Since last summer’s departure of Daniel Strohl from Hemmings, I have mainly been drawn to its website because of a Pat Foster column. He has become one of the most prominent U.S. auto history book authors — and is among the few who also write in a mass-circulation magazine. That’s admirable.
So too are his efforts to advance automotive history by providing a factual counterpoint to what I consider to be overly fawning treatments of Packard head James Nance (go here for further discussion). However, the downside of some of Foster’s magazine writing is that it can have a trite, pop-culture sensibility.
As a case in point, in a recent column he argued that AMC could have had a “minor hit” if it had plopped a 360-cubic-inch V8 into the Gremlin and called it a GT. This was a proposed design that did not reach production (Foster, 2023).
If one is playing to the gearhead crowd I suppose this is an inevitable idea. What’s more central to U.S. muscle cars than shoehorning the biggest engine into the lightest car? For example, one AMC dealer put the automaker’s 401-cubic-inch V8 into a handful of Gremlins (Iger, 2018).
Why not a 360? In 1971 AMC offered that engine in the Hornet SC/360. The Gremlin was merely a shortened Hornet, so Foster (2023) was correct that such a car “wouldn’t have needed much effort to get it into production.”
Foster suggests vainly chasing a collapsing market
A souped-up Gremlin might have made some sense back around 1967, when the muscle-car market was in full swing. But by 1972, when the Gremlin was first available with the 304 V8, even the mighty Pontiac GTO had fallen to such a degree that it was downgraded to an options package.
Or consider what happened when AMC offered the Hornet SC/360 in 1971 — only 784 were built. That was despite Car Craft magazine finding this car to be faster than a Chevelle with a 454 V8 and close to a Dodge Demon 340 (Mitchell, 2000).
Larry G. Mitchell suggested that one reason the SC/360 may not have caught on was because it was only offered as a two-door sedan, which was “viewed by many as a return of the grannymobile Rambler American” (2000, p. 106).
That argument makes a certain amount of sense, so perhaps a Gremlin with a 360 V8 might have done better. But how much? Even the racy-looking Javelin AMX was selling under 3,000 units per year.
The Gremlin with a 304 V8 sold somewhat better — 8,500 units in 1972, rising to around 12,000 units annually in 1973-74 before sales collapsed. A more-costly model with a 360 V8 would have been unlikely to come close to those levels.
At the end of his column Foster (2023) admitted that a Gremlin with a 360 V8 would have sold in “fairly small numbers” but he thought that it could have “greatly” enhanced AMC’s performance image. This raises two questions.
1. Would a Gremlin 360 have improved AMC’s image?
The car Foster imagines would have looked somewhat similar to a Gremlin with the top-end X package, but with a few more sporty features such as a hood scoop and AMX-style rocker-panel moldings. That sounds fairly close to how the Hornet SC/360 looked. Did that car greatly enhance AMC’s performance image?
Foster (2023) argues that the Gremlin could have had even better acceleration than the SC/360 because it was lighter. That may have been true, but he offers a telling caveat: If AMC could have “kept wheel spin under control.”
Also see ‘1968-70 AMX was American Motors’ answer to a question nobody asked’
Putting such a big V8 in a small car would have resulted in lopsided weight distribution. Even with a six-cylinder engine the Gremlin was arguably nose heavy (Severson, 2008). Adding a V8 presumably made the car’s handling and braking as twitchy as the two-seater AMX (Clarke, 1994).
Why would someone in the market for a cheap muscle car go for a Gremlin rather than a conventional compact sporty coupe such as a Demon 340? The Gremlin would likely have cost less and gotten slightly better gas mileage, but it would not have been as roadworthy — or as roomy — as a Demon.
2. Would a better image have saved American Motors?
One of Foster’s weaknesses in his AMC history books has been accepting at face value management’s contention that increasing the automaker’s performance image was a key to rebuilding sales in the late-60s and early-70s.
The problem with this narrative is that AMC’s dramatic image change did not translate into much better sales. Passenger-car output from 1968 to 1972 was only modestly higher than in the 1967 calendar year, when the automaker teetered on the brink of insolvency after barely surpassing 229,000 units. As a case in point, calendar-year production in 1971 was less than 236,000 units — well below AMC’s breakeven point of 275,000 units (Business Week, 1970).
How could sales have stayed so low after American Motors had spent a fortune on new products such as the Javelin, AMX, Hornet and Gremlin? Foster has sidestepped answering that question even though it is central to understanding AMC’s plight in the early-70s.
Instead, he fantasizes about a Gremlin muscle car that I suspect would have been a poor-selling curiosity which did little more than cannibalize the Javelin’s already struggling sales. AMC management made quite a few mistakes in the 1970s, but it was right to not produce a Gremlin with a 360 V8.
NOTES:
Production figures were drawn from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006), Gunnell (2002) and Hyde (2009). I used Hyde’s calendar-year figures for total AMC passenger-car production because they appeared to be more internally consistent than the model-year figures from other sources.
RE:SOURCES
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, IL.
- Business Week; 1970. “American Motors’ crucial year.” Oct. 3: p. 17.
- Clarke, Clarke; 1994. AMX & Javelin Muscle Portfolio, 1968-1974. Brooklands Books, Surrey, UK.
- Foster, Pat; 2023. “American Motors’ Proposed Gremlin GT Was The Sporty Subcompact We Never Received.” Hemmings. Posted Dec. 1.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised Fourth Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Hyde, Charles K; 2009. Storied Independent Automakers: Nash, Hudson, and American Motors. Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI.
- Iger, Bradley; 2018. “Muscle Cars You Should Know: AMC Gremlin 401-XR.” Streetmuscle. Posted Jan. 27.
- Mitchell, Larry G.; 2000. AMC Muscle Cars. MBI Publishing Company.
- Severson, Aaron; 2008. “Do Not Feed After Midnight: The AMC Gremlin.” Ate Up With Motor. Posted April 8.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: AMC (1971, 1972); Dodge (1971)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Pontiac (1972)
When I read Foster’s piece on the Gremlin 360, I immediately thought, “What would Steve say?”. And I completely agree with you.
I just acquired a very interesting book about the S.C.C.A.’s Trans-Am series: “The Cars of Trans-Am Racing – 1966-1972”, by David Tom, CarTech (191 pages), Second Edition, 2020. (www.cartechbooks.com). In the summer of 1967, the Braintrust at A.M.C. decided the best way to combat their stodgy image was to go racing with the Javelin and compete with the Dodge Dart, the Ford Mustang, the Mercury Cougar, the Chevrolet Camaro, the Plymouth Baccaruda and the Pontiac Firebird (1968 with Canadian Chevy engines). A.M.C. selected Chicago-area road-racer Ronnie Kaplan (Ron Kaplan Engineering) to build the # 3 and # 4 cars for Jim Jeffords, the team manager, Peter Revson and George Follmer for late-1967 and 1968. Kaplan utilized the 304-cu.-in. A.M.C. engine to be compliant with the S.C.C.A.’s 5-litre displacement limit (Pp. 87, 91-92). Of course, A.M.C. moved on from Kaplan to acquire the services of Roger Penske and Mark Donohue for 1970 and 1971. Penske and Donohue had won in 1968 and steam-rollered the series in 1969 with the 302 Z-28 small-block and the tricks they learned from the 1968 Smokey Yunick Camaro (plus acid-dipped bodies). In 1970, the Penske Javelins did not win, even though Penske promised A.M.C. that they would win nine races. Penske avenged his 1970 record by winning seven races with Donohue and the Javelin to one win for George Follmer in Bud Moore’s Mustang. But even by 1971, with A.M.C. the only remaining factory-backed team, even A.M.C.’s management saw the handwriting on the wall, so the Javelins were sold to Roy Woods Racing for the 1972 season. Why would A.M.C. at this point put a 360 in a Gremlin. Should they have saved the 360 for the Pacer ?
I’m a long time AMC guy and historian/ writer, but an amateur compared to Pat (who I consider a friend). I have to agree with Steve though. Now AMC could have used the Gremlin body with different front sheetmetal to make an AMX GT, bur it would have been a boutique car, not a big seller. Might have helped image, but doubt it would translate into sales. An AMX was used as a test mule for the short wheelbase of the Gremlin. Wheel hop would be controlled to a degree as it was on the AMX. Another reason the SC/360 didn’t sell as well is it was only available with a 2V carb, but dealer could install a Group 19 intake and 4V. That was to put it just under insurance power to weight limits.
I learned to drive behind the wheel of my parents’ 1973 AMC Gremlin with a 258 I-6 and floor-mounted automatic. That car did not need more power – for the time, it was peppy. Nor did it need additional weight over the front wheels. The light back end made that car downright scary in winter weather.
What the Gremlin needed in 1974 was the facelift it received for 1977, the revised dashboard that would arrive for 1978, and a decent four-speed manual transmission.
And add to the list a 4-cyl engine. If AMC menaged to get the GM “Iron Duke” or the 153 Chevrolet (lots of people think then they’re both related) for 1974, who knows if things would have been different?
It is wonderful to read about everyone’s ideas of what might have been, but it is still all speculation. Keep it civil. No need to put someone down for their own interpretation of what never actually happened. We can all agree or disagree, but , we should also regard it all as fantasy. No one is right, no one is wrong. Keep it fun.
Mike, where has the discussion not been civil?
There was a guy, can’t remember his name, in high school who with the help of his father put a 360 in his Gremlin. Most of the guys thought why go to the trouble of going to the trouble. I pointed out that such a comparatively light car with more power wasn’t a bad idea, it wasn’t. It was fairly quick, it couldn’t compare to the Maverick Grabber that was seriously modified as well as several other cars but the guy got some grudging respect. He lost the car due to a series of speeding tickets, his father took it from him. That was in ’76 my last year of high school so I don’t know if he ever got it back, the father was into cars so I imagine he finally did. In my mind something like that would be good for the Drag Strip but not much else, a bracket racer if I ever saw one.
Having owned 5 Gremlins including 2 73 X’s factory 304′(one had a 390/with a top loader 4 speed that I swapped out with a built 401) I have a strong affection for them. I despised the updated 77 look but liked the Spirit enough that I owned 2 of them also. The 70’s were a bad time for true car enthusiast’s. GM screwed AMC when they cancelled the Wankel program so AMC lost millions on the Pacer due to that and their purchase of Jeep. Would a Gremlin GT 360 have sold well? Doubtful. I’m proud my kids are 3rd generation AMC gear heads hopefully with some knowledge passed down my grandkids with be 4th generation AMC car lovers.