believe the '56 Ford Interceptor engine was 292ci...not 318.

318 was a later Chrysler corp engine.

I could be wrong, but I remember that the 272ci was in the '55 Ford, and 292 was in the '56.

1957 had a 312ci along with (I think) a 352ci big block. It may have been a 332ci with the 352 coming in 1958. not sure on that one.

But on the 6 cyl Chevy's...I had a '50 model 2 door Chevy.

It had a Dual carb intake...split exhaust manifold, with dual straight pipes...no mufflers.

It ran real well.

I sometimes miss that old car. It was a good 'un.

[Cadillac Jim]

Sorry, that was a typo, and it was a 57, and it was a 312 Interceptor. I had been thinking it was a '56 but I thought back and pictured the car, and it was a two-tone blue four-door 1957 Ford.

The only production dual exhaust Chevrolet six that I knew of from the 1950's was the 1953-1955 Corvette six, which was a 235 CID sold only with Powerglide. It had triple Stromberg side-draft carburetors and a mechanical lifter cam from the 261 cid version that was used in Chevrolet and GMC trucks (another 261 with hydraulic lifiters was used in the Canadian Pontiac instead of the early V8 for some reason). But aftermarket dual exhausts were common for Chevrolet sixes, and I suppose that dual intakes were too, although I never saw one.

[Texas Jim]

Sorry, that was a typo, and it was a 57, and it was a 312 Interceptor. I had been thinking it was a '56 but I thought back and pictured the car, and it was a two-tone blue four-door 1957 Ford.

The only production dual exhaust Chevrolet six that I knew of from the 1950's was the 1953-1955 Corvette six, which was a 235 CID sold only with Powerglide. It had triple Stromberg side-draft carburetors and a mechanical lifter cam from the 261 cid version that was used in Chevrolet and GMC trucks (another 261 with hydraulic lifiters was used in the Canadian Pontiac instead of the early V8 for some reason). But aftermarket dual exhausts were common for Chevrolet sixes, and I suppose that dual intakes were too, although I never saw one.

Very interesting info about the cams being interchangeable... I did not know that.

All of my intake and exhaust stuff was aftermarket.

[Cadillac Jim]

The Chevrolet six from 1937 through 1962 came in two basic designs. They all had four main bearings and most of the parts were interchangeable.

The first design used mechanical valve lifters with cast iron pistons and splash lubrication for the rod journals and pistons. It came in two displacements. The first one was 3.5" bore by 3.75" stroke (amazingly, the same as those of the 1917 V8, which was 289 cid or 4730 cc!), 216.5 cid (3547 cc) and was used for all standard shift Chevrolets from 1937 through 1952. The second displacement was 3 9/16" bore by 3 15/16 stroke, 235.5 cid (3858 cc) and was used by Chevrolet for the Powerglide option from 1950 through 1952 and for the standard shift option in 1953.

The second design used aluminum pistons and full pressure lubrication including support for hydraulic lifters. Mechanical lifters were used in the 1953-1955 Corvette and in GMC and Chevrolet trucks. The two displacements were 235.5 cid and a larger 3 3/4" bore for 261 cid (4276 cc) displacement. The 235.5 cid engine with hydraulic lifters was used as the standard engine for Chevrolet from 1953 through 1962. Mechanical lifter 235.5 cid engines were used in the 1953-1955 Corvette and in Chevrolet and GMC trucks, and the 261 cid engine with mechanical lifters was also used in Chevrolet and GMC trucks. The 261 cid with hydraulic lifters was used in Canadian Pontiacs.

The first and second designs were really two different engines, like the different generations of SBCs. Parts interchangeability is interesting, with the main items being the crankshaft and head. The first design crankshaft used scoops on the crank journals with holes in them that dipped into the oil as the crank turned, and oil went through the holes to the rod journals and was vented out the opposing journals to squirt up to the pistons to lubricate the pistons and rings. The second design had no scoops and instead had matching holes in the main bearing journals to take oil from the main bearings and then to the rod journals and a squirt up to the pistons and rings like just about all modern crankshafts. Thus the first design crankshafts could be used in second design engines, converting them to splash lubrication, but second design crankshafts would not provide rod and piston lubrication if used in first design engines. Also, second design heads had three more head bolts than first design heads (235.5 cid first design heads may have had them also, I don't know) so this may have repercussions if you tried to interchange heads. The head bolt torque of all of them was very high (a lug-nut-like 95 lb-ft, if memory serves) and on the verge of distortion of cylinder bore, so I suspect that the extra head bolts enabled higher compression ratios to take advantage of postwar gasoline octane ratings.

Parts interchangeability is a very interesting topic. As I said in an earlier post, the 261 truck cam was the same part number as the Corvette cam. I suspect that this was due to the fact that the Corvette was actually intended as a show car with very limited production until Zora Akus-Duntov showed up and thus was pretty much a parts bench engine except for the sports-car show pieces of triple side-draft carburetors and dual exhausts to match the then-current Jaguar XK, which it would give more than a run for its money, Powerglide or no Powerglide. Interestingly enough, the Stromberg side-draft carburetors were very similar, if not identical to, similar carburetors used in the 1953 Studebaker, which needed side-draft carburetors to clear the hood of the classic Raymond Loewy design for that period, and rebuild kits from the Studebaker carburetor can be used for the much rarer Corvette carburetors. But, the most interesting part to me is the exhaust valve, which is interchangeable -- with the same part number -- from the 1937 Chevrolet to many SBC V8's (and V6's) and is still available form your local Chevrolet dealer today.

[Texas Jim]

Very interesting.

Thank you for the information.

I like it and appreciate it.

[Cadillac Jim]

One last thing that I forgot to mention was the engine weight for the 1937-1962 Chevrolet six. It weighed about the same as an iron 454. When the V8 came out in late 1955, it weighed 221 pounds less. When both engines were offered in the same chassis, the V8 needed a stiff stabilizer bar to get back the understeer, while the same car with the six-cylinder option did not use a stabilizer bar.

From 1955 through 1962, the 235 cid six and standard V8 (i.e., two-barrel carburetor) were tuned and geared to have the same feel in driving. From behind the wheel, it was difficult to tell the difference. The difference was apparent only when you got above about 3500 RPM.

[Baldur]

I am searching for an old Cadillac ad featuring my grandmother, Beryl Miller Hatt, of Chatham or Summit, NJ. The year would be 1910 +/-.

The substance of the ad would be that a Cadillac was so easy to drive that even a woman would enjoy driving. The story in my family is that Beryl was the first licensed female driver in NJ, but I doubt it. The family story is that it appeared in the Saturday Evening Post, but it could have been any other magazine. I do not know whether it was a picture of Grandma, or a stylized line drawing as were many of the ads.

Any help appreciated. Is there a repository of Cadillac ads at the Cadillac Company? Would you have a specific contact for such a repository?

[Paul S]

The add that Bruce provided the link for answered a question that I have had for a number of years.

Any one who remembers the old "All in the family" TV series might remember that in their theme song they would mention how their "old Lasalle ran great". Well up untill I looked at the link I had always wondered "What in the world is a Lasalle".

Now I know that it was a Cadillac product. (Maybe that is why it ran great.)

Thanks Bruce for clearing that up for me.

[Göran W]

Read more about Lasalle here: http://www.motorera.com/lasalle/1927.htm