Four reasons why the AMC Gremlin was a bad idea

(UPDATED FROM 4/20/2022)

The AMC Gremlin may be one of the most memorable cars of the 1970s, but it was a bad idea for four often-forgotten reasons.

I grant you that what I am about to say is not universally popular. For example, Aaron Gold (2020b) described the Gremlin as the “right car for a changing market, and it served both American Motors Corporation and its buyers very, very well.” Meanwhile, Curbside Classic contributor ERIC703 (2022) called the Gremlin “a remarkable and underappreciated success for a company that was perpetually on the verge of collapse.” And Indie Auto commentator Kenosha Curt (2021) insisted that the Gremlin was a “significantly better car than all the direct competitors” and its “sales were a huge financial success for AMC.”

Before proceeding, let’s acknowledge that people like what they like. There’s nothing wrong with Kenosha Curt being a huge Gremlin fan. However, just because we are fond of a car doesn’t mean that it was a triumphant success for its manufacturer.

And just to be clear: I would not describe the Gremlin as an outright flop like the Pacer or the 1974 Matador coupe. Indeed, AMC’s pseudo-subcompact did do sort-of okay for a few years before sales collapsed. However, I would still argue that the Gremlin was an evolutionary wrong turn for four reasons.

Reason 1: The Gremlin was a lousy subcompact

AMC marketed the Gremlin as the “first car to break through the subcompact barrier.” It did beat the Chevrolet Vega and Ford Pinto to market by around six months. However, it would have been more honest for AMC to have described the Gremlin as an entry-level, compact personal coupe rather than a subcompact.

Pretty much everyone who is reading this already knows that the Gremlin was a Hornet two-door sedan with a foot chopped out of the wheelbase. Why then is it so hard for some folks to acknowledge that — even under ideal conditions — a truncated compact car isn’t going to compete very well against real subcompacts?

Also see ‘How American Motors abandoned its uniqueness in the second half of the 1960s’

For one thing, the Hornet body was way too wide and heavy to achieve competitive fuel economy even once the Gremlin offered a four-cylinder engine — which didn’t happen until its seventh year of production. Meanwhile, the wheelbase was too short for a compact platform so the back seat was sandwiched between the rear wheel wells. That seat could be a tighter fit than in imports whose exterior dimension were considerably smaller. And even if you didn’t plop a V8 in the Gremlin, it was so nose-heavy that handling and braking suffered.

AMC compounded the inherit problems with a shortened Hornet platform by giving the Gremlin’s greenhouse a triangular shape that reduced both rearward visibility and cargo capacity.

The Gremlin also suffered from a variety of weaknesses resulting from AMC trying to sell a compact car at a subcompact price. For example, the rear hatchback door was unusually small and did not have a metal frame . . . so it was more prone to breaking. And equipment that was often standard on imports was either optional or unavailable. In 1971 you could order bucket seats at extra cost but not disc brakes or a four-speed manual transmission.

The Gremlin was not a well-sorted car, particularly if not carefully optioned. In a 1971 Car and Driver road test of subcompacts, the AMC was criticized for an “incredibly heavy clutch,” very slow unassisted steering, “ponderous” handling and skittish brakes (Niedermeyer, 2018).

None of these practical weaknesses might have mattered much to those who were looking for a stylish and cheap compact coupe. But import fighter this was not.

Reason 2: The Gremlin wasn’t very profitable

Gold (2020b) wrote that the Gremlin was “the second-best-selling car in AMC’s history behind the Hornet.” This isn’t true — the Classic, American and even Ambassador nameplates outsold the Gremlin. During the eight full model years the Gremlin was in production it garnered only 26 percent of AMC’s passenger-car output even though it was the automaker’s entry-level nameplate.

The Gremlin’s brief moment in the sun was largely attributable to the first oil embargo. This spiked the sales of smaller cars in general. Although the Gremlin’s output shot up more than 39 percent in 1974, that wasn’t exceptional — Hornet production went up slightly more. Just as importantly, over the next two years Hornet output also saw a less drastic decline than the Gremlin’s (62 percent versus 69 percent).

It’s probably just as well that AMC’s smallest car didn’t sell better. Car and Driver (1970) noted that the “Gremlin has to be priced below the Hornet for tactical reasons but, un­avoidably, it costs nearly the same to build — what else can you expect when most of the body and mechanical parts are common to both cars? AMC officials are more than just a little apprehensive about this situation. When asked about produc­tion capacity for Gremlins, one executive was confident that the plant could cope with high demand — but if it appeared that Gremlins were being sold primarily to cus­tomers who otherwise would have bought a Hornet, or something else in the AMC line, the Gremlin volume would have to be cut back — the profit margin is too slim.”

As a case in point, the 1971 Gremlin weighed in at 2,553 pounds. That was only 102 pounds lighter than a base Hornet two-door sedan but a whopping 603 pounds heavier than a Pinto. The four-passenger Gremlin listed for $1,999, which was $175 less than a Hornet but $80 more than a Pinto.

Car and Driver (1970) went on to note that the Gremlin “will be successful only if it attracts new buyers to the AMC flock, and only if these buyers ante up extra money for high-profit optional equipment.” Gremlin marketing thus tended to highlight cars equipped with the sporty X package and other doodads.

Reason 3: AMC did not keep the Gremlin up to date

One reason why the Gremlin may have lost altitude so fast was because AMC did little to keep the design up to date. For example, when 5-mph bumpers were required in 1974, AMC designers tacked them on with minimal sheetmetal changes. The result was one of the ugliest cars on the road.

The 1977 Gremlin’s nicely done facelift hints at what the automaker should have done three years earlier. Or, if that was unaffordable, at least giving the Gremlin the Hornet’s new — and better looking — front end. I don’t think it was an accident that Gremlin-based show cars from that time period were fitted with the 1973 Hornet front sheetmetal; it looked much better.

Presumably AMC was slow to update the Gremlin because management wanted to emphasize the more profitable Hornet and, later, the Pacer. This made some sense but resulted in the Gremlin having even less going for it than in previous years. Whereas 1971-73 models may have won over some buyers primarily because of their cuteness, the 1974-76 styling had a kit-car tackiness. In addition, the Gremlin didn’t receive even modest practical improvements such as a more modern dashboard.

Also see ‘Collectible Automobile puffs up the 1971-74 AMC Javelin‘

Here it should be mentioned that foreign automakers were not standing still. By the mid-70s their subcompact entries tended to be roomier, more comfortable and more powerful. Some imports offered advanced features such as front-wheel drive and five-speed manual transmissions. In comparison, the Gremlin was positively archaic.

Reason 4: The Gremlin’s branding was too faddish

The Gremlin was intentionally introduced on April 1, 1970 — April Fool’s Day. It was also given a name that brought to mind the opposite of what one might consider admirable in a car: “a mischievous invisible being, said by airplane pilots in World War II to cause engine trouble and mechanical difficulties” (Dictionary.com, 2022).

That sense of humor might have had less of a downside if AMC had a better reputation for the quality of its products — particularly prior to introducing the Buyer Protection Plan in 1972 (go here for further discussion).

The styling was also offbeat in order to grab people’s attention. AMC told Car and Driver (1970) that all of the automaker’s “surveys indi­cated that distinctive styling is the single most important feature to the imported car buyer and it is hoped that the Grem­lin’s unique silhouette will become as fashionable in the public eye as that of the Beetle.”

I suspect that surveys were less important to AMC’s management’s decision making than Detroit groupthink. Unlike during the Rambler era, styling was clearly considered more important than functionality. When the Gremlin was introduced, head designer Richard Teague told Motor Trend magazine that the Gremlin wouldn’t win any styling awards but “at least the car has personality and character and it has a different-looking little image. It isn’t just another little funny-looking sedan” (Gold, 2020a).

Also see ‘Richard Teague’s styling helped to kill American Motors’

The offbeat marketing and styling may have initially gotten people’s attention, but was it a sustainable approach for a car whose product cycle ended up being eight years? AMC essentially admitted the limitations of the nameplate by replacing it in 1979 with the Spirit. By the same token, the Gremlin-based show cars generally used the Hornet Sportabout’s more conventional — and roomier — rear hatchback design. Also note that the Pacer, which was an indirect successor to the Gremlin, was given a four-inch-longer wheelbase to improve rear-seat legroom.

What should AMC have done instead of the Gremlin?

The luxury of hindsight suggests that AMC could have been better off sticking with the bottom end of the compact car market. This is for two reasons: 1) The automaker could have generated a higher profit and 2) AMC’s entry would have stayed competitive longer as a compact rather than as a subcompact.

Ford arguably had the better idea with its Maverick two-door coupe. The car was positioned below traditional compacts such as the Plymouth Valiant in size, content and price. However, even before the subcompact Pinto was introduced, the Maverick’s list price was higher than that of a four-passenger Gremlin.

The Maverick was also a more versatile size than the Gremlin because its seven-inch-longer wheelbase gave it a roomier back seat, better weight distribution and at least the potential for more cargo capacity. AMC could have offered a number of body styles on a 103-inch wheelbase such as a coupe, hatchback and wagon.

Also see ‘Five questions about Aaron Severson’s take on American Motors’

Or AMC could have simply come out with a coupe version of the Hornet in 1970-71 that shared the same roofline as the hatchback. The breakout success of both the Maverick and the Plymouth Duster suggest that AMC could have done better with a sporty compact coupe than the Gremlin even at the peak of the oil embargo.

In short, I would argue that the Gremlin was not the “right car for the market.” It was a gimmick that didn’t flop but also didn’t possess the staying power AMC needed to make it through the 1970s.

NOTES:

Production data and product specifications were drawn from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006), Gunnell (2002), Flammang (1992) and Wikipedia (2020).

Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.

---

RE:SOURCES

• Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, IL.
• Car and Driver; 1970. “American Motors Gremlin.” Published April 16.
• Dictionary.com; 2022. “Gremlin.” Accessed April 20.
• ERIC703; 2022. “Curbside Classic: 1977 AMC Gremlin – Purposely Contentious.” Curbside Classic. Posted Feb. 23.
• Flammang, James M.; 1992. Standard Catalog of Imported Cars: 1946-1990. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
• Gold, Aaron; 2020a. “How One of History’s Dorkiest Cars—the AMC Gremlin—Became a Sales Success.” Automobile. Posted Jan. 3.
• ——; 2020b. “Terrible Cars That Weren’t Terrible: The AMC Gremlin.” MotorTrend. Posted June 1.
• Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised Fourth Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
• Niedermeyer, Paul; 2018. “Curbside Classic: AMC Gremlin – 1971 Small Car Comparison Number 6.” Curbside Classic. Posted Jan. 8.
• Wikipedia; 2020. “U.S. Automobile Production Figures.” Page last edited Oct. 4.

ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:

• wildaboutcarsonline.com (Automotive History Preservation Society): AMC Gremlin (1971); Toyota Corolla (1970)
• oldcaradvertising.com: AMC Hornet (1971, 1973)
• oldcarbrochures.org: AMC Gremlin (1971, 1975, 1977, 1978); AMC Hornet (1973); Ford Maverick (1971); Plymouth Duster (1970)