AutoHunter Spotlight: 1941 Cadillac Series 62

Up for auction on AutoHunter, the online auction platform driven by ClassicCars.com, is a 1941 Cadillac Series 62 that is one of 3,100 convertibles produced for the model year.

This car, restored to concours standards, has won multiple awards, including CCCA 1st price, an AACA Senior Award and First Place at the 1995 AACA show in Hershey.

1941 Cadillac Series 62 side view 1941 Cadillac Series 62 side view

It’s been refinished in Oceano Blue from its original shade of Valcour Maroon and accented with chrome side spears behind the front and rear wheels, side hood vents, taillight bezels and an egg-crate style front grille with an AACA Senior Award badge.

1941 Cadillac Series 62 badge 1941 Cadillac Series 62 badge

The tan convertible top is power-operated and equipped with a rear glass window.

Inside the Cadillac, the bench seats, door panels, visor and carpeting are outfitted in tan with the convertible boot in a slightly lighter shade of tan. You’ll find brightwork on the inside door handles, window cranks, vent window levers, dashboard, interior windshield trim, door sills and the bottom of each door panel.

The wood-grained dash houses the factory 2-spoke wheel with a chrome center horn ring.

Power comes from a 150-horsepower 346cid Flathead V8 connected to a 3-speed manual transmission.

The odometer reads 19,800 miles.

This Cadillac’s auction ends august 31 at 12:00 p.m. PDT.

Visit the convertible coupe’s AutoHunter listing for more information and gallery of photos.

I’m Thinking About The 2020 Cadillac CT5-V

Illustration for article titled Im Thinking About The 2020 Cadillac CT5-V

Photo: Cadillac

The CT5 is Cadillac’s midsize sedan… think Audi A6 or BMW 5-Series. The CT5-V is the performance-oriented version of the CT5, but not the only performance version. There’s another one coming, so there will end up being at least two performance-oriented CT5-Vs. If you’ve heard this before, it’s because it’s the only part of the CT5-V that anyone has talked about since it was introduced. Which is too bad, because it’s actually a pretty good car.

Advertisement

(Full Disclosure: Cadillac dropped this car off in my driveway with a full tank of gas. At least I assume it was gas. I didn’t check.)

(Testing Conditions: Some city driving. A little highway cruising. I went out to the suburbs and drove around some roads with gentle curves. It was nice.)

Advertisement

When the CT5-V was announced (last year, alongside the CT4-V) and the specs were made public, a bunch of people were left scratching their heads because it was less powerful than the outgoing CTS-V. I was at that event, which took place a few hundred yards from my old office. I asked one of the PR people something like, “Hey, this isn’t the real V, is it?” and it was explained to me that there was a “big V” in development — this car should be thought of as similar to the E53 AMG or M550i, whereas the forthcoming car would be more comparable to the E63 or M5.

Easy enough. They intimated that there was another, more track-oriented car coming during the presentation, but people were already fired up by then.

They could have called this one “Son of CT5-V” or “CT5-V, not a direct CTS-V replacement” or maybe shared a chart showing how these cars line up against the competitive German cars, even if they would have had to put a little black silhouette with question marks on it next to the E63 AMG S. But regardless, go ahead and visit the German car websites and poke around. Issues with complex naming conventions aren’t limited to Cadillac. Maybe this all started with someone’s desire to be like the Germans.

Anyway, last month (or thereabouts) I actually got to drive a CT5-V. I pressed the positively scandalous naming thing to the most remote reaches of my little brain, strapped in and did my best to evaluate the car on its merits. While I didn’t get quite enough time in it to offer the full-boat Jalopnik Review, Andrew has given me a temporary disposition to share some quick impressions.

Advertisement

Thoughts On How It Looks:

In the dead-on profile view, my eye was drawn to the rear where the taillight interacts with the rear quarter window which is, notably, not a window. The tail light has a little protrusion that reaches toward the front of the car and the not-window has a little tail that reaches back toward the tail light. It’s like they want to touch, but can’t. The tension is too much for me.

Advertisement

Illustration for article titled Im Thinking About The 2020 Cadillac CT5-V

Photo: Cadillac

I’m sure it all has a purpose, probably something to do with the fact that I (6’2”) can sit comfortably in the backseat. To me, someone who is widely considered to be not a car designer, it draws a lot of attention to the back of the car that might be better directed elsewhere.

Advertisement

But from the C-pillar forward, it’s a very good-looking car. You’ve got your classic sporty-car dash to axle situation, the still-futuristic-looking upright LED headlight signature, the whole deal. It doesn’t always work in photos, but in person, it’s an exciting car to walk up to.

Advertisement

If I’m finding another complaint, I’d prefer less of the black plastic everyone’s using now. Normally, I’d tell you to get one of the more expressive colors while probably quietly choosing black for myself, but in this case, I’m going to suggest we all get ours in black. Deal?

What About The Inside?

The interior is a huge step up from the previous generation of Cadillacs, which if you’ve driven every generation of Cadillac since the Art and Science era, you’ll recognize as a pretty clear trend. By now, pretty much all the stuff you come into regular contact with — seats, upper door cards, etc. — is nice, soft leather. The seats even have the famous perforations that we know and love.

Advertisement

There’s a floating touchscreen on the dash that can also be controlled via a console-mounted wheel. In place of the old swipe controls you get dials and switches for just about everything important. The ability to skip a song without performing the perfect magic trick hand wave? That’s real luxury, baby!

Advertisement

That said, there is one thing that I found objectionable: If the rest of the car is proof that GM is capable of building cars that compete with just about anything on the market, the shift lever is a little reminder of a time when that wasn’t the case. It’s not the only lightweight plastic shifter out there (BMW’s is similar) but it is the only one you can also find in a Buick Enclave. How about a little rubberized hat for my friend?

How’s It Drive?  

As you may have intuited from the beginning of this post, this car doesn’t have a big V8 with 500 or 700 HP. It doesn’t have a manual transmission. It’s got a twin-turbo V6 with 360 HP and 405 lb-ft of torque and a conventional automatic transmission. It’s enough, the car is fun to drive, smooth, sounds pretty good — but it’s in the same league as other 3-liter twin-turbo V6s that are suddenly everywhere. For the first time in a V-badged car, you can get all-wheel-drive, but do not do that.

Advertisement

The shifts and throttle responses keep the car from feeling really special until you select Track Mode. That’s when you get access to the excellent Performance Traction Management system, and it’s when you can start getting a sense for the brilliance of the electronic diff. It’s clear that an ungodly amount of time went into tuning this car, but had I not switched it into Track Mode for a drive that took place entirely on the street, I probably would have been left with a different impression of it overall.

The brakes are “brake by wire” but if I hadn’t looked it up, I wouldn’t have known. I didn’t get the chance to really abuse them, but they’re great on the street. Like the rest of the car, they’re intuitive and confidence inspiring.

Advertisement

Once you press the right buttons, the GM/Ford 10-speed automatic shifts quickly, you stay right in boost, it’s fun. I complained to a Cadillac rep about the settings and he reminded me that the parameters are all customizable and I could program my own “V” button to do whatever I wanted. I had to remind him that I’m pretty widely considered to be a buffoon.

If you haven’t driven an Alpha platform car (this one is Alpha2) then you can’t possibly begin to conceive of how good GM’s best chassis engineers are. Building a supercar is one thing, but building a luxury sedan that provides the same magic you get in an ND Miata or a Camaro SS 1LE is a vastly more difficult and impressive thing. When car reviewers say a chassis is “communicative,” this is what they’re talking about. The “communicating” is the CT5-V telling you how to go fast.

Advertisement

This is where automotive engineering approaches artistry: Balancing hundreds of variables and parameters to create that impossible, intangible sense that you know exactly how the car is going to respond to every input. Tuning the chassis, suspension, drivetrain, steering, etc., so that the car, through a combination of cues, very clearly tells you that exactly NOW is the time to flatten the throttle pedal if you want to bring the rear end around, feel it hook up and slingshot you out of a corner like you’re Jim Lovell coming around the moon.

There are a lot of cars that are great to drive, and a lot of them are fast enough to set incredible times on a racetrack. But the number of cars that get the “feel” thing exactly right is vanishingly small. GM can do it.

Advertisement

Final Thoughts

The CT5-V was much better to drive than I expected, and like pretty much everyone who’s ever worked here, I’ve been a pretty vocal fan of past Cadillac V-cars. The combination of Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires, the electronic diff and the magnetorheological shocks is a cheat code, but the chassis everything gets bolted onto is special. And this car starts at $48,690. The old CTS V-sport started $13k higher. It’s a deal.

Advertisement

If I were shopping for a performance sports sedan today, I’d probably get the Cadillac. Part of it is that I gravitate to less-obvious cars. But the bigger thing is that because it’s so much fun to drive, this car feels less like a diminished version of the real thing than the competition.

That said, when the one with the V8 and the manual transmission arrives, I expect it to be monumental.

The Forgotten Story Of Cadillac’s Brass Era VTEC

Illustration for article titled The Forgotten Story Of Cadillacs Brass Era VTEC

Illustration: David Grimshaw

Alanson Partridge Brush. Remember that name. Because it was according to his patents that Cadillac put into production something that Honda and Alfa Romeo took decades to match. Mr. Brush’s invention? Variable valve timing.

Advertisement

The information I am about to relate should be a welcome addition to any pedant’s armory of trivia. In 1903, the first production Cadillacs rolled out of the factory, fitted with chain drive and single-cylinder Leland and Faulconer engines—engines equipped with variable valve timing—built in accordance with patents held by Alanson P. Brush. This was not some sort of bizarro failed Edwardian experiment of which two or three were made, recalled, and destroyed. These cars were mass-produced and hugely successful for the era, tens of thousands having been sold. In its early years, Cadillac marketed itself on reliability and economy, something it could do thanks to that ingenious variable valve timing system.

Advertisement

Let’s go back to the beginning so we can understand why this happened, and how it works. If you’re a fan of automotive history, you probably already know that before founding the Ford Motor Company, Henry Ford had founded the Henry Ford Company. Things didn’t quite work out between Mr. Ford and the people in charge of the company bearing his name, however, and he was paid to leave.

In need of someone to appraise the company before liquidation, the company brought in Henry Martyn Leland, an engineer and builder of engines. Leland knew a good thing when he saw it, and sensing an opportunity to sell his engines, he convinced the company to reorganize instead.

In that reorganization, the Henry Ford Company became Cadillac, with a new Henry (Leland) in charge, and Mr. Ford went his own way. Mr. Leland, brought along Brush, an employee of Leland and Faulconer, to come work at the new Cadillac.

In 1903, Ford and Cadillac both released their first series-produced cars. They look remarkably similar outwardly, as they should, because Henry Ford oversaw the design of both of them. The key difference was in motive power. The Ford Model A used what was, by 1903 standards, a very modern horizontally-opposed twin cylinder engine. It had heads cast en bloc, and side valves. The Cadillac used what was, at first glance, a rather more conservative single-cylinder design. Supplied by Leland and Faulconer, the big IOE engine didn’t look much different from a lot of early single cylinders. In detail, though, it was quite different. Visually, the copper water jacket (another patented idea of Alanson P. Brush) was the biggest indicator that this was something else.

Advertisement

Illustration for article titled The Forgotten Story Of Cadillacs Brass Era VTEC

Photo: Brian Heyd

The engine, dubbed the “Little Hercules” did not have a carburetor, or a throttle for that matter. The fuel-air mixture was supplied by a mixer, a mechanism which is not quite fuel injection, but not quite a carburetor either, and was better known in marine applications as a “mixing valve” in the early part of the last century. The operation of the mixer is exceedingly simple. With basic maintenance, it’s also reliable, which is something carburetors were decidedly not in 1903. An incoming charge of air flows into the mixer, and in doing so strikes a baffle which lifts a weighted needle valve from its seat, allowing gasoline fed by gravity from the fuel tank, to flow, to mix, with the incoming air. And that’s it. There’s no choke, and there’s no throttle, no float or float bowl. Aside from an adjustable spring which limits the travel of the needle valve to adjust the richness of the mixture, there’s not much to adjust. Aside from the needle itself, there’s not much that can wear out.

Advertisement

Patent drawing for Alanson Brush’s mixer.

Patent drawing for Alanson Brush’s mixer.
Illustration: Patent Art

If you’re mechanically minded, you’ve already spotted a problem with this simple mechanism. It’s fine and dandy for an engine that only needs to run under constant load and speed (as was more or less the case when mixing valves were used in marine applications) but how is that going to work in a car? Enter patent No. 767,794 “INLET VALVE GEAR FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES” filed August 3rd, 1903, and granted August 16th, 1904 to one Alanson P. Brush. Alanson’s invention allowed the driver of the Cadillac to have control over the intake valve’s duration and lift, negating the necessity of a conventional throttle for control of engine power and speed. In 1908, Ernest E. Sweet, then chief engineer of the Cadillac Motor Company, wrote to The Horseless Age to explain the purpose and function of Brush’s variable valve timing:

…it is desirable to have the inlet valve open and close practically on centres in an engine that is designed to run very slowly, say, for instance, 100 r. p. m.

It is also recognized that in engines that are designed to run at 2,000 r. p. m. it is desirable to leave the inlet valve off from its seat from 60 to 90 degrees past centre.

Advertisement

The “centres” Mr. Sweet refers to are Top Dead Center (TDC) and Bottom Dead Center (BDC): the position of the crank when the piston is at the top-most part of its stroke, and bottom-most part of its stroke, respectively.

Since it is not possible have an automobile engine run at a fixed revolution (as it is with a stationary engine), it is desirable to have a variable valve timing which will more nearly meet the conditions at the varying revolutions, which is accomplished in the single cylinder Cadillac motors in a large measure.

For the extreme slow speed work our inlet valve does not open until the piston has traveled out on the suction stroke about 1 1/2 inches [out of 5″ total stroke], and closes a little past the next centre. Whereas for the extremely high speed work our inlet valve opens 12 degrees past centre and remains open about 77 degrees past the next centre, and there are about twenty gradations between these two extremes which change the time of opening and closing and also the lift of the inlet valve proportionately.

Advertisement

At idle, the intake valve (or inlet valve, as Mr. Sweet calls it) was open for 114 degrees of crank rotation, and “wide open” its duration was 245 degrees. This variation in timing and lift is controlled by the driver with a hand lever. How this was achieved is delightfully simple. The intake valve is operated by a roller rocker. Under this roller is the push rod, which is squared, and has a ramped end. Under the ramped end of the push rod is a cam, fitted with its own roller which is connected to the hand lever by a linkage. The push rod slides between the cam and the rocker roller, and the ramped section of the rod rides up the cam, pushing the rod against the rocker roller, opening the valve. The cam can be rotated to move the end of the push rod closer, or further, from the rocker. The closer it moves the sooner the valve opens, and the longer it is held open, et voila, variable valve timing. The pushrod itself is run off an eccentric, in a manner reminiscent of steam engine practice.

Advertisement

As it happened, 1908 would be the last year Cadillac would offer single cylinder cars. The pace of development in the first decade of that century was rapid, and while the design’s extreme simplicity and ruggedness had been a selling point in 1903, by 1909 buyers were looking for something more sophisticated. Ford had begun selling low priced four cylinder models in 1906, and the Model T which had just appeared in 1908 was set to dominate the low end of the market. Cadillac moved on and never looked back. Improvements in carburetors since 1903 had removed the reliability advantage once held by the dead simple mixer, and as it went, it took with it the first mass-produced variable valve gear.

Advertisement

Alanson Brush had already left Cadillac by this point, to pursue other endeavors. He worked on the short-lived Oakland, creating for it an upright twin cylinder engine, which featured a pioneering use of a balance shaft. Reportedly, a pencil could be balanced on end, atop the cylinder head of a running Oakland engine, so smooth was its operation. Then he worked on what was likely his most famous product, the Brush Runabout. This inexpensive single cylinder car was the first to feature coil spring suspension for both front and rear axles. Unfortunately despite its sales success, the Brush Runabout Company was brought down by poor management, and defunct by 1914. Brush reconnected with Cadillac later in life, when he was hired by General Motors as a consulting engineer. He passed away in 1952.

Advertisement

Various vehicle manufacturers tinkered with variable valve timing in the decades since, but by the time it reappeared in the 1980s on production Alfas and Hondas, Cadillac’s pioneering role had long since been forgotten. By the time BMW introduced continuously variable valve lift to manage engine speed, in 2001, Brush’s patent was 98 years old. Brush’s invention is almost incredible in its prescience, offering variable timing, duration, and lift, and doing so reliably in a production vehicle over a century ago. It is a shame then, that this early success goes almost completely unrecognized in this age of a multitude of various systems, VTEC, VVEL, Valvematic, Valvetronic, aiming to achieve the same goals. So here’s to Alanson P. Brush and Cadillac, the forgotten pioneers of variable valve timing.