2008 American Motor Corporation

[SwampTiger]

Remember the Hornet was Hudson's big car. Introduce the car in 1956 to 1959, the name will be a natural progression.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

That may be the case though on the other side of the Atlantic, when one thinks of a Hornet car they are likely thinking of the Mini-based Wolseley Hornet.

The questions that comes to mind now is how would this ATL AMC progress into the late-1980s-1990s beyond, what path should AMC go down and which companies could serve as inspirations / potential templates?

Sure AMC would likely be capable of developing their own platforms in this ATL though it would be a shame to completely butterfly away the OTL Eagle Premier whose platform is the spiritual grandfather of the OTL RWD Chrysler LX platform, which is why would probably have AMC inspired to design a similar RWD platform (a composite of Renault 25 and Renault 21 like in OTL though with elements of the Mercedes-Benz W124) for a slightly smaller V6/V8-engined Packard in the early/mid-1980s.

It also makes one wonder what would have happened to Chrysler in this scenario, minus the OTL acquisition of an ailing AMC / Eagle including Jeep.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Lets say George Mason lived for 2 more years and managed to get Studebaker-Packard as well as Kaiser Jeep to become part of AMC, how would it impact the development of the AMC V8?

 

[SwampTiger]

As I said previously, AMC cannot, under any circumstances, acquire the Studebaker debt and management. This problem is what destroyed Packard. Mason surviving may have helped. Studebaker was negotiating in bad faith, hiding its red ink and labor issues.
AMC wants the manufacturing facilities, possibly the Hawk line, and nothing else. The styling department was Raymond Loewyand Associates.

Chrysler needs a bailout/buyout in this scenario, or it dies. Probably gets a bailout, which kicks the can down the road for a few years.

AMC should step away from Austin/BMC in the 60's. Peugeot, Citroen and Fiat have good technology and engineering. BMW and Porsche were promising firms during the 60's and 70's. VW managed the transition from the Beetle based technology. Finally, Honda was a real force for such humble beginnings.

I love the Eagle/Renault Premier derived AMC/Chrysler products. If Chrysler falls in the mid-80's, this ATL may see AMC again working with Renault. Alternately, the company may come to a similar design on its own.

In regard to the Hornet name, I still think the name works for a mid-sized sedan/coupe/station wagon in the US. Use another name in Europe and other markets. AMC will want a full-size vehicle below Packard to compete with Ford/Chevrolet/Plymouth. This is where the Ambassador nameplate will go for the 50's and 60's. A new name for both class vehicles would appear by the 70's or 80's. You need continuity of some sort to keep the Nash and Hudson customers through the transition.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

So the only way would be if Studebaker-Packard happened in the 1930s or Packard not merging with Studebaker prior to becoming part of AMC (with the latter later acquiring the remains of Studebaker)?

It is probably the case the ATL Chrysler 300 becomes more reliant on Mercedes-Benz E-Class mechanicals compared to OTL, perhaps Chrysler even works closely with Mitsubishi and even Hyundai via a Chrysler version of the Mitsubishi Proudia / Dignity and 1st generation Hyundai Equus.

Chrysler themselves could have probably made better decisions beforehand, which is a story for another time.

In terms of FWD, Peugeot's best years were from the Peugeot 205 up until the late-1990s onwards with the lackluster Peugeot 206, Peugeot 307 and Peugeot 407. Fiat/Citroen are good for collaboration / inspiration, with Porsche open to helping other carmakers which would be very useful for Packard. On the other hand it would not be a good idea to collaborate with BMW given what they did to Rover in OTL. Not sure about the rest of Honda, though the 90-degree Honda C V6 engine would have made a great V8 had they been willing and would probably be in this ATL AMC's interest to draw inspiration from the Honda engine to develop a replacement for the Maserati derived/inspired V8.

Will have to agree to disagree regarding the Hornet name, and have the ATL Matador carry over the Rebel name.

 

[SwampTiger]

So the only way would be if Studebaker-Packard happened in the 1930s or Packard not merging with Studebaker prior to becoming part of AMC (with the latter later acquiring the remains of Studebaker)?

Yes. If you can grab the best parts during the fire sale, Studebaker has some value. The corporation and stock were an expensive loss.

I'm not sure Chrysler survives the 90's, even with access to Mitsubishi products. Maybe a buyout by another firm in the 80's, if the US government allows it. Maybe AMC buys parts of Chrysler.

Peugeot swallowed up Citroen, and managed to survive their financial crisis in the 80's. I'm looking at survivors who managed to continue building interesting cars.

Honda was able to parlay a small bicycle shop after WW2 into a world-wide automotive powerhouse. Their marketing and sales brought them recognition in a crowded market. Plus, I still miss my 1985 CRX Si.

I'm not wedded to the names. I only wish to note the historical background of the names in the market. I never was a fan of the Rebel or Matador names.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

...
I'm not sure Chrysler survives the 90's, even with access to Mitsubishi products. Maybe a buyout by another firm in the 80's, if the US government allows it. Maybe AMC buys parts of Chrysler. ...

So my 1994 Dodge truck would be about the last of the Ram truck line? I'd have taken better care of it. Drive train is still trouble free at 303,480 miles.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

How would the AMC V8's developed be affected with the inclusion of Kaiser-Jeep and Packard?

Guess an early-1990s merger with Fiat would have provided some interesting possibilities for Chrysler including the Alfa Romeo V6 as well as a inline-6 petrol / turbodiesel version of the Fiat Pratola Serra modular engines.

Envision the following ATL scenario regarding Chrysler, Peugeot and Citroen.

Amongst other things Chrysler could have developed a Slant-4 that along with further potential developments of the Slant-6 opens up some interesting possibilities including a smaller related V8 cast in aluminum (basically a Chrysler analogue of the 215 Buick V8), avoid buying the black hole that is Rootes in favor of possibly acquiring Borgward and instead establishing an additional factory in the UK to produce cars under a largely Simca-dominated Chrysler Europe. Basically some actions on Chrysler's part as well as this ATL Chrysler Europe being a valued asset ends up ultimately saving Chrysler along with benefiting Peugeot.

Citroen manages to survive due to bringing the Citroen C60 prototype into production and not getting involved with the Wankel engine, leaving them tied though not fully acquired by Fiat. Some maneuvering means Lancia goes to Citroen and Maserati goes to Fiat during the mid/late-1960s, which means the OTL FWD Maserati Quattroporte II becomes an early ATL FWD Lancia Flaminia II (powered by the Fiat 130 V6 and Maserati V8) while the OTL RWD Fiat 130 forms the basis of the ATL RWD Maserati Quattroporte II (powered by the Maserati V6/V8).

As a result of Peugeot not being burdened with acquiring both Citroen and Chrysler Europe, their ambitions and product plan are not negatively impacted causing them to cancel or delay various projects as was the the case in OTL (many of which are unknown).

One consequence the ATL Peugeot 305 is essentially a production version of Project J18 featuring an all-new platform, 5-speed gearbox and 1600cc engine (possibly the OTL PSA XU that would appear in the mid-1970s instead of the early-1980s). Another is Peugeot does not drop out of a joint-venture project with Fiat to develop the Fiat FIRE engines as a result of financial difficulties at the beginning of the 1980s, which either butterflies away the PSA TU engine (meaning an ATL Peugeot could include a 1565-1585cc FIRE variant) or only partially butterflies away the lower-end TU engines in favor of the 769-1242cc FIRE.

 

[SwampTiger]

How would the AMC V8's developed be affected with the inclusion of Kaiser-Jeep and Packard?

Depending on the date of the mergers, you have a surfeit of good engineers to work on the V8 designs. Nash and Hudson used Packard 320 cubic inch in 1955/56. Packard was slow to the table with a first generation V8. AMC engineers could help find ways to improve the Ultramatic, including cutting costs. Kaiser/Fraser engineers could help design the second general V8's, sixes and fours. Note,the Wankel engine also led AMC down a rabbit hole. Kaiser and Willys brought Jeep and additional engineers and stylists. The only problem I see would be too many strong leaders. The group would need a strong, steady political leader at the helm. Unfortunately, George Mason died at the wrong time. I agree with Citroen going to Fiat. I really don't care what happens to Chrysler in this TL.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Would be interesting having a production version of the 288 Kaiser V8 to be retroactively considered an AMC V8 given their relation meaning the V8 "technically" appears in the early-1950s instead of the mid-1950s, also like to see smaller displacements version of the AMC V8 below 250 cubic inches (possibly around 221-244 cubic inches) or even a 160-248+ hp 3956cc+ Tornado-based V8 derived from the 80-124+ hp 1978cc+ Tornado 4-cylinder.

Though Chrysler is not of your interest. What is fascinating in this TL or more specifically (Simca-dominated) Chrysler Europe is how the OTL 180 engine was said to have been derived/inspired by the BMW M10 engine, which opens up the possibly of M10-derived/inspired inline-6s (displacing around 2458-3232cc) akin to the BMW M20/M30 (or even a 90-degree V6) as well as a related M10 V8 (or even related M20/M30 V12).

How much longer would you have George Mason live for in this ATL (would 2 years be enough?) and who would be a suitable successor assuming there were better candidates available than George Romney?

 

[SwampTiger]

Well, I understand Mason died of complications from Pancreatitis and Pneumonia at 63 years of age. He could have lived anywhere from 2-10 years more with better medical care and a reduced fat diet. Avoid Nance of Packard or Romney in the short term. Kaiser had too much on his plate. This leaves A.E.Barit of Hudson. As with the others, he brings some baggage to the table, but is a competent administrator.

Why did Kaiser-Fraser abandon the design, money, design problems or both? Amc hired several of the engineers. Chevy hired some.

Yes, the Chrysler four was a good engine. This is an ATL. Have AMC work with BMW.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

The problem with Abraham Barit succeeding George Mason from 1956-1964 is his belief Hudson and other marques should not have been rationalized and discontinued in favor of the AMC brand, when retaining separate marques (with the exception of Packard and Jeep) would be untenable on the grounds of cost (whether in pursuing badge engineering or separate development projects with little to no commonality in terms of mechanicals). If he later reconsiders his views later on then fair enough, that just leaves the question of who succeeds Barit.

Apparently Kaiser-Frazer had the choice to either produce the Henry J or the 288 Kaiser-Frazer V8 yet not both (though the latter would have allowed Kaiser-Frazer to later come back to the small car project), the last prototype version designed was a 1953 327 Kaiser-Frazer V8 that was later taken to AMC by Ralph Isbrandt and David Potter. Links and more on Kaiser-Frazer below.

- https://macsmotorcitygarage.com/a-v8-that-never-was-the-kaiser-frazer-288/
- http://www.kaiserbill.com/Flyers/1.pdf
- http://www.kaiserbill.com/Flyers/3.pdf (would love to have seen Darrin's proposal for what became the Henry J)
- http://www.kaiserbill.com/Flyers/4.pdf

BMW would probably asset strip AMC down to the bone at the first opportunity like they did with Rover in OTL, merely pointing out that Chrysler could have placed itself in a much better position on both sides of the Atlantic (and possibly even the Pacific via Chrysler Australia).

 

[SwampTiger]

Yes, Barit was enamored with Hudson. AMC may have had to deal with three marques for a few years - AMC, Packard and Hudson. Slot Hudson into the Buick/Mercury/Dodge range as an upmarket AMC, downmarket Packard. Use the same engines for all lines within reason. The small Packard engine for Hudson, the AMC/Fraser V8 for AMC. The Tornado six for the entry level Hudsons and the AMC line. Tornado or CIBA derived fours for the AMC small cars. If Hudson succeeds, you keep it. Otherwise, place an AMC in this slot. Barit is a placeholder for Romney or someone else down the line.

Kaiser did not have the resources, time or knowledge to run a car company. Nance screwed up the Studebaker purchase. Romney wanted nothing to do with Packard or large cars. Pick your poison.

AMC struggled whenever the public passion returned to larger cars. The American market lusted for larger cars. AMC cannot ignore the large car market unless it finds a way to derive sufficient profit without them. However, squeezing profit from small cars in a buyers market, 1953 and 1957 for instance, was hard. AMC found ways to do so, eventually. It is a mistake to rely too heavily on the small car market. The larger Ramblers were built because of the need to diversify the product line. It provides your customers a ladder up from the smaller Ramblers. A you college graduate wants to move up from his Rambler American to a luxury car by middle age. If not Hudson and/or Packard, then Buick/Cadillac.

I have yet to see any evidence the Fraser V8 made any more than a cursory influence on the AMC or the Chevy smallblock V8's. Do you have any other source on the issue? Kaiser Bill appears to be an ardent fan of the engine.

BMW, like several other firms, was always seeking an advantage. Work with them, but don't get too close.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Would probably have an ATL George Mason live another decade prior to being succeeded in the mid-1960s by Roy Chapin Jr (who despite his Hudson background via his co-founder father did not appear to share Abraham Barit's stance against marque rationalization), the latter taking charge of AMC around 3 years earlier compared to OTL.

Beyond David Potter's involvement with both the Kaiser-Frazer and AMC V8s, no. Kaiser Bill may be enthusiastic about the V8 though do not blame him given what happened to Kaiser-Frazer as a result of the compromised Henry J. Perhaps ATL Kaiser-Frazer produces the V8 and upon becoming part of AMC in the mid-1950s, certain aspects of the stillborn Henry J (including styling by Darrin and hatchback variants) are potentially carried over to a few AMC models.

Would prefer Porsche over BMW particularly from the 1970s onwards as the former was small enough to not potentially threaten AMC yet was fairly competent when used by carmakers in a consultancy role kind of like Ricardo.

 

[SwampTiger]

Agree with the above. Porsche was quite capable and willing to advise or provide design assistance.

If Mason can go six or seven years, you may have chance. Roy Chapin Jr. needs to be further up the ladder before he can take the reins. Romney was too conservative in his plans for the company. Roy Abernathy went too quickly into competing with the Big 'low cost" Three. The Ambassador should not have grown so big, the Marlin...the Tarpon was a better choice at the time, and he emptied the piggy bank. Romney should have put a Hudson equivalent where the Ambassador became, left the big AMC/Rambler the size of the Rebel, then have the Hornet/Rambler/Tarpon as the compact/sporty car. Build our previously discussed sub-compact below Hornet. Packard leads the lineup. Use as parts interchangeability as much as reasonable. This how I envision Mason's future path.

AMC had the mid-60's 287 and later 290/304 for a small V8. A smaller V8 needs the power available from OHC or supercharging in the American market. Is it cost effective over a V6 or the Tornado series? The generation after the 304/360/401 should see the arrival of a more advanced V8, preferably based on prior fours and sixes arising in European markets, to compete in a new, fuel efficient, reduced pollution production environment. The Tornado remains in the Jeep for now.

 

[fscott]

Would probably have an ATL George Mason live another decade prior to being succeeded in the mid-1960s by Roy Chapin Jr (who despite his Hudson background via his co-founder father did not appear to share Abraham Barit's stance against marque rationalization), the latter taking charge of AMC around 3 years earlier compared to OTL.


Beyond David Potter's involvement with both the Kaiser-Frazer and AMC V8s, no. Kaiser Bill may be enthusiastic about the V8 though do not blame him given what happened to Kaiser-Frazer as a result of the compromised Henry J. Perhaps ATL Kaiser-Frazer produces the V8 and upon becoming part of AMC in the mid-1950s, certain aspects of the stillborn Henry J (including styling by Darrin and hatchback variants) are potentially carried over to a few AMC models.

Would prefer Porsche over BMW particularly from the 1970s onwards as the former was small enough to not potentially threaten AMC yet was fairly competent when used by carmakers in a consultancy role kind of like Ricardo.

The one smartest move that AMC could make would be when Ford fired Lee Iacocca they hired him.

 

[SwampTiger]

Lee Iacocca was fired by Henry Ford II in July 1978. AMC may have an opportunity at that time. The issue discussed in the previous couple of posts is during the period 1955-1965. Iacocca was pushing the brand new Mustang in 1965. He was Ford's Golden Boy. AMC had no chance to get him in the 60's or much of the 70's.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Trying to figure out how to differentiate the AMC equivalent of the Viva HA/HB and an early/mid-1960s ATL 2nd gen Rambler American (aka OTL 3rd gen Rambler Armerican) based AMC Gremlin.

Obviously the latter is much bigger and features larger engines compared to the former, yet the former would be capable of spawning 4-door and potentially even hatchback variants, whereas the latter would only be able to feature 2/3-doors and styling aside is basically exposed as a cut-down Rambler American.

One idea would be for the ATL Rambler American "Gremlin" to actually be an early/mid-1960s 3-door AMC Spirit liftback coupe with Avanti-esque styling (particularly at the front) and 100/124-248 hp 1978-3950cc AMC Straight-4/6 (aka Tornado) engines.

Interesting this particular model would probably be significantly lighter than the OTL AMC Gremlin and AMC Spirit by around 200-250+kg with the OTL 3rd Gen Rambler American apparently being 214kg lighter than the later AMC Hornet.

Another would be an upscaled version of AMC's Vauxhall Viva HA/HB equivalents that are of similar size to the mk1/mk2 Ford Cortina yet powered by upscaled CIBA-derived 1600-1800/2000cc engines with possible Ford Capri-like 4-cylinder only Coupe variant (despite the latter actually being largely derived from the Ford Corsair).

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Not really a fan of the rear hoods on the Tarpon and Marlin since it looks like both are longing to become liftbacks.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

AMC had the mid-60's 287 and later 290/304 for a small V8. A smaller V8 needs the power available from OHC or supercharging in the American market. Is it cost effective over a V6 or the Tornado series? The generation after the 304/360/401 should see the arrival of a more advanced V8, preferably based on prior fours and sixes arising in European markets, to compete in a new, fuel efficient, reduced pollution production environment. The Tornado remains in the Jeep for now.

Would define a small V8 as anywhere from or below a 215 Buick V8 in terms of displacement up to around 244 cubic inches / 4000cc+ that may or may not be all-alloy, perhaps Tornado-based V8s remains exclusive to Jeep prior to being superseded by the Maserati derived/inspired V8.