mmarshall

IN A NUTSHELL: Basically a chopped-off Hornet, but with some interesting trim packages.

In the late 1960s, with the long-established success of the subcompact air-cooled/rear-engine VW Beetle, the small-but-growing popularity of the Toyota Corolla and Datsun (Nissan) 510, the popularity of domestic American compacts Valiant/Dart, Falcon, and Nova, economic inflation steadily pushing up the prices of new vehicles, new vehicle-emission standards now on the horizon, and a number of other factors, it was becoming more and more evident that domestic American subcompacts would be needed, and soon have a market in the U.S. Ford responded with the subcompact 1971 Pinto, and Chevrolet with the 1971 Vega…both of those cars had significant engineering and/or safety defects, which I have covered extensively in other write-ups, so I won’t re-hash them here. Chrysler, with the ongoing success of its compact Valiant-Dart series and its extremely durable Slant-Six engine, and in growing financial and organizational trouble, chose not to invest in a new domestic subcompact, instead relying on the (quite unimpressive, IMO) European Hillman/Simca-sourced Plymouth Cricket. American Motors (AMC), the smallest of the four American automakers, although in somewhat better financial shape than Chrysler, still did not have the budget and resources of giants Ford and GM to design a totally new subcompact car from scratch. So AMC took a relatively easy and interesting way out. They had just introduced the compact AMC Hornet the year before (1970), the Hornet itself a replacement for the long-running compact Rambler and Nash-Rambler series. What the designers at AMC essentially did was to take a Hornet body-shell/chassis, cut off the rear end of it, change the trunk-lid into a hatch-lid, limit it to two doors instead of four, and give it a new name……Gremlin. The result looked and drove like exactly what it was…a chopped-off / nose-heavy part-Hornet, with strong understeer from the slow steering-gear-ratio and weight up front, and poor traction from the light/bobbly rear-end having very little weight over the rear drive-wheels, particularly with the larger engines that AMC used. Unlike the Pinto and Vega with their small in-line fours (and the Vega aluminum/iron four was notoriously unreliable), AMC used the same engines and transmissions in the Gremlin that it did for other products in its line-up…an Audi-sourced 2.0L (121 c.i.) in-line four would not be offered until 1977. Base engine, until then, was the 3.3L (199 c.i.) in-line six, with the 3.8L (232 c.i.) in-line six, 4.2L (258 c.i.) in-line six, and 5.0L (304 c.i.) V8 as options….engines which would, later on when AMC bought out Kaiser-Jeep, become popular in the Jeeps themselves. All of these engines, of course, dwarfed the small fours in the other American subcompacts, and, in comparison, made the Gremlin, despite its lack of agility and maneuverability from the heavy front end and slow steering, feel and accelerate like a muscle-car. The V8 version, in particular, had a reputation of being what was (arguably) the lowest-priced American-made performance-car, at some $2200 to start. Five different transmissions were used, depending on the version….a Borg-Warner 3 or 4-speed manual (like Chrysler’s three-speed manual, with a non-synchronized first gear in the early versions), a 3-speed manual unit with automatic overdrive, a 3-speed Borg-Warner automatic in the early versions that was less-than-ideal, and the much better Chrysler 3-speed TorqueFlite automatic in later versions. As much as the V8 version had a reputation for being a cheap muscle-car, in some ways, it was still not a very pleasant version to drive. The big engine simply added more weight to what was already a much heavier front end than other subcompacts, and, with little weight on the rear wheels, would spin the rear tires with relatively little throttle-input, particularly on slick surfaces. The weight up front meant power-steering, to keep effort under control, was needed for many people…..which added even more weight, and more stress on the front tires, which could wear quickly in those days before radial-design and modern tire-tread compounds. But, despite the somewhat awkward driving characteristics, the Gremlins, because of their older/more-conservative and proven powertrain components (particularly with the later Torqueflite-automatic models), generally proved reliable, and came from the factory without many….well, Gremlins……in the assembly-process, with a reasonable amount of care in their assembly. Consumer Reports remarked about how well their test-versions were assembled, compared to that of many other American-built cars back then, particularly from Chrysler. Consumer Reports found more factory-defects in their 1970 Plymouth Satellite than in any other vehicle they have ever tested….we have been spoiled by today’s much better levels of quality control that it’s difficult to remember what many new American cars were like back then.

The Gremlin, however, had some interesting trim/appearance packages to make up for its ho-hum road manners. I don’t remember all the different packages, but two of them, from what I do remember, that stood out, were the Gremlin-X package and the Levi package. The sport-oriented Gremlin-X package, which proved extremely popular, included body-color exterior trim, trim-stripes/decals, and customized road-wheels. The Levi package, though not as popular as the X package, was, IMO, even more interesting. …and AMC did a series of TV ads pitching the Levi-package to young people. It consisted of exterior paint in the classic Levi-blue-jean color, and an interior in a matching blue-color, with real (genuine) Levi blue-jean-cloth and embroidery on the seats. Later, the Levi interior-trim package was expanded to include other exterior colors.

The Gremlin, despite its relatively awkward stance, proved successful enough to stay in production until 1978, by which time it had also acquired the aforementioned smaller in-line four-cylinder engine. The poor rear-wheel traction, however, was not in vain…..its successor, the AMC Spirit, along with the larger Hornet-derived Concord, went on to become the AMC Eagle and Eagle SX-4 (see my separate write-up on the Eagle), which, in 1980-81, introduced the world’s first car-based AWD system, with a viscous-filled center-differential, that eliminated the former need for transfer-cases, lock/unlock front-wheel-hubs, and the part-time 4WD restriction on dry pavement. This made them true winter-vehicles. The Eagle-derived AWD system, which was further-developed in later years by Subaru and Audi, went on to completely change the auto-industry as we know it, although AMC itself went out of business and was bought up by Renault and, later, Chrysler. The real fruits of the new car-based AWD system would become apparent some 15-20 years later, with the explosion of the crossover/car-based SUV market, that forms a huge portion of today’s auto industry and market, and has almost universally adopted the center-differential AWD system that AMC first came up with. But, back then little was imagined of what would ultimately become of the deaths of the Hornet/Gremlin and Concord/Spirit/Eagle….time often brings surprises with it.

And, as Always, Happy Car-Memories.

MM

Kira X

iTrader: (24)

That was a really cool car. I like that Levi Jeans package.

Byprodrive

iTrader: (1)

I saw one with the blue jean interior on display at the University of Illinois, That's the only one I ever saw.
My Mom had a gremlin company car for her 1st job as a pager sales & service rep.The owner of the company always bought the cheapest American made cars.

mmarshall

For a low price on an American-made car, it was tough to beat the Gremlin.....and, though awkward to drive, it generally did not suffer the safety and mechanical problems of its Pinto and Vega competition. It was not as well-built, though, as the competing VW Beetles of the period.

Hameed

This car has to take the cake for one of the ugliest cars ever made......

mmarshall

Probably more awkward-looking than really ugly, but your point is taken.

sdls

I think time has been kind to the design. It may have been ghastly back in its heyday (if it ever had a heyday) but now it’s a sort-of funky classic car.

tex2670

I saw an episode of Wheeler Dealers where they restored an old Jeep CJ7 to simulate the Levi's package. I guess that was an AMC thing across multiple models?

Big Andy

I’m assuming you couldn’t get these wet or fill them up after midnight?

mmarshall

Remember, though, that AMC once owned the Jeep Division.....that's why the straight-six AMC engines were used in some Jeep models for many years. So, it would probably make sense for Jeep to use the old Levi-trim rights that AMC had used back on the Gremlin, even if the package was not used in regular Jeep production.

tex2670

That is precisely why I said it must have been an AMC thing.

mmarshall

Everybody wanted the Jeep Division, because of its image, profitability, and cult-like following of buyers. That's why AMC took it away from Kaiser/******, Renault from AMC, Chrysler, from Renault, Daimler (Mercedes) from Chrysler, Cerberus from Mercedes, Fiat from Cerberus, and, just recently, PSA from Fiat. Who knows what the next owner will be LOL?

JDR76

Man I hated these things as a kid. Still do. Ugh.

Jezza819

It probably isn't even the ugliest AMC ever made. Remember the Pacer came out in 1975.

mmarshall

The Pacer is arguably the only production domestic American car where the passenger door was not the same size as the driver's door.