(first posted 8/23/2014) Everybody loves the underdog, so how can we not love this Concord? Or everything else that AMC kept coming up with in its increasingly desperate attempts to forestall its inevitable demise as America’s last (major) independent car maker? Every couple of years, a new strategy appeared to position its cars in whichever little niche that seemed to offer a glimmer of hope: compact economy cars in the mid-fifties, the dorky-sporty fastback Marlin, the pony car Javelin, the two-seater “sports car” AMX, the full-sized Ambassador, the #%$@&% Gremlin (adjectives fail me), the wide-body compact Pacer, the ultra-swoopy Matador coupe, the all-wheel drive Eagle.
Desperation is the mother of improvisation, and AMC did plenty of that. This Concord is one of AMC’s last gasps before it rolled over and played dead. And exactly what niche was it trying to fill?
AMC’s new 1970 Hornet (CC here) was a mighty clean machine for those coke-bottled times; one of Dick Teague’s best in his highly varied but never dull career as head of AMC styling. I’ve been vigilantly looking for a Hornet, and regret not stopping in a little town where I saw a nice early example parked. It was the Rambler American’s successor, and aimed straight at the compact car class dominated by the Nova, Valiant and Dart; tough company. Especially so, since it was a segment vulnerable to two big factors: the swing in oil prices, and the invasion of the Japanese sub-compacts. The Hornet’s only year to crack the 100k barrier was in 1974, in the midst of Energy Crisis I.
The Hornet’s front two-thirds, the Gremlin, was left to fight off the sub-compacts, but its all-body-parts-accounted-for donor languished in the late seventies, as the old “compact” class started to fragment. What to do? Where is the new niche? AMC certainly couldn’t afford to develop a genuine new car, and the “mid-size” Matador was already as good as dead.
AMC decided that the opportunity lay somewhere between Mercedes and Toyota, as the booming success of those two brands were determined to be the result of American’s new-found love with quality and luxury, or some reasonable facsimile of them. The Hornet would get a face-lifted front, and a healthy dose of quality, luxury and class, but without throwing value to the winds along with the Hornet’s foreshortened front end. And a new name, of course: Concord.
And it actually kind of worked. The real secret sauce was that by 1978, the Hornet/Concord had been in constant production at Kenosha for almost a decade, so the bugs and panel gaps had all been pretty much worked out. Slather on a hefty dose of sound-deadening, thick new rugs (both on the floor and on the roof), and a higher grade of interior materials. The Ford Granada had shown the way with this formula. At least AMC avoided any fake classic grilles; Dick Teague wouldn’t have allowed that; thank you.
Sales jumped: in its first year (1978), they hit a decent 117k. That would remain the high water mark, but the Concord had two more decent years, in ’79 and ’80. Then the formula petered out, like so many of AMC’s perpetual stop-gap measures. Energy Crisis II might have been part of it, but the market was just shifting away. 1983 was the Concord’s last year, as it handed off the baton to the Renault R11 based Alliance. But that’s another story.
Concords were powered mostly by the venerable AMC six, the 258 CID (4.2 L) version only after 1980. It actually made the Concord feel fairly zippy at lower speeds, with its very healthy torque curve. The 304 was available the first two years only. And the unloved Audi-castoff 2.0 L four was available for hard core economy freaks in ’78 and ’79, but undoubtedly struggled more than a bit under the burden of all that padding in the vinyl half-roof. GM’s Iron Duke 2.5 L four was recruited from 1980 on, and with a long-geared four speed stick gave pretty good mileage during those high-gas price years. Although that combination didn’t really suit the Concord’s character, and I’ve never seen one. These cars are quintessential six cylinder machines, with an automatic. The fours and eights just never quite seemed right.
This particular Concord is the only one I’ve seen around town, and eluded me until a couple of days ago. Like so many well kept original older cars, it’s a multi-generational affair. The driver’s grandfather bought it new, and will inherit it after his elderly mother passes on, as she made a point of telling me. It’s certainly aged well, and the condition of that red vinyl cardinal’s hat tells me it’s been garaged.
Amazingly enough, the Concord did the trick, sort of; it didn’t keep AMC independent, but it allowed it to survive long enough until Renault stepped in; or stepped into it, as the case may be. What were they thinking? Along the lines of Fiat today, I presume; but then AMC was no Chrysler.
Olds wheel covers heh? Well my Dad put those on an early 80s F150 cause he had them laying around. It really made the truck look great and they do good things for that Concord. I saw a 304 powered coupe on eBay a few days ago. Amazingly well kept.
AMC must have gotten a good deal on some surplus ones. Good catch. I knew the Concord had several different wheel cover designs, and never stopped to check these out.
Well I am as much an Olds guy as Supreme Brougham is, I’d be ashamed of myself it I didn’t catch it.
Looks like the wheel covers are off of a 88-91 Cutlass Calais.
This style of wheel cover started life on the 1982-85 Chevy Celebrity. In 1986, the emblem was changed to the Monte Carlo logo, and it became the base wheel cover on the Monte Carlo LS through 1988. After that, the emblem changed to the Olds rocket, and it was used on the Cutlass Calais through 1991. In its last years, it was the rarely-seen base wheel cover on the 1992-93 Olds Achieva.
Actually, that wheel cover was around on “A” (later “G”) bodied Cutlasses of the ’80s . . . . I had a very cherry Cutlass Supreme Brougham (an ’86); it had the wires – a bitch to keep clean in central Oahu (Hawaii) in the day with the red dirt/mud. Toothbrush with every cleaning plus the ‘groan’ of the spokes. Was desperately trying to find regular Olds wheel covers for ages (before the real universal application of the Internet – this was the mid 1990s).
You make me proud Danny 🙂
AMC did not use those wheelcovers. Period.
My mom had a 73 Hornet with the 6-cyl/auto, and I can attest to the torque of that engine: I could get rubber on the 1-2 shift at will, and since I was 17 at the time, that was just about every chance I got……
My mom’s last American car was a ’75 Hornet hatchback, with the 304, rally wheels and a vinyl top. By all accounts, it was a great car, save for the AMC stigma. Mom used to have quirky taste; Before this she had a Corvair ragtop (that she hated because it was slow), and a Bug with the Automatic Stickshift (that she loved, go figure), and a 383 Satellite sandwiched in-between. But in the summer of ’80, she fell in love with a new Corona on the showroom floor of the local AMC-Toyota dealer while the Hornet was getting serviced, and she’s driven nothing but Toyotas and Hondas ever since.
The Hornet/Concord/Eagle really was a great design. Despite the unfortunate vinyl top (One of several unnecessary attempts to modernize the 1970 rear window design. By the way, the 2 and 4 doors share the same roof stamping for cost savings…When they were focused, AMC was very clever at saving money), the car still looks up-to-date by 1981 standards. The Eagle held up even better; Since its truck classification exempted it from the bumper standards, AMC was able to fit it with better-integrated bumpers. As maligned (or in my opinion, inspired) as cars like the Gremlin, Pacer, and Matador coupe were, Dick Teague certainly the most creative designers/styling directors of the era.
The Hornet/Gremlin and their derivatives represented the same approach to product design that made AMC so successful during the Romney years. Considering what little investment these cars received during their lifetimes, they did pretty well in the marketplace. It makes you wonder where AMC would be today if they hadn’t veered off course every time they started to do well.
That’s a wonderfully preserved Concord. I still contend that AMC is the car company that CAFE killed. After 1978 when the regulations went into effect, AMC found it harder and harder to comply with them, started to court Renault and find ways to put smaller and smaller engines in their cars. These cars were never designed for four cylinder engines, and these were stopgap measures to buy time until they were able to release a new line of fuel efficient and CAFE compliant cars for the 1980’s and beyond. I think the arrangement with Renault was a disaster, and takeover by Chrysler was the only way out. At that time, they only had the one ‘jewel’, that being Jeep. They didn’t have the resources to keep up with the regulations and were forced to take desperate measures to stay in business. Just my 2 cents.
Since I’m trying to get a couple of kids through college, collecting cars is out of the picture for me now. I’ve passed up a couple of AMXs and Javelins that were sweet, Now, with EVERYTHING becoming collectible, my choices are narrowing down, and the Hornet or Spirit AMX I’d like to find are going up in price. Something like this Concord would make a great inexpensive driver, something you could drop a SBC into, have a lot of fun and not tick off the ‘serious’ collectors. I’d leave the vinyl roof on just for the kitsch value.
Something like this Concord would make a great inexpensive driver, something you could drop a SBC into, have a lot of fun and not tick off the ‘serious’ collectors. I’d leave the vinyl roof on just for the kitsch value.
Nah, drop a fuel injected Jeep I-6 into it and a matching transmission just to keep things more “correct.” Plus that would be a sort of “creative” solution, I mean anybody can drop a SBC into a car.
@Dan: Back in the day, I put a 302 V8 into a six cylinder Maverick, and even with all of the factory parts it was a lot of friggin’ work.
I ‘get’ the idea of using the AMC 6 and I have great respect for it, but if I’m going to do an engine swap, I want something I can easily hot rod. SBC’s are great for this exact thing, cheap, light, tons of inexpensive go-fast parts, and it seems like there’s lots of adapters available to put one anywhere. An AMC V8 would be OK too, but I don’t know what kind of problems I would encounter trying to source all of those parts for a 40+ year old car.
The thing to do would be to save the crank and connecting rods out of the 258 and place them in the 4.0. With a bore you can get 4.7l or so out of it and it is easy to make some serious HP with it w/o resorting to forced induction. Backed by a 5sp it could be a fun yet economical car if you were able to go easy on the loud pedal frequently enough.
I hear you. My first motorcycle was a 1970 Honda Trail 70, and one just sold at Hemmings auctions for $8300. Youza…. I could buy them for $25-50 all day long back in 1981…
Im not sure if we can post pics here so I won’t. I had an 80 AMC Eagle Sport Coupe that was the 606th off the line. Had to drive to Independence, IA get it and drive it back to Chitown. At the time I had no idea it was a Hornet in drag. I was still new to AMC cars.
I learned two things owning that car.
1, There is NOTHING between Iowa and Illinois
2, AMC almost had it right. That thing was serious fun..
We’re working on a way to post owner rides, perhaps via Facebook. Stay tuned.
“1, There is NOTHING between Iowa and Illinois”
As I recall, there is a river of some consequence.
I’ll repeat what I’ve written before on the Concord. After my dad died and mom moved in with us, the old 1970 Duster was about done in and she needed a new car. We looked at the Dodge Aspen (in early 1979), and for what you got, it was too expensive for a base model. We went down the street to the AMC dealer and saw a beautiful 1979 metallic brown 4 door Concord with saddle brown interior, 6 cyl., PS, PB, auto, A/C, AM radio, vinyl seats, pinstriped exterior – in other words, a beautiful car, and on the advice of our mechanic – a life-long Chrysler man, who was painfully aware of the Aspen/Volare debacle then in progress, not to mention the GM X cars and the Granada, mom bought the Concord. $4,750.00 cash. Probably could’ve bargained better, but she had that car until 1990 when she stopped driving. That machine was a Sherman tank, virtually indestructable! All in all, a wonderful car that we missed and still talk about on occasion.
This car was a lot of things, but beautiful? You must really like brown, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Were you being sarcastic ? I’m just curious. My Dad favored the underdog that was AMC. I suppose he liked his Ambassadors in the same way.
The 70 Hornet was AMC’s version of the 53 Studebaker. I have difficulty counting the variations from the original. These were solid cars. The AMC engines were good and they used Chrysler Torqueflites, as I recall. The bodies were always the weak spots, and things in the interiors always seemed to break.
I always kind of liked the Concord. But by 1981, it was plainly an old car. Modern cars looked like the K-Car or the Cutlass Ciera. The Concord of 1983 was kind of like the Studebaker sedan (no longer called Lark) of 1964. They had done what they could with the old girl, but she was still the old girl. In retrospect, this car and Fox body Fairmont (both conventional rear wheel drive) were the cars to own if you liked honest, durable transportation. The Concord was comfortable as a side benefit.
I just never liked the door handles. Bad ergonomics. Opening the door with either your thumb or 2 fingers on the other hand just never felt right. They looked nice, but I consider this the worst door handle of all time.
Excellent comparison to the Studebaker. The longish wheel base even adds to the visual aspect of the comparison. Here’s what would have been interesting: if Studebaker had made a Gremlin version of their sedan. The Lark wasn’t quite radical enough to be eligible.
Just as radical would have been an AMC pickup built off of the Hornet/Concord, like an El Camino or Ranchero. The Stude Lark at least begat a pickup, if not a Gremlinesque shorty.
Actually, I am now recalling the AMC Sportabout wagon – the only compact wagon of the 70s, and a really good looking car. May be my favorite AMC product of the 70s, but then I have a thing for wagons. Maybe there’s still one bopping around Eugene?
AMC built a couple of prototypes of a Hornet-based pickup. I recently purchased The Story of Jeep by Patrick Foster, and there is a photo of one, badged as a Jeep Cowboy. It said in the book that three were built; one with a six, one with the V8, and one styling model with no drivetrain. It looked pretty nice, very much like a smaller El Camino or Ranchero.
I quick spin on Google brings up two of them, anyway. There’s a Jeep Cowboy that’s a bright red Hornet with a bed with JEEP in bright white on the tailgate. There’s also the AMC Cowboy, which is a Hornet Sportabout El Camino-ized. There was a magazine a couple months back that had the full story on them but I was too cheap to pay $5.99 on a two page article.
That Sportabout wagon morphed into the Eagle wagon a few years later. Used one as a rental, to move an old girlfriend out of the college dorms, and that was a mistake. There was absolutely no room inside, and the sloped rear door reduced the usefulness of what space there was. The basic shape of the car looked great, though.
I owned a Sportabout wagon for a couple of years, and it proved to be a fairly decent, though somewhat “minimalist” car. I don’t even recall the year model, now, but I bought it second-hand and used it for those brief years with no glaring issues/problems that I remember. It was, in fact, somewhat novel, and even had a decent ride for what it was. I believe that the one I had did NOT have A/C, and that may have factored into my letting it go, as in the South, here, A/C really is valuable for comfort – especially when travelling with family on a vacation, or playing host to friends, etc. I’ve always lightly lamented the fact that AMC didn’t make it, ultimately, on it’s own merit. They produced some decent, useable autos, now many years ago…. and this Hornet Sportabout wagon was almost ahead of it’s time, as far as size/utility goes.
These always stood out to me, too, when I was a kid and used to see them on the road. The design did look clearly “older” than most everything else out there, but in a quirky sort of way with the updated front clips.. I never saw many Hornets (either no one in North Carolina bought them, or they had all rusted away by the mid 80’s, one of the two) so it wasn’t until much later that I figured out how minimal the updates were to turn them into Concords (and later Eagles), hence the looks.
There was a 1982 Concord coupe for sale not far from my house about four months ago. It was amazingly rust free for being a New Hampshire car. At $2,000, I was tempted. I just couldn’t get past that hideous half vinyl roof and partial rear window delete.
I remember one of their big selling points, and fairly rare at the time, was galvanized bodywork. They withstood rust exceptionally well for the era.
They also were received Ziebart rustproofing “at the factory” Being from Buffalo, I remember these being very durable…much better than Volare’s or any Ford product
I remember looking at these when they were on the lot in Boston, around the time the K-cars came out. I was intrigued by the Limited Versions, I remember being skeptical as to how anything AMC built was limited in that They were overrun with cars in relation to the demand for them. They would gladly have built as many as anyone wanted. Stodgy in my opinion. I think I remember the half roof covering the part of the rear window as being odd. When I looked at the Clue, I was thinking either this or The first K-car I saw that day. That must have had something to do with my choosing a Mazda GLC, which was a world more modern at the time.
Finally, the long awaited Concord review! Thank you Paul.
The Concord has a dear place in my heart, when my Grandfather’s 1971 Toyota Corona was failing Dad and I discussed what to replace it with. We decided on an AMC Concord because you could get a pretty luxurious interior in a reasonable size car without too much gagetry. As a Dutch immigrant Grandpa didn’t learn to drive until he was 40, so he ran the car and Grandma handled the heater controls and radio.
Dad found a nice deep green 4 door with a tan vinyl roof and tan velour interior, it provided him reliable service for the rest of his life. It passed through the hands of a few family members until I got it in 1991. I drove it for two years, singing my own version of the Beach Boys’ Little Deuce Coupe (Little Green Concord) until I gave it away. That car was still running after the RX7 I’d replaced it with was dead. Not a great car, but a very good car.
By 1981, AMC was a dead brand walking. It took a gamble with it’s terrifically orginal Matador Coupe and Pacer, and it blew what little cash it had left on them instead of reinvesting in a completely new Hornet and completely new engine. AMC shot it’s wad with two novelty vehicles when it’s bread and butter sedan went stale.
The Matador Coupe was a complete market miss. It was four years after the success of the Monte Carlo, Grand Prix, and Lincoln Mark III, and the market preferred goth stylings in personal luxury. Muscle cars were dead. Why AMC would think a Matador Coupe, styled as it was, could succeed, is beyond me. It’s styling was incompatible to the popular goth style and incompatible to the lines of a successful sedan and wagon. The Coupe was an utter waste of money. Within 12 months, everyone knew it bombed and couldn’t be fixed up enough to find buyers to pay for the investment made.
The Pacer should have never been attempted. It was a waste of money.
We saw how strong stable platforms could spin off inexpensive versions of itself, and had AMC launched a new Hornet in 1974, it could have become it’s version of Chrysler’s K car or LeBaron. We knew that by 1974 there would be a new trend towards small cars. It was rather foolish for AMC to believe it’s old Hornet could continue for another seven years without replacement.
So after witnessing the failure of the Coupe and Pacer, it was too little too late for AMC to attempt a name change and a couple of front end restylings to keep AMC afloat. The Hornet lifeboat it needed to cling to, became too old to stay viable.
The Market could have supported a five year old heavily refreshed Hornet, but not an 11 year old one.
“had AMC launched a new Hornet in 1974, it could have become it’s version of Chrysler’s K car or LeBaron. ”
Here’s a better scenario; AMC inherited the old exBuick V6 tooling when it bought Jeep. GM bought the tooling back in the spring of 74, revised the crank to smooth out the firing, and used versons of that engine in both RWD and FWD platforms for the next 30 years.
If AMC had hung on to that engine, bolted on the automatic trans Borg Warner had modified for transverse installation for the Austin Landcrab a few years earlier, they would have had a virtually off the shelf, mature, FWD powertrain. Use the straight edge styling with tall greenhouse we were seeing in 73-74 in the Audi Fox and VW Dasher, and they could have had an 82 Buick Century, in 75.
But the Pacer had been in development since 72. Who knew that the price of gas would double by 75, and the Pacer, heavy because it was so wide, would be exactly the wrong thing to come out with? Would the US market that snapped up 82 GM A-bodies, even accept a car like that in 75, before they had gotten used to the idea of expensive gas and downsized “family sedans”?
My grandpa took me to the Auto Show in 1980 – he even let me play hooky from school so I could go. I was a silly, nerdy teen boy who couldn’t understand why the Fairmont/Zephyr or any of the imports were better cars than the cheerfully dated and baroque Concord Limited that was on the floor. I thought it was a hoot that a compact car had reclining leather seats and power everything…plus I have always had a thing for the underdog, being a bit of one myself. The Aspen/Volare fiasco was in full swing, and they were my former favorite compacts; I dropped them like the shallow youth that I was. I still think that maybe they should have turned the Concord hatchback into a coupe; it would have looked much better with the landau roof. The 2-door sedan always looked awkward with it. I thought that the 79 D/L hatchback, with it’s brushed aluminum tiara band and half-vinyl roof was quite handsome in its own way.
I miss AMC. Too bad they didn’t stick around or didn’t find a buyer to let them express themselves instead of what the buyer wanted like Renault and later, Chrysler.
“What were they thinking?”
They were competing with the dressed up compacts, that’s what. Renault came knocking at about the same time, too. It wasn’t that the Concord failed, its that the whole company was losing $$ from bad investments, i.e. Matador/Pacer.
Renault imported the 18i compact sedan and Fuego coupe to supposedly replace the Hornet…, I mean Concord. The Alliance was meant to replace the Gremlin/Spirit and give AMC dealers a new small car to sell, then have an 18i for step up. Later was to be the Medaliion and Premier, but they came too late to aviod Mopar buyout.
I have a 81 concord dl and it is a beauty. Runs great and its in great condtion. Just a perfect car.
My hillbilly friends and I got drunk on Saturday night. Sunday we got up and went to the flea market. Which was attached to a trailer park, naturally. Someone was selling this exact car for a hundred bucks. Except it was red and a 1980. So I bought it. Drove it for a year with no problems until it died in the Taco Bell drivethru.
I had both a ’78 and an ’80 Concord, both 4 cylinder models. My ’78 was a 2 door with an automatic, and had to be one of the slowest-accelerating cars I’ve ever owned. You could time its 0-60 time with a sundial. My ’80 was an Iron Duke 5 speed (a Ford trans, go figure :D), and that car got unblievable fuel economy. One particular trip I made with that car in the summer of ’82 (Cleveland to Iowa City) that car got just shy of 33 mpg, not bad for a reconstituted Hornet. That car was near bulletproof as well, needing nothing but oil changes for its 160k miles. Alas, N.E. Ohio salt ate it up. I would love to find another like it someday but I doubt that will happen…
Great comment ! Reminds me of my car, a ’90 Cavalier VL 4 door. 2.2L , three speed auto. Accelerates like a sick turtle. But once you’re up to speed, it does just fine. Engine is unbelievably rugged. Body, not so much. Like a 4 door Vega, with a better engine.
Ha! The Google ad below the last picture was for Fiat…. Is it a digital CC Effect, or was it because of the reference in the text. I’d prefer to believe the former, but alas it’s probably the latter.
CC resurrection! I have to admit being a closet AMC fan. I always have been, and for a few reasons: Ive always been a frothing at the mouth Jeep fanatic. With Kool Aid stained lips. AMC kind of rode into my good graces on account of AMC era Jeeps are what I saw and fell in love with as a kid. And AMC put factory V8 power under the hood of the CJs. My first ever vehicle was a ’78 CJ-7 with a swapped in AMC 360 and it was a total madman! Most of AMCs carline I could care less about, save a few. Never cared much for the hornets until recently. The coupes and wagons from a stylistic standpoint are some of the best looking cars in that class/era. The SST/360 is a neat machine. A little AFX slotcar is what really turned me onto AMC tho. I had a blue (favorite color) with black stripes ’71 or ’72 Javelin pro stocker #5 (my b-day is march 5th) in my collection and it was by far my favorite. I still have it, actually. I thought it was a Mach 1 mustang but my dad corrected me…the 2nd gen Javelin is my holy grail of Muscle cars ever since.
Too bad about the Concorde. Granted, they went with the times in terms of going from sporty little midsizer to a me-too brougham. The Eagle version of this car is….interesting. But I always did like the Spirit and SX/4 bodystyle. Much better looking than the similar fox mustang, to my eyes.
I like this a lot,apart from the half vinyl roof.Now if there was a non or full vinyl roof model I would like it even more.6 cylinders RWD attractive looks,I’m pretty sure I’ve never seen one in the metal though.Let’s see a few more underdogs please
I’ve never seen one without the half-vinyl roof, and when I asked about it in an Eagle article not too long ago the consensus seemed to be that all the 2-door sedans came that way. Undoubtedly an attempt to cover up the Concord’s resemblance to it’s predecessor – I’m sure if you peeled back that vinyl, the Hornet’s rear window cut-outs would be underneath, if not the same exact piece of glass. If that’s the case, I’m sure replacing one of those windows on these was a bitch and a half!!
Thanks Sean
Wonder how often the trailer hitch gets used?
Looking back at the cars I have owned or lusted over, I always remember more than a few that qualify IMO as hitting the sweet spot. My 68 Nova and 67 Chevelle were certainly two of them. A third was the 78 Corcord. What they had in common was a long six cylinder sticking out front. The concord was higher geared and the best hiway car of the three. The 300 six was my favorite truck engine. There might be a common thread here.
For those of you that think that the concord was not stylish I just have to say that I frequently wear bib overalls and brogans. I also like them. YMMV
AMC decided that the opportunity lay somewhere between Mercedes and Toyota, as the booming success of those two brands were determined to be the result of American’s new-found love with quality and luxury, or some reasonable facsimile of them. The Hornet would get a face-lifted front, and a healthy dose of quality, luxury and class, but without throwing value to the winds along with the Hornet’s foreshortened front end. And a new name, of course: Concord.
That’s a really interesting take on these. I’ve always just thought they were AMC hopping on the Brougham bandwagon several years too late – and in the process somehow managing to do it in a way that was remarkably less tacky than Detroit’s usual efforts. But if there were such a thing as an American Cressida or Datsun 810, this (or the sedan/wagon versions, at least) would certainly be it.
I was born well after AMC entered their final nosedive into oblivion and, much like Studebaker, I’ve never really understood why most Americans at the time considered AMCs and Ramblers to be something competent but also something that no one actually wanted. No one who is even remotely interested in cars, anyway. I guess you had to be there. This is actually a terrible car to make that statement about, because by 1981 it was pretty out-of-date… but I’ll never get why it’s predecessors were considered less desirable than Chevy IIs, Novas, Falcons, Mavericks, etc.
AMC, in my opinion, went a bit backwards with the first Hornets. The American was actually better-looking in a more formal way, and the quality on the early Hornets left a lot to be desired. The Concords could have been more competitive, because they were quality cars, but just not backed with enough resources. (Mopar makes a stroker six you could drop into one that makes 265 hp and 290 lb-ft of torque and still look stock.)
I’m glad you cut off the discussion before you got into the Alliance. The one-hoss shay lasted a hundred years to the day; the Alliance maybe a hundred days…..
This gets my vote for ugliest Malaise Era half-vinyl top. My mother actually had a ’75 Hornet four-door for a while, but it was plain-roofed.
+1 half vinyl tops remind me of bad hairpieces.They’re up there with the Mopar toilet seat and Continental kit and “tribute” cars in my book of Deadly Sins
I don’t care much for a lot of the landau vinyl tops, but considering the time of this Concord, it was something you had to offer to meet the competition. There may be a little “me too” vis-a-vis the other luxury American compacts offered at the time, but as AMC themselves used to say, “when you compete with the three biggest car companies in America, what would you do?”
A fresh name to the Hornet with some visual and equipment upgrades was a good way to offer something “fresh” – the Concord – and I’ve driven a couple from this vintage and it feels like a compact Cadillac . . . the 258 six is torquey; not a powerhouse, but not a slug. Can run 80mph on the freeways with no strain.
Sadly, AMC being AMC in the early eighties, much like Studebaker being Studebaker in the early sixties, couldn’t/wouldn’t put any more development into this car (their chips on the table for the Renault products which were supposed to be the “new direction” of AMC) . . . . for it’s day and even in retrospect, the Concord is not a bad car at all; in fact, opposed to the competition of the day (including Datsun 810s, Toyota Cressidas), it’s actually a pretty good car. No more kitschy than the rest of the ’78-’83 cars in its class.
The landau from 1980 was a bit of an improvement aesthetically at least.
Why didn’t AMC borrow money like Chrysler did? And why didn’t the government encourage the two companies to join forces back then, before their actual 1987 merger?
In college I had a ’73 Hornet hatchback in flaming red. While it was only a base model with the 232, that car was awesome – handled well for the time, economical, the hatch handled a ton of stuff. It was great looking as well – tight package, great lines.
Sadly a MB creamed it at a stop sign and that was that.
“The Hornet’s only year to crack the 100k barrier was in 1974, in the midst of Energy Crisis I.”
I don’t think this is correct. Eyeballing the body style-by-body style production stats in my copy of the Standard Catalog, it looks the Hornet also cleared 100K in 1971 and 1973.
An additional note on AMC’s 1974 model year production: from what I understand, rather than wind down 1974 model year production during the summer of ’74, AMC kept producing 1974 model vehicles well into the fall. They did this to hold off for as long as possible on new emissions regulations taking effect for the 1975 model year (which required most vehicles to have catalytic converters), and because the Gremlin and Hornet were selling well enough in the wake of the energy crisis that they didn’t think customers would care whether the cars dealers had were ’74s or ’75s (I’m sure that a certain segment of the buying public actually would have preferred a ’74 with no catalytic converter). I don’t know if further inflating their already strong ’74 MY numbers was a consideration, making themselves look better at a time when most of their competitors were down, but it certainly had that effect. Even without AMC taking this measure, the Hornet undoubtedly would have hit 100K for ’74, and may have even still had its best year ever, but its ’74 MY numbers are a bit artifically inflated by this.
I remember the ‘74 AMC Hornets hit the streets early in August of ‘73.
As an unrepentant curmudgeon hater of big-three cars, my first ever brand-new vehicle was a special-ordered 1983 Concord— AMC ‘s last 2WD.
It had rare 5spd w/rear axle ratio about 3:1– so the 0.75 5th gear yielded a 2.25 final drive ratio giving about 1400 rpm at 60 mph —talk of tall gearing! I used it for daily 70 mile commutes plus many long distance driveabout/campouts all over American West. It had that sturdy 7 main 258 set up really lean by factory for mileage and emissions without fuel injection. It wasn’t especially quick but chugged along and would approach 30 hiway mpg if kept under 75 mph. Like my 1966 Rambler American (reported elsewhere) it ran >300k without head ever taken off. Gave to my eldest son who drove til wouldn’t pass CA emissions because I’d removed the cat converter. Nash later AMC was early into good gas mileage with 1941 Nash 600 so-named for ability to go 600 miles on a 20 gal gas tank!
Bob,
I had the same Concord you described in your post of jan 11, 2014. My 1983 was a DL wagon, no vinyl on the sides with rally 14 in wheels,radio and ac delete. The 5spd was excellen!. Later in my ownership, I changed the wheel size to 15 in and increased the aspect ratio a bit.I bought the wagon in Oct 1985 as part of a local Kansas City defunt AMC dealer’s inventory with <3K miles for $4.5K. I drove it until spring of 2004, when the clutch failed. By then the doors sagged, the rear hatch broke 3 sets of hinges,the right rear leaf spring broke*, but I dearly loved that grey wagon, "Greyman" and would buy a 5 spd ("W" code) or even 4 spd again. Had i rebuilt it, I would be driving it today. I replaced my Concord wagon with a 2006 Honda Element 5spd AWD. * I had to use a rear leaf spring from a Pacer b/c no Concord parts were available in Kansas City area.
Addendum to my previous reply to “Bob”; If anyone knows of, or has a descent unmodified Concord sedan, or wagon, with a four or five speed manual transmission that can be driven to Kansas City, MO for a fair n reasonable price, LMK @ robert22700@hotmail.com. I’ve never stopped thinking of my Concord wagon and from what I’ve read, I’m not the only one!!
The father of a friend of mine worked as a foreman in an AMC-owned foundry that made cast engine blocks, and he got a new company car as part of his compensation package. Every six months, he could get whatever he wanted, as long as it was a Renault or AMC product.
I remember my friend coming over one day for a visit on a sunny and uncharacteristically warm early spring day and he pulled in the driveway with his father’s brand new 1980 AMC Concord. It was finished in a powder blue colour and it was loaded with the nicest seating and every conceivable option.
One thing that really struck me was the overall fit and finish of the car. While nowhere near as good as the standard set by even the best Japanese cars, it was extremely well assembled for a car of its time. The paint was smooth and lustrous, the body panels and trim lined up properly, and the interior was pretty tightly put together too. The ride was really comfortable, and the car was really quiet.
The 1981 Concord wagon that came later was an even nicer car.
In a lot of ways, AMC were ahead of their time, even though the Hornet platform on which their Concord was based had been around for at least a donkey’s age.
It’s too bad AMC didn’t survive.
I have owned more than a few Concords, will love then for life!!! My next will get an LS2 swap.
Concord’s, and other AMC’s, eventually got Zeibart Factory Rustproofing and galvanized body panels. The new Concord dash was a tremendous improvement in style and finish on the old Hornet model. I cannot confirm it, but l read once the Concord had the lowest recall record of any car of it’s time. Believable, considering the lifespan of that platform. I agree with the other post–for a fraction of the Chrysler bailout, AMERICA could have saved AMERICAN MOTORS/JEEP…Just a few years later, Governors and states were falling over themselves, offering huge incentives to the Japanese to build factories in their backyards.
You cite the 258 as being available from 1980. My concord was a 78 and had a 258. I am certain. It was sold side by side with the 232 from 1975 on according to wiki. 1980 may have been the year the 232 was phased out but it is not the first year of the 258. Surprised I didn’t catch that first time around.
I would love to have that car back in a new condition. Found one in Conroe couple years ago and it was on CC (possibly a Hornet, can’t remember).
Good cars that afaic did not age. You could tack on FI, front discs, and airbags and it would do well in daily use today. That’s my opinion but then, as I said above I am sitting here wearing bib overalls.
Junior Samples wore bib overalls. He was a fine American.
My grandfather took me to Wullenweber AMC in Cincinnati to pick out a replacement for his 77 Hornet hatchback…went home with a white Spirit hatchback with burgundy corduroy and velour interior…4 speed manual, no a/c, no radio either, but spiffy body-color wheelcovers and a stripe kit. I remember that car well, and agree that AMC put some really nice interiors in their cars in that era. I think the Spirit was a 1981 model…
.
I’d love to add a 304/360 V8 powered Hornet Sportabout Station Wagon to my driveway.
Hmmm…this CC might inspire a renaissance of grape-related new models. How about a Cabriolet Sauvignon? Pinto Noir? Perhaps a Rieslingenfelter Corvette, or Malibeaujolais?
Oh, yes. We must not forget the Studebaker-inspired Chianti II, the Chardonnay Impala and the Asti-Martin. However, no matter how good the U.S. models might be, I predict a lot of wining by the auto press.
Hmm, the second re-run of this post. I guess there’s a lot of Concord love out there! 🙂
Well I owned 3 of them and my dad had 2, so yes, we loved the Concord! The 1980 and up models were better built and finished inside, and the 258 straight 6 engine could not be beat.
How much would a 1981 amc concord that hasn’t ran or moved for 12 years go for?
I bought a 1981 Concord Limited 2weeks ago-absolutely love this thing:) I missed the whole AMC era(I was born in the 70’s)but fell in love with these cars after owning an Eagle Wagon a few years back…too bad this company didn’t make it…
Hopefully going to be trading my ’82 Ford T-Bird, for a ’82 Concord, tomorrow. Lol We shall see how this works out.
My father’s oldest half sister had a Concord similar to the white 2 door pictured. Aunt Jean’s Concord was triple beige and appeared to be loaded. My mother, who was ambivalent about most cars, declared (out of hearing by Aunt Jean) that a salesman saw my aunt coming. Apparently, my mother thought no one with a few working brain cells would have bought an AMC product.
I thought the Concord (no matter the model) was a pretty decent car, especially considering it’s “roots”, but that triple beige look wasn’t the best combination of colors.
My mother had one of these when I was very little, think mid-late 90s. It had been given to her by my paternal grandmother when her Skylark (or whatever other poorly-made domestic car she was driving) bit the dust. I feel like hers was black with the same red top and interior as this example.
She crashed it when she was still pregnant with my sister (98 or early 99), bought a Honda, and never looked back.
Always liked these things and had a number of them in the early-mid ’90s. Unfortunately by that time most of them were pretty used up and abused, and it was hard to find a good one. But in summer 1991 I went with my parents to an outdoor flea market where they were vendors. But there was an old couple there with a 1980 Concord Limited wagon for sale – for just $700! This car was absolutely pristine with about 60,000 kms (about 40,000 miles) on it and it really showed. It was not only mint but also fully loaded with power everything and the very rare St. Lauren plush velour interior, dark burgundy ext. and tan interior. The seats weren’t even broken in! I wanted that car so badly but I was flat broke at the time and $700 might as well have been $7million.
Oh well. The one that got away, the car I’ll never forget.
The Man said “one more trick” not “one last trick” probably because he’s still scheming on catching a surviving Eagle in the wild.
Good read, Paul. Thumbs up.
Can’t believe this thread is still going…just like my Concord lol Pretty cool…
After reading the many complimentary comments of the final Concords, I’d really like to drive one.
The closest I came was a ’73 or so Hornet in base trim, including rubber flooring. A former parks department fleet car, it did have auto, power steering and brakes, an AM radio and AC.
While I did not grow up around luxury cars, think Impala, LTD, Caprice and Delta 88 at the high end, I was used to middle of the road niceties like sound insulation. The car was a booming tin can, it was almost impossible to hear the tinny radio over the AC blower and road noise while the car labored at 30 mph cruising speeds. I picked up my sister in it and she asked me what the hell was wrong it. I had to explain that this level of crudeness was possible in a showroom on auto row near the mall.
A note in the Standard Catalog of American Cars says the automotive press called it the crudest American compact on the road.
It would be fun to contrast a late Concord with power windows and a stereo with that penalty box econo-car Hornet.
Probably not unlike the Pygmalion story of the Grand Wagoneer under AMC’s watch.
About in this era AMC tried cost cutting on the 6’s proven old valve cover, substituting plastic for steel.
It didn’t work, caused a lot of grief and cost.
IIRC, the old cover would not fit the new head, so there was no cheap fix.
Seems like on one model (Pacer?) the cover was an extra royal pain.
The plastic valve cover is definitely one of those “What the heck were they smoking?” kind of things. Fortunately aftermarket aluminum valve covers are commonly available since the same engine was used in Jeeps.
Every now and then I see a car that makes me wish I could find the designer, tap him on the shoulder and say “Excuse me, but what were you thinking?”
Tap, tap, “Mister Teague, sir. About the Concord’s rear quarter window…..
I fully understand the need to differentiate it from the Hornet that came before – I don’t agree, the original was your best shape ever IMHO, but I understand. I fully comprehend the necessity of a luxury compact having a vinyl roof. And I know that opera windows had been de rigueur at the time. The window’s not a bad shape, by itself. But it doesn’t come by itself. That chrome frame! Why is the chrome frame almost twice as wide as the window? Why does the chrome frame encircle not only the glass but also a sizable portion of roof material? If the chrome frame has to be way out there, why doesn’t it have about 10-15 degrees more slant to it so it integrates better with the roofline?
I just don’t get it.
I’ve seen at least one fleet-spec 2-door Concord without the vinyl roof and funky windows. It looked just like a base Hornet sedan aside from grille and headlights.
The ’78 Concord rear-quarter window on vinyl roof models was smaller than the original Hornet window but had a much more attractive shape that fit the car better than the later rendition seen here.
I’ve seen Eagle coupes with the weird square opera window too. That odd juxtaposition of broughamy personal luxury coupe and quasi-SUV design cues didn’t exactly work well together.
AMC also tried using a nearly-square opera window in a vinyl roof to update the late-model Madator coupe to give it a somewhat more mainstream (for the time) personal-luxury coupe look. It couldn’t hide that the swoopy roofline just wasn’t made to look that way.
But was it actually the same roof, glass, and opening, just “broughamed” in with pad and fillers?
my parents had a 1973 AMC Hornet Sportabout wagon with the 258 inline six and auto trans. Great car.
I wonder if I can make a fair comparison between the Hornet/Concord and the Volvo 240.
The AMC lasted a long time, 1970-1985
The 240 lasted a long time, 1975-1993
Both lasted a long time because there really wasn’t money to develop anything new.
Both cars had rabid fans who kept buying them even though there were (probably) better choices available toward the ends of their production runs.
Both cars started out with pretty good engines based on earlier units from their respective companies.
But both companies needed other engines for their cars and couldn’t do a new engine by themselves, so they reached out to other manufacturers.
Volvo joined a consortium to design and build the PRV V-6. They also purchased Diesel engines from VAG.
AMC purchased the Iron Duke from GM. They also bought VAG engines for the Gremlin and DJ, although I don’t think that engine made it into the Hornet/Concord.
Does any of this make sense or am I grasping at straws?
I get your drift, yes. Though I’ve never thought about it before, I do see some similarities as well.
The Concord only lasted through 1983; however, the Eagle made it partway into the 1988 model year. The little EA831 huffer was available in the Concord in 1978 and 1979, in the same Spirit as the 1977-78 Gremlin… where you paid more money for less engine than the standard six cylinder.
It’s too bad AMC’s own four cylinder didn’t come online earlier, as that woulda been a pretty decent choice if you were trying to skinflint a Gremlin… both from a cost and performance standpoint.
In an alternate universe, with a different chronology of business, economic and geopolitical events, including Renault hanging on to AMC and a slower global take up rate of FWD, the Hornet with AMC’s 258 six would have had a long life with a Dacia badge and marketed in Africa and the Middle East.
Totally agree.
Difficult to imagine a clumsier half vinyl roof treatment, but the Aspen/Volare nearly managed it, with their final year version. The 1976-1979 F-Body vinyl roof design being better integrated, particularly along the lower edge.
I drove them and liked them but they were a Studebaker for the 80’s.
I remember when these cars came out, I was in high school. They filled an emerging niche. We had a vacation home that was at the end of 10 miles of extremely rough and steep terrain. Regular cars at the time would be ground up and destroyed on this road. 4WD trucks were crude and unpleasant on-road (we had a land-rover and a Bronco) but were the only things that could take the off-road pounding. So it was a real eye-opener when the AWD concord and Eagle, and the ugly duckling Subaru came along. These vehicles were both great on road, and had enough clearance and AWD to go up the 10% grade dirt roads with potholes and other obstacles. There was nothing else like them back then, and they really opened up a market that never existed before. Now AWD sedans are offered by pretty much every manufacturer, but back then this was all new. It was really brilliant for AMC to exploit this new market, a somewhat natural extension given they had the Jeep pedigree to help them.