Media | Articles
Final Parking Space: 1982 Cadillac Cimarron
Since this series is all about automotive history, we can’t be afraid to shy away from the vehicles that stir controversy. We’ve already seen such polarizing discarded machines as the Chevrolet Corvair, the Edsel, the Pontiac Fiero, the Ford Mustang II, the Audi 5000, and the Cadillac Allanté. Today we’ll be taking a look at the vehicle most likely to enrage Cadillac purists today: a first-year Cimarron, found in a Colorado Springs car graveyard last year.
The path that led to the Cimarron began in the middle 1970s, when GM developed the Cadillac Seville. This car was derived from GM’s compact X Platform, and despite the Seville’s chassis having benefited from extensive modifications, it was still a close relative of the proletariat-grade Chevy Nova. Plenty of Cadillac buyers didn’t worry about that association, however, and the Seville was a sales hit.
For the 1980 model year, the Seville moved to a front-wheel-drive platform derived from the one under the Toronado/Riviera/Eldorado. That left the Cadillac Division without a fuel-efficient compact model, just in time for the oil crisis caused by the Iranian revolution.
But wait! A family of front-wheel-drive small cars was being developed for use on the new J Platform. This would be the Chevrolet Cavalier and its siblings from Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Buick (the J2000, Firenza, and Skyhawk, respectively), to hit the street as 1981 models.
It seemed to make sense to add a Cadillac-badged J-Car, and the Cimarron debuted as a 1982 model.
The biggest problem with the Cimarron was obvious at a glance: It looked distressingly similar to the Cavalier. For 1982, the list price of a new Cimarron was $12,181, while a 1982 Chevy Cavalier sedan started at a mere $7137 (those figures come to $41,034 and $24,042 after inflation).
And while the 1976-1979 Sevilles got Oldsmobile V-8s not available in the Chevy Nova, the 1982 Cimarron had exactly the same engine as the Cavalier: a 1.8-liter pushrod straight-four rated at 88 horsepower and 100 pound-feet. This was the first Cadillac model with four-banger power since 1914.
The base transmission in the first-year Cimarron was a four-speed manual, the first three-pedal Cadillac since 1950. This car has the optional three-speed automatic, which cost $370 ($1246 in 2025 dollars).
Bigger engines (including a 2.8-liter V-6) came in later Cimarrons, along with a five-speed manual.
The Cimarron’s interior was much nicer than the Cavalier’s, with leather seats and standard air conditioning.
But still, it wasn’t European enough to woo young buyers away from Audis, Saabs, and BMWs. And it was too Cavalier-ish to appeal to “traditional” Cadillac buyers.
The Cimarron stuck around through 1988, with more than 130,000 sold. Its legacy has been mostly negative, despite the J-Body becoming a tremendous, decades-long global success story for GM. Dan Neil included the Cimarron in his famous 50 Worst Cars of All Time list, blasting it as “everything that was wrong, venal, lazy and mendacious about GM in the 1980s.”
Personally, I think putting Cadillac badges on Chevy Suburbans was a greater violation of Cadillac tradition than putting them on Chevy Cavaliers, but that’s just me.
You’ll need driving gloves to get the most out of your Cimarron!
My parents had an 86 Cimarron with a 2.8L V6. It was a good driver with plenty of pep. The first Cimarrons were so grossly underpowered with that four cylinder that it kind of doomed it from the start. Just like the Fiero, it was too late to save it by the time they got it right.
My wife sat in one of these at the Chicago Auto Show, and said to the sales guy, “This is the nicest Cavalier I’ve ever seen”. He was not amused.
She was not wrong. The whole conversation with the sales guys reaction would have had me laughing. I se to go to the Chicago Auto Show every year. Some of those guys had no sense of humor.
🤣🤣
After being assigned a brand new, Cavalier in 1981, I can attest to the incredibly underwhelming power from the incredibly noisy 4 banger in these sad offerings. The chassis wasn’t bad, but the tires were too narrow to really have any fun with these “company cars”. The look-alike body, and anemic, clunky engine doomed this project from the start. However, GM’s Delco boys did get the AC right, it had more power than the driveline.
I know this story is about the Cimarron, but I owned an 85 Cavalier Type 10 coupe (new) an 87 four door (used) and a 02 coupe (new). Cavaliers usually got bad press and reviews, but they were some of the most reliable vehicles I ever owned. All three were great vehicles and I drove them for many, many years, but the 02 was by far the best. Drove it for 18 years and close to 300k miles. Only issue with it was a faulty fuel pump that was replaced at 60k miles. Sold it in 2020 and I still see it on the road.
It’s funny that you’d write ” the Cimarron’s interior was much nicer than the Cavaliers” and then show the interior door panel. It has a very much ‘ just find away to make it work’ appearance with little or no consideration for integrating the switch gear. Hastily designed and executed. Like they handed everyone on the line a utility knife, a rough idea and told them to hack away at a Cavalier door card. In a word shoddy. Was highlighting that your intent?
I was riding around in full-size 70s Cadillacs when these things were still relatively new, and I saw them as straight up blasphemy. I have heard from people who owned them who thought they were great little cars, but they do represent a very low point for Cadillac. This was at a point (a lot like now) where people were heralding the end of the V8, and when the Allante, STS, and ETC rolled around, I knew better days were on the horizon
Murilee, disappointed in your lack of knowledge about the first generation Seville. The ONLY part from the non-Cadillac parts bin that was used for the Seville was the rear door latching mechanism. The chassis was completely different from those of the other divisions midsize cars, different wheel base different length. Yes a lot of components were from the Cadillac parts bin bit not from the other divisions. You are a better writer then one that would state as fact something that was not true. Also, the 5th floor did not think Cadillac could make the J -Car into a Cadillac in 12 months and they were correct, but by the end of the model run they had turned into Cadillac but by then it was a lost cause.
Speaking of better writer…
“You are a better writer then one that would state as fact something that was not true.“
The word you are looking for is “than”, not “then”.
The floor pan was a stretched X-body, and the front door skins (not the shell as the window frames were different) were X-body. Part of the roof stamping and the rear trunk floor were also shared. Several front suspension components were shared, as were the front brake calipers.
The many changes made earned it the designation of “K-body”, but its origins are still X-body. It was a far more successful evolution than that of the Mopar F-body (Aspen/Volare) to M-body (Diplomat/LeBaron/Fifth Avenue), but its origins are was only an evolution nonetheless.
I remember a cartoon in an automotive magazine from 1983. Automotive executives gazing through their Detroit skyscraper office window at the bustling freeway below. “Ah, a sure sign of springtime. The ‘J’ cars are running again.”
Yes, the earliest carbureted J-cars had a horrible cold-start problem. It was finally traced to an EGR valve that would be open at cold-start when it should have been closed. The open valve leaned out the air/fuel mixture so much that, even with the choke closed, that a cold engine would not start.
All the 1982 J cars were terrible, not just the Cimarron. The V6 in later years was a huge improvement. Even fuel injection in 1983 helped a lot.
I was a Service Manager at a Chevrolet dealer in the 80’s and remember that our body shop had a customer that wanted a Cimarron convertible of course GM didn’t make one so he had them take a new Cavalier convertible and change all the badges and emblem to look like a Cadillac. Came out pretty nice
“Nasty, brutish, and short”
I worked with a guy who always owned Cadillacs. His wife hated driving them. When the Cimmaron came out, she thought it was the greatest thing ever. She was 4’-10”.
So I’ve owned not one, not two, but SEVEN of these little monsters. Only one, my 1983, was a four-cylinder. It was stupid slow, but not the “Dear God, I’m going to die!” slow of the 1982. I can vouch for the V6 cars being quick little cars with decent handling; since ALL Cimarrons from 1985-88 used the Cavalier Z24 setup. The 5-speed transformed the V6 car into a genuine performance car. Think Z24 in a tuxedo. Because that’s what it was. So the question is- Were they good cars? Heck, yeah! Were they good Cadillacs? Oh, hell, no.
Paul I – Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate you quoting Hobbes. But maybe just maybe grasping at the first phrase at hand? I expected a bit better of you. You know you’ve always have been a disappointment to your mother and I. We had such high hopes.
That is the second time you have tried to insult me. I don’t understand your deep interest in my comments. Would you care to explain why you are interested? It seems odd.
I had one of these in my shop once that belonged to a friend. I could not get it to idle up to proper RPM no matter what I did. Finally my friend told me to just fix the AC and he would just keep his foot on the throttle when he stopped. When I charged the AC the pressure switch sent the signal to the ECM to set the idle correctly whether the AC was on or not. So I guess I unwittily did fix stupid.