MC stopped by to respond to our story, “Collectible Automobile’s 1967 Rambler Rebel SST feature is pretty but vapid.”
A few points on this article and comments. First, about the platform of the 1967 Rambler Rebel (and Ambassador). This was an all-new platform, not just an updating of the 1963-66 platform. The styling was leading and modern, and by no means out of date by 1968. GM was definitely the style leader at the time, but the ’68 Rebel was still more contemporary than the new for ’68 mid-size offerings from Ford and Chrysler.
The new for 1963 platform was intended to be used seven years, just as the preceeding 1956-62 platform was. This was Romney’s plan. But Abernathy put an end to that with his misguided quest to compete head on with the Big 3. There are some interesting photos of styling proposals and mock-ups out there of ’65, ’66, ’67 Classic/Ambassador models clearly showing the ’63-’64 bloodline. (Abernathy moved up a facelift/restyling to 1965). AMC should have stuck with the 1963 platform for seven years, rather than bringing an all new platform to the market for the 1967 model year. The money saved would have been enormous. In addition, the quality of these cars (especially the ’64, ’65, and ’66 model years) set the standard for the industry.
I have never heard of any reliability issues with the new AMC six cylinder engine. Introduced in 1964 with 232 cu. in., it was the most advanced in-line 6 on the market. It was also offered in 199 and 258 versions. This engine regularly makes the top ten lists of best engines ever made. It continued in production to power luxury Jeep Grand Cherokees and Jeeps well into the 2000s.
— MC
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Packard (1927, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1941, 1953)
Indie Auto invites your comments (see below) or letters to the editor (go here). Letters may be lightly edited for style.
I would agree with you that the 1967 models represented more than a reskinning. However, I wouldn’t place that redesign as anywhere as extensive as, say, the 1963 Classic or the 1970 Hornet. Interior widths stayed the same, and the additional turn-under angle at the rocker-panel level was the result of increasing the width of exterior sheetmetal. The windshield was angled more sharply and the upper door frames reshaped, but I’d bet that the basic cowl design was carried over.
I also suspect that the 1968 Javelin’s inner-door construction was interchangeable with that of the 1967 Rebel, much like the 1966 American was with the Classic. Note how the Javelin had much less turn under than the Hornet.
I’d also agree with you that the Rebel body was not out of date by 1968 and that AMC’s six-cylinder engine didn’t have reliability issues. In my article I argued that AMC starved the Rebel for updates and in 1969 decontented the SST, both of which reduced its competitiveness.
The 67s were stunning to me when they came out and showed AMC was finally moving beyond the retired schoolteacher market. The Marlin finally had a front end worthy of the swoopy fastback rear, bad ergonomics notwithstanding.
I’d agree that the 1967 models represents a dramatic styling transformation. I thought that the Ambassador was the most successful redesign — it maintained a familiar front-end look but was much cleaner than the previous year. The Rebel struck me as being too plain and generic.
It’s too bad that 1967 wasn’t the greatest year for auto industry sales — and that the new models had a variety of teething problems that undercut their reputation. My guess is that negative assessments by Consumer Reports were particularly problematic.
AMC histories tend to treat the 1968 Javelin as a positive turning point for AMC, but I suspect that all of the focus on that car undercut the Rebel and Ambassador at a point where they were still relatively new designs. For example, the Rebel SST might have sold better if AMC had given it the performance goodies that were showered upon the Javelin (and later the AMX). By the time the Machine was introduced in 1970, the muscle-car party was over (and that model was too cartoonish of an entry anyway).
The cast iron OHV 6 introduced in 1964 was reliable, but the cast aluminum 6 AMC used in the early ’60s had a poor durability record which had a negative hangover on AMC’s reputation in the late ’60s.
my first real job was washing Ramblers every Saturday morning starting at 4 am. we sold a lot of Ramblers is Santa Rosa Ca and it was my job to make sure these cars were clean and ready for the new owners. I made .75 cents per hour. This job was my start to a wonderful automotive career.
As a lifelong AMC fan I have always thought the 67 Rebel, all models, was the best styled car AMC ever produced. Yes I think better than the Javelin and AMX. I was in high school in the fall of 66 when these were introduced. I think the front end, grill and front side fenders gave it an Oldsmobile look and especially the wagon. GM lead the way in style then and I thought it had a GM look. These cars looked as stylish as anything the competition offered. And a nice instrument panel. The convertible- beautiful! The wagons were about the best looking of anything on the market in 67 and of course there were the unique regional models, the Westerner, Mariner and Briargate. Nothing else like them in the market and it’s too bad they were not continued into 68. When the 68s came out I thought the new grill and hood treatment really cheapened the look of the car. Poor annual styling updates ruined what had been a beautiful car, something that plagued AMC into the future. If only they tried to build something that looked and felt like real quality they could have been a success.