Channel the spirit of Fleetwood Mac with their talisman

Fleetwood talisman up for grabs The Fleetwood talisman, a historic artifact with cultural significance, is currently up for grabs in an auction. The talisman, which has been handed down through generations, is believed to hold mystical powers and bring good luck to its owner. This rare opportunity to acquire the talisman has generated great excitement among collectors and enthusiasts alike. The talisman, featuring intricate carvings and precious gemstones, has a rich history dating back centuries. Legends surround its origins, with some stories recounting tales of powerful masterminds and secret societies. It is said that those who possessed the talisman were able to harness its mystical powers for their advantage.

TERRIBLE INTERIORS! Just like so many people have said. I owned a 1993 and I liked the performance! The exterior design was great, loved it. BUT, that interior was as BLAND and to me, ruined the entire experience of the car. SOLD IT. You know, you don’t drive the outside of the car, it’s the INTERIOR that makes the car enjoyable. Great Article!

But, they did look like Cadillacs, which I can t say about Cadillac cars of the last 20 years, and a detail I never really took in before is while the front end of the Fleetwood is thematically similar to that of the Deville there is a noticable but subtle forward angle to the lights and grille that makes a substantial difference in presence and confidence. Although he only lived to be 42, Presley is said to have owned some 200 Caddies during his lifetime, almost all of which he gave away to friends and family.

It is said that those who possessed the talisman were able to harness its mystical powers for their advantage. The decision to auction off the Fleetwood talisman has sparked a frenzy among bidders. Collectors from around the world are eagerly awaiting the chance to add this unique artifact to their collections.

Cohort Pic(k) of the Day: 1995 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham – The End Of The Long Road

You’re not likely to be surprised when I tell you that I’ve always found it a bit hard to warm up to these final RWD Cadillac sedans. But given their place in history as the end of a very long line of traditional BOF Cadillac sedans, I can certainly muster some respect. It certainly manages to convey the classic Cadillac image, even if the execution isn’t exactly up to peak Cadillac standards.

Time is the great healer. Or we just grow up, hopefully, and get over our youthful prejudices. I’m beginning to find some genuine appreciation for these, if not exactly gushing enthusiasm. In its day, one inevitably compared it to all the more contemporary and sleeker cars that were the apple of my eye, which inevitably meant import brands in my case. Audi A6, Mercedes w124, BMW 5/7 Series, and of course the Lexus LS. And a few others too.

But now the comparison is with the overwrought SUVs and oversized trucks on the road. That makes this Fleetwood look quite a bit better, in terms of a contrast, in any case. Who wants to quibble over the details at this stage of the game?

For the record. just what were my issues with this 225″ long car? Image and proportions. Let’s take the latter first: It looks too top heavy, especially at the rear. And the wheelbase looks too short for its mass. The rear wheel looks overpowered by the massive C-pillar.

None of those were issues with its predecessor. But this restyled B/C body just never quite worked for me, starting with the Chevrolet Caprice. The Buick Roadmaster is the worst of the three, as its 116″ wheelbase was shared with the Chevy. GM was chasing the aero look that was so wildly successful at Ford with the Taurus, but translating it to the existing RWD B/C platforms just didn’t quite click.

Most likely it’s the problem of not starting with a clean sheet; the designers were locked in to key hard points, most of all where the seats and dash had to be. Or maybe they were too torn between going all aero and staying traditional. Their love handles didn’t help. Ford’s Panther cars never got that sudden increase in width, and seemed to age a bit better, despite the changes being more subtle.

Corey didn’t shoot its interior, which may be just as well. Traditional, yes; genuine quality, no.

As to its image, it was of course a sop to Cadillac traditionalists, who never could quite warm up to the FWD cars. That demographic was of course getting older and ever more “traditional” with every passing year. So yes, at the time, these were just about the ultimate old fart’s car, no offense intended.

In the way things go so often, these last of the BOF big cars, whether from GM or Ford, have found a lot of love from a very different demographic: young guys. The percentage of these still on the road being piloted by a guy 35 or younger seems decidedly high to me, although the really pristine example like this one are also quite likely to be in the hands of a more mature owner.

There’s been quite a bit of love shared on the pages of CC by owners of these (links below), and my hat’s off to them. They’re dwindling in numbers, and I’d hate to think of a time when there’s none left on the road.

38 Comments

I always loved the looks of exterior of these cars, very menacing and mobsteresque. The interior was terrible, though. The ridiculously deep dash and cheap materials were off-putting.

Meh. Lincoln Town Car for me, please. A MUCH nicer, rattle free interior when compared to this Caddy.

I had both of these, a red 95 and the a boxy 91 D’Elegance. The 95 was actually fun to drive with the LT1 V8 under the hood. A car bigger than a Suburban had no right to be that fast(I also swapped the rear gears for a 3.73 with a posi) But as far as the style and build quality, no comparison, the 91 was infinitely superior. All those nice details, extra bits of chrome, all gone in the 95, the interior was basically a chevy with really nice leather seats in the 95. Also the 91 drove/handled better, felt like a much smaller car and didnt lean over in the turns/wallow like the 95

I agree as a 47 year old dude, I grew up with cadillacs. The last of the greats was the 91 5.7 liter d’elagance.

These made it to 96 as well as the impala olds vista cruiser & Buick estate Pontiac did not make it into the new 91 up body ! the chassis is the same from 77 to 96 so you can put the SS impala parts on the others Ok someone needs to correct that BOF to BOP which means Buick Oldsmobile Pontiac as these 3 were sorta close as chevy was at the low end & caddy at the top ! but only Buick survived as the middle price car all the last of chassis under body full size cars !! as it took a while to get front drive cars to handle really good !

I was never a fan of the 91-96 B bodies, especially the Caprice…although they did make some improvements to it midstream with updating the design of the rear wheel openings. In 1990, I was looking to trade in my 1979 Caprice Classic, and the first of the restyled 1991’s were appearing on the dealer lots……I took one look and did not like the look of the aero body along with the rear wheelwell design….It seemed to me that GM went a bit too far with the aero look on this redesign. I ended up switching out from my box Caprice to a 1991 squarebody K Blazer which was the final model year for the ’73-’91 body design.

Fuselage styling didn’t work for Chrysler back in the day, and it doesn’t work here. Makes the car look too bloated.

I also saw the Fuselage Chrysler in this Cadillac when it came out. I actually rather like the Fuselage Chryslers, and appreciated some of the old school elements in the Cadillac, but the execution of this Cadillac is just off. It can be an attractive look when done right…..

I never really saw the difference in greenhouse until today. It’s interesting; if you compare it to the contemporary shrunken Fleetwoods, the passenger compartment is proportionally almost similar. I’ve never disliked this model…certainly there are some touches that I dig, especially the rear 3/4 view, but what’s worst for me is the interior. It’s pretty much the same as the Buick Roadmaster in many ways, and killed the exclusivity that the old one had. I’ve always wondered what would’ve happened if this chassis had made it into the edgy next generation of Cadillacs, say a year 2000 version of this, and if they had been able to keep some of the clubby atmosphere of the 80s Brougham interior.

I don’t think it’s fabulous, but I do commend the Cadillac designers for making it as old-school Cadillac-y as possible, given the “bones” of the Caprice to start with.

Too bad more of them didn’t have metal roofs. Too bad they didn’t leave off the fender skirts and lower cladding. The front seatbacks are huge and make it feel cramped.

Yes! That’s what I was describing in my reply below before I had realized what you did! Raising the side window beltline to windshield/back glass level makes a huge difference. Still has most problems Paul pointed out but that solves the top heaviness.

I currently have a ’96, and until recently had a ’91 (5.0). Like pretty much everyone, I agree that the older model is MUCH better proportioned. Having said that, the whale body is far more spacious inside…. even SUVs have a hard time offering that much width around your shoulders and hips. It has the best rear seat of any car I’ve been in, though the footwell is lumpy and narrow. Visibility is worse, alas, but still better than most modern cars. The new one is even smoother while handling better, though still too squishy for most drivers. Not much to add here aside from the cliche… if only GM had put the new powertrain and chassis on top of the old body!

I have a writeup of a 94 Fleetwood Brougham that I purchased a couple months ago – I’m 33 going on 34, and while the car doesn’t quite have the special touches of the previous generation….the room and comfort kind of make up for it. As does the LT1 under the hood 🙂 But those repair bills…OY!

I have this car and the last Towncar. Better than buying 96impala or 03murada that were cheaper than 40k when new. Now people tax for them an give away the luxury cars as good deals. Don’t mind if I do😂 I love how backwards most car guys are. The Lincoln Town car and Cadillac Fleetwood is still America’s Bentley. My Fleetwood came fully loaded all the way down to the tow package. Better than an Impala. What’s funny is I always loved the 64 and 96 Impala but their Chevys bottle of the barrel but Cadillac is King so Im looking to purchase a 64cadillac coupe instead of the Impala. Just like my 03Towncar instead of a Mercury Marauder. I refuse to pay more for the lesser vehicle just to say I have one, I’ll take luxury and people giving the luxury cars away and taxing for the cheaper sporty version of the same car 🤣🤣 the Fleetwood is sharp hands down. Car crazy here.

I couldn’t agree more with the author. I was selling Cadillac’s at the time when the ’92 model ended and the “all new” ’93 came out. I didn’t dislike them, but certainly liked the old design much more. My favorite models were the 1977 to 1979 which had the most crisp lines. In 1980, they rounded things out just a little and although I still love them, I prefer the 77-79 more. Of course, we all know the 1980 to 1992 were nearly identical. Still a very classy design all these years later.

I really wanted to like these, but just never really got there. I spent 4 years in an 89 Brougham, and if everyone says that the new one’s interior was cheaper, then Yikes, because the old one was far from traditional Cadillac standards from the Division’s prime. I always thought that if I found one, the hotter engine would make a decent tradeoff for the grim interior, but I never found one when I was looking for a car. It is probably just as well. My 89 had a kind of elegance that I could get into, but not these.

It’s the gargantuan chrome strip along the bottom of the body that I find particularly repelling. I completely agree there is a also proportional problem(the top heaviness), but I think it was deliberate and somewhat of an optical illusion, it was very much in Cadillac’s theme at the time to drop the greenhouse below the natural beltline and with the in effect large side windows and that massive chrome strip combined the bodysides look skinny and unsubstantial to the roof. Devilles based on the FWD platform are almost indistinguishable from the fleetwoods to the untrained eye, and while I don’t care for the styling of those either, the lack of chrome at the bottom doesn’t make the proportions look as off… Bloated yes. I don’t hate these anymore either, I think I did in the past because I had kind of bad memories of these as a kid, as it was the bodystyle of both the hearse and limousines we rode in when my grandma passed away after a battle with cancer and I always associated them with death. Actually I’d go so far to say the styling reminds me of modern coffins with plushy interiors, metallic paints and swaths of chrome hardware. But, they did look like Cadillacs, which I can’t say about Cadillac cars of the last 20+ years, and a detail I never really took in before is while the front end of the Fleetwood is thematically similar to that of the Deville there is a noticable but subtle forward angle to the lights and grille that makes a substantial difference in presence and confidence

While not bad, and a passable attempt at marrying traditional cues with contemporary style, it left me wondering. In Harley Earl’s time, Cadillac used to be at the forefront of style, the first with the latest, usually. Or if it wasn’t Cadillac, it was La Salle. Others tried (Graham Blue Streak, Chrysler Airflow, Lincoln Zephyr…) and sometimes succeeded, but usually Cadillac was the style leader. Somewhere along the way things ossified, and Cadillac styling became set in tradition-think rather than reaching for the future. I’d postulate that about the time this happened is when their prestige started to leak away.

I’m one of those former young guys that had one. I’m 42 now and sold my red 94 almost 6 years ago. Sadly, even then parts were getting thin on the ground to keep it going at 225k miles. While I agree that the earlier box B/D bodies were generally better looking cars, I think that the Cadillac wore the new aero styling the best. They were all stylistically too wide, but the Fleetwood is most unabashed about its size. The length of the car helps the width not seem so disproportionate. And I’ll disagree with everyone saying that the interiors of these were ruthlessly cheap feeling. Almost every surface was covered in leather or matching padded vinyl, with a few odd omissions, like the door panel armrests. But the plastics (and the fake wood) were just as good as anything put in the box body cars. It’s just that the design was much simpler, so the quality of the plastic wasn’t as hidden by the fussy frilliness of the design. The digital dashes did nothing to help make them feel expensive, but that’s true of the last years of the box Broughams as well. We should also remember that these were the cheapest Cadillacs you could buy at the time, if I remember correctly.

TERRIBLE INTERIORS! Just like so many people have said. I owned a 1993 and I liked the performance! The exterior design was great, loved it. BUT, that interior was as BLAND and to me, ruined the entire experience of the car. SOLD IT. You know, you don’t drive the outside of the car, it’s the INTERIOR that makes the car enjoyable. Great Article!

I love it. Clearly two disparate opinions on the interior. Black or white! All in all it means YMMV and it would be best for any individual to experience the interior first hand. Personally I liked the 91-92 the best.

The gas cap is behind the rear license plate.
The “locking gas filler” function is provided by a rather crude, short, straight, single-pivot lever located right behind the plate, accessible when the deck lid is open. It needs to be swung back to lock it each time. No spring-loaded auto-lock.

The license plate gas filler lock was connected to the electric door locks. Locked doors=locked license plate and vice versa.

Last of what a Cadillac should be. I still love the RWD V8 luxobarges. I have a 1976 Coupe DeVille, 1991 Brougham deElegance, & 1996 Fleetwood. Must admit the 96 is the least posh interior wise, a sign of the times back in 96. However, it still makes a presence when arriving standing out from all the cookie cutter cars today. My 2022 CT4 is a really nice car but doesn’t have the rich classy look like my 91 Brougham

I’m far enough removed from ownership of this in ’93 garb (silver with burgundy leather), and also a ’97 Town Car Signature (black with grey leather) to say these had some remarkable engineering advances over the box predecessor….stopped better, drove better, was quieter, and is still the most fuel efficient big boat I’ve ever owned, regularly pulling mid 20s on the highway and a crazy causing range of 500-550 miles, on regular. And Fleetwoods look best from 60 degree angles, focusing on the corners of the car. The side profile is awful. Raising the belt line and not offering vinyl roofing would have helped. But black and navy ones without vinyl roofs are probably the best looking of all from this run. In comparison with the TC, the TC Signature Series by ’97 had a modern but kind of plasticky interior too. It was perhaps a bit better quality than this but not notably so. The TC also was better looking and far better proportioned outside, and retained the great visibility in aero guise that the predecessor classic box Bs and Panthers had, whereas the whale Fleetwood really lost some visibility with the huge dash and high back window. But the TC was not as isolated, fast, comfortable, or fuel efficient as the whale Fleetwood, though I thought the handling about the same. You really miss the extra torque in the 4.6L modular 8 vs the 5.7. Neither had the classic baroque design touches that make you feel like (at least to an extent) you are driving a car from the 60s or 70s like the box 80s models sometimes do. By that I mean stuff like the peaked hood on the Cadillacs and the fender tip hood on the Lincolns that looked like prior, more classic cars, and certain interior trim that was identical to those prior cars. The 90s models lost a ton of that continuity with the past and traded it for a sort of competent forgettableness. You don’t feel like Elvis driving a ’93 Fleetwood but you might at odd moments in a ’92 Brougham. I wish that, knowing it’d be the end of the line, GM had made more of an effort inside and out on this. Driving it, in today’s world, and not thinking too hard about how it looks, it still feels like a quick, modern, relatulively fuel efficient take on the classic land yacht and it retains that tremendous old school Cadillac presence of its predecessors whereas the 90s TC fades into the background. And in that sense, it’s actually a good car and way better than what came before and in my opinion the increasingly decontented Panthers that lingered on after. I like it more than I did even 3 or 4 years ago. But it just didn’t get the finishing touches that would have made it the appropriate swan song for old school Cadillacs. It was a memorial service with an uninspired eulogy.

Thanks for your very objective and insightful comment. It’s comments like this that allow me (and others) to better appreciate their qualities, especially in comparison to other cars.

Inside Elvis’s 1975 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham

The talisman's reputation for bestowing good fortune and protection has added to its allure and increased its value in the eyes of many. Experts and historians are also intrigued by the Fleetwood talisman. They see it as an important piece of history and culture, representing a bygone era of mystery and enchantment. The opportunity to study and analyze the talisman up close is a tantalizing prospect for these experts, who hope to unravel the secrets behind its creation and significance. The auction house responsible for the sale of the Fleetwood talisman anticipates fierce bidding and record-breaking prices. Given its rarity and desirability, it is expected to attract bidders from all walks of life. Whether it ends up in the hands of a private collector or a museum, the talisman is sure to continue captivating the imagination of those who come into contact with it. In conclusion, the Fleetwood talisman up for grabs represents a unique opportunity to acquire a historic artifact brimming with cultural significance. With its tales of mystical powers and its intricate craftsmanship, the talisman has captured the attention of collectors, enthusiasts, and experts alike. The auction for the talisman promises to be an intense and exciting affair, with bidders from around the world vying to possess this coveted item..

Reviews for "The talisman that fueled the magic of Fleetwood Mac's music"

1. Sarah - 2/5 - I was really disappointed with "Fleetwood Talisman Up for Grabs". The writing was subpar, with a predictable plot and shallow characters. I found myself struggling to connect with any of them or care about what happened to them. The dialogue felt forced and unrealistic, and the pacing was all over the place. Overall, I found this book to be underwhelming and wouldn't recommend it to others looking for a gripping read.

2. John - 1/5 - This book was a complete waste of my time and money. The story lacked depth and originality, with cliché tropes and predictable twists. The author's writing style was unimpressive, filled with disjointed sentences and awkward descriptions. Moreover, the characters felt one-dimensional and unrelatable. I was constantly bored while reading and struggled to finish it. I regret spending my hard-earned money on "Fleetwood Talisman Up for Grabs" and would advise others to steer clear of it.

3. Emily - 2/5 - "Fleetwood Talisman Up for Grabs" had so much potential, but it fell short. The main issue was the pacing, which was incredibly slow and dragged on unnecessarily. There were moments where it seemed like the story was going to pick up, but then it would quickly lose momentum. Additionally, the characters lacked depth and development. I found it difficult to invest in their stories or empathize with their struggles. Overall, while the concept was intriguing, the execution left much to be desired.

4. Michael - 2/5 - I was not a fan of "Fleetwood Talisman Up for Grabs". The plot was convoluted, with too many unnecessary subplots and twists that didn't add much to the overall story. The writing was also subpar, with awkward sentence structures and repetitive phrases. I struggled to stay engaged and found myself skipping pages just to get through it. The book could have benefited from better editing and a more focused storyline. Unfortunately, this was not a satisfying read for me.

Get inspired by Fleetwood Mac's talisman and create your own legacy