posted by mncarspotter
AMC managed to keep updating the styling of its 1955 108″ wb cars all the way through 1962, but by then they were musty old things. So there was a lot riding on the new 112″ wheelbase 1963 Classic and Ambassador, as in stemming AMC’s market share decline, which had set in in 1961, after AMC’s glorious peak of 7% in 1960. That year would be a massive turning point for AMC, as its image of David slaying The Big Three Goliath was now over; Goliath launched a barrage of new compacts in 1960 followed by new mid-sized cars starting in 1962 that overwhelmed poor little David’s rapidly-aging Ramblers.
Nothing less than AMC’s future was riding on these and the American, which would share some of this same body in 1964. The results were not encouraging: AMC’s market share continued to wither away, despite rather attractive qualities of the new Classic.
The ’63s were the last cars styled by long-time AMC chief stylist, Ed Anderson, who resigned in a huff when AMC turned down his well-deserved request to be a VP, as were the other styling honchos at the Big Three. The front end rear ends are a bit quirky, which his replacement Dick Teague sanitized for 1964. But the parts in between are clean, modern, and well-done, resulting in a relatively space-efficient “six seater” on a fairly compact 112″ wheelbase. The curved side glass was well ahead of the competition; a bold move that made the Classic look a year or two ahead of its time.
That’s a lot more than what can be said of the 1962 Fairlane, which mostly looked like a slightly wider 1960 Comet with silly little fins. Who was putting fins on a newly-designed car in 1962?
Nevertheless, the Fairlane handily outsold the Classic, 297k to 262k in 1962, and more painfully, 345k to 279k in 1963. The new ’63 Classic only barely outsold its aged predecessor, but that was very short-lived. The 1964 Classic’s sales plunged by a massive 48%, to 147k. That improved some in 1965, but that was just a temporary blip too, and overall, AMC’s market share continued their steady decline, interrupted only in 1974 when the energy crisis gave them a healthy boost.
Related reading:
Curbside Classic: 1963 Rambler Classic 660–Ed Anderson’s Departing Farewell Is A Classic As Well As Motor Trend’s COTY
Curbside Classic: 1962 Rambler Classic – The Peak Rambler Experience
Kind of makes me wonder how many of those Ramblers they would have sold if it was the same car with a Ford badge on it?
I quite like these, despite being rarer than the smaller American they seem to have a higher survival rate.
Not sure about the front end on the 63 though, it reminds me of a cross between an electric shaver and a paper bag puppet.
Good question, and let’s go a step further by wondering if these Rambler would have sold if it was the same car by being badged Dodge or Plymouth or even as a DeSoto (had Chrysler didn’t pulled the plug on DeSoto yet) if the electric shaver front end could have been a modern interpretation of DeSoto’s “toothy” grille of the 1940s and early 1950s.
As for the drop of sales in 1964, I guess the Ambassador also stepped in classic territory.
Spent many formative years in the shotgun seat of a 64 Classic 660. Solidly built car. Mom’s was the secretary special: 196, 3 on the tree, knockouts on the dash were the radio, clock, and lighter, would have been.
Vacuum wipers of course, which AMC had mitigated, to a degree, by piggybacking a vac pump on the fuel pump. The wipers would slow, but not stop, pulling Westnedge or Howard St hill, then flap at high speed when stopped at the traffic light at the top.
The other odd thing was how rapidly surface rust would form on the inside of the non-power drum brakes. Parked outside, over a summer’s night, at the lake cottage, the brakes would grab for the first few applications, until the rust was cleaned off and they resumed their normal, smooth, function.
The torque tube rear end might not have been the best, in terms of unsprung weight. When the dirt road to the lake had not been graded in a while, and developed a washboard contour, the back end of the Rambler would dance. But then 60s American shocks were built for price, not performance.
The worst thing was the instrument cluster. *ouch* They had the dash cleaned up for 65.
Chatted for a bit with Frank Pascoe and Pat Foster at the local AMC show last summer. Asked Pat about the status of the Alliance he bought a few years ago: had a bearing knock in the engine, and his mechanic refused to rebuild a Renault engine, so the Alliance was sold. Commented that I had seen the trailer for the AMC documentary Pat is working on. Pat promptly whipped out a handout about the documentary, as he is trying to crowdfund it.
The front and rear bumpers, may be interchangeable.
They are interchangeable. When installed on the rear, the knockouts that were for the turn signals, when used at the front, were used for the backup lights, which were still an option then.
iirc, the door window frames were also diagonally, front right/left rear, interchangeable.
Using the same bumper front and rear was a very clever way for AMC to keep costs down. Unfortunately it made their cars look like a loaf of Wonderbread.
Interesting observation and quite possible. Would be done for cost savings of course.
And it’s not like the Blue Oval never copied that, the MkI Fiesta’s Federal bumpers were the same way down to the turn signal/backup light placement.
Ben Vaughn could not have produced/ recorded a better album in other than a 65 Rambler
This brings back memories! I inherited a 63 Classic when my dad passed. Nice car, ran well…..until it rained. Would crank right over, but wouldn’t start. When I jumped it, started right up. So, new plugs, wires, dist cap, points, rotor etc. Ran like a top….until it rained. Guys at work got tired of my bitching. One guy, who didn’t say anything, offered to buy it. Sold it to him and found out later he replaced the coil. Next time it rained…..guess who was late for work? (not me!).
Never heard anymore about it.
Were these cars unreliable compared to the big three? I ask because the no nonsense or bland and boxy depending on point of view styling might have been expected to attract a cult following from the anti Detroit counter culture the way the Valiant did. That didn’t ever seem to happen with these. Was there something politically incorrect about AMC, maybe the George Romney Michigan feud with liberal Detroit government at the time of the 60s riots?
Not at all unreliable. Just terminally uncool. Despite a collective effort by 3 successive teenage drivers, we couldn’t kill our parents’ Rambler.
Our teenage logic thought that if the Rambler broke, we might persuade our parents to buy something a bit less uncool. Even a Chevy or Ford 6 would have been a welcome change.
Unlike many who lust for a car they associate with their youth, I still don’t like Ramblers.
I am remorseful that it never dawned on any of us that perhaps a used Rambler was the best our parents could afford at the time.
With the benefit of that hindsight, I’m glad our Rambler proved rugged enough to stand up to the regular beating my brothers and I delivered at every opportunity.
According to the CR dot charts for 67 (black is bad, grey is average, no dot is better than average), the Classic was about on a par with a Falcon, worse than a Dart or Valiant.
Well, the Valiant *was* a Detroit product, I sit roughly a mile away from the site of where Dodge Main once stood and where Valiants, Lancers and Darts were produced. Any anti-Detroit car culture locally and elsewhere took the form of VWs, Datsuns, Fiats etc.
AMC would never have been “counter-culture”, their image would’ve been like a stodgier Studebaker, kind of a weirdo car. They were pretty reliable and competent vehicles, but I don’t think they were most people’s first choice. Dealership coverage would’ve been biased towards the Midwest and the East Coast, although an AMC dealer would’ve been near to any military base. I think an argument could be made that AMC was better loved in Mexico, where they captured a larger proportion of sales in what was then a much smaller and more restricted market.
My grandfather owned a couple of Matadors back in the 70s. He liked them quite a bit, but both were written off in high speed car accidents. To the credit of the AMC engineers, my grandfather walked away from them mostly unscathed.
Ramblers were cool in the late 50s. They sold for higher prices than the bigger Big3 cars, and their buyers were better educated and more affluent. In other words, in the 50s they were the Volvo or Toyota of their times. These buyers were unhappy with the ever-bigger same-old same-old from the Big 3, and were attracted to the Rambler’s smaller size and the smart image they projected.
That all ended after 1960. Some of these former Rambler buyers now bought a much cooler Corvair Monza, or a Buick Special/F85, or a Valiant, or just a bigger car because the family had gotten bigger. And many gravitated to imports; the Volvo would be a perfect next step.
That left Rambler chasing the cheapskates after 1960, trying to compete head-on with all the compacts and mid-sizers from the Big 3.
Ramblers had been cool in 1957-1959; suddenly they weren’t.
My 1955 Rambler CC goes into this in great detail:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/junkyard-classic-1955-rambler-cross-country-wagon-how-rambler-won-the-1950s-compact-war/
That really was a great deep dive into 1950s Ramblers that I missed the first time. The chasing after the female buyer was definitely something that dropped away in the 60s at Rambler. At Rambler’s peril, as so many of us men folk are such spendthrifts. In defense of men though, many of those 50s women buyers were spending lavishly their husbands and father’s money.
Why do you feel the need to defend men? And why make such a sexist comment? What do you base that assertion on?
I’m curious: are you divorced? I’m going to guess yes, but I’d like to know for sure.
Married 29 years!
Congratulations! But you didn’t answer my other questions.
Since you require it, and only because you require it
Why defend men? I am one, and don’t see why I should be ashamed of it.
Why make sexist comment? I don’t believe I did.
What do you base the assertion on? The percentage in period of household income brought in by the female being lower than the percentage of female decision authority on big purchases. That may no longer be true today as men are pushed aside in the labor force and more female lead households.
What colour is the sky on the planet where that’s happening? How many suns are there, and how many moons?
It’s blatantly sexist, as you make the assumption that women were “lavishly spending their husband’s and father’s money”. By the fact that you said it was “the husband’s money”, you deny the concept of community property, or that women should be compensated for their domestic work.
You think women were buying expensive Rambler’s against their husband’s or father’s wishes? Seriously?
And your comment also denies the fact that there were many (and a growing number) of women who had jobs, careers, or were just financially independent.
I find your assertion very sexist and rather ugly. The poor men in the 1950s, whose wife’s “lavishly” spent all their money.
That kind of comment belongs at JB’s site, not here. It’s a blatant put down of women, at a time when their rights and freedom was drastically impinged upon by men.
Strictly speaking, your comment violates our commenting policy, which does not allow for groups; women in this case. You might want to read it:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/welcome-to-curbside-classics/
Daniel, in this country, I don’t know the numbers for this planet or any other, the labor participation rate for working age males is going down. If they were being pulled in instead of pushed out, the labor participation rate would be going up.
Say what you will, but i think the ’63 to ’66 Rambler were some of the best looking cars to come from AMC. They had an almost understated elegance to them, and have a rather timeless look today. On top of that, the AMC inline sixes are renown for their durability, to the point that a descendent of them (the Jeep 4.0L) was available all the way up to 2006! Of course, I may be biased–my great-grandfather had a Rambler dealership from ’46 to ’66, and i own a few little Ramblers of my own, including this 31k mile ’66 American.
including this 31k mile ’66 American.
*blink* is that a 65 Apache Golden Eagle hitched on to your American?
Good eye! It is an Apache, but its actually a 1970 Eagle. And not hitched to, unfortunately; I have been having a hard time finding a hitch for the American! But the end goal is to be able to use them together.
In the garage; a “65 Rambler”?
1966 Marlin, actually. 232ci straight six auto with 45k miles. I bought it a few years ago, but its been a bit of a problem child. It sat for quite a while before i bought it.
Good eye! It is an Apache, but its actually a 1970 Eagle.
My aunt had a 65 Silver Eagle. 65 was the first year for that body. I have several pix she took of that 65, variously with her 65 Fury III wagon and 70 Ambassador wagon. Unfortunately, they are all 35mm slides, so I can’t scan them….for that matter, seems none of the pix I try to upload make it onto the site.
iirc, there are brackets that support that clamshell top, when it is open, so it doesn’t hang only by the hinge. My aunt’s also had that plastic top. Turns out the plastic apparently didn’t like sunlight, and she had increasing problems with it getting brittle and cracking as the years passed.
I found one of the slides that gave a good look at my aunt’s Apache set up. The clamshell lids are not dangling by the hinge. They are cinched up under the beds. I took a pic of the slide, backlit by a table lamp, but don’t know if it will upload to this site.
Thats really cool! Thanks for sharing.
Like the “spiffy, grown up”, wheel covers on the American!
The wheel covers are the only change i’ve made in three years of ownership. They’re off a same year Classic, but i think they class the little American up a little bit over the ‘plain jane’ dog-dishes it came with originally.
My sense is that the people who had bought Classics migrated to the Dart and Valiant from the mid 60s as Chrysler adopted boxier styling. They were narrower, and thereby more economical, had more reliable powertrains (the old aluminum block Rambler 6 had developed a bad reputation), handled better, and were slightly cheaper. But still offered adequate room for 6 plus luggage.
John. I believe the issue was the image that AMC had cultivated with a downward spiral in sales and doubts they would survive. Who wanted to own an orphan make when parts and service might not be available? Keep in mind Studebaker was circling the drain at the same time, closing the South Bend plant and moving operations to Canada which lasted no more two years when they folded their cards in 1966.
Studebaker was a little different. The high costs and low volume had them pricing at a premium hoping I think for a college professor crowd who would appreciate the sensible size, premium interior, and perhaps even Canadian construction.
60s Rambler combined the not as big but designed to be roomy style with rock bottom pricing, even matching VW prices with a family sized car. The ads seem directed at counter culture types but few takers among them. No wonder Mr. Teague switched gears and discovered the coke bottle.
> Who wanted to own an orphan make when parts and service might not be available?
Irony being that sixty years later, nearly every part you need to keep your ’60s Studebaker alive is still available.
It seems that the only time AMC really thrived was when they had a niche to themselves. In the 50s they had the American compact market sewn up and they had better management than Studebaker. In that decade vis a vis the South Bend competition, as the old joke’s punchline goes, “I don’t have to outrun the bear, I only have to outrun you.”
Nash/AMC’s larger cars never really made much of a case for themselves and seemed to appeal only to loyalists. Other than that golden period between 1958-62 there was just nothing to entice buyers away from the Big 3. I have wondered if they could have done something consistently better, would they have made it longer? If AMC cars had been ultra durable, consistently stylish, consistently high economy, or resale value, or assembly quality or something, maybe they could have found that niche within the mainstream. As it was, most of those attributes were found in the 1964 GM A body cars, which were every bit as compelling in their class as the Dart/Valiant were in theirs.
if they could have done something consistently better, would they have made it longer? If AMC cars had been ultra durable, consistently stylish, consistently high economy, or resale value, or assembly quality or something,
They were always searching for a new niche, that the big three wouldn’t immediately fill with their orders of magnitude more money. That is what they tried with the Pacer and Matador coupe.
Consumer reports noted, around 60, that the Rambler and Lark both had substantially superior build quality, compared to the big three compacts they tested. But it didn’t last. My aunt’s 70 Ambassador was typical big three of the time: ill fitting interior bits and rattles. AMC had so little confidence in it’s cars that, in 71, it cut the warranty to 90 days. That move apparently didn’t go over very well, because they rolled out the “Buyer Protection Plan” in 72, claiming it superior to the big three’s warranties.
I gave AMC the Steve alt history treatment. The merger with Studebaker worked out well, for a bit, but by the end of 57, it resolved down to the Rambler anyway.
The only thing I could come up with for the 70s, was retain the ex-Buick V6, rather than sell it back to Buick. Build a front drive powertrain using a Borg-Warner Type 35, as B-W was proving very willing to reconfigure it for front drive. Then build something to replace the Ambassador with in 75, that resembled the 82 Buick Century. Then, for 76, offer a downmarket, hatchback version, to replace the Hornet and Gremlin. I even did an alt, alt version where, instead of developing a front drive platform in house, they licensed the Renault 30 platform, which came out in 75. but used the Buick V6 and Type 35, rather than the more fragile Renault powertrain.
Just speculating based upon their similar greenhouse and other similarities, especially in the C-pillar and rear window treatment, this Rambler’s styling influenced the design of the ’67 Dodge Dart.
One of my favourite vintage street pics of these Ramblers, is this shot from 1966, of the then new main train station in my city.
Thought the ‘63 Rambler was a major improvement in styling over the prior generation. The curved side glass and concave grill were pretty sharp.
Ramblers always looked good as a wagon and the ‘63 was no exception. A cheapskate uncle traded his ‘47 Studebaker on an end of the year ‘63 660 9 passenger wagon. Was a sickly, mint green oddly equipped only with Solex glass and power rear widow as options. Said he got good deal as it sat on the dealers lot for a while.
Before marrying my Dad, my Ma got a new ’60 Rambler 6, with her own money. Agree that they had cache’ like imports around then. When needed bigger car, traded in for ’64 Classic 550 wagon.
By 1969, needed a 3 row wagon, and parents were “sick of Ramblers” and got Plymouth Fury wagon. Didn’t even look at AMC wagons.
Not only a ’63, but prior to it my parents owned a ’61 Rambler Classic wagon. I’m not sure why they bought the ’63 only 2 years after buying the ’61 (which they bought in Compton CA), it is one question I never asked my Dad while he was alive, and my Mother would have no idea about, but I speculate that something happened to it during our trip moving back east (which we did in late ’61). We’d originally moved to California from the east coast in 1959, my sister and I were deemed to young to make the trip by car, but for some reason (again, can no longer ask my Dad) he drove all the way in his ’56 Plymouth Plaza, he had a cooler packed with dry ice and some dangerous chemical that he needed for his new job (he was a semiconductor process engineer, he worked for Hoffman electronics making solar cells, some went up in Explorer 6 in 1959, though he worked on semiconductors the rest of his working life, he never worked on solar cells again, and wouldn’t consider putting them on the roof of his home, even after moving to the sunbelt from the northeast).
My sister and I were a couple years older, plus Dad traded in the Plymouth on the ’61 Rambler wagon, undoubtedly for the space needed for 2 kids worth of “stuff” but also because my Mother was never comfortable driving standard (the Plymouth had no options save for maybe a heater, my Dad bought it right out of college, and he hadn’t met my Mother till the next year)…so when Dad got a job back east, he drove us all back (imagine moving from Southern California to Pittsburgh in 1961…my Dad certainly didn’t follow trends). Anyhow, I think the ’61 got sandblasted in a dust storm on that trip, I vaguely recall my Dad mentioning it but I didn’t followup and ask details, but probably some damage done, though I don’t know why he wouldn’t have had it repaired unless the engine also sucked in some of the dirt and caused some damage.
Anyhow, he bought a new ’63, which also didn’t last very long, but wasn’t the fault of the car, by mid 1965 my Dad got yet another job (he’d already moved from Pittsburgh to Catonsville, MD in the meantime, though with the same company, he had same occupation but changed jobs frequently in his early years) up in Vermont. We’d vacated our house in Catonsville and were staying in the Holiday Inn there, when my Dad was hit by another car while turning into the entrance to the motel (apparently one guy motioned him to go ahead, but the guy in the other lane didn’t see and clobbered the Rambler).
We only had the one car, and I think we ended up staying with our Grandparents awhile (we never lived in the same area, closest was about 2 hours away) and my Dad somehow got up to East Fishkill then up to Essex Junction, and he bought a new ’65 Olds F85 wagon, which he picked us up in at our Grandparent’s home. Don’t know why he went with GM after that, kind of an odd story, but later on I ended up going to school with the son of the local AMC dealer in the area (which I think became Honda after AMC) but by then we’d never returned to getting another AMC…my Dad also got his first “2nd” car right after he bought the F85, it was a rusty ’59 Beetle, which also didn’t last long, it was in an accident parked in front of our house (sounds like we had lots of accidents, but my Dad only had 1 other minor one years later, that was the end of him totalling out car due to accident). Our main car persisted in being a wagon, until my sister and I left home, with 2 younger sisters they no longer needed the space provided by wagon and he went back to buying sedans for that purpose.