There are some times and places where seeing a nearly 50-year-old car isn’t so surprising, like on an uncrowded country road on a mild Sunday afternoon. But on a hot summer Thursday in downtown Washington, D.C.? Not quite the ideal environment for a curbside car show. Yet, here is one example that defied the odds: a beautifully preserved Rambler Classic parked right on a busy commercial street.
The Classic was one of AMC’s compact offerings, aimed at value-conscious buyers, and this particular body style was only produced in 1965 and 1966. This example is a 550 – the standard version, as opposed to the more upmarket 770.
When I was growing up, there were still a few Rambler drivers around, and I recall them as being proudly frugal people who considered it almost a badge of honor to drive a plain-looking, un-embellished car such as this one.
AMC knew its market, and at one point in the mid-1960s marketed its three Rambler models (the American, Classic and Ambassador) as the “Sensible Spectaculars.” That phrase accurately sums up this particular Rambler’s appeal; these were spectacular cars for buyers looking for a no-nonsense sedan.
Like most cars, after 5 decades they have become quite rare, particularly for the more entry-level models such as this one. Given that, this car is in remarkable condition, and its location on a busy downtown street indicates its owner is not afraid to drive it. Furthermore, a child seat was positioned in the rear seat, so maybe someone’s lucky kid enjoys this Rambler as well. Whatever this car’s story is, let’s hope it sensibly sticks around for many more years.
Photographed in Washington, DC in June 2015.
I, too, remember when these were fairly common on the streets. The typical grandma car. I always wanted to hop one up and make it into a sleeper, keeping the external appearance as completely stock as possible.
Seeing this car is like a nice glass of water after drinking too much soda – very refreshing and enjoyable.
Its good to see this plain Jane being used.
I believe the word is stripper, not standard. In addition to the 770, there was a mid-line 660. Pretty much the end of an era, Rambler-wise.
Actually, I believe that Rambler discontinued the 660 for 1966, leaving only the 550 and 770 in the lineup. Seems like an odd move, since I assume the 660 sold pretty well.
This was a common vehicle in Chicago and the Mid-West. Being made in Kenosha meant it only had 100 miles from factory to Chicagoland homes. There were many Ramblers in my neighborhood growing up in new blue-collar suburbia. They made excellent second cars for Moms. Parking lots were filled with them.
My aunt had a new 1965 Rambler Classic Cross Country, which was the station wagon version. Turquoise with white trim. It was filled with children, my cousins, my siblings and myself. Eight kids in one car, plus two moms. This was a very common sight.
What made Rambler successful was their low prices and available credit for less than stellar buyers. Think of AMC Ramblers as the Hyundai and Kia of this era. Their cars were dependable, frugal and as good as what you’d pay more for, from Ford, Plymouth or Chevrolet.
The six cylinder engines were old fashioned iron. Families didn’t buy these cars because they wanted a Rambler. They bought a Rambler, because they needed a new car. While there were Rambler enthusiasts, the Beetle often became their new love as the 1960s went along. It wasn’t uncommon to see Ramblers and Beetles throughout Chicago suburbs during this era.
The ’65 last five years, but would have lasted much longer had it not been wrecked. A pair of cars t-boned in an intersection and the force of the impact shoved them into the Rambler’s front end, wiping it out. So, my aunt did what a lot of Rambler owners did – she bought another new Rambler. This time, an olive green AMC Rebel wagon.
I love these cars because they remind me of a time when simple cars could taxi a family for years without quitting. I’ve sat in a lot of them, crammed between siblings and cousins on cross country trips.
These were good cars. AMC made them well proportioned and handsome. What they lacked in flash, they more than made up in honest value.
Man, if I had to pick the most boringly styled car ever produced, I’d be hard pressed to choose something other than the ’65-’66 Rambler Classic, even by sixties’ standards. I can’t say it’s ‘polarizing’ (today’s buzzword for ‘ugly’), but just about as plain-Jane as was possible.
The analogy of this being the sixties’ version of the Hyundai/Kia is a good one. People bought Ramblers not because they wanted one, but because they needed a reliable, point-A to point-B car, and this was what they could afford. It was a commuter, work vehicle that didn’t do anything particularly well, but most things okay, with the main one being that it simply started and ran when asked.
They may have been plain Jane, but they were a heck of a lot better looking than the 1st Plymouth Valiants of the early 60s. I saw a youtube of a guy who has a 51 Nash
Rambler, and he said he could order some parts from Napa that came from South America, where there are probably a few more Ramblers running around .
If one considers bland and inoffensive as the criteria for good-looking, well, the ’65-’66 Rambler Classic certainly qualifies.
Frankly, though, I’d rather go with something weird and polarizing, and just about any ’60-’62 Mopar fills that bill rather handily, the automotive equivalent of being unable to look away from a bad car crash.
These cars did seem to be much more “plain-Jane” in appearance than their 1963-1964 predecessors.
Amazing transformation Dick Teague pulled off with these. The 65 is essentially the same car as the 63-64 Classic, with new front and rear on the existing platform and passenger compartment. Same thing with the 65-66 Ambassador, different front clip and rear, and a wheelbase stretch, all added on to the 63 Classic passenger compartment. There were a 64 Classic and 66 Ambassador parked together at the AMC meet a few years ago. so it was easy to pick out the reused parts.
Amazing transformation If you say so 🙂
The front end looks very similar to the ’64-’65, and I bet the hood stamping is the same one. Bu yes, the tail did get a bit squared off as did the roof. The same kind of desperate, low budget refreshes that Studebaker and AMC had gotten so skilled at doing. Sort of like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, although that’s a bit harsh.
The ’65-’66 Classic and Amby were about as fashionable in their time as the the Studebakers were in….name your year. But 1967 was the great (and final) leap forward!
The front end looks very similar to the ’64-’65,
The 63/64 had different grills. The hood was different, the earlier cars had the ridges in the hood closer together. The character line along the top of the front fender looks sharper in the newer car, as well as the front end of the fender being different to accommodate the different grill. The wheel arches are different: the arches on the newer car are flatter at the top and the sweep in the trailing edge is not as long. The bumpers look different too.
although that’s a bit harsh.
Just a bit. If everyone else said “we don’t have the resources that GM has, so we’re doomed”, everyone else would have closed up 60 years ago, including Ford and Chrysler. Toyota and Nissan would never have entered the US market.
But 1967 was the great (and final) leap forward!
Yes, the senior series that came out in 67 was a great leap forward for AMC. Got even leapier when they abandoned trunnions and vacuum wipers
There is a school of thought that Abernethy going to two different platforms (American/Hornet/Javelin and the senior series) was what doomed them as they didn’t have resources to keep two platforms up to date. Could as easily blame Romney for reviving the original Rambler, or Mason for introducing the original Rambler.
Could be that what was the 63 Classic should have been the new American, while the 65 Classic styling with it’s longer tail and upmarket look would have been the 63 Classic, and the longer wheelbase 65 Amby should have been the 63 Amby. Then make the 67 senior platform as adaptable as the Ford Fox platform was 11 years later.
Don’t forget that the ’63 Classic/Amby and the ’64 American shared many key body pressings, including all the doors, etc. The American was just a narrow-body Classic, essentially.
The American was just a narrow-body Classic, essentially.
The common doors and such yes. iirc, the American used leaf springs in back, rather than the Classic’s coils and torque tube drive. The American also had a shorter wheelbase, it went head to head with the big three’s compacts in the 108-109″ wheelbase range.
Between the shorter w/b and narrower platform, there probably was not a lot of inner structure that was interchangeable. That was a lot of tooling expense for saving not a lot of steel, and going head to head with the big three.
And in later years, AMC had to go back and modify the front end of the American to accommodate a V8. The 63 Classic platform could accommodate a V8 from day 1. I have seen a 64 Classic with their old 327 in it.
Studebaker didn’t keep the Lark in that 108-109″ range very long, before they used the longer President State passenger compartment and stretched the w/b for 4 door sedans to 113″
Rambler could have done the same thing: use the American’s simpler styling, the single headlights and the simpler instrument panel, on the Classic platform and bragged “more room that the big three compacts, smoother coil spring ride than the big three compacts”, meanwhile the Classic, with more upscale styling would meet the Fairlane and Chevelle.
Its having apparently spent much of its life in or around Tuscumbia, Alabama, where it was first sold, probably accounts for its survival. In the Rust Belt Northeast, no way…if it didn’t get crashed or bruised and dented beyond reason, it would have disintegrated into a pile of brown flakes.
But in Alabama it would have had to be drivable and to move often enough so as not to be overgrown by kudzu…
This essentially like my Grandfather’s car, a 1965 Classic 660 sedan he bought new, with a 232 six, 3 speed column shift, and full wheelcovers but blackwall tires. A no-nonsense car that I didn’t appreciate then. Realizing he was a Rambler man at heart, I wanted him to at least buy a Marlin instead. Anyway after 5 years and 70K miles, he swapped the 660 for his 3rd and final Rambler, a one year old 1969 Rebel sedan with a 304 V8 and BW automatic.
I wish I felt so sensibly spectacular in my 49 years. I’m at home with a bad back today. I bet that car’s frame is straighter than mine.
Nice well maintained Rambler, I remember an old friend of my uncle’s used to have a yellow 1966 Rambler Classic and I remember thinking how unique that car is compared to the other cars I’ve ridden in, every time I see these cars I always think of my uncle’s old friend.
I’d be willing to wager that maintenance on these frugal strippers is usually at one of two extremes. They’re either neglected to the point of falling apart, simply because the owners were on a tight budget to be able to get the car in the first place.
Or the owners weren’t really that strapped for cash, didn’t care all that much about cars, in general, and were just very careful with their money, in which case they would religiously follow maintenance requirements to make the car last as long as possible, making for a few lucky survivor cars.
Sort of like loaded cars today being bought with 84 month loans?
My father owned two Ramblers. The first one he bought used, not long after purchasing our house in 1959. I’m sure money was very tight. A couple of years later he traded it for a brand new ’64 American. He must have been impressed by the first one. I never knew another kid with a dad who drove a Rambler.
Sweet looking 66 Rambler. The only question I have is how to keep the car running like it should 49-50 yrs after production ended. Are parts still available? I’d love to buy a classic American car, but I don’t know how that’s possible.
Depending upon what you buy, keeping it going can be rather easy. This AMC is going to be harder to source body parts, but mechanical parts on these likely saw little change through the 1970s with some of the engine components being used in Jeeps for much longer.
The pitfall in all this is getting a car that has had various pieces grafted onto it; it works, but you may not know what year car the water pump actually belongs to, if the heads on the engine are still the same, etc. One would just need to enter those waters with their eyes wide open.
Originality is important, but not as important as reliability and safety.
I’d love to buy a classic American car, but I don’t know how that’s possible.
Parts support is frequently a matter of installed base. If there are a lot of a model around, and an active collector community, there will be reproduction and refurbished parts support. A first generation Mustang, or a Model T would probably be the easiest to restore and keep running.
One of the oddities is Studebaker. The cars are rare, but when Studebaker closed, investors bought up the parts stock and NOS Studebaker parts are still available.
AMC is at the opposite end of the spectrum as, when Chrysler bought AMC, the old AMC tooling and parts inventory was sold for scrap.
“AMC is at the opposite end of the spectrum as, when Chrysler bought AMC, the old AMC tooling and parts inventory was sold for scrap.”
It was worse than that – Chrysler dumped all of the pre-1980 AMC parts and tooling into a landfill. I remember years ago seeing a picture of Lee Iacocca smiling on top of a bulldozer as all that stuff was about to be destroyed. The only factory parts left for older AMC models are those that dealers didn’t turn in or that were in private hands. In comparison, as you say, factory Studebaker parts are still plentiful.
a picture of Lee Iacocca smiling on top of a bulldozer as all that stuff was about to be destroyed.
Chrysler was after Jeep only in that deal. They dropped AMC like a bad habit. The thought I have if Marchionne is successful in selling FCA, the same will happen again: the buyer grab on to Jeep, and toss everything else in the trash. Looking at the June sales numbers, Jeep nearly sold more cars than Chrysler and Dodge brands combined.
In comparison, as you say, factory Studebaker parts are still plentiful.
iirc, when Auburn closed up in 37, same thing happened as with Studebaker. An investor bought the parts inventory, and the Auburn service building behind the HQ building and sold Auburn parts for several decades. Apparently, if you wanted to drive your Auburn to that facility, his organization would service it for you, using genuine Auburn parts.
Ironic that, had AMC simply closed, the parts inventory may well have been bought and owners today would have better support.
These are the sorts of stories that just break the hearts of old car lovers. Yeah, it was the most expedient way for Chrysler to divest itself of the AMC parts inventory but, geez, imagine if Iacocca and company had just taken a little time and went to the (very little) effort it would have taken to sell off the AMC parts inventory. Even at a fraction of what it was worth would have been all profit for Chrysler, even after subtracting what the logistics might have cost.
I seriously doubt Iacocca will be very welcome at any AMC car reunions, that’s for sure.
Buying AMC’s parts inventory and storing it all of these years, would not have been a smart investment in my opinion. It would be like buying Suzuki’s auto parts inventory hoping that people restoring their Samauri or Aerio would give you a return on your money. Not likely.
Buying AMC’s parts inventory and storing it all of these years, would not have been a smart investment in my opinion.
At the time of the AMC buyout, 87, there would have still been a significant number of 70s vintage AMCs in daily use. Service parts is usually a profitable business, and it would have drawn more people into the Eagle dealerships. The thought may have been “we don’t owe these AMC customers anything. if we cut off their parts supply, maybe they’ll give up on their Hornet and buy a K-car.”
The rumor mill has it that Audi intentionally cut off parts support for the early 70s 100LS and Super 90 to force them off the road as they did not reflect well on the upscale image Audi was trying to cultivate.
If there was no money in service parts, automakers would cut off parts supply about the time the warranty ran out, so when you come in the parts guy shrugs and tells you to get a new car.
Anyone know what the parts support situation was on the Alliance/Encore in the late 80s/early 90s? It appears that those cars hit the junkyards at an early age. iirc, last Alliance I saw on the road was in 96. I have yet to see an Alliance, Encore, Medallion or Premier show up at the local AMC meet, although they would be welcomed by club officials.
The theory that Iacocca’s agenda when he destroyed all of the AMC parts inventory was an underhanded effort to get people out of their old AMC vehicle and into a new Chrysler product is a good one. It sounds exactly like something a business mind would come up with.
Unfortunately, someone trying to repair their otherwise reliable old Hornet, only to find the parts had all been thrown away, might be so incensed that they wouldn’t buy a Chrysler product but, instead, go to a competitor (or, worse, a Japanese car).
When Packard closed up shop, they did sell off all of their old-stock parts inventory to somebody who moved it to another old Detroit warehouse, where he sold those parts for decades afterwards. I have never followed up to see what happened in that case.
I have personally worked for several manufacturing companies, and they have zero nostalgic (speaking corporately, not for each employee) sense. They write equipment/tooling off, and it is to be scrapped/destroyed. They don’t care that they could make some money off of selling the parts or tooling because typically that is not their core business and they don’t want to be bothered with it.
Now individuals within those companies, OTOH, have in certain cases secreted away prototype vehicles in seldom-used company buildings (essentially hiding them from company executives) until the company sentiment changed enough to understand the value of such heritage. This actually happened at one truck company that I used to work for.
That’s an unforgivable shame. Why did Chrysler dump AMC when they bought Jeep and sell its parts for scrap?
Eric703,
Downtown DC is actually a surprisingly good place for finding 1960s-70s American compacts parked in the streets. Here are some of my finds from 2013:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classics-detroit-compacts-of-dc/
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/curbside-classic-a-blazing-mercury-comet/
Looks a lot like the first car my Dad owned when I was a kid- a ’67 Ford Fairlane. The Fairlane had a bit more style, however. Dad’s car was a stripper, with no power brakes and a standard 3-on-the-tree tranny. I like AMCs but this mid 60’s stuff does nothing for me at all.
The Fairlane had a bit more style,
By 67, the mid sized AMCs had a bit more style too.
A friend of mine has one of those Rebel convertibles, though after near 50 years it doesn’t look near as good as that factory photo. 🙂
It’s actually quite a nice car despite some engineering that was obsolete even at the time like trunnions and vacuum windshield wipers. (AMC didn’t go to full ball joint suspension until 1970 and electric wipers until 1972.) At least in ’67 they finally dropped the torque-tube setup.
A friend of mine has one of those Rebel convertibles, though after near 50 years it doesn’t look near as good as that factory photo.
Found this 68 for sale in Wisconsin recently. The nearly $2,000/yr I would have to pay for storage for it brought my AMC fantasies to a screeching halt.
When this car was new I thought it a dud .
.
My Step Grandmother had a light metallic blue two door one , i6 and three on the tree tranny , in Rochester New York , when I attended her funeral in the late 1970’s it was still pristine looking and ran great although the steering didn’t unwind after making 90° corners in traffic ~ I nearly hit another car as I was frantically unwinding the big steering wheel .
.
I look at this car now and see very pleasing lines and details in the taillights etc.
.
I remember lots and lots of Rambler Enthusiasts in the 1960’s , they’d have loved to buy a fully optioned one every year if only they could have .
.
-Nate
I have faint memories of one being the family as a kid. I don’t think we had it very long. Other than an 62ish American the lady across the street had it was the only Rambler I remember. (Wait! I remember my uncle had a Marlon for a short while!). I recall thinking it was different but actually pretty nice. I believe it was a 66 770 in a teal-ish color. A/C. Which was a first for us, I believe. I’d have one.
Like the Ambassador, the 1963-66 Rambler Classic was also made in Argentina until the mid-1970s like this 1970 model https://www.flickr.com/photos/ifhp97/4845887830
Interesting — I had no idea that Ramblers were marketed worldwide, or were made anywhere other than Wisconsin.
Ramblers were assembled in knock-down kit form by Renault for sale in Europe.
They were also made in right-hand-drive versions for sale in Great Britain and Australia. (The ’65 and ’66 right-hand drive models retained the 1963 dashboard.) Rambler/AMC cars were also built and sold in Mexico, where they sometimes had their own unique variants. (Look up the “Lerma.”)
The Rambler name was discontinued in the U.S. after 1969 but it was retained in overseas markets for some time afterwards.
Trunions. Vacuum operated windshield wipers. Mechanically AMC products were obsolete, I think they finally got a modern front suspension with ball joints about 1970. Maybe it was George Romney’s Mormon upbringing, but I felt he regarded automobiles as utilitarian devices from their styling and advertising (“Sensible Spectaculars”). They may have appealed to a certain segment of the population who shared this mindset, or couldn’t afford anything else. Unfortunately it wasn’t large enough to sustain AMC; the company tried to cultivate a more upscale and contemporary image in the late ’60s and ’70’s but they never could quite manage it. When I was growing up I didn’t know anybody who drove AMC products, there was one man who drove, I think, a ’65 Ambassador-he had a couple of lights on the rear package shelf that lit up with the word “stop” when he applied the brakes, I believe he also had reflective red tape on the rear bumper. A real fun guy apparently.
That guy undoubtedly bought those package shelf “STOP” lights from the J.C. Whitney catalog!
I spent countless childhood summertime hours pouring over every single page of that catalog which we received in the mail a few times a year. As a youngster, I could have probably told you exactly what page of the catalog had those lights on it.
I liked the JC Whitney catalogs mainly because they were a sure-fire cure for insomnia.
An orchard I worked on a few years back was managed by a guy who drove one of these as his daily car his other vehicle was a 37 Nash flatbed utility factory not a cut down sedan, I asked.
Because these cars were so basic, they weren’t gussied up with a lot of add on crap. Now you can appreciate the simplicity of their styling. When they new they were plain Janes and as they aged they were often scrapped. I guess a Marlin or AMC Rebel Machine might have had some collector appeal but I haven’t seen one in a long time. I like the way these look, There hasn’t been such an honestly styled American since the Ford Fairmont. My Dad bought a used 62 ( I think), American sedan he kept for about a year, I’m not sure of the model year but it had those little fins.
Though I am not much of an AMC guy, these 65-66 Ramblers are as attractive as anything they ever made. The clean, boxy look was in and these cars did it well. One of these might be my top choice for an AM (as they were called then) car.
Let’s have a little more Classic love. I’m not crazy about the color of this one, but the instrument panel is light years better than the 63-64 version. The speedo even has zeros on it!
This era Rambler was all too often bought by people who needed a car; but did not want or liked cars. If they could avoid driving or owning a car; these Rambler drives would had been happy to do so.
The handling was sloppy and loose, the engines “got you where you were going” but without any excitement, the ancient borg-warner automatic transmission started in second gear if you didn’t floor the gas, the base interiors were dull and drab, the ancient vacuum actuated windshield wipers were safety hazards, the ride quality was bouncy and loosely sprung; but still noisy and jouncy.
The sum total of this car screamed “D U L L”.
The ultimate “anti-car”, in My opinion.
In the Seattle-Tacoma area, I do believe that these were the type of people that bought Ramblers. I remember once a group of us were at the Seattle Center, cutting through a parking lot to get to the entrance. There was a Rambler station wagon full of kids, the driver looking for a spot, and as we passed around it one of us called out, “Never walk in front of a Rambler driver.”
PFSM: I also recall that quote, from that time period. I thought it was just a local expression! Obviously not!!
My Father had a profane laden, long road trip canned rant that he could spew out about “Left lane bandits, card carrying members of the Anti-Destination League Rambler drivers” that would have my brothers and I in tears.
Aw man.
My grandparents had a ’66 Classic 550. White over mint green, same colors as the one Steve posted above.
By the time I knew anything about cars, they had stopped driving and the Rambler was permanently parked in the garage on the farm northwest of Milwaukee. This was the late ’70s. Sometimes the cousins and I would go look at and sit in it. It was the oldest rust-free car I was aware of at the time and I thought it was cool.
I heard the story once. My grandparents were still driving a ’53 Chevy at the time, and my aunt was all scandalized by the fact that she was having to be seen in such an ancient beater, so she went in halves with my grandparents to buy this Rambler. Honestly I’m not sure how much of an improvement this was, but at least it was a new car and it seemed like a nice solid investment. 232 straight six, automatic, radio, not a whole lot else.
The car still exists, as far as I know – my cousin (the son of the aunt who helped buy it) dragged it with him when he moved up north. I haven’t talked to him in years but last I heard the gas tank was rusted through and sourcing a replacement is well near impossible. I don’t know if he ever got it back on the road. I hope he does, because I’d like to see it again someday.
The Dad of a childhood friend drove one of these for years. Red with a sprayed-on black roof. I remember his sons joking about the “Old Man’s Rambler” and how uncool it was. Looking back, he was actually pretty smart. For a man with seven kids, a lightly used bone-stock Rambler was a pretty shrewd buy if you weren’t concerned about what others might think.
Sharp-looking car–the shape may not be exciting, but it’s clean with nice subtle details. Cool thing to find curbside in DC!
Stumbled on this site by accident, didn’t know there were so many knowledgeable AMC fans. I . I have 2 1978 Matador coupes, they are truly AMC’s Avanti. Very polarizing, sorry but back in 1974 when they came out high style was square and gaudy, anything else written off as “weird”. Also had a. Alliance, great car and now have a flock of Medallions, the largest collection probably in the world, also great cars ( learned early the best protection for them was to keep AMC mechanics away). Basically the auto business has always been for big buck companis that know how to produce reliable cars at a fair price, and they must be popular so as to hold resale value. If a car doesn’t sell well to start with or later becomes known as a lemon, it’s a guaranteed loser. As in the past, way more so today, your’re throwing your money down the drain not buying Japanese or Ford. Alfa Romeo is coming back to US under FCA, expensive cars, will they be reliable and hold resale, probably not. I guess you know they are desperate for a merger to save money.
WELCOME Gs ! .
You’ll find quite a few AMC Die hards here .
Be cautious of blanket statements as they’re often not correct .
Matadors , IMO were sterling cars , we ran them as cruisers @ l.A.P.D. and they outlasted anything else we had , even my beloved Chevrolets .
Many were still in service after 10 + years .
-Nate
Thanks for sharing your find. The story behind your photos was cool too! Sometimes you gotta be quick! The trunklid is a bit askew on your find, whereas the hood is a bit off on the one I found. Great to share the cars we find innocently awaiting our photos and wordsmithing.