(first posted 12/23/2017) Brendan’s excellent post on the Spirit GT captures AMC’s Herculean efforts to create something out of nothing. In February 1979, Car and Driver reviewed the Spirit GT, read on to see their thoughts on how well AMC succeeded back in the day.
Visual glitz over prosaic underpinnings took Detroit by storm in the late 1970s. Credit must be given for larding “glamour” onto a Gremlin, about the least likely “sow’s ear to silk purse” transformation imaginable.
Sadly for AMC, the Spirit’s appeal was only skin deep. The handling wasn’t great, and the V8 was lackluster. Plus, with the onslaught of more efficient and better handling small cars arriving for 1979, the V8 Spirit seemed woefully out-of-place.
Nor was the Spirit GT a screaming value. The as-tested price of $6,578 ($23,757 adjusted) put the car into fiercely competitive territory, up against superior rivals like the all-new Ford Mustang. Unless you were a die-hard AMC fanatic, there were many other choices for the same money (or less) that were either more modern or from a brand with more cachet.
But you have to give AMC credit for trying. The Spirit, along with the rest of the archaic cars in AMC’s line-up, simply couldn’t survive so long past their “sell by” date–but the scrappy fighter mentality that defied the odds was a testament to AMC’s employees–and wound up helping Chrysler immensely as well, after AMC was brought into the Pentastar fold.
Worst fuel economy of the cars they were comparing it to, highest price, but quietest interior…
Did the AMC 304 ever get a four barrel carb? Sounds like it was desperately in need of one.
Nope. The 304 never got a 4-barrel. That would have been nice!
Car Craft magazine August(?),1979 issue- They took a 1979 Spirit AMX, (304, 4-speed) and swapped on a 4-barrel carb, Edelbrock manifold (I think it was one of the SP2P intakes) and a set of headers. They were ecstatic that they got it into the 16-second range in the 1/4 mile…..
If only AMC had jumped on the faux luxury small car bandwagon 3-5 years earlier. Like the rest of the Big Three, they could have better capitalized on this mid 70s trend. Product planners at Ford, Chrysler and GM saw it years earlier, and ensured the Mustang II, Granada, Volare, Aspen, and Nova could be optioned like big cars.
The Concord and Spirit needed to be launched by 1976 at the latest.
They could have done it in 1970 with their “Little Rich Car” Hornet and beaten the market by three years before Maverick/Comet came up with the LDO package.
AMC advertised it as such and then went nowhere with it.
Even the SST interiors were no match for an LDO, Valiant Brougham or Nova Concours.
Actually, AMC invented the small car market back in the late 50’s when GM/Ford/Chrysler were building behemoths, and they did well for about 5 years in that smaller car market. They strayed from it a bit in ’65-69 as they tried to compete more head-to-head with the Big 3. When the Hornet was introduced in 1970 (the basic platform for this ’79 Spirit), it was marketed as “The Little Rich Car” and had options you couldn’t get on a Maverick, like V8, power disc brakes, and reclining seats.
But it still had the crappiest interior of any car in its class, with very poor seats, a sloppy & disjointed instrument panel and lots of painted metal showing, a major fail. The Concord/Spirit upgrades, as noted by Daniel M. above, were needed several years before they were actually offered.
Right there, Frank. The most ill fitting and thinnest Vacu-Form materials ever seen.
The folk’s 71 Gremlin and subsequent Ambassador Brougham shared the same material and assembly. Dubious on a subcompact,it should have been unacceptable on AMC’s finest.
https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/cto/d/rare-1983-amc-spirit/6432127771.html
Hmm … I’m only 280 miles away. And it’s a 5 speed …
Thanks GN! Reading this review really made my day.
The AMC Spirit strikes me as completely pointless. It’s essentially a two-seater as the back seat and trunk are all but useless. And I’m sure that would be fine if the Spirit went as well as it looked, but by all accounts they handled poorly, delivered barely adequate acceleration (even with the 304..) and guzzled fuel. This car is all about aesthetics, and AMC never had the cache to sell a car on looks alone.
The best part of the article was the picture of Seventies Man posing with the Spirit on pg. 54. It’s the perfect representation of the guy who would have actually bought this car in 1979.
The AMC Spirit strikes me as completely pointless.
Me too. And I think a few other folks felt that way back in its time. Which explains its short and pathetic life.
Comparing this to say a Honda Accord hatchback makes it perfectly clear why AMC essentially croaked, and why the other American companies did too, or almost did. This is the most cynical small car ever made. The Gremlin was bad enough, with a back seat fit only for double amputees, but then they even took away the headroom with this.
And with a V8, that makes its max (four-cylinder level) power at 3200 rpm. No wonder folks were snapping up cars like the Datsun 200SX we saw here the other day. Truly pathetic.
When it comes to AMC I always have to substitute the word cynical for desperate, this ain’t GM we’re talking about. AMC was trying to be all things in this one remains car line in a rapidly changing time in vehicle segments… with a 10 year old base design. The Hornet/Gremlin derived Concord/Spirit badge jobs were going for the mainstream market the Accord would soon dominate, but the “new” spirit liftback seemed more like it was as an attempt for AMC to re enter the ponycar segment where back seat space and headroom never was a strongsuit anyway, American or Japanese. It falls short regardless but I give it a pass for packaging inefficiency there. The liftback should have had a different model name from the “sedans” IMO
You’re right, “cynical” is not the right word. Let’s just settle on “pathetic”.
It’s important to note however that the V8 was only available in ’79 and when you remove that weight from the front end the handling improves. The vast majority of these cars came with the 258 six or Iron Puke 4 cylinder. A grand total of 3893 V8 Spirits were built so this is a review of a very rare car. It was a dated attempt at a pony/muscle car that AMC could offer because they could. If there were a very small amount of people that would buy a V8 Spirit why not offer it?
I can’t imagine anyone cross shopping a ’79 Spirit AMX with a Honda Accord. If you want to compare apples to apples then you’d have to compare to an ’82 Spirit 2.5 with the first 5 speed offered by an American Manufacturer. It got an alleged 37mpg under the dubious old system and was a far more balanced handler. Yes I know it falls short in any in depth comparison but it’s not so cynical when you make a fair comparison. Also as noted, AMC was drowning at the time and the fact that they could re-skin the Gremlin in a fairly attractive package was a minor miracle in itself.
I’m one of the very few people in the world that have actually driven a V8 Spirit, as my brother had a ’79 Spirit AMX 304 auto. Did it handle weird? Oh yeah, but it was an improvement over my axle-hopping V8 Gremlin. Steering was much improved as well. It’s really quite fun when you get used to it, the short wheelbase means you have to be quick to correct things when it gets snakey.
As for the strangled power of the 304, that was par for the course in ’79. Yeah it was probably worse at AMC but at least that didn’t shrink their V8s to make CAFE numbers like Ford with the 255 and Chevy with the 267.
With my brothers’s 304, it was beat when he got it so he had it rebuilt to factory specs but added an aluminum intake, a Holley 4 barrel and removed all the smog junk. It made gobs of power well past 5000 rpm and beat a few 90’s 5.0 Mustangs.
Oddly enough my Mom had a ’85 Accord shortly before my brother had his Spirit AMX. That Accord was a 15 year old car at the time but it lasted 2 Winnipeg winters before rusting apart before 200 000 kms. The 21 year old Spirit, soldiered on for 5 years before he sold it. But yeah, it was rusty too. Apples to apples.
Oh, and that console armrest was annoying on the automatics too. The Spirit AMX had a black interior so at least it looked normal. I don’t remember the fuzzy seat bottoms though.
I can’t imagine anyone cross shopping a ’79 Spirit AMX with a Honda Accord.
You’re right. Accord buyers knew what they wanted, and it sure wasn’t a Spirit. Which explains the relative success of these two cars.
I meant comparing for comparison’s sake; as in two compact hatchbacks. That couldn’t be more different.
Its only ‘pointless’ due to the climate of the late ’70s and AMC’s limited resources. Had they taken the Spirit full ponycar with a hopped up 304 or better yet a 360…who knows, it may have made a dent. But as it was, they submitted to the all show, no go mindset and well, its just an also ran.
Sorry, but having ridden in the back seat of one of these Spirits, it was not useless. Perhaps it was only good for children, but so were the back seats of most 3-door subcompacts of its day.
Between that Spirit and the 1973 Matador my grandparents had, I disagree the interiors were as bad as people are judging them in contrast to other cars of the time.
The expectations people have were beyond the capabilities of AMC by the 1970’s. They simply did not have the money and resources to come up with new powertrains and platforms. They had to take what they had and tweak.
No Rambler Scrambler, this one!
“The ’79 Wretched Excess award goes to the Spirit’s fancy fuzzy seat bottoms”… all that needs to be said, right there!
Looks like “Homely the Lonely” just realised the AMC Spirit was not the chick magnet he thought it would be.
I liked the AMC Spirit much better than the Gremlin even though it struck me as ugly and unappealing. Hornet/Concorde were more appealing to me. I have a lifelong friend who owned a Hornet for a while and beat the crap out of it and it always came back for more. I also have a lifelong aquaintance, who owned a Spirit, and is the type of person that only needs to talk for five minutes or so before you get a strong urge to punch him in the face. Hmmm.
We had a mailman who drove a couple of Hornets over many years. Hard use, and they went a very long time before they gave up. Very durable cars.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
You would not believe just how close we came to buying one of these! Boy, we dodged a real bullet.
“For years it tried to out VW, VW, out Datsun, Datsun, out Toyota, Toyota…”
Can someone explain when that ever was or what that claim from the article is supposed to mean ????
It reads like something pulled from the mind of the author to impress other writers rather than anything based on reality.
Thanks GN, for posting this.
I always wondered why seemingly nothing learned from the old Javelin(which seemed to be decently tuned at the end) line was applied these to make them more competent handlers so they could shine in at least one measure. The fact that these were dynamically Gremlins, with nothing more than some black trim and big fat tires and mags is disheartening to say the least. It’s not a leap to say these could have been the closest car to a 68-70 AMX AMC had made otherwise
Something I always wondered, do Spirits have a higher ride height than previous Gremlins? Or do they just look higher because of the larger wheel diameters? These always look like 4×4 Eagles at a glance to me, so if that’s the case the handling potential these may have been sabotaged from the start.
The styling was excellent for the time IMO, I firmly believe these *looked* as contemporary as anything else made until the mid-80s. The interior is where the dated aspect of the platform really sets in, at the very least a new dash could have helped with the disguise.
That dash was new for ’78 and was miles ahead of the one that preceded it. Also the metal above the door panels was finally gone. I thought the interiors were at least on par with the Big 3 at the time. Sadly that new dash would be the last one.
I’ve never looked into it but I think the ride heights for the Gremlin and the Spirit were the same. I’ve got a picture in my head of the engineering team tasked with putting together the handling package for the Spirit GT comprising of a ragtag group of interns coming in on the weekend and getting paid in doughnuts and coffee. Maybe the best engineering interns got paid in old Gremlins?
True, but it clearly seems the dash was only externally refreshed within the existing core structure, still showing it’s Hornet hardpoints, the most distinctive aspect being the lower AC ducting/package tray, and to lesser extent the lower corner trim partially surrounding the instrument panel and glove box door. The most obvious changes are to the instrument panel, the “flattened” pad above the center stack and bulged out center stack to house the relocated climate controls and stereo.
And 78
It could have been the same core structure, I don’t know as I’ve never had one of the newer ones apart. The newer ones always felt way more solid then the old ones so at the very least it was tightened up and refined. Doesn’t say much though as the old ones were pretty terrible.
That junky bottom package tray/AC ducting was optional, and was a separate part to the rest of the dash. It’s very unfortunate that it survived to the end of Eagle production. When the shelf itself didn’t rattle whatever was in it did.
Funny… I was a park worker in Kenosha at the time. One of the guys was an older fella, retired from AMC. He said he’d been a tech or engineer who’d worked on the Hornet suspension. This guy specialized in finding places to hide the park truck & crew out of sight of the bosses. His MO was, The less work done, the better.
You and me both, Matt. Ive always liked the Spirit from the aesthetics standpoint. I wish AMC wouldn’t have half assed it and rather made this a full on successor to the Javelin/AMX.
It seems to me that after the 50s, AMC was never able/willing to build a car that was outstanding in at least one area. Even clean sheet designs like the Hornet or the 67 Ambassador were compromised in pretty much every way. It was as if they tried to not offend on any one metric and managed to appeal to almost nobody. The two times they seem to have tried style (the Pacer and the 74 Matador coupe) they whiffed badly.
The last Studebakers were durable and could be blazingly fast. Mopars of the era were fast, durable and good handlers. Fords were smooth, quiet, and luxurious. GM cars were well sorted, stylish and by the 70s were very good handlers. You can pick almost any American car of the 60s or 70s that stood above all others for being really good at (at least) one thing. I cannot think of a single AMC that managed to pull this off. And the situation only got worse as AMC’s resources dwindled.
Even clean sheet designs like the Hornet or the 67 Ambassador were compromised in pretty much every way. It was as if they tried to not offend on any one metric and managed to appeal to almost nobody.
My windshield time was all in Ambassadors, a 70 and 74, both wagons. The 74 was owned by a foundry I worked at, along with a 74 LTD. I utterly hated that LTD for it’s sloppy, wallowing, handling. Loved the Amby for it’s much tighter feel. That 74 was also screwed together better than the 70. Ambys were great for long trips as AMC had persisted with coil spring seats, which gave much better support.
AMC, because of it’s size, was dependent on outside vendors for more components than the big three. The Amby’s Saginaw power steering was vastly better than Ford’s, both quicker and with better feel. While the Torqueflite that AMC switched to in 72 had a better reputation than the Borg it replaced, I wonder if Chrysler was dumping it’s QC rejects on AMC. When I toured the Kenosha plant in 75 we went through a room where there was a mountain of Torqueflites in crates that, we were told, were rejected by AMC QC, There was a big pile of Bendix brake parts in the reject stack too.
The Ambassador was a real missed opportunity. Nice seats, yes. But everything I ever read was that the rest of the interior felt cut-rate. Had AMC trimmed them to Olds 98 levels and priced them reasonably, they should have sold well when gas prices started to jump. Sort of a variation on the original Romney formula of more car inside, less car outside. But the cars never had the top quality feel of AMC stuff of 10-15 years earlier. They killed it one year into a fairly attractive restyle (As attractive as it could get with those 1970 roof, quarters and rear doors.)
The last Studebakers were durable and could be blazingly fast.
Until Studebaker switched to Chevy engines, they still suffered from the excess weight of the, by then, ancient 259. Brooks Stevens did a very attractive styling update for 64, but the fashionably low roofline came at the expense of interior room. Front seats were very low to maintain headroom, while the rear seats were positioned higher to make up for little legroom, but then suffered little headroom. And Studebakers were always narrow.
Keep in mind that, when Studebaker went toes up, all the emissions and safety standards that AMC labored under in the 70s did not yet exist. If you want to compare apples to apples, consider a 259 64 Studebaker with a 64 Rambler Classic, which was available with a 250hp 327, which Studebaker could only top with a blown R2 289.
You want that Spirit to fly? All the AMC V8s used the same block, so a 401 crate engine could live under that hood with an afternoon of wrenching.
I knew somebody would bring up the Studebaker comparison. The Spirit is AMC’s ’62 GT Hawk, a stunningly good looking car that did an amazing job of hiding mostly carryover sheetmetal and structure with a stylish and trendy new roofline, a few minor tweaks to the front and back, and a new but not-all-that-new dashboard. Dick Teague (who had already worked his facelifting magic at Studebaker-Packard on the ’55-’56 Packards) now was called to do the same thing to a ’70 Gremlin that Brooks Stevens did to a ’56 Hawk which itself a facelift of the ’53 Starliner/Starlight. (That comparison is closer than Teague’s own restyling of the ’55 Packards, since that refresh also included an all-new engine, and a novel new suspension, as well as a budget for a new windshield and cowl). In all, the Spirit coupe looked up to date at first glance, but as with the ’62 Hawk (and ’60s Studes in general) the new duds couldn’t hide the outdated platform and mechanicals it was riding on. Sliding behind the wheel of a Spirit, much would feel instantly recognizable to Hornet or Gremlin owners, just as a ’64 Hawk felt much like a ’53 Starliner from behind the wheel.
The unfortunate thing is that AMC didn’t built this car back in 1970. Given the mandate to chop down a Hornet to make a plausible “subcompact”, Dick Teague could have shaped it this way from the start instead of the malproportioned Gremlin. It would have had even less rear seat and trunk room than the Gremlin did, but people were used to no trunk room (Beetle) or tiny back seats (Camaro, Vega, Pinto) in the early ’70s; the Spirit would have fit right in, yet looked better than most of its competitors.
In the end, AMC may have been smart not to spend much money or time on the Concord and Spirit, instead saving what little money they had for the Eagle. That gave them something with a unique selling point that nobody else had back then, before bringing forth the all-new XJ Cherokee and Wrangler with some help from Renault. AMC proved clairvoyant in thinking AWD and SUVs were going to take over the market; who else saw that coming in the early ’80s?
The Hornet was not really a clean-sheet design. Under the skin in many ways it was still a 2nd-gen (1964+) Rambler American. The front crossmember will even swap between the American, Hornet, Gremlin, Concord, and Spirit. (I think it was different on the Eagle due to the lower suspension being redesigned for driven front wheels.)
The only major chassis difference was the company-wide change to full ball-joint suspension for 1970 which was accomplished by welding different inner fender panels to the same structure to accommodate the new upper control arms. Of course there were detail differences over the years but I remember a review at the time calling the Hornet “the same wine in a different bottle.”
AMC was not alone in this kind of thing of course, look how much mileage Ford got out of the Falcon platform over the years.
Now somebody needs to find the Car and Driver ‘Short Take’ road test from 1980 on a really gaudily pimped-out AMC Spirit equipped with the Iron Duck 2.5 power(?)train….
Ive always liked the looks of these cars, and saw the potential. I mean, just look at this car…its clearly aimed right between the eyes of the Fox body Mustang although that’s probably coincidental rather than intentional. What a tremendous missed opportunity these cars were. Even though this era is known for smog choked disco-mobiles, strong sales of GM’s F bodies as well as whatever Mustang was available depending on what year we’re talking it was obvious that not everyone was willing to forgo some fun.
What could AMC have done to make this a true ponycar contender? Its tough to say. The 304 was a workaday engine, never a hi performance plant so most likely there wasn’t much that could have been done to make it competitive. A 4 bbl 360 would have given it the right punch, although CAFE numbers may have suffered. The Eagle SX/4 with some real power would have been a game changer against the Ford/GM ponies, what with the closest competing Mopars relying on turbo 4 cylinders and fwd. Supposedly, the Jeep 4.7 V8 was in the development stages as early as around 1987 and by then the last of the Eagle wagons were petering out. If only that combo would have been possible in the Spirit. A small DOHC v8 in this bodystyle kicking out over 200 hp…
It’s surprising to me these never really caught on with the hot rod crowd to build just that, if you can’t afford a two seater AMX, a Spirit Liftback really is the perfect answer, and staying within the AMC family for the right combination of factory parts would make for a fun “what if” project.
I can see the general automotive climate and CAFE (though I kind of doubt a 360 could do much worse than the tested 304 in this measure) being unfavorable to such a submodel in 1979, but had it been competent it could have put AMC on the radar of one market at least, and get some positive word of mouth going. The sticker jobs that were done in real life to win those buyers over weren’t cutting it with quick F-body’s, nimble new Fox Mustangs, and the many imports there to send the poor AMC to the distant bottom of comparison charts.
At age 19 I bought a new Spirit GT at Zeiglie Pontiac/AMC,January 1979. I added a set of ET “turbine” wheels,wide bias play tires,Hurst t handle for the four Speed shifter and hacksawed off the stock muffler and slipped on a “Thrush” glass pack. A few months later I shattered the ring gear and had the car towed back to the dealership,dreading the news.AMC covered the repairs even though I obviously abused and altered the car.Tired of the $90.00 a month car payment,I sold the car for the $4,500 I paid for it and bought a ’70 Charger R/T that I couldn’t break. My brother bought a ’80 Spirit GT a few years later and totaled it Iin a wreck.
A lot of hate here for these cars. I always thought they were way betting looking than the amputated Gremlin, even the sedan, with much better finished interiors as well. AMC did the best they could with very limited capital. They sold about 52k of these in MY ’79 vs 20k of the tired old ’78 Gremlins, so there was definitely a market for small, sporty and luxurious performance cars. But as usual, AMC was a dollar short and a day late.
I still like them even with all their flaws, and I like Concord and Eagle too. The underdog tried and failed – but at least they tried.
The AMC Eagle was a much nicer car. My Uncle owned one. We had a 1979 Mustang 4 cylinder 4-speed. Decent handling but, you had to plan passing on a 2-lane Highway, well in advance.
I bought one of these in 1981 with the 4.2L six heavy duty suspension and positraction. In counterpoint to many of thr commenters negative remarks I drove it 10 years reliably and comfortably. There are a lot of advantages to using established and well proven technology
“Only the continued popularity of the Jeep division products, insiders feel, has kept AMC in the car business.”
Some say the same about Fiat-Chrysler today.
Oh, don’t be so dramatic, it’s not they’re riding on ancient platforms and putting out costly flops.
…Oh wait
I remember AMC desperately trying to compete by turning a Gremlin into a Spirit, a Hornet into a Concord and aSportabout into an Eagle…They did create a niche….Living in Buffalo, I remember one detail that was worthwhile. The use of a lot of galvanized steel and factory applied Ziebart rust proofing. This was at a time when new cars in the northeast would show signs of rust perforation within 3 years…especially Fords which were pathetically subject to corrosion…AMC’s came with what I believe was a 5 year perforation warranty and they did hold up pretty well.
AMC never had the resources to compete effectively against the big 3 domestic automakers let alone the German and Japanese automakers; I also think part of the
company’s problems were they were squirreled away in the Wisconsin hinterlands of Kenosha away from Michigan and Detroit. Short periods of product acceptance merely misled the company’s executives. Detroit saw the luxury compact market years before AMC; in 1974 the big things were the formal European look popularized by Mercedes and BMW and the personal luxury-and its signature feature, the opera window-AMC came out with the Matador and Pacer.
Probably AMC’s best course of action would have been to cease manufacturing automobiles and become an auto parts producers-as Checker did. Of course Checker didn’t have dealers and the franchise laws to worry about, but in the last few years of its existence, AMC was reduced to restyling old obsolete designs and not succeeding successfully at all with it.
I am based in Beirut LEBANON. I have small collection of american & other vintage cars. To be honest I was Never an AMC fan but my latest purchase was 1981 AMC Concord DL coupe blue ext with blue cloth int 50K original miles. I bought car via Internet from http://Www.jimbabishauto. com in Pennsylvania United States its being shipped soon. this is the link to my 81 Concord
http://babish.ebizautos.mobi/detail-1981-american_motors-concord-coupe-used-16897956
I am based in Beirut LEBANON. I have small collection of american & other vintage cars. I was Never an AMC fan but my latest purchase is 1981 AMC Concord DL coupe blue ext and blue cloth int. 50K original miles. asking price was 7K I got it for 6.5K. its being shipped soon. here is link to my 81 Concord
http://www.jimbabishauto.com/detail-1981-american_motors-concord-coupe-used-16897956
If Cant open page plz go to inventory & recently sold
I knew a guy who already owned a Rebel MACHINE and a 1972 Javelin AMX with a hopped-up 401. He bought a brand new Spirit AMX with a 304, and dropped a 401 in it. Who needs a warranty, right?
With its wide track, 14 inch wheels and tires, and tall ride height, the Spirit already almost looked like a four wheel drive. Previewing the Later Spirit SX4. Sans the SX4’s bold fender flares.
Poetic that the lead photo was taken at sunset, just like the impending fate of its maker.
Rather than taking that photo in front of a rather staid, old building, a more action worthy shot might have helped bring life to this article, if not the car. If that’s the writer, he didn’t look very excited to be assigned to this vehicle.
should’a…could’a…would’a…..
If AMC has passed on the Pacer & Matador Coupe, it might have had enough cash to develop an up to date replacement for the Hornet platform. At the time, Jeep was the only cash cow in the portfolio. A second vehicle would have mitigated the red ink.
No matter what, it still needed a dance partner and Renault looked good at the time. Too bad the timing was about 2 to 3 years out of sync.
How soon people forget why AMC was such an appealing prize for Chrysler.
Thanks to Renault’s assistance, it had an up-to-date small car in the Alliance and an equally modern sedan in the Premier, which provided the template for the company-saving LH cars. The XJ Cherokee and YJ Wrangler were big hits for Jeep and the Grand Cherokee was almost ready to go. The Eagle and SX/4 were nearing the end of the line but AMC’s product line was much fresher than Chrysler’s warmed-over K-cars. Chrysler simply transplanted AMC’s engineering department and workflow because AMC’s engineers could act quickly on limited budgets.
As a result, Chrysler was basically taken over by AMC.