LuAnn was a modest, quiet, and unassuming woman.
During the late 1980′s, she was in her mid-60′s. LuAnn had had a sad, rough life. Widowed at an early age, she was left to raise her only son whom had various issues that would never allow him to live on his own or work outside the home. She was rail thin and gaunt. Time had not been kind to her.
LuAnn had been left with little by her late husband. She had found a job as a school cook in a small public school in the vicinity of her home in extreme Southern Illinois. She and her son lived in a well-worn house on the banks of the Mississippi River. She kept her two Ramblers, the newer one being a 1964 Classic 770, in a makeshift carport.
She strongly preferred her green ’64.
LuAnn had a 12 mile drive to the school for work. As money was always a precious resource for her, she could not entertain the idea of anything new. Economy was paramount in acquisition, operation, and maintenance. LuAnn had found Rambler products to perfectly fit her needs. Maybe the old Rambler was not as stylish as a newer car, but LuAnn had never been one to bother with stylishness.
As a woman who did not believe in excess in either words or behavior, LuAnn’s nature would have caused her to pause had she been shopping for another Rambler and encountered such extravagances as a V8 engine or frivolities such as a transmission called “Flash-O-Matic”. She couldn’t fathom spending extra for whitewall tires.
No, LuAnn’s Rambler was 25 years old at the time and still going strong. It’s straight-six and three-speed manual suited her needs. She knew it slowed considerably on some of the hills in the area, much to the chagrin of the high-schoolers following her home. Some of these hills were enough of a strain on her six-cylinder Rambler they sometimes caused her to have to downshift to second gear. But her Rambler was still highly reliable regardless of how warm or cold the weather. It always started immediately and got her to work and back.
LuAnn surmised she had another five good years left in her 1964 Rambler.
Sometimes the smallest things can trigger memories that had seemed forgotten. LuAnn had not crossed my mind since graduating from that small high school.
I do not know what happened to LuAnn or either of her Ramblers.
This particular Rambler has had an easier life than LuAnn and her Ramblers. Time has been kind to it for the last 48 years. Having been born with a V8 and a Flash-O-Matic, it was parked in front of an ice cream parlor, extravagances in which LuAnn would not have likely partaken.
How fitting to have found this modest ’64 Rambler Classic 770 in a small town on the banks of the Mississippi River. It may have made LuAnn take notice.
Nice find! I’ve always thought these cars bear a strong likeness to the second generation Valiant. I wonder how the two would compare in terms of longevity, affordability, and handling. The Valiant probably wins hands down on all counts, but there is something charming about a well taken care of Rambler.
I’m in a position to offer some insight on your question. I had a ’64 Valiant, and I currently have a ’63 Rambler Classic 660 which is very much the same car as pictured, except a few cosmetic differences.
The Classic was a “big” car and the American was the small Rambler. I don’t have measurements, but I’d say the Classic was a little bigger all around than the Valiant.
Both the Classic and the Valiant were unibody, and I’d say the handling and ride were about the same. The difference between these cars and BOF cars (such as my brother’s ’61 Lark) was quite noticeable. They both ride a lot better than most other cars of their size built in those times.
They are both close in longevity too. It’s hard to beat the slant -6, which is legendary. It’s less well known that Rambler designed a new 6 for ’64. This would be their 6 right to the end and would even continue in the Jeep until well into this century. I have a ’67 Rambler with the 199ci version of the engine. 232 was also a common size and 258 would be the big 6 for many years. I don’t know how big the last versions were. These are very smooth engines -7 mains – and parts availability is very good. IMO these engines are every bit as good as the Chrysler slant 6. Alas, my ’63 Classic has the older 195 engine – a different design and less reliable.
I know the car restoration Gods would frown, but I’m thinking engine swap.
As far as affordability, I can’t tell you what the prices of each car were when new. If you were looking for a car to restore I’d say the Valiant probably has more parts available, which makes it more affordable – but I doubt the difference is huge. Operating costs should be about the same. Neither gets good MPGs by todays standards.
You could swap in a later 232 I6 out of a Jeep, it would keep it AMC but give you a modern engine with plenty of support.
The AMC straight six was the go to engine for the Jeep line throughout the 80s and 90s. It was the big engine in the Wrangler and Cherokee (small) and the base engine in the 1st and 2nd Gen Grand Cherokees. The last product to have them was the previous style of Wrangler (TJ) that ran from 97-06.
Up here in Sierraland Cherokees where second only to Subaru Outbacks as winter beaters its not uncommon to see them with 200+ on the clock with the original drive train.
Wow, thanks. Both cars do seem to be based on the same formula.
Here’s a nice one for sale in So Cal. if anyone is interested. Same year too (though not a 770 judging by the pics.)
http://www.autotraderclassics.com/classic-car/1964-AMC-Other+AMC+Models-729250.xhtml?conversationId=164520
The Valiant front suspension is very weak they eat through lower ball joints like crazy. So much so that Rare Parts the company that specializes in suspension parts for older cars has developed a new much stronger ball joint. The torsion bar mounts are also subject to the rust monster and can give way.
The slant 6 has a slight edge in that putting oil in it is optional which you can’t get away with on the AMC 6. However the AMC 6 is easier to service as you can actually get at the distributor to change the points.
I wonder what kind of car LuAnn would drive if she were still alive today, and in roughly the same situation? My guess is a Japanese econobox circa 1990s. Corolla, Sentra, Protege, what have you.
I seem to see the LuAnns of today frequently driving around in Hyundai Excels…
I haven’t seen an Excel on the road around here for years.
Wide whitewalls? Can’t remember when I last saw a set. To me they look pretentious and out of place on a car built after they were out of fashion. But somehow I like them on this car. They go nicely with the white roof and the side stripe.
The styling still looks good after all these years. However, I think that the grille on the ’63 is more interesting.
The ’63 grill is more interesting. They are also impossible to find – w/o a dent or two in them.
LuAnn’s other Rambler was a ’63, about the same shade of green as the ’64. I agree on the ’63 having a more attractive (more aggressive?) looking grille.
I think LuAnn is the star of the story, not the car. Without trying to delve too deeply into social commentary the LuAnn of today would probably be on food stamps, ADS, and who knows what. Probably too busy seeing government counselors for her special needs child (even adult child) to work.
Before I am subjected to some misplaced fecal blizzard for these comments, I spent 20 years teaching in Special Education. I am trying to actually be descriptive and not prescriptive here. There are still some LuAnns out there but society (since 1964) has made them rare.
Not saying good or bad but LuAnn is a special woman. Chances are she came from my generation or before. You may not see her very often today. If you doubt that, look around.
nice post teach.
I agree completely. While reading this article I gave so little thought to the car its surprising. I would also like to add that since the demise of Rambler, there really has been no American make to compete on quality and price with the lower end Japanese brands or Hyundai today.
Ah the ’64 Rambler Classic. Thinking back, I think that this must have been one of the most beautifully restrained and timeless cars of the ’60s. No fripperies, which was a welcome change after the 57-61 Ramblers and their pointless geegaws, but enough subtle detailing to keep it from looking bland. The taillamp assemblies were solid chunks of chrome, and the rear wheelarches had a gentle sweep back. I think the general ‘bar of soap’ profile of these is what inspired not only the later Valiants, but also the Volvo 240, Fiat 124, and the Mercedes w114/5- the seminal ‘International Style’ of automotive architecture that defined the era.
I had a ’64 550 stripper model that I got off Ebay in 2000 in totally rust free ‘western car’ (i.e. no salt only sand on roads) condition. The owner got it from a retired farmer for his son, but his son didn’t want such a car. When I won it, he set out rebuilding the brakes for free so I could drive it home to Detroit. I think he was glad it was going to someone who would appreciate it in the way his son didn’t.
It was a wonderful car, in turquoise with turquoise vinyl and cloth interior and a sparkly glassfibre headlining. It wasn’t fancy by any means, but the dashboard was really cool and made it seem more expensive than it was. It was one of the first American cars to have the controls grouped within the driver’s reach. Unfortunately, it also still had vacuum wipers, which gave the driver the option of accelerating up a hill or seeing ahead- you could choose one, but would need to upgrade to an electric motor to do both simultaneously. For a stripper, it was quite generously equipped, wipers not withstanding. It had an alternator, very good heater, torque tube propshaft, and the best seats ever put into a strippo. Now, until the 1990s, if you bought a basic American car with a bench seat, you had to ensure that you had the same body shape as the dummy who they fitted the seats around. The Rambler however had- Reclining seats- yes, reclining seats in a bottom of the range car. Not only did these seats recline, but they also made into a bed, a factor which probably made many Rambler owners into premature grandparents.
Even driving it in Metro Detroit traffic in the 2000s, it didn’t feel underpowered. It could get up to speed and cruise at 70-80 easily enough. The 3 speed was quite nice to use, and although the steering took a few twirls to change headings, it wasn’t bad. I have also been a Mopar boy from way back, and can honestly say that the A body was worlds apart on handling.
If the Rambler was the Olds Ciera on the test track, the Duster/Valiant was the Neon. Both were safe and far better than the bloated full size cars by GM and Ford, but the Rambler was not sporty by any definition.
Mine also had the 195, not a bad engine for one designed in the 30s, but it required the type of servicing most owners weren’t used to. Every 6000 miles, the head bolts needed to be torqued and the valves adjusted. Seals were made of rope, and often leaked. If I remember correctly, the bearings were white metal instead of shells too. In other words, it was like driving a model T Ford.
Ian- the 199/232 was an option in ’64 and unless you had the build sheet on display, you’d be the only one who knew it wasn’t original if you were to do a swap!
Sadly for mine though the gearbox developed bearing wear, and needed to be changed. I was at university at the time, and couldn’t afford to have it done at a shop, and thanks to that torque tube, it wasn’t the type of repair I could do at my apartment building’s parking lot- the whole rear axle/propshaft/gearbox had to come out! It was probably just as well that I sold it, as a few more winters in Detroit would having it look as rough as LuAnn’s, in spite of the Ontario OilGard applications every year.
I still scour Ebay hoping to find it, and if I see it again, I’d be half tempted to ship it back over to the UK where I now live to keep my equally archaic Rover P4 company.
It’s interesting to compare the side profile pic of the 64 Classic with that of the 1970 Mercedes W114 in Tom K’s piece from April.
( http://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/1970-mercedes-benz-220d-ride-in-teutonic-luxury-with-65-hp/ )
I hope many decades from now we still see Buicks and Oldsmobiles in this sort of condition.
An amazing car! I can always remember these cars in the “other side of the tracks” neighbourhood where I grew up, the place with the Catholic working class families with 4+ kids. These were inevitably the “winter car,” the “nice car” being stored in the back yard under a tarp. Mom did not have a car of her own in 1960s Quebec! They were great cars but were exceptionally prone to rust, not that they were really any worse than anything else. Quebec winters cause anything of this era to have holes in it after three years.
I had a cousin as a kid whose dad worked for the CNR. He drove a Rambler in the winter and had a pristine 1956 Ford he drove after the snow left. He bought the Ford new and only drove it May-October. I wonder what happened to it?
Is this car from an alternate dimension? Had the pictures been taken in Eugene, the car would be a Volvo with “Bush Lied, Soldiers Died” and “Grand Oil Party” bumper stickers.
I liked the fact that the front & rear bumpers of these cars were interchangeable…
After reading one of the earlier posts…I’m kicking myself for throwing out the perfect aluminum ’63 grille I had been saving…I never could find a box big enough to ship it in…and E-bay finally succeeded in running me (the typical small-time seller) off. I remember that grille being quite the booger to remove at the scrapyard. *sigh*
I liked the fact that the front & rear bumpers of these cars were interchangeable…
If you look closely I believe the glass was interchangeable on the front and back doors too. One of AMCs many money saving measures.
Jack, your piece was a very engaging read. I never had any firsthand experience in these. The first thought that comes to my mind is how far back on the body the rear wheels were set. Sort of like the 56 Studebaker that Laurence wrote about recently. There is a little bit of a dogleg in the back door, but not much of one for a car of this size.
Another Stude connection is that the Flash-O-Matic transmission in the Ramblers was virtually identical to the Flight-O-Matic used in the Studes (and the 1950s Ford-O-Matic). All were supplied by Borg Warner. I am curious for you commentators who actually lived with one of these – did it use the full 3 speeds in the normal Drive range, or did Drive start you in second gear and upshift to 3rd as in the Studes and the Fords? I need to get busy and turn my obsession with 1950s Automatic Transmissions into a piece here at CC.
Mine was a 3 on the tree manual so I can’t comment 100% on my rambler, but as an ironic twist, the Flash-0-Matic is AMC’s name for the BW35, which is used on the Rambler’s Swedish cousin the Volvo 140 and 240, and the equally boxy and Rambleresque Hillman Hunter amongst many others. The 35 is a ‘normal’ 3 speed, starting in 1-2-3. These were designed for ‘low power’ engines that didn’t have enough torque to start in 2nd like most other American slushboxes.
It’s been many years since my ’63 has been driven (waiting for that happy coincidence of time and money to restore it) but as I recall it shifts through all 3 speeds, in D.
Good read and touching as well. Thank you, Inspector McGarret.
My connection with this car is quite removed. These Ramblers were used as Limos in Mid 60′s Argentina. Paul has written quite a bit about Rambler’s connection to the IKA Torino and Rambler American. IKA basically chopped a couple of Rambler bodies and created the Argentine muscle car. a pretty fun if not loud ride!
Back to the Amerk, my parent’s wedding ride was a pristine white American–possibly of this same vintage as they were married Sept, 65. There are a boatload of pictures of them getting into the car and I wish I had access to those for this blog– unfortunately, they didn’t keep the wedding limo for their honeymoon, however I don’t think they greatly missed that great reclining bench seat as mom still returned home from honeymoon with me floating around in there.
Hey Paul….
what’s this? Cheating on us????
http://www.amcrc.com/feature/04_09.html
Cheating on us??? They’re cheating me out of my work, stealing it, in other words. It would be ok if they ran the first paragraph and linked back to us, but this is very uncool, and technically illegal.
My apologies for making light of the situation. I thought for some reason that they had achieved some type of permission to post that as they’re a Rambler aficionado site-
not very cool then!
That webpage is down, at least for now…
What were they lifting, by the way?
My whole article.
I sent them a message requesting to take that piece down, and they responded quickly by saying they would. This happens a lot; I run into my articles repeatedly. Most of the time, they’re on obscure blogs, so it’s really not even worth my time to chase them down.
You could’ve instead asked them to provide an excerpted paragraph with a link to the original article. I read the page on the Wayback machine, and seeing as they credited you by name as the author, I’m sure they would’ve obliged. They are possibly only honest folk, and a link would also serve to drive some of their readers to CC, readers who could also be old car aficionados, not just Rambler fans, and Rambler club is hardly an obscure blog (relative to the obscurity of Rambler cars themselves). Sending a takedown request isn’t always the best way to proceed, and does not earn many friends, or readers. But that is just my opinion.
I did. That was just one of the two options I presented to them. Everyone likes links; me included. That’s the right protocol, and what is done all over the web. I pointed that out to them. They chose to take it off, apparently.
i did manage to save this picture as it may be the nicest Torino I’ve ever seen. I really need to locate one of these in Argentina and have it shipped up this way. Other than the gas prices, it would be hoot to drive on our highways as the Argentine roads are notoriously bad.
Great car, great story and great comments. A very fine example of the All-American Six.
I loved the curved side glass on these cars. At the time I thought the 64 grille ruined the nearly perfect design of the 1963 by Richard Teague, one to be surpassed the next year by his 1964 Rambler American. According to his wiki entry, the American was designed around the same set of doors from the Classic, exemplifying his ability to do so much with so little. American Motors was turning out some really great looking cars during these years, including my uncle’s 1964 American and 1966 Ambassador, and my cousin’s 1968 Javelin.
Those wide whitewalls do not look good on this car.
You are right about the whitewalls. This is a “thing” with me. No car made after 1956 should have these whitewalls. The fat whitewall belongs to a certain era, and cars outside of that era just do not look right with them. IIRC, there was a narrower whitewall from 1957-61 (around 2 1/2 inches or so) then the narrower (an inch or less) starting in 1962. These were pretty standard until the ultra skinny Michelins came out on the Mark III.
Seeing those anti-Obama bumper stickers on this Rambler makes me wonder…why isn’t Mrs. Romney driving a couple AMC Ambassadors instead of Cadillacs?
You missed a joke I made on TTAC about Romney and his coments about the auto industry… “And then Mr. Romney drove off into the sunset in his 1974 Ambassodor.”