The term compact car had the same meaning in the 1950s but the results didn’t seem quite as dramatic as they do today. This 1959 Rambler American Super was a compact car and yet it looks big compared to almost any small car today. It’s a foot and a half longer than a Honda Fit or a Ford Fiesta. This big compact is posted on Craigslist in the Old Town, Florida area and the seller is asking $5,000 for what looks like a nice, solid car. Thanks to Wishing 4OHV for this submission!
Here’s the infamous profile view of the first-generation Rambler American with the wonky rear wheel position. The second-generation models were basically the same in regard to the rear-wheel-vs.-wheel-opening and it really makes a person look twice if they don’t know that at least the spare tire fit in the trunk that way. I think it adds a quirky punch to these already quirky cars. The wheels are so far inboard and then those rear wheels are a couple of inches too far forward, it’s an interesting look. And the company ok’d this design for two whole generations of Rambler Americans! That, my friends, is something that will never happen again but I’m glad that it happened here.
Here’s the famous bathtub-Nash look, even though this technically isn’t a Nash. The seller isn’t giving us any interior or engine photos at all (don’t get me started) but they do show the speedometer/odometer which shows 52,082 miles, or almost what I drive in a single year and this car will be 60 years old in a few months. Being a Super trim level American it had “four padded arm rests, a right-hand sun visor, cigarette lighter, foam-cushion front seat, map and glove-box lamp, automatic dome lamp and roll-down rear side windows”. Fancy!
With no interior or engine photos we have to hope for the best. They say “Could use paint and interior clean-up”. I would personally not repaint this car, I love it as it looks now but that’s just me. Almost any interior ailments are fixable, at least upholstery ailments, so hopefully it won’t be a huge chore to make it nice again. The engine should be a 195.6 cubic-inch L-head six with 90 hp and 150 ft-lb of torque and it “Runs great!” according to the seller. Is this car worth a personal inspection given the missing photos or am I the only Rambler American fan here?
Blast from the past is right( a BF’s exclusive) When I was in HS( early 70’s) the guy across the alley had a car like this, only yellow. He was a biker, and this was his $100 winter beater. It was an automatic, I remember, he pulled the shift lever toward him to start it. I think it, full of buddies, was the slowest accelerating car I ever rode in. The gas pedal was bent in a “U” shape from being on the floor all the time. It did however, get us to school everyday in the winter. He literally killed that car.
Early 90’s, I went to local auto auctions weekly and remember seeing an identical (but grey) one go through. It was obviously a pampered, garaged “grandpa car” with low miles. Brought all of $100.
I’ve often wondered what the thinking was on the rear wheel placement of these cars. Wouldn’t centering the wheel in the opening be one of most fundamental things to do when designing a new model?
Or was Rambler in such dire financial straits that they were forced to cobble together an existing frame with the body?
The unit body used by this Rambler was first introduced in 50. Dropped for a couple of years then AMC dusted off the dies and re-introduced it as the American with a some updates.
Smart, inexpensive and quick move to add to the Rambler line and at the right time as well: 1958, year of the Edsel and a big sharp recession.
We had one of these in wagon form when I was a kid. Slowest car since the Model T, and very prone to overheating. Kind of cool looking, but a V8 Studebaker Lark, its direct competition at the time, is soooo much better in every way…
I had to think twice about the automatic dome lamp comment. Then, I thought about my old Willys. Problem solved!
Mention of mileage: In times back then the average yearly miles driven was around 12,000 a year; About as many miles one could get on a good set of tires and tubes, and then one bought 6000 mile retreads.
Average length of time owned was just under 3 years, about time that every
damn thing on it was falling apart.
You save coins so that at end of 3 years your trade in plus coins equaled 1/3 cost of new one and financed through bank for 1-2-3 years remaining cost.
If not in city those of lower priced autos did own maintenance which did not require mechanical and electrical engineering degrees to figure out why it ran like crap, or would not start.
As a commuter and even a cruiser, with exception another responder noted overheating radiator, this auto would work just fine in town.
If overheating run without a 3 or 4# radiator cap. and keep a jug of water in trunk.
During early Viet era, my friend and I roamed, at 45 mph, the Smokey Mountains in one of these, and learned to not argue with a cop who said you were speeding or could not have whiskey or beer in rig, just flash a Single $10 for speeding and a $20’s for booze, promise to not come back, and be on way.
Simple times with common sence autos and people.
This is where it all began with American compacts. They were essentially a 1950 Nash Rambler with upgrades and it was successful.
Scotty, you are so delightfully whacked. You “get” cars like this.
And those roll down windows on a two door are something you cannot find today [and why I will never again own a modern 2 door anything, or any vehicle that has fixed rear windows].
This car and the Lark were the shortest cars built domestically. For perspective think 80 Chevrolet Citation: 175.4″. American 178.3″ N Body 85 Calais 178.6, 60 Lark: 175
Width: 80 Citation: 68.3, 60 American 73, 85 Calais 66.9, 60 Lark 71.3
All that downsizing and capital spent to get back to where the industry had been years before.
AMC had the first wide small car a decade and a half ahead the Pacer and they didn’t even know it. D’oh.
I love these cars. That they opened up the wheel wells for 58 not only improved their looks but their turning circle as well’
Still the right size for a small car.
Those rear windows only rolled down about half way. The rear wheel tub got in the way. My mom had one of these, and the maroon red paint was just as faded in 1964 when she bought it for $300. I don’t think it was a super, it didn’t have a dome light or arm rests in the back seat. At night, you had light a match to tune the radio.
I’ve been an AMC fan since I was a kid and these Rambler Americans and the next generation ’61-’63 are just so quirky I can’t help but love them. I was lucky to find a ’61 Custom only about eight miles from where I live about a year and a half ago. It had been sitting in a garage since 1974 and the body was solid and it had less than 44,ooo miles on it. It runs great and looks pretty good for a fifty seven year old car. These were great cars if you wanted good, economic, no frills transportation. Buff up the paint on this ’59 and it will be a sharp little ride.
Beautiful car ! so essentially my recently purchased 81 AMC Concord DL (49K original miles) coupe has same roots as this !!
Same roots? The Concord was based on the 1970 Hornet that it replaced. Other than the fact it’s in the Rambler/AMC family, it shares nothing with a ‘59 American. (And I say this coming from a 40 plus year AMC family.)
I collect classics and fan in general. mostly I am GM classic fan but I wanted something AMC As an expert in AMC’s whats your personal opinion in 81 Concord ? I knew it was basicaly a more luxury version of popular compact Hornet!
Max
hada same motor in a few yr newer American ‘vert (’64”) I believe. Justa square box! By then Nash wuz outta it, gone.
As this 17 y/o kid pulled up to the only traffic lght (brand new in 1969) in town other kids at the soda fountain would laugh. The engine wuz so quiet they thought it stalled.
U could set a glassa H2O onda hood & nary a ripple could B seen.
That old flathead mill (which dated to the 1941 Nash “600”) was the base engine in the American through the 1965 model year. It was the last U.S. car that came with a flathead. You are correct though that other than that motor the 1964 model was a complete redesign that finally left the old Nash platform behind.