I'll bet that high compression 472 driving through a 2.93 axle wasn't even working hard! I had two '69 Coupe de Villes in the early 90's--one with 22K miles, the other with 8,500 when I got it.
if i were you, id hold it at full throttle and let it go as fast as it can go and then let off the gas. but i wouldnt hold it at full throttle after it has gotten up to full speed.
Been there done that! Did seem a bit slower up to 100 then I remember mine being. These cars would do 0 to 60 in about 8 seconds which is pretty damned good for a heavy car; And the passing gear, if you had a really good running Caddy, would set you BACK! A 500 is just a 472 with I believe a .30 overbore. The 472 of 69/70 was a hell of an engine. After 1970 they became slugs with the 500 & all the pollution controls/lowered compression. I'd love to use a 472 block & build a torque machine!
@EVHSlightReturn Slugs? Don't think so. Read my posts in Highest Rated comments. Why do so many still believe a few emissions parts takes 200hp out of an engine?
According to Road Test mag May '75, a 1975 CDV did 0-60 in 10.97 and pulled off the standing 1/4 in the high 16s. That ain't bad. Especially when you consider the extra weight over a '69 472.
@cadillacjim75 Well the 69/70 Caddy went 0-60 in the mid/higher 8s (Like the 95 FLeetwood I had with the tuned down vette 350 engine... But nothing beats those 472s!) so taking that up to nearly 11 is a big difference. Enough was done between lower compression, emissions, and a few extra hundred pounds to make that difference.
The emissions gear didn't put too much of a dent in HP and the decrease in compression from 10 to 8.5 only took about 35HP. The numbers REALLY look bad due to quoting net HP instead of gross. Pre-72 muscle car guys tend to "forget" this, and the fact that the almighty 472/500 needs to lug 2000lbs more than most other cars.
Screw HP anyway.........TORQUE is your REAL friend :)
I guess it performs pretty well, but you can not drive 120 mph + for a longer time in the US, and that is the situation to judge about the high speed handling of a car. A short "sprint" doesn't do it.
With a mid-sixty Mercedes or BMW you can drive with high speed for a long time without being exhausted afterwards. This is simply not possible with a US car, simply because they were never made for that purpose. But at low speeds it is much more comfortable than a BMW
@MercedesBenzGKlasse Fyi, a mid 60´s BMW was 1500cc and less than 80 hp, i duobt it ewen hit 100, the strongest BMW in the 60´s had 3.0 inline six @195hp, rated top speed 180km/h.
Mercedes had similar power, not bad cars but no high speed monsters as they are today, i have owned old beemers and mercs and can say the caddie the best to drive as a tuoring car on god roads at high speed.
Been on vacation in germany and italy and even today they stand well in competition with newr cars.
If you think that the Caddy which has the aerodynamics of a fridge on wheels is a better high speed monster than the W108s of equal time or W116s of later with far greater aerodynamics, then you are strongly mistaken.
Benzes have always been the ultimate highway stormers. Pair a W108 280SE 4.5, which weighs a solid 1000-1500 lbs less, or even a 300SEL 6.3 and that weighs still at least 500 lbs less, the 4.5 will get to 60 about a sec or 2 quicker, the 6.3 3 sec quicker, both topping out faster.
with an engine that size it OUGHT to fly. it was only when they started putting all the emissions crap on them post-73 that the HP took a nosedive, culminating with a 500ci that only made 200 bhp
I don't check gas mileage too often since it's only driven about once every 7-14 days.
When I did record the mileage, it ended up being 9-13 mpg with an average of 11 mpg. The 11 mpg figure is with about 70% surface street driving and 30% highway driving.
@knipdlo I can answer this question. On the highway, at a steady 55 M.P.H., you would expect 13 M.P.G. with the A/C on. In the city, no more than 7-8 M.P.G. Gas was .25 cents/gallon though when new so, no one cared about it. It was like that in most of the full-sized cars back then. On a long trip, it was nothing to fill up 2xs/day.
Damn.....that was cool. I had a 68 w/ the 472, best road car I ever owned, that thing would cruise at 90 MPH, like it was nothing..........and damn if you had to open it up to pass somebody it was "almost" scary the way that car would just pick itself up and tear up the road..............damn I miss it.
I certainly didn't mean to come across as insulting, but for me, it's nostalgia.
They will NEVER make cars like that again.
Enjoy yours while you can. Someday, you'll look back with a sense of awe when you join the rest of us old foggies sittin' around the porch talkin' how fast them Caddies could go.
They were beautiful cars and boy were they smooth as silk. I'm sorry GM but you've just forgotten what was real. Fleet, you should look up 1953 Cadillac Coupe de Ville. I had one of those. :>)
Wow, it just pulls and pulls. Doesn't even slow down in getting to that century mark! Most cars get up to about 70 no problem, then really struggle from there up.
My Grandpa has a '70 sedan DeVille with a 500ci. and two years ago he beat some kid with a 2003 Mustang in a streetrace. Pretty funny considering he's 88 years old!
472 engine a lot of power just transmissions did not hold up if beat on all the time with the torque these motors have !
midnitesquirldog 5 months ago
I'll bet that high compression 472 driving through a 2.93 axle wasn't even working hard! I had two '69 Coupe de Villes in the early 90's--one with 22K miles, the other with 8,500 when I got it.
VictrolaJazz 7 months ago
I LOVE that sound...
clarkinthedark1 9 months ago
Great Scott! 88mph is the limit on back to the future! You just went and came back and went back! lol
FirstWard24 10 months ago
ahhh cadillac quietley fast i like it but still four barrel carbs kicking in thats the best sound in the world to me
gunny556fly 1 year ago
Fuel Injection may more efficient and economical,but NOTHING beats the sound of a four barrel carb kicking in... GOOD STUFF!
Poncho389 1 year ago
if i were you, id hold it at full throttle and let it go as fast as it can go and then let off the gas. but i wouldnt hold it at full throttle after it has gotten up to full speed.
dnl5649 1 year ago
I had a 76 M&M Hearse with the 500, It would pass anything but a gas station... Rock on!
MicrotekMybisi 1 year ago 4
thats pretty fast! she would have gone way over 120 if you held the throttle down. my mercury cougar did 157 mph on a dyno 6 months ago.
dnl5649 1 year ago
@dnl5649 my cadillac did 120 on the freeway.
sweendog1969 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dnl5649 my Cadillac did 120 on the freeway.
sweendog1969 10 months ago
Been there done that! Did seem a bit slower up to 100 then I remember mine being. These cars would do 0 to 60 in about 8 seconds which is pretty damned good for a heavy car; And the passing gear, if you had a really good running Caddy, would set you BACK! A 500 is just a 472 with I believe a .30 overbore. The 472 of 69/70 was a hell of an engine. After 1970 they became slugs with the 500 & all the pollution controls/lowered compression. I'd love to use a 472 block & build a torque machine!
EVHSlightReturn 1 year ago
@EVHSlightReturn Slugs? Don't think so. Read my posts in Highest Rated comments. Why do so many still believe a few emissions parts takes 200hp out of an engine?
According to Road Test mag May '75, a 1975 CDV did 0-60 in 10.97 and pulled off the standing 1/4 in the high 16s. That ain't bad. Especially when you consider the extra weight over a '69 472.
cadillacjim75 1 year ago
@cadillacjim75 Well the 69/70 Caddy went 0-60 in the mid/higher 8s (Like the 95 FLeetwood I had with the tuned down vette 350 engine... But nothing beats those 472s!) so taking that up to nearly 11 is a big difference. Enough was done between lower compression, emissions, and a few extra hundred pounds to make that difference.
EVHSlightReturn 1 year ago
Make no mistake, those old Caddy's are quick. They'll pass anything (except gas stations ;)
roycohen17 1 year ago
The emissions gear didn't put too much of a dent in HP and the decrease in compression from 10 to 8.5 only took about 35HP. The numbers REALLY look bad due to quoting net HP instead of gross. Pre-72 muscle car guys tend to "forget" this, and the fact that the almighty 472/500 needs to lug 2000lbs more than most other cars.
Screw HP anyway.........TORQUE is your REAL friend :)
cadillacjim75 2 years ago 17
especially when you're trying to get 5000lbs going
dumapies 2 years ago
you are getting into speed areas, i would wan't to be driving with this car ;)
Rather a vehicle to cruise with. But i really like it, a classic battleship!
MercedesBenzGKlasse 2 years ago
If you ever driven one in good condition you´d be supriced how well they perform.
I could run the meter out in my -69 de ville and it dident feel a bit scary.
It outperformed allmost any luxurycar in those dayes.
smirnofowner 2 years ago
I guess it performs pretty well, but you can not drive 120 mph + for a longer time in the US, and that is the situation to judge about the high speed handling of a car. A short "sprint" doesn't do it.
With a mid-sixty Mercedes or BMW you can drive with high speed for a long time without being exhausted afterwards. This is simply not possible with a US car, simply because they were never made for that purpose. But at low speeds it is much more comfortable than a BMW
MercedesBenzGKlasse 2 years ago
@MercedesBenzGKlasse Fyi, a mid 60´s BMW was 1500cc and less than 80 hp, i duobt it ewen hit 100, the strongest BMW in the 60´s had 3.0 inline six @195hp, rated top speed 180km/h.
Mercedes had similar power, not bad cars but no high speed monsters as they are today, i have owned old beemers and mercs and can say the caddie the best to drive as a tuoring car on god roads at high speed.
Been on vacation in germany and italy and even today they stand well in competition with newr cars.
smirnofowner 2 years ago
If you think that the Caddy which has the aerodynamics of a fridge on wheels is a better high speed monster than the W108s of equal time or W116s of later with far greater aerodynamics, then you are strongly mistaken.
Benzes have always been the ultimate highway stormers. Pair a W108 280SE 4.5, which weighs a solid 1000-1500 lbs less, or even a 300SEL 6.3 and that weighs still at least 500 lbs less, the 4.5 will get to 60 about a sec or 2 quicker, the 6.3 3 sec quicker, both topping out faster.
chinny4290 1 year ago
with an engine that size it OUGHT to fly. it was only when they started putting all the emissions crap on them post-73 that the HP took a nosedive, culminating with a 500ci that only made 200 bhp
mrspivvy 2 years ago
I know its an odd question, but I love these cars- what kind of gas mileage in regular driving do you get? Thanks!
knipdlo 2 years ago
I don't check gas mileage too often since it's only driven about once every 7-14 days.
When I did record the mileage, it ended up being 9-13 mpg with an average of 11 mpg. The 11 mpg figure is with about 70% surface street driving and 30% highway driving.
Fleet472 2 years ago
@Fleet472 i bet you didn't get that when recording this video
cps45314 1 year ago
@cps45314
I didn't get what when recording this video?
Fleet472 1 year ago
@Fleet472 the 9-13 mpg....more than likely less LOL....but like some other guy said "the hell with the gas mileage! this is too much fun!"
vpiedra1 9 months ago 2
@Fleet472 11 mpg
corvettels9 8 months ago
@Fleet472 That good of gas milege.
midgetmayo 7 months ago
@cps45314 wat a classic!
mquiroz90 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Fleet472 i bet you didn't get that when recording this video haha
cps45314 1 year ago
@knipdlo I can answer this question. On the highway, at a steady 55 M.P.H., you would expect 13 M.P.G. with the A/C on. In the city, no more than 7-8 M.P.G. Gas was .25 cents/gallon though when new so, no one cared about it. It was like that in most of the full-sized cars back then. On a long trip, it was nothing to fill up 2xs/day.
cadrolls 3 months ago
Damn.....that was cool. I had a 68 w/ the 472, best road car I ever owned, that thing would cruise at 90 MPH, like it was nothing..........and damn if you had to open it up to pass somebody it was "almost" scary the way that car would just pick itself up and tear up the road..............damn I miss it.
FRANCIS6189 2 years ago
I had a 73 coupe de ville 472 4bbl. It would do 85 before the four barrel opened.
davidmacewen 2 years ago
pretty good for a 5000lb car
kreigsmann 2 years ago
those 472s were loaded with amazing torque at any rpm!
Amazing acceleration for a nearly 3 ton car. Mine got me 3 speeding tickets in 2 weeks time. They simply love high speed.
WisdomVendor 3 years ago 5
A good example of a thirsty car... Even though thirsty, the ride is sweeeeeeeeeeet!!!!!!
Banj95 3 years ago
That's nothin' I drove my '72 coupe de ville at around 100-110 for about an hour straight.
No kiddin'
MrRottenApple 3 years ago
Oh, it had plenty of power to go 110-120 mph. It was nowhere near finished at 100 mph.
How many seconds does it take your '72 to go from 60-100 mph?
Fleet472 3 years ago
Fleet, that almost 20 years ago. It was a mint cream yellow w/ black top and black interior.
The Coupe de Ville being a two door, would a wee bit lighter than the Fleetwood so it would be a wee bit quicker than it's big sister.
When I mentioned 110 I was referring to high-cruise - you don't want to take it to the top and stay there, you might break something.
Indeed you CAN peg it deep, but when you do, you're at peak RPMs, that's when something can break, so for me, I was pleased @ 110.
MrRottenApple 3 years ago
Well, if a low-compression (8.5:1) '72 Cad can do 100-110 mph for an hour straight, a '69 high compression (10.5:1) Cad certainly can, too.
60-100 mph in 12 seconds with a 5,060-lb, 2.94:1 geared Fleetwood should not be classified as "nothing," maybe in 20 seconds, yes, but not 12. ;-)
Fleet472 3 years ago
I certainly didn't mean to come across as insulting, but for me, it's nostalgia.
They will NEVER make cars like that again.
Enjoy yours while you can. Someday, you'll look back with a sense of awe when you join the rest of us old foggies sittin' around the porch talkin' how fast them Caddies could go.
They were beautiful cars and boy were they smooth as silk. I'm sorry GM but you've just forgotten what was real. Fleet, you should look up 1953 Cadillac Coupe de Ville. I had one of those. :>)
MrRottenApple 3 years ago 12
climbed up there no problem, that big engine torques the tall gears with no problems
ajpimp55 3 years ago
Wow, it just pulls and pulls. Doesn't even slow down in getting to that century mark! Most cars get up to about 70 no problem, then really struggle from there up.
BigOldCar 3 years ago
preety damn fast
anthonynami2 3 years ago
how many km/h is 100mph? I've sat in a 2,5 l V6 Alfa Romeo a few days ago.. we have reached 130mph-s, thats 210km/h i guess.. Am i right?
Sanyey 3 years ago
161kmh is 100 mph and i think 220kmh is 120 mph
mopar43v3r 3 years ago
My Grandpa has a '70 sedan DeVille with a 500ci. and two years ago he beat some kid with a 2003 Mustang in a streetrace. Pretty funny considering he's 88 years old!
Kolfritz 3 years ago 5
lmao that is funny man
gldcnk 3 years ago
500 only came in eldorados 1970, it would have been a 472, massive engine as well.
smirnofowner 2 years ago
You're right, it did come with a 472ci, but that engine threw a rod, and he just happened to have this low mileage 500 just sitting around...
Kolfritz 2 years ago