New Cadillac by Great Iconic Models
What do You think about ?
Rear door a bit strange to me ..
The wood trim mimics the (lower) rear compartment floor "walk-in" height of the '51 to '53 Fleetwood 75's:
An almost invisible feature thanks to the mostly dark colors specified on these cars.
Marlborough, Massachusetts USA
Well, it's the depth of rear door on the real car that looks a bit strange to me! Almost looks like somebody hand-crafted a replacement door and miscalculated the depth. But maybe the car had a lowered rear sill to make access easier for arthritic rear seat passengers. Or maybe it was just a badly-judged stylistic gimmick.
Anyway, Great iconic Models seem to have "corrected" it, and it looks nicer to me, but obviously they were wrong.
p.s. Ah, I've just seen J. Sharisky's post. That odd "dropped door" detail looks much less glaring on the basic Fleetwood than it does on the woodie version.
Well, as usual, another bad model. This one is identified as a '51, when in fact it is a 1952 model.
This can be clearly identified by the gold Cadillac emblems under the headlights.
The second issue is the missing wood ribs on the roof. There appears to be 8 on the 1:1.
This Cadillac was customized by Pasadena-based Maurice Schwartz (formerly of Bowman & Schwartz and Murphy), and is believed to have been originally commissioned by the husband of a period movie actress, and was purchased in the mid-1950s by Gene Autry who owned it for more than 30 years.
I think the real car needed another thin strip of wood below the front door to even out the front and rear doors.
John F. Quilter
Eugene, Oregon USA
A big, impressive Cadillac ! The model looks great and would be a really nice one on display or to photograph.
Wow! A tuff crowd. IMO, that "drop-rear-door" was replicated adequately. Why all the fuss? Geez.... what would've been said if GIM failed to duplicate that "drop-door" all together?
That rear door was replicated properly. It was done so to permit rear passengers ease of entrance/exit.
However, the two issues I pointed out are deal breakers for me. The 1:1 is all over the internet and it is easy to see what needs to be done. These manufacturers continue to pump out poorly researched models because too many reviewers have no criticisms of them.
A good reviewer will note the good and the bad.
Elegance models made 30 years ago by hand are more true to the original than this new stuff.