(first posted 11/18/2015) The parking lot of the neighborhood grocery store has yielded some pretty incredible finds. Still, I was flabbergasted to find there what appeared to be a daily-driver, mid-1970’s AMC Matador station wagon. I wonder what kind of owner(s) had lovingly nursed it through the years as an AMC-orphan. That’s true devotion.
I think this one is a ’77 or ’78, by the stand-up hood ornament and lack of “Brougham” (a trim level gone after ’76) script emblems on the C-pillars. It has been entertaining to read opinions in CC threads ranging from tolerance to straight-up disgust with the end-result of Chief Stylist Dick Teague’s staff’s efforts. Personally, I think there was nothing wrong with the related, restyled ’74 Ambassador’s front clip. That car’s smoother, quad-headlamp front-end treatment fixes almost everything that’s wrong here.
While I don’t love the Matador’s front end, I do respect where I think AMC was trying to go with it. A coffin-nose has proved to be dashing in some applications – the Cord 810/812, the Dodge Mirada (which, yes, came later), and I’m sure there are at least a few other examples. I understand how Kenosha might have thought this frontal treatment would add some distinction to what was, up to that point, a very innocuous and inoffensive (if also forgettable) design.
But, still…I dunno. I watched the 1978 movie “The Eyes Of Laura Mars”, with Faye Dunaway playing a renowned fashion photographer, on TV while doing laundry one night. I had real trouble believing the titular character would have been squired around Manhattan by her chauffeur in such an unfortunately-faced car. Some artists have unusually eclectic tastes, but some of the more successful ones also have a bit more money to play with than rolling in a Matador would suggest. I’m also trying to imagine what an AMC dealership in NYC would have looked like. But all of that is beside the point, I guess.
One of my favorite things about the featured car is that it looked like a regular driver. AMC had been effectively gone for twenty years prior to this spotting. The owner(s) must have known a good mechanic. I also love how the “luxury” features like the Di-Noc woodgrain and hood ornament were in direct contrast to the lived-in (hopefully not literally) condition of the car. Granted, this wagon wasn’t in horrible shape for being at least thirty-one years old, but it didn’t appear to be a pampered family heirloom, either.
I haven’t seen this Matador since, but I’d like to think that by its longevity and (presumed) years of faithful service, it earned a permanent spot in someone’s cache of fond memories. Even if it wasn’t considered traditionally attractive like its Hornet Sportabout stablemate, it was at the very least memorable.
The subject car was photographed by the author in Edgewater, Chicago, Illinois.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009.
Related reading:
- From Doug Frechette: In Defense Of The 1974 AMC Matador Sedan: The Bullfighter Gets A Bum Rush
- From Tom Klockau: CC Capsule: 1975 AMC Matador Brougham Station Wagon – What, No Barcelona Wagon?
“One Adam 12, one Adam 12. 2-11 in progress. Please report to the Ralph’s parking lot corner of Reseda and San Carlos.” The code and location are probably completely fictitious but every time I see this subject car I think of the old TV show with Martin Milner and Kent McCord.
I will always have a soft spot for these, and will overlook how ridiculous that snout looks.
These were pretty good cars IMO , L.A.P.D. used them as black & white patrol cars and most divisions also had a few wagons as station cars . they remained in daily service into the early 1990’s .
In spite of the weak oiling in the big blocks , they had plenty of power and robust chassis that handled police duty easily .
-Nate
Eyes of Laura Mars is such a terrific movie!
Agree, the movie is great. It combines many things I like. I bought it on DVD shortly after watching it on TV.
In the mid 70s a high school classmate of mine bought one of these (BRAND NEW) as his first car. That car was medium blue in and out with very few options….it even had hub caps instead of full wheel covers. I couldn’t imagine ANYONE buying a car like that, and as their 1st new car, and being single, too.
Funny, I would never have called this “coffin-nosed” in the vein of a Cord 810….or even a Dodge Magnum. I have always been puzzled as to why AMC used that jutting grille or at least didn’t use quad headlights….but the Ambassador did use quads and the same jutting grille so the cheaper car had to get duals. And of course the Matador coupe had dual headlights.
The “basic” Matador didn’t look too bad, but that jutting grille was too far out there….in more ways than one.
Actually, the ’74 Ambassador grille did not extend quite as far out as the Matador’s snout. I’ve always felt that AMC made a mistake dropping the Ambassador in favor of the Matador – it should have been the other way around. After all, there had been fleet Ambassadors for several years prior to 1974, so AMC need not have worried about that market segment.
I did notice that, too, about the Ambassador’s grille not protruding out quite as far. Totally agree with you – this design should have been kept. But what would AMC have done with the new Matador coupe? You know they were going to build that, anyway, regardless of what it was called.
They should have kept the Matador name for the coupe. Not that it mattered all that much anymore – the coupe sales were already tanking by 1975-1976.
Agreed- the Matador coupe was never going to be a huge sales leader, but it’s nothing like the sedan or wagon. I think that giving the coupe a unique name would help. Why not make the Matador sedans and wagons take the Ambassador name- a few years later, GM would downsize models.
Plus, the government would likely purchase them regardless of name anyways.
Exactly. Keeping the Matador as a coupe but making the sedans and wagons Ambassadors might have sold a few more of them. There’d be a few schlubs and AMC-faithful who would think they were getting a bargain luxury car. But, then, it’s not like AMC’s marketing department was ever on the ball. In fact, it seems they were copying Chrysler at this point (which isn’t exactly a good idea, either) from their 1971 Plymouth B-body line-up where the coupes shared no sheetmetal, whatsoever, with either sedans and wagons, yet they all kept the Satellite name. The big difference was there was still a clear-cut Plymouth Fury full-size line, too.
Of course, they didn’t do the same with the Coronet, where there was no 1971 Coronet coupe and they were all called Chargers. That’s the Chrysler route AMC should have taken when the new 1974 Matador coupe was introduced.
It’s hard to say that AMC dropped much more than a nameplate when the Ambassador was done. The Matador and Ambassador were the same car and played in the same parts bin.
The Ambassador name always sounded stodgy to me, and I still think Matador is sort of a strange name as well. If they could have afforded to give the car an honest update, I’d have put an all new name on it. AMC Accord has nice alliteration!
Condensing the large AMC to one model name with several trim levels was probably the right move – and certainly the direction of the modern market. Using the Matador’s unfortunate snout was not likely the right move, but it was certainly more in keeping with AMC’s penchant for, ahem, unusual styling. The ’74 Amby front isn’t ugly, but it is rather dull. It’s not surprising the Matador’s front end made the cut with team AMC.
If you look at the coupe, sedan, and wagon, it’s pretty easy to play “One of these three things doesn’t belong”. I think separating the odd-ball coupe would make sense. Matador kind of implies a sporting, manly type of image. I think a personal luxury coupe could fit the name, but I don’t see the see the sedan/wagon as being like that.
Since the Ambassador nameplate had a pretty long history, I’d continue using it- especially for basically the same vehicle. Calling it the Accord would have been a great name, too. It’s worked pretty well for Honda….
If I was to play, which one of these three doesn’t belong, I’d definitely have to say the Matador Coupe.
The Matador sedan and Ambassador didn’t cost much to tool up the year to year changes. It’s the coupe and Pacer that sank AMC.
The Matador sedan and Ambassador didn’t cost much to tool up the year to year changes. It’s the coupe and Pacer that sank AMC.
The senior platform was getting very long in the tooth. They would have had to do something dramatic to regain anything like the volume the seniors sold in in the early/mid 60s.
It was not just the millions spent on the Pacer and Matador coupe. as the company would have run out of money eventually as their existing products became hopelessly obsolete and sales dried up.
It’s more a question of opportunity cost. What could they have invested in, if they had not spent the money on those two niche models? It would have been easy to turn back the clock 10 years, use the existing senior passenger compartment, suspension and powertrain, and wrap them in a new, downsized, space efficient, shell, think an AMC version of the Ford Fox platform, 3 years before the Fairmont came out. Or they could have kept the ex-Buick V6, instead of selling the tooling back to GM, adopt it to transverse installation, use the transverse automatic that Borg Warner had in production to create a new luxury front driver, along the lines of a 82 Buick Century, as the next Ambassador, and a more downmarket hatchback, along the lines of the Chevy Citation, to replace the Hornet and Gremlin.
The US has had hundreds, maybe thousands, of automakers over the years. Only 3 have survived, and two of those had to be bailed out by the government. Evidence suggests that it is very very easy to fail in the car business, and very difficult to avoid making fatal mistakes.
Ooooo – that car was probably the direct opposite of a chick-magnet. On the flip-side, though, I like that a high school student back then could have afforded a new car this size (even if deeply discounted by the local AMC dealer).
Nice find. The boxiness of the shape makes the Matador wagon seem more utilitarian than a colonnade or Torino wagon. As this look can back into style with the 77 b body, maybe AMC could have reused some of the late 60s sheetmetal to bring it up to date with little budget. Integrating the big bumpers would have been the challenge.
Maybe that could have seen it survive to allow an Eagle 4wd version. The formally Hornet Eagle wagon, the Matador 4wd and the Grand Waggoneer all with matching dinoc could have made quite the model line.
Scariest ride I ever had was in a Matador. When I was a college student in the 80s I hitchhiked home down the coast of SC with a buddy of mine. We caught a ride with a gospel singer driving a ’77ish Matador down a stretch of two lane highway. I was in the front seat. I thought he was going to kill me; passing cars and playing chicken with oncoming traffic. He looked at my terrified, 19 year old self and laughed and said “Don’t worry, I’m not gonna crash. I like me.” Cold comfort.
The initial 1974 rendition of the Matador coffin-nose grille was particularly unfortunate. It gave the car a kind of cross-eyed look that almost induces vertigo looking at it.
I actually find the Matador nose quite attractive. Probably more attractive than the Matador coupe nose.
I had a ’74 Matador beater during college. It had a police package and was a great urban vehicle as it handled rough roads rather well. I never understood why a police package would come with drum brakes on all wheels, considering the model year.
I have always liked the Matador, despite the unfortunate front end. I think a pair of quad square headlights would have helped a lot to make that front end look better with the long snout. I remember reading a MT road test of a ’76 wagon with handling suspension, the AMC 360 V8 and a few power options. They really liked it and praised it’s tight handling, and said it rode better than either the Ford or Chevy competition.
Eyes of Laura Mars – love that movie! Despite it’s serious plot about a woman who sees events thru the eyes of a murderer, it’s so campy and over the top it’s a hoot to watch! Love the shots of NYC in the late 70s, and co-star Rene Auberjonois drives an AMC Pacer!
“Autos supplied by AMC”
AMC did supply cars for many movies and TV shows.
Diana Prince [Lynda Carter] on “Wonder Woman” had an AMC Concorde, too. And some of Sheriff Roscoe’s squad cars were Mat’s.
Hahaha! “Dukes of Hazzard” must have switched to Matadors after they ran out of Monacos and “small” Furies. (“Furys”?)
It went the other way. They used Matadors in the first season and then switched to the B body Furies and Monacos thereafter. I assume they used the Matadors because they were the cheapest used police cars available at the start, but they probably realized they had to standardize on something that would be available for several seasons after the show was a success. I don’t know what % of a typical Dukes episode was recycled footage, but it was quite a bit. That’s why Bo and Luke always wear the same outfits.
Sonny Shroyer, the actor that played deputy Enos, and even had a short lived spinoff with him becoming a detective in LA, personally owns a Matador done up as a Hazard County police car. He uses it to make appearances. He lives back in his hometown in Georgia. Not in Hazard County, that place is ficticious. We do have a Buttes County.
It really is hard to say something nice about the front end of the Matador. I’ve always thought of them as AMC funniest mistake of the 70’s. And they made lots of mistakes in the 70’s. Keeping the Ambassador instead would have made much more sense, or even just putting the Ambo front end on it would have sufficed.
That being said, I’d love to get my hands on one of these, there was even one in good shape for sale for $2000 nearby. Would make a cool cop replica with a rebuilt 360, beefed up 727 and heavy duty suspension and brakes. It still wouldn’t be worth anything though.
Tooling expense for two different hoods for 1974, one which looks reasonably styled, the other grotesquely out of proportion. Were Teague and his boys pulling one on management? One can imagine them late on a Friday, exhausted, ready to go home, feeling a bit silly, ginning up the Matador snout as a joke. Monday rolls around only to find that management has viewed the joke, loves it, orders it into production before they have a chance to obliterate the snout….. Shades of Frank Spring presenting three different designs for the Hudson Jet, one which is so obviously tall, ungainly, badly proportioned and undesirable but then Barit selects it for production!
I have also been mystified by the decisions about that front end. I had thought it might be a shared hood latch point, making it necessary to shorten the edges of the hood with some additional stamping operations. But then that would not seem to account for the full difference in wheelbase between the Amby and the Matador.
Had the Matador used the Ambassador front end , the car would have been quite attractive.
Shades of Frank Spring presenting three different designs for the Hudson Jet, one which is so obviously tall, ungainly, badly proportioned and undesirable but then Barit selects it for production!
The story goes that Barit picked the tall one because he figured people should have enough headroom to wear their hat in the back seat.
Floyd Clymer wrote car tests for a magazine in the 50s. I read some of those tests, and he always commented whether he could wear his hat in the car. So, maybe Barit was right. If you were an old bugger in the 50s, like Barit and Clymer, being able to wear your hat was important.
“The story goes that Barit picked the tall one because he figured people should have enough headroom to wear their hat in the back seat.”
Barit and Clymer were just the buyers that the Jet appealed to: tall height, short overall length and narrow width, just like the packages twenty years before they’d loved. Neither was looking toward the future.
The bigger problem was that there wasn’t much of a market for domestic compacts in the early 1950s.
The Willys Aero was quite handsome – it was by far the best-looking of the bunch – and it didn’t sell very well. The Nash Rambler was the only one that could remotely be deemed a success, and it was hardly a beauty queen.
I really like this car, but would have a hard time resisting the temptation to drive the front end of it into an industrial grinder to smooth down that horrid growth on the front.
I still think that with a decent front end, this car could have been moderately successful during the 70s as a sort of super-sized Valiant. Especially the wagon, that was quite good looking.
I recall as a kid in the 90’s seeing a Matador for the first time and thinking; what happened to the front end of that Valiant? Then I saw the door handles and it all made sense.
I still think that with a decent front end, this car could have been moderately successful during the 70s as a sort of super-sized Valiant. Especially the wagon, that was quite good looking.
Or they could have dug out the Rebel tooling and downsized back to the 114″ wheelbase., aiming at the Granada with the one thing the Granada line lacked: a wagon.
They were in a tight spot right then. The big three had gone to bloated styling that AMC did not have the money to copy. By the time trimmer styling came back, the senior platform was gone.
A few of the old AMC styling guys show up at the local meet each year. Last summer, I asked Vince Geraci about that snout, as we looked at the front of a mid 70s Matador that had the hood open. At that time Vince was working on interiors, so didn’t really know. He suggested I shoot an e-mail to Pat Foster. Foster’s reply to why the extended nose was “to make the cars look longer”. Had nothing to do with providing extra crush room for crash tests, like I figured. Just a cheap and dirty bandaid to making a bigger car. Ford had some outrageously long front overhangs at that time, but Ford spent the money on an entire front clip, so it didn’t look as bad as the Matador.
My favorite Vince Geraci quote: “There’s a very fine line between unique and strange”
Why they kept making the Matador? They must have figured they were putting a couple dollars in the till, but I’m sure it created problems at the plant.
I toured Kenosha assembly in 75. There were two lines: one assembling Hornets mixed with Matadors and the other line assembling Gremlins mixed with Pacers. These days, automakers limit trim and option availability to minimize complications and errors in assembly. Running totally different platforms on the same line had to have caused problems, though the line didn’t screech to a halt due to a Matador axle appearing when a Hornet passed the station, when I was there.
Completing the entire front to be longer would make sense. Ford had enough room in their hoods to keep a Pinto just in case.
This just seems weird. I’d think that it would also cause visibility issues with the turn signals at angles.
Completing the entire front to be longer would make sense.
Would also cost more: new, longer, front fenders, as well as the new hood.
Ford had enough room in their hoods to keep a Pinto just in case.
I remember derisive comments in a road test of a 69 Grand Prix about the excessively long hood and the wasted space underneath.
I’d think that it would also cause visibility issues with the turn signals at angles.
I would expect that the front side marker lights may have flashed with the turn signals to address that issue.
But, it would look better. If the cost was too much, why couldn’t they have used the front end for the Matador coupe? We have a “What-if” on this site for that already.
The front end of the coupe is way more appealing to me, and they’ve already spent money to make it.
——–
I haven’t owned a car from this era, but the hoods all look long. I can see why AMC wanted to make their car look larger- it is the largest of their offerings. But, the result looks even a little weird by AMC standards.
Had not seen that 4 door based on the Matador coupe. Somehow, I suspect it would go over as well as the 53 Studebaker sedans that were styled to mimic the 53 coupe.
For jollies, I started comparing the internal and external dimensions of the 70s senior sedans to the Fairmont. Ever notice how the wheels on the AMCs seem sunk into the wheelwells? The senior AMC body was 7″ wider than the Fairmont, but the AMC’s track was only 3″ wider. Inside, the AMCs had 3″ more shoulder room than the Fairmont, and 2″ more rear legroom. So the senior AMCs were a Granada/Dart/Nova wrapped in a lot of extra sheetmetal.
The mind boggles at the possibility of AMC taking the money spent on the Pacer and Matador coupe, turning back the clock sizewise to 1963 and wrapping new, more space efficient sheetmetal and a 10″ shorter wheelbase, around the Ambassador suspension and interior. I remember when the Granada was new, and the streets absolutely crawled with them.
It’s a What-If, so it is only theoretical.
I’ve noticed the wheel wells. I thought it was fender shaping, but that’s cool to know.
Your Matador four door looks very nice, just needs a neo-classic central grille and vertical flanking fenders to succeed in that period.
Just don’t try and put the Matador sedan front end on this. Please.
Steve, thank you for this! I want to try to go to the next meet. Is it in Kenosha? I love that you’ve had a chance to talk directly with the sources formerly from American Motors. I may not love this Matador, but I’ve been an AMC fan-geek for close to 30 years!
Steve, thank you for this! I want to try to go to the next meet. Is it in Kenosha?
AMC’s engineeering and styling were done in a facility on Plymouth Rd, in Detroit. That building was also the corporate HQ until the 70s, when the big shots moved to an office tower in Southfield.
The Detroit area meet is held in Livonia, another burb of Detroit. Here is the club’s site. The “shows” tab will have the flyer for the 2016 meet when they have it scheduled.
http://www.greatlakesamc.org/
Steve, thanks so much for the info. I will definitely have to make plans. I’ll bet any money the meet was where the owner of this ’73 Javelin AMX was headed this past summer: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/cc-capsule-1973-amc-javelin-amx-kenosha-muscle/
I’ll bet any money the meet was where the owner of this ’73 Javelin AMX was headed this past summer:
The AMC meet this year was the same weekend as the Dream Cruise, which may be why the AMC meet was thinly attended.
A few AMCs show up for the Motor Muster at Greenfield Village too.
I havent seen one of these in a very long time, I test drove one in western Sydney it was on the back of a used car lot with the other $1495 beaters it went ok and I was tempted but where I was going there were no dealers or parts so I bought the Holden next to it at least if it stopped the parts were under every second tree.
Our neighbors had a dark green 1976 sedan with the same basic front as this car and the 304 2 BBL V8 and burn your ass off in the Summer vinyl bench seats. It made a distinctive sound that none of there other AMC’s had probably because it didn’t have A/C and the cooling fan was direct drive. That car was the last AMC they ever bought however. That poor car rotted badly, never seemed to run right and was an electrical nightmare. I distinctly remember getting woken up at 3 PM in the morning by that car’s horn going off by itself and of course my bedroom was sitting on the same side that damned car was parked so it scared the crap out of me many a time. The memories
It was actually ahead of its time. As you pointed out – later model cars went coffin nose for a while. AMC was a legend. Shame they sold out to Chrysler in the end. Chrysler stole all their good technology.
I’m thinking this Matador was a car collector taking one of his ‘babies’ on a “day out”. Is probably the 2nd or 3rd owner who got it at an estate sale. Doesnt have antique plates since many collectors want to drive more than Sundays and Holidays.
This one wasn’t nice enough to be what I’d consider a collectible, but your theory is plausible. The body was straight, but rusting/fraying around the edges, and the wheel covers were missing.
An interesting thing, though (hidden because I photoshopped the license plate) – it had custom tags. Someone seemed to want to be identified with this car.
Some people “collect” cars but don’t have a place to properly store them.
Until about a year ago, in one of Harrisburg’s older suburban neighborhoods, there was a 1959 Oldsmobile 88 four-door sedan and 1968 Delta 88 hardtop coupe parked in front of a 1960s ranch house that had seen better days.
The cars had current registration and were drivable, but were hardly in pristine condition. They sat outside all year.
I’m in a local car club and most of the cars owned aren’t ‘Concours’, but hobby cars, like this wagon. Member like vintage cars, not just “muscle” ones.
I rode many, many miles in a friend’s mom’s ’74 Matador wagon. I don’t remember the nose sticking out that much. Maybe I was just used to it, or maybe the lenses on modern cameras exaggerate it a bit.
Always thought parking one of these nose to nose with a 67-69 dart would require an x rating.
And Matt wins the internet today. (Mic drop…)
If you can’t live without a ’74 Ambassador sedan, buy yourself a 33k mile original for $3,995!
http://columbus.craigslist.org/cto/5300647752.html
Act fast, it won’t last!
You dirty rat! My Aunt lives in Columbus. I could drive there in 3 1/2 hrs, grab it, stash it in her garage for the winter……..no….I’d rather have the Rebel ragtop that’s for sale in Wisconsin, at three times the price….but I don’t have a place to keep it anyway, so I’ll skip the whole idea.
Hey Steve, none of us could have garages enough to house all the cars we’d gladly own, but its sure fun to look at what’s for sale. I’d grab this ’69 Ambassador in an instant if I did too!
http://madison.craigslist.org/cto/5310236095.html
My ideal would be a custom convertible built from a ’69 Ambassador hardtop, 390, fully power optioned, four bucket seat leather interior, silver gray metallic, red interior, dark blue-gray top……dream on!
The front end on the ’74 is downright hideous–the front end on the ’71 was much better looking. I don’t know what AMC was thinking, but it certainly didn’t work. The rest of the vehicle has a rather bland Toyota quality to it, it’s not unattractive but it makes the front end on the ’74 that much more polarizing. It wouldn’t surprise me if that alone turned a lot of people off.
I really liked the Matador police cars that were used from 1971 to 1973 in the city where I grew up. When the 74 models appeared I was very disappointed in the nose job.
One weekend while still attending technical school I borrowed 74 four door Matador sedan for a radio feature and headed home 2 1/2 hours away. Great highway car at 120 km/ph but sucked back the gas! Not such much fun on city streets either…like a whale on wheels.
I’ve always liked the “coffin nose” look of the 1974-78 Matador sedan and wagon.
Having grown up in Kenosha, these were considered the luxury cars of my childhood (until I discovered Cadillac and Lincoln in 1975).
My mother bought a ’74 Hornet Sportabout in ’74 and the ’74 AMC brochure was my very first car brochure! Naturally my eyes and tastes leaned towards the “luxurious” Ambassador Brougham sedan featured in the brochure. After all, it had POWER WINDOWS available!!
Without further ado, I bring you the first car I fell in love with:
The 1974 AMC Ambassador Brougham: (wallpaper)
I was also a Kenosha kid. A high-school friend’s dad was an AMC engineer, and their #1 family car was a top-trim ’74 Ambassador wagon. I once rode along on a day trip to Madison. Was very impressed by the acceleration and handling, relative to my own folks’ ’73 Impala wagon. Always liked the AMC emphasis on utility over flash. The Impala was almost more whale than wagon.
Hi!!
If you grew up in Kenosha in the 1960s, 70s, or 80s, you couldn’t help but know at least one person who worked at “Motors”. I knew at least four and probably more indirectly.
The only AMC products I was ever in:
’74 Hornet Sportabout – mom’s car
’74 Gremlin – test drove one as a teen in the eighties
’76 Pacer – mom traded ’74 for it. Yes, she regretted it very soon afterwards, so she traded it for a new ’77 Buick Electra 225 sedan
Hi to you Michael! Yes, your neighbors, your friends’ parents or relatives, and when you were old enough, people you knew, worked at AMC.
AMCs I recall personal experience with being a driver and/or passenger of
Three different Hornet Hatchbacks.
Hornet Sportabout.
Hornet sedan with manual everything (The word ‘Armstrong’ was made for these.)
Two different Gremlins
Two different 1962 Classics
1968 Rebel coupe
1969 Rebel wagon
1972 Ambassador coupe
1974 Ambassador wagon
1966 Ambassador sedan
There may be more that I can’t recall after the years.
Looking at these late AMC wagons relative to the Big 3, I still like the styling of these, even with the protruding snout, though the ’74 Amb really had it all. A big interior space with an simple but elegant wrapper.
Remembered two more…
1972 Matador sedan with 258 & 3 on the tree.
1972 Matador sedan with 258 & automatic.
My mom had a 1975 Matador two door when I was little. As attractive as it was for the time, it wasn’t very reliable. During the time she drove it, things fell apart while she drove it. The headliner would remove itself from the ceiling of the car. The car didn’t climb hills very well. And the trim would come off. There were probably other problems that plagued the car during the time she drove it. I don’t know whether it was the fault of AMC, for not assembling the car like they should have, or if it was my dad’s fault, because he didn’t take care of his cars.
! Sheriff Rosco had a few matador cars. They had super powers and could magically change into Plymouth gurus when chasing the dukes.
But, can Matador’s jump over stuff? In Hazzard County, that’s all that matters!
Cars also had to be able to burn rubber and make their tires squeal – on dirt roads.
I’ve always thought this was one of the more unattractive noses to ever see production. It’s just so exaggerated… However, it’s still very cool to see one out and about on the road! I literally cannot remember *ever* seeing one of these in person, despite that they should have been around during my childhood in the early 80’s. I can only conclude that they never sold well in my part of the country, as we didn’t have massive rust problems either.
The current model Escalade has set-back headlamps and a protruding proboscis, more similar to the AMC than you might think…
The Cadillac’s nose is much more deftly handled than the nose on the Matador. Perhaps because the bumper, lower grilles and running lights tie everything together, making the entire front look like a cohesive design?
I think I’d rather be seen in the Matador, all things considered. My wife and kids may beg to differ…
I find the front of the Cadillac Escalade hideous to look at..
As someone who was born in ’92, I never had the pleasure of seeing one of these in the flesh; at least, I don’t recall seeing one at all growing up. The Matador is on my ever-growing list of cars I have to see before I die, joining cars like the Dodge St. Regis (and its other elusive R-body siblings) and so on.
That front end is very strange indeed, but it sure beats looking at the some of the truly hideous designs of 2010-era cars on the freeway each and every bloody day.
The Matadors I have seen…don’t they have “Matador” on the top right of where the hood meets the grille? I haven’t seen a picture of a Matador with the AMC emblem taking its place. I know, small detail…
In retrospect, Ambassadors could’ve been kept around as the longer front end clip and the 122″ wheelbase looked so much better than the forward of the cowl chopped 116″ of the Matador sedan (and using obviously the shorter ’71-’73 front fenders). One size, two trim levels. So what if AMC no longer had a mid-sized sedan? It was all a charade anyway as cabin sizes were similar.
This is what I like about the 1974-78 AMC Matador sedan and wagon, the protruding grille.