Vintage Review: 1957 Rambler Rebel – “America’s Fastest Sedan” – Not Quite

images via Hemmings

The 1957 Rambler Rebel truly lived up to its name; it was totally out of character for the thrifty, compact, six-cylinder Rambler brand at the time. Out of the blue in the spring of 1957 AMC dropped the Rebel onto the beach at Daytona, where it quickly proved to be the fastest production sedan at the Speed Trials being held there. Its husky 255 hp 327 cubic inch V8 — intended for the large Nash and Hudson — shot the fairly light Rambler from 0-60 in 7.5 seconds and through the 1/4 mile in 18.32 seconds. That was seriously fast in 1957 and the quickest 0-60 time of any sedan at the event.

Those results have commonly been used by AMC fans to claim that the Rebel was “America’s Fastest Sedan” in 1957. As much as I’m impressed by the Rebel—especially coming from AMC—that claim doesn’t quite hold up under closer scrutiny. After the Motor Trend write-up I will present the evidence and you can draw your own conclusions.

There’s much to like in the Rebel but only 1500 were made and AMC did not offer any further performance Ramblers for some years to come.  Presumably the Rebel was intended to be a halo car, to capture some attention for AMC’s new V8 engine. If not, it was a solid dud in the marketplace. The more expensive and similarly-fast ’57 Plymouth Fury sold five times as well.

 

Given that AMC’s new V8 engine that arrived in 1957 was built in both a modest 190 hp 250 cubic inch version for the Rambler line as well as a 255 hp four-barrel 327 inch version for the large Nash and Hudson, it should not be surprising that a couple of AMC engineers and racing buffs, Jim Moore (left) and Carl Chakmakian, couldn’t resist the temptation to drop the larger displacement version in a Rambler. It was 1957, a pivotal time for the performance car boom, when lower priced cars took on the higher priced ones with their new V8s and increasingly often spanked them. Think Plymouth Fury, and of course most of all, the Chevy with its hot V8.

The continental spare might have been better left off, but that was a popular option at around the time and was seen as adding a bit of cachet to the Rambler. And it probably helped its traction in the hard-packed sand too.

Having gotten the go-ahead, Moore and Chakmakian spearheaded the effort to make it work well, including the appropriate suspension upgrades. The Rebel wasn’t just a dragstrip special; its chassis was upgraded with stiffer springs and adjustable Koni shocks and an anti-roll bar so that it handled reasonably well too. It was a complete package with a top-tier interior and special paint job, and a compelling one in many ways, although the lack of a two-door hardtop was undoubtedly a negative.

And it wasn’t exactly cheap: its $2,786 was a $360 premium over a regular V8 4-door Custom hardtop. Not quite as expensive as the Plymouth Fury ($2,925), but certainly more than a Chevy Bel Air V8 coupe with the powerpack. And unlike the Plymouth and Rambler, Chevy made all of its engines available across the line, meaning also in the low end  $1,996 150 series sedan. That was a key element to Chevy’s rapid dominance in the performance sector.

This isn’t exactly a genuine road test (M/T called it a “Drivescripton”), as it documented their experience in driving the Rebel on the beach during the trials and then a bit of a drive on some paved roads near the beach. M/T timed a 0-60 sprint in 7.5 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 18.32 seconds. They didn’t say what their speed through the traps was, but claim that all of the various journalists that drove it went through the traps at 85-90 mph. Unfortunately I’ve not been able to find a proper test of the Rebel, in order to better put its performance in context. More on that after the rest of the review.

It should be noted that the 327 in the Rebel was not modified from its use in the large Nash and Hudson, and was clearly not a “hot” engine, as confirmed by its (gross) hp peak at 4700 rpm and its 345 lb.ft. of torque at a fairly modest 2600 rpm. AMC had planned to also offer a 288 hp version using the Bendix “Electrojector” fuel injection unit, but that system was clearly not ready for production use and none were delivered to consumers. Chrysler tried again in 1958, but that too ended in tears all too soon.

The Rebel tested at Daytona came with a 4.10:1 rear axle and the heavy duty Borg Warner three-speed manual with overdrive. GM’s Hydra-Matic was optional.

 

Thanks to overdrive and fairly modest weight, the Rebel got 17.5 mpg according to the engineers that drove it down to Daytona from Kenosha.

Handling was rated as “fine—not superb, but improved over the regular Rambler line”. Given that Ramblers with the none-too-light V8 were inevitably nose-heavy and tended to understeer badly, that’s a good thing. Four turns lock-to-lock was a bit much for the power steering, but this was a common issue back then. The torque tube drive prevented rear axle wind-up on full throttle starts. The brakes were just barely ok in this limited drive but larger ones were very much indicated given the Rebel’s potential.

M/T asks: “Will this rig sell?” M/T predicts that it should, given its performance, interior room rivaling the larger cars, good quality and “a personality all its own”. And M/T goes on to predict that others will replicate this swap on their own, dropping in the 327 in existing Ramblers, and describing one such homemade Rebel. And ends the article with a prophecy: “I’ll bet there will be more Rebel-ized Ramblers”.

 

History shows that M/T was significantly off in all of these predictions. Only 1500 Rebels were sold in 1957, and it was dropped in 1958. The 327 then became standard in the new Ambassador in 1958 (above), which “replaced” the big Nash and Hudsons. The Ambassador had a significantly stretched front end purely for looks and presumed prestige appeal, was therefor heavier and had zero performance pretensions. Hot rodders were not the slightest bit interested.

More to the point: the 327 was not available on the smaller 1958 108″ Rambler line. If anyone else other than the one owner mentioned in the end of the review spent the significant amount of money to swap out the 250 V8 and drop in the 327 is not known. But I have never come across any indication that this happened more than once (or twice?). The reality is that the go-fast crowd and the after-market suppliers simply didn’t take to the Rambler and its new V8. I’ve seen more evidence of Studebaker V8s being hopped up and raced, but never a Rambler back in the ’50s.

Was AMC serious about entering the performance market? Or was the Rebel intended all along to just be a halo car to showcase its new V8? The total production number of an even 1500 rather suggests the latter. Was it a missed opportunity, by not offering the 327 in the ’58 Rambler as an option?

AMC clearly dropped any performance aspirations after the Rebel’s brief moment in the sun and stuck with its compact/economy schtick. That is, until the late ’60s when they suddenly got performance religion again and bestowed us with something of an update of the Rebel: the 1969 AMC-Hurst SC/Rambler. Drop AMC’s biggest 390 V8 into their smallest American, and add lots of over-the-top graphics. In this case history did rather repeat itself, as AMC managed to sell all of 1512 units; exactly twelve more than the ’57 Rebel. “Fool me once…”

Admittedly AMC’s second performance push was drastically more extensive than in 1957, with successes in Trans Am and NASCAR, among others. As to whether it really made an impact on the sales of Ramblers, that’s a difficult question to answer, although it’s pretty easy to argue the negative side. Maybe George Romney was right back in 1957.

As to the Rebel’s timed performance at Daytona, we need to qualify that a bit. First, the competition (and some of their 0-60 times): An Oldsmobile with the top 300-hp, 371-cu.in. V-8 with three two-barrel carbs ; a supercharged 289-cu.in., 275-hp Studebaker Golden Hawk (8.7 seconds); a 290-hp Pontiac Tri-Power 347-cu.in. V-8 (7.9 seconds); a 300-hp supercharged Ford and Thunderbird; a Chrysler 300C with a 392-cu.in. dual-quad V-8 (7.6 seconds); a 345-cu.in., 345-hp dual-quad De Soto Adventurer; a Plymouth Fury with a dual-quad 318 producing 290 hp (8.0 seconds); two Dodges, including a D-500 powered by a Red Ram 325 that made 285 hp, and a D-500-1 with dual quads and 310 hp (8.8 seconds); and a Mercury Monterey M-335 pushing 335 hp from its 368-cu.in. V-8. The notable exception was the ’57 Chevy, although a fuel injected Corvette was tested and did the 0-60 in 7.0. That’s well slower than numerous (essentially all) Corvette tests I’ve seen, the fastest one by R&T was timed at 5.7 seconds.

The Rebel’s numbers (0-60 in 7.5 seconds; 1/4 mile in 18.32) need to be put in perspective. The 0-60 time is impressively quick, but frankly, that is rather limited as tends to be heavily impacted by traction as well as low-end torque, both of which the Rebel undoubtedly had. But acceleration above 60 is a much better indicator of genuine performance.

Here’s a chart I made for my Vintage Review of the ’57 Plymouth Fury, comparing it to its Chrysler stablemates. These are from the various SCI magazine review/tests. Their 0-60 time are all a bit longer, but their 1/4 mile times are all quicker.

And there’s this chart I also made for that review. Again, the Rebel’s 0-60 time holds up well, but not so its 1/4 mile time. In fact, the discrepancy between the two is a bit curious; the Ford 312 automatic equaled it in the 1/4 mile, but took a full 11 seconds to 60.  There’s no doubt in my mind that a ’57 Chevy with one of the hotter 283s and the right gearing would put away the Rebel. The 250 hp version, which had a mild cam, clearly does so; it spanks it in the 1/4 mile. The 283 hp FI version was undoubtedly quicker yet.

And it wasn’t just Chevy: Pontiac jumped into the performance race big-time in ’57, and their 290 hp tri-Power 347 cubic inch V8 was capable of the 1/4 mile in 16.6 @84 mph. And then there was also a 317 hp version…

I’m not interested in taking anything away from the Rebel, but the lack of any other tests on pavement as well as the odd discrepancy between its 0-60 time and its 1/4 mile time rather overwhelmingly suggest that it was not quite “America’s Fastest Sedan”.

 

Related CC reading:

Vintage SCI Review: 1957 Plymouth Fury – The Best All-Round Performance Car Of Its Time?

Vintage Review: 1969 AMC-Hurst SC/Rambler – AMC Pulls A Fast One On Us

Vintage R&T Road Test: 1956 Chevrolet 210 205 HP – “The Hot One Is Even Hotter”