I like 100-inch wheelbase Ramblers (Nash Ramblers/Rambler Americans), and I’ve read a fair amount about them over the years, but one thing has always puzzled me. Most histories make a big deal out of how Nash President George W. Mason refused to build a cheap compact, and instead loaded the first Ramblers with options, and built them all as convertibles. Later came a two-door hardtop, a two-door wagon, and later yet the 108-inch wheelbase four-door sedan and wagon. In 1956, the 100-inch wheelbase cars were dropped, and Rambler was built exclusively on the 108-inch wheelbase. Then, just in time for the 1958 recession, the 100-inch car was reintroduced exclusively as a mildly restyled two-door sedan called the Rambler American. But, was a two-door sedan ever actually available in the original, 1950-55 Rambler series? Or is the 1958 American actually the convertible with a fixed metal roof? Anyone have a picture of a ‘50-‘55 Rambler American two-door sedan? Thanks, Dave
Yes there was definitely a 2 door sedan. Mason supposedly said "You have to put your best foot forward. Bring out a new car "dressed up" and undress it later". At its introduction the Rambler convertible was only $50 less than a Chevy convertible. They brought out the convertible and station wagon first, the most expensive styles in any car line at that time. The first station wagons were all 2 tone paint jobs as they had no woody. The hardtop came soon after. But the 2 door sedans were not far behind. In fact there were no 4 door sedans until they lengthened the wheelbase in 1955 or 56. After the car was established in the public mind as being chic and rather expensive, they brought out the cheaper models and they looked like great bargains! A web search should turn up some pictures.
The pic you show is a 55 Nash Country Club Hdtp..I had the exact same car as well as a 55 Nash 2 door sedan parts car years ago..
Thanks fellas. Any idea what the first year for the two-door sedan was? Google images doesn't seem to show anything older than '54, and the old brochures don't seem to show them at all. -Dave
This is labled as a 53 Nash, but a Statesman not necessarily a Rambler. This as a 52 rambler The 50's all seem to be verts, two door hardtops or two door wagons, affirming what was mentioned above, although there is this listed as a 50.
I have this one that I picked up a couple of months ago. As you can see its RHD, and I would like to find out if there are any more in Australia I am trying to find out its history, as we were told it ran a supercharged Holden motor. As the mounts for this type of motor are fitted and been there a long time. Look at the size of the tyres on the rear, and we were told it was drag raced in the 60's and 70's. Was last registered in 1977
From what I can make out in my book, the 2-door sedan didn't really see mass-production until '54 with the addition of the longer wheelbase sedans and wagons. There are a handful of prototypes (production total of 6 for 1950) but the non-convertible slot was filled by the "Country Club" 2-door hardtop for the first few years. The convertible isn't a true convertible, though, with fixed window frames, so making it become a 2-door sedan was relatively cheap - one more stamping and a new rear glass.
8 years ago when we bought my daughter's Nash, I saw another car there, had great Buck Rogers styling. Door top edges had the same Nash Metro ribbed cut-ins, but this car was much bigger than a Metro. Any ideas what it was? I'm pretty sure it was a Nash. Definetly from the '50s.
Nash chief stylist Edmund Anderson did most of the styling on the "Pinin Farina" Nashes. He was ordered to use some of the styling cues Farina offered and to let Pinin Farina take the credit for marketing. Being a company man, and seeing that his name wouldn't help sales like Farina's would, he did it. What was good for the company was good for him, right? The two door sedan appeared in 1954, so was made as a Nash for only 54 and 55. The photo in post #7 is indeed a Rambler -- a 54, not a 53. The Statesman had a vertical bar grille like the Ambassador, only the Rambler used the single horizontal bar in the center of the grille. The fake "hood scoop" didn't appear until 54. I've got no info on the Aussie Rambler. I didn't even know those were exported in RHD, only know that the bigger cars were exported to Australia and assembled by AMI (Australian Motor Industries).
First time I've looked at this thread other than on a mobile phone. First off, thanks everybody for the input. Second: I want one of these! -Dave
My favorite thing about the Ramblers was they came in about three increments sizewise,but all looked like the others -either blew up or shunken down! by the way,I currently own two and had others before those as well,so in no way am I tryin to put em down......
The "three sizes" didn't happen until 58 as far as Ramblers were concerned. If you go back to Nash then you have the Ambassador, Statesman, and Rambler -- three different wheelbases and widths. Starting in 58 there were really only two "sizes", but three different wheelbases. The 58-61 and 65-74 Ambassador rode a noticeably longer wheel base (4-9", depending on year), but was THE SAME CAR from the firewall back -- same interior room, just different trim and rear end treatment. The wheelbase change was all forward of the firewall -- different front rails/fenders/hood. Cheap way to make a car APPEAR bigger when in the areas that count the most (interior and maybe trunk room) it isn't!
In '57 were the Rebel and Ambassador the same size? And weren't Metropolitans produced until '61? -Dave
There was no 57 RAMBLER Ambassador -- there was still a Nash Ambassador (57 was the last year of the big Nash and Hudson). There was only ONE size Rambler from 50-57. The 56 and 57 models jumped up to a larger 108" wheelbase. There were only four door sedans, wagons, and a hardtop sedan. The special edition Rebel (only 1500 made) was built on the four door hardtop body. You could get a Rambler V-8 in any of the bodies -- it was a smaller 250 inch model. Standard was the 196 OHV six. The L-head wasn't produced in 56 and 57, it reappeared in 58 for the "new" Rambler American. The whole line was restyled and the "middle" size car stretched 9" in front to make the "Ambassador by Rambler", hence the start of the three sizes of Ramblers.
And to add to the general confusion, there were Nash Ramblers and Hudson Ramblers from 1954 until 1957, when both Nash and Hudson names were retired. There were also Nash and Hudson Metropolitans. The company became known as the American Motors Corporation, the parent company since the merger, until bought out by Chrysler, who wanted the Jeep.
Yep. But the company was "American Motors Corporation" since May of 1954. AMC sold the two brands Nash and Hudson. Nash and Hudson badges were stuck on almost identical Rambler and Metropolitans. In 57 the Rambler was marketed as a separate model, as was the Metropolitan. In 1958 AMC marketed solely under the Rambler brand name. The Rambler brand name was starting to be phased out beginning in 1967 with the Ambassador and Marlin sold as individual brands, or under the AMC banner, while the American, Rogue, and Rebel lines continued using the Rambler brand name for another year. For 1969 "Rambler" as a brand name was gone, but was still used for the lowest cost model. AMC simply changed the name of the American to the Rambler. The Rambler brand name soldiered on overseas. You could buy a Rambler through 1983 in Mexico, through the mid 70s in Argentina and South Africa.
It would have been neat (maybe not realistic, but neat) if AMC had also encompassed Packard and Studebaker. Imagine: Rambler = Chevrolet/Ford/Plymouth Studebaker = Pontiac/Mercury/Dodge Hudson = Oldsmobile/Edsel/DeSoto Nash = Buick/Lincoln/Chrysler Packard = Cadillac/Continental/Imperial Alternately, put Nash at the bottom (with Rambler remaining a model in the Nash lineup) and put Clipper against Buick et al. You can imagine the possibilities: A '65 Studebaker Hawk midsize competing with GTO; Hudsons continuing the mid-priced performance category with the Rocket 88s; a Nash (or Clipper) personal luxury coupe ala Riviera and Thunderbird. Kinda fun to dream. -Dave
Would you believe that was the original vision? At least it was George Mason's vision. Mason was head of Nash from the late 30s (Charles Nash bought Kelvinator just to get Mason to take over for Nash when he retired!!) through the early 50s. He died suddenly of a heart attack in late 54. He had talked with the heads of Studebaker and Packard. The plan was for AMC and Hudson to merge, and Studebaker and Packard. That much happened. What didn't happen was the "phase two" merger of AMC and the SPC. After Mason died George Romney took over. Although Romney was Mason's hand picked successor, he had slightly different ideas about how the company needed to survive. The AMC/SPC merger might have happened if Mason and James J. Nance (SPC prez, 54-56) had got along. The talks between Mason and Nance had been informal, so nothing was on paper. They had a "gentleman's agreement" that the two companies would start by buying parts from each other. Packard sold AMC V-8s and Ultramatic transmissions (all the Packard powered Nash and Hudson cars have the Ultramatic -- that was a condition of the sale). Packard sent AMC a few bids, but rejected all of them as "too high". Nance refused to compromise with Mason, who was highly ticked off! So much so that he ordered his engineering department to come up with a V-8 ASAP. The GEN-1 AMC V-8 (more commonly called the Nash V-8 or Rambler V-8) went from drawing board to in a car in only 18 months! Phenomenal for slide rule days, but the engineering department cheated! The AMC engineers had no V-8 experience and knew the boss meant business, so they hired someone who did! David V. Potter (who also was the main force behind the GEN-2/3 AMC V-8 and the 64 232 six, which is the basis of the 4.0L) had been developing a V-8 for Kaiser over at Continental (which was owned by Kaiser Industries). Kaiser let him go easily since they had already decided to get out of the US auto industry and sixes were fine for their overseas locations (mainly Brazil and Argentina). Potter had built prototypes at Continental, but I don't think any went into production even as an industrial engine. Don't know if he brought the prints over to AMC or not, but with an 18 month development time in those days he probably did.
Farna. I sometimes think you already gave all of the knowledge you have about Nash / Rambler, but each time I read from you I learn new things Please finish the book !!!! You won t sell much, but it will be a reference of knowledge.
I did say "since the merger", which was in 1954. I admit to knowing a lot of history, but I'm not a historical writer. Frank, you should finish your book. You are much more accurate than many published authors that I cringe while reading. The reason Studebacker-Packard did not merge with Nash-Hudson was mostly due to the fact that Nance wanted the top spot, and he wasn't going to get it. He and Mason were long-time rivals from Hotpoint and Kelvinator, respectively, and both had huge egos. Mason ran a better company, too.
You did! sometimes I just read to fast or get too caught up in the answer... Yeah, Nance wanted to be in charge... so did Mason. If they had merged neither could have been in the top spot. Maybe Romney, but since he was Mason's hand picked successor I doubt Nance would have went for that! Those two would have had to take top board seats and hired someone else to run the company. With all the back biting and board room politics all that would have caused I doubt such a merged company would have lasted as long as AMC did. Probably would have went down about the same time Studebaker did. We can only speculate as to what could have happened. If Nance had went ahead with the merger when he decided to get out of SPC in 1956, with the company on the verge of bankruptcy, maybe Romney could have pulled it off. The expensive and way too big Stude plant would have been abandoned (or mostly so anyway), I think most will agree on that. Kenosha had a 100,000+ capacity, more than was needed, and was a bit more efficient (though still old and a bit more costly than most Big Three operations). Hard to imagine what the model mine-up would be and look like! Drop the Ambassador name and make a Packard or two on the big AMC body... maybe even make another body for the prestige/publicity car. If it just broke even the showcase car would draw attention to the company and people in show rooms -- an advertising draw if nothing else (sort of like the Plymouth Prowler, Dodge Viper -- not really intended to make money, more for publicity). I can't see keeping the Studebaker name, but can see keeping the Avanti in production as a sport/luxury car. Let's say they had that and never produced the Marlin. Brand name would have changed to AMC sooner, with the Packard/Avanti/Rambler lines. All AMC based (because of the move to the AMC plant, except for the military vehicle facilities, and at least short term the Avanti fiberglass body facilities). Change the company brand name to AMC as happened. Avanti would have been phased out by the late 60s, maybe as long as the early 70s, but I suspect it would have gone when the Javelin came out in 68. I would think the big car would still be a Packard... maybe just one model.. essentially just the AMC Ambassador with Packard replacing the Ambassador name. And that would be it. So after the late 60s it would be AMC history as it was, at the best. I don't think the merger really wouldn't have accomplished much in the long run. I think the above scenario is the best that could have been hoped for. To keep the company afloat the SPC affiliates would have been sold off, just like AMC sold off their on subdivisions over time. Or maybe Nance would have brokered an auto division merger and kept the rest of SPC together and sold to Curtiss-Wright, as he did. In that case, the merger could have killed AMC a lot sooner than it went under...
The Jalopy Journal
