Photos from the CC Cohort by canadiancatgreen.
Here we have an unusual survivor, none other than a 1973 American Motors Matador. In its current state, a fairly well-preserved beater going a bit over the half-century right now. Yet, when it comes to survivors such as these semi-forgotten models, my mind ponders: How did it make it to our age? How come you’re still around?
I mean, when it comes to such old specimens, they usually come from easily imaginable scenarios. First, the models that have been loved, with efforts to keep them alive since day one; the Mustangs, and Camaros for example. Sporty models, quirky ones, and luxury rides tend to fall into that category. And then, those that were built in such quantities that survival is just but assured. The Falcons and Chevy IIs, the never-dying Caprices of the ’80s…
But an average mid-’70s mid-size from an independent, rather anodyne, in 4-door sedan form, that sold mostly to fleets and few bothered to keep? How does it make it to our days?
This proves that random events in this universe are the norm and not the exception. By all logic, any mid-’70s Matador that hadn’t found a devoted fan should have ceased to exist about 10 years ago or so.
And yet, here’s this one. Not quite well preserved, but still around.
The young out there may be wondering, What’s a Matador? Well, the new nameplate that took over the Rebel, which had been AMC’s mid-size offering since ’67. Despite unique styling and an array of versions –some even rather hot— sales hadn’t gone too great for the model. Moniker aside, turned out the Rebel wasn’t rebellious enough for those youthful ’60s.
Not giving up on the field, AMC’s mid-sizers arrived in ’71 with a new face, updated trims, and the meant-to-be-exciting Matador name. What’s a Matador? Became a sales line, the way the new name was promoted in period TV ads (link HERE):
“Introducing one of the best secrets of Detroit… the Matador.
Wait, What’s a Matador?”
Indeed, AMC was in the intermediate-size business. Better let folks know, just in case.
A slight restyling arrived for ’71 that would remain until ’73, with minor revisions in trim and detailing. Bodies remained the same throughout, and the company boasted of having more interior space and hip room than competitors in the segment. Sensible traits American Motors’ products had been associated with since their Rambler era.
Intermediates were a “hot” thing in the early ’70s, along with the Brougham phenomenon. An era when fashion was highly favored over sensible traits.
So, despite an early uptick, the Matador didn’t do much of a killing in the marketplace, with a good number of units sold to fleets—the way most seem to remember them. A questionable restyle arrived in ’74, again debuting to good numbers and dropping quickly after.
Overall, these mid-sizers were part of AMC’s long ongoing struggle to be accepted beyond the compact segment, something that, as told elsewhere on this site, never quite gelled.
We know that AMC had spread itself too thin since the mid-’60s in its pursuit of matching the Big Three toe to toe. By the early ’70s, the company’s lineup was a most curious thing, thanks to the designs created under VP of styling Dick Teague’s unsteady guidance. The products were either clean and tasteful, like the Hornet. Occasionally exciting, like the early Javelin and AMX. Or oddly quirky, like the Gremlin.
One last tendency was evident in the Matador due to constrained finances and the company’s preference for sensible packaging. In ’71, the year the model was first launched to the market bullring, the car arrived sporting the contradicting hallmarks of any non-compact AMC product: oddly generic and familiar, and yet with tiny detailing bits that seemed desperate to make an impression.
In all, between the 2-door hardtop, 4-door sedan, and wagon, the Matador moved about 46K units in its debut year. Most, of the 6-cyl. variety, in keeping with AMC’s fame as a provider of fuel-saving rides.
So, nope, no Burt Reynolds types were roaming AMC’s dealers for these Matadors.
Let’s check out a bit closer this surviving Matador in civilian guise. This being an AMC product, there are a few elements of alienness that we must address. Like the pieces of aluminum trim, the opening door levers, and the vertically-arranged radio.
Elements that say: “Look, I’m Kenosha different!”
Here’s the back seat. And how does that interior strike you? It does look roomy, especially for a 1970s mid-size offering. And talk about mustard-lovin’ ’70s!
Now, I’ve put quite a few words into this old Matador and have little idea as to how it has survived to these days. If I were to take a guess, I would assume it had an early pampered life that fell on rougher hands in later days.
Not having any way to know for sure, I’ll leave you with what’s perhaps the car’s most distinctive angle. That fuselage-inspired face that evokes a Plymouth Satellite, and that grille pattern that’s working way too hard to make an impression.
A face that’s far from the company’s most memorable product, and yet so AMC.
Related CC reading:
Curbside Classic: 1973 AMC Matador Sedan – The Stench Of Death
Suddenly struck by how much Matadors resemble a 1971 Toyota Crown sedan or coupe.
Both Matadors and Crowns were assembled by the same company in Australia.
But at least it has three pedals 🙂
Gosh, this is amazing, a three pedal Matador! This specimen is in better shape than mine was in 1990.
I kind of want it, but sadly (or perhaps luckily) it’s very far away in Edmonton I think.
And in case you missed it, here’s the definitive Matador COAL entry (which… I wrote)
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/cars-of-a-lifetime/coal-1972-amc-matador-i-saved-it-and-it-saved-me/
The police car dimensions comparison sure is a bad look for the Ambassador, driving home how the additional length goes to waste. In the consumer market the extra length might appeal to some for looking more expensive or luxurious, but I can’t begin to understand why a police department would want a car that’s longer just for the sake of being longer.
Some PDs had minimum wheelbase requirements – CHP among them.
In the days before suspension systems became as developed as they are today, a longer wheelbase was believed to help both high speed and towing stability.
I doubt towing stability was important to PDs, but I can understand putting a minimum wheelbase requirement in bid specs for state highway patrol units more likely to see higher speeds than urban PD units.
The manual is rare for sure. After 1960 most of the bigger Ramblers were automatic while the Americans were typically manual. I’ve never seen a bigger Rambler with stick.
I missed the three pedals until it was mentioned here in the comments, and I’d wager that, alone, goes a long way to explaining the survivor status of this otherwise easily forgotten (and usually quickly used up) car.
IOW, something of a fleet special that no one wanted to drive because of the difficulty in shifting, so mileage remained low and the general condition good enough to last all these years. Although still technically running and serviceable, it stayed in the back row, undriven and unloved, for over a half century.
One thing that I ‘did’ notice were the thick rubber, front bumper ‘boob’ guards. It was an exception granted for the brand-new, 5mph front bumper regulation for 1973 cars from the smaller manufacturers that would be entirely replaced (or out of production) for 1975. Other examples were the Chrysler B- and E-bodies, as well as the AMC Javelin.
Too bad advertising. What Is It? It’s a Matador! It’s Magnificent! Didn’t throw enough BULL to save AMC. Still NASHing my teeth over those fabulous 50s AMBASSADORS.
The ’68 to ’73 Rebel/Matadors were not bad looking, the awkward C pillar perhaps a bit off, but decent and almost mainstream. However by ’73 the loop front bumper and tailights in the rear bumper look was passe, even Mopar had moved on. And by ’73 AMC quality was declining, particularly in the interior, the dashboard especially. Not a terrible effort, but the abyss was looming, and the weird nose on the ’74 was just the start… Pacer, Matador coupe, Gremlin variants… what were they thinking?
One thing I have never understood about this car or the 1973 Camaro or Vega was how they managed to meet the 5 mph front bumper requirements, especially when you consider all 3 had major front end redesigns for the 1974 model year. I can see that the Matador has 2 small puny looking front bumper guards but these do not look strong enough to meet the federal requirements for no damage to safety related components in a 5 mph or less frontal crash. If I remember correctly the 1973 Plymouth Fury had 2 extremely large front bumper guards to meet the 5 mph standards.
The 1973 Firebird too. It, and the Camaro in particular, looked pre-1973. Especially the Camaro Rally Sport with the split bumper design.
One thing I cannot understand about this Matador or the 1973 Camaro or Vega was how they managed to meet the 5mph front bumper standards especially when you consider all 3 received major front end redesigns for the 1974 model year. The Matador does have 2 front bumper guards but these do not look strong enough to meet the 1973 federal requirements.
For 1973 I think some cars got a pass on the 5mph for the back bumper. The 1973 Dart Swinger is another.
The 1973 Matador has the front bumper sticking out a couple inches further than the 1971/1972, so there must be some kind of shock absorber built in that got them over the line on the 5mph standard.
I can’t believe they’re asking $1,999 for this rusty hulk .
These were indeed pretty stout cars .
I wonder what engine it has ? .
-Nate
If it’s a 3 speed on the column, it’s a 232 or 258 under the hood.
The Iowa City PD bought a bunch of these in ’73. Curiously they were in several pastel shades, and were soon dubbed “The Rainbow Patrol” .
I’m not too shocked by the manual; this was probably bought by a retired farmer or such. Who else bought Matadors in 1973? This was the Studebaker of the ’70s.
the comment in the advertisement is one of the reasons I bought a ’72 Matador.No stripped down models. In fact, there was only one trim and best of all, they adopted Chrysler Torqueflite for this year.An assembled car of a variety of parts, one of the very best cars I have ever had.
2 grand for running and driving car that can be worked on by most shops . Parts not hard to come by to keep on the road. it’s Ok car but when other cars are for more money for far less why not ? You take what you can and I m guessing it well still be running in 2 or 5 years compared to 2 grand modern beater car . That going to be toast with in a year.
The Adam-12 boys drove a ’72 Matador with a 401 for a few years on their show. It was their last car in the series, but in one of the very last show Malloy was driving a ’74 model. The featured car looks like it is missing it’s heater controls which belong opposite the radio. I agree they were attractive and stout cars, but not modern or exciting. However, in ’77 GM downsized their full sized lines and the Impala had a very similar three square box look with a two inch shorter wheelbase. So AMC was behind the times and ahead of the times, which was not uncommon for the independents.
Had a few AMCs as MP units. The steering wheel on these always looked like it was installed upside down. It didn’t interfere with anything, but it always just looked wrong to me.
Funny how you can recall such inconsequential irritants long after other more substantial memories of a vehicle fade away.
That AMC steering wheel always bothered me too, and for the same reason.
Just acquired 68 amb 232 spd…rare car l guess
Doesn’t look all that rusty to me. Actually looks decent. I appreciate them all. I grew up in the seventies, and remember AMC well. They were okay. It’s a shame that they’re gone.
I ran across a video of this car, posted by the new owner.
This was for sale art a local junkyard and was sold Hopefully to live a longer life