[AMC-List] More

["Mahoney, John" <jmahoney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Remember an Alliance?

"The goal is to create a strategy that assures sustained profitability of DaimlerChrysler; we don't exclude anything here.  We at first are doing the analysis, then we are talking about it, and we draw our conclusions."

[Will D-B divest of Mopar?]

"I can only repeat myself: first analysis, second measures, third is conclusion.  That is what my statement is."

http://tinyurl.com/w3ytv

Remember a Medallion?

"Sometime towards the end of the year we should start to get a clear picture within the management and sometime in the beginning of next year we should be at a point where we can inform the public about what we will be doing."

http://tinyurl.com/evvcu

Remember Project Titan?

"We shall be listening."

http://tinyurl.com/y222j6

http://tinyurl.com/yypvmg

CFO and Vorstandsvorsitzender spoke 10/25/06; CEO spoke in an AMC dream.


Remember when AMC had 1,472 North American dealerships??  Remember 1987.

General Motors had 39.6% of the American market then!  And AMC had 0.7%.

You say, "I don't care: history is bunk."  

You believe everything is fine with AMC.

It was, it is, and, for forever will be.  

History's bunk.

Indeed.


"Whatever Iacocca touches turns to gold."

One of the 19,500 AMC employees who celebrated on Chrysler buyout day.

Does he still have his job at AMC-Jeep?

Does AMC still employ 5,400 in Kenosha?

Do you still believe "History is bunk"?

It was, it is, and, for forever will be.

History sucks.

Indeed.


Remember Rambler and Concord?

"Small does not equate to cheap anymore."

http://www.carlist.com/conceptcars/davidrand.html

[Neither '50 Convertible Landau nor '78 D/L were sold as "cheap" cars!] 

Remember Gremlin and Pacer?

"A successful small car isn't just a downsized version of a larger one; in the '80s and late '70s, the idea was to take a big car and shrink it down.  Now we start with fresh architecture [and] we do it right."

http://tinyurl.com/u736z

(Yes, dude has ponytail)

[Both '70.5 96" and '75 100" 3-doors were "revolutionary" car designs!] 

Remember Rambler, Hornet, Gremlin, LeCar, Fuego, and AMC Jeep Cherokee? 

http://www.allpar.com/trucks/jeep/liberty-2008.html

>From roof to lights, flair to flares, go back to square one: AMC roots! 


>>
when did the xj have rear disks?  afaik only the zj, wj, and tj
rubicon have had them.  dunno about the liberty.
<<

http://www.rockcrawler.com/reviews/jeep/liberty_2002/index.asp

http://tinyurl.com/yb4rlw

Do your own due diligence:

http://www-5.jeep.com/vehsuite/VehicleCompare.jsp

or take Liberty in new-old trucks.

http://www.southernmotorcompany.com/

Could Frank sell new-old SC AMCs?

Maybe a "T/A Javelin" and "AMX/3"

http://tinyurl.com/y8mcps

http://tinyurl.com/gsth9

and everyone's favorite machine, a '57 "Rambler Rebel" muscle car?  No?

http://www.1957chevybody.com/body_options.html

Why not?  Didn't you just say that AMC is doing great as a collectible?


Which brings to mind one of the AMC magazine mentions no one writes up.

If AMC fans read, why don't they note?  Is Jock the only one to bother?

A question: the sole car in Fall '06 MCR (their "'69 car" issue) that's not totally stock is an AMX.  How does that strike you?  What does that say about AMC?  What does it imply about AMC values?  What will non-AMC people infer about AMC standards.  Or are you happy to see -any- AMC in a national publication, no matter how it compares to the "other" makes?

Remember: Nash began by building "Buicks" and Hudson didn't build "poor man" cars.  Essex, Ajax, Terraplane, and Rambler never were bottom-of-the barrel.  Packard was more prestigious than Cadillac and Studebaker built Presidents.  American Motors never was planned to be second-rate.

Somehow its demographic fell --- and so did its values: on history, on quality, on community, and on vehicle value.  "Rambler mentality" took on a different meaning and "AMC fan" took on a different slant.  Don't you think it's well past time to turn -your- automotive hobby around?       


My bling-on-wheels point(s) missed their mark (what else is new?): in part because one link didn't connect.  It does work, but you will have to work to make that happen.  You can't just click.  Copy and paste it

http://k41.pbase.com/u39/xl1ken/upload/25286246.DSCN7502.jpg

and you'll see results.  Shimmers like any SS Electro-Motive (I'm sure someone probably prefers an astounding ALCO or a big Baldwin to my D-E fav [Super Chief livery symbolizes both an era and a lifestyle to me]) and hauls like any loco (of which Loewy's S1 cover-up was as Avanti as any sporting car he drew from Munich or South Bend) plus, maybe sadly, shows what America --- e.g. Detroit --- still -could- do.  I consider Burlington Zephyr and similar designs as I consider the AMC Vixen and AMX/2: wonderful work that never truly stood a -permanent- chance for success.  Brief shining moments with limited opportunity,
yet influential beyond their wildest dreams.  Such a list is endless.

Graham Blue Streak, Airflow, Cord 810, Gremlin, Pacer, and many more.

Milwaukee Road's Brooks Stevens Hiawatha Observations (and SuperDome: has there ever been a more magnificent passenger car?); the line was bankrupt, but their memory lives on.  Off the ground, de Havilland's Comet, Sud's Caravelle, and even Tupolev's Tus are "failed" beauties from transportation history, but you can be sure they are remembered.  

http://hondajet.honda.com/
     
>>
didn't that lafrance v12 come from auburn?  iirc it was acquired when
auburn went under.
<<

Yes, the '38-'59 AFL motor looks like Auburn's Lycoming V-12, but there were changes.  491-526ci vs. 392ci to begin with, differences in blocks and bearings.  Auburn carbs are too small to swap well as are exhausts.  Transmission, generator, distributor, and [dual-spark] ignition issues, but it can, and has, been done.  Some even do V-12 Duesies.   Dunno why though.

>>
" Zephyr's V-12 was only a plus-four Ford V-8 flathead...
" --- and nearly as big as the 2003 Cadillac Sixteen Concept Car's 829ci

it was?!?  iirc the -original- zephyr v12 topped out at 305 cubes in
its biggest version.  and 'ford' is right - the chassis was ford all
the way, only stretched from 112" wb to 118".
<<

I wrote a zillion e-mails yesterday afternoon, didn't really have time to play with AMC cars, had to cut my "commentary" and mucked up what I -did- write.  Didn't make sense to me either and I used to know it cold.  Let's do it again.  And do it right.  Albeit with rounding.  And even more rushed finger taps.

Lin '32-'33: 448; '34-'40 [K]: 414; '36-'39 [Z]: 267.3; '40-'48: 292.

Cad '30-'37 [12]: 368; '30-'32 [16]: 453; '33-'37: 450, '38-'40: 431.

Pac '32-'34: 445.5; '35-'39: 473.

P-A '32-'38: 462.

Mar '31-'33: 491.

Quite amazing; only 930 lbs.  370 lighter than Cad's and with all the aluminum in chassis and body (which was NOT --- as I've actually read AMC experts write --- designed by the father of Richard Teague), 0-60 faster than a Duesenberg (which would've won 0-100, thanks to DOHC at higher revs) --- the kind of car you will sit and stare at endlessly.  Mine (which I mentioned here recently) was one of several in maroon-on-silver two-tone, but even in a screaming yellow,
Sixteen seems a thing of beauty.

I'm running out of time again today, so you can do Franklin V-12 and Peerless V-16 on your own (see the aluminum body that Murphy built before Carling began filling aluminum cans with beer...); I'll note that the Auburn 391 was the best buy of all the multi-cylinder cars.  $975 (closed) in '32:  I'm happy to own a Custom Eight sedan; I'd be nuts about a Salon Twelve phaeton.  To dream Errett's dream; that's life.

Why didn't anyone else build 12s or more?  Chrysler's first [385] 8 didn't appear until '31 (in beautiful bodywork, factory-done and by Derham, **LeBaron**, Locke, Murphy, or Waterhouse:  CG, CH, and CL were glorious vehicles): WPC wasn't able to rustle up more muscle at the height of the depression.  First came the Depression, then came the Airflow: fewer than 100 146.5" CW and 137.5" C3 Imperials were sold.   

Studebaker had 134" and 135" Presidents, however, from 1928-1933, Studebaker also had its own luxury liners: Studebaker owned Pierce-Arrow.  Stude's 8 was designed by Locomobile-Marmon-Pierce Roos, but, by 1933, Stude was bankrupt.  No V-12/16.

Duesenberg didn't need more cylinders; blowing on its 8 was enough.

Nash could have put a 12 in his 133" and 142" Ambassadors, but his 8 (322) was good for 125-hp (when Buick's 345 made 113-hp.)  Nash mentality.  'Nuf said?

Hudson's 354 8 made only 101-hp, but it didn't much matter, for, as Hudson would be famous for in the '50s (and BMW remains famous for, albeit with new wind blowing), Hudson was a Super Six automaker.

The lack of a V-8, as much as the lack of styling options, was what made Hudson marry Nash in 1954.  You just couldn't sell a six when you could have a V-8.

.

_______________________________________________
AMC-List mailing list
AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

or go to http://www.amc-list.com