2008 American Motor Corporation

[SwampTiger]

Adding a marque isn't the issue. Kaiser owned Willys-Jeep. Kaiser moved his car making branch to South America. He kept Willys-Jeep until the early 60's. Packard divested its military related firms in the 50's. If the new AMC acquires and keeps these divisions during the 50's, it has a better base for defense contracts through the 60's.

 

[SwampTiger]

MG I would like to see AMC/Indian continue competing with Harley-Davidson through the 50's and 60's. A CIBA based twin running on short tracks against HD, Indian Fours at Daytona, would be great fun. The problem is over-diversification and excessive growth. This is an expansion outside the core of the original companies.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Over-diversification is an understandable concern, the rationale behind AMC acquiring or incorporating such companies would be to help smaller companies survive against larger companies in as part of AMC.

The addition of Packard (with or without Studebaker) becoming part of ATL AMC would have apparently allowed the company to surpass Chrysler to become the 3rd of America's Big 3, yet wouldn't the addition of Kaiser-Jeep, International Harvester. Checker Motors, Crosley and Indian Motorcycles (plus possibly the Continental Motors Company) during the 1950s-1960s have been enough to propel ATL AMC or at least allow it to close in on whoever was the 2nd of the US Big 3?

 

[SwampTiger]

The brands of OTL AMC never came close to 3rd. TTL AMC would be hard pressed to reach 3rd. Rambler beat out Plymouth for 3rd brand name for 1961 before promptly dropping, without Studebaker. You want to assume Studebaker's production without their debt. Even adding in Studebaker's production you are short of number two Chevrolet by nearly one million vehicles. Chevy builds nearly four times the vehicles of AMC in 1961! The Big Three make their money on BIG cars during this period. Rambler/AMC hold the small car market until the compact wars starting with the Studebaker Lark in 1959.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Understand.

Was also envisioning a scenario where American Bantam somehow returns to car production after WW2 prior to being acquired by AMC, though not sure exactly what they had planned and whether they even wanted to build cars again.

What brought it to mind was the OTL French carmaker Rosengart (who shared a similar history to American Bantam in producing Austin 7-based cars), developed the OTL 1951-1955 French Rosengart Ariette (length - 154 inches / wheelbase - 88.6 inches / weight 720kg) that was available in 2-door saloon, 2-door estate/van and 2-door convertible bodystyles.

Unfortunately for the car was burdened with the pre-war 18-23 hp 747cc SV 4-cylinder Austin 7-based engine, with the company later closing its doors before it had a chance to produce an updated Ariette called the Sagaie that was powered by a 40 hp 750cc or 850cc Panhard Flat-Twin.

Had in mind two possible PODs for the car to become part of AMC:

American Bantam Route - Returns to car production after WW2 initially producing a new small car powered by derived/reverse-engineered 788cc BMW 3/20 OHV (derived from Austin 7 engine tooling) or 845cc BMW 309 OHV engines as war reparations, which soon powers a US version of the Rosengart Ariette prior to becoming part of AMC.

Crosley Route - Also produces a US version of the Rosengart Ariette powered by 26.5/30-42+ hp 724-1042cc Crosley CIBA engines prior to becoming part of AMC, where it becomes AMC's entry-level car below the ATL 4-door Metropolitan.

 

[marathag]

The Big Three make their money on BIG cars during this period. Rambler/AMC hold the small car market until the compact wars starting with the Studebaker Lark in 1959.

For raw materials and labor, a small car 'costs' near the same as a upper tier marque, and less chance of of the buyer going crazy with the build sheet to make that custom car from the myriad options back then from engine/driveline/interior upgrades.

Many more Chryslers got record players installed than in a Rambler.

Options were/are pure money makers

http://www.mopar1.us/build.html

For the list of add/delete options for Mopars

 

[Simon]

Adding a marque isn't the issue. Kaiser owned Willys-Jeep. Kaiser moved his car making branch to South America. He kept Willys-Jeep until the early 60's.

When you wrote about Kaiser leaving US auto production in 1955 and offering to fold the division into AMC I read that to mean the car operations that they exported as Industrias Kaiser Argentina rather than the distinct Willys Motors since they carried that on until selling it to AMC in 1970.

Packard divested its military related firms in the 50's. If the new AMC acquires and keeps these divisions during the 50's, it has a better base for defense contracts through the 60's.

Oho? I don't have much in the way of knowledge of Packard's military related firms, I was mostly thinking of vehicles thanks to having looked at AMC for a Chicago based automotive company timeline I was considering some time back. This is going from rusty memory and a couple of quick searches to refresh it so apologies for any errors.


In the ¼-ton light truck class Willys-Overland designed and produced the iconic Jeep during WWII sharing production with Ford, before going on to design its post-war replacements the M38 and M38A1 - the latter just before being taken over by Kaiser. Ford snaked the follow-on M151 but shared production with Kaiser and later the AM General division of AMC after the takeover. AMC also produced the M422 for a few years. When AMC was bought by Renault foreign government ownership laws forced them to sell AM General to LTV but the design and prototype contracts plus initial production order were made before the sale so I count it as an AMC vehicle. At around 280,000 Humvees produced that's money that could have helped fund other projects.

For 2½-ton trucks Studebaker made the US6 during WWII which was mostly exported via Lend Lease. REO getting the contract for the replacement M35 - although sharing production with Kaiser, later AM General - with production starting in 1950 which is before the formation of AMC. In the 5-ton class International Harvester designed and built the M54 along with Diamond T, Kaiser, and Mack. The replacement M809 was an AM General vehicle, as was the M939 which in turn followed it.

Altogether not a bad run. However, concerning the ¼-ton M151 if AMC have bought Willys from Kaiser might being part of a larger company with more 'heft' as it were and sites across a greater number of districts and states give them more lobbying/political influence? Fords not exactly a small company themselves but it could make things more competitive. For 2½-ton trucks whilst its ahead of AMCs formation if you go with the idea of Packard buying Studebaker during its brief insolvency and running it more professionally they might be in a better position to win. AM General already looks to have dominated the 5-ton truck field. It's completely up to the author.

If you want to get really heavy-metal then there's always armoured personnel carriers specifically the M113. After WWII the US Army decided that APCs seemed like a good idea so twenty experimental M44s were built by Cadillac, the design however was completely insane in that it was large enough to carry 24 soldiers. The follow-on M75 from International Harvester was moderately successful with around 1,700 being produced but was in turn replaced by the smaller and cheaper M59 from Food Machinery and Chemical only a couple of years later. Even after buying 6,300 the Army still weren't fully satisfied looking for something that combined the protection of the M75 with the size and weight of the M59 so issued a new specification. Kaiser Aluminum had been working on aluminium armour in the 1950s so FMC put in two proposals - the aluminium armoured T113 which had two variants, a thicker and a thinner armoured model, and the T117 with steel armour, with the thicker armoured T113 being chosen and after some more design changes becoming the M113.

If AMC bought Jeep from Kaiser in a friendly deal when they withdrew from car production, and provided that they didn't do anything subsequently to annoy him, might he decide to partner with them instead? With 80,000 variants being built and it still being in service that's a very decent revenue stream. You could even tie in International Harvester although that might be a little soon.

Edit: Apologies for the size of the post, only realised after it had gone through.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Not really knowledgeable on the military / defense divisions of the various marques that would become part of ATL AMC, only that it is something which could have benefited the company and potentially give them more lobbying/political influence (even if there is some debate as to where AMC would rank against the Big 3).

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Could the ATL AMC have also acquired International Harvester, if so how would it benefit AMC? ....

Read a magazine article describing how IH bought off on some questionable management ideas in the 1960s, that poorly prepared it for the business environment of the 1970s. Wonder if affiliation with AMC would help that or make it worse. IH had a very different market alignment of the other AMC components, with only some overlap. A lot of companies mergering don't handle such diversification well. Management is confused by differing markets & requirements.

 

[SwampTiger]

MG: I like the Bantam/Rosengart vehicle, but the idea is to rationalize onto a line of cars for each size/price classification. AMC needs to chose a path and stick with it. As Marathag noted, a small car costs nearly the same as a large car in materials and labor. The Ramblers with options as standard were more expensive than base Chevrolets. Chevy had much better supporting finances which allowed it to undercut price competitors. The small car market in the US was tiny until the mid-70's. The sub-compact market has returned to tiny today. The purpose of the small car for AMC is as a value priced, not-low-priced, entry car in the US, and an export model for other markets. The issue of American Bantam or Crosley or any other name will be to choose one per national market, building the same car with styling changes for each market. In other word, AMC should merge its OTL strategy with the Japanese strategy plus a larger luxury brand.

These small cars will help in the European and Asian markets. If AMC can work with local dealers and suppliers, it may be able to design, manufacture and/or assemble cars in other markets.But this idea would be a goal for the 60's at the earliest. Save the core company first. As with any lifeboat, you cannot save everyone in the water.

Simon: Packard was an aircraft/marine engine manufacturer from WW1 onward. They company developed two early jet engines before leaving the market in the late 40's. AMC sold AM General after the Renault buyout in 1983 after it designed the HMMWV.

MG: With good management and AMC's OTL ability to gauge the market, the ATL AMC will pass Chrysler. It may not be until the 80's, but it can get there.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Have doubts regarding American Bantam upon further investigation as it would entail PODs that would impact Jeep and cause massive butterflies.

The best bet would be for Crosley to develop a US version of the Rosengart Ariette (dubbed Crosley Cosmo) in the late-40s / early-50s powered by 724-1042cc CIBA engines prior to becoming part of AMC, yet while being lighter than the OTL 2-door Metropolitan by 80+kgs the Ariette was also slightly larger compared to the Metropolitan (and potentially being even lighter via the CIBA unit).

It is not yet known whether the Rosengart Ariette platform (let alone one built by Crosley / AMC) was capable of being slightly lengthened at the wheelbase to spawn a 4-door saloon bodystyle. Otherwise the former as the Crosley / AMC Cosmo should remain a 2-door on a wheelbase of 88.6-inches, meaning the ATL Metropolitan becomes a 4-door on a wheelbase of almost 100-inches with the Nash / AMC Rambler also becoming a 4-door on a wheelbase of around 106-108-inches.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Been thinking about how to approach Packard becoming part of AMC (with the latter soon taking the remains of Studebaker) and how it would evolve from the mid-1950s up to 1970.

Did the Studebaker V8 and Packard V8 engines have much development potential left for another 15+ years or could both have been adequately replaced by the AMC V8 (apart from the latter's lack of prestige)? Additionally did both marques have anything else of value in terms platforms / etc that could be used by AMC?

Would like to see post-AMC Packard initially have a 3 or so model range from the mid-1950s with names ranging from Packard Pacific, Packard Panther, Packard Power Hawk, Packard Panama, Packard Patrician, Packard Pan-American and Packard President.

Not sure what styling language ATL Packard would adopt though during the mid-1950s to 1970 period and nor where Packard goes from the 1970s onwards (akin to the Monica?)? If necessary would Raymond Loewy be suitable for designing Post-AMC Packard's styling language or should the services of other coachbuilders be utilized like Graber, Pietro Frua, Touring and Fissore?

The only thing certain is post-1970s Packard featuring models powered by 60-degree V6, V8 and V12 engines along with a possible Packard equivalent to the Range Rover as well as a halo V12 supercar.

 

[phx1138]

I do like the idea of a 100" Gremlin.

I wish AMC had entered the ponycar market earlier, with something based on the Rambler American (100" WB) instead of the bigger Ambassador (114"). This, and earlier availability of the 390 & 401, could've put AMC firmly in the hunt, instead of an outsider. (They'd need a better name than Tarpon. Scrambler? Panther? Arbalest? Or just use Rebel...) Then, they'd need to not make the mistake Chrysler did, & keep making them in the '70s, using them as a cash generator; Camaro, Firebird, & Mustang continued to sell, & an AMC equivalent might keep the company afloat.

Fixing the styling of the Pacer would help, too...& it wouldn't take much to keep it from being so awful.

I'd like to have seen a Gremlin or Pacer built as a Camino/Ranchero. (There was a prototype Gremlin version, which is seriously cool.)

Go back a bit further, what about AMC innovating with a 'glass-bodied "sporty car", on the American platform, in '58-9? Call it the Confederate?

Even fixing the styling of the Metropolitan wouldn't hurt, & it's not hard to do. If you allow AMC to go a bit nuts, you could build an AMC version of an Anglia gasser, with a 343 V8. Call it the Hoplite? (I can't think of anything thematic to Metropolitan that hasn't been used yet...)

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Like the idea of a LWB ATL 2nd gen (aka OTL 3 gen) Rambler American forming the basis of an early/mid-1960s AMC Spirit as well as possibly the Rambler American equivalent of the OTL AMC Hornet GT, along with an early Cowboy pick-up variant.

Agree with the an early Rambler American derived Ponycar, not sure about such a car keeping AMC afloat though continuing to build it is worth considering despite envisioning AMC embracing FWD (with optional 4WD) across most of the AMC range from the 1970s.

The only chance worth making to the Metropolitan would be to feature a 4-door bodystyle from the outset akin to the likely related 1954-1958 Austin Cambridge and possibly a 1.6 B-Series engine.

An ATL Darrin replacement would probably appear in the early-1960s and likely be derived from the Rambler American, perhaps with similar styling to the OTL Brazilian 1964 Willys Capeta? (Especially with Kaiser-Jeep becoming part of AMC in the mid-1950s)

 

[phx1138]

Agree with the an early Rambler American derived Ponycar, not sure about such a car keeping AMC afloat though continuing to build it is worth considering

That may be overstating, but it'd be a moneymaker, if the Camaro, Firebird, & especially Mustang are any clue: they increased sales in the '70s, when (AIUI) no other products did.

The only chance worth making to the Metropolitan would be to feature a 4-door bodystyle from the outset akin to the likely related 1954-1958 Austin Cambridge and possibly a 1.6 B-Series engine.

I had in mind detail changes to avoid the "bathtub" look (so, open wheelwells), & maybe a different grille.

An ATL Darrin replacement would probably appear in the early-1960s and likely be derived from the Rambler American, perhaps with similar styling to the OTL Brazilian 1964 Willys Capeta? (Especially with Kaiser-Jeep becoming part of AMC in the mid-1950s)

That styling, on a '50s AMC? Look out, Ferrari 250 GTO! The Corvette is in big trouble, too. (Just, please, don't make it a "2+2", like the '58-up T-birds...)

 

[Masked Grizzly]

That styling, on a '50s AMC? Look out, Ferrari 250 GTO! The Corvette is in big trouble, too. (Just, please, don't make it a "2+2", like the '58-up T-birds...)

No, the styling would feature on a 1960s AMC replacement for the ATL 1950s Kaiser / AMC Darrin.

 

[Kevin Renner]

The Javelin was built on AMC's "junior" platform. AMC manufactured two different rearends. Think of them as equivilants of Ford 8 inch and 9 inch rear ends. The smaller rearend went in the junior platform. But both rearends used the same size ring and pinion IIRC. The readend machinery all wound up being either sold to or shipped to Dana Corp in about '85. Except for the gear cutting equipment. That went to China.

 

[SwampTiger]

Search for the AMC Cowboy for an El Camino/Ranchero utility late 60's. Move the Cowboy to 1963-64, AMC has a winner.

Packard Patrician was a legacy Packard nameplate. Packard could run with the 320/354/374 base with an overbore and stroke for the next decade. Packard releases the return of the Twin-Six or Twelve with SOHC/DOHC heads in the late 60's, with an updated engine in the late 70's or early 80's to address smog requirements.

Remember the Tarpon debuted on the Car Show Circuit before the Mustang. Have Abernathy approve its production for 1964/5. Call it the Mako!!!. I liked the early Javelin and the AMX. AMC fell for the bigger is better muscle car hype in 1971 with the 2nd generation. I would have liked to see a remodeled short AMX two-seater with fully independent suspension and an OHC 304/360/401 V8. Who needs the humongous engines, when you can beat their horsepower with less.

Nash promoted and sold the Nash-Healey from 1951-54. AMC could have continued the sports car without Healey, or look for another partner. Standard-Triumph was looking for a partner in 1954.

AMC should have used the Rambler/Hornet remodel to add the Gremlin?Spirit on the 100 inch wheelbase.

AMC sold their axle production to Dana in the mid-80's breakup. AMC 15's became Dana 35's. The AMC 20 was dropped.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

So ATL Packard under AMC from the mid-1950s to early-1960s / early-1970s initially produces an Ambassador sized/derived car under the Patrician nameplate with an updated (possibly overbored/stroked) Packard V8, along with a smaller model under the Packard Panama or Pan-American nameplate with Studebaker-derived V8 (or upgraded Tornado 6-cylinder) engines. Packard from the late-1960s to early-1970s then introduces the V12-engined flagship as the Packard President, while the mid-range Patrician and entry-level Panama / Pan-American feature V8 and SOHC/DOHC 6-cylinder (inline-6 or 60-degree V6) engines respectively.

The ATL 2nd gen (aka OTL 3rd gen) Rambler American features features a pick-up / coupe-utility variant, along with a smaller variant for an early-1960s Gremlin/Spirit models a 100-inch wheelbase.

The Nash-Healey (not sure how it can merit a V8 during its production run) would be replaced by the ATL Kaiser / AMC Darrin (possibly with improved styling and now featuring V8 along with tuned Hurricane inline-6 and Tornado inline-6 engines), with the latter in turn replaced by a new model in the earlys-1960s with similar styling to the OTL 2-door 2-seater Willys Capeta coupe.

Where would the Budd XR-400 fit in this ATL scenario where the Tarpon is produced?

Apart from Jeep, what products would be valuable in an ATL including Kaiser and Willys (e.g. Willys Aero)? Additionally what if the ATL Henry instead resembles a downsized 1951 Kaiser full-size model as was originally proposed by Darrin instead of what actually entered production? What remains of an ATL independent Studebaker would AMC find worth appropriating depending on whether they go under during the mid/late-1950s to early-1960s?

 

[SwampTiger]

Starting with Packard, why on G**'s green earth would you put you flagship/halo brand with the best suspension in America on a Nash Ambassador chassis? No way!!! You are aiming for Rolls Royce, not Cadillac, Lincoln or Chrysler. If you make money on the car, great. However, it is designed to provide access to the luxury class, not suburban wannabe's. No six cylinder motor is going anywhere near this car.

Despite the Stude-fan hype, the Studebaker V8 is not a great motor. The Hurricane is done. The Tornado will continue in AMC cars until replaced with a newer, lighter, more advanced design in the 70's.

The AMC/Rambler American is the small car based on OTL Rambler/Hornet. A smaller lineup for export markets and possible city/student/third car use in the US.

We rationalized the lineup in the 50's. Do not introduce more lines which compete with one another. Tooling for bodies costs money. Save the cash for R&D.

Budd XR-400 or Tarpon? Tarpon has more room, is based on a model in production, and requires no real development.

The real question in the late 50's and early 60's is the upper mid/full size car, whether Hudson or Nash Ambassador. This car, with the Rambler/Hornet compact is your bread and butter car. I would prefer using the Packard Torsion-Level suspension with an AMC V8. You can experiment with styling a bit. Push advanced aerodynamics, engineering and efficiency in your advertising.