AMC Rambler Aficionados
Anybody out there a rambler owner? My first car
was a '66 AMC Rambler Classic 770 that I bought
from my uncle for $1000. It was sitting in his
garage for 20 years, so it only had about 60k on it
when I got it in 1996. It was a really nice
blue-green color that the manual described as
"Coronado Aqua", which shows the conquistador
revialism of the 60's. It was a huge v8 that
sounded like a demon and could be heard coming from
a mile away. This was due to use of a "heat
riser" that over the years disintegrated and left a
gaping hole in the exhaust system. My mechanic
told me he could fix it for about 5 or 6 hundred
dollars, but I figured what the hell cause it sure
scares the hell out of the neighbors. Well, my
rambler is long gone. After driving it for a year
the brakes failed (knew I should've got those
fixed) and I got in an accident. The front was
smashed in and needed a new radiator, water pump
and fan. It cost more than a $1000 to fix and
after that just deteriorated more and more. By the
second year it was falling apart left and right.
Since my uncle lived in Wisconsin, where they salt
the ground to deter ice, the whole underbelly was
rusted to pure hell. The floor on the driver side
was wide open like those cars in the Flintstones
where they use their feet as brakes. And in Miami,
this made for a very uncomfortable ride whenever
it rained (nearly everyday). So, after more than 2
years and nearly $2000 in repair costs, I junked
the rambler for $80. It was a sad, sad day and I
still miss her. Now, every once in a blue moon
when I see a rambler on the road, I remember her.
was a '66 AMC Rambler Classic 770 that I bought
from my uncle for $1000. It was sitting in his
garage for 20 years, so it only had about 60k on it
when I got it in 1996. It was a really nice
blue-green color that the manual described as
"Coronado Aqua", which shows the conquistador
revialism of the 60's. It was a huge v8 that
sounded like a demon and could be heard coming from
a mile away. This was due to use of a "heat
riser" that over the years disintegrated and left a
gaping hole in the exhaust system. My mechanic
told me he could fix it for about 5 or 6 hundred
dollars, but I figured what the hell cause it sure
scares the hell out of the neighbors. Well, my
rambler is long gone. After driving it for a year
the brakes failed (knew I should've got those
fixed) and I got in an accident. The front was
smashed in and needed a new radiator, water pump
and fan. It cost more than a $1000 to fix and
after that just deteriorated more and more. By the
second year it was falling apart left and right.
Since my uncle lived in Wisconsin, where they salt
the ground to deter ice, the whole underbelly was
rusted to pure hell. The floor on the driver side
was wide open like those cars in the Flintstones
where they use their feet as brakes. And in Miami,
this made for a very uncomfortable ride whenever
it rained (nearly everyday). So, after more than 2
years and nearly $2000 in repair costs, I junked
the rambler for $80. It was a sad, sad day and I
still miss her. Now, every once in a blue moon
when I see a rambler on the road, I remember her.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
In 1993 I bought a 65 Classic 660 4dr from a young lady in So. Cal. for $600. The car was totally original and except for its faded paint and shreded drivers seat cover the car was original and complete.
I drove the car around for several years as secondary "fun" transportation and really got a kick of of its "Tri Poised Power" six banger engine and the "Frig-o-matic" air conditioner.
Both were 6cyl 3spd sticks. Hornet must have been a column shift originally, later converted to floor shift, because whenever I shifted, the sleeve on the steering column rotated. Occasionally the linkage got hung up too. Couldn't kill the engines though.
Sometimes I miss the good old days when my cars cost less than the tax on a new one. I even knew what most of the parts were!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I didn't even know until recently that AMC (before its demise in 87) was based in Kenosha, Wisconsin, which is where I lived as a kid. I guess that's why my dad had an ambassdor and my grandmother a pacer (acrually, I think she still has that crazy thing).
Anyway, I'm hoping to someday have enough time and money to restore an old AMC. My favorites would be the 63, 64 and 66 classics, or the little 2 door Americans from 64 and 65. Thoughthe big 64 ambassador convertibles are beautiful as well. The 70's models are fast, but just don't thrill me as much as the 60's. However, I would to get my hands on a '69 SC/Rambler (scrambler?), drop a 401 in it and tear the tires to shreds. And waste a lot of gas. That would be great...
If you go back and look at photo's of new models from all American marques for any given year the AMC product alway stand out to me as the black sheep of the family. They never seemed to design their cars along the lines of any current fashion trends. They always seem to stand out on there own in a funky sort of backwards way.
These cars were mostly so far removed from the mainstream that even today they still capture the imagination as to who in their right mind could have come up with such an idea for a mainstream comercial automobile.
I admire these cars today mostly becuase I know that it really was ony the very off their rocker die hard AMC fan who would have bought them originally. Waynes World the movie has made the Pacer infamous but I'm embarased to admit that my engineer Dad aspired to own one when they were first introduced.
My father never did aquire one but I just may yet find that cherry AMC Pacer that "ALEXT" has put up for sale from his grandmother's estate. I'd buy it more for what it represents in underachievement in design and engineering than for it's power, styling, and taste.
I was take the engine apart to figure what was wrong with the one and I found a hole in the timing chain cover...... I am looking for another one to put on so I can drive the car this summer...... it has a 390 ci engine and lots of toys so I am excited if I can get a cover so I can drive it!
A word to the wise, buy the cleanest low mileage AMC you can find and be done with it. Restoring these cars is a lost cause. The $'s spent surely will never be returned. Look at prices for old Kaisers, Hudsons, and Nashes you'll see the whole story right there in the price guide book.
AMC's in particular are an independant breed of cars that appeal to a niche of American car enthusiasts. While many Americans are content to fix up 57 chevy's, 65 mustangs, 64 Impala's, and other generic "old cars"; there are a select few people who really love AMC's. Usually because they grew up around them or just appreciate their oddball design and performance qualities.
So don't tell me not to restore a car because it's got bad gas mileage or because it's not profitable, because I'll tell you #1 I do not plan to use a restored AMC as a daily driver and #2 I'm not trying to make any money, I'm just trying to relieve old times. So take your financial worries and your negativity elsewhere.
Back in the mid seventies, when I ran a large shop, we would cringe when a Rambler came in.
First, Rambler owners were, well...different...but I won't go there!
Now, if a Buick needed a real wheel bearing, no problem. Call the parts house and tall them we needed a real wheel bearing (or whatever) for a 71 Le Sabre. The part would come and it would fit. End of story.
A Rambler was different! We would be asked," Does it have a Dana axle? " Or what is the VIN number?" Or, " Does it have an ID tag under one of the differential bolts?"
I only said wheel bearing as an example, but it was always something! Despite out best efforts, the parts were usually wrong and we would have to send the old part back as a sample.
The mechanics hated Ramblers! They would tie up a stall waiting for parts.
Other than that, they weren't bad cars, but IMHO, there were much better choices!
Oh, and brake parts were the worst!
My own indifference to AMC Ramblers is that they represent to me a complete lack of passion and peronality--they are a total acquiesence to utilitarianism. You sit in one, and you instantly feel humble. The American is somehow unamerican in that respect.
This is not to say they are the only car "guilty" of this--there are many, and this is probably why interest in the Rambler and similar types of cars is so underwhelming.
But I could see someone going through the agony of restoration if they thought utility and plainess were real virtues to be preserved. It's just a rather odd point of view in current car culture, and odd points of view carry their penalties, such as indifference or even disapproval from the mainstream people.
I mean, I don't get it, but heck, I've been wrong before.
You bust me up! I've owned and driven a 65 Rambler in the 90's and actually enjoyed its plebian character. I'd rank the Rambler equal to my 65 Nova Wagon, but I know the market thinks different. These were absolutly basic transportation and both the Nova and Rambler are very endearing to me.
Just two weeks ago we bought a 1996 Volvo Wagon and it gives me a similar feeling, although in a modern form, to owning both the Nova and Rambler. The Volvo is very basic, very well tested and understood, and safe as a brick. The engine in modern terms is exactly like the old Nova and Rambler straight sixs, slow but deliberate.
You'd never guess what my daily driver is, a 1982 Gold Lincoln Mark VI. I'm working on restoring a 1949 Packard 4dr Super 8, and own a Lincoln Mark III and 1978 Cadillac Seville too. I'm not sure where I might fit on "badgerpaul's" Rambler ownership scale but I certainly do appreciate these automobiles.
Now Shiftright try to place me in the market! I'm certainly a loon I'm sure.
I know that my cars are total gas hounds and definitely not the cream of their crop but they do a dang good job getting me down the freeways in style, comfort, and intimidation. I'd never own a SUV Chevy Suburban but I'd nearly die for a two door Hudson Hornet. Put that car up nearly anyone's @#$ and watch them move out of the way!
I prefer the seven lost sister marques because they offer something different. They were American marques but through various unique situations they each slipped into history. I personally think that the Rambler was not all that bad of a car it just didn't have the obvious clear and current marketing story to move the metal.
So the "seven lost sisters"...care to name them for the class?
Oh, I didn't know them either...I thought you were gonna handle that one...actually, I think you were pretty right on, except for Tucker, which I think was a pretty minor player to be a real "sister"....let's see....I'd guess these:
Studebaker, Hudson, Kaiser, Frazer, Crosley, Desoto and Packard....all major casualties of the 50s (early 60s for Desoto).
Hey, tanks are coming back. What's the new Ford SUV called again? It weighs in around 8,000 lbs I'm told. It's war out there!
But...Why??
Who's the next corpse in the automotive world. I suspect anything associated with Renaut, Citron, Fiat, or Peugot. Where will these companies be in the next 10-20 years?
Renault, Peugeot and Citroen are virgorously protected from competition by their government, so they may very well be around in 20 years. Actually, Renault is a huge company (one of the world's first auto manufacturers, with a glorious history and really, the perfectors of the early car) and they built many types of cars one never sees in the US. It's possible some of the smaller French companies could expire or merge, like the US ones did in the big "shakeout" of the 1950s, but France would no more let Renault die than England would let Rolls pass away. In the US, nobody cares who lives or dies in the auto biz...it's industrial darwinism...true, the US government bailed Chrysler out, but that was a loan and it got paid back...fortunately for Chrysler, the political climate was more favorable than it was for the "poor sisters" of the 1950s.
The upholstery was restored in its original big check gingham grey plaid with the reclining front seats. I really should have gone up to speak with the owner since most everyone else at the event had not a clue as to what a gem he had brought to the show.
I mean please what the hell does a modern 80's 25th Anniversary Addition Maserati Countach have that is more rare than a pristine 60's Rambler Rebel? You don't need to answer that but the show was a really fun eclectic mix of car from around the world.
There was even an old bath tub hot rod from the forties that I'd swear was just pulled out of the barn. My wife was wondering why the heck it was there in such a sorry state but when I explained the fact that this car was completely original down to its bald tires she began to understand.
A 1989 Anniversary Lamborghini Countach IS quite valuable (about 20 times more than the Rebel) because it is REALLY rare--on 68 made--goes nearly 200 mph and, most important, there are probably more buyers than sellers.
Actually, I'm just like you when it comes to cars...I'm more interested in the kinds of cars I like visually, perhaps have some experience in, and know something about. I don't care how much they're worth if I like them.
While I was there looking at his car he was commiserating with a fellow Italian exotic owner about how he'd spoken with a spectator at the show for quite a while about his Maserati before the spectator realized that the car they were speaking about was not in fact a Ferrari.
Back to the Rambler.
I'd heard about the Rambler's reclining seats that converted into a bed, but the reclining seat I saw came no where near flat as a bed. You might be able to get some nooky in those seats but you'd never wake up with anything but a crook in your neck if you slept in them.
Station Wagon with a flat 6 in it. It was a
sickly green with a white top and luggage racks.
It had the pushbutton automatic transmission. We
used to call it the "flying brick"....especially
when being driven downhill into the San Fernando
Valley. The car that I bought from my mom's friend
was a 1965 Plymouth Barracuda. I was 19 at the
time, and I didn't know that much about cars. It
had a wood-grain steering wheel, and automatic
transmission that actually looked like a manual
with the shifter. All I knew was it was fast.
Someone told me it had a 318 V8, but I'm not sure
it was that size. I'm not even sure they put the
318 in the Barracuda for that year...even as an
option. Now I see those Barracudas restored and
going for as much as $10,000. Everything I've seen
on the Barracuda web-sites suggest I had a keeper,
but I didn't keep her.
I'm presently restoring and hope to bring to AMC East Coast National meet this June in Bristol Conn. RIP AMC gone but not forgotten !!!!!!!!!
I brought it back to the States in 1970, and put a trailer hitch on it, and pulled my 16 foot outboard ski boat. At 70 mph with the boat on the back I got 30 mpg, that bigger 290 c.i. V-8 was really economical in that light car, with AT, PS, PB, Michelon ZX Tires. I had to sell it about 2 years later as I got an overseas assignment to Korea where I could not take it. The guy who bought it from me later sold it and will not tell me who he sold it to, so I've lost track of it. It was the best car I've ever owned.
I have 65 Rambler Classic 550 which was left to me when my Grandmother passed about 10 years ago. I got it running after rebuilding the starter, replacing the brake lines, dropping the pan and cleaning out the sludge, etc. (it sat for at least 8 years without starting). It has only 65,000 miles and only a little rust behind the rear tires. It has three on the tree and an AM radio.
I now only drive it a couple times a year and I am paying more for storage then it is worth.
I live in the Chicago area. Does any one know if there is a Rambler club in Kenosha, WI. I've heard a few people refer to the car as a Kenosha Cadillac....
I'll check back in a few days to see if this forum is resurrected. Any help would be appreciated.
http://www.classicar.com/clubs/rambler/officers.htm
Mr. Shiftright
Host
For some reason, the '87-91 generation Toyota Camry makes me think of a late 60's Rambler.
-Andre
I had 3 Rambler Americans in succession. Not because I admired the "marque" I assure you. My father got a deal on em cuz they were company cars that were retired.
If somebody already mentioned the vacuum-powered windshield wipers I missed it. I used to enjoy driving home in a wet snowfall, choosing between moving and seeing where I was going. Had to decelerate every now and then to clear the windshield. A brilliant innovation.
Actually, American Motors was not the only American automaker guilty of keeping their level of technology as low as possible....I recall that Chrysler used flathead engines into the 1960s, and really, a 1965 Ford Mustang was not much different at all from a 1935 Buick once you removed the attractive body. In fact, you could say that a mechanic from around 1915 could have repaired just about any 1965 American car...at least tuned it up! Now of course, no 1965 mechanic could do much with a 2001 car.
My grandfather used to do mechanic work part time, and once he retired. He'd get one of those big blue Motor's Repair manuals every year. He stopped at 1976, though. The catalytic converter, emissions controls, tighter engine bays, crude computer systems, etc, were what ended up doing him in. There was some stuff he could still do on the newer cars, but would mainly work on older ones. He was a GM guy, so I ended up learning just about every Ford slam of the time! He never had anything derogatory to say about Chrysler. Well, he did one day when I almost bought a '69 Dart parts car and wanted to keep it at his house (I was living there at the time ;-)
-Andre
The 4WD AMC Eagle was a sturdy car, but man, was it SLOWWWWWW.....
I loved that car, it was red and I had polished the paint off of the eddges of the fenders. Sometimes I have dreams that I found someone selling it for $100 and I buy it back. It really was a very nice design. Very clean lines, something seldom seen in Ramblers.
My second car was a 1968 AMC Ambassador DPL. I paid $700 for it in 1973. Mine had a rear roof/window treament that was different from any other I have ever seen. It was a nice car, with gold paint and interior. For some reason I thought it looked like a Road Runner. I don't think that now, but I did back then.
I prepped, sanded and taped it and took it to MAACO for a paint job. It looked great. They could do a nice paint job, they just did a crappy prep job.
It was reliable, but had a nylon timing gear that would not keep in time. The chain would slide and one moment it ran great, the next moment it knocked. It had 290 CID V8. Towards the end, the starter went bad and I carried a hammer with me and when it would not start I'd crawl under the car and rap the starter with the hammer and get back in the car and it would start right back up! The tranny started going out and I had to park in places where I either did not have to reverse the car or I could let gravity roll it back. Finally when the forward gears began to fail, I traded it in on a 68 Camaro convertible.
There might be a market for them today if they paid people enough money to take em. Not sure that that would be real profitable though.
I found a road test of a 1985 AMC Eagle in an old Consumer Guide auto book. It was pretty sad, really, even for back then. The car was an Eagle Limited 4wd wagon, with a 258 AMC-6 and a Chrysler 3-speed Torqueflite. It had a wheelbase of 109.3", and an overall length of only 180.9". For a 70's compact, this thing was small! In comparison, the '68 and '69 Dart hardtops I've owned were about 195" long, and by the 70's most compacts (Nova, Dart/Valiant, Granada, Aspen/Volare, etc) were around 200" long.
They don't list the hp/torque of this car, for some reason, but it's a 2-bbl, so I'd guess about 110 hp, tops. It got 14.8 mpg in their test driving, while the EPA rating in the city was 16. 0-60 in...hold onto your hats...16.6 seconds!!
And here's what Consumer Guide had to say about it in summary..."A clever but dated design, the Eagle can be an attractive alternative to less civilized truck-based 4x4's. However, our loaded test car carried a bottom line of nearly $17,000, which should make it easy prey for Mitsubishi, Honda, Toyota, and other makers entering the all-wheel-drive fray."
I guess that this shows just how crude the truck-based SUV's were back then, if they're calling a 4x4 station wagon that dates back to 1970 or so a good alternative to them! But then again, back then, that list would include vehicles like the Ford Bronco II, Chevy S-10 Blazer, and Jeep Cherokee/Wagoneer. And of those, only Jeep's Wagoneer/Cherokee would've been available as a 4-door. This particular auto issue actually tested those other SUV's (a term not even used back then!) and, sadly, the Eagle handled as well or better than all of them, and only the Bronco II was faster from 0-60! In fact, Jeep's own Wagoneer did 0-60 in 17.2 seconds, with a Chevy 2.8 V-6. It did get better gas mileage, though...16.3 mpg (EPA city rated at 16)
But I just can't get over that $17,000 sticker price! In comparison, my grandparents bought 2 vehicles that year...a fully loaded LeSabre Limited (don't laugh...the hood medallion says "Collector's Edition!) for about $16,000, and a Chevy Silverado 1/2 ton pickup, 305, regular cab, long bed, 2wd, pretty well-equipped, for $13,500. So even back in the 80's, these things weren't cheap!
As for personal experience with an AMC product, I have some friends (a married couple) who used to have a 1976 AMC Hornet wagon, with the 258. They also had a 1978 Malibu with a speedometer that had rolled over a couple times...and the car looked it! In 1994, he got his Dad's '87 Nissan Sentra, and they also bought a 1994 Honda Civic. Someone at the Honda dealer gave them $70.00 for the Malibu! As for the AMC, they offered to give it to me, but I didn't want it. Back then, it would've cost me about $600-700 a year to insure it! We ended up taking it to a junkyard, and the guy gave them $90.00 for it. It was still running fine, although was leaking oil from the valve cover gasket like crazy. I don't think it had any rust on it, either, and the robin's-egg blue paint was still shiny. It was just an old car that nobody wanted.
-Andre
But after the test drive, I was so disappointed in handling, braking and acceleration, I realized I could never own a car like this anymore. It's too modern and ordinary to be a "classic" that anyone would notice, and too old fashioned for everyday use in the mountains.
Which, I guess, is why they are so cheap (DOH!)