When I was a kid, my father had a '61 Rambler Classic that stood out like a prop from a cheesy fifties sci-fi movie in a sea of lusciously sleek Chevys and Buicks. All Rambler's of that vintage had a weird, not of this world motif as if they were from Mars or a communist bloc country. For model-year 1964, though, Rambler got far more mainstream with their wares making them look not unlike something you'd see in a Chrysler-Plymouth showroom. Albeit one up in Canada where everything is just like it is down here except everything is different enough for you to realize you're not in the United States. For 1965, Rambler even got into the burgeoning personal luxury car ring with something they called "Marlin". However, something got lost in Rambler's interpretation of what a personal luxury car was or was supposed to be.
In fairness, even by 1965, the definition of what a "personal luxury car" meant was still fairly fluid. GM and Ford designs were all based on full-size two-door models, Chrysler didn't have one really, meanwhile Rambler based theirs on their compact "American". All well and good as they stuffed the Marlin with as many luxury accoutrements as possible. Even an optional, all metal tissue dispenser under the glove compartment. Problems was American Motors executives insisted the Marlin be a "family-friendly" 3+3. What's more, a 3+3 with not just generous leg room for rear seat passengers but commodious headroom.
To make that happen, designers literally raised the roof. Or the back of the roof to make more headroom. While the rest of the car is a pretty generic mid-sixties mashup of then contemporary designs, the back half of the car looks like a '66 Dodge Charger got jiggy with a Ford Mustang 2+2. With the Charger's DNA, the '66 (and '67) Charger certainly being nothing to look at, winning out. Just like that, a design that could, on paper at least, give a Ford Mustang 2+2 a stylistic run for the money was unceremoniously ruined.
Big fastbacks aren't everyone's cup of anti-freeze. They certainly aren't mine. The Big Three all tried their hand at it with varying degrees of success. Or failure depending on your point of view. When a small or smallish car like this Rambler Marlin apes the lines of a larger design, proportions tend to go into the proverbial dumpster. No matter how practically successful it was. I mean, that's some serious head room for the back seat of a compact car. And seeing the impetus for this design was pragmatic in nature, in a universe where style was king, the end results could only be dubious.
American Motors sold just over ten-thousand Marlins for 1965, less than half that for 1966. While a total reboot of the Marlin for 1967 resulted in what perhaps it should have been from the start, AMC sold just over three-thousand of them. They promptly pulled the plug on production and the Marlin became but a footnote in history. Note the three-on-a-tree above. Unusual, I'd say, for a car with luxury pretension. Again, though, what a personal luxury car would come to be known as was still several years away.
Shoot, I can't tell you the last time I even saw one of these at a car show. Even the biggest and broadest of shows too. Rambler Marlins are that rare; they were known as AMC Marlins in 1966 and 1967. This one popped on my Facebook Marketplace feed recently and I jumped on it. Well, saved pictures of it so I could "blog it". I'm still making good on my New Year's Resolution from a couple of years ago to branch out and blog about cars that I don't like.
Seller is asking some $12,000 which means they've done their homework. NADA pricing guidelines peg this "average retail" at $11,650. High retail at $18,800. Based on these photos, I'd say they've got it priced just right. This thing does appear to be in great shape. Bonus points for the original AM radio and a clock that allegedly still works. Remarkable.
Comment below if you're interested and I'll do my best to hook you up. I could be wrong, but something tells me this white fish is going to be around for a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment