I am such a follower. I had to get in on AMC week, and have a lot of AMC ammo on my hard drive. What to choose? I went with the one that wins the “most endangered” award, and that’s this ’69 Rebel. Although it would be easy to overlook this pre-Machine machine amongst the rest of the crowd at the 2013 Pure Stock Musclecar Drag Race, I couldn’t help being won over by its “what the heck?” factor.
This ’69 Rebel sports a gleaming coat of Willow Green Metallic, and I love almost any color in the green family, so that’s a plus. It wears “SST” badges, but seems to be missing the chrome ornaments ahead of the rear wheel openings, so maybe the owner didn’t like them. Or maybe s/he “faked” an SST. It doesn’t really matter as far as rarity is concerned: in 1969, AMC sold 5,396 regular Rebel hardtops, and 5,405 SST Rebel hardtops. Most late-60s intermediates look more dashing with a set of Magnum 500-style wheels mounted to their hubs, and the Rebel is no exception.
Near the edge of the rear quarter panels, tiny callouts suggest that there’s a 290 under the hood, and my materials suggest that the 290 was the 225-hp four-barrel version that also saw standard duty under the hood of the AMX. Therefore, although I photographed this very nice version at Stanton Dragway in Stanton, MI, it’s more of a peppy cruiser than a drag car.
The 1969 AMC full line brochure shows a more “out on the town” oriented SST with the chrome ornaments on the rear quarters. Unlike my featured version, this car rolls on whitewalls with true blue, honest, simulated wire wheels. Finally, the vinyl top adds a touch of class. As for me, I’ll take the boss-looking green one. You just never see ’69 Rebels, and this one is such a great example.
While past AMC’s greatest point, I always thought the late-60’s AMC’s were the last of the good looking cars. There was a nice tightness to the line and went completely awry over the next five years.
These Rebels were good cars and quite popular even here but it went rapidly downhill from here for AMC.
Probably my favorite AMC product. Nice size and proportions without any unneeded flash.
I have always been struck by how much this car looked like the 68-69 Plymouth Satellite. Both the Rebel and the Satellite were quite out of phase with GM’s coke-bottle 1968-69 intermediates, but I preferred the more squared-up look.
I will agree with some others, and go so far as to say this may be the most overall attractive car ever done on this body. Over this platform’s entire life, there would be attractive parts and unattractive parts, and even the best looking cars (like DougD’s Matador hardtop) suffered from a somewhat awkward front end on an otherwise beautiful car. This one is just right.
It is also interesting to note the lack of progress in engine output. 225 horsepower out of a 4 bbl 290 is identical to the 225 horses that Studebaker got out of a 4 bbl 289 in 1956 or 57 (and right on up to the end). In fairness though, the easy development route was just to add cubic inches.
+1 on looking like a B body.It’s gorgeous and up there with the early Javelin in AMC’s finest hour.Sadly it was all down hill after this with very little to interest me.
I was going to say the same thing – I would like to see my ’68 GTX parked next to this as the similarities are uncanny. The C pillar (although the Plymouth’s rear glass has a little more ‘flying buttress’ look) and the quarter panel’s curvature are very comparable. Even the tail panel and rear bumper are very similarly styled.
The Rebel had arrived a bit earlier as a 1967 model year. The 1968-69 Belvedere/Satellite seems to have some Rebel influence, the front end of the 1968 Dodge Coronet got some influence from the front end as well.
Here a classic Rebel ad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZER63EzKd2c
Also, interesting to note then the 1967-70 Rebel was still sold in Mexico as the Rambler Classic
The 68-70 Plymouth Satellite similarity was one of the main reasons that a Rebel was high on my list for the AMC fantasy garage QOTD. From the back however, I’d say this Rebel looks a lot like a ’68 Ford Galaxie.
…225 horsepower out of a 4 bbl 290 is identical to the 225 horses that Studebaker got out of a 4 bbl 289 in 1956 or 57
The high octaine gas that was expected to arrive when the Studie 8 was designed never arrived. The 56 Studie’s 8.3 compression ratio was about the same as a “regular gas” V8 in the late 60s.
One big difference. the AMC 290 weighed 540 lbs. The Studie 289 weighed 685. Interestingly, that 225hp is more than the Wiki article shows for the mid 60s Ford 289: 210 with a 4bbl and 9.0:1, but the Ford was even lighter at 506lbs
So who will jump in with the specs for the Chevy 283 and Mopar 273?
I know the standard 289 4-barrel was up to 225 hp (rated) by ’65, and the 273 4-barrel was rated at 235. The 283 by this point was a 2-barrel only engine, with the 327/350 taking over as the 4-barrel engines. 4-barrel 327s were generally 250 or 300 hp, with Corvette variants going up from there.
Actually, the four barrel 283 came back for ’65 and ’66, rated at 220 hp. These comparisons are mostly academic, as all these engines had the potential to make various hp figures depending on their state of tune, compression ratio, heads, valve size, camshaft, etc. The carb 283 was making 270 hp in ’57.
The reality is that the Studebaker 289 had the lowest power intrinsic potential of the bunch. It took R1 tune (high lift cam, special heads, etc) to get it to 240 hp; a Chevy 283 in that state of tune easily did 250-270 hp. Anything more for the Stude required a blower. Of course, it was by far the oldest design.
The hi-po Ford 289 made 306 hp in Shelby tune 271 without). The 273 was never given a hi-po state of tune, but it it certainly could have been given the 340’s parts to do so.
These lo-po 4 barrel 225 hp (or so) small-block V8s were specifically tuned for the typical family chariot with an automatic behind it, to give a wee bit mire urge than their two-barrel brethren. Those power ratings don’t reflect their power potential.
The 235-HP version was the Hi-po 273. It had a bigger cam, a 4 bbl, solid lifters and I think different exhaust manifolds with an awesome-sounding exhaust, and in 1966, Chrysler offered a race-spec 275 HP version for the D-Dart. It was a very rev-happy engine but all 273s had very restrictive cylinder heads and by the time the 340 came out in 1968, it was obsolete as a performance engine. The standard 273 2 bbl was rated at 180 HP, which was probably pretty peppy in an early Dart or Valiant.
For comparison with the 290, in 1969, the standard issue passenger car 318 2 bbl was rated at 230 HP.
What a great looking car that Rebel is though. Definitely looks part Mopar and part Ford.
Ah…did they put the 283-4 barrel in the Nova that year? Hmmmm.
The return of the four-barrel 283 in 1965 caught me by surprise. In ’65, it was optional in all three main Chevy lines, and was the most powerful engine in the Nova available.
But oddly enough, in ’66 it was only available in the full sized cars. I knew that because our neighbors down the street bought a new Impala sedan that year. I’d noticed the 283 badge on the front fender, yet it had dual exhausts. Hmm. He opened the hood, and there was the 220 hp 283. The brochures confirmed that.
Maybe it was a competitive thing against the popular 230 hp 318 in the Mopars? After ’66 it disappeared again.
The reality is that the Studebaker 289 had the lowest power intrinsic potential of the bunch. It took R1 tune (high lift cam, special heads, etc) to get it to 240 hp; a Chevy 283 in that state of tune easily did 250-270 hp. Anything more for the Stude required a blower. Of course, it was by far the oldest design.
The Studie V8 came out in 51, and the rumor mill has it as a shrunken knock off of the original Caddie V8.
One of the Studie’s handicaps was a small bore, which restricted valve size, only 3 9/16 for the 224,259 and 289. The original 232 only had a 3 3/8 bore. vs 4″ in the Ford 289, 3 3/4 for the AMC 290, 3 7/8 in the 283 and 3 5/8 for the 273. I wonder how durable the Studie 304 was as it had the smell of desperation: bored a teeny bit, 3.655, and offered in parallel with the 289, instead of replacing it, like they wanted to advertise the power, but not really sell it.
On the other hand, the Studie was probably best able to take the pressure of the blower. I have seen material stating it was designed to take a 14:1 compression ratio in street trim.
The worst thing about the Studie in an early 60s compact was the weight: 685 lbs, and if you want to keep up with the Fords and Chevies, add another 50lbs for the blower, so you end up with an extra 200 lbs on those front bias ply tires.
It’s funny, in a pathetic sort of way, to read a road test of a 65 or 66, when Studie was using 283s, and the testers comment on how much better the car handles due to the lighter engine.
Man, this was bugging me, so I looked through old brochures, and although the 283/220 wasn’t listed in the ’65 brochures, it is listed in my other materials as an option, so it must have been one of those “off the books” engines like the 396/375 sometimes was. The 283/220 was listed in all of the ’66 brochures, like Paul said.
Chevy sure messed around with their engine lineups in the 60s. Think about the 283/307/327 switcheroo in the late 60s.
Grandpa’s last “Rambler”; a Frost White 1969 Rebel SST sedan. He splurged by getting a car with a 290 V8 and an automatic. I only drove it a couple of times, but I don’t remember anything unusual about it, just a good, decent sedan. Certainly more mainstream than his first two Ramblers. After Grandpa died, the car was sold to someone else nearby in town who drove it for another 10 years; finally replacing it with a nearly new 1984 Ford Tempo. Wonder how that went.
Ew. Tempo.
It looks like fordfan won the clue, although mFred was the first with the SST addendum…
That line may be directly quoted for tomorrow’s clue.
It looked like it was going real fast in the picture. I knew it had to be an SST.
Super nice looking car. I like it.
Such a pretty car.
The colour’s even like a Mopar colour.I used to get a lift from a guy with a 69 Polara almost the same shade of green
That is a nice looking AMC. the Tahoe with 9C1 rims looks nice, I wonder if it was once a police vehicle? The Copper Silverado sure is a looker and Chevy clearly ripped off the design of the 1992-1997 F-series.
SST meant what? a friend has a rare here 67 SST coup’e what was that lettering to signify.
Back in this era, the letters SST said Supersonic Transport to most folks (or at least to me), which conventional wisdom said was the next great wave of aviation transport. The French/British (or is it British/French 🙂 ) Concorde was the result of all of that research and development, and was just the very coolest thing at the time. I think SST had a very modern, high-tech kind of vibe then, so I guess it made a good name for a top-end sporty ish trim level.
And it sure sounded better than the DPL luxury trim level of around that time.
Back in this era, the letters SST said Supersonic Transport
That is how I interpreted it, an attempt to project a “high tech, high performance” image.
And it sure sounded better than the DPL luxury trim level of around that time.
I figure DPL was an abbreviation of “Diplomat”, later cribbed by Dodge, which would fit with the “Ambassador” and “Statesman” models AMC had over the years.
I guess you couldn’t blame AMC, they had to keep up with SS, XL, LTD, VIP, GT, GTO, GTX, GS and however many alphabet soup model designations came from everywhere in Detroit back then. SST wasn’t bad, but DPL always reminded me of Dumpling, Dimple or Duplicate.
I remember an ad Fiat ran here in Australia back around ’70, that made fun of all the weird alphabet soup model designations. The headline read “Introducing the GT.SE.HO.SS Super Italians”, followed by a photo of a 124 and 125. After a rundown on the cars’ extra equipment, the ad concluded. “We just decided to call them Special.”
That’s a pretty nice looking car. I’d say a toss up between the stacked headlight styling and this.
When I think of a Rebel SST…This is what I envision.
Or how about going a step further with a Rebel Machine? I spotted an interesting picture of a prototype Rebel “The Machine” at http://www.arcticboy.com/Pages/arcticboysrebel2.html We could wonder what if AMC had introduced “The Machine” one year earlier, for the 1969 model year instead of 1970?
For those too lazy to click the link, here’s the prototype 1969 Rebel ‘Machine’:
Wow. All blacked out. 40years ahead of the game. Who else was doing this back then?
This: And it was popular to take the hub caps of the ’68 Road Runner and just run it with black wheels. The Rebel was just taking it to the next step.
Flat black trim, hoods, etc. were a big thing starting around ’67 or so. The Road Runner was the biggest exponent of it in 1968. The Rebel Machine’s inspiration is all-too obvious.
The 1966 Lamborghini Miura takes a lot of credit for popularizing the black trim fad.
Yep, but this is factory black all over. And a sort of stealth matte as well. No chrome edging or dog dishes or any brightwork concession except the lettering on the tyres. This look would certainly have come from the street, but brave of AMC to deck out its prototype like this.
The text says it had flat paint on the hood, just like the Road Runner. The B/W photo makes it look like it’s flat paint all over, but I’m quite sure it’s not. And that goes for the wheels too. B/W photos don’t show gloss at all well.
FWIW, guys were using flat black paint on the rods in the 30s, 40s and 50s. Except it was called “Primer” 🙂 But it was a popular look.
Primer is the toughest look out there. It’s the FU of colours. I noticed total blackout returned in the nineties around the time of black sneakers.
Yep, reading too much into a b&w pic. My imagination ran away with me.
@ Paul. Read the text again. It says the prototype has a flat hood, not a flat-black hood (as opposed to the big ole scooped hood which included a tachometer and was used on the production 1970 Machine).
It does, indeed, appear that the ’69 Machine prototype was entirely painted some sort of flat/matte black (i.e., primer). It’s a shame it wasn’t released in that form, just to see how it might have sold. With the exposed wheels (which look like big, 15″, too) and chrome lug nuts, it would have been the most blatant street machine ever released, even more so than the ’69 440-6v Mopars which did have the chrome lug nuts and matte-black, lift-off hoods (but with otherwise normal, bright color body finishes)
Totally badass!I could imagine Tig from Sons of Anarchy would drive this
DPL trim was shortened to D/L, not sure what year. But, Eagle brand kept D/L for the base Talon, too.
DPL trim was shortened to D/L,
I’d say D/L was an abbreviation for DeLuxe.
Trivia note: notice this 67 does not have the mousetrap doorhandles that AMC became famous for. The mousetraps appeared on the Rebel the next year.
A nice looking car. Too rare these days. I have yet to see one at the AMC meet in “normal” trim. The only senior series cars from this era that show are a couple of Rebel Machines and a lone Ambassador. Only gripe I could think of is the front end looks too short, a situation remedied with the Ambassador and Matador, as their extra length was all in front of the firewall.
The Rebel had the best TV ads though. My favorite was the one with a guy doing a Humphry Bogart impersonation driving the Reb through the Baja, past the wreckage of cars that “weren’t rugged enough” to make the trip.
Some thoughtful person has uploaded the hilarious “driver’s ed” ad, also focusing on the Rebel’s ruggedness.
The Rebel is easily my favorite AMC of all time. I especially like the thin grille on the early models.
I look at this one now, and it’s plain to see that AMC took a 1967 Chevelle, a 1968 MoPar and a corresponding 1968 Ford Torino, put them in a blender, and viola! A 1969 Rebel. A Chevelle body, a MoPar front end and a Ford Torino greenhouse and rear.
Simply beautiful. It even works in green…
Awesome, all around! I love that color on damn near anything and the wheels are the finishing touch. The Rebel 2 door hardtop is a gorgeous machine with decent performance and a killer name to boot. Its just too bad that AMC wasn’t on this train 10 years earlier. They could’ve offered less hairy versions of sweet cars cheap for the sensible set, yet offering style and performance for those of us who drive for the thrills. Such a shame, AMC had a lot of unrealized potential. This car and the Jav/AMX are bittersweet reminders of why arriving late to the game is just no good.
The first car I owned. Bought it in 1979 for $700 white with a black vinyl top and blood red interior.
Wasn’t sure which AMC thread to post it in, but here is my AMC collection.