From 1957 through 1966 the Imperial was a completely separate car. Other years were not. Most years Cadillac shared much body and sheet metal with lesser cars. Many were those that the Imperial wasn't sharing with other cars, yet Cadillac out sold them. Based on that, I don't think vehicle separation was the issue.
Why was the Imperial and New Yorker virtually the same in body and features? Cadillac made itself completely different than the top of the line for Buick, Pontiac, and Oldsmobile 98. Lincoln also like Cadillac stood alone against any other Ford product and their other divisions. So again, if the Imperial was to be recognized as a class unto itself it had to be different than the other Models. I believe it fail to do so. Example of today- The Imperial concept car of 2008 looks so similar to the 300 than why would you even look at the Imperial or get excited about it. Why pay more for and Imperial when there is no real difference except for the price tag! In my opinion the New Yorker/5th ave. sold more in the 90's because it looked the same as the Imperial ,but was cheaper! A loaded 5th gave you just as much as the Imperial- In fact , one can argue that the Interior on the 5th was more luxurious than the Imperial. Help me understand The Chrysler mentality on this matter -Regards -Anthon
y
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network