(first posted 9/11/2013) By the early seventies, AMC’s Matador and Ambassador were the equivalent of the Studebaker Lark ten years earlier: you just knew they were not long for this earth. They were the driving dead, and driven by the same cast of characters who had still been buying Studes in the sixties: old folks who were either loyal to a fault, or still held to some belief that Ramblers (or Studes) were truly superior in some way, like AMC’s devotion to those extruded aluminum window surrounds. Yes, when car companies are dying, it’s all about the little practical details. That’s because practical folks are the only ones who actually care about those details while everyone else is buying the hot new thing.
The aluminum window surrounds were a great idea actually, like so many AMC innovations (folding seats, etc.). They never rusted, and it meant that even the cheapest American 220 had a bright window trim, unlike the dismal painted window surrounds of everyone else’s strippers.
But by the seventies, folks didn’t give a rat’s ass about practical details like that. That is, those that hadn’t already drifted off to Toyotas. Most Americans pined for a new Colonnade coupe with opera windows, not a dowdy and malformed Matador sedan.
In 1973, I saw plenty of new Matador sedans just like this in Iowa City, but it was the police who were driving them. I forget what they were driving before, but suddenly this whole fleet of various pastel colored unmarked Matadors arrived replacing the black and whites. Pretty sneaky, or not actually, since nobody else was buying them except for one or two old retired farmers. We called them the rainbow patrol.
I assume AMC was cutting pretty aggressive deals with the police departments then, out of desperation to keep the the lines moving. Because suddenly Matador cop cars were everywhere. And a year or two earlier, who had ever seen a Rambler cop car? Never.
This generation Matador arrived as the 1967 Rebel, and was AMC’s last shot at a competitive mid-size line. A rather nice and clean design for the times, it just got swamped by the Big Three despite its many virtues. Love that 1967 vintage art direction in the brochure shots.
Even the sedan was a decent-looking car, comparing well against the competition. But in 1970, if memory serves me right, the Rebel morphed into the Matador, with a hip-ectomy. It just didn’t come off right, like a botched buttocks-augmentation surgery.
Of course, I wish I had found the famous 1974 Matador, with its truly mind-boggling second plastic surgery malpractice. It sprouted one of the most bizarre lip or nose extensions, and assured that everyone now knew the game was truly up for AMC’s sedans. I mean, did they do that on purpose to make sure Renault really did keep buying AMC stock on the cheap? Dick Teague; what where you thinking? I know you were pretty preoccupied with your last-gasp Matador coupe, but maybe you should have delegated the Matador face lift to someone other than the janitor.
Of course, I’m still holding out for the coupe, but it’s been a while since I saw one. But I’ve said that about so many cars I never expected to find again, so I know it’s just a matter of time. Truly one of the most remarkable cars of the era.
Perhaps you’ve noticed that I ‘m not really saying much about this actual Matador sedan. And it’s not just because it’s late and I’m tired. Believe me if, if this were the ’74 coupe, I’d be buzzing.
Instead I’m falling asleep. Beats the alternative.
You could make a pot of coffee lol. I am curious, is that gray original, or is it a primer? It’s hard for me to tell for sure.
Hi,
I have a 1973 Madator, What the hell do I do with it? She was giving to me yes I might love her but she has to go. HOGGGGGING up my driveway, I can barely get my barrels by it on trash day. I must she is lovely and its fawn color and back seats are the best trunk too. that being said I live in the city and already drive and love my jeep. and don’t have a clue what to ask or start. You seem to know a bunch and I can see your humor in this car. Any suggestions where to start would be great.
Thanks
Barb
Barb, this is a fairly old posting, so he may not see your reply. You might look into the AMC Rambler Club (http://www.amcrc.com/). There may be a local chapter in your area and if you have a quality car, this may be a place to try and sell it. Good luck.
Barbie, when she gets a loving home, let us know. Whatever you do, don’t send her to the scrapyard for someone will want her if the price is good.
My email is jma91122@aol.com can u let me no the info on the matador if you stilll have her thanks john
a 1973 Matador was my first blk and wht police car in LAPD PK
Barbie—
I’m an AMC fan from way back and I’m STILL looking for a Matador Wagon that I can “pair-up” with my ’74 Coupe and ’87 Eagle Wagon… Being in the okanagan, It’ll be tended well and get a good home amongst the other AMC’s that I’ve inherited from my late Uncle. So if you’re still looking for someone to care for it right, I’m your man! Just email me @ valiantlogan65@outlook.com, or ring me @ 360-972-8347. Thanx!!
Logan Chrysler
a 1973 AMC Matador was my first Blk and Wht LAPD Policecar,it was a great driving Car,very fast with the 401 Engine,like to hav eone now
All through high school (1975 to 1979), I had the pure unadulterated pleasure of campaigning one of, if not the best ever, street sleeper. A 401 AMC EX-COP MATADOR. Yes, the car was indeed lack luster in its profile, but that front end looked pretty good and I do have to say that a lot of 396 chevelles and 289 or 351 Mustangs only got to see the back bumper (a couple of mopar 6 pack cars did see the grill!!) . The 1973 COP cars came with the 401, a 4 barrel carb, something akin to a mid rise intake (stock), dual exhausts, a Chrysler 727 transmission. Huge sway bars front and rear and a trailing arm coil spring rear suspension. Of course, there were a few things I did to make if “work” better. I changed the distributor advance springs, added a shift kit (which I didn’t get set exactly right. First day after the shift kit was installed, Dad drove it work, he did ask why it didn’t shift to second until 65 mph. LOL). I also added a underdash control that created a vacuum leak when I pulled it out… This made the car run really ruff at a stop light and all the way into the nearest parking lot, where money was discussed, thus the would be victim would think it was not running well. At one point I installed an extra windshield wiper pump and water supply in the rear wheel wells, for burnouts that really heated the tires up, for, aaaaa,,, traction, yea traction (read: impressed the chicks back then). I also added a small tach on the column and even made burl wood contact paper overlays for the dash faces (like the ambasador had) Officially, the car did an on track 1/4 mile at Beeline raceway with a 12.46 at 128 mph, through the traps. believe it or not. The total secret to that car was to stomp the brakes hard, slowly run the rpms up to 2500, pump the brakes once, really fast. This allowed the trailing arms to “setup” the rear end about 2 inches. Then when you mashed the peddle and let off the brakes, the car squatted down in the rear and hooked up hard. The weight transfer and collapse of the springs, kept the back tires from spinning and off you went! of course the flipped over air cleaner sounded like you were lowering the barometric pressure over the entire state, but that was half the fun! of course the most fun was to insult the chevelles and mustangs by commenting that my Dads crappy car can beat that Chrome POS your driving. I believe that the phrase all show and no go was mentioned to those owners once in a while and it made them a tad angry. Again, believe it or not, Dads crappy car did indeed beat them. I am not ashamed to say that I cried when that car died an untimely death due to a fuel line failure and a resulting fire.
Many many years latter when I was in my 40s and had kids of my own, I told my Father a few of my best Matador stories. He commented ” No wonder I could not keep tires on that car”, followed by, “Come over here, I am about to give you a good whoopin for being a sneaky punk kid !!”
1973 AMC Matador 4 door sedan, I salute you!!!!
Not surprised. The CHP used Matadors for a while, and they DEMANDED performance. The only police car that could run with a 401 Matador was…a 440 Mopar. (Though an E58 360 in a relatively-light Aspen wouldn’t be far behind.) I had a 74 briefly as a parts car…sadly, it was way too rotted to save.
Gotta ask: it wasn’t a CHP car, was it?
Sargeant Stadenko’s car.
That’s Hardhat!!
Lots of ’em were LAPD cars on The Rockford Files.
Also Adam 12 had lots of LAPD Matadors.
I don’t think the lines of the featured car are all that terrible, especially when compared to the grotesque, bloated pigs that GM and Ford were producing at the same time and in the same category. I have a pretty strong distaste for almost every generic domestic family car from this era, but this car doesn’t make my stomach churn nearly as hard as a Chevelle from the same year.
Hey, you know what it needs? I needs a shit ton more chrome, more emblems with scripts and crests and swirly decorative doodads, more wood-flavored tape on the dash, a vinyl top, a 4″ high hood ornament, and tufted velour loose pillow seating. In a word: Brougham.
AMC did make an Ambassador Brougham in ’73 with basically all the items you mentioned. The Ambassador even had fake wood on the gauges. I’m not kidding!
Buyers wanted the big car looks of the 70’s Mid Sized cars. The 72 GM’s, while now considered the last classic ‘muscle cars’, were considered ‘outdated and too small’ compared to the 72 Torino by Motor Trend. So, the big GM colonnades hit the market sweet spot.
Was this like what Chrysler did when they phased out the Imperial? The Imperial was gone, but the following year The New Yorker was basically it.
What exactly was the difference in This car and the 72 Ambassador? Actually this is a dead ringer behind the grill of My Dad’s Hileah Yellow 70 Ambassador (Base Model) not a D/L or SST.
These were truly Embarrassing to be seen in. How uncool could your Dad be?
His was a company car, sedan I believe. In 72 he drove home in it’s replacement. A Grasshopper Green Ambassador Brogham IIRC, it had a darker green roof & matching Brokade Upolstery. It was a definite improvement as it blended into the scenery better.
In our House It was that or my Mother’s 63 Grand Prix in Marimba red at the time. A 9 year old car was rather passe in those days, so having AC the company car was slightly less
ghastly to be seen in as a young teen.
They felt like they were styled aftyer the fuselage 69 Plymouth makeover. I liked how the radio was on its side, well within reach of the driver.
Geez these are rather dull to speak of.
Your mother had a 1963 Grand Prix? And you didn’t bow down before it every morning? Shame on you.
Honestly…I’d rather have an Ambassador.
We had locally assembled Rebels here good cars by all accounts I test flew a Matador in Sydney many years ago it was cheap but unimpressive I bought the Holden next to it for $600 or so and it was a bomb too but easier to fix
The Ambassador had a 4 inch longer wheelbase. Contrary to convention, the stretch was in front of the firewall instead of the usual rearward pull of the rear axle.The same was done when GM stretched the A-body to make the Monte Carlo and Grand Prix.
I really liked the Rebel when it came out – a perfect counterpart to the Chevelle and to me, better looking than the Torino.
When in the air force, all staff cars were Matadors in air force ultramarine blue with yellow lettering in the appropriate places. Black or blue interiors. That dash? Talk about all the hard, plastic-y surfaces on cars nowadays, check one of these out – nary a soft touch anywhere on the dash! When in Okinawa in the fall of 1970, I was assigned to wash and wax the staff car assigned to our group. Washing went fine, but using the greasy G.I.-issue wax was awful. It took what seemed like hours to buff the stuff off. I kind of got it done, but sure had lots of swirls on it!
I was “ordered” to take that car to the mess hall one morning while suffering the most horrible hangover I have ever had – I was carrying my stomach slung over my shoulder and told to get something to eat. That didn’t go too well. Later, after a near-disastrous pre-flight briefing I assisted on, I was ordered to get out of there and get some sleep and don’t come back ’til the next morning! Good times back then! Yeah – lots of Matadors and little Chevy C-10 short bed, stepside pickups and a few Dodge Power Wagons. No Jeeps/MUTTS for the USAF where I was.
My wife’s aunt and uncle also owned a Matador – a very “nice” school-bus yellow with black interior! It was visible from the air! They had that car for years.
“extruded aluminum window surrounds”
Yes, those spelled cheap, cheap, cheap. For that matter, everything about the car spelled cheap, cheap, cheap!
Wifey’s aunt & uncle had a school bus yellow Matador sedan. It worked OK, but it was such an outdated car in 1978. It was an outdated car in 1973!
Sorry, but after all these years, there’s nothing I like about these.
I call foul!
I think the 71-73 Matadors are quite handsome, and the last gasp of sanity before AMC plunged headlong into the malaise era. The sedan is frumpy, but the 2 door hardtop lines flowed much better, was raced in NASCAR by Mark Donohue and known as “The Flying Brick” because of it’s poor aerodynamics. They even managed to win a race.
Of course I’m biased here, because a 72 hardtop was my first car. Dad bought it new because the enormous trunk was just the thing for a family with three kids. I got it 14 years later and kept it on the road until 1991 on a shoestring.
It was a fun car. Fun because nobody knew what it was even then, most guessed a 1967 Dodge. Fun because you could seatbelt two kegs of beer into the back, fill the trunk with ice at the hockey rink, and park on the front lawn of a house party. Fun because the torquey 258 could pull a 17.7 quarter mile, which is not great but it would beat 5.0 Mustangs to 60 feet. Total Matador production was only something like 40,000 per year, so it’s very uncommon to see one today.
If I’d found a coupe, especially like yours’, I would have been a bit more enthused. I haven’t seen that style in ages either.
Actually, this Matador sedan isn’t all that bad looking, especially compared to the bloated barges the Big Boys were building. Did I say it was? Maybe it came across that way…
Came off a little harsh, but some of it was deserved. AMC’s designs were bi-polar to put it nicely. The “Coffin nose” cars may have been the strangest ones of all.
Here’s a custom job that blew my mind, I’m not sure if I like it or not..
I like it but it looks like it inspired the styling of the front end of 1980s Mercury Grand Marquis.
Birddog: Eagle head lights on that “custom”, or so it looks. Is it a proto of a last gasp?
That was just a pic from an Eagle forum from a few years back.
It does have an odd Grand Marq vibe..
Oh my god, it does look like a proto-Grand Marquis! And it does look like Eagle or Concord headlight clusters were faired in, rather nicely, as a matter of fact.
That’s a lot of work. It begs the question, WHY?
Looks like a ’74 Matador sedan with Concord headlights.
I prefer the single headlights and turn signal. It looks fine on the Eagle and the Spirit, but not this. I do like the protruding nose and the divided grille of the 1974 Matador. It’s too bad it didn’t continue to the end of production.
I’ve always loved the “coffin nose” AMC Matador sedan and wagon. My favourite year is 1974, with the “divided” grille, like the one in the photo. I’m not too crazy about the double headlamps, but the grille itself is nice. It goes well with the protruding front end. 🙂
I like it, too, also confirming the Grand M. look. As fine a looking brougham as any of this era.
That’s a gorgeous car.
I agree totally. I’ve never owned a Matador, either in sedan form, station wagon, or coupe form, but I’ve always found the Matador to be a handsome looking vehicle. It may be dated, but so what? If it’s been properly maintained, any car can give you reliable enjoyment. I particularly like the 1974 and later Matador sedan and wagon, with its protruding nose. It may not be to EVERYONEs tastes, and I’m sure people have their reasons, but I like the car.
I watched Bobby Allison Race one of these at a USAC stock car event at the Wisconsin State Fair Park – painted in the Donahue red/white/blue livery. He won. I owned a 1972 4-dr. example in the early 80’s – i fondly remember that car – rock solid dependable, comfortable, good performance and handling. My mother had one too – mom and dad racked up over 200,000 miles before they traded it on a (urg!) 1984 Chevette! Mom got a big surprise at the local county fair that August, as her old 6-cyl. Matador drove out onto the track for the annual demolition derby! She could have cried…
My 73 Matador 401
This is one of the fastest cars I’ve ever owned!
Mines faster….tunnel ram 401 manual valve body 727 and 4.10s. I have owned every body style of Gen 1 Matador and a Gen 2 sedan and 76 Coupe. This ones a keeper
That car is a real beauty; you did a fabulous job on it. Many of AMC’s products were underrated and just overshadowed by the big three.
My grandfather drove one of these. A ’70, I think. Base model with no options.
My grandfather was very frugal, so he always bought one of the last cars from the old model year once the new models were out. So his cars always were hued with that year’s least-desirable color, in this case a hideous sea-foam green. Other than a low price, his only requirement was a trunk big enough for four golf bags. The Matador swallowed them easily.
He got almost a decade of reliable service out of it and then traded it in for the last ’78 Le Mans on the Pontiac dealer’s lot. In this case a dreadful baby blue that looked chalky and faded even fresh off the lot. Another stripper, but it had the Chevy 305, which made it much more fun to drive than our ’79 Cutlass with the wheezing Olds 260.
“but it had the Chevy 305, which made it much more fun to drive than our ’79 Cutlass with the wheezing Olds 260.”
Careful what you say about anything Olds – Educator Dan will have your head!
Well, the 260 had a two-barrel carb, and I think the 305 had a four-barrel. So, technically, the Chevy had better breathing, which does make the Olds engine wheezy by comparison.
I admire Olds’ gumption to attempt such a small displacement V8. That is all I have to say on the subject. (Although with the rarely seen 4-speed manual the 260 might have been drive-able.)
I don’t think anything could help the 260. I sold auto parts over a NAPA store counter from ’83 to ’89, and I never heard a good word about the 260. The 307, by comparison, was well-regarded, except that it had a puzzling tendency to blow its valley-pan gasket. We could not keep them in stock.
It must be that you can only push a given engine architecture so far. On the face of it, there’s no reason that the 260 should have been a dud, but it was. Ford had similar problems with the 255. In Ford’s case that seems less forgivable, since the small-block had begun its life at 221cid, and there was a perfectly good version in the early ’60s at 260cid. IIRC, Ford engineers had carved a lot of metal out of the block to make it even more flyweight, and that led to unanticipated block strength issues.
Olds had a beautiful small displacement V8. It was all aluminum. It was 215 cubic inches. GM is so STOOPID
http://goldenrod-garage.com/DETAIL.ASP?DT=1&CI=6&UI=483&MI=1&DH=0
I once owned a ’78 Cutlass Salon “aero sedan” with the 260 at 140,000 it chewed up a valve rocker and bent the adjoining pushrod; pretty easy fix. At 180,000 the front seal began to pour oil, I didn’t have the machanical skill to fix it and sold it to someone who did. Overall, I was happy with the engine, it was slow but smooth. On the advise of a friend’s dad who had the same car, I did my best to nurse it along with no jackrabbit starts, he said the transmissions were for a six cylinder and too weak for the 260 and easy to fry if abused.
A 1978 Lemans equipped with the 305 Chevy would have been a 2BBL dualjet. The Olds 260 came with the same carb but was severely handicapped with dime sized valves and heads that came with tiny ports that quit flowing past 4400 RPM. The Hp and torque tell much about why the Chevy 305 performed so much better than the 260 Olds in the A-G body cars. 145 HP and 240 torque compared to 110 Hp and 205 torque at very low RPM’s. The 305 also had a 8.4:1 compression ratio vs the 260’s 7.5:1.
The 4BBl version of the 305 was rated up to 165 Hp in certain aplications such as the Regal and Cutlass of the same year. The Malibu and Lemans just came equipped with the 2BBl carb of the 305 option.
The 260 Olds was a smooth reliable engine but severely under powered in stock setup, especially during the 80-82 time frame when GM introduced there C-3/C-4 emissions system which conspired to reduce this poor strangled engine down to a mere 100 HP and 190 torque. Even Fords lamented 255 made 15 more horses than that!
A lightly optioned A body from the 1978 redesign would have been a very fun and lively car for the era, if it were equipped with the 305. I recall these cars were very nice to drive and the SBC worked really well, since they made huge torque and the cars were not that heavy.
They were not nearly as much fun with the 260, which was heavier than the SBC. I have never really understood why the 260 existed, since it was no more powerful than the 3.8 V-8 and a lot heavier.
Here in Canada almost all the A/G bodies built by GM Canada had the 305 and many with four barrel carb.
My parents would wait to buy a last of line in an unpopular colour,Ludlow green Mk1 Cortina, a ,dog turd brown Mk3 Cortina,hearing aid beige Allegro Mk1 Granada in the same awful brown are just a few examples.
Have to say that not all owners of these cars were golden agers. I bought a medium green 73 Matador Station Wagon in 1976 when I was 33 years old. Paid $2700 for it and drove it about 4 years till rust and the automatic transmission put an end to it. The vinyl interior was attractive and durable, seats were very comfortable, plenty of leg room everywhere, nice riding, and I still recall that this car was one of the quickest cars I have ever owned. I did not know in those days that automatic transmissions should be serviced periodically and a trip from Ohio to Long Island to pick up a load of printed catalogs for a customer pretty well fried it at 98,000 miles.
LAPD was the big customer for Matador squads.They were driving Plymouth Belvedere’s before that. AMC actually won the bid on performance, not just price. LAPD had its own test track in San Pedro. The 401 in a lighter car outperformed the CA smog-control strangled Mopar 400. The hideous 1974 Matador Coupe was a favorite of the Studebaker Lark set.
Reed and Malloy drove one of these that magically morphed into an older Satellite when it was about to be involved in a collision.
That scene rings a bell to me
Wonder how Reed and Malloy felt about the Studebaker Lark????
Hdeous? How dare you, sir!
I confess that even after reading several articles in various places about how obviously dreadful that styling was I still don’t see it when I look at that car. I see a serious contender to the Colonnades. Maybe it’s geographical/cultural? In small town NE PA in 1974 AMC was still a very popular choice, lots of people historically bought Nashes and Ramblers, then went on to Hornets, Gremlins, Pacers, Eagles, and even Jeeps.
Our next door neighbor in 1974 bought one of the Matador coupes in a periwinkle blue with the white striping and interior. It was extremely glamorous, at least to me and to the couple that bought it. 🙂
Oh, I forgot to mention — http://arcticboy.com has a wealth of info on AMC/Nash/Hudson and more. Not affiliated, just an enthusiastic reader.
I’ve been meaning to ask you if you son was dumped by a swede or something in high school, given his hatred of saabs. But once he posted about his significant other driving a suburu wagon, it all kind of made sense.
How to tie it into your post? Trying to convince my dad that a new 9-5 wagon was worth waiting for. after all it’s a wagon — with a stick. And so practical. Then you tore my heart out with the aluminum window surrounds this morning.
Let’s just say there are a number of reasons why each of the Niedermeyers is at their respective websites; one wasn’t big enough for both of us. Family harmony restored.
I like the clean lines of this car but I see how it got lost compared to the baroque excesses of GM.
A kid I went to high school with had one of these, the ’71 Matador SST Sedan. He was what we would call today a nerd, and super religious on top of it. But he was no dummy, got one of those cars for well under $1000 in 1979, while kids like me were trying to scrape together the $1500-$2000+ for a V8 Chevelle or Cutlass.
Like other AMCs, there was no frakin’ room under the hood, and IIRC this car had the 360. I helped him do a tune up with new plugs and points. The nice thing about these cars, is they blended parts from all of the manufacturers. I remember setting the points on this car because the distributor was up front, but it was a GM distributor with the little window on the side so you could stick the allen wrench in there and adjust the dwell on the points very easily. One of the few niceties on that car. EVERYTHING else in the engine bay was a b*tch!
I also remember riding around with him in the car, the seats were very comfortable and the car had a very smooth ride, with what seemed to me as much room as the then current LTD. Lots of room to spread out gangly 18 year old legs. But wow, did we look like dweebs!
Oddly enough, I’d love to have one those old beasts now. Mostly for the room and the smooth ride, plus the weirdness of the styling appeals to me now more than ever. It sure didn’t back in high school, though.
Oddly 72 or 73 would have been around the the time my grandfather moved from Brooklyn to New Jersey and traded in his Ambassador for a Hornet, skipping the intermediate step of a Matador. Grandpa was a Nash man from way back so he was staying loyal. My strongest memories of those cars were the dozen rubber bands hanging from the column shift (storage), the “weather eye” air conditioner and how flat the seats in the Hornet were. Also my grandfather and parents were unusually strong on seat belt use after a relative went through a windshield. Coincidentally my other grandparents had a Colonnade style Cutlass sedan and previous gen Cutlass Supreme.
As for fleet sales, by the mid 70s AMC dominated the Federal motor pools, and every time a I saw a Hornet or Matador with GSA or DOD markings the first thought in my head was “low bid on the contract”. I felt the same about the hordes of government K cars in the 80s after AMC cratered.
Speaking of AMC innovations: I remember finding the recessed door handles on my grandfather’s Matator to be very futuristic. Was this another trail blazed by AMC? It seems the Big Three all still used protruding door handles with the thumb button in those days.
Answering my own question. This old Popular Science article by (Parnelli Jones!) indicates that the recessed door handles were an AMC innovation for the ’68 model year.
http://books.google.com/books?id=lCYDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA78#v=onepage&q&f=false
Chrysler used exterior door handles that were almost completely recessed on the 1957 Dodges, DeSotos, Chryslers and Imperials.
That makes sense Roger, TY. I can picture that as being a visual difference as well, now that you point it out.
As for the 74′ I remember thinking that as well about the front end, They can’t think that is an improvement!
The State of New Hampshire used AMCs in the 70’s (at least the Dept. of Safety did). My father had the joy (???) of driving a ’72 Ambassador for four years. In ’76 it was replaced by a Matador wagon, which hauled his state equipment better. He doesn’t have much to say about them other than that they were better than the Fairmont and the Omni he had later.
Who ever owns Jeep seems doomed to extinction
…The Jeep Curse.
It’s taken down:
American Bantam
Willys
Kaiser (not exactly; Kaiser survived in several permutations, finally to engineer sale of its own automotive interests to AMC at inflated prices; but it’s now gone)
American Motors
Chrysler
…and now, perhaps Fiat is next.
The curse of that humble GP recon car, born of government money; borne by independent after independent. Always profitable but always to an operation doomed to fail for other reasons.
I heard about the “Jeep curse” on Allpar forums, we wonder sometimes if there’s a way to break the curse like the Boston Red Sox break the “curse of the Bambino”?
Those extruded aluminum window frames were a talking point in AMC’s annual “X-ray” car brochure of the 50s and 60s, which “dared to compare” AMC models with their competitors, selectively of course. Unusual for the times, the competitors were named and illustrated/photographed, no Brand C or Brand F here!
Other 4-door sedans had exposed, fixed B-pillars between the window frames, giving them a “stodgy” look, according to X-ray. Come to think of it, so did my ’80 Volvo 240 2-door.
And did you know in 1966, the Rambler Classic had a sturdy (stainless steel?) grille while the Plymouth Barracuda’s was a weak die-cast, the Ford Galaxie had aluminum bars that you could bend with your fingers, and the Pontiac Tempest had the audacity to offer only a plastic grille?
(BTW, are there any cars today WITHOUT stock plastic grilles?)
Whose brilliant idea at AMC was it to name the vehicle after a guy who wears a funny suit and dances around in a ring with a ton of angry pot roast?
I am willing to bet that bullfighting has an absolutely microcosmic following in the United States. Having the car graced with that poor choice of a name certainly wouldn’t have helped sales any.
The first use of the name “Matador” was by Dodge in 1960, when it introduced the full-size, Plymouth-based Dodge Dart in the low-price field.
The “senior” Dodges in the medium-priced field were continued and given new model names. The lower-level model was dubbed “Matador,” while the top-of-the-line Dodge was called “Polara.”
It’s worse than that. “Matador” actually translates literally as “killer”.
The coffin face wasn’t that bad, considering all the other styling silliness going on around the industry.
AMC could still smack a single or double back in those days – the Jeeps were doing quite well, and personally I loved the simplicity of my Hornet hatchback.
Always though the Hornet hatch was a nice, clean looking car.
That’s a good photo of a Hornet coupe. I agree with you–it was one of the cleanest designs of the time, and still looks good today. I could see that in my driveway. How old is this photo?
Always loved the Hornet!
When I had my Eagles I really wanted to find a way to scrimp the money together to Frankenstien a Hornet and Eagle. The floor pan is really the only major difference. 401 and all wheel drive? Oh Yeah!
I always considered the 70-73 2 door hardtops to be pretty attractive cars back in the day. But then I always preferred the squarer mid 60s styling to the liquigel look that hit the industry in the late 60s/early 70s. I appreciated anachronisms like the big AMC 2 doors (as well as the Dart/Valiant Swinger/Scamp that soldiered through 1976).
It was harder to work up any enthusiasm for the sedans. Something about the greenhouse in the rear door/sail panel area just never worked for me. But the 74 nose job took a good idea (a bit of a protrusion to give the flat face some character) but ruined it by supersizing. That was when the Matator started to sing like a (Studebaker) Lark for me.
Final note – I remember that in the mid-late 70s, the AMC Matador was the police car of choice on TV and in the movies. The production companies must have made a heckuva deal on these, because they sure had a lot of them. The big or small screen was the only place I ever saw a Matador police car.
If you’ve ever seen “The Man With the Golden Gun”, the 1974 James Bond offering, you’ll notice that just about every vehicle is an AMC. In Hong Kong, of all places. Completely implausible for James Bond to be driving an AMC, but I think that may have been the movie that introduced Roger Moore as James Bond, so implausibility must have been par for the course.
Just for the record, “Live and Let Die” was Moore’s first Bond film. As for “MWGG”, I’d love to see a modern movie barrel roll a car from a ramp and land it perfectly without the aid of CGI.
My dad had a 69 Ambassador SST coupe when I turned 16. It was fully loaded, including the 390 big block. I lusted for an AMX, and when he brought that home and I lifted the hood, I couldn’t believe what I saw. The air cleaner said “AMX 390”.
With that big block engine it would really launch. I used to steal the keys and do burnouts with it when he went out and left it home.
I quit that after I scared myself trying to stop it. It had pitiful four wheel drum brakes. I had it up to about 95, and then lifted and laid on the brakes about an 1/8 mile from a railroad crossing. I had both feet on the brake and my rear end a foot off the seat at 50 mph when I hit the crossing. The brakes were almost gone, and it was about 200 feet to the end of the road. Miss that stop, and you’re in some treetops; someone had died there doing that the year before. It finally pulled up with a few feet to spare.
The next year he traded it for the exact same matador as in the top photo. What a letdown. He did it to save money with the smaller engine (304), and picked up about 1 MPG. He never owned another interesting car.
Here’s a photo of a 69 that I found; something to remind us of what once was. It was a fine looking car with great lines.
my name is John adams and am looking for a 71 72 ex amc 4dr ambassador or matador sedan police car to fix up with my dad and my 6 year old son,my dad allways told us what cool cars there where,I would really like to find a running one,i am grateful for any help,I have adaughter in college and i support my mom and dad so i dont have a lot of money but would really like to find one,thanks john,,i think is great that you have a site just for ex police cars,they are still great cars,all of them, I would love to perserve one and hopefully soon cause my dad is very sick and would love to find one running and ride my dad around with his 6 year old grandson,it was my dads fav car and its was an american made car compant witch he so believed in,thanks ja jma91122@aol.com
Stench of death? If you pictured a 1977 Matador, sure. But in 1973 AMC was still riding high on compact car sales spurred by the oil embargo. And this was before AMC sunk a fortune into the ill-fated 1974 Matador coupe and the 1975 1/2 Pacer. Ironically, if AMC had taken a more conservative approach to its mid-70s redesigns it would have survived longer as an independent automaker.
The Oil Embargo was in Oct 1973, right when the 74 models came out, and not “before”. AMC compacts sold greatly, but the brand new Matador tanked and started the red ink that Renault had to clean up in a few years.
Why oh why did they stick that little upkick on the C pillar? It really made the cars look ugly. The coupes fared little better with their ransomed 68 Mopar full-size formal hardtop styling either. Sometimes I wonder if someone put LSD in the cafeteria at AMC. From the 70s on, they were in a free-fall and did some really dumb shit stylistically.
+1 but AMC weren’t the only guilty ones making the new car worse looking.The 71 bloated B body Mopars and the 71 Mustang spring to mind
I have to add, the Rebel and Ambassador Coupes 67-69 were downright beautiful. They really botched things up, word.
Nice looking car. I’ve always preferred the Matador sedan than the coupe. Although the extended nose of the 1974 and later sedan and station wagon are obviously not to everyone’s tastes, I actually like it.
The 1974 Matador coupe was AMC’s ‘Deadly Sin #1″, per an AMC History Book. It was a clear attempt to match GM’s colonnade fastbacks [and Torinos], but GM’s formal roofed mid-sizers ended up hits, instead. Trying to compete with the Big 3, car for car, hurt them badly. While the ’74 Hornet and Gremlin sold great, they needed more profits, AMC blew its bank on the Matador’s tooling and then came Renault.
BTW, Pacer was “deadly sin #2”.
This looks just like the one I got out of the GSA motor pool in Chicago during 73 or 74. It was new, but extremely noisey, perhaps from a drive train malfunction. It was an incredibly crude vehicle. At the time I wondered if it were made that way because it was the low bid on a goverment contract.
I rate this article two middle fingers up, to the writer, Paul. and that just for your harsh comments on this car.
Stench of death? Bullshit! I disagree wholeheartedly. No car is perfect. But in the automotive world, neglect and abuse is the key to an early death. Maintenance and care is the key to long and enjoyable life.
I know some Windstar owners who would quibble with you 🙂
I believe that the author was referring more to the company’s declining health than to the particular car. By 1973, the Matador was in the 7th year of a design cycle in one of the most competitive segments in the industry, and it was not doing all that well. I really can recall very few diehard AMC apologists back in the 70s, and those I did know were high on the Hornet. I never really heard the Matador get a lot of love, and they did not seem to be particularly long-lived cars.
We always welcome passionate fans of any kind of car, and are always happy to see a thoughtful defense when a piece is less than enthusiastic about a vehicle. Our motto is that every car has a story, and it is usually more than one. So, welcome to the discussion. We are all friends here, even when we disagree with another’s take on a given car.
Did some AMC fansite get a whiff of the stench?
To me, it’s like vanilla pudding. I wouldn’t order it but won’t turn it down if it’s free!
I know that American Motors (AMC) was on the decline by the 1970s. Unfortunately, the 70s were a trying time for the auto industry as a whole. With govt. regulations bombarding companies left and right. It’s a wonder any of the car companies lived through the 70s.
I recall reading a 1973 Consumer Reports comparison between the Matador sedan and a few competitors, and they really couldn’t find much nice to say about it–despite having been very much on board with AMC’s pragmatic and conservative mission. Ride, handling, braking, room and seat comfort were all panned IIRC.
They also noted the awkwardness of using the Spanish word for ‘killer’ or ‘murderer’ to name a family sedan…
It looks like a giant Morris Marina, a vehicle that also signified the death of it’s maker and also has the dubious distinction of spawning the worst ever British car. It aslo had the dubious distinction of using a 1948 platform into the 80s.
Possibly BLs worst sin,at one time it was Britain’s most scrapped car.My ex BIL had one which dissolved in 5 years.
Like most AMCs, the styling of this car looks disproportionate to me. I do like the front-end styling on this featured car though.
Glad someone mentioned the police fleets. LAPD had a fleet of them in the early 70s and since I was into cop shows, saw a lot of them on TV.
I don’t know. In hindsight, it seems like the only thing AMC has going for it in the late sixties and seventies is nostalgia and absurdity, particularly for those of us who were of age during that time period. My driver’s ed car was a ’76 Matador fleet special. Lame? Yeah, but because I learned how to drive in that car (and for absolutely no other reason), it’s forever etched in my memory. So, I swoon (just the tiniest bit) whenever I see one of those mangy seventies’ beasts.
I actually like this one and i mean the whole design. It reminds me of Chrysler’s fuselage styling and I really love the styling of those. And for 1973 it’s really not a huge luxobarge. However, the color of the car is really dull and unattractive.
I love these. Full stop. Don’t know why. Don’t care.
From what I’ve read, these cars were very popular with the police officer that drove them. Apparently the proformance was very good as was the comfort. I read someplace that AMC was the first to include A/C as part of the police package. Cop gotta luv that!
AMC and Chrysler would have been about the same time…I think Chrysler stopped offering non-A/C C-bodies in 1971 or 1972. (I recall it was whatever year the RB motor front accessories got changed.)
They were indeed the first LAPD squads to have AC. The prior year cars were Satellites with PS, but no AC.
I gotta ask, WTF were the AdMen thinking with the 1967 Rebel rollout print campaign?? Looks like the coupe suddenly drove itself into a Reinaissance Festival from Hell and the creepy, wacked-out, psychopaths in the background are doing some kind of bizarre AMC interpretative dance. I want to scream at them, “GET A JOB!” Did this sell cars in the ’60s?? Or was its purpose to pack the Hooka, drop the needle on some Frank Zappa, and gaze some kinda meaning into promoting what could possibly be the most boring car until the glorious advent of the K-car?
A few pic of my wagon
http://theamcforum.com/forum/topic60206_post541300.html#541300
AMC made fun of themselves with the “What’s a Matador?” ads. My long-standing observation is that the more attractive dual headlamp nose of the 1974 Ambassador should have been continued on the Matador. About 1975, one of the car rags ran some renderings of a hoped-for Matador SEDAN based on the ’74 Coupe. They were exquisite and timeless. AMC would’ve sold twice as many sedans in that form versus the Coupe or Rebel-based sedans. Too bad AMC spent the tooling costs on the Pacer.
I agree. While I like the protruding nose and the grille of the 74-78 Matador sedan, the Ambassador had a better looking headlamp arrangement.
I have no love for anything AMC ever built, but I do admire AMC enthusiasts. They are the most grimly determined & unwaveringly loyal car fanatics in the hobby. The odds are stacked so far against them. Yet somehow, this small but vocal group of enthusiasts manage to keep their Ramblers ramblin’!
My parents had a 1974-75 Matador when I was a small boy. It was a pile of shit. It was underpowered. It seemed to be running on four cylinders rather than the eight it came with. Unfortunately, the 70s were a trying time for car makers. And American Motors was no exception.
Actually the most grimly determined are Landrover & Leyland P -76 enthusiasts.
In my experience at least.
Just because it’s cliche, I have to ask this:
What’s a Matador?
I like it. It’s a bit gaudy in the front but still looks like a staunch 70’s American car.
The Australian and New Zealand built Matadors were externally identical to the U.S ones but had the dash of the 1967 Rebel and instrument dials of the 1967 Ambassador for every year through to 1975, in other words 8 years of the same interior. Then in 1976 they’re still using the 67 dash binnacle with U.S 76 dials. Why did AMC manufacture the same dash year after year for the RHD market? Seats, headlining, visors and door cards were all made locally for tariff concessions and were a bit different from their U.S counterparts. In fact the 1971 U.S Matador front seat with the twin fold down centre arm rests were reused every year in Australia until 1976. The door cards were also exactly the same from 71-78. That’s a lot of years of the same interior! AMC even cost-cut its international market!
Pic is of a 1976 Australian Matador with 1967 dash + 1976 U.S cluster mash up. Also note the U.S 1971 Matador front seat
The Matador was a big car in the Australian market. You didn’t see that many Ramblers around. AMI would have been making its profits on Triumph and especially Toyota sales in the late sixties/early seventies; Rambler assembly was almost something of a sideline. Local sales of Matadors would have been so small it wouldn’t have made economic sense to change parts just because the US parent company did.
Good grief that looks like the one I drove it did look quite Rebelish inside I never knew it was all Rebel, havent seen another in a long time.
Wow! That’s quite a dashboard. I fail to see how anyone can build a RHD car like that.
Interior picture shows exactly how they came from the factory: ill fitting plastic pieces, cost cut to the bone.
I once saw a brand new one on a dealers lot with the right hand trim piece laying on the floor.
That fancy aluminum trim on the armrests of my parent’s 72 Ambassador were all loosely fitted and never did stay in the armrest. The wind lacing never met the corners of the doors. You could almost get a finger between it and the door frame. Looks like the one in the 73 picture was assembled better.
The Ambassador, and I suspect the Matador as well used a cheap single braided mesh strap to hold the glove box, same as on the Gremlin.
The parents had their Ambassador for 8 years, front end needed rebuilding before 50,000 miles, rear seat simply shredded apart, even though it rarely had passengers, vinyl top started rusting underneath in year two, thin carpeting [more like flocking] was shot early on. And this on a bloody BROUGHAM.
I loved the Gremlin and Ambassador my parents bought, mostly after hearing me talking about them so much. Parents are wise not to listen to their kids when it comes to vehicle purchases.
What disappointments those cars were, but I would still love to have both today. And even the 74 Rondo Hatton Matador.
The problem with the design of the 71-73 Matador in profile, is the forward top of the hood before the wheel well to the bottom of the front fender is way too short and unbalanced with the rest of the body. Something I don’t like on mid 60s Rovers either.
The 74 had that outrageous grille and round turn signals that looked a lot like bull’s eyes.
I love em, but AMC in the early 70s was feeding off their reputation from the 50s and early 60s.
The book “The Last Independent” is an interesting read chronicling AMC’s history. The ’67-’68s were my favorite AMC designs along with the first-gen Javelin.
It’s a wonder why AMC didn’t just pull the plug on this segment after 73 or even 70. Things couldn’t possibly get better with the aging platform, and the cost to even get it competitive again(if it ever was) was blown on the flash in the pan 74 coupe. With cars like the Javelin, Hornet and even Gremlin there was a glimmer optimism in the AMC lineup in the early 70s, all of which were fresh attractive and even closer in spirit to the Rambler heritage, but the dog of the showrooms were these things, even shaking the minor vestige of heritage the Rebel name carried for the utterly terrible Matador name.
On that note, GM has nothing on American Motors when it comes to name changes, Rambler Six, Rambler Classic, AMC Classic, AMC Rebel, AMC Matador, yeesh! At least they stuck with Ambassidor to the end.
The tooling was completely paid for, the assembly line just kept going, and even with few sales they still made some profit.
I like the front end styling of the 1974 through 78 Matador sedan and wagon.
The specs for the ’71-’78 Matadors match up to those of the ’67-’68 Ambassadors which became their successful full-sized line when the concurrent Rebels tanked. Logic told them to recycle that content when the Ambassador moved up in spec for 1969. Unfortunately, regardless of name, they had all the identity of those anonymous insurance company ‘every car’ renderings. Fleet buyers helped keep the assembly lines going and the rest were bought by the old AMC die-hards and loyalist keeping their trusted dealer in business.
I’ve read that, according to AMC designers. the extended hood of the 1974 Matador sedans and wagons was intended to make the cars look longer and larger.
I also recall seeing drawings in many car magazines of the period showing alleged future new Matador sedans that used the front end sheet metal from the 1974 Matador coupe. It is not unreasonable to assume that such a vehicle was a possibility.
I think this is one of my favorite titles of any post here, ever. And the writing is classic early Niedermeyer to boot. Big Fan.
The Matador itself I find interesting if only because I have no real recollection of seeing them around. I’d never been a big AMC fan but find myself appreciating them more, if for nothing else than their general uniqueness. At this point in time, even if they did suck compared to their direct contemporaries at the time, the reality is that nowadays I’d be comparing any old car to others within at least a ten-year span either way anyway, so that part’s kind of irrelevant.
It was good to re-read this one, thanks!
Yes, deserved contempt runs through this piece. The latest Collectible Automobile has a piece on the cars of 1969, and it really stands out how poorly the Rebel that preceded the first Matador did in what was a growing intermediate segment. Again, not sure why because it wasn’t a bad looking car – maybe it’s just all of the Big 3 offerings looked better, tended to be a bit bigger, and moved faster.
An interesting point from that article: In 1969 Chrysler was 1st in compacts, 2nd in intermediates (helped a lot by the Road Runner) and a distant 3rd in full size. How they bungled that market deserves more study – although I know we’ve tackled it here. AMC, of course, was #4, even in compacts. A sad requiem, indeed.
“How they bungled that [full size] market ?”
The ’69 big Mopar fuselage look turned off conservative big car buyers, who didn’t like ‘racy’ styling. Same thing happened in 1971, with B bodies.
Ford’s near luxury looks of the hidden headlight LTD were a hit in ranch house land.
Until they spoiled it with the ’74 nose job, I liked the sedan-based 2 & 4 door Matadors and Ambassadors.They just weren’t as huge & gross as Detroit’s big cars. I kind of liked those aluminum window frames too. But their styling had evolved from their cars of the late ’60s, which looked good to me, but apparently no longer appealed to mainstream America.
But I think, while overall, their cars were solidly built, what hurt AMC badly, besides the retro ’60s size and styling, was that so much of the interior trim and hardware was cheap and poorly fastened.
Too bad AMC wasted so much time & money on the bizarre frog-eye Matador fastback and pregnant cockroach Pacer! Perhaps, with cleaner styling and improved quality, they could’ve hung on until the downsized GM cars came out in ’77, and showed that maybe AMC had the right idea all along.
Happy MotorIng, Mark
I have to disagree. You may not like its front-end appearance, but I thought it made the Matador more attractive than either the 1972-73 years.
The upward-slanting design of the rear doors and the shape of the C-pillar never worked for me. They desperately needed to be upgraded with a flat beltline and squared off C-pillar. Oh, and larger, beefier tires would have helped immensely as well to get rid of that ridiculous skating-on-tiptoes stance.
The ’74-’78 front snout would have been helped a lot by a pair of quad headlights. AMC in the 1970s messed up their designs just enough so they could never been mainstream success stories. Hornet/Concord came closest to being right but even they had serious quality issues. It was like they had a death wish.
Dead on, Mr Bray. The Matador and Ambassador buyer also did not get better trim, fittings, carpet or appreciably greater quality plastics than the buyer of a Gremlin or Hornet.
My parent’s 71 Gremlin was about $2600. With rubber floor mats. Their 72 Ambassador Brougham was $5000, but one could recognize the parts bin from which both were assembled.
The Ambassador did come with the AC, power steering, power brakes, new for 72 Chrysler automatic and standard troll hair carpeting [same as the upgrade one would find in a deluxe Gremlin or Hornet SST ], as well as the same sloppy assembly found on a $1998 two passenger 71 Gremlin.
Sad, as the Ambassador was a nice package on paper: sensible size, relatively lightweight, elegant styling, roomy as an LTD or Impala according to interior dimension comparisons, well equipped for the money, superficially attractive upholstery choices and with the 304 V8, a good balance of performance and economy.
A legitimate case could be made for the Ambassador on paper at least. The longer wheelbase certainly helped the styling.
The awkwardness of the Matador nose from 71 on put it on a different level. The Ambassadors dual headlight system fixed the problems of the 74 Matador sedan front end, a far better resolution for that coffin nose.
The Ambassador did have standard AC from 1968 on, which was pretty major, as the Rolls Royce was the only car at the time that offered it for no added cost.
A shame. I love these cars. Saw a 2012 -2014 Chrysler 200 in Autumn Bronze that made me stop in my tracks and circle back to Larry H Miller Chrysler Jeep to check it out.
The color was almost identical to my parent’s Cordoba Brown Ambassador. Appropriate, I think as that 200 was sort of a modern version of AMC’s top of the line in 1972.
The parts bin ran deep at AMC. The Gremlin even used the same front suspension parts as the Ambassador and Matador. (Think of Chevrolet using the front suspension of the Impala on the Vega, or Ford putting the LTD front end on the Pinto!)
Didn’t know that, Inspector. That’s just absurd. Maybe that explains all the suspension work my folk’s 72 Ambassador needed at 50,000 miles !
Actually pretty brilliant from a cost savings frame of reference, given AMC’s lack of development funds.
But the higher up the price range those baseline parts bin pieces went ensured AMC wouldn’t be competitive in those mid size and full segments.
Very self defeating in the end.
I bought a used 3 year old 73 Matador wagon in 1976. Absolutely loved that car. It was roomy, very quick acceleration, and a comfortable ride. It was large enough to carry whatever was needed. One January evening we left our home in Ohio to drive to the St. Louis, MO airport for a flight to Phoenix and then on to Palm Springs where I had a sales meeting to attend. My idea was to save money on the flights by driving part way on each end. Had beautiful weather on the first evening. Upon arising from a fine night’s rest at our motel in Indianapolis we were greeted by better than 12 inches of snow on the ground. No choice but to battle on. We were practically the only car on the road and many semis were laying in the median along the way. We arrived at the St. Louis Airport two hours before flight time. Arriving in Phoenix at 11 pm we found our motel reservation was nonexistent and had no choice but to pile into our rental Mercury Cougar and head out to California. That was a memorable trip for many reasons but a typical uneventful ride in the Matador. Too bad they were not more popular. I sure enjoyed mine. The photo below was taken in my driveway at my house at the time in Stow, Ohio. I always thought the wagon version of the 73 Matador was far more attractive than the sedan. The Plymouth belonged to one of my Mom’s sisters. If you click to make the photo larger you will see my 1975 Toyota Chinook Roundtripper in the garage. I was very fortunate to own both of those vehicles at the same time. They were both real favorites. I drove the Toyota for nearly 9 years and 250,000 miles, having bought it in 1978 with 30,000 on the clock. It was primarily used as an on the road office for my industrial advertising sales business but also for family camping.
What a great picture, Dennis! I had no idea a Chinook could fit in a garage, does that version have a pop-top or is lower than some others?
The Matador wagon does look good. Then again, I like most all wagons. That Plymouth is sharp too.
The Toyota Chinooks were pop-ups, and the ability to fit in a garage was one of the key selling points. Well, that and not overtaxing the four cylinder engine too much. 🙂
Yes, as Paul said here, these little marvels had the pop top and fit easily into a standard garage. The garage in my photo had an office built on the back so I usually would back the Chinook into the garage and then I could step out the rear door of the Chinook right into my home office. I contracted ads for Thomas Register in northern Ohio so the Chinook was an ideal on the road office. It had a long counter for work space, a stainless steel sink just the right size to hold al my renewal contract folders plus a couch on the other side with removable cushions so.i could house the multi volume set of Thomas Register each year. I used a Little Tykes rotationallly molded plastic child’s step stool for a seat in front of the counter. I could actually reach nearly all the volumes of Thomas Register from the driver’s seat for easy checking in industrial parks. At 80,000 miles on the odometer I did need an overhaul of the 2 OR engine. I suspect the mileage showing 30,000 miles when I bought it was not accurate. I was the third owner and it burned oil from day one. I had a private mechanic who replaced everything that it might have needed in the near future and he also put in larger cylinders. After that there was no catching me on the hills of the Ohio Turnpike and it still got 15 to 19 mpg. I often dream I am driving that rig and really wish I still had it. I traded it for a cream puff 77 Chrysler New Yorker Brougham in 1986. Wish I still had that too!
My Paul you’re harsh on these cars.
They were excellent police vehicles with the right engine and handled better than similar mid-size police cars from the big three. I’m a fan of the 71-73 models and remember well watching a grey unmarked Matador with 360 accelerating from a stop to pull someone over one day. It was very quick. As a family car? Don’t know any families back then that had one.
I think that one of AMC’s big problems was that a lot of the car buying public wasn’t sure what they were all about. In less than a 15 year period they went from building Nash Ambassadors to Rambler Ambassadors to AMC Ambassadors. Nash and Hudson Ramblers morphed into the whole product line being Ramblers, and once the Rambler name was established they phased it out in favor of AMC. This is piss poor marketing no matter how you look at it. Not only does it confuse the average Joe, but it is expensive to have to make new signage to correspond with yet another change in direction.
AMC tried to use VW type ‘anti-establishment’ ads to sell ‘establishment’ type cars in 68-72. Didn’t quite work.
Pacer was promoted as a “new Rambler” a rebellious car going after Big 3, but it didn’t have the ‘Rambler gas mileage’ expected.
Import and Big 3 fans stuck with what they liked.
I’ll throw in my two bits:
The foundry I worked for in 75 had two company cars a 74 LTD and a 74 Ambassador wagon. I loathed the LTD for it’s mushy handling, and loved the Ambassador’s responsiveness. Drove that Ambassador over a fair portion of Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Illinois and Wisconsin. It always ran perfectly, was stable on the road and it’s seats never left me tired.
The few surviving AMC styling department guys show up at the local AMC owner’s meet here each August. Had a chance to talk with Vince Geraci a couple years ago, and asked him about that bump on the front end of the Matador, and, to a lesser degree, the Ambassador, starting in 74. Vince was head of interior design in the 70s, so wasn’t sure if it was to meet crash standards or something else. He suggested I drop an e-mail to Pat Foster, who is accumulating a vast amount of Nash/AMC information for a new book. Foster replied to my e-mail and said that the bumped nose was simply to make the cars look longer. Sounds crazy, but when I look at a 70-71 Thunderbird or Mercury Montego, or a 69 Gran Prix, I see a lot of crazy nose jobs.
By the way, in the current issue of Hemming’s, Pat Foster is giving a nod to Nash/AMC on the 100th anniversary of the company, both for Charles Nash’s astute management and for the many innovations the company introduced.
I’ve never been a fan of the Ford LTD of the 70s. Nor do I like the Chevy cars of the same vintage. And forget about Chryslers. Except for the Dodge Dart and the Plymouth Valiant of the 70s, I find them hideous looking.
Steve, Thanks for that info on the motivation for the nose job. It’s actually what I assumed when I first saw it at the time. AMC had been wanting to play with the big boys for some time, and they all had big-boy noses. So this was a way to do it that presumably kept the tooling changes down for the fenders.
Ironic, since 1974 was the preview of downsizing to come, with the Mustang II. And then the Seville in ’75. Now if only they’d made it look more like the Seville, they might had aomething on their hands and been a trend-setter instead of a johnny-come-lately.
And I don’t doubt the Amby drove better than the LTD. Everything did. 🙂
While the downsizing of the Matador might’ve helped sales, it’s hard to say what a change in appearance would’ve done. AMC already had the Hornet and the Gremlin.
Totally agree about the Seville look, Paul. Square up the rear roof line, flatten the belt line at the back door, put 4 square headlights on the front and bigger, beefier tires, and they’d have had a viable competitor to the ’77 Caprice on their hands. Tooling costs would have been minimal.
Ugh, sorry, can’t agree at all.
From a business perspective in 1975 sure, maybe, but wasn’t going to happen for AMC (look at how much GM put into the Seville).
From a collectors/cool perspective today, man is the Seville dull. I mean, just how much more attention would a 72 Newport get over a 76 Seville today?
Sure the Seville was a better car, but so what? One was a massive rolling slab of American art, unique to the world, while the other was a reluctant attempt to play catch-up and get with the times, sort of a cleaning up on Sunday morning after an all nighter.
Ironic, since 1974 was the preview of downsizing to come, with the Mustang II. And then the Seville in ’75. Now if only they’d made it look more like the Seville, they might had aomething on their hands and been a trend-setter instead of a johnny-come-lately.
I have pondered what niche they could have looked at, if not the Pacer and Matador coupe. Ever notice how the wheels seem sunken into the fenders on the senior AMCs? The track is actually very close to that of the Fairmont/Zephyr. Take tin snips to the body and carve off all the extra sheetmetal, while retaining the existing suspension and powertrain, then offer the new downsized Ambassador in a full 70s brougham suit, while retaining the Hornet/Gremlin as the low buck offering. I saw oodles of Granadas and Volares around in the 70s, and AMC could have been right in there with them, with the boxy styling and a better suspension.
Thing is, being “right in there with them” wouldn’t do AMC any good because they had to pull customers away from the big three, and they needed something different to do that. Say what you like about the Pacer and Matador coupe, they were different. Problem was, the clientele that likes that sort of “different” was too small.
Pacer and Matador coupe were different but they were also ugly with those big fisheyed headlights bulging up into the hood. If ever there were two cars that should have had square headlights, these were them.
I’ve never been fond of the Matador coupe, particularly from 1974 to 77. I’ve always preferred the sedan and wagon.
Hornet and Gremlin made AMC as a ‘small car expert’, and the ’74 gas crisis pushed this more. After spending cash to try to compete in NASCAR, and fastbacks, they had no cash to try to bring out new bigger cars. Renault had to step in.
They tried the Barcelona Matadors to compete with Cutlass, but those were like little kids in men’s suits too big for them.
Some dillweed put the front amber sidemarker lights on the rear, and the red rear ones on the front—see 3rd photo.
For the record, I’d love to buy a Gen 1 Matador, but they appear to be VERY scarce, and the few solid ones that come up seem to be commanding decent coin.
I should also add that I’m rather a fan of the ‘coffin-nose’ Gen 2 Matador. Yes, it is less attractive, but at least the bloody thing stands out in a crowd. To be fair I’m biased; here’s me a week ago…
I also like the “coffin nose” AMC Matador sedan and wagon of 1974-1977. I regret that I’ve never owned one, nor have I driven a Matador, but I’ve always found them more attractive than most cars of the 70s.
Thanks Car Nut.
I can say that they drive pretty much like they look – a 19ft barge from the 70s, BUT…when you turn the steering wheel the car actually turns, and aside from severe body roll, it’s definitely not a mushy ride. It’s very stable and predictable at all speeds – very easy car to drive.
For me at least, it’s not hard to imagine how a 401 + front power disks + uprated suspension = a car you could chase bad guys down in.
I agree. I reckon if you ordered the police pursuit package, you could get beefier suspension, heavier duty items. Like most people, I like a comfortable ride, but I don’t like having the car scrape the pavement every time I hit a bump, a dip, or a pothole.
I’ve always liked the AMC Matador sedan and wagon. I know there are plenty of dissenters here who find its styling hideous, and especially the protruding “coffin nose” look, but that’s their opinion, and they have a right to have it. I just happen to like the styling.
Interesting rereading some of the old comments and perspective. Here in California, Rmablers certainly had a following but by the early ’70’s those folks had either died or moved on to Toyotas. As a high school kid, I was amazed when we started seeing AMC patrol cars first on TV and then locally. That seemed as odd then as it is today when I see a British or Swedish TV show with Kia police cars. I think the fleet sales were just the end of the end for AMC. Ditto for the foray into NASCAR. By the way, I’m pretty sure the CHP never used the Matadors, as someone mentioned. Is my memory wrong?
I think you’re right about the CHP not opting for the Matadors. They used Mopars in the 1970s pretty much exclusively – such as Dodge Polaras and Monacos.
The LAPD was the big user of Matadors during that time – so you saw a lot of them on cop shows based in Southern California, such as Adam-12.
You’re correct. CHP never used the Matador. They bought full sized Dodge (never Plymouth) in the 70s up until they piloted the B-body Coronet in 1975 in response to the gas crisis. After that, they went to the B-body Monaco and then the St. Regis.
It was LAPD who was the big purchaser of Matadors in California. They were popular police cars all over the country in ’72 and ’73 because the 401 had a performance advantage relative to the competition. It didn’t hurt that they were cheaper and came with air conditioning too.
I can’t help it. I LIKE these Matador’s. Even the 74’s. Guess I just have a sickness that can’t be cured. Nor would I want to be cured. I owned a 73 Ambassador for a brief while. Same basic car as the Matador stylewise. Wish I still had it.
Whenever I see these cars I instantly think of the nuns at my church growing up. They would literally speed going up and down the street in their black Ambassador wagon! We had two AMC dealerships literally across the street from each other, so my neighborhood was full of AMC cars when I was a kid.
I always have a soft spot for AMC cars as they seemed to be behind the times in comparison to the big three. The funny thing is that people that owned them always seemed happy with them, too.
Had one just like this when I was a surfbum on Oahu 1986/87. It was an ex airforce car. It was a very reliable car and a great ride! Sweet ol memories.
Did Paul say “74 Matador Coupe”?
https://modesto.craigslist.org/cto/d/1974-amc-matador-coupe/6303439140.html
My parents had a 74 Matador Coupe. I believe theirs was either Orange or Red. Sadly, he didn’t maintain it like he should’ve, and it didn’t run very well. Since then, my mom hasn’t had a good thing to say for anything American Motors, but especially for the Matador. 🙁
My, the styling of that blue Matador coupe hasn’t aged well at all. It looks like a rejected proposal for the 2nd generation Camaro / Firebird. Check out the outline of the windshield and the door window. Also, the rear quarter panel. IIRC, the rear featured round taillights reminiscent of the Camaro’s.
5 years later it’s still there, “for sale”. https://modesto.craigslist.org/cto/d/turlock-1974-amc-matador-coupe/7540748130.html
And it had been hanging around for a while then, which is how I knew to go looking for it at the time.
Love that pic of women stacking giant blocks in a field while rocking those flared sleeves.
Fashion!
I grew up in Kenosha & my parents were from elsewhere & were GM people. We had a ’73 Impala clamshell wagon. One day I was invited along on a road trip to Madison to register my h.s. friend for college. His dad was an AMC engineer & they had a ’74 Ambassador wagon. Dad drove & I don’t think I’ve ever passed the miles from SE Wis to Madison in faster time. The Ambassador wagon seemed to me on that day to be a far superior driving car. Lighter weight, better suspension control, more powerful engine vs the weight of the car. These wagons although slightly smaller on the outside had loads of room inside. I thought the styling was fine, functional with a dash of pizazz.
If decade ending awards were handed out, the Matador sedan could be have been awarded, ‘Dumpiest Styled Domestic Car of the 70s’. These could have been decently styled cars, but a number of design details, were handled poorly IMO. Shame, as their size seemed right in many ways.
I looked and looked and looked at these cars as a boy when they were new and found them just so odd. (Then thinking that having Adam-12 cred might be their salvation from being about as sexy as a deep freezer.)
I do the same here trying to imagine what is wrong with them that they might look so odd.
Trying to think about a line here or some sculpting there, some things that would make it look less odd.
I don’t think these cars are ugly, more just a combination of random strangeness, too thicc, to thin, fussy about hinges like weird little gap hiders under the hood and deck lid, etc.
Then it hits me, just everything about them is wrong.
But I still like them for that.
Ps growing up in detroit, in the shadow of the AMC Center even, it seemed as if everybody just thought of AMC as the company saved by Romney Sr that started to build odd looking cars after he left and it was just a matter of time before they went the way of the dodo. (I think there was agreement that the Javelin, and esp AMX, made up for all the rest.)
Some go on about “AMC being ahead of GM’s 1977 B body”, but they were a HS Auto Shop project of junkyard 1967 parts, compared to a ’77 Caprice.
74-77 Matador was the joke of the industry, ignored, unloved and kept on market to say “we’ll show ’em”. Big waste of space, money and led to Renault buy out, then Chrysler…
74 coupe sales sold ok 1st year like the Pacer, to the trendy “1st on the block” car fashionistas. Then, pitiful sales. NASCAR did nothing for it, also.
Chrysler and DeSoto had aluminum bolt-on window frames on some 1959 models that looked like stainless appliques but were separate bolt-on frames.
Our family ride in 1970 was a “Rebel SST Sdn”. Was kind a /sort a optioned, relative to 1970.
The a/c was an “aftermarket, hang on the dash” one. It threw copious amounts of water after being on for a while.
The wipers turned out to be “vacuum operated”. Who knew such things existed in 1970???lol Man they were a pain.
The “304 cid V8” was sufficient and smooth. Some ladies in a pickup with a camper on it backed into the front of it in 1972; did quite a number to the front end. It was a low speed hit though.
Once the car was “supposedly” repaired, the radiator was never right. My parents, for some unknown reason, never did get it dealt with.
The car hung in until late 1975. Became second car in fall of 1973, as I recall.
Our driver’s ed car was a ’74 Matador, never thought anything about it at the time. My grandparents had a ’65 Rambler Classic which became ours when grandma wanted a new car. I LOVED driving that 2-door, fire engine Rambler, it had a very strong engine. Dad sold it to a collector since it was still like new with just 48K on it.