They actually made some terrific cars during that time. I had a '68 Rebel that I bought in 1974 for $800. Got me through college, and a cross country trip from Cape Cod, Massachusetts to Newport Beach, California, and back to the East Coast. It was a great, problem free, comfortable car. Sorry to see them go.
I currently own a 67 Rebel Cross Country station wagon with the original 290 v8. 50 years later it is still kicking butt and taking names. Great car. Fun to drive. It gets plenty attention wherever it goes.
Ok, let's stop nitpicking. We have inane commercials these days. The bottom line is that American Motors played off the Jack Benny Cheapskate rep. And having Frank Nelson in this footage is freaking awesome!
Great stuff! Thanks again for all your uploads; these commercials are fun and free and not leaking ATF, brake fluid, and antifreeze on my garage floor like the real thing is right now... Cheers! I'd better get back to work on it now...
Boy, I don't know, styling is a matter of taste and for 67, I think the Ambassador is beautiful. Seats, the coil springs are fantastic. Just like Imperial or Cadillac. But I will admit, I am biased, I own a 67 and a 73. The seat fabric in my 73 is soooo soft too! :O)
AMC actually built good cars. Its a shame the public was not very in tune to their products because 1967 was a banner year for the American auto industry.
My Mom got a rebel when I was like 6 . It spent more time in dealers garage then she got to drive it . She traded it for a older convertible which she loved it a lot.
I owned a 1966 AMC American Rogue 2 door hard top. Hat the 232 6 and automatic. Pulled the automatic out and put in a full syncro 3 speed from a Gremlin. Clifford 4 bbl intake, headers (3 into 1 with dual exhaust, and a 465 Holly gave it decent power. Maybe too much for the OEM clutch. The SC Rambler with the 390 would have been cool. One thing that hurt AMC sales was their poor resale value compared to comparable GM and Ford vehicles.
At least the U.S. Postal Service thought the Ambassadors were tough; they special-ordered 3,000 of them in 1967, all right-hand drive. I have a buddy that has one of the survivors; a really cool and unique car!
But they aren't all right hand drive....there's one in Oxford Maine at Ayoutte's salvage yard that's left hand drive....while parting it out, I found the business card of the Postmaster of Portland from 1967. I think the Supervisor cars were all left hand drive. I've heard that about 400 or 300 of them were left hand drive
Oh yes, I know. I remember a handful of folks around my neighborhood had light green Ramblers, which looked like light sedans. At least the name was cool. Say, at 1:14 Frank lets out a rockin' "OOH-OOOOHHH, are they!".Thanks for this upload.
if you look closely, you notice the paint on the ambassador doesn't match the car on the right front fender. my father had one of these, it was great car but they had production problems. he paid 7400 for it in 1967. that was more than a top-of-the-line Cadillac cost.
Caliph 0bama they didnt have knock off wire wheels changing the hubs and brakes on an ambassador to accomodate k.o. wires ? 7400 dollars in 1967 maybe he bought two of them
American Motors was in pretty deep trouble in 1967. They were trying to compete with the Big 3, that didn't work out too well for them. Not that the cars were bad, but the public perception was. I actually like this commercial, but more for the interaction between Jack Benny and Frank Nelson, something that always makes me laugh.
They weren't hurting that bad. One really bad year was survivable. Despite what you read and the myths that are out there. Yes, 1967 was a bad year for sales and also a loss year financially, like 1966 as well, the fact is they were able to withstand that loss year and reap the rewards in future years. they had profits year over year from 1958 thru 1965 with some record breaking years for sales. The additional fact you have wrong is that they weren't trying to compete with GM, Ford and Chrysler head to head. It's a misquote about Roy Abernathy. The real quote is out there, it's from an article that was written in the New York Times in 1962. Abernathy was quite clear, he wanted to go head to head against the low priced big three, Plymouth, Chevy and Ford. They weren't competing against the other car brands. by 1968, that strategy was in place in full, AMX, = Corvette, Javelin = Camaro, Rebel - Chevelle, Rambler = Nova, Ambassador = Impala....that strategy lasted up thru 1974 with very successful results with the Hornet replacing the Rambler and the Gremlin coming on the scene. They didn't experience a loss again until 1975. 1975 was a recession year and even Chrysler experienced a loss year for 1975. The reality is that that strategy was in place even during the 1950's, with Metropolitan, Nash Healey, Rambler and Nash Statesmen and Nash Ambassador. A full line of car. What Abernathy did was ended what Romney foolishly started for the 1964 model year with one platform, one car size for all. That would never have worked and would have killed them. That lost year in 1967 had no impact on their ability to acquire Jeep in 1969, they were able to do that financially. Which also brought them into the truck business and ultimately set them up as a target for take over from Chrysler. The only reason why they couldn't survive the 1980's was due to the disasters alliance with Renault and the sale of AM General which was a real cash cow but required by federal law since Renault for a short period owned the majority of shares of outstanding stock. Read the book "The Last American CEO" by Joseph Cappy, the last CEO of AMC. Excellent read.
Any idea when this particular clip aired? I have a 67 Marlin that was built very early in 66 and sold to a guy in Florida. Sure looks just like this one here. Trying to develop a timeline to either say its possible or eliminate the possibility. Thanks
First Five Seconds of this ad, shows in the lower left hand side of the Screen, a Two tone Blue and Black Marlin. It's only in the first 5 seconds of the commercial out of the whole 2.31 long commercial.....you probably missed it
The Marlin that year had a 2-tone Barbados Blue w/ Royal Blue. I'm pretty sure that's the combination on this one. Wish I could go back in time and sit in on this set. Lol
My 2nd car was a 1967 Rambler Rebel, white roof, cherry red body. Suffice to say, I learned a lot about cars and girls,and friendship, and girls, during my brief ownership. My Rebel had an independently reclining driver's seat(gr8 idea!). This "luxury" would randomly recline when climbing a steep slope. Like our driveway. But, I had occasions where the insert appropriate foul word seat would not recline! %@!*&%$!! The first time the seat got stuck, I was. incredibly, in the company of a seductively scented girl-type friend. This event, to be honest, only occurred twice. The seat thing. Traded it for a 'vette blue '69 Camaro. Hilarity and foolishness ensued.
I did a search for a 1967 Rambler Marlin and this video didn't have one. I'm looking for an auto restoration specialist named Luke Jones that has 6 shops around the U.S. 2 of which are in Anchorage, Alaska and somewhere in Tennessee that owned such a car in1982.
My dad's friend bought a 66 American brand new and I thought it was a pretty neat car. And my brother had a 68 Ambassador that he bought from one my buddy's and really liked the car.
The Marlin was a sub series of the Ambassador in 1967 with an Ambassador platform. The only difference between the Ambassador 2 door Hardtop and Marlin 2 door roof style is Sheetmetal. Just like a Station Wagon or Four Door Sedan sharing much, it's just the roof that's different. It wouldn't have been that expensive to include the Marlin in the line up and actually, Roy Abernathy insisted on it because it was an inexpensive addition to a full line up and hit a completely different market segment...the Dodge Charger market which AMC and Dodge were creating basically. It didn't sell well because there was internal belief that Abernathy was wrong and people didn't support it. Some folks inside AMC felt it was their Edsel, which really was an overdramatization. If you can't get the sales people behind something, it's doomed. It allowed the Ambassador to have a Four Door Sedan, Two Door Sedan, 2 door hardtop, sporty Marlin 2 door hardtop and a Station wagon....that's a lot of models for salesmen to sell, but also gets you a lot of open doors.
@Lumotaku lol, well, I'm assuming you mean Frank Nelson, that was his Schtick with Jack Benny for more than 40 years. It's really an awful commercial and one reason why I'm sure the advertising agency would be changed in 1968 and the President of AMC forced to Resign. The whole "now car" concept was moronic I think and they really confused people by calling the company "The 1967 American Motors"?????? seriously...it should have been either.......67 Rambler or 67 AMC or 67 American Motors
Say what you will about the Ambassador: The interior was so-so, the seats were like sitting on a soft cushion atop of a rock, the dasboard was ugly, the outside styling was hideous! The ride though. VERY few cars rode as nice as the American Motors Ambassador.
Neither vehicle had any flimsiness to it whatso ever....I think AMC wasnt on top of their game, thinking they had it made from the early sixties awards and profits and didnt continue doing the best they could.
The profits did continue, 66 and 67 were lost years, but frankly after tax loss carry forwards, not that big of a loss considering the Sales Volume.....those profits from that point forward, paid to purchase Kaiser Jeep. AMC's other division, AM General was raking in the cash. The next bad year was 1975 where they lost money but Chrysler too got hit hard that year as did the other Car Companies It was the economy. 76 was close to break even, 79 a bad year too...and like everyone, 1982 thru 1985 was truly awful.....AMC wasn't as small as the current crop of Auto Historians like to say. They made some mistakes in the 70's that hurt them, AMC Pacer really was bad in not producing the sales. Yes, they sold about 300,000 of them, but the development costs of that car could have been use to modernize Gremlin and Hornet. When Chrysler aquired them for 1.5 billion dollars, they were again profitable, they were once again positioned well to make money and that's one reason why Chrylser bought the whole thing, lock stock and barrel. Chrysler wanted to buy only Jeep and tried for 3 years, but Renault wanted to make their money back and said, no to only Jeep, you buy the whole company. The AMC cars served as platforms for the Chrysler LH series of cars which were amazingly successful. It's important to remember, nobody lost money on AMC, no Banks lost money, No investor ever lost money on AMC. Renault made a profit on it's 47% stake in AMC and the other 53% share holders got a very good price for their AMC stock. This is the part of the story that never gets told. No Bond holders lost money, everyone made out. Even the workers got to keep their jobs (with the exception of some of the Kenosha factory workers when Chrysler eventually shut that plant down.
I am sure these cars were as well built as any car on the road for 1967, but they all look cheap to me. AMC never impressed me with their cars, it's just they all looked flimsy. Maybe it was their stodgy appearance. I mean, Chrysler products looked sexy next to AMC cars.
Many people think the 67 model line up were very sexy and sleek and very similiar to the style of the 68 mid sized Mopar products to be launched in the future. A 67 Marlin, or Rebel or Ambassador Coupe are quite attractive. As for being Flimsy. GM seems to have been the high water mark on interior quality over AMC, Ford and Chrysler.
We owned two Rebels; a 1967 cross country wagon 770 complete w/ roof rack, a 3 on the tree trans. and a 232/2 bbl six cyl. which lasted forever and gave great performance and mpg. The 2nd was a 1970 Rebel
They actually made some terrific cars during that time. I had a '68 Rebel that I bought in 1974 for $800. Got me through college, and a cross country trip from Cape Cod, Massachusetts to Newport Beach, California, and back to the East Coast. It was a great, problem free, comfortable car. Sorry to see them go.
I currently own a 67 Rebel Cross Country station wagon with the original 290 v8. 50 years later it is still kicking butt and taking names. Great car. Fun to drive. It gets plenty attention wherever it goes.
I had a 67 American and a 67 ambassador. They were great cars. Thanks for sharing this.
I had a 68 Ambassador. Grand car!!! Loved that Rebel!!!
Ok, let's stop nitpicking. We have inane commercials these days. The bottom line is that American Motors played off the Jack Benny Cheapskate rep. And having Frank Nelson in this footage is freaking awesome!
And johnny Carson
Great stuff! Thanks again for all your uploads; these commercials are fun and free and not leaking ATF, brake fluid, and antifreeze on my garage floor like the real thing is right now... Cheers! I'd better get back to work on it now...
Is this a foreshadowing of future videos to come? :3
AMC did another fine job restyling it's cars in 1967 and they.looked just as good as GM, Ford, and Chrysler Corporation.
Boy, I don't know, styling is a matter of taste and for 67, I think the Ambassador is beautiful. Seats, the coil springs are fantastic. Just like Imperial or Cadillac. But I will admit, I am biased, I own a 67 and a 73. The seat fabric in my 73 is soooo soft too! :O)
AMC actually built good cars. Its a shame the public was not very in tune to their products because 1967 was a banner year for the American auto industry.
Almost as good as 1966. The Ambassador convertible from that year is breathtaking.
My Mom got a rebel when I was like 6 . It spent more time in dealers garage then she got to drive it . She traded it for a older convertible which she loved it a lot.
I had a 67 Rebel SST IN HIGH School in 1974 great car full reclining front seat
Fun commercial to watch, canned laughter and all.
They were nice looking cars !!
The audience was probably an older crowd. They should have just showcased the Ambassador.
Hysterical!
Yep! Jack Benny and Frank Nelson were so funny!!
I owned a 1966 AMC American Rogue 2 door hard top. Hat the 232 6 and automatic. Pulled the automatic out and put in a full syncro 3 speed from a Gremlin. Clifford 4 bbl intake, headers (3 into 1 with dual exhaust, and a 465 Holly gave it decent power. Maybe too much for the OEM clutch. The SC Rambler with the 390 would have been cool.
One thing that hurt AMC sales was their poor resale value compared to comparable GM and Ford vehicles.
At least the U.S. Postal Service thought the Ambassadors were tough; they special-ordered 3,000 of them in 1967, all right-hand drive. I have a buddy that has one of the survivors; a really cool and unique car!
hahaha.DOUG! I'm the guy that you know that owns one. Osborn! lol
But they aren't all right hand drive....there's one in Oxford Maine at Ayoutte's salvage yard that's left hand drive....while parting it out, I found the business card of the Postmaster of Portland from 1967. I think the Supervisor cars were all left hand drive. I've heard that about 400 or 300 of them were left hand drive
I thought all 3,000 were right-hand drive; that must've been an ordering nightmare!
YEEEESS !
Oooooooh would I.
Mr Hanson appeared on General Hospitol for years as Dr Lee Baldwin
Oh yes, I know. I remember a handful of folks around my neighborhood had light green Ramblers, which looked like light sedans. At least the name was cool. Say, at 1:14 Frank lets out a rockin' "OOH-OOOOHHH, are they!".Thanks for this upload.
if you look closely, you notice the paint on the ambassador doesn't match the car on the right front fender. my father had one of these, it was great car but they had production problems. he paid 7400 for it in 1967. that was more than a top-of-the-line Cadillac cost.
he didnt pay 7400 in 67
maybe 3400
they were not more money than a caddy
these were cheaper than a mercury
emil sponga with tax and everything yes he did, I saw the invoice. they got him good, I think they shoved the keys up his ass.
emil sponga the one my father bought was custom built, it had knock off wire wheels.
Caliph 0bama they didnt have knock off wire wheels
changing the hubs and brakes on an ambassador to accomodate k.o. wires ?
7400 dollars in 1967
maybe he bought two of them
The Rambler spokesperson sounds like Johnny Carson.
It IS Johny Carson. I think!!!
American Motors was in pretty deep trouble in 1967. They were trying to compete with the Big 3, that didn't work out too well for them. Not that the cars were bad, but the public perception was. I actually like this commercial, but more for the interaction between Jack Benny and Frank Nelson, something that always makes me laugh.
They weren't hurting that bad. One really bad year was survivable. Despite what you read and the myths that are out there. Yes, 1967 was a bad year for sales and also a loss year financially, like 1966 as well, the fact is they were able to withstand that loss year and reap the rewards in future years. they had profits year over year from 1958 thru 1965 with some record breaking years for sales. The additional fact you have wrong is that they weren't trying to compete with GM, Ford and Chrysler head to head. It's a misquote about Roy Abernathy. The real quote is out there, it's from an article that was written in the New York Times in 1962. Abernathy was quite clear, he wanted to go head to head against the low priced big three, Plymouth, Chevy and Ford. They weren't competing against the other car brands. by 1968, that strategy was in place in full, AMX, = Corvette, Javelin = Camaro, Rebel - Chevelle, Rambler = Nova, Ambassador = Impala....that strategy lasted up thru 1974 with very successful results with the Hornet replacing the Rambler and the Gremlin coming on the scene. They didn't experience a loss again until 1975. 1975 was a recession year and even Chrysler experienced a loss year for 1975. The reality is that that strategy was in place even during the 1950's, with Metropolitan, Nash Healey, Rambler and Nash Statesmen and Nash Ambassador. A full line of car. What Abernathy did was ended what Romney foolishly started for the 1964 model year with one platform, one car size for all. That would never have worked and would have killed them. That lost year in 1967 had no impact on their ability to acquire Jeep in 1969, they were able to do that financially. Which also brought them into the truck business and ultimately set them up as a target for take over from Chrysler. The only reason why they couldn't survive the 1980's was due to the disasters alliance with Renault and the sale of AM General which was a real cash cow but required by federal law since Renault for a short period owned the majority of shares of outstanding stock. Read the book "The Last American CEO" by Joseph Cappy, the last CEO of AMC. Excellent read.
Any idea when this particular clip aired? I have a 67 Marlin that was built very early in 66 and sold to a guy in Florida. Sure looks just like this one here. Trying to develop a timeline to either say its possible or eliminate the possibility. Thanks
First Five Seconds of this ad, shows in the lower left hand side of the Screen, a Two tone Blue and Black Marlin. It's only in the first 5 seconds of the commercial out of the whole 2.31 long commercial.....you probably missed it
The Marlin that year had a 2-tone Barbados Blue w/ Royal Blue. I'm pretty sure that's the combination on this one. Wish I could go back in time and sit in on this set. Lol
Yes this video does have a marlin its blue and you only see it rom the back corner
My 2nd car was a 1967 Rambler Rebel, white roof, cherry red body. Suffice to say, I learned a lot about cars and girls,and friendship, and girls, during my brief ownership. My Rebel had an independently reclining driver's seat(gr8 idea!). This "luxury" would randomly recline when climbing a steep slope. Like our driveway. But, I had occasions where the insert appropriate foul word seat would not recline! %@!*&%$!! The first time the seat got stuck, I was. incredibly, in the company of a seductively scented girl-type friend. This event, to be honest, only occurred twice. The seat thing.
Traded it for a 'vette blue '69 Camaro. Hilarity and foolishness ensued.
I'm pretty sure it was for an AMC Ambassador ('67), but I'm trying to find the commercial in which they talk about "the boulevard ride".
I did a search for a 1967 Rambler Marlin and this video didn't have one. I'm looking for an auto restoration specialist named Luke Jones that has 6 shops around the U.S. 2 of which are in Anchorage, Alaska and somewhere in Tennessee that owned such a car in1982.
Jack sounds like the Mr.Magoo Scrooge...
@OsbornTramain
Lol well yeah that is a great way to advertise a car call the low priced one cheap.
My dad's friend bought a 66 American brand new and I thought it was a pretty neat car. And my brother had a 68 Ambassador that he bought from one my buddy's and really liked the car.
@NYVoice you might call it nitpicking, but two short years later, Ramblers were bye bye.
I wonder why they didn't feature that car as well?
oh the whole Now thing has to go and that guys voice Lol
I think only 3000 Marlins were sold.
I wonder how much it cost to make a model that was only in the showroom for one year.
The Marlin was a sub series of the Ambassador in 1967 with an Ambassador platform. The only difference between the Ambassador 2 door Hardtop and Marlin 2 door roof style is Sheetmetal. Just like a Station Wagon or Four Door Sedan sharing much, it's just the roof that's different. It wouldn't have been that expensive to include the Marlin in the line up and actually, Roy Abernathy insisted on it because it was an inexpensive addition to a full line up and hit a completely different market segment...the Dodge Charger market which AMC and Dodge were creating basically. It didn't sell well because there was internal belief that Abernathy was wrong and people didn't support it. Some folks inside AMC felt it was their Edsel, which really was an overdramatization. If you can't get the sales people behind something, it's doomed. It allowed the Ambassador to have a Four Door Sedan, Two Door Sedan, 2 door hardtop, sporty Marlin 2 door hardtop and a Station wagon....that's a lot of models for salesmen to sell, but also gets you a lot of open doors.
@Lumotaku lol, well, I'm assuming you mean Frank Nelson, that was his Schtick with Jack Benny for more than 40 years. It's really an awful commercial and one reason why I'm sure the advertising agency would be changed in 1968 and the President of AMC forced to Resign. The whole "now car" concept was moronic I think and they really confused people by calling the company "The 1967 American Motors"?????? seriously...it should have been either.......67 Rambler or 67 AMC or 67 American Motors
cant give a like it is at 290
Say what you will about the Ambassador: The interior was so-so, the seats were like sitting on a soft cushion atop of a rock, the dasboard was ugly, the outside styling was hideous!
The ride though.
VERY few cars rode as nice as the American Motors Ambassador.
I'd say the exterior was absolutely the epitome of good taste.
Neither vehicle had any flimsiness to it whatso ever....I think AMC wasnt on top of their game, thinking they had it made from the early sixties awards and profits and didnt continue doing the best they could.
The profits did continue, 66 and 67 were lost years, but frankly after tax loss carry forwards, not that big of a loss considering the Sales Volume.....those profits from that point forward, paid to purchase Kaiser Jeep. AMC's other division, AM General was raking in the cash. The next bad year was 1975 where they lost money but Chrysler too got hit hard that year as did the other Car Companies It was the economy. 76 was close to break even, 79 a bad year too...and like everyone, 1982 thru 1985 was truly awful.....AMC wasn't as small as the current crop of Auto Historians like to say. They made some mistakes in the 70's that hurt them, AMC Pacer really was bad in not producing the sales. Yes, they sold about 300,000 of them, but the development costs of that car could have been use to modernize Gremlin and Hornet. When Chrysler aquired them for 1.5 billion dollars, they were again profitable, they were once again positioned well to make money and that's one reason why Chrylser bought the whole thing, lock stock and barrel. Chrysler wanted to buy only Jeep and tried for 3 years, but Renault wanted to make their money back and said, no to only Jeep, you buy the whole company. The AMC cars served as platforms for the Chrysler LH series of cars which were amazingly successful. It's important to remember, nobody lost money on AMC, no Banks lost money, No investor ever lost money on AMC. Renault made a profit on it's 47% stake in AMC and the other 53% share holders got a very good price for their AMC stock. This is the part of the story that never gets told. No Bond holders lost money, everyone made out. Even the workers got to keep their jobs (with the exception of some of the Kenosha factory workers when Chrysler eventually shut that plant down.
Do you think there may be any feasibility in Chrysler ever resurrecting an AMC division within its lineup?
I am sure these cars were as well built as any car on the road for 1967, but they all look cheap to me. AMC never impressed me with their cars, it's just they all looked flimsy. Maybe it was their stodgy appearance. I mean, Chrysler products looked sexy next to AMC cars.
Many people think the 67 model line up were very sexy and sleek and very similiar to the style of the 68 mid sized Mopar products to be launched in the future. A 67 Marlin, or Rebel or Ambassador Coupe are quite attractive. As for being Flimsy. GM seems to have been the high water mark on interior quality over AMC, Ford and Chrysler.
We owned two Rebels; a 1967 cross country wagon 770 complete w/ roof rack, a 3 on the tree trans. and a 232/2 bbl six cyl. which lasted forever and gave great performance and mpg. The 2nd was a 1970 Rebel