Automotive AHC - Improve Studebaker's (and Packard's) prospects

[Masked Grizzly]

I can believe that. TBH, tho, much as I hate to say, it makes more sense to me for Packard (minus a stubborn Nance) to join with Nash into AMC & let Stude go under. Then have alt-AMC buy out Jeep & make it & the Ramblers cash machines for the Packards, which are individually more profitable (given they're not hand-built, as they need updating.

It would had Studebaker been in the same position ITTL as IOTL, yet the improved pre-merger prospects for both preclude an outcome where Studebaker experiences the same issues that caused it to go under like in OTL.

I could believe most of that. I don't see a need for Austin, & in this era, they're too small anyhow.

The BMC component is optional yet based on the role it played in OTL with Nash/AMC (including Romney’s ideas) and International Harvester respectively, also the fledgling BMC (that became the World’s 4th largest carmaker upon its formation in 1952) was hardly that much smaller compared to the newly formed AMC (in 1955).

It is easy to believe that an ATL AMC and thriving Studebaker-Packard ITTL (the latter via a number of PODs beginning pre-war) would both have the necessary capital to foot the bill in developing common platforms with their short-lived alliance from the 1950s-1960s.

Curbside Classics also suggested a really interesting angle, a joint venture with Japan. AIUI, there was one planned, but a corporate lawyer advised talking to both Nissan & Toyota, & that blew up any deal with either. The lawyer's name? Richard Nixon. Getting a deal with Toyota, IMO, would ultimately be better than one with Renault or BMC, not least because the Japanese figured out improving quality control and controlling costs better than just about anybody.

There would be a risk of either ATL AMC (plus Willys-Jeeps or thriving Studebaker-Packard (plus IH and Checker) being swallowed up by either Toyota or Nissan and would be too simple a solution for a pair of US automotive combines that are now much better prepared for what is to come in the 1970s and beyond ITTL compared to the US Big Three.

There were growing ties between Willys-Overland/Jeep and IKA with Renault IOTL, with the former two part of AMC ITTL and given the latter's increased prospects in ATL where they should be strong enough to be ok heading into the 1990s on their own (kind of like OTL Chrysler). There is a chance for a more equal collaboration between ATL AMC and Renault to happen during the 1960s allowing for an early transition to FWD by the late-60s with an ATL Renault 12-based family of cars (including an SUV) compared to OTL AMC in the late-70s.

There is also something amusing about an ATL sub-Rambler American FWD model called the Americar being based on a US-built late-60s French car (even if AMC in this scenario played a larger role in its development ITTL), though it is a model that would prove to be very successful in South America and elsewhere IOTL.

OTL Nissan were linked to both Studebaker and International Harvester for different reasons. With the latter two part of the ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard combine (including Checker Motors) and their (IH-inspired) SUV and 4x4 projects being realised ITTL, it is difficult to see where Nissan could be an asset to what is essentially an American JLR apart from playing a role in a FWD/AWD taxi project analogue to the Checker Galvan and Galvan II .

I like a Monteverdi-style Packard GT.

Imagine ATL Packard by the late-60s to early-70s producing platforms that are closer in sophistication to the De Tomaso Deauville (replacing the ATL Classic and Ambassador derived models), yet either clothed in similar styling as the Fissore styled (Dodge Aspen based) Monteverdi Sierra or Frua styled Maserati Kyalami (or Momo Mirage) for that luxury European-style exterior. WIth Brooks Stevens assigned to ATL Studebaker on the ATL thoroughly improved consolidated Rambler American platforms (that have since diverged upon the dissolution of the short-lived alliance / partnership with AMC).

Now imagine Packard’s ATL Big Block (Oldsmobile/Buick-inspired) US emissions compliant V8 was updated to feature SOHC amongst other improvements from the late-60s to early-70s, as was done by De Tomaso on the Ford Cleveland V8 in the De Tomaso Zonda concept (along with an illustration of a Deauville with that same 351 SOHC engine installed) yet unlike the De Tomaso effort actually reaching production. - https://performance.ford.com/enthusiasts/newsroom/2020/08/missing-detomaso-zonda-concept.html

 

[phx1138]

It would had Studebaker been in the same position ITTL as IOTL, yet the improved pre-merger prospects for both preclude an outcome where Studebaker experiences the same issues that caused it to go under like in OTL.

Not exactly as OTL, maybe, but eventually, unless the changes until TTL's postwar are pretty radical. IMO, it means Stude is likely to be done for: later, maybe, but done for. As much as I like the idea of Stude surviving (& I really do), I'm not seeing how.

The BMC component is optional yet based on the role it played in OTL with Nash/AMC (including Romney’s ideas) and International Harvester respectively, also the fledgling BMC (that became the World’s 4th largest carmaker upon its formation in 1952) was hardly that much smaller compared to the newly formed AMC (in 1955).

I wouldn't reject it. It's just a bit hard to swallow, because none of the U.S. players have any real European presence.

It is easy to believe that an ATL AMC and thriving Studebaker-Packard ITTL (the latter via a number of PODs beginning pre-war) would both have the necessary capital to foot the bill in developing common platforms with their short-lived alliance from the 1950s-1960s.

Given the stated changes, I'd agree.

There would be a risk of either ATL AMC (plus Willys-Jeeps or thriving Studebaker-Packard (plus IH and Checker) being swallowed up by either Toyota or Nissan and would be too simple a solution for a pair of US automotive combines that are now much better prepared for what is to come in the 1970s and beyond ITTL compared to the US Big Three.

At the time, I don't think either (as an auto company) is large enough. Maybe I'm underestimating the size of their parent organizations.

There were growing ties between Willys-Overland/Jeep and IKA with Renault IOTL, with the former two part of AMC ITTL and given the latter's increased prospects in ATL where they should be strong enough to be ok heading into the 1990s on their own (kind of like OTL Chrysler). There is a chance for a more equal collaboration between ATL AMC and Renault to happen during the 1960s allowing for an early transition to FWD by the late-60s with an ATL Renault 12-based family of cars (including an SUV) compared to OTL AMC in the late-70s.

I'm picturing a W-O/Jeep/AMC/Packard merger (by whatever name) not needing Renault at this time (perhaps never); AIUI, the Renault connection post-dates the failure of the parent(s).

Now, if you're prepared to accept alt-AMC taking over SIMCA Brazil... (Yes, that dead horse again. )

There is also something amusing about an ATL sub-Rambler American FWD model called the Americar being based on a US-built late-60s French car (even if AMC in this scenario played a larger role in its development ITTL), though it is a model that would prove to be very successful in South America and elsewhere IOTL.

Agreed. (Truth to tell, it probably wouldn't end up with that name, ironic as it might be.)

OTL Nissan were linked to both Studebaker and International Harvester for different reasons. With the latter two part of the ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard combine (including Checker Motors) and their (IH-inspired) SUV and 4x4 projects being realised ITTL, it is difficult to see where Nissan could be an asset to what is essentially an American JLR apart from playing a role in a FWD/AWD taxi project analogue to the Checker Galvan and Galvan II .

I was looking at Nissan as an access point to the Japanese market, & to the Japanese production methods. Honda, at this point ('55 or so?), seems too small to even be noticed; you'd need pretty sharp management IMO to see the value, & pretty brave to propose a joint venture, merger, or takeover.

Keeping the IH Scout would be a great idea. I picture some badge engineering with Jeep, maybe, to get something like the Cherokee or Suburban. At least, sharing 4x4 between Jeeps & Scouts. With more utility (& better styling) than the Jeepster. (Come to think of it, tho: a Stude ute, predating the Ranchero, with available AWD {not a 4x off-roader}...& one that stays in production... )

Imagine ATL Packard by the late-60s to early-70s producing platforms that are closer in sophistication to the De Tomaso Deauville (replacing the ATL Classic and Ambassador derived models), yet either clothed in similar styling as the Fissore styled (Dodge Aspen based) Monteverdi Sierra or Frua styled Maserati Kyalami (or Momo Mirage) for that luxury European-style exterior. WIth Brooks Stevens assigned to ATL Studebaker on the ATL thoroughly improved consolidated Rambler American platforms (that have since diverged upon the dissolution of the short-lived alliance / partnership with AMC).

Now imagine Packard’s ATL Big Block (Oldsmobile/Buick-inspired) US emissions compliant V8 was updated to feature SOHC amongst other improvements from the late-60s to early-70s, as was done by De Tomaso on the Ford Cleveland V8 in the De Tomaso Zonda concept (along with an illustration of a Deauville with that same 351 SOHC engine installed) yet unlike the De Tomaso effort actually reaching production. - https://performance.ford.com/enthusiasts/newsroom/2020/08/missing-detomaso-zonda-concept.html

That I can believe. A "Packard Deauville"? (You say DeTomaso, I think Vallelunga & Pantera, first.) Giving Packard that in the '70s, even without going to SOHC, would be great. Add the SOHC?

From way out in left field, have Nash stay in the four-wheel-drive business from back in the '10's and '20's. Nash took over the build of the Jefferey Quad, the supremo 4WD vehicle of WW1 and after. Technology advanced for its day and built like brick out-houses. Merge that alternate home-grown Nash talent with this version of Jeep.

I do kind of like that. How far back a POD do you want for all this? (Let's see, OTL Studebaker was founded in 1852... )

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Not exactly as OTL, maybe, but eventually, unless the changes until TTL's postwar are pretty radical. IMO, it means Stude is likely to be done for: later, maybe, but done for. As much as I like the idea of Stude surviving (& I really do), I'm not seeing how.

At best without a merger with ATL Packard, Studebaker ITTL with the previously mentioned PODs could probably hold out until the fuel crisis ridden 1970s.

When viewed from 1951, Studebaker was the independent automaker most likely to succeed. The South Bend, Indiana-based automaker generated unusually high sales by inventing the family-sized compact. This allowed Studebaker to invest in both a V8 engine and an automatic transmission well before any other independent.
....
Studebaker was also the only independent that was a major player in both the passenger-car and truck markets.

Among the independents, Studebaker had the only passenger-car platform flexible enough to be used for both a larger and a compact car.

The Studebaker body’s flexibility was important because none of the independents sold enough cars in the early-50s to make money fielding two distinct platforms. Yet Nash, Hudson and Kaiser took the risk of introducing compacts while trying to maintain entries in the full-sized field. None succeeded.

1951 Studebaker: Pointing in the wrong direction - Indie Auto

1951 Studebaker: Pointing in the wrong direction - Fake Design Indie Auto

www.indieauto.org

Despite the issues Studebaker’s faced during the great depression and its president opting to commit suicide, it still possessed the necessary ingredients to be in a much better position compared to other independents.

It is just a matter of crafting a scenario where Studebaker makes better decisions ITTL which is not completely insurmountable, the same goes with an early better-developed Skybolt OHV enlarged to 3298cc and the early addition of an ATL SBC-like Studebaker V8 and related family of engines to slot below Packard.

The merger/acquisition of International Harvester (plus Checker Motors) by an ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard, also means IH could be absorbed into and further bolster Studebaker’s presence in the truck segment.

I wouldn't reject it. It's just a bit hard to swallow, because none of the U.S. players have any real European presence.

Both ATL AMC (plus WO/Kaiser-Keep) and Studebaker-Packard (plus IH/Checker) would be largely avoiding the Detroit groupthink embodied by the US Big Three at the time, although both companies would ultimately go in different directions towards the same end instead of seeking to outright compete against the Big Three and thereby place themselves in a better position to survive the import onslaught and downsizing trend of the 1970s onwards.

It is not required since something like a SBC-like Studebaker V8-derived V6 or 153-like 4-cylinder could have been a suitable in-house alternative, the same goes with an AMC V8-based V6 or early AMC Straight-4, or any other variation that would obviate the need to buy engines source from an outside company whether from the US Big Three or elsewhere. Just that both AMC and IH IOTL missed out amongst other things on the larger 5-bearing B-Series engines and could have easily and quickly made a locally built version into their own like Nissan did which would have fulfilled the needs of both whether in petrol or diesel/turbodiesel forms (instead of making do with the early 3-bearing underpowered 1.5 B-Series).

I'm picturing a W-O/Jeep/AMC/Packard merger (by whatever name) not needing Renault at this time (perhaps never); AIUI, the Renault connection post-dates the failure of the parent(s).

From the following French language link below, Renault was establishing links with Kaiser and Willys in both South America as well as the US IOTL as early as the 1950s-1960s.

ATL AMC could use those links with Renault to their advantage to help it transition to FWD much earlier, since despite being in a much better positon compared to OTL still cannot see them being able to afford to transition to FWD on their own ITTL, so they might as well get involved early on in a more equal collaboration with Renault on what became the Renault 12.

Renault avec Kaiser Jeep, AMC et Chrysler

Keeping the IH Scout would be a great idea. I picture some badge engineering with Jeep, maybe, to get something like the Cherokee or Suburban. At least, sharing 4x4 between Jeeps & Scouts. With more utility (& better styling) than the Jeepster. (Come to think of it, tho: a Stude ute, predating the Ranchero, with available AWD {not a 4x off-roader}...& one that stays in production... )

Can see the IH Scout and Studebaker equivalent (aka ATL Monteverdi Safari) likely being competitors of sorts to Jeep ITTL, especially after the dissolution of the alliance / partnership between ATL AMC and Studebaker-Packard.

That I can believe. A "Packard Deauville"? (You say DeTomaso, I think Vallelunga & Pantera, first.) Giving Packard that in the '70s, even without going to SOHC, would be great. Add the SOHC?

They would probably opt for a more conventional front-engined RWD approach as embodied by the Deauville-derived Zonda concept, with the most ambitious likely being an 4WD variant reminiscent of the OTL Jensen FF.

 

[phx1138]

At best without a merger with ATL Packard, Studebaker ITTL with the previously mentioned PODs could probably hold out until the fuel crisis ridden 1970s.

Despite the issues Studebaker’s faced during the great depression and its president opting to commit suicide, it still possessed the necessary ingredients to be in a much better position compared to other independents.

It is just a matter of crafting a scenario where Studebaker makes better decisions ITTL which is not completely insurmountable, the same goes with an early better-developed Skybolt OHV enlarged to 3298cc and the early addition of an ATL SBC-like Studebaker V8 and related family of engines to slot below Packard.

The merger/acquisition of International Harvester (plus Checker Motors) by an ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard, also means IH could be absorbed into and further bolster Studebaker’s presence in the truck segment.

I would expect it a bit sooner, given the OTL troubles, but that's reasonable. As I think about it, the strength of IH (& Checker) even after the Oil Shock suggests it might be possible for a merged Stude to survive longer still.

I should also point out, I was predicating the failure on not merging with Packard. If that still happens, Stude isn't the financial basket case it was OTL, & there's a merger with IH & Checker, I'll withdraw my doubts.

I do think a merger of W-O/Jeep, Stude, & Packard, with or without Nash, makes the most sense, if it's the hardest to manage: it reduces competition in the SUV segment, & that's good for Stude.

It is not required since something like a SBC-like Studebaker V8-derived V6 or 153-like 4-cylinder could have been a suitable in-house alternative, the same goes with an AMC V8-based V6 or early AMC Straight-4, or any other variation that would obviate the need to buy engines source from an outside company whether from the US Big Three or elsewhere. Just that both AMC and IH IOTL missed out amongst other things on the larger 5-bearing B-Series engines and could have easily and quickly made a locally built version into their own like Nissan did which would have fulfilled the needs of both whether in petrol or diesel/turbodiesel forms (instead of making do with the early 3-bearing underpowered 1.5 B-Series).

That works for me.

From the following French language link below, Renault was establishing links with Kaiser and Willys in both South America as well as the US IOTL as early as the 1950s-1960s.

ATL AMC could use those links with Renault to their advantage to help it transition to FWD much earlier, since despite being in a much better positon compared to OTL still cannot see them being able to afford to transition to FWD on their own ITTL, so they might as well get involved early on in a more equal collaboration with Renault on what became the Renault 12.

I don't think it's a bad idea. It just strikes me a bit unlikely. The Renault link OTL seems to me based on W-O/Kaiser being a bit desperate; TTL, that won't (AFAICT) be true.

Can see the IH Scout and Studebaker equivalent (aka ATL Monteverdi Safari) likely being competitors of sorts to Jeep ITTL, especially after the dissolution of the alliance / partnership between ATL AMC and Studebaker-Packard.

I don't see Stude going so far up-market (unless you want to try a Packard edition, too, which wouldn't be impossible). As said, IMO reducing the competition with Jeep is better for both, given the Big Three getting in the game.

They would probably opt for a more conventional front-engined RWD approach as embodied by the Deauville-derived Zonda concept, with the most ambitious likely being an 4WD variant reminiscent of the OTL Jensen FF.

Oh, I don't expect a Packard variant of the Vallenlunga. I just mean, that's my first thought when you say De Tomaso. A Packard on the lines of the Deauville (or 7-series, or something)? Absolutely. An AWD version? (I will say, if younger Packard senior management in the '70s or '80s {Delorean or Bricklin or somebody getting derailed from OTL, say?} was to offer something like the Vallelunga, I'd be thrilled. {Provided it looks less Bricklin & more Ferrari 246 Dino...} I just think that borders ASB. )

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I would expect it a bit sooner, given the OTL troubles, but that's reasonable. As I think about it, the strength of IH (& Checker) even after the Oil Shock suggests it might be possible for a merged Stude to survive longer still.

I should also point out, I was predicating the failure on not merging with Packard. If that still happens, Stude isn't the financial basket case it was OTL, & there's a merger with IH & Checker, I'll withdraw my doubts.

The ideal has always been for ATL Studebaker to merge with ATL Packard in this scenario, just contend that ATL Studebaker's improved prospects would allow it to hold out for a bit longer even if it did not happen, particularly if ATL Studebaker merges with IH (plus Checker).

It is inevitable there would be some consolidation among the independents, however a consolidation into the US 4th and 5th carmakers would have probably been a lot tidier compared to a grand merger among the independents.

I don't think it's a bad idea. It just strikes me a bit unlikely. The Renault link OTL seems to me based on W-O/Kaiser being a bit desperate; TTL, that won't (AFAICT) be true.

It really depends to what extent ATL AMC still subscribes to the conservative Detroit Groupthink that was prevalent among the US Big Three IOTL and thus handicapped themselves against the import onslaught.

ATL AMC would be in a better position in the sense of having a sub-Rambler American model in the form of the ATL Americar/Metropolitan replacement from the 1960s, however without a company like Renault helping it transition to FWD at the lower end of the range by the late-60s to early-70s (albeit a conservative longitude FWD layout). It would have to instead adopt a more conventional downsized front-engined RWD platform* (that should be within ATL AMC's capability to develop ITTL) rather than a literal cut-down Concord platform like the OTL Gremlin was.

*- Essentially a flexible sub-Rambler American D-Segment platform in the manner of the Opel Ascona B that is also capable of forming the basis of a related C-Segment GM T-Car model, the Chevrolet Chevette remained in production until 1987 while the T-Car derived Isuzu Piazza ceased production in 1990 (being the absolute latest ATL AMC could hold out before transitioning to FWD).

I don't see Stude going so far up-market (unless you want to try a Packard edition, too, which wouldn't be impossible). As said, IMO reducing the competition with Jeep is better for both, given the Big Three getting in the game.

When thinking about it further it would probably be simpler for both IH and Checker to be renamed as Studebaker ITTL, with Packard being utilized for Scout-derived Range Rover-rivalling ATL equivalents of the OTL Monteverdi Safari.

Oh, I don't expect a Packard variant of the Vallenlunga. I just mean, that's my first thought when you say De Tomaso. A Packard on the lines of the Deauville (or 7-series, or something)? Absolutely. An AWD version? (I will say, if younger Packard senior management in the '70s or '80s {Delorean or Bricklin or somebody getting derailed from OTL, say?} was to offer something like the Vallelunga, I'd be thrilled. {Provided it looks less Bricklin & more Ferrari 246 Dino...} I just think that borders ASB. )

As far as its exterior styling goes, would look into the styling portfolios of both Frua and Fissore for a approximate idea of what such a car would look like at it appeared in the 1960s-1970s.

 

[phx1138]

The ideal has always been for ATL Studebaker to merge with ATL Packard in this scenario, just contend that ATL Studebaker's improved prospects would allow it to hold out for a bit longer even if it did not happen, particularly if ATL Studebaker merges with IH (plus Checker).

I'd agree, without the merger & in the described conditions.

It is inevitable there would be some consolidation among the independents, however a consolidation into the US 4th and 5th carmakers would have probably been a lot tidier compared to a grand merger among the independents.

Maybe. I have trouble seeing small(ish) 4th & 5th place lasting appreciably longer alone: that is, past the '70s. It may be possible; I just have trouble seeing it.

It really depends to what extent ATL AMC still subscribes to the conservative Detroit Groupthink that was prevalent among the US Big Three IOTL and thus handicapped themselves against the import onslaught.

That's very true. Also true for P-S, in-TL. Both would need something like the Rambler, & much earlier than OTL. IMO, that would also be an ideal way to "steal a march" on the Big Three in the lucrative (near future) muscle car & pony car market. How much would a Stude or AMC GTO be worth in profits? Or a Mustang? Allowing they've got decent styling & aren't over-large, both of which severely crimped AMC's entries OTL (not over about 108" WB, to start): as suggested upthread, I'd build on the OTL American platform, both times. It's a fraction small compared to the Goat (frex); I think I'd use that & position it where the OTL Road Runner was, at the bottom of the market, rather than option-up & try & get a premium price: that puts you up against the nailhead Buicks (& later the 455s), which isn't really where I'd want to be with a small(ish) car. Much the same is true for the 'stang analog: effectively creating that market would be a tremendous advantage.

That said, Stude & Packard would have a harder time, I think. It would fall mostly on Stude; IDK if you could reasonably put out a Packard muscle car. (Answer the 300 letter cars, yes, but that's another niche.) The '57 Scotsman (which became the Lark) was the right size and had decent styling. (The '54 Champion Starliner is amazing, but it's way too radical to succeed, IMO.) Everything else is too ugly, too boring, or too big...

ATL AMC would be in a better position in the sense of having a sub-Rambler American model in the form of the ATL Americar/Metropolitan replacement from the 1960s, however without a company like Renault helping it transition to FWD at the lower end of the range by the late-60s to early-70s (albeit a conservative longitude FWD layout). It would have to instead adopt a more conventional downsized front-engined RWD platform* (that should be within ATL AMC's capability to develop ITTL) rather than a literal cut-down Concord platform like the OTL Gremlin was.

*- Essentially a flexible sub-Rambler American D-Segment platform in the manner of the Opel Ascona B that is also capable of forming the basis of a related C-Segment GM T-Car model, the Chevrolet Chevette remained in production until 1987 while the T-Car derived Isuzu Piazza ceased production in 1990 (being the absolute latest ATL AMC could hold out before transitioning to FWD).

Going smaller than the Metropolitan before about 1980 strikes me as suicidal. (Never mind the peculiar styling, which isn't actually hard to fix.) Smaller than the Rambler seems like a pretty bad idea, too. Unless you're selling it mainly in Europe &/or Japan--& that brings me back to the "no European presence" concern: S-P & AMC both lack that, AFAICT. A licence deal (or alliance) with Renault could see something like an R5 badged as a Stude in Europe; I don't see it selling well here (if at all). If that happens, it seems almost mandatory for AMC to answer with a similar arrangement with BLMC (to keep the OTL ties, for simplicity), & the Minor & Mini badge-engineered (which actually puts them in a better position, since at least the Mini might sell here).

If S-P is looking for a European partner, I'd sooner go to Volvo, I think: reputation for quality, able to sell in the U.S. at a premium. (If only they had SAAB's rally team... )

Thinking of BLMC, I wonder if there's not a Canadian connection that makes sense, both for assembly & sales into the U.S. & export into Oz, & possibly a buyout of an Oz auto company. Failing that, perhaps Stude, Packard, or AMC Oz being created, building more/less U.S.-spec cars with RHD conversion. (Given Oz demanded local content, AIUI, local assembly & sourcing of parts to go with U.S.- or Canadian-built CKDs would be the path.)

When thinking about it further it would probably be simpler for both IH and Checker to be renamed as Studebaker ITTL, with Packard being utilized for Scout-derived Range Rover-rivalling ATL equivalents of the OTL Monteverdi Safari.

I like the Safari a lot. IMO, losing the IH brand costs the brand loyalty, & I'm not sure it's worth losing in favor of Stude. OTOH, how niche was IH as a brand? And could you market an ex-IH truck as a Stude with echos of WW2 Stude trucks?

Come to think of it, would dropping IH push S-P out of the market for heavier trucks, in the 1 ton to 10 ton range? Or make room for a wider Stude range?

As far as its exterior styling goes, would look into the styling portfolios of both Frua and Fissore for a approximate idea of what such a car would look like at it appeared in the 1960s-1970s.

I do like Frua's '65 Mistral & '65 AC428 ragtop (the AC FHC, not so much). The later cars from both are too "wedgy" for my taste. (I know, that was the trend... Doesn't mean I like it.) The '78 Lambo Faena concept is kind of interesting (if a bit long-tailed), being a 4dr; a notchback (which would also fix the AC FHC), would suit me fine.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Maybe. I have trouble seeing small(ish) 4th & 5th place lasting appreciably longer alone: that is, past the '70s. It may be possible; I just have trouble seeing it.

Both companies would each have the ingredients to survive over the next few decades ITTL, more so if they are involved in a short-term alliance / partnership with each other from the 1950s-1960s via both common platforms as well as ATL variations of their own engines.

ATL AMC would benefit from an equal collaboration with Renault from the 1960s that potentially involves an eventual merger by the 1980s as opposed to OTL where AMC was a basket case. Renault's earlier ties with AMC would also protect it from the prospect of a forced merger with Peugeot by a French government keen on creating its own BL-like monstrosity.

ATL Studebaker-Packard is another matter though the addition of IH and its planned developments in the SUV and 4x4 segments would provide the profits necessary to remain in business for the next few decades, yet can see it being acquired by another company either in (e.g. Tata with JLR, Geely with Volvo, etc) or outside of the automobile industry (e.g. US aerospace or defence industries akin to Vickers with Rolls-Royce Motors, BAe with Rover Group, etc - albeit more successful and large scale compared to latter two examples).

Nissan is one distant possibility in some capacity for ATL Studebaker-Packard, Volvo is another interesting idea that would mesh much better though both candidates would go on to establish ties with Renault (who ITTL would be in a more equal collaboration with ATL AMC). Peugeot is another idea as despite their ties with Renault at the time it could work out well for them in the sense they would seek further ties with ATL Studebaker-Packard (like Renault with ATL AMC) to forestall any prospect of a forced merger between Renault and Peugeot by the French government.

That's very true. Also true for P-S, in-TL. Both would need something like the Rambler, & much earlier than OTL. IMO, that would also be an ideal way to "steal a march" on the Big Three in the lucrative (near future) muscle car & pony car market. How much would a Stude or AMC GTO be worth in profits? Or a Mustang? Allowing they've got decent styling & aren't over-large, both of which severely crimped AMC's entries OTL (not over about 108" WB, to start): as suggested upthread, I'd build on the OTL American platform, both times. It's a fraction small compared to the Goat (frex); I think I'd use that & position it where the OTL Road Runner was, at the bottom of the market, rather than option-up & try & get a premium price: that puts you up against the nailhead Buicks (& later the 455s), which isn't really where I'd want to be with a small(ish) car. Much the same is true for the 'stang analog: effectively creating that market would be a tremendous advantage.

That said, Stude & Packard would have a harder time, I think. It would fall mostly on Stude; IDK if you could reasonably put out a Packard muscle car. (Answer the 300 letter cars, yes, but that's another niche.) The '57 Scotsman (which became the Lark) was the right size and had decent styling. (The '54 Champion Starliner is amazing, but it's way too radical to succeed, IMO.) Everything else is too ugly, too boring, or too big...

By the time alliance / partnership between ATL AMC and ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard is dissolved in the 1960s, envision the latter utilizing the ATL 3rd gen Rambler American derived platforms (mainly Studebaker) as well as the 2nd/3rd gen Classic and 4th/5th gen Ambassador platforms (mainly Packard) with the latter two eventually being replaced either by an upscaled Rambler American platform or a platform that is altogether more sophisticated and initially specific to Packard (akin to Deauville or Momo Mirage) beginning in the 1970s with elements filtering down to Studebaker ITTL.

Going smaller than the Metropolitan before about 1980 strikes me as suicidal. (Never mind the peculiar styling, which isn't actually hard to fix.) Smaller than the Rambler seems like a pretty bad idea, too. Unless you're selling it mainly in Europe &/or Japan--& that brings me back to the "no European presence" concern: S-P & AMC both lack that, AFAICT. A licence deal (or alliance) with Renault could see something like an R5 badged as a Stude in Europe; I don't see it selling well here (if at all). If that happens, it seems almost mandatory for AMC to answer with a similar arrangement with BLMC (to keep the OTL ties, for simplicity), & the Minor & Mini badge-engineered (which actually puts them in a better position, since at least the Mini might sell here).

If S-P is looking for a European partner, I'd sooner go to Volvo, I think: reputation for quality, able to sell in the U.S. at a premium. (If only they had SAAB's rally team... )

Thinking of BLMC, I wonder if there's not a Canadian connection that makes sense, both for assembly & sales into the U.S. & export into Oz, & possibly a buyout of an Oz auto company. Failing that, perhaps Stude, Packard, or AMC Oz being created, building more/less U.S.-spec cars with RHD conversion. (Given Oz demanded local content, AIUI, local assembly & sourcing of parts to go with U.S.- or Canadian-built CKDs would be the path.)

Do not get me wrong, am referring to an ATL Metropolitan of approximately the same dimensions as the OTL 1954-1958 Austin Cambridge of the period which shared both the same engines and width as the much shorter OTL Metropolitan.

It would be of roughly similar size as the ATL post-war Willys Americar prior to Willys-Overland/Jeep/etc becoming part of ATL AMC, where both the ATL Metropolitan and ATL Americar would be superseded by a common replacement possibly derived from the ATL 3rd Rambler American platform yet with the rough dimensions of the 2nd gen Rambler American such as the 100-inch wheelbase and length of about 167-173-inches albeit with a slight reduction in width from 70.8-inches to ranging from 65-inches (as on the GM H Platform) to 67-inches (as on the mk3-mk5 Ford Cortina) if not 69-inches at most (as on the Ford Pinto or Chevrolet Opala).

It would be from that ATL basis where a C-Segment type sub-Americar model could be developed from in time for the 1970s akin to the Chevrolet Chevette and Plymouth Cricket in terms of size, though that scenario would be in the event ATL AMC does not collaborate with Renault and get involved earlier on in the development of the longitude FWD Renault 12 project (that could form the basis of a C-Segment sized model akin to the Audi 80-derived Volkswagen Gol).

ATL AMC might be able to have better luck in Australia ITTL based on the previous PODS, on top of their increased presence in South America (particularly in Argentina and Brazil) maybe even South Africa and the Middle East.

-Links-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Motor_Industries#Operations_with_AMC

American Motors Corporation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I like the Safari a lot. IMO, losing the IH brand costs the brand loyalty, & I'm not sure it's worth losing in favor of Stude. OTOH, how niche was IH as a brand? And could you market an ex-IH truck as a Stude with echos of WW2 Stude trucks?

Come to think of it, would dropping IH push S-P out of the market for heavier trucks, in the 1 ton to 10 ton range? Or make room for a wider Stude range?

It would be a gamble discontinuing IH and Checker in favor of Studebaker ITTL, though cannot see the ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard combine (plus IH and Checker) being able to support 4 marques.

Maybe an earlier branding to something like Navistar could work as a commercial/taxi/etc specific marque to encompass both IH and Checker? OTOH does an ATL Studebaker-Packard really need its own equivalent of a redundant marque that is to Studebaker what Chevrolet is to GMC?

I do like Frua's '65 Mistral & '65 AC428 ragtop (the AC FHC, not so much). The later cars from both are too "wedgy" for my taste. (I know, that was the trend... Doesn't mean I like it.) The '78 Lambo Faena concept is kind of interesting (if a bit long-tailed), being a 4dr; a notchback (which would also fix the AC FHC), would suit me fine.

Agreed, the rear of the Faena could have done with a more conventional solution.

 

[phx1138]

Both companies would each have the ingredients to survive over the next few decades ITTL, more so if they are involved in a short-term alliance / partnership with each other from the 1950s-1960s via both common platforms as well as ATL variations of their own engines.

ATL AMC would benefit from an equal collaboration with Renault from the 1960s that potentially involves an eventual merger by the 1980s as opposed to OTL where AMC was a basket case. Renault's earlier ties with AMC would also protect it from the prospect of a forced merger with Peugeot by a French government keen on creating its own BL-like monstrosity.

ATL Studebaker-Packard is another matter though the addition of IH and its planned developments in the SUV and 4x4 segments would provide the profits necessary to remain in business for the next few decades, yet can see it being acquired by another company either in (e.g. Tata with JLR, Geely with Volvo, etc) or outside of the automobile industry (e.g. US aerospace or defence industries akin to Vickers with Rolls-Royce Motors, BAe with Rover Group, etc - albeit more successful and large scale compared to latter two examples).

Nissan is one distant possibility in some capacity for ATL Studebaker-Packard, Volvo is another interesting idea that would mesh much better though both candidates would go on to establish ties with Renault (who ITTL would be in a more equal collaboration with ATL AMC). Peugeot is another idea as despite their ties with Renault at the time it could work out well for them in the sense they would seek further ties with ATL Studebaker-Packard (like Renault with ATL AMC) to forestall any prospect of a forced merger between Renault and Peugeot by the French government.

You make a good case.

I do like the Peugeot connection, too. I'm thinking of the Volvo 780; TTL, it might have Packard power, or be badge-engineered--or be a Packard, for all that: any of those would be good, IMO. Having S-P (P-S?) adopting Volvo quality & safety measures would be good, too.

By the time alliance / partnership between ATL AMC and ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard is dissolved in the 1960s, envision the latter utilizing the ATL 3rd gen Rambler American derived platforms (mainly Studebaker) as well as the 2nd/3rd gen Classic and 4th/5th gen Ambassador platforms (mainly Packard) with the latter two eventually being replaced either by an upscaled Rambler American platform or a platform that is altogether more sophisticated and initially specific to Packard (akin to Deauville or Momo Mirage) beginning in the 1970s with elements filtering down to Studebaker ITTL.

I was thinking of either or both going the alt-GTO/Mustang route on their own, rather than relying on a common platform. (The timing looks wrong for that.) If they do share the platform at the time...that could make an alt-GTO/Mustang very interesting, indeed. Candidly, I'd rather they didn't.

Do not get me wrong, am referring to an ATL Metropolitan of approximately the same dimensions as the OTL 1954-1958 Austin Cambridge of the period which shared both the same engines and width as the much shorter OTL Metropolitan.

It would be of roughly similar size as the ATL post-war Willys Americar prior to Willys-Overland/Jeep/etc becoming part of ATL AMC, where both the ATL Metropolitan and ATL Americar would be superseded by a common replacement possibly derived from the ATL 3rd Rambler American platform yet with the rough dimensions of the 2nd gen Rambler American such as the 100-inch wheelbase and length of about 167-173-inches albeit with a slight reduction in width from 70.8-inches to ranging from 65-inches (as on the GM H Platform) to 67-inches (as on the mk3-mk5 Ford Cortina) if not 69-inches at most (as on the Ford Pinto or Chevrolet Opala).

It would be from that ATL basis where a C-Segment type sub-Americar model could be developed from in time for the 1970s akin to the Chevrolet Chevette and Plymouth Cricket in terms of size, though that scenario would be in the event ATL AMC does not collaborate with Renault and get involved earlier on in the development of the longitude FWD Renault 12 project (that could form the basis of a C-Segment sized model akin to the Audi 80-derived Volkswagen Gol).

That's about exactly the size I'd want for the AMC (or Stude) GTO/Mustang. Putting a commuter (akin Chevette) on that, too, would be a good way to amortize the cost (at the risk of accusations of turning a Mustang into a Pinto, per OTL); it could also offer an easy (even factory) way to get to a *Chevette GT: underpinnings & engine parts could cross over, which (IMO) would be a good thing.

ATL AMC might be able to have better luck in Australia ITTL based on the previous PODS, on top of their increased presence in South America (particularly in Argentina and Brazil) maybe even South Africa and the Middle East.

Any luck or presence, IMO, could only be good for *AMC, & the Oz industry. Not to mention rodders & customizers, who could, just, import Oz parts & swap 'em into locally-built cars.

It would be a gamble discontinuing IH and Checker in favor of Studebaker ITTL, though cannot see the ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard combine (plus IH and Checker) being able to support 4 marques.

Maybe an earlier branding to something like Navistar could work as a commercial/taxi/etc specific marque to encompass both IH and Checker? OTOH does an ATL Studebaker-Packard really need its own equivalent of a redundant marque that is to Studebaker what Chevrolet is to GMC?

The Navistar approach makes sense. (Adding Checker hadn't occurred to me, & that makes it interesting, & novel.) I was thinking, tho, you really only have three, since Checker is so narrow-focused. (I've never seen a Checker that wasn't a cab.)

You're not wrong IH could be redundant, & I may be taking the same (wrong) view BLMC did on brand loyalty. If you break it out as Stude, Packard, Stude Truck, & IH (heavy truck)/Checker, I'd be fine with it.

 

[oliver123]

Do not get me wrong, am referring to an ATL Metropolitan of approximately the same dimensions as the OTL 1954-1958 Austin Cambridge of the period which shared both the same engines and width as the much shorter OTL Metropolitan.

It would be of roughly similar size as the ATL post-war Willys Americar prior to Willys-Overland/Jeep/etc becoming part of ATL AMC, where both the ATL Metropolitan and ATL Americar would be superseded by a common replacement possibly derived from the ATL 3rd Rambler American platform yet with the rough dimensions of the 2nd gen Rambler American such as the 100-inch wheelbase and length of about 167-173-inches albeit with a slight reduction in width from 70.8-inches to ranging from 65-inches (as on the GM H Platform) to 67-inches (as on the mk3-mk5 Ford Cortina) if not 69-inches at most (as on the Ford Pinto or Chevrolet Opala).

It would be from that ATL basis where a C-Segment type sub-Americar model could be developed from in time for the 1970s akin to the Chevrolet Chevette and Plymouth Cricket in terms of size, though that scenario would be in the event ATL AMC does not collaborate with Renault and get involved earlier on in the development of the longitude FWD Renault 12 project (that could form the basis of a C-Segment sized model akin to the Audi 80-derived Volkswagen Gol).

Can't see the reason why ATL Metropolitan could exists.
Austin Cambridge had similar size to the original Rambler.
Since AMC already has Rambler, why they want to import Metropolitan from the other side of the Atlantic Ocean?

 

[Masked Grizzly]

You make a good case.

I do like the Peugeot connection, too. I'm thinking of the Volvo 780; TTL, it might have Packard power, or be badge-engineered--or be a Packard, for all that: any of those would be good, IMO. Having S-P (P-S?) adopting Volvo quality & safety measures would be good, too.

Peugeot at the time were also renowned for building reliable and hardy cars clothed in Pininfarina styling, butterflying Peugeot being forced by the French government to buy both Citroen and Chrysler Europe IOTL during the 1970s would have also helped.

Volvo IOTL were said to have been planning a Redblock based family of inline-6 and V8 as well as 4/6-cylinder diesel engines, though the company could not afford it and had to buy into the PRV V6 and VW-sourced diesels. Would be great if the Volvo was in a position to develop the rest of the Redblock derived engine family ITTL in collaboration with ATL Studebaker-Packard as a possible candidate to gradually replace Studebaker's, Packard's and possibly even IH's engine families yet each of those three company's engines would possess some serious production longevity to last up to the 1990s and beyond (given their ATL templates as well as IH's own engines latent potential longevity).

A case could be made for a joint-venture between Volvo and ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard on both transitioning to FWD via alternate versions of the Volvo 400 Series as well as the Volvo P80 platforms, with Packard largely remaining RWD. Just wonder how Volvo would be affected if they missed on acquiring DAF Cars ITTL.

I was thinking of either or both going the alt-GTO/Mustang route on their own, rather than relying on a common platform. (The timing looks wrong for that.) If they do share the platform at the time...that could make an alt-GTO/Mustang very interesting, indeed. Candidly, I'd rather they didn't.

The common platforms would likely diverge to suit each of the two companies requirements even before the dissolution of their decade or so alliance / partnership, it ultimately depends on the relationship both ATL AMC and ATL Studebaker-Packard have with each other.

It can also be a similar situation to what happened between the Opel Kadett A and Vauxhall Viva HA IOTL. Where though both cars were a result of the same GM project and share the same floorpan, engine constructions (one main difference being the use of metric measurements for the Opel and imperial ones for the Vauxhall) and are also visually similar, at the same time few components are interchangeable and the cars are thus not "sister models" or versions of one another.

That's about exactly the size I'd want for the AMC (or Stude) GTO/Mustang. Putting a commuter (akin Chevette) on that, too, would be a good way to amortize the cost (at the risk of accusations of turning a Mustang into a Pinto, per OTL); it could also offer an easy (even factory) way to get to a *Chevette GT: underpinnings & engine parts could cross over, which (IMO) would be a good thing.

Essentially am thinking of something like an early GM U-Car (aka Opel Ascona B) that also forms the basis for an AMC equivalent of the GM T-Car, the latter was sold in South America up to the mid-1990s IOTL (particularly in Brazil).

Any luck or presence, IMO, could only be good for *AMC, & the Oz industry. Not to mention rodders & customizers, who could, just, import Oz parts & swap 'em into locally-built cars.

Indeed and they would be in a better position to downsize in places like Australia over the course of the 1970s-1980s compared to the local US Big Three.

The Navistar approach makes sense. (Adding Checker hadn't occurred to me, & that makes it interesting, & novel.) I was thinking, tho, you really only have three, since Checker is so narrow-focused. (I've never seen a Checker that wasn't a cab.)

You're not wrong IH could be redundant, & I may be taking the same (wrong) view BLMC did on brand loyalty. If you break it out as Stude, Packard, Stude Truck, & IH (heavy truck)/Checker, I'd be fine with it.

Checker did build some non-taxi models AFAIK, though not from North America one gets the impression that brand loyalty gradually became less of a factor over the course of the 1970s-1990s onwards (as platforms and engines were rationalised down particularly in GM's case) OTOH there seem to be little issue when AMC superseded its constituent marques IOTL during the 1950s.

 

[phx1138]

Peugeot at the time were also renowned for building reliable and hardy cars clothed in Pininfarina styling, butterflying Peugeot being forced by the French government to buy both Citroen and Chrysler Europe IOTL during the 1970s would have also helped.

That works for me. It does put Mopar Europe in play for somebody else, which has fair size butterflies itself. I'm thinking they end up SIMCA, but...

Volvo IOTL were said to have been planning a Redblock based family of inline-6 and V8 as well as 4/6-cylinder diesel engines, though the company could not afford it and had to buy into the PRV V6 and VW-sourced diesels. Would be great if the Volvo was in a position to develop the rest of the Redblock derived engine family ITTL in collaboration with ATL Studebaker-Packard as a possible candidate to gradually replace Studebaker's, Packard's and possibly even IH's engine families yet each of those three company's engines would possess some serious production longevity to last up to the 1990s and beyond (given their ATL templates as well as IH's own engines latent potential longevity).

A case could be made for a joint-venture between Volvo and ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard on both transitioning to FWD via alternate versions of the Volvo 400 Series as well as the Volvo P80 platforms, with Packard largely remaining RWD. Just wonder how Volvo would be affected if they missed on acquiring DAF Cars ITTL.

I could believe S-P badge-engineering FWD Volvos (captive imports, first, I think). What happens to DAF (with or without Volvo), I could only guess. TTL, it might end up with Bedford.

The common platforms would likely diverge to suit each of the two companies requirements even before the dissolution of their decade or so alliance / partnership, it ultimately depends on the relationship both ATL AMC and ATL Studebaker-Packard have with each other.

I'm less interested in before/after separation than the timing relative to both OTL & to the Big Three: is it AMC, Stude, AMC & Stude, GM, or somebody else who gets to the alt-GTO first? To the alt-'stang first? If AMC & Stude share a platform when they introduce their (badge-engineered) *GTOs, they're going to diverge afterward anyhow, separation or no.

The "plainjane" models, for me, are less impactful, tho they are the profit-makers...

As noted, if I could get either S-P or alt-AMC to the Goat in '56 or '57, sized like the American, or Cambridge (wider, for the U.S.), or the Willys Aero, I'd do it in a second, & worry about joint platforms later.

It can also be a similar situation to what happened between the Opel Kadett A and Vauxhall Viva HA IOTL. Where though both cars were a result of the same GM project and share the same floorpan, engine constructions (one main difference being the use of metric measurements for the Opel and imperial ones for the Vauxhall) and are also visually similar, at the same time few components are interchangeable and the cars are thus not "sister models" or versions of one another.

Essentially am thinking of something like an early GM U-Car (aka Opel Ascona B) that also forms the basis for an AMC equivalent of the GM T-Car, the latter was sold in South America up to the mid-1990s IOTL (particularly in Brazil).

I'm seeing the differences being bigger, but that depends on when we're talking about, given a common starting point.

Indeed and they would be in a better position to downsize in places like Australia over the course of the 1970s-1980s compared to the local US Big Three.

Also downsizing at the right time. I find myself imaging (or perhaps wishing for) the Oz BMC P76 coming about 10yr sooner than OTL, & their version of the Allegro/Marina (by whatever name) in the mid-'70s, essentially reversing their OTL order. If *AMC &/or S-P working in Oz helps that, all the better. *AMC or S-P effectively replacing them...

Checker did build some non-taxi models AFAIK, though not from North America one gets the impression that brand loyalty gradually became less of a factor over the course of the 1970s-1990s onwards (as platforms and engines were rationalised down particularly in GM's case) OTOH there seem to be little issue when AMC superseded its constituent marques IOTL during the 1950s.

Yeah, I've seen occasional references to "civilian" Checkers, but AFAIK, the numbers are dismissably (is that a word? ) small. (I'd happily buy a used one to do a custom job on, but I doubt very many'd buy new ones.)

You make a good point on brand loyalty. The Big Three seemed to make a Thing of it, & I know there are people who wouldn't imagine driving anything but a Chevy or Ford, but how general that strict adherence is, IDK; it may be a lot less than I think. That being so, the only way to know is to find a company that tried it & see how much difference it made; can you say (or guess) with any confidence how many AMC Rambler buyers had never bought a Rambler, how many a Nash only, so forth? (Don't go digging hard into it if you can't pretty well offhand; it's just a notion. ) I'd happily live with rebranding/dropping IH (light) trucks; I guess I'm just looking for a good enough excuse for the TTL execs to use (or me to say they'd use ).

 

[Masked Grizzly]

That works for me. It does put Mopar Europe in play for somebody else, which has fair size butterflies itself. I'm thinking they end up SIMCA, but...

Quite like the idea of France's 3 notable carmakers (sans CItroen) in Renault, Peugeot and Simca having successful ties with ATL AMC, Studebaker-Packard and Chrysler respectively ITTL (as opposed to what unfolded IOTL).

I could believe S-P badge-engineering FWD Volvos (captive imports, first, I think). What happens to DAF (with or without Volvo), I could only guess. TTL, it might end up with Bedford.

For Volvo to be a viable alternative to Peugeot as a partner to ATL Studebaker-Packard. They really needed to be in a position to develop a smaller model below the Amazon to replace the PV444 and a more compact sub-Volvo B18 engine to replace the wartime Volvo B4B engine (in place of the Renault engines via DAF). Something like the 1955 Volvo Wood Rocket proposal below (in place of the PV544), which would butterfly away the need for Volvo to rebadge the 1972 DAF 66 into 1975 Volvo 66 though have no idea how to further improve Volvo's post-war prospects ITTL.

WOOD ROCKET In 1955, plans were firm to introduce the Amazon as a larger, more costly Volvo than the PV444. At that time, it wasn't clear whether the smaller PV444 would be continued in parallel with the Amazon, or dropped. If it were phased out, there might be room for a still smaller car in the Volvo lineup. With that in mind, this prototype was designed.
This 1955 study existed only as a scale model made of wood, and for that reason was known as the "Wood Rocket." It showed an attractive, small, two-door car with generous glass area, thin pillars and a mesh grille with a prominent vee emblem. With its high fender peak line and airy greenhouse, it had much of the look of the BMW 1600 of a decade later. But the Wood Rocket was destined never to launch.

I'm less interested in before/after separation than the timing relative to both OTL & to the Big Three: is it AMC, Stude, AMC & Stude, GM, or somebody else who gets to the alt-GTO first? To the alt-'stang first? If AMC & Stude share a platform when they introduce their (badge-engineered) *GTOs, they're going to diverge afterward anyhow, separation or no.

The "plainjane" models, for me, are less impactful, tho they are the profit-makers...

As noted, if I could get either S-P or alt-AMC to the Goat in '56 or '57, sized like the American, or Cambridge (wider, for the U.S.), or the Willys Aero, I'd do it in a second, & worry about joint platforms later.

I'm seeing the differences being bigger, but that depends on when we're talking about, given a common starting point.

Envision the time period for the alliance / partnership between ATL AMC and ATL Studebaker-Packard lasting about 8-10 years or so before it dissolves in approximately the mid-1960s.

It is hard to say which out of ATL AMC or ATL Studebaker-Packard would produce their own equivalents of the GTO/Mustang first ITTL, since both the OTL Studebaker Avanti and AMC-derived Budd XR-400 both appeared in 1962.

No clue on mid-50s analogues short of maybe an AMC branded continuation of the Nash-Healey or a US-built derivative under another name with V8 power up to 1957, similar to how the Austin-Healey Sprite was renamed the Austin Sprite in 1971 (when BL IOTL severed the Healey connection) followed by an all-new replacement from 1958.

Also downsizing at the right time. I find myself imaging (or perhaps wishing for) the Oz BMC P76 coming about 10yr sooner than OTL, & their version of the Allegro/Marina (by whatever name) in the mid-'70s, essentially reversing their OTL order. If *AMC &/or S-P working in Oz helps that, all the better. *AMC or S-P effectively replacing them...

ATL AMC for the Australian markets would need to develop and sell analogues of the Holden Torana (e.g. Americar) and Chrysler Valiant (e.g. Rambler American) ITTL amongst other models.

Yeah, I've seen occasional references to "civilian" Checkers, but AFAIK, the numbers are dismissably (is that a word? ) small. (I'd happily buy a used one to do a custom job on, but I doubt very many'd buy new ones.)

You make a good point on brand loyalty. The Big Three seemed to make a Thing of it, & I know there are people who wouldn't imagine driving anything but a Chevy or Ford, but how general that strict adherence is, IDK; it may be a lot less than I think. That being so, the only way to know is to find a company that tried it & see how much difference it made; can you say (or guess) with any confidence how many AMC Rambler buyers had never bought a Rambler, how many a Nash only, so forth? (Don't go digging hard into it if you can't pretty well offhand; it's just a notion. ) I'd happily live with rebranding/dropping IH (light) trucks; I guess I'm just looking for a good enough excuse for the TTL execs to use (or me to say they'd use ).

OTL AMC set a precedent for brand loyalty to be less of an issue at the time, allowing ATL Studebaker-Packard to simply integrate both IH and Checker into Studebaker.

 

[phx1138]

Quite like the idea of France's 3 notable carmakers (sans CItroen) in Renault, Peugeot and Simca having successful ties with ATL AMC, Studebaker-Packard and Chrysler respectively ITTL (as opposed to what unfolded IOTL).

IIRC, SIMCA did get Mopar Europe OTL, so not a big change.

For Volvo to be a viable alternative to Peugeot

No, I meant "and" less than "instead of", per your suggestion. If that means badge-engineered Peugeots as Studes (TBH, I can't think of a Peugeot that would sell really well over here ), or a lot of Peugeot tech underneath, so be it.

They really needed to be in a position to develop a smaller model below the Amazon to replace the PV444 and a more compact sub-Volvo B18 engine to replace the wartime Volvo B4B engine (in place of the Renault engines via DAF). Something like the 1955 Volvo Wood Rocket proposal below (in place of the PV544), which would butterfly away the need for Volvo to rebadge the 1972 DAF 66 into 1975 Volvo 66 though have no idea how to further improve Volvo's post-war prospects ITTL.

That could work, given no DAF & Volvo tie.

As for improving Volvo's chances, I tend to think the timing matters, here. If S-P buys a piece, if not all, in the late '50s or early '60s (maybe later, but IMO this is the ideal time), it means both get the benefit of a strong partner with better access to a less-tapped (or untapped) market. In the '70s, I'm seeing the Oil Shock & financial trouble for both sides making mergers harder (if more necessary); maybe it takes that increased pressure to move them. That also puts Peugeot, & Paris, in play, based on when the forced buyout happens (or when it needs to be prevented TTL).

View attachment 641678

I could easily see that on U.S. roads as a Stude, & maybe as the entry-level Packard. And if it has space for the Stude V8, I'd happily badge that as S-P's proto-GTO, too. (Obviously, it would need new grille and other bits to distinguish one from another... )

Envision the time period for the alliance / partnership between ATL AMC and ATL Studebaker-Packard lasting about 8-10 years or so before it dissolves in approximately the mid-1960s.

I was thinking '57 or '58 was when I'd want that alt-GTO, but as I think of it, now, OTL was 7yr later...& the Rebel Machine over 10. (Serves me right for not checking my dates, first. ) If the alliance saves both companies, it might matter a lot less that there was sharing.

In any event, IMO, getting there first would be a good idea, so with a '55-6 model based on the Wood Rocket, or a '57-8 on the Rambler, or a '62-3, based on something new (in-TL), I'm not going to complain. (I tend to like earlier; the demographics to drive creation of a GTO or 'stang might take time to be clear, so '55 or '58, even, might be asking too much--provided you don't have S-P management taking a cue from Hollywood & it's "hot rod hooligan" films of the era, or from the creation of the NHRA. That could happen; it would take a bit of explaining.)

It is hard to say which out of ATL AMC or ATL Studebaker-Packard would produce their own equivalents of the GTO/Mustang first ITTL, since both the OTL Studebaker Avanti and AMC-derived Budd XR-400 both appeared in 1962.

Could be it can't be done any sooner, as noted, & I was asking too much.

No clue on mid-50s analogues short of maybe an AMC branded continuation of the Nash-Healey or a US-built derivative under another name with V8 power up to 1957, similar to how the Austin-Healey Sprite was renamed the Austin Sprite in 1971 (when BL IOTL severed the Healey connection) followed by an all-new replacement from 1958.

AFAIK, the only analog in the '50s is the 300 letter cars, which were much less muscle cars (as we'd now understand them) than "banker's hot rods" or American GTs: comparatively high performance, but also heavy and costly, rather than the "smaller car, bigger engine" approach of the Goat.

ATL AMC for the Australian markets would need to develop and sell analogues of the Holden Torana (e.g. Americar) and Chrysler Valiant (e.g. Rambler American) ITTL amongst other models.

Agreed. I was thinking the size range of the P76 & Allegro, & TTL's AMC would seem to be pretty well-fitted to have something for both. More than that, tho, it would seem to have cars generally better suited for Oz roads than British models, so it could steal some sales there. The only questions left are when, & can alt-AMC afford it? (Which may be more/less the same question.)

 

[Masked Grizzly]

IIRC, SIMCA did get Mopar Europe OTL, so not a big change.

Not relevant to the thread though have been looking into ways Chrysler as a whole could have avoided most of its problems in some ATL, OTL Simca itself was actually an asset just that it along with the rest suffered as a result of issues from Chrysler HQ itself (though the issues at Rootes did not help matters with both it and Chrysler being better off not being associated with each other).

No, I meant "and" less than "instead of", per your suggestion. If that means badge-engineered Peugeots as Studes (TBH, I can't think of a Peugeot that would sell really well over here ), or a lot of Peugeot tech underneath, so be it.

The RWD Peugeots of the late-1960s to 1980s were pretty good mechanically, not to mention there was Peugeot's version of the stillborn Project H flagship saloon.

That could work, given no DAF & Volvo tie.

As for improving Volvo's chances, I tend to think the timing matters, here. If S-P buys a piece, if not all, in the late '50s or early '60s (maybe later, but IMO this is the ideal time), it means both get the benefit of a strong partner with better access to a less-tapped (or untapped) market. In the '70s, I'm seeing the Oil Shock & financial trouble for both sides making mergers harder (if more necessary); maybe it takes that increased pressure to move them. That also puts Peugeot, & Paris, in play, based on when the forced buyout happens (or when it needs to be prevented TTL).

Was referring to a Volvo wank independent of ATL Studebaker-Packard at both the lower end (with the Wood Rocket) and higher ends though that is beyond my knowledge.

I could easily see that on U.S. roads as a Stude, & maybe as the entry-level Packard. And if it has space for the Stude V8, I'd happily badge that as S-P's proto-GTO, too. (Obviously, it would need new grille and other bits to distinguish one from another... )

Based on the image of the Wood Rocket mock-up and its likely placement below the Amazon, appears to be more of a C-Segment / Subcompact Car in the manner of the Vauxhall Viva HB/HC in terms of size. Doubt a V8 was possible since there were a few attempts to install Volvo's own V8 into an Amazon which entailed much widening and modification (and led to Volvo developing its B18-derived B30 inline-6 for the 164). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_B36_engine

AFAIK, the only analog in the '50s is the 300 letter cars, which were much less muscle cars (as we'd now understand them) than "banker's hot rods" or American GTs: comparatively high performance, but also heavy and costly, rather than the "smaller car, bigger engine" approach of the Goat.

Had ATL AMC made better decisions ITTL it should be possible for some form of Nash-Healey under another V8 and equipped with a V8 to survive for another 2 years, the trickier question then becomes what could replace it from 1958 apart from some Rambler V8-derived successor that itself is replaced by some earlier Rambler American III-based equivalent of the Budd XR-400 from 1962.

Agreed. I was thinking the size range of the P76 & Allegro, & TTL's AMC would seem to be pretty well-fitted to have something for both. More than that, tho, it would seem to have cars generally better suited for Oz roads than British models, so it could steal some sales there. The only questions left are when, & can alt-AMC afford it? (Which may be more/less the same question.)

It would depend on ATL AMC avoiding its earlier OTL mistakes ITTL, it is possible they could buy Australia Motors Industries and have them build as opposed to assemble cars in the country. The fact that many of ATL AMC's cars would utilize a common platform derived from the ATL Rambler American should allow the company to easily rationalise selling most of its range in the country.

 

[phx1138]

The RWD Peugeots of the late-1960s to 1980s were pretty good mechanically, not to mention there was Peugeot's version of the stillborn Project H flagship saloon.

Serves me right for not looking before saying something... The Peugeots don't have the peculiar styling I was thinking of in the '60s at all. It wasn't til the '70s you start to get that "eyebrowed" look.

Was referring to a Volvo wank independent of ATL Studebaker-Packard at both the lower end (with the Wood Rocket) and higher ends though that is beyond my knowledge.

What happens to (with) Volvo is pretty much a blank slate for me; I know virtually nothing about the company.

Based on the image of the Wood Rocket mock-up and its likely placement below the Amazon, appears to be more of a C-Segment / Subcompact Car in the manner of the Vauxhall Viva HB/HC in terms of size. Doubt a V8 was possible since there were a few attempts to install Volvo's own V8 into an Amazon which entailed much widening and modification (and led to Volvo developing its B18-derived B30 inline-6 for the 164).

I had that feeling. I do like the styling a lot. If it could be widened, without buggering that, I'd leave the wheelbase alone and get Stude & Volvo to both build it, Stude's with the V8 option (& the alt-GTO package); I have a sense Volvo buyers, & Europeans in general, wouldn't want the V8. (A jointly-developed V6, OTOH...)

Had ATL AMC made better decisions ITTL it should be possible for some form of Nash-Healey under another V8 and equipped with a V8 to survive for another 2 years, the trickier question then becomes what could replace it from 1958 apart from some Rambler V8-derived successor that itself is replaced by some earlier Rambler American III-based equivalent of the Budd XR-400 from 1962.

I'm wondering it in-TL the Healey connection even happens. If it does, that might just be the prod for alt-AMC, & ultimately S-P, to move toward the alt-GTO/Mustang. As I think of it, import of the first MG TCs/TDs & TR-1s is around this time, too, & that could help. Which produces a quite different alt-GTO/Mustang in-TL...& a better one, IMO. As for what the *Nash-Healey comes out like, I wonder if you get something akin the Sunbeam Tiger, if not (quite) the Cobra (& those might be Ford's & Chrysler's answers to a V8 Nash-Healey...). (Can I dream of the 2-seat T-bird surviving as a Merc in-TL? )

When I look at this, I see *AMC & S-P both being constrained by finances, so they can't replace as often, which works for me. I'm thinking of the GM G-body, which didn't get radically restyled &, more importantly, resized. If *AMC uses the American platform & builds everything from a Willys Aero to a '71 'cuda (as their *GTO & *Mustang) on it, I'm thrilled; even moreso if they go from a 250ci (or so) V8 to a 421ci (or so) or 450ci (or so), as the horsepower (& displacement) wars take off, with engines which will swap across, & back (so the '70 421 will still fit the '59 or '60 car without major surgery); more still if it means the bread & butter wagons & sedans (especially the police models) built on this platform can have their axles and brakes pirated. (For S-P, I'd be looking for the Checker brakes, I think--&, just possibly, a Checker police interceptor variant. {Too nutty?})

I don't see AMC needing the resizing, & I'm seeing financial constraint keeping them away from the Detroit groupthink of upward-sizing, which could have beneficial effects on the rest of Detroit, too.

That this would produce some seriously good muscle cars & pony cars?

It would depend on ATL AMC avoiding its earlier OTL mistakes ITTL, it is possible they could buy Australia Motors Industries and have them build as opposed to assemble cars in the country. The fact that many of ATL AMC's cars would utilize a common platform derived from the ATL Rambler American should allow the company to easily rationalise selling most of its range in the country.

That makes sense. My ignorance of the options for the Oz industry leaves me unable to say what options *AMC did (might) have.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I'm wondering it in-TL the Healey connection even happens. If it does, that might just be the prod for alt-AMC, & ultimately S-P, to move toward the alt-GTO/Mustang. As I think of it, import of the first MG TCs/TDs & TR-1s is around this time, too, & that could help. Which produces a quite different alt-GTO/Mustang in-TL...& a better one, IMO. As for what the *Nash-Healey comes out like, I wonder if you get something akin the Sunbeam Tiger, if not (quite) the Cobra (& those might be Ford's & Chrysler's answers to a V8 Nash-Healey...). (Can I dream of the 2-seat T-bird surviving as a Merc in-TL? )

The Healey link with Nash (as with the BMC link with the Metropolitan) preceded the formation of AMC IOTL, what am proposing ITTL is basically keeping it in production for two more years (in line with the OTL Ambassador it is derived from) yet in an updated form equipped with a V8 via another name (under the AMC label) before it is replaced by a new model for 1958.

 

[Simon]

... enters into an alliance with alternate timeline AMC (as opposed to an outright merger that may still be a possibility at a later date in this timeline)...

Funnily enough even though in the past I have been a proponent of a potential AMC and Packard – that had bought Studebaker back in 1933 – merger I was wondering about this the other day, and when I remember this thread you've already posted it. My general concern was that AMC leaned heavily into their 'dinosaur' critique of Detroit's thinking which might be harder to do if the company owned Packard as a subsidiary. An alliance nicely sidesteps that.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

An alliance nicely sidesteps that.

Indeed and it is something Romney himself proposed IOTL It is just a matter of improving both Studebaker and Packard's prospects ITTL prior to their successful ATL merger for such an idea to come into fruition, which has been looked at a few times in this thread.

There is another potential area where AMC and ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard could have collaborated with each other on prior to going their own separate ways a decade or so after their alliance.

Basically inspired by elements of the article below a thriving Studebaker-Packard after switching over to unit-body construction (either on their own pre-merger or during their alliance with AMC) would repurpose their pensioned off body-on-frame Champion/Lark platform into a ATL Champ-based family of Jeep/IH Scout-rivalling compact trucks and SUVs, etc. AMC meanwhile would find new purpose with the remains of the AMC M422 Mighty Mite where the latter provides the 4WD system and any other beneficial componentry (sans engine*) for the ATL Champion family of SUVs to be sold (with different exterior styling) under both the AMC and Studebaker badges (before AMC acquires Jeep and Studebaker-Packard acquires IH respectively) .

Could Studebaker have come out of the 1970s as successful as Jeep? - Indie Auto

Could Studebaker have come out of the 1970s as successful as Jeep? - History Indie Auto

www.indieauto.org

*- It seems the Mighty Mite's V4 was originally instigated by Nash IOTL as a possible economy car engine for a small car project to replace the Metropolitan prior to the formation of AMC (though it could have also been Nash's initial thoughts before they selected Austin during the Metropolitan's development). With that in mind the V4 would appear to fall short against the BMC B-Series engine, the latter even formed the basis of a few 1622-1760cc Perkins diesels (the 1760 is pretty much the same displacement as the racing 1762 B-Series Twin-Cam) - Would read the Morris 1.5-litre engine mentioned in the article below as the 1.5 BMC B-Series.

https://sites.google.com/site/perki...pets/the-story-of-the-4-99-4-107-4-108-engine

 

[Simon]

The major question is what can be traded. The two main systems are engines and transmissions, with bodywork also a possibility. Between them I could see a need for a high specification V8, an automatic transmission, an engine similar to the Chevrolet small-block V8, and possibly a modern I-6.

Packard has to make their own V8, as a prestige marque they simply can't buy in. In our timeline they developed the Ultramatic automatic transmission. AMC developed their own V8 which was adequate, in an ideal world they'd develop a modern I-6 for immediately after the war and then their own equivalent of the small-block in the early 1950s. Would they have the resources though? Also if Studebaker is still around and been positioned upmarket between AMC and Packard in the market – similar to say Buick at GM – could they get away with buying in larger displacement variants of an AMC V8, or would they need to build their own large-block V8?

International Harvester is interesting, IIRC as well as farm equipment and automobiles they also sold their own line of farm and household appliances similar to Nash-Kelvinator. An alliance with AMC could see them continuing to build the specialised farm appliances and sell Kelvinator home ones, either rebadged or as a retailer. Up until the mid-1960s IH was apparently the third largest truck manufacturer, does anyone know how they sold them? If it was just via their own dealerships alongside the farm machinery in mostly rural areas then that gives the possibility of a partnership to sell IH pickup trucks in AMC dealerships in urban areas to expand the potential market. Apologies if I'm covering old ground.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Will look to present what each would have likely had in the cupboard ITTL at the time of the proposal alliance.

AMC had the Unit-Body Construction and potential for their ATL Rambler American and Ambassador platforms to underpin a wide range of cars for many decades (with use by ATL Studebaker-Packard plus Checker helping to atomize costs) as well as the Mighty Mite's 4WD system, ATL Studebaker-Packard would have the ATL Ultramatic transmission as well as the pensioned off yet still flexible Champion/Lark platform capable of being repurposed into family of Compact Trucks and SUVs, whilst both Nash/AMC as well as International Harvester had lingering ties with Austin/BMC to be utilized (if necessary) in terms of subcompact platform (aka Metropolitan - read Austin Cambridge) and engines (B-Series).

Both Willys (pre-AMC takeover ITTL) with a post-war Americar (below the Aero) and Nash/AMC with a properly conceived (e.g. A40 Cambridge-sized) ATL Metropolitan, would have bolstered AMC and allow the company to be in a better position to produce a decent import beater ITTL below the Rambler/Rambler American (both preceding as well as butterflying away the badly conceived OTL Gremlin). Depending on whether the ATL early-60s Americar/Metropolitan successor is derived from a downscaled ATL Rambler American platform or loosely derived from the Austin Cambridge/Farina B, there is further potential for an even smaller Sub-Americar/Metropolitan model (akin to the virtually Farina B-sized and likely not completely clean sheet Datsun Cedric 30/31 that replaced the Nissan built Austin Cambridge and spawned the smaller Datsun Bluebird 310* on top of spawning a few other models including the Fairlady / Sports SP310 and Silvia CSP311).

*- Think of the Datsun Bluebird 310 as template for a sort of 4-door Austin A40 Farina three-box saloon (slightly larger than the Metropolitan) slotting below the Americar/Metropolitan replacement and you have a rough idea of how of how much a sub-Americar/Metropolitan could resemble ITTL (if ATL AMC deemed it desireable).

In terms of V8s. AMC would be as OTL as would International Harvester later on (prior to being acquired by Studebaker-Packard and potentially superseded by the SBC-like Studebaker V8) with Kaiser/Willys-Jeep opting for producing the Kaiser V8 (that post-AMC takeover in 60s is replaced by similar AMC V8), with pre-merger Studebaker and Packard's approximate ATL V8 templates being the SBC and "Big Block" Oldsmobile/Cadillac/Buick respectively (the latter two being complimentary as opposed to overlapping like IOTL).

As far as 6-cylinder engines go. AMC would be as OTL (absent any potentially better alternatives they had pre-formation though with an earlier Straight-4). ATL Studebaker would both enlarge the Champion Six to 3.3-litres and along with the Commander Six convert it to OHV, prior to replacing both with a new inline-6 derived from the SBC-like Studebaker V8 (with Chevrolet Straight-6 as an approximate template with scope later on for 153 4-cylinder and 90-degree V6 analogues - also drawing inspiration from IH's related Comanche Slant-Four / V8 engines).

Depending on if pre-merger Packard retains a presence in the luxury 6-cylinder market, envision their approximate template being the 2nd gen Chevy 6-derived Austin Straight-6 as well as the Armstrong-Siddeley Sapphire 346 6-cylinder yet can see it losing out to the ATL SBC-like Studebaker V8-derived 6-cylinder by virtue of the latter being able to reach smaller displacements.

Had Willys been in a position to produce the pre-war Willys 99 6-cylinder along with the 77/Americar 4-cylinder, their later Go-Devil/Hurricane 4-cylinder and Lightning 6-cylinder engines would feature an earlier OHV conversion akin to the dieselized Mitsubishi 4/6-cylinder versions of the Hurricane. Potentially butterflying away the Continental-derived Super Hurricane and Jeep Tornado engines (that might become a short-lived thing in South America) prior to the ATL OHV Hurricane/Lightning engines being replaced with earlier ATL AMC Straight-4/6 engines (or less likely an AMC V8-based 90-degree V6) upon Jeep being acquired by AMC in the early-60s.

International Harvester also had inline-6 engines however their sixes had limited use IOTL in the Scout due to its size. One possible short-term option prior to being acquired by ATL Studebaker-Packard (and utilizing the SBC-like V8-derived 6-cylinder) in the 60s would be developing an inline-6 from the BMC B-Series 4-cylinder used in the Metro-Mite and Scout.