No doubt in todays market the Japanese cars have become what Rambler stood for in the 60’s, a practical and reliable car and one that would place high in an objective review of cars.

When I engage my left brain I go for the Consumer Reports Buyers Guide. Do they have a drug to help with this chemical imbalance?

Somehow, I doubt the folks who read “Off-Road” would say the same.

One thing I like about CR is that they are consistant. You may not agree with their conclusions, but they have high visibility with their methodologies, priorities, and “biases”. I can look at a year-old review for a RAV4 and feel comfortable in comparing it to a current CR-V review. Hard to do with, say, Car and Driver or Motor Trend. ::shudder::

As the 1960s wore on, the magazine gave AMC products lower ratings. The invasion of Rambler’s turf by the Big Three was the main culprit.

If I recall correctly, the magazine even gave the 1967 AMC Ambassador an “unacceptable” rating because of one major problem (which escapes me at the moment).

Consumer Reports preferred Dodges and Plymouths in the compact and intermediate class, and Fords in the full-size class, if I recall correctly.

Interestingly, Rambler’s fall from grace with Consumer Reports was mirrored in the sales charts. It’s also interesting to note that after 1965, testers at other auto magazines routinely noted quality control problems with Ramblers.

Did they mean “self-satisfying?”

-Matt

It tells me that they tested impartially.

American Motors’ Rambler line sold 91,469 cars in 1957, good for 12th place, one place ahead of Studebaker.

1958: 162,182, Rambler had 7th place. It moved ahead of Dodge, Mercury, Cadillac, Chrysler, Edsel and DeSoto to beat Studebaker out.

1959: 374,240 cars, quite a sales uptick for any company year-on-year, wouldn’t you say? #6 in the marketplace. Ahead of Buick, this year, which had been #3 in the US market in 1955 and 1956. Still outsold Studebaker, with their new Lark compact, 3 to 1.

1960: Despite competition from the big-3’s new compacts, Rambler moved up to #4 in the US markeplace, with 458,841 cars. Ahead of Pontiac and Oldsmobile, this year.

1961: Rambler was #3 in the US markeplace, behind Ford and Chevrolet (in that order). 377,904 cars, beating out Plymouth this year. This, despite all-new ‘luxury’ compacts from Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick, which competed with Rambler’s top of the line Ambassador.

1962: Rambler was #4, with 442,346 cars – an obvious sales increase from 1961, but fell behind Pontiac this season, by 80,000 cars.

1963: With very modern, all-new Classic and Ambassador lines, Rambler’s sales increased to 464,126, but was #6 in the market this year, with Plymouth and Oldsmobile passing them in volume. Oldsmobile only by 12,600 cars, however.

After 1963, the muscle car era “officially” started, and the marketplace moved away from Rambler’s position as “sensible shoes” cars (kind of like the Subaru of the day). You can see that it really began in 1962, with GM’s Pontiac Division “excitement” and “performance” push exceeding AMC’s sales.

But looking back at American Motors from the perspective of the 1980’s when they were failing, does not give the entire picture. Look again at
1960, 1961 and 1962. They were a highly successful company, formed in 1954 from two “survivor independents”, Nash and Hudson. They were a nominal success right through the early 1970’s with the fuel crisis again moving the market towards their position. But by that time, mismanagement (with the loss of George Romney due to his successful run for Governor of Michigan) spelled their eventual doom.

They used to for Toyotas, and I believe Honda still gets a pass.

“Consumer Reports Readers ♥ Japan”

And people will be able to read it.

It’s all got so confusing, I’ve given up paying attention!