(EXPANDED FROM 10/15/2021)
A lingering point of contention in the auto history media has been whether the last-generation AMC Ambassador had as much interior room as the Big Three’s full-sized cars. The short answer: Not quite.
Indeed, this is an example of how an automaker’s spin can be picked up by a car-buff magazine . . . and the resulting myth is perpetuated for decades.
This particular myth likely began when American Motors classified its Ambassador as a full-sized car in 1967. Although in 1969 the wheelbase was stretched to 122 inches — the longest of any low-priced car — the Ambassador’s interior room and trunk space were the same as AMC’s mid-sized entries, the Rebel (1967-70) and Matador (1971-78).
The 1967-74 Ambassador was mainly distinguished from its lower-priced siblings by a front end that was lengthened ahead of the cowl. This approach was similar to the postwar Nash Ambassador, which had a seven-inch-longer wheelbase than its junior model. And once the Ambassador was switched to the Rambler platform, from 1958-61 it had a nine-inch-longer wheelbase.
A narrower exterior resulted in less room for six
Road Test magazine stated that the 1971 Ambassador’s “interior room is more generous than most standard size cars” (GN, 2015; p. 31). That assessment was contrary to what Consumer Reports had to say.
The latter magazine’s data tables show that the 1970 Ambassador — which was virtually identical to Road Test’s 1971 model — was roomier than Big Three mid-sized cars but had from two- to-three inches less hip room than the full-sized Plymouth Fury, Chevrolet Impala and Ford Galaxie.
One could point out that the Ambassador was more competitive when it came to other dimensions, such as head and leg room. However, there wasn’t all that much variance in those measurements when comparing big and mid-sized cars. Even the compact Dodge Dart had only 1.5 inches less rear-compartment length than its corporate sibling, the Fury. The Ambassador also had the second-largest trunk of the big cars, but it was only two cubic feet more than the mid-sized Plymouth Satellite.
The reason why the Ambassador was narrower inside was because its exterior was only 77 inches wide. That was around three inches less than Big Three’s full-sized cars. And even with its awkwardly long wheelbase, the Ambassador was still six or seven inches shorter. That resulted in a lower weight — from roughly 300 to 500 pounds in 1970.
American Motors ranked better in the mid-sized field
One might think that the penny-pinchers at Consumer Reports would have been impressed by the Ambassador’s trimmer dimensions, which presumably translated into somewhat better gas mileage.
Instead, the magazine ranked the AMC well below the rest of the field in “overall quality.” The Ambassador was downvoted because of weaknesses in its ride, handling, braking and probable dollar depreciation (1970, p. 216-217).
Meanwhile, the Rebel ranked somewhat higher among 1970 mid-sized cars. Consumer Reports noted that the AMC was “the roomiest car in the group and rides best under a full load. But it’s a distinct notch below the GM and Chrysler cars” (1970, p. 215).
The Ambassador’s sales were no better than its Consumer Reports’ ranking. From 1970-73 output hovered around 40,000-60,000 units annually. At best, that amounted to 2.8 percent of the full-sized, low-priced market.
To make matters worse, the market for full-sized, low-priced cars had been shrinking from around 3 million units in 1965 to under 2.2 million in 1970, when they were outsold for the first time by mid-sized cars. And that was before the first gas crisis. By 1976 mid-sized car production was triple that of big cars.
As mid-sized cars became more popular, so too did top-end luxury models such as the Ford Gran Torino. American Motors presumably did not give its Matador competing models because that could have cannibalized Ambassador sales.
AMC’s main advantage was more efficient packaging
The only plausible advantage the Ambassador had was that its Big Three competition was getting steadily lower, longer and wider as the decade wore on. Ironically, AMC’s aging body was strikingly similar in space efficiency to a 1977 Chevrolet Impala, which was downsized to a 116-inch wheelbase and 75.5-inch width.
American Motors management presumably continued to position the Ambassador as a big car because they could charge a higher price tag, and thus generate a bigger profit per vehicle. For example, in 1972 a base Ambassador SST four-door sedan listed for $3,885 — which was similar to a Ford LTD but roughly $1,000 more than a Gran Torino. Although the Ambassador’s price included more standard equipment than the Torino, I would imagine that this gave AMC at least somewhat more pricing headroom.
But even if that had been the goal, the automaker might have sold more cars if it had brought back a strategy from the late-50s, when advertising for a Rambler-based Ambassador emphasized its greater maneuverability, better gas mileage and lower price.
Instead, from 1968 until the Ambassador’s death at the end of the 1974 model year, ads focused almost entirely on the car’s increasingly long list of standard equipment.
An example of this is a television commercial from 1969. The spot is amusing but rather vapid compared to the Volkswagen Beetle’s legendary ad campaigns. This apparently reflected the assumption by AMC’s ad agency that the Ambassador lacked a unique selling point (go here for further discussion).
Historian Patrick Foster suggested that making air conditioning standard in 1968 was a “brilliant marketing move” and that “sales of the Ambassador began to rebound strongly”(2013, p. 99). Elsewhere I have countered that this was, at best, a small blip in the car’s descent into irrelevance (go here).
AMC’s build quality never returned to the Romney era
A broader problem with all American Motors’ cars during the 1970s was that they did not have the best reputation when it came to manufacturing workmanship and the quality of materials used. This is illustrated by a number of Curbside Classic commentators who wrote about their experiences with AMCs.
For example, Geeber (2015) concluded that “quality wasn’t ‘Job 1’ anywhere in Detroit during this time period, but AMC cars were definitely a cut below their GM and Ford competition, particularly when the Matador and Ambassador were compared to their Buick and Oldsmobile intermediate and full-size counterparts. They were even below their Chrysler Corporation counterparts in many ways.”
Also see ‘Would AMC have done better if George Romney had stayed longer?’
I would offer the friendly amendment that the overall quality of AMC passenger cars did improve somewhat with the advent of the Buyer Protection Plan in 1972. This initiative included engineering improvements, such as finally ditching the archaic vacuum-powered windshield wipers and replacing a balky Borg-Warner automatic transmission with Chrysler’s excellent Torqueflite.
Just as importantly, factory quality-control measures were added, as was a hassle-free process for customers to get manufacturing defects fixed.
Despite AMC’s heavy marketing of the Buyer Protection Plan, its cars did not return to the quality standards of the early-60s. 58L8134 (2015) rightly noted that then-CEO George Romney “pressed for better materials and build quality which he knew would affect the long-term satisfaction customer(s) perceived from their Ramblers.”
Romney’s prescient attitude was reflected in the 1962 Rambler brochure, which included the following letter (click on image to enlarge).
Ambassador was an attempt to refight the last war
The 1967-74 Ambassador had a decidedly “retro” quality in that it revived Nash’s long-time practice of giving its top-end models a cowl stretch. That wasn’t necessarily a bad strategy — Pontiac arguably gave its downsized 1969 Grand Prix more cachet by stretching its wheelbase four inches from cheaper LeMans two-door models. However, the Grand Prix wasn’t sold as a big car even though its price tag was higher than most Ambassador models.
Note that Grand Prix output soared to over 112,000 units in 1969 whereas the Ambassador barely cracked 76,000 units — and this would be the nameplate’s high-water mark. Yet AMC continued to sell the Ambassador as a big car through 1974, when sales fell to such a low level that the nameplate was discontinued. Pontiac had the better idea by pioneering the mid-sized personal coupe.
American Motors apparently did consider consolidating the Ambassador and Matador on the same wheelbase. Foster (2013) has shown images of a proposed new design that mainly differentiated the two nameplates with fascia treatments, much like the 1972 Torino and Gran Torino.
Alas, that idea was aborted when AMC instead came out with the radical 1974 Matador coupe while giving facelifts to four-door sedan and wagon models. At that point the Ambassador lost its two-door hardtop and started to share a weird-looking front bumper with the Matador (go here for further discussion). This would prove to be an undistinguished end for one of the longest-lived nameplates in the U.S. auto industry.
Would the Ambassador have sold better in the 1970s if Romney’s championing of more efficient packaging and higher quality had been maintained by his successors? I suspect so, but such a strategy was clearly viewed as no longer viable even though big-car sales had been on the decline since the mid-60s. Somehow AMC considered it smarter to fight the last war than the one they were now in.
NOTES:
This story was originally posted Nov. 14, 2015 and expanded on Oct. 15, 2021 and April 7, 2025. Dimensions are from Consumer Reports (1970) except for trunk capacity, which is from Automobile Catalog (2021). Market share and production figures were from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006) and Gunnell (2002).
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- 58L8134; 2015. Commentator in “Curbside Classic: 1970 AMC Ambassador SST – The Patriarch of Kenosha.” Curbside Classic. Posted 5:31 p.m., Oct. 14.
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International, Lincolnwood, Ill.
- Automobile Catalog; 2021. “Full detailed specifications listing and photo gallery.” Accessed Oct. 13.
- Consumer Reports; 1970. “Basic body dimensions.” Auto Buying Issue, pp. 221-223.
- Foster, Patrick R.; 2013. American Motors Corporation: The Rise and Fall of America’s Last Independent Automaker. MBI Publishing Co., Minneapolis, MN.
- GN; 2015. “Vintage Review: 1971 AMC Ambassador SST — Road Test Magazine Evaluates AMC’s Biggest Sedan.” Curbside Classic. Posted Nov. 11.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised 4th Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Road Test; 1971. “Ambassador SST.” Road Test. August, pp. 28-33.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- autohistorypreservationsociety.org: Rambler Ambassador (1959)
- oldcaradvertising.com: AMC (1972)
- oldcarbrochures.org: AMC Ambassador (1970, 1971, 1972, 1973); AMC Matador (1971); Chevrolet (1970, 1971); Ford LTD (1970); Rambler (1962)
- AutomobileHistoryUSA (YouTube): AMC Ambassador (1969)
‘A broader problem with all American Motors’ cars during the 1970s was that they did not have the best reputation when it came to manufacturing workmanship and the quality of materials used.’
I saw this firsthand with the new ’71 Gremlin and ’72 Ambassador Brougham my parents bought, back to back.
One got the same cut-price hardware and trimmings in the Ambassador as one did the Gremlin. The same low-grade ill-fitting plastic [Vacu-form type if anyone remembers that toy from the ’70s], sloppy assembly, paint runs, and cheap carpet.
Only the most fanatical AMC fans still claim that AMC quality in the ’70s was the equal of the Big Three.
AMC rode that quality reputation hard long after it was thoroughly discredited.
It’s a shame, as I always loved AMC and likely my folks made those purchases because of my influence.
My Dad: “If that [’72 Ambassador ] is AMC’s “best” car, I’ll never buy another one”.
But it was a beautiful car: Cordoba brown with a brown vinyl top and on paper it was an ideal “full” size car if one cared about trim design without excess lighter weight and better fuel economy.
My older brother of the brand new Gremlin: “Seems slapped together’. He had plenty of experience in a new Pinto his wife’s dad had purchased.
Say what one will about the Pinto it was at least screwed together well.
On a long trip to PA in the Gremlin, a heavy rainstorm caused the entire floorboard to fill with water. That was just one of the quality problems with it.
The Buyer Protection Plan was necessary. I can’t say it did much to improve the ’72s if our Ambassador was an example.
It drove home from the dealership unable to shift into third gear. Yes, the new for ’72 Chrysler automatic.
One can see from the photographs the difference in quality. I saw it first hand as well given the various driver’s ed cars I was in at the time and the ’66 Mercury Montclair and 70 Olds 88 that were also in the family.
So thank you for saying the quiet part out loud.
Rose-tinted glasses on full display.
As a thought experiment, imagine there had been no Rebel in 1967 and instead the Classic carried on with a facelifted version of the ’65-’66 bodyshell. Would the ’67 Ambassador then have seemed like a rational new take on the full sized car? Less hiproom, yes. But as the ’77 GM B body proved, that wasn’t necessarily critical.
In the 70’s Chrysler cars were built better than most ford and GM cars, they were just oversized gas swilling boats, but their build quality was ahead of Ford and GM.