Proposed 1972-73 design could have saved AMC from ill-fated 1974 Matador coupe

June 20, 2026 Steve Design Notes 16
1972 AMC Ambassador proposal by Brooks Stevens

(EXPANDED FROM 2/4/2022)

The above image shows an early design proposal by Brooks Stevens for a redesigned AMC Ambassador planned for 1972-73. The car has vague similarities to mockups pictured in a Patrick Foster (2013) book — which were scrapped. Instead, AMC came out with the radically styled 1974 Matador coupe and a facelift of its larger sedans and wagons.

Stevens’s design looks crude compared to the mockups pictured in Foster’s book. However, some elements showed up in subsequent proposals, such as a mid-level crease, a squared-off grille and inset headlights.

Brooks Stevens AMC Ambassador proposal
The right side of Stevens’s proposal has larger wheel openings and a vertical front fender ridge. The mockup shown in Foster’s (2013) book has a more rounded beltline similar to the previous generation (Milwaukee Art Museum, 1977)

Subsequent proposals differed from Stevens’s mockup by gaining more rounded contours. Front fender tops were also unusually low for a car of that era. This gave the fascia a surprisingly sleek look on the four-door sedan even though it appeared to carry over a tall windshield, which dated back to 1967.

Thus, the new design might have continued to be the roomiest of mid-sized cars. That could have been an advantage because Big Three mid-sized cars had increasingly emphasized bulky styling over efficient packaging.

1977 AMC Matador sedan
The 1974-78 Matador’s Jimmy Durante nose appears to be as long as on a subsequent proposed redesign but looked ugly rather than attractive because of carryover fenders and a taller hood line (Old Car Brochures).

Ambassador was smartly repositioned

The proportions of Stevens’s mockup as well as subsequent proposals suggest that the Ambassador would no longer have had a longer wheelbase ahead of the cowl. Instead, it would mainly be differentiated from the Matador with grilles and trim.

Beginning in 1969, the Ambassador’s wheelbase was 122 inches. This was eight inches longer than the 1967-70 Rebel’s and four more than the 1971-73 Matador’s. This was supposed to help legitimize marketing the Ambassador as a big car even though it had no more interior room or trunk space than the Rebel/Matador, which were sold as intermediates.

1972 Ford Gran Torino 2-door hardtop
1972 AMC Ambassador Brougham two-door hardtop
The proposed Ambassador had the potential to be much more competitive against the likes of the 1972 Ford Gran Torino (top image) than the utilitarian Matador and overpriced Ambassador that reached production (Old Car Brochures).

Without the longer wheelbase, the Ambassador would presumably have been repositioned as a luxury mid-sized car. That would have been an overdue move because this market niche was booming in sales. For example, in 1972 Ford produced almost 347,000 Gran Torinos. In contrast, roughly 55,000 Matadors and 44,000 Ambassador were built. Indeed, sales were arguably too low to continue justifying a distinct platform.

Both AMC nameplates may have suffered from old sheetmetal. However, their positioning was also problematic. The Matador didn’t offer a luxury model and the Ambassador was priced too high. In 1972 the Ambassador Brougham two-door hardtop listed for $4,018 whereas a Gran Torino V8 went for only $3,094. The Ambassador had more standard equipment, but that didn’t make up the difference.

1970 Mercury Cyclone
The proposed hardtop had a semi-fastback roofline that was somewhat similar to that of a 1970-71 Mercury Montego and Cyclone. However, the AMC had more glass area and a more rounded appearance (Old Car Brochures).

Ambassador had more potential than Matador coupe

The Ambassador hardtop was a compromise between the previous model — which deviated only modestly from the sedan — and the 1974 Matador coupe, which had unique sheetmetal. Although the hardtop shared the same front and rear as the sedan, it apparently had a shorter wheelbase behind the B-pillars, a lower windshield, and a beltline and greenhouse that sloped farther downward.

By the same token, the basic look of the Ambassador’s overall lineup was distinctive enough that it would not have been confused with Big Three cars. Even so, it still was a lot more “normal” than the boy-racer Matador coupe and the downright ugly sedan.

1978 AMC Matador
The Matador coupe was designed so specifically to be a sporty coupe that it looked ridiculous when given a brougham treatment. Here the relative blandness of the proposed hardtop would have been a big advantage (Old Car Brochures).

Even though the Ambassador was still AMC’s top-of-line nameplate, the hardtop pictured in Foster’s (2013) book eschewed a full-fledged “brougham” look. The car had a semi-fastback roofline, sporty road wheels and no opera windows. The overall vibe was a bit like the 1966 Buick Riviera — an understated and somewhat sporty luxury coupe.

That was arguably not the best way to compete in the depths of the brougham era. However, the basic design was much closer to the norm than the Matador coupe.

1977 Plymouth Fury
To broughamize the proposed Ambassador two-door hardtop, it might have needed to move in a similar direction as the 1977 Plymouth Fury, which offered a partial vinyl roof and tacked-on opera window (Old Car Brochures).

Would more ‘normal’ mid-sized cars have done better?

AMC reportedly spent about $40 million to develop the Matador coupe and facelift the sedan and wagon. That was similar to what was spent on the 1970 Hornet (Foster, 1993). It’s hard to see how the proposed redesign could have cost any more than that — and that it would have sold as poorly (go here for further discussion).

Perhaps the most important reason is that the Ambassador could have been a better fit with the market than the Matador coupe. Although the hardtop might not have been a huge seller, it could have appealed to a broader range of buyers than the overly specialized coupe.

1974 Ambassador was hopelessly uncompetitive
The coffin nose of the 1974 Ambassador and Matador appears to be so similar to the aborted 1972-73 AMCs that I wonder whether designers tried to salvage the development costs of some front-end components (Old Car Brochures).

In addition, the sedans and wagons could have sold better if they had been given new sheetmetal. Former AMC designer Bob Nixon was delusional to suggest that these cars didn’t need more of an updating because they were already “getting a decent share of the sedan and wagon market” (Foster, 2014).

The key reason why the 1974 facelift came off so badly was because the body was eight years old. But because so much money had been spent on the coupe, there wasn’t enough left to do more than minimal changes to the sedan and wagon.

1978 Chevrolet Impala
The 1974 Matador sedan was remarkably similar in size and space efficiency to the downsized 1977 Chevrolet Caprice. With better styling might it have led the parade to more space-efficient six-passenger family cars (Old Car Brochures)?

Ambassador anticipates the downsized 1977 GM cars

I don’t have specific dimensions for the proposed Ambassador, but it appears to be roughly the same size as the previous year’s Matador. If that was indeed the case then the car’s basic size would have been in the general vicinity of General Motors’ downsized 1977 big cars.

With updated styling that didn’t offend, might the Ambassador have been able to steal at least some sales away from Detroit’s full-sized cars in the wake of the oil embargo of 1973-74? AMC’s production was already so modest that it wouldn’t have taken much to boost sales. At the very least, production might have tapered off in 1975-77 rather than collapsed. That, in turn, might have eased at least somewhat the deteriorating financial situation of AMC’s passenger-car operations.

All of this said, the best course of action might have been to discontinue the mid-sized platform. AMC could have plausibly been more successful if the Ambassador had been turned into a luxury compact based on a stretched Hornet body. However, if the automaker was going to stay in the mid-sized field, its first guess as to where the market was going was arguably better than its second one.

NOTES:

This article was originally posted on Feb. 4, 2022 and expanded on June 20, 2026. Two photographs of Stevens’s proposed Ambassador are dated Sept. 12, 1977 (Milwaukee Art Museum). I assume this date does not reflect when the proposal was developed because his consulting contract with AMC reportedly ended in 1969 (Adamson, 2003), which was around the time AMC may have started work on 1972 redesigns.

Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.

RE:SOURCES

Patrick Foster's latest AMC book

ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:

  • oldcarbrochures.org: AMC Ambassador (1974); AMC Javelin (1971); AMC Matador (1977, 1978); Chevrolet Impala (1978); Mercury Cyclone (1970); Plymouth Fury (1977)

PHOTOGRAPHS:

Related Articles

16 Comments

  1. AMC never showed the ’74’s front end in it’s brochures.
    The one pictured here is an improvement if there ever was one. The’74 was a waterfall affair with bull’s eye turn signals and an effect like an automotive version of Groucho Marx.
    People make constant references about how Awkward and awful the Ambassador front end is.
    However it works infinitely better than the Matador’s because the dual headlamp configuration balances it out, plus the fender end caps don’t look like cheap fillers for the same openings as previously used on the 71-73 Matador. Like ’58 Studebaker pods for dual headlights: cheap, quick and awkward.
    I had just learned to drive when the Matador coupe came out. I thought it was beautiful, and unlike the “broughamed” opera windowed offerings of the Big Three, the rear windows still rolled down if ordered without that heinous landau roof.
    My folk’s had a ’72 Ambassador Brougham, brand new after having had a new ’71 Gremlin.
    I think why AMC couldn’t get traction with the Ambassador was that the materials and hardware used in it were no better in quality than that used on it’s Gremlin and Hornet.
    The Ambassador didn’t get better quality, better interior plastics, better workmanship.
    At that time as AMC’s quality had dropped so hard the Buyer Protection Plan had to be implemented. My folks saw this first hand and I remember well.
    Even the rags at the time noticed.
    Motor Trend in a comparison test of the new Javelin mentioned AMC’s ad tag line for that year :”If you had to compete with GM Ford and Chrysler, what would you do ?”
    MT’s answer was: kick some butts on the assembly line and get the employees to finish their work”.
    They went on to mention the water and air leaks, assembly screw ups etc.
    Such a shame. I loved AMC and it’s cars but sometime around 1967 their well known rep for quality started a quick decline.
    Sorry for the gas. I love the IA articles on the Independents, always

    Reply

  2. Wish I could edit.
    Correction: ‘AMC never showed the ’74 Matador SEDAN’s front end…’ in the brochure.
    Sorry

    Reply

  3. At this time, AMC needed to figure out how to style a body to remain attractive for 7-8 years, given their available resources for re-tooling. Neither Stevens’ proposal nor the in-house ones have the legs to have sold in the early 80s. But what if AMC had gone back to consulting Pininfarina and re-skinned along the lines of the Fiat 130 coupe and Peugeot 604? That might have worked.

    Reply

    • It would have been interesting to see what the Italians could come up with — and whether American car buyers would have been attracted to a European approach to a mid-sized car during the depths of the brougham era. It could have worked but had an element of gambling to it.

      I think that the all-time best idea was to move AMC’s entire passenger-car lineup to an updated Hornet platform. That would have given the automaker the economies of scale needed to more easily navigate the second half of the 1970s. An Italian design might have worked even better on a compact.

      The above story is based upon the premise of AMC management having to choose between the proposed 1972-73 reskinning and the Matador coupe. Stevens’s design strikes me as rather amateurish and the in-house proposal as okay but hardly award winning. To my eyes the exaggerated nose was its worst feature, particularly when adding 5-mph bumpers.

      I also think that they missed a golden opportunity to put the car on a bit of a diet. After all, the Matador and Ambassador were based on the same platform as the meaningfully smaller 1963 Rambler Classic/Ambassador (go here for further discussion).

      Reply

  4. I echo the appreciation of the articles on independents! Thank you!
    l was never a fan of the Matador coupes, even though l was a Hornet owner at the time. I even bought a couple of shares of AMC and still have the original certificate (l never turned it in when Chrysler purchased AMC)!
    A friend and l took a test drive in a used Matador coupe. It did not change my opinion. My boss inherited his father-in-law’s low mileage Matador coupe and he hated it. Never ran right.
    Dweezil’s assessment that AMC’s quality went quickly downhill in the ’60s seems to ring true. My Hornet’s dash panel was a plastic mess. The top of the front fenders rusted through in 6 years despite care. The rear springs were weak. The car was reliable, though! Only replaced brakes and a water pump on the 258.
    Looking at the pictures of Brooks Stevens”72 AMC proposal, l don’t think it was very “inspired” and would not likely lead to anything really attractive.
    Perhaps he liked working with Studebaker better! His facelifts there were miracles!

    Reply

  5. From the right side, the Ambassador mockup looks like it might have been a reasonable proposal for the 1969 full-size Ford, albeit with a front end that is completely out of place and is somewhat predictive of the 1973 Chevelle, sans cow-catcher bumper. In the end, it doesn’t appear anyone at AMC was really interested in breathing life back into their mid-size vehicles in a meaningful way (ie, updated sedans & wagons). I find it more than a little ironic that about 15 years later, while under Renault’s wing, AMC initiated development of the large Premier sedan, created by Italdesign, and which ended up being sold by Eagle dealers (and as the Monaco by Dodge dealers). The Premier, according to Wikipedia, was targeted for annual production of 150,000 units. Actual first-year production was just over 32,000 cars. European-cache and good media reviews didn’t help it nor would they have on a mid-sized 1970s AMC product. AMC’s experience with Renault in the 1980s ended up being an example of American and European car companies at odds with one another at the expense of product and marketshare.

    Reply

  6. I don’t argue that Pininfarina styling would have increased market share. It might have: remember that Bill Mitchell acknowledged the Fiat 130 coupe as an inspiration for the 1977 Chevrolet B body. But GM was seen as the style leader, so AMC going in a different direction 3 years earlier may very possibly have lacked mass appeal.

    My argument is different. By the 1970s, the Matador and Ambassador were largely selling to AMC/Nash loyalists. An exterior that was plainer and more elegant than what was fashionable in Detroit could have enabled sales to those loyalists to go on for longer without retooling. If AMC could have sold just 35,000 cars off its large platform for 8 years to its loyal clientele, that would be 280,000 units in all. Given that the basic engineering had already been paid for as well as the body structure under the skin, this would likely have yielded significant incremental profit. As it was, the increased sales obtained by the 74 Matador coupe were a flash in the pan and the platform didn’t live past 4 years.

    Reply

  7. Back in the 1970s, I had little to no appreciation for AMC. But after learning more about the company, I could only wish that it had worked on quality control, just as Chrysler did with its 1965 models; reskinned the Ambassador/Matador in time for the 1973 oil crunch; and offer a new Javelin coupe that could have shared doors with an Ambassador coupe. It also should have looked into reskinning the Hornet, making it more fuel efficient. But we know Detroit doesn’t think outside the box, sadly.

    Reply

  8. The sedan proposal looks like he had a thing for pimpmobile headlights, and finished it off with a Mercury Bobcat grille. You mention the 2 door design and go to great lengths to describe it but no photos?

    Reply

    • I don’t have access to photos that are not copyrighted. However, those photos are in Foster’s book (go here). I have disagreed with his analysis on a number of fronts but still think that his book makes a valuable contribution to AMC history. It’s well worth buying!

      The rise of the Internet has cultivated the idea that information should be free. The problem with that view is it takes time and skill to produce good-quality automotive history. If we want writers to keep on producing it, then we need to somehow pay them — such as by buying their books and magazines. Websites that repost copyrighted material without permission may please their readers in the short run but undercut the long-term viability of the automotive history field.

      It’s also illegal.

      Reply

  10. Did Brook Stevens have friends in the Chrysler Styling Dept?
    The 1972 proposal’s front end has a strong resemblance to the 1975-77 Chrysler Cordoba.
    From the B pillar back, it looks like the 1974 Plymouth Fury

    Reply

  11. The more I gaze at Stevens’ proposal for the Matador, the more I think that it was only marginally better than the extended snout of the Matador / Ambassador sedans. Without better quality in the 1970s and more cohesive styling, I don’t think the A.M.C. would have been any more successful in the marketplace. Except for the 1965-1968 Ambassadors, the first-generation Javelins, the 1970 Hornet and the 1964-1969 Americans, the high watermark for A.M.C. styling was the 1963 Classic and Ambassador.

    Reply

  12. When I was program director at WIBC-AM, Indianapolis, the news department acquired a new red Matador coupe. I guess WIBC got a good A.M.C. as it was heavily used as a mobile unit for three years before being traded in on a Chevelle and an A.M.C. Concord. I liked the Matador coupe, but I apparently was the only one. You cannot argue taste as beauty (or the lack of it) is in the eye of the beholder.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*